GUILTY CA - Boat fire near Santa Cruz Island; 34 missing, Sept 2019 *captain charged*

[Penelope]

Though I definetly respect his views as a marine designer, I cant help but think of the human factors that seem to reduce the chances of the fire starting in the bunk space:

- Though nearly all would of had their privacy curtains closed, my guess is that several people would not have been asleep (thinking of the days dives, too excited- or too tired to sleep etc). Others would have been dozing lightly. Somebody would have either seen the fire, or smelled smoke and raised an alarm.

- The boat's cook slept with the divers. Evidently, the fire started at 3:30, too early for even her to be up. But, she would be getting up soon to prepare breakfast. Thus, a chance that she would be lightly sleeping. Being on the crew, she would investigate the source of even slight smoke.

- Recreational divers are likely to be physically fit individuals capable of thinking under pressure and capable of following directions with out panic. In even a fast moving fire starting in the bunk space, I think most would have escaped or, if possible, smothered the fire out with blankets etc.

In short, my guess is that had the fire started in the bunk space, the story would have read:

Severe fire- A tragedy occured on a dive boat as five people were fatally overcome by smoke in a fast moving fire. Some survivors suffered burns escaping from the space. The fire was extinguished and survivors taken off the boat by the USCGS.....

Less severe fire- Several divers suffered first or second degree burns extinguishing a fire in a bunk space. Other were treated for smoke inhalation and released from hospitals.... .

I agree. There would be individuals, like me, who are light sleepers. I would think that someone would have noticed something and grabbed the fire extinguisher while others began to get out at least one of the exits. What makes more sense is the fire beginning in the galley - possibly where all the phones are charging - and getting out of hand before anyone noticed. What concerns me is that it seems as though no one did notice. There should have been someone patrolling or watching that second level. Were the five individuals who survived all located in the top level at the time? Were they all sleeping at the same time? These are a few of the questions I would like to see answered.

PS: I am not placing blame - just want to know what happened so it will hopefully never happen again.

 

[Cryptic]

I agree. There would be individuals, like me, who are light sleepers. I would think that someone would have noticed something and grabbed the fire extinguisher while others began to get out at least one of the exits. What makes more sense is the fire beginning in the galley - possibly where all the phones are charging - and getting out of hand before anyone noticed. What concerns me is that it seems as though no one did notice. There should have been someone patrolling or watching that second level.

I think you have very valid questions. From a previous job, I know that civilian cargo ships maintain "skeleton" watches while the ship is in port. Does anybody know if it is customary for charter boats of this size to maintain a constant watch of one crewman being awake at all times?

Though a designated crewman whose sole duty is standing watch on duty at all times would be preferred, I imagine that as the cook got up early, he/she could relieve the previous watch and be the morning watch while preparing breakfast.

A possible practice of standing watch for the boat while being busy with other duties would probably not pass navy muster, but there are only six crew members and the arrangement would probably work.

Were the five individuals who survived all located in the top level at the time?

Yes, evidently all five survivors escaped from the upper (third level) after seeing that the fire was too large to even begin to fight and that they would be killed as well if they remained on board.

 

[imstilla.grandma]

In lengthy interviews with NTSB investigators, the surviving crew members described harrowing moments after the fire started.

"They tried to enter through the double doors and couldn't get in because of the flames. They tried to access the galley from the front, through the windows, but the windows wouldn't open and at some point, because of heat and smoke and fire, they had jumped from the boat," said Homendy.

The effort to raise the boat is being hampered by strong wings that are forecast over the next few days. One of the six crew members was supposed to have served as a night watchman. The NTSB is investigating to determine who that was and if they were on duty.
Investigators believe deadly California boat fire started on the second level

 

[imstilla.grandma]

Owners of California dive boat where 34 died in fire file lawsuit to head off potentially costly litigation from victims.
Owners of California dive boat where 34 died in fire file lawsuit to head off potentially costly ...

 

[imstilla.grandma]

Truth Aquatics Inc., which owned the Conception, filed suit Thursday in U.S. District Court under a pre-Civil War provision of maritime law that allows it to limit its liability.

Anyone who can make a claim against the company will be served with notice the company is asserting it is not liable for damages from victims.

The suit said the company and owners Glen and Dana Fritzler made the boat seaworthy and the craft was properly manned and equipped.

Charles Naylor, who represents victims in maritime law cases, says the action forces family members in their grief to respond to a lawsuit.
BREAKING: Owners of Dive Boat in Deadly Fire File Lawsuit to Avoid Liability

 

[imstilla.grandma]

Homendy said at least one crew member was awakened and left his bunk and, at some point, jumped over the side with his other crew members to try to rescue passengers.

