Any confirmation of removal of MVRiver Princess has to face two tests. Firstly, whether the removed trans-shipperweighed the same when it was removed as much as it weighed when it wasregistered?
Secondly, whether it has been scientificallyproven that nothing exists on the sea floor. While the first test failed asonly 11319 metric tonne of the 19361 tonne of River Princess was salvaged andscrapped, many unanswered questions exist also in the way underwater scan wereconducted.
The report submitted by Dr. A. K.Chaubey, Chief Scientist, NIO and Cdr. R.M. Thomas, National Institute ofHydrography, Vasco on the survey conducted by M/s New Horizon Surveys attacksthe underwater survey from the word go calling it ‘incomplete’. The expertsopine that the ‘introduction, objectives and extend of investigations do notreveal any kind of addressing of wreck debris, if any, below seabed’. The factthat the survey did not incorporate the correct geographic position of thevessel raises serious issues whether the survey itself was in good faith. Thereport also points that New Horizon did not conduct the survey as discussed anddecided upon with the experts from NIO and NIH.
New Horizon Survey’s survey report didnot contain details of findings on sub -bottom profiling. Sub-bottom profilingentails identifying and measuring various marine sediment layers below thewater level. In River Princess’s case it would have helped establish whetheranything existed below the seabed. The surveyor failed to submit the data. Eventhe bathymetric data (data that measures the depth of the ocean through sonar,which helps ships navigate by providing the depth of the ocean along theirjourney) did not match. This means that the actual depth of the ocean at thatpoint, and the depth recorded by sonar, were different, due to the presence ofthe bottom of the ship on the ocean floor. No wonder then that the fishingtrawler from Vasco did not judge what lay beneath the surface.
In a written reply to The Goan, TourismDirector Nikhil Desai confirms that “the discrepancies as raised by scientistwere rectified and the same was forwarded directly to NHO Dehradun”. However,the question whether why were two scientists required to verify the surveyorNew Horizon Survey’s underwater survey in the first place and they too were notsatisfied by the way the data were collated raises serious question on whetheris the removal of River Princess was done thoroughly at all. The fact remainsthat it has been an all win situation for Arihant Shipbreakers who will pocket morethan 30 crores when the scrap is sold but get only 14 crores deducted fromtheir invoice raised to the government because the government has scrap valuedit at 2010 rates.
