With a couple of other threads going off topic and getting into discussions about the USCG and ABS, I thought maybe it would be better to start a new Thread.
There has been a lot of talking going on about ABS and the CG, here are a couple of thoughts of what I have seen change in the 30 plus years of being around Yard Periods as Vessel Crew and also as Company Representative.
It used to be you had CG Personnel that STAYED in Marine Inspection for a good part of their Career. This meant that those that were coming onboard to inspect had been around for a while and might just know what they were looking at. While, I am sure that some of the Inspectors may have got a little too close to the Owner’s Reps after dealing with them over several years. I have known some that moved on to Nice Jobs with some of the Companies that they had spent years inspecting when the decided to get out.
On the Other hand I have also had the pleasure of dealing with 30 Day Wonders that were just doing their time in Marine Inspection before moving on to bigger and better things.
So, on one hand you have very experienced Inspectors that may or may not be too friendly with the Owner’s Reps or you have Inspectors that may just be doing their time there waiting to move on to a better area with more room for advancement. Which is better, I am not sure but I would think having better trained Inspectors would be a great thing.
Now as for ABS. I have had the pleasure to meet some really good class Inspectors. As a matter of fact, most of the Inspectors that I met over the years were pretty good guys.
My problem lies with some of the Younger Inspectors that are recent Academy Grads and have never sailed and in some cases never planned on sailing on their hard earned License. When going through a Class Inspection (both as Vessel CE and Owners Rep) I grew to dread seeing a Young ABS Inspector show up with a nice Clean and New Boiler Suit on, as it usually meant that they were fairly new. I’m not saying that they did not have to training to do the job but these were the guys that looked at everything as Black and White. We all know that a lot of the USCG and ABS rules have a little clause in there saying “Or up to the Discretion of the Inspector”.
While sailing a CE, there were times that a Class Inspector asked me “what do you need fixed that the Company is stalling on”? The first time that this happened, I just shook my head and said Nope all is good. Only to have the Inspector say, well let’s just say you have an Air Compressor that is getting a little long in the tooth and would not be a bad idea to get it rebuilt, now is the time. These were the inspectors that I really like having come aboard.
There were also some ABS Inspectors that sucked in my Opinion. Years ago on a Coastwise Tug in N.Y. Harbor there had been a Cement Patch on a Sea Chest for more that a couple of years. When ABS came down, we (Crew) made sure that most of the lighting was out highlighting the area of hull with the Cement Patch. We did everything short of painting an Arrow Pointing to a sign saying LOOK HERE! ABS, just walked around and said “everything looks good” and headed up to sign off on the inspection. I was around that tug for several years after this happened and that patch was still there!
So, let’s hear what you have to say about the current way the Inspections being done and how the line of Responsibility has been blurred when t comes to what the USCG Inspects and what ABS Inspects.
Is there any other country where the Coast Guard is tasked with inspecting ships for certification and issuing Certificates of Competence, incl. STWC compliant CoCs?
In most coastal states the Cost Guard guard the coast and enforce the rules that applies to whatever vessels and activity that is present within their territorial waters and EEZ, as the case may be.
The administration of Maritime Affairs is left to a Department under some Ministry, with civilian employees to carry out inspections, issue CoCs etc.
Example: In Norway it is the task of Norwegian Maritime Directorate (NMD), in Singapore Maritime & Port Authority (MPA) and so on. Similar arrangement applies in most other countries, as far as I know.
The Coast Guard is usually a part of (or a branch under) the Navy, although civilian vessels may be engaged and manning may be wholly or partly by civilian crews, depending on the role the vessel is going to play.
In Singapore we have Police Coast Guard to patrol and enforce the Law within Port limits, while the Navy is charged with the same in territorial waters and in Singapore Strait, jointly with the Indonesian and Malaysian Navy.
Again, I’m asking, not criticizing or implying anything here. I genuinely don’t know of any other country with the same system as in the USA.
[QUOTE=Tugs;173226]T
There were also some ABS Inspectors that sucked in my Opinion. Years ago on a Coastwise Tug in N.Y. Harbor there had been a Cement Patch on a Sea Chest for more that a couple of years. When ABS came down, we (Crew) made sure that most of the lighting was out highlighting the area of hull with the Cement Patch. We did everything short of painting an Arrow Pointing to a sign saying LOOK HERE! ABS, just walked around and said “everything looks good” and headed up to sign off on the inspection. I was around that tug for several years after this happened and that patch was still there![/QUOTE]
As a Warranty Surveyor (aka “the Insurance man”) I came on a jackup rig to approve it for a tow from Singapore to Vietnam when I found there were several cement boxes in the pre-load tanks. This was from a accident while working off India several months earlier.
