An Analysis of the Civil Diving Population of the United States c X S ^TES Of *■ f • 4?.^ r^"/ "***&= U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Manned Undersea Science and Technology May 1975 Washington, D.C. Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2012 with funding from LYRASIS Members and Sloan Foundation http://www.archive.org/details/analysisofcivildOOunit >. a o u >s I. o O c a CO An Analysis of the Civil Diving Population of the United States U.S. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE Rogers C.B. Morton, Secretary National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Robert M. White, Administrator Manned Undersea Science and Technology May 1975 Washington, D.C. For Sale By The Superintendent, of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 Price ,$L10 Acknowledgements A survey of this magnitude necessarily reflects the efforts of many individuals. The project leader was Karl Jugel of the Manned Undersea Science and Technology Office (MUS&T) . Walter Leight , Director, Decisions Systems Branch, Technical Analysis Divison (TAD) of the National Bureau of Standards, served as the Chief NBS coordinator and reviewer. Jonathan Bromberg, Ben E. Clayton, June Tuberg, and Harold Marshall, all of TAD, contributed to the data collection and preliminary analysis. Other principal reviewers included Nicholas Loope, Research Director, International Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners of America; Willard Searle of Searle Consultants; Robert Dill, Paul Stang, and Morgan Wells of the MUS&T Office. James W. Miller, Deputy Director of MUS&T served as final editor. Donald C. Beaumariage Director Manned Undersea Science and Technology An Analysis of the Civil Diving Population of the United States Table of Contents Introduction Definitions and Scope of the Study Summary of the Results Commercial Diving o Introduction o Major Firms Procedure o Estimate Developed from the "Yellow Pages" o Impact of Using the Heading "Divers" o Free-Lance/Part-Time Divers o Diver Pay Scales o Industries Using Diver Services o Commercial Diver Training o Commercial Diving Expenditures Scientific/Educational Institutional Divers o Introduction o College and University Divers o College and University Departments Using Diving o College and University Diver Training o College and University Expenditures on Diving o Associate Degree Institution Diving o Research Ion-Military Governmental Diving o Introduction o Federal Agency Data Collection o Federal Agency Divers o Types of Diving for Federal Agencies o Federal Agency Training o State and Local Data Collection o State and Local Divers o State and Local Training o Police Department Diving o Fire Department Diving o Police and Fire Department Training o Non-military Governmental Diving Expenditures Lecreational Diving o Introduction o Recreational Diver Training Organizations o Computation of "Individuals with Diving Skills" o Recreational Diving "Dropouts" o Geographic Distribution o Expenditures on Recreational Diving o Diving Safety List of Tables and Illustrations Table Title 1 Estimated U.S. Civil Diving Population 2 Geographic Distribution of the Civil Diving Population 3 Estimated Annual Expenditures for Civil Diving by Purpose 4 Number of Listings Under "Divers" in Yellow Pages of Telephone Directories by State 5 Regional Telephone Listings of Commercial Diving Firms and Sampling of Such Firms 6 Computation Table for Uncontacted "Smaller Firm" Full-Time Payroll Employment 7 Estimated Total Full-Time Payroll Employment Computational Table 8 Sampling of "Non-Diver" Firms for Full-Time Commercial Divers 9 Diver Membership Reported by Locals Affiliated with the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners Union of America 10 Estimated Free-Lance/Part-Time Employment by Geographic Area 11 Estimated Percentage of Commercial Diving Services Used by Industries 12 Computation of Estimated Annual Expenditures for Commercial Diving 13 Responses from Colleges and Universities by Geographic Area 14 College and University Divers by Geographic Area 15 Characteristics of College and University Diving by Geographic Area 16 Divers at Associate Degree Awarding Institutions and Research Consortia by Geographic Area 17 Federal Agency Personnel Using Diving by Geographic Region 18 Employees who Dive Reported by States 19 Estimated Number of Policemen Who Use Diving by Region 20 Training Reported by Major Recreational Training Organizations 21 Estimated Recreational Divers by Geographic Area Figure Title 1 Geographic Areas Used in the Analysis 2 Regions Used in the National Bureau of Standards Police Department Study and Estimated Number of Divers by Region AN ANALYSIS OF THE CIVIL DIVING POPULATIONS OF THE UNITED STATES * INTRODUCTION The Manned Undersea Science and Technology (MUS&T) Program of the Department of Commerce f s National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration was founded to "develop, promote, coordinate and support a national civilian operational capability for man to work under the sea to achieve better understanding, assessment, and use of the marine environment and its resources." The MUS&T Program includes the use of divers and existing undersea facilities (sub- mersibles and undersea laboratories) in marine science projects. In assessing the MUS&T Program and planning for an October 1972 workshop held by the National Academy of Science (NAS) and the National Academy of Engineering (NAE) to examine the needs for and applications of manned undersea activities, it became obvious that quantitative information on divers and diving activity was lacking. The applications of divers could be listed and various tasks in safety, diving physiology, and diver support equipment could be delineated, but information was lacking on the number of divers in various fields. The latest Federally published information, which addresses expendi- tures on diving and the commercial diving population, was contained in Marine Science Affairs , the April 1970 report by the President to the Congress on marine resources and engineering development. The estimates were made by a panel of experts for the National Council on Marine Resources and Engineering Development in 1968. The Technical Analysis Division (TAD) of the National Bureau of Standards was enlisted to assist the MUS&T Program when it was found that an extensive data collection and analysis effort was required. The effort required became evi- dent when itwas found that individuals active in the various fields of diving, persons associated with the NAS/NAE effort, insurance companies, trade associa- tions, and other individuals and organizations which might be expected to have summary data did not. TAD developed methodologies and collected information until a reduction in the MUS&T budget forced their participation to be terminated. Diving was divided into four major fields (commercial, scientific, educational, nonmilitary governmental, and recreational). These fields were then further subdivided. After a summary of the findings, a section is devoted to each major field. In each section, the methodologies are explained to permit an evaluation of the accuracy of the estimates given. The information in this report is based on information gathered through January 1, 1973, with the exception of some commercial diving pay rates which are correct to January 1974. DEFINITIONS AND SCOPE OF THE STUDY For the analysis, a diver and categories of diving are defined as follows: Diver - Any individual in direct or clothing contact with the water who uses equipment which supplies a breathing gas mixture from a compressed source that enables the individual to breath underwater at ambient pressure. Commercial Diver - A diver who engages in diving in connection with non-training (of divers) employment with a "for profit" firm. Scientific/Educational Institutional Diver - A diver who engages in diving in connection with research, studies, or employment at an institution of higher education or associate degree (two year) awarding institution. Nonmilitary Governmental Diver - A diver who engages in diving in connection with direct employment by a nonmilitary Federal, state, or local government agency or a police or fire department (includes marine science and engineering). Recreational Diver - A diver who engages in diving solely for personal enjoyment without financial compensation. These categories are further subdivided as discussed below. The Commercial Diving category was divided into "Full-Time Payroll Employment" and "Free-Lance/Part Time." Individuals in the first category are paid whether diving or not and may be paid a fixed salary while diving and at a lower rate when not diving. To obtain information, major employers were contacted and sampling techniques were used. Individuals in the second category may be employed under one of three conditions but in each case are only paid for days on which diving is conducted. The Scientific/Educational Institutional Diving category was divided into: "Colleges and Universities," and "Associate Degree Institutions and Research Consortia." These were then further subdivided into the type of individual diving, i.e., "Professional staff" or "student." Questionnaires were sent to all institutions listed in the Oceanographer of the Navy's "University Curricula in the Marine Sciences and Related Fields." Telephone calls were made to key non-respondents. The Nonmilitary Governmental Diving was divided into "Federal, State and Local," "Police Departments" and "Fire Departments." Since there was no focal point for information on diving at the Federal level, agencies were extensively canvassed. At the "State and Local" levels, coastal and inland jurisdictions, including up to four organizations within the jurisdiction, were contacted and these data used to estimate the remainder. NBS had previously performed an effort for the Department of Justice's Law Enforce- ment Assistance Administration which sampled 1,400 of 13,000 law enforcement agencies and permitted estimating departments which utilize diving. A small sample was used to obtain estimates of the total number of divers and the number of fire department divers per state. Recreational Diving was divided into "Individuals Capable of Diving" and "Individuals Engaging in the Sport," the former being those who have received formal or informal training and the latter being those who continue to dive after completing training. These data were obtained by contacting major training organizations and from a survey by Skin Diver magazine. 1 Three estimates of the population were made for each subdivision: the "Estimated Minimum Population," the "Most Likely Population," and the "Estimated Maximum Population." The upper and lower limits are based on a combination of computation and judgment on the part of analysts on the adequacy, completeness, and accuracy of the data obtained. Geographic distribution was considered important in addition to nationwide estimates. Accordingly, the methods of data collection and analysis were designed to permit estimates on a regional basis. For the analysis, the United States was divided into four regions, which are illustrated in Figure 1: East Coast (Maine to Georgia) - West Coast (Including Alaska and Hawaii) - Gulf of Mexico (Including Florida) - Great Lakes and Inland Florida was included in the Gulf of Mexico statistics. However, it was found that proportionately there is somewhat more diving on the east coast of Florida than on the west coast. Alaska and Hawaii were included in the west coast statistics because of limited information in these areas. The time differences, cost of data acquisition, and basic difficulty of obtaining information (particularly in Alaska) limited the effort which could be expended. For commercial diving, the locations of the firms' headquarters were used instead of field office and actual locations of diver activity. The inquiries made to each firm, institution, agency, and organization included requests for information on activities, costs, health and safety, trends, and so forth. From these, it was possible to estimate an "average per diver expen- diture per year." This was combined with related information to develop a rough approximation of annual U.S. expenditures for diving. For this analysis, the expenditures were categorized by purpose, such as "Marine Science and Engineering," rather than employer. 1m 1972 Skin Diver Reader Survey," Peterson Publishing Co., P4. 