81294 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

1 46 U.S.C. 9301–9308. 

2 46 U.S.C. 9302(a)(1). 

3 Department of Homeland Security (DHS) 

Delegation No. 00170.1, Revision No. 01.3, 

paragraph II (92)(f). 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND 

SECURITY 

Coast Guard 

46 CFR Parts 401 and 402 

[Docket No. USCG–2022–0025] 

RIN 1625–AC79 

Great Lakes Pilotage Modernization 

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DHS. 

ACTION: Notice of proposed rulemaking. 

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is proposing 

to amend certain Great Lakes Pilotage 

regulatory requirements to align with 

current Coast Guard and U.S. pilot 

association operations and pilotage 

practices. This proposed rule would 

clarify the different phases of training 

and types of registrations for pilots who 

work on the Great Lakes, eliminate 

outdated practices and redundant 

requirements, and adds much needed 

structure regarding the billing dispute 

process. 

DATES: Comments and related material 

must be received by the Coast Guard on 

or before January 22, 2024. 

ADDRESSES: You may submit comments 

identified by docket number USCG– 

2022–0025 using the Federal Decision 

Making Portal at www.regulations.gov. 

See the ‘‘Public Participation and 

Request for Comments’’ portion of the 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION section for 

further instructions on submitting 

comments. 

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For 

information about this document, call or 

email Mr. Vincent Berg, Coast Guard; 

telephone 202–906–0835, email 

vincent.f.berg@uscg.mil. 

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: 

Table of Contents for Preamble 

I. Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

II. Abbreviations 

III. Basis and Purpose 

IV. Background 

V. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

VI. Regulatory Analyses 

A. Regulatory Planning and Review 

B. Small Entities 

C. Assistance for Small Entities 

D. Collection of Information 

E. Federalism 

F. Unfunded Mandates 

G. Taking of Private Property 

H. Civil Justice Reform 

I. Protection of Children 

J. Indian Tribal Governments 

K. Energy Effects 

L. Technical Standards 

M. Environment 

I. Public Participation and Request for 

Comments 

The Coast Guard views public 

participation as essential to effective 

rulemaking and will consider all 

comments and material received during 

the comment period. Your comment can 

help shape the outcome of this 

rulemaking. If you submit a comment, 

please include the docket number for 

this rulemaking, indicate the specific 

section of this document to which each 

comment applies, and provide a reason 

for each suggestion or recommendation. 

We encourage you to submit 

comments through the Federal Decision 

Making Portal at www.regulations.gov. 

To do so, go to www.regulations.gov, 

type USCG–2022–0025 in the search 

box and click ‘‘Search.’’ Next, look for 

this document in the Search Results 

column, and click on it. Then click on 

the Comment option. If you cannot 

submit your material by using 

www.regulations.gov, call or email the 

person in the FOR FURTHER INFORMATION

CONTACT section of this proposed rule 

for alternate instructions. 

Viewing material in docket. To view 

documents mentioned in this proposed 

rule as being available in the docket, 

find the docket as described in the 

previous paragraph, and then select 

‘‘Supporting & Related Material’’ in the 

Document Type column. Public 

comments will also be placed in our 

online docket and can be viewed by 

following instructions on the 

www.regulations.gov Frequently Asked 

Questions web page. That page also 

explains how to subscribe for email 

alerts that will notify you when 

comments are posted or if a final rule is 

published. We review all comments 

received, but we will only post 

comments that address the topic of the 

proposed rule. We may choose not to 

post off-topic, inappropriate, or 

duplicate comments that we receive. 

Personal information. We accept 

anonymous comments. Comments we 

post to www.regulations.gov will 

include any personal information you 

have provided. For more about privacy 

and submissions in response to this 

document, see the Department of 

Homeland Security’s eRulemaking 

System of Records notice (85 FR 14226, 

March 11, 2020). 

We do not plan to hold a public 

meeting, but we will consider doing so 

if based on public comments we 

determine that a meeting would be 

helpful. We would issue a separate 

Federal Register notice to announce the 

date, time, and location of such a 

meeting. 

II. Abbreviations 

CFR Code of Federal Regulations 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

Director Director, Great Lakes Pilotage 

FR Federal Register 

GLPAC Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory 

Committee 

GT Gross tonnage 

MMC Merchant Mariner Credential 

MOU Memorandum of Understanding 

NPRM Notice of proposed rulemaking 

NAICS North American Industry 

Classification System 

NTSB National Transportation Safety Board 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

§ Section 

TWIC Transportation Workers 

Identification Credential 

U.S.C. United States Code 

WWM–2 Coast Guard Great Lakes Pilotage 

Division 

III. Basis and Purpose 

The legal basis of this proposed 

rulemaking is Title 46 of the United 

States Code (U.S.C.) Chapter 93,1 which 

requires each foreign vessel and each 

vessel of the U.S. operating ‘‘on 

register,’’ meaning U.S. vessels engaged 

in foreign trade, to use United States or 

Canadian pilots while transiting the 

U.S. waters of the St. Lawrence Seaway 

and the Great Lakes system.2 For U.S. 

Great Lakes pilots, 46 U.S.C. 9303(a) 

requires the Secretary to prescribe, by 

regulation, standards of competency to 

be met by each applicant for registration 

as a Great Lakes pilot. Additionally, 

sections 9303(c) and (d) authorize the 

Secretary to prescribe regulations 

establishing the validity period of Great 

Lakes pilot’s registration and other 

conditions for service respectively. The 

Secretary’s duties and authority under 

46 U.S.C. Chapter 93 have been 

delegated to the Coast Guard.3

The purpose of this notice of 

proposed rulemaking (NPRM) is to 

update the Great Lakes pilotage 

regulations in title 46 of the Code of 

Federal Regulations (CFR) parts 401 and 

402 to reflect the current pilotage terms 

and practices used by the Coast Guard 

and U.S. pilot association operations. 

While the regulations in the current CFR 

do not conflict with our current 

practices, they do not fully reflect the 

current apprentice pilot training 

requirements and titles for pilot 

progression. Accordingly, the Coast 

Guard proposes to update the current 

CFR as follows: 

1. To redefine the different phases of 

pilot registration, which would 

generally follow this progression: 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81295 

4See The Great Lakes Pilotage Act of 1960, Public 

Law 86–555, June 30, 1960, as amended (codified 

at 46 U.S.C. 9301 et seq.). 

5 82 FR 34909, July 27, 2017. 

6See Meeting Minutes from the March 6, 2018, 

meeting of the GLPAC Regulatory Reform SubCommittee, which can be found in the docket. To 

locate the docket for this rulemaking, see the Public 

Participation and Request for Comments portion of 

this preamble. 

7The recommendation is on page 171 of the 

September 10, 2018, GLPAC Meeting Transcript, 

which is available in the docket for this rulemaking. 

‘‘Applicant,’’ ‘‘Applicant Trainee,’’ 

‘‘Apprentice Pilot,’’ ‘‘Limited 

Registration,’’ ‘‘Full Registration,’’ and 

‘‘Temporary Registered Pilot’’; 

2. To add ‘‘marine accident’’ to the 

definitions section to clarify a pilot’s 

reporting requirements; 

3. To clarify training benchmarks to 

ensure registration of qualified mariners 

and help retain experienced U.S. 

Registered Pilots. 

4. To align medical requirements and 

radar observer training requirements for 

U.S. Registered Pilots with the Merchant 

Mariner Credential (MMC) and manning 

regulations in 46 CFR parts 10–15; 

5. To clarify the pilotage billing 

dispute process with respect to when a 

vessel is and is not liable for charges; 

and 

6. To remove outdated provisions, 

including dates and terms, from the 

Transportation Workers Identification 

Credential (TWIC), the foreign language 

requirements for navigation, the oneyear time limit for applicants to 

complete training, and other regulations 

that were written when both the 

Department of Commerce and the Coast 

Guard had regulatory authority over 

U.S. pilotages services. 

The Coast Guard believes that the 

updated registration process in this 

proposed rule would ensure that 

regulations reflect current training 

practices while keeping within the 

statutory mandate to prescribe standards 

of competency in 46 U.S.C. 9303(a). The 

proposed updates would also align with 

the program’s goals of promoting 

competent, safe, efficient, and reliable 

pilotage service throughout the Great 

Lakes and St. Lawrence Seaway, 

promoting commerce, and protecting 

the marine environment. 

IV. Background 

Chapter 93 of Title 46 of the U.S.C. 

establishes a system of compulsory 

pilotage on the Great Lakes, requiring 

that each vessel of the United States 

operating ‘‘on register,’’ meaning United 

States vessels engaged in any 

commercial activity, and all foreign 

vessels, use a United States or Canadian 

Registered Pilot when operating in the 

Great Lakes.4

Great Lakes pilots use in-depth local 

knowledge, seasoned navigational and 

ship handling expertise, and informed 

independent judgement to guide both 

U.S. and foreign oceangoing commercial 

vessels safely in and out of Great Lakes’ 

ports and waterways. Congress made 

pilotage use compulsory in 1960, after 

becoming concerned that the 1959 

opening of the St. Lawrence Seaway led 

to a surge in shipping traffic. Congress 

addressed such a definite threat to safe 

navigation by passing the Great Lakes 

Pilotage Act of 1960. 

The regulations for pilot application 

and registration appear in 46 CFR parts 

401 and 402. These regulations require 

that mariners applying for pilot 

registration meet minimum 

requirements and qualifications and file 

an application form with the Director. 

While the Coast Guard is responsible for 

publishing an annual rule that sets 

pilotage rates, 46 CFR parts 401 and 402 

have not been otherwise substantively 

updated since the early 1960s. As a 

result, these regulations are not in 

alignment with current practices by the 

Coast Guard and the pilotage industry 

operating on the Great Lakes. 

In 2017, the Coast Guard asked the 

Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory 

Committee (GLPAC) to help the Coast 

Guard identify existing regulations, 

guidance, and collections of information 

(that fall within the scope of the 

Committee’s charter) for possible repeal, 

replacement, or modernization.5 In 

March 2018, GLPAC made several 

recommendations to update or remove 

outdated regulatory requirements from 

46 CFR parts 401 and 402.6 In a 

September 10, 2018 meeting, GLPAC 

also recommended that the Coast Guard 

explore deadlines for contesting pilotage 

service invoices in part 402.7

In addition, the Coast Guard has 

identified several other areas that we 

propose revising. Ambiguities in 

regulatory text have caused confusion 

for pilots regarding training and 

registration instructions. A mariner 

qualifies for a given pilotage district in 

segments, allowing the Coast Guard to 

provide limited credentials as a mariner 

completes each stage of the pilot 

association’s training program. This 

progression is in the best interest of the 

mariners who can gain responsibility 

during the training program while 

ensuring that safety is not compromised. 

As explained above, with this 

rulemaking, the Coast Guard proposes to 

clarify the different phases of training 

and types of registrations for pilots who 

work on the Great Lakes. This includes 

clarifying the differences between 

temporary and limited registrations, and 

which pilots are eligible for those 

registrations. 

This proposed rule would affect 

approximately 51 United States 

Registered Pilots, 9 Apprentice Pilots, 

and 3 Temporary Registered Pilots on 

the Great Lakes as well as 3 district pilot 

associations and the owners and 

operators of approximately 293 vessels 

opting to use those pilots or statutorily 

required to use those pilots. 

V. Discussion of Proposed Rule 

A. Summary of Proposed Changes 

This proposed rule would make 

several changes to 46 CFR parts 401 and 

402 to clarify nomenclature and align 

these regulations with current practice 

and with other relevant regulations and 

plain language guidelines. The changes 

are summarized here and discussed in 

detail, section-by-section, below. The 

most substantial change that the Coast 

Guard is proposing in is to update the 

definitions section in part 401, subpart 

A, to clarify the phases of transition 

through the registration process, as well 

as adding definitions for miscellaneous 

terms to help clarify their application in 

other subparts. The Coast Guard is also 

proposing to change each instance of the 

affected terms based on the new 

definitions that appear elsewhere in 

parts 401 and 402. Additionally, the 

Coast Guard is proposing to change the 

application and training requirements 

for the different phases of pilotage 

registration in part 401, subpart B, that 

would generally follow this progression: 

‘‘Applicant,’’ ‘‘Applicant Trainee,’’ 

‘‘Apprentice Pilot,’’ ‘‘Limited 

Registration,’’ ‘‘Full Registration,’’ and 

‘‘Temporary Registered Pilot.’’ 

The Coast Guard proposes changing 

these regulations to align them with 

current pilotage training practices and 

to clarify the obligations that mariner 

applicants must fulfill before advancing 

to the next phase of registration. 

The Coast Guard is also proposing to 

change the regulations covering the 

administration of registered pilots 

located in subparts B, C, D, E, and G. 

The Coast Guard is proposing these 

changes to bring the regulations into 

conformity with modern pilot 

administrative practices. Many of the 

specific requirements reference 

outdated locations, contact information, 

and procedures. These antiquated 

references make the regulations difficult 

to understand, and the proposed 

changes will bring much needed clarity 

to the regulations imposed on registered 

pilots. 

The last category of changes that the 

Coast Guard is proposing is a series of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81296 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

technical amendments that will bring 

the regulations into conformity with the 

Plain Language Act and Information 

Network’s Plain Language guidelines. 

One such proposed technical 

amendment, for example, is changing 

‘‘The Coast Guard shall’’ to ‘‘The Coast 

Guard must.’’ 

A section-by-section description of 

the proposed changes follows. 

B. Definitions 

The Coast Guard is proposing to make 

a number of changes to § 401.110 to 

update the phases of pilot registration, 

to add definitions to terms that are 

commonly used by industry members 

but not reflected in the CFR, to revise 

definitions for terms whose meaning has 

changed since the last update to these 

regulations, and to remove definitions 

for terms that are no longer used or 

applicable to these regulations. 

Updated Phases of Pilot Registration 

In § 401.110, the Coast Guard is 

proposing to redefine the different 

stages of pilot registration to clarify the 

transitions through the registration 

process. At the present, there are 

training phases that are commonly used 

by the pilots in practice but lack precise 

legal definitions. This can lead to 

confusion for pilot applicants as to what 

is required of them before advancing to 

the next phase. 

The Coast Guard proposes to add the 

following terms and their definitions, 

currently used in practice, to the CFR: 

Applicant, Limited Registration, and 

Temporary Registered Pilot. The Coast 

Guard proposes to redefine the 

following terms already existing in the 

CFR: Apprentice Pilot and Applicant 

Trainee. The proposed general 

progression would be Applicant, 

Applicant Trainee, Apprentice Pilot, 

Limited Registration, Full Registration 

(which we also refer to as a United 

States Registered Pilot or U.S. 

Registered Pilot in the regulations), and 

Temporary Registered Pilot. This would 

help clarify the differences between the 

terms and phases. We describe these 

updates, in turn, below. 

Applicant 

The Coast Guard proposes to add the 

term Applicant and its definition to the 

CFR. Applicant would mean a person 

who has submitted an application (Form 

CG–4509) to the Director for 

consideration for placement in an 

approved U.S. Great Lakes pilotage 

training and qualification program at an 

association. The Director would review 

the application to see if the Applicant 

meets the minimum requirements per 

§ 401.210. 

Applicant Trainee 

The Coast Guard proposes to redefine 

the term Applicant Trainee that 

currently appears in the CFR. 

Redefined, Applicant Trainee would 

mean a person who is approved by the 

Director and is participating in an 

approved U.S. Great Lakes pilot training 

and qualification program. The mariner 

would meet the minimum requirements 

of the pilotage regulations in proposed 

new § 401.214 for Applicant Trainees. 

These requirements are spelled out in 

further detail below in Section C., 

Updates to Training Requirements for 

Pilots. The Applicant Trainee does not 

have the necessary 6 months of service 

or experience on the Great Lakes or 

endorsement on their MMC to qualify as 

an Apprentice Pilot. The Director would 

issue the Applicant Trainee a U.S. Coast 

Guard Applicant Trainee Identification 

Card. 

In practice, the Applicant Trainee 

would spend at least 6 months at the 

district becoming familiar with the area 

waters. The Applicant Trainee would 

conduct trips on vessels, accompanying 

a U.S. Registered Pilot or Temporary 

Registered Pilot, to gain pilotage 

experience on the Great Lakes. These 

trips, conducted as an Applicant 

Trainee, would not count toward the 

minimum number of round trips 

required for Full Registration. Once the 

Applicant Trainee completes the 

familiarization in the district waters, the 

association could request the Applicant 

Trainee become an Apprentice Pilot in 

the district’s training and qualification 

program. The Applicant Trainee is not 

eligible for a Limited or Temporary 

Registration. 

Apprentice Pilot 

The Coast Guard proposes to redefine 

the term Apprentice Pilot that currently 

appears in the CFR. Redefined, 

Apprentice Pilot would mean a person 

who has been approved by the Director 

and is participating in an approved U.S. 

Great Lakes pilot training and 

qualification program. The mariner 

would meet the minimum requirements 

in revised § 401.211. The Director 

would issue the Apprentice Pilot a U.S. 

Coast Guard Apprentice Pilot 

Identification Card. The proposed 

requirements for an Apprentice Pilot are 

discussed further in the preamble with 

the proposed changes to § 401.211. 

Apprentice Pilots would typically 

possess a minimum of 6 months of 

pilotage experience on the Great Lakes 

and have a First Class Pilot endorsement 

on their MMC for the waters in which 

Full Registration is sought. The 

Apprentice Pilot would be required to 

complete round trips until the 

Apprentice Pilot demonstrates 

proficiency, accompanying a U.S. 

Registered Pilot or Temporary 

Registered Pilot, upbound and 

downbound in the district’s waters, and 

inbound to and outbound from ports, in 

accordance with their individual 

training plan. 

Limited Registration 

The Coast Guard would add the term 

Limited Registration and its definition 

to the CFR. Limited Registration would 

mean an authorization issued by the 

Director via letter to an Apprentice 

Pilot, upon the request of the pilotage 

association, that allows the Apprentice 

Pilot to provide pilotage service without 

direct supervision from a U.S. 

Registered Pilot or Temporary 

Registered Pilot in a specific area or 

waterway to facilitate the Apprentice 

Pilot’s training. The proposed 

requirements for a Limited Registration 

are discussed with the proposed 

changes to § 401.211 in new paragraph 

(k). 

Full Registration 

The Coast Guard would add the term 

Full Registration and its definition to 

the CFR. Full Registration would mean 

the issuance of a Certificate of 

Registration ID card, by the Director, to 

an Apprentice Pilot, who meets and 

completes all the Coast Guard’s 

proposed registration requirements in 

new §§ 401.210, 401.211, 402.210, and 

402.220. These proposed requirements 

are discussed further below in Section 

C., Updates to Training Requirements 

for Pilots. 

Generally, if the Apprentice Pilot 

satisfies all the Coast Guard’s 

registration requirements and the 

pilotage association’s requirements, and 

has maintained favorable performance 

evaluations during the training program, 

the Apprentice Pilot advances to Full 

Registration. The pilotage association 

could request that the Director consider 

an Apprentice Pilot for Full Registration 

as a United States Registered Pilot. The 

Director could approve or deny the 

request. If approved, the Director would 

issue the Apprentice Pilot a Certificate 

of Registration, making them a fully 

registered pilot. Full Registration would 

make the Apprentice Pilot a United 

States Registered Pilot who may provide 

pilotage services for the relevant 

pilotage association in accordance with 

the pilotage regulations. 

Temporary Registered Pilot 

The Coast Guard is proposing to add 

the term Temporary Registered Pilot and 

its definition to the CFR. A Temporary 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81297 

Registered Pilot means a person who is 

issued a Temporary Registration by the 

Director, in accordance with proposed 

new § 401.222. A Temporary 

Registration would apply to pilots who 

desire to provide pilotage services but 

who have either reached the age of 70, 

or previously retired from pilotage 

service. The Coast Guard would require 

that a Temporary Registered Pilot hold 

a valid MMC, have previously held a 

Full Registration, meet the requirements 

of proposed § 401.222, and have been 

requested to provide pilotage services 

by the pilotage association. The new 

requirements in proposed § 401.222 are 

discussed further below in Section C., 

Updates to Training Requirements for 

Pilots. The Director may make the 

Temporary Registration valid for a 

certain period of time, not to exceed 1 

year from the date of issuance. 

New Definitions 

In addition to the updated phases of 

pilot registration, the Coast Guard also 

proposes to add definitions to the CFR 

for the following terms that currently 

appear in the CFR to better clarify their 

meanings: chemical test, gross tonnage, 

individual training plan, marine 

accident, minimum number of round 

trips, officer endorsement, round trip, 

and semi-annual performance 

evaluation report. These terms clarified 

in the following paragraphs. 

Chemical Test 

The Coast Guard proposes to add the 

definition of ‘‘chemical test’’ to the 

definitions in § 401.110 to clarify the 

kind of test that will comply with the 

proposed new reporting requirements. 

Chemical test would mean a 

scientifically recognized test that 

analyzes an individual’s breath, blood, 

urine, saliva, bodily fluids, or tissues for 

evidence of dangerous drug, alcohol 

use, or any illegal substance, in 

alignment with the existing definition in 

46 CFR 4.03–7. The definition of 

chemical test would apply to new 

requirements in parts 401 and 402 for 

mariners to submit chemical tests to the 

Coast Guard either at the Applicant 

phase of their application to be a pilot, 

or for marine accident reporting. 

Gross Tonnage or GT 

This proposed rule would add a 

definition for ‘‘gross tonnage or GT’’ to 

align with the gross tonnage 

measurement of the vessel under 46 

U.S.C. chapter 143, Convention 

Measurement. Though 46 U.S.C. chapter 

143 does not apply to a vessel of United 

States or Canadian registry or 

nationality, or a vessel operated under 

the authority of the United States or 

Canada, and that is operating only on 

the Great Lakes, unless the owner 

requests, the Coast Guard proposes to 

adopt the Convention Measurement’s 

definition of gross tonnage to clarify 

which tonnage scheme the Great Lakes 

Pilotage regulations use. Parts 401 and 

402 use gross tonnage in the context of 

determining whether Applicants or 

Apprentice Pilots (referred to as 

applicant pilots in the current CFR) 

have had comparable experience on 

other vessels or integrated tugs and tows 

on the Great Lakes or oceans to that of 

registered pilots on the Great Lakes. 

This is the same definition used in 46 

CFR 10.107 for MMCs and in 46 CFR 

69.57 for piloting regulations. As 

defined in parts 401 and 402, gross 

tonnage would require the mariner to 

obtain knowledge and previous 

performance that is equivalent to the 

knowledge and technical skills obtained 

by serving as an officer on vessels 4,000 

GT or over. 

Individual Training Plan 

The Coast Guard proposes to add the 

term ‘‘individual training plan’’ and its 

definition to the CFR. This term and its 

definition are consistent with its use in 

current pilot association training 

programs. The individual training plan 

would outline the specific requirements 

of the association for an Apprentice 

Pilot, including the length of time to 

complete the training and the minimum 

number of round trips required to 

demonstrate proficiency. The individual 

training plan would communicate the 

qualifications and demonstrated skills 

that the Apprentice Pilot would be 

required to complete to meet the 

proficiency requirements for the 

training. The association would submit 

the individual training plan to the 

Director for review and approval, and 

the Director would then track the 

Apprentice Pilot’s development through 

the training period. This is consistent 

with current practice. The association 

would establish an individual training 

plan’s training requirements based on 

the association’s determination of 

proficiency, the officer endorsement on 

the MMC, and the Apprentice Pilot’s 

pilotage experience on the Great Lakes. 

Marine Accident 

The Coast Guard proposes to add a 

definition for the term ‘‘marine 

accident’’ that currently appears in the 

CFR. A marine accident would include 

any of the following incidents that occur 

while a U.S. Registered Pilot, 

Apprentice Pilot, Apprentice Pilot with 

Limited Registration, or Temporary 

Registered Pilot is providing pilotage 

services in U.S. or Canadian waters: 

(i) Any allision or collision; 

(ii) Any grounding; 

(iii) A loss of main propulsion, 

primary steering, or any associated 

component or control system that, due 

to its duration or other circumstance, 

significantly impacts the 

maneuverability of the vessel; 

(iv) An occurrence, directly related to 

the provision of pilotage services, 

involving significant harm to the 

environment as currently defined in 46 

CFR 4.03–65, and including Canadian 

waters throughout the Great Lakes in 

addition to U.S. waters; or 

(v) Any other incident, directly 

related to the provision of pilotage 

services, causing property damage in 

excess of $75,000 U.S. dollars 

(including the cost of labor and material 

to restore the property to its condition 

before the incident, but excluding the 

cost of such things as salvage, cleaning, 

gas-freeing, drydocking, or demurrage). 

The outlined instances in this 

proposed definition are based on the 

definition in 46 CFR 4.05–1 for marine 

casualties, tailored for reporting marine 

accidents related to the Great Lakes 

pilotage program. 

This definition would be used to 

identify events or occurrences where 

pilots must submit a marine accident 

report to the Director under revised 

§ 401.260. Clearly defining marine 

accident would help ensure that certain 

marine accidents are reported to the 

Director in support of the Director’s 

oversight. The reporting requirement 

would clarify that this obligation to 

report marine accidents to the Director 

does not alleviate any other marine 

casualty reporting requirements 

elsewhere in Coast Guard or other 

agency regulations. We propose adding 

the marine accident definition and 

reporting requirement to alleviate 

concerns about accidents related to 

Great Lakes pilotage not being reported 

to the Director. 

Minimum Number of Round Trips 

The Coast Guard proposes to add a 

definition for ‘‘minimum number of 

round trips’’ to have one term to define 

the number of successful round trips an 

Apprentice Pilot must complete to 

become eligible for Full Registration. 

The phrase minimum number of round 

trips would mean the fewest successful 

round trips that the Apprentice Pilot 

would be required to perform under the 

direct supervision of a U.S. Registered 

Pilot or Temporary Registered Pilot to 

demonstrate proficiency prior to 

advancing and completing training. The 

minimum number of round trips 

required would be prescribed in the 

Apprentice Pilot’s approved individual 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81298 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

training plan, discussed in revised 

§ 401.211. Section 402.220 contains the 

minimum number of round trips for 

certain officer endorsements. 

In practice, each round trip would be 

evaluated, and the evaluation form 

would be retained in the mariner’s 

training record. If, after evaluation, the 

Apprentice Pilot does not satisfy the 

Director’s or association’s proficiency 

requirements, additional trips in that 

area or port could be required. 

Officer Endorsement 

Officer endorsement is currently used 

in the regulations governing MMCs in 

46 CFR part 10 to mean an annotation 

on an MMC that allows a mariner to 

serve in the capacities listed in 46 CFR 

10.109. We are proposing to add a 

definition for ‘‘officer endorsement’’ 

that matches the definition in 46 CFR 

part 10 to help ensure that the term is 

interpreted consistently. 

Round Trip 

The Coast Guard proposes to add a 

definition for ‘‘round trip’’ to clarify 

what is expected of the Apprentice 

Pilot, as outlined in their individual 

training plan. We propose to define 

round trip as providing pilotage service, 

in both directions, from one change 

point to another change point or 

inbound and outbound in a port 

designated by an authorized pilotage 

pool. This definition would also apply 

to the round trip in the proposed 

definition minimum number of round 

trips. Defining round trip would help 

clarify the minimum requirements for 

Apprentice Pilots in their training. 

Semi-Annual Performance Evaluation 

Report 

The Coast Guard proposes to add a 

definition for ‘‘Semi-annual 

Performance Evaluation Report.’’ Twice 

per shipping season, the association 

would be required to submit to the 

Director a progress report of how the 

Apprentice Pilot is progressing through 

their training. The report would assess 

an Apprentice Pilot’s progress in the 

pilot association’s training and 

qualification program, and the 

Apprentice Pilot’s performance in 

completing their individual training 

plan. 

Revised Definitions 

We are also proposing to revise the 

definitions of association, Commandant, 

comparable experience, Director, 

person, pilotage pool, Rate computation 

definitions to determine Weighting 

Factors, Secretary, and United States 

Registered Pilot or U.S. Registered Pilot 

to align the regulatory definitions with 

industry usage and understanding. 

These proposed revisions are detailed 

below. 

Association 

The Coast Guard proposes to remove 

the words ‘‘or held’’ from the definition 

of ‘‘association.’’ This would clarify that 

if the Coast Guard revokes an 

association’s Certificate of 

Authorization, they are no longer an 

association under the Act or Coast 

Guard regulations. In addition, the Coast 

Guard proposes to specify in the 

definition of association that the 

Director, instead of the Great Lakes 

Pilotage Branch, issues the Certificate of 

Authorization to the association. 

Commandant 

In the definition of ‘‘Commandant,’’ 

our only proposed change is to replace 

the outdated office symbol, CG–00, with 

the current office designation, CCG. 

Comparable Experience 

The Coast Guard proposes to change 

the first sentence in the definition of 

‘‘comparable experience’’ to better 

define the requirements. Currently, the 

definition suggests that comparable 

experience is similar experience 

obtained by serving as an officer of a 

vessel. The proposed changes would 

state that comparable experience means 

knowledge and previous performance 

that is equivalent to the knowledge and 

technical skills obtained by serving as 

an officer on vessels of at least 4,000 GT 

or over. We propose adding this 

requirement, that comparable 

experience must be obtained on vessels 

of at least 4,000 GT, throughout the 

regulations to be consistent regarding 

comparable experience and the 

requirements to be a registered pilot in 

46 U.S.C. 9303(a)(2). The existing 

regulations for qualifying for registration 

in 46 CFR 401.210(a)(1) require service 

to be accrued on vessels of 4,000 GT or 

over on the Great Lakes or oceans. This 

experience, on vessels of 4,000 GT or 

over, also applies to Apprentice Pilots 

(currently referred to as Applicant Pilots 

in the CFR) in existing § 401.211(a)(1). 

Director 

In the definition, this proposed rule 

would remove outdated reference to 

Commandant (CG–WWW–2) and 

replace it with Director, Great Lakes 

Pilotage. We would also update the 

mailing address for the Director within 

the definition. 

Person 

In the definition of ‘‘person,’’ we 

propose changing ‘‘pool’’ to ‘‘pilotage 

pool,’’ to align with the new definition 

of ‘‘pilotage pool’’ discussed below. 

Pilotage Pool 

The Coast Guard proposes to revise 

the current term and definition of 

‘‘pool’’ by revising the term and 

amending the definition. First, we 

propose to revise the term pool by 

adding ‘‘pilotage’’ to identify it more 

clearly. Throughout parts 401 and 402, 

this proposed rule would update all 

references to ‘‘pool’’ to ‘‘pilotage pool.’’ 

In current practice, the Director 

provides the pilotage pool a Certificate 

of Authorization to operate as an 

association. Second, the definition of 

pool in the current CFR text is an 

organization authorized to provide 

pilotage services. We propose to revise 

the definition to account for the 

requirement that an organization must 

hold a Certificate of Authorization 

issued by the Director to provide 

pilotage services. The new definition 

would clearly indicate what is required 

for a pilotage pool authorization. 

