# Mr. Cavo or anyone else **URL:** \ **Category:** Professional Mariner Forum\ **Created:** [July 7, 2014, 7:05am UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981 "2014-07-07T07:05:48Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![captjoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/2bfe46/32.png) [@captjoe](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/captjoe)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2014, 7:05am UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/1 "2014-07-07T07:05:48Z")
Is it possible to visit the NMC in Martinsburg? Has anyone been there? thank you ---
**Author:** ![New3M](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.gcaptain.com/new3m/32/394_2.png) [@New3M](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/New3M)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2014, 7:08am UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/2 "2014-07-07T07:08:26Z")
> [@"captjoe"](#): > > Is it possible to visit the NMC in Martinsburg? Has anyone been there? thank you Nope… ---
**Author:** ![captjoe](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/c/2bfe46/32.png) [@captjoe](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/captjoe)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2014, 7:16am UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/3 "2014-07-07T07:16:17Z")
[QUOTE=New3M;140537]Nope…[/QUOTE] Care to expound on that? ---
**Author:** ![z-drive](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/c37758/32.png) [@z-drive](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/z-drive)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2014, 9:24am UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/4 "2014-07-07T09:24:15Z")
> [@"captjoe"](#): > > Care to expound on that? Well the answer is no. ---
**Author:** ![Fraqrat](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.gcaptain.com/fraqrat/32/1961_2.png) [@Fraqrat](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/Fraqrat)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2014, 9:28am UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/5 "2014-07-07T09:28:05Z")
He’s addressed this before. I believe he said its a nondescript building requiring key card pass to parking area. He made it sound as if you can’t just walk in the front door. If you can’t get your evaluator to return a phone call I doubt they would be available for a face to face. ---
**Author:** ![jdcavo](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.gcaptain.com/jdcavo/32/108_2.png) [@jdcavo](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/jdcavo)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2014, 9:46am UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/6 "2014-07-07T09:46:13Z")
[QUOTE=captjoe;140536]Is it possible to visit the NMC in Martinsburg? Has anyone been there? thank you[/QUOTE] You can’t just show up. It’s restricted access with no reception/public area. You can visit if you make an apointment to meet with a specific person. ---
**Author:** ![psquiggs](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/51bf81/32.png) [@psquiggs](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/psquiggs)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2014, 10:12am UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/7 "2014-07-07T10:12:26Z")
I hate to air my grievances here but… it is getting ridiculous trying to get an application through the process. After 10 weeks of waiting the evaluator finally looked at the application. Then I got a letter saying that I needed another 975 days of sea time. When I called and questioned this I was told that the evaluator was not sure what she was thinking when she wrote this. Then came another letter saying I needed another 323 days of sea time. When I questioned this I sent here a copy of all of my sea time letters and a copy of of legacy file. I spelled out exactly what sea time I have using the checklist as a reference. Now it seems like the evaluator does not want to admit that she made yet another mistake. This is costing me money, I am ready to test. ---
**Author:** ![snacktray](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/5daacb/32.png) [@snacktray](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/snacktray)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2014, 12:31pm UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/8 "2014-07-07T12:31:11Z")
I think the massive increase of applications, paired with the new STCW final rule from December is raising absolute hell in that office. There are now 2 sets of training/ sea time requirements in play, and exponentially more applications to sort and apply them to. Id would get used to the idea of waiting, and make frequent contact to follow up. Remember, its not just costing “you” money, its costing all of us with an applications money. ---
