NVIC_02-16_sail_rigging.pdf

DISTRIBUTION – SDL No. 167 a b c d e f g h i j k l m n o p q r s t u v w x y z

A B x x x x x C x x D x x E x x F G H

NON-STANDARD DISTRIBUTION:

COMDTPUB P16700.4

NVIC 02-16

13 APR 2016

NAVIGATION AND VESSEL INSPECTION CIRCULAR NO. 02-16

Subj: INSPECTION GUIDANCE FOR SAIL RIGGING AND MASTS ON INSPECTED

SAILING VESSELS

Ref: (a) Subchapter T - Small Passenger Vessels Under 100 Gross Tons:

46 CFR 176.402 (c)(1), 176.700, 176.800, 176.802.(a)(3), 177.202 (b)(12) and 177.330

(b) Subchapter K – Small Passenger Vessels Carrying more than 150 Passengers or Overnight Accommodations for more than 49 Passengers:

46 CFR 115.402 (c)(1), 115.700, 115.802 (a)(3); 116.202 (b)(14) and 116.330

(c) Subchapter R – Sailing School Vessels 46 CFR 169.221 (a), 169.222, 169.203, 169.239, 169.305 (a)(13), (14) and 169.309

1. PURPOSE. This Circular provides guidance to vessel owners, riggers, marine surveyors, other marine service providers, and Coast Guard marine inspectors regarding inspection of sail rigging, masts, and associated components for inspected sailing vessels and the use of preventative maintenance as a good marine practice.

2. ACTION.

a. Officers-in-Charge, Marine Inspection (OCMIs), vessel owners and operators, or their representatives, are encouraged to take advantage of the procedures and guidelines detailed in this Circular. Area Commanders, District Commanders, Sector Commanders, Commanding Officer Marine Safety Center, and OCMIs are encouraged to apprise industry representatives of this Circular and apply its provisions appropriately. This Circular will be distributed by electronic means only and is available on the World Wide Web at http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/nvic/default.asp.

b. Coast Guard Marine Inspectors should refer to the enclosed guidance when conducting inspections on sailing vessels. It is important to follow the recommended frequencies of maintenance and inspections. Excessive frequencies (e.g., for unstepping the rig) may

Commandant United States Coast Guard

US Coast Guard Stop 7501 2703 Martin Luther King Jr Ave, SE Washington, DC 20593-7501 Staff Symbol: CG-CVC-1 Phone: (202) 372-1251 Fax: (202) 372-1216 Email: CG-CVC-1@uscg.mil http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg5/nvic/default.asp

NAVIGATION AND VESSEL INSPECTION CIRCULAR NO. 02-16

impose unnecessary expenses for the owner/operator without appreciable findings.

Enclosure (1), along with its appendices, provides guidance for the purpose of assisting vessel owners/operators and U.S. Coast Guard personnel with the inspections and recommended documentation of maintenance for sail rigging and masts on inspected sailing vessels.

c. The use of this guidance will assist sailing vessel owner/operators to adequately assess the safe condition of their sail rigging systems through the use of a documented preventative maintenance plan.

3. DIRECTIVE(S) AFFECTED. None.

4. BACKGROUND.

a. In 2005, the entire rig of a U.S. tall ship was carried away as a result of a single, failed component in the standing rigging; fortunately, no injuries or fatalities occurred.

b. In 2006 and 2007, two separate dismastings occurred aboard Coast Guard inspected catamarans in the Hawaii region; each tragically resulted in a passenger fatality. Post-casualty investigation analysis revealed rigging equipment failure as the primary causal factor in both cases (activity numbers 2833864 and 2895732; accessible at http://cgmix.uscg.mil/IIR/IIRSearch.aspx). Following these serious marine casualties, a comprehensive review and inspection of the Hawaiian fleet of 59 sailing vessels was conducted where approximately 20% were found to have significant mast and rigging deficiencies. These deficiencies included excessive corrosion, fractures in the masts, missing bolts, spreaders, and mast fittings.

c. Post-casualty analysis and follow-up inspections highlighted the need for the Coast Guard, in collaboration with the commercial sailing vessel industry, to develop a standardized inspection, examination, and maintenance regime for sail vessel rigging nationwide to improve safety of commercial sailing vessel operations.

d. In 2008, after a third catamaran dismasting, Sector Honolulu along with the U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters Traveling Inspection Staff led a workshop with local sailing vessel owners, operators, rigging suppliers, riggers, naval architects and marine surveyors to develop an inspection regime for sail vessel rigging. As a result of that collaborative effort, Sector Honolulu Inspection Note #13 dated October 16, 2008, established a recommended inspection and examination regime for sail vessel rigging that then became the standard for the nation’s inspected sailing vessel fleet.

e. To date, there have been 37 reportable marine casualties involving inspected sailing vessels, 18 of which have involved masts, spars and rigging failures on both contemporary and traditional rigs. Dismastings were mostly attributed to, but not exclusively limited to multi-hulled sailing vessels.

http://cgmix.uscg.mil/IIR/IIRSearch.aspx https://homeport.uscg.mil/cgi-bin/st/portal/uscg_docs/MyCG/Editorial/20081024/INSNOTE13.pdf?id=a7721922554f2ad13dafbcb35f69ef66bcfd028b&user_id=b8fa33cce7f3221b10770fd1bfbae062

