Promoting Safe Operations—recreational boating on the Western Rivers

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine. By LT Steven Peelish, LTJG Brandon Guldseth, and LT Michael Anderson, U.S. Coast Guard.

Although the majority of recreational boating safety enforcement is covered by state governments, the U.S. Coast Guard remains an active partner for recreational boating safety on the Western Rivers. From fielding search and rescue (SAR) calls to providing boating safety instruction, the Coast Guard continually strives to ensure that the boating public is well informed and protected in this ever-changing, unique environment.

Teamwork
Due to its limited resources, the Coast Guard on the Western Rivers has a special working relationship with other government agencies, civilian police, and fire departments when conducting SAR operations. If a Coast Guard vessel is not in the area, the sector communication centers will notify the nearest civilian resource of the vessel in distress and ask if it is available to respond.

The Coast Guard Auxiliary is also tasked with SAR when active duty Coast Guard personnel are not available.

Law Enforcement Efforts
One of the major “hot spots” along the Missouri River is the Lake of the Ozarks, a 54,000-acre lake with more than 1,150 miles of shoreline, considered one of the most dangerous recreational boating locations in the United States.

Another major concern on the Western Rivers is close proximity. On August 25, 2005, a houseboat operating at night in Cincinnati, Ohio, with no navigation lights was struck by a towboat, killing four people. LT Mike Fields of the Kentucky Department of Fish and Wildlife stated, “It’s common for recreational boats to get into trouble on the Ohio River with commercial barge traffic. In an urban environment, large vessels tend to blend in with the surrounding area. Due to the slow, steady movement of the barges, it can be difficult to notice them—particularly at night. In the Cincinnati area, barge lights are difficult to distinguish due to background lighting from the city.”

Safety and Security Team
To promote boating safety on the Western Rivers, Mr. Kevin Kelly, District Eight’s recreational boating safety manager, created the boating safety and security team.

The team travels throughout District Eight’s area of responsibility, conducting vessel boating safety boardings on recreational boats. The team is comprised of a group of selected Coast Guard Reserve members with law enforcement backgrounds, and typically performs missions during the busiest holiday seasons like the Fourth of July, Memorial Day, and Labor Day weekends.

Sector Ohio Valley’s field intelligence support team, which pre-deploys to a location and meets with the local law enforcement agency, is also a welcomed resource. The field intelligence support team gains valuable insight into the trouble spots, develops a geographic partnership, and plans out the best place to be plugged into the boating safety operation. This effort helps locals to target boating safety patrols and provides an additional federal resource for “boating under the influence” enforcement.

About the authors:
LT Steven Peelish is a former BM1. With three marine safety unit river tours, he has acquired a vast knowledge base of marine safety and security on the Western Rivers.

LTJG Brandon Guldseth has served in both the Air National Guard and the Coast Guard. He has operated ground radars to train Air Force fighter pilots to evade surface-to-air missiles and weapons systems and piloted small boats in the U.S. Coast Guard for search and rescue and law enforcement.

LT Michael Anderson served as a helicopter rescue swimmer prior to attending Officer Candidate School in 1998. Since completing OCS, he has completed a joint staff and two tours in the marine safety field. He holds a Master of Science degree in business ethics from Duquesne University.

For more information:
Full article and “U.S. Coast Guard Western Rivers Sectors” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and then “2007-08 Vol. 64, Number 4” (Winter 2007-08).

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Online survey available at: http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

River Tenders—aids to navigation on the Western Rivers

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine. By LCDR Jerry Davenport, U.S. Coast Guard.

The Coast Guard’s inland river tenders, while conceivably the most unrecognized part of the organization’s afloat community, play a vital role in maintaining safe navigation throughout the Western Rivers.

Inland vs. Coastal Aids to Navigation
Coast Guard river tenders service and maintain the nearly 10,000 buoys and 4,000 fixed shoreside aids that assist those navigating the waters.

Each river system is unique and requires a variety of operational standards. For instance, on the Ohio River, buoys are typically positioned using smaller river-type buoys (6th-class buoys), with moorings of 1/2-inch chain and 1,500-lb. sinkers. On other rivers, buoys may be positioned using moorings of wire rope with concrete sinkers, or they may be jetted or pushed into the river bottom. On rivers like the lower Mississippi River, larger river-type buoys (4th-class buoys) with 3/8-inch wire rope and 1,500-lb. sinkers are used.

