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 MOUâs 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.
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 agreeâŚnew to me. I guess mobile offshore unit such as bargeâŚwill check the CFRs to see if there is anything there
[QUOTE=KrustySalt;135590]Why canât you run a 340 with just 8 men? Itâs just a bigger mud boatâŚ[/QUOTE]
why would any mariner want smaller crews on very big OSVs? why donât you want the additional jobs a 14man crew would create? why donât you want there to be a designated chief mate or first assistant? why donât 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 donât you want the additional jobs a 14man crew would create? why donât you want there to be a designated chief mate or first assistant? why donât you want additional people available to respond to an emergency?
ONLY THE OWNERS WANT SMALL CREWS SO THEY CAN MAKE MORE PROFITS?[/QUOTE]
Doesnât look like this is about crew size.
USCG 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.
[QUOTE=Traitor Yankee;135585]The coiâs still call for three men a boy and a dog, itâs 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 doesnât seem to be stopping anytime soon.
As long as the operatorâs day rate is commensurate with the clientâs 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 340â and 6000grt but to 500â 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 shipâs 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?
[QUOTE=c.captain;135617]why would any mariner want smaller crews on very big OSVs? why donât you want the additional jobs a 14man crew would create? why donât you want there to be a designated chief mate or first assistant? why donât 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.
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 Godâs sake manâŚdonât get me started on this shit again! when will the madness ever end?