United States, primarily U.S. Gulf of Mexico.As of December 31, 2017, 472021, 15 vessels were located in the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, including 3712 owned, fivetwo leased-in three joint ventured and two managed.one managed-in. The Company’s vessels in this market support deepwater anchor handling, fast cargo transport, general cargo transport, well intervention, work-over, decommissioning and diving support operations.

Africa primarily West Africa.and Europe, continuing operations. As of December 31, 2017, 182021, 16 vessels were located in West Africa,the region, including 1415 owned two leased-in, one joint ventured and one managed.leased-in. The Company’s vessels in this area generally support projects for major oil companies, primarily in Angola. OtherAngola and Nigeria, and the construction and maintenance of offshore wind turbines. On January 12, 2021, the Company completed the sale of its Windcat Workboats CTV Business, comprised of 46 CTVs (45 active vessels and one vessel previously removed from service) located in this region operate in the Republic of the Congo and Mauritania.

Middle East and Asia.As of December 31, 2017, 412021, 20 vessels that were located in the Middle East and Asia including 25 owned, five joint ventured and 11 managed.were all owned. The Company’s vessels in this area generally support exploration, personnel transport

Latin America. As of December 31, 2017, 172021, 30 vessels were located in Mexico,this region, including two10 owned and 15 joint ventured through the Company’s 49% noncontrolling interest in20 joint-ventured. Of these joint-ventured vessels, (i) 16 are owned by Mantenimiento Express Maritimo, S.A.P.I. de C.V. (“MexMar”)., a joint venture company that is 49% owned by SEACOR Marine International LLC (“SMI”), a wholly owned subsidiary of SEACOR Marine, and 51% owned by subsidiaries of Proyectos Globales de Energía y Servicios CME, S.A. de C.V. (“CME”), and (ii) four are owned by Offshore Vessels Holding, S.A.P.I. DE. C.V. (“OVH”), a joint venture company that is 49% owned by SMI and 51% owned by a subsidiary of CME. These vessels, consisting of a fleet of FSVs, supply, specialty and liftboat vessels, provide support for exploration and production activities in Mexico. In addition, two owned vessels were located in Brazil.Mexico and Guyana. From time to time, the Company’s vessels have workedalso work in Trinidad and Tobago, Guyana, ColombiaBrazil and Venezuela.

The Company’s principal customers are major integrated national and international oil companies, and independent oil and natural gas exploration and production companies, oil field service and construction companies, as well as wind farm operators, and wind farm installation and maintenance companies. Consolidation of oil and natural gas companies through mergers and acquisitions over the past several years has reduced the Company’s customer base. This, together with the depressed oil and gas price environment that began in 2014 has negatively affected exploration, field development and production activity as consolidated companies generallycontinue to focus at least initially, on increasing or maintaining efficiency and reducingcontrolling costs and delay or abandon exploration activity and facilities with less promise.

During the year ended December 31, 2017, one customer, Perenco UK Limited, was2021, two customers, SEACOR Marine Arabia LLC, a joint venture that is 45% owned by a subsidiary of SEACOR Marine, through which vessels are in service to Saudi Aramco, and Exxon Mobil, were each responsible for over 10% or more of the Company’s consolidated operating revenues.revenues from continuing operations. Saudi Aramco and Exxon Mobil were responsible for 17% and 21%, respectively, of the Company’s consolidated revenues from continuing operations in 2021. The Company’s ten largest customers accounted for approximately 59%76% of its operatingthe consolidated revenues from continuing operations in 2017.2021. The loss of one or more of these customers could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial position, results of operations, cash flows and cash flows.

The Company earns revenues primarily from the time charter and bareboat charter of vessels to customers based upon daily rates of hire. Therefore, vessel revenues are recognized on a daily basis throughout the contract period. Under a time charter, the Company provides a vessel to a customer and is responsible for all operating expenses, typically excluding fuel. Under a bareboat charter, the Company provides a vessel to a customer and the customer assumes responsibility for all operating expenses and all risk of operation. In the U.S. Gulf of Mexico, time charter durations and rates are typically established in the context of master service agreements that govern the terms and conditions of the charter. From time to time, the Company may also participate in pooling arrangements whereby the time charter revenues of certain of the Company’s vessels are shared with the time charter revenues of certain vessels of similar type owned by non-affiliated vessel owners based upon an agreed formula.

