The 

Aids to Navigation Bulletin 

National Aids to Navigation School Summer 2009
National Aids to Navigation School 

US Coast Guard Training Center, Yorktown, Virginia 

ATON systems of the United States and its territories 

are established, operated, and maintained by the Coast 

Guard to assist mariners in locating their position and to 

warn of nearby dangers and obstructions. This is done 

for the benefit of commercial vessels, recreational boaters, and to support the operations of the Armed Forces. 

Title 14 of the US Code makes this a responsibility of 

the Coast Guard. 

The Bulletin is published to support the individuals and 

units involved in providing a reliable ATON system for 

the mariner. The Bulletin seeks to meet the following 

objectives: 

• To provide a means of circulating job skill information among ATON technicians, 

• To increase the professionalism and knowledge of 

all ATON personnel, 

• To act as a channel for information flow amidst the 

ATON servicing units, Sector Office staffs, District 

Office staffs, Headquarters staffs, and units, and 

• To publish articles and photographs about people, 

units, or events which may be of general interest to 

the ATON community. 

To satisfy these objectives, it’s necessary for all who 

read the Bulletin to take an active part in determining its 

contents. If you have found a “better way” or performed 

a unique evolution, share it with other people in the 

ATON field. Submissions are welcome in any form. 

Articles and images may be submitted electronically to 

the editor via email at tracy.m.speelhoffer@uscg.mil or 

mailed to: 

ATON Bulletin Editor (tnaton) 

US Coast Guard Training Center Yorktown 

1 USCG Training Center 

Yorktown, VA 23690 

Electronic submissions are preferred. Please keep photographs in original electronic form, and send them as 

separate files; do not imbed or copy them into word 

documents. 

The articles contained herein are non-directive and nonrecord material. They are published for informational 

purposes only. 

Special permission for reproduction, either in whole or 

in part, with the exception of copyrighted articles or 

artwork, is not required as long as credit is given to the 

Bulletin and the article’s author. 

School Telephone Numbers 

(757) 856-XXXX 

General Information/YN............... 2139

LCDR B. Huff, School Chief ....... 2143

LT S. Kingsley, Asst School Chief ..2509

CWO D. Merrill, Tech Advisor/ 

Buoy Deck Training Team..........2145

LTjg T. Speelhoffer, Operations....2350 

BMC C. Langeslay, Minor Aids... 2977

EMCS K. Wiehrs, Major Aids...... 2795 

Fax .............................................. 2326 

After Hours Technical Support Hotline 

(757) 449-3681 

Editor: LTjg Tracy Speelhoffer 

School Home Page: 

www.uscg.mil/tcyorktown/ops/naton/index.shtm 

Deadlines for Articles: 

Summer 2009 - Phonebook 

Fall 2009 - 15 September 

Winter 2009 - 15 January 

Spring 2010 - 15 April 

Volume 36, Number 3 

 

On the Cover: Then-SN Sean Peterson (now MST3 Sean Peterson) 

works an aid on CGC JAMES RANKIN (WLM 555) 

Photo by PA1 John Edwards, 

PADET Baltimore 

 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

1 

IN THIS ISSUE . . . 

NATON News.........................2 

Good to Know........................4 

News Clips..............................8 

Technical Corner...................24 

Buoy Deck Training Team....28 

From the Helm......................32 

USCGC BRISTOL BAY (WTGB 102) steams along with a full deckload. 

Photo contributed by BM1 Kristian Sova. 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

2 

NATON Resources Page 

by ETC Noel Stakes, NATON School 

Are you missing your copy of the DGPS Equipment Verification Job Aid? How about the Solar Design worksheet? Or how about the Technical Manual for the GCF-C2-1216-DGPS(V)1, 

Differential Global Positioning System? You can relax! Many of the handouts we distribute in 

class, and even some of the Powerpoints we use, are available on the NATON Resources Web 

Site: 

http://cgweb.tcyorktown.uscg.mil/NATON/download.asp 

This page is part of the Training Center Yorktown intranet, but anyone with CGDN access can 

get to the intranet by using the link above. At our site, you can find many of the manuals, job 

aids, and yes, even some of the Powerpoints used in our classes. They are free for the taking, 

and do not require stamps or any other kind of postage. All you need is a standard Coast Guard 

workstation hooked up to the intranet, and in the words of Emeril Lagasse, “BAMM,” you’re 

in! It’s painless—even the Powerpoints are easier when you can do them at your own pace! 

In addition to course materials, we also post links to other interesting websites, useful tools 

we’ve received from other units, a link to the latest ATON Bulletin and 3 back issues, and even 

a narrated video of a buoy deck evolution! You never know what you might find on the NATON Resources Web Page! Along those lines, if you’ve developed a tool or found a web site 

that’s helpful to you, and think the rest of the fleet might find it useful, send it to someone here 

at NATON and we’ll post it on the site. 

This is not a new web page, in fact it has been in place for several years, but it’s always good to 

get the word out there to those who didn’t know about it. The web page is a valuable source to 

use when brushing up on the standards of ATON, and provides you with a lot of materials 

should you want to do some training at your unit. 

Something that IS new, however, is the capability to subscribe to updates on the website. 

That’s right, you can sign up to be alerted when something new has been added to our resources 

page. When you go to the resources page, on the right hand side of the screen you’ll see a box 

that says “Subscribe to the NATON Web Site!” Simply click on that box and follow the easy 

directions, and every time we add something to the site, including the latest issue of the ATON 

Bulletin, you’ll get an email letting you know! 

Still can’t find what you’re looking for? Try the NATON Hotline at (757) 449-3681. This 

phone is a cell phone that is attached to one of the instructors 24/7. If the instructor who answers the phone can’t answer your question, he or she will find someone who can as soon as 

possible. 

NATON NEWS 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

3 

NATON NEWS 

Click on this box and follow the simple instructions to receive an email when we add 

something new to the Resources web site—

including the latest issue of the ATON Bulletin! 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

4 

Purchasing ATON Safety Boots 

by CWO CJ Brown, Office of Cutter Forces (CG-7513) 

In some cases, the current standard uniform boot (CG Super Boot) does not meet the safety requirements needed to conduct ATON operations. There are many unique environments and jobs 

in the ATON community, and for this reason there are many different safety and ANSI/ASTM 

requirements that must be met. In certain situations, the boot has insufficient height for tall 

grassy and/or snake infested ATON environments, does not afford adequate protection for 

chainsaw use, and lacks a steel shank which assists in ladder climbing. Another concern is to 

standard footwear: due to inherently harsh buoy tender deck operations, constant water exposure and continuous boot abrasions/cuts are typical when working on deck or handling ATON 

gear. 

Within the ATON and purchasing community there is a perceived inability to legally procure 

safety footwear appropriate for hazardous shipboard and/or land environments. ALCOAST 

262/08 (reprinted at the end of this article) outlines policy for Coast Guard procurement and 

replacement of safety shoes and prescription eyewear for Coast Guard military and civilian personnel exposed to workplace hazards. This article is not creating policy but rather supporting 

the policies set forth in the Uniform Regulations Manual COMDINST M1020.6 (series) chapter 

4.D and ALCOAST 262/08. ATON units should reference the previously mentioned manual 

and ALCOAST when the standard issued CG uniform boot is deemed ineffective for the mission being completed or when issued footwear is deemed unusable due to deterioration and 

needs replacing. 

Purchase of appropriate safety boot: Paragraph 2 of ALCOAST 262/08 establishes that a 

workplace assessment by “Safety & Health Professionals” is required to determine the need 

for and type of appropriate safety gear. The “Safety & Health Professionals” referenced in 

ALCOAST 262/08 are considered to be the Unit Safety Officer, Sector Safety Officer, or the 

MLC (kse) Safety and Environmental Health Officer (SEHO) detached to each District. 

