View Poll Results: Do You Believe in the ABYC?
Yes, they serive a vital service for the boating community. 18 58.06%
No they are a secret society and is a pain in the..... 2 6.45%
Yes if it became a public entity 5 16.13%
No ABYC the USCG should handle all standards 6 19.35%
Voters: 31. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
 
Old 01-27-2016, 01:50 AM   #21
Guru
 
twistedtree's Avatar
 
City: Gloucester, MA
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2013
Posts: 3,187
Peggy did a nice job clearing up a lot of the confusion and miss-information. I'll add one more clarification. Anyone can join for $255 per year and have access to all the standards online. I joined a year or two ago to be sure I was up to snuff while my boat was being spec'd and built. While a member I downloaded all the standards and have them for reference. My membership lapsed so I'm not getting updates, but that's acceptable for me in my situation.

I agree $255 was a little steep for the specs, but in the grand scheme of things, I think worth it. At $100 I would not have given it a second thought. After-all, you can spend $50 to $100 for a service manual for an engine or gear box, so $255 isn't that bad for all the ABYC standards.
__________________
Advertisement

__________________
www.MVTanglewood.com
twistedtree is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 02:01 AM   #22
TF Site Team
 
Peter B's Avatar
 
City: Brisbane
Country: Australia
Vessel Name: Lotus
Vessel Model: Clipper (CHB) 34 Sedan/Europa style
Join Date: Jun 2008
Posts: 6,669
Send a message via Skype™ to Peter B
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marin View Post
............However, I feel that there should also be a mechanism that ensures--- legally ensures--- that surveyors and other people/organizations/businesses that judge and "rate" a vessel's condition will not try to apply and enforce new standards to vessels that were designed and built before the technology, materials, processes and history were established.......
.........history has definitively proven that if any organization is going to do something ineptly, expensively, and ineffectively it's going to be a government.....Claiming that ABYC standards must be applied to a vessel, particularly an older one, is akin to claiming that a Ford Model A pickup must be fitted with airbags, anti-lock brakes, and traction control. I get the impression that most people on this forum understand this but we still see posts about such-and-such a surveyor writing up a vessel for not having some particular feature that hadn't even been conceived at the time the vessel was designed and manufactured.

That, I believe, is something that needs addressing in a consistent, industry-wide and enforceable manner that prevents individual surveyors, insurance companies, etc., from imposing their own mistaken beliefs or assumptions on vessel owners, particularly the owners of older vessels.
Not being in the US, it was pointless me undertaking the survey, but I definitely get where most of you are coming from, and Marin summed the situation up perfectly there...

My personal beef is as follows...different country - same bureaucratic approach...

I know my primary filter has a non-metallic drain plug, but I don't intend to change it now. The boat is 40 years old. I was also reminded of this annoying tendency to make new rules, and then make then retrospective, without due thought as to whether older vessels can comply, let alone the cost to do so, when we were out in the boat this past long weekend. Eg the mandatory installation of holding tanks here now without them also mandating that marinas have to have pump-out facilities. Most do not - go figure...

Then there's my pet annoyance that now, under recently passed new regulations, the perfectly functional 4 burner gas cooker which has served the boat well for over 20 years, is now non-compliant because the burners do not have flame out protection. The oven does. No burner has ever flamed out in all out numerous uses, nor for anyone else. It has a remote solenoid close-off valve at the cylinder we switch off immediately after each use. Everything still works perfectly. We were using it the last few days. But to sell the boat now, it will all have to be ripped out and replaced.

My take on all this is we are all saying the same thing. Please (powers that be - whoever and wherever you are), be sensible, and stop trying to retrospectively make the whole deal idiot-proof, because it can't be done..!
__________________

__________________
Pete
Peter B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 07:00 AM   #23
Guru
 
O C Diver's Avatar
 
City: Fort Myers, FL... Summers in Crisfield, MD
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Slow Hand
Vessel Model: Cherubini Independence 45
Join Date: Dec 2010
Posts: 4,813
Quote:
Originally Posted by Peter B View Post

Then there's my pet annoyance that now, under recently passed new regulations, the perfectly functional 4 burner gas cooker which has served the boat well for over 20 years, is now non-compliant because the burners do not have flame out protection. The oven does. No burner has ever flamed out in all out numerous uses, nor for anyone else. It has a remote solenoid close-off valve at the cylinder we switch off immediately after each use. Everything still works perfectly. We were using it the last few days. But to sell the boat now, it will all have to be ripped out and replaced.
While I feel your pain on this, seems to me that they were at least generous enough to let you continue to use the stove till you sell your boat. IMO, when it comes to changing standards, the government should leave you alone with your existing compliant stuff so long as it doesn't impact the safety of other people.