**Author:** ![tugsailor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/a9adbd/32.png) [@tugsailor](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/tugsailor)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2014, 2:23pm UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/9 "2014-07-07T14:23:57Z")
The NMC needs to employ, train, and manage an appropriately sized staff to get the job done with reasonable dispatch. This pitiful lack of performance is disrupting the US economy, interfering with shipowner’s businesses, and putting seamen on unemployment. There is no excuse for this. A Congressional investigation is required, and heads need to roll at the NMC. The Commandant of the Coast Guard should be forced to resign. ---
**Author:** ![z-drive](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/c37758/32.png) [@z-drive](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/z-drive)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2014, 3:42pm UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/10 "2014-07-07T15:42:05Z")
They need advocates for mariners working there with whom we can reach out to. Liaisons, ombudsmen, whatever you’d call them. Someone we can call who who will effect a 2 way flow of information. The single biggest thing that gets me is that if they need more information, you don’t know what they need until you get a letter in the mail. Why not just have this info online or in an email? Bottom line, call your congressman when you have trouble. Yes congress and Washington is terrible but you ought to be ashamed of yourself if you’re complaining without reaching out to your elected officials as well. ---
**Author:** ![rshrew](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.gcaptain.com/rshrew/32/107_2.png) [@rshrew](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/rshrew)\ **Post date:** [July 7, 2014, 3:55pm UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/11 "2014-07-07T15:55:20Z")
One of my mates called our local congressman and he had the issue resolved for him within a few days. This was in Washington State. ---
**Author:** ![jdcavo](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.gcaptain.com/jdcavo/32/108_2.png) [@jdcavo](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/jdcavo)\ **Post date:** [July 8, 2014, 6:23am UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/12 "2014-07-08T06:23:13Z")
[QUOTE=psquiggs;140548]I hate to air my grievances here but… it is getting ridiculous trying to get an application through the process. After 10 weeks of waiting the evaluator finally looked at the application. Then I got a letter saying that I needed another 975 days of sea time. When I called and questioned this I was told that the evaluator was not sure what she was thinking when she wrote this. Then came another letter saying I needed another 323 days of sea time. When I questioned this I sent here a copy of all of my sea time letters and a copy of of legacy file. I spelled out exactly what sea time I have using the checklist as a reference. Now it seems like the evaluator does not want to admit that she made yet another mistake. This is costing me money, I am ready to test.[/QUOTE] If you think the evaluator is wrong, send a letter or e-mail asking for a RECONSIDERATION (use that word) of the evaluator’s decision and explain why you think it’s wrong. This is the first step in the appeal process and elevates it to a higher level than the evaluator. ---
**Author:** ![Warnerved40](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/3be4f8/32.png) [@Warnerved40](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/Warnerved40)\ **Post date:** [July 9, 2014, 3:52am UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/13 "2014-07-09T03:52:02Z")
RECONSIDERATION was successful for me recently. Felt good to go over the braindead evaluators head. Price tag was a 3 month wait. ---
**Author:** ![roundabout](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/dec6dc/32.png) [@roundabout](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/roundabout)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 8:03am UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/14 "2014-07-11T08:03:10Z")
[QUOTE=jdcavo;140621]If you think the evaluator is wrong, send a letter or e-mail asking for a RECONSIDERATION (use that word) of the evaluator’s decision and explain why you think it’s wrong. This is the first step in the appeal process and elevates it to a higher level than the evaluator.[/QUOTE] Would this email for “RECONSIDERATION” automatically take it to appeal or only elevate it above the current evaluator? I would rather try and get another letter than start an appeal at this time in other words. as I read Policy Letter No. 12-06, since my seatime towards VPDSD was before March 2014 and have the recent time required also my letter on a company letter head signed by the owner of the vessel should qualify me for VPDSD. I used the exact wording as was successfully used by others here and was emailed by NMC for more info requested. When I called this morning to NMC I was advised my letter no longer sufficed & to see, CFR 33- 104.220, which contained no pertinent info on this. I do not see another NVIC (Policy Letter) on changes, could you advise to an updated policy letter pertaining to this application please. also question the “verbiage” of