Once an assessment is completed, the appropriate safety gear should be identified as a piece 

of organizational clothing/PPE asset. The PPE assessment shall be documented and filed as 

appropriate to be referenced during unit inspections. It is important to note that it is the 

unit’s responsibility to purchase a boot that meets the appropriate ANSI and/or ASTM standards along with consideration for the geographical location, environment and the specific 

ATON mission. Personal preference is not an acceptable reason to purchase a specific 

brand. 

Replacement of uniform boot: Paragraph 2.A. of ALCOAST 262/08 establishes that except

where the work environment causes an unusually high rate of deterioration, maintenance and 

replacement of the uniform safety boot is the member’s responsibility. That being said, it is 

understood that a member’s uniform safety boot is routinely damaged well ahead of the typical life cycle when working in ATON environments. When the working environment damGOOD TO KNOW 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

5 

ages or degrades the boots to a degree where they no longer provide adequate and reliable 

safety protection, the member shall request a new pair from his/her supervisor. The supervisor shall inspect the boots for damage or deterioration and if appropriate will authorize a new 

pair of boots. Once the member receives a new pair of boots, the unserviceable boots will be 

turned into the supervisor and destroyed. 

Documentation for issuing and replacing footwear: Chapter 4.D.of the Uniform Regulations 

Manual COMDINST 1020.6 (series) permits ATON (and other) units to acquire CG safety 

boots, or substitutes, under Organizational Clothing procedures and must be accounted for 

using the AF-538 form. These items are to be replaced on a turn in basis, that is, one turned 

in and one issued. The turned in footwear is deemed unusable and is destroyed. 

It is important to note that safety footwear issued for ATON usage is only worn when conducting the specific ATON mission. Once the member completes that mission and shifts back to the 

uniform of the day, the appropriate footwear must be worn. For example, when changing back 

into the ODU at the ANT, the CG Super Boot is the only boot authorized to be worn. It is also 

important that when completing the purchase request the purpose of the boot procurement is 

clear. State that you are looking to purchase a safety boot to be worn while working the ATON 

mission. This must be clear because the only authorized uniform boot for procurement is the 

CG Super Boot. 

R 052011Z JUN 08 ZUI ASN-A00157000046 ZYB 

FM COMDT COGARD WASHINGTON DC//CG-11// 

TO ALCOAST 

BT 

UNCLAS //N05100// 

ALCOAST 262/08 

COMDTNOTE 5100 

SUBJ: COAST GUARD SAFETY POLICY AND PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES FOR 

SAFETY FOOTWEAR (SAFETY SHOES) AND PRESCRIPTION SAFETY EYEWEAR FOR 

CIVILIAN AND MILITARY MEMBERS 

A. OSHA STANDARDS FOR GENERAL INDUSTRY, 29 CFR 1910 

B. SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH MANUAL, COMDTINST M5100.47 

C. BASIC PROGRAM ELEMENTS FOR FEDERAL EMPLOYEES OSHA, 29 CFR 1960 

D. RESCUE AND SURVIVAL SYSTEMS MANUAL, COMDTINST M10470.10 (SERIES) 

E. AVIATION LIFE SUPPORT MANUAL, COMDTINST M13520.1 (SERIES) 

F. UNIFORM REGULATIONS MANUAL, COMDTINST M1020.6E (SERIES) 

G. MEDICAL MANUAL, COMDTINST M6000.1, (SERIES) 

1. DISCUSSION. THE COAST GUARD ACTIVELY STRIVES TO PROTECT ITS 

PERSONNEL BY ASSESSING AND CONTROLLING RISKS. THE BEST MEANS OF 

PROTECTING PERSONNEL FROM EXPOSURE TO HAZARDS IN THE WORKPLACE IS 

TO ELIMINATE OR MINIMIZE HAZARD EXPOSURE THROUGH ENGINEERING 

CONTROLS. IF THIS IS NOT FEASIBLE, ADMINISTRATIVE CONTROLS THAT 

REDUCE EMPLOYEE EXPOSURE TO THE HAZARD SHOULD BE IMPLEMENTED. IN 

SITUATIONS WHERE NEITHER OF THESE METHODS CAN BE EMPLOYED, 

REFERENCES A AND B REQUIRE THE EMPLOYER TO CONDUCT A HAZARD RISK 

ASSESSMENT AND IDENTIFY HAZARDS THAT ARE PRESENT. REFERENCE C, 

REQUIRES THE EMPLOYER PROVIDE APPROPRIATE PERSONAL PROTECTIVE 

EQUIPMENT (PPE) TO AFFECTED EMPLOYEES AT RISK TO HAZARDOUS 

GOOD TO KNOW 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

6 

GOOD TO KNOW 

EXPOSURES. THE EMPLOYER IS FURTHER REQUIRED TO TRAIN EMPLOYEES TO 

USE THE PPE AND ENFORCE ITS USAGE. EMPLOYEES ARE REQUIRED TO USE 

THE PROVIDED EQUIPMENT FOR THEIR PROTECTION. TO CLARIFY THE 

ACCEPTABILITY FOR UNITS TO PROVIDE SAFETY GEAR, THIS MESSAGE 

ESTABLISHES POLICY FOR COAST GUARD PROCUREMENT AND REPLACEMENT OF 

SAFETY SHOES AND PRESCRIPTION EYEWEAR FOR COAST GUARD MILITARY AND 

CIVILIAN PERSONNEL EXPOSED TO WORKPLACE HAZARDS REQUIRING THESE 

ITEMS. 

2. POLICY. UNIT COMMANDING OFFICERS AND OFFICERS IN CHARGE SHALL 

ENSURE A WORKPLACE HAZARD RISK ASSESSMENT HAS BEEN CONDUCTED AT 

EACH WORKPLACE BY SAFETY AND HEALTH PROFESSIONALS, TO DETERMINE THE 

NEED FOR AND TYPE OF SAFETY FOOTWEAR AND EYEWEAR TO PROTECT 

EMPLOYEES. THIS POLICY CHANGE WILL BE REFLECTED IN REFERENCE B 

DURING THE NEXT REVISION. FOR HEADQUARTERS LEVEL SAFETY PROGRAMS 

(RESCUE AND SURVIVAL SYSTEMS, AVIATION LIFE SUPPORT, ORDNANCE), 

REFERENCES D AND E WILL APPLY. 

 A. MILITARY PERSONNEL. FOOTWEAR SHALL BE STANDARD UNIFORM SAFETY 

SHOES IN ACCORDANCE WITH REFERENCE F, UNLESS WORKPLACE HAZARD RISK 

ASSESSMENT INDICATES A SPECIALTY TYPE SHOE IS REQUIRED. EXCEPT 

WHERE THE WORK ENVIRONMENT CAUSES AN UNUSUALLY HIGH RATE OF 

DETERIORATION, MAINTENANCE AND REPLACEMENT OF SAFETY SHOES IS THE 

MEMBERS RESPONSIBILITY. SAFETY PRESCRIPTION EYEWEAR WILL BE 

PROVIDED PER REF G. 

 B. CIVILIAN PERSONNEL. CIVILIAN EMPLOYEES WORKING IN AREAS 

REQUIRING SAFETY FOOTWEAR OR EYEWEAR WILL BE PROVIDED THESE ITEMS 

USING STANDARD PROCUREMENT PROCEDURES INCLUDING THE REQUIREMENTS OF 

FEDERAL ACQUISITION REGULATION (FAR) PART 8. HOWEVER, CIVILIAN 

EMPLOYEES REQUIRED TO WEAR PRESCRIPTION SAFETY EYEWEAR MUST OBTAIN 

THE PRESCRIPTION AT THEIR OWN EXPENSE. THE SUPPLY SOURCE AND 

PROCUREMENT OF SAFETY FOOTWEAR AND EYEWEAR ARE NON-NEGOTIABLE IN 

COLLECTIVE BARGAINING AGREEMENTS. 

