MaritimeLicensing.com

Hello Everyone I hope all of you are doing well, I must say my blood pressure is up a bit, Oh yes, that is because I am dealing with NMC isn’t it, I almost forgot that.  Here I go again jumping on my SOAP BOX yet again, this time it is about nonexistent, non-published IN HOUSE POLICY UP-DATES.  The only way we find out about them is when you get bitten by an NMC Evaluator whom NMC has been training NOT TO THINK and not to use common sense!  I know that consistency is imperative to a well functioning organization of any kind and I am sure you do also, so I can almost understand.  HOWEVER, if you want total automation or you want a robot, then you go build a NON-Thinking machine right?  Geeze, already my brain boggles at the thought- oops I forgot, thinking not allowed, just doing my young padawan.

Here is an exact quote out of an e-mail response I received from NMC.

“…to bring us together after centralization and treat all mariners the same, 

we train to use CG791P, verbiage on back referencing 46 CFR 16, Part B or 

Guidance Document 03-04….”

BEWARE all Evaluators at NMC have been instructed, trained, taught, turned into an automaton or what ever you want to call it, to see only BLACK AND WHITE, no gray areas thank you very much and no using common sense either.  Thinking on their own, OUT OF THE QUESTION!

Here is the latest and greatest in the IN HOUSE POLICY OF THE NEW AND IMPROVED NMC.  I am presuming here that this goes for everything being presented and sent into NMC, not just what I am about to explain to you so be prepared and be forewarned.

USE EXACT EXAMPLE VERBIAGE ONLY, no alterations, no variations.  I had a client who has been with a company for years and that I have been familiar with for the last 20 odd years who sent their mariner a letter of sea service with the drug test verbiage in it that has been acceptable for the past how many ever years.  There letter simply stated that Mr. X has been involved in our random drug testing program for the past x number of years under 46 CFR part 16 and has not failed or refused testing.   NMC is now sending it back saying it was unacceptable because it did not state SPECIFICALLY one of the following examples, and I do mean SPECIFICALLY:

Please note that each one of these say “EXAMPLE” however, I suggest that you word it exactly like one of the EXAMPLES LISTED, otherwise, I’m sure you will confuse the evaluators at NMC.

So, to all of the employers out there, take heed and be specific in your letters.  Cut and paste one of the examples into your letters of sea service until NMC comes out with another “unwritten”, “unpublished”, in house, policy.

REQUIREMENTS:

• A drug test is required for all transactions EXCEPT endorsements, duplicates and STCW certificates.
• ONLY a DOT 5 Panel (SAMHSA 5 Panel, formerly NIDA 5), testing for Marijuana, Cocaine, Opiates, Phencyclidine, and Amphetamines will be accepted.

OPTION I
PERIODIC TESTING
PROGRAM

• A USCG drug test conducted within the past 185 days by a laboratory accredited by Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA), Department of Health and Human Services.
• COLLECTION of a urine sample may be conducted by an independent medical facility, private physician or at an employer-designated site as long as the collection agent meets the qualification requirements to be a collection agent given Title 49 CFR Part 40.31. It is CRITICAL that the sample is sent to an accredited SAMHSA laboratory for ANALYSIS or the drug test is invalid.  A list of service agents that can assist in meeting these requirements is included or a list of service agents can be obtained at www.uscg.mil/hq/g-m/moa/dapip.htm.
• The ORIGINAL results are required. A FACSIMILE is acceptable, if it is originated from the Medical Review Officer (MRO) or the Service Agent assisting the mariner, and sent directly to our office. The drug test result must be signed and dated by the MRO or by a representative of the service agent who assisted you in meeting this requirement.

OPTION II
RANDOM TESTING

• An ORIGINAL DATED letter on marine employer stationary or, for ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY MEMBERS, an ORIGINAL DATED letter from your command on command letterhead attesting to participation in random drug testing programs.

EXAMPLE (From Marine Employers): APPLICANT’S NAME / SSN has been subject to a random testing program meeting the criteria of Title 46 CFR 16.230 for at least 60 days during the previous 185 days and has not failed nor refused to participate in a chemical test for dangerous drugs.
EXAMPLE (Active Duty Military/Military Sealift Command/N.O.A.A./ Army Corps of Engineers):  APPLICANT’S NAME / SSN has been subject to a random testing program and has never refused to participate in or failed a chemical drug test for dangerous drugs.

