GOVERNMENT UPDATEO? shore Supply VesselsAfter all, the industry was created in America ... it is only appropriate that the United States dominate it again.BY DENNIS BRYANTffshore supply vessels On October 6, 1980, Public Law 96-vessel that was certi? cated on or after level playing ? eld.As speci? cally allowed by the 2010 (OSVs), also known as plat- 378 was signed into law. It established March 15, 1996. OSVs that were certi? -form supply vessels (PSVs), the offshore supply vessel as a separate cated prior to that date were considered statute, the US Coast Guard skipped category of vessel subject to inspection existing OSVs. Existing OSVs could over the usual notice of proposed rule-Ohave been a distinct ves-sel type since 1956, when the MV Ebb by the Coast Guard. It also rede? ned either comply in their entirety with the making (NPRM). The agency issued, instead, an interim rule (IR) on August Tide was placed into service in the Gulf the term “passenger” as regards OSVs new regulations or comply with the pre-of Mexico. Ebb Tide was designed by to exclude a person employed in some vious regulations and policy, including 18, 2014 entitled “Offshore Supply Ves-Alden J. “Doc” Laborde to meet the phase of exploration, exploitation, or the NVIC. The OSV ? nal rule, largely sels of at Least 6,000 GT ITC”. While its provisions entered into effect upon growing demand for vessels to service production of offshore mineral or ener- adopting the interim rule, was promul-the increasing number of offshore oil gy resources served by the vessel. This gated on September 19, 1997. Various publication, the Coast Guard requested drilling rigs in those waters. Previously, provision exempted OSV crew boats amendments have been promulgated comments from the public on potential improvements. The IR is intended to be this new industry had been served, al- from coverage under the small passen- over the years.beit inadequately, by existing vessels, ger vessel regulations. The statute also It gradually became apparent, though, consistent with international standards particularly surplus amphibious assault established minimum manning levels that the designers of the OSV program for the design, engineering, construc-barges. Ebb Tide was designed with the for OSVs and provided for licensing and had imposed unforeseen constraints. tion, operations and manning, inspec-pilot house at the bow and with an open certi? cation of of? cers and crew. Final-Few envisioned in the early days of the tions, and certi? cation of OSVs. In one particular aspect, the new regulations deck from there aft to the stern. It was ly, the new law made all OSVs subject industry that OSVs would exceed the 500 may exceed international standards. The an immediate hit with customers and to inspection, including those operating gross ton upper limit provided for in the formed the foundation of the Tidewater under bareboat charters.1980 statute. The oil and gas industry, regulations require that tanks on these Company, now a leader in the industry. The process of drafting and promul-though, kept building larger and larger larger OSVs intended for carriage of cargo oil, including drilling ? uids con-The problem, if it can be considered gating regulations implementing the rigs, drilling further and further offshore, taining oil, comply with double hull re-from that perspective, was that the exist- new statute turned out to be excruciat- and operating in harsher conditions than quirements developed for tank vessels. ing statutory and regulatory scheme had ingly long. In the meantime, though, the the Gulf of Mexico. The support ves-Similar protection is required for fuel not envisioned such a vessel. Although Coast Guard issued guidance to its ? eld sels, particularly the OSVs, had to be-personnel and to the industry in the form come larger and more robust in order to oil tank protection on these larger OSVs. relatively small, it could carry a signi? -of a Navigation and Vessel Inspection keep up with the demand. This was not These steps have been taken so as to re-cant amount of cargo, including bulk liq-duce the risk of pollution in the event uid cargo. In a different con? guration, it Circular (NVIC). As its name implies, a problem in other countries, where there of a casualty, a measure that has proven could carry a signi? cant number of per- NVIC 8-81 “Initial and Subsequent In- was no arti? cial limit on OSV size, but it effective on tank vessels and has since sons in addition to crew. The U.S. Coast spection of Uncerti? ed Existing Off- put an unexpected constraint on the OSV been expanded to many cargo vessels. Guard was at a loss regarding how these shore Supply Vessels under Public Law industry in the United States.The ball is now back in the court of the vessels should be regulated. Likewise, 96-378” provided guidance for applying Included within the Coast Guard Au-United States offshore supply vessel in-the classi? cation societies, including the standards to OSVs (and later, liftboats) thorization Act of 2010 (Pub.L. 111-281) dustry – the naval architects, shipyards, American Bureau of Shipping (ABS), that were already in operation when was section 617. This section eliminated the statute was enacted. This guidance the upper tonnage limit of 500 GRT or owners, operators and crew members – had no succinct rules for their classi? ca-tion. The Coast Guard and ABS did the was updated and expanded by means of 6,000 GT ITC for OSVs and set certain to demonstrate that they can truly com-same thing that Mr. Laborde had done NVIC 8-91, entitled “Initial and Subse-manning and construction requirements pete in this dynamic global sector. After all, the industry was created in America. – they improvised, initially developing quent Inspection of Existing, Uncerti? ed for larger OSVs. The section also pro-one-off, ad hoc approaches intended to Offshore Supply Vessels, Including Lift-vided for the direct promulgation by the It is only appropriate that the United States dominate it again.allow the innovative vessels to continue boats”, which superseded NVIC 8-81. Coast Guard of regulations implement-working while ensuring that the crews, After two Advance Notices of Pro- ing the statutory amendments. The impe-cargoes, and vessels were safe. posed Rulemaking (ANPRMs) in 1983 tus for these amendments was the drastic The Coast Guard soon developed the and 1987 and one Notice of Proposed change in the industry, particularly inter-The Authorpractice of inspecting OSVs as cargo and Rulemaking (NPRM) in 1989, the In- nationally. While the U.S. offshore in-miscellaneous vessels if of more than 15 terim Rule for Offshore Supply Vessels dustry was bound by the 500 GRT limit, Dennis L. Bryant is with Maritime Regu-gross tons and of less than 500 gross tons was ? nally promulgated on November foreign competitors were building and latory Consulting, and a regular contribu-and carrying freight for hire (referred to 16, 1995. For the ? rst time, it provided operating larger OSVs, capable of carry-tor to Maritime Reporter & Engineering as “supply boats”). Those OSVs of less a complete set of regulations (new Sub- ing more freight further offshore. The News as well as online at MaritimePro-than 100 gross tons and carrying more chapter L of Title 46, Code of Federal United States, where the OSV had been fessional.com. t: 1 352 692 5493 than six passengers for hire were referred Regulations) applicable to new OSVs, born, was forced to play catch-up. The e: dennis.l.bryant@gmail.com to as “crew boats” and were inspected as including liftboats. For purposes of the 2010 statutory amendment was intended small passenger vessels. regulation, a new OSV was any such to put the U.S. OSV industry back on a 22 Maritime Reporter & Engineering News • OCTOBER 2014MR #10 (18-25).indd 22 MR #10 (18-25).indd 22 10/1/2014 9:36:09 AM10/1/2014 9:36:09 AM