Rate Computation Definitions To 

Determine Weighting Factors 

The Coast Guard proposes to add the 

words, ‘‘to determine Weighting 

Factors’’ to the existing phrase, ‘‘Rate 

computation definitions,’’ at 

§ 401.110(a)(10) to indicate to the public 

the purpose for these rate computation 

definitions. The definitions of ‘‘length’’, 

‘‘breadth’’, and ‘‘depth’’ at 

§ 401.110(a)(10)(i)–(iii) themselves 

would remain unchanged. Weighting 

factors are used in the calculation of a 

vessel’s pilotage rate to determine the 

appropriate fee for a vessel’s pilotage 

services and are based on the size of the 

vessel. 

Secretary 

This proposed rule would revise the 

definition of ‘‘Secretary’’ to align with 

the definition used in 46 U.S.C. 2101. 

The revised definition would point to 

the Secretary of the department in 

which the Coast Guard is operating, 

instead of the Secretary of Homeland 

Security. This proposed change would 

promote consistency between 

definitions used throughout statutes and 

Coast Guard implementing regulations. 

United States Registered Pilot or U.S. 

Registered Pilot 

This rule proposes non-substantive 

changes to the definition of ‘‘United 

States Registered Pilot or U.S. 

Registered Pilot.’’ First, we propose to 

remove an outdated reference to 

‘‘license’’ and revise the discussion of 

the authorization document to read ‘‘an 

MMC with an officer endorsement.’’ We 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81299 

8See Meeting Minutes from the March 6, 2018, 

meeting of the GLPAC Regulatory Reform SubCommittee, which can be found in the docket. 

propose to add the word ‘‘areas’’ to 

capture that the endorsements for 

pilotage on the Great Lakes can be for 

routes or areas. We also propose an edit 

to make clear that, under the newly 

proposed training stage nomenclature, a 

United States Registered Pilot currently 

holds a Certificate of Registration. 

We would also update the outdated 

references to Title 52 of the Revised 

Statutes of the United States with 

references to Title 46 of the United 

States Code, which is where the Coast 

Guard’s statutory authority exists for 

Great Lakes pilotage regulations. 

Removed Definitions 

The Coast Guard proposes to remove 

the definition of Movage because the 

ratemaking methodology no longer 

supports this action. Under the 

ratemaking methodology before 2016, 

pilot districts charged the vessel owners 

a defined movage fee to move a vessel 

from one place to another; for example, 

from an anchorage to inside the harbor, 

or dock to dock. Since the ratemaking 

methodology was updated in 2016, 

vessel owners are charged an hourly rate 

for any vessel movement by a United 

States Registered Pilot, rounded up or 

down to the nearest 15 minutes. 

The Coast Guard also proposes to 

delete the definition of ‘‘other officer’’ 

from the definition section because we 

are proposing to delete the only 

reference to the term in § 401.510(b)(3). 

The definition would no longer be 

necessary because we would not 

reference the term anywhere in part 400. 

Organizational Changes 

The Coast Guard proposes to revise 

§ 401.110 to list the existing and new 

definitions in alphabetical order to 

make it easier for the reader to find 

definitions. The changes to the 

definitions are described in the 

alphabetical order they would appear in 

the revised § 401.110 definition section. 

The Coast Guard is also proposing to 

update each instance of affected terms 

in parts 401 and 402 to align with the 

new definitions. 

C. Updates To Training Requirements 

for Pilots 

The Coast Guard is proposing to 

update the regulations that govern the 

application and training requirements to 

bring the CFR into conformity with 

industry practice. These regulations, 

located in part 401, instruct an 

applicant pilot as to what specifically 

they must do in order to apply and 

progress through the newly clarified 

phases of pilot registration. Following is 

a section-by-section description of the 

updates being proposed to the Great 

Lakes Pilotage application and training 

requirements. These changes include 

formatting changes that will improve 

the usability and readability of the CFR. 

§ 401.200 Application for Registration 

In § 401.200, the Coast Guard 

proposes to add the email address, 

‘‘GreatLakesPilotage@uscg.mil’’, and 

physical mailing address, ‘‘Great Lakes 

Pilotage Office, 2703 Martin Luther King 

Jr. Ave. SE, Stop 7509, Washington, DC 

20593–7509’’ to which Applicants for 

pilotage on the Great Lakes must submit 

the Application for Registration as a 

United States Registered Pilot (Form 

CG–4509). We propose allowing either 

physical mail or electronic submission 

of the Application for Registration as a 

United States Registered Pilot (Form 

CG–4509) form to the Director to 

provide flexibility to the mariners. This 

change would also provide clear 

guidance for where to submit the form. 

In this section, the Coast Guard 

proposes to remove the requirement to 

submit two full-face photographs when 

submitting Application Form CG–4509. 

The passport photos are not needed at 

this stage of the process. Following the 

submission of an application and an 

interview process, passport-style photos 

would be requested from the Applicant 

if they are approved to be placed into 

a U.S. Great Lakes pilot training and 

qualification program. The requirement 

to submit the photos upon the request 

of the Director would be in § 401.211(e) 

for Apprentice Pilots, and in proposed 

new § 401.214(e) for Applicant Trainees. 

In practice, if the Applicant does not 

submit the required application 

materials, the Coast Guard Great Lakes 

Pilotage Office works with the 

Applicant to obtain the required 

documentation to meet the minimum 

requirements. Once the Applicant 

provides additional information and 

meets the minimum requirements, the 

approved application is forwarded to 

the pilot district(s) requested by the 

applicant for consideration. The pilot 

associations maintain a list of 

Applicants who meet the minimum 

requirements, and conduct interviews 

based on the applications provided by 

the Great Lakes Pilotage Office and the 

need for more pilots. If the Applicant is 

selected by the association, the 

association submits a letter to the 

Director requesting that the Applicant 

be placed in that district’s approved 

training and qualification program. 

We are also proposing a formatting 

change to this section where we would 

remove the paragraph (a) designation. 

All the text within this section would be 

undesignated. Removing the paragraph 

(a) designation would remove the need 

for the unused reserved paragraph (b) 

within this section. There is no need for 

multiple paragraph designations within 

this short section. 

§ 401.210 Requirements and 

Qualifications for Full Registration 

In paragraph (a)(1), the Coast Guard 

proposes to clarify that the mariner 

must have an MMC with an officer 

endorsement issued in accordance with 

46 CFR subchapter B, part 11. We 

propose to delete the outdated 

references to Title 52 of the Revised 

Statutes of the United States. We also 

propose to change applicants qualifying 

with ‘‘ocean service’’ to applicants 

qualifying with ‘‘other than Great Lakes 

service,’’ because mariners may have 

different endorsements on their MMC, 

such as Master Ocean or Master Inland 

Waters. This change would help clarify 

that applicants qualifying with an 

endorsement on their MMC other than 

Great Lakes service must obtain at least 

6 months of service as a deck officer or 

comparable experience on the Great 

Lakes.8 We also propose to clarify in 

this section that the officer experience 

must be ‘‘deck’’ officer experience. Deck 

officer experience means the mariner is 

working on a vessel under the 

endorsement as per their MMC. 

The paragraphs in paragraph (a) of 

this section contain several 

requirements a pilot must meet to be 

eligible for full registration. We propose 

making the following changes to the 

paragraphs and redesignate the 

requirements in paragraphs (a)(1) 

through (8). 

In paragraph (a)(4), the Coast Guard 

proposes to add a reference to 46 CFR 

part 10, subpart C, for the mariners to 

find the applicable medical 

requirements and standards prescribed 

by the Commandant. 

In paragraph (a)(6), the Coast Guard 

proposes to remove the requirement for 

a U.S. Registered Pilot to have a valid 

TWIC because this requirement is 

duplicative of the TWIC requirement 

prescribed in 46 CFR 10.203 for 

obtaining an MMC. A mariner cannot be 

a U.S. Registered Pilot without holding 

an MMC. This non-substantive change 

is in accordance with GLPAC 

recommendation 1 from the GLPAC 

Subcommittee Teleconference Meeting 

Minutes from March 5, 2018. Because 

we propose to remove the text from 

paragraph (a)(6), we propose to 

redesignate the subsequent paragraphs. 

We propose to move the existing 

requirement that the mariner agrees to 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81300 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

be available for service, currently in 

paragraph (a)(7), into paragraph (a)(6), 

without change. 

In redesignated paragraph (a)(7), the 

Coast Guard proposes to change 

‘‘Applicant Pilot’’ to ‘‘Apprentice Pilot’’ 

to conform to the proposed new 

definitions. Revised paragraph (a)(7) 

would require mariners seeking Full 

Registration to complete the 

requirements for an Applicant Pilot in 

§ 401.220(b). We are also proposing to 

delete the text ‘‘if applying for 

registration for waters in which a 

pilotage pool is authorized’’ because the 

requirements in § 401.220(b) would 

apply to all Apprentice Pilots. 

In 401.210(a)(8), the Coast Guard also 

proposes to add that Apprentice Pilots 

requesting full registration must meet 

chemical testing requirements as 

defined in 46 CFR part 16. Currently, all 

U.S. pilots on the Great Lakes are 

required to meet the chemical testing 

requirements in part 16. The purpose of 

this proposed addition is to clarify that 

this will also be part of the Apprentice 

Pilot qualifications. 

§ 401.211 Training requirements for 

Apprentice Pilots and Limited 

Registration Authorization 

The Coast Guard proposes to change 

the term ‘‘Applicant Pilot’’ to 

‘‘Apprentice Pilot’’ throughout this 

section to align with the new definition 

of Apprentice Pilot. Use of the term 

Apprentice Pilot falls more in line with 

industry vernacular for this stage. We 

also propose to add ‘‘Limited 

Registration Authorization’’ to the 

section name because we propose to 

include the requirements for Apprentice 

Pilots to obtain this authorization as 

part of their training program. 

This proposed rule would separate 

the requirements for Apprentice Pilots 

to be selected for training from existing 

paragraph (a) and put the list into new 

paragraph (b). In the requirements for 

Apprentice Pilots in redesignated 

paragraph (b)(1), this proposed rule 

would update the cross-reference from 

§ 401.210(a)(7) to paragraph (a)(8) to 

conform with proposed redesignations 

in that section. 

In revised paragraph (b)(3), the Coast 

Guard proposes to revise the radar 

observer requirement to state that the 

Apprentice Pilot must have a radar 

observer (unlimited) endorsement on 

their MMC. We would also include a 

cross-reference to the radar observer 

requirements in § 11.480 for the public’s 

reference. By removing the obsolete 

radar competency certificate option, we 

would bring the regulations up to date 

with the current radar observer 

endorsement requirements in 46 CFR 

subchapter B, part 11. This conforming 

change would not be a new requirement 

for mariners, because they are already 

expected to have a radar endorsement 

issued by the Coast Guard. 

In this section, we also propose to 

allow submission of the Application 

Form CG–4509 to the email address 

GreatLakesPilotage@uscg.mil in 

addition to the physical mailing address 

Great Lakes Pilotage Office, 2703 Martin 

Luther King Jr. Ave. SE, Stop 7509, 

Washington, DC 20593–7509. Emailing 

the form could reduce the 

administrative burden associated with 

submitting the form. We would also 

clarify that the Director will request a 

signed passport-style photograph from 

those applying to be an Apprentice 

Pilot, when needed. The photographs 

would not be required when submitting 

Form CG–4509, because the photos are 

not needed until the Coast Guard is 

ready to issue an identification card. 

In this revised section, the Coast 

Guard proposes to clarify the issuance 

of the U.S. Coast Guard Apprentice Pilot 

Identification Card. If the applicant 

meets the requirements in this section 

and is selected to be placed in an 

association’s training program, the 

association would submit a letter to the 

Director for approval. If the Director 

approves placing the applicant in the 

training program, the Coast Guard 

would issue the applicant an 

Apprentice Pilot Identification Card. 

The Coast Guard proposes to expand 

the list of circumstances when an 

Apprentice Pilot Identification Card 

would become invalid to account for the 

Director’s statutory authority to set 

validity periods in 46 U.S.C. 9303(c). At 

the time of issuance of the Identification 

Card, the Director would indicate a 

validity period for the card. For 

example, the Director could coincide 

the expiration dates of the identification 

card with the dates of the Semi-annual 

Performance Evaluation Reports, August 

15 and January 15. The other three 

existing grounds for expiration for the 

Identification Card would remain 

substantively the same, including when 

the Apprentice Pilot is registered as a 

pilot under § 401.210, when the 

Apprentice Pilot withdraws from the 

training program, or when the card is 

ordered withdrawn by the Director. 

In new paragraph (g), we propose to 

add a requirement that all Apprentice 

Pilots must have a Director-approved 

individual training plan. The 

associations currently provide Directorapproved individual training plans to 

the Apprentice Pilots as guidance 

during the approved U.S. Great Lakes 

pilot training and qualification program. 

We intend to codify this current practice 

in the regulations. As stated in the 

proposed definition, an individual 

training plan would outline the specific 

requirements and expectations for each 

Apprentice Pilot. The individual 

training plan would provide clear 

direction for the Apprentice Pilot, 

association, and Director regarding the 

Apprentice Pilot’s goals and progression 

through the training program. The 

Apprentice Pilot and the pilot 

association would record the round 

trips outlined in the individual training 

plan and provide this information to the 

Director for review. 

In new paragraph (g) we also propose 

to clarify that round trips completed as 

an Apprentice Pilot would count toward 

the minimum number of round trips 

required for Full Registration. As a 

consequence of not defining round trips 

previously, there has been confusion for 

Applicant Trainees and Apprentice 

Pilots regarding when their trips do or 

do not count towards the Full 

Registration certification. The trips 

outlined in the Apprentice Pilot’s 

individual training plan and conducted 

with a U.S. Registered Pilot or 

Temporary Registered Pilot would have 

to be recorded by the Apprentice Pilot 

and count towards Full Registration. If 

the association feels the Apprentice 

Pilot is not ready to provide pilotage 

services after completing the required 

minimum number of round trips 

outlined in their individual training 

plan, the association could require the 

Apprentice Pilot to continue conducting 

round trips until they meet the 

association’s requirements. Trips 

completed while an Applicant Trainee 

would not count toward the minimum 

number of round trips. 

In addition, the Coast Guard is 

proposing at new paragraph (h) to 

require that associations conduct Semiannual Performance Evaluation Reports 

for their Apprentice Pilots to assess the 

Apprentice Pilots’ progress in their 

training program. The associations 

currently provide evaluation reports to 

the Director to share the Apprentice 

Pilot’s progress in the approved U.S. 

Great Lakes pilot training and 

qualification program at the District. We 

propose to codify this current practice 

in the regulations. The associations 

would submit these reports to the 

Director by August 15 and January 15 of 

each year. 

The report would include 

recommendations to the Director on 

whether to keep the Apprentice Pilot in 

the training program. This report would 

be intended to evaluate the Apprentice 

Pilot’s progression through their 

training and help keep the Director 

informed of that progress. The report 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81301 

would provide the Apprentice Pilot 

necessary feedback to stay on track with 

their individual training plan and 

association expectations. By requiring a 

semi-annual report submission to the 

Coast Guard, all parties would remain 

informed of the progression of the 

Apprentice Pilot’s training throughout 

the Great Lakes. All requests for 

Apprentice Pilots and Limited 

Registrations must contain a positive 

endorsement from the pilot association’s 

training committee or president for the 

Director’s consideration. The positive 

endorsement does not guarantee 

issuance or renewal by the Director. The 

Director considers the Apprentice’s 

training progress, traffic projections, and 

other relevant information when making 

the decision to issue a certification. 

Another proposed requirement for 

this section at new paragraph (i) is that 

the Apprentice Pilot must be enrolled in 

the association’s chemical testing 

program, commonly known as drug 

testing, that meets the requirements of 

46 CFR part 16. We are proposing to add 

chemical testing requirements and 

compliance into these regulations to 

ensure Apprentice Pilots are being 

monitored by the associations in the 

interest of maritime safety on the Great 

Lakes. 

In new paragraph (j), the Coast Guard 

proposes procedures for how an 

Apprentice Pilot may obtain a Limited 

Registration. Where the Director 

determines a need for the pilot in order 

to meet the needs of increased vessel 

traffic, a Limited Registration could be 

issued to an Apprentice Pilot who has 

completed the requirements in 

§ 401.220(b) and maintained a favorable 

performance evaluation in their Semiannual Performance Evaluation Reports. 

Specifically, the Apprentice Pilot 

would be required to satisfy the 

association’s requirements in a specific 

area or port of the district waters before 

being eligible for a Limited Registration, 

as set out in the Apprentice Pilot’s 

training plan. Thereafter, the association 

would request approval for the 

Apprentice Pilot to provide pilotage 

services in these specific areas without 

supervision by a United States 

Registered Pilot or Temporary 

Registered Pilot. If approved, the 

Director would issue the Apprentice 

Pilot a letter authorizing Limited 

Registration for the area or port 

completed and requested by the 

association. The Apprentice Pilot would 

be able to provide pilotage services 

without supervision in the authorized 

area and would continue to complete 

round trips in other areas and ports as 

opportunities are provided by the 

association. Once all required round 

trips are completed per their individual 

training plan, only the association may 

make a request to the Coast Guard that 

the Apprentice Pilot take the pilot’s 

written exam. 

The Director could revoke the Limited 

Registration if the Director feels the 

Apprentice Pilot is not receiving the 

appropriate training time to complete 

the remaining trips left in the District 

waters. Limited registrations are valid 

for as long as the Director determines. 

Last, we propose adding new 

paragraph (k), which would state 

requirements for when an Apprentice 

Pilot may be eligible for a Certificate of 

Registration. These requirements are 

distinct from the requirements for 

Applicant Trainees contained in 

§ 401.210 and reflect the value of an 

Apprentice Pilot’s experience. The four 

proposed requirements would be: 

completion of a Director-approved Great 

Lakes pilot association’s training 

program, a positive endorsement from 

the association, successful completion 

of the Director’s exam, and a 

determination by the Director that there 

is a need for an additional pilot in that 

association. These requirements exist in 

practice and are referenced throughout 

parts 401 and 402. We propose 

codifying them here so that it is clear to 

the Apprentice Pilot and associations 

what conditions are necessary to reach 

Full Registration. 

§ 401.214 Training Requirements for 

Applicant Trainees 

In this new section, we propose to 

outline all the requirements for 

Applicant Trainees, as we do for Full 

Registration and Apprentice Pilots in 

other sections. This section would 

codify the Director’s authority to 

determine the number of Applicant 

Trainees needed to be in training at a 

time for each association to ensure a 

sufficient number of U.S. Registered 

Pilots in that district. This authority is 

exercised in the ratemaking update 

every year, but this proposed rule would 

codify it. 

The requirements for Applicant 

Trainees would be similar to those of 

Apprentice Pilots but would not require 

any prior Great Lakes service 

experience. In the proposed 

requirements, the Applicant Trainee 

must be a U.S. citizen, of good moral 

character and temperate habits, 

physically competent, available for 

service, under the age of 60, in 

compliance with the chemical testing 

requirements, and have a radar observer 

(unlimited) endorsement on their MMC. 

The Applicant Trainee would be 

required to obtain at least 6 months of 

service as a credentialed officer on the 

Great Lakes before being eligible to be 

considered for Apprentice Pilot. 

Training performed as an Applicant 

Trainee would be under the supervision 

of a U.S. Registered Pilot or Temporary 

Registered Pilot. This proposed section 

states that the Director must approve the 

pilots designated to provide training to 

Applicant Trainees, as an oversight 

measure. When an Applicant Trainee is 

conducting trips with a U.S. Registered 

Pilot or Temporary Registered Pilot to 

complete the 6-month familiarization 

requirement or comparable experience 

on the Great Lakes, the round trips 

would not count toward Full 

Registration certification. 

In practice, Applicant Trainees would 

be required to receive a positive 

endorsement from the pilot association’s 

training committee or president for the 

Director’s consideration. The positive 

endorsement would not guarantee 

issuance or renewal by the Director. The 

Director would consider the Applicant 

Trainee’s progress, traffic projections, 

and other relevant information when 

making the decision to issue a 

certification. 

As we also propose in other sections, 

we propose clarifying that the Applicant 

Trainee may submit the Application 

Form CG–4509 to the to the email 

address GreatLakesPilotage@uscg.mil or 

the physical mailing address Great 

Lakes Pilotage Office, 2703 Martin 

Luther King Jr. Ave. SE, Stop 7509, 

Washington, DC 20593–7509. We also 

note that the Director would request the 

signed passport-style photographs when 

they are needed, but they would not 

need to be submitted with the 

application. The Coast Guard does not 

need the photos until issuing the 

identification card. 

Applicant Trainees who are selected 

by the association and approved by the 

Director would be issued a U.S. Coast 

Guard Applicant Trainee Identification 

Card. The card would remain valid until 

the earliest of an expiration date set by 

the Director, the date the Applicant 

Trainee is registered as an Apprentice 

Pilot, the date the Applicant Trainee 

withdraws from the training program, or 

the date the Director orders the card 

returned. 

§ 401.220 Registration of Pilots 

The Coast Guard proposes to remove 

the 1-year time limit in §§ 401.220(b)(1) 

and 402.220(a) for Apprentice Pilots to 

complete their round trips, and instead 

allow the applicable time limit to be 

specified in an Apprentice Pilot’s 

individual training plan. Due to limited 

vessel traffic in some districts and ports, 

some Apprentice Pilots are not able to 

complete the required number of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81302 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

9See Meeting Minutes from the March 6, 2018, 

meeting of the GLPAC Regulatory Reform SubCommittee, which can be found in the docket. 

training trips in 1 year. This change 

would allow Apprentice Pilots more 

time to complete these trips, in 

accordance with their individual 

training plan. Currently, training takes 

2-to-3 years, on average, depending on 

which MMC endorsements the 

Apprentice Pilot holds and how quickly 

they satisfy the requirements set forth 

by the association. This proposed 

change is in accordance with GLPAC 

subcommittee recommendations 4 and 

5, described in the GLPAC 

Subcommittee Teleconference Meeting 

Minutes from March 5, 2018, and 

adopted at the GLPAC Teleconference 

meeting on April 11, 2018.9

The proposed revisions to 

§ 401.220(b) would align the 

requirements in paragraphs (b)(1) 

through (3) with the new definition for 

Apprentice Pilots. In proposed 

paragraph (b)(3), the Coast Guard 

proposes to clarify when the written 

examination is to be taken by the 

Apprentice Pilot. The written 

examination is the final step before 

being considered for Full Registration. 

After all the requirements of the 

regulations and the individual training 

plan have been met, and the association 

is comfortable with the Apprentice 

Pilot’s progress, the association would 

send a request to the Director for the 

administration of the written exam. The 

Director would then arrange for the 

Apprentice Pilot to take the written 

exam at the nearest Regional Exam 

Center or respective pilot association 

office. The proposed changes to 

paragraph (b)(3) would indicate that the 

Apprentice Pilot is eligible to take the 

exam after they complete their 

minimum number of round trips and 

complete their approved course of 

instruction prescribed by the 

association. 

In paragraph (c), this proposed rule 

would provide that the pilot 

association’s recommendation for 

registering the Apprentice Pilot can 

include reasons for or against their 

registration. Currently, the text only 

requires the association include reasons 

for the registration. We wish to clarify 

that the association should include any 

reasons, for or against registration, that 

are relevant to the Director’s decision. 

The Coast Guard proposes to clarify in 

paragraph (d) that a Certificate of 

Registration may be issued to an 

Apprentice Pilot who has completed all 

the requirements and has been found 

qualified. 

Last, in § 401.220, this proposed rule 

would delete paragraph (e). This 

paragraph authorizes the Director to 

issue a temporary Certificate of 

Registration for a period of less than 1 

year to qualified persons regardless of 

age. We propose deleting this because 

Temporary Registration is redefined and 

prescribed in new proposed § 401.222, 

discussed next. 

D. Administration of Great Lakes Pilots 

The Coast Guard is proposing to 

update various sections in parts 401 and 

402 that govern the administration of 

Great Lakes pilots. The proposed 

changes included in this section will 

modernize the mechanisms and 

practices used by the Coast Guard to 

register, monitor, and ensure the 

compliance of Great Lakes pilots. 

Following is a section-by-section 

description of the proposed changes to 

each section. 

§ 401.222 Temporary Registered Pilots 

on the Great Lakes 

In conjunction with the new proposed 

definition for ‘‘Temporary Registered 

Pilot,’’ the Coast Guard proposes a new 

§ 401.222 regarding the requirements 

and issuance of a Temporary 

Registration. The mandatory retirement 

age for United States Registered Pilots is 

70 years old. However, if a pilot 

maintains their MMC and meets the 

medical requirements, they could, with 

the Director’s approval, receive a 

Temporary Pilot Identification Card to 

continue providing services where the 

association requests their pilotage 

services and where there is a need for 

the pilot. Alternatively, if a United 

States Registered Pilot has previously 

retired and is requested by the 

association to again provide pilotage 

services, the Director could consider 

issuing a Temporary Registration for 

them as well. 

A mariner seeking Temporary 

Registration under this section would be 

required to meet all the requirements of 

a United States Registered Pilot in 

§ 401.210, except the age requirement. 

This Temporary Registration would be 

for pilots who have reached the age of 

70 or who have retired, but who desire 

to provide pilotage services. The 

Temporary Registration would be valid 

for a period of time defined by the 

Director but would not exceed 1 year 

from the date of issuance. Current 

regulations in § 401.222(e) for 

Temporary Registration have the same 

1-year validity period. Given the risks 

associated with piloting large vessels 

through the Great Lakes and rivers, an 

annual renewal requirement would 

continue to promote the safety goals on 

the Great Lakes while allowing 

flexibility to mariners who wish to 

continue to provide pilotage services 

after retirement or age 70. 

§ 401.230 Certificates of Registration 

In § 401.230(a), when describing the 

waters where the Certificate of 

Registration authorizes the pilot to 

perform pilotage services, the Coast 

Guard proposes to use ‘‘areas and 

routes’’ in place of ‘‘part or parts.’’ 

Using ‘‘areas and routes’’ better aligns 

with language used throughout the 

pilotage regulations. 

In paragraph (c), the Coast Guard 

proposes to clarify that a Certificate of 

Registration may not be digitally 

reproduced or be used to make a 

facsimile, in addition to the current 

prohibitions against copying or 

Photostat. The original Certificate of 

Registration, issued by the Director, is 

the only document allowed to be carried 

by a U.S. Registered Pilot. These 

proposed changes would further clarify 

that no copies, printed or electronic, are 

allowed. 

The Coast Guard proposes to require 

that requests for replacement of 

Certificates of Registration must be 

made on Form CG–4509, instead of 

simply in writing, as the Coast Guard 

requires all the information on the form 

be updated to issue a new Certificate of 

Registration. The Coast Guard also 

proposes in paragraph (d) to clarify the 

style of signed photographs needed to 

generate a replacement for a Certificate 

of Registration that has been lost, 

damaged, or defaced. Because the 

signature on the photo is needed to 

authenticate the certificate, the 

signature would need to be as close to 

the head as possible, so that the 

signature remains visible when the 

photo is trimmed to fit the certificate 

during creation. 

§ 401.240 Renewal of Certificates of 

Registration 

The Coast Guard proposes to clarify in 

§ 401.240(a) that an applicant for a 

renewal of Certificate of Registration 

must submit the Application for 

Registration as a United States 

Registered Pilot, Form CG–4905. 

The Coast Guard proposes to clarify 

the style of photographs needed to 

generate a Certificate of Registration for 

renewal. Specifically, we propose 

stating that the signature on the 

photograph needs to be as close to the 

head as possible, so that the signature 

remains visible when the photo is 

trimmed to fit the certificate during 

creation. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81303 

10See Meeting Minutes from the March 6, 2018, 

meeting of the GLPAC Regulatory Reform SubCommittee, which can be found in the docket. 

§ 401.260 Reports 

In paragraph (a), the Coast Guard 

proposes to clarify that, when a marine 

accident occurs while a United States 

Registered Pilot, Apprentice Pilot, 

Apprentice Pilot with Limited 

Registration, or Temporary Registered 

Pilot is providing pilotage services, they 

must report the accident to the Director 

in writing. We propose adding the 

results of the pilot’s post-casualty drug 

and alcohol test, if required, to the 

report’s mandatory contents. The 

existing requirements would be put into 

a list format to better clarify what the 

pilot must include in the report. 

We propose redesignating as new 

paragraph (b) the existing requirement 

from paragraph (a) that the report to the 

Director does not relieve the pilot or 

others of responsibility for submitting 

any report required by other government 

agencies of the United States or Canada. 

We also propose clarifying in new 

paragraph (b) that this reporting 

requirement does not affect any other 

reporting requirements in Coast Guard 

regulations. 

We propose to remove the 

requirement in 46 CFR 401.260(c) for 

the pilotage pool to submit a monthly 

availability report to the Director. As per 

46 U.S.C. 9303(a)(3), ‘‘the applicant will 

be available for service when required.’’ 

In 46 CFR 401.210(a)(6), pilots must 

agree to be available for service. The 

Coast Guard sees no use for this 

monthly availability report requirement 

because the associations notify the 

Director when a pilot is not available to 

provide pilotage services. In practice, 

the Director has not been requiring this 

monthly report. Accordingly, we 

propose to remove the requirement from 

the regulations. 

§ 401.420 Cancellation, Delay, or 

Interruption in Provision of Services 

In paragraph (a)(3) of this section, the 

Coast Guard proposes to remove the 

words ‘‘or movage’’ and replace them 

with ‘‘or transit,’’ because the 

ratemaking methodology does not 

account for this movage action. 

‘‘Transit’’ aligns better with the 

terminology used in part 400. 

In paragraph (c), the Coast Guard 

proposes revisions to the existing 

provisions specifying that, when 

pilotage delay is due to ice or weather, 

the vessel is not responsible for the 

additional charges invoiced by the 

association. The regulations currently 

only state that the vessel is not liable for 

charges under this part. We propose 

adding language to explicitly extend 

this exemption to vessel owners to more 

clearly establish the lack of liability for 

charges under this section. 

We would also clarify that the 

decision to interrupt the voyage or 

detain the pilot as a result of ice or 

weather must be jointly determined by 

the vessel master and the United States 

Registered Pilot, Apprentice Pilot with 

Limited Registration, or Temporary 

Registered Pilot authorized to provide 

pilotage services to the vessel. This 

interruption of the voyage or the 

detention of the pilot would be in 

consideration of marine safety. 

Requiring them to reach this decision in 

agreement is an equitable solution to 

resolve when the vessel or owner is not 

liable for the pilotage charges. When 

possible, they should make the 

determination to interrupt, detain, or 

delay the vessel due to ice or weather 

prior to the pilot departing for the 

vessel. This additional guidance on 

when the determination should be 

communicated to the pilot would 

promote efficiency in the process of 

calling a pilot to a vessel. 

We also propose removing 

interruption or detention due to traffic 

as a justification for this exemption for 

delayed pilotage charges. Vessel traffic 

is a normal occurrence on the 

waterways that can be expected during 

the normal course of business. On the 

other hand, weather and ice delays are 

made in response to maritime safety, 

and vessels should not be penalized for 

delays made in the interest of safety. 

