—

¢ HITZEOO ToED 0

MMM UN

| IOHM/181

Foreword

Ever since assuming my duties as Secretary of the Treasury in
January 1961, I have been concerned about the critical problem facing
the United States Coast Guard because of the obsolescence of much
of its equipment and facilities. A review of long-range requirements
for vessels, shore stations, and aircraft indicated a need for a phased
program of capital expenditures totaling more than $1 billion in
order to provide adequate operating tools for the men of the Coast
Guard.

T concluded that a comprehensive study of the Coast Guard’s roles
and missions, together with a review of existing policy and opera-
tional guidelines, would be helpful in deciding our course of action.
Accordingly, a study of the Coast Guard’s 10 major missions was
begun by an inter-agency group composed of experts from the Bureau
of the Budget, the Department of Defense and the Treasury Depart-
ment. This study, lasting 8 months, was concluded in June 1962,
and resulted in 80 recommendations. I have now directed that action
be taken on 76 of them.

This pamphlet summarizes the reports submitted to me by the study
group and the most significant implementing actions I have approved.
Some of these actions will be taken immediately; others will take
effect, only in phases extending over a number of years. The results
of the study should prove to be extremely beneficial to the United
States Coast Guard and to the people it serves.

eae

Douglas Dillon

Table of Contents

Page
Eistonicalskivemliohts sce scum te 2 MP 1
IRort) security 99222 22s! oe eat es 8

Military Readiness_____________- Sob ter Ca a 10

Mids-tovNavigation 92920 oe 1570) EES eee ow 12
Oceanography. 2.0 >. ele Gs ee hye eye 14
awalimioncementiar —2 ots ek ee a 19
earchvamduvescue. 2.22.2. 422022222 oe. BL See ts 26
Ocean Stations__________- x Bias Viel erly al gta by At 29

Merchant Marine Safety... 2.2.2 2s eee 30

Wesenve Draining. 22.22 J.-F 2 Rican. 35

leebreaking ....___.-.-__._- Linnean Ener: 39

iii

yer eae 4
iy i i, are i

Ot j | se taboo wot

Fr ; reise \
4 }
i
'
' wl
f 5!

Historical
Highlights

That versatile triphibious (sea, air, and land) service that became
the Coast Guard was created in 1790, soon after the American nation
was born. Its development paralleled that of the new nation, and
it grew in much the same fashion—sporadically, swinging pendulum-
like between progress and doldrums, meeting each new situation by
improvising, learning by experience what could threaten a nation’s
safety and maritime interests, and by trial and error how to deal with
the dangers.

In war and peace the service has had many varied duties, and has
had to produce results under handicaps of overlapping authority,
obsolete and sometimes conflicting laws, and complex interagency
relationships.

Many of the Coast Guard’s multiple functions were transferred to
it during national emergencies, under the hard logic of expediency;
there was nobody else who could do the job right then. With imagi-
nation and flexibility, the Coast Guard fitted each new task into its
pattern of operation.

The first U.S. Congress accepted 12 lighthouses built by the colonies
along the Atlantic seaboard, and authorized 10 light, fast, 50-foot two-
masted schooners to enforce customs and revenues laws. Though both
the Revenue Cutter Service and the Lighthouse Establishment were
placed under the Secretary of the Treasury, they operated independ-
ently of each other for more than a century, becoming part of the
Coast Guard in 1915 and 1939, respectively.

The expenses of the Lighthouse Establishment were borne by the
Federal treasury, while the Cutter Service was financed from tariffs
collected on imported goods, and was controlled by the Collectors of
Customs of U.S. ports.

Most Cutter Service men had fought the British during the Revo-
lution and they were sea-wise and battle-worthy. They played a grim
and effective game of hide-and-seek with smugglers. With Marines
aboard, they raided French shipping along the coast and in the West
Indies. During these hostilities, the Hagle seized 5 armed vessels and
helped capture 4 others, out of a total of 90 French vessels taken.

After a decade of peace, the Revenue Cutters helped fight the British
in the War of 1812, taking a number of prizes. They also had stirring
set-tos with slavers and pirates, finally making these enterprises
unprofitable.

During the Seminole War, Cutter crews often stormed ashore and
chased marauding bands of Seminoles all the way to the Everglades.
They helped the Navy in Civil War actions.

However, not all the Cutter Service duties involved fighting. From
the very first, Cutter men had gone to the aid of ships in distress, in
the age-old tradition of the sea.

In 1831 the Secretary of the Treasury made search and rescue a
formal part of Revenue Cutter duty with orders to the Gallatin to
cruise coastal waters in search of “persons in distress.” Five years
later the Jackson was authorized to patrol off-shore waters to aid
distressed mariners. The following year, 1837, Congress gave the
President authority to detail public vessels to winter coastal patrol
for the same purpose. “Winter Cruising” off the Atlantic coast be-
came standard practice, along with law enforcement work.

To this was soon added authority to police the loading of explosives
and other dangerous cargo in U.S. ports, and enforcement of regula-
tions in anchorage grounds and harbors.

Beginning in 1848, the Revenue Cutter Service (by then the U.S.
Marine Bureau) established Houses of Refuge for distressed seamen
along the New Jersey shore. In 1878 this effort was separated from
the parent Service and became the independent U.S. Lifesaving
Service. By 1900 the Lifesaving Service operated 269 stations in 12
districts along the eastern seaboard.

In the meantime America had acquired a new frontier, the Terri-
tory of Alaska, purchased from Russia in 1867. Revenue Cutters
were sent to patrol these waters, and in isolated areas the Cutter
captain was the only representative of lawful government. The
Service became very active, first in law enforcement and aid to
mariners, then charting, exploring, sounding and locating fishing
areas, ice-breaking, and finally in administration of the Territory.

Since Robert Fulton invented the steamboat in 1807, units of this
glamorous new means of transportation had been blowing up with
terrifying regularity, killing passengers and destroying cargo. In
1852 the Marine Inspection Service was established in the Treasury
Department (separately from the Revenue Cutter Service), with
authority to license engineers and pilots, and to inspect hulls, boilers,
hfeboats, signal lights, and firefighting equipment.

This was followed some years later by creation of the Bureau of
Navigation, also in Treasury, to administer the Nation’s marine laws.

£E( =

SQ

EE
Ma
a
Kish
7, . ee

This, like the Marine Inspection, Service, was also a separate Bureau.
Both were to be transferred later to Commerce, where they would
be merged as the Bureau of Marine Inspection and Navigation, and
eventually transferred to the Coast Guard.

Technologies changed. The Revenue Cutter Service converted from
sail to steam-powered iron hulls. The Lifesaving Service established
an efficient telephone network for relaying weather information to the

3

Army Signal Corps, and added powered lifeboats. Lighthouses be-
gan to burn acetylene and electricity, and some were made automatic.

All these bureaus, services, establishments, and miscellaneous mari-
time programs boomed into the 20th century, proliferating, over-
lapping, and growing as turbulently as America’s economic and
industrial might.

The Motorboat Act of 1910 set up required safety standards for
vessels 65 feet or less in length, which covered virtually all the pleasure
boats being built in increasing numbers, as well as commercial craft
too small to come under the steamboat inspection laws. The Cutter
Service had the job of enforcement, and boating accidents dropped
toa fraction of what they had been.

The world beyond the oceans moved in upon us with international
responsibilities. There was an international conference on mari-
time safety; 32 nations signed the convention for protection of sub-
marine cables. Wireless was made standard equipment aboard ship.

The United States, Russia, Great Britain, and Japan signed an
agreement to protect the vanishing fur seals and sea otters in 1911,
and the Bering Sea Patrol was created.

The 7itanic rammed an iceberg and sank in 1912 and the Interna-
tional Ice Patrol was formed 2 years later, with the Revenue Cutters
playing an important part. Operational airplanes and the First
World War were just over the horizon. As the seagoing Revenue
Cutter Service grew, so did the shore-based U.S. Lifesaving Service.
Recognizing their similarities and complementary aspects, Congress
in 1915 amalgamated them under the name of the United States Coast
Guard. The new service had a total of 255 officers and 3,900 warrant
officers and enlisted men. It manned a Washington headquarters,
17 regional commands, 4 depots, an academy, 25 cruising cutters, 20

ayy
RY Jom =

ew \
\\ \Ss
me FF a AN
I ae —_~_—==
f <<AS =S>
iD = a
—

f
———

harbor cutters, and 280 lifeboat stations. The law placed it under
the Secretary of the Treasury during peacetime and under the Navy
in time of war.

In 1917 the Coast Guard was given part of the responsibility of
enforcing the Espionage Act and the Neutrality Laws. Our neu-
trality was at anend. During World War I the Coast Guard main-
tained a port security force of more than 41,000 officers and men,
and performed sea patrol and vessel escort duty.

