James riverpartnership2003
•
1 like•743 views
The document provides an overview of Honeywell's Hopewell, Virginia plant and its environmental performance. It describes the plant's history and products, including its position as the world's largest producer of caprolactam and ammonium sulfate. The plant ships over 900,000 tons of ammonium sulfate annually via its pier on the James River. It also discusses projects undertaken to reduce nutrient pollution to the river by over 85% while increasing production. The document highlights the plant's certified wildlife habitat and efforts to prevent water pollution and eliminate hydraulic oil from its loading equipment.
Recommended
More Related Content
What's hot
What's hot (20)
Viewers also liked
Similar to James riverpartnership2003
Similar to James riverpartnership2003 (20)
More from Norfolk District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
More from Norfolk District, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (9)
Recently uploaded
Recently uploaded (20)
James riverpartnership2003
- 1. James River Partnership VIII FUNDING TRENDS MAINTENANCE DREDGING SINCE LAST PARTNERSHIP FY 04 SCHEDULED MAINTENANCE ANNUAL CONTRACT STATUS
- 2. James River O&M Funding Trends 0.0 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 Funding($millions) FYAllocation Trend
- 5. James River Federal Navigation Project Environmental Coordination Review of Permit Issues Betty Grey Waring Chief, Technical Support Section Operations Branch US Army Corps of Engineers Norfolk District
- 6. James River
- 7. The Corps of Engineers navigation mission carries out one of the primary needs and uses of the James River. It is our job to keep the channel open and navigable.
- 8. Navigation
- 9. In order to maintain the channel, the Corps must obtain » DEQ 401 Water Quality Certification » VMRC permit
- 10. For permitting purposes, the 90 mile James River navigation channel is separated into three parts: – Upper – Mile 90 to mile 70 (Richmond Harbor to Hopewell) – Middle – Mile 69 to mile 27 (Hopewell to Hog Island) – Lower – Mile 27 to mile 5 (Hog Island to the river mouth)
- 14. Each of these channel segments has distinct engineering and environmental characteristics that made separation into three permits logical. – For example: •Middle James –Finer material –Overboard placement sites –More industrial •Lower James –Fine material –Higher salinity –Oyster grounds –Wider river •Upper James –Mostly granular material –Upland placement sites –Low salinity
- 15. The state permits must be renewed every 5 years (VMRC) or 10 years (DEQ). In 2004, 3 permits will expire: – Upper James – 401 Certificate – Middle James – 401 Certificate & VMRC permit
- 16. Conditions placed on previous permits required to be completed before renewal. – Middle James River Dredged Material Placement Alternatives Study 2002 – Sediment Sampling/Testing City Point Channel 1999 – Before Dredging Benthic Surveys 1999-2000 – Richmond Harbor Core Sampling and Analysis 1993
- 17. Conditions continued: – Richmond Deepwater Terminal Sediment Sampling 2002 – Sampling and Analysis Plan for Turkey Island Cut-off and Richmond Deepwater Terminal 2003 – Navigation Project Evaluations & Sediment Fate • City Point Channel • Jordon Point-Harrison Bar-Windmill Point • Goose Hill Channel • Dancing Point-Swann Point
- 18. In addition, the Corps undertook the following engineering and other studies in the James River to learn more about the river processes: – Surface Tidal Current and Sediment Distribution-Turkey Island Cut-off 1997 – Long-term Dredged Material Management Plan for the Upper James River 1995 – Preliminary Analysis for Alternative Upland Dredged Material Placement Sites at Turkey Island Cut-off 1998 – Anadromous Fish Study 2002 – Underwater Archeological Investigations 1995
- 19. We now have a good understanding of the river and how it is affected by dredging and placement of dredged material. The results of some of these studies will be discussed in more detail this afternoon.
