China has built permanent stations for its rescue and maritime forces on its artificial islands in the disputed South China Sea.

Citing reports from state broadcaster China Central Television, South China Morning Post said that a new flying squadron and maritime rescue and administration staff will be stationed on the Fiery Cross, Subi, and Mischief reefs, Beijing’s three biggest man-made islands in the Spratlys.

The SCMP said the Chinese move boosts a regular on-call rescue ship deployment into a permanent institutional presence that could greatly improve the coverage of the southern area of the South China Sea.

The Chinese newspaper added that the forward-stationed Chinese departments will “undertake maritime emergency rescue tasks, perform maritime traffic safety supervision and prevention of ship pollution and other duties in the Nansha (Spratly) waters, provide strong protection for the safety of ship navigation and daily production activities at sea for the people of coastal countries”, quoting a report from the Chinese state news agency Xinhua, using the Chinese name for the archipelago.

“This is a concrete step for China to better provide public goods to the international community and actively fulfil its internationalresponsibilities and obligations,” Xinhua added.

The SCMP recalled that there have long been calls to upgrade China’s search and rescue capabilities in the South China Sea, including a 2018 article by Shi Chunlin, a professor at the Dalian Maritime University, who argued it could help strengthen its “substantial presence in the disputed waters and enhance China’s dominance over South China Sea affairs”.

China claims sweeping sovereignty over the South China Sea under what it calls its historical nine-dash line, including all of the Spratly archipelago.

But the Philippines, Brunei, Malaysia, Vietnam and Taiwan have competing claims over some or all of the islands. Beijing has repeatedly rejected a 2016 ruling on the Spratlys by an international tribunal at The Hague that was overwhelmingly in favor of claims by the Philippines.

The SCMP said the Chinese Ministry of Transport’s newly established 2nd Flying Service Squadron of the South China Sea will be stationed in the Spratlys, taking on rescue duties that were previously performed by planes flying from bases on the mainland or Hainan Island.

Profession Shi stressed that arriving at a rescue site later than other claimants “does not match China’s status.”

The three reefs chosen for the enhanced facilities are located in a key area of the region and also host military garrisons. Each of them has large hharborsand a runway long enough for passenger planes.

The vast South China Sea is one of the world’s busiest waterways where up to 30 percent of the world’s trade passes through. More than 100,000 ships sail through each year. South China Sea emergency forces have successfully rescued 1,721 people over the past 10 years, according to official data from Beijing.

Ships in need of help can send distress signals either through the International Maritime Organization (IMO) or directly to the nearby local maritime administration. Beijing’s new offices in the Spratlys could also improve communication and emergency response, according to Chen Xiangmiao, a research fellow with the National Institute for South China Sea Studies.

However, search and rescue in this area is not only a humanitarian mission, but also involves political complexities, because of the overlapping territorial demarcations by six rival claimants, including China.

Search and rescue operations are independent of any territorial disputes, and the IMO has divided the sea into several regions to assign to surrounding authorities, even non-claimant Singapore. In fact, part of the Spratly area falls into Singapore’s search and rescue region.

Chen said Beijing is in talks with the Asean to create a regional search and rescue cooperation platform for the whole South China Sea, because such operations are always big efforts and cannot be carried out by one or two countries.
“Although there are political sensitivities in it, largely (search and rescue) is still a matter of public service,” Chen noted.

Source: https://manilastandard.net/news/314246439/china-builds-scs-rescue-maritime-station.html

Bellingham, Wash., based All American Marine (AAM) has delivered another whale-watching vessel to the Hanke family’s Puget Sound Express (PSE). This latest vessel, the Swiftsure, is modeled after the AAM-built, Teknicraft-designed Saratoga, delivered in the spring of 2018, but, at 77 feet long, is slightly longer than the 73-foot Saratoga.

