Modern Coast Guard Failures

Cappy, I was just pulling your chain.

I think fault is for politicians. I think root causes are the proper way to deal with issues such as this unless an individual is blocking resolution. WE need to work together to come up with solutions. I work 60 and 30 but can work with others on a project like this.

My bandwdth stinks right now so do not expect much form me until Friday.

[QUOTE=cappy208;32816]to put it clearer terms: I firmly believe in term limits for politicians. I feel the same for Governmental employees. They get a 20, or 25 yr pension. then GET OUT… [/QUOTE]

You might be stuck with mwe longer than that. I won’t be 65 when I get 25 years, and I’ll have a kid in college. How about 30?

I didn’t say dont work, I made reference to not being directly involved in the same industry you have spent the first 25 years of your career regulating and controlling.

Let me ask you this. How do you feel about BMSCRET posts? Does this ring a bell? Is there a Us VS them mentality inside the CG? Why is it so hard to get/accept laymans input? How does the legislative process slow down the whole process?

Did you skim through that link I posted? Is it illuminating?

[I][QUOTE=cappy208;32813]You are probably aware of the TSAC committees. One would think this would be where the melding of the minds would occur. Not so! They have been made up of industry and environmental and blue suits for so long, no one actually has an input who DOES Towing for a living. Recently the USCG was taken to task to make these spots on TSAC open to the mariners who actually do the work. This was a first, and is still a struggle to attend, make positions and have a say. No matter what is done, said or submitted by rank and file members is unceremoniously dumped after a couple of yeah, we’ll look into that, and other similar responses… [/QUOTE][/I]

There are open vacancies on TSAC: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-9121.pdf. I assume you’ll be applying.

The USCG decided after the Bayou Canot, and Bay Titan, and the Ohio river (?) allision that operators needed more qualifications to run towing vessels. A simple masters license was not sufficient to run a tow boat. How did this become watered down?

TSAC is a pain to attend. I was approached by a MTVA member to join. I have no way to keep my job, effectively attend, and be able to pay my mortgage. Luckily my kids are out of college and out of the house! I do converse with Capt Dady, and MTVA regularly. So my input does make it there. However, It appears that the TSAC committee is just one cog in the problem. There are two towing members on TSAC now. This appears to an outsider to be the same problem as has been going on for decades. Industry has WAY too much control. What they need to have is equal input, with ALL sides having equal say in the issues.

The recent decision about the TOAR 30 day wonder discussion was pretty illuminating. The AWO and industry held sway, even with MTVA vociferous input, and letter writing. About 10 of my peers (and I) sent comments in, and only industry comments were in favor. Guess who won? The larger issue seemed to be glossed over.

That brings me back to the original topic. These are all ‘alternative’ ideas to actually regulating the towing industry. AWO would (IMHO) be greatly relieved if ‘they’ were prounounced the ‘watchkeeper’ of these issues. The Mel Oliver issue should pretty much dispell that notion!

Cappy-

IMHO:

The Mel Oliver incident wasn’t a CG issue, AWO had nothing to do with it, the company wasn’t at fault.

It was the captains decision to go ashore and leave his training mate in command.
If he had asked the CG, AWO or his boss if that would be okay, they all would have told him “NO!”.
Two stupid men made a stupid decision and got caught out.

the ‘wonder’ of the AWO is the RCP. This is being touted (at least by AWO) as an effective, more desirable alternative to USCG inspections. I feel that AWO has been pushing this for about the last 10 years to try to downplay, or minimize the USCG’s effectiveness or relevance to whether tugs should be inspected. Sort of like letting the fox guard the henhouse if you ask me!

The Mel Oliver issue IS directly involving the USCG, because they (the uscg) have ‘let’ AWO be the watch keepers, and to make an industry even seem to police itself is ludicrous. That is all AWO is; an industry paid, supported and managed mouthpiece for the company point of view. The RCP is NOT an acceptable form of oversight, and to return to the headline of this blog “Modern Coast Guard Failures” I would say THIS is the biggest failure of all! The complicity with, the taking of sides, the ignoring of the real issues regarding operating of towing vessels, The lack of success in influencing legislators to actually pass effective legislation, and the silence among members out of inexperience and lack of know how.

