Cause of Recent Oil Leak at Police Coast Guard's Brani Regional Base

6 Mr Dennis Tan Lip Fong asked the Minister for Home Affairs (a) what is the cause of the oil leak at the Brani Regional Base of the Police Coast Guard on 5 February 2025 which has resulted in 23 tonnes of diesel being leaked into the waters south of Singapore; (b) whether there will be a formal investigation to ascertain the causes of the oil leak; and (c) if so, whether the full findings can be made known to the public.

The Minister of State for Home Affairs (Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim) (for the Minister for Home Affairs): Mr Speaker, Sir, I will first provide a summary of the chronology of events surrounding the oil leak from the Police Coast Guard’s Brani Regional Base on 5 February 2025, before touching on the cause of the leak.

On 5 February 2025, at about 3.25 pm, the Police Coast Guard (PCG) was alerted by the Maritime Port Authority of Singapore (MPA) of a possible oil leak from Brani Base after MPA had detected oil sheens near Sentosa Gateway.

While PCG was checking for the oil leak, a contractor who was performing unrelated works in the vicinity saw oil leaking from a fuel hose at one of the pontoons at Brani Base. The contractor isolated the main valve to the leaking hose and the leak was stopped at about 3.40 pm. The contractor was unaware about the report of oil leakage at this point and had acted independently.

After carrying out its checks, PCG confirmed that the leak was from this damaged hose and verified that there were no signs of other leaks around Brani Base. PCG updated MPA of the situation at around 5.50 pm. Agencies commenced measures to mitigate the impact, including Sentosa Development Corporation which laid booms to prevent any oil from reaching the beaches.

On the morning of 6 February 2025, MPA and PCG flew drones over the waters in the vicinity of Brani Base and the Southern Islands to get a clearer assessment of the impact and also activated an oil cleaning contractor to assist with the clean-up operations.

During this period, navigational traffic was not affected, the operations in the Port of Singapore were able to continue unimpacted, and no beaches were closed. On 8 February 2025, MPA and PCG stood down the clean-up operations.

After PCG had confirmed the source of the leak on 5 February 2025, it carried out further investigations and CCTV checks, and established that the affected hose had first leaked at about 11.40 am that morning. PCG was unaware of any leaks at that point. That morning, an auxiliary police officer (APO) deployed in PCG had reported at 11.57 am that water was leaking from the affected hose at the pontoon. As there were both fuel and water hoses at the pontoon, and the APO was not trained to identify oil leaks, he had mistakenly reported it to be a water leak. Marine diesel appears as a clear transparent fluid, so he thought it was water.

Pursuant to the APO’s report, a PCG officer arrived at about 12.25 pm to do further checks but did not observe any leak. There was no visible oil sheen on the water in the area and no noticeable smell of leaked fuel.

The facilities management staff arrived subsequently at 1.38 pm to conduct further checks as part of PCG’s fault reporting protocol for leaks. The staff did not observe any oil sheen on the water, and there was no noticeable smell of fuel.

As both the PCG officer and facilities management staff had observed no sign of discharge of oil into the water, it was assessed that the leak reported by the APO was indeed a water leak. A case was lodged for the rectification of a water leak.

Mr Speaker: Minister of State, you might want to wrap up.

Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Yes, Sir. Through PCG’s subsequent investigation and retrospective CCTV checks, PCG discovered that the leak had stopped on its own at about 12.20 pm but restarted at about 2.47 pm. The leak was finally stopped at about 3.40 pm when the contractor spotted the leak and isolated the main valve, as I explained earlier.

Based on PCG’s investigations, the leak was caused by a damaged fuel hose connecting the wharf's fuel distribution network to the fuel dispenser on a pontoon. PCG’s preliminary assessment is that the fuel hose developed micro-cracks due to cyclical stresses during routine coiling and uncoiling, which eventually led to a tear that caused the fuel spillage.

Sir, just a few minutes. Actually, one minute, Sir.

Mr Speaker: We are actually out of time. A quick one, please.

Assoc Prof Dr Muhammad Faishal Ibrahim: Thank you, Sir. The fuel hoses are checked and maintained every month. The last maintenance check was conducted on 17 January 2025 and the next inspection was scheduled for the week of 10 February 2025.

Following the oil leak at Brani Base, PCG promptly inspected all fuel hoses there on 6 February 2025. Similar checks were completed on 8 February 2025 at its three other bases – Loyang, Lim Chu Kang and Gul Regional Bases.

While PCG’s maintenance and reporting protocols are generally consistent with industry best practices, PCG is reviewing them nevertheless to further reduce the likelihood of leaks of such magnitude in the future. Thank you very much, Sir.

11.34 am

Mr Speaker: Order. End of Question Time. The Clerk will now proceed to read the Order of the day.

[Pursuant to Standing Order No 22(3), provided that Members had not asked for questions standing in their names to be postponed to a later Sitting day or withdrawn, written answers to questions not reached by the end of Question Time are reproduced in the Appendix.]