The International MaritimeHuman Element Bulletin

Issue No. 7 April 2005

Human-Centred Design (HCD) focuseson making systems usable. It is the process of systematically applyinghuman factors and ergonomicsknowledge and techniques tominimize human error, enhanceeffectiveness and efficiency, improvehuman working conditions, andcounteract possible adverse effects of use on the health, safety andperformance of the mariner.

HCD - as a science - is a relatively newconcept in ship design. The operationalexperience of the various users and theexpert knowledge of a Human Factorsspecialist should be exploited by thedesigner to ensure that the number ofdesign errors so often identified duringthe late stage of build, or even whenthe ship enters operational service, areminimized. The downstream effect willbe a reduction in the number of costly‘change notices’ during build, and inthe number of slips, trips, falls,operating errors and other causes ofaccidents at sea, and an increase increw satisfaction with their ship.

There are many stakeholders involvedin the design of ships and theirsystems. Teamwork and communi-cation at all levels, from concept tobuild, are essential to the success ofany project.

Aship is comprised of a number ofSystems; each system has a specific

purpose and it can either operatealone or form a component part of a larger system. A System is acombination of interacting elements(human and/or machine) organized toachieve one or more stated purposes.

The increasing reliance upon complexsystems in merchant ship operationsplaces certain demands and con-straints on the human element, notleast in terms of the competence of theuser and of the organisational andphysical environment in which he/sheis required to operate.

The human element is a critical featureof all aspects of ship or system designand operation. User-input is essentialto ensure that the operationalparameters and the layout, crewingand procedures for the operation of shipboard systems are beingoptimised for the specific role or tradeof the ship. Those who are involved inthe design, build and updating of shipsand their systems and in theiroperation need to be aware of theproblems associated with onboardoperations not only in terms ofworkplace design but also in respect to crew habitability and the educationand training needs of the seafarer.

Putting it all together

Know thy users - for they are not you!

Designing usableshipsPage 3

A Nautical Institute project sponsored by Lloyd’s Register EMEA

The NauticalInstitute

Identify the good.....

Page 7

Feedback, please...

We are now well past the halfway stagein this three-year project, the aim of

which is to raise the awareness of the HumanElement in the maritime industry. Is Alert!achieving this aim? Are we striking the right balance with the mix of articles in each issue?

What do you think of the centrespreadfeatures? Do you use the website (www.he-alert.org)? Of what use has it been to you?Have you downloaded any papers from thedatabase? Have they proven useful to youin the conduct of your business? Whathuman element issues would you like to seefeatured in future editions of Alert!

If you have any thoughts on Alert!, please letthe editor know, either by letter or by e-mail.

Your feedback is important to thefuture of the Alert! project.

Alert! is a forum for like-minded people to share ideas and solve problems onhuman element issues. The website -www.he-alert.org - provides a referenceresource for study and information.

Contributions to the Bulletin and to thewebsite database are always welcome, as areletters to the editor, which can now beuploaded and published on the website.

The Editor,Alert!The Nautical Institute202 Lambeth RoadLondon SE1 7LQUnited Kingdom

editor@he-alert.org

Fax: +44 (0)20 7401 2817

2 Inside this issue:

A ‘good design’ is one that exceeds the owner’s expectations 2

Usability in the maritime industry 2

The role of the InternationalOrganisation for Standardization 3

Designing usable ships 3

A human-centred approach to ship & system design 4/5

Fit for purpose -

Designing Queen Mary 2 6

Closing the loop – feedback from the user modulating the designs 6

Identify the good and build upon it 7

What’s new 7

Accident investigation reports 8

Reports and Studies 8

The International Maritime Human Element Bulletin

Editor: David Squire, FNI

Published by the Nautical Institute, theworld’s leading international professionalbody for qualified mariners

www.nautinst.orgMembership info: sec@nautinst.org

The opinions expressed herein are those of the editoror contributors and do not necessarily represent theviews of The Nautical Institute or Lloyd’s Register EMEA.

The Nautical Institute and Lloyd’s Register EMEA,their affiliates and subsidiaries and their respectiveofficers, employees or agents are, individually andcollectively, referred to as ‘The Nautical Institute andLloyd’s Register EMEA’. The Nautical Institute andLloyd’s Register EMEA assume no responsibility andshall not be liable to any person for any loss, damageor expense caused by reliance on the information oradvice in this Bulletin or howsoever provided, unlessthat person has signed a contract with an entity fromThe Nautical Institute and Lloyd’s Register EMEA forthe provision of this information or advice and in thatcase any responsibility or liability is exclusively on theterms and conditions set out in that contract.

