Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine by PA3 Seth Johnson, U.S. Coast Guard Public Affairs Detachment New York.
As the rust-colored doors swing open, there is a sharp chemical smell, and dozens of white metal barrels become visible in the cargo container as sunlight spills in. A hazardous materials investigator in the Pipeline & Hazardous Materials Safety Administration in West Trenton, N.J., places his gloved hands on a barrel and peers inside. He begins meticulously looking over each of the barrels for spillage and damage in a container big enough to double as a small garage.
He is also looking for safety deficiencies. Mainly what he sees are a lot of problems with placards not being there or filled out properly. For example, one carrying adhesives was labeled right, but the placard was wrong.
Teamwork
This was just one out of hundreds of containers inspected in a Coast Guard-led initiative that involved 12 federal agencies and lasted over three days around the Ports of New York and New Jersey in March 2008. The initiative, called a multi-agency strike force operation (MASFO), focused on identification of safety violations in the storage and shipment of hazardous materials and numerous other deficiencies, and also built cooperation among organizations that do not work together every day.
“This has allowed everyone to come together and inspect cargo on roads, railways, ports, and vessels,” said John Hillin, an inspector at Coast Guard Sector New York’s Prevention Division. “With 100 inspectors working together, they have been able to learn a great deal and will work better as a team in the future, providing a safer port.”
The Players
Participants in the MASFO included the U.S. Coast Guard, Customs and Border Protection, Federal Aviation Administration, Federal Railroad Administration, National Cargo Bureau, Department of Homeland Security, Office of Inspector General, New Jersey State Police, Norfolk Southern Railroad Police Department, Port Authority Police Department, Federal Motor Carrier Safety Administration, Pipeline & Hazardous Material Safety Administration, and the New Jersey Department of Transportation.
Each of these agencies has specialties; having other members of agencies working in areas they usually wouldn’t provided a unique training experience. Each agency defined the roles of its participants. For example, the Federal Railroad Administration inspected cargo on trains, Port Authority Police worked alongside agencies to provide safety and assist with inspections, and the New Jersey State Police helped assist in roadside inspections and law enforcement.
Checks and Balances
With members of multiple agencies working together, the multi-agency strike force operation was also able to “catch” more in terms of identifying violations and deficiencies, as a whole.
“The idea is if there is a problem with a shipment, to catch it before it gets into another transportation mode,” said Joe Evans, a hazardous materials program manager at the Federal Motor Carrier Administration. “We check brakes, tires, driver credentials, and licensing to make sure he is able to carry hazardous material.”
While many agencies were local, Coast Guard leaders in the field of marine safety, inspection, and prevention traveled from places like Boston, Mass., and Oklahoma City, Okla., to work together during this operation and unique learning experience.
During the course of the MASFO there were 28 containers put on hold, 76 inspected containers found with deficiencies, 127 violations issued, and 15 trucks placed out of service. With roughly 2,000 man-hours and 636 containers inspected, this proved to be a large, successful operation that left road, rail, and waterways safer, while bolstering the communication and cooperation among agencies enforcing shipping safety and regulation.
For more information:
Full article and “Interagency Success Stories” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2009.
Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.
Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.
Thursday, July 29, 2010
Tuesday, July 27, 2010
Lessons Learned—Tow Allides with Moored Casino—Part III
Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine.Click here for Part I and Part II.
Permanently Moored Vessel Quality Action Team
Because of a number of other accidents involving permanently moored vessels, the Coast Guard convened a quality action team to identify risks involving permanently moored vessels, establish more formal means of Coast Guard involvement in their siting and mooring, and develop measures for reducing their risk of accidents.
The team found that barge breakaways, collisions, and high water were the main causes of permanently moored vessels parting their moorings. The team also found that 68 percent of the accidents occurred at high-risk locations, concluding that appropriate site selection was the most effective way of managing permanently moored vessel risk.
The team developed a permanently moored passenger vessel initial risk assessment to better quantify risks. To confirm its validity, the team examined accident data from almost 300 accidents that occurred between 1992 and 1997 within a half-mile of permanently moored vessels. That accident data generally validated the methodology, and those accident statistics were used to establish acceptable risk scores.
The information and recommendations were then used as a base for changes in Coast Guard policies applicable to permanently moored vessels. These policy changes, including the risk assessment, were included in the 2000 update of the Coast Guard’s Marine Safety Manual.
Coast Guard/Corps of Engineers Memorandum of Agreement
Because a vessel switches from the Coast Guard’s authority to the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE) when it receives permanently moored vessel status, one of the concerns voiced during the investigation was the feeling that the Coast Guard should be more involved and seek a formal role in guaranteeing safety.