While coastal and inland waterways are marked for safe navigation by the lateral system of buoyage, coastal buoy tenders have transitioned to the use of differential global positioning systems to set buoys and use a very precise automated aid positioning system software program to calculate and record buoy location. Inland river tenders operate on the extreme outer limits of a channel to mark the maximum safe navigational channel, considering channel alignment, prevailing river stage, and obstructions.

Inland river tenders determine the best navigable channel by using a depth finder to ascertain the channel and surveys provided by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. Because of the ever-changing and unpredictable environmental conditions associated with the Western Rivers, buoys are not assigned positions.

Another notable difference is that Western River buoys and day boards are not numbered, since they don’t have assigned positions. However, the river fixed shoreside aids have placards or “mile boards” to help show the river mile location.

Typically, a coastal buoy tender might work five buoys a day, with each buoy taking up to two hours to service. It takes longer to determine the assigned positions of the aids, and the buoys are usually larger, making them more difficult to handle. An inland river tender can service a significantly larger number of buoys a day—perhaps up to 100—spending only a couple of minutes on each aid, verifying that a buoy’s last position still marks the navigable channel, replacing missing buoys, or resetting the channel. A typical day for an inland river tender consists of replacing or repairing numerous buoys and making frequent stops to maintain and service fixed shore aids along its area of responsibility.

Multimission Platform
In addition to its primary aids to navigation responsibility, each inland river tender is also a disaster response and homeland security platform. It is also common practice for inland river tenders to serve as command platforms for various events. In this capacity, the vessel serves as the command and control platform, providing vital communication links among the participating federal, state, and local agencies.

Within the homeland security mission area, every time an inland river tender gets underway, it is conducting a maritime domain awareness patrol. Aboard armed vessels capable of protecting valuable waterways assets, the river tender crews constantly analyze the surroundings with an emphasis on understanding all elements of the maritime environment that could impact security, safety, or the economy of the United States.

An Aging Fleet
The majority of inland river tenders are 40-plus years old. Over the last several years, the number of catastrophic machinery failures has increased tremendously. It has also become increasingly difficult to find replacement parts to effect timely repairs. This leads to additional costs and extended repair times, placing greater stress on the remaining fleet that must spend more hours underway to ensure service intervals are met and waterways properly marked.

Although some progress has been made over the years, the inland river tenders need to be updated and replaced. The Coast Guard has recognized many of the challenges associated with the existing inland river tender fleet. In fact, the organization has chartered several working groups to address many of these issues.

Several groups are focused on providing the most fruitful short-term options to bridge maintenance gaps and extend the lifespan of the existing vessels. Other groups are looking at long-term solutions. One can be assured that these groups are committed to ensuring continued availability of inland river tenders and timely maintenance of the navigational system until a long-term solution is achieved.

About the author:
LCDR Jerry Davenport has served in the Coast Guard since 1980. He has served various cutters and shore units and has 13 years of experience at units within the Western Rivers.

For more information:
Full article and “U.S. Coast Guard Western Rivers Sectors” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and then “2007-08 Vol. 64, Number 4” (Winter 2007-08).

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Online survey available at: http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

Disaster Assistance Response Teams—rescuers on the rivers

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine. By U.S. Coast Guard LT Steven Peelish and LCDR Jesse Stevenson.

Floods are common in the Midwest, causing extensive damage to area infrastructure and greatly impacting or endangering those living and working there.

Disaster Assistance
The U.S. Coast Guard has created a unique team designed to help evacuate those caught in the middle of this devastation. These disaster assistance response teams (DARTs) work with local emergency operations centers to:

· provide search and rescue support,
· transport victims,
· provide essential waterborne logistic support,
· assure delivery of vital supplies and materials,
· maintain access to storm-damaged areas for key response personnel.

Coast Guard members operate 16-foot flood punts—shallow-draft, flat-bottomed boats ideally suited for this kind of work. The days can be long and the work dangerous. The teams operate in unfavorable weather conditions and uncharted water, often working in cities with school buses, street signs, tree tops, and other unknown hazards lurking beneath the surface.

Sector Disaster Assistance Response Teams
Whenever flooding is anticipated, the DARTs are placed in “standby” status. Teams are normally deployed via land, with a support convoy following close behind. If the destination is farther than 12 hours’ driving time or floods destroy roads and bridges, the Coast Guard coordinates transportation via military aircraft.

