Maritime Safety News Archives - Page 79 of 260 - SHIP IP LTD

Rear Admiral (Rear Adm.) Ann Phillips, USN, Ret., has been confirmed and sworn in as the 20th Administrator of the Maritime Administration (MARAD). Nominated by President Biden on October 21, 2021, Rear Adm. Phillips was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on May 10, 2022. She is the first woman to lead MARAD as administrator.

“From her distinguished naval service to her leadership on coastal infrastructure, Rear Admiral Ann Phillips has championed America’s maritime sector throughout her career,” said Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg. “Her experience and expertise will be invaluable as we address supply chain bottlenecks, implement the maritime investments in the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, ensure the safety and success of midshipmen at the Merchant Marine Academy, and combat climate change in the maritime sector. I thank Deputy Administrator Lucinda Lessley for her tremendous service guiding MARAD as Acting Administrator and look forward to all that she and Ann will accomplish together at the agency in the years ahead.”

As head of the Maritime Administration, Phillips will advise the Secretary of Transportation on commercial maritime matters, to include the movement of goods, supply chain, as well as the U.S. maritime industry, environment and compliance, ports and waterways infrastructure, and strategic sealift. She will engage public and private stakeholders in the maritime industry and oversee the U.S Merchant Marine Academy.

Phillips will also oversee MARAD’s programs to improve and modernize the nation’s maritime network by administering the unprecedented investment in our ports and waterways made possible by the Bipartisan Infrastructure Law, including $2.25 billion to be awarded over the next five years through our Port Infrastructure Development Program and $25 million for the America’s Marine Highway Program.

“It’s an honor to work alongside the professionals who make up the MARAD team, and, to serve the American people, Secretary Buttigieg and the Biden-Harris Administration,” said Administrator Phillips. “I understand the critical role that our commercial Merchant Marine plays in our national and economic security. In my nearly 31-year Navy career, I have witnessed many of the challenges facing our maritime sector and look forward to working with my colleagues to address them. This is an exciting time for MARAD as we work to expand and strengthen America’s waterborne transportation system and workforce.”

Phillips served most recently as Special Assistant to the Governor for Coastal Adaptation and Protection, Commonwealth of Virginia, developing Virginia’s first Coastal Resilience Master Plan. Prior to her appointment to the Office of the Governor, she served nearly 31 years on active duty and has extensive experience operating with multi-national maritime forces, including NATO and Partnership for Peace nations, and serving overseas in Guam and Lisbon, Portugal.

Her final flag command, Expeditionary Strike Group TWO, included 14 ships and 10 subordinate commands – all the Amphibious Expeditionary Forces on the East Coast of the United States. Earlier she served on the Chief of Naval Operations’ Staff as Deputy Director and then Director of Surface Warfare Division. Previous to those positions, she had the honor to commission and command the USS MUSTIN (DDG 89), and to command Destroyer Squadron 28.


Two decades after the devastating Erika and Prestige accidents, the European maritime safety framework has evolved to become one of the most robust in the world. That’s according to the European Maritime Safety Report (EMSAFE), the first ever comprehensive overview of maritime safety in the European Union.

One of the key pillars of the EU safety framework is port state control, which results in over 14 000 vessel checks each year by inspectors in EU ports, complemented by legislative initiatives like the specific EU survey regime for RoPax and high-speed craft, and the obligation for Member States to report and monitor accidents centrally for analysis and development of preventive actions. This legislation supports the implementation and enforcement of international conventions adopted at the International Maritime Organisation (IMO) by addressing specific risks and putting in place a centralised approach in support of maritime safety.

The EMSAFE report, published by the European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) also highlights the assistance that the Agency provides to the European Commission to check the implementation of EU legislation. In this regard, EMSA has carried out more than 300 visits to Member States on behalf of the Commission over the past two decades, as well as more than 300 inspections of EU recognised organisations, to which Member States are increasingly delegating tasks linked to their flag state responsibilities.

In addition, more than 70 inspections of maritime administrations, education, and training institutes in third countries were carried out in the same period, to assist the Commission in assessing compliance with the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification, and Watchkeeping for Seafarers.

In 2020 alone more than 680 000 calls to EU ports were registered. The exchange of safety information between Member States in areas like dangerous cargo transported, vessel positioning data, and the registration of passengers, is therefore vital. Consequently, EMSA will continue to develop and improve SafeSeaNet, the EU-wide maritime data exchange, to offer facilitation services, simplify the fulfilment of reporting obligations, and support new and revised EU legislation. These developments consolidate the role of SafeSeaNet as the primary platform for maritime safety information in the EU.