After the war the Coast Guard returned to peacetime duties ever
more complex and extensive. Prohibition plunged the service into
perhaps as dramatic and frustrating a large-scale law enforcement
effort as any major nation ever attempted. New functions such as
icebreaking, new scientific developments for the study of ocean cur-
rents, new responsibilities in conservation, new techniques such as
search and rescue patrol by aircraft demanded more trained personnel,
more equipment, and more liaison with other Government and non-
Government agencies. In 1939 the Bureau of Lighthouses with its
5,200 officers and men, 30,000 aids to navigation, and other facilities
was transferred to the Coast Guard. Two years later the Navy
transferred its radio-direction-finding stations to the Coast Guard.

Pearl Harbor put the Service back into the Navy for the duration,
and Coast Guard cutters and planes hunted the Nazi submarine
“wolf-packs,” patrolled the icy coasts of Greenland and Newfound-
land, rescued thousands of survivors from torpedoed ships, and par-
ticipated in invasions from Salerno to the Philippines. Victory won,
the Coast Guard once more returned to Treasury jurisdiction.

Postwar developments dealt with materials and techniques un-

670544 O—63——2 5

known 10 years before: nuclear power, LORAN, International Geo-
physical Year research in the Antarctic, toname only a few.

During all the years from 1790 Coast Guard authority and policy
had been a piecemeal affair as one and another and then another func-
tion was added to its activities. (For example, the vital Ocean Sta-
tion Vessel program is operated by the Coast Guard, but financed
by the Defense Department; this splits administration and authority.)
In the field of Merchant Marine Safety alone, multiple responsibili-
ties and overlapping jurisdictions currently force the Coast Guard to
maintain active liaison with 23 agencies in 8 U.S. Government depart-
ments, and with 46 non-Government agencies and advisory bodies.

This loosely-knit fabric of responsibility and authority had never
been codified as a cohesive body of law, which made long-range
planning and programing difficult, to say the least.

In 1949, Congress enacted Title 14 of the U.S. Code, which for the
first time in history specified the Coast Guard’s “. . . responsibilities,
functions, and spheres of activity.” This welcome document, how-
ever, simply spelled out Coast Guard responsibility and authority.
It told the Service what it had to do but left all details of operation,
programing, and funding to be worked out by the Coast Guard and
its multitude of cooperating agencies.

6

Meantime, Coast Guard facilities have been deteriorating rapidly.
Most of its major cutters are approaching obsolescence. Replacement
has become critical. It is estimated that the replacement cost of fa-
cilities could reach more than a billion dollars over the next 10 years.

The lack of properly documented overall policy guidelines left the
Secretary of Treasury and the Director of the Bureau of the Budget
in no position to make the major policy decisions demanded by the
growing breadth and complexity of Coast Guard operations, as well
as by obsolescence of equipment. To correct this situation, and to
have the scope and extent of its responsibilities in all areas clearly
defined for the first time in its history, an exhaustive inter-depart-
mental study of Coast Guard Roles and Missions was carried out in
1962.

The following chapters on the 10 major missions of the Coast Guard
have been condensed from this study. In addition to describing each
mission briefly, each chapter contains minimum specific recommenda-
tions that can bring the Coast Guard up to par in personnel and fa-
cilities with the other branches of the Armed Forces.

To a nation at war, no domestic consideration is more vital than the
security of its ports. Sabotage or accident that destroys a port re-
duces the flow of troops, material, and supplies to reinforce our forces
and our allies overseas.

Traditionally, port security has been a wartime function of the
Coast Guard. In World War I and again in World War IT the Coast
Guard built up its port security forces.

Acting under delegation of authority from the Secretary of Navy,
the Commandant on April 15, 1942, ordered district officers and
captains of the ports to “. . . deny entrance to and remove from all
vessels, harbors, ports, piers, and waterfront facilities . . . all persons
whose presence thereon is found . . . to be inimical to the national
war effort by reason of, but not limited to, drunkenness, violations of
safety orders, or subversive inclinations as demonstrated by utterances
or acts.”

The period from mid-1942 to mid-1943 saw the greatest expansion
of port security forces. These ultimately amounted to 22 percent of
the Coast Guard’s wartime manpower. The high point was reached
in July of 1943 when a total of 28,482 officers and men were assigned
to port security duties. These were assisted by 20,000 temporary re-
serve personnel serving without pay in volunteer port security forces.

The port security program ended with the war’s end, but the United
States was headed for decades of tensions, international emergencies,
and near-wars. In 1950, the so-called Magnuson Act enabled the
President to institute a security program whenever he should decide
that the United States was in danger. The President implemented
the bill with Executive Order 10173, and the Coast Guard was once
again charged with carrying out an active port security program for
the country.

8

Security measures similar to those of World War II, but on a re-
duced scale, were put into effect. Specifically, the Coast Guard was
responsible for :

a. The control of anchorage and movement of merchant vessels
within the territorial waters of the United States;

b. The supervision of loading and discharge of explosives and other
dangerous cargo;

c. The provision of fire-fighting facilities supplementing those al-
ready available;

d. The development and enforcement of suitable and adequate fire-
prevention measures;

e. The issuance of identification credentials and the control of access
to vessels and waterfront facilities; and

f. The operation of shore and harbor patrols in connection with
the foregoing activities.

Personnel strength did not approach that of World War II. The
period 1950-52 saw a maximum of about 4,800 officers and men en-
gaged in port security activities. De-emphasis of certain functions of
the program reduced personnel to something under 4,000 men and
officers by the close of 1953.

After the Korean emergency the port security forces declined by
another 2,000 officers and men. But since Executive Order 10173 re-
mained in effect, there was no proportionate decrease either in the
Coast Guard’s port security responsibility or in its operational work-
load.

Penalties for violation include prison sentences up to 10 years, and
fines up to $10,000. If a vessel is involved, it may be confiscated.

The port security program is designed to safeguard vessels, harbors,
ports, and waterfront facilities in the United States and all territory
and water subject to the jurisdiction of the United States, exclusive
of the Panama Canal Zone, from destruction, loss, or injury from
sabotage or other subversive acts, accidents or other causes of similar
nature. A necessary part of the program is to prevent introduction
into the United States, through ports, of persons, articles, or other
things, including weapons of mass destruction, inimical to national
security. While the objectives of the program are clearly stated, the
character of enforcement effort is subject to change depending on na-
tional policy and assignment of responsibilities.

The changing requirements of the port security program are a basic
concern of the Coast Guard. The program, while based on law, is
activated in circumstances other than a state of war by a determin-
ation of the President, and implemented by directives of the Secretary
of the Treasury as approved by the National Security Council. The
result has been a changing program level with shifting emphasis on
various facets of the program. Responsibilities within Treasury have
been divided between the Bureau of Customs and Coast Guard.

In peacetime, port security is the responsibility of the Secretary of
the Treasury, with the program being carried out by both Coast Guard
and Bureau of Customs. The scope of the program varies according
to policy determination reflecting security needs at any given time.
The statutory authority is permissive rather than mandatory.

In wartime, the program is greatly expanded, becoming the re-
sponsibility of the Secretary of the Navy, who in turn delegates this
responsibility to the Coast Guard. The statutory authority in the
Magnuson Act places a mandate on port security functions.

AGREEMENTS

There are no formal agreements with other agencies regarding the
current port security program. There is an agreement with the
Office of Emergency Planning concerning the control of small craft
in wartime port security. The agreement pertains primarily to use
of tugs and harbor craft, with Coast Guard having initial contro] over
the tugs so that merchant vessels may be moved to safe anchorages.

Recommendations

Considering the sensitivity of port areas in peace as well as war, the
personnel screening program should be continued. The port security
program should also be extended, and in some places personnel in-
creased, in the Great Lakes area and Alaska.

Military Readiness

While designed and operating as an agency to keep the peace, the
Coast Guard, as any police force must be, is organized and equipped
to fight when and if war comes.

Title 14 U.S. Code states that the Coast Guard shall be a military
service and a branch of the armed forces of the United States at all
times, operating in the Treasury Department in peacetime. Title 14
also directs the Coast Guard always to be ready to function as a

10

specialized service in the Navy in time of war. Closely allied to
peacetime readiness is the training and planning of a reserve strength
adequate to perform early mobilization duties.

Many agreements exist between Navy and Coast Guard providing
for exchange of information, training at Naval facilities, and pro-
curement by the Navy of specialized equipment related to military
readiness. Installation and maintenance of equipment provided by
the Navy is a responsibility of the Coast Guard.

With the prospect that international tensions will continue, Coast
Guard’s military readiness has become an increasingly important fac-
tor. Therefore, greater emphasis is indicated in training, moderniza-
tion of equipment, and the detailed planning incident to fulfilling
mobilization tasks and manpower requirements. Close coordination
between Coast Guard and Navy is essential to implementation of an
appropriate state of military readiness.

