ABYC Standards

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

Thought I would start a new thread dedicated to a discussion about ABYC standards with a poll.

I will start it off.

I do not believe any owner, buyer, manufacture, insurance or lender should be forced or require that ABYC suggested standards be enforced until:

1. They become a public forum
2. Public has input in any proposed standards
3. The board is elected

Then again it seems we are creating another red tape bureaucracy. Maybe all we really need is the USCG.

 

[GFC]

Tom, I'm not sure what the ABYC standards are, or how they are different from whatever standards boat builders are held to when building a new boat.


Can ya' splain a bit more of where you're headed? At this point I don't know enough about the ABYC standards to even vote in your poll.

 

[RT Firefly]

Greetings,
Mr. ASD. As good as your word...A couple of questions to the general population and maybe Mr. SD or one of our insurance gurus knows some of the answers. 1) How does the European boating industry handle this situation of "standards"? Private enterprise (like AYBC) or government? 2) Is the insurance industry large enough to maintain a pool of knowledgeable underwriters who can give a true assessment of certain risks that may be present in recreational craft? Case in point: the contentious Racor "non-conforming" fuel filters mentioned in another thread.

 

[Marin]

If you'd had a category that states the ABYC provides a useful service to the boating industry I'd have chosen that one. But I don't believe the ABYC in its current form provides a vital service.

I think what's needed is a forum, if you will, that provides guidelines for boat systems and structures that take into account advances in technology, processes and materials, and what's been learned over time. In that respect the ABYC in its current form does this.

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.

I do not believe that the USCG should be charged with creating, administering and enforcing anything other than very basic, broadly applicable safety standards if for no other reason than 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.

 

[TDunn]

One of my main concerns about the ABYC standards is that they are not freely available to the boating public. Access to the standards is restricted to ABYC members and there is no membership category for an individual boater. Yes, I am aware that parts of some of the standards are out there, but to get all the current standards you have to join ABYC. Personally I find the idea of being held to standards I can't access unacceptable.

 

[ksanders]

I like the concept of AYBC standards, and I want my boat to comply with them.
I think that having standards in place provide a set of best practices that can and should be used by persons working on boats.

That said, the standards need to be easily assessable. I do not mind paying a fee (everything costs) but the standards need to be access able to be effective.

I think the current AYBC policy of only allowing marine professionals or students access to the standards defeats the whole purpose which should be to promote safety and safe installation practices.

A good example of something that works is the National Electrical Code. Anybody can buy a copy of the NEC code book, which provides detailed standards governing the installation of electrical equipment. You do not have to be an electrical professional to buy the code book.

 

[RT Firefly]

Greetings,
Mr. ks. Now THAT'S the best idea out there and the solution to a whole bunch of problems the AYBC system now has (at least I perceive them as problems) BUT, won't that cut down on the profits of the mechanics and tradespeople one is required to hire to address "deficiencies" pointed out by surveyors?

 

[DavidM]

None of your choices match my views on ABYC, so I didn't vote.


ABYC is mostly good. But I have seen the influence of manufacturer's of the latest gadget who get their equipment written into the standards without any reality check.


Their standards are not mandatory and that point should be clear to any new and used boat buyer. But the same thing can be said about other national codes.


And as others have said above, ABYC standards should be available to the public at a reasonable price.


David

 

[TDunn]

ABYC standards aren't mandatory unless your insurance company decides they are. At my last insurance survey I had that issue to deal with. Admittedly that was partly due to a less than fully competent surveyor who also stated unequivocally that the keel bolts on my sailboat needed renewing despite the fact that the boat had encapsulated ballast and no keel bolts.

 

[Northern Spy]

I do not agree with any of the poll choices either. I do agree with David and Kevin. It is apparent that they work with code on a regular basis.

I have no problem with the adoption of ABYC code for minimum construction standards. I do have issue with it for maintainance, and its use by surveyors and insurance companies. I believe that the ABYC should delineate between standards and best practices, not unlike API. I think that will come with time. It took almost 90 years before ASME came out with the PCC recommendations.

I do not think the USCG should be writing standards for commercial or recreational boats. Not their forte...

Somewhere around this site, I had a topic with hyperlinks to other governing bodies standards and practices.

DNV, Nordic, CE, NZ, Aus, and such...

 

[tpbrady]

Kevin,

My only complaint with the NEC is the standards are adopted by states as their body of electrical standards. At that point in time, a public standard should be available to the public. Since our work has to comply with certain NEC articles, technically I have to buy to whole thing to know the 3 paragraphs I have to comply with. As soon as a state gives it the force and effect of law, then you would think it would be publicly available. If the standards are so critical, they should be available for us that would like to do it on our own. Secret standards that are legally binding sound like the product of a mutual protection society.

As far as ABYC, I like to have a recommended way to do things, that I can choose to follow or not. I wish they were more easily accessible. However, once they become enforceable standards, they better be publicly available.

Tom

 

[caltexflanc]

The USCG does have standards for inspected commercial craft. It is their forte and a system long in place.

 

[ksanders]

Greetings,
Mr. ks. Now THAT'S the best idea out there and the solution to a whole bunch of problems the AYBC system now has (at least I perceive them as problems) BUT, won't that cut down on the profits of the mechanics and tradespeople one is required to hire to address "deficiencies" pointed out by surveyors?

RTF, I nor anyone else here can speak to the rational of why the AYBC limits sale of its standards to marine professionals. I would be quite happy to pay my $99 a year to access a set of best practices. I would then use them when I am doing projects.