EMSAFE is released at a time in which the EU Member State-flagged fleet is experiencing slower growth than that of world fleet (3.4% growth over the past five years as compared to 7% growth for the world fleet). Although the average age of EU Member State-flagged vessels is broadly comparable to that of the world fleet, some ship categories are ageing, including passenger vessels, which have an average age of 28 years.

“Today’s report stands testimony to how the EU’s efforts to ensure maritime safety have been effective in preventing accidents and ensuring a high level of harmonised safety rules across the Union. At the same time, a single maritime accident can have catastrophic consequences for human life and the marine environment, so continuous vigilance and improvement remain essential. I welcome this worthwhile initiative,which provides an essential guide to the maritime safety situation and the issues with which we are confronted,” said EU Transport Commissioner, Adina Vălean.

“Safety is the cornerstone of all maritime activities. Without safety there can be no sustainability, no security, and no evolution of the maritime transport sector in the EU. Therefore, safety is at the heart of EMSA’s work, both now and in the future. But our report makes clear that maritime safety is, and always will be, a joint concern. Only by working together – at international, European, national, policy, industry, and stakeholder level – can we sustain the strong framework we have built over the past twenty years and continue to meet future challenges,” said the Executive Director of EMSA, Maja Markovčić Kostelac

Future trends:
According to the report, maritime safety will continue to pose challenges in the short and medium term, not only in managing the current fleet, but also in the areas of digitalisation, emerging technologies, and sustainability.

· The sector’s efforts to reach emission targets as part of the European Green Deal are also linked to maritime safety, especially given that the use of new fuels (hydrogen, methanol, ammonia, and biofuels) and power technologies (batteries and fuel cells) need to be underpinned by adequate safety standards.
· In addition, the number of alternatively fuelled vehicles, including electric cars, increased by 29% between 2019 and 2021 in the EU, meaning that both passenger and cargo ships need to prepare for the safety risks of transporting more of these vehicles.
· The report underlines that although autonomous ships offer new opportunities for industry, they also bring challenges in the regulatory and technical fields, including the need to develop a legal framework, standards, surveys, manoeuvres at sea and in port, and the qualifications of those on board, among others.


In 2020, the German navy signed a contract for four F126 frigates and an option for two more with Damen Shipyards. The war in Ukraine will now likely see Germany make use of that option, meaning a multi-billion-euro order is once again headed for Damen.

Dutch newspaper FD says the plans were revealed Johannes Dumrese, sea captain and head of the German Navy Press and Information Centre.

The Federal Office of Bundeswehr Equipment Information Technology and In-service Support (Das Bundesamt für Ausrüstung, Informationstechnik und Nutzung der Bundeswehr (BAAINBw)) and Damen Schelde Naval Shipbuilding signed the contract for the construction of the MKS 180, now named F126, for the German Navy on 19 June 2020. It is one of the largest procurement projects in the history of the German navy.

The F126 will replace the F123 Brandenburg class frigates. The contract comprises the supply of four ships from 2028 to 2031 with an option for two more beyond 2032. The new frigates come with a price tag of more than one billion euros a piece.

Built in Germany

The signing of the contract is the result of a European tender issued by the BAAINBw in 2015. Damen, together with its partners Blohm+Voss, a subsidiary of the Lürssen Group, and Thales, was declared the winner of the five-year tender. Together with its partners and involving German Naval Yards Kiel, Damen will handle the order in such a way that about eighty per cent of the total net investments will remain in Germany.

The ships will be built at Blohm+Voss in Hamburg, involving other Northern German shipyards in Bremen, Kiel, as well as in Wolgast and thus 100 per cent in Germany. The main contract also includes logistic services and multiple land-based test and training sites.

All signals green for extending order

According to Dumrese the political decision still has to be made at a later stage in the Bundestag, but according to him all signals are green for extending the frigate contract, adding that Germany wants ‘to be quick’.

A spokesman for Damen Shipyards tells FD the company is both delighted and ready should Germany decide to make use of the option.


(Bloomberg) —Boeing Co. is expected to deliver Orca –an underwater drone the size of a subway car that’s envisioned to lay mines and perform other missions for the US Navy — as much as three years later than planned.

