The PA concludes by drawing preliminary conclusions.
Primarily, the poor condition of the wreck is highlighted. Also, the location of the deformation as shown in the 2020 videos matches the location of outcropping bedrock. Two conclusions are made, based on evidence gathered so far, which state that there is no indication of a collision with a vessel or a floating object nor is there any indication of an explosion in the bow area.
Lastly, an assessment conducted by SHK and OJK summarized facts from the 1997 JAIC report with regards to the seaworthiness of MV ESTONIA. This assessment is presented in an appendix of the Intermediate Report, but the preliminary conclusions of this study are that MV ESTONIA was not seaworthy. This is based on two facts: 1) flaws existed in the construction of the visor which could have been discovered had an inspection of the bow parts been performed, and 2) as the location of the bow ramp as the upper extension of the collision bulkhead was based on a practical decision for an exemption from regulations, the condition for such an exemption should have been recorded in certificates, but was not. If the latter of these had been noted in the relevant certificate, the vessel would not have been trading the Tallinn–Stockholm route.
Nothing that would significantly alter the technical findings and the reasoning of how the accident occurred as presented in the 1997 JAIC report has been found thus far.
