[House Hearing, 111 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
NATIONAL MARITIME CENTER AND MARINER CREDENTIALS
=======================================================================
(111-47)
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON
COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
July 9, 2009
__________
Printed for the use of the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
[GRAPHICS NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
50-974 PDF WASHINGTON: 2009
______________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota, Chairman
NICK J. RAHALL, II, West Virginia, JOHN L. MICA, Florida
Vice Chair DON YOUNG, Alaska
PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon THOMAS E. PETRI, Wisconsin
JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina
ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee
Columbia VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan
JERROLD NADLER, New York FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey
CORRINE BROWN, Florida JERRY MORAN, Kansas
BOB FILNER, California GARY G. MILLER, California
EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas HENRY E. BROWN, Jr., South
GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi Carolina
ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois
LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania
TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania SAM GRAVES, Missouri
BRIAN BAIRD, Washington BILL SHUSTER, Pennsylvania
RICK LARSEN, Washington JOHN BOOZMAN, Arkansas
MICHAEL E. CAPUANO, Massachusetts SHELLEY MOORE CAPITO, West
TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York Virginia
MICHAEL H. MICHAUD, Maine JIM GERLACH, Pennsylvania
RUSS CARNAHAN, Missouri MARIO DIAZ-BALART, Florida
GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California CHARLES W. DENT, Pennsylvania
DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois CONNIE MACK, Florida
MAZIE K. HIRONO, Hawaii LYNN A WESTMORELAND, Georgia
JASON ALTMIRE, Pennsylvania JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio
TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan
HEATH SHULER, North Carolina MARY FALLIN, Oklahoma
MICHAEL A. ARCURI, New York VERN BUCHANAN, Florida
HARRY E. MITCHELL, Arizona ROBERT E. LATTA, Ohio
CHRISTOPHER P. CARNEY, Pennsylvania BRETT GUTHRIE, Kentucky
JOHN J. HALL, New York ANH ``JOSEPH'' CAO, Louisiana
STEVE KAGEN, Wisconsin AARON SCHOCK, Illinois
STEVE COHEN, Tennessee PETE OLSON, Texas
LAURA A. RICHARDSON, California
ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
DONNA F. EDWARDS, Maryland
SOLOMON P. ORTIZ, Texas
PHIL HARE, Illinois
JOHN A. BOCCIERI, Ohio
MARK H. SCHAUER, Michigan
BETSY MARKEY, Colorado
PARKER GRIFFITH, Alabama
MICHAEL E. McMAHON, New York
THOMAS S. P. PERRIELLO, Virginia
DINA TITUS, Nevada
HARRY TEAGUE, New Mexico
VACANCY
(ii)
?
SUBCOMMITTEE ON COAST GUARD AND MARITIME TRANSPORTATION
ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland, Chairman
CORRINE BROWN, Florida FRANK A. LoBIONDO, New Jersey
RICK LARSEN, Washington DON YOUNG, Alaska
GENE TAYLOR, Mississippi HOWARD COBLE, North Carolina
BRIAN BAIRD, Washington VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan
TIMOTHY H. BISHOP, New York TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania
STEVE KAGEN, Wisconsin PETE OLSON, Texas
MICHAEL E. McMAHON, New York
LAURA A. RICHARDSON, California
JAMES L. OBERSTAR, Minnesota
(Ex Officio)
(iii)
CONTENTS
Page
Summary of Subject Matter........................................ vi
TESTIMONY
Block, Richard, Secretary, National Mariners Association......... 25
Clark, Captain Bill, Owner, South Ferry, Inc.-Shelter Island, New
York, Representing The Passenger Vessel Association............ 25
Cook, Rear Admiral Kevin, Director, Prevention Policy, United
States Coast Guard............................................. 6
Laird, Thomas, Director of New Business Development, American
Maritime Officers.............................................. 25
Rodriguez, Mike, Executive Assistant, Masters, Mates, and Pilots
Union, accompanied by Bill Van Loo, Secretary-Treasury, Marine
Engineers' Beneficial Association.............................. 25
Stalfort, Captain David C., Commanding Officer, National Maritime
Center, United States Coast Guard.............................. 6
Wells, Ken, President, Offshore Marine Services Association...... 25
PREPARED STATEMENTS SUBMITTED BY WITNESSES
Block, Richard................................................... 39
Clark, Captain Bill.............................................. 62
Cook, Rear Admiral Kevin......................................... 68
Laird, Thomas.................................................... 75
Wells, Ken....................................................... 87
SUBMISSIONS FOR THE RECORD
Stalfort, Captain David C., Commanding Officer, National Maritime
Center, United States Coast Guard:.............................
Responses to questions from Rep. Bishop, a Representative
in Congress from the State of New York................... 13
Laird, Thomas, Director of New Business Development, American
Maritime Officers, supplemental testimony...................... 83
ADDITIONS TO THE RECORD
Bronson, Lawson E., letter to the Subcommittee................... 94
Meservey, Mark S., Commander, U.S. Coast Guard Congressional and
Governmental Affairs Staff, letter to Rep. Adam Smith, of
Washington..................................................... 96
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.015
HEARING ON THE NATIONAL MARITIME CENTER AND MARINER CREDENTIALS
----------
Thursday, July 9, 2009
House of Representatives
Subcommittee on Coast Guard and Maritime
Transportation,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in
Room 2167, Rayburn House Office Building, the Honorable Elijah
E. Cummings [Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Mr. Cummings. This hearing is called to order. The
Subcommittee will convene.
We convene here today to review the operations of the
National Maritime Center and the issuance of merchant mariner
credentials. Over the past 18 months, the Coast Guard has
consolidated the credentialing functions that were previously
provided at 17 Regional Exam Centers into the National Maritime
Center, and the Center opened at a new facility in West
Virginia.
The Coast Guard has also made significant changes to the
actual credential that it issues. Specifically, it has
consolidated the licenses, documents, certificates of registry,
and endorsements that it previously issued as separate items
into a single new Merchant Mariner Credential, which is
essentially a passport-sized booklet. MMCs began to be issued
on April 15th of this year.
Finally, the Coast Guard has issued new guidelines to
govern the type of medical information mariners are required to
submit at the time they apply for a new or renewal credential,
as well as the specific review processes to which this
information will be subjected to assess mariner fitness for
duty.
Each one of these changes is a significant alteration in
the way the Coast Guard manages mariner licensing and I am
hopeful that each change will, over the long term,
significantly improve the licensing process and the services
provided to mariners. That said, these hoped-for improvements
have not yet been realized. To be frank, it appears that the
Coast Guard did not adequately plan all aspects of the
consolidated credential production process and the roll-out of
the MMC, and this has led to extensive delays in the issuance
of credentials.
Let me say this. As I read the testimony of the Coast
Guard, that became very clear to me. We have got to do better
planning. I am sorry, we can do better than what we are doing.
We can do better. This is the United States of America, this is
not some third world country. I have looked at the testimony
and, to be frank with you, I think that when we are talking
about an organization with the sophistication of the Coast
Guard, a lot of the glitches that we ran into should have been
anticipated and we should have prepared for them. Most
importantly, we should do nothing to stand in--Government must
work for the people, not against them, and if I have got
mariners that cannot work because they cannot get their
credentials, that is a major problem, major.
Further, as one specific area of delay has been resolved,
subsequent bottlenecks have developed, and it appears that no
significant progress has been made in speeding credential
processing times. In fact, in a report issued on January 22nd,
the Coast Guard indicated that the average gross processing
time between July 2008 and January 2009--meaning both the time
required by the Coast Guard to process an application and the
time the service waits for a mariner to provide additional
information--totaled 83 days. Fifty percent of the credentials
issued during this period were processed in under 52 days.
Looking just at the time that it took the Coast Guard to
process an application, and excluding all time spent waiting
for a mariner to provide additional information, the Coast
Guard reported that its average processing time in that period
was 41 days, and that 50 percent of credentials were processed
in 31 or fewer days.
By comparison, in a report issued on June 29, 2009, the
Coast Guard reported that the average gross processing time for
a credential between the beginning of 2009 and June 23rd was 80
days, while 50 percent of credentials processed during that
period were processed in 54 or fewer days. That same report
indicated that the length of time required by the Coast Guard
itself in that period to process an application was 48 days,
and only 35 percent of credential applications were being
completely processed in 30 or fewer days.
In other words, between January and June 2009, total
processing time remained in the 80-day range, and it was
actually taking the Coast Guard itself longer to process
credential applications in the January to June 2009 period than
in the six months leading up to January 2009.
A credential is a mariner's ticket to work. Let me repeat
that. A credential is a mariner's ticket to work. If the
mariner does not have that credential, for whatever reason, the
mariner cannot work. I want to be very clear. I want to make
sure that we uphold our standards and make sure that those
people who are performing the job as mariner are properly
qualified and we send them through the processes that they have
to go through. But, as I said before, we can do better.
Unfortunately, the Subcommittee has heard of instances in
which mariners' credentials have expired before a renewal
application could be fully processed, and these mariners have
been left without an income while they were waiting for the
bureaucratic wheels to grind. I am interested to see what the
Coast Guard does when somebody falls in that position. Is there
any priority given to that person who is about to lose their
license through no fault of their own? I would like to hear
what you have to say about that.
This is simply unacceptable. Given all that we are doing to
stimulate our economy and to support the growth of jobs, it is
inexcusable that any person should be out of work because the
Government cannot process a professional credential in a timely
manner.
I look forward to hearing from Admiral Cook, the Coast
Guard's new Director of Prevention Policy, and Captain
Stalfort, the Director of the National Maritime Center,
specifically what is being done to ensure that the new
credential processing systems finally yield real benefits to
mariners.
