Ask the MSSC - You have questions. We have answers from the USCG Marine Safety and Security Council.

Why is the TWIC not required for public vessels sailors (Navy/Coast Guard)? CG places this on commercial mariners, but is it required for mariners who sail on public vessels?

Answered by the USCG Office of Prevention Policy, Cargo & Facilities Division.

Under Title 46 Code of Federal Regulations, by April 15, 2009, all mariners holding an active license, certificate of registry, MMD, or STCW endorsement must hold a valid Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) issued by the Transportation Security Administration under 49 CFR Part 1572. Title 46 does not apply to a public vessel of the United States (a “public vessel” means a vessel that is owned, or demise chartered, and operated by the United States government or a government of a foreign country; and is not engaged in commercial service). Mariners who sail on public vessels are not required to hold a license, certificate of registry, MMD, STCW endorsement, or TWIC.

Even though these individuals are not required to hold a CG-issued credential by law, many (for example: mariners aboard Military Sealift Command vessels) are required by the operator to hold a valid qualification document as a condition of employment. As such, they will be required to obtain a TWIC before their credential will be renewed.

In addition, Under 33 CFR § 101.514, federal officials, including employees of the armed services, are not required to obtain or possess a TWIC.

Additional information on TWIC is available on the U.S. Coast Guard’s Homeport website at http://homeport.uscg.mil/twic.

The Care and Handling of Liquefied Natural Gas

This "Chemical of the Quarter" excerpt is from the U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine, by Dr. Alan Schneider, U.S. Coast Guard Office of Operating and Environmental Standards.

Liquefied Natural Gas

What is it?
Natural gas is a flammable gas we use to heat our homes, cook our food, and make electricity. It is made up of over 90 percent methane. The U.S. no longer produces enough natural gas to meet our needs, so we import it as liquefied natural gas (LNG) in tank ships.

How is it shipped?
Natural gas must be converted to a liquid before you can put it on a ship. If you didn’t, you’d need 600 ships to carry the same amount as a gas! Natural gas cannot be liquefied by compressing; it must be cooled to below its boiling point, -258°F.

Why should I care?
Shipping concerns. Engineers design LNG tank ships with special metals and materials placed where LNG makes contact (cargo tanks, pumps, piping). They do this because liquefied natural gas is so cold that it will crack ordinary steels. For example, whenever you make or break a line, you need to put a drip pan made of a material that is not brittle at LNG temperatures underneath. Aluminum makes a great drip pan.

Health concerns. As noted, liquefied natural gas is extremely cold, and will give you frostbite if you get even a small amount on you. Additionally, LNG is an asphyxiation concern in unventilated areas; as it vaporizes, it pushes air out of the space. Great care needs to be taken when entering an area containing LNG that does not receive air exchanges on a timely basis.

Fire or explosion concerns. LNG is very flammable. If spilled on water, it will boil off and form a potentially flammable vapor cloud. If it catches fire (on land or water), it will rapidly burn with a tall, hot flame.

Does that mean that an LNG ship is a “floating bomb”? No. LNG won’t burn unless it is a vapor, and only then if it is diluted to between five and 15 percent LNG vapor in air. LNG does not explode, even if it catches fire.

What’s the Coast Guard doing about it?
LNG’s safety record is excellent due to the high safety standards that have been implemented throughout the industry. The Coast Guard normally escorts LNG carriers in and around ports and also routinely creates a restricted area around moving LNG tank ships and shoreside terminals.

For more information:
Full article and “Environmental Protection” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/Winter2008-09//.

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Online survey available at: http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

The Hawaii Superferry—information sharing leads to operational success

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine. By CAPT Vince Atkins, former commander, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Honolulu, and ENS Meghan Hough, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Honolulu.


Hawaii Superferry (HSF) came to Hawaii to start a high-speed ferry service between the Hawaiian islands of Oahu, Maui, and Kauai. The Superferry vessel, the Alakai, is a 350-foot high-speed catamaran designed to carry 866 passengers and 282 vehicles.

