Citation

Material Information

Title:
Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council
Alternate title:
Proceedings of the Marine Safety and Security Council
Alternate title:
Coast Guard proceedings
Alternate title:
Journal of safety & security at sea
Alternate title:
Coast Guard journal of safety & security at sea
Alternate title:
Coast Guard journal of safety at sea
Creator:
United States -- Marine Safety & Security Council
United States -- Department of Homeland Security
United States -- Coast Guard
National Maritime Center (U.S.)
Place of Publication:
[Washington, D.C.]
Arlington, VA
Publisher:
U.S. Dept. of Homeland Security
U.S. Coast Guard, National Maritime Center
Publication Date:
Frequency:
Quarterly
regular
Language:
English
Physical Description:
volumes : illustrations (some color) ; 28 cm

Subjects

Subjects / Keywords:
Merchant marine -- Safety measures -- Periodicals -- United States ( lcsh )
Merchant marine -- Safety measures ( fast )
United States ( fast )
Genre:
Periodicals ( fast )
serial ( sobekcm )
federal government publication ( marcgt )
periodical ( marcgt )
Periodicals ( fast )

Notes

General Note:
Title from cover.
General Note:
"The Coast Guard journal of safety at sea."
Statement of Responsibility:
U.S. Department of Homeland Security ; United States Coast Guard.

Record Information

Source Institution:
University of Florida
Holding Location:
University of Florida
Rights Management:
This item is a work of the U.S. federal government and not subject to copyright pursuant to 17 U.S.C. §105.
Resource Identifier:
53935453 ( OCLC )
2003215831 ( LCCN )
1547-9676 ( ISSN )
ocm53935453
Classification:
VK23 .A26 ( lcc )
614.8/64/05 ( ddc )

Related Items

Preceded by:
Proceedings of the Marine Safety Council

UFDC Membership

Aggregations:
Digital Military Collection

Full Text

PAGE 2

PROCEEDINGSFall 2018 Vol. 75, Number 2 Captain of the Port Authorities 6 The Captain of the Port | A vital authority in service to our nation by CAPT Andrew E. Tucci 10 Taking Charge! | Critical success factors for a captain of the port by CDR Kirsten Trego, CDR Caroline Beckmann, and CDR Justin Jacobs 14 Coast Guard Captain of the Port | A brief history by Larry Brooks 19 The U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary and the COTP | Integration and support of Coast Guard marine safety operations by Barry BergWaterways Management 25 The Coast Guards Waterways Management Program | Past progress, future direction by LCDR William Albright and LCDR Eric Stahl 30 Dynamic Under Keel Clearance Project by LCDR Isaac D. Mahar 33 Ports and Waterways Safety Assessment by Michael Emerson 35 The Coast Guards Marine Transportation System Recovery Program | More than a decade of increasing effectiveness by Joseph Couch and Douglas Campbell 41 Marine Planning | Analyzing requirements before making changes that affect the marine transportation system by Paul Crissy and George Detweiler 48 Rollin on the River | Mitigating environmental and economic impacts during high/low water seasons through government/industry collaboration by LCDR Howard Vacco 52 A Tale of Two Rivers by Matt Lagarde 57 Chicagos Waterway System | Competing demands on Chicagos shared waterways by LT John Ramos 61 Public Safety on the Burning River by LCDR Michael J. Dougherty IM_photo | Shutterstock.com

PAGE 3

Additional Responsibilities 64 Cook Inlet Ice Guidelines | A best practice for stakeholder engagement by LTJG David Parker and CDR Justin Jacobs 69 Captain of the Port | Lessons learned from LCDR Laura Springer 72 Big Events in the Big Apple | Marine events in Sector New York by LT Rebecca Miller 77 Floridas Future in Space Travel | Pioneering Coast Guard support of the commercial space industry by A. Eugene Stratton Editorial Team Samantha L. Quigley Executive Editor Diana Forbes Managing Editor Leslie C. Goodwin Graphic Designer Proceedings is published three times a year in the interest of safety at sea under the auspices of the Marine Safety & Security Council. Special permission for republication, either in whole or in part, except for copyrighted material, is not required, provided credit is given to Proceedings. The articles contained in Proceedings are submitted by diverse public and private interests in the maritime community as a means to promote maritime safety and secu rity. The views expressed by the authors do not necessarily represent those of the U.S. Coast Guard or the Department of Homeland Security or represent ocial policy. Editorial ContactEmail: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil Mail: Commandant (CG-DCO-84) ATTN: Editor, Proceedings Magazine U.S. Coast Guard Stop 7318 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. S.E. Washington, DC 20593-7318Web: www.dco.uscg.mil/proceedings Phone: (202) 372-2316Subscription Requests Proceedings is free and published in March, August, and December each year. Subscriptions: www.dco.uscg.mil/proceedings Graphics USCG and its licensors, unless otherwise indicated. 83 Coast Guard Sectors and Bridge Program Management by Brian DunnOn Deck 4 Assistant Commandants Perspective by Rear Admiral John P. Nadeau 4 Champions Point of View by Rajiv Khandpur 0 Chemical of the Quarter | Understanding Tetrachloroethylene by Hillary Sadoff Nautical Queries 1 Engineering 3 Deck On the Cover: The Brooklyn Bridge and East River comprise just a small part of the Port of New York and New Jersey, which is the third-largest U.S. port and the busiest on the East Coast. The ports cargo volume for 2017 was 6,710,817 TEUs (twentyfoot equivalent units). The captain of the port holds a position of great responsibility, especially when the ports already-heavy load of recreational use of the port waters during events such as Fleet Week or Drop of Light | Shutterstock.com

PAGE 4

4Proceedings Fall 2018The Captain of the Port (COTP) is a critical role for the Coast Guard and the Nation as a unique, broad authority overseeing important aspects of safety and security in the Maritime Trans portation System (MTS). The individuals in this role at different ports across the country are in a position of high visibility Admiral Karl L. Schultz Commandant U.S. Coast GuardThe Marine Safety & Security Council of the United States Coast GuardRear Admiral Steven J. Andersen Judge Advocate General & Chief Counsel Chairman Rear Admiral Melissa Bert Director for Governmental and Public Affairs Member Rear Admiral Thomas G. Allan Assistant Commandant for Member Rear Admiral John P. Nadeau Assistant Commandant for Prevention Policy Member Captain Jennifer F. Williams Director of Inspections and Compliance Member Mr. Jeffrey G. Lantz Director of Commercial Regulations and Standards Member Mr. Michael D. Emerson Director of Marine Transportation Systems Member Rear Admiral Anthony J. Vogt Assistant Commandant for Response Policy Member Ms. Dana S. Tulis Director of Incident Management and Preparedness Policy Member Mr. William R. Grawe Director of National Pollution Funds Center Member Mr. Michael W. Mumbach Executive Secretary Champions Point of View by RAJIV KHANDPU R U.S. Coast Guard Assistant Commandants Perspective by REA R ADMI R AL JOHN P NADEAU Assistant Commandant for Prevention Policy U.S. Coast GuardI am pleased to champion this edition of Proceedings, which highlights cap tain of the port (COTP) authorities and how vital the captain of the port role is to all Coast Guard missions. Sector commanders have a wide range of authorities and responsibilities under federal law, wearing several hats as a captain of the port; federal on-scene coordinator; federal maritime security coordinator; officer in charge, marine inspections (OCMI); and search and res cue mission coordinator. However, of all these authorities, many sector command ers agree with retired VADM Peter V. Neffenger that the COTP authority is the most important, far-reaching, and power ful authority held by a sector commander.

PAGE 5

5Fall 2018 Proceedings and must possess a wide array of qualities. Their actions have far-reaching effect not only for the local region but nationally. They must be leaders who can build coalitions and consensus; have robust knowledge of the governing laws and regulations; must be politically astute; and above all, have a clear understanding of their local port commu nity and stakeholder interests. As might be expected, the Coast Guard sends some of its best and brightest to serve in these positions. The MTS is a dynamic environment with thousands of major vessels transiting in and out of U.S. ports on a daily basis. Americas waterways support a wide range of com peting activities within the marine environment. From extraction, ocean tourism, and marine sanctuaries, the MTS is an open system that supports the interests of a broad community of stakeholders. system, it also presents challenges. The sea, our ports, and all our waterways serve as vectors for multiple threats to our nations safety and security, including terrorist threats; mass migration; and illegal smuggling of drugs, immi grants, and contraband. As the Nations premier multi-mission maritime agency, the Coast Guard offers enduring value. It is the only branch of the U.S. Armed Forces within the Depart ment of Homeland Security and is uniquely positioned to secure our ports, protect the MTS, and safeguard Ameri cas national and economic security. The following articles demonstrate the diversity of issues that our COTPs and service deal with on a daily basis and illustrate the tremendous work and dedication of the women and men of the U.S. Coast Guard. I hope you enjoy them! District commanders, sector commanders, and com manding officers of marine safety units designated as COTPs often issue captain of the port ordersa tool available to provide them with operational controls over an emergent situation posing safety, security, or environmental risks to the COTPs area of responsibil ity. A COTP may order a vessel to anchor to await repair of critical equipment, for example, or direct a shoreside facility to take certain actions regarding the handling of dangerous cargo. These orders are issued under one of two statutes: the Ports and Waterways Safety Act, or the Magnuson Act. The Coast Guards marine safety and prevention mis in the past several years. Prior to sectorization, the tion between COTP and OCMI missions and authorities. The creation of sectors as well as new divisions for plan ning, waterways management, and incident management divided captain of the port authorities among multiple divisions and departments. This edition includes articles from various Coast Guard headquarters program ele ments focusing on the excellent work done across disci plines to support the COTP mission, including various success stories, best practices, and case studies from While we are proud to share such COTP authority achievements, there is still work to be done to elevate the status of the waterways management program as it endeavors to better support the USCG prevention mis ways management billet gaps at sectors, right-sizing the billet grades, assigning the right people to the right jobs, professionals. I would like to take this opportunity to extend thanks to my staff for their help in coordinating this edition, and to all the authors who have taken the time to contribute articles. Your efforts were instrumental to highlighting captain of the port authority accomplishments while also conveying whats at stake as we progress forward.

PAGE 6

6Proceedings Fall 2018 What person or organization could possibly monitor, manage, and control all of these elements? While Coast Guard captains of the port are not responsible for over all port governance, they do, however, have a vital role in how ports operate in both steady-state and crisis situ ations. The title captain of the port commands great respect within the Coast Guard and across the maritime indus try. The responsibilities of a captain of the port (COTP) literally cover the waterfront and include extraordinary authority over vessels, facilities, cargo operations, and the people working on vessels and the waterfront. Wise use of these authorities can have a strong impact on ports as well as regional and even national challenges. Captain of the port regulations and responsibilities are found in a number of locations, including 33 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Part 6 and 33 CFR Part 160. A port today is a delightful and diversesome would say motleycollection of agents, brokers, shippers, labor groups, contractors, government description not to mention the boats, barges, ships, military and emergency vessels, docks, piers, bridges, railroads, pipelines, and other infrastructure. Add to the mix some residences, non-maritime businesses, parks, and public access areas, and stir well. Ports have interests as varied as their elements. They are vital links in global commerce and a driver of busi nesses. They serve strategic military and energy functions and recreational vessels. They are a place of recreation for coastal residents and transportation for local commuters, while boasting fragile marine habitats and environmental resources. The Captain of the PortA vital authority in service to our nationby C AP T AND R EW E TU CC I Former Sector Commander Coast Guard Sector Long Island SoundCaptain of the Port Authorities The busiest container port in the United States, the Port of Los Angeles, adjoins the separate Port of Long Beach. Together, these two port complexes cover nearly 4,300acres of land and water along 43miles of waterfront. Trekandshoot | Shutterstock.com

PAGE 7

7Fall 2018 Proceedings While a full examination of all of these regulations is beyond the scope of this article, allow me to point out the nature of this authority. To take just one example, 33 CFR 160.111 states that a COTP may order a vessel to operate or anchor in the manner directed when: (a) the COTP has reasonable cause to believe that the vessel is not in compliance with any regulation, law, or treaty. Other regulations allow the captain of the port to direct cargo operations, prohibit vessels from operating, and inspect waterfront facilities. The simplicity of these regulations reveals their power. While my legal colleagues will properly point to vari ous implicit and explicit limitations, the fact remains that the American people have granted captains of the port an almost astonishing degree of authority over maritime operations. That being the case, how has the Coast Guard man aged to retain and exercise COTP authority over time? The short answer is that we have exercised that authority with considerable restraint, and with due regard to all stakeholders, while never hesitating to employ it when warranted and needed to achieve clear objectives. A Historic PerspectiveA little historical context can help us understand this unique authority. Captain of the port authority can be traced to the Espi onage Act, passed by Congress on June 15, 1917, shortly after our entry into World War I. Less than a year earlier, destroyed the munitions facility on Black Toms Island in New Jersey. Authorities correctly suspected German saboteurs. The act granted the president delegated to the Coast Guardthe authority to control ports, control the movements of vessels, establish anchorages and restricted areas, and supervise the handling and stor age of explosive cargos. Commodore Ellsworth P. Bertholf appointed Captain Godfrey L. Carden in New York the first Coast Guard captain of the port, with other Coast Guard per sonnel assuming that same title in nine other major port areas. Captain Cardens command became the single-largest Coast Guard command in the war, including over 1,400 personnel, four U.S. Army Corps of Engineers tugs, and five cutters. He was therefore able to establish a unity of effort with the objective of maintaining safety and security in the port. Some COTP-related authorities and activities ended with the armistice, but oth ers continued, and in the lead-up to World War II, the Coast Guard resumed many of its previous port security functions. Once again, the scope of author ity granted to COTPs was impressive. The captain of the port shall have the right of entry to waterfront facili ties at all times. The captain of the port may cause to be inspected and searched at any time, any waterfront facil ity or any person or package thereon 1 With the Cold War concerns of the 1950s came the Magnuson Act and an executive order by President Harry S. Truman. Later the Port and Waterways Safety Act, the Port and Tanker Safety Act, and the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 expanded upon or leveraged COTP authori ties. After the 9/11 attacks, Congress passed the Maritime The Coast Guard and local law enforcement sign an agreement to improve safety and security in and around Oak Blus Harbor, Massachusetts. The agreement, signed by Oak Blus Chief of Police ErikG. Blake, left, and CAPT Raymond J. Perry, the captain of the port for southeastern New England, provides the Oak Blus Police Department federal authority to enforce Coast Guard safety and security zones. Coast Guard photo Alexander Hamilton Coast Guard Historians Oce

PAGE 8

8Proceedings Fall 2018 Transportation Security Act, which built upon long-standing captain of the port authorities.Principles of Coast Guard OperationsCoast Guard captains of the port have been exercising their authority since 1917. The principles that guide all Coast Guard opera days of our service. The principles of Coast Guard operations, as described in Coast Guard Publication 1, are instructive as to how we have exercised this authority over time as well as how we should continue to do so. These principles apply to all Coast Guard operations, not just those associated with captains of the port. They are derived from Alexander Hamiltons Let cers of Revenue Cutters, dated June 4, 1791: The principle of clear objective is particu larly important and speaks to the purpose of COTP authorities. Going back to 1917, the objective was to keep ports functioning by enabling the Coast Guard to keep them safe from accident and secure from sabotage. One way to look at this is that captains of the port of the port as a whole, rather than they would to benefit any individual vessel or facility operator. Our regulations make this clear in sev eral locations. For example, 33 CFR 160.109 states that captains of the port may take cer tain actions To prevent damage to, or the destruction of, any bridge or other structure in the United States Other regulations cite conditions that are unsafe, those pos ing a threat to the marine environment, or on the bridge. While in some cases captains of the port achieve these objectives by issuing direction cases they serve as honest brokers to resolve Clear Objective COTPs exercise their authority to address situations that might threaten people, the environment, and port infra structure, as well as to promote safe, secure, and environ mentally sound port operations. On-Scene Initiative Captains of the port do not need to seek permission from higher authority to issue orders, and Coast Guard administrative procedures are streamlined to avoid delays. Equally important, captains of the port can lift restrictions with equal speed as soon as conditions allow. Eective Presence Our operational presence in port areas means that we are aware of baseline maritime activity and risks before an event, and therefore are able to make informed decisions when incidents occur. Specic COTP actions, like safety zones, are generally enforced via on-scene Coast Guard personnel. This means COTP orders are eective and meaningful. Managed Risk A captain of the ports job is not to eliminate risk, but to manage it to an acceptable level. Accepting a certain degree of risk in consultation with stakeholders allows commerce to proceed while taking prudent measures to limit the overall potential consequences of a situation. Unity of Eort COTP actions such as safety and security zones or vessel trac systems help coordinate actions by various private and public sector organizations into a unity of eort that serves the port community as a whole. COTP involvement in forums such as harbor safety committees and area maritime security committees promotes a unity of eort in steady-state situations and lays the groundwork for collec tive action in contingencies. Flexibility The broad nature of COTP authority allows great exibility in addressing risk. Captains of the port have exibility in the geographic scope of an order (e.g., the size of a safety zone), the timing (e.g., daylight transit only), and the specic measures they may take or require of a vessel or facility operator. Another example of this exibility is COTP approval of facility security plans, which are performancebased plans customized for individual port facilities. Restraint The Coast Guard recognizes that most vessel and facility operators are responsible, professional, and share the Coast Guards interest in a safe and timely resolution to an incident. Highly prescriptive measures are rarely needed. Cooperation with operators helps ensure that the COTP takes only those measures necessary to achieve the desired objective. Consultation with stakeholders promotes transparency and reminds us that we serve the public as a whole. Captain of the port actions are not punitive in nature, but intended only to address specic safety, secu rity, and environmental hazards.

PAGE 9

9Fall 2018 Proceedings procedures. This is especially true in contingency pre paredness and in addressing risks associated with new or novel operations in the port. While individual vessel or facility operators may understandably grumble a bit about by working toward the objective of a safe, secure port. As explained on page 8, the principle of clear objec tive demonstrates the purpose and driver behind COTP actions. Other principles help inform how the Coast Guard uses its authority. The table provides some exam ples. These principles help explain how the Coast Guard has served our nation so well for so many years.The Future of Captain of the Port AuthorityCoast Guard captains of the port have served our nation for over a century, and the need for this authorityand the Coast Guard crews who put it into actionwill con tinue, as well. As our economy and coastal population grow, more commerce must pass through a limited num ber of ports in any given time. Just-in-time manufac performance and high safety, security, and environmental standards as well as rapid, organized recovery from any incident. These are all areas where prudent use of COTP authorities will play a role. One new challenge is the increased use of cyber tech nology in ports and the maritime industry. Some U.S. ports have already seen cyber incidents impact port oper ations. More will come, and captains of the port will use their authorities and work with stakeholders and experts to address these threats. Whether risks come in the form of accidents, natural disasters, old-school threats, or cutting-edge technology, the ever-present need to quickly and decisively resolve safety, security, and environmental threats to port com munities tells us that COTP authorities will continue to serve the nation. About the author: CAPT Tucci is the past sector commander and captain of the port for Coast Guard Sector Long Island Sound. References: U.S. Coast Guard historians website at http://www.history.uscg.mil This Is the Coast Guard, Kaplan & Hunt, 1972, Cornell Maritime Press Inc., Cam bridge, MD. Endnote :1. The Captain of the Port is responsible for establishing and enforcing safety zones when necessary, as with the Kilauea volcano eruption that began May 3, 2018. The eruption was such a prolonged event the Coast Guard released public service announcements, one of which showed an image similar to the one here, and read Please Kokua Respect the Safety Zone. If you take a lava boat tour ensure your operator has a Coast Guard-issued mariner credential and a permit from Hawaii DLNR [Department of Land and Natural Resources]! These operators are licensed. Their vessels are inspected and meet federal safety guidelines. USGS Hawaiian Volcano Observatory photo

PAGE 10

10Proceedings Fall 2018Taking Charge!Critical success factors for a captain of the portby C D R KI R S T EN TR EGO Sector Delaware Bay U.S. Coast Guard C D R CA R OLINE BE CK MANN Marine Safety Unit Port Arthur U.S. Coast Guard The position of the captain of the port (COTP) with far-reaching federal authoritiesthe power to control vessels, facilities, activities, and people on Americas navigable waterways in order to safeguard the marine transportation system. Given the complex nature of this role, and the significant consequences of any actions the captain of the port may take, it is imperative they possess certain leadership, knowledge, and decisionmaking skills to be effective. This article explores some critical factors that can foster their success. Due to Coast Guard organizational structure changes the captain of the port is typically the sector commander. on-scene coordinator; federal maritime security coordina tor; and search and rescue mission coordinator. ignated as a captain of the port come from a variety of professional backgrounds, yet all show a commonality of factors that make them successful. The success factors discussed in this article stem from a study the authors conducted that included interviewing numerous current and retired captains of the port from a geographically diverse cross-section of sectors. 1 Success Factor 1: Relationship BuildingIt is vital that captains of the port build strong relationships with port partners early in their tours. These relationships will be extremely helpful when emergent situations require teamwork, communication, and flexibility. COTPs must also understand that the motivations and goals of their port partners will be as varied as the interests that they represent. Businesses want their operations to continue at all costs, certain stakeholders believe that environmental concerns trump all others, and still others will promote their niche interests and concerns. The COTP must de-conflict the shared use of the waterways and C D R JUS T IN JA C O B S Prevention Department Head Sector Anchorage U.S. Coast GuardCoast Guard Captain of the Port Tony Hahn (center) updates port conditions during a press brieng at the Robstown Incident Command Post outside Corpus Christi, Texas, in August 2017. Other participants are (from left) Texas General Land Oce Area Manager Jay Veselka, Corpus Christi Port Commission Chief Operations Ocer Sean Strawbridge, and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Resident Engineer Andrew Smith. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 2ndClass CoryJ. Mendenhall

PAGE 11

11Fall 2018 Proceedings Success Factor 2: Political Acumen and AwarenessCaptains of the port must be aware of several important points: The COTP position holds a great deal of federal authority. Their position grants them substantial power and Their actions will have very real consequences that are far-reaching and could potentially affect the region, state, or nation. They are always in the public eye. These points are important to keep in mind when issuing a captain of the port order or closing a waterway, either of which may have direct, unforeseen economic and environmental impacts on waterway users. On the other hand, a failure to take timely action on an emergent situation could result in a safety, security, or environmen tal incident. Either scenario will affect the public. This is important to consider in a hyper-connected society, where individuals can post actions by the captain of the port, as well as their opinions of those actions, to social media and news websites within minutes. strike a balance between safety, security, environmental protection, and the promotion of commerce. Open and frequent communications with port stake holders and waterway users is vital to success. This inter action can occur in traditional settings such as harbor safety committees, area maritime security committees, and incident command system port-wide exercises. Com munications can also be forged through involvement in less formal venues like rotary clubs, propeller clubs, other private organizations, Chambers of Commerce, industry events, and social events. Exercising captain of the port authority is all about managing risk. Equally critical is how that risk mitiga tion is communicated to partners so they understand the why, what, and how of any action being taken. Port part ners are more willing to accept bad news when a COTP is communicating with them, especially when that COTP demonstrates they are listening to their concerns and ensuring they are heard. If a captain of the port is not willing to listen to their stakeholders, then trust and com munication breaks down and the captain of the port may lose credibility. Coast Guard crewmembers enforce a safety zone as the CMA CGM Theodore Roosevelt, a 1,200-foot container ship on its maiden voyage to the United States, passes under the recently elevated Bayonne Bridge in September 2017. The bridge connects Bayonne, New Jersey to Staten Island, New York. Captain of the port duties include ensuring the safety of the marine transportation system. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 1stClass Sabrina Clarke

PAGE 12

12Proceedings Fall 2018 the entire port for any number of rea sons. These actions have the potential to disrupt the normal operations of the port and create unforeseen ripple effects. Many of the nations ports generate millionsor even billions of dollars in economic activity every day. Closing a port for even a single day can have farreaching economic impacts that can affect businesses and the national economy. A COTPs actions must take into account all of the possible impacts. Captain of the port authorities should be exercised sparingly and judiciously. Rather than using the full weight of the authority from the out set, it is recommended that they start with the lowest possible authority/enforcement action to gain compliance where lesser measures are appropriate. Additionally, the public assumes the Coast Guard has the authority to take action on a variety of issues when, in fact, it does not. Captains of the port are cautioned against taking action when they may not have jurisdiction or authority to do so.Success Factor 4: Delegation of AuthorityThe complexity of leading a Coast Guard sector, includ ing exercising COTP authority, requires a strong, trusting Another important consideration is the connection of the private sector and the public to political powers in the region. Disgruntled port partners and stakeholders may quickly call politicians and congressional representatives to vent their frustration with the local COTP. Decisions made with the informed consent of the port partners and stakeholders can diminish the potential for bad press and negative political involvement. Success Factor 3: Knowing the Consequences of ActionsCaptains of the port have many tools at their disposal to exercise risk management within their respec tive ports. Past experience will help a COTP decide how to manage risk within a port, but the COTP must understand the unique nature of each port and determine what risk management looks like in that area of responsibility for that particular situation. A successful COTP must develop a process that mitigates risk and simultaneously ensures the safety, security, environmental pro Economic impacts and potential ripple effects resulting from a cap tain of the port order must also be considered. A captain of the port can direct the movement of any vessel, order a vessel or facility to cease cargo operations, bar a ves sel from entering or departing port, terminate operations at regulated facilities, close a waterway, or close During the response to a collision of two vessels in the Houston Ship Channel in March 2015, CAPTBrian Penoyer, Sector Houston/Galveston captain of the port, briefs Congressman Gene Greene (far left corner) on port restrictions. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 3rdClass DustinR. Williams Seaman Kevin King keeps an eye on the electronic chart system as his 45-foot response boat-medium passes a buoy in the Tampa Bay area in September 2017. The Coast Guard in St.Petersburg spent the day evaluating the condition of the ports in the Tampa area in order to reopen the port to trac after Hurricane Irma. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 3rdClass Steve Strohmaier

