The polar regions are one of today’s potential maritime flashpoints. The Arctic in particular has been a recurring topic in public discourse: from the polar silk road and China’s claim as a “near polar” nation to the need for a U.S. Arctic combatant command.1 There are many ideas on how the United States should meet the governance challenges of its 1,000,000 square miles of territorial water and exclusive economic zone in the region, but the consensus is that presence equals influence, and the United States currently does not have the means to maintain adequate maritime presence.2
While the U.S. Coast Guard is acquiring new platforms to ensure access in the high latitudes—the first two of three planned polar security cutters are now fully funded—one crucial detail could unseat its plans for renewed emphasis in the polar regions: a lack of ice pilots. Unless the Coast Guard takes action, it could find itself with ships able to meet the challenges of the polar regions but no officers qualified to pilot them.
What’s an Ice Pilot?
Ice pilots are specially trained Coast Guard underway officers of the deck responsible for navigating cutters through different types of polar ice, such as pack ice (free-flowing, unattached ice such as icebergs or ice floes) and fast ice (grounded icebergs or sea ice attached to the coast or seafloor).
Having a watch specialist for ice navigation is not just a Coast Guard idea. Since 2017, the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO’s) International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters has required ship operators to ensure that officers in charge of navigational watches on board ships operating in polar waters have completed appropriate training. To that end, the Nautical Institute, a nongovernmental organization that often consults the IMO on seagoing issues, launched an Ice Navigator Training and Certification Scheme to train officers on shiphandling in ice-covered waters.3
While the Coast Guard ice pilot qualification is not as intensive as that required for an ice navigator, the service established watch officer training specific to ice conditions early and correctly. The Office of Cutter Forces (which oversees the acquisition, planning, managing, and training for all Coast Guard cutters) recently merged the USCGC Healy (WAGB-20) and Polar Star (WAGB-10) qualification processes into an official personnel qualification standard for polar icebreakers, another step toward creating a standard similar to that of the IMO.
What’s the Problem?
The Coast Guard provides all polar icebreaking capability for the United States, but opportunities to become a Coast Guard ice pilot as a permanent member of an afloat unit are limited: Only the Healy and Polar Star support the qualification. On average, each icebreaker qualifies just four to five new ice pilots a year between officer and enlisted personnel. Because many of the Polar Star and Healy’s deck watch officers are either senior enlisted boatswain’s mates or first-tour ensigns, there is no guarantee they will maintain an afloat career path or request to return to a polar icebreaker in the future. The Coast Guard looks for experienced ice pilots to take command cadre roles on board icebreakers, but it often must assign personnel with only one prior polar assignment, or even no ice experience.
Compounding the problem is the Coast Guard’s struggle to attract officers to sea duty at all.4 The icebreaking community is getting the long-awaited infusion of the polar security cutter (first to be
delivered in 2027), the Arctic security cutter (three planned), and a stop-gap commercial ice breaker set to be converted for Coast Guard service. Simultaneously, the cutter fleet is undergoing the largest recapitalization since World War II. Simply put, in addition to cultivating a sufficient talent pool to command six or more icebreakers, the polar icebreaking subcommunity must overcome the retention woes of the cutter community writ large.
The Coast Guard has taken steps to immerse afloat officers in icebreaking and develop the future leaders of the icebreaking fleet. The main initiative—the Afloat Icebreaker Training Program (AITP)—assigns qualified deck watch officers with minimal to no icebreaking experience to Coast Guard and foreign icebreakers over the course of a year. In these assignments, the officers develop the skills needed to become Coast Guard–qualified ice pilots. Participants must pay back time with an assignment on an icebreaker of some class.
The AITP has had mixed results. On completing the program, the first participant was sent to Patrol Forces Southwest Asia in Bahrain. However, another participant, now-Lieutenant Lauren Kowalski, was selected as the commissioned Superior Cutterman of the Year and went on to serve as the assistant operations officer on board the Polar Star.
While the AITP is a practical solution, it produces just one qualified ice pilot a year—not a significant increase in the number of ice pilots for what will soon be a larger number of polar icebreakers. The Coast Guard has looked to other icebreaking ships to fill future polar icebreaker opportunities. Icebreaking experience is common on board the Mackinaw (WLBB-30) and the Bay-class tugs, and even buoy tenders in the Great Lakes and Alaska have some ice experience. But polar ice and domestic ice have drastic differences in size, thickness, and effective breaking methods. These differences can be understood and overcome with education and opportunities to serve on future polar icebreakers, but that training does not currently exist.