3 SUMMARY OF RESULTS Table 1 summarizes on a nationwide basis the U.S. diving population giving estimated upper and lower limits (non-statistical) in addition to a "most likely population." Categories used are as previously defined. The first three categorizations are additive, while the fourth category can overlap any or all of the other three. It should be noted that in the second and third categories, diving is primarily a skill used by the individual, rather than a vocation. TABLE 1 ESTIMATED U. S. CIVIL DIVING POPULATION Estimated Population Diver Categories Minimum Most Likely Maximum Commercial Full-Time Payroll Employment 1450 1530 1750 Free Lance/Part Time 650 775 1000 TOTAL 2100 2305 2750 Scientific/Educational Institutional Colleges and Universities Professional Staff 590 595 625 Students 1300 1360 1425 Support Divers 60 65 75 TOTAL 1950 2020 2125 Associate Degree Institutions and Research Consortia Staff 30 45 50 Students 230 250 280 Support Divers 15 25 30 TOTAL 275 320 360 Nonmilitary Governmental Federal Agencies 590 600 650 State and Local 300 335 500 Police Departments 6500 8060 9700 Fire Departments 2500 5000 7500 Recreational Individuals with Diving Skills 1,500,000 1,890,000 2,300,000 Individuals Practicing in the Sport 375,000 474,000 600,000 The following estimate of commercial divers was given in the April 1970 Marine Science Affairs : COMMERCIAL DIVERS IN THE UNITED STATES Location Number East Coast 150 Florida . . . , 100 Louisiana- Texas 1 1,000 California 1 250 Alaska 60 Total 1,560 Peak season in summer. Source: Panel of Experts, 1968, National Council on Marine Resources and Engineering Development. Included in the earlier estimate are those who work "part time." In addition, estimates of approximately two million active scuba divers and of training between 50,000 and 100,000 individuals per year were given. In comparison, the current analysis shows a greater number of commercial divers and a lower estimate of recreational divers. The estimated number of "individuals with diving skills" relates reasonably well to the earlier estimate of "active scuba divers." The earlier work did not define "active," but in a computa- tion of expenditures it is inferred that "active" divers average ten dives per year. Later information from five major recreational diver training organizations shows that prior to 1971 they had trained approximately 704,000 individuals but that only one in four or one in five individuals trained during 1970 and before continued diving after training when the novelty wore off. Thus, the earlier estimate was probably quite high. The conclusion regarding the rapid increase in recreational diving, however, was correct, as evidenced by rises in the approximate annual training levels to over 165,000 and over 226,000 in 1971 and 1972, respectively. Table 2 provides the estimated geographic distributions of each category by geographic area using the "most likely" estimate from Table 1. TABLE 2 GEOGRAPHIC DISTRIBUTION OF THE CIVIL DIVING POPULATION Diver Category East West Gulf Great Lakes Coast Coast Mexico and Inland Total 365 160 905 100 1530 140 170 450 15 775 Commercial Full Time Payroll Employment Free Lance/Part Time Scientific/ Educational Institutional Colleges and Universities Professional Staff Students Support Divers TOTAL Associate Degree Institutions and Research Consortia* Staff Students Support TOTAL Nonmilitary Governmental Federal Agencies State and Local Police Departments Fire Departments Recreational Individuals Capable of Diving Individuals Engaging in the Sport * Excludes Faculty and Students in Commercial Diving Training Programs ** Includes U. S. Citizens Outside of the Country Table 3 provides the estimated annual expenditures on civil diving in the United States by purpose. It should be noted that prior tables were by employer. Because some organizations hold contracts with or grants from Department of Defense organizations, the estimates reflect some military spending. The esti- mates do not include military expenditures for diving by Defense employees. 195 195 160 45 595 355 645 285 75 1360 15 35 15 65 565 875 460 120 2020 15 15 10 5 45 50 170 15 15 250 15 5 5 25 80 190 30 20 320 165 190 120 125 600 130 110 45 50 335 1260 670 900 5230 8060 1300 500 500 2700 5000 In Thousands 300 790 480 290 1890** 75 198 120 73 474** 2. ,6 0, ,3 63, ,1 2. ,0 0. ,9 13. ,0 41. ,6 186, J 3. ,3 2. ,6 TABLE 3 ESTIMATED ANNUAL EXPENDITURES FOR CIVIL DIVING BY PURPOSE Expenditures Purpose ($xl, 000,000) Marine Science and Engineering (Government and Academic) Direct Diving Cost Equipment and Replacements Industrial Applications Diving Services (Worldwide) Diver Equipment Replacement Training Recreational Basic Training Equipment Advanced Equipment and Replacements Personnel Expenditures Public Safety Direct Diving Cost Equipment and Replacement The major differences between the current analysis and information in the following table from the April, 1970 Marine Science Affairs , are under "Science" and "Recreation": -Estimates of Current Total Annual U.S. Expenditures on M a n-i n-t he-Sea [In millions of dollars] 1. Science (less than) 0.5 2. Defense: Diving training 4. 5 Diver equipment 6. 8 Man-in-the-sea 7. 1 Diving operations (approximately) 25.0 3. Commercial (approximately) 45.0 4. Recreation: Personal expenditures x 350. Diving equipment 22. 5 Auxiliary equipment 25. Total (approximate) 486. 4 1 Estimated on the basis of 1.5 million divers, 10 dives each year, at cost of between $20 and $25 per dive. Source : Derived from staff research, National Council on Marine Resources and Engi- neering Development, July 1969, The difference between the earlier estimate under "Science" and the current analyses' estimate under "Marine Science and Engineering" is probably that the current analysis includes diving by government personnel for scientific and engineering purposes and, because of Department of Defense sponsorship of activities at colleges and universities, also includes some expenditures which were carried in the earlier effort under "Defense." Expenditures on recreational diving equipment were estimated to be between $40 and $50 million in Marine Science Affairs. This agrees reasonably well with the current estimates of $54.6 million for basic and advanced equipment. The major difference is in the "Personal Expenditure" category. The earlier estimate was based on 1.5 million divers diving ten times per year at a cost between twenty and twenty-five dollars per dive ($23.33 was actually used). As noted earlier, the 2.0 million "active" divers was probably high and the actual "individuals with diving skills," as used in the current analysis, was probably not more than 1.0 million. Had 1.0 million been used, the early estimate would have been $233 million if all of the 1.0 million averaged ten dives per year. If it had been assumed that only one in four continued diving, the earlier estimate would have been further reduced to slightly over $58 million. While the current estimate of $186.7 million is by no means exact, it is believed to be more realistic than the earlier estimate of $350 million. COMMERCIAL DIVING Introduction A "Commercial Diver," as earlier defined, is the employee of a "for profit" firm who engages in diving in connection with non-training (of divers) employ- ment. In addition to including what is traditionally considered a "commercial diver," this definition also includes oceanographers or geologists who use diving in their work if employed by a "for profit" firm. In general, such employees use diving intermittently as a tool in their primary vocation. Specifically excluded were any individuals engaged in diver training regard- less of the type of organization. From marine science staff members who are divers, their peers, and their asso- ciates connected with commercial diving, there was prior knowledge of the commercial diving field on which to base the data collection and analysis. Commercial diving in the United States was estimated to be dominated by twelve to eighteen firms, of which perhaps six could be considered leaders. The remainder of commercial diving is performed by a large number of smaller firms. A major difference between large and small firms is the availability of facilities and equipment which permit the larger firm to perform a greater variety of work and to work at deeper depths. Employment in the diving industry fluctuates with season and industrial factors. These latter factors include the sale of petroleum or gas field leases and field development; coastal, harbor, and estuary construction projects and the phase of construction; severe weather conditions and the need to inspect and repair facilities; and conditions which lead to the need for underwater sal- vage. Because of the fluctuations, divers are hired by commercial diving firms under one of the following conditions: - Full-Time Payroll - paid a constant salary regardless of dive days or at one rate for dive days and at a lower rate for non-dive days. - Exclusive Basis - employed by only one firm, but only paid when in a diving status. - Contract - employed for the duration of a specific job or a specific contract, at the end of which the diver seeks another job. - Day-to-Day - employed on a day-to-day basis or for a number of days required to complete a specific job. (Hiring is through lists main- tained by unions and/or companies.) Those employed under the last three conditions were grouped into a subdivision called "Free Lance/Part Time." Two methods were used to obtain information on full-time payroll employment. The first involved contacting major firms; the second involved the sampling of firms listed under "Divers" in the "Yellow Pages" of telephone directories from various parts of the United States. Total full-time payroll employment was estimated by summing information from the large firms and adding to it the data obtained based on the sampling of small firms. A special analytic and sampling process, described later, permitted assessing the ramifications of using the "Divers" heading and also yielded useful information for analyzing "Free Lance/Part Time" employment. Data from labor unions was combined with data from the large firms and samples to develop the estimates for "Free Lance/Part Time" employment. Major Firms Procedure The MUS&T Program supplied the Technical Analysis Division (TAD) of the National Bureau of Standards (NBS) with a list of firms believed to be the major ones in commercial diving. NBS contacted each of these firms, making inquiries regarding employment, equipment, safety and business factors. The interviewers asked about other firms which the respondant considered "large" or a major competitor. This procedure was followed until no new firms were being added to the list, which finally contained fourteen names. Care was taken to dif- ferentiate between full-time employees and those hired under the other condi- tions listed previously. The following ten firms, in alphabetical order, reported employing a total of eight hundred and ninety-five divers on a full- time payroll basis: Firm Names Headquarters Location Santa Fe Engineering & Construction Co. Louisiana Garrison-8 Divers & Marine Contractors, Inc. Washington International Underwater Contractors, Inc. New York 10 Firm Names J. and J. Marine Diving Company, Inc. J. Ray McDermott Diving Division (Formerly Dick Evans Divers) Ocean Systems, Inc. Oceaneering International, Inc. Podesta Divers and Construction Company Sub-Sea International, Inc. Taylor Diving and Salvage Co. (Division of Halliburton, Inc.) Headquarters Location Texas Louisiana Virginia Texas California Louisiana Louisiana Three of the firms employ over half of the total. Information was supplied to the NBS with the understanding that it would be held in confidence; hence, no attempt was made to verify individual reports. It is possible that reports have been inflated or made conservative based on a firm's perception of the purpose of the study. Estimate Developed from the "Yellow Pages" To estimate the full-time payroll employment of firms not identified in the "Major Firms Procedure," the TAD utilized the telephone directory collection maintained by the Library of Congress. The firms listed under "Divers" were counted and noted for major cities, coastal cities or cities on major bodies of water for each state. Ninety-four percent of the directories were dated 1970 or later. The irregular arrival times of directories at the Library