NAVIGATION AND VESSEL INSPECTION CIRCULAR NO. 02-16

5. DISCUSSION.

a. Sail Rigging Inspections. Under 46 CFR 176.802(a)(3), 115.802 (a)(3) and 169.309 regular rigging inspection is already prescribed; however, the regulations do not establish specific time intervals for unstepping the mast. Given the high risk for and potential fatal consequences of a rigging failure, preventative maintenance is critically important for sailing vessels. The basis for any preventative maintenance plan is a robust examination regime to determine, with some level of confidence, component service life and replacement intervals in order to prevent equipment failures and related marine casualties.

b. Condition of the Sail Rigging. Sailing vessels and their rigging are made up of a complex system that must stay intact and function properly else risk catastrophic failure that could result in a significant marine casualty. Sail rigging is also exposed to a complex variety of dynamic stresses in service. Variable operating conditions such as climate, wind strength, and weather and sea state, among other influences, imposes dynamic stresses that affect the working life of the rig and its components. Corrosion is also ever present based on materials used and exposure to the salinity of the marine environment. Proactive and thorough periodic examinations by vessel owners and operators are essential to monitor wear and corrosion, determine service life and replacement cycles, and help identify potential rigging failures before they occur. There may not always be obvious visual cues to prompt replacement or renewal of rigging equipment. Continuous monitoring, with an understanding of the equipment in use, is essential to maintain safe operating conditions.

c. Vessel Specific Rigging Maintenance Regime. The inspection and maintenance regime set forth in Enclosure (1) and its appendices are intended to assist vessel owners and operators in determining the reasonable service life and replacement interval of rigging components as based on the vessel’s operations, environmental conditions, vessel type (i.e., monohull vs catamaran) and other factors.

d. This NVIC incorporates the best practices for sail vessel rigging of all types and sizes based on input from sailing vessel operators, Coast Guard marine inspectors, riggers, and marine surveyors. Publishing this guidance enhances consistency with the inspection process and helps sustain proper rigging maintenance and awareness in the commercial sailing fleet.

6. DISCLAIMER. This guidance is not a substitute for applicable legal requirements, nor is itself a rule. It is not intended to nor does it impose legally binding requirements on any party. It represents the Coast Guard’s current thinking on this topic and may assist industry, mariners, the general public, and the Coast Guard, as well as other Federal and state regulators, in applying statutory and regulatory requirements.

7. ENVIRONMENTAL ASPECT AND IMPACT CONSIDERATIONS.

a. The development of this NVIC and the general policies contained within it have been thoroughly reviewed by the originating office in conjunction with the Office of Environmental Management, and are categorically excluded (CE) under current USCG

Enclosure (1) to NVIC 02-16

Inspection Guidance for Sail Rigging and Masts on Inspected Sailing Vessels

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS 3

I. OVERVIEW 4

a. General 4

b. Variables to Consider: Rigging Equipment Service Life/Replacement Intervals 4

II. PREVENTATIVE MAINTENANCE PLAN (RIGGING INSPECTION REGIME) 4

a. Written Maintenance Plan 4

b. Contents 5

c. Documenting Exams/Maintenance 5

III. INSPECTION OF SAIL RIGGING 6

a. Coast Guard Inspections 6

b. Third Party Rigging Surveys 7

c. Supplementary Inspection Techniques Beyond Visual Examinations 10

d. Guidance for Inspection and Replacement of Standing Rigging and Components 10

e. Sail Furling Systems 14

f. Running Rigging 15

g. Unstepping the Rig 16

h. Sail Condition 17

i. Recommended Emergency Safety Equipment 18

IV. SAILING VESSEL DESIGN AND PLAN REVIEW 18

a. The Marine Safety Center (MSC) – Plan Review 18

b. Sail Vessel Plan Review – New Construction or Initial Certification 18

c. Sail Vessel Plan Review – Rigging Repair or Modification 19

d. Modification or Changes to Rigging or Sail Plan 20

V. APPENDICES

(1) Rigging Key Components List

(2) Rigging Inventory/Preventive Maintenance Inspection Template (Sample)

(3) Third Party Rigging Survey (Sample A)

(4) Third Party Rigging Survey (Sample B)

(5) Recommended References

(6) Preventive Maintenance Cleaning for Stainless Steel Rigging Components

(7) Typical Stainless Steel Cable End Fittings

(8) Corrosion Inspection Points

(9) Pathways to Spar and Rigging Failure (Not Including Operator Error)

(10) Wood Spar Grade Standards

Inspection Guidance for Sail Rigging and Masts on Inspected Sailing Vessels

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This NVIC was developed as the result of over six years of rigging awareness and lessons learned in the field aboard the inspected sail vessel fleet, including the implementation of Honolulu Inspection Note #13, incorporation of sail vessel training at the Marine Inspector’s Course in Yorktown, beneficial input from experienced sailing professionals, as well as commercially-available rigging inspection training created specifically for Marine Inspectors.

Special thanks to the following industry partners and Coast Guard personnel who assisted in the evolution of this document by providing lessons learned on best practices and real-life experiences.

