Understanding Coal

This "Chemical of the Quarter" excerpt is from the U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by Mr. Richard Bornhorst, Chemical Engineer, U.S. Coast Guard Hazardous Materials Standards Division.

Coal
Editor's Note: Though coal is not a chemical, it does have unique physical and chemical properties. We are providing this information for the safety of those transporting and handling it.

What is it?
Coal is a rock formed by compression of decomposing plant material. Since it is primarily composed of carbon, it is a useful energy source. According to the World Coal Institute website, in 2007, the total world coal production was more than 5.5 billion tons, and coal meets about 26 percent of the world's energy needs and generates about 41 percent of the world's electricity.

How is it shipped?
Coal is generally shipped in bulk quantities either by rail, cargo vessel, or barge. For cargo vessel or barge transport, coal is loaded directly into the cargo hold without mark, count, or any intermediate form of containment such as packaging.

Coal is also sometimes shipped by self-unloading cargo vessels with a conveyor belt system that moves coal from the cargo holds to an unloading arm. A self-unloading cargo vessel is advantageous when it becomes necessary to deliver coal to ports or waterfront facilities that lack the proper shoreside equipment.

The International Maritime Solid Bulk Cargoes (IMSBC) code specifies how coal is loaded, unloaded, and transported by cargo vessel for international shipments. Recent changes to the International Convention for Safety of Life at Sea made the IMSBC code mandatory for all cargo vessels regardless of age, size, or character.

Why should I care?
Shipping concerns. Under the provisions of the IMSBC code, coal is regulated as a hazardous material when transported in bulk by cargo vessel. The code contains provisions for shipping papers, trimming the cargo, segregation, temperature monitoring, and gas detection. All of these provisions will generally apply to coal because of its unique physical and chemical properties.

Health concerns. Exposure to coal dust generated from processing, transporting, or handling coal can cause pneumociosis (black lung), bronchitis, and emphysema. The permissible exposure limit for coal dust is a time-weighted average of 2.4 milligrams per cubic meter over the course of a working period, according to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Coal may also deplete the available oxygen in cargo holds and compartments. Some self-heating coals may give off carbon monoxide, which can be toxic at an air concentration as low as 50 parts per million.

Environmental concerns. Although coal is generally not considered toxic or hazardous to the environment, it should be handled carefully and efficiently to minimize releases. Coal can be released into the environment during loading and unloading operations or during routine cleaning (cargo sweeping) operations. Releases from these operations may be prohibited, restricted, or allowed depending upon whether or not they occur in environmentally sensitive areas, coastal or inland waters, or the open sea.

Fire or explosion concerns. Some coals may self-heat spontaneously and emit flammable gases, such as methane. A concentration between five percent and 15 percent methane in air can be flammable or explosive when exposed to a source of ignition. When methane is released from coal stowed on a cargo vessel, it can build up in the cargo hold, thus creating the potential for fire or an explosion. Some self-heating coals may also spontaneously combust during transportation. However, spontaneous combustion is not common. If it does occur, it usually only affects some of the stowed cargo.

What's the Coast Guard doing about it?
Industry has been transporting coal in bulk for many years with relatively few incidents. The safety provisions contained in the IMSBC code have been largely adopted by the coal industry on a voluntary basis. Nonetheless, industry practices will need to be brought into line with the international standards to further improve safety and facilitate the shipping of coal in international commerce.


For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/summer2010.

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

Maritime Security—The National Maritime Intelligence Center

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by CAPT Paul Crissy, U.S. Coast Guard Reserve, National Maritime Intelligence Center Plans and Policy Staff.


The Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 authorized the Director of National Intelligence to establish national intelligence centers to provide all-source analysis. In January of 2009 he established the National Maritime Intelligence Center to coordinate the efforts of the global maritime community of interest (GMCOI) with regard to information sharing.

As a result, it is an integrated capability where U.S. maritime intelligence requirements and all maritime security requirements, including military, criminal, economic, and national sovereignty issues, threats, and opportunities are considered in aggregate.

The NMIC’s goal is to create a “decision advantage” that confronts motivated, adaptive, and determined adversaries and focuses on threats and activities including:

• Illicit activities
• Gaps and seams
• Asymmetric threats
• Disruption of the global supply chain
• Extreme climatology
• Critical infrastructure interruption
• Environmental destruction
• Safety, security, and stewardship of the maritime environment

Synergistic Efforts
The NMIC’s key functions are coordinating and integrating maritime information and intelligence in support of national policy and decision makers, supporting maritime domain awareness objectives, and supporting interagency maritime requirements.