Today’s naval architect needs to be awell-rounded engineer with an eye

towards inspirational and innovativedesign, but with a deep understanding ofprinciples, an experienced ‘feel’ for thestrength, durability and safety of thefloating structures he designs, and anunderstanding of the ‘ways of the sea’ andof the needs of the User.

A ‘good design’ is one that exceeds theowner’s expectations. Priorities will be thatit meets his specification, is safe to operate,provides comfort and habitability for crewand passengers, meets environmentalregulations and concerns, and complieswith the relevant regulations of class,international and national authorities.Meeting the regulations is a question ofdiligence in assuring that all relevant rulesare adhered to, and will produce a vesselwith features that comply with aninternational consensus - but it may notnecessarily be a good design.

Comfort and habitability is of increasingconcern - the quality of life to a seafarer isone of the keys to a successful operation.There is no doubt that good ship motions,minimal noise and vibration, and well-planned ship accommodation are featuresof a good design.

The increasing use of safety case analysisand failure mode and effect analysis inship design significantly enhances shipsafety and is perhaps a better approachthan the previous prescriptive andsometimes arbitrary safety rules - allprovided that the naval architect does notbecome lost in a welter of analysis.

Probably the most difficult aspect, is thatof providing the shipowner with a vesselthat exceeds his expectations as regardsspecification. His requirements willinclude speed, deadweight and fuelconsumption and also sea kindliness,maintainability, manoeuvrability, andreliability.

These are challenging times for today’sNaval Architect.

A longer article by Nigel Gee, can bedownloaded from:www.he-alert.org (Ref: HE00365)

Nigel Gee BSc CEng FRINAMSNAMEPresident,Royal Institution of NavalArchitects

The usability of systems is described interms of the efficiency, effectiveness

and satisfaction of users performing taskswith the system in a defined context ofuse. This goal-based view of systemperformance offers considerable benefitsin the design and acceptance of theincreasing range of marine computer-based systems.

Targets for usability are defined and metthrough Human-Centred Design whichentails the following project activities:

• Understanding and specifying thecontext of use;

• Specifying the user and organizationalrequirements;

• Producing design solutions;

• Evaluating designs against requirements.

And, by observing the following principles:

• The active involvement of users and aclear understanding of user and taskrequirements;

• An appropriate allocation of functionbetween users and technology;

A ‘good design’ is one that exceeds the owner’s expectations

Usability in the maritime industry

Dr Jonathan Earthy,Principal HumanFactors SpecialistLloyd’s Register

• Iteration of design solutions;

• Multi-disciplinary design.

The maritime environment presentspotential challenges to the existing range of methods and techniques. Theinaccessibility of the working environ-ment, the ‘make do’ attitude of theseafarer, the need for detail on seafarerculture and communication, and longoperating life of marine systems requiresall parties to work from a detailed contextof use statement.

Furthermore, the high complexity ofintegrated systems, the uniqueness ofeach ship’s design and the dependence on(and lack of seafarer input to) prescriptivestandards requires a detailed and carefullymaintained specification of userrequirements. From a process point ofview the emphasis on contract, shortdesign and build times, low profit marginsand the number of equipment suppliersto each ship, requires managementcommitment to achieving usability.

Despite these challenges usability isstarting to be used in the marine sector.However, work has so far emphasised newbuilding and bridge operations and thusmissed the easier targets of office andcontrol systems, especially in retrofit.

For further information go to: www.usabilitynet.org

3

The foremost aim of internationalstandardization is to facilitate the

exchange of goods and services worldwidethrough elimination of technical barriers totrade, a precept of the World TradeOrganization. Three bodies are responsiblefor developing International Standards:

• The International Organization forStandardization (ISO), responsible for allsectors excluding electro-technical. Itsmembership comprises of the NationalStandards Bodies of some 130 countries.Technical Committee 8 (TC8) deals specific-ally with Ships and Marine Technology.

• The International Electro-technicalCommittee (IEC), responsible forinternational standards for all electrical,electronic and related technologies.