Floods of National Significance
The Western Rivers’ floods of 1937, 1993, and 1997 are among the largest seen in recent times, and Coast Guard disaster assistance response team forces responded to them all. DARTs were also called out to aid efforts in the aftermath of Hurricane Isabelle, which ravaged and isolated portions of the Outer Banks in 2003. Disaster assistance response teams also played a critical role in search and rescue efforts during the response to Hurricane Katrina.

Staying Mission-Ready
Hurricane Katrina took its toll on the aging 20-year-old fleet of flood punts, so the Eighth District decided to replace them with new, more modern equipment. The new boats, trailers, and engines will be standardized throughout the Coast Guard. The single-axle open trailers currently in use will give way to larger twin-axle ones that are fully enclosed to protect the gear from the elements.

The new design of the boats will allow members to efficiently maximize space, store vital gear, and provide a more stable platform. New four-stroke engines will replace outdated two-stroke engines to better align with what the Coast Guard is currently using.

Humanitarian Efforts
Through the years, disaster assistance response teams have been deployed to various “hot spots” in flooded areas. They have rescued the stranded, evacuated the sick, and delivered water and groceries to “die-hards” who would not leave their homes.

They have patrolled homes, farms, neighborhoods, and local businesses, assisting those in need and guarding property from looters. Even in their off time, DART members help fight back the waters by filling sand bags and pumping water back over the levees.

About the authors:
LT Steven Peelish has served in the Coast Guard for 18 years and is a former BM1. With three marine safety unit river tours, he has acquired a vast knowledge base of marine safety and security on the Western Rivers.

LCDR Jesse Stevenson has served in the Coast Guard for more than 27 years. He was prior enlisted, obtaining the rank of MKC before his commission. With his diverse background, he has served in many capacities, including aboard three ships, earning his permanent cutterman’s pin.

For more information:
Full article and “U.S. Coast Guard Western Rivers Sectors” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and then “2007-08 Vol. 64, Number 4” (Winter 2007-08).

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Online survey available at: http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

Mayday, Mayday—search and rescue on the Western Rivers

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine. By U.S. Coast Guard CDR P.J. Maguire.


True or False:

1. The Coast Guard conducts search and rescue on the Western Rivers.
2. The Air Force conducts all inland search and rescue.

The answers are “true” and “false,” in that order.

There are misunderstandings regarding search and rescue (SAR) along the Western Rivers that have become ingrained through misperception and repetition. SAR in this area during the early years of commercial navigation was, in fact, mostly “do it yourself.” Lacking any official search and rescue organization or policy, most mariners looked to their peers or to bystanders for help when in trouble. This history of self-reliance continues, as the skilled captains and crew of workboats typically come to the aid of peers in distress.

Maritime vs. Aeronautical SAR
U.S. SAR coordinators and search and rescue regions are delineated in the National SAR Plan.
· The U.S. Air Force is responsible for the recognized U.S. aeronautical SRR (search and rescue region) corresponding to the continental U.S. other than Alaska.
· The U.S. Pacific Command is responsible for the recognized U.S. aeronautical SRR corresponding to Alaska.
· The U.S. Coast Guard is responsible for the recognized U.S. aeronautical and maritime SRRs that coincide with the ocean environments, including Hawaii.

The “land” portion of the maritime search and rescue regions in the U.S. is covered by the New Orleans search and rescue region, administered by the Eighth Coast Guard District.

The Nature of the Territory
In addition to the Ohio and Mississippi Rivers, there are numerous other rivers and lakes in this area that are used for recreational boating. Many of the rivers have been harnessed by dams, which form large lakes upstream. Commonly called “pooled water,” these systems have become havens for recreational boating activity.

In addition to use of the rivers for leisure, there is also tremendous commercial use, which means that not only recreational boaters but also working mariners are at risk.

Inland USCG Search and Rescue
Western Rivers SAR is fundamentally no different than any other Coast Guard SAR. Each sector is a designated search and rescue mission coordinator and carries out SAR on behalf of the rescue coordination center along all the navigable waterways in its areas.

The only real differences in Western Rivers SAR is 1) the frequency with which Coast Guard assets are deployed, and 2) that Coast Guard assets are not usually the primary search and rescue units. Due to crew and funding limits, none of the Western Rivers boat or cutter units are held in the “firehouse” stance of our typical air and small boat stations.

Coast Guard SAR Personnel and Equipment
Within each USCG sector command center, you will find SAR-qualified personnel—the operations specialists and SAR controllers who are required to attend SAR school and maintain proficiency in these duties. Personnel on Coast Guard river tenders are also held to the same high standards, which gives them the necessary skills to conduct SAR.

