McDonald outlines MARAD’s safety work, acknowledges scope for further development

Director of Maritime Safety Courtney McDonald outlined the Maritime Administrative Department’s (MARAD) inspection procedures and ongoing staff development, while acknowledging the continuing need to strengthen technical capabilities, during his testimony on Thursday before the Commission of Inquiry (CoI) into the sinking of the MV Barima.

His evidence covered both the handling of the Barima’s inspection findings and the wider responsibilities of the MARAD’s safety division, including supervision of inspectors, safety awareness and the development of personnel working in an expanding maritime sector.

McDonald told the inquiry that his maritime career began as a cadet in 1995 and included work at sea in the Caribbean and offshore industry. He also described his previous inspection responsibilities before assuming leadership of the safety division.

Explaining the inspection process, he said reports are forwarded to the vessel’s operator, which is expected to address any deficiencies identified. Vessel officers also accompany inspectors during assessments, making them aware of the matters requiring attention.

Following the inspection, the captain or operator is debriefed on the inspectors’ observations and the corrective work required. Once deficiencies are addressed, the operator is expected to notify MARAD so that inspectors can return to verify the corrections before departure.

In the Barima’s case, McDonald said he reviewed the report prepared by MARAD inspector Christopher Bailey and forwarded it to the Transport and Harbours Department for corrective action. The report was also shared with officers of the vessel’s operator.

In assessing the findings, he took account of the inspector’s comments that the vessel was undergoing maintenance and was not operating when inspected on November 17, 2025, at the Kingston Goods Wharf.

He also emphasised the importance of the inspecting officer’s assessment, explaining that the officer who physically examined the vessel was responsible for recording findings and identifying their significance.

The commissioners examined that explanation closely, questioning whether the report clearly established a satisfactory or unsatisfactory inspection outcome and whether the vessel’s temporary maintenance status provided sufficient assurance about its subsequent return to service.

McDonald said he had not instructed inspectors to follow up with the operator after the report. He explained that inspectors did not remain aboard after completing their assessments and that the inspectorate lacked a departure-tracking system.

McDonald also pointed to the Transport and Harbours Department’s established management team and its responsibilities for managing the vessels. The inquiry, in turn, questioned whether reliance on the operator’s notification provided sufficient independent oversight.

Beyond the Barima inspection, McDonald described efforts to develop MARAD’s workforce in response to growth in maritime activity, including the offshore industry. He said additional personnel were being trained for inspection duties and that staffing decisions reflected the department’s assessment of expanding demands.

He explained that the number of inspectors was not fixed, but was adjusted in response to the department’s assessment of activity in the sector. The commissioners questioned that approach, asking how staffing requirements were determined and whether the division’s structure adequately anticipated the demands it faced.

The questioning also addressed whether staff development and advancement were supported by sufficiently clear, documented standards. McDonald said job descriptions set out responsibilities, while explaining that training opportunities also depended on availability and management decisions.

McDonald said professional development combined formal courses, workshops and seminars with practical experience alongside more experienced officers. He described participation in inspections and other departmental activities as part of the process of developing personnel.

Asked about resources and technical development, he acknowledged the continuing need to strengthen capabilities. He described training as an ongoing requirement rather than a completed exercise, while noting that officers and inspectors were already undertaking training to support their work.

Related

Legal Disclaimer:

EIN Presswire provides this news content "as is" without warranty of any kind. We do not accept any responsibility or liability for the accuracy, content, images, videos, licenses, completeness, legality, or reliability of the information contained in this article. If you have any complaints or copyright issues related to this article, kindly contact the author above.