Maritime Safety News Archives - SHIP IP LTD

Maritime-Industry-Meets-to-Discuss-Progress-Towards-Decarbonization.jpg

IB, an international IT Company specialized in technical management systems and solutions for the maritime industry, has partnered with Verifavia Shipping, the leading independent global provider of carbon emissions verification and IHM services, according to the company’s release. The collaboration ensures shipping companies are supported with a certified process which helps meet the demands of environmental regulations including EU Monitoring Reporting and Verification (EU MRV), the International Maritime Organisation’s Data Collection System (IMO DCS), and Inventory of Hazardous Materials (IHM).

IB’s InfoSHIP® is a web-based software suitable for all vessel types. It brings a high level of fleet control and efficiency to a broad range of technical processes. Verifavia Shipping will certify InfoSHIP Performance for the compliance of shipping emissions regulations, including EU MRV and IMO DCS requirements.

InfoSHIP® is designed to apply new technologies as soon as they become available, and to facilitate integration with other systems to ensure an efficient and reliable process. IB and Verifavia Shipping have established a strategic cooperation to support compliance with IHM requirements. By integrating Verifavia Shipping’s “3 Way Plug & Play” IHM maintenance dashboard, shipowners have live access to the IHM maintenance status of the vessel and the system can automatically generate monthly or ad-hoc IHM maintenance reports to demonstrate implementation and compliance with regulations, also ensuring vessels are prepared for PSC inspections.

In accordance with the EU Ship Recycling Regulation and the Hong Kong Convention for the Safe and Environmentally Sound Recycling of Ships, it is mandatory for ships to carry a certified and maintained IHM specifying the location and approximate quantities of hazardous materials – such as asbestos or ozone-depleting substances – onboard. The IHM Part I must be constantly maintained during the operational lifetime of a vessel which can be complicated and time consuming. This means that for all items and equipment installed, modernised or replaced, the IHM must be updated; from a coat of paint or the addition of a single gasket.

About Verifavia:

Verifavia Shipping strives to be the maritime industry’s first choice for the provision of emissions verification and hazardous materials preparation and maintenance services. With offices in Paris, Singapore, and Chandigarh, Verifavia also has trusted partners based in Panama, the US, Canada, Australia, China, Greece, Turkey, Hong Kong, Germany, etc, to provide an accurate and expert service worldwide.

Verifavia Shipping was the first company to provide EU Monitoring Reporting and Verification (MRV) services and the first independent verifier to provide International Maritime Organisation’s (IMO) Data Collection System (DCS) verification for a number of flag states.

With one of the largest in-house hazmat teams in the industry, Verifavia Shipping helps shipping companies prepare and digitally maintain an Inventory of Hazardous Materials (IHM) on existing ships. Approved by the Korean Register, Indian Register of Shipping, ABS Group, Lloyd’s Register, RINA, Bureau Veritas, China Classification Society and DNV GL, Verifavia Shipping also provides IHM services for Class NK. Verifavia is also one of the first companies to be approved by the LISCR and RMI flag states.

About IB

Born under the IT star early in the 80’s, IB -Influencing Business- focuses on design, development and implementation of enterprise asset management systems for the technical, maintenance and energy management of all kinds of assets for the Maritime Sector.

A single web-based software system to support, digitalize and integrate a broad range of fleet technical and operational processes, complying with the latest regulatory requirements in the market: this is the essence of InfoSHIP™.

Designed to be an ally for ship managers and operators, the software can be stand-alone or work in a multiconnected environment such as a fleet operation remote control center, making it highly adaptable to all kinds of clients.

 

Source: en.portnews


PORT_290-120x100.jpg

During February, there were zero new detentions of foreign flagged vessels in a UK port.

