No, they weren’t. To verify, you need only go to a MERPAC meeting and hear the propreitor of Lapware rail about losing access to the questions, or read one of the screeds he disributes on that issue.
Incorrect.
No one has the new question bank.
Lapware has the entire test bank that was previously posted on the CG Web site, just like all the testing support companies. What they are complaining about at MERPAC is that they would like access to the updated test bank. But the updated questions only constitute a small percentage of the entire bank, and since you only need 70% to pass most modules, I don’t see that as a big issue.
Or you could just tell me.
I’m also interested in your future plans for the RECs. Was there truth in what I was told?
The only reason I personally recommend lapware is because the solutions and how to work the problems are provided. Regardless of changes to the question bank, if you know how to work the math you can solve for anything thrown at you.
1 Like
Just like many mariners do, what’s your point?
Where are you getting your information from?
Let’s see, a quick trip through the past should give us some background on this subject…
As far as I recall, until there was a lawsuit (by someone who claimed to be disadvantaged and had taken the licensing test repetitively some 5X times- unsuccessfully) in the 1980’s- the USCG did NOT publish the question banks. I believe that the lawsuit centered on the FOIA. Then the GPO printed the complete bank of many thousand questions…
There were numerous “license factories” back in the late 1970’s who pretty much “guaranteed” that you would pass if you tested when they “told you to test”. I sailed with some of the recipients of the licenses… Some were great engineers- others were some of the worst I ever sailed with.
License examinations have changed A LOT in the 38 years since I got my 1-1 License… Originally there were USCG Licensing Centers in ports throughout the US and abroad (everywhere- Guam, Panama, Puerto Rico, Yokohama- not to mention Port Arthur, Honolulu, Houston, Portland (ME and OR), Norfolk)…
There was at first a decentralized approach where the tests and grading were administrated locally. Then to control “manipulation” the tests were sent to the USCG Test Center (St Louis or Kansas City ?) and then they returned to local control.
There were few License Prep materials- for instance the Mass Maritime Professor from Sandwich MA (Sorry his name escapes me) probably published the best one… to be used as a study guide…
Professional qualification and credentialing tests (P/E License and etc) are NOT required to publish their questions… The FAA does not and will not publish ANY of their active test questions for their Airman tests…
Other Flag States still have written, oral and practical exams…
I believe that the ACTIVE questions should NOT be published. I also believe that there should be practical deckplate level exams conducted by either a QA or by the flag state and NOT substituted by Training Courses- parts may be conducted by approved simulation, but not entirely…
1 Like
I remember it otherwise but that was 16 years ago.
The FCC does publish their question banks though.
Oh, BTW let me just add that I self studied and sat cold for all of my Licenses since 1980. I am also stricken by the fact that most of the questions on my MEECE test were originally contained on my C/E test in 1990… Seems like an awful waste of time, money and resources were poured into this.
The USCG MUST revise their thinking in being just about the only Flag State which has over-implemented IMO rules regarding some of these courses. There were NO “Gap Closing” courses anywhere else- and with exception to ERM and Leadership- no other Flag States implemented them.
The Upgrade training requirements are equally cumbersome. These USCG requirements are taking mariners away from their families during valuable vacation time even after these guys and gals have already spent 6 months of their lives at sea.
MERPAC and the other “interested parties” need to streamline all of these training requirements by designing onboard Computer Based Training regimens and other training ONBOARD as opposed to taking us away from our families while on vacation!
Excellent ideas
1 Like
You are generally accurate, but some clarifications…
There was a FOIA request from Richard Block, there was never a lawsuit. In response to the FOIA request, the Coast Guard and GPO published “yellow books” with the questions. They were available in the bookstore in most Federal buildings at a very nominal cost.
This may not be as nefarious as it sounds. At that time, you couldn’t schedule exams at your convenience. Each type of exam was given once a month at fixed dates and times, all RECs gave the exams on the same schedule. Are you saying the schools told mariners “don’t test this month, wait another month or two…?” How many people would be willing to protract their preparation and wait months to get what might be an easier test? This sounds more like second and third hand versions of someone being told they can’t test this week, they have to wait until the next time their exam will be given.
Since multiple choice exams were brought out, the exams were never prepared locally. They were prepared at a central location and distributed to the RECs per the fixed schedule. The location at which exams were prepared at changed, but for most of this period it was the Coast Guard Institute in Oklahoma City. Tests have always been graded locally, using answer keys provided with the tests from the central location.
Joe Murphy, a partner in Lapware. The “Murphy Books” weren’t published until the '90s, after the question pool was made public, and after the GPO stopped publishing the yellow books. Before then, when exam questions were not public, I used materials I saved from SUNY Maritime and a so-called “Blue Book” of sample questions, many of which were the same “captured” questions SUNY Maritime had given me. I cannot recall the “authors” but I seem to remember Richard Plant (Lapware) was one of them, there was another.
With some exceptions (i.e. FAA), those exams are not given by the Federal government, and thus not subject to FOIA. It was questionable if the Coast Guard was required to publish the exams when they did so in the 90s. There was what was known as a “High 2” exception to FOIA that would have allowed withholding the questions. However, a court case circa 2008 invalidated the High 2 exception, so from that time until the FOIA was amended to specifically allow withholding USCG questions, they were required to be disclosed.
I am not sure, but I believe the FAA has always had a specific exemption for their exams.