The hull design is complemented by Teknicraft’s signature integration of a wave piercer positioned between the catamaran hulls to break up wave action and ensure reduced drag while enhancing passenger comfort. The vessel’s design offers all passengers a smooth ride and comfort as the hull provides a cushioned effect when encountering waves.

The USCG Subchapter T certified, high-speed catamaran whale-watching vessel has two asymmetrical semi-planing hulls and an adjustable aluminum midship hydrofoil plus two aluminum aft foils, which allow the boat to achieve top speeds of 40+ knots. This design, coupled with finely-tuned, wave-piercing eco bows, enables the boat to travel through calm and rough water at full cruising speed while keeping underwater noise to a minimum.

“This is another very special occasion for Puget Sound Express,” said co-owner Peter Hanke. “The Swiftsure is the third boat that we have had the opportunity to build with All American Marine. Once again, this vessel has exceeded all performance expectations while incorporating EPA Tier III engines. Despite numerous supply chain challenges during the construction process, All American still delivered this exceptional vessel on time and on budget. They listened to us and, as they did on the first two vessels, met or exceeded our needs. We’re excited for our customers to enjoy the Puget Sound onboard Swiftsure.”

DESIGNED FOR LOW FUEL CONSUMPTION AT HIGH SPEED

The Swiftsure was designed from top to bottom for low fuel consumption at high speeds, a factor critical to the success of the daily whale watch tours, which operate out of Edmonds. Wash., a short drive north of downtown Seattle.

Its four Scania Di 16 083M engines, with a rating of 800 mhp @ 2,300 rpm, power four HamiltonJet HJ364 water jets, complete with a state-of-the-art HamiltonJet AVX control system. .

AAM says this system is second to none in terms of maneuverability and fuel efficiency at higher speeds.

“During sea trials, we went out with a specifically fully laden vessel, and the difference in terms of fuel consumption between light laden and fully laden was almost negligible,” said designer Nic De Waal. “We’ve done many years of research to develop a vessel design that’s particularly low-wake, due in large part to our unique hydrofoil system that doesn’t displace as much water and create waves as is the case with traditional hull design.”

The soundproofing details in the engine room ensure that the passenger cabin of the whale-watching vessel is quiet and comfortable throughout the ride. The interior of the vessel is finished with cutting-edge materials, including recyclable Ayres aluminum honeycomb wall panels and recyclable Dampa aluminum ceiling tiles with acoustic insulation that span the main cabin as well as the interior cabin on the second deck. Other amenities include ADA-friendly accommodation spaces, comfortable Beurteaux seating, three restrooms, and an extended galley complete with a full-service bar for passengers.

The Swiftsure is also equipped with seven HDTVs and a premium sound system with speakers inside and out for a fully immersive experience throughout the vessel’s journey.

Source: https://www.marinelog.com/passenger/all-american-marine-delivers-whale-watching-boat-to-puget-sound-express/

Panama City. Fla.-based Eastern Shipbuilding Group Inc. (ESG) has filed a bid protest with the GAO contesting the U.S. Coast Guard’s decision to award Stage 2 of the Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC) program to Mobile, Ala.-based Austal USA.

A bid protest is a challenge to the terms of a solicitation or the award of a federal contract. The GAO (U.S. Government Accountability Office) Procurement Law Division adjudicates these bid protests. You can find out more about the process HERE.

ESG was the original prime contractor for the whole of the OPC program, but in June 2019 submitted a request to the Coast Guard’s parent agency, the Department of Homeland Security for extraordinary contract relief after its shipbuilding facilities sustained significant damage resulting from Hurricane Michael, a Category 5 storm, in October 2018. In response, then Acting Secretary of Homeland Security Kevin K. McAleenan made the decision to grant extraordinary contract relief limited to the first four hulls. Following that, the Coast Guard revised the OPC acquisition strategy “to mitigate emergent cost and schedule risk by establishing a new, full and open competition for OPCs five and through 15, designated as Stage 2 of the overall program.”