A Hostile Operating Environment
Citizens and environmental groups opposed to this new service voiced several concerns, citing Alakai’s lack of an environmental impact study, the possibility of increased traffic congestion, and the potential for introducing invasive species and harming marine life.

Alakai’s initial operations were greeted by an estimated 300 protestors in Kauai, endangering public safety at sea and ashore. USCG Station Kauai’s small boat is shown removing protesters on surfboards from the path of the Alakai into Nawiliwili Harbor, Kauai. The crowd forced the HSF facility to close its gates due to security concerns and, due to continuing public unrest, HSF decided to temporarily halt its Kauai operations altogether.

As the courts wrestled with the legalities of the situation, law enforcement agencies had to prepare for the ferry’s possible return to full service and the subsequent widespread civil disturbances it could cause ashore and in the harbors.

Unique Challenges
Federal, state, and local authorities faced the challenge of balancing seemingly contradictory objectives: upholding the law, ensuring public safety, ensuring the safe arrival and departure of the ferry in multiple ports and jurisdictions, and protecting and promoting constitutional freedoms. Information sharing was critical for successful operations, and for them to be viewed with the broadest scope—not just as an exchange among government agencies, but with the public at large.

Achieving Interagency Alignment
The Coast Guard; its port partners; and various county, state, and federal government officials routinely worked together on a number of committees, at exercises, and during other operational incidents to understand and align the various legal authorities and jurisdictional concerns.

The mechanism that provided for information sharing and interagency alignment was a unified command structure consistent with the National Incident Management System. The Incident Command System (ICS) provides an organizational structure and process wherein agencies with differing authorities, competencies, and equities may come together to work toward a common goal. The operational challenges, varying agency concerns, and differing agency capabilities were laid bare and discussed thoroughly during the frequent meetings of the unified command.

Execution of the Operation
The unified command worked together to develop a plan that recognized differing authorities and competencies. The two operations/groups (onshore and waterborne security operations) created an overall plan designed to reduce the number of on-water protesters, provided a pre-designated protest zone, and developed coordinated methods to deal with illegal and unsafe protests. The coordinated plan also required a temporary fixed security zone to ensure the safety of the vessel and its passengers.

Operational Success
The implementation of the new security/protest zone required extensive public affairs efforts to ensure the affected maritime stakeholders and ocean recreation community understood the scope of the security regulations. To increase compliance, the unified command formed a joint public information staff to meet with the public to outline security zone boundaries and explain the legal consequences of violating the zone. Public outreach proved successful in deterring a large number of protesters from illegally entering the on-water security zone.

It’s important to note that the intended result of this information sharing process and interagency collaboration was not to change the protestors’ opinions regarding the ferry operation.

In this instance, information sharing achieved its intended goals: allowing the Alakai to transit in and out of Maui without incident, allowing protestors to voice their dissent, and helping agencies to make the best use of unique authorities and competencies.

The complexities of maritime operations are often compounded by factors such as the variability of the sea itself, differing and sometimes overlapping legal authorities, and the presence of a wide range of concerned agencies with varying competencies and capabilities. Information sharing reduces operational complexity and sets the stage for success.

For more information:
Full article and “Focus on Safety” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and then “2008 Vol. 65, Number 2” (Summer 2008).

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Online survey available at: http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

The International Trade Data System—a global data-sharing initiative

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine. By LCDR Mike Dolan, chief, Cargo Security Branch, U.S. Coast Guard Office of Port and Facility Activities.


On January 24, 2008, RADM Brian Salerno, the U.S. Coast Guard Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety, Security and Stewardship, signed a letter of intent for the Coast Guard to become the 43rd participating government agency in the International Trade Data System. This decision opened the door for the Coast Guard to explore new ideas for using information to improve programs, harmonize processes with other agencies, and reduce regulatory burden on industry.

