Propane Bottle Location Requirements

When we bought our boat almost five years ago there were two tanks under the cowling on the bridge. The surveyor said they had to be moved. We bought a nice teak cooler that was intended for poolside use, put it at the back corner of the bridge deck and put a horizontal tank in. The cooler has a rubber seal, does not require tools to open and vents out of the brass spigot into to open air and not above an opening window. The pictures gives you the idea but it was taken to show the freshly sanded deck.

Anode said:

Slip over here and ask what BBQ is....
The BBQ BRETHREN FORUMS. - Powered by vBulletin

Click to expand...

Thank you for that link. It eventually led me to
Smokenator Setup and Tips

The Smokenator is cute and does what it is supposed to. But, the real deal is that PartyQ Thermostat. That baby is priceless. It holds a low and slow cooking temperature within a few degrees for hours. I've smoked a few slabs of salmon and a few whole chickens in my Weber Performer using it. Near perfection!

Did someone mention that Thread Creep fellow?

ABYC standards are VOLUNTARY....there is no legal requirement to follow them.
There are written to help boat builders build boats to a specific standard.
Most surveyors like to quote these standards knowing that buyers are unaware.

and put a horizontal tank in.

Great for a boat that doesn't cruise much , as the refill must be done in person at a refill place.Maybe a taxi ride over and back.

Far easier (tho the propane is more costly) to simply swop 20lb bottles at the nearest gas station 7-11 , or food store.

YRWV

marinetrader said:

ABYC standards are VOLUNTARY....there is no legal requirement to follow them.
There are written to help boat builders build boats to a specific standard.
Most surveyors like to quote these standards knowing that buyers are unaware.

Click to expand...

Thanks for reemphasizing this. The word needs to get out about uninformed and often unscrupulous surveyors.

The nice thing about surveyors using ABYC recommendations is they are getting the industry best practices out there for everyone, whether voluntary or not.

I don't think surveyors profit in any way by following ABYC guidelines.

I think that a surveyor that cites them during the survey, but clearly informs the buyer that these standards are voluntary blah-blah-blah and you don't have to follow them etc-etc-etc THAT would be the way I would like to see it approached.

Here is a question that seems the essence of ABYC stuff that gets bandied about on this and other boating Forums:

"Should one take the advice of a well regarded surveyor, who you have paid good money to prepare a document for your bank and insurer OR, take the advice of a stranger (likely uninformed and not licensed), on the internet?"

GonzoF1 said:

I think that a surveyor that cites them during the survey, but clearly informs the buyer that these standards are voluntary blah-blah-blah and you don't have to follow them etc-etc-etc THAT would be the way I would like to see it approached.

Click to expand...

Better I think would be that he explains WHY they are recommended, and reenforces that they are voluntary. All of their recommendations are good ideas, but not the ONLY ideas.

He could also then explain where the USCG has (and has not) aligned to those same recommendations.

Very few of them are bad idea.

SomeSailor said:

The nice thing about surveyors using ABYC recommendations is they are getting the industry best practices out there for everyone, whether voluntary or not.

I don't think surveyors profit in any way by following ABYC guidelines.

Click to expand...

We've been through this previously, but the issue is one of driving up costs for the boat owner via implied "requirements". And by the way, I've had two instances where surveyors identified items as ABYC "non-compliant" and then gave me the names of individuals who could do the modification work for me...his buddies. The scam warning lights start flashing in my head and they're asked to leave. There are posters on this forum who continue to infer that ABYC criteria are somehow mandatory.

skidgear said:

And by the way, I've had two instances where surveyors identified items as ABYC "non-compliant" and then gave me the names of individuals who could do the modification work for me...his buddies.

Click to expand...

My experiences differed from yours, and many of the recommendations in my latest survey were corrected (by myself) to take those recommendations on board, and many remain as they were.

If they are safety related and could affect your insurance rates, liability... I would pay attention and correct them. No one says you have to use someone's "buddy".

My insurance co takes blindly whatever recommendation the surveyor cites. I finally had to tell the last guy not to say the boat would look nicer if it was painted blue because my insurance co would require it be painted blue for safety and to continue my insurance.

sunchaser said:

"Should one take the advice of a well regarded surveyor, who you have paid good money to prepare a document for your bank and insurer OR, take the advice of a stranger (likely uninformed and not licensed), on the internet?"