• The International TelecommunicationUnion (ITU) responsible for developinginternationally-agreed technical andoperating standards for internationaltelecommunication services

The scope of the ISO Technical Committee8 (TC8) is:

Standardization of design, construction,

structural elements, outfitting parts,equipment, methods and technology, andmarine environmental matters, used inshipbuilding and the operation of ships,comprising sea-going ships, vessels for inlandnavigation, offshore structures, ship-to-shoreinterface and all other marine structuressubject to IMO requirements.

TC8 is comprised of eleven subcommittees- two of which are devoted to our role withIMO Committees; five are for majorsubsystems in ships and shipbuilding,and others cover inland navigation vessels, computer applications, generalrequirements, and intermodal and short-sea shipping.

A principal role for TC8 is to serve as the linking instrument between therequirements/regulatory regime and theinternational maritime industry. (SeeFigure) Over 100 current items of work inISO/TC8 relate directly to IMO. IMO hasasked us to develop some standards,while some ISO standards bring aboutmore specificity and clear guidance on compliance with IMO regulations,and some IMO circulars determinerequirements from ISO standards.

We have focused on the Human Element ina number of standards, such as: Integratedbridges; life saving and fire protection;pilot and embarkation ladders; andnavigation equipment.We are also lookingat alarms and indicators - to bring some

order to the system so that thewatchstander has better information andis not overwhelmed with noise andflashing lights.

TC8 is proactive in working with all therelevant international stakeholders, bothindustry and government. The ISO/TC8philosophy is: Timing and Timeliness - Youhave to ‘be there’ when the need is statedand you must be ‘on time’ for deliveringthe finished standard to meet thestakeholder needs! This is not a spectatorsport - you have to be on the playing field,not in the stands or on the sidelines. Also,remember that if you as a stakeholder arenot participating, then the chances arethat your competitor is!

Further information on the work of TC8 canbe found at:www.iso.org/iso/en/stdsdevelopment/tc/tclist/TechnicalCommitteeDetailPage.TechnicalCommitteeDetail?COMMID=340

The role of the International Organisation for Standardizationin relation to Ships and Marine Technology

• Owners/operators want a ship that iseasy to maintain and operate, inexpensive,safe, etc.

• Shippers/cargo owners do not want anyharm caused to the cargo and they alsowant the cargo to reach its destination, i.e.the ship should be safe.

• Passengers are looking for a comfort-able, exciting and safe ship.

• Masters and crew want a ship that iseasy to operate, comfortable and also safe, in the broadest sense of the word,and certainly with respect to the working environment.

• Society wants environmentally friendlyas well as safe ships.

The only real common concept seems tobe safe. However, safe might not be giventhe same meaning by all users. Societywould probably tend to view safe as nodisasters while the crew would look at asafe ship as one that not only keepsfloating but also is not inviting smallpersonal accidents such as slips and falls.

So how do you build a ship that is - at thesame time - cheap, safe, comfortable, easyto maintain, easy to operate andenvironmentally friendly?

Rules, regulations and recommendationsissued by IMO, ILO and classificationsocieties help to a certain extent, but theydo not in themselves solve the problem.The professional knowledge and skill ofthe designers and builders of ships is ofparamount importance in order for us toget ships that are really usable.

Simple things like making sure thatsurfaces, ladders and staircases do notinvite slips, trips and falls; sufficientlylighted work areas; avoidance of noise and vibrations; layout of crews’ accom-modation; etc play a very important rolefor the persons on board and should beaddressed already at the design stage.There is a wealth of information availablefrom other industries on human factorsand ergonomics - why not use it?

Common sense should be used whendesigning a ship. This would and shouldcertainly include consulting the peoplewho are actually going to spend a lot oftheir time on board - the seafarers. And bythis I do not only mean the master!

A full version of Jorgen Rasmussen’s paper onDesigning Usable Ships can be downloadedfrom www.he-alert.org (Ref: HE00360)

Captain Charles Piersall Chairman ISO TC 8

Jorgen RasmussenChief Ship Surveyor,Danish Maritime AuthorityChairman,IMO Human Element Working Group

Designing usable ships

4

5

Ships and ships’ engine rooms are notnew. The cumulative experience of

designing, operating and maintainingships is so enormous; but, if used properly,it can bring about a much-desired positivechange in the equipment capacities,layout of the engine rooms and space for maintenance.

