Propeller Guard Information Center

Archive for Regulation

Since the mid 1990′s the United States Coast Guard has published several notices concerning proposed regulations involving propeller guards & other propeller safety devices, and requested public input on those proposals. While much of the focus has been on propeller guards, other propeller safety devices have also been discussed. Among them are swim ladder interlock switches, backup alarms, mirrors, swim gate switches, kill switches, virtual kill switches, starter delays (beeps for a few seconds before starts), and rear view cameras.

Propeller Solutions Propeller Guard

Propeller Solutions Propeller Guard

The announcements have been published in the Federal Register.

A few notices have only requested comments, however, most of them refer to a proposed rule. When notices of a proposed rule are first published, they are typically marked as a “Notice of Proposed Rulemaking” (NPRM) or as an “Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking” (ANPRM).

The process appears to have been less defined prior to 1998. The Coast Guard was using its own set of docket numbers and reused one of them several times as a rental boat propeller safety project continued to evolve. USCG opened and closed public comment periods numerous times, renamed the proposal a few times, then finally renumbered the proposal under the new docket system in order to archive the records.

In this post we bring all those notices together and post them as a timeline. Read More→

0 Categories : Regulations

A case currently before U.S. District Court in Seattle may have bearing on the licensing of propeller guards and other propeller safety technologies.

In the past, some have said that swim ladder switches such at Keith Jackson / MariTech’s Prop Stopper could not be included in any USCG propeller safety regulation because they are a proprietary, patented design.

Boat Propeller Proximity to the Swim Ladder

Boat Propeller Proximity to the Swim Ladder

We have previously explained that when a company agrees to allow its patented products to be included in an industry standard, it must license others in the the industry so they too can meet the new industry standard, AND that license must be at a reasonable rate. Legal types refer to these reasonable patent license terms as RAND (Reasonable AND Non Discriminatory) or as FRAND (Fair, Reasonable AND Non Discriminatory).

The Federal Government retains the right to step in and reset those terms if the licensor tries to gouge the other participants.

We have also relatively recently written of the Australian Environmental Safety Propeller and its effort to sign a licensing agreement with a manufacturer. As part of that discussion we mentioned how that discussion might proceed. We noted that mechanical devices often license somewhere in the range of 4 to 7 percent of sales. Another method is to request something in the range of 25 percent of the profits.

In the case of the Australian Safety Propeller, the propeller guys would probably begin by asking for something in the range of 4 to 7 percent of the sales of a marine drive PLUS the Propeller (4 to 7 percent of a lot of money) while the manufacturer would probably be thinking of something in the range of 4 to 7 percent of the propeller only. After they talk it out quite a while, they would probably settle somewhere in the middle.

Yamaha recently released a propeller guard in Europe they claim meets all their expectations. If such a guard were to be accepted as an industry standard, it would face licensing issues similar to those faced by the swim ladder switch and the Safety Propeller.

Reference: Pivotal Patent Case Heads to Court: Microsoft, Motorola Mobility Face Off Over Paying for Technology That is Part of an Industry Standard. Wall Street Journal. November 12, 2012. Page. B4.

A very interesting case is coming to court in Seattle the week of November 12, 2012 that addresses both the points raised above:

  • What is a reasonable rate / royalty percentage?
  • Should that rate be paid on the value of the technology itself (like on the Safety Propeller) OR should that royalty be paid on the value of the device that uses the technology (marine drive plus propeller)?

Read More→

0 Categories : Regulations

Many have called for improving the completeness, accuracy, and ease of use of the records surrounding boat propeller accidents.

Those seeking to prevent or mitigate propeller accidents are generally forced to rely upon the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Annual Boating Statistics report for propeller accident frequency data. For example, we covered the release of the 2011 Boating Statistics. We post propeller accident frequency data from the annual Boating Statistics reports from the last several years on our Propeller Accident Statistics page.

USCG recognizes not all accidents are reported in BARD, but claims almost all of the fatalities are reported. USCG claims the more serious the accident, the more likely it is to be reported. The boating industry says most propeller accidents are serious, USCG says the more serious the accident the more likely it is to be reported, so most propeller accidents are reported.

The individual accident reports behind USCG’s annual Boating Statistics report are themselves summarized in USCG’s annual Boating Accident Report Database (BARD).

When researchers are trying to determine the magnitude of a particular problem (such as boat propeller accidents), they first turn to USCG’s annual Boating Statistics report. Then to better understand the specifics of the individual accidents and if a particular device or process might have prevented or mitigated a particular accident, they turn to the individual accident reports in BARD.

