Oil Products Tanker🇧🇴 BoliviaActive

PAULINA S

Compare

IMO: 8700151
MMSI: 720867009
Call Sign: CPB904

Technical Specifications

Key Figures

Gross Tonnage

3,015GT

Deadweight

2,500DWT

Length Overall

97.4m

Beam

14.23m

Year Built

1989

Intelligence

Risk & Sustainability

Risk scoreHigh

58/ 100

Safety38

Compliance95

Environment38

Carbon intensity · estimatedE

This ship has no verified emissions report. We estimate a band E from its segment, size and age (99% confidence).

Estimate, not a reported figure. Within one band 95% of the time on reported peers.

Compliance

Safety Record

Marine casualties8

GROUNDING - Under power (non-intentional)Serious
Nov 27, 2010MARY'S HARBOUR HEAD, NL, NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR (NL)
On 27 November 2010, the tanker "MOKAMI" grounded on a rock while manoeuvring into Mary's Harbour, Labrador, Newfoundland. Vessel floated free as tide rose with no apparent damage.
GROUNDING - Under power (non-intentional)Serious
Oct 4, 2010CARTWRIGHT, NL
On 04 October 2010, the tanker "MOKAMI" ran aground while leaving Cartwright, Newfoundland and Labrador. Vessel refloated itself at high tide. Vessel not taking water or releasing polution.
GROUNDING - Under power (non-intentional)Serious
Aug 8, 2010PANGNIRTUNG, NU, NUNAVUT (NU)
On 08 August 2010, the tanker "MOKAMI" settled on a sand bar when the tide ran out after mooring at the Pangnirtung, Nunavut unloading/discharging location. After inspection by ship's crew, no damage nor pollution was found.TCMS informed.
GROUNDING - Under power (non-intentional)Serious
Jun 28, 2010NATUASHISIH, NL, NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR (NL)
On 28 June 2010, the oil tanker "MOKAMI" grounded while turning off Natuashisih. When the tide rose the vessel refloated and departed. No damage reported.
TOTAL FAILURE OF ANY MACHINERY OR TECHNICAL SYSTEMMinor
Sep 21, 2009CARTWRIGHT, NL
On 20 September 2009, the M/T "MOKAMI" with 15 POB reported fouling it's propellor while departing Cartwright, NL.
BOTTOM CONTACTMinor
Aug 3, 2009RIGOLET, NL
On 03 August 2009, the M/T "MOKAMI" reported touching bottom while departing the wharf at Rigolet. Damage to the propeller tips reported.
BOTTOM CONTACTMinor
Nov 20, 2005HAVRE DE NATASHQUAN, QC, QUEBEC (QC)
On 20 November 2005, while approaching Natashquan harbour, the tanker Mokami made contact with the bottom. No apparent damage.
COLLISION - With another vessel or other floating objectSerious
Jun 13, 2001OUTSIDE CARTWRIGHT HARBOUR, NFLD, NEWFOUNDLAND AND LABRADOR (NL)
Vessels collided after F/V altered course to pass in front of the tanker at close proximity. No damage was reported to hull of either vessel. F/V reported slight damage to stabilizer. No injury reported.

Recorded marine occurrences naming this vessel.

Composite Risk

Risk Score

78/100

High risk60% component coverage

Strong, corroborated adverse evidence — a detention, sanctions exposure or a dark-fleet signal.

PSC detentionsno data

Sanctions exposureno data

Dark-fleet signal50

Hull age100

Flag register100

A coverage-weighted blend of the 3 components we could read for this hull — the weights renormalise over only the components present, so a thin read is never inflated and a hull is never credited a “safe 0” for a signal it has no row for. Higher means riskier. Derived in-house from government-open port-State-control, flag, sanctions and our own vessel data; weight it by the coverage above.

Estimated

Capacity & Classification

Cargo capacity at draughtMedium confidence

~2,500t at summer draught

Tanker · summer draught 4.53 m · 7.4 t per cm immersion

Estimated intake by draught

3.17 m~1,493 t

3.39 m~1,661 t

3.62 m~1,828 t

3.85 m~1,996 t

4.07 m~2,164 t

4.3 m~2,332 t

4.53 m~2,500 t

Design draught looks implausible for this class and size — the figures above are anchored to it, so treat them with extra caution.

Estimate only — modelled from deadweight (deadweight only) using a first-principles hydrostatic model, not measured hydrostatic tables. The design draught it is anchored to is unreliable across the fleet.

Type classificationConflict

Declared

Tanker

→

Inferred from size

Gas

declared tanker but density DWT/GT=0.83 is below the light-cargo cut 1.05 — under even a small bulker/tanker (typical >= 1.2); reads like a gas carrier or storage/FSO unit; beam/LOA=0.146 is fine-lined

DWT/GT 0.83Beam/LOA 0.146Declared type: Oil Products Tanker

The declared type conflicts with the class implied by the vessel’s size signals — a possible mis-declaration. Inferred via our shared size-based classifier.

Transparency

Risk signals

Behavioural flags raised against this vessel — each shown with the raw evidence behind it. Derived in-house from data we are entitled to publish; informational, not a determination of wrongdoing.

Type vs. size mismatchmediumstrength 0.65

Declared type contradicts the size-implied class

Jun 23, 2026

Audit Confidence: 0.652
Beam Loa Ratio: 0.146
Deadweight: 2,500
Declared Class: TANKER
Declared Type: Oil Products Tanker
Dwt Gt Ratio: 0.829
Gross Tonnage: 3,015
Reason: declared tanker but density DWT/GT=0.83 is below the light-cargo cut 1.05 — under even a small bulker/tanker (typical >= 1.2); reads like a gas carrier or storage/FSO unit; beam/LOA=0.146 is fine-lined
Size Implied Class: GAS

Method: declared type vs size-implied class (DWT/GT density + beam/LOA fullness). Source: vessel_type_audit (sibling P3#3 job; shared coarse_class classifier).

Signals are a current-state view: a flag clears once the vessel stops tripping its detector. These are screening indicators, not a substitute for your own due diligence.

Commercial