Its four functional areas and representative initiatives are collection integration, analysis integration, architecture, and information management and sharing.

What to Expect From Your NMIC
To ensure robust dialogue from stakeholders and ensure the greatest return on investment, the Director of the National Maritime Intelligence Center will continue to aggressively engage the GMCOI. Temporary and standing working groups and communities of interest such as the NMIC interagency working group, the maritime threat working group, and the interagency advisory group have been created to advise the NMIC director and bring together expertise from the intelligence community, the interagency and international communities, and industry to address matters of shared concern in the maritime domain.


For more information:
The Maritime Domain Awareness Information Exchange: http://www.mda.gov/.

The National Maritime Domain Awareness Coordination Office: http://www.gmsa.gov/index.html.

Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/summer2010.

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

Maritime Domain Awareness—Knowledge Is Good

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by Mr. Dana Goward, Director, U.S. Coast Guard Marine Transportation Systems Management; and Mr. Curt Dubay, U.S. Coast Guard Director of Maritime Domain Awareness Program Integration.


In the movie “Animal House,” the film opens with a shot of the college’s motto: “Knowledge Is Good,” which is a great summary of maritime domain awareness (MDA).

As the Department of Homeland Security’s lead federal agency protecting the U.S. maritime domain and our marine transportation system, awareness is essential to all the U.S. Coast Guard does. Enhancing MDA reduces risk and facilitates collaboration.

Your Contribution to MDA
Why is contributing to maritime domain awareness important to the Proceedings reader? Enforcement authorities—the Coast Guard and all local, state, federal, and international agencies—need to know whether laws and regulations are being followed, and, if not, how to deploy their resources to enforce them.

MDA is equally important because:

• Transparency leads to self-correcting behavior. It is a rule of human nature that people will behave better if they know there is a chance someone is watching.
• It helps level the playing field. Those who play by the rules are rewarded, and they are encouraged to identify to authorities those who are not.
• Scarce enforcement assets can be focused on response rather than patrol. Effective awareness can provide a virtual presence and deterrence at a fraction of the cost of fielding boats or enforcement personnel.

Awareness Network
Even more importantly, maritime domain awareness is the key to countering our biggest challenge—maritime criminal and terrorist networks. Because they are organized as networks, they are incredibly effective in thwarting the efforts of hierarchies such as governments. Fortunately, governments can effectively combat networks if they also operate as networks.

Shared awareness allows the local fish and wildlife officer, the national intelligence analyst, and everyone in between to bring their own experiences, capabilities, and authorities together in a widely distributed but unified effort. The general public can also join in a network for maritime good by identifying suspicious behavior and helping to counter illegal activity.

In upcoming posts we will feature a cross-section of articles that cover the efforts of the U.S. Coast Guard and our partners to transform maritime domain awareness through a whole-government approach to policy, capabilities, and technology led by the newly formed National MDA Coordination Office.

For more information:
The Maritime Domain Awareness Information Exchange: http://www.mda.gov/

The National Maritime Domain Awareness Coordination Office: http://www.gmsa.gov/index.html

Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/summer2010.

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

Understanding Ethyl Alcohol

This “Chemical of the Quarter” excerpt is from the U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine.


Ethyl Alcohol

What is it?
Ethyl alcohol, also known as ethanol or ethyl hydroxide, is the proper name for grain alcohol “spirits.”

Retail gasoline typically contains 10 percent ethanol.

How is it shipped?
In the U.S., ethanol is shipped almost exclusively in rail tank cars and in tank barges from the chemical plant where it was produced to the refinery or plant where it’s blended with gasoline. Additionally, large quantities of ethanol are shipped from one region to another on tank ships.

Ethanol is shipped and stored at ambient temperature and atmospheric pressure and, like gasoline and diesel fuel, is never heated prior to being pumped through a hose or pipeline.

Why should I care?
Shipping concerns. Ethanol is a grade “C” flammable liquid, with a closed-cup (sealed lid) flashpoint of 55°F, meaning it can be expected to be above its flashpoint in warm weather (see endnote 1). Gasoline is always above its closed-cup flashpoint of -38°F, but automotive diesel fuel is almost always transported and stored below its 125°F closed-cup flashpoint. Therefore, the level of concern among transportation workers handling ethanol is midway between gasoline and diesel fuel.

Ethanol, like other alcohols, is somewhat corrosive. However, there is little concern for the structure of an ethanol-carrying barge or its pumps and piping because the tanks are inspected (for certification) by the Coast Guard and because ethanol is only mildly corrosive.