  1. In response to one of the recommendations of Lord Donaldson’s inquiry into the prevention of pollution from merchant shipping, and in compliance with the EU Directive on Port State Control (2009/16/EC as amended), the Maritime and Coastguard Agency (MCA) publishes details of the foreign flagged vessels detained in UK ports each month.
  2. The UK is part of a regional agreement on port state control known as the Paris Memorandum of Understanding on Port State Control (Paris MOU) and information on all ships that are inspected is held centrally in an electronic database known as THETIS. This allows the ships with a high risk rating and poor detention records to be targeted for future inspection.
  3. Inspections of foreign flagged ships in UK ports are undertaken by surveyors from the Maritime and Coastguard Agency. When a ship is found to be not in compliance with applicable convention requirements, a deficiency may be raised. If any of their deficiencies are so serious, they have to be rectified before departure, then the ship will be detained.
  4. All deficiencies should be rectified before departure.
  5. When applicable, the list includes those passenger craft prevented from operating under the provisions of the EU Directive on a system of inspections for the safe operation of Ro-Ro passenger ships and high-speed passenger craft in regular service and amending directive 2009/16/EC and repealing Council Directive 1999/35/EC (Directive EU 2017/2110).

Notes on the list of detentions:

  • Full details of the ship: The accompanying detention list shows ship’s International Maritime Organisation (IMO) number which is unchanging throughout the ship’s life and uniquely identifies it. It also shows the ship’s name and flag state at the time of its inspection.
  • Company: The company shown in the vessel’s Safety Management Certificate (SMC) or if there is no SMC, then the party otherwise believed to be responsible for the safety of the ship at the time of inspection.
  • Classification society: The list shows the classification society responsible for classing the ship only.
  • Recognised organisation: Responsible for conducting the statutory surveys: and issuing statutory certificates on behalf of the flag state.
  • White (WL), grey (GL) and black lists (BL) are issued by the Paris MoU on 01 July each year and shows the performance of flag state.
  • Deficiencies: The deficiencies listed are the ones which were detainable. Further details of other deficiencies can be provided on request.

 

Source: gov.uk


port-state-control-inspection-16x9.jpg

The Coast Guard’s Cruise Ship National Center of Expertise (CSNCOE) has published its spring newsletter highlighting its latest list of the top five deficiencies found on cruise vessels.

The deficiencies listed are:

•    Fire screen doors not operating properly
•    Impeding means of escape – Corridors, doors and hatches in areas designated as escape routes were found to be either partially or completely blocked. Doors in some instances were locked, without the ability to defeat the lock, preventing passage in the direction of escape.
•    Water tight doors were found with missing portions of gaskets, hydraulic oil leaking, inoperable audible alarm, or the means of indication that show at all remote operating positions were found to be in a fault condition.
•    Fire suppression systems were found to be deficient. Sprinkler heads/water mist nozzles were found painted over, damaged, or completely missing. Other issues included failed couplings.
•    Improper utilization of categorized spaces – There were several deficiencies issued regarding improper use of spaces. Space is at a premium on cruise ships. Because of this, sometimes crews store combustible materials in spaces that do not have the adequate fire protection and suppression systems in the event of a fire.

CSNCOE notes that the industry as a whole has improved to the point where it was no longer necessary to include a top 10 list as the remaining issues were identified so infrequently that they didn’t warrant inclusion.

In calendar year 2015 the Coast Guard reported 205 vessel detentions to the IMO. In that time, the Coast Guard conducted 259 cruise ship examinations and only 1.6 percent received a detention. “This low percentage shows that there is a strong safety culture in the cruise line industry, stated CSNCOE. This list highlights cases where deficiencies led to the detentions:

•    Inoperability of the oil filtering equipment, the three-way valve did not operate when the oil content reached and/or exceeded 15PPM.
•    A ship’s officer did not have a valid certificate endorsement from the flag state administration.
•    Ship was not manned in compliance with the applicable safe manning requirements of the Administration. A ship’s officer was not certified to serve onboard the type of ship.
•    The engineering space deck plates were slippery, surfaces were coated with an oily layer, and all bilges had a one inch thick layer of oil.
•    Fire hoses were found rotted and inoperable.
•    The vessel was not following their fire control plan by stowing random items in spaces throughout the ship, and installing cooking equipment in berthing and accommodation spaces.
•    Multiple exhaust dampers were wasted and did not close properly.
•     The deep fryer did not have a fixed fire extinguishing system.
•    Rescue boat hull had severe pitting, corrosion and wastage, allowing water intrusion.