Recommendations

That the Commandant implement measures to improve the military
readiness of Coast Guard vessels, with special attention to an orderly
program of acquiring and installing equipment needed now in active
vessels.

The Secretaries of Treasury and Navy should provide periodic re-
view of the Coast Guard’s military readiness program to see that it
can always be easily and quickly integrated with the Navy’s war plans.
War plans covering all contingencies should be closely coordinated
between Navy and Coast Guard at the field level.

11

Without 20th century aids to navigation, sea travel would be far
more hazardous than it is, and transoceanic air transport would be
seriously impeded. In the United States, aids to navigation began as
they did in most lands, with lighthouses built in the earliest days of
the country’s settlement.

In 1789, the first Congress of the newly-independent United States
accepted title to 12 lighthouses and other navigational aids along the
Atlantic coast. From that beginning, aids to navigation has developed
into one of the most important of the Coast Guard’s 10 major missions.
Of the 31,000 total personnel, aids to navigation is the primary duty
of 6,350 officers and men, and another 9,388 officers and men spend a
substantial part of their time in carrying out this mission.

Today, the Coast Guard operates seven types of aids to navigation.
They are: lighthouses, lightships, buoys, daybeacons, long-range elec-
tronic aids (LORAN), short-range electronic aids (radio-beacons,
RATAN), and fog signals. Their cost and complexity vary from an
inexpensive river buoy costing less than $100 to a multimillion-dollar
LORAN station. The 41,101 aids of all types includes one experi-
mental radar-television (RATAN) installation.

The Coast Guard also provides meteorological data to the Weather
Bureau and helps the mariner with storm warnings and weather
broadcasts. A Coast Guard aircraft photographs uncharted areas
for Coast and Geodetic Survey, helping that agency’s mapping and
charting program while adding to their own data on aids to naviga-
tion.

In cooperation with the Council of State Governments and State
boating officials Coast Guard has developed a Uniform State Water-
way Marking System, chiefly for pleasure craft.

Another function is operation of the International Ice Patrol dur-
ing the ice season, which it has done since 1914, except during war

12

years. The Ice Patrol provides ice information on North Atlantic
shipping routes, helps vessels in distress, and makes studies of ice
and ocean currents.

Coast Guard participates in many international organizations.
Among these is the International Association of Lighthouse Authori-
ties (IALA), which keeps the Coast Guard abreast of new foreign
developments in navigation aids.

Electronic and nonelectronic aids extend Coast Guard operations to
the Western Pacific, the Arctic, Europe, and the Middle East. Re-
search and development is constantly extending the range and relli-
ability of navigational aids, while reducing maintenance costs and
personnel requirements. In response to latest developments, the Coast
Guard has worked out a 1960 LORAN Planning Study that provides
for a gradual transition from LORAN-A to LORAN-C, which will
give broader coverage and greater accuracy.

Present U.S. policy to International Civil Aviation Organization
(ICAO) calls for a single system of long-distance aid to sub-surface,
surface, and air navigation. No such proven system exists yet, but
LORAN-A and LORAN-C have been internationally accepted as
interim systems. Despite the Coast Guard’s major role in long-dis-
tance aids to navigation, including air, the Secretary of Treasury is
not a member of Interagency Group on International Aviation
(IGIA,), which develops U.S. international air policy.

Since the operations of a number of agencies are involved with aids
to navigation of one sort or another, the Coast Guard has inevitably
run into certain conflicts of jurisdiction over who is responsible for
operating what, and how costs are budgeted.

Three areas of overlapping responsibility involve the Federal Avia-
tion Agency (operation of LORAN); the Corps of Engineers (re-
sponsibility for marking wrecks); and the St. Lawrence Seaway
Corporation (operation of aids in the Seaway).

However, working agreements are in effect on these points, and
permanent solutions are under study. Agreements in other areas
regarding navigation aids are in effect with the above agencies and
with the Navy and Air Force. Agreements on administrative, com-
munication, and logistics support are in effect with the other armed
Services.

Cooperation is plainly a key to efficient performance of this su-
premely important mission, and should govern all proposals designed
to make the program more effective.

Recommendations

In cooperation with the Federal Aviation Agency, the Department
of Defense, and other interested agencies, the Treasury Department
should develop legislation giving the Coast Guard the necessary flex1-
bility in the use of electronic aids to navigation; evaluate long-distance

670544 O—63——3 13

navigation aids, especially LORAN-A and LORAN-C, to provide
information that will support the U.S. position to ICAO in 1964. The
Department should also continue review of new developments in long-
distance navigation aids.

The Secretary of Treasury should become a member of IGIA.

Suitable criteria should be developed that will enable the Coast
Guard to measure performance of its multiple functions against
program costs.

The Treasury Department should continue to support the Coast
Guard’s research and development program, its conversion from
LORAN-A to LORAN-C, cooperation with the Weather Bureau
and the Coast and Geodetic Survey, and operation of the International
Ice Patrol.

wed fE Oceanography
——Z

Salen ~

The sea, where life began, is our last unexplored frontier this side of
outer space. Across the slow centuries while men climbed the moun-
tains, probed the jungles and mapped the deserts, the sea retained the
ancient mysteries of its currents and tides, and of the myriad life in
its depths.

Oceanography, the scientific study of the sea, is a natural interest
of the Coast Guard, which has participated regularly in oceanograph-
ic current research since 1914, particularly in the Eastern American
Arctic regions.

The Coast Guard has also contributed to this research through
cooperation with other Government and scientific agencies.

Legislation passed in 1961 with the President’s support gave the
Coast Guard greater authority and responsibility in oceanographic
research. Also the Coast Guard was made a member of the inter-
agency Committee on Oceanography (ICO), created in 1960 to co-
ordinate the oceanographic activities of various Government agen-
cies involved in developing a national program.

14

The other members of the Committee are the Departments of:
Defense (Navy) ; Commerce (Coast and Geodetic Survey) ; Interior
(Bureau of Commercial Fisheries) ; Health, Education, and Welfare
(Office of Education); the National Science Foundation; and the
Atomic Energy Commission. The Committee also includes observers
from the National Academy of Science’s Committee on Oceanography
and the Bureau of the Budget.

In fiscal 1963, the Coast Guard expects to become a participating
member in the National Oceanographic Data Center Interagency
Agreement.

The Commandant has been given authority to use the Coast Guard’s
unique abilities, experience, and facilities to support the National
Oceanographic program.

The program, which covers several agencies, is based on: the re-
port of the National Academy of Science’s Committee on Ocean-
ography; program planning by the ICO of the Federal Council of
Science and Technology; and review by a Special Panel of the Presi-
dent’s Science Advisory Committee.

The program’s objectives are: to increase our knowledge of the
physical, chemical, and biological properties of the ocean; to deter-
mine its mineral and nutrient resources; and to understand its inter-
action with atmosphere and shore boundaries.

The Coast Guard will participate in the following seven activities of
the program. Other agencies, such as the Corps of Engineers, Coast
and Geodetic Survey, and the Navy, also have operating programs in
these areas.

Ocean-wide Surveys. Collection of data designed to yield informa-
tion about the world’s oceans.

In-shore Surveys. Observations along the continental shelves and
marine estuaries, as well as along large inland bodies of water such as
the Great Lakes.

Ocean Waves and Swell. The design and construction of ships and
other marine structures require systematic observation and study of
waves and swell. This is also required in order to forecast sea condi-
tions for ship routing, military operations, search and rescue, etc.

Ice in the Sea. More information on sea and berg ice formation,
drift, and deterioration is needed by increasing polar operations, by
high-latitude and military research, and for the development of water-
ways in traditionally ice-bound areas.

Radioactivity in the Ocean. Studies are necessary to determine
the effects of radioactive contamination upon the ocean and marine life.

Oil Pollution of Navigable Waters. Long-range plans to cope with
this problem requires investigation into coastal circulation and estua-
rine flushing. Enforcement of the Oil Pollution Acts requires ocean-
ographic studies to determine the causes of problem areas, and solution
of the problems.

15

Military Oceanography. Military oceanography requirements are
discussed in Navy plans. These include Coast Guard contributions in
the area of antisubmarine warfare.

Coast Guarp Program.

In addition to the above, the Coast Guard has developed its own
provisional Long-Range Plan for Oceanography, 1962-70, dated
March 5, 1962. Itsessentials follow.

Coast Guard Role and Objective. To establish guidelines for an
increasing role in oceanography within the provisions of Title 14, U.S.
Code, and in the national interest. The program covers four basic
projects:

1. Ocean Station Project. Includes underway observations between
port and station, and time-series observations while on station.

2. Special Patrols Project. Collecting and reporting standard
oceanographic data during such operations of the Coast Guard as In-
ternational Ice Patrol, Bering Sea Patrol, Fisheries Patrols, Polar
Operations, and Ocean Survey Patrols.