As far as the stability and seaworthiness of the vessel is concerned, it’s a physical impossibility to overload a barge because the specific gravity of ethanol is considerably lower than fresh water: 0.79 (at 68°F) vs. 1.00. The principal concern is for the flammable vapors.

Fire or explosion concerns. One characteristic of ethanol vapor that causes concern is the width of its flammable range (see endnote 2). Ethanol’s range, from 3.3 to 19.0 percent (by volume in air) is considered somewhat wide in comparison to gasoline’s narrow range of 1.4 to 7.4 percent. The wider the range, the greater the chance of a flammable mixture should a leak or spill occur. Since ethanol is heavier than air, its vapor spreads out downwind and downhill, hugging the ground or deck.

Health concerns. The short-term exposure limit is 1,000 parts per million (ppm). Exposure to a concentration of ethanol vapor of more than 1,000 ppm may cause headache and eye irritation. Exposure to ethanol vapor also causes dizziness, double vision, and other classic alcohol intoxication symptoms. A victim of vapor exposure should always be removed to fresh air.

What's the Coast Guard doing about it?
Domestic tank vessels are inspected and certificated under Title 46 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Subchapter “D” (rather than subchapter “O”) because alcohol has a relatively low danger threat. If an alcohol-carrying tank ship is of foreign registry, it must be issued the appropriate certificate of compliance by the Coast Guard.

Additionally, the Coast Guard monitors ethanol spill statistics. Over the past six years, there have been only two ethanol spills from tank vessels in the U.S. while loading or discharging, and they were both under five gallons. Waterfront facilities have averaged one spill a year, and only one of these spills has been more than 100 gallons.

Endnotes:
1. Flashpoint: The lowest temperature at which the vapor can be ignited momentarily. A “closed-cup” (sealed lid) flashpoint tester with a low-mass thermocouple is used. In general, the closed-cup value is 10 to 15°F lower than the “open cup” value.
2. Flammable range: The range of vapor concentration (percent by volume in air) that will burn or explode if an ignition source is present. Limiting concentrations are called the “lower explosive limit” (LEL) and the “upper explosive limit” (UEL). Below the LEL the mixture is too lean to burn. Above the UEL it is too rich to burn.


For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2010.

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

The National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by Capt. Bill Donaldson, NOSAC Deep Water Ports Representative.


From its beginnings, the Coast Guard has depended on existing internal resources to provide guidance for missions including public safety, national security, environmental stewardship, and exploration and development of mineral and energy resources beneath the U.S. outer continental shelf.

The Coast Guard’s role in public safety and national security has changed over the years. More focus has been directed toward security, which consequently significantly increased the Coast Guard’s role in offshore activities, particularly since the tragic events of 9/11. These additional mandated tasks prompted the Coast Guard to look for alternative means to gather information to fulfill its role in the rulemaking process for offshore activities. The Coast Guard found one means in the National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee (NOSAC).

NOSAC is a voluntary group assembled to assist the Coast Guard in gathering information for the rulemaking process, particularly with regard to rules related to protection of the safety and welfare of offshore workers, safeguarding the environment, and resource management. The passage of the Federal Advisory Committee Act laid the groundwork for forming NOSAC. In 1988, the Secretary of the Department of Transportation, under which the Coast Guard operated, created NOSAC to provide a public forum capable of rendering advice on, consultation with, and discussions of safety matters and concerns related to OCS activities.

The group acts in an advisory capacity to the Commandant of the Coast Guard on matters related to the offshore mineral and energy recovery industry. The committee is also responsive to specific assignments related to conducting studies, inquiries, and workshops as authorized or directed by the Commandant.

NOSAC reports to the Commandant of the Coast Guard through its sponsor, the Assistant Commandant for Marine Safety, Security, and Environmental Protection, who designates NOSAC’s executive director. The National Offshore Safety Advisory Committee is composed of not more than 15 members from various sectors of the offshore industry, appointed by the Secretary of the Department of Homeland Security from recommendations made by the Commandant of the Coast Guard.

The majority of NOSAC members are made up of those involved in offshore exploration and energy recovery resources who have devoted time to assisting the Coast Guard in its mission to protect the offshore community’s workforce. Additional members come from the environmental community, the general public, and the deepwater ports community. NOSAC meets bi-annually, and the meetings are open to the public.


For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2010.

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

The Paperwork Reduction Act—Collecting information, collecting your input, protecting you

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by Ms. Esa L. Sferra-Bonistalli, Attorney Advisor, United States Coast Guard Office of the Judge Advocate General.


To keep the amount of paperwork you fill out for the federal government in check, there is a federal administrative law: the Paperwork Reduction Act (PRA), which requires a federal agency to follow certain procedures before asking you to take the time (and possibly spend money) to provide certain information to that agency.