The market for offshore marine services is highly competitive.fragmented and competitive depending upon the region of operation. The most important competitive factors are pricing, and the availability and specifications of equipment to fit customer requirements. Other important factors include service, reputation, flag preference, local marine operating and regulatory conditions, the ability to provide and maintain logistical support given the complexity of a project and the cost of moving equipment from one geographic region to another.

For the years ended December 31, 2017, 20162021, 2020, and 2015, 87%2019, 88%, 85%89%, and 68%75%, respectively, of the Company’s operating revenues from continuing operations and $1.9$15.4 million, $(4.2)($7.5) million and $8.6($13.5) million, respectively, of the Company’s equity in earnings gains (losses) from 50% or less owned companies, net of tax, were derived from its foreign operations.

Most of the vessels operated by the Company are registered in foreign jurisdictions, with the remainder registered in the U.S. Vessels are subject to the laws of the applicable jurisdiction as to ownership, registration, manning, environmental protection and safety. In addition, the Company’s vessels are subject to the requirements of a number of international conventions that are applicable to vessels depending on their jurisdiction of registration. Among the more significant of these conventions are: (i) the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, 1973, as modified by the Protocol of 1978 relating thereto (“MARPOL”); (ii) the International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea, 1974 and 1978 Protocols (“SOLAS”); and (iii) the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers (“STCW”).

Domestically registered vessels are subject to the jurisdiction of the United StatesU.S. Coast Guard (“USCG”), the National Transportation Safety Board (“NTSB”), the U.S. Customs and Border Protection (“CBP”), EPAthe U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”) and the U.S. Maritime Administration (“MARAD”), as well as in certain instances applicable state and local laws. The Company’s operations may, from time to time, also fall under the jurisdiction of the U.S. Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement (“BSEE”) and its Safety and Environmental Management System regulations, and the Company must also periodically certify that its maritime operations adhere to those regulations. These agencies and organizations establish safety requirements and standards and are authorized to investigate vessels and accidents and to recommend improved maritime safety standards.

The Company is subject to regulation under the Jones Act and related U.S. cabotage laws, which restrict ownership and operation of vessels in the U.S. coastwise trade (i.e.,(defined as trade between points in the United States)U.S.), including the transportation of cargo. Subject to limited exceptions, the Jones Act requires that vessels engaged in U.S. coastwise trade be built in the United States,U.S., registered under the U.S.-flag, manned by predominantly U.S. crews, and be owned and operated by U.S. citizens within the meaning of the Jones Act. Violation of the Jones Act could prohibit operation of vessels in the U.S. coastwise trade during the period of such non-compliance, result in material fines and subject Company vessels to seizure and forfeiture.

To facilitate compliance with the Jones Act, the Company’s SecondThird Amended and Restated Certificate of Incorporation and SecondThird Amended and Restated By-Laws: (i) limit the aggregate percentage ownership by non-U.S. citizens of any class of the Company’s capital stock (including Common Stock) to 22.5% of the outstanding shares of each such class to ensure that ownership by non-U.S. citizens will not exceed the maximum percentage permitted by applicable maritime law (presently 25%) but authorize the Company’s Board of Directors, under certain circumstances, to increase the foregoing percentage to 24%; (ii) requirepermit the institution of a dual stock certification system to help determine such ownership; (iii) provide that any issuance or transfer of shares in excess of such permitted percentage shall be ineffective as against the Company and that neitherprohibit the Company norand its transfer agent shall registerfrom registering such purported issuance or transfer of shares or be required to recognize the purported transferee or owner as a stockholder of the Company for any purpose whatsoever except to exercise its remedies; (iv) provide that any such excess shares shall not have any voting or dividend rights; (v) permit the Company to redeem any such excess shares; and (vi) permit the Board of Directors to make such reasonable determinations as may be necessary to ascertain such ownership and implement such limitations. In addition, the Company’s SecondThird Amended and Restated By-Laws provide thatlimit the number of non-U.S. citizencitizens that may serve as directors shall not exceed a minority of the number necessary to constitute a quorum for the transaction of business and restrict any non-U.S. citizen officer from acting in the absence or disability of the Chairman of the Board of Directors, the Chief Executive Officer or the President.