While the responsibility for issuing permits remains with the USACE, a memorandum of agreement was signed in June 2000 establishing a formal process through which the Coast Guard provides input during the evaluation process for issuing permits—including permanently moored vessels and facilities—on safety standards, emergency equipment, and other safety conditions.
To facilitate this transition, Coast Guard personnel evaluate each vessel’s mooring arrangements. Once they have determined that the vessel meets the risk criteria, the USACE provides a site permit and the Coast Guard then transfers responsibility for future safety regulation of the vessel to local authorities. The Coast Guard remains involved with the permanently moored vessel, reevaluating the vessel’s risks every two years (and when pertinent local conditions change) using the aforementioned risk assessment.
The creation of the risk assessment, along with clarification of permanently moored vessels and the Coast Guard’s role with them, has created a more quantified means of assessing risk and establishing safer measures.
For more information:
Full article is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and “2006 Volume 63, Number 2” (Summer 2006).
Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.
Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.
Monday, July 26, 2010
Save the Date - 3rd Annual GMISS, Baltimore, Sept. 14-16, 2010
SAVE THE DATE - September 14th-16th 2010!
The National MDA Coordination Office (Formerly OGMSA) is pleased to announce the third annual Global Maritime Information Sharing Symposium (GMISS), to be held at the Baltimore Hilton on September 14-16th, 2010.
With this year's theme, "Charting the Course for MDA," NMCO is expecting over 250 participants from the maritime community of interest to participate in helping the U.S. federal government hone their message to ensure safety, security, commerce, and environmental protection in the maritime domain.
The overwhelmingly positive response received from last year's GMISS offers the opportunity to align all interested parties on improving MDA.
Your attendance would ensure that diverse viewpoints and opinions are heard and acted upon. Our Director, Mr. Gary Seffel, extends this invitation to all who are interested in maritime commerce and safety and looks forward to seeing you all in September.
For more information:
LT Patrick Dowling
National MDA Coordination Office Outreach and Coordination
Tel:(202)372-3074
Fax:(202)372-3905
Please visit our website for updates:
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Lessons Learned—Tow Allides with Moored Casino—Part II
Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine.Read Part I here.
Cause
The Coast Guard investigation blamed poor decision-making on the part of the tow’s captain—specifically his failure to account for the prevailing currents, which led him to oversteer.
To the captain’s credit, no evidence was found to suggest that alcohol or drugs contributed to the accident, and there was no actionable misconduct, inattention to duty, or willful violation of law. The report also acknowledged that his actions after the casualty were commendable, and likely played a large role in minimizing injury or loss of life and further damage to property.
Could the Accident Have Been Prevented?
Ironically, this was not the first time the Admiral had been struck. In 1994, shortly after the allision of the M/V Robert Y. Love with the Admiral, the Coast Guard captain of the port at Marine Safety Office St. Louis wrote a letter to the Corps of Engineers St. Louis District, requesting a review of the casino vessel’s permit, to determine if additional conditions were necessary to assure public safety.
The Admiral has been moved 1,000 feet and now resides just north of the last of St. Louis Harbor’s four bridges.
Actions Taken
The many questions of “What if…” made the Anne Holly /Admiral allision a noteworthy accident. What if the allision had been more severe? What if the drifting barges had been heavier or larger? What if the Admiral had parted its last remaining mooring line and been forced southbound toward the Poplar Street Bridge, which did not have adequate vertical clearance?
With more than 2,000 people aboard, the consequences of a subsequent sinking could have been catastrophic. Those questions served as the impetus for a number of safety improvements for permanently moored vessels, which we will outline in part III.
For more information:
Full article is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and “2006 Volume 63, Number 2” (Summer 2006).
Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.
Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
Lessons Learned—Tow Allides with Moored Casino—Part I
Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine by Ms. Jennifer Kiefer, special correspondent to Proceedings.Lessons learned from USCG casualty reports are regularly featured in Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine. These articles explore marine incidents and the causal factors, outline the subsequent U.S. Coast Guard marine casualty investigations, and describe the lessons learned as a result.
It is important to note that lives were lost in some of the marine casualties we present. Out of respect for the deceased, their families, and surviving crewmembers, we do not mention the name of any person involved.
On April 4, 1998, aboard the Admiral’s President Casino in St. Louis, Mo., more than 2,000 people were enjoying the casino’s entertainments. Just a short distance away, the M/V Anne Holly allided with a bridge, which set adrift most of its 14 barges. The current carried some of those barges back toward the casino, a permanently moored vessel, parting its mooring lines and swinging it out into the river.
Fortunately nobody aboard either vessel was seriously hurt and the damaged barges were quickly recovered. What makes this accident so noteworthy is how it set the stage for a number of valuable maritime safety improvements.
