[Federal Register Volume 61, Number 174 (Friday, September 6, 1996)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 47060-47064]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 96-22746]
=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
Coast Guard
46 CFR Parts 10 and 12
[CGD 94-029]
RIN 2115-AE94
Modernization of Examination Methods
AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.
ACTION: Final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 47061]]
SUMMARY: By this final rule, the Coast Guard amends the rules that
require examinations for merchant-marine licenses and for unlicensed
ratings to be written and to be administered by it: This rule removes
references to writing and broadens the scope of those authorized to
administer the examinations. These two changes reflect the efforts of
the Coast Guard to develop testing by alternative media and, with that
testing, the use of private-sector and public-sector testing services.
The development of more effective and modern examination of applicants
for merchant-marine licenses and unlicensed ratings will enhance the
safety of the maritime environment.
DATES: This final rule is effective on October 7, 1996.
ADDRESSES: Unless otherwise indicated, documents referred to in this
preamble are available for inspection or copying at the office of the
Executive Secretary, Marine Safety Council (G-LRA-2, 3406), [CGD 94-
029], U.S. Coast Guard Headquarters, 2100 Second Street SW.,
Washington, DC 20593-0001, between 9:30 a.m. and 2:00 p.m. Monday
through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone number is (202)
267-1477.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT:
Mr. Mark C. Gould, Project Manager, Marine Personnel Qualifications
Branch (G-MOS-1), (202) 267-6890.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
Background and Purpose
Currently, Coast Guard rules require that applicants for merchant-
marine licenses and unlicensed ratings pass written examinations
administered by it. During the latter part of 1993, the Coast Guard
conducted meetings and discussions of a focus group, which addressed
the future of Coast Guard licensing. Specifically, the group looked at
ways to improve and modernize merchant-mariner examinations.
The report of the focus group, ``Licensing 2000 and Beyond''
(November, 1993), a copy of which is available in the public docket for
this rulemaking [CGD 94-029] where indicated under ADDRESSES above,
recommends that the Coast Guard's Marine Licensing Program adopt new
methods of verifying competency, including practical demonstrations and
the use of simulators. Practical demonstrations and simulators would
provide more effective means of testing the skills of the applicants by
requiring proper actions and reactions during real-time, real-world
scenarios. Electronic methods of examination are employed by private
sector and public-sector organizations. There is increasing user of
Third-Party or Fourth-Party testing systems that maximize the
significant benefits new technology offers. The report of the focus
group defined a ``Third Party'' as one who trains or teaches the
mariner, and a ``Fourth Party'' as someone, other than the Coast Guard
or a Third Party, who administers a test or makes a subjective judgment
about the competency of the mariner. The Coast Guard is exploring the
possibility or implementing electronic methods and the use of Third-
Party or Fourth-Party testing services.
However, 46 CFR 10.205, 10.207, 10.901, 12.05-9, 12.10-5, 12.15-9,
and 12.20-5 specify that applicants need pass written (or oral)
examinations administered by the Coast Guard. Because the Coast Guard
is considering the use of other, proved methods of proficiency testing,
which could significantly improve a very critical aspect of the Coast
Guard's qualification system, this final rule removes the terms
``written'' and ``in writing'' from the rules governing merchant-marine
examinations and makes minor revisions to authorize testing other than
by the Coast Guard.
Regulatory History
On February 23, 1995, acting on the delegated authority, among
others, of Chapters 71 (for 46 CFR Part 10) and 73 (for 46 CFR Part 12)
of Title 46 of the United States Code, the Coast Guard published in the
Federal Register [60 FR 10053] a notice of proposed rulemaking (NPRM),
entitled Modernization of Examination Methods. The Coast Guard received
eight letters commenting on the proposal. It held no public hearing.
Discussion of Comments
The Coast Guard received eight comments from various companies and
individuals. Most supported the rulemaking. One flatly opposed it, and
several expressed concern about its impact on mariners, maritime
employers, and marine educational institutions. These concerns are
addressed below.
One commentor stated that the Coast Guard does not solicit the
ideas and comments of small businesses or other small organizations to
examine the impact of proposed rules. Another insisted that it would
have an adverse economic impact on independently owned and operated
small businesses. The Coast Guard disagrees. As required by the
Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. 553) and the Regulatory
Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the Coast Guard solicited
comments from the public in the NPRM [60 FR 10053], and it considered
all comments received during the comment period. In addition, it
receives advice and recommendations from the Merchant Marine Personnel
Advisory Committee (MERPAC) on a variety of matters pertaining to U.S.
merchant mariners, including standards of training and qualification.
