2 July 2009

I

wrote this article in a Washington, DC 

office. You are likely reading it on a 

dive boat, in a dive locker, on a ship or 

submarine. You are deployed supporting expeditionary forces, in shift work 

repairing an SSN in a shipyard or conducting salvage training with a partner 

from one of our MSC salvage ships. 

You are out doing the business of Navy 

Diving and Salvage. The SUPSALV 

D.C. office is not the focal point of the 

diving Navy, you are. The Supervisor 

of Salvage and Diving (NAVSEA 00C) 

is here to support you. We strive to ensure you have the necessary equipment 

and technical procedures to perform your 

missions. If we do this well your capabilities are virtually unlimited as you 

continue to demonstrate. Specifically:

Salvage: The initial damage assessment of USS Port Royal (CG 73) and the 

underwater survey to determine the retraction path for that grounded ship were 

performed by Mobile Diving and Salvage Unit One (MDSU ONE). This diving work was instrumental in the ship’s 

successful de-beaching. A MDSU TWO 

detachment deployed to Bahrain was on 

their way to a body recovery and aircraft 

salvage job in Lake Victoria, Africa (surface elevation 3,720 feet above sea level) 

when we needed their services for an 

initial damage assessment of USS New 

Orleans (LPD 18) following that ship’s 

collision with USS Hartford (SSN 768) 

in the Straits of Hormuz. MDSU TWO 

conducted the survey providing valuable 

video footage to our engineers (ultimately 

viewed by the CNO) and then entered the 

flooded fuel tank to remove 20,000 gallons of DFM in preparation for weld repairs. Fortunately, USS Frank Cable (AS 

40) Divers were in Bahrain at the time 

of the collision for work on another unit. 

They performed an underwater inspection on USS Hartford. So in an interval 

of just a few months, I have been able to 

tell my bosses (the Chief Engineer of the 

Navy and Commander, Naval Sea Systems Command) not to worry, Navy Divers are in place, ready and capable of performing these difficult, important jobs.

Underwater Ship Husbandry 

(UWSH): On an average day, UWSH 

lockers around the world are engaged in 

20 underwater repairs to our ships and 

submarines. Military and civilian Divers 

performing complex waterborne rigging 

and equipment removal and re-installation procedures were able to keep 30 submarines and 40 surface ships from having to be drydocked in 2008. Our Fleet 

readiness levels would not be as high as 

they currently are without your efforts.

Expeditionary support: Our Divers work directly with EOD and SPECWAR units performing underwater 

inspections, assisting with SDV operations and maintaining diver life support 

equipment. You are members of teams 

that keep our ships and personnel safe 

and take the fight directly to our enemies.

Experimental: Perhaps you have 

just climbed out of a tank filled with 

ice water and are shaking so badly that 

you can’t even de-instrument yourself. 

Someday, a Diver will benefit from your 

pain because they will have better equipment and be more effective in the water.

As you continue to prove your versatility and professionalism, SUPSALV 

personnel are trying to make your jobs 

easier. We haven’t always been successful. For example, we are attempting to 

give you a tool for real-time air monitoring that will allow you to assess the quality of your Diver’s air on-site without 

having to send bomb samples to Panama 

City, FL for analysis and then await the 

results. The Portable Air Monitor (PAM) 

that we have begun to issue to selected 

fleet units (primarily deployers) is a good 

start but it does not check for all contaminants listed in Table 4-1 of the U.S. Navy 

Diving Manual. So commands that are 

issued a PAM will (initially) still need 

to take periodic air samples the way we 

have for years. The PAM provides most 

of the immediate sampling capability 

you need but is not a complete solution. 

Our goal is a real-time Diver’s air monitoring tool that will replace the requirement to send out samples for analysis. 

We are not there yet. We are also having trouble completing and fielding a 

Saturation Fly-Away Diving System 

(SATFADS). Consequently, our saturation diving career pipeline is in jeopardy. 

Because of problems like these I have 

taken the advice of the three SUPSALV 

Master Divers; Master Chiefs Costin, 

Johnson, and Stark, and we held a Diving Leadership Working Group vice a 

Working Divers Conference this Spring. 

Our purpose in changing the focus of this 

meeting is to gather the leaders of our 

diving community so that we can work 

together to try to solve these problems 

that are keeping you, the working Navy 

Diver, from even greater accomplishments than those you continue to demonstrate. We will provide an update on our 

progress in the next issue of Faceplate. 

Keep diving and I hope to see you around 

the Fleet.

In This Issue

SUPSALV Sends ............................................2

Portable Air Monitor Is On The Streets...........3

USS Port Royal Grounding.............................4

Andros Island Project .....................................6

Newcomer to 00C4.........................................6

Certification Notes ..........................................7

Navy Launches Career Guide for Divers........8

Letters To The Editor ......................................9

NEDU: Building Trust & Interoperability

with Foreign Navies......................................10 Cover: NEDU participating in Deep Dive Exercise 2008 in Curacao. Photo Credits: Doug Elsey / DougElsey.com 

Navy Diving School Pearl Harbor:

A Brief History (Part 2)..................................12

2009 Dive School Graduates........................17

Hyperbaric Oxygen For Traumatic 

Brain Injury ...................................................18

The Navy and Marine Corps Dive Team:

The Importance of Navy Divers Serving.......19

CAPT Willard F. Searle, Jr. USN (Ret.) ........20

How Hooyah Can You Be?...........................21

The Authorized for Navy Use Process..........22 

Cold Water Regulators - Smithsonian

Institution’s Dive in Anartica..........................24

HMS Endurance Heavy Lift ..........................26

So Cal ROV Ops ..........................................28

The Old Master.............................................30

SUPDIVE......................................................31

Books of Interest...........................................32

Captain Patrick J. Keenan

Supervisor of Salvage and Diving

(NAVSEA 00C)
PORTABLE AIR MONITOR IS ON THE STREETS

By: LCDR (RN) Jim Pearson

July 2009 3

I

t is now 18 months 

since September 

2007’s Faceplate Article ‘New Portable 

Air Monitor (PAM) 

Undergoes Field Testing’ introduced the 

concept of a portable 

monitor capable of approving Divers’ air for 

use without the need 

to conduct bomb sampling. I am pleased to 

report that 25 PAMs 

have been purchased 

by the Navy and are 

in the process of being issued to the fleet. 

At the time of going 

to press MDSU ONE 

and TWO, UCT ONE 

and CTG 56.1 Bahrain 

are already in receipt 

of one or more PAMs.

The path from 

research and development to operational 

use has not been a 

smooth one. There has 

been much internal 

debate as to whether 

the benefit of having 

the ability to conduct 

real time screening -

for dangerou s levels 

of CO, CO2

, O2 and 

Volatile Organic -

Compounds (VOCs) is 

outweighed by the risk 

of not being able to 

measure oil, mist and 

particulates, water vapor, and halogenated 

compounds (solvents) 

in accordance with 

Tables 4-1 and 4-2 of 

the U.S. Navy Diving 

Manual. Clearly, if the 

PAM is used in addition to the current air 

sampling program we 

have a ‘gold standard’ 

in terms of safety but 

have gained nothing 

in turns of versatility. 

I will try to summarize some of the main 

areas of discussion be- Portable Air Monitor cont’d on page 5. 

fore highlighting the current policy and 

the way ahead.

The PAM is unique in that it is the 

first unit to be able to measure CO, CO2, 

O2

 and VOCs in the same box. High or 

low O2 levels or high levels of any of the 

other gases are immediately life threatening to the Diver and the PAM will alarm 

if the dive table limits are exceeded. Not 

only does this mean that the PAM can be 

used to sample a compressor, or another 

air source, to immediately confirm that the 

air is suitable for life support, but it also 

means that the PAM can be left attached 

to an operating compressor to warn the 

surface team if the compressor begins to 

malfunction or draw in poor quality air.

What the PAM cannot do, due to its 

extremely small size, is warn the user if 

the weight of oil, mist and particulates, 

the presence of certain solvents, or the 

presence of water vapor and separated water exceeds the limits 

in the Dive Manual. 

00C has been looking 

closely at the real risk 

associated with these 

hazards and how such 

risk may best be mitigated. Looking back at 

historical data we have 

found that the number 

of ANU compressors 

failing air sampling on 

the basis of high levels 

of oil, mist and particulates is very low (less 

than 0.5%). We have 

also been reviewing 

the actual health risk to 

the Diver from oil, mist 

and particulates and it 

appears that the biggest 

risk comes from chronic exposure over a long 

period of time. Most occupational exposure limits are referring to industrial factory workers, e.g., in car plants, and the 

risk would appear to be far lower for a 

military Diver. One other potential risk, 

which requires more investigation before 

it can be completely ruled out, is any fire 

risk when using the ORCA for in water 

O2

 decompression if there is potential for 

oil, mist, and particulates to be present.

The water vapor risk is slightly 

easier to quantify. The main risk associated with water vapor is one of regulator 

freeze up, but there are no health risks 

to the Diver. Change A to Revision 6 

of the Dive Manual will state that Divers’ air authorised for use with a PAM is 

not to be used for cold water diving as 

defined in the manual. There is also an 

additional requirement to visually inspect flasks on completion of diving for 

the presence of water. There are also a 

number of very simple hand held devices 

designed to detect the presence of water 

vapor which NAVSEA is looking at to 

see if they could be used in conjunction 

with the PAM. The solvents requirement 

in Table 4-2 dates back several decades 

and was incorporated to detect the presence of a number of specific solvents that 

some disreputable contractors were using to clean flasks and that the U.S. Government recognised as being dangerous 

to the Diver. The PAMs VOC detector 

will pick up only one of these solvents 

so there is a requirement to determine 

whether or not these solvents are still in 

use and whether there is still a requirement to screen for them. 

To further ‘muddy the waters’ the 

current requirements in Table 4-2 are 

based on FED SPEC BB-A-1034 B 

which is no longer extant but for which, 

as far as I am aware, no replacement has 

Calibration and Span Gas

Reducer and Connection Equipment

Portable Air Monitor
Early in the evening of 5 February 

2009 USS PORT ROYAL (CG 73) 

ran aground on a reef, port side to and approximately 1,000 yards south of the Honolulu International Airport on the island 

of Oahu. Initial damage reports indicated 

that the sonar dome was flooded, one air 

conditioning plant was inoperative, and 

possible flooding of a crew baggage storage compartment. A subsequent video 

taken by US Navy Divers showed that 

the propeller blades had been sheared off 

by contact with the reef. Initial attempts 

using harbor tugs were unsuccessful in 

freeing the vessel.

Mobilization of MDSU ONE, Pearl 

Harbor Naval Shipyard, USNS SALVOR 

(T-ARS 53), along with the resources of 

NAVSEA, including 

SEA 05, SUPSALV, 

and Titan Salvage 

(a Crowley company 

and SUPSALV’s West 

Coast Salvage Contractor) were required 

to effect a successful recovery of PORT 

ROYAL.

Using the Program of Ship Salvage 

Engineering (POSSE) 

and the Flooding and 

Casualty Control System (FCCS) program, 

NAVSEA engineers 

determined that the ship was aground 

with a ground 

reaction of approximately 470 

long tons and 

would require 

a force of 441 

long tons to free 

the ship from the 

reef. Reduction 

of the ground reaction required 

off loading of 

salt water ballas t , 140 crew 

members, and 

t h e ship’s anchors and anchor 

chains. 

MDSU ONE Divers completed a 

survey that showed a large obstruction

on PORT ROYAL’s starboard side which 

would prevent moving laterally off of 

the reef. The survey also showed that the 

area astern was deeper and free of obstructions. The extraction plan was modified to include a larger pulling force in 

the astern direction. 

Since PORT ROYAL was aground 

for a significant period of time in active 

seas (waves 3 – 5 feet, wind 15 knots 

from the East), the effect on the structural integrity of the hull and the possible failure of seals or hull plating due 

to the continuous pounding on the reef 

had to be considered. POSSE analysis 

of the worst case scenarios showed that 

potential stresses were larger than normal 

Bull rope under tension

4 July 2009
July 2009 5

operational loads, but did not exceed 50 

percent of the steel’s yield strength, and 

that only total flooding of an engine room 

would result in unacceptable stability. 

These results were considered acceptable 

for the short tow into Pearl Harbor.

Using two ocean-going tugs and 

seven harbor tugs PORT ROYAL was 

pulled free of the reef in the early morning hours of 9 February 2009. As predicted by POSSE, the ship was stable with a 

small starboard list and trim by the stern. 

She was immediately towed into Pearl 

Harbor and preparations for dry docking 

began.

This salvage job was particularly 

challenging. It was successful due to 

the complete dedication and professionalism of the many agencies and people 

involved. The lessons that were learned 

will have a very beneficial effect on the 

command, control, communications, and 

execution of future salvage operations.

Mr. John Juergens is a Senior Engineer at ROH, 

Inc., the engineering, technical, and administrative support contractor for NAVSEA 00C.

been issued. NAVSEA is investigating 

the overall Table 4-1 and 4-2 requirements for future updating to meet current 

needs and requirements. 

Having covered the background 

to fielding the PAM here is the current 

situation. NAVSEA owns 25 PAM sets. 

A set consists of a PAM, a reducer kit 

(reducer, HP whip, SCUBA, FADS III, 

LWDS, CGA 580 connections and tubing for connecting to the PAM), Calgas 

and PAM instructions. The 25 sets are 

being held at the ESSM Base in Virginia 

and are being issued to a preapproved list 

of commands that NAVSEA feels will 

gain the most from the PAM. ACN-6A 

(Diving Advisory 08-18) to Revision 6 

to the U.S. Navy Dive Manual authorizes the use of the PAM for approving any 

source of Divers’ compressed air, 00C3 

letter, Ser 00C3FN/3017 dated 6 March 

2009 temporarily restricts the use of the 

PAM to those occasions when a dive unit 

cannot utilize the air sampling program 

(i.e. they would normally be forced to request a waiver from NAVSEA in order 

to dive).

NAVSEA wants to lift the restriction on the use of the PAM as soon as 

practicable. To this end NSWC have 

been tasked to investigate the availability of, or if necessary develop, a portable 

filter which could be used in conjunction with the PAM to remove oil mist 

and particulates. We are also looking for 

any other COTS solutions that would 

allow us to test for those contaminants 

not currently detected by the PAM without significantly increasing the overall 

foot print. The second part of a twopronged approach is to review the current compressed air breathing requirements to see if any of the requirements 

in the current tables can safely be removed or updated in light of advancements in dive equipment and general 

safety.

In summary the PAM is out there 

and is already helping the fleet. It has 

been used in the Gulf and is currently 

being used on various operations across 

the globe. We have asked those units in 

receipt of a NAVSEA PAM to provide 

feedback to 00C on the monitor. Initial 

indications are that it works extremely 

well and will prove to be a rugged and 

valuable addition to any dive locker’s inventory.

LCDR Jim Pearson is a Royal Navy Exchange 

Officer working for Diving Programs at NAVSEA 00C and is the Program Manager for Contaminated Water Diving.

Portable Air Monitor cont’d from pg 3.
6 July 2009

Members of Underwater Construction Team One (UCT ONE), Air 

Detachment Alfa, recently joined forces 

with Naval Facilities Engineering Service Center (NFESC) and Motor Vessel 

(MV) RICHARD L. BECKER (a civilian salvage ship) in a project to install 

a new acoustic measurement system at 

Andros Island, Bahamas. The project, 

which is key to supporting the U.S. Submarine Force, replaced the use of a shipdeployed portable acoustic measurement 

system, which provides measurement 

and tracking underwater, with a fixed 

cable array system. 

