Connect with us

Business

SCMA: Bunker players gain most when adopting SBC Terms 2022 in marine fuel supply contracts

SCMA elaborates on Singapore Bunker Claims Procedure (SBC Terms), key changes made to its
terms, its positive impact in resolving bunker disputes and how it is in the financial interest of
bunker players to adopt SBC Terms 2022.

Admin

Published

on

SCMA Logo MT v4

In an exclusive interview with Singapore-based bunkering publication Manifold Times, Ms Corina Song, Vice-chairperson of Singapore Chamber of Maritime Arbitration, recently shared more about Singapore Bunker Claims Procedure (SBC Terms) that came into force in September 2022 including:

  • the key changes made to its terms,
  • its impact in resolving bunker disputes,
  • how it has been designed by SCMA to specifically benefit the bunker industry and
  • the importance of bunker players adopting SBC Terms

MT: Tell us about the Singapore Chamber of Maritime Arbitration’s Singapore Bunker Claims Procedure (SBC Terms).

The Singapore Bunker Claims Procedure SBC Terms is a set of arbitral rules for the resolution of disputes arising out of or in connection with the sale and supply of bunker by arbitration. This includes, amongst others, disagreements over quality and/or quantity of bunker; and/or non-payment or non-delivery of bunker.

The quantum of claims in bunker disputes can sometimes be modest when compared to other shipping and international trade disputes. Moreover, the issues of fact and law are relatively simple. The SBC Terms were designed by the Singapore Chamber of Maritime Arbitration (SCMA) with these features in mind. Besides the general SCMA Rules (4th Edition, 1 January 2022) (the SCMA Rules) that is applied to all types of disputes, the bunkering industry is uniquely offered the additional option of applying the SBC Terms for an even faster and less costly process to resolve bunker disputes.

MT: When was SBC Terms 2022 launched? What’s the difference between the old SBC terms and the latest SBC Terms?

The SBC Terms 2022 is found in the Singapore Standards 600 of 2022, the Code of Practice for Bunkering for Bunker Tankers Using Tank Gauging (SS 600:2022). It came into force in September 2022 when SS 600:2022 was launched.

The previous iteration of the SBC Terms is the SBC Terms 2014, found in SS 600:2014.

The key changes made to the SBC Terms are set out below:

No requirement to send Notice of Protest or Complaint to Maritime and Port Authority of Singapore (MPA)

Where there is a dispute over the quantity of the bunker, the Notice of Protest only needs to be sent to the Singapore Shipping Association (SSA). Similarly, where there is a dispute over the quality of the bunker, the complaint only needs to be sent to SSA. There is no longer any need to send either the Notice of Protest or complaint to MPA.

Additional information required in the Notice of Arbitration

The Notice of Arbitration (NOA) now requires that the Claimant (i) specify whether the dispute concerns the quality or quantity of bunker, failure to deliver the bunker, non-payment for the bunker, or any other dispute arising from the supply of bunker; and (ii) include a formal request for arbitration as well as reference to the arbitration agreement or a reproduction of the arbitration agreement.

Expedited Arbitration and Summary Procedure

  • An arbitration conducted under the SBC Terms may proceed in two (2) ways. There is a default process, and a faster process known as ‘Summary Procedure’. SS 600:2022 now refers to the default process as ‘Expedited Arbitration’ to avoid confusion with the ‘Expedited Procedure’ in the SCMA Rules.
  • When the Summary Procedure applies, pursuant to SBC Terms 2022,
  1. the hearing will be fixed within 21 days from the day the SCMA Registrar receives the request for Summary Procedure. This gives parties more time to prepare their cases. By comparison, the SBC Terms 2014 fixes a hearing within 14 days;
  2. supporting documents and written submissions must be filed no later than 5 days before the date of the hearing. Previously, parties could file their supporting documents and written submissions 2 days before the hearing. This change gives the SCMA Registrar or Tribunal more time to review the facts and arguments.