This has not happened however. Everytime a new building supervisor interactswith the design department personnel of the shipyards during the technicaldiscussions and day-to-day onsitesupervision, he wishes that they had a better understanding of onboardoperation and maintenance. While thereare exceptions, the experience has beenthat the designers, in general, have none or

bare minimum practical experience andare not in a position to appreciate thedifficulties that are encountered after thedelivery of a vessel.

Designers get the opportunity to get a feelof the practical difficulties through thefeedback from the ship owners’ technicalteams during technical negotiations, newbuilding supervisors during constructionof the ships and later from the guaranteeclaims from a series of sister vessels. It hasbeen noticed that even after suchfeedback, there is a strong resistance to changes or modifications probably for commercial reasons. In the highlycompetitive business of shipbuildingwhere some shipyards have the advantageof using cheap labour, others try tocompete through increased productivityto compensate for the expensive cost ofproduction. They do not like to disrupt theassembly line production and hence areinflexible to changes, even though theymay appreciate the usefulness of thechanges asked for.

An example here is of the shipboardincinerator. In a regime where the

shipboard staff is threatened withimprisonment and heavy personalliabilities and the ship owner subjected tosevere financial penalties, the ships areprovided with bare minimum capacityincinerators in the name of compliancewith the requirements. Another importantissue is treatment or preparing the sludgemixture prior burning. This is the partwhere further difficulties are encountereddue to poor tank arrangements asdesigners provide for only one tank forincinerator service.

Thus, inadequate handling capacity ofincinerators, lack of proper agitationarrangements and in some cases improperdrainage to get rid of water, coupled withpoor tank arrangements present severedifficulties for the users onboard thevessels. More often than not, the designersresist the increase in capacities eventhough a ship owner is willing to incur areasonable additional cost.This is either forcommercial reasons as mentioned above,or because of sheer lack of understandingof the severe implications resulting fromless than adequate practical capacities ofsuch equipments.

In a passenger ship it is the comfort, safetyand pleasure of the passengers that comesfirst, which can present the designer with anumber of interesting challenges. Stephen MPayne OBE, the Chief Naval Architect ofCarnival Corporate Shipbuilding (anddesigner of Queen Mary 2) reflects on someof the design aspects of this ship.

During her first year of operation theQueen Mary 2 has shown off her paces andhas been universally acclaimed as ’the onlyway to cross’. She embodies all the latesttechnology and passenger comforts and is set to maintain the transatlantic ferryinitiated by her predecessors hopefully forthe next 40 years. All aspects of the designrelate to passengers. Cruise industrypractices contribute to operationalefficiency only where they do not impacton the passenger transatlantic experience.

The size of the ship at 150,000 grt (thelargest passenger ship ever built) enableda superlative array of signature publicrooms to be provided as well as 1,310cabins ranging from modest insides tomagnificent bi-level duplexes. To justifythe return on investment Queen Mary 2has to maximise her earning potential byincreasing the proportion of premium ratebalcony cabins above that of normal cruiseships and by taking full advantage of theaxiom of ‘economy of scale’. To maximisethe number of balcony cabins the publicrooms were placed low down in the shipwith a much larger than cruise ship normaltween deck height to provide sufficientvolume to enable some impressive publicrooms to be incorporated. This wasespecially the case where the two adjacentpublic room decks were combined intodouble height rooms, some with domesextending into the cabin decks above.

Time is also critical. The QM2 is designedfor a six-day transatlantic crossing with aten-hour turn around at each port. It is

crucial that her schedule is maintained.To offload her passengers and luggage on arrival, dispose of garbage, refuel andembark her new passenger load and their luggage requires a minimum of tenhours. If the ship is delayed this canseriously impact on her departure with a cumulative knock on effect through the season resulting in cancelled flights,hotel bookings and reimbursements topassengers etc.

On her maiden transatlantic crossing inApril 2004, Queen Mary 2 encountered two North Atlantic storm systems.Despite these, her reserves of power incombination with her strength and overalldesign enabled her to maintain herschedule and arrive in New York on time.This performance is delivered silentlywithout the knowledge of the passengersand, even at full speed, noise and vibrationlevels are almost non-existent.