EO1 (SCW/DV) Nicholas Gegg, 

Assistant Officer in Charge, explains 

the importance of the project, “Stealth 

is the submarine’s most important tactical advantage. Force protection and mission success depend on how well the 

Navy maintains the quality of submarine stealth. South Tongue of the Ocean 

Acoustic Facility (STAFAC) provides 

specialized, quality assurance services 

for assessing the stealth of all existing 

submarine classes. UCT ONE’s work is 

essential to maintaining U.S. Navy submarine superiority and advancing undersea warfare.”

Air Detachment Alfa combined efforts with other teams to land the ground 

and trunk cable, starting two miles out at 

sea and ending at the Mesa Vault on Atlantic Undersea Test and Evaluation Center Site 1. Detachment Alfa 

Divers executed all diving 

operations during the shore 

side of the project and also 

operated on a Junction Box 

(J-Box) from MV Becker 

approximately 90 nautical 

miles off the coast of Andros 

Island. 

Initially used to keep 

the two cables afloat prior to 

placement, the dive team removed 500 flotation buoys, 

each weighing 50 lbs, and 

ensured both cables sat on 

the ocean floor, free of any 

environmental hazards, i.e. 

coral. Once the cables were 

in the Mesa Trench and secured, the shore-based crew 

replaced 300 feet of double armor cable 

protection with conduit, in order to feed 

the cables into the MESA Vault for the 

NFESC Engineers. 

Back at sea, a J-Box was precisely 

placed on the sea bottom, then anchored 

with four 750-foot cable tethers stretching from the J-Box towards the Tongue 

of the Ocean. 

First, UCT ONE Divers inspected the 

J-Box for proper orientation and ensured 

it was free of any environmental dangers. 

Next, they focused their efforts on assisting the service ship retrieval and splicing of the four cable tethers. After completing each splice, the Divers inspected 

the tether, applied cable stoppers to the 

cable, and organized each tether to ensure proper orientation of all four cables. 

This project directly supported efforts to ensure the Navy’s submarine 

force maintains its global superiority. The 

members of UCT ONE, Air Detachment 

Alfa, were instrumental in accomplishing 

a crucial upgrade to U.S. Navy test and 

evaluation facilities, thereby enhancing 

our national security.

LT Li Sung is the Executive Officer for UCTONE in Norfolk, VA.

BU1(SCW/DV) Brian Strantz and EA1 (SCW/DV) Wyatt Boettger mount all-thread bolts to the sea floor with epoxy-grout using a pneumatic assisted dispenser. Photo by Jason Tanaka, 

NFESC.

Newcomer to 00C4!

We would like to welcome Eric Frank to SEA 00C4 Certification Division. Eric 

came onboard in March as a System Certification Manager. He comes to us from 

PCCI where he supported Military Sealift Fleet Support Command (MSFSC) as one 

of their Towing and Salvage Specialists. Eric was responsible to the MSFSC Tugs and 

Salvage Class Program Manager for providing towing and salvage technical assistance 

to the East Coast T-ARS and T-ATF class vessels. Eric recently retired from the Navy 

as a highly regarded Master Diver with over thirty years of naval service. He spent 

the majority of those years in the diving community supporting salvage and ship husbandry missions. Eric brings with him a strong background in diving operations, system certification, and DLSS maintenance. 

Eric joins our other two retired Master Divers, and providers of sage wisdom to the Fleet, Steve Smith and Brendan Murphy. 

Eric will be carrying out on-site surveys and answering certification issues pertaining to Diving Systems Safety, and of course 

pontificating and commiserating on the ‘Good Ol’ Days in Navy Diving with all of you out in the Fleet. Welcome aboard!
July 2009 7

I

t’s hard to believe that as of July 

 I will have been a member of the 

NAVSEA 00C Team for seven years. 

As one of the three Diving Safety Certification Managers supporting the System Certification Authority (SCA), I 

have participated in dozens of Diving 

System Certifications Surveys. Though 

we field a wide variety of questions 

during these surveys there is one that 

is asked by virtually every command; 

what is the purpose of the Diving Certification Program? The first paragraph 

in the Forward of the U.S. Navy Diving and Manned Hyperbaric Systems 

Safety Manual (MAN 10) says it best: 

“Diving is an inherently dangerous 

occupation, performed in a hostile environment. The sole purpose of the US 

Navy Diving and Hyperbaric Systems 

Safety Certification Program is to make 

this occupation as safe as possible for 

the men and women who put their lives 

on the line, every day, in the service of 

their country.

Through the System Certification 

Programs, it is our mission to provide a 

final independent review of diving and 

hyperbaric system design, fabrication, 

testing, repair, maintenance and operation.”

A key component of the program is 

the On-site Diving System Safety Certification Survey. Suffice it to say that 

these surveys are independent inspections whose outcome could seriously 

affect a Dive Locker’s ability to continue diving operations. The purpose of 

the survey is to verify that the operational commands have maintained their 

Diver Life Support Systems (DLSS) 

in the “as-built” configuration and 

that the system being maintained and 

operated safely in accordance with 

approved written procedures. On-site 

surveys are performed on all U.S. 

Navy, U.S. Marine Corps, and U.S. 

Army Special Operations DLSS every 

three years. Important details concerning on-site surveys and how to prepare 

for them can be found in MAN 10, 

Section 2-6. Below are some additional recommendations on how commands should prepare for an on-site 

DLSS Certification Survey. They 

are gleaned from the literally hundreds of on-site surveys completed 

by the Certification Managers, Certification Engineers, and the SCA. 

Brendan Murphy is a NAVSEA Diving Safety Certification Manager. He is a retired Master Chief 

and Master Diver who has also worked several years in the commercial diving industry.

• Master Divers must be -

i n v o l v e d . R e m e m b e r

delegation is giving a task 

to somebody else with 

responsibility from you. 

However, it does not re

move the responsibility 

from you.

The hundreds of years of diving experience imbedded in NAVSEA 00C are at 

your disposal. Please do not hesitate to use us. 

• Train your Dive Locker with the skills necessary to maintain your DLSS.

• Closely review all RECs prior to their being closed, and ask questions.

• Review each PMS Force Revision (FR) with your technicians, prior to 

its installation.

• Work with your personnel to have all of the answers pertaining to every 

aspect of your Dive Locker.

• Always be certification ready. Foster a climate within the Dive Locker 

that would welcome or even challenge an on-site survey with little or no 

notice. 

• Develop a deep bench. Too often Dive Lockers have only one “PMS 

Guy” and “REC Guy”. This does not support the development of our 

new Navy Divers who are coming from the school house with virtually 

no QA or DLSS maintenance training. It is also unfair to the Petty Officer who is stuck reviewing Quarterly Boards, implementing PMS FR’s 

and writing REC’s while everyone else is in the water or on the side. It 

hampers their development in the operational aspects of their job.

• Call early and often. Look ahead to future maintenance requirements and 

certification visits. If you have any questions give us a call. NAVSEA 

00C will never gaff off a question from the Fleet. If we don’t have a 

specific answer we will either get it for you or direct you to another resource that can help you out. Whenever possible, please give your Master Diver the opportunity to answer your question prior to contacting us.

• Use the Certification Checklist. Not very often in life is one given all 

the questions prior to the test. The System Certification Requirements/

Guidelines checklist contain the questions we will be asking during an 

on-site survey. If you are properly prepared to answer those questions, 

you ace the test. If you haven’t properly prepared, it will show, and we 

will be forced to delve into the system more deeply to be assured that the 

DLSS is safe for continued manned use. 

An Underwater Construction Team ONE LWDS 

Ready for Certification. 
The Navy dive community now has 

a roadmap to help enlisted Sailors 

succeed in their careers with the launch 

of a new career tool available on Navy 

Knowledge Online (NKO).

The Learning and Development 

Roadmaps (LaDR – pronounced ladder) are being developed by the staffs 

at the Learning Centers charged with 

providing career learning and development for each Navy rating. The Diver 

roadmap was developed by the staff 

at the Center for Explosive Ordnance 

Disposal and Diving (CEODD) in Panama City, FL.

“Today’s Sailor can find a written path to success,” said Navy Diver 

Hugh “Sandy” Bell, Command Master 

Chief at the Naval Diving and Salvage 

Training Center, Panama City, FL. 

“This path is located at their finger tips 

on Navy Knowledge Online. There are 

no questions as to what courses are required and what courses are suggested 

to better ones self. No questions as to 

what type of duty to take or when to attend professional development school.” 

In 2007 Naval Education and 

Training Command was tasked by the 

Chief of Naval Personnel to develop an 

Enlisted Education Strategy. The result 

is the Enlisted Learning and Development Strategy (ELDS), which includes 

the career roadmaps.

The first rating career roadmaps 

included Legalman (LN), Mass 

Communications Specialist (MC), 

and nonrated Sailors in the Surface 

Professional Apprenticeship Career Tracks program (S-PACT),” explained ELDS Core Team Co-Leader Master Chief Petty Officer Tom 

Smith, an Electronics Technician 

and the Enlisted Learning and 

Development Program Coordinator for NETC. “Sailors can 

find their roadmap to success on Navy Knowledge Online (NKO), 

and I recommend every Sailor and 

their supervisors use the roadmap. It is 

a great mentoring and counseling tool.”

The roadmap is for enlisted Sailors to refer to throughout their Navy 

career, and progresses to the rank of 

Master Chief. “It provides detailed 

information on training and advanced 

education opportunities,” said Smith. 

“The roadmap is a visual guide to track 

their career and helps the Navy get the 

right Sailor, with the right training, in 

the right job, at the right time.”

“Deckplate leadership and mentoring is essential in the Navy,” said 

Master Chief Petty Officer Brett Rowell, NETC Force Retention and a Navy 

Counselor. Rowell is also the ELDS 

Team Co-leader with Smith. “The 

roadmap is a great tool for supervisors 

to use during mentoring sessions and 

Career Development Boards providing 

Sailors feedback on what learning and 

development programs are available to 

them.

The career roadmap includes training from the “sailorization” process at 

Recruit Training Command (RTC), basic technical training, advanced technical training, and Navy Professional 

Military Education (NPME). It also 

includes advanced education opportunities through the Navy College Office, 

as well as programs at the Naval Post 

Graduate School and the Naval War 

College. Professional certifications are 

part of the LaDR through Navy Credentialing Opportunities Online (Navy 

COOL). For example, with Navy 

COOL an ND can receive civilian certifications from the Association of Diving Contractors International (ADCI), 

the National Association of Underwater Instructors (NAUI), or the National 

Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, to name just a few.

The goal is to have LaDRs for all 

ratings on NKO by April 2010. ELDS 

will not necessarily create new programs, but provide visibility to current 

Navy programs. It is an umbrella for 

the learning and development programs 

that enlisted Sailors need access for a 

successful career. The LaDR provides 

that umbrella, giving Sailors a checklist 

to see where they are, and where they 

need to be. 

“Gone are the day’s where Navy 

Divers gaze over a cap rail wondering what their next duty station will 

be,” explained Bell. “Where DV after 

your rate really stood for ‘Duties Vary’, 

and where no one really knew what it 

took to make Chief or to make Master 

Diver. With this tool, the Sailor who 

is looking for answers and the Chief 

who is giving guidance is not guessing, they both can see what needs to be 

done.”

“The ND roadmap should not be 

something that is looked at 

once and forgotten, instead 

it should be used as a living 

tool that can guide today’s 

Navy Diver on the path to 

success and be a guide for the 

Navy Divers of tomorrow.”

To learn more about the Learning and Development

Roadmaps, visit NKO https://wwwa.nko.navy.mil 

For more information about learning and development in 

the Navy, visit NETC https://www.netc.navy.mil/ 

8 July 2009
NDC/E7 Mark Smith

MOBDIVSALU TWO 

Congratulations on another great Faceplate. I hope to point out something 

new that I have learned, and to suggest an actual “letters to the editor 

column”, as well as suggest a “lessons learned from the fleet” column...

make this a truly interactive medium...just a thought. 

I have recently been assigned to the Area Search Platoon here at MDSU-TWO, 

and am both excited and disappointed at what I have learned. I’m excited 

that I have learned a lot that will help maximize bottom time with new 

technology, and disappointed that I did not know much of this before. 

These are skills and NMETs which can significantly maximize bottom time, 

while minimizing search time, and greatly increase mission success. I’m 

sure many of you crusty MDV’s are already much more familiar with this 

material than I am at present, but as a regular Diver, I wonder if the 

“other” regular Divers are familiar with these assets? Any Dive supervisor 

would find that “knowing what to ask for” is more than half the battle in 

many cases.

Now, if I can only figure out how to use the Blackberrry thingy they gave 

me.... Keep up the good work! 

Letters To The Editor

Chief Smith, 

Thanks for the feedback. I like it! It means you’re reading FACEPLATE. 

HOOYAH! 

You bring up good points about getting some of the new technology 

taught at the school house level so you can bring it with you to the 

Fleet. It eventually will!

Look for MTT’s in the future that will bring 

Dive Computers and Portable Air Monitors (PAM) 

etc... to your location for instructional use.

HOOYAH Navy Diver! 

VR/ 

Mike Egan 

CDR Michael L. Egan, U.S. Navy 

Supervisor of Diving

Faceplate 

appreciates all 

feedback, so if you’d 

like to sound off about 

something we have published please do! To submit 

feedback, go to www.supsalv.org

July 2009 9
We can’t surge trust; trust must be 

built bit by bit. Trust must be a 

Through NEDU research and experience on diving, technical diving recommendations are made to NAVSEA, to 

support the operational requirements of 

our Sailors and Marines, industry as well 

as our allies. 

While some research can be conducted indoors, skill and understanding 

are often learned outdoors and under 

the water’s surface through “hands on” 

application of systems and procedures. 

Hands on experience fosters trust. 

Some of that experience was acquired in December 2008 when NEDU 

participated in an international deep diving exercise on the island of Curacao in 

the Netherland Antilles.

This is the first time the U.S. has -

participated in this NATO exercise. The 

exercise was a great opportunity to see 

different capabilities -

and how each country 

responds to similar challenges in deep diving 

operations.

 The exercise was first 

held in 1997 with Norway, Canada and Netherlands as the initial 

participants. Over time, 

Belgium, Portugal, Finland, Sweden, and Italy 

have also participated. 

For the 2008 exercise, 

Norway, Netherlands, 

Italy, Portugal, Estonia, 

Finland, and the U.S. 

took part in the diving 

exercise. Each country 

featured a 10-man dive 

team that conducted 

multiple dives in up to 

300 feet of sea water using Heliox rebreathers. 

The U.S. team was 

very eclectic group of 

people. Rather than a 

deployable team, like 

the other countries, this 

team was assembled 

from multiple departments and disciplines at 

NEDU. 

“We had two EOD, one SEAL, two 

DMT, one DMO, three ND, and one 

government service civilian participate.

Despite this, we were extremely effective and worked together very well,” said 

Runkle.

“An exercise of this kind was unique 

because it’s considerably more complicated to conduct such deep dives compared to shallower or No-Decompression 

dives. We had numerous difficulties due 

to the differences between power requirements and hose fittings,” said EODCS 

Rob Womble. “Onboard the Dutch dive 

“mothership” Pelikaan, its machine shop 

was used to fabricate some components 

that we had not anticipated needing. Otherwise, it could have prevented us from 

participating if we hadn’t improvised.”