PAGE 13

13Fall 2018 Proceedings relationship with the deputy sector commander and the delegation of those responsibilities that improve mander/COTP must also rely on department heads to cover multiple meetings within the port. However, port stakeholders could perceive a decision ticular group or stakeholder is unimportant. A successful captain of the port will navigate port politics by creat ing strong relationships with port partners and trusting when necessary. A sector commander/COTP can become a choke point if they choose not to delegate responsibili ties and authorities, which becomes very important to the effective execution of daily Coast Guard missions. That said, knowing when not to delegate is even more impor tant. For example, a COTP must not delegate authority for the issuance of captain of the port orders. In conclusion, to be successful, COTPs must under stand their authorities and their proper applications. They must understand the various missions within their respective areas of responsibility and routinely check up strong relationships with port partners, waterway users, the public, and their representatives in local government. Communication is paramount, allowing a COTP to assess situations from multiple perspectives before making a decision. Captains of the port must learn how to listen to all sides of an issue, then move forward boldly with their authorities. A successful captain of the port leads Coast Guard members and industry partners to ensure the safety and security of the port. About the authors: tor Delaware Bay in Philadelphia, where she oversees Reserve forces to execute all Coast Guard missions in the eastern Pennsylvania, southern New Jersey, and Delaware region. In her civilian capacity, CDR Trego promotes oil pollution research and technology development among the federal agencies. Marine Safety Unit Port Arthur, Texas, overseeing Reserve forces in the southeastern part of the state. Prior to that, she was the emergency pre CDR Justin Jacobs is the head of the prevention department at Sector Anchorage, Alaska. He has served in the Coast Guard for 17 years in a variety of national and international assignments in the marine safety American Military University, and another in transportation policy, operations, and logistics from George Mason University.Endnote : 1. of Port and Facility Compliance, a captain of the port study was conducted in 20142015 and included present and former captains of the port from 2006 through 2014. Ships and barges resume transit along a previously closed section of the Houston Ship Channel after responders moved a damaged chemical tanker out of the channel. In 2015, a collision between the Carla Maersk and Conti Peridot led the captain of the port to close the ship channel for three days. Coast Guard photo by Chief Warrant Ocer Matthew Tilimon

PAGE 14

14Proceedings Fall 2018 of war. The authorities were reinstated at the beginning of World War II. It wasnt until 1950, and the passage of the Magnu son Act, that the captain of the port role was made a Guard authorities grew from safeguarding ships to the protection of harbors, ports, and waterfront facilities. Our services port security activities for the next two decades were not well documented, but the Coast Guards role in In 1916, the Black Tom Island, New Jersey, munitions terminal was the primary staging area for munitions bound for the war in Europe. On July 30 of that year, German saboteurs attacked the terminal, causing it to explode with a force 30 times more powerful than the 2001 World Trade Center collapse. Situated across the Hudson River from Manhattan, the Black Tom Island explosion shattered windows as far away as New York City and caused more than $500 million in damage, if calculated today. Until the 9/11 terrorist attacks, it was ranked as the worst foreign terrorist attack on U.S. soil. It also prompted the Espionage Act of 1917, which shifted responsibility for the safe transit of vessels in the United States from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers to the Department of the Treasury, the Coast Guards par ent agency at the time. It also created the Coast Guards captain of the port (COTP) role and the services authority over the anchorage and navigation of ships in U.S. waters. At the conclusion of World War I, those authorities were rescinded, as the Espionage Act only applied during times Coast Guard Captain of the PortA brief historyby LA RR Y BR OO K S Training Specialist Marine Safety Branch, Training Center Yorktown U.S. Coast Guard Black Tom Island port facilities in Jersey City were destroyed in a massive explosion on July0, 1916. Everett Historical | Shutterstock.com Above: Captain of the port for the Coast Guards New York Division, CAPT GodfreyL. Carden, became the best-known Coast Guard captain of WWI. In fact, the term captain of the port was invented to describe his role as overseer of New Yorks port security. Coast Guard Collection photo Left: Department of the Treasury Secretary WilliamG. McAdoo served at the time of the 1917 Espionage Act. Library of Congress photo

PAGE 15

15Fall 2018 Proceedings ports would eventually expand to include port safety and environmental protection responsibilities. Most current sector commanders are assigned regu latory titles as part of their duties. These include COTP (OCMI); federal on-scene coordinator (FOSC); and fed eral maritime security coordinator (FMSC). The search and rescue mission coordinator is not a regulatory title, commander and is delegated through USCG policy to the sector level.Growing ResponsibilitiesIn 1950, as the nation entered the Cold War, the COTP, through 33 CFR part 6, was delegated authority to address port security concerns, but not safety concerns. The statu tory authority for these regulations (50 USC 191) covers the subject of war and national defense, so the regulations were strictly for addressing national security concerns in the ports. The regulations in 33 CFR 126 for waterfront facility inspections were not as expansive as the current version, and were limited to facilities of particular hazard, handling designated dangerous cargo, and a few control ling permits. From 1950 until 1971, there was no COTP program manager at Coast Guard headquarters, so little guidance was provided for standardization. Originally written to ensure secure naval anchorages and management of com plex port needs, the anchorage regulations in 33 CFR 110 were managed using the district commanders authority. tionslike explosive load-outsdeveloped an active COTP program. In other ports, it appears there was a lot of local interpretation of the regulations and program emphasis depending upon command priorities. In January 1970, a Navy cargo ship anchored in the Chesapeake Bay dragged anchor during a 50-knot gale and damaged a 350-foot section of the Chesapeake Bay Bridge Tunnel. It took almost two months to repair the damage. The following year, the tankships SS Arizona Standard and SS Oregon Standard collided with each other in heavy fog at the entrance of the San Francisco Bay. Since both vessels were operated by the same company, and the incident caused a major oil spill, this incident got 33 CFR 1.01-30 Captains of the PortCaptains of the Port and their representatives enforce within their respective areas port safety and security and marine environmental protection regulations, including, without limitation, regulations for the protection and security of vessels, harbors, and waterfront facilities; anchorages; security zones; safety zones; regulated navigation areas; deepwater ports; water pollution; and ports and waterways safety. Tugboats Z-Four and Valor assist CMA CMG Libra as it maneuvers into the Port of Oakland, California, in September 2015. Sheila Fitzgerald | Shutterstock.com

PAGE 16

16Proceedings Fall 2018 port emergencies like oil spills or storms to manage water the authority to mitigate risk by issuing orders to vessels or facilities to take action as directed. The regulations for COTP orders are in 33 CFR 160. The Coast Guard has been involved in enforcing regu lations for handling dangerous cargo for the protection of vessels, ports, and the marine transportation system since 1871. This responsibility has grown over the years to include stowage, as well as segregation and documen tation of bulk, containerized, or packaged dangerous cargoes. This includes enforcement of safety, security, and marine environmental protection regulations for waterfront facilities. The facility inspection and container inspec tion programs are a major part of COTP duties and require specialized training in 33 CFR parts 105, 126, 127, 128, 154, and 156. As the risk associated with handling a cargo increases, the COTPs oversight will also increase.Expanding DutiesThere have been a number of indi vidual laws that refined or expanded Coast Guard and COTP authorities and duties. The grounding of the tankship Argo Merchant in 1976 off the coast of Nantucket, Massachusetts, resulted in Congress passing the Port and Tanker Safety Act of 1978. This law expanded Coast Guard authority over tank vessel cargo transfers. It also provided author ity for 33 CFR part 164, which requires nationwide attention. In both cases, Congress expressed concern that no agency had oversight or control of the pre vention aspects of these incidents. This changed in 1972 with the enactment of the Ports and Waterways Safety Act (PWSA), which empowered the Coast Guard to control waterways when needed for safety purposes. Safety Authority GrantedThe Ports and Waterways Safety Act authorized the part 161) for ports with a high risk of casualties. Today, the 10 ports and cooperative services in another three ports. The PWSA authorized the COTPs and district com manders to establish safety zones and close or control waterways for safety purposes. These safety zones can be established on a permanent basis around vessels or facili for planned events like powerboat races or air shows to ensure public safety. They can also be established during Robert Price, a captain in 1971 when he was assigned as commanding ocer of Base Gloucester, New Jersey, said that COTP was considered a collateral duty at the time, and port oversight was shared with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Upon signing the Ports and Waterways Safety Act on July0, 1972, President Richard Nixon made the following statement: Under this act, the Coast Guard gains muchneeded new authority to protect against oil spills by controlling vessel trac in our inland waters and territorial seas, by regulating the handling and storage of dangerous cargoes on the waterfront, by establishing safety requirements for waterfront equipment and facilities, and by setting standards for design, construction, maintenance, and operation of tank vessels. The legislation provides a rm basis for the safeguards we will need to handle increased tanker trac with minimum environmental risk. Petty Ocer 1stClass Ramona Mason, an operations specialist and vessel trac service (VTS) watchstander, monitors vessel trac in the Strait of Juan de Fuca while on watch at VTS Puget Sound, Seattle, on September11, 2012. VTS Puget Sound watchstanders monitor maritime trac in the Puget Sound, Admiralty Inlet, Rosario Strait, and the Strait of Juan de Fuca. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 3rdClass Nathan Bradshaw

PAGE 17

17Fall 2018 Proceedings gross tons, and responsibility for the vessel master to report non-operating equipment prior to entering port. These regulations also require dual radar systems on tankships over 10,000 gross tons. As interest in port safety was growing, so was the nations concern for the environment. The tankship Torrey Canyon grounded off the coast of England in 1967, spilling over 25 million gallons of crude oil. The cleanup operations were grossly inadequate, showing a lack of planning for, or knowledge of, oil cleanup techniques. In one of many cleanup efforts, the British tried to bomb the tankship to ignite the oil. Besides being unsuccess ful, it opened the tanks and helped the oil to spread. In addition, the vessels liability for the oil spill was based on 1800s law, limiting the vessels liability to the value of the vessel and cargo following the casualty. The value of the Torrey Canyon following the grounding and bombing consisted of a single lifeboat valued at $50. The U.S. Con gress took note and pushed the Coast Guard to address pollution response contingencies. In late 1967, the Coast Guard established a task force in Elizabeth City, North Carolina, to start preparing for a tank vessel pollution casualty. Polluted waterways like Ohios Cuyahoga River, which self-ignited on several occasions, highlighted environ mental problems within the United States. In an effort to be proactive, the nations Council on Environmental Quality recommended the Coast Guard be given a lead role in pollution response. Congress subsequent passage of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act created the regulatory title of federal on-scene coordinator (FOSC) for the Environmental Protection Agency and the Coast Guard to share. At the same time, it expanded COTP responsibilities by adding pollution prevention regulations for vessels and facilities. This linked the regulatory titles of COTP and FOSC. The pollution prevention regulations added the third component of COTP responsibilities for marine environmental protection, as outlined in 33 CFR 1.01-30. The Coast Guard realized these combined responsi bilities for safety, security, and marine environmental protection needed structure and policy support, so in Environmental Systems (W). RADM Michael Benkert and policy for maritime law enforcement, port safety, port security, maritime pollution, and aids to navigation. Coast Guard aircrews conduct yovers to assess the ports of Houston, Texas City, Freeport, and Galveston, Texas in August 2017. These port assessments are conducted in order to identify any damaged Coast Guard-regulated port facility, potential oil spills, or chemical release as well as any navigational obstructions along the ports. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 1stClass Patrick Kelley

PAGE 18

18Proceedings Fall 2018 responders and facility inspectors. Eventually they were also instrumental in conducting freight and tank vessel compliance examinations. The marine science techni cian rate grew into the marine safety programs preferred rate, yet the marine science technician A school curricu lum did not have any marine safety-related information until the early 1990s. Other enlisted rates, particularly boatswains mate and machinery technician, staffed the value because knowledge of their individual rate could be applied to vessel compliance or pollution response incidents. the National Vessel Documentation Center in the early 1990s because it was a very exacting process to register a documentation was also centralized in the late 90s and is now managed by the National Maritime Center. Several sectors have co-located regional exam centers. As programs matured, the maritime law enforce ment and aids to navigation functions found new pro Marine Environmental Systems was merged with the marine inspection and investigations offices in 1988. With the merger, the headquarters program manager for the COTP title disappeared. Staff components for individual parts of the regulation existed at headquar ters for the next 20 years, but there was no overall COTP program manager to provide guidance or policy on the use of safety zones, security zones, regulated navigation areas, anchorage grounds, marine event permits, or COTP CG-WWM-1, the Waterways Policies & Activities Division, and is commit ted to the establishment of policies for the proper management of the nations maritime transportation system. Acknowledgements: The author would like to acknowledge USCG Historian William Thiesen, Ph.D.; retired USCG Vice Admiral Robert Price; retired USCG Captain Wayne Six; and retired USCG Captain Don Taub for their contributions to this article. About the Author: Lawrence Brooks is a training specialist for the marine safety branch at Training Center Yorktown. He is a retired Coast Guard captain with 26 years of marine safety expertise. His He had a strong marine inspection background, and the new W staff soon realized many of their primary stake of Marine Inspection and Investigations (M). These stakeholders were the owners/operators of commercial vessels, port authorities, and waterfront facility operators. It didnt take long to decide that the COTP and FOSC should be combined with the OCMI at marine safety contact. By the mid-1970s, many COTP positions that had been located at groups, bases, or port safety and security ners. These marine inspectors typically worked remotely out of the commercial shipyards and rarely returned to the main office. The port operations staff consisted commands had to adjust to the difference in operational tempo between the scheduled workload with shipyard inspections and crisis management incidents surround ing pollution response. Within a few years, cross-training programs were tions, investigations, pollution response, and port safety. Coast Guard crewmembers from Maritime Safety and Security Team New York aboard a 25-foot response boatsmall enforce a waterway security zone surrounding Washington, D.C., leading up to the 2017 presi dential inauguration. State, federal, and local agencies worked together to restrict unauthorized vessel trac navigating through the area. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 2ndClass MatthewS. Masaschi

PAGE 19

19Fall 2018 Proceedings Created by Congress in 1790, the United States Coast a uniformed military service, federal law enforce ment agency, and federal regulatory agency. Consisting of four branchesactive duty, Reserve, civilian employees, and Auxiliaryit is unlike any other agency in the federal government. The Coast Guards past has uniquely shaped the orga nization. It originated in the Treasury Department, shifted a part of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). With roots in the Revenue Cutter Service, the Life Boat Service, and Steam Boat Inspection Service, it came to be known as its modern form, for the most part, in January 1915. In January and June 1939, respectively, the United States Lighthouse Serviceaids to navigationand the Coast Guard Civilian Reserve were added. On February 19, 1941, Congress passed the Coast Guard Auxiliary and Reserve Act, Title II, Section 201. This divided the Coast Guard Civilian Reserve in two the United States Coast Guard Reserve, and the Coast Guards civilian arm, the Coast Guard Auxiliary, which currently numbers 26,000 volunteers. 1Evolving with the storms of change, the Coast Guard ibility. Its Auxiliary is also unlike any other organ of the federal government. As such, the Coast Guard is relying more on integration of its Auxiliary year after year to meet those mission requirements, especially those in marine safety.What is the U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary? or benevolent organization, which in this case couldnt be more wrong. Many liken it to its cousin, the Civil Air Patrol, or more properly the U.S. Air Force Auxiliary. The Civil Air Patrol is a patriotic civilian orga nization like the American Red Cross. 2 Thus, it is a non-governmental organiza emergency services, education, and a cadet corps focusing on aerospace. The Auxiliary is a uniformed volunteer branch of the Coast Guard. 3 In contrast to the branches that are paid, auxiliarists are enrollees, 4 and as such are strictly prohib ited by law from military action or direct The U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary and the COTPIntegration and support of Coast Guard marine safety operationsby BA RR Y BE R G Division Chief, Ports & Safety Division National Prevention Directorate USCG Auxiliary A Coast Guard auxiliarist observes the partially submerged shing vessel Perseverance. The crew abandoned the vessel after it struck a rock and began taking on water in Icy Strait near Spasski Island, Alaska. They were rescued by the crew of the vessel Whittle Wall and taken to Hoonah, Alaska. Coast Guard Auxiliary photo courtesy of Mike and Noreen Folkerts

PAGE 20

20Proceedings Fall 2018 military services. 6 Those not able to engage in combat sup port or not eligible for military service for age or health rea sons were transferred to the Auxiliary, thus using civilians to augment and support the home front. There were times auxil iarists and reservists were performing jobs that were indistinguishable from each other, and no one seemed to mind. 7 This included danger ous jobs like attacking Ger man submarines in U.S. coastal waters. By 1943, as production of coastal destroyers began to catch up, this mission was abandoned and the Auxiliary took up more civilian duties, such as recruiting, blood drives, coastal patrol, and Coastwatchers. 8 By 1944, civil ian aircraft and marine radios were allowed to aid in search and rescue missions, freeing up military resources. After the war, the emphasis of the Auxiliary returned to its roots of recreational boating safety and boater edu cation, yet part of the initial mandate remained unful 9Recreational boating safety remained the Auxiliarys focus from the 1950s until the early 1990s. 10 During the same period, Congress expanded the Coast Guards mis sions. In 1976, the Coast Guard commissioned a study by consider the Auxiliary the greatest economical resource readily available to the COGARD (sic) It performs in an outstanding manner and its personnel are among the most professional group of volunteers in the nation . 11 Another study done at about the same time similarly com plimented the work done by the Auxiliary, but urged the regular Coast Guard to do a better job of using Auxil iary resources and play a bigger role in its administra tion. One sentence in the report echoed many auxiliarists sentiments then and now: Many Coast Guard person nel are not familiar with the Auxiliary, nor aware of its capabilities. 12Around 19901991 the Coast Guard Active Duty began to integrate the Auxiliary into day-to-day operations aug Coast Guard boat crew. 13 This culminated with the Coast law enforcement. During his 2010 State of the Coast Guard address, ADM Thad Allen, 23rd Commandant of the Coast Guard, was asked his opinion of the Coast Guard Auxiliary. To paraphrase his response, they are the bestkept secret in all Washington. They are dedicated, enthu siastic, and work for free. A Bit of History: The Auxiliarys Evolution into Coast Guard IntegrationCongress created the Coast Guard Auxiliary as the Coast Guard Reserve in 1939. They were trained as volunteer forces to augment active duty Coast Guard forces, work ing primarily with recreational boating. By assigning this mission to its Reserve, it was free to apply more resources As early as May 1940, well in advance of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, President Roosevelt and key members of government realized, that it was probably a question of when, not if, the United States would be drawn into war. 5 Forward-thinking members of govern ment saw a need for a rapid expansion of all U.S. mili tary branches, including the Coast Guard, which needed personnel to engage in both military and law enforce ment. In February 1941, Congress changed the Civilian Reserve to the United States Coast Guard Auxiliary, mak ing room to create a military reserve similar to the other Coast Guard Auxiliarist Cheryl Little, otilla sta ocer-marine safety, right, assists Petty Ocer 3rdClass Danny Bast in collecting soil samples from a mock oil spill on the shore of Tampa Bay, Florida. The eld training exercises were hosted by the Sector St.Petersburg Response Department as part of federal on-scene coordinator representative training. Coast Guard Auxiliary photo by Patti Kuhn

PAGE 21

21Fall 2018 Proceedings Guard Appropriations Act of 1996, 14 in which Congress The purpose of the Auxiliary is to assist the Coast Guard as authorized by the Commandant, in performing any Coast Guard function, power, duty, role, mission, or operation authorized by law. This change in law allowed the Auxiliary to integrate into Coast Guard operations as long as auxiliarists served in non-military roles and avoided the direct law enforce ment terms of U.S. Code, Title 14. The beginning of the 21st century opened two major portals to integration of the Auxiliary: professional accomplishment by qualifying active duty, Reserve, civilian, and Auxiliary personnel serving the marine safety mission. 15 Guard Auxiliary was called upon to integrate with Coast Guard surge operations. This marked the beginning of Coast Guard reliance on Auxiliary participation during events of national make more effective use of his or her staff. For example, a marine safety team consisting exclusively of active duty personnel can only perform one inspection at a allows doubling capacity without changing the budget or billets. What does that mean to the Coast Guard? In 2007, the Coast Guard concluded that the worth of each auxiliarist was between $2,850 and $2,927 annually, reporting, The CG receives close to $70 million worth of work from the Auxiliary organization each year, following the subtrac tion of $14M in expenses. 16How Does the Auxiliary Integrate? Commandant is responsible for management of the Auxiliary. The headquarters unit delegated the Chief Director of the Auxiliary. The website States Coast Guard Auxiliary is the uniformed volunteer component of Team Coast Guard. 17 Lets focus on what this author believes is the most important word in that sentence vol unteer In any organization, especially in those dedicated to public service, whats the differ ence between a person who volunteers and paid staff? Except for remuneration, nothing! They work alongside each other, often doing the same Auxiliarist Don Garvey and marine science technician Gregory Steiger, MSD-St.Paul, Sector Upper Mississippi River, ready the boom for deployment during a 2015 joint boom exercise on the Mississippi River. In the background, Auxiliarist Matthew Stokes unloads a trailer. Coast Guard photo by MSTC MaryK. Strauss 1. Marine Safety Professional Device2. Auxiliary Marine Safety Professional Device USCG Auxiliary photo archivesUSCG & USCG Auxiliary Marine Safety Professional Device 1 2job. The same level of professionalism and dedication is expected from both. What, then, is the value of a volunteer? In the Fall 2010 issue of Proceedings, CDR David Chareonsuphiphat said that Auxiliary personnels 2009 contributions were equiv alent to that of 2,186 full-time Coast Guard employees. Allowing a value of $20.25 per volunteer hour, that trans lates to an estimated savings of $91 million for the year. 18 that were saved, and the value is even greater.

PAGE 22

22Proceedings Fall 2018 The Coast Guard requires force readiness and work force training for all of its branches, including the Auxil iary. Beyond this, it encourages interested auxiliarists to meet the same rigorous competencies it expects from its paid staff to enable them to assist in day-to-day opera tions. When a Coast Guardsman has achieved at least the Marine Safety Professional Device. While the Auxiliarist version of the device is slightly different, the determination and dedication required to earn it is the same. Only minor differences exist between an auxiliarist cation standards. Those differences involve tasks the law prohibits auxiliarists from engaging in, or directives from the commandant. active duty personnel are expected to complete them in about 240 hours, or a minimum of 10 hours per week for about six months. As volunteers, auxiliarists generally take between one and two years to complete the same intensive 15to 20-day course of study at a Coast Guard training center, or C-School. Based on the value auxilia rists provide the Coast Guard, additional value might be had by allocating more C-School slots for these dedicated volunteers, as most auxiliarists almost never attend these courses. Regardless, both groups are held to the same standards. When they have completed this pro cess, the captain of the port designates in writing that back to my previous comments about volunteers, you can see there is no difference, except remuneration. IntegrationRegular Day-to-Day Operations tions include 11 statutory missions. 19 Auxiliarists can be found working in all but four missionsdrug inter diction, migrant interdiction, defense readiness, and law enforcement. Even in those excepted missions, auxiliarists play a supporting role, whether adminis tratively or in a minor adjunct role. While all volunteer contributions are regarded as valuable and cost effective, the importance of auxilia rists who have achieved the marine safety professional designation should be noted. Because their tasking is the same as their active duty counterparts, their hours spent on those activities should not be counted as adjunct hours, but rather as full-time equivalent (FTE) hours. The business world uses FTEs as a means to ref erence the costs and productivity of any project, task, or job. Guard policy does not allow for auxiliarists to work near HAZMAT areas in pollution operations, these volunteers can supervise oil spill removal organization (OSRO) boom deployment at environmentally sensitive areas safely downstream from the actual pollution site. This enables increase in the operational productivity and tempo. The Coast Guard, being a small force, does not densely populate its geographic areas of responsibility. Currently, location, two unit members are dispatched to observe and report. This can disrupt normal operations from four hours up to two days. As an alternative, auxiliarists from the local area of the spill can be dispatched to view and photograph the spill, sending observations back to the unit. This can result in the command staff receiving vital information in minutes and with limited disruption of normal operations. If the incident warrants it, trained aux iliarists can supervise OSRO operations until active duty personnel arrive to assume responsibility. This is just one of many situations where command ers can enhance staff and capabilities without additional impact to staff task load or billet count. The Coast Guard Auxiliary provides a pool of personnel almost as large as that of active duty Coast Guard, and with some invest ment in training, commanders can potentially augment Auxiliarist Rusty Pumphrey, one of about 60 Coast Guard Auxiliarists activated for service during Hurricane Harvey and its aftermath, works in the Houston incident command post September 17, 2017. Pumphrey was a deputy liaison ocer for the post-Harvey oil and hazardous material recovery eort led by the Environmental Protection Agency. Coast Guard photo by Chief Petty Ocer John Masson

PAGE 23

23Fall 2018 Proceedings auxiliarists into unit operations, 22 including the comman dants auxiliary policy statement to unit commanders. 23 However, while the vector of Coast Guard policy points to integrating auxiliarists into sector operations, a lack of understanding regarding auxiliarist capabilities and individuals. IntegrationIncident Management organization. When Coast Guard personnel are deployed for emergencies, individual units, as well as the commer cial entities they serve, are affected. While only a few members of a unit may be deployed, it can be a large percentage of the units prevention staff. Long-running incidents, like Deepwater Horizon, can require individuals to make multiple deployments, affect A force of trained Auxiliary personnel with the same day-to-day experience as active duty personnel can back a pool of deployable personnel available for the affected understaffed missions. This is an important tool in any commanders quiver. Independent Sector, 20 a leadership forum of charities, foundations, and corporate giving programs, valued vol unteer labor in 2016 at $24.14 per hour. For the calendar year 2017, auxiliarists directly contributed just over 60,000 hours to marine safety missions, not counting adminis trative time. 21 This is worth nearly $1.5 million in direct attributable labor, and this value does not include the cost Allowing for more auxiliarists to receive on-the-job training or attend C-School would create more marine individuals available for a commanders discretionary ularly used to keep their skills currentnot just trained and then forgotten. Since the Coast Guard Appropriations Act of 1996, there has been an increasing trend for integration of the Auxiliary into day-to-day operations, most especially in marine safety. As the relationship between the Coast Guard and its Auxiliary has evolved, so has the history of policy changes encouraging commanders to integrate Crewmembers aboard the Coast Guard Cutter Vice escort the Jose Gaspar pirate ship during the 2017 Jose Gasparilla Pirate Invasion in the Port of Tampa, Florida. Photo by Coast Guard Auxiliarist George Papabeis