Back in the good old days, we just went to the local OCMI and told them what we wanted. A Coast Guard officer who was a hands on Mariner reviewed our seatime told us what he would let us sit for. We could sit down and take the exam the same day. Those who passed went for a chat with the OCMI himself. The OCMIs where typically Lt. Commanders who personally knew most boats, owners, and many mariners in their zone. He would ask questions about our seatime and experience, and ask about what we intended to do with our license. Back in those days the USCG was big on local knowledge and near coastal licenses had a very limited geographic scope based upon how much seatime one had in each of the zones under the OCMI’s jurisdiction. If you want a license for further along the coast, you had to go see the OCMI in that area for an endorsement. You really had to argue for why you needed a large geographic area. If the OCMI was satisfied, he signed your license, handed it to you and shook your hand. It was possible to do all of this in one day.
The emphasis on local knowledge was beneficial and important. And it’s something which should be brought back. Someone who has only worked in one area is not ready for the All the US Coasts, or the entire world.
When I went to the Gulf in the 70’s, I had to work on deck for 90 days to get a local near coastal endorsement. As soon as I had the 90 days in Louisiana, I went to the OCMI in New Orleans to see about an endorsement for part of Louisiana. I was shocked when they gave the entire Gulf with barely a question asked. Maybe what is good enough for one part of the country isnt good enough for others. Maybe the push to national uniformity and one size fits all solutions is not appropriate.
I would like to see licensing return to local OCMIs. We have a right to competent and knowledgeable USCG license services in our home states. We have a right to have our applications reviewed by competent USCG personnel looking is in the eye and asking the right questions. The USCG needs to do a much better job to fulfill its regulatory licensing duties.
A USCG license should really mean something, and have real value, not just be another pencil-whipped pseudo credential.
1 Like
Thanks jdcavo for your response… I will dig through my memory banks and get the name of the one in MA- it was a stalwart piece of MA Maritime License Prep for years- and the first “pony” as far as I can remember- it dates back to around 1976 and was republished and updated every two or three years before disappearing.
The questions and answers were all brought back by the Cadets right after testing- generally one each…
I disagree with the grading locally- I tested at Norfolk VA in 12/80 for my Original 3rd A/E Steam. My test was mailed to Oklahoma City for grading and the results were then sent to me by mail- it took about 12 weeks. I received the notification in the mail on 3/26/81 and PROMPTLY drove to Norfolk the following Monday to get
my license (Cdr. R. Vollbrecht issued it!).
The “license factory” I think was more the people at the school telling people that they were ready vice something nefarious- my point being that anyone can memorize the test as opposed to learning the material…
My experience was not like that. I’m polite to those officious assholes if I need something but when I first went to the CG at Pier 36 in Seattle the civilian there basically blew me off, I’d say very rude about it.
Later I found out I needed to get the little yellow lifeboat book to study. When I went back to the CG to get one (they were free) they told me that the books were locked up and the person with the key wasn’t there. I went back the next day, same thing. The third time I went they gave me one.
I got set on the right path by the agent at the SIU hall. I found out later that guy at the CG Seattle went to jail for selling AB tickets.
There are many reasons why we shouldn’t go back to that old system. Abuses of power, selling credentials, being overly strict or discriminatory, etc. People would get denied something at one REC and just go to another one and get it issued. Sometimes they were denied in error sometimes not. The people at the RECs really weren’t experts, they just knew will the licenses they regularly did at that location.
1 Like
Let’s not return to that system when the OCMI has that much power.
1 Like
As you say, if you didn’t like what the OMCI said, you could always go to New Orleans for a more generous interpretation.
What’s not acceptable is total incompetents at NMC taking 8 months to deny something, followed 11 months more to get it approved on a request for reconsideration.
There is no consistency at NMC either. It all luck of the draw on the evaluators. The evaluators and NMC are totally unaccountable.
I’d also like to see local knowledge brought back to its proper role. There is nothing about steaming between Fouchon and two or three deep water rigs for a few years on an AHTS that never tows anything that prepares someone for: crossing the Columbia River Bar with a tow; or working in 20’ tides.
The one size fits all NMC system has completely thrown local knowledge out the window for licensing purposes.
3 Likes
Pilots are the ones expected to have local knowledge. If you don’t have enough trips on the Columbia River Bar you are expected to have a pilot onboard.
1 Like
With rare exceptions, No pilot or pilotage required unless you are towing a large oil barge, or on a vessel over 1600 GRT.
Incorrect, pilots are still required. It’s just that on vessels under 1,600 GRT and tank barges under 10,000 GRT the officers are allowed to serve as pilots as long as they have local knowledge and trips.
See below:
(2) An individual holding a valid license or MMC officer endorsement as master or mate, employed aboard a vessel within the restrictions of his or her credential, may serve as pilot on a vessel of not more than 1,600 GRT propelled by machinery, described in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(3) of this section, provided he or she—
(i) Is at least 21 years old;
(ii) Is able to show current knowledge of the waters to be navigated, as required in §11.713 of this subchapter; and
(iii) Provides evidence of completing a minimum of four roundtrips over the route to be traversed while in the wheelhouse as watchstander or observer. At least one of the roundtrips must be made during the hours of darkness if the route is to be traversed during darkness.
(3) An individual holding a valid license or MMC officer endorsement as master, mate, or operator employed aboard a vessel within the restrictions of his or her credential, may serve as pilot on a tank barge or tank barges totaling not more than 10,000 GRT/GT, described in paragraphs (a)(1) and (a)(3) of this section, provided he or she—
(i) Is at least 21 years old
(ii) Is able to show current knowledge of the waters to be navigated, as required in §11.713 of this subchapter
(iii) Has a current physical examination in accordance with the provisions of §11.709 of this subchapter
(iv) Has at least 6 months of service in the deck department on towing vessels engaged in towing operations; an
(v) Provides evidence of completing a minimum of 12 roundtrips over the route to be traversed, as an observer or under instruction in the wheelhouse. At least three of the roundtrips must be made during the hours of darkness if the route is to be traversed during darkness
2 Likes