For further information about the QueenMary 2 go to:http://www.cunard.com/QM2/home.asp

6

Jagmeet Makkar,FICS, FIMarE(I)Vice President.KC Maritime Ltd,Hong Kong

Stephen M. Payne ,OBE, FRINA, CEng,BSc Eng (Hons)

Closing the loop - feedback from the user modulating the designs

Fit for purpose - Designing Queen Mary 2

With the obvious exception of Noah’sinvolvement with the ark, seafarers

have historically had little involvement inthe design of the vessels on which they are engaged. Naval architects designed,shipbuilders constructed and successivegenerations of seafarers were then left tooperate vessels that frequently failed tomeet the legitimate expectations of theprofessional mariner.

This situation is widely perpetuated today,but the problem is not universal. Visionaryshipowners, conscious of the beneficialexperience of the end-user, have fordecades been directly involving sea-staffin the design process for newbuild vessels.How short sighted it is that this practice isnot more widespread.

Within the family-owned tanker fleet of F T Everard & Sons, a long-standingphilosophy of consultation between sea-staff and shore-based management hasbenefited the development of conceptsfor new vessels. Sea-staff haveconsequently been directly involved withequipment manufacturers and softwaredevelopers, and have been embedded as members of the newbuild super-vision team at the shipyard. A newdevelopment? Not really, it is justenlightened thinking in the late 1970s thathas evolved into a design process thatconsistently delivers vessels surpassingtheir contemporaries, and has morerecently produced vessels that are themost advanced of their type in existence.

After deciding to construct new vessels,this process of consultation (which isongoing even without such a project) isconducted in various ways, the ever-present cornerstone being the close

professional relationship between sea-staff and shore-staff. Ship visits regularlyprovide a conduit to introduce commentand criticism into the design process andalso allows for the identification of thoseseafarers with a tangible interest in theproject, coupled with the underpinningaptitude to provide a positive contri-bution. From that cluster, a representativegroup is selected to advise the in-housedesign team.

The initial challenge is always to conductan operational review of current vessels(especially the most recent) with parti-cular emphasis on cargo control andmonitoring, navigational activities, powergeneration and propulsion, ergonomicsand quality of on-board life. The intentionis to identify the good and build upon it;but, equally important, is to eliminatemistakes or oversights in previous designs.Whenever possible, these areas forimprovement are incorporated within thenew design.

Everard currently has four vessels underconstruction at Qingshan Shipyard,

Wuhan, China, the first of which is MVSpeciality, due for delivery mid-2005.Whilst the vision for this project originatedfrom senior management, its developmentinto reality benefited greatly from thecontribution and involvement of sea-staffat every stage of the process. By ensuringthat the needs of the operational seafarerare properly taken into account, itbecomes possible to design vesselsproviding a comfortable workingenvironment, fitted with state-of-the-artequipment, which is effectively integratedto permit the greatest potential forefficiency. This cannot be achievedwithout focussing the design on the users– seafarers.

It would be highly complimentary, butwholly inaccurate, to suggest that theEverard philosophy is based entirely onaltruistic principles. Far from it! Thedefining tenet is that of survival in anincreasingly competitive marketplace. Thisis coupled with an absolute convictionthat, by combining the best availableequipment, the most appropriateadvanced technology and a user-friendlyenvironment, high quality seafarers willaspire to be associated with such vessels.And, once on board will perform to theirprofessional potential thereby operatingthe vessels to optimum efficiency – incomplete safety.

For further information on the ships of FTEverard Ltd go to www.ft-everard.co.uk/index_a.html

Captain Eion W Lyons FNIMarine Directorand Head of TechnicalDepartmentF T Everard & Sons Limited

7Identify the good and build

upon it

What’s new… IMO Maritime Safety Committee 79th session

Goal-based construction standards fornew ships. The development of goal-based standards for new ship constructionhas moved forward. It was agreed, ingeneral, that work on goal-based new shipconstruction standards would be based onthe premise that the standards should bebroad, over-arching goals against whichship safety should be verified at designand construction stages and during shipoperation. They are not intended to setprescriptive requirements or to give

specific solutions. The main objective is tointroduce a system whereby the standardswould be a measure against which thesafety of a ship could be assessed duringits design and construction, as well as lateron during its operation.

