18th Volume, No. 18 1963 – “54 years tugboatman” - 2017 Dated 01 March 2017 Buying, Sales, New building, Renaming and other Tugs Towing & Offshore Industry News M I D W E E K – E D I T I O N TUGS & TOWING NEWS WWII MARINER GAINS VETERAN STATUS – 75 YEARS AFTER THE FACT 75 years after the fact and 10 years of very strenuous efforts, Sadie O. Horton has received her just recognition as a veteran of this nation. This week a package from the US Coast Guard arrived that contained her US CG Discharge and DD 214 reflecting her service to our country. To date Sadie Horton is the one and the only female WW II Merchant Marine veteran on record. We made it through. Success is ours. We have finally broken the glass ceiling that kept our women and schoolchildren from obtaining their due recognition for services to this nation during WW II. We cannot stop now with just a single recognition. Hundreds of women and children, perhaps thousands served during WW II and have never been given their due recognition. Help us find these mariners or their descendants so they too can receive the recognition now 75 years late. This breakthrough only indicates more has to be done to have all of our Merchant Marine recognized for their gallant efforts still untold. With as much as 15,000 cubic feet of MM personnel records still under wraps and resting in cardboard boxes around our nation’s National Archives, we must get them released and into a useable form for research and allow our veterans to be known. We need help in getting this done. Who will step up and help? Sadie Horton’s story is posted at www.usmmv.blogspot.com. The article is located at pin #125. We wish to obtain the widest possible dissemination of info possible; so please read and forward it on for all to see. (Press release) Advertisement 1/27 18TH VOLUME, NO. 18 DATED 01 MARCH 2017 READERS REPORT I´m an enthusiastic reader of you mag "Towingline" - We had an Email - chat already regarding the former German navy tugboat "Scharhörn - class"... My favourite Tugboat is the "Lore" which was sailing for the Belgian Company "Depret" - See your own earlier newsletter issue 37 – 15 June 2014. To find out anything about this nice little tug is not so easy because there is no IMO -number known or a MMSI - number - It seems that this tugboat was disappeared from the surface... Then I have started a very hard and long-term investigation - The start was made by the article in your newsletter: Lore was sold to the Norwegian company NCC. The manager of NCC, Mr Groensdal was so kind to tell me that the "Lore" was sold to another Norwegian company: BK-Marine. In the following year I sent 3 ( three ) emails to this company to ask if they are the owner of this littel tug - No answer. Two weeks ago I decided to write a letter as a hardcopy and today I got the happy news: Yes, they are ! The former "Lore" is renamed "Rodny" and you can still find a photo on their website. The female staff "Grete Brandsdal" promised me to keep me informed with further news regarding the "Rodny" Thanks Ralph Melkau for your magic investigation work on this tug and to share this with the Tugs Towing & Offshore Newsletter readers. WESTERN MARINE DELIVERS TUG BOAT TO CPA The country's leading shipbuilder Western Marine Shipyard has handed over a sea-going harbour tug boat to Chittagong Port Authority today. The tug boat named Kandari-12 is 25.20 metre-long with a capacity of 25 tonne BP. The boat was built under the supervision of the international classification society CLASS NK Japan with the main engine and machinery from Japan and European countries. Chittagong City Mayor AJM Nasir Uddin was the chief guest at the hand-over ceremony. M Khaled Iqbal, chairman of the CPA, president of Chittagong Chamber of Commerce and Industry Mahbubul Alam and Western Marine MD Sakhawat Hossain were present as the special guests. The ship was constructed at a cost of Tk 170 million, the company said. AJM Nasir Uddin expressed pleasure at the specialty and design of the ship. Mahbubul Alam said that the Western Marine has already proved its capacity and the company is constantly working to enhance the capacity of the Chittagong Port. CPA Chairman Rear Admiral Khaled Iqbal said these boats were assets and through proper utilisation and maintenance of the boats, the efficiency of the port would increase in future. (Source: The Financial Express) 2/27 18TH VOLUME, NO. 18 DATED 01 MARCH 2017 Advertisement COMPLYING WITH SUBCHAPTER M Some operators still don’t realize that a safety management system is not required under Subchapter M. Since proposing a rule-making for the Inspection of Towing Vessels in 2011, it has taken