- 20. Status of Permit Renewals: – Middle James • VMRC – On Commission Agenda January/February • DEQ – Awaiting draft permit – Upper James • DEQ – Awaiting draft permit after completion of current testing at Turkey Island and Richmond Deepwater Terminal Possible condition to test before every dredging event
- 21. Where do we stand? – The Corps has spent significant effort and funds to study the James River to satisfy permit conditions and for our own engineering navigation needs. – Renewing permits is becoming more and more difficult • greater time required • more questions to answer • more studies and sediment testing
- 22. As our partners, all of you need to know and understand the costs associated with meeting permit requirements, particularly in these times of reduced funding • sediment testing requires significant time and effort and must follow strict protocols • High cost for preparation, collection, and chemical analysis
- 23. If we do not obtain permits, we cannot dredge – Affects current navigation in river – Uncertainty affects future plans to send additional ships up the James – Economic consequences for Commonwealth of Virginia
- 24. Key is to put the true engineering and environmental effects of dredging in perspective with all of the other natural processes and man-made activities in the river.
- 25. • Norfolk District, Corps of Engineers continues to look for ways to maximize navigation, while meeting state regulatory requirements. • Good working relationships with agencies has assured unrestricted navigation. • Requirements are becoming more difficult while funding is getting tighter. • The Corps continues to take pride in balancing the navigation needs of the James River with the true environmental impacts of dredging. Conclusions:
- 26. Thank You US Army Corps of Engineers Norfolk District
- 28. INLAND & COASTWISE TUGS / BARGES
- 29. THE JAMES RIVER & WHAT IT MEANS TO ALLIED KEY CONTRACT WITH MAJOR PLANT SCHEDULE IS CRITICAL RESTRICTIONS = DELAYS SOME BARGES ARE DRAFT SENSTIVE
- 30. KEEPING BUSINESS GOING ADEQUATE NAVIGATION CHANNEL PROPER AIDS TO NAVIGATION CUSTOMER VIABILITY AVOID IMPEDIMENTS TO COMMERCE ENVIRONMENTALLY SOUND OPERATIONS
- 31. THE TOWING INDUSTRY PROVIDES TANGIBLE BENEFITS SAFETY & ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION EFFICIENCY OF OPERATIONS TAKES TRUCKS OFF THE ROADS PROVIDES EMPLOYMENT
- 32. Barges and The Environment 1 60,000 bbl. barge is equivalent to: 300 Trucks 80 Rail Cars Barges are fuel efficient and reduce air pollution
- 33. Barges and The Environment One gallon of fuel can move one ton of freight 522 miles by barge, compared to 386 miles by rail and 59 miles by truck Barges are fuel efficient and reduce air pollution
- 34. Tank Barge Spills 0 200,000 400,000 600,000 800,000 1,000,000 1,200,000 Gallons Tank Barge Spill Reduction Gallons Spilled Per One Million Moved 1.92.3 3.5 2.3 16.916.3 13.9 0 5 10 15 20 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 …resulting in an 92% drop in spill volume per million gallons of oil moved. The industry commitment to environmental stewardship has significantly reduced spills from tank barges…
- 35. AWO Responsible Carrier Program A comprehensive safety and environmental code of practice for the towing industry Ever since 2000 all AWO members have been required to undergo an audit to ensure compliance.
- 36. What Is The Responsible Carrier Program? • Developed By AWO For Barge And Towing Companies • A Safety Code Of Practice That Encompasses Every Aspect Of Fleet Operations
- 38. Tiered Evaluations for Dredged Material James River Partnership Meeting December 03, 2003 by Norman R. Francingues OA Systems Corporation
- 39. Regulatory Considerations • Dredged material is regulated as a CWA Section 404 discharge to waters of the US • State Issues a Section 401 Water Quality Certification • NEPA requires consideration for all pathways of concern
- 40. USACE/ EPA Technical Framework • Jointly Developed • Alternative Selection • Environmental Suitability • Open Water • Confined (diked) • Beneficial Uses • Full range of materials • Umbrella for OTM, ITM, UTM
- 41. OTM/ ITM/ UTM – What do they do? • Ocean Testing Manual/ Inland Testing Manual – Evaluate potential Open Water contaminant effects – Determine suitability of material for open water placement • Upland Testing Manual – Evaluates potential contaminant effects of material placement in a CDF – Determines the need for management actions or controls for placement of material in a CDF
- 42. Tier I Existing Info Tier II Screening Evaluations Tier III Effects-Based Testing and Evaluations Tier IV Case Specific Studies/ Risk Assessment A Tiered Approach for Evaluations
- 44. Initial Evaluations (Tier I) • Need for Pathway Evaluations – “reason to believe” – sand/gravel; clean material; new work • Identify Relevant Pathways • Identify Contaminants of Concern • Compile Existing Information Evaluate all relevant pathways & Test only as needed!