Power requirements and hose fittings 

weren’t the only differences. Disparities 

in how the U.S. and the other countries 

conducted their dive operations were recognized. The same problems realized by 

all Divers were met with different solutions. Those different solutions generated 

the real value for countries participating 

in the diving exercise, which was the opportunity to compare tactics, techniques 

and procedures to help everyone expand 

and improve their capabilities.

All of the countries (except the U.S.) 

dove utilizing the Carleton Viper+ Rebreather while the U.S. uses the Carleton 

Mk-16 rebreather. The maximum depth 

for the Viper is 81m (~260ft) whereas 

the Mk-16 can dive to 300ft. Both use 

a Helium/Oxygen mixture for breathing 

at medium depths, however they differ in the ratio of gas used and how it’s 

controlled. Another major difference 

between the U.S. and the other countries 

is the decompression schedule used. For 

example, U.S. dives conducted at 260 ft 

for 10 minutes require a decompression 

in the water for 11 minutes whereas the 

other countries had to decompress in the 

water for up to 70 minutes.

Once out of the water, the Divers were furnished with quarters at the 

Dutch Naval Base Parera on Curacao. 

Onboard Pelikaan there were two Dutch 

recompression chambers and workspac- NDCS Somsack Phanthavong at deco stop.

“

relationship that there’s no question that 

when there’s a need, you will step forward and stand by your partner.” - ADM 

Gary Roughead, CNO

Diving is synonymous with trust...

and experience. Lives are dependent 

on shipmates helping each other, ensuring diving procedures are followed, 

equipment is functioning properly and 

decompression is done safely. 

The Navy’s Experimental Diving 

Unit (NEDU), a field activity of the Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA), 

tests and evaluates diving, hyperbaric 

and other life-support systems and procedures, and conducts research and development in biomedical and environmental 

physiology. 

10 July 2009
es comfortably utilized by all of the dive 

teams. The ship also carried seven small 

dive boats that were utilized by all of 

the teams.

With a very steep bottom gradient it 

was clear why Curacao was a good site 

for the exercise. While the diving depths 

ranged from 250-300 feet sea water 

(fsw), 300 fsw could be found less than 

100 yards off shore, and continued to 

slope rapidly to thousands of feet.

The exercise included nine diving days. The first day was utilized for 

equipment checks and work up dives. 

However, before the work up dives could 

commence, the exercise was interrupted 

by a real world situation.

The night prior to commencement the NEDU Dive Team was 

contacted by a USMC Dive Team 

that coincidently was also operating on Curacao. They had lost a Diver 

Propulsion Vehicle (DPV) after an equipment failure on one of their dives. The 

two operators were unharmed but the 

DPV could have been anywhere from 

200 to 2000 fsw. After multiple phone 

calls and meetings, the Pelikaan was 

tasked to proceed to the estimated location of the DPV and see if the embarked 

Divers (from all the countries) could 

locate and recover it. After arriving on 

station it was 

d e t e r m i n e d 

that the depth 

was in excess 

of 1800 f s w. 

Since the depth 

was well beyond the diveable range, 

the search was 

cancelled and 

the exercise 

restarted. However, the international 

teamwork demonstrated in the effort set 

the stage for exceptional cooperation 

throughout the rest of the exercise. 

Once the exercise commenced, the 

NEDU team immediately began conducting dive scenarios, while the other 

countries spent a few days conducting 

work-up dives. By the end of the first 

week, the U.S. team had completed an 

aircraft crash salvage project and a mine 

search and recovery project. 

The remaining days were devoted 

to individual scenarios assigned each -

morning. Projects ranged from aircraft 

crash recovery to mine location and neutralization. 

“This has been a very interesting 

and challenging exercise. A 300-foot 

dive only gives you about five minutes 

(In boat left to right) EODCS Rob Womble, NDCS Clint Porter and CWO5(SEAL) Randy Poladian. 

(In water) ND1 Sam Peterson and LCDR Runkle.

LCDR Michael Runkle is the Executive 

Officer at the Navy Experimental Diving 

Unit in Panama City Beach, FL.

of usable work time at the bottom - not 

a lot of time when you have to search 

for something or conduct a project,” said 

Runkle. 

Multiple dives were conducted during the second week to recover projects 

that had been laid too deep (or had tumbled down the slope) and were beyond 

the depth limits of the other countries.

At the conclusion of the exercise the 

NEDU team had conducted 29 dives and 

spent 762 minutes in the water.

NDCS Clint Porter sums up the 

NEDU effort, “With proper planning, 

the right training and the right people, 

you can accomplish anything.”

“We hope this has laid the groundwork for future involvement of operational dive teams in this challenging and 

rewarding international exercise,” said 

Runkle.

LCDR Runkle with mine.

Cover photo & all article photos: 

Doug Elsey / DougElsey.com 

Doug Elsey is a Canadian documentary photographer specializing in expedition and adventure photo documentation for corporate clients that 

have included National Geographic, 

NATO Special Forces, the Canadian 

Department of National Defence and 

the Icelandic Coast Guard - EOD 

Command.

July 2009 11
A continuation of the history of the

 Navy Diving School in Pearl Harbor. Part one of this article was published in Faceplate, Volume 12, number 

2 released in December, 2008.

 A cartoon titled: 

“Strange as it 

seems” was 

- drawn by 

Elsie Hix in 

September 

1 9 5 1 w i t h 

a c a p t i o n 

t h a t s a y s : 

“Instructors 

at the Pearl 

Harbor Suba s e Tr a i n -

i n g T a n k 

descend 100 

feet, cross the bottom in 3 minutes and 

10 seconds where the pressure is 44 psi 

without any breathing apparatus.” 

I conducted several interviews which 

follow:

BMCM (MDV) (RET) John Lankford:

Master Diver Lankford was a BM1 

and an instructor at the school from 

January 1958 to January 1962. “Second 

Class Dive School ran 6 weeks but the 

instructors had flexibility in determining 

the length of training which they based 

on the student’s competence. Topics of 

the course consisted of how to use deep 

sea gear and how to determine floodable 

volume of pontoons and patches. When 

the instructors finished their training day, 

they would go to work performing underwater ship’s husbandry. The instructors would use either the Jack Browne or 

a modified gas mask. The Jack Browne 

wasn’t very popular, so the instructors 

would modify a gas mask to accept an air 

supply valve and hose. The Gas Masks 

provided a good fit and were readily 

available, just had to remember to install 

a non-return valve otherwise that thing 

would suck right up to your face. The 

primary submarine repair work consisted 

of replacing screws. The Divers would 

use detonating cord to loosen the screw. 

A typical screw change would take about 

4 hours to complete with a crew of 6 

Divers. We also did a lot of ballast tank 

work, replacing valves or finding a loose 

bracket and welding it back into place. 

Once, we conducted a demonstration 

dive for the Prince of Japan, who I think 

is the Emperor now. We also had Lloyd 

Bridges come by for a tour. We invited 

him to dive but he didn’t seem too impressed, it seemed like the water was too 

deep for him. The worst treatment we 

had was a gas embolism. We did a Treatment Table 4 and it took us 3 days just to 

get back to 50 feet.” The staff consisted 

of 1 LT as Officer in Charge, 1 Master 

Diver, 5 Chief Petty Officers and about 

26 enlisted instructors. 

BMCM (MDV) (RET) Donald Mc

Kenzie:

Master Diver McKenzie was an instructor in 1967 and 1968. He remembers that DCCS Buehl was the Master 

Diver at the time and the school was 

located in the back room of T-3; which 

w a s b e h i n d b u i l d -

ing 1003 on the Submarine Base. “We also 

performed underwater 

ship’s husbandry on 

the submarines. We 

did everything from 

changing screws to 

readiness inspections 

to hooking up and removing waste pipes, 

normally at night. We 

had what I believe 

was the first fly away 

beach gear which was 

500 feet of nylon and an old fashioned 

anchor. Plus we had a fly away 4 point 

mooring system complete with an open 

bell. We flew the system to San Diego 

and used it off the fantail of an ATF. In 

those days the command was known as 

Fleet Submarine Training School.”

QMC (DV) (RET) Mike Fitzpatrick: 

“I was sent to SCUBA school at Pearl 

in 1964. The Master Divers at the school 

were Charlie Ranger and Stinky Stout. 

I had to wait about three weeks before 

class started so I was sent down to help 

a First Class Shipfitter build the diving 

boat for the school. His name was John 

Ortiz. My indoctrination dive was in the 

MK-5. Several prospective candidates 

freaked out just putting the hat on. I graduated as a SCUBA Diver and returned to 

my duty station in Johnston Atoll. I was 

offered my choice of duty stations when 

my tour was over but that all changed 

when an Army General dropped his sunglasses in the water. I went into the water 

and salvaged the General’s glasses. Next 

thing I know, I got orders to First Class 

Dive School. I think that was in 1966, 

John Searcy was a classmate of mine. I 

worked at the ‘tank’ from 1978 to 1979 

and served as a SCUBA and Second Class 

Dive instructor; in fact, I was the first one 

there to qualify to teach the MK-12. The 

Master Divers at the school during this 

period were John Ortiz, Mac McKenzie, 

and Andy Anderson. Occasionally, we 

would dive the USS ARIZONA (BB 39) 

to patch oil leaks.” The casket story: “Me 

and Lou attended a ‘non-run’ marathon 

downtown Honolulu (code for drinking/

costume party). 

Lou was wearing 

the MK-5 deep sea 

dress and I was 

his tender hauling around a 300 

lb anchor. We won 

1st place. The prize 

was a real casket 

and it wasn’t even 

H a l l o w e e n ! We 

brought the casket 

back to the Escape 

Training Tank. A 

couple of students 

were sleeping in the bunk room and 

BM1 (DV) Bob Yarborough had the 

duty. Lou’s wife called and woke Bob 

up, said she wanted to thank him for 

treating her son but that she couldn’t find 

him and asked if he was still there. Of 

course, Bob had no idea what she was 

talking about, until he got up and found 

the casket down below, it was hilarious! 

We received the Navy Life Saving Medal 

in either 1979 or 1980. It was presented 

to us by the Governor of Hawaii for all 

the bends cases we did. Doctors would 

come over and perform operations and 

debride burn patients inside our chamber. 

I can’t remember what holiday it was but 

NAVY DIVING SCHOOL PEARL HARBOR: 

Yellow Diver coming up and 

over from a training dive.

Diver is required to float over to the 

descent line, take one end a test line 

from the instructor (2-100 feet lines 

separated by a shackle) and proceed 

down the descent line to the bottom.. 

12 July 2009
July 2009 13

we had 8 bends cases going on in one 

duty day. There were two patients in the 

chamber below the tank, one in chamber above the tank, an ARS was brought 

over from Harbor Clearance Unit ONE 

and moored by the tank. There were two 

patients in its chamber and we had two 

people with pain only bends waiting for 

a chamber to open up. Then we got a call 

from the outer islands they were bringing 

a Diver who was embolized, had a pneumothorax, and was unconscious. Captain 

Claude Harvey was the medical officer, 

Bob Yarborough was my outside tender, 

Brad Ingles was my inside corpsman. Me 

and Dr. Harvey would take turn’s visiting 

all the chambers. We got the embolism 

guy and ran a Table 4 on him. He regained consciousness but was still paralyzed from waist down so we ran a table 

6 on him everyday until we finally got his 

paralysis down to his left foot.”

HTCM (MDV) (RET) John Searcy: 

Master Diver Searcy was stationed 

at the School from 1978 to 1981. He 

went to Master Diver evaluations when 

he transferred and reported to the USS 

DIXIE (AD 14) in June 81. (He was my 

first MDV!). “We were performing Underwater Ships Husbandry when I first 

showed up but turned over all maintenance responsibility to the newly formed 

Subase Dive Locker in 1978. The Subase 

Divers worked out of the Torpedo Shop 

back then. We conducted back to back 

SCUBA and Second Class Classes. Most 

of our SCUBA students were either from 

submarines or the Marine Corps. The 

SCUBA classes fed right into Second 

Class classes too. Typically, we used 6 

instructors for these classes, with a total 

of 25 or 30 guys stationed at the school. 

The Submarine Escape Training Tank 

performed lock out exercises and conducted free and buoyant ascent training 

for the submarine crews. It seemed like 

every Friday we were conducting dog 

and pony shows for local VIPs. There 

were two chambers, one on top of the 

tower and a big Submarine Tender Steel 

Riveted Chamber below. We maintained 

the Pacific Bends Watch for all outer 

islands. The worst it ever got was one 

weekend we ended up with 8 bends cases 

at one time. People just kept showing up. 

Fortunately, EOD had an LCM-6 and it 

was brought around along with an ARS. 

That was a long day! Another time we 

had a student pass out during free ascent 

training. We got him out of the water and 

loaded him into the chamber but the doc 

closed that heavy assed chamber door on 

his foot. Good thing he was passed out, 

but boy that guy sure was pissed when 

he woke up! 

ENCM (MDV) (RET) Clifford M. 

Ellis:

“I was an instructor at the Dive 

School in Pearl Harbor (NSTCP) from 

Dec. 1980 to May 1983. I was the lead 

instructor for Class 8203, which include 

future Master Divers: Bobby Quant, 

Steve Smith, Frank Perna, Eric Frank, 

and Rick Storment. I was also lead instructor for Ray Augustine, Don Curtis, 

Bob Carmichael, Donny Dennis, Shawn 

Fanning, and Tom Stogdale. I was stationed at the Escape Training Tank until 

it was de-commissioned. Greg Lalonde 

was also one of my students.”

BMCM (MDV) Richard Storment:

“I graduated Second Class Dive 

School and they had me stay as an instructor. I was there from 1982 to 1985. I 

worked at the Escape Training Tank until it closed, I think sometime in early or 

mid 1983. I was the guy responsible for 

draining the tank; unfortunately, I ended 

up flooding the SUBPAC and Squadron 

buildings in the process. 240,000 gallons 

is a lot of water and the Admiral wasn’t 

very happy. I remember that Rusty Hunt 

and Brendan Murphy were instructors 

too. We had 3 chambers and there were 

several times we would end up using 

all three chambers treating local Divers 

while we had SCUBA and Second Class 

classes on board. We were busy. I’ll tell 

you what; I have never seen so many serious cases where the patients would come 

in paralyzed or unconscious. One of the 

good things about moving the school to 

Ford Island is that we were out of sight 

and out of mind. We used to get into a 

lot of trouble for Physical Training with 

the students. Pushups with twin tanks on 

your back makes you strong!”

 A BRIEF HISTORY Part 2

Red and Yellow Divers are being undressed after a training dive. The instructor is observing and timing the 

student during the undress process.

By: NDCM Brick Bradford

MMCM (MDV) (RET) Don Curtis:

“I was a submarine qualified MM1 

when I went to Second Class Dive 

School in Oct. 1982 and was assigned 

instructor duty upon graduation in Jan. 

1983. Eric Frank, Frank Perna and Rick 

(‘Storm’) Storment also attended Second 

Class Dive School during this time frame 

and were subsequently given instructor 

duty upon graduation. The Submarine 

Escape Training Tank had stopped free 

ascent training but we used the tank -

for surface supplied MK-12 training. I 

made the last inspection dive with Jade 

the night before ‘Storm’ drained the Tank 

in early 1983. MDV Charlie Obrien was 

relieved by MDV Coy Payne during this 

period. I was an instructor until Jan. 1985. 

