Here’s something that’s been a rather rare sight in the last year or so…..

…..a more-or-less full box ship, in this case Hapag-Lloyd’s 4,890 TEU Rotterdam Express, coming into New York Harbor. On a cold and windy late afternoon in mid-December the Margaret Moran slides up alongside, tucks in under the rake a little, and puts up a line just behind the drop…..

…..then falls back on it for the ride into Jersey City’s Global Terminal, her 3,000 hp at the ready.

The rapidly setting sun shines off the house of the Margaret, who’s been doing this for exactly 30 years. Happy birthday, Margaret. Like a lot of American tugs she’s got a Bayou Country pedigree: hull #254 from McDermott Shipbuilding in Morgan City, LA. Nowadays, they’re known as Bollinger Marine. For geographical reference in the present day, Bayou Country may be loosely defined as that part of Louisiana which lies south of I-10. This may sometimes be confused with Cajun Country, or Acadiana, which has a somewhat different boundary and is more cultural in origin.

Either way you cut it, the food’s damn good. If you should find yourself in NYC and crave authentic Cajun fare prepared by genuine Louisiana natives, try Mara’s Homemade. It’s a small, family-owned and operated crawfish oasis on Manhattan’s Indian Row (E. 6th St.). It’s bad ass…..and as good or better than any place I ever ate at in NOLA and the rest of Bayou Country.

I’ll just call this one Navigation Odds-n-Ends, as it’s basically a grab-bag of stuff I missed the first time through or couldn’t find a good spot for otherwise.

Here’s the Weems & Plath GPS Plotter (6″ x 20″)…..it’s available for $32.99 from Landfall Navigation.

And the Para-Lock Plotter…..a handy size (only 7.25″) for those with serious space constraints, it’s $22.99 at Landfall.

The Plotfix GPS plotter is designed to get accurate results while working on folded charts. Celestaire has it for $12.00.

The search-pattern course finder: something I used fairly regularly in conjunction with a grease pencil in my Coast Guard days for running vector and expanding square searches for a PIW / MOB…..it’s really handy to have so that you can run a reasonably accurate search in a hurry, without the need to plot it all out accurately and in advance. Just plot the datum point from which you’re starting your search and get going…..the quicker you start the better the chance of finding the person(s). True, it is something that will probably never have to be used by most tug seafarers (you hope). But in that very unlikely but very high stakes situation, an open-waters  MOB with enough sea room to run an unobstructed  search pattern, there is nothing that can substitute for it, especially on the typical minimally-manned tug. It costs $29.99 at Blue Water Books & Charts.

And the Vectormaster, which has a multitude of uses…..Blue Water has it for $38.99.

If you insist on brass-armed parallel rules, as I do, the one offering we all know of from Weems & Plath goes only to 15″ in length. Anything longer and they come only with aluminum arms, a sorry substitute when you need the extra weight to prevent slippage on the chart surfaces. But there are alternatives available from Blundell Harling in England, and they come in three different lengths of 400mm (15.75″), 500mm (19.7″), & 600mm (27.6″). You can get all of them from sailgb.com, who promise “Extreme Products, Fanatical Service.” They cost $31.33, $42.55, & $49.11 respectively.

If you work on the East Coast from Norfolk to Portland, and particularly in the Northeast and New England, don’t forget your Eldridge Tide & Pilot Book. For New York Harbor, Long Island Sound, Narragansett Bay, Buzzards Bay, the Cape Cod Canal and the waters up to Boston Harbor it’s considered indispensable and the standard by which all others are judged. Well worth the $12.95 charged by Landfall Navigation…..I won’t leave the dock without it. It also provides coverage for Delaware Bay, Chesapeake Bay, the C & D Canal that connects them, and on down to Southeast Florida.

The approximate but more localized West Coast equivalent is Captain Jack’s Tide & Current Almanac. It covers the Pacific Northwest’s Puget Sound, Hood Canal, San Juan Islands and the Strait of Juan de Fuca. The 2010 edition costs $17.95 at Armchair Sailor Books & Charts in Seattle.

Check out the previous posts (Part I, Part II, Part III & Part IV) in this series…..

If you’re a tug-boater who has a job, congratulations, that’s wonderful! If you’re one who’s been out of work and is looking for another job, would you consider working outside the towing sector of the marine industry? Congress is considering making it a requirement that the owners of U.S.-flagged uninspected fishing vessels “post” their job openings to Americans first before being allowed to hire foreigners to crew their vessels. If this is something you would apply for, or not, please take a moment to vote. Click here to go to the poll. Members of congress are interested in seeing the results, so it may really help if you vote!