- 45. Equilibrium Partitioning TBP + DPTA Extraction Effluent; Runoff; Leachate; Volatiles (Henry’s Law) Animal & Plant Uptake Tier II - Screening Screening Spreadsheet
- 46. Tier III • Effects Based Testing and Evaluations • Chemical and Biological Tests • Models for Mixing, Attenuation, Dispersion • Results of all Tier III tests can be used in Risk Assessments
- 47. Effluent During Filling Effluent Elutriate Test Water Column Bioassay Surface Runoff Rainfall Simulator
- 48. “Pancake” column leach test (PCLT) Leachate to Groundwater Sequential Batch Leach Test (SBLT) Volatile Flux Chamber Volatile Emissions to Air
- 49. Plant Uptake Plant Bioassay Index Plant – Cyperus Animal Uptake Earth Worm Bioassay
- 50. Guidance Documents • DOTS Website – http://www.wes.army.mil/el/dots • USACE/EPA Technical Framework – http://www.epa.gov/OWOW/oceans/framework/ • Upland Testing Manual – http://www.wes.army.mil/el/dots/pdfs/trel03-1.pdf
- 51. Take Home Message • Over 30 years and $150 Million in background and technical data bases • Joint EPA and Corps developed protocols and evaluation guidelines • OTM/ITM/UTM provide a tiered approach for evaluations • Contaminant pathways must be appropriately evaluated • Testing/ evaluation procedures are available for all pathways • Evaluate all relevant pathways and test only as needed
- 53. 1Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary James River Partnership Williamsburg, Va. Honeywell Overview
- 54. 2Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Hopewell Plant: History 1915 - Dupont Munitions Plant 1928 - Allied Atmospheric Ammonia 1954 - Allied Enters Nylon Business, Begins Caprolactam Production 1975 - Initiated Specialty Chemicals Business 2001 - Began Making Merchant Caprolactam 2002 - World’s Largest Producer of Caprolactam & Ammonium Sulfate Beginning to Present
- 55. 3Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Business Segment: Chemical Intermediates • Products include: Sulf-N Ammonium Sulfate Nadone Cyclohexanone Naxol Cyclohexanol Merchant Caprolactam Key Customers Sulfate • Agriliance • Heringer (Brazil) • Bunge (Brazil) • Scotts Intermediates • Beaulieu • Firestone • Dow Chemical
- 56. 4Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Shanghai BHYN Tech svc/R&D, marketing, administration Carpet fibers plant Spinning polymer plant Textile fibers plant Caprolactam plant Tech svc/R&D, marketing, administration Carpet fibers plant Spinning polymer plant Textile fibers plant Caprolactam plant Anderson Clemson Arnprior C H I N A HopewellChesterfield Columbia Dalton Colonial Heights • Honeywell Facilities: • Former BASF Facilities: • New business has 3,800 employees Charlotte Honeywell Nylon Facilities
- 57. 5Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary • Plant employs about 900 people • About 25 miles of railroad track in plant • Consume about 11 railcars of molten sulfur every day • River water pumping capacity of 135,000 gallon per minute • Largest consumer of natural gas on east coast 50 MCF/Day - 1500 TPD ammonia plant • Sell several hundred TPD of CO2 to Anheiser-Busch, Coca-Cola, Perdue and others • Hopewell Plant produces Ammonium Sulfate as co-product of Caprolactam Process • Approximately 4.3 lbs AS per pound of Caprolactam • Produce about 1.7 million tons / year (over 4,500 tons per day ) • Ammonium sulfate is crystallized from solution to form crystalline particles Honeywell Hopewell Plant Summary
- 58. 6Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Merchant Quality CaprolactamPhenol Hopewell, VA 19 Million Pounds Per Day Natural Gas Sulfur Caprolactam Columbia, SC Chesterfield, VA Carpet Fibers Performance Fibers Specialty Polymers Specialty Films Intermediate Chemicals Specialty Chemicals Chemical Intermediates Hopewell Plant