At first, all training was accomplished on 

Subase and the open training tank was 

located at the end of S-15 in front of the 

Quonset hut. PWC moved the open training tank to Ford Island, and installed it 

behind bldg. 39. The instructors pretty 

much did everything else, moved all the 

equipment, installed the air system and 

set up the classrooms while conducting 

SCUBA and Second Class classes. We 

finished the move in about 3 months and 

the only chamber left was on the LCM8. Attrition was pretty high back then, I 

think we averaged about 65 to 70 percent. The LCM was used for all pierside 

and at sea training evolutions and the 

students were pretty good about finding 

old submarine “hand warmers” (coffee 

cups without handles) but the most interesting item they salvaged were the old 

‘Territory of Hawaii’ milk bottles. If you 

missed the ferry you would muster at the 

Arizona Club and if you caught the Ferry 

you mustered at Rainbow Marina. Times 

have changed! 
CMDCM (SS/DV) Bob Ashton:

A student’s perspective: A very 

young ET3 attended SCUBA school in 

May 1983. He was stationed aboard the 

USS ASPRO (SSN 648). Mike Winter 

(yeah, the same one) was a shipmate who 

was also stationed on board ASPRO at 

the same time. “The school had moved 

to Ford Island and Frank Perna and Eric 

Frank were my instructors. Frank Perna 

would run us around Ford Island and was 

known for his ability to run like a gazelle. That guy could flat out run us into 

the ground. Frank Perna and Eric Frank 

were great instructors. They led all PT 

sessions by their outstanding example. 

We would perform our compass swims at 

West Lock. Jamming SCUBA cylinders 

was a challenge. We would load the tanks 

onto a cart, push the cart to the ferry boat 

landing, catch a ferry to Halawa Landing, 

then push the cart to Richardson Pool. 

During lunch, we would load the empty 

tanks back onto the cart and push the cart 

to the Submarine Escape Training Tank, 

fill them up and run them back to the 

pool for the afternoon training. A lot of 

us went hungry that week. During final 

problem solving I was paired up with a 

guy who freaked out and bolted to the 

surface, the instructors tried to pull him 

back down but couldn’t stop him from 

reaching surface, he quit. Next, they 

paired me up with a Marine, it was the 

end of a hit and the Marine had no equipment left and somehow my UDT shorts 

were around my ankles, but we passed 

the hit! If I had to do it over again (referring to his career)... humm.”

HTCM (MDV) (RET) Jimmy Johnson:

“You know, you can teach anybody 

diving in a classroom but you find out if 

they have what it takes to be a Diver during pool week.”

Master Diver Johnson was stationed at the school from Oct. 1991 to 

Mar. 1996. He provided great leadership stories regarding how he handled 

issues with his instructors and students. 

“I had one instructor who kept coming 

in late. The Chiefs couldn’t seem to get 

this guy’s attention so I pulled him into 

the office and told him to muster at the 

brig and hold ‘Colors’ in his whites for 

the next 3 weekends. With the Sailor in 

my office, I called the Chief who ran 

the brig, explained what I wanted to do 

and told him that if the Sailor was late 

or in a shabby uniform, the Chief was 

authorized to immediately apprehend the 

sailor, throw him into the brig, hold him 

for the entire weekend and if the Sailor 

gave them any grief, they could give him 

bread and water, they were also authorized to physically discipline the Sailor 

as needed, in other words beatings were 

authorized, hell, I didn’t care! Of course, 

all of it was a show to get the Sailor’s attention, there the Sailor sat, eyes big and 

round not saying a thing and the Chief on 

the other end of the phone had no idea 

who I was or what I wanted, he just kept 

saying, Master Chief, there is no way I 

can do that, we can’t just confine a Sailor, 

let alone beat him, we just can’t do that. 

I totally ignored the Chief and kept on 

talking as though the Chief was agreeing with me. Needless to say, the Sailor 

mustered as directed and I didn’t have no 

more trouble with him. Another time, we 

had a Second Class Diver who just graduated and checked out of the BEQ. The 

BEQ was empty and locked up but he 

got drunk and broke back into the BEQ 

to sleep it off. Well, he passed out with a 

cigarette in his hand and caught his mattress on fire. He woke up, put the fire out, 

then tossed the mattress out the window 

because it stunk and he goes back to sleep. 

A little while later the mattress reflashed 

and started burning again. Security was 

making their rounds and found the mattress on fire. Security called the fire department and they came and put the fire 

out. They conducted a search throughout 

the building and found the Sailor passed 

out on the second deck. I had 4 of my 

instructors make Master Diver, Jim Santos, Jim Carolan, Steve Wiggins and 

Fred Orns. Steve Wiggins wanted to retire so he could sell carpet, he put in his 

papers but then he starts having second 

thoughts. I called the detailer and pulled 

Steve’s retirement papers and sent him to 

evals. He had about 5 days notice before 

leaving for the show.” 

NDC Anthony Collins:

“I was in the last Deep Sea class to 

graduate at Pearl Harbor; 92-50-2C. I was 

an HTFA and 18 years old at the time. 

We heard about Master Diver Johnson. 

Heard about his exploits in Japan and I 

was so afraid of meeting him. I thought 

it was all over when we got caught stealing pies out of the galley on Ford Island. 

It wasn’t really our fault though, the instructors would PT us late and we would 

miss chow. I don’t know how, but thank 

God I never had to stand tall in front of 

him. One of the things I remember most 

was that we would load the LCM and 

get U/W for Halawa Landing and the instructors would make us man the rail in 

our white t-shirts and UDT shorts. I also 

saw plenty of Hammerhead sharks in the 

harbor too; of course they would normally show up just as I was being hatted 

up to work on a project. Our class started 

out with 33 students; only 11 graduated 

though.”

ENCM (MDV) (RET) Steve Wiggins:

Master Diver Wiggins was stationed 

at the school from May 1991 to Dec. 

1996. His memory is like an elephant 

and he has more stories than just about 

everybody else combined, most of which 

I cannot publish! “Hi Spalding and Rick 

Bedard were the Master Divers at the 

Pearl Harbor Dive School 

Graduation Class 06-79

ENCM (MDV) Mike Winter:

“I was a Submarine Sailor and attended SCUBA school in 1979. I tried to 

get out of submarines and go to Second 

Class Dive School, but the boat wouldn’t 

release me. I decided to get out of the 

Navy and was at TPU just 24 hours away 

from civilian life when a former instructor saw me milling around Subase. The 

instructor asked me what I was doing; 

I explained the situation and told him I 

wanted to go to Dive school but the Navy 

wouldn’t let me so I was going to get 

out. The instructor grabbed me, made a 

phone call and the next thing I know, I 

got orders to Second Class Dive School.”

14 July 2009
time; Jimmy John came in shortly after 

I did. We ran 15 SCUBA and 8 Second 

Class classes annually. The last Deep 

Sea class was taught in May of 1992. 

We would send Mobile Training Teams 

to Camp Pendleton and Okinawa every 

year and most of our students were Marines. During the MTT’s to Okinawa, 

we would have a Helicopter standing by 

for our emergency transportation during pool week. One of the students embolized and we had to transport but the 

pilot refused to take off because of bad 

weather. Jimmy John got into the helo 

talked to the pilot and next thing we 

know they are taking off. I jumped into 

the truck to meet them at the chamber but 

there’s nobody around when I get there. 

Turns out the Air Force does things differently, they wanted to check the patient 

into the emergency room prior to treating 

him, I thought Jimmy was going to come 

unglued! We finally got the guy into the 

chamber though. In 1995 the Navy was 

offering early retirements and I decided 

to get out and take over my dad’s carpet 

business. I already had a seat in a Master 

Diver Evaluation but I pulled my name 

and submitted my retirement papers. I 

started to have second thoughts and talked to Jimmy about it, next thing I know 

my retirement papers were pulled and 

I was scheduled to leave for evals in a 

week. So I made Master Diver and came 

back to the school and relieved Jimmy 

John. We had a good bunch of instructors but it was funny though, when we 

conducted General Military Training the 

instructor assigned to give the training 

would be given no slack. The other instructors would critique him like he was 

teaching a class. The instructors that also 

made Master Diver included: Jim Santos, Jim Carolan, Ron Irvin, Mike Moser, 

Fred Orns and Troy Larck. Troy was a 

master at making booby traps; I think he 

got just about everybody! I was relieved 

by JT Reiss.” 

CDR (RET) Dave Davis:

“I’m a retired Salvage Officer, served 

as the director at the school from June 

1994 to Oct. 1996. Of all my tours in 

the Navy, none had as great an impact as 

the dive school. The Divers and Sailors I 

worked for (and I mean that) are the most 

incredible bunch you’ll ever meet; I’ve 

got their photos on the bulkhead and often refer to them when I’m boring some 

poor SWO with tales of the great Sailors 

I’ve known. Most importantly, and absolutely without question the bedrock of 

the school, was Jimmy John. Jimmy John 

encouraged Steve Wiggins to stay in the 

Navy. Steve made MDV and continued 

on to a great career. Jimmy John encouraged Sailors and one particularly tired 

and crusty former junkboat XO (me), 

and all the rest to do our best and excel. 

His influence was key to my developing 

command philosophy, and during many 

operations aboard GRAPPLE, the challenges at NDSTC, and even today, I think 

back to his leadership and guidance and 

am proud and thankful to have had the 

opportunity to work with him. I would 

literally not be where I am today, without having had the chance to serve at the 

school.” 

NDCM (MDV) James Costin:

Master Diver Costin offers a unique 

account of his experience with the Pearl 

Harbor Dive School. “The Louisville 

Courier Journal had an article about 

Louis “Buddy” Costin who was in the 

Navy aboard the USS WEST VIRGINIA 

(BB 48). The article corrected a long running error that had been made to protect 

the feelings and suffering of the Costin family. The family was initially told 

that Buddy died during the bombing of 

the WEST VIRGINIA on December 7th 

1941. The article would lay out a different story. Buddy along with two of his 

Shipmates were found dead differently 

than the others from that fateful day. 

According to the article “they had survived the blast and were trapped inside 

the ship. When salvage crews raised the 

WEST VIRGINIA six months later, they 

found the bodies of three men huddled in 

an airtight storeroom: Ronald Enidcott, 

Clifford Olds, and Louis “Buddy” Costin. The men in storeroom A-111, clad 

in their blues and jerseys, were removed 

like 63 other men, carried away in heavy 

canvas bags drawn at the top. Clues left 

in the dry storeroom hinted at their horrific final days: Flashlight batteries littered 

the floor. The manhole to a supply of 

fresh water had been opened. Emergency 

rations had been eaten. And a calendar 

had a red X scratched through each of the 

dates from Dec. 7th through Dec. 23.” 

“Truth about Sailor’s death haunts brother and sisters” Louisville Courier Journal 

Newspaper, December 7th 1995. “After 

reading this I remembered going past 

Battleship Row on the ferry to Ford Island when I was a student in 1990. When 

I returned to Pearl Harbor as instructor 

10 years later, a good friend, MDV Paul 

Adams, gave me book ‘Descent into the 

Darkness’. I read the book and loved reading about Deep Sea history. Then I came 

across the chapter named USS WEST 

VIRGINIA and when I stumbled on the 

passage below I was face to face with my 

family and my career meeting each other 

head on.”

“Work crews from the ship’s force 

and the Salvage and Repair Unit began unloading oil, ammunition, and stores from 

the accessible areas. In addition, sixty-six 

bodies in an advanced state of decomposition were recovered and placed in canvas 

bags for burial. Three bodies were found 

in a completely dry storeroom. They were 

dressed in blue uniforms. The three had 

emergency rations stored at their battle 

station, and they had ample water, since 

they had removed the cover to an adjacent 

freshwater tank. They also had battle lanterns available for their use. Two of them 

had wristwatches, and one of them carried 

a wallet-size calendar, which had the days 

checked off from 7 December to 23 December. It was believed their deaths were 

due to lack of oxygen.”

“Descent Into Darkness: Pearl Harbor, 1941: a Navy Diver’s Memoir”

By: Commander Edward G. Raymer, USN 

“Re-enlisting as a Navy Diver in 

Pearl Harbor I had the chance of honoring 

my Great Uncle and give some kudos to 

my Deep Sea brethren of days gone by. 

MDV Westling and MDV Sampson arranged for me to reenlist underwater at the 

site of the USS WEST VIRGINIA. So you 

can see that Pearl Harbor Dive School is 

more than a duty station to me.”

NDCM (MDV) Brick Bradford: 

My first experience with the dive 

school was in 1980 during my second 

West Pac. I completed my diving interview and indoc dive in the MK-5 using 

the open training tank when it was at 

S-15. I relieved Master Diver Westling in 

Apr. 2006, actually, he had transferred in 

Dec. 2005 and NDC Mike Miller was actJuly 2009 15
ing Master Diver. Mike transferred a year 

later and was selected as Master Diver in 

July, 2007. In the 76 or so years of this 

school’s existence, I have wondered how 

many instructors have served here and 

how many students have walked through 

these halls. My best estimate suggests 

that 856 instructors have served here and 

approximately 18,200 students, including 

at least 200 midshipmen have trained here 

not counting the countless scores of students who have trained in the Submarine 

Escape Training Tank. A sense of sadness 

hangs in the shadows of my mind with the 

closing of the school. For those who have 

served as an instructor here, you should 

know that this school has maintained an 

outstanding reputation for safety and professionalism that can only come from the 

leadership and dedicated effort of its staff 

and instructors. That certainly has been 

true during the two years I have served 

here. As with the generations before us, 

our staff and instructors who graduated 

the last class and closed the doors of the 

school for the last time committed their 

hearts wholly to the mission. The school 

has changed over time and the courses 

taught have been refined over the years but 

the same basic principles, philosophies, 

and characteristics of training Navy Divers are timeless. The following excerpt 

is taken from my last graduation speech: 

“You sat through 78 hours of classroom instruction, completed 33 hours in 

the lab, spent 59 hours on dive station, 

and performed 31 hours of PT. Every 

aspect of this course was designed for 

one purpose, to develop Navy qualified 

Divers. The banner displayed in front 

of the building asks the question: Do 

you have it in you? Implying, do you 

have what it takes to be a Navy Diver, 

but what is the recipe, what is the secret ingredient? I can tell you this: We 

took 25 students, a whole bunch of staff 

and instructor personnel, mixed them 

together vigorously for 5 weeks, carefully adding just the right amount of PT, 

bay swims, classroom instruction, and 

practical diving experience to create the 

next generation of Navy SCUBA Divers. All the while, we were testing you, 

evaluating you, and challenging you 

mentally, physically, and academically.