As the Navy works to incorporate pilotless ships in its future fleet, budget documents show the first of five operational Orca drones may be delivered in September 2023, rather than December 2020, “due to contractor challenges and supplier issues.”

Boeing beat out aerospace rival Lockheed Martin Corp. for the project in February 2019. Boeing’s $274 million fixed-price contract requires the company to absorb overruns above a certain threshold.

“The Navy is working with Boeing to mitigate schedule delays and execute risk reduction” by paying for a prototype that’s being used for testing and training, the service said. The test drone was christened April 28 and began its first in-water testing.

Boeing’s ability to complete work on Pentagon contracts on time and to promised specifications is being scrutinized after the company recorded more than $1.3 billion in charges in the first quarter for cost overruns on fixed-price defense contracts including the new Air Force One, the KC-46 tanker programs and the Navy’s MQ-25 aerial refueling drone.

Boeing has continued investing in futuristic unmanned technologies in the air and sea as it addresses delays and quality lapses in conventional airplane programs like the 777X jetliner, whose market entry has been delayed by five years to 2025.

“Development work comes with uncertainties and variability in terms of cost and time estimates required to develop new, advanced technology,” Boeing said in a statement on the 70-ton Orca’s delay. “We also experienced Covid-related impacts during the stand-up of the new industrial base and supply chain necessary to enter system production” so “delivery of the first operational vehicle, which was slated for the end of 2020, was delayed.”

Asked if Boeing anticipated taking a charge on Orca, the company said “as always, we’ll evaluate the financial position of all our programs during our normal quarterly closing process.”

Boeing has “worked diligently to stand up a new industrial base and supply chain for titanium composites, pressure vessel manufacturing” at efficient production rates and “batteries necessary to enter production” on the Orca system, the Naval Sea Systems Command said in a statement.

The command didn’t address why these production challenges weren’t anticipated before Boeing’s award over Lockheed. Nor did it address what cost growth the delays and production issues have caused.

The hulking underwater drones that Boeing is manufacturing jointly with shipbuilder Huntington Ingalls Industries Inc. build on decades of cutting-edge research into manned and unmanned submarines by Boeing as well as defense programs that it acquired from Rockwell International Inc. in 1996.

The Orca is based on Boeing’s 50-ton Echo Voyager, an experimental drone that was designed to cruise underwater for months at depths of as much as 11,000 feet (3,400 meters) on anti-submarine, mine-sweeping and other missions.

“The one place they’ve had some success organically and through acquisitions is through remotely piloted vehicles and unmanned vehicles,” said Richard Aboulafia, an analyst with AeroDynamic Advisory. “If they can’t do that well either, that’s a problem.

Drone Ambitions

Orca is the largest of several classes of unmanned underwater surface and surface vessels that Navy officials were developing in the Trump administration’s final years in the effort to boost the service’s total inventory from 298 deployable vessels today to as many as 355 by 2030. The Biden administration hasn’t endorsed the Trump number nor proposed a new goal. But the Navy continues to see value in unmanned vessels, as outlined in a March 2021 framework. The service’s shipbuilding plan has budgeted more than $4 billion through 2027 on pilotless systems.

Orca’s technical issues are likely to be repeated as the service pursues unmanned systems, according to Shelby Oakley, a Government Accountability Office acquisition director who has followed the issue. “The Navy is in the beginning phases of developing uncrewed systems and, like all new technical endeavors, is likely to face some challenges,” she said.

“The Navy can improve the development by changing its management approach and better planning its strategy for transitioning its prototyping efforts,” she said. “We are currently in the process of reviewing the challenges facing” the Orca program “and plan to report on the Navy’s path forward this summer.”

Loren Thompson, an analyst for the Lexington Institute, said “the expectation is that Orca will eventually be able to perform mine-laying, mine countermeasures, intelligence-gathering, antisubmarine operations and electronic warfare missions” and maybe even conduct strike operations against surface targets at sea and on land.

Thompson, whose think tank takes contributions from Boeing, said “Orca could be the leading edge of a revolution at sea.”

© 2022 Bloomberg L.P.


(www.MaritimeCyprus.com) The idea of a European Maritime Safety Agency (EMSA) originated in the late 1990s along with a number of other important European maritime safety initiatives. EMSA was set up as a regulatory agency that would provide a major source of support to the European Commission and the member states in the field of maritime safety, security and prevention of pollution from ships.