3. Coastal Oceanography Project. Data collection on the con-
tinental shelf and coastal regions, in which Coast Guard lightships,
off-shore structures, coastal stations and buoy networks can be useful.

4. Cooperative Projects. This permits the extension of Coast Guard
facilities to other participating and cooperating agencies.

Coordination. The Coast Guard Oceanographic Unit will coordi-
nate the Coast Guard Program, including technical supervision, ad-
ministration, scientific liaison, etc.

Facilities. The Coast Guard has numerous facilities adaptable to
oceanographic research, particularly data collection. These include
high-endurance cutters, icebreakers, medium patrol cutters, and light-
ship stations.

Personnel and Training. Requirements will be met by increasing
personnel at units, and training (including post-graduate studies for
officers) regular assigned personnel.

Instrumentation. Given the research potential of Coast Guard fa-
cilities, oceanographic instrumentation becomes the principal program
requirement. Special instrumentation must be installed to carry out
the program.

NatTIoNaAL OcEanocrapHic Dara Center (NODC)

The Data Center, established 2 years ago in Washington, D.C., is a
centralized national repository where oceanographic data is available
to everyone. It acts as a clearing house for acquiring, compiling,
processing, and preserving data, including that of the Coast Guard sur-

16

veys. The Coast Guard supports NODC, both in operational proce-
dures and funding. The Coast Guard Oceanographic Unit will work
with NODC.

Tuer Coast Guarp’s ExTERNAL RoLE IN OcEANOGRAPHY

This includes all Coast Guard activities that support the national
program through cooperation with other agencies involved in oceano-
graphic research. The Coast Guard’s many sea-going vessels, as well
as officers and enlisted men trained in sea-lore, can make a valuable and
economical contribution once the ships and stations are equipped with
the necessary instruments, laboratories and storage space, and addi-
tional personnel are trained. The versatile medium and large vessels
can be equipped at moderate cost, and the 13 graduate oceanographers
already serving as Coast Guard officers can handle the initial phase
of the expanded program.

Internal Role. This includes “in-house” research pertinent to other
Coast Guard missions, such as analysis and study of data supporting
the International Ice Patrol, law enforcement, merchant marine safety
and research on wave and swell action relative to search and rescue.

For example, at sea a distressed aircraft must be given a ditch head-
ing which is the best compromise betwen wind, swell, and surface wave

a. GUAR)
<sie SN =~ D x
yan WE Pp; aN

17

action. The effect of wave and swell on a ship’s structure is an im-
portant area in which more basic research is needed. The Coast
Guard is in good position to contribute to this type of research, but
any expansion of its research efforts would require more personnel and
laboratory facilities at the Oceanographic Unit.

Future Role. The multi-agency control of coordination of the
National Oceanography Program is primarily through the Inter-
agency Committee. However, the program’s operation is complicated
by the justification that each agency must make before the respective
appropriations committees of the Congress. This is likely to lead to
an unbalanced program, depending on the importance that each ap-
propriations committee attaches to oceanography.

This difficult budgeting problem could be solved best by a detailed,
composite national program which allocates priorities for manpower,
goals, and investment in vessels and facilities.

The national program will be administered by the Office of Science
and Technology, established in June 1962.

Although Treasury’s (Coast Guard) role in the national program
is minor in terms of dollars needed, it is a major participant in terms
of the facilities and manpower it can provide. Further, its traditions,
training, and professional interest have given the Coast Guard ad-
ministrative abilities not fully recognized under existing plans for the
future. The Study Group believes the Coast Guard is able to con-
tribute substantially to the national program, not only in research,
but also in planning and annual programing.

Recommendations

The Coast Guard should assume an increasingly active role on the
Interagency Committee on Oceanography. It should be a major par-
ticipant in the national program, taking part in all stages of deter-
mining policy, planning, programing, and allocating resources.

18

Law Enforcement

Law enforcement agencies afloat or ashore share the built-in frustra-
tion of police work in every land and every period of history: there
are always more violators than can be prevented from breaking a law
out of ignorance or carelessness, and also more with criminal intent
than can be caught. There are never enough men, equipment, or
money to do the job they are charged with, and the regulations they
must enforce are often obsolete or conflicting.

The Coast Guard is no exception, especially since law enforcement
is only 1 of its 10 major missions. Its responsibility is broad: en-
forcement of all Federal laws upon the navigable waters of the United
States and its possessions, and on the high seas. In the latter in-
stance, jurisdiction applies generally to U.S. merchant vessels, and
to vessels of other nations in conservation enforcement.

These laws were described in the report under four main categories
relating to:

1. Safety and law enforcement at sea or on navigable waters.

2. Harbor safety and regulation.

3. Conservation.

4, Enforcement activities in cooperation with other Federal
agencies.

Since most of the enforcement work is preventive and educational
rather than pursuit of criminals, the Coast Guard more nearly re-
sembles a national Department of Public Safety than an ordinary
police force.

The growth of this important Coast Guard function has been on
the same basis as many of its other missions: broad general authority
without any policy statements by the Secretary or formal departmental
guidance.

Of the many agencies queried by the study group, not one provided
a suitable yardstick by which adequacy of enforcement could be

19

measured. Incomplete data on workload and enforcement standards
make it difficult to evaluate the level of enforcement, and to do long-
range planning and budget programing.

General Recommendations

The Study of Coast Guard Roles and Missions shows that the
Coast Guard’s long-standing practice of cooperating with other Fed-
eral and State agencies in many law enforcement activities has pro-
duced a high level of performance and an excellent working relation-
ship. This practice should be continued and expanded wherever
necessary.

The Study also shows a need for all laws now enforced, and that
added enforcement is needed in virtually all areas, especially in con-
servation, motorboat safety, oil pollution, and dangerous cargo
loading.

Coast Guard can better carry out its enforcement responsibilities
with increased departmental and headquarters direction, and greater
training effort.

Cooperative efforts between the Coast Guard and other agencies
should also be extended and improved, and standards should be de-
veloped from which program requirements can be determined.

Safety and Law Enforcement at Sea and on Navigable Waters

This is by far the largest and most complex category. It governs
vessel movements, specifies lights and markers for artificial islands
and fixed structures, regulates the use of motorboats, and provides
authority to arrest suspected criminals and prevent oil pollution.

Tue RUuLEs oF THE Roap

The Rules of the Road, which deal with lights, fog signals, speed,
steering, right of way, operations in narrow channels, and distress
signals, are really four sets of rules: International (high seas), In-
land (rivers and harbors), Western Rivers, and Great Lakes. These
differ considerably, making uniform enforcement difficult if not im-
possible. Moreover, while there are penalties for violation of the
latter three, the International Rules are not backed up by penalties.

The Rules and Missions study recommended that legislation be
proposed to make the various Rules of the Road conform as nearly
as possible to International Rules in order to improve safety of
navigation.

ARTIFICIAL ISLANDS AND FIxED STRUCTURES

There are 3,700 offshore structure (mostly oil rigs) in U.S. terri-
torial waters. Without proper lights, warning devices, and safety
equipment these would endanger navigation as well as the lives of

20

those working abroad the structures. The Coast Guard is authorized
to issue and enforce regulations covering these matters (43 USC
1333).

It was recommended that legislation be proposed giving authority
to regulate aids to navigation and safety equipment on all such struc-
tures, and that the Coast Guard exercise broad control over these and
safety of boats supporting the offshore structures.

Mororsoat SAFETY

The Motorboat Act of 1940 (amended in 1950, 46 USC 526), and
the Federal Boating Act of 1958 (46 USC 527) are designed primarily
to keep the inexperienced or careless pleasure boaters from killing or
maiming themselves and others. The phenomenal postwar increase of
small boats in U.S. waters (estimated at 6 million in 1961) make these
laws as necessary and as hard to enforce as traffic laws ashore.

The law specifies for each of three classes of boats up to 65 feet long,
lights, sound-signal equipment, lifesaving equipment, fire extinguish-
ers, ventilation, and the like. Registration is required for power boats
of more than 10 horsepower, boarding for inspection is authorized, and
any boat operator may be required to show identification.

The Coast Guard Auxiliary was formed in 1941 (14 USC 821).
This is an organization of owners of boats, aircraft, or radio stations,
which helps the Coast Guard with safety, education, and rescue meas-
ures. They do not take part in enforcement duties. As of 1961 they
totaled 21,000. Spearheaded by the Coast Guard and the Auxiliary
Flotillas, State boating authorities, safety officials, U.S. Power Squad-
rons, Red Cross, and the YMCA are carrying out an extensive pro-
gram of education in boating safety.

21

There are still areas of conflict between Federal and State boating
laws, and between Federal and National Park Service regulations cov-
ering navigable waters in national parks.