This course of instruction is not easy, 

nor was it ever meant to be. We are not 

recreational Divers, we are Navy trained 

professional Divers who are expected 

to competently operate in a variety of 

environments using various tools and 

techniques to accomplish the objectives 

set before us. From this day forward, 

anyone of you could be called upon to 

plan, organize and safely execute a dive 

that requires urgency. It may be in the 

middle of the night, out in the middle of 

nowhere, in frigid waters with no visibility and in heavy seas with a strong 

current. Ultimately our goal was to develop your competence and confidence 

in yourself, your buddy, and the procedures and equipment we use. To prepare 

you for the challenges ahead where you 

are expected to exercise good judgment 

in determining the safest method to get 

the job done and not become part of the 

problem. What we do is dangerous business. Navy doctrine states that “Diving 

and working in inherently hazardous 

underwater environments presents considerable risk of mishap. The danger of 

injury and death is always present; however, these risks can be significantly reduced through safe diving practices.” It 

is because of our adherence to safe diving practices that the Navy Diving program has earned the reputation of being 

the safest in the world. I know you have 

heard this before, but it is worth saying 

again. Train the way you dive and dive 

the way you train. Always remember 

that complacency is your greatest enemy. 

We have provided you with the tools, 

training, and resources you will need 

to fight this enemy and never forget the 

dive manual is your single best resource. 

You will find that training is emphasized 

throughout the manual. The best training 

is practical training. Never forget that an 

accident or casualty can occur at any moment and most often it will occur without 

any warning. The question I want you 

to ask yourself is: How would I react if 

that happened to a member of my dive 

team, would I be prepared? Today, each 

of you has earned the distinction of being 

the last class to graduate from the Pearl 

Harbor Dive School. Equally important, 

each one of you is entitled to wear the 

breast insignia of a Navy SCUBA Diver. 

I know you will wear it proudly. I ask 

you to honor this community with the 

same commitment, tenacity and can do 

spirit you demonstrated here. Do not let 

this day be your best or brightest. I challenge you to go forward building on the 

foundation you established here. It is a 

great day to be a Navy Diver, we have 

a motto that says: We dive the world 

over: The Atlantic Ocean, Mediterranean 

Sea, South China Sea, the Red Sea, the 

Gulf of Aden, the Persian Gulf, the Indian Ocean, and the Great Pacific Ocean. 

Yeah, we dive the world over because it 

is our domain. Congratulations.” 

Countless scores of Navy Divers 

have walked these decks either as instructors or as students. I wish I could 

have listed all of you, past and present. 

The staff and instructors who closed the 

school include: 

CWO2 Charles Senter, OIC, NDCM 

(MDV) Brick Bradford, Master Diver, 

NDC (DV) Craig Simon, LCPO, NDC 

(DV) Josh Cole, Training Officer, ND1 

(DV) Jason Tangalin, LPO/SCUBA, 

ND1 (DV) Greg Howe, LPO/Maintenance, ND1 (DV) Derwin Leiva, Supply 

Officer, EN1 (SW) Greg Smith, HM2 

(DMT) Brad Okeefe

My favorite quotes (as shared by 

those interviewed) include: “Blood 

makes the grass grow!”; “Nasty Pac photographers should not leave their cameras unattended!”; “Mary Point Landing 

is no longer an issue!”; “Master Grind 

Warfare Specialist: Quality and Quantity 

over time (immediate qualification granted by consuming 3 plates of nachos!)” ; 

“Golden Coconut!”; “Yes it does get cold 

in Hawaii—just spend the day at Richardson Pool!”

References:

NDCM Brick Bradford is recently retired from 

MDSU-ONE in Pearl Harbor, Hawaii.

Photos provided by: John Thompson HT2/DV2, 

Enlisted 1977-1981, stationed aboard the USS Kirk 

FF-1087 & USS Orion AS-18.

(1) Into the Deep (The History of Man’s Underwater 

Exploration) By Robert F. Marx (Copyright 1978)

(2) Torpedo from Wikipedia

(3) Early History of US Navy Diving Department of 

the Navy Historical Center 805 Kidder Breese SE 

Washington Navy Yard Washington DC 

(4) Navy Diver: The Incredible Undersea Adventures 

of a Master Diver By Victor Boesen (Joseph Sidney 

Karneke, Master Diver) copyright 1962-2001

(5) Angels in Lead Boots By Bob ‘Dex’ Armstrong: 

Story found at: www.olgoat.com

(6) US Navy Diving Manual 1943

(7) Shallow-Water Diving Mask: Use of Gas Mask. 

Navy Department Bulletin. (Cumulative edition, 

1943): 1118-1121 Department of the Navy -- Department of the Navy Historical Center 805 Kidder Breese 

SE Washington Navy Yard Washington DC

(8) Bureau of Ships Diving Manual 1 July 1952

(9) Salvage Diver: Men Who Wear the Iron Hat Who 

Lighten Our Ship Losses by Robert C. Fay Our Navy 

Magazine Mid-September 1944

16 July 2009
July 2009 17
What is Traumatic Brain Injury?

According to the National Institute of Neurological Disorders and 

Stroke website, Traumatic Brain Injury 

(TBI) occurs when a sudden trauma 

causes damage to the brain. Closed TBI 

can result when the head suddenly and 

violently hits an object or in the case of 

the recent OEF/OIF conflict, a Service 

member is exposed to a blast. Symptoms of a TBI can be mild, moderate, 

or severe, depending on the extent of 

the damage to the brain. A person with 

a mild TBI may experience loss of consciousness for a few seconds or minutes, but more commonly, experiences 

a transient alteration of consciousness 

such as being dazed. Other symptoms 

of mild TBI can include headache, 

confusion, dizziness, blurred vision, 

ringing in the ears, fatigue, a change 

in sleep patterns, behavioral or mood 

changes, and trouble with memory, 

concentration, attention, or thinking. A 

person with a moderate or severe TBI 

may show these same symptoms, but of 

greater severity.

What about Hyperbaric Oxygen?

A White Paper from the Hyperbaric 

Oxygen (HBO2

) Steering Committee recognizes HBO2

 as an effective treatment 

in dive-related injuries, soft tissue healing, and carbon monoxide poisoning. 

The Department of Health and Human 

Services has not approved HBO2

 therapy 

for the treatment of TBI due to the lack 

of evidence for clinical efficacy. There is 

evidence from trials in humans with severe TBI to support that HBO2

 initiated 

within a day of injury may improve survival, but not functional outcomes. There 

are no high quality clinical trials in humans of HBO2

 for acute, mild to moderate TBI or for sequelae from TBI of any 

severity. Scientific evidence is essential 

to determine if HBO2 improves clinical 

and functional outcomes of patients with 

TBI-related sequelae. Optimally, large, 

well-designed clinical trials are recommended to further evaluate HBO2

 for TBI. 

stimulation of living, yet non-functional 

neurons by mechanisms that are unknown. Side effects from HBO2

 are uncommon and severe or permanent complications are rare. For chronic sequelae 

from TBI, HBO2

 is commonly offered at 

1.5 atm abs for 60 minutes, which is a 

protocol with low risk. However, while 

using HBO2 “off-label” in a child with 

cerebral palsy, a chamber fire resulting in 

fatality recently underscores the critical 

importance of strict adherence in hyperbaric chamber operations. 

Proposed Randomized, Multi-center, 

Controlled Clinical Trial of HBO2

 for 

TBI Principal Investigator, Dr. Lindell K. Weaver 

Dr. Lin Weaver provided the following overview of the study to CAPT Pat 

Keenan, Supervisor of Salvage and Diving, NAVSEA 00C, and to CDR Mark 

Matthews, Commanding Officer of the 

Navy Experimental Diving Unit, which 

has enthusiastically agreed to support 

this important study:

“Let me review the high points of 

this study for you. We will enroll Active Duty military that have had brain 

injury more than four months prior 

to enrollment, that can participate in 

outcome assessments, and willing to 

travel, plus provide self consent. They 

will not have any contraindication for 

hyperbaric oxygen, of course. An initial outcome assessment, which will include questionnaires, neuropsychological test and brain MRI imaging, will 

take approximately one week. Next we 

need to randomize them to one of two 

interventions. The chamber interventions are sham (1.2 atm abs breathing 

air x 60 minutes) or hyperbaric oxygen 

(1.5 atm abs, 100% oxygen x 60 minutes). The total number of sessions is 

40, or 10 weeks from start, whichever 

occurs first. Then they have a second 

outcome assessment battery of tests. 

The same outcomes as before chamber interventions will be administered 

to permit comparison by intervention. 

TBI During the Iraq and Afghanistan Wars

It has been reported that the number of service personnel suffering serious brain injuries is approximately five 

times the number who have experienced 

amputations. The reasons for the increase in diagnosis of closed TBI likely 

include the effectiveness of body armor 

in protecting vital organs from injuries 

that would previously have proved fatal, 

increased awareness of closed TBI and 

the potential sequelae of mild and moderate closed brain injury, and the prominence of blast as an injury mechanism. 

Identification of mild to moderate closed 

brain injury in a war zone is more difficult than recognition of penetrating or 

severe closed head injuries. Corpsmen 

and Medics are now receiving training 

to help them recognize closed TBI, and 

assure injured personnel are assessed, 

rested, and monitored while they are 

recovering from their concussion, and 

when appropriate medically evacuated.

HBO2 Background

The Undersea and Hyperbaric Medical Society (UHMS) defines HBO2

 as the 

breathing of 100% oxygen at a pressure 

greater than or equal to 4 times higher 

than the atmospheric absolute pressure 

at sea level (1 atm abs). A typical HBO2

clinical treatment uses 2.0 to 3.0 atm abs 

pressure for 90 to 120 minute durations. 

The total number of treatments per patient and the time elapsed between treatments varies widely depending on the 

clinical indication. HBO2 increases the 

oxygenation of the blood and tissues of 

the patient and has immune modulating 

properties. The use of HBO2 for acute 

TBI is based on the theory that marginal 

brain cells around the destroyed areas 

of the brain may potentially be revived. 

Improving oxygen availability to these 

cells may stimulate them to function normally ultimately resulting in neurologic 

improvement. In addition to restoring 

proper cellular function, HBO2

 may reduce brain swelling. The benefits of treatment may diminish the greater the time 

from injury to treatment. HBO2 applied 

months to years after TBI may involve 

stem cell migration to the injured brain, 

down regulation of inflammation and 

18 July 2009

Hyperbaric Oxygen continued on pg 19.
July 2009 19

Navy Divers are an essential element to the development of a 

credible USMC ground reconnaissance 

combatant diving capability. They 

have been an integral and valued asset 

to Marine reconnaissance dive lockers 

since 1997. Their firsthand experience, 

professionalism, and wealth of diving 

knowledge have made an immediate 

impact on each reconnaissance unit 

they have served with.

In the late 1990’s, due to the lack of 

qualified USMC combatant Divers and 

manning shortfalls, the pivotal decision 

was made to staff Navy Divers at active 

duty and reserve reconnaissance units. 

This addition freed up more Marine 

combatant Divers to be used in other 

operational areas within the Marine 

reconnaissance battalions. Due to their 

often transient nature and constant focus on maintaining operational readiness for upcoming deployments, Marine combatant Divers were unable to 

achieve and maintain the advanced skill 

levels, knowledge, and experience that 

Navy Master Divers, 1st Class Divers, 

and Diving Medical technicians possess. This consistent level of experience and knowledge base is required to 

effectively support a fully operational 

diving locker. Additionally, the maintenance requirements and certification 

processes are very complex. This identified gap was filled immediately by the 

addition of Navy Divers.

The most crucial contribution of 

U.S. Navy Divers in Marine Reconnaissance was the addition of a 

Master Diver billet within the 

Marine Reconnaissance units. 

The Senior Navy and USMC 

leadership made the decision in 

early 1997 that the life support 

mission of the TRCS (Transportable Recompression Chamber)/

EHCS (Expeditionary Hyperbaric Chamber System), coupled 

with the medical complexity 

associated with treating diving 

related injuries at remote locations required senior experienced Navy Divers for the mission. 

all Naval instructions and publications 

pertaining to diving, and diving operations. 

The U.S. Navy Divers currently 

serving in Marine reconnaissance units 

are a valued asset to the Marine Corps. 

They serve harmoniously with leathernecks in dive lockers around the globe 

continuing the long and historic traditions of the Navy/Marine Corps team.

NDC Keith Barker of 2nd Reconnaisance Battalion 

and NDC Milligan of 2nd Marine Special Operations Battalion train on KMS 48 along with numerous 

other Navy and Marine Corp Divers. With this training they will return to their respective commands and 

be able to train Reconnaissance and Special Forces 

Marines on KMS 48.

Master Sergeant Ramsey currently serves 

as the Reconnaissance Occupational Field 

Sponsor, and Combatant Diving Advocate 

at PP&O HQMC.

CAPT John W. Murray is an Undersea 

Medical Officer/Family Physician who 

serves as the Diving Medical Officer for the 

Supervisor of Salvage and Diving.

Six months after enrollment, the research subjects repeat these same tests 

to determine durability of any possible 

favorable effects. One year after enrollment we will administer final outcome 

measures by telephone.”

 “Intervention blinding is critically 

important! The study coordinators will 

educate the chamber sites about blinding methods. The fewest number of 

chamber operations and inside attendants that must know is optimal. They 

can talk about the allocation amongst 

themselves, but cannot reveal the blind 

to any clinician. Anything that could 

reveal the allocation must be covered 

or concealed. The operators and inside 

attendants conducting the sham must 

act like it is a real hyperbaric oxygen 

exposure, and take blinding seriously. 

If research subjects discover the blind, 

the study integrity could be compromised. In the event of a chamberrelated adverse event, we will have 

protocols to follow, as well as immediate availability of Coordinator Center 

personnel to guide what then happens, 

including appropriate documentation.”

Hyperbaric Oxygen cont’d from page 18.

In addition to freeing up 

Marine Reconnaissance men 

for operational reconnaissance 

duty, the integration of the Master Diver and his team brought -

several unique qualifications 

and capabilities to the dive lockers. A 

few examples of these capabilities are: 

Diving supervisory skills, the management of all preventative and corrective 

maintenance on all diving life support 

systems and equipment, and technical 

expertise in the following areas: the 

operation of Navy approved and certified underwater breathing apparatuses, 

life support systems and recompression 

chambers, and diagnosis and treatment 

of diving injuries and illnesses, particularly those requiring recompression 

therapy. The Master Diver and his team 

also possess a comprehensive knowledge of the scope and application of 
I

n his initial Navy career, which began 

during World War II, and in his subsequent civilian activities “Bill” Searle has 

been an active force for development and 

progress in international maritime salvage, 

diving and work under the sea - in Ocean 

Engineering. Practically no phase of those 

activities has been untouched by his review, supervision or active participation. 

Divers with modern protective equipment 

and effective tools work at previously only 

dreamed-of depths and times to accomplish once impossible tasks. Archaeologists 

can investigate history hidden underwater 

for centuries and millennia. Underwater 

structures for an amazing number of useful and necessary purposes are now installed in previously impossible locations. 

From among the technical development 

programs initiated by him in the 1960’s 

have arisen Remotely Operated Vehicles 

{ROV’s} and Autonomous Undersea Vehicle’s {AUV’s} which safely [and quietly 

in necessary] penetrate all areas and depths 

of the ocean and perform important tasks 

which are emblazoned in newspapers and 

headlines [or never mentioned]. All these 

are the result of a truly prodigious career.

The story that is told by this man from 

the Naval Academy to Submarine Salvage 

on to the H-bomb and the Deep Submergence Program; CAPT Searle saw it all.

Willard F. Searle Jr. was born 17 January 1924 in Columbus, Ohio. The attack 

on Pearl Harbor occurred during his initial 

year at Washington and Lee University, and 

he transferred to the US Naval Academy 

where he graduated in 1945 [wartime Class 

of 1946]. On 14 April 1945 he marched 

with his Naval Academy Company in the 

funeral cortege which accompanied the 

casket of the late President Franklin D. 

