So, has anyone called them? If the answer is no, send me a specific question and I'll be happy to pick up the phone.

Mike Krantz said the same thing last year about getting Zhic jackets certified.. insanely expensive and not viable

Yes i think so... how many people carry one of these?
anyone ever ticketed for not having a throw able on board as well?

Yes I did get a ticket once for not having a throwable device (cushion) while pulling a water skier with a Hobie 16 in Put-In-Bay harbor.

Since then you will always see one on my boat.

At Hobie regattas in the 70s, every 16 had a cushion and also a paddle, BTW!

Now I see a lot of cats at regattas without a cushion...so I guess no one is really looking.

I have the smallest one possible, much more comfortable then a big one.
From what I know most catsailing incidents that resulted in death where from people getting stuck under the tramp.
It makes you wonder if a PFD with maximum flotation is something you want.
Anyway, European safety standards are quite strict so why not change the requirement to have either a CG or CE approved PFD?
Any idea why the approval process is so expensive? Its a PFD, how much could you possibly test?

Use caution when posting the results of your call, Pete. You might get some answers that people don't like and you'll get the blame.

John,

The Brazilian solution was simple: they had the coast guard equivalent ammend their rule so that, besides the locally aproved PFDs, CE or USCG approved PFDs are acceptable for use in Brazilian waters respecting the same limitations imposed by the approving authority.

Part of the reasoning to convince them was that foreign boats visiting a country must comply only with the safety rules of their country of origin, so foreign aproved PFDs (as well as even more important safety equipment) are already worn legally in many vessels. Why would it be ilegal in local vessels?

While this line of reasoning is valid for any country, it clearly isn't enough. I don't know what would work in the US, maybe globalization, perhaps reciprocity to EU regulations (if it is the case) or something else.

Another question regarding this. If the insurance agency covering your club, regatta, or event new that you were not requiring USCG PFD's, do you think they would have anything to say?

Would the insurance company find a way out of payment of damages if a lawsuit comes about from an incident were USCG PFD were not required? This would leave the OA totally exposed.

Unless things have changed in the years I have been out of the "standards" business, a big difference is that CE is a self-certification system, whereas the US has government testing. The CE publishes the mandatory specifications, but it's up to the manufacturer to determine on its own if it meets those standards. In the US, government testing agencies test each product to determine compliance, and providing all the required documentation is a major factor in the cost. Therefore if ANYTHING changes (ie: embroidered logo) it starts the process all over again.

Karl,

Pretty much any incident that occurrs while sailing will incur some liability on the part of the OA, because attornies are just that persistent. Too much/too little wind, storms during event, spin/non-spin sharing a course... even just being there are all reasons for the OA to be called out by enterprising attorneys with bills to pay for those cheezy TV ads (just "Axe Gary" or whodoIsuedotcom)

The PFD question becomes front and center in a number of wrongful death suits, so I suspect the USCG requirement will be the only way to have a chance at defending against such a strategy.

for-the-people

but, I guess I'm a bit partial being in the industry that I am

Thanks for the response. I have never heard of anyone in my area ever getting a ticket. Nor have i ever seen a cat inspected.

PS I carry one on my front tramp, right under my cooler of rum (wouldn't want the cooler to sink in a flip)

I always found this one kinda humerous. It makes sense in the possibility of having to "rescue" someone else, but if I'm singlehanded, who the hell is going to throw it to me? I don't know if this is a state thing, or what, but the way its worded in the Minnesota handbook I'm required to carry a functioning fire extinguisher as well. I don't think any water patrol would write a ticket, or any judge would let it stick, but......

Don't you find it interesting that the agency making and enforcing the rule profits from the required tests.

I doubt that very much. it is true however that the manufactorer needs to perform the testing and paperwork or arrange to have it done, but final certification is still left to the associated authorities. You can can't just carry the CE mark without their audit of your results and approval.

The CE standards are in my opinion good enough for these bouyancy aids; they are up to the job. Note that lifevests are defined differently in the EU and our bouyancy aids do not satisfy the requirements for a lifevest. For example a lifevest needs to turn you on your back even when you are unconcious when you hit the water; the PFD's will not do that.

Wouter

You're right, the results are audited, but the testing is done by the manufacturer. By putting the CE mark on his product, he is certifying that it meets the specs. There are severe penalties for putting the mark on inadaquate products, but how he gets there is up to him.

But in the US, all the testing is done by the regulating agency. Documentation has to be provided on all materials and all maufacturing processes, even packaging. A big part of the testing is verification that the product EXACTLY matches the documentation, then that it EXACTLY meets all the performance specifications, including destructive testing. If the manufacturer changes thread suppliers, it is not the exact same product which received the approval, so it takes the full process on the new configuration. That's why the choices are so limited, and changes come so slowly.

I don't know Karl, you were smokin' in the pics i saw on your new V-rocket

Well, there are a lot of rules (including prescriptions and class rules) that can get you tossed for all sorts of reasons, and at higher levels of the sport (particularly qualifiers, international events and Olympics), you should almost expect to be protested if you do not follow them. For better or worse (depending on your perspective), it's all part of the game.

Now, in reading your posts John, I'm having difficulty understanding where in the prescription, or on the USSA PFD webpage, there was a clause that made the CE vest at that youth event legal enough to justify a warning and not a DSQ. Was there something else in the SIs that allowed the PC to issue a warning for this infraction? This was a US sailor on a US boat in US waters, right?

This is the sort of thing that could lead to an appeal at a minimum, up to everyone's new favorite buzzword, arbitration.

Please help me understand this a bit more in case I find myself on a PC for such a thing...

Mike

My question, why is US Sailing trying to enforce a USCG or local DNR regulation?

We might as well write into the SI's, no robbing, raping, and plundering during the course of the event and while we're at it, include all of the state/federal laws and regulations...

My question is what is it that clubs/parents/coaches are doing that leads little kids to think that winning is so important that a protest is the right way to address a concern like this? Even if the rule were justified on safety grounds, it's interesting that what she didn't do was go to the RC before the race and say "I'm concerned that some of the kids aren't going to be safe on the water".

What's being taught is:
Win at all costs, rather you can do it on your own merit or not.The AC just reaffirms this.
Unfortunately ,Corinthian spirit is becoming a thing of the past.