Waterway/Transit Hazards
In some ways the accident almost seemed inevitable. The Eads Bridge—where the allision began—has long been recognized as a difficult navigation area. Clearing the bridge’s diminishing vertical clearance requires steady steering and concentrated accuracy.
In addition to the bridge, the water itself presented an unusual challenge that night. High river conditions prompted the Coast Guard to impose a “daylight operation only” restriction on southbound tows over 600 feet. However, as the tow was traveling northbound, it was not affected, and the transit occurred during the more challenging night hours.
The Allision
Shortly after getting underway, the captain requested towing vessel assistance. Unfortunately there was only one vessel working at the time and it was unable to meet the request. The captain decided he would keep going without an assist vessel.
The vessel passed under two bridges and began the tricky approach to the Eads Bridge. The only passage possible, with the tow’s height and the increased flood stage, was directly under the center span. This approach required a course change and repositioning of the tow alignment. It is this steering maneuver that caused the allision and its domino effect.
As the forward barges passed under the bridge’s center span, the captain began steering to port to ensure the pilot house would pass under the center span. Partway under the bridge the vessel stalled, its forward movement halted by the opposing river current.
With the headway stopped, the current caused the tow to drift sideways toward the Missouri shore, pushing the tow’s port side barges into a bridge support and breaking its tow coupling. A number of the barges broke away and drifted back south.
Shortly thereafter, several barges allided with the Admiral’s bow and an entrance ramp, breaking the walkway loose from its moorings. Additionally, when eight of its 10 mooring lines parted, the casino vessel began to swing out into the river.
The captain released the remaining barges and raced downriver to place his bow against the casino vessel as its next-to-last mooring line parted. The combined efforts of the tow and the last remaining mooring wire held the vessel near the bank.
In part II we will outline the subsequent investigation report.
For more information:
Full article is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and “2006 Volume 63, Number 2” (Summer 2006).
Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.
Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.
Thursday, July 15, 2010
Providing Information to Mariners—the U.S. Coast Guard, Army Corps of Engineers, and NOAA team up
Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine by CDR Brian J. Tetreault, Chief, Vessel Traffic Services Division, U.S. Coast Guard Office of Shore Forces; Mr. Michael Winkler, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Engineering Research and Development Center; and Mr. Darren Wright, Program Manager, NOAA PORTS®.
The U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) all have leading roles in promoting marine safety and providing mariners critical navigational safety information.
For example, the Coast Guard’s Automatic Identification System (AIS) infrastructure is currently used to more effectively provide the USACE and NOAA’s large amounts of data to mariners via electronic transfer. This effort is focused on vessel traffic service areas where the Coast Guard has existing AIS capability, but as the Coast Guard expands this capability, it is anticipated that these applications will expand to other areas.
AIS has primarily been used as a sensor to aid in vessel tracking, complementing the information available through vessel voice reports, radar, and visual means. AIS has generally improved the monitoring of vessels, allowing more accurate and frequent tracking in areas where there were limited sensors and the confirmation of vessels’ identities were only observed on radar or through remote television cameras.
Expanded Use of AIS Capability
There is great potential to further improve vessel traffic service operations using Automatic Identification System transmit capability. AIS may be used as another way to provide information to mariners silently and on existing navigation systems. Mariners who have seen the benefits of AIS aboard have been asking for additional information.
For example, pilot organizations in several large port areas have asked for AIS-transmitted weather information, and inland towboat operators have asked for weather and hydrological data to assist them with difficult lock approaches. Two of the primary information providers are the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for navigation safety and services on more than 11,000 miles of inland and inland coastal waterways, nearly 200 lock sites, and other critical navigation infrastructure. USACE continually works to improve navigation safety and efficiency and has established an overarching program—the Coastal and River Information Service. Its purpose is to facilitate transfer of electronic information regarding navigation activity on our nation’s rivers and along coastal areas. The ultimate goal is to provide the framework by which the USACE can utilize and obtain electronic data that relates to commercial transportation on the U.S. coastal and inland waterways systems.
Cooperation Through an Interagency Research Project
An overarching project has been established with the USCG Research and Development Center to investigate the implementation of Automatic Identification System transmit capability. There are three main efforts associated with this project, all with a high level of interagency cooperation. First, a requirements study gathered information from various stakeholders involved with AIS transmit capability. The Coast Guard, USACE, NOAA, and others worked together to determine which agencies collected data that could be disseminated via the Automatic Identification System; what capabilities they already had for collecting, managing, and disseminating this information; and what capabilities would be needed to improve such dissemination.
This requirements study is being used to guide the second main effort of the project—establishing a test bed and individual demonstration projects of the capability. The information gathered from the test bed and demonstration projects will be used to refine requirements to be used as a basis for establishing the capability in operational systems nationwide.