Click to expand...

There are no requirements for a toy boat "surveyor" to hold any professional license whatsoever.

A surveyor is no more likely to have any more practical skills or real-life marine industry experience than anyone else posting on the Internet.

SomeSailor said:

My experiences differed from yours, and many of the recommendations in my latest survey were corrected (by myself) to take those recommendations on board, and many remain as they were.

If they are safety related and could affect your insurance rates, liability... I would pay attention and correct them. No one says you have to use someone's "buddy".

Click to expand...

You make my point...and also miss my point. Just because a surveyor points to ABYC to label something safety related or "unsafe" doesn't make it so. It's simply different than the latest ABYC guidelines for new boat construction. The problem is that it costs me either time or money when they characterize something in a survey as an ABYC "safety" concern. If you look to the aviation world, fifty year old airplanes are held to the FAA engineering standards in place at the time of original certification (along with airworthiness directives)...not those in the current regulations, which have been updated many times over the years. The ongoing surveyor initiated "safety" creep for old boats should alarm owners.

Obviously I don't have to use someone's buddy...and I won't. But I have to take the time and effort to filter out the surveyors who are bums. Why isn't SAMS/NAMS performing that function? Because they're little more than lobby groups for their members with insurance companies. This is not to say there aren't good surveyors out there. But it's certainly buyer beware. The whole process is flawed.

RickB said:

"A surveyor is no more likely to have any more practical skills or real-life marine industry experience than anyone else posting on the Internet"


Correct, if one does not do some research before approaching the surveyor street. Locating a good surveyor is akin to hiring someone in industry for an important technical position which then requires the hirer to know how to look for and assess the hiree.

If not required to use a surveyor to satisfy insurance or banking needs when conducting boat inspections, I prefer to use a good boat yard whose work I am familiar with - preferably one with specific skill sets and who has done lots of new build commissioning work on like vessels. I've heard there are a few in Florida ----------.

skidgear said:

You make my point...and also miss my point. Just because a surveyor points to ABYC to label something safety related or "unsafe" doesn't make it so.

Click to expand...

I get your point just fine. I just disagree with it.

skidgear said:

If you look to the aviation world, fifty year old airplanes are held to the FAA engineering standards in place at the time of original certification (along with airworthiness directives)...not those in the current regulations, which have been updated many times over the years.

Click to expand...

Airplanes built 50 years ago, may well be grandfathered, but those are reasons of economy, not safety. They ARE NOT safer than currently built aircraft, and neither are our older boats.

All of my surveys have pointed to recommended safety improvements, and some were indeed unsafe and needed to be rectified.

GFCI is an example. It did not exist when my boat was built, but I insist on it for safety reasons. I believe a boat without it IS unsafe. Wiring color codes are another. My boat has wiring colors that could be safer, but it would not be economical to replace them. I do step up whenever I rewire anything and meet all ABYC requirements and recommendations. But, safe is an adjective and therefore very subjective. I am not concerned about someone having a more conservative safety approach than me at all.

"Safety Creep" is not a huge concern.

SomeSailor said:

I rewire anything and meet all ABYC requirements ....

Click to expand...

There you go again. There are no "requirements" for an owner to comply with any of the ABYC recommendations for recreational boats.

Stop trying to make people think ABYC is a regulatory body and that little plastic hammer wielding surveyors are some kind of safety officer.

SomeSailor said:

Airplanes built 50 years ago, may well be grandfathered, but those are reasons of economy, not safety. They ARE NOT safer than currently built aircraft, and neither are our older boats.

Click to expand...

I didn't say they are more safe. They are officially SAFE per the law if properly maintained. Old airplanes are not "grandfathered", they are in compliance with the letter of the regulations (law). The philosophy behind the law has worked for many decades and been proven to provide a satisfactory level of safety. Obviously there is an element of cost behind any safety philosophy....which is precisely the point I'm making. In the unusual instance where a regulation is applied retroactively, there will always be a well documented safety issue that supports the change...and the change will always be vetted through a formal cost-benefits analysis in an officially sanctioned public process. In the recreational boating community these self appointed safety "experts" are willy nilly dictating their personal safety requirements and are indeed costing unsuspecting owners. The longer it persists, the more commonplace it will become. It's time to put a stop to it.