Ted
__________________
Blog: mvslowhand.com
I'm tired of fast moves, I've got a slow groove, on my mind.....
I want to spend some time, Not come and go in a heated rush.....
"Slow Hand" by The Pointer Sisters
O C Diver is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 08:30 AM   #24
Guru
 
ranger42c's Avatar
 
City: Maryland
Country: USA
Vessel Model: 42' Sportfish
Join Date: Aug 2013
Posts: 3,157
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alaskan Sea-Duction View Post
To be transparent, I am not an ABYC fan or at least the way it is used. It is used as IF IT WERE THE LAW. For instance in another thread about batteries, the subject of fuel filters came about and the need for MA filters vs the standard Racor type which don't have the metal drain or shield. Yes my surveyor wrote up my filters. I disagree with the suggested ABYC standards.

If my boat ER is on fire, and my automatic fire suppression doesn't work, I am not staying on the boat. 2.5 minutes extra this mod may give me is really irrelevant. Just my $0.02 worth

Just building on this, a bit...

If a surveyor, insurer, or banker insists upon adherence, especially retro-active, to ABYC standards, not sure the blame lies with ABYC.

Perhaps successful ABYC marketing can lead (has led) to that situation, but still.... doesn't seem to me that ABYC is a villain there...

(In those circumstances, I'm outa here, too. OTOH, I certainly wouldn't mind an extra 2˝ minutes to grab the ditch bag and cut the dinghy loose...)

-Chris
__________________
South River, Chesapeake Bay
ranger42c is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 08:43 AM   #25
Guru
 
caltexflanc's Avatar
 
City: North Carolina for now
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Small Incentive
Vessel Model: Boston Whaler 130 Sport
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by FlyWright View Post
No, I just wish I could read the standards so I can apply them to projects on my boat.

Non-profit? Then don't ask for my money to read the standards. Where's the money going if not to their bottom line?

It's not easy for a DIYer to access the information. If the info is out there, I'd sure appreciate a FREE link to the source.
You might want to take an introduction to accounting class sometime. There are these little things between revenue and the bottom line called "costs".
__________________
George

"There's the Right Way, the Wrong Way, and what some guy says he's gotten away with"
caltexflanc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 08:48 AM   #26
FF
Guru
 
FF's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 16,518
A similar con is run by the RVIA .

They decide what is "good" legal building practice in the RV industry.

Poor practices abound , a standed wire can be slipped under a screw , with out a terminal end.
FF is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 08:56 AM   #27
Guru
 
Tom.B's Avatar
 
City: Cary, NC
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Skinny Dippin'
Vessel Model: Navigator 4200 Classic
Join Date: Jul 2009
Posts: 5,153
Just because something says "non-profit" doesn't mean a lot of people aren't making money (or a few people making a lot of money) ;-)

I don't have much of an opinion either way. What I do have a problem with are insurance companies and lenders hanging their hat on the ABYC AS IF it was a set of standards or building codes. We have all bought boat (or nearly all of us) where a surveyor said that something was "unsafe" or "didn't met ABYC", then the insurer insists it get corrected up to "code" or no deal. FFW to an accident or claim and the insurer will therefore use this and a basis for claim denial. Will it hold up in court? Who knows, but I'll bet there are some cases out there that have been litigated. Anyway, why are we seemingly force into compliance by a set of best practices, when, in reality, are not even enforceable standards or codes?

That is my main problem with this.
__________________
2000 Navigator 4200 Classic
(NOT a trawler)
Tom.B is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 08:57 AM   #28
Guru
 
djmarchand's Avatar
 
City: East Greenwich, RI
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Bella
Vessel Model: Mainship Pilot 34
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 2,877
ABYC is always conservative to a fault relative to safety. RVIA, not so. There is no comparison between the two.


Insurer's insisting on bringing a boat up to a specific ABYC standard is their right. They set the conditions under which they will insure. If you don't like their conditions, go someplace else for your insurance.


Only in one very minor instance did I find the insurer wanting something that I considered unreasonable, and it had nothing to do with ABYC standards. It cost me $75 to correct.


David
djmarchand is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 09:00 AM   #29
Guru
 
psneeld's Avatar
 
City: Avalon, NJ
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Freedom
Vessel Model: Albin 40
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 15,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by ranger42c View Post
Just building on this, a bit...

