scholarly journals A Means to Streamline Historic and Cultural Resource Consultation and Compliance for Pollution Assessment and Recovery Activities on Shipwrecks

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (1) ◽  
pp. 2024-2036 ◽  
Author(s):  
Lisa Symons ◽  
James Delgado ◽  
Deborah Marx ◽  
Erika Martin Seibert
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Historic Preservation ◽  
Pollution Assessment ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Hazardous Substances ◽  
Advisory Council ◽  
Consultation Process ◽  
Environmental Threats ◽  
Pollution Removal ◽  
Battle Of The Atlantic

ABSTRACT In May 2013, per Congressional direction and to support a better understanding of pollution sources in the U. S. waters, the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA) provided the U. S. Coast Guard (USCG) a detailed report on the assessment of risks from potentially polluting shipwrecks. The report, Risk Assessment for Potentially Polluting Wrecks in U.S. Waters, was a result of the Remediation of Underwater Legacy Environmental Threats (RULET) project that evaluated 20,000 shipwrecks for their pollution potential as well as issues that could impact operations including whether or not those wrecks could be historically significant properties and/or gravesites. “Historic property” is defined by the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (NHPA), to be any prehistoric or historic district, site, building, structure, or object included in, or eligible for inclusion in, the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP.) The NHPA requires a Federal agency to “take into account” the effects of its undertakings, such as pollution removal from a submerged shipwreck, and afford the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP) a reasonable opportunity to comment. Federal agencies meet Section 106 responsibilities through a consultation process with the ACHP and other parties as set out in the ACHP's regulations implementing Section 106 of the NHPA (36 CFR Part 800), or through implementation of the nationwide 1997 Programmatic Agreement for emergency response under the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan. NOAA evaluated a number of the report's shipwrecks for eligibility under the NRHP criteria to determine if any could be considered historic properties. The majority of RULET sites are associated with World War II casualties in the Battle of the Atlantic. As of 2013, the average age of each wreck is 83 years old, as many were built or retrofitted for service during WWII, meeting one of the criteria, per the National Park Service's regulations at 36 CFR Part 60 for eligibility for nomination to the NRHP. Three potentially eligible shipwrecks were subsequently nominated and accepted to the NRHP. The information contained in the RULET risk assessments and the NRHP nominations, facilitates the efforts of USCG to work through the required consultation processes; more effectively balancing responsibilities to address potential environmental impacts and legal mandates to avoid or mitigate impacts to historic resources.

Development and Implementation of Guidelines for Federal On-Scene Coordinators for Protecting Historic Properties

1999 ◽  
Vol 1999 (1) ◽  
pp. 363-366 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jan C. Thorman ◽  
Pamela Bergmann
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Historic Preservation ◽  
Emergency Response ◽  
The United States ◽  
Hazardous Substances ◽  
Advisory Council ◽  
Hazardous Substance ◽  
Contingency Plan ◽  
National Response ◽  
Response Team

ABSTRACT In 1997, the National Response Team completed a Programmatic Agreement on Protection of Historic Properties during Emergency Response under the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan. This agreement, which was drafted by a National Response Team ad hoc committee consisting of representatives of National Response Team member agencies, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, and the National Conference of State Historic Preservation Officers, has important ramifications for federal On-Scene Coordinators and responsible parties conducting spill response in the United States. The purpose of the Programmatic Agreement is to ensure that historic properties are appropriately taken into account in planning for and conducting emergency response to oil spills and hazardous substance releases under the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan. The agreement provides a uniform, nationwide approach to considering and protecting historic properties before and during an emergency response. Signatories, which include the U.S. Coast Guard and the Environmental Protection Agency, agree to implement this Programmatic Agreement or to develop and then implement regional Programmatic Agreements that are consistent with the nationwide Programmatic Agreement and the National Historic Preservation Act. As of September 1998, implementation of the nationwide Programmatic Agreement and development of regional Programmatic Agreements were just beginning by Regional Response Teams and federal On-Scene Coordinators throughout the United States. The Alaska Regional Response Team, whose development of regional cultural resources guidelines in the early 1990s led to the development of the nationwide Programmatic Agreement, had begun preparing a document on implementation of the nationwide Programmatic Agreement in Alaska. The emergency response provisions of the nationwide Programmatic Agreement were implemented for the first time in the November 1997, M/V Kuroshima spill near Dutch Harbor, Alaska. The major lesson learned from this incident with regard to the nationwide Programmatic Agreement is that its provisions are workable and can contribute to the overall success of the response.

The Battle of the Atlantic, September 1939-May 1943, (History of United States Naval Operations in World War II, Volume I.)

1948 ◽  
Vol 12 (3) ◽  
pp. 179
Author(s):  
Theodore Ropp ◽  
Samuel Eliot Morison ◽  
Wesley Frank Craven ◽  
James Lee Gate ◽  
Air Historical Office ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
World War Ii ◽  
World War ◽  
History Of ◽  
Naval Operations ◽  
Battle Of The Atlantic

Going Big

2013 ◽  
Vol 1 (1) ◽  
pp. 13-23 ◽  
Author(s):  
Sarah Schlanger ◽  
George MacDonell ◽  
Signa Larralde ◽  
Martin Stein
Keyword(s):  
New Mexico ◽  
Historic Preservation ◽  
Land Management ◽  
Advisory Council ◽  
Bureau Of Land Management ◽  
Permian Basin ◽  
New Development ◽  
Collaborative Working ◽  
Time And Energy

AbstractIn 2008, the Carlsbad Field Office of the Bureau of Land Management (BLM) made a fundamental change in how they work with the energy industry in the Permian Basin of southeastern New Mexico, one of the nation's busiest “oil patches.” Through a collaborative effort that involved the Bureau of Land Management, the New Mexico State Historic Preservation Officer, the Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, the Mescalero Apache Tribe, and industry representatives, they developed and implemented the Permian Basin Memorandum of Agreement (MOA). This agreement allows energy development proponents to contribute funds to archaeological research in lieu of spending an equivalent amount of money on traditional archaeological field survey. The mitigation program governs how BLM addresses long-term damage and cumulative impacts to archaeological resources as new development proceeds in the Permian Basin MOA area. Now in its fifth year, the program has succeeded in key ways: industry has gained control over schedules and time, while archaeologists have gained control over where and how they do archaeology. Key lessons have been learned along the way: The funding mechanisms of the program work well, but doing archaeology through a collaborative working group takes a lot of time and energy.

The Sudanese Revolution of October 1964

1967 ◽  
Vol 5 (4) ◽  
pp. 491-509 ◽  
Author(s):  
Yusuf Fadl Hasan
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Self Determination ◽  
Advisory Council ◽  
World War ◽  
The People ◽  
Western Democracy ◽  
Traditional Institutions ◽  
The Right ◽  
Right Of Self Determination ◽  
Legislative Assembly

About 70 years ago, the Mahdist or Ansār state, in many ways a traditional Muslim government, crumbled under the fire of the Anglotional Egyptian cannons. On the condominium government that followed fell the task of pacifying the country and introducing western concepts of administration. All Sudanese attempts to defy foreign domination had failed completely by 1924. The British, the stronger of the two partners, had the lion's share in shaping the destiny of the country. Towards the end of World War II, the influential and educated Sudanese, like other Africans and Asians, demanded the right of self-determination. In 1946, in preparation for this, a sample of western democracy was introduced in the form of an Advisory Council. This Council, which was restricted to the northern Sudan, was followed two years later by the Legislative Assembly, which had slightly more powers. Although these democratic innovations were quite alien to the country and were introduced at a relatively late date, they were in keeping with traditional institutions. Until recently, the Sudan consisted of a number of tribal units where no classes or social distinctions existed and the tribal chief was no more than the first among equals; the people were therefore not accustomed to autocratic rule.

The cavity magnetron in World War II: was the secrecy justified?

2004 ◽  
Vol 58 (3) ◽  
pp. 283-294 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Lovell
Keyword(s):  
World War Ii ◽  
Radio Astronomy ◽  
Present Author ◽  
World War ◽  
Main Contributor ◽  
Battle Of The Atlantic

The cavity magnetron was invented in Birmingham University and developed by the GEC for centimetric radar in World War II. Its existence was kept secret, and its deployment was delayed, in the belief that as soon as it was used the enemy would be able to adopt the technique both in radar and in countermeasures. The H 2 S radar using the cavity magnetron was first used in January 1943, and a Stirling bomber with H 2 S crashed a few nights later near Rotterdam. The radar equipment was recovered almost intact by Telefunken engineers. The author of a German report on the equipment, Otto Hachenberg, subsequently became a colleague of the present author in radio astronomy. He died in 2001 and his report of May 1943 was discovered among his papers. It reveals that the principle of the cavity magnetron was already well known in Germany, based on work published in Leningrad in 1936. The most serious effect of the delay in deployment of the magnetron in centimetric radar was in the anti–U–boat campaign, in which the new centimetric radar became the main contributor to the successful end of the Battle of the Atlantic.

MEXUSPAC: MEXICO/U.S. PACIFIC REGIONAL RESPONSE COORDINATION TEAM1

1995 ◽  
Vol 1995 (1) ◽  
pp. 959-960
Author(s):  
Daniel Whiting
Keyword(s):  
United States ◽  
Mexico City ◽  
Marine Environment ◽  
United States Of America ◽  
The United States ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Hazardous Substances ◽  
Contingency Plan ◽  
Marine Safety ◽  
The U.S

ABSTRACT The Agreement of Cooperation Between the United States of America and the United Mexican States Regarding Pollution of the Marine Environment by Discharges of Hydrocarbons and other Hazardous Substances, signed in Mexico City in 1980, provides a framework for cooperation in response to pollution incidents that pose a threat to the waters of both countries. Under this agreement, MEXUSPAC organizes Mexican and U.S. response agencies to plan for and respond to pollution emergencies in the marine environment. The MEXUSPAC contingency plan designates the commandant of the Mexican Second Naval Zone and the chief of the U.S. Coast Guard 11th District Marine Safety Division as the MEXUSPAC Cochairmen, and defines on-scene commanders, joint operations centers, and communications protocols that would be needed to coordinate the response to pollution incidents affecting both countries.

THE COAST GUARD'S FORENSIC OIL IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM

1977 ◽  
Vol 1977 (1) ◽  
pp. 189-191
Author(s):  
James C. Clow
Keyword(s):  
Fluorescence Spectroscopy ◽  
Thin Layer ◽  
Thin Layer Chromatography ◽  
Oil Spills ◽  
Analytical Techniques ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Hazardous Substances ◽  
Laboratory System ◽  
Field System ◽  
Layer Chromatography

ABSTRACT The Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA), as amended in 1972, tasks the Coast Guard with development of “procedures and techniques to be employed in identifying…. oil and hazardous substances….” In carrying out this portion of the service's environmental mandate, the Coast Guard Research and Development Center has developed first generation laboratory and field systems for the forensic identification and classification of oil spills. The laboratory system utilizes four independent analytical techniques (infrared and fluorescence spectroscopy, gas and thin-layer chromatography) to match spill samples with suspected sources, while the field system utilizes two analytical techniques (fluorescence spectroscopy and thin-layer chromatography). The field system is designed to give each Captain of the Port or Marine Safety Office the capability to rapidly identify the source of the majority of oil spills, or in more difficult cases to provide sufficient information to justify the collection of additional samples for more detailed analysis by the laboratory system.

ESA Section 7: Time for a Refresh in the Pre-Spill Planning Consultation Process

2017 ◽  
Vol 2017 (1) ◽  
pp. 173-192
Author(s):  
Stacey L. Crecy ◽  
Melissa E. Perera ◽  
Elizabeth J. Petras ◽  
John A. Tarpley
Keyword(s):  
Endangered Species ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
Environmental Protection Agency ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Agencies ◽  
Coast Guard ◽  
Service Agency ◽  
Consultation Process ◽  
Oil Spill Response ◽  
The U.S

ABSTRACT #2017-373 Federal agencies involved in oil spill response in the U.S. are required to comply with several environmental compliance laws. Where a Federal agency is operating in a way that may affect endangered species in the area, Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act (ESA) requires the agency to “consult” with the two Federal agencies responsible for protecting those species and habitats – the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) and the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS). Following the Deepwater Horizon oil spill, nonprofit organizations filed several lawsuits against the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (the “Action Agencies”) for failure to comply with the ESA during oil spill contingency planning. In one case, a settlement required the Action Agencies to consult with the NMFS and USFWS (together, called the “Services”) on the plan to use oil spill dispersants in California waters. Perhaps responding to these developments, several Regional Response Teams across the country initiated or made plans to review the status of their ESA Section 7 consultations. These efforts have varied in cost, scope, composition of agency representatives involved, and success in completing a consultation for a variety of reasons. There have been numerous challenges for USCG and EPA in meeting the ESA Section 7 consultation requirements for oil spill planning. First, the most recent framework for cooperation between the Action Agencies and the Services regarding consulting on oil spill planning and response activities is contained in an Interagency Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) signed in 2001. Although the agreement is still valid, some parts have been identified as outdated or in need of clarification. Secondly, there are no direct funding mechanisms or dedicated personnel assigned to the Action Agencies to work on pre-spill ESA Section 7 consultations. Third, recommendations and consultation outcomes can vary between Service agencies as well as internally within each Service agency due to a high level of regional autonomy. In 2015, the National Response Team (NRT) formed a new, interagency subcommittee to improve the Federal Action Agencies’ ability to comply with environmental laws such as the ESA with respect to oil spill response and pre-spill planning. A workgroup of the NRT Subcommittee was formed to specifically address pre-spill ESA Section 7 consultation processes. The workgroup includes regional and national representatives from the Action Agencies and the Services. In addition to strengthening relationships and understanding among the participating agencies, the workgroup has identified gaps in the 2001 MOA and is in the process of developing tools and templates on how to conduct pre-spill ESA Section 7 consultations to help fill some of the existing gaps. The workgroup ultimately hopes to facilitate the development of updated, complete, efficient, and consistent ESA Section 7 consultations across the nation.

Addressing the Uncertainty and Requirements for Oil Spill Response Consultations

2014 ◽  
Vol 2014 (1) ◽  
pp. 1881-1898 ◽  
Author(s):  
Bradford Benggio ◽  
Debra Scholz ◽  
Dave Anderson ◽  
Joseph Dillon ◽  
Greg Masson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Native American ◽  
Oil Spill ◽  
The United States ◽  
Federal Agencies ◽  
Hazardous Substances ◽  
Federal State ◽  
Consultation Process ◽  
Planning Stage ◽  
Response Planning ◽  
Oil Spill Response

ABSTRACT In the United States (U.S.), oil spill response planning, preparedness, and response requirements are dictated primarily by the National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan, a regulation that implements the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, the Clean Water Act, and the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act. At the planning stage, these regulations require the development of national, regional, and local response capabilities and promote overall coordination among responders. During a spill, these capabilities are utilized by the Federal On-Scene Coordinator (FOSC) to analyze whether response actions are likely to impact protected resources. The consultation process required under Federal statutes, charges the FOSC to consult with Federal, state, Tribal entities, and other Federal agencies to determine potential effects of response actions during an incident and to develop strategies to avoid, minimize, and mitigate those effects (40 CFR § 300.135(j); § 300.305(e); and § 300.322(a), 1994). Consultations should continue until response operations are concluded and may continue after operations are complete. Four key regulatory mandates that require an FOSC to initiate consultation during a response include:Endangered Species Act of 1973, as amended requires consultation with US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and the National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) on federally listed species and designated critical habitats;Magnuson-Stevens Act requires consultation with NMFS on any action that may affect Essential Fish Habitats;National Historic Preservation Act of 1966, as amended requires Federal agencies to consult with states, federally recognized tribes, and other stakeholders on potential impacts to historic and cultural resources; andTribal Consultations under Executive Order 13175 – Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments when federally recognized Indian Tribes and their interests are affected by a response. Consultation is also required under the Native American Graves Protection and Repatriation Act when Native American burial sites, human remains, funerary objects, sacred objects, or items of cultural patrimony are identified on Federal or Tribal lands during a response and no pre-consultation plan of action has been developed.1 Consultation requirements are not universally understood, leading to uncertainty and inconsistencies across the response community and Trustees regarding when to initiate and how to conduct the consultations. This paper discusses the Federal consultation requirements and identifies areas of possible uncertainties in the consultation process throughout the pre-spill planning, response, and post-response phases of an incident. This paper will suggest resolutions and recommendations to further enhance the consultation process by the Federal spill response decision-makers and planning bodies.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document