The text of the following statement was released by the Government of the United States of America, as President of the G7, on the conclusion of discussions with G7 partners on restoring confidence in transportation and travel.

Begin Text:

Recognizing the ongoing challenges presented by the COVID-19 pandemic and acting in response to the G7 Leaders’ Statement issued on March 16, 2020, G7 experts launched an initiative to reinvigorate the global interconnected transportation system.

The G7 set forth key objectives to address all modes of transportation– air, land, and sea.  They noted the importance of working together in a transparent way, communicating collective efforts, and helping to restore confidence in travel and tourism.  They stressed the need for coordination between governments, industries, and international organizations to:

• ensure global transportation routes and supply chains remain open, safe, and secure;
• restore consumer and passenger confidence;
• underscore the importance of transportation and critical infrastructure workers as “essential” employees;
• integrate evolving public health considerations into transportation and travel; and
• recognize the importance of transportation in facilitating repatriation efforts.

To support global coordination, the G7 will share this document with the G20, other key international partners, and relevant international organizations, including the International Civil Aviation Organization and the International Maritime Organization.

The G7 endorsed the following high-level principles to:

Transportation Safety, Security, and Health

1. ensure unwavering commitment to safety, security, and public health;

2. restore passenger and transport operators’ confidence in the health safety of travel through globally compatible public health measures that incorporate the latest scientific and epidemiological understanding of COVID-19;

3. recognize that the health posture is ever-changing, such that mitigation measures should be based on health and risk-based criteria to allow for continuous monitoring and adjustments of mitigation measures as appropriate; and to avoid unnecessary burdens on the public or industry;

4. communicate clear and transparent messages to the public on the nature and purpose of the actions being taken in an effort to reduce confusion and restore confidence;

Economic Growth and Recovery of the Interconnected Transportation Systems

5. underscore the importance of compatible requirements imposed on transportation in response to COVID-19 in order to avoid a global patchwork of health safety measures and to minimize market access barriers and burdens on transportation operators;

6. maintain connectivity and global supply chains to facilitate the movement of essential goods, medical products, equipment and agricultural goods;

7. enhance overall systemic resilience in response to the COVID-19 pandemic for all modes of transportation of passengers and goods;

8. promote innovative digital solutions to advance seamless interconnectivity to accelerate recovery;

9. recognize transportation as a driver of economic recovery, and aviation’s particular role, in revitalizing global economic growth, travel, and tourism;

International Coordination and Transparency

10. ensure that any restrictive public health-related measures on travel and transportation resulting from COVID-19, are:
    • responsive, targeted, transparent, proportionate, temporary, and non-discriminatory;
    • risk-based, continuously reviewed, monitored, and adapted as appropriate;
    • compatible with international best practices; and
    • consistent with obligations under international agreements;

11. share best practices and technological advancements on common challenges such as prevention, sanitization, and cleaning protocols;

12. promote global coordination among governments and between governments, international organizations the private sector, other key stakeholders;

13. encourage information sharing regarding repatriation efforts so that citizens may travel to their home countries;

14. recognize these principles do not alter the sovereign right of a state to take actions to protect its safety and security, consistent with international obligations;

Protection and Treatment of Air Crews

15. promote a closely coordinated international approach to the treatment of air crews, consistent with recognized public health standards in order to avoid impacts on aviation operations, and to alleviate burdens on air crews, including testing, quarantine requirements, travel to and from their worksite, and immigration restrictions that apply to other travelers;

16. recognizing that air crews must abide by their employer’s health requirements in their course of duty, to avoid subjecting crew to additional invasive testing;

17. facilitate or expedite screening for crews and ensure that health screening methods are as non-invasive as possible, for the countries where these measures are required;

18. continue to support the urgent repatriation of air crews in lieu of quarantine, as circumstances may warrant;
19. highlight the importance of safeguarding crew rest, with adequate layover facilities and access to food and amenities made available to ensure the continued safety of aviation operations; including for crews operating pre-positioning, ferry, or non-revenue flights;

20. maintain close contact and coordination with the aviation industry to get updated information on current issues affecting air crews during the COVID-19 pandemic;

Protection and Treatment of Seafarers

21. encourage discussions among relevant countries in response to COVID-19 outbreaks at sea;

22. promote an international approach to the treatment of maritime crews in order to alleviate burdens on seafarers, including testing, quarantine requirements, travel to and from their worksite, and immigration restrictions that apply to other travelers;

23. consider designating maritime crew, and workers requesting to cross a border for the purpose of performing vessel construction, repair, refit, maintenance or inspection/certification, as essential workers to facilitate cross border movement for those that are asymptomatic;

24. promote a safe and secure workplace for seafarers and their access to prompt and adequate medical care both on board and on shore;

25. support the repatriation of discharged seafarers to their home countries and travel of new crew members to their ships in order to facilitate crew changes; and

26. maintain close contact with the maritime industry in order to ensure the exchange of relevant information affecting seafarers and the operation of international shipping during the COVID-19 pandemic.Source: state.gov

The seafarer community is in the midst of a mental health crisis due to the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic on the seafarers’ welfare and that of their families, the latest edition of the Seafarers Happiness Index (SHI) published by the Mission to Seafarers shows.

The SHI is a barometer of the key issues facing those at sea today, and the latest report for the second quarter of 2020 reflects the responses from crew members globally against the backdrop of a global crew change crisis precipitated by COVID-19.

The report said the continuing decline of happiness at sea, was largely due to the inability of seafarers to sign off and return home. Heavy workloads, virus fears and a perceived lack of COVID-19 precautions on board vessels are exacerbating the decline in satisfaction.

“Without immediate action, there are significant risks for the mental and physical wellbeing of crew and a growing risk to safety,” the report warns.

The latest survey, undertaken in association with the Shipowners’ Club and Wallem Group, analyses the experiences of seafarers across the global maritime industry between April and June 2020, at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic. Overall, seafarer happiness has dropped from 6.30 in Q1 2020 to 6.18 in Q2 2020.

The survey unveils the harsh reality of crews not being able to get home, worries about the safety of family and friends, and frustration at extended contracts and even fears about entire careers, not just jobs.

Crew members are tired, fed up, lonely, homesick, sometimes even suffering illness and pain, and they desperately want to get back home.

Furthermore, the report shows vessels are sailing with fewer crew members, increased sickness onboard, and pressure to keep hygiene standards at almost hospital-like levels. The demands of meeting these standards while also maintaining social distancing are relentless and seafarers are struggling to adhere to new guidance.

Seafarers have reported feeling unsupported and stressed, and without respite, which is impacting work standards as well as the welfare of seafarers.  Combined with the challenge of accessing medical services, the risk of an increase in incidents of self-harm and in the number of accidents is very real as stress impacts work, compromising safety at all levels.

“We are in the midst of a welfare crisis. While Q1 showed us how seafarers suffered as COVID-19 struck home and provided insight into the support that was needed, the Q2 report highlights the cost of inaction and the need for immediate solutions,” Andrew Wright, Secretary-General of The Mission to Seafarers, commented.

“It is paramount that we see progress with crew changeovers, onboard PPE and improved communication between shore and sea, to defuse this ticking time-bomb. Protecting seafarers is a priority and governments must now come together and work with industry before it is too late.”

As explained by Louise Hall, Director – Loss Prevention at the Shipowners’ Club, social distancing has taken a great toll on relationships and connectivity on board.

“Reports of additional safety measures, such as separating tables and limiting the capacity of mess rooms at meal times, has made even the most habitual social interactions difficult. This, coupled with extended periods of time at sea, raises serious concerns for seafarers’ mental wellbeing as feelings of loneliness and isolation intensify.”

“Never has the statement ‘money doesn’t buy happiness’ had more meaning than in the crew crisis.  No bonus or extra pay can resolve the anguish, mental stress and problems being faced by the crew today,” Frank Coles, Chief Executive Officer, Wallem Group, added.

The report also reaffirms the importance of communication to seafarers. With many seafarers unable to leave their vessels or contact their family due to the crisis, online access is fundamental to their wellbeing.

Without the connection to home and restricted support from ship visitors and port chaplains, seafarers are on the edge of serious mental distress. It is reported that many companies are not communicating well with their seafarers and little support is on offer. With little or no communication, seafarers are trapped on vessels, imagining the worst.

The Q1 2020 Seafarers Happiness Index identified the pride that seafarers feel in their work and their hope that the industry would protect them.

Today, this is clearly tempered with disappointment that seafarers are not recognised as key workers. The challenges being reported are reaching intolerable levels, due to contracts being disregarded and growing reports of sexism, racism and bullying and drunkenness onboard. Seafarers are at a tipping point and it is essential that faster progress is made to protect seafarers and stop the industry from falling into a deeper crisis.

The message of the report is clear: crew changes are needed, and those who can make them happen must do so, now. Only once seafarers can return home to their families and those serving at sea feel safe can we avert the both the immediate and the long-term impact of a mental health crisis among our seafarers.

