Shipyard/ dry dock time for engineers

So, I have an opportunity to be on a vessel for an extended shipyard period (6-8 months). Does anyone have any experience with engineering sea time with the vessel in dry dock? Is it counted at all, partially? I have been reading things published by the CG and some of it says 25% counts, some says all, for engineering anyway. Anyone know?

I think for engineering it still doesn’t count day for day. I had to do a renewal after spending months in the shipyard for the new boats. My seatime letter had “duties similar…closely related to” type verbiage “in accordance with CFR something.” I think the dates are recorded and then the NMC gives you day for day for renewal but % for upgrade. I’ll have to go dig in my files and find my last packet and see if I can get the CFR number.

Update

Ok I found it, my time was 1 for 3 days as per 46 CFR 10.227 (D).

That is what I thought too because ROS engineers used to get 1 for 3, but I have heard and read that now they get all of it or at least the 5 days out of the week that they work. I was wondering if any one has experience with dry dock /shipyard time and sea time within the last year or so

Well this was seatime acquired in middle of 2013 used for a renewal end of 2014.

I would think that a lot would have to do with what type of yard period, Outfitting a New Build or just a Long Stay for repairs. If it is for repairs it could be the way that the letter or discharge is written. I have seen in the past that regular discharges were given to the crew even though we were in the Yard out of the water.

It’s for repairs. The captain is not going to omit any information.

[QUOTE=cajaya;173535]So, I have an opportunity to be on a vessel for an extended shipyard period (6-8 months). Does anyone have any experience with engineering sea time with the vessel in dry dock? Is it counted at all, partially? I have been reading things published by the CG and some of it says 25% counts, some says all, for engineering anyway. Anyone know?[/QUOTE]

See 46 CFR 10.232(e).

Well I’ve done extended yard periods and when I got off for crew change in the yard or after back in the water, I just had the normal discharge the Captain fills out. I was on the ship and to the office/captain it is just another day. Whether that was correct, I don’t know, CG never questioned it.

[QUOTE=jdcavo;173571]See 46 CFR 10.232(e).[/QUOTE]

I think there’s a difference in a vessel that doesn’t get underway yet remains ‘in operation’ and one on the dock, probably with an expired COI while they credit the 5-year docking and is neither fully manned, nor ‘in operation’ for the service for which it is certificated. But if you’re saying there isn’t for the purposes of sea-time, Mr. Cavo, I’ll believe you. Sub-paragraph (g) seems the closer match for the inquiry.

[QUOTE=Jamesbrown;173589]I think there’s a difference in a vessel that doesn’t get underway yet remains ‘in operation’ and one on the dock, probably with an expired COI while they credit the 5-year docking and is neither fully manned, nor ‘in operation’ for the service for which it is certificated. But if you’re saying there isn’t for the purposes of sea-time, Mr. Cavo, I’ll believe you. Sub-paragraph (g) seems the closer match for the inquiry.[/QUOTE]

I took “shipyard period” to mean that the vessel was under a valid COI, and would return to service after. This is the provision that service on an RRF vessel would be evaluated under. If the vessel was in a lay-up status without a valid COI and an indefinite and/or uncertain return to service, then (g) would be more appropriate.

The sub-paragraph I cited is the codification of the previous NMC Policy Letter 9-01.

Part of the propulsion system was damaged. It will take about 6 months or more to get it back and resinstalled, in the meantime it is in dry dock and we are working on everything else. It will go back into service, it does not have a COI because it is foreign flagged. I am thinking it has some kind of foreign equivalency to a COI, I haven’t asked yet.

I’ve done some big yard periods on a few different ships. I’ve been questioned on my sea service each time I’ve upgraded, and from what I can see in my own research and dealing with evaluators, if the engineering plant is operational, you get day for day up to 50% of your total time.

This NVIC is pretty straightfoward: http://www.uscg.mil/nmc/regulations/policy/09-01.pdf

In my opinion yard time should count more, not possibly less. There is no point in your career as an engineer where you will learn more in a shorter period of time than in the yard. But CG and NMC seem to be run by either Deck side people or people who have never stepped foot on a ship. Definitely not many engineers advocating for us. But, all in all it is probably a good thing as we’d probably be doing 8 million redundant classes like the deckies have to.

