Wrecks Process.pdf

Wreck processes (under MTA 1994 section 33J)
(includes “Notice to Improve Vessel” and “Declaration of Wreck”)

Amendment Record Sheet moved to rear of the document

Page intentional y left blank

Inform Coastal Team re consideration for
- Refer to Section 33B of MTA for definition of wreck
- vessel stranded/sunk
removal under RMA. Wreck actioned (in
‘Wreck’ to be dealt with
- vessel that is abandoned or in distress
terms of nav safety).
- vessel broken free of moorings and become wrecked
No
The decision on whether the vessel is a wreck and a
Declare the
Yes
Is there a hazard to
Verfiy vessel in state of
navigation safety hazard, should ordinarily be considered
vessel a wreck
navigation?
‘wreck’
by a minimum of 2 Harbourmaster warrant holders
- Yachting NZ
- Previous mooring
Hazard = Actual or potential
- Mooring register
cause or source of harm
- Marina register
- Google search
- Lloyds register
Is the vessel
Attempt to find owner –
- Trademe sales
considered to be a
No
reasonable effort in relation to
- Local boating clubs
‘wreck’ due to being
value of vessel.
- On board evidence: Log book, phone
derelict?
MTA section 33J(2)(b)
numbers etc
- VHF register
- Private investigator (for high value)
Yes
- MNZ registry
- Other vessel owners
Arrange for marking of wreck If
- Port of registry info
necessary – temporary (detail
- Yachting forums
timeframe) or permanent. Local
NTM/ful NTM, marker details.
Is there an
Yes
identified owner?
No
1
2
3

1
2
3
Non-statutory sub-process for
Issue the Wreck Notice. Advise
Timeframe:
“floating wreck”/derelict
that the wreck wil  be removed in a
- Discuss with Owner
Issue the Wreck Notice. Advise
specified timeframe and in a
- appropriate
owner to remove wreck in a
manner satisfactory to ECan. MTA
- aligned to site/nature/
specified timeframe and in a
Discuss with owner,
section 33J(2)(a)
complexity
manner satisfactory to ECan. MTA
include timeframe and
- no less than period it wil  take
section 33J(2)(a)
outcomes to meet.
ECan to undertake removal
- Use Template text “Declaration
of Wreck”
Yes
Have outcomes/
deadline
Confirm reasons for non-
An independent third party
been met?
removal, advise owner that the
marine surveyor should
wreck wil  be removed and
ordinarily be requested to
No
owner will be charged for
Has the removal taken place
provide “Clarification of
No
removal costs plus Council fees
within the timeframe?
Condition” before moving
MTA Section 33J(2)(b),(3),(4)
Issue written “Notice to
forward with wreck process
Improve Vessel” if
unless a strong case exists not to
outcomes/deadline not
Yes
met.
Attempt to find owner – reasonable effort in
relation to value of vessel.   MTA section
33J(2)(b)
Have outcomes/
Wreck dealt with.
deadline been met? Discretion of
No
TRIM details/emails/logs to:
HM to further timeframes or start
NAVI/ACCI/REC: NAVIGATION
wreck process
SAFETY – Accidents Incidents –
Hazards - Recreational
Does the wreck have
Yes
any residual value?
Wreck dealt with.
TRIM details/emails/logs to:
NAVI/ACCI/REC: NAVIGATION
SAFETY – Accidents Incidents
2
– Hazards - Recreational

2
Yes
No
Arrange removal to secure
location. Council to bil  owner
Arrange contractor to
cost of removal plus Council
remove wreck, Council to
fees
bil  owner cost of removal
plus Council fees.
Yes
Has owner paid for
cost of removal
No
Retain wreck for a suitable timeframe, until
owner has settled account(if account >= value of
vessel, dispose of vessel)
Wreck dealt with.
Yes
Does sale of wreck
TRIM details/emails/logs to:
cover al  costs?
NAVI/ACCI/REC: NAVIGATION SAFETY – Accidents
Incidents – Hazards - Recreational
No
Consider taking recovery
action against owner

Notes on determining “wreck” where the vessel is/potentially is derelict

MTA 1994 33B (Interpretation) gives definitions of “ship” and “wreck”. S33J covers wreck removal powers
of regional councils. Also note that NS Bylaw 2016, clauses 35, 36, 41, 42, may come into play here.