It was recommended that the Coast Guard establish a broad and
continuing campaign to promote uniform State boating safety laws
with minimum requirements equal to those of the Federal Motorboat
Act of 1940, as amended (46 USC 526). Also, where minimum re-
quirements have been established by enactment, Coast Guard should
seek to enter into agreements for enforcement by local authorities.

It was recommended that uniform boating safety regulations also
be established with the Department of Interior (National Park Serv-
ice). The Coast Guard should retain its responsibility and the right
to occasional review of enforcement in national parks.

It was recommended that motorboat safety education be intensified
through strong support of the Coast Guard Auxiliary.

It was recommended that Coast Guard ask for legislation to estab-
lish a self-inspection plan for owners of recreational boats and a formal
program to promote self-inspection in the States. In this regard, the
Secretary of the Treasury asked the Commandant to examine the possi-
bility of including such proposed legislation in the Department’s legis-
lative program for 1965.

CRIMINAL LAW

Most major crimes afloat are the same as those ashore: treason, mur-
der, manslaughter, assault and maiming, rape, robbery, arson, kid-
napping, etc. Marine crime also includes piracy and barratry, the
destruction of a ship in order to collect insurance. Enforcement of
criminal law represents a minor part of the Coast Guard effort. How-
ever, enforcement is felt to be below standard. This is especially true
of barratry, where the lack of trained Coast Guard investigators makes
it difficult or impossible to get evidence that will justify prosecution.

Om PoLLuTION

Pollution of coastal or tidal waters by discharging oil is a serious
offense, dangerous to human, marine, and wildlife. The Oil Pollution
Act of 1924 (83 USC 431-487) and a subsequent one stemming from
an international agreement, the Oil Pollution Act of 1961 (PL
87-167), provide heavy fines and possible loss of license for violations.
The Corps of Engineers and Bureau of Customs also investigate and
make arrests for oil pollution. However, industrial operations in and
around port areas and the impossibility of keeping an eye on every
wandering tramp steamer make this difficult to enforce.

The machinery of enforcement also hampers Coast Guard efforts.
Both acts are administered by the Corps of Engineers, which acts as
intermediary between the Coast Guard and the U.S. Attorney in build-

22

ing a case for prosecution. This delays enforcement action, and since
the offending vessel is generally available for very short periods, it is
frequently beyond reach before the law can be enforced.

It was recommended that administration be transferred from the
Corps of Engineers to the Coast Guard, but with the Corps of Engi-
neers to continue enforcement; that Coast Guard be given authority
to make agreements with other agencies in order to enforce the law;
that jurisdiction of the Oil Pollution Act of 1924 be extended to all
U.S. navigable waters; and that penalties for convicted violators be
increased.

Harbor Safety and Regulation

ConTRoL oF VEessEL MovEMENT AND ANCHORAGE TO
Protect U.S. Navy VEssELSs

The Coast Guard has authority to control the anchorage and move-
ment of any vessel in U.S. waters to protect the security of U.S. Navy
ships. However, there are no penalties for violation, and the law
gives no control over surface or underwater swimmers.

It was recommended that the basic statute be amended to provide
control over swimmers in restricted areas, and to establish penalties
for violations.

ANCHORAGE GROUNDS AND Harpor REGULATIONS—REFusE ACT

The Coast Guard and Army Engineers cooperate to enforce regula-
tions in harbors and anchorage grounds and to protect navigable wa-
ters as well as river and harbor improvements. Included in these
are laws forbidding the dumping of refuse, floating logs or timbers,
damaging U.S. marine facilities, obstructing navigation by anchoring
or sinking a vessel in channels. Fines are provided for violations.
Enforcement of most of these requires expanding efforts.

CarRIAGE OF EXxpLosives oR DANGEROUS SUBSTANCES

Regulations covering the handling of explosives (46 USC 170) and
dangerous substances have been adequately enforced. But the con-
tinuing development of hazardous new chemicals, radioactive mate-
rials, and new types of containers presage a need for increased efforts
in order to maintain the present safety record. Broader enforcement
will also be required because more foreign ships, generally unaware of
USS. safety requirements, are calling at U.S. ports.

A high degree of compliance is essential, since a mishap from care-
less handling can endanger an entire port.

It was recommended that minimum standards be established for
supervising the handling, storage, and loading and unloading of dan-
gerous cargo.

23

Conservation Laws

The Coast Guard enforces a number of fish and game conservation
laws, generally codifying provisions of conventions, treaties, or agree-
ments between the United States and other nations. Most of these
deal with deep-sea fishing, while others protect the fur seal and regu-
late whaling and sponge-fishing.

The Interior Department (Fish and Wildlife Service), State De-
partment, and the Coast Guard all consider the conservation laws
adequate, but all agree that proper enforcement is not possible with
the men and equipment available. Coast Guard supplies all marine
enforcement except in the North Pacific, where the Interior Depart-
ment makes an unsatisfactory effort with a small vessel of its own and
three launches under contract.

More enforcement will be required in the future. Treaty regula-
tions need to be expanded to protect additional species of fish and
shell fish, the Northwest Atlantic Fisheries Convention should be
changed to permit international policing of the fishermen of signa-
tory nations, and the large Russian and Japanese fishing fleets in both
Atlantic and Pacific concern State, Interior, and the Coast Guard.

It was recommended that, in order to assure survival of many of our
vanishing species of wildlife and so that the vast natural resources of
our fishing grounds not be diminished, sufficient Coast Guard person-
nel and facilities be allocated to carry out a more adequate enforce-
ment program.

It was recommended that the Coast Guard and Departments of State
and Interior continue to study and coordinate marine conservation
law enforcement, with the Coast Guard assuming enforcement respon-
sibilities in areas of marine conservation under Interior’s administra-
tive supervision.

It was recommended that Treasury, Interior, and State develop
jointly standards and requirements for conservation law enforcement.

CAMPECHE PATROL

In 1951, the Coast Guard began a continuous patrol in the Gulf of
Campeche (part of the Gulf of Mexico) to provide SAR assistance and
to prevent incidents with Mexico over claims that U.S. shrimp boats
were violating Mexican waters. Since the patrol began, the incidents
have decreased.

Recently a part-time patrol was begun in the Western Gulf of
Mexico, at the request of the State Department.

There is potential need for a full-time patrol, which cannot be car-
ried out with existing facilities and men.

It was recommended that these patrols be continued and the pro-
gram be reviewed periodically.

24

Enforcement in Cooperation With Other Agencies

The Coast Guard furnishes water and air transportation, and oc-
casionally manpower in emergencies, to help the Bureau of Customs
enforce the customs laws.

The Immigration and Naturalization Service gets Coast Guard help,
such as coastal surveillance in the Florida area, with ship searches for
stowaways, and with transportation for immigration inspection board-
ing parties.

The Coast Guard cooperates with the Department of Health, Educa-
tion, and Welfare, usually by furnishing transportation to Public
Health Service personnel who must board incoming vessels for health
inspection.

The Neutrality Laws are enforced by the Coast Guard, operating
under authority delegated to the Secretary by Executive Order 10637,
of September 1955.

Cooperation of the Coast Guard is also extended to: the Alcohol Tax
Unit of the Internal Revenue Service, usually as air transportation to
help locate illicit stills; and the Office of Territories of the Interior
Department, in the form of periodic visits to a few U.S.-owned islands
in the Pacific. Sometimes also the Coast Guard will carry mail in
emergency conditions or at isolated locations such as between Puerto
Rico and the Virgin Islands.

It was recommended that these cooperative working arrangements
be continued.

25

Disasters on land and sea can happen anywhere, any time, and
seldom happen twice in just the same way. Perhaps the only effective
way to deal with them is to get good men, train and equip them well,
establish general criteria, and let them use their own judgment in
saving lives and property when disaster strikes or threatens.

This is the essence of the Coast Guard’s Search and Rescue mandate.
They are instructed to: “perform any and all acts necessary to rescue
and aid persons and protect and save property.” A Senate report says
further that “. . . Congress expects the Coast Guard to save lives
and property whenever it can .. .”

Search and Rescue is the Coast Guard’s primary mission. Any Coast
Guard vessel or aircraft on any other mission can be diverted to help
a ship or aircraft in distress.

In 1961 Coast Guard SAR efforts saved the lives of 3,499 people,
helped 84,397 people out of trouble, and saved or gave aid to nearly $2
billion worth of property that was in danger. These activities ac-
counted for 47 percent of Coast Guard’s total activities in all fields of
operation.

Search and Rescue activities are divided into categories of long,
medium, and short range. Long-range missions extend as far as 1,000
miles at sea. These usually occur in lanes of high-density trans-oceanic
air or surface traffic. A long-range Coast Guard aircraft is sent to
escort the crippled plane to the nearest airport. When aircraft or
vessels are missing or unreported and overdue, the plane begins the
long search covering thousands of square miles of open sea. Also, one
or more of the Coast Guard’s 36 large, high-endurance ships races to
the scene to give whatever help may be needed.