[QUOTE=deven;177105]…This NVIC is pretty straightfoward: http://www.uscg.mil/nmc/regulations/policy/09-01.pdf[/QUOTE]

That’s a policy letter, not a NVIC, but more importantly, it’s been cancelled.

However, the relevant regulation was revised to incorporate the previous policy. See 46 CFR 10.232(e).

Here’s a question: if you sail as master on a vessel not required to carry an engineer can you use the time towards an engineer license? I also have extended shipyard time doing major repairs, and all the vessels were over 4000 HP… Could I use the time towards a DDE license?

Sounds iffy to me. If you are on as captain then I think splitting your time between captain/QMED would be fair if you were actually doing the work and not just “supervising”. I have sailed on vessels where there is no engineer required and gotten sea time for it. I personally hate doing it because then the deckhand and captain both think they can do your job as good as you if not better. It shouldn’t be hard to explain why you refuse to go help tie up at that very moment when you aren’t actually needed because you are troubleshooting the effluent pump motor and control circuit which has two loose wires, blown fuses and with the motor being stuck between two poles and the effluent tank about to overflow.

Another good one is when the captain asks you what you have been doing for the last 2-3 hours when you were troubleshooting 2-3 very complicated things…because they didn’t actually see you performing at “work”…like the way an AB would work (chipping and painting).

I wish captains (especially limited tonnage captains) were required to take some kind of course or training on how to manage knowledge workers…or if it could be incorporated into all the other BS they already have to take since we are all already on that path.

I do think using the using a certain percentage of deck time thing is fair if it is still like that. All of it or even half of it just does not seem right just because someone was “there” and helped out a little bit. A lot of deckies think that qualifies them but it is not the same thing as being down in the nitty gritty of it, there is a lot of stuff you miss out on that you don’t know about from not being the sole engineer and having that be your main responsibility. It is just not the same thing although it might seem that way.

[QUOTE=fishyluke;177151]Here’s a question: if you sail as master on a vessel not required to carry an engineer can you use the time towards an engineer license? I also have extended shipyard time doing major repairs, and all the vessels were over 4000 HP… Could I use the time towards a DDE license?[/QUOTE]

I remember seeing in the sea-time requirements for DDE and asst engineer ltd, 25% of qualifying time could be deck, with a max of 6 months. I did not see it in the quick search I did in the recent CFR and MSM. It may have been canceled.

[QUOTE=injunear;177162]I remember seeing in the sea-time requirements for DDE and asst engineer ltd, 25% of qualifying time could be deck, with a max of 6 months. I did not see it in the quick search I did in the recent CFR and MSM. It may have been canceled.[/QUOTE]

[U][B]46 CFR 11.504[/B][/U]

[QUOTE=jdcavo;177150]That’s a policy letter, not a NVIC, but more importantly, it’s been cancelled.

However, the relevant regulation was revised to incorporate the previous policy. See 46 CFR 10.232(e).[/QUOTE]

Right, Policy Letter, NVIC stuck in my head was doing some RFPEW stuff with one of my guys.

As far as it being cancelled, I found that policy letter on the CG NMC website and it was [I]not[/I] on the list of cancelled letters. Though, the cancelled list was last updated in 2013…

Stuff like that can be confusing to people.

[QUOTE=deven;178700]Right, Policy Letter, NVIC stuck in my head was doing some RFPEW stuff with one of my guys.

As far as it being cancelled, I found that policy letter on the CG NMC website and it was [I]not[/I] on the list of cancelled letters. Though, the cancelled list was last updated in 2013…

Stuff like that can be confusing to people.[/QUOTE]

It was cancelled. It’s still on the NMC web page as anyone who is evaluated under the old regulations by grandfathering can still use it.

[QUOTE=injunear;177162]I remember seeing in the sea-time requirements for DDE and asst engineer ltd, 25% of qualifying time could be deck, with a max of 6 months. I did not see it in the quick search I did in the recent CFR and MSM. It may have been canceled.[/QUOTE]

Can 6 months of engine time be used towards a limited deck license as well?