 

Source: maritime-executive


inmarsat-graphic-16x9.jpg

Since December 2019, the novel coronavirus (COVID-19) has spread throughout the world. The outbreak and the public health response have had a serious impact on every sector of the maritime industry: global cruise lines have halted operations, container carriers have had to blank dozens of sailings, and offshore operators are looking at a severe downturn in the oil market.

For this episode, Maritime Executive publisher and editor-in-chief Tony Munoz brought together three top experts – maritime medicine leader Dr. Arthur Diskin, admiralty lawyer Erik Kravets and Port of Tampa President and CEO Paul Anderson – in a conference call on the global coronavirus challenge. To hear their conversation, listen in below.

 

Source: maritime-executive


Copy-of-GTR-036-animated-300x250-High-Quality-1.jpg

It’s been almost one year since the deadly pandemic known as COVID-19 started spreading across the globe and companies are still feeling its effects and will perhaps for years to come. In response, most educators have had to adapt to online learning as an alternative, but what about the crucial hands-on learning experiences offered by so many maritime training centers?

Rick Schwab, senior director of the Maritime and Industrial Training Center at Delgado Community College in New Orleans, La., says, unsurprisingly, that COVID-19 has brought about significant changes for its training center.

“For the first time in 25 years, our entire training schedule had to be canceled for over a month, as the facility was shutdown because of the governor’s lockdown mandate,” says Schwab. “Corporate partner training programs were put on hold, as well.”

During the shutdown, Schwab said the college put into place several safety precautions to ensure its staff and students could attend classes safely. Smaller class sizes, social distancing, temperature checks, mask mandates, and hand sanitizer were put into place ahead of a hopeful return to school.

Another well known maritime college, the Maritime Training and Technology Center at San Jacinto College Program located just outside of Houston, Texas, had its own set of hurdles to overcome despite not enduring a shutdown like the one Delgado Community College underwent last year.

“We left for spring break in March 2020 with the expectation of returning as we do every spring, but we didn’t,” says John Stauffer, associate vice chancellor of maritime for the school. “We had to launch a business learning program with a partnership called Learn America, and that’s how we operated for incumbent workers.”

Stauffer says the school received U.S. Coast Guard authorization to conduct its Maritime Credit Program courses as a hybrid experience, where students have both online and offline (in-person) educational experiences. The school has been operating under a cautious eye and with a hybrid offering ever since.

It’s not all doom and gloom for these schools, though. Both have new and exciting training applications and courses to offer its students in 2021.

Moving Forward – A New Approach
Before COVID-19 hit the country, much of what maritime students learned came from hands-on training.

The Delgado Maritime Center has adapted to the new norm of working with corporate partners and mariners by building a few newly designed programs. Like San Jacinto, the school received Coast Guard approval to create hybrid courses with real-time lectures occurring through the Zoom platform.

“The Coast Guard courses approved for this hybrid learning were Basic & Advanced Firefighting and Advanced Firefighting,” says Schwab. “We also created a new deckhand training program for new hires, and we’re breaking ground on a new $1.4 million deckhand building with a barge set up for training new industry employees, giving them the opportunity to learn the ropes of the maritime industry.”

Schwab says the new building is expected to open in 2022.

As the bulk of courses move online, it’s important that maritime students still have access to hands-on training when possible.

San Jacinto, which was awarded a grant in October 2020, recently announced that it would be launching a new firefighting course in the next month or two using the funds it received. A new fire field was opened on campus, and the school says it will be conducting firefighting training classes off campus at various locations as well.

 

Source: marinelog


covid-impact.png

The International Maritime Organization welcomes this year’s United Nations theme for International Women’s Day 2021 of “Women in leadership: Achieving an equal future in a COVID-19 world.”

This important message aligns with the various activities undertaken by IMO over the years to make the maritime sector more gender inclusive and to enhance the contribution of women as key maritime stakeholders.