So, what can the Coast Guard do now to create a sustainable ice pilot program with experienced command cadres for its future fleet?
A Blueprint for Success
There are three measures the Coast Guard could take to ensure the longevity and health of the ice pilot pipeline:
• Implement an AITP 2.0.
• Establish an ice pilot version of the 2-4-2 Naval Engineering Program.
• Message the legitimate national security reasons for maintaining a pool of personnel with icebreaking experience.
AITP 2.0
The AITP is a good way to introduce officers to icebreaking and grow ice pilots; however, its current iteration should not be its last. There are several adjustments that would foster the long-term health of the ice pilot pipeline.
First, the AITP needs to mandate community-relevant payback tours. Obtaining icebreaking credentials and experience may assist participants at later points in their careers, but to not immediately employ AITP graduates in the icebreaking community is a waste of talent and resources. The program also would benefit from increasing participation to two or three officers, if only temporarily. With the first polar security cutter expected to be delivered in 2027, time is short to train the command cadres of the future icebreaking fleet.
In addition, the polar and Arctic security cutters should maintain at least three junior officer deck watch officer billets per year for newly minted ensigns. Currently, the Healy and Polar Star receive two deck watch officers and two engineer officers in training per year. The extra deck watch officer would promote an appropriate and sustainable replacement rate to fill more senior roles in the soon to be burgeoning icebreaking fleet.
Ice Pilot 2-4-2 Program
The Coast Guard naval engineering community recently piloted the 2-4-2 Naval Engineering Program, in which naval engineers commit to two, two-year engineering officer afloat tours with a related staff tour sandwiched between. The program offers enhanced opportunities to compete for special assignments and postgraduate education, as well as a handsome bonus.5 Programs such as this allow specialty managers to better conduct assignment planning and ensure that critical community-specific knowledge is not lost.
A potential Ice Pilot 2-4-2 Program could have junior lieutenants commit to two icebreaking assignments and a community-specific staff tour. Assuming polar and Arctic security cutters will be homeported in one place, there will be shoreside logistical and operational infrastructure that will require junior and mid-grade officers to man, which would serve the staff tour function. In addition to keeping icebreaking talent in the pipeline, a 2-4-2 program could be a linchpin in the Commandant of the Coast Guard’s intention to create geographic hubs to foster stability for Coast Guard personnel.
Securing the Polar Regions
Ensuring the security of the polar regions is a messaging opportunity stakeholders can use to support stability and longevity in the ice pilot program. The polar security cutter’s justification centered heavily on the need to maintain a credible U.S. presence in the Arctic to deter competing polar and near-polar states, and the Coast Guard justification for growing its ice pilot program could follow a similar course.
Emphasizing the connection between the ice pilot program and national security concerns could help ensure resourcing requirements are met. As a practical matter, because the polar and Arctic security cutter programs are relatively new, articulating the demand for ice pilots now—as opposed to after the cutters are completed and billeted—will be critical to addressing shortfalls. This includes joint force training opportunities, as the Navy does not have an ice pilot qualification for surface assets. (Surprisingly, it does have an ice pilot program for submarines, but these individuals are not active-duty personnel.) As receding Arctic sea ice opens the High North to increased maritime activity and competition, cooperation between the Sea Services will be essential to the safe navigation of all U.S. warships in the region.
All Dressed Up, Nowhere to Go
It is clear that despite all the good ideas concerning the U.S. Coast Guard’s role in the polar regions, the service must address its dearth of ice pilots if it is to play a meaningful role. As badly needed new icebreaking platforms come into service in the near future, the Coast Guard must cultivate a robust pool of officers and senior enlisted members with icebreaking experience to man them. Otherwise, the Coast Guard could find itself all dressed up with nowhere to go.
1. LCDR David Zwirblis, USCG, “Send the Coast Guard into the Cold,” U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings 147, no. 8 (August 2021).
2. David Vergun, “Coast Guard Commandant Wants Bigger Arctic Presence. How Cool Is That?” Defense.gov, 4 December 2018.
3. International Maritime Organization, International Code for Ships Operating in Polar Waters, IMO.org; and The Nautical Institute, “The Nautical Institute Launches Ice Navigator Scheme,” press release, NautInst.org, 3 July 2017.
4. CDR Craig Allen Jr., USCG, “Sea Duty: Still Wanna Do It?” U.S. Naval Institute Proceedings 147, no. 8 (August 2021).
5. U.S. Coast Guard, ALCGOFF 105/21, “Solicitation for AY22 Naval Engineering 2-4-2 Program,” 19 October 2021.