[From the U.S. Government Printing Office, www.gpo.gov]


          Q)                        Report on Port and
          U-S.Delmmrent             Shipping Safety and
          Of Tbrsponcmm
          Maritime
          Administraflon            Environmental Protection


            QUARTERLY REPORT
            NUMBER 28


            JULY 1993














                           Co







                                                    C
                                                        u Gin



















         HE                        54"
         571
                                       TOO
         .R476
         no.28





                flow
                  D
                U.S. Department                                                             400 Seventh Street. S.W
                of Transportation                                                           Washington, D.C. 20590
                Maritime
                Administration



                                                            June 7, 1993


              Dear Colleague:

              I am pleased to transmit the 28th quarterly report on safety and
              environmental protection matters related to ports and shipping.
              Some highlights covered herein are the following:

                      1.      The 68th session of the Legal Committee (LEG 68) of the
                              International Maritime Organization (IMO) was held at
                              IMO Headquarters in London from March 15-19, 1993.
                              (Item 1-D)

                      2.      The IMO International Conference on Safety of Fishing
                              Vessels (SFV-P/CONF) was held in Torremolinos, Spain,
                              from March 22 - April 2, 1993. (Item 1-E)

                      3.      The 22nd session of the IMO Facilitation Committee
                              (FAL 22) was held at IMO Headquarters in London from
                              April 26-30, 1993. (Item 1-H)

                      4.      On April 8, 1993, the Coast Guard, U.S. Department of
                              Transportation, promulgated regulations to require
                              ballast water management practices for each vessel
                              entering the Great Lakes after operating on waters
                              beyond the Exclusive Economic Zone. (Item 3-H)

                      5.      The U.S. Department of the Navy has published a
                              technical instruction report entitled "Internal
                              Combustion (Gas Turbine and Diesel) Engine Exhaust
                              Emission Study." (Item 4-A)

              For further information, please contact the office of Technology
              Assessment, (phone: (202) 366-1921), or the Office of Port and
              Intermodal Development, (phone: (202) 366-4357), Maritime
              Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh
              Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590.

                                                           Sincerely,



                                                           NAN HARLLEE
                                                           Associate Administrator
                                                                   for Marketing

























                          U.S. DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
                               MARITIME ADMINISTRATION












                                        REPORT
                                          ON
                                   PORT AND SHIPPING
                         SAFETY AND ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION








                                   QUARTERLY REPORT
                                       NUMBER 28











                                       JULY-1993



                                           Property of CSC Library

                                          U.S.  DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE NOAA
                                          COASTAL SERVICES CENTER
                                          2234 SOUTH HOPSON AVENUE
							CHARLESTON, SC 29405-2413






           











                                     TABLE OF CONTENTS


                                                                                Page


          SUMMARY                                                                  1



          1.    INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES                                           3

                A.    IMO Subcommittee on   Lifesaving, Search
                           and Rescue   ....................................       3
                B.    IMO Subcommittee on Ship Design and Equipment       ......   4
                C.    IMO Subcommittee an Standards of Training
                           and Watchkeeping    ..............................      6
                D.    IMO Legal Committee   ................................       8
                E.    IMO International Conference on Safety
                           of Fishing vessels    ............................     10
                F.    NATO Maritime Environmental Protection      .............   10
                G.    IMO Subcommittee on Flag State Implementation       ......  12
                H.    IMO Facilitation Committee    .........................     14



          2.    LEGISLATION AND EXECUTIVE ORDERS                                  16


                A.    National Research Council Amendments (E.O. 12832)..         16
                B.    Ozone-Depleting Substances (E.O. 12843)      ............   17


          3.    REGULATIONS                                                       19

                A.    Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacons (CG)        ... 19
                B.    Conformity of General Federal Actions
                           to Implementation Plans (EPA)      .................   19
                C.    Phaseout of Chemicals Which Deplete
                           Stratospheric Ozone (EPA)    .....................     20
                D.    Occupational Exposure to Glycol Ethers (OSHA)       ......  20
                E.    Longitudinal Strength and Plating Thickness (CG)        ... 21
                F.    Subdivision and Damage Stability (CG)      ..............   22
                G.    Class II Civil Penalties (CG)    ......................     22
                H.    Ballast Water Management (CG)    ......................     23
                I.    Water Quality Guidance for the
                           Great Lakes System (EPA)    ......................     24
                J.    Lead Exposure in Construction (OSHA)      ...............   25
                K.    Tanker Navigation Underway (CG)     ....................    25
                L.    Substitutes for Chemicals which Deplete
                           Stratospheric Ozone (EPA)    .....................     26
                M.    Refrigerant Recycling (EPA)     ........................    26
                N.    Emissions from New Nonroad
                           Compression-Ignition Engines (EPA)      ............   27
                0.    Recordkeeping of Refuse Discharges
                           from Ships (CG)    ...............................     28
                P.    Personal Flotation Device Components (CG)       ..........  29
                Q.    Immersion Suits for Commercial
                           Fishing Industry Vessels (CG)      .................   29









                R.    Safeguarding Food from Contamination (RSPA)     ........  30
                S.    Bulk Hazardous Materials and
                           Noxious Liquid Substances (CG)     ................  30
                T.    Particulate Matter (EPA)    ...........................   31



           D.   SPECIAL PROJECTS AND REPORTS                                    32

                A.    Internal Combustion Engine
                           Exhaust Emissions (Navy)    ......................   32
                B.    Free-Fall Lifeboats on U.S. Vessels (MARAD)     ........  33
                C.    Cruise Ship Safety (GAO)   ...........................    34



           APPENDIX


                      International Maritime organization (IMO)
                      Piracy and Other Crimes












         SUMMALRY



         This quarterly report is the 28th in a series concerning safety
         and environmental protection matters related to ports and
         shipping. Some highlights covered herein are the following:

              1.    The 68th session of the Legal Committee (LEG 68) of the
                    International Maritime Organization (IMO) was held at
                    IMO Headquarters in London from March 15-19, 1993.
                    Among LEG 68 agenda items were the consideration of a
                    draft International Convention on Liability and
                    Compensation for Damage in Connection with the Carriage
                    of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by Sea (HNS) and
                    the legal issues regarding mandatory ship reporting
                    systems and vessel traffic services. (Item 1-D)

              2.    The IMO International Conference on Safety of Fishing
                    Vessels (SFV-P/CONF) was held at Torremolinos, Spain,
                    from March 22 - April 2, 1993. The Conference adopted
                    the Protocol of 1993 relating to the 1977 Torremolinos
                    International Convention for the Safety of Fishing
                    Vessels (SFV PROT 1993). (Item 1-E)

              3.    The 22nd session of the IMO Facilitation Committee
                    (FAL 22) was held at IMO Headquarters in London from
                    April 26-30, 1993. Among its actions, the Committee
                    approved several priority amendments to the Annex to
                    the Convention on Facilitation of International
                    Maritime Traffic (FAL Convention) and considered
                    facilitation aspects of methods to prevent and control
                    illicit drug traffic. (Item 1-H)

              4.    On April 8, 1993, the Coast Guard, U.S. Department of
                    Transportation, promulgated regulations to require
                    ballast water management practices for each vessel
                    entering the Great Lakes after operating on waters
                    beyond the Exclusive Economic Zone. These requirements
                    (33 CFR part 151) will help to prevent the additional
                    introduction of nonindigenous aquatic nuisance species
                    through the ballast water of vessels entering the Great
                    Lakes. (Item 3-H)

              5.    The Naval Sea Systems Command, U.S. Department of the
                    Navy, has published a report dated December 31, 1992,
                    and entitled "Internal Combustion (Gas Turbine and
                    Diesel) Engine Exhaust Emission Study." This report
                    surveys current rules and regulations, summarizes
                    current techniques/technology to meet these
                    regulations, discusses the origins of diesel and gas
                    turbine pollutants and the techniques for reducing and
                    measuring emissions, presents a parametric study of
                    diesel and gas turbine engines, and recommends a
                    program for the Navy to follow. (Item 4-A)









         For further information, please contact the following individuals
         at the Maritime Administration, U.S. Department of
         Transportation, Washington, DC 20590:

              Mr. Daniel W. Leubecker              phone: (202) 366-1939
              Maritime Safety and Environmental Specialist
              office of Technology Assessment

              Mr. Paul B. Mentz                    phone: (202) 366-1925
              Director
              office of Technology Assessment

              Mr. John M. Pisani                   phone: (202) 366-4357
              Director
              Office of Port and Intermodal Development









































                                         2












          1.  INTERNATIONAL ACTIVITIES



          A.  International Maritime Organization (IMO), Subcommittee on
              Lifesaving, Search and Rescue (LSR)

          The 24th session of the Subcommittee on Lifesaving, Search and
          Rescue (LSR 24) was held at !MO Headquarters in London from
          February 15-19, 1993. The session was chaired by Mr. Robert L.
          Markle of the United States, who was reelected for 1994. Forty-
          two member governments, 1 associate member, 1 United Nations
          specialized agency, 2 intergovernmental organizations, and 11
          nongovernmental organizations participated. The United States
          was represented by the Coast Guard with assistance from three
          private sector advisers.

          Among LSR 24 agenda items were the following: (1) amendments to
          chapter III (Lifesaving Appliances and Arrangements) of the 1974
          International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea
          (SOLAS 1974) regarding new ships; (2) revision of the
          recommendation on testing of lifesaving appliances; (3) free-fall
          lifeboats, including requirements for acceleration protection in
          lifeboats; (4) matters concerning search and rescue (SAR),
          including those related to the 1979 SAR Conference and the
          introduction of the Global Maritime Distress and Safety System
          (GMDSS); (5) safety instructions to passengers; (6) safety
          awareness and emergency training; (7) revision of chapter 8 of
          the Code of Safety for High Speed Craft (HSC Code); (8)
          inflatable liferafts; (9) international approval standards; (10)
          role of the human element in maritime casualties; and (11) review
          of existing ships' safety standards.

          Major accomplishments achieved by LSR 24 are as follows: (1)
          development of a draft Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) circular
          on the evaluation of free-fall lifeboats; (2) engaging the
          Subcommittee in a frank discussion of international approval and
          enforcement of SOLAS requirements; (3) development of amendments
          to SOLAS chapter 111; (4) development of amendments to the IMO
          recommendation on the testing of lifesaving appliances; (5)
          development of consensus on codi-ng and registration of emergency
          position indicating radio beacons (EPIRBs) and 121.5 MHz locating
          signals for SAR; (6) development of a draft IMO recommendation on
          emergency instructions to passengers; (7) development of a
          revised Assembly resolution on approval of liferaft servicing
          stations; and (8) completion of the lifesaving system
          requirements for the IMO HSC Code (formerly the Code of Safety
          for Dynamically Supported Craft).