If a surveyor, insurer, or banker insists upon adherence, especially retro-active, to ABYC standards, not sure the blame lies with ABYC.

Perhaps successful ABYC marketing can lead (has led) to that situation, but still.... doesn't seem to me that ABYC is a villain there...

(In those circumstances, I'm outa here, too. OTOH, I certainly wouldn't mind an extra 2˝ minutes to grab the ditch bag and cut the dinghy loose...)

-Chris
I agree to a point the ABYC isn't necessarily the offender.

BUT....I believe everyone who puts themselves in an authoritative position, by choice or otherwise, should point out their advice in at certain levels and not automatically god-like.

Certainly retrofitting older propane setups for safety is a good idea....

But is every component and method the ABYC or any other organization recommends of equal safety value?

Obviously not. Most major organizations such as the airlines and the USCG leaned to go to frequency based maintenance over calendar based maintenance for several reasons. They are able to do that when they see just what is an issue and what can be deferred. Well ...that all is a huge oversimplification but hopefully good enough for now.

On new builds where newer safety recommendations can be incorporated easily...no big deal with the "my way or the highway" suggestions/guidelines/best practices......

But on older builds, where some of the lesser components or methods might be the only items out of "suggested compliance", it would be nice to know what levels of threat not complying would be.

It would be nice to see that if only one reported accident in 50 years of boating was caused by a certain situation, or the "imagined threat ones" was notated as such and what a fix might be.

But making that issue of equal importance to something that contributed to a large number of accidents isn't really fair to many of us in that surveyors and insurance companies without a decent grasp make life difficult or expensive for a really small reason.
psneeld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 09:57 AM   #30
Guru
 
TDunn's Avatar
 
City: Maine Coast
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Tortuga
Vessel Model: Nunes Brothers Raised Deck Cruiser
Join Date: Feb 2015
Posts: 671
As a counterpoint to Peggy's comments. Sure I could join ABYC as a business IF I LIED about what my business does even though it is a marine related business since ABYC is completely irrelevant to my particular business. I am not willing to do that

Yes I can also buy copies of the standards at inflated prices.

Personally I find that an industry based standard where increased sales of parts and services may indeed be drivers behind some of the standards to be completely unacceptable. I would much prefer standards based ONLY on safety and best practices and that those standards be prepared by a totally independent body where "industry" input is limited to determining feasibility.
TDunn is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 10:29 AM   #31
Guru
 
BandB's Avatar
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 13,135
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alaskan Sea-Duction View Post
I disagree with the suggested ABYC standards.
Ah, but this is where I have the problem with anything that isn't transparent. You say you disagree with the suggested ABYC standards, but you probably haven't seen those standards and may be disagreeing with a surveyor's interpretation or even mis-interpretation of those standards.

Not just on this but on many things in life I've heard non-existent laws quoted or policies (banks are the worse on that one), I've seen people misapply rules that you don't have access to. Someone tells me something is against a rule or law or policy and I want to see the rule or law or policy they're referring to. I'm use to dealing with quite a few rules makers over the years such as OSHA, EPA, the SEC, the IRS, and others and there are always so many nuances. There are requirements vs. preferences. There is often more than one way to meet the "regulation." The problem is if they have the rules and you don't, you're always subject not just to the rules but what they might think the rules are.

I think the rules are necessary and I insist ABYC is followed for lack of anything else. I, however, do not like their proprietary use and/or misuse of the rules as if some secret society. In today's age there is no valid reason for them not to be fully available online to everyone. In fact, I think they are in a way demeaning their own certification. It's as if they're saying the value of an ABYC certification is we have access to these rules you don't, as opposed to we have training and skills in the use of these rules.

We're in a time in which every maritime regulation is available online for free, every state law, every IRS regulation, every building code in most places. For a very small fee, every court case in most jurisdictions. For classed boats, those standards are available online. There is something inherently wrong with the lack of transparency. The rules are valuable. Their secrecy is inexcusable.

And my view is one shared by many of their members. I look at the member benefits they offer:
  • 24/7 online access to the Standards and Technical Information Reports for Small Craft
  • Technical assistance via phone from ABYC Technical Department
  • Listing in online directory for members and certified technicians
  • Mailed quarterly member magazine, the Reference Point, and emailed a monthly newsletter
  • Member discounts on all ABYC certification courses
  • Member discounts on all publications and products sold in the ABYC Ship’s Store
  • Access to variety of webinars and educational videos on the ABYC website
  • Use of ABYC logo to promote your business and access to marketing toolkit

Are they saying that take away the first of those benefits, it's not worth being a member? Apparently.

