Dunlap is a good company with good people on the boats. The MALOLO has been around in Alaska for at least 35 years. I think Dunlap is probably the only American union (MMP) company routinely transiting the Inside Passage.
Unfortunately, Dunlap also had a northbound AML barge grounding on Quadra Island in 2019.
The NATHAN STEWART grounding and oil spill near Bella Bella just about put Kirby out of business.
The result of that grounding was the imposition of new pilotage waiver rules and navigation restrictions in the Inside Passage. This forced oil barges to take a more exposed route.
As a result of the oil barges must take a more outside route restriction, a Centerline ATB was ejected from the notch in rough weather. The barge anchor narrowly prevent a grounding and major spill.
I think that forcing oil barges to take a more outside route through Hecate Strait is a huge mistake. It will eventually lead to heavy weather damage, a grounding, and a spill.
The Canadian pilotage rules have also resulted in more vessels transiting the Strait of Juan de Fuca to sea, and then proceeding outside up the Canadian coast for 600 miles to Alaska. Sooner or later, this will lead to a disaster.
I don’t know it will lead to a disaster as long as the companies towing these oil barges use newer equipment with enough horsepower, proper manning (3 watches) and good maintenance practices. The west coast is the last place you’ll find so much wire towing because of the weather we have out here and it is not conducive to ATBs especially during the winter months. Something Centerline learned the hard way but got lucky.
this type of barge typically has salvage plugs fitted to the hatch covers. purposely installed for an air fitting. should be a simple matter to refloat her on an air bubble. this will not only find the hull breach for batching but stabilize the barge and stop further water damage to the bottom containers. In good weather the barge could be towed on the air bubble without patching, particularly if it’s in the bottom of the barge and not the side shell
The guys that crew the wire boats have my full admiration. We tried it in the Tasman Sea and no one knew if the trip was a couple of weeks or which month.
The MALOLO was 35 years old. In my experience ships are not like fine wine and improve with age.
First, what is a safe manning level for any certain vessel is left up to the USCG to determine and they hold very firm on a master, three mates and two seamen per watch which right there is 10 and then comes the engine department of which they might allow three officers and three QMEDs so BINGO…16 crew in the safe manning certificate. Maybe a couple off for a periodically unmanned engineroom and you are at 14 which is still more than double the manning that what is accomplished today with a tug.
On a sidenote, I see it is confirmed now that the MALOLO was in fact southbound at the time of the casualty.
I will admit to being unfamiliar with the USCG chief and regarding manning. Practice here would be master and 3 three mates, chief engineer and second engineer, watchkeeper (ideally an electrician with watchkeeper ticket), a cook, 4 seamen.
Ships I have sailed on with a shaft generator the engineers mostly had an undisturbed night at sea when running UMS.
The simple fact of higher capital and manning costs makes any thought of coaster vessels taking over this service a non starter. I will continue to be done as over more than 5 decades with tugs towing barges. The question now is how Canada will overreact to this casualty which I am certain they will. The problem of course this reciprocal right to transit each others waters is almost 100% favoring US vessels which is already a thorny issue which Canadians (read First Nations here) hate. They don’t like this happening one iota and now they have been handed yet more political ammunition to use against us so expect even more regulations enacted to force US vessels to cease using the Inside.
How would first the general population then the local authorities and finally state and federal governments reach if an undermanned and overaged tug/barge combination had polluted a pristine US beach/coastline? (Never mind foreign or domestic owned/operated/manned)
Especially if this was just to save costs, while there are other well proven ways to move cargo with far less risk and at a relatively small additional cost.
Are there other places where transport of oil/chemical or containers with potential dangerous/polluting cargo on board, is regularly done by tug/barge over relatively long distances and in potentially dangerous or difficult waters?
PS: Yes I know that this is done in benign waters, like in Indonesia.
The tug and barge, which were transiting from Alaska to Washington, have taken shelter in a safer area near Matthew Island. While there are no immediate concerns about pollution and the barge hasn’t taken on more water,
Unconfirmed and purely unofficial but the master may have allowed a mate without the required pilotage stand watch without a watch officer with pilotage also supervising which if true is in violation of the regulations US vessels are required to comply with.
This could get ugly even though the environment wasn’t harmed. It could be coming that US tugs towing any barges on the wire will be forced to run outside since they can’t be trusted to follow the rules. Remember that to be American these days makes us less than welcome in Canada. Had this been a Canadian tug it likely would not be a very big deal for them.
We will see what the investigation brings out and what the fallout ends up being.
Nobody has polluted anything. The tug was manned according to all flag state and local requirements. Define “overaged”. There’s nothing about the tug or barge that has so far suggested that a mechanical failure or shortcoming of some kind has caused this snafu.
