Hi everybody ! Is there anybody that knows something about recognizing STCW licences by the USCG.
I’am a US citizen (born in USA) finished highschool and collage (2year- marine engineerig) in europe (croatia) have an engineer license : Officer in charge of engine watch STCW III/1
other training certificates : Basic saftey training VI/1
Proficiency in survival craft and rescue boats operation VI/2
Advanced fire-fihting VI/3
Medical first aid certificate VI/4
Tanker familiarization certificate VI/1-1
All of the certificates and license were mad in croatia. All under strict STCW rules. Some trainings were even longer then in the US. I have 1year sea service as an assistant engineer and 6 month as and 3rd ass.engineer (tanker) . Soon I think going on a US flag ship soo I whoud need US documents.
Help me out with any kind of info!
[QUOTE=Andy STCW;33131]Soon I think going on a US flag ship soo I whoud need US documents.
[/QUOTE]
All you need is an Amercan passport, MMC, TWIC, and license. If you don’t have them you’ll need a green card, MMC, and a TWIC and you can sail unlicensed.
Coming to the USA with your USA Passport is all you’re eligible to do right now. None of that foreign training or License/STCW is recognized in the states. You’ll have to start from scratch but you can get credit for the seatime and may be evaluated to TEST for your QMED or your assistant engineer licensed, maybe-it’s up to how much experience/seatime credit you get out of the USCG. For sure you’ll get endorsed as Wiper, but you’ll have to do all that STCW and other required training again… This is my “unqualified opinion”, but I think it’s pretty close to fact.
Cheers and good luck!
[QUOTE=Jeffrox;33138]Coming to the USA with your USA Passport is all you’re eligible to do right now![/QUOTE]
What the … ???
Thanks for answering. I’ve been looking all over the internet and I think that all of my training would have to be recognized beceuse all of the countrys that are on the so called IMO white list have same kind of training and is recognized by all contrys that are on that list. The only thing that maybe will not be recognized is my engineering licence. Probably as you say I can get QMED licenses or something simulair. As I see I can get a TWIC beceuse I’am an american citizen and have an valid USA passport.
Now I’am on a local tanker (coastal) the contract is 3 months ( 2 on board and 1 off) after that I can repeat again the contract. Every body aboard is telling me that I’am waisting time here and that I would have alot better sallary and conditions on an US flaged company vessel. How long are contracts there? Rotations on/off board? How is the situation on OSV?
I took an STCW crowd and crisis management course overseas that was accepted by the flag state of the vessel. I asked the NMC, in writing, it this would be a violation of my US license, because I could not find the course in the US when I needed it. The the Coast Guard said that I would need a US crowd and crisis STCW certificate to sail on a US vessel but I could sail on my US ticket on the foreign-flagged vessel with the foreign STCW course.
I doubt that they Coast Guard will accept a foreign STCW course as a substitute for a course required for a US license that would allow you to sail on US flagged ships.
EDIT: Although the NMC has become centralized, it has not proven to be extremely consistent in its rulings. So, you might a different result than I did.
[QUOTE=Andy STCW;33152] I’am an american citizen and have an valid USA passport. [/QUOTE]
Ah, that makes a big difference, you should have said that to begin with. The first thing you need to do is apply for a TWIC, then go to the USCG and apply for a MMC. When you have all that in hand, talk to them about how much of your training they will recognize toward a USCG license. If you have an engineering degree you may have few problems but given how the NMC seems to be measure its success by how many people they can keep out of the industry, it is a crap shoot what they will recognize. In any event, good luck, I have known several other Eastern Europeans who have successfully made the transition, it took time and tested their sense of humor but they succeeded eventually … of course that was before the NMC sprung up like a mushroom from a cowpie.
Wait a minute, wasn’t the whole point of STCW to have standardised(sp?) training throughout? I was told 11 years ago that the reasons for it were to ensure that every person sailing, no matter what flag they are sailing for, had the same basic training. Isn’t that what it was put in place for? If I am wrong, then I am wrong and I am sorry for that, but even though I had trouble spelling the word, I still know what the “S” stands for.
[QUOTE=Emills505;33169]Wait a minute, wasn’t the whole point of STCW to have standardised(sp?) training throughout? I was told 11 years ago that the reasons for it were to ensure that every person sailing, no matter what flag they are sailing for, had the same basic training. Isn’t that what it was put in place for? If I am wrong, then I am wrong and I am sorry for that, but even though I had trouble spelling the word, I still know what the “S” stands for.[/QUOTE]
Emills505 - You are too logical in your thinking. Unfortunately, Jeffrox has a 99.9% chance that his statement is correct (notice I left the 0.1% open in case I am wrong). I worked with a yachty a while back who had a USCG license but took a STCW class “overseas” and had to retake the class in the good ole US of A because the class he took was not a USCG “approved” class.