When announced at the February 2008 meeting of the Commercial Operators Advisory Committee, this decision generated applause and acclaim. The senior industry leaders who comprise the committee represent major companies that import the consumer goods our nation relies on. These leaders know that the global marketplace’s future progress requires an emphasis on data and technology. As a heavily regulated community, they were happy to see the Coast Guard join a project intended to streamline the process of delivering required information to the government.

What Is the International Trade Data System?
The International Trade Data System (ITDS) is an ongoing, long-term U.S. interagency community of interest. The Customs and Border Protection automated commercial environment (ACE) major acquisition project, which is creating and modernizing computer network interfaces with the international trade community, supports the ITDS community. The ITDS members’ requirements will shape the spiral development of ACE capabilities. The objective is to provide a single portal for commercial entities to submit all trade data and information required by the federal government. Once through the ACE portal, the data then goes into the ITDS community’s repository.

The project intends to facilitate more streamlined operations in that commercial entities will submit information to the government only once, in paperless form. Regulatory agencies will benefit by having complete visibility of all trade data along with connection to all the other agencies’ programs and activities.

Opportunities for interagency coordination and program improvement abound, and some agencies have already reaped benefits. For example, the Federal Safety Inspection Service achieved a 44-fold increase in the tonnage of ineligible product detected, detained, and removed from the food supply in one year using information obtained through an early version of the ACE portal.

Why Is This Important to the Coast Guard?
Like most high-level policy issues, the decision to participate in ITDS had both political and pragmatic drivers and implications. First, the politics. Signed into law in October 2006, the Security and Accountability for Every Port Act of 2006 states, “All federal agencies that require documentation for clearing or licensing the importation and exportation of cargo shall participate in the ITDS.” The act also states, “It is the sense of Congress that agency participation in the ITDS is an important priority of the federal government …”

Additionally, Coast Guard leadership began to see potential value in the concept. Program managers started to recognize that participation in the International Trade Data System could give the Coast Guard not only access to information, but to other agencies’ processes and programs, as well. This access would have a cumulative value that exceeded any cost of participation.

Finally, because the ACE system and the ITDS agency network interfaces were already being built, the Coast Guard realized that the window of opportunity was limited. The longer the wait to join, the less influence it would have had on the design of the network interface. And so, with a leap of faith, the Coast Guard joined the International Trade Data System with some visionary ideas of what it might achieve.

As a large, complex organization, we are at the most exciting phase of this new initiative. We are envisioning all the wonderful things that we can achieve, and stand ready to deal with the challenges that lie ahead. Participation in the International Trade Data System gives us a powerful tool and a path forward to make sure that the Coast Guard stays current with technology and stays engaged with the regulated community.


For more information:
Full article and “Focus on Safety” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and then “2008 Vol. 65, Number 2” (Summer 2008).

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Online survey available at: http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

Creating a Culture of Information Sharing

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine. By Ms. Susan Henry, U.S. Coast Guard Information Sharing executive agent.


The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 was signed into law on August 3, 2007, bringing assessment of federal information sharing practices and performance into sharper focus. Though annual assessment of federal information sharing had already been mandated under the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, the ownership and scope of the process were uncertain, and the reorganization of the intelligence community was still in progress.

The interpretation of information sharing within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has also been evolving since 2004. Within DHS, the vision of our responsibility to share stretches across all threats, all hazards, and all missions under the department’s purview. The Coast Guard is accountable for our information sharing performance across all maritime regimes and all missions, with a huge number and variety of partners.

New Annual Performance Measures
A few months after the 9/11 Commission Act was passed, the program manager for the information sharing environment of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) began working closely with DHS and other federal departments and agencies to identify specific, achievable measures of information sharing performance. The baseline measures focus on several key improvement categories, including:

· establishing integrated policy and practices, such as international agreements, privacy policy, and interagency reporting of suspicious activities;
· establishing agency-level information sharing governance;
· implementing joint federal/state/local fusion centers and “common terrorism information sharing” standards;
· cultural transformation (including personnel incentives and disincentives) and training.