Source: offshore-energy

In response to the worldwide COVID-19 pandemic, the Congressional Research Service released a report that stated global economic growth has declined by 3% to 6% in 2020 with a partial recovery predicted for 2021. Also, the GDP of the U.S. has fallen by 5% in the first quarter 2020. According to the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the maritime industry, and seafarers themselves, have not been able to escape the significant effects of this crisis.

All sectors of the maritime industry have been adversely affected by the global pandemic. The shipping industry alone can face up to $1.7 billion loss in revenues to the carriers. Cruise lines in particular have been hit hard by the virus; most companies have essentially shut down operations until the fall at the earliest. Other sectors have also been negatively affected, including ports, terminal operators and their workers according to Lauren Brand, the President of the National Association of Waterfront Employers (NAWE), in her hearing testimony before the House Committee on Transpiration and Infrastructure regarding “the Status of the U.S. Maritime Supply Chain During the COVID-19 Pandemic” on May 29,2020.

Finally, we have seen seafarers stranded as a result of COVID-19 and makeshift efforts have been made to allow them to travel home. For instance, the IMO has created a Seafarer Crisis Action Team (SCAT) to assist stranded seafarers.

What has Congress done to help the maritime industry? Unfortunately, not much. So far, Congress has passed three COVID-19 stimulus bills: the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act (P.L.116-136), the Coronavirus Preparedness and Response Supplemental Appropriations Act (P.L.116-123), and the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (P.L.116-127). Anecdotally, these response packages are referred to as the CARES Act, CARES Act 2, and CARES Act 3, respectively. When they return from July 4th recess on July 20, 2020, Congress is primed to enact their fourth, and likely final, stimulus package for Coronavirus aid. Very few funds were allocated to the maritime industry in these first three stimulus bills.

The fourth package is still in the early stages of negotiation so whether maritime will get aid this time around remains to be seen.  The House of Representatives has already enacted their version of the next stimulus bill entitled the Health and Economic Recovery Omnibus Emergency Solutions (HEROES) Act (H.R. 6800), at over $3 trillion the bill would constitute the single largest piece of economic support legislation ever, if enacted. On the other side of the Hill, the Republican-led Senate is reluctant to pass another stimulus bill with such a high price tag so negotiations will determine what is stripped or stays in the final legislation. However, with COVID-19 resurging in Republican-led states, Members may have no choice but to provide more money to states, local governments, and even to unemployed workers.  Though Congress has set a goal of passage by the end of July, we expect the fourth stimulus bill to be enacted by the end of the summer.

Relief for the Maritime Industry
The first bill directly targeted to the maritime industry is The Maritime Transportation System Emergency Relief Act (MTSERA), introduced on July 9, 2020, by the Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, Rep. Peter DeFazio (D-Ore.) and the Coast Guard Subcommittee Chair, Sean Patrick Maloney (D-N.Y.). According to Chair Defazio,

“[t]he men and women who work within the Maritime Transportation System are part of our nation’s essential workforce that has been key to keeping critical goods moving during the global pandemic, and for that, we owe them a debt of gratitude.”

“But our thanks are not enough. We must also ensure that stakeholders across our maritime industry have the resources and equipment they need to keep the global supply chain moving and stay safe while doing so.”

The bill would establish for the first time a comprehensive maritime emergency relief authority to enable the Maritime Administration (MARAD) to provide financial assistance to stabilize and ensure the reliable functioning of the U.S. Maritime Transportation System (MTS) in the event of a national emergency or disaster, including, the current COVID-19 public health emergency. The bill would authorize MARAD to provide grant assistance, during this and other emergencies, to state and private entities engaged in maritime transportation activities. The federal share can be 100% of the cost. One element of reimbursement is for the cost of personal protective equipment that these entities have incurred during the pandemic.

To date, there is no companion Senate bill but we expect this bill will be wrapped into the House-passed infrastructure package entitled the Moving Forward Act (H.R. 2) or the FY2021 MARAD appropriations bill. Funding may also be available from the existing Disaster Relief Fund that is administered by FEMA.

Regular Order of Maritime Business

In the meantime, Congress is continuing its regular order of passing authorization and appropriation bills for FY2021. Senator Roger Wicker (R-Miss.), Chair of the Senate Commerce and Infrastructure Committee introduced the MARAD authorization bill (S. 3930) on June 11, 2020. The bill would:

• • Provide COVID-19-related relief for ships participating in the Maritime Security Program (MSP), so that they can continue to support military sealift.
• • Authorize the Tanker Security Program – based on the successful MSP framework – to support U.S. maritime sealift capacity for military refueling operations.
• • Improve MARAD’s Marine Highways program by streamlining eligibility and application requirements. These reforms would increase eligibility for the program and obligate the Executive Branch to be timely in their review of applications.
• • Authorize funding for the Port and Intermodal Improvement Program to improve the safety, efficiency, or reliability of the movement of goods through ports and intermodal connections. The bill would also make small ports more competitive under the grant program.
• • Reauthorize the National Ocean Partnership Program to increase federal coordination of ocean research across the federal government.
• • Authorize a Community College Maritime Career Training Grants Program to provide funding for community and technical colleges to develop, offer, or improve educational or career training programs for maritime workers along the nation’s coasts, the Great Lakes, Mississippi River System, and other inland waterways.
• • Authorize increased funding for the Small Shipyard Grant program and full funding for the Title XI maritime guaranteed loan program to support the maritime industrial base.
• • Reauthorize the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration’s Commissioned Officer Corps. The NOAA Corps supports the collection of ocean and atmospheric data vital for predicting weather and managing ocean resources.
• • Enact a number of reforms to support the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy.

Traditionally, the MARAD authorization bill has been added, on the Senate side, to the National Defense Authorization Act (NDAA) and we expect this will transpire this year as well. Like the MTSERA, the MARAD authorization bill is funded through the MARAD appropriations title of the Transportation-HUD (T-HUD) appropriations bill.

The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Authorization Act of 2019 is proceeding through Congress on separate tracks. The House passed its version of the bill, H.R. 3409, last July and the Senate reported its bill, S. 2297, through the Senate Commerce Committee last July as well. Due to limited time the Senate has for floor action before the end of the fiscal year, the chamber is looking to pass its USCG bill through “unanimous consent” procedures. If one Senator objects to a provision, the offending provision is usually struck so the entire bill will not be torpedoed. The House and Senate are informally conferencing their bills and with one exception all language has been worked out.

The one remaining provision in dispute is Section 305 of the House-passed bill which creates a complicated Jones Act waiver system, to be administered by MARAD, that allows a developer on the outer Continental Shelf (for oil and gas or offshore wind) to use a foreign-flag heavy lift vessel only if no U.S. flag vessel is capable and available. This Jones Act waiver process is supported by the Offshore Marine Service Association (OMSA) and the Shipbuilders Council of America but opposed by the International Marine Contractors Association (IMCA), the American Petroleum Institute (API), and the American Wind Energy Association (AWEA). We are waiting to see how Congress resolves this longstanding dispute; it is unusual for them to act when the maritime industry is split in half.
Funding for Maritime Agencies

At this writing, Congress has begun the regular order of passing FY2021 appropriation bills to fund authorized and new programs before the end of the fiscal year. The House is further ahead of the Senate.  Full Committee markup is scheduled on July 15 in the House for the major appropriation bills. Draft bills include the following for MARAD and USCG programs.

For MARAD, funding is allocated as follows: $1.2 billion total authorization, including $314 million for the Maritime Security Program, $300 million for the Port Infrastructure Development Program (PIDP), $389 million for schoolship construction, and $100 million for assistance to small shipyards. On top of these funds, the bill would appropriate $3B for the TIGER/BUILD grant program and an additional $1 billion for the PIDP.

For USCG, the draft House bill would appropriate a total of $12.8 billion for the US Coast Guard, including a procurement budget of $2.16 billion for a second polar security cutter, 4 fast response cutters and continuation of the offshore patrol cutter program.

Are New Icebreakers a Reality?
A final word must be said about icebreakers. We know that the United States has only one functional heavy icebreaker, the Polar Star, operated by the U.S. Coast Guard which pales in comparison to the Russian fleet with around 40 icebreakers. On June 9, 2020, President Trump issued a memorandum on “Safeguarding U.S. National Interests in the Arctic and Antarctic Regions” which directed the Secretary of Homeland Security, along with other agencies, to develop an acquisition program for a fleet of polar security icebreakers and report back in 60 days. We anticipate this report being issued soon.

On July 10, 2020, during a visit to U.S. Southern Command in Doral, Fla., President Trump announced that he was working on securing 10 icebreakers for the U.S. Coast Guard but did not offer specifics on where the government would acquire these additional icebreakers from and whether it would do so through an outright purchase or some other type of arrangement. “We’re trying to do a deal with a certain place that has a lot of icebreakers, and we’re seeing if we can make a really good deal where you can have them very fast,” the President said.