Most air and surface traffic is concentrated within the medium range,
500 or 600 miles off the coast. In this belt are found not only the large

26

trans-oceanic ships and aircraft, but also the smaller and often less
fully equipped coastal vessels, pleasure boats, small aircraft, and fish-
ing fleets. Medium-range amphibian aircraft and smaller ships can
carry out long searches at this distance. Under favorable conditions,
the amphibians can land at sea to rescue survivors of ditched aircraft
or sunken vessels, or to pick up people needing emergency medical care.

Search and Rescue’s busiest area is short range, within 100 miles of
shore. Everything that can happen to an aircraft or ship in mid-
ocean can also happen here. In addition, people are stranded by in-
coming tides, small craft are overturned, disabled boats are caught in
surf, swimmers become exhausted, and fishermen get lost in early dark-
ness. The vast increase in pleasure boating during recent years has
multiplied the frequency of this type of emergency. The classic sea-
side Lifeboat Station is of particular value along the coasts. They
have communications equipment, boats, and vehicles. Their tradi-
tional function of taking surviving seamen off wrecked vessels has
been replaced largely by helping the pleasure cruiser or the shallow-
draft commercial fisherman in distress.

Within the 100-mile area the patrol craft can usually reach the scene
within 6 hours after the first call for help goes out, the helicopter much
sooner. In evacuating people from areas of floods, fires, storms, etc.,
and in towing boats for limited distances, the helicopter is the work-
horse of the Coast Guard.

Search and Rescue duties also include holding until the owners
claim it property saved from disasters, supplying food, clothing, shel-
ter, and medicine to those rescued, and destroying or towing to port
sunken or floating dangers to navigation.

On a somewhat reduced scale, these services are also extended to the
waters of the Gulf of Alaska and the Aleutian-Bering Sea, and the
Hawaiian Islands.

Since other agencies of the U.S. Government also engage in SAR,
the National Search and Rescue Manual, approved in July 1959, defines
geographic jurisdictions and responsibilities among the Air Force,
Coast Guard, and the Overseas Unified Commands duties of SAR co-
ordinators.

The basic agreement affecting Coast Guard’s SAR function is the
National Search and Rescue Plan, designed to integrate into a co-
operative network available U.S. search and rescue facilities, to be co-
ordinated in any one area by a single Federal agency.

The United States has Search and Rescue treaties with Canada and
Mexico and other agreements providing for entry of one into the other’s
national waters, respective responsibilities, and cooperative efforts.

Agreements providing for SAR cooperation also exist with ICAO
and North Atlantic Ocean Station vessels.

27

The Atlantic Merchant Vessel Report System (AMVER), admin-
istered by the Coast Guard, is a voluntary merchant vessel position
report system using movement reports from vessels of all nationalities
plying the Atlantic Maritime Region. This system is used to provide
the Rescue Coordination Center with positions of merchant vessels
near a vessel in need of assistance.

As of January 1, 1962, 6,400 vessels, representing 56 flags, partici-
pated in the AMVER program. This represents approximately 65
percent of foreign flag and 90 percent of American flag merchant ships
plying international waters of the Atlantic.

Coast Guard maintains 9 air stations, 14 air detachments, 107 opera-
tional aircraft of varying types, and 1 aircraft repair supply base.
Nine of the 14 detachments have been activated since 1946, and plans
call for 15 more by fiscal 1967.

Coast Guard has 147 surface vessels of all types, exclusive of special
purpose vessels such as bouy tenders, and needs a total of 162, including
2 more large high-endurance ships and 27 more large patrol craft.
Lifeboat Stations total 140. The program for the next 3 years is
aimed at broadening and modernizing their operations.

Recommendations

In order to meet the complex SAR requirements on an orderly and
logical basis, there should be an operations research study that will en-
able the Coast Guard to develop a coordinated long-range plan for
total mission accomplishment. An essential requirement, both for im-
mediate and long-range SAR purposes, is a program of progressive
replacement of obsolescent vessels, particularly those handling the
bulk of the SAR workload.

The Coast Guard should encourage State and local authorities to
develop SAR facilities in inland navigable waters in accordance with
the National SAR Plan.

The ocean station program had its inception in a pre-World War IT
need for meteorological and navigational aid services for transoceanic
aircraft flights. Since then the program has increased and diminished
according to wartime versus peacetime requirements and the austerity
of budget policy.

The Coast Guard now provides the equivalent of 18 vessels operat-
ing full time to support 6 ocean stations—4 in the North Atlantic and
2 in the Pacific. These vessels, while on station, perform the follow-
ing functions:

a. Collect and transmit meteorological information to the Weather
Bureau, enroute aircraft, and vessels.

b. Maintain readiness to perform search and rescue missions.

ce. Provide aircraft and vessels with aids to navigation information.

d. Relay aircraft and vessel communications.

e. Collect, collate, and transmit time-series oceanographic informa-
tion.

f. Provide a supplementary national defense capability.

A continuing requirement for these services is evident from the
many agency and user responses. Thus, the program should be
acknowledged nationally and internationally. Obsolescent equipment
on the ocean station vessels should be replaced with efficient, modern
equipment.

Recommendations

Because the ocean station vessel program is such an obviously essen-
tial component of the overall national and international effort in com-
munications, safety of air and sea travel, scientific data, and national
Defense, it should be continued.

At present the Department of Defense provides funds for the pro-
gram. This splits management and control of operations. Transfer
of funding to the Treasury Department logically should follow af-
firmation of the requirement for the services being rendered.

Beginning with fiscal 1964, Treasury should budget for acquiring
and installing the necessary equipment, including radar, aids to navi-
gation, and communications equipment. The Department of Com-
merce should assume budgetary responsibility for weather personnel
and equipment, because the Weather Bureau is a Commerce agency.

Safety

The U.S. Merchant Marine Safety Program got its start in 1824,
when Congress directed the Secretary of Treasury to investigate the
appalling number of boiler explosions aboard steamboats. From this
beginning evolved today’s broad concern over the safety of life and
property at sea, which has given the United States the world’s high-
est safety standards.

The Coast Guard has had its present authority to enforce laws
dealing with Merchant Marine Safety only since 1950. As with
many of its other functions, the Coast Guard inherited a fabric

30

of modern and obsolete laws, regulations, and overlapping author-
ity. If it were not for the good will and cooperation of the other
agencies involved, as well as the shipping industry, enforcing the
safety provisions would be much more difficult.

The Coast Guard’s Merchant Marine Safety function can be divided
into the following categories:

1. Inspection and regulation of vessels and equipment for physi-
cal protection of crew, passengers, and cargo.

2. Regulation of marine personnel and protection of their rights.

3. Engineering and technical supervision over safety standards.

4. Investigation and review of marine casualties and acts of in-
competency or misconduct.

5. Liaison with the maritime industry and international bodies.

To carry out these broad and varied responsibilities is the duty
of 510 commissioned officers, 160 warrant officers, 150 enlisted men,
and 400 civilian personnel.

The officers are general duty officers who have been given special-
ized training in merchant marine safety. This specialized training,
supplemented by approximately 3 years of apprenticeship, provides
the background for a marine inspector newly entering the field. Pro-
vision of competent officers for the marine safety function is a con-
tinuing and difficult problem for the Coast Guard.

31

Meanwhile, the workload becomes not only heavier but more com-
plex. Rapidly developing marine technology (nuclear ships, super
tankers, semi-automated vessels, etc.) demands a higher degree of tech-
nical competence for safety inspection.

A few figures illustrate the magnitude of the tasks of this group:
during 1958 the subsidized segment of the American Merchant Marine
transported between United States and foreign ports more than 6,000
million tons of goods valued at $16 billion; 2,400 subsidized voyages
on essential trade routes authorized for 1961 were expected to equal or
better these totals.

In wartime when all American merchant vessels are requisitioned
and operated by the Government, the Maritime Administration de-
pends heavily on Coast Guard functions as an arm of the Navy. Close
cooperation is necessary to coordinate merchant marine safety in war
effort.

No function of the Coast Guard involves as much conflict of juris-
diction and overlapping authority as merchant marine safety. In
addition to the Coast Guard, statutory authority in this field also
belongs to: the Bureau of Customs, the Maritime Administration, the
Department of Labor, the Atomic Energy Commission, and the Public
Health Service. Active liaison must be carried on with no less than
23 agencies in 8 U.S. Government departments. Beyond this, the
Coast Guard has agreements and arrangements with: the Great Lakes
Pilotage Administration, the American Pilots Association, and the
Underwriters Laboratories, Inc.

Not surprisingly, conflicts of jurisdiction and overlapping authority
have created problems of administration and execution of the safety
function.