of Congress is partially attributable to there being approximately 1,892 different telephone exchanges in the United States in addition to the Bell Telephone System. To avoid multiple counting and the counting of firms listed under "Divers," but not providing commercial diving services, several procedures were used, as follows : (1) Any firm which had an "out-of-state" address was not counted on the assumption that it would be encountered in its "home" state listing; (2) Each newly searched directory was examined to determine if any of the listed firms had already been counted from another directory in the same state, thus preventing double counting of firms listing themselves in cities within the state other than their "home" city; (3) Advertisements were carefully examined to categorize and count firms as "Apparent Commercial Diving Firms," "Sport Diver Schools," "Commercial Diver Schools," and "Sport Diving and Cruises." Equip- ment suppliers were counted separately; 11 (4) Advertisements and listings were carefully examined by comparing telephone numbers to prevent double counting of firms which have a listing under more than one name or also under the name of the owner. (5) Firms which could be identified as divisions or subsidiaries of other firms, which would also be contacted, were not counted and the parent firm was asked for the overall total. Information developed on the number of listing in each state is presented in Table 4. TABLE 4 NUMBER OF LISTINGS UNDER "DIVERS" IN YELLOW PAGES OF TELEPHONE DIRECTORIES BY STATE State Apparent Sport C(*HTflD f. Sport Diving State Total Commercial Diver Diver and Cruises Diver Firms Schools Schools Alabama 8 7 1 - . Alaska 2 2 - - - Arkansas 4 3 1 - - Arizona 5 3 2 - - California 82 76 4 2 - Colorado 2 2 - - - Connecticut 7 7 - - - Delaware 2 2 - - - Florida 77 40 10 3 24 Georgia 6 6 - - - Hawaii 3 3 - - - Illinois 18 15 2 - 1 Idaho 1 1 - - - Indiana 1 1 - - - Iowa - - - - Kansas - - - - Kentucky 4 4 - - - Louisiana 36 35 1 - - Maine 4 4 - - - Maryland 9 9 - - - Massachusetts 16 15 - - 1 Michigan 12 12 - - - Minnesota 7 6 1 - - Mississippi 3 3 - - - Missouri 4 4 - - - Montana - - - - Nebraska 2 2 - - - New York (State) 35 33 1 1 - New Mexico - - - - New Jersey 14 14 - - - New Hampshire 1 1 - - - Nevada 1 1 - - - North Carolina 6 6 - - - North Dakota - - - - Ohio 22 19 3 - - Oklahoma 2 1 1 - - Oregon 7 7 - - - Pennsylvania 12 10 2 - - Rhode Island 3 3 - - - South Carolina 3 3 - - - South Dakota 1 1 - - - Tennessee 6 4 2 - - Texas 23 21 2 - - Utah 1 - 1 - - Vermont - - - - Virginia 9 9 - - - Washington 26 23 2 1 m West Virginia 2 2 - - — Wisconsin 4 4 - - — Wyoming - - - — District of Columbia 2 2 - ~ ™ TOTAL 495 426 36 7 26 12 Regional random samples were selected from the lists of firms which had not been contacted in conjunction with the effort to identify the ten largest firms. As can be seen in Table 5, one hundred and three contacts were attempted and of these, ninety-five were successful. Fifty- four of these firms, or approximately fifty-seven percent, reported divers on their full-time payroll while 41 firms did not. TABLE 5 REGIONAL TELEPHONE LISTINGS Of COT?Er»CIAl DIVING FIRMS AND SAMPLING OF Sl'CH FTPMS Region No. Diving Finn Listings No. Contacts Attempted (Excl. "10 Largest"), No. With Disconnected Telephone No. With At Least One Diver* Per Cent With . Divers* No. of Divers* Rerorted Avg. No. Per Firm Reporting No Divers* East Coast 122 2. • 1 15 53.6 1»5 3.0 13 Vest Coast 111 18 11 61.2 20 1.8 7 Gulf of Mexico 106 43 6 21 56.8 fio '••2 16 Great Lakes & Inland 87 13 1 7 58.3 15 2.1 i 5 TOTAL U26 103 8 i_ . — 56.8 169 3.1 — 1*1 * "DIVER" MEANS ON THE ITRM'S FULL-TIME PAYROLL. The results of the contacts can be extrapolated to estimate the full-time payroll employment of firms not contacted assuming that the sampled firms are representative of all firms within the same region. It should also be noted that a significant number of commercial divers, whose numbers are estimated independently later, are employed on other than a full-time payroll basis. A review of listings resulted in the development of a non-overlapping list of firms. The extrapolated estimate, therefore, should be close to the actual population. Statistics derived from the sampled group are applied to the total group as shown in Table 6. 13 TABLE 6 COMPUTATION TABLE FOR UNCONTACTED "SELLER FIRM" FULL-TIME PAYROLL EMPLOYMENT Region Efo. Not Contacted (>!C) Disconnect Rate (PR)* (X) Potential Disconnect NCxPR-PD Firms To Be Est. NC-PD-F Per Cent Having Divers* (R) So. Est. To Have Divers FxR-.NF Avg. Divers Per Firn (AD>* — Est. IIo. Divers ;J~XrJ) Scs- Coast 93 3.4 3 90 i3.b 4a 3.00 144 "..'est Ccsst 93 93 61.2 d7 1.82 103- Gulf Coast 63 14.0 9 .54 56,3 30 U.2l» .127 Greit Lakes £ Inland 7^ 7.7 It 70 •5S.3 40 2.1»i 35 Total 323 16 307 175 459 National ! i 323 7.8 25 298 56.8 169 3.13 528 * From Table 5 The estimate of full-time payroll employment by region can be made by summing the number of individuals reported by the "largest firms," the number reported by sampled firms, and the estimate made for uncontacted firms. This information is given in Table 7» 14 TABLE 7 Estimated Total Full-Time Payroll Employment Element East Coast West Coast Gulf of Mexico Great Lakes & Inland Total Largest Firms 175 35 685 895 Sampled Firms 45 20 90 15 170 Uncontacted Firms 145 105 130 85 465 TOTALS 365 160 905 100 1530 It should be noted that the region is by the location of a firm*s headquarters and is not necessarily where the diving is conducted. It is estimated, con- sidering related information from unions* locals and indications from firms, that the actual number is not likely to be less than 1450 nor more than 1750. Impact of Using the Heading "Divers" The "Yellow Pages" sampling described was based on divers being listed as such in the telephone directories. To determine whether firms other than those listed in directories under "Divers" also employ full-time commercial divers, special samples were taken in the following areas: New York City New Orleans-Morgan City, La. Los Angeles-San Diego, Calif. Seattle, Washington The following listings were checked in addition to those already identified: Marine Contractors (Contractors, Marine) Pile Driving Docks-Dock Building Dredging Marine Salvage (Salvage, Marine) Marine Engineers (Engineers, Marine) In the marine engineers category, several variations of listings were checked to assess the number of oceanographers, geologists, and engineers who use diving in their work with "for profit" firms. The method was not successful, so the data may be incomplete for such individuals. Table 8 summarizes the total number of listings examined for the four regions. It also indicates the total number of unique listing (counting a company listed under two or more headings only once), the sample size used, and findings regarding the employment and use of divers. In the method used 15 to determine "Unique Listings," a hierarchy of headings was established, using the order shown above. Thus, a firm listed under "Divers," "Marine Contractors," and "Marine Salvage" would only be counted as a "Unique Listing" under "Divers." Similarly, a firm listed under "Marine Contractors" and "Pile Driving" would only be counted as a "Unique Listing" under "Marine Contractors." TABLE 8 SAMPLING OF "NON-DIVER" FIRMS FOR FULL-TIME COMMERCIAL DIVERS Area Total of All Listings 1 - No. of Unique Listings' No. Unique Non-Diver Listings Jo. Non- Diver Sampled Sue cess full \ c No. Not Using Diver No. Report- ing F.T. Divers No. Report- ing Use Of Diving Contractor No. Report- ing Use Of Independent InDivers New York City Area 148 127 113 41 26 9 6 New Orleans-Morgan City, La. 153 117 92 38 16 17 5 Los Angeles-San Diego, Calif. 55 44 30 15 7 2 4.5 1.5 Seattle, Washington 75 52 37 20 4 6 1 9 1 - Divers; Marine Contractors; Pile Driving; Marine Salvage; Dredging; Docks-Dock Building; and Marine Engineers 2 - Counting firms listed under more than one heading only once. In New York and New Orleans-Morgan City it was found that for all headings except "Marine Salvage," at least one firm with a "Unique Listing" used diver services. Firms using divers which were listed under "Marine Salvage" were also listed under "Divers." Thus, it can be reasonably assumed for the East and Gulf Coasts that the use of additional headings would not yield a signifi- cant increase in the estimate of divers. It was also found that the majority of firms using diver services obtain these services through a commercial diver firm. In the Los Angeles-San Diego area, it was found that a firm listed under "Marine Contractors" and "Pile Driving" employed one man who dives and a firm listed under "Marine Engineers" employed two men who dive. In the first case, the employee had basically non-diver duties in pile driving and was called upon ten per cent or less of his time to perform diving duties. In the second case, the firm (one of five sampled and ten listed) had two scientists who were qualified SCUBA divers and used these skills for particular studies requiring diving. It can be assumed for Southern California that the use of additional headings would not yield a substantial increase in the number of commercial divers. A high reliance on contract diving services was found among firms using diver services. 16 In Seattle, it was found that six firms not listed under "Divers" had employees who dive. Using the headings, there were three "Marine Contractors" with such employees and one firm each under "Pile Driving," "Docks Building," and "Marine Salvage." It was found that all of the subject firms listed under "Marine Contractors" were also listed under "Pile Driving" and that the employees were in fact pile drivers. It was found that for the firms listed under "Dock Building," that the owner was the diver and he used his skills where he would otherwise contract or hire an occasional independent diver for the work. The firm listed under "Marine Salvage" reported its employees were involved in scientific diving, not salvage. Rearranging the hierarchy for Seattle would yield sixteen "Unique Listings" under "Pile Driving" and seven "Unique Listings" under "Marine Contractors," with all of the firms reporting employees who dive being listed under "Pile Driving." It was also found that there is little reliance on contract diving services among firms using diver services in the Seattle area. Therefore, by not using the heading "Pile Drivers" in addition to "Divers" in Seattle, the estimate of divers on the payrolls of firms is low. From the comments made, this appears to be a local practice. Based on these checks, the use of the heading "Divers" seems to be valid. It, therefore, can be assumed that the estimates made using firms listed under this heading will be very close to the actual full-time commercial diving populations and only slightly conservative. Free-Lance/Part-Time Divers A "Free-Lance/Part-Time Diver," as used in this analysis, may be associated with one firm, or move from job-to-job. In either case, there is considerable room for error. To develop the estimate, two methods were used. The first involved contacting unions which represent divers and the second combined surveying and sampling data for the Gulf of Mexico region. Several organizations in the United States represent divers; these include the International Association of Professional Divers (New Orleans) , the Pile Drivers and Divers Association (Long Beach, Calif.) and locals affiliated with the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners Unions of America. Cooperation was exemplery from the latter organization and its locals. Locals were asked about the number of divers employed inter- mittantly and the degree to which divers in their area were organized. Information on full-time employment was not used directly because infor- mation from firms employing divers and using diving services indicated that these individuals were more than likely counted through the survey and sampling. 