In the summer of 2008 ODNI used an overall list of 14 key measures to create and present the first annual report to Congress.

How Do We Measure Up?
Coast Guard missions have always required information sharing with international, federal, state, local, tribal, industry, public, and private partners. As a result of our tradition of information sharing, our entering position against the new baseline measures is strong. Coast Guard sector commanders have actively pursued new collaborative planning, prevention, and response partnerships at the local level. Regional alliances promoted by federal law, policy, sponsorship, and grants, such as area maritime security committees, have been added to existing area contingency plan-based and Incident Command System-oriented partnerships.

DHS has formed several focused shared mission communities already. New shared mission communities will focus on other aspects of the “all threats, all hazards” DHS realm, establishing policy-level collaboration in critical infrastructure, incident response, and other concerns crucial to safety and security. These will cut across all Coast Guard missions, and all will require Coast Guard representation.

What Do We Still Need to Do?
To account for the information sharing we already do, we need to establish enterprise information sharing governance. We need to develop an agency-level information sharing strategy that publicly articulates the improvements we intend to support and invest in for the future. We need to continue to develop an information sharing segment architecture to ensure that our essential exchanges of information with our partners become part of our capability requirements. We also clearly need better collaborative, networked capabilities to work efficiently and effectively with our partners at local and regional levels.

Consistent with the 9/11 Commission Report’s call to “unity of effort” in information sharing, the new federal annual performance measures also call us to create a culture of information sharing. To facilitate this, we must include measurable improvements to our personnel evaluation and appraisal standards and institute incentives and rewards for excellence in information sharing, as well as disincentives for obstructing information sharing with our partners.

As a whole, our monitoring of Coast Guard field units’ information sharing practices shows a multi-mission federal agency stretching to the limits of its resources to share information in order to increase operational effectiveness. The new federal information sharing performance measures give us additional opportunities to showcase successful partnering, better document our constraints, and continue to improve the safety and security of the U.S. maritime domain.

For more information:
Full article and “Focus on Safety” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and then “2008 Vol. 65, Number 2” (Summer 2008).

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Online survey available at: http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

USCG Marine Safety Performance Plan Specific Safety Initiatives—improve commercial fishing vessel safety

Excerpt originally published in the Summer 2008 issue of the U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine as part of a special section—Capacity, Communication, Culture: The U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Performance Plan.

Commercial fishing continues to be one of the most dangerous occupations in America. The industry also faces severe economic pressures, including depleted stocks and limits on fishing, increasing fuel and other costs, and prices that have stagnated since at least 2000. This fosters an attitude of greater risk tolerance that can lead to less emphasis on training, safety equipment, and maintenance.

The Coast Guard has pursued improvements in safety in the commercial fishing industry since before World War II. Voluntary commercial fishing safety programs received considerable attention in the 1970s, and the Commercial Fishing Industry Vessel Safety Act of 1988 provided authority to require survival equipment, but did little to address prevention efforts. http://www.uscgboating.org/

Outreach and Communication
To improve our impact, we will seek to add full-time civilian commercial fishing vessel safety examiners and coordinators. This will allow us to expand the voluntary dockside examination program and reach out to those in the fishing industry to help them understand and come into compliance with regulations for basic safety equipment and lifesaving devices.

The Coast Guard Auxiliary performs a significant number of these safety exams and is an integral part of the fishing vessel safety team. We will seek to expand auxiliary involvement and institutionalize its role. In particular, we will use auxiliarists in boarding officer training and include auxiliarists in fishing vessel casualty investigations.

We will continue to promote safety and best practices through active participation at conferences and industry trade shows and through printed materials.