The 19-member committee includes representatives from shipping
companies both large and small, maritime academies, proprietary marine
educators, and active mariners.
One commentor stated that this rulemaking is significant under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866. The Coast Guard and OMB
disagree. Because this final rule simply broadens the available methods
of administering examinations, and because it changes the rules to
allow the use of fourth-party testing in the future (beyond the
existing authorization for third-party and Coast Guard testing), it
should not harm any organization, large or small.
The specter of simulators disturbed several commentors, who adduced
five main criticisms: (1) The Coast Guard is using this rulemaking to
mandate the use of simulators as a stand-alone method to demonstrate
proficiency. (2) Simulation will be used where a student's performance
would be better ascertained by written examination. (3) Such radical
changes in the examination process should be made slowly. (4)
Simulators cannot adequately present the conditions encountered by
towboats on rivers or inland waters. (5) There are insufficient
simulators presently available for this program. These criticisms are
mistaken.
(1) This rulemaking was undertaken to permit, rather than mandate,
the use of simulators as an option to demonstrate proficiency. There is
no intention to mandate the use of simulators as a sole means of
demonstrating proficiency.
(2) Some subjects (meeting and passing, navigation involving
traffic, and the like) are ideally suited to simulation because the
evaluator can guage the timeliness and adequacy of the student's
response. Others (tides and currents, employment of navigational
equipment, and the like) are indeed better suited for a multiple-choice
examination and use of reference materials. The use of simulators will
be allowed only where it affords a clear advantage over written
examinations.
(3) Because the Coast Guard is permitting, rather than mandating,
the use of simulators and practical demonstration in addition to
written examinations, changes can be introduced gradually. The Coast
Guard
[[Page 47062]]
intends to retain written examinations for the foreseeable future.
(4) There is, in fact, one third-party training course approved by
the Coast Guard for towboats that uses simulators for part of its
curriculum, and uses them to good effect. This is simply another option
available to the license candidate.
(5) Because the use of simulators as one part of testing is merely
one option available to the license candidate, the number of courses
approved by the Coast Guard and now available to the public that use
simulators is irrelevant.
A related matter, the 1995 Amendments to the International
Convention on Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for
Seafarers, 1978 (STCW), will affect virtually all phases of the system
used in the United States to train, test, evaluate, license, certify
and document merchant mariners for service on seagoing vessels. The
Amendments will require both written examinations and practical
demonstrations of skills and will promote the use of simulators. They
are the subject of a separate rulemaking [CGD 95-062], an NPRM which
appears at 61 FR 13284 (March 26, 1996).
One commentor opposed the Coast Guard's accepting successful
completion of a course, approved by the Coast Guard and offered by a
third-party company, that combines the use of simulators and written
examinations, instead of an examination administered by the Coast
Guard. The commentor felt that the written examination would be
compromised. The Coast Guard disagrees. It will conduct independent
visits and audits, under the authority of 46 CFR 10.303(f), to ensure
that the conditions for Coast Guard approval are maintained. It may
also administer partial examinations to applicants who have already
successfully completed these courses so it can monitor whether training
facilities are meeting their training objectives. Under the current
rules (46 CFR 10.301) applicants who successfully complete certain
approved courses offered by third-party trainers throughout the
country, including administration of final examinations, are exempt
from the requirement to pass examinations administered by the Coast
Guard. There is no reason to amend or limit application of these rules,
as long as adequate oversight is maintained.
One commentor stated that the Coast Guard should expand the role of
the third-party training companies so that completion of their approved
courses would satisfy major portions of licensing and documentation
examinations. The Coast Guard agrees. Experience gained in recent years
has convinced the Coast Guard that, under the right conditions and
guidelines, a Coast Guard examination is unnecessary, if the candidate
is subject to a rigorous program of evaluation by competent assessors.
Five commentors expressed support for the concept of fourth-party
testing, but felt that Coast Guard testing should remain in place as a
check against cost increases in private-sector testing. The Coast Guard
agrees that this is a valid concern. The Coast Guard is maintaining its
testing system.