The Disaster Assistance Response Teams, known as DARTs, are unique to the USCG Western Rivers sectors. These highly mobile teams consist of personnel and trailers loaded with flood punts—flat-bottomed boats designed to operate in the shallow waters typically found in flooded areas. These teams train to be ready for response to natural disasters like the floods of 1993 and the hurricanes of 2005.

Another prevalent SAR entity around the Western Rivers is the Coast Guard Auxiliary. The boats and aircraft of the auxiliary are active and engaged in virtually all of the popular recreational boating areas. As they do along the coasts, they also provide significant support to the Coast Guard’s SAR mission. They train and qualify to the same standards as their coastal counterparts.

Additionally, an extensive network of communication towers is in place throughout the Western Rivers. Urgent Marine Information Broadcasts are sent over this network and “maydays” are received. Each site is connected to one of the three sector command centers, and they are in use 24 hours a day.

So when a mayday call goes out along the Western Rivers, a Coast Guard command center will kick into action. While the Coast Guard relies heavily upon the great help of many local police and fire departments as well as the towing industry, the job is carried out in the same fashion as SAR all over the country—with due diligence, and to the best of our ability.

About the author:
CDR P.J. Maguire has served in the Coast Guard since graduation from the Coast Guard Academy in 1989. He has served aboard cutters and at shore units.

For more information:
Full article and “U.S. Coast Guard Western Rivers Sectors” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and then “2007-08 Vol. 64, Number 4” (Winter 2007-08).

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Online survey available at: http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

Coast Guard on the Western Rivers

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine. By U.S. Coast Guard CDR Kevin Kiefer, LCDR Patrick Clark, and LT Leon McClain.

A proverb observes “It is not possible to step twice into the same river,” since a river is always changing. Rain water, current, debris, and other factors can quickly change the path, width, and depth of a river, making navigation by even the most experienced of its mariners a challenge.

The Western Rivers of the United States provide an extremely cost-effective means to transport commodities throughout the country, supplying goods to millions of people, generating jobs, and producing economic benefit. But with the substantial waterways traffic comes another challenge—maintaining safety and security for the people and companies who work on and near the water.

Coast Guard Responsibilities
The “Western Rivers” (also known as the “Inland Rivers”) is the area from North Dakota to Louisiana and from the Appalachian Mountains to the Rocky Mountains in Wyoming.

Three Coast Guard sectors are in charge of maintaining safety and security along these rivers—Sector Lower Mississippi River, Sector Upper Mississippi River, and Sector Ohio Valley—all of which are within the Coast Guard’s Eighth District.

Each sector, while separate in command and area of responsibility (AOR), shares different portions of the same waterways, sees many of the same vessels, and works with many of the same companies and facilities.

Partnership among the sectors is essential in maintaining a unified Coast Guard posture as well as a safe, secure maritime community. Their responsibilities include:
· port and waterway safety and security,
· marine environmental protection,
· industrial facility inspections and investigations,
· search and rescue coordination,
· aids to navigation operations,
· commercial vessel safety,
· maritime law enforcement,
· merchant licensing and documentation,
· contingency planning,
· disaster relief,
· recreational boating safety,
· logistics and support.

While these responsibilities are the same ones expected of other Coast Guard units, the implementation of them on the Western Rivers is quite different—for example, protection of critical infrastructure such as bridges, refineries, and chemical facilities. Unlike coastal areas, where the majority of critical infrastructure is relatively close and confined to a specific geographic port, the Western Rivers are vast, with infrastructure spread over a large region, and, in some cases, far from Coast Guard resources.

Also, while portions of the Western Rivers are relatively wide, for the most part the rivers are narrow and less forgiving of navigational errors. Vessel groundings, damaged locks and dams, breakaway barges, and river closures are just some of the problems that keep the Coast Guard continually busy.

Sector Lower Mississippi River
The Sector Lower Mississippi River AOR includes Arkansas, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Tennessee. It encompasses more than 2,200 miles of the Mississippi, White, Arkansas, Black, Ouachita, Red, and Yazoo Rivers and their major tributaries.

Much of the sector’s area of responsibility, which does not have locks and dams to control the flow of river currents, consists of free-flowing navigable waterways. The lower Mississippi River levels, for example, can vary over a 50-foot range, which necessitates continuous movement of aids to navigation to mark the channel. These conditions also impact the navigable waterways and can accelerate occurrences of marine casualties.