Partnerships
We will come together within the Commercial Fishing Industry Vessel Safety Advisory Committee to improve safety communications and risk tools to assist fishermen. Additionally, we will join forces with the National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health (that staffs a field office in Alaska focused on fishing industry safety) and take advantage of this expertise to develop future strategies to reduce commercial fishing vessel deaths and injuries.

We will also seek to improve information sharing with insurance companies to better understand injury mechanisms and potential interventions, and will leverage relationships with safety equipment manufacturers to identify areas where new or improved products are needed.

We intend to maintain close relationships with state fisheries regulators and seek to leverage their authority to favorably impact commercial fishing vessel safety. We will also work with Canadian regulators to share solutions and develop common approaches to minimize deaths and injuries.

Maritime Law Enforcement
We will direct a robust program of fishing vessel safety enforcement to deter unsafe operation, detect violations, and educate the industry. We will encourage operational commands to provide capable and sufficient resources, to schedule activities to maximize access to vessels and crews, and to provide ample advance publicity to effectively announce the program and explain its purpose.

We will encourage effective coordination of at-sea boardings, by identifying vessels that pose a greater safety concern because the operators refused to allow a voluntary dockside examination or were found not in compliance.In all instances, we will emphasize the importance of keeping the process cooperative and non-adversarial.

For more information:
Full article and “Focus on Safety” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and then “2008 Vol. 65, Number 2” (Summer 2008).

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Online survey available at: http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

USCG Marine Safety Performance Plan Specific Safety Initiatives—recreational boating safety

Excerpt originally published in the Summer 2008 issue of the U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine as part of a special section—Capacity, Communication, Culture: The U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Performance Plan.


Recreational boating is a fun and generally safe activity, yet each year some 700 boaters are lost and thousands more are injured. Recreational boating results in the third-highest annual number of transportation fatalities, and boating deaths are on the National Transportation Safety Board’s “Most Wanted” list.

To improve recreational boating safety, the Coast Guard is aggressively implementing a strategic plan developed in consultation with the National Boating Safety Advisory Committee.

Elements of the plan address:

Boating education. We will work with our partners to track the use and effectiveness of training and education courses.

Safety communications. We will act with key stakeholders and partners to improve safety communications and increase awareness of safe boating practices.

Safety equipment. We will increase boaters’ knowledge of required safety equipment and monitor trends for carriage.

Compliance with navigation rules. The Coast Guard will collaborate with the National Association of State Boating Law Administrators and other boating safety partners to improve the awareness and enforcement of navigation rules.

Additional Safety Measures
We will aggressively work with our partners to increase life jacket wear rates. We will join forces to assess factors affecting life jacket usage, encourage availability of life jackets, and strengthen the enforcement regime. In addition, we will seek to curb boating under the influence. The Coast Guard will create a baseline measurement to track trends in alcohol use by boaters, assess the effectiveness of field sobriety penalties, and increase the effectiveness of enforcement.

Performance Measurement and Reporting
We will team with National Association of State Boating Law Administrators to pursue a Memorandum of Agreement with all federal land management agencies to ensure proper and timely accident reporting to state authorities.

Manufacturer Compliance Efforts
The Coast Guard will identify boats involved in accidents where carbon monoxide, flotation, capacity, or fuel systems are factors and enhance manufacturer understanding of USCG regulations. We will verify any non-compliance via a factory visit program, and ensure corrective actions are implemented.

For more information:
Full article and “Focus on Safety” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and then “2008 Vol. 65, Number 2” (Summer 2008).

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Online survey available at: http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

USCG Marine Safety Performance Plan Objectives—improve program management

Excerpt originally published in the Summer 2008 issue of the U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine as part of a special section—Capacity, Communication, Culture: The U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Performance Plan.

We must deploy dynamic performance management practices through all levels of the program to maintain capacity, performance, and service, while delivering best value to the taxpayer.

Improve Management Accountability
We will restore transparency to the management of the marine safety program, and improve industry accessibility to Coast Guard leadership.

