BALTIMORE — When the Dali sailed out of the Port of Baltimore, it was escorted by tugboats. Once the ship entered the channel, the tugs peeled off. According to the National Transportation Board, that’s normal practice at the Port of Baltimore.
But just 19 minutes later, the pilots called for a tug assist. They had lost steering capabilities and were headed toward the Key Bridge.
One of the tugboats started heading back - but it was already three miles away. It was too late.
"If the ship had had a tug escort, would it have hit the bridge even after it lost power?" asked Rep. Bruce Westerman (R-Arkansas) during a House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee hearing last week.
NTSB Chairwoman Jennifer Homendy replied, "We are looking into that as part of our investigation; I can’t answer that right now. It’s a question that we have, but it is something we’re delving into."
Coast Guard Vice Admiral Peter Gautier echoed her statement. "We don’t know whether there was sufficient time to have made a difference or whether it would have added to the casualty or not."
The hearing was called to assess the federal response to the Key Bridge collapse, and gather more information that will help members of Congress decide whether they want to approve more funding for the bridge reconstruction. You can find more on that topic here.
In terms of maritime safety implications, the committee members focused on three areas of concern: whether or not tugs would have helped prevent the collision, whether different standards for foreign-flagged vessels played a role, and whether an overworked crew led to human error.
Rep. Mike Ezell (R-Mississippi) asked Gautier, "Do you think this incident could be a cause for recommending harbor tugs escort large ships through larger channels? And if so, do you think this incident could have been avoided?"
Gautier responded: "It may be, but we don't know yet. It's too early in the investigation to understand whether tugs would or would not have helped in this circumstance. Although what I will say is that there are some areas in some ports around the US that have tug escort requirements for a variety of reasons, and they're all different. For example, under the Verrazzano Bridge, in the state of California for tank vessels entering into the San Francisco Bay area. Those determinations are typically made by harbor safety committees with all stakeholders getting together to understand the totality of risks, not just the Coast Guard, and then agreeing on what tug requirements might be very particular to that area of risk."
Gautier added that he is convening a nationwide Board of Inquiry to conduct a risk assessment at ports across the country.
"While we look forward to the results of these investigations, it is evident looking more broadly, that the size and complexity of ships has grown over the years, placing greater demands on our marine transportation infrastructure that may not have kept pace with the increased risks that these vessels pose. It's time for us to more broadly understand these risks," he said.
Several Congressmen brought up concerns with flag-of-convenience (FOC) vessels, referring to an often-criticized practice of a registering a ship in a different country than where the shipowner resides.
The Dali was flagged in Singapore and is owned by Synergy Marine Group and Grace Ocean Private Limited, both of which are based in Singapore. According to the Maritime & Port Authority of Singapore, the country’s flag is not considered an FOC.
The representatives who brought up FOC concerns seemed to be critical of any foreign-flagged vessels, favoring instead ships flagged in the U.S. Some mentioned the Jones Act, also known as the Merchant Marine Act of 1920, which restricts shipping between U.S. ports to U.S.-flagged ships. Critics of the Jones Act say it places a burden on shippers, because operating a U.S.-flagged ship is more expensive than operating one flagged in a foreign country. Supporters of the act say it protects our national security, and makes our waterways safer, because the ships are held to U.S. standards.
Rep. Salud Carbajal (D-California) asked Vice Admiral Gautier, "The [International Maritime Organization] IMO ensures minimum global standards for safe shipping practices. The U.S. flag vessels are subject to higher standards and scrutiny. This is one of the several reasons I believe it is unacceptable that we rely on flag of convenience vessels to carry over 98% of our international cargo. There's a small minority of my colleagues who believe that the Jones Act should be repealed. I am not one of them. How would your job of ensuring safety in U.S. waters be made more difficult if U.S. vessels sailing in our coastal waterways and inland rivers were supplanted by foreign ships with foreign mariners?"
Gautier responded: "The Jones Act has been with us for 100 years; it's pretty foundational to how maritime commerce flows in the United States. The Coast Guard's worked very hard to provide an equivalent level of safety from foreign flag vessels, foreign crews and IMO through established standards. But what I really can say here is that the Jones Act is crucial for our maritime security elements in terms of the industrial shipbuilding capability in the United States of America, that the Coast Guard, and that the Navy, and others rely on. And we do not want in any way, shape or form to jeopardize that maritime security element of the defense industrial complex through shipbuilding.”
