Marine & Transit - December 2009

Pilotage – duty of master and bridge team to assist

MAIB report on the “Vallermosa”

This recent Marine Accident Investigation Branch (MAIB) Report on the collision incident involving the tanker “Vallermosa” at Fawley Marine Terminal has again highlighted the serious issue of how a pilot’s effectiveness can be compromised by a lack of integration into the vessel’s bridge team.

In February this year the “Vallermosa” was proceeding inbound to the BP Hamble Terminal in Southampton Water laden with a full cargo of 35,000 tonnes of jet fuel.  Whilst approaching the terminal to berth the vessel made contact with two other oil tankers, the “Navion Fennia” and the “BW Orinoco” that were discharging alongside at the Fawley Marine Terminal.  Damage was caused to all three vessels and to the jetty and there was some minor oil pollution.

The incident was investigated by the MAIB who found that the pilot who was assisting the navigation of the “Vallermosa” lost control of the vessel which started to sheer to port on the final approach turn.  The pilot was unable to regain control before the vessel came into contact with the other tankers at the berth.

The pilot involved was very experienced and qualified.  However the MAIB concluded that a number of safety issues had contributed to the accident:

• The vessel’s approach to the terminal had been unnecessarily aborted for administrative reasons 
• The pilot’s effectiveness was reduced due to his heightened workload, frustration and increasing stress
• The master and bridge team did not monitor the pilot’s actions sufficiently

In particular it appeared the master of the “Vallermosa” had effectively placed total reliance and trust in the pilot’s ability to control the vessel.  No effort had been made by the bridge team to support the pilot, who was to a great degree left on his own to deal with the safe navigation of the vessel.

This is notwithstanding the clear position under English pilotage law that a marine pilot on board a ship conducting the navigation is considered as the employee of the shipowner.  As such the shipowner remains fully liable for any negligence or fault on the part of the pilot.  In addition, the safety management system for vessels requires the master and bridge team of a vessel to carefully monitor the activities of a pilot and provide assistance where necessary.

The report highlights the severe consequences that can occur if a pilot is left to his own devices without any support from the bridge team.  It was fortunate indeed that this incident did not result in injury or loss of life and more serious damage to the vessels and greater pollution.

The message for ship operators and their insurers is clear.  The master and bridge team are ultimately responsible for the safety of their ship and should always monitor the actions of a pilot assisting with the navigation.

Terry Donaghy, Partner
Weightmans LLP