Since surviving Hurricane Michael, ESG has fully rebuilt its operational facilities. It has made many infrastructure investments. These infrastructure investments include an aluminum fabrication facility specifically designed to support full construction of the OPC aluminum superstructure in a covered and controlled environment. ESG has also completed launch way upgrades, upland bulkhead upgrades, construction platen expansions, and waterway deepening projects to further enhance ESG’s capability to launch and deliver two OPC sized vessels per year. It has also constructed a state-of-the-art C5ISR Production Facility to conduct testing and integration of navigation, communication, and command and control, equipment, and simulators on premises prior to final installation on the vessel.

Joey D’Isernia, president of ESG, issued this statement on the decision to file the bid protest:

“Upon careful evaluation of the OPC Stage 2 award, we have found several grounds for protest that have been filed with the U.S. Government Accountability Office. Our decision to protest does not come lightly. Our community is left reeling from the decision to abandon our workforce and move the Coast Guard’s largest acquisition program from our successful production line to a high-risk situation. It begs the question, why? While this process plays out, we remain committed to our USCG partners and delivering shipbuilding excellence on the first four hulls. We are grateful for the outpouring of support we have received.”

BACKGROUND ON GROUNDS OF PROTEST

The following are just some excerpts from the public redacted protest filing submitted to GAO by ESG on Monday, July 18:

“If the USCG had reasonably evaluated and made the award in accordance with the RFP, ESG would have received the award.”

“Moreover, the USCG evaluation failed to adequately consider risk (e.g., schedule, cost, and performance), contrary to an express RFP requirement.”

“The procurement was also deeply flawed because the USCG (a) ignored or otherwise failed to mitigate the USCG’s leak of ESG price data and (b) failed to avoid an Austal unfair competitive advantage arising from Austal’s use on its proposal writing team of a former USCG employee who had access to competitively useful non-public information.”

“The Austal award cannot be reconciled with the RFP and stated USCG objectives. ESG was higher rated and provided lower risk with strong, relevant past performance. Austal’s purported lower price is overwhelmed by the substantial risks associated with an award to Austal, a new entrant to the steel shipbuilding industry with a record of well publicized cost overruns and performance issues. The USCG’s flawed evaluation risks depriving the United States of a significant shipbuilding capability (ESG, judged ) in the United States’ Defense Industrial Base at a time of rising near-peer capabilities by hostile nations. The Austal award is inconsistent with the USCG’s stated objective in the RFP and elsewhere seeking a sustainable shipyard that can produce a fleet of OPCs over the long term. The USCG award arbitrarily ignores the additional risks and costs associated with award to Austal.”

“The USCG’s award to Austal is also contrary to USCG representations to GAO regarding the OPC program. Previous USCG statements to GAO support ESG’s protest. The USCG noted to GAO numerous positive aspects of ESG OPC 1 performance demonstrating low ESG schedule, technical and cost risk for the OPC program. The USCG evaluation and award here is inconsistent with prior USCG statements and rewards Austal for the low price, high risk approach contrary to the RFP and the USCG’s stated objectives.”

CICA AND FAR

In its filing ESG asserts that “the USCG violated the Competition in Contracting Act (“CICA”), the Federal Acquisition Regulation (“FAR”), and the terms of the RFP” and says that “The USCG award determination was arbitrary and unreasonable.”

ESG asserts that it was materially prejudiced by a number of procurement errors that it addresses in the filing. It says that the USCG evaluation “unreasonably failed to evaluate Austal schedule, cost and technical risk.”

“Given Austal’s status as a new entrant to steel shipbuilding and its well-publicized performance issues on large projects,” ESG says in the filing, “the USCG should have evaluated schedule, cost and technical risks higher, all of which could result in substantially higher actual costs to the government and delays and disruptions in contract execution, sustainment of the delivered vessels, and extended sustainment of existing vessels when the schedule slips.”