- 59. 7Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Hopewell Plant: Products Annual Caprolactam Production Rates 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 Million of Pounds/Year Annual Products Shipped Capacity (M Lbs) Caprolactam 800 Ammonium Sulfate 3,200 Cyclohexanone 58 Cyclohexanol 11 Adipic Acid 32 Carbon Dioxide 690 Specialty Oximes 31 Products Consumed Internally Sulfuric Acid 900 Ammonia 1,100 Total Annual Production 6,822 Diversity & Quality in Our Product Mix
- 60. 8Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Ammonium Sulfate Production • Contains 21% nitrogen and 24% sulfur • Available in two grades – Granular for bulk blends – Standard for direct application or for dissolving into liquid fertilizers • Compatible with all fertilizer products • Less hygroscopic, enhanced storability • World’s Largest Caprolactam Production Site • World’s Largest Ammonium Sulfate Producer • Total Production in Excess of 1.7 million tons – About 9% of World Total • Multi-Modal Shipping (Marine, Rail, Truck) Hopewell, VA Plant
- 61. 9Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Activity At James River Honeywell Pier •Fifty Five Export Vessels per year (880,000 tons) •Twenty five require Top-Off in Norfolk (290,000 tons) •Top Off cost an additional $10/ton •Fifteen Domestic Barges per year (62,000 tons) •Total Ammonium Sulfate (940,000 tons) •Phenol inbound by barge (700,000 tons) •Other inbound commodities include Oleum & Oil
- 62. 10Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Environmental Performance
- 63. 11Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 Tons/Year To Hopewell Treatment Plant To James River History of Preventing Water Pollution Reduced NH3-N to James River by >80% While Increasing Plant Production Rate by 25% Slide102Slide102
- 64. 12Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Projects To Reduce Nutrients Capital Investment Reduced Nutrient Pollution to Hopewell Treatment Plant by Half & Eliminated Spikes
- 65. 13Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Environmental Pollution Prevention Gantry - Equipment to Load Fertilizer Product Onto Ships & Barges - Has Oil Hydraulic Drive System to Move Loading Arm New Equipment Eliminated Hydraulic Oil System
- 66. 14Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Sewer Monitoring & Response Early Detection Allows Quick Response
- 67. 15Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Certified Wildlife Habitat
- 68. 16Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Environmental Summary • Nutrients to James River >85% • Air Emissions >40% • TRI Emissions 70% • Significant Capital investments for Environmental Protection • Emphasis throughout the plant on Environmental Performance • Year-To-Year Focus on Continuous Reductions With New Technology • New projects planned for continued improvements 1985 2000 2010 Emissions Track Record of Decreasing Emissions
- 69. 17Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Availability of Ships
- 70. 18Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary 0 50 100 150 200 250 300 2001Aug 2002Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 2003Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Honeywell International Demolition Activity ('000 dwt) 10-30,000 dwt 30-55,000 dwt
- 71. 19Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary New Building Orders ('000 dwt) 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 2001Aug 2002Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 2003Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sep Honeywell International 10-30,000 dwt 30-55,000 dwt
- 72. 20Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Honeywell International 11.2948645425183861265330-55,000 dwt (total dwt) 2.71159011555948510-30,000dwt (total dwt) 11.2210956846130-55,000 dwt (#Vessls) 2.7564272510-30,000 dwt (# Vssls) %Total2006200520042003 % = Percentage of World Fleet Dry Bulk Carrier Orderbook