3. EQUIPMENT SPECIFICATIONS AND REQUIREMENTS. 

 A. ALL PERSONNEL PROTECTIVE EQUIPMENT SHALL BE OF APPROPRIATE 

DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION TO ENSURE THE SAFETY OF THE WORKER FOR THE 

PARTICULAR WORK PERFORMED. PERSONNEL SHALL USE ONLY THOSE ITEMS 

THAT HAVE BEEN RECOGNIZED AND APPROVED IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE 

FOLLOWING STANDARDS. SAFETY SHOES SHALL CONFORM TO THE REQUIREMENTS 

OF THE ASTM F2413-05 STANDARD. WHEN SAFETY SHOES EXHIBIT WEAR, SUCH 

THAT SAFETY PROTECTION IS NO LONGER AFFORDED, THE EMPLOYEE SHALL 

CONTACT THEIR SUPERVISOR AND REQUEST A REPLACEMENT PAIR. WHEN NEW 

SAFETY SHOES ARE PROVIDED IAW PARA. 2 ABOVE, THE OLD PAIR SHALL BE 

DESTROYED. FOR MILITARY PERSONNEL, PRESCRIPTION SAFETY EYEWEAR 

SHALL MEET ANSI Z87.1-1989 2003 HIGH IMPACT STANDARDS AND MAY BE 

PROVIDED WHEN CURRENT SAFETY EYEWEAR IS NO LONGER USABLE OR WHEN 

THE MEMBERS PRESCRIPTION CHANGES. 

 B. BOAT FORCES PROTECTIVE CLOTHING AND EQUIPMENT SHALL MEET 

SPECIFICATIONS LISTED IN REF D. FLIGHT CLOTHING SHALL MEET 

SPECIFICATIONS LISTED IN REF E. 

4. FOR QUESTIONS CONCERNING PPE PROCUREMENT, CONTACT MR. MICHAEL L. 

SMITH, CG-1132 AT 202-475-5205, EMAIL MICHAEL.L.SMITH4(AT)USCG.MIL 

OR LT FRANCISCO ESTEVEZ, CG-843, AT 202-372-3656, EMAIL 

FRANCISCO.A.ESTEVEZ(AT)USCG.MIL. 

5. CAPT. LORI A. MATHIEU, ACTING, DIRECTOR OF HEALTH, SAFETY AND 

WORK-LIFE SENDS. 

6. INTERNET RELEASE IS AUTHORIZED.
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

7 

Competencies and the ATON Professional 

by BMCS R. Scott Pugh, Office of Cutter Forces (CG-751) 

After a review of existing competencies (Qualification Codes for the older crowd), it was determined that an oversight of crane operators had taken place. Buoy Deck Riggers and Buoy Deck 

Supervisors were amongst the certifications that would earn an individual a competency, but the 

person responsible for the safe and smooth operation of the crane and other equipment operated 

from the boom shack was left out of the competency crowd. 

This oversight was recently corrected and all of the buoy deck crane operators are now eligible 

for an additional competency. In time the additional competency could help to compete for 

leadership positions within the black hull fleet. Having this competency, and any other competencies, in your file (Direct Access) may also put you ahead of the competition if a unit is in 

dire straits and in need of certain competencies. 

It should also be noted that because EPM doesn’t do competency based assignments, each 

member has the responsibility to earn the competencies assigned to any position they are assigned to. To do anything less is a dis-service to the member’s future career, their current unit 

and the service as a whole. This means that if you are assigned as a BM1 to a WLB or WLM, 

you have a responsibility to earn the Buoy Deck Supervisor competency. 

Personnel who have earned this competency, or their commands, will have to provide documentation to the Servicing Personnel Office or administrative staff for entry into Direct Access. If 

you used to be stationed aboard a buoy tender and were certified to operate the crane, provide 

that documentation to your command and the SPO should be able to enter the competency for 

you. Also, commands and individuals are encouraged to review the competency dictionary to 

see what other competencies they might be eligible for. Most boat crew related tasks will automatically get entered into DA once certified in the E-Training system. However, most Afloat 

and ATON related competencies will not. Below is a sample listing of some of the competencies that you and/or your crews might be eligible for; for a complete description and the requirements, refer to the competency dictionary. Some of them require more than just completion of the school. 

Here is the website to access the competency dictionary: 

http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg1/psc/da/CompetencyDictionary.xls. 

You can also search for “Competency Dictionary” in CGCentral. 

Code Title Code Title 

ATNBDR ATON Buoy Deck Rigger ATNNC Buoy Deck Supervisor 

 Buoy Deck Crane Operator ATNND Construction Deck Supervisor 

ATNNE Minor Aid Tech (Basic) ATNNK Construct Tender Equip 

Oprtr 

ATNNF Minor Aid Tech (Adv) ATNNL Aid Positioner 

OODLP 225 WLB U/W OOD 

GOOD TO KNOW 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

8 

NEWS CLIPS 

The Discontinuation of Johnston Atoll 

by ENS Matthew Romano, USCGC KUKUI (WLB 203) 

During the month of May, USCGC 

KUKUI discontinued District Fourteen’s aids to navigation in Johnston 

Atoll, closing an important chapter in 

the history of the United States and 

Coast Guard Aids to Navigation. Additionally, this trip provided C2CEN an 

opportunity to test the new GPS 

Autonomous Point Positioning System 

(GAPPS) unit alongside a prototype 

Automated Aid Positioning System 

(AAPS) system, version 5.5. 

Although one of the most isolated atolls 

in the world, Johnston Atoll served a 

vital role in United States history. The 

island was declared a federal bird refuge by President Coolidge in 1926. In 

1934, President Roosevelt transferred control of Johnston Atoll to the Navy and established an 

airplane runway, seaplane base, and refueling station. It was later designated as a Naval Defensive Sea Area and Airspace Reservation and served as a nuclear weapons test site, missile 

launch site for spy satellites, chemical munitions storage facility and the site of the Johnston 

Atoll Chemical Agent Disposal System (JACADS). Jurisdiction of Johnston Atoll was transferred from the U.S. military to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service in 2003 and declared part of 

the Pacific Remote Islands Marine National Monument in early 2009.

The Coast Guard’s association with Johnston Atoll began in the 

early 1940’s, when the first aids to navigation were established 

there. A Coast Guard Long Range Aid to Navigation (LORAN) 

station was established on the atoll in 1957 and successfully operated until 1992, when the precision of Global Positioning System (GPS) left the station no longer necessary and too expensive 

to maintain. The station, in its 35 year existence, assisted in the 

navigation of numerous Coast Guard cutters and aircraft, enabling the safe execution of countless missions and operations. 

Additionally, the atoll was a frequent port call for Coast Guard 

cutters and an emergency landing airstrip for Coast Guard aircraft. 

Aerial Picture of Johnston Island 

U.S. Coast Guard LORAN Station 

Johnston Atoll patch 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

9 

NEWS CLIPS 

Because of the jurisdictional transfer and a Waterway Analysis and 

Management System survey of the 

atoll, it was concluded that there 

was no longer a need for the aids to 

navigation in the harbor. It took 

KUKUI three days to discontinue 

the eighteen aids to navigation, concluding almost 70 years of Coast 

Guard service for Johnston harbor. 

KUKUI effectively utilized several 

methods to complete the disestablishment. In total, 5 buoys were 

recovered with the ship, 4 buoys 

with the dive team, and 9 dayboards 

and 2 ranges were removed with 

ATON technicians. All that remains of the harbor now are a few concrete pylons and range 

towers. 