EMSA’s activities:

  • providing technical and scientific assistance to the member states and the European Commission in the proper development and implementation of EU legislation on maritime safety, security, prevention of pollution by ships and maritime transport administrative simplification
  • monitoring the implementation of EU legislation through visits and inspections
  • improving cooperation with and between member states
  • building capacity of national competent authorities
  • providing operational assistance, including developing, managing and maintaining maritime services related to ships, ship monitoring and enforcement
  • carrying out operational preparedness, detection and response tasks with respect to pollution caused by ships and marine pollution by oil and gas installations
  • at the request of the European Commission, providing technical operational assistance to non-EU countries around relevant sea basins.

This publication hinges around our five strategic areas of action – sustainability, safety,
security, simplification and surveillance – and our four-fold role of service provider,
reliable partner, international reference and knowledge hub. Through this structured
approach, we share how we have delivered on the aims and ambitions set out in our
roadmap that is the Single Programming Document 2021-2023.

Source: EMSA


A major argument for autonomous vehicles is that they’ll make roads safer by removing human error — by far the dominant cause of traffic accidents — from the equation.

By making ships autonomous, the maritime industry thinks it could make the seas safer, too, while also making shipping cleaner and more efficient. Now, a transoceanic trip powered by AI has brought it one step closer to realizing that vision of the future.

Navigating rough waters

Maritime transport is hugely important to the global economy — more than 80% of international trade (by volume) happens via sea, mainly because it’s more economical than moving goods great distances by land or air.

There are more than 62,000 vessels in the world’s trading fleets, and getting all those ships where they need to be, when they need to be there is a complex undertaking — navigators need to take into account weather conditions, the locations of other ships, port activity, and more when deciding which routes to take and at what speed.

If something disrupts this system, the impact can be huge — when the massive container ship Ever Given got stuck in the Suez Canal for six days in March 2021, it caused months of supply chain issues and cost the maritime industry an estimated $10 billion per day.

Even more devastating than the economic impact, though, is the fact that a person died during the process of freeing the ship.

While incidents that major aren’t common, groundings and collisions between ships or ships and stationary objects, such as oil rigs and bridges, occur regularly — Japan, for example, averages 286 ship collisions annually.

In addition to costing money and, in some cases, human lives, these accidents can also damage the environment — 62% of the oil spills that occurred between 1970 and 2021 were caused by tanker collisions or groundings.

Autonomous ships

As was the case with the Ever Given, the majority of accidents at sea are ultimately blamed on human error, so the maritime industry is now developing ships that can operate with greater levels of autonomy.

These vessels are called “Maritime Autonomous Surface Ships” (MASS), and in June 2019, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) — the UN agency that regulates shipping — approved guidelines for MASS trials.

Three months later, Japanese shipping company NYK Line conducted the world’s first MASS trial following those guidelines, letting an autonomous navigation system control a massive ship during a two-day journey from China to Japan.

“[The system] collected information on environmental conditions around the ship from existing navigational devices, calculated collision risk, automatically determined optimal routes and speeds that were safe and economical, and then automatically navigated the ship,” wrote NYK Line.

Several other MASS trials have taken place since then, and Avikus — a subsidiary of Hyundai Heavy Industries, the world’s largest shipbuilding company — has now conducted the first in which a large ship used an autonomous navigation system on a transoceanic journey.

That ship, the Prism Courage, left a port in the Gulf of Mexico on May 1st, sailed through the Panama Canal, and then arrived at a port in South Korea 33 days later.

The AI’s route choices increased fuel efficiency by 7% and reduced carbon emissions by 5%.

For about half the journey, the ship was controlled by an autonomous navigation system called HiNAS 2.0 — the AI assessed the weather, waves, and the rest of the vessel’s surroundings to determine the ideal route in real-time and then command the ship’s steering systems to follow it.

HiNAS 2.0’s ability to recognize other ships in the Prism Courage’s vicinity during the trip allowed it to avoid collision more than 100 times, according to Avikus. The AI’s route choices also increased fuel efficiency by about 7% and reduced carbon emissions by about 5%

Both the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) and the Korea Register of Shipping (KR) monitored the Prism Courage’s journey in real-time.

“Avikus’ autonomous navigation technology was greatly helpful in this ocean-crossing test especially for maintaining navigating routes, autonomously changing directions, and avoiding nearby ships,” said Young-hoon Koh, the Prism Courage’s captain.

The bottom line

The IMO rates a MASS’s level of autonomy on a scale, starting with Level 0 (no autonomy) and ending with Level 4 (full autonomy). HiNAS 2.0 is a Level 2 system — that’s equivalent to a self-driving car that still needs a backup driver behind the wheel.

