RedactedNarrative: On 8/6/16 at approximately 9:20pm, a boating incident occurred on lake wylie.  The incident occurred south of the buster boyd bridge in charlotte, nc.  Vessel 1 was owned and operated by subject.  Operator1's son and his girlfriend were on board the vessel at the time of the incident.  
  
  Vessel 2 had operator and  his girlfriend was on board the vessel at the time of the incident.  Both vessels were traveling northbound when vessel 1 overtook and struck vessel 2 causing personal injury and extensive vessel damage.
  
  Operator1 and his passengers on vessel 1 had been out boating on lake wylie for several hours prior to the incident.  They had been on the south carolina side of lake wylie looking at potential properties for purchase.  At one time, they stopped behind an island and swam.  Operator1 stated that he had consumed alcoholic beverages throughout his time on the lake that evening.  Once sunset came, operator1 turned on his required navigation lights.  The vessel was heading northbound or upstream when the incident occurred.
  
  Operator2 and his one passenger on vessel 2 had left their dock around dusk to go and look at a house that was under construction.  He stated that he remembers putting in the rear navigation light post and turning on his navigation lights prior to leaving the dock.  Operator2 stated that he and his girlfriend docked at the house that was under construction and got out to walk around the property.  He stated that he did not turn off the navigation lights while they walked around the property and could vividly remember looking down the hill to the dock and seeing his navigation lights on.  The two then got back on the vessel and began traveling northbound or upstream at idle speed.  Operator2 and occupant stated that they were sharing a bottle of red wine while they were out on the lake.  Operator2 was seated behind the steering wheel and  she was seated on the port or left side of the bow seating area facing the rear of the vessel at the time of the incident.
  
  Operator1 stated that he was operating his vessel at 3,000 rpm when the incident occurred.  He was standing up operating while his son was standing up beside him.  Girlfriend was on the back sun deck of the vessel.  Operator1 stated that he was operating at what he believed to be a safe speed and had his son assisting him in looking out for other vessel in the dark.  Neither of the two men saw the vessel operated by operator2 until after the collision.  They both stated that they never saw any navigation lights to alert them of another vessel in their path.  Operator1 did not have time to change course or speed prior to the collision.  Operator1's vessel struck vessel 2 on the starboard rear section.  Operator1's vessel then ramped vessel 2 before sliding off the starboard bow of the vessel.  Operator1's vessel came completely out of the water during the collision.  This was made apparent due to prop strike damage on the starboard gunnel on vessel 2.  The aluminum pole that held the rear navigation light of vessel 2 was sheered off during the collision.  All of the occupants of vessel 1 were thrown to the floor and uninjured.
  
  V2 occupant aboard vessel 2 was facing the rear of the vessel when she noticed another vessel approaching them rapidly from the rear.  She stated she remembers seeing a green light on the other vessel.  She told operator2 to look.  Operator2 looked over his right shoulder but had no time to react prior to impact.  Vessel one struck operator2 and threw him into the floor.  The impact caused numerous lacerations on operator2's back and right arm.  Operator2 also had an injury to the back of his head.  V2 occupant was uninjured.
  
  After the collision, operator1 operated vessel 1 in a circle to return to vessel 2.  They tied up to vessel 2 and v1 occupant boarded vessel 2 with permission to begin rendering first aid to operator2.  Operator1 dialed 911.  Cmpd lake patrol along with charlotte fire boat 3 were dispatched to the scene and arrived within about 20 mins of the incident.  A type ii pfd was placed on operator2 and he was transported to shore via fire boat 38, medic transported him to cmc steel creek for treatment.  V2 occupant accompanied him to the hospital.  Cmpd officers noticed an odor of an alcholic beverage coming from operator1's breath.  An officer from the uscg administered standardized field sobriety tests to him approximately 2 hours after the collision.  Preliminary breath test samples indicated a bac of .049.  Cmpd officers began taking written statements from others.  I then followed him as he operated his vessel back to his marina.  I took pictures of the damage to his vessel once it was placed on a lift.  I had vessel 2 towed by tow boat us to the cmpd lake patrol boat house where it was placed on a lift and locked down for the night.  I returned the next day with cmpd crime scene to take photos.  Officer tw prince from the ncwrc traveled to cmc steelcreek to take written statements from operator2 and v2 occupant.
  
  V1 had multiple areas of fiberglass damage on the keel and port side of the vessel.  First evidence of contact on v1 was appx four ft from the bow.  The most notable damage on v1 was the starboard windshield post from v2 was impaled in the port side gunnel.  V1 did not take on water from the collision.  V2 had the most significant damage.  The top and bottom sections of the hull were separated at the point of impact on the starboard side of the vessel.  The windshield was shattered and the frame was crushed.  
  
  On 8/7/16, i returned to the cmpd boathouse to begin examination of operator2's vessel. I had cmpd crime scene unit take photos to document the vessel damage.  The rear navigation light bulb was retrieved from its housing and siezed as evidence.  The bulb was taken to the cabarrus coso crime lab where detailed photos could be taken.  The bulb's glass housing was unbroken.  However, the filament was stretched out and broken.  This is indication that the filament was hot and on when it was subjected to the force that broke it.
  
  It appears that v1 operated by operator1 is at fault for failing to adjust his course and speed as the give way vessel in an overtaking situation.
  After presenting the results of the investigation to the meck co da, operator1 was charged with negligent operation of a vessel ncgs 75a-10(a).
  
  *************************end of report***************************