These exemptions are intended to 

relieve vessels for charges brought on by 

forces outside of their control. While 

vessel traffic used to be difficult to 

predict, the availability of the Vessel 

Traffic System and Automated 

Information System data means that 

vessels are able to predict traffic. 

Therefore, the Coast Guard is removing 

this exemption and making vessels 

responsible for accurately predicting 

vessel traffic. 

§ 401.425 Provision for Additional 

Pilot 

The Coast Guard proposes to remove 

the text, ‘‘Great Lakes Pilotage Staff, 

U.S. Coast Guard, or the General 

Manager, Great Lakes Pilotage 

Authority, Ltd., Canada’’ and all 

references to Canada and other U.S. 

Coast Guard staff in this section to 

clarify who makes the decision as to 

when an additional U.S. Registered Pilot 

is required. We would clarify in the text 

that the Director makes this double 

pilotage determination, when necessary, 

for the safe navigation of the vessel. 

We also propose removing the 

statement that the provisions for an 

additional pilot do not apply to a ship 

that is not required to have a pilot on 

board in undesignated waters of Lake 

Erie between Southeast Shoal and Port 

Colborne, because a pilot is always 

required in these waters. As this 

exemption is obsolete and no longer 

applies, we propose deleting it from the 

regulations. 

Additional pilot determinations are 

currently made on a case-by-case 

evaluation and are usually authorized 

for the opening and closing of the 

shipping season. We propose noting in 

the regulations that this is a case-by-case 

evaluation and include the potential 

reasons for the need for additional 

pilots. The association or vessel 

representative could request an 

additional pilot on the vessel for a 

specific time, particular port or area, or 

situation. For example, an association or 

vessel could need an additional pilot 

due to seasonal removal of aids to 

navigation, ice conditions, weather 

forecasts, or other relevant situations. 

§ 401.431 Disputed Charges 

The Coast Guard proposes to update 

this section to simplify and streamline 

the billing dispute process. This would 

make it easier to understand Coast 

Guard requirements and how the vessel, 

owner, or master should provide the 

required data, such as via a written 

letter from an authorized officer of a 

company. We would also define the 

response time periods for the Coast 

Guard, the vessel owner or agent, and 

the pilot association, to both shorten the 

process and hold all involved 

stakeholders to regulatory timelines, per 

GLPAC recommendation 2 from the 

GLPAC 2018 Annual Meeting on 

September 10, 2018.10

Under revised paragraph (a), a vessel 

master, owner, or agent who disputes 

the rate or charge for a pilot would be 

required to appeal to the Director within 

60 days of the date the pilot association 

issues the bill. We propose clarifying 

that the pilot association may also apply 

the charge to the vessel owner, master, 

or agent thereof, because it is not always 

the pilot who applies the charge. The 

appeal would continue to be for the 

Director to issue an advisory opinion as 

to whether the disputed rate or charge 

is a prohibited charge or incorrectly 

assessed/calculated charge. 

In proposed revisions to paragraph 

(b), the vessel owner, Master, an agent, 

or an employee empowered to speak on 

behalf of the owner or an agent would 

deliver the appeal to the Director in the 

form of official correspondence. The 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81304 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

11See Meeting Minutes from the March 6, 2018, 

meeting of the GLPAC Regulatory Reform SubCommittee, which can be found in the docket. 

12 Ibid. 

rule would require the appeal 

correspondence to describe the pilotage 

services, exact disputed charges, 

regulatory citation for the dispute, and 

requested resolution. 

The proposed rule would also require 

the owner or agent to provide the pilot 

association with a copy of the appeal 

and inform them that the disputed 

charges have been sent to the Director 

for an advisory opinion. 

The association would continue to 

have up to 20 days to provide the 

Director and the entity that provided the 

complaint with any further data or 

arguments in defense of the disputed 

charges. We propose clarifying that they 

have 20 business days, starting upon 

receipt of the notice of appeal from the 

charterer or owner. We also propose 

removing ‘‘rates’’ from the subject of a 

dispute because the pilots and 

associations do not create or set the 

rates; the Coast Guard sets the rates 

through an annual rulemaking. 

In paragraph (e), we propose adding a 

timeline of up to 30 business days for 

the Director to issue an advisory 

opinion. We propose removing the 

express recital that the Director 

considered all relevant material. Per 

current paragraph (e), the advisory 

opinion must address the disputed rates 

and charges, discuss the facts and 

information provided by both parties, 

and include a statement of opinion, so 

a recital that the Director considered the 

material is unnecessary. 

If the Director’s advisory opinion 

finds the disputed rates or charges are 

prohibited, the association currently has 

a reasonable time, but not more than 30 

days, to return the amount of disputed 

charges as per the advisory opinion. We 

propose revising the deadline to simply 

say the association must issue any 

refund according to the advisory 

opinion within 30 business days. 

If the pilot association or the vessel 

owner feels the advisory opinion is 

incorrect, under proposed new 

paragraph (h), they would be able to 

appeal the advisory opinion to the 

Director of Marine Transportation 

Systems (CG–5PW). The pilot 

association would be able to submit an 

appeal for adjudication of the advisory 

opinion within 10 days of receiving the 

original advisory opinion. 

§ 401.450 Pilot Change Points 

In paragraph (b) of this section, the 

Coast Guard proposes to remove the 

effective date for the addition of change 

point Iroquois Lock. The change point 

went into effect on October 2, 2017, to 

provide enough time for the association 

to hire more pilots. Since the effective 

date has passed and the change point is 

currently in use, we propose removing 

the start of the effective date, per 

GLPAC recommendation 1 from the 

GLPAC 2017 Annual Meeting on 

September 26, 2017.11 In paragraph (b), 

we also propose to update the location 

of the change point for the Iroquois 

Lock. The change no longer happens 

between Iroquois Lock and the area of 

Ogdensburg, NY on the St. Lawrence 

River; the pilot exchange now takes 

place in the Iroquois Lock. 

In paragraph (i), the Coast Guard 

proposes to update change point ‘‘Gros 

Cap’’ to ‘‘Buoy 33’’ of the St. Marys 

River, Point Iroquois. The GLPAC 

created a subcommittee to discuss all 

the pilot change points in the St. 

Lawrence Seaway and Great Lakes 

system. They found that Gros Cap was 

too far out of the St. Marys River, and 

weather conditions created unsafe 

conditions for the pilot boat to transfer 

pilots. Buoy 33 of the St. Marys River 

is a better harbor to transfer pilots, as it 

is safer for the pilots as they transit up 

and down the ladders of the vessels. 

This proposed change is from GLPAC 

recommendation 1 from the GLPAC 

2017 Annual Meeting on September 26, 

2017, and conforms to current 

practice.12

§ 401.510 Operation Without 

Registered Pilots 

The Coast Guard proposes to remove 

outdated regulations in paragraphs 

(b)(3) through (7) of this section that 

were codified when both the 

Department of Commerce and the Coast 

Guard had regulatory authority over 

U.S. pilotage services. From 1960 to 

1967, primary responsibility for Great 

Lakes pilotage resided with the 

Department of Commerce. As the Coast 

Guard is now the sole Federal agency 

responsible for enforcing the Great 

Lakes Pilotage Act, these regulations are 

unnecessary or cumbersome. And, 

because all the regulatory authority is 

now under the Coast Guard, we can 

coordinate more effectively and 

efficiently with Coast Guard District 9 

than was possible when the authority 

was split between the Coast Guard and 

the Department of Commerce. 

The regulations in § 401.510 

addressing operation without registered 

pilots would be significantly 

streamlined to reflect the current 

operation requirements. For example, if 

a pilot is not available when needed, the 

Director’s pilotage office can coordinate 

with Coast Guard District 9 much more 

effectively, because everything is under 

one agency. The 6-hour rule in current 

paragraphs (b)(3) and (4) has not been 

used since around the late-1980s or 

early-1990s. The 6-hour period was 

intended as a buffer to allow the Coast 

Guard time to evaluate a situation before 

concurring with the Department of 

Commerce’s desire to pull a pilot off 

their rest period. The Coast Guard 

monitors traffic throughout the 2,300 

nautical miles in the Great Lakes system 

for compulsory pilotage and is now able 

to make these decisions in real time. 

We propose deleting paragraph (b)(5) 

because the language is obsolete and 

outlines practices that are no longer 

relevant to the modern pilotage 

industry. The decision as to whether a 

vessel can proceed without a pilot rests 

solely with the Director. It does not 

require the concurrence of the Coast 

Guard officer to whom the violation was 

reported. Removing this paragraph from 

the CFR will prevent confusion by 

removing instructions that are contrary 

to the practices being followed by 

modern-day pilots. 

We also propose deleting paragraph 

(b)(6), which requires a pilotage pool to 

obtain verification from the Canadian 

Supervisor of Pilots that they do not 

have a pilot available, for the same 

reasons. 

The parts we propose to retain in 

existing paragraphs (b)(1), (2), and (8) 

outline the Director’s authority to allow 

a vessel to depart without a registered 

pilot and sufficiently articulate that the 

Director will make each decision on a 

case-by-case basis. The Director would 

continue to obtain Coast Guard District 

9 concurrence before providing this 

information to the vessel. 

§ 401.710 Operating Requirements for 

Holders of Certificates of Authorization 

We propose updating the reference in 

this section to the Memorandum of 

Understanding (MOU) to reflect the 

most current issue of this Memorandum 

issued in conjunction with the Canadian 

Government. The updated version is the 

‘‘Memorandum of Understanding, Great 

Lakes Pilotage, Between The United 

States Coast Guard and the Minister of 

Transport of Canada,’’ effective 

September 19, 2013, and can be found 

at www.dco.uscg.mil/Portals/9/DCO

%20Documents/Office%20of

%20Waterways%20and%20Ocean

%20Policy/CG-WWM-2/2013%20MOU

%20English.PDF?ver=2019-11-19-

120352-133. The previous version 

mentioned in this section was issued in 

1970 and is no longer current. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81305 

13See Meeting Minutes from the March 6, 2018, 

meeting of the GLPAC Regulatory Reform SubCommittee, which can be found in the docket. 

14See Meeting Minutes from the March 6, 2018, 

meeting of the GLPAC Regulatory Reform SubCommittee, which can be found in the docket. 

§ 402.210 Requirements and 

Qualifications for Registration (Medical 

Requirements) 

The Coast Guard proposes to revise 

the language in this section to align the 

medical and vision requirements for 

Apprentice Pilots, United States 

Registered Pilots, and Temporary 

Registered Pilots with the existing MMC 

medical certification standards. There is 

no reason to duplicate the medical 

requirements in the pilot regulations 

that already exist in 46 CFR part 10 

subpart C. Aligning these regulations 

would reduce the time and burden on 

pilots having to comply with regulations 

in two separate parts of the CFR, per 

GLPAC recommendation 7 from a 

subcommittee meeting on April 11, 

2018.13 We propose revising the 

requirements in this section to say that 

United States Pilots, Apprentice Pilots, 

and Temporary Registered Pilots must 

pass the physical examination in 

accordance with 46 CFR, part 10 subpart 

C, and removing the requirements from 

paragraphs (b) regarding disease and 

impairment and from paragraph (c) 

regarding vision. 46 CFR part 10 subpart 

C sufficiently covers these medical 

requirements for pilots. Pilots would 

still be required to meet the annual 

physical examination requirements in 

46 CFR 11.709. 

Table 1: Medical Regulations 

Comparison compares the newly 

proposed medical requirements under 

the two medical regulations addressing 

Great Lakes pilots and the medical 

requirements for mariners with a First 

Class Pilot endorsement on their MMC. 

TABLE 1—MEDICAL REGULATIONS COMPARISON

Pilotage requirements 

46 CFR 402.210 

Mariners’ requirements/first class pilot endorsement 

46 CFR 10.302 Comments 

Use Form CG–719K ..................................................... Use Form CG–719K .................................................... Both pilots and mariners use the same form for the 

physical examination. This form is approved under 

OMB No. 1625–0040. No changes to the form 

would be required. 

Examination performed by a medical doctor ............... Examination performed, witnessed, or reviewed by a 

licensed medical doctor, licensed physician assistant, licensed nurse practitioner, or a designated 

medical examiner.

Great Lakes pilotage regulations allow only a medical 

doctor to perform their physical examination. This 

limits the number of practitioners eligible to perform 

the examinations. Many pilots on the Great Lakes 

live in remote areas where it is difficult to see a 

medical doctor and must travel to be seen by a 

medical doctor, which increases the cost of getting 

an exam. 

46 CFR 402.210(c) An applicant for original registration must have a visual acuity either with or without 

glasses of at least 20/20 vision in one eye and at 

least 20/40 in the other. An applicant who wears 

glasses or contact lenses must also pass a test 

without glasses or lens of at least 20/40 in one eye 

and at least 20/70 in the other. Registered Pilots, 

however, must have either with or without glasses 

or lens visual acuity of at least 20/30 in one eye 

and at least 20/50 in the other. A Registered Pilot 

who wears glasses or lens must also pass a test 

without glasses or lens of at least 20/50 in one eye 

and at least 20/100 in the other. The color sense of 

original applicants and Registered Pilots must be 

tested by a pseudoisochromatic plate test. Passage 

of the Williams lantern test or its equivalent is an 

acceptable substitute for a pseudoisochromatic 

plate test.

46 CFR § 10.305 Vision requirements (a) Deck 

standard. (1) A mariner must have correctable vision to at least 20/40 in one eye and uncorrected 

vision of at least 20/200 in the same eye. The 

color sense must be determined to be satisfactory 

when tested by any of the following methods or an 

alternative test acceptable to the Coast Guard, 

without the use of color-sensing lenses:.

(i) Pseudoisochromatic Plates (Dvorine, 2nd Edition; 

Approved Color Vision Test (AOC); revised edition 

or Hardy Rand and Rittler (AOC–HRR); Ishihara 

14-, 24-, or 38-plate editions).

(ii) Farnsworth Lantern. 

(iii) Titmus Vision Tester/OPTEC 2000. 

(iv) Optec 900. 

(v) Richmond Test, 2nd and 4th edition. 

The vision requirements for pilots on the Great Lakes 

are more restrictive than those for mariners holding 

an MMC. Aligning these vision requirements would 

meet the minimum requirements for pilotage. 

§ 402.220 Registration of Pilots 

In this section, we propose updating 

the terminology for ‘‘Apprentice Pilot’’ 

and ‘‘minimum number of round trips’’ 

to reflect changes made throughout part 

401. In paragraph (a), we would clarify 

that the pilot association training 

committee, pilot association president, 

or Director may require additional 

round trips. The additional rounds trips 

would be as needed to demonstrate 

proficiency in a specific waterway or 

port to ensure maritime safety. We also 

propose removing the 1-year time limit 

to complete the round trips because of 

limited vessel traffic in some districts 

and ports, meaning that some 

Apprentice Pilots are not able to 

complete the required number of 

training trips within one year. We also 

propose including a caveat that the 

minimum number of round trips listed 

in the regulations or in an Apprentice 

Pilot’s individual training plan does not 

guarantee advancement to Full 

Registration. This way, the pilot 

association and the Director would be 

able to reserve the discretion to require 

additional round trips when necessary. 

The Coast Guard proposes to remove 

foreign language requirements from 

§ 402.220(b)(5) and knowledge of 

foreign-made navigational equipment 

from § 402.220(b)(10). The pilotage 

regulations in paragraph (b)(5) require 

United States Registered Pilots to be 

able to provide ‘‘[instructions] in basic 

helm and engine telegraph orders in 

Greek, Spanish, German, and Italian 

languages.’’ These outdated foreign 

language requirements and instructions 

are no longer necessary or enforced 

because they have been superseded by 

international treaty requirements. Under 

Chapter 5, Regulation 14, paragraph 4 of 

the International Convention for the 

Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), all ships 

are required to use English as the 

working language for bridge-to-bridge 

and bridge-to-shore safety 

communications, as well as for 

communications between the pilot and 

the bridge watchkeeping personnel. 

This change is in accordance with 

GLPAC recommendations 2 and 3 from 

the subcommittee meeting on April 11, 

2018.14


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81306 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

In addition, we propose updating the 

reference to the 1977 version of the 

MOU referenced in this section to 

reflect the most current issue of this 

Memorandum. The updated version is 

the ‘‘Memorandum of Understanding, 

Great Lakes Pilotage, Between The 

United States Coast Guard and the 

Minister of Transport of Canada,’’ 

effective September 19, 2013. The MOU 

can be found online at https://

www.dco.uscg.mil/Portals/9/DCO

%20Documents/Office%20of

%20Waterways%20and%20Ocean

%20Policy/CG-WWM-2/2013

%20MOU%20English.PDF?ver=2019- 

11-19-120352-133. 

§ 402.320 Working Rules 

The Coast Guard proposes to remove 

the working rule references in 

paragraphs (a)(1) through (4), and 

instead provide an email address where 

the public may request a copy of the 

approved working rules for each 

District. Each association updates its 

working rules frequently. It is 

impractical for the Coast Guard to issue 

regulations to update this section every 

time an association issues new working 

rules. To receive accurate information, 

the public can request the most current 

copy of the working rules by emailing 

the Coast Guard. 

E. Technical Revisions Throughout 

Parts 401 and 402 

Throughout parts 401 and 402, this 

proposed rule would change most 

instances of ‘‘shall’’ to ‘‘must’’ to 

conform to plain language guidelines. 

We propose changing instances where 

the regulations require the Director or 

the Coast Guard to act from ‘‘shall’’ to 

‘‘will’’ to clearly indicate how the Coast 

Guard will respond. However, we 

propose changing instances where the 

Director or the Coast Guard needs to 

reserve discretion in issuing certain 

endorsements or decisions from ‘‘shall’’ 

to ‘‘may.’’ 

We also propose changing uses of 

‘‘registered pilot’’ within the text of the 

regulations to specify exactly which 

phases of pilot registration are meant 

and to align these references with 

defined terms. We propose updating all 

references to ‘‘pool’’ to ‘‘pilotage pool’’ 

to conform to the new definition for 

pilotage pool. 

Additionally, in several sections, we 

propose updating the mailing addresses 

in the regulations for the Great Lakes 

Pilotage Office to our current address: 

2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE, 

Mail Stop 7509, Washington, DC 20593– 

7509. 

In certain places in the regulations, 

we propose to replace ‘‘Commandant’’ 

with ‘‘Director’’ for decisions that are 

made, in practice, by the Director. This 

change would help clarify the 

procedures and expectations for the 

public. For example, we propose 

making this change in § 401.220(b), 

because the Director prescribes the 

minimum number of round trips and 

written examination for Full 

Registration. These changes would 

reflect current practice. 

Another nomenclature change 

proposed throughout part 401 and 402 

is changing instances of ‘‘his’’ to ‘‘they’’ 

or ‘‘their’’ to be gender inclusive. 

We propose several technical 

revisions and nomenclature changes in 

the Administrative Law Judge decision 

sections in 46 CFR part 401, subpart F, 

including sections 401.645 and 401.650. 

There are no proposed substantive 

changes in subpart F. 

This proposed rule also removes 

outdated references to Title 52 of the 

Revised Statutes and replaces them with 

the current statutory requirements for 

Great Lakes pilotage, Title 46 of the 

United States Code. Public Law 98–99, 

97 Stat. 558 consolidated these statutory 

requirements into 46 U.S.C. on August 

26, 1983. 

VI. Regulatory Analyses 

We developed this proposed rule after 

considering numerous statutes and 

Executive orders related to rulemaking. 

A summary of our analyses based on 

these statutes or Executive orders 

follows. 

A. Regulatory Planning and Review 

Executive Orders 12866 (Regulatory 

Planning and Review), as amended by 

Executive Order 14094 (Modernizing 

Regulatory Review), and 13563 

(Improving Regulation and Regulatory 

Review) direct agencies to assess the 

costs and benefits of available regulatory 

alternatives and, if regulation is 

necessary, to select regulatory 

approaches that maximize net benefits 

(including potential economic, 

environmental, public health and safety 

effects, distributive impacts, and 

equity). Executive Order 13563 

emphasizes the importance of 

quantifying costs and benefits, reducing 

costs, harmonizing rules, and promoting 

flexibility. 

The Office of Management and Budget 

(OMB) has not designated this proposed 

rule a significant regulatory action 

under section 3(f) of Executive Order 

12866, as amended by Executive Order 

14094. OMB has not reviewed this 

regulatory action. A regulatory analysis 

(RA) follows. 

Affected Population 

The affected population for this 

proposed rule includes an average of 51 

U.S. Great Lakes pilots, 9 Apprentice 

Pilots, and 3 Temporary Registered 

Pilots over the last five years (2018– 

2022) all represented by 3 pilot 

associations. Table 2 shows the 

population from 2018 to 2023, using 

projections provided by the pilotage 

associations published in the annual 

ratemaking for each year. Some of the 

changes detailed below impact a subset 

of this population, in which case we 

later detail the average of that subset 

along with the cost estimate. Unless 

otherwise noted, the change impacts the 

entire affected population equally. 

TABLE 2—AFFECTED POPULATION 2018–2023 

Pilots 

Temporary 

registered 

pilots 

Apprentice 

pilots Total 

2023 ................................................................................................................. 56 3 6 65 

2022 ................................................................................................................. 51 2 9 62 

2021 ................................................................................................................. 54 3 8 65 

2020 ................................................................................................................. 52 3 13 68

2019 ................................................................................................................. 51 3 8 62 

2018 ................................................................................................................. 49 3 7 59 

Average (2018–2022) ...................................................................................... 51.4 2.8 9 63.2 

* Note: Data provided above for each year (inclusive of Year 2023) are projections based on pilot association estimates. We have chosen to 

draw the average from the previous 5 years (2018–2022). Projected figures for 2023 are provided for transparency’s sake. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81307 

Costs 

Most of the cost impacts for this 

proposed rule have already been 

realized by industry. As a result of the 

2018 ratemaking final rule, a new 

staffing model was established, and 

updates to the GLPMS data management 

system occurred. 2018 also saw the 

Director provide industry and 

associations informal guidance on many 

of the cost provisions found in this 

rulemaking. This informal guidance 

directly impacted current industry 

practices referenced in this proposed 

rulemaking. 

Therefore, to provide a 

comprehensive estimate of the impacts 

of this proposed rulemaking, the Coast 

Guard utilizes two baselines, a ‘‘PreGuidance’’ baseline’’ and a ‘‘No Action’’ 

baseline. The ‘‘Pre-Guidance’’ baseline 

captures costs across two different time 

horizons. First, it provides transparency 

regarding costs realized from 2018–2022 

due to informal guidance becoming 

industry practice. Second, it captures 

new cost impacts across a 10-year 

period of analysis from 2023–2032 that 

stem from this proposed rulemaking. 

Therefore, the entire period of analysis 

for the Pre-Guidance baseline is 2018– 

2032. The ‘‘No Action’’ baseline 

represents the current state of the world 

as if there were no proposed 

rulemaking. Quantifying costs against 

the No Action baseline entails including 

only costs directly attributable to this 

rule and excludes any costs derived 

from 2018 guidance. The period of 

analysis for costs relative to the No 

Action baseline is 2023–2032. See table 

3 for a visual depiction of the baselines. 

Table 4 shows the summary of net 

costs, broken down by each of the two 

baselines. The figures shown for each 

baseline are in 2022 dollars and are 

discounted at 7-percent. 

TABLE 4—SUMMARY OF NET COSTS BY BASELINE

[2022 Dollars] 

Pre-Guidance Baseline 

(2018–2032; discounted 7-percent) 

No action baseline 

(2023–2032; discounted 7-percent) 

Net Private Costs to 

Industry.

Net Costs to Industry: ($720,755.13) ....................................

Annualized Net Costs to Industry: ($56,422.19) ...................

Net Costs to Industry: ($834,809.05). 

Annualized Net Costs to Industry: ($118,858.03). 

Net Costs to Government.Net Costs to Government: $12,540.65 ..................................

Annualized Net Costs to Government: $981.71 ....................

Net Costs to Government: $0.00. 

Annualized Net Costs to Government: $0.00. 

Total Net Costs Total Net Costs: ($708,214.47) .............................................

Annualized Net Costs: ($55,440.48) .....................................

Total Net Costs: ($834,809.05). 

Annualized Net Costs: ($118.858.03). 

* Note: Components may not add to the totals due to rounding. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3EP21NO23.007</GPH>

Table 3: Visual Depiction of No Action and Pre-Guidance Baselines 

I 

I 

I 

I 

I 

Time ·Period of Analvm: Pfe.Guktam:a 8aHIIM 

GLP Informal Guidance 

I 

I 

GlP Modernization NPRM 

~ 
81308 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

The no-cost category, summarized in 

table 5, includes changes that have no 

cost because the change is 

administrative, where the regulatory 

text needs revision for clarity to reflect 

reorganization of the text. It also 

includes proposed changes that result in 

no costs for either baseline, where the 

substantive action occurred prior to 

2018 (through either existing regulatory 

text or long-standing guidance). For 

many of the cost items, the affected 

population already realizes the impact 

of the changes from prior ratemakings 

and general changes to industry’s 

current practice. Certain items in table 

5 solely represent information collection 

costs, rather than new regulatory costs. 

Note that information collection costs 

include any cost of ongoing reporting or 

recordkeeping that must be submitted to 

the Coast Guard. 

TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF NO-COST CHANGES

CFR section Description of change Reason for no cost Benefits 

Purpose: § 401.100 ......... Adds the word ‘‘pilotage’’ to clarify the 

part relates to the creation of ‘‘pilotage 

pools’’.

This would be an administrative change; pilotage is 

an older term from the 60’s whereas pilotage 

pools is more commonly used today but both 

refer to the same thing.

Further clarifies the purpose of the section and reduces confusion. 

Purpose: § 401.100 ......... Adds text to clarify that ‘‘Registered Pilots’’ refers to ‘‘United States Registered Pilots’’.This would be an administrative change that 

makes explicit that the regulation does not include Canadian pilots, which is implicit based on 

the contextual language.

Further clarifies the purpose of the section and reduces confusion. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Removes numbering of definitions and 

arrangement in alphabetical letter.

This would be an administrative change ................. Eases finding definitions, increasing 

readability and clarity. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Adds the definition for ‘‘Applicant’’ to 

clarify that an ‘‘Applicant’’ is a person 

who has submitted a Form CG–4509 

to the Director to be considered for 

placement in an approved U.S. Great 

Lakes pilot training and qualification 

program at one of the established pilotage pools.

This would be an administrative change that distinguishes an applicant that is awaiting an acceptance decision from an applicant trainee that has 

been accepted into training.

Further clarifies the differences between 

an ‘‘Applicant,’’ ‘‘Applicant Trainee,’’ 

and ‘‘Apprentice Pilot,’’ Which were 

previously not distinguished but all referred to synonymously as ‘‘applicant’’. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Modifies the definition of ‘‘Applicant 

Trainee’’ to clarify that an Applicant 

Trainee is a person who is approved 

and certified by the Director who is 

participating in an approved U.S. 

Great Lakes pilot training and qualification program but does not qualify 

as an Apprentice Pilot.

This would distinguish an applicant trainee that 

been accepted into training from an applicant 

that is awaiting an acceptance decision.

Further clarifies the differences between 

an ‘‘Applicant,’’ ‘‘Applicant Trainee,’’ 

and ‘‘Apprentice Pilot.’’ Which were 

previously not distinguished but all referred to synonymously as ‘‘applicant’’. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Removes the last sentence from the definition of Apprentice Pilot, ‘‘This definition is only applicable to determining 

which pilots may be included in the 

operating expenses, estimates, and 

wage benchmark in §§ 404.2(b)(7), 

404.103(b), and 404.104(d) and (e)’’.

The base definition of Apprentice Pilot would be 

unchanged.

Clarifies how this definition would be 

used in conjunction with the new definitions of Applicant and Applicant 

Trainee, which were not used when 

the term Applicant Pilot was first introduced. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Modifies the definition of ‘‘association’’ to 

clarify that the Director of Great Lakes 

Pilotage issues a Certificate of Authorization, not the Great Lakes Pilotage 

Branch.

This would be an administrative change that does 

not change the method of authorization but clarifies the source of authority.

Adds additional clarity to the source of 

the Director’s authority and reduces 

confusion on what actions are the responsibility of the Coast Guard and 

what is the responsibility of the Director. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Updates the abbreviation of ‘‘Commandant’’ from CG–00 to CCG.This would be an administrative change ................. Adds additional clarity and reduces confusion. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Adds a definition for ‘‘chemical test’’ ....... This would be an administrative change. The new 

definition is the same as the existing definition in 

46 CFR 4.03–7.

Adds additional clarity and reduces confusion. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Updates the address for the Director 

from ‘‘Commandant (CG–WWM–2), to 

Attn:’’ to ‘‘Director’’.

This would be an administrative change ................. Adds additional clarity and reduces confusion. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Updates the definition for ‘‘comparable 

experience’’.

This would be an administrative change. It clarifies 

that experience similar to experience on a vessel 

of 4,000 GT or over can be used to qualify as an 

applicant.

It has the unquantifiable benefit of expanding the number of potential applicants using experience from other 

areas of the US to qualify as an applicant. To date, this has not occurred. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Adds the definition of ‘‘Full Registration’’ 

for additional clarity.

This would be an administrative change that does 

not change the requirements to achieve full registration but distinguishes the different types of 

registration.

Further clarifies the difference between 

Full, Limited, and Temporary Registrations. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Creates a definition for ‘‘Limited Registration’’.This would be an administrative change that distinguishes from a temporary registration where previously ‘‘temporary’’ referred to multiple types of 

registration. This does not change the current requirements for receiving any of the types of registration.

Further clarifies the difference between 

Full, Limited, and Temporary Registrations. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Creates a definition for ‘‘marine accident’’.This would be an administrative change that distinguishes between reportable marine casualties 

that are sent to the Coast Guard under 46 CFR 

Part 4, and accident reports of those casualties 

that are sent to the Director in the event that the 

casualty would affect pilotage.

Further clarifies 46 CFR 401.260(a), incident reporting requirements for pilots 

on the Great Lakes. The requirement 

to notify the Director is not new, but 

differentiating the kinds of reports 

makes it clearer to whom the notice 

must be given. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81309 

TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF NO-COST CHANGES—Continued 

CFR section Description of change Reason for no cost Benefits 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Creates a definition for ‘‘minimum number of round trips’’.This would not change the existing minimum requirements which are detailed in 401.220(b). 

This addition clarifies that the number of trips 

applies to trips conducted by an Apprentice, not 

by an applicant trainee.

Further clarifies round-trip requirements 

for Apprentice Pilots to be in line with 

added distinctions between apprentice 

pilots and applicant trainees. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Renames the term ‘‘pool’’ to ‘‘pilotage 

pool’’ and adds additional text to the 

definition.

This would be an administrative change that better 

aligns with current authorization language.

Further clarifies that pilotage pools are 

organizations holding a Certificate of 

Authorization issued by the Director, 

which are the three existing pilotage 

associations for each of the three districts. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Adds additional text to the term ‘‘rate 

computation definitions’’ to clarify that 

these definitions are used to determine the weighting factors in the rate.