Rep. Carbajal pressed Homendy further in the below exchange:
CARBAJAL: "It is common practice for American mariners working on U.S. flag ships to work on board a vessel for two to three months at a time; mariners sailing on a flag of convenience vessels often remain at sea for longer. In the case of the Dali, I understand that the engineers have been on board for more than eight months. Since your preliminary report showed at least one mistake by the engineer, should we be concerned with the prevalence of flags of convenience vessels, which operate with lower standards operating in and around critical US infrastructure?
HOMENDY: We will look at any sort of federal regulations or IMO standards to make sure they're adequate. But it's too early to tell.
CARBAJAL: What about the standards? If they bid by lower standards, that shouldn't be of concern?
HOMENDY: I'm not saying it's not of concern. I'm saying we have to evaluate with this particular incident, what was in place? And whether that was adequate or not.
CARBAJAL: Beyond this incident, is there a concern?
HOMENDY: I will have to get back to you on that for the record.
Rep. Garret Graves (R-Louisiana) asked, We had a similar incident in Louisiana in the mid 90s. The Bright Field came in and crashed into the riverwalk in Louisiana. It was a Japanese-built vessel. It was run by Chinese and flagged in Liberia. Admiral, I want to ask you real quick. Can you think of any similar incidents with Jones Act vessels that have occurred like this?
Gautier said, "Not from deep-draft vessels." Homendy shook her head no.
Rep. Graves said, "Look, Jones Act vessels, U.S.-built US-crewed, US-flagged, we go through annual inspections, a night and day difference. And I think that's something else we need to take into consideration here.”
But Rev. Joshua Messick, executive director for the Baltimore International Seafarers' Center, does not believe the fact that the Dali was a foreign-flagged vessel is cause for concern. "Honestly a number of those flag states have stricter requirements than we do in the U.S. We have very particular for U.S.-flagged vessels. Every vessel that operates, operates under the Maritime Labor Convention of 2006, which is constantly amended, with seafarers as a party to the table. Each flag state is a little different, some are better than others, but they’re all held to generally the same standards."
Just a few days after the collapse, we talked to Captain Jim Staples, a master mariner who spent nearly 40 years at sea, including 23 years as a captain on all types of vessels, including cargo ships. Now, he does consultant and investigative work for agencies ranging from the Department of Justice, to the NYPD's Counterterrorism Maritime Division. He brought up the concern of crew fatigue, and how it could lead to mistakes.
"When I started going to sea, we started with 42-man crews and the ships were half the size. And now we're down to a 20-man crew and the ships are bigger, faster, carry more cargo, and guys are tired; they're fatigued, all around the world. And they come out with these nice regulations and rules. But if you don't have the manpower, you just can't do it. [...] The only way around it is to put more people on board ships. That's it - period. There is no other answer."
NTSB Chairwoman Homendy was asked about the topic by Rep. Mark DeSaulnier (D-California).
"Just the most recent report about human error on the boat reminds me of some of our discussions about the aviation industry. There's a lot of pressure on these companies to move product and show a profit. Are you concerned the same thing that we're not providing enough oversight to the people who are running the ships in the system, and they're being overworked, so they're missing things? Whether it's people who are mechanics repairing ships, or people who are operating the ships?" DeSaulnier asked.
Homendy responded, "Well, with respect to what occurred in Port on March 25, there was routine maintenance going on, on the vessel. And it was not something that stood out to us as I mean, there's human error in everything we do, routine maintenance, if we're working on our cars in our garage, sometimes we make mistakes, in this case a damper was closed, and an engine failed. So you know, in these situations,the crew took action to get everything back up and running. And on the next day, they were on a different set of breakers and a different transformer. So we'll look at that as part of the investigation, including any sort of human error that occurred on the 25th or the 26th."
That damper close she mentioned happened the night before the collapse, and led to the first set of power outages. Investigators are still working to determine whether those blackouts were related to the ones that happened right before the collision. The full NTSB report isn't expected for at least another year. Read more about the preliminary findings here.
This morning at a press conference about the successful removal of the Dali from the Fort McHenry channel, Governor Moore called the NTSB's initial findings "troubling, because what happened on March 26 never should have happened." He also reiterated his commitment to holding people accountable for the tragedy, "in every way, shape and form."