Captain Jonathan Boulware, Tall Ships America - Newport, RI Captain Bert Rogers, Tall Ships America - Newport, RI Captain Les Bolton, The Spar Shop, Gray’s Harbor Historical Seaport - Aberdeen, WA Mr. John Koon, Tradewinds Marine Services - Honolulu, HI M. Brion Toss, Brion Toss Yacht Riggers - Port Townsend, WA Mr. Roger Hatfield, Gold Coast Yachts - St. Croix, USVI Mr. John Marples, Marples Marine - Penobscot, ME Mr. Kurt Hughes, Kurt Hughes Sailing Designs – Seattle, WA Mr. Gino Morelli, Morelli & Melvin Design and Engineering - Newport Beach, CA Mr. Pete Melvin, Morelli & Melvin Design and Engineering-– Newport Beach, CA Mr. Buzz Ballenger, Ballenger Spar Systems, Inc - Watsonville, CA Mr. Ty Goss, Navtec Rigging Solutions - Guilford, CT Mr. Mark Hudson, New Wind Corporation - Long Beach, CA The Maine Windjammers Association - Camden, ME The Passenger Vessel Association - Alexandria, VA LCDR Greg Schultz, Sector Honolulu, HI LCDR John Taylor, Commandant (CG-CVC-1) LT Mark Neeland, USCG Marine Safety Center – Small Vessel Branch (H-1) LT Nicole Auth, Sector Honolulu, HI Marc Cruder, CDR (Ret.), Commandant (CG-5P-TI)

I. Overview

a. General: This NVIC provides inspection guidance that is specific to sail rigging equipment for inspected commercial sailing vessels. The goal of this inspection guidance is to ensure critical components of the sail rigging are replaced on a routine schedule before they experience failure.

Note: When there is a component failure that results in a reportable marine casualty, as defined in 46 CFR 4.05-1, the owner or operator shall notify the nearest Coast Guard Sector or Marine Safety Unit.

b. Variables to Consider: Rigging Equipment Service Life/Replacement Intervals: There are many variables in rig design, component materials and attachment methods that should be considered when determining equipment service life and replacement intervals. These intervals for sail rigging and components vary according to vessel design characteristics including the following:

i. Mast/spar construction material (e.g., solid, laminated, hollow/wood, steel, aluminum, carbon fiber, composite);

ii. Mast installation (e.g., keel or deck stepped, fixed, rotating or unstayed without standing rigging);

iii. Sail rig type and or technology (e.g., marconi, gaff or square rigged);

iv. Standing rig system complexity (e.g., minimally vs. heavily stayed);

v. Vessel type (e.g., monohull or multi-hull);

vi. Service route variables and local wind/sea state (e.g., protected vs. exposed waters);

vii. Frequency and duration of operation (e.g., length of cruise; number of trips per day;

hours under sail per week, month, or year);

viii. Design safety factor and review process (e.g., rig pedigree, load assumptions and/or independent engineering review);

ix. Nature of operations (e.g., high performance or low stress); and

x. Area of operations in terms of propensity for corrosion (e.g., heat, salinity and climate).

II. Preventative Maintenance Plan (Rigging Inspection Regime):

a. Written Maintenance Plan: All inspected sailing vessel owner/operators should have a written Preventive Maintenance Plan (PMP) that specifically addresses their vessel’s sail rigging equipment and components. Maintenance of the rigging is the most critical factor toward ensuring safe operation of the sail rigging and its components, and thus helps ensure the safety of passengers and crew. The PMP, when carried out, will be comprised of inspection of the sail rigging components per Section III below.

b. Contents: A PMP, should include, at a minimum:

i. General Description: A description of the sailing vessel, including the type of rig, drawings and/or photographs of the vessel itself.

ii. Examination/Maintenance Schedule: The PMP should include the maintenance schedule of the rigging and associated equipment. These maintenance examinations should establish routine as well as very detailed examination protocol; everything from deck-level rigging prior to sailing, to the cycle of regular inspections aloft, and including comprehensive annual inspections with component disassembly as needed.

iii. Inventory of Rigging Components: The PMP should include an inventory of all rigging components, including the age of component, size, type of material, and a replacement schedule for all rig components based on inspection results, service history, and manufacturer or designer recommendations. Not all components have the same service life in all conditions. Due consideration should be given to the service, rig type, level of maintenance, sizing and other factors as appropriate regarding the replacement of or the renewal intervals for rigging components. The variable factors discussed in paragraph I.b. should also be taken into account.

iv. PMP examples: Several examples are provided as Appendices to this Enclosure to assist owners/operators with their PMP. Appendix (1) provides a generic list of key components that should be addressed in a PMP. Appendix (2) contains a sample template of a rigging equipment inventory document and a general inspection outline for the rigging equipment on a sailing catamaran. The Appendices are for general information and may not apply to all rigs.

c. Documenting Exams/Maintenance: All rigging examinations and maintenance conducted by the vessel crew and/or third party rigging surveyor should be documented (e.g., written reports, surveys, or photos). Documentation of exams and maintenance should include documenting the condition of equipment, maintenance performed to the equipment, and the replacement of equipment. This information is especially helpful in assessing life-cycle trends and objective evidence for revising rigging component maintenance and replacement schedules.

i. Tall Ships America (TSA)1 – Recommended Protocol for Rig Inspection and

Template for Rig Inspection Checklist: In 2012, Tall Ships America published a

1 Tall Ships America is an international group of over 150 sailing vessels that, at the time of this NVIC’s publication, has in its membership over 60 inspected U.S. flag vessels certificated for underway operations, in addition to a number of Moored Attraction Vessels as well as registered naval vessels from various countries. As an organization, they have been a resource supporting Coast Guard efforts to understand rigging inspection issues in the traditionally rigged fleet.