This would be an administrative change ................. Further clarifies how the weighting factors are calculated. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Adds definition for ‘‘round trip’’ ................ This would be an administrative change ................. Further clarifies what is considered a 

round trip. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Adds definition for ‘‘Semi-annual Performance Evaluation Report’’.This would be an administrative change ................. Further clarifies the Semi-annual Performance Evaluation Report. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Adds definition for ‘‘Sponsoring Organization’’.This would be an administrative change ................. Further clarifies what is considered a 

Sponsoring Organization for the chemical testing requirement. 

Definitions: § 401.110 ..... Adds the additional text to the definition 

of ‘‘United States Registered Pilot’’.

This would be an administrative change ................. Updates text to reference current U.S. 

Code sections and mariner 

credentialing requirements. 

Application for registration: § 401.200.Adds email address and physical mailing 

address for submission of Form CG– 

4509.

This would be an administrative change ................. Adds email address and physical mailing 

address to make it easier for the regulated public to submit the form. 

Application for registration: § 401.200.Removes text requiring two photographs 

be submitted with Form CG–4509.

Form CG–4509 already requires the submission of 

two signed photographs. This change would 

merely remove duplicative text, not the requirement to submit the photographs.

Adds clarity by removing duplicative text. 

§ 401.210(a) .................... Changes ‘‘Requirements and qualifications for Registration’’.

To ‘‘Requirements and qualifications for 

Full Registration’’.

This would be an administrative change ................. Further clarifies Full Registration in comparison to requirements for new definitions. 

§ 401.210(a) .................... Adds the word ‘‘fully’’ .............................. This would be an administrative change ................. Adds clarity by matching title to altered 

text in the body paragraph. 

§ 401.210(a)(1) ................ Adds clarifying text updating authority 

from ‘‘revised statutes’’ to specify 46 

CFR part 11, removing ‘‘license or 

MMC’’ to read ‘‘MMC with an officer 

endorsement’’, and replacing ‘‘tows’’ 

with ‘‘barge’’ in ‘‘integrated tug and 

barge’’.

This change would remove outdated language and 

updates to the most current authority citations to 

provide clarity but does not change existing requirements.

Adds clarity by making citation more 

specific Mariners are no longer issued 

licenses, but credentials with endorsements so this change removes outdated language and clarifies using 

more current language and authorities. 

The emphasis on barges clarifies that 

pilots must be credentialed deck officers and the tonnage requirements 

apply to an integrated tug and barge, 

not the aggregate tonnage of a tug 

and tow. 

§ 401.210(a)(4) ................ Adds ‘‘applicable’’ to ‘‘applicable medical 

requirements and standards’’ and the 

CFR citation to the existing requirements.

This would be an administrative change because 

the requirements in the cited CFR section are 

unchanged.

Improves clarity of the source of requirements. 

§ 401.210(a)(6) ................ Removes text specifying a requirement 

to hold a TWIC in addition to an MMC.

TWICs are already required to hold an MMC so 

specifying both is redundant.

Increases clarity and readability of the 

CFR by removing unnecessary text. 

§ 401.210(a)(7) ................ Removes unnecessary text and changes 

the term ‘‘Applicant Pilots’’ to ‘‘Apprentice Pilots’’.

This would be an administrative change necessary 

to make text consistent with new definitions 

added in other sections that clarify between applicants, applicant trainees, and apprentices.

Increases clarity and readability of the 

CFR by removing text specifying application for pilotage, which is already 

specified in the title of the section. 

Increases clarity by changing ‘‘Applicant 

Pilots’’ to ‘‘Apprentice Pilots’’ to be 

consistent with proposed definition 

changes. 

§ 401.210(a)(8) ................ Adds new paragraph requiring the individual to meet the chemical testing requirements in 46 CFR part 16 for Full 

Registration.

This would be an administrative change that integrates references to the existing source of requirements rather than restating requirements. 

This is an existing requirement for all mariners 

holding a MMC, per 46 CFR 10.209(h) and 46 

CFR Part 16.

Adds clarity by making citation more 

specific and eliminating the need to 

update text when parts of 46 CFR part 

16 change. 

§ 401.211 ........................ Changes text from ‘‘Applicant Pilots’’ to 

‘‘Apprentice Pilots’’ to be consistent 

with new terms.

This would be an administrative change necessary 

to make text consistent with new definitions 

added in other sections.

Adds clarity and consistency for references to new definitions. 

§ 401.211(b) .................... Creates new paragraph (b) containing 

current text.

This would be an administrative change necessary 

to detail changes in the organization of the text.

Adds clarity and better readability by 

making requirement list stand out within the paragraph. 

§ 401.211(b)(3) ................ Adds citation to 46 CFR part 11.480 to 

clarify requirements to obtain radar 

observer qualification, but does not 

change the existing requirement to 

hold a radar observer qualification.

Pilots must already hold a radar observer qualification.Adds clarity by making citation more 

specific and eliminating the need to 

update text when parts of 46 CFR part 

11.480 change. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81310 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF NO-COST CHANGES—Continued 

CFR section Description of change Reason for no cost Benefits 

§ 401.211(e) .................... Adds address for submission of Form 

CG–4509.

This would be an administrative change ................. Adds email and mailing address to make 

it easier for the regulated public to 

submit forms. 

§ 401.211(e) .................... Adds text requiring two photographs be 

submitted with Form CG–4509 to provide clarity since § 401.200 would no 

longer require it.

This would be an administrative change that does 

not alter the existing requirements of Form CG– 

4509.

Clarifies the requirements for submitting 

Form CG–4509 where methods of 

submission are discussed. 

§ 401.211(f) ..................... Modifies text to clarify who may be 

issued a U.S. Coast Guard Apprentice 

Pilot Identification Card. Replaces the 

terms ‘‘applicant’’ and ‘‘Applicant Pilot’’ 

with ‘‘Apprentice Pilot’’.

This would be an administrative change ................. Improves clarity and makes text consistent with proposed definitions. 

§ 401.211(f)(1) ................. Adds new paragraph stating the Director 

may set an expiration date for the Apprentice Pilot Identification Card.

This would be an administrative change ................. Improves clarity. 

§ 401.211(g)(4) ................ Minor wording changes ........................... This would be an administrative change ................. Improves clarity by specifying the identification card is withdrawn. 

§ 401.211(j) ..................... New paragraph requires Apprentice Pilots to be enrolled in the association’s 

chemical testing program.

This change would update text as this is already 

required as part of casualty reporting.

Improves clarity of applicability to make 

all text consistent across new sections 

that specify requirements for applicants, applicant trainees, and apprentices. 

§ 401.211(k) .................... New paragraph outlines requirements for 

Full Registration, including passing an 

exam, a positive endorsement from 

the association, and the determination 

by the Director of the need for an additional pilot.

This change would update text to describe current 

practice. The impact of the change from prior 

text has already been realized in 401.220(b).

Creates clarity by detailing section title 

for Apprentice Pilot to be consistent 

with new terms. 

§ 401.214 ........................ Adds new section with requirements for 

Applicant Trainees.

This would be an administrative change to separate requirements to Applicant Trainees and Apprentice Pilots in accordance with proposed definitions.Creates clarity by codifying requirements 

for Applicant Trainees in a separate 

new section distinct from apprentices 

so that requirements are in clearly distinct sections and consistent with new 

terms. The requirements themselves 

are not new, as they were in place 

when all stages of training were referred to indistinguishably as applicants. 

§ 401.214(b) .................... New paragraph adding qualifications to 

be considered an Applicant Trainee.

This would be an administrative change necessary 

to distinguish Applicants from Applicant Trainees. Use of this term is already common practice.

Creates clarity by listing requirements in 

clearly distinct sections and consistent 

with new terms. The requirements 

themselves are not new, as they were 

in place when all stages of training 

were referred to indistinguishably as 

applicants. 

§ 401.214(e) .................... New paragraph clarifies that Applicant 

Trainees must submit an application 

on Form CG–4509.

Applicant Trainees have already been submitting 

these forms, but the regulatory text did not reference Applicant Trainees specifically. This practice pre-dates any guidance issued in 2018 and 

is not a result of this proposed rulemaking. This 

new clarifying paragraph would codify a longstanding practice. Therefore, this would be a nocost change in both our Pre-Guidance baseline 

(2018–2032) and our No Action baseline (2023– 

2032).

Improves clarity by codifying the requirement that Applicant Trainees must 

submit an application. The requirement itself is not new and is a longstanding practice. 

§ 401.220(b) .................... Changes the term ‘‘Applicant Pilot’’ to 

‘‘Apprentice Pilot’’.

This would be an administrative change necessary 

to make text consistent with new definitions 

added in other sections.

Creates clarity by listing requirements in 

clearly distinct sections and consistent 

with new terms. The requirements 

themselves are not new, as they were 

in place when all stages of training 

were referred to indistinguishably as 

applicants. 

§ 401.220(b)(2) ................ Clarifies that Apprentice Pilots, not Applicant Pilots, must complete the approved course of instruction prescribed by the association authorized 

to establish the pilotage pool.

This would be an administrative change necessary 

to make text consistent with new definitions for 

applicant, applicant trainee, and apprentice.

Increased clarity of the CFR to specify 

where ‘‘Apprentice Pilot’’ would replace the previous term ‘‘Applicant 

Pilot.’’ 

§ 401.220(b)(3) ................ Minor wording changes to improve clarity and readability.This would be an administrative change necessary 

to make text consistent with new definitions 

added in other sections.

Removes outdated and gendered references consistent with changes in 

other sections. 

§ 401.220(c) .................... Changes wording to be consistent with 

new definitions of Apprentice Pilot and 

Applicant.

This would be an administrative change necessary 

to make text consistent with new definitions 

added in other sections.

Increased clarity of the CFR to specify 

where ‘‘Apprentice Pilot’’ would replace the previous term ‘‘Applicant 

Pilot.’’ 

§ 401.220(d) .................... Changes wording to be consistent with 

new definitions.

This would be an administrative change necessary 

to make text consistent with new definitions 

added in other sections.

Increased clarity of the CFR to specify 

where ‘‘Apprentice Pilot’’ would replace the old language and remove 

gendered references. 

§ 401.220(e) .................... Deletes paragraph ................................... This would be an administrative change ................. Increased clarity of the CFR necessary 

to be consistent with new sections. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81311 

TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF NO-COST CHANGES—Continued 

CFR section Description of change Reason for no cost Benefits 

§ 401.222 ........................ Moves Temporary Registration requirements to their own section for clarity.This would be an administrative that changes organization of the part.Creates clarity by making requirements 

clear and consistent with a section for 

each category of applicant, applicant 

trainee, apprentice, pilot, and temporary pilot. 

§ 401.222(a) .................... New paragraph that clarifies who may 

hold a Temporary Registration.

This would be an administrative alteration that 

changes organization of the text but does not 

change the requirements.

Creates clarity by making requirements 

clear and consistent a section for each 

category of applicant, applicant trainee, apprentice, pilot, and temporary 

pilot. 

§ 401.230(a) .................... Minor wording change, updates statutory 

reference.

This would be an administrative change necessary 

to make text consistent with new definitions 

added in other sections.

Updates text to reference U.S. Code to 

improve clarity. 

§ 401.230(c) .................... Modifies to include more up-to-date 

terms and methods of copying documents.

This would be an administrative change necessary 

to make text consistent with new definitions 

added in other sections.

Increased clarity as ‘‘Photostat’’ is not a 

common term. 

§ 401.240(d) .................... Minor wording changes, replaces the 

word ‘‘Commandant’’ with ‘‘Director’’.

This would be an administrative change ................. Improves clarity by better matching the 

language used by industry. 

§ 401.250(d) .................... Removes the word ‘‘license’’ ................... This would be an administrative change that does 

not change the requirement to have an MMC.

Improves clarity and eliminates confusion as to what ‘‘license’’ refers. 

§ 401.260(a) .................... Clarifies reporting requirements also 

apply to pilots on a Limited or Temporary Registration and other minor 

wording changes.

This would be an administrative change necessary 

to make text consistent with new definitions 

added in other sections.

Creates clarity by making requirements 

clear and consistent with new terms. 

§ 401.260(a) .................... Reformats report contents from a paragraph to a numbered list.This would be an administrative change reflecting 

organization of text.

Improves clarity by making the list of requirements more legible. 

§ 401.260(a) .................... Modifies 401.260(a) to add clarity regarding the existing practice of receiving marine accident reports. It outlines 

that a written report is required when 

a marine incident occurs while an Apprentice Pilot, Apprentice Pilot with 

Limited Registration, United States 

Registered Pilot, or Temporary Registered Pilot is providing pilotage services.

This practice predates any 2018 guidance. The Director’s office already receives these reports and 

does not expect the trend in reports received to 

change as a byproduct of this rulemaking. The 

submission requirement for these reports is 

found in § 401.260 and originated in 31 FR 

9065.15 Therefore, it is a no-cost change in both 

our Pre-Guidance baseline (2018–2032) and our 

No Action baseline (2023–2032).

Improves clarity on the format of the 

submission and when the marine accident report is required. 

§ 401.260(a)(7) ................ Adds requirement for pilot to share the 

results of post-casualty drug and alcohol tests in the notice to the Director.

This would not change the requirement for testing 

governed by 46 CFR § 4.06–3. Rather, 

§ 401.260(a)(7) would detail what information 

must also be shared with the Director in the 

event that a reportable casualty affects pilotage.

Improves clarity by making requirements 

easier to find in an explicit list. 

§ 401.420(c) .................... Minor wording changes, clarifies that a 

vessel master and a pilot authorized 

to provide pilotage service to the vessel determine weather delays jointly.

This would be an administrative change since this 

is already industry practice.

Further clarifies who determines whether 

an interruption is caused by weather. 

§ 401.425 ........................ Removes provisions governing Canadian 

approval of double pilotage.

This would be an administrative change since the 

Director does not have to confer with the Canadians to approve pilotage and has not had to. 

The reference to Canada was erroneous.

Adds additional clarity, as the Director 

approves double pilotage for the U.S. 

pilots but has no jurisdiction over Canadian pilots. The Canadian pilots 

base their decisions on different criteria, though both countries may notify 

each other of their decision to approve 

double pilotage to assist in pilotage 

assignments. 

§ 401.425 ........................ Removes the undesignated waters of 

Lake Erie from the Southeast Shoal to 

Colborne restrictions and states the director will evaluate dual pilotage on a 

case-by-case basis.

This change would update text as the Director can 

already require double pilotage as the situation 

dictates. The regulatory text was outdated, and 

double pilotage is allowed in this area when 

needed.

Improves clarity by removing outdated 

language. 

§ 401.431(a) .................... Establishes 60-day billing dispute deadline, minor word changes.There has only been one instance of a dispute 

longer than 60 days. We do not expect any further impacts.

Improves clarity and reduces the likelihood of a dispute occurring after the 

books have been closed. 

§ 401.431(d) .................... Minor wording changes to clarify that the 

pilot association is the respondent, 

and they have 20 business days to 

defend disputed charges starting from 

when they receive the notice of appeal. Previous text listed 20 days without specifying business days or when 

those days would begin counting.

This process predates the 2018 guidance. The 

ability to appeal (§ 401.431(d)) was initially 

added to the CFR via 29 FR 10467 (July 28, 

1964).16 No changes to this behavior occurred 

over 2018–2022. The Coast Guard does not expect wording changes in the proposed rulemaking to alter behavior from the pilot association. Therefore, it is a no-cost change in both our 

Pre-Guidance baseline (2018–2032) and our No 

Action baseline (2023–2032).

Improves clarity on who is considered 

the respondent and the exact timeline 

for any pilot association wishing to defend disputed charges. 

No previous dispute exceeded 20 days.

§ 401.431(e) .................... Minor wording changes to clarify that the 

Director would respond with an advisory opinion within 30 working days..

Previous text did not specify a specific 

number of days.

No cost. This process predates 2018 guidance. 

§ 401.431(e) was initially added to the CFR via 

29 FR 10467 (July 28, 1964).17 No changes to 

this behavior occurred over 2018–2022. The 

Coast Guard does not expect wording changes 

in the proposed rulemaking to alter the Director’s 

behavior in responding with advisory opinions. 

The text simply clarifies a long-standing practice.

Improves clarity for pilot associations 

submitting charge disputes as to when 

an advisory opinion can be expected 

from the Director. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81312 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

15To access 31 FR 9065, please see https://

archives.federalregister.gov/issue_slice/1966/7/1/ 

9063-9067.pdf. Note that while the requirement is 

not new, a definition for ‘‘marine accident’’ is being 

proposed for § 401.110 in this NPRM. 

16 § 401.431(d) was initially added to the CFR via 

29 FR 10467 (July 28, 1964). To read the referenced 

final rule, see https://archives.federalregister.gov/ 

issue_slice/1964/7/28/10461-10468.pdf#page=7. 

For more information on the history of how the 

requirement was redesignated and amended 

through the years, see https://www.ecfr.gov/current/ 

title-46/chapter-III/part-401/subpart-D/section401.431. 

17 § 401.431(e) was initially added to the CFR via 

29 FR 10467 (July 28, 1964). To read the referenced 

final rule, see https://archives.federalregister.gov/ 

issue_slice/1964/7/28/10461-10468.pdf#page=7. 

For more information on the history of how the 

requirement was redesignated and amended 

through the years, see https://www.ecfr.gov/current/ 

title-46/chapter-III/part-401/subpart-D/section401.431. 

18To access the Great Lakes pilotage Rate 

Methodology ICR, please see www.reginfo.gov/ 

public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_nbr=201709-1625-004. 

TABLE 5—SUMMARY OF NO-COST CHANGES—Continued 

CFR section Description of change Reason for no cost Benefits 

§ 401.431(h) .................... Creates new paragraph (h) that codifies 

the existing practice of pilotage associations appealing the advisory opinion 

made by the Director. The proposed 

reg text specifies that the associations 

may do so within 10 days of receiving 

the opinion.

This process predates any 2018 guidance. This 

proposed paragraph is codifying this long-standing practice performed by the pilotage associations. Neither 2018 guidance nor the proposed 

rulemaking substantively modifies this pilot association practice. Therefore, it is a no-cost change 

in both our Pre-Guidance baseline (2018–2032) 

and our No Action baseline (2023–2032).

Improves clarity by codifying the existing 

ability for pilotage associations to appeal the advisory opinion made by the 

Director. The practice itself is not new 

and is a long-standing practice. 

§ 401.450(b) .................... Removes the effective date for the establishment of the pilot change point 

at Iroquois Lock.

This would be an administrative change since the 

date has passed.

Improves clarity as the text is outdated 

from when change point was first introduced. 

§ 401.450(i) ..................... Replaces Gros Cap with Buoy 33, St. 

Mary’s River, Point Iroquois.

This change would only move the change point to 

a more convenient location; it would not change 

the number of change points.

Makes text consistent with change 

points currently used. This change 

point is a new location in the river, 

closer to the locks and a safer location 

to transfer pilots on and off the pilot 

boat. Gros Cap was too far out in the 

bay (about 2 nautical miles) and the 

transfers were affected by the weather 

and transit time. 

§ 401.450(k) .................... Replaces Gros Cap with Buoy 33 ........... See above ................................................................ See above. 

§ 401.510(b)(3)–(7) ......... Deletes outdated text .............................. This would be an administrative change removing 

outdated references that refer to old systems of 

communication in paragraph (3) and references 

to when the Coast Guard was part of the Department of the Treasury in paragraphs (4) 

through (7).

Improves clarity of the CFR by removing 

outdated text. 

§ 401.710(b) .................... Updates Memorandum of Understanding 

reference and date.

This would be an administrative change removing 

outdated references.

Improves clarity of the CFR. 

§ 402.220(a) .................... Adds discretion for the Director or association to require additional round trips 

in a particular area as part of meeting 

the overall minimum number of round 

trips requirement.

This would codify an existing practice that would 

not change the total number of trips to meet the 

minimum but may change where those trips 

occur in order to ensure that the experience in 

training is representative of future operations.

Improves clarity of the CFR. 

§ 402.220(a)(5) ................ Removes section describing requirement 

for training in foreign languages.

This would be an administrative change removing 

outdated references as these courses are no 

longer required under STCW.

Improves clarity of the CFR. 

§ 402.220(a)(7) ................ Updates Memorandum of Understanding 

reference.

This would be an administrative change removing 

outdated references.

Improves clarity of the CFR. 

§ 402.220(a)(10) .............. Removes paragraph ................................ This would be an administrative change removing 

outdated references.

Improves clarity of the CFR. 

§ 402.230(a) .................... Updates statutory references and makes 

minor wording changes to improve 

clarity and readability.

This would be an administrative change removing 

outdated references.

Improves clarity of the CFR. 

§ 402.320(a) .................... Removes reference to each working rule 

individually and instead makes all 

rules available electronically by email 

request.

This would be an administrative change as the 

same information remains available and the 

Coast Guard has never received a request for a 

paper copy of a working rule.

Improves clarity and electronic access of 

information by the public and eliminates the need to provide a technical 

amendment whenever the date of a 

working rule changes. 

The information collections in this 

proposed rule are actions that the 

affected population of pilots and pilot 

associations have already complied with 

in prior years. Prior to this proposed 

rulemaking, the Coast Guard had not 

codified the burden for these collections 

into the information collection request 

for the Great Lakes Pilotage Rate 

Methodology (OMB Control Number 

1625–0086).18 We present details on 

past reporting and estimated future 

regulatory costs to industry in table 6, 

broken down by each of the two 

baselines. Table 6 also details relevant 

regulatory costs that concurrently act as 

information collection costs. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81313 

TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF COSTS BY BASELINE

[2022 Dollars, discounted at 7%] 

CFR section Description of change Pre-guidance baseline 

(2018–2032) 

No action baseline 

(2023–2032) 

Definitions: § 401.110 .............. Creates a definition for ‘‘individual 

training plan.’’ Prior to 2018, associations used the same template 

plan for the entire district, rather 

than individualizing plans.

The Coast Guard began receiving individualized training plans in 2018. Beginning 

in 2018, assume that individualized training plans take 2 hours to prepare. This 

hour burden per training plan is expected 

to remain consistent (2 hours) across 

2018–2032.

Total Cost to Industry 2018–2032: 

$10,015.59. 

Annualized Cost: $784.04. 

No cost. No expected changes in cost from 

this rule when compared with cost of informal guidance issued in 2018. Our No 

Action baseline excludes any costs directly attributed to the guidance. 

§ 401.211(g) ............................. Adds new paragraph that codifies existing practice of requiring Apprentice Pilots to have The Director approve their individual training plan.The Coast Guard began requiring The Director approve these individual training 

plans in 2018 (same year the agency 

began receiving the individualized training 

plans). Beginning in 2018, assume that it 

takes the Director 30 minutes to review. 

This hour burden per training plan is expected to remain consistent (0.5 hours) 

across 2018–2032.

Total Cost to Government 2018–2032: 

$3,899.46. 

Annualized Cost: $305.26. 

No cost. No expected changes in cost stemming from this rule when compared with 

informal guidance issued in 2018. Our No 

Action baseline excludes any costs directly attributed to the guidance. 

Definitions: § 401.110 .............. Adds definition for ‘‘Temporary Registered Pilot’’.2018–2022: In the 2023 annual ratemaking, 

the Coast Guard utilized the definition of 

temporary pilot to reduce the number of 

temporary pilots projected.

2023–2032: Any further impacts would be 

realized through a ratemaking. 

Any further impacts would be realized 

through a ratemaking. 

§ 401.211(h) ............................. Adds new section that codifies existing practice of requiring Apprentice 

Pilots to have a Semi-annual Performance Evaluation Report.

This requirement began via informal guidance in 2018. Average of 5 Apprentice Pilots annually submitting 18 reports on average. Submission requires 6 hours per 

report. Review of these reports at the Director’s office takes 20 minutes (0.33 

hours) per report. These hourly burdens 

remain unchanged across 2018–2032.

Total Cost to Industry 2018–2032: 

$99,875.41. 

Annualized Cost: $7,818.45. 

No cost. No expected changes in cost stemming from this rule when compared with 

informal guidance issued in 2018. Our No 

Action baseline excludes any costs directly attributed to the guidance. 

Total Cost to Government 2018–2032: 

$8,641.19. 

Annualized Cost: $1,053.61. 

§ 401.230(d) and § 401.240(a) Adds additional text to clarify the nature of photos submitted to the 

Coast Guard. Provides clarity by 

using common language for ‘‘passport style’’ photographs that would 

be more easily understood. The 

Coast Guard requires a signed 

photo inserted into Certificates of 

Registration as the photo with the 

signature is used in making certificates. In some cases, the photo 

submitted is too far away from the 

face of the subject, and in order to 

capture the signature a portion of 

the person may be cut off. This 

change would help eliminate these 

issues and needing new photos to 

be submitted.

2018–2022: Applicants have been asked to 

resubmit photos only a handful of times 

since 2018.

2023–2032: No cost. Potential for cost savings if the number of photos retaken is reduced. This cost saving could not be 

quantified given the limited number of 

times a cost has been incurred to retake 

photos and that cost was never quantified. 

No additional cost stemming from rulemaking. Potential for cost savings if the 

number of photos retaken is reduced. 

This cost saving could not be quantified 

given the limited number of times a cost 

has been incurred to retake photos and 

that cost was never quantified. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81314 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

19To access 31 FR 9065, please see https://

archives.federalregister.gov/issue_slice/1966/7/1/ 

9063-9067.pdf. 

20 § 401.431(b) was initially added to the CFR via 

29 FR 10467 (July 28, 1964). To read the referenced 

final rule, see https://archives.federalregister.gov/ 

issue_slice/1964/7/28/10461-10468.pdf#page=7. 

TABLE 6—SUMMARY OF COSTS BY BASELINE—Continued 

[2022 Dollars, discounted at 7%] 

CFR section Description of change Pre-guidance baseline 

(2018–2032) 

No action baseline 

(2023–2032) 

§ 401.260 ................................. Removes paragraph (d) which required submission of monthly availability reports.2018–2022: No cost savings. This process 

pre-dates 2018 guidance and has not 

changed in scope during 2018–2022 due 

to guidance. The requirement to provide 

these originates in 31 FR 9065 (July 1, 

1966).19 From 2018–2022, associations 

kept record of approximately 672 monthly 

availability reports each year during the 

10 months of the shipping season, for 

each pilot and apprentice on roster.

2023–2032: If Coast Guard continued to require these reports, we would expect to 

receive 650 annually. It estimated that 

each monthly report takes 2.5 hours to 

submit. Removing this required submission results in cost savings over 2023– 

2032. 

Total Cost Savings to Industry (2018–2032): 

$(835,065.99). 

Annualized Cost Savings: $(65,370.68). 

Cost savings over 2023–2032 are attributed 

only to this rulemaking and are not a byproduct of any guidance over the 2018– 

2022 timeframe. Therefore, our cost savings in the No Action baseline equate to 

those in our Pre-Guidance baseline. 

Removing the submission requirement results in cost savings over the No Action 

Baseline period of analysis (2023–2032). 

Total Cost Savings to Industry (2023–2032): 

$(835,065.99). 

Annualized Cost Savings: $(118,894.61). 

§ 401.431(b) ............................. Changes ‘‘in writing’’ to ‘‘official correspondence’’ and adds requirements for what information must be 

in the appeal, rather than Coast 

Guard receiving disputes in varying 

formats.

2018–2022: No cost. The appeal process 

did not originate from 2018 guidance. The 

ability to appeal (§ 401.431(b)) was initially added to the CFR via 29 FR 10467 

(July 28, 1964).20 2018 guidance did not 

alter any aspect of this existing requirement.

2023–2032: With the proposed changes, the 

Coast Guard estimates that forthcoming 

submissions will take one hour each, an 

additional 30 minutes per report. To avoid 

double counting an existing regulatory 

cost associated with these reports, the 

Pre-Guidance baseline uses 0.5 hours for 

the time burden. The Coast Guard estimates receiving one of these reports annually over 2023–2032. 

Total Cost to Industry 2018–2032: $256.94. 

Annualized Cost: $20.11. Costs over 2023–2032 are attributed only to 

this rulemaking and are not a byproduct 

of any guidance over the 2018–2022 

timeframe. Therefore, our cost savings in 

the No Action baseline equate to those in 

our Pre-Guidance baseline. 

The proposed changes result in costs over 

our No Action baseline period of analysis 

(2023–2032). 

Total Cost to Industry 2023–2032: $256.94. 

Annualized Cost: $36.58. 

§ 402.210(a) ............................. Adds Apprentice Pilots and Temporary 

Registered Pilots. Adds citation to 

current CFR requirements for all pilots to pass a physical examination. 

Given this edition, it equates to 

more than an editorial change.

This requirement began via informal guidance in 2018.

This change impacts mariners who submit 

Apprentice Pilot applications to the Director. From 2018–2022, the Coast Guard 

received an average of 15 such applications annually. Each medical certificate 

takes about 18 minutes (0.3 hours) to 

draft and submit. The Coast Guard expects no change in behavior or burden 

over 2023–2032 as a result of this rulemaking. 

No cost. No expected changes in cost stemming from this rule when compared with 

informal guidance issued in 2018. Our No 

Action baseline excludes any costs directly attributed to the guidance. 

Total Cost to Industry 2018–2032: 

$4,162.92. 

Annualized Cost: $325.88. 

§ 402.210(b) ............................. Removes paragraph ............................ Cost included in change to § 402.210(a) ...... No cost. 

§ 402.210(c) ............................. Removes paragraph ............................ Cost included in change to § 402.210(a) ...... No cost. 

Costs: Pre-Guidance Baseline 

This section outlines regulatory costs 

in accordance with the Pre-Guidance 

baseline. Therefore, costs from 2018– 

2022 stemming from the 2018 guidance 

are included, as applicable. The Coast 

Guard estimates that the annual time 

burden over the 2018–2022 period is 

zero in cases where the proposed 

rulemaking is (1) instituting a brandnew requirement; (2) making a 

substantive change to an industry 

practice that pre-dates 2018; or (3) 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81315 

21The base wage of captains, mates, and pilots of 

water vessels is $50.09 as of May 2022, per https:// 

www.bls.gov/oes/2022/may/oes535021.htm. The 

load factor of 1.46 is obtained by dividing total 

hourly compensation for Transportation and 

Material Moving Occupations of $33.07 by hourly 

wages (CMU2010000520000D) and salaries of 

$22.64 (CMU2020000520000D). Access these series 

by searching the series number at https://

beta.bls.gov/dataQuery/search. Last accessed 

August 2023. 

22https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/ 

2023/02/27/2023-03212/great-lakes-pilotage-rates2023-annual-ratemaking-and-review-ofmethodology. 

23The loaded wage of $113.95 (rounded) comes 

from the base hourly wage of $68.55 for a GS–14 

Step 5 from the DC region multiplied by a load 

factor of 1.66, per https://www.opm.gov/policydata-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salarytables/pdf/2022/DCB_h.pdf. To calculate the load 

factor of 1.66, we divide total hourly compensation 

for workers with master’s degrees as shown in table 

4, $74.80, by the average hourly wage for workers 

with master’s degrees as shown in table 2, or 

$45.00. $74.80 ÷ $45.00 = 1.6622. See ‘‘Comparing 

the Compensation of Federal and Private Sector 

Employees, 2011–2015,’’ https://www.cbo.gov/ 

system/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/reports/ 

52637-federalprivatepay.pdf. 

makes a substantive change to an 

existing regulatory requirement that predates 2018. This is to avoid including 

new costs in 2018–2022 that are not 

attributable to guidance and therefore 

out of scope for this portion of the PreGuidance baseline’s timeframe. The 

Coast Guard estimates costs specifically 

stemming from this proposed 

rulemaking in the 2023–2032 portion of 

the Pre-Guidance period of analysis. 

