1. Belleville Locks & Dam Barge Accident on 6 Jan 05 John Clarkson
This salvage plan describes the plan to pull the 5 barges off the dam so that they are not interfering with the gates. This will solve the immediate issue which is to allow the dam gates to function normally and be closed to maintain the pool. The salvage work will then continue with the barges above the dam and one of barges below the dam which has one end that is sunk.
This document outlines our salvage in as much detail as is currently known.
B&H Towing, Inc. has contracted with Oki Moore Diving and Salvage, from St. Louis, MO and River Salvage (owned by Jim Zubic), from the Pittsburgh area. These two salvage companies are the most qualified companies to complete this job and we have both of them working on this job so that we can accomplish it in a timely manner.
The barges are not in the navigation channel, however, they are interfering with some of the dam gates which if not removed could result in the loss of pool above the dam. The loss of pool could result in the waterway being restricted.
The points of contact for this salvage plan are:
Keith Lay, B&H Towing Co, (Towing Co operating the M/V Jon J. Strong), Cell: (270)
Jan Haynes, Merrill Marine Surveyors, Cell: (270)
Jason Hauck – Corps of Engineers, Cell – (304)
All three are on the scene and can be contacted at the Belleville Lock and Dam, phone number (740) – because cell phone service does not work very well at the Belleville Lock and Dam.
B. Site Conditions
The entire salvage operation will be impacted by the river stages, however, work to pull the barges off the dam gates nearest to the lock can be done as soon as the equipment is on the scene and set up unless there is additional significant rain causing the river to reach significant flood stages again. Set up work to get the shoreline on the West Virginia side prepared to anchor a pulling barge can begin once the river has receded enough to allow a crane barge or an excavator with a backhoe configuration to dig holes for the two dead men.
The barges against the dam are the following:
AEP 8815 – sank against the pier between Gates 3 and 4 and is likely interfering with Gate 3 and possibly Gate 4 as well. This is a rake barge which contained aggregate but has shifted over on it’s side and collapsed and wrapped around the pier. Its cargo is not hazardous.
AEP 8823 – lodged against the pier between Gates 4 and 5 and is interfering with Gate 5. This is an open hopper coal barge, which is not hazardous.
PEN 207 – this barge is wrapped around the pier between Gates 6 and Gate 7. This is an open hopper coal barge without a rake, which is not hazardous.
AEP 611 – after the accident, this barge was floating next to MEM 94256, however it sank at 1840 hrs on Jan. 7. This barge was a box barge with “p coke” which is not hazardous. We believe this barge is now below MEM and is lodged against the pier between Gates 6 and 7.
MEM this barge is still partially floating and is lodged against the pier between Gates 6 and 7. It may be hung up on another barge because we attempted to push the barge on one end using a towboat and an empty barge from below the dam, however, the barge would not move. It is a cover top box-end barge with talc, a type of lime which is powdery and is not hazardous. The loaded barge may have to be off loaded with a crane barge, before it can be pulled away from the dam. It is not obstructing the gates, however, the barges underneath it may be obstructing the gates.
C Salvage Plan: Phase I
Phase I of our salvage plan is to mobilize the equipment needed to accomplish this job. We have mobilized the following equipment:
From River Salvage Co., Jim Zubic,
Bringing equipment from the following places:
Below Cincinnati (Ohio R. Mile 503):
M/V Roger Kinney (2800 HP) picked up the equipment below and pushed it above the bridges in Cincinnati and turned it over to the “Capt. John Reynolds”
M/V “Capt. John Reynolds” (5600 HP towboat) – will bring the following equipment:
4600 Crane and barge
A-frame (350 ton)
2 jumbo deck flats (as support barges)
M/V Lucedale (600 HP) will be included in the tow for additional assistance with salvage rigs.
The “Capt. John Reynolds” will depart from Ohio River, Mile 503 at Midnight, Jan 8, Estimate 2.5 days to arrive on Tues., Jan 11 at 1200 hrs.
Ohio R. Mile 70:
M/V James Moorhead – will bring the following equipment:
2 Salvage Rigs (A-frames) 500 ton and 350 ton.
Estimated departure at Noon, 1/9/2005, will arrive on 1/10/2005 at 1500 hours
Ohio R. Mile 15:
M/V James Garret – will bring the following equipment:
150 Ton Crane, anchors, anchor chains, oxygen tanks
Estimated departure at Noon, 1/9/2005, will arrive 30 hours later
Charleston, WVa, Kanawha River
Nelson Jones (Madison Coal Co.) is assembling a pulling barge with winches and cabling that will be used as the pulling barge on the lock wall side. The winches have the 3 inch diameter cables that were requested by River Salvage (Jim Zubic) have been located and are being trucked to Charleston.
The estimated departure of this barge from Charleston is Monday, January 10, 2100 hrs to arrive at Belleville on Tuesday at 1800 hours.
From Oki Moore Diving & Salvage, Oki Moore
M/V Noble C. Parsonage, 6000 HP, departed St. Louis with the following equipment:
2 A-frames (350 ton ea.)
2 Crane barges (150 ton & 60 ton)
1 Support barge
M/V Steven Foster (1800 HP)
M/V Captain Val (800 HP)
5 Crew Members
