US Coast Guard proposes removing six STCW training requirements

The US Coast Guard is proposing to remove six training and competency requirements attached to certain merchant mariner endorsements, arguing that the requirements go beyond what is required under the international STCW Convention and, in some cases, impose additional burdens without providing corresponding safety benefits.

The proposal would affect a range of deck and engineering personnel, including Masters and Officers in Charge of a Navigational Watch (OICNW) serving on vessels of less than 500 GT in near-coastal waters, as well as engineering officers, Designated Duty Engineers (DDEs) and Electro-technical Ratings (ETRs) serving on vessels with propulsion machinery of 750 kW/1,000 HP or more.

The US Coast Guard (USCG) says the changes form part of a broader review of its regulations aimed at eliminating requirements considered duplicative, outdated or more restrictive than international standards.

Six requirements targeted for removal

The proposal would eliminate the following requirements:

1. Leadership and Managerial Skills (LMS) training for Masters of vessels under 500 GT operating in near-coastal waters, including the requirement for renewal.
2. Bridge Resource Management (BRM) training for OICNWs on vessels under 500 GT restricted to near-coastal waters.
3. Demonstration of competence in Leadership and Teamworking (LTW) skills for the same OICNW endorsement.
4. Engineering Terminology and Shipboard Operations (ETSO) training for engineering officers and DDEs on vessels with propulsion power of 750 kW/1,000 HP or more.
5. Computer Systems and Maintenance (CSM) training for ETRs on vessels meeting the same propulsion-power threshold.
6. High Voltage Power Systems (HVPS) training for ETRs on those vessels.

The Coast Guard is also proposing technical amendments to remove outdated or duplicative language from the regulations, including correcting an instance where the Radar Observer requirement was inadvertently listed twice.

Why is the Coast Guard proposing the changes?

The central argument is that some of these requirements go beyond the competency standards established by the STCW Convention and STCW Code.

For smaller near-coastal vessels, the Coast Guard points to the relatively small size of the bridge team. In many cases, a single credentialed mariner serves as the watchstander while also performing the functions of helmsman and lookout.

Against that operating model, the Coast Guard says additional LMS, BRM and LTW requirements designed for larger bridge teams are not necessary for these particular vessels.

Importantly, the proposal does not suggest that BRM, leadership or teamworking competencies are unnecessary across the maritime sector. The Coast Guard specifically notes that these skills remain relevant for officers serving on vessels of 500 GT or more, or on ocean-going voyages where they are responsible for larger bridge teams.

Engineering requirements

• The Coast Guard takes a similar approach to the proposed removal of ETSO training. Its position is that engineering officers should already acquire the underlying knowledge through their broader engineering education, training and experience. Their competence is then assessed through examinations and onboard service.
• The agency therefore considers a separate approved ETSO course unnecessary for the affected endorsements.
• For ETRs, the proposal takes into account the limits of the role itself.
• The Coast Guard says an ETR would not be authorised to undertake computer-system or high-voltage power-system work independently. Instead, such work would be performed under the direct supervision of a credentialed officer, who would retain responsibility for directing and completing the work.
• On that basis, the Coast Guard considers separate CSM and HVPS courses to exceed both the STCW requirements and the responsibilities associated with an ETR endorsement.

What does this mean for mariners?

If adopted, the proposal would reduce the number of specific courses or competency demonstrations that some US-credentialed mariners need to obtain or renew their STCW endorsements.

It is particularly relevant to mariners working on:

• vessels under 500 GT operating in near-coastal waters;
• vessels with propulsion power of 750 kW/1,000 HP or more;
• engineering departments operating with DDE or OICEW endorsements; and ETRs.

However, the proposal should not be interpreted as eliminating the underlying need for competent bridge, engineering or electrical operations. Rather, the Coast Guard’s position is that some of the additional course-specific requirements are disproportionate to the duties and operating environments covered by these particular endorsements.

The measure is currently a proposed rule, meaning the requirements have not yet been removed. The Coast Guard is inviting comments, with submissions due 90 days after publication in the Federal Register. The agency will then consider the comments before determining whether and how to proceed with the proposed regulatory changes.

Ultimately, the proposal reflects a broader effort to align US merchant mariner credentialing more closely with the international STCW framework while ensuring that training requirements remain proportionate to the duties and operating environments involved.

If adopted, the changes could reduce the regulatory and training burden for affected mariners without removing the underlying competency standards expected for safe operations.

For the maritime industry, the proposal also highlights the continuing challenge of balancing robust safety requirements with credentialing rules that are practical, targeted and appropriate to the size, complexity and responsibilities of different vessels.

Source Safety4Sea