PAGE 24

24Proceedings Fall 2018 area, allowing commanders an effective tool during surge operations and improving continuity of forces. In this authors opinion, unit commanders need to look outside pool of talent before them. To capitalize on this option, needs must be anticipated and integration must begin with training and then merging this workforce into regu lar operations before the surge demands it.In ConclusionAs a volunteer force, the Auxiliary is mostly comprised of older individuals who wish to dedicate their retirement to public service. They bring to the Coast Guard their time and their passion for public service. Many have led successful careers in civilian and military occupations. This provides the Coast Guard with new and sometimes unique solutions to problems. At present, less than 0.5 percent of Auxiliary members are actively involved in the professionally demanding area of marine safety. There is a reservoir of talent out there that has demonstrated its perseverance, dedica tion, and enthusiasm. When added to their active duty shipmates, this resource pool could infuse the Coast Guard with cost-effective solutions, helping to enhance the very DNA of the service to which they have pledged themselves. About the author: Barry Berg has served in the USCG Auxiliary for 11 years. He has held the Auxiliary Marine Safety Professional Device and is a three-time recipient of the Auxiliary Achievement Award. He currently volunteers part-time as the designated Auxiliary unit coordinator at Marine Safety Detachment St. Paul, Sector Upper Mississippi River, Eighth Coast Waterway Watch website for Coast Guard headquarters. While active in many marine safety roles, his passion lies in environmental outreach edu cation, serving as a guest lecturer to undergraduate elementary education teachers on science methods techniques for environmental awareness.Endnotes :1. https://cgaux.org, referenced June 20182. Both named in federal statutes 36 USC Subtitle II (b) 403 (40302 to 30307)3. 14 USC 821832 4. The preceding 3 segments under the terms set forth in 14 USC are employees. The role of Auxiliarists changes when on assignment to duty, when they assume the same status as employees, per 14 USC 832. When they join, Auxiliarists are enrolled rather than hired.5. Susan Dunn, The Debate Behind U.S. Intervention in World War II. The Atlantic, July 8, 2013.6. http://wow.uscgaux.info/content.php?unit=081&category=auxiliary-history7. http://wow.uscgaux.info/content.php?unit=130-05-03&category=uscg-auxhistory8. Ibid.9. http://wow.uscgaux.info/content.php?unit=081&category=auxiliary-history10. http://wow.uscgaux.info/content.php?unit=130-05-03&category=uscg-auxhistory11. Ibid.12. Ibid.13. Ibid.14. www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-104publ324/pdf/PLAW-104publ324.pdf 15. ALCOAST 183/0116. http://wow.uscgaux.info/content.php?unit=081&category=auxiliary-history17. www.uscg.mil/Our-Organization/Auxiliary/18. CDR David Chareonsuphithat, Return on Investment: The value of the U.S. Coast Guard Auxiliary, Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council, Fall 2010, pp. 7375.19. www.gocoastguard.com/about-the-coast-guard/discover-our-roles-missions20. www.independentsector.org/resource/the-value-of-volunteer-time/21. the USCG Auxiliary22. http://wow.uscgaux.info/content.php?unit=P-DEPT&category=alcoastarchive 23. www.uscg.mil/Portals/0/OurOrganization/auxiliary/CGA_Policy.pdfCurrent Marine Safety Qualications Available to Auxiliarists Auxiliary Assistant Container Inspector (AUX-EC) Auxiliary Assistant Barge Inspector (AUX-BI) Auxiliary Assistant Contingency Planner (AUX-ACP) Auxiliary Assistant Facility Inspector (AUX-EU) Auxiliary Assistant Foreign Freight Vessel Examiner (AUX-FFVE) Auxiliary Assistant Foreign Passenger Vessel Examiner (AUX-FPVE) Auxiliary Assistant Hull Inspector (AUX-HI) Auxiliary Assistant K-Boat Inspector (AUX-KI) Auxiliary Assistant Life Raft Inspector (AUX-LR) Auxiliary Assistant Machinery Inspector (AUX-MI) Auxiliary Assistant Machinery InspectorSteam (AUX-MS) Auxiliary Assistant Marine Casualty Investigator (AUX-FO) Auxiliary Assistant Maritime Enforcement Investigator (AUX-EO) Auxiliary Assistant Pollution Responder (AUX-ED) Auxiliary Assistant Port State Control Examiner (AUX-PSCE) Auxiliary Port State Control Dispatcher (AUX-PSC) Auxiliary Assistant Suspension and Revocation Investigator (AUX-FN) Auxiliary Assistant T-Boat Inspector (AUX-TI) Auxiliary Uninspected Passenger Vessel Examiner (AUX-UPV) Auxiliary Assistant Waterways Management Representative (AUX-WM) Find more information on these qualifications at wow. uscgaux.info/content.php?unit=P-DEPT&category=ms-pqs

PAGE 25

25Fall 2018 Proceedings Coast Guard management of waterways is a com plex endeavor essential to the nations marine transportation system (MTS). The purpose of waterways management is to provide mariners access to ment of commerce to and from intermodal connections; and promote a safe, secure, and environmentally sound marine transportation system as a component of the national transportation system. It requires an understand ing and balancing of competing prioritiessafety, secu rity, facilitation of commerce, stakeholder perspectives, and even political acumen and the ability to articulate clear, well-thought-out positions. One of the more powerful tools used to manage water ways is the captain of the port authority, which is vested in the sector commander. This authority ties together the agencys 11 Homeland Security and non-Homeland Security missions (see sidebar this page) within Americas navigable waters. For many years, waterways management (WWM) has served a crucial role within the Coast Guard sectors command cadres. It often serves as a bridge between the Coast Guard and the public, as well as between the ser vices prevention and response missions. Other articles in this edition explain in more detail the variety of ways WWM provides a vital service to the nations ports and waterways. Ocean Policy (CG-WWM) under the Marine Transpor tation Systems Directorate (CG-5PW), the Waterways Policies and Activities Division (CG-WWM-1) is respon associated with WWM and marine transportation system issues. This small division puts out policies delineating and supporting Coast Guard field activities in WWM and devising strategies that anticipate and set the ser vices responses to emerging practices among ports and waterways stakeholders. Thus, while the Coast Guards units throughout the nation, CG-WWM-1 provides the overarching guidance, policy, and training to make it happen. In the wake of the September 11 terror attacks, and during the years of the global war on terrorism, WWM in wildly diverse sets of public and government demands. Over the last several years, the division of CG-WWM-1 prioritizing those demands. Despite this progress, much work remains to improve program functionality, develop emerging policy and work processes, enhance publicprivate partnerships, and offer opportunities for junior service members to chart their careers in the program. What follows is a discussion of recent history, accomplish ments, goals, and the programs direction for the next The Coast Guards Waterways Management ProgramPast progress, future direction by L C D R WILLIAM AL BR IGH T Waterways Program Manager U.S. Coast GuardWaterways Management L C D R ER I C ST AHL Waterways Program Manager U.S. Coast Guard Section 888 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 denes Coast Guard missions as: Non-Homeland Security Missions Marine safety Search and rescue Aids to navigation Living marine resources (sheries law enforcement) Marine environmental protection ICE operationsHomeland Security Missions Ports, waterways, and coastal security Drug interdiction Migrant interdiction Defense readiness Other law enforcement

PAGE 26

26Proceedings Fall 2018Past History and Recent Successes The past 12 years have significantly altered the Coast Guards marine safety and prevention missions. Prior to the creation of sectors in the early 2000s, the Coast Guards marine inspection (OCMI) authorities and roles. However, the creation of sectors relocated traditional marine safety sions within the new prevention-response organization. Pollution incident response and contingency planning merged with other incident response and management functions. The consolidation of vessel and waterfront facility compliance activities with WWM and the aids to navigation mission under the new prevention department further blurred the formerly bright line between COTP and OCMI authorities and roles. As service members adapted to the new architecture, subject matter expertise entire shoreside service. By 2010, the reorganization into sectors and the Coast Guards emphasis on vessel compliance activities meant that the WWM program had fewer than 100 dedicated billets. By that time, both the standard guide for person Marine Safety Manual (Volume VI), WWMs foundational doctrine, last no formal C school at Coast Guard training centers to set baseline understanding among service members for tion in other prevention specialties commonly thought to sufficiently explain COTP authorities did not serve to explain many of the more nuanced aspects of WWM. Among these were harbor safety committee engagement, Sectors and Prevention Mission Oces

PAGE 27

27Fall 2018 Proceedings USCG Sector Puget Sound, co-located with USCG Base Seattle, pictured here, is one of many Coast Guard port locations providing waterways management services. Coast Guard photo authorities, limited access areas, marine event permitting, and other WWM issues industry internship programs for WWM including the redesign of billet paygrades to more closely match job responsibilities to earn recognition as a waterways management career specialistthe Operations Ashore Specialty Management System By 2015, Project Trackline was complete and the program was well on its way to recovery and being recognized as not only a critical element of the prevention mission, but also as essential to all Coast Guard missions.Future DirectionUnquestionably, the Coast Guards role in the manage ment of the nations waterways and marine transporta tion system will remain one of the cornerstones of the services marine safety mission. Ports and waterways operators continually adopt new systems and services such as commercial space vehicle recovery, autonomous within highly specialized programs like marine planning and the permitting of bridges and marine events. These facts were not lost on Coast Guard leadership or ports and waterways stakeholders. From 2010 on, serious work began to resurrect the Coast Guards WWM program. In April 2011, ALCOAST 197/11 announced Project Trackline, designed to focus this resur rection, alongside other programs, in three major areas: program structure, people, and leadership. By 2013, these areas had become distilled to three parallel lines of effort: missions, ultimate ends, concepts of organization and operation, and performance results proper training, assignment, and career development for personnel and policies, including interagency agreements and joint work processes, to result in enhancement of its information and decision support systems The Waterways Policies and Activities Division, bol completed some very noteworthy tasks and accomplished

PAGE 28

28Proceedings Fall 2018 vessels and port equipment, and expanded public-private partnerships for infrastructure development. In order to maintain consistent regulatory oversight of ports and waterways operations, the WWM program must likewise continue to monitor such advancements and adopt new technologies and procedures when the services existing methods are no longer relevant. This requires a constant eye on the balance between oversight and the impact of such oversight on the Coast Guards government partners, ports and waterways stakeholders, and U.S. taxpayers. Waterways Policy and Activities Division will continue to focus on four areas of effort, building on our past successes: optimize the structure of the program at all levels of the organization enhance the professionalism and competencies of the programs active duty, reserve, and civilian workforce provide programmatic leadership by and guidance foster partnerships with other government agencies, members of the public, and the maritime industry Key lines of effort within these four areas include: changes relevant to emerging practices among national ports and waterways operators and their international counterparts unit performance within the WWM program, as key performance indicators to reduce workloads on waterways managers and to simplify public and private stakeholders optimal workforce structures throughout the program using performance indicators address subjects emerging at districts and Coast Guard Cutter Webber, the services rst fast response cutter, arrives at Coast Guard Sector Miami. The Coast Guards maritime transportation system man agement program ensures safe, ecient, secure, and environmentally sound waterways essential to the ow of goods and commerce. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 2ndClass Kelley Parker

PAGE 29

29Fall 2018 Proceedings As with any program or mission, the future successes of waterways managers and the program will stem from the policies and strategic objectives of today, based on the progress achieved in the past. Because WWM activities deal directly with industry partners and local govern ments, and clearly affect the successes of local economies and public perception, the service must continue to sup port the development of WWM training regimens, career specialization, and workforce management. In summary, WWM is a critical element of the health of the nations MTS, which supports millions of American goods, and allows Americas economy to remain globally competitive. Additionally, effectively managed water ways are essential to all 11 Coast Guard missions. It is therefore important to have a well-trained and competent workforce of Coast Guard personnel along with a com prehensive set of regulations, procedures, and practices to vigilantly carry out WWM duties. About the authors: LCDR William Albright has served in many capacities during his nearly 14 years in the U.S. Coast Guard. Most recently, this included serving as the inaugural waterways management industry trainee in 2016, the supervisor of MSD Homer, and a waterways management program manager at Coast Guard headquarters. He has received three Coast Guard Commendation Medals, a U.S. Army Achievement Medal, and a Letter of Commendation. LCDR Eric Stahl joined the U.S. Coast Guard in 1997. His assignments have included two cutters, marine inspections and investigations tours, has received two Meritorious Service Medals, the Coast Guard Commen dation Medal, and two Coast Guard Achievement Medals. understanding among all waterways managers reserve, and civilian specializations in WWM at all levels of government to holistically manage the marine transportation system communication among waterways stakeholders, commitment to harbor safety and other publicprivate committees These lines of effort recognize that progress still needs and establish a clear career path for WWM professionals into senior leadership positions. While the division has these objectives will require ongoing collaboration with the programs partners to ensure that the programs activ ities remain relevant and targeted. As noted above, the managers will require the Waterways Policy and Activi ties Division to leverage all of its working relationships. training center personnel, as well as partner government agencies and ports and waterways operators.At Sector Houston-Galveston, Texas, Petty Ocer 2ndClass Adrian Ortegon moves cards along the vessel trac services manual board used to track vessels while the automatic identication system is down for maintenance in 2016. The Coast Guard provides these services in major ports throughout the United States as a way of communicating to various mariners about port conditions that would aect safe transit in and out of ports and waterways. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 3rdClass Jennifer Nease

PAGE 30

30Proceedings Fall 2018The Ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach are criti cal to the economic vitality of California and the rest of the country. The port complex is 4,300 acres, including 43 miles of waterfront, 270 berths, and 86 gan try cranes. It also produces $235 billion in trade annu ally as of 2016. Combined, these ports have the largest container complex in the U.S., representing 40 percent of the nations containerized cargo. More than 50 percent of Californias oil comes through the port complex. Also of note, the Port of Long Beachs Pier 121 has the deepest super tanker berth on the West Coast. Oil imports are an important part of the overall economic picture, and they are increasing. There were 4,405 total transits in 2015 and 4,601 in 2016. Oil tanker transits accounted for 632 transits in 2015 and 637 in 2016, and the trend is up. This means that an increasing number of shipsand ships of greater and greater sizeare transit ing in and out of this port complex with limited capacity. A typical supertanker is around 1,100 feet long, 200 feet wide, and weighs over 300,000 metric tons. These vessels also have extremely deep drafts, often 65 feet or more. The channel into the Port of Long Beach is dredged to a depth of 76 feet. The U.S. Coast Guard captain of the port, in accordance with the harbor safety plan, requires a 10 percent safety margin, which allows tankers with a draft of 69 feet or less to enter Long Beach. For many years, as an additional safety precaution, it was agreed that maximum drafts would be limited to 65 feet, how ever. This presents a challenge: How do you increase the you safely get vessels with drafts deeper than 65 feet into the port?The Solution: Dynamic Under Keel Clearance ProjectIf there was a better way to measure the sea conditions and other factors impacting a vessel, especially a ships pitch and rollput simply, if we could know instead of guessa more precise prediction could be made for the under keel clearance needed. As the word dynamic rather than a one-size-fits-all approach. The process advanced technology to better predict the safety margin actually required? The good news is that tools to improve the process already exist. A software group out of the Netherlands, Charta Software, has been using a sys tem they developed which measures tides; currents; wave conditions; chan nel depth; ships course, speed, pitch, and roll; and numerous other factors to predict the required under keel clearance with adequate safety factors cessfully in the Netherlands by the Ports of Rotterdam, Amsterdam, and Eamshaven. Captain John Strong, vice president of the Jacobsen Pilot ServiceLong Beach Pilots made a transit with Dutch Pilots and brought the idea of using the system back to Long Beach. In 2014, a partnership was formed between the Jacob of Spill Prevention and Response, and Tesoro (now Andeavor), which owns and operates Pier 121. Also involved was the Marine Exchange of Southern Califor nia as well as numerous partners cooperating through the vital harbor safety committee, including U.S. Coast Guard captain of the port Charlene Downey. In addition, the tools and expertise of the Coastal Data Information Program (CDIP), National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA), Southern California Coastal Ocean Observation System, and U.S. Integrated Ocean Observing System were used. Technical and subject mat ter experts using weather measuring systems in Europe were consulted. In the same year, a memorandum of understanding was signed laying out the goals and phases of the project. Dynamic Under Keel Clearance Project by L C D R ISAA C D MAHA R Division Chief Waterways Management U.S. Coast Guard Sector Los Angeles-Long Beach In 2016, the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach produced $235billion in trade.

PAGE 31

31Fall 2018 Proceedings The agreed-upon goal was simple: to have an accurate and reliable prediction model that could be applied to Long The goals of the interagency mission agreement were to increase safety, improve effectiveness, and reduce emissions. Safety would be improved through the tran ing under keel clearance requirements, thus reducing the be seen by having a better means to calculate arrival times to the port, thus decreasing time at anchorage. Lastly, emissions would be reduced by simply having larger but fewer vessels with an overall decrease in stack emissions per cargo ton, as well as by cutting down on the number of required lightering operations.Progress So FarThe feasibility study was successfully completed in 2015. First, the advanced measurement system used updated NOAA weather as well as CDIP buoy inputs for the local area. In the summer and fall of 2015, additional analysis and validation was realized through observing 20 super tanker transits. Predictions were then compared with real-time Octopus measurements. The Octopus is a monitoring device that connects directly to the ships bridge to record vessel movement information that is dis played on a laptop using proprietary software. In 2016, an additional 10 transits were completed, fur ther improving and validating the model. In December 2016, when the project findings were presented to the harbor safety committee and the Coast Guard captain of the port, it was agreed that the maximum draft could be increased from 65 to 69 feet, increasing gradually by onefoot increments. In 2017, the project took a dramatic leap forward with the implementation phase of the project. Gem No. 2, successfully completed a transit, followed one month later by the 67-foot-draft Eagle Varnas transit. Then, on November 9, 2017, the next milestone The Eagle Varna, with a 67-foot draft, transits to a Long Beach berth. Andeavor Marine Operations Manager photo by Captain Rob McCaughey

PAGE 32

32Proceedings Fall 2018 to be validated. The project partners hope to continue out reach, helping other ports and interested maritime opera tors to learn from what is being done in Long Beach. ConclusionThis project has been an outstanding success so far, meet reduction. While the primary focus has been the Port of Long Beach and deep-draft tanker ships, other ports and types of vessels may be able to duplicate this process. From very large container vessels to cruise shipsor even bulk carriersthe under keel process used here could be an excellent way to overcome deep draft clearance chal lenges. The most important take-away is the success of the partnerships in this project. The tremendous cooperation between private industry, the port, research and technical experts, and government agencieslocal, state, and fed eralhave enabled a smooth implementation of cuttingedge technology for the port. Clearly agreed-upon goals, understanding of roles and responsibilities, and effective information sharing has enabled this project to progress on schedule while exceeding expectations. Acknowledgements Captains Kip Louttit, John Strong, and Rob McCaughey contrib uted to this article. About the author: LCDR Isaac D. Mahar is a 2003 graduate of New St. Andrews College and a 2016 graduate of the Naval War College, where he earned his mas ters degree. He recently transferred from Coast Guard headquarters to his current role as the chief of Coast Guard Sector Los Angeles-Long Beachs waterways management division. He has more than 12 years of Coast Guard experience, including tours conducting marine inspections and overseeing waterways management operations in the Gulf of Mexico as well as the Ports of Houston and Mobile, Alabama. Bunga Kasturi Empat. It takes highly skilled professionals and tremendous coordination to safely navigate a vessel of this size. In accordance with past transits, a detailed safety brief took place with the Long Beach Pilots and other critical operators. A go/no-go decision was made based on sea state as well as an exhaustive list of safety parameters. Three Long Beach pilots, an Andeavor repre sentative, a towing vessel representative, and two Coast Guard Sector LA-LB personnel met the vessel at the outer anchorage. The Octopus, with its advanced sensors, was brought on board to measure vessel motion, which was recorded on a laptop. A typical transit has two assist tugs; in this case, four were employedtwo on the bow, and two on the stern as the vessel made its way through Queens Gate, the entrance through the Long Beach Harbor breakwall. The transit continued with no issues, safely mooring at Long Beach Pier 121. The total transit took less than two hours and provided positive proof of the effectiveness of the model. At the time this article was written, there had been 21 successful transits of vessels with a draft greater than draft, which is expected in 2018 if model data continues For inquiries regarding the project in Long Beach, California, please contact: Marine Exchange of Southern California, klouttit@mxsocal.org For more informationCoast Guard observers LCDR John Suckow and LCDR Isaac Mahar stand on the deck of the Bunga Kasturi Empat on November, 2017. Coast Guard photo

PAGE 33

33Fall 2018 Proceedings The Ports and Waterways Safety Assessment (PAWSA) has unbounded utility for our captains of the port. It is a structured discussion among waterway stakeholders that focuses on hazards, risks, and mitigation strategies. In developing shared priorities, par community interests.PurposeCaptains of the port are responsible for enforcing port and waterway safety and security as well as marine environ mental protection regulations. They use PAWSA work shops to inform and implement safety zones, security zones, regulated navigation areas, anchorage grounds, marine event permits, and port orders that facilitate com for planning navigation projects, furthering coopera tion among government agencies and the private sector, strengthening the role of harbor safety committees, and reinforcing the role of sector commanders in promoting waterway management activities. The Coast Guard has completed 58 PAWSA studies nationwide since the pro grams inception in 1999. PAWSAs are disciplined, results-oriented, intensive workshops designed to identify major waterway safety hazards, estimate risk levels, evaluate potential mitiga tion measures, and set the stage for the implementation of selected risk intervention strategies. These two-day quan titative assessments rely on expert opinions to evaluate causes and consequences of marine accidents. Process experts from Coast Guard headquarters frequently host Ports and Waterways Safety Assessmentby MI C HAEL EME R SON Director of Marine Transportation Systems U.S. Coast Guard CGC Sturgeon Bay breaks ice on New Yorks Hudson River in January 2014. Navigable waterways must be kept open for ships delivering petroleum products such as home heating oil and other goods. Coast Guard photo

PAGE 34

34Proceedings Fall 2018 for all participants and interested community members.Key ElementsA successful PAWSA requires the participation of profes sional waterway users with local expertise in navigation, waterway conditions, and port safety. Additionally, stake holders are included in the process to ensure important environmental, public safety, and economic consequences are given appropriate attention as risk intervention strate atorsfrom large cargo ships to paddleboardsharbor pilots, waterfront facility managers, local government other public stakeholders in the same room for two days is essential to establishing consensus on risks and the poli cies to address them. It also supports transparency that builds trust among stakeholders and prompts buy-in to the groups recommendations. Selection of PAWSA participants is based on their waterway expertise and done in a way that maintains equities to create a balanced cross-section of users and stakeholders. The process balances a need to draw in affected waterway community. These objectives must be accomplished without exceeding a manageable number of participants involved in the deliberations and judgments. There must also be a balanced mix of waterway users and stakeholders. Waterway users are those who are actu ally involved in the movement of vessels in the waterway being assessedvessel masters, pilots, officers of operating companies, and the like. Stakeholders represent all others whose livelihood or lifestyles are affected by waterway activities. Absent a proper blend of participants, the same people will be talk ing about the same issues they have been discuss ing for years. Instead, the goal is to build a team that of community interests and can provide a com prehensive evaluation for each of the 24 risk factors that make up the PAWSA Waterways Risk Model (see graph).Recent SuccessIn two recent Hudson River PAWSA workshops in Pough keepsie and Albany, New York, participants from across the state gathered to address anchorages and other measures to improve safety. During each session, about 40 users and stakeholders engaged in facilitated discussions of waterway commerce, vessel traffic, mishaps, weather, fatigue, and proposed projects. These variables as well as the associated mitigation options were often contentious, groups ultimately achieved consensus on a way forward, including the establishment of a Hudson River Harbor Safety Committee as a forum for continuing dialogue. The Hudson River PAWSAs provided a valuable foun dation for addressing safety measures along the entire waterway. The captain of the port may still have hard work ahead and face opposition to anchorages, but spe sions can be continued. These PAWSAs were especially complex, and equally instructive. The users and stake holders in New York revealed unique waterway concerns that hadnt previously been considered, and which may inform PAWSA participants in other regions. A subse quent PAWSA was recently completed in Buzzards Bay, Massachusetts. About the author: Michael Emerson is the Director of Marine Transportation Systems at Coast Guard headquarters. He manages a broad portfolio of marine navi gation, waterway, and bridge programs, and is also responsible for a wide variety of polar and Arctic safety and security initiatives. Mr. Emerson retired from the Coast Guard in 2014 with 30 years of service. Chart courtesy of author

PAGE 35

35Fall 2018 Proceedings Formed in response to Hurricane Katrina, the Coast Guard Maritime Recovery and Restoration Task Guard Atlantic Area and Eighth District commanders in April 2006. The report included 17 key recommendations to enhance the Coast Guards process for recovery and restoration of the marine transportation system (MTS). This article will explore the Coast Guards response to the challenges issued by the MR2TF and how the program gies and priorities as they responded to events from 2010 through the 2017 hurricane season.The MR2TF and Key RecommendationsHurricane Katrina made landfall in August 2005, result ing in a substantial disruption of the nations marine transportation system. In an effort to understand how the Coast Guard addressed MTS disruption at all levels of the organization, commanders of the Atlantic Area and Eighth District chartered the MR2TF with four objectives in mind: 1. Identify the shortand long-term issues affecting the MTS. 2. Recommend recovery actions to operational commanders. 3. Identify long-term needs for full restoration. 4. Recommend improvements to national plans and organization for future recovery efforts. 1After an extensive review of current Coast Guard pol icy and procedures for MTS recovery, then conducting interviews with an exhaustive list of port stakeholders and operators throughout the Eighth District, the MR2TF gaps noted in the study and start implementing MTS recovery procedures in a systematic way across all Coast Guard sectors The Winter 20062007 issue of Proceedings 2 included an article authored by a member of the MR2TF on this opportunity to enact several of the concepts envisioned by the task force. The author detailed the response of a spe cialized unit within the planning section of the Incident Management Team (IMT) and how they worked closely with port partners when 45,000 barrels of waste oil were discharged into the Calcasieu River and adjacent water ties, managed and prioritized vessel movements, and kept progress toward economic recovery.MTS Recovery Plans and PolicyThe Coast Guard has primary responsibility for coordi nating and expediting the recovery of the MTS. 3 When an MTS disruption occurs, the captain of the port (COTP) will implement activities outlined in the MTS recovery plan designed to facilitate recovery of an impacted port using a coordinated and collaborative effort. The MTS recovery plan is currently an annex within the Area Mar itime Security Plan (AMSP) based on a federal regula tory requirement33 Code of Federal Regulations Part address the procedures to facilitate recovery of the MTS after a transportation security incident. The Coast Guard began expanding its approach to address all possible categories that could disrupt the MTSan all hazards approachin 2008. This led to a more holistic planning method for responding to manmade and natural disasters. This methodology now The Coast Guards Marine Transportation System Recovery Program More than a decade of increasing eectivenessby JOSEPH COU C H Port Security Specialist (Recovery/Salvage) LANT-55 U.S. Coast Guard DOUGLAS CAMP B ELL Port Security Specialist (Recovery/Salvage) U.S. Coast Guard Sector Jacksonville