IMO Secretary-General Kitack Lim said: “International Women’s Day is the perfect opportunity for everyone in the maritime sector to ask: ‘Are we doing enough to make our industry more diverse?’

“We have seen time and again that having women in all roles, particularly in leadership creates a more prosperous and dynamic workforce. Moving forward, we must embrace these principles to ensure a sustainable recovery from the impacts of the COVID19 Pandemic, and to shape a fairer future for all,” the Secretary General continued.

As part of IMO’s remit to meet the Sustainable Development Goal for gender equality (SDG 5) under the UN 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development, the organization has been taking tangible steps to make maritime more inclusive, including the Women in Maritime Programme, 2019 World Maritime Theme, and more.

He said “It is vital that the maritime sector shows support for the many talented women in our industry. We take this support seriously and at IMO we launched our ‘my maritime mentor’ online campaign to celebrate International Women’s Day, and to highlight the 2021 World Maritime Theme ‘Seafarers: at the core of shipping’s future’. We encourage everyone to recognize the support and to share their stories about their inspiring mentors in the maritime industry, who have helped them shine brighter.”

“We are currently working with WISTA International to gather data for the first “Women in Maritime” survey, to assess the participation of women in the maritime sector. The results of this will create a baseline for our industry to measure effort and track progress. I look forward to working with each and every one of you to continue on the path to making maritime more inclusive,” he said.

IMO has focused its diversity efforts via its gender and capacity building programme, which is now in its thirty-third year. The Women in Maritime gender programme supports women in both shore-based and sea-going roles.

This programme spearheaded activities around the IMO’s 2019 World Maritime Theme, ‘Empowering Women in the Maritime Community’. The programme has supported the creation of a number of regional associations for women in the maritime sector across Africa, Asia, the Caribbean, Latin America, Arab States and the Pacific Islands. Women from developing countries are also being given support to move into leadership roles via sponsorships to the Maritime SheEO leadership accelerator programme.

To increase visibility of women in maritime, IMO has produced a video showing how the Women in Maritime Programme is helping to support gender diversity. It has also made available a photo bank of images of women in maritime from submitted content. The use of these real-life photos in news stories, social media posts and brochures is vital to more diverse representation in the maritime world.

 

Source: hellenicshippingnews


Port-of-Long-Beach-Nov-2020.b5a3f4.jpg

KG: Hi everyone, it’s Kevin. Today is Wednesday, March 10th (day recorded). On today’s podcast I’m going to talk about a topic critical to our mission—ship certification—with someone who has had a storied career and in my view is a legend in service to our nation, especially in the business of submarines. Retired Vice Admiral Paul Sullivan graduated from the U.S. Naval Academy in 1974 and later MIT with degrees in Ocean Engineering, Naval Architecture and Marine Engineering. Admiral Sully earned his dolphins on board the nuclear-powered ballistic-missile submarine USS James Madison. Over his naval career, Paul served in a variety of roles, a lot of them right here at Electric Boat, including Ohio-class submarine project officer, Los Angeles-class project officer at SUPSHIP, staff to the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, and as Program Manager for both the Seawolf and Virginia programs. In 2005 Paul was promoted to Vice Admiral. He led NAVSEA, the Navy’s largest Echelon II Command, until his transition from the Navy in 2008. Sully has since held a variety of civilian roles, including Director of the Applied Research Laboratory at Penn State. He currently serves as a Highly Qualified Expert for the Assistant Secretary of the Navy, providing expert guidance and mentorship to PEO Submarines, PEO Columbia and PEO Maintenance and Modernization.

Admiral, welcome back to Electric Boat and thanks for your support in helping us prepare for a very busy year of ship certification.  As you know, this year we will certify two new-construction Virginia ships and two Virginias completing their post-shakedown availabilities—that’s the 790 and the 791. The timing of these certifications will likely result in all of us being in the process of certification for at least three ships at the same time. We’ve got a great amount of work ahead of us, and that’s exciting, but it’s also a tremendous challenge for the community to manage, acknowledging that above all, we need to deliver a safe, high-quality and high-performing product to the operators and the Navy. So welcome again Admiral to the podcast.