The type of information the Coast Guard collects:

• The Coast Guard requires commercial crewmembers to present on demand an acceptable identification to verify identity. Crewmembers must provide certain information to the Coast Guard to obtain the identification document.
• The Coast Guard also requires any vessel destined for the United States to provide pre-arrival messages containing certain information.
• Masters of certain vessels must provide information to the Coast Guard that details the vessel operator’s ballast water management efforts.

Under the Paperwork Reduction Act, the Coast Guard must obtain the approval of the Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Office of Information and Regulatory Affairs before collecting information from the public.

Collecting Your Input
In order to obtain OMB’s approval, the Coast Guard must first solicit public comments on its collection of information. Regardless of whether the collection is a stand-alone or part of a rulemaking, the Coast Guard specifically asks for comments on:

• the practical utility of the collections—whether the agency will be able to actually use the information collected in a timely and useful manner;
• the accuracy of the estimated burden of the collections;
• ways to enhance the quality, utility, and clarity of information subject to the collections;
• ways to minimize the burden of collections on respondents, including the use of automated collection techniques or other forms of information technology.

Comments help the Coast Guard identify issues it may not have been aware of that may have an impact on the persons being asked to provide information. The Coast Guard reviews all comments and may change the COI in response.

While it is unlikely that the Paperwork Reduction Act will ever completely eliminate federal agency paperwork, it does provide you the opportunity to become involved in the creation of that paperwork.


For more information:
To find a list of currently approved collections of information (COIs), including specific information such as estimated paperwork burdens and expiration dates, visit OMB’s website at http://www.reginfo.gov/.

For more information on the Paperwork Reduction Act and collections of information, see the OMB website at http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/inforeg_infocoll/.

Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2010.

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

USCG / DHS Regulatory Affairs

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by Ms. Mary Kate Whalen, Associate General Counsel, Regulatory Affairs Law Division, Office of the General Counsel, Department of Homeland Security.


USCG Within DHS
The U.S. Coast Guard has one of the broadest missions in DHS, encompassing maritime safety and security, law enforcement, border protection, and environmental protection.

It’s not surprising, then, that the Coast Guard also has the largest and most varied regulatory agenda of any of the department’s components. The Coast Guard issues hundreds of regulations each year, ranging from local field regulations establishing or revising safety and security zones to complex regulatory actions proposing environmental protections and maritime security initiatives.

Regulations Can Improve Security
When DHS promulgates regulations to further the security of the homeland, it imposes obligations on millions of citizens—legally binding obligations that can result in significant costs. Therefore, it is critical that DHS regulations are well coordinated—within the department and the executive branch—to ensure that regulatory initiatives are implemented in compliance with applicable statutory authorities.

These regulations must also be the product of reasoned decision-making and consistent with the policies and priorities established by the White House, the Secretary of Homeland Security, and, with respect to Coast Guard regulations, the Commandant of the Coast Guard.

A Centralized Regulatory Process
The Regulatory Affairs Law Division’s Office of the General Counsel manages the centralized regulatory process for DHS. Regulatory Affairs works closely with the Coast Guard’s Office of Regulations and Administrative Law to coordinate Coast Guard regulations within DHS and through OMB’s interagency review process.

USCG/DHS Coordination
Regulatory Affairs economists also work closely with the Coast Guard’s Standards Evaluation and Analysis Division to develop and coordinate regulatory impact assessments supporting the Coast Guard’s regulatory initiatives.

The close partnership between Regulatory Affairs and the Coast Guard’s regulatory staff remains a highly valuable component of the continued success of the Coast Guard’s regulatory program.


For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2010.

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

Developing Multi-Mission Regulations

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by Mr. Jaideep Sirkar, former Chief, U.S. Coast Guard Regulatory Project Development Division.

The U.S. Coast Guard has 11 missions:

• Ports, waterway, and coastal security
• Drug interdiction
• Aids to navigation
• Search and rescue
• Living marine resources
• Marine safety
• Defense readiness
• Migrant interdiction
• Marine environmental protection
• Ice operations
• Other law enforcement

One way we exercise the authority given to us by the U.S. Congress is through regulations. Since our roles and responsibilities are so diverse, our regulations will be equally diverse.

Our regulations are primarily contained in Title 33, Navigation and Navigable Waters, and Title 46, Shipping, of the Code of Federal Regulations.

Current Regulations
To review all Coast Guard regulations currently in effect, look at the online Code of Federal Regulations. You will notice regulations for “hardware”—ships, equipment, materials; those for “software”—operating/operational requirements, personnel requirements; and those for financial requirements.