The third main effort of the project is the establishment of a working group to review current VTS AIS capability within U.S. waters, review the potential uses of AIS-transmitted messages as part of an expanded VTS AIS capability, identify both the challenges and opportunities associated with this capability, recommend new or revised AIS transmit/broadcast messages suitable for regional and international implementation, and identify changes needed for Automatic Identification System equipment to support new/expanded capabilities.
For more information:
Full article and “Interagency Success Stories” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2009.
Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.
Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil
The U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) all have leading roles in promoting marine safety and providing mariners critical navigational safety information.
For example, the Coast Guard’s Automatic Identification System (AIS) infrastructure is currently used to more effectively provide the USACE and NOAA’s large amounts of data to mariners via electronic transfer. This effort is focused on vessel traffic service areas where the Coast Guard has existing AIS capability, but as the Coast Guard expands this capability, it is anticipated that these applications will expand to other areas.
AIS has primarily been used as a sensor to aid in vessel tracking, complementing the information available through vessel voice reports, radar, and visual means. AIS has generally improved the monitoring of vessels, allowing more accurate and frequent tracking in areas where there were limited sensors and the confirmation of vessels’ identities were only observed on radar or through remote television cameras.
Expanded Use of AIS Capability
There is great potential to further improve vessel traffic service operations using Automatic Identification System transmit capability. AIS may be used as another way to provide information to mariners silently and on existing navigation systems. Mariners who have seen the benefits of AIS aboard have been asking for additional information.
For example, pilot organizations in several large port areas have asked for AIS-transmitted weather information, and inland towboat operators have asked for weather and hydrological data to assist them with difficult lock approaches. Two of the primary information providers are the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.
The U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is responsible for navigation safety and services on more than 11,000 miles of inland and inland coastal waterways, nearly 200 lock sites, and other critical navigation infrastructure. USACE continually works to improve navigation safety and efficiency and has established an overarching program—the Coastal and River Information Service. Its purpose is to facilitate transfer of electronic information regarding navigation activity on our nation’s rivers and along coastal areas. The ultimate goal is to provide the framework by which the USACE can utilize and obtain electronic data that relates to commercial transportation on the U.S. coastal and inland waterways systems.
Cooperation Through an Interagency Research Project
An overarching project has been established with the USCG Research and Development Center to investigate the implementation of Automatic Identification System transmit capability. There are three main efforts associated with this project, all with a high level of interagency cooperation. First, a requirements study gathered information from various stakeholders involved with AIS transmit capability. The Coast Guard, USACE, NOAA, and others worked together to determine which agencies collected data that could be disseminated via the Automatic Identification System; what capabilities they already had for collecting, managing, and disseminating this information; and what capabilities would be needed to improve such dissemination.
This requirements study is being used to guide the second main effort of the project—establishing a test bed and individual demonstration projects of the capability. The information gathered from the test bed and demonstration projects will be used to refine requirements to be used as a basis for establishing the capability in operational systems nationwide.
The third main effort of the project is the establishment of a working group to review current VTS AIS capability within U.S. waters, review the potential uses of AIS-transmitted messages as part of an expanded VTS AIS capability, identify both the challenges and opportunities associated with this capability, recommend new or revised AIS transmit/broadcast messages suitable for regional and international implementation, and identify changes needed for Automatic Identification System equipment to support new/expanded capabilities.
For more information:
Full article and “Interagency Success Stories” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2009.
Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.
Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil
Tuesday, July 13, 2010
The Puget Sound Joint Harbor Operations Center—leveraging people and technology to optimize interagency interoperability
Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine by CAPT Stephen Metruck, U.S. Coast Guard Commander, Sector Seattle.
On a cold day in November 2003, a small boat may have stood off the transit lane in Puget Sound’s Hood Canal, concealed by a dense fog, observing as a USN ballistic missile submarine made its way from homeport to a dive point 100 miles away ...
This scenario highlights the ever-present challenge faced by the Coast Guard’s command centers as they try to determine whether threats exist to or from the vessels operating here, and how to best work with other agencies and armed services to resolve and respond to them. At Sector Seattle, Wash., the Coast Guard has created a Joint Harbor Operations Center that has become the nation’s benchmark for federal, state, and local maritime interagency coordination and interoperability in evaluating and responding to maritime threats.
History
In May of 2007, the U.S. Coast Guard established the initial operational capability of the Puget Sound Joint Harbor Operations Center (JHOC), designed to identify and respond to all threats to maritime safety, port security, and the environment. This followed an August 2005 memorandum of agreement (MOA) between the U.S. Navy Vice Chief of Naval Operations and the Coast Guard Vice Commandant to leverage the sensor, detection, personnel, and communication and decision-making systems of each partner. The result: a more accurate and timely common operating picture in Coast Guard sector areas of responsibility with a large Navy presence.