A Google search for [derelict] produces several results, al  on a similar theme, such as this from Oxford
Languages (the OED):
derelict
adjective
1.in a very poor condition as a result of disuse and neglect.
"a derelict Georgian mansion"

The above OED definition would lead to “a derelict ship” being “a vessel which is in a very poor condition as
a result of disuse and neglect” which seems a reasonable match for common usage.

Factors to be considered before declaring a vessel a wreck due to it being derelict.
The list is not exhaustive, nor wil  any one factor, nor any particular combination of them, necessarily
definitively determine a vessel to be derelict.

Overal , where does it sit on the spectrum of total rubbish <------> pristine?

- Is it watertight/weathertight?
o  Hul  holed
o  Weather deck holed
o  Openings/hatches, securable or not
o  Means of pumping out available, operational, monitorable, reliable
o  Fittings in a state that could cause damage leading to water ingress (e.g.: stays or
stanchions that could tear out in bad conditions leading to holes in the deck)
o  Hul  or deck material in unsound condition (e.g.: soft or brittle deck that could easily hole)
- Secure means of remaining on mooring or alongside?
- Buoyancy reduced by excessive marine growth or waterlogged hul  or other material?
- Stability compromised?
- Material (hazardous or not)/cargo/other items on board which due to their inherent nature or manner of
stowage/restraint aboard create a risk of the vessel sinking or it being/becoming a hazard to other
vessels?
- Beyond economic repair to a state of the vessel not being unseaworthy? May require an external
appraisal.

N.B.: Using the broader, proposed by NSG to Part 91 review, definition of unseaworthy (rather than current
Bylaw one) which is “unseaworthy means, in the opinion of the Director or a Harbourmaster either or both
of the fol owing: Not being in a fit condition or readiness to safely navigate or remain on the water; not being
in a fit condition or readiness to safely undertake a voyage within its design capabilities.”

Notice to Improve

If a vessel is determined to be a potential wreck through being a derelict vessel but could reasonably be
expected to be repaired to a satisfactory state such that formal y declaring it a wreck could be avoided, then
consider the interim step of issuing a “Notice to Improve”.  This letter would be the formal notice fol owing a
conversation with the vessel owner, and it would be highlighted in the conversation that the notice is
necessarily blunt and formal but that the HMO would be working with the owner to maintain a watch on the
process of improvement.

Template text fol ows – to be inserted into most current ECan letter template, with MTA extract on page
fol owing letter.
=====================================
DD Month YYYY
[Name]
[Address]
[Email]

Dear [NAME]
Notice to Improve Vessel
Name of vessel:
Location of vessel:
[Insert photograph if available]

As per our conversation, this letter is written notification that your vessel is considered by the
Harbourmaster’s Office to be a in a state of repair such that it could become a hazard to navigation.

You are required to achieve, as a minimum, the fol owing outcomes by [tttt DD Month YYYY] in a manner
satisfactory to the Harbourmaster’s Office:
-
[LIST OUTCOMES TO BE MET]

As discussed, the Harbourmaster’s Office wil  remain in touch with you regarding the work programme so
we can continue to discuss progress and any difficulties in work completion you may encounter. However, if
the outcomes above are not met to the satisfaction of the Harbourmaster’s Office, your vessel may be
declared a wreck under section 33J of the Maritime Transport Act 1994 (details on next page) and
subsequently removed and disposed of should you not take the required action yourself. You wil  be liable
for expenses incurred.

Yours sincerely,

[NAME]
Title (RHM, HM, DHM(S), DHM(O), NSO, MAO)

Declaration of wreck notice template
If the vessel is deemed a wreck and owner identified forward the ‘Declaration of Wreck’

Template text fol ows - to be inserted into most current ECan letter template, with MTA extract on page
fol owing letter.
==============================

DD Month YYYY
[Name]
[Address]
[Email]

Dear [NAME]
Declaration of Wreck
Name of vessel:
Location of vessel:
[Insert photograph if available]


This letter is written notification that your vessel has been declared a wreck pursuant to section 33J of the
Maritime Transport Act 1994.