          For further information, contact Mr. Robert L. Markle, Chief,
          Survival Systems Branch (G-MVI-3), Office of Marine Safety,
          Security and Environmental Protection, U.S. Coast Guard, 2100
          Second Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593, (phone: (202) 267-1444).




                                        3










          B.   International Maritime Orcranization (IMO), Subcommittee on
               Ship Design and Equipment (DE)

          The 36th session of the Subcommittee on Ship Design and Equipment
          (DE 36) was held at IMO Headquarters in London from
          February 22-26, 1993. Thirty-three member governments, 2
          associate members, 1 United Nations specialized agency, and 12
          observers from nongovernmental organizations participated. The
          United States was represented by the Coast Guard with assistance
          from two private sector advisers.

          DE 36 agenda items included the following: (1) extension of the
          Code on Alarms and Indicators to cover other IMO instruments; (2)
          maneuverability of ships and maneuvering standards; (3) revision
          of the Code of Safety for High Speed Craft (HSC Code); (4)
          helicopter facilities offshore; (5) ventilation of vehicle decks
          during loading, unloading, and during the voyage; (6) guidelines
          on standard calculation methods for anchor positioning systems
          for mobile offshore drilling units (MODUs); (7) guidelines for
          dynamic positioning systems for MODUs and ships engaged in
          similar operations; (8) introduction of the harmonized system of
          surveys and certification (HSSC) into the MODU Code; (9) use of
          ozone-depleting substances other than halons on board ships; (10)
          structural integrity of tankers and bulk carriers; (11)
          feasibility study on voyage data recorders; (12) coating
          requirements for ballast tanks; (13) fuel line failures; (14)
          reduction of secondary sources of pollution by minimizing the
          source of general flooding and by improving control of equipment
          vital to safe operation of the vessel; (15) revision of towing
          requirements; (16) requirements for ships intended for operation
          in polar waters; (17) guidelines for standardization of the
          layout of essential instrumentation on the bridge and in the
          engine room; (18) safety of passenger submersibles; (19)
          introduction of a standard for ship construction into the 1974
          International Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea
          (SOLAS 1974); (20) review of existing ships, safety standards;
          (21) role of the human element in maritime casualties; (22)
          safety aspects of alternative tanker designs; (23) structural
          aspects of the use of composite materials on board ships; (24)
          access to tanks and ballast space structures; and (25) standards
          for the design and construction of sewage systems on ships.

          Among the significant actions taken at DE 36 are the following:

               1.   The Subcommittee approved amendments to the Code on
                    Alarms and Indicators to cover the 1989 Code for the
                    Construction and Equipment of Mobile Offshore Drilling
                    Units (MODU Code) and the Code of Safety for Diving
                    Systems.

               2.   The DE agreed to draft interim maneuverability
                    standards which are to be forwarded to the Maritime
                    Safety Committee (MSC) as a recommended Assembly
                    resolution.



                                         4









              3.    Concerning the HSC Code, the Subcommittee agreed to
                    pursue the option of establishing a new chapter under
                    SOLAS which will provide basic regulations that refer
                    to the HSC Code. SOLAS 1974 will serve as the
                    benchmark for the level of safety to be achieved.

              4.    With regard to ventilation of vehicle decks, the DE
                    agreed to form an intersessional correspondence group
                    and directed the group to address specific vehicle deck
                    ventilation system issues as identified by the United
                    States.

              5.    The Subcommittee agreed to develop a final text of
                    draft amendments to the 1989 MODU Code in order to
                    harmonize the survey and certification requirements and
                    the safety certificates with the requirements of the
                    1988 SOLAS and Load Line Protocols. It was agreed to
                    prepare a draft MSC resolution for adopting the
                    amendments.

              6.    The DE agreed with the information provided by the
                    United States on alternatives for ozone-depleting
                    CFC-11 and CFC-12 as well as on retrofitting existing
                    refrigeration units to use alternative refrigerants and
                    on availability of equipment for recycling, recovering,
                    and reclaiming CFC-11 and CFC-12.

              7.    The Subcommittee agreed that voyage data recorders are
                    technically feasible. It was felt that hull strength
                    monitoring devices would be useful as an aid to the
                    master in vessel operation and would provide
                    information for naval architects in the design process.
                    The Subcommittee agreed, in principle, on a
                    recommendation to fit hull strength monitoring devices
                    on board bulk carriers of 20,000 DWT and above and also
                    agreed to consider extending the application of the
                    recommendation to other types of ships.

              8.    The Subcommittee approved the draft text of amendments
                    to SOLAS 1974 concerning coating requirements for
                    ballast tanks and invited the MSC to approve and adopt
                    the amendments as soon as possible. The DE agreed to
                    form an intersessional correspondence group to prepare
                    guidelines on the selection, application, and
                    maintenance of protective coatings of dedicated
                    seawater ballast tanks.

              9.    The DE agreed that the towing requirements should be
                    changed so that towing equipment would be pre-rigged
                    and capable of being rapidly deployed from both the bow
                    and the stern of tankers above 20,000 DWT. The
                    Subcommittee approved the draft text of amendments to
                    chapter V of SOLAS 1974 and recommended that the MSC
                    treat this as an urgent matter.


                                        5









           For further information, contact Capt. T. E. Thompson, Chief,
           Marine Technical and Hazardous Materials Division (G-MTH), Office
           of Marine Safety, Security and Environmental Protection, U.S.
           Coast Guard, 2100 Second Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593,
           (phone: (202) 267-2967).


           C.   International Maritime organization (IMO), Subcommittee on
                Standards of Training and Watchkeeping (STW)

           The 24th session of the Subcommittee on Standards of Training and
           Watchkeeping (STW 24) was held at IMO Headquarters in London from
           March 8-12, 1993. A total of 58 member governments, 2 associate
           members, 2 United Nations specialized agencies, 3
           intergovernmental organizations, and 14 nongovernmental
           organizations participated. The United States was represented by
           the Coast Guard with assistance from the Maritime Administration,
           Federal Communications Commission, and three private sector
           advisers. Major STW 24 agenda topics were as follows: (1)
           comprehensive review of the 1978 International Convention on
           Standards of Training, Certification and Watchkeeping for
           Seafarers (STCW 1978); (2) draft Protocol to STCW 1978 relating
           to fishing vessels; (3) officer of the watch acting as sole
           lookout in periods of darkness; (4) special training for
           personnel on tankers; (5) international eyesight standards; (6)
           drug use and alcohol abuse; (7) training for personnel to assist
           passengers in emergencies; (8) training for repair and
           maintenance of on-board electrical installations; (9) training
           for personnel on mobile offshore units (MOUs); and (10) issue of
           certificates to holders of non-Global Maritime Distress and
           Safety System (non-GMDSS) certificates.

           Significant actions taken at STW 24 include the following:

               1.    The Subcommittee prepared a provisional list of items
                     to be considered in the comprehensive review of STCW
                     1978 which is broad in scope and includes manning
                     implications. The STW also agreed on a number of
                     principles to guide the review. The principles call
                     for retaining the integrity of the existing Convention,
                     reviewing the existing control system, and introducing
                     a "functional approach" to certification which relates
                     skills to shipboard functions without reference to
                     traditional shipboard organization. A working group
                     was established for the comprehensive review of the
                     STCW Convention.

               2.    The Subcommittee agreed to U.S. proposals and proposals
                     received from the Subcommittee on Radiocommunications
                     (COM) concerning the draft preliminary outline of
                     subjects to be addressed in the evaluation of results
                     of trials with one man bridge watches at night. The
                     modifications emphasize the importance of considering
                     the human factors implications of one man watches and



                                           6









                    the ability of one person to perform all duties related
                    to GMDSS.


               3.   Concerning special training requirements for personnel
                    on tankers, the STW approved a proposed revision to the
                    draft amendments to chapter V of STCW 1978. The
                    revision provides for a specified period of on-board
                    training and requires training in procedures to be
                    followed when a malfunction occurs which poses a risk
                    of pollution. The draft amendments with revisions will
                    be forwarded to the 63rd session of the Maritime Safety
                    Committee (MSC 63) for consideration and adoption.

               .4.  The Subcommittee adopted a draft MSC circular
                    establishing international in-service eyesight
                    standards based on the principles and guidelines
                    proposed by the U.S. delegation at STW 23. The
                    standards are consistent with U.S. eyesight fitness
                    standards and preserve flag-state discretion to grant
                    waivers for any of the standards, with a limitation
                    imposed on the degree of permissible loss of distant
                    visual acuity. The draft MSC circular will be
                    submitted to MSC 62 for consideration and adoption.

               5.   The STW approved a working group recommendation, as
                    proposed by the U.S. delegation, for the adoption of an
                    IMO Assembly resolution incorporating the principles
                    and guidelines concerning drug and alcohol abuse
                    programs in MSC circular 595, taking note of the
                    International Labor organization's endorsement of the
                    IMO principles and guidelines. Member governments were
                    also encouraged to prescribe a maximum blood-alcohol
                    concentration of 0.08 percent as a minimum acceptable
                    safety standard. MSC 62 was invited to instruct the
                    STW to prepare the Assembly resolution for future
                    consideration and adoption.

               6.   The Subcommittee adopted a final draft Assembly
                    resolution on minimum training requirements for
                    personnel assigned to assist passengers in emergency
                    situations on passenger ships. The draft resolution
                    includes the U.S. delegation proposal on periodic
                    retraining and enhanced communication skills for crew
                    members assigned to assist passengers in emergencies.
                    The draft resolution will be submitted to MSC 62 for
                    consideration and adoption.

               7.   The Subcommittee prepared a draft Assembly resolution
                    on radio licenses in the GMDSS. The primary purpose of
                    the resolution is to denounce the practice of issuing
                    GMDSS certificates to holders of non-GMDSS certificates
                    without reViring additional training.




                                          7









          For further information, contact Capt. John F. McGowan, Chief,
          Merchant Vessel Personnel Division (G-MVP), Office of Marine
          Safety, Security and Environmental Protection, U.S. Coast Guard,
          2100 Second Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593, (phone: (202) 267-
          0214).