One commentor stated that no third-party or fourth-party testing
should be allowed unless proctored by professional mariners. In
addition, the commentor cautioned the Coast Guard about third-party and
fourth-party training or testing organizations' selling their services.
The Coast Guard does not believe that these concerns warrant changes to
the NPRM. There are currently more than 100 third-party training
organizations that offer courses approved by the Coast Guard and that
teach and examine applicants for licenses or merchant mariners'
documents. In most instances, the applicants then must pass
examinations administered by the Coast Guard. The operations of these
organizations are overseen on a regular basis by Coast Guard personnel
of local Regional Examination Centers (RECs). At least some of the
personnel in each REC have military sea time, and several are former
professional merchant mariners. Coast Guard personnel of Marine Safety
Offices, reservists, and auxiliarists with river or seagoing experience
may oversee these operations as well. For fourth-party testing,
professional expertise in maritime matters is not relevant. Fourth-
party testing organizations merely proctor and grade multiple-choice
examinations for their employers. Any fourth-party testing organization
involved in direct assessment of candidates will be subject to Coast
Guard approval, including confirmation of the professional credentials
of the staff involved in assessment.
One commentor had several questions concerning fourth-party
testing. Although the Coast Guard is not implementing such testing in
the immediate future, changes made by this final rule do enable the
Coast Guard to implement the use or partial use of such testing in the
future. Fourth-party testing may serve as a second alternative to
traditional examinations administered by the Coast Guard, the first
being third-party training with testing. The Coast Guard could, for
example, submit a data bank of questions to the fourth-party examiner,
who would randomly generate examinations. The only contact that fourth-
party testers would then have with the course or student would be to
administer and grade the examinations. Other approaches to fourth-party
testing may emerge from increased use of simulators.
One commentor asked whether Coast Guard would dictate objectives of
learning and methods of determining competency to the training
companies, and whether it would dictate the curriculum. It currently
has course-approval guidelines for most courses required by its rules.
These guidelines, authorized by 46 CFR 10.302, describe the desired
learning objectives but not the methods of determining competency.
Although the Coast Guard does not dictate the curriculum, it will not
approve it unless the information contained in the guidelines is
imparted to the student. Although it does not anticipate imposing rigid
requirements for the assessment of competency, it will take into
account methods and criteria of assessment in its approval of courses
permitted by this final rule.
One commentor expressed concern about organizations and courses
which exist solely to assist the applicant in memorizing the answers to
the questions in the bank of Coast Guard examinations and actually
teach the applicant nothing. The use of simulators and practical
demonstration of proficiency in certain topics will tend to eliminate
this questionable method of examination preparation.
A maritime educational institution suggested that the Coast Guard
issue each original license and each raise in grade or increase in
scope as a nonrenewable temporary document, which would expire in five
years unless replaced by a permanent license based on compliance with
STCW. In contrast, a maritime educator suggested that each eligible
student, upon graduation from a Federal or State maritime academy,
automatically receive a license as a third mate or third assistant
engineer. Whatever their merits, both comments lie well beyond the
scope of this final rule, which merely removes the requirement that
licensing examinations be written and allows other entities to
administer them.
One commentor stated that this final rule should require the
functional use of the English language. The Coast Guard agrees. Title
46 CFR 10.201(c) requires that ``an applicant for a license must
demonstrate an ability to speak and understand English as found in the
navigation rules, aids to navigation publications, emergency equipment
[[Page 47063]]
instructions, machinery instructions, and radiotelephone communications
instructions.'' That rule remains unchanged by this. Likewise, the
current rules regarding examinations for able seamen [46 CFR 12.05-
9(b)], lifeboatmen [46 CFR 12.10-5(b)], and qualified members of the
engine department [46 CFR 12.15-9(a)] all require that the examinations
be conducted in the English language. These rules continue to be
necessary to ensure that personnel in these critical positions will
sufficiently understand orders that may come down under the stress of
an emergency. The ability to understand such orders can make the
critical difference in life-threatening situations. Therefore, these
rules, too, remain unchanged by this.
