As a US Army vessel it most likely does not have a COI. The contract provided the Army/MSC minimum manning requirement and in lieu of a COI and/or MSMD, that is what it is. The Army has its own manning levels for its watercraft. MARAD vessels and, unless I am mistaken, USACE vessels may have a COI even though they too are public vessels.
This boat might be going to Kuwait to be turned over to a Kuwaiti operator and that is the reason civilian mariners are being recruited, I don’t know for certain but suspect that may be the case. Who knows, the Army is hard pressed for qualified personnel so that may be a reason they don’t do it themselves.
How or why they do things is a mystery to most normal people. I did sea trials on one of their “large” landing ships just a few years ago as C/E, even though the Army gang was looking over my shoulder. They wanted a civilian license and the pay was good, who am I to complain.
I am not in this for glory or blood, I made my point and it seems to have been understood and I acknowledge the reasons for some questioning the manning detailed in the job notice. You guys have my full understanding of how difficult it is to keep up with the regs and the threat to your livelihood. I spend way too much time keeping track of which country’s license is valid for endorsement at what level on a particular vessel in a certain operation by another and what country is flexing its maritime muscles on some bit of SOLAS or MARPOL minutia.
[quote=Steamer;22243]Now there’s a course correction! What happened to: “If it’s a tug you’re going to need people who hold Master or Mate of Towing Oceans endorsements.”[/quote]
Course correction? I’d call it the progression of the discussion. In my career on tugs, a tug is a tug is a tug is a tug. Now that one must have a MOTV license to operate a tug, I, mistakenly as it turned out, made the assumption that for this trip they would need a person holding that license. So I’m wrong. That’s fine with me, I was wrong earlier today about something else and I’ll be wrong about something different tomorrow. But you seem to revel in the fact that I was wrong. As C_A says, “Whatever”.
I haven’t read the MOU reports, I’ve read the trades and the other bulletins warning two watch US boats to stay out of foreign ports. It isn’t hard to follow the logic and realize that it might blow up in someone’s face if they took that boat into a port that frowns on two-watch vessels. So sue me for attempting to warn someone who might not be aware of that fact. That’s one of the reasons I participate here, to share knowledge with others, and to learn from others.
[quote=Steamer;22243]If you don’t like 12 and 12, don’t apply for the job. If you think the US Government is exploitiing seamen, complain to the government, start an anti-USCG/MARAD/MSC thread if you like.
You didn’t hesitate to call in the Feds on your little fishboat adventure, have you called them to report the MSC and Army for abusing seamen and forcing them to put their licenses at “risk”?[/quote]
I love 12 and 12. I HATE 6 and 6, which is what most tugs are on, which is why I assumed that is what a headhunter looking to deliver a tug demanding a two watch system meant. I’ll do 12 and 12 any day, but again I won’t do it on an ocean voyage. It just isn’t safe.
By the way, I’m finding it difficult to find a direct connection between this issue and the issues I dealt with out west. Why would I make a complaint to anyone about an issue I’m not directly involved in? My “little fishboat adventure” went to the USCG and the government of the Republic of Kiribati because my fellow human beings, men that I came to respect and love, were being beaten by the vessel’s Korean officers in my presence, and those same Korean officers were throwing plastic garbage and oil into the ocean that I love dearly, and that ocean cannot take much more abuse. Your trivialization of these abuses speaks for itself.
(To all concerned, it is just my opinion that the ocean cannot take much more of this abuse. Said opinion based on nothing more than steaming through areas of plastic garbage and oil in the Western Pacific. Oh, that and the science. But I’m not a scientist so I can’t cite particular research. Sorry, Steamer.)
I gave no legal advice, I’m not a lawyer. I gave my only my opinion. I made statements about the need for a MOTV license, and when I was corrected I freely admitted that I was wrong. So what the heck is the problem?
I never said you were the one who wrote that “little gem” the author is shown on the post and those who actually read the thread rather than react to out of context strings of words will know that.
Not when it is in foreign waters, then it is a vessel (most commonly “other” of X tonnage. Only the US has come up with the towing endorsements. There is no “tugboat” STCW endorsement. When it’s in American waters a tug is a tug when it is in the business of towing. A tug style vessel that is not in the business of towing in the US is just a boat. A tugboat sold to someone who wants to use it as a yacht is whatever it is called on the registry documents even if it still has all the towing equipment in place and operational.
“I’ve read the trades and the other bulletins warning two watch US boats to stay out of foreign ports. It isn’t hard to follow the logic and realize that it might blow up in someone’s face if they took that boat into a port that frowns on two-watch vessels.”
If you are interested in what foreign PSC officials are looking at and what they find on American workboats manned by lower level license holders entering their waters to perform coastal work, you would do well to read the Paris MOU reports. Some of them make you wonder how the CG ever let these things sail.
“I love 12 and 12. I HATE 6 and 6, which is what most tugs are on, which is why I assumed that is what a headhunter looking to deliver a tug demanding a two watch system meant.”
Neither the bid spec or the job posting said anything about 6 and 6. It is up to the master to set the watches. I didn’t see anyone rush in to advize the contractor or applicants to make a case for 12 and 12 rather than 6 and 6. Or a discussion of the merits or risks of one or the other, just a condemnation of the government and warnings to applicants that their license or documents will be at risk - without mention of the reason or source of that risk.
“My ‘little fishboat adventure’ … Your trivialization of these abuses speaks for itself.”
That is another wild assumption. It was a small fishing boat wasn’t it? Was it a large fishing boat? I personally believe you did the right thing for the right reasons and you have my respect for taking the actions you did. Many, if not most, would have just put up with it and collected the paycheck. There doesn’t seem to be a history of paper captains dropping a dime on those guys and the CG only goes after industries don’t have a good lobby.
A/B Unlimited 10+ years Exp. STCW 95 TWIC 100T Master NC Out of Work Since 7/2009 I have Worked on NAVY Contract Vessels for over 3 years. I also Have Engeering experience as well on 6,300 hp LNG Escort Tugs. I am Intrested in making the trip. wadehicksjr@aol.com