          D.   International Maritime Organization (IMO), Legal Committee
                (LEG)

          The 68th session of the Legal Committee (LEG 68) was held at IMO
          Headquarters in London from March 15-19, 1993. A total of 43
          nations, 3 intergovernmental organizations, 20 nongovernmental
          organizations, Hong Kong, and the United Nations Environment
          Programme (UNEP) were represented. The United States was
          represented by the Coast Guard with assistance from the
          Department of State, Department of the Navy, Customs Service, and
          two private sector advisers. Among LEG 68 agenda items were the
          following: (1) consideration of a draft International Convention
          on Liability and Compensation for Damage in Connection with the
          Carriage of Hazardous and Noxious Substances by Sea (HNS); (2)
          legal issues regarding mandatory ship reporting systems and
          vessel traffic services; (3) technical cooperation -- subprogram
          for maritime legislation; (4) work program for the 1994-1995
          biennium and long-term work plan; and (5) matters arising from
          the 69th session of the Council (C 69).

          Significant actions taken at LEG 68 include the following:

               1.   In its consideration of the draft HNS Convention, the
                    LEG made very little progress with regard to the
                    second-tier international fund scheme. This was due,
                    in part, to the varied submissions calling for the
                    establishment of separate sector accounts within the
                    proposed second-tier. while the idea of multiple
                    accounts was initially raised at LEG 67, the
                    submissions made at LEG 68 were the first concrete and
                    detailed formal proposals seen. Because of the late
                    distribution of these proposals, most delegations did
                    not have specific positions regarding them. There was,
                    however, a willingness to refer the submissions to the
                    Legal Committee's working group of experts (WGE) with
                    only minimum discussion.

               2.   The Committee attempted a final reading of the first 10
                    articles of the HNS Convention, but the discussion was
                    characterized by many reservations and comments. The
                    chairman reiterated a view that many issues in the
                    first 10 articles need further discussion, but
                    mentioned that some were best left to the diplomatic
                    conference. Some discussion focused on a submission
                    proposing a discrete list to define HNS substances.
                    The LEG decided to again refer the issue to the WGE to
                    allow the experts to comment on the technical issues



                                         8









                    raised by the specific submission. The U.S. submission
                    proposing the deletion of liability for all
                    International Maritime Dangerous Goods (IMDG) Code
                    Class 7 radioactive substances was relatively well
                    received; however, the LEG did not make a decision on
                    the matter. The chairman asked that interested
                    delegations work towards a compromise solution to be
                    presented at LEG 69.

               3.   The Committee decided to recommend to the Council (C)
                    that the scheduled HNS diplomatic conference be removed
                    from the 1994-1995 work program and moved work on
                    revisions to the 1976 Convention on Limitation of
                    Liability for Maritime Claims (LLMC 1976) to equal
                    priority with HNS on the work program. The Committee
                    decided to allow the WGE to continue priority work on
                    HNS.

               4.   In considering the mandatory ship reporting issue, the
                    LEG referred without amendment the summary of
                    conclusions from the informal working group to the
                    Maritime Safety Committee (MSC). There were some
                    attempts to amend the document, but the chairman and
                    other delegations persuaded the Committee to allow the
                    summary to go forward without amendment and to allow
                    delegations to make comments for the LEG report, which
                    would be forwarded along with the summary.

               5.   The LEG also: (a) expressed a willingness to implement
                    the subprogram for maritime legislation in the
                    Integrated Technical Cooperation Program which was
                    adopted by the Technical Cooperation Committee (TC);
                    (b) adopted a work program for the 1994-1995 biennium
                    and a long-term work plan for the period beyond,
                    including in the short-term consideration of a draft
                    convention on offshore mobile craft, work on the
                    subject of arrest of ships, work on a possible
                    convention on wreck removal and related issues, and
                    work on a draft convention on civil jurisdiction,
                    choice of law, recognition and enforcement of judgments
                    in matters of collision at sea; and (c) recommended to
                    the Council (C) the granting of consultative status to
                    the International Maritime Lecturers Association (IMLA)
                    and the World Wide Fund for Nature (WWF).

          While work on HNS seemed to plateau, there was a hint on the
          margin of an upcoming attempt to refocus HNS on a single second-
          tier account, funded through post-incident levies only on high
          volume bulk liquid and gas cargoes. For further information,
          contact Capt. David J. Kantor or Lt. Lee Handford, Maritime and
          International Law Division (G-LMI), Office of the Chief Counsel,
          U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 Second Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593,
          (phone: (202) 267-1527).



                                         9










          E.   International Maritime Orcfanization (IMO), International
               Conference on Safety of Fishing Vessels (SFV-P/CONF)

          The IMO International Conference on Safety of Fishing Vessels
          (SFV-P/CONF) was held at Torremolinos, Spain, from March 22
          April 2, 1993. The Conference adopted the Protocol of 1993
          relating to the 1977 Torremolinos International Convention for
          the Safety of Fishing Vessels (SFV PROT 1993). The Protocol is
          intended to make the Convention acceptable to more nations,
          thereby enabling it to be ratified by a sufficient number of
          states to bring it into force. The Conference was attended by 48
          states, 1 observer state, 1 associate member, 2 United Nations
          specialized agencies, 2 intergovernmental organizations, and 1
          nongovernmental organization. The United States was represented
          by the Coast Guard with assistance from one private sector
          adviser. The final act of the Conference acknowledged that 10
          governments, including the United States, provided the necessary
          funds for the Conference.


          Protocol technical requirements for the construction and
          equipment of fishing vessels address the following broad areas:
          (1) construction, watertight integrity, and equipment; (2)
          stability and associated seaworthiness; (3),machinery and
          electrical installations and periodically unattended machinery
          spaces; (4) fire protection, fire detection, fire extinction, and
          fire fighting; (5) protection of the crew; (6) lifesaving
          appliances and arrangements; (7) emergency procedures, musters,
          and drills; and (8) radiocommunications. The Protocol will be
          open for signature from July 1, 1993, to June 30, 1994, at IMO
          Headquarters in London. It will come into force once it is
          ratified by a minimum of 15 states whose fishing fleets comprise
          at least 14,000 vessels in the aggregate.

          The United States has not ratified the 1977 Torremolinos
          International Convention for the Safety of Fishing Vessels
          (SFV 1977). If the United States is to become a party to the
          1993 Protocol, the U.S. Coast Guard needs, as a first step,
          legislative authority from the U.S. Congress to inspect fishing
          vessels. In 1992, the Coast Guard submitted a report to Congress
          recommending that the Coast Guard inspect fishing vessels. For
          further information, contact Mr. Gene F. Hammel, Assistant
          Director, International Affairs Staff (G-CI), U.S. Coast Guard,
          2100 Second Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593, (phone: (202) 267-
          2280).



          F.   North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), Maritime
               Environmental Protection (MEP)

          The NATO Special Working Group 12 on Maritime Environmental
          Protection (SWG 12/MEP) met on April 7-8, 1993, at NATO
          Headquarters in Brussels, Belgium. The SWG 12 meeting was
          preceded by a 2-day meeting of the ad hoc working group on ship
          engine exhaust emissions. Representatives from Belgium, Canada,


                                         10









         Denmark, France, Germany, Italy, the Netherlands, Norway,
         Portugal, the United Kingdom, and the United States participated.
         SWG 12/MEP was formed by the NATO Naval Armaments Group in order
         to address the challenge that NATO navies must be environmental
         leaders while effectively executing the alliance defense mission.
         The focus of SWG 12 is on technology sharing and cooperation
         which has resulted in several cooperative efforts.

         Among significant actions taken at this SWG 12 meeting are the
         following:

              1.   SWG 12 continues to aggressively share information and
                   seek opportunities for MEP cooperation. This NATO
                   forum is rapidly becoming a focal point for
                   international MEP discussions. Many representatives
                   are contributing information developed within their
                   bilateral arrangements with other (including non-NATO)
                   nations.

              2.   Blue water navy representatives expressed the
                   requirement for worldwide naval operations with minimal
                   regulatory constraints, without inappropriate
                   dependence on shore facilities, and without
                   unreasonable costs imposed by future environmental
                   regulations.

              3.   Representatives have validated the vision of an
                   environmentally sound ship of the 21st century (ESS-21)
                   which was first articulated by the U.S. Navy in 1989.

              4.   The U.S. representative presented an overview of the
                   strategic planning process for environmental research
                   and development. The presentation also included the
                   recent effort for integration of the science and
                   technology strategic planning process with the overall
                   thrust of the environmental program.

              5.   The Netherlands representative presented his nation's
                   national strategy called "Total Material Management"
                   which seeks to examine every current and future
                   operation or development with regard to its impact on
                   the environment.

              6.   Representatives harmonized their strategies and
                   requirements to achieve MEP. Common strategies for
                   waste streams will lead to the identification of the
                   technological needs and areas for possible
                   collaboration in research and development.

              7.   Representatives agreed that international regulation of
                   ship diesel engine exhaust emissions was likely in the
                   next few years. Without exception, the experts
                   attending the meeting of the ad hoc working group on
                   ship engine exhaust emissions endorsed the position


                                         11









                    that new engine exhaust emissions restrictions, if any,
                    should only apply to new engines after the year 2000
                    and should not apply to existing engines.

               8.   Representatives agreed that there was no drop-in
                    replacement for Halon 1301 that would meet shipboard
                    fire fighting, safety, and health requirements. The
                    representatives all agreed that finding a suitable
                    replacement was one of their highest priorities.

          SWG 12 will hold its next meeting on October 13-14, 1993, in
          Brussels, Belgium. For further information, contact Mr. Lawrence
          J. Koss, Head, Ship and Air Systems Branch, Environmental
          Protection, Safety and Occupational Health Division (N45), U.S.
          Department of the Navy, Washington, DC 20350, (phone: (703) 602-
          2562).



