Jump to content
q
Peter J Pilkington
Peter J Pilkington
Sign in to follow this  

USCG Proposed Rule Making

    In 1998 The USCG begain a proposed rule making to update the then current comercial diving regulations. That process has remained a work in progress for 14 years

On June 26, 1998 the United States Coast Guard published a notice in the Federal Register that they would be seeking comments regarding the need to update the commercial diving operations regulations. The request goes on to state that “the regulations are over 20 years old and do not include current safety and technology standards and industry practices.” That request for comment garnered ninety two public submissions in addition to submissions from the Commercial Dive School Educators and other industry groups.

On September 29, 1998 a second notice was published extending the time persons and organizations would have to submit comments on the need revisions for 45 days.

On June 22, 1999 the United States Coast Guard held a formal Investigation which in part was focused on the need to reform and re-write the commercial diving regulations.

(See or refer to the Investigation into the events aboard the Cliffs 12.)

In April of 2001 the then Commandant of the United States Coast Guard, Admiral James M.

Loy, released the “findings in fact” that were an outgrowth of that formal investigation. That “finding in fact” included twenty six recommendations for major revisions to the existing Federal Regulations as they pertain to commercial diving.

In November of 2008 the United States Coast Guard posted those same “findings in fact” as part of the proposed rulemaking procedure.

On January 6, 2009 the United States Coast Guard once again opened a public comment period as part of the proposed rulemaking by posting a notice in the Federal Register. That notice was essentially the same as the notice published on June 26, 1998, which was more than 10 years prior, with the exception of the reference to the formal investigation held in June of 1999. (The Cliffs 12 Report.)

On May 19, 2010 your office notified Representative Jim McDermott that there would be an opportunity for additional comment and that there would be “at least one public hearing prior to finalizing” the proposed rulemaking.

This proposed Rulemaking into the need to reform the Federal Regulations as they pertain to Commercial Diving has now been ongoing for 12 years. According to the notice in the 1998 Federal Register the regulations at that time were out dated, for over 20 years, and did not reflect industry standards or practice. That condition has not changed. Since 1998 there have been 273 deaths from diving accidents according to USCG records under USCG jurisdiction. Most of these fatalities occurred during commercial diving activities.

Commercial divers continue to be adversely effected by the lack of proper, enforceable and responsible regulations.

It is an ongoing practice for many commercial diving companies to reduce the size of the dive crew to the dangerous levels currently allowed by ADCI Consensus Standards. This loophole permits them to undercut more responsible contractors. The Coast Guard needs to adopt minimum safe crew size, minimum standards for divers, minimum standards for diving supervisors, assuring that the men and women for the commercial diving industry can perform their appointed tasks in a safe as well as a competitive manner to assure safe diving operations.

The current Coast Guard regulations state that a minimum commercial diving crew consists of; a diving supervisor, a diver, a standby diver, and a tender for each diver. This means that a five man crew is required. But unscrupulous diving contractors are interpreting the regulation to mean that tasks can be combined reducing the size of the crew to 3 men. This works until there is an emergency requiring the standby diver to assist or recover a diver in distress. In that scenario the supervisor has to change roles to become the standby diver and enter the water. Now you have two divers in the water with no supervisor to man the radio to direct the rescue operation and one tender who cannot tend two divers. This situation has led to numerous unnecessary fatalities such as the one described in the Cliffs 12 report. In addition the current regulations do not provide for any minimum standards of skill, knowledge or ability for the dive supervisor, the diver or the tenders to perform a rescue operation.

On January 14, 2009 the USCG, National Offshore Safety Committee released a report, written in April 2008 regarding their recommendations for revisions to the current 46CFR. A report formulated without any input from actual working divers. Those recommendations did not include any of the 26 recommendations addressed in Admiral Loy’s “Findings in Fact”, did not include the requirements for minimum training, skills, knowledge, and made no recommendation for minimum crew sizes other than the one that already exists.


