Should standards that become a part of a law be free to the public?

[Paul L]

Originally Posted by ramblinrod

If one becomes a member of ABYC (US$99/yr for a general membership) you get free access to all standard and technical papers online. I simply don’t understand why everyone is making such a big deal.

It’s about the same cost as a dozen flares, far more likely to be needed, and in my opinion about 100 times better value.

And for everyone with the opinion a boater doesn’t need the standards, my opinion is “You are wrong.” Left to their own devices, most DIY boaters will find several ways to make a perfectly safe boat, patently unsafe, mostly because they simply don’t know any better, because they have never read the standards that explain how to do it safely.

Where did you get $99? Website says

Recreational Boaters Can Join ABYC
Individual Membership - $185 annual dues
ABYC offers a recreational boater level membership for $185/yr. This level was created for an individual who may be restoring or repairing their own boat, someone who needs access to Standards information when traveling or long range cruising, or a boating enthusiast who want to stay up-to date on the marine industry and support the mission of boating safety.

[hpeer]

Ramblinrod,

Thanks for the response to my query.

As to the balance of your comment I take partial exception in part because, as has been noted numerous times above, the standards are heavily influenced manufacturers to their benefit, not ours. Therefore I take exception that the ABYC should be followed because they show the “right” way, they show the way that is most beneficial to manufacturers.

I’m going to say right now I’m not familiar with the ABCY so I’m in slippery ground and if I make a statement that is incorrect with what they say i will stand corrected. That said allow me to make my point.

ABYC requires tinned wire. My Yanmar does NOT have tinned wire? So I guess my Yanmar is not ABYC compliant and therefore is not safe and therefore should be removed. OR is there an exception that allows Diesel engine wiring to be NOT tinned? That is the most likely explanation, diesel engineering is exempted. WHY?

Clearly the engine wiring is a safety critical component, and it runs up into the cockpit so it’s not contained in the engine room.

While I agree that tinned wire is a “best practice” and I use it almost everywhere. There have been times when I did not. For example the “marine grade” ABYC approved lamps and cans that come without tinned wire.

So I contend that tinned wire is NOT a safety issue (it is a best practice) but is a manufacturers way of forcing us to spend more money. Elsewise the manufacturers would be required to use tinned wire on their components.

I could give other examples but this is one that is pretty easy for others to check out for veracity.

It’s that kind of thing, an abuse of power, that causes folks to scoff and chafe at ABYC. Hiding behind “safety” when it’s about money.

[Maine Sail]

Originally Posted by hpeer

I’m going to say right now I’m not familiar with the ABCY so I’m in slippery ground and if I make a statement that is incorrect with what they say i will stand corrected. That said allow me to make my point.

See below...

Originally Posted by hpeer

ABYC requires tinned wire. My Yanmar does NOT have tinned wire? So I guess my Yanmar is not ABYC compliant and therefore is not safe and therefore should be removed. OR is there an exception that allows Diesel engine wiring to be NOT tinned? That is the most likely explanation, diesel engineering is exempted. WHY?

The ABYC standards do not require tinned wire...


For $185.00 any recreational boater can have access to each and every ABYC standard for less than the pro's pay to join the ABYC..


https://abycinc.org/mpage/becomeamember







.

[hpeer]

Mainsail,

Thank you, I stand corrected. Then it’s another instance where a surveyor has lied to me or didn’t understand the codes.

Which then does make the case to have the codes so you can argue with the surveyor.

So while I’m at it then, is there an ABYC requirement to make your stove gimbal?

[GordMay]

Originally Posted by hpeer

... as has been noted claimed numerous times above, the standards are heavily influenced manufacturers to their benefit, not ours. Therefore I take exception that the ABYC should be followed because they show the “right” way, they show the way that is most beneficial to manufacturers ...

Such has been often claimed, but never substantiated.

[ramblinrod]

Originally Posted by hpeer

Ramblinrod,

Thanks for the response to my query.

As to the balance of your comment I take partial exception in part because, as has been noted numerous times above, the standards are heavily influenced manufacturers to their benefit, not ours. Therefore I take exception that the ABYC should be followed because they show the “right” way, they show the way that is most beneficial to manufacturers.
I’m going to say right now I’m not familiar with the ABCY so I’m in slippery ground and if I make a statement that is incorrect with what they say i will stand corrected. That said allow me to make my point.

