🔍 Key Concepts

• Cargo-specific requirements in 46 CFR for diethylamine and similar toxic cargoes • Differences between personal protective equipment (PPE) requirements versus cargo handling system/venting requirements • How simultaneous carriage of multiple dangerous chemicals (like diethylamine and allyl alcohol) affects venting and segregation rules

💭 Think About

• Look at which options describe protections for the crew (escape devices, gas detection) versus protections built into the cargo system (material of construction, venting arrangement). Which type of protection is most consistently required for highly toxic cargoes like diethylamine? • Think about why stainless steel type restrictions might exist. Would regulations ever be this specific about which stainless steels are acceptable for certain aggressive chemicals? • When carrying two different toxic, reactive cargoes, does it make more sense that venting systems can be combined, or that they must be segregated? Which choice sounds like it is relaxing safety rather than enhancing it? • Ask yourself: which option sounds like an exception or weakening of normal chemical tanker safety standards, instead of a precaution?

✅ Before You Answer

• Verify in 46 CFR Part 153 (Ships Carrying Bulk Liquid Hazardous Materials) what is required for diethylamine regarding emergency escape breathing apparatus and toxic vapor detection. • Check whether material of construction (like specific stainless steel types) is actually listed for diethylamine in the CFR tables. • Confirm whether regulations generally require segregated venting when carrying multiple incompatible or hazardous cargoes such as diethylamine and allyl alcohol, and whether any option on the list contradicts that principle.