the Coast Guard five years to publish the long-awaited final rule on Subchapter M. Officially issued on June 20, 2016 and weighing in at 798 pages in the long format, it takes a good week to read through. Yet despite its size and length, the final rule appears to have been well worth the wait. The Coast Guard has done a fine job of simplifying and reorganizing the regulation, making it much easier to understand and implement than the original proposal. The big news is that (1) operators now have a choice of compliance options (third-party Towing Safety Management System or standard Coast Guard inspections) and (2) the “grandfathering” clause has been greatly expanded to cover much of the existing towboat fleet. Many of the costly equipment requirements have been relegated to new towing vessels only. Preamble Don’t skip the Preamble. The actual regulation begins on page 537 of the 798-page document. The first 536 pages are the Preamble. We were taught, as Coast Guard marine inspectors trying to decipher the intent of a regulation, to go back to the Federal Register where the regulation in question was originally published. It has always been an invaluable source of information, and this Preamble is no exception. Following the publication of the proposed rule in 2011, the Coast Guard held four public meetings in different cities across the country and received over 3,000 comments on the proposed rule. The long-awaited answers to those comments are found in the Preamble. A few brought forth unexpected results, reminding us to be careful what we wish for. For example, a commenter requested that the requirement for a self-priming portable pump be removed, and another noted that crews have problems with the self-priming feature. The Coast Guard not only declined to remove the requirement but instead added another requirement to require regular training for crews on the self-priming feature! But the real headline for this Final Rule is the Coast Guard’s response to what it refers to as a “very large number of comments” suggesting that a Towing Safety Management System (TSMS) be required for all towing companies and not be optional. The Coast Guard’s response is found in several places in the Preamble. Here are two: • “The Coast Guard disagrees that the TSMS should be mandatory.” • “Regarding the TSMS requirement, it is optional. In 3/27 18TH VOLUME, NO. 18 DATED 01 MARCH 2017 this Final Rule, the only vessels required to maintain a TSMS are those that choose the TSMS option.” Unfortunately, there are still some in the industry who do not understand that a safety management system is not required under Subchapter M. Existing Safety Management Systems The Coast Guard estimates that 51 percent of the 5,509 towing vessels in operation are covered by an existing safety management system (SMS). But this does not mean that they must choose the TSMS option or that their SMS will become part of the compliance for Subchapter M. The Coast Guard is clear on this: “These regulations do not preclude any towing vessel company from adopting a safety management system. However, the structure of Subchapter M provides towing vessel companies with flexibility in how to comply with this subchapter.” • Coast Guard Option vs. Third-Party TSMS Option As a former Coast Guard marine inspector and industry consultant for the past 12 years, I do not see a substantial benefit to choosing the third-party TSMS option over traditional Coast Guard inspections. Sure, there will be lots of benefits to companies like mine and even the Coast Guard itself, but not for the towing companies. Beware of sales pitches. One recent article mentioned that choosing the Coast Guard option would incur a Coast Guard user fee of $1,030 per vessel, when in fact the user fee applies to all towing vessels regardless of the compliance option. Some of those intent on using the TSMS option rely on the reasoning that the Coast Guard will not have enough personnel to do the inspections required. The Coast Guard provides the following reassurance in the Preamble: “The Coast Guard is prepared for the estimated demand for annual inspection from owners and managing operators selecting the Coast Guard annual-inspection option. The Coast Guard will closely monitor the demand for inspections and make resource adjustments as necessary.” The Preamble goes on to explain that demand was estimated by assuming that companies with five or fewer vessels would use the Coast Guard option. Choosing the compliance option will be the single biggest decision companies make regarding Subchapter M. • Operating Under a Certificate of Inspection (COI) Nothing is left to chance with a COI.