ABYC requires tinned wire.

False.

Using tinned wire is very good practice, but not an ABYC nor NMEA standard.

My Yanmar does NOT have tinned wire? So I guess my Yanmar is not ABYC compliant and therefore is not safe and therefore should be removed.

False.

I could give other examples but this is one that is pretty easy for others to check out for veracity.

Can you?

It’s that kind of thing, an abuse of power, that causes folks to scoff and chafe at ABYC. Hiding behind “safety” when it’s about money.

I recommend you visit the ABYC website and become a member before making these kinds of statements.

ABYC has done an incredible amount of work to standardize boat manufacturing, repair, and modification, and improve boater safety.

As a professional marine service provider, my membership costs considerably more than a general membership, and I have also paid several thousand dollars for ABYC training and certification.

After working for 35 years as an Electronic Engineering Technician for products in oil and gas, chemical, water waste water, cement, aggregate, pulp and paper, and commercial buildings, I was shocked (har) to learn what I didn’t know about marine electrical standards.

I can’t count the number of boats I’ve had to completely strip and rewire, because a boat had Bubba his residential electrician friend rewire his boat “cheap”. It of course, ends up costing more, to do it and then do it again, because a surveyor declares, “The electrical system is a mess.”

I have yet to inspect a boat (and I’ve inspected hundreds) that has not had at least 3 serious electrical system deficiencies. About 1 in 10 boats I perform an electrical inspection on, within a few minutes, I step off, and advise the owner we will have to remove all combustibles and disconnect all power sources before proceeding.

The one disadvantage of actually knowing ABYC standards and inspecting boats, is the knowledge that my boat is only one fault away from being destroyed by someone else’s in the marina.

I wish ABYC standards were “law”.

I would far sooner work on new “compliant” installations, where the customer gets new functionality they are excited about, than survey remediation rework, where the customer is pissed they tried to do it themselves, or hired a bum, who doesn’t know the standards and how to follow them.

[boatpoker]

Originally Posted by hpeer

Ramblinrod,
As to the balance of your comment I take partial exception in part because, as has been noted numerous times above, the standards are heavily influenced manufacturers to their benefit, not ours.

Yes, the mfg's do have an influence on the standards but not with profit as a goal. I see them having two goals. 1. Self regulation to minimize government bureaucratic interference. 2. To minimize law suits.

Minimizing law suits by doing things correctly is a worthy goal.

The average boater can have just as much influence on ABYC as the manufacturers. All they have to do is join ABYC then volunteer for committee work.

Sadly it is easier to complain than contribute.

.

[ramblinrod]

Additionally, I resent the attitude that ABYC cowtails to manufacturers and it is just a money grab.

Furthest thing from the truth and anyone who is a member, understands electrical system theory, the marine environment, and ABYC standards, knows it.

ABYC technical committees consist of members from the manufacturing industry, repair, industry, boating interest groups, and other standards experts.

It would be incredibly foolish for ABYC to establish a number of standards that manufacturers do not or will not comply with.

So changes to standards take time and negotiation, and require an implementation delay from finalization to enable manufacturers and the rest of the industry to “catch up”.

The boat I just purchased, was built in 1985, and had the 30 A shore power inlet in the anchor locker.

Absolutely brilliant location, for a bow in slip, enabling a 50 ft cord to reach a pedestal 50 ft away, instead of 50 ft less distance between bow and shore power
inlet.

However this was cited on the survey (and in my detailed inspection notes completed before the surveyor was called in), because the distance between the original inlet and the AC distribution panel breaker was greater than 10 ft. Now I don’t know if this standard was in place before or after the boat was built, but I understand why the shortest distance between inlet and breaker is desired and that 10 ft was chosen for practical reasons. I also do not have an ELCI in the shore power AC circuit. I do know that this standard was implemented well after the boat was built. I also understand the benefits to safety an ELCI represents.

So part of our initial refit will be to install a 30A shore power breaker, equipped with an ELCI as close to the shore power inlet as possible, in compliance with current ABYC standards.

Not because this ABYC standard is law, but because I know the very intelligent people on the technical committee evaluated the risks vs rewards and determined the installation would be safer as such, and I simply couldn’t agree with them more.