Adm. Paul Sullivan (PS): Thanks, it’s an honor to be here. As you know, we just spent about an hour and a half with our senior managers downstairs talking about this subject. I was very encouraged by the great attitude and participation of everybody; it’s a team sport.

I share that with you. This is a milestone for us. We’ve been doing this podcast for just about a year now, really since COVID began. What’s transitioned from a COVID update has now become something we’re using to communicate to the rest of the community about what it is the business is facing. You are the first outside-EB guest on the podcast, and I can’t think of a better topic than ship certification and how important that is to our business than to have you as a guest for that very discussion.

You’ve got an enterprise view—not just here at EB, but Newport News and the entire Navy. What do you see as the major challenges we’re faced with as an enterprise as we approach the ship certification schedules in the months ahead and then overall as an enterprise?

PS: The challenge facing us all—this is not only people at EB and Newport News, but in the Navy headquarters, because certification is a team sport, as you know—it will be hard to make sure we’re focusing on the most important stuff; our day-to-day challenge of balancing cost, schedule and quality pushes us to the limit all the time. When we stack up ship deliveries like this, we’ve got to make sure we get it right every time, first time, as we go through all these certifications. As I mentioned in our earlier discussions today, I think the biggest challenge is actually physical stamina. Because these certifications come down very hard, and when they are back-to-back, as these certifications coming up this year are going to be, we’re going to have to make sure our people are mentally and physically prepared to go through all of that, otherwise all of the culture doesn’t matter because we’re too tired.

Absolutely, it’s a marathon, not a sprint to be sure. We also talked a little bit about some of the tragedies the submarine community has confronted over the decades, notably the Thresher and the Scorpion. There are others that are near-tragedies, such as collisions. All of these underscore the significance of what it is we do from a certification process, but we don’t want to just learn from tragedies. We want to make sure we’re learning lessons on things like a near-miss. Sometimes that’s hard to do without getting complacent over time. How do we maintain that culture absent a significant tragedy?

PS: The biggest thing we need to think about when we’re avoiding the culture of complacency that generates these tragedies is to constantly remind ourselves that every time a U.S. Navy submarine submerges, we’re putting our friends, our shipmates, and in the case of ship delivery trials, our own shipyard personnel at risk because the sea pressure is absolutely unforgiving. We do have problems, and you should know that many of the tragedies that we’ve had in our past are either out of new construction or after post-repair trials or post-shakedown availability trials—they are all important, every single one of them. With the near-misses, it is sometimes hard to recognize that it was a near-miss, but every time we do recognize we’ve had a near miss, we should run a critique to go figure out what happened, and more importantly, out of that critique should come the lessons learned that are nuggets for us to avoid that culture of complacency. If we treat the near-miss like the casualty actually happened, we do a better job of learning the lessons out of that and applying it to the future.

Let’s talk a little bit about the Thresher disaster. From our perspective, that should stay as fresh in our mind as if it happened yesterday. How do we apply that to our current workforce across the enterprise?

PS: Thresher was a first-of-class ship. I know we call it the Permit class, but it was the Thresher class and that class of ship changed everything. It was the hot-rod of the fleet at the time, and the performance from a deep diving, heavily armed, acoustically superior submarine, all of those new-hull steel, they were all game-changing technologies that we put into one submarine. I think it got away from us in that we didn’t system engineer it well enough, and we didn’t make sure that the standards that we had in our shipyards—this one was built at Portsmouth—were up to the standards of having that new technology and all of those aggressive design features. The takeaways from the Thresher were many, and they are all really still relevant today: inadequate design review of critical components and systems where we didn’t really understand what was going to happen when those were subject to the rigors of submarine operations. There was poor workmanship involved. There were signatures put in place for work that was incomplete. We had unknown weld deficiencies. We had inadequate inspection procedures, and we didn’t know in some cases how badly some of the, for instance, piping joints were on Thresher because we just didn’t have good enough non-destructive testing at the time to go evaluate all of those joints, and they were in sea-connected seawater systems, which probably was the initiation.