As I mentioned, the Coast Guard has also instituted new
guidelines regarding the assessment of mariner fitness for
duty. This guideline, known as Navigation and Vessel Inspection
Circular 04-08, is intended to provide the level of specificity
regarding mariner fitness for duty that previous guidance and
even statute and regulation have lacked. The NVIC was the
product of extensive work and consultation, and the National
Transportation Safety Board indicated in its report on the
COSCO BUSAN accident in San Francisco that it is ``responsive''
to much of what the Board called for in recommendations made
after the 2003 allision of the Staten Island Ferry.
Nonetheless, despite this improvement, there remain issues
related to the assessment of a mariner's fitness for duty that
we look forward to examining today. Currently, pilots are
required to submit to the Coast Guard the results of annual
physicals. However, most mariners submit medical exam results
only once every five years, when they seek the renewal of their
credentials.
In its report on the COSCO BUSAN incident, the NTSB, which
this Congress has a tremendous amount of respect for, noted
that the Coast Guard has not moved to require mariners to
report changes in their medical condition during the five-year
period between credential renewals as the Board had recommended
after the Staten Island Ferry accident. We wish to understand
why this recommendation remains unaddressed.
Additionally, in its marine casualty investigation report
on the COSCO BUSAN incident, the Coast Guard Senior
Investigating Officer recommended that ``the Commandant of the
Coast Guard amend the existing standards in Marine Safety
Manual (MSM) Volume III, for medical professionals performing
mariner physicals, to ensure that physicals are performed only
by designated physicians with a thorough understanding of the
physical and mental demands of a mariner's position.''
The Coast Guard responded to this recommendation,
incredibly, by stating these words: ``We believe the guidance
provided in NVIC 04-08 is sufficient to provide medical
professionals with the necessary understanding of the
occupational demands of mariners to perform marine physicals''
and that the Service therefore does not intend to change its
requirements regarding the medical personnel who perform
mariner physicals.
I tell you, I am looking forward to examining these and
related issues in more detail today. We look forward to the
testimony of the industry witnesses assembled on our second
panel, who will provide a variety of perspectives on these
issues.
I have read all the testimony and I would advise and hope
that the members of the--I know that you all usually don't
stick around for the second panel, but I hope you would at
least leave staff here. But if nothing else, you need to read
the testimony of the second panel so you can see what kind of
problems are happening here.
Mr. Cummings. With that, I want to recognize the
distinguished Ranking Member, Mr. LoBiondo.
Mr. LoBiondo. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, as always,
for holding this hearing.
All U.S. merchant mariners, from the most inexperienced
personnel to the master of the vessel, are required to hold one
or more credentials issued by the Coast Guard. These
credentials prescribe the duties these mariners may carry out
aboard vessels and are required for maritime employment. As
such, we should be very concerned by the situations or
conditions which may cause a delay in the issuance or renewal
of maritime credentials within the Coast Guard.
Unfortunately, we are experiencing such a situation now.
Many merchant mariners have found it difficult to renew their
licenses and merchant mariner documents over the previous year
have been difficult to get. The Coast Guard has taken several
actions to address many of these issues over the last six
months. The Coast Guard recently completed a significant
restructuring of its credentialing programs, including the
establishment of the National Maritime Center. As part of this
overhaul, the service consolidated its responsibilities to
review and approve applications for new and renewed
credentials, which previously were handled independently by 17
Regional Exam Centers located throughout the Country.
While the consolidation has succeeded in standardizing the
review of applications, it has also coincided with substantial
delay in the issuance of new and renewed credentials. I hope
the witnesses will address in their testimony the specific
issues which are causing the delays and the actions that the
Coast Guard will take to rectify these problems.
The overhaul of the credentialing program also coincided
with the move of the new Merchant Mariner Credential Center,
which will bring together licenses, merchant mariner documents,
and other Coast Guard credentials into one document, and will
be responsible for the implementation of the Transportation
Worker Identification Card, or the TWIC program. We have heard
the Coast Guard has had some difficulty in switching over to
the software necessary to support the new MMC and that this has
caused administrative delays.
Additionally, I remain concerned that the delays in
processing TWIC applications within the Transportation Security
Agency will cascade into further delays in the issuance of MMCs
to otherwise qualified U.S. merchant mariners. It is clearly
unacceptable to have government procedures delaying the review
and approval of applications that have been correctly completed
and submitted. I hope that we will hear specific answers on how
the Coast Guard will address these serious issues in a timely
manner.
This is a matter of extreme importance to the maritime
community and I thank all of the witnesses for their ongoing
efforts to improve the credentialing process.
Lastly, Mr. Chairman, I would just like to take a moment to
recognize the service of two Coast Guard liaison officers who
will be transferring to their next post later this month.
Commander Mark Messervy has been a House Liaison Officer for
the last three years and has provided valuable assistance to
everyone on this Subcommittee. Lieutenant Jamie Frederick has
served for two years as the Assistant Liaison Officer and has
likewise be an invaluable resource to all the members and their
staff.
These gentlemen have served as the face of the Coast Guard
here in the House and have sacrificed countless hours of time
with their families to respond to congressional requests and to
accompany members and staff as we travel to learn firsthand
about Coast Guard missions and policy in the field.
Mr. Chairman, I hope that you and the other members of the
Committee will join with me in thanking them and their families
for their service to the House of Representatives and their
service to the United States of America.
Mr. Cummings. I want to thank you, Ranking Member, for your
statement, and I certainly join you in your words with regard
to our two distinguished staff members who are leaving us. So
often what happens is that folks perform duties that, in the
words of one of my favorite theologians who says that they are
unseen, unnoticed, unappreciated, and sometimes unapplauded.
But he goes on to say that those are the most important people
and they do the most important functions, but always do not
necessarily receive the proper recognition.
So I take this moment to thank you. I thank you for
touching our lives. I thank you for being a part of what we try
to do here to uplift the people of our Country and uplift the
people of the world. I just want to let you know that you are
not unseen, you are not unnoticed, you are not unappreciated,
and you certainly are not unapplauded. May God bless you on
your mission and we thank you.
With that, we now will call Rear Admiral Cook--oh, Mr.
Olson. I am sorry.
Mr. Olson. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Given the
Floor schedule, I will be very brief.
I look forward to hearing how the Coast Guard plans to
reduce the merchant mariner credentialing backlog that exists
today. It is important to ensure that the backlog is addressed
and that new applications are processed in a timely manner so
our Nation's merchant mariners can continue working without an
unnecessary interruption.
I thank you all for joining us today, look forward to
hearing your testimony, and I yield back my time, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Cummings. Thank you very much, Mr. Olson.
The hearing today is going to be broken up a bit. We are
going to have, shortly, a number of amendments on the Floor, so
what we are going to try to do is get through these opening
statements. If we get through that, we have accomplished a lot,
considering the limited amount of time we have.
Rear Admiral Kevin Cook is the Director of Prevention
Policy with the United States Coast Guard. He will be followed
by Captain David C. Stalfort, who is the Commanding Officer of
the Coast Guard's National Maritime Center.
Rear Admiral.
TESTIMONY OF REAR ADMIRAL KEVIN COOK, DIRECTOR, PREVENTION
POLICY, UNITED STATES COAST GUARD; AND CAPTAIN DAVID C.
STALFORT, COMMANDING OFFICER, NATIONAL MARITIME CENTER, UNITED
STATES COAST GUARD
Admiral Cook. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and distinguished
members of the Subcommittee.
Mr. Cummings. Good morning.
Admiral Cook. I am Rear Admiral Kevin Cook, as you
introduced me, Director of Prevention Policy for the Marine
Safety, Security, and Stewardship of the United States Coast
Guard. I am pleased to have this opportunity to appear before
you today to discuss the Mariner Credentialing program.
I would like to ask, Mr. Chairman, if I could have my
written statement entered into the record.
Mr. Cummings. Without objection, so ordered.
Admiral Cook. Thank you, sir.
I think before I get into what I prepared, I just want to
assure you that it is our intention to stay for the second
panel. That is a hallmark for us, to be able to hear from the
mariners themselves and those that represent them.
Mr. Cummings. I really appreciate that. Thank you very
much.
Admiral Cook. Sure.
I recently assumed my new duties as Director of Prevention
Policy. While I have previously served in a number of marine
safety capacities, including Captain of the Port in Houston-
Galveston, where I oversaw maritime operations, including a
Regional Exam Center, the Mariner Credentialing program and the
National Maritime Center fall under my new responsibilities,
and while they have undergone significant transformation during
a restructuring and centralization initiative, I know there is
much work to do.
The Coast Guard is fully committed to improving the Mariner
Credentialing program and strongly believes that centralized
operations will improve consistency, improve customer service
through a dedicated customer service center, and will reduce
credential processing time. These improvements were
unachievable in the decades of decentralized operations at the
17 independent Regional Exam Centers.
While there are many benefits to centralization, I am also
keenly aware of the considerable challenges the centralization
has experienced, most importantly our inability to meet the
Coast Guard's targeted credential processing time of 30 days. I
am extremely concerned that the average processing time remains
80 days, and has or may impact the livelihood of individual
mariners. This backlog is unacceptable and resolving this
problem is my first and my foremost priority.
I would like to take a minute or two first to review key
changes that have been implemented since October 2007. Through
a phased approach, all 17 Regional Exam Centers transitioned to
centralized operations. The new building was built in
Martinsburg, West Virginia, where we also introduced new
credentialing production processes. A quality management system
was created to provide a framework for process management,
which is now compliant with ISO-9001.