Conclusion
In sum: the maritime industry will have to wait for the MTSERA to be enacted and funded in order to receive significant COVID-19 relief; the U.S. Coast Guard Authorization is hung up over the Jones Act waiver process; funding needs to be resolved for FY2021 for the two key maritime agencies; and the report on new icebreakers for the United States remains outstanding. With the number of FY2020 Congressional working days quickly diminishing and COVID-19 cases surging, Members must get to work quickly if they want to help not only the maritime industry but the country.

“Congress Responds to COVID-19 and Other Challenges for the Maritime Industry,” by Joan M. Bondareff was published in Maritime Reporter and Engineering News on July 30, 2020. Reprinted with permission. 

Source: blankrome

Shipping giant DFDS and union Unite have clashed over claims it is using the coronavirus pandemic as an excuse to make redundancies and make “brutal attacks” on workers’ pay.

Regional officer Mike Wilkinson launched the broadside, suggesting the dispute could escalate, with 86 jobs at risk and an overhaul of overtime terms and conditions.

But the accusations have been completely refuted, with the scale of the impact outlined.

DFDS Seaways announced last month that 86 jobs were at risk, as part of cuts that will see 650 roles go across the company’s European operations.

A total of 62 positions are in the ferries and terminals business, with 24 in logistics. Unite represents around 300 members of the workforce.

Mr Wilkinson said: “DFDS Seaways is using Covid-19 as an excuse to cut jobs and make brutal attacks on its Immingham workforce’s terms and conditions.

“While many companies have rewarded their staff for working through the lockdown, DFDS at Immingham has chosen instead to punish its employees with redundancies and pay cuts. We consider this action by the company to be grossly unfair and opportunism of the worst kind.

“DFDS’ work volume at Immingham has increased steadily since operations were disrupted in April so there is no reason to enact such severe and draconian measures. Unite will not sit by and let this opportunistic attack by DFDS on our members’ jobs and terms and conditions take place.

“Our members supported the company during lockdown and are incredibly angry at the way they are now being treated and unless DFDS rethinks its plans and engages constructively with Unite this dispute will only escalate further.”

It is understood a total of 14 members are being made redundant, on a voluntary basis.

In a statement, Andrew Byrne, DFDS Seaways’ managing director, said: “DFDS, as with many other supply chain and logistics companies, has been significantly impacted by the Covid-19 pandemic. We saw volumes fall by 30 per cent, and as a high fixed cost business our costs fell by a lot less, creating a critical financial situation.

“The need for DFDS to make changes to its cost base is to ensure we survive this difficult period and protect the business and the majority of our colleagues.”

He told how while volumes have increased “from a desperately low base, they are still a long way behind where they need to be to make us a viable proposition”.

A £200 million hit has been forecast by the business, with 12 of 50 freight vessels laid up at the pandemic peak.

“We are making absolutely every effort to work to find agreement on a way forward to protect our business and protect as many roles as possible in these difficult circumstances,” Mr Byrne continued.

He confirmed a time and a half to single time overtime payment had been proposed, adding that DFDS has offered to reinstate it should a move to a framework overtime contract that removed guarantees and was based on volume levels being achieved, be accepted.

“We are doing everything possible to change fixed costs to variable costs so hopefully when we move beyond this period and grow, the current benefits are restored, and the majority of our employees understand this,” Mr Byrne said. “We are asking Unite to work with us on achieving this rather than continuing to refuse to engage in solutions, which could ultimately mean all the initial proposals are imposed as nothing has been tabled or agreed from Unite.

“DFDS is a reputable company, who topped up all salaries to 100 per cent during furlough, and have made these difficult decisions to protect the employment of the majority of staff. “For Unite to state that they are prepared to escalate the situation further appears irresponsible and would potentially put the employment of their members at risk unnecessarily.”
Source: Business Live

West P&I Club head of claims Americas Emily McCulloch reports that more and more shipowners have been forced to weigh the immediate needs of the crew against compliance with contracts of carriage which provide little flexibility for such unique circumstances – often resulting in legal challenges from unsympathetic charterers.

The International Group of P&I Clubs and BIMCO have produced a clause for timecharters that ensures charterers understand the responsibilities owed to crew by giving shipowners the right to deviate to land crew where crew changes are not possible in the ports contemplated for the voyage.

BIMCO commented, “If shipowners are unable to make crew changes at the ports where the ship visits, they should not be penalised if they must carry out the crew change elsewhere. The ability of a ship to continue operating safely depends on regular crew changes to avoid fatigue. In the exceptional circumstances created by the pandemic, agreement is needed that crew changes are a common benefit and that those hiring the ships should be willing to contribute to the process.”

The BIMCO Covid-19 Crew Change Clause for Time Charter Parties 2020:

(a) In addition to any other right to deviate under this contract, the Vessel shall have liberty to deviate for crew changes if Covid-19-related restrictions prevent crew changes from being conducted at the ports or places to which the Vessel has been ordered or within the scheduled period of call. Any deviation under this clause shall not be deemed to be an infringement or breach of this contract, and Owners shall not be liable for any loss or damage resulting therefrom.

(b) Owners shall exercise the right under subclause (a) above with due regard to Charterers’ interests and shall notify Charterers in writing as soon as reasonably possible of any intended deviation for crew changes purposes.

(c) Charterers shall procure that subclause (a) shall be incorporated into any and all sub-charter parties, bills of lading, waybills or other documents evidencing contracts of carriage issued pursuant to this Charter Party.

(d) During the period of such deviation the Vessel shall:

(i)* remain on hire, but at a reduced rate of hire of US$ ……….. per day. In the absence of an agreed amount, 50% of the hire rate shall apply. The cost of bunkers consumed shall be shared equally between Owners and Charterers.

(ii)* be off-hire and the cost of bunkers consumed shall be for the Owners’ account.

(e) While the Vessel is at the port of deviation all port charges, pilotage and other expenses arising out of such crew changes shall be for the Owners’ account.

*(d)(i) and (d)(ii) are alternatives. Delete whichever is not applicable. In the absence of deletions alternative (d)(i) shall apply.

As can be seen, the clause allows for the emergence of hub crew change ports and includes a provision to include the clause into any sub-charterparties and bills of lading. Ms McCulloch points out that members should contact their P&I Club in advance of undertaking deviation when the vessel is laden.

Source: rivieramm

The Port of Seattle has been responding to the outbreak of 2019 Novel Coronavirus (COVID-19) since late January after public health officials confirmed the first case of the virus in the United States in Washington state.

Since then the Port implemented protocols to maintain the health, safety, and well-being of our employees, travelers, and community members who use Port facilities while maintaining the essential functions of the Port.

The Port of Seattle supports efforts to limit the spread of COVID-19 while maintaining essential operations. In response to Governor Jay Inslee’s “stay at home” order issued on March 23, 2020, Port of Seattle Commission President Peter Steinbrueck made the following comment: “Critical Port facilities and operations are still open. We are doing everything we can to support those staying home while keeping Port facilities safe for those who do essential work.”

• Read the FlyHealthy@SEA weekly update for July 24, 2020
• Read COVID-19 Status Updates at SEA Airport
• Read COVID-19 FAQs at SEA Airport 
• See Public Health Insider updates from Seattle and King County

Travelers should check with their airline for specific flight information. The Port of Seattle will update its response pages if an employee or contractor working in a public-facing role tests positive for COVID-19.

Port-wide

• The Port Commission updated its 2020 construction plans to boost local COVID-19 economic recovery through project spending and hiring while enacting public health protocols developed with guidance from state and federal agencies.
  • For more details, read the full announcement.
• The Port will provide rent relief for qualifying business tenants and customers throughout its maritime and landside properties, which include office, retail, and restaurants, along with recreational and commercial moorage.
  • For more details, read the full announcement.
• On April 1, 2020, the Port of Seattle Commission approved an immediate, short-term emergency financial relief package for airport-based businesses, barred evictions of tenants at Port of Seattle facilities (including live-aboard residents) due to an inability to pay rent through June 30, 2020.
  • Read more about the additional relief and recovery strategies for Port tenants.
  • Download COVID-19-related relief and recovery updates from the Port
• June 25, 2020, the Port committed an additional $3 million to community benefit programs to aid COVID-19 recovery, which will go to short-term, youth employment and tourism recovery programs that strengthen Port-related industries, create jobs, and spur spending in the regional economy.
• The Port is partnering with five local non-profit organizations as part of its effort to save youth jobs for the summer and beyond.  The Port’s Opportunity Initiative aims to provide summer jobs for 220 youth, ages 16 to 24, who have been adversely affected by the COVID-19 pandemic.

