1 / 23


FY-2002 AFLOAT SAFETY REPORT FOR COAST GUARD CUTTERS, CUTTER BOATS, AND SHORE-BASED BOATS Commandant (G-WKS-4) Afloat Safety Division TABLE OF CONTENTS Why This Report pg 3 Message from the Chief of Afloat Safety pg 4 Cutter Mishaps Section pg 5

Download Presentation


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.


Presentation Transcript


  2. TABLE OF CONTENTS Why This Report pg 3 Message from the Chief of Afloat Safety pg 4 Cutter Mishaps Section pg 5 Shore-Based Boat Section pg 12 Class A&B Mishap Summaries pg 16 Afloat Safety Initiatives: TCT pg 18 Common Mishap Discrepancies pg 20 Contact Us pg 23


  4. Coast Guard Cutter Operational Mishaps This graph depicts the major (Class A-C) operational mishaps reported by our cutter fleet from FY98 to FY02. Excluded from this graph are mishaps that took place while off duty (such as sports-related and motor vehicle injuries) and mishaps that occurred outside of the shipboard environment. Although there appears to be a very significant increase in mishaps in FY02, the majority of this increase was due to our exhaustive review of the mishap data base and the resulting input of many incidents that were not being captured before, as well as a reclassification of mishap types. For these reasons, comparisons from previous FY’s may not be appropriate and are not included in many of the subsequent analyses. However, not all of the increase can be attributed to such benign causes; a portion of the increase was due higher numbers of accidents, serving as a reminder of the importance of being vigilant and using operational risk management while operating in the dangerous marine environment.

  5. Number of Cutter Mishaps by Type The above graph compares the number of reported Class A-D Marine mishaps by cutter type. As expected the platforms with the most operational hours tend to have the most mishaps.. Below, marine mishaps are then computed per 100,000 resource hours for cutter types. With overall resource hours remaining steady (within a half of a percent (0.5%) of FY01 numbers) and the overall number of mishaps included in the system jumping 71% (as discussed previously), a a significant jump in the mishap rates is also apparent. Cutter Mishap Rates by Type (per 100,000 Resource Hours)

  6. Types of Cutter Mishaps What types of mishaps are occurring? This graph details the types of mishaps our cutters and crews are experiencing. Equipment mishaps (fouled screws, etc.), fires, collisions (both with fixed and floating objects), and falls were again the most common causes for the third consecutive year. In FY02, the Main Space Fire Doctrine was set 26 times.

  7. Cutter Mishap Rates By MISSION (per 100,000 Resource Hours) Enforcement of Laws and Treaties, Ice Ops, SAR, Short-Range ATON, and Training comprise the majority of mission types in which mishaps occurred. There was a noticeable increase over FY01 in the mishap rate for all of the above categories. The most noticeable increase of 25 additional mishaps per 100K of Op hours while training, although primarily due to the benign causes noted previously, point to a need to apply risk management to greater degree during drilling so that we use the training to increase our effectiveness in dealing with future emergency situations and not to become the the emergency of the present. In addition to the missions you see above, 71 mishaps took place during Maintenance and Repair (M+R) periods, both in ports away from homeport and in homeport. These are not computed as rates since there are no resource hours reported for M+R. This number is down from 93 mishaps a year ago. Given the expected increase simply due to better reporting and accounting, this decrease is even more significant. Keep up the good work!!

  8. Causal Factors to Cutter Mishaps 62 % of cutter mishaps are due to human error.

  9. Cutter-Based Boat Mishaps The above graph is a comparison of total number of cutter boat mishap for FY99 through FY02. It does not take into account the operational hours of the various boat types. Below, the mishaps are broken down into various “types”. Cutter-Based Boat Mishaps by TYPE


  11. Number of Shore-Based Boat Operational Mishaps The above graph depicts major (Class A-C) mishaps associated with Shore-based boat operations from FY99 to FY02. While Class A & B mishaps have remained quite steady, there was a significant increase of class C mishaps in FY02. As previously noted, much of this increase was due to better entry and classification; however these factors alone don’t account for the entire rise in mishaps. The increased operational tempo over the past year is also a major contributing factor. Below the mishap rates are compared for FY02. As the Small Boat fleet transitions between new platforms the number of mishaps and the operational hours vary widely making the two year comparison difficult to extract any trends from. Boat Mishap Rate per 100,000 Resource Hours

  12. Boat Mishap Rates by MISSION (per 100,000 Resource Hours) Above is a four year comparison of the mishap rates for the three most significant missions for shore boats. Below is a look at the types of mishaps. There have been consistent increases in overboard and grounding mishaps over the past four years. Much of the large increase in FY02 was due to better reporting and classification. Boat Mishaps by Mishap Types

  13. Overboard/PIW Rates by Boat Type The above graph depicts the rate of mishaps in which personnel unintentionally entered the water by type of platform. Overall, the rates of these types of mishap occurring on a non-standard boat was almost equivalent to that for standard boats. This is an improvement over FY01 in which the rate was two times higher for NSB’s. Causal Factors in Boat Mishaps *77% of the boat mishaps are due to human error.

