SIRE 2.0 in 2026: what the new Human Factor pillar concretely changes for your vetting preparations

SIRE vetting is no longer what it used to be.

For years, preparing for a SIRE inspection relied on a well-established documentary logic: ensuring certificates were up-to-date, procedures were displayed, logs were complete, and the crew knew how to answer the OCIMF inspector's recurring questions. A good SIRE 1.0 inspection was 80% rigorous documentation and 20% presentation.

SIRE 2.0 partially reverses this equation. And the pillar that most radically changes the nature of the inspection — the one that most surprises shipowners who haven't yet adapted their preparation — is called the Human Factor.

What SIRE 2.0 Structurally Changes

Before delving specifically into the Human Factor, let's review what's changing in SIRE 2.0 overall.

The digital format. The inspector works on a tablet. Questions are asked dynamically — meaning the answer to one question determines the subsequent questions. There is no longer a fixed and predictable list of 500 questions that your superintendent can review with the crew the day before. The inspection is adaptive and non-linear.

The number of questions. A SIRE 2.0 inspection can generate between 200 and 400 questions depending on the vessel's profile and the crew's answers. The dynamic nature means that a partial answer or hesitation can trigger a series of in-depth follow-up questions.

Transparency of results. SIRE 2.0 reports are more detailed, more easily comparable between vessels, and more quickly accessible to charterers via the OCIMF SIRE platform. A poor report spreads quickly.

The Human Factor as a full-fledged pillar. This is the most significant new feature. SIRE 2.0 introduces a chapter dedicated to the human element, which no longer just evaluates what procedures state — but what people actually do, understand, and feel onboard.

The Human Factor Pillar: What the Inspector Truly Evaluates

The Human Factor in SIRE 2.0 covers six main areas. Each modifies vetting preparation in a specific way.

1. Onboard safety culture

The inspector assesses whether safety is a lived value or a displayed procedure. They do this through direct questions to crew members — not to the captain, not to the chief officer. To the quartermaster. To the bosun. To the second engineer.

What they look for: Does the crew know the near-miss reporting procedures? Do they actually use them? How many near-misses have been reported this month? If the answer is zero, is it because there haven't been any — or because no one is reporting them?

What changes in preparation: Onboard training can no longer be limited to procedures. It must include reporting exercises, real discussions about recent near-misses, and a culture where reporting is not perceived as a fault.

2. Fatigue management

SIRE 2.0 goes far beyond checking watchkeeping records. The inspector assesses whether the crew understands the risks associated with fatigue, whether real mechanisms are in place to report it, and whether watch schedules reflect operational reality — not just what is written in the record.

What they are looking for: Inconsistencies between recorded hours and actual operations (a complex port entry performed by an officer whose record indicates 8 hours of rest in the preceding 12 hours — is that credible?). The quality of individual declarations regarding experienced fatigue.

What changes in preparation: Work and rest hour records must not only comply but also be consistent with the logbook and actual operations. Any inconsistency, even minor, will lead to a series of in-depth questions.

3. Bridge Resource Management (BRM) and Engine Resource Management (ERM)

The inspector observes — and questions — how bridge and engine room teams work together. Not the written procedure: the actual practice.

What they are looking for: How are watch briefings conducted? Does the second officer feel free to question a master's decision? How is information transmitted between watches? Is the use of navigation tools active or passive?

What changes in preparation: BRM/ERM exercises can no longer be annual theoretical training sessions. The inspector looks for evidence that these practices are integrated into daily onboard life — recent briefing reports, examples of documented constructive questioning, active use of communication checklists.

4. Individual operational competence

SIRE 2.0 introduces targeted competency assessments. The inspector may ask an officer to demonstrate a procedure — not describe it, but demonstrate it. They may present emergency scenarios and assess the quality of the response.

What they are looking for: Does the officer truly know the procedure — or do they just know where it's written? The difference is fundamental in a real emergency.

What changes in preparation: Reviewing procedures is no longer enough. Application exercises — real scenarios, real demonstrations — must be part of regular preparation.

5. Onboard and company communication

The inspector assesses the quality of communication channels between ship and shore, and within the crew. They look for evidence that information flows – that feedback is escalated, and that instructions from the office are understood, not just received.

What they look for: DPA visit reports, feedback on company circulars, and procedures for communicating lessons learned. The recency and authenticity of these documents.

6. Stress and Well-being Management Onboard

New for many shipowners: the SIRE 2.0 inspector may address crew well-being. This includes internet access, accommodation quality, and support mechanisms for personal difficulties. This is not a subjective assessment — it's an evaluation of the existence and accessibility of resources.