By the way, if a surveyor found a rusty clamp or frayed wire on my boat I'd fix/replace it every time. No problem with them telling me about the latest ABYC criteria...just don't put any of it in a survey report.

SomeSailor said:

GFCI is an example. It did not exist when my boat was built, but I insist on it for safety reasons. I believe a boat without it IS unsafe. Wiring color codes are another. My boat has wiring colors that could be safer, but it would not be economical to replace them. I do step up whenever I rewire anything and meet all ABYC requirements and recommendations. But, safe is an adjective and therefore very subjective. I am not concerned about someone having a more conservative safety approach than me at all.

"Safety Creep" is not a huge concern.

Click to expand...

So I'll play Devil's Advocate here.


You have your GB Europa for sale. And the prospective buyer gets me to survey his new purchase. I come aboard and see that in some places you are compliant with the ABYC's "new rules". But in most of the other wiring being as you have had nothing to repair it is not up to the ABYC so called "requirements". So being the diligent surveyor that I am I write up the survey as the boat needs a complete rewire by the new color codes so every thing matches. Something like $40k in scope.

Should I venture a guess as to how you might react to such a survey? I'm only putting what you are suggesting into full force. This is what is in fact happening with some folks. Just that the cost isn't $40k but a bit less or blows the deal completely. "I am not concerned about someone having a more conservative safety approach than me at all." Would this get you concerned because my saftey approch is more conserative than yours? My bet is it would if it happend to you in real life.

Could be wrong.

Slowboat 37 said:

When we bought our boat almost five years ago there were two tanks under the cowling on the bridge. The surveyor said they had to be moved. We bought a nice teak cooler that was intended for poolside use, put it at the back corner of the bridge deck and put a horizontal tank in. The cooler has a rubber seal, does not require tools to open and vents out of the brass spigot into to open air and not above an opening window. The pictures gives you the idea but it was taken to show the freshly sanded deck.

Click to expand...

Hi Steve,

That looks like a neat solution, and a really nice job on the teak deck.

Cheers

RickB said:

There you go again. There are no "requirements" for an owner to comply with any of the ABYC recommendations for recreational boats.

Stop trying to make people think ABYC is a regulatory body and that little plastic hammer wielding surveyors are some kind of safety officer.

Click to expand...

First of all... I'll do as I please.

Secondly; there are "requirements". If a manufacturer wants to satisfy to any regulatory body or agency that they are building in compliance with the ABYC, they must meet certain standards. These standards are outlined as ABYC requirements.

Each manufacturer self certifies their own boats to meet USCG standards. The NMMA then verifies that each boat model meets both USCG and ABYC standards.

You're right that individuals do not have to maintain or step up to ABYC, NMNA, NMEA standards or any other, but there is nothing that I have seen that the ABYC recommends that is contrary to safety, or just good practices.

I highly recommend all boaters at least understand what the ABYC recommends and make a responsible decisions from there.

JD said:

Would this get you concerned because my saftey approch is more conserative than yours? My bet is it would if it happend to you in real life.

Click to expand...

No. My boat was built in Taiwan in 1980. There are LOTS of things that are done more safely and of a higher quality than they did back then. I have no problem with them and nothing that the surveyor recorded in either of the last two surveys was beyond good advice and would be taken on as such.

Does the boat's wiring meet current ABYC standards? No. Would it be safer if it did? Sure. Will I rip out all the wiring and replace it all? No, it wouldn't be cost effective.

SomeSailor said:

No. My boat was built in Taiwan in 1980. There are LOTS of things that are done more safely and of a higher quality than they did back then. I have no problem with them and nothing that the surveyor recorded in either of the last two surveys was beyond good advice and would be taken on as such.

Does the boat's wiring meet current ABYC standards? No. Would it be safer if it did? Sure. Will I rip out all the wiring and replace it all? No, it wouldn't be cost effective.

Click to expand...

Ditto, Ditto, Ditto!

Boats made in Australia and NZ have Requirements eerily similar to ABYC Suggestions. Many (not all) builders in China today build to ABYC (or stiffer regulations/code) assuming it is a Requirement as their vessels go to Europe, Australia, etc. For a good up to date read on Build Standards go to Nordhavn's site to see how they deal with this issue.

Up grading my beloved 1967 Buick Wildcat to today's standards would cost a fortune (heck, probably couldn't be fully accomplished anyway!). Is my Wildcat safe, perfectly kept in its original classic condition? Damn well safer than computer chips that force some newer car models to accelerate till death's may occur, or fires happen due to various items over-heating.