1. Inspection and Regulation of Vessels and Equipment for Physical
Protection of Crew, Passengers, and Cargo.

Requirements: Inspection of merchant vessels and enforcement of
safety regulations pertaining to hulls and machinery, lifesaving, fire-
fighting, and other equipment, to determine seaworthiness as a pre-
requisite for issuing certificates of inspection and international docu-
ments; performing similar functions on public vessels on request;
making factory inspections of certain equipment and materials for use
in merchant vessels; and administering penalty procedures for viola-
tions of the navigation and inspection laws.

Problem Areas: There are problems in regard to inspecting nuclear
vessels (involving the Atomic Energy Commission) ; and inspecting
cargo gear and safe working practices (involving the Department of
Labor). The maritime industry reports the need for uniform regula-
tions, for joint inspection by Coast Guard and American Bureau of
Shipping, and for a single agency administering maritime safety laws.

32

2. Regulation of Merchant Marine Personnel and Protection of
Their Rights.

Requirements: Examining, licensing, and certifying merchant
marine personnel, and licensing motorboat operators; prescribing
manning necessary for safe navigation; supervising shipment and
discharge of merchant seamen; controlling logbooks; maintaining
merchant marine personnel records; regulating pilotage, including
licensing of pilots under the Great Lakes Pilotage Act of 1960; and
administering the security program relating to merchant seamen.

Problem Areas: Problems exist regarding the licensing of personnel
on nuclear vessels (involving Atomic Energy Commission) ; manning
requirements for diesel towboats and fishing vessels; and automation
of merchant vessels and other technological developments. The mari-
time industry reports the need for more uniform manning standards
and physical fitness tests for merchant seamen.

3. Engineering and Technical Supervision over Safety Standards.

Requirements: Approving plans and specifications for construction
or alteration of merchant vessels; classification of vessels; conducting
stability tests on merchant vessels and preparing stability letters;
examining and testing equipment and devices submitted for Coast
Guard approval or for determination of suitability; developing regu-
lations for naval architecture; for marine, chemical and electrical
engineering; for firefighting and safety equipment and other mer-
chant marine safety functions; and reviewing vessel load line certifi-
cates and enforcing load line regulations.

Problem Areas: Problems exist in regard to technological develop-
ments in new types of vessels requiring increasing technical compe-
tence in plan approval and regulation and in regard to duplication
of plan approval and work backlog. The maritime industry reports
a lack of uniformity in some regulations, unnecessary repetition in
others, and delays in approval of ship construction plans. The in-
dustry recommends that a single Federal agency be responsible for
the entire field of merchant marine safety.

4. Investigation and Review of Marine Casualties and Acts of In-
competency or Misconduct.

Requirements: Investigating accidents and complaints; revoking
or suspending licenses or certificates as appropriate; and presenting
cases brought before hearing examiners.

Problem Areas: No significant problems other than possible duplh-
cation between Department of Labor hearings and those of the Coast
Guard.

5. Liaison with Maritime Industry and International Bodies.

Requirements: Two Coast Guard organizational units, the Mer-
chant Marine Council and the International Maritime Safety Co-
ordinating Staff.

33

The Council (a) maintains liaison with industry, States, and other
groups or individuals, including participation and staff work on inter-
national marine safety bodies; (b) holds public hearings according
to the Administrative Procedures Act; and (c) prepares and edits
“Proceedings of the Merchant Marine Council.”

The International Maritime Safety Coordinating Staff helps pre-
pare U.S. positions and also furnishes delegates to international con-
ferences concerned with safety of life at sea and other international
maritime problems. Under authority of 46 USC 150, it details Coast
Guard officers as attachés to diplomatic missions.

FUNDING

Coast Guard receives direct appropriations from general tax reve-
nues, except in certain minor instances. Until 1886, when they were
discontinued, fees for inspecting American vessels and licensing offi-
cers were the rule. In 1954 a schedule of proposed fees for “user
charges” in marine safety was published. Legislation is required to
permit certain of these charges, but Congress has not taken favorable
action. Industry representatives have in the past opposed such
charges to the shipping industry and its personnel. Imposition of
such fees would result in duplicate charges to vessel owners in those
areas where Coast Guard and American Bureau of Shipping make
similar inspections.

Recommendations

Information developed by the study group shows clearly that the
Department, through legislative proposal and comment on other de-
partments’ proposals, should support the Coast Guard as the single
Federal agency with responsibility and authority for merchant marine
safety. In cooperation with the Congress, other Federal departments
and agencies, and the maritime industry, the Department should also
develop a legislative plan to revise and modernize shipping laws.

The Coast Guard should study additional areas in which it could
accept American Bureau of Shipping plan approvals and inspection
certifications without relinquishing statutory responsibility.

The Treasury Department should support legislation to extend mer-
chant marine safety regulation to fishing vessels. It should also decide
whether to assess user fees for inspections and other merchant marine
safety services.

34

The Coast Guard Reserve, by its very nature, waxes and wanes with
international crises. For its purpose is to provide a trained military
force of officer and enlisted personnel to supplement the regular Coast
Guard in time of war or national emergency. The program has always
been focused on mobilization. It is administered by the Commandant
under “such regulations as the Secretary of the Treasury, with the
concurrence of the Secretary of the Navy, may provide (14 USC 751).”

The Coast Guard Reserve is made up of the Ready Reserve, Standby
Reserve, and Retired Reserve. This study is concerned mainly with
the Ready Reserve since (1) almost all costs of the Reserve Program
are for the Ready Reserve; and (2) the Ready Reserve can be mobil-
ized on short notice to meet initial military manpower requirements.
The Ready Reserve at this time totals about 29,000 members.

The Coast Guard’s principal reserve programs are its Organized
Reserve Port Security Training Program (ORTUPS), and its Organ-
ized Reserve Vessel Augmentation Program (ORTUAG). Approxi-
mately 11,000 reservists are now participating in the port security pro-
gram which is aimed at preventing the entrance into this country of
persons or objects inimical to national security and at reducing fire
hazards and other dangers inherent in waterfront areas. Since port
security will probably be a key activity during the start of hostilities,
these reservists are being trained to go into action immediately upon
the declaration of a national emergency.

In the Vessel Augmentation Program, reservists are being readied
to carry out smoothly and efficiently any naval tasks which may be
demanded of them in the event of war.

History

The predecessor to the present Coast Guard Reserve was a nonmili-
tary organization, established by law in June 1939. Its name was

35

changed to Auxiliary in February 1941, and a military Reserve set up
on the pattern of the Naval Reserve. The Women’s Reserve (SPARS)
was established during World War II, terminated after the war, and
re-established November 1949 (14 USC 762).

On VJ-Day, there were about 144,000 Coast Guard reservists out of a
total Coast Guard membership of some 172,000. During the next fiscal
year the Coast Guard was cut back to 22,000 military personnel, and
almost all the reserves were discharged or placed on inactive status.
The organization remained static for several years. In 1949, the
Reserve had 4,875 officers and 125 enlisted men, all veterans of World
War II.

Then world conditions became precarious again. In 1950, the Coast
Guard began to train a nucleus reserve of officers and enlisted men,
primarily for port security and vessel augmentation (more personnel
aboard ship). Their long-range mission was to be ready for immedi-
ate action in time of emergency.

The Reserve Forces Act of 1955 established the National Ready
Reserve Manpower Pool, with a Coast Guard quota subsequently set
at 39,600 officers and men needed for early mobilization. The act
authorized two training programs: The 2 x 6 program called for 6
years of service, 2 on active duty. The 6x 8 program specified 8 years
of service, with 6 months of active duty. The balance of obligated
service included drills and short periods of active duty for training.

Ready Reservists can be drafted for active duty for not more than
24 months in national emergency proclaimed by the President. Con-
gress may call them for the duration of a war or emergency and 6
months thereafter. All Ready Reservists are designated in “Active
Status,” and thus eligible for pay, promotion, and retirement credits.

PRESENT STATUS

Because the Coast Guard operates normally as an arm of the Navy
in time of emergency, Coast Guard and Navy cooperate closely in the
use of training schools, drill facilities, equipment, ete. Coast Guard
Reserve pay, allowances, and other benefits are affected by Naval
Reserve legislation, and most Coast Guard regulations, policies, and
operating procedures conform to those prescribed by the Secretary
of Defense.

The Reserve Training Program is funded by direct appropriation
to the Coast Guard. Its costs have always been separated from those
of the regular service so that results could be measured against ex-
penditures. Reserve training is one of the few Coast Guard activities
budgeted on a program basis.

Coast Guard reserve training involves 48 paid drills and 15 days of
paid active duty per year. There are about 15,000 Ready Reservists

36

in the 232 organized reserve training units. Coast Guard considers
these its available reserve manpower for the first 15 days of mobiliza-
tion (M plus 15).

The reserve training program today does not satisfy mobilization
requirements in terms of numbers. The Ready Reserve is sufficient
for M plus 15 port security requirements, but can only partially fulfill
other M plus 15 needs. The principal shortage will be in personnel
for vessel augmentation and activation (more ships in commission).