Also, in accordance with the International Maritime
Organization requirements, a third-party evaluation was
completed by Transport Canada in March 2008 and found that the
Coast Guard's Mariner Credentialing program fulfills the United
States' obligations and responsibilities under the
International Convention for Standards of Training,
Certification, and Watchkeeping for Seafarers. A call center
was established and is now providing enhanced informational
services to 26,000 mariners each month. And, most recently, the
Coast Guard introduced the consolidated merchant mariner
credential in April to coincide with the implementation of the
Transportation Worker Identification Card.
These new procedures were established with TSA to share
mariner data, eliminating the need for mariners to travel to a
Regional Exam Center for fingerprinting and identification,
saving time and money for both the mariners and the Coast
Guard. This new passport-style credential also reduces the
number of individual credentials a mariner must carry, provides
enhanced security features to prevent forgery, and reduces U.S.
mariners' problems that they were facing overseas when
presenting their credentials. Of note, since the full
centralization in January of this year, the National Maritime
Center has issued over 35,000 credentials, 12,000 of these, or
35 percent, in less than 30 days.
Immediately after I assumed my duties just two weeks ago, I
received a detailed briefing on the operations at the National
Maritime Center and conducted a site visit to learn more. This
was my first step in a holistic look at the entire program, and
I have worked with my staff to develop an aggressive action
plan to resolve current delays and maintain greater oversight
and accountability.
Just this Monday, we stood up a Tiger Team on site at the
National Maritime Center to focus exclusively on clearing the
current backlog. I am arranging to bring in an independent
outside expert to analyze the credentialing processes and to
identify the bottlenecks and opportunities for improvement that
we are not currently seeing. I am examining to see if our call
center and Web site are meeting mariner expectations as they
work their way through their credentialing process. And I will
ensure that there is regular communication with the maritime
industry to listen to suggestions and feedback.
Mr. Chairman, I will conclude my remarks by reiterating
that reducing the processing time is at the very top of my
priorities. The Coast Guard is fully committed to providing
efficient, consistent, and top quality credentialing services
to our Nation's mariners, and I intend to deliver on this
commitment.
With your permission, Mr. Chairman, I would now like to
have Captain Stalfort do some brief introductory remarks.
Mr. Cummings. Very well.
Captain?
Captain Stalfort. Good morning, Mr. Chairman, distinguished
members of the Subcommittee. I am Captain David Stalfort, the
Commanding Officer of the National Maritime Center.
I was assigned to the National Maritime Center in June of
2007 and given responsibilities to transition the Coast Guard's
licensing and credentialing program to centralized operations.
I have been a licensed mariner for 20 years and have been
assigned to marine safety positions throughout the Country,
including assignment of Captain of the Port in Memphis, where
my duties included oversight of the Regional Exam Center.
I spent the last two years at MMC leading our team as we
transitioned all 17 exam centers to centralized operations,
working to change the culture of the MMC and the RECs to better
focus on customer service, and I have listened to the maritime
representatives to include and incorporate their input into the
establishment of our credentialing production facilities. I
have implemented the ISO-9001 compliant quality management
system that is being used to systematically improve the
efficiency of our processes, with our ultimate goal of reducing
processing time and meeting mariners' expectations. I also led
the project design to implement the new consolidated merchant
mariner credential.
Shortly after we finished the centralization in January of
this year, we faced initial bottlenecks with medical
evaluations, which we resolved by expanding the size of our
medical evaluation staff. We are now facing bottlenecks created
by the technical and software issues associated with production
of the new credential, which, when combined with the surge in
new applications submitted by mariners in advance of the April
2009 TWIC deadline, created a backlog of about 6800
applications.
As Admiral Cook has said, this is absolutely unacceptable.
While we have resolved many of the initial software challenges,
we have also recently established a Tiger Team, along with
their existing evaluation team, who is expected to increase the
production rate substantially and eliminate the backlog as
quickly as possible.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear today, and we would
be pleased to answer any questions you may have.
Mr. Cummings. One of the questions I asked in my opening
statement was what happens and do we have a way of knowing when
somebody has made application timely and then they are in
jeopardy of coming to a point where you all have not done
completely your work and the present license will lapse? Do we
have any way of flagging those people? Because it seems to me
that those are the people that are in most jeopardy and those
are the people that are going to lose their jobs. Do you follow
my question? What happens to that person? Do they get any
priority? Assuming they have done everything they are supposed
to do.
Admiral Cook. Mr. Chairman, they do get priority. The
simplest way we are notified is through the mariner call
center, and that information is relayed directly to the
processing people. And I have witnessed the great care of how
the records are handled within the National Maritime Center so
that at any point we can find that record and move it along. We
have a number of examples of cases which continue to come in
like that.
The shortcoming is that I don't know that all mariners are
familiar with calling in to the call center. We do receive some
from RECs; we receive some from Coast Guard units who are made
aware through industry connections; and, also, their companies
will call in. So when we know, they do get fast-tracked and a
number of them have been resolved.
Mr. Cummings. You know, it is nice to have these hearings,
but I am also trying to come up with solutions, because I don't
have time to waste, nor do you, nor do the mariners, and I
guess you just said something that tweaked my interest. So, in
other words, there is a possibility that a lot of mariners
don't know that they can perhaps, when they find themselves,
say 15, 20 days, looks like they are going to have that problem
of not having a license, they can call in and try to expedite
their situation.
Until we get all of this resolved and caught up, how can we
make sure we get that word out to the mariner community so that
they will know that? I don't want one person losing one hour of
work because of something that the Government failed to do. You
follow what I am saying? And I know you don't want that either.
So how can we make sure, coming out of this hearing, that we
get that word out to let folks know that we have got those
kinds of situations? In other words, that they can try to take
action or get hold of somebody to try to speed up their
process? You follow me?
Admiral Cook. Well, Mr. Chairman, certainly, as I
mentioned, there were the 26,000 or so mariner hits either on
our Web site or our call center, so that number is growing.
But, in the meantime, we could offer to do a targeted outreach
through our advisory committees and the major mariner groups,
the unions, the major employers, and let them know that if they
have anybody that is falling into that category, that they need
to contact us immediately.
Of course, that is the short-term solution. We mentioned a
couple times here about this Tiger Team, and the Tiger Team is
going to continue to tackle this backlog. At the same time, we
have also had our internal issues primarily overcome now with
the software, the training that goes with the new credential.
So we continue to see the internal production ramping up. At
the same time, we are now adding a cap group of Tiger Team on
top. So we do anticipate that we are going to continue to see
dramatically less and less mariners put in jeopardy like this.
Mr. Cummings. Yes, I understand. What I am trying to do is
I am trying to get to the one person who may find themselves in
that predicament. So if you will do that, I would really
appreciate it. I know you are going to move towards resolving
this.
I am going to allow Mr. LoBiondo to go. I have a lot of
questions, so you can go ahead. I will yield to you.
Mr. LoBiondo. Mr. Chairman, are we going to break?
Mr. Cummings. We are going to break when we have five
minutes. Right now it is 9:40.
Mr. LoBiondo. Okay.
Mr. Cummings. And we can just go back and forth, whatever
you need.
Mr. LoBiondo. Okay. All right.
The Coast Guard has temporarily repositioned personnel to
address the backlog by issuing 500 MMCs per day, as we
understand it. Are your baseline funding and personnel levels
adequate to meet the baseline goal of issuing 300 MMCs a day?
Admiral Cook. Congressman, I do believe it is adequate. We
believe that this backlog is a temporary aberration caused by
first processing through a backlog of medical and then a surge
which occurred around April with the new TWIC coming on line,
on top of a seasonal surge, and then the new credential and the
software issues associated and training with that. So once we
have a capability to produce 300 credentials with normal
staffing, and that is what we have as our incoming load, so we
will be at a steady state once we get the backlog down.
So you mentioned 500 or so. That is the number that we are
tracking, and each day we should be able to whittle down 200
additional credentials against the backlog. So once we get it
down to the point where we can have 300 coming in, 300 going
out, and we can conduct that with our normal staffing.
Mr. LoBiondo. Can you give us your take on if the delays
have impacted the abilities of maritime employees to get new
hires or temporary seasonal workers on board? Have they
experienced difficulty here?
Admiral Cook. Congressman, I would like to ask Captain
Stalfort to answer the detailed questions on some of our
expedited procedures.
Captain Stalfort. Congressman, for the entry level
mariners, those processed applications are expedited at the
Regional Exam Centers and sent directly to the NMC, where they
are fast-tracked through the evaluation process. So they are
not held up in the backlog that we currently have. We did that
deliberately because the evaluation of those entry level
mariners is fairly simplistic, so they go right from the
Regional Exam Centers, when the mariners apply, directly to
production, and those are being produced in less than 15 days.
Mr. LoBiondo. Do you have the authority to allow a mariner
to continue operating under a license on an interim basis in a
situation where the mariner, through no fault of his or her
own, does not receive a new license before the old one expires?
Captain Stalfort. No, sir, we do not.
Mr. LoBiondo. That is it for right now, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Cummings. What was your question again?
Mr. LoBiondo. The question was do they have the authority
to issue an interim license if a mariner, through no fault of
his or her own, can't get requalified in time. It seems like
they should be able to.
Mr. Cummings. Did you have something, Admiral?
Admiral Cook. Just to add on top of that. We do allow
applications to be sent in a year in advance of their
expiration date, and we will honor the initial date for
anniversary and hold that application, process it, and then
issue it so the mariner does not lose any time.
Mr. Cummings. All right, Ms. Richardson and Mr. Olson, we
have six minutes before the vote. Do you want to ask, Mr.
Olson? Are you ready? Do you have a question?
Mr. Olson. No, Mr. Chairman, I am fine. Thank you.
Mr. Cummings. All right. We are going to recess. It will
probably be at least an hour. Someone from the Committee will
keep you briefed on where we are. We have 13 votes.
I do want to ask one last question. I noticed that when my
staff went up there on July 2nd, to the Center, you all had
6,800 applications awaiting review by a professional
qualification evaluator. Is that backlog 6,800? Back on July
2nd, would that have been about right?
