The Troubled Waters Of "Deepwater"
Congressman: The Country Is Less Safe Than Before $24 Billion Refurbishment
-
Play CBS Video Video Preview: Deepwater Only On The Web: An ex-Coast Guard officer tells Steve Kroft that having contractors run the agency's upgrade program was like asking "the fox to develop the security plan for the henhouse."
-
Video Kroft's Reporter's Notebook Only On The Web: "60 Minutes" correspondent Steve Kroft discusses his upcoming exposé of the Coast Guard's botched effort to upgrade its fleet.
-
Video Deepwater In Full: An ex-Coast Guard officer tells Steve Kroft that having contractors run the agency's upgrade program is like asking "the fox to develop the security plan for the henhouse."
-
-
(CBS)
-
Retired Coast Guard Capt. Kevin Jarvis talks with Steve Kroft. (CBS)
-
-
Interactive Military 101 Basic training to learn all about America's fighting force.
-
News Tools 60 Minutes
Email AlertSign up for our 60 Minutes email alert.
"We used to call it a brick. It was just so heavy. And even a brick, if you put enough horsepower on it, you could make it plane on the water. Well, that's exactly what they did here," Capt. Jarvis explains.
Why did they decide to make it out of composite and not out of steel or aluminum?
Says Jarvis, "I really don't know that answer other than the fact that one day it was a traditional hull, and the next day it’s gonna be composite."
"Do you think it had anything to do with the fact that the contractor had built this big, huge shipyard to do composite hulls?" Kroft asks.
"One could really make that inference. I don't know if that was part of the decision. But once can sure make that inference," Jarvis says.
Asked if one of those composite cutters was ever built, Jarvis says, “No. Thank goodness.”
After tests showed technical and design problems, the Coast Guard finally pulled the plug, and another $38 million in developmental costs went down the drain.
But the huge National Security Cutter is still going full speed ahead. At 418 feet long, it is by far the largest ship the Coast Guard has ever had, and the most expensive. It’s supposed to be able to monitor 56,000 square miles of ocean every day. The Coast Guard expects to accept delivery of the first one by this fall.
"This was like a Navy ship?" Kroft asks Jarvis.
"It's supposed to be able to run with the Navy battle groups," he replies.
Asked if it will be able to, Jarvis says, "In my opinion, no. Our models show it's not gonna meet the speed requirements. It's gonna miss."
"Is that a problem?" Kroft asks.
"It'll be good enough," Jarvis replies.
But speed wasn’t the only problem for the National Security Cutter. Coast Guard engineers found serious flaws in the structural design that could lead to premature metal fatigue and even structural failure. A second opinion from the Navy’s engineers concurred. But that didn’t stop the Coast Guard from christening the first National Security Cutter last year. A second one is now being built. The cost, so far, is nearly $800 million.
This is a story the Coast Guard didn’t want 60 Minutes to tell. It refused to make Commandant Thad Allen or any other officer available for an interview. The contractor, Integrated Coast Guard Systems, also declined.
They did, however have to appear before Congress. And Miss. Congressman Gene Taylor, who spent 12 years in the Coast Guard, wasn’t much more successful than 60 Minutes was at getting answers, particularly when he asked the contractors about those eight patrol boats that proved to be un-seaworthy.
"So at what point does one of you step forward and say, 'We made a horrible mistake,'" the congressman asked.
The response? Dead silence.
"I think the stakes are pretty high, folks. I'm giving you an opportunity to tell me what went wrong and who's going to accept responsibility," Rep. Taylor said.
Eventually, James Anton, Northrop Grumman’s Deepwater Vice President, spoke up. "We need to determine the cause of the failure, sir, and when we determine the cause of the failure, we'll determine accountability, and when we determine accountability, we'll know who needs to stand up," Anton said.
"How long does that take? What was it, two years ago?" Rep. Taylor replied.
Besides serving on the Coast Guard oversight subcommittee, Congressman Taylor knows a few things about extending the length of boats. He did it with an old shrimp boat in his hometown of Bay St. Louis.
"And I pretty well drew it out on the back of a napkin. Went and found some guys, some welders, and we did basically the same thing they did that Coast Guard, on a smaller scale," Taylor says. "My boat works fine. In their case, they didn't think it through."
Asked if these boats are good for anything, the congressman tells Kroft, "No. I've even asked if they could be used on river environments, if we couldn't give 'em to the Colombians or the Hondurans, just go use 'em for a river patrol boat. And they didn't have the confidence that the vessel could get down to Latin America to be given away."
"Has anybody been fired or demoted?" Kroft asks.
"To the absolute best of my knowledge, no one in the Coast Guard was demoted. No one was fired," Taylor says. "The taxpayers have not been given their money back, and of course, the ships haven’t been fixed."