Thank you for saying I am too logical. It just seems silly that this is still going on, I am assuming that they all have the same sylibus and curriculim (sp?) as every other STCW signee. way to go congress! I guess as they make the rules. I typed something here and tried to retype it 4 times, couldn’t get it right and still can’t, so here I go am not part of the problem. The fact is, we are being fed wrong information which may save our lives. from my post about lifejackets, to my reply about the wrong information about trying to drop the riding pawl on a runnaway anchor, and of course the fact that if you use the “Test” setting on an EPIRB, you are not transmitting anything, just testing the battery and the strobe. I can see why they tell you the top of the hour rule, but that is only for active tests, not the battery tests, it is so the battery won’t be dead when it is needed, but don’t tell me on my BST refresher “let the 2nd Mate deal with it!”. Sorry, quite a rant, but that is how I feel about our industry. OK I read this 6 times and I am happy with my rant, I just want the people teaching these courses to have some, damn what is the word I am looking for?, starts with an “S” training themselves
I may have killed your too logical argument with my last post, but I had to get some of that out
Thank you all on your opinions. This is from the internet:
[CENTER][B]IMO WHITE LIST & YOUR MARINER’S DOCUMENTS[/B]
by Douglas B. Stevenson, Esq.
Director, Center for Seafarers’ Rights
The Seamen’s Church Institute
On December 6, the International Maritime Organization (IMO) announced that seventy-one countries and one Associate Member* were on its long-awaited “White List” of countries that the IMO has determined to be in full compliance with the 1995 amendments to the International Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping of Seafarers (STCW).
This was a very important announcement for seafarers because their livelihoods depend upon their certificates and endorsements being recognized around the world. Modern ship operations require highly trained and competent ship’s crews. Before mariners can get jobs on ships, they must have certificates or endorsements that attest to their training and qualifications. These certificates or endorsements are issued by flag states. Because mariners may work on ships from many countries during their careers, it is important to them that many countries recognize their certificates.
The 1995 amendments to the STCW were welcomed by professional mariners because, among other things, they put a high priority on the human elements of maritime safety, they set clear training and certification standards that recognized the complexities of their work, they required all member countries to follow the same standards (98 percent of the world’s shipping tonnage is registered in countries that are parties to the STCW), they required flag states to ensure that mariners on their ships meet the STCW standards, and they enhanced port state control provisions. Proof of compliance with the 1995 amendments to the STCW would be established by STCW 95 certificates or endorsements issued to individual mariners by flag states. The 1995 STCW amendments became effective on February 1, 1997. By February 1, 2002, all mariners must have STCW 95 certificates or endorsements.
At the time of the amendments, many STCW member states were concerned about some countries’ capabilities to comply with them. The amendments placed a new burden on flag states that endorse other member states’ certificates, to confirm that the original certificates were issued in accordance with STCW 95. They were afraid that some countries would not be able to get their training facilities or certification procedures up to the STCW 95 standards by the February 2002 deadline. In an unprecedented affirmation of the IMO, the STCW member states asked the IMO to verify member states’ compliance with the 1995 amendments. The “White List” is the result of the IMO’s review of applications from 82 countries.
What does the “White List” mean to mariners? If a country is on the “White List,” it means that the IMO has deemed it to be in full and complete compliance with STCW 95. Accordingly, other countries should accept their certificates and amendments. Mariners holding certificates or endorsements issued by “White List” countries should find it easier to get a job on a foreign ship and to get endorsements from other countries than seafarers whose certificates are from countries not on the “White List”.
The fact that a country is not on the “White List” does not invalidate its certificates or endorsements. STCW certificates and endorsements from countries not on the “White List” remain valid. However, port state control is not likely to accept these documents at face value. They may detain vessels until shipowners can establish by other means that each crewmember is in compliance with STCW 95. As a practical matter, to avoid detentions, shipowners will be reluctant to hire mariners who do not possess certificates or endorsements from “White List” countries.