  14. Three annual convenings of the TCT Cutter Operations course are offered at the Command and Operations School, USCG Academy. The 23 students successfully completing the 14-16 January 2003 TCT Cutter Operations Course (Session # 0008) were the first to receive the STCW certificate of training - titled “24-hour Team Coordination Training (TCT) Cutter Operations” – satisfying the BRM training requirements of 46 CFR 10.205(o) and Section B-VIII/2, Part 3-1 of the STCW Code. The next convening of this course is scheduled for 09-11 September 2003. For all you ever wanted to know about STCW or other information on U.S. mariner licensing and documentation requirements as well as how to meet the requirements, please visit: http://www.uscg.mil/STCW/s-history.htm Furthermore, the Command and Operations School has embedded the three-day TCT Cutter Operations Course curriculum into the two-week CG Prospective Operations Officer (POPS) Afloat Program (Course Code 501080). The 20 students successfully completing the 15-17 April 2003 TCT Cutter Operations Course embedded in the 07-18 April 2003 CG POPS Afloat Course (Session # 0003) received the STCW certificate as discussed above. For the most up-to-date convening date information on resident training courses, established course prerequisites, and the procedures for obtaining approval and submitting Short-Term Training Requests (STTRs) or Electronic Training Requests (ETRs), please visit the CG Training Quota Management Center (TQC) web site: http://www.uscg.mil/hq/tqc

  15. FY-2002 TCT STATISTICS ·Total number of students receiving TCT Resident Training: 117 32 TCT-Group Operations (Course Code 500687) 49 TCT-Cutter Operations (Course Code 500686) 26 TCT-Facilitator Training (Course Code 500688) ·Total number of students receiving Exportable, TCT Unit-Level Training (Course Code 500834) (as reported by District TCT Administrators and LANT/PAC Area Training Teams): 6,991 (4532 Active Duty, 509 Reservists, 1950 Auxiliarists) ·Total number of active district TCT Facilitators is 69 (does not include LANT/PAC AREA Training Team instructors). ·The Exportable, TCT unit-level training program averaged about $18.68/quota, which keeps it competitive for limited training dollars (reducing training expenses while optimizing performance). ·Total number of students receiving TCT embedded in other Resident Training Courses: 17 17 Cutter Prospective Operations Officer (POPS) (Course Code 501080)

  16. In accordance with Team Coordination Team (TCT), COMDTINST 1541.1, all requests for exportable, TCT-unit level training (500834) shall be forwarded to the cognizant District TCT Administrator and/or coordinated through the appropriate Auxiliary division captains for Auxiliary TCT. Current (as of 01 May 2003) District TCT Administrators (and work phone numbers) are listed below for reference: D1(reserve): CDR M. Cicalese (617) 227-3979 D5(oax): CWO W. Orvis (757) 398-6509 D7(oax): CWO R. Flynn (305) 415-7053 D8(oax): CWO B. Barr (504) 589-6620 D9(osr): LT N. Novotny (216) 902-6118 D11(osr): QMC S. Tierney (510) 437-5366 D13(cc): LT C. J. Cunningham (206) 220-7004 D14(osr): LT M. Wessel (808) 541-2312 D14(osr): LT Jeff A. Janszen (relieves LT Wessel in June 2003) D17(oan) MCPO D. Coffman (907) 463-2266 Other helpful information: ·COMDT TCT Program Manager: LCDR Kathryn L. Oakley koakley@comdt.uscg.mil (202) 267-2965 ·Afloat & Marine Safety Division (G-WKS-4) / TCT/ORM web site: http://www.uscg.mil/hq/G-W/g-wk/g-wks/g-wks-4/index.htm ·Office of Boat Forces (G-OCS) Boat Forces Newsletter web site: http://cgweb.comdt.uscg.mil/g-ocs/BFN%20home.htm ·Training Quota Management Center (TQC) web site: http://www.uscg.mil/hq/tqc ·   Coast Guard Institute (CGI) web site: http://www.uscg.mil.hq/cgi

More Related