Sector Upper Mississippi River
Sector Upper Mississippi River has the largest geographic area of responsibility of any sector within the lower 48 states. Its AOR spans Colorado, Illinois, Iowa, Kansas, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota, Wisconsin, and Wyoming.

It encompasses more than 3,800 miles of the Missouri, upper Mississippi, and Illinois Rivers and their major tributaries, including more than 30 locks and dams and over 200 bridges. The sector is also responsible for several major interstate lakes, and is home to the famed “Party Cove” on Lake of the Ozarks, Mo.

Sector Ohio Valley
Sector Ohio Valley’s area of responsibility includes all or part of Alabama, Illinois, Indiana, Kentucky, Mississippi, Missouri, Ohio, Pennsylvania, Tennessee, and West Virginia. It encompasses more than 8,000 miles of navigable waterways, 11 major rivers, and major lakes on the Ohio, Tennessee, Mississippi, and Cumberland Rivers and their major tributaries. Within the AOR are more than 80 navigational locks and 200 major dams.

The Western Rivers
This area contains critical paths along the nation’s inner cities, providing valuable commerce throughout the nation. Protecting these waters and maintaining the safety and security of their surrounding maritime communities is a key mission for the Coast Guard, and one that provides many unique and interesting challenges for those members fortunate enough to serve here.

About the authors:
CDR Kevin Kiefer is a 1989 graduate of the U.S. Coast Guard Academy and holds a Master of Engineering in manufacturing and a Master of Science in naval architecture and marine engineering.

LCDR Patrick Clark is a 1988 graduate of Georgetown College, with a Bachelor of Science degree in biology, and a 1990 graduate of Tennessee Technological University, with a Master of Science degree in biology.

LT Leon McClain is a 1998 graduate of Xavier University of Louisiana, with a Bachelor of Science degree in biology, and a 2007 graduate of Webster University, with a Master of Arts in human resource management.

For more information:
Full article and “U.S. Coast Guard Western Rivers Sectors” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and then “2007-08 Vol. 64, Number 4” (Winter 2007-08).

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Online survey available at: http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

The U.S. Coast Guard “Western Rivers” Sectors

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine. By CAPT John R. Bingaman, former Commander, Sector Ohio Valley.


An “inland Coast Guard” unit sounds like a contradiction. Doesn’t the Coast Guard … guard the coast? The U.S. contains more than 22,285 miles of inland rivers, of which 14,000 miles are commercially navigable, and maintaining safety and security on them is a crucial role for the Coast Guard.

These inland rivers serve as highways for commerce, transporting millions of tons of cargo annually. Specifically, the Western Rivers (from North Dakota to Louisiana and from the Appalachian Mountains to the Rocky Mountains) are home to industries that continually transport their products up and down the rivers.

Like all Coast Guard units, the Western Rivers units must vigilantly perform missions such as homeland security, search and rescue, and environmental response. Where the Western Rivers units differ is in their response to these missions. Their areas of responsibility are vast—so large that some areas require a day of travel to reach. The rivers they serve are also unpredictable, with water levels sometimes changing in mere hours. Accidents can block waterways and stop traffic for days.

Someone once asked me if a Coast Guard tour on the rivers was “a sleepy one, with very little to do.” The reality is quite the opposite. The Coast Guard’s numerous and demanding responsibilities are underestimated by many, even by some within the Coast Guard.

Mark Twain, noted author and a river boat pilot on the Mississippi River, once commented, “No one can learn all there is to know. The subject is just too big. Besides that, it changes every day.”

We hope this series of blogs, excerpted from the Proceedings of the Safety & Security Council magazine, will offer some interesting insight into life on the Western Rivers.

For more information:
Full article and “U.S. Coast Guard Western Rivers Sectors” edition of USCG Proceedings is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings. Click on “archives” and then “2007-08 Vol. 64, Number 4” (Winter 2007-08).

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp.

Online survey available at: http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

Shiver Me Timbers! (You want to do WHAT?!?)

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine. Original article written by LCDR Peter Gooding, former chief, Waterways Management Division, U.S. Coast Guard Sector Los Angeles/Long Beach


Marine Event and Movie Shoot Approval
Sector Los Angeles/Long Beach has oversight of more than 320 miles of the California coastline. It is also home to the motion picture capital of the world. The waterways management staff reviews applications for more than 150 movie shoots and approximately 75 marine events each year, including “CSI: Miami,” “Next,” “Vanished,” “Without a Trace,” and “Pirates of the Caribbean.” The majority of non-movie-related events are holiday boat parades and Fourth of July fireworks.

