Page 7: USNS John Glenn pays tribute to an American hero
Page 2: There are more questions than answers about what the U.S. mar-itime industry can expect from the White House in the next four years. Butthere is one strong, specific and favorable portent, and in a wider sense,optimism arises from the President’s thematic pledge of “America First.”
Early indications spark optimism onU.S. maritime policy
On December 17, the Liberty— the third Jones Act tanker in a seriesbeing built for SEA-Vista LLC — was christened at General DynamicsNASSCO. AMO represents all licensed officers aboard the SEA-Vistatankers. Coverage of this event will be featured in the February edition.
Liberty, third Jones Act tanker inSEA-Vista LLC series, christened
Volume 47, Number 1 January 2017
See American Endurance ◆ Page 6
New AMO jobs aboard American Endurance
Photos: Philly Shipyard, Inc.
President andChief ExecutiveOfficer of PhillyShipyard SteinarNerbovik,AmericanMaritime Officersmember CaptainScott Davis andLisa McCord,sponsor of theAmericanEndurance,gather for thepresentation ofthe ship’s plaqueduring the chris-tening ceremonyheld November16 at PhillyShipyard.
Philly Shipyard, Inc. (PSI), the soleoperating subsidiary of Philly ShipyardASA, on November 30 delivered theAmerican Endurance, the first of four nextgeneration 50,000 dwt product tankers thatit is building for American PetroleumTankers (APT), a subsidiary of KinderMorgan, Inc.
The American Endurance was chris-tened at the shipyard on November 16.American Maritime Officers represents alllicensed officers aboard the ship, which isoperated for APT by Intrepid Personnel andProvisioning.
The Jones Act tanker was the 25thvessel built by PSI (formerly known asAker Philadelphia Shipyard, Inc.). The nextgeneration 50,000 dwt product tanker isbased on a proven Hyundai MipoDockyards (HMD) design that also incor-porates numerous fuel efficiency features,
2 • American Maritime Officer January 2017
Early indications spark optimismon U.S. maritime policyBy Paul DoellNational President
With a newPresident whobrings an unprece-dented, unortho-dox style to gov-erning, there aremore questionsthan answers aboutwhat the U.S. mar-itime industry canexpect from theWhite House inthe next four years.
But there is one strong, specific andfavorable portent: President Trump’sselection of Elaine Chao to serve asSecretary of Transportation, which countsthe Maritime Administration among itsagencies. Chao, who served as Secretaryof Labor under President George W. Bush,is a former deputy transportation secre-tary, a former chair of the FederalMaritime Commission and a formerdeputy administrator at MARAD. Sheknows and supports our industry, and sheunderstands our issues.
In a much wider sense, optimismarises from the President’s prevailing the-
matic pledge of “America First” in busi-ness and jobs. A strong privately ownedand operated U.S. merchant fleet and askilled, reliable American merchantmariner workforce fit snugly into the newadministration’s overarching policy visionas economic and national security assets.
Maritime policy inclinations onCapitol Hill are at this point easier tosense in specific ways. U.S. maritimeinterests still have many influential sup-porters in key positions in both parties andin both the House of Representatives andthe Senate. One rare point of broad bipar-tisan agreement on the Hill is that the U.S.needs a large and diverse private sectorU.S. merchant fleet and a skilled, reliableAmerican merchant mariner workforce toserve the U.S. in domestic and internation-al trade and to provide effective and effi-cient defense shipping services the federalgovernment is incapable of.
The agenda this year is familiar:sustaining the Maritime SecurityProgram; enforcing the body of U.S.-flag cargo preference laws; allowing theExport-Import Bank of the UnitedStates to function as intended; defend-ing the Jones Act, the domestic shippinglaw that is a perennial target of mis-guided or misinformed criticism; boost-
ing the U.S. Great Lakes bulk fleet bycountering unfair trade in iron ore andpromoting necessary nationwide infra-structure projects.
Congress and the White House mayalso consider American-flag tanker partic-ipation in new U.S. oil and natural gasexport trades.
The Maritime Administration’slong-awaited National MaritimeTransportation Strategy will come intofocus as well. In an email announcing hisJanuary 6 departure from the agency, for-mer administrator Paul “Chip” Jaenichensaid release of the NMTS was imminent.
VPAF: a reliable resourceAmerican Maritime Officers is pre-
pared to navigate the new legislativeseascape in Washington, and seagoingAMO members can do their part by sup-porting a most reliable resource — theAMO Voluntary Political Action Fund.
Contributions to VPAF are usedexclusively to support lawmakers whosupport the U.S. merchant marine. This isthe only criterion governing use of themoney. Party affiliation and political ide-ology are not considered. Nor are candi-dates’ positions on gun control, abortionor other social issues. The AMO Voluntary
Political Action Fund covers no travel,meal, lodging or entertainment expenses.
To put it bluntly, the AMO VPAFreflects one most important reality —every job held by every deep-sea, GreatLakes and inland waters AMO memberdepends directly on what Congress doesor doesn’t do.
Moreover, the fund works as intend-ed. For example — and some of our alliesin maritime advocacy will bristle at this —our union held the lead in authorizing,renewing, expanding and extending theMaritime Security Program. The effort toincrease MSP funding to $5 million pership per year began with AMO andAmerican Maritime Officers Service inprivate conversation at the highest level inthe House of Representatives.
AMO also triggered the recentrenewal of the Ex-Im Bank charter, andwe were out front in successful support ofthe Jones Act in connection with the eco-nomic crisis in Puerto Rico.
On behalf of the National ExecutiveBoard of AMO, I thank AMO memberswho contribute to the AMO VoluntaryPolitical Action Fund routinely. I askmembers who don’t participate in the fundto reconsider — contribute in amountsyou can be comfortable with, and considerthe modest expense an investment in joband benefit security.
As always, I welcome AMO mem-bers’ questions, comments and sugges-tions on any topic. I can be reached toll-free at 800-362-0513, on the headquartersline at 954-921-2221 (ext. 1001) or on mycell at 954-881-5651.
AMO aboard Ocean Freedom in the Maritime Security Program fleet
The Ocean Freedom called at Freeport, Texas in November. The heavy-liftcargo ship is operated in the Maritime Security Program fleet by CrowleyLiner Services and is manned in all licensed positions by AMO.
Members of American Maritime Officers working aboard the Ocean Freedomin November included Second Mate John Merrone, Captain Paul Zubaly andChief Mate Matt Sanford.
AMO mem-bers work-ing aboardthe OceanFreedom inNovember
includedSecond
AssistantEngineerNIcholas
Bruen andChief
EngineerAllen Dorn.
AMO mem-bers work-ing aboardthe OceanFreedom inNovemberincludedFirstAssistantEngineerAnthonyAmandolaand FirstA.E. SaifulDewan.
American Maritime Officer • 3January 2017
Autonomous shipsImplications for mariners, unions and industryBy Michael MurphyNational Vice PresidentGovernment Relations
I have asked the editor to run a seriesof recent articles discussing autonomousships in order to start the conversation thatwe, as a maritime union, must have soon,and to provide insight to how other ele-ments of the industry see the future.
I will also be writing short lead-ins toaccompany these articles because I aminvolved in the international automationdiscussion through the Maritime SafetyCommittee that I chair for the InternationalTransport Workers’ Federation (ITF). Ihope to bring some clarity to what theimplications are for each mariner who isworking today and what the future mightlook like for the next generation.
The first article included below is byCaptain George Quick, who is also involvedin the international discussion with me.Captain Quick’s article examines the full
spectrum of whether autonomous ships arepossible, the economic, regulatory, legal andcultural hurdles, and most important to us,the impact on us as mariners and union mem-bers. Furthermore, he discusses automationin the broader context of its continuingimpact on workers and society in general.
But first, let us take a general look atautomation in our industry. Shipboardautomation has followed an ever-steepeningcurve for the fifty years I have been associ-ated with the industry. At the beginning ofmy career, it was still in its nascent stagewith simple, incremental changes such asautomated coordinate readouts on theLORAN C (an upgrade from the tables usedwith LORAC A) and the early, and mostlyunsuccessful, attempts at boiler automation.Over the last twenty years, automation hasramped up primarily because of the increas-es in computing power and has brought usdramatic changes in navigation, engineer-ing and communications.