A View of the JHOC
Walking into the JHOC in Seattle, a visitor immediately notices the complex video display “Wall of Knowledge,” with the vast array of visual information sources available to a JHOC watchstander at a glance. Each watch station has four or five computer monitors on the desktop in addition to the large-format screens on the front wall, each one capable of displaying different applications or tactical information (see picture).
The communications specialist monitors seven different radio systems. Over 70 multi-agency cameras are integrated into the sensor management system. On top of that, there are more than 40 different data sources the watchstanders have access to.
There are several initiatives to integrate this information—Watchkeeper, a new software suite being developed at USCG headquarters, the JHOC’s own quick-response checklists, and command duty officer and watchstander training based on realistic scenarios. Initiatives with the Department of Homeland Security-sponsored university centers of excellence, military research and development centers such as the Coast Guard Research and Development Center and SPAWAR, and self-initiated demonstrations and trials at the local deckplate level are paving the way for intelligent applications that will free decision-makers to make decisions rather than sift through data.
Looking Ahead
Today, that same small boat described in the scenario at the beginning of the article may have hoped to remain concealed while observing the transit. However, our sensors can now penetrate the fog to detect the boat. Observant watchstanders, attuned to picking out anomalies, would alert the Coast Guard command duty officer, who could request that airborne assets track the small boat to its destination. Within five minutes of returning to a local marina, the owner of that small boat might get a call from the USCG command duty officer asking if he was having engine problems.
Coordination like this is possible only through the concerted and sustained outreach effort that brings all port stakeholders together with one aim—to contribute to port and national security, safety, and environmental protection through information sharing and coordinated processes.
For more information:
Full article and “Interagency Success Stories” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2009.
Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.
Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.
On a cold day in November 2003, a small boat may have stood off the transit lane in Puget Sound’s Hood Canal, concealed by a dense fog, observing as a USN ballistic missile submarine made its way from homeport to a dive point 100 miles away ...
This scenario highlights the ever-present challenge faced by the Coast Guard’s command centers as they try to determine whether threats exist to or from the vessels operating here, and how to best work with other agencies and armed services to resolve and respond to them. At Sector Seattle, Wash., the Coast Guard has created a Joint Harbor Operations Center that has become the nation’s benchmark for federal, state, and local maritime interagency coordination and interoperability in evaluating and responding to maritime threats.
History
In May of 2007, the U.S. Coast Guard established the initial operational capability of the Puget Sound Joint Harbor Operations Center (JHOC), designed to identify and respond to all threats to maritime safety, port security, and the environment. This followed an August 2005 memorandum of agreement (MOA) between the U.S. Navy Vice Chief of Naval Operations and the Coast Guard Vice Commandant to leverage the sensor, detection, personnel, and communication and decision-making systems of each partner. The result: a more accurate and timely common operating picture in Coast Guard sector areas of responsibility with a large Navy presence.
A View of the JHOCWalking into the JHOC in Seattle, a visitor immediately notices the complex video display “Wall of Knowledge,” with the vast array of visual information sources available to a JHOC watchstander at a glance. Each watch station has four or five computer monitors on the desktop in addition to the large-format screens on the front wall, each one capable of displaying different applications or tactical information (see picture).
The communications specialist monitors seven different radio systems. Over 70 multi-agency cameras are integrated into the sensor management system. On top of that, there are more than 40 different data sources the watchstanders have access to.
There are several initiatives to integrate this information—Watchkeeper, a new software suite being developed at USCG headquarters, the JHOC’s own quick-response checklists, and command duty officer and watchstander training based on realistic scenarios. Initiatives with the Department of Homeland Security-sponsored university centers of excellence, military research and development centers such as the Coast Guard Research and Development Center and SPAWAR, and self-initiated demonstrations and trials at the local deckplate level are paving the way for intelligent applications that will free decision-makers to make decisions rather than sift through data.
Looking Ahead
Today, that same small boat described in the scenario at the beginning of the article may have hoped to remain concealed while observing the transit. However, our sensors can now penetrate the fog to detect the boat. Observant watchstanders, attuned to picking out anomalies, would alert the Coast Guard command duty officer, who could request that airborne assets track the small boat to its destination. Within five minutes of returning to a local marina, the owner of that small boat might get a call from the USCG command duty officer asking if he was having engine problems.
Coordination like this is possible only through the concerted and sustained outreach effort that brings all port stakeholders together with one aim—to contribute to port and national security, safety, and environmental protection through information sharing and coordinated processes.
For more information:
Full article and “Interagency Success Stories” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2009.
Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.
Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.
Thursday, July 8, 2010
U.S. Coast Guard Provides Law Enforcement Training to Caribbean Partners
Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine by SGT Ryan Matson, U.S. Army 372nd Mobile Public Affairs Detachment.In April of 2008, Coast Guard seamen from several Caribbean nations engaged in a law enforcement training exercise in which they tracked down and apprehended a suspected terrorist. This exercise was just one training scenario in “Operation Tradewinds,” a two-week training exercise in the Dominican Republic. During this exercise, U.S. Army, Navy, Coast Guard, and Marine personnel and soldiers, seamen, and police officers from partner nations in the Caribbean trained on everything from martial arts to basic urban skills.
The picture shows Leading Seaman Brangurgon Glasgow of the Saint Vincent Coast Guard and Dominican Republic Coast Guard Ensign Manuel Fernandez acting out taking a terrorism suspect portrayed by a U.S. Coast Guardsman into custody.
Joint Training
“The whole point of this operation was to give them exposure to different types of situations,” said LTJG Richard Nines, a U.S. Coast Guard controller serving with Sector San Juan, who trained the Caribbean seamen on law enforcement and search and seizure tactics. “I work with all the partner nations down to Venezuela on a daily basis in San Juan. This exercise was just to let them know we’re here, we’re very active, we’re always willing to help, so they can go back with a positive image of the U.S. Coast Guard.”
Training Scenarios and Feedback
During the law enforcement training, a group of partner nation seamen simulated boarding a cruise ship vessel after a person of interest arrived at their port. Next they searched the quarters of the suspected terrorist, where a variety of clues and pieces of evidence could be found—everything from bombs to maps of the vessel, and, perhaps most importantly, the suspect’s passport. The passport was of particular significance because the seamen did not have any photo identification of the suspect in the exercise.
After the partner nation seamen were done searching the quarters, their U.S. instructors showed them where some of the clues they missed were hidden. Evidence was hidden everywhere, from cracks in the wall to under boards and mattresses. This evidence gave the seamen enough proof to detain the suspect—the second portion of the exercise.
The Action Begins
In the next scenario, the partner nation seamen approached the subject in a lounge and attempted to take him into custody. A different situation unfolded for each group that made this attempt.
In one case, the bartender in the lounge whipped out a pistol and acted as a second terrorist. In another training session, another role player burst through a back door and ambushed the seamen. (In all cases, role players used air pistols that fired soft pellets.) The seamen said they learned a lot from the “surprise” portion of this exercise.
After apprehension, the participants searched the suspect, recovering a knife and more information relating to the overall “plot.” Through every stage of the process, the seamen kept in close contact with their command, radioing in their actions and receiving guidance on the mission.
The law enforcement exercise served as something of a final exam for the participating seamen. This portion was emphasized with good reason, since participants will more than likely be involved with similar situations in real life.
For more information:
Full article and “Interagency Success Stories” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2009.
Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.
Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.
Wednesday, July 7, 2010
Steamboat Inspection Service Anniversary
July 7, 1838: First Laws Established for the Inspection of SteamboatsIn the early days Congress hesitated to pass adequate safety laws because of fear of interfering with the growing steamboat industry which was playing a big part in the country's economic development.
The advent of the steam engine, in particular, freed ships from the limits of the wind, giving them greater flexibility to stay out of harm's way. However, early steam engines were driven by primitive boilers which exploded frequently, causing large losses of life.
In 1823 alone, 14 percent of all steam vessels in the United States were destroyed by explosions, resulting in more than 1,000 fatalities.
As the industry grew the general public became aware of the need for maritime safety laws. In January 1838, at President Van Buren’s urging, the Senate finally passed steamboat legislation, but the House refused to budge. That spring as the steamboat Moselle moved out into the river above Cincinnati, OH, with over 200 passengers onboard her four boilers exploded killing 62 with 52 missing and presumed killed.
On February 14, 1903, congressional action transferred the Steamboat Inspection Service to the newly created Department of Commerce and Labor. It remained here until its functions were transferred to the Coast Guard during World War II.
There is more information on the Steamboat Inspection Service on the US Coast Guard History website.
Tuesday, July 6, 2010
The U.S. Coast Guard Maritime Law Enforcement Academy—standardized training brings the U.S. Coast Guard closer to U.S. and international partners
Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine by LT Michael P. Attanasio, Regulations Branch Chief, U.S. Coast Guard Maritime Law Enforcement Academy.
The maritime community continues to experience the challenges of rapid growth, increasing regulation and competition, transnational threats, and the volatility of overseas markets, all of which have heightened the price of failure. To meet these growing challenges, the Coast Guard has made measurable progress advancing the training, education, and qualification of its members serving across the country through standardization, achieving federal accreditation, and seizing upon opportunities to work with domestic and international partners.