PAGE 36

36Proceedings Fall 2018 positions were assigned at various levels within the Coast Guard, including: Area Area Over the past 10 years, COTPs have counted on this talented workforce to champion important tasks dedi cated to advancing preparedness for and response to MTS disruptions. Those tasks have direct links to many related Coast Guard missions or programs, including but not lim ited to waterways management, contingency planning and force readiness, and incident management. In preparation for an incident, a typical security spe cialist (port/recovery) will lead the development of MTS recovery and salvage response plans. This includes pro viding training for unit personnel, coordinating with other government agencies and key stakeholders within the ports, and exercising MTS recovery strategies and priorities as part of a normal exercise schedule. These spe cialists are trained to assist with post-incident recovery activities involving activation of the MTS recovery unit. ing role in the recovery unit or act in a supporting role to help a MTS recovery unit leader: e MTS with recommended prioritie s includes an all-hazard MTS recovery plan in each COTP zone nationwide. Consequently, substantial MTS recovery implementation occurred in 2008, and then again in 2014, which included key lessons learned from Deepwater Horizon and Superstorm Sandy. Coast Guard guidance, as outlined in the Navigation and Ves sel Inspection Circular (NVIC) 9-02 series, included detailed MTS recov ery procedures, a standardized MTS recovery plan format, and guidance indicating where to include the recov ery plan within the AMSP. Since then, captains of the port have revised the MTS recovery plan they use and implemented it in response to realworld incidents. In the near future, the Coast Guard anticipates an expansion of this planning effort. An MTS recovery plan NVIC, currently being promul gated at Coast Guard headquarters, will provide needed guidance on: stand-alone MTS recovery plan procedures stakeholders within each COTP zone Most importantly, the MTS recovery plan is activated by the COTP when one of the following categories of MTS disruption occurs: earthquake, major infrastructure casualty (e.g., bridges, roads, public infrastructure) security level increase, cyberattack, labor shortage, movement of cargo to non-impacted area mass rescue operations, mass casualty The new plan format is process-focused, meaning the plan elements directly relate to preparedness and response.Security Specialist (Port/Recovery) Position and Training and Qualication InitiativeFollowing the devastation of hurricanes Katrina and Rita, Coast Guard leadership began outlining many initiatives to better prepare and respond to MTS disruptions. One of the initiatives involved future planning for organizational improvements and resulted in the hiring of 29 security specialist (port/recovery) civilian positions in 2008. These This map shows the locations of security specialist (port/recovery) assignments, a position created in 2008 to improve preparation for and response to MTS disruptions. Coast Guard graphic

PAGE 37

37Fall 2018 Proceedings LANTAREA, and headquarters program managers, becoming the foundation for all future Type 3 MTS Recov ery Unit Leader (MTSL3) workshops. When the MTS recovery unit (MTSRU) leader position was formalized within the planning section of an incident management organization in 20082009, there was only leader in the Coast Guard. The success of the collabora tive effort between COTPs with dedicated support of area and headquarter champions can be effectively measured unit leaders160. 4 have continued to champion the effort to develop a train ing program for Coast Guard Training Center Yorktown, fully supported by the Coast Guard Force Readiness Command. Congressional Review of Coast Guard EortsIn 2011, the House of Representatives Committee on Com merce, Science, and Transportation and the House Com mittee on Transportation and Infrastructure requested mine how extensively the Coast Guard had revised the By 2009, it became clear across all levels of the organi approach to MTS recovery would be applied in all coastal and river COTP zones. In 201011 the Coast Guard Sev recovery workshop to familiarize personnel assigned to the various Seventh District MTS recovery units with the Coast Guards new policy, MTS recovery plans, and the ning and reporting. Though the grassroots effort in the Seventh District was promising, there was a clear need for a master les son plan (MLP) to align and standardize training materi als and meet minimum requirements for MTS recovery unit leader qualification. The Coast Guard headquar ters Domestic Ports Division (CG-FAC-1) and both Coast Guard area commands supported additional workshops ing materials developed for the workshops and design a MLP to meet the overall objectives. In 2012, the master lesson plan for MTS recovery workshops was completed and approved by PACAREA, Excerpt from the Government Accountability Oce AuditElements of Recovery Present in all AMS Plans? Additional/Notable Information Provided Procedures for establishing unit Roles in information gathering and providing guidance to the Incident Command Communication with stakeholders Two plans provide particularly robust details regarding topics such as conducting post-incident assessments, identifying port area needs, and checklists for key items needed to support MTSRU functions Two port areas leverage existing collaborative bodies to support MTSRU information-sharing functions during atransportation security incident (TSI) Discussing importance of developing pre-incident baseline data Obtaining and updating data during a TSI Providing guidance for EEI development and/or references to other guidance Five plans provide a template or instructions for determining applicable EEIs to gather, in some cases providing details on specic EEIs within the portarea 1 All plans provided guidance or references to external guidance to be used in EEI development General priorities for port area recovery Five plans include slight modications to Coast Guard HQ-dened priorities to reect unique conditions in their port areas Dening the roles and responsibilities of federal, state, and local partners Dening recovery-specic tasks to identify salvage response needs Identifying local marine salvage providers for use when needed Details were generally very consistent between individual plans One plan outlines specic tasks for the senior salvage ocer following a TSI1. Of the other two plans, one provides guidance on the roles and responsibilities of an EEI work group for developing and cataloging EEIs in their data system. The other plan states that EEIs are kept and maintained separately within the Coast Guard and made available when needed following an incident.

PAGE 38

38Proceedings Fall 2018 area maritime security plans to address the key recovery elements. Overall, the GAOs response was positive. The Coast Guard had worked to incorporate key recovery pro cesses and procedures into 43 AMSPs nationwide, and the COTPs had made efforts to incorporate industry partners in the marine transportation system recovery mission. 5 dations for change to the Coast Guards approach to the recovery of the marine transportation system. It was one of the few GAO audits of Coast Guard programs that highlighted the success of the agencys efforts rather than provided recommendations to address program gaps or identify areas for improvement. MTS Recovery During Responses to Major EventsBy 2009, all COTPs had completed the development of MTS recovery plans, either as stand-alone plans or as an annex to area maritime security plans. In January 2010, a series of natural and man-made disastersincluding the Haiti earthquakeonce again tested the foundations of the MTS recovery program and the Coast Guards readi ness to implement the MTS recovery strategies envisioned by the MR2TF. Hurricane Sandy: In 2012, this superstorm pre The ports of New York and New Jersey suffered exten sive infrastructure and system damage from the storm surge that exceeded 14 feet in some port areas. Lost and submerged containers in navigable channels impacted waterway systems. Fixed and floating critical aids to navigation were severely damaged or destroyed, and widespread damage to key energy and cargo transfer ter minals in New Jersey threatened the delivery of fuels and commodities to the northeastern United States as winter approached. Sector New York quickly established an MTS recovery unit comprised of key port stakeholders and USCG repre sentatives. This team quickly developed port assessment the region, and coordinated with national leadership to rapidly stabilize the marine transportation system. Sector New York set a new standard for the training, preparation, and use of a multiagency MTS recovery unit. The success of the effort can be directly related to the strong relationships built between the COTP and indus try partners, training and exercises focused on recovery Haiti and Deepwater MTS Response Unit ActionsImplementation of initial MR2TF recommendations during the rst two major responsesthe Haiti Earthquake and Deepwater Horizon events after Marine Transportation System recovery plans were developed in 2009Response 2006 MR2TF Recommendation 2010 Response ImplementationHaiti Earthquake Insert MTSRU in Planning Section IMTs for HAITI at all levels included MTS recovery units or support cells Develop cadre similar to IMAT to assist with MTS Recovery MTS Recovery Assist Teams created and deployed to Haiti to assess and prioritize MTS recovery mission and coordinate with USN Rene the set of measures for Essential Elements of Information The MTS recovery assist team and TMS support cell at the area command used the new EEI concept to develop EEIs for Haiti, using the data to monitor recovery eorts and determine prioritiesResponse 2006 MR2TF Recommendation 2010 Response Implementation Insert MTSRU in Planning Section IMTs for DWH at all levels included MTS recovery units or support cells Develop cadre similar to incident management assist team to help with MTS Recovery MTS Recovery SMEs from sectors deployed to D8 to support area command and eld units Rene the set of measures for Essential Elements of Information MTSRUs used the Common Assessment and Reporting Tool (CART) to report the status of the MTS and recovery eorts. Area command used CART data to make resource and response decisions and develop an incident-wide COP for MTS status Engage major maritime trade organizations via MTSRU participation Port coordination teams across D8 supported and participated in MTS recovery planning and helped develop priorities and alternative pathways for recoveryCoast Guard graphics

PAGE 39

39Fall 2018 Proceedings fuel inventories and required a coordinated approach between the Seventh District and the states of Florida, Georgia, and South Carolina to gain a full awareness of the critical fuel inventory levels and identify port status and support needs. The coordination was also crucial to developing a prioritized distribution of limited assets to correct damaged aids to navigation and conduct channel assessments. vide real-time updates on the status of all key systems in their ports using the Common Assessment and Reporting Tool (CART). Within 24 hours of the storms impact, they were able to start the port opening process, with priorities established to include relief cargoes for the Caribbean, fuels, and passenger vessels. Hurricane Maria: This Category 4 storm carved a path through Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, resulting in the closure of 22 commercial ports. In addition to the remote location and widespread damage to the transpor tation infrastructure, the complete and total loss of all utility services in the islands complicated the MTS recov ery effort, further constraining all MTS assessment and recovery efforts. MTS recovery support cells formed at the area and headquarter levels, linking with an embedded MTS recovery presence in Emergency Support Function 1 led by the Department of Transportation at the National Command Center. This direct link between all levels of the response organization helped maintain a balanced, sustained MTS recovery effort, providing the ability to address critical COTP priorities, including: replenish critically needed cryogenic oxygen for hospitals conduct channel surveys prior to the storm, 6 and the development of a communication process based on com mon measurements and terminology. The Coast Guard incorporated these key les sons into the 2014 Coast Guard-wide MTS recovery plan update effort. The 20162017 hurricane season again lenges for the entire Coast Guard. From Hurricane Matthew through Hurricane Maria, an increasingly effective line of units and national leadership. This helped to prioritize the allocation of limited and exhausted assessment and recovery assets, accurately identify critical needs, and led to the rapid resumption of port activities often within days of impact. Hurricane Matthew: This October 2016, category 5 storm damaged more than 700 aids to naviga tion in multiple southeastern and mid-Atlantic ports. This damage resulted in the closure of 13 commercial ports, affecting national defense capabilities and increasing the potential loss of fuel inventories throughout the south eastern United States. The area command established for the event coordinated closely with the MTS recovery units within each COTP to prioritize the deployment of these assets. They also coordinated with the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) channel assess ment teams. Hurricane Harvey: This storm system impacted the southeastern Texas coast, stalling over the HoustonGalveston area, where more than 50 inches of rain caused immediate national impacts. The Coast Guard MTS recov ery units and the stakeholder port coordination teams activated as envisioned by the MR2TF and enacted their predetermined plans for assessment, prioritization, and recovery. This coordinated effort streamlined the assessment and repair of damaged aids to navigation and channels, allowing for rapid resumption of operations in these nationally vital ports. These successful efforts instilled a ness of how pre-planning and coordination strengthens resiliency and the ability to rapidly recover from a disrup tion event. 7Hurricane Irma: The enormous size and power of this storm system resulted in nearly every critical Sev enth District port being impacted within a 12-hour period. The statewide evacuation initiated prior to the The Sector New York Marine Transportation System Recovery Unit participates in a workshop. Coast Guard photo

PAGE 40

40Proceedings Fall 2018 cruise vessels acting as berthing for emergency responders address U.S. vessels arriving to support relief and infrastructure repair The story is still being written on the 2017 hurricane season and how MTS recovery initiatives recommended in 2006 assisted the national recovery effort. The empha sis on recovering the marine transportation system after each storm, however, could not be more evident. Head lines across the nation carried the same message after the storms passed. From USA Today to CNBC, the message was clear: The recovery of the marine transportation sys tem is vital to the overall local and regional recovery effort. It is through the marine transportation recovery pro gram, and after 12 years of effort after the MR2TF, that we recover the MTS after a major disruption. About the authors: Joseph Couch retired from the Coast Guard in 1997, returning in 2003, as the environmental specialist for the Fifth Coast Guard District. In 2003, he obtained a port security specialist position within the Coast Guard Atlantic Area Command. He currently serves as a port/recov ery security specialist in their preparedness division. Prior to civil service, Mr. Couch worked as the training division manager for IMS Environmental Services in Chesapeake, Virginia, and served as the proj ect manager for development of more than 200 federal and state-required oil and hazardous substances contingency plans. During his 20 years with the Coast Guard, he served at the Coast Guard Training Center Baltimore; and aboard the Coast Guard cutters Westwind and Storis. Douglas Campbell retired from the Coast Guard in 2004 as a lieutenant commander. During his 25-year Coast Guard career, he served aboard the Coast Guard Cutter White Sumac; with additional assignments to the as the supervisor of Marine Safety Detachment Marathon in the Florida Keys. In November 2008, he obtained a port security specialist ( recovery/ salvage) position with Sector Jacksonville. He is responsible for the devel opment, implementation, and coordination of marine transportation sys tem recovery plans and salvage response plans for Northeast and East and has provided MTS recovery support to the Incident Management Teams for the Haiti Earthquake, Deepwater Horizon, and hurricanes Sandy, Matthew, Irma, and Maria.Endnotes :1. Maritime Recovery and Restoration Task Force, Final Report, 27APR062. LCDR Brian Falk, Planning the Recovery of the Marine Transportation System: Establishing the marine transportation system linkage within the Incident Command System, Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council, Winter 20062007, pp. 3840.3. 4. Coast Guard Business Intelligence Cube on MTS Recovery Unit Leader Quali 5. GAO-12-494R-Coast Guard Recovery Planning, April 6, 20126. USCG Super Storm Sandy After Action Report (FOUO)7. E-mail between authors and LCDR Russell Pickering, MTSRU Leader, Sector Corpus Christi Coast Guard LCDR Eric Carrero, international port security liaison ocer for Haiti, and LTJG Mike Clausen from the Coast Guard District Seven Marine Transport System Recovery Assist Team (MTSRAT), inspect a section of the pier that collapsed in November 2010 during Hurricane Tomas. The MTSRAT deployed to Haiti to conduct an assessment of the marine transportation system and the condition of the piers for vessels to dock and ooad supplies. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 3rdClass Sabrina Elgammal

PAGE 41

41Fall 2018 Proceedings Marine planning resembles the more commonly recognized discipline of urban planning. A well-established technical and political pro cess, urban planning negotiates the development and use of land, planning permission, protection and use of the environment, public welfare, and the design of the urban environment, including air, water, and infrastructure. address ocean management challenges through strategic policy and sustainable goals. Both planning processes identify and integrate competing and complementary interests into design and functionality, taking a holistic approach to development. When done correctly, marine planning is completed before changes are implemented and is part of a review, validation, and approval process that includes participa tion by all stakeholders. Marine planning is increasingly critical as our marine population density and competing interests swell. Accord council task force: 1Demands on the ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes are intensifying, spurred by population growth, migra tion to coastal areas, and economic activities. Human uses of the ocean, coasts, and the Great Lakes are expanding at a rate that challenges our ability to plan and manage them under the current sector-bysector approach. New and expanding usesinclud ing energy development, shipping, aquaculture, and emerging security require mentsare expected to place increasing demands on our ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes ecosystems. There is also increasing demand for access to these places for recreational, cultural, and other societal pursuits. As these demands increase, overlapping uses and differing views about which activities should occur where can generate con an overarching need to sustain and preserve abundant marine resources and healthy ecosystems that are criti cal to the well-being and continued prosperity of our Nation. The Coast Guard Strategy for Maritime Safety, Secu exclusive economic zone (EEZ) catastrophic incidents of the global maritime domain 2 Although several stakeholders have equities in spe safety, security, and stew ardship directly or indirectly links it to every interest. The Coast Guard pro tects U.S. national interests from all threatsinternal and external, natural and man-madealong Ameri cas coasts, in international waters, and in any other maritime region where they may be at risk. 3 But new challenges continue to arise, including increased conges tion, larger vessels, greater complexity of port opera tions, increased exploration Marine PlanningAnalyzing requirements before making changes that aect the marine transportation systemby PAUL CR ISSY Marine Transportation Specialist U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters GEO R GE DE T WEILE R Marine Transportation Specialist U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters Giant trevally along a shallow reef in Hawaiis Papahnaumokukea Marine National Monument. NOAA photo

PAGE 42

42Proceedings Fall 2018 and resource extraction on the Outer Continental Shelf, advanced marine technologies, transport of energy resources and hazardous materials, and expansion of the Panama Canal that may alter maritime shipping routes. 4 The captain of the port (COTP) relies on marine plan modate evolving changes in the marine transportation system (MTS). Additionally, USCG headquarters, areas, and districts are coordinating studies that cross traditional boundaries to better serve the interconnected needs of the broader system. Marine planning is the fundamental planning activity that enables the Coast Guard to operate ments in Title 14 U.S. Code, Section 2activities for which the Coast Guard is organized, trained, and equipped to carry out.ARegional IssueEach Coast Guard district has unique characteristics, resources, capabilities, requirements, and constituencies that must be considered to effectively address local mari time needs. Improved technologies, new opportunities, and active, vocal constituencies have created an environ ment where competing interests vie to secure maritime Globalization has led to an interconnected world, where the security and prosperity of any one nation relies on productive international relationships. Todays economy is critically dependent on global trade, which in turn relies on safe, resilient, and ecient transportation systems. Over 90percent of global trade travels through maritime conveyance, making the safety, security, and environmental stewardship of the U.S. Maritime Transportation System (MTS) a national security and economic imperative. Technological advancements have led to greater eciencies in maritime trade, and have allowed for greater exploitation of critical maritime natural resources. Eciencies in extracting criticalyet niteresources have increasingly challenged our collective ability to govern and manage competing needs of growing populations. The impacts of climate change in the maritime environmentalready evident in the Arcticmay also exacerbate many of these competing demands. USCG Commandants Strategic Intent 20152019 The Port of Oakland, California, loads and discharges more than 99percent of containerized goods moving through Northern California. Multiple cargo ships are shown docked in inner harbor. Sheila Fitzgerald | Shutterstock.com

PAGE 43

43Fall 2018 Proceedings informing agency decisions and practices rather than beginning of the process and the frame for continued work.A National Priority ning is demonstrated by the establishment of the NOC, a cabinet-level organization. Reliable sea lines of com munication, which describe the primary maritime routes between ports and are used for trade, logistics, and naval forces, are absolutely critical to U.S. national security. They are also among the most important of marine plan ning concerns, especially for the Coast Guard in its role of regional marine plan to ensure it is consistent with other regions, national security objectives, and the National Ocean Policy. 6The United States has the largest system of ports, waterways, and coastal seas in the world, including some 95,000 miles of coastline. The MTS contains 26,000 miles of commercial waterways that serve 361 ports; 3,700 marine terminalsfrom marinas to mega-ports; 200 locks; and resources that up until now have been either ignored or For example, in the Gulf of Mexico, the placement of hundreds of oil rigs caused an atypical ship routing sys tem that wasnt carved out until after many of the rigs ciently and safely routed, and living marine resources may have been better protected, had effective marine planning processes been in place beforehand to analyze the impact these structures would have on myriad inter ests in the region. Now countless considerations affect ing maritime regions are part of the analysis of maritime usage plans to ensure theyre consistent with Coast Guard maritime safety, security, and stewardship objectives. It isnt unreasonable to assume that additions to the list of new and expanding ocean, coastal, and Great Lakes uses will increase in years to come. Regional planning bodies are coalitions of stakehold ers that strengthen coordination, planning, and policy implementation, and enhance public participation. 5 They provide an opportunity for stakeholders to inform oth ers of their plans and objectives, to better understand other stakeholders equities, and to coordinate activities. The Coast Guard is the advocate for the MTS, safe naviga tion, and the mariner while remaining mindful of how various initiatives could affect Coast Guard operations. The portfolio represented by the district commander is increasingly complex due to technological advances and many other changeslarger number of transits, an expanded cruise industry, neo-Panamax shipping, and greater intermodal connectivitywhich affect existing routes, routing measures, and safety margins. The other stakeholders include a diverse group of inter national, federal, state, tribal, and local governments as well as advocacy groups representing their constituents interests and objectives. For example, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Fisheries is responsible for the stewardship of the nations ocean resources and their habitat. The organization is increasingly focused on aquaculturethe breeding, rearing, and harvesting of plants and animals in all types of water environments as population growth increases pressure on our ability to provide adequate food. Similarly, the Bureau of Ocean Energy Management oversees offshore renewable energy development as we deplete non-renewable resources and renewable resources become more competitive. These are two of myriad organizations and coalitions representing their communities of interest and lobbying to ensure their concerns are addressed. Regional plans for the Northeast and Mid-Atlantic have been developed and validated by the National Ocean Council (NOC). These plans are based on a premise that they summarize the ocean planning process as guides, Traditional, New, and Expanding Ocean, Coastal, and Great Lakes UsesThe ocean, our coasts, and the Great Lakes are home to and support myriad important human uses. Marine planning provides an eective process to better manage a range of social, economic, and cultural uses, including: Aquaculture (sh, shellsh, and seaweed farming) Commerce and Transportation (e.g., cargo and cruise ships, tankers, and ferries) Commercial Fishing Environmental/Conservation (e.g., marine sanctuaries, reserves, national parks, and wildlife refuges) Maritime Heritage and Archeology Mining (e.g., sand and gravel) Oil and Gas Exploration and Development Ports and Harbors Recreational Fishing Renewable Energy (e.g., wind, wave, tidal, current, and thermal) Other Recreation (e.g., boating, beach access, swimming, surng, nature and whale watching, and diving) Scientic Research and Exploration Security, Emergency Response, and Military Readiness Activities Subsistence Uses Tourism Traditional Hunting, Fishing, and Gathering Working WaterfrontsSource: Final Recommendations of the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force

PAGE 44

44Proceedings Fall 2018 1,000 harbor channels. The system also includes 1,500 miles of international maritime border with Canada, con necting population centers to the Atlantic Ocean through the Great Lakes and the St. Lawrence Seaway System. 7 These individual components are essential to the smooth function of the entire system.The Coast Guard ApproachAs the worlds premier multi-mission maritime ser vice, the Coast Guard offers unique, enduring value to the Department of Homeland Security and the Ameri can public. At all times a military service, a federal law and an intelligence community member, the Coast Guard serves a nation whose economic prosperity and national security are inextricably linked to vast maritime interests. To preserve these interests at home and abroad, the Coast Guard employs its broad authorities; an expansive net work of interagency, military, and industry relationships; and unique operational capabilities and international partnerships that enable it to execute daily, steady-state operations and respond to major incidents. This requires prioritization and uniformity throughout the service as well as coordination of ongoing and projected activi ties with other stakeholders. The end result is a coherent national approach that still allows operational command ers the necessary flexibility to accommodate unique regional factors. 8The Coast Guard has long used marine planning as the basis to meet its statutory responsibilities. The Coast Guard provides a safe, efficient, and navigable waterway system to sup port domestic commerce, international trade, and military sealift require ments for national defense. 9 To accom plish this, several programs work together to address the same issue from different, but related, perspec tives. The director of marine transpor tation systems management oversees marine planning efforts and facili tates coordination with, and outreach to, other affected programs and MTS stakeholders, including other federal, state, tribal, and local agencies. This directorate supports short-range aids to navigation, navigation systems and It also offers support for mapping and charting tide, current, and pilot age information, as well as domestic icebreaking and technical assistance and advice. The director of commercial regulations and standards develops national regulations, standards, and policies to enhance maritime safety, security, and stewardship; develops and executes an engagement plan for interna tional standards; and administers a technical compliance program to ensure uniform application of design and operating standards on commercial vessels. The director of inspections and compliance develops and maintains policy, standards, and prevention activities associated with MTS recovery planning and operations. Complementary response programs such as search and rescue, maritime environmental protection, law enforce ment, and defense operations are key elements of the com prehensive marine planning process. 10 The ultimate purpose of marine planning is to reduce risk. Marine Planning to Operate and Maintain the Marine Transportation System (MTS) and Implement National Policy, COMDTINST 16003.2A, emphasizes the multi-mission character of the Coast Guard by expanding marine planning activities within several operating pro grams. Prevention includes such measures as placing aids to navigation (ATON), ensuring that commercial vessels are properly designed, built, and maintained, and recre ational boater safety education. A heightened prevention posture may mean deploying automatic identification systems (AIS) and aids to navigation before a dangerous weather event to make waterways more resilient, should physical aids be damaged or lost. Response efforts by Located about 4 miles from Block Island, Rhode Island, the Block Island wind farm is the rst oshore wind farm in the United States. NOAA photo

PAGE 45

45Fall 2018 Proceedings also chartered the waterways analysis and management system (WAMS) study for the Atlantic and Gulf Coast Seacoast System in June 2015 to deal with increasingly congested and complex waterways, as well as to help district commanders adjust their aids to navigation to better match capabilities with emerging requirements. The ACPARS and the WAMS study for the AGSS fol lowed the basic models for port access route studies and waterways analysis and management system stud ies, but went well beyond the scope of previous studies. These studies provide valuable insight into future MTS requirements. routes and density off the Atlantic Coast in support of the Department of Interiors Smart from the Start initiative, as well as provide data to support future marine plan ning efforts. The study area included the entire Atlan tic Coastfrom Maine to Floridaand was focused on waters seaward of the existing port approach systems within the exclusive economic zone. Its intent was to iden tify all current and anticipated new users and determine what impact the siting, construction, and operation of proposed alternative energy facilities may have on near coastal users. Additionally, it looked at whether routing measures should be modified or cre ated to ensure the safety of navigation. 12 Though the ACPARS focus was intended for offshore wind energy, other activities like hydrokinetics, aquaculture, or tradi tional oil, gas, and mineral extraction are served equally well. ACPARS used AIS data to identify the primary routes taken by shipping along the Atlantic Coast. It also identi fied additional data requirements to evaluate changes in navigational safety risk resulting from different siting and routing scenarios. The study provided invaluable information to myriad Coast Guard programs regarding the effects that changes in the offshore areas could have on existing resources and capa bilities. The precedence of activities var ies, depending on many factors, to help determine an optimal balance. The ACPARS also led to develop ment of marine planning guidelines to assist offshore developers and marine planners with their evaluation of the navigational impacts of projects with multiple permanent fixed structures. The guidelines consider sea space nec essary for ships to maneuver safely and discuss other factors to be considered district commanders and COTPs are the Coast Guards reaction to adverse events, and are often precipitated by pre-positioning forces from across the nation, using them to support post-incident operations. 11 These related and complementary aspects of marine planning help enable the COTP to maintain the MTS. Coast Guard marine planning activities are mostly carried out at the district or sector level. Coast Guard headquarters and areas provide guidance and assistance, but the Deputy Commandant for Operations has the over all responsibility for marine planning. Several headquar ters directorates and programs provide policy guidance process. Area commanders are mostly concerned when regional planning overlaps district boundaries.Studying the Atlantic and Gulf Coast Seacoast Systems Coast Guard headquarters and Atlantic Area chartered the Atlantic Coast Port Access Route Study (ACPARS) in May 2011 to address the potential navigational safety risks associated with the development of offshore renewable energy installations and to support future marine planning efforts. Subsequently, headquarters Graphic courtesy of Dr. Jean-Paul Rodrigue, Department of Global Studies and Geography, Hofstra University, New York, USAEvolving Ship Designs Aect MTS Marine Planning to Accommodate Maneuvering Requirements