Are they saying that members don't really have any special skills or knowledge, just access to the rules? Apparently.

Do they even realize the absurdity of how they conduct their business? Apparently not.
BandB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 10:37 AM   #32
Guru
 
City: Carefree, Arizona
Country: usa
Vessel Name: sunchaser V
Vessel Model: DeFever 48
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,361
In 2012 we were considering new builds from Nordhavn, Dashew and KK. In all cases the subject came up of building to standards, code and class. The three sell internationally and build their vessels to comply, as best can be discerned.

After that new build consideration I do not recall any ABYC standards that seemed too silly other than unfathomable location for battery on off switches and starter fusing. One thing I did note was Dashews far exceeded any other builder for bulkheads, water intrusion, crash proof flooding, sealing of through hulls and capsize protection.

On mature vessels, ABYC does seem though more a tool for surveyors and insurers to wag their finger on than anything else. My insurer has a boat type, year and brand they like to request a "current" survey on. This probably makes sense - profiling if you will.

Do any on TF have information on current recreational boat builders that intentionally flout ABYC?
sunchaser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 10:38 AM   #33
Enigma
 
RT Firefly's Avatar
 
City: Slicker?
Country: Bumpkin?
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 9,995
Greetings,
Mr. TD. You raise valid points. One would like to think that AYBC is, in fact, based on safety and best practices and I think it can be argued that their "suggestions" are. The problem arises when "someone", be-it a "surveyor" or insurance company determines that what was perfectly safe yesterday is now unsafe due to revised "suggestions" and NOT common sense.
Case in point NOT in reference to AYBC. Our last insurance company changed their policy regarding hurricanes about 3 years ago. When renewal time came around, we dutifully arranged for the necessary 5 year survey and in reviewing the new policy we discovered that we were required to haul our vessel IF it was to be in the path of a named storm. No haul, no coverage. As it turns out we were docked in a recognized hurricane hole. Nothing had hit the area for over 85 years. The closest facilities for haulage were on the Outer Banks of NC, an area that regularly gets hammered (sometimes 2 or 3 times a season).
I asked our agent what the rationale was for moving our boat from a safe location to an area where it was sure to be slammed I was informed it was a new company policy. Results? New insurance company.
__________________
RTF
RT Firefly is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 11:03 AM   #34
Guru
 
City: Carefree, Arizona
Country: usa
Vessel Name: sunchaser V
Vessel Model: DeFever 48
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 6,361
RT

Lotta good being on dry land did for the vessels caught up in Sandy. Wonder if your ex-insurers language now stipulates move vessels to Catskills?
sunchaser is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 11:04 AM   #35
Guru
 
BandB's Avatar
 
City: Fort Lauderdale
Country: USA
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 13,135
Quote:
Originally Posted by RT Firefly View Post
Greetings,
Mr. TD. You raise valid points. One would like to think that AYBC is, in fact, based on safety and best practices and I think it can be argued that their "suggestions" are. The problem arises when "someone", be-it a "surveyor" or insurance company determines that what was perfectly safe yesterday is now unsafe due to revised "suggestions" and NOT common sense.
Case in point NOT in reference to AYBC. Our last insurance company changed their policy regarding hurricanes about 3 years ago. When renewal time came around, we dutifully arranged for the necessary 5 year survey and in reviewing the new policy we discovered that we were required to haul our vessel IF it was to be in the path of a named storm. No haul, no coverage. As it turns out we were docked in a recognized hurricane hole. Nothing had hit the area for over 85 years. The closest facilities for haulage were on the Outer Banks of NC, an area that regularly gets hammered (sometimes 2 or 3 times a season).
I asked our agent what the rationale was for moving our boat from a safe location to an area where it was sure to be slammed I was informed it was a new company policy. Results? New insurance company.
We once had a major hurricane in Jamaica in which we had zero damage to the building, no storm damage as such, just some flood damage. The insurer said we must have the owner (Jamaican government) rebuild it to 150 mph standards plus needed a sprinkler system. We switched insurers.
BandB is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 11:24 AM   #36
Guru
 
caltexflanc's Avatar
 
City: North Carolina for now
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Small Incentive
Vessel Model: Boston Whaler 130 Sport
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 3,786
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tom.B View Post
Just because something says "non-profit" doesn't mean a lot of people aren't making money (or a few people making a lot of money) ;-)

