iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Coast Guard Cutters Rust Away, Break Down


First Posted: 12/21/11 11:21 AM ET Updated: 12/21/11 11:33 AM ET

BALTIMORE -- Cmdr. William Lane climbs down a steep ladder deep within the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Bear.

Stepping over a pipe with paint blistered and bubbled by rust, the commanding officer ducks into a narrow storage area beside the hull and shines a flashlight into a dark corner mottled with rust, the smell of corroded iron mingling with diesel fuel and saltwater.

"I'm not sure how far into the hull plating it goes," Lane says as he peers into the void two feet below the cutter's waterline.

No water can seep in now. The 270-foot Bear has been in dry-dock at the Coast Guard Yard here since October, where it is undergoing a $10 million overhaul scheduled to last until May. When it was launched in 1980, the first of a class of medium-endurance cutters (WMEC) designed for search-and-rescue and law enforcement, the Bear was built to last 30 years. Now officials are counting on repairs and upgrades to give it another 10, maybe 15, years on patrol from its base in Portsmouth, Va.

"It's always a struggle," said Lane, whose vessel typically sails into heavy seas and stormy weather that Navy ships typically avoid, which contributes significantly to the cutters' higher rate of corrosion from salt air and water. His last patrol, a drug interdiction operation in the Caribbean, was delayed because of "a cascading set of failures" that included a busted water maker and problems with the propulsion controls. Before going into dry-dock, the Bear was logging 15 to 30 "casualties," or mechanical breakdowns, on every eight-week patrol.

"The crews on the ship work very, very hard to keep them running and executing their mission," Lane said, but, "It's a day-to-day fight."

One the Coast Guard has been fighting for more than a decade. A perfect storm of mismanagement, procurement cost overruns, expanded post-9/11 security duties, budget constraints and a rapidly aging fleet have combined, analysts say, to make a mockery of the service's motto: Semper Paratus -- Always ready.

The frequently floundering fleet -- the Bear was one of four WMECs in for rehab of a total 13 -- has increasingly struggled to carry out missions that range from port security to policing commercial fisheries to saving mariners to enforcing drug and immigration laws. Squeezed resources have also affected the Coast Guard's ability to inspect offshore drilling platforms to prevent future disasters like the BP Gulf oil spill.

The sea service came up short last year after another disaster, the devastating earthquake in Haiti. Of the dozen large cutters -- including the Bear -- sent to evacuate Americans and bring critical supplies to Haitians, 10 needed emergency repairs that delayed or took them out of action.

Earlier this year, the Cutter Mohawk was forced to suspend a Caribbean patrol for 10 days while it underwent emergency repairs in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, to replace a busted lube oil cooler in the engine room. Other ships have been forced into port to repair or replace hydraulics, radar, propulsion, air conditioning and other critical systems worn down by age and overuse.

"We're sensitive to the fact that we're in fiscally tough times right now," said Vice Adm. Robert Parker, who commands the Coast Guard's Atlantic area. Still, "There's a certain breaking point ... where it's so hard to maintain it that the effort that you expend to maintain it really distracts you from the ability to do your job"

"I think we're at that latter stage now," he said.

The aging fleet "affects where you can go and how long you can be there and what you can do," said Robbin Laird, a defense analyst who follows Coast Guard issues closely. "Ship building is great job creation. If the president wants shovel-ready jobs, these are shovel-ready jobs."

IN DEEP WATER OVER DEEPWATER

The Coast Guard is charged with enforcing U.S. law in an exclusive economic zone that extends out 200 miles from shore and includes 90,000 miles of coastline. At 3.4 million square miles, it is the world's largest territorial sea zone.

In 2000, according to a USA Today story entered into the Congressional Record, the Coast Guard fleet patrolling those waters was older than 38 of 41 navies of similar size and mission. An ambitious modernization program known as Deepwater was soon launched, only to be entirely rethought after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks. Congress transferred the Coast Guard from the Department of Transportation to the new Department of Homeland Security to reflect its expanded role in maritime security.