Thanks!

Capt. Doug Pine

MTVA member

Facing the oncoming death penalty of OPA ‘90 and a final trip into the history books, the elegantly old-school Patrick Sky continues to work New York Harbor on a late autumn day, a surviving classic of the dwindling single-hull species. By 2015 all single-skin petroleum tankers and tank barges will be extinct in this part of the world;  put to work in a different trade, sent off to be scrapped, or else to be used by countries more willing than we are to gamble on poisoning their waters. Is that for the better? Absolutely. Our evolution has been very slow in coming, and the ruination of Prince William Sound by the Exxon Valdez in 1989 was a very heavy price to pay for it. Still, it’ll be sad to see her go…..

Last month our members were out in force at Workboat’s Pacific Marine Expo in Seattle to continue working as much as possible on our primary missions: generally improving knowledge, professionalism and safety within our industry, ensuring realistic and adequate regulations for the same become the new norm, working with equipment designers and manufacturers to steadily improve the real-world usability and dependability of their products, and making sure our voice is heard by Congress and regulatory agencies like the USCG. We’re also forging new alliances internationally with our brethren in Europe, South America, Australia and elsewhere to eventually make towing a specialized skill set recognized by the IMO. Yeah, we’ve been pretty busy…..

Here is Capt. Jordan May’s report:

The Pacific Maritime Expo wrapped up last week and the MTVA booth was well worth our time again this year. We acquired 11 new captains, a couple of new sponsors, and have entered into a few new ventures. Our total membership is now around 185 tug captains. For ease of use, a Paypal link is now part of our online membership application. We will ad a check box for “renewal” soon.

One project moving forward is an MTVA Training Tractor Tug capable of accommodating 2 senior captains and 4 mates. We’ve started dialog with tug designer Jonathan Parrot of Jensen Maritime towards designing this tug, incorporating some of our captains ideas and concepts. This would be utilized for real ship work and training instead of relying on just a simulator. The idea has already received remarkable support from the industry and simply requires $7,000,000.00 in educational funding, which is not un-realistic with the current administration’s and congress’s push toward developing training and workforce programs for the marine industry.

The USCG Towing Vessel Inspection Conference did not lead to any real eye-popping revelations, in fact we might be even more confused than we were before the Expo. We were told, however, that they’re coming someday and that somebody is holding them close to their chest. We thought that somebody might be the Prevention Doctrine Branch Chief, Steve Danscuk, who presented the Towing Vessel Inspection Bridging Conference, however…..it wasn’t. Steve was very considerate of our issues, though, and is happy to help where possible. We did stress our main concern that work hours and manning levels are absolutely critical if a COI is coming to tugs. If proper logbooks, carefully checked by the Coast Guard on a semi-regular basis, are avoided as they have been in the past then there is no use in doing a tug inspection.

Over the past year we’ve covered nearly every controversial towing topic in detail on the Towmasters blog which is also accessible in the “Towing Forum” area of the main website. We’ve had a great year considering our small, grassroots beginning. Much thanks to all the MTVA Members who came to work the booth and see the show. We’re now preparing for the 2010 International Tug & Salvage Conference in Vancouver B.C. this May 17-21, where we will also have a booth. Any of our members who are off during that time are strongly encouraged to attend if at all possible.

Our first round of elections for MTVA Board Members took place at the show and the remaining votes will be gathered over the internet over the next 4 weeks. 10 members have been nominated for the board of directors. Their names and a short bio will be forwarded soon. The 7 elected board members will serve a 2-year term. They’ll review and consider the various issues we juggle and attempt to forward a consensus representative of the entire MTVA membership. For the most part, feedback and opinions so far have been universal 99% of the time. Regardless of geography, it appears that being stuck on a tug half the year produces many of the same challenges.

Best regards,

Capt. Jordan May

The National Mariners Association has just published its November-December 2009 newsletter #65 for your reading pleasure…..

In case you missed it, last month the Coast Guard published another Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (NPRM) in the Federal Register. This one is titled Implementation of the 1995 Amendments to the International Convention on Standards for Training, Certification & Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978. At 90 pages it’s not light reading, but for anyone who sails beyond the boundary line you definitely want to pay close attention to this and be prepared to let the Coasties know what you think before it’s too late.

