Your chief officer reports that 50 bags of coffee beans in an FCL container (said to contain 1,000 bags) arrived at the terminal with external damage to 50 bags. The shipper demands a clean bill of lading. What is your response?

A. CLEAN VS CLAUSED BILL OF LADING — MASTER'S DECISION: HAGUE-VISBY RULES ARTICLE III RULE 3: the carrier must issue a B/L showing "the apparent order and condition of the goods." If goods are visibly damaged — the B/L must note this condition. A CLEAN B/L represents that the cargo was shipped in good condition. THE DEMAND FOR A CLEAN B/L: issuing a clean B/L for visibly damaged cargo is: (a) fraud against the receiver (who will rely on the clean B/L as evidence of good condition at loading); (b) a breach of Hague-Visby Art III Rule 3; (c) a criminal offence in most jurisdictions (false statement in a commercial document). MASTER'S CORRECT RESPONSE: (1) CLAUSE THE B/L: note the damage on the B/L — e.g., "50 bags received in torn/damaged condition at time of loading." This is a "claused" or "soiled" bill; (2) THE SHIPPER'S PRESSURE: the shipper may argue they cannot present a claused B/L to their buyer (letter of credit may require clean B/L). This is a commercial problem for the shipper — not a reason for the master to issue a fraudulent document; (3) LETTER OF INDEMNITY (LOI): the shipper may offer a Letter of Indemnity — promising to compensate the carrier for any claims arising from issuing a clean B/L despite damage. CRITICAL: P&I Clubs advise NEVER to accept an LOI in exchange for issuing a clean B/L for known damage. An LOI for this purpose is unenforceable as it requires the carrier to commit fraud. Most P&I Clubs will NOT cover claims arising from B/Ls issued in exchange for LOIs for known damage; (4) SURVEY: arrange P&I Club surveyor to document the damage before loading.

B. Accept the Letter of Indemnity from the shipper and issue a clean B/L. The LOI protects the carrier from any claim arising from the cargo condition.

C. The container is an FCL (Full Container Load) — "said to contain." As the carrier has not opened the container, a clean B/L is appropriate regardless of external damage.

D. Issue a clean B/L and note the cargo condition in the Mate's Receipt only. The Mate's Receipt protects the carrier and the clean B/L satisfies the shipper's letter of credit.

A. CONTAINER LOSS OVERBOARD — MASTER'S OBLIGATIONS AND INVESTIGATION FOCUS: IMMEDIATE ACTIONS: (1) SAFETY: no crew on deck in the current conditions. Head count — is anyone missing?; (2) MANOEUVRE: alter course to reduce vessel motion and prevent further casualties. Inform VTS if in TSS or coastal waters; (3) MAIB NOTIFICATION: lost containers and damage to vessel = significant marine incident. Call MAIB 023 8023 2527; (4) MARPOL: if containers contained goods that are now discharged into the sea — MARPOL reporting obligation (material that could pollute); (5) SOPEP/Emergency Response: if hazardous goods are in the lost containers — what is the UN number? IMDG EmS code? Coastal state environmental alert?; (6) LOG: immediate OLB entry — number of containers lost, position, time, sea state, course/speed; (7) NOTIFY: owner, DPA, P&I Club, charterer; (8) MARK ON CHART: position of lost containers. MAIB will want this. Container stranding is a major navigation hazard — notify MRCC/VTS for NAVTEX broadcast; INVESTIGATION FOCUS: (a) WAS THE CARGO SECURED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CSS CODE AND CARGO SECURING MANUAL (CSM)?: the CSS Code (Code of Safe Practice for Cargo Stowage and Securing) and vessel-specific CSM (approved under SOLAS VI/5.6) specify lashing requirements. Did the lashings meet specification? Were they correctly applied?; (b) WAS THE VESSEL'S STABILITY AND LOADING CONDITION APPROPRIATE?; (c) WAS THE WEATHER FORECAST CONSIDERED IN STOWAGE DECISIONS?; (d) WERE LASHINGS CHECKED EN ROUTE?; (e) MASTER'S SIGNATURE ON CARGO PLAN: did the master approve the stowage and securing plan?

B. Container losses at sea are covered by cargo insurance. Notify the charterer and continue the voyage — the containers are their problem once they fall overboard.

C. Container lashing is the chief officer's responsibility. The master is only accountable for navigational decisions and has no cargo securing liability.

D. Three containers overboard is a minor incident. Continue voyage and report at the next port. MAIB notification is only required for vessel damage.

A. IRON ORE FINES LOADING — TML AND MOISTURE ASSESSMENT: LIQUEFACTION RISK: iron ore fines are an IMSBC Code Group A cargo (may liquefy). Liquefaction is when cargo behaves like a liquid due to high moisture content exceeding the Transportable Moisture Limit (TML). Several bulk carriers have sunk due to liquefaction (e.g., Bulk Jupiter 2015, Vinalines Queen 2011). TML TESTING: the shipper must provide: (a) TML certificate (maximum 6 months old for iron ore fines); (b) Moisture content (MC) certificate showing actual MC is below TML. The margin: actual MC should be BELOW TML — the IMSBC Code requires actual MC < TML. A "can test" may be used as a pre-load indicator. RECENT RAINFALL — ADDITIONAL DUTY: if rainfall has occurred since the TML/MC certificate was issued, the moisture content of the surface cargo stockpile may have increased. THE MASTER'S DUTY: (1) REQUEST UPDATED MOISTURE CONTENT TEST: ask the shipper for a fresh moisture content test reflecting post-rainfall conditions. IMSBC Clause 4.4.2 allows the master to request additional testing if there is reason to believe moisture content has increased; (2) VISUAL INSPECTION: inspect the stockpile. Wet sheen on surface, water pooling, flowing consistency when disturbed — all indicators of elevated moisture; (3) CAN TEST: IMSBC Appendix 2 — can test procedure. Take a sample of the cargo into a tin can, seal it, shake vigorously. If free moisture appears or the cargo flows — it is too wet to load; (4) REFUSE TO LOAD IF UNCERTAIN: the master has the right (and duty) to refuse to load Group A cargo that may be unsafe. This is backed by ISM Code 5.3.

B. The shipper's TML certificate is valid. Once the certificate is presented, the master has no further obligation to assess moisture content.

C. Iron ore fines do not liquefy in transit — they are a solid mineral cargo. Moisture content testing is only required for agricultural cargoes such as grain.

D. Rainfall affects only the surface layer of stockpiled cargo. Load the cargo at reduced speed and the surface moisture will dissipate once in the hold.