To assist that effort, Coast Guard leadership directed the merger of Coast Guard law enforcement schools in Yorktown, Va., and Petaluma, Calif. As a result, on November 1, 2004, the U.S. Coast Guard Maritime Law Enforcement (MLE) Academy opened its doors for business at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Charleston, S.C.
Curriculum
The MLE Academy provides demanding classroom instruction and varied practical exercises. Students are taught constitutional law, vessel safety regulations, commercial vessel practices, detection of drug and alcohol impairment, defensive tactics, radiological detection, maritime security threats, and law enforcement officer etiquette. The picture at left shows Coast Guard and Royal Canadian Mounted Police shiprider officers simulating detention and arrest procedures aboard a fishing vessel at MLE Academy.
Learning by doing, students participate in exercises on boats, in non-lethal training ammunition shoot houses, in use-of-force classrooms, and aboard the 494-foot break bulk freighter SS Cape Chalmers.
The MLE Academy offers five different courses: a boarding officer course, boarding team member course, boarding officer practical course, radiation level 2 operator course, and marine patrol officer course.
For more information:
Full article and “Interagency Success Stories” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2009.
Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.
Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.
The maritime community continues to experience the challenges of rapid growth, increasing regulation and competition, transnational threats, and the volatility of overseas markets, all of which have heightened the price of failure. To meet these growing challenges, the Coast Guard has made measurable progress advancing the training, education, and qualification of its members serving across the country through standardization, achieving federal accreditation, and seizing upon opportunities to work with domestic and international partners.
To assist that effort, Coast Guard leadership directed the merger of Coast Guard law enforcement schools in Yorktown, Va., and Petaluma, Calif. As a result, on November 1, 2004, the U.S. Coast Guard Maritime Law Enforcement (MLE) Academy opened its doors for business at the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Charleston, S.C.
Curriculum The MLE Academy provides demanding classroom instruction and varied practical exercises. Students are taught constitutional law, vessel safety regulations, commercial vessel practices, detection of drug and alcohol impairment, defensive tactics, radiological detection, maritime security threats, and law enforcement officer etiquette. The picture at left shows Coast Guard and Royal Canadian Mounted Police shiprider officers simulating detention and arrest procedures aboard a fishing vessel at MLE Academy.
Learning by doing, students participate in exercises on boats, in non-lethal training ammunition shoot houses, in use-of-force classrooms, and aboard the 494-foot break bulk freighter SS Cape Chalmers.
The MLE Academy offers five different courses: a boarding officer course, boarding team member course, boarding officer practical course, radiation level 2 operator course, and marine patrol officer course.
For more information:
Full article and “Interagency Success Stories” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2009.
Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.
Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.
Thursday, July 1, 2010
Upcoming in Proceedings
Summer 2010: Maritime Domain Awareness
• Transforming MDA policy
• Transforming MDA capabilities
• Transforming MDA through technology
• Lessons Learned
Arctic Rose: A fishing vessel meets a mysterious end in the Bering Sea.
Tug Valour: Failed assumptions lead to a fatal sinking at sea.
Fall 2010: Recreational Boating Safety (RBS)
• RBS program synopsis
• State RBS involvement
• RBS partners
• Manufacturing standards
• USCG Auxiliary
• Small vessel security
Winter 2010-11: Fishing Vessel Safety
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.
• Transforming MDA policy
• Transforming MDA capabilities
• Transforming MDA through technology
• Lessons Learned
Arctic Rose: A fishing vessel meets a mysterious end in the Bering Sea.
Tug Valour: Failed assumptions lead to a fatal sinking at sea.
Fall 2010: Recreational Boating Safety (RBS)
• RBS program synopsis
• State RBS involvement
• RBS partners
• Manufacturing standards
• USCG Auxiliary
• Small vessel security
Winter 2010-11: Fishing Vessel Safety
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.
The National Hazardous Materials Fusion Center
Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine by CDR Rick Raksnis, former Chief, U.S. Coast Guard Hazardous Materials Standards Division, and Mrs. Tonya Schreiber, Executive Director, Office of Hazardous Materials Safety, Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation.
Imagine you are the mayor of a small Midwest town. You receive word from your fire chief that a train has derailed in your town of 5,000. Several tank rail cars of chlorine gas are laying on their sides. Gas is venting from them and a vapor cloud is moving toward the center of town.
The fire chief has plenty of first responders on scene but is unable to repair the leaking chlorine rail cars because he is unsure how to proceed in this hazardous environment. What can you do? What resources do you have available to help respond to and mitigate this situation?
