Almost a year and ten months after a ship collided with the Rio-Niterói bridge, the Federal Public Ministry (MPF) is demanding negotiations capable of finding solutions for abandoned vessels in Guanabara Bay.
The institution considers that there is a serious environmental and security crisis. At the beginning of the year, a public civil action was filed against the Union, the Brazilian Institute of Environment and Renewable Natural Resources (IBAMA) and the State Institute of Environment (INEA).
Inea carries out inspection and identification activities for abandoned vessels – Tania Rêgo/Agency Brazil
On Wednesday (21) the MPF released a note announcing that it had forwarded a request to the Federal Court for a conciliation hearing with all those involved.
Named São Luiz, the ship involved in the Rio-Niterói bridge accident had been anchored since 2016. The collision occurred on November 14, 2022, at around 6 pm, leading the concessionaire Ecoponte to completely block traffic. The flow was partially released about three hours later, and completely normalized the following morning. Engineering assessments found that the damage was not structural.
At the time, the Navy reported that a strong wind had broken the chains holding the vessel, leaving it adrift. After the accident, the ship was rescued by three tugboats.
The note released by the MPF includes an assessment by Federal Prosecutor Jaime Mitropoulos on the current situation. “These vessels represent a serious risk to the environment, navigation safety and public health. The hearing is crucial for the efficient resolution of the case, promoting a possible agreement that can speed up the process and guarantee the protection of the collective rights involved,” he stated. According to the prosecutor, the expectation is that the Union and the environmental agencies will agree to draw up an integrated management plan, including a schedule of actions to resolve the problem.
Collision
When the collision occurred on the Rio-Niterói bridge, the Marina did not report whether it had any survey of abandoned ships in Guanabara Bay. A survey carried out in 2021 by the Fluminense Federal University (UFF) counted the presence of 61 forgotten hulls, which posed environmental and navigation safety risks due to oxidation and possible leakage of harmful substances. Environmentalists coined the term “ship graveyard” to refer to the situation.
The Navy and environmental agencies have specific responsibilities for dealing with abandoned vessels. Photo: Tania Rêgo/Agency Brazil
According to the note released by the MPF, article 225 of the Federal Constitution and the National Environmental Policy establish the responsibility of the Public Authorities in the preservation and combating of pollution. “The Navy, through the Harbor Master’s Office, and environmental agencies such as Ibama and Inea, have specific responsibilities to deal with abandoned vessels. The situation is aggravated by the inefficiency of inspection and the lack of compliance with international standards on maritime safety and waste management,” it highlighted.
AGU does not see any obstacles to scheduling a conciliation hearing – Tania Rêgo/Agency Brazil
Guanabara Bay has been declared a permanent preservation area, which means that its water resources, landscape, geological stability and biodiversity must be protected. In the lawsuit filed earlier this year, the MPF had already argued for the need for urgent action by the competent authorities, including the Navy, Ibama and Inea, to remove the hulls. It also demanded the implementation of several measures to mitigate the damage.
Wanted by Brazil Agencythe Attorney General’s Office (AGU) reported, in a note, that it does not see any obstacles to scheduling a conciliation hearing, since the negotiated solution of disputes involving available rights is a guideline for the institution’s actions.
“If the hearing is scheduled by the federal judge, Ibama, if summoned, will also participate, and may provide any technical information as a form of collaboration, despite understanding that it is not the competent entity to act on the case,” the note adds.
Inea reported that it carries out inspection and identification activities for abandoned vessels, in addition to monitoring irregularities in water transport and acting in response to oil spills with no identified origin in Guanabara Bay.
The agency says it has already indicated two employees to the Navy to assist in the preparation of an emergency plan for coordinated action and integrated management, aiming at the inspection and removal of ships. “INEA informs that it is at the disposal of the MPF to meet all necessary demands”, it added.
In turn, the Navy reported that the Rio de Janeiro Port Authority (CPRJ) is responsible for monitoring water traffic inside Guanabara Bay and that there are no vessels adrift.
“The anchored vessels, visible north of the Rio-Niterói Bridge, are all in good standing, manned by their crews and awaiting operational conditions, such as vacancies in the ports, crew changes, new contracts or repairs. It is worth noting that the CPRJ carries out periodic inspections on these vessels, aiming to identify signs of abandonment or non-compliance with safety requirements, in order to require those responsible to comply with applicable standards and legislation.”
According to the text, in areas near Niterói and São Gonçalo, the Navy identified hulls in a total or partial state of sinking and in an advanced level of deterioration. However, it reports that there is no risk of movement, as they are stranded in shallow areas.