PAGE 46

46Proceedings Fall 2018 when determining appropriate separation distances for the siting of offshore structures near shipping routes and other multi-use areas. These guidelines consider port coastal shipping routes; offshore deep draft routes; navi gation safety corridors; and potential contributions and mitigations to risk, as well as unique circumstances. 13 other users in understanding the constraints that mari ners operate under and how these constraints could affect their initiatives. It is also an important basis upon which guidance. The AGSS WAMS was conducted to determine the short-range aids to navigation requirements for the United States Eastern Seaboard from the border with Canada to the Mexican border. Its recommendations and conclusions were focused on providing consistent, pro gram-wide policy to support district commanders ATON services within the AGSS. It did not determine individual aids to add, keep, or remove, but rather analyzed the capa bilities of various user types to shape policy for the nextgeneration waterway system management and design. Western Rivers.Coast Guard Mechanisms to Develop and Maintain the MTS Waterways Analysis and Management System studyvalidates the adequacy of the existing aids to navigation system Navigation Safety Risk Assessmentevaluates the impact of a structure on or near the navigable waters of the United States Waterway Suitability Assessmentused by the COTP to assist in making a determination on the suitability of the waterway for liqueed natural gas marine trac and liqueed hazardous gas facilities Port Access Route Studyused by program managers to assist in making a determination of the need to establish trac routing measures, fairways, trac separation schemes, limited access areas, recommended routes, and regulated navigation areas in order to ensure navigational safety in the United States o-shore approaches and coastal waters Ports and Waterways Safety Assessmentidenties major waterway safety hazards, estimates subsequent risk levels, evaluates potential mitigation measures, and sets the stage for implementation of selected measures to reduce risk. Harbor Safety Committeea principal building block in the national marine transportation system (MTS) coordinating structure. HSCs ensure that the United States MTS is safe, secure, ecient, eective, accessible, globally competitive, dynamic, and environmentally responsible.Source: Marine Planning to Operate and Maintain the Marine Transportation System and Implement National Policy, COMDTINST 16003.2A, dated 18November 2016 The Way Ahead for Marine PlanningCaptains of the port enforce port safety, security, and marine environmental protection regulations, includ ing, without limitation, regulations for the protection and security of vessels, harbors, and waterfront facili ties; anchorages; security zones; safety zones; regulated navigation areas; deepwater ports; water pollution; and ports and waterways. 14 Their authorities enable the Coast Guard to coordinate incident and disaster preparedness and response, singularly and in coordination with other government entities. 15 The COTP is the Coast Guards pri mary operational component responsible for maintaining a reliable, safe, secure, and resilient MTS. Marine planning has been, and will continue to be, an shape decision making as the Coast Guard endeavors to ensure maritime safety, security, and stewardship in ocean areas, along U.S. coasts, and in the Great Lakes. Consistent with the concept of marine planning, the Coast Guard must unify efforts and foster invaluable relationships with a full range of stakeholders who depend upon, or operate in or near, the MTS. The Coast Guard must capitalize on the unique nature of its broad authorities and capabilities edging the growing complexity and vitality of com mercial activities in the maritime region, the Coast Guard will continue to build upon robust interagency relationships with federal, state, and local governments, and engage maritime industry stakeholders in forging an optimal solution. 16 Risk management and hazard preven tion across the MTS will remain the essential approach to accomplishing safety and security objectives. In an increasingly complex mari time environment, the Coast Guard will con tinue to emphasize the role of effective incident management in response and recovery opera tions for events and activities that pose major threats to commercial activity, the environ ment, or human life. The Coast Guard must endeavor to meet the emerging demands of all commercial maritime activities. This will include active engagement in ship design and construction, offshore infra structure, transportation of energy products via the MTS, and the construction and opera tion of new terminals. The service must also enhance its technical competency and work force capacity while expanding contingency plans and preparedness activities, ensuring vigilance in waterways management, and exploring improvements to national response policy. 17

PAGE 47

47Fall 2018 Proceedings Part of the Coast Guards aids to navigation mission includes maintenance. Coast Guard photo About the authors: Paul Crissy and George Detweiler are marine transportation specialists in the ler has championed the development of international routing measures for sev planning processes within the Coast Guards statutory authorization.Endnotes :1. Final Recommendations of the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, The White House Council on Environmental Quality, July 19, 2010, p. 132. Executive Summary, Coast Guard Strategy for Maritime Safety, Security, and Stew ardship, January 19, 20073. Coast Guard Publication 1, p. 54. USCG Commandants Strategic Intent 2015-2019, p. 85. Final Recommendations of the Interagency Ocean Policy Task Force, The White House Council on Environmental Quality, July 19, 2010, p. 86. Executive Order 13547Stewardship of the Ocean, Our Coasts, and the Great Lakes, July 19, 20107. 2014 USCG Western Hemisphere Strategy, p. 78. 2017 Budget in Brief, Posture Statement9. Coast Guard Publication 1, p. 1910. Marine Planning to Operate and Maintain the Marine Transportation System (MTS) and Implement National Policy, COMDTINST 16003.2A, dated 18 November 201611. Coast Guard Publication 1, p. 8612. Atlantic Coast Port Access Route Study Final Report, dated 8 July 2015, p. 113. Marine Planning to Operate and Maintain the Marine Transportation System (MTS) and Implement National Policy, COMDTINST 16003.2A, dated 18 November 2016, Appendix E. 14. Title 33 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR), Navigation and Navigable Waters, Part 1 General Provisions, Subpart 1.01Delegation of Authority; 1.01-30 Captains of the Port15. Coast Guard Publication 1, p. 916. USCG Commandants Strategic Intent 20152019, p. 1417. USCG Commandants Strategic Intent 20152019, p. 8 Deep draft routing along the Atlantic Coast. Coast Guard photo

PAGE 48

48Proceedings Fall 2018 The challenges experienced on the Mississippi River in Mark Twains time still resonate with our maritime com munity today. As the seasons change, so do the various navigational challenges for those who brave operating on the mighty Mississippi. If you couple those ever-present issues with recent unexpected and extended weather patterns, you realize that the maritime community, as well as the agencies that regulate and support it, must remain nimble and vigilant. This requires the fostering of processes and programs that promote effective com munication and collaboration when facing uncertain impact navigational safety and disrupt the maritime transportation system.Historical Perspective of High and Low Water ConditionsThroughout its existence, the Mississippi River has been entrenched in a multitude of high and low river events, some reaching historic proportions. One of the most was the Great Mississippi River Flood of 1927. During that event, more than 26,000 square milesor 16,800,000 acresof land became flooded, displacing more than 700,000 people from their homes, killing 500 people, and causing about $1 billion in damage, which was one-third of the federal budget at the time. 1 tion was felt across the countryextending west to Texas, Oklahoma, and Kansas, north to Missouri, Illinois, and Kentucky, and dipping south into Arkansas, Mississippi, and Louisiana. The impact to the government and its citizens was so significant that the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) was called upon to devise a plan to ensure a similar future catastrophe would not cause the same level of devastation. This paved the way for the 1928 Flood Control Act, which instituted the Mississippi River and Tributaries Project. This monumental project put in within the Lower Mississippi Valley that would provide the project has four major features pertaining to levees or lization, and tributary basin improvements. During the and expanded to include reservoirs, tributary improve ments, cutoffs, and other channel improvement features. The current estimate for completion of this enormous, complex project involving layers of local, state, and federal agencies is 2031. While high water events have caused navigational safety hazards and economic disruption for the river com munity, extreme low water also presents its own distinct river. During low water conditions, the river becomes much narrower and shallower, forcing vessels to navi gate much closer together, even impacting nearby barge the river. One of the most severe low water periods occurred in 1988 when about 66 percent of the Mississippi River Basin experienced severe drought. At the time, it was one of the drop in river stage caused massive congestion, blocking numerous routes along the river with excessive shoaling Rollin on the RiverMitigating environmental and economic impacts during high/low water seasons through government/industry collaboration by L C D R HOWA R D VA CC O Chief, Waterways Management Division U.S. Coast Guard Sector New Orleans One who knows the Mississippi will promptly avernot aloud, b ut to himselfthat ten thousand river commissions, with the mines of the world at their back, cannot go there, and make it obey; cannot save a shore which it has sentenced; cannot bar its path with an obstruction which it will not tear down, dance over, and laugh a t. Mark Twain

PAGE 49

49Fall 2018 Proceedings and lack of navigable water, costing billions of dollars in property damage and a reduction in commodity trans portation. High and Low Water Conditions of Today and Stakeholder Coordination ber that extreme river conditions are not just a thing of the past. Most recently, a 2015 El Nio (warmer) weather pattern present throughout most of the year shifted to a La Nia (cooler) pattern. This caused unusually heavy rains throughout the Mississippi River drainage basin during the late fall, catching many by surprise since low water is usually expected at that time of the year. The chain reaction of events impacted more than 1,000 miles of the Mississippifrom St. Louis to the Gulf of Mexicos Southwest Pass. The response required the coordination and collaboration of industry, the Coast Guard, USACE, and a myriad of stakeholders to minimize disruption to hundreds of millions of dollars in commerce while avoid ing the compromising of navigational safety. While marine casualties did occur, if not for the excep tional communication and coordination of all parties, fur and the environment would have been much more prev alent. Mariners and industry stakeholders played their parts by communicating about what they were experienc ing, which provided the Coast Guard and USACE critical information. Based on that information, appropriate traf overly stressed river system. River. With water levels at their lowest since 1988 in some areas, USACE was called upon to feverishly work toward ensuring the largest inland marine system in the world On April0, 1927, the waterfront of Cape Girardeau, Missouri, was ooded as the Mississippi River rose to a stage of 40feet. Coast and Geodetic Survey map and National Weather Service photo from The Floods of 1927 in the Mississippi Basin, Frankenfeld, H.C., 1927 Monthly Weather Review SupplementNo.29

PAGE 50

50Proceedings Fall 2018 and organizations, a larger contingent of operators can be reached to craft and implement longer-range contingency plans for future highand low-water events. The challenge for government agencies and industry is of safety concerns on the waterway. The question moving forward is: What tools do we use to reduce the potential of marine casualties while concurrently working to limit maritime disruption?Tools for Mitigating Risk Much like working on a car or doing a home repair, a captain of the port will carefully select the best tool to effectively mitigate risk and achieve a positive outcome on the waterway. This is especially true during periods of extremely highor low-water stages. One tool that most commercial operators may be familiar with is a captain of the port order. This is essentially a direct order from the COTP to a commercial operator outlining specific requirements for safe operation. Since it is directed at a and scope. COTPs have a few additional tools in their risk mitigation arse nals, including safety zones and regulated navigational areas (RNAs). Safety zones are temporary measures employed to protect personnel, ves sels, and the marine environment from hazards in an associated area on the waterway. While a bit more expansive than a captain of the port order, it also has limitations in its abil ity to outline multiple requirements, and requires a rulemaking procedure to enact. RNAs prescribe procedures to a regulation. While this is the most detailed and effective of the three, it requires a regulatory process that can be established only by the Coast Guard district commandernot the COTP. Consequently, once in place, it can be challenging to deviate from it if circumstances change during a spe If you are fortunate enough to have a vessel traffic center (VTC) in your COTP zone, it can adminis ter a vessel traffic service measure or direction. Since one of the VTCs stayed passable. While most of the waterways remained open, towing vessel operators dealing with the shallower water had to reduce the number of barges they pushed while deep-draft vessels carried less cargo to reduce the necessary to prevent an accident that could cause further damage and waterway disruption. During an incident, most actions the Coast Guard implements on the waterway will be communicated through Marine Safety Information Bulletins (MSIBs) or Broadcast Notices to Mariners (BNMs). Behind the scenes, carefully selected agency and port partner representa tives within the captain of the port (COTP) zone known as Port Coordination Teams (PCTs) engage in conference calls with the COTP to discuss the current status on the waterway as well as any needed action from involved par ties. From there, actions are implemented and the public (Right) Dredge Hurley on the Mississippi River at Thebes, Illinois, in February 2013, dredging during extreme low water as part of eorts to keep the navigation channel open for use. Army Corps of Engineers photo by Jim Pogue (Bottom) The Mississippi River Basin. Image by Rainer Lesniewski | Shutterstock.com

PAGE 51

51Fall 2018 Proceedings purposes is to help manage the safe transit of vessels on the waterway, they have exceptional capability and authority to enact swift and detailed requirements during times of hazardous conditions on the waterway. However, since there are only 12 VTCs in the country, this is not an option for most COTPs. While these tools are appropriate and effective for many cases, they are not always adept at dealing with the dynamic circumstances occurring with highor low-water challenges from year to year, and typically place a majority of the decision making on the COTP. With that said, any Coast Guard COTP will tell you that one of the major keys to success is the ability to work collaboratively with maritime stakeholders to mitigate risk on a waterway. In addition to the aforementioned COTP tools, a waterway action plan (WAP) has been extremely effec tive in dealing with dynamic risk associated with highand low-water stages. Drafted and signed by the Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, and key river operators/stakeholders, a WAP is a living document that establishes a framework for all parties to use when tak ing proactive measures to respond to highand low-water conditions. managing various river conditions. While the plan out lines elements of Coast Guard and USACE regulatory requirements, it also incorporates industry and mariner best practices. This may come in the form of a reduction of tow sizes at certain river stages/locations, or the use of towing assist vessels at areas on the river that present navigation challenges. The plan also highlights effective communication processes, like when to expect MSIBs or BNMs, and outlines timelines for PCT calls. The most successful processes are the ones where all interested parties come to the table and contribute to the process of safe navigation. As all members are aware, the operating conditions under which the agreements are made are not optimal, but with effective communication processes and best practices in place, there arent many challenges that mariners, industry, and agencies cant adapt to and overcome. With each passing year, the demands we place upon the Mississippi River have continued to increase. Ships grown, increasing the demand for real estate to permit operations along the waterfront. While the expectations of how we use the Mississippi River have increased, the behaviors and challenges in dealing with extreme river conditions remain the same. Every seasoned captain who has operated on the Mississippi River will tell you that each day on the river has its own story to tell. What might have been true yesterday, may not hold true tomorrow. If the Mississippi River were a book, a captains daily expe rience would contribute just one page to a chapter, offer ing its own unique perspective and experience toward telling the complete story. However, as we look to the past for perspective to help our ability to work together to craft policies and prac our achievements are directly tied to how well maritime government agencies and industry stakeholders continue to cooperate and collaborate to overcome the challenges Mother Nature presents. When that happens, theres no feat we cannot accomplish. About the author: LCDR Howard Howie Vacco has served in the U.S. Coast Guard for more than 20 years. His experience includes port safety and security, waterways management, and vessel inspections. At the time this article was written, he was assigned as the chief of the waterways management division at Sector New Orleans. He has served in response to many inci dents, most notably receiving personal and event awards for participation during Hurricane Maria, Deepwater Horizon, and hurricanes Katrina Mississippi River.Endnote :1. Smith, James A.; Baeck, Mary Lynn (2015). Prophetic vision, vivid imagina http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/2015WRR....51.9964S The Dredge Potter, one of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers dustpan dredges, removes sediment from the mainstem of the Mississippi River channel to keep commercial navigation owing during extreme low-water conditions between St.Louis and Cairo, Illinois, in January 2013. Army Corps of Engineers photo

PAGE 52

52Proceedings Fall 2018The Mississippi River winds its way from north ern Minnesota to the Gulf of Mexico over a course of 2,320 miles. The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) provides a chart that shows the course of this great river, but that chart only provides part of the story. Ive had the pleasure of experiencing more of that story personally over my career of navigating tows, both large and small, over a large portion of this river. Ive had the knowledge and wisdom down to me as I learned the trade as a Mississippi River towboat pilot and then captain. You come to learn and appreciate that the river is alive and ever-changing. The truth of the matter is that you cannot see this river one time and pretend to know what it has in store, nor can you examine a chart and grasp how to navigate safely. It takes years to appreciate the rivers different ways of require very different skill sets to navigate at different times of the year, and on the same hitch aboard the vessel, a person may need to employ several different skill sets to navigate safely during the voyage. Without this hands-on passing of knowledge, the task would be very daunting. Im grateful to have had the opportunity to be taught by master riverboat captains.Low Water Above NatchezContrary to popular belief, the river is not always easier to navigate when water levels drop. As the river settles down into its natural channel, in some places the width constricted channel below a sandbar can often increase in velocity in the same way a hose squirts water when you squeeze the end. Plugging that narrow hole with a tow only causes the velocity to worsen, sometimes causing the tow to nearly stall during upbound transits. A Tale of Two Riversby MA TT LAGA R DE former Regulatory Compliance Director American Commercial Barge Lines Low river levels forced river trac to operate closer to each other on the Mississippi River near St.Louis in December 2012. Coast Guard photo

PAGE 53

53Fall 2018 Proceedings These narrow channels limit the amount of room for a downbound tow to slide, requiring the tows to slow to allows the head of the tow to fall into the swift current in the bight of the bend, allowing the current to wash the head of the tow around the corner, thus limiting inertia in the steer and controlling the mass of the tow. Part of when to steer a bend. The best advice is to work with the currentnot against it. These difficult transits through restricted chan nels also create traffic jams. The flanking of the bend can sometimes double the time it would take to transit the sandbar. Often several boats will pile up before the ing below to make the jump up through the narrow area. Keep in mind, they are going to take a long time to shove up through the narrow spot with the increased velocity. The depth of the water in certain spots can also be a challenge. As river levels go up and down, the draft of the tow when you depart New Orleans upbound could be an issue seven days later when you get up past Memphis and beyond. After every high water event, the sandbars seem to shift and re-form, occasionally giving way to rock for mations hidden beneath the surface. Every summer, after the mighty Mississippi have to feel their way up the river to discover what new surprises it has in store. Sometimes its a bar that built out, or sometimes the river channel completely shifts from one side of the river to another.Low Water Below NatchezWhen there is low water in the areas below Natchez, Mis sissippi, where the river takes a more traditional channel and its width remains fairly consistent throughout the year, the current slows. Often this lazy river makes for easier steering on downbound transits and more speed on upbound transits. It comes with its own set of challenges, though. Tow boat captains use the river current to steer the tow one way or another when not making way, and to maintain This can be a real challenge when trying to hold position with empty barges in wind, for example, or when stopped along the bank waiting for service. The head of the tow becomes a little more difficult to control, and suction Workers contracted by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) clear rocks from the Mississippi River oor near Thebes, Illinois, in December 2012. The Coast Guard and USACE supervised these rock blasting operations in an eort to mitigate the low water situation on the Mississippi River. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 3rdClass Ryan Tippets

PAGE 54

54Proceedings Fall 2018 High Water Below NatchezWhen the water below Natchez rises enough that the USACE can control the rivers course, keeping it on its path toward the sea, the river cant get any widerit can only get faster. This is where the navigation of large tows more of a concern, especially in the congested areas below Baton Rouge. The captain has to listen closely for downbound ship and ships behind them may be unable to stop and wait with a following current. The ability to stop along the banks becomes more of a challenge as the water covers raised river beds and the proximity of tows to levees and embankments become more of a concern, greatly restrict ing the opportunities for safe berth. The lack of parking or the need to maintain a position in the river current while doing tow work. Drift poses another problem for tows during high water, where large trees and debris can jam a rudder or rob a boat of an engine for a few minutes. Another thing nerve-wracking. Just because the current has diminished and the water level has fallen does not mean that there is less work or stress on the pilothouse.High Water Above NatchezAbove Natchez, when the water levels get higher and the bars, behind her islands, and through the woodlands. As the river breaks out of her channel and spreads, it has a chance to spread out and allow a lot more room to navi become wide enough to steer without issue. Narrow spots where tows could not meet are now wide enough that and continue their journeys when meeting downbound tows. In fact, they are often able to navigate behind islands and completely out of the paths of other vessels. For these reasons, contrary to belief, sometimes high water is a pleasure. Every river towboat pilot keeps good notes on the nav igability of chutes and the amount of water over dikes and bars. The most critical thing about high water is that although the river channel itself has a tendency to widen with the increased water levels, bridges do not. The bridge of the current out of a bend or across a point. At every different river stage, the bridges have a different personality, consideration, and the effect of the cur rent on the vessel and barges greatly Top: Crewmembers on the bridge of the Coast Guard Cutter Harry Claiborne guide the ship through the Mississippi River in 2010. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 3rd Class Barry Bena Left: A red nun buoy lies on the levee bank of the Mississippi River, a casualty of the high water on the river. Coast Guard aids to navigation units replace and maintain aids to navigation on the rivers to maintain a safe, navigable waterway. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 3rdClass Lora Ratli

PAGE 55

55Fall 2018 Proceedings to realize is that the current speed is not always perfectly aligned with the height of the water on the river gauge. No event is the sameany or all of the following may play a part in the expected velocity: Mitigation StrategiesThe industry has many different strategies for dealing work with regulatory agencies and industry groups to craft waterway action plans from experience and insight. These collaborative efforts, when properly employed and regularly reviewed and amended, create a framework or set of ground rules upon which everyone can base deci sions. Years of experience and practice go into planning. Often those with the experience and wisdom to make such decisions have gone on to calmer waters long ago, but the legacy knowledge guides new mariners and Coast Guardsmen who rotate through positions that help moni tor the river conditions. Tow size restrictions are another method of reducing risk. The less tow-to-horsepower ratio a boat has generally means greater control of the tow and better speed through the water on upbound transits. Tow sizes are generally considered part of the waterway action plan and are usu be acceptable standards. These tow-to-horsepower ratios were always consid ered with the knowledge that most vessel designs were conventional wheel and shaft setups. New technology and efficienciesborn with the influx of azimuthing drives (Z-drives) and bow thruster combinationsare changing how we determine adequate control of a tow for a given tow size. Smaller tows on the vessels do not always eliminate all risks. There have been times when tow sizes were reduced so much that what had worked for pilots previously had A barge carrying slurry oil being pushed by the towing vessel Amy Francis allided with the Natchez-Vidalia Bridge on the Mississippi River in January 2016. The barge reportedly had a maximum potential of more than 1million gallons of slurry oil on board. Coast Guard Sector Lower Mississippi River photo

PAGE 56

56Proceedings Fall 2018 It is a large expense to provide these vessels and crews, highly important to each and every company. Companies where industry representatives partner with Coast Guard personnel to advise transiting crews and maintain a sem blance of order as it applies to the large queues of boats unteers help keep track of the list of boats as they arrive and advise the Coast Guard of handling characteristics, In all, the Mississippi is a single river with multiple personalities. From day to day and river stage to river stage, the river shows us a different side of itself, requir ing different sets of skills to tame. One thing the river will teach you is that there is always something else to learn. Together, the professional mariners plying the waters of the Mississippi, in close coordination with other indus try partners and the Coast Guard, are working to ensure to help alleviate some of the risks associated with an ever-changing river. Legacy knowledge of river naviga tion strategies, past experience, familiarity with emerg ing technology, and up-to-date information on changes in river currents and channels are all part of the strategy. It is very important to understand that there is no one solution to these complex navigation problems, and every high river is different. With this in mind, it is important to capture the lessons learned and have a framework for ible and have a team ready to work out problems unique to each river level event. About the author: Matt Lagarde wrote this article while serving as the regulatory compliance director for American Commercial Barge Lines. He is currently the director of tank barge operations for Ingram Barge Company. He holds a Master of Towing for Western Rivers, Great Lakes, and Inland waters, and has navigation experience through out the Inland waters and Western Rivers navigating tows. He also has experience working shore-side in a support and advocacy role for the mariners throughout the industry. He has also served on numerous industry committees, including the last six years as a member of the USCGs Towing Safety Advisory Committee, and as a board member for the Maritime Navigation Safety Association for the last eight years. fundamentally changed, causing the current set at the bridge to not act on the tow as it had in the past. In such a case, the pilot would be counting on the current to push the tow in a certain direction, but the small tow and greater horsepower would cause an unanticipated action, and the tow would end up alliding with the bridge pier despite the preventative measures taken. Information sharing is another hallmark of the inland towing industry. While we all compete for contracts in the marketplace, a grounding or collision on a narrow chan nel doesnt help anyone. In open waters, one could simply go around a problem, but on a river, an incident generally results in a closure impacting everyones business. During times of water level extremes, river industry and Coast Guard personnel hold conference calls to share informa tion, create strategies to minimize delays, and ensure everyone understands the risks and takes appropriate action to mitigate those risks. All experiences are passed along and recorded for inclusion into updated waterway action plans. Self-help is another industry hallmark of cooperation and mutual care. The industry often provides boats at bridges and locks to assist other vessels and ensure the whole of the industry is able to continue to move com merce. The personnel on these helper boats are able to pass on valuable information and serve as a local expert, having witnessed transits through the area. They are also able to render assistance if the situation does not quite go as planned. The U.S. Army Corps Dredge Potter works on the Mississippi just south of the Jeerson Barracks Bridge near St.Louis to ensure the channel is properly cleared and dredged in December 2012. Low water is also uncovering a sand bar near the southbound tow. Coast Guard photo

PAGE 57

57Fall 2018 ProceedingsWelcome to Chicago! Located on the southwest corner of Lake Michigan, Chicago is a vital Lakes to the western rivers system. While early forms of land-based transportation, like transcontinental rail roads, dominated connections between inner cities, Chi cagos waterways were the key to solidifying the citys role as a commercial powerhouse. Nearly 175 years ago, Louis Jolliet and Father Jacques ous connection from the Atlantic Ocean to the Gulf of Mexico using the waterways near Chicago. Today, because of the 1822 congressional authorization of the Illinois and Michigan Canal, this dream is a reality, making Chicagos waterways the conduit to the Great Mississippi River and a welcoming point to the heartland of America. 1Competition for Todays Waterway SystemDowntown Chicago is divided by three navigable branches of the Chicago Riverthe north, south, and main branches. Water flows into the branches via the Chicago Lock, which connects Lake Michigan to the river but polluted river water caused major contamination of the public drinking supply taken from the lake. This led to the creation of the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal (CSSC), and the reversal of the river to protect the areas source of drinking water. Construction of the 160-footwide engineered channel to support reversal of the Chi cago River began in 1892 and was completed in 1900. 2These three branches of the Chicago River allow a diverse group of waterway users, from commer Chicagos major metropolitan areas. During the sum mer, Chicagoans and visitors regularly board passen ger vessels and recreational boats to take advantage of all the city has to offer. This path through the city has naturally led entrepreneurs to develop popular com charge, marine inspection (OCMI) authority, the Coast Guard regulates many of these operations to ensure passenger vessels comply with applicable federal laws. Chicagos Waterway System Competing demands on Chicagos shared waterwaysby L T JOHN RAMOS Chief, Waterways Management Division Marine Safety Unit Chicago U.S. Coast Guard The Chicago skyline during the summer, showing Lake Michigan and the Chicago Harbor on the left. Boats are moored in the harbor and Lake Shore Drive winds around the city. Photo by Joseph Sohm | Shutterstock.com