Advances in automation allowed us
to do more with less. Thus, the number ofcrew aboard has rapidly declined to the“minimum safe manning” listed on thevessel’s Certificate of Compliance.Certainly there are other factors, primarilyeconomic, that influenced the minimumsafe manning requirement, but automationkick-started the competitive race to thesmallest crew possible.
Automation has also effected numer-ous changes to our training as seagoingmariners. Until automation and STCWchanged the landscape, a mariner’s skillswere broadened and honed by on-the-jobtraining and self-study — there were fewprofessional courses required. Now, we areinundated by training and spend a gooddeal of our time off the ship in school. Ofcourse, we can’t blame the entire trainingburden on automation. The commercialmaritime industry’s entry into governmentmilitary vessel operations has graduallyintegrated military type training require-ments into many of our lives as the nation’s
war plans have increasingly made us anational security asset. Work on govern-ment contract ships has provided manygood paying jobs, but it comes with a priceof additional training time.
So where does that find us today? Wemust manage increasingly complex vesselswith minimal onboard manning and wespend our “vacation” time in school takingtraining courses to prepare us for an evenmore challenging shipboard environment.Now, the manufacturers are touting theirautomation and autonomous vessels as away to replace us to reduce or eliminate thecost of salaries, benefits and training.However, there are many obstacles toreplacing mariners and they will beexplored in the coming articles.
As union leaders, both in the U.S.and abroad, begin to tackle the challengesthat lie ahead for the next 20 to 30 years,we must ensure that the members who areactually working aboard ships have aninput to the discussion. While none of ushas a crystal ball, we must look forwardand begin planning today to ensure we arehere tomorrow.
I hope you find the automation arti-cles printed over the next few monthsinformative and stimulating. Let the dis-cussion begin.
American Maritime Officer(USPS 316-920)
Official Publication of American Maritime Officers601 S. Federal HighwayDania Beach, FL 33004
(954) 921-2221Periodical Postage Paid at
Dania Beach, FL and Additional Mailing OfficesPublished Monthly
POSTMASTER—Send Address Changes To:American Maritime Officers — ATTENTION: Member Services
P.O. Box 66Dania Beach, FL 33004
ISO 9001:2008Certificate #33975
Would autonomous ships be good for society?The following article was written by
Captain George Quick and is republishedhere with permission. It was previouslypublished by The Maritime Executive:http://tinyurl.com/hlwgjka.
There has been a good deal of dis-cussion recently suggesting thatunmanned, autonomous ships representthe future of the maritime industry. Thediscussion has been primarily driven byEU-funded research that seesautonomous, unmanned ships as a keyelement for a competitive and sustainableEuropean shipping industry in the future.
The EU has had a long-term goal ofmaking short sea shipping more compet-itive with road and rail transport, whichis under stress from the transportationbottlenecks caused by increasing vol-umes of internal trade. Faced with mas-sive infrastructure costs to upgrade roadand rail, the EU is making a concertedeffort at the policy level to move largevolumes of cargo from land to the“motorways of the sea.”
The discussion has also been influ-enced by ambitious press releases fromequipment manufacturers and potentialservice suppliers, who are expanding theconcept to include a proposed automatedglobal shipping industry. This would cre-ate a new market for vendors, but it is notdriven by user demand.
There is little doubt that advancesin information and communicationstechnology and robotics will impact themaritime industry and acceleratechanges in the way ships are operated.We have already seen the effects ofautomation in the manufacturing anddistribution sectors and the massive
changes they have brought.The concepts underlying
autonomous ships are based on the“Industry 4.0” (1) model recently devel-oped in Germany, in which cyber-physi-cal systems would monitor sensors, cre-ate a virtual copy of the physical worldand permit decentralized decisions. Itsgoal is managing automated productionwithin a “Smart Factory” and the integra-tion of multiple factories, suppliers, dis-tributors and consumers through theinternet of things or services. But it isquestionable whether a model developedfor a controlled manufacturing environ-ment can be transplanted to the dynamic,global, uncontrolled and open maritimeenvironment.
Given both the unique nature of themaritime industry and the exponentialgrowth in the application of technology,any attempt to predict the extent and con-sequences of automation is speculative atbest. Any change will come in stages, andeach stage will require evaluation.
One stage will certainly includeremote monitoring of all functionsaboard ships with far greater shoresidemanagement of shipboard operations. Tosome extent, for certain functions,remote monitoring has been around fordecades. Cost considerations and band-width have been limiting factors, but nowthat is changing. Efforts at theInternational Maritime Organization(IMO) to develop and implement tech-nology to support e-Navigation —including interoperability and harmo-nization of information between ship andshore — could potentially be a precursorto remotely controlled ships. That raises,
at least as a concept, the possibility oftruly autonomous, unmanned ships mak-ing their own decisions using artificialintelligence. While this seems like fanta-sy at the present time, given the increas-ing capabilities of technology it cannotbe completely ruled out as a possibility inthe decades ahead.
The pace and extent of how thiswill all evolve in international shippingwill primarily be determined by econom-ics and risk factors. It is anticipated thatthe cost of building a ship with therequired technology and redundancies forremotely controlled operation may behigher than that of a conventional ship,even with the elimination of the crew’saccommodations. The system would alsorequire shoreside infrastructure with aglobal reach for monitoring and control,as well as expensive shoreside supportfor maintenance, repairs and functionsnow carried out on conventional ships byseafarers from relatively low-cost-labor-supply countries.
Can the additional costs of anautonomous system be offset by substan-tial reductions in crewing costs, or theircomplete elimination? If not, there is noeconomic justification for ship owners toshift to autonomous ships.
It is estimated that crewing costsare only about six percent of the overallcost of running a ship. (2) Capital costsare about 42 percent and voyage costs,including bunkers, run about 40 per-cent. There can be no doubt that ship-ping is capital intensive rather thanlabor intensive.
Even if all manning were to beeliminated, it is not at all clear how the
relatively minor savings in crewingexpenses could compensate for the addi-tional costs of building and operating aremotely controlled autonomous shipsystem and its supporting shore sideinfrastructure.
There has been a disturbingdegree of enthusiasm in some circlesfor autonomous ships, which would cre-ate massive unemployment of theworld’s seafarers and disrupt the econo-my of the maritime labor supply coun-tries, all to achieve a rather minorreduction in the cost of shipping. But sofar there has been a noticeable lack ofenthusiasm for autonomous shipsamong shipowners: perhaps they have abetter grasp of the economics than theenthusiastic proponents.
Maersk has indicated that it may belooking at some form of autonomousships in the 2030-35 timeframe, whichwould coincide with the end of the usefullife of their recent newbuilds. But shipowners will only embrace autonomousshipping if it is commercially viable andthey can gain a competitive advantage byeliminating the costs of seafarers. As wesee from the statistics, however, theextent of any cost reduction accom-plished through cuts in manning wouldbe limited at best.
Advocates of autonomous ships areattempting to justify their position basedon a shortage and a fictional lack of com-petency of seafarers. They propose a“solution” they say would lower costsand increase safety through eliminatingseafarers and with them the risk of
See Autonomous Ships ◆ Page 7
4 • American Maritime Officer January 2017
El Faro voyage datarecorder transcript,factual reports addedto NTSB docket
The following article was released December 13 by the National TransportationSafety Board and is available online: http://tinyurl.com/zd5ydd8.
WASHINGTON — The transcript from the El Faro’s voyage data recorder bridgeaudio was one of five factual reports added Tuesday to the NTSB’s El Faro investigationdocket as part of the agency’s ongoing investigation into the maritime tragedy.
Entered into the docket were factual reports from the Electronic Data Group,Meteorology Group, Survival Factors Group, Engineering Group and the Voyage DataRecorder Audio Transcript Group.
NTSB Chairman Christopher Hart was joined by the agency’s Director of the Officeof Research and Engineering, James Ritter, and Brian Curtis, Director of the Office ofMarine Safety, in a press briefing in which they described the documents within the docketand provided highlights of the information contained within the docket.
The Engineering Group Factual Report contains information about the El Faro’smachinery system, a description and history of the vessel, maintenance histories for theplant, survey and inspection information, the vessel’s safety management system, and infor-mation about the training and experience of the El Faro’s engineering staff.
The Survival Factors Group Factual Report contains information about the U.S. CoastGuard’s search efforts, the El Faro’s survival equipment, crew preparedness, lifeboat stan-dards and regulations, and information about distress transmissions.
