Roll Call. Executive Committee members Sarah Alger, Charley Cook, Don Durant, Bruce Eissner, Ted Everingham, Craig Healy, Linda Kessler, Dave Rosekrans, John Ross, Mike Schoettle, Pat Seidenspinner, and Larry White were present. Also present were Interim Executive Director William Placke and, at the invitation of the president, Budget Chair Donna Hobbs and board members T.K. Wegg and Clay Mock.

1.       Approval of Minutes.

  • Motion: A motion to approve the July 30, 2001 minutes of the Executive Committee, as corrected, was seconded and approved.

2.       Presidentís Remarks. No report.

3.       Budget Update. Donna Hobbs reported that the budget review with staff is scheduled for end of the month.

4.       Treasurerís Report. No report.

5.       Interim Executive Directorís Report.

5.a.    Membership Report. Bill Placke reported that US SAILING has been making progress on acquisitions, and results are ahead of last year. The next membership initiative will be to reach out to those who have not renewed.

5.b.    Work Plan. Implementation of the Work Plan is beginning. Next week, staff is planning to do an initial dissemination to board and committee chairs.

6.       ISAF-ORC Submissions.

Proposed changes to the ISAF-ORC regulations were reviewed by the Executive Committee. Individual motions were seconded and approved to submit the following recommended changes to the ISAF-ORC, as described in Attachment A, Items I and II:

  • Re-evaluate the Gyradius Adjustment for hulls containing carbon fiber.
  • Give the IMS committee approval to implement beta testing for one year of  laser hull measurement device

Individual motions were seconded and approved to submit the following Safety Recommendations for Offshore Sailing to ISAF-ORC, as described in Attachment A, Item III:

  • Item 3.04.2 Emergency Exits (Multihulls)

  • Item 3.10: Crash bulkheads in multihulls. 

  • Item 3.11.1 Multihull Nets or Trampolines

  • Item 3.18 Bilge Pumps and Buckets

  • Item 4.04 Fire extinguishers on multihulls.

  • Item 5.02 (Harnesses)

  • Item 5.07.1 Survival Equipment

In addition,

  • Item 4.05 has already been approved.

  • A proposal submitted by the Safety at Sea Committee to require that 
    hatches be covered with non-skid tape was deferred to 2002, pending further definition and review.

  • Motion: a motion was seconded and approved that ISAF-ORC 
    submissions must be submitted to the Executive Committee at least 
    six weeks in advance of the submission deadline.

 7.       Proposed Candidates for ISAF Race Official Status

  • Motion: a motion was seconded and approved to approve, on recommendation of the Judges Committee, the applications of Donald Makowiecki and Donald R. Becker for certification by ISAF as International Judges and the application of Bruce A. Cook for certification by ISAF as an International Umpire and, on recommendation of the Race Management Committee, to approve conditionally the application of Peter Reggio for appointment by ISAF as an International Race Officer, pending observation during ISAF regatta(s).

8.       Unfinished Business

8.a.  ISAF Visit to the US in May 2004. Charley Cook noted that summaries have been submitted from San Diego Yacht Club, Rhode Island Sailing Association in Newport, RI, and Boston. ExCom elected to propose the San Diego location to ISAF. Gratitude was expressed to all three organizations for their interest in hosting this important visit.

8.b.  Anti-doping Bylaw Request. ExCom noted that anti-doping should be incorporated into the regulations, not into the bylaws. Fred Hagedorn and Ted Everingham were asked to prepare draft regulations. Fred Hagedorn will continue to keep Bill Waggoner, as chair of the Sports Medicine Committee, informed of developments regarding the anti-doping issue.

8.c.   Appeals Charges. Currently a fee of $25 for members and $75 for nonmembers for appeals is charged. A recommendation that the charge be dropped was discussed.

  • Motion: A motion was seconded that US SAILING will discontinue charging a fee for appeals of protests received on or after August 21, 2001. The 
    motion was tabled pending further review.

8.d.    The Appeal of RRS 69.1-Related Issues. Input and proposals regarding a process for the appeal of protest committee decisions under RRS 69.1 and requests for conformation or correction of such decisions have been submitted by the Rules, Judges and Race Management committees, and reviewed.