Admiral Cook. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cummings. And so how many applications come in a day?
In other words, I am trying to figure out how long it is going
to take you all to get the backlog down. You said you will be
able to do 200 extra a day, hopefully, but how many come in a
day? In other words, you have got them constantly coming in and
you have got a backlog, so I am trying to figure out--let me
tell you what I am trying to do. I am trying to hold you to
something. I am trying to hold you to getting down the backlog,
because it is my plan to bring you all back in here in a
certain amount of time, and I want to hear you say we have
resolved the backlog.
So while we are out, you might want to think about that and
then be able to tell me how you are going to do it. I just
believe that we can do it. I believe that the Coast Guard is an
organization that is capable of achieving it.
And I tell you, I would not have been so adamant if you had
answered the Ranking Member's question a little different than
what you did. When he asked you the question was it a personnel
issue, did you have enough personnel, you said that was fine;
you said there were just some problems that you had to work
out. I think we pretty much know now what the problems are,
based on your testimony, so what I want to do is I want to try
to figure out a way to come up with some deadlines so that the
mariner community feels comfortable. But I also want the Coast
Guard to feel comfortable. I don't want the Coast Guard making
commitments to things that they cannot keep. You follow me?
So you have got about an hour and a half, maybe, to think
about that, and then you can let me know when we come back and
then we will hold a hearing whenever you tell me to so that we
can get the report back. You understand, Admiral?
Admiral Cook. Understand, Chairman.
Mr. Cummings. All right. We are going to recess now for at
least an hour. Thank you.
[Recess.]
Mr. Cummings. Call the hearing back to order.
Admiral Cook, I had asked you about some type of timetable
to deal with the backlog. I think we have a 6,800 backlog, is
that right?
Admiral Cook. Mr. Chairman, what I would like to propose is
that you have us come back towards the beginning of the fiscal
year and, in the meantime, we give your staffers monthly
updates and give them some progress reports. It is our
estimation that we will have good news at that point, but along
the way we will keep you apprised of how it is going.
Mr. Cummings. We will aim for October, is that what you are
saying?
Admiral Cook. Yes, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Cummings. All right. Very well.
Tell me something, why is it that the time required by the
Coast Guard to process an application appears to have
lengthened between January and the June reports and why are
fewer applications being processed in 30 or fewer days in June,
as compared to January? I know that the Merchant Mariner
Credential was introduced during that period. For how much of
the processing delay does the introduction of that credential
account and what are the other major sources of delay?
Admiral Cook. I think there are three factors, Mr.
Chairman. The first one is January 2009 was the full
centralization such that all medical information had to come
into the National Maritime Center. It was a higher volume than
we anticipated; it caused a backlog, and that backlog was
addressed as it went through the medical evaluation. It is now
at the professional qualifications evaluation point in the
process, which is the final point, and that is where the
backlog is.
The second thing that added to it was the applications
which were caused to be expedited through the deadline for the
TWIC. So there was an unnatural surge there. We normally also
see a spring surge in applications, for whatever reason, so
that was on top of the TWIC surge.
And then it wasn't the introduction of the credential in
itself, it was the fact that some of the software supporting it
and then the additional training for the staff to be able to do
it at an efficient rate was the third element.
So those three things combined and they all took place over
the first six months of the year, and that is why we saw the
backlog grow, as well as the processing time.
Mr. Cummings. How are we coming with regard to training of
personnel?
Admiral Cook. Training is very good. I would like to have
Captain Stalfort just talk about that.
Captain Stalfort. Yes, sir. Everybody goes through a
deliberate process of training when they first come into the
program; it takes about four to five months through a series of
training entry levels first, moving up to the different levels
of evaluation. The new evaluators are trained by seasoned and
they pass a qualification performance standards, and then they
are issued evaluations. But it is a lengthy process. Part of it
is on-the-job training, where they start out under the tutelage
of an experienced one working on the entry level ones before
they get up to the harder level, upper level licenses.
Mr. Cummings. You know, one of the complaints--and I am
sure you will hear it in a few minutes--in the written
testimony from folks in the second panel was that a lot of the
people who supposed are trained don't seem to know what they
are doing, and they felt that it was unfair to them, that is,
the mariners, when they have people that were not properly
trained. Have you heard that complaint at all?
Admiral Cook. Sir, it is not a general complaint, but there
are always training issues, and I think one of the things that
we have learned in introducing the mariner call center is that
initially we had hoped that kind of the operator level folks
that were in the call center would be able to handle some more
difficult questions than they are able to; they are just too
wide of a range. So we have adapted that call center and we
have a pocket of experts as well that can help answer the
questions. So I could see why someone would get that
impression, but we have done some things to address it.
Mr. Cummings. I was looking at Ken Wells' testimony, the
President of Offshore Marine Services Association, and he says
inexperienced evaluators, evaluators are new to the licensing
system and are learning the nuances of licensing on the fly.
Not surprisingly, they have made mistakes. He also mentions
that incorrect interpretations.
We have also seen evaluators interpret policies and
regulations incorrectly and then those interpretations take on
a life of their own and repeating themselves with each new
mariner application. Again, this is a natural outcome when a
new staff learns its job, but that does not make it easy for a
mariner who is affected by the interpretation.
Are you familiar with those complaints?
Admiral Cook. Yes, we are. And I know Mr. Wells is a
supporter of the centralization overall, and he has always been
good about providing feedback through other forms as well. So
we are continuing to work with OMSA and any of the other trade
associations to take that feedback and make the process better.
But I can tell you as just a matter of degrees of training,
there is a substantial improvement in the contractor corps that
is doing a lot of the evaluation.
Mr. Cummings. I would suggest that you take a look at his
testimony; it is very good. I mean, he really lays it out and I
think he presents it in a very balanced way that would be
helpful to the Coast Guard and to the mariners.
Admiral Cook. We will do that, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Cummings. Mr. LoBiondo?
Mr. LoBiondo. I am good, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Cummings. Mr. Bishop.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am sorry that I was not here for your testimony earlier,
and I don't know whether you have access to the testimony of
the people who will be on the second panel, but one of the
individuals on the second panel is a person I am proud to call
a constituent, Captain Bill Clark, of the South Ferry and
Shelter Island, and he is here representing the Passenger
Vessel Association. He is the President of that Association and
in his testimony he urges the Subcommittee to get answers to
several specific questions, and I would like to formally pose
those questions to you now. I don't expect that you will have
the answers to them, but with the indulgence of the Chairman, I
would like to formally request that you provide answers to
these questions, and they are as follows:
How many qualified medical reviewers does the Coast Guard
believe are necessary on staff at the National Maritime Center?
That is question number one.
[Information follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.016
Question number two: How many such positions are actually
filled at present and how many remain open?
[Information follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.017
Question number three: Of those that are currently filled,
how many are filled with permanent employees and how many have
been filled by personnel on temporary duty?
[Information follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.018
And, lastly: How difficult is it for the Coast Guard to
recruit qualified medical evaluators for assignment to the
National Maritime Center?
[Information follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.019
As I say, I don't expect you to have those answers at the
tip of your tongue, but I do request that you provide them to
the Committee in writing at your earliest possible convenience.
Admiral Cook. We will do that, Congressman. We have general
flow of information regarding that, but I think putting it
together in an answer for the record would be the best thing.
Mr. Bishop. I thank you very much.
Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Cummings. Thank you very much.
Just a few more questions. Admiral Cook, as you may know,
the promulgation of the regulations bring towing vessels under
inspection is of great concern to the Subcommittee. Your
predecessor, Admiral Watson, had promised in a hearing before
this Subcommittee that he would try to get the notice of
proposed rulemaking on the towing vessel regulations out by the
spring of this year, before he transferred out of the position
you now hold.
Obviously, that didn't happen. The Commandant wrote to me
on June 25th stating that, ``The Coast Guard has drafted the
notice of proposed rulemaking and it is in the final stages of
review within the Department of Homeland Security.''
Has the notice gone to OMB yet and what is your estimate of
when it might be released?
Admiral Cook. Mr. Chairman, it is still in review at the
Department. We can't commit to a time line until we
satisfactorily resolve whatever issues they may bring up, and
we have not gotten feedback on that yet.
Mr. Cummings. Okay. Do you have any idea when we may get
that? This is my frustration, you see? This is why I set
deadlines, because over and over again--you go ahead. I am
listening.
Admiral Cook. Well, sir, like I said, the difficult part of
anticipating a final outcome is we don't know what issues the
Department may raise. Then we will have to work those and send
them back to the Department before it gets to OMB. So I am
hesitant to commit on a time line.
Mr. Cummings. I understand. All right, we will revisit
that.
On mariner medical standards, Admiral Cook, you indicated
in your written testimony that the centralization of the
mariner credentialing program to the National Maritime Center
revealed that a large number of medical waivers were previously
granted to mariners under the previous mariner credentialing
program. How many such waivers were issued in the past and how
many waivers have been issued by the NMC this year?
Captain Stalfort. Currently, waivers issued by the National
Maritime Center are about 5,600 since the beginning of this
year, and that is roughly the same number that were issued in
the past by the NMC under the decentralized.
Mr. Cummings. So this year you waived 5,000? Is that what
you said?
Captain Stalfort. Yes, sir. And the waiver is when we
review the medical conditions for the five years that the
license is going to be good for, our physicians look into the
mariner's medical condition and anticipate what changes may
take place during those next five years. And if the mariner has
medical conditions that are acceptable now to issue the
credential, but our physicians feel may deteriorate, we issue
the waiver, meaning that the condition is good, but we are
concerned that it may change over the future. And the text of
the waiver would be that the mariner may have certain
stipulations, but that they need to report changes in their
medical condition throughout the five year period of the
credential.
