COMDTINST 5860.2A
Congress is more likely to give authority to address a specific problem rather than grant broad,
general authority. Narrowly-tailored legislation has greater potential for success. Congress is
also unlikely to be sympathetic to a legislative proposal if the Coast Guard already has authority
to achieve its desired objective.
d. Political considerations. Although the Coast Guard works closely with Congressional staffs to
explain the benefits of proposed legislation, Congress must balance the competing interests of a
number of constituencies (local residents, environmental groups, industry, labor, etc.) and may
substantially change the legislation to reach a compromise or it may even prohibit the Coast
Guard from accomplishing the objective of the proposed legislative change (e.g., "The
Commandant of the Coast Guard may not . . ."). If Congress enacts a provision unfavorable to
the Coast Guard, the Coast Guard must either accept the provision as enacted or recommend that
the President veto the entire bill. Presidential vetoes are rare. Therefore, any legislative
proposal must carefully consider the possibility that it could not only be unsuccessful but could
actually have an adverse effect on Coast Guard authority.
8. RESPONSIBILITIES.
a. Commandant. The Commandant approves the draft Coast Guard Authorization Act and
forwards it to DHS for departmental clearance, inter-agency clearance through OMB, and
transmittal to Congress.
b. Chief of Staff (G-CCS). G-CCS reviews and approves or disapproves LCPs for development,
reviews the draft Coast Guard Authorization Act to ensure that it reflects Coast Guard policies
and that resource implications are considered in the budgetary process, and makes
recommendations to the Commandant.
c. Program Directors.
(1) Defined. For purposes of this instruction, program directors are the Assistant Commandants,
the Director of International Affairs and Foreign Policy Advisor (G-CI), the Director of the
Previous Page