The Maritime Labour Convention, 2006 (the “MLC”) establishes comprehensive minimum requirements for working conditions of seafarers including, among other things, conditions of employment, hours of work and rest, grievance and complaints procedures, accommodations, recreational facilities, food and catering, health protection, medical care, welfare, and social security protection. The MLC also provides a definition ofdefines seafarer that includesto include all persons engaged in work on a vessel in addition to

The hull and machinery of everymost commercial vessel must bevessels are classed by an international classification society authorized by its country of registry and be subject to survey and inspection by shipping regulatory bodies. The international classification society certifies that a vessel is safe and seaworthymaintained in accordance with the applicable rules and regulations of the country of registry of the vessel and the United Nations Safety of Life at Sea Conventions.SOLAS. Certain of the Company’sCompany's vessels are subject to the periodic inspection, survey, drydocking and maintenance requirements of the USCG, the American Bureau of Shipping and other marine classification societies.

6

Under provisions of the Merchant Marine Act of 1936 and Chapter 563 of Title 46 of the United States Code, the Company’s U.S.-flaggedU.S.-flag vessels will beare subject to repositioningrequisition, charter or purchase by the U.S. Governmentgovernment under certain terms and conditions during a national emergency declared by Presidential Proclamation as described further in the risk factor under the heading “The Company’s U.S.-flag vessels are subject to requisition for ownership or use by the United StatesU.S. in case of national emergency or national defense need” under Item 1A“Item 1A. Risk Factors” of this Annual Report on Form 10-K.

A wide range of domestic governmental agencies, including the USCG, the EPA, the U.S. Department of Transportation’s Office of Pipeline Safety, the BSEE and certain individual U.S. states, regulate vessels facilities and pipelinesother structures in accordance with the requirements of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (“OPA 90”) or analogous state law. There is currently little uniformity among the regulations issued by these agencies, which increases the Company’s compliance costs and risk of non-compliance.

OPA 90 establishes a regulatory and liability regime for the protection of the environment from oil spills. OPA 90 applies to owners and operators of facilities operating near navigable waters of the United StatesU.S., and owners, operators and bareboat charterers of vessels operating in U.S. waters, which include the navigable waters of the United StatesU.S. and the 200 mile200-mile exclusive economic zone around the United StatesU.S. (the “EEZ”). For purposes of its liability limits and financial responsibility and response planning requirements, OPA 90 differentiates between tank vessels (such as chemical and petroleum product vessels and liquid tank barges) and “other vessels” (such as the Company’s offshore support vessels).

Under OPA 90, owners and operators of regulated facilities and owners and operators or bareboat charterers of vessels are “responsible parties” and may be jointly, severally and strictly liable for removal costs and damages arising from facility and vessel oil spills or threatened spills up to certain limits of liability (except if the limits are broken as discussed below).below. Damages are defined broadly to include: (i) injury to natural resources and the costs of remediation thereof; (ii) injury to, or economic losses resulting from, the destruction of real and personal property; (iii) net loss by the United States government, a state or political subdivision thereof,various governmental bodies of taxes, royalties, rents, fees andor profits; (iv) lost profits or impairment of earning capacity due to property or natural resources damage; (v) net costs of providing increased or additional public services necessitated by a spill response, such as protection from fire or other hazards or taking additional safety precautions; and (vi) loss of subsistence use of available natural resources.

OPA 90 limits liability for responsible parties for non-tank vessels, such as the Company’s, to the greater of $1,100$1,200 per gross ton or $939,800.$997,100. These liability limits do not apply (a) if an incident is caused by the responsible party’s violation (or the violation of a person acting pursuant to a contract with the responsible party) of federal safety, construction or operating regulations or by the responsible party’s gross negligence or willful misconduct, (b) if the

7

OPA 90 requires vessel owners and operators to establish and maintain with the USCG evidence of insurance or qualification as a self-insurer or other evidence of financial responsibility sufficient to meet their potential liabilities under OPA 90. TheIn recent years, the Company has satisfied USCG regulations by providing evidence of financial responsibility demonstrated by commercial insurance and self-insurance. OPA 90 regulations also implement the financial responsibility requirements of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), which imposes liability for dischargesany discharge of hazardous substances, similar to OPA 90, and provides compensation for cleanup, removal and natural resource damages. Liability per vessel under CERCLA is limited to the greater of $300 per gross ton or $5 million, unless the incident is caused by gross negligence, willful misconduct, or a violation of certain regulations, in which case liability is unlimited.