At Seattle-Tacoma International Airport

• Seattle-Tacoma International Airport (SEA) is open and operating to provide an essential service to the public. We made operational adjustments at SEA in response to COVID-19 as part of FlyHealthy@SEA.
• Face coverings or masks are required for all passengers, visitors, and airport workers. Please wear face coverings or masks over your mouth and nose. This is consistent with the requirement in Washington state, as well as the policies of our airline partners that are requiring passengers to wear face coverings. For more details including applicable exceptions, read the Port’s policy.
• Airport travel is different, but know what you can do to prepare. For many travelers, this will be the first trip through the airport after several months. Be ready with FlyHealthy@SEA virtual tour video and these travel tips.
• We currently anticipate a 61 percent drop in passenger volume for this year compared to 2019. Explore our public dashboard to provide local governments and industries with key indicators each week to track the recovery at the airport.
• Read SEA Airport status updates and COVID-19 FAQs for more information.

The Port, public health organizations, and federal partners are taking the following actions to help prevent the spread of the virus and keep travelers and employees safe:

• We have made many operational adjustments at SEA in response to the changing public health landscape. Here’s how the Port is keeping our facilities clean and safe.
• The Port has installed 250 hand sanitizers in and around the terminal. Traveling right now? Find the closest hand sanitizer to your gate.
• The Department of Homeland Security issued a notice of arrival restrictions outlining the process for American citizens, legal permanent residents, and their immediate families who are returning home after recently visiting high-risk countries. Learn more about international arrival protocols during the coronavirus response.
• The CDC, Customs and Border Protection Agency, the Port fire department, and other airport partners have infectious disease response plans in place that are reviewed, practiced, and updated throughout the year.

At Maritime Facilities

• We thank our cruise partners for recognizing the severity of the COVID-19 health crisis and making the difficult decisions to cancel cruises. We look forward to welcoming cruise passengers back to Seattle, once health authorities declare this crisis over, and we can provide safe facilities necessary for operations.
  • Read more about the delay of the 2020 cruise season and 2020 cruise season FAQs.
  • On April 9, 2020, the CDC extended the No Sail Order for all cruise ships. For more details, read the full announcement.
• Shilshole Bay Marina (SBM) has implemented the following measures to support the “Stay Home, Stay Healthy” emergency order. Non-liveaboard moorage customers should only visit the SBM if your trip is essential. For more details, read the SBM COVID-19 Operations Update.
• Commercial fishing facilities are essential and will remain open to provide moorage, infrastructure, storage, and equipment services to the Commercial Fishing Fleets at Terminal 91 and Fishermen’s Terminal during COVID-19.
  • Some businesses at Fisherman’s Terminal are open and operating under proper protocols while the North Pacific Fishing Fleet prepares for the fishing season. For more details, read the Fisherman Terminal COVID-19 Operations Update.
• The parking lots at Jack Block, Terminal 107, and Terminal 105 parks are open. For reminders on what’s open, closed, and best practices if you plan to visit maritime parks and marinas, please read the Safe and Healthy On Shore and Off blog.
• Daily enhanced cleaning protocols have been implemented to prevent the spread of coronavirus at Port maritime and marine maintenance facilities including:
  • Providing hand sanitizer and Clorox wipes for self-cleaning of desks, shops, Port vehicles
  • Disinfecting high-touch surfaces and floors throughout facilities, including kitchens, handrails, doorknobs, offices, conference rooms, and restrooms
• The CDC is the main federal response agency for maritime vessels. The United States Coast Guard has forwarded precautionary information to vessel owners/operators and local stakeholders.
• The Northwest Seaport Alliance and Washington state ports are in communication with each other and the United States Coast Guard (USCG) through the USCG Area Maritime Security Committee (AMSC), which was established to be prepared for events such as this.

For Employees and Community Partners

The Port is working to minimize the spread of coronavirus and keep employees at our facilities informed by:

• Optimizing telework for our Port workforce.
• Creating public videos about COVID-19 response and making them available to all airport employees via YouTube.
• Printing a COVID-19 fact sheet for airport employees, translated into multiple languages.
• Reviewing large gatherings, events, celebrations, or tours scheduled to occur on Port properties.
• Hosting Port of Seattle Commission meetings virtually until the public health crisis subsides.
• We are adjusting our Port Commission meeting public comment protocol due to the Governor’s ‘Stay at Home’ order. There will be no physical location and the Port will not accept in-person, verbal comments during meetings. Those wishing to provide public comment will have the opportunity to:
  • Deliver public comments via email: All written comments received by email to commission-public-records@portseattle.org will be distributed to Commissioner and attached to the approved minutes.
  • Deliver public comment via phone or Skype for Business conference: To take advantage of this option, please email commission-public-records@portseattle.org with your name and the topic you wish to speak to by 9:00 a.m. PT on Tuesday, June 9. You will then be provided with a link to join the Skype meeting.

How You Can Stay Healthy

Public health officials recommend personal hygiene and frequent hand washing as the best way to prevent illness.

• Wash your hands frequently, cover your mouth and nose with a tissue when you cough or sneeze, then throw the tissue in the trash and wash your hands.
• Avoid contact with people who are sick and stay home when sick.
• Avoid touching your eyes, nose or mouth with unwashed hands.
• If you are traveling overseas, follow the CDC’s guidance.
• Check-in with your airline if you have questions about your travel itinerary.

Resources

Information on COVID-19 is updated frequently; check the following resources for the most up-to-date information:

• Public Health-Seattle & King County
• Washington State Department of Health
• Washington State Coronavirus Response
• Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC)
• COVID-19 Screen Tool and Resources

Covid-19 is showing the world how a health crisis can exert disproportionate pressure on existing social and political fissures. The Asia–Pacific maritime environment is no exception, with hybrid challenges persisting and non-conventional incidents on the rise. As state budgets adjust to accommodate the health crisis, non-state actors are escalating violence on land that is spilling over into the maritime domain.

Before the onset of the pandemic, illegal, unreported and unregulated fishing incidents were gaining recognition as a serious security issue. Known as hybrid challenges, these incidents are characterised by the combination of regular and irregular tactics used by adversaries to exploit non-conventional concerns in order to gain an asymmetric advantage. These tactics include the use of criminal behaviour, subversion, sponsorship of proxy forces and even military expansionism.

Covid-19 is not hindering state and non-state actors from posing maritime hybrid threats despite national budgets being diverted to crisis response. The sinking of a Vietnamese fishing boat near the Paracel Islands, harassment of supply ships off Sarawak, and China’s annual announcement of a fishing ban are some of the irregular hybrid tactics that persist alongside the global pandemic.

Non-state actors are also exploiting the health crisis and perceived weakening of state capacity to heighten internal violence, with negative consequences for the Asia–Pacific’s maritime domain. Organised violence in Myanmar’s Rakhine and Chin states increased by 74% from January to April 2020 compared with the year before. The increased violence is causing mounting civilian fatalities, displacing villagers and pushing migrants out to the Andaman Sea—a maritime route into other regional countries. As countries reject migrants for fear of spreading unidentified infections, the exodus under pandemic conditions could trigger a repeat of the 2015 migration crisis.

There has also been a marked increase in piracy and armed robbery during this period. The Regional Cooperation Agreement on Combating Piracy and Armed Robbery against Ships in Asia (ReCAAP) Information Sharing Centre reported a two-fold increase in the number of piracy and armed robbery incidents from January to June 2020 as compared to 2019. Security arrangements such as the Eastern Sabah Security Command were also on high alert after receiving information of a raised risk of armed Abu Sayyaf Group members targeting vessels in the Sulu and Sulawesi seas.

The heightened risk of instability at sea is accompanied by related reports of clashes between government forces and militants on land. In Sultan Kudarat province, Philippine government forces targeted Bangsamoro Islamic Freedom Fighters militants that are associated with a kidnap-for-ransom group. Violent clashes with Abu Sayyaf Group members were also reported in Sulu.

While these maritime challenges demand an immediate security response, Asia–Pacific countries are preoccupied with battling Covid-19 infections within their own borders. By redirecting more resources towards containing the spread of Covid-19, regional countries are experiencing corresponding budget cuts to other state functions—including defence. For example, Indonesia’s defence budget has been lowered by 7% and Thailand’s budget will shrink by 8%. For Thailand, this has translated into a standstill on military procurement purchases including two Chinese-made submarines.

Despite these restrained national resources, regional governments are still adopting strategies to compensate for any shortfall in state capacity. To maintain a coordinated and balanced response to both domestic and external threats, Malaysia is implementing the integrated ‘Ops Benteng’ to enhance enforcement along maritime and land borders. In the Philippines, a controversial bill designed to strengthen the country’s counterterrorism authorities came into effect on 18 July. Meanwhile, annual multilateral naval exercises such as Southeast Asia Cooperation and Training, or SEACAT, have shifted to virtual platforms to maintain active levels of information sharing and multilateral coordination among naval forces in the region.