This been accepted by the Warranty Surveyor who approved it for tow from India to Singapore, where the rig was going for maintenance and repairs.
In Singapore it was approved by ABS until next Special Survey, which was still more than a year ahead.
Even so, I refused to issue “Certificate of Approval for Tow” on the reason that; "cement boxes were intended to get you to a safe haven, or a repair yard, NOT to leave from a yard. or port for a new assignment.
As can be expected I had another run-in with ABS, who felt that I had to accept their judgment.
I got the backing by the company I was representing at the time and the Underwriter, however.
The Rig Owners were not happy though.
[QUOTE=ombugge;173244]Is there any other country where the Coast Guard is tasked with inspecting ships for certification and issuing Certificates of Competence, incl. STWC compliant CoCs?
In most coastal states the Cost Guard guard the coast and enforce the rules that applies to whatever vessels and activity that is present within their territorial waters and EEZ, as the case may be.
The administration of Maritime Affairs is left to a Department under some Ministry, with civilian employees to carry out inspections, issue CoCs etc.
Example: In Norway it is the task of Norwegian Maritime Directorate (NMD), in Singapore Maritime & Port Authority (MPA) and so on. Similar arrangement applies in most other countries, as far as I know.
The Coast Guard is usually a part of (or a branch under) the Navy, although civilian vessels may be engaged and manning may be wholly or partly by civilian crews, depending on the role the vessel is going to play.
In Singapore we have Police Coast Guard to patrol and enforce the Law within Port limits, while the Navy is charged with the same in territorial waters and in Singapore Strait, jointly with the Indonesian and Malaysian Navy.
Again, I’m asking, not criticizing or implying anything here. I genuinely don’t know of any other country with the same system as in the USA.[/QUOTE]
It’s pretty bizarre to me, too. It makes about as much sense to me as having the Air Force regulate the airlines, or the Army regulate commercial truck drivers. Marine Inspection is filled with some of the most arrogant, petty lowlifes (lowlives?), and it’s no wonder that they need to show up for a routine inspection dressed like they’re storming the Mayagüez. I guess it’s the one thing they get to do that makes them feel like big tough men instead of bitter pencil-pushing bureaucrats. If you put the Air Force in charge of airlines, I bet they’d wind up sticking their LVPs in Commercial Inspection and pull the same kinda crap. Strutting through the terminal with camo and machineguns, trying to look cool when they know they’re just there to inspect the stamps on some maintenance records.
[QUOTE=ombugge;173245]As a Warranty Surveyor (aka “the Insurance man”) I came on a jackup rig to approve it for a tow from Singapore to Vietnam when I found there were several cement boxes in the pre-load tanks. This was from a accident while working off India several months earlier.
This been accepted by the Warranty Surveyor who approved it for tow from India to Singapore, where the rig was going for maintenance and repairs.
In Singapore it was approved by ABS until next Special Survey, which was still more than a year ahead.
Even so, I refused to issue “Certificate of Approval for Tow” on the reason that; "cement boxes were intended to get you to a safe haven, or a repair yard, NOT to leave from a yard. or port for a new assignment.
As can be expected I had another run-in with ABS, who felt that I had to accept their judgment.
I got the backing by the company I was representing at the time and the Underwriter, however.
The Rig Owners were not happy though.[/QUOTE]
Personally, I feel that cement boxes in jack up rigs should only be for temporary measures. Especially considering that they are fairly easily repaired w/o drydocking.
[QUOTE=Glaug-Eldare;173251]It’s pretty bizarre to me, too. It makes about as much sense to me as having the Air Force regulate the airlines, or the Army regulate commercial truck drivers. Marine Inspection is filled with some of the most arrogant, petty lowlifes (lowlives?), and it’s no wonder that they need to show up for a routine inspection dressed like they’re storming the Mayagüez. I guess it’s the one thing they get to do that makes them feel like big tough men instead of bitter pencil-pushing bureaucrats. If you put the Air Force in charge of airlines, I bet they’d wind up sticking their LVPs in Commercial Inspection and pull the same kinda crap. Strutting through the terminal with camo and machineguns, trying to look cool when they know they’re just there to inspect the stamps on some maintenance records.[/QUOTE]
I have seen both sides of the USCG Marine Inspector. When I ran the Galveston ABS office in the 90s, I worked pretty darn closely with the Coast Guard inspectors. I have to say that there was a good group of warrant officers that handled the core of the marine inspection duties and were certainly knowledgeable and fair. The commissioned officers often deferred to their knowledge and even the Captain of the Port was fair and reasonable. It was in the later 90s, when Port State Inspections of foreign flag vessels began that there were some real problems. Inexperienced inspectors, completely separate from the regular marine inspectors would board with their SOLAS manuals and start writing up vessels and detaining them. That would be when I, as a flag state representative would get called out and have to come down and examine the “deficiencies”. There were a few instances where minor repairs had to be carried out, but often times writing a “Statement of Fact”, noting the applicability of SOLAS to older vessels was all that was needed. Yeah, I appreciated the overtime, but some weekends I wanted to spend more time with the kids.
