SENATE BILL REPORT

                                    SB 5104

                      AS PASSED SENATE, FEBRUARY 11, 1991

Brief Description:  Revising pilot examinations.

SPONSORS:Senators Moore, Amondson and Metcalf.

SENATE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION

Majority Report:  Do pass.

     Signed by Senators Patterson, Chairman; Nelson, Vice Chairman; Barr, Erwin, Madsen, McMullen, Oke, Sellar, Skratek, Snyder, Thorsness, and Vognild. 

Staff:  Vicki Fabre (786‑7313)

Hearing Dates:January 29, 1991

HOUSE COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION

BACKGROUND:

Current state law requires the Board of Pilotage Commissioners to conduct a pilotage examination every two years in order to license pilots of foreign vessels operating in state waters.  It also requires the board to develop five examinations and grading sheets for the Puget Sound Pilotage District and two for each other pilotage district, for the testing and grading of pilot applicants.

SUMMARY:

The requirement that the Board of Pilotage Commissioners conduct an examination for pilot applicants every two years is deleted.  In lieu of that, the board is given discretion to hold exams at such times as will, in its discretion, ensure the maintenance of an efficient and competent pilotage service.  When there are three or fewer pilots on the waiting list for the Puget Sound Pilotage District, the board is required to hold an exam.

Further, the development of a single examination and grading sheet for each pilotage district is required rather than the multiple examinations currently required.

Appropriation:  none

Revenue:  none

Fiscal Note:  available

TESTIMONY FOR:

The increasing number of pilot applicants and limited number of anticipated retirements necessitate giving the Board of Pilotage Commissioners greater flexibility in determining when examinations should be held.  A growing number of successful pilot applicants must wait five to seven years, or longer, before being able to work as active pilots.

The requirement to develop and maintain multiple updated examinations and grading sheets for each pilotage district is costly and dilutes the value of individual examinations.  Board experience in preparing examinations indicates that the development of a single comprehensive examination would provide a better measure of an applicant's knowledge of the information deemed essential for pilots.

TESTIMONY AGAINST:  None

TESTIFIED:  Chester Richmond, Washington State Pilotage Commission (pro); Bill Bock, Puget Sound Pilots (pro)

HOUSE AMENDMENT(S):

The board is required to provide, as prescribed by law, reasonable advance notice of the examination.