- 73. 21Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary HandySize Market Dynamics 1840 1860 1880 1900 1920 1940 1960 1980 2000 2020 2040 2060 2001Aug 2002Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 2003Jan Feb Mar Apr May June July Aug Sept #ofVessels 10-30,000 dwt (# vssls) 30-55,000 dwt (# vssls)
- 74. 22Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary Honeywell Wish List •Maintain the James River at current conditions •Deepen and widen river for larger vessels •Identify an upriver anchorage
- 75. 23Honeywell Confidential and Proprietary What Makes A Successful Partnership • Understanding of what makes each partner successful • Creating win-win scenarios • Trust • Execution on commitments… do what you say you’re going to do We Believe in Building Successful Partnerships
- 77. Figure 1-1 Middle James River Jordan Pt - Harrison Bar - Windmill Pt Dancing Pt - Swann Pt Channel City Pt Channel Goose Hill Channel Overboard Placement Area
- 79. Figure 3-1 Goose Hill Channel
- 80. Figure 3-4 Dancing Point - Swann Point Channel
- 81. Figure 3-7 Jordan Point - Harrison Bar - Windmill Point Channel
- 82. Figure 3-8 City Point Channel
- 87. Alternatives for Goose Hill Channel Goose Hill Channel Physical Feasibility Environmental Impacts Cost Comparison Present Practice Highly Feasible Temporary $4.0 million Upland Placement Potentially Feasible Minimal to aquatic, significant to uplands $7.1 million Alternative Overboard Highly Feasible Temporary, but reduced from Present Practice $3.8 million Wetland Creation Potentially Feasible Questionable $4.8 million Alternatives for Dancing Point - Swann Point Channel Dancing Point – Swann Point Physical Feasibility Environmental Impacts Cost Comparison Present Practice Highly Feasible Temporary $41.1 million Upland Placement Potentially Feasible Minimal to aquatic, significant to uplands $69.0 million Alternative Overboard Not Feasible Not Applicable Not Applicable Wetland Creation Not Feasible Not Applicable Not Applicable Alternatives for Jordan Point – Harrison Bar – Windmill Point Channel Jordan Point Physical Feasibility Environmental Impacts Cost Comparison Present Practice Highly Feasible Temporary $10.0 million Upland Placement Potentially Feasible Minimal to aquatic, significant to uplands $19.5 million Alternative Overboard Not Applicable Not Applicable Not Applicable Wetland Creation Potentially Feasible Questionable $12.5 million Alternatives for City Point Channel City Point Physical Feasibility Environmental Impacts Cost Comparison Present Practice Highly Feasible Temporary $0.7 million Upland Placement Potentially Feasible Minimal to aquatic, significant to uplands $2.0 million Alternative Overboard Highly Feasible Temporary, but reduced from Present Practice $0.6 million Wetland Creation Potentially Feasible Questionable $2.2 million
- 88. Monitoring Migratory Behavior of American Shad (Alosa sapidissima) in the James River, VA: Feasibility of Dredging Impact Assessment John Olney and Brian Watkins, VIMS Doug Clarke, ERDC & Keith Lockwood, USACE
- 89. Summary Report for Anadromous Fish Studies in Goose Hill Channel and Turkey Island Cutoff on the James River April 17, 2002
- 93. Onshore Monitoring and Recording Station
- 94. Proposed Study Site on the James River Goose Hill Channel
- 95. Study Objectives • Evaluate effectiveness of catching and tracking American Shad in the James River. • Refine methods for future tracking of shad when dredge is operating in the channel.
- 96. Primary Goal • Establish if shad are affected by dredging operations. –If not, can restrictions be reduced to allow more time to dredge in the spring to better manage navigation requirements?
