Why a Dive Charter is a Commercial Dive Boat..

[Wookie]

I'm going to propose something here. I will propose that the required crew of an inspected vessel (Captain, Mate if away from the shoreside facility more than 24 hours, and the required deckhands) are considered seamen by the Coast Guard, and are therefore exempt from OSHA while acting in that capacity. The trouble comes when the dive ship owner places the DM/instructor in the capacity of deckhand on the vessel, making the person filling the position beholden to the Coast Guard, but also filling the capacity of instructor or guide, therefore making that person beholden to OSHA. You see, Kevin, I won't argue that a South Florida dive guide/instructor is not subject to OSHA, they are. Unless acting in the capacity of deckhand on an inspected vessel. If you are making your DM fill the role of Deckhand for the purpose of meeting your COI, you are making that individual answer to 2 masters, which is impossible, because one premepts the other, depending on the situation.

But that's not what this thread is about. Referring back to the title, "Why a Dive Charter is a Commercial Dive Boat.", by definition, it isn't. A dive charter is an inspected passenger vessel, a commercial dive boat is an inspected Oilfield Supply Vessel. It's a definition. You can't argue it.

I have to show the Coast Guard every year that I have a written training program for my Deckhands, because Divemaster is not a recognized term that the Coast Guard uses. I have such a program. To be clear, while on dive charter, a deckhand must be a Divemaster as a prerequisite for the training, on non diving charters, the deckhand must only complete the Spree specific training, without regard to diving certification. On research charters, we do not provide Divemasters, only Deckhands, a coast guard recognized term for staff of an inspected passenger vessel.

The Coast Guard has told me verbally (Sector Key West) that I may not allow my deckhands off the boat below minimum manning while on charter. That means that if you are using a Divemaster to fill the role of deckhand and that Divemaster is guiding the dive leaving only the master onboard during the dive, you are in violation of your COI. I'll bet that happens every day in Boynton Beach. It has on every inspected vessel I've ever ridden on from Key West to West Palm....

---------- Post added November 29th, 2012 at 03:22 PM ----------

From your quote, however, it would seem that a seaman is no longer under USCG jurisdiction when they are no longer on an inspected vessel. They may remain a seaman, but if they trip over an extension cord in the office on land, and suffer an injury, would not OSHA investigate?

This seems to go along with Wookie's comment about only having shipboard operations, and nothing land based. This keeps it clean and simple.

The Coast Guard uses a term "in service to the vessel". If I send a deckhand to Ace Hardware to get a pipe fitting for the bilge system, the deckhand is in service to the vessel, and therefore under CG jurisdiction. If he gets in an auto accident, I have to report it to the CG. If he gets the nipple and stops for lunch and is mugged, he is not in service to the vessel, and no report is required.

In neither case do I need to fill out the OSHA 200 log. OSHA accepts CG-2962 reports in lieu of OSHA 200 reports, btw.

 

[SC_Hoaty]

Wookie - how does that change for uninspected vessels? Aren't 6 packs uninspected vessels?

 

[Wookie]

The common slang for Uninspected Passenger Vessel is 6-Pack, referring to the 6 passenger limit on such vessels, although in some circumstances, Uninspected Passenger Vessels may carry 12 passengers. There are 2 vessels operating in South Florida under such an exemption. As the name implies, these vessels are Uninspected, and only marginally responsible to the Coast Guard. I believe your question is " do Uninspected Passenger Vessels need to have minimum manning requirements, as in does the deckhand need to stay onboard when divers are in the water?". The answer is that Uninspected Passenger Vessels do not have a COI that specifies minimum manning, so no, there is no minimum manning for such vessels. Uninspected passenger vessels do not have Masters, either. They have "Operators" who do not need nearly the training a Master gets. I say they don't need the training, in reality they only get about 1/2 of the training a candidate for Master does. IMHO they need about the same amount of training.

 

[Scubakevdm]

Woo-hoo! It looks like we're almost on the same page.

So Frank, as far as you know, the only commercial diving that take place off of commercial dive boats is in the oil industry?

---------- Post added November 29th, 2012 at 05:23 PM ----------

For what it's worth, there wasn't a whole lot more covered in my master course, and I wasn't really overwhelmed by the scope of the OUPV part either.

---------- Post added November 29th, 2012 at 05:32 PM ----------

So Frank, what you're sharing is that there is no vessel defined by the US Coast Guard as a Commercial Diving Vessel/boat?

 

[SC_Hoaty]

I had asked:

From your quote, however, it would seem that a seaman is no longer under USCG jurisdiction when they are no longer on an inspected vessel. They may remain a seaman, but if they trip over an extension cord in the office on land, and suffer an injury, would not OSHA investigate?

This seems to go along with Wookie's comment about only having shipboard operations, and nothing land based. This keeps it clean and simple.

Wookie responded to part of the question with this:

The Coast Guard uses a term "in service to the vessel". If I send a deckhand to Ace Hardware to get a pipe fitting for the bilge system, the deckhand is in service to the vessel, and therefore under CG jurisdiction. If he gets in an auto accident, I have to report it to the CG. If he gets the nipple and stops for lunch and is mugged, he is not in service to the vessel, and no report is required.

In neither case do I need to fill out the OSHA 200 log. OSHA accepts CG-2962 reports in lieu of OSHA 200 reports, btw.