The US west coast does have the Strait of Juan de Fuca, which I’m sure you know is a thoroughfare bounded on the north by the Canada, and the south by the US. Vessels of every description use this waterway to access ports in both countries, and I’ve been witness to many, many dodgy situations where the vessel clearly had a mechanical issue and wasn’t able to comply with traffic instructions, but was not forthcoming with the information, and sometimes simply language issues occurred where the officer at the radio didn’t understand questions or instructions. So my little corner of the US is definitely exposed to the possibility of our pristine beaches being sullied.
As far as costs, there is no cheaper way to send a ton of freight from x to y than on a barge. Additionally, Western Alaska infrastructure is minimal. Barges like the one in question are really the only way to move a relatively large amount of containerized frozen cargo from these small ports to a hub for transshipment. Dock sizes, extreme tides, and even the possibility of going dry at the dock make these places unfriendly to ships. It’s all about flexibility. Containers, yes, but also heavy equipment, large diameter conduit, 100 foot long pipe sections, school buses, and prefab homes. Barges just get the job done.
Maybe not this time (but it`s not over yet) There have been earlier incidents though. Remember the Nathan Stewart?
PS: Much of the US tug fleet are “overaged”. “Average age 35 years”
Source:
There are other places in the world that has the same problems, but that doesn`t mean they accept higher risk to save a few USD/tonnes on freight.
The Polfoss (blt. 2007-8) is one of three sister vessels that is operating between Northern & Western Norway and ports in NV Europe year around.
They have a crew of 11:
Post these from now to doomsday if you want but these type of vessels are not going to take the place of tugs and barges to serve Alaska. I have already pointed out that between the much higher capital costs to build these ships then the higher operating expenses makes them a nonstarter for any company providing these freight services even if the Canadians force wire towing to go outside.
“ …dives assessing the problem revealed the barge’s hull had significant punctures and was taking in water in two compartments, Housty said, noting divers confirmed one “hole was so large he could have swum right through it.”
Because the hull was “compromised in several places,” Housty assumes “it must have run aground somewhere. We don’t know where at this time.””
I may be overthinking this but it’s curious that there has been no mention of the tug having reported any grounding, prior to their assistance request - when the flooding/listing became obvious/serious.
I agree, it’s not going to happen as long as the cost of building modern vessels to replace these aging, inefficient tugs and barges are allowed by US authorities.
Never mind what Canada say about it, or what international rules may apply. Even loss of American mariners wouldn`t make a difference.
The only thing that can change it is if insurance premiums goes up.
(Only $$$ counts)
If foreign built vessel could be purchased, or ordered new, then MAYBE it would be possible to consider doing something to improve safety for seafarers and protect the environment, both along the Canadian and Alaskan coasts.
PS: Polfoss and her sisters MAY become available for sale soon.
MV Kvitbjørn and MV Kvitnos will probably not be up for sale for a while:
It is quite possible the crew on the tug was unaware that the barge was taking on water and possibly a passing vessel warned them that the stern of the barge was almost awash.
Being southbound the place with most dangers of a barge dragging the bottom near to Bella Bella is Perry Patch in Tolmie Channel at Boat Bluff followed by Vancouver Rock in Milbanke Sound. In years past barges have grounded on both.
And yet you won’t quit. The USCG will not cease issuing COIs nor will insurance underwriters going to stop writing cover for these vessels due to their age alone and with that operators are not going to change to self-propelled ships to replace their tugs and barges. Only Canada and/or BC can demand changes as to the vessels they allow to use the Inside route and I do expect because of this casualty that they will demand there to be changes which will significantly impact US operators.
It’s up to you to decide if you want to keep beating this dead horse but it’s not going to go anywhere. Just because of the fact that your vaunted Norwegians do it differently doesn’t make it the only way it can be done.
Apart from working in the offshore oil industry my only previous experience was as a 15 year old on a small tug and barge carrying sand. The coastal passage was about 180 miles and there were plenty of places to shelter if the weather cut up rough. A schedule was never mentioned and the only sense of urgency was when there was a big game to get back for.
My questions are:
Who maintains the barge, lashing gear and any cranes? The feeder ship I was master of the ship’s crew carried out these tasks including changing wires etc..
What happens to the reefer containers on a voyage? On a modern vessel they are continuously monitored and visually inspected at least once per day.
Who is responsible for lashing the cargo?
The worst sinking on the BC IP in memory was with a ‘fully-manned’, three-watch system BC ferry in excellent condition. The Canadian officers and crew were all seasoned veterans of navigating the IP.