17 TABLE 9 Diver Membership Reported by Locals Affiliated With the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners Union of America REGION NO. OF LOCALS CONTACTED NO. OF LOCALS REPORTING NO. WITH NO DIVERS NO. OF DIVERS E'TPLOYED FULL- TIME NO. OF DIVERS EMPLOYED TNTERMTTANTT.Y TTNTONTZATTDN EAST COAST 24 21 6 99 123 HIGH WEST COAST 6 6 166 148 HIGH GULF OF tiEXICO 15 15 2 110 85 MIXED GREAT LAKES AND INLAND 11 11 6 31 10 HIGH TOTAL 56 53 14 406 366 It was generally believed that information from the union locals would allow valid estimates to be made for all areas except the Gulf of Mexico. Union and diving firm contacts generally agreed that divers in the Gulf of Mexico region (with the exception of Florida) are far less unionized than in other areas. Since the total number of divers employed through firms in the regions mentioned is not exactly known and will fluctuate, it is impossible to state exact percentages of union and non-union divers. However, it seems safe to assume that at least seventy-five per cent of the divers employed through the region and who are not providing services to the non-diver firms contacted are not unionized. Since diving firms contacted during the "Yellow Page" analysis of full-time payroll employment were also queried on their use of free-lance and part-time divers, a gross total was obtained. This number is meaningless since it was found that some of these divers work only for one firm, while others may work for several firms during a year and would be counted more than once. Based on the information from the non-diver firms and the unions, the only region where sole reliance on union-supplied data would lead to substantial under- estimation would be the Gulf of Mexico (excluding Florida). Thus, further analysis of information from diving firms was limited to the Gulf of Mexico region. An attempt was made to determine for how many firms the same Free-Lance/ Part-Time diver might work during a year. Without sampling the divers them- selves, it was necessary to rely on information supplied by firms contacted during the survey of large firms and the sampling of other firms. It was estimated that freelance divers would associate with two or three firms, with five firms considered to be the general maximum for all but a few individuals. 18 It was found that five large firms employed between three hundred and five hundred Free-Lance/Part-Time divers. In several cases, the firms reported that the divers were employed exclusively by the firm, but only paid when diving was to be conducted. Adjusting for multiple reports of the same individual, it is estimated that approximately two hundred individual divers are involved, with there being no less than one hundred and fifty and no more than three hundred and fifty. From the information obtained during the sampling of firms from the "Yellow Pages" it was possible to derive statistics which could be applied to the uncontacted firms. It was found that approximately forty-two per cent of the firms listed use Free-Lance/Part-Time divers and that of these approxi- mately twenty per cent have exclusive arrangements with the diver. Combining information from firms with the information from the unions, yields an estimate of Free-Lance/Part-Time population by region, given in Table 10. The actual total population would not likely be less than six hundred and fifty nor more than one thousand. Table 10 Estimated Free-Lance/ Part-Time Employment By Geographic Area East Coast West Coast Gulf of Mexico Great Lakes & Inland Total 125 150 85 10 370 15 20 365 _5 405 140 170 450 15 775 Union Members Non-Union Members Total Diver Pay Scales Firms were only queried in general terms about pay scales for their divers. The variations in conditions under which divers are employed and individual differences among divers make it extremely difficult to generalize for non- union divers. Union contracts covering divers are more explicit on minimums that must be paid. A union diver supplying his (or her) own equipment generally rents the equipment at a separately negotiated rate. For a diver on the full-time payroll, the annual minimum salary is between $10,000 and $15,000 per year. A highly skilled diver with a large firm can earn in excess of $25,000 per year. Without an extensive survey it was impossible to estimate the distribution of salaries. Non-union divers on other than a full-time basis are hired for between $50 and $100 per diving day, with the rate tending to be closer to the upper end of the range. 19 Union divers in the New York (N.Y.) area, which extends for union business south to Wilmington, Delaware and includes New Jersey (Philadelphia is not included), are members of the Marine Divers and Tenders Union Local No. 2295. The local is affiliated with the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners Union of America. The base pay scale reported for a New York diver is $11.11 per hour or $88.88 per day to which is added $3.21 per day for fringe benefits covering welfare, pension, annuity, and vacation.* In addition, there is a daily pre- mium based on water depth, added to the base pay scale as follows: Depth Premium** Air Dives 0-59 feet 60 - 74 feet 75 - 125 feet Over 125 feet No depth rate 22c/ft/day 70c/ft/day Negotiated with Company Mixed Gas Dives 0-74 feet 75 - 125 feet Over 125 feet No depth rate 70c/ft/day Negotiated with Company These pay rates do not include equipment. Divers who furnish their own equipment may charge additionally as much as $25 per day. A tender on the surface reportedly costs an additional (approximately) $60 per day in pay and benefits. After six months of membership in the union, divers are reported to quality for the same $30,000 life insurance coverage as other union members. New York State residents are covered by workman's compensation for cases of on the job injury. Union divers in the Los Angeles (L.A.) area, for the most part, are members of Local 2375 of the Pile Drivers, Bridge, Dock and Wharf Builders Union. The union is affiliated with the United Brotherhood of Carpenters and Joiners Union of America. The base pay scale reported for a diver in construction work if approximately $150.00 per day to which is added $19.28 in fringe benefits. In addition, there is a daily premium based on water depth, reported to be as follows: * These figures are in effect until June 30, 1975. ** As of January 14, 1974. 20 Depth Premium* 50 - 100 feet $1. 00/foot/day 100 - 150 feet $1.50/foot/day 150 - 200 feet $2.00/foot/day 200 - 225 feet $3. 00/foot/day 225 - 250 feet $4. 00/foot/day 250 - 275 feet $8. 00/foot/day Over 275 feet Negotiated, but at least $10/ft/day There is also hazard pay for entering tunnels and pipes, as follows: Entrance Distance Premium* 5-50 feet $2.30/foot/day 50 - 100 feet $4.60/foot/day 100 - 150 feet $9.15/foot/day These pay rates do not include equipment. Divers who furnish their own equipment negotiate a separate rental fee. A tender on the surface reportedly costs an additional $7.46 per hour plus $1.90 per hour in fringe benefits. Industries Using Diver Services Two sources were used to determine which industries are users of diver serv- ices : the commercial diving firms which were conducted and the other firms sampled in the procedure to locate previously uncounted divers. Very few commercial diving firms keep, or will release, quantitative information on their major customers and very few customers keep careful track of their diver utilization. Thus, typical responses would be "our business is mostly oil, with some construction, and a little salvage every so often" or "we use divers a couple of days at a time, a couple of times a year." Attempts were made to have respondents attach percentages to terms such as "mostly" or to state "we used a diver twice last year for one day one time and three days the other." An attempt was made to develop weighted averages within each region, and then a weighted average nationally. Because of the poor quality of the source information, the estimates should be considered very "rough." For the analysis, users were classified as follows: • Petroleum and Natural Gas - including support of drilling, performing undersea connections, pipeline installations and jetting, and platform and pipeline inspection. • Construction - including work on bridge and structure foundations, cofferdams and water intakes and the performance of periodic repairs and inspections. • Salvage and Ship Repairs - including the salvage of ships and other lost equipment and the performance of hull and machinery cleaning repairs, and inspections. As of January 14, 1974. o Other - such as diving instruction; cable laying; underwater TV and photography; metal detection; demolition and wrecking; collec- tion of sponges, abalones, and king clams; and research and develop- ment. Seven of the ten largest firms (based on full-time payroll employment) and the firms hiring large number of free-lance/part-time divers, reported that most of their work was in support of the petroleum industry. The four which cited percentages gave them as ranging from 80% to 100%. A reply of "mostly oil" was acknowledged by respondents to mean at least three quarters. Six of the seven firms doing "mostly oil" work are headquartered in the Gulf of Mexico. The other firms in the list of ten largest reported that their work was distributed in various fields, including petroleum. One firm indicated its work was mainly in construction and minimally for the petroleum industry. It is also interesting to note that three of the seven firms supplying services to the petroleum industry provide substantial amounts (over 25%) of these at overseas locations. The other four firms supply overseas services occasionally. Three-quarters of the commercial diving firms in the New Orleans-Morgan City area supply their services primarily to the petroleum industry; the remaining quarter reported no petroleum work. These latter firms service the con- struction industry and the salvage industry, approximately equally. Of the firms servicing the petroleum industry, approximately two-thirds (representing but 1/4 of the offshore oil diver population) reported no overseas business. With the exception of Southern California, providing services for construction predominates in other areas, with there being substantial services used in salvage and ship repairs. It should be noted that the respondent often per- ceived that business data could be of use to competitors, hence information supplied for a study of this type tends to be general in nature. As a result, the data presented are considered a very broad approximation. Table 11 shows the Estimated Percentage of Commercial Diving Services Used by Industries }y Region. TABLE 11 Estimated Percentage of Commercial Diving Services Used by Industries East 'Jest Gulf of Great Lakes Weighted National Industry Petroleum and Natural Gas 20 Construction 37 Salvage and Ship Repair 31 Other 12 Coast Mexico i Inland Average 22 82 56 40 6 65 20 28 11 19 18 10 1 16 6 A recurring comment made was that the diver .had to be more than just a diver. Good mechanical aptitude, experience with tools, and experience on the equipment being used on were considered essential. In the vast majority of activities reported, surface breathing gas supplies are used to increase bottom time. The following are representative operations divers are expected to perform: Application of expoxy and other coatings Cable laying, inspection, and maintenance Demolition and wrecking Equipment installation (electrical and mechanical) Freeing fouled screws Hull inspection, cleaning, and maintenance Inspection, maintenance and repair of foundations and structures Inspection, maintenance and repair of intakes, outfalls, tunnels, and dams Installation of scientific sensors Installation of stern bearings Oceanographic and geological sampling and measurements Photographic and video tape surveys Pile driving Pipeline jetting, inspections, maintenance, and repairs Repairs to propeller shafts, propellers, and rudders Search and Salvage Ultrasonic measurements Welding, cutting, and burning Commercial Diver Training Ten organizations were identified where training in the industrial skills for commercial diving can be obtained; seven are training firms, two are institutions which award associate degrees and one is a prison. They are as follows: Coastal Diving Academy, New York, N.Y. Coastal School of Deep Sea Diving, Oakland, Calif. Commercial Divers Center, Wilmington, Calif. Divemasters, Inc., Madison, Wisconsin Divers Institute of Technology, Seattle, Wash. Divers Training Academy, Fort Pierce, Fla. Oceaneering International, Commercial Diver Training Division, Houston, TX Highline Community College, Seattle, Wash. Santa Barbara City College, Santa Barbara, Calif. California Institution for Men, Chino, Calif. TAD made contact with eight of these organizations. Their programs tend to stress such industrial skills as cutting and welding and the use of diving and support equipment. Some training in the marine sciences is common. SCUBA training is given, but primary emphasis is placed on surface supply systems. The use of chambers and mixed gas is also generally taught. There is usually considerably greater practice than classroom training (e.g. two-thirds practice, one-third classroom) . The duration of courses ranges from three months (private schools) to two years (associate degree institu- tions) . 