Should EM's be allowed to be Station EPO's? I was recently told by a BM that any station with a 47' MLB is supposed to have an EM attached. I've checked for stations with EM's attached, and I've only found 3 stations. Of those stations with EM's attached, it is a single EM1 billet. Those billets are listed as "47' MLB Support". I have however also found a ton of EM billets at Groups and Sectors that are also listed "47' MLB Support". A check of the 47' Operational Handbook which was dated from the 1990's stated that there was not a need for EM's at Stations, but rather in increase in electrical training for the systems on the 47'. With EM1 billets at a few stations, could this be another opportunity for EM to be EPO's? I think I personally could handle this job. On a WMEC I was qualified both in port and undereway EOW. I've got expiernce with yard packages, CASREPs, and the endless amount of paperwork.
Maybe an ANT EPO would be a little more reasonable. Baby steps...
Plus it seems that many of the station EM's are exempted or abstain from qualifying as a boat engineer on some/all of the boats. That seems like a problem to me.
Originally posted by AntarcticChamp: Maybe an ANT EPO would be a little more reasonable. Baby steps...
Plus it seems that many of the station EM's are exempted or abstain from qualifying as a boat engineer on some/all of the boats. That seems like a problem to me.
What are the reasons for the exemption? Is it because they are handling both the shoreside and boat electrical duties? If we were to become EPO's, I would think that we would have to be qualified on all the platforms. I see no reason why an EM couldn't be a station EPO.
Originally posted by shua_b: What are the reasons for the exemption? Is it because they are handling both the shoreside and boat electrical duties? If we were to become EPO's, I would think that we would have to be qualified on all the platforms. I see no reason why an EM couldn't be a station EPO.
I couldn't really tell you why. I hear different 'reasons' from different commands.
A station EPO doesn't have to qualfy on the boats, they are exempt; but they darn well ought to have some small boat experience. I just don't think we have a sufficently large pool of candidates to select from and still be fair in sea to shore rotation.
If any platform an EM has to know all about the engineroom and how all machinery works why can't an EM be the EPO of a station? During my stay on all the cutters I have been on I had to Qualify as a watch stander both quarter deck and engineering watches along with duty EM...in the engineering quals we have to learn how it works, why it works that way, and what to do incase the machinery fails you can't always call on a MK to fix it. I don't see MK's doing that as much as the EM's do. So why take baby steps when the EM rate is the rate that can take of everything. At my present unit i also do alot of MK work cause some MKs don't know how to fix it properly of don't want to do it. I do MK, EM and DC pms and other work around here...so EMs in my view run the ENgineering world.
As a current EPO on a 175 WLM I say we EMs are more then capable of being an EPO of a Station. Though I do not think I will see it happen in my career. We are making small gains with the 175s and some of the 87s. I agree we do as much or more then the other two engineer rates But we will probable never dislodge the MKs from those good billets. At least we have it better then the DC they never get to be EPOs. Every one E-mail EMCM Abernathy and ask when we will get EPO of a Station billets
Being the XPO of an ANT with an EM1 attached, I see absolutely no reason why one could not an EPO of and ANT or Station. Just as with the 175's and 87's with EM EPO's, there is absolutely no difference. Go ahead and give it a whirl! I'm sure that is would work out great.
(Don't get your hopes up Rob....I know you are reading this! ha ha ha)
Antartic, I see no problem with EM's doing the job as long as you know what your getting into. Case in point, EPO's are NOT exempt from qualifying on the platforms or maintaining currency on all platforms attached. That is COMDT's policy. If they are not being held to the standard then that is simply piss-poor management from the command cadre. But, I di-gress, I know of more than a few EM's that could handle the job.
Sardine, I spent an hour and a half looking through variuos CIM trying to support my arguement, and couldn't find anything conclusive either way. I found lots of evidence that anyone who is an OINC, XPO, or a dutystander would be rewuired to qualify as a boatcrewmember, but no evidence that somone who was NOT a duty stander would be required to qualify. Wanna point me in the right direction? I haven't been assigned to a boat unit since 2001, so I may have missed a few things in between.
Antarctic, here's the answer to your question. COMDTINST 16114.32A Boat Manual Volume 1 pages 5-11 and 5-12 states Command Cadre SHALL qualify on all platforms attached to their unit. In a nutshell, lose your qual, lose your job. At a station, this manual is looked at as often if not more than the personnel manual and the manual for courts martial. Wayne
Sardine & Antartic I not sure I’m following your points. What is the problem with the EM’s qualifying on all platforms? I’ve had to qualify on every unit I’ve ever been. If the MK who is a EPO can qualify so could an EM
Hillobeans, I have no problem with EM's qualifying on the boats, and in my previous posts I have no problem with EM's being Station EPO's. I was simply answering the question of: Are EPO's "required" to qualify on the platforms and if so what was the reference.
Don't know the reference, however the command "OinC, XPO, Epo" are required to maintain boat hours on each platform in order to keep there quals up to date. I'm an em2 at a STANT station/ant attached to the ANT side of the house but am required to be qualified on all station platforms 25/41 as crewmen, as well as BTM. Having an EM as an EPO would be the waste of a good electrician. Let the MKs have the stations, we should be fighting for more Underway EPO jobs. I have 6 years sea time and have never been so far out of rate than I am now.
As an EM at an ANT from 1997-2001, I didn't qualify as BUSL anything until the last 6 months of my tour (I often had more TANB hours than anyone else though)the same was common for the other folks in my division. The EPO, if he qualified, must've done it by telepathy.
Were the rules different then or were they just being ignored? I honestly don't know.
I work as an EM2 At a sector. I know all of the EPO's for our stations are required to carry and keep quals on all platforms. This is one of the things the RFO and STAN teams check for. EPO's are required to run a certain amount of drills during the STAN team inspection. The reason the EM'2 were exempt for quals was that there is only one EM. The duty section runs port and starboard, the EM must be available everyday, so you can't really have him in a duty section. He is allowed to carry quals, and CAN assist, but is not required to because he would never have any time off due to problems arising on non-duty days.