For any proposed marine event other than a movie shoot, the applicant must submit a Coast Guard Form 4423 at least 135 days in advance of the event. For movie shoots, Sector Los Angeles/Long Beach uses a questionnaire instead of Coast Guard Form 4423. The questionnaire asks for information related to names of the production manager, production company, location manager, the marine coordinator, the number of boats and types of any Coast Guard documentation the boats may have, the special effects that will occur during filming, and a diagram depicting the location of the filming event.

Who’s Who and What Does This Mean for the Coast Guard?
So who are these people—the production manager, the location manager, and the marine coordinator? In the filming industry, these people are the ones the sector usually works with to obtain filming details and develop associated safety measures.

The first step is a site evaluation. The sector then fills out an environmental checklist. We are concerned about the impact of the event on public health and safety, unique characteristics of the geographic area, impact on the highly sensitive environmental systems, and the potential for effects on the human environment that are hazardous or highly uncertain. We also consider whether the event will set a precedent that could impact a cultural or historic resource, a protected species or habitat, or violate federal, state, or local environmental protection law.

Special Effects Mean Special Consideration
Since most vessels used in movie shoots are charters—that is, they do not belong to the filming company—they are conducting an operation of “passenger for hire.” As such, the sector ensures that either the vessels do not violate Title 46 CFR Subchapter T or that each vessel is certificated in accordance with the regulation. When you consider actors, directors, lighting technicians, sound crew, makeup people, special effects technicians, stuntmen, and camera operators in a filming operation, it can be very easy to put more people than are allowed on a vessel, especially on small ones.

We then determine appropriate safety or mitigation measures. Some of the movie shoot effects include smoke that has been thick enough to completely restrict the navigation visibility of the main channel of the Port of Los Angeles and high-speed boat chases near large commercial tankers and container vessels. In these cases, the sector applies appropriate management strategies to ensure that the locations of these marine events are clearly identified, and that the public is aware.

Pirates of the Caribbean III
An example of this process is evident in the filming of “Pirates of the Caribbean III.” For the entire process, the sector worked with the location manager and marine coordinator to discuss the impact to the public and ensure safety during the filming. In the USCG photo here, CGC Halibut provides safety assistance during filming, aiding the pirates instead of arresting them as usual.

The 45 days of filming activities in Sector LA/LB’s area of responsibility included “actors overboard” from the Black Pearl, several scenes of the vessel sailing in man-made “Hollywood fog,” numerous cannon fights, and the simulated capsize of the vessel in the middle of the ocean.

To ensure public awareness, the sector conducted daily broadcasts and sent faxes to pilots and vessel traffic service. The sector worked with the local police to provide waterside safety for the shooting operations. There were more than 1,000 spectators a day at some of the shooting locations. As a result of proper planning, appropriate safety resources, and the daily public notices, all of the shooting events were successfully completed on schedule. In addition, the sector was able to ensure the safety of the movie company personnel and the public.

About the author:
At the time the article was published, LCDR Peter Gooding had served in the U.S. Coast Guard for 10 years and served as chief of the Waterways Management Division at Sector Los Angeles/Long Beach, overseeing marine events, movie shoots, port construction projects, a vessel traffic service, and an aids to navigation team.

For more information:
Full article is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings; click on “Archives” and then “2007 Volume 64, Number 1” for this Spring 2007 “Risk Management” edition.

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp. Online survey available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

Upcoming in Proceedings

Fall 2009
Marine Environmental Response Preparedness
· Preparing for the unexpected
· Testing plans
· Improving preparedness

Winter 2009-2010
Grassroots efforts
· What’s the Coast Guard done for me lately?
· Local and regional efforts

Your Opinion
· What do you want to read in Proceedings?
· What area under the Coast Guard’s marine safety, security, and environmental protection missions affects you most?
· What do you want to know more about?

Post a comment here or send us an e-mail at HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

Overcoming the Gilligan Factor—enhancing mission effectiveness through risk management

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine. Original article written by LCDR Thomas Olenchock, former Industrial Hygienist, U.S. Coast Guard Office of Safety and Environmental Health.


Remember the TV show “Gilligan’s Island”? Do you think the professor and Mary Ann expected they were about to embark on a fateful three-hour tour? Would they have done anything differently if they knew about operational risk management?