The overall period of analysis for the 

Pre-Guidance timeframe is 2018–2032. 

Individual Training Plans for 

Apprentice Pilots 

One proposed addition to the 

Definitions portion of § 401.110 is the 

creation of a definition for ‘‘individual 

training plan.’’ Moreover, the proposed 

creation of paragraph (g) in § 401.211 

would codify the existing requirement 

for individual training plans to be 

submitted to the Coast Guard for each 

Apprentice Pilot. The Coast Guard has 

been receiving individualized plans 

since 2018 but did not previously 

specify in the regulatory text that plans 

must be individualized. Mentor pilots 

generate these plans and summarize the 

training that Apprentice Pilots undergo 

to ensure that they are gaining 

experience in all relevant transit areas. 

This is to ensure they are qualified for 

Full Registration at the end of their 

training. From 2018 to 2022, the Coast 

Guard received an average of 5 

individual training plans annually, as 

shown in table 7. The Coast Guard 

estimates that it took 2 hours to generate 

and submit these plans during 2018– 

2022. The loaded wage of pilot 

submitters is $73.17 from a base wage of 

$50.09 and a load factor of 1.46.21

Going forward, the Coast Guard 

expects to receive six plans annually, 

one for each of the Apprentice Pilots 

authorized in the 2023 annual 

ratemaking (88 FR 12226, Feb. 27, 

2023).22 Given the Coast Guard is 

simply codifying this requirement, these 

individualized plans will still each take 

2 hours to generate and submit from 

2023–2032. With six submissions 

annually, the Coast Guard estimates the 

annual cost of requiring individual 

training plans for apprentices over 

2023–2032 to be $877.99 (6 submissions 

× 2 hours × $73.17). For the PreGuidance period of analysis (2018–

2032), we estimate the grand total cost

to be $10,015.59 discounted to 7 percent

and $784.04 annualized as summarized

in table 7.

TABLE 7—COST OF SUBMITTING INDIVIDUAL TRAINING PLANS FOR APPRENTICE PILOTS

[Pre-guidance; 2022 dollars] 

Year Plans 

Total 

pre-guidance 

hours 

Wage of 

submitter 

Pre-guidance 

baseline 

cost 

7-Percent 3-Percent

[A] [B] [C] [D = A * B * C] 

2018 ....................................................... 4 2 $73.17 $585.33 $767.24 $658.79

2019 ....................................................... 5 2 73.17 731.66 896.31 799.50

2020 ....................................................... 5 2 73.17 731.66 837.68 776.22

2021 ....................................................... 3 2 73.17 439.00 469.73 452.17

2022 ....................................................... 6 2 73.17 877.99 877.99 877.99

2023 ....................................................... 6 2 73.17 877.99 820.55 852.42

2024 ....................................................... 6 2 73.17 877.99 766.87 827.59

2025 ....................................................... 6 2 73.17 877.99 716.70 803.49

2026 ....................................................... 6 2 73.17 877.99 669.82 780.08

2027 ....................................................... 6 2 73.17 877.99 626.00 757.36

2028 ....................................................... 6 2 73.17 877.99 585.04 735.30

2029 ....................................................... 6 2 73.17 877.99 546.77 713.89

2030 ....................................................... 6 2 73.17 877.99 511.00 693.09

2031 ....................................................... 6 2 73.17 877.99 477.57 672.91

2032 ....................................................... 6 2 73.17 877.99 446.33 653.31

Total ................................................ ................ ........................ .................... 12,145.54 10,015.59 11,054.11

Annualized ...................................... ................ ........................ .................... .............................. 784.04 798.75

* Note: Components may not add to the totals due to rounding.

The Coast Guard estimates that it 

takes 30 minutes (0.5 hours) for the 

Director’s office to review these plans. 

This estimate remains consistent across 

2018–2022 and 2023–2032. With 6 

submissions annually, using a loaded 

wage of $113.95 for a GS–14 ingovernment worker,23 the Coast Guard 

estimates the annual cost to government 

of reviewing individual training plans 

for apprentices over 2023–2032 to be 

$341.84 (6 submissions × 0.5 hours × 

$113.95). For the Pre-Guidance period 

of analysis (2018–2032), we estimate the 

grand total cost to be $3,899.46 

discounted to 7 percent and $305.26 

annualized as summarized in table 8. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81316 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

24The base wage of captains, mates, and pilots of 

water vessels is $50.09 as of May 2022, per https:// 

www.bls.gov/oes/2022/may/oes535021.htm. The 

load factor of 1.46 is obtained by dividing total 

hourly compensation for Transportation and 

Material Moving Occupations of $33.07 by hourly 

wages (CMU2010000520000D) and salaries of 

$22.64 (CMU2020000520000D). Access these series 

by searching the series number at https://

beta.bls.gov/dataQuery/search. Last accessed 

August 2023. 

25The 6 hours to submit includes some time 

assumed for back-and-forth review between the 

apprentice and their approving manager. 

TABLE 8—COST TO GOVERNMENT OF REVIEWING INDIVIDUAL TRAINING PLANS FOR APPRENTICE PILOTS

[Pre-guidance; 2022 dollars] 

Year Plans 

Total 

pre-guidance 

hours 

Wage of 

reviewer 

Pre-guidance 

baseline 

cost 

7-Percent 3-Percent 

[A] [B] [C] [D = A * B * C] 

2018 ....................................................... 4 0.5 $113.95 $227.89 $298.72 $256.49 

2019 ....................................................... 5 0.5 113.95 284.86 348.97 311.28 

2020 ....................................................... 5 0.5 113.95 284.86 326.14 302.21 

2021 ....................................................... 3 0.5 113.95 170.92 182.88 176.05 

2022 ....................................................... 6 0.5 113.95 341.84 341.84 341.84 

2023 ....................................................... 6 0.5 113.95 341.84 319.47 331.88 

2024 ....................................................... 6 0.5 113.95 341.84 298.57 322.21 

2025 ....................................................... 6 0.5 113.95 341.84 279.04 312.83 

2026 ....................................................... 6 0.5 113.95 341.84 260.79 303.72 

2027 ....................................................... 6 0.5 113.95 341.84 243.72 294.87 

2028 ....................................................... 6 0.5 113.95 341.84 227.78 286.28 

2029 ....................................................... 6 0.5 113.95 341.84 212.88 277.94 

2030 ....................................................... 6 0.5 113.95 341.84 198.95 269.85 

2031 ....................................................... 6 0.5 113.95 341.84 185.94 261.99 

2032 ....................................................... 6 0.5 113.95 341.84 173.77 254.36 

Total ................................................ ................ ........................ .................... 4,728.73 3,899.46 4,303.79 

Annualized ...................................... ................ ........................ .................... .............................. 305.26 407.61 

* Note: Components may not add to the totals due to rounding. 

Semi-Annual Performance Evaluation 

Reports for Apprentice Pilots 

The proposed creation of paragraph 

(h) in § 401.211 would require 

associations to submit Semi-annual 

Performance Evaluation Reports to the 

Director for Apprentice Pilots. The 

Coast Guard assumes that mentor pilots 

generate these evaluation reports, which 

summarize the Apprentice Pilot’s 

training progress twice annually. These 

reports allow the Director and the 

associations to make informed decisions 

on Apprentice Pilot progress to better 

tailor what training is needed for an 

Apprentice Pilot to successfully 

complete training to become a United 

States Registered Pilot. Based on 

information from a United States Coast 

Guard SME, this industry practice began 

in 2018. The Coast Guard estimates that 

it takes 6 hours to generate and submit 

these reports. The loaded wage of pilot 

submitters is $73.17 from a base wage of 

$50.09 and a load factor of 1.46.24

From 2018 to 2022 Coast Guard 

received an average of 18 reports 

annually, which is greater than the 12 

reports the Coast Guard would expect 

for 6 Apprentice Pilots, assuming 2 

reports submitted annually. Where 

Coast Guard initially received more 

reports than the number of active 

apprentices, some reports were 

backdated for mariners who had already 

completed apprentice training and 

become pilots. To be conservative, the 

Coast Guard uses the higher average of 

18 to estimate ongoing costs. The Coast 

Guard estimates the annual cost of 

requiring individual training plans for 

apprentices over 2023–2032 to be 

$7,901.92 (18 submissions × 6 hours × 

$73.17).25 For the Pre-Guidance period 

of analysis (2018–2032), we estimate the 

grand total cost to be $99,875.41 

discounted to 7 percent and $7,818.45 

annualized as summarized in table 9. 

TABLE 9—COST OF SUBMITTING SEMI-ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORTS FOR APPRENTICES

[Pre-guidance; 2022 dollars] 

Year Reports 

Total 

pre-guidance 

hours 

Wage of 

submitter 

Pre-guidance 

baseline 

cost 

7-Percent 3-Percent 

[A] [B] [C] [D = A * B * C] 

2018 ....................................................... 20 6 $73.17 $8,779.91 $11,508.67 $9,881.87 

2019 ....................................................... 18 6 73.17 7,901.92 9,680.19 8,634.64 

2020 ....................................................... 22 6 73.17 9,657.90 11,057.33 10,246.07 

2021 ....................................................... 9 6 73.17 3,950.96 4,227.53 4,069.49 

2022 ....................................................... 18 6 73.17 7,901.92 7,901.92 7,901.92 

2023 ....................................................... 18 6 73.17 7,901.92 7,384.97 7,671.77 

2024 ....................................................... 18 6 73.17 7,901.92 6,901.84 7,448.32 

2025 ....................................................... 18 6 73.17 7,901.92 6,450.32 7,231.38 

2026 ....................................................... 18 6 73.17 7,901.92 6,028.34 7,020.75 

2027 ....................................................... 18 6 73.17 7,901.92 5,633.96 6,816.26 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81317 

26The loaded wage of $113.95 (rounded) comes 

from the base hourly wage of $68.55 for a GS–14 

Step 5 from the DC region multiplied by a load 

factor of 1.66, per https://www.opm.gov/policydata-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salarytables/pdf/2022/DCB_h.pdf. To calculate the load 

factor of 1.66, we divide total hourly compensation 

for workers with master’s degrees as shown in table 

4, $74.80, by the average hourly wage for workers 

with master’s degrees as shown in table 2, or 

$45.00. $74.80 ÷ $45.00 = 1.6622. See ‘‘Comparing 

the Compensation of Federal and Private Sector 

Employees, 2011–2015,’’ https://www.cbo.gov/ 

system/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/reports/ 

52637-federalprivatepay.pdf. 

27 § 401.260(c) that deals with monthly 

availability reports was initially added to the CFR 

via 31 FR 9065 (July 1, 1966). To read the 

referenced final rule, see https://archives.federal

register.gov/issue_slice/1966/7/1/9063- 

9067.pdf#page=3. For more information on the 

history of how the requirement was redesignated 

and amended through the years, see https://

www.ecfr.gov/current/title-46/chapter-III/part-401/ 

subpart-B/section-401.260. 

TABLE 9—COST OF SUBMITTING SEMI-ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORTS FOR APPRENTICES—Continued 

[Pre-guidance; 2022 dollars] 

Year Reports 

Total 

pre-guidance 

hours 

Wage of 

submitter 

Pre-guidance 

baseline 

cost 

7-Percent 3-Percent 

[A] [B] [C] [D = A * B * C] 

2028 ....................................................... 18 6 73.17 7,901.92 5,265.38 6,617.73 

2029 ....................................................... 18 6 73.17 7,901.92 4,920.92 6,424.98 

2030 ....................................................... 18 6 73.17 7,901.92 4,598.99 6,237.85 

2031 ....................................................... 18 6 73.17 7,901.92 4,298.12 6,056.16 

2032 ....................................................... 18 6 73.17 7,901.92 4,016.93 5,879.77 

Total ................................................ ................ ........................ .................... 117,211.79 99,875.41 108,138.95 

Annualized ...................................... ................ ........................ .................... .............................. 7,818.45 7,813.88 

* Note: Components may not add to the totals due to rounding. 

The Coast Guard estimates that it 

takes 20 minutes (0.33 hours) for the 

Director’s office to review these reports, 

using a loaded wage of 113.95 for a GS– 

14 in-government worker.26 Using the 

same metric of 18 submissions annually, 

the Coast Guard estimates the annual 

cost to Government of reviewing 

individual training plans for Apprentice 

Pilots over 2023–2032 to be $683.67. For 

the Pre-Guidance period of analysis 

(2018–2032), we estimate the grand total 

cost to be $8,641.19 discounted to 7 

percent and $1,053.61 annualized as 

summarized in table 10. 

TABLE 10—COST TO GOVERNMENT OF REVIEWING SEMI-ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REPORTS FOR APPRENTICES

[Pre-guidance; 2022 dollars] 

Year Reports 

Total 

pre-guidance 

hours 

Wage of 

reviewer 

Pre-guidance 

baseline 

cost 

7-Percent 3-Percent 

[A] [B] [C] [D = A * B * C] 

2018 ....................................................... 20 0.33 $113.95 $759.64 $995.73 $854.98 

2019 ....................................................... 18 0.33 113.95 683.67 837.53 747.07 

2020 ....................................................... 22 0.33 113.95 835.60 956.68 886.49 

2021 ....................................................... 9 0.33 113.95 341.84 365.76 352.09 

2022 ....................................................... 18 0.33 113.95 683.67 683.67 683.67 

2023 ....................................................... 18 0.33 113.95 683.67 638.95 663.76 

2024 ....................................................... 18 0.33 113.95 683.67 597.15 644.43 

2025 ....................................................... 18 0.33 113.95 683.67 558.08 625.66 

2026 ....................................................... 18 0.33 113.95 683.67 521.57 607.43 

2027 ....................................................... 18 0.33 113.95 683.67 487.45 589.74 

2028 ....................................................... 18 0.33 113.95 683.67 455.56 572.56 

2029 ....................................................... 18 0.33 113.95 683.67 425.76 555.89 

2030 ....................................................... 18 0.33 113.95 683.67 397.90 539.70 

2031 ....................................................... 18 0.33 113.95 683.67 371.87 523.98 

2032 ....................................................... 18 0.33 113.95 683.67 347.54 508.72 

Total ................................................ ................ .................... ........................ 10,141.13 8,641.19 9,356.15 

Annualized ...................................... ................ .................... ........................ .............................. 1,053.61 676.06 

* Note: Components may not add to the totals due to rounding 

Removing Monthly Availability Reports 

This proposed rule would remove the 

requirement in § 401.260 that pilots and 

apprentices submit monthly availability 

reports. Often these availability reports 

do not communicate meaningful 

information because in practice pilots 

are listed as always available if they 

could be called in. Therefore, the Coast 

Guard no longer sees a benefit in 

requiring these reports. Based on 

information from a Coast Guard SME, 

these monthly reports have been 

submitted by industry since the mid1960’s.27 To capture the recent burden 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81318 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

28The base wage of captains, mates, and pilots of 

water vessels is $50.09 as of May 2022, per https:// 

www.bls.gov/oes/2022/may/oes535021.htm. The 

load factor of 1.46 is obtained by dividing total 

hourly compensation for Transportation and 

Material Moving Occupations of $33.07 by hourly 

wages (CMU2010000520000D) and salaries of 

$22.64 (CMU2020000520000D). Access these series 

by searching the series number at https://

beta.bls.gov/dataQuery/search. Last accessed 

August 2023. 

29 § 401.431 was initially added to the CFR via 29 

FR 10467 (July 28, 1964). To read the referenced 

final rule, see https://archives.federalregister.gov/

issue_slice/1964/7/28/10461-10468.pdf#page=7. 

For more information on the history of how the 

requirement was redesignated and amended 

through the years, see https://www.ecfr.gov/current/ 

title-46/chapter-III/part-401/subpart-D/section401.431. 

30The base wage of captains, mates, and pilots of 

water vessels is 50.09 as of May 2022, per https:// 

www.bls.gov/oes/2022/may/oes535021.htm. The 

load factor of 1.46 is obtained by dividing total 

hourly compensation for Transportation and 

Material Moving Occupations of $33.07 by hourly 

wages (CMU2010000520000D) and salaries of 

$22.64 (CMU2020000520000D). Access these series 

by searching the series number at https://

beta.bls.gov/dataQuery/search. Last accessed 

August 2023. 

these reports have had on industry, the 

Coast Guard has chosen to use data from 

the last 5 years (2018–2022). From 2018 

to 2022, the Coast Guard received an 

average of 672 monthly availability 

reports. Each report takes an estimated 

2.5 hours to submit. Given this practice 

did not begin in 2018 and is not a cost 

attributable to guidance, the Coast 

Guard has zeroed out the hours from 

2018 to 2022. If the Coast Guard 

continued to require these reports, we 

could expect to receive 650 annually, 

one report for each of the 6 apprentice 

pilots, 56 pilots, and 3 temporary pilots 

for the 10 months of the active shipping 

season (650 reports = (6+56+3) × 10 

months). The loaded wage of pilot 

submitters is $73.17 from a base wage of 

$50.09 and a load factor of 1.46.28

Continuing to require these reports 

would result in an hour burden of 2.5 

hours per submission. By entirely 

removing this regulatory requirement, 

this acts as a marginal decrease in 

burden of 2.5 hours per submission. 

Since this marginal change in hour 

burden is based in a change to existing 

regulatory text rather than codifying or 

modifying industry practice stemming 

from 2018 guidance, our annual PreGuidance reduction in hourly burden in 

2023–2032 is equal to that of our annual 

No Baseline hourly burden (2.5 hours). 

For the Pre-Guidance period of analysis 

(2018–2032), we estimate the total net 

cost savings to be $(835,065.99) 

discounted to 7 percent and 

$(65,370.68) annualized as summarized 

in table 11. 

TABLE 11—COST OF SUBMITTING MONTHLY AVAILABILITY REPORTS

[Pre-guidance; 2022 dollars] 

Year Reports 

Total 

pre-guidance 

hours 

Wage of 

submitter 

Pre-guidance 

baseline 

cost 

7-Percent 3-Percent 

[A] [B] [C] [D = A × B × C] 

2018 ....................................................... 670 * 0 $73.17 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 

2019 ....................................................... 620 * 0 73.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 

2020 ....................................................... 720 * 0 73.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 

2021 ....................................................... 630 * 0 73.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 

2022 ....................................................... 720 * 0 73.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 

2023 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (111,116.46) (115,431.66) 

2024 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (103,847.16) (112,069.57) 

2025 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (97,053.42) (108,805.41) 

2026 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (90,704.13) (105,636.32) 

2027 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (84,770.21) (102,559.54) 

2028 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (79,224.50) (99,572.36) 

2029 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (74,041.59) (96,672.20) 

2030 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (69,197.75) (93,856.50) 

2031 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (64,670.79) (91,122.82) 

2032 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (60,439.99) (88,468.76) 

Total ................................................ ................ ........................ .................... (1,188,946.11) (835,065.99) (1,014,195.15) 

Annualized ...................................... ................ ........................ .................... .............................. (65,370.68) (73,283.50) 

Note: Components may not add to the totals due to rounding. Cited hours with ‘‘*’’ indicate that this practice did not begin with the onset of 

guidance in 2018. To avoid inappropriately categorizing this as a new cost attributable to 2018 guidance, the Coast Guard has opted to zero out 

hours in applicable cases. 

Disputes 

Under § 401.431(b), the Coast Guard 

changes ‘‘in writing’’ to ‘‘official 

correspondence’’ and specifies that the 

letter expressing the dispute must 

include the vessel name, date of service, 

and reference number for the invoice/ 

bill, the exact amount of dispute, 

regulatory citation for dispute, and the 

requested resolution. Per a Coast Guard 

SME, disputes have been submitted long 

since the mid-1960’s in accordance with 

§ 401.431.29 However, the Coast Guard 

previously received these disputes in 

varying formats. From 2018 to 2022, the 

Coast Guard received 6 unique disputes 

(some including multiple charges). Note 

that no unique disputes were submitted 

from 2019 to 2022. According to a Coast 

Guard SME, the agency expects one trip 

charge dispute submission per year 

starting in 2023. The loaded wage of 

pilot submitters is $73.17, from a base 

wage of $50.09 and a load factor of 

1.46.30

During 2018–2022, each dispute 

required 30 minutes to submit. 

However, given this practice did not 

begin in 2018 and is, therefore, not a 

cost attributable to guidance, the Coast 

Guard has zeroed out the hours from 

2018 to 2022. With the proposed 

changes, the Coast Guard estimates that 

future submissions will take 1 hour 

each, an additional 30 minutes per 

report. Since this marginal change in 

hour burden is based in a change to 

existing regulatory text rather than 

codifying or modifying industry practice 

stemming from 2018 guidance, our 

annual Pre-Guidance hourly burden in 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81319 

31The base wage of captains, mates, and pilots of 

water vessels is 50.09 as of May 2022, per https:// 

www.bls.gov/oes/2022/may/oes535021.htm. The 

load factor of 1.46 is obtained by dividing total 

hourly compensation for Transportation and 

Material Moving Occupations of 33.07 by hourly 

wages (CMU2010000520000D) and salaries of 22.64 

(CMU2020000520000D). Access these series by 

searching the series number at https://beta.bls.gov/ 

dataQuery/search. Last accessed August 2023. 

2023–2032 is equal to that of our annual 

No Baseline hourly burden (0.5 hours). 

For the Pre-Guidance period of analysis 

(2018–2032), we estimate the grand total 

cost to be $256.94 discounted to 7 

percent and $20.11 annualized as 

summarized in table 12. 

TABLE 12—COST OF SUBMITTING TRIP CHARGE DISPUTES

[Pre-guidance; 2022 dollars] 

Year Submissions 

Total 

pre-guidance 

hours 

Wage of 

submitter 

Pre-guidance 

baseline 

cost 

7-percent 3-percent 

[A] [B] [C] [D = A × B × C] 

2018 ............................................... 6 * 0 $73.17 $0.00 $0.00 $0.00 

2019 ............................................... 0 * 0 73.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 

2020 ............................................... 0 * 0 73.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 

2021 ............................................... 0 * 0 73.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 

2022 ............................................... 0 * 0 73.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 

2023 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 34.19 35.52 

2024 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 31.95 34.48 

2025 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 29.86 33.48 

2026 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 27.91 32.50 

2027 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 26.08 31.56 

2028 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 24.38 30.64 

2029 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 22.78 29.75 

2030 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 21.29 28.88 

2031 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 19.90 28.04 

2032 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 18.60 27.22 

Total ........................................ ........................ ........................ .................... 365.83 256.94 312.06 

Annualized .............................. ........................ ........................ .................... .............................. 20.11 22.55 

Note: Numbers may not sum due to rounding. Cited hours with ‘‘*’’ emphasize that this practice did not begin with the onset of guidance in 

2018. To avoid inappropriately categorizing this as a new cost attributable to 2018 guidance, the Coast Guard has opted to zero out hours in applicable cases. 

Submission of Medical Certificates 

Medical certificates are already 

required as part of an application for an 

MMC under 46 CFR part 10, subpart C, 

which is an existing requirement to 

apply to be an Apprentice Pilot as noted 

in § 401.110 and § 401.210. The 

proposed change in text would clarify 

that the requirement applies to 

Apprentice Pilots, which was not 

specified before. This change would 

directly impact mariners who submit 

Apprentice Pilot applications to the 

Director. On average, the Coast Guard 

receives 15 such applications annually. 

According to a Coast Guard SME, this 

practice began in 2018 through informal 

program guidance. This guidance was 

issued following a recommendation 

from the Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory 

Committee in 2018. 

The medical certificate part of the 

application takes approximately 18 

minutes to draft and submit, as detailed 

in Information Collection Request OMB 

Control Number 1625–0040, 

‘‘Applications for Merchant Mariner 

Credentials and Medical Certificate.’’ 

Given this information collection both 

accounts for all medical certificates that 

have been received and periodically 

updated, this uptick in medical 

certificates is already accounted for in 

1625–0040. Therefore, this is a 

regulatory cost but not an information 

collection cost. The loaded wage of 

submitters is $73.17, from a base wage 

of $50.09 and a load factor of 1.46.31 For 

the Pre-Guidance period of analysis 

(2018–2032), we estimate the grand total 

cost to be $4,162.92 discounted to 7 

percent and $325.88 annualized as 

summarized in table 13. 

TABLE 13—TOTAL COST OF MEDICAL CERTIFICATES FOR APPRENTICE PILOT APPLICATIONS

[Pre-guidance; 2022 dollars] 

Year Submissions 

Total 

pre-guidance 

hours 

Wage of 

submitter 

Pre-guidance 

baseline 

cost 

7-percent 3-percent 

[A] [B] [C] [D = A * B * C] 

2018 ............................................... 17 0.3 $73.17 $373.15 $489.12 $419.98 

2019 ............................................... 15 0.3 73.17 329.25 403.34 359.78 

2020 ............................................... 11 0.3 73.17 241.45 276.43 256.15 

2021 ............................................... 15 0.3 73.17 329.25 352.29 339.12 

2022 ............................................... 15 0.3 73.17 329.25 329.25 329.25 

2023 ............................................... 15 0.3 73.17 329.25 307.71 319.66 

2024 ............................................... 15 0.3 73.17 329.25 287.58 310.35 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81320 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

32 § 401.260(c) that deals with monthly 

availability reports was initially added to the CFR 

via 31 FR 9065 (July 1, 1966). To read the 

referenced final rule, see https://archives.federal

register.gov/issue_slice/1966/7/1/9063- 

9067.pdf#page=3. For more information on the 

history of how the requirement was redesignated 

and amended through the years, see https://

www.ecfr.gov/current/title-46/chapter-III/part-401/

subpart-B/section-401.260. 

33The base wage of captains, mates, and pilots of 

water vessels is $50.09 as of May 2022, per https:// 

www.bls.gov/oes/2022/may/oes535021.htm. The 

load factor of 1.46 is obtained by dividing total 

hourly compensation for Transportation and 

Material Moving Occupations of $33.07 by hourly 

wages (CMU2010000520000D) and salaries of 

$22.64 (CMU2020000520000D). Access these series 

by searching the series number at https://

beta.bls.gov/dataQuery/search. Last accessed 

August 2023. 

TABLE 13—TOTAL COST OF MEDICAL CERTIFICATES FOR APPRENTICE PILOT APPLICATIONS—Continued 

[Pre-guidance; 2022 dollars] 

Year Submissions 

Total 

pre-guidance 

hours 

Wage of 

submitter 

Pre-guidance 

baseline 

cost 

7-percent 3-percent 

[A] [B] [C] [D = A * B * C] 

2025 ............................................... 15 0.3 73.17 329.25 268.76 301.31 

2026 ............................................... 15 0.3 73.17 329.25 251.18 292.53 

2027 ............................................... 15 0.3 73.17 329.25 234.75 284.01 

2028 ............................................... 15 0.3 73.17 329.25 219.39 275.74 

2029 ............................................... 15 0.3 73.17 329.25 205.04 267.71 

2030 ............................................... 15 0.3 73.17 329.25 191.62 259.91 

2031 ............................................... 15 0.3 73.17 329.25 179.09 252.34 

2032 ............................................... 15 0.3 73.17 329.25 167.37 244.99 

Total ........................................ ........................ ........................ .................... 4,894.80 4,162.92 4,512.82 

Annualized .............................. ........................ ........................ .................... .............................. 325.88 326.09 

* Note: Components may not add to the totals due to rounding. 

Costs: No Action Baseline. 

This section outlines regulatory costs 

relative to the No Action baseline 

scenario. The No Action analysis period 

is 2023–2032. Our No Action baseline 

differs from the Pre-Guidance baseline 

in its exclusion of any costs that are not 

directly stemming from the proposed 

rulemaking. In other words, the No 

Action baseline represents the current 

state of the world that exists solely 

under pre-existing regulatory text and 

prior guidance. This results in many 

items having non-zero costs in our PreGuidance baseline that are no-cost items 

in the No Action baseline. For example, 

the Coast Guard began receiving 

individualized training plans as a 

byproduct of informal guidance in 2018. 

While the proposed rulemaking codifies 

this practice through a proposed 

addition to the CFR (§ 401.110), there is 

no additional regulatory burden that 

results from said codification. In other 

words, all applicable costs across 2018– 

2032 for individualized training plans 

can be attributed specifically to the 2018 

guidance. Therefore, this is a no-cost 

provision in our No Action baseline. 

The following items had non-zero 

costs in our Pre-Guidance baseline but 

are no-cost provisions in the No Action 

Baseline: (1) Individual training plans 

for Apprentice Pilots (§ 401.110 and 

§ 401.211(g)); (2) Semi-annual 

Performance Evaluation Report for 

Apprentice Pilots (§ 401.211(h)); and (3) 

Submission of Medical Certificates 

(§ 402.210(a)). These three-line items all 

began as a byproduct of informal 

guidance from 2018 and have no 

alteration in burden stemming from this 

rulemaking that differs from the 

guidance. See table 6 (the ‘‘No Action 

Baseline (2023–2032)’’ column) for more 

context on each of these items. 

The following items have non-zero 

costs in our No Action Baseline: (1) 

Removing monthly availability reports 

(§ 401.260) and (2) Submitting Trip 

Charge Disputes (§ 401.431(b)). Both 

items have associated costs or cost 

savings that stem directly from changes 

made from this proposed rulemaking. 

Removing Monthly Availability Reports 

This proposed rule would remove the 

requirement in § 401.260 that pilots and 

apprentices submit monthly availability 

reports. Often these availability reports 

do not communicate meaningful 

information because in practice pilots 

are listed as always available if they 

could be called in. Therefore, the Coast 

Guard no longer sees a benefit in 

requiring these reports. Based on 

information from a Coast Guard SME, 

these monthly reports have been 

submitted by industry since the mid1960’s.32 If the Coast Guard continued 

to require these reports, we could expect 

to receive 650 annually, one report for 

each of the 6 apprentice pilots, 56 

pilots, and 3 temporary pilots for the 10 

months of the active shipping season 

(650 reports = (6+56+3) × 10 months). 

Continuing to require these reports 

would result in an hour burden of 2.5 

hours per submission. By entirely 

removing this regulatory requirement 

through this proposed rulemaking, this 

acts as a marginal decrease in burden of 

2.5 hours per submission. The loaded 

wage of submitters is $73.17, from a 

base wage of $50.09 and a load factor of 

1.46.33 For the No Action period of 

analysis (2023–2032), we estimate the 

total net cost savings to be $(835,065.99) 

discounted to 7 percent and 

$(118,894.61) annualized as 

summarized in table 14. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81321 

34 § 401.431(b) was initially added to the CFR via 

29 FR 10467 (July 28, 1964). To read the referenced 

final rule, see https://archives.federalregister.gov/ 

issue_slice/1964/7/28/10461-10468.pdf#page=7. 

