OICNW 2nd Mate/Ballast Control Operator Dual Roles Equal Seatime?


#1

I have recently applied for my Chief Mate. I also applied for my Barge Supervisor. Expecting to get my approved to test, instead I get a letter stating that my sea time letter has to have OICNW on it. Having 2nd Mate is not sufficient. Also, some of my sea time is dual 2nd Mate OICNW and Ballast Control Operator. I am being told that it can only be one or the other, but not both. Although, being OICNW I am tasked with Ballasting duties and any OICNW on a ship is responsible for the list and trim of the vessel. I asked if my evaluator could ask for guidance and I was told the evaluator would look into it. Other than that, What can I do. I also have to take ARPA again, because the ARPA class I took 6 years ago was not approved for Chief Mate. I also have to take VSO again because the class I took, which was taught by ABS was not ABS approved or approved by the Coast Guard! What a night mare.


#2

Damn Lee, you just are not having any luck with NMC on this upgrade. Now you have me wondering about he ARPA class I took. That is the first I ever heard of a Chief Mate ARPA class. Is this something new?


#3

Apparently Delgado was not approved when I took ARPA for M-5-1A, M-5-1B, and M-5-1C. And you can not just do it on the vessel, especially on a drilling rig, because they clearly state on a simulator a very specific exercise has to be accomplished. The thing is I was aware of this, so I looked on the Coast Guard’s approved list and it showed Delgado was OK. The only problem is the approved list is for current approvals only. Horrible over sight on my part, but no big deal. I can just go take the class and that part is fixed. The hard part is going to Chouest and getting a sea time expedited with the correction of OICNW included. It was hard enough to get a sea time letter when I was an employee there, much less an ex-employee. They have always provided a letter in a timely matter in the past, so I can only hope for the same now. My question is shouldn’t some things be understood? I hold an OICNW endorsement and all my sea time is on vessels from 5900 tons to 33,000 tons. You would think that having sea time in the capacity of my license would suffice.


#4

Wow… With nightmares like this it is no wonder people don’t want to go to sea anymore.


#5

I’ve been on a few ships where the COI no longer requires a 3rd or 2nd Mate but instead reads something like: 2 OICNW for the tonnage of the vessel. I even changed my resume to read OICNW for various mate jobs I’ve had.
The language has been changed throughout the industry, it would have been nice if there had been a heads-up instead of just letting it creep-up and bite us on the ass.


#6

ARPA courses are not specific to operational level or management level. Are you certaimnn this is what you were told? It is possible that some of the assessments for Chief Mate/Master that relate to ARPA are not part of the course’s approval, some courses perform appropriate exercises in the course and get credited with some of the assessments, while others do not do these and while they are approved for ARPA [U]training[/U] requirements, the mariner has to get the assessments signed off on their vessels. n Is there any change that this is what the NMC evaluator told you?


#7

[I][quote=Capt. Lee;16494]I have recently applied for my Chief Mate. I also applied for my Barge Supervisor. Expecting to get my approved to test, instead I get a letter stating that my sea time letter has to have OICNW on it. Having 2nd Mate is not sufficient… I also have to take VSO again because the class I took, which was taught by ABS was not ABS approved or approved by the Coast Guard! What a night mare.[/quote][/I]

See 46 CFR 11.406 (formerly 46 CFR 10.406), it requires one year of experience [U]as[/U] officer in charge of a navigational watch, just holding a 3rd Mate license is not sufficient. You will need some segregation of the time noting how much was as OICNW and how much as BCO.

I have explained the problem with the ABS course before. The Coast Guard does not approve VSO courses, they are accepted on behalf of the Coast Guard by organizations approved as “Quality Standards Systems.” ABS is one of these QSSs. The conflict of interest should be opbvious, ABS cannot approve their own course. This notwithstaning, the Coast Guard has evaluated the way in which this course was given and what if any internal segregations existed at ABS to ensure the integirty of the course and its separation from the QSS function. We have determined that such segregation existed, and will accept the course if taken between 6/9/03 and until 9/30/09. Note that this determination was just made, and NMC may not yet have had the opportunity to revise the records used by the evaluators.


#8

STCW Assessment(s) - You have submitted Chief Mate Assessments and courses which cover some of these assessments. Your ARPA course does not cover management level assessments for M-5-1A, M-5-1B, and M-5-1C. Please submit documentation of the completion of those 3 assessments to the NMC. Once the listed deficiencies are met, you
may be approved to test.


#9

STCW Assessment(s) - You have submitted Chief Mate Assessments and courses which cover some of these assessments. Your ARPA course does not cover management level assessments for M-5-1A, M-5-1B, and M-5-1C. Please submit documentation of the completion of those 3 assessments to the NMC. Once the listed deficiencies are met, you
may be approved to test.


#10

[quote=jdcavo;16512]

I have explained the problem with the ABS course before. The Coast Guard does not approve VSO courses, they are accepted on behalf of the Coast Guard by organizations approved as “Quality Standards Systems.” ABS is one of these QSSs. The conflict of interest should be opbvious, ABS cannot approve their own course. This notwithstaning, the Coast Guard has evaluated the way in which this course was given and what if any internal segregations existed at ABS to ensure the integirty of the course and its separation from the QSS function. We have determined that such segregation existed, and will accept the course if taken between 6/9/03 and until 9/30/09. Note that this determination was just made, and NMC may not yet have had the opportunity to revise the records used by the evaluators.[/quote]

Training Certificate(s) - You have submitted a copy of a course completion certificate for VSO from ABS Consulting. This course is not a Coast Guard approved VSO course.


#11

[I][quote=Capt. Lee;16518]Training Certificate(s) - You have submitted a copy of a course completion certificate for VSO from ABS Consulting. This course is not a Coast Guard approved VSO course.[/quote][/I]

See the post you just responded to. It says your course is now acceptable.


#12

[I][quote=Jeffrox;16505]I’ve been on a few ships where the COI no longer requires a 3rd or 2nd Mate but instead reads something like: 2 OICNW for the tonnage of the vessel. I even changed my resume to read OICNW for various mate jobs I’ve had.[/quote][/I]

I didn’t say that service letters and discharge certificates that indicate 2nd Mate are not acceptable. The issue here appears to be that the documentation says the time was as 2nd Mate and BCO, but doesn’t say how much time was spent in each of the two different capacities. Only the time as 2nd Mate meets the requirement for OICNW service.


#13

If the VSO is now approved…How do I prove it to my evaluator?


#14

Wow, sounds like gCaptain comments are starting to be considered in the writing of NMC policy! Glad to see someone is awake at the USCG helm!!


#15

Tell them you were contacted by ABS (you will be getting a letter from them soon) and told that Coast Guard HQ (CG-5434) has indicated they will accept the course, ask them to confirm this with “NMC-2” (the part of NMC that manages course approvals).


#16

Jim,

Most Dynamically Positioned MODU’s have 2 mate’s on watch. Does this mean that only one of them (the one in charge) will be able to claim seatime?