PAGE 58

58Proceedings Fall 2018 through the CAWS supported more than 1.7 million jobs and $102.5 billion in wages. 3 Recreational boating is another entity competing for use of the water ways in Chicago. On Lake Michi gan, recreational users gather near Chicagos 10 harbors located along the 14 mile lakeshore that makes up the largest municipal harbor system within the United States. 4 The Coast Guard accomplishes this mission with marine inspectors who examine vessels and enforce laws using the Code of Federal Regulations. barges pass through Chicago carrying dry cargo like salt, sand, petroleum coke, and scrap metal. Normally these barges continue through the south branch of the river, headed for the CSSC. On the CSSC, barges are parked in fleeting areas are typically parked sideby-side, waiting to be taken to a local facil ity to discharge cargo. With the possibility of carrying two barges wide, and a single parked barge measuring 35 feet wide, towing vessel masters are left with only 20 feet of open space in which to operate. If mariners continue fur ther south, they navigate into the Des Plaines River, which creates a confluence with the Kankakee and Illinois rivers, that later con nects to the mighty Mississippi near Grafton, Illinois. The Chicago River, CSSC, and other water ways are the primary navigation channels comprising the commercial portion of the area commonly referred to as the Chicago Area Waterway System (CAWS). The CAWS is critically important to southern Lake Michigan ports like Chicago, Indiana Harbor, Gary, and Burns Harbor, Indiana, that receive cargo. A 2016 study showed that commerce Tug and barge trac transits through the sh barrier at the Chicago Sanitary and Ship Canal. Coast Guard photo by CGAuxiliarist Brian Hinton The major waterways included in the Chicago Area Waterway System. U.S Army Corps of Engineers graphic

PAGE 59

59Fall 2018 Proceedings The city of Chicago rekindled public interest in the waterway with its new Chicago Riverwalk, which fully opened in 2017. The 1.25 mile continuous walkway takes pedestrians along the navigable channel of the Chicago Rivers main branch from the lakefront to the heart of downtown. This walking path includes restaurants and concessions, lookout points, boat rentals and tours, and theater-style seating for pedestrians. Crowd-Drawing EventsThe third most populous city in the nation, Chicago hosts numerous water-based marine events, including some ways management program, the service oversees the per mitting of marine events when they occur on federally navigable waters. Since the Chicago River and the larger Chicago Area Waterway System act as a commercial high way for interstate commerce, Coast Guard Marine Safety Unit (MSU) Chicago facilitates water-based marine events in accordance with Title 33 Code of Federal Regulations Part 2.36. Common examples of annual marine events include the Chicago Air and Water Show, boat races, swim events, water-based filming, and fireworks displays. Larger intermittent events like the 2016 Louis Vuitton Americas toryand the famous Tall Ships Challenge Series of inter national sailing races, cruises, and maritime festivals also bring in tens of thousands of spectators. These events are earn a special event assessment rating from the Depart need for federal, state, and/or local resources. Across the United States, local Coast Guard units use their captain of the port (COTP) authority under the Magnuson Act and the Ports and Waterways Safety Spectators board vessels to participate in tours at the 2016 Tall Ships Challenge Series. Coast Guard photo by CGAuxiliarist Brian Hinton

PAGE 60

60Proceedings Fall 2018 Police, and Chicago Fire Departments serving as force multipliers. Outside of marine events, captains of the port, in coor dination with their district commanders, may control ardous condition by developing a regulated navigation area (RNA). The one on the CSSC in Romeoville, Illinois, for the Aquatic Nuisance Species Electric Dispersal Bar rier System, is one example of an RNA unique to the Chi cagoland area. Operated and maintained by the United States Army Corps of Engineers, the electric dispersal Act to address safety concerns at marine events. The Magnuson Act and the Ports and Waterways Safety Act allow the Coast Guard to use its federal authorities to protect vessels, waterfront facilities, ports, harbors, and the general public. Typically, enforcement is conducted by on-site patrol commanders through safety and secu rity zones prohibiting vessels from entering areas. Coast Guard small boat stations, like Stations Calumet Harbor and Wilmette Harbor, are the main patrol commanders within the Chicago area, with the Illinois Department of Natural Resources Conservation Police, Chicago Stretching roughly 85 miles, the Cuyahoga River, meaning Crooked River, has been vital to Cleve land since the citys 1796 incorporation. While its namethe Burning Riveris commentary on the num The most recent incident was in 1969. Historically, the Cuyahoga River has been used to transport iron ore, salt, and cement, but a spike in rec reational boat usage in the 1980s created a dangerous mixture of small pleasure crafts and large freight ships in the extremely narrow, twisting waterway. The result ing marine casualties forced the Cleveland community to work together on ways to mitigate the risk. One idea resulted in the creation of the Cuyahoga River Safety Task Force. Comprised of representatives from the captain of the port (COTP) and commercial, rec reational, and city stakeholders, the group went to work and proposed the designation of 11 safety zones that were task force and safety zones are driven by authorities given to the COTP in 33 CFR. These efforts, combined with an economic downturn, quieted the waterway issues. However, in 2012, a near-miss between a large pas senger vessel and a tandem kayak reinvigorated a call for action to reexamine policies on the river and increase safety beyond the safety zone regulation. As such, the task force sought solutions to effectively reach users of human-powered craft to explain the rules of the road on the waterway. The Cuyahoga River Safety Task Force developed a public outreach strategy to reach all waterway users. First, the task force teamed with Cleveland Metroparks on a safety-focused press conference with local live news spots to dis cuss how citizens could use the parks along the Cuyahoga River in a man ner that would ensure a safe return home. Next, we worked with the Lake Carriers Association for the freight ships as well as local paddling groups to develop a safety pamphlet to be distributed to pad dlers at various splash locations along the river and at local marinas. The The 630-foot U.S. freight vessel RobertS. Pierson navigates under the Willow Street Bridge in the Old River as it approaches Clevelands Flats District. Encounters and near-misses have been on the rise as recreational and commercial trac struggle to share this busy, narrow waterway. Photo by Jim Ridge courtesy of Share the River, found at http://sharetheriver.com/ Cuyahoga: The Burning RiverWaterway safety is a universal concern

PAGE 61

61Fall 2018 Proceedings barrier system deters the invasive Asian carp and other aquatic nuisance species from reaching the Great Lakes via the CSSC. While effective, the electric dispersal barrier system is dangerous to common boaters. To mitigate the dangers, Coast Guard regulations prohibit personal or humanpowered watercraft and vessels under 20 feet in length from transiting the area. In addition, the RNA requires personnel to remain inside a cabin or as inboard as prac ticable to prevent electrical shock while passing through the area. The Chicago Harbor Safety Committee Coordination of RNAs, safety zones, security zones, and large marine events takes resources and constant com munication with local industry stakeholders, including city, state, and federal agencies. Across the United States, many industry waterway stakeholders coordinate con centrated efforts through groups called harbor safety committees. The Chicago Harbor Safety Committee (CHSC) was established on July 15, 2013, with the main purpose to form a partnership between the private sector and pamphlet contained information on how to interact with commer cial freighters and a map of the Cuyahoga River that highlighted the specific areas on the river to avoid when freighters were tran siting. Finally, and most success fully, the task force produced a Cuyahoga River safety video focused on educating recreational users. This video had representa tion from all users and explained safety procedures in an innovative and out-of-the-box manner. The video was distributed across multiple social media platforms, and has been viewed thousands of times in addition to being praised at the city and regional levels. While the actions taken by the Cuyahoga River Safety a step in the right direction. Cooperation and collabora our problems. by L C D R MI C HAEL J DOUGHE RT Y U.S. Coast Guard(Left) Two eight-person crew teams pass the 635-foot U.S. freight vessel Great Republic while navigating under Clevelands Eagle Ave. Bridge after exiting Collision Bend in the Cuyahoga River. (Below) ACoast Guard asset patrols the highly congested waters near Clevelands Flats District on a typical weekend during the summer of 2017. Photo by Jim Ridge courtesy of Share the River, found at http:// sharetheriver.com/

PAGE 62

62Proceedings Fall 2018 operators These groups, combined with the board of directors, provide an insightful self-regulating forum that promotes 6Illegal Passenger Vessel Operations When major safety concerns arise on the water, often the harbor safety committee provides the Coast Guard with knowledge and expertise on the issues. Over several years, the CHSC has worked with the Coast Guard to pre vent illegal passenger vessel operations through boating community outreach. In 2017, an effort to detect and deter an increasing number of illegal passenger vessel opera tions occurring on Chicagos congested waterways began. of preserving life, promoting maritime safety, and facili tating commerce, was developed into a comprehensive intelligence-driven operation. The U.S. Coast Guard Investigative Service, MSU Chicago, Station Calumet Har bor, and Sector Lake Michigans intel division, in addi tion to other federal, state, and local partners, partnered to execute surge operations targeting illegal operators. During the course of the 2017 season, 24 operators were ordered to cease illegal passenger vessel operations via U.S. Coast Guard captain of the port orders. government agencies for identifying, assessing, and use of Chicago area waterways, including the Chicago River and Lake Michigan. 5 The CHSC, in particular, is a very diverse and active group of stakeholders that works closely with the Coast Guard as well as other city, state, and government agencies. The committees most recent accomplishment was the production of the short summer boating season to reinforce safe boating on the safe boating techniques, local areas of concern, historical facts, and provides aerial footage of Lake Michigans lakefront and the Chicago River. The Chicago Harbor Safety Committee continues to serve as the Gold Standard as shown by the time, effort, and resources invested in producing a safe boating video that will ben CDR Zeita Merchant, command Chicago, said. The making of this video is a great opportunity for the Coast Guard and other rate with the diverse committee stakeholders to highlight the Chicago River and Lake Michi gan as shared waterways that all can enjoy if done in a safe and informed manner. The strength of the CHSC comes from its uniquely designed subcommittees. To incorporate ideas and address concerns from a broad range of stakeholders, a membersubcommittees involved in the Chicago Harbor Safety Committee include, but are not limited to: (49 passengers or less) (50+ passengers) To view Safe Boating in Chicago, go For more informationThe Coast Guard and other state and local agencies provide safety tips to boaters during the taping of the Chicago Harbor Safety Committees Safe Boating in Chicago video. Coast Guard photo courtesy of MSU Chicago

PAGE 63

63Fall 2018 Proceedings In addition, MSU Chi imposed $45,500 in civil pen alties, prosecuted licensed captains, and opened more than 30 federal criminal cases. These illegal passen ger vessel charters are often cited for unsafe operations, including overloading pas sengers, no life jackets, and no required lifesaving equip ment, as well as being oper ated by people without the proper merchant mariner licenses/credentials. For vessel owners and operators who do not comply with U.S. Coast Guard cap tain of the port orders, it can lead to a civil penalty of not more than $90,063, pursuant to 33 U.S.C. 1232(a), with each day of continued operation constituting a separate violation. Furthermore, a willful and knowing viola tion of this order under 33 U.S.C. 1232(b) constitutes a Class D Felony, which may expose the operator to a term to $250,000. In an effort to educate the public before the enforce ment initiative took place, MSU Chicago hosted several educational mariner outreach events, canvassed local marinas, and issued press releases to inform the public and bareboat charterers of the applicable requirements for having a safe and legal operation. My top priority is to ensure vessels carrying passen gers on our waterways are operating safely and in accor dance with the law. Vessels that do not adhere to federal regulations not only pose serious safety concerns to the public and the environment, but also adversely impact the livelihood of legitimate operators who do comply with federal regulations, CDR Merchant said. Our joint efforts with federal and state agencies are helping to eliminate unsafe vessels and unlicensed operators that do not comply with state and Coast Guard regulations from operating on our shared waterways.Reintroducing Chicago by WaterRich with maritime history, Chicago continues to play port. As the city of Chicago promotes use of the water through major projects like the Riverwalk, congestion concerns rise as small passenger vessels, recreational vessels, and larger commercial entities compete for the limited space on the rivers and within the breakwaters of Lake Michigan. In the summer, spectators from all over the world par ticipate in popular water-based marine events, necessitat ing that the Coast Guard use COTP authorities to enforce safety zones, RNAs, and regulations to ensure port and waterway safety. To manage coordination on the water, comprehensive planning is accomplished with support from specialized committees within harbor safety com mittees. If problems arise, the Coast Guard creates har monized approaches for enforcement actions by working with local, state, and federal agencies. As the connection between the Great Lakes and the western rivers, Chicagos dynamic waterway system will continue to play an important role for years to come. About the author: Lieutenant John Ramos has worked as a marine inspector at Sectors New York and San Francisco. Following his marine industry training, he was assigned as the inspections division chief at Marine Safety Unit Chicago, and is now serving as the waterways management division chief. Endnotes :1. David M. Solzman, The Chicago River: an illustrated history guide to the river and its waterways, 2nd ed., University of Chicago Press ed., 2006.2. Ibid.3. Economic Development Research Group, Inc., Final Report: An Economic Impact and Cluster Analysis of Illinois River Lock and Dam Facilities for ilchamber.org/wp-content/uploads/2011/08/IL-River-Economic-Impact-andCluster-Analysis-Report-Aug-2016-.pdf4. Chicago Harbors, Explore the Harbors, 2017. www.chicagoharbors.info/ harborspage/5. Chicago Harbor Safety Committee, About Us, www.chicagoharborsafety.org 6. Ibid.A MSU Chicago marine inspector and Station Calumet Harbor boarding ocer question mariners on potential illegal passenger vessel operations. Coast Guard photo by Master Chief Petty Ocer Alan Haraf

PAGE 64

64Proceedings Fall 2018 On February 2, 2006, the T/V Seabulk Pride, a dou ble-hull oil tanker built in 1998 for the domestic energy market, was conducting routine cargo transfer operations at the Kenai Pipeline Dock in Nikiski, Alaska, on Cook Inlet. Conditions at the time were typi ice. As the current carried ice past the vessel, it began to accumulate between the vessel and dock. The vessel her mooring lines. The crew unsuc cessfully attempted to start the main engine before the vessel grounded on the opposite shore of the Cook Inlet. Despite significant damage to the vessels hull, the cargo tanks were not breached, and none of the 5 million gallons of oil carried by the vessel spilled into the icy Alaskan waters. 1Several other vessels experienced similar incidents in Cook Inlet, where ice and swift currents create these dynamic and dangerous situations. Unlike other parts of the United States that experience ice, Cook Inlet is a unique 189-mile-long, freshwa ter marine estuary fed by multiple glaciers to the north and south of Anchorage. It is generally a shal low body of water that experiences the second-largest tidal range in the world at 29.5 feet. This tidal range creates extreme currents that are typ ically 4 knots, but have been reported to be as high as 8 knots in some areas. 2 The addition of sub-zero tempera tures for multiple months each year adds fast-moving ice to an alreadyhazardous marine environment. The Western Alaska captain of the port (COTP), in coordination with the port stakeholders and industry mem bers, took decisive actions to enact best practices and work toward pre venting a reoccurrence of these types of events in Cook Inlet during the 2007 ice season.Cook Inlet Ice GuidelinesA best practice for stakeholder engagementby L T JG DAVID PA RK E R Waterways Management Division Chief, Sector Anchorage U.S. Coast Guard C D R JUS T IN JA C O B s Chief of Prevention, Sector Anchorage U.S. Coast Guard A satellite image shows a signicant presence of ice extending into lower Cook Inlet. NOAA imageAdditional Responsibilities

PAGE 65

65Fall 2018 Proceedings Ice FormationCook Inlet is located in south-central Alaska and connects and interior Alaska. Ice formation begins in the northern part of the inlet near Anchorage, where ice concentration is thickest. It proceeds incrementally toward the lower portion of the inlet as temperatures drop and snowfall increases. As the turbulent tidal activity combines with freezing winter temperatures, heavy snowfall, and strong wind patterns, sea ice is formed and scattered by the tide throughout the inlet. There are four major types of ice that form in Cook Inlet: 3 Sea Ice ice crystals that form at various levels in the water column and aggregate on the surface of the water Beach Ice when exposed to air at low tide; water adjacent to the frozen mud freezes at a rate of about 1 inch per day Stamukhi and deposited on top of other beach ice, forming thick layers of ice in excess of 20 feet thick Estuarine Ice freshwater ice formed in river drainages and pushed into the inlet; the hardest of all the ice forms The T/V Seabulk Pride grounded a half-mile north of the Kenai Pipeline Dock in Nikiski, Alaska. Coast Guard photo In January 2009, a large ice oe pinned the M/V Monarch against the leg of the Granite Point platform, causing the vessel to capsize and sink to the bottom of Cook Inlet. This incident resulted in increased bridge manning requirements during ice conditions. Coast Guard photo

PAGE 66

66Proceedings Fall 2018 as -20 to -30 degrees Fahrenheit. 7 Unlike other parts of the United States, Cook Inlet has no commercial or Coast Guard icebreaking capability to assist other ves sels. The element of ice in motion adds multiple factors that affect the safety of a vessels crew and the integrity of the sur rounding marine environment.Stakeholder InvolvementThe COTP Western Alaska has proactively engaged with the maritime industry and interested stakeholders to develop and implement best practices for ves sel operators during ice conditions. The Cook Inlet Harbor Safety Committee is a major vehicle through which the COTP engages a diverse group of port partners, and is comprised of various stakeholders committed to developing sound marine practices unique to Cook Inlet. 8 From a geographic perspective, it is likely one of the largest har bor safety committees in the United States and represents various members of the maritime industry and Cook Inlet region. These stakeholders include oil companies, com ators, environmental non-governmental organizations, and local city government representatives. It also has a and local government agencies. Other organizations that participate in the process include: Conservation Weather Service marine operators that come together each winter to analyze detailed aspects of ice operations One of the many achievements of collaboration between the COTP and the Cook Inlet Harbor Safety Committee is the development of standards of care for vessel and oil terminal operators known as the Operating Guidelines for Ice Conditions in Cook Inlet, or ice guidelines. The COTP, in consultation with the pilots, industry, and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) Sea Ice Program, activates the ice guidelines each winter via a navigation advisory 9 based on the concentration of exist ing sea ice and forecasted conditions by NOAA. 10 The implementation of the guidelines varies from year to year as weather patterns continue to change and industry prac and dynamica living document that can adapt quickly As each type of ice begins to form, the tidal cycle forces them to mix together, creating a concentration effect where large slabs, or pans, of ice travel up and down the 4 presenting a major navigational challenge for ships transiting the inlet and for vessels alongside a pier. As the ice concentra ver vessels, especially large tankers and container ships delivering fuel and freight to Anchorage and Nikiski. Thankfully, large vessels are able to maneuver through Cook Inlet throughout the winteralbeit with increasing risk to their safetybecause the tides and currents keep ice from solidifying into a conjoined mass.Infrastructure and Vessel TracCook Inlet is the source of Alaskas oldest producing oil 5 Long known the inlet provides access to the city of Anchorage, the inland rail belt, and Alaskas four major military bases. Large refineries located in Nikiski provide petroleum products for military bases and the Anchorage Interna tional Airport. The Port of Alaska is the commercial and economic hub of the state and receives weekly shipments of fuel and waterborne freight. In fact, 90 percent of fuel used by Alaskans enters through this port, as well as 90 percent of all freight bound for points west of Cordova, Alaska. 6Maritime commerce is a year-round activity, even during heavy ice conditions in extremely cold winters. Although winters have become increasingly mild over the past decade, it was common during the 1980s and 1990s to have several consecutive weeks of temperatures as cold The National Weather Services Alaska Sea Ice Program produces daily ice analyses showing ice concentration in Cook Inlet. This image shows the ice concentration on December5, 2017. National Weather Service image

PAGE 67

67Fall 2018 Proceedings to the recommendations of experienced mariners and growing expertise in ice operations. Another best practice that has recently emerged from stakeholder engagement with the COTP came from cor porate sponsorship of a vessel simulator training session at the Alaska Vocational Technical Center (AVTEC) in Seward, Alaska. This event was led by Andeavor, which owns the Kenai Pipeline Dock, and the Cook Inlet Cit izens Advisory Council. The event included hands-on scenarios simulating actual vessels that operate in Cook Inlet and discussions afterwards to share lessons learned. AVTEC has three vessel simulators that can be synchro nized to the same scenario, where each simulator served as a different vesselthe oil tanker, the tug boat, and the ice scout. Professional mariners with experience in Cook Inlet were given the opportunity to run more than 30 mooring evolutions and self-arrest scenarios in ice and used all three simulators to better understand the han dling characteristics of these vessels. Ice GuidelinesThe ice guidelines created by the Western Alaska COTP and Cook Inlet Harbor Safety Committee apply gen erally to all vessels greater than 300 gross tons that transit Cook Inlet dur ing two potential ice phases: Phase I is a set of conditions when ice is pres ent in the upper portion of Cook Inlet, and Phase II is an additional set of parameters when ice has extended to the lower portion of Cook Inlet. This two-phase approach allows a greater guidelines, and better timeliness in exercising risk mitigation strategies. Since ice accumulation begins in the northern part of the inlet and then works its way south as it increases in concentration, Phase II is naturally a stricter set of parameters. There are supply vessels and tug and barge operations. The ice guidelines are standards of care agreed on by various stakehold ers and do not replace any regulations. Rather, the guide lines provide inexperienced mariners with best practices to assist them in safely navigating the waters of Cook Inlet. The ice guidelines address a wide range of issues from engineering controls and navigation principles to additional mooring equipment. For example, vessels are advised to monitor their draft and maintain ballast in order to keep the sea suction and propeller well below the ice. Mariners are also advised to maintain a watch on the bridge and engine room during cargo operations so that the vessel can be navigated if it is pushed off the dock. It also requires that engines be ready for operation as soon as possible, if needed. The guidelines advise mariners to increase personnel on the bridge, to be ready for maneu vering when necessary, and not to force ice at any time. Ice Safety Exams ice buildup in the sea chest. When a vessels sea chest freezes, cooling water can no longer circulate to the engines, resulting in overheating and loss of propul sion. The ice guidelines stipulate that all vessels deliver a heated mediumtypically steamto the primary and secondary sea chests to prevent the accumulation of ice or slush ice within the system. Coast Guard marine inspectors from Sector Anchorage and Marine Safety Detachment Homer conduct ice safety exams to verify the suitability of the steam lines and heat ing systems on board. These exams are conducted at the pilot station before the vessel transits Cook Inlet or prior to departure from Anchorage. In addition to verifying the status of the steam lines, Coast Guard marine inspectors also witness tests of the vessels steering gear, mooring equipment, emergency procedures, and the adequacy of the crews cold-weather clothing. Members of Coast Guard Sector Anchorage and Marine Safety Detachment Homer participate in the 2017 winter operations meeting in Nikiski, Alaska. Coast Guard photo by LTJG David Parker

PAGE 68

68Proceedings Fall 2018 Endnotes :1. Settlement Reached in Seabulk Prides 2006 Alaska Grounding. Professional Mari ner, July 2, 2010. Available at www.professionalmariner.com/June-July-2010/ Settlement-reached-in-Seabulk-Prides-2006-Alaska-grounding/. 2. Mulherin, Nathan D., et al. Marine Ice Atlas for Cook Inlet, Alaska. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, Engineer Research and Development Center, Cold Regions Research and Engineering Laboratory, May 2001. Available at www.dtic.mil/ dtic/tr/fulltext/u2/a392126.pdf.3. Hutcheon, Richard J. Forecasting Ice in Cook Inlet Alaska. NOAA Technical Memo randum AR, August 1972. Available at https://repository.library.noaa.gov/ view/noaa/7181/noaa_7181_DS1.pdf. 4. Ibid.5. Cook Inlet Platforms and Infrastructure. Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation, August 20, 2013. Available at http://dec.alaska.gov/spar/ppr/ response/sum_fy15/141002201/ci_platforms_infrastructure_drr.pdf. 6. Alaskas Lifeline, Cargo Distribution Patterns from the Port of Anchorage to South central, Northern, Western and Southeast Alaska. University of Alaska Anchorage College of Business & Public Policy, February 2011. Available at www.portofanc. com/wp-content/uploads/Alaskas_Lifeline_POA_2011.pdf. 7. Interview with Captain Ron Ward, Southwest Alaska Pilots Association, December 20168. 2016 Cook Inlet Harbor Safety Plan. Cook Inlet Harbor Safety Committee, October 2016. Available at www.cookinletharborsafetycommittee.org/documents. 9. Navigation advisories released by USCG Sector Anchorage are available on the USCG Homeport website at https://homeport.uscg.mil/port-directory/ western-alaska-(anchorage). 10. National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, National Weather Service. Forecast data and imagery available from the Alaska Sea Ice Program website. Available at https://www.weather.gov/afc/ice. 11. 33 U.S.C. 1223 states that the Secretary of Homeland Security, through the the United States, which the Secretary determines to be hazardous, or under conditions of reduced visibility, adverse weather, vessel congestion, or other hazardous circumstances by establishing vessel size, speed, draft limitations, and vessel operating conditions.The Ports and Waterways Safety Act empowers the Coast Guard with captain of the port authority to control tion and the marine environment. 11 The Cook Inlet ice guidelines are an excellent example of the Coast Guard exercising this authority in an area where a unique set of hazards creates challenges unlike anywhere else in the is a business that requires commitment and collaboration among every operator on the waterway. About the authors: LTJG David Parker is the waterways management division chief for Sector Anchorage, Alaska, the largest and most geographically diverse area of operations in the Coast Guard. He previously served as a deck Hickory, servicing aids to navigation throughout Western Alaska and the Arctic. CDR Justin Jacobs is the head of the prevention department at Sector Anchorage, Alaska. He has served in the Coast Guard for 17 years in a variety of national and international assignments in the marine safety Military University and in transportation policy, operations, and logis tics from George Mason University. Large pans of ice, also known as pancake ice, comprise the most common ice concentrations in Cook Inlet. NOAA photo

PAGE 69

69Fall 2018 Proceedings F weather year. Winter brought a Canadian snowpack that was 260 percent above normal, which led to high water in the Columbia River Basin in the spring. The summer brought hot and dry conditions despite the heavy as fall approached. By September 5, Washington State had 1 in the Columbia Gorge National Scenic Area near Cascade Locks, Oregon. Just three days grown to more than 20,000 acres and jumped the Columbia River into Washington, starting the Archer Mountain Fire. At this point, the Eagle Creek Fire was deemed a National Inci dent Management System Type 1 incident, evacuation orders were issued for residents of the area, and Interstate 84 was closed to all 2 This section of the Columbia River is a major east/west transportation corridor routinely transited by tugs, barges, overnight passenger and recreational boating vessels. Every year about 26.5 million metric tons of grain moves through this river system. According to the makes the Columbia River the third-largest grain export corridor in the world behind the Mississippi River and South Americas Parana River. 3 Closing the Columbia River for any grain terminals, and grain shippers. Working closely with the Eagle Creek Incident Com mand staff, the captain of the port (COTP) determined of the Columbia River. As a result of these conditions, on September 6 the COTP issued a safety zone barring all vessel traffic from passing between river mile 154 and 158 unless they had permission from the Captain of the Port. Wildres and the Captain of the Port Lessons learned from the Eagle Creek reby C AP T TOM GR IFFI TT S Marine Safety Unit Portland U.S. Coast Guard L C D R LAU R A SP R INGE R Waterways Management and Facilities Division Marine Safety Unit Portland U.S. Coast Guard Hikers head away from the Eagle Creek Trail toward the Indian Creek Fire plume in the Columbia River Gorge near Portland, Oregon, in September 2017. Air Force Technical Sergeant Robert Dones, 349th Medical Squadron surgical technician, helped guide the group safely out of the re. Air Force photo provided by Sarah Carlin Ames