But in a move many have likened to assigning the fox to guard the henhouse, the Coast Guard handed Deepwater to a joint venture between defense contractors Lockheed Martin and Northrup Grumman. Delays, cost overruns, shoddy work and allegations of fraud soon followed. The Coast Guard was put back in charge of its own modernization last year as Congress barred private contractors from overseeing it.

But the damage was done. Deepwater was originally a $17 billion program that called for 91 new cutters, 124 new small boats and 247 new or modernized airplanes, helicopters and unmanned drones. By July 2011, the Government Accountability Office said the cost had ballooned to $29.3 billion. Delivery of all new vessels and aircraft has been pushed from 2018 to 2027.

Rep. Bennie Thompson (D-Miss.), ranking member of the House Homeland Security Committee, told The Huffington Post he still has doubts about the Coast Guard's ability to stop cost overruns in what remains a "flawed" program.

Still, the congressman said the Coast Guard needs new ships.

"If we had the money and support to do that, that would be optimal, but it just appears that Congress is not in the mindset of providing those funds," Thompson said.

Under the 2012 spending legislation recently passed by Congress, the Coast Guard will receive $10 billion, $86 million over this year's budget. The appropriations bill matches the $1.4 billion requested by President Obama to replace and sustain ships, boats, aircraft and other equipment.

The money will fund another National Security Cutter, which at 418-feet is nearly the size of a Navy frigate and the largest ship the Coast Guard has ever owned. The service recently took delivery of the Stratton, the third of eight high-endurance cutters to replace the vintage 1960s Hamilton-class cutters.

The 2012 budget also has funds for six smaller patrol boats, two HC-144A surveillance aircraft and 40 small boats for search and rescue.

But, as Parker has noted, there is no money to replace the aging ice-breaking tugs that keep shipping lanes in the Great Lakes open in winter. Similarly, there is "no relief on the horizon" for old river buoy and construction tenders that aid navigation on inland waterways.

And then there is the lack of even one operational heavy icebreaker in the Arctic Ocean. At a time when global warming has led to more vessel traffic and the prospect of oil exploration in areas once permanently covered by sea ice, Congress has refused to fund new ships that could reach a sinking cruise ship or oil spill in the far north. House Republicans have threatened to scrap the last remaining heavy icebreaker, even as the State Department recently signed a treaty pledging to aid in major search-and-rescue operations that will be made more difficult, if not impossible, without the ice-busters.

ON THE MARGINS

But the Coast Guard's top priority is replacing "Famous class" cutters like the Bear and the even older 210-foot "Reliance class" cutters that first entered service during the Vietnam War with a new Offshore Patrol Cutter (OPC).

Intended to be the workhorse of the service, the OPC was to have entered service in 2012 but was put on a back burner after Coast Guard officials realized they couldn't afford both it and the National Security Cutter at the same time. They opted for the latter and have since shown off the state-of-the-art vessels, most of them headed to the Pacific Coast and Alaska, where distances are far vaster than in the East.

The new federal budget includes just $25 million for final design work on the OPC before it is put out to bid for construction. The earliest possible delivery date for the first cutter is 2018.

The Coast Guard wants 25 OPCs, which would be the single largest purchase the service has ever made. Having already once escaped the chopping block, the OPC fleet is expected to cost $8.1 billion, more than double original estimates.

Coast Guard Commandant Robert Papp has urged Congress to fully fund the new cutters. But GAO called the Coast Guard's modernization program "unachievable" given "today's climate of rapidly building fiscal pressures," and the previous commandant, Thad Allen, was reportedly pressured by the White House to tone it down after he complained about his service's ability to respond to crises like Haiti without new equipment.

Yet Ron O'Rourke, a naval affairs specialist at the Congressional Research Service, has warned for years that the Coast Guard wasn't asking for enough. Fiscal realities aside, he said, even if Deepwater was fully funded, the service would be left with "a force with as much as 40 percent fewer cutters and 50 percent fewer aircraft than the service calculates it would need to more or less fully perform its projected missions in coming years."