The vessels would also not have any material or substances that are hazardous to the environment on board. “The georeferenced mapping of the sunken hulls in Guanabara Bay was carried out in January 2023, with the support of the Airmobile Group of the Military Police of the State of Rio de Janeiro. 51 sunken hulls were identified. Since then, the CPRJ has adopted interagency coordination initiatives to facilitate the removal.”
Abandoned vessels in Guanabara Bay. – Tania Rêgo/Agency Brazil
According to the Navy, six hulls have already been removed and there is a discussion with different public authorities to establish a technical cooperation agreement to deal with the issue. “The Brazilian Navy will continue to ensure the safety of navigation, the safeguarding of human life at sea and the prevention of environmental pollution caused by vessels,” the text adds.
Removal
According to the lawsuit filed earlier this year, the MPF wants the Navy to seize and remove vessels that pose a danger and to conduct regular inspections to ensure compliance with safety and pollution prevention standards. It also demands that Ibama monitor environmental conditions in Guanabara Bay, paying special attention to the impacts caused by abandoned vessels. In addition, it demands that Inea and the Union get involved in developing plans to solve the problem, ensuring that vessels are recycled in accordance with best practices.
“The lack of effective action, even after the São Luiz collision, exposes the urgent need for a more coordinated and efficient structural process to prevent and respond adequately to emergency situations and environmental risks,” says a note released by the MPF. According to the institution, the 2022 episode highlights the inefficiency of the Public Authorities in dealing with the issue.
Sinking ships is a procedure that often generates controversy. Photo – Tania Rêgo/Agency Brazil
In a legal proceeding, the removal of the ship São Luiz was determined in September 2021. The decision was made within the scope of a lawsuit filed by Companhia Docas do Rio de Janeiro. Linked to the National Secretariat of Ports and Waterway Transport of the Ministry of Infrastructure, the company is the port authority responsible for managing the public ports located in the capital of Rio de Janeiro and in three other municipalities in the state: Itaguaí, Niterói and Angra dos Reis. At the time, the company Navegação Mansur, responsible for the vessel that collided with the bridge, was requested to be sentenced.
Reports included in the lawsuit indicated that the ship’s abandonment posed risks to navigation, environmental pollution and human life. According to the Rio de Janeiro Dock Company, the vessel was completely abandoned and in an advanced state of deterioration. In addition, it was twisted by numerous 360-degree turns around its own axis. The situation, including the advanced state of oxidation of the chains that held it to the bottom, had already generated fears that the ship could break loose and drift, as ended up happening.
In the lawsuit filed against Navegação Mansur, Companhia Docas do Rio de Janeiro was demanding a debt of almost R$6.7 million for the use of the port infrastructure. The ship São Luiz itself is indicated as a possible guarantee for the payment of these amounts. Navegação Mansur was tried in absentia: although it was summoned, the company did not comment on the lawsuit, and was ordered to pay the debt and remove the vessel, which did not occur. Brazil Agency tried unsuccessfully to contact the company.
Sinking
The sinking of ships is a procedure that often generates controversy. In 2016, federal judge Paulo André Espirito Santo, of the 20th Federal Court of Rio de Janeiro, assessed that the Navy does not need judicial authorizationof an abandoned vessel without a crew in Brazilian territorial waters that is putting the environment and the safety of other vessels at risk.
The judge analyzed the case involving the ship Recife Star, whose hull was adrift near the municipality of São João da Barra, in the north of Rio de Janeiro, a place where there are several oil platforms. The Union requested authorization from the courts to sink it, but the judge considered that the measure did not depend on a court decision.
Paulo Espírito Santo gave those responsible a 48-hour deadline to recover the ship, which had no engine and was to be taken to India by a tugboat, when it lost control after a cable broke.
Abandoned vessels in Guanabara Bay. – Tania Rêgo/Agency Brazil
“To understand the gravity of the situation, just imagine the damage a drifting vessel could cause to human life and public or private property if it collides with another vessel or oil platform,” wrote the judge.
According to him, if those responsible did not act, the Navy would be protected by Federal Law 7,542/86, and could sink or remove the ship “at its own risk” and based on a technical decision. For the judge, by requesting judicial approval to sink the ship, the Union was seeking to transfer to the Judiciary a burden that is its own.
“The court cannot choose the best military strategy to be adopted: whether to destroy or remove the vessel,” the decision of Espirito Santo stated. He also noted that the Navy acts in the defense of the Homeland and has the power to act to prevent navigation accidents.
Last year, the sinking of the aircraft carrier São Paulo also ended up in court. The vessel had been adrift for months on the high seas off the coast of Pernambuco. The MPF, however, filed a lawsuit to prevent the Navy from sinking it, claiming that it had asbestos in its structure, a substance that had toxic and carcinogenic potential. The request was not accepted by the courts. aircraft carrier ended up being sunk in February of last year.
