Negligence Ruling Sparks Navy Review of Buoy Safety

Stung by a judge’s ruling that military negligence left Anaheim Bay hazardous for thousands of pleasure boaters, the Navy has quietly launched a review of the safety of all of its mooring buoys in the United States.

In addition to reviewing the marking, lighting and placement of all such buoys, the Navy is surveying what one official described as “new technologies” that may allow much lighter materials to be used in the buoys, commonly heavy metal cans designed for such purposes as holding warships in place in anchorages.

The Navy’s failure to light a buoy in Anaheim Bay was cited by a federal judge in Los Angeles earlier this year as the reason the service must share equally in responsibility with a drunken speedboat driver convicted of manslaughter in a 1984 crash that left five dead. The government is considering an appeal of that ruling, in which damages were fixed at $2.3 million.

All Buoys Being Studied

In a meeting May 26 in Washington, Navy officials approached their Coast Guard counterparts for advice on how to conduct the project. While Coast Guard officials confirmed that the safety review is under way, the Navy initially denied the existence of the project before confirming it Friday.

“It is true that as a result of the Seal Beach incident, the Navy in coordination with the Coast Guard initiated a review of the general design of mooring buoys. As the review progresses, all mooring buoys now in place will be included,” a statement released by the Navy said.

A total of 265 such buoys are being reviewed.

In the lawsuit, U.S. District Judge James M. Ideman ordered the Navy to pay half the damages suffered by the victims of the Oct. 28, 1984, crash, in which a speedboat shattered after plowing head-on at night into an unlighted metal mooring buoy. The driver, Virl Earles of Westminster, whose blood alcohol content was above the level considered intoxicated for auto drivers, is appealing his manslaughter conviction.

“It (Ideman’s decision) encouraged us” to review buoy safety, said one Navy official who declined to be identified.

Each year an estimated 40,000 civilian boaters pass through Anaheim Bay, run by the Seal Beach Naval Weapons Station. According to testimony at the trial, the Navy had been warned of the hazard posed by the unlit buoys before the crash but failed to act. Ideman found that because the Navy failed to take steps to ensure the safety of the pleasure boaters, an accident such as Earles’ was “inevitable.”

Coast Guard’s Authority

The Coast Guard has general authority over buoys and navigation aids for the nation’s waters. Even navigation aids installed by the military generally must be approved by the Coast Guard.

The Earles boat, Whiskey Runner, smashed into an unlit mooring buoy maintained by the Navy inside the bay. Earles and survivors of the crash testified during his criminal trial in Orange County Superior Court that there was no advance warning of the collision.

Although the area is classified as dangerous because naval ammunition and weapons are transferred there, current regulations of the Department of Transportation, under which the Coast Guard operates, do not require that its mooring buoys be lit.

After the 1984 accident, the Navy placed reflectors on all mooring buoys in the bay. The strips make it easier to see the buoys in the dark. The buoys have not been lighted, and no additional safety measures have been taken since the crash, said Tracey Schwaze, spokesman for the weapons station.

Navy Denial

The Navy also replaced the old buoys, made of heavy metal, with a lighter material, said Houston attorney Neal W. Hirschfeld, one of five lawyers suing the government in the Earles case. The Navy denied that the buoys were replaced, a spokesman said.

Informed of the safety review, Hirschfeld applauded the Navy. “It’s about time. It’s something they should have done a long time ago. The Navy should be more concerned with the safety of boaters.”

Hirschfeld said evidence uncovered in preparation for the trial showed a conscientious effort to ensure the structural integrity of the buoys, such as thorough underwater inspections at least every two years, but virtually no safety planning.

Also praising the action was Michael Sciulla, vice president of Boat/U.S., a Washington-based association of recreational boaters. Boating accidents accounted for the second-largest number of transportation deaths in the United States last year, totaling 1,030 fatalities, he noted.

Study ‘Long Overdue’

“It’s long overdue. The Navy should be scoping out its markers and doing everything they possibly can to inform the boating public so that accidents like this don’t happen again,” Sciulla said.

While federal regulations establish general buoy standards, specific requirements for marking and lighting are left up to each of the 12 Coast Guard districts. For example, a number of Navy mooring buoys were lit in San Diego after prodding by local Coast Guard officials, Hirschfeld and Coast Guard officials said.

But lit buoys in certain areas may be more confusing than helpful because they can obscure the sometimes complicated array of harbor lights--often with varied intensity and flashing sequences--that mark channels and hazards. Statistics were not available on crashes involving buoys.

Several Coast Guard officials decried Ideman’s ruling, which the Navy said Friday it has asked the Department of Justice to appeal, but they nonetheless praised the Navy review.

“It’s a smart thing to make life better for the boaters,” said one Washington official. “They’re going in the right direction.”

The Big Picture

“It’s a general safety review,” the official said. “They’re taking a look at their whole picture as far as trying to use this as a jumping off point to get their house in order.”

A number of Navy officials declined comment on the review, which is being conducted by the Navy Facilities Engineering Command.

The Navy consulted the Coast Guard last month “because we are the experts,” said Cmdr. George Perreault, head of the Coast Guard’s Signal Management Branch.

“There are a lot of boaters out there and not enough room. And there’s more pressure on the system to protect small boaters from themselves and those who are going to abuse the privilege of being part of the boating public,” Perreault said.

“Our waters are stressed to the limits, and not all users are compatible at any one time. The Navy has special concerns and commercial users have special concerns and the pleasure boater may not be aware of those concerns. It just needs a little more attention.”