You will also find, among other things, regulations on treatment of ships’ ballast water to prevent the introduction of non-indigenous species, regulations on inspection standards for towing vessels, discussion of standards for card readers that read identification cards for transportation workers, and environmental issues that include pollution sources such as engine emissions and oil spills.

Reg Agenda
Do you want to know what regulations the Coast Guard is currently working on, or is thinking of working on?

Go to: http://www.reginfo.gov/. Click on the link in the center of the page, “Current and Past Agendas and Plans and How to Use Them.” From the drop-down menu for “Select Agency,” select “Department of Homeland Security” and click “Submit.” Scroll down to the Coast Guard entries—the ones labeled “DHS/USCG.”


For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/spring2010.

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

Lessons Learned—Vessel Breaks Mooring Lines, Grounds—Part II

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine. Click here for part I.



The Analysis
One A/B was working his first time in Cook Inlet after only 27 days aboard the vessel. As he worked the lines alone, his inexperience, combined with the lack of a seasoned A/B to provide him with the necessary guidance on the vessel’s equipment, contributed to his releasing too much tension. This caused a strain on the other mooring lines, which then compromised the strength of the entire mooring system.

Contrary to Coast Guard ice guidelines, there was no seagoing watch present on the bridge and the engines were not kept in immediate standby.

Additionally, the operations manual at the facility necessitated mooring lines be doubled or tripled during extreme ice conditions, and required that transfer operations should be suspended within two hours of max flood or max ebb currents during ice conditions. The incident occurred within one minute of the calculated max flood.

The master’s failure to ensure that the vessel’s moorings were strong enough to hold during all anticipated conditions resulted in the Coast Guard seeking a two-month suspension of his license and merchant mariner document.

Follow-up
As a direct result of this grounding, the Coast Guard continues to conduct spot-checks of vessels mooring at Cook Inlet facilities to ensure they take adequate extreme weather precautions.

These spot-checks include the following tasks:

• Affirm proper vessel mooring.
• Ensure all deck personnel are equipped with protective winter clothing.
• Conduct an operational test of steering gear.
• Confirm a properly heated wheelhouse and living quarters.
• Conduct an operational test of ballast and emergency fire pumps.
• Conduct an operational test of all deck mooring winches and anchor windlasses.
• Confirm that a heated medium is available to primary and secondary sea chests to prevent icing.
• Confirm that all systems and machinery will be operable in ice-filled waters and air temperatures to -40°F.
• Ensure that the emergency generator is fully fueled and the generator is set to automatic mode and do an operational test of the generator, conducted by setting it to “manual” and back.
• Conduct a briefing for the vessel’s personnel to discuss the requirements needed to maintain compliance with ice guidelines while at the dock or underway.

For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/winter2009.

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

Lessons Learned—Vessel Breaks Mooring Lines, Grounds—Part I

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council magazine by Ms. Krista Reddington, 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.



In Nikiski, Alaska, in the early morning of February 2, 2006, the tank vessel Seabulk Pride (pictured below) broke free of its mooring lines due to the current and ice in the arctic Cook Inlet. The cargo transfer hoses separated as the vessel drifted from the pier, discharging oil onto the dock.

Though ice and current were clearly causal factors leading to the breakaway, the investigation determined that human error was primarily responsible for the casualty.


The Incident
The events leading to the incident began in a very routine manner. By 5:15 a.m., ice had begun flowing near the vessel. Video footage showed a significant amount of ice moving past the dock, and medium-sized ice pans were evident.

Prior to the breakaway, strain gauges indicated that the strain in the mooring lines had increased within a six-second period to an approximated tension of 50 to 100 tons. Before the line parted, the A/B (able-bodied seaman) on deck was tending the lines.

At 5:23 a.m., two A/Bs were on watch when the after spring wire parted, followed shortly by the other spring wire.

Initial Response
The pilot ordered anchors dropped. Because the starboard anchor was frozen in place, only the port anchor could be released, and the current kept the bow pointed toward the shoreline.

Multiple mooring lines fouled the propeller, leaving the main engine unavailable, so the master was limited to using rudder and anchors to maneuver the vessel away from shore. The vessel remained at the mercy of the current and grounded just over half a nautical mile north northwest of the dock.

Grounded
Fortunately, the double hull functioned as it was designed. Though the outer hull was penetrated by rocks, no oil contained within the tanks was spilled into Cook Inlet.

In Part II, we will describe the Coast Guard analysis and follow-up.


For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/winter2009.