Under the Nontank Vessel Response Plan Final Rule issued by the USCG in 2013, owners and operators of nontank vessels are required to prepare Nontank Vessel Response Plans (“NTVRPs”).Plans. The Company expects its current pollution liability insurance to cover any cost of spill removal costs and damage, subject to coverage deductibles and limitations, including a cap of $1.0 billion. There could be a material adverse effect on theThe Company’s business, financial position, results of operations, cash flows or growth prospects could be material adversely affected if the Company incurs spill liability under circumstances in which the Company’s insurance carrier fails or refuses todoes not provide coverage, the Company’s underwriters fail or refuse to pay a covered claim, or the loss exceeds the Company’s coverage limitations.

MARPOL is the main international convention covering prevention of pollution of the marine environment by vessels from operational or accidental discharges. It is implemented in the United StatesU.S. pursuant to the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships.

The Clean Water Act (“CWA”) prohibits the discharge of “pollutants” into the navigable waters of the United States.U.S. The CWA also prohibits the discharge of oil or hazardous substances into navigable waters of the United StatesU.S. and the EEZ around the United StatesU.S. and imposes civil and criminal penalties for unauthorized discharges, thereby exposing the Company to potential liability that is in addition to liabilityits exposure arising under OPA 90 and CERCLA.

The CWA also established the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) permitting program, which governs discharges of pollutants into navigable waters of the United States.U.S. Pursuant to the NPDES permitting program, the EPA has issued Vessel General Permits covering discharges incidental to normal vessel operations. The currentEPA issued the 2013 Vessel General Permit (the “2013(“2013 VGP”), which became effective in December with an initial five-year term. In light of the legislation described below, the 2013 appliesVGP continues to apply to the Company’s U.S.-flag and foreign-flag commercial vessels that are at least 79 feet in length and operate within the three-mile territorial sea of the United States.U.S. The 2013 VGP requires vessel owners and operators to adhere to “best management practices” to manage the covered discharges that occur normally in the operation of a vessel, including ballast water, and implements various training, inspection, monitoring, record keeping, and reporting requirements, as well as corrective actions upon identification of deficiencies. The Company has filed a Notice of Intent to be covered by the 2013 VGP for each of its ships that operate in U.S. waters.

On December 4, 2018, the U.S. Congress enacted the Vessel Incidental Discharge Act (“VIDA”), establishing a new Vessel General Permit will be issued byframework for the endregulation of 2018.discharges incidental to the normal operations of vessels. In October of 2020, the EPA published proposed performance standards for vessel incidental discharges and is in the process of promulgating final standards. VIDA requires the USCG to develop implementation, compliance, and enforcement regulations within two years of EPA’s promulgation of standards. VIDA extends the 2013 VGP’s provisions, leaving them in effect until new regulations are final and enforceable. Non-military, non-recreational vessels greater than 79 feet in length must continue to comply with the requirements of the 2013 VGP, including submission of annual reports. The Company can provide no assurance thatas to when the permitnew regulations and performance standards will be issued, on a timely basis, or at all, nor can it predict what additional costs it may incur to comply with any such new Vessel General Permit.

Many countries have ratified and are thus subject toapply the liability scheme adopted by the International Maritime Organization (the “IMO”)IMO and set out in the International Convention on Civil Liability for Oil Pollution Damage of 1969 (the “1969 Convention”). Some of these countries have also adopted the 1992 Protocol to the 1969 Convention (the “1992 Protocol”). Under both the 1969 Convention and the 1992 Protocol, a vessel’s registered owner is strictly liable for pollution damage caused in the territorial waters of a contracting state by discharge of persistent oil from ships carrying oil in bulk as cargo, subject to certain complete defenses. These conventions also limit the liability of the shipowner under certain circumstances, provided the discharge was not causescaused by the shipowner’s actual fault or intentional or reckless misconduct.

Vessels trading to countries that are parties to these conventions must provide evidence of insurance covering the liability of the owner. The Company believes that its Protection and Indemnity (“P&I”) insurance willshould cover any liability under these conventions, subject to applicable policy deductibles, exclusions and limitations.

