NTSB CONCEPTION HEARING - THIS TUESDAY @ 10AM

[drrich2]

Since the impact of this issue on California's dive boat industry is a pertinent tangent of interest, quick question; my one trip was a 5-day limited load Southern Channel Islands live-aboard trip about T.A.'s Vision, similar to the Conception (but with a fresh water maker). That let me cram a lot of diving into a short trip at a surprisingly low price.

Going forward, if true 'live-aboard' trips (e.g.: multi-day, passengers overnighting on board) stop, what options are the best substitutes for that approach?

1.) Day Boat - if they're back at the home pier, is a roving watch necessary? If not, maybe day boat people can overnight onboard cheaply?

2.) Day Boat + hotel - do any of you currently do this, a cheap hotel easy walking distance from the boat? That's going to add a chunk to total trip cost. Will boats let you leave your gear on overnight if you're booked for a multi-day stay?

Either option would mean fewer total dives offers, and option 2.) adds hotel and evening meal costs. It's also going to limit destination islands a lot.

 

[Ken Kurtis]

1.) Day Boat - if they're back at the home pier, is a roving watch necessary? If not, maybe day boat people can overnight onboard cheaply?

The COI states that a roving patrol is required anytime passengers occupy bunks, whether under way or not. It does not specify time of day. So yes, you'd need to have a roving patrol even on a day boat. Now, if all the crew is awake and performing deck or wheelhouse duties, will that suffice? Probably. But I think one of the lessons here is to specifically designate an individual as the roving patrol person, even during a day trip, if the passengers are going to have access to the bunks.

 

[Basking Ridge Diver]

But homes out for hire are called hotels

They are also called rentals - truss construction and no sprinklers if you build them 2 stories tall - wood frame construction - no stand pipes and sprinklers in common areas only... They are residential not commercial structures... same building codes and going up all over in the US...

 

[Jcp2]

I guess you’re right. I must be thinking of bigger commercial structures.

 

[chillyinCanada]

---

---

A ScubaBoard Staff Message...

Let's stick to the topic please

---

 

[KevinNM]

If you ban all the current boats due to safety I’m not sure they will ever be replaced. I’m suspicious that the new boats will cost a lot more to buy and operate and price themselves out of a market. Maybe that is needed, but I’m not convinced.

I think it’s clear that more complete and centrally monitored smoke/fire alarms and performing the legally required tasks will increase safety significantly, but is it enough?

Of course, if the USCG answer is ‘no, you can operate once you spend 100k on renovations following a two year review at the MSC of you PE stamped plans’ I suspect that in 4 years there won’t be any either.

 

[The Chairman]

She is as safe as she is because Mike Lever wants her to be safe, not because her flag state requires it.

This is so true.

Each boat that is out there is as safe as her owner wants her to be. They make the decision(s) to cut corners, or not. To exceed standards or not. To hire the best or not. Mike Lever has built his reputation on having the best boats, gear and crew he can possibly afford. I love his boats.

 

[HalcyonDaze]

If you ban all the current boats due to safety I’m not sure they will ever be replaced. I’m suspicious that the new boats will cost a lot more to buy and operate and price themselves out of a market. Maybe that is needed, but I’m not convinced.

I think it’s clear that more complete and centrally monitored smoke/fire alarms and performing the legally required tasks will increase safety significantly, but is it enough?

Of course, if the USCG answer is ‘no, you can operate once you spend 100k on renovations following a two year review at the MSC of you PE stamped plans’ I suspect that in 4 years there won’t be any either.

And there's the rub. It's easy to sit here now and espouse all-steel or otherwise fireproofed construction, new standards for emergency egress, etc. - major structural issues. The operator who currently has a vessel that was built for economical service 40 years ago probably has no other option besides buy and refit a newer vessel or have one designed and built. If the existing vessel is dismissed as a worthless firetrap then there goes the dive operator's typical primary means to help pay for a new boat.

As I understand, the whole point of "grandfathering" in the USCG regs was to not suddenly revoke licenses on an entire swath of US domestic passenger-carrying vessels; it's a mechanism to phase out older vessels not built to modern standards. The issue is that boats tend to be long-lived equipment. As stated, these lessons don't apply just to dive boats; you can probably walk into any large marina in California or elsewhere in the coastal US and find overnight passenger-carrying vessels with similar build material, electrical, and emergency exit issues as the Conception. I've been on a few of them in the last two decades. So what's the way out of this? Do we take a hard line from here on out and immediately condemn every one of those vessels? Or do we make interim safety improvements to electrical systems, fire alarms, escape routes, etc. and make damn sure there actually is a roving watch when the passengers are bunked down?

 

[Ken Kurtis]

Couple of random thoughts based on recent posts:
1. One of my divers suggested a sunset clause on grandfathering. In other words, you have 5 or 10 years to comply with the new standard so it gives you time to adapt or decide that the vessel can't be brought into compliance.
2. As for fiberglass-over-wood vessels - which is a large majority of certainly the CA fleet - NTSB Chair Sumwalt said in the press briefing he thought they all ought to be retired.
3. Mexico did just that a number of years ago, refusing to re-certify any wooden boats (which is why the Don Jose went out of service).
4. I think Mike Lever and Nautilus have an excellent reputation and run a good operation as well. (I charter with them as well.) Ironically, Glen Fritzler and Truth Aquatics had that same reputation before the fire. The question really isn't what is tyour reputation before a problem, but that if there's a major accident and your entire operation is gone over with a fine-toothed comb and put under a microscope, what will your reputation be once that process is completed. And I would posit that no one's as good as they think they are. There's always room for improvement or criticism.

 

[Open Ocean Diver]

And there's the rub. It's easy to sit here now and espouse all-steel or otherwise fireproofed construction, new standards for emergency egress, etc. - major structural issues. The operator who currently has a vessel that was built for economical service 40 years ago probably has no other option besides buy and refit a newer vessel or have one designed and built. If the existing vessel is dismissed as a worthless firetrap then there goes the dive operator's typical primary means to help pay for a new boat.

As I understand, the whole point of "grandfathering" in the USCG regs was to not suddenly revoke licenses on an entire swath of US domestic passenger-carrying vessels; it's a mechanism to phase out older vessels not built to modern standards. The issue is that boats tend to be long-lived equipment. As stated, these lessons don't apply just to dive boats; you can probably walk into any large marina in California or elsewhere in the coastal US and find overnight passenger-carrying vessels with similar build material, electrical, and emergency exit issues as the Conception. I've been on a few of them in the last two decades. So what's the way out of this? Do we take a hard line from here on out and immediately condemn every one of those vessels? Or do we make interim safety improvements to electrical systems, fire alarms, escape routes, etc. and make damn sure there actually is a roving watch when the passengers are bunked down?

Stiff fines should take care of the problem. Yearly inspections, if you can’t prove that you had a watchman on every trip $2000 fine per undocumented trip, if documents are falsified you lose your license to operate for a year. Slap on the wrist or warnings never work.