Roosevelt from Union Station to the White 

House. His subsequent naval career focused primarily on salvage, diving and 

ocean engineering. He was designated as 

an Engineering Duty {ED} Officer in 1952 

after graduate study in Naval Architecture 

at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. In 1982 he was elected a Member of 

the National Academy of Engineering.

After graduation from the Naval Academy in 1945 Bill Searle was retained there 

as an instructor in Marine Engineering, and 

used the assignment as an opportunity for 

graduate study in physics at George Washington University in DC. His first shortcourse diving instruction came at Norfolk 

in 1946 while serving in the fast attack 

destroyer USS MEREDITH (DD-890). He 

transferred to the USS WEISS (APD-135), 

which transported Underwater Demolition 

Team personnel, where he became familiar with their operations. From this ship he 

went to MIT and afterwards, in 1952, was 

a student at the Navy Salvage and Diving 

School, then in Bayonne NJ.

Two shipyard tours followed, at 

Charleston SC and then at Subic Bay Ship 

Repair Facility in the Philippines. At Subic 

he ran the shipyard Diving School. Also 

during this period he participated in and 

managed the salvage/clearance of several 

hundred wrecks from World War II, as well 

as being Technical Advisor for salvage operations in Manila Bay which were then 

being performed by the Japanese as part of 

their war reparations. In 1956 Searle was 

ordered as Engineering Research Officer to 

the Experimental Diving Unit, which was 

then located in Building 214 of the Washington Navy Yard [Naval Gun Factory]. 

After training at the adjacent Naval School, 

Deep Sea Divers, he was qualified as a 

Navy Deep Sea Helium-Oxygen diving 

officer, and received additional indoctrination in the diving activities of the Navy Underwater Demolition and Explosive Ordinance Disposal programs. At EDU he also 

has Additional Duty to the Bureau of Ships, 

which entailed assignment to a number of 

salvage, clearance, wrecking and towing 

operations worldwide. After two subsequent years at sea as Chief Engineer on the 

missile cruiser USS PROVIDENCE (CLG6), he went in 1961 for a year of study at 

the Command and Staff Course of the Naval War College in Rhode Island. His next 

two-year assignment was as Pacific Fleet 

Salvage Officer in Pearl Harbor. In 1964 he 

returned to Washington and the Bureau of 

Ships as Supervisor of Salvage. It was then 

that, with his characteristic intelligence and 

energy, Bill Searle completely revamped 

and expanded the office and accomplishments of SUPSALV, established the Navy 

Directorate of Ocean Engineering, and 

placed his signature stamp on the character 

of Navy diving and underwater intervention which has endured for the subsequent 

quarter century.

As Navy Supervisor of Salvage from 

1964-1969 he was responsible for the planning and buildup for the salvage and harbor 

clearance forces in South Vietnam, as well 

as major salvage and deep ocean search 

and recovery projects such as the H-Bomb 

lost off Palomares, Spain, the location of 

the sunken nuclear submarine SCORPION, 

and many others. He conceived and engineered the procedures which successfully 

recovered the Woods Hole research submersible ALVIN. He also assisted with 

the management of the United States’ first 

major oil pollution incident: the OCEAN 

EAGLE at San Juan, Puerto Rico. He was 

actively involved in the development of 

modern Navy deep dive systems, and of the 

Deep Ocean Technology (DOT) programs. 

He is a co-designer of the Navy’s heavyduty TSF Oil Boom and was instrumental 

in initiating many of the NavyÕs early oil 

pollution control plans. Additionally he 

served on the interagency committee and 

co-authored (1970) the first National Oil 

and Hazardous Materials Pollution Contingency Plan.

His final assignment in the Navy was 

as Project Manager (Ship Acquisition) for 

auxiliary vessels including responsibility 

for all the Navy’s towing-types and (though 

the term was not used at that time) ocean 

engineering ships. His attention focused 

on the new-construction heavy duty ocean 

rescue and salvage ships of the EDENTON 

(ATS) class which were being built in England. These ships were the culmination of 

conceptual recommendations made by his 

predecessors in the Pacific Fleet Salvage 

Officer billet, and which Captain Searle has 

shepherded through the Ships Characteristics Board and the contract design phases. 

His interest in their design was in depth 

and in great detail, and it was only after the 

first ship (of three) was about ready for sea 

trails that Captain Searle retired from active Navy duty in 1970.

Beginning his retirement that summer 

Captain Searle was the founding Chairman 

of Searle Consortium, international consulCAPT Searle cont’d on pg.31

1924 - 2009

20 July 2009
July 2009 21
Within the Department of Defense, 

the United States Navy is the lead 

agency in military diving technology 

and training, utilizing the most modern 

diving equipment available to perform 

tasks related to salvage, ship husbandry, 

underwater construction, and submarine 

rescue. Without having the necessary 

safe diving equipment available, today’s 

Navy Divers would not be able to operate 

in the wide spectrum of conditions that 

their specialized missions require. The 

Supervisor of Salvage and Diving (SUPSALV), Diving Program Division (SEA 

00C3), provides cradle-to-grave service 

for diving equipment, policies, and procedures from basic research through prototype development, acquisition, publication, and life-cycle management. 

U.S. Navy diving equipment can 

be authorized for use by the Authorized 

for Navy Use (ANU) list or by holding 

a current NAVSEA or NAVFAC system 

safety certification certificate. The U.S. 

Navy Diving Manual restricts the use of 

life support diving equipment and hazardous diving equipment to ANU items 

or diving equipment that is certified. 

Waivers may be obtained in order to use 

equipment that is not authorized, but a 

necessary mission requirement must exist which cannot be fulfilled by an authorized piece of equipment.

As the U.S. Navy’s diving technical 

authority, SEA 00C3 is responsible for 

maintaining the Diving Equipment Authorized for Navy Use (ANU) Program, 

which is utilized to designate diving 

equipment safe for Diver use. SEA 00C4 

acts as the System Certification Authority for U.S. Navy diving systems and is 

responsible for system certification of 

surface supplied diving systems, hyperbaric chamber systems, and selected free 

swimming SCUBA underwater breathing 

apparatus. System Certification is not the 

focus of this article, but more information about this formal technical review 

process can be found in the U.S. Navy 

Diving and Manned Hyperbaric Systems 

Safety Certification Manual. 

ous or essential to safe diving operations, 

such as fins and wet suits. Each item is 

assigned a category rating and once approved is placed on the ANU list under 

one of the following ten sections: 

Approved thermal protection equipment and surface supplied diving equipment can be found on the 

ANU list.

The ANU Process:

The Office of the Chief of Naval 

Operations Instruction (OPNAVINST) 

3150.27B requires SEA 00C3 to prepare 

and publish a list of diving equipment 

Authorized for Navy Use (ANU). The 

ANU list acts as a directory of diving 

equipment, tools, and accessories, which 

have undergone an independent technical 

design review and/or testing and evaluation to ensure that the equipment satisfies 

SEA 00C standards, Diver safety standards, and Fleet operating requirements. 

The ANU list is available to the public 

on the SUPSALV website (www.supsalv.org), providing a centralized index 

of diving equipment that can be used by 

U.S. Navy Diving Commands to support 

diving operations. Inclusion of a commercial manufacturer’s piece of equipment on the ANU list does not constitute 

as an endorsement of the U.S. Navy, but 

simply cites items authorized for U.S. 

Navy use. 

The ANU process focuses on three 

categories of diving equipment. Category I encompasses life support diving 

equipment, such as SCUBA regulators 

and decompression computers. Category II covers all non-life support diving 

equipment that is potentially hazardous 

to the Diver, such as explosive actuated 

tools and Diver heating equipment. Category III includes all non-life support 

diving equipment that enhances mission 

capability but is not considered hazard1. SCUBA Equipment 

2. Thermal Protection Equipment

3. Surface Supplied Diving Equipment

4. Recall Devices

5. Diver’s Breathing Air and Mixed 

Gas Compressors

6. Air Purification Systems, Air Filters, and Filter Elements

7. Recompression Chamber Instrumentation and Equipment

8. Gas Analysis Equipment

9. Diver’s Underwater Tools

10. Medical

Category I equipment must undergo testing and evaluation prior to 

ANU inclusion in order to ensure that 

the equipment will function properly 

in its intended operating environment. 

Category II equipment will undergo a design safety review at minimum, but testing and evaluation may also be required 

to demonstrate and mitigate any possible 

existing hazards. Category III items do 

not require technical design reviews or 

formal testing because of their non-hazardous nature, but they are still presented 

during the ANU Board Meeting, which 

will be further discussed in the following 

paragraphs.

A piece of diving equipment may 

be proposed for ANU evaluation through 

Program Office tasking, NEDU or NAVSEA internal memoranda, and Fleet requests. Requests from commercial vendors to test and evaluate equipment must 

be appropriately endorsed by Fleet sponsors in order to be considered for ANU 

evaluation. NAVSEA 00C may self sponsor an item. Currently, NAVSEA Instruction 10560.2C is utilized for ANU procedures and includes the outline for the 

ANU Data Package under Enclosure 1, 

which is designed for ANU submission 

requests and acts as the documentation 

for the ANU evaluation process. There 

are upcoming revisions to the current 

NAVSEA Instruction, including a revised 

ANU Submission Data Form.

22 July 2009
In order to submit an item to SEA 

00C3 for ANU evaluation, the sponsor 

must fill out the ANU Submission Data 

Form, which can be found on SUPSALV’s 

website at https://secure.supsalv.org/anu/

home.asp, and provide the required supporting documentation. As outlined in 

the submission form, the sponsor of the 

proposed submission item is responsible 

for providing and collecting information 

for the appropriate level of ANU evaluation. Once the requirements for submission are fulfilled, the form and supporting documentation are forwarded to the 

ANU Coordinator (SEA 00C39) for review. The position of ANU Coordinator 

exists to serve as the Program Manager 

for the ANU evaluation process, for the 

equipment designated as ANU, and for 

organizing the formal quarterly ANU reviews and informal meetings of the ANU 

Board Members. 

The ANU Coordinator works directly 

with the NAVSEA Supervisor of Diving 

(SUPDIVE, SEA 00C3B) to assign ANU 

Board members, whose responsibility is 

to formally review documentation within 

the ANU Submission Data Package and 

recommend ANU action to the Supervisor of Diving (00C3B). The ANU Review 

Board may include technical sponsors, 

NAVSEA 00C, Fleet or Program Office 

representatives, or others as designated 

by SUPDIVE. Other responsibilities of 

the ANU Board include discussion of 

configuration management issues related 

to equipment already on the ANU list. 

After an independent review of the supporting documentation, the ANU Board 

may recommend that the item requires 

further testing and evaluation, which is 

usually conducted by the Navy Experimental Diving Unit (NEDU). Once all the 

documentation is reviewed by the ANU 

Board, SUPDIVE maintains the technical responsibility for all ANU equipment 

and retains the final approval signature for 

ANU inclusion. 

Once an item is approved by SUPDIVE for ANU inclusion, the ANU Coordinator updates the ANU list and sends 

notification to the item sponsor and the 

equipment’s manufacturer as required. 

All the supporting documentation related 

to the new ANU item, including the ANU 

Data Package and ANU Review Board 

meeting minutes, is cataloged and filed by 

the ANU Coordinator for future reference. 

ANU Coordinator Contact

Information:

Ms. Robyn McGinn is currently serving 

as the ANU Coordinator at NAVSEA 00C, 

while providing engineering support to diving programs.

Currently, the ANU Coordinator has 

actions to identify, analyze and improve 

the existing ANU process and to develop new goals for the ANU program. In 

order to better streamline the process, 

NAVSEA Instruction 10560.2C is currently being reviewed and restructured 

to improve response time for submission 

items. A phased plan is in place to review 

items that currently exist on the ANU list 

and to remove items that have become 

obsolete. 

Further information regarding this 

initiative can be found at www.supsalv.

org/00C3_anulist.asp. 

Contact SUPSALV’s ANU Coordinator, Ms. Robyn McGinn, via email at 

00C39@supsalv.org, for any questions 

regarding the content of this article, the 

ANU equipment designation process, or 

the ANU List. 

July 2009 23
You are 100 feet down using SCUBA, 

with your dive light spotlighting the 

most exotic looking Sea Hare you’ve 

ever seen. It’s noon at McMurdo Station, 

Antarctica but it’s dark at your depth because between you and the surface of the 

Ross Sea lies 19 feet of snow covered 

ice. Your dive buddy has drifted about 

100 feet away, but you can see him without hindrance in the gin clear water of the 

early Antarctic springtime. The 800-foot 

water visibility also means you can easily 

see the strobe light hanging on the down 

line 200 feet away, the line leading to the 

three and a half foot diameter hole bored 

through the ice.

Under these conditions, you should 

not have to worry about your regulator, 

but you do, because you know that any 

SCUBA regulator can fail in 28° F water, 

given enough opportunity. You also know 

that some regulators tolerate these polar 

conditions better than others, and you are 

using untested regulators, so yours might 

free-flow massively at any moment.

Should that happen, you have a backup plan; you will shut off the free flow 

of air from your failed regulator with an 

isolation valve, remove the failed second stage from your numb and stiff lips 

and switch to a separate first and second 

stage regulator on your bottle’s Y-shaped 

slingshot manifold, after first reaching 

back and opening the manifold valve. Of 

course, that backup regulator could also 

free flow as soon as you start breathing 

on it – as has already happened to one of 

your fellow test Divers.

In that situation you would have no 

choice except to continue breathing from 

what feels like a torrent of liquid nitrogen, 

teeth aching from the frigid air chilled to 

almost intolerable temperatures by unbridled adiabatic expansion, until you reach 

your dive buddy and convince him that 

you need to borrow his backup regulator. Once he understands that two of your 

regulators have failed, then the two of 

you would buddy-breathe from his single 

95 ft3

 bottle as you head slowly towards 

the strobe marking the ascent line. And 

of course he will be praying that his own 

primary regulator doesn’t fail during that 

transit.

Once you reach the ascent line you 

are still not out of difficulty. The two of 

you cannot surface together through the 

narrow 19-foot long borehole. So you 

would remove your regulator once again 

and start breathing off a pony bottle 

secured to the down line. Once it is released from the line, you can then make 

your ascent to the surface, but only if a 

1,300-lb Weddell seal has not appropriated the hole. In a contest for air, the seal is 

far more desperate following an 80-minute breath-hold dive, and certainly much 

more massive than you. Weddells are like 

icebergs – their cute small face sits atop a 

massive body that is a daunting obstacle 

for any Diver.

But you even have a plan for that — 

you’ve heard that Weddell seals don’t 

like bubbles, and they get skittish about 

having their fins tugged on, and will thus 

relinquish the hole to you. ... At least, 

that’s what you’ve been told. You certainly hope he would leave before you 

consume the meager amount of air in 

your pony bottle.

The U.S. Navy, through a Navy 

Experimental Diving Unit representative, was invited to observe an October 

2008 series of 134 regulator test dives 

for the Smithsonian Institution Science 

Diving Program. This test series, based 

at McMurdo Station, was funded by the 

Smithsonian for the benefit of the U.S. 

Antarctic Diving Program (USAP). The 

National Science Foundation (NSF) 

Office of Polar Programs was a primary financial contributor. The preceding 

year the Smithsonian and NSF partially 

funded the author’s travels to the high 

Arctic (Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard) for an 

Ice Diving Workshop for science Divers (Lang and Sayers, 2007).