“Recommended Protocol for Rig Inspection and Template for Rig Inspection Checklist.” This protocol is designed to assist member vessel operators in conducting and documenting routine monthly inspections of rigging and related structures aboard their vessels. It also recommends keeping a Rigging Maintenance Logbook to document deficiencies and corrective actions and to make this logbook available to attending Coast Guard Marine Inspectors at scheduled inspections. This protocol should be adapted and modified by the vessel operator into a format most suitable to the individual vessel. It should be noted that this protocol is not a substitute for implementing a PMP, as discussed above, and rig inspection checklists should be incorporated as part of the overall plan.

III. Inspection of Sail Rigging

a. Coast Guard Inspections: If a vessel maintains a PMP, it is an excellent tool that will help streamline vessel inspections conducted by the Coast Guard. Coast Guard Marine Inspectors can review a vessel’s PMP, if one is maintained, and evaluate its implementation against the condition of the rigging. At a minimum, this review should be conducted at each annual inspection. Further, Marine Inspectors should determine whether the PMP is being carried out by the vessel crew or by a third party rigging surveyor or both, and assess the credentials and experience of those conducting rigging examinations and maintenance aboard. In reviewing the PMP, Marine Inspectors should determine if any rigging components were replaced in-kind or changed to another type of component throughout the year, and if the replacement or change was for reasons other than normal scheduled intervals. For a vessel that does not maintain a PMP, the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspections (OCMI) and/or Marine Inspector may require a third party rigging survey in order to verify the condition of the sail rigging and components.

i. Breakdown, disassembly, or removal of standing or running rigging: Before components are broken down, disassembled, or removed for inspection, it is critical to know how to safely disassemble components because disassembly can significantly alter the tune of the rig. Therefore, after components of a sail rigging have been disassembled and before a vessel goes back into service, a Coast Guard Marine Inspector should attend for operational tests and sea trials. Special attention must be given to the “tune” of the rig in its entirety. As an example, the improper tuning of one component can adversely impact loads elsewhere on the rig.

ii. Marine Inspectors Going Aloft: Coast Guard Marine Inspectors are not expected to go aloft because the Coast Guard does not provide Personnel Protective Equipment specific to Marine Inspectors conducting surveys aloft. Attending Marine Inspectors may use binoculars or other visual aids from the deck level to identify the condition of the rigging aloft. If an area or item of concern is identified aloft (from the deck level), it will be incumbent upon the operator by any available means, such as an aloft survey conducted by a third party rigging surveyor or qualified crewmember, to provide evidence of the condition of the rigging components in question. When made available by the owner or operator in a shipyard or other commercial environment, Coast Guard Marine Inspectors may use man-lift cranes such as “pettibones” or “cherry pickers” to assist with inspection of a vessel’s rigging.

iii. Deficiencies: If deficiencies in the condition of the rigging are found, requirements for corrective action may be issued. Requirements for corrective action should normally be made only after a visual inspection of the rigging, dialogue with the vessel owner or operator, and an assessment of the vessel’s implementation of a PMP has been made. Based on the variables listed in paragraph I.b., the OCMI will set the time frame to comply with requirements associated with corrective action, which may include operational controls. For example, an auxiliary sail vessel with a rigging deficiency may be restricted from operating under sail, but be allowed to operate under engine power, until the rigging deficiency is rectified; or, the deficiency may be confined to a particular section of the rig, such as the head rig, where a restriction from using the foresail may be imposed until head rig repairs are made, etc.

iv. Coast Guard Documentation Requirements: Upon completion of a vessel’s scheduled annual Coast Guard inspection, the Marine Inspector will ensure the following items are documented and retained in the vessel’s permanent file and/or in MISLE:

1. Detailed description of the rig and associated gear;

2. Drawings or pictures of rig and location of key components;

3. Manufacturer, purchase and installation dates of all components;

4. Types of furlers and tensioning systems; and

5. A description of sea trials including tests of all sailing configurations on all points of sail, condition of cleats and running rigging while operating and any potential hazard or sail/rigging arrangement that impairs navigation or passenger safety.

vii. Attending Tall Ships of America (TSA) Vessels: Coast Guard Marine Inspectors attending TSA vessels should review the TSA protocol aboard member vessels, ensuring it is appropriately detailed for the complexity of the rig as part of the comprehensive rigging examination regime envisioned by the above mentioned checklist: “Recommended Protocol for Rig Inspection and Template for Rig Inspection Checklist.”

b. Third Party Rigging Surveys: There are two types of third party rigging surveys:

voluntary and Coast Guard-required for cause. In the latter, the owner or operator furnishes a third party rigging surveyor. A third party rigging surveyor used to conduct, for example, an annual inspection of the sail rig does not substitute for the vessel owner/operator from implementing a PMP or conducting and documenting preventative maintenance inspections.

i. A report from a third party rigging surveyor may be required when a PMP is not in place and/or not being carried out to help the OCMI and/or Marine Inspector determine the operating condition of a vessel’s sail rigging and components. When used, the reports of an independent third party rigging surveyor should address the elements of a PMP. Inspected sailing vessel owners and operators may voluntarily use the reports of independent third party rigging surveyors on a regular basis to supplement their own regime.