A lot of work practices were not up to speed with the new technology. So we learned a whole bunch of lessons including design lessons for emergency main ballast tank blow systems where we completely redesigned those. Also, sea-connected systems, we minimized those going through the submarine. Spray-tight switchboards where we thought that it was quite possible on Thresher that electric power went out because the spray from the seawater leaks impacted all the electrical equipment on board the submarine. Although those deficiencies have been corrected, every time we design a new class of submarine, we need to go look for all these new things we’re putting on the boat that could cause a problem down the road if they’re not adequately reviewed by themselves and as a system interacting with each other.

And here we are, right on the verge of introducing some new technology and putting it to sea for the first time, for example on the 790, and we’ve just completed the design on the Columbia.

PS: I would say the 790 PSA is almost a lead submarine because of all the changes we’ve made to that boat. 803 and 804 is a lead submarine in each shipyard with the VPM’s in there, the SSW boat is right around the bend, we’re working on the design for that, and the Columbia is a lead submarine, so we have a lot of first-in-class issues coming our way almost all at the same time.

You have talked about the little “c”s in certification and how they are the basis of the big “C,” ship certification.  What does that mean, and why is it so important?

PS: Certification is our bond to the crew of that submarine that we did our work and our testing correctly. We’re giving our word. When each shipbuilder, then the supervisor, then NAVSEA sign off on those certifications, the signatures at the top level, I would call those the big “C,” they’re all based on submissions from the next level down, and the next level down is based on certifications all the way down to the design engineer working on the drawing-board and the tradespeople who are assembling and putting together our submarines. When we sign off on that, it’s objective quality evidence—we always talk about OQE—that’s the sign that we’ve done everything correctly in the SUBSAFE boundary, the FLY BY WIRE boundary, and for the boats that have SCOPE of CERT (DSS-SOC)—all three of those have been taken care of. I’ll call it a pyramid of signatures built all the way on the integrity of the first-level worker, whether that’s an engineer, a quality assurance person, or a tradesperson. We build those to the next level and that overall certification is dependent on that we all knew what we were signing for and we looked at it personally and have detailed personal knowledge of that signature.

Signatures, the little “c”s that happen almost every day, are really THE building block for how we get to the big C certification process. We talked about how there are some tear-down forces in today’s environment where maybe our signature doesn’t mean so much. It’s different though, with submarines, isn’t it?

PS: It sure is, and I’m very worried about this. In our world today, we’re information driven. We look at many more written words. They may be on the internet, or on our computer, but we’re actually reading more and more than our parents or grandparents. Because of information security requirements, we’re required to do single verification, double verification, triple authentication for our banking accounts, etc., and we do this at the drop of a hat in our daily business. There are some examples that drive us in the wrong direction. In 1950, to buy a house it probably was a five-page document. Today it’s a stack of documents an inch high. We sign every one of them trusting that our real estate agent and attorney knows what’s in there and that they’ve been correctly assembled. We probably look at the summary sheet and make sure the numbers line up and that’s about it, yet we sign how many pieces of paper? Same thing with buying a car—we read the sales agreement but we don’t read the fine print. Finally, downloading an app on your cell phone—when you hit “yes, I accept terms and conditions,” you’re actually making a legal commitment to that software developer that you’re not going to re-use or violate copyright, but we tend to ignore the detail and just say “yes” because after all, there are no consequences to us of that as long as we know that the software developer is not going to come after us, or our house closing is going to go through, or we are going to drive off the dealer’s lot with the car. That is absolutely not what we have to do in submarine certification. Our signature means we’ve done the work, we’ve witnessed the test, it met 100% of the requirements or it didn’t, and we adjudicated what went wrong. We either re-test, fix it or agree that the risk of living with the deficiency is correct, proper and won’t jeopardize the safety of the boat. Very, very different, and we have to almost re-train ourselves. For senior people, we have to re-train ourselves constantly because we’re all doing the same thing Generation Y and Z are doing that they grew up with. It’s not just “those young people”; it’s all of us.