          G.   International Maritime Orccanization (IMO), Subcommittee on
               Flag State Implementation-(FSI)

          The first session of the Subcommittee on Flag State
          Implementation (FSI 1) was held at IMO Headquarters in London
          from April 19-23, 1993. Forty-six member governments, 1
          associate member, I United Nations specialized agency, 3
          intergovernmental organizations, and 15 nongovernmental
          organizations participated. The United States was represented by
          the Coast Guard with assistance from the American Bureau of
          Shipping. FSI 1 agenda items included the following: (1)
          responsibilities of governments under safety and pollution
          prevention conventions; (2) essential services required for the
          implementation of IMO instruments; (3) general guidelines for
          flag states; (4) difficulties experienced by flag states in
          implementing IMO instruments; (5) difficulties experienced by
          states other than flag states in implementing IMO instruments;
          (6) specific needs, as provided by individual flag states or
          identified by the Subcommittee; (7) deficiency reports; (8)
          casualty stat iSt4 cs and investigations; (9) changes to IMO
          working methods and instruments to reduce the difficulties
          associated with implementation of IMO instruments; (10)
          application of exemptions and equivalent provisions contained in
          IMO instruments; (11) technical assistance; and (12) guidance on
          matters relating to port state control.

          Major accomplishments of FSI 1 include the following:

              1.    During this first session of the FSI, a significant
                    amount of plenary time was spent in the development of
                    the purpose and direction of the group. After
                    extensive discussion, it was clearly established, in
                    line with U.S. objectives, that the Subcommittee would
                    develop, implement, and provide guidance on IMO
                    instruments leading to the reduction of substandard
                    ships.


                                         12









              2.    The Subcommittee approved guidelines to assist flag
                    states in the discharge of their duties under IMO
                    conventions. The guidelines will be issued as a
                    Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) circular. This will
                    allow maritime administrations the opportunity to
                    provide information concerning the usefulness of the
                    guidelines. After an evaluation period, the guidelines
                    will be issued as an MSC resolution.

              3.    The FSI completed a draft resolution on guidelines for
                    the authorization of and minimum standards for
                    recognized organizations acting on behalf of
                    administrations. This document is the compilation of
                    documents created in two separate working groups formed
                    during this session.

              4.    The Subcommittee established a permanent working group
                    on casualty statistics and investigations. The FSI
                    views the analysis of casualty and deficiency data as
                    being of paramount importance to the evaluation of flag
                    state and port state effectiveness. The establishment
                    of a permanent working group is an integral part of the
                    overall effort to improve flag state compliance.

              5.    A draft circular was completed that establishes an IMO
                    data base and outlines a format which will enable the
                    IMO to capture and analyze information from
                    investigations completed by administrations in
                    accordance with Assembly resolution A.322(IX).

              6.    The Subcommittee developed detailed guidelines on the
                    control of operational requirements related to the
                    safety of ships and pollution prevention. These
                    guidelines are to be approved at MSC 62 and forwarded
                    to the 18th Assembly as a resolution.

              7.    The Subcommittee established a correspondence group on
                    the amalgamation of numerous existing port state
                    control resolutions. This single port state resolution
                    will comprise the first comprehensive IMO document on
                    port state control. It will take into consideration
                    all existing port state control documents and will
                    ensure that port state control matters become an
                    integral part of the F@I Subcommittee.

         For further information, contact Capt. Robert C. North, Deputy
         Chief, Office of Marine Safety, Security and Environmental
         Protection (G-M), U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 Second Street, SW,
         Washington, DC 20593, (phone: (202) 267-2201).







                                        13










          H.   International Maritime Organization (IMO), Facilitation
               Committee (FAL)

          The 22nd session of the Facilitation Committee (FAL 22) was held
          at IMO Headquarters in London from April 26-30, 1993. The United
          States was represented by the Department of Transportation with
          assistance from the Immigration and Naturalization Service.
          FAL 22 agenda items included, among others, the following: (1)
          Convention on Facilitation of International Maritime Traffic
          (FAL Convention); (2) consideration and adoption of proposed
          amendments to the Annex to the FAL Convention; (3) automatic data
          processing of shipping documents and documents used for the
          clearance of ships; (4) general review of the FAL Convention,
          e.g., facilitation aspects of methods to prevent and control
          illicit drug traffic; (5) formalities connected with the arrival,
          stay, and departure of persons; and (6) policy on ports.

          Among significant actions at FAL 22 are the following:

               1.   The Committee approved several priority amendments to
                    the FAL Annex, including two dealing with unmanifested
                    parcels and the listing of stowaways. The United
                    States actively participated in a special working group
                    established to review and prioritize additional
                    amendments, primarily concerning the handling of
                    stowaways and inadmissible passengers, for
                    consideration at future sessions.

               2.   The Committee noted the first report of the working
                    group on strategy for port interface. Several
                    delegations expressed a strong interest in having the
                    work of this group incorporated into the FAL Committee.
                    It was agreed that no decision would be taken until
                    after the Maritime Safety Committee (MSC) and the
                    Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meet
                    later in 1993.

               3.   Concerning facilitation aspects of methods to prevent
                    and control illicit drug traffic, the observer from the
                    Customs Cooperation Council (CCC) advised the Committee
                    that the CCC had entered into memorandums of
                    understanding (MOUs) with eight international maritime
                    organizations, including the International Chamber of
                    Shipping (ICS). These MoUs provide a framework for
                    cooperation between customs authorities and shipping
                    companies to reduce or eliminate the use of vessels in
                    contraband trafficking. The CCC observer noted that
                    they had concluded the report undertaken for the Group
                    of Seven (G-7) nations and submitted it to the Munich
                    Economic Summit in July 1992. The G-7 Summit endorsed
                    the report and the expansion of MoUs between customs
                    authorities and the transport sector at both the
                    national and international levels. The CCC observer
                    also strongly supported the proposed amendments to the


                                         14









                   FAL Convention that had been submitted by the ICS at
                   FAL 21 indicating that they are consistent with the
                   finding of the G-7 study. (See also the Appendix
                   herein.)

              4.   The Committee requested the ICS to take the lead in
                   translating the six FAL paper document forms (general
                   declaration, cargo declaration, ship's stores
                   declaration, crew's effects declaration, crew list, and
                   passenger list) into electronic messages. The United
                   States again urged the IMO not to develop electronic
                   data interchange (EDI) messages outside the UN EDIFACT
                   process.

              S.   The United States, along with the observers from the
                   International Civil Aviation Organization (ICAO) and
                   the CCC, informed the Committee as to the facilitation
                   value of advance passenger information systems (APIS)
                   in clearing international maritime passengers. The
                   Committee supported the use of APIS, particularly where
                   travel documents were machine readable.

         For further information, contact Mr. Clifford W. Woodward, Office
         of International Transportation and Trade (P-20), U.S. Department
         of Transportation, 400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590,
         (phone: (202) 366-9505).






























                                        15











          2.   LEGISLATION AND EXECUTIVE ORDERS



          A.   National Research Council Amendments (E.O. 12832)

          On January 19, 1993, President Bush signed Executive Order 12832
          which amended Executive Order 2859, as amended, in order to
          update the National Research Council (NRC). The NRC was
          organized in 1916 at the request of the President by the   National
          Academy of Sciences, under its Congressional charter, as   a
          measure of national preparedness. It is the principal operating
          agency of the National Academy of Sciences and the National
          Academy of Engineering, the latter having been established in
          1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences. The
          Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences,
          established in 1970 under the Academy's charter, conducts its
          programs and activities under the approval, operating, and review
          procedures of the NRC. In recognition of the work accomplished
          through the NRC in organizing research, in furthering science,
          and in securing cooperation of government and nongovernment
          agencies in the solution of their problems, the NRC has been
          perpetuated by the Academy of Sciences as requested by the
          President in Executive Order 2859.

          With regard to the functions of the NRC, the amendments are:

               1.   "To stimulate research in the mathematical, physical,
                    biological, environmental, and social sciences, and in
                    the application of these sciences to engineering,
                    agriculture, medicine, and other useful arts, with the
                    object of increasing knowledge, of strengthening the
                    national security including the contribution of science
                    and engineering to economic growth, of ensuring the
                    health of the American people, of aiding in the
                    attainment of environmental goals, and of contributing
                    in other ways to the public welfare.

               2.   "To survey the broad possibilities of science, to
                    formulate comprehensive projects of research, and to
                    develop effective means of utilizing the scientific and
                    technical resources of the country for dealing with
                    such projects.

               3.   "To promote cooperation in research, at home and
                    abroad, in order to secure concentration of effort,
                    minimize duplication, and stimulate progress; but in
                    all cooperative undertakings to give encouragement to
                    individual initiative, as fundamentally important to
                    the advancement of science.

               4.   "To serve as a means of bringing American and foreign
                    investigators* into active cooperation with the
                    scientific and technical services of the Federal
                    Government.




                                         16










              5.   "To direct the attention of scientific and technical
                   investigators to the importance of military and
                   industrial problems in connection with national
                   security, to the importance of environmental problems
                   in connection with public health and the economy, and
                   to aid in the solution of these problems by organizing
                   specific research.

              6.   "To gather and collate scientific and technical
                   information, at home and abroad, in cooperation with
                   governmental and other agencies, and to disseminate
                   such information to duly accredited persons and the
                   public."

         Federal scientists, engineers, and other technically qualified
         professionals are encouraged by these amendments to participate
         in the work of the NRC as requested and authorized. Also,
         because of the unique qualifications of the National Academy of
         Sciences, the amendments authorize the acquisition of services by
         the Academy on a noncompetitive basis if otherwise in accordance
         with applicable law and regulations.

         For further information, contact Dr. Frank Press, President,
         National Academy of Sciences, 2101 Constitution Avenue,
         Washington, DC 20418.


         B.   Ozone-Delpletincr Substances (E.O. 12843)

         On April 21, 1993, President Clinton signed Executive Order 12843
         entitled "Procurement Requirements and Policies for Federal
         Agencies for Ozone-Depleting Substances." E.O. 12843 states
         that: (1) the essential function of the stratospheric ozone layer
         is shielding the Earth from dangerous ultraviolet radiation; (2)
         the production and consumption of substances that cause the
         depletion of stratospheric ozone are being rapidly phased out on
         a worldwide basis with the support and encouragement of the
         United States; (3) the Montreal Protocol on Substances that
         Deplete the Ozone Layer, to which the United States is a
         signatory, calls for a phaseout of the production and consumption
         of these substances; (4) the federal government, as one of the
         principal users of these substances, is able through affirmative
         procurement practices to reduce significantly the use of these
         substances and to provide leadership in their phaseout; and (5)
         the use of alternative substances and new technologies to replace
         these ozone-depleting substances may contribute positively to the
         economic competitiveness on the world market of U.S.
         manufacturers of these innovative safe alternatives.