The United StatesU.S. is not a party to the 1969 Convention or the 1992 Protocol, and thus OPA 90, CERCLA, CWA and other federal and state laws apply in the United StatesU.S. as discussed above. In other jurisdictions where the 1969 Convention has

8

The International Convention on Civil Liability for Bunker Oil Pollution Damage, 2001, was adopted to ensure that adequate, prompt and effective compensation is available to persons who suffer damage caused by spills of oil when used as fuel by vessels. The convention applies to damage caused to the territory, including the territorial sea, and in the EEZs, of the countries that are party to it. Although the United StatesU.S. has not ratified this convention, U.S.-flag vessels operating internationally would beare subject to it ifwhen they sail within the territoriesterritorial waters of those countries that have implemented its provisions. The Company believes that its vessels comply with these requirements.

The National Invasive Species Act (“NISA”) was enacted in the United StatesU.S. in 1996 in response to growing reports of harmful organisms being released into U.S. waters through ballast water taken on by vesselsreceived in foreign ports. The USCG adopted regulations under NISA that impose mandatory ballast water management practices for all vessels equipped with ballast water tanks entering U.S. waters. All new vessels constructed on or after December 1, 2013, regardless of ballast water capacity, must comply with these requirements on delivery from the shipyard absent an extension from the USCG. For non-exempt vessels, ballast water treatment equipment may be required to be used on the vessel. In response to these requirements, the Company’s ships operating in the United StatesU.S. waters currently use water from U.S. public systems.

The IMO ratified the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships’ Ballast Water and Sediments, otherwise known as the Ballast Water Management Convention (the “BWM Convention”), which entered into force oneffective September 8, 2017. Under the BWM Convention, all ships engaged in international trafficvoyages are required to manage their ballast water and sediments under a ship-specific ballast water management plan. The United StatesU.S. is not a party to the BWM Convention, but U.S. flagged vessels that undertake international voyages may have to install an IMOa USCG/EPA approved ballast water treatment system (“BWTS”) or use one of the other management options under the USCG/EPA ballast water management rules and the BWM Convention to achieve compliance. In response to these requirements, theThe Company currently uses a BWM Convention-compliant ballast water management method of chemical disinfectantinstalls BWTS on its vessels operating outsideas required by the United States.

The Endangered Species Act, related regulations and comparable state laws protect species threatened with possible extinction. Protection may include restrictions on the speed of vessels in certain ocean waters and may require the Company to change the routes of vessels during particular periods.

The Clean Air Act (as amended, the “CAA”) requires the EPA to promulgate standards applicable to emissions of volatile organic compounds and othervarious air contaminants. The CAA also requires states to submit State Implementation Plans (“SIPs”), which are designed to attain national health-based air quality standards throughout the United States,U.S., including major metropolitan and/orand industrial areas. Several SIPs regulate emissions resulting from vessel loading and unloading operations by requiring the installation of vapor control equipment. The EPA and some U.S. states have each proposed more stringent regulations of air emissions from propulsion and auxiliary engines on oceangoing vessels.

MARPOL also addresses air emissions, including emissions of sulfur and nitrous oxide (“NOx”), from vessels, including a requirement to use low sulfur fuels worldwide in both auxiliary and main propulsion diesel engines on vessels. VesselsSince January 1, 2020, vessels worldwide are currentlyhave been required to use fuel with a sulfur content no greater than 3.5%0.5%, which is a reduction from the IMO decided in October 2016 to reduce to 0.5% beginning in January 2020. As a resultprior limit of this reduction, fuel costs for vessel operators could rise dramatically beginning in 2020, which could have a material adverse effect on the Company’s business, financial position, results of operations, cash flows and growth prospects.3.5%. MARPOL also imposes NOx emissions standards on installed marine diesel engines of over 130 kW output power other than those used solely for emergency purposes irrespective of the tonnage of the vessel into which such an engine is installed. Different levels, or Tiers, of control apply based on the vessel’s construction date. Within any particular Tier, theThe actual NOx limit is determined fromby a variety of factors, including the engine’svessel’s construction date, the rated speed on a sliding scale based onof the vessel’s engine, revolutions per minute. The Tier III controls apply only toand the specified vessels while operatingarea in an Emission Control Area (“ECA”), as discussed below, established to further limit NOx emissions. The Tier II controls apply to vessels operating in areas outside of ECAs.