23 Two large organizations reported training between one hundred and eighty and two hundred individuals each per year; four others approximately one hundred each per year. It appears that as many as eight hundred and fifty individuals (approximately) are trained in industrial diving skills each year by civil organizations. Of these, approximately 15% are in programs of associate degree granting institutions. In addition to the industrially oriented programs, nine associate degrees institutions prepare marine science technicians capable of using diving in support of their work. These programs will be discussed under "Scientific/ Educational Institutional Diving." Commercial Diving Expenditures Diving and diving equipment dollar value statistics are continually collected by the Federal Government under business data programs. These data are not maintained nor compiled separately, but are included in an "other" or "miscel- laneous" category. Diving firms were queried on their revenues resulting from diving activities, on costs, and on capital investments. The information supplied by them, however, is scant and is considered to be questionnable. Table 12 summarizes the information obtained from this survey. For this pur- pose, estimated personal expenditures were simply multiplied by the estimated number of divers. Divers were classified as follows for the estimate: "Full-Time Payroll, large firm" "Full-Time Payroll, small firm (including owner-diver firms)" "Intermittant , large firm" "Intermit tant, small firm and independent" Training expenses are estimated to average $1,100 per new individual trained per year. Using this and the prior estimate of eight hundred and fifty trainees per year, results in an estimated annual training expenditure of $935,000. TABLE 12 Estimated Annual Expenditures for Commercial Diving Estimated Number (N) Estimated Total Annual Charge For Scrvices/Jiver (C) Estimated Total Annual Expenditures (NxC) $M Est. Annual Expenditure For Equip. /Diver (E) Est. Total Annual Equip. (tixE) $M Full-Time Payroll, Large Firm 395 $32,500 29.1 $1,200 1.1 Full-Time Payroll, Small Firm 635 $27,500 17.5 $ 700 0.4 Intermittant, Large Firm 200 $25,000 5.0 $ 900 0.2 Intermittant, Small Firm & Iudependent 575 $20,000 11.5 $ 500 0.3 TOTAL 1805 63.1 2.0 24 SCIENTIFIC/EDUCATIONAL INSTITUTIONAL DIVERS Introduction A major element of the MUS&T Program is providing facility (submersible and undersea laboratory) support to marine scientists and engineers who use manned underwater activities. Individuals supported have come from govern- ment, industry, and "academia." A questionnaire was sent to one hundred and twenty-seven colleges, universities, associate degree institutions, and research consortia listed in the August, 1971, edition of the Oceanographer of the Navy's pamphlet, "University Circula in the Marine Sciences and Related Fields." From responses to the questionnaire or telephone inquiries made to key non-respondants, information was obtained from approximately eighty-three per cent of the total. For the analysis the following types of divers were defined: Support/Helper Divers - divers employed by the institution to support scientists, engineers, and students who dive or to install sensors or to take samples for scientists, engineers and students, or to service or maintain equipment or facilities operated by the institution. Faculty/Research Associate Divers - members of the faculty or staff engaged in research and/or teaching (except teaching diving) who use diving skills in support of their activities. Scientific/Technical Student Divers - graduate and junior and senior year undergraduate students (of other than diving) who use diving skills in support of their educational or research programs. Marine Science Divers - students of associate degree institutions who are enrolled in a marine science technical program in which diving skills are a major factor. Students of commercial diving (industrially used skills) were counted earlier and have been reported in the section on commercial diving. In addition to information about numbers of divers, the following data were also sought: the average number of days per year diving conducted by individ- uals in each category; the geographic areas and bodies of water in which operations are conducted; the schools or departments within the institution which use divers; and whether an individual was designated as a "Diving Officer" (or similar title) , who supervises diving. Colleges and University Divers Of the one hundred colleges and universities contacted, using questionnaires or the telephone, information was obtained from eighty-seven. Of the eighty- seven, only nine reported no diving activities. Table 13 shows the responses by geographic location. 25 TABLE 13 Responses from Colleges and Universities by Geographic Area Response East Coast West Coast Gulf of Mexico Great Lakes & Inland Total Reported Divers 29 23 16 10 78 Reported No Divers 5 2 2 9 Did Not Respond 10 3 13 Total 44 25 21 10 100 Of the institutions reporting diving activities, thirty-two reported that ten tc forty-nine members of the professional staff and students dive, another eight reported fifty to ninety-nine; and five reported one hundred or more. Insti- tutions reporting at least one hundred in alphabetical order are: University of California (3erkley) University of Hawaii University of Miami Scripps Institute of Oceanography University of Washington Institutions reporting fifty to ninety-nine, in alphabetical order, are: University of California (Davis) Florida Atlantic University Long Island University (all campuses combined) University of Michigan Texas A&M United States Naval Academy Virginia Institute of Marine Science Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Because there were a significant number of non-respondents in the East Coast and Gulf of Mexico regions, population estimates were made for non- respondents in these regions. The following assumptions were made: - the non-respondents are those programs involving less than ten staff members and students; the same proportion of non-respondents would have divers as the insti- tutions in the region which responded to the questionnaire; - the non-respondents would have the same average numbers of professional staff members and students as other institutions in the region with less than ten professional staff and students who use diving. 26 For the East Coast, ten institutions did not respond. Of thirty- fj3ur institutions responding to the questionnaire, twenty-nine reported divers. It is estimated eight of the non-respondents would have divers. It was also computed that institutions with less than 10 divers averaged 2.3 professional staff members and 2.2 students who used diving. These were multiplied by the estimated non-respondents with divers to obtain an esti- mate of eighteen staff members and seventeen students. A similar procedure was followed for the Gulf of Mexico region. Table 14 summarizes the results of the questionnaires, the telephone inquiries, and the estimates of divers at colleges and universities. TABLE 14 East Coast West Coast Gulf of Mexico Great Lakes & Inland Total 195 195 160 45 595 355 645 285 75 1360 15 35 15 _0 65 565 875 460 120 2020 College and University Divers by Geographic Area Type Faculty and Research Associates 195 Students Support/Helper Divers Total Tabulations were also made which show by region the characteristics of the diving programs at colleges and universities. These are summarized in Table 15, TABLE 15 Characteristics of College and University Diving Programs by Geographic Area East West Gulf of Great Lakes Coast Coast Mexico & Inland Total Number With Diving Activities 29 23 16 10 77 Number With 10 or More Divers 15 17 11 2 45 dumber With 10 or More With 10 14 10 1 35 Diving Officer Number With Less Than 10 With 3 2 1 1 7 Diving Officer Number Using Waters In or Off 9 16 5 1 31 Home State Only Number Using Foreign Waters 8 5 5 5 23 27 College and University Departments Using Diving Information was requested about the departments or schools within the institutions which use diving. This information was obtained from all but about 15% of the institutions. Because the questionnaire did not provide standard descriptions, a wide range of responses were received. For instance, some respondents used such terms as "biology" broadly, while other differentiated between "biology" and "zoology." The term "biology" was used by nearly half of the respondents, the term "geology" by nearly one-third, "geosciences" and "zoology" by roughly 10% each and roughly one-fifth states "marine sciences." To permit comparisions, a set of "stan- dard" descriptions was developed after the fact, as follows: Biosciences - biological sciences, biology, zoology, genetics, and related fields dealing with living aquatic organisms. Geosciences - earth sciences, geology, geophysics, and related fields. Marine Sciences and Oceanography - interdisciplinary programs that include elements of biosciences, geosciences, physical oceanography, water chemistry, and resource programs. Diving Physiology and Medicine - diver physiology, diving medicine, and diver communications. Engineering - ocean, marine, civil, chemical and related fields of engineering. Other - physics, archeology, etc. Of the sixty-five institutions reporting, twenty-six institutions indicated that only one department or school used divers. For twelve, this department was "Marine Science and Oceanography" and for eleven "Biosciences." The following are the number of times each "department" was indicated-^: Biosciences - 43 Geosciences - 30 Marine Science/Oceans - 27 Diving Phy. /Medicine - 5 Engineering - 10 Other - 4 College and University Diver Training The questionnaires and telephone calls did not ask what type of training was required before an individual could use diving as part of a program at the institution. However, some information on training requirements was furnished by respondents. While some institutions with small numbers of individuals using diving do not impose minimum training requirements, it 3 Since a college or university could indicate more than one "department," these are not additive. 