As is the case with autonomous cars, the speed at which the maritime industry authorizes fully autonomous ships (if it does) will depend in large part on how quickly regulators adapt to the tech. The fact that shipping is an international affair complicates that process, since the regulations could change between ports.

Some think it’s more likely that ships will always have someone on board, as that would be easier to get approved than a crewless ship, while still allowing shippers to reap most of the benefits of autonomous navigation tech.

“We may not remove the person from the ship, but we will remove them from the bridge and have them do more high-value work and call the person in when they are needed,” Hendrik Busshoff, product manager for autonomy at maritime tech firm Wärtsilä Voyage, told Wired in 2020.

Avikus hopes to play a major role in getting autonomous navigation systems into ships at sea — it expects the ABS to certify HiNAS 2.0 based on the Prism Courage’s journey and plans to begin commercializing the tech before the end of 2022.


Serial entrepreneur Elon Musk is known for deploying technological developments early, rapidly and independently. His carmaker Tesla rolled out self-driving features for its vehicles in 2015, far ahead of competitors, and his spaceflight company SpaceX debuted an early unmanned vessel – a rocket landing barge with stationkeeping capability – in 2016.
Dubbed “droneships,” these barge conversions have four thrusters, a blast shield to protect components, and a robot to secure landed rocket boosters. They are built to operate without manning during rocket landings.

In 2021, with little fanfare, SpaceX built and deployed a fully autonomous droneship – a converted deck barge dubbed A Shortfall of Gravitas (ex name Marmac 302). The 10,000 dwt, 300-foot barge was converted at Bollinger’s Port Fourchon yard last year and has been in active commercial service since last August. It is the company’s first self-navigating, autonomous vessel, and (unlike its predecessors) it was designed to transit to its operating area without a tow.

After a year of operating the Gravitas, SpaceX has now contracted with ABS to evaluate the remote-control system architecture for one of its three unmanned vessels.

“Through our work on autonomous and remote-control technologies in projects with leading partners all over the world, ABS has been leading the way in supporting its practical application at sea,” said Patrick Ryan, ABS Senior Vice President, Global Engineering and Technology. “We are proud that our capabilities in this area have been recognized by a true pioneer such as SpaceX.”

The project will review the design of one of SpaceX’s unmanned at-sea rocket landing platforms for compliance with the ABS Guide for Autonomous and Remote-Control Functions. ABS will apply a risk-based approach to the evaluation of the vessel’s autonomous functions.


In its annual report for 2021, CHIRP Maritime included a single known case of a master who deceived port officials and denied the presence of COVID symptoms aboard his ship. “While this is the first such report to be received by CHIRP Maritime, it is unlikely to be an isolated case but rather the tip of an under-reported industry-wide problem,” the organization reported. 

Case study outline: A conscious decision not to declare notifiable disease symptoms on board when entering port put the pilot, dockworkers, and the wider community at risk.

What the reporting crewmember told CHIRP:

Following a full crew change in port, the vessel sailed that evening and went to anchor outside the port. Soon after joining, two of the crew exhibited COVID symptoms – one of them later learned he was a ‘close contact’ with a confirmed COVID sufferer – both seafarers were isolated on board.

Initially, the master kept the presence of symptomatic crew quiet, choosing not to inform the vessel’s management company. Additionally the master falsified the seafarers’ temperature records by asking them to stand outside in the cold before recording their temperature. When the master was persuaded to inform the company (as per the COVID management plan), the company instructed the master not to disclose the issue. The vessel remained at anchor.

The symptomatic seafarers were employed through a manning agency, which applied pressure to the management company to conduct COVID tests. Three days after COVID symptoms were first exhibited, the management company instructed the vessel to proceed into port. The two symptomatic seafarers would be replaced on board and then accommodated and tested ashore.

During the phone call with the company, the captain volunteered to lie to the harbor authorities about having COVID symptoms onboard. (The port asks all arriving vessels “if they have reportable symptoms on board.”) The company accepted the captain’s offer.

Subsequently, the vessel entered port without informing any authority of the reportable symptoms on board. The pilot who boarded the vessel was not informed of the symptomatic crew and neither was the taxi driver whodrove the two seafarers to their accommodation ashore.