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

Understanding Chlorine

This "Chemical of the Quarter" excerpt is from the U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine, by Ms. Suzanne Chang, Chemical Engineer, U.S. Coast Guard Hazardous Materials Standards Division.

Chlorine

What is it?
Chlorine (CLX) is highly reactive and most commonly found combined with other elements, i.e. sodium chloride (table salt), sodium hypochlorite (bleach), and calcium hypochlorite (swimming pool chlorinator).

It is also one of the most essential chemical building blocks in manufacturing many household goods, such as polyvinyl chloride plastics, insecticide, refrigerants, sandwich wrap, carpeting, paints, and house siding.

How is it shipped?
Bulk chlorine is typically shipped as a compressed liquefied gas in tank cars, tank motor vehicles, and barge tanks.

For transporting by barge, the design of the barge is dependent upon whether it is used for inland river routes or for oceangoing routes.

Why should I care?
Shipping concerns. Since chlorine is shipped under pressure, one concern is maintaining cargo pressure. Depending on the capacity of the tanks aboard a barge, at least two pressure relief devices are installed into each cargo tank to prevent any over-pressurization.

Normally, dry chlorine does not corrode steel. However, wet chlorine is highly corrosive because it forms hydrochloric acid, so precautions need to be taken to keep the chlorine and equipment dry and atmospheric moisture out.

Health concerns. Chlorine gas is primarily a respiratory irritant and is highly corrosive when in contact with moist tissues such as the eyes and skin. The extent of damage caused by chlorine depends on the amount a person is exposed to, how the exposure occurred, and the duration of the exposure.

Chlorine can be detected by its odor (it smells like household bleach) at levels of 0.002 parts chlorine per million parts air (ppm). At 1.0 ppm, chlorine is a perceptible irritant. A level of 10 ppm is considered immediately dangerous to life and health—a person exposed to that level should seek protection at once. Continued exposure at that level could result in permanent damage or even death within as little as 30 minutes.

Fire or explosion concerns. Chlorine is not flammable or explosive. However, it is capable of supporting the combustion of certain substances, similar to oxygen. Also, chlorine may react readily with organic chemicals, sometimes violently and with the generation of heat.

What's the Coast Guard doing about it?
The U.S. Coast Guard enforces chlorine barge regulations and inspection standards under the regulations in 46 U.S. Code of Federal Regulations part 151.3.

The Coast Guard is also working with other federal agencies and local authorities to develop measures to protect people, property, and the environment in areas where chlorine barges transit.

For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/winter2009.

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

CG Inspectors Help Bring Waterfront Facility Into Compliance—Part III

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine. Click here for Part I and Part II.


Part III—The Results

The incident commander’s goals were developed in cooperation with the facility representative. The goals stressed:

• safety of nearby populations and response personnel,
• environmental protection,
• teamwork,
• regulatory compliance,
• a safe return to commercial operations.

Follow Up, Follow Through
Improvements were noted each day. Inspectors briefed the facility owner, his representative, and the tenants on progress, which helped increase their cooperation. Other agencies were often present to discuss the facility’s progress and become familiar with its new, safer operations.

The team provided continuous guidance and helped with various tasks to maintain the project’s progress. The facility representative and tenants became excited to show the visiting inspectors their progress, especially when they went above and beyond what was required for the next operational period.

The Results
After 40 days of intense work, more than 25,000 pounds of debris and over 500 drums and totes totaling more than 25,000 gallons of hazardous and flammable liquid waste were removed.

The firefighting system was repaired and fully operational, proper signage and markings were put up around the building, and a cargo stowage plan was implemented for each floor of the warehouse. The basement no longer flooded, the roof was repaired, and waste was no longer stored on the premises.

In completing these improvements, the facility met all requirements to the satisfaction of the captain of the port. Best of all, the clean-up operations were conducted without injury to any personnel or damage to the environment.


For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/winter2009.

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

CG Inspectors Help Bring Waterfront Facility Into Compliance—Part II

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine. Click here for Part I.

Part II—The Challenges

To avoid a potentially catastrophic fire, the warehouse had to be completely ridden of rubbish, waste, and hazardous material. The facility also needed to provide adequate fire extinguishing capability, and the structural integrity of the building had to be certified.

This situation was made more complex because the facility had five tenants, each involved in independent, uncoordinated hazardous material handling operations.

It Gets Worse Before It Gets Better
Tenants were using different sections of the same floor to mix flammables and other materials that were not compatible with each other. Packing and distribution materials were haphazardly stored, creating a fire hazard and blocking egress and response routes.

The operations varied in size and occupancy space, and there was no way to distinguish between operations. Even the tenants were unclear where one leased space ended and the next began.