The Electronic Data Group Factual Report provides a system overview and discus-sion of data recovered from the El Faro’s voyage data recorder and other onboard electronic
systems. The ship’s voyage data recorder captured 26 hours of data in 11 parameters leadingup to the sinking of the vessel. The 11 parameters were:
•Bridge Audio•Date•Time•VDR power supply status•Position and other GPS data•Heading•Course•Speed•Rate of Turn•Wind data•Automatic Identification System data
The Meteorology Group Factual Report provides information about what meteoro-logical information was available to the El Faro’s crew.
The Voyage Data Recorder Audio Transcript Group Factual Report contains thetranscript of the discernable and relevant bridge audio captured by the VDR. Membersof the group included the NTSB, the U.S. Coast Guard and TOTE Services — theowner of the El Faro.
The NTSB considers the information captured in the VDR’s bridge audio recordingcritical to determining the events leading up to the loss of the El Faro. The bridge audio wascharacterized as “poor quality” and contains high levels of background noise; however, thisis not considered unusual. There were six microphones positioned throughout the El Faro’sbridge. Extensive digital audio filtering was necessary to enhance the audio. The entire 26-hour recording was reviewed many times, with some statements reviewed more than 100times by the VDR audio transcript group to ensure they understood what was being said inthe recording. About 10 hours of audio was determined to be relevant to the investigationand therefore transcribed by the VDR audio transcript group. The transcript required morethan 1,100 work hours to complete. The transcript report is more than 500 pages and is thelongest transcript ever produced by the NTSB.
The following is a summary of the characterization of the bridge audio transcript.The bridge audio recording began about 5:37 a.m., Sept. 30, 2015, roughly eight
hours after the El Faro departed Jacksonville, Florida.The first recorded conversation about the forecasted weather was captured the morn-
ing of Sept. 30, between the captain and chief mate, who agreed on a course diversion theybelieved would keep them sufficiently clear of the eye of Hurricane Joaquin. There weremultiple conversations regarding weather and route planning throughout the day andevening of Sept. 30.
The captain departed the bridge at about 8 p.m. Sept. 30, and returned at about 4:10a.m. Oct 1. At about 4:37 a.m. the chief mate received a phone call from the chief engineerregarding the vessel’s list and engine oil levels. This appears to be the first recorded conver-sation about these issues. The information was related to the captain. The alternate chiefengineer is heard stating at about 5:12 a.m. that he’s never seen the ship with such a list.
At about 5:43 a.m. the captain takes a phone call and indicates there is a problem inthe number three hold of the ship and sends the chief mate to investigate. They discuss sus-pected flooding over UHF radio, which appears to be the first recorded conversation abouta flooding condition on the ship.
The captain indicates at about 6:13 a.m. that the ship lost propulsion. Numerous con-versations are heard throughout the remainder of the recording about the ship’s floodingcondition, attempts to rectify the ship’s list and attempts to regain propulsion.
The second mate began formatting a GMDSS distress message at about 6:32 a.m. asdirected by the captain. At 7:07 a.m. the captain notified TOTE Service’s designated shore-side representative of the critical situation and that he was preparing to send an electronicdistress signal. The captain instructed the second mate to send the distress message at about7:13 a.m. The captain gave the command to sound the ship’s general alarm at about 7:27a.m. and about two minutes later the second mate exclaimed there were containers in thewater and the captain gave the command to sound the abandon ship alarm. About four min-utes later the captain relayed over the UHF radio to put the life rafts in the water.
The bridge audio recording ended at about 7:40 a.m. Oct. 1, 2015, with the captainand one of the helmsmen still present on the bridge.
The full bridge audio transcript and other factual reports are available online in thedocket at http://go.usa.gov/x8p9j.
The public docket contains only factual information collected by NTSB investigators.The public docket does not provide analysis, findings, recommendations or probable causedeterminations, and as such, no conclusions about how or why an accident occurred shouldbe drawn from the docket. Providing the docket affords the public the opportunity to seewhat information has been gathered about the accident. Any analysis, findings, recommen-dations, or probable cause determinations related to the accident will be issued by the NTSBat a later date.
Release of VDR transcripts,upcoming hearing — a notefrom the El Faro MarineBoard of Investigation (MBI)
The following article was posted December 13 by the U.S. Coast Guard andis available online: http://tinyurl.com/hxndd7u.
Written by Capt. Jason Neubauer, chief of the Coast Guard Office ofInvestigations and Casualty Analysis
Today, the National Transportation Safety Board (NTSB) released(www.ntsb.gov/news/press-releases/Pages/pr20161209.aspx) a transcript of the S.S.El Faro’s voyage data recorder (VDR), in addition to several other factual reports, tothe docket (www.ntsb.gov/investigations/Pages/2015_elfaro_jax.aspx) for its inves-tigation into the October 1, 2015, sinking of the vessel.
The transcript and factual reports provide information collected regardingthis marine casualty, and we continue to work in partnership with NTSB as ourinvestigations progress. In light of this release, we continue to seek additionalinformation from the maritime community after examining the newly releasedVDR audio transcript and factual reports. If you have information to share with theMBI, please e-mail the El Faro team at [email protected].
Today, the Coast Guard also released the findings of the Research andDevelopment Center’s (RDC) immersion suit test (http://tinyurl.com/hmwkynk).The test was conducted to study immersion suit endurance after issues arose duringthe search for El Faro’s crew members. The test showed that tethered, but free-float-ing mannequins, in the same type of immersion suits El Faro carried, remainedafloat in the water for a two-week period. Additional details can be obtained fromthe report on this matter.
To date, the Coast Guard has conducted two rounds of public hearings as partof our Marine Board of Investigation into the loss of El Faro, and a third hearing isscheduled for February 2017 in Jacksonville. This final hearing session will examineadditional elements of the investigation, including but not limited to questions aris-ing from the contents of the El Faro’s VDR, as well as additional witnesses such asformer crewmembers, TOTE company officials, Coast Guard personnel and others.A follow-up media advisory will be sent out when the dates and venue for the thirdhearing session are finalized.
We have updated the website for the Coast Guard Investigations LiveStreamchannel (https://livestream.com/USCGinvestigations/). Archived sessions from pre-vious hearings are available for public viewing on the site. Live streaming and anarchive of the third hearing session will also be available at this site. Transcripts ofthe hearings and additional information will continue to be made available via theU.S. Coast Guard Newsroom (www.uscgnews.com/go/doctype/4007/286370/).
This El Faro investigation is being conducted to determine as closely as pos-sible the factors that contributed to the incident, and propose corrective actions inorder to prevent those conditions from causing or contributing to future casualties.
USCG: Potential shutdown ofonline Mariner Live Chat tool
The following article was releasedDecember 12 by the U.S. Coast Guard’sNational Maritime Center.
On July 1, 2015, the NationalMaritime Center launched an online chatweb tool as part of a continued effort to bet-ter serve the maritime community. Theresponse from users has been extremelypositive. However, a review of the system isbeing conducted and Live Chat may be shutdown in January 2017.
In the event that Live Chat is shutdown, our customer service center will con-tinue to serve you. The same dedicated indi-viduals who answer questions via Live Chatwill continue answering phone and e-mailinquiries.
Mariners and other providers shouldcontact the NMC Customer Service Centervia e-mail at [email protected] or bycalling 1-888-IASKNMC (427-5662) withany questions.
American Maritime Officer • 5January 2017
U.S. Coast Guard: Update on Merchant MarinerCredential processing delays, MMC extension
The following bulletin was released December 23 by the U.S. Coast Guard and isavailable online: http://tinyurl.com/zxnd99v. Please note, the bulletin and letter of extensiondo not waive the requirement for mariners to submit timely applications for renewal of aMerchant Mariner Credential, nor do they extend the validity of an STCW endorsement ora Mariner Medical Certificate.
The National Maritime Center (NMC) continues to experience a greater-than-averagevolume of applications for Merchant Mariner Credentials (MMC). This bulletin outlinesactions to be taken for U.S. mariners holding national and STCW endorsements.
National Endorsements: The United States Coast Guard (USCG) is exercising itsauthority under Title 46, United States Code, Section 7507, and is granting an extension ofnational endorsements for any mariner whose MMC expires on or after December 1, 2016.This extension is effective immediately and will be valid until September 30, 2017.Mariners, employers, and owner/operators are encouraged to print a copy of the letter(http://tinyurl.com/hch5vmv) explaining the extension. All mariners sailing exclusivelyunder the authority of their national endorsement on inland or coastwise voyages areadvised to carry a copy of this letter with their expired credentials and produce it upon therequest of USCG personnel or other officials. Expiration dates of new MMCs will be 5years from the date of expiration of the previous MMC, in accordance with current policy.The extension of validity of expired credentials provides the opportunity for a mariner to
work under the authority of that credential during this period, so there is no loss of MMCvalidity associated with this decision.