The day after the symptomatic seafarers were taken ashore, two replacement crew joined the vessel. Only one of them had been informed of the suspected coronavirus on board the vessel before they joined. The vessel departed the harbor after embarking the two crew replacements and taking on food stores. The vessel did not take a pilot for sailing.

Five days after the symptomatic seafarers were landed ashore (and 8 days after their symptoms first appeared), the two seafarers were finally tested by a private company. The test results were positive for coronavirus. Sometime later, the two previously symptomatic seafarers were re-tested – the results came back negative for coronavirus. The company offered them employment on another vessel, but they declined and their contracts were terminated. Their manning agency paid for alternative accommodation and flights back to their home country.

After departing the harbor, no further symptoms presented on board.

The reporter had contacted the DPA, but only after the two crew members were landed ashore, which the reporter recognized was too late. Earlier action might have led to a better outcome with proper procedures followed and safety precautions in place for the pilot and the taxi driver. However, the conversation between the master and the company had been with the company directors, by-passing the DPA. It is unclear if the DPA would have had any influence given the direct relationship between the master and company directors.

In response to questions, the reporter noted the following: there are many human element failures within this report including the reporter’s own. Whatever the captain’s misguided reasoning for offering to lie to the authorities, the company should have declined and instructed him to make a full and honest declaration to the port authorities.

Finally, the reporter thought that there must be other vessels in similar situations waiting outside ports in various parts of the world.

CHIRP comment

The CHIRP Maritime Advisory Board (MAB) noted the following points.

• This report identifies an absolute violation of the WHO International Health Regulations (2005) concerning the requirements to report the presence or suspected presence on board of a notifiable disease. Beyond the regulations are questions of moral and ethical integrity.

• Long established by the WHO, IMO, and ILO is an obligation on the master of a ship to make an accurate declaration when entering port.

• Early in the coronavirus pandemic, a broad coalition within the maritime industry came together to produce a framework of protocols to facilitate safe crew changes and repatriation. On 5th May 2020, IMO issued a Circular Letter (No.4204-Add.14), informing shipping companies of the recommended framework of protocols.

• This report concerns a recent incident which was a wilful breach of the regulations and those established protocols, not just by the master but by the management company as well. Given the potential harm to those individuals involved in repatriating the two seafarers with symptomatic Covid-19 conditions, pilot, crew, agents and taxi driver, this case highlights the imperative to properly report any notifiable disease.

• COVID restrictions and quarantine have both direct and indirect consequences on seafarers and additionally on a ship’s ability to continue to work cargo. All such issues can be compounded by restrictive charters and inflexible charter parties.

• The reporter also highlighted that the master engaged directly with the company’s directors and by-passed the Designated Person Ashore (DPA) (The DPA is the authorised direct link between the ship and the highest level of management of the Company who is responsible for ensuring the safe operation of the ship.)

While this is the first such report to be received by CHIRP Maritime, it is unlikely to be an isolated case but rather the tip of an under-reported industry-wide problem, made possible by lack of enforcement.

As far as CHIRP Maritime is aware, the company has not carried out an internal investigation so there are no lessons learned from this incident. However, CHIRP Maritime feels it is incumbent on all shipping companies and masters to understand the reporting requirements for reportable diseases and to make accurate declarations. Notwithstanding any charterer’s contractual agreements, the master must ensure that the regulations are robustly adhered to and that reporting via the correct channels is followed.

The CHIRP (Confidential Human Factors Incident Reporting Programme) Charitable Trust has provided a totally independent and confidential safety reporting system to seafarers worldwide since 2013, complementing the reporting system it has offered to the UK aviation industry since 2003. By publishing our analysis of received incident and near-miss reports we raise awareness of safety issues and contribute to improved safety outcomes through all sectors of the maritime industry.


Senate authorizers want to stop the Navy from retiring half the ships it planned to decommission next year, according to a summary of the bill.

The Senate Armed Services Committee’s Fiscal Year 2023 defense authorization bill would halt the Navy’s plans to retire 12 ships, half of the 24 the service proposed decommissioning in its budget request.

Should the upper chamber’s bill become law, the Navy would need to keep four Dock Landing Ships, five Littoral Combat Ships, two Expeditionary Transfer Docks and one Ticonderoga-class guided missile cruiser.