- 98. •Ship calls (-51%) and commodity types (-100% change in forest product traffic which now goes to Hampton Roads) have changed substantially since 1999 Richmond Deepwater Terminal Turning Basin Expansion •2001 – Disposal Area Issue Raised, Numerous Sites Evaluated •2003 – Disposal Area Issue Resolved
- 99. Dredged Material Testing In The James River Contact: Robert Pruhs Technical Support Section Operations Branch US Army Corps of Engineers Norfolk District
- 100. Why Test Dredged Material? • Section 401 CWA, Water Quality Certification (WQC) – WQC required for the discharge of dredged material into waters of the U.S. – Discharge must be certified as complying with applicable State Water Quality Standards (WQS)
- 101. Why Test Dredged Material? (Cont’d) • Currently, Corps is renewing the Upper James River Virginia Water Protection Permit (WQC) through DEQ for maintenance dredging activities (mile marker 90 to mile marker 70) – DEQ has raised concerns that dredged material may contain contaminants – Specifically TBT, PCB, PAH, and Metals
- 102. Where Will Dredged Material Testing Occur? • Currently, Corps is testing shoals at Richmond Deepwater Terminal and Turkey Island Cut-Off
- 103. Where Will Dredged Material Testing Occur? • In the future, DEQ has requested that all shoals within the James River navigation channel be tested as dredging becomes necessary
- 104. How is Dredged Material Evaluation to be Performed? • Goal – Utilize the tiered approach and perform only the amount of testing necessary to make factual determinations – Implement the “Reason to Believe” principle for future sampling/testing events to ensure good stewardship of taxpayers dollars
- 105. How is Dredged Material Testing to be Performed? • Corps has conducted a Tier I evaluation – Determined that additional information was needed • Tier II & III: The Corps has developed a Sampling & Analysis Plan (SAP) utilizing the tiered approach developed under the framework established by the EPA & USACE manual “Evaluation of Dredged Material For Discharge in Waters of the U.S. – Testing Manual”
- 106. How is Dredged Material Testing to be Performed? • Tier II: Involve determination of sediment and water chemistry • Tier III: Effluent elutriate test will predict if effluent water from the respective upland placement sites act as a pathway for the migration of contaminants
- 107. How is Dredged Material Testing to be Performed? • Tier III: Effluent elutriate test mimics the dredged material placement process in upland placement sites and predicts the release of contaminants (if present) as a result of placement operations • Effluent elutriate test is a conservative evaluation of impacts to the water column
- 108. What are the Benefits of Dredged Material Testing? • Tier III evaluation for the current testing event at Richmond Deepwater Terminal and Turkey Island Cut-Off can be used to predict performance of potential contaminants in similar upland placement sites along the James River • Conducting dredged material testing in accordance with the EPA and USACE guidance will validate dredged material testing protocols
- 109. What are the Costs of Dredged Material Testing? • Cost of dredged material testing at Richmond Deepwater Terminal and Turkey Island Cut-Off – $65,000 for sample collection and analysis • What are the costs for testing dredged material at every shoal along the entire navigable James River?
- 110. What are the Potential Impacts to Navigation? • Withholding of Water Quality Certification – Result: No dredging, restricted navigation • Increased testing costs to meet environmental regulatory requirements – Result: Limited annual funding for James River Navigation Project may impact ability to maintain navigation
- 111. What are the Potential Impacts to Navigation? • Potential permit condition to test dredged material prior to each dredging event will add significant costs and delays to maintaining navigation
- 112. Questions?