Mr. Cummings. The NTSB noted in its report on the COSCO
BUSAN incident that the Coast Guard has not taken action with
regard to one deficiency noted in safety recommendation M055,
that is, the lack of a requirement for mariners to report
changes in their medical condition between examinations--which
are usually conducted every five years, as you just stated--at
the time a mariner seeks to renew his credential. Why hasn't
action been taken on this recommendation? Wouldn't it be
preferable that mariners at least be required to report changes
in their medical status to the Coast Guard during the five year
period between credential renewals, Admiral?
Admiral Cook. Mr. Chairman, we have not solved that
entirely, that is correct, but I think we have approached it to
try and get the highest risk personnel first. So you heard
about the waiver conditions that a general mariner can get,
which requires them then to report back changes in their
health. We have instituted an annual requirement for pilot
physicals, since we know pilots are always operating in the
most congested waters. We get that annually, so we do get that
update.
And then what we have, our plans are to bring ourselves in
compliance with some international rules which are coming up
under the STCW Convention, which will require physicals every
two years for mariners, with the requirement to report changes
during that interim period if there are changes. Even though it
is under the Standards of Training, Certification, and
Watchkeeping for Seafarers, the STCW, we are going to
incorporate that by regulation for all of our mariners.
Mr. Cummings. So now pilots, unlike other credentialed
mariners, have to submit to an annual physical, is that what
you are saying?
Admiral Cook. That is correct. And they have to submit it
to the Coast Guard.
Mr. Cummings. And after the COSCO BUSAN incident, the Coast
Guard issued work instructions to guide the review of these
physicals to ensure that they are properly reviewed. Does the
Coast Guard have the ability to identify at any given time
those pilots who have not submitted the results of their annual
physicals or to remind pilots that a physical is due?
Admiral Cook. We are very nearly complete on that, sir. It
is one of the database fields that was added to our overall
merchant mariner document tracking system. So I can't say that
it is 100 percent yet, but every time we are getting an annual
physical into the NMC, it is being recorded and then tracked
for anniversary dates.
Mr. Cummings. So you don't know when somebody has failed to
submit within the five year period, is that it?
Admiral Cook. There could be some pilots who have not come
up yet into the program, so we are still--maybe Captain
Stalfort can give you the exact amount, but we have the process
down and it is coming right along.
Captain Stalfort. Yes, Mr. Chairman. We know all the
mariners that have come up on their five year cycle because
that physical is associated with the renewal of their
credential. For those pilots that have submitted the annual, we
know those and are tracking those for the annual. We are still
updating our database to find out what pilots have not
submitted a physical so we can better track those, and that is
one of the software changes that are coming forth.
Mr. Cummings. All right.
Mr. Bishop?
Mr. Bishop. I thank the Chairman for granting me one more
question.
Again, I don't know whether you have had access to the
testimony of those on the second panel, but in his testimony,
Captain Clark makes a pretty compelling case for the increased
utilization of trusted agents. So my question is how many
trusted agents are you now utilizing and what impediments, if
any, exist for the appointment of additional trusted agents so
as to help facilitate the process that appears to be pretty
severely backlogged?
Admiral Cook. Okay, first off, Congressman, until we can
make it so that mariners didn't have to go to an REC, then we
really couldn't use trusted agents the way we envisioned it. So
with the adoption of data sharing from the TSA TWIC, we now are
able to do our identification and fingerprinting through that
database and they no longer have to go to an REC.
So I know at that point Captain Stalfort introduced the
trusted agent concept and solicited for agencies that might
want to participate, and he has got a list. I think the only
thing that has held us back is our own internal workload. So we
are looking to this fall to be able to go back out to those
companies with a robust company, because it will require some
oversight on our part and we think that, by the end of the
year, the companies that are capable of doing the job as a
trusted agent will be empowered to do so.
Mr. Bishop. But you have a fairly well-established backlog
of companies that wish to be employed or engaged as trusted
agents?
Admiral Cook. I know we have a number of associations like
PDA, some union interest, as well as some----
Mr. Bishop. But you have no shortage of those who are
interested in serving, is that correct?
Admiral Cook. That is correct, Congressman.
Mr. Bishop. And you believe that you will be able to begin
to engage them in a formal way by the end of this calendar
year?
Admiral Cook. We do. And we see that as part of a long-term
strategy to alleviate our own workload.
Mr. Bishop. Okay. Thank you very much.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Cummings. I want to thank you gentlemen very much. You
all are going to still stick around, right?
Admiral Cook. We will.
Mr. Cummings. All right, thank you very much. I had a
number of questions, but I am going to submit them in writing.
One of them concerns this NVIC 04-08. I don't know why you all
are resistant to going along with NTSB. Why is that?
Admiral Cook. Mr. Chairman, we think we have gone along
with them in spirit, like I said, addressing the highest risks
first. But as far as the mechanics of then producing
regulations which we can go along--and we want to get the
industry support too. Right now, mariners are not looking
forward to that additional requirement. It is an added expense;
it is potentially putting their license in jeopardy.
So I think we have a way to go to work this up from the
NVIC, which now includes the pilots and other people that have
waivers, to getting the full spectrum of seafarers. But,
regardless, we will be doing that to come in compliance with
the STCW and draw that into our general mariner pool. So there
will be regulations.
Mr. Cummings. All right, thank you very much.
We will now call our second and final panel. Mr. Ken Wells
is President of the Offshore Marine Services Association;
Captain Bill Clark is the Owner of the South Ferry, Inc. and is
President of the Passenger Vessel Association; Mr. Richard
Block is Secretary of the National Mariners Association; Mr.
Mike Rodriguez is Executive Assistant to the President of the
Masters, Mates, and Pilots Union; and he is going to be
accompanied by Mr. Bill Van Loo, the Secretary-Treasurer of the
Marine Engineers' Beneficial Association; and he will also be
accompanied by Mr. Thomas Laird, who is the Director of New
Business Development with the American Maritime Officers.
So basically we have Mr. Wells, Captain Bill Clark, Mr.
Richard Block, and Mr. Rodriguez will be testifying in that
order. And it is my understanding that Mr. Bishop will be
introducing Mr. Clark when Mr. Wells finishes.
Mr. Wells, thank you very much.
I want to thank all of you for sticking around. I really
appreciate it. I know it is a long day. What we can do is we
have read your testimony, but, having been here this long, we
want you to say what you have got to say. But if you don't feel
like saying it all, it is okay; we are not going to be mad at
you.
But we get the gist of it. And as you could tell from the
testimony of our two witnesses from the Coast Guard, we have
our concerns. So I would like for you to, if you don't mind,
keep in mind what we have already said. And if there are things
that you are concerned about that were not said or you want to
bring out, I think the best and beneficial use that we can have
is for you to highlight things that you are still concerned
about, even with all that has been said. Does that make sense?
Mr. Wells.
TESTIMONY OF KEN WELLS, PRESIDENT, OFFSHORE MARINE SERVICES
ASSOCIATION; CAPTAIN BILL CLARK, OWNER, SOUTH FERRY, INC.-
SHELTER ISLAND, NEW YORK, REPRESENTING THE PASSENGER VESSEL
ASSOCIATION; RICHARD BLOCK, SECRETARY, NATIONAL MARINERS
ASSOCIATION; AND MIKE RODRIGUEZ, EXECUTIVE ASSISTANT, MASTERS,
MATES, AND PILOTS UNION, ACCOMPANIED BY BILL VAN LOO,
SECRETARY-TREASURY, MARINE ENGINEERS' BENEFICIAL ASSOCIATION;
AND THOMAS LAIRD, DIRECTOR OF NEW BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT,
AMERICAN MARITIME OFFICERS
Mr. Wells. Thank you, sir, and good afternoon, Chairman
Cummings, Ranking Member LoBiondo, members of the Subcommittee.
Thank you for giving us the opportunity to testify.
OMSA is the national trade association representing the
owners and operators of America's offshore work boat industry.
The American citizens who work onboard OMSA member vessels make
it possible for our Country to explore and produce its offshore
oil and gas, and soon they will be instrumental in the
construction and maintenance of offshore wind and other
renewable energy facilities.
It is worth noting these mariners are among the largest
group of U.S. seafarers who are currently required to meet STCW
requirements.
I will just touch on my testimony.
We raise some concerns about the NMC. They have been very
well vetted by the Committee members and the Coast Guard itself
has raised some of those concerns. It is not surprising that
there have been glitches in this process. We haven't managed to
avoid Murphy's Law. The thing we would stress is that for each
problem there is a mariner whose livelihood is at stake. We
think the Coast Guard knows that, but it raises the stakes
very, very high; it means that we need to be virtually error
free.
However,--and this gets to our conclusion--we can only make
the system so efficient if the product is still a bad product.
We can only deal with the structure of the NMC so much before
the real problem emerges, and we think the real problem is that
the licensing and documentation system itself is broken.
Evaluators can only do so much when the system is so complex
that the mariners can't even fill out the forms correctly and
only the most experienced evaluators can figure out how to
apply this patchwork of regulations, policies and
interpretations correctly.
First, the Coast Guard has broached the idea of making this
a computer-based application process. It is a good idea. They
have talked about making it like Turbo Tax. That is a good
example. And we have to remember 7 million Americans receive a
notice every year from the IRS saying they made a math error.
So the licensing process is not the only one that is prone to
error. We would urge the Coast Guard to move forward to
allocate the proper resources to make that electronic system
work.
Secondly, we need to simplify the process itself. We have
to recognize in the process that one size doesn't fit all. We
train mariners to work on OSVs. There are tow boat captains,
there are supertanker captains. As we said in the testimony,
there are different skills at work. Most captains in the U.S.
fleet try to avoid large objects at sea. Our captains try to
get as close to them as they possibly can without hitting them.