The cruiser the Navy would need to keep in service is USS Vicksburg (CG-69), which is nearly finished with a modernization overhaul at BAE Systems Ship Repair in Norfolk, Va. The four LSDs are USS Germantown (LSD-42), USS Gunston Hall (LSD-44), USS Tortuga (LSD-46) and USS Ashland (LSD-48), while the two ESDs are USNS Montford Point (ESD-1) and USNS John Glenn (LSD-2). It’s unclear which five LCSs the committee is saving in its bill. The Navy asked to decommission nine LCSs in the FY 2023 budget request.

Asked why the panel is preventing the Navy from retiring some of the ships, committee staff said the vessels still have years of service life left. Staff also noted that the committee included a requirement for 31 amphibious ships, meaning the service would need to keep the LSDs. The LCSs are young ships, and the cruiser’s modernization overhaul is almost complete and would give it more years of service life, according to staff.

The bill follows a similar provision in the House Appropriations defense subcommittee’s legislation, which would also mandate the Navy keep five LCSs and allow the service to retire four. Meanwhile, the House Armed Services Committee seapower and projection forces subcommittee’s mark of its policy bill would require the Navy keep Vicksburg and the four Whidbey Island-class amphibs.

The SASC bill, which the committee approved on Thursday, increased the defense topline by $45 billion, about half of which will go toward inflation, according to committee staff.

The panel met the Navy’s request for ship procurement by authorizing eight battleforce ships: two Virginia-class attack boats, two Arleigh Burke-class destroyers, one Constellation-class frigate, one San Antonio-class amphibious transport dock, one T-AO-205 John Lewis-class oiler and one T-ATS 6 Navajo-class towing, salvage and rescue ship

The SASC notably included research and development funding for the Sea-Launched Cruise Missile, which has become a controversial pursuit over the last year. The Biden administration in the FY 2023 budget proposal chose to cancel SLCM. SASC committee staff pointed to Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Gen. Mark Milley’s, U.S. Strategic Command chief Adm. Chas Richard’s, Vice Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff Adm. Chris Grady’s support for developing SLCM in justifying why the panel included the research and development funding for the program.

Some House Democrats have voiced opposition to the program. House appropriators did not allot any funding for SLCM in their defense spending bill, unveiled earlier this week. The House Appropriations defense subcommittee passed the bill on Wednesday and it awaits markup from the full House Appropriations Committee.

On the aviation side, SASC largely met the Navy’s request – authorizing 15 F-35B Lightning II Joint Strike Fighters, 13 F-35Cs, and five E-2D Advanced Hawkeyes. The service authorized 12 CH-53K King Stallions for the Marine Corps, an increase of 2 aircraft from the Navy’s request for 10. HAC-D similarly allotted funding for 12 CH-53Ks.

Now that the authorization bill has passed through SASC, it will head to the Senate floor.

“This forward-looking NDAA invests in people, platforms, and infrastructure. It authorizes increased funding for our national defense and sets policies to equip, supply, and train U.S. forces now and in the future. It provides for military families while strengthening America’s industrial base and the workers who contribute to our national security,” SASC Chairman Jack Reed (D-R.I.) said in a statement. “This year’s markup provides our troops and Defense Department civilians with a well-deserved 4.6 percent pay raise, as well as new tools and reforms to protect the health and well-being of our servicemembers and their families.”


In its annual report for 2021, CHIRP Maritime included a single known case of a master who deceived port officials and denied the presence of COVID symptoms aboard his ship. “While this is the first such report to be received by CHIRP Maritime, it is unlikely to be an isolated case but rather the tip of an under-reported industry-wide problem,” the organization reported. 

Case study outline: A conscious decision not to declare notifiable disease symptoms on board when entering port put the pilot, dockworkers, and the wider community at risk.

What the reporting crewmember told CHIRP:

Following a full crew change in port, the vessel sailed that evening and went to anchor outside the port. Soon after joining, two of the crew exhibited COVID symptoms – one of them later learned he was a ‘close contact’ with a confirmed COVID sufferer – both seafarers were isolated on board.

Initially, the master kept the presence of symptomatic crew quiet, choosing not to inform the vessel’s management company. Additionally the master falsified the seafarers’ temperature records by asking them to stand outside in the cold before recording their temperature. When the master was persuaded to inform the company (as per the COVID management plan), the company instructed the master not to disclose the issue. The vessel remained at anchor.

The symptomatic seafarers were employed through a manning agency, which applied pressure to the management company to conduct COVID tests. Three days after COVID symptoms were first exhibited, the management company instructed the vessel to proceed into port. The two symptomatic seafarers would be replaced on board and then accommodated and tested ashore.