I don't have much of an opinion either way. What I do have a problem with are insurance companies and lenders hanging their hat on the ABYC AS IF it was a set of standards or building codes. We have all bought boat (or nearly all of us) where a surveyor said that something was "unsafe" or "didn't met ABYC", then the insurer insists it get corrected up to "code" or no deal. FFW to an accident or claim and the insurer will therefore use this and a basis for claim denial. Will it hold up in court? Who knows, but I'll bet there are some cases out there that have been litigated. Anyway, why are we seemingly force into compliance by a set of best practices, when, in reality, are not even enforceable standards or codes?

That is my main problem with this.
So tell us Tom, who is making a lot of money at ABYC? Name names please!
__________________
George

"There's the Right Way, the Wrong Way, and what some guy says he's gotten away with"
caltexflanc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 11:27 AM   #37
Guru
 
Brooksie's Avatar
 
City: Cape Cod, MA
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Island Seeker
Vessel Model: Willard 36 Sedan
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 954
Interestingly there is an article in Pro Boat Builder this month saying basicly that ABYC, without discussion or warning, has made cleanout ports on diesel tank sides non-compliant. They can henceforth only be on the top of the tanks to meet their specifications. The article's author is suggesting that except for very large vessels this will end the ability to check and/or clean tanks. If my experience with surveyors holds true, they will soon be asking for removal of "non-compliant" tanks when they see side cleanouts.
Brooksie is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 11:32 AM   #38
TF Site Team
 
Larry M's Avatar
 
City: JAX, FL
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Hobo
Vessel Model: Krogen 42-120
Join Date: Nov 2008
Posts: 5,729
Has BoatUS written articles about ABYC? They are one of the largest boating lobbies but also in the insurance business.
Larry M is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 12:04 PM   #39
Guru
 
psneeld's Avatar
 
City: Avalon, NJ
Country: USA
Vessel Name: Freedom
Vessel Model: Albin 40
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 15,877
I think the snowball is already halfway down the hill and getting bigger.


In today's world...who is going to endorse anything less than 100% safe?


Even though that is a nebulous target...as long as someone with any kind of reputation says so....it would be hard to go against a recommendation....


Sure some things are almost scientific fact...but look at all the boating discussions here that are really only opinion.


Gosh forbid someone starts quoting anchor tests as a "standard" to be used just because a couple companies and experienced boaters endorse the test....but it is headed that way versus the opposite.
psneeld is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-27-2016, 12:42 PM   #40
Scraping Paint
 
City: -
Country: -
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 13,748
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brooksie View Post
...ABYC, without discussion or warning, has made cleanout ports on diesel tank sides non-compliant. ....If my experience with surveyors holds true, they will soon be asking for removal of "non-compliant" tanks when they see side cleanouts.
This is where common sense needs to be applied. The standard itself would seem to make sense; side inspection ports do carry the risk of leaking due to poor or deteriorating seals, bad design and fabrication, etc. Eliminate the side inspection port and you eliminate that set of risks.

But it's obvious from a long history worldwide that side inspection ports can be made to be more than reasonably free of risk. Sure, it requires an owner to keep an eye on them, but individual responsibility is a requirement for life, be it having to do with the condition of one's boat or how much attention one pays when walking while texting or e-mailing. You can get dead either way and in my opinon that risk is solely in the hands of the individual.

We should not avoid new ideas which improve safety, efficiency, and so forth. But at the same time we should use commmon sense when determining when and where to apply these new ideas. To build on psneeld's comments, it seems that for a whole lot of reasons humans in more advanced societies are increasingly sucumbing to nanny state mentality.

My own opinion is that the fundamental reason for this is the fact that with the possible exception of sloths and male lions, humans are the laziest living things on the planet, so anything that relieves us of having to think or do anything requiring effort on our part becomes desirable.

So the reality is that we have set up the environent where organizations like ABYC and all the rest can create rules, regulations, or standards that direct our lives. So the bottom line with what ABYC does and our acceptance of it is that it's our own damn fault.

But that's a big-picture view and it's inevitable, I think. But in the meantime, if enough common sense prevails to create and apply the ABYC standards and recommendations sensibly, I think having these standards and recommendations is a good idea.
__________________

Marin is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off





All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:38 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Search Engine Optimization by vBSEO 3.6.0
Copyright 2006 - 2012