STCW Endorsements: The NMC is focusing on evaluating applications withInternational Convention on Standards of Training, Certification, and Watchkeeping forSeafarers (STCW) endorsements. In accordance with Regulation I/2 of STCW, we areunable to extend the validity of these endorsements. As a result, applications containingMMCs with STCW endorsements will be processed as quickly as possible. This includescredential applications with an endorsement (that) currently has a limitation of “Not validafter Dec 31, 2016” associated with it.
Mariner Medical Certificates: Mariners must continue to maintain a valid marinermedical certificate.
Nothing stated in this bulletin is intended to relieve mariners from their responsi-bility to submit timely applications. Mariners should continue to submit their renewalrequests in time to receive a new MMC prior to the expiration date of their credentials.Mariners who have already submitted renewal applications do not need to resubmit theirrequests for renewal.
For additional information, please visit the NMC website(https://www.uscg.mil/nmc/default.asp), call 1-888-IASKNMC (427-5662), or [email protected].
Great Republic enters winter lay-up
American Maritime Officers members working aboardthe Great Republic as the ship entered winter lay-up inToledo, Ohio in December included First AssistantEngineer John Brightman and Chief Engineer MattWilliams. AMO represents the licensed officers andstewards aboard the Key Lakes vessel.
AMO members working aboardthe Great Republic as the shipentered winter lay-up includedCaptain James Fisher.
U.S.-flag Lakes cargoes up nearly 7 percent in NovemberU.S.-flagged Great Lakes freighters
moved 8.4 million tons of cargo inNovember, an increase of 6.7 percent com-pared with November of the previous year.However, the November cargo float was6.7 percent below the month’s five-year
average mark, the Lake Carriers’Association reported.
Iron ore cargoes for the steel industrytotaled 4.7 million tons in November, anincrease of 29.6 percent compared with thesame period of the previous year. However,
coal shipments to power plants and steelmills fell to 1.2 million tons, a decrease ofmore than 20 percent. Aggregate and flux-stone for construction projects and steelproduction totaled 2 million tons, a decreaseof nearly 10 percent.
For the season at the end ofNovember, U.S.-flag carriage stood at 76.2million tons, a decrease of 4.5 percent. Ironore cargoes were up 6.6 percent, but coalloads had dipped 25.8 percent. Limestoneshipments trailed last year by 7 percent.
AMO secures new multi-year agreement with Port City Marine
American Maritime Officers has secured a new multi-year agreement withPort City Marine Services covering the tug/barges operated by the company.AMO members who work aboard Port City Marine vessels voted unanimouslyto ratify the new agreement. AMO members working aboard the PrentissBrown/St. Marys Challenger in December included Engineer Karl Smith,Junior Mate John King, Captain Gerald Apple and Senior Mate CharlesEdwards. With them here in Charlevoix, Mich. is AMO Senior NationalAssistant Vice President Brian Krus.
The tug/barge Prentiss Brown/St. Marys Challenger loads cement inCharlevoix, Mich. in December.
6 • American Maritime Officer January 2017
flexible cargo capability, and the latest reg-ulatory requirements. The vessel has also
American EnduranceContinued from Page 1
received LNG Ready Level 1 approvalfrom the American Bureau of Shipping(ABS). The 600-foot tanker has a carryingcapacity of 14.5 million gallons of crude oilor refined products.
The delivery of our 25th vessel,
aptly named the American Endurance, is aprofound symbol of the shipbuilding lega-cy we have continued since re-opening in1997, the shipyard stated, adding: In col-laboration with American PetroleumTankers, we are proud of our contributions
to renew the current tanker fleet with amore modern and environmentally friend-ly design. This vessel, like all others, wasbuilt from the hands and hearts of 1,200shipbuilders for future crew to operatesafely and with the quality expected.
At left: Among those attending thechristening of the AmericanEndurance from American MaritimeOfficers were AMO NationalPresident Paul Doell, Chief EngineerThomas Balzano, Chief EngineerDaniel Savoie, Captain Scott Davis,Chief Mate Michael Stutevoss andSecond Mate Peter Guggina (not inthe picture).
Photos: Philly Shipyard, Inc.
Above: American Maritime Officersmembers attending the christening ofthe American Endurance includedChief Engineer Thomas Balzano(center).
American MaritimeOfficers members
attending thechristening of the
AmericanEndurance
included CaptainScott Davis, here
with Lisa McCord,the ship’s sponsor.
Congressman Hunter highlights importance ofJones Act in letter to President-elect Trump
Congressman Duncan Hunter (R-CA), chairman of the Subcommittee onCoast Guard and Maritime Transportation,sent the following letter dated December 2to President-elect Donald Trump.
I write to you today highlighting theimportance of United States domestic cab-otage laws in keeping American jobs inAmerica. These laws, found in chapter 551of title 46, United States Code, and popu-larly known as the Jones Act, require thatmerchandise and passengers that move bywater between two points in the UnitedStates do so on U.S.-built, -owned, -flagged, and -crewed vessels. Simply put,the Jones Act protects and creates goodAmerican jobs — jobs that would have oth-erwise fled our shores. Like so many oth-ers, I supported your campaign because ofyour commitment to protecting Americanjobs. You can carry out this promise by pro-tecting the Jones Act from attempts, initiat-ed and funded by foreign corporations, todismantle or repeal it. Throughout our his-tory, the U.S.-flag fleet has providedAmerican jobs, protected domestic eco-nomic prosperity, and provided criticalsealift capability for our military.
Changes to the Jones Act wouldresult in the elimination of tens of thou-sands of good American jobs by allowingforeign vessels, vessels constructed in for-eign shipyards, or vessels crewed by for-eign seafarers to be used in internal U.S.waterways. We simply cannot allow oureconomy to lose these jobs to foreignshippers and shipbuilding interests. The
loss of these jobs will affect every stateand will result in the loss of billions ofdollars in investments made by Americansand will place at risk hundreds of millionsof dollars in federal loans that financeAmerican ship construction. Moreover,losing these jobs would result in adecrease of American wages, taxes andless overall economic activity.
Historically, the Jones Act hasallowed the United States to retain a baselevel of expertise in shipbuilding, ship
operations and maintenance, providingstability to our commercial U.S. water-borne transportation industry. It providesaccess to U.S.-flag vessels and U.S. mer-chant mariners that provide critical capa-bilities to our national defense sealiftneeds. Changes to the Jones Act wouldalso cause irreparable harm to the U.S.merchant marine, a critical asset to ournational defense sealift readiness. Anyloss to this commercial base would beboth costly and time consuming for the
U.S. government to replicate on its own.As you move forward in your transi-
tion, I look forward to working with you onreturning American jobs back to America,and in the case of the Jones Act, protectingcurrent American jobs from foreign threats.As you work to reverse the disastrous poli-cies that have led to the outsourcing ofAmerican jobs, I urge you to promote poli-cies and retain the Jones Act. The Act helpsgrow a strong and robust U.S. shipbuildingindustry and U.S. mariner workforce.
AMO aboard Jones Act tanker Golden State
Members of American MaritimeOfficers working aboard the JonesAct tanker Golden State inNovember, here in Houston,Texas, included Third AssistantEngineer Cameron Eisenhaur,Second A.E. Rob Fluharty andFirst A.E. Chris Sundquist. TheGolden State is operated forAmerican Petroleum Tankers byIntrepid Personnel andProvisioning and is manned in alllicensed positions by AMO.
American Maritime Officer • 7January 2017
USNS John Glenn pays tribute to an American hero
On December 10, the officers and crew of the USNS John Glenn paid tribute to the ship’s namesake, John Glenn— U.S. senator, astronaut and veteran of World War II and the Korean War — who died December 8 at the age of95. The crew of the expeditionary transfer dock formed a 7 and saluted John Glenn for his service and tremendouscontributions to our nation. On February 20, 1962, Glenn piloted the Mercury-Atlas 6 ‘Friendship 7’ spacecraft onthe first manned orbital mission of the United States, becoming the first American to orbit the Earth.