ii. Within the sail vessel rigging industry, there is no independent certification or standard qualification criteria for conducting rigging surveys. However, the goal of a third party rigging survey, in the context of this inspection circular, is to provide a comprehensive inspection of the entire rigging system – aloft and at and below deck level (alow), including the integration of the rig system to the hull structure (e.g., mast steps, compression posts, beams, chain plates, anchoring points aloft and at deck level, fastenings, etc).

iii. When the Coast Guard requires a third party rigging survey for cause under the authority of 46 CFR 176.840, 115.840, or 169.259, it is for the purpose of determining that the vessel and its equipment are suitable for the service in which it is employed. The Coast Guard Marine Inspector will be in attendance for the survey and a copy of the surveyor’s report will become part of the vessel’s inspection record with the Coast Guard. Furthermore, when the Coast Guard requires a third party rigging survey, the intent is that the survey include a rigging survey aloft.

Because an examination of the rigging aloft requires sound expertise and judgment, it is in the interest of both the owner or operator and the Coast Guard to ensure that a surveyor with demonstrated experience in rigging aloft examinations perform the required survey. Therefore, prior to contracting for surveyor services, vessel owners or operators are encouraged to notify the cognizant OCMI, or the OCMI’s representative, regarding which surveyor will be performing the survey. Doing so will allow the OCMI, or the OCMI’s representative, the opportunity to communicate to the vessel’s owner or operator if there are any concerns regarding a surveyor’s level of expertise.

iv. Third party rigging surveyor qualification screening protocol should include, but not be limited to, a review of the selected surveyor’s (1) bio or resume, (2) sample work product to ensure individual has the requisite experience for the rig type being surveyed and has normal work practice that include comprehensive rigging inspections and going aloft, and (3) documentation of findings and recommendations for repair/replacement of rigging components as appropriate. Appendices (3) and (4) are samples of content to review when evaluating a rigging surveyor.

v. Underway rigging examination/survey: While inspecting the rig in the static mode is generally adequate to fulfill the intent of the third party survey, the attending Marine Inspector or the contracted surveyor may require the vessel to get underway in representative conditions of wind speed, sea state, etc., to effectively inspect the rigging system under dynamic load, including rig tune, mast column behavior, load-lead paths, operation of winches, condition of halyards with sails hoisted and working ends exposed, operational maneuverability, and handling of the vessel. There have been many instances of small passenger vessel sail rigs passing static rigging inspections dockside, but shortly thereafter, experiencing a critical operational or mechanical deficiency while underway.

vi. Large, historic, period rigs other than basic fore and aft technology are typically far more complex and may be beyond the expertise of yacht rigging surveyors or typical rigging service providers. This may present a resource challenge when a third party rigging survey for a “tall ship” is deemed necessary pursuant to 46 CFR 176.840, 115.840, or 169.259. Most inspected commercial sail vessels in this category are members of Tall Ships America (TSA). Because of the strict adherence to the “Recommended Protocol for Rig Inspection” developed by TSA, there have not been many instances in which a third party survey for a Tall Ships member vessel was deemed necessary. However, in those instances when a third party survey is deemed necessary pursuant to the aforementioned regulation cites, the OCMI may, on a case-by-case basis and after taking into consideration the relevant third party rigging screening protocols in paragraph III.b.iv above, accept a survey that has been performed by part of that membership group who possesses the rigging expertise specific to historic tall ships.

vii. Owners may enroll in certain rig certification programs and be considered equivalent to meeting the inspection regime recommended by this guidance document. Those owners should enroll and be able to show current completion of a Coast Guard reviewed rig certification program. Currently, the Coast Guard is aware of and has reviewed only one outside rig certification program provided by Germanischer Lloyd (GL) Group. In 2013, GL published “Guidelines for Inspection and Maintenance of Tall Ships.” Now merged with Det Norse Veritas (DNV), DNV GL offers a condition survey service for tall ships that are associated with the above mentioned guidelines. See details at http://www.gl-group.com/infoServices/rules/pdfs/gl_i-4- 4_e.pdf. Vessels enrolled in this program, essentially a rig certification program available to all vessels (including those not classed2 by DNV GL) and based on mandated regular third-party inspection conducted by DNV GL designated rig inspectors, will be considered as meeting an equivalent standard to the inspection regime recommended in this document. Rig certification programs are not necessarily limited to DNV GL. Any company that wishes to have their rig certification program reviewed by the Coast Guard, for equivalence to this inspection regime, should contact the Office of Commercial Vessel Compliance (CG-CVC) at CG-CVC-1@uscg.mil. Likewise, owners may inquiry about the list of reviewed rig certification programs by also contacting CG-CVC at the aforementioned e-mail address.

viii. When making his or her assessment, the attending Coast Guard Marine Inspector shall review the findings of the rigging surveyor (overall assessment of the rigging system, recommendations made, conclusions reached, etc.) and indicate agreement

2 Classed means that a vessel meets the classification society requirements that embody the technical rules, regulations, standards, guidelines and associated surveys and inspections covering the design, construction and through-life compliance of a ship's structure and essential engineering and electrical systems.

http://www.gl-group.com/infoServices/rules/pdfs/gl_i-4-4_e.pdf http://www.gl-group.com/infoServices/rules/pdfs/gl_i-4-4_e.pdf mailto:CG-CVC-1@uscg.mil with results or express reason for disagreement, to include addressing additional concerns.

ix. If deemed necessary by the Coast Guard Marine Inspector, disassembly or “backing down” rig tension may be required pursuant to 46 CFR 176.840, 115.840, or 169.259.