The tenants were not familiar with federal hazardous materials regulations, and this was their first interaction with the Coast Guard. All of them were very concerned about going out of business. At first, some tenants did not want to comply.

The Work Begins
Because of this initial resistance and since each operation was so different, Coast Guard members and facility representatives met with each tenant individually. Most of these meetings took place in the warehouse, where inspectors could point out and explain the dangers within each tenant’s area. This allowed the tenants to propose solutions that could be evaluated and, in many cases, approved on the spot.

This approach allowed the tenants to see that the Coast Guard was in support of keeping them in operation, and that the incident management team viewed them as part of the solution. Following the one-on-one meetings, the tenants took ownership of the safety requirements and the response picked up momentum.

In part III, we look at the results.


For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/winter2009.

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

CG Inspectors Help Bring Waterfront Facility Into Compliance—Part I

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine by LT Tiffany Johnson, Chief, Shoreside Compliance, U.S. Coast Guard Sector New York.


Part I—The Problem

New Operations Trigger Coast Guard Involvement
When facility managers of a waterfront warehouse notified the Coast Guard that it would be receiving barges for biofuel marine transfers after a 13-year hiatus, Coast Guard inspectors were dispatched to conduct a safety and security inspection and found numerous structural, safety, and security problems.

The warehouse contained undocumented and improperly stored hazardous substances, corrosive materials, and flammable liquids. The basement, filled with unlabeled drums and packages, flooded after heavy rainstorms. The roof above the fifth floor was dilapidated, providing little protection to the hazardous materials stored there, and the building’s sprinkler system did not work.

And It Gets Worse
To top it all off, the building was just yards from the Passaic River and one block from a residential area and shopping center. Since the facility was not in a safe condition, it received a captain of the port order to suspend all hazmat and oil transfer activities.

The story could have ended here. Coast Guard inspectors had done their jobs. They identified a hazardous situation and took action to protect the workers within the facility, the many citizens that lived or shopped nearby, and other workers in the area.

Keep the Businesses in Business
But Coast Guard involvement continued. During the initial meeting with the owner/operator, the incident commander explained that the Coast Guard’s intention was to help his facility stay in operation, and an incident management team was created to oversee the clean up.

In part II we will examine the challenges.


For More Information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/winter2009.

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

Understanding Benzene—the chemical with a license to kill

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


Benzene

What is it?
Benzene is a flammable liquid used to make many chemicals that, in turn, go into common consumer products like plastics, rubber, nylon, dyes, detergents, drugs, synthetic fibers, and pesticides. It’s used as a solvent in paints, varnishes, and lacquer thinners. Because it is so versatile, benzene is shipped in very large quantities as a pure chemical, as well as in mixtures.

How is it shipped?
Benzene boils at 176°F, so it is typically carried unpressurized at room temperature in tank ships and tank barges.

Why should I care?
Benzene is a very common cargo. It is also very dangerous. For example:

• Benzene is flammable and explosive.
• Benzene is a known carcinogen.
• Benzene attacks the lungs, blood, bone marrow, central nervous system, liver, kidneys, and women’s reproductive organs.
• It irritates skin and eyes.
• Ingesting benzene may lower blood pressure and cause vomiting, nausea, dizziness, and loss of consciousness.

Shipping concerns. Benzene vapor may be released during normal cargo venting and transfer operations and during tank cleaning. Because it is heavier than air, the vapor can accumulate on the deck, possibly in concentrations high enough to be damaging or fatal.

Health concerns. How much benzene is “bad”? The official exposure level to avoid is more than 0.5 ppm (parts per million). That's the amount that can be in the air you breathe every day at work (for up to a 30-year career) and not get sick.

Benzene is a dangerous chemical, but years ago people didn’t know this. At one time it was a standard practice for workers to wash grease and oil off their hands with benzene.

What’s the Coast Guard doing about it?
The Coast Guard has detailed rules regarding benzene. You'll find these in the Code of Federal Regulations (46 CFR Subchapter D, 46 CFR Subchapter O, 46 CFR 197 Subpart C).

Benzene safety depends on you. The rules can be inconvenient. For example, it can be uncomfortable wearing a respirator continuously during warm weather, but you have to follow the rules if you want to live to retirement age. Too many marine workers have died from leukemia and other diseases linked to benzene exposure.

For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/fall2009.

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

Catching Polluters: Marine Pollution Enforcement—Part 2

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine. Read Part I here.


International Outreach and Cooperation
In an effort to strengthen MARPOL compliance internationally, Coast Guard and Department of Justice (DOJ) personnel have presented training sessions on port state control and MARPOL Annex I compliance, focusing on methods of detection, enforcement, investigation, prosecution, the oil record book, and other inspection issues.