Passenger ship safety. The guidingphilosophy, strategic goals and objectivesfor passenger ship safety have beenagreed. This philosophy is based on thepremise that the regulatory framework

should place more emphasis on theprevention of a casualty from occurring inthe first place and that future passengerships should be designed for improvedsurvivability so that, in the event of acasualty, persons can stay safely on boardas the ship proceeds to port.

Further information can be obtained fromthe IMO website at:http://www.imo.org/Newsroom/mainframe.asp?topic_id=110&doc_id=3665

8

&

AccidentInvestigationReports

Atwin hulled 180gt high speed passengercraft, while conducting Builder’s Sea Trials

at night, grounded during a turn at highspeed. The investigation report highlights anumber of failings in navigation, planningand Bridge Resource Management but it alsofocuses on some significant design problems.

This was the first of three identical vesselsto be operated by a long-term charterer,who provided the shipbuilder with thedetailed design specification for thevessels, based on their expected operatingrequirements. During the design and buildstages, the shipbuilder’s trials master wasgiven copies of the vessel’s operationsmanual and details of layout of theoperating compartment. Despite the trialsmaster bringing some deficiencies to theattention of the builders, the chartererssubsequently directed that no changesshould be made to the layout.

The report concludes that the vessel’soperating compartment was poorlydesigned and equipped and did notcomply with the High Speed Craft Code. Further deficiencies included: poor

instrumentation layout, light pollutionfrom the passenger cabin, faultyinstrumentation and control stationwindow demisting difficulties.

In addition to the problems and faultsfound with the bridge design andinstrumentation before and during thetrials, no Electronic Chart Display andInformation System (ECDIS) or ElectronicNavigational Chart (ENC) system was fittedto the vessel.

The report makes a number of importantrecommendations, not least one for the Flag State to take forward - with the appropriate committees andsubcommittees of the IMO - theintroduction of requirements for:

• All high speed craft to be fitted withnavigational instruments designed tocope with the unique requirements ofhigh-speed craft. In particular, a displaysuch as ECDIS or ENC, which gives aninstantaneous indication of chartedposition, to be fitted on all vesselsexcept those solely engaged on line-of-sight voyages.

• A minimum of two type rated people tobe required to navigate a high speedcraft except where the vessel’s voyage is a short line-of-sight passage. Each of the navigators should havenavigation/control stations within theoperating compartment.

• A global standard layout of navigationalinstrumentation for the operatingcompartment of all high speed craft.

• Measures to ensure that theadministration has early involvement inthe design approval of all high speedcraft operating compartments.

Flag Administrations, owners, designers

builders and operators involved with

the design, build and commissioning of

high speed craft are strongly advised to

read the full report which can be

downloaded from:

http://www.maib.gov.uk/publications/investigation_reports/2004/katia__3_december_2003.cfm

ReportsStudies

(SN/Circ.243 dated 15 December 2004)

The purpose of these guidelines is to provide guidance on the use ofappropriate navigation-related termin-ology and abbreviations intended forpresentation on shipborne navigationaldisplays. These are based on terms andabbreviations used in existing navigationreferences. They have been issued toensure that the terms and abbreviationsused for the display of navigation-relatedinformation on all shipborne navigationequipment and systems - including, radar,ECDIS, AIS, INS and IBS - are consistent anduniform.Downloadable from:www.imo.org/includes/blastDataOnly.asp/data_id%3D10988/243.pdf

IMO GUIDELINES FOR THEPRESENTATION OF NAVIGATION-RELATED SYMBOLS, TERMS ANDABBREVIATIONS

ABS Pub #102

Developed with the objective ofimproving the quality of seafarerperformance by improving their workingand living environments in terms ofambient environmental qualities and insome instances the physical characteristicson board cargo vessels and passengervessels. These habitability criteria havebeen chosen to provide a means to reducecrew fatigue and to increase crewretention.Downloadable from:www.eagle.org/rules/downloads/102-HAB.pdf

ABS GUIDE FOR CREW HABITABILITY ONSHIPS (DECEMBER 2001)

Grounding of a High Speed Craft ... whilst on Builder’s Sea Trials

THE HUMAN ELEMENT IN SHIPPING

Commodore David Squire, CBE, FNI (February 2005)

A paper outlining the various HumanElement issues that can affect the ability ofthe master and his crew to ensure the safeconduct of the ship and the safe andtimely delivery of its cargo.Downloadable from:www.he-alert.org (Ref: HE00350)