Due to KUKUI’s experience with GAPPS, C2CEN identified this ATON patrol as an ideal opportunity to test the prototype version of the GAPPS/AAPS system. Version 5.5 no longer requires a correction sheet to account for the 109.36 yard error associated with a GPS fix. Instead, the error calculation is hardwired into the system, avoiding the opportunity for human 

error. The new version is more portable, user-friendly, and compact and requires significantly 

less time for setup and execution. Having this system in a smallboat allows the positioning of 

any aid regardless of its geographical location or proximity 

to a DGPS site. 

While KUKUI’s patrol marked 

the end of an era for District 

Fourteen’s Aids to Navigation on 

Johnston, it did provide a new 

beginning for the future of the 

Coast Guard’s ATON methods 

of operation with the new 

GAPPS/AAPS interface.

KUK I departing the Johnston Island pier for the last time 

KUKUI’s Deck Force discontinuing Johnston Island Buoy 5 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

10 

NEWS CLIPS 

Eight Days in the Life of USCGC WILLOW 

by ENS Isaac Slavitt, USCGC WILLOW (WLB 202) 

At the end of May, WILLOW got underway for what all hands assumed would be a routine patrol. In fact, the next eight days would prove to be some of the most dynamic in the ship’s recent past. By the end of the week-long trip, the ship would have participated in dive operations, 

commercial salvage, fisheries enforcement, discrepancy response, NOAA operations, and completion of an ATON project. 

Barely 15 minutes after leaving her berth at Naval Station Newport on the foggy, windswept morning of May 

27th, WILLOW got a call from District informing them 

of an overturned 25’ PSU boat in the vicinity of Martha’s Vineyard. Although happy to assist, there was one 

catch: the PSU boat had flipped over during a GUNNEX 

and had all three of her machine guns loaded and ready 

to fire. The ship returned to the pier, embarked a team of 

Navy Explosive Ordinance Disposal (EOD) divers, then 

shoved off again enroute to the overturned vessel. 

Arriving on scene in the early evening, WILLOW relieved JEFFERSON ISLAND of her security watch and 

began drafting a plan to recover the 25’. After a quick 

brief with the bridge team, the EOD team suited up and 

hopped in the small boat for a dive into the frigid waters 

of Rhode Island Sound. After some tense waiting, the 

divers reported that they had made all weapons safe and 

had also managed to rig some slings around the boat for 

the ensuing lift effort. 

The small boat passed the slings to the buoy 

deck and they were connected to the crane. 

The delicate process of righting the overturned boat began. By putting the crane at a 

high vertical angle and slewing it inboard, 

the Deck team managed to flip the boat upright without dragging it against the ship or 

applying too much force which, it was 

feared, could either damage the PSU boat’s 

hull or re-capsize it in the other direction. 

Righting the PSU boat 

The PSU boat sitting securely on 

deck 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

11 

NEWS CLIPS 

Having safely recovered and secured the 25’ on deck, WILLOW steamed overnight back to 

Newport. In a quick touch-and-go the next morning, the PSU boat was dropped off and the 

EOD team debarked. As the sun rose, WILLOW headed right back out for discrepancy response. 

After several hours of steaming through Buzzards Bay, the crew shifted into ATON mode as 

the ship approached Hog Island Channel, the cramped waterway leading to the west side of the 

Cape Code Canal. Earlier in the week, one of the channel buoys had been reported as sinking. 

Sure enough, when WILLOW arrived on scene the beleaguered number “16” was listing heavily and sitting low in the water. After the sad-looking 7x17 was brought onto the buoy deck, 

water started draining out of a small hole near the swing arms which seemed to have been 

caused by chafing. 

Having successfully deployed a relief, WILLOW made her way seaward to begin her Living 

Marine Resources Enforcement (LMRE) patrol. Over the next five days, the bridge team queried numerous fishing vessels in the waters off of Rhode Island and Massachusetts. Despite 

heavy fog throughout the week, the Boarding Team inspected six vessels and ended up issuing 

several violations for safety and crew citizenship standards. On the sixth day, WILLOW took 

on a team of NOAA technicians from a Station Provincetown small boat and headed north into 

the Boston Traffic Separation Scheme. The crew transitioned seamlessly back into ATON and 

spent the next two days hard at work. As part of an aid relocation project for District, four Boston Approach buoys were moved to new locations and one was replaced by a 3-meter discus 

NOAA data buoy. While in the Traffic Separation Scheme, one interesting piece of field intelligence was collected. To the dismay of the ship’s Marine Mammal Officer, the bridge team 

observed that whales crossing Traffic Schemes blatantly disregard their give-way status under 

Rule 10 of the Navigation Rules, and were sighted in large numbers attempting to come close 

aboard the ship. 

After days of low visibility details, tangled moorings, sporadic LE Bill settings, and late nights 

all around, all hands were ready for a few days inport. On the seventh evening, WILLOW began making way towards homeport. Moored up once again the following morning, a tired crew 

filtered off the ship for a few 

days of well-deserved rest before returning to sea for another LMRE patrol. 

WILLOW conducting the LMRE 

portion of their patrol 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

12 

NEWS CLIPS 

ELDERBERRY Takes Drastic Measures to Prevent 

“Disappearance” of Moorings on Mendenhall Bar 

by BMCS James Madsen, USCGC ELDERBERRY (WLI 65401) 

Mendenhall Bar in Juneau, Alaska has 18 

seasonal buoys that mark an ever shifting 

channel. Last fall, buoys began to be 

found adrift without the moorings. 

Rather than make the 110 mile steam 

each way, ELDERBERRY initially put 

an ATON tech on a ferry to Juneau who 

found the mooring and replaced the buoy 

at low tide, when the buoys were “high 

and dry.” Shortly after that, another 

renegade buoy went missing, then another. Only these times, the moorings 

were not located. Within a month, the 

buoys were seasonally decommissioned. 

In March of this year, Mendenhall Bar was once again marked by ELDERBERRY. The commissioning of Mendenhall Bar is one of the first signs of spring in Juneau. Within 2 weeks of 

the buoys being installed with all new chain and hardware, buoy 10B was found adrift. It was 

at this point that ELDERBERRY was certain that someone had discovered a better use for the 

moorings than anchoring buoys on Mendenhall Bar. At a previous unit that had a similar problem, the ELDERBERRY OIC used “Hammer Lock” shackles to secure the buoys. Those are 

expensive and hard to come by in Alaska, so the next best alternative was to weld the shackles. 

Due to the nature of Mendenhall Bar being dry at low tide and current that runs on the bar, ELDERBERRY’s OIC decided not to take the cutter on the bar. This meant bringing each buoy 

back to the cutter to have the shackles welded and then replace it back 

on the bar. This was a daunting 

task—clearly, there had to be better 

way. ELDERBERRY’s OIC and 

XPO brainstormed ideas and tried 

to think outside the box, when they 

realized the answer was right next 

door. The U.S. Forest Service has 

several pieces of floating dock that 

they use with a floating lodge in the 

Testing the operation of the welding float with ELD-1 

Dropping the “spud” to hold ELD-1 and 

the barge’s position 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

13 

summer. After a quick consultation 

with the Forest Service, permission was 

granted to use a part of their floating 

dock for ELD-1 to push like a barge up 

Mendenhall Bar with ELDERBERRY’s welder on it. 

After arriving in Juneau, the “barge” 

was secured to ELD-1 and a quick test 

run was made. The next day, as the 

tide came in, so did ELD-1 and its 

“barge.” ELD-1 would get as close as 

possible to the aid and drop a “spud” to 

hold position in the current. Then a 

couple crew members would deploy to the buoy, mark the position of the sinker and bring the 

buoy and mooring to the waiting 

barge for welding before returning it 

to its position. Starting this evolution at low tide and working our 

way over the bar with the tide allowed the crew to do as little “chain 

hauling” as possible. Without a 

davit on the ELD-1, this would have 

meant a lot of back breaking work. 