 

[FlyWright]

I support ABYC like I agree with UL, local building codes and neighborhood codes. It can protect us from our ignorance and helps keep us safe. I agree that the code should be accessible to all, but ABYC had a corner on the market here. That seems short sighted, but profitable to ABYC. I hope that era ends soon.

I found the poll limited, hard to read and biased in its wording.

 

[HeadMistress]

Wow...if false conclusions were bridges, y'all would have jumped to your deaths!

I do not believe any owner, buyer, manufacture, insurance or lender should be forced or require that ABYC suggested standards be enforced until:

1. They become a public forum
2. Public has input in any proposed standards
3. The board is elected

ABYC standards are not regulations or "codes,"...they are not enforceable. They ARE recommendations intended to protect the vessel and its occupants, that most people with any sense follow willingly and most insurance companies insist they be followed.

The public has all kinds of input into the creation of ABYC standards. Every major boat builder is a member as are surveyors, yards, dealers and any other person or business entity--including individual boat owners--who have a legitimate connection to the boating industry.

The public has a lot of input into ABYC standards....they are arrived at by consensus of the members of specific committees that consist of equipment mfrs, surveyors, yard owners and yes, boat owners. I sat on an ABYC sanitation project committee from 1992-1996...it's members included 2 yard owners, the president of a major sanitation equipment mfr (not Raritan fwiw... he chaired--and may still chair--the boat piping committee}, 2 NAMS certified surveyors and 2 boat owners. We met in Annapolis several times a year.

I nor anyone else here can speak to the rational of why the AYBC limits sale of its standards to marine professionals.

They don't. Anyone who has a valid use for them can buy them...members do pay less. And the board IS elected. Two previous board members--one a surveyor, the other a boat owner--are close friends of mine.
I think the current AYBC policy of only allowing marine professionals or students access to the standards defeats the whole purpose which should be to promote safety and safe installation practices.

They don't. Anyone who has a valid connection to the marine industry can buy them They do charge members considerably less than non-members--and some may be available for free to some students... but any boat owner can buy them...just specific ones, or the entire library.

I have no problem with the adoption of ABYC code for minimum construction standards.

ABYC standards are not codes.

I do have issue with it for maintainance, and its use by surveyors and insurance companies.

You'd rather have anyone with a business license mess with your electrical system instead of an ABYC certified MARINE electrician? A lawn mower mechanic instead of an ABYC certified diesel mechanic to work on your diesel engines? You're ok with gate valves as seacocks...surveyors whose only qualification is, they have business cards that say they're a surveyor?

I believe that the ABYC should delineate between standards and best practices, not unlike API.

You, like at least half the people in this thread, are confusing standards with codes. They are not...standards ARE best practices recommendations! And btw, UL also has a marine standards committee...its standards are also "best practices recommendations" and are incorporated into ABYC standards.

As far as ABYC, I like to have a recommended way to do things, that I can choose to follow or not. I wish they were more easily accessible.

They're readily accessible, but not free or dirt cheap. Standards are not created once and set in stone...as technology evolves, so must standards evolve and change. Keeping them current is not cheap...neither is training and educating mechanics, yard personnel, surveyors and brokers. And all that is expensive! The "tuition" charged for certification training doesn't begin to cover the actual cost. Too many people put enough value on ABYC standards to WANT them, but not enough to be willing to pay a fair price for them.

However, once they become enforceable standards, they better be publicly available.

Iow, free. When standards become enforceable, they cease to BE standards...they become regulations which ARE enforceable and will be incorporated into the CFR (Code of Federal Regulations), which is readily accessible for free.

I agree that the code should be accessible to all, but ABYC had a corner on the market here. That seems short sighted, but profitable to ABYC.

ABYC is a non-profit organization.

I hope that era ends soon.
Iow, you WANT the standards to become regulations just so you can get them for free?

I've said my piece. Hopefully I've managed to talk at least a few of you off the bridge railing.

 

[ksanders]

Peggie

After reading Peg's post I went back to the AYBC site, and looked very closely this time.

She is right. to join you need a marine business, certified tech, or student status.

If you go to the store you can buy the standards.

$475 for the complete set on CD

You can buy individual subjects (like Generators for example) for $50 each.

There is even training material to take their certification tests.

I stand corrected, Thanks Peg!

 

[FlyWright]

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.

 

[ksanders]

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.

I do not mind paying for material.

$475 is allot of money though.

My NEC code book costs about a hundred dollars. I'd pay that. Possibly a bit more but $475 in my mind is shelling out five large. That's a tough one

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

Tom, I'm not sure what the ABYC standards are, or how they are different from whatever standards boat builders are held to when building a new boat.


Can ya' splain a bit more of where you're headed? At this point I don't know enough about the ABYC standards to even vote in your poll.

I think Marin splained it good.........maybe

 

[Alaskan Sea-Duction]

Sorry folks for the confusion the poll created. My intent was to create a conversation surrounding ABYC.


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

 

[twistedtree]

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.

 

[Peter B]

............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..!

 

[O C Diver]

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

 

[ranger58sb]

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 2½ minutes to grab the ditch bag and cut the dinghy loose...)

-Chris

 

[caltexflanc]

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".

 

[FF]

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.

 

[Tom.B]

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.

 

[DavidM]

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

 

[psneeld]

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 2½ 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.

 

[TDunn]

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.