- 113. Maritime Security in Hampton Roads Presented by LCDR Steve Midas Chief, Planning & Risk Management Department
- 114. Presentation Agenda • Impact of Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) Regulations • Virginia Area Maritime Security (AMS) Committee – Responsibilities – Members – Charter – Efforts • Current maritime security measures in place
- 115. MTSA Regulations • MTSA Regulations Final Rule released on October 22, 2003 • Requirements include: – Designation of Facility Security Officers and submission of Facility Security Plans for each applicable facility – Designation of Vessel Security Officers and submission of Vessel Security Plans for all applicable vessels – Formation of AMS Committee for each COTP zone – Development of AMS Plan for each COTP zone
- 116. Virginia AMS Committee Responsibilities • Provide advice and assistance to the Federal Maritime Security Coordinator (FMSC) in the development of the AMS Plan • Develop and coordinate a comprehensive area strategy to minimize and/or respond to the threat of a Transportation Security Incident (TSI) • Complete an AMS Assessment and update as necessary
- 117. Virginia AMS Committee Membership • Executive Committee responsible for oversight and management of all AMSC efforts • Members must have at least 5 years of maritime or port security operations experience • Minimum of 7 members • Subcommittees may be formed to address short-term or long-term projects • Subcommittees may include non-AMSC members to obtain advice/technical expertise as necessary
- 118. Virginia AMS Committee Charter • Virginia AMS Committee Charter signed October 23, 2003 • Formalizes relationship and responsibilities of AMSC • Executive Committee membership includes: - USCG COTP (Chair) - Norfolk FBI (Co-Chair) - USCG Group HR - U.S. Asst. Attorney - NAVSTA Norfolk - Office of the Governor - Navy Mid-Atlantic Region - HRMA - BICE - Virginia Port Authority - BCBP - Port of Richmond
- 119. Virginia AMS Committee Efforts • Development of Law Enforcement Subcommittee – Completed numerous training events between USCG, federal and local law enforcement personnel • Creation of AMS Assessment Subcommittee • Making relationships more formal between AMSC and existing committees/groups in Hampton Roads region • Completion of AMS Plan in progress (due to USCG D5 by April 1, 2004)
- 120. Maritime Security Measures in Hampton Roads • Joint Harbor Operations Center (JHOC) • Regulated Navigation Area (RNA) • Joint Law Enforcement training • USN Patrol Craft (PC-170’s) • Virginia AMSC • USCG overflights • Daily, random waterside patrols • Exercise coordination
- 121. JHOC Current Camera and Radar Sites Camera Site (≈2-5NM) Radar Site (12 or 6NM)
- 122. JHOC Proposed Camera and Radar Sites Camera Site (≈2-5NM) Radar Site (12 or 6NM)
- 123. Hampton Roads FMSC Top Concerns • Expanding AMS efforts to incorporate all of AOR • Identifying/Developing communications process to support MTSA requirements (i.e. facilities, vessels, LE/response personnel, etc.) • Continued coordination with the many stakeholders • Completion of Area Maritime Security Plan
- 124. Area Maritime Security Plan Communications • Identify methods to communicate with Facility Security Officers, Company Security Officers, Vessel Security Officers, public safety officers, emergency response personnel and crisis management organization representatives within the port, including 24 hour contact details.
- 125. Area Maritime Security Plan Threat Response • Procedures…for responding to security threats or breaches of security, including provisions for maintaining infrastructure and operations in the port; • Procedures for reporting transportation security incidents • Procedures for communicating appropriate security and threat information to the public • Procedures for handling reports from public and maritime industry regarding suspicious activity
- 126. Area Maritime Security Plan TSI Response & Recovery • Details of the security incident command and response structure; • Procedures for evacuation within the port in case of security threats or breaches of security; • Security resources available for incident response and their capabilities; • Procedures for responding to a TSI; • Procedures to facilitate the recovery of marine transportation system
- 127. Unified Command Federal Maritime Security Coordinator (i.e. USCG COTP) Safety Officer DOJ DOD State Governors Office Liaison Officer Information Officer Assistant Safety Officers Agency Representatives Joint Information Center Operations Section (CGD(O) Planning Section Finance Section Staging Area(s) Water Interdiction Branch Holding Area Branch Vessel Disposition Branch Air Operations Branch Logistics Section Division A Division B Division C Security Group On Water Group On Shore Group Medical Group Transportation Group Vessel Evaluation Group Vessel Storage Team Vessel Disposal/Sales Group INS Asylum Screening Group Tactical Air Group Helibase Fixed Wing Coordinator Helicopter Coordinator Multi Branch Organization Transportation Security Incident Staging Area(s) land Technical Specialty Unit Situation Unit Resources Unit Documentation Unit