OPTION III
PRE-EMPLOYMENT
TESTING

•  An ORIGINAL DATED letter on marine employer stationary signed by a company official, stating that you have passed a pre-employment chemical test for dangerous drugs within the past 185 days.

EXAMPLE: APPLICANT’S NAME / SSN passed a chemical test for dangerous drugs, required under Title 46 CFR 16.210 within the previous six months of the dateof this letter with no subsequent positive drug test results during the remainder of the six month period.

I will soon be sending out an e-mail to all of the companies that I have e-mail addresses for giving them this updated information (or at least updated as of the 4th of February 2010) remember, this could change at any moment and we won’t know about it until an evaluator sends it back as being wrong.  I just hope all of the evaluators are reading the same hand book, but unfortunately, I don’t think they are.

Touch Keys with you later,

N.

Well every one, I hope you all have an absolutely FANTASTIC New Year, I know I am looking forward to more exciting times.

Here is an excerpt from an e-mail that I received from one of my clients, Mr. O,  concerning his on-going problems with NMC and the Medical Evaluation Branch (MEB).  When the new Medical NVIC came out, one of my major concerns was the BMI and sure enough that is a stickler.

Mr. O received a letter from NMC and was told he needed additional information from his doctor concerning his BMI and Sleep disorders.

With Mr. O’s approval and permission, I am posting this.

Well I don’t think its a bad thing that the CG screens folks in an attempt to make the industry safer BUT am a bit amused @ their thought process for example their letter to me Your BMI score of 43.2 (I used the BMI chart on the Internet & came up with 41) still FAT without a doubt! & the letter goes on with “puts you @ higher risk of developing obstructive sleep apnea, due to this BMI score , coupled with your safety sensitive duties as a master 1600GRT”  that statement amuses me, so is that to say that there is less safety sensitive duties @ the 200 ton level? Falling asleep on a 199 ton tug towing a 4000 ton barge loaded with 1 million gallons of fuel seems quite safety sensitive to me?? so anyway I need to go see the Dr & have him tell them I do not suffer from lack of sleep.

As Mr. O states, and I agree, it is a good thing that CG is trying to make the industry safer.

Mr. O gave me permission to publish this so that others with BMI problems will be aware of at least one item that needs to be addressed.  This will prepare you, in advance, and you can have the doctor (at the time that the physical is done) write a letter concerning any sleep disorders, breathing disorders, or any other weight related problems that the doctor can think of, to add to your physical.  I am sure it won’t be the “end all” letter, but it will be one less thing that MEB will have to write you a letter about.

You should consider this as a proactive measure on your part and it might save you some heart aches, head aches, frustration and time, when going down the MEB road.

With this new physical form, BMI is not the only thing you need to pay attention to.  Make sure your doctor writes you a letter to put with your physical should you have any of these problems: vision, hearing, heart, medications, surgery’s, mental, breathing, digestion, renal, etc., etc., etc.

Touch Keys with you later,

N.

I just wanted to say HAPPY NEW YEAR TO YOU ALL and to THANK YOU for all of the support that you have given me this year, you are the best.

I would like to point you to http://www.ProfessionalMariner.com for some fresh, informative and interesting articles.  Lots of good stuff in there so check them out.  I stole the below article from their website.

My friend Captain Kelly Sweeney was nice enough to talk about me in his latest article and I just wanted to thank him for always being one of my staunch supporters and for always talking me up and for kicking me in the butt when I need it.

I have so many supporters and I can’t begin to THANK THEM enough.  So I will say the simple words that don’t express my deepest feelings    THANK YOU.

Touch Keys with you later (no, I’m not blubbering-but dang it’s a close thing).

N.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Time for mariners to make their New Year’s resolutions
Capt. Kelly Sweeney

Almost every mariner I talk with has an opinion about the recent U.S. Coast Guard Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular (NVIC) 04-08, which established physical and medical standards not seen in our industry before. The NVIC details over 201 conditions that require a medical waiver from the Coast Guard — along with the time-consuming review process it involves. This long list includes everything from mundane conditions like wearing glasses, to more serious problems such as bipolar disorder.