Covid-19 is placing intense pressure on pre-existing political and social fissures in the Asia–Pacific. Non-state and state actors are taking advantage of a perceived reduction in state capacity to pursue activities that result in maritime instability. An extended pandemic period threatens to exert further pressure on national budgets and state capacity to protect exclusive economic zones. Although Covid-19 began as a threat to public health, it is slowly evolving into a threat to maritime security too.

Source:aspistrategist

Since January 2020, the COVID-19 pandemic has caused widespread impacts on virtually every sector of the global economy, including world trade and global supply chains. The unprecedented effect of such a pandemic and the resultant restriction rules imposed in many countries have revealed    acute bottleneck in supply chains links in many trade regions. For example, it has been widely reported that significant disruptions have been experienced by a number of firms whose supply chains are heavily dependent on China, and more than 200 of the Fortune Global 500 firms have a presence in Wuhan, the highly industrialized province where the outbreak originated, and has been hardest hit[1]. As a result, it has been argued that the existing globalised economies might require to be restructured in the aftermath of the COVID-19 pandemic when governments and firms start to re-strategize their critical supply chains through back-shoring and near-shoring[2]. Hence, the reconfiguration of global supply chains and restructuring of their associated operations is inevitable.

As more than 90% of the world trade in terms of volume are moved by sea, the global maritime supply chain is considered critical. Like many other economic sectors, various segments of the maritime industry have been severely impacted by COVID-19. The pandemic has exposed the vulnerability of maritime networks, port efficiency, and hinterland connectivity. As a consequence, global shipping markets have been negatively affected with the slump in demand for goods on everything from container ships to oil tankers. The impact of COVID-19 has not only forced cruise shipping to cancel orders and trips, but also created a massive reduction in demand due to non-essential travel, a largely reduced workforce in factories and the closure of production and shipbuilding facilities. Being closely and directly linked to the economic activities, the container shipping sector has also been severely affected due to lockdowns and other social restrictions[3]. Meanwhile, ports as critical nodes in global maritime supply chains have been congested due to reduced workforce, productivity and lengthened cargo receipt/delivery transactions[4]. At the same time, other shipping intermediaries i.e. freight forwarders and logistics service providers who play crucial roles in connecting demand and supply of maritime supply chains have also suffered due to reduced business transactions[5].

Given this context, there is a need to re-evaluate global maritime supply chains in light of the new business environment.  Hence, the focus of this special issue is on understanding possible trends of global trade and maritime supply chains and developing strategies and policies in the aftermath of the pandemic. It is expected that papers will contribute to furthering our knowledge on:

• what lessons have been learned so far and what preparedness alternatives are necessary?
• what new best practices and strategies are required to be developed and implemented? and,
• how can technology assist in minimising and mitigating the risks of distributing goods and services during and after the pandemics?

This special issue of the Maritime Business Review aims to address the aforesaid issues and encourages the submission of high quality and impactful research. We believe that expected new knowledge and practices from this special issue will help building more resilient and responsive maritime supply chain networks during and after the pandemic business environment. We encourage in-depth case studies, papers with secondary data analysis, and papers with primary data analysis employing qualitative/quantitative or mixed-method.
Recommended topics:

Several research themes can be addressed in this special issue. Some research issues may include but are not limited to:

•    Impacts of reshoring or near-shoring production and supply destinations and reconfiguration of global maritime supply chains;
•    Triple-Bottomline (economic, social and environmental) impacts of COVID-19 on various sectors of maritime supply chain i.e. dry and liquid bulk, general cargo, container, cruise, as well as ports and terminals, freight forwarding, and ship building;
•    Capacity management of the various maritime supply chain sectors to adapt to the fluctuating market demand;
•    Strategies to address vulnerability and build more resilience and responsive maritime supply chain networks in the aftermath of COVID-19;
•    Mitigation strategies of shipping, port and other maritime sectors in the post-pandemic business environment;
•    The role of digital technologies in decision-making processes and coordination mechanisms in the new business environment;
•    Designing innovative collaborative partnership and supply chain network structures for developing robust global maritime network systems.

Source: emeraldgrouppublishing

The following are a set of FAQs which further interpret Government guidance on Covid-19 for the Maritime Sector.

This information is issued via UK Government departments.  PSS is providing a platform to share the information as widely as practicable so that readers can make informed decisions.  The FAQs are correct at the time of posting.  However, this is a living document which is being routinely updated by government health experts as information emerges.  We will endeavour to keep it up to date, but the reader should check that they are referring to the latest version.

This is version 8, dated 9 July 2020.

Summary of principles

• Recent experience has shown that it is not possible to self-isolate on ships without the risk of continuing transmission
• PHE advice is to get people off ships wherever possible if COVID 19 is suspected
• The same guidance applies as onshore; seriously ill people go to the hospital, mildly ill and contacts self-isolate ashore
• For cases, contact the HPT (in England) for advice on appropriate accommodation
• For those crew members who have been in contact with a case ask the operators to arrange shore-side accommodation for self-isolation. HPT should be able to assist with this however ultimately the responsibility of crew welfare rests with the Master and ship owner
•  Health and safety of the crew takes priority over berthing or mooring vessels

Update: Quarantine rules for arrivals into the UK commence on Monday 8th June. Persons entering the UK, including Britons, need to self-isolate at home for 14 days, except those coming from the Common Travel Area or in exempt category.

LINK

Face-coverings

• The Government’s Our plan to rebuild, May 2020, p27 now advises “that people should aim to wear a face-covering in enclosed spaces where social distancing is not always possible and they come into contact with others that they do not normally meet”

UK GOVERNMENT COVID-19 RECOVERY STRATEGY

Guidance for operators and passengers

COVID-19 SAFER TRANSPORT GUIDANCE FOR OPERATORS

FAQs

Q1 Is there general guidance for the maritime industry to deal with Covid-19?

A Yes

GOV UK GUIDANCE FOR SHIPPING AND SEAPORTS ON COVID-19

CORONAVIRUS (COVID-19): SAFER TRANSPORT GUIDANCE FOR OPERATORS

Q2 Does this guidance cover all maritime situations?

No. The above guidance sets out general principles, but because the maritime industry is so diverse, each incident will need to be assessed on a case by case basis. In England, the local Health Protection Team (HPT) will advise (similar but separate arrangements apply elsewhere in the UK)

Q3. Can a ship with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases dock at a UK port?

Yes. The master should send a Maritime Declaration of Health to the PHA with details of illness on board and the PHA/LA will advise, in consultation with the local public health authority. In England, the local HPT will advise (similar but separate arrangements apply elsewhere in the UK). The ship’s owner/operator/crew manager and P&I Club should all be notified by the Port Agent. The local Health Protection Team, in consultation with the Master, will advise if the crew member can safely remain on board in isolation or if shore treatment is required

Q4. Can a pilot join a ship with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases on board?

Yes. Specific guidance has been issued for them (see Annex 1 below. This guidance covers PPE and social distancing. Pilots do not need to self-isolate after boarding a ship with suspected COVID-19 cases on board, as these individuals with suspected cases should be isolated in their cabins. From May, see advice on face-coverings (p1). As such, pilots and others in close contact are advised to wear face coverings. Otherwise, there is no change in PPE advice. Ships arriving in UK waters have no right to insist on pilots wearing additional PPE

Q5 What is a sensible level of PPE for marine Pilots boarding a vessel with a suspected case of COVID-19 on board?

Suspected cases should be isolated in their cabins. Pilots should adopt straightforward precautions such as the use of heavy gloves. Government guidance now advises face coverings (p1). Additional PPE, such as overshoes, is not required and may cause other safety issues (e.g. ascending / descending ladders). The most effective safeguard against inadvertent transmission of virus, such as through changing boots, using handrails etc. is thorough handwashing or the use of sanitising hand gel (minimum 60% alcohol content) and minimising hand to face contact. All efforts should be made to maintain 2m distancing, but it is accepted that might not be possible, e.g. on ship’s bridge. In such circumstances common sense should be used e.g. keep symptomatic people or close contacts off the bridge. There is no evidence to confirm that heating, ventilation or air conditioning systems are conduits of COVID-19. As Q4, Ships arriving in UK waters have no right to insist on pilots wearing additional PPE

Q6. What is the risk of transmission of COVID-19 on board from air conditioning or sewage treatment systems?

Not yet known but is unlikely to be significant compared with contamination of surfaces from droplets. The wearing of overshoes is not recommended (they pose a greater safety hazard).

Q7. Does a ship with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases on board need to be quarantined?

No. The ship should be allowed to dock as usual. This will allow easy access for affected individuals on board to be removed on shore if required and public health staff to board if required. If the ship is unable to leave the port, it can then be moved to a different anchorage if the berth is required for another ship.

Q8. Should a ship with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases on board be treated as a household?

No. Individuals who are confined to their cabins should follow the same guidance as those confined at home. This does not mean that everyone on board automatically has to self isolate for 14 days. As the living conditions on different ships vary widely, each case will be considered individually. In England, the local HPT will advise (similar but separate arrangements apply elsewhere in the UK).

