This is a 70 page report by the Sindicato Libre de la Marina Mercante.
It is in Spanish and my Spanish is nearly non-existent.
But here is my best guess at what the report says.
It argues strongly that the cause was an uncharted ledge,
compounded by the decision by the port captain
to order the ship back to sea.
The report includes a copy of the Saybolt cargo survey at Ras Tanura.
The total cargo wt was 107,678 mt and the sailing draft was 15.4 m even keel.
The ship had a deadweight of 111,225 LT.
The report points out that even with some trim the ship could not have had
a max draft of more than 16.5 m on arrival.
According to the charts, the ship had an underkeel clearance
of more than 5 meters throughout the channel.
The report points out that the port captain explicitly required
the ship to return to sea by the same channel she came in.
The report has two charts indicating that the second grounding
was almost exactly in the same place as the first,
and both points were well within the channel
Most importantly, the report includes what appears to be
a statement from the Instituto Hidrograficode la Marina
which admits that the charted depth of 30 M near where the ship hit,
was actually 11.2 m.
The report claims that the initial damage was confined to
the forward cofferdam,
the pump room flooded by the cargo tank forward of it,
and the starboard aft BFO tank.
(The pump room was still operational.)
This sort of damage is next to impossible.
It is much more likely that all 5 center tanks
were holed on the flat bottom,
but hydrostatic balance was quickly established.
The SLMM reports says the ship's forward draft
was 1.5 m more was 1.5 m larger on the way out
than on the way in,
which would have generated
a big improvement in the hydrostatic balance.
The report claims the leakage from the starboard FO tank
was halted by transferring BFO to other tanks.
The report claims that on the second grounding
1S, 1C, 2S and 2C vented strongly.
There is no mention of any venting
on the first grounding,
so any penetration into the cargo tanks
at that time was quite small.
The SIMM report makes no mention of inert gas.
CTX is assuming that the brand new ship
was not fitted with an IGS system
despite the fact that it was 2.5 years
after the Mactra, Marpessa, and Kong Haakon.