Conception families suing the Coast Guard

[danddmiller1]

 

[danddmiller1]

Of course I guess the NTSB could return to question the crew and review all the evidence once they are allowed. I mean after all they are charged with investigating this incident. But that’s just my opinion. But it’s my understanding that’s what the government charged them to do.

 

[Manatee Diver]

A guess? There will be a criminal case as well as the USCG investigation. Proceedings from the investigation are public record, meaning that the feds will have to give up their criminal case.

only a guess.

That would be my guess as well.

TBH I'm not sure how you can handle doing both a criminal investigation and an accident investigation.

Those involved in the accident can't accurately testify to the accident investigators for fear of incriminating themselves, so they either give the same lie they give the criminal investigators of plead the fifth.

The only way I could see it working is if the records are sealed until the conclusion of a criminal investigation, and even after they are unsealed they can't be used in anyway for criminal purposes including as a starting basis for a new criminal investigation (ie pulling a Cosby).

 

[admikar]

Wait, I thought that NTSB records can't be used in any sort of investigations?

 

[Wookie]

Wait, I thought that NTSB records can't be used in any sort of investigations?

Exactly. Think about that. If the captain dumped his soul to the NTSB investigators, he can’t testify in court.

 

[Scared Silly]

Nope. There was one exit from the bridge level, where the crew quarters were. Which was blocked by the fire. There was never the second means of egress that was legally required. How many Coast Guard inspectors had looked at the boat and not noticed that?

P45 of the accident report
'As an existing vessel, the Conception was required to meet the Old T standards for means of escape and emergency egress, which required that “not less than two avenues of escape from all general areas accessible to the passengers or where the crew may be quartered or normally employed, so located that if one is not available the other may be.”'

There is a particular call-out of this issue somewhere in the thousands of pages of supporting documents in the docket file, but I can't find it now.

Thanks for that. Except to my knowledge there is a door from the bridge. In fact I believe there is a door on both sides as well the one to the stern to the sun deck. This photo shows that door. Now it does lead anywhere unless on jumps so perhaps that is the issue.

 

[Bob DBF]

Except to my knowledge there is a door from the bridge. In fact I believe there is a door on both sides as well the one to the stern to the sun deck. This photo shows that door. Now it does lead anywhere unless on jumps so perhaps that is the issue.

100% survival rate from the bridge. Less than optimal but proved to be adequate.

 

[KevinNM]

100% survival rate from the bridge. Less than optimal but proved to be adequate.

Luckily there were other people to pull to guy with the broken leg off the boat before he fried. But it was a blatantly obvious example of nonconformance to the regulations that were in effect from the moment it was designed. And apparently, over the decades it was in service, none of the numerous inspectors thought to ask "what's the alternate egress path from the crew quarters?"

 

[BackAfter30]

Luckily there were other people to pull to guy with the broken leg off the boat before he fried. But it was a blatantly obvious example of nonconformance to the regulations that were in effect from the moment it was designed. And apparently, over the decades it was in service, none of the numerous inspectors thought to ask "what's the alternate egress path from the crew quarters?"

Is the requirement that there shall be egress paths to the main deck (or some such definable area), or only that there be multiple egress paths from interior to exterior spaces? If the latter, then the crew quarters should have been compliant, right?

 

[Wookie]

Is the requirement that there shall be egress paths to the main deck (or some such definable area), or only that there be multiple egress paths from interior to exterior spaces? If the latter, then the crew quarters should have been compliant, right?

If I were inspecting the vessel (I am not now,
Nor ever have been a coast guard inspector) I would consider 3 exits from the crews quarters to be adequate. If either the boat is on fire or sinking, there are 3 ways to fresh air and escaping the vessel.