1. NBSAC Resolution 2009-83-01 US Coast Guard NBSAC October 2009
Marty Jackson CG-5214

2. NBSAC Resolution (April 2009)
“…request the U.S. Coast Guard to develop a new program for life jacket design approval and follow up quality control to reduce barriers and enhance opportunities for life jacket innovation.”

3. NBSAC Resolution (April 2009)
Supports Current Efforts
ISO Adoption
Innovation
Recognition of Other Labs
Separate Standards Administration

4. NBSAC Resolution (April 2009)
Testing & Q/A Modifications
Working Group
Consolidated Standards
ISO N Devices
Recognized Laboratories

5. Testing/QA Modification
Flammability test requirements have been eased with CPSC fabric exemption
Risk based performance criteria is being incorporated
Less prescriptive design criteria
Greater flexibility in design
Q/A Inspection Frequency – 2002 Study
Recreational White Water Rescue PFDs

6. Working Group Meetings
27 January 2009 – CG-52/ PFDMA/NMMA
24 February 2009 – CG-5/ PFDMA/NMMA
22 March 2009 – ISO CG/PFD Mfrs
5 May 2009 – CSTG Standards Dev.
10 June 2009 – CG-54/ PFDMA/NMMA
21 Sept 2009 – PFDMA -Webinar
7 October 2009 – CG-5214/ PFDMA
15 October 2009 – CSTG Standards Dev.
*6 December 2009 – ISO CG/PFD Mfrs.
+Numerous Teleconferences

7. Consolidated Standard Task Group (CSTG) -- Participants
Canadian representatives
Paul Potter * (Cord)
Ravi Shankar (TC)
Larry Spears (Helly Hansen)
Sam Wehr * (Mustang)
* - Drafting Gp Mbrs
^ - Added Sept ‘09
US representatives
Dr. Ayyub (UMD)
Mike Cunningham &
Chris James * (UL)
Marty Jackson *^(CG)
Ralph Steger * (Coleman)
Robin Scott * (Sport Dimension)
Dorothy Takashina (TLPC)
Wayne Walters (Kent)

8. Consolidated North American Standard
General Plan - Project Milestones
Draft for comment – May 2010
Standard for ballot – March 2012
Funding shared –
Boating Safety Grant
PFD Industry UL label fee

9. Consolidated North American Standard
Canadian – US Standard
Adopt ISO PFD Standard
Some National Deviations
Risk based Performance Assessment Tools
Standards Holder 9

10. Recognized Laboratory
USCG prerequisites for PFD labs:
Actively engaged as “accepted” lab for testing CG-approved marine equipment
Have no other commercial interest in the manufacturer
Not rely on USCG approval work to remain in business
Request “recognition” for PFDs
USCG visit the lab
Demonstration of ability to perform required subject testing and production quality control

11. Recognized Laboratory
In order to be “Recognized”, a lab must:
Meet the requirements for “acceptance” for the specified equipment;
Have an established factory inspection, listing and labeling program;
Use acceptable standards for minimum design and performance evaluation; and
Enter into a MOU with the CG to document how they will perform and report on those responsibilities
Final Step: Successful Comparison Testing
All labs for each subpart are listed on CGMIX:

12. Way Ahead for PFDs Continue: PFDMA/NMMA Dialogue
USCG Support of ISO TC 188/ WG 14
ISO (PFDs 275N - 50N)
Recognized Laboratory Qualification Effort
Support Standards Maintenance – UL/ABYC

13. Questions? Office of Design and Engineering Standards
Lifesaving and Fire Safety Division CG-5214
Marty Jackson –

14. Independent Laboratory
In order to be “Accepted”, the lab must:
Be regularly engaged in inspecting/testing same or similar equipment;
Have suitable facilities, personnel and equipment;
Have no other commercial interest in the manufacturer; and
Not rely on USCG approval work to remain in business.
All independent labs are listed on CGMIX:

15. Consolidated N.American Std Work-plan (1)
Specific Steps:
1. Review all the stakeholder inputs
2. Develop the goals
3. Complete draft plan
4. Identify the principles
5. Obtain written input on project work plan
6. Preliminary ranking of proposed requirements
7. Obtain stakeholder input on principles & ranking
8. Transition plan
9. Identify acceptable ISO parts
10. Submit ISO Comments

16. Consolidated N.American Std Work-plan (2)
11. Finalize test methods for new parameters (new)
12. Rank proposed requirements (in workshop) (new)
13. Draft minimum deviations
14. Identify “IHC” Staff
15. Validation of Aggregate Performance Models (new)
16 Draft any new Part(s) (if ISO standard is not suitable) -- (Milestone 1) -- May 31, 2010
17. Project costs & funding
18. IHC decision
19. Balloting
20. Publish Std(s) -- (Milestone 2) -- Mar 2012