With IMO 2020 regulation in force, shipowners are quite stressed about fuel issues. They simply don’t have any idea how to check for fuel quality issues onboard ships. Keeping this in mind, the Standard Club has issued guidelines that deals with proper VLSFO sampling and testing.
Let’s look at that today.
The IMO have released various guidance notes on the sampling and verification of fuel. The aim is to promote a consistent approach to verifying the sulphur limits of fuel. The Club has
also published guidelines on the sampling of fuel (see here).
The Club has seen numerous cases where fuel has been delivered to a vessel with a BDN declaring it to have a sulphur content level of ≤ 0.50%, whereas testing at an
independent laboratory of a sample of the fuel taken at delivery (in accordance with ISO standards) indicates that the fuel stem has a sulphur content of more than 0.50%,
indicating non-compliant fuel. This has led to disputes under both time charterparties and bunker supply contracts.
It must be remembered that compliance with MARPOL and confirmation of the sulphur content is primarily based on the BDN which is to be accompanied by a representative
sample of the fuel delivered.
Whereas, commercial samples are not, in and of themselves, to be considered conclusive
evidence of sulphur content, although they can be taken into account as part of a PSC inspection if they have been notified to the PSC as part of a vessel notification.
If a compliant BDN has therefore been provided by bunker suppliers, this suggests prima facie paper compliance.
Guidance has also been provided by BIMCO on this issue in which it suggested that as long as commercial test results give a sulphur content of 0.53% or less, then this might allow the ship to burn this fuel in good faith that the BDN value has been verified.
However, BIMCO accept that there is still a risk that the fuel may subsequently be tested and found to be noncompliant by PSC, particularly the MARPOL delivered sample, so there is no guarantee of compliance on this basis either.
Ultimately, there appears to be no guidance as to whether fuel is to be consumed in such circumstances. Ship owners may choose to consume the fuel in question and seek to rely on any indemnity contained in the time charterparty should there be an inspection by PSC and it be determined that it is non-compliant fuel.
However the reality is that, depending on the nature of the sample taken by PSC, this could still lead to disputes over whether the indemnity has in fact been triggered (i.e. where an in-use sample is taken which identifies excessive sulphur content, the question could arise as to whether this was due to the fuel stem itself or ship board issues for which ship owners are responsible (e.g. inadequate tank cleaning) unless PSC do, in fact, test the MARPOL delivered sample).
The Club has issued an article on bunker tank cleaning and preparation to receive complaint fuel (see here).
Cautious ship owners may therefore be reluctant to take the risk of burning fuel in these circumstances and will want to verify, as best as they reasonably can, the actual sulphur
content of the fuel.
However, with the Carriage Ban now upon us, there will be no time for verification as the carriage of non-compliant fuel is prohibited, and ship owners will be
forced to make a decision very early on, if not immediately.
Did you subscribe to our daily newsletter?
It’s Free! Click here to Subscribe!
Source: Standard Club