the highlighted area of this NVIC 02-14 concerning transitions and grandfathering: "TRANSITIONAL PROVISIONS FOR STCW ENDORSEMENTS This Enclosure contains information on transitional and grandfathering provisions included in the regulations in Title 46, Code of Federal Regulations, Subchapter B, that are applicable to STCW endorsements. d. The transitional and grandfathering provisions for STCW endorsements apply to the following two categories of mariners: 1. Mariners who apply for an endorsement based on service or training that was started before March 24, 2014. A mariner will be considered to have started service on the first day of their service that meets the requirements for the endorsement they have applied for. Training is considered to have started on the first day of a period of training used to qualify for an endorsement. c. Vessel Personnel with designated security duties (VPDSD) [46 CFR 12.625]. 1. Until March 24, 2014, mariners who commenced approved seagoing service prior to January 1, 2012, may apply for an endorsement as VPDSD by showing one of the following: 1) seagoing service with designated security duties, for a period of at least 6 months in total during the preceding 3 years; 2) having performed security functions considered to be equivalent to the 6 months seagoing service; or 3) successfully completing Coast Guard-accepted or Coast Guard-approved training. 2. An MMC with a VPDSD endorsement will also be endorsed with the SA endorsement. d. Security Awareness (SA) [46 CFR 12.627] 1. Until March 24, 2014, mariners who commenced approved seagoing service prior to January 1, 2012, may apply for an endorsement as SA by showing one of the following: 1) seagoing service for a period of at least 6 months in total during the preceding 3 years; 2) having performed security functions considered to be equivalent to the 6 months seagoing service; or 3) successfully completing Coast Guard accepted or Coast Guard-approved training." Any clarity would be a great help? Thanks - - - Updated - - - [QUOTE=Warnerved40;140683]RECONSIDERATION was successful for me recently. Felt good to go over the braindead evaluators head. Price tag was a 3 month wait.[/QUOTE] Just asked Mr. Cavo if this took it to appeal, somehow missed your post here. May well be worth it since I’m not in a hurry on this one for a change. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Canal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/898d66/32.png) [@Johnny\_Canal](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/Johnny_Canal)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 11:50am UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/15 "2014-07-11T11:50:22Z")
why is that even after 15+ months (if not much longer) since the VPDSD bullshit was created, so many mariners (especially in the oil patch) are still whining about troubles with the USCG or company letters or whatever the bitch du jour is about VPDSD?! the "how dare they?!,’ outlandishly cumbersome, 3-day VSO class that I took was 9+ fucking years ago, and the VSO endorsement I received at NO CHARGE by submitting the same course certificate has been around for at least 5yrs. RECONSIDERATION??? MORE LIKE… PROCRASTINATION LEADS TO UNEMPLOYMENT… ---
**Author:** ![z-drive](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/c37758/32.png) [@z-drive](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/z-drive)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 3:28pm UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/16 "2014-07-11T15:28:44Z")
You had until march if 2014 to apply for it, if your service began before whatever day in 2012. Did you apply before march 2014? If the answer is no, then that provision shouln’t apply, as its written. looked it up, but it doesn’t say what you have to do if you apply AFTER march of 14…I am guessing an approved course, but it doesn’t say so anywhere I can find??? ---
**Author:** ![roundabout](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/dec6dc/32.png) [@roundabout](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/roundabout)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 9:34pm UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/17 "2014-07-11T21:34:29Z")
[QUOTE=z-drive;140822]You had until march if 2014 to apply for it, if your service began before whatever day in 2012. Did you apply before march 2014? If the answer is no, then that provision shouln’t apply, as its written. looked it up, but it doesn’t say what you have to do if you apply AFTER march of 14…I am guessing an approved course, but it doesn’t say so anywhere I can find???