[CENTER][/CENTER]
- [I]The seventy one member countries and one Associate Member of the IMO included on the white list are: Argentina, Australia, Bahamas, Bangladesh, Belgium, Brazil, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, Colombia, Croatia, Cuba, Denmark (including Faeroe Islands), Egypt, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Ghana, Greece, Honduras, Iceland, India, Indonesia, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Jamaica, Japan, Kiribati, Latvia, Liberia, Luxembourg, Malaysia, Maldives, Malta, Marshall Islands, Mexico, Morocco, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Pakistan, Panama, Peru, Philippines, Poland, Portugal, Rep. of Korea, Romania, Russian Federation, Samoa, Singapore, South Africa, Spain, Sri Lanka, Sweden, Thailand, Tonga, Trinidad & Tobago, Turkey, Tuvalu, Ukraine, United Kingdom (including Isle of Man, Bermuda, Cayman Islands & Gibraltar), USA, Vanuatu, Venezuela, Vietnam and China Hong Kong.[/I]
[/CENTER]
[QUOTE=Emills505;33169]Wait a minute, wasn’t the whole point of STCW to have standardised(sp?) training throughout?[/QUOTE]
Sort of sometimes for some purposes when politics and power doesn’t get in the way. The reason behind all the recent USCG license changes is to bring the US into the “S” with most of the rest of the world because our lower level license scheme is nearly as bent as the MCA yachtie license scam. Because the “S” doesn’t really count in the eyes of the USCG, it doesn’t really matter how good some other training source might be. The fact that most of the rest of the world accepts it is irrelevant. The USCG accepts it as meeting the requirements for foreign licenses and foreign flags in US waters but they don’t have the knowledge base or interest to properly oversee our own merchant marine much less understand someone else’s so it’s easier just to issue a blanket exclusion. Other flag state maritime authorities simply recognize the “S” and get on with it so their license holders can work wherever the jobs are. It’s good economic policy to bring money home isn’t it? If we did that, it would break some CG office weenie’s “oversight” ricebowl and the possibility of a retirement job.
safest bet is to get your stcw training in the country that issues your primary maritime license. non-stcw training can be done anywhere (DP training, HLO, etc).
stcw training standards mean that all people who hold the same job will have had the same minimum of background training. these standards were not put in place so that people could jet all over the world taking their courses in various countries, but just to make sure the vessels were operated by people like us (professional mariners). the good news about all this is that we now have real mariners driving most of the world’s ships, which was not the case when I started shipping in the 80’s.
[QUOTE=Emills505;33169]Wait a minute, wasn’t the whole point of STCW to have standardised(sp?) training throughout? I was told 11 years ago that the reasons for it were to ensure that every person sailing, no matter what flag they are sailing for, had the same basic training. Isn’t that what it was put in place for? If I am wrong, then I am wrong and I am sorry for that, but even though I had trouble spelling the word, I still know what the “S” stands for.[/QUOTE]
Partially, but STCW reserved the right for a country nbot to accept those of others. It gave the option of recognizing another country’s documents, it did not require it. Currently, the US is not exercising that option and does not accept training that was not approved by the USCG, and does not currently endorse certificates issued by other countries.
Come on guys. Let me here some more opinions!
[QUOTE=Andy STCW;33257]Come on guys. Let me here some more opinions![/QUOTE]
I’m not sure what you expect with regard to options and I have been waiting for Mr. Cavo to weigh in on this since he is the expert, but I believe that the US does not accept STCW certificates from other nations. Which means your only option would be to get the training again in the US taking Coast Guard approved courses.
[QUOTE=Steamer;33184]Sort of sometimes for some purposes when politics and power doesn’t get in the way. The reason behind all the recent USCG license changes is to bring the US into the “S” with most of the rest of the world because our lower level license scheme is nearly as bent as the MCA yachtie license scam. Because the “S” doesn’t really count in the eyes of the USCG, it doesn’t really matter how good some other training source might be. The fact that most of the rest of the world accepts it is irrelevant. The USCG accepts it as meeting the requirements for foreign licenses and foreign flags in US waters but they don’t have the knowledge base or interest to properly oversee our own merchant marine much less understand someone else’s so it’s easier just to issue a blanket exclusion. Other flag state maritime authorities simply recognize the “S” and get on with it so their license holders can work wherever the jobs are. It’s good economic policy to bring money home isn’t it? If we did that, it would break some CG office weenie’s “oversight” ricebowl and the possibility of a retirement job.[/QUOTE]
Good point, I just feel that if someone when through all of the same courses we have to take outside of the US, they should count over here.
[QUOTE=Robert;33264]I’m not sure what you expect with regard to options …[/QUOTE]
I think he wrote “opinions.”
Today it is correct to say that a holder of a non-US STCW will get zero credit for STCW training conducted outside the US/not USCG approved toward an application for any US mariner credential. Also true today is for those US vessels allowed to use non-US crew members - MODUs or OSVs operating outside US waters, the USCG will NOT issue any endorsement to any officer holding a non-US STCW to allow the non-US officers to legally serve on a US vessel as required by the STCW Code Regulation I/10. This endorsement requirement only applies to officers not ABs/QMEDs/OS
However the USCG is working on a system to endorse some (i.e. the most numerous countries) mariner credentials. Don’t expect to see this before 2011.
Retired REC employee