Q9. What should happen to suspected or confirmed cases of COVID-19 on board?

In port, the same guidance applies as for domestic cases. At present, only seriously ill cases should be transferred to hospital (as an urgency). The local HPT will advise on ambulance transfer (similar but separate arrangements apply elsewhere in the UK). Symptomatic individuals who are not seriously ill should ideally be transferred for care ashore, if this is available, but may need to be confined to their cabins on board if this is feasible. They should self-isolate for 7 days. At sea, individuals who are confined to their cabins should follow the same guidance as those confined at home. This does not mean that everyone on board automatically has to self-isolate for 14 days. As the living conditions on different ships vary widely, each case needs to be considered individually.

Q10. What should happen to asymptomatic contacts of suspected or confirmed cases of COVID19 on board?

Given the close proximity of living conditions on board the majority of ships, it is usually more problematical to identify close contacts compared those with a lower likelihood of exposure, depending on the size and configuration of the ship. As with domestic cases, close contacts should self-isolate for 14 days, ideally ashore but on board if unavoidable, bearing in mind the likelihood of contacts becoming symptomatic and contributing to continuing transmission on board.

Q11. Is testing available for people on board a ship with suspected COVID-19 symptoms?

The situation with testing is changing progressively as the capability is ramped up. At present, in England, key workers are now eligible for testing, but tests need to be booked and there are issues about access to testing sites. There are, as yet, no specific arrangements for mariners. Different arrangements may apply elsewhere in the UK.

COVID-19 GETTING TESTED GUIDANCE

Key workers who may be tested in the transport sector include

• those who keep the air, water, road and rail passenger and freight transport modes operating during the coronavirus response
• those working on transport systems through which supply chains pass

Q12. What is the current view of the reliability of testing?

There are two types of test:

• Antigen – ‘do I have COVID?’ – requires a mouth swab which needs to get sent away to a laboratory for processing (polymerase chain reaction, PCR). It takes 24-48 hours to get a result. There is no quicker way and adverts for ‘6-hour test results’ are not reputable or reliable.
• Antibody – ‘have I had COVID?’ – several different tests are in process of being evaluated in NHS trials. Unfortunately, there are problems with the interpretation of the results, in particular there is no assurance that a positive test confirms immunity. It will take some time to get production of the valid antibody test in quantity and the strategy for its use has not yet been promulgated. In the meantime, there is no indication of its use in the port setting. There are a number of companies promoting ‘rapid point-of-care’ testing kits. The current view by PHE is that the use of these products is not advised.

TESTING GUIDANCE

As the Chief Medical Officer has commented, “a bad test is worse than no test”. Also, the current view is that thermal monitoring / temperature screening is unlikely to be an effective screening tool on its own. It is not recommended by the UK science advisory group and is not being utilised at airports.

Q13. What assistance is available to a vessel with COVID-19 on board?

See Q9. The Port Agent should assist co-ordinating any medical care for the crew ashore

Q14. If a crew member comes ashore and has to recuperate ashore after being discharged from hospital, is there accommodation available for this to happen?

Is there a central list of suitable accommodation? The LRFs may be able to advise about suitable facilities through their liaison with the local hospitality sector. However, these are likely to be limited. There are some facilities available for accommodating key workers who need to travel or transit and workers who need accommodation post discharge.

Q15. The ship owner/operator/crew manager would obviously be looking to send urgently a replacement crew member, so the ship can depart port. Does the UK have any plans for crew change arrangements and what would be the requirements?

The UK is currently considering what measures may be necessary for relief crew arriving in the UK prior to joining the vessel.

Q16. If a ship leaves port with a suspected case of COVID-19 on board, how can it be ensured that it will not affect others on board?

This needs to be carefully assessed on a case-by-case basis with the PHE HPT prior to sailing. It is preferable that cases, or suspected cases, do not remain on board, but there may be circumstances where this is essential, and the health of affected individuals is not being put at risk (i.e. either a very mild illness or someone testing positive who is asymptomatic). In such circumstances, suspected cases should self-isolate. Also, the length of the proposed journey is important – short voyages will be less risky than long ones and ships with small crews may be more vulnerable to safety being compromised than larger ones. In making a decision to sail, consideration must include realising that though self-isolation may reduce the likelihood of transmission to others, it will not eliminate it completely.

Q17. Are there any plans to introduce thermal screening at ports?

Not at present. Current advice is that this is unreliable, as some cases of Covid-19, or presymptomatic individuals incubating the disease, do not have a fever.

Q18. Can crew from ships with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 cases on board be allowed ashore?

Providing they are not close contacts, they should be allowed ashore for limited exercise and essential shopping, as long as they observe the same social distancing precautions as the rest of the community. https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/covid-19-guidance-on-social-distancing-andfor-vulnerable-people

Q19. Does social distancing guidance apply to both large and small ports?

Yes. See Q18 above.

Q20. Does social distancing guidance apply to off-shore wind-farm and offshore oil & gas vessels?

Yes, insofar as it is possible to. Specific guidance has been produced by Health Protection Scotland.

OFF-SHORE GUIDANCE – SCOTLAND

There is additional guidance on practising social distancing, which provides further details for employers and employees:

STAY SAFE AT HOME GUIDANCE

and

EMPLOYER GUIDANCE

This should help organisations, agencies and others (such as self-employed transport providers) understand how to provide safer workplaces and services for themselves, their workers and passengers across all modes of private and public transport. It outlines measures to assess and address the risks of coronavirus (COVID-19) in the transport sector across England.

SAFER TRANSPORT GUIDANCE

Workplaces should follow guidance published by BEIS on safe workplaces and follow the legal obligations they have under Health and Safety legislation to protect their staff at work. Additionally, workplaces may have specific guidance for protective equipment. The information on face coverings does not replace those workplace recommendations. Workers are advised to follow the specific guidance for their place of work.

WORKING SAFELY GUIDANCE

Q21. Will PHE (or similar public health authorities elsewhere in the UK) advise on safe manning levels for a ship to leave port?

No. This is not within public health area of competence.

Q22. What input does PHE have in the HSE Guidance on Reporting of Injuries, Diseases and dangerous Occurrences Regulations (RIDDOR)

Not known. All queries about the interpretation of these regulations should be made to HSE.

Q23. Is it against international law for a ship to sail with COVID-19 cases on board?

No. There is no applicable international law; there are the International Health Regulations 2005, but their status is as a treaty between Member States. There is, however, a moral obligation to prevent onward transmission to other countries. PHE HPTs will advise on measures to prevent onward transmission on a case-by-case basis.

Q24. What legislation is in place to address the transmission of disease via the maritime sector?

The Public Health (Ships) Regulations 1979, as amended 2007 In addition, the WHO published interim guidance in February 2020.

WHO INTERIM GUIDANCE

Q25. How is a vessel with an infectious disease stopped from departing port?

Following a meeting with PHE on 21st April, PHE advised that, legally, there were no grounds which could be imposed by them for preventing a vessel from departing from port. This would need to occur in co-operation between PHE and the Harbour Master and/or MCA. In the case of MCA, the only grounds for preventing a vessel departing from port would be by issuance of a prohibition notice or, more likely, a preventative detention. However, it should be noted that an MCA detention could only be issued where a vessel was found to be in breach of the Merchant Shipping Act. Therefore, it is foreseen that the MCA could only prevent a vessel departing port for reasons on Minimum Manning either because the Minimum Safe Manning of the vessel could not be maintained, or the vessel could not continue to operate, in the opinion of the MCA in consultation with the vessel’s Flag State, in a safe manner.

Q26. Is a vessel only stopped when a confirmed case is identified; or when a suspected case is identified?

The presence of COVID-19 on board, whether confirmed or suspected does not prevent a ship from leaving port, unless the criteria in Q25 are met.

Q27. What happens if crew member(s) had to come ashore and the ship no longer meets the minimum manning requirements?

The MCA would want to be informed if a seafarer is removed from a vessel and a replacement member of could crew could not join the vessel. In discussion with vessel’s agent/Master the MCA would request a copy of the Minimum Safe Manning Document and also a crew list. The MCA would then, probably in consultation with the vessel’s flag state, determine if the vessel can continue its voyage safely.

Q28. Where a vessel is stopped from departing port, whom will be responsible for the welfare of those onboard both with the virus (suspected or otherwise) and without?

The welfare of the entire crew will be the responsibility of the Master/owner/operator/agent. The PHA and local HPT will need to be advised of the situation regarding confirmed or suspected cases on board and they will advise accordingly. For contacts or remaining crew, the PHA may advice staying on the vessel following self isolation procedures. Should the situation however require the unaffected crew to leave the vessel then the owner/operator needs to secure accommodation, but availability of suitable premises is reducing and there may be a need to engage with the Local Resilience Forum via health officials.

