Letter: Subchapter M, One Year In
The industry has celebrated the one-year anniversary of the implementation of Subchapter M. Following are a few observations that I have made, and, according to discussions among other people in our industry, many feel the same way. This no way an attack on the United States Coast Guard. They have to follow and enforce the law and I’m very respectful of all they do for the industry.
Just a quick refresher:
• Subchapter M was not supposed to be a financial burden to companies since the Bridging Program was a success and few deficiencies were found. So, adding more regulations will not be a hinderance. $16,627.00. This is the figure the Coast Guard determined it would cost per vessel to be compliant with Subchapter M regulations. I know my boss wishes that was true. The industry indicated the figures to be more in the range of $50,000–$100,000, with some even higher. After conversations with companies, the latter figure seems to be the one that is more accurate. We haven’t even reached the Internal Structural Exam (ISE) phase yet.
As competitive as our industry is, these are daunting numbers to recoup with the slim profit margin in which we operate.
• Inconsistency. This seems to be a prevalent theme throughout the river system on how Subchapter M is being instituted. News on the river travels faster than Amazon’s Prime delivery, so its no wonder that what one district does compared to another gets around pretty fast. Some districts enforce certain regulations while others will let it slide because common sense dictates that it is not needed. Two regulations that are bandied about commonly are 33 CFR 83, Dayshapes and Lights; and 46 CFR 141.375(b), Visual Distress Signals. The technology we possess today on our vessels makes these regulations outdated on the Western Rivers. Rosepoint, AIS, cell phones, radars and computers make the physical presence of the dayshapes and flares obsolete. Though there are others, I just wanted to point out a couple of examples.
• CFR 136.202-phase in period. As of July 22 of this year, 25 percent of a company’s fleet was supposed to have a COI on board to be compliant, and all vessels were supposed to be Subchapter M compliant as of July 20, 2018. A hearty well-done to the companies that have achieved both of these goals. To the companies that have not met the 25 percent, how are you still operating? Another inconsistency. What is your secret? To the companies still doing business with these companies shame on you. This is literally a slap in the face to the companies that have spent the time and money to be in compliance. Has a precedent been sent? Will the 50, 75 or 100 percent be enforced? Not enforcing the 25 percent has set a bad example.
As I said previously, these observations do not lay solely on the Coast Guard. Our industry leaders have been more than complicit. It has been approximately 15 years that Subchapter M has been in development and implemented. How many more years will it take for the Coast Guard, industry, surveyors and auditors to get aligned with their interpretations of the regulations? Surveyors and auditors are a whole other topic. But I digress. The financial burden put on companies in the first phase has been daunting. Don’t forget the ISE is coming soon to a shipyard near you and they are smiling. Not all companies can afford new construction. I surmise there will be a few more “for sale” signs going up and a few more “out of business” signs in the doors as well in the near future.
God bless the mariner. God help the industry.
Name withheld upon request
