TABLE 20. - VESSEL'S HO:iE PORT 

 RELTiTED TO INSURAHCE COVERAGE AND LOSS EXPERIENCE 

 OF HULL AND PROTECnON AMD INDEMNITY INSURANCE 



Percent e. ga ratio a^/ 



Hort« porta Insured -5 ^P . n\/ , i f^o/ 



_ vk #-!.%<* -tv^mi-y^Af^ Hull — * r .*? _L^»' 



by area . 



nonlnoured Hull- ? H^ 1- 



1- New Ent^land 



l.Eookland, Maine 0.10 



2. Portlimd, Maine O.llO 



5. Glouceetor, MaBsachusetts U.55 



U- Boston, Massachusetts 0.60 



5. New Bedford, Maseochusetts .^.62 



6- Plymouth, Maeaachusctts l^^O 



7. New London, Connecticut O.m 



II. Gulf ^'.raa 



l.Tainpa, Florida O.58 7-30 



2.BII0XI, MleaisGippi O.07 2.1j0 



5. New Orleanc, Louisiana O.55 O.6O 

 l+^brgan City, Louisiana 3.59 0.8.5 

 ^.GalvesLon, Texas 1.55 1'20 



6. Corpus Chrlstl, Texas I.56 0.90 

 7.Bram8vllle, Texas 25. 30 0.91 



III. Cal ifornia 



I.San Diego, California 2.59 1.19 1-50 



2, Los Angeles, California 1.1+5 0.88 O.Ol 



3. San Frftncieco, Califarnia 0.?5 l.'vU O.6O 

 U. Euro ka, California 0.18 0.0 2.3O 



^/Ratios v/ere obtained by dividing the percentage of nonlnaured and worst vedeelo 

 of Indicated characteristic luio tho poi'cen lu^e of Insured and best vessels, 

 respectively. 



—'For lull iisurance, beat vrcHC la include best active wood and active steel vessels; 

 worst vessels consist of worst active wood and lost wood vessels » 



£/No paid losses in Lhe GulT Area, 



Source : For ineured vh nonlnauvid dlchotoniy table A-20; for hull insurance table A-k6; 

 and for protection ,'ind indemnitry insuranca table A-67 in Appendix A. 



90 