28 appears that most institutions require at least the equivalent of certi- fication by one of the national recreational diver training organizations. The divers at institutions obtain this training under one of the following types of programs: a. Independent courses offered by a national recreational diver training organization (on or off campus) b. Courses offered through the Physical Education Department by an instructor affiliated with a national recreational diver training organization which yields both institution and nationally recognized certification. c. Independent diving courses offered through the Physical Education Department. d. A course offered through a campus diving club which is taught by an instructor affiliated with a national recreational diver training organization and which yields both institution and nationally recognized certification. Programs offering both institutional and nationally recognized certification seem most common. The reason may be that nationally recognized certifications permit students to continue diving in the course of their work after they leave the institution. Institutions with large programs often superimpose additional training requirements, particularly for such specialized tech- niques as use of undersea facilities and saturation diving. It should be noted that the student is fundamentally a biologist, geologist, etc. and that diving is only a tool, not the primary course of study. College and University Expenditures on Diving When diving is an essential element of a course of study or in a research project, "expenditures" can be estimated either as the total cost of the course or research or only in terms of the direct cost of the diving itself. For instance, a $100,000 research effort composed of salaries, laboratory efforts, computer time, surface based data collection, data analysis, publi- cation and $10,000 of diving costs for data collection, could be considered as a diving "expenditure" of $100,000 if the diving were absolutely essen- tial for completing the research, or only a $10,000 "expenditure." For this analysis, the latter interpretation was adopted. The questionnaire asked for the average number of days on which diving operations were conducted by the "average individual" for each type of diver. The interpretations and responses were quite variable. An overview of the responses shows that a rough "average" nationwide is in the range of fifteen to twenty-five days of diving per individual per year. The direct cost of the diving itself lies between $20 and $25 per day. Using the estimated number of divers, the approximate expenditure each year is $900,000. Various Federal programs in marine sciences and engineering 29 are the source of the research funds which support projects involving diving. It is estimated that approximately $600,000 per year is spent by NOAA and others to support operations involving the use of divers. Thus, expenditures total approximately $1.5 million per year. If it is assumed that the institution replaces equipment for the professional staff and that the average annual cost is $200 per staff member, there is an additional expenditure of approximately $109,000. Specialized equipment used by students may average another $25 per student per year, for an expenditure of approximately $25,000. Associate Degree Institution Diving Fourteen of nineteen institutions which award associate two-year degrees in marine technology responded, of which ten indicated diving activity. Two of these, Highline Community College and Santa Barbara City College, indicated only commercial diving programs and were reported in the section, "Commercial Diver Training." In identifying divers at associate degree awarding institutions, an attempt was made to distinguish between faculty and students who use diving inci- dentally to their primary purposes and those engaged in programs where diving skills are a major factor, such as marine science diving. For eight institutions, a total of sixteen faculty members and one hundred and fifty-five students were reported in the first category and a total of five faculty and forty-five students in the latter. Use of seventeen support/ helper divers was also reported. (Geographic distribution is combined with research consortia information in Table 16). Diving is usually conducted in local waters. Five of eight institutions have a Diving Officer. Students generally take an initial diving course as part of Physical Education and then either use diving to support their studies or may take (in a few cases) advanced diving courses. Certification by a national recreational diver training organization is common. Research Consortia Diving Seven of nine listed research consortia responded, of these, six reported diving activities. A total of six members of the professional staff and forty-one students reportedly used diving, with a total of three support/ helper divers. The reporting consortia are composed of colleges and uni- versities in a geographic area and are staffed substantially by university personnel. Hence, the number of individuals and fields associated with the consortium as an institution is small. The geographic distribution for research consortia divers and associate degree institution divers is sum- marized in Table 16. 30 TABLE 16 Divers at Associate Degree Awarding Institutions and Research Consortia by Geographic Area East Coast West Coast Gulf of Ilexico Great Lakes & Inland Total Professional Staff 15 15 10 :> 45 Students 30 170 15 15 250 Support/Helpers 15 5 5 — 25 Total 30 190 30 20 320 31 NON-MILITARY GOVERNMENTAL DIVING Introduction Initially it was expected that the analysis would reveal two types "of divers, those whose duties were primarily diving (such as ship repairs and the like) and those who use diving as a tool to support their primary vocation (e.g., geology, fisheries, engineering, etc.). It became apparent that this differentiation is not workable because diving, qualitatively, is seldomly a sole duty and information is not maintained by agencies in such a manner to make this dif ferentation. Categorizations within the field of diving were made to facilitate data acquisition and analysis. At a Federal level, only a limited number of agencies and activities have marine science and engineering missions. Neither the Civil Service Commission nor any other agency was found to maintain a central source of information on diving. The MUS&T Program however had completed an assessment of Federally sponsored use of manned undersea facilities for the Interagency Committee on Marine Science and Engineering (ICMSE) , which provided a good starting point for a canvass of Federal agencies using diving. A distinction was made between "State and Local" diving and diving by police and fire departments primarily because of the differences in purposes and the availability of information. Federal Agency Data Collectio n Twelve Federal agencies have marine science and engineering missions and are members of ICMSE, these include two Department of Defense activities (the U.S. Navy and Army Corps of Engineers), and the Coast Guard. The Corps of Engineers was included in the assessment of non-military diving since its diving is performed in conjunction with civil works programs. The Coast Guard reports to the Secretary of Transportation and was also included in the following list of ICMSE agencies (Intergovernmental Committee on Marine S_cience and Engineering) . Army Corps of Engineers, Civil Works Directorate (COE/CW) Department of Commerce (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration [NOAA] and Maritime Administration [MARAD]) Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) Department of the Interior (Geological Survey [USGS], Bureau of Sport Fisheries and Wildlife [BSFW] , Bureau of Mines [BuMines], Bureau of Land Management [BLM] , National Park Service [NFS], and Bureau of Outdoor Recreation [BOR] , Bureau of Reclamation [BR] Department of State (State) Department of Transportation (U.S. Coast Guard) [USCG] Atomic Energy Commission (AEC) Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA) National Science Foundation (NSF) Smithsonian Institution (SI) 32 No divers were reported by MARAD, BuMines , BLM, BOR, State, AEC, NASA, and NSF. It should be noted that the inquiry concerned diving by employees of the agency, not the use of diving. For instance, AEC sponsors work which involves diving, but such diving is performed by contractors or grantees. The same is true for NSF. The NASA uses Navy and contractor divers. Hence, a report of "no divers" does not necessarily imply "no diving" in support of an agency's mission. Contacts with an agency occasionally provided a lead to a "non-marine science and engineering" activity which used divers. Federal law en- forcement agencies, such as the Bureau of Customs, Border Patrol, and Federal Bureau of Investigation were also contacted. These agencies depend on either Navy or Coast Guard divers when diving is required. Federal Agency Divers Agencies vary with regard to the degree to which information on diving is centralized. NOAA has an agency-wide coordinator and regional coordinators. Each NOAA diver receives a letter authorizing he or she to dive on "official business." The Office of the Chief Engineer, Corps of Engineers, annually collects statistics on Corps-wide diving. The Coast Guard keeps track of diver "billets." For EPA, it was necessary to survey each Regional Administrator and each Research Center. The number of divers reported by each agency by region are shown in Table 17. Because of the decentralization of statistics on diving and the number of agencies and activities involved, a small number of indi- viduals may have been missed but it is unlikely that an activity with a large number of personnel who dive was missed. It should be noted that individuals were recorded on the basis of the geographic location of their duty station, not where the diving is conducted. TABLE 17 Federal Agency Personnel Using Diving By Geographic Region Gulf of Great Lakes Coast Coast Mexico & Inland Total Department of Commerce, NOAA 63 97 53 2 215 Army Corps of Engineers 28 14 26 69 137 Environmental Protection Agency 21 16 15 14 66 Department of Transportation, USCG 13 34 9 8 64 Department of the Interior 24 6 30 60 Smithsonnian Institution 36 8 44 TOTAL 161 185 117 123 586 33 Types of Diving for Federal Agencies Concentrations of individuals certified to dive for NOAA are found in the National Ocean Survey (NOS) and National Marine Fisheries Service (NMFS) . The dives in NOS are, for the most part, officers in the uniformed NOAA Corps and their efforts are associated with ship operations and NOS's hydrographic and oceanographic surveys. In NOS, work includes doing field repairs, installing instrumentation, identifying obstructions located by two ships in wire-drag surveys of navigation areas, and the acquisition of scientific data. In NMFS, diving is associated primarily with research concerning fish, fishing equipment and ecology. Other NOAA divers are associated with the Environmental Research Laboratories and MUS&T Program. In the latter case, divers do engage in operational research missions, but mainly review and manage programs using manned undersea activities. For most NOAA personnel, diving is a support tool, not their principal function. Corps of Engineer (COE) divers are associated with Waterways Experimental Stations, Coastal Engineering Research Centers, in the following regions, Lower Mississippi Valley, North Atlantic, North Pacific, Ohio River, Pacific Ocean, South Atlantic, South Pacific, and South West. Those who dive are concerned with inspections and COE public works projects, such as shoreline and harbor protection, dams, and canals. In the COE, as in NOAA, diving is usually a support tool for personnel with other technical specialities. Coast Guard divers primarily perform hull inspections and minor underwater ship repair work and, to a lesser extent, bottom surveys, underwater search and salvage, research, aid-to-navigation inspections and pollution monitoring and control operations. Approximately half of the diving billets are aboard ship. In DOI , the USGS , BSFW, NPS, and BR diving by employees, was also reported to be a tool, not a speciality. At USGS, geologists use diving in the study of sediments and mineral resources. The BR has six teams composed of geologists and engineers which inspect dams and other public works in the western states. Biologists with the BSFW and NPS also use diving. Six of ten EPA regions and two of three National Environmental Research Laboratories report the use of diving. Approximately three-quarters of the personnel have technical specialities and use diving as a support tool, while the others are support personnel. Diving is used both in monitoring efforts and for research. Most diving for the Smithsonian is performed by individuals associated with cooperating institutions and foundations. However, some individuals associated with the Smithsonian itself dive in the course of their studies of living resources, ecology, and natural history. 34 Federal Agency Training The Coast Guard exclusively uses Navy diving schools, specifically the Navy Ship Salvage Diving Officer School, the Navy Diver Second Class School, and the Navy Scuba Diver School. Divers in other agencies receive training from a variety of sources. For instance, for Corps of Engineers divers, approximately fourteen per cent had Navy training, nine per cent commercial diving school training, fifty-one per cent recreational diving training, and twenty-six per cent had no formal training. At NOAA, employees who dive must have at least the equivalent of recreational diver training, a physical exam, and generally at least fifteen open- water dives before fully participating in operational dives. Additional requirements are imposed for saturation diving and the use of closed circuit systems. Requirements are judged on a case by case basis by; a regional diving coordinator. NOAA Regional Diving Coordinators are frequently called upon to assist other agencies in the certification of their divers. The divers are certified by their own agency, not NOAA. The EPA and BLM have requested and received such assistance from NOAA. Divers remain certified primarily through regular diving. Continued training, through regular meetings and seminars, is limited. State and Local Data Collection As previously noted, police and fire department diving will be discussed separately. To develop an estimate of divers associated with state and city agencies, the NBS contacted agencies of twenty-five states and in twenty-one major cities and counties in coastal and Great Lakes regions. Three problems were encountered, the first being that diving is seldom an exclusive duty, but rather is a skill used by certain employees with technical backgrounds to accomplish elements of their work, Secondly, the use of diving is generally handled less formally than in Federal agencies, with a resultant lack of centralized compilation of operating records. In addition, knowledge of the use of diving within agencies is limited. Three basic types of agencies and departments which use diving services, fere identifed: 1. Law enforcement agencies or departments. 