American Maritime Officers mem-bers Captain W.G. McCullough,Chief Engineer Gregg Daley, FirstAssistant Engineer HenryMatuszynski and Chief MateColin Adler gather at the portraitof John Glenn onboard the USNSJohn Glenn.
Autonomous ShipsContinued from Page 3human error. They fail however toacknowledge the very real risk of intro-ducing new sources of error in technicalsystems, communication links, cybersecurity and remote human controllerswho are isolated from the reality of theship and its actual environment: thegreater the complexity, interdependen-cies and links within a system, the greaterthe opportunity for errors and failures.
We should be skeptical of opti-mistic projections of the future benefitsand efficiencies of autonomous ships thatare based on the aspirational views ofadvocates who have a commercial stakein creating a market for an autonomousship system. A great deal of investors’money has been lost in the past throughbets on over-hyped expectations regard-ing new technology. The “Dot-com” bub-ble of 2000 is a good example.
There is also a misconception thatcomplex, highly automated systemsrequire highly skilled operators. But nei-ther the experience of other industriesnor the academic literature support sucha view. As the technology assumesincreasingly complex functions, there is adown-skilling of operators who becomedependent on highly automated, self-reg-ulating systems. The more automated thesystem, the less is required of the humanoperator since basic competencies andlower level decision making functionsare built into the technology.
The human operator loses theopportunity to develop through experi-ence the deeper skills and talents, such asassessment and judgment. (3) The prob-lem with machines that think is that theygive rise to people who don’t need tothink. This presents a significant chal-lenge in the dynamic and complex mar-itime world, where assessment and judg-ment, based on experience and total situ-ational awareness, are fundamental tomaking the “right” decisions — oftenunder tight time constraints — that canspell the difference between a safe pas-sage and disaster.
Replacing skills and active partici-pation with the boring task of monitoringdisplays can lead to a dangerous level ofcomplacency. When things go wrong, thehandover problem between the automat-ed system and the complacent, unin-volved human operator—with degradedskills and situational awareness—hasproven to be a major problem. The signif-icance of this problem has been demon-strated in the air transport sector andother industries.
There is, in addition, the need totake a much broader view of automation,beyond its impact on the maritime sector.What is required is a realistic view ofautomation’s social and political conse-quences in the world at large. The asser-tion that technology is a purely benevo-lent force, whose only impact on societyis a positive one, is clearly erroneous.There is no economic law that says thateveryone, or even most people, willinevitably benefit from technologicalprogress. Technology is neither good norbad. Unlike humans, it has no moral orethical values.
Technology is a powerful force thatcan destabilize institutions and indus-tries, upset the social contract betweencapital and labor — as well as the tradi-tional employer/employee relationship— with profound consequences. Thechanges it brings have been compared toa fourth industrial revolution. (4) Andthere is considerable concern in academic
circles regarding technology’s impact onthe future of our society, on our econom-ic system and on our political institu-tions. The issue is not solely of concernto people being replaced by technology;this year at the World Economic Forum atDavos, it was the main topic of discus-sion among global leaders.
Academics estimate that as muchas 50-70 percent of the labor force canultimately be replaced by technology.The gains that automation produces fromincreased productivity with lower laborcosts primarily benefit the capitalinvestors who own and control the tech-nology. The resulting profit-concentrat-ing effects, coupled with technologicalunemployment or under-employment, arelargely responsible for the increasinginequality of income that is creatingsocial tensions and political turmoil inthe United States and elsewhere.Globalization has been the ready scape-goat of politicians, but technologicalunemployment is responsible for much ofthe problem.
Technology-generated incomeinequality is also a threat to our freemarket economic system because itreduces consumer demand by reducingthe number of consumers, principallyworkers, with the ability to purchasegoods. Our free market system is basedon consumer demand driving manufac-turing and production. In past industrialrevolutions (steam, mass production,electricity) an increase in demand creat-ed more jobs in production. Those jobswould in turn increase consumer spend-ing and drive up production. In thefourth industrial revolution, with tech-nology replacing workers, this classiceconomic principle no longer holds true.The cycle between consumer demand,production and jobs has been disrupted.
Automation now allows for a scaling-upof production coupled with little if anyincrease in the number of jobs. This isevident in the economic data: corporateprofits and the stock market go up,while worker income and consumerdemand are near stagnant.
The factors of primary concern tosociety are: the consequences of thechange in the nature of work (or even itselimination); the distribution betweencapital and labor of the enormous gainsin productivity that derive from technol-ogy; the preservation of the traditionalemployer/employee relationship, whichprovides stability and social benefits; andthe effect on the future of society as awhole of technology and robotics replac-ing or down-skilling workers.
In a globalized industry, these arenot issues that lend themselves to easysolution. They involve economic andpolitical issues — which impact the soci-ety as a whole — regarding the distribu-tion of productivity gains derived fromtechnology. In our democratic free mar-ket system, individual economic deci-sions are determined by self-interest.Matters of common interest to the wel-fare of society at large should beaddressed on a political level throughgood governance. The negative conse-quences of the disruptive power of tech-nology may not be the fault of technolo-gy, but the failure of government policiesto address its impact on society.
Where technology ultimately takesus will be decided within political insti-tutions, legislative bodies, regulatoryagencies and international organizationssuch as the United Nations and the IMO.What is needed is a common under-standing of the issues and a coordinatedeffort to protect not only the interests ofseafarers and workers but also the future
of our society as a whole.These thoughts have touched pri-
marily on the broader economic andsocial issues. There is a great deal moreto be said on the technical aspects—legaland regulatory, ultimate responsibilityand liability for risks, human factors andman/machine interface issues, softwarequality, cyber security, reliability of thecommunication/data links, and engineer-ing, sensor and technical systems—thatwill be left for another discussion.
Captain George Quick is vice pres-ident of the Pilot Membership Group atthe International Organization ofMasters, Mates & Pilots. He serves onthe delegation of the InternationalTransport Workers’ Federation (ITF) tothe IMO Maritime Safety Committee, theIMO Legal Committee and the IMOFacilitation Committee.
Sources:
(1) “Industrie 4.0” originated in aworking group organized by the Germangovernment to promote the computeriza-tion of manufacturing. The final report ofWorking Group Industry 4.0 was present-ed in April 2013.
(2) Martin Stopford, “MarineEconomics (Third Edition),” page 225.Based on data for a Capesize bulker. Attoday’s bunker rates, my rough calcula-tions are that manning costs fluctuatebetween 3% and 5%, depending on thevolatility of bunker rates and their impacton voyage costs.
(3) “The Glass Cage, Automationand Us” by Nicholas Carr.
(4) “The Fourth IndustrialRevolution” by Klaus Schwab, executivechairman, World Economic Forum,Davos.
Radar Courses
Radar Recertification 1 day 20 January 14, 16 March 10, 25, 27 April 8, 12, 15 May 6, 8, 20, 22 June 11, 13 July 1, 3, 15, 17 August
ARPA 4 days 21 February 16 May
Radar Recertification & ARPA 5 days 20 February 15 May
Original Radar Observer Unlimited 5 days 13 February
8 • American Maritime Officer January 2017
AMO Safety and Education Plan — Simulation, Training, Assessment & Research Center(954) 920-3222 / (800) 942-3220 — 2 West Dixie Highway, Dania Beach, FL 33004
General Courses
IGF Code Training 5 days 24 April 24 July 28 August
Confined Space Entry 3 days 6 March 17 July
Advanced Fire Fighting 5 days 13 February 17 April 22 May
Basic Safety Training — All 4 modules must be completed within 12 months: Personal SafetyTechniques (Mon/Tues — 1.5 days), Personal Safety & Social Responsibility (Tues pm — .5 days),Elementary First Aid (Wed — 1 day), Fire Fighting & Fire Prevention (Thurs/Fri — 2 days) — not required.if Combined Basic & Adv. Fire Fighting completed within 12 months.
5 days 30 January 1 May
Basic Safety Training — Refresher 3 days 1 February 3 May
Chemical Safety — Advanced 5 days 13 February
ECDIS 5 days 23 January 27 February 17 April 12 June 7 August
Environmental Awareness (includes Oily Water Separator) 3 days 27 March 30 May 19 June
Fast Rescue Boat 4 days 17 January 13 March 26 June 24 July
GMDSS — Requires after-hour homework 10 days 30 January 27 March 17 July
LNG Tankerman PIC 8 days 22 February 14 June
LNG Simulator Training — Enrollment priority in the LNG simulator course is given to qualified membercandidates for employment and/or observation opportunities with AMO contracted LNG companies. In allcases successful completion of the LNG PNC classroom course is prerequisite.