         In order to reduce the federal government's procurement and use
         of substances that cause stratospheric ozone depletion, this
         order requires federal'agencies, to the extent practicable, to:
         (1) conform their procurement regulations and practices to the
         policies and requirements of Title VI of the Clean Air Act


                                         17









          Amendments of 1990 (P.L. 101-549) which deal with stratospheric
          ozone protection; (2) maximize the use of safe alternatives to
          ozone-depleting substances; (3) evaluate the present and future
          uses of ozone-depleting substances, including making assessments
          of existing and future needs for such materials and evaluating
          their use of and plans for recycling; (4) revise their
          procurement practices and implement cost-effective programs both
          to modify specifications and contracts that require the use of
          ozone-depleting substances and to substitute non-ozone-depleting
          substances to the extent economically practicable; and (5)
          exercise leadership, develop exemplary practices, and disseminate
          information on successful efforts in phasing out ozone-depleting
          substances.

          The term "procurement regulations, policies, and procedures"
          encompasses the complete acquisition process, including the
          generation of product descriptions by individuals responsible for
          determining which substances must be acquired by the agency to
          meet its mission. For further information, contact Mr. Paul
          Stolpman, Acting Director, office of Atmospheric Programs, U.S.
          Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC
          20460, (phone: (202) 233-9140).


































                                          18












         3.   REGULATIONS



         A.   Emergency Position Indicating Radio Beacons (CG)

         The EPIRB's On Uninspected Vessels Requirements Act
         (P.L. 100-540) amended the shipping laws of the United States by
         requiring uninspected commercial vessels to have the number and
         type of alerting and locating equipment, including emergency
         position indicating radio beacons (EPIRBs), prescribed by
         regulation. On March 10, 1993, (58 FR 13364), the Coast Guard
         (CG), U.S. Department of Transportation, promulgated a final rule
         (46 CFR part 25) which amends the uninspected vessel regulations
         by requiring EPIRBs to be carried on all uninspected commercial
         vessels, except uninspected passenger vessels, operating on the
         high seas or beyond 3 miles from the coastline of the Great
         Lakes. By implementing this law, the regulations will improve
         Coast Guard search and rescue (SAR) activities during emergency
         situations. An EPIRB is Type Accepted by the U.S. Federal
         Communications Commission under requirements in 47 CFR parts 2
         and 80.


         For further information, contact Mr. Robert L. Markle, Chief,
         Survival Systems Branch (G-MVI-3), Office of Marine Safety,
         Security and Environmental Protection, U.S. Coast Guard, 2100
         Second Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593, (phone: (202) 267-1444).


         B.   Conformity of General Federal Actions to Implementation
              Plans (EPA)

         The Clean Air Act (CAA) requires the U.S. Environmental
         Protection Agency (EPA) to promulgate rules to ensure that
         federal actions conform to the appropriate state implementation
         plan (SIP). Conformity to a SIP is defined in the CAA, as
         amended in 1990, as meaning conformity to a SIP's purpose of
         eliminating or reducing the severity and number of violations of
         the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) and achieving
         expeditious attainment of such standards. The federal agency
         responsible for the action is required to determine if its
         actions conform to the applicable SIP. On March 15, 1993,
         (58 FR 13836), EPA proposed rules (40 CFR parts 51 and 93)
         governing the determination of conformity.

         The EPA Administrator, with the concurrence of the Secretary of
         Transportation, is required to promulgate criteria and procedures
         for demonstrating and assuring conformity to the SIP of federal
         highway and transit actions (transportation conformity). These
         proposed transportation conformity rules are set forth in 40 CFR
         part 51, subpart T, as proposed on January 11, 1993, (58 FR
         3768), and in 40 CFR part 93, subpart A, as proposed in this
         notice of proposed rulemaking. The CAA also requires EPA to
         promulgate criteria and procedures for determining conformity of
         all other federal actions to a SIP (general conformity). These


                                         19









          proposed general conformity rules are set forth in 40 CFR
          part 51, subpart W, and 40 CFR part 93, subpart B, as proposed in
          this notice of proposed rulemaking. As used in this proposed
          rulemaking, a "federal action" subject to the proposed general
          conformity rules means any activity engaged in by a department,
          agency, or instrumentality of the federal government or any
          activity that a department, agency, or instrumentality of the
          federal government supports in any way, provides financial
          assistance for, licenses, permits, or approves.

          For further information, contact Mr. Doug Grano, Office of Air
          Quality Planning and Standards (MD-15), U.S. Environmental
          Protection Agency, Research Triangle Park, NC 27711,
          (phone: (919) 541-3292).


          C.  Phaseout of Chemicals Which Deplete Stratospheric Ozone
               ( E P A)

          On March 18, 1993, (58 FR 15014), the U.S. Environmental
          Protection Agency (EPA) issued a notice of proposed rulemaking
          (40 CFR part 82) which proposes to amend the schedule for the
          phaseout of chemicals which deplete stratospheric ozone, as
          provided for under section 606 of the amended Clean Air Act
          (CAA). This action responds to several petitions and comments
          seeking an accelerated phaseout of ozone-depleting substances
          under section 606. It also proposes regulations implementing the
          amendments, adjustments, and decisions adopted by the parties to
          the Montreal Protocol on Substances That Deplete the Ozone Layer
          at their November 1992 meeting. In this action, EPA is proposing
          to list and phase out methyl bromide and hydrobromofluorocarbons
          (HBFCs). Finally, in accordance with trade provisions in
          article 4 of the Montreal Protocol, EPA proposes with this action
          to ban specified trade between the United States and foreign
          states not party to the Protocol.

          For further information, contact Mr. Peter Voigt, Stratospheric
          Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric Programs, U.S.
          Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW, Washington, DC
          20460, (phone: (202) 233-9185).


          D.  Occupational Exposure to Glycol Ethers (OSHA)

          On March 23, 1993, (58 FR 15526), the Occupational Safety and
          Health Administration (OSHA), U.S. Department of Labor, issued a
          proposed rule to amend its existing regulation (29 CFR part 1910)
          for occupational exposure to 2-Methoxyethanol (2-ME),
          2-Ethoxyethanol (2-EE), and their acetates (2-MEA, 2-EEA) (Glycol
          Ethers). OSHA has determined, based on a review and evaluation
          of studies conducted on the health effects of these glycol
          ethers, that the current permissible exposure limits (PELs) do
          not adequately protect employees from significant risks of



                                        20









         adverse health effects, specifically reproductive and
         developmental health effects.

         To eliminate these significant risks of adverse health effects,
         OSHA is proposing for general, maritime, agriculture, and
         construction industries to reduce the existing 8-hour time
         weighted average (TWA) PELs for 2-ME and 2-MEA to 0.1 parts per
         million (ppm) and for 2-EE and 2-EEA to O.S ppm. OSHA proposes
         excursion limits (ELs) for these glycol ethers of five times the
         proposed PELs. OSHA also proposes to set action levels (ALs) for
         these glycol ethers of one-half the proposed PELs, measured as an
         8-hour TWA, in order to encourage lower exposure for employees
         while reducing administrative burdens on employers. In addition,
         OSHA proposes that no employee shall be exposed to these glycol
         ethers through dermal contact. Also proposed are requirements
         concerning certain ancillary provisions for employee protection
         such as preferred methods to control exposure, employee exposure
         monitoring, medical surveillance, recordkeeping, regulated areas,
         emergency procedures, hazard communication, and personal
         protective equipment.

         For further information, contact Mr. James F. Foster, Office of
         Public Affairs, occupational Safety and Health Administration,
         U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW,
         Washington, DC 20210, (phone: (202) 219-8151).


         E.   Longitudinal Strength and Plating Thickness (CG)

         Section 4109 of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-380,
         OPA 90) requires the issuance of regulations on two matters
         related to structural integrity of vessels that carry oil in bulk
         as cargo or cargo residue. These new regulations will: (1)
         establish minimum standards for plating thickness and (2) require
         periodic gauging of the plating thickness of all tank vessels
         over 30 years old operating on the navigable waters of the United
         States or the waters of the Exclusive Economic Zone. The purpose
         of these regulations is to ensure adequate structural integrity
         of tank vessels throughout their service life. This will reduce
         the likelihood of a vessel breaking apart and spilling a
         substantial quantity of its cargo oil. The statute also requires
         the regulations to be consistent with generally recognized
         principles of international law.

         On March 23, 1993, (58 FR 15740), the Coast Guard (CG), U.S.
         Department of Transportation, proposed to establish minimum
         longitudinal strength and plate thickness standards (46 CFR parts
         31 and 32) for tank vessels that carry oil cargoes. These
         proposed regulations also would require the periodic gauging of
         these vessels after they reach the age of 30 years. These
         regulations would reduce the likelihood of oil spills from
         structural failure of tank vessels, particularly in the case of
         unclassed tank barges.



                                        21









          For further information, contact Mr. Thomas Jordan, Project
          Manager, Oil Pollution Act Staff (G-MS-1), Office of Marine
          Safety, Security and Environmental Protection, U.S. Coast Guard,
          2100 Second Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593, (phone: (202) 267-
          6751).



          F.   Subdivision and Damage Stability (CG)

          On April 1, 1993, (58 FR 17316), the Coast  Guard (CG), U.S.
          Department of Transportation, issued a final rule (46 CFR
          part 174) which requires new dry cargo ships of 500 gross tons or
          more, calculated in accordance with the 1969 International
          Convention on Tonnage Measurement of Ships (TONNAGE 1969), to
          meet a minimum standard of subdivision and damage stability.
          Subdivision is the partitioning of a ship's internal volume into
          watertight compartments. Its purpose is to limit the quantity of
          water which may enter the ship following accidental hull damage
          or internal piping failure. Damage stability is the ability of a
          ship to avoid capsizing following accidental flooding. These
          regulations implement an international standard that was
          developed to ensure that a ship can sustain limited damage
          without loss of that ship. The current International Maritime
          Organization (IMO) damage stability rules for dry cargo ships
          were adopted in May 1990. These rules became effective as of
          February 1, 1992, as an amendment to the 1974 International
          Convention for the Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS 1974).

          For further information, contact Lt. Robert Holzman, Naval
          Architecture Branch (G-MTH-3), Office of Marine Safety, Security
          and Environmental Protection, U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 Second
          Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593, (phone: (202) 267-2988).