Departed at 0800, 1/9/2005, ETA for this is 1800 hrs on Thursday.
Note on Salvage Plan: Phase I:
We have too much equipment arriving on the scene, but due to the fact that we need to pull the barges off the dam to enable gate operation, we are making redundant plans for equipment. The equipment is coming from above and below the dam. If one or more of the shipments are held up, we can begin with what arrives on the scene first. Once the situation is stabilized, then several of these items can be sent to other salvage sites.
D: Salvage Plan: Phase II: Pull barges off the dam
In this phase we will pull the barges off the dam. Work will be going on simultaneously with the two salvers. One of them will pull from the long wall side of the dam (the Ohio side), the other will pull from the West Virginia shore, the opposite of the river.
D.1 Ohio Side (using the Long Wall)
River Salvage Co. (Zubic), will somehow (see methods below) attach to the long wall and will use a pulling barge to pull the two barges currently blocking Gate 4 and the adjacent gates 3 and 5. These barges are AEP 8815 and AEP They are shown in the photo below. This photo was taken on 1/8/2005 from the dam. AEP 8815 is on the left of the photo and its box end is push into the rake of AEP 8823.
We plan to use a pulling barge that is located near the long wall as shown in the sketch below.
Two methods of anchoring the pulling barge have been discussed with the salvers, the surveyors, and the Corps of Engineers structural engineers from the Huntington District and with experts from the Louisville district on the installation and use of pad-eyes for connecting to the wall.
Method 1: This method will involve anchoring to the bottom of the river on the bank side of the long wall. The pulling barge will be anchored with a cable traveling around the bull-nose. One or more cables that are 2 inches in diameter will be used to connect the pulling barge to the sunken barges that are against the dam. Depending on the exact size of the winch and the cable, block sets could be used if needed to handle pulling force.
Issues:
How much force will the anchor hold? This is being addressed by examining soil type, but will ultimately require testing an anchor with the winch on the pulling barge and a boat pushing on the pulling barge. We will go as far downstream as we can along the long wall on the shore side to place the anchor. This will increase the bite of the anchor, allowing it to dig in more.
Will the bull-nose be able to handle the force around it? This is being addressed by structural engineers at the Corps. They have said as long as the cable remains near the bottom of the bull nose, the long wall can withstand plenty of force against it. We will place the pulling barge far enough away from the bull nose to accomplish this.
Method 2: This method would involve anchoring pad-eyes to river side of the long wall. We are assured by the experts from the Louisville District of Corps of Engineers (Rick Lewis) that this method will work if we have the water level low enough to anchor to a safe place on the wall. The Louisville District has used this method before. This will be done by using a Hilty Drill and drilling 15 inches into the long wall, then using epoxy and inserting a bolt with a plate and pad-eye. A cable from the pad-eye to the pulling barge will provide the anchor for the pulling barge. The barges on the dam that are across gate 4 will be pulled from the pad-eye near the bull nose which gives an angle of 26 degrees with respect to the long wall. According to Corps experts from Louisville this gives us a force component along the wall that will keep us from pulling the pad-eye out of the wall. Corps experts from the Huntington District have reviewed the planned anchor point on the bull nose for structural stability.
D.2 West Virginia Shore
Salvage operations on the West Virginia shore will concentrate on pulling the three barges off of the pier between Gates 6 and 7. The picture below shows the barge that we believe is stuck on one or both of the barges below it.
On the West Virginia Shore, two “dead-men” will be assembled and the pulling barge from Oki Moore Diving and Salvage will be anchored to these and will use its winches and block sets to pull the barges one at a time off of the pier between Gates 6 and 7. We will use either a crane barge to dig the hole and sink the dead-men or an excavator. The loaded barge that is on top and upright may have to be lightered initially to see if this will help it float. The barge will be tied off, lightered and then pulled away from the dam pier face. From that point the barges below it will be pulled off the dam pier.
E: Barge Down River
There is one of the barges, AEP 877, that went through the dam that remains down river at OH River Mile This barge will have to be salvaged using one of the A-frames that are coming. The salvage of this barge is secondary to getting the barges out of the dam gates.
F: Safety Plan
When pulling near the long wall the pulling barge will be secured with safety lines off the long wall in case any of the cables were to break or an anchor were to slip.
When pulling from the West Virginia shore, the dead-man will secure the pulling barge.
The salvers will wear life jackets.
Salvage work will only be done during daylight hours.
Connecting the cable to the sunken barge will be done by placing the salvers into a skip box and lowering them with a crane from the top of the dam, utilizing Corps equipment.