Just like they made the decision to get on the S.S. Minnow, we make risk-based decisions every day. Weighing the risks and benefits associated with activities defines operational risk management, or ORM.

The Steps in Operational Risk Management
ORM is a way to evaluate risk. While seven steps may seem like a lot, the process steps are fairly simple:

1. Identify what you want to do.


2. Identify the hazards.


3. Assess the risk.


4. Identify your options.


5. Weigh the risks against the benefits.


6. Perform the task.


7. Monitor the situation.

Analyzing the “Gilligan Factor”— The Green, Amber, Red Model
So how did the crew of the S.S. Minnow get stuck on that remote island? Would applying the ORM model of green, amber, red (GAR) have suggested they reconsider their decision to sail that day?

The GAR model has six inputs that are weighted to evaluate risk. These factors, scored on a scale of 1 to 10, with “10” being a high risk, are:

• Supervision—In this case, the skipper was probably not a substantial source of supervision risk and could be scored low. Let’s call this a “1.”


• Planning—Since it was a trip they had made several times before, we’ll score it a “2.”


• Crew selection—This is where we factor in Gilligan. I would have to say the “little buddy” is a walking risk and would score him around a “7.”


• Crew fitness—Remember this is not just rating weight and strength, but also takes into consideration things like fatigue, alertness, and external stresses. I would rate crew fitness a “2.”


• Environment—Sailing or flying into a typhoon sounds like a very high-risk maneuver to me. I would rate environment as a “10.” Environment also factors in the platform or location. For example, the S.S. Minnow would not weather the typhoon as well as would a large, steel-hulled vessel.


• Event complexity—Event complexity would be low. It was only a three-hour tour, so I’d rate it a “3."

A score of 0 to 23 indicates “green” (low risk), 23 to 44 warns “amber” (caution), and between 44 and 60 is “red” (high risk).

By adding up the S.S. Minnow’s factors, we see it rates a score of 25, or “amber,” which tells us that something should be addressed to help mitigate the risk.

A look at the categories shows that environment is the largest source of risk. By postponing the tour or taking a different route, we could reduce that risk.

The Severity, Probability, and Exposure Model
The green, amber, red model is just an assessment of the risks associated with a plan. How can we reduce risk during the planning process? The operational risk management green, amber, red model does not lend itself easily to planning. That is why ORM contains several risk models to choose from. For planning, the simplest one to use is the severity, probability, and exposure (SPE) model, where risk = S x P x E:

Value / Risk Level / Action to Take
80-100 / very high / discontinue, stop
60-79 / high / immediate correction
40-59 / substantial / correction required
20-39 / possible / attention needed
1-19 / slight / possibly acceptable
0 / none / none

For the S.S. Minnow, I would rate severity (being stranded for years or even perishing) as a “5” on a scale of 0 to 5 (ranging from “no potential for loss” to “catastrophic”). I would rate probability as “very likely” if you are going out with that typhoon around, so that would also be a “5” on a scale of 0 to 5 (ranging from “impossible” to “very likely to happen”). Exposure is the number of people affected—seven, for the cruise we’re considering. I would consider this to be an average exposure, so I’d give it a “2” on a scale of 0 to 4 (ranging from “no exposure” to “great exposure”).

This plan to go out in a typhoon would have an SPE score of 50 (risk = S x P x E), which clearly indicates that substantial corrective actions would be needed to make this tour a success.

Enhancing Mission Success
The USCG formalized the concepts of ORM in 1999 with the publication of Operational Risk Management (COMDTINST 3500.3). However, the ideals of risk management have been present in various communities much longer than that.

About the author:
At the time the article was published, LCDR Olenchock was an industrial hygienist in the U.S. Coast Guard Office of Safety and Environmental Health, where he had spent the previous three years working on risk management issues surrounding sector operations, vessel inspections, and safety management. He holds a Master of Science degree from the University of Washington in industrial hygiene.

For more information:
Full article is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings; click on “Archives” and then “2007 Volume 64, Number 1” for this Spring 2007 “Risk Management” edition.

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp. Online survey available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.

Promoting Parasail Safety—using PVA’s risk guide to develop USCG Sector St. Petersburg’s voluntary commercial parasail vessel safety exam program

Excerpt from U.S. Coast Guard “Proceedings of the Marine Safety & Security Council” magazine. Original article written by LCDR Scott W. Muller, Project Manager, U.S. Coast Guard Office of Vessel Activities.