  • Motion: a motion was seconded and approved to adopt the Appeals 
    Committee recommendation that appeals of decisions of a protest committee made under RRS 69.1 and requests by a protest committee for confirmation or correction of such decisions be made to the US 
    SAILING Appeals Committee and take precedence over any other 
    matters pending at the time.  The Bylaws Committee was asked to 
    draft a proposed amendment to the Bylaws to make the change, for consideration at the October meetings in St. Petersburg.


9.       Executive Session. (Executive Committee members and Executive Director only)

      Article 14 and RRS 69 Issues.   


Adjourn at 9:20 p.m.

Next Executive Committee meeting Ė Tuesday, September 18, 2001, at 8:00 pm (Eastern standard time)

Respectfully submitted,




Sarah J. Alger




Attachment A

Proposed ISAF-ORC Regulations

I. Carbon Fiber Hull Gyradius Adjustment

Re-evaluate the Gyradius Adjustment for hulls containing carbon fiber.

The current Gyradius adjustment of 0.010 for Carbon hulls is perceived to be too high and therefore punitive.  This is particularly so for smaller yachts whose seakeeping drag is a large proportion of their total drag.  (VPP predictions for large yachts are relatively immune to differences in gyradius because the seakeeping drag is relatively small.)  The effect of this is to bias the construction of smaller yachts toward Kevlar and less restrictive materials.


II. Hull measurement using a laser system

US SAILING requests approval to conduct a Beta Test of the Laser Measusring System. It is envisioned that this test would use the Laser system to create and produce valid IMS certificates for use in the US only for the Year 2002. An evaluation will be made during this time in anticipation of approval for international use at future date.

The US Rating Office has developed an end-to-end set of processes and procedures that cover hull measurement to VPP input using the SMX Laser system. A comparison has been made with the standard HMI system. Excellent agreement was achieved. Detail differences demonstrate the improved definition achievable by the laser system. In addition, the laser system measuring is easier and faster.

The existing hull measurement instrument, HMI, is a clever device that permitted the characterization of the canoe body and appendages.  This accomplishment made possible the prediction of a boats performance that is the key to modern VPP rating rules. The HMI operating procedures require that precise distances and angles be recorded at multiple locations and combined to achieve an accuracy of a few millimeters. While within the capability of this electro-mechanical device, the mitigating features of soft ground, gravel and uneven surfaces can overstress the ability to produce sufficiently accurate hull representations.

The laser system described herein has several attributes that greatly reduce the time of the measurement process and reduce the impact of the measurement site characteristics. Briefly they can be reduced to these features. High accuracy, automatic position registration each time the machine is moved, fewer required machine repositioning and self-calibration. These result in quick, accurate hull measurements.

This spring a dual measurement was made of the Farr 395 hull and appendages. The boat was presented for measurement per the requirements of IMS rule 401. The boat was located inside the Carroll Marine facility on a level concrete surface. On day 1 measurements were taken with the SMX laser machine. Details are presented below. On day 2 the standard HMI measurement was made. Prior to measurement initiation, freeboard location points and centerline points were selected and marked on the hull. Both measurement techniques captured these points as reference data.

Software was created that converted the SMX hull surface files into IMS VPP hull offset files with station locations coincident with those of the HMI. This file was aligned with the HMI file using the common reference points for alignment. The comparison shows that without question, both techniques measured the same hull. The laser system produces more uniform hull sections and more thoroughly captures dimensions and shapes of the appendages. Details of these comparisons and the laser measurement process will be presented at the September Rome ITC meeting and at the ORC AGM in November.

IMS certificates produced by the HMI and Laser system have ratings that are quite similar, but differ in detail values.

III. Proposed Changes for the 2002-2003 Safety Recommendations for Offshore Sailing (Including the ORC Special Regulations)


3.XX (Non-Skid) Surfaces which may be stood on as hatches, portals, working deck areas, including companionways, shall have adequate non-skid characteristics or have non-skid materials applied or embedded for good footing.