The degree of disassembly, untensioning, etc., will be based on the third party rigging surveyor’s findings and recommendations. While the third party rigging surveyor’s findings and recommendations offer the OCMI valuable insight and information about the condition of the rigging components and associated equipment, he or she is not strictly bound by it and, when exercising discretion, may allow continued operations contingent on increased monitoring and inspection if the risks can be effectively managed. Deficiencies should be documented into actionable written requirements that include a specific timeframe to comply, which, depending on the circumstances, could be long-term, short-term, or “no sail.”

x. A Coast Guard Marine Inspector is not required to attend third party surveys used by the vessel owner/operator for normal maintenance or as part of an already approved rigging maintenance program.

c. Supplementary Inspection Techniques Beyond Visual Examinations: Regular rigging inspection in the context of this guidance document is intended as preventative maintenance and shall be primarily based on a detailed visual examination of the rig and associated components, supplemented by the use of visual magnification (e.g., pocket microscope) and non-destructive testing (NDT), as necessary.

i. NDT is appropriate when questions of materiel integrity exist after close visual examination. The use of NDT may be required by the attending Marine Inspector or recommended by the third party rigging surveyor. Hull integrity and strength in way of chain plates, masts, mast steps, and other critical attachment points shall be carefully evaluated. If a rigging component and/or structures are found with evidence of significant deterioration such as fractures, excessive pitting or corrosion, the particular component shall be renewed or replaced in-kind. Repairs or alterations to equipment that affect the safety of the vessel shall be done in accordance with 46 CFR 176.700, 115.700 or 169.235. The OCMI has the discretion and authority to request review by the Marine Safety Center (MSC). See section IV below.

d. Guidance for Inspection and Replacement of Standing Rigging and Components: The replacement cycles outlined in this section are recommendations based on industry published guidelines. Replacement cycles are vessel specific and based on the variables discussed in Section I.b. above, manufacturer’s specifications and recommendations, prior rigging inspections, as well as inspection observations by the attending Coast Guard Marine Inspector. Owners should use empirical data from rig design parameters (safety factors), manufacturer’s recommendations, vessel use, environmental conditions and the condition of the rigging at the time of evaluation to establish their replacement intervals.

Special attention should be given to components and equipment used in a high ambient heat and water salinity environment. Components and/or rigs with minimal to no local service history should start with conservative inspection cycles and be examined very closely until operating history and subsequent inspection provides the confidence that a reliable life cycle trend is emerging.

Recommended references on rigging and sail vessel inspection are provided in Appendix

(5) and preventative cleaning maintenance for stainless steel rigging components are provided in Appendix (6).

i. Stainless Steel Wire Rigging: The following guidelines apply to bare 316 grade stainless steel wire cable that is not “served,” coated or otherwise covered. The intervals are not absolute but considered good marine practice. Industry published guidelines for the replacement or renewal of stainless steel wire cable are based on many variables, including heat, geographic location and salinity of the water.

NAVTEC “Rigging Service Guidelines” notes the following life expectancy based on those variables:

1. Heat & water salinity maximum (FL, HI, Caribbean) – 5 to 10 yrs.

2. Heat & water salinity medium (East/West Coast of U.S.) – 10 to 15 yrs.

3. Fresh water climate – 15 to 20 yrs.

Replacement intervals outside these guidelines may be considered on a case-by-case basis with the approval of the local OCMI where an individual norm can be justified due to design, condition and service exposure. Establishing individual norms may also result in shorter intervals under certain circumstances. In the absence of maintenance history, OCMIs are encouraged to start the replacement interval discussion based on the above and then tailor it to local conditions while ascertaining the condition of fleets within their area of responsibility.

ii. Stainless Steel Wire and Terminals: Rigging wire cycles include not only the service life of the wire cable itself, but the end fittings used to make standing rigging attachments and associated anchoring points. The two most common methods of cable attachment are swage (factory compression end fittings) or swageless (mechanical field or shop installed end fittings). See additional guidance and examples in Appendix (7).

iii. Stainless Steel “Swageless” Mechanical Compression, Terminals: Mechanical rigging terminals are designed to create various types of wire rope or rod terminations depending on the required application at the anchoring point. These fittings are known to be very reliable with excellent longevity when properly sized and assembled for the application. The mechanism operates by creating an aggressive clamping action on the wire rope using an internal, conical and collapsible wedge/cone, which separates the wire-core wire strands from the cover strands.

When assembled, the mechanical clamping action on the wire end resembles the “Chinese finger-lock” principle. See the following link for an example:

http://hayn.com/marine/tech/himod/install.html.

http://hayn.com/marine/tech/himod/install.html

Common trade names for wire compression fittings include: Norseman, Sta-Lok and

Hayn (Hi-Mod). All three manufacturers claim to exclusively use 316 series grade stainless steel in their production, which provides a reasonable degree of corrosion resistance and high level of service reliability in the marine environment. Mechanical terminals are also known to be reusable in subsequent rigging wire replacement cycles, generally recommended not to exceed 2 to 3 wire replacements. If rigging terminal reuse is intended when recycling the rigging wire, these fittings should be closely examined for indications of cyclic fatigue or excessive elongation of clevis pin holes. As with all stainless steel rigging components, the service life of these fittings can also vary and so should be given close scrutiny whenever wire cables are inspected. As with all other stainless steel marine hardware, fittings subject to increased salinity, temperature and load cycles will require more frequent component replacement.