Service leaders at all levels will create opportunities to improve stakeholder engagement. We will capitalize on the Coast Guard’s modernization efforts to strengthen accessibility and timely service without jeopardizing transparency.

Strengthen Program Management
Ensuring that management structures and practices align with customer and other stakeholder needs—and that they are completely understood—is central to improving service delivery to the marine industry.

We will provide program direction that supports close, cooperative relationships with operational commands, industry customers, and other stakeholders. To the greatest extent possible, we will provide single-point accountability for all program outcomes, and designate management authorities and line-of-service responsibilities that correspond with key industry segments.

Develop a Balanced Scorecard
We will expand and improve our performance measurement capabilities and practices and develop a balanced scorecard that includes customer satisfaction metrics as well as a complete suite of outcome, output, activity, capability, and efficiency measures.

Implement a Quality Management System
We will implement a defined set of policies, processes, and procedures to execute marine safety mission activities. Implementing a quality management system throughout the program will enable us to identify, measure, control, and improve the core processes that will ultimately lead to improved mission performance.

For more information:
Full article and “Focus on Safety” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and then “2008 Vol. 65, Number 2” (Summer 2008).

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Online survey available at: http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

USCG Marine Safety Performance Plan Objectives—improve marine safety program capacity and performance

The next few blog excerpts were originally published in the Summer 2008 issue of the U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine as part of a special section—Capacity, Communication, Culture: The U.S. Coast Guard Marine Safety Performance Plan.


For the past decade, our marine inspector and investigator workforce has remained relatively constant despite a growing demand for domestic inspections, increasing port state responsibility, and increased homeland security requirements. Our ability to keep abreast of this evolving maritime industry is fundamentally linked to our potential to develop and retain an experienced cadre of technically savvy professionals.

Increase Capacity
To accomplish this, the Coast Guard must increase marine inspector and investigator capacity. To retain expertise and geographic-specific competencies while ensuring long-term continuity in critical mission areas, many of these will be civilian positions.

Achieve Appropriate Blend of Military/Civilian Workforce
Military personnel must continue to serve as marine inspectors and investigators to ensure innovation and to garner experience for management and command responsibilities. We will distribute civilian positions according to need and to complement the military workforce.

Maintaining proficiency within the marine safety program begins with recruitment and accession of additional maritime professionals. We intend to strengthen recruiting efforts at the maritime colleges through additional liaison officers and by seeking opportunities for Coast Guard officers to serve as faculty at those institutions.

Support and Reward Competency
To support these marine safety program recruits, we will work to ensure a viable career path to the most senior ranks of the Coast Guard. We must recognize and reward those who advance from apprentice, to journeyman, to expert marine safety professional status.

In addition, we will expand training and education programs, including engaging industry (within applicable legal and ethical guidelines) to maximize training opportunities and immerse our personnel in industry operations.

Expand Professional Education
Increased complexity in ship design and construction, including high-speed ferries, liquefied natural gas ships, mega-container and mega-cruise ships, and novel structural designs, calls for an innovative and knowledgeable technical staff to develop guidance, standards, and policy. We will work toward additional capacity and expertise to meet this demand.

For more information:
Full article and “Focus on Safety” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and then “2008 Vol. 65, Number 2” (Summer 2008).

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Online survey available at: http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

Upcoming in Proceedings

Winter 2009-2010: Grassroots efforts
• What’s the Coast Guard done for me lately?
• Local and regional efforts

Spring 2010: Rulemaking Update
• Rulemaking 101
• Interagency interaction
• Supporting analysis
• Public participation

Summer 2010: Maritime Domain Awareness
• Transforming MDA policy
• Transforming MDA capabilities
• Transforming MDA through technology

Your Opinion
• What do you want to read in Proceedings?
• What area under the Coast Guard’s marine safety, security, and environmental protection missions affects you most?
• What do you want to know more about?

Post a comment here or send us an e-mail at HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Online survey available at: http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.