We need a system that allows people to advance in all of those
areas. We need a system that allows the hawsepiper to have as
much chance of success as the academy grad.
The system needs to make logical sense. We need to remove
any of the barriers that don't allow Americans to succeed based
on their own hard work and skill. We need a system that works
for the mariner, not against him. We think the Coast Guard
shares that vision, but we think the Coast Guard needs to put
the proper resources into simplifying the entire system;
otherwise, all of the efficiencies--to use a phrase that came
out of the former Louisiana senator is like putting socks on a
rooster. It is not going to solve the problem, it will just
dress it up.
A couple of other issues that we raised. Mr. LoBiondo has
very accurately brought up the TWIC problem. I won't go into it
here. Only to say that after having TSA promise so often that
they would make this process seamless and efficient, it is
inexcusable that we find the problems we find.
The final thing I would raise is there have been some
experiments in privatizing course approval. Course approval
gets to the heart at the whole licensing process. The MTSA
required mariners to have security training through STCW. Most
of the vessel captains on those vessels are required to have
vessel security officer training. A private company was brought
in early to develop the courses, handle course approval, and
then oversee the quality control. This was originally done
under a grant, but the grant ran out, and then a fee was
assessed on the training institutions. That fee was then passed
on as a cost to mariners or their companies, who paid for the
training.
Without anybody really intending it, what we found was we
have an unfunded mandate, paid for by the maritime industry,
with not the sort of responsibility and control that we think
it should have. So if the Coast Guard is going to continue this
experiment, we hope that it will be vetted with the maritime
community.
And that concludes my testimony. Thank you very much.
Mr. Cummings. Thank you.
Recognize Mr. Bishop for introduction.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
It is my honor to introduce Captain Bill Clark, President
of the Passenger Vessel Association for 2009, and who, along
with his brother Cliff, own and operate South Ferry,
Incorporated, a year-round ferry service between the towns of
Shelter Island and Southampton in my congressional district.
Bill and Cliff are fifth generation ferry operators whose
family business has provided ferry service to the south fork of
Long Island since the early 1800s. Bill and Cliff are both
merchant mariners holding captains licenses issued by the Coast
Guard. As it relates to today's hearing, over half of Bill's
employees are credentialed by the Coast Guard. In addition,
Bill is a retired Coast Guard captain. His active duty spanned
nearly 30 years. He commanded three Coast Guard cutters and
also had several assignments in the marine safety mission,
including marine inspector, commanding officer of a marine
safety office, captain of the port, and officer in charge of
marine inspection.
South Ferry's five double-ended ferry boats vary in size
and can carry up to 20 vehicles, and each year transports more
than 700,000 vehicles and 1.3 million passengers over its five-
minute single route.
Mr. Chairman, I thank you for inviting Bill to testify
before us today, as he is an ideal witness to discuss the
issues we are exploring. I welcome him to Washington, D.C. and
I thank him for his participation and thank you for allowing me
to introduce him.
Mr. Cummings. Mr. Bishop, thank you very much.
We welcome you, Captain Clark.
Captain Clark. Thank you so much, Congressman Bishop, for
that kind introduction. And thank you, Mr. Chairman, for
inviting us to participate today.
Mr. Cummings. Thank you.
Captain Clark. PVA is aware of too many instances in which
a mariner has been prevented from working because of credential
processing delays, even when the mariner has submitted a
complete application well in advance. We don't buy into the
notion that a properly completed application should be held up
in system, awaiting processing or assignment to an evaluator,
and we object to delays when an application is stuck in the
pile.
The Coast Guard acknowledges that the average processing
time for credentials is 80 days. That is far too long. We know
of a number of PVA members who have endured much longer
experiences getting their licenses renewed.
What is more, the Coast Guard estimates that at least 29
percent of the processing time is totally within their own
control in the system.
Here is an example from a PVA member in New York, on Long
Island. The company owner applied to the NMC for renewal of his
captain's license more than 90 days in advance. The medical
application took over three months to clear the medical review
branch. Then more delay occurred at the professional evaluation
branch. His license expired and he was unable to captain his
own boat for a month, until he received his renewed credential.
His small business had to incur the unnecessary expense of
hiring another captain.
The NMC should set tight standards in which each step of
the evaluation process is accomplished. There are a number of
steps. We understand the need for such steps and such orderly
process, but there needs to be a time frame and we need to meet
that time frame.
We appreciate the Coast Guard's commitment to improving the
situation; we think it is sincere. We have seen them work
wonders with the RECs in the past, where they brought failing
units up to speed, and we expect that will happen this time and
we need it to happen.
The National Maritime Center has taken on too many changes
in too short a time to effectively serve its customers. The
mariners, as one customer of the NMC, are bearing the brunt of
these changes. Neither Congress nor the Coast Guard should be
content with the current level of service.
Congressman Bishop covered my questions, so I am going to
skip past that.
The Coast Guard may be considering a medical examination--I
think we heard it today--every two years. If the Coast Guard
can't handle the volume of five-year medical reviews now, how
does it expect to deal with the flood of two-year medical
evaluations? We urge the Coast Guard to delay any move toward
two-year evaluations or any other additions to the licensing
requirements until such time that the current system stabilizes
at a satisfactorily level of service.
And, again, I will just hit on this. Congressman Bishop has
covered this one also, and I think the Coast Guard thoroughly
agrees on this. NMC should make expanding the trusted agent
program a top priority. It sounds like they have, but I think
that is going to add a lot to the equation by not having the
Coast Guard return incomplete documents and then start the
process all over again sometime later.
Communication difficulties between applicants and the NMC
continue to be of concern. Mariners must have real-time,
accurate information about the status of their applications.
PVA proposes that there should be a merchant mariner on staff
at NMC who can serve as point of contact for applicants having
difficulty with the process and who can advocate for these
mariners within the NMC apparatus. I think this is similar to
something you put forth as an omnibus program in the last Coast
Guard authorization bill.
Mr. Chairman and members of this Committee, please accept
my sincere appreciation for inviting me to participate today
and for your obvious keen understanding of the issues. I
appreciate your plans for follow-up. Thank you very much.
Mr. Cummings. Thank you very much.
Mr. Block?
Mr. Block. I wish to thank you, Chairman Cummings, for
extending this kind invitation to appear before your
Subcommittee today. I represent the National Mariners
Association that speaks on behalf of limited tonnage
credentialed merchant mariners, all of whom are directly
impacted by the quality of services provided by the National
Maritime Center.
I have actively participated in credentialing--to use the
new terminology--for the past 40 years. My day job is as
publisher of Marine Education Textbooks, which is a small
business that has been preparing instructional material to help
mariners pass the lower level Coast Guard license exams for
vessels up to 1600 tons.
I am Secretary of our Association and I previously prepared
and transmitted two reports to the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee dealing with today's topics, the first
in February of 2007, two years ago, the second one in May of
this year. I prepared both reports in collaboration with our
Association President, Captain Joseph Dady. Your staff has
electronic copies of these and all numbered reports referenced
in my testimony. I don't think I have to go into any more
detail on those reports.
The 126,000 credentialed mariners that we speak for, the
lower level mariners, pay user fees and expect timely service
on obtaining, upgrading, and renewing their credentials.
Delayed credentials cost money, job opportunities, and even
loss of employment, all especially important in today's tough
economic times. Delays cost the National Maritime Center as
well by fruitlessly fielding repetitive telephone calls from
our frustrated mariners. Our mariners frequently tell us about
useless calls that they have made to the NMC help desk in
painful detail.
Under Captain Fink, the former commanding officer of the
National Maritime Center, mariners who faced personal crises
received prompt and personal attention when our Association
brought these problems to his attention. He extended similar
courtesies to our board members, who also serve on several
advisory committees.
Statistics don't tell the whole story; however,
manipulating statistics and putting the best possible spin on
them appears to be standard practice at NMC. We review NMC from
our mariners' perspective, that of working mariners who pay
user fees in return for services that should help them continue
and keep on the job, and not interrupt and delay, deter, or
discourage them, as frequently happens.
Most credentialed mariners are independent and self-
reliant. They only seek our help after their best efforts fail.
Each mariner presents a unique set of problems, as our two
reports show. In most cases, they already have asked advice
from their friends, coworkers, employers, and schools.
Occasionally, we remain their last resort.
We have had some problems with the present commanding
officer of the National Maritime Center, who has totally
sabotaged the efforts of our Association to deal with many of
these problems. This is covered in our written testimony, and I
don't see any reason to drag it out here.
We appreciate the work of this Subcommittee and we support
H.R. 2652, and especially in U.S. Code Section 7508, which
would provide authority to extend the duration of licenses. We
hope that you will be able to craft this legislation in a
manner that will protect individual mariners from the type of
losses that have been discussed today, resulting from needless
delays and possibly end the adversarial relationship with our
mariners that has erupted during the current administration of
the National Maritime Center.
I seek to extend the duration of licenses long enough so
that somebody who has lost his or her license or stands to lose
it may possibly be covered for a week or a month, or whatever
time is necessary to straighten out their application and carry
them through without loss of job, opportunity or pay.
Thank you very much, and I apologize for over-extending my
time.
Mr. Cummings. Thank you very much.
Mr. Rodriguez?
Mr. Rodriguez. Good afternoon, Chairman Cummings, Ranking
Member LoBiondo, and members of the Subcommittee. The American
Maritime Officers, the International Organization of Masters,
Mates, and Pilots, and the Marine Engineers' Beneficial
Association are grateful for the opportunity to appear today
before the Subcommittee.
Accurately documenting merchant mariner qualifications is
critical to our industry and to the individual mariners who
make it work.