2. Belleville Barge Accident
Salvage Operations
Lessons Learned
Preventive measures considered to lessen the chances of losing pool in the event of future barge accidents. 

3. BARGE ACCIDENT
On January 6, 2005 the M/V Jon Strong, a twin screw towboat was up bound with 12 loaded barges.
Nine of the barges drifted down into the dam.
Four of the barges went through the dam gates, however, five of the barges lodged or sank against the dam piers.
, built in1965 by Nashville (Tenn.) Bridge Co. 148 L x 30.8 W with 3600 hp.GM CE2 diesel engines begin to top around above the Belleville dam. The boat began to back down the long wall and was able to keep both the boat and the first row of 3 barges in the lock chamber. All of the crew is safe and had no injuries. Currently we can see 3 of the barges and are assuming that the other 2 barges are located roughly where we last saw them.

4. Barge Location AEP 8815 – sank against the pier between Gates 3 and 4
AEP 8823 – lodged against the pier between Gates 4 and 5.
PEN 207 – wrapped around the pier between Gates 6 and Gate 7.
AEP 611 – lodged against the pier between Gates 6 and 7.
MEM lodged against the pier between Gates 6 and 7.

5. Belleville Barge Accident
The barge accident blocked 5 of the 8 gatebays. 
The effects of the subsequent pool loss to the area caused approximately 5 million dollars a day in damages. 

6. BARGE ACCIDENT, cont
Heavy Rains had caused flood conditions, the dam gates raised out of the water.
High water allowed for some lockages to continue, Locks closed to traffic for two of the four weeks
Loss of pool aided salvage operations
, built in1965 by Nashville (Tenn.) Bridge Co. 148 L x 30.8 W with 3600 hp.GM CE2 diesel engines begin to top around above the Belleville dam. The boat began to back down the long wall and was able to keep both the boat and the first row of 3 barges in the lock chamber. All of the crew is safe and had no injuries. Currently we can see 3 of the barges and are assuming that the other 2 barges are located roughly where we last saw them.