To buy all the cutters and aircraft it needs, O'Rourke estimates, would cost a staggering $65 billion, not including onshore support -- a figure more than twice what the service has requested.

The Coast Guard has New Jersey Republican Frank LoBiondi's sympathy, but the chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure subcommittee recently spoke for many lawmakers when he said Congress "will not simply supply a blank check" in a time of fiscal constraints.

"We are managing on the margins for all of the missions we consider important for the national interest but, quite frankly, we have to take some shortcuts," said Parker's Pacific Coast counterpart, Vice Adm. Manson Brown. Whether it's a terrorist attack like 9/11, a major oil spill or a natural disaster like Hurricane Katrina, "When there are surge events, we do accept a lot of risk," he said.

To mitigate that risk while it awaits the new cutters, the Coast Guard began a program in 2005 to retrofit many of its old ships with modern operating systems and even new hulls. At the time, only 40 percent of the fleet was fully mission-ready on any day. That number is now up to 60 percent, and the service is aiming for 80 percent by 2014.

But, as Parker notes, there is only so much that workers here in Baltimore can do. Take the Bear's main propulsion control console, which fills a large cabin. "You can replace the computing power that's in there with what's in an iPhone," he said.

Like other older ships, the Bear was built before stricter standards for sewage and graywater discharges, air pollution and fuel efficiency.

"Some of this stuff is so old, we have to custom fit parts -- it's not sustainable," Parker said. "It's like trying to take a 1970s car and really build it up to be a patrol car that we'd use out on the streets today."

Video produced for The Huffington Post by Sara Kenigsberg.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST POLITICS
Subscribe to the HuffPost Hill newsletter!
BALTIMORE -- Cmdr. William Lane climbs down a steep ladder deep within the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Bear. Stepping over a pipe with paint blistered and bubbled by rust, the commanding officer ducks ...
BALTIMORE -- Cmdr. William Lane climbs down a steep ladder deep within the U.S. Coast Guard Cutter Bear. Stepping over a pipe with paint blistered and bubbled by rust, the commanding officer ducks ...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 114
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Post Comment Preview Comment
To reply to a Comment: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to.
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
02:09 PM on 01/04/2012
FCW story on the Coast Guard trying to declare Deepwater program dead

http://fcw.com/articles/2012/01/04/coast-guard-chief-acquisition-officer-declares-deepwater-to-be-dead.aspx
05:25 PM on 01/02/2012
Im not surprised at all to hear this. I just got out this past summer. There were portions of my cutters hull where the paint was thicker than the steel. We even had an unsealed (not) potable water tank. Thank god they decomm'd that ol' girl (ironically not before wasting A LOT of $$$ on refurbing the bridge for the ceremony because the D5 commander was coming...) The crew of the Northland definitely didnt help when they borrowed the poor Bear. Just another reason I jumped ship..
08:09 AM on 01/02/2012
Note that the reshaped Deepwater II program continues one of the wasteful premises of the original Deepwater program, and, for that matter, almost all Pentagon ship and aircraft procurement projects: the Not-Invented-Here refusal to purchase mission-ready platforms available from overseas suppliers. Shipyard in NATO countries, for example, could fulfill orders for these patrol boats quickly and more cheaply than the Deepwater contractors. But, uh, being foreign contractors, they would have to incorporate US subsidiaries for one of the post important parts of providing those badly-needed ships and boats: providing campaign contributions to the Representatives and Senators on the relevant committees. The same logic applies to the procurement of wheeled and tracked vehicles for the Army and the Marines.
04:26 PM on 01/02/2012
Employing people here using our designs is preferred. But the FRC and original 110s were leveraged designs from overseas. I hate to see this but if that is the most value added way to go then so be it. Regardless of the overseas option we should not be using contractors that screw us here. Where are the debarments? Killing ICGS didn't change much. ICGS subcontracted itself when it picked Northrop to build the ships and they picked Bollinger for the 123s and the CG picked them directly for the FRCs. Both are being sued by the government for committing fraud and the government gives them more contracts? I understand innocent until proven guilty but this is nonsense. If the DoJ takes or allows for a case on its behalf that should bring at least a pause in future contracts until the case is completed. If companies are found innocent then let them sue the government for damages. The DoJ has emails from Bollinger showing they lied about the design calculations to save money on steel. In spite of that the government gave them more money for more FRCs. With that kind of accountability why would the contractors think or do otherwise? Our government rolls over and trains the contractors to continue and even increase their bad behavior. (And where are the criminal cases? All of these suits are civil. Weren't we at war? How fraud during a time of war, when it involves DoD or DHS contracts, not criminal?)
10:36 AM on 12/28/2011
A Case of Negligence?
Given the significant and worsening degradation of the fleet’s assets and Coast Guard’s mission performance capability, especially when compared to the post 9/11 RAND report, can one make a case that mission failure could be caused by negligence?
What if a mission fails and there is a loss of life due to a breakdown of an asset that was supposed to be replaced by now through the Deepwater program? (For arguments sake I am making the comparison to the RAND baseline schedule, not the 10 or 15 year accelerations, and the static degradation measured by the DHS IG recently. If that failed asset has not been replaced because of willful decisions and not the lack of funds or excusable events isn’t that negligence?