For more information on the history of how the 

requirement was redesignated and amended 

through the years, see https://www.ecfr.gov/current/ 

title-46/chapter-III/part-401/subpart-D/section401.431. 

35The base wage of captains, mates, and pilots of 

water vessels is 50.09 as of May 2022, per https:// 

www.bls.gov/oes/2022/may/oes535021.htm. The 

load factor of 1.46 is obtained by dividing total 

hourly compensation for Transportation and 

Material Moving Occupations of $33.07 by hourly 

wages (CMU2010000520000D) and salaries of 

$22.64 (CMU2020000520000D). Access these series 

by searching the series number at https://

beta.bls.gov/dataQuery/search. Last accessed 

August 2023. 

TABLE 14—COST OF SUBMITTING MONTHLY AVAILABILITY REPORTS

[No action baseline; 2022 dollars] 

Year Reports 

Total no 

action 

baseline 

hours 

Wage of 

submitter 

No action 

baseline 

cost 

7-percent 3-percent 

[A] [B] [C] [D = A * B * C] 

2023 ....................................................... 650 2.5 $73.17 $(118,894.61) $(111,116.46) $(115,431.66) 

2024 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (103,847.16) (112,069.57) 

2025 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (97,053.42) (108,805.41) 

2026 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (90,704.13) (105,636.32) 

2027 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (84,770.21) (102,559.54) 

2028 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (79,224.50) (99,572.36) 

2029 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (74,041.59) (96,672.20) 

2030 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (69,197.75) (93,856.50) 

2031 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (64,670.79) (91,122.82) 

2032 ....................................................... 650 2.5 73.17 (118,894.61) (60,439.99) (88,468.76) 

Total ................................................ ................ ........................ .................... (1,188,946.11) (835,065.99) (1,014,195.15) 

Annualized ...................................... ................ ........................ .................... .............................. (118,894.61) (118,894.61) 

* Note: Components may not add to the totals due to rounding. 

Disputes 

Under § 401.431(b), the Coast Guard 

proposes changing ‘‘in writing’’ to 

‘‘official correspondence’’ and specifies 

that the letter expressing the dispute 

must include the vessel name, date of 

service, and reference number for the 

invoice/bill, the exact amount of 

dispute, regulatory citation for dispute, 

and the requested resolution. Per a 

Coast Guard SME, disputes have been 

submitted long since the mid-1960’s in 

accordance with § 401.431.34 However, 

the Coast Guard previously received 

these disputes in varying forms. 

According to a Coast Guard SME, the 

agency expects one trip charge dispute 

submission per year starting in 2023. 

With the proposed 1changes, the 

Coast Guard estimates that forthcoming 

submissions will take one hour each. 

This is an increase in 30 minutes when 

compared to the Coast Guard’s estimate 

for submission time associated with 

prior disputes that lack these new 

changes (30 minutes). The loaded wage 

of submitters is $73.17, from a base 

wage of $50.09 and a load factor of 

1.46.35 For the No Action period of 

analysis (2023–2032), we estimate the 

grand total cost to be 256.94 discounted 

to 7 percent and 36.58 annualized as 

summarized in table 15. 

TABLE 15—COST OF SUBMITTING TRIP CHARGE DISPUTES

[No action; 2022 dollars] 

Year Submissions 

Total no 

action 

baseline 

hours 

Wage of 

submitter 

No action 

baseline 

cost 

7-Percent 3-Percent 

[A] [B] [C] [D = A * B * C] 

2023 ............................................... 1 0.5 $73.17 $36.58 $34.19 $35.52 

2024 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 31.95 34.48 

2025 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 29.86 33.48 

2026 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 27.91 32.50 

2027 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 26.08 31.56 

2028 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 24.38 30.64 

2029 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 22.78 29.75 

2030 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 21.29 28.88 

2031 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 19.90 28.04 

2032 ............................................... 1 0.5 73.17 36.58 18.60 27.22 

Total ........................................ ........................ ........................ .................... 365.83 256.94 312.06 

Annualized .............................. ........................ ........................ .................... .............................. 36.58 36.58 

* Note: Components may not add to the totals due to rounding. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81322 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

Summary of Total Net Costs 

To foster transparency, the Coast 

Guard has decided to summarize total 

net costs by each baseline Pre-Guidance 

and No Action. Table 16 accounts for 

net private costs to industry and the 

associations for our Pre-Guidance 

baseline. For the Pre-Guidance period of 

analysis (2018–2032), we estimate the 

net private cost to industry to be 

($720,755.13) discounted to 7 percent 

and ($56,422.19) annualized as 

summarized in table 16. 

TABLE 16—NET PRIVATE COSTS TO INDUSTRY

[Pre-guidance; 2022 dollars] 

Year 

Individual 

training 

plans for 

apprentice 

pilots 

Semi-annual 

performance 

evaluation 

reports for 

apprentice 

pilots 

Removing 

monthly 

availability 

reports 

Disputes 

Submission 

of medical 

certificates 

Total 

net private costs 7-Percent 3-Percent 

[A] [B] [C] [D] [E] [F = SUM(A:E)] 

2018 ............................................ $585.33 $8,779.91 $0.00 $0.00 $373.15 $9,738.38 $12,765.03 $10,960.64 

2019 ............................................ 731.66 7,901.92 0.00 0.00 329.25 8,962.82 10,979.85 9,793.92 

2020 ............................................ 731.66 9,657.90 0.00 0.00 241.45 10,631.01 12,171.44 11,278.44 

2021 ............................................ 439.00 3,950.96 0.00 0.00 329.25 4,719.20 5,049.55 4,860.78 

2022 ............................................ 877.99 7,901.92 0.00 0.00 329.25 9,109.16 9,109.16 9,109.16 

2023 ............................................ 877.99 7,901.92 (118,894.61) 36.58 329.25 (109,748.87) (102,569.04) (106,552.30) 

2024 ............................................ 877.99 7,901.92 (118,894.61) 36.58 329.25 (109,748.87) (95,858.91) (103,448.84)

2025 ............................................ 877.99 7,901.92 (118,894.61) 36.58 329.25 (109,748.87) (89,587.77) (100,435.76)

2026 ............................................ 877.99 7,901.92 (118,894.61) 36.58 329.25 (109,748.87) (83,726.89) (97,510.45) 

2027 ............................................ 877.99 7,901.92 (118,894.61) 36.58 329.25 (109,748.87) (78,249.43) (94,670.34) 

2028 ............................................ 877.99 7,901.92 (118,894.61) 36.58 329.25 (109,748.87) (73,130.31) (91,912.95) 

2029 ............................................ 877.99 7,901.92 (118,894.61) 36.58 329.25 (109,748.87) (68,346.08) (89,235.88) 

2030 ............................................ 877.99 7,901.92 (118,894.61) 36.58 329.25 (109,748.87) (63,874.84) (86,636.77) 

2031 ............................................ 877.99 7,901.92 (118,894.61) 36.58 329.25 (109,748.87) (59,696.11) (84,113.37) 

2032 ............................................ 877.99 7,901.92 (118,894.61) 36.58 329.25 (109,748.87) (55,790.76) (81,663.47) 

Total ..................................... .................... ...................... ........................ ................ ........................ (1,054,328.14) (720,755.13) (890,177.21) 

Annualized ........................... .................... ...................... ........................ ................ ........................ ............................ (56,422.19) (64,322.24) 

* Note: Components may not add to the totals due to rounding. 

Table 17 accounts for net costs to 

government for our Pre-Guidance 

baseline. For the Pre-Guidance period of 

analysis (2018–2032), we estimate the 

net cost to government to be $12,540.65 

discounted to 7 percent and $981.71 

annualized. 

TABLE 17—NET COSTS TO GOVERNMENT

[Pre-guidance; 2022 dollars] 

Year 

Individual 

training 

plans for 

apprentice 

pilots 

Semi-annual 

performance 

evaluation 

reports for 

apprentice 

pilots 

Total net 

government 

cost 

7-Percent 3-Percent 

[A] [B] [C = A + B] 

2018 ....................................................................... $227.89 $759.64 $987.53 $1,294.45 $1,111.47 

2019 ....................................................................... 284.86 683.67 968.54 1,186.50 1,058.34 

2020 ....................................................................... 284.86 835.60 1,120.46 1,282.82 1,188.70 

2021 ....................................................................... 170.92 341.84 512.75 548.65 528.14 

2022 ....................................................................... 341.84 683.67 1,025.51 1,025.51 1,025.51 

2023 ....................................................................... 341.84 683.67 1,025.51 958.42 995.64 

2024 ....................................................................... 341.84 683.67 1,025.51 895.72 966.64 

2025 ....................................................................... 341.84 683.67 1,025.51 837.12 938.49 

2026 ....................................................................... 341.84 683.67 1,025.51 782.36 911.15 

2027 ....................................................................... 341.84 683.67 1,025.51 731.17 884.61 

2028 ....................................................................... 341.84 683.67 1,025.51 683.34 858.85 

2029 ....................................................................... 341.84 683.67 1,025.51 638.63 833.83 

2030 ....................................................................... 341.84 683.67 1,025.51 596.85 809.55 

2031 ....................................................................... 341.84 683.67 1,025.51 557.81 785.97 

2032 ....................................................................... 341.84 683.67 1,025.51 521.32 763.07 

Total ................................................................ .......................... ........................ 14,869.87 12,540.65 13,659.95 

Annualized ...................................................... .......................... ........................ ............................ 981.71 987.04 

* Note: Components may not add to the totals due to rounding. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81323 

By aggregating values from table 16 

and table 17, the Coast Guard estimates 

the total net costs associated with our 

Pre-Guidance baseline. For the PreGuidance period of analysis (2018– 

2032), we estimate the total net costs to 

be ($708,214.47) discounted to 7 percent 

and ($55,440.48) annualized as 

summarized in table 18. 

TABLE 18—TOTAL NET COSTS

[Pre-guidance; 2022 dollars] 

Year Total net 

private costs 

Total net 

government 

costs 

Total net 

annual 

costs 

7-Percent 3-Percent 

[A] [B] [C = A + B] 

2018 ....................................................................... 9,738.38 987.53 10,725.91 14,059.48 12,072.11 

2019 ....................................................................... 8,962.82 968.54 9,931.36 12,166.34 10,852.27 

2020 ....................................................................... 10,631.01 1,120.46 11,751.47 13,454.26 12,467.13 

2021 ....................................................................... 4,719.20 512.75 5,231.96 5,598.19 5,388.91 

2022 ....................................................................... 9,109.16 1,025.51 10,134.66 10,134.66 10,134.66 

2023 ....................................................................... (109,748.87) 1,025.51 (108,723.36) (101,610.62) (105,556.66) 

2024 ....................................................................... (109,748.87) 1,025.51 (108,723.36) (94,963.20) (102,482.20) 

2025 ....................................................................... (109,748.87) 1,025.51 (108,723.36) (88,750.65) (99,497.28) 

2026 ....................................................................... (109,748.87) 1,025.51 (108,723.36) (82,944.53) (96,599.30) 

2027 ....................................................................... (109,748.87) 1,025.51 (108,723.36) (77,518.26) (93,785.73) 

2028 ....................................................................... (109,748.87) 1,025.51 (108,723.36) (72,446.97) (91,054.11) 

2029 ....................................................................... (109,748.87) 1,025.51 (108,723.36) (67,707.45) (88,402.04) 

2030 ....................................................................... (109,748.87) 1,025.51 (108,723.36) (63,277.99) (85,827.23) 

2031 ....................................................................... (109,748.87) 1,025.51 (108,723.36) (59,138.31) (83,327.40) 

2032 ....................................................................... (109,748.87) 1,025.51 (108,723.36) (55,269.44) (80,900.39) 

Total ................................................................ .......................... ........................ (1,039,458.28) (708,214.47) (876,517.26) 

Annualized ...................................................... .......................... ........................ ............................ (55,440.48) (83,014.78) 

* Note—Components may not add to the totals due to rounding. 

Now, we will repeat this process but 

for costs relative to our No Action 

baseline. Table 19 accounts for net 

private costs to industry and the 

pilotage associations relative to our No 

Action baseline. For the No Action 

period of analysis (2023–2032), we 

estimate the net private cost to industry 

to be ($834,809.05) discounted to 7 

percent and ($118,858.03) annualized as 

summarized in table 19. 

TABLE 19—NET PRIVATE COSTS TO INDUSTRY

[No action; 2022 dollars] 

Year 

Removing 

monthly 

availability 

reports 

Disputes Net private 

cost 7-Percent 3-Percent 

[A] [B] [C = A + B] 

2023 ....................................................................... ($118,894.61) 36.58 ($118,858.03) ($111,082.27) ($115,396.14) 

2024 ....................................................................... (118,894.61) 36.58 (118,858.03) (103,815.20) (112,035.09) 

2025 ....................................................................... (118,894.61) 36.58 (118,858.03) (97,023.56) (108,771.93) 

2026 ....................................................................... (118,894.61) 36.58 (118,858.03) (90,676.22) (105,603.82) 

2027 ....................................................................... (118,894.61) 36.58 (118,858.03) (84,744.13) (102,527.98) 

2028 ....................................................................... (118,894.61) 36.58 (118,858.03) (79,200.12) (99,541.73) 

2029 ....................................................................... (118,894.61) 36.58 (118,858.03) (74,018.81) (96,642.45) 

2030 ....................................................................... (118,894.61) 36.58 (118,858.03) (69,176.45) (93,827.62) 

2031 ....................................................................... (118,894.61) 36.58 (118,858.03) (64,650.89) (91,094.78) 

2032 ....................................................................... (118,894.61) 36.58 (118,858.03) (60,421.39) (88,441.54) 

Total ................................................................ .......................... ........................ (1,188,580.28) (834,809.05) (1,013,883.09) 

Annualized ...................................................... .......................... ........................ ............................ (118,858.03) (118,858.03) 

* Note: Components may not add to the totals due to rounding. 

Note that there are no costs to 

government relative to the No Action 

baseline, as costs associated with 

government review of both individual 

training plans and semiannual 

performance evaluation reports stem 

from 2018 informal guidance. Therefore, 

for the No Action period of analysis 

(2023–2032), we estimate the total net 

cost to be ($834,809.05) discounted to 7 

percent and ($118,858.03) annualized as 

summarized in table 20. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81324 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

TABLE 20—TOTAL NET COSTS

[No action; 2022 dollars] 

Year Net private 

costs 

Net 

government 

costs 

Total net 

annual costs 7-Percent 3-Percent 

[A] [B] [C = A + B] 

2023 ....................................................................... (118,858.03) 0.00 (118,858.03) (111,082.27) (115,396.14) 

2024 ....................................................................... (118,858.03) 0.00 (118,858.03) (103,815.20) (112,035.09) 

2025 ....................................................................... (118,858.03) 0.00 (118,858.03) (97,023.56) (108,771.93) 

2026 ....................................................................... (118,858.03) 0.00 (118,858.03) (90,676.22) (105,603.82) 

2027 ....................................................................... (118,858.03) 0.00 (118,858.03) (84,744.13) (102,527.98) 

2028 ....................................................................... (118,858.03) 0.00 (118,858.03) (79,200.12) (99,541.73) 

2029 ....................................................................... (118,858.03) 0.00 (118,858.03) (74,018.81) (96,642.45) 

2030 ....................................................................... (118,858.03) 0.00 (118,858.03) (69,176.45) (93,827.62) 

2031 ....................................................................... (118,858.03) 0.00 (118,858.03) (64,650.89) (91,094.78) 

2032 ....................................................................... (118,858.03) 0.00 (118,858.03) (60,421.39) (88,441.54) 

Total ................................................................ .......................... ........................ (1,188,580.28) (834,809.05) (1,013,883.09) 

Annualized ...................................................... .......................... ........................ ............................ (118,858.03) (118,858.03) 

* Note: Components may not add to the totals due to rounding 

Table 21 gives a summary of the total 

net costs by baseline. The figures shown 

for each baseline are in 2022 dollars and 

are discounted at 7-percent. 

TABLE 21—SUMMARY OF NET COSTS BY BASELINE

[2022 dollars] 

Pre-guidance baseline 

(2018–2032; discounted 7-percent) 

No action baseline 

(2023–2032; discounted 7-percent) 

Net Private Costs to Industry Net Costs to Industry: ($720,755.13) ..............................

Annualized Net Costs to Industry: ($56,422.19) .............

Net Costs to Industry: ($834,809.05). 

Annualized Net Costs to Industry: ($118,858.03). 

Net Costs to Government .... Net Costs to Government: $12,540.65 ...........................

Annualized Net Costs to Government: $981.71 .............

Net Costs to Government: $0.00 

Annualized Net Costs to Government: $0.00. 

Total Net Costs .................... Total Net Costs: ($708,214.47) .......................................

Annualized Net Costs: ($55,440.48) ...............................

Total Net Costs: ($834,809.05). 

Annualized Net Costs: ($118.858.03). 

* Note: Components may not add to the totals due to rounding. 

Benefits 

The Coast Guard also considered the 

benefits of this proposed rule relative to 

both the Pre-Guidance and No Action 

baselines. The Pre-Guidance baseline 

refers to the state of the world prior to 

any 2018 informal guidance. This 

baseline captures provisions from both 

the 2018 informal guidance as well as 

the proposed rulemaking. Therefore, the 

Pre-Guidance period of analysis is 

2018–2032. The No Action baseline 

refers to a world absent the proposed 

rulemaking. When referring to this 

baseline, we only measure the impact of 

new provisions stemming directly from 

the proposed rulemaking, relative to the 

current state of the world. The No 

Action baseline period of analysis is 

2023–2032. For both baselines, the 

benefits are solely qualitative. 

Benefits: Pre-Guidance Baseline 

There are qualitative benefits 

associated with both the 2018 informal 

guidance as well as this proposed 

rulemaking. The overarching benefit is 

codifying current industry practices to 

foster transparency between Coast 

Guard regulations and the U.S. pilot 

associations. Many changes outlined in 

this rulemaking are meant to improve 

understanding by clarifying current CFR 

text or creating new regulatory text that 

outlines existing practices. This is 

especially true of the numerous 

administrative changes that result in no 

cost (outlined in table 5). Additionally, 

this rulemaking codifies and modifies 

some practices that predate 2018 

guidance, to clarify the pilotage terms 

and practices used by the Coast Guard 

and U.S. pilot association operations. 

The Coast Guard outlines the qualitative 

benefits for items that have associated 

costs in our Pre-Guidance baseline. 

Individual Training Plans 

Prior to 2018, associations used the 

same template plan for the entire 

district, rather than individualizing 

plans. Individualized training plans 

better ensure that Apprentice Pilots are 

gaining experience in all relevant transit 

areas, when compared to the prior 

template plans. This improves safety for 

the pilots and supports pilots during the 

training program by ensuring that 

Apprentice Pilots are qualified for Full 

Registration at the end of their training. 

Semi-Annual Performance Evaluation 

Reports 

Requiring the associations to submit 

Semi-annual Performance Evaluation 

Reports allows the Coast Guard and the 

Director’s office to better track the 

progression of the apprentice through 

the training program. The reports show 

(1) if an apprentice is meeting 

expectations and (2) if an apprentice is 

ultimately a good fit for the pilotage 

program. Where an apprentice does not 

meet these two conditions, reports help 

the Director more quickly determine if 

further training or dismissal from 

training is appropriate. 

Removing Monthly Availability Reports 

Often availability reports do not 

communicate meaningful information 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81325 

36To access Executive Order 13573 (‘‘Improving 

Regulation and Regulatory Review’’), please see 

https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2011/ 

01/21/2011-1385/improving-regulation-andregulatory-review. 37 Ibid. 

38Phone communication with Marine 

Transportation Specialist of the Great Lakes 

Pilotage Division. 

39 Ibid. 

40The base wage of captains, mates, and pilots of 

water vessels is $50.09 as of May 2022, per https:// 

www.bls.gov/oes/2022/may/oes535021.htm. The 

load factor of 1.46 is obtained by dividing total 

hourly compensation for Transportation and 

Material Moving Occupations of $33.07 by hourly 

wages (CMU2010000520000D) and salaries of 

$22.64 (CMU2020000520000D). Access these series 

by searching the series number at https://

beta.bls.gov/dataQuery/search. Last accessed 

August 2023. 

41The loaded wage of $113.95 (rounded) comes 

from the base hourly wage of $68.55 for a GS–14 

Step 5 from the DC region multiplied by a load 

factor of 1.66, per https://www.opm.gov/policyContinued 

because in practice pilots are listed as 

always available if they need to be 

called in. Eliminating this requirement 

will benefit the pilots and apprentices 

through saved time, as shown in the 

discounted cost savings of ($835,065.99) 

over the 2018–2032 Pre-Guidance time 

horizon. 

Disputes 

By changing ‘‘in writing’’ to ‘‘official 

correspondence’’ in § 401.431(b) for 

disputes, the Coast Guard provides more 

flexibility in how a dispute can be 

formally submitted. The proposed 

revisions to the regulatory text more 

explicitly outline that the letter 

expressing the dispute must include the 

vessel name, date of service, and 

reference number for the invoice/bill, 

the exact amount of dispute, regulatory 

citation for dispute, and the requested 

resolution. Outlining these requirements 

should result in a more standardized, 

higher-quality submission that 

expedites the Director’s decision on the 

dispute leading to a quicker resolution 

for the submitter of the dispute. 

Submission of Medical Certificates 

The proposed rulemaking aligns 

medical and vision requirements for 

Apprentice Pilots, United States 

Registered Pilots, and Temporary 

Registered pilots with the existing MMC 

medical certification standards. This 

proposed change was a recommendation 

from the Great Lakes Pilotage Advisory 

Committee in 2018. Therefore, this 

practice began in 2018. Alignment of 

these requirements would prevent 

confusion and avoid delays when 

submitting and processing an apprentice 

pilot’s application. 

The Coast Guard recognizes that, per 

Executive Order 13563,36 agencies are 

called to quantify anticipated benefits 

‘‘as accurately as possible’’ but may 

discuss benefits qualitatively when 

determining a numerical metric is not 

possible. Note that the proposed 

rulemaking does not inhibit the ability 

for industry, associations, or the Coast 

Guard to reap benefits that stem from 

prior guidance. The Coast Guard 

welcomes comments on any additional 

ways to evaluate these benefits. 

Benefits: No Action Baseline 

The No Action baseline highlights 

benefits that stem solely from the 

proposed rulemaking. Therefore, any 

benefits that are solely attributed to 

prior guidance will not be highlighted 

here. The No Action baseline refers to 

a world absent the proposed 

rulemaking. Since many provisions of 

this proposed rule codify industry 

practices that arose from previous 

guidance, the qualitative benefits of the 

No Action baseline are very similar to 

those of the Pre-Guidance baseline. 

Removing Monthly Availability Reports 

Often, availability reports do not 

communicate meaningful information 

because in practice pilots are listed as 

always available if they need to be 

called in. Eliminating this requirement 

would benefit the pilots and apprentices 

through saved time, as shown in the 

discounted cost savings of ($835,065.99) 

over the 2023–2032 No Action time 

horizon. 

Disputes 

By changing ‘‘in writing’’ to ‘‘official 

correspondence’’ in § 401.431(b) for 

disputes, the Coast Guard would 

provide more flexibility in how a 

dispute can be formally submitted. The 

proposed revisions to the regulatory text 

more explicitly outline that the letter 

expressing the dispute must include the 

vessel name, date of service, and 

reference number for the invoice/bill, 

the exact amount of dispute, regulatory 

citation for dispute, and the requested 

resolution. Outlining these requirements 

should result in a more standardized, 

higher-quality submission that 

expedites the Director’s decision on the 

dispute leading to a quicker resolution 

for the submitter of the dispute. 

The Coast Guard recognizes that, per 

Executive Order 13563,37 agencies are 

called to quantify anticipated benefits 

‘‘as accurately as possible’’ but may 

discuss benefits qualitatively when 

determining a numerical metric is not 

possible. Note that the proposed 

rulemaking does not inhibit the ability 

for industry, associations, or The Coast 

Guard to reap benefits that stem from 

prior guidance. The Coast Guard 

welcomes comments on any additional 

ways to evaluate these benefits. 

Alternatives Considered 

Alternative 1. The primary alternative 

to this rulemaking would be to take no 

action and not alter any of the processes 

for issuing Limited Registration. The 

Coast Guard rejected this alternative 

because it would leave outdated text in 

the CFR and perpetuate confusion as 

industry practices continue to evolve 

past what is detailed in current 

regulations. 

Alternative 2. The second alternative 

would require Apprentice Pilots to 

complete a test before receiving their 

Limited Registration. Currently, tests are 

only administered when a mariner tests 

to receive Full Registration, and tests are 

administered when test administrators 

are already in the area and can conduct 

a test for multiple Apprentice Pilots at 

once. Tests are administrated by the 

Great Lakes Pilotage Office at the 

nearest Coast Guard Regional Exam 

Center (REC) to the Apprentice Pilot, 

usually REC Toledo. The exam is 

administered individually to each 

Apprentice Pilot, and the answer sheet 

is returned to the Great Lakes Pilotage 

Office for grading. 

Adding tests for each Limited 

Registration would require the Coast 

Guard to generate a test for each area in 

which a Limited Registration is 

requested, because Limited 

Registrations are issued for specific 

geographic areas. The Coast Guard 

would then need to administer the 

generated test, requiring travel for both 

the test administrator and the test taker. 

The Coast Guard estimates there are an 

average of 17 requests for Limited 

Registration annually. Each request 

would require 1.5 to 4 hours of testing 

for both the test taker and the test 

administrator, with an average of 2 

hours for each test.38 For both parties, 

the Coast Guard has decided to use the 

conservative estimate of 4 hours for the 

testing burden. In addition, both the test 

taker and test administrator must travel, 

which is an average of 2 hours for the 

test taker and 6 hours for the test 

administrator.39 The Coast Guard 

estimates an annual cost of $7,462.92 for 

test takers, using a loaded wage of 

$73.17 for test takers and assuming 4 

hours for testing, 2 hours for travel, and 

17 tests annually.40 For test 

administration, the Coast Guard 

estimates an annual cost of $19,370.71, 

using a loaded wage of $113.95 for test 

administrators and assuming 4 hours for 

testing, 6 hours for travel, and 17 tests 

annually.41


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81326 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

data-oversight/pay-leave/salaries-wages/salarytables/pdf/2022/DCB_h.pdf. To calculate the load 

factor of 1.66, we divide total hourly compensation 

for workers with master’s degrees as shown in table 

4, $74.80, by the average hourly wage for workers 

with master’s degrees as shown in table 2, or 

$45.00. $74.80 ÷ $45.00 = 1.6622. See ‘‘Comparing 

the Compensation of Federal and Private Sector 

Employees, 2011–2015,’’ https://www.cbo.gov/ 

system/files/115th-congress-2017-2018/reports/ 

52637-federalprivatepay.pdf. 

42NAICS codes were found using ReferenceUSA 

for the Lakes Pilot Association and the Lake 

Carrier’s Association. Coast Guard assumes that the 

code for the joint association is representative of all 

associations. 

43https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/ 

2023/02/27/2023-03212/great-lakes-pilotage-rates2023-annual-ratemaking-and-review-ofmethodology. 

The Coast Guard rejected this 

alternative because it would increase 

the burden upon the pilots and the pilot 

associations without a commensurate 

increase in safety. The Coast Guard 

believes the documentation currently 

received from the pilots and the 

associations is adequate to determine if 

an Apprentice Pilot should be granted a 

Limited Registration. 

Alternative 3. The Coast Guard also 

considered removing the requirement 

for Apprentice Pilots to submit 

Performance Evaluation Reports semiannually (for example, once at the end 

of the shipping season and once midseason) to obtain a Limited Registration. 

Instead, the Coast Guard would only 

require Apprentice Pilots to submit a 

Performance Evaluation Report annually 

(i.e., only once at the end of the 

shipping season). The Coast Guard 

rejected this option because we do not 

believe that annual reporting alone 

would allow us to accurately evaluate 

the performance of an Apprentice Pilot, 

which could potentially contribute to a 

decrease in safety. The Coast Guard 

receives annual evaluations once a year, 

by January 15th. If an Apprentice Pilot 

requested a Limited Registration that 

required evidence of trips completed 

that were not included in the most 

recent performance evaluation, then the 

Coast Guard could not issue the limited 

endorsement. Using Semi-annual 

Performance Evaluation Reports allows 

greater flexibility in issuing Limited 

Registrations, as the Semi-annual 

Performance Evaluation Reports are 

more likely to have relevant and timely 

information to evaluate qualifications 

for Limited Registration. The semiannual evaluations also allow for greater 

tailoring of training resulting in safer 

operations because performance in a 

particular area or on a particular route 

can be evaluated while there is time to 

increase focus on that area for the 

remaining trips to be completed for the 

season. 

Alternative 4. Preferred Alternative. 

The preferred alternative is the one put 

forth in this proposed rulemaking. The 

Coast Guard selected this alternative 

because it would be less costly than the 

other alternatives, give the Coast Guard 

more relevant and timely information to 

evaluate qualifications for Limited 

Registration, and update the CFR to 

remove outdated references. 

B. Small Entities 

Under the Regulatory Flexibility Act, 

5 U.S.C. 601–612, we have considered 

whether this proposed rule would have 

a significant economic impact on a 

substantial number of small entities. 

The term ‘‘small entities’’ comprises 

small businesses, not-for-profit 

organizations that are independently 

owned and operated and are not 

dominant in their fields, and 

governmental jurisdictions with 

populations of less than 50,000. 

The affected population for this 

proposed rule includes 51 U.S. Great 

Lakes pilots, 9 Apprentice Pilots, and 3 

Temporary Registered Pilots, all 

represented by 3 pilot associations. 

The three associations are the St. 

Lawrence Seaway Pilots Association 

representing District One, the Lakes 

Pilot Association representing District 

Two, and the Western Great Lakes Pilots 

Association representing District Three. 

Together, the associations are jointly 

referred to as the Lake Carriers’ 

Association. All these associations 

classify under the North American 

Industry Classification System (NAICS) 

Code 81391002 for Business 

Associations.42 The size standard for 

Business Associations of $8 million was 

current during the development of the 

2023 annual ratemaking and utilized in 

the final rule (88 FR 12226).43 Based on 

revenue figures reported as part of the 

2023 annual ratemaking, none of the 

associations have revenue under $8 

million. To further analyze the impacts 

these associations may face, the Coast 

Guard is parsing this out based on the 

two baselines in the regulatory analysis. 

The figures referenced are discounted 

using a 7-percent discount rate. 

Under the Pre-Guidance baseline, the 

annualized cost to industry from the 

proposed rulemaking amounts to 

$8,948.49. This is not more than 1 

percent of revenue for any of the 

associations and would be offset by the 

annualized cost savings under the same 

baseline of ($65,370.68). Therefore, the 

annualized net cost to industry is 

($56,422.19) for the Pre-Guidance 

baseline’s period of analysis. 

Relative to our No Action baseline, 

the annualized cost to industry from the 

proposed rulemaking amounts to 

$36.58. This is not more than 1 percent 

of revenue for any of the associations 

and would be offset by the annualized 

cost savings under the same baseline of 

($118,894.61). Therefore, the annualized 

net cost to industry is ($118,858.03) for 

costs relative to the No Action baseline’s 

period of analysis. 