Same with our 1977 Tollycraft tri cabin... all original, important portions of mechanical/electric/plumbing... etc kept in VG condition... She's Doing Just Fine!

Art

Our 1973 GB was 25 years old when we bought it. The only reference the hull surveyor made to ABYC standards during the survey was with regards to the boat's then-new stainless steel fuel tanks.

As I've described in another thread, stainless at that time was not an "approved" (aka "recommended") fuel tank material by the ABYC. The surveyor told us this, explained why (variable quality of stainless even within a specific grade, and variable quality of welds made on stainless) but made no mention of the stainless tanks on the survey itself. He told us about the potential issues with stainless tanks as an advisory caution only. He also said he knew boats in the SFO Bay Area that had had stainless tanks for decades with no problems.

He did not make any mention of ABYC standards to us or on the survey with regards to the boat's twenty-five year old original systems, from wiring to propane. He wrote up a number of things, one of which was serious in nature, but none of which were related by him to the ABYC. And none of our subsequent surveys have included any references to ABYC standards or recomendations.

So it all depends on the surveyor one hires.

SomeSailor said:

No. My boat was built in Taiwan in 1980. There are LOTS of things that are done more safely and of a higher quality than they did back then. I have no problem with them and nothing that the surveyor recorded in either of the last two surveys was beyond good advice and would be taken on as such.

Does the boat's wiring meet current ABYC standards? No. Would it be safer if it did? Sure. Will I rip out all the wiring and replace it all? No, it wouldn't be cost effective.

Click to expand...

I agree with everything you said. But I thought the point that was being made was that sometimes an overzealous surveyor can write up some dumb up grade and cause either a buyer to go south or an insurance company to require unnecessary up grades. In my example you would have lost the sale due to the over reaction form a surveyor. The same guy you were supporting just a post or two before. All in the name of ABYC standards.

If I missunderstood your position then carry on. Well carry on anyway.

JD said:

In my example you would have lost the sale due to the over reaction form a surveyor. The same guy you were supporting just a post or two before.

Click to expand...

First of all... if a buyer is depending on the surveyor to make / break their deal I don't necessarily care to deal with them. My last two boats I sold, and the last I bought I went in with some recommendations and ABYC related observations. None were deal-breakers.

Too many people think they will be paying for the survey and getting a price reduction based on survey findings. I am very clear up front that that is not what a survey is for, and I would not be playing those games. We already had a handshake deal and were now looking for a third party confirmation of the quality of the vessel and it's appointments.

This is an excerpt from my last survey. He outlined his system of prioritizing his recommendations:

· "Priority I Recommendations" are related to Safety & Regulatory findings and are listed in RED in the report.

· "Priority II Recommendations" are related to Maintenance & Standards findings and are listed in BLUE in the report.

· "Other Recommendations" are findings that are relatively minor in nature and are listed in Black in the report.

This is an actual finding:

Battery Set Two: There is one battery located in the engine compartment that is a Grp. 8D lead acid battery that services the main engines that is fitted with wing nuts. ABYC 10.8.3 Battery cables and other conductors size 6 AWG and larger shall not be connected to the battery with wing nuts. Recommendation is that batteries be connected with USCG approved terminations not utilizing wing nuts.

That battery terminal is still on my "to-do" list. Will I change it? Most likely. I understand their recommendations and they are good practices. It was also found to be missing GFCI outlets in two wet spaces. I fixed those the first weekend I owned the boat. None of his recommendations were color coded red.

JD said:

But I thought the point that was being made was that sometimes an overzealous surveyor can write up some dumb up grade and cause either a buyer to go south or an insurance company to require unnecessary up grades.

Click to expand...

You got it.

For those who are still having problems with the topic, go back to page 1 and see just exactly what "an overzealous surveyor" will say to both to the boat owner and anyone who questions the "surveyor's" competence.

RickB said:

For those who are still having problems with the topic, go back to page 1 and see just exactly what "an overzealous surveyor" will say to both to the boat owner and anyone who questions the "surveyor's" competence.

Click to expand...

That wasn't my experience. Mine have had great recommendations and were very amenable to our wishes and did nothing that would have jeopardized any sale. They were there to give non-advocate examination of the condition of the boats and their systems.