An interesting question is what is your signature worth? In our business it’s worth the souls of every sailor, every EB employee, every person who ultimately ends up sailing on that ship over its life. I think you’d probably agree with me.

PS: I absolutely do. That’s why on that first dive so many people ride the boat: the 4-Star Director of Naval Reactors, the Supervisor of Shipbuilding, the Navy Program Manager, the shipbuilder President, the Ship’s Manager.  All of those people because unless we’re facing our own mortality—it is that serious—we are not motivated to pay the absolute amount of diligence that we must pay to all those signatures.

We began SUBSAFE certifications after the loss of the Thresher many years ago. Since then, no SUBSAFE-certified ship has ever been lost.  That’s a tremendous record, but should we be comfortable that it can’t happen?

PS: We absolutely should not be comfortable. History shows that all complex systems have failures and the two times I’ve been up here at EB I’ve been talking about complex failures and complicated systems. First off, they always fail in complicated ways, which means a whole bunch of things have to line up for you to have a bad day. Generally, it’s a cycle. You have a tragedy, you have a recovery process, you get to a culture of excellence, and then after three generations of the culture of excellence, you start to slip. And then you slip into a culture of complacency. We can’t do that; we’ve got to break that cycle and prevent that next tragedy. You can see it in the airplane industry, the space industry, the automotive industry and other complicated systems—oil rig blowouts, Deepwater Horizon, nuclear power plant accidents. The cycle of learning is tragedy, and we have to break that cycle and always stay in a culture of excellence and not go down the path to a culture of complacency. It’s very, very hard to do, but back to the start of our discussion, if we consider every near-miss as if it were the actual tragedy, we can stay on the good side of that cycle.

Terrific points, I want to say as we wrap up, thank you very much for chatting with us today on the podcast and sharing that with the rest of the EB team. This is a great way to get to 17,000 folks who come to work every day here at EB and get them to understand the significance of the certification process. I want to tell you how much I appreciate your participation, now twice, in preparing the senior team for a busy year of ship certifications ahead.

PS: Thanks, and again it’s an honor to be here, and it’s a pleasure to talk to your leadership team. Everybody is focused in the right direction.

 

Source: eblanding


Machine_Learning_Sea_News_New-768x421.jpg

On 9 March 2021, Singapore ratified the Convention on the International Organization for Marine Aids to Navigation. It is the first country to do so shortly after it signed the Convention on 1 March 2021. Ratifying the Convention will support the International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation and Lighthouse Authorities (IALA) to become an intergovernmental organisation.

Established in 1957, IALA is the leading international association for technical standards in marine aids to navigation (ATON), vessel traffic services (VTS) and e-navigation. Consisting of technical committees that develop common standards and practices across the maritime industry, IALA drives the harmonisation of ATON worldwide to foster safe, economic and efficient shipping. As an intergovernmental organisation, IALA will be better placed to fulfil the crucial role it plays in facilitating marine navigation.

As a major hub port and a coastal state situated along one of the world’s busiest waterways for international shipping, Singapore recognises the importance of IALA’s efforts to establish common technical standards for VTS and e-Navigation in promoting safe and efficient shipping. Besides hosting various IALA workshops and courses over the years, Singapore also signed a memorandum of understanding with IALA in 2018, which committed S$1 million over five years to support the IALA World-Wide Academy in capacity building and human resource development for IALA’s National Members. Singapore is presently serving a four-year term as an elected Council Member of IALA.

Mr Francis Zachariae, Secretary-General of IALA, said, “Over the years, the MPA has been instrumental in their active support to IALA and the generous sponsorship to the World-Wide Academy. Their strong experience and continued innovation, especially in the domains of vessel traffic services and e-navigation has greatly assisted the work of IALA. The MPA has also been instrumental in the change of status process and is now the first State to have ratified the Convention, for which I am very grateful.”