          G.   Class II Civil Penalties (CG)

          On April 6, 1993, (58 FR 17926), the Coast Guard (CG), U.S.
          Department of Transportation, issued an interim final rule
          (33 CFR part 20) which addresses practice and procedure for cases
          assessing class II civil penalties under section 311(b) of the
          Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA), as amended by the
          Oil Pollution Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-380, OPA 90), and section 109
          of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
          Liability Act (CERCLA). These regulations make available the
          enhanced enforcement capabilities provided by the OPA 90
          amendments to the FWPCA. All class II penalties will be assessed
          following notice and opportunity to be heard in proceedings that
          meet the requirements of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA).
          With regard to the FWPCA, this rule provides for public notice of
          a class II civil penalty action and an opportunity for interested
          persons to comment on the proposed civil penalty, to present
          evidence at a hearing, and to seek a hearing if none is
          scheduled. Topics addressed include administrative law judges,
          pleadings and motions, proceedings, conferences and settlement,


                                          22









          discovery, hearings, evidence, decisions and orders, appeals, and
          finality and availability of orders.

          For further information, contact Ms. Pamela M. Pelcovits, OPA 90
          Staff (G-MS-1), Office of Marine Safety, Security and
          Environmental Protection, U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 Second Street,
          SW, Washington, DC 20593, (phone: (202) 267-6823).


          H.   Ballast Water Manacrement (CG)

          On April 8, 1993, (58 FR 18330), the Coast Guard (CG), U.S.
          Department of Transportation, promulgated regulations (33 CFR
          part 151) to require ballast water management practices for each
          vessel entering the Great Lakes after operating on waters beyond
          the Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ). These requirements, which
          replace voluntary guidelines published on March 15, 1991, will
          help to prevent the additional introduction of nonindigenous
          aquatic nuisance species through the ballast water of vessels
          entering the Great Lakes. This final rule implements the
          regulatory requirements of the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance
          Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-646). Historical
          records suggest that over 100 non-native species have been
          introduced into the Great Lakes. The introduction of non-native
          fish and other aquatic organisms through the discharge of ballast
          water alters the balance of the ecosystem, often to the detriment
          of the system. Scientists believe that, in the 1980s alone,
          ballast water discharges have introduced six nuisance species to
          the Great Lakes.

          The regulations require the employment by the master of the
          vessel of one of the following ballast water management
          practices:

               1.   Carry out an exchange of ballast water on the waters
                    beyond the EEZ, in a depth exceeding 2,000 meters,
                    prior to entry into Snell Lock, at Massena, New York,
                    such that, at the conclusion of the exchange, any tank
                    from which ballast water will be discharged into the
                    Great Lakes contains water with a minimum salinity
                    level of 30 parts per thousand.

               2.   Retain the vessel's ballast water on board the vessel.
                    If this method of ballast water management is employed,
                    the Captain of the Port may seal any tank or hold
                    containing ballast water on board the vessel for the
                    duration of the voyage within the waters of the Great
                    Lakes.

               3.   Use an alternative environmentally sound method of
                    ballast water management that has been submitted to,
                    and approved'by, the Coast Guard prior to the vessel's
                    voyage.




                                         23









          In addition, no master of a vessel subject to these regulations
          may separately discharge sediment from tanks or holds containing
          ballast water unless it is disposed of ashore in accordance with
          local requirements. Nothing in these regulations authorizes the
          discharge of oil or noxious liquid substances in a manner
          prohibited by U.S. or international laws or regulations.

          For further information, contact Lt. Jonathan C. Burton, Project
          Manager, Marine Environmental Protection Division (G-MEP), Office
          of Marine Safety, Security and Environmental Protection, U.S.
          Coast Guard, 2100 Second Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593,
          (phone: (202) 267-6714).


          I.   Water Ouality Guidance for the Great Lakes System (EPA)

          On April 16, 1993, (58 FR 20802), the U.S. Environmental
          Protection Agency (EPA) promulgated a proposed rule (40 CFR
          parts 122, 123, 131, and 132) concerning the proposed Water
          Quality Guidance for the Great Lakes System developed under
          section 118(c)(2) of the Clean Water Act (CWA), as amended by
          section 101 of the Great Lakes Critical Programs Act of 1990.
          This Guidance, once finalized, will establish minimum water
          quality standards, antidegradation policies, and implementation
          procedures for waters within the Great Lakes System in the states
          of New York, Pennsylvania, Ohio, Indiana, Illinois, Minnesota,
          Wisconsin, and Michigan, including the waters within the
          jurisdiction of indian tribes. This proposal also is intended to
          satisfy the requirements of section 118(c)(7)(C) of the CWA that
          EPA publish information concerning the public health and
          environmental consequences of contaminants in Great Lakes
          sediment and that the information include specific numerical
          limits to protect health, aquatic life, and wildlife from the
          bioaccumulation of toxins.

          The proposed Guidance specifies numeric criteria for selected
          pollutants to protect aquatic life, wildlife, and human health
          within the Great Lak-es System and methodologies to derive numeric
          criteria for additionial pollutants discharged to these waters.
          The proposed Guidance also contains specific implementation
          procedures to translate the proposed ambient water quality
          criteria into enforceable controls on discharges of pollutants,
          as well as a proposed antidegradation policy for the Great Lakes
          System. The Great Lakes states and tribes must adopt water
          quality standards, antidegradation policies, and implementation
          procedures for waters within the Great Lakes System which are
          consistent with the final Guidance. If a Great Lakes state or
          tribe fails to adopt consistent provisions, EPA will promulgate
          such provisions.

          For further information, contact Ms. Wendy Schumacher, Water
          Quality Branch (WQS-16J), Region V, U.S. Environmental Protection
          Agency, 77 West Jackson Boulevard, Chicago, IL 60604, (phone:
          (312) 886-0412).


                                         24










         J.   Lead Exposure in Construction (OSHA)

         On May 4, 1993, (58 FR 26590), the Occupational Safety and Health
         Administration (OSHA), U.S. Department of Labor, promulgated an
         interim final rule which amends the standards for occupational
         health and environmental controls in 29 CFR part 1926 by adding a
         new section containing employee protection requirements for
         construction workers exposed to lead. This interim final rule is
         mandated by and issued under the exclusive authority of sections
         1031 and 1032 of Title X of the Housing and Community Development
         Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-550).

         This standard reduces the permitted level of exposure to lead for
         construction workers from 200 micrograms per cubic meter as an
         8-hour time weighted average (TWA) to an 8-hour TWA of 50
         micrograms per cubic meter. The standard also includes
         requirements addressing exposure assessment, methods of
         compliance, respiratory protection, protective clothing and
         equipment, hygiene facilities and practices, medical
         surveillance, medical removal protection, employee information
         and training, signs, recordkeeping, and observation of
         monitoring. An action level of 30 micrograms per cubic meter as
         an 8-hour TWA is established as the level at which employers must
         initiate certain compliance activities. In instances where
         employers can demonstrate that employee exposures are below 30
         micrograms per cubic meter as an 8-hour TWA, the employer is not
         obligated to comply with most of the requirements in this interim
         final rule.


         For further information, contact Mr. James F. Foster, Office of
         Public Affairs, Occupational Safety and Health Administration,
         U.S. Department of Labor, 200 Constitution Avenue, NW,
         Washington, DC 20210, (phone: (202) 219-8151).


         K.   Tanker Navigation Underway (CG)

         On May 10, 1993, (58 FR 27628), the Coast Guard (CG), U.S.
         Department of Transpo'rtation, consolidated three proposed rules
         into one final rule (33 CFR part-164 and 46 CFR part 35) which
         requires tankers of 1,600 or more gross tons (GT) when operating
         on the navigable waters of the United States to navigate with two
         officers on the bridge and an adequate engineering watch,
         including a licensed engineer in the machinery spaces.
         Restrictions are also imposed on the use of an automatic pilot by
         these tankers. These actions are required by the Oil Pollution
         Act of 1990 (P.L. 101-380, OPA 90). This final rule will provide
         additional tanker navigation safety requirements to reduce the
         incidence of tanker casualties.

         For further information, contact Ms. Margie Hegy, Short Range
         Aids to Navigation Division (G-NSR), Office of Navigation Safety
         and Waterway Services, U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 Second Street, SW,
         Washington, DC 20593, (phone: (202) 267-0415).


                                         25










          L.   Substitutes for Chemicals Which Devlete Stratosipheric Ozone
               (EPA)

          On May 12, 1993, (58 FR 28094), the U.S. Environmental Protection
          Agency (EPA) proposed its program for evaluating and regulating
          substitutes for the ozone-depleting chemicals being phased out
          under the stratospheric ozone protection provisions of the Clean
          Air Act (CAA). In section 612 of the amended CAA, EPA is
          authorized to identify and restrict the use of substitutes for
          Class I and Class II ozone-depleting substances where other
          alternatives exist that reduce overall risk to human health and
          the environment. EPA is referring to the program that would
          provide these determinations'as the Significant New Alternatives
          Policy (SNAP) program. The intended effect of this action is to
          expedite movement away from ozone-depleting compounds.

          In this notice of proposed rulemaking (40 CFR part 82), EPA is
          both issuing preliminary decisions on the acceptability of
          certain substitutes and introducing its plan for administering
          the SNAP program. To arrive at determinations on the
          acceptability of substitutes, EPA completed a cross-media
          analysis of risks to human health and the environment from use of
          various substitutes in different industrial applications. This
          analysis covers substitutes in the following applications:
          refrigeration, foam blowing, solvent cleaning, fire
          extinguishing, sterilants, aerosols, tobacco expansion, and
          adhesives, coatings, and inks. These sectors comprise the
          principal industrial sectors that historically consume large
          volumes of ozone-depleting compounds.

          For further information, contact Ms. Drusilla Hufford,
          Stratospheric Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric
          Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW,
          Washington, DC 20460, (phone: (202) 233-9101).


          M.   Refrigerant Recycling (EPA)

          On May 14, 1993, (58 FR 28660), the U.S. Environmental Protection
          Agency (EPA) promulgated regulations (40 CFR part 82) under
          section 608 of the Clean Air Act (CAA) that establish a recycling
          program for refrigerants which deplete stratospheric ozone and
          are recovered during the servicing and disposal of air-
          conditioning or refrigeration equipment. Together with the
          prohibition on venting during servicing, repair, and disposal of
          Class I and Class II substances that took effect on July 1, 1992,
          these regulations should substantially reduce emissions of ozone-
          depleting refrigerants. This final rule applies to the servicing
          and disposal of most air-conditioning and refrigeration
          equipment, including household air conditioners and
          refrigerators, commercial air conditioners and chillers,
          commercial refrigeratibn, industrial process refrigeration,
          refrigerated transport, and air-conditioning in vehicles not
          covered by EPA's regulations under section 609 of the CAA (which


                                         26









          apply to the service of motor vehicle air conditioners). The
          transport refrigeration sector consists of refrigerated ship
          holds, truck trailers, railway freight cars, and other shipping
          containers.