The boat has been sailed for 35 years without a fault due to this condition, but I also know that there is always tomorrow, and this is a relatively simple “improvement” that will help prevent a possible tragedy.

Boaters who have never read the standards and bothered to learn and understand why they are so, can’t understand why if they want an AC system modification, that suddenly there are a whole bunch of improvements that should be incorporated at the same time.

Usually, when I explain why, they approve the mods, because they want their boat to be safe. If they won’t approve the mods, a note goes on the Work Order before they sign it, that they declined the recommendation to bring the circuits the new equipment is to be connected to, up to standard. This protects me from their survivors, should the non-updated system hurt them, through no fault of mine, after I’ve laid hands on it.

[Dsanduril]

Originally Posted by ramblinrod

...Boaters who have never read the standards and bothered to learn and understand why they are so, can’t understand why if they want an AC system modification, that suddenly there are a whole bunch of improvements that should be incorporated at the same time.

Usually, when I explain why, they approve the mods, because they want their boat to be safe. If they won’t approve the mods, a note goes on the Work Order before they sign it, that they declined the recommendation to bring the circuits the new equipment is to be connected to, up to standard. This protects me from their survivors, should the non-updated system hurt them, through no fault of mine, after I’ve laid hands on it.

I'm sure you think it protects you, but does it really? Particularly if you are an industry "expert" or "qualified" or worse, sit on a standards committee. Then it may be pretty easy to convince a jury that you "should have known better" than to let your client talk you into installing a system that does not meet the current standard. The fault becomes entirely yours in their mind. If you believe as strongly as you appear to in the standards then why not simply decline work if the client does not want to come up to current standards?

When standards become law we frequently don't have the choice you are describing. Take the electrical code (since we're talking electrical on a boat). If I pull a permit today to add a receptacle in a bedroom in a house that was built in 1975 I have to install that new receptacle to the current code (standard). There is no choice. It may be an easy install, it may not be, all depends on the existing system and how far it is from the current standard. I don't have any choice because the standard has become law and requires an update. The costs associated with this can then lead to unsafe behavior, such as using an extension cord and overloading it leading to increased fire risk rather than installing another receptacle that at least meets the original standards.

[Lake-Effect]

Late to this.

I've been ABYC certified in electrical for almost 10 years, was a member for a few years, and have an EE education. I took a week-long seminar from Ed Sherman, who's their electrical standards guy.

Some random points:

• ABYC is a voluntary, non-profit organization. Nobody's getting rich off of the membership, certification or standards fees. Not the ABYC, not the boatmakers
• The recreational marine industry lacked consistent technical standards and practices. The ABYC was set up to proactively address this, lest they get imposed from above, by either government or the insurance industry. The ABYC has done a good enough job with this that their standards have been widely adopted by manufacturers, surveyors, as a qualifier for insurance, and even as a build standard for small commercial boats.
• The standards are a series of prescriptions and best practices, based on wide experience and testing. I don't know of any that are particularly obscure, difficult or unreasonable
• it seems to me that many parts of the ABYC standards are freely available: paraphrased or excerpted many places like the Blue Seas website, the West Marine website, and in good books like Nigel Calder's boat maintenance one.

As far as I know, the whole ABYC standards are not part of law; in fact I'd appreciate being shown where some ABYC specs ARE part of law but the actual details have not been made public.

Most of us take pride in the boat projects and repairs that we have pulled off; those require learning and practice. Through manuals, books, forums,articles and advice, the majority of ABYC-recommended practices can be obtained without coughing up for ABYC membership or standards docs.

Of course, the deeper you get into boat work, the more you will encounter ABYC standards, and if you want mastery or to be professional in some aspect, you may at some point join the ABYC, or buy the current standards volume. It's no different from buying good tools and instruments, or service manuals, or taking courses.

[hpeer]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Such has been often claimed, but never substantiated.

Gord,

I have limited experience in standards committees, and none with ABYC. In the small exposure I did have I saw quite clearly how one company or individual was working very hard for advantage and with success.

In another case, where I can not claim I was the sole or primary cause, I exposed a egregious “standard”. Long story not appropriate here, but I had a bad situation and had to make a defense for a stupid mistake by a different engineer. In that case I pointed out how there were two very similar situations yet the “standards” were exceptionally different. I argued this to a client who participated on the standards committee. Shortly thereafter the standards committee corrected the situation and harmonized the standards. That was a clear case of a manufacturer having undue influence, they wrote an unduly restrictive spec. the standards committee accepted.