“The galley area was engulfed in flames,” he told investigators. “They tried to enter through the double doors but couldn’t get in because of the flames. They tried to access the galley from the front through the windows, but the windows wouldn’t open.

The crew member who initially heard the noise got up to look over the side. He looked down and flames were coming up.

He tried to use the ladder, “but the ladder was engulfed in flames,” Homendy said. “They just couldn’t get in.”

The escape hatch and the entrance were blocked by flames.

“It surprised me how small it was and how difficult it was to access, she said about the escape hatch. “I couldn’t see the people in front of me.”

What did the first crew member see?

“He heard no smoke alarm, he smelled no smoke, but he did see flames when he looked over,” she said. “They didn’t hear anything.”

She described the smoke alarm on the vessel as one that can be bought at Home Depot. She said the Vision — a boat she toured Wednesday that is very similar to the Conception — also had one smoke alarm, but it is not wired to a centralized system with alarms.
Surviving crew members say boat fire was too intense to save any passengers

 

[Kubirai]

Finstad run Worldwide Diving Adventures website has albums of many previous trips. I looked through all photos of Channel Island trips since 2012, and some show various areas of Conception.

 

[ilovewings]

Truth Aquatics Inc., which owned the Conception, filed suit Thursday in U.S. District Court under a pre-Civil War provision of maritime law that allows it to limit its liability.

Anyone who can make a claim against the company will be served with notice the company is asserting it is not liable for damages from victims.

The suit said the company and owners Glen and Dana Fritzler made the boat seaworthy and the craft was properly manned and equipped.

Charles Naylor, who represents victims in maritime law cases, says the action forces family members in their grief to respond to a lawsuit.
BREAKING: Owners of Dive Boat in Deadly Fire File Lawsuit to Avoid Liability

 

[ilovewings]

could somebody please explain their filing a lawsuit denying liability- i dont understand
it---and it is cruel to the families of the victims

 

[Kubirai]

could somebody please explain their filing a lawsuit denying liability- i dont understand
it---and it is cruel to the families of the victims

There are "ambulance chasing" lawyers who contact victims, and file a gigantic claim. The owner is probably trying to pre-empt such lawsuits, using obscure maritime law.

 

[SuziQ]

Truth Aquatics Inc., which owned the Conception, filed suit Thursday in U.S. District Court under a pre-Civil War provision of maritime law that allows it to limit its liability.

Anyone who can make a claim against the company will be served with notice the company is asserting it is not liable for damages from victims.

The suit said the company and owners Glen and Dana Fritzler made the boat seaworthy and the craft was properly manned and equipped.

Charles Naylor, who represents victims in maritime law cases, says the action forces family members in their grief to respond to a lawsuit.
BREAKING: Owners of Dive Boat in Deadly Fire File Lawsuit to Avoid Liability

This is so wrong in so many ways.

 

[Kubirai]

There are "ambulance chasing" lawyers who contact victims, and file a gigantic claim. The owner is probably trying to pre-empt such lawsuits, using obscure maritime law.

The Finstad family business is even more exposed, since they chartered the Conception, and would be considered the main party in any lawsuit.

 

[PommyMommy]

SEP 5, 2019
Electronics Probed as Possible Cause for Mass Fatality Boat Fire Off Santa Cruz Island: NTSB
U.S. investigators on Thursday were examining potential ignition sources of a deadly fire on a scuba diving boat, including electronics aboard the vessel where 34 people were killed off the coast of Southern California.

Investigators know photography equipment, batteries and other electronics were stored and plugged in on the Conception, said Jennifer Homendy, a member of the National Transportation Safety Board.

"We are not ruling anything out at this point," she said.

[...]

The Conception had been in full compliance with Coast Guard regulations, officials said.

The federal investigation continued as divers resumed a search for the last victim who remained missing. Divers have pulled 33 bodies from the seabed and the charred wreckage of the sunken, overturned boat.

[...]

Other California divers have said Truth Aquatics, which owned the Conception, and its captains were very safety-conscious and the tragedy shocked the industry.

[...]

 

[Lilibet]

There are "ambulance chasing" lawyers who contact victims, and file a gigantic claim. The owner is probably trying to pre-empt such lawsuits, using obscure maritime law.

Or it could be their insurance company filing the lawsuit. It can look like someone is suing when it’s really their insurance company exhausting all possibilities before paying out. I’m not going to blame the owners of Truth Aquatics for this yet. They probably can’t control what their insurance company does.