2. Conservation, environmental protection, civil works or park agencies or departments . 3. Fishery, wildlife, or game and related enforcement agencies and departments. 35 Other agencies or departments reported using divers include: public health, water resources, dam safety, and education. State and Local Divers It was learned that cities, counties, port authorities, and other local jurisdictions obtain required diver services either through contracting or from the local police or fire department. The work generally consists of inspection and minor repair of public facilities. Large jobs are almost always contracted. Table 18 provides the information reported to TAD by organizations in twenty-five states. All contacts reported the use of diving services, and seventeen had employees who performed diving. Nine of the seventeen reported over ten employees who dive. It is interesting to note that twenty states, including twelve of those with employees in other departments who dive, contract their highway department diving work. Alaska, Georgia, Hawaii, New York, Rhode Island, South Carolina, and Virginia were not contacted nor were eighteen non-coastal states. Assuming that Alaska, Hawaii, New York, and Rhode Island have on the average at least the number (seventeen employees) who on the average dive in the New England states, and that Georgia, South Carolina, and Virginia average the same number (seven) as the other Middle Atlantic States, and that uncontacted inland states average two employees, the following regional distribution can be computed: East Coast 130 West Coast 110 Gulf of Mexico 45 Great Lakes and Inland 50 TOTAL 335 It is believed that a thorough canvass would reveal a total number of divers of at least three hundred, and unlikely more than five hundred. State and Local Training Of those states reporting training, only Maryland relies exclusively on Navy diving schools. The remainder have their own programs (some using ex-Navy divers as instructors) or require national recreational diver training organization certifications. States with ten or more diving employees generally conduct training sessions on a regular basis (semi- annually, quarterly, or monthly). This is also done by some states with fewer divers. 36 0) cu w a *j m >> J3 TJ CU u V4 00 a. rH cu Pi cu fH CU rfl > CO •H H P CO CU CU o I Total Reported O n m O tH CM O rH m r-l vO m CM u CU ,3 4-1 O 1 1 1 ' O 1 O O O O ■H CM Cons. & Parks 1 • 1 1 1 O O O O CM CO CM Fish 6. Game 1 1 1 CO ' m 1 CM r-l CM O rH m tH CO CO CO rH High- way CJ O c_? CJ m CJ CJ CJ CJ rH cu 4J eO 4J r/2 «0 4-1 O CO CU e a •H •rl O. Q. •H CO CO •H CO CO •H 3 CO CO M .O CU ■55 CU u •H rj 'co & B cu > cu CO u cu •-3 CU 53 co 1 rH O u CO CJ 43 4J r4 O 53 O •rj O c 5 (0 •H S CO > iH > CO a cu &4 CO tO CU H c 4-1 at c •H Jc CO Is •H CO s CO ;H $ O H Total Reported -* O 00 rH •* CN O CO 0\ CM 00 O rH r-» u CU JG 4J O O 1 iH O CN O 1 1 O r* O O Cons. & Parks CJ 1 co CO O 1 1 O CM 00 O m Fish & Game CJ 1 CM CM sr CN O CM 1 1 CO CM O rH CM High- way ■«* O rH co cj <* CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ CJ cu 4J « 4J CO (8 6 CO CO 1 * CO CO CO a 4 CO •H c r4 O y-i •H ■a 4-1 •H 4-» CJ cu ti CJ cu M CO 3 CO rH CU Q «0 TJ •H U O rH b CO •rl O a •H rH H r-l cfl a CO •H d CO a CO •H CO i-l 3 O ►J cu * ■a CO iH > U | CO 4-1 u cu CO CJ CO CO CO 1 cs CO « •H r* CJ •H TJ CU 4J CJ CO >-i 4-> c O CJ 4J o 55 4J O O CO r-l 4J C O CJ CJ 37 Police Department Diving Police and fire departments personnel who dive are called upon to perform the following duties: • Body recovery • Evidence recovery • Motor vehicle recovery • Maintenance of small craft • Support of other state and local agencies and departments Diving is generally conducted on a voluntary basis in addition to regular dutieso NBS contacted 1,392 out of 12,842 (11%) law enforcement jurisdictions in a survey for the Department of Justice's Law Enforcement Assistance Administra- tion (LEAA). The resultant information was used for estimates of the diving population supplemented with additional information after contacts with organizations such as the International Association of Chiefs of Police and National Sheriffs' Association failed to yield the desired quantitative data. One of the questions in the NBS survey specifically addressed the performance of underwater recovery operations. NBS wrote a computer program to count the number of positive responses and, from these, to project the number and types of jurisdictions which appear to perform such operations. The LEAA survey used the ten standard Federal regions, shown in Figure 2. Within each region, the police jurisdictions were identified as: state, county, one of the "fifty largest cities" in the United States, city with a one-to-nine-man police force, ten-to-forty-nine-man police force, fifty or more-man police force, and townships. The overall sample design, was as follows: Type of Jurisdiction State County "50 Largest Cities" City (1-9) City (10-49) City (50 or more) Township Number of Number Sent Per Cent Sent Jurisdictions Questionnaire Questionnaire 56 56 100 3137 300 9.6 50 50 100 5486 297 5.4 1985 300 15.1 554 269 48.6 1574 120 7.6 12342 1,392 10.8 A maximum sample size for each type of jurisdiction within each region (with the exception of state police and the "fifty largest cities") was established, with random sampling. In four jurisdiction-region combinations, there were less than thirty jurisdictions of a given type providing 100% coverage. 38 For only four jurisdiction-region combinations was the sample less than ten per cent, with most of these being a two per cent sample. The return rate was approximately eighty-four per cent for the state police depart- ments, ninety per cent for the "fifty largest cities," and eighty - three per cent for the other types of jurisdictions. The returns were usually high, which is indicative of strong cooperation. From the returns, the number of each type of jurisdiction in each region using diving was computed. The following departments and organizations were contacted to estimate the average number of divers in a department engaging in diving activity: International Association of Police National Sheriffs' Association Calevares (CA) County Sheriff's Office Atlantic City (NJ) Police Department Chicago (IL) Police Department Cleveland (OH) Police Department Dade County (FA) Marine Patrol Detroit (MI) Police Department Deluth (NM) Police Department Florida State Police Houston (TX) Police Department Los Angeles (CA) Police Department Maryland State Police Michigan Sheriff's Association Michigan State Police Milwaukee (WI) Police Department Minneapolis (MN) Police Department Nassau County (NY) Police Department New Orleans (LA) Police Department New York Police Department New York State Police Philadelphia (PA) Police Department Ramsey County (MI) Sheriffs' Office St. Paul (MI) Police Department San Francisco (CA) Police Department San Diego (CA) Police Department Seattle (WA) Police Department Suffolk County (NY) Police Department Public Technology, Inc. Each organization was asked not only about its own jurisdiction, but also about any others in the area or region with which they were familiar. For those departments having a diving activity, the following are the (approxi- mate) average numbers of officers who dive: 40 Type of Jurisdiction State County City (1-9 Officers) City (10-49 Officers) City (50 or more Officers) 50 Largest Cities Townships of Divers 20 5 2 4 6 10 2 While these numbers are estimates, they are most probably conservative. The results for each region based the sampling and averages are shown in Table 19, Table 19 Estimated Number of Policemen Who Use Diving by Region* ,1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 TOTAL Total No. in Region Responding 116 129 128 113 136 105 100 103 117 95 1142 Total No. in Region Reporting Divine 20 26 16 15 33 14 14 19 26 34 217 Implied No. in Region with Divine 101 160 35 170 627 221 157 167 100 133 1871 Implied No. Divers 350 590 270 780 2400 1000 790 800 480 600 8060 * Region numbers correspond to those shown in Figure 2. The total number of divers estimated in Table 19 (i.e. 8060) has been allocated to geographic areas, in rough proportion to state populations, and in accord with significant bodies of waters in or adjacent to the states. This crude process yielded the following result for police department divers: East Coast 1260 West Coast 1670 Gulf of Mexico 900 Great Lakes and Inland 5230 TOTAL 8060 It is believed that the actual number is most likely at least as large as 6500 and not more than 9700. Fire Department Diving In the course of exploring diving statistics for fire departments, TAD con- tacted a variety of organizations, such as the International Association of Fire Fighters, National Fire Protection Association, and University of Maryland Fire Safety Department. As with police officers and others reported on earlier, firefighters who are assigned normal duties may occasionally be 41 called upon to dive. In general, firefighters who dive tend to be associated with rescue squads, life saving, maintenance and repair of fireboats, motor vehicle recovery and support of the police department or other local agen- cies. Divers generally use Scuba to depths not exceeding sixty feet. NBS questions regarding fire department diving were also addressed to police departments. The following fire departments were contacted: Anne Arundel County (MD) Fire Department Boston (MA) Fire Department Chicago (IL) Fire Department Howard County (MD) Fire Department Los Angeles County (CA) Fire Department Mulwaukee (WI) Fire Department New York (NY) Fire Department Prince Georges County (MD) Fire Department The number of firefighters who use diving can only be estimated in the absence of broad sample data (such as was available through the LEAA efforts). Such estimates are further complicated because of the number of volunteer companies and unaffiliated volunteers. The consensus of the various orga- nizations, police departments, and fire departments contacted is that there are about one-hundred firefighters who dive per state. Assuming that this "average" applies to all states, the following regional estimates are made: East 1300 West Coast 500 Gulf of Mexico 500 Great Lakes and Inland 2700 TOTAL 5000 Police and Fire Department Training Police officers and firefighters obtain diving training through the Navy, commercial diving schools, and recreational diver training organizations. Most personnel volunteer for diving as an additional duty; hence, they tend to be recreational divers and were initially trained as such. Large departments customarily hold periodic training sessions or seminars for personnel who dive. Such sessions only encompass a total of approximately 1,000 police officers associated with state police and the fifty largest cities which use diving, and perhaps 25-50% of the approximately 5200 police officers associated with counties using diving. Similar ratios may be assumed for fire departments. Non-Military Governmental Diving Expenditures Diving by non-military governmental personnel is conducted on an intermittent, rather than a regular basis. An individual might not dive for a period of perhaps six months, but then dive nearly every day for two or three weeks. This can be attributed to diving being a tool rather than a vocation among 42 such individuals. Thus, all contacts were hard pressed to cite an average number of diving days per year per individual. As in the case of scientific/ educational institutional diving, it was decided to estimate the direct expenditures on diving rather than attempt to include a dollar value for the program for which the diving is conducted. Information furnished by Federal agencies and state and local agencies (excluding police and fire departments) , suggests that the average individual who dives does so on fifteen to twenty-five days per year. Using a cost figure of $25 per day per individual, yields an estimated expenditure of $460,000. To this must be added approximately $600,000 per year NOAA contri- butes to facilities which support NOAA and other Federal divers. Thus, con- servatively, direct annual expenditures in these categories for diving are approximately $1.1 million. Assuming that new and replacement equipment is purchased annually as employees commence diving and equipment wears out, using a cost figure of $200 per year per employee yields an estimated expen- diture of another $187,000. A consensus among police and firefighter information sources was that there was an average of approximately ten dive-days per individual per year. Using the $25 per dive cost figure yields an estimated annual expenditure of $3.3 million. If a similar assumption on equipment replacement is made for police and fire departments as for other government agencies, there is an estimated $2.6 million in expenditures for this purpose. 