This all goes back to thelinkshowing decades of USCG dropping the ball, and kowtowing to Company pressure to ‘leave tugs alone’. Well; it worked! Now were so far up unregulated creek, there isn’t any paddle big enough to get us out, short of falling over the waterfall!

OKl, OK, Ill keep it nice and sweet, so as to not offend anyone!

The Mel Oliver incident was about a RCP approved company who had lost their accreditation. No one from AWO notified the USCG. The USCG looks especially hard at NON RCP towboats. So the USCG IS using AWO RCP status to determine towing vessel suitability. See the conundrum? refer to sentence above about fox and henhouse!

I remember where I come from. I run a 500’ tug and tow with with 4.2 million gallons of petro with a 7 man crew. The CG runs (for example) a 140’ ice breaker with a 17 man crew. Where’s reality? They pass and I see a 3 man foc’sle watch, a port and stbd lookout, and a three man bridge team. Who can discuss our industry with guys who have done that, and think THAT is the norm? Last night on your boat how many people were awake at 0300? Manning req’s? Where? Safety gear Req’s? where? Minimum hull standard req’s/ Where? I am not happy waiting for AWO (company mouthpieces) to make more decisions regarding the industry and seeing the USCG sitting around yessing everyone to death waiting for the next calamitous event to galvanize them into action.

I think the USCG does a good job considering all they are responsible for: at the end of the day we are all human and prone to typical human weaknesses.
In my 25 year working career both in and out of the merchant marine, I have seen all types of people: good, bad, lazy, aggressive, dull, sharp, friendly, angry, knowledgable, clueless, etc etc. why would we expect the USCG be any different??

This is NOT about personality but about ‘corporate malfeasance.’ The CG is a corporation (sort of.) They are in charge of regulating some things. Part of regulation is the decision making as to what is regulated. The towing industry has been a loophole bender for decades. We have all seen it, and we usually know how to work the loopholes. The attempts to make excuses and avoid CG oversight are plenty.

The problem is that industry can’t police itself. Can the police police themselves? Nope. Can the construction industry police themselves? Nope. If there is a shortcut to be had, and more profits to be made any industry will take it, fake it, and make it all seem just rosy (AWO.)

In this case, the failure is the CG has not been able to overcome the industry clout to be able to effectively regulate the towing industry. Sure, reactive measures are taken post casualty. But isn’t our job as masters to take preemptive measures to ensure the safety of our crew? Why do we have to wait until the next casualty for the CG to get some sack and take remedial measures, which should have been there in the first place?

Again, this is about an unregulated industry that is slooooooowly being dragged into the 20th century. not the 21st, but the 20th. I guess a hundred years old is not too bad a place to start!

When is the last time a pressure tank was tested and certified on your tug? When was the last time the hull was audio gauged and interior frames, scantlings were inspected? (and I don’t mean by some boozer from the shipyard who just waves: OK) How about the stability letter? How easy is that to follow on a tug? How many slack tanks can you have on your boat, and still meet the stability letter? Then how many slack tanks do you run with on an everyday basis? If. And i mean if the possibility exists that you are violating your stability letter you are going to be taken (post accident of course) to the mast, and be held accountable. Just ask the Captain of the Valor how this is working for him. Then again who would approve of a stability letter form that states, “only one pair of centerline tanks may be slack?” What reality are we looking at here? Who is in charge?

I could go on and on, but that would be superfluous. The issue is why. We know who. I guess the only debate is when.

[QUOTE=jdcavo;33005][I][/I]

There are open vacancies on TSAC: http://edocket.access.gpo.gov/2010/pdf/2010-9121.pdf. I assume you’ll be applying.[/QUOTE]

Yes, I will. Unfortunately I just got a promotion and will be working 60/30 out of the country. I am still going to apply to ALL the safety committees. If I can do a lot of of it over the web, I will probably c u at some of the meetings. I really want to get on the Navigation Committee being a former QM.

Now that we have that out of the way, is there anybody out there that wants to get togther online and do something constructive or is this thread dead?