[QUOTE=TJ;43916]I’ve used incorrect terminology and further confused my issue.
I think what I’m trying to clarify is what, to me, was confusing.
I mistakenly believed all the classes I took would be in the MMC.
this caused my confusion.
now my query is, are there similar required training that will not be
listed on or in my MMC?
more specifically, are there any more that are “stand alone training” by that
i mean not embedded or included in another endorsement like the BRM?
this has been very helpful and I’m beginning to see the light!
thanks for all your professionalism and patience.
The MMC lists STCW endorsements, not the training you’ve had to get them. In some cases, the endorsement doesn’t require any training, for example, RFPNW. In other cases, the endorsement can be obtained by a single course, for example Advanced Fire Fuighting, or Medical Care Provider. In other cases, it may take more than one course to get the endorsement, e.g. OICNW or Master. It’s the endorsement we list, niot the training to get it.
The past issue was involved not listing certain endorsements because you held another endorsement that had as a prerequiste that you had first obtained another endorsement. For example, an MMC might not have listed Advanced Fire Fighting (VI/3) if you held OICNW (II/1) because you could not get OICNW unless you had advanced fire fighting. This was a case where the mariner qualified for an endorsement, but it wasn’t listed as it was an “inherent” part of qualifying for the other endorsement. There were problems with this, among them that the mariner had qualified for an endorsement and it wasn’t listed, and also because while in the U.S. we might require it to qualify for something else, that may not be true elsewhere in the world and other countries wille xpect to see the “lesser included” endorsement listed. Another way to look at this was if you could qualify for advanced fire fighting without being an OICNW, and would have it listed on your MMC, then it should still be listed if you get OICNW, For the most part, this has been resolved and we are putting all of the endorsements a mariner qualifies for on their MMC.
Bridge Resource Management is different. While it’s required training to qualify for certain endorsements, it’s not itself an endorsement. It’s just one of the things you must do to get an endorsement. This was what I tried to explain with my discussion of the language in the various STCW regulations. Generally, if the regulation says that “candidate for certification shall” it’s an endorsementand the regulation specifies what the mariner must do to get the endorsement. If the reguilation has language like “Administrations shall…” it’s not an endorsement, it’s something that countries that are parties to STCW must do tenfortce and comply with STCW.
So BRM is not an endorsement and doesn’t go on the MMC. I don’t think there are any other countries that would consider VIII/2 to be an endorsement that should be listed on the STCW document.
Hopefully this is a little clearer.