Q29. What actions are currently being taken with respect to the provisions in the Guidelines on protection of health, repatriation and travel arrangements for seafarers, passengers and other persons on board ships?

We are generally supportive of the recommendations outlined by the EU and already implemented a range of measures prior to the publication of this guidance. The UK welcomes the guidance particularly in relation to the responsibilities shipping operators and the flag state as we have already taken measures to repatriate British nationals and we are currently monitoring the status of vessels with British crew members to ensure their safety and welfare. In relation to crew changes, the UK is supportive of the EU guidelines to allow crew changes at all ports as this is instrumental to the flow of goods and a letter was sent to UN organisations a few weeks ago confirming our position on this. We are currently engaging further with the industry to see what more could be done to facilitate crew changes globally. There are some differences in relation to the health measures adopted by the UK as not all vessels are the same and therefore the same blanket approach cannot be used for all maritime settings. Therefore, any incidents on board vessels have to be considered on a case by case basis and masters will need to seek advice from the local Health Protection Team.

WELFARE

Q30. Do the EU Regulations apply to the UK?

No. As these are only guidelines, they are not legally binding on the UK during the transition period.

Q31. What should a seafarer do if challenged about his movement between an airport and the ship?

Crew should be supplied with a company letter identifying the crew as key workers and including the purpose of travel. Templates have been produced by the ICS, ITF and European Commission.

Q32. What is the best web-link that stresses that handwashing is absolutely crucial?

HAND WASHING GUIDANCE

Q33. What is being done to ensure consistency between PHE, HSE and the Devolved Administrations?

As much as possible, PHE is working to avoid contradictory advice, as are colleagues in the DAs, with whom we are working closely on a regular basis.

Q34. What is the significance of workers who have to be within 2m of each other not doing so for more than 15 minutes?

This is probably a confusion with the case definition of face-to-face contact or close contact, which is within 2m for more than 15 minutes. Guidance for safe working is available at

EMPLOYER SAFE WORKING GUIDANCE

Q35. If workers chose to wear their own PPE, who is responsible for disposal?

They are responsible for the safe disposal of their own PPE. It is not clinical waste and should be double-bagged and disposed of in a waste bin as usual.

Q36. Can workers over 70 years old return to work?

There is no unequivocal answer. People over 70 are classified as clinically vulnerable. Some of them with underlying health conditions may be classified as extremely clinically vulnerable (as might some people under 70 who have serious underlying health conditions). Anyone classified as extremely clinically vulnerable should have been notified by letter by their GP. Those people in the clinically vulnerable group are advised to stay at home wherever possible, and practice rigorous social distancing, but, if they can’t work from home, can go to work, if workplace safety can be assured after a workplace safety assessment. People in the extremely clinically vulnerable category should not go to work. Individual cases should be referred to the employer’s Occupational Health Advisor to assess each case on an individual basis.

Q37. Are the Quarantine Regulations introduced on 8th June applicable to small boats and yachts and also ports without a Border Force presence?

This is a policy issue which will have to go to the Home Office, or local Border Force officer to answer

Q38. If an employee us contacted by NHS ‘Track and trace’, is their advice to self-isolate for 14 days mandatory or subject to risk assessment and mitigation measures being put in place?

Unless there are very pressing reasons to the contrary, the track-and-trace guidance is mandatory. Exceptions should be considered on an individual basis but should be kept to the absolute minimum.

Q39. Does the husband & wife crew of a yacht which has taken 16 days to sail across the Atlantic without calling anywhere before the UK need to self-isolate for 14 days in accordance with the Quarantine Regulations?

Despite the obvious observation that the journey was longer than the COVID-19 incubation period, there is no exemption in the Regulations for such an event.

Q40 Does a crew change need to be recorded on the Maritime Declaration of Health?

If a MDH is issued by a ship, any passengers or crew who have joined “since international voyage began or past thirty days, whichever is shorter” should be listed, “upon request of the competent authority of the port of arrival” (IHR2005, Annex 8). There has been no national requirement in England during the Covid-19 pandemic to require this, though this may be different in some Devolved Administrations. It means there may be local variations in requiring this. The corollary is that crew or passengers joining the ship do not, of themselves, require a MDH to be issued if the ship is free from infection (unless local requirements differ). Any crew who have joined a ship, who are still within the incubation period of Coid-19, are exempt from the Quarantine Regulations (see Q18).

Other useful contacts:

• (England only) Find your local Health Protection Team (HPT) here: https://www.gov.uk/healthprotection-teamS
• Contact details for Port Health Authorities (PHA) available here: http://www.porthealthassociation.co.uk/

Annex 1

Coronavirus Resilience: Maritime Pilot Transfer Arrangements – suggested procedure at UK ports – 31 March 2020

This guidance note has been prepared in consultation with a collection of UK maritime trade associations (British Ports Association, UK Maritime Pilots’ Association, UK Harbour Masters’ Association and UK Major Ports Group) and is designed to give some non-prescriptive options to help pilotage authorities remain resilient. There are a wide variety of pilotage options around the UK and our approximately 500 maritime pilots are an important component in facilitating a wide number of shipping movements, helping to maintain supply chains and trade. Pilots and other port and maritime operatives have been identified as ‘Key Workers’ by the Government and therefore expected to carry out their roles in as normal a way as possible whilst being mindful of advice on limiting the potential spread of COVID-19. The guidance is intended to supplement other local transfer advice such as already exists or be integrated, either in full or in part, where appropriate. It does not attempt to alter or replace the safety advice contained in the Pilotage Boarding and Landing Code or any Workboat Codes merely highlight procedures that will contribute to limiting the risks presented by infectious diseases such as COVID-19. The guidance is non-statutory and harbour authorities may wish to use sections as appropriate.

Suggested procedures:

Like many Key Workers in other occupations, it will not always be practically possible to follow the Government’s guidance to maintain a two-metre distance at all times during pilotage and pilot cutter operations. However the following measures could greatly reduce the likelihood of spreading COVID19 if followed closely as far as practically possible but subject to review:

• Prior to boarding a cutter, the coxswain and crew should ensure they are not suffering with any of the symptoms of COVID-19 nor are any members of their household, i.e. the people they live with (in this case they should self-isolate in line with Government guidance)
• The cutter crew shall have all washed their hands thoroughly prior to boarding the cutter
• The coxswain/crew shall ensure that the cutter is clean and that appropriate areas such as handrails and seats are wiped down with a soap-based or disinfectant solution or wipes after each run. They should also aim to have an on-board supply of hand sanitiser/wipes which are used regularly, especially on entry into the cabin
• Where possible the cutter should be as ventilated as possible with fresh air
• The pilot shall also be symptom free, having thoroughly washed their hands prior to boarding
• If the pilot is joining from a ship, the cutter crew should where possible provide disposable hand wipes to the pilot and have a suitable way to dispose of them after use
• Pilots should observe the highest precautions with their own health and to minimise exposure whilst on board the cutter, and minimise physical contact with cutter crew members if not essential or use of gloves where possible, maintaining as much distance as practical
• To aid physical distancing, for some operations the Competent Harbour Authority may wish to limit the number pilots transferred on a single cutter and, subject to boat size and seating arrangements attempt to maintain as close as is possible to a 2-metre space for those on board
• Consumption of food or drink whilst on board the cutter should be avoided unless essential
• Prior to boarding or landing the Pilot, the coxswain can, if possible, confirm via radio with the master of the ship that previous advice provided to the harbour authority/VTS that all on board are healthy. Some authorities may choose to seek this confirmation through their VTS.Source: portskillsandsafety

Desperate for information, a work-at-home employee of an industrial port tenant clicks on what appears to be an official looking source promising the latest Covid-19 updates, only to innocently launch malware that for a time disables his employer’s GPS system.

Experts say the risks of such a hypothetical scenario occurring within the vulnerable maritime and offshore communities has grown appreciably as the coronavirus has forced most offices to lock down. This left information technology (IT) specialists scrambling to ensure updated security patches are installed on widely dispersed computers and has intensified monitoring of their respective networks for signs of malicious malware, ransomware and email phishing.

Advancing digitalization and connectivity, combined with more employees exiled to work from remote and sometimes poorly secured locations, has provided fertile ground for cybercriminals set on injecting their own brand of virus into the pandemic-induced anxieties of companies from the inland waterways industry to the deepwater Gulf of Mexico.

“This experience reinforces that cybersecurity has got to be a focus for everyone,” said Jennifer Carpenter, president and CEO of the American Waterways Operators, Arlington, Va., which, so far, has helped headed off any network disruptions to its tug and barge company members. “It doesn’t matter where you’re located, the size of your operation, or the complexity of your operation, we all have to make sure we have the network system that will get us through unusual events.”

The maritime sector is well-versed in monitoring and initiating response plans to unfolding events like slow-developing hurricanes, but the full brutality of Covid-19 slammed the U.S. quickly and with unexpectedly dire health and economic consequences.