However, this still leaves the issue of injuries in the land-based office. I assume for purposes of the discussion that the office had other non-seamen, such as a clerk who answers phones and does filing. I'm going way out on a limb and assuming the clerk is working to OSHA rules. When the seaman leaves the inspected vessel to assist the clerk in rearranging the office furniture, and trips over a cord and is injured, which authority has jurisdiction over the investigation?

(Thanks for the answer you provided, Frank, I just want to make sure I understand, since you have already stated you have NO land based operations for a reason. )

 

[Scubakevdm]

OSHA would, (or a similar state agency, depending on the state)

I believe that most of us, can agree on a whole bunch at this point:

I think we can agree that if an instructor/guide is working for money within three miles of the east coast of Florida on nitrox that they are regulated by OSHA.

I think we can agree that OSHA has authority over the vessel. (In addition to the coast guard)

I think that we can agree that, as far as OSHA is concerned, that this instructor/guide is engaging in commercial diving operations.

I note that Frank makes the distinction that the diver is engaging in commercial diving operations, and that the boat is not. This remains a point of contention.

I agree with Frank's assessment of the Coast Guard's vessel definitions, but would argue that Commercial Diving Vessel is undefined, and that in the context of the cost guard regs, "commercial dive boat" is equally incorrect when applied to either an inspected passenger vessel, or an oil field support vessel.

Have we got this much settled?

---------- Post added November 29th, 2012 at 08:44 PM ----------

Also, there's a can of worms out there that I'd like to stay away from. Not that it would affect me directly, but let's not stir up trouble for anyone else.

 

[Wookie]

Woo-hoo! It looks like we're almost on the same page.

So Frank, as far as you know, the only commercial diving that take place off of commercial dive boats is in the oil industry?

---------- Post added November 29th, 2012 at 05:23 PM ----------

For what it's worth, there wasn't a whole lot more covered in my master course, and I wasn't really overwhelmed by the scope of the OUPV part either.

---------- Post added November 29th, 2012 at 05:32 PM ----------

So Frank, what you're sharing is that there is no vessel defined by the US Coast Guard as a Commercial Diving Vessel/boat?

I think that your statements are correct. I know of one commercial dive boat that the Coast Guard classifies as an "industrial vessel". Aside from that one vessel, all of the commercial dive vessels I know of are OSVs. Being an OSV gives many exemptions to rules that may be applied to T-boats.

 

[mrfixitchapman]

Frank - In Post #51 - "He gets the nipple..." Key West thing?

DC

 

[Scubakevdm]

I think that your statements are correct. I know of one commercial dive boat that the Coast Guard classifies as an "industrial vessel". Aside from that one vessel, all of the commercial dive vessels I know of are OSVs. Being an OSV gives many exemptions to rules that may be applied to T-boats.

Awesome. I think we may be able to get to the interesting stuff from here, but first, do you see the can of worms?

Fixit!

 

[dadediver]

I'm going to propose something here. I will propose that the required crew of an inspected vessel (Captain, Mate if away from the shoreside facility more than 24 hours, and the required deckhands) are considered seamen by the Coast Guard, and are therefore exempt from OSHA while acting in that capacity. The trouble comes when the dive ship owner places the DM/instructor in the capacity of deckhand on the vessel, making the person filling the position beholden to the Coast Guard, but also filling the capacity of instructor or guide, therefore making that person beholden to OSHA. You see, Kevin, I won't argue that a South Florida dive guide/instructor is not subject to OSHA, they are. Unless acting in the capacity of deckhand on an inspected vessel. If you are making your DM fill the role of Deckhand for the purpose of meeting your COI, you are making that individual answer to 2 masters, which is impossible, because one premepts the other, depending on the situation.

But that's not what this thread is about. Referring back to the title, "Why a Dive Charter is a Commercial Dive Boat.", by definition, it isn't. A dive charter is an inspected passenger vessel, a commercial dive boat is an inspected Oilfield Supply Vessel. It's a definition. You can't argue it.

I have to show the Coast Guard every year that I have a written training program for my Deckhands, because Divemaster is not a recognized term that the Coast Guard uses. I have such a program. To be clear, while on dive charter, a deckhand must be a Divemaster as a prerequisite for the training, on non diving charters, the deckhand must only complete the Spree specific training, without regard to diving certification. On research charters, we do not provide Divemasters, only Deckhands, a coast guard recognized term for staff of an inspected passenger vessel.

The Coast Guard has told me verbally (Sector Key West) that I may not allow my deckhands off the boat below minimum manning while on charter. That means that if you are using a Divemaster to fill the role of deckhand and that Divemaster is guiding the dive leaving only the master onboard during the dive, you are in violation of your COI. I'll bet that happens every day in Boynton Beach. It has on every inspected vessel I've ever ridden on from Key West to West Palm....

---------- Post added November 29th, 2012 at 03:22 PM ----------



The Coast Guard uses a term "in service to the vessel". If I send a deckhand to Ace Hardware to get a pipe fitting for the bilge system, the deckhand is in service to the vessel, and therefore under CG jurisdiction. If he gets in an auto accident, I have to report it to the CG. If he gets the nipple and stops for lunch and is mugged, he is not in service to the vessel, and no report is required.

In neither case do I need to fill out the OSHA 200 log. OSHA accepts CG-2962 reports in lieu of OSHA 200 reports, btw.

Not to split hairs here, but there are no longer 200 logs. They were changed sometime ago. I only say this in case you are still using the 200 logs.