Wederhoor MSC, deel 2

Zembla heeft MSC verzocht om een interview op camera. Daar was MSC uiteindelijk niet toe bereid. Daarom hebben we MSC onze vragen schriftelijk voorgelegd. Omdat enkele antwoorden nieuwe vragen opriepen, hebben we later nog aanvullende vragen gesteld.

Hieronder de vragen en antwoorden die betrekking hebben op de zaken die we in onze tweede uitzending aan de orde stellen.

MSC begint met een algemeen statement over het incident met de MSC Zoe. Daarna volgen specifieke antwoorden op onze vragen, deze vragen staan dikgedrukt in de tekst.

MSC is committed to safe shipping and to learning from incidents at sea. Since the MSC ZOE incident a number of investigations into the exact events that took place have started. All of these investigations are still in progress. MSC would like to respect these investigations and neither wants to interfere with them nor get ahead of the outcomes. All the facts need to be clear before more detailed public statements could be made.

Why did the MSC Zoe decide to sail the southern route above the Wadden isles? MSC ZOE was operating on a regular and approved container shipping route as part of the Asia- Europe Silk Service provided by MSC. The service carries cargo for customers of MSC and other shipping lines on a well-known route.

The weather was bad, with gales, high waves and shallow water. This means that the captain took a risk, why did he do that? Did he discuss his decision with the head quarters in Geneve? I do not acknowledge all the assumptions in your questions. The master of MSC ZOE followed a regular and approved shipping route, which is used by many international container-carrier companies. On the occasion of the MSC ZOE incident this traffic lane was used by many other vessels. The Master deemed the heavy weather encountered navigable, as did many other cargo vessels operating in the area.

The Passage Planning Guide for this particular area advises to take the nortern route, especially with NW-winds. Why was this advice ignored? Your suggestion about is not correct. In January 2019 using the southern route was common and approved practice for vessels such as the MSC ZOE.

Who is responsible for this decision to sail the southern route? The general statement above should speak to this point.

Where and why did the MSC Zoe lose 342 containers? What went wrong? The general statement above should speak to this point.

When did the captain report that he lost containers? As soon as he became aware.

Why didn’t he report it earlier? We know now that they lost the first containers hours before he called it in. The Master reported the container loss as soon as he became aware.

Did the captain underestimate the circumstances? At present, our findings are that the Master did not understimate the circumstances.

Did the Zoe touch the sea floor? No.

Does MSC consider the southern sailing route safe enough for ships the size of the Zoe? Yes. Awaiting the outcome of the current investigations, MSC now voluntarily uses the northern sailing route, even while considering the southern sailing route to be safe.

The incident happened in Dutch waters. Is the Dutch government responsible for the safety? Please address your question to the Dutch authorities.

The new MSC Gulsun is even bigger than the Zoe. Recently, it passed the Dutch coast and sailed the northern route. Why did the Gulsun take this route? Is this new MSC policy? If so, why? Awaiting the outcome of the current investigations, MSC voluntarily uses the northern sailing route, even while considering the southern sailing route to be safe.

After reaching Bremerhaven, the Zoe was inspected, as is standard after such an incident. What was the result of these inspections? MSC was assured from inspections in Bremerhaven that the MSC ZOE did not hit the sea floor and that the ship was relatively undamaged from the incident.

Toevoeging ZEMBLA: de inspecties vonden begin januari plaats na aankomst in Bremerhaven. De Havendienst wil de resultaten niet aan Zembla toelichten. Op 18 februari stelt plaatsvervangend directeur van de Duitse Kustwacht Dieter Schmidt dat nog steeds wordt onderzocht of het schip de bodem heeft geraakt. Schmidt doet de mededeling in het parlement van deelstaat Nedersaksen, het verslag van deze bijeenkomst staat op de website van ZEMBLA.

Did the results of the inspection have any effect on the investigation of the container loss incident? To some extent.

Did you provide the investigators with all the relevant data? MSC has fully cooperated with the relevant authorities.

Could you show us this data? No, MSC has not supplied this data to the media, only to relevant government authorities, with which we have had a full and useful collaboration and coordination since the incident.

Do the investigators have access to all required data? Yes.

Immediately after the incident, MSC promised that all damages will be paid for. Given there is no limit, why is it taking so long to pay for the damages? This was a significant incident and MSC has responded and addressed many issues, such as the salvage operations which were performed at sea and on land. MSC instructed contractors to undertake the search and recovery of the lost containers and debris lost at sea. An area of 3,600 km2 was surveyed with multibeam and side-scan sonar whereby numerous items were mapped and subsequently defined as MSC ZOE and non-MSC ZOE related. With the assistance of echo-scope and ROV, the lost containers and debris were recovered by deploying DP offshore supply vessels equipped with an hydraulic peel grab. A total of 11 floating assets were involved including survey vessels, recovery vessels, guard ships and pollution control vessels. Additionally, a broad shore-based operation was set up which provided for survey registration and process systems, vessel management, waste removal and control facilities, as well as the overall management of personnel from the global salvage experts Ardent. On land MSC has also had contractors inspect, retrieve and treat debris and waste. Tens of millions of euros have been paid out as part of the MSC-led response operation over more than 9 months.