PAGE 70

70Proceedings Fall 2018 mile 146.1they were concerned about embers impact ing the area. During discussions with USACE, there was particular concern because vessels in the lock would be lock could result in serious injuries and potentially cause catastrophic damage to the lock gates. Damage to this entire Upper Columbia River System. the situation, close collaboration with our interagency partners and waterway users created better understand zone was initially set between river miles 154 and 158, the resetting it for river miles 126 to 185. Lessons LearnedQuickly embedding liaison ocers into the ICPInitially, the incident was managed remotely from MSU Portland. When it was realized this was not the right the incident command post (ICP), MSU Portland devel oped a three-person rotation to staff the ICP. Though this ments to hurricane response operations during the same time period, assigning personnel to the ICP proved cru cial to remaining nimble and being able to adjust to the incidents requirements more quickly. Sending personnel to the ICP allowed us to understand provided the most up-to-date situation briefs, allowing the Coast Guard to learn what the IC needed to respond to the incident. Strong communication with the IC also allowed us to lift safety zone restrictions as soon as the Trac coordinationTwo major tug and barge companies service the Columbia River, routinely sending multiple tugs and tows up the river. Petroleum, lumber, and agriculture products are the primary commodities carried on the river. Additionally, various types of passenger vessels transit the river during the summer months. ing to the local economy, which was already reeling from traffic through, waterways personnel worked directly with industry to implement risk mitigation steps to allow Not only did the safety zone protect those who would otherwise be on the river, it also allowed firefighting aircraft better access to the water. The safety zone also operations, such as bucket dips, on the river. The Coast Guard worked diligently with local maritime industry stakeholders and the incident commander (IC) to mini mize the economic impact to the region and fully open the Columbia as soon as it was deemed safe to do sowhich in this case was at 6 p.m. on September 10. Decision Making Process since the 1980 Mount St. Helens eruption, and the Lower created a very unique situation. Sector Columbia River the time of the Eagle Creek Fire, COTP authorities and responsibilities had moved to Warrenton, Oregonabout 95 miles from Marine Safety Unit (MSU) Portland and Creek Fire occurred in a portion of the captain of the port zone in which MSU Portland did not typically operate. The nearest response unit was Station Portland, about In this instance, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) was the closest federal entity with navigation safety responsibilities. Because the fire was burning within 200 yards of the Bonneville Dam complexthe The wake created when helicopters dipped 500-gallon bambi bucketslike this one used to ght the 2017 Stouts Creek Fire near Canyonville, Oregon into the Columbia River to ght the Eagle Creek Fire enticed kite surfers, caus ing danger to all involved. Oregon National Guard photo by Sta Sergeant Jason van Mourik

PAGE 71

71Fall 2018 Proceedings involved. Through our ICP liaison, we worked closely with local law enforcement to get word about the safety Conclusion navigation, it is imperative for Coast Guard personnel to embed themselves in the response organization and truly understand the needs of the incident commander, waterway stakeholders, and the safety risks associated with vessel transits. About the authors: Guard Marine Safety Unit Portland. He has 24 years of marine safety experience, including 6 years of port security liaison work based in Sin gapore and Japan. He also served as a traveling marine inspector as one of the Coast Guards foremost technical experts for inspection of commercial vessels. LCDR Springer currently serves as the waterways management and facil tours in inspections, investigations, and planning. She is a licensed mer chant mariner and a FEMA master exercise practitioner. Endnotes :1. northwest2. https://inciweb.nwcg.gov/incident/5584/3. www.pnwa.net/wp-content/uploads/PNWA_Handout.pdfadditional watches, and minimizing time spent in the danger areas. Local towing companies also implemented additional safety measures, including the use of escort ment staff developed a tracker and briefed the COTP twice a day on expected transits. Keeping the river open risk-based decision making. Coordination with tribes and local government agenciesIn addition to being a major inland waterway, the Colum bia River is a Usual and Accustomed Fishing Ground for four federally recognized Native American tribes, and period. In order to make sure all entities were aware of the safety zone, it was vital to reach out to local emergency operations centers and tribal entities to understand their Bucket drop wakes and kite surfers technique in which a helicopter dips a bucket into a large from spreadingare commonly used. Kite surfers were wake created by the bucket dips. ations, we enacted a safety zone around all aircraft Heavy smoke from the Eagle Creek Fire hangs over the Bonneville Lock and Dam in September 2017. Mission-essential personnel remained at the dam to main tain safe operations and monitor the critical infrastructure. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers photo

PAGE 72

72Proceedings Fall 2018The Port of New York and New Jersey hosts myriad marine events requiring coordination with indus try and other government agencies to ensure the safety of participants and spectators. This includes the annually. And these are just the events with an associated Coast Guard marine event application!Fleet Week New YorkTo kick off the 29th Fleet Week New York, thousands of sailors, Marines, and Coast Guardsmen sail into New York Harbor during the Parade of Ships, the only permit ted marine event of the week. The 2017 parade featured a variety of U.S. naval vessels including U.S. Naval Acad emy yard patrol boats, at least one Canadian ship, and a Coast Guard national security cutter. Fire Department New York (FDNY) fireboats, New York Police Depart ment (NYPD) boats, and a National Oceanic and Atmo spheric Administration (NOAA) research ship joined the procession. While this event occurs every year, the parade par ticipants are always changing, so we follow a method to ensure consistency and another smooth Fleet Week. It is essential to reach out early and often to key stakeholders, including Coast Guard units, the NYPD Harbor Unit, the FDNY Harbor Unit, NOAA, and the U.S. Navy to plan and coordinate the parade. The event sponsorin this case, for 2017, the Navyis required to submit a marine permit application 135 days prior to the event. This application provides information like the size of the event, number Big Events in the Big AppleMarine events in Sector New Yorkby L T RE B E CC A MILLE R Assistant Division Chief, Waterways Management U.S. Coast Guard Sector New York The amphibious assault ship USS Kearsarge arrives at Pier88 in downtown Manhattan for Fleet Week New York on May24, 2017. Navy photo by Petty Ocer 2ndClass Shamira Purifoy

PAGE 73

73Fall 2018 Proceedings impacts, and whether any safety vessels are required. The sponsor gives the Coast Guard a general idea of how many ships will be coming into New York Harbor, but waits to provide a list of the exact vessels closer to the date of the event, as assets are often diverted to support operations at the last minute. Since Fleet Week is a regularly occurring event out lined in the Code of Federal Regulations, we complete a Notice of Enforcement (NOE). Once the NOE is assigned a docket number, a unique identifying number used to track regulations, the captain of the port (COTP) signs it and returns it to HQ to be published in the Federal Register. Essentially, this announces to the public that the regulation will be enforced on the specified dates and times. The parade, visible in upper and lower New York bays and along the Hudson River from the Verrazano Bridge to the George Washington Bridge, lasts about 5 hours. The parade is organized throughout the harbor, with berths in Manhattan, Brooklyn, and Staten Island. We pass the information we receive in the marine event application to the NYPD so they can set checkpoints and explosive detection sites along the spectator viewing areas. In addition to working with external partners, it is essential to work with other divisions within our unit that can contribute to the safe transit of the ships. By commu nicating with the Sector New York Enforcement Division and Station New York, we arrange for security patrols to once the ships are moored at their respective locations. The Coast Guard law enforcement small boats enforce a as a security zone permanently in place around U.S. Navy visiting countries naval vessels. As Fleet Week nears its end, the ships stagger their departures over the course of a few days so there is limited effect to the waterways, and no other actions are required by waterways management. Arguably the most important part of the marine event process is the communication with the public regarding upcoming events. Since Fleet Week is such a large-scale event, we publish a Coast Guard Advisory Notice (CGAN) about one week prior to the start of the event outlining the basics of the NVPZs and route of the parade. Our water Notice to Mariners (BNM) on the day of the event, which Marines and sailors aboard the USS Kearsarge man the rails during the Parade of Ships on May 24, 2017. The event kicked o Fleet Week New York, during which U.S. Marines, sailors, and Coast Guardsmen interact with the public, demonstrate their services capabilities, and teach people about Americas sea services. Marine Corps photo by Pfc.AbreyD. Liggins

PAGE 74

74Proceedings Fall 2018 is very similar to a CGAN except that it is transmitted over VHF radio. In the case of Fleet Week, the CGAN and BNM include the times of the Parade of Ships, the security zones in place, and the channel impacts that boaters can expect to face. Macys Fourth of July Fireworks DisplayThe Macys Fourth of July Fireworks, held on the East in the United States. The 2017 fireworks show, its 41st annual display, was the largest in over a decade. More than 3 million spectators watched the 25-minute display as it launched more than 60,000 shellsthe largest being barges along the East River. Planning for this monumental event begins in January, when our marine events branch reaches out to the Macys event operation manager to begin gathering details. Those details include determining the approximate loca tion of the display, the number of barges to be used, and the viewing locations for spectator vessels. Then, as with any other marine event, the manager of the event opera tion submits the application for marine event through the Coast Guards Homeport website, which generates a barges and spectator vessels is called a special local regu lation (SLR), which allows us to cater a zone to the needs of the Coast Guard, maritime community, sponsoring organization, other governmental agencies, and specta based on the size of the vesselthe smaller vessels were nearer the display, and larger vessels were further away. Following the development of the SLR, a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking or a Temporary Final Rule is drafted. We work with our partners at Coast Guard District One and at Civil Engineering Unit Provi dence for legal review and our environmental review, respectively. Once the legal and environmental reviews are complete, the rule is ready for the captain of the ports approval and publication in the Federal Register. As with any event, we need to be sure that any poten tial impacts to navigation are communicated to the public. Three weeks before the event, we publish a Coast Guard Crewmembers from USCGC Katherine Walker, a 175-foot buoy tender based in Bayonne, New Jersey, watch the reworks in New York City during the 2017 Macys 4thof July reworks show. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 3rdClass Steve Strohmaier

PAGE 75

Studios photo courtesy of Macys

PAGE 76

76Proceedings Fall 2018 (UCP) full of bustling interagency partners representatives from Macys, NYPD, FDNY, Class Ron Sampert. All the big players from so many differ ent organizations were there, he said about the atmosphere in the UCP. Everyone was working together to celebrate our nations independence and to ensure every specta tor celebrating, whether on land or water, could do so safely without worry and without knowing what all went into making that event happen. It was a humbling experience. As Petty Officer First Class Sampert alluded to, our regulation writing is a small part of what goes on to make the Macys 4th of July Fireworks possible. There are sev eral phone calls, conference calls, and meet ings at city hall in Manhattan. We work with NYPD, FDNY, and other agency partners like the Staten Island Ferry in order to minimize impact on port operations. There are tactics and operations briefs assigning USCG, NYPD, from local waterfront property owners and harbor cruise companies early in the year seeking details on where the display location will be so they can start selling spots on their vessels or in their venues for the fireworks show. As always, the communication with stakeholders is the most critical piece of the entire process. The culmination of months worth of planning and organizing comes down to just a few hours during which the ational boaters are shepherded to designated viewing areas, and law enforcement patrols are actively underway all over the harbor. One of the major takeaways from every marine event, no matter how large or small, is the importance of getting started early and communicating with all relevant stakehold ers. Professional relationships within the mar itime community here in New York are at their best during harbor-wide events, when everyone comes together with the common goal of protecting the community and mak ing the waterway safe and enjoyable for all. About the author: LT Rebecca Miller has served in the U.S. Coast Guard for 7 years. A 2011 on a National Security Cutter out of California, as a marine inspector at Sector Boston, and in the Waterways Management Division at Sector New York. Advisory Notice to Homeport, as well as a Local Notice to Mariners. These detail the information about the event so that members of the port can plan accordingly. On the day of the event, a Safety Broadcast Notice to Mariners is broadcast to mariners over VHF. The culmination of all the behind-the-scenes commu nication and drafting of regulations is spectators loading onto boats, lining the streets and shoreline, and climb ing to the rooftops to observe never-before-seen effects. Behind the pyrotechnics is a Unified Command Post Macys reworks light up the East River in New York City as crewmembers from the USCGC Hawser, homeported in Bayonne, New Jersey, keep spectators safe during the July4, 2004, event. USCG photo by Petty Ocer 2ndClass Mike Hvozda

PAGE 77

77Fall 2018 Proceedings In October 2017, 13 senior members of the Seventh Coast Guard District staff in Miami and the leader ship of Coast Guard Sector Jacksonville gathered at Cape Canaveral for two days of meetings with federal and state regulatory partners and commercial launch ser vice operators. What sparked this tour? A growing aware ness that the Coast Guard is at the center of a burgeoning industry growing faster and pushing boundaries further than anything in recent memory. Due to the inherently hazardous nature of launch ing large rockets into space, launch sites have beenand continue to bepredominantly located in coastal envi ronments. The U.S. Air Force and the Federal Aviation Administrations (FAA) range clearance regulations 1 Floridas Future in Space Travel Pioneering Coast Guard support of the commercial space industryby A EUGENE STR A TT ON Chief of Marine Planning and Information, Waterways Management Branch U.S. Coast Guard, Seventh District Wiseman captured this image of Florida to NASA photo

PAGE 78

78Proceedings Fall 2018 program required a Coast Guard presence on the watera presence that could only be managed with reservists called in to augment the small active duty Coast Guard station on Cape Canav eral to support each shut tle mission. In the early 1980s, the Coast Guard developed strong working relation ships with NASA and the Air Forces 45th Space Wing, creating a water side support program that made full use of its maritime expertise and law enforcement author ity to ensure the public safety and the security needs of Americas criti cal launch infrastruc ture, launch vehicles, and payloads. The relationship was that formalized Coast Guard support for the Eastern Range, the area controlled by the 45th Space Wing and used for rocket launches out of Cape Canaveral Air Force Station and the Kennedy Space Center. The end of the left the Cape Canaveral launch industry focused on much smaller payload delivery rockets and a reduction in Coast Guard support posture. The Rise of the Commercial Space IndustryWhile the shuttle pro gram was winding down, a private firm, SpaceX, successfully launched its first Falcon 9 rocket from Launch Complex 40 in October 2012. 3 This feat initiated six years of extraordinary private growth and innovation in an industry once con sidered inherently gov ernmental.BMC Robert Martin gives a surveillance operations center overview to Coast Guard leadership. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 3rdClass Ryan Dickinsonrequire that launch operators are able to ensure that peo ple are not in the highest risk areas around and under the The largest concentration of active launch sites in the United States is located on Cape Canaveral, Florida. The National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) and the Air Force have been launching missiles and rockets over the ocean from Cape Canaveral since the early 1950s. As federal partners, the Air Force and NASA have historically relied on the Coast Guard and their broad paths of their launch vehicles. While this relationship is well-established among traditional federal regulators, new developments have the industry seeing more and more traditionally governmental launch-related activity being conducted by private companies. With the current Guard has found itself in partnership with a new marinerelated industry. The Space Shuttle EraOn July 21, 2011, the orbiter Atlantis landed at the Kennedy Space Center on Cape Canaveral to close out the 135th and last mission of the NASA space shuttle programthe end 2 This also brought to an end a robust Coast Guard Reserve footprint at Coast Guard Station Canaveral that had been developed to support the program. The size, hazards, and public interest in Americas space shuttle rocket launches from pad Center in Cape Canaveral, carried almost 6,000 pounds of science research, crew supplies, and hardware to the NASA photo by Bill Ingalls

PAGE 79

79Fall 2018 Proceedings In the shuttle days, in contrast, the Coast Guard and other maritime partners had over 84 active duty, reserve, and auxiliary members employed for four days prior to a shut tle launch. 4 Due to changes in perceived risk and shifts in mission priorities, Coast Guard support had dwindled to in the 45th Space Wings SCO when a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket exploded in 2015. An Anomalys ImpactThat June 28, 2015, explosionan anomalyoccurred on a SpaceX Falcon 9 rocket shortly after launch, causing it to self-destruct, scattering debris up to 150 miles offshore. 5 Before this incident, coordination with the Coast Guard for rocket launches had primarily taken the form of Noti Eastern Test Range to alert mariners of the upcoming launches, activations of safety and security zones, and monitoring and control of vessels that may encroach upon those zones. The explosion and subsequent concern for the pub lics safety and impacts to port and waterways operations exposed gaps in coordination among the Coast Guard, the agencies, and companies engaged in orbital launch ser vices. Sector Jacksonville and its subordinate commands in the Cape Canaveral area suddenly found themselves engaged in a technological/transportation revolution in ways few had anticipated. The incident prompted Coast Guard leaders to take a hard look at where the commercial launch industry was in its evolution, where it is going, and what it means for the maritime public. A key component of making commercial space launch costs associated with the traditional system of unrecov erable rocket stages. SpaceX proved that it was possible landed it on the autonomous barge Of Course I Still Love You. ing at a pad located on Canaveral Air Force Station. With SpaceX unequivocally proved the viability of their pio neering business model. In completing this recovery and reuse cycle, SpaceX has fundamentally changed the way rockets are launched. Other companies like Blue Origin have already made a heavy capital investment in the area and will likely also follow this new model of orbital launch services. This change resonates with Col. Burton H. Catledge of the Air Forces 45th Operations Group so much that he says, Landing is the new launching. Federal agencies such as the FAA, USAF, and Coast Guard are under new pressure to adjust to this unprec edented shift from a primarily governmental partnership to a more complex public and private partnership model. Under a memorandum of agreement with the 45th Space Wing, signed in 2013the most current at the timethe Air Force maintained one enlisted reserve billet to fund a Coast Guard representative to staff the surveillance oper ation (SCO) room. That individual also ensures that the

PAGE 80

80Proceedings Fall 2018 Orbital Launch ServicesThe value of the global space services industry is esti mated at about $335 billion. That estimate includes every thing associated with space, from rockets to satellites and the services they provide. Of that estimate, orbital launch servicescarrying cargo into spaceare estimated to account for $5.4 billion of that global total. 6 In 2016, ser vice providers conducted a total of 85 orbital launches from seven countries. U.S. providers like SpaceX and the Boeing/Lockheed partnership United Launch Alliance are beginning to capture market share from international providers due to rapid commercial development follow ing the end of the U.S. space shuttle program. 7The U.S. space industry captured about $126 billion of the global market share in 2015, which saw launch service providers accounting for about $1.8 billion of the global total revenue. This represents 34 percent of global launch services, 8 and projections anticipate a sharp uptick in demand and growth in capacity in the coming years. Global trends in civil and commercial space activities pre dict growth from an estimated $330 billion annually to some $600 billion by 2024. 9 What will this mean for the Coast Guard and other supporting agencies? Industry analysts forecast a global average of about 41 commercial cargo and passenger launches per year from 2017 through 2026. Of those launches, 79 commercial crew and cargo launches are also predicted from 2017 to 2026. The vast majority of these will be to service and resupply the International Space Station. 10 Both NASA and private companies are feverishly competing to bring human space flight back to U.S. launch sites, and with it, the national attention and safety and security posture once needed for space shuttle missions. Floridas ResponseThe state of Florida and Cape Canaveral have been at the center of the U.S. space pro gram from its earliest days. With the Commercial Space Act of 1998 driving more and more launch service busi ness to private entities, and the impending conclusion of the space shuttle program, the governors office com missioned a report in 2006. This report ultimately recom mended a single-state entity to serve Floridas aerospace interests and to promote and facilitate the growth of the commercial space industry in Florida. When the Space Florida Act of 2006 was passed, Space Florida was created with a mission to attract and expand the next generation of industry businesses with the goal of generating opportunities and strengthening Floridas position as the global leader in aerospace research, invest ment, exploration, and commerce. 11 goals of the newly minted state agency was to preserve the unique national role served by the Cape Canaveral Air Force Station and the John F. Kennedy Space Center commercial sector launches while pursuing the develop ment of complementary sites for commercial horizontal launches. 12 Pursuant to this mission, Space Florida has been working to facilitate the creation of the Cape Canaveral Spaceport and to help a growing number of companies interested in operating in the area to navigate the regula tory, infrastructure, and partnering landscape inherent to the industry. The effectiveness of this decision to focus on attracting commercial operators to the Cape Canaveral area is evident in the number of major industry players investing heavily in local infrastructure and pursuing various regulatory approvals for future operations. The list of companies operating in the area includes SpaceX, Blue Origin, United Launch Alliance, Boeing, Moon Express, OneWeb, Airbus, and Astrotech, among others. The capital resources these companies bring to bear, as well as their unlimited ambitions, are creating the kind of A Coast Guard Station Canaveral 45-foot response boat-medium patrols o the coast of Kennedy Space Center in Cape Canaveral prior to the launch of Space Shuttle Atlantis in July 2011. The launch was the 135th and nal launch of NASAs 30-year space shuttle program. Coast Guard photo by BryanS. Lilley

PAGE 81

81Fall 2018 Proceedings the rocket, payload, or parts thereof fall into the water ways, presenting hazards to public safety. Perhaps most importantly, the Coast Guards authority to control vessel paths of rockets is critical to the success of Americas space programs. Other regulatory agencies and private launch service providers are waking up to the idea that the Coast Guard is a fundamental partner in their launch operations. With out the Coast Guards comprehensive captain of the port authoritiesparticularly the ability to control vessel traf lations to operate in the continental United States. It is the location of launch sites adjacent to the Atlantic Ocean and the ability to control the range under their easterly and payloads a feasible business enterprise. Without the authority entrusted to Coast Guard captains of the port, no commercial launch service provider would be able to satisfy range safety requirements required by the Federal Aviation Administration and the Department of Defense. (AST) is the federal agency authorized to regulate the industry boom the Florida legislature likely hoped for and the jobs and investment the area and residents needed.The Coast Guards RoleHow will the Coast Guard best support this industry while also providing for maritime public health and safety? Historically, launch activities were inherently governmental aerospace affairs where the Coast Guard used its authorities to support the Air Force or NASA. The shift to private ownership and control of more and more aspects of orbital launch services, technological shifts to coastal and ocean-based recovery operations, and competitive pressures increasing the frequency of launches are rendering the industry a de facto maritime industry. New autonomous barges and vessels conducting haz ardous operations at sea and transiting in and out of Port rethink regulatory and inspection criteria as it applies to new and rapidly evolving uses. Coast Guard incident gency operations centers (EOC) to orchestrate waterside response in the event that a launch mission goes awry and European Space Agency astronaut Alexander Gerst, Expedition 41 ight engineer, takes a photo from a window in the cupola of the International Space Station as the SpaceX Dragon commercial cargo craft approaches in September 2014. NASA photo

PAGE 82

82Proceedings Fall 2018 commercial space industry, issuing licenses, permits, and safety approvals for commercial launches and reentry of orbital and suborbital rockets and vehicles. It also issues licenses for launch or reentry site operators, or space line of business. Their overall mission is to ensure public safety and safety of property while protecting the national security and foreign policy interests of the United States during commercial launch and reentry activities. Simply said, they exist to encourage, facilitate, and pro mote U.S. commercial space transportation. 13Included in the requirements to obtain an FAA site operators license is an agreement with the U.S. Coast issuance of a Notice to Mariners prior to launch and other such measures as the Coast Guard deems necessary to protect public health and safety. Other FAA regula tions refer either directly or indirectly to Coast Guard coordination, but 14 CFR 420.31 effectively makes each Coast Guard district a party to the licensing process of new commercial spaceports. This regulation is essentially referring to the applicants responsibility to ensure that Given the inherent complexities and hazards of space these launch sites, the Coast Guard is heavily weighing the last 15 words of that regulation other such measures as the Coast Guard deems necessary to protect public health and safety. This has prompted Sector Jacksonville and the Seventh Coast Guard District to consider implications and interpret regulations in bold new ways. It has spurred unprecedented and highly productive collaboration with and innovative solutions to support the industry while also protecting the public interest. What Does the Future Hold?Few things are certain in this emerging industry where capital investment is abundant and ambition boundless. next year with their Orion vehicles, and the Air Force is on a steady march to support an operational pace of 48 launches a year. Space Florida is planning for the expan sion of space-related activities on existing government sites as well as the creation of new commercial launch sites in the Canaveral area. Blue Origin has built a rocket factory and leased launch site facilities at Kennedy Space Center. SpaceX has proven its viability as a launch service provider and is on target to reach a frequency of space airports. If nothing else, it is becoming certain that the airways of the Space Coast will likely be streaked with rocket trails on a weekly basis in the very near future. Tragically, not all of these events will go as planned, making Coast Guard incident management coordination even more critical. The checklist needed to launch a payload into space is mind-boggling to industry outsiders. For the Coast Guard, each of these events require safety zones to be activated, EOCs to be staffed, law enforcement vessels to be on scene, and frequent vessel inspections to be conducted. This is in addition to the normal, busy task loads Coast Guard units in the Canaveral area already have year-round. Coast Guard staffs are heavily involved with shaping the nearand long-term support posture needed to carry out statutory missions and responsibili ties. They are working with partner agencies to establish best practices and develop new roles and agreements. They are also increasingly developing relationships with private operators to help support their endeavors while protecting public health, safety, and freedom of navigation. Acknowledgment: LT Jessica Thornton of the Sector Jacksonville Incident Manage ment Division and BMC Robert Martin, U.S. Coast Guard rep to the 45th Space Wings surveillance operations center, contributed to this article. About the author: A. Eugene Stratton has served the Coast Guard in various military and civilian capacities for 20 years. Currently, he is responsible for marine planning as well as oversight of the waterways management and aids to navigation planning programs for the Seventh Coast Guard District. He has received numerous awards for excellence and holds degrees from the Endnotes :1. 14 CFR 4172. Space Florida, Jan. 2017, Cape Canaveral Spaceport Master Plan. Exploration Park, Florida: Space Florida.3. Ibid.4. S.E. West, 2016, Report on Space Operations in Canaveral given to District Com mander. Port Canaveral.5. Ibid.6. The Tauri Group, Jan. 2017, The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Trans tion (AST).7. Ibid.8. Ibid.9. Space Florida, Jan. 2017, Cape Canaveral Spaceport Master Plan. Exploration Park, Florida: Space Florida.10. The Tauri Group, Jan. 2017, The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Trans tion (AST).11. Space Florida, In Florida, the future of space is always launching. Retrieved Decem 12. Florida Statute 331, Part II, Sections 331.3011, 331.360, and 331:30513. The Tauri Group, Jan. 2017, The Annual Compendium of Commercial Space Trans (AST).