During the phone call with the company, the captain volunteered to lie to the harbor authorities about having COVID symptoms onboard. (The port asks all arriving vessels “if they have reportable symptoms on board.”) The company accepted the captain’s offer.

Subsequently, the vessel entered port without informing any authority of the reportable symptoms on board. The pilot who boarded the vessel was not informed of the symptomatic crew and neither was the taxi driver whodrove the two seafarers to their accommodation ashore.

The day after the symptomatic seafarers were taken ashore, two replacement crew joined the vessel. Only one of them had been informed of the suspected coronavirus on board the vessel before they joined. The vessel departed the harbor after embarking the two crew replacements and taking on food stores. The vessel did not take a pilot for sailing.

Five days after the symptomatic seafarers were landed ashore (and 8 days after their symptoms first appeared), the two seafarers were finally tested by a private company. The test results were positive for coronavirus. Sometime later, the two previously symptomatic seafarers were re-tested – the results came back negative for coronavirus. The company offered them employment on another vessel, but they declined and their contracts were terminated. Their manning agency paid for alternative accommodation and flights back to their home country.

After departing the harbor, no further symptoms presented on board.

The reporter had contacted the DPA, but only after the two crew members were landed ashore, which the reporter recognized was too late. Earlier action might have led to a better outcome with proper procedures followed and safety precautions in place for the pilot and the taxi driver. However, the conversation between the master and the company had been with the company directors, by-passing the DPA. It is unclear if the DPA would have had any influence given the direct relationship between the master and company directors.

In response to questions, the reporter noted the following: there are many human element failures within this report including the reporter’s own. Whatever the captain’s misguided reasoning for offering to lie to the authorities, the company should have declined and instructed him to make a full and honest declaration to the port authorities.

Finally, the reporter thought that there must be other vessels in similar situations waiting outside ports in various parts of the world.

CHIRP comment

The CHIRP Maritime Advisory Board (MAB) noted the following points.

• This report identifies an absolute violation of the WHO International Health Regulations (2005) concerning the requirements to report the presence or suspected presence on board of a notifiable disease. Beyond the regulations are questions of moral and ethical integrity.

• Long established by the WHO, IMO, and ILO is an obligation on the master of a ship to make an accurate declaration when entering port.

• Early in the coronavirus pandemic, a broad coalition within the maritime industry came together to produce a framework of protocols to facilitate safe crew changes and repatriation. On 5th May 2020, IMO issued a Circular Letter (No.4204-Add.14), informing shipping companies of the recommended framework of protocols.

• This report concerns a recent incident which was a wilful breach of the regulations and those established protocols, not just by the master but by the management company as well. Given the potential harm to those individuals involved in repatriating the two seafarers with symptomatic Covid-19 conditions, pilot, crew, agents and taxi driver, this case highlights the imperative to properly report any notifiable disease.

• COVID restrictions and quarantine have both direct and indirect consequences on seafarers and additionally on a ship’s ability to continue to work cargo. All such issues can be compounded by restrictive charters and inflexible charter parties.

• The reporter also highlighted that the master engaged directly with the company’s directors and by-passed the Designated Person Ashore (DPA) (The DPA is the authorised direct link between the ship and the highest level of management of the Company who is responsible for ensuring the safe operation of the ship.)

While this is the first such report to be received by CHIRP Maritime, it is unlikely to be an isolated case but rather the tip of an under-reported industry-wide problem, made possible by lack of enforcement.

As far as CHIRP Maritime is aware, the company has not carried out an internal investigation so there are no lessons learned from this incident. However, CHIRP Maritime feels it is incumbent on all shipping companies and masters to understand the reporting requirements for reportable diseases and to make accurate declarations. Notwithstanding any charterer’s contractual agreements, the master must ensure that the regulations are robustly adhered to and that reporting via the correct channels is followed.

The CHIRP (Confidential Human Factors Incident Reporting Programme) Charitable Trust has provided a totally independent and confidential safety reporting system to seafarers worldwide since 2013, complementing the reporting system it has offered to the UK aviation industry since 2003. By publishing our analysis of received incident and near-miss reports we raise awareness of safety issues and contribute to improved safety outcomes through all sectors of the maritime industry.


Company DETAILS

SHIP IP LTD
VAT:BG 202572176
Rakovski STR.145
Sofia,
Bulgaria
Phone ( +359) 24929284
E-mail: sales(at)shipip.com

ISO 9001:2015 CERTIFIED