Therefore, the Coast Guard certifies 

under 5 U.S.C. 605(b) that this proposed 

rule would not have a significant 

economic impact on a substantial 

number of small entities. If you think 

that your business, organization, or 

governmental jurisdiction qualifies as a 

small entity and that this proposed rule 

would have a significant economic 

impact on it, please submit a comment 

to the docket at the address listed in the 

ADDRESSES section of this preamble. In 

your comment, explain why you think 

it qualifies and how and to what degree 

this proposed rule would economically 

affect it. 

C. Assistance for Small Entities 

Under section 213(a) of the Small 

Business Regulatory Enforcement 

Fairness Act of 1996, Public Law 104– 

121, we want to assist small entities in 

understanding this proposed rule so that 

they can better evaluate its effects on 

them and participate in the rulemaking. 

If the proposed rule would affect your 

small business, organization, or 

governmental jurisdiction and you have 

questions concerning its provisions or 

options for compliance, please call or 

email the person in the FOR FURTHER

INFORMATION CONTACT section of this 

proposed rule. The Coast Guard will not 

retaliate against small entities that 

question or complain about this 

proposed rule or any policy or action of 

the Coast Guard. 

D. Collection of Information 

This proposed rule would call for a 

revision to an existing collection of 

information under the Paperwork 

Reduction Act of 1995, 44 U.S.C. 3501– 

3520. As defined in 5 CFR 1320.3(c), 

‘‘collection of information’’ comprises 

reporting, recordkeeping, monitoring, 

posting, labeling, and other similar 

actions. The title and description of the 

information collections, a description of 

those who must collect the information, 

and an estimate of the total annual 

burden follow. The estimate covers the 

time for reviewing instructions, 

searching existing sources of data, 

gathering, and maintaining the data 

needed, and completing and reviewing 

the collection. 

Title: Great Lakes Pilotage. 

OMB Control Number: 1625–0086. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81327 

44Applicant Trainees have already been 

submitting these, but the regulatory text did not 

reference Applicant Trainees specifically. These 

submissions pre-date any guidance issued in 2018 

and are not a result of this proposed rulemaking. 

The clarifying text proposed in this rulemaking 

(acts to codify a long-standing practice. For these 

reasons, this line item is only an information 

collection cost and not a regulatory cost present in 

the cost model. 

45The submission requirement for written marine 

accident reports found in § 401.260 originated in 31 

FR 9065 (July 1, 1966). Therefore, this is a 

longstanding requirement which was not previously 

captured in ICR 1625–0086. For this reason, this 

line item is only an information collection cost and 

not a regulatory cost present in the cost model. To 

access 31 FR 9065, see https://archives.federal

register.gov/issue_slice/1966/7/1/9063-9067.pdf. 

Note the while reports of marine casualties are 

generally accounted for in ICR 1625–0001 (‘‘Report 

of Marine Casualty & Chemical Testing of 

Commercial Vessel Personnel’’), a Coast Guard SME 

confirmed the scope of the marine accident reports 

provided to the Director differs from those in 1625– 

0001. To access ICR 1625–0001, see https://

www.reginfo.gov/public/do/PRAViewICR?ref_

nbr=202204-1625-009. 

46 Dispute appeals (found in 401.431(b)) 

originated in 29 FR 10467 (July 28, 1964). 

Therefore, this is a longstanding requirement which 

was not previously captured in ICR 1625–0086. For 

this reason, this line item is only an information 

collection cost and not a regulatory cost present in 

the cost model. To access 31 FR 9065, see https:// 

archives.federalregister.gov/issue_slice/1964/7/28/ 

10461-10468.pdf#page=7. 

Summary of the Collection of 

Information: The Director requires that 

pilot associations provide data relating 

to bridge hours; vessel delay, detention, 

cancellation, and movage; pilot travel; 

revenues; and pilot availability. This 

proposed rule adds additional 

collections which includes the 

collection of individual training plans 

and Semi-annual Performance 

Evaluation Reports, codifies responses 

by Apprentice Pilots and Temporary 

Registered Pilots that were previously 

not detailed, and codifies disputes and 

dispute appeals on trip charges. 

Need for Information: Pursuant to 46 

CFR part 404, the Director of the Great 

Lakes Pilotage is required to set pilotage 

rates on the Great Lakes. In meeting this 

requirement, the Director requires that 

pilot associations provide data relating 

to bridge hours; vessel delay, detention, 

cancellation, and movage; pilot travel; 

revenues; and pilot availability. The 

new information proposed to be 

collected in this rule assists in 

estimating the number of pilots that may 

be available in a season by accurately 

tracking their progress through training 

(training plans and performance 

evaluations). 

Proposed Use of Information: The 

Director of Great Lakes Pilotage uses the 

data stored in the Great Lakes Pilot 

Management System and on Form CG– 

4509 to carry out operational and 

ratemaking oversight of pilotage 

activities on the Great Lakes. 

Description of the Respondents: The 

respondents are mariners and pilots 

operating on the Great Lakes, and 

employees of the pilot associations. The 

population of mariners and pilots varies 

year to year. There are three pilot 

associations, representing each of the 

three pilotage districts: St Lawrence 

Seaway Pilots Association, Lakes Pilot 

Association, and Western Great Lakes 

Pilots Association, with the collective 

Lake Carrier’s Association representing 

the three associations together. 

Number of Respondents: This 

proposed rule would increase the 

number of respondents by 9, comprising 

6 Apprentice Pilots and 3 Temporary 

Registered Pilots. 

Frequency of Response: 

Individualized training plans would be 

submitted annually. Semi-annual 

Performance Evaluation Reports would 

be submitted twice annually with 

follow-up as needed. Applicant trainee 

applications would be submitted as 

needed,44 with 8 submitted annually on 

average. Written marine accidents 

would be submitted as necessary,45 with 

3 submitted annually on average. 

Disputes and dispute appeals 46 would 

be submitted as necessary, with 1 

anticipated annually per SME guidance. 

Burden of Response: Individualized 

training plans would take 2 hours to 

submit, for an increased annual burden 

of 12 hours. Semi-annual Performance 

Evaluation Reports would take 6 hours 

to submit, for an increased annual 

burden of 108 hours. The additional 

applications for the Applicant Trainees 

would take 30 minutes each to submit, 

for an increased annual burden of 4 

hours. Written marine accident reports 

would take an hour to submit. for an 

increased annual burden of 3 hours. 

Disputes would take 1 hour to submit, 

with an increased annual burden of 3 

hours. Dispute appeals would take 

thirty minutes, with an increased 

annual burden of 1.5 hours. 

Estimate of Total Annual Burden: The 

total increase in burden from this 

proposed rule is 138 hours. 

As required by 44 U.S.C. 3507(d), we 

will submit a copy of this proposed rule 

to OMB for its review of the collection 

of information. 

We ask for public comment on the 

proposed collection of information to 

help us determine, among other 

things— 

• How useful is the information; 

• Whether the information can help 

us perform our functions better; 

• How we can improve the quality, 

usefulness, and clarity of the 

information; 

• Whether the information is readily 

available elsewhere; 

• How accurate our estimate is of the 

burden of collection; 

• How valid our methods are for 

determining the burden of collection; 

and 

• How we can minimize the burden 

of collection. 

If you submit comments on the 

collection of information, submit them 

to the docket where indicated under 

ADDRESSES. 

You need not respond to a collection 

of information unless it displays a 

currently valid control number from 

OMB. Before the Coast Guard could 

enforce the collection of information 

requirements in this proposed rule, 

OMB would need to approve the Coast 

Guard’s request to collect this 

information. 

E. Federalism 

A rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132 

(Federalism) if it has a substantial direct 

effect on States, on the relationship 

between the National Government and 

the States, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities among the 

various levels of government. We have 

analyzed this proposed rule under 

Executive Order 13132 and have 

determined that it is consistent with the 

fundamental federalism principles and 

preemption requirements described in 

Executive Order 13132. Our analysis 

follows. 

In 46 U.S.C. 9303, Congress directs 

the Coast Guard to regulate Great Lakes 

pilot applicants’ standards of 

competency, Certificates of Registration, 

duration of validity of registration, and 

the conditions for service by United 

States Registered Pilots, including 

availability for service. These 

regulations are issued pursuant to that 

statute and is preemptive of State law as 

specified in 46 U.S.C. 9306. Under 46 

U.S.C. 9306, a ‘‘State or political 

subdivision of a State may not regulate 

or impose any requirement on pilotage 

on the Great Lakes.’’ As a result, States 

or local governments are expressly 

prohibited from regulating within this 

category. Therefore, this proposed rule 

is consistent with the fundamental 

federalism principles and preemption 

requirements described in Executive 

Order 13132. 

While it is well settled that States may 

not regulate in categories in which 

Congress intended the Coast Guard to be 

the sole source of a vessel’s reporting 

obligations, the Coast Guard recognizes 

the key role that State and local 

governments may have in making 

regulatory determinations. See Locke v. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81328 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

United States, 529 U.S. 89, 115–16 

(2000). Additionally, for rules with 

implications and preemptive effect, 

Executive Order 13132 specifically 

directs agencies to consult with State 

and local governments during the 

rulemaking process. If you believe this 

rule has implications for federalism 

under Executive Order 13132, please 

contact the person listed in the FOR

FURTHER INFORMATION section of this 

preamble. 

F. Unfunded Mandates 

The Unfunded Mandates Reform Act 

of 1995, 2 U.S.C. 1531–1538, requires 

Federal agencies to assess the effects of 

their discretionary regulatory actions. In 

particular, the Act addresses actions 

that may result in the expenditure by a 

State, local, or tribal government, in the 

aggregate, or by the private sector of 

$100 million (adjusted for inflation) or 

more in any one year. Although this 

proposed rule would not result in such 

an expenditure, we do discuss the 

effects of this proposed rule elsewhere 

in this preamble. 

G. Taking of Private Property 

This proposed rule would not cause a 

taking of private property or otherwise 

have taking implications under 

Executive Order 12630 (Governmental 

Actions and Interference with 

Constitutionally Protected Property 

Rights). 

H. Civil Justice Reform 

This proposed rule meets applicable 

standards in sections 3(a) and 3(b)(2) of 

Executive Order 12988, (Civil Justice 

Reform), to minimize litigation, 

eliminate ambiguity, and reduce 

burden. 

I. Protection of Children 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13045 

(Protection of Children from 

Environmental Health Risks and Safety 

Risks). This proposed rule is not an 

economically significant rule and would 

not create an environmental risk to 

health or risk to safety that might 

disproportionately affect children. 

J. Indian Tribal Governments 

This proposed rule does not have 

tribal implications under Executive 

Order 13175 (Consultation and 

Coordination with Indian Tribal 

Governments), because it would not 

have a substantial direct effect on one or 

more Indian tribes, on the relationship 

between the Federal Government and 

Indian tribes, or on the distribution of 

power and responsibilities between the 

Federal Government and Indian tribes. 

K. Energy Effects 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Executive Order 13211 (Actions 

Concerning Regulations That 

Significantly Affect Energy Supply, 

Distribution, or Use). We have 

determined that it is not a ‘‘significant 

energy action’’ under that order because 

it is not a ‘‘significant regulatory action’’ 

under Executive Order 12866 and is not 

likely to have a significant adverse effect 

on the supply, distribution, or use of 

energy. 

L. Technical Standards 

The National Technology Transfer 

and Advancement Act, codified as a 

note to 15 U.S.C. 272, directs agencies 

to use voluntary consensus standards in 

their regulatory activities unless the 

agency provides Congress, through 

OMB, with an explanation of why using 

these standards would be inconsistent 

with applicable law or otherwise 

impractical. Voluntary consensus 

standards are technical standards (e.g., 

specifications of materials, performance, 

design, or operation; test methods; 

sampling procedures; and related 

management systems practices) that are 

developed or adopted by voluntary 

consensus standards bodies. 

This proposed rule does not use 

technical standards. Therefore, we did 

not consider the use of voluntary 

consensus standards. 

M. Environment 

We have analyzed this proposed rule 

under Department of Homeland 

Security Management Directive 023–01, 

Rev. 1, associated implementing 

instructions, and Environmental 

Planning COMDTINST 5090.1 (series), 

which guide the Coast Guard in 

complying with the National 

Environmental Policy Act of 1969 (42 

U.S.C. 4321–4370f), and have made a 

preliminary determination that this 

action is one of a category of actions that 

do not individually or cumulatively 

have a significant effect on the human 

environment. A preliminary Record of 

Environmental Consideration 

supporting this determination is 

available in the docket. For instructions 

on locating the docket, see the 

ADDRESSES section of this preamble. 

This proposed rule would be 

categorically excluded under paragraphs 

A3, L54 and L56 of Appendix A, table 

1 of DHS Instruction Manual 023–01– 

001–01, Rev. 1. Paragraph A3 pertains to 

the promulgation of rules, issuance of 

rulings or interpretations, and the 

development and publication of 

policies, orders, directives, notices, 

procedures, manuals, advisory circulars, 

and other guidance documents of the 

following nature: 

(a) Those of a strictly administrative 

or procedural nature; 

(b) Those that implement, without 

substantive change, statutory or 

regulatory requirements; 

(c) Those that implement, without 

substantive change, procedures, 

manuals, and other guidance 

documents; 

(d) Those that interpret or amend an 

existing regulation without changing its 

environmental effect; 

(e) Technical guidance on safety and 

security matters; or 

(f) Guidance for the preparation of 

security plans. 

Paragraph L54 pertains to regulations 

which are editorial or procedural. 

Paragraph L56 pertains to regulations 

concerning the training, qualifying, 

licensing, and disciplining of maritime 

personnel. 

This proposed rule involves the 

potential amendment of certain Great 

Lakes Pilotage regulatory requirements 

to align them with current Coast Guard 

and U.S. pilot association operations 

and related pilotage practices. In 

particular, this proposed rule would add 

or amend definitions for pertinent terms 

in order to clarify the different phases 

of training and registrations for pilots 

who work on the Great Lakes. All of 

these changes are consistent with the 

Coast Guard’s maritime safety missions. 

We seek any comments or information 

that may lead to the discovery of a 

significant environmental impact from 

this proposed rule. 

List of Subjects 

46 CFR Part 401 

Administrative practice and 

procedure, Great Lakes, Navigation 

(water), Penalties, Reporting and 

recordkeeping requirements, Seamen. 

46 CFR Part 402 

Great Lakes, Navigation (water), 

Seamen. 

For the reasons discussed in the 

preamble, the Coast Guard is proposing 

to amend 46 CFR parts 401 and 402 as 

follows: 

Title 46—Shipping 

PART 401—GREAT LAKES PILOTAGE 

REGULATIONS 

■ 1. The authority citation for part 401 

is revised to read as follows: 

Authority: 46 U.S.C. 2103, 2104(a), 6101, 

7701, 8105, 9303, 9304; DHS Delegation No. 

00170.1, Revision No. 01.3, paragraph 

(II)(92)(a), (92)(d), (92)(e), (92)(f). 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81329 

§ 401.100 [Amended] 

■ 2. In § 401.100, remove the words 

‘‘pools by voluntary associations of 

United States registered pilots and the 

establishment of rates, charges, and 

other conditions or terms for services 

performed by registered pilots’’ and add, 

in their place, the words ‘‘pilotage pools 

by voluntary associations of United 

States Registered Pilots and the 

establishment of rates, charges, and 

other conditions or terms for services 

performed by United States Registered 

Pilots’’. 

■ 3. Revise § 401.110 to read as follows: 

§ 401.110 Definitions. 

As used in this chapter: 

Act means the Great Lakes Pilotage 

Act of 1960, as amended (Pub. L. 86– 

555, 74 Stat. 259–262; 46 U.S.C. 216 

through 216i). 

Applicant means a person who has 

submitted a Form CG–4509 to the 

Director of Great Lakes Pilotage 

(‘‘Director’’), to be considered for 

placement in an approved U.S. Great 

Lakes pilot training and qualification 

program at one of the established 

pilotage pools. 

Applicant Trainee means a person 

approved by the Director who is 

participating in an approved U.S. Great 

Lakes pilot training and qualification 

program. This individual meets the 

minimum requirements listed in 46 CFR 

401.214 but does not have the necessary 

service or experience on their MMC in 

the Great Lakes to qualify as an 

Apprentice Pilot. The Applicant Trainee 

is not eligible for a Limited or 

Temporary Registration. 

Apprentice Pilot means a person 

approved by the Director who is 

participating in an approved U.S. Great 

Lakes pilot training and qualification 

program. This individual meets all the 

minimum requirements listed in 46 CFR 

401.211. 

Association means any organization 

that holds a Certificate of Authorization 

issued by the Director to operate a 

pilotage pool on the Great Lakes. 

Canadian Registered Pilot means a 

person, other than a member of the 

regular complement of a vessel, who 

holds an appropriate Canadian license 

issued by an agency of Canada, and is 

registered by a designated agency of 

Canada on substantially the same basis 

as registration under the provisions of 

Subpart B of this part. 

Chemical test means a scientifically 

recognized test that analyzes an 

individual’s breath, blood, urine, saliva, 

bodily fluids, or tissues for evidence of 

dangerous drug or alcohol use. 

Commandant means Commandant 

(CCG), Attn: Commandant, U.S. Coast 

Guard Stop 7000, 2703 Martin Luther 

King Jr. Avenue SE, Washington, DC 

20593–7000. 

Comparable experience means 

knowledge and previous performance 

that is similar to the knowledge and 

technical skills obtained by serving as 

an officer on vessels of at least 4,000 

gross tonnage. Training and experience 

while participating in a pilot training 

program of an authorized pilot 

organization is considered equivalent on 

a day for day basis to experience as an 

officer on a vessel. The training program 

of the authorized pilot organization 

must, however, include regularly 

scheduled trips on vessels of at least 

4,000 gross tonnage or over in the 

company of a United States Registered 

Pilot. 

Director means Director, Great Lakes 

Pilotage. Communications with the 

Director may be sent to the following 

address: Director, Great Lakes Pilotage, 

U.S. Coast Guard Stop 7509, 2703 

Martin Luther King Jr. Avenue SE, 

Washington, DC 20593–7509. 

Full Registration is the issuance of a 

Certificate of Registration, by the 

Director, to an Apprentice Pilot who 

meets all the requirements in 46 CFR 

401.210 and 401.211 and completes all 

the requirements in 46 CFR 402.210 and 

402.220 and so becomes a United States 

Registered Pilot. 

Great Lakes means Lakes Superior, 

Michigan, Huron, Erie, and Ontario, 

their connecting and tributary waters, 

the St. Lawrence River as far east as 

Saint Regis, and adjacent port areas. 

Gross Tonnage or GT means the gross 

tonnage measurement of the vessel 

under 46 U.S.C. chapter 143, 

Convention Measurement. 

Individual Training Plan is an outline 

of specific requirements reviewed and 

approved by the Director for an 

Apprentice Pilot, including but not 

limited to the length of time to complete 

the training, the minimum number of 

round trips required, the association’s 

determination of proficiency, the officer 

endorsement on the MMC, and the 

Apprentice Pilot’s pilotage experience 

on the Great Lakes. The plan 

communicates the qualifications and 

demonstrates skills the mariners must 

complete to meet the proficiency 

requirements for which the mariner is 

training. 

Limited Registration is an 

authorization issued by the Director, 

upon the request of the respective pilot 

association, to an Apprentice Pilot to 

provide pilotage service without direct 

supervision from a United States 

Registered Pilot or Temporary 

Registered Pilot in a specific area or 

waterway. 

Marine accident is any of the 

following that occurs while a U.S. 

Registered Pilot, Apprentice Pilot, 

Apprentice Pilot with Limited 

Registration, or Temporary Registration 

Pilot is providing pilotage services in 

U.S. or Canadian waters: 

(a) Any allision or collision; 

(b) Any grounding; 

(c) A loss of main propulsion, primary 

steering, or any associated component 

or control system that, due to its 

duration or other circumstance, 

significantly impacts the 

maneuverability of the vessel; 

(d) An occurrence, directly related to 

the provision of pilotage services, 

involving significant harm to the 

environment as defined in 46 CFR 4.03– 

65 (including Canadian waters); or 

(e) Any other incident, directly 

related to the provision of pilotage 

services, causing property damage in 

excess of $75,000 (including the cost of 

labor and material to restore the 

property to its condition before the 

incident, but excluding the cost of such 

things as salvage, cleaning, gas-freeing, 

drydocking, or demurrage). 

Merchant mariner credential or MMC 

means the credential issued by the Coast 

Guard under 46 CFR part 10. It 

combines the individual merchant 

mariner’s document, license, and 

certificate of registry enumerated in 46 

U.S.C. subtitle II part E as well as the 

STCW endorsement into a single 

credential that serves as the mariner’s 

qualification document, certificate of 

identification, and certificate of service. 

Minimum number of round trips is 

the fewest number of successful round 

trips an Apprentice Pilot must perform 

under the direct supervision of a fully 

registered United States Registered Pilot 

or Temporary Registered Pilot, 

according to their individual training 

plan. 46 CFR 402.220 contains the 

minimum number of round trips for 

certain officer endorsements. 

Officer endorsement means an 

annotation on an MMC that allows a 

mariner to serve in the capacities listed 

in 46 CFR 10.109. 

Person means an individual, pilot, 

partnership, corporation, association, 

voluntary association, authorized 

pilotage pool, or public or private 

organization, other than a government 

agency. 

Pilotage pool means an organization 

holding a Certificate of Authorization 

issued by the Director to provide 

pilotage services. 

Rate computation definitions to 

determine Weighting Factors: 

(a) Length means the distance 

between the forward and after 

extremities of the ship. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81330 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

(b) Breadth means the maximum 

breadth to the outside of the shell 

plating of the ship. 

(c) Depth means the vertical distance 

at amidships from the top of the keel 

plate to the uppermost continuous deck, 

fore and aft, and which extends to the 

sides of the ship. The continuity of a 

deck is not considered to be affected by 

the existence of tonnage openings, 

engine spaces, or a step in the deck. 

Round trip means providing pilotage 

service, in both directions, from one 

change point to another change point, or 

inbound and outbound in a port 

designated by an authorized pilotage 

pool. 

Secretary means the Secretary of the 

department in which the Coast Guard is 

operating. 

Semi-annual Performance Evaluation 

Report is an assessment performed on 

an Apprentice Pilot twice a year, by the 

association, to report the Apprentice 

Pilot’s progress in the approved U.S. 

Great Lakes pilot training and 

qualification program at the established 

pilotage pool. 

Temporary Registered Pilot means a 

person who is issued a Temporary 

Registration by the Director in 

accordance with 46 CFR 401.222. A 

Temporary Registered Pilot holds a 

valid MMC, meets the requirements of 

§ 401.222, has previously held a Full 

Registration, is requested to provide 

pilotage services by the pilotage 

association, and has either: 

(a) Reached the age of 70 and desires 

to continue providing pilotage services; 

or 

(b) Retired from pilotage service and 

desires to provide pilotage services. 

United States Registered Pilot or U.S. 

Registered Pilot means a person, other 

than a member of the regular 

complement of a vessel, who holds an 

MMC with an officer endorsement 

authorizing navigation on the Great 

Lakes and suitably endorsed for pilotage 

on areas and routes specified therein, 

issued under the authority of the 

provisions of Title 46 of the United 

States Code, and who also currently 

holds a Certificate of Registration ID 

card under the provisions of Subpart B 

of this part. 

§ 401.120 [Amended] 

■ 4. Amend § 401.120 as follows: 

■ a. In the first sentence, remove the 

word ‘‘shall’’ and add, in its place, the 

word ‘‘may’’. 

■ b. In the second sentence, remove the 

word ‘‘Arrangements’’ and add, in its 

place, the word ‘‘Understanding’’. 

■ 5. Revise § 401.200 to read as follows: 

§ 401.200 Application for registration. 

An application for registration as a 

U.S. Registered Pilot must be made on 

Form CG–4509, which must be 

submitted via email to: 

GreatLakesPilotage@uscg.mil; or by 

physical mail to: Great Lakes Pilotage 

Office, 2703 Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. 

SE, Stop 7509, Washington, DC 20593– 

7509. This form may be obtained from 

the Director. 

■ 6. Amend § 401.210 as follows: 

■ a. Revise the section heading and 

paragraph (a); and 

■ b. In paragraph (b), remove the word 

‘‘shall’’ and add, in its place, the word 

‘‘will’’. 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 401.210 Requirements and qualifications 

for to be fully registered. 

(a) No person may be fully registered 

as a United States Registered Pilot 

unless: 

(1) The individual holds an MMC 

with an officer endorsement as a master, 

mate, or pilot, issued under the 

provisions of subpart B of 46 CFR part 

11, and has acquired at least twenty-four 

months service as a deck officer or 

comparable experience on vessels or 

integrated tug and barge, of at least 

4,000 gross tonnage, operating on the 

Great Lakes or oceans. Those applicants 

qualifying with other than Great Lakes 

service must have obtained at least 6 

months of service as a deck officer or 

comparable experience on the Great 

Lakes. Those applicants qualifying with 

comparable experience must have 

served a minimum of twelve months as 

a deck officer under the authority of 

their MMC. 

(2) The individual is a citizen of the 

United States. 

(3) The individual is of good moral 

character and temperate habits. 

(4) The individual is physically 

competent to perform the duties of a 

U.S. Registered Pilot and meets the 

applicable medical requirements and 

standards prescribed by the 

Commandant in subpart C of 46 CFR 

part 10. 

(5) The individual has not reached the 

age of 70. 

(6) The individual agrees to be 

available for service under the terms 

and conditions as may be approved or 

prescribed by the Commandant. 

(7) The individual has complied with 

the requirements set forth in 

§ 401.220(b) for Apprentice Pilots. 

(8) The individual meets the chemical 

testing requirements as defined in 46 

CFR part 16. 

(9) The individual agrees to comply 

with all applicable provisions of this 

part and amendments thereto. 

* * * * * 

■ 7. Revise § 401.211, including the 

section heading, to read as follows: 

§ 401.211 Requirements for training of 

Apprentice Pilots and Limited Registration 

Authorization. 

(a) The Director will determine the 

number of Apprentice Pilots required to 

be in training by each association 

authorized to form a pilotage pool in 

order to assure an adequate number of 

United States Registered Pilots. 

(b) No Apprentice Pilot will be 

selected for training unless: 

(1) The individual meets the 

requirements and qualifications set forth 

in paragraphs (a)(1) through (4), (6), (8), 

and (9) of § 401.210. 

(2) The individual must not have 

reached the age of 60. 

(3) The individual possesses a radar 

observer (unlimited) endorsement on 

their MMC in accordance with § 11.480. 

(c) For purpose of determining 

whether an applicant meets the 

experience requirements contained in 

§ 401.210(a)(1), not more than twelve 

months of ‘‘comparable experience’’ 

may be used in fulfilling the twentyfour-month experience requirement. 

(d) The Director must approve the 

United States Registered Pilots or 

Temporary Registered Pilots designated 

by the authorized pilot organization to 

provide training to those pilots in 

training to be United States Registered 

Pilots. 

(e) Persons desiring to be considered 

as an Apprentice Pilot must file with the 

Director a completed Application Form 

CG–4509 by email to: 

GreatLakesPilotage@uscg.mil; or by mail 

to: Great Lakes Pilotage Office, 2703 

Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE, Mail 

Stop 7509, Washington, DC 20593– 

7509. Upon the request of the Director, 

the person desiring to be considered as 

an Apprentice Pilot must submit two 

full-face passport style photographs, 

signed on the photo, vertically, as close 

to the head as possible. 

(f) Applicants meeting the minimum 

requirements of this section who are 

both selected by the association and 

approved by the Director will be issued 

a U.S. Coast Guard Apprentice Pilot 

Identification Card. Such Card is valid 

until such time as: 

(1) The expiration of a term 

determined by the Director; 

(2) The Apprentice Pilot is registered 

as a pilot under § 401.210; 

(3) The Apprentice Pilot withdraws 

from the training program; or 

(4) The card is ordered withdrawn by 

the Director. 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81331 

(g) The Apprentice Pilot must have a 

Director-approved individual training 

plan. The Apprentice Pilot, along with 

the pilotage association, will record all 

their round trips, as per their individual 

training plan, and provide this 

information to the Director for review. 

Round trips completed as an Apprentice 

Pilot will count toward Full 

Registration. 

(h) The appropriate pilot association 

must perform a Semi-annual 

Performance Evaluation Report on the 

Apprentice Pilot twice a year, to assess 

the Apprentice Pilot’s progress in the 

approved U.S. Great Lakes pilot training 

and qualification program at the 

established pilotage pool. The 

evaluation must be submitted to the 

Director by August 15 and January 15 of 

each year. The report should provide a 

recommendation to the Director on 

whether to keep the Apprentice Pilot in 

the training program. 

(i) The Apprentice Pilot must be 

enrolled in the association’s chemical 

testing program. The chemical testing 

program must meet the requirements of 

46 CFR part 16. For the purposes of this 

Part, the association is deemed to be the 

Sponsoring Organization. 

(j) To facilitate the training of the 

Apprentice Pilot, the Director may 

authorize Limited Registration to the 

Apprentice Pilot, upon the request from 

the pilot association. The Apprentice 

Pilot obtains a Limited Registration by 

completing and recording the 

requirements set forth in § 401.220(b)(1). 

Limited Registration periods will not 

exceed 6 months before the need to 

request a renewal; the specific period is 

determined by the Director per 46 CFR 

401.110(9). The Apprentice Pilot must 

maintain a favorable performance 

evaluation via their Semi-annual 

Performance Evaluation Reports and the 

Director must determine a need for the 

pilot. At any time, this authorization 

may be revoked at the discretion of the 

Director. 

(k) An Apprentice Pilot may be 

eligible for a Certificate of Registration, 

after: 

(1) The mariner completes an 

approved U.S. Great Lakes pilot training 

and qualification program in one of the 

Great Lakes’ pilot associations; 

(2) The appropriate pilot association 

gives the mariner a positive 

endorsement; 

(3) The mariner passes the Director’s 

exam; and 

(4) The Director determines that the 

association needs an additional pilot. 

■ 8. Add new § 401.214 to read as 

follows: 

§ 401.214 Training requirements for 

Applicant Trainees. 

(a) The Director will determine the 

number of Applicant Trainees required 

to be in training by each association 

authorized to form a pilotage pool in 

order to assure an adequate number of 

United States Registered Pilots. 

(b) No Applicant Trainee may be 

selected for training unless: 

(1) The individual meets the 

requirements and qualifications set forth 

in paragraphs (a)(2) through (4), (6), (8), 

and (9) of § 401.210. 

(2) The individual must not have 

reached the age of 60. 

(3) The individual possesses a radar 

observer (unlimited) endorsement on 

their MMC in accordance with § 11.480. 

(c) An individual with other than 

Great Lakes service must obtain at least 

6 months of service as a credentialed 

officer, or comparable experience, on 

the Great Lakes with the pilot 

association in the District waters 

assigned before they are eligible to 

become an Apprentice Pilot. Round 

trips and related activities completed 

during this training phase will not count 

towards Full Registration. 

