Addressing the M/V Dali Incident:
Infrastructure, Trade and the Future of U.S. Maritime Policy
By Jamie Rock
On March 26, 2024, the M/V Dali, a massive Neopanamax (the terms for the size limits for ships travelling through the Panama Canal, 1201 ft. long and 168 ft. wide) container ship, collided with the Francis Scott Key Bridge, an incident that highlights the growing tension between U.S. maritime infrastructure and modern shipping practices. This accident is poised to create ripple effects across infrastructure, trade regulations, and even maritime law, especially in terms of the Merchant Marine Act of 1920 (the Jones Act).
The collision serves as a stark reminder that the United States, despite being a maritime nation, has failed to adapt its infrastructure to meet the demands of larger vessels and changing trade patterns. The incident also raises a fundamental question; can the U.S. legislate the necessary infrastructure changes to prevent future disasters while addressing the needs of global trade partners?
Inside the U.S. Maritime Sector
The United States is a unique maritime nation. While it has an extensive coastline, the use of its shores for interstate trade has been limited. Instead, the U.S. relies heavily on trucks and railways to move most imported cargo from major ports to inland hubs. This approach has led to a situation in which the nation’s maritime infrastructure, particularly its ports and waterways, has not evolved at the same pace as global shipping. In fact, the U.S. Merchant Marine has been in decline since the 1980s, and there has been a marked lack of investment in maritime infrastructure (bridges, tunnels, terminals). As a result, many U.S. ports are difficult to access, and navigating these ports often requires specialized pilotage and tugboat assistance, especially given the increasing size of modern vessels.
The M/V Dali incident is not just an isolated event ( Sunshine Skyway, Jiujiang Bridge, Bay Bridge, Eggners Bridge) ; it is part of a broader pattern of challenges in the U.S. maritime industry.
The Key Bridge, which the Dali struck, was designed in the 1970s, at a time when the largest container ships were much smaller. The M/V Sydney Express, which was among the largest ships of its time, measured 225.83 meters (740.9 feet) in length and had a beam of 30.5 meters (100 feet). In contrast, the M/V Dali is a Neopanamax vessel, measuring 299.92 meters (984 feet) in length and 48.2 meters (158 feet) in beam. The Dali’s massive size and draft, combined with the outdated infrastructure, created a perfect storm for an accident. This incident highlights the failure of U.S. ports to keep pace with the size of modern vessels and the global shift toward larger ships to reduce costs and improve efficiency.
Can Regulations Help?
To prevent future incidents like the M/V Dali, the U.S. must take a hard look at its regulations One immediate solution could involve legislating limits on the size of vessels allowed to enter U.S. ports. However, this raises several complications. The size and capabilities of modern vessels are largely driven by global trade demands. Restricting the size of ships that can enter U.S. ports may prompt backlash from international trade partners, especially those who rely on large vessels for cost-effective shipping. Furthermore, enacting such legislation could be a lengthy and contentious process, given the bureaucratic hurdles and the need for international cooperation on trade regulations.
Additionally, the slow pace of infrastructure development must be addressed. The governmental method for updating U.S. infrastructure is notoriously slow, and significant investments are needed to modernize ports, improve navigational channels, and ensure that critical bridges and tunnels can accommodate larger vessels. While the Dali incident calls attention to the urgency of these changes, the process of making those changes will take years, if not decades. In the meantime, the U.S. will need to find ways to balance the needs of its own infrastructure with the demands of global trade.
The Jones Act, which mandates that goods moved by water between U.S. ports must be carried on ships that are built, owned, and operated by U.S. citizens, also plays a role in this equation. The act was designed to protect U.S. maritime interests and ensure national security. The Dali incident may lead to further modification of the Jones Act, especially if future regulations require maximum vessel sizes to protect infrastructure. While changes to the Jones Act could be politically difficult, they may be necessary to enable greater flexibility in U.S. shipping and ensure that U.S. ports are prepared for the future of global trade.
The M/V Dali collision serves as a wake-up call for the U.S. to address its maritime infrastructure regulations. The country must modernize its ports, update its regulations to accommodate larger vessels, and consider potential changes to the Jones Act. While these changes may be difficult and slow to implement, they are crucial for ensuring that the U.S. can remain competitive in global trade while maintaining the safety and security of its maritime infrastructure. Ultimately, the U.S. must find a way to balance the needs of its infrastructure with the realities of modern shipping, from managing the trade deficit to making US flag shipping more abundant thus ensuring that incidents like the M/V Dali become a thing of the past.
“The views expressed in this article are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent the views of the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy, the Maritime Administration, the Department of Transportation or the United States government.”

About the Author
Jamie Rock is currently an Associate Professor at the US Merchant Marine Academy and a reservist with the US Navy currently assigned to 2nd Fleet. He holds a Master Unlimited tonnage, Oceans license with 20 years of sailing experience.