Many of us who work on towing vessels, for a variety of reasons, hold licenses beyond what is required for the purpose of meeting the basic manning requirements for towing vessels. Many of those currently working their way up the ladder are also working towards obtaining licenses beyond the Mate or Master of Towing Vessels. Why? Because for years now a significant and growing part of the towing industry, primarily along the coasts, has shown a distinct preference for the 500 or 1,600 GRT near coastal or oceans licenses/endorsements as the minimum for consideration for employment, even though they are seldom actually required by the tug’s tonnage and regardless of the fact that you still need a towing license/endorsement in any case. As a result, more and more tug mariners got them. But that was before the latest STCW requirements for those licenses were implemented in 2002, requiring very burdensome and expensive formal schooling requirements. The hawsepipe for licenses over 200 GRT was officially covered over with a thick steel plate and welded shut, and the hawsepiper went from the endangered species list to near-extinction. The towing licenses are the last true hawsepipe advancement route left but many of the bigger companies don’t want them because the bigger-means-better principle has become more dominant than ever when it comes to licenses. With just a few exceptions, we mariners have been largely left to our own devices to cope with the fallout. So just because most towing vessels are less than 200GRT doesn’t mean that this won’t affect you.

I can’t help but wonder if this current STCW rulemaking will result in the industry finally taking a collective step back from the 500/1,600 GRT ledge. Will the towing licenses, upgraded and revamped specifically for our industry over a period of years ending in 2003, finally be accepted as the industry-wide standard? If not, why? Are there genuine and substantial shortcomings that can be practically addressed? Do those regulations need further revision to make them more acceptable? Shouldn’t we be pushing hard to get the IMO to recognize towing as a distinct and officially recognized skill set within the STCW certification scheme? This debate needs to happen, and preferably much sooner rather than later.

Speaking of 500-ton licenses, their days may well be numbered as it is being proposed that the 500 GRT deck licenses  be eliminated. There would be an unbroken tonnage span from over 200 GRT to not more than 1,600 GRT, all covered by the 1,600 GRT-or-less licenses, as well as the addition of a Chief Mate license to that tonnage category. The engineering license structure is in for some revision, too. In general, after the first read, most of the changes seem to be for the better. I repeat, seem. Time and again these regulatory projects have spawned unforeseen or unintended consequences aplenty, so I’m assuming more of the same this time too.

The one part of it specific to towing vessels is the proposed addition of 46 CFR – Part 11.463 to clarify exactly where and when the STCW standards apply to us. There has been confusion about this amongst mariners ever since STCW ‘95 came into effect. Having read the proposed addition I can find no fault with it. It is quite clear and should serve its intended purpose well. It reads as follows:

(d) Mariners who serve on the following seagoing vessels must comply with the requirements of §§11.412, 11.413 and 11.414 of this part for the appropriate STCW endorsement:

(1) A towing vessel on an oceans voyage operating beyond near-coastal waters;

(2) A towing vessel on an international voyage; and

(3) A towing vessel of 200 GRT/500 GT or more on a domestic, near-coastal voyage.

The exact definitions for boundary line, seagoing, seagoing vessels, domestic voyage, international voyage, gross register tons (GRT) and gross tons (GT) will all be added to 46 CFR – Part 10.107 for easy reference.

But the one area that stands out to me as potentially very negative, 46 CFR – Parts 11.404 & 11.412, is a big one. Once again, in what appears to be an alarming trend, sea time requirements would be reduced without a convincing explanation as to why. But first you have to understand the differences between STCW and our domestic system.

We have a 4-step 3rd Mate/2nd Mate/Chief Mate/Master system of advancement within the unlimited-tonnage license structure. There once was a time when you were required  to have at least a year of sea service in each grade before you could apply for an upgrade to the next higher grade, but the STCW-influence has  already managed to water this down. Today’s domestic regulations were altered to allow for a substitution of service that, in the past, would not have been allowed. For instance, you can go directly to Chief Mate from 3rd Mate without having actually worked a day as a 2nd Mate: you just have to serve as an Officer in Charge of a Navigation Watch (OICNW) for a year while “holding” a license as 2nd. That means you can do 2 years as a 3rd and then jump straight over 2nd to Chief. Why? Because STCW simply doesn’t differentiate between 3rd Mate and 2nd Mate. Similar “allowances” and substitutions are made for the other upgrades (see 46 CFR – Part 10.404-406 for the details). Now they want to go further down that road without properly justifying it first.