Mr Chee Hong Tat, Senior Minister of State for Transport and Foreign Affairs, said, “Singapore supports the elevation of IALA’s status from a non-governmental organisation to an intergovernmental organisation. This will boost international participation in IALA’s activities and strengthen global cooperation and coordination in harmonising marine ATON and related services. As an IALA Council Member, Singapore strongly supports IALA in growing its mandate to improve navigational safety and the efficiency of maritime traffic for the global shipping community.”

 

Source: hellenicshippingnews


shutterstock_406440547-by-Anatoly-Menzhiliy-1280x640-1-1200x600.jpg

“One year ago, as the world plunged into the COVID-19 crisis, I spoke of our voyage together and the need for collaboration and cooperation. I am glad to say that over these past 12 months, we have worked intensely with many different stakeholders to address challenging conditions.

The maritime sector has continued to deliver the vital supplies that people need. Seafarers have worked tirelessly, at the heart of this trade, to keep goods flowing. Despite difficulties with port access, repatriation, crew changes and more, there can be no denying that seafarers have gone beyond the call of duty.

Hundreds of thousands of seafarers have been forced to work long beyond their contracted time. We have estimated that throughout the last months of 2020 and up to the beginning of this year, 400,000 seafarers still needed to be repatriated, with a similar number needing to join ships.

Thanks to concerted efforts by Governments, shipowners and others, this figure is now estimated at 200,000 seafarers needing repatriation and a similar number needing to join ships. One of the major achievements of last year contributing to this was the adoption of the United Nations Assembly resolution calling on UN Member States to designate seafarers and other marine personnel as key workers and to implement relevant measures to allow stranded seafarers to be repatriated and others to join ships, and to ensure access to medical care.

But we cannot be complacent. Fewer than 60 countries so far have heeded our call for seafarers to be designated as key workers. More countries need to do so if we are to resolve this crisis and ensure seafarers are treated fairly and so that their travel to and from their place of work is properly facilitated. There is still a long way to go before we are back to a normal crew change regime.

As vaccination is rolled out in many countries, I urge Governments to prioritize seafarers in their national COVID-19 vaccination programs.

Governments should also identify and prepare for the challenges of the vaccination of seafarers who spend long periods of time away from their home countries. We need to continue to work together to develop relevant protocols and guidance around vaccine certification. This is particularly important as any barriers to travel created by national vaccine protocols may further complicate an already difficult crew-change situation.

On our voyage through this pandemic, which has been challenging for the whole world, I recognize that many seafarers have endured intense hardship as they have worked to keep trade flowing. I wholeheartedly thank seafarers for this.

We will continue to work with our sister UN agencies, with industry bodies and with Governments to address the ongoing needs of seafarers. We will also be looking towards taking the lessons learned going forward, so we can be better prepared in the future.”

 

Source: maritimeprofessional


cma-cgm-shipping-cargo.jpg

The bill, HR 3375, was introduced by Representative David Brock Smith and seeks to establish a 3-GW goal in federal waters off the Oregon coast. It also seeks to establish a task force on floating offshore wind.

HR 3375 also requires that the task force put together a floating offshore wind strategic plan and submit that plan to interim committees of the legislative assembly related to energy no later than 15 September 2022.

A 2019 study published by the National Renewable Energy Laboratory found that floating wind off Oregon was a ‘promising’ potential source of clean energy for the state.

The study, Oregon Offshore Wind Site Feasibility and Cost Study, said floating wind would be required off Oregon because 97% of the 62 GW of available technical offshore wind energy resource in Oregon is in water depths greater than 60 m.

The study noted that although floating offshore wind energy is still in a ‘nascent’ stage of development, it is advancing toward commercialisation in both Europe and Asia.

“Overall, the prospects for offshore wind in Oregon look promising for large-scale electricity generation,” the authors of the report said. “Floating technology is maturing rapidly, and offshore wind can provide a carbon-free alternative electricity source in coastal regions.”

The authors of the report said there will also be significant challenges for offshore wind to overcome in Oregon, including optimization of floating technology, coexistence with the fishing industry, mitigating impacts to wildlife and the viewshed, and integrating with the existing land-based grid.

 

Source: rivieramm