Dealing with claims has been another key area of work following the MSC ZOE incident. We have seen a large number of claims and not all of them were submitted in a proper manner. Some were not fully supported with vital supporting details, while others seem to have been lodged without any proper basis. Having discussed this with the Dutch authorities, it was decided that some of the claimants would be asked to present their claims again (together with substantiating details), this time through a special founded central Rijkswaterstaat centralised claims office, with which MSC would liaise. Thereafter all claims which were properly justified and documented were assessed and investigated on their merits. This has clearly been a very time-consuming process in order to do things properly.

The mayors of the Wadden isles and local fisherman say that not all their damages are reimbursed. Why didn’t MSC pay them? How long will this take? See above.

MSC is grateful for the civic actions of volunteers from the public who reacted to the incident in January. In relation to some of the claims referred to above, it will take as long as it takes to receive proper justification and documentation for claims related to this incident. MSC will address every claim fairly through the same process outlined above, which was agreed with the Dutch government. Outstanding claims represent only a small fraction of the total cost of the response operation already paid out.

How much money did MSC set aside to pay for the damages? MSC regrets that this very significant incident took place. MSC responded by coordinating a very significant response operation and no financial figure could have been set at the start to cover this. MSC’s operation has ensured that beaches were cleaned, in some cases repeatedly, and the sea survey covered every area where we were permitted to go, following up every single sonar detection of material under the sea. The clean-up operation was fully funded and MSC continues to hold regular and constructive discussions with the Dutch government.

Tweede set vragen:

Right after the container loss, the MSC Zoe arrived at Bremerhaven. At this location, the German Port State Control performed an inspection of the ship, during which they found several deficiencies. One issue was a deficiency on the Voyage Data Recorder, it is listed as ‘not as required’ on the inspection form. We have the following questions about this: - Can you confirm that there was a deficiency with the Voyage Data Recorder on the MSC Zoe? - What was the nature of the deficiency? - Did this have an effect on the investigation to the cause of the container loss incident? If so, what effect?

I would refer you to the relevant authorities to ask your questions, if you are referring to equipment that MSC previously passed to the authorities following the incident.

Later komt MSC met een aanvullende reactie:

In relation to your article of 10 October 2019, MSC would like to clarify that the MSC ZOE had a functioning Voyage Data Recorder (VDR) onboard and data from the voyage was successfully downloaded.

Zembla stelde deze vervolgvragen als reactie op het nieuwe statement:

- Why is it that you didn't send us this statement before? - As for your statement, could you elaborate on this? As it is now, we can't verify it.

We have the following questions about it: - You said the data was successfully downloaded, when and where did this happen? By whom? - What data was downloaded exactly? - Was all data downloaded? - Was this confirmed to you in writing? - Can you provide us with the document in which this is done? - The German Port State Control found a defect on the Voyage Data Recorder, what exactly was this defect?

I reviewed your additional questions about the VDR and would simply reiterate to you that MSC ZOE had a functioning voyage data recorder onboard and that data from the voyage was successfully downloaded. ______

Derde set vragen:

1. When the MSC Zoe was sailing near the Wadden isles, the ship listed heavily for at least two times. Among others, this is mentioned by Mr. Schmidt from the German Havariekomando in the German regional Parliament in Hannover. From other sources, we know the ship made an angle of over 30 degrees. • Could you confirm the degree of this listing? • Is there a relation between this heavy listing and the container loss? If so, what is the relation? • In your assessment, when did the MSC Zoe lose containers for the first time?

2. Sea Chart 1970, titled 'Mariners Routeing Guide Southern North Sea' is the relevant chart for ships sailing past the Wadden isles in the southern North Sea. This chart is published by the Dutch and German authorities and includes rules and advice. Paragraph 4.3.2 lists an advice for ships like the Zoe to take the northern Deep Water route. This advice has been in effect in it's current form since October 2017. The Zoe took the southern route closer to the shore. • Is MSC aware of this advice? • Why wasn’t the advice followed up?

3. Last week, we published your change of policy on MSC taking the northern route, pending the current investigation of the container loss. In your previous answers, you state that MSC takes this northern route, even though MSC considers the southern route to be safe. • If MSC considers this southern route to be safe, why doesn’t MSC use it anymore? • Why does MSC wait for the outcome of the investigation to decide whether to use the southern route or not?

4. According to several of our interviewees, among whom an experienced Northsee pilot, the captain of the MSC Zoe showed pour seamanship, given the choice to take the southern sailing route in these particular circumstances. What is your response to this?

5. The report of the German Port State Control in Bremerhaven lists ‘hull damage’ as one of the deficiencies on the MSC Zoe. • Where exactly on the ship was this? • What exactly was the nature of it? • According to the Port State Control, the hull damage impaired the seaworthiness of the ship. In what way was the seaworthiness impaired? • Where was the hull of the Zoe inspected? Only in Bremerhaven, or in Gdansk as well? If so, what was the result of the hull inspection in Gdansk? • What are the consequences of the inspections' findings for the investigation to the cause of the accident?

I have covered most of these topics already in earlier responses to you and decline to comment further.