Hatches do not come from the factory with non-skid on them. This represents the slickest spot on the working deck. Additionally, it has been noted that non-skid is being eliminated on some new boats as a way to prevent the retention of water on the deck, thus eliminating the carrying of additional weight while sailing. This trend is expected to lose more crew overboard, which is a contradiction to safety.

3.04.2 Emergency Exits (Multihulls)
3.04.2 (b) change to Cat. 0 1
3.04.2 add: (c) Cat. 2 3 4 On yachts under 12 m, appropriate tools for cutting an escape hatch may be substituted for a separate emergency exit. These tools must be secured to the vessel by line and a clip.

In the past twenty years, there have been dozens of offshore multihull capsizes, and almost none have resulted in loss of life. Phil Weld on Gulfstreamer and Walter Greene on Gonzo are examples. Both of these skippers cut holes in the bottom, then the top, of their capsized vessels. I have witnessed one capsize on a 37' tri in front of me during the Buzzards Bay Regatta without injuries. He was righted and sailing on the following day. It is not clear to me that requiring an installed emergency exit in Cat. 2 3 4 is necessary to add safety particularly on vessels under 40-feet. For some large boats, a good case can be made to require them especially for Cat. 0 & 1, but for small boats there seems to be little benefit because the natural exit path is through the largest hole available, i.e. the companionway hatch. It is highly unlikely that an emergency exit would be needed with assistance not far off and the likelihood of a timely recovery. Another aspect to consider is placement. Necessarily, the escape hatch is located near the waterline. When capsized, usually the same conditions that might have contributed to capsize, cause waves to wash into the boat through the escape opening. The optimum location is usually on top of the overturned boat. Rather than requiring a hatch installed on the bottom of the boat, it makes sense to require tools to cut a hatch. An overturned multihull generally creates the best platform for survivability at sea, and there is ample time to cut the hatch to the desired location and size. Concern has been voiced with regard to 3.02.2 (Flotation). A solid glass construction boat is not likely to meet this requirement or to serve as a good life raft.

3.10 Add Multihull Category 0

Reason: Adds crash bulkheads to multihulls to the most susceptible point of the hull.

Debris in the water is no less damaging to a multihull than a monohull, it seems that it should be appropriate for both types of craft.

3.11.1 Multihull Nets or Trampolines
3.11.1 Remove the US prescription as it is already duplicated in the text.
3.11.1 (b) Add a third bullet to read: In lieu of the aft triangle net, high cockpit combings or lifelines may be substituted that meet the minimum heights in 3.11 (b).

The after net requirement for a trimaran is often not of practical use to keep crew from falling. The arrangement of a net so described, particularly on smaller boats, would tend to trampoline a falling crewmember into the water. There are often better choices for keeping crew aboard.

3.18 Bilge Pumps and Buckets
3.18 (b) Remove Mu from Category and add a second bullet: Mu 0 1 2
One manual bilge pump either above or below deck as specified above. (If ORC accepts this, the US prescription is eliminated).

Here the question points to the multihull difference. Where the regulations already stipulate flotation, the need for an additional pump does not contribute to safety.

4.04 Add Multihull Categories 0,1,2,3,4

Reason: Requires fire extinguishers on multihulls.

Appears to be an oversight in the 2000-2001 ORC book.

4.05 Insert - "Fully assembled and" before "ready for use".

Reason: Recent vessel inspections have shown that some boat owners are trying to fulfill their ORC anchor carriage requirements using disassembled multi-part anchors stowed in cloth bags below decks.

This strengthens the wording that an anchor should be ready to deploy in a moments notice.

5.02 (Harnesses) - Replace "shall" with "is recommended to".

Only one product is currently available in the marketplace to denote that the tether has been overloaded, and even that product uses a different method of determining overload than the one defined.  There is not enough demand yet in the marketplace for manufacturers to develop and manufacture this system.

5.07.1 Survival Equipment
Add: Multihull Cat. 1 2 Immersion suit as specified above for each crew member is strongly recommended above latitude 30.

We assume multihulls are to be used as their own life raft, as a result of an inverted hull, the crew members are almost guaranteed to be in moving water all of the time.  Weakness from hypothermia is a major threat.