For mariners, licensing and documentation is not about
metrics, action plans, surging resources, or outreach to the
industry; it is about our ability to maintain employment that
provides for our families, maintains health care and pension
benefits, and allows mariners to advance in the seafaring
profession.
In 2004, when the Coast Guard began revising its medical
review process by proposing a new Navigation and Vessel
Inspection Circular, or NVIC, we agreed that the system of
medical review needed to be improved. However, we also
expressed our concerns that the NVIC was excessive and overly
complex, and that the Coast Guard had underestimated the number
of mariners affected, the number of requests for medical
waivers, and the size of staff and the level of resources
required. We, among many others, predicted that the system
would be prone to delays and that mariners would lose income
and essential benefits.
It is absolutely unacceptable that any mariner should be
out of work due solely to the failure of the system to
adequately anticipate problems that we have experienced,
especially after the agency was repeatedly warned that these
problems were coming. We have come to the conclusion that the
present Coast Guard medical review process is a flawed system
that seriously needs to be revisited. And I would add that on
the Senate side there is some legislation to do just that,
Senate Bill 685.
Merchant mariner licensing and documentation, now called
credentialing, is an area of great concern to us as well.
Accurately documenting mariners is critical to our ability to
provide qualified mariners to every sector of the industry,
including U.S. flag and international flag sector. There is
general concern among the licensed mariner community that the
Coast Guard is deliberately diminishing the professional
standing of merchant mariner officers by eliminating the word
``license'' from their regulations in favor of the terms
``credential'' and ``officer endorsement.'' We recall that, in
2004, Coast Guard legal personnel issued a legislative change
proposal to rewrite 46 U.S.C. 7101, the statute that
establishes merchant mariner licenses. Among other things, the
term ``license'' would have been dropped from that statute.
In our view, by eliminating the word ``license'' from its
regulations, the Coast Guard is doing by regulation what the
Congress would not allow it to do in statute.
In addition, we have other serious and specific concerns
over the credentialing functions. Mariners are receiving their
documents with necessary endorsement stripped away from them.
Mariners wait for months in order to have their documents
updated, and several of our members complained that advice from
the NMC help desk is inconsistent or just plain wrong.
In the past, mariners went to one of the Coast Guard's
Regional Exam Centers, or RECs, to initiate and complete their
licensing and documentation transactions. The benefit to the
mariner was the availability of REC personnel to address
problems on the spot. Centralization of licensing and
documentation has concentrated the workload at the NMC,
eliminated the professional discretion of the RECs to fix
problems, and has deepened the split between the Coast Guard
and the mariner community.
In conclusion, we hold the view that our merchant mariners
are a national asset. They contribute to the quality of life
around the world by maintaining and upgrading their skills and
professionalism, carrying our commerce, supporting our armed
forces, and assisting during national disasters. They deserve
no less than the best efforts of our Government to assist them
in providing their service to our society.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Cummings. Thank you.
Mr. Van Loo, you are not testifying, are you?
[No audible response.]
Mr. Cummings. Okay.
Mr. Laird?
Mr. Laird. No, I am not.
Mr. Cummings. Thank you very much.
I am going to go to Mr. LoBiondo. I will go to you first,
then we will go to Mr. Bishop, then I will clean up.
Mr. LoBiondo. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Captain Clark, your testimony notes that the Coast Guard
has implemented a consolidated merchant mariner credential and
entered into a partnership with the TSA to coordinate certain
aspects of TWIC and the MME processing program; implemented a
new medical review system; implemented new endorsements for
standards of training, certification, and watchkeeping; and, in
addition to these changes, the Coast Guard has also established
the National Maritime Center and consolidated many activities
formerly conducted in the 17 Regional Exam Centers.
I understand your argument that, in the short-term, the
Coast Guard is having difficulty absorbing all of these
changes; however, in the long-term, do you believe that these
changes will result in a stronger, more effective credentialing
program or that there will still be problems?
Captain Clark. You are asking me that question?
Mr. LoBiondo. Yes, Captain Clark.
Captain Clark. I think the Coast Guard is doing their level
best to make this new credentialing system work, and time will
tell. When you go to a centralized system, you have a better
opportunity for consistency than you would at 17 independent
RECs that we had around the Country. But I think the other side
of that argument is, if it is not a top-notch central
organization, the mariner has no place else to turn.
I am from a port where we had an option for two RECs in the
day of the RECs, where you went to the REC, they had somebody
at the REC that would look at your application, would tell you
there are things missing here, so you get them corrected
immediately.
We actually had a situation where one of the RECs that was
within our reach was doing an abysmal job and the other one was
doing an outstanding job, so all of our mariners had an option
and they all went to that port that was doing well, and it was
remarkable because it wouldn't have been the first choice, but
geographically it was similar traveling time and all those
things.
So I think we have an opportunity here for uniformity, if
we can produce a central system that demonstrates excellence in
all phases of this. But when the mariner is removed by
geography and there is question as to the ability to
communicate specifically about his case, we have opened the
door to some of the concerns that we have heard expressed
today.
Mr. LoBiondo. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you, Captain Clark.
Captain Clark. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cummings. Mr. Bishop.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Wells, you indicate in your testimony that the
credentialing system should be simplified and that obstacles
that, in your view, serve no purpose, should be removed. Can
you be specific about some of the obstacles that currently
exist that serve no purpose, that you believe should be
removed?
Mr. Wells. To cite specific examples, I would like to go
back and think about it and provide it to you in writing.
Mr. Bishop. But you will submit that for the record?
Mr. Wells. Yes.
Mr. Bishop. Thank you. I appreciate that.
Captain Clark, I am going to guess that a fair number of
the members of the Passenger Vessel Association are seasonal
businesses and, thus, the consequence of a credential expiring
during the height of a season can be particularly difficult for
that business to accommodate. In our testimony, you cite one
example of a vessel owner who had to hire someone to operate
his own vessel. Are there other examples that you can cite and
can you just sort of walk us through the consequences of a
credential expiring?
Captain Clark. Yes, sir. Thank you for that question. I
have one of my two senior pilots, he has been working at South
Ferry for 40 years, and I guess that means he is on his eighth
issue of a five-year license. In the middle of June, he brought
to my attention that he had submitted his renewal package to
the NMC six weeks ago, and he just then, six weeks later, in
the middle of June, when our big season is coming up and we
need him more than ever, received a letter regarding his
medical condition. There was an existing condition.
I fully understand why we need to get to the bottom of any
existing medical situation that could compromise safe
transportation, but the delay between the time he sent this
completed package in and he got the notification that now we
need more information, he got that information within, I would
say, three working days and did just what I told him, to make
sure you get that right there, overnighted to the NMC so they
can get right to work on it.
But now we are getting towards the end of June and his
license is due to expire next week, on the 14th. I think that
exemplifies for me and others why we need to have a special
queue for people that have submitted everything they need to
submit and their license is going to expire, and in most cases
it is going to get issued. But don't make it so he has to stop
working, he can no longer do his job just because of an
administrative situation.
And we do have other situations like that where mariners
have just been caught up in a system that is backlogged, quite
frankly.
Mr. Bishop. Okay, thank you very much.
Mr. Chairman, I thank you.
Mr. Cummings. Captain Clark, as you were talking, I was
seeing that the Rear Admiral--I guess you all were talking
about the problem that Captain Clark just stated. I hope that
you all can talk afterwards and perhaps get the information
about this situation.
Captain Clark. Well, thank you so much for that comment,
Mr. Chairman. We have talked and we will continue to talk.
Mr. Cummings. Oh, good. Good. So your family has been in
this business for a long time?
Captain Clark. It goes back to--and we are trying to nail
down the exact date, but early part of the 1800s, when our
forebearer, Samuel G. Clark, came all the way from Connecticut,
a small-time farmer, found that he could pick up a few extra
bucks rowing people across the small passage.
Mr. Cummings. Is that right?
Captain Clark. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cummings. So you have lived basically by the water.
Captain Clark. We grew up right by the water and the ferry
boats are right in front of the house when they are not in
service on the route, which is right next door.
Mr. Cummings. And I take it, in listening to your
testimony, all of you, you have tried to be balanced. I mean,
you understand the Coast Guard has a job to do, but I take it
that you are trying to make sure that, in the process of doing
that job--and this is to all of you--that they do their job,
but that job does not interfere with commerce unreasonably and
unnecessarily. Is that a pretty good----
Captain Clark. That is an excellent way of putting it. And
I will say this, we need to do our part as mariners. We need
not wait until the very last moment. But that is exactly what
we are looking for.
Mr. Cummings. Well, if you notice in my questions to the
members of the Coast Guard, officers from the Coast Guard, one
of the things I said, I kept asking assuming that people submit
their paperwork in a timely fashion, why we are having this
problem? Because I agree with you, I think it has to be a two-
way street.
Captain Clark. It has to be.
Mr. Cummings. We have got to make it as easy as we possibly
can. We have got to go by the rules, as far as mariners are
concerned, to do the right things. But then, once we do the
right things, do them timely, then Government has a duty not to
stand in the way. It has a duty to do its job, but, at the same
time, not to stand in the way because we can't get our act
together, and that seems to be the problem.
I just want to go to the four of you. If you had something
that you would really want to see--I mean, you have the Coast
Guard right here, you have the folks who are in charge of the
program. If there is something that you really would want to
see them do, I mean, I know you have testified, but if you
could just give us a sentence or two that would make a big
difference, we just want to hear that, because we want to be
effective and efficient.
And I have got to tell you, working with Mr. LoBiondo, our
Ranking Member, we really work together well, and our Committee
has worked together trying to figure out how to not get so
caught up in politics and deal with curing people's problems,
because we only have one life to live, and this is it.