This “barge” idea proved very successful and added tremendous capability to ELDERBERRRY’s 

“shallow water operations.” 

NEWS CLIPS 

With the location of the sinker marked, the crewmembers haul the 

buoy and its mooring over to the welding barge. 

Working the buoy on the welding 

barge 

ELDERBERRY crewmembers mark the location of the sinker 

before removing the buoy and its mooring to weld the shackles 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

14 

ANT New Orleans Conducts Post-Grounding Survey 

by BMC Kevin Erwin, ANT New Orleans 

ANT New Orleans conducted a postgrounding survey on the Mississippi River 

near the English Turn Bend on the morning 

of 11MAR09, after the 850ft M/V Saxonia 

Express (Great Britain flagged), who was 

up bound in the river, plowed aground at 8 

knots around 0600 approximately 15 yards 

from light 79. ANT New Orleans crewmembers onboard the CG26201 verified 

that all aids to navigation in the area were 

watching properly. The grounding is under 

investigation. Weather may have been a 

contributing factor, as fog was present in 

the morning before sun up. The M/V Saxonia Express was returned to the river 6 hours later with the assistance of 3 tug boats. Following 

are some great shots of ANT New Orleans conducting the survey with the Saxonia Express in 

the background. 

Photos taken by SN Lisa Berlanga/BMC Kevin Erwin 

TANB Crew: BMC Kevin Erwin, MK2 Kendall Cook, EM3 Aaron Kindrick, SN Lisa Berlanga 

Tower Climber: MK2 Kendall 

Cook 

NEWS CLIPS 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

15 

NEWS CLIPS 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

16 

NEWS CLIPS 

BUSL Deck Locker Organization 

by BMCM James Bordell, ANT Cape May 

ANT Cape May recently devised a means of stowage for the deck lockers on the BUSL main 

deck that we want to share with the fleet. According to the BUSL Operators Handbook, certain 

tools and equipment must be stowed in each port and starboard locker. Just shoving the gear 

inside these lockers makes accessibility a nightmare. It ends up a disorganized mess, taking 

valuable time to locate any needed equipment. 

Our solution was to fabricate liners to be 

placed inside the lockers. These are not 

bolted down so therefore don’t interfere 

with the boat’s stowage plan. 

We constructed our liners using 1⁄4” aluminum plate. By cutting out notches to 

place tools or hang hooks, we made it a 

lot easier get all of the equipment inside 

the box. 

A liner made from 1/4” aluminum plate 

Liners installed in the port and starboard deck lockers 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

17 

All Aton are Not Created Equal 

It’s time to improve our ATON and Waterways performance metric

by CDR Mike Glander and ENS Jim Ellsworth, USCGC OAK (WLB 211) 

The problem 

Aid availability is defined as the percentage of ATON watching properly over some time period. It is the Coast Guard’s most important metric for measuring the output performance of the 

ATON program – as well as the ATON performance of individual units, sectors, and districts. 

While this metric has worked well enough for us in the past, it suffers from two significant 

shortcomings that should be addressed going forward: 1) it treats every aid as equally important, and 2) it does not have a visible enough link to waterway risk reduction. 

What’s wrong with measuring our performance by treating every navigational aid as equally 

important? For one thing, we can do better. The Coast Guard has always been a government 

leader in quality program measurement. We sell ourselves short with a metric that disregards 

what waterway users and ATON professionals understand well: some ATON are significantly 

more important than others. 

The other problem with treating all aids as equally important is what performance analysts call 

“perverse incentive.” A metric with perverse incentive can inadvertently reward poor decisions 

or punish good decisions. An example of how our current aid availability metric is thusly 

plagued is easy to imagine: 

Think about a cutter that finds itself with only one day to fix several discrepancies before the 

start of an 8-week dockside Charlie period. It has discrepancies in two different corners of its 

AOR, but has time to visit only one. (To make it simple, we’ll assume all the discrepancies are 

the same type: buoys off station.) Should the ship go north where it can bang out six discrepancy corrections, or south where it can fix two? The aid availability metric will reward the unit 

for going north. Easy enough. But what if the southern AOR is known to be more important? 

And what if the unit has been under the gun lately for having a low aid availability – would this 

unit be tempted to go north anyway? The plot thickens. 

Of course, we rightfully trust our COs and OICs to make these calls. They have the judgment, 

experience, and integrity to do the right thing regardless of what a performance metric says; 

they are willingly accountable. All the more reason they deserve a performance metric that reflects their good decisions – not one that can so easily be at odds with their professional wisdom! 

NEWS CLIPS 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

18 

NEWS CLIPS 

An easy fix 

The Coast Guard has long had an excellent tool for informing discrepancy response decisions: 

the Discrepancy Reponse Factor (DRF) system. Since this tool is based on the notion that all 

aids are not equally important, it can easily be applied to our aid availability metric to eradicate 

the problems described above. An aid’s DRF1 value is a pre-calculated, historically proven, 

command reviewed measure of each aid’s importance. It is calculated using all the right criteria: waterway sensitivity, channel geometry, traffic characteristics, the aid’s purpose, etc. 

Buoy A, with a DRF1 of 45, has more potential to reduce risk to the public than buoy B with its 

DRF1 of 24. All other things equal, the DRF system tells us to fix buoy A first. This aid is 

more important - the Coast Guard says so. 

Yes, our DRF system is risk-based. This is a long-standing achievement upon which we should 

be proud to shed more light. As far as the Department of Homeland Security is concerned, reducing public risk is the most important aspect of government performance. (Reducing public 

risk is what Coast Guard ATON does – we know this.) But, to remain competitive as a government program, our ATON program must be able to advertise its risk-reducing value to the public by using powerful, risk-based metrics. 

It will be a simple task to incorporate this valuable aid-importance information into our ATON 

metric because the DRF1 data already exists in our I-ATONIS database! (And the math is easier 

than Tinkertoys for the Coast Guard’s Business Intelligence gurus.) For now, let’s call this improved metric the Risk-Informed Aid Availability, or RIAA. 

Here’s the RIAA for a unit that only has 3 aids. Its least important aid is discrepant. 

Buoy A’s DRF1 = 48 48 x 1 = 48 

Buoy B’s DRF1 = 52 52 x 1 = 52 

Beacon C’s DRF1 = 23 23 x 0 = 0 (Beacon C is discrepant - not 100% available.) 

RIAA = (48 + 52 + 0) / (48 + 52 + 23) = 100 / 123 = 81%

This ATON unit has 81% of its total potential risk-reducing mojo watching properly. 

____________________________________________________________________ 

If the same unit’s most important aid is discrepant: 

Buoy A’s DRF1 = 48 48 x 1 = 48 

Buoy B’s DRF1 = 52 52 x 0 = 0 

Beacon C’s DRF1 = 23 23 x 1 = 23 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

19 

NEWS CLIPS 

RIAA = (48 + 0 + 23) / (48+52+ 23) = 71 / 123 = 57%

Now, only 57% of the ATON unit’s total risk-reducing superpowers are winking and blinking. 

____________________________________________________________________ 

If we only look at traditional Aid Availability we get the same results for both cases... 

Aid Availability = (1+1+0) / 3 = 2 / 3 = 66% 

... regardless of whether the most or least important aid(s) are discrepant. We can measure better than this! 

 

Ready to kick it up a notch? 

An additional future enhancement to the metric could be the replacement of the “0”s and “1”s 

in the equations above with factors between 0 and 1 to reflect the seriousness of an ATON discrepancy. Here, we bring the DRF2 factor into the game: an aid discrepancy gets a 0 if the aid is 

completely missing, maybe a .5 if it is extinguished, and perhaps a .9 if the discrepancy is due 

to something minor such as a missing topmark. You get the idea. 