Many mariners have been unhappy about the implementation of the new medical standards, not only because of the onerous requirements but because the medical evaluation branch at the National Maritime Center has been so understaffed that thousands of applications have been delayed for weeks or months, forcing many merchant mariners into unemployment while awaiting medical approval for their credentials.

Recently I was talking with my wife over morning coffee about this situation and my upcoming license renewal. Munching on my third homemade orange/pistachio biscotti while sipping my double-tall latte, I commented how NVIC 04-08 had established a number of different and more stringent medical standards, including one requiring agility tests and/or additional evaluation for a body mass index (BMI) of 40 or higher.

She raised an eyebrow. “BMI of 40, huh? Well then, no more biscotti for you this morning, Captain.”

I protested. “I bet my weight is well below the cutoff.”

I could make that claim, since I knew that our old bathroom scale showed a different weight depending on where you stood on it — I figured that I could easily “fudge” my weight by 15 pounds. I was worried when the next day my wife went shopping at the local pharmacy and came back with a new digital scale. “Uh-oh,” I thought, “There goes my fudge factor.”

After verifying that the scale was indeed correct and properly set, I had to admit that the morning pastries had taken their toll on my waistline — I was above the BMI of 40. So I made a New Year’s resolution to lose a goodly amount of weight before my renewal physical, joined a gym, and even started doing yoga for flexibility. Now I have a low-fat bran muffin with my skim milk latte, and while I miss doughnuts (especially apple fritters!) — I don’t miss the pounds I’ve lost… so far.

In the fast-paced, post Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping (STCW) ’95 world of the modern merchant marine, staying informed of all the changes continually being heaped upon us is difficult. A missed deadline for submitting paperwork or not taking a class could mean the loss of a job, or even the end of a career. Thinking about this while contemplating my upcoming license renewal led me to add a second resolution to my list — to check up on current licensing and documentation changes. This resolution is easier than going to the gym three times a week, because there are some excellent sources of information available — if you know where to look.

For starters, when down at Fremont Maritime Services in Seattle recently I got a copy of Capt. Leonard Lambert’s book, The New Hawsepipe. The book gives a good overview of deck officer licensing requirements, including a detailed discussion of all the different practical assessments needed for upgrade to able seaman (AB) and officer in charge of a navigational watch (OICNW). While reading chapter four, which talks about schools and classes, I saw that a number of the vessel security officer (VSO) courses were not “officially approved” by the U.S. Coast Guard when mariners took them — and as a result many applications for a VSO endorsement were being denied. This denial meant they had to take an “approved” refresher class costing several hundred additional dollars. I decided that I’d better find out if I was going to get stuck, too. So I went online to www.uscg.mil/nmc to check the list of approved classes. It looked like good news — the vessel security course I attended in Seattle at Pacific Maritime Institute was approved.

Still, I worried that I was possibly missing something else or misreading the list, and didn’t want to take a chance. So I called Norleen Schumer to confirm it. Norleen was a longtime Coast Guard evaluator, and now has her own consulting business advising mariners. Using her service has helped me avoid mistakes in interpreting the new rules and requirements in the past, and when she gave me the word that my class was indeed on the approved list, I knew it was a certainty. Turning to trusted sources for updated information regarding licensing gave me peace of mind — and can do the same for you.

My final maritime-related resolution is to volunteer more for one of our local seamen’s centers here in Seattle. Seamen’s centers offer a safe place where merchant mariners of all nationalities can contact loved ones, send mail, get a fair exchange on foreign currency, pick up a few gifts, and even receive spiritual counseling. Volunteering at our local center will give me the chance to “pay forward” the kindness and generosity I have been shown over the years at seamen’s centers from Yokohama, Japan, to Port Everglades, Fla.

New Year’s resolutions are all about being proactive, doing something to better your life or circumstances. During these financially challenging times, it’s easy to be anxious and insecure when you hear news of companies facing bankruptcy, or laying up boats. Instead of worrying, I urge you to add checking to see how you stand with your credentials, making sure all your documents are current, and planning to upgrade if possible to your list of mariner’s New Year’s resolutions. There have been a number of booms and busts since I began in the maritime industry nearly 30 years ago, and I can say unequivocally that the effort you spend making sure that your career is secure could make all the difference in how you’ll ride out this economic downturn.