          These regulations require persons servicing air-conditioning and
          refrigeration equipment to observe certain service practices that
          reduce refrigerant emissions and establish equipment and off-site
          reclaimer certification programs, as well as a technician
          certification program. A sales restriction on refrigerant is
          included, whereby only certified technicians will legally be
          authorized to purchase such refrigerant. EPA's regulations also
          require repair of significant leaks, based on annual leak rates
          of equipment. In addition, these regulations require that ozone-
          depleting compounds contained "in bulk" in appliances be removed
          prior to disposal of the appliances and that all air-conditioning
          and refrigeration equipment, except for small appliances, be
          provided with a servicing aperture that would facilitate recovery
          of the refrigerant.

          For further information, contact Ms. Debbie Ottinger,
          Stratospheric Protection Division, Office of Atmospheric
          Programs, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 401 M Street, SW,
          Washington, DC 20460, (phone: (202) 233-9200).


          N.   Emissions from New Nonroad Comipression-Ignition EncTines
               (E P'M

          Section 213 of the Clean Air Act (CAA), as amended by the Clean
          Air Act Amendments of 1990, requires the U.S. Environmental
          Protection Agency (EPA) to conduct a study to determine whether
          emissions of carbon monoxide (CO), oxides of nitrogen (Nox), and
          volatile organic compounds (VoCs) from nonroad engines and
          vehicles contribute significantly to levels of ambient ozone   and
          CO in more than one area not in compliance with the national
          ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for these pollutants.    On
          May 17, 1993, (58 FR 28809), EPA issued a notice of proposed
          rulemaking (NPRM) which proposes to find that emissions from   such
          nonroad sources significantly contribute to nonattainment of   the
          NAAQS for ozone and CO in more than one area. If EPA finalizes
          this positive determination, section 213 requires the Agency to
          promulgate regulations that will 'result in reductions in
          emissions from nonroad sources.

          Consequently, EPA is proposing in this NPRM standards (40 CFR
          part 89) for NOx and smoke emissions from nonroad compression-
          ignition (CI) engines greater than or equal to 50 horsepower
          (37.3 kilowatts), with exclusions for certain types of engines.
          Engines explicitly excluded from this rulemaking are the
          following large nonroad CI engines: (1) engines regulated by the
          Mine Safety and Health Administration for underground use, (2)
          engines used in aircraft, (3) engines used to propel locomotives,
          and (4) engines used in marine vessels.


                                          27









          EPA is not including engines that propel or are used only on
          marine vessels for several reasons. First, these engines are
          currently subject to safety regulations by the Coast Guard. EPA
          must analyze these current Coast Guard safety requirements and
          determine the best method for regulating emissions from these
          engines consistent with the Coast Guard regulations. Second, at
          the present time insufficient information is available as to
          whether the proposed nonroad engine 8-mode test procedure is
          sufficiently representative of the operating cycle of these
          engines or whether some other cycle would be more appropriate.
          Finally, the application of auxiliary engines on marine vessels
          allows the use of unique technological solutions not available to
          other engines covered in this NPRM. Consequently, if EPA decides
          to regulate these engines, it will be through a separate
          rulemaking. This exclusion includes auxiliary engines used only
          on marine vessels.


          For further information, contact Mr. Michael A. Sabourin,
          Certification Division, Office of Mobile Sources, National
          Vehicle and Fuel Emissions Laboratory, 2565 Plymouth Road, Ann
          Arbor, MI 4810S, (phone: (313) 668-459S).


          0.   Recordkeening of Refuse Discharges from Ships (CG)


          The Marine Plastic Pollution Research and Control Act of 1987
          (P.L. 100-220) implemented Annex V (Garbage) of the 1973
          International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from
          Ships, as modified by the Protocol of 1978, (MARPOL 73/78).
          Section 2107 of this Act requires that the Secretary of the
          Department in which the Coast Guard (CG) is operating prescribe
          regulations which: (1) require certain U.S. ships (defined to
          include fixed or floating platforms, as well as vessels) to
          maintain refuse record books and (2) specify the ships to which
          the regulations apply. Refuse record books would be used to
          document waste discharges from the ships.

          On May 20, 1993, (58 FR 29482), the Coast Guard, U.S. Department
          of Transportation, issued a notice of proposed rulemaking (33 CFR
          part 151) which would require that all manned, oceangoing U.S.
          vessels of 40 feet or more in length engaged in commerce and all
          manned fixed or floating platforms subject to the jurisdiction of
          the United States keep records of garbage discharges and
          disposals. Regulations specifying the vessels and platforms
          required to maintain these records are mandated by statute. The
          use of shipboard garbage discharge and disposal records would
          promote compliance, facilitate enforcement, and reduce the amount
          of plastics discharged into the marine environment. In addition
          to this rulemaking, the Coast Guard is pursuing adoption of an
          international requirement for refuse recordkeeping through the
          International Maritime organization (IMO).

          For further information, contact Ltjg. Claudia C. Gelzer, Project
          Manager, Marine Environmental Protection Division (G-MEP), Office

                                         28









         of Marine Safety, Security and Environmental Protection, U.S.
         Coast Guard, 2100 Second Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593,
         (phone: (202) 267-6714).


         P.   Perso nal Flotation Device Comnonents (CG)

         On May 20, 1993, (58 FR 29488), the Coast Guard (CG), U.S.
         Department of Transportation, issued a final rule (46 CFR parts
         159, 160, and 164) which establishes procedures for obtaining
         Coast Guard acceptance of non-standard components, requirements
         for oversight of non-standard components, self-certification
         requirements for standard components, and production quality
         control requirements for all components used in the manufacture
         of Coast Guard-approved personal flotation devices (PFDs). This
         final rule also prohibits the use of cotton thread as a PFD
         component, designates specified nylon and polyester threads as
         standard components, and adds new performance requirements for
         non-standard thread. The regulations in this final rule relating
         to standard PFD components and to certain non-standard PFD
         components, for the most part, represent a codification of
         longstanding procedures and requirements that are currently
         applied to those components.

         For further information, contact Ensign Jerry Johnson, Survival
         Systems Branch (G-MVI-3), Office of Marine Safety, Security and
         Environmental Protection, U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 Second Street,
         SW, Washington, DC 20593, (phone: (202) 267-1444).


         Q.   Immersion Suits for Commercial Fishing Industry Vessels (CG)

         On May 20, 1993, (58 FR 29502), the Coast Guard (CG), U.S.
         Department of Transportation, promulgated a notice of proposed
         rulemaking (46 CFR part 28) to require the carriage of immersion
         suits for each individual on board undocumented commercial
         fishing industry vessels operating on coastal waters which are
         only seasonally cold and on board documented commercial fishing
         industry vessels operating inside the Boundary Line on coastal
         waters which are only seasonally cold. This regulation is
         intended to improve the overall safety of commercial fishing
         industry vessels. "Coastal waters that are only seasonally cold"
         means the U.S. waters of the Great Lakes, except for Lake
         Superior; the coastal waters on the entire east coast of the
         United States; and the coastal waters on the west coast of the
         United States, south of Point Reyes, California, and the waters
         of Drakes Bay which is north of Point Reyes, California.

         For further information, contact LCdr. Tim Skuby, Offshore
         Activities Branch (G-MVI-4), Office of Marine Safety, Security
         and Environmental Protection, U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 Second
         Street, SW, Washington, DC 20593, (phone: (202) 267-2307).




                                         29










          R.   Safeguarding Food from Contamination (RSPA)

          On May 21, 1993, (58 FR 29698), the Research and Special Programs
          Administration (RSPA), U.S. Department of Transportation,
          proposed regulations (49 CFR parts 106, 107, 108, 110, 121, 171,
          173, 178, and 180) which address the safe transportation of food
          products in highway and rail transportation. This action is
          required by the Sanitary Food Transportation Act of 1990 (SFTA).
          The intended effect of this rulemaking is to increase the level
          of safety associated with the transportation of food products.
          This proposal would restrict a cargo tank, tank car, or portable
          tank to the carriage of either food products or nonfood products.
          RSPA has not identified any nonfood products that are acceptable
          to be carried in a tank vehicle that carries food products and,
          therefore, is not proposing an "acceptable nonfood product list."
          For other motor and rail vehicles, the proposal would forbid the
          transportation of food products in the same vehicle with poisons,
          infectious substances, hazardous wastes, or solid wastes
          (i.e., "unacceptable nonfood products"). However, such vehicles
          would be allowed to carry unacceptable nonfood products before or
          after the carriage of food products provided that the vehicle is
          free of any contaminating residues.

          The proposal would require any motor vehicle or rail vehicle that
          has transported unpackaged friable asbestos to be dedicated to
          the transportation of asbestos and refuse. These food safety
          regulations would not apply to: (1) the transportation of
          products in farm vehicles, considered implements of husbandry,
          operated by a private carrier exclusively for agricultural
          purposes; (2) the offering or accepting for transportation of
          cardboard, pallets, beverage containers, and other food packaging
          materials; or (3) the transportation of food products which are
          packaged in two fully enclosed packagings.

          For further information, contact Mr. John A. Gale, Office of
          Hazardous Materials Standards (DHM-10), Research and Special
          Programs Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation,
          400 Seventh Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590, (phone: (202)
          366-8553).



          S.   Bulk Hazardous Materials and Noxious Liguid Substances (CG)

          On May 24, 1993, (58 FR 29890 and*29940), the Coast Guard (CG),
          U.S. Department of Transportation, promulgated two proposed
          rulemakings to amend its regulations on the carriage of bulk
          hazardous materials (46 CFR parts 30, 40, 98, 147, 150, 151, and
          153) and its noxious liquid substances (NLSs) regulations (33 CFR
          part 151). The bulk hazardous materials regulations would be
          amended by adding cargoes recently authorized for carriage by the
          Coast Guard or added to the International Maritime Organization's
          (IMO's) Bulk Chemical Codes and by making minor technical and
          editorial changes and corrections. This action would update the
          bulk hazardous materials tables and better inform persons


                                         30









         shipping a bulk hazardous material of that material's
         compatibility and special handling requirements. The NLS
         regulations would also be amended to include substances recently
         authorized for carriage by the Coast Guard or added to the IMOIs
         Bulk Chemical Codes and by making minor technical and editorial
         changes and corrections. This action would update the current
         lists of oil-like and non-oil-like NLSs allowed for carriage.