STCW uses a 3-step advancement system: Officer in Charge of a Navigation Watch (OICNV), which covers both the 3rd and 2nd Mate positions in our system, is considered to be an operational-level certification. Chief Mate and Master are both considered to be management-level certifications. What is now being proposed is to allow those holding the operational-level certification of OICNV to go straight to Master without getting any sea time at all at the management level as a Chief Mate first. In short, you would need either 2 years total, with 1 year as an OICNW and 1 year as Chief Mate, or 3 years total as just an OICNW. This is supposedly being done to allow those who can’t, for whatever reason, find a position as Chief Mate and get the required experience at that level to still be able to advance to Master.

Hello?! Maybe there’s a good reason that some people can’t get jobs as a chief mate. Maybe it’s because it’s been recognized that they aren’t capable of it and shouldn’t ever be a chief mate. Everyone isn’t suited to move up to the highest levels and no one is “owed” a license as Master, let alone the position, just for a good attendance record. If allowing this change to happen is “consistent” with STCW then maybe it is STCW itself that is flawed. It definitely looks to be in direct conflict with its own safety mandate on this point, and skipping steps is a poor principle to establish and practice.

The primary and immediate danger to our domestic system lies in the fact that this line of short-cut logic, which smells a lot like the 30-Day Wonder (the biggest, baddest regulatory turd laid in a long time), is likely to be applied throughout our entire licensing structure. Marine safety will be eroded further as more certifications fall into the wrong hands. This already happens, of course, because it’s a given that no system can be perfect. But professional  experience and qualifications should not be sacrificed for the sake of having the most convenient job promotion system we can devise. The Coast Guard, not to mention the IMO, has some splainin’ to do on this one if they want it to pass the stink test…..and just saying “as provided in the STCW Convention” isn’t going to cut it. Formal classroom training and practical experience at sea are not necessarily always equivalent to one another, no matter what the people who stand to make even more money from these regulation changes (read: the training institutions) say to the contrary. The Coast Guard needs to explain, in crystal clear terms, how skipping right past chief mate is both safe and consistent with the principle of gaining practical experience at sea in each position before allowing incremental advancement of seafarers, and the burden of proof that this will do no harm rests with them. The NPRM doesn’t provide anything of the sort.

Having said all that I will nonetheless give full credit to the Coast Guard for providing a well-written NPRM. Although governmental regulatory-ese is often very difficult to read, let alone understand, they’ve done a good job here for what it is. Go to Section IV. Discussion of Proposed Rule on page 59356 (the 4th page) and you will find, over the following dozen-or-so pages, all of the proposed changes laid out in a clear and orderly fashion, complete with concise explanations. Going further into the document shows each change as it would actually appear in the Code of Federal Regulations.

Comments must be received no later than February 16, 2010. You can read and/or download the NPRM here, and go to Docket #USCG-2004-17914 to comment or to read the comments of others. Once there go down to the 7th item down from the top on the first page (which is a hyperlink to the new NPRM) and click the small balloon icon with “Comments Due 2/16/10 11:59 PM ET” beneath it. This will redirect you to the Submit a Comment page, where you can type in your comments directly in the box on the right or you can attach a previously completed file such as a Word document.

The mighty Dorothy J, all 65 feet and 2,000 hp of her, hauls the Weeks 533 past the towers of Jersey City, southbound in the North (Hudson) River, and right by the scene of some very heavy lifting last winter.

All mariners need to read the Coast Guard’s Safety Alert 8-09 and make sure you aren’t carrying around an EPIRB  with a bogus or defective battery that may not function properly when you need it the most. 7th District inspectors have received three recent reports from EPIRB manufacturers asserting that, while servicing their own beacons, these bad batteries were discovered, with the previous servicing having been conducted by someone other than the manufacturer.  Battery replacements should always be done in accordance with the EPIRB’s manual, which normally means by the original manufacturer. Given the tough economic times we’re in the pressure to cut corners wherever possible to save money is intense. But trusting your EPIRB inspection and battery replacement to Cap’n Crunch’s Marine Safety Co. may well blow up in your face. Look elsewhere for cost savings…..do you want to find yourself bobbing around in the ocean thinking help is on the way when it isn’t?