To incorporate the DRF2 factor, however, the Coast Guard’s Waterways program would first 

need to devise and approve the correct degradation factors. Neither I-ATONIS nor the existing 

DRF2 worksheet is equipped to describe the full range of discrepancies adequately enough for 

measurement purposes. Both are overdue for overhauls in this respect anyway, especially IATONIS, which is not even able to create fully accurate descriptions of all aid discrepancies for 

the District Local Notice to Mariners. Adding the DRF2 to the metric should wait. 

“But we can’t / shouldn’t / don’t want to change the ATON metric!” (Circle one) 

There are no good reasons for not continuously improving our performance metrics. However, 

here are three reasons that might be offered in this case: 

1. Aid availability is an IALA metric with international standards. We can’t change it! 

IALA sets recommended minimum aid availabilities for ATON in three categories: 99.8% for 

ATON of “vital significance,” 99% for “important significance” and 97% for ATON of 

“necessary significance.” Indeed, categorized aid availability figures can be viewed in IATONIS for Coast Guard aids – and the categories are, in fact, determined by DRF1 limits. 

But the aid availability metric we are most familiar with, the one we hold up to represent our 

ATON program, kluges together all of our aids, regardless of importance. None of these minimum IALA standards apply to the manner in which we report regular Coast Guard aid availability. And no international association seeks to prescribe the manner in which the Coast 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

20 

NEWS CLIPS 

Guard measures its programs. IALA, in fact, recommends risk-based approaches, and would 

probably approve of a more visible link to risk reduction. One final note here: The RIAA metric 

being proposed in this article is similar to categorized aid availability. RIAA roles the math up 

into one comprehensive metric, whereas the categorized system is three or four separate metrics. 

2. We have all this historic data for regular aid availability. If we change the metric, we’ll lose 

the ability to understand the trends or place our performance in proper context with respect to 

our past! Nay, we shall be adrift with nary a beacon to guide us! 

In the case of aid availability, nothing prevents us from creating a new-and-improved metric 

while simultaneously tracking the old one for comparison purposes. In fact, this is a good program measurement practice – and the electrons are free. An even better solution to this concern 

might be to capitalize on the fact that our DRF1 values are already databased and do not change 

significantly from year to year, which means we can incorporate the aid-importance data retroactively. Yes, we have the ability to hind cast with an improved measure to gain instant performance trend context. The analysts are salivating. 

3) Aid availability is not our main Waterways metric anymore, so we should not bother improving it. We now use the number of collisions, allissions, and groundings (CAG). 

It is true that the Coast Guard has associated the nation’s annual number of collisions, allissions 

and groundings (the CAG metric) with our ATON program in high level government reports of 

outcome performance. However, aid availability is still advertised in conjunction with CAG in 

those reports. It has been very difficult for the Coast Guard to effectively prove a link between 

ATON performance and ultimate outcomes like annual CAG reduction. (We know the relationship is there, we just haven’t been able to prove it.) This is why we still need a lower-level output metric like aid availability. In any case, output metrics are the most appropriate kind for 

reckoning our performance at the management level anyway. 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

21 

In Conclusion 

We recommend the Office of Waterways Management (CG-541) work with Coast Guard Business Intelligence to create this ready-made RIAA metric and add it to I-ATONIS and our CGBI 

suites. We can immediately give our ATON units, Sectors, and District Waterways staffs a 

much improved metric for their management toolbox – at little to no cost. The Office of Performance Management and Assessment (CG-512) might also consider adopting such a metric 

for enterprise tracking and public performance reporting. 

In the mean time, OAK’s ENS Jim Ellsworth has developed an MS Query-tool to assist units in 

extracting and calculating their RIAA directly from I-ATONIS. The tool can be downloaded at 

www.uscg.mil/d7/cgcOak/RIAA.asp

Let us, therefore, no longer mumble passively, in a Napoleon Dynamite-type voice: 

 “___ % of our ATON is available... just in case anyone wants to use them.” 

Instead, let us shout, in an active voice: 

“Our ATON system is operating at ___% of its total waterway risk-reducing potential!” 

Final Note: 

Upon providing a courtesy professional review of this article prior to publication, ATON expert 

CDR Kevin Hanson observed, “If we adopt this new metric, all of our wildest dreams will come 

true.” 

 

 

References

“On Categorisation and Availability Objectives for Short Range Aids to Navigation – IALA 

Recommendation 0-130”, Edition 1. International Association of Marine Aids to Navigation 

and Lighthouse Authorities, December 2004 

“DHS Annual Performance Report: Fiscal Years 2008-2010”, Department of Homeland Security, Office of the Chief Financial Officer, Program Analysis and Evaluation. January 15, 2009. 

NEWS CLIPS 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

22 

CGC JAMES RANKIN’s Own Sistine Chapel 

by LT Wayne Wallace, USCGC JAMES RANKIN (WLM 555) 

Several months ago, the crew of CGC JAMES RANKIN decided to take on a Community 

Beautification Project to get rid of some vulgar graffiti and replace it with the American Flag. 

As you can see in the “Before” photo, no doubt censored by the Bulletin’s meticulous editor, 

the local artists had done quite a number on the bridge. Each time JAMES RANKIN headed 

out of Curtis Creek, we would always see the graffiti-marred bridge abutment just before passing under the I-695 draw bridge. It was very embarrassing when we had guests aboard, especially kids. 

I thought about this project for a long time and came up with the idea to paint a mural of the 

American Flag. All the painting supplies were purchased by donations and our work of art was 

completed for just under $200.00. We completed the project during the week of Earth Day and 

as of today...Old Glory remains proud and true, free of graffiti! 

NEWS CLIPS 

* 

Before... 

...and After. 

Photos by FS1 

Mark Grandjean 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

23 

Old School 

by CWO2 Michael Popelars, USCGC CYPRESS (WLB 210) 

Even though the 180’s are gone, it doesn’t mean the lifejackets the Deck Force wore on them 

are gone as well. Onboard CYPRESS, we still use the Stearns Force II Type V work vest—just 

like the old days. 

Many people don’t realize that they are authorized for use on the buoy deck. As a matter of 

fact, Boat Forces is currently making changes to the Rescue and Survival Manual to address the 

use of the Type V. The Type V work vest rates 17 1⁄2 lbs of buoyancy vice the 15 1⁄2 lbs of 

buoyancy the Type III offers, and when you outfit it as per the R&S manual with a whistle and 

PML it is actually worn as a Type III. Use Maintenance Procedure Card 4-1 in the R&S manual for your Type V set up and required inspections. 

The Type V PFD is composed of Unicellular Plastic 

Foam, and with its orange nylon coating it never 

fades. Another benefit of the Type V is that the 

grease wipes right off, as opposed to the Type III 

where the grease soaks in, giving the vest a permanent dirty greenish-orange tint. The work vest is very 

light, non restrictive and has no pockets, meaning you 

don’t find all those old cigarette packs, dip cans and 

potato chip bags jammed in every pocket like you do 

on the Type III’s. The back section of the vest also 

has a groove in the center of the back piece so that 

you can grasp and back up anyone working over the 

side. 

 So, in conclusion, wear your 

Type V for deck work only 

onboard the cutter and leave 

your clean pretty Type III’s in 

you R&S locker all decked out 

for the boarding teams and 

boat crews. 