More stringent sulfur and NOx requirements apply in certain designated ECAs.Emission Control Areas (“ECAs”). There are currently four ECAs worldwide: the Baltic Sea ECA, North Sea ECA, North American ECA, and U.S. Caribbean ECA. As of January 1, 2015, vessels operating in an ECA must burn fuel with a sulfur content no greater than 0.1%. Further, marine diesel engines on vessels constructed on or after January 1, 2016 that are operated in an ECA must meet the stringent NOx standards described above.

The Company’s operations occasionally generate and require the transportation, treatment and disposal of both hazardous and non-hazardous solid wastes that are subject in the United StatesU.S. to the requirements of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”) or comparable U.S. state, local or foreign requirements. From time to time the Company arranges for the disposal

9

MARPOL also governs the discharge of garbage from ships. MARPOL defines certain sea areas, such as the “wider Caribbean region” as “special areas” requiring a higher level of protection than other areas of the sea.

Various international conventions and federal, state and local laws and regulations have been considered or implemented to address the environmental effects of emissions of greenhouse gases, such as carbon dioxide and methane. The U.S. Congress has considered, but not adopted, legislation designed to reduce emission of greenhouse gases. At various United Nations climate change conferences over the past few decades, various countries have agreed to specific international accords or protocols to establish binding limitations on greenhouse gas emissions have been proposed.emissions. In December 1997, the Kyoto Protocol was adopted pursuant to which member parties agreed to implement national programs to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases. At the 2015 United Nations climate change conference in Paris, various countries adopted the Paris Agreement, which seeks to reduce emissions in an effort to slow global warming, was adopted.warming. The U.S. signed the Paris Agreement was signed by the United States in 2016 but in August 2017, the U.S. State Department officially informed the United Nations of the United States’ intent to withdraw.and, after withdrawing from it for a short period, remains a signatory thereto. The Paris Agreement does not specifically mention shipping.

The IMO has announced its intention to develop limits on greenhouse gases from international shipping and is working on proposed mandatory technical and operational measures to achieve these limits. The first step toward this goal occurred in October 2016, when the IMO adopted a system for collecting data on ships’ fuel-oil consumption, which will be mandatory and apply globally.

For operation within the European Commission proposed legislationUnion (“E.U.”), the Company’s vessels need to meet the E.U. Ship Recycling Regulation (E.U. SRR) that requires survey and established a strategy for progressively integrating maritime emissions into the E.U.’s policy for reducing domestic greenhouse emissions. Asrecord of January 1, 2015, E.U. Member States haveInventory of Hazardous Materials (IHM). The Company’s fleet is being impacted by changes to ensure that ships in the Baltic, the North SeaMARPOL and the English ChannelInternational Code for the Construction and Equipment of Ships carrying Dangerous Chemicals in Bulk (IBC Code). These changes limit the number of Chemical NLS cargoes that the Company’s vessels can carry as certain cargoes traditionally categorized as Pollution Only are using fuels with a sulfur content of no more than 0.10%. In addition, the European Parliamentnow categorized as Safety or Toxic and E.U. Council have adopted a series of regulations beginning with Regulation 2015/757, which became effective on July 1, 2015,require additional systems, segregations in place that establish a system for monitoring, reporting and verifying emissions from vessels of 5,000 or more gross tons calling at E.U. ports. The first reporting period began on January 1, 2018.

The Company manages exposure to losses from the above-described laws through its development of appropriate risk management programs, including compliance programs, safety management systems and insurance programs. Although the Company believes these programs mitigate its legal risk, there can be no assurance that anythese programs will be able to prevent all infractions, nor can the Company provide assurances that future regulations or requirements or any discharge or emission of pollutants by the Company will not have a material adverse effect on its business, financial position, results of operations, cash flows or growth prospects.

The USCG, the IMO, states and local ports continue to adopt heightened security procedures relatingrelated to ports and vessels.

To implement certain portions of the U.S. Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (“MTSA”) was signed into law. To implement certain portions of MTSA,, in July 2003, the USCG issued regulations requiring the implementation of certain security requirements aboard vessels operating in waters subject to the jurisdiction of the United States.U.S. Similarly, in December 2002, the IMO adopted amendments to SOLAS, known as the International Ship and Port Facility Security Code (the “ISPS Code”), creating a new chapter dealing specifically with maritime security. The chapter came into effect in July 2004 and imposes various detailed security obligations on vessels and port authorities. AmongIncluded in the various requirements under MTSA and/or the ISPS Code are:are the following: