b'moving parts, they improve configuration capabilitybut we need toulations. Thats very valuable to us and it actually gives us flexibility continue working with the manufacturers and advising the operatorsto work equivalent designs underneath our existing systems. While about the risk of thermal runway, how important monitoring this is,its not clean or transparent and there are challenges of expectation and doing what they can to prepare in case there is an issue.setting for early adopters, it allows us to move forward. The more I do this job as a regulator, the more I am pleased with the flexibility thats On the flip side of the last question, are there issues that werein our existing system. concerns with diesel that are no longer a problem, or not as much of a problem, with newer systems and fuels?That said, with respect to the development of guidelines for some of these fuels, the Coast Guard is heavily engaged in the IMO. This offers Cost: Certainly one of the areas that we always think about with ourus the opportunity to work with other flag states, technical experts, marine inspectors is them having to worry about chemical ingestion,and classification societies, to look at putting out those types of safety especially in respect to benzine. Thats less of a safety risk with someguidelines for different types of fuels. At the IMO, there are guidelines of these fuels. The other big one is pollution. The risk of pollution forout for the use of methanol, there are guidelines for fuel cells, and were hydrogen, LNG, or even potentially ammonia or electric, is way differ- working on hydrogen now. Were engaged with other subject matter ent than diesel. That said, I think that its a trade-off situation. Wereexperts in these technologies and in these safety systems. This allows trading off pollution for these flammability concerns, increased fireus, as were looking at equivalent considerations here in the United risks, and potential increased toxicity to the operator.States, to have the back and forth with the system designers and the ship owners and operators about those usage guidelines. We can build When you say pollution, are you referring to pollution createdthat into the design framework for these case-by-case vessels, enabling during operation or as the result of an incident, for example, anus to ultimately move those guidelines and what we learn on these accident that causes a fuel spill?projects into policy. That helps with expectations and transparency for other adopters. Eventually, that works over into our regulations. Thats Cost: Yes, its twofold. Were reducing emissions, along with emissionhow we work the process with the system that we have. It does work. reduction strategies, but these alternate fuels dont have the same pol- Because of our good partnerships and our continued acknowledgment lution response requirementshydrogen evaporates right away, andof early and often communication, we can be successful in the current LNG doesnt stay in the water. So, there is a benefit on that front. environment we have.Are there additional concerns for the Coast Guard in the event of a rescue from an all-electric vessel? Cost: Sure, thats part of our general arrangement review. Thats where tank arrangement or battery placement on the vessel are the focus, making sure you factor that into the general arrangement of where the passengers and crew are going to be. In many cases, unlike a car where the battery is right underneath where the passenger is sitting, theres more space on vessels. For instance, lets say there was thermal runaway from a battery, you wouldnt want that to be right next to your primary lifesaving equipment or egress. Neeland: Not to mention the ventilation systems, where are you put-ting ventilation systems. To tack on to what Dan was mentioning, every new fuel has its unique benefits, but it has its unique hazards as well. For each new fuel, were going to try to make sure were mitigating those hazards to ensure protection of both the passengers and the crew. We have yet to see ammonia on a passenger vessel, but there are several people looking at that. The toxicity is a huge concern with ammonia that you dont necessarily have in hydrogen. If you have a diesel spill, generally diesel goes down in the vessel, but if you have a hydrogen leak, its going up. Its a different lens you that you have to look through at the hazard for each product. Have there been any changes to Coast Guard regulations based on new propulsion systems and fuels? Cost: You asked whether were considering instituting regulations, yes, were considering it. However, there are challenges with regula-tions and the timeliness of them, even relevance in respect to time-liness. We, the Coast Guard, are very fortunate that whoever came before us and worked on our regulation put what I would consider very powerful equivalence authority consideration in our existing reg-19 MAY 2023'