Anyone ever asked for this ?
d) The Coast Guard may exempt an applicant from meeting any individual knowledge, understanding, and proficiency required in Section A-II/1 of the STCW Code. These exemptions must be approved by the Coast Guard based upon vessel type. Under these circumstances, the credential may include a corresponding limitation.
Anyone ever asked for this ?
Play stupid games, win stupid prizes.
Unless you have a legitimate reason to attempt this, I would advise against anything that might cause your MMC to be printed with anything other than standard text.
It is very difficult to explain away something like this if they never call you for an interview because your ticket has some weird exclusion on it.
Is there something specific limiting you from fulfilling the requirements on your current vessel?
9 posts were split to a new topic: USCG National Maritime Center Bureaucracy
I currently have my OICNW for less than 500, two of our vessels are about 680 gt. The assessments are no problem, but those classes aren’t cheap and there are a lot of them. I’m on a ATB. I just read that clause and was wondering if I’d be able to NOT have to do some of the classes if I asked.
I think the million dollar question is “what verbiage will they add or delete on your ticket”. You can ask and see, but it sounds to me that they will only make adjustments for some limitation of the vessel.
I think it’s free to ask for this… but I suggest clarifying any special notation that might get printed with it.
The ones that I would like to not take is the stability and ship construction, meteorology, ship handling, cargo handling and stowage, terrestrial, celestial. I’d think these are more for ships, than a ATB and more for oceans routes than near coastal.
This is policy and way outside of NMC’s lane.
Those numbers have not been on credentials for 15 years. A good number of people here probably have no idea what you are talking about. For those who did not get their first credential in the last century, those numbers are the times you have upgraded and the times you have renewed.
Not a compelling reason to not comply with an international agreement. If that’s why you think STCW doesn’t apply to you, save your energy. That would be DOA.
You just eviscerated your own argument. If the assessments can be done on your vessel, you cannot credibly argue that they don’t apply to your vessel.
So that means LOTS of sea days?
My compelling reason would be that I think it applies more to a ship than a tug and more so applies to ocean routes not near coastal. I would not cite PRICE as a reason. However my question was if anyone had done this, it appears that you have not.
No, you can renew without sea days. I have seen a 1-10 Third Mate.
You think stability and ship construction, meteorology, ship handling, cargo handling and stowage, terrestrial, and celestial don’t apply to an ATB?
Interesting. Sure go apply for that reason, and I’m curious as to what they say.
Like I said, I have my less than 500gt and the vessel is only 680gt, so in my mind, all of that only applies to a vessel that’s an additional 180gt? That’s my point, maybe on a 1000gt, but it’s a giant jump for a little tonnage. I assure you, I will not be sharing what happens if I choose this route, it’s too much bickering here. I’d asked if anyone had done it, not should I do it.
That’s not how it works.
It’s 180 times an additional 1 ton for a 199 GRT towing vessel, or a 99 GRT “T-Boat.” So your argument isn’t it’s too expensive (although it is your argument) but instead “meh, close enough?” Good luck with that.
How many times do I need to say something for you to understand it ?