         For further information, contact Mr. Curtis G. Payne, Hazardous
         Materials Branch (G-MTH-1), Office of Marine Safety, Security and
         Environmental Protection, U.S. Coast Guard, 2100 Second Street,
         SW, Washington, DC 20593, (phone: (202) 267-1577).


         T.   Particulate Matter (EPA)

         On June 3, 1993, (58 FR 31622), the U.S. Environmental Protection
         Agency (EPA) issued a final rule (40 CFR parts 51 and S2) which
         revises the maximum allowable increases (increments) for
         particulate matter (PM) under the requirements of the Clean Air
         Act (CAA) for prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) of
         air quality. The revised increments, based on particles with an
         aerodynamic diameter of less than or equal to a nominal 10
         micrometers (PM-10), replace the original increments for PM,
         which were based on total suspended particulate (TSP). As a
         result, the PSD increments and the national ambient air quality
         standards (NAAQS) for PM will be measured by the same indicator
         for PM, namely PM-10.

         The PSD program is required to balance three goals. The first of
         these goals is to protect public health and welfare from actual
         or potential endangerment. This goal includes the protection of
         existing air quality in all areas where the ambient pollutant
         concentrations required by the NAAQS are currently being
         achieved. The second goal emphasizes the protection of air
         quality in national parks, wilderness areas, and similar areas of
         special concern where air quality is considered particularly
         important. The third goal is to assure that economic growth in
         clean air areas occurs only after careful deliberation of the
         impacts of growth on air quality-by the state and local
         communities and only when such growth would be consistent with
         the preservation of clean air resources.

         For further information, contact Mr. Dan deRoeck, Air Quality
         Management Division (MD-15), Office of Air Quality Planning and
         Standards, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Research
         Triangle Park, NC 27711, (phone: (919) 541-5593).









                                        31












          4.   SPECIAL PROJECTS AND REPORTS



          A.   Internal Combustion Engine Exhaust Emissions (Navy)

          The Naval Sea Systems Command (NAVSEA), U.S. Department of the
          Navy, has published a report (Technical Instruction lX3-373)
          dated December 31, 1992, and entitled "Internal Combustion (Gas
          Turbine and Diesel) Engine Exhaust Emission Study." The U.S.
          Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and state regulatory
          bodies, like the California Air Resources Board (CARB), as well
          as the International Maritime Organization (IMO), are beginning
          to examine marine exhaust emissions. The U.S. Navy, therefore,
          contracted for the preparation of this comprehensive study of
          marine exhaust emissions with the goal of developing a strategy
          for meeting stringent controls. This report surveys current
          rules and regulations, summarizes current techniques/technology
          for meeting these regulations, discusses the origins of diesel
          and gas turbine pollutants and the techniques for reducing and
          for measuring emissions, presents a parametric study of diesel
          and gas turbine engines, and recommends a program for the Navy to
          follow for in-use and new engines in anticipation of more
          stringent rules over the next few years. Included is a program
          plan and an exhaust emissions database of fleet engines.

          Among the major findings and recommendations of this study are
          the following:

               1.   The Navy currently is exempt from complying with any
                    emission requirements except nuisance smoke. Various
                    local, state, national, and international regulatory
                    bodies, however, are considering placing exhaust
                    emission limits on marine vessels. It is unclear
                    whether the Navy will have to comply with any of the
                    proposed requirements. The two initial exhaust
                    constituents of primary concern and the targets of
                    proposed legislation are sulfur oxides (SOx) and
                    nitrogen oxides (Nox).

               2.   There are currently no emission test requirements or
                    procedures for marine gas turbine and diesel engines.
                    There is some activity to develop standards for
                    measurement and emission tests, but none would address
                    Navy operating modes or cycles.

               3.   As legislation is developed to limit marine exhaust
                    emissions, recommendations for techniques to meet the
                    requirements will also have to evolve. One of the most
                    important aspects of meeting any requirements is
                    developing an exhaust emission inventory that details
                    the type of engines in use and level of emissions. For
                    Navy gas turbine and diesel engines, some manufacturer
                    and previous Navy test exhaust emission data are
                    already available.


                                         32









              4.   To meet future emission requirements, the current gas
                   turbine or diesel engine designs or operation of the
                   engines will have to be changed or exhaust after-
                   treatment will have to be added. Most of these design
                   solutions, however, will impact some other parameters
                   such as increasing fuel consumption, increasing the
                   generation of other exhaust constituents, or creating
                   operational restrictions on engine power levels. In
                   order to backfit most of these solutions, the Navy may
                   have to balance operational readiness with
                   environmental readiness.

              S.   As a result of the findings of this report and the
                   direction of NAVSEA, a gas turbine and diesel engine
                   emission reduction program strategy was developed. The
                   objective of the emission reduction program is to
                   eliminate or reduce shipboard gas.turbine and diesel
                   engine exhaust emissions to a level acceptable to the
                   various state and local regulatory agencies.
                   Additionally, a program plan consisting of three phases
                   was developed. Implementation of this program plan
                   should enable the Navy to identify the exhaust
                   emissions and compare them with any current proposed
                   requirements, to develop strategies for reducing
                   exhaust emissions for current engines that fail to meet
                   regulated levels, and to include emission requirements
                   and emission testing for future gas turbine and diesel
                   engine acquisition.

         For further information, contact Mr. Michael Osborne, Naval Sea
         Systems Command (NAVSEA 05X31), U.S. Department of the Navy,
         2341 Jefferson Davis Highway, Arlington, VA 22242, (phone: (703)
         602-3615).



         B.   Free-Fall Lifeboats on U.S. Vessels (MARAD)

         The Maritime Administration (MARAD), U.S. Department of
         Transportation, has issued a report (MA-RD-840-92000) dated
         January 28, 1993, and entitled "Applicability of Free-Fall
         Lifeboats on United States Vessels." This report provides an
         overview of free-fall lifeboat systems. Acquisition and life-
         cycle costs, design and installation issues, and training and
         safety implications are discussed. Free-fall lifeboat systems
         are compared and contrasted with conventional davit launched
         lifeboat systems. The report serves as a starting point for
         shipowners, fleet operators, and naval architects that are
         considering the use of free-fall lifeboats. It also provides
         useful information for classification societies and regulatory
         authorities. A number of recommendations are made to facilitate
         the application of free-fall lifeboat systems on U.S.-flag
         vessels.





                                          33









          According to this report, free-fall lifeboats are the latest
          innovation in survival craft and have become very popular during
          the last decade. Free-fall lifeboats have been successfully
          launched from heights as great as 40 meters. The world demand
          for free-fall lifeboats, especially in Europe, has increased
          steadily during the past 15 years. Advantages of free-fall
          lifeboats, when compared with conventional lifeboats, include:
          (1) faster and more efficient evacuation, (2) a single stern-
          mounted lifeboat can be used instead of port and starboard
          lifeboats, (3) secondary launching means are available, (4)
          always stowed in the ready-to-launch position, (5) the boat is
          propelled clear of the vessel during the launch, (6) fewer tasks
          are required to launch the lifeboat, and (7) safer evacuation
          from vessels having a high freeboard.

          For a typical 24-person shipboard installation, the estimated
          life-cycle cost for a 20-year period is approximately $482,000
          for a free-fall installation and $534,600 for a conventional
          installation. Currently there are no certificated free-fall
          lifeboats within the United States, nor are there any training
          facilities. This situation can change very quickly if the U.S.
          maritime community, especially ship designers and owners, is
          informed about the advantages of free-fall lifeboats. When the
          demand exists, manufacturers are likely to pursue certification
          of free-fall lifeboats and to market them despite perceived
          product liability issues. It should be noted that some free-fall
          lifeboats produced by foreign manufacturers have nearly completed
          U.S. Coast Guard certification requirements.

          For further information, contact Mr. Alexander C. Landsburg,
          Office of Technology Assessment (MAR-840), Maritime
          Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation, 400 Seventh
          Street, SW, Washington, DC 20590, (phone: (202) 366-1923).


          C.   Cruise Shir) Safety (GAO)

          The U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) has published a report
          (GAO/RCED-93-103) dated March 1993 and entitled "Coast Guard:
          Additional Actions Needed to Improve Cruise Ship Safety.,' In
          1990, a fire aboard the SCANDINAVIAN STAR off the coast of Norway
          killed 158 persons. This accident served as a catalyst to
          strengthen international standards for ship fire safety and
          design and also raised questions about the adequacy of other
          passenger safety standards. The accident investigation
          criticized the failure of inter-national inspections to detect and
          correct safety deficiencies, the fire fighting response, and
          inadequate shipboard emergency information.

          The report indicates that nearly all (137 out of 139) cruise
          ships operating in U.S. ports are registered (or "flagged") with
          foreign countries. International safety standards for such ships
          are set through the International Maritime Organization (IMO), an
          agency of the United Nations. A ship's flag nation is


                                         34









         responsible for certifying the ship's compliance with safety
         standards, although many nations delegate this task to
         classification societies, which perform safety inspections under
         contract. The country where the ship calls (the "port state")
         can conduct its own ship examinations to verify compliance with
         international standards and can detain a ship if it finds
         significant noncompliance. The Coast Guard, U.S. Department of
         Transportation, performs these examinations and enforces
         standards in U.S. ports.

         The report's results are briefly as follows:

              1.   Through its safety -examinations, the Coast Guard
                   continues to find safety problems on cruise ships,
                   including inoperable fire doors and improperly designed
                   escape routes. Key reasons for these problems include
                   inadequate inspections by flag nations or
                   classification societies and differing interpretations
                   of some key international safety standards. The IMO
                   has begun efforts to identify needed reforms. However,
                   the Coast Guard has not adequately assessed
                   information, nor shared it with the IMO, on the extent
                   of substandard safety oversight by flag nations and
                   classification societies.

              2.   The Coast Guard's own examination program can be
                   improved in two respects. First, the Coast Guard needs
                   to more effectively collect and analyze its cruise ship
                   examination results, because its current automated
                   system does not