All three manufacturers indicate that their wire terminals are capable of being disassembled for inspection, and then reassembled for continued use. While this is true to some degree, only the Hi-Mod terminals are fully capable of disassembly inspection as the rigging wire is not permanently deformed over the internal compression cone or encapsulated in the recommended water sealant used to fill the air space inside the terminal body with Norseman and Sta-Lok fittings.

Disassembly of mechanical rigging terminals for inspection should only be required when there is visible evidence of corrosion. When required, the disassembly process should be done with care and awareness in an effort to avoid galling or stripping the female-threaded terminal body or the male-treaded end fitting. If this occurs, it renders the entire rigging component non-repairable, requiring replacement.

Disassembly of mechanical compression terminals should not be considered a routine inspection procedure.

iv. Galvanized Steel Wire Rigging: Galvanized steel wire is in common use aboard vessels with historic period or simple working rigs. In addition to the galvanized coating, wire rope on traditional or period rigs is normally “wormed, parceled, and served” a three-step process to seal and cover the wire rope protecting it from the elements and corrosion. Worming involves using tarred marline to follow the lay of the wire rope and fill it out to a smoother surface for serving. If the lay is shallow, the wire may only be tarred. Parceling is the winding of tarred pieces of canvas around a wire rope that has been wormed. Serving completes the operation by binding small cord, spun yarn or marline around an already wormed and parceled wire rope.

When properly applied and maintained, standing wire rigging protected in this manner can last indefinitely. The most common reason for early replacement is chafing, broken strands or something other than just simple corrosion. Wire rope with this type of treatment should only be uncovered for further examination when inspection indicates the covering has been penetrated as evidenced by visible corrosion (rust).

v. Galvanized Steel Wire Fittings: Stainless steel swages or swageless fittings are not normally used on galvanized wire rope. Galvanized steel wire, especially when used on historical or period rigs may be spliced and fitted with a thimble, for use with a shackle when attaching directly to strap chain plates or chain plates composed of individual links that incorporate dead eyes and lanyards. Similar to the inspection of the wire itself, splices or turnbacks with wire seizing as terminal fittings should be visually inspected to determine their condition. Evidence of rust, broken wires, excessive racking (in the case of seized turnbacks), or displaced/sunken strands (in the case of splices) would be cause for closer inspection and/or judicious spot removal of the protective service. When not spliced, galvanized wire rope eyes may be made and secured mechanically with wire clamps. The clamp consists of a saddle and a u-bolt with nuts. The saddle should be installed over the standing part of the wire and the u-bolt over the bitter end section. There are usually a minimum of two clamps and preferably three, evenly spaced and wrenched down tight. Smaller rigs may use Nicopress fittings to secure wire eyes. Nicopress is a trade name for oval shaped compression sleeves designed to be slipped over the standing and bitter ends, then mechanically pressed on to both wires simultaneously with a special tool. Wire pendants are commonly attached to centerboards using these fittings.

vi. Poured, Socketed Wire Terminals: More often utilized in classic/period rigging applications with galvanized steel wire, these fittings are also used to terminate stainless steel wire in a number of contemporary rigging systems. The sockets are typically cast from steel or bronze with significant cross sections and scantlings that generally exceed the breaking strength of the wire or cable by a very large factor.

These terminals are routinely used and regulated in the lifting appliance industry (elevators), where the working load limit (WLL) is generally 20% of the wire/cable breaking strength, but there are no similar regulations or standards in the sail vessel rigging industry. Sail rigging safety factors are considered in the design phase but are not specified by regulation and vary depending on a sail vessel’s origin or intended purpose. While proof load testing (such as “pull testing”) provides a level of confidence in the completed assembly, this testing method could be excessive, damaging to the fitting, or prove inconclusive if conducted without parameters.

Historic and/or more-recently-built classically-rigged-vessels are more likely to have designs empirically developed over time with substantial scantlings and redundant standing rigging components, typical of the world before precise computer modeling and calculation. Marine Inspectors should use caution when considering “proof load testing,” as it may not accurately assess the assembly’s function within the rigging system if individual components are of varying ultimate breaking strengths.

vii. Fiber Rigging: These systems, particularly those using the latest synthetics, are specialized installations that come in a variety of materials and associated end fittings. They are being increasingly used to replace natural fiber rope rigging on period traditional rigs of all sizes. The manufacturer should be consulted for details on inspection and longevity.

viii. Rod Rigging: Rod rigging is a specialized application usually seen on purpose-built racing rigs, such as retired America’s Cup boats. The end fitting is a cold formed rod head and unique to this style of rigging. Rod rigging terminals must be disassembled for inspection and/or subject toNDT at regular intervals as recommended by the product manufacturer or as necessary based on service records. While rod and rod-heads generally last longer than wire rigging, re-heading will eventually be necessary as specified by the manufacturer.

ix. Chain Plates: Strap-type chain plates and attachment bolts may be removed and made available for inspection at the discretion of the attending Marine Inspector. Vessels with embedded chain plates and attachments, especially if stainless steel, may require further inspection/removal based on age, material and operating conditions. These potentially destructive inspections may be minimized by removing a representative sample and closely evaluating its condition prior to making the determination to remove more chain plates for inspection.

