The Coast Guard Authorization Act of 2010 (the Act) removed the statutory size limit previously placed on offshore supply vessels (OSVs), and required the Coast Guard to issue regulations to mitigate the risk created as a result, noting the need “to ensure the safe carriage of oil, hazardous substances, and individuals in addition to the crew” on OSVs exceeding the previous size limit. In accordance with the Act, the Coast Guard is issuing this interim rule to ensure the safe carriage of oil, hazardous substances, and individuals other than crew by requiring U.S.-flagged OSVs of at least 6,000 gross tonnage as measured under the Convention Measurement System to comply with existing regulatory requirements and international standards for design, engineering, construction, operations and manning, inspections, and certification. This rule also will affect any vessel of at least 500 gross register tons as measured under the Regulatory Measurement System, if that vessel is not assigned a measurement under the Convention Measurement System and the owner desires to have the vessel certificated as an OSV. The Coast Guard intends to finalize this interim rule after considering, and incorporating to the extent appropriate, any comments from the public.
will be reading the NPRM closely tonight and commenting tomorrow
Of course you will…
[QUOTE=Fraqrat;142570]Of course you will…[/QUOTE]
you were just waiting for me weren’t you Fraq?
anyway, I suspect the NRPM mentions nothing about crew size or licensing but I will be certainly looking to see if it does…
STCW does not have any such thing as a large OSV license so why does the USCG issue them if they are a signatory to the convention?
The world wonders…
that didn’t take long…
one additional mate and one assistant engineer…that is all
why am I not surprised?
.
Take it easy dude. One of these days you are going to get so worked up you are going to completely stroke out!
In section G did they do away with the 36 PAC rule? I’m skimming through on my phone I’m gonn have to reread this later.
Once again…name me two OSV’s over 6000…now name one over 3000 that operates on minimum manning.
I’ve got 16+ on my 300 at all times. COI calls for 7. This is much to do about nothing.
[QUOTE=rigdvr;142588]Once again…name me two OSV’s over 6000…now name one over 3000 that operates on minimum manning.
I’ve got 16+ on my 300 at all times. COI calls for 7. This is much to do about nothing.[/QUOTE]
AIVIQ,and there will be more if there aren’t already. Given that the oil companies have already set a high standard a lot of extra crew, it seems like the USCG should follow suit.
[QUOTE=c.captain;142567]will be reading the NPRM closely tonight and commenting tomorrow[/QUOTE]
You can comment, but it’s not a NPRM, it’s an interim rule and it took effect yesterday (8/18/2014).
It doesn’t include licensing, the tonnage aspects for OSV licenses were included in the 12/24/2013 STCW rule.
As far as my understanding goes, I’m not sure Aiviq has operated under OSV. I know they were using personnel from the Unlimited division.
[QUOTE=rigdvr;142588]Once again…name me two OSV’s over 6000…now name one over 3000 that operates on minimum manning.
I’ve got 16+ on my 300 at all times. COI calls for 7. This is much to do about nothing.[/QUOTE]
There will always be an effort to man extra personnel on these vessels. The client must pay over and beyond what is required as a bare minimum. The companies do not want low manning to over work skeleton crews; they want low manning so they can charge extra for each person over the COI.
Ding ding ding! Winna winna chicken dinna!
^^^^true dat^^^^