Editorial: Is The Coast Guard Driving Nails In The Coffin?

With the continuing manning crisis in the river industry, we can’t help but observe that many of the government’s recent security and personnel initiatives aren’t helping to solve what is rapidly becoming the most serious issue facing towing companies. In some ways, the Coast Guard’s policies and interpretations are serving to exacerbate the shortage of people qualified and willing to work on the river.

Anyone who missed the change to new towing licenses has been asleep for the past decade. A comprehensive means to provide training and an assessment of the skills needed to operate towing vessels were the major features of the new system of licenses for towing vessels. The lengthy apprenticeship as a steersman, the documentation of training, and the requirement to demonstrate skill in seven major areas of competency have already resulted in a significant reduction in the numbers of people seeking an original towing license. We are not repopulating the species.

Many who hold towing licenses are pleased with this development. Wage rates have dramatically increased as demand greatly exceeded the supply of licensed operators. But even those who hold licenses are finding the process of renewing a towing license becoming ever more complicated and selective. Early this year, the Coast Guard announced new procedures to renew a license, including a trip to a Regional Exam Center (REC) or other authorized Coast Guard unit to provide proof of identity, fingerprinting and consent to a criminal background check. These were accomplished at the time of the original license issue, but are now required at each license renewal or upgrade as well.

Aside from the inconvenience and logistics of the trip to the Coast Guard, a practical problem is that the criminal records check is now a “deep look-back,” which reports arrests as well as convictions. For many years, the terminology on the Coast Guard license renewal paperwork has been “Have you ever been convicted...?” The inclusion of arrest reports means that information will now be reported to the Coast Guard, which must be investigated and resolved. This does not necessarily mean that a license will be denied, but it will take time to conduct the investigation. There will be those who are judged to have falsified their application for a license, leading to an administrative procedure to suspend or revoke that license. One wonders how many altar boys work on the river.

The Coast Guard National Maritime Center is reported to be working on new physical exam standards and an updated list of potentially disqualifying conditions. The draft NVIC (policy circular) is occasionally referred to in various professional journals, but it seems to be held very closely at this time. In spite of the “draft” status of the NVIC, the Coast Guard appears to be selectively enforcing some of the provisions of the new standards. One potentially troublesome standard has to do with obesity. Reports have surfaced of river men being denied a license on the basis of obesity. While we agree that obesity is a bad thing, we must also acknowledge that the nature of the work in the wheelhouse tends to lead one to put on weight. This issue is being addressed through wellness programs at many companies, but just as the weight didn’t appear overnight, neither can it disappear quickly. A public announcement of the new standards and an opportunity to adjust to them would seem more appropriate than disrupting the livelihood of experienced people who are needed to keep the river transportation system operating.

We’ve heard some estimates that as many as 10 percent of current license holders may not qualify under the new physical standards. That should be setting off alarms!

Buried in the minutiae of the new towing license rule is a requirement that candidates for the renewal of a towing license must provide evidence of continued participation in training and drills. This standard can be met by providing documentation (logs and records) or by a statement that the individual has served on vessels that comply with the AWO Responsible Carriers program. A third possibility is that the license-renewal candidate demonstrate proficiency in handling towing vessels before a designated examiner (DE). The rub is that the Coast Guard recently issued a “work instruction” to the RECs that requires an extensive demonstration of skills—not a simple check ride with a DE. This administrative requirement will effectively eliminate the third option for towing license renewals. The hardest hit will be trip pilots—the very people that the towing industry has come to depend upon to fill gaps in vessel manning.

Let us not forget that the Coast Guard has begun to construct a new license-processing center. During the next two years, all licensing, documents and processing will be relocated. The REC’s role will be reduced to minor administrative functions and examinations. This will serve to place even more distance between the individual license holder and the bureaucrats holding the key to his livelihood. We can only trust that this consolidation will have a positive long-term result, but doubt that the transition will go as smoothly as advertised. We were once told by a Coast Guard district commander that it was necessary to close the REC in St. Louis “in order to serve you better.” We must endure these “improvements” but the timing may prove unfortunate.

Then there is the proposal for a Transportation Worker Identification Credential. Much has been written, and much more will be regarding this extensive and very troublesome initiative. Suffice to say that as proposed, most river industry experts predict this rule will lead to a catastrophic loss of personnel to man towboats.

Taken individually, each of these initiatives must make good sense to someone in the government. Taken collectively, the potential consequences spell trouble for the river industry.

The Waterways Journal encourages letters to the editor.
Have something on your mind?
Send letters to: jshoulberg@waterwaysjournal.net.
(Please indicate whether or not your letter is intended for publication.)