Cold Water Regulators 

	 - Smithsonian Institution’s Dive in Antarctica 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 	 By: John R. Clarke, Ph.D.

Sea Hare Scuba Regulator Weddell Seal

24 July 2009
The Antarctic regulator testing expedition began with participants gathering 

in springtime Christchurch, New Zealand 

to be fitted for extreme cold weather gear, 

including the famous red parkas reserved 

for Antarctic scientific personnel who 

venture out on the ice. After being on 

hot standby for five days waiting for the 

weather to clear at McMurdo, the team 

finally embarked on a cavernous C-17 

Globemaster for the no frills 2,400 mile 

trip to McMurdo. A plane departing for 

the ice the day before had boomeranged; 

they were within sight of McMurdo but 

could not land due to low visibility in 

blowing snow.

Our flight, packed full of USAP employees attempting to head south for the 

season, broke the bad weather spell. Conditions were clear on approach to the ice 

runway at McMurdo. 

For first time visitors like myself, our 

exit from the aircraft onto the ice was just 

what we had anticipated – biting winds 

and bitter cold. The extreme weather 

clothing we wore could not conceal the 

fact that we had landed on the coldest 

continent on Earth, Antarctica.

Mr. Michael Lang of the Smithsonian, the Diving Officer for the USAP 

and Principle Investigator of the study 

described the genesis of this dive testing as follows: At its inception in 1947 

(through the U.S. Naval Support Force 

Antarctica) through 1967 the USAP diving program issued double-hose regulators to NSF scientific Divers. In 1991, 

double-hose regulators were retired from 

service and replaced with single-hose, 

modified Sherwood Maximus SRB3600 

regulators. A heat retention plate was fitted over the second-stage exhaust valve 

and around the air delivery lever and 

the intermediate pressure detuned from 

145 to 125 psi to reduce the probability 

of free-flow in supercooled sea water at 

-1.86o

C in McMurdo Sound. The decision to investigate replacement regulators was influenced by the age of the 

1991 Sherwood models, their less than 

optimal breathing characteristics, and 

the lack of continued parts availability 

in 2008 to avoid potentially catastrophic 

regulator failure.

Eleven Divers from the U.S., U.K., 

Switzerland, and Australia, three of them 

female, were recruited by the Smithsonian as test Divers. All Divers had passed 

extraordinarily stringent medical qualifications and logged no fewer than 10 drysuit dives in the previous 6 months.

The manufacturers represented by 

the test regulators were Poseidon, Apeks, 

Mares, Aqualung, Zeagle, and Sherwood. 

In all, nine regulator models were tested, 

all having been approved for Navy use 

or showing promise as cold-water regulators. All dives were no-decompression 

dives, and included a mandatory safety 

stop at 15 feet. Dive profiles were recorded on UWATEC One dive computers.

Most of the dives were conducted 

on the Ross Ice Shelf just off McMurdo 

Station, but a remarkable series of dives 

were conducted at the foot of a glacier a 

long and cold Pisten Bully’s ride away, 

riding on narrow lanes on the sea ice 

marked only by flags. 

Typical dives lasted between 30 and 

40 minutes at depths between 60 and 100 

fsw, with one series of dives down to 165 

feet using the better performing regulators. Out of 134 under-ice dives, there 

were 28 free flows, for an approximately 

20% free flow incidence. Some regulators performed far better than the others; regulators were dropped from testing whenever their free flow incidence 

reached 33%. All the Poseidon regulators and the one Sherwood regulator had 

a combined free flow incidence of 5%, 

whereas the others had a combined incidence of 44%. Two of the worst regulators reached an alarming 50% failure rate 

after only 6 dives each. 

One of the first regulators to be 

dropped from testing in Antarctica was 

the Mares V32 Proton Ice Extreme, the 

subject of a recent Diving Advisory (09-

07). At the other end of the spectrum, the 

Poseidon Xstreme was the only regulator 

that suffered no free flows at McMurdo, 

and is also the only regulator that never 

free flowed during the NEDU rigorous 

2004 testing program for cold water regulators. The prototype Mares regulator 

Driving on narrow lanes on sea ice that was the progenitor of the Proton Ice 

marked only by flags. Ice runway at McMurdo Sherwood Regulator

Cold Water Regulators cont’d on pg.27

Dives conducted at the foot of a glacier.

July 2009 25

Divers surfacing through a narrow 19-

foot long borehole.
26 July 2009

On 25 Feb, 2009 a joint US/UK heavy lift team conducted a successful lift 

of the HMS ENDURANCE on the Dockwise Heavy Lift ship M/V TARGET in 

the Falkland Islands. 

The HMS ENDURANCE experienced a hull valve casualty in mid December while operating in the Straits 

of Magellan off Punta Arenas, Chile. 

The casualty occurred while conducting routine maintenance causing severe 

flooding of the main machinery spaces which required extensive damage 

control efforts to save the ship and 

restore its stability. Following these 

efforts, the ship was towed to the 

Falkland Islands for safe stowage 

while awaiting its final disposition 

decision by the Royal Navy. In late 

January the Royal Navy made the 

decision to heavy lift the ship back 

to the UK for repair. The UK Ministry 

of Defense (MOD), Chief of Salvage 

and Mooring Office (CSALMO), reENDURANCE on Blocks Port 4

By: Jim Ruth

quested technical on site assistance 

from NAVSEA’s Director of Ocean 

Engineering, Supervisor of Salvage and Diving (SUPSALV), 

code 00C. SUPSALV enthusiastically agreed and provided two 

engineers, Vince Jarecki and Jim 

Ruth, from 00C2 as well as LCDR 

Elmer Roman from the SUPSALV NR Heavy Lift and Dry 

Docking Detachment (HLDD).

SUPSALV and its UK counterpart CSALMO established an 

International Exchange Agreement (IEA) on Towing and Heavy 

Lift in 2005. The IEA was an 

outgrowth of joint salvage operations 

conducted during Operation Iraqi Freedom in 2003. The initial concept was to 

establish common practices and standards for conducting towing and heavy 

lift operations utilizing lessons learned 

from the lifts of the USS COLE and the 

HMS NOTTINGHAM. Since that time 

SUPSALV and CSALMO have been 

conducting monthly phone-cons and 

annual meetings to establish personnel 

qualifications, interoperable standards 

and table top exercises. Both Navy 

Offices have provided observers during heavy lifts which have included 

the Canadian Submarine CHICOUTOMI and the AFDM 10 RESOLUTE. 

The ultimate goal of the IEA is to be 

able to conduct joint operations and 

in the event of a USS COLE type 

casualty on either Navy’s side of the 

pond, the U.S. or the UK could provide 

experienced qualified first responders 

until the responsible Navy could get their 

own personnel on scene.

The lift of ENDURANCE is the first 

time the interoperable joint integrated 

team concept has been implemented. 

Per the heavy lift contract the M/V 

TARGET transited from Cape Town, 

South Africa to Rio De Janeiro, Brazil 

for pre-load mobilization. This included 

the construction of 30 sea fasteners and 

building of the landing blocks. The U.S. 

team departed for Rio on 13 February 

and rendezvoused with the UK team on 

the 15th. Over the next several days, 

inspections of ship preparations and 

block build were conducted. On 19 February M/V TARGET departed for the 6 

day transit to the Falkland Islands. The 

joint team departed Rio on the 19th for 

the Falkland Islands via Santiago, Chile 

through Punta Arenas, Chile arriving in 

the Falkland Islands on 21 February. The 

team was housed at the RAF Base in Mt. 

Pleasant approximately 40 miles from 

Port Stanley, Falkland Islands. 

ENDURANCE Cribbing and Guide Posts
July 2009 27

TARGET arrived in the Falklands 

on the 23rd. Final inspections were conducted, and the heavy lift operation was 

scheduled for the 25th. Weather forecasts indicated if the lift could not be 

conducted on the 25th, the next favorable 

weather window would be 2 or 3 March. 

On the evening of the 24th, the team was 

split into two teams, one team deployed 

to the M/V TARGET to monitor heavy 

lift ship operations and the other team deployed to ENDURANCE to monitor cargo stability and landing. On the morning 

of the 25th at approximately 0500 ENDURANCE was towed from the dock to 

the heavy lift loading site with the intention of commencing loading operations 

at approximately 0800. Upon arrival at 

the heavy lift site, M/V TARGET had 

not reached her load ballasting condition 

and ENDURANCE was held in place by 

tugs awaiting the go decision. By 0900, 

the weather conditions at the load site 

were deteriorating rapidly and the loading operation was placed on hold until 

2000 when the winds were predicted to 

diminish. 

The winds began to diminish as 

predicted and the go decision was made 

at 2030. At 2130 ENDURANCE was 

in position over the deck of TARGET 

as deballasting operations commenced.

Deballasting operations were suspended at approximately 2200 to launch the 

Remotely Operated Vehicle (ROV) to 

verify ENDURANCE’s position over the 

blocks prior to landing. While preparing 

to launch the ROV, the forward guide 

post separated from the TARGET’s load 

deck causing it to deflect approximately 

two feet to port raising concerns as to 

whether landing on the keel blocks and 

side blocks was going to be possible. 

Inspection by the ROV confirmed ENDURANCE’s bow was swinging approximately two feet off center line over the 

keel blocks. The primary concerns were 

would ENDURANCE topple over if she 

did not land on the blocks as designed 

or if the hull were breached during landing could refloating be accomplished. 

ENDURANCE was without power and 

dewatering could not be accomplished 

should the side blocks collapse during 

initial touch down. After several consultations and further inspections by the 

ROV the decision to continue with the 

lift was reached. ENDURANCE touched 

down at approximately 2230 and was up 

and dry at approximately 0100 on 26 

February. The team deployed on ENDURANCE returned to the RAF base 

while the TARGET team continued to 

monitor deballasting operations.

The following morning sea fastening 

for the three week transit back to the UK 

began in earnest. 

On the evening of the 27th while 

conducting lessons learned and consolidation of observations, the MOD, 

CSALMO Team commented that while 

things were getting a bit dodgy during 

the landing operations that they had no 

reservations about turning to the U.S. 

Team for input and handling of critical 

functions during the operation. The operation was proof positive that the interoperable joint integrated team concept 

was a success. The U.S. team departed 

for home on 28 February.

The heavy lifting of the HMS ENDURANCE provided an excellent opportunity for the US/UK team to sharpen 

their heavy lift skills, build team confidence, and most of all prove that the 

hard work to develop joint standards and 

personnel qualifications has resulted in a 

truly integrated team that enhances both 

Navy’s abilities to conduct heavy lift operations in the event of a USS COLE type 

incident.

Jim “Doc” Ruth is an Ocean Engineering 

Graduate of Florida Institute of Technology 

serving as the Towing and Salvage Engineer at 

NAVSEA 00C.

ENDURANCE Bow on Blocks

Cold Water Regulators cont’d from pg.25

Extreme, then called the Mares Proton 

Ice Teflon V32 CWD, did free flow occasionally in NEDU testing. At this point, 

the regulator’s poor performance in Antarctica is inexplicable. Further NEDU 

testing should soon reveal the cause of 

the problem.

Cold water regulators are the only 

piece of diving equipment that NEDU 

tests and recommends for Navy use based 

solely on unmanned testing. Manned testing of new regulators by Navy Divers under field conditions is simply not practical.

The Navy’s participation in the 

Smithsonian’s field trials was made 

possible by a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) between NEDU and the 

Smithsonian Institution Scientific Diving Program, Office of the Undersecretary of Science. Through this MOA the 

Navy provides technical information to 

the Smithsonian relating to cold-water 

regulators and access to sophisticated 

equipment testing facilities. In turn, the 

Smithsonian provides cost-effective NSF 

sanctioned access to Polar Regions for 

field-testing of cold water regulators by 

civilian divers. 

As demonstrated by both this Antarctic dive series and ICEX 2009 recently 

held in the Arctic, partnering between the 

U.S. Navy and civilian science Divers 

is a mutually beneficial and financially 

responsible way to conduct work in the 

harsh Polar Regions. We can anticipate 

this trend continuing, to the betterment 

of all Navy Divers as NEDU pushes to 

qualify only the very best life support 

equipment.

John R. Clarke, Ph.D., Diving Researcher at 

the Naval Medical Research Institute from 

1979-1991, Scientific Director of the Navy 

Experimental Diving Unit from 1991 to present.

Contributing Author: 

Lang, M.A. and M.D.J. Sayer (eds.) 2007. 

Proceedings of the International Polar Diving 

Workshop, Ny-Ålesund, Svalbard, March 15-

21, 2007. Smithsonian Institution, Washington, D.C. 213 pp.

Photography By: Dr. Martin D. Sayer and Dr. 

Sergio A. Angelini
SUPSALV ROV operations included 

recovery of a dipping sonar transducer for NAVAIR, inspection of ‘Deep 

Seat’ for PMS 394, video survey of 

the Weapon Set To hit Threat Target 

(WSTTT), and video documentation for 

NUWC of an acoustic range off of San 

Clemente Island.

In late October 2008, an MH-60 

helicopter from HSM 71 was in a fleet 

exercise in the Southern California operating area. During the exercise, the AN/

AQS-22 ALFS dipping sonar from the 

MH-60 came into contact with a submarine participating in the exercise and was 

subsequently lost at sea. The squadron 

requested salvage of the Airborne Low 

Frequency Sonar (ALFS) sonar to assist 

in the aviation mishap investigation.

Upon receipt of the salvage request, 

SUPSALV began to coordinate the details of the salvage operation with the 

C3F Salvage Officer, CPF Salvage and 

Diving Officer, CNAF, NAVAIR, HSM71, SEALOGPAC, and Phoenix International. Various courses of action were 

presented to NAVAIR and CNAF, but the 

decision was made to wait until an MSC 

salvage vessel was available to support 

the recovery operation as contracting a 

commercial vessel of opportunity was 

cost prohibitive. The next availability 

window for a west coast MSC vessel was 

in the January-February 2009 timeframe.

During the coordination of the ALFS 

sonar recovery, PMS 394 (Advanced 

Undersea Systems Program) and the 

Deep Submergence Unit (DSU) contacted SUPSALV regarding the potential for 

performing an underwater inspection of 

the DSU training asset ‘Deep Seat’. This 

seat is a submerged training fixture 

used during submarine rescue exercises to simulate a submarine mating surface. SUPSALV provided 

PMS 394 with several inspection 

options. It was decided to perform 

the survey in conjunction with the 

ALFS sonar recovery to take advantage of the mobilization and demobilization costs already covered 

by the sonar recovery. 

At the same time, the NAVSEA technical warrant holder for the NUWC Undersea Range Tracking Systems program 

contacted SUPSALV with a request to 

perform an inspection and video survey 

of an acoustic range near San Clemente 

Island. The program needed a survey of 

the sea floor around the proposed site for 

a new array installation. A year earlier, 

SUPSALV had removed the previous 

non-working array assembly and assisted 

with capping off the trunk cable, preventing water intrusion so a future array 

could be spliced in. It was determined 

that there was a good possibility of combining this mission with the other ones 

being planned for the region.