As stated elsewhere, equally dangerous are those new field surveyors that come down and board with Rule Book in hand and little practical knowledge. I think that more important than practical knowledge being applied is that when a surveyor has a good ocean going background, it makes it easier to communicate with the ocean going personnel onboard. A new, unseasoned surveyor will never have that. As a surveyor, it made it easier for me to get the Chief or Captain to accept my recommendations just because we spoke the same language; so instead of just reciting rules from a book, I could give then the reason why something had to be done, instead of quoting a page and paragraph number. . .
I’ve dealt with Good, The Bad, and The Ugly USCG inspectors. One shipyard period in Singapore in the 90’s I had a great USCG officer and an electrician mate pair of USCG inspectors. During the boiler hydro we a couple handhole weeps and the inspecting offer said “No big deal as we are looking for cracks and catastrophic deficiencies not a gasket weeping.” I had a lousy one in Port Arthur, Tx who told me I won’t pass the hydro on the new fuel skid because the pump “seal” was leaking. IT WAS A PACKED PUMP. We hydroed the steam lines and this clown wouldn’t pass it because the packing on a warm up valve was dripping at the test pressure.
I think the old system of marine inspectors staying in that field for their careers was a definite plus as to fast track types.
[QUOTE=ombugge;173244]Is there any other country where the Coast Guard is tasked with inspecting ships for certification and issuing Certificates of Competence, incl. STWC compliant CoCs?
In most coastal states the Cost Guard guard the coast and enforce the rules that applies to whatever vessels and activity that is present within their territorial waters and EEZ, as the case may be.
The administration of Maritime Affairs is left to a Department under some Ministry, with civilian employees to carry out inspections, issue CoCs etc.
Example: In Norway it is the task of Norwegian Maritime Directorate (NMD), in Singapore Maritime & Port Authority (MPA) and so on. Similar arrangement applies in most other countries, as far as I know.
The Coast Guard is usually a part of (or a branch under) the Navy, although civilian vessels may be engaged and manning may be wholly or partly by civilian crews, depending on the role the vessel is going to play.
In Singapore we have Police Coast Guard to patrol and enforce the Law within Port limits, while the Navy is charged with the same in territorial waters and in Singapore Strait, jointly with the Indonesian and Malaysian Navy.
Again, I’m asking, not criticizing or implying anything here. I genuinely don’t know of any other country with the same system as in the USA.[/QUOTE]
It’s only weird to me that the USCG does inspections, since they rarely have practical knowledge in what is being inspected. The best inspectors got that way from training under inspectors, not from sailing, so even they lack a bit of necessary common sense. It works be ideal to have a federally funded (so the owners aren’t the client) private civilian agency (so no federal bureaucracy, no ridiculous federal hiring practices, or (lack of) federal firing practices) composed of experienced mariners doing the inspections.
The licenses are issued by the NMC, which is composed of civilians working under the coast guard. That system seems to work OK.
[QUOTE=ombugge;173245]As a Warranty Surveyor (aka “the Insurance man”) I came on a jackup rig to approve it for a tow from Singapore to Vietnam when I found there were several cement boxes in the pre-load tanks. This was from a accident while working off India several months earlier.
This been accepted by the Warranty Surveyor who approved it for tow from India to Singapore, where the rig was going for maintenance and repairs.
In Singapore it was approved by ABS until next Special Survey, which was still more than a year ahead.
Even so, I refused to issue “Certificate of Approval for Tow” on the reason that; "cement boxes were intended to get you to a safe haven, or a repair yard, NOT to leave from a yard. or port for a new assignment.
As can be expected I had another run-in with ABS, who felt that I had to accept their judgment.
I got the backing by the company I was representing at the time and the Underwriter, however.
The Rig Owners were not happy though.[/QUOTE]
You were right. Cement boxes are temporary repairs. Now that said, each circumstance varies a bit, and depending on the relevance of the cement bx to the intended voyage / operation / whatever, if can be allowed or not. In my opinion, determing the relevance and acting on it is where experience comes in … But you better be on top of your game, because if you screw it up, it is on your head, and people may indeed get hurt. I’ve definitely refused to accept vessels tendered for hire with cement boxes. Just depends where and how many …
Some old Russian reefer ships were legion with cement boxes. I’ve seen 'em range from coffee can size to 25liter pails to 209 liter drums, to full blown 2m3 concrete constructions, all in one engine room. I had to give 'em an award for talent. But no SLC cert…