REQUEST OF RELIEF

ESG requests a ruling by the Comptroller General of the United States that award to Austal is in violation of statute and regulation. The Comptroller General should recommend that the Austal contract be terminated, and that award be made to ESG.

In the alternative, the Comptroller General should recommend that the USCG reevaluate proposals, conduct clarifications or discussions, reevaluate revised proposals in accordance with the RFP criteria, assess Austal conflict and unfair competitive advantage issues and then make new responsibility and award determinations.”

AUSTAL USA RESPONDS

Asked to comment, an Austal USA spokesperson said:

“We are confident in the integrity of the solicitation process and that the United States Coast Guard’s selection of Austal USA as the Stage II OPC shipbuilder will be upheld. We will remain focused on delivering world-class ships to our customers.”

Source: https://www.marinelog.com/shipbuilding/shipyards/shipyard-news/eastern-shipbuilding-files-gao-bid-protest-of-stage-2-opc-award/

Passenger ro-ro ship ANATOLIAN left Mogadisho Port, Somalia, on Jul 3, bound for Alang India, most probably for dismantling. On Jul 19 EUNAVFOR ATALANTA Command was alerted by distress signal or message from the ship, reporting total blackout, lack of supplies. Spanish frigate ESPS NUMANCIA and other Naval units responded, technicians teams failed to restore power and propulsion, and ANATOLIAN finally, was taken on tow, to be towed to Bosasso Somalia, Gulf of Aden. The ship arrived at Bosasso or Bosasso Anchorage on Jul 22. Navies delivered on board of distressed ship food and fresh water. Commercial towage is hampered by adverse weather. Ship’s last AIS position dated Jul 10.

New FleetMon Vessel Safety Risk Reports Available: https://www.fleetmon.com/services/vessel-risk-rating/

Fire erupted in engine room of ferry HOLIDAY ISLAND at around 1100 LT (UTC -3) Jul 22 when ferry was entering Wood Islands Harbor, on arrival from Nova Scotia, Gulf of St. Lawrence, Canada. It was decided to ground the ship to avoid negative developments. Fire was contained by crew, understood extinguished as of morning Jul 23. 182 passengers on board were evacuated, no injures reported. 18 crew is said to remain on board to fight fire jointly with firefighters. HOLIDAY ISLAND according to track, was still aground as of 0050 LT Jul 23, evacuated passengers waiting for their cars remaining on board. Ferry is said to block entrance channel, i.e. Wood Islands port is blocked.

New FleetMon Vessel Safety Risk Reports Available: https://www.fleetmon.com/services/vessel-risk-rating/

Offshore supply ship THUNDER in the afternoon Jul 23 reported water ingress in Gulf of Mexico some 65 nm south of Port Fourchon, Louisiana. The ship is returning to Port Fourchon after carrying out offshore works, with ETA Jul 24. THUNDER was disabled and went adrift at around 1900 UTC Jul 23, as of 0345 UTC Jul 24 she was dead in the water, drifting in southern direction, with US Coast Guard ship USCG MORAY nearby. THUNDER sister ship of the same company, MV SQUALL, was approaching drifting THUNDER.

New FleetMon Vessel Safety Risk Reports Available: https://www.fleetmon.com/services/vessel-risk-rating/

The global seaborne coal market has grown yet again, over the course of the first half of 2022, following the significant rise of 2021. In its latest weekly report, shipbroker Banchero Costa said that “following a disastrous 2020, with the world hit by lockdowns and recession pretty much everywhere, global seaborne coal trade managed to rebound to some extent in 2021. In the full 12 months of 2021, global seaborne coal exports increased by +4.5% y-o-y to 1149 mln tonnes, from 1099 mln tonnes in 2020, according to vessels tracking data from Refinitiv. This however was still well below the levels we had in pre-Covid times, being -10.0% down from the 1276 mln tonnes shipped during 2019. In the first half of 2022, global coal trade was a bit of a mixed picture. In the January to June period of 2022, global coal loadings increased by +1.5% y-o-y to 572.7 mln t, from 564.1 mln t in the first half of 2021, but still well below the 637.9 mln t in 1H 2019. However, the worst was at start of the year, and the trend in recent months has been very positive. In 1Q 2022, global coal loadings were down -5.1% y-o-y to just 258.5 mln t. In 2Q 2022, coal loadings were a strong +7.7% y-o-y at 314.2 mln t. The month of June 2022 was actually a record 111.6 mln t, +12.3% y-o-y.