[/QUOTE] Thanks z-drive. I too looked all around the worldwide web for what to do other than the course. The lady @ NMC this morning told me to see the CFR I mentioned above, it only has qualifications and such listed. Went through several CFR subs looking to no avail, hence my inquiry. The lady there also said that I would find the new “verbiage necessary in the CFR’s” (she did say my verbiage was wrong) and I could email, fax or snail mail my new letter to my evaluator (which she gave me the letter abbreviation for evaluator’s first name & complete last name to mark attention to. She also said a certificate or the approved course would suffice, but could not or would not further elaborate, thank god. I am not sure if you are saying you looked up my highlighted question to find your answer or not as I am not convinced this is the correct “verbiage” as it would be absolutely hypocritical of a grandfather or transitional clause. I am hoping that Mr. Cavo will weigh in, if not i am going to ask for reconsideration and begin the appeal. The sea service letter attached to the company letter dated from 2005 to 2012 . Which makes it meet both criteria of recency & beginning prior to Jan. 2012. Truthfully I feel just as Johnny Canal about the whole damn thing, it’s udder nonsense and obviously the Gov. & the certified learning schools are in this ripoff bullshit together! No wonder so many mentions by the Policy Letters always with a disclaimer as to not certifying the schools. They are in cahoots! No doubt in my mind whatsoever. There is also a lengthy FAQ notice by the NMC on just this subject that says over & over again that I should be granted the endorsement. One which was dated only 4 days ago! I guess I bragged on the lot @ NMC a bit early & brought the bad luck of a moron for my evaluator on myself. Well, it can’t get too calm too scare me! ---
**Author:** ![roundabout](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/dec6dc/32.png) [@roundabout](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/roundabout)\ **Post date:** [July 11, 2014, 9:44pm UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/18 "2014-07-11T21:44:13Z")
Dated 7/7/14 This was put out as new on NMC site 4 days ago and clearly states a couple of times that 12-06 is still the go to letter. hence my curiosity of the wording in 02-14 I highlighted. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Canal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/898d66/32.png) [@Johnny\_Canal](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/Johnny_Canal)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2014, 12:10am UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/19 "2014-07-12T00:10:14Z")
[QUOTE=roundabout;140837]Thanks z-drive. I too looked all around the worldwide web for what to do other than the course. The lady @ NMC this morning told me to see the CFR I mentioned above, it only has qualifications and such listed. Went through several CFR subs looking to no avail, hence my inquiry. The lady there also said that I would find the new “verbiage necessary in the CFR’s” (she did say my verbiage was wrong) and I could email, fax or snail mail my new letter to my evaluator (which she gave me the letter abbreviation for evaluator’s first name & complete last name to mark attention to. She also said a certificate or the approved course would suffice, but could not or would not further elaborate, thank god. I am not sure if you are saying you looked up my highlighted question to find your answer or not as I am not convinced this is the correct “verbiage” as it would be absolutely hypocritical of a grandfather or transitional clause. I am hoping that Mr. Cavo will weigh in, if not i am going to ask for reconsideration and begin the appeal. The sea service letter attached to the company letter dated from 2005 to 2012 . Which makes it meet both criteria of recency & beginning prior to Jan. 2012. Truthfully I feel just as Johnny Canal about the whole damn thing, it’s udder nonsense and obviously the Gov. & the certified learning schools are in this ripoff bullshit together! No wonder so many mentions by the Policy Letters always with a disclaimer as to not certifying the schools. They are in cahoots! No doubt in my mind whatsoever. There is also a lengthy FAQ notice by the NMC on just this subject that says over & over again that I should be granted the endorsement. One which was dated only 4 days ago! I guess I bragged on the lot @ NMC a bit early & brought the bad luck of a moron for my evaluator on myself. Well, it can’t get too calm too scare me![/QUOTE] you clearly didn’t get the point of my post / rant. i don’t know how to lay on the scathing sarcasm any thicker. ---
**Author:** ![LI\_Domer](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex016/user_avatar/forum.gcaptain.com/li_domer/32/768_2.png) [@LI\_Domer](https://forum.gcaptain.com/u/LI_Domer)\ **Post date:** [July 12, 2014, 5:17am UTC](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981/20 "2014-07-12T05:17:38Z")
I’ve had VSO for a few years now and don’t know how other ppl never took care of this or VPDSD. I do wonder why they can’t put at least VPDSD online for free though. The same way the FEMA ICS certifications work. It’s not in depth material and the ability to do it has been out there for at least 10 years now. People need to step up more and demand the USCG actually work for us instead of making requirements and telling us to pay some random people a couple hundred dollars for our certifications. [Next page](https://forum.gcaptain.com/t/mr-cavo-or-anyone-else/12981.md?page=2)