Similarly, chain plates made up of chain assemblies or links on historic or period traditional rigs may be visually inspected and disassembled or removed for close-up inspection and/or subject to NDT for evaluation at the discretion of the attending Marine Inspector.

x. Mast tangs, Toggles and Anchoring Points Aloft: Similar to chain plates as discussed above, mast tangs, toggles, fasteners and anchoring points aloft shall also be made available for inspection by disassembly as necessary to determine fastener condition and replacement cycles.

e. Sail Furling Systems:

Sail Furling Systems, also referred to as “roller-furling” systems, are very common on modern-day/contemporarily rigged vessels and becoming more common on new-built, period/classically rigged vessels. Since appearing on the market in the 1970s, these systems have proven quite reliable. While furling systems are more frequently used with headsails, jibs, and staysails, they are becoming more commonly used for mainsail furling with in-mast and on-boom furling systems as well.

When a sail furling system fails to operate, and, if for any reason, the sail cannot be removed, this can put the safety of the vessel and passengers at risk. For this reason, sail furling system and equipment inspections should be conducted on an annual basis to confirm proper functioning of the system including the ability to remove the sail.

Testing sail furling systems and equipment is most effectively conducted while underway with the sails powered up.

During annual inspections, Coast Guard Marine Inspectors should examine the operation of the roller furling systems by asking to have the sail opened and closed to confirm proper operation and lower the halyard to demonstrate the sail moves freely in the furling extrusion. The head of the sail should be lowered enough so it passes freely past the uppermost foil section connector (about 10 ft).

Furling drum and torque tube assemblies that conceal essential standing rigging, headstay, terminals and turnbuckle should be disassembled for inspections on an annual basis in the presence of a Coast Guard Marine Inspector or qualified third party surveyor.

Caution should be used and manufacturer’s instructions followed when conducting roller furling system disassemblies. If unfamiliar with this procedure, the vessel owner or operator should consult with a professional rigger for assistance until proficient with the process.

f. Running Rigging: While the primary focus of this guidance document is to ensure an appropriate examination of the condition of the standing rigging and the associated components that contain the stationary rig, it is equally important to inspect the condition of the running rigging and associated equipment. Inspections should be conducted with due consideration for system complexity including components in high load bearing service with high consequence should failure occur. Relevant components include running back and check stays employed in dynamic mast standing rigging systems, highly loaded halyards and sheeting systems of both period and contemporary rigs.

Boom topping lifts, quarter lifts, multi-purchase tackle systems, belaying points, as well as the condition and fastening of running blocks adjacent to passenger passageways on deck and in all applications aloft should also be given careful scrutiny. Equipment issues include the following:

i. Condition of cordage or wire rope: Many factors influence service life, such as age;

designed load rating and use application; ultraviolet light deterioration; point loading;

designed radius and effective operation of turning blocks and sheaves; rope deformation; chafe; parted yarns on wire rope; and condition of splices, thimbles and shackles, including shackle seizing where applicable.

ii. Winches – manual, hydraulic or electric: They are used on nearly all contemporary and many traditionally rigged vessels. Typical manual winches can easily multiply force on the order of 40 to 1. Hydraulic/electric winches are capable of even higher ratios. Winch failure of any kind can lead to catastrophic results. Disassembly for inspection and servicing should occur on a regular and scheduled basis.

Documentation of winch service cycles should be included in the records of the vessel’s rig inspection log. Coast Guard Marine Inspectors may require winch disassembly if acoustic or visual observations indicate corrosion or disrepair or if there is no record of servicing. Winch mounting fasteners to mast or deck surfaces should also be pulled for inspection every few years to ascertain condition. Special consideration should be made for the condition of winches used to haul crew members aloft to conduct maintenance and required inspection. Fastener inspection should include drum pawls when winches are disassembled.

iii. Boom Vangs and Hydraulic Tensioners: Generally, these are used on contemporary rigs, performance sail craft, retired race boats and large cruising boats to shape and bend the mast/boom to achieve desired sail trim in changing conditions. Local loading of components and their attachment points can be high, especially at anchoring points on booms and mast bases. Fastenings and welds on extruded aluminum spars need to be inspected closely for fractures due to normal service stress on these components.

iv. Lifts and Lazy Jacks: Topping lifts need to be rigged correctly to keep booms in place when sails are lowered or doused to prevent passenger or crew injury. When lazy jacks are relied upon in lieu of topping lifts, they should be capable of suspending booms in all operational circumstances (i.e., max loading). Topping lifts should be inspected closely in rigs where the sail does not carry the weight of the spar or where the rig is otherwise “topping lift dependent.” Boom goosenecks or other pivot points must also be inspected for continued serviceability, with attention to welds, fasteners, axis pins, axis bores, etc. Excessive wear on axis points should be addressed in a timely fashion.

g. Unstepping the Rig: The purpose of unstepping the rig is to provide a close-up visual inspection of the entire rig including the mast and mast step as well as critical…