NEWS CLIPS 

The groove in the back piece makes it easy to 

back up your shipmates on deck 

CYPRESS crewmembers looking 

sharp in their Type V’s 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

24 

TECHNICAL CORNER 

Joint Fog Detector/Air Visibility Sensor Study 

by Mr. Paul Lamczyk, C2CEN 

Commencing in February 2008, C2CEN has entered into an agreement with the Army Corps of 

Engineer (ACOE) Field Research Facility (FRF) and National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration's (NOAA) National Ocean Service (NOS) Center for Operational Oceanographic 

Products and Services (COOPS) to conduct a cooperative study to test air visibility sensors 

(otherwise known as fog detectors). The testing involves comparison of air visibility sensors 

from different manufacturers in support of USCG and COOPS operations. Currently, 5 different air visibility sensors (fog detectors) are being evaluated by C2CEN along with the VM-100. 

NOAA is also evaluating 2 short range (1-2 miles) air visibility sensors for use at airport runways. 

The Field Research Facility (FRF) is an ACOE owned and operated facility located in Duck, 

NC about 10 miles north of Kitty Hawk. Among other research efforts, the ACOE FRF also 

conducts coastal and tidal impact studies. The initial fog detector evaluation period is for one 

year, beginning April 2009. 

Fog Detector data will be collected in 6-minute averages, centered on reported time, every 6 

minutes starting at the top of the hour (i.e., 0, 6, 12 ... minutes). Some fog detectors operate in 

polled mode and others in auto-transmit mode. Data recorded include visibility measurements 

for each instrument (in kilometers or miles). Local weather sensors will also record air temperature, humidity, wind speed and direction. 

Three video cameras mounted 

on the FRF observation tower 

will also provide ground-truth 

data for verification of fog 

detector visibility readings. 

The camera elevations are 3.4, 

15.5, and 19.5 m (11, 51, and 

64 ft) above ground level. The 

upper two cameras are used 

for visibility estimates; the 

lowest camera is for viewing 

the immediate area around the 

sensors. Snapshot video images are also collected every 6 

minutes at the mid-point of 

the visibility averages. These 

video images are recorded on 

a Digital Video Recorder for Photograph showing arrangement of visibility sensors and cameras at the 

ACOE FRF in Duck, NC. 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

25 

future analysis where it will be compared with the actual visibility readings so it can be determined if it was actually foggy when the fog detectors indicated a low visibility condition. A 

link to the ACOE FRF Visibility Study web page is available at: http://frf.usace.army.mil/

airvis/av.shtml. 

Data collected from this study will be used as supporting documentation for future procurements to replace the VM-100 fog detector.

Fog Detector Performance and Impact of Nearby 

Obstructions 

by Mr. Paul Lamczyk, C2CEN 

The VM-100’s performance (specifically false readings) can be adversely impacted by physical 

changes that occur within the line of sight of the fog detector’s optical transmitter and receiver. 

These changes are caused when interference occurs between the transmitting source of light and 

receiver of backscatter. All visibility sensors require a clear line of sight from the optical transmitter and receiver elements and a certain distance from any vertical obstructions. This distance is dependent upon the specific fog detector equipment specifications. On the VM-100 the 

distance is 100 feet. If mounted too close to the vertical obstruction, light may be erroneously 

reflected to the receiver, giving a false indication of fog. 

So, if a fog detector has been working properly when it was initially installed and is now causing the fog horn to energize on clear days, check the line of sight from the transmitter and receiver elements to see if an obstruction is currently in the way (e.g. excessive tree/shrub vegetation or newly constructed fence). In the case of Monterrey, the rocks forming the breakwater 

near the fog detector have caused an increase in the amount of ocean spray from the waves 

crashing on the breakwater rocks. 

TECHNICAL CORNER 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

26 

Changes to Carmanah Lanterns 

by Mr. Jon Grasson, CG-432A 

There have been some significant changes to Carmanah lanterns over the past few months. 

This article summarizes those changes. 

The 701 and 702 lanterns have been discontinued. They have been replaced by the 701-5 and 

702-5 lanterns. The visual difference between the two is the latter has a top mounted solar 

panel. Carmanah sizing tables are available at: http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg4/cg432/docs/

led_instructions/LEDInstructionsCarmanah701-5,702-5Rev5.pdf. The tables have been updated to reflect the new lantern types. 

The low intensity setting of the 704-5 lantern has been adjusted after verification of production 

lanterns at the CG R&D Center. The “low” effective intensity values have been reduced, so 

please verify that your aids using this lantern are advertised correctly. See: http://

www.uscg.mil/hq/cg4/cg432/docs/led_instructions/Carmanah%20704-5%20Instructions%

20v1%2003.pdf for the new intensity values. 

The 708 lantern is approved for use by CG units & cutters. The capabilities of this lantern are 

detailed at: http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg4/cg432/docs/led_instructions/Carmanah%20708%

20Instructions%20v1%2002.pdf . Note that while the 708 is capable of matching the performance of the 701-5, 702-5 and 704-5 at the lower intensity settings, it is generally more economical to use the smaller lanterns if they meet the criteria of the solar sizing. 

All lanterns are being manufactured in Texas, so shipping costs and lead time should be reduced. All orders for lanterns and parts are now placed through regional sales managers. A list 

of managers is detailed at the end of the above mentioned instructions. These sales managers 

will honor the GSA Advantage prices detailed on http://www.gsaadvantage.gov/ (type 

“Carmanah” under “keyword”). Returns and problems should be addressed to Brian O’Flynn at 

Carmanah in Victoria, BC Canada: boflynn@carmanah.com , 250-412-8331. 

A Carmanah sizing program is posted on our website at: http://www.uscg.mil/hq/cg4/cg432/

docs/software/Solar/Solar%20Sizing%20Programs%20and%20Tables.xls. This program enables you to properly size, chose and compare the three series lanterns for all CG data sites and 

to our legacy (155mm lantern) equipment. This program can be used to size Carmanah lanterns 

for seasonal aids. 

Note that all of the above links are available through the Ocean Engineering website: http://

www.uscg.mil/hq/cg4/cg432/. 

Please direct any questions to Jon Grasson at jon.t.grasson@uscg.mil., 202-475-5629. 

TECHNICAL CORNER 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

27 

New 120 VAC, 1000W Lamp 

by Mr. Jon Grasson, CG-432A 

The 120 VAC, 1000 watt lamp manufactured by General Electric has been redesigned. The 

new lamp has a ceramic base and no outer glass envelope. Care must be exercised to not touch 

the lamp during installation; instead handle it from the base. 

Installation, focusing and performance in the DCB-24/224, RL14 and classical lanterns are the 

same. The new lamp is presently undergoing life testing and at the time this article was written 

has completed 2000 hours life (the old lamp is rated at 3000 hours life). If the new lamp does 

not achieve 3000 hours life we will notify the field via message. 

The lamp is available via MILSTRIP from the ELC; NSN CG6240-00-905-7512. If you need 

assistance, contact your Training Team Chief, the NATON School, or COMDT (CG-432A). 

TECHNICAL CORNER 

Old Lamp New Lamp 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

28 

BUOY DECK TRAINING TEAM 

Setting Up the Deck for a Stage Lift on the WLBB/WLB/

WLM 

by BMC Allen Hunter, NATON School 

When use of the chain inhaul winch is not possible, an alternative method of bringing the chain 

aboard the cutter is used. This method involves using the crane to hoist staged purchases of 

chain aboard, hence the name, “stage lift.” The Buoy Deck Training Team (BDTT) has recently received several calls regarding stage lifts. Stage lifts are somewhat of a dying art, but 

there are still some “old salts” out there who remember the way to do this. We in the ATON 

world need to teach our new people how to do stage lifts so that in the event we suffer an inhaul 

winch failure we don’t necessarily have to return to homeport. 

 

The following procedure requires that the chain be secured in the mechanical chain stopper with 

the horse collar in place. Because of its design, the hydraulically actuated rising sheave/fixed 

plate chain stopper cannot be used for staged lifts. Buoy mooring chain should be in the "up 

and down" position prior to hoisting chain aboard. Have a crossdeck rigged in line with the mechanical stopper. Keep the buoy in line with the mechanical stopper if at all possible—this will 

make it easier. 