5 days 6 March 26 June
Proficiency in Survival Craft (Lifeboat) 4 days 6 February 10 April 9 May
Proficiency in Survival Craft (Lifeboat) — Assessments Only 1 day Please Call
Safety Officer Course 2 days 2 March 15 June
Tankerman PIC DL — Classroom 5 days 20 March 1 May 10 July
Tankerman PIC DL — Simulator 10 days 23 January 27 March 15 May 24 July 14 August
Tankerman PIC DL — Accelerated Program 10 days Please Call
Train the Trainer 5 days 6 March 1 May 26 June 21 August
Train the Trainer — Simulator Instructors (Requires after hours work) 5 days Please Call
Vessel Personnel with Designated Security Duties — VPDSD 2 days 26 January 27 April
Vessel/Company Security Officer — Includes Anti-Piracy 3 days 13, 27 Feb. 12 June
Crowd Management 1 day Please Call
Crisis Management & Human Behavior 1 day Please Call
Basic Training & Advanced Fire Fighting Revalidation (Required by firstcredential renewal AFTER 1 Jan 2017) 2 days 23 February 20 March 3 April 15 May 22 June 10 July 3 August
EFA (Scheduled with Basic Training Revalidation BUT NOT REQUIREDFOR STCW 2010) 1 day 22 February 22 March 5 April 21 June 12 July 2 August
Leadership & Management (required by ALL management level Deckand Engine officers by 1 Jan 2017) 5 days 16 January 6, 27 February 20 March 17 April 8 May 5 June 14 August
Maritime Security Awareness 1/2 day Please Call
Deck CoursesAdvanced Bridge Resource Management — Meets STCW 2010Leadership & Management gap closing requirements 5 days 15 May 31 July
Advanced Shiphandling for Masters — (No equivalency) Must havesailed as Chief Mate Unlimited 5 days 27 March 8 May
Advanced Shiphandling for 3rd Mates — 60 days seatime equiv. for 3rdMates 10 days 23 January 20 February 6 March 5 June 7 August
Advanced & Emergency Shiphandling — First Class Pilots, Great Lakes 5 days 6 February
Dynamic Positioning — Basic 5 days 30 January 1 May 24 July
Dynamic Positioning — Advanced 5 days 20 March 5 June 28 August
Navigational Watchkeeping Standardization & Assessment Program 5 days 30 January 6 March 1, 22 May 12 June 31 July 28 August
TOAR (Towing Officer Assessment Record) — Third Mate (Unlimited orGreat Lakes) or 1600T Master License required AND OICNW required 5 days 23 January 15 May 21 August
Tug Training — ASD Assist (Azimuthing Stern Drive) 5 days 27 March 19 June
Visual Communications (Flashing Light) — Test only 1 day Please Call
Medical Courses
Heat Stress Afloat / Hearing Conservation Afloat 1 day 13 March 3 April 5 June
Elementary First Aid — Prerequisite for MCP within preceding 12 months 1 day 17 January 14 March 4 April 15 May 6 June 25 July
Medical Care Provider — Prerequisite for MPIC within preceding 12months. Please fax EFA certificate when registering 3 days 18 January 15 March 5 April 16 May 7 June 26 July
Medical PIC — Please fax MCP certificate when registering 5 days 23 January 20 March 12 June 31 July
Urinalysis Collector Training 1 day 30 January 27 March 19 June 24 July 7 August
Breath Alcohol Test (BAT) — Alco Sensors 3 and 4 only 1 day 31 January 28 March 20 June 8 August
Saliva Screening Test — QEDs only 1/2 day 1 February 29 March 21 June 9 August
Medical PIC Refresher — MSC approved 3 days Please Call
Deck Upgrade — STCW 2010 — Management Level (NVIC 10-14)— If sea service or training towards management level (Chief Mate/Master) upgrade started ON OR AFTER 24 March 2014 you must adhereto this new program of training. Completion of both required and optional courses listed below will include all Task Assessments required by NVIC 10-14 , providing ECDIS, GMDSS and ARPA have been previously completed.
Upgrade: Shiphandling at the Management Level 10 days 17 April 17 July
Upgrade: Advanced Meteorology — Requires after-hours homework 5 days 23 January 15 May 10 July
Advanced Stability 5 days 30 January 8 May 31 July
Search & Rescue 2 days 13 February 1 May 7 August
Management of Medical Care 1/2 day 15 February 3 May 9 August
Leadership & Management 5 days 16 January 6, 27 February 20 March 17 April 8 May 5 June 14 August
Advanced Cargo — Optional for task sign-off 5 days 20 February 5 June 21 August
Marine Propulsion Plants — Optional for task sign-off 5 days 27 February 19 June 28 August
Advanced Celestial — Optional for task sign-off 5 days 6 March 12 June
Advanced Navigation — Optional for task sign-off 5 days 13 March 26 June
American Maritime Officer • 9January 2017
MSC Training ProgramBasic CBR Defense 1 day 3 February 10, 31 March 7 April 18 May 23 June 21 July
Damage Control 1 day 2 February 9, 30 March 6 April 19 May 22 June 20 July
Heat Stress Afloat / Hearing Conservation Afloat 1 day 13, 27 March 5 June
Helicopter Fire Fighting 1 day 31 January 10 February 8 May
Marine Environmental Programs (with CBRD) 1/2 day 3 February 10, 31 March 7 April 18 May 23 June 21 July
Marine Sanitation Devices 1/2 day 14 March 6 June
MSC Readiness Refresher — Must have completed full CBRD & DC once incareer. 2 days 30 January 1 May
MSC Watchstander — BASIC — Once in career, SST grads grandfathered 2 days 19 January 23 March 8 June
MSC Watchstander — ADVANCED — Required for all SRF members 1 day 13, 27 January 17 February 3, 31 March 28 April 5 May 16 June 14, 28 July
MSC Ship Reaction Force — Required every three years for SRF members 3 days 30 January 6 March 3 April 19 June 31 July
Small Arms — Initial & Sustainment (Refresher) Training — Open tomembers & applicants eligible for employment through AMO (w/in 1 year) orMSC on MARAD contracted vessels.
4 days 23 January 13, 27 February 13, 27 March 10, 24 April 1, 22 May 12, 26 June 10, 24 July 14, 28 August
Water Sanitation Afloat 1/2 day 7 March 6 June
NOTICE: AMO members planning to attend the union’s Center for Advanced Maritime Officers’ Training/STAR Center in Dania Beach, Florida—either to prepare for license upgrading or to undergo specialty training—are asked to call theschool to confirm course schedule and space availability in advance.
NOTICE OF NON-DISCRIMINATION POLICY AS TO STUDENTS: The Center For Advanced Maritime Officers Training (CAMOT) and Simulation Training Assessment and Research Center (STAR), established under the auspices of theAmerican Maritime Officers Safety and Education Plan, admits students of any race, color, national and ethnic origin or sex to all the rights, privileges, programs and activities generally accorded or made available to students at the Center.It does not discriminate on the basis of race, color, national or ethnic origin or sex in administration of its educational policies, admission policies and other programs administered by the Center.