PAGE 83

83Fall 2018 Proceedings The Coast Guard, with jurisdiction over bridges and causeways spanning the navigable waters of the United States, monitors about 20,000 bridges, ensuring they are not unreasonable obstructions to navi gation. Its authorities include approving proposed bridge locations and clearances, alteration of unreasonably obstructive bridges, bridge lighting and other signals, and regulation of drawbridge operations. Coast Guard Bridge Program Functions The Coast Guard bridge program preserves the public right of navigation through the various statutes, U.S. environmental laws, and pertinent regulations. This mission contributes to the development of a safer, transportation system that effectively uses and con ner. It also provides for the well-being, general safety, security, and interests of all Americans. The bridge program carries out the responsibili ties detailed in the bridge statutes (see page 86) by executing in four functional areas: Permitting: Issuing permits for the location and clearances for construction or alteration of bridges over navigable waters Regulation: Ensuring that the operation of movable bridges meets the reasonable needs of navigation, that all bridges are properly marked and lighted to facilitate the safe passage of vessels beneath, and that discrepancies are corrected Construction monitoring: Monitoring bridge construction, maintenance, and repair operations to ensure minimal impact to navigation, as well as coordinating navigation impacts with waterway users Alteration: Identifying bridges that are unreasonable obstructions to navigation and reviewing, inspecting, and managing design and construction contracts when the federal government is the primary source of funding through the Truman-Hobbs ProgramBridge Program Transfer to the Coast GuardMuch like the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, the 1966 Department of Transportation Act (Public Law 89-670) brought 31 previously scattered fed eral elements into one cabinet-level department. Prior to the creation of the Department of Transportation (DOT), the Under Secretary of Commerce for Transportation administered many of the functions now associated with the DOT. 1 The Coast Guards historic involvement in Coast Guard Sectors and Bridge Program Managementby BR IAN DUNN U.S. Coast Guard The Coast Guard Cutter Bertholf, a 427-foot national security cutter homeported in Alameda, California, enters San Francisco Bay to participate in the areas 2011 Fleet Week Parade of Ships. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 3rdClass Seth Johnson

PAGE 84

84Proceedings Fall 2018 maritime transportation and safety 2 earned the service a place in the new department, which also included four federal transportation administrationsthe Federal Avi ation Administration, the Federal Highway Administra tion, the Federal Railroad Administration, and the Saint Lawrence Seaway Development Corporation. The act also moved a number of transportation-related functions conducted by other entities into the new depart ment. Additionally, it transferred the laws and provisions relating to drawbridge operating regulations, obstructive bridges, and approval of the location and clearances of bridges and causeways from the secretary of the Army to the secretary of Transportation. These functions were then delegated to the commandant of the United States Coast Guard. As a result, since April 1967 the Coast Guard has had jurisdiction over bridges and causeways that span navigable waters of the United States. The effectiveness of the bridge program is largely due to the Coast Guards inherent maritime expertise, its famil iarity with the maritime community, and its close work ing relationship with that community. As a core element within the Marine Transportation System Directorate, the bridge program works closely with waterways managers at the headquarters and district levels to facilitate effective secure, and environmentally sound national transporta implements sectors that combine the legacy group opera tions and captain of the port (COTP) roles and authorities into a single command, which offers an opportunity to better coordinate bridge and waterway operations with the needs of navigation.Bridge Program Roles and AuthoritiesThe authority delegated to the district commander in 33 CFR 1.01-60(b) 3 to issue certain bridge permits cannot be further delegated. District commanders have, however, authority to issue temporary deviations from drawbridge regulationsparticularly regarding operating schedules. As a result, the bulk of the bridge programs day-to-day serve as the front line for coordination with the bridge for a host of activities, including: with the bridge owner, sector/COTP, and waterway usersWorkers tie rebar to set the foundation of the Ro Abajo Bridge in Utuado, Puerto Rico, on January27, 2018. The bridge collapsed due to debris from Hurricane Maria. FEMA photo

PAGE 85

85Fall 2018 Proceedings activities navigation of a bridge lighting plan Prior to the implementation of the Coast Guard sec fell under multiple mission-based commandsgroups, cally dispersed, had unique chains of command, and had different program managers at Coast Guard headquarters. These commands lacked a common voice to the public and a unity of effort, which often led to some mission overlap. Under the sector construct, the Coast Guard began to consolidate field activities for the mission-based commands under one local sector command. The organizational change eliminated the historical segrega tion of operations and marine safety activities at the local level, creating a comprehensive unit to bring together Prior to the implementation of sector organization, most bridge operation decisions were made at the district level. This was done primarily because neither the opera proper authorities, nor were they staffed to oversee the bridge projects and operations. At times, those decisions temporarily impacted the safety and movement of navi circumstances created challenges when trying to balance and waterway users. As the bridge program has become more accustomed to the sector construct, the importance of involving the Coast Guard members from Maritime Safety and Security Team San Francisco conducted K-9 and remote operated vehicle pier sweeps before the March 2015 arrival of USS Freedom in San Francisco. MSST San Franciscos primary missions include ports, waterways, and coastal security and defense readiness. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 3rdClass Loumania Stewart

PAGE 86

86Proceedings Fall 2018 Bridge StatutesThrough the enactment of various bridge statutes, Congress has established exclusive jurisdiction for all bridges over all navigable waters of the United States. When combined with the imple menting regulations found in Title33, Code of Federal Regulations Parts 114118, these statutes form the basis for the Coast Guards bridge program. These statutes are intended to help maintain freedom of naviga tion on navigable waters and to prevent interferences with naviga tion resulting from the placement of bridges, dams, dikes, or other obstructions without the express permission of the United States. The decision as to whether to issue a bridge permit or promulgate a drawbridge operation must take into consideration the eect such action will have on the reasonable needs of navigation. The Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899 focuses on preventing inter ference with navigation and protecting U.S. waters from pollution. The act establishes the federal authority for: Approval of the construction of bridges over or in navigable waterways (33 USC 401) Penalties for wrongful construction of bridges, piers, etc., or removal of structures (33 USC 406) Alteration, removal, or repair of bridge or accessory obstructions to navigation The act also provides for: Civil and criminal penalties for violation Alteration or removal of unreasonably obstructive bridges (not subject to the Truman-Hobbs Act) Notice and hearing, specication of changes, time for compliance, notice to United States attorney, misdemeanor, nes, new oenses, and proper repair requirements (33USC 502) Establishment of special and general anchorages (33USC 471, 474) The Bridge Acts of August18, 1894; 1906; and August2, 1946 prohibit the construc tion of any bridge across navigable waters of the United States unless rst authorized by the Coast Guard. The Coast Guard approves the location and clearances of bridges through the issuance of bridge permits or permit amend ments. A permit is required for new construc tion, reconstruction, or modication of a bridge or causeway over waters of the United States. The Bridge Act of August18, 1894, provides for the regulation of drawbridge operations and prescribes civil and criminal penalties for bridge and vessel owners and operators for violation of regulations (33USC 499). The [General] Bridge Act of 1906 requires approval of location and plans for construc tion of certain bridges, provides for removal or alteration of obstructive bridges, provides authority for requiring navigation lighting of bridges, and prescribes civil and criminal penalties for violations (33 USC 491-495). The Congressional (Secretarial) Consent for Bridge Construction, Codication of the General Bridge Act of 1946: Delegates to the secretary of the department in which the Coast Guard is operating the consent of Congress for the construction, maintenance, and operation of bridges over the navigable waters of the United States Requires approval by the secretary of location and plans for construction of those bridges prior to construction Prescribes civil and criminal penalties for violation of lawful orders relating to maintenance and operations of bridges (33USC 525 (except (c)), 530, and 533) This act also provides the requirements for marking wrecks or other obstructions in the navigable waters of the United States or waters above the continental shelf (33USC09) The Truman-Hobbs Act (Bridge Act of June21, 1940), Altera tion of Bridges (33USC 511524), authorizes the alteration of bridges determined to be unreasonable obstructions to naviga tion, provides for the apportionment of cost for federal funding, prescribes procedures for relocation of bridges, and contains provi sions addressing the applicability of the Administrative Procedure Act and the availability of judicial review. Prior to passage of the Truman-Hobbs Act, the removal or altera tion of bridges determined to be unreasonable obstructions to navigation and so ordered by the Secretary of the Army was at the expense of the persons owning or operating the bridge. The International Bridge Act of September26, 1972 (33USC 535535i) governs the construction, maintenance, operation, and sale or transfer of bridges connecting the United States to any foreign country. The fourth-longest steel arch bridge at the time of its completion in 1931, the Bayonne Bridge con nects Bayonne, New Jersey, with Staten Island, New York. The process of raising the road bed from a height of 155feet to deck to a height of 215feet began in 2013 to accommodate New Panamax ships. The new road bed was opened to trac in February 2017 and the process of removing the original deck began. Photo courtesy of Port Authority of New York and New Jersey

PAGE 87

87Fall 2018 Proceedings Event requests that will temporarily affect bridge operations Waterway/vessel restrictions that do not require a change to the bridge operating schedule (sector approval) Temporary changes to the bridge operating schedule (district commander approval) Bridge construction/maintenance projects that affect vessel navigation Waterway/vessel restrictions in or around a bridge (sector approval) Temporary changes to vertical or horizontal clearances (district commander approval) Permanent or temporary changes to a bridge operating regulation Changing operating schedules (district commander approval) Changing to remote operations (district commander approval) Investigation of bridge allisions and potential regulation violations Failure to open with ship in extremis for local authorities and or owner/operator Heavy weather preparations, coordination with state/local EOCs 5 Initial reports and follow-up on enforcement actions (See sidebar page 88)ConclusionThe sector organizational construct offers an opportunity to modernize and align the bridge program with other waterways management activities. The authorities avail able to the sector commander and interactions with the maritime community provide a single point for the coordination of waterways management activities not previously available to the bridge program. Addition ally, the program should work to develop guidelines and practices that use the sectors inherent and unique capabilities. sector in the coordination and decision-making process for bridge projects and operations that may affect man agement of their waterways has become more apparent. In many cases, required actions are not a matter of being a program expert, but rather being the waterways manage ment expert. The bridge program has started to consider alternative program constructs to better align program matic activities that can be integrated with other Coast Guard activities that provide for the safety of navigation, such as sector waterways management. 4 tinue to successfully implement, all of the bridge program functions, but the sectors offer capabilities that would to the sector commander waterway users (harbor safety committees, pilot associations, facility operators, etc.) discrepancies and incidents discrepancy response and enforcement The district commander and the sector commander each have authorities that can impact bridge operations and navigation on a waterway. For example, the sector commander could establish a safety or security zone for a special event in the vicinity of a bridge, effectively closing the waterway and preventing navigation from passing through the bridge. Conversely, the district commander could approve a temporary deviation from the draw bridge operating regulations for maintenance, allowing a from passing through the bridge, and effectively closing the waterway. In either situation, coordination between to the maritime community, should be included in the decision-making process. While there is not yet any formal district or sector guidance on coordinating bridge projects or operations, here are some situations to consider for coordination: As a guideline, the sector commander CANNOT directly authorize a bridge owner to: construct, modify, or alter a bridge depart from approved permit plans deviate from approved operating regulations change the vertical or horizontal clearance during construction or maintenance change bridge lighting or other signals As a guideline, the sector commander CAN: restrict access/movement of vessels in the vicinity of a bridge for safety and security establish safety and security zones issue permits and special regulations for marine events control the movement of vessels take action necessary to prevent damage to any bridge

PAGE 88

Coordinating Roles and AuthoritiesIn all of the following examples, the sector and the district should coordinate with waterway users and develop appropriate public notices for the events. 1. Sector Coast Guard received a special event request for the Big Run Marathon. Marathon City is requesting that the Run Bridge remain closed to navigation from 06001800 on the day of the marathon. The Run Bridge is a two-leaf bascule bridge which is required to open on demand for navigation. What should the sector do? Does this situation require a devi ation for the bridge operating regulation? In this situation it does appear that a safety or security zone is required for the event, but a temporary deviation will be required in order to allow the bridge to remain in the closed to navigation position for the requested period. The sector should forward the request to the district bridge oce in order to initiate a temporary devia tion in accordance with 33CFR 117.35. 2. Sector Coast Guard received a report from the owner of the Fixed Bridge that, during a scheduled painting project, their contractor found signicant rust in the center span of the bridge. The contractor said they will need to hang a plat form 10 feet below the bridge deck for 30 days to replace the damaged metal. Can the sector authorize the work? What should the sector do? The sector cannot authorize the work because it requires a temporary reduction in the vertical clearance of the bridge. The sector should forward the report to the district bridge oce for action. 3. The district bridge oce has been noti ed that the state DOT plans to replace the I 95 drawbridge with a xed bridge. How should the district go about deter mining the required vertical clearance for the xed bridge? What can the sector do? The district bridge oce will require the applicant to complete a navi gation study to gather information about waterways users and vessels that use the waterway. Reviewing the bridge tender logs will also provide information on the types of vessels and number of vessels that have previously required an opening to pass through the bridge. The sector can coordinate with local waterway users and provide information to conduct the navigation study. 4. Sector Coast Guard received a special event request for the 4th of July re works show. The city has requested a safety zone to limit vessel trac within one mile of the City Drawbridge for a period to extend from two hours before the reworks until two hours after the reworks. What should the sector do? Is a deviation from the operating regulations required? The sector can establish the requested safety zone in accordance with 33CFR 1.05-1(f), which would limit navigation through the bridge during that period. The sector should notify the district bridge oce. Though it does not appear that a temporary deviation is required, as the waterway will be closed during the period, the district should notify the bridge owner. 5. Sector Coast Guard received a report at 2230 from the M/V Captain that the channel lights on the Metropolitan Bridge are extinguished. What should the sector do? What should the district bridge oce do? The sector should issue a Broadcast Notice to Mariners to inform mariners that the lights on the bridge are extin guished. If there are Coast Guard units or other vessels in the area, the sector should request verification of the lighting discrepancy and notify the district bridge oce of the discrepancy as soon as possible. The district bridge oce will contact the bridge owner to coordinate the discrepancy response. The district bridge oce will prepare a notice for the Local Notice to Mariners, ifneeded.Coast Guard Cutter Mackinaw escorts the freighter Canadian Olympic (on horizon) under the Mackinac Bridge. Cutter Mackinaw keeps the Great Lakes navigable for freighters shipping goods around the region during the winter. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 3rdClass WilliamB. Mitchell 88Proceedings Fall 2018

PAGE 89

89Fall 2018 Proceedings A timeline for completion of analysis and formal implementation of sector-level bridge program man agement has not yet been determined. In the interim, establishing open communications and local processes between the districts and sectors for the coordination of bridge projects and operations will help facilitate better management of the maritime transportation system and service to the maritime public. About the author: for the approval of plans and location of bridges and causeways across navigable waters of the United States, operating regulations for draw bridges, lights and signals on bridges required for safe navigation, and the alteration of bridges found to be unreasonable obstructions to navigation. Prior to retiring from active duty, he served as the chief of waterways management for the Fifth Coast Guard District and served nine years on Endnotes :1. Creation of Department of Transportation Summary, February 3, 2016, www. transportation.gov/50/creation-department-transportation-summary2. Creation of a 12th Cabinet Post, March 9, 1966, www.transportation.gov/50/ creation-12th-cabinet-post3. 33 CFR 1.01-60(b)Delegation for Issuance of Bridge Permits and 33 CFR 1.05-1(e)(1)(iii)Delegation for Issuance of Drawbridge Regulations4. Bridge Program Strategic Plan 2015-20205. 33 CFR 117.33 Closure of Draw for Natural Disasters or Civil Disorders. Drawbridges need not open for the passage of vessels during periods of natural disasters or civil disorders declared by the appropriate authorities unless oth erwise provided for in Subpart B or directed to do so by the district commander. A Coast Guard 47-foot motor lifeboat is moored at Coast Guard Station Golden Gate in Sausalito, California, in December 2015. Coast Guard photo by Petty Ocer 3rdClass Loumania Stewart

PAGE 90

90Proceedings Fall 2018 Understanding Tetrachloroethyleneby HILLA R Y SADOFF Chemical Engineer, Hazardous Materials Division U.S. Coast Guard Chemical of the QuarterWhat is it?Tetrachloroethylene (C2Cl4), also known as PERC, PCE, or Perchloroethylene, is a halogenated alkene. It is a volatile organic compound or solvent that dissolves oils, greases, and waxes. There are four grades available, each differen tiated by its level of purity and the amount of stabilizers added to prevent the decomposition of tetrachloroethylene. commercial production in the United States beginning in 1925. It is commonly used as a fabric cleaner at dry cleaners and as a metal vapor degreaser in industry. Other industry purposes include use as a component in paint removers, printing inks, glues, polishes, and lubricants. It is also found in household products like shoe polish, spot removers, and orocarbons and other rubber coatings. It is even a precursor to ground-level ozone, which is an antioxidant that irritates the respiratory system. Why should I care? less liquid at room temperature. Most people can smell the sweet, ether-like odor of PERC at 1 part in 1 million parts of air (1ppm). The vapor is heavier than air. It is a recog nized marine pollutant. Liquid PERC can be transported a number of ways, including by truck, train, plane, barge, or ship, provided it is transported according to the applicable regulations. This material is stable at room temperature and atmospheric pressure, but containers can explode if the material is heated. It is only slightly soluble in water, but mixes easily with alco hol, ether, chloroform, benzene, hexane, and other oils. Tet rachloroethylene reacts with chemically active metals such as aluminum, barium, beryllium, lithium, and zinc. It also reacts to sunlight and with acids, bases, oxidizing materials, and combustible materials. When this product thermally decomposes, it creates phosgene, hydrogen chloride, and chlorine. Therefore, PERC should be stored in the dark and not near sources of heat or ignition. Furthermore, it should be segregated from food and feedstuffs. Tetrachloroethylene is considered a likely carcinogen. Addi air pollutants presenting the greatest threat to public health in urban areas. The major routes of exposure to tetrachloroethylene include inhalation and ingestion through consumption of something that has been contaminated. There is little der mal exposure risk for this product, as studies have shown it does not pass through the skin, but the product may cause skin irritation and dryness by removing the oils from within the skin. This material also causes central nervous system effects such as headaches, dizziness, impaired coor dination, sleepiness, confusion, and nausea, and is likely to cause damage to the liver and kidneys. Those working with tetrachloroethylene should work in a well-ventilated area and wear personal protective gear such as special clothing, gloves, safety goggles or face shield, and a respirator with a What is the Coast Guard doing about it?The Coast Guard enforces maritime transportation require ments for poisonous materials like tetrachloroethylene to minimize the risk associated with transporting them. Regu lations found in 49 CFR Subchapter C set requirements for marking, labeling, and transporting the material in pack ages, and 46 CFR Subchapter O sets regulations for carriage requirements of bulk liquids. Additionally, the U.S. Coast Guard operates the National Response Center, which is the sole federal point of contact for reporting chemical spills. In the event of a spill or emer gency with tetrachloroethylene, call (800) 424-8802. About the author: Hillary Sadoff is a chemical engineer in the Hazardous Materials Division bilities revolve around areas of packaged hazardous materials shipment by water. She serves as the USCG subject matter expert for rulemaking proj ects harmonizing international and domestic packaged hazardous materi als regulations. She earned her B.S. and Master of Engineering degrees in chemical engineering at the University of Maryland, College Park, and References: http://www.inchem.org/documents/icsc/icsc/eics0076.htm lene.pdf https://www.cancer.org/cancer/cancer-causes/tetrachlorethylene-perchloroeth ylene.html

PAGE 91

91Fall 2018 ProceedingsNauticalEngineeringQueries Nautical Engineering Queries1. What is the rotor speed of a six-pole, 60-cycle induction motor operating at full load with 3% slip? A. 3492 RPM B. 1800 RPM C. 1164 RPM D. 1746 RPM 2. When using a sling psychrometer to determine relative humidity, the indicated difference between the dry bulb and wet bulb reading is known as what? A. relative humidity B. dew point C. wet bulb depression D. partial saturation temperature 3. A diesel engine exposed to widely varying ambient temperatures should use lubricating oil with A. a high viscosity index B. a low viscosity index C. extreme pressure additives D. no additives D. All of the above. Q uestions Prepared by NMC Engineering Examination Team

PAGE 92

92Proceedings Fall 2018 Answers1. A. 3492 RPM Incorrect answer. This RPM corresponds to the rotor speed of a two-pole, 60-cycle induction motor operating at full load with 3% slip. B. 1800 RPM Incorrect answer. This RPM corresponds to the synchronous speed of a four-pole, 60-cycle induction motor. C. 1164 RPM Correct answer. Reference: Operation, Testing, and Preventive Maintenance of Electrical Power Apparatus, Hubert. Solution is as follows: ns = 120f/p = 120(60)/6 = 1200 RPM synchronous speed nr = ns (100 s)/100 = 1200 (100 3)/100 = 1164 RPM rotor speed D. 1746 RPM Incorrect answer. This RPM corresponds to the rotor speed of a four-pole, 60-cycle induction motor operating at full load with 3% slip. 2. A. relative humidity percentage of the maximum amount that the air could hold at a given temperature. Although the relative humidity will impact the indicated difference between the dry bulb and wet bulb readings of a sling psychrometer, the actual difference is NOT known as relative humidity. B. dew point condense to form water droplets (dew). The dew point varies with the barometric pressure and the moisture content of air (humidity). C. wet bulb depression Correct answer. bulb temperatures associated with the use of a sling psychrometer. If the surrounding air is dry, there is a greater difference between the temperatures of the two thermometers. If the surrounding air is saturated with moisture100% relative humiditythere is no difference between the two temperatures. Reference: Modern Refrigeration and Air Conditioning; Althouse, Turnquist, and Bracciano. D. partial saturation temperature Incorrect answer. The total pressure of air is the sum of the individual constituent gas partial pressures. Saturation temperature is the temperature at which vapor will condenseor its liquid will evaporateat a given pressure. 3. A. a high viscosity index Correct answer. A lubricating oil with a high viscosity index exhibits a high resistance to viscosity change as the temperature changes, which is a highly desirable property for an oil to have as used in engine applications subject to widely varying ambient temperatures. As the temperature changes, the oil viscosity of oils with a high viscosity index remains relatively stable, providing optimal lubrication and reliable starting. Reference: Diesel Engineering Handbook, Stinson. B. a low viscosity index Incorrect answer. A lubricating oil with a low viscosity index has a low resistance to viscosity change as the temperature changes, which is NOT a desirable property for an oil to have as used in engine applications subject to widely varying ambient temperatures. As the temperature changes, the oil viscosity of oils with a C. extreme pressure additives Incorrect answer. Extreme pressure additives are generally associated with reducing tooth wear in reduction gear applications and are generally not associated with motor oils. Geared steam turbine drive lubricating oils would feature extreme pressure additives, for example. D. no additives Incorrect answer. High viscosity index oils used in engine applications subject to widely varying ambient temperatures are formulated with additives to improve the viscosity index. 4. A. be known. B. people to enter without a breathing apparatus. Correct answer. In order for the inspection team to enter the area to do their work unencumbered Oklahoma State University. C. cooled so that accidental skin burns will not occur. D. All of the above. Engineering

PAGE 93

93Fall 2018 ProceedingsNauticalDeckQueries 1. When shall signals be sounded by a power-driven vessel intending to overtake another vessel? A. if any vessel is within half a mile of that vessel B. if the other vessel is power-driven, and both are in sight of one another C. if both are in sight of one another D. if another power-driven vessel is within half a mile 2. Which statement is TRUE for the directive force of a gyrocompass? A. The force increases as the latitude increases, being maximum at the geographic poles. B. The force decreases as the latitude increases, being maximum at the geographic equator. C. The force is greatest when a vessel is near the Earths magnetic equator. D. The force remains the same at all latitudes. 3. You are transporting dangerous cargo on your vessel. Who is required to sign the Dangerous Cargo Manifest acknowledging to its correctness? A. only the master B. the U.S. Coast Guard marine inspector C. the shipper D. the master or his authorized representative 4. IMO requires minimum standards for initial metacentric height for cargo and passenger vessels. Which is the minimum metacentric height for these vessels? A. not less than 0.15m B. not less than 0.20m C. not less than 0.25m D. not less than 0.27m Q uestions Nautical Deck Queries Prepared by NMC Engineering Examination Team

PAGE 94

94Proceedings Fall 2018 1. A. if any vessel is within half a mile of that vessel Incorrect answer. B. if the other vessel is powerdriven, and both are in sight of one another Correct answer. Reference: 33 CFR 83. Also IAW Inland Rules 83.34(c)(i), which state: (c) (i) power-driven vessel intending to overtake another power-driven vessel shall (1) One short blast to mean, I intend to overtake you on your starboard side; (2) Two short blasts to mean, I intend to overtake you on your port side C. if both are in sight of one another Incorrect answer. D. if another power-driven vessel is within half a mile Incorrect answer. 2. A. The force increases as the latitude increases, being maximum at the geographic poles. Incorrect answer. B. The force decreases as the latitude increases, being maximum at the geographic equator. Correct answer. Reference: The American Practical Navigator, 2002 edition, states the following on page 94: The directive force is maximum at the equator and decreases to zero at the poles. C. The force is greatest when a vessel is near the Earths magnetic equator. Incorrect answer. D. The force remains the same at all latitudes. Incorrect answer. 3. A. only the master Incorrect answer. B. the U.S. Coast Guard marine inspector Incorrect answer. C. the shipper Incorrect answer. D. the master or his authorized representative Correct answer. IAW 49 CFR 176.30(c) states: designated by the master and attached to the vessel, or in the case of a barge, the person in charge of the barge, acknowledges the correctness of the dangerous cargo manifest, list, or stowage plan by his signature. 4. A. not less than 0.15m Correct answer. The International Code on Intact Stability (2008) states the following on page 20: 2.2.4 The initial metacentric height GM0 shall not be less than 0.15m. B. not less than 0.20m Incorrect answer. C. not less than 0.25m Incorrect answer. D. not less than 0.27m Incorrect answer. AnswersDeck

PAGE 95

In the News: Sector Boston pollution response team On April 13, 2018, a Sector Boston pollution response team and the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection responded to reports of a sheen on the Mystic River near the Amelia Earhart Dam between Somerville and Everett. An intensive investigation revealed that a damaged electrical conduit allowed dielectric uida highly rened mineral oilto seep into the surrounding soil and the storm drain system before reaching the Mystic River. The pipe was permanently repaired May 9.

PAGE 96

COMMANDANT (CG-DCO-84) ATTN: PROCEEDINGS US COAST GUARD STOP 7318 2703 MARTIN LUTHER KING JR AVE SE WASHINGTON, DC 20593-7318 PRSRT STD POSTAGE & FEES PAID U.S. COAST GUARD PERMIT NO.G-157 Homeported in Bayonne, New Jersey, USCGC Katherine Walkers primary mission is the upkeep of 335 aids to navigation. It also conducts search and rescue; domestic icebreaking; and ports, waterways, and coastal security in its area of responsibility. Photo by Glynnis Jones | Shutterstock.com