 

[Lilibet]

I wonder if either Truth Aquatics or Worldwide Diving Adventures requires their participants to sign a “hold harmless” agreement. Basically, as I understand it, the agreement acknowledges the risks involved in an activity and absolves the company of responsibility for injuries.

Here’s an example of a contract for renting watercraft (see page 2) BBM:

EXPRESS ASSUMPTION OF RISK AND RESPONSIBILITY: I agree to assume responsibility, even those risks arising out of negligence by Company, other passengers, riders, and/or all participants on the Watercraft. My and our participation in the activity is purely voluntary. I assume full responsibility for myself and all passengers on the Watercraft, including any minor children, for any bodily injury, accident, illness, paralysis, death or loss of personal property even if caused, in whole or in part, by the negligence or other fault of passengers, riders, quests and any other passenger on the Watercraft and even if caused, in whole or in part by the negligence or other fault of the Company, its officers, directors, employees, agents, subsidiaries, legal representatives and assigns.
I agree to the foregoing because I understand that Watercraft, water bodies and areas in and around watercraft and watercraft concessions can be hazardous to both property and persons, thereby posing a substantial risk of damage, injury and even death to both property and persons. Such hazards include but are not limited to:
<lists possible injuries>

By signing this Agreement I acknowledge that if anyone is hurt or property is damaged while I am using the Watercraft, or during my presence on or use of the Watercraft or Company’s equipment, facilities, premises or services, I may be found by a court of law to have waived my right to maintain a lawsuit against Company on the basis of any claim, including subrogation, from which I have released it herein, including claims that the Company was solely or partially negligent or otherwise at fault with respect to such damage, injury or death. I acknowledge and agree that I have had sufficient opportunity to read this entire document. I have read and fully understood it and I agree to be bound by its terms.

I therefore agree, on behalf of myself, my heirs, representatives, survivors and assigns, to release, hold harmless, and indemnify the Company’s respective officers, directors, employees, agents, subsidiaries, legal representatives and assigns, from and against any and all liability for any and all claims of any kind or nature whatsoever (including subrogation) arising out of or relating to my presence on or use of the Watercraft, Company’s watercraft, equipment and/or premises, including without limitation any and all claims for injury or death, or damage to property, including claims arising out of or relating to death, injury or damage arising solely or partially from the negligence or other fault of the Company.

https://www.nature.org/content/dam/tnc/nature/en/documents/independence-lake-boat-agreement-2017.pdf

 

[imstilla.grandma]

I read early on the trip website that the divers sign waivers. This is another article saying so:

“Every trip starts with a mandatory safety briefing and liability waiver. Exits, fire plans, emergency diving procedures, and eating procedures are discussed. There are multiple fire extinguishers on every level. However, the main entrance and egress to the berths are via the double-sided staircase to the showers and bunks at the bow next to the galley,” said Sarina Elliot, who has taken multiple trips with the company since 2015 as a guest and a charter.
Deadly California boat fire has dive community struggling for answers

 

[bluedivergirl]

Every dive I have been on, I have signed my life away with waivers. In the US, Honduras, The Caymans, Mexico, Bon Aire. Different countries, different standards ~ the same waiver.

 

[Mickey Mouse]

The waiver may not stand up in court.

California's liability waiver law refined by ruling

Recreation providers in California may be held liable for gross negligence regardless of the wording on liability waivers signed by participants or their parents, the California Supreme Court ruled 6-1 Monday.

 

[Lilibet]

The waiver may not stand up in court.

California's liability waiver law refined by ruling

Recreation providers in California may be held liable for gross negligence regardless of the wording on liability waivers signed by participants or their parents, the California Supreme Court ruled 6-1 Monday.

Thanks. This 2007 ruling applies only to gross negligence. So it remains to be seen regarding the fire, but apparently juries tend to assume gross negligence in the case of serious injury or death, according to this article.

Ordinary negligence is the failure to provide care that any reasonable person would know was required. Gross negligence is defined as “want of even scant care” or “an extreme departure from the ordinary standard of conduct.”

Lawyers on opposing sides of the Santa Barbara case agreed that Monday’s ruling makes a major change in the law involving legal releases in California.

Even though people now can sue only for gross negligence, juries tend to assume that any accident that results in a serious injury or death must have involved gross negligence, said Andrea J. Saltzman, who represented Santa Barbara in the case.

BBM

 

[Sleuth15]

This NTSB video shows the bunk escape hatch both top side and from bunk room.
Hard to maneuver to get up thru hatch