Adducing oral evidence

Oral evidence could not be adduced in any circumstances under the SBC Terms 2014. However, under SBC Terms 2022, oral evidence can be presented at the request of the SCMA Registrar or Tribunal having conduct of the hearing. This strikes a better balance between having a fair hearing, with a better understanding of the evidence, and resolving a dispute expeditiously.

No mandatory physical hearings

Hearings under the SBC Terms 2022 can now be conducted virtually. This adopts the change in work practices during the COVID-19 pandemic. It is no longer mandatory that hearings be held at a physical venue.

Written awards for all disputes

Under SBC Terms 2014, a written award only needs to be rendered where the claim or counterclaim exceeds SGD50,000. The SBC Terms 2022 has changed the practice, requiring the SCMA Registrar or Tribunal having conduct of the arbitration to issue a written award for all disputes.

No need for security of the claim to be lodged with SSA

The SBC Terms 2022 no longer provides that security for the claim may be lodged with SSA. This simplifies proceedings and reduces costs. In addition, respondents would not be out-of-pocket before the merits of the claim are even decided. Should such security be required, the claimant could make an application to the SCMA Registrar or Tribunal, seeking such security.

The SCMA is grateful for the help of the organisations involved in the revision of the SBC Terms.  We would like to thank MPA, SSA, Singapore Standards, and the Singapore Chemical Industry Council.

MT: What are the differences between SBC Terms 2022 and the rest of arbitration terms out there?

A distinguishing feature of the SBC Terms 2022 (as is also the case under the SCMA Rules) is the non-administered model of arbitration upon which it was crafted. Unlike institutions that adopt an administered arbitration model, parties are given full control of managing their own arbitration process. The SBC Terms 2022 and the SCMA Rules provide parties with the tools and procedural flexibility to maximise efficiency and decrease costs. There are no fees payable for administration of the arbitration since this is not performed by the SCMA. There is also no need to pay a filing fee before commencing the arbitration or placing a deposit. The upfront costs are significantly reduced. However, should parties require specific services, such as the appointment of the sole arbitrator when parties cannot agree, this can be provided by the SCMA Secretariat at a modest fixed fee.

It is due to these cost-saving measures that the shipping and international trade industries have long favoured non-administered arbitration. For this reason, the SCMA was re-constituted in 2009 as an independent body to provide a framework for maritime arbitration specifically tailored to the needs of the maritime community.

When the SBC Terms 2022 are compared to SCMA Rules, some examples would illustrate how the former has been designed by SCMA to specifically benefit the bunker industry.

  • Where a bunker claim is valued at SGD100,000, the earliest it can be resolved under the SCMA Rules’ Expedited Procedure is an estimated period of three (3) months. By contrast, the same claim could, when applying the Summary Procedure of the SBC Terms 2022, be determined in or around less than two (2) months.
  • The arbitrator’s fees and legal costs for proceedings under SBC Terms 2022 are capped at a lower ceiling than that for the SCMA Rules’ Expedited Procedure.

MT: Why should bunker players adopt SBC Terms 2022 in their contracts?

For the reasons earlier shared, it is clearly in the financial interests of bunker players to adopt the SBC Terms 2022. The cost savings do not, in any way compromise due process to achieve a fair and just outcome.

Should a bunker player wish to use the SBC Terms 2022 in its sale and/or supply contracts, the model arbitration clause is available for incorporation on the SCMA website.

MT: How can SBC Terms 2022 help the maritime sector as it moves towards the adoption of clean fuels in preparation for IMO 2030/2050?

The IMO has implemented the Carbon Intensity Indicate Rating Scheme that measures, amongst other indicia, carbon emissions of ships. One key way to reduce carbon emissions is to use low-carbon or cleaner fuels.

The utility and benefits of the SBC Terms 2022 remain unchanged, regardless of the composition of the fuel. Quality and quantity assurance will persist as perennial concerns. Similarly, the possibility of parties refusing to make full and timely payment continues to exist, as does non-delivery of low-carbon fuels. These are all causes of disputes arising out of or in connection with the sale and/or supply of low-carbon bunker.