Engineering Courses
Basic Electricity 10 days 5 June
Diesel Crossover 4 weeks Please call
Gas Turbine Endorsement 10 days 6 March 15 May
High Voltage Safety Course (Classroom) 3 days 13 February
Hydraulics/ Pneumatics 5 days 8 May
Ocean Ranger Program 6 days 3 April
Programmable Logic Controllers (PLCs) 5 days 6 February
Refrigeration (Operational Level) 5 days 27 February
Refrigeration (Management Level) 5 days 6 March
Steam Endorsement 4 weeks 23 January 17 April 5 June
Electronics (Management) 1 week Please call
Instrumentation (Management) 10 days Please call
Welding & Metallurgy Skills & Practices — Open to eligible Chief Mates and Masters on a space availablebasis. Interested participants should apply online and will be confirmed 2 weeks prior to start date. 2 weeks 23 January 27 February 15 May 12 June 14 August
Self-Study, CDs and Online Courses
Afloat Environmental Protection Coordinator CD
Anti-Terrorism Level 1 Online
Crew Endurance Management CD
DOT Hazardous Materials Transportation Training CD
EPA Universal Refrigerant Certification Examination Self Study
Prudent Mariner’s Guide to Right Whale Protection CD
Qualified Assessor Online
Vessel General Permit — EPA CD
Engine Upgrade — STCW 2010 — Management Level (NVIC 15-14) — If sea service or training towards management level (1A/E-Chief Eng.) upgrade started ON OR AFTER 24 March 2014, you mustadhere to this new program of training. Completion of both required and optional courses listed below will include all Task Assessments required by NVIC 15-14. By completing the series, no expiration limitation will be placed onyour STCW credential. See STAR Center’s website for full details: https://www.star-center.com/stcw2010-engine.upgrade.html
Leadership & Managerial Skills (G500 as amended) —REQUIRED 5 days 16 January 6, 27 February 20 March 17 April 8 May 5 June 14 August
ERM (E050 as amended) — REQUIRED (unless previously takenfor gap closing or original license) 5 days 20 February 13 March 24 April 12 June 31 July
Upgrade: Electrical, Electronics & Control Engineering(Management Level) (E133 as amended) (UPGRADE with tasks)Required unless previously taken for gap closing or original license
5 days 23 January 13 February 6 March 1 May 19 June 7 August
STCW Upgrade Task Assessment — General Engineering &Procedure (E135 as amended) — OPTIONAL: Tasks can besigned off onboard
5 days 6 February 10 July
STCW Upgrade Task Assessment — MEECE — OPTIONAL:Tasks can be signed off onboard 5 days 30 January 26 June
STCW Upgrade Task Assessment — Motor (E120 as amended) —OPTIONAL: Tasks can be signed off onboard 3 days 13 February 5 July
STCW Upgrade Task Assessment — Steam (E121 as amended) —OPTIONAL: Tasks can be signed off onboard 5 days 20 February 24 July
STCW Upgrade Task Assessment — Gas Turbine (E122 asamended) — OPTIONAL: Tasks can be signed off onboard 5 days 27 February 17 July
10 • American Maritime Officer January 2017
AMO NATIONAL HEADQUARTERS
DANIA BEACH, FL 33004-4109601 S. Federal Highway(954) 921-2221 / (800) 362-0513Paul Doell, National President [email protected] 1001Mobile: (954) 881-5651FAX: (954) 926-5112 Charles A. Murdock, National [email protected] 1004 / Mobile: (954) 531-9977 / FAX: (954) 367-1025Joseph Z. Gremelsbacker, National Vice President, Deep [email protected] 1009 / Mobile: (954) 673-0680 / FAX: (954) 367-1029Todd Christensen, East Coast Representative [email protected] / Mobile: (561) 806-3768Marie Doruth, Executive Assistant to the National [email protected] 1017 / Mobile: (954) 290-8109FAX: (954) 926-5112Dispatch: (800) 345-3410 / FAX: (954) 926-5126Brendan Keller, Dispatcher ([email protected])Extension 1061 / Mobile: (954) 817-4000Robert Anderson, Dispatcher ([email protected])Extension 1060 / Mobile: (954) 599-9771Member Services:Extension 1050 / FAX: (954) 367-1066 / [email protected]
OFFICES
WASHINGTON, D.C. 20024490 L’Enfant Plaza East SW, Suite 7204(202) 479-1166 / (800) 362-0513 ext. 7001Paul Doell, National President [email protected] 7004Mobile: (954) 881-5651J. Michael Murphy, National Vice President, Government [email protected] / [email protected] 7013 / Mobile: (202) 560-6889T. Christian Spain, National Assistant Vice President, Government [email protected] 7010 / Mobile: (202) 658-8887FAX: (202) 479-1188
PHILADELPHIA, PA 191131 International Plaza, Suite 550Chris Holmes, Contract Analyst (cholmes@amo‐union.org)(800) 362‐0513 ext. 4002 / Mobile: (856) 693‐0694
TOLEDO, OH 43604The Melvin H. Pelfrey BuildingOne Maritime Plaza, Third Floor(800) 221-9395 / FAX: (419) 255-2350John E. Clemons, National Vice President, Great [email protected] / Mobile: (419) 205-3509Brian D. Krus, Senior National Assistant Vice [email protected] / Mobile: (216) 571-9666Michelle Moffitt, [email protected] / Mobile: (419) 481-3470
GALVESTON, TX 775512724 61st Street, Suite B, PMB 192David M. Weathers, National Vice President, Inland [email protected](800) 362-0513 ext. 2001 / Mobile: (409) 996-7362FAX: (409) 737-4454
SAN FRANCISCO / OAKLAND, CA 946071121 7th Street, Second FloorOakland, CA 94607FAX: (954) 367-1064Daniel E. Shea, National Executive Vice President ([email protected])(510) 444-5301 / (800) 362-0513 ext. 5001Mobile: (415) 269-5795William Barrere, West Coast Representative ([email protected])Mobile: (415) 654-2671
NEW ORLEANS / COVINGTON, LA 70434P.O. Box 5424Covington, LA 70434Daniel J. Robichaux, National Assistant Vice [email protected](954) 367-1036 / Mobile: (985) 201-5462 / FAX: (954) 367-1062
FINANCIAL ADVISERS: THE ATLANTIC GROUP AT MORGAN STANLEY(800) 975-7061 / www.morganstanleyfa.com/theatlanticgroup
MEDICAL CLINIC AMO PLANS2 West Dixie Highway 2 West Dixie HighwayDania Beach, FL 33004-4312 Dania Beach, FL 33004-4312(954) 927-5213 (800) 348-6515FAX: (954) 929-1415 FAX: (954) 922-7539
LEGAL
AMO Coast Guard Legal Aid General CounselProgram Glanstein LLPMichael Reny 711 Third Ave., 17th FloorMobile: (419) 346-1485 New York, NY 10017(419) 243-1105 (212) 370-5100(888) 853-4662 (954) [email protected] FAX: (212) 697-6299
As a reminder to all members and applicants of American Maritime Officers workingaboard vessels subject to the STCW Convention, the 2010 amendments to STCW entered intoforce January 1, 2017.
Mariners with operational-level or management-level STCW endorsement limita-tions are required to have completed the mandatory STCW 2010 Gap Closing trainingand related training/assessment requirements, submitted proof of completion to the U.S.Coast Guard, and have received acknowledgement from the Coast Guard removing thelimitation of December 31, 2016 in order to sail aboard vessels subject to the STCWConvention. Additional renewal requirements for STCW Basic Training/AdvancedFirefighting refresher/revalidation training are also now in effect.
Complete information regarding these requirements for all officers is available onthe STAR Center website: www.star-center.com/stcw2010.html.
AMO members are reminded that U.S. Coast Guard processing times for all appli-cations have increased and these extended processing times will continue into the fore-seeable future.
AMO members with any questions can contact STAR Center Director ofMember Training and Officer Development Jerry Pannell at (800) 942-3220 Ext. 7507or via e-mail: [email protected].
STCW 2010 training, assessmentrequirements now in effect
Regular monthly membership meetings for AmericanMaritime Officers will be held during the week following thefirst Sunday of every month at 1 p.m. local time. Meetings willbe held on Monday at AMO National Headquarters (onTuesday when Monday is a holiday). The next meetings willtake place on the following dates:
AMO National Headquarters: February 6, March 6
American Maritime Officer • 11January 2017
Continuing resolution funds MSPfleet at fiscal year 2016 level
A continuing resolution to fundthe federal government through April28, 2017 was signed into law December10. The appropriations legislation forthe most part provides for governmentfunding at fiscal year 2016 levels.
The Maritime Security Program
— although authorized at approximate-ly $300 million per year, or $5 millionper ship, in fiscal year 2017, whichbegan October 1, 2016 — is fundedthrough April 28, 2017 at the fiscal year2016 level, which equates to an allot-ment of $3.5 million per ship per year.
USCG: U.S. will follow IMO recommendation for enforcementof STCW 2010 amendments (transitional provisions)
The following bulletin was posted January 5 by the U.S. Coast Guard and is availableonline: http://tinyurl.com/jeahpzw.
Please note: The extent to which foreign port state control authorities will followthe IMO’s recommendation is not known. The standards and practices that will beapplied by U.S.-flag vessel operating companies regarding STCW compliance formariners working in their fleets are also unknown.
