Bunker contamination: the importance of timely intervention

0 comments

Bunker contamination: the importance of timely intervention

in Marine Insurance P&I Club News 03/01/2019

The shipping industry has previously faced problems with bunker contamination due to the presence of catalytic fines and is again experiencing similar issues. The culprit this time has been identified as phenols and fatty acids.

One theory is that these contaminants originate from refineries in the US Gulf. Irrespective of the origin, the contaminants have now been found in bunkers supplied as far as Singapore. The issues are compounded by the unavailability of competent testing facilities, the high cost of bunker analysis and long waiting times.

Generally, the contractual framework for the supply of bunkers addresses liabilities and obligations between various parties involved in the voyage. These contracts, however, do not address all the practical issues that shipowners, charterers and bunker suppliers may face when contaminants are discovered and the legal environment in which these parties operate will come into play.

Time is of essence

It is worth highlighting that timely identification of any issues with the bunkers is of prime importance, not only because of very short time bar provisions in the bunker supply contracts, but also to preserve evidence.

Shipowners may find themselves facing issues, such as disposal of the contaminated bunkers, as well as cleaning of bunker tanks and pipelines. If contaminated bunkers have been consumed, owners will need to identify any damage caused to the machinery and whether it relates to the bunkers. If there is any doubt as to the quality of bunkers supplied, shipowners should contact charterers and bunker suppliers as soon as possible and retain the samples collected during bunkering for further analysis. Our members and assureds should also notify Skuld immediately if any issues with the bunkers arise to ensure that the dedicated claims teams can intervene in a timely fashion.

When collecting samples, the parties should ensure that a sufficient quantity is collected from the delivery line during bunkering. A complete log of events (including but not limited to bunkering procedures, tanks, in which bunkers were received, pipeline layout etc.) and machinery records must be preserved.

Contractual framework

It is often the time charterer who arranges for bunkers to be supplied to the vessel and enters into a supply contract with the bunker supplier. The charterer’s relationship with the shipowner is governed by the terms of the charterparty, which may include specific provisions concerning bunker quality. Usually reference is made to ISO 8217 standards (2005, 2010, 2012 or 2017 edition).

The physical supplier presents a Bunker Delivery Note to the vessel, which, amongst other things, confirms the quantity and quality of the bunkers supplied. This document usually incorporates the physical supplier’s terms, which are likely to be in their favour.

Charterers’ dilemma

Although the charterer is the contracting party ordering and usually also paying for bunkers, they have little control on the actual supply process. It is highly unlikely that they will be able to collect and retain representative samples, as this is done by the supplying barge and/or the receiving vessel. Additionally, by the time a problem with the bunkers is identified, the contractual time bar in the supply contract may have already passed.

Charterers may face claims related to costs of deviation and disposal of contaminated bunkers from the shipowners. If contaminated bunkers have been consumed, claims for damage to the machinery may follow.

All this means loss of time for the charterer and potentially loss of reputation. In extreme cases, and depending on the circumstances, the charterer may be faced with a termination of the charterparty or withdrawal of the vessel. Whether the charterer can make deductions from hire for the downtime or indeed seek other remedies will depend on the terms of the charterparty.

If the charterer is the Carrier under the bills of lading, they may face considerable cargo claims arising from the delay, especially if the cargo is of a perishable nature. They may also be exposed to commercial pressure from other contractual parties to complete the voyage as early as possible and face claims for breach of contract should they fail to do so.

Further, if the vessel suffers machinery failure and the owner decides to declare General Average, the charterer may be required to provide security for their portion of the adjustment.

As can be seen from the above, there are numerous risks charterers may be exposed to, should the bunkers supplied to the vessel turn out to be contaminated. Moreover, the issues are not limited to treating or removal of contaminated bunkers and are exacerbated by the practical difficulties of positively identifying the presence of phenols and fatty acids.