Ms Corina Song is also a Partner in the international arbitration, litigation, and maritime and aviation practice groups at Allen & Gledhill LLP. Ms Song is a Senior Accredited Specialist in Maritime and Shipping Law by the Singapore Academy of Law, a statutory board.

 

Photo credit: Singapore Chamber of Maritime Arbitration
Published: 8 May, 2023

Continue Reading

Alternative Fuels

Yang Ming orders six LNG dual-fuel, ammonia-ready containerships from Hanwha Ocean

Each of the six new vessels will have a capacity of up to 13,650 TEU and feature LNG dual-fuel propulsion and Ammonia Fuel Ready specifications.

Admin

Published

on

By

Yang Ming orders six LNG dual-fuel, ammonia-ready containerships from Hanwha Ocean

Taiwanese shipping firm Yang Ming Marine Transport Corporation (Yang Ming) and South Korean shipbuilder Hanwha Ocean on Wednesday (2 September) signed a shipbuilding contract for six 13,000 TEU class LNG dual-fuel container vessels. 

The contract was signed by Dr. Chuck Tsai, Chairman of Yang Ming, and Mr. Charles Kim, CEO of Hanwha Ocean. The vessels are scheduled for delivery between 2028 and 2029. 

They will complement Yang Ming’s existing fleet of 10,000+ TEU vessels and serve as key vessels on East-West services, with deployment flexibility across trade lanes connecting Asia with the East and West Coasts of North America, South America, and the Mediterranean. 

Each of the six new vessels will have a capacity of up to 13,650 TEU and feature LNG dual-fuel propulsion and Ammonia Fuel Ready specifications.

“As Yang Ming transitions toward net-zero emissions, LNG provides a relatively mature and economically viable alternative fuel solution, capable of reducing greenhouse gas emissions by approximately 20%,” the company said. 

“At the same time, ammonia can serve as a carbon-free fuel by utilising converted LNG storage facilities, while offering relatively lower conversion costs and comparatively well-developed supply chains and infrastructure. The Ammonia Fuel Ready design will therefore provide Yang Ming with greater flexibility in responding to increasingly stringent international regulations on greenhouse gas emissions.”

In addition, the vessels will be equipped with Type B LNG fuel tanks with a design pressure of 1.0 bar to enhance the safety and efficiency of LNG operations, together with a range of energy-saving technologies, including Wind Shields, Rudder Bulbs, Pre-Swirl Stators, and Shore Power Systems. Smart ship technologies and cybersecurity protection features will also be incorporated to enhance operational efficiency, safety, and reliability while effectively reducing fuel consumption and greenhouse gas emissions.

Deliveries under Yang Ming’s next-generation fleet optimization plan commenced earlier this year. By 2030, a total of 24 new vessels are expected to enter service. 

This includes 18 LNG dual-fuel vessels—comprising five 15,500 TEU, seven 16,000 TEU, and the six 13,000 TEU vessels under this contract—alongside six 8,000 TEU methanol dual-fuel-ready ships. 

 

Photo credit: Yang Ming Marine Transport
Published: 4 September, 2026

Continue Reading

Alternative Fuels

LR, China’s MARIC unveil tanker concept ready for three future bunker fuels

Both secured AiP for a new 114,000 DWT product and crude oil tanker designed to accommodate future conversion to LNG, methanol or ammonia.

Admin

Published

on

By

LR, China’s MARIC unveil tanker concept ready for three future bunker fuels

Lloyd’s Register (LR) and the Marine Design and Research Institute of China (MARIC) on Thursday (3 September) have secured Approval in Principle (AiP) for a new 114,000 DWT product and crude oil tanker designed to accommodate future conversion to LNG, methanol or ammonia.

Announced at SMM 2026, the concept addresses one of the biggest investment challenges facing shipping today: the need to develop vessels and capabilities that can support a range of alternative fuel options and pathways as technologies, infrastructure and regulations evolve.

While LNG is already a mature fuel pathway, methanol and ammonia remain at an earlier stage of development, with questions around global fuel availability, infrastructure development, economics and long-term adoption.