What traditional preparation no longer covers

This is the gap that most shipowners have not yet closed.

SIRE 1.0 preparation was essentially documentary and procedural. Certificates were checked, procedures were reviewed with the crew, and registers were ensured to be up-to-date. An experienced superintendent could prepare a vessel in 3 to 5 days with a well-designed checklist.

SIRE 2.0 adds a behavioral and cultural dimension that a checklist alone cannot cover. The inspector no longer just seeks to verify that procedures exist — they seek to verify that they are actively implemented.

This means that preparation must now cover two distinct layers.

The documentary layer — unchanged in principle, but more demanding in its consistency. Rest hour records must be consistent with operations. Reported near-misses must be real and recent. Briefing reports must exist and be dated. BRM/ERM training must be documented with participants and content.

The behavioral layer — entirely new in its formal requirements. The crew must be prepared not only to answer questions — but to demonstrate behaviors. The bosun must be able to explain the near-miss system without hesitation. The second officer must be able to describe a recent example where they used a BRM tool. The chief engineer must be able to cite the latest feedback received from the office.

Documentation as a foundation: whatOptivalue.ai changes for DPA teams

The Human Factor pillar does not reduce the importance of documentation — it increases the requirements for consistency and accessibility.

A SIRE 2.0 inspector who detects an inconsistency between a rest hour record and the logbook will investigate further. They will request the company's fatigue management procedures. They will cross-reference with declared operations. They will request the reports from the latest DPA visits. If your superintendent takes 20 minutes to find these documents — or if the version they find does not match the onboard version — that's a discrepancy.

For DPA teams managing multiple vessels and simultaneously preparing for SIRE, PSC, and charter party vettings, managing compliance documentation is a growing challenge.

Optivalue.ai centralizes all fleet documentation — SMS (Safety Management System), procedures, certifications, previous inspection reports, DPA reports, company circulars — and allows you to answer vetting questionnaires in minutes by directly leveraging this documentation database. Each answer is sourced: document, section, last revision date.

The instance is private and dedicated. Your safety procedures, accident logs, and inspection reports remain within your perimeter. This is a non-negotiable requirement in the maritime sector.

The SIRE 2.0 Human Factor Preparation Checklist

📎 For use during pre-inspection, 4 to 6 weeks before vetting

Documentation to verify

• [ ] Work and rest hour records — consistency with logbook over the last 3 months
• [ ] Near-miss and safety observation log — recent entries (< 30 days) and closure of corrective actions
• [ ] Watch briefing reports (bridge and engine room) — dated, signed, consistent with operations
• [ ] BRM/ERM drill log — date, participants, scenario, lessons learned
• [ ] Fatigue management procedure — current version, consistent with company policy
• [ ] Reports from last DPA visits — open and closed actions
• [ ] Latest lessons learned received from the office — disseminated, signed by crew
• [ ] Individual training records — up-to-date for each crew member
• [ ] Previous SIRE reports — corrective actions addressed and documented

Crew preparation to be conducted

• [ ] General SIRE 2.0 briefing — explain the dynamic format and the Human Factor pillar
• [ ] Near-miss scenario drill — simulation of reporting, from completion to closure
• [ ] BRM review with watch officers — emergency communication scenario, constructive self-assessment
• [ ] Random individual questions — each officer able to cite a recent near-miss and a lesson learned
• [ ] Verification of internet access and well-being resources — functional and known to the crew

What the best-prepared shipowners have understood

Companies that achieve the best SIRE 2.0 results do not prepare their vessels for inspection. They prepare them to operate in a way that naturally passes inspection.

The difference is fundamental. Preparation focused on "passing the inspection" produces crews who know how to answer questions. Preparation focused on "operating correctly" produces crews who have real-life examples to share, integrated BRM practices, and a vibrant near-miss culture.

The SIRE 2.0 inspector notices the difference within five minutes. The vessel that has rehearsed answers and the vessel that lives by the procedures do not give the same impression — and do not receive the same report.

SIRE 2.0 is more demanding. It is also fairer: it rewards companies that genuinely invest in onboard safety, not just in safety documentation.

**Optivalue.ai enables DPA teams to prepare SIRE vetting questionnaires by directly leveraging fleet documentation — SMS, certifications, inspection reports, company circulars. Dedicated private instance, hosted in France, section-by-section sourced answers.** Request a personalized demo →

‍