On 9 January the SEALOGPAC 

scheduler notified SUPSALV that the 

USNS NAVAJO (T-ATF 169) had become immediately available due to a 

change in schedule, but would have to 

depart for a maintenance availability 

no later than 3 February 2009. Given 

the time needed to transport the salvage 

equipment across country plus mobilize 

and demobilize the vessel, this provided, 

at most, a 10-day operational window. 

The firm mission termination date meant 

that there was no ability to extend the 

operational timeline if events required 

and thus might not provide enough time 

for SUPSALV to perform the primary 

ALFS sonar recovery mission and all 

the follow-on missions. The decision 

was made to immediately ship the search 

and recovery equipment to NAVSTA San 

Diego in order to provide the largest operational window possible. The equipment selected for these operations was 

the Shallow Water Intermediate Search 

System (SWISS) and the Deep Drone 

ROV, both 8,000-fsw capable systems.

Upon arrival of the salvage equipment in San Diego, Phoenix International personnel under the direction of the 

on-site SUPSALV representative began 

mobilizing the equipment onto NAVAJO. At approximately 0800 on 20 January, NAVAJO was underway enroute to 

the search area for the ALFS sonar with 

all personnel and equipment onboard, 

ready to operate. By late afternoon, Deep 

Drone was launched at the position provided by HSM 71 and began a short reconnoiter of the bottom in hopes that the 

ALFS sonar would be easily found. Approximately 90 minutes later, a strong return was received by the ROV’s searching 

sonar such that the operators determined 

it to be a viable target for visual identification. This was fortunate, as it was outside the 100 meter square search grid that 

was designed for the ROV search phase 

of the recovery operation. The ALFS sonar was found in 1500 fsw, 150 meters 

from the position provided. The ALFS 

was recovered shortly thereafter by the 

ROV using two manipulator clamp tools 

originally designed to recover items of a 

similar diameter to that of the ALFS sonar. During the course of two brief dives, 

the sonar was successfully recovered intact with no damage from the recovery 

efforts. 

When Deep Drone was back on deck 

and secured for sea, NAVAJO got underway for the acoustic range near San 

Clemente Island. Enroute, a brief stop 

was made at the site where the WSTTT 

was lost 18 months before in just over 

300 fsw. The WSTTT is an unmanned 

Southern California ROV Operations

By: Ric Sasse and LT Sal Saurez

28 July 2009
proximately 725 fsw with no observed 

issues along the way. The capped cable 

end appeared in good shape. It was noted 

that there was a lot of nylon line piled 

on the bottom in the vicinity of the bitter 

end. This was the remnants of a marker 

buoy and light anchor assembly that was 

attached to the cable when it was deployed from the surface. No buoy was 

found suggesting that it had experienced 

a turbulent ride to the bottom. Deep 

Drone was then flown from the bitter end 

to the proposed new anchor location in a 

search for obstructions, rock formations, 

or crevasses. The direct line between the 

two points was approximately 1000 feet. 

No obstructions were found. Deep Drone 

was recovered by 0500 on 22 January 

and NAVAJO returned to port by 1100 

that day to commence vessel offload.

This operation was estimated to last 

a full 10 operational days onboard NAVAJO. Due to the quick completion of 

each operation, SUPSALV, Phoenix International and the crew of the USNS Navajo were able to successfully complete 

all four operations in just over 48 hours at 

sea for a fraction of the estimated cost to 

NAVAIR, PMS 394, and NUWC.

submarine that mimics a submarine at 

idle on the bottom, allowing the fleet 

to perform search and targeting drills 

on it. A previous attempt to coordinate 

its salvage was cancelled due to budget 

constraints. As it was deemed a low risk 

dive on a relatively shallow known position, the decision was made to perform 

a quick video survey to confirm material 

condition in order to support any possible 

future salvage mission. This survey took 

approximately 90 minutes from taking 

station over the WSTTT to Deep Drone 

back on deck and NAVAJO underway 

enroute to the acoustic range.

At approximately 0630 on 21 January, NAVAJO arrived at the site of the 

acoustic range and began making preparations to deploy Deep Drone for the video survey. Upon arriving on station, the 

salvage team was informed that the range 

was occupied and unavailable for ROV 

operations from 0800 through 1700 over 

the next two days. The decision was made 

to break station and proceed to the site 

of ‘Deep Seat’ to perform that inspection, 

then return to the acoustic range when it 

was not in use. PMS 394 and DSU representatives wanted to be present during 

the inspection so DSU was contacted 

and notified that NAVAJO would arrive 

at ‘Deep Seat’ at approximately 1200 that 

same day to perform the inspection.

NAVAJO arrived on station in the 

vicinity of ‘Deep Seat’ as scheduled. 

Deep Drone was deployed to perform the 

video survey. The seat was finally located 

approximately 800 yards from the position provided. Two personnel from DSU 

arrived via small boat at the time Deep 

Drone reached the seat. The inspection 

was completed by 1500. Deep Drone 

was back on deck by 1545 with NAVAJO 

underway for the acoustic range. The 

underwater video survey showed that the 

seat was in good condition allowing PMS 

394 to certify it for continued DSU use. 

Due to the quick inspection of ‘Deep 

Seat’, the SUPSALV on-site representative was optimistic that they could arrive 

on station at the acoustic range when its 

operations were complete for the day, 

perform the survey, then depart the area 

before 0800 the next morning when it 

would be back in operation. NAVAJO 

arrived on station at 2130 on 21 January 

2009. Deep Drone was deployed at the 

proposed location for the new array. The 

bottom was at approximately 1050 fsw 

and a 50 meter radius area was surveyed 

with no obstructions observed. Deep 

Drone ROV was flown to the estimated 

position of the bitter end of the cable. It 

took approximately 3-1/2 hours to locate 

the cable. The on-site team hypothesized 

that the discrepancy in the cable location occurred when the bitter-end was 

released from the surface and the stored 

energy in the cable catenary caused it to 

move wildly through the water column 

before hitting the bottom resulting in a 

large delta between the surface release 

point and the final bottom position. Upon 

locating the cable, it was raced toward 

shore looking for any kinks, short radius 

bends or passage of the cable over any 

steep drop-offs. No issues were found 

during the survey that stopped at a shallow water depth of 350 fsw. Deep Drone 

then turned and traced the cable toward 

deeper water in search of the bitter end. 

The end was eventually located in apRic Sasse is the Deep Ocean Search & Recovery 

Program Manager for SUPSALV. LT Sal Suarez 

was an Engineering Duty Officer/Diver serving 

as the Assistant for Salvage at NAVSEA 00C, 

and was the on-site project manager during operations.

Pictures left to right: NAVAJO’s stern deck 

with the Deep Drone ROV system; ALFS 

Sonar unit in the ROV Manipulators; Deep 

Drone being recovered with the sonar in 

it’s grasp; Conning tower of the sunken 

WSTTT; Crumpled bow damage from impact with the bottom.

July 2009 29
30 July 2009

I

n opening let me say what an honor it is to share my thoughts with my Navy Diving family. 

I truly believe that there is no better job than that of a U.S. Navy Diver (ND). From day one, 

which was 27 years ago, I was and continue to be amazed at the level of comradery, community pride, and “Can-Do” spirit within this community of Sailors. 

In recent years we have seen many changes in the diving community. Becoming our own rate (ND), like it or not, was a good thing and 

necessary to align our community with the big Navy. My personal feelings are that the diving community has benefited greatly by the course 

we have taken. Specifically, structuring a career path from cradle to 

grave has removed the wonder and speculation from what is the best 

path to advancement. It’s laid out for you to look at and plan years in 

advance.

With that being said, there have been some sad times also such as 

the fading away of the Basic Diving Officers (BDOs) that guided our 

community for so long. I had the privilege of working with a number 

of BDOs who I consider some of the best officers in military service. A few by name are 

Navy Captains Wilkins, Herb, Scholley, Barcus, Helmkamp, and Murray, and Army Captain 

Menendez. Obviously there are many more but hopefully you see my point. I personally 

feel that I was spoiled working for some of these senior leaders that I know came up through 

the same diving channels as I did, and have the same love of Deep Sea in their heart as I do.

The reason I write this is because I have recently heard it said that our new guiding lights 

may not have the Navy Diving and Salvage Community’s best interest in mind when directing employment and managing community longevity. I say have faith! It’s hard for me 

to imagine that our leadership is not aware of the importance and necessity of these skills. 

There may be no significant demand signals now, but history has shown us that there has 

been and always will be an existing requirement for diving and salvage skill sets. It’s up to 

us as a community to maintain these proficiencies and as before, be ready to carry out that 

mission when called to do so.

Until then it’s the task at hand supporting one common goal. And as in years past we 

make ourselves valuable with our “anywhere, anytime, anything, “Can-Do” attitude that 

makes us who we are. Never let the tradition die!

NDCM Westbrook, Master Diver, Naval 

Surface Warfare Center Panama City Dive 

Locker.

HOOYAH DEEP SEA!
July 2009 31

Yes SUPDIVE is an EOD Officer. Rest assured though, I know a little 

about diving. I was trained by the best.As 

Master Diver Paul Schadow taught me, 

“plan your dive, dive your plan, and no 

good dive plan ever started out by saying 

*#@%&!$, just get in the water!” Bridging the gaps between all our diving specialties is imperative and is at the top of 

my To-Do List. 

I am NAVSEA 00C3B in the Diving Programs office which is one of five 

offices that work for the Supervisor of 

Salvage and Diving (SUPSALV). My 

advocacy is extended to those personnel 

who represent the communities within 

the Department of the Navy that breathe 

compressed air underwater. That said, I 

address many issues and concerns in trying to keep all diving safe and all Divers well equipped. The other four offices 

within SUPSALV are Salvage, Underwater Ships Husbandry, Certification, and 

Finance. All the SUPSALV offices are 

staffed with hard-chargers that come in 

early and stay late. 

First and foremost, I have had a lot 

of talks with the “Old Masters” and I listen far more than I talk. There are many 

facets to my job as Supervisor of Diving 

(SUPDIVE), but the most important is 

listening to the Fleet, hearing what they 

are asking for, and on my word, delivering it. I have tried hard over the last six 

months to grasp the “big picture” of Navy 

Diving. What I learned was no surprise. I 

saw hard-working men and women supporting the Navy’s mission in carrying 

out the orders of the President and the officers appointed over them. That’s what 

we do. I say we and I mean we Divers. 

In writing this article, I made it a point 

to keep notes of things I’ve seen during 

my travels outside of the Washington 

Navy Yard that I wanted to see in FACEPLATE. As ALF said, “When you crawl 

under people’s houses you hear things!” 

I’ve been to many of your houses, and 

I’ve heard many things.

SUPSALV recently hosted the Diving Leadership Working Group (DLWG) 

in Panama City, FL. Based on your feedback, it was a success. We accomplished 

our goal of getting everyone in one 

room and putting out the word, as well 

as, hearing the word from many leaders from around the Diving Navy. Have 

faith in our leadership. They are paying 

close attention to capabilities, personnel, training, and equipment. I know the 

way ahead for Diving and Salvage is being examined and its future is in good 

hands. We adjourned DLWG 2009 with 

a database of not less than thirty action 

items that myself and Master Divers 

Stark, Johnson, and Costin are tracking 

and providing monthly updates on the 

SUPSALV Secure website. If you have 

not been to the SUPSALV website login 

and visit, it has a wealth of information 

and gets better every day. The Working 

Group is something we will continue, so 

go ahead and put a place holder on your 

calendar for May 2010. 

The Diving Management team 

currently in place (OPNAV N873, 

SUPSALV, CEODD, EODTECHDIV, 

NAVSLOLEOD, NEDU, NDSTC, SUPDIVE...and many others) is unlike any 

I can remember. It is the most “Can-Do” 

bunch I’ve ever seen assembled at one time.

tants in ocean engineering, towing, salvage 

and diving. Because he had in 1956 interfaced with the World Bank-UN clearance 

of the Suez Canal, he was called upon by 

the United Nations, subsequent to a revolution in Bangladesh in 1971/72, to serve 

with the rank of Ambassador as a Special 

Consultant for the purpose of taking technical and executive charge of the UN Relief 

Operation Bangladesh (UNROB) in order 

to salvage and clear sunken ships from their 

waterways. In this capacity he supervised 

the work of four international salvage contractors working in the Port of Chalna and 

interfaced with the Russian Navy’s salvage 

teams working at the Harbor of Chittagong, 

the other major Bangladesh port.

He was also a principal in related firms 

SEAWARD Corporation and TRITON 

Marine Construction. In 1990 the Searle 

Consortium changed its name to MacKinnon Searle Consortium when Rear Admiral 

Malcolm MacKinnon USN (ret) joined its 

operations. Captain Searle ceased active 

participation in these enterprises in 1994 

because of declining health.

Captain Searle was a senior visiting 

lecturer on the staff of the Department of 

Ocean Engineering at MIT. He had also 

been a visiting professor at the Maine 

Maritime Academy, and he lectured on 

salvage and ocean engineering subjects at 

Webb Institute of Naval Architecture. He 

also lectured at the University of California, Berkeley, Scripps Institute of Oceanography, and several of the other state 

maritime academies. From 1970-1989 

Captain Searle served two terms as a member of the Marine Board of the National 

Research Council. He is a member of the 

Marin Technology Society, the American 

Society of Naval Engineers, The Society 

of Military Engineers, the American Society of Mechanical Engineers and the Royal 

Institution of Naval Architects. He was a 

founding member of the American Institute of Nautical Archaeology, and chaired 

the ANSI Committee to develop a standard 

addressing pressure vessels for human occupancy. The Undersea Medical Society 

awarded him Special Recognition in 1988 

for his continuing support of physiological 

and medical research in undersea development.

CAPT Searle cont’d from pg.20

The RUBICON FOUNDATION of Durham 

NC is developing, digitizing and maintaining 

an archival repository of material relevant to 

diving and diving history - including the Oral 

History of Captain Willard F Searle USN. The 

Foundation welcomes queries from qualified researchers and from those interested in diving. 

http://archive.rubicon-foundation.org/

Commander Michael L. Egan

Supervisor of Diving

(NAVSEA 00C3B)

HOOYAH Navy Diver!
Captain Patrick Keenan, USN

Director of Ocean Engineering

Supervisor of Salvage and Diving

patrick.keenan@navy.mil

 

Kelly Stokes

Production Manager

kstokes@roh-inc.com

FACEPLATE is published by the Supervisor of Salvage and Diving to make the latest and most informative news available to the Navy diving and salvage 

community. Discussions or illustrations of commercial products do not imply endorsement by the Supervisor of Salvage and Diving or the U.S. Navy.

Articles, letters, queries and comments should be directed to the Commander, Naval Sea Systems Command, NAVSEA 00C, 1333 Isaac Hull Ave. SE Stop 

1070, Washington Navy Yard, DC 20376-1070. (Attn: FACEPLATE). Visit our website at http://www.supsalv.org. To view an electronic version of Faceplate 

in PDF format go to our website and click on the word “Faceplate” located in the left hand column. This link will direct you to our list of Faceplate issues. 

CDR Michael Egan, USN

Supervisor of Diving

Editor-In-Chief

michael.egan@navy.mil

Otto Adams

Preflight (Graphic) Designer

oadams@roh-inc.com

NDCM (MDV) James Costin, USN

james.costin@navy.mil

NDCM (MDV) Kent Johnson, USN

joseph.k.johnson@navy.mil

NDCM (MDV) Henry Stark, USN

henry.j.stark@navy.mil

Fleet Liaison Editors

32 July 2009