The 114,000 DWT tanker concept has been designed as a product and crude oil carrier that can accommodate future conversion to LNG, methanol or ammonia as technologies, regulations and fuel supply chains mature. By incorporating conversion readiness at the design stage, the concept aims to reduce future retrofit complexity and provide owners with greater confidence when planning long-term fleet investments.

The design concept was reviewed against LR’s July 2026 class rules and regulations, including requirements relating to ships using gases and other low-flashpoint fuels, alongside relevant IACS Common Structural Rules for oil tankers. Final classification and statutory approval remain subject to full compliance with all applicable rules and regulations.

Theo Kourmpelis, Global Business Director for Tankers, Lloyd’s Register, said: “Shipowners are being asked to make major investment decisions today despite continued uncertainty around which fuels will dominate in the decades ahead. Alternative fuel solutions each offer potential pathways to compliance, but fuel infrastructure, regulation and economics continue to evolve at different speeds around the world.

“Designs that preserve flexibility will be critical in helping owners manage risk while preparing for multiple future scenarios.”

Si Nan, Marine & Offshore Marketing Department Vice Director, MARIC, said: “As the industry explores different decarbonisation pathways, shipowners need vessel designs that can adapt alongside technological and regulatory developments. This concept was developed specifically to provide greater fuel flexibility and long-term resilience, allowing owners to respond to changing market requirements without being locked into a single fuel strategy.

“Receiving Approval in Principle from Lloyd’s Register is an important milestone that validates the design concept and supports its future development.”

 

Photo credit: Lloyd’s Register
Published: 4 September, 2026

Continue Reading

Alternative Fuels

DNV: Alternative-fuelled vessel orders hit highest monthly level since October 2024

LNG-fuelled vessels accounted for the vast majority of August activity while the strong summer performance marked a significant acceleration in ordering activity after a relatively slow start to the year.

Admin

Published

on

By

DNV: Alternative-fuelled vessel orders hit highest monthly level since October 2024

Latest data from classification society DNV’s Alternative Fuels Insight (AFI) platform alternative-fuelled vessel ordering was strong in August, with 52 new vessels added to the platform.

This is the highest monthly total since October 2024 and follows another active month in July, when 47 vessels were added to the database.

LNG-fuelled vessels accounted for the vast majority of August activity, with 46 orders recorded. The container segment led the way with 30 orders, while the car carrier segment contributed a further 12 LNG-fuelled vessels. In addition, four ethanol-fuelled bulk carriers and two hydrogen-powered bulk carriers were added during the month, as well as one LNG bunker vessel.

The strong summer performance marked a significant acceleration in ordering activity after a relatively slow start to the year. In total, 242 alternative-fuelled vessel orders have been placed in the first eight months of 2026, representing a 27% increase compared with the same period in 2025.

LNG remains the dominant fuel choice, accounting for 63% of all alternative-fuelled vessel orders registered so far this year. Container vessels represent the largest share of these LNG orders (59%), followed by car carriers (30%).

Jason Stefanatos, Global Decarbonization Director at DNV Maritime, said: “The past two months have been particularly strong for alternative-fuelled vessel ordering, with August recording the highest monthly total we’ve seen since October 2024. This has helped lift year-to-date orders to a level well above the same period last year.

“LNG remains the leading fuel choice, driven largely by activity in the container and car carrier segments. These sectors have been among the earliest adopters of alternative fuels, supported by predictable liner operations and increasing demand from cargo owners to reduce emissions across supply chains. 

“For many owners, LNG offers a combination of emissions reductions, fuel availability and future flexibility while the longer-term fuel landscape continues to evolve. 

“At the same time, the latest figures include orders for ethanol- and hydrogen-fuelled vessels, highlighting that owners continue to explore a range of decarbonization pathways. Different segments are making different fuel choices, but the overall level of activity demonstrates continued investment in lower-emission shipping.”

Screenshot 2026 09 04 at 12.29.26 PM Screenshot 2026 09 04 at 12.29.36 PM

 

Photo credit: DNV
Published: 4 September, 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

OUR INDUSTRY PARTNERS



Trending