In sum: The NPRM proposed to remove the terms ``written'' and ``in
writing'' from the rules governing examinations administered by the
Coast Guard for merchant mariners seeking licenses and raises of grade
[46 CFR 10.205(i)(1), 10.207(d)(1), 10.217(a) (1) and (2), and
10.901(a)], and for applicants seeking to fill unlicensed ratings [46
CFR 12.05-9 (a) and (b), 12.10-5 (a) and (b), 12.15-9 (a) and (c), and
12.20-5]. (The last of these, 46 CFR 12.20-5, along with the rest of
the subpart, 12.20, to which it belonged, was removed by a supervening
Interim Rule on Tankermen [60 FR 17134 (April 4, 1995)].) The NPRM also
proposed to let the Coast Guard Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection
(OCMI), authorize the examination of applicants by private-sector and
public-sector testing services. These two changes reflect the Coast
Guard's efforts to develop more modern, efficient, and effective
methods of examination.
Regulatory Evaluation
This final rule is not a significant regulatory action under
section 3(f) of Executive Order 12866 and does not require an
assessment of potential costs and benefits under section 6(a)(3) of
that Order. It has not been reviewed by the Office of Management and
Budget under that Order. It is not significant under the regulatory
policies and procedures of the Department of Transportation (DOT) [44
FR 11040 (February 26, 1979)]. The Coast Guard expects the economic
impact from this rule to be so minimal that a full Regulatory
Evaluation under paragraph 10e of the regulatory policies and
procedures of DOT is unnecessary. This rule will impose no costs on
industry.
Small Entities
Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601 et seq.), the
Coast Guard must consider the economic impact on small entities of a
rule for which an NPRM is required. ``Small entities'' may include (1)
Small businesses and not-for-profit organizations that are
independently owned and operated and are not dominant in their fields
and (2) governmental jurisdictions with populations of less than
50,000. As the Discussion of Comments makes clear, this final rule will
place no additional costs on the public. Therefore, the Coast Guard
certifies under section 605(b) of the Regulatory Flexibility Act (5
U.S.C. 601 et seq.) that this rule will not have a significant economic
impact on a substantial number of small entities.
Collection of Information
This final rule contains no collection-of-information requirements
under the Paper Reduction Act (44 U.S.C. 3501 et seq.).
Federalism
The Coast Guard has analyzed this final rule under the principles
and criteria contained in Executive Order 12612 and has determined that
it does not have sufficient implications for federalism to warrant the
preparation of a Federalism Assessment. The authority to develop and
administer examinations for merchant mariners' licenses and other
documents has been committed to the Coast Guard by Federal statutes. If
State or local governments ever did purport to regulate these
examinations, the Coast Guard would move to pre-empt their acts for the
sake of uniformity under the Commerce Clause of the Constitution; but
the issue promises to remain hypothetical.
Environment
The Coast Guard considered the environmental impact of this final
rule and concluded that, under paragraph 2.B.2.e(34)(c) of Commandant
Instruction M16475.1B, this rule is categorically excluded from further
environmental documentation. The rule clearly has no environmental
impact. A ``Categorical Exclusion Determination'' is available in the
docket for inspection or copying where indicated under ADDRESSES.
List of Subjects
46 CFR Part 10
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, schools, seamen.
46 CFR Part 12
Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, seamen.
For the reasons set out in the preamble, the Coast Guard amends 46
CFR parts 10 and 12 as follows:
PART 10--LICENSING OF MARITIME PERSONNEL
1. The authority citation for part 10 is revised to read as
follows:
Authority: 31 U.S.C. 9701, 46 U.S.C. 2103, 2110; 46 U.S.C.
Chapter 71; 49 CFR 1.45, 1.46; Sec. 10.107 also issued under the
authority of 44 U.S.C. 3507.
2. In Sec. 10.205, paragraph (i)(1) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 10.205 Requirements for original licenses and certificates of
registry.
* * * * *
(i) Professional Examination. (1) When the OCMI finds the
applicant's experience and training to be satisfactory and the
applicant is eligible in all other respects, the OCMI will authorize
the examination in accordance with the following requirements:
(i) Any applicant for a deck or engineer license limited to vessels
not exceeding 500 gross tons, or a license limited to uninspected
fishing-industry vessels, may request an oral-assisted examination in
lieu of any written or other textual examination. If there are textual
questions that the applicant has difficulty reading and understanding,
the OCMI will offer the oral-assisted examination. Each license based
on an oral-assisted examination is limited to the specific route and
type of vessel upon which the applicant obtained the majority of
service.