43 RECREATIONAL DIVING Introduction In diving, as in many sports, there are a large number of persons with skills necessary for participation, but a lower number who participate regularly. Training for recreational diving can be obtained from a number of sources, including national recreational diver training organizations, government organizations, military services, independent clubs and organizations, or from a friend. There is a tendency for more and more individuals to obtain training from a nationally recognized source, possibly because more dive shops are requesting evidence of such certification prior to providing air. There is a problem in identifying the total number of individuals with diving skills who "dive regularly" or who are "active." For this analysis, it was easier to define a "dropout:" an individual who completed training and essentially stopped diving after the novelty wore off. Subtracting "dropouts" from those with diving skills yields "individuals practicing the sport." No definitive census of recreational divers has ever been taken. The April, 1970, Marine Science Affairs , the Annual Report of the President to the Congress on marine resources and engineering development, contained estimates of 1.5 million and 2.0 million active Scuba divers (pages 106 and 107). For this analysis, two sources were used: the major recreational diver training organizations and the Skin Diver Magazine reader survey of 1972. Recreational Diver Training Organizations The Skin Diver survey showed that 86.9 per cent of the sampled readers with formal training were trained by one (or more) of five major organizations, namely : Young Man's Christian Association (YMCA) National Association of Underwater Instructors (NAUI) Professional Association of Diving Instructors (PADI) National Association of Skin Diving Schools (NASDS) Los Angeles County (LA Co.) Telephone contacts were made with each of these organizations to obtain infor- mation on the number of individuals trained during 1972, 1971, and in 1970 and earlier. Each was also asked about dropout rates and the geographic distribution of instructors and students. Table 20 summarizes the reported training and provides the percentage of the total reported by each of the five, as well as the percentage of Skin Diver readers who reported training by the organization. 4 "1972 Skin Diver Reader Survey," Peterson Publishing Co., 16 pp, 44 Table 20 Training Reported by Major Recreational Training Organizations and Training Reported by Skin Diver Readers 5 (In Tho usands) 1970 and % Trained % of Organization Organization Before 1971 1972 Total b> ' Each Skin Diver Readers Total ■* Frac- tion of Skin Diver Readers YMCA 172 12 42 226 20.7 29.4 769 NAUI 212 54 67 333 30.4 30.0 1110 PADI 47 37 52 136 12.4 9.9 1374 NASDS 133 52 55 240 21.9 12.2 1967 LA Co. 140 10 10 160 14.6 5.4 2963 TOTALS 704 165 226 1,095 100.0 86.9 - Computation of Individuals with Diving Skills If it is assumed that the sample drawn from the readership of Skin Diver Magazine is representative of the persons with diving skills in general, then the total trained population can be estimated by dividing the total number trained by a given organization by the fraction of Skin Diver readers trained by that orga- nization. Using this technique for the organizations listed yields five esti- mates of the population; ranging from nearly 0.8 million to nearly 3.0 million. These can then be weighted according to the contribution of the individual orga- nization to the combined total, yielding a single estimate of the trained popula- tion of approximately 1.5 million. This must be added an estimate of the population without formal training. In mathematical terms, this rather crude estimation process is as follows: Total Population = (1 + » £m w i Where: T, = total number of individuals trained by training organization "i" Pj = percentage of Skin Diver readers trained by training organization tij it W. = percentage of total training reported for the analysis by training organization "i" I = ratio of untrained to trained individuals reported by Skin Diver readers 5 (17.3/82.7) Ibid, page 44 45 The foregoing computation leads to an estimate of 1,890,000 individuals with diving skills. More than likely there are individuals trained by more than one of the listed organizations. However, this effect is believed to be minimal in that only major, national organizations were considered in the procedure. Multiple counting would have been more serious if independent operations had also been used. The actual population is believed to be not less than 1.5 million nor more than 2.1 million. Recreational Diving Dropouts A dropout diver is one who stops diving soon after completing training. Because of this, the number of persons "practicing the sport" is somewhat less than the number with skills. The recreational diver training organizations contacted estimate that the "dropout" rate lies somewhere between 22% and 95%. However, they indicate that this rate is decreasing substantially. Two explanations are offered, both associated with changes in training programs. Courses have been lengthened and made more difficult. Thus, an individual has to have a greater commitment than in the past to complete training and also has invested more time and effort. Secondly, a greater number of open water dives, partic- ularly in the ocean, during training builds confidence and tends to get indi- viduals "hooked." The individual estimates of dropout rate by the training organizations con- tacted were weighted in their fraction of the total training reported. This results in an estimate of 74.9% for the dropout rate. Stated conversely, about 25% of those trained actually practice the sport. Thus, of 1,890,000 trained, about 474,000 actually practice the sport. Geographic Distribution Training organizations were also queried about the geographic distribution of their instructors and trainees. It was generally agreed that California has the greatest number of divers and a relatively distant second was Florida. Other states with significant numbers of divers were identified as follows (in alphabetical order) : Hawaii, Massachusetts, New York, Texas and Washington. Based on percentages furnished by the training organizations, a rough alloca- tion of the "individuals with diving skills" and of "individuals practicing the sport" was made to the four regions used throughout this analysis. Data being developed (such as NAUI's planned analysis of instructors and trained individuals by zip code) should permit better analyses to be made in the future. Table 21 give the estimates on a regional basis. Table 21 Estimated Recreational Divers By geographic Area Great East West Gulf of Lakes Coast Coast Mexico & Inland Foreign Total Individuals With Diving Skills 300,000 790,000 480,000 290,000 30,000 1,890,000 Individuals Practicing the Sport 75,000 198,000 120,000 73,000 8,000 474,000 46 Expenditures on Recreational Diving A wealth of information on equipment and expenditures was collected by Skin Diver 's reader survey. It was estimated that their primary readers spent over $44.5 million dollars on diving trips in a twelve month period. If it is assumed that the estimated 474,000 persons dive at least once per month over a year or at least twelve days per year (Skin Diver readers reported diving on an average of 24.7 days ) and that each spends $25 per day on direct diving expenses, the minimum expenditure would be $142.2 million. Adding the cost of travel, lodging, and meals, expenditures on diving and related activities are probably well in excess of $186.7 million. To direct expenditures must also be added equipment purchases. There are perhaps five basic types of purchases: initial equipment (such as fins, mask, snorkel, and life vest; basic equipment such as a weight belt, knife, pressure gauges, watch, and dive gear bag); advanced equipment (such as a wet suit, tanks, and regulator); accessories (such as underwater lights, cameras, underwater scooters, compressors) and replacement equipment. The standard industrial codes used by the Government for industrial statistics do not permit the differentiation of diving equipment information, hence a combination of assumptions, estimates, and Skin Diver survey information has been adopted. Approximately 226,000 individuals were trained during 1972 by the recreational diver training organizations contacted. Applying the percentages of individ- uals trained by these organizations and those not trained by them as derived from the Skin Diver survey yields, an estimated annual training level of approximately 260,000. If each individual purchases entry level equipment (which is likely because of greater emphasis on open water dives during training), consisting of a mask, snorkel, fins, and life vest at an approxi- mate cost of $50, such expenditures would total $13 million. If forty per cent go further, at least temporarily, they would probably spend an addi- tional $400 or so on basic and advanced equipment, resulting in an additional annual expenditure of $41.6 million. Diving Safety The University of Rhode Island (URI) has conducted studies of underwater fatalities at a modest level since 1970 and has been sponsored since 1972 for data collection by a cooperative effort of NOAA, the Coast Guard, and the Navy. The URI study determined that in calendar year 1971 there were one hundred and sixteen fatalities which involved diving with compressed gas (mostly Scuba). The studies determined that in calendar year 1972 there were one hundred and twenty fatalities involving diving if three "special nature" fatalities are excluded. (These "special nature" fatalities included a diving team which perished while attempting to set a depth record using air and an individual killed by an exploding compressed air cylinder in a 6 Ibid, page 3 „ 47 compressor room. ) Ideally to measure fatality rates and the improvement or decline of safety, a measure such as fatalities per million dive-hours or something similar should be used. At worst, a measure such as fatali- ties per total individuals involved could be used; although this is a weak measure since it does not include a measure of activity or differing hazards in different areas or types of diving. Unfortunately, statistics on diving are inadequate to permit accurate assessments of safety. There is an indication that diving is becoming safer. For instance, if fatality rates are computed for 1971 and 1972 using estimates for each year of "Individuals Practicing the Sport," there is a decrease in the rate of over fifteen per cent. A decrease in the rate of approximately one-third can be shown if the base number divisor in rate computation is taken as the sum of the "Individuals Practicing the Sport" for the prior year and the total trained in the current year (i.e., in computing the rate of 1972, the one hundred and twenty fatalities would be divided by the sum of the computed "Individuals Practicing the Sport" for 1971 plus the individuals trained during 1972). » U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1975-210-959/5 48 P T,^.«^rv VBRAR , ES «ood>Wf{^'»