Future Puans

The Coast Guard’s long-range plan will build up unit strength by
some 11,000 Ready Reservists to 26,000 (3,000 officers and 23,000 en-
listed men). This will: (1) meet requirements for M to M plus 15;
and (2) by 1968, have brought the Ready Reserve almost to the 39,600
ceiling.

The complex function of keeping proper balance of rates and
ranks—matching personnel to billets—and maintaining pre-cut orders
will soon be electrically automated.

Most reserve officer procurement is under the 3-year (3 x 6) active
duty program. Upon release from active duty, these officers are well

37

trained for mobilization. Enough of them voluntarily join organized
units to supply the program with competent officers.

MATERIEL

Materiel deficiencies were found chiefly in port security operational
units. For example, there are not enough foul weather clothing and
communications equipment.

Status of training aids and supplies in organized units is good,
with materiel levels in other than port security units being fair to
good. The Coast Guard 5-year plan includes procurement of the
materiel needed for operational port security units.

TRAINING

In the early days of reserve training, greater emphasis was put on
recruiting veterans and 2 x 6 enlisted men. After 1956 the 2 x 6
program was replaced by the recruitment of 6 x 8 personnel. This
program entails 6 months’ training on active duty—roughly 4 months
of boot and shipboard training and 2 months of advanced training.
This is followed by 714 years in reserve status, 514 years of which
the reservists must attend weekly drills and 15 days of active duty
for training annually.

The 2 x 6 program was abandoned in June 1959; it lowered morale
and efficiency of the regular Coast Guard personnel because reservists
were replacing regulars. Ifthe 2 x 6 personnel could have augmented
regular Coast Guard units, rather than replacing personnel, the situa-
tion might have been different.

In 1961, operational unit training was established, stressing unit
teamwork. At present 128 of the 232 reserve units are designated
operational. The remaining units are still rate training for individual
specialty.

Recommendations

The specialized demands of modern warfare led the study group to
advise the Coast Guard to reevaluate its overall reserve wartime re-
quirements in order to be sure of having adequate trained personnel
and materiel to meet M plus 15 days mobilization task assignments.
To this end, Coast Guard should restudy the 2 x 6 program to deter-
mine its effectiveness in training for vessel augmentation and activa-
tion, and for special skills requiring extensive training. This study
should also determine the potential impact on the regular Coast
Guard of a revived 2 x 6 program whereby reserve personnel could
spend 2 years on operational units, in addition to, but not instead of
regular personnel. Further, this program would be financed from
the reserve appropriation.

38

Though the Coast Guard’s predecessors were breaking Arctic ice
and helping ice-beset ships nearly 100 years ago, not until World
War II did the Coast Guard get ships entirely designed for icebreak-
ing. Four deep-draft icebreakers, the Northwind, Eastwind, South-
wind, and Westwind were built for polar and sub-polar use. All
but the Zastwind were lend-leased to Russia for the duration, so the
combined Navy-Coast Guard wartime team got through the war with
one sea-going icebreaker and a number of smaller vessels.

Today the United States has eight sea-going icebreakers—five oper-
ated by the Navy and three by the Coast Guard. The remaining Coast
Guard icebreakers are: the Mackinaw, built in 1941 for Great Lakes
duty ; the Storis, built in 1942 for sub-polar duty ; 26 buoy tenders and
32 harbor tugs with built-in icebreaking features, for use in the Great
Lakes and northeastern rivers and harbors.

Icebreakers can do many jobs. They take part in search and
rescue, law enforcement, aids to navigation, and many other missions,
with their icebreaking ability latent until it is needed.

Title 14 of the U.S. Code gives the Coast Guard broad authority
to break ice when and where it is required.

Basically three specific functions require icebreakers: domestic
commerce; military operations; and oceanography and other scientific
exploration in the polar areas. In the latter two instances, both Navy
and Coast Guard have significant missions. Increase of icebreakers
to fulfill expanding requirements in these areas should be jointly
agreed upon by the Navy and Coast Guard.

The Coast Guard has in normal times undertaken to keep open only
the principal harbors, bays, and rivers of the northeastern seaboard,
Alaskan waters, and the Great Lakes. (U.S. West Coast harbors are
ice-free. )

39

There are no interagency agreements covering icebreaking. Agree-
ments are implicit in Navy-Coast Guard correspondence on Arctic and
Antarctic operations.

There is a working agreement between the United States and Cana-
dian Government department for operation of the Joint Arctic
Weather Stations. This calls for the “usual icebreaker support.”
The U.S. Air Force is coordinator.

Mission ASSIGNMENTS

Oceanography—Almost all polar oceanography has been done by
the WIND class [Navy and Coast Guard] icebreakers. Recent ad-
ditional sources have been from under-ice submarines and ice island
stations, but this has been relatively minor compared to the ice-
breakers.

Logistics Support—Without the icebreakers and their Canadian
counterparts, the North American Arctic bases could not have been
built or maintained. The same is true of U.S. Antarctic bases.

Other Uses—In LORAN-C development the icebreakers have been
vital for site surveys, construction, and system calibration (especially
the latter). Coast Guard icebreakers maintain navigation on the
Hudson River during heavy ice blockages. The Northwind is em-
ployed along the north Alaska coast for native health care, icebreak-
ing, law enforcement, marine safety, mail delivery, fisheries, patrol,
and other State and Federal cooperative missions.

The Navy-Coast Guard icebreaking partnership has evolved such a
high degree of cooperation that both Services defend the dual au-
thority and responsibility.

As with most other missions, the requirements for icebreaking are
increasing. The opening of the St. Lawrence Seaway and Alaska
statehood have stimulated maritime commerce in both areas, bringing
the demand for more icebreaking to extend the navigation season.

40

This points up a problem that must be faced soon if it is to be solved
in orderly fashion. Icebreaking is rough duty. By definition carried
out only in the bitterest weather, it consists simply of patrolling navi-
gation channels, ramming with brute force into ice sometimes several
feet thick, backing off and battering it again and again until it shatters
into chunks small enough to be brushed aside by any moving vessel.
Use of major seagoing icebreakers compares favorably with that of
general duty cutters. Considering the rigors of their duty, the record
is exceptionally good.

However, of the eight seagoing icebreakers, three are 15 years old
and four are 18. The Coast Guard reports increasingly severe hull
damage and mechanical wear and contends that the vessels are ap-
proaching obsolescence. The Navy’s “Program Packages and Ele-
ments—Shipbuilding and Conversion Plans for the Fiscal Years
1962-67,” as approved by both the Secretary of the Navy and the
Secretary of Defense, indicate that the Navy plans to construct one
icebreaker each year beginning in 1964 through 1967—a total of
four for replacement purposes. It is believed that now is the time
to think about planning for replacement and possible additions. In
order to plan properly, the existing operation of icebreakers and the
future requirements must be considered together from the viewpoint
of the national interest, as well as from the viewpoints of the operating
agencies. However, a less than complete understanding, at top level,
of each agency’s role and responsibility in meeting national require-
ments, could result in an unnecessarily low priority for replacement
vessels.

Some of the scientific endeavor of the National Science Foundation’s
new research vessel, the H7tanin, requires icebreaking assistance this
year. Also, while oceanographic research is but one of many fields of
science being pursued in the polar regions, no single effort is more
dependent upon the icebreaker than oceanography. Icebreakers are
utilized as the research platform or in company with other research
vessels. In view of the increasing interest in the polar regions, it may
become necessary to augment the number of major U.S. operated ice-
breakers. Because of dual responsibilities, it will be difficult to decide
whether the increase should be Coast Guard’s or Navy’s.

Although domestic icebreaking needs are expanding, incorporating
icebreaking features in new Coast Guard vessels should meet this need.

Recommendations

If the reasonable demands of commerce are to be met, the Treasury
Department should give high priority to an adequate and timely
schedule for modifying or replacing necessary vessels and equipment.
Also the Secretaries of Treasury and Defense should determine the
extent of dual Coast Guard-Navy polar operation of icebreakers, and
how the two Services should plan for replacement and augmentation.

41

U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE:1963 O—670544

. A ;
Ja oe pe. -~ = “)°- 9
ACS TL Eyer ys WD. 7 nonbedinn

Je ee? Ls “4a Ae

«

+ oe = " “i! a
L sthiegev nay Die. acit Lia ia : _
fa: ; “< «&e'% r =f Tat at Fae ae a ey
: er Tie VERY) ont J Tine 49) get Yih] WVCPI GN: ea wd
ar gt :

fi

’ 4 i | = * : ae>8 +
ra mn ' de ? _
i ' &£ i 7 { mits eV ECT ted e yg
’ >
ae | bit 7 %
t ‘ A
; ESL i
5
¢ uly
4
i —
’ -
! ‘
: ,
‘ =
Rak
—,
4
4
J

ps.

om