Sign in to follow this  


User Feedback

Recommended Comments

The Coast Guard has said they will be releasing the new recommend changes to the CFRs for public review and comment. As soon as they are released they will be posted here for our members review and comment!

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Without an outcry of public pressure the revised regulations may linger behind closed doors for years to come

Attached is a response I received this afternoon from the USCG regarding the regulatory reform of the commercial diving industry. Bottom line under existing United States Coast Guard regulations there is:

• No requirement for back up divers for commercial diving in less than 130 feet of water.

• No requirement for backup breathing gas supplies for commercial diving in less than 130 feet of water.

• No requirement for backup equipment for commercial diving in less than 130 feet of water.

• No requirement for the testing of skills, or knowledge, or for ability for commercial divers.

• No requirement for the licensing or testing for competency for commercial diving supervisors.

The proposed rulemaking procedures as they pertain to commercial diving are still under review and have been since 1998.

And a commercial diver is still 40 times more likely to die at work than all other employees

Industry standards are elected practice not mandatory requirements. Without proper enforceable regulations the carnage that exists today in the industry will continue.

-----Original Message-----

From: Duane.E.Boniface@uscg.mil [mailto:Duane.E.Boniface@uscg.mil]

Sent: Tuesday, May 15, 2012 11:44 AM

To: peter.pilkington@thediversassociation.com

Cc: John C. Roat; Mark Longstreath; Georges Arnoux; Hal Lomax; Mike Shord; Mike Sisley; Justin Mitchell; Barbara Pilkington

Subject: RE: USCG Proposed rulemaking - commercial diving

Mr. Pilkington,

There is, indeed, a substantial period of time that has passed since the findings of fact from the Coast Guard final report on the Rig-12 casualty. Moreover, during that time there have been substantive changes to the challenges confronting our nation and the United States Coast Guard. This period has seen vast improvements, changes and enhancements to commercial diving industry standards, as you cite in your email. Moreover, there have been additional industry standards that have been published and largely incorporated into modern industry practices. The Coast Guard views these enhancements to existing standards and the publication of new, complementing if not competing standards, as contributing greatly to the enhancement of safety for those working in the commercial diving industry.

Particularly, of the Final Recommendations made from the Rig-12 casualty, the vast majority of those recommendations have been implemented by industry standards. The Coast Guard will address those recommendations not implemented by industry standards in its next rulemaking document for this project.

The Coast Guard does engage with professional divers and diving authorities in the development of its proposed rules. While the Coast Guard is restricted from coordinating directly with the public on the contents of the proposed rule, in order to prevent the appearance of providing one segment of industry with an unfair advantage, we are required to coordinate with other federal agencies. As well as U.S. Navy trained Coast Guard divers, the Coast Guard also relies upon the input from the U.S. Navy, U.S. Army Corps of Engineers and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration.

Additionally, the Coast Guard is very aware of the concerns, thoughts and suggestions of the men and women who are commercial divers. The information available to the Coast Guard at public meetings and trade publications, and on social media and the internet, provides a constant stream of invaluable information that is timely and relevant to our rulemaking. This availability of information to the Coast Guard is a valued source permitting us to question every aspect of our rulemaking to validate assumptions and content.

Federal policy prohibits us from releasing our pre-decisional products to the public at this time. However, our next publication in the Federal Register will include a comment period during which time your organization, and all members of industry, may comment on our latest proposals and all analysis and information we used to develop it.

Best Regards,

Duane E. Boniface

Chief

Office of Standards Evaluation and Development Commandant (CG-REG)

(202) 372-1460

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 years and still counting! Mr Boniface you write fine words, especially in your last two paragraphs, but meanwhile divers are still dying every month it seems and more often than not in shallow and inshore waters.

Quoting our vice-president "When all is said than done, more is said than done"!

This matter is so urgent and I plead with you to speed up the process!

Share this comment


Link to comment
Share on other sites

×

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.