For your convenience we keep an archive of all pertinent USCG Safety Alerts, along with other interesting stuff including many accident reports, in our Safety section. Please check it from time to time.

I’d like to add to what Captain Joel Milton wrote in a recent column in Workboat Magazine.  First I should say that in the past I’ve been strongly opposed to the idea of a limited Towing Officer’s Assessment Record (TOAR), but now I’m convinced that this has to change.

It’s no secret that new wheelhouse guys coming up now are facing a steeper climb in acquiring their credentials.  The TOAR (a blessing as far as it goes to ensure that the wheelhouse is safe from an incompetent boat handler) has added an unintended stumbling block.  In a prior post I described what it once took to earn your first steering job, now the TOAR creates a real apprenticeship record to show written proof with a signature that the man at the helm has earned his stripes.  But with this innovation there’s an unintended consequence, practically speaking.

More and more petroleum transportation companies like the one I work for are converting or retrofitting their fleets to Articulated Tug-Barge (ATB) units, and the number of conventional tugs in our operation is dwindling. Therefore the training opportunities are becoming even more rare than they were only a short while ago.  It’s apparent that with the new designs of ATB’s and tractor tugs, the TOAR is limited in its ability to meet the needs of the industry “as is”.

For example, in the near future my outfit may not have enough conventional platforms to train prospective wheelhouse personnel to meet the need for qualified mates “in-house”.  With the way things are shaping up we’ll be forced to go outside the outfit to hire Tug Mates with a completed TOAR.  Shouldn’t we be able to advance qualified employees who already have a company history and familiarity with the company’s vessels and policy to senior positions rather than bringing in fresh blood that will need orientation and assessment?

The ATB, in its common configuration, is a limited application vessel with few similarities to the conventional tugboat (dual mode  units notwithstanding).  The tractor tug is another animal completely with its own operating parameters that dwarf the abilities of a conventional tug.  And although the industry is aware of the capabilities of these vessels, the official Coast Guard TOAR has not been addressed to meet the operational needs of these vessels specifically.

In my opinion, I feel there could be an adjustment made to the TOAR to consider a limited towing endorsement for ATB operations. Realistically, ATB’s operate like a ship and have similar maneuvering parameters. They utilize assist boats the same as ships.  Their officers are tugboat men, but they aren’t towing alongside or astern anymore, the skill-sets they’ve acquired will serve them in an emergency but when it comes to a full breakout (for some of the new systems) you’ll find the general consensus among the men who crew these vessels that unless the full breakout is the last resort it won’t happen, and I do mean the last resort.

For a Mate-Candidate on an ATB to advance to the wheelhouse on that same vessel, he must return to a conventional tugboat and put in the time.  In considering the limited availability of training vessels wouldn’t it make sense to allow that candidate to train and handle the ATB under the same direct supervision and qualify him for a limited ticket?

Back when I was working on upgrading my license I was granted a waiver by the local Coast Guard Captain of the Port (COTP), at my employers request, to work as Chief  Mate on a small coastal tanker of just under 1,800 gross tons in order to serve the necessary time on a vessel over 1,600 gross tons.  After the time requirement was satisfied under that specific limitation I was granted the unlimited tonnage endorsement and was able to continue upgrading my pilotage with the tonnage limits removed.

Captain Kelly Sweeney of Professional Mariner Magazine recently made the case for increased application of simulators in qualifying candidates for ship operations including navigation, piloting and tanker ops.  These days, the latest simulators are being used to prepare and train mariners regarding the abilities of the new tractor style tugs without scratching a dollar’s worth of paint.  All good things, but I was of the opinion that it was limited because the “real-world” intensity isn’t there. Captain Sweeney offers a different perspective and I can agree that the simulator may be the only way to get the necessary expertise/exposure without creating more roadblocks for many endorsements, not just the TOAR.

Maybe its time we have a conversation to see if this can be accomplished and meet the needs of the industry without sacrificing the quality of the officers we want to see at the helm. Maybe the “waiver” is the way to go.  Or perhaps we can utilize the latest simulators in the Bridge Resource Management curriculum for advanced operations like emergency breakaways and towing scenarios, and arrive at a practical compromise.

Of course with that accommodation, the flexibility to work on several styles of tugs will be limited requiring different levels of endorsement.  A whole separate issue to which Captain Milton offers an elegant and simple solution, complete a standard TOAR and remove any limits on the endorsement.

Capt. Bill Brucato

NY Tugmaster’s Weblog