So we will start with you, Mr. Rodriguez. And I want it
just to be brief; we are going to end this hearing in the next
few minutes. But I just want you to let us know what is your
number one thing that you want them to do? You have got them
sitting right there. They are taking notes. It looks like they
are running out of paper and ink, but they are taking notes.
But they are listening.
Mr. Rodriguez?
Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The first--may I--
--
Mr. Cummings. Two. I will give you two. All right, two.
Mr. Rodriguez. The first would be the trusted agent
proposal. We would like to explore that and expand it and make
it work. We have people in our schools around the industry who
have the expertise to help the Coast Guard with some of these
problems. They have the proper interest because they would be
helping their fellow mariners through the process and----
Mr. Cummings. And the trusted agent concept is to try to
help make sure the application process is complete so they
don't have to start all over again, is that pretty much----
Mr. Rodriguez. It could be that. It could be expanded to a
number of different areas where there is a problem with the
volume of work that is going to the National Maritime Center.
My second wish would be to revisit the medical review
process. We have never been in agreement with centralizing the
medical review process because we have a system now where
fitness for duty is determined by somebody in West Virginia who
has never seen a mariner, has never examined the person, and is
making a determination based on paperwork traveling back and
forth. That has resulted in a number of delays. We have a
medical profession out there that is perfectly capable of
making physical examinations and determining whether a mariner
is fit for duty.
Now, I think what was missing in the old system was the
ability of the Coast Guard to communicate consistent policy to
its RECs and also to physicians who were examining mariners. In
our written testimony, we talk about a system that is in place
in the United Kingdom, I believe, and that is a system where
the maritime authority in the U.K. sends some very clear and
very understandable guidance to physicians around the U.K. to
do the mariner medical evaluations. So we have always advocated
for a system like that.
Mr. Cummings. Okay.
Mr. Rodriguez. This medical review process is just too
complex, it is too difficult, and results in many, many delays,
as we have seen.
Mr. Cummings. Mr. Block.
Mr. Block. My wish for the day is in four words for the
Coast Guard: respond to our letters. Thank you.
Mr. Cummings. Captain Clark?
Captain Clark. I would emphasize that, when we have a
licensing situation in extremis--and by that I mean if this
thing doesn't get renewed in a very short period of time, this
mariner is going to be out of work--when we have that kind of
an extremis situation, follow the rules of the road and avoid a
collision.
And I think the Coast Guard is working very hard to put a
process in place that they can depend on that will kind of put
the thing on automatic pilot, and I think, to some extent, if
it is done right, it can do that. But they will never get past
the point where certain situations arise and we get into that
extremis situation, and that needs to be a priority. I can't,
for the life of me, understand why, if the mariner is going to
get his credential, let's get it now.
Mr. Cummings. Well, it is interesting. Mr. LoBiondo had
asked a question about whether, when they fall into that
category, was there any authority to give them at least a
temporary kind of license or something to hold them over, keep
them working, and the answer from the Coast Guard was no. We
might want to look into that.
Go ahead.
Captain Clark. If I may, I think the Coast Guard feels like
they are bound by a Congressional mandate that says you can
only issue a credential for five years, and one of the tides
that is working against us here is that if mariners have a
disincentive to send it in a year ahead of time, as was
mentioned, or six months, because traditionally that has led to
a loss of some percentage of your license--in other words, now
it is a four and a half year license--I think there is a
process in place now where they can do a delayed action and
maybe minimize the loss of time on your license to maybe one
month under a delayed issuance program.
But I think all those kinds of things need to be made
better known to the mariners. PVA needs to do its part to get
that word out; Coast Guard needs to do their part.
Mr. Cummings. Before we get to you, Mr. Wells, I just want
to ask you one other thing, Captain. You indicated that many
queries to the National Maritime Center go unanswered. Is this
still the case, and how long do you have to wait, on the
average, to receive a response?
You also indicated that you support the establishment of an
ombudsman to help. The only reason I am mentioning it now is
Mr. Block had a similar concern when he said the four words,
and basically he is saying just respond to us, let's keep the
communication going. I am just trying to figure out are you
still having problems getting your--now, the Coast Guard claims
they are in pretty good shape as far as----
Captain Clark. Interaction.
Mr. Cummings.--interaction.
Captain Clark. Yes, sir.
Mr. Cummings. But if we have a breakdown where people are
not at least getting some type of response, all that does is
lead to total frustration and it puts the mariner in a position
and the employer of the mariner in an unpredictable position. I
try to tell people all the time, as one who ran a small
business for several years, the most important thing you can do
for a business person is give them a decision, be it good or
bad. They need to know something so that they can plan.
So I am just trying to figure when you say--and I know you
want to be fair to the Coast Guard. Are you still having
problems? Because I don't want that to hang out there if it has
been resolved or whatever.
Captain Clark. I think the problem is not so extreme that
you just can't get an answer, because you can get somebody on
the phone. But I think the problem that I see and that we see
in the PVA is getting enough information about exactly where
that document is that is in for renewal, or if it is a new
issue, where we stand on that.
It seems like that is the part of the puzzle that is so
important to the mariner. If it is not specific information, if
it is just sitting in the pile, that makes him feel worse than
before he picked up the phone. If he can get some information--
he is wondering is there something I have done to make this
worse? If I have, I need to fix it. And they understand that.
Mariners know that. I think that has been, to me, at the crux
of the problem, just getting the specific information that they
need.
Mr. Cummings. Mr. Wells?
Mr. Wells. It sounds a little corny, but I think the
message we would want to pass on is we would want the Coast
Guard to wake up in the morning knowing that day, if this
system doesn't work for the individual mariner, that mariner's
ability to earn a livelihood or advance in his profession is at
risk. To own that fact and put the resources in place to fix
it.
Mr. Cummings. Mr. Bishop, did you have anything?
We are going to end the hearing, but let me just say this.
I want to thank all of you for your testimony.
Mr. Laird, did you have anything? Yes, please do. You sat
here all day.
Mr. Laird. Okay. Thank you, sir. I just want to say that we
have a fledgling project here all three unions are involved
with that was really initiated in 2007 by MARAD, the LNG
international business, and everything has been said as far as
disadvantaging the mariner and the things that we are doing. I
agree with everything. I like the dialogue.
The issue is here we are making our debut internationally,
and when we go on these international contracts, they are
evaluating whether or not we can deliver. We have a couple of
contracts, one is with a major oil company, and they put these
people through complex training programs, and, at the end of
the day, at the end of the time of the four months, they are
looking for these people to go in service. They don't want to
hear that it is going to be another four to eight weeks,
because there are tens of thousands of dollars at stake, not
just the mariners' pay.
So that is all I want to say, because there is a government
initiative with the MARAD project that we have put a lot of
time and effort into, and we don't want to see it vanish,
because mostly it is for the new generation of officers coming
up the line. We want them to have--I sailed LNG captain and I
had a great career there, and we see, luckily this week we had
nine new juniors from a couple of the maritime academies start
out with this major oil company.
We want them to have a career at sea and many more of these
young officers out of these maritime academies. We have to
prove ourselves to these international companies that, first of
all, we know we can do the job and we can be competitive. The
third thing is that we need to be able to do our job with our
documents in a timely way, basically.
Thank you for giving me that time.
Mr. Cummings. Thank you, Mr. Laird.
Mr. Van Loo?
Mr. Van Loo. In my file, I have numerous examples of
mariners that are experiencing difficulties in renewing their
documents. It is our wish that the Coast Guard would expedite
the process and get these guys back to sea.
Mr. Cummings. Well, I would appreciate it if you would--
since you have the main people here--that you talk to them
before you leave.
Mr. Van Loo. I will.
Mr. Cummings. I want to thank all of you for being here. I
want to make sure that we are very clear. This is not a bash
the Coast Guard hearing. This is about how do we work with the
Coast Guard so that they can accomplish their mission and so
that the mariners can accomplish theirs. I think sometimes we
can make things more difficult than they have to be.
But I think that, listening to all of you, the Coast Guard
included, we can do this. This doesn't sound like rocket
science stuff. I think Mr. Wells said it, and perhaps it was
some philosopher that said it even better than I can say it,
that if we would just take a moment to put ourselves in the
other person's shoes sometimes, we would have a greater
sensitivity and could probably work things out better. That is
both ways, by the way.
All I am saying to you is that we are going to work with
the Coast Guard. I think we can do better. We need to get rid
of this backlog. We just simply cannot--even if the economic
times were not what they are today, we simply cannot afford to
have one single person out of work because the Government
cannot get its act together, as I said a little bit earlier. So
we are going to work hard with the Coast Guard and we are going
to follow up with the Coast Guard and make sure that we address
this backlog.
Again, going back to Mr. LoBiondo, our Ranking Member's
question, probably one of the most crucial questions during
this hearing is when he asked the question does the Coast Guard
have what they need; and the Coast Guard said they have what
they need. Once you answer that in that form, we expect
results.
We also expect something else. We expect the Coast Guard to
be able to look and see certain things coming. We don't expect
them to be the person that can see every single thing, but
there are certain things that you just see coming, and you all
are in the business of seeing things coming out there on the
water.
So all I am saying is that I think probably a little bit
more foresight would have been helpful and then acting on that
foresight would have been helpful, and perhaps we would not
find ourselves in the situation that we are in today. That
doesn't mean that we would not have had problems, but maybe not
to the degree that we have them now.
And I don't want us to underestimate how serious this is. I
think we need to resolve it, because the one thing we don't
want to do is we don't want it to get worse. So, again, I want
to thank you all for your patience. Speaking of foreseeability,
we could not foresee that we were going to have this problem to
delay you all for so long, but we really do appreciate the fact
that you stuck around and made your voices heard.
So, with that, we will adjourn the hearing. Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 2:27 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.075
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.076
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.077
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T0974.078