So perhaps I am biased because I have witnessed such behavior. Not ABYC, and perhaps I’m guilty of assuming all organizations are subject to the same forces. But it does strike me as human nature to exploit whatever advantage one can.

I’m not against the ABYC whatsoever although I believe they can be manipulated. What irks me is that it is, according to surveyors I’ve used, ABYC is REQUIRED by insurance companies. But also that I’m told by surveyors that this or that is not compliant and it is written up that way in the survey. And I really don’t want to take the time or effort to check every damn statement he makes and argue about it. And some of it is just plain dumb.

Now that is not ABYC’s fault and I’m wrong for blaming them for that.

[hpeer]

So in an effort to further my ABYC education someone explain this to me. Please.

I had replaced some diesel fuel line. I went to Parker and bought fuel line, got good quality “recommended” stuff. Surveyor says it’s not ABYC and has to be replaced with some other specification. So I tromp off back to Parker and explain the issue. So the salesman grubs around and finds some of the supposedly ABYC compliant stuff. I ask him the difference. He says the “approved ABYC” is good for BOTH gas and diesel, whereas what I had was just for diesel. He insists that’s the only difference and the stuff he sold was perfectly adequate and is widely used on Diesel engines.

So can someone here explain the difference? Why would the same diesel hose that works for Mack and White and Freightliner not be OK for a boat?

[Dsanduril]

Originally Posted by Lake-Effect

...
As far as I know, the whole ABYC standards are not part of law; in fact I'd appreciate being shown where some ABYC specs ARE part of law but the actual details have not been made public.

See this post for just some of the ABYC standards that are part of law.

Note, for instance that this regulation requires compliance with ABYC E-8 and E-9 - standards that don't even exist anymore. They have been combined into E-11. Is the law behind? Is the current E-11 identical to E-8 (2001) and E-9 (1991)? If it is, why? Were the standards set up in such a way that they completely predicted 25 years of technological progress? If not, then why hasn't the law caught up (rhetorical question)?

[thinwater]

Originally Posted by GordMay

Such has been often claimed, but never substantiated.

I will not comment on ABYC because I have not participated. I did NOT start this thread to target ABYC and I did not want it to go there. Most ABYC standards are clearly not aimed to benefit manufacturers, they are just good practice. The same can be said of most standards from API, ASTM, and ASME (the ones I have worked with).

But short of pasting internal e-mail threads that would get me sued, I promise you there is no motivation other than self interest behind some standards (can't name the groups). Been there, done that, was a part of the corporate process.


I still believe standards need to be free if they are a part of a law. Only if they are in a law, and only the portions that are (and there are ABYC, ASME, standards that are adopted by reference--I even posted the federal mechanism used to do this) ASTM. This belief does NOT have to do with believing anyone is getting rich, that everything should be free (or not free--irrelavant to the argument), or that standards may include self-interest.



My point is that once something is placed into law, it has been offered as public domain and the copyright on that small portion has been given up. That is all. Not all standards, only the parts that were offered to the government for inclusion.

[Lake-Effect]

Originally Posted by Dsanduril

See this post for just some of the ABYC standards that are part of law.

Note, for instance that this regulation requires compliance with ABYC E-8 and E-9 - standards that don't even exist anymore. They have been combined into E-11. Is the law behind? Is the current E-11 identical to E-8 (2001) and E-9 (1991)? If it is, why? Were the standards set up in such a way that they completely predicted 25 years of technological progress? If not, then why hasn't the law caught up (rhetorical question)?

Thanks for the link back to that comment; I'd skipped quite a bit. It's a list of cited standards, but not the specific laws themselves. So I still don't know how the cited standard is being applied.

All I can say at this point is that as a boater, when you buy a part or contract for a service, and those are claimed to meet an ABYC spec, then we must conclude that the mfr or service provider knows the spec. If you are doing your own work, and you want it to meet applicable ABYC standards... then it's up to you to understand those specs. As I mentioned previously, the better books (Calder, Casey et al) generally tell you enough about the spec to enable you to meet it.

I'm sure you'd agree that some group's intellectual property shouldn't be given away for free by the government without compensation; how do you propose the government should compensate the ABYC if the standards are released to the public without charge?