“I think it caught a lot of people off guard,” said April Danos, director of homeland security and technology for the Greater Lafourche Port Commission, Port Fourchon, La. The southern Louisiana port is widely recognized as the world’s premier deepwater oil and gas service and supply base. “When this all started happening, I put my security team on high alert and upped the vigilance of our network. I could see what was coming, so we got proactive. We want to be efficient, but we still have to be secure.”

In a joint advisory issued on April 8, the U.S. Department of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency (CISA) and its UK counterpart warned that “a growing number of cybercriminals and other malicious groups online are exploiting the Covid-19 outbreak for their own personal gain.” However, putting a precise number to the threats or the dollars lost to cybercrime is inexact, at best. Save for widespread disruptions, like the heavily publicized Maersk malware attack in 2017, most companies elect to quietly and internally resolve cyberissues, mainly to save face or preserve client relationships.

“There are more of these cyber related instances coming to the forefront,” said Arinjit Roy, vice president, North America, for the American Bureau of Shipping (ABS) in Houston. “There have been quite a few already. Some we’ve heard of, but many others kind of go under the radar. This will become more prominent.”

As Covid-19 restrictions laid bare the soft underbelly intrinsic of many remote communication and teleconference technologies, many companies, like those engaged in offshore oil gas development, had recognized the criticality of maintaining network security well before the virus’s furious stampede across the nation. “We’ve been seeing more and more companies asking us to show up and do a breach assessment or a compromise assessment,” said Dr. Mate Csorba, global service line leader for cybersecurity, DNV GL Digital Solutions Group.

CHANGING COURSE

Given the travel risks associated with the highly contagious new coronavirus, DNV GL had to redefine the “show up” component during the late March execution of a planned cybersecurity assessment for a Gulf of Mexico asset. Normally, a certified ethical hacker would be installed aboard the asset to simulate a cybersecurity breach and evaluate the company’s vulnerabilities to a major attack. With travel off the table, the Maritime Advisory and Digital Solutions groups collaborated closely with the client to enable the assessment and penetration tests to be carried out remotely between client personnel and DNV GL offices across three countries.

“We shipped hardware that was installed inside the company and could be remotely controlled,” Csorba said from his office in Trondheim, Norway, where he works with clients from the maritime, offshore oil and gas and utilities industries, among others. “Basically, we simulated an attacker on the inside of the corporate network and if a breach happened, we then looked at what the attacker can do from there, and what are the vulnerabilities offshore that an attacker would be able to exploit.”

A second remote assessment was underway in Europe in May.

Though cybersecurity occupies a high profile among many companies, especially within  the increasingly digitized offshore oil and gas arena, Csorba said the pandemic has further driven home the need for companies to elevate cybersecurity to a level equal to their uncompromising safety programs. “Generally, there is very good safety awareness within the oil and gas industry and there should be equally good security awareness, because there’s no safety without security.”

Any renewed focus on cyberawareness, he said, must begin and end with the human factor. “Even before Covid, what we’ve seen from assessments is that some of the major threats you have in offshore cybersecurity come from the crew taking short cuts. They often breach natural segregation by not following policies and procedures, by installing (contaminated) USB devices in drive ports, making networks connections they’re not supposed to make, and thereby circumventing the technical defenses that are out there. The crew also has onboard email access, so that’s a primary threat factor, even more so than remote access.”

Indeed, the mass office exodus reinforces the weight that must be placed on enforcing corporate security policies, even when the user is working outside the office-based firewall, said Robert Guidry, chief technology officer at Global Data Systems (GDS).

GDS is a Lafayette, La.-based IT managed service provider with complimentary desktop and security management technologies designed to secure data centers, networks and the critical end points. “This is where we get into end point security, and making sure the users, even though they are disjointed from their regular corporate networks, still have a governance about them,” Guidry said. “Which websites can they reach and, more specifically, which ones can they not reach, to make sure they are not subjected to malware or ransomware activities.”

Widespread work-from-home orders also further exposed the technical vulnerabilities of popular telecommunications technologies, which were on the rise well before the blanket pandemic lockdowns. “What happened with Covid is that the hackers started looking at these remote collaboration tools,” Csorba said. “Recognition of the vulnerabilities of remote access was rising before Covid, so hopefully now it will get more focus.”

He said the longer offshore hitches resulting from Covid-related crew change difficulties provides an ideal training window for improving cyberawareness.

Guidry agreed, emphasizing that even with top-of-the line security measures, “no one will ever be 100% secure. Along with technical solutions, we have to stress end-user education. Phishing training campaigns, for instance, are very important.”

PORTS TARGETED

In the early days of the Covid-19 assault on the U.S., Coast Guard Commandant Adm. Karl Schultz spoke of port vulnerabilities during his annual State of the Coast Guard address in February. While not pointing specifically to the then emerging threat, Schultz said over the past year the service’s new Cyber Protection Team had been dispatched to New York, New Orleans and elsewhere as part of an intergovernmental response to what he described, as “an emerging vulnerability in the increasing cyberattacks targeting our ports.”

The Lafourche Port’s Danos said conversations with her peers show that ports and maritime interests have “absolutely” seen more targeted hits amid the pandemic. The 60-year-old port, however, managed to avoid any cyberissues and remained secure, even as most of its employees were forced to work outside the port’s Galliano, La., administrative office.

“We’ve been very safe here so far,” Danos said. “There’s always issues with people working at home and one concern is the wireless networks and how they’re being segregated and if they’re being segregated. We advise people working at home to make sure your business wireless is on a segregated channel, so you don’t have that crossover between personal and business.”

More than 250 different companies, with varied levels of cyberprotection, use Port Fourchon as an operational base. Louisiana’s southernmost port also is home to the separately managed Louisiana Offshore Oil Port (LOOP), the nation’s only deepwater oil export and import terminal with drafts capable of accommodating very large crude carriers (VLCC). With Port Fourchon’s strategic importance to U.S. energy infrastructure, security gets top billing and the initiation of established response plans critical for any impending threat.

Danos said that pandemic response protocol included installing updated security patches without interruption while the work-at-home mandate was in effect. She emphasized, however, that any security upgrade is never a one-and-done  proposition. “Just because you’re working from home doesn’t mean you don’t continue to patch. But this not something you fix one time and never touch again. You may put up a gate or fence on the physical side and hope it blocks out the bad people, but in cybersecurity you’re constantly having to upgrade, because they are constantly trying to get ahead of you.”

While the port and its tenants operate under totally different networks, Danos said it is incumbent on her security team to help all companies operating out of the port stay secure. “As a port authority, our goal is to try to help everybody stay cybersecure, especially with so many working from home. It’s important that I know what my tenants’ cyber posture is, because if they’re not doing proper cyber hygiene to protect themselves, the port could get shut down and that would impact us all.”

Danos said tenant outreach includes sharing the pertinent alerts and updated information that come only from trustworthy sources such as CISA, the Maritime Transportation System–Information Sharing Analysis Center (MTS-ISAC), and the American Association of Port Authorities (AAPA). “We also do cyberassessments every year and cyberawareness training for our employees and tenants, which is paying off with everybody working at home,” she said.

Among the port’s largest tenants is Edison Chouest Offshore (ECO). The Cut Off, La.-based offshore service vessel operator has built, what it claims, is one of the maritime sectors most robust cybersecurity infrastructures. Other than adding a small section to the business continuity plan to address the pandemic, ECO Fleet Cybersecurity Manager Joseph Jaubert said the company had no need to develop any special crisis response. “We haven’t really needed to change anything, because we had some of maritime’s highest cybersecurity standards way before any of this,” he said. “We’ve been ahead of the curve for years and was doing this when nobody else even thought it should be done.”

MARITIME VULNERABILITIES

That alone puts Edison Chouest in an exclusive club within the maritime community, said GDS sales consultant Justin Getzinger, who works exclusively with inland marine, offshore maritime and offshore oil and gas clients. “Before this pandemic came to the doorstep of the maritime and offshore sectors, a basic survey of maritime companies showed that 70% were unprepared for a cyberattack,” he said. “They either lacked a business continuity plan or lacked the resources just to be able to identify when an attack was happening, detect where the attack was happening, and mitigate it in an organized fashion.”

Getzinger, who worked 12 years for a major vessel operator, said the maritime industry’s susceptibility to cyberattacks can be traced, in no small part, to 2015 and the height of the previous oil and gas industry downturn, which filtered down to supporting industries. With companies operating in survival mode, the limited capital available was allocated only to what was deemed absolutely critical to maintain operations. Cybersecurity did not qualify.

“What I saw firsthand among many clients across the industry was that a lot of IT managers and IT staff struggled to get executive management buy-in,” he said. “They were unable to communicate the importance of identifying cyber risks on a regular basis and communicate the impact of those risks if they’re not addressed. This (Covid-19) is a great opportunity for IT managers to have the leverage they may not have had previously to get executive buy-in.”

Source: workboat