Source: banchero costa &c s.p.a

According to the shipbroker, “the European Union is now the fifth largest seaborne importer of coal in the world, after India, China, Japan and South Korea. In 1H 2022, the EU accounted for 10.4% of global seaborne coal shipments. The EU’s seaborne coal imports in the 12 months of 2021 increased by +30.3% y-o-y to 87.1 mln tonnes. This was mostly a rebound from a massive -32.9% y-o-y decline in 2020 caused by Covid lockdowns. Previous years also saw a negative trend, with European coal imports declining by -18.3% y-o-y in 2019 and by -7.6% y-o-y in 2018, as European countries progressively abandon coal as a source of energy and embrace natural gas and renewables. In the first 6 months of 2022, coal imports into the EU further increased by +49.6% y-o-y to 57.6 mln tonnes. Europe accelerated its coal imports as a direct reaction to the threat of a reduction in gas supply from Russia. This compensated for the sharp drop in demand from Mainland China”.

Banchero Costa added that “in 1H 2022, China’s seaborne coal imports declined by -26.0% y-o-y to 87.8 mln t, from 118.6 mln t in the same period of 2021. The main coal import terminals in the European Union (27) are: Rotterdam in the Netherlands (14.6 mln tonnes discharged in 1H 2022), Amsterdam Netherlands (6.8 mln tonnes), Hamburg Germany (3.0 mln tonnes), Gdansk Poland (3.0), Gijon Spain (2.8), Dunkirk France (1.9), Fos France (1.9), Ljmuiden Netherlands (1.6), Ghent Belgium (1.2), Vlissingen Netherlands (1.2), Plonce Croatia (1.2), Taranto Italy (1.1), Wilhelmshaven Germany (1.1), Koper Slovenia (1.0), Antwerp (1.0), Algeciras Spain (0.8). In terms of sources of the shipments, Europe was and still now remains heavily dependant on Russia. In the whole of 2021, as much as 44% of the EU’s seaborne coal imports were sourced from Russia. In 1H 2022, as a result of the war in Ukraine, this proportion has declined. Nevertheless, Russia was still the source of 31.5% of the EU’s coal imports this year, and remains as the top supplier of coal to Europe. In 1H 2022, coal imports to the EU from Russia increased by +0.2% y-o-y to 18.2 mln tonnes. Of this, 9.1 mln tonnes were imported in the first quarter of 2022 (-1.6% y-oy), and 9.0 mln tonnes were imported in the second quarter (+2.1% y-o-y)”.

Source: banchero costa &c s.p.a

“The second most important supplier to Europe is now the USA, accounting for 19.4% of Europe’s imports in 1H 2022. In 1H 2022, imports from the USA surged by +91.6% y-o-y to 11.2 mln t. The third largest supplier to Europe is Australia, accounting for 17.6% of the EU’s seaborne imports in 1H 2022. In 1H 2022, imports from Australia increased +27.3% y-o-y to 10.2 mln t. In fourth place was Colombia, with a 12.7% share of Europe’s coal imports. In 1H 2022, 7.3 mln tonnes were imported from Colombia to the EU, up +113.6% y-o-y. In fifth place was South Africa, with a 5.6% share of Europe’s coal imports. In 1H 2022, the EU imported 3.2 mln tonnes from South Africa, up +764.4% y-o-y from just 0.4 mln t in 1H 2021”, the shipbroker concluded.
Nikos Roussanoglou, Hellenic Shipping News Worldwide