(d) The Director must approve the 

United States Registered Pilots or 

Temporary Registered Pilots that are 

designated by the authorized pilot 

organization to provide training to those 

pilots that are in training to be United 

States Registered Pilots. 

(e) Persons desiring to be considered 

as an Applicant Trainee must file with 

the Director a completed Application 

Form CG–4509 via email to: 

GreatLakesPilotage@uscg.mil or by mail 

to: Great Lakes Pilotage Office, 2703 

Martin Luther King Jr. Ave. SE, Mail 

Stop 7509, Washington, DC 20593– 

7509. Upon the request of the Director, 

the person desiring to be considered as 

an Applicant Trainee must submit two 

full-face passport style photographs, 

signed on the photo, vertically, as close 

to the head as possible. 

(f) Applicants must meet the preemployment chemical testing 

requirements as defined in 46 CFR 

16.210. 

(g) Applicants meeting the minimum 

requirements of this section who are 

both selected by the association and 

approved by the Director will be issued 

a U.S. Coast Guard Applicant Trainee 

Identification Card. Such Card is valid 

until such time as: 

(1) The expiration of a term 

determined by the Director; 

(2) The Applicant Trainee is 

registered as an Apprentice Pilot under 

§ 401.211; 

(3) The Applicant Trainee withdraws 

from the training program; or 

(4) The card is ordered withdrawn by 

the Director. 

■ 9. Amend § 401.220 as follows: 

■ a. In the introductory text of 

paragraph (a), remove the word ‘‘shall’’ 

and add, in its place, the word ‘‘must’’; 

■ b. Revise paragraphs (b), (c), and (d); 

and 

■ c. Remove paragraph (e). 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 401.220 Registration of pilots. 

* * * * * 

(b) Registration of pilots must be 

made from among those Apprentice 

Pilots who have: 

(1) Completed the minimum number 

of round trips prescribed by the 

Commandant over the waters for which 

application is made on oceangoing 

vessels, in company with a United 

States Registered Pilot or Temporary 

Registered Pilot, and in accordance with 

the Apprentice Pilot’s approved 

individual training plan; 

(2) Completed the approved course of 

instruction for Apprentice Pilots 

prescribed by the association authorized 

to establish the pilotage pool; and 

(3) After completing the requirements 

in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this 

section, satisfactorily completed a 

written examination prescribed by the 

Director, evidencing their knowledge 

and understanding of the Great Lakes 

Pilotage Act of 1960, Great Lakes 

Pilotage Regulations, Rules and Orders; 

the Memorandum of Understanding, 

Great Lakes Pilotage, between the 

United States and Canada; and other 

related matters including the working 

rules and operating procedures of the 

district, given at such time and place as 

the Director may designate within the 

pilotage district of the Apprentice Pilot. 

(c) The pilot association authorized to 

establish a pilotage pool in which an 

Apprentice Pilot has qualified for 

registration under paragraph (b) of this 

section must submit to the Director in 

writing its recommendations together 

with its reasons for or against the 

registration of the Apprentice Pilot. 

(d) Subject to the provisions of 

paragraphs (a), (b), and (c) of this 

section, an Apprentice Pilot found to be 

qualified under this subpart may be 

considered fully registered and issued a 

Certificate of Registration, valid for a 

term of five (5) years or until the 

expiration of their master’s, mate’s, or 

pilot’s endorsement, or until the pilot 

reaches age 70, whichever occurs first. 

■ 10. Add a new § 401.222 to read as 

follows: 

§ 401.222 Temporary Registered Pilots on 

the Great Lakes. 

(a) The Director may, when necessary 

to ensure safe, efficient, and reliable 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81332 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

pilotage service for maritime commerce, 

issue a Temporary Registration to any 

person found qualified under this 

subpart who: 

(1) Holds a valid MMC; 

(2) Meets the requirements of 46 CFR 

401.210 (except paragraph (a)(5)); 

(3) Has previously held a Full 

Registration; 

(4) Meets the requirements of 46 CFR 

part 16; 

(5) Is requested by the pilotage 

association; and 

(6) Either: 

(i) Has reached the age of 70 and 

desires to continue providing pilotage 

services; or 

(ii) Has retired from pilotage service 

and desires to provide pilotage services. 

(b) A Temporary Registration is valid 

for a length of time to be determined by 

the Director, but not to exceed one year 

from the date of issuance. 

■ 11. Revise § 401.230 to read as 

follows: 

§ 401.230 Certificates of Registration. 

(a) A Certificate of Registration must 

describe the areas and routes of the 

Great Lakes within which the pilot is 

authorized to perform pilotage services 

and such description must be consistent 

with the terms of the pilotage 

authorization in their masters, mates, or 

pilot’s endorsement issued under the 

authority of Title 46 of the United States 

Code. 

(b) A Certificate of Registration does 

not authorize the holder to board any 

vessel, or to serve as a pilot of any 

vessel, without the permission of the 

owner or master. A Certificate of 

Registration must be in the possession 

of a pilot at all times when they are in 

the service of a vessel, and must be 

displayed upon demand of the owner or 

master, any United States Coast Guard 

officer or inspector, or a representative 

of the Director. 

(c) A Certificate of Registration 

evidencing registration of the holder is 

the property of the U.S. Coast Guard and 

it may not be pledged, deposited, or 

surrendered to any person except as 

authorized by this part. A Certificate of 

Registration may not be copied or 

digitally reproduced, or be used to make 

a facsimile or Photostat. A Certificate 

which has expired without renewal, or 

renewal of which has been denied 

under the provisions of this section, 

must be surrendered to the Director 

upon demand. 

(d) An application for a replacement 

of a lost, damaged, or defaced Certificate 

of Registration must be submitted to the 

Director, on a Form CG–4509, together 

with two full-face passport style 

photographs, signed on the photo, 

vertically, as close to the head as 

possible. A replacement fee of five 

dollars ($5) by check or money order, 

drawn to the order of the U.S. Coast 

Guard, must accompany any such 

application. A Certificate issued as a 

replacement for a lost, damaged, or 

defaced Certificate will be marked so as 

to indicate that it is a replacement. 

Upon receipt of a Certificate issued as 

a replacement, the damaged or defaced 

Certificate must be surrendered to the 

Director. 

(e) A Certificate of Registration may 

be voluntarily surrendered to the 

Director by a U.S. Registered Pilot at any 

time such pilot no longer desires to 

perform pilotage services; however, in 

the event such U.S. Registered Pilot has 

been served with a notice of hearing 

pursuant to § 401.250, a voluntary 

surrender of the Certificate of 

Registration will be at the option of the 

Director. 

■ 12. Amend § 401.240 as follows: 

■ a. Revise paragraphs (a), (b), and (d); 

and 

■ b. In paragraphs (c) and (e), remove 

the word ‘‘shall’’ wherever it appears 

and add, in its place, the word ‘‘must’’. 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 401.240 Renewal of Certificates of 

Registration. 

(a) An application for renewal of a 

Certificate of Registration must be 

submitted to the Director, on a Form 

CG–4509, together with two full-face 

passport style photographs, signed on 

the photo, vertically, as close to the 

head as possible, at least 15 days before 

the expiration date of the existing 

Certificate. The form for renewal of 

Certificates of Registration may be 

obtained from the Director. A renewal 

fee of five dollars ($5) by check or 

money order, drawn to the order of the 

U.S. Coast Guard, must accompany an 

application for renewal of registration, 

which will be refunded if registration is 

not renewed. Failure of a U.S. 

Registered Pilot to comply with these 

requirements or file a complete and 

sufficient application may constitute 

cause for denying renewal of the 

Certificate of Registration. 

(b) No Certificate of Registration will 

be renewed unless the applicant for 

renewal meets the requirements and 

qualifications set forth in § 401.210 for 

issuance of an original Certificate of 

Registration, excepting that compliance 

with § 401.210(a)(4) is not required if 

the examination was satisfactorily 

passed on a previous application for 

registration within six (6) months next 

preceding the date of application for 

renewal. 

* * * * * 

(d) In any case in which the applicant 

has made timely and sufficient 

application for renewal of his 

registration, no such registration will 

expire until such application has been 

finally determined by the Director 

unless the public health, interest, or 

safety requires otherwise. 

* * * * * 

■ 13. Amend § 401.250 as follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (a), add the word ‘‘A’’ 

before the word ‘‘Certificate’’; and 

■ b. Revise paragraph (d). 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 401.250 Suspension and revocation of 

Certificates of Registration. 

* * * * * 

(d) Every U.S. Registered Pilot must, 

whenever their MMC officer 

endorsement is revoked or suspended 

under the provisions of part 5 of this 

title, deliver their Certificate of 

Registration simultaneously with their 

MMC to the U.S. Coast Guard. If the 

officer endorsement is suspended, the 

Certificate of Registration will be held 

with the suspended officer endorsement 

and returned to the holder upon 

expiration of the suspension period. 

■ 14. Revise § 401.260 to read as 

follows: 

§ 401.260 Reports. 

(a) A marine accident which occurs 

while a United States Registered Pilot, 

Apprentice Pilot, Apprentice Pilot with 

Limited Registration, or Temporary 

Registered Pilot is providing pilotage 

service to a vessel in U.S. or Canadian 

waters of the Great Lakes must be 

reported in writing by the pilot to the 

Director as soon as possible, but not 

later than 15 days after the accident. 

The written report must include: 

(1) Name and description of the vessel 

or vessels involved; 

(2) Description of the accident; 

(3) Type of accident; 

(4) Location; 

(5) Time of occurrence; 

(6) Prevailing weather; 

(7) Results of the pilot’s post-casualty 

drug and alcohol test, if required; 

(8) Damage to the vessel or vessels or 

property; and 

(9) Injury to persons or lives lost. 

(b) The report in paragraph (a) of this 

section does not relieve the pilot or 

others of responsibility for submitting 

any report required by other Coast 

Guard regulations or other government 

agencies of the United States or Canada. 

(c) Every United States Registered 

Pilot, Apprentice Pilot, Apprentice Pilot 

with Limited Registration, and 

Temporary Registered Pilot must file 

with the Director any change of their 

mailing address, email address, or 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81333 

phone number within 15 days after the 

change. 

■ 15. Amend § 401.300 as follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (a), remove the text 

‘‘U.S. registered pilots will be 

authorized to establish a pool’’ and add, 

in its place, the words ‘‘United States 

Registered Pilots will be authorized to 

establish a pilotage pool’’; and 

■ b. Revise the section heading and 

paragraph (b). 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 401.300 Authorization for establishment 

of pilotage pools. 

* * * * * 

(b) The Director must determine the 

number of pilotage pools that will be 

authorized for establishment by 

voluntary associations of United States 

Registered Pilots in order to assure 

adequate and efficient pilotage services 

for the United States waters of the Great 

Lakes. 

■ 16. Revise the heading and 

introductory text to § 401.310 to read as 

follows: 

§ 401.310 Application for establishment of 

pilotage pools. 

An application by a voluntary 

association for authorization to establish 

a pilotage pool must be filed on the form 

to be obtained from the Director. The 

form must require, among other things, 

furnishing of the following information: 

* * * * * 

■ 17. Amend § 401.320 as follows: 

■ a. Revise the section heading, the 

introductory text, and paragraph (d)(6); 

and 

■ b. In paragraph (d)(5), add the word 

‘‘pilotage’’ before the word ‘‘pools’’. 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 401.320 Requirements and qualifications 

for authorization to establish pilotage 

pools. 

No voluntary association will be 

authorized to establish a pilotage pool 

unless: 

* * * * * 

(d) * * * 

(6) It will coordinate on a reciprocal 

basis its pilotage pool operations with 

similar pilotage pool arrangements 

established by the Canadian 

Government and pursuant to the 

provisions of the United States-Canada 

Memorandum of Understanding, Great 

Lakes Pilotage, or any other 

arrangements established by the United 

States and Canadian Governments. 

■ 18. Amend § 401.330 as follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (a), add the word 

‘‘pilotage’’ before the word ‘‘pool’’; and 

■ b. Revise paragraph (b). 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 401.330 Certificates of Authorization. 

* * * * * 

(b) A Certificate of Authorization 

must be in such form as the Director 

may prescribe, but must describe the 

area of the Great Lakes in which the 

pilotage pool will perform pilotage 

services. A Certificate of Authorization 

must be posted in the principal place of 

business of an association in such 

manner so as to be available for 

examination by members of the 

association and the public. 

§ 401.335 [Amended] 

■ 19. Amend § 401.335 as follows: 

■ a. In paragraphs (c) and (e), remove 

the word ‘‘shall’’ and add, in its place, 

the word ‘‘must’’; and 

■ b. In paragraph (d), remove the word 

‘‘shall’’ and add, in its place, the word 

‘‘will’’. 

■ 20. Amend § 401.340 as follows: 

■ a. Revise the section heading and 

paragraphs (a) and (c); and 

■ b. In paragraph (b), add the word 

‘‘pilotage’’ before the word ‘‘pool’’ 

wherever it appears. 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 401.340 Compliance with working rules 

of pilotage pools. 

(a) United States or Canadian 

Registered Pilots utilizing the facilities 

and dispatching services of any 

authorized pilotage pool must comply 

with its working rules approved under 

§ 402.320, except to the extent 

inconsistent with the dispatch orders of 

the Director under § 401.720(b), and 

with other rules of the pilotage pool that 

are related to those facilities and 

services. 

* * * * * 

(c) United States Registered Pilots 

who fail to execute such an 

authorization will not be considered 

members of the U.S. pilotage pool, and 

are not entitled to reciprocal 

dispatching and related services by 

United States and Canadian pilotage 

pools as provided for by the 

Memorandum of Understanding. A 

United States Registered Pilot who fails 

or refuses to avail themselves of the 

established facilities and services will 

be considered as not being continuously 

available for service pursuant to section 

4(a) of the Great Lakes Pilotage Act of 

1960 (46 U.S.C. 216 through 216i) and 

their agreement executed on the 

Application for Registration as a United 

States Registered Pilot, and may be 

subject to suspension or revocation 

proceedings as prescribed by § 401.250. 

§ 401.400 [Amended] 

■ 21. In § 401.400, amend the 

introductory text by removing the word 

‘‘shall’’ and adding, in its place, the 

word ‘‘must’’. 

■ 22. Amend § 401.420 as follows: 

■ a. In paragraph (a)(3), remove the 

word ‘‘movage’’ and add, its place, the 

word ‘‘transit’’; and 

■ b. Revise paragraph (c). 

The revision reads as follows: 

§ 401.420 Cancellation, delay, or 

interruption in rendition of services. 

* * * * * 

(c) Between the dates of May 1 and 

November 30, a vessel or owner is not 

liable for charges under paragraphs 

(a)(1) or (2) of this section, if the 

interruption or detention was caused by 

ice or weather as determined by the 

vessel master and the United States 

Registered Pilot, Apprentice Pilot with 

Limited Registration, or Temporary 

Registered Pilot authorized to provide 

pilotage services to the vessel. When 

possible, the determination to interrupt, 

detain, or delay the vessel due to ice or 

weather should be made prior to the 

pilot departing for the vessel. 

* * * * * 

■ 23. Revise § 401.425 to read as 

follows: 

§ 401.425 Provision for additional pilot. 

The Director may require the 

assignment of two pilots to a ship upon 

request of the ship or when the Director 

deems it necessary for the safe 

navigation of the ship, because of 

anticipated long transit, uncommon 

ship size, adverse weather or sea 

conditions or other abnormal 

circumstances. The charge to the ship 

will be twice the appropriate charge 

provided for in §§ 401.405, 401.407, 

401.410, and 401.420. Each situation 

will be evaluated on a case-by-case 

basis. This authorization may occur at 

the opening and closing of the shipping 

season for a defined time period based 

upon the availability of the aids to 

navigation, ice conditions, weather 

forecasts, and other relevant 

information. 

§ 401.427 [Amended] 

■ 24. Amend § 401.427 by removing the 

word ‘‘shall’’ and adding, in its place, 

the word ‘‘must’’. 

■ 25. Revise § 401.430 to read as 

follows: 

§ 401.430 Prohibited charges. 

No rate or charge may be applied 

against any vessel, owner or master 

thereof, by a United States Registered 

Pilot that differs from the rates and 

charges set forth in this part, nor may 

any rates or charges be made for services 

performed by a United States Registered 

Pilot, or for support services directly 

related to the provision of pilotage that 

a United States Registered Pilot requires 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81334 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

a vessel to utilize, other than those for 

which a rate is prescribed in this part, 

without the approval of the Director. 

■ 26. Revise § 401.431 to read as 

follows: 

§ 401.431 Disputed charges. 

(a) Any rate or charge applied against 

any vessel, owner, or master thereof by 

a registered pilot or pilot association 

that the owner or master disputes as a 

charge prohibited by § 401.430 may be 

appealed to the Director, within 60 

business days of the date the pilot 

association issues the bill, for an 

advisory opinion as to whether such 

rate or charge is a prohibited charge. 

(b) The appeal must be official 

correspondence from either the vessel 

owner, vessel charterer, or an agent or 

employee empowered to speak on 

behalf of the owner or charterer. The 

appeal must be supported by evidence 

that a reasonable attempt has been made 

to resolve the matter between the parties 

and that a bona fide controversy exists. 

The correspondence must articulate the 

following: 

(i) Vessel name, date of service, and 

reference number for the invoice/bill; 

(ii) Exact amount of dispute; 

(iii) Regulatory citation for dispute; 

and 

(iv) Requested resolution. 

(c) The pilot association must be 

furnished with a copy of the appeal and 

be notified by the owner or charterer 

that the matter has been appealed for an 

advisory opinion. 

(d) The pilot association must be 

allowed 20 business days from receiving 

the notice of appeal in which to provide 

any data or arguments desired to be 

submitted in further defense of the 

disputed charges. 

(e) The Director must consider all 

relevant matters presented and issue an 

advisory opinion within 30 business 

days of receiving the pilot association’s 

submission(s) per paragraph (d) of this 

section. The advisory opinion must set 

forth the rates and charges in dispute, a 

discussion of the facts and relevant 

information considered, and a statement 

of opinion. 

(f) When the opinion of the Director 

is that the disputed rates or charges are 

prohibited by § 401.430, the respondent 

must refund moneys, adjust invoices, 

and otherwise conform to the advisory 

opinion within thirty (30) business 

days. 

(g) Failure or refusal to comply with 

the advisory opinion within the time 

allowed may form a basis for a 

determination that there is a violation of 

the Great Lakes Pilotage Regulations 

subject to the provisions of § 401.500. 

(h) The pilot association or vessel 

owner may appeal the advisory opinion 

to the Director of Marine Transportation 

Systems (CG–5PW), no later than 10 

business days after receiving the 

advisory opinion, for a final 

adjudication. 

■ 27. Amend § 401.450 as follows: 

■ a. In the introductory text, remove the 

words ‘‘he is’’ and add, in their place, 

the words ‘‘the pilot is’’; 

■ b. Revise paragraph (b); 

■ c. Revise paragraph (i); and 

■ d. In paragraph (k), remove the words 

‘‘Gros Cap’’ and add, in their place, the 

text ‘‘Buoy 33’’. 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 401.450 Pilot change points. 

* * * * * 

(b) Iroquois Lock, Ogdensburg, NY; 

* * * * * 

(i) ‘‘Buoy 33’’, St. Marys River, Point 

Iroquois; 

* * * * * 

■ 28. Revise § 401.451 to read as 

follows: 

§ 401.451 Pilot rest periods. 

(a) Except as provided in paragraph 

(b) of this section: 

(1) Each United States Registered Pilot 

upon completing an assignment at a 

change point designated in § 401.450, 

and 

(2) Each United States Registered Pilot 

upon completing a series of assignments 

totaling more than 10 hours with no 

more than 2 hours rest between 

assignments, must not perform pilotage 

services for at least 10 hours. 

(b) In the event of an emergency or 

other compelling circumstances a 

pilotage pool may assign a United States 

Registered Pilot for service before their 

10-hour rest period required under 

paragraph (a) of this section is 

completed. Pilotage pools must advise 

the Director of each assignment made 

under this paragraph. 

■ 29. Revise the heading of Subpart E to 

read as follows: 

Subpart E—Penalties; Operations 

Without Registered Pilots 

§ 401.500 [Amended] 

■ 30. Amend § 401.500 by removing the 

word ‘‘shall’’ and adding, in its place, 

the word ‘‘may’’. 

§ 401.510 [Amended] 

■ 31. Amend § 401.510 as follows: 

■ a. In the introductory text to 

paragraph (b), add the word ‘‘only’’ 

between the word ‘‘Pilot’’ and the word 

‘‘when’’; 

■ b. In paragraph (b)(1), remove the 

word ‘‘admit’’ and add, in its place, the 

word ‘‘permit’’, and remove the word 

shall’’ and add, in its place, the word 

‘‘must’’; 

■ c. In paragraph (b)(2), add the word 

‘‘pilotage’’ before the word ‘‘pool’’, and 

remove the words ‘‘U.S. Coast Guard’’ 

and add, in their place, the word 

‘‘Director’’; 

■ d. Remove paragraphs (b)(3) through 

(b)(7); 

■ e. Redesignate paragraph (b)(8) as 

paragraph (b)(3); and 

■ f. In newly redesignated paragraph 

(b)(3), remove the word ‘‘shall’’ and add, 

in its place, the word ‘‘must’’. 

■ 32. Revise § 401.615 to read as 

follows: 

§ 401.615 Representation. 

(a) The United States Registered Pilot, 

Apprentice Pilot, Apprentice Pilot with 

Limited Registration, or Temporary 

Registered Pilot designated 

‘‘respondent’’ in a suspension or 

revocation hearing or ‘‘applicant’’ in a 

refusal-to-renew-registration hearing, 

may be represented before the 

Administrative Law Judge by any 

person who is a member in good 

standing of the bar of the highest court 

of any State, Commonwealth, Territory, 

Possession, or the District of Columbia, 

upon filing with the Administrative Law 

Judge a written declaration that they are 

currently qualified and are authorized to 

represent the particular party in whose 

behalf they act. 

(b) Whenever a person acting in a 

representative capacity appears in 

person or signs a paper in practice 

before the Administrative Law Judge, 

Director, Commandant, the 

Administrator, or other official of the 

U.S. Coast Guard, their personal 

appearance or signature constitutes a 

representation that under the provisions 

of this subpart and applicable law they 

are authorized and qualified to 

represent the particular person in whose 

behalf they act. 

(c) When any United States Registered 

Pilot, Apprentice Pilot, Apprentice Pilot 

with Limited Registration, or Temporary 

Registered Pilot is represented by an 

attorney at law, any notice or other 

written communication required or 

permitted to be given to or by such a 

pilot must be given to or by such 

attorney. If a pilot is represented by 

more than one attorney, service by or 

upon any one of such attorneys is 

sufficient. 

§ 401.630 [Amended] 

■ 33. Amend § 401.630 as follows: 

■ a. In the introductory text to 

paragraph (a), remove the word ‘‘his’’ 

and add, in its place, the word ‘‘her/ 

his’’; 

■ b. In paragraphs (a)(1) and (2), and (b), 

remove the word ‘‘shall’’ wherever it 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 81335 

appears and add, in its place, the word 

‘‘must’’. 

§ 401.635 [Amended] 

■ 34. Amend § 401.635, including the 

heading, by removing the word ‘‘shall’’ 

wherever it appears and adding, in its 

place, the word ‘‘must’’. 

§ 401.640 [Amended] 

■ 35. Amend § 401.640 by removing the 

word ‘‘shall’’ wherever it appears and 

adding, in its place, the word ‘‘will’’. 

■ 36. Revise § 401.645 to read as 

follows: 

§ 401.645 Administrative Law Judge’s 

decision; exceptions thereto. 

At the conclusion of the hearing, the 

parties may submit briefs and 

recommended conclusions and findings 

within such time as the Administrative 

Law Judge determines appropriate. The 

Administrative Law Judge will 

thereafter issue a written initial decision 

in the case, which decision will be final 

and binding upon the Director, except 

as provided in § 401.650. 

■ 37. Revise § 401.650 to read as 

follows: 

§ 401.650 Review of Administrative Law 

Judge’s initial decision. 

(a) The Commandant may, on their 

own motion, or on the basis of a petition 

filed by the United States Registered 

Pilot, Apprentice Pilot, Apprentice Pilot 

with Limited Registration, or Temporary 

Registration Pilot in the proceedings or 

the Commandant, review any initial 

decision of the Administrative Law 

Judge by entering a written order stating 

that they elect to review the action of 

the Administrative Law Judge. Copies of 

all orders for review, replies, and 

decisions must be served on all parties. 

(b) A petition for review must be in 

writing and must state the grounds upon 

which the petition relies. A petition for 

review must be limited to the record 

before the Administrative Law Judge. A 

hard copy or electronic version of such 

a petition for review, together with 

proof of service on all parties, must be 

filed with the Commandant (CL) within 

fifteen (15) days after the date of service 

of the initial decision of the 

Administrative Law Judge. Parties may 

file replies, in writing, to a petition for 

review, with proof of service on other 

parties in the same manner and number 

of copies as is provided for filing of a 

petition for review and within ten (10) 

days after the date the petition for 

review is timely filed. A reply must be 

limited to the record before the 

Administrative Law Judge and the 

petition for review. 

(c) The initial decision of an 

Administrative Law Judge will be made 

final; 

(1) Fifteen (15) days after the timely 

filing of a petition to review unless a 

reply is filed thereto or the 

Commandant enters a written order 

granting the petition for review; or 

(2) Twenty (20) days after the date of 

service of the Administrative Law 

Judge’s decision if no petition for review 

is filed and the Commandant does not 

elect to review on his or her own 

motion. 

(d) If the Commandant reviews the 

initial decision as provided in this 

section, they must issue a written order 

affirming, amending, overruling, or 

remanding the initial decision of the 

Administrative Law Judge within thirty 

(30) days after the date on which they 

take review. There is no other 

administrative remedy within the 

Department of Homeland Security. 

(e) When the Commandant has 

sustained an order of suspension or 

revocation of a registration, the 

respondent may appeal to the National 

Transportation Safety Board under 49 

CFR 825.5 within ten (10) days after 

service of the Commandant decision. 

■ 38. Amend § 401.700 as follows: 

■ a. Revise the section heading and 

introductory text; and 

■ b. In paragraph (a), remove the word 

‘‘his’’ and add, in its place, the words 

‘‘their pilotage’’. 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 401.700 Operating requirements for 

United States Registered Pilots. 

Each United States Registered Pilot 

must— 

* * * * * 

■ 39. Amend § 401.710 as follows: 

■ a. In the introductory text, remove the 

word ‘‘shall’’ and add, in its place, the 

word ‘‘must’’; 

■ b. In paragraph (a), remove the word 

‘‘his’’ and, add in its place, the word 

‘‘their’’; and 

■ c. Revise paragraph (b). 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 401.710 Operating requirements for 

holders of Certificates of Authorization. 

* * * * * 

(b) Coordinate on a reciprocal basis its 

pilotage pool operations with pilotage 

pool operations of the Canadian 

Government, under the ‘‘Memorandum 

of Understanding, Great Lakes Pilotage, 

Between The United States Coast Guard 

and The Great Lakes Pilotage 

Authority,’’ effective September 19, 

2013; 

* * * * * 

PART 402—GREAT LAKES PILOTAGE 

RULES AND ORDERS 

■ 40. The authority citation for part 402 

continues to read as follows: 

Authority: 46 U.S.C. 2104(a), 8105, 9303, 

9304. 

■ 41. Revise § 402.210 to read as 

follows: 

§ 402.210 Requirements and qualifications 

for registration. 

Pursuant to § 401.210(a)(4), each 

applicant for an original registration at 

the time of application and each 

Apprentice Pilot, United States 

Registered Pilot, and Temporary 

Registered Pilot is required to pass a 

physical examination in accordance 

with subpart C of 46 CFR part 10. 

■ 42. Amend § 402.220 as follows: 

■ a. Revise paragraph (a); 

■ b. In the introductory text to 

paragraph (b), remove the word ‘‘shall’’ 

and add, in its place, the word ‘‘will’’; 

■ c. Remove paragraph (b)(5); 

■ d. Redesignate paragraphs (b)(6), 

(b)(7), (b)(8), and (b)(9) as paragraphs 

(b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7), and (b)(8); 

■ e. Revise newly redesignated 

paragraph (b)(7); and 

■ f. Remove paragraph (b)(10). 

The revisions read as follows: 

§ 402.220 Registration of pilots. 

(a) Each Apprentice Pilot must 

complete the minimum number of 

round trips specified in this section 

prior to registration as a United States 

Registered Pilot. The round trips must 

be made in company with a United 

States Registered Pilot or Temporary 

Registered Pilot, on oceangoing vessels 

that have a gross tonnage of at least 

4,000. The pilot association training 

committee, pilot association president, 

or Director may require additional 

round trips to demonstrate proficiency 

for a given waterway or specific port in 

order to ensure maritime safety. The 

minimum number of round trips listed 

here is not intended to guarantee 

completion of a training plan or 

advancement towards Full Registration. 

(1) If the Apprentice Pilot holds a 

master’s endorsement, a minimum of 

five round trips are required over the 

waters for which registration is desired. 

(2) If the Apprentice Pilot holds a 

chief mate’s endorsement or a second 

mate’s endorsement, or holds a first 

class pilot’s endorsement with service 

in the capacity of first mate or second 

mate, a minimum of eight round trips 

are required over the waters for which 

registration is desired. 

(3) If the Apprentice Pilot holds a first 

class pilot’s endorsement or a third 

mate’s endorsement, a minimum of 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3
81336 Federal Register / Vol. 88, No. 223 / Tuesday, November 21, 2023 / Proposed Rules 

twelve round trips are required over the 

waters for which registration is desired. 

(b) * * * 

(7) Instruction in the Great Lakes 

Pilotage Act of 1960; Great Lakes 

Pilotage Regulations; Presidential 

Proclamation of December 22, 1960; and 

Memorandum of Understanding, Great 

Lakes Pilotage, Between The United 

States Coast Guard and The Great Lakes 

Pilotage Authority, effective September 

19, 2013. 

* * * * * 

■ 43. Revise the heading of subpart C to 

read as follows: 

Subpart C—Establishment of Pilotage 

Pools by Voluntary Associations of 

United States Registered Pilots 

■ 44. Revise § 402.320 to read as 

follows: 

§ 402.320 Working rules. 

Sections 401.320(d)(2) and (6) of this 

chapter require that voluntary 

associations of United States Registered 

Pilots authorized to establish pilotage 

pools agree to submit Working Rules for 

approval of the Director and that they 

will coordinate their pilotage pool 

operations with Canada on a reciprocal 

basis. The approved Working Rules of 

each pilot district are on file in the 

office of the Director and may request a 

copy of the Working Rules by emailing 

GreatLakesPilotage@uscg.mil. 

Dated: November 9, 2023. 

W.R. Arguin, 

Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant 

Commandant for Prevention Policy. 

[FR Doc. 2023–25425 Filed 11–20–23; 8:45 am] 

BILLING CODE 9110–04–P 


lotter on DSK11XQN23PROD with PROPOSALS3