Coast Guard seeks comment on new OSV safety training requirements

this should make for some interesting discussion

[B]Coast Guard seeks comment on new OSV safety training requirements[/B]

By WorkBoat Staff 4/15/2014

On Monday the Coast Guard announced the publication of an advance notice of proposed rulemaking regarding training of personnel and manning on mobile offshore units (MOUs) and offshore supply vessels (OSVs) engaged in U.S. outer continental shelf activities.

The Coast Guard seeks comment on plans to expand its maritime safety training requirements to cover all persons other than crew working on OSVs and MOUs in the U.S. outer continental shelf, regardless of flag. The goal of the expanded training is to enhance personnel preparedness for responding to emergencies such as fire, personal injury and abandon ship situations in hazardous environments.

Comments is requested on the following topics:

-The sufficiency of existing maritime safety training and the value of additional maritime safety training for maritime crew and persons other than crew on OSVs and MOUs

-A MOU’s safety organizational structure (defining levels of authority and lines of communication); the professional education and service requirements for industrial officers on MOUs

-The sufficiency of manning regulations on MOUs and OSVs

-Any available economic data on current labor market trends and conditions as well as the current costs, benefits, and effectiveness of mandated maritime safety training courses and programs for maritime crew and persons other than crew.

Comments should be submitted by July 14. Material must either be submitted to the online docket via http://www.regulations.gov, docket number USCG-2013-0175, or reach the docket management facility by that date.

Read more at: 79 Fed. Reg. 20844

So are 340’ OSVs safe to operate with only 8 men? Any comments from the unwashed ones out there?

As long as there is some super awesome unlimited tonnage god to hold our hands and think for us…

[QUOTE=Fraqrat;135568]As long as there is some super awesome unlimited tonnage god to hold our hands and think for us…[/QUOTE]

got any particular God in mind?

What is a MOU? I thought that was memorandum of understanding. I get OSV and know MODU but MOU? Can you get a MOU license? Anybody got a picture of a MOU? Is that like a barge or what?

[QUOTE=tengineer1;135576]What is a MOU? I thought that was memorandum of understanding. I get OSV and know MODU but MOU? Can you get a MOU license? Anybody got a picture of a MOU? Is that like a barge or what?[/QUOTE]

I agree…new to me. I guess mobile offshore unit such as barge…will check the CFRs to see if there is anything there

Maybe they forgot the ‘D’.

About time though, hope they up those manning requirements. If the companies get their way though look at smaller crews.

[QUOTE=LI_Domer;135581]Maybe they forgot the ‘D’.

About time though, hope they up those manning requirements. If the companies get their way though look at smaller crews.[/QUOTE]

The USCG is probably asking because companies are complaining that crew sizes are excessive and too costly.

The coi’s still call for three men a boy and a dog, it’s the clients that want the big crews

Why can’t you run a 340 with just 8 men? It’s just a bigger mud boat…

[QUOTE=LI_Domer;135581]Maybe they forgot the ‘D’…[/QUOTE]

Not all offshore “units” drill.

[QUOTE=KrustySalt;135590]Why can’t you run a 340 with just 8 men? It’s just a bigger mud boat…[/QUOTE]

why would any mariner want smaller crews on very big OSVs? why don’t you want the additional jobs a 14man crew would create? why don’t you want there to be a designated chief mate or first assistant? why don’t you want additional people available to respond to an emergency?

ONLY THE OWNERS WANT SMALL CREWS SO THEY CAN MAKE MORE PROFITS?

[QUOTE=c.captain;135617]why would any mariner want smaller crews on very big OSVs? why don’t you want the additional jobs a 14man crew would create? why don’t you want there to be a designated chief mate or first assistant? why don’t you want additional people available to respond to an emergency?

ONLY THE OWNERS WANT SMALL CREWS SO THEY CAN MAKE MORE PROFITS?[/QUOTE]

Doesn’t look like this is about crew size.

USCG plans to expand its maritime safety training requirements to cover[U] all persons other than crew w[/U]orking on OSVs and MOUs in the U.S. outer continental shelf, regardless of flag.

[QUOTE=Traitor Yankee;135585]The coi’s still call for three men a boy and a dog, it’s the clients that want the big crews[/QUOTE]

Exactly!

Not really concerned with what the COI says because the clients are the ones who have ultimately created so many additional jobs in excess of the COI. That trend doesn’t seem to be stopping anytime soon.

As long as the operator’s day rate is commensurate with the client’s requests for crew (as in more than COI), there really is no argument here.

The only ones complaining must be the mom and pop operators.

I think it is important to say that this ANPRM directly is in response to the new super class of Very Large OSVs and MOUs that are coming hence why it is important for mariners to reply to it. It goes past 340’ and 6000grt but to 500’ and 10000grt! I believe we all need to weigh in on this matter and make our voices heard.

It has already been determined that super sized OSVs are not going to require UL licenses to man them but should they have a ship sized crew with a ship’s structure? I say absolutely they should! Chief mate and first assistant licenses must be developed to man these vessels and the old system of pencil whipping large OSV endorsements needs to be brought to an end. Now how should those licenses be developed and what should the seatime requirements be?

That wasn’t my point, hence what I quoted before I responded.

[QUOTE=c.captain;135617]why would any mariner want smaller crews on very big OSVs? why don’t you want the additional jobs a 14man crew would create? why don’t you want there to be a designated chief mate or first assistant? why don’t you want additional people available to respond to an emergency?

ONLY THE OWNERS WANT SMALL CREWS SO THEY CAN MAKE MORE PROFITS?[/QUOTE]
Easy fella, it was a joke.

[QUOTE=KrustySalt;135656]Easy fella, it was a joke.[/QUOTE]

Fella? Who? Me?

.

We already got 3rd, 4th, and 5th captains on the bridge how many more officers do we need. I guess maybe a 3rd or 4th chief for the engine room might be cool.

[QUOTE=Fraqrat;135681]We already got 3rd, 4th, and 5th captains on the bridge how many more officers do we need. I guess maybe a 3rd or 4th chief for the engine room might be cool.[/QUOTE]

for God’s sake man…don’t get me started on this shit again! when will the madness ever end?

I for one won’t be happy until there is consistently a 9th Captain on ever boat afloat.