More of this post can be found here
http://cgreport.wordpress.com/2011/12/28/a-case-of-negligence/
photo
Marvin Hadley Jr
Blinding Insight
10:45 PM on 12/24/2011
Blame this on Reagan and gw bush, eh?
11:06 AM on 12/24/2011
Sorry, "privatization" was the wrong word to use. I am talking only about an private source of capital, since Congress cannot supply sufficient money for USCG to acquire as many assets as it needs within the time it needs them. Although the financing company or consortium would own the assets during the leasing period, USCG would control the acquisition, not industry. USCG would have all the benefits (and risks) of economic ownership. I first had this thought back in 2000 or 2001; it was obvious even then that the National Security Cutter would monopolize the cashflow leaving little left over for the rest of the assets to be built concurrently. USCG was part of DOT at that time, and DOT routinely uses capital leasing for infrastructure replacement or creation. For example, see: http://www.fta.dot.gov/grants/12865.html.
01:02 PM on 12/24/2011
Could be. Thing is none of the issues were tough design issues. This was all caused by leadership decisions. Now applied to real cutting edge design like fighters I have thought a NASA model would work. Why not have the government foot the bill for just a couple cutting edge fighters so industry doesn't have to worry about losing money? Of course there would have to be good oversight. Seems to work for shuttles?
10:42 AM on 12/23/2011
Privatization could actually be the answer to making up the huge funding deficit for building new cutters. Commercial funds could be brought into play as is done with non-military infrastructure projects by means of capital leases. These are not like regular leases, but are more like long-term loans. USCG would get the money and could still control cutter design and manufacture. Congress will hate the idea because it takes the purse strings out of their hands. Also, it is illegal to lease if leasing is more expensive than buying. However interest rates are so low today, and having cash in hand to build cutters in economic order quantities rather than onesies and twosies would very likely cover the interest cost and more. It deserves a look.
09:57 AM on 12/24/2011
I don't think you understand how we got here. ICGS was almost privatization as they wrote the requirements, design, built, wrote the tests and self-certified.Heck they subcontracted themselves for all of the work. Because of how bad they screwed the CG and the country the DW program and ICGS was terminated. As a matter of fact a law was passed saying all of DHS and DoD weapons program can never use a lead system integrator again. ICGS had a sweet deal and ruined it for everyone. Industry was supposed to have the nations back, be a trusted agent for the government and act on their behalf. They failed miserably. Government doesn't do all things well and since they are comprised of people they are open to a lot of the failings industry leaders are. However the profit motive isn't the same. As such government should be doing some important things. Do you really want industry running air traffic control? Our military? Maybe the FBI could be farmed out too? The only way industry can do this is if somehow strong ethical leadership is guaranteed to prevail. As that won't happen let's leave DHS, the military, the CG etc to the government and do our best to keep them in line.
09:14 PM on 12/22/2011
I am Michael DeKort - the whistleblower who raised the issues. Things are worse than this excellent article covers. We found a new $9B fraud in discovery while trying to get the 123 refund. That fraud involves a false guaranty and the fraudulent inducement of the whole contract by ICGS. As for the fleet-compare the current status to the RAND report which was commissioned by the USCG post 9/11. We are between 5 and 20 years behind their recommendations. There are no 123s, no FRCs or OPC in the fleet and less than half of the NSCs there were supposed to be. This is why those aging ships are still in service. http://www.rand.org/content/dam/rand/pubs/monographs/2004/RAND_MG114.pdf