May 2010 be a safe, healthy, and successful one for all.

Till next time I wish you all smooth sailin’. •

Kelly Sweeney holds the licenses of master (oceans, any gross tons) and master of towing vessels (oceans), and regularly sails on a wide variety of commercial vessels. He lives on an island near Seattle. You can contact him at captsweeney@professionalmariner.com.

Hey Y’all, there is going to be a meeting in Seattle -

December 11, 2009

 0900

 The Marriott Seattle Airport Hotel

3201 South 176th Street

 Seattle 98188.

Just for your information, the meetings held in New York had 4 people attend and the meeting in Miami had 5 people in attendance, sad I think, very sad.

This is important stuff people, so don’t bitch if things change and you did not make your thoughts and opinions known when you had the opportunity to do so.

Touch Keys with you later,

N.

Good day to you;

This is just a quick reminder for you to be aware that if you are going to make an application with the Coast Guard BEFORE December 31, 2009, you can still use the Old 719K (4 page) physical form, but that form must be turned in to, and accepted by, an REC on or before the dead line of December 31, 2009.

BEGINNING January 2, 2010, you MUST use the new 9 page 719K physical form for any and all applications.  The old 719K form will no longer be accepted by the Coast Guard after January 1, 2010.

This form as well as other information can be found on the Coast Guard Website.

Since I am not known for my Political Correctness, I want to wish every one, a very

MERRY CHRISTMAS!

Touch Keys with you later,

N.

I wish to thank a Blog reader for the following information.  It has cleared up some things.  I looked on a totally different website for the current and new CFR, than the one listed below.  I looked at http://www.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/cfrassemble.cgi?title=200846 I also contacted several REC’s and they did not have this website information either, I’ll pass this along unless they are also reading my blogs.

“I noted you are having trouble finding 46 Part 11.  Part 11 was created in the same rulemaking that created the combined MMC.  While the hard copy CFR with the new changes has not been published, it is available on-line.  I suspect you looked for it at this web page:
http://www.access.gpo.gov/nara/cfr/cfr-table-search.html.

This isn’t the right place to look, it only has electronic versions of the printed CFR.  For the current FCR, you need to go to the “E-CFR” webpage at:
http://ecfr.gpoaccesss.gov/cgi/t/text/text-inx?c=ecfr&tpl=%2Findex.tpl  Within a week of a change the e-cfr is site is updated.

It includes the new Part 11: http://ecfr.gpoaccess.gov/cgi/t/text/text-idx?c=ecfr&sid=15601ec9cc6cff9e0308d71639853f9c&rgn=div5&view=text&node=46:1.0.1.2.11&idno=46″.

Thanks again Mr. Blog Reader. This is great information.

Touch Keys with you later.

N.

Hello everyone;

It’s been a while for me to set down to do my Blog.  I am not complaining, but my plate, thanks to you, is getting fuller and fuller - bad grammar - but true none the less.

If you have not had a chance to see the latest and greatest, I suggest you read and voice your opinions on this one.

See

Federal Register / Vol. 74, No. 220/Tuesday, November 17, 2009/Proposed Rules.

It is 90 pages and covers 46 CFR Chapter 11, among other STCW items.  This is interesting to me because in the 2008 version of the CFR there was no Chapter 11.

Here is where my confusion comes in.  In the past 2-3 months, I have had many of you  send me copies of letters that you have received from the NMC requesting that you meet and comply with 46 CFR 11 . ???.  Obviously I have missed something along the way so I did a little research.  I have been on the CFR Website looking to make sure I have the most current CFR published in 2008, (2009 version has not been published yet according to those folks and they should know don’t ya think?).  I checked with several REC’s and they have also told me that there is no Chapter 11 in the current CFR so how can NMC tell you to comply with something that does not exist?

Now here are my questions. 

• How in bloody blue blazes can you, the mariner, possibly comply with something that has not been published yet? 
  