HOISTING CHAIN AND SINKERS ABOARD, STAGE LIFT METHOD 

a) The crane main hook is secured to the buoy chain inboard of the stopper utilizing a 

modeer shackle, rated lifting shackle, or sling. 

b) The chain is lifted by raising the hoist hook. When the limit of chain is reached, chain is 

re-engaged in the chain stopper by using the opposing crossdeck to pull chain into mechanical stopper. 

c) Between each pick with the hoist hook, the chain must be faked between the bull chain 

and the deck edge. 

d) Steps (a), (b) and (c) are repeated until the sinker is at the 

water’s edge and the chain is faked on deck (attached to 

the bull chain with rotten stops if needed). The buoy end 

of the chain shall be attached to the deck using a pelican 

hook or alloy shackle as an extra safety measure to keep 

the chain from running overboard. Another pelican is 

used to secure excess chain to the deck and serve as a 

back-up to the stopper (ensuring enough chain is left for a 

pick). 

e) The crane's hoist hook is then secured to the mooring 

chain inboard of the stopper and the horse collar is removed. 

f) The weight of the chain and sinker is taken off the chain 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

29 

stopper using the crane and the sinker is lifted and maneuvered to the center of the buoy port until the crossdeck line(s) can be attached. 

g) Using the crane and crossdeck, the sinker is slowly 

lifted and maneuvered up and over the deck edge to the 

desired location on the buoy deck. Keep an opposing 

angle between the crane and crossdeck to provide horizontal control. 

h) The sinker is placed on dunnage and griped. 

HANGING SINKERS OVER THE SIDE 

a) The sinker is kept securely griped to the buoy deck until the crossdeck and the hoist hook 

are connected. 

b) If using new chain, the necessary amount of mooring chain is removed from the chain 

bins and attached to the sinker. The chain is faked between the bull chain and tied off 

with rotten stops and secured in pelican hooks so that it will not run overboard when the 

sinker is lowered over the side. 

c) The hoist hook is attached to the mooring chain. 

d) The slack is taken out of the crossdeck line. 

e) Disconnect the sinker gripes and drop the safety chain. 

f) Once you have an opposing lead between the crane and crossdeck, the sinker is hoisted 

over the side, pinned up against the hull and the crossdeck is removed. 

g) The sinker is maneuvered to the mechanical stopper and the chain is hogged in and 

seated. Once the chain stopper is taking the strain, the hoist hook is cleared. 

h) The sinker is now ready for deployment. 

i) Fake out any remaining mooring chain into bights between the bull chain and the buoy 

port and stop off to the bull chain using rotten stops. 

j) The mooring chain is secured to a second pelican hook near the buoy, leaving enough 

chain between the pelican hook and buoy to allow the buoy to be placed over the side 

and floated. 

k) The hoist hook is placed in the buoy lifting 

bail. 

l) Utilizing standard procedures, rig a cage line 

and the crossdeck to the buoy. 

m) When ready on deck and permission is 

granted from the bridge, the buoy end of the 

mooring chain is attached to the buoy. 

n) The buoy is ungriped, then hoisted and maneuvered to the buoy port while being kept 

under control by the crossdeck line(s) and the 

cage lines. 

BUOY DECK TRAINING TEAM 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

30 

BUOY DECK TRAINING TEAM 

o) The buoy is slid out of the buoy port, bottom first. When the bottom is outboard with the 

body resting against the buoy port sill, the cage line is shifted. 

p) The buoy is then lowered so that the center of the body is even with the buoy port sill. 

q) The crossdeck is removed. 

r) The chain stopper’s back-up pelican hook is released. The mooring chain should lead 

clear to the second pelican. 

s) When given the command to set the buoy, trip the mechanical chain stopper, allowing the 

mooring chain to run overboard; breaking the rotten stops until it fetches up on the second pelican (ensure enough chain is available so the sinker will hit the bottom). 

t) The buoy is lowered into the water and the hoist hook is cleared. 

u) The second pelican hook is tripped, allowing the remaining mooring chain to fall over the 

side. 

v) The cage line is released and brought back aboard. The buoy is now successfully deployed. 

w) The safety chain is reinstalled. 

Hopefully these steps and photos will help you envision the process, and this diagram will give 

you a better understanding of how to set up and work a buoy with the mechanical stopper. This 

takes practice. If you have questions, please call—the NATON BDTT is here to help you!
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

31 

BUOY DECK TRAINING TEAM 

Storing Your LED Lanterns on a WLM 

by DC2 Clifford Morgan, USCGC BARBARA MABRITY (WLM 559) and BMC Jason Wyglendowski, NATON School 

It never seems to matter how new or how big our ships are, there never seems to be enough 

space to store our gear. DC2 Clifford J. Morgan of CGC BARBARA MABRITY has found a 

great space saver that keeps your LED lanterns charged up! This was done by the ship’s force, 

looks great and best of all takes up no previously used space. Please read the write up done by 

DC2 and look at the pictures of their innovation to see if you agree. 

The rack is made of 316 stainless steel 

angle and flat bar. It is a simple rack design. 2 pieces of angle, a 1 1⁄2” piece and 

a 1” piece are welded together and connected at each end, leaving a channel just 

big enough for the lip of the Carmanahs 

to slide through. The larger piece of angle is a solid piece forming the bottom 

and the top piece is installed in 3 sections, forming the top and leaving 2 openings for the Carmanahs to be inserted into and slid 

over. The openings can be closed with a toggle bolt, line, 

clamp, etc. Or, if the rack is made just right with close enough 

tolerances, then the Carmanahs won’t actually slide with the 

roll of the ship—the bases would have to be physically pushed 

to move. This has worked for us—we have gone through 

some rough seas (for a 175’), and they have not moved. We 

still tie a rope over the openings just in case. We had a bolt 

but it took longer to remove them so the deck department just 

likes to tie it up. After completion the rack holds between 21-

23 Carmanahs, depending on whether or not you tie them 

down in the opening 

space. 

The rack wasn’t 

really hard to build; 

the hardest thing was 

keeping the longer pieces of angle to stay straight during the welding process, especially because the length 

of the metal required that all the work take place on 

the uneven buoy deck. 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

32 

FROM THE HELM 

Message from the NATON Helm 

by LCDR Brian Huff, NATON School 

Ahoy ATON Professionals! 

By now you are enjoying the great calendar that LTJG Speelhoffer constructed for you...and 

I’m sure you were so excited that you flipped forward to see what the year holds ahead—did 

you happen to study the August Picture? Yep, that’s our history. We as ATON Professionals 

are descendants of the Lighthouse Service. That pennant flew over the Roanoke River Lighthouse, and many others like it. 

This August 7th, pause to pay respect to those who served before us. Let us never forget where 

we came from, and continue to improve our service, our legacy and our professionalism. 

Thanks to the efforts led by LCDR Mike Davanzo, below is the legislation from the House of 

Representatives last year, recognizing August 7th, 1789. 

Thank you for the great work you do—be safe and enjoy YOUR holiday! 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

33 

FROM THE HELM 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

34 

FROM THE HELM 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

35 

FROM THE HELM 
The ATON Bulletin Volume 36, Number 3 

36 

FROM THE HELM 
National Aids to Navigation School 

AFTER HOURS 

Technical Support Hotline 

(757) 449-3681 

Call for after hours and weekend technical support questions! 

Underway on Friday night? Sunday? Have a Question? 

WE CAN HELP!!
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

Commanding Officer 

US Coast Guard Training Center 

Yorktown, VA 23690-5000 

OFFICIAL BUSINESS 

PENALTY FOR PRIVATE USE: $300 

Presorted 

Standard Mail 

Postage & Fees Paid 

US Coast Guard 

Permit No. G-157