The Coast Guard officially revoked its acceptance of the converted patrol boats in May and demanded at least some of its money back. But the relationship between the Coast Guard and contractors continues to flourish.
Earlier this month, Integrated received a nearly $600 million contract to complete the first two National Security Cutters and build a third one, some of that money will go to fix the cutters' structural design flaws. After this story had been completed, the Coast Guard finally offered to make Commandant Thad Allen available, but only for a live, unedited interview, which 60 Minutes declined to do.
Produced by L. Franklin Devine
© MMVII, CBS Worldwide Inc. All Rights Reserved.

- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 69 CommentsYou have pointed out the pro''s and con''s about our US Coast Guard organization. The best improvement for any powerful organizations, example, for our US Coast Guard is not pretending that there is no problem. If you have kept hiding problem without reporting out to the American people, then there won''t be good and positive will coming out from, for improving roles , and enforcing discipline, especially toward the leadership in US Coast Guard. Forgive me for saying this, but Too many Officers were in charged in the office, and studied papers for passing test only for more paycheck, just to become an officers without the skills experiences about common sense to do a good job. These Officers did not cared about doing good job, except for helding power, and big paycheck, too.
Speaking of Which, The Navy folks have problem, but the good thing about the Navy, is they know how to taken cared of their every family members. They provided hospital just for their own. For example, when the US Coast Guard have messed up our tiny paycheck, and do not want to paying our healthcare, I have gone sleep without eating, except coffee, and water. These are really sadden for the small guy in the US Coast Guard have works so hard supporting his family and doing good job,(serving his country...) and have ended-up shuffling around, because of poor leadership coming from the top, and because I''ve happen to be a non-white, wife, too. Respectfully.
The deepwater program was origianlly devised to spend not-enough-money and in the end, the U.S. taxpayer will wind up paying for poor quality.
As it stands today, the USCG has one of the oldest fleets in the world and still they manage day-in and day-out without much complaint.
I know that there is no question of who is resposnible for the present mess - the U.S. Congress. Feel free to write them and ask them to start doing their jobs of supporting this service.
Here is a real article about the USCG:
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1122007-1,00.html
Respectfully.
they need to do over night.If CG would have gotten the Money they ask for, this ship expansion might not have had to happen. You should go back and do a study of why Congress alway cut the CG''s money yet excepted them to do there job there an old saying follow the money or should I say lack of Richard LeLievre
to thoughtrules: you don''t have to believe they are "all a bunch of crooks and idiots", just that the CG finds itself hamstrung by a system that took operational control away and gave it to contractors who were inexperienced and only thinking of profit. Ever work in a defense industry? Most of the contracts are cost plus%; so the greater the cost the greater the plus (profit).
Coast50 did a great job of summing this up (read it below). This is not just about these examples but about a system that the CG had that was corrupted by outsourcing to the very people it was supposed to oversee.
Who allowed this contract in the first place?
The 110''s were used up pieces of *** when the FRAM jobs were done on them, and the first one should have been extensively tested before any others were altered.
That''s the usual manner, but not for Lockheed,Gruman,Northrup,Halliburton,KB&R. Ripoff is what they do and did, and jail isn''t good enough.
It''s times like this I''m so embarrassed to be an American...
As stated in the interview Northup Gruman owned the "ONLY" shipyard on the Gulf Coast that was capable of building a composite hull of the required size. Northrup Gruman was also 50% of ICGS...therefore it only made good company sense to approach the CG with a composite hull plan. Why not? Northup Gruman runs the contract and then offers it to themselves to build. What could make it any better?
Oh yeah I forgot to mention...Northrup Gruman also proposed to pay a substantial percentage of the composite hull prototype. Don't make the mistake of thinking they were being generous.... they would have more than made it up in follow-on hulls once they convinced the CG composite was the way to go.
This interview and video is ridiculous. Everything about it from the congressmen, to the whistleblower, and especially the sensationlist reporter...my god could you make it any more Jerry Springerish?
I won't go into the specifics of the contract or shipbiuilding, but I will comment on the CG's readiness and stance. The USCG, even before 9:11, was responsible for protection of US waterways, coastline, ship inspections, and a thousand other assignments the general public never hears about could even fathom. We performed these jobs with equipment and personnel shortages then...just as we perform them now! We have never faultered in our job because we were short on something. We made due and got the job done. We are a small and very proud service with many, many jobs that we do very well.
My real point of posting here is to advise anyone to not listen to this kind of sensationlism reporting and learn the facts for yourself. I've always had a high opinion of 60 Minutes until I saw this video. I was involved in the Deepwater project for some while and that gives me very good insight on just how realistic this report is...and in my opinion it is simply a weak attempt at stirring controversy vs showing the real CG. 60 Minutes should try to save face and leave this type of reporting to Springer.
- 1
- 2
- 3
- 4
- next
See all 69 Comments