One resource is the National Hazardous Materials Fusion Center. With its secure, Web-based portal, the fire chief has instant access to a wide range of information to quickly locate the nearest hazardous materials team in the area or list of equipment and personnel protective gear needed to respond safely. Essentially, the fire chief has a vast network of professional support on a laptop.
A Fusion Center Is Born
The fusion center concept is the result of a cooperative effort between the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC) and the Department of Transportation Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). Through their strong partnership, as well as support from other federal, state, and local agencies and groups, the hazardous materials fusion center has been built to serve the first responder community. The center is located at IAFC headquarters in Fairfax, Va., and its staff manages daily operations.
Organizers determined that the fusion center could best meet the needs of the first response community through a three-tiered approach: information collection, data analysis, and disseminating best practices.
Step One: Collect Information
The fusion center serves as the repository for hazardous materials incident information collected from actual response cases. Regional incident survey teams collect information on how well the first responders performed to develop response techniques, lessons learned, and best practices.
In addition to hosting this collection of response data, the fusion center will also maintain information on the nation’s network of trained hazardous material teams, including location, contact information, capabilities, and equipment. This type of information will be very valuable, especially for those jurisdictions without a trained hazardous materials response team.
Second Step: Analyze Information
The hazardous materials fusion center will receive incident reports from the regional incident survey teams and create response-specific after-action reports summarizing the effective practices, planning tools, and resources that were observed to work well during the response. Part of the analysis may include recommended training. In addition, the fusion center will look for trends and patterns to prevent and mitigate hazardous material incidents.
Third Step: Share the Results
The principal point is to create a national database for the free flow of information among hazardous materials teams and interested stakeholders. This includes sharing after-action reports, curriculum materials, training drill exercises, noteworthy hazardous materials conferences, and hazardous material shipping information. This information will be available to hazardous materials response teams and national and international decision makers, who are responsible to establish criteria for the safe shipment of these materials.
For more information about the National Hazardous Materials Fusion Center, visit http://www.iafc.org/ and under the title “What’s Hot,” click on the “Hazmat Fusion Center and RISTs” link.
For more information:
Full article and “Interagency Success Stories” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2009.
Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.
Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.
Imagine you are the mayor of a small Midwest town. You receive word from your fire chief that a train has derailed in your town of 5,000. Several tank rail cars of chlorine gas are laying on their sides. Gas is venting from them and a vapor cloud is moving toward the center of town.
The fire chief has plenty of first responders on scene but is unable to repair the leaking chlorine rail cars because he is unsure how to proceed in this hazardous environment. What can you do? What resources do you have available to help respond to and mitigate this situation?
One resource is the National Hazardous Materials Fusion Center. With its secure, Web-based portal, the fire chief has instant access to a wide range of information to quickly locate the nearest hazardous materials team in the area or list of equipment and personnel protective gear needed to respond safely. Essentially, the fire chief has a vast network of professional support on a laptop.
A Fusion Center Is Born
The fusion center concept is the result of a cooperative effort between the International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC) and the Department of Transportation Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA). Through their strong partnership, as well as support from other federal, state, and local agencies and groups, the hazardous materials fusion center has been built to serve the first responder community. The center is located at IAFC headquarters in Fairfax, Va., and its staff manages daily operations.
Organizers determined that the fusion center could best meet the needs of the first response community through a three-tiered approach: information collection, data analysis, and disseminating best practices.
Step One: Collect Information
The fusion center serves as the repository for hazardous materials incident information collected from actual response cases. Regional incident survey teams collect information on how well the first responders performed to develop response techniques, lessons learned, and best practices.
In addition to hosting this collection of response data, the fusion center will also maintain information on the nation’s network of trained hazardous material teams, including location, contact information, capabilities, and equipment. This type of information will be very valuable, especially for those jurisdictions without a trained hazardous materials response team.
Second Step: Analyze Information
The hazardous materials fusion center will receive incident reports from the regional incident survey teams and create response-specific after-action reports summarizing the effective practices, planning tools, and resources that were observed to work well during the response. Part of the analysis may include recommended training. In addition, the fusion center will look for trends and patterns to prevent and mitigate hazardous material incidents.
Third Step: Share the Results
The principal point is to create a national database for the free flow of information among hazardous materials teams and interested stakeholders. This includes sharing after-action reports, curriculum materials, training drill exercises, noteworthy hazardous materials conferences, and hazardous material shipping information. This information will be available to hazardous materials response teams and national and international decision makers, who are responsible to establish criteria for the safe shipment of these materials.
For more information about the National Hazardous Materials Fusion Center, visit http://www.iafc.org/ and under the title “What’s Hot,” click on the “Hazmat Fusion Center and RISTs” link.
For more information:
Full article and “Interagency Success Stories” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2009.
Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.
Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.