The problems with that approach are: Read More→

Several regulations, standards, statements, and developments have resulted in more boat builders offering propeller guards. Among these are:

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations

U.S. Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 46: Shipping Part 160 – Lifesaving Equipment Subpart 160.156 – Rescue Boats and Fast Rescue Boats (SOLAS) requires each propeller of a rescue boat be fitted with a propeller guard to receive Coast Guard approval of a rescue boat, including fast rescue boat, complying with SOLAS and the IMO LSA Code, for use on waters other than protected waters as defined in 46 CFR 175.400.


U.S. Coast Guard Requires Life Boats to Have Propeller Guards

The United States Coast Guard has a checklist for reviewing lifeboats that requires them to have propeller guards.

USCG Lifeboat Requirements

USCG Lifeboat Requirements for Propeller Guards


Tenders for Commercial Large Yachts Now Also Serve as SOLAS Rescue Boats So They are Required to Have Propeller Guards

While the standards go by different names around the world (Large Yacht Code, Mega Yacht Code, Large Commercial Yacht Code, etc), large commercial yachts used for Pleasure or Sport 20 meters or longer (about 78 feet or longer) are required to carry a SOLAS rescue boat. Since these large charter craft already carry one or more tenders, now one of those tenders serves double duty as the SOLAS rescue boat. As mentioned earlier, SOLAS rescue boats must have propeller guards. Read More→

0 Categories : Regulations

NMMA’s Public Comments on USCG-2011-0497 as a Wordle

We covered the National Marine Manufacturers Association NMMA public comments on the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking on Recreational Vessel Propeller Strikes and Carbon Monoxide Poisoning in our regulations section.

At the close of our coverage, we presented a wordle of NMMA’s comments.

This post presents a much larger version of that wordle. Read More→

Review of public comments on U.S. Coast Guard’s (USCG) Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking titled, Recreational Vessel Propeller Strike and Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Casualty Prevention. Comments were due by November 25, 2011.

We were disappointed with the total number of responses, but thank all those on both sides of the propeller safety issue for responding.

As of today, December 2nd, USCG lists a total of 27 items in that docket. We will list and briefly summarize them below, by Docket Item Number. Read More→

0 Categories : Regulations

The U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) requested public comments for their Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking titled, Recreational Vessel Propeller Strike and Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Casualty Prevention. National Marine Manufacturing Association (NNMA) responded on November 25, 2011.

NMMA Public Comment Letter on USCG-2011-0497

NMMA Public Comment Letter on USCG-2011-0497

While we may not agree with the six page letter written by Cindy Squires it was very well written. She has a law degree, works from NMMA’s Washington D.C. Office, and now often writes environmental and safety regulatory responses, in place of John McKnight who wrote many previous similar documents. She is NMMA’s Chief Counsel for Public Affairs & Director of Regulatory Affairs.

NMMA’s letter is easy on the eyes, makes good use of open space, uses over sized top and bottom margins, and is arranged into six numbered sections, with section six being the conclusion. Their comments are printed on NMMA’s letterhead with the blue wave at the bottom of page one and NMMA’s logo in the top left. We discuss each numbered section of their letter below. Read More→

0 Categories : Regulations

USCG published an advanced notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM) for Recreational Vessel Propeller Strike and Carbon Monoxide Poisoning Casualty Prevention, USCG-2011-0497, in the Federal Register on August 26, 2011.

The deadline for public response was November 25, 2011.

The U.S. Coast Guard sought comments on specific measures to protect recreational boaters in the water at the stern. Similar to the earlier Kill Switch NPRM, it asked a large number of very specific questions. Read More→

0 Categories : Regulations

Kill Switch Lanyard

Lanyard photo courtesy of The U.S. Coast Guard

The United States Coast Guard (USCG) published an Advanced Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (Regulations) in the Federal Register on June 8, 2011. The proposal is titled, Installation and Use of Engine Cut-Off Switches on Recreational Vessels.

As part of the proposal, the Coast Guard also published a Preventable Fatalities and Injuries Report listing boating accidents from 2002 through 2006 in which the use of an Engine Cut-Off Switch / Kill Switch would have likely prevented the fatalities or injuries resulting from an operator falling overboard or otherwise being ejected.

The USCG proposal includes a Background Section with a history of the Coast Guard’s efforts to reduce vessel and propeller strikes since about 1990.

While the Coast Guard engine cut-off proposal seeks input on almost countless points, the two primary kill-switch issues being debated are: Read More→

0 Categories : Regulations