• How and where is NMC coming up with this? AND above everything else,
  
• Why is NMC permitting their evaluators to request items listed in 46 CFR 11 when 46 CFR chapter 11 does not currently exist?
• and WHAT THE H#(( have I missed?
  

That little tidbit was just the first thing that jumped out at me, I’m sure that I will have one or two more comments to send to the Coast Guard concerning these proposals.

So my suggestion to you would be to PLEASE READ THESE PROPOSED RULES CAREFULLY AS THEY AFFECT YOUR LIVELIHOOD and make your concerns and opinions and objections known.  Otherwise, YOU are going to have to live with the outcome.  Just like voting, if you didn’t vote, you don’t have a right to bitch.  Why do you think I am so good at bitching?

THIS DOES NOT GIVE YOU MUCH NOTICE SO PASS IT ALONG.

Hello everyone;  It has been ages since I have had time to write in my blog and I have all of you to thank for that.  You have been keeping me very very busy and mostly out of trouble.  Well, with my big mouth that is kind of hard to do but you are trying and again I thank you.

I just wanted to let all of you know (if you haven’t already seen it or heard about it) that the new Coast Guard Physical form is “Officially” out on the street, all 9 pages of it.  The current physical form that everyone is used to, can continue to be used until December 31, 2009.

BEGINNING

JANUARY 1, 2010

THE NEW REVISION 01-09

MUST BE USED

Touch Keys with you later,

N.

Hi y’all:

Here is a little ditty I received from one of my customers that I thought needed to be shared.

Here is his question.

Sirs;

   I have received my new issue MMC for Chief Engineer, Oceans,

6000HP.  I note that in the STCW Competencies listed there

appears:  ….”duly qualified in accordance with the provisions of

regulation(s) III/2;  III/4;  VI/2.”  My previous STCW Endorsement

Certificate (Engineering) listed all of these AND also:   VI/1. Please explain why competency in STCW Regulation VI/1 has not been continued and included in my newly issued MMC.

HERE IS NMC ANSWER -

Dear Mr. ———:

THE REGULATION VI/1 IS THE “BASIC SAFETY TRAINING”, IN WHICH WAS NO LONGER REQUIRED ON THE STCW. SINCE THE BST’S ARE A PREREQUISITE QUALIFICATION FOR THE STCW IT WASN’T NECESSARY TO BE PLACED ON THE INTERNATIONAL ENDORSEMENT.  HOWEVER, WITH THAT SAID, DUE TO REGULATORY CHANGES; CREDENTIALS ISSUED AFTER SEPTEMBER 11, 2009, ALL INHERENT REGULATIONS WILL APPEAR ON THE CREDENTIAL.  SINCE YOUR CREDENTIAL WAS ISSUED PRIOR TO SEPTEMBER 11, 2009, THAT REGULATION WAS CONSIDERED INHERENT AND LEFT OFF.

Thank you for contacting the Mariner Information Call Center.

Soooo, it appears that Bitching really does work, and boy am I good at it.  I cannot take credit for this change (regulatory changes my … —lazy is more like it), but I can tell you this much, this was one of the issues I had addressed LOUDLY with NMC.  Not everyone knows what is “INHERENT” in a license.

Touch Keys with you later,

N.

Good day to you all.  I thought I would share this e-mail with you that I received over the weekend.  I can hear the anger and frustration in this and once again I would like to apologize for the NMC for creating yet another happy and satisfied customer.

This person has every right to feel this way, you and I have felt this way many times and I know I have surpassed his/her frustration level by a magnitude of thousands over my years with the REC, so believe me, I do not take this personally.

Touch Keys with you later,

N.

Queston:
In reading your 5-19-09 Blog, “Are my services really necessary?”, I’d have to say no. It’s not that I doubt you are an expert in this area. I too have studied the CFR’s, MSM, STCW Code, etc, etc. The problem itself is the morons at the NMC. Submitting an application for a credential renewal,raise-of-grade (whatever it be)is a gamble at best. You know what you should get, but who knows what you WILL get. So no, I would not pay $25 for an answer I could research on my own. (I would probably provide a blank check, however, to have a competent person at the NMC handle my paperwork, provided such a person works there). The problem is, just because it IS a regulation means nothing. It’s all about how the untrained NMC evaluator interprets your application.