LEGAL & REGULATORY MATTERS SUSTAINABILITY IN THE SUBMARINE CABLE REPAIR MARKET BY ANDRÉS FÍGOLI
I
n submarine cable damage litigation, judges frequently question the exorbitant costs of maintenance operations. Surprisingly, from 30% and up to 70% of the total average repair cost (USD 1.5-2 million) stems from fuel expenses for vessel transit from port bases to fault locations, rather than the repair itself. This raises a critical consideration: Could alternative maintenance vessels in closer proximity have reduced fuel consumption and costs? While claimants cite pre-existing maintenance contracts, defendants (typically fishing vessel operators or insurers) often counter that costs appear inflated. Geopolitical barriers exacerbate this issue by excluding cost-effective repair providers from the market, undermining both financial efficiency and sustainability goals. This article examines sustainability from two perspectives: environmental impact and market viability amid global distortions. In this article, we will avoid mentioning any particular nation in order to avoid drawing attention to geopolitics. Talking too much about such issues will not improve the industry in any way.
CABLE MAINTENANCE AGREEMENTS
Submarine cable repairs operate under two frameworks: • Private agreements: Direct negotiations between cable owners and contractors. • Club agreements: Collective terms negotiated by multiple cable owners.
116 SUBMARINE TELECOMS FORUM MAGAZINE
Maintenance vessels, strategically stationed mainly in northern hemisphere ports or equatorial regions for rapid deployment, incur substantial fuel costs during transit. For example, a South Atlantic repair requiring vessel mobilization from the Caribbean may cost USD 2 million, with almost 70% allocated to fuel.
rine cable operators in remote regions. Fortunately, Chile’s unique seabed topography plays a crucial role in ensuring cable safety, with deep slope near the shore. Many submarine cables in the region have required minimal repairs. Their location in deep waters has provided a natural defence against external threats. Other southern hemi-
The lack of strategically located repair ports in the South is largely due to insufficient regional cable deployments, making it economically unviable to station dedicated repair vessels in these areas. The lack of strategically located repair ports in the South is largely due to insufficient regional cable deployments, making it economically unviable to station dedicated repair vessels in these areas. Without a minimum number of cables to justify the cost, operators are left with limited and expensive maintenance options. This dilemma is particularly evident in cases such as the new submarine cable projects in Chile. Even if a club agreement were to include them in its coverage, the need to mobilize vessels from distant locations would still result in significant costs. Finding an available construction vessel on the open market for urgent repairs is also an expensive alternative, further complicating cost management for subma-
sphere countries are not so lucky and face economically unviable solutions.
WHY DOES THIS COST INEFFICIENCY PERSIST?
Geopolitical constraints severely limit cable repair supplier selection options. In some cable laying tenders, the difference between the bids can be more than 80% of the price quoted. The submarine cable maintenance market follows the same pattern, with a clear divide between “authorized suppliers” and those who are not. Africa exemplifies this imbalance, with only three maintenance vessels: one in South Africa, one in Cape Verde (serving West Africa), and one in Oman (East Africa). Surely open-market competition could reduce