(ii) The general instructions for administration of examinations
and the lists of subjects for all licenses appear in Subpart I of this
part. The OCMI will place in the applicant's file a record indicating
the subjects covered.
* * * * *
3. In Sec. 10.207, paragraph (d)(1) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 10.207 Requirements for raise of grade of license.
* * * * *
(d) Professional Examination. (1)(i) When the OCMI finds an
applicant's experience and training for raise of grade to be
satisfactory and the applicant is eligible in all other respects, the
OCMI will authorize the examination. Oral-assisted examinations may be
administered in accordance with Sec. 10.205(i)(1). The OCMI will place
in the applicant's file a record indicating the subjects covered.
(ii) The general instructions for administration of examinations
and the lists of subjects for all licenses appear in Subpart I of this
part.
* * * * *
[[Page 47064]]
4. In Sec. 10.217, the second sentences of paragraphs (a) (1) and
(2) are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 10.217 Examination procedures and denial of licenses.
(a)(1) * * * The examination fee set out in Sec. 10.109 must be
paid before the applicant may take the first examination section. * * *
* * * * *
(2) * * * The examination fee set out in Sec. 10.109 must be paid
before the applicant may take the first examination section. * * *
* * * * *
5. In Sec. 10.901, paragraph (a) is revised to read as follows:
Sec. 10.901 General provisions.
(a) Each applicant for any license listed in this part shall pass
examinations on the appropriate subjects listed in this subpart, except
as noted in Sec. 10.903(b).
* * * * *
PART 12--CERTIFICATION OF SEAMEN
6. The authority citation for part 12 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 31 U.S.C. 9701; 46 U.S.C. 2103, 2110, 7301, 7701; 49
CFR 1.46.
7. In Sec. 12.05-9, paragraph (a) and the introductory text of
paragraph (b) are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 12.05-9 Examination and demonstration of ability.
(a) Before an applicant is certified as an able seaman, he or she
shall prove to the satisfaction of the Coast Guard by oral or other
means of examination, and by actual demonstration, his or her knowledge
of seamanship and the ability to carry out effectively all the duties
that may be required of an able seaman, including those of a
lifeboatman. The applicant shall demonstrate that he or she:
(1) Has been trained in all the operations connected with the
launching of lifeboats and liferafts, and in the use of oars;
(2) Is acquainted with the practical handling of boats; and
(3) Is capable of taking command of the boat's crew.
(b) The examination, whether administered orally or by other means,
must be conducted only in the English language and must consist of
questions regarding:
* * * * *
8. In Sec. 12.10-5, paragraph (a) and the introductory text of
paragraph (b) are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 12.10-5 Examination and demonstration of ability.
(a) Before an applicant is certified as a lifeboatman, he or she
shall prove to the satisfaction of the Coast Guard by oral or other
means of examination, and by actual demonstration, his or her knowledge
of seamanship and the ability to carry out effectively all the duties
that may be required of a lifeboatman. The applicant shall demonstrate
that he or she:
(1) Has been trained in all the operations connected with the
launching of lifeboats and liferafts, and in the use of oars;
(2) Is acquainted with the practical handling of boats; and
(3) Is capable of taking command of the boat's crew.
(b) The examination, whether administered orally or by other means,
must be conducted only in the English language and must consist of
questions regarding:
* * * * *
9. In Sec. 12.15-9, the first sentence of paragraph (a), and
paragraph (c), are revised to read as follows:
Sec. 12.15-9 Examination requirements.
(a) Each applicant for certification as a qualified member of the
engine department in the rating of oiler, watertender, fireman, deck
engineer, refrigeration engineer, junior engineer, electrician, or
machinist shall be examined orally or by other means and only in the
English language on the subjects listed in paragraph (b) of this
section. * * *
* * * * *
(c) Each applicant for certification as a qualified member of the
engine department in the rating of pumpman shall, by oral or other
examination, demonstrate sufficient knowledge of the subjects peculiar
to that rating to satisfy the Officer in Charge, Marine Inspection,
that he or she is qualified to perform the duties of that rating.
* * * * *
Dated: August 15, 1996.
J.C. Card,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Chief, Marine Safety and Environmental
Protection.
[FR Doc. 96-22746 Filed 9-5-96; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-14-M
