Page 1
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 7
Page 8
Page 9
Page 10
Page 11
Page 12
Page 13
Page 14
Page 15
Page 16
Page 17
Page 18
Page 19
Page 20
Page 21
Page 22
Page 23
Page 24
Page 25
Page 26
Page 27
Page 28
Page 29
Page 30
Page 31
Page 32
16 APRIL 2016 FOGHORN REGULATORYREPORT EASY MANEUVERABILITY Give your passengers a smooth ride with reliable John Deere PowerTech propulsion and generator drive engines. With high torque and low-rated rpm they deliver excellent vessel control and quiet operation. For easy navigation on the water Nothing Runs Like A Deere. JohnDeere.commarine 60 to 559 kW 80 to 750 hp and government employees and making recommendations for further action under administrative andor federal statutes penalty processes. The Department of Transportation DOT was created by Congress in 1966 and established the NTSB as an agency under the DOT from its roots from the federal governments role in aviation safety. Its goal is the determination of probable cause and to make recommen- dations for improvement in regulation and policies involving safety in trans- portation modes. The marine transpor- tation mode was not included initially. NTSB recommendations when made are often independent of existing regu- lation the ability to create new regula- tion and may not be limited to current technology. My first experience or really non- experience with NTSB was during my casualty analysis duties. It was during the time that the NTSB did not inves- tigate or determine probable cause of marine casualties. There was a Coast Guard officer assigned to the NTSB as a liaison resource that often interacted with Coast Guard investigation policy activities. By the time of my first MBI role the Transportation Safety Act of 1974 had passed Congress. That Act included major marine accidents under NTSB purview. Major marine accidents were then defined primarily as the loss of six or more lives or the loss of an inspected vessel over 100 gross tons. When legislation increased the NTSB scope of responsibility to include marine incidents Coast Guard au- thorities remained in place so there was a shared interest in major marine accidents. My MBI experiences all post-date this expanded role of NTSB. In October 1976 the inbound Norwegian tanker Frosta collided with the Louisiana state ferry George Prince at mile 120.8 AHP in the Lower Mississippi River. The George Prince capsized and its five crewmembers and 72 passengers perished. Only 18 passengers survived. The Coast Guard convened a Marine Board of Investigation that met within days of the accident. When the Board met to take the testimony of witnesses the NTSB assigned a staff member to the panel. The Coast Guard published their Marine Casualty Report on April 18 1978. In August 1979 the down-bound Peruvian freight vessel MV Inca Tupac Yupanqui lost power and collided with the moored tank barge Panama City and its tug Capt. Norman at mile 125.4 above the Head of Passes in the Mississippi River. Ten MV V Inca Tupac Yupanqui crewmembers and two Capt. Norman crewmembers died in the resultant fire. The Coast Guard convened a Marine Board of Investigation that met within days of the accident. An NTSB staff member participated in the first day or so of testimony of the witnesses. Upon his departure the NTSB member indicated that the Coast Guard report would be accepted as ful- filling NTSB responsibilities. The Coast Guard published their Marine Casualty Report on May 10 1983. In February 1983 during a winter storm the cargo vessel SS Marine Electric progressively flooded and capsized off the Virginia Capes. All but three of the 34 crewmembers perished in the cold dark waters. The Coast Guard convened a Marine Board of Investigation that met within days of the accident. The NTSB assigned two staff members to participate in the panels taking of testimony. Through them the MBI accessed some of the in- vestigative assets of the NTSB. In 1981 the Coast Guard and NTSB entered into a Memorandum of Understanding MOU that sought to clarify for each their respective un- derstandings of this area of mutual statutory and regulatory interest. There remained an aura of competition and discomfort. The NTSB Authorization Act of 2000 directed NTSB and the Coast Guard to revise their 1981 MOU. The revised MOU was signed in 2002. A news release from NTSB characterized the MOU as follows The agreement is in response to legisla- tion requiring the two agencies to clarify when the NTSB will lead a marine inves- tigation and to develop standards for deter- mining if an accident involves significant issues related to the Coast Guards per- formance of its safety functions that may require independent review. It replaces an earlier agreement dating from 1981. For the most part the Safety Board expects to concentrate its activities on passenger vessels and those marine casual-