Parasailing is not without its risks. This Sector St. Petersburg case file photo shows a near-collision of two parasail vessels with parasail riders aloft. In 2001, a tragic incident in Ft. Myers, Fla., claimed the lives of a mother and daughter when high winds and rough seas caused the parasail towline and riser straps to part from the parasail, causing the two to freefall more than 200 feet into the water.

The Problem: The Need to Improve Parasail Vessel Safety
In a 10-year period (1992-2001), the Coast Guard investigated an increasing number of reportable parasail vessel marine casualties and injuries. In the 59 cases, there were 64 injuries and three deaths. Twenty-eight percent of these parasail casualties occurred in Sector St. Petersburg’s area of responsibility. It was clear that intervention was needed.

In marine safety, risk can often be mitigated through federal regulation, but the parasailing industry is largely unregulated. The Coast Guard does not regulate the actual parasailing activity. Commercial passenger vessel regulations only address vessel equipment and licensing requirements.

The Solution: Creation of the Voluntary Exam Program
In January 2004, in an effort to promote commercial parasail vessel safety in a non-regulatory manner, Sector St. Petersburg hosted a workshop. More than 120 parasailing stakeholders participated. Sector St. Petersburg investigating officers proposed creating a voluntary commercial parasail vessel examination program. A “Seal of Safety” decal would serve to distinguish compliant operators. The participants overwhelmingly supported the proposal.

In February 2004, a “developmental team” of 12 local parasail operators and manufacturers, Sector St. Petersburg investigating officers, and USCG Auxiliary members worked together for a two-day session. The team needed a methodology to help develop a creditable program. After careful consideration, the solution came from the Passenger Vessel Association (PVA) risk guide.

The Method of Success: The PVA Risk Guide
Developed by the U.S. Coast Guard and the Passenger Vessel Association, the guide is a simple, effective tool to address risk in marine operations through risk assessment, management, and communication. The PVA Risk Guide can be accessed at http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/cg5211/docs/pvarisk_guide.pdf.

The team used prepared forms/worksheets provided by the risk guide to manage and record their findings by advancing through each of the risk activity’s ten steps.

• Risk assessment (steps 1- 6). The team addressed a particular aspect of risk for parasailing operations—the parasail ride itself. The conditions that yielded the highest relative risk scores included: towline separation, mechanical failure, and hazardous weather conditions.
  
• Risk management (steps 7- 10). The team then identified countermeasures that could best mediate the risk. The countermeasures with the highest cost/benefit values included: distance offshore, towline/winch spool connection, weather assessments, length of towline, and towline standards.
  
• Risk Communication. Involving stakeholders in the decision-making process strengthened the ties between the Coast Guard and the local parasail industry. Furthermore, proven methods provided by the guide supported the decision outcomes, adding to its credibility and potential effectiveness.

The team developed a list of approximately 20 countermeasures to help mitigate parasailing risk. Ultimately, the team established countermeasures that represented parasailing “best practices” that were both cost effective and reduced risk.

The Voluntary Commercial Parasail Vessel Safety Exam Program
The next step was to transfer the countermeasures into exam criteria. For uninspected parasail vessels, members of the Coast Guard Auxiliary conduct the voluntary examinations, while active duty marine inspectors conduct the exams for the inspected parasail vessels during the course of routine inspection for certification examinations.

Those who pass are awarded the Seal of Safety decal, which is valid for two years with a re-exam on or about the first anniversary of issuance.

In the three years between the program’s creation and when this article was first published, there were no reported marine casualties involving parasail vessels within Sector St. Petersburg’s area of responsibility. This is significant considering the alarming rate and consequences of parasailing accidents between 1992 and 2001.

About the author:
LCDR Scott Muller served as a marine inspector and senior investigating officer. Past assignments included MSO Hampton Roads and MSO Tampa as well as graduate school for modeling and simulation at Old Dominion University. At the time this article was published he was a project manager in the Office of Vessel Activities at Coast Guard headquarters.

For more information:
Full article is available at www.uscg.mil/proceedings; click on “Archives” and then “2007 Volume 64, Number 1” for this Spring 2007 “Risk Management” edition.

Subscribe online at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/subscribe.asp. Online survey available at http://www.uscg.mil/proceedings/survey.asp.

Direct requests for print copies of this edition to: HQS-DG-NMCProceedings@uscg.mil.