You are required to remove the vessel from [the waters of the Canterbury region]/[its present location to
XXX] by tttt DD Month YYYY in a manner satisfactory to the Harbourmaster’s Office.

If the vessel is not removed as above, arrangements wil  be made by the Harbourmaster's Office for the
removal of the vessel. You wil  be liable for expenses incurred.


Yours sincerely,




[NAME]
Title (RHM, HM, DHM(S), DHM(O), NSO)
Acting under delegation

Maritime Transport Act 1994

33J Removal of wrecks by regional council
(1) A regional council may take steps in accordance with this section to remove and deal with any wreck
within its region that is a hazard to navigation.
(2) The regional council may—
(a) require the owner of the wreck, or an agent of the owner, to remove the wreck within a time and in a
manner satisfactory to the regional council:
(b) destroy, dispose of, remove, take possession of, or sel a wreck (or any part of it) if—
(i) the regional council has made reasonable efforts to find the owner or agent; and
(i ) the owner or agent cannot be found or fails to remove the whole of the wreck within the time specified or
in a manner satisfactory to the regional council.
(3) The regional council may reimburse itself from the proceeds of any sale of the wreck for any actual
expenses incurred in removing the wreck (but must pay any balance owing to the owner of the wreck).
(4) The regional council may recover the expenses incurred in removing a wreck as a debt owed by the
owner of the wreck in any court of competent jurisdiction.

33B Interpretation
In this Part, unless the context otherwise requires,—
wreck includes—
(a) a ship or an aircraft that is abandoned, stranded, or in distress, or any equipment, cargo, or other
articles belonging to or separated from such a ship or aircraft:
(b) shipping containers and property lost overboard or similarly separated from a ship other than cargo lost
in the course of unloading or discharge from the ship while the ship is in a port:
(c) a derelict ship.

2 Interpretation
(1) In this Act, unless the context otherwise requires,—
ship means every description of boat or craft used in navigation, whether or not it has any means of
propulsion; and includes—
(a) a barge, lighter, or other like vessel:
(b) a hovercraft or other thing deriving ful or partial support in the atmosphere from the reaction of air
against the surface of the water over which it operates:
(c) a submarine or other submersible

AMENDMENT RECORD

Date
Reason for Amendment
Person Amending
New
version
No.
11/09/21
Visio diagram has now been embedded into the Word
GH
4.3
document
24/02/22
Tweaked the arrows so that if we have dealt with the
GH
4.4
wreck, we should afterwards check that the owner has
paid the costs we incurred.
28Sep22
Added notes on determining wreck; added notes and
IF
5.0
template text for “Notice to Improve Vessel”; amended
flowchart to account for changes and addition of “Notice
to Improve…” step; added non-statutory sub-process to
flowchart.
1 Jan 2023
Moved amendment table to the rear of the document.
TJ
5.1
Removed the two templates from the document and
created separate templates in the templates folder
21Apr23
New embedded visio diagram, with inclusion of two
TJ
6
people making the decision on the wreck and also an
independent third party marine surveyor to provide
clarification on condition.  Also an explanation on the
factors/considerations before providing a timeline for
removal
8May23
Two templates returned to the document after further
TJ, IF
6.1
discussion that easier to find when kept together
8Jun23
After fol owing the process, during a live incident, it was
TJ
6.1
felt that the instruction of the Marine Surveyor needs to be
after confirming a Navigation Safety Issue.  There are
other possible amendments to be discussed and a new
draft wil  be drawn up, but this process wil  remain until
completed and approved
13Jun23
Adjusted the process to reflect the recent incident
TJ
7
responses.
16Jun23
Adjusted the ‘wreck’ due to being derelict section, changed
TJ, IF, GH, EM, GM
7.1
position of Navigation Safety issue.  Added a note for
discretion with regards to the non-statutory procedure for
timelines.  Process replaced the current process in SP
08Sep23
New document created with a new visio diagram, the
TJ, IF, GH, EM, EM, JK,
8
original process document is now in Archive and accessible
RE
there.  Amendments arose fol owing review – See TRIM
3Mar24
Added an interpretation from the MTA for hazard to clarify
TJ, GH
8.1
– Actual or potential cause or source of harm