http://www.oig.dhs.gov/assets/Mgmt/OIG_11-111_Sep11.pdf
This is the new DHS IG report that shows the mission degradation per year. (P4). And notice the Coast Guard explains why on P5. “According to Coast Guard officials, this decline in total resource hours is attributable, in part, to unavailability of aging cutters and aircraft resulting from unscheduled maintenance. There has also been increased use of these assets for support functions such as training. Support hours for the 11 statutory missions have increased 15% since FY 2007, thereby decreasing the total available resource hours for conducting missions.”
We are hopeful that working with the Coast Guard and DoJ on our False Claims Act case we can right these horrible wrongs.
08:31 AM on 12/23/2011
These reports demonstrably show the Coast Guard is far worse off than before. And that is just compared to the RAND post 9/11 Deepwater project baseline schedule. Factor in the 10 and 15 year accelerations RAND recommended and the country is far less safe than before 9/11.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Chris Herz
01:56 PM on 12/22/2011
We blow billions to patrol the Persian Gulf, to send ships into the Black Sea to annoy Russia, to hassle the Chinese in their own waters, and the result is we seem unable to build the small vessels to patrol our own coasts. Maybe the answer is to brink these fleets home.
Then of course how many of the suckers -- whoops, I should say citizens -- are aware that much construction of what new vessels the Coast Guard does get has been out-sourced abroad?
09:41 AM on 12/22/2011
The Coast Guard should be funded to operate like the Navy, put a 20 year life limit on its cutters and continuously replace them, no ands-ifs, or buts. There is no more pride in gold numbers on a hull. With the current world situation & critical threats to our shores, our defense requires a modern multi-purpose fleet. The Coast Guard must be equipped to effectively perform all of the missions consistently to maintain our security. It seems that we only wake up after the bad guys penetrate our safety net. How can we be Semper Paratus without the support of our government. If our elected officials wimper that there are no funds, suggest canceling the entitlements where so many useless political projects with no bearing on the defese of our nation exist.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:34 PM on 12/21/2011
"The CG has many more missions tasked to it by Congress then it can successful­ly perform."
Along with being perennially underfunded I wonder what (if) % of the failed deep water program was created by congressional mandates?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
mike3845
06:58 PM on 12/21/2011
Eisenhower warned us this would happen.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8y06NSBBRtY
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
10:31 PM on 12/21/2011
Mike,
Look what our congess critters of both parties have done. They waste more defense dollars than any other group.
06:19 PM on 12/21/2011
As with anything else, the people need to decide what they want $$ spent on. The CG has many more missions tasked to it by Congress then it can successfully perform.
photo
beauwulff
I'm dyin' last
05:41 PM on 12/21/2011
After the US's 50+ years of overseas military debacles, the Coast Guard should be transformed into the largest branch in the service.
sugacan1
Expect the BS, but NEVER accept it!
08:50 PM on 12/21/2011
Coast Guard is not Department of Defence. It is Department of Transportation...
photo
The Anti-Con
Conservatism is the devils work
09:26 PM on 12/21/2011
No it is the Department of Homeland security... They fell into that Department after 9/11...
photo
The Anti-Con
Conservatism is the devils work
09:27 PM on 12/21/2011
Also Coast Guard was activated to fight in WW1 and WW2
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ljimlong
To promote the general Welfare-Constitution
04:59 PM on 12/21/2011
Hey, not to worry, the repubs will privatize it and everything will be OK. (Sarcasm)