Owners’ concerns

Although the owner will have more control over the supply, sampling and testing of the bunkers, they may find it difficult to enforce rights under their charterparty due to competing jurisdictional issues. It is therefore important that owners involve experts and preserve as much evidence as possible. This will ensure that contamination issues are identified quickly and accurately. It is crucial that correct and representative samples are clearly identified and analysed.

The owner’s obligations under the bills of lading will continue whilst the parties look for a solution to handle the contaminated bunkers. At the same time, owners may face claims for unseaworthiness, as the vessel may not have sufficient bunkers to execute the intended voyage. An expert’s advice will be invaluable and Skuld can assist in this regard.

It is in the common interest of the parties involved that a solution to the contaminated bunkers is executed as soon as possible – whether it be onboard treatment with additives, offloading or any other solution agreed between the owner, charterer and supplier. Co-operation between all parties is crucial to mitigate damages and avoid disputes about title to the bunkers and associated costs.

How Skuld can assist

In bunker contamination cases, it is critical to establish whether the bunkers are in fact off specification (on ISO 8217 or other parameters) and deal with time constraints and a raft of costs and claims that may arise.

Skuld offers a wide range of insurance products including owners’ and charterers’ P&I and FD&D cover, which allows us to assist charterers and owners in dealing with the fallout of contaminated bunkers being supplied to the vessel.

Our underwriting team will provide tailormade solutions, and Skuld’s claims handlers and technical managers are well placed to respond to such incidents.

We encourage our members to contact us as soon as they experience problems with contaminated bunkers. Timely intervention can save valuable time and costs.

Should you have any comments or questions, then please do not hesitate to contact us at any time.

On behalf of your Skuld team of underwriters and claims handlers who serve our charterers and traders 24/7/365.
Source: Skuld

Leave a Reply

SSCP   CAS-002   9L0-066   350-050   642-999   220-801   74-678   642-732   400-051   ICGB   c2010-652   70-413   101-400   220-902   350-080   210-260   70-246   1Z0-144   3002   AWS-SYSOPS   70-347   PEGACPBA71V1   220-901   70-534   LX0-104   070-461   HP0-S42   1Z0-061   000-105   70-486   70-177   N10-006   500-260   640-692   70-980   CISM   VCP550   70-532   200-101   000-080   PR000041   2V0-621   70-411   352-001   70-480   70-461   ICBB   000-089   70-410   350-029   1Z0-060   2V0-620   210-065   70-463   70-483   CRISC   MB6-703   1z0-808   220-802   ITILFND   1Z0-804   LX0-103   MB2-704   210-060   101   200-310   640-911   200-120   EX300   300-209   1Z0-803   350-001   400-201   9L0-012   70-488   JN0-102   640-916   70-270   100-101   MB5-705   JK0-022   350-060   300-320   1z0-434   350-018   400-101   350-030   000-106   ADM-201   300-135   300-208   EX200   PMP   NSE4   1Z0-051   c2010-657   C_TFIN52_66   300-115   70-417   9A0-385   70-243   300-075   70-487   NS0-157   MB2-707   70-533   CAP   OG0-093   M70-101   300-070   102-400   JN0-360   SY0-401   000-017   300-206   CCA-500   70-412   2V0-621D   70-178   810-403   70-462   OG0-091   1V0-601   200-355   000-104   700-501   70-346   CISSP   300-101   1Y0-201   200-125  , 200-125  , 100-105  , 100-105  , CISM   NS0-157   350-018  , NS0-157   ICBB  , N10-006 test  , 350-050   70-534   70-178   220-802   102-400   000-106   70-411  , 400-101   100-101  , NS0-157   1Z0-803   200-125  , 210-060   400-201   350-050   C_TFIN52_66  , JN0-102  , 200-355   JN0-360   70-411   350-018  , 70-412   350-030   640-916   000-105   100-105  , 70-270  , 70-462   300-070  , 300-070   642-999   101-400   PR000041   200-101  , 350-030   300-070  , 70-270  , 400-051   200-120   70-178   9L0-012   70-487   LX0-103   100-105  ,