Punishing the Perpetrators
Additionally, the Coast Guard and DOJ have received international cooperation in several recent high-profile vessel pollution cases.

In 2007, a maritime operator agreed to a $37 million criminal settlement—the largest to date involving deliberate vessel pollution, 12 of its vessels in six separate U.S. ports.

The investigation was based upon a tip from Transport Canada, after an investigation into a mystery oil spill revealed suspicious entries in the vessel’s oil record book. The information was sent to the Coast Guard and resulted in a case that spread to six different ports.

Later in the investigation, Transport Canada provided aerial images of another of the operator’s vessels potentially engaged in illegal discharges.

In another incident, a maritime operator was convicted of 13 counts of violating the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships, three counts of falsifying records, one count of conspiracy, and one count of obstruction of justice. The operator was fined $4.9 million for its role in falsifying records to conceal overboard dumping of oily waste in international waters and efforts to conceal those discharges from the Coast Guard. (The operator is appealing this conviction.)

During the prosecution of this case, the Netherlands Royal Military Police, Ministry of Transport, and Coast Guard provided assistance. Netherlands government officials were able to provide aerial surveillance images of a vessel discharging oily waste within the Netherlands’ exclusive economic zone and testified to the same at trial.

Keep it Clean
Without the fear of discovery and prosecution, polluters have no incentive to change their illegal and destructive ways. The U.S. Coast Guard, through its international training and outreach efforts, seeks to ensure that all port states can detect and prosecute violations of MARPOL, forcing polluters to take corrective action.


For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/summer2009.

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

Catching Polluters: Marine Pollution Enforcement—Part 1

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine by LCDR David O’Connell, U.S. Coast Guard Office of Maritime and International Law.


Port State Control
Port state control is an internationally accepted process through which a nation exercises its authority over foreign vessels when those vessels are in waters subject to its jurisdiction.

Environmental Protection
Under the umbrella of environmental protection, the main treaty for which Coast Guard port state control officers verify compliance is the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships, or “MARPOL.”

MARPOL Annex I regulates the discharge of oil from ships. It is also designed to control the operational discharges of oil and oily waste that accumulate in ships as a result of normal operations.

The handling of oily waste is a constant challenge because it is continually produced, and the operation and maintenance of pollution prevention equipment takes time and effort. Additionally, disposal options can be costly. This has led some vessels to discharge oily waste overboard in direct contravention of MARPOL requirements.

The Oil Record Book
Oil record books, which capture all related onboard pollution prevention efforts, are examined regularly as part of the Coast Guard’s port state control program. Indications that large amounts of oily bilge waste are being discharged may indicate that there are substantial problems in the machinery space or elsewhere within the ship.

Irregular entries or a lack of entries may indicate that pollution prevention equipment is not being used properly and there is a potential violation.

In the most serious cases involving intentional discharges of oily waste or attempts to deliberately deceive Coast Guard port state control officers, the case can be referred for criminal prosecution.

Deliberate Discharge
Unfortunately, incidents of non-compliance with MARPOL Annex I requirements are on the rise. To combat this, the Coast Guard developed guidance on procedures to detect and respond to potential MARPOL Annex I violations.

The guidance focuses on scrutinizing the oil record book for irregularities, such as:
· oily water separators processing amounts that exceed capacity,
· dates not in order,
· missing pages,
· wrong codes,
· entries with the same time and amount processed,
· soundings taken during the inspection that do not match the latest entries.

Signs of bypassing of pollution prevention equipment:
· loose bolts,
· blanked flanges,
· different color piping,
· chipped or fresh paint,
· oil stains around pollution prevention equipment or overboard piping.

Despite the guidance being fully transparent to the marine industry and the success the Coast Guard has had in detecting and prosecuting these cases, discoveries of illegal operations continue at an alarming rate.

In part two we will examine Coast Guard prevention and detection efforts.

Photo Caption: Tell-tale signs of tampering include new bolts, different-colored piping, paint chipped from frequent handling, and oil stains on the bulkhead.

For more information:
Full article is available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/summer2009.

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

Multi-Agency Search Yields Results

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.

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

Patrick.J.Dowling@uscg.mil

Tel:(202)372-3074

Fax:(202)372-3905

Please visit our website for updates:

www.gmsa.gov/gmiss

Facebook:
http://www.facebook.com/GMISS2010

Twitter:
http://twitter.com/GMISS2010

LinkedIn:
http://events.linkedin.com/Global-Maritime-Information-Sharing/pub/359137

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.