Regarding U.S. Coast Guard enforcement procedures, please note this entry from thebulletin: “U.S. Coast Guard Marine Inspectors will review the STCW endorsements issuedto mariners employed on U.S.-flag vessels. If a mariner’s Merchant Mariner Credential(MMC) has a limitation (that was put in place as part of the transitional provisions) and themariner cannot provide evidence that they have completed the required training and submit-ted an application to the National Maritime Center for the appropriate STCW endorsement,a deficiency will be issued to the vessel. However, no control action will placed on the vesseland the mariner will be allowed to continue to be engaged on the vessel until July 1, 2017.”
In November 2016, the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) MaritimeSafety Committee (MSC) issued MSC circular (MSC.1/Circ.1560)https://www.uscg.mil/hq/cgcvc/cvc4/bulletins/MSC.1-Circ.1560.pdf, which outlined thedifficulties that have been encountered by administrations and seafarers in meeting the2010 amendments to the International Convention on Standards for Training,Certification and Watchkeeping for Seafarers, 1978, as amended (STCW). These diffi-culties came about due to the large number of seafarers that needed to meet certain train-ing requirements and the capacity of the administrations to process the documentationnecessary to issue the required endorsements.
In recognition of the above challenges, the MSC circular recommended Port StateControl authorities take a pragmatic and practical approach during inspections and fur-ther established a mechanism for delayed enforcement until July 1, 2017. The IMO fur-ther recommended that this situation be taken into account when taking action under thecontrol procedures in Article X and Regulation I/4 of the STCW Convention. After areview of the impacts on the maritime industry, individual mariners and the related IMOguidance, the United States has chosen to follow the IMO recommendation for delayedenforcement actions resulting from the new credentialing standards.
The 2010 amendments to the STCW went into effect on January 1, 2012, with afive-year transitional period, which ended on January 1, 2017. Although the UnitedStates will take the IMO guidance into account, Port State Control Officers will still
review the requirements of the 2010 amendments during Port State Control examina-tions in the United States. It should be noted that the decision to relax the use of controlactions as an enforcement measure applies only to those new transitional provisionswithin the STCW requirements. Vessels may still be issued deficiencies, which may leadto detention, for other reasons including demonstrated crew incompetence such as fail-ure to perform critical drills. All deficiencies will be documented on the Port StateControl Report of Inspection (Form B) for review by the company and FlagAdministration, as appropriate. For details on the U.S. Coast Guard’s enforcement ofSTCW on foreign vessels, you may contact the Port State Control Program [email protected].
With regard to U.S.-flag vessels that are subject to the STCW Convention, theU.S. Coast Guard will take a similar approach to the Port State Control measuresdescribed above. U.S. Coast Guard marine inspectors will review the STCW endorse-ments issued to mariners employed on U.S.-flag vessels. If a mariner’s MerchantMariner Credential (MMC) has a limitation (that was put in place as part of the transi-tional provisions) and the mariner cannot provide evidence that they have completed therequired training and submitted an application to the National Maritime Center for theappropriate STCW endorsement, a deficiency will be issued to the vessel. However, nocontrol action will placed on the vessel and the mariner will be allowed to continue tobe engaged on the vessel until July 1, 2017. For details on the U.S. Coast Guard’senforcement of STCW on U.S.-flag vessels, you may contact the Domestic VesselCompliance Division at [email protected].
12 • American Maritime Officer January 2017
Crew of USNS Wheeler raisesmoney, buys Christmas giftsfor orphans in BusanBy Captain Glenn MacarioMaster, USNS VADM K.R. Wheeler
For the fifth year in a row, theUSNS VADM K.R. Wheeler crewraised money and purchased toys forthe Miewon Orphanage in Busan,South Korea. The toys were presentedto the children at the MSCO KoreaChristmas party at Pier 8, Busan onDecember 16, 2016. The Wheelercrew raised $1,700 and then boughtthe toys during a special run to COST-CO in Busan. Unfortunately, Wheelerhad to depart a month before theparty, but the children presentedMSCO-Korea with a ‘thank you’ forthe Wheeler.
AMO members working aboardthe USNS Wheeler include CaptainGlenn Macario, Chief EngineerPatrick Yarbrough, Chief Mate PatrickLeahy, First Assistant Engineer ChrisBlouch, Second Mate AlfredoNoriega, Second Mate Matt Farmer,Third Mates Mark Blom, JamesMcLaughlin, and Tommaso Giannetti,and Third Assistant Engineers JasonPeters, Jeff Polek, and John Melcher.
USNS Wheeler’s SIU crew con-sists of Bosun Jesse Toves, QMEDJasper McGirt, Chief Steward JeanFavreaux, ABs Brian Frederick, AlBharrat, Jay Aki, and LynneWinstanley, Chief Cook MichelleTaylor, and Wiper Julio Soriano.
AMO secures new agreementswith inland waters operators
American Maritime Officers members participating in contract negotiations inNew Orleans, La. with Crescent Towing for the new agreement secured with thecompany were Captain Keith Schneider, Captain Roy Helmstetter, CaptainDerek Dragon, Chief Engineer Barry Quirk and Chief Engineer Dwayne Price.With them are AMO National Assistant Vice President Daniel Robichaux andAMO National Vice President, Inland Waters, David Weathers.
American Maritime Officers members participating in contract negotiations inCamden, N.J. with Express Marine for the new agreement secured with thecompany were Chief Engineer Jackie Pruitt, Second Assistant Engineer TommySpain and Third A.E. Scottie Nobles.
American Maritime Officers members participating in contract negotiations inSouth Florida with Seabulk Towing for the new agreement secured with the com-pany were Captain Gene Makus, Chief Engineer Keith Capizzi, Captain DougRamey and Chief Engineer John Clifford.
National Defense Authorization Act addresses keyissues for U.S. maritime industry, merchant fleet
The National Defense AuthorizationAct (NDAA) for fiscal year 2017, whichwas signed into law December 23, address-es issues important to the U.S. maritimeindustry and U.S.-flag merchant fleet.
The NDAA authorizes an appropria-tion of approximately $300 million for theMaritime Security Program in fiscal year2017, which would equate to a $5 millionallotment for each of the 60 ships enrolledin the Maritime Security Program.
The MSP supports a fleet of militari-ly-useful U.S.-flagged ships, which arecrewed by U.S. merchant mariners andoperate in international commercial trades.The ships and their corresponding private-ly-owned intermodal cargo systems andnetworks are available to the Department ofDefense for military sealift operations andin national security emergencies. The cost
of the MSP amounts to a small fraction ofthe projected $65 billion it would cost thegovernment to replicate this sealift capacityand the intermodal infrastructure and globalcargo networks provided to the DOD byprivate-sector MSP participants.
Although the increased funding isauthorized, the money for the MSP wouldstill need to be appropriated by Congressand approved by the President.
Under the continuing resolutionsigned earlier in December, the MSP isfunded at the fiscal year 2016 level, equat-ing to $3.5 million per ship per year,through April 28, 2017.
The NDAA includes a provision toadvance the ‘Military to Mariner’ initia-tive in order ease the transition for mem-bers of the military seeking employmentin the U.S. merchant marine post service,
an initiative American Maritime Officersand American Maritime Officers Servicehave be advocating on Capitol Hill forseveral years.
The NDAA provision, in part,requires the U.S. Coast Guard to work col-laboratively with branches of the U.S.Armed Forces to assess the marine train-ing available through the Army, Navy andCoast Guard, as well as the sea servicetime earned on duty, in an effort to maxi-mize service members’ ability to applyqualified training and sea service towardobtaining a Merchant Mariner Credentialand/or an STCW endorsement. The lawrequires a report to be submitted to selectcongressional committees in 2017 docu-menting the findings.
This provision of the NDAA alsomandates an effort to increase awarenessamong military personnel of the require-
ments for applying military training, edu-cation, practical experience and sea ser-vice toward obtaining a MerchantMariner Credential for maritime employ-ment following the completion of theirmilitary service.
The work of Congressmen DuncanHunter (R-CA), chairman of theSubcommittee on Coast Guard andMaritime Transportation, and JohnGaramendi (D-CA), ranking member on thesubcommittee, was crucial to the inclusionof the increase in the MSP authorization andthe advancement of the ‘Military toMariner’ initiative in the NDAA.
Separately, the NDAA authorizes thecontinuation of the design of a ‘NationalDefense Reserve Fleet National SecurityMulti-Mission Vessel,’ which could serve asan academy training ship and in disasterresponse and sealift operations.
