US Army Corps of EngineersBUILDING STRONG®

US Army Corps of EngineersUS Army Corps of EngineersLife Jacket Policy TestLife Jacket Policy TestLynda NuttLynda NuttNational Association of State Boating Law Administrators Annual Conference

September 2010

BUILDING STRONG®

BUILDING STRONG®

BOTTOM LINE:

Since 1998, nearly 2,000 visitors have died on Corps-managed waters while engaged in water-based recreation:

Greater than 90% of the victims were NOT wearing a life jacket.

BUILDING STRONG®

“…explore the feasibility of establishing a life jacket wear policy on all US Army Corps of Engineers waters.”

MG Don T. Riley

Command Decision to Test

BUILDING STRONG®

BUILDING STRONG®

Vicksburg District Four Lakes in Mississippi

Arkabutla, Arkabutla, Sardis, Grenada Sardis, Grenada and Enid Lakesand Enid Lakes

BUILDING STRONG®

Pittsburgh District Limited policy actually

implemented in 1991; adopted by State in1995 (Corps lakes)

Decline in enforcement activity over years

Brought into the study in 2008

► Baseline data showed very low rates

► Minimal enforcement activity 2009 wear rates fell below

national voluntary rate

BUILDING STRONG®

Sacramento District

BUILDING STRONG®

Policy based on statistical trends Policy based on statistical trends

Greatest risk groups:► Boaters in smallcraft ► Boaters underway► Swimmers outside of designated swim beaches

BUILDING STRONG®

The Wear Rates JSI Study – Voluntary wear JSI Study – Wear rates under policy Validation study important for

confidence in findings Early findings show great success

when policy exists AND is worked ►Through educational contacts►Through posted restriction►Through obvious LE presence

BUILDING STRONG®

Vicksburg DistrictVicksburg District

2008 Baseline versus 2009-10 Cumulative Wear Rates2008 Baseline versus 2009-10 Cumulative Wear Rates

BUILDING STRONG®

The TestWHAT IT IS ABOUT:

- Increasing wear rates to effectively reduce fatalities

- Implementation challenges

- Finding the pro’s and con’s

- Information gathering for USACE and others

WHAT IT IS NOT ABOUT:

- Killing boating or any other water-based recreation

- Taking away personal choices

- Replacing education

BUILDING STRONG®

What we’ve learnedWhat we’ve learned Advance coordination and continued Advance coordination and continued

communication is criticalcommunication is critical

Education still plays a roleEducation still plays a role

Boaters will comply when faced with a Boaters will comply when faced with a policy; swimmers outside designated policy; swimmers outside designated areas were tougher to regulateareas were tougher to regulate

Lives have been saved Lives have been saved

BUILDING STRONG®

Documented statements from survivors Documented statements from survivors that despite educational messages, that despite educational messages, they would not have worn a life jacket they would not have worn a life jacket without policywithout policy

BUILDING STRONG®

USACE Test Will DocumentUSACE Test Will Document Wear rates pre-and-post policy testWear rates pre-and-post policy test

Recreation effectsRecreation effects

Budget and staffing implicationsBudget and staffing implications

Public, Stakeholders and Public, Stakeholders and Congressional reactions/actionsCongressional reactions/actions

Agency costs of not having policyAgency costs of not having policy

BUILDING STRONG®

Our expectationsOur expectations Our test will be a catalyst for changeOur test will be a catalyst for change Recognition by Corps, US Coast Guard Recognition by Corps, US Coast Guard

and partners of need for national policyand partners of need for national policy Acceptance of life jacket policy by Acceptance of life jacket policy by

boating public boating public To be able to make solid To be able to make solid

recommendations to HQs leadershiprecommendations to HQs leadership► Is it right for the Corps?Is it right for the Corps?