7. Aerial View of Belleville Locks and Dam
Gate No 1
Gate No 8
Aerial View of Belleville Locks and Dam

8. Gate No 1
Gate No 8
Location of Barges

9. Belleville Locks & Dam
Tow Boat Operator responsible for hiring 2 salvagers to remove barges.
Assembled Belleville Team, Included Industry, Coast Guard and the Corps.
Introduction
Dave Margo, Civil Engineer with the Huntington District
Bluestone Lake Experience
Use of risk analysis in a DSA study
Outline of Presentation
Project background
Summary of DSA studies
Summary of risk analysis studies

15. Belleville Locks & Dam
Get salvage equipment onsite as quickly as possible before loss of pool prohibits transport.

16. Salvager’s Equipment 2 towboats 4176 kilowatt (5600 HP)
454 metric ton (500 ton) A-frame crane
Pulling barge
Hydraulic shear
Cutting beam
Numerous other smaller cranes, A frame cranes, and barges

17. Various Concepts to Remove the Barges
Push Floating Barge
Pull Barges Upstream off the Dam
Pull and Lift Barges Downstream
Cutting Beam
Hydraulic Shear
Underwater Cutting by Divers
Pull Downstream with Three Towboats
Lift out with Bulkhead Crane

20. Salvage Equipment Upriver
River Salvage digging with a crane to anchor a barge with winches to lower down their excavator
with a hydraulic shear
Okie Moore
Equipment:
Crane barge
2 pulling barges
M/V Capt. Val
M/V James
Moorehead

21. Need to install pad-eye
Pad eye pic
Pull from Upstream
Need to install pad-eye

23. 2 in (5cm) pulling cables being installed

25. Cutting Beam and Pile Driver

26. Started to use cutting beam (Successfully used by the Louisville District) Ultimately not used, only had one barge that might be able to use, restriction that the beam could not extend beyond pier

27. Pull and lift barges from downstream

30. Cutting torch is the salvagers most useful tool

31. Hydraulic shear

32. Gate 7 Divers cutting PEN 207 PEN 207 AEP 611 Divers ladder
and support lines
Divers
cutting
PEN 207
Gate 7

33. After 17 days of trying, the first of 5 gates was cleared

34. Most of the wreckage came out by cutting in sections
with a torch and pulling downstream

37. Bow down
river, with cargo
compartment
outlined
Upstream rigging pulled out of the last barge which left it on the floor of the dam.

38. Saturday, Jan 29th
Worked a sling under the bow of AEP 8815.

39. Last Barge
Running out of options and tried pulling the downstream rigging with three towboats. While unsuccessful, there was some movement, the barge appeared to be hung up on a part of the dam sill.

40. Lifting out with Bulkhead Crane and the 454 metric ton (500 ton) A-frame to lift the barge. The salvager raised one end of the barge with the A-Frame crane and worked a sling under the mid-section to rig to the dam’s bulkhead to lift the other end out of the water and then cut the barge into two pieces.
To remove concern from the current imparting an offset load on the crane, a maintenance bulkhead (stop log) was used as a lifting beam. The bulkhead would transfer any downstream current force into the dam piers at the bulkhead slots.

45. Sliding Deck Barge Under AEP 8815

46. M/Vs Capt John
Reynolds
and James Garret
coordinated the
movement out of
Gate 3 and down
river.

47. Finally, after 26 days the locks reopened
Queues at the lock increased to a total of fifty-three (53) towboats waiting

52. Past Accidents
Smithland Locks and Dam Cheatham Locks and Dam

53. Pike Island

54. Past Accidents
Columbia Lock and Dam Pipe to Protect Diver from Current

55. Maxwell Locks and Dam

56. Barge Accident Study
Studying modern era pool loss accidents to find commonalities.
Preventive measures are being considered to lessen the chances of losing pool in the event of future barge accidents.
Homeland Security

57. Barge Accident Study, cont.
The preferred solution would be transported via roadway to quickly get onsite and be deployed with minimum if any floating plant (working barge). It would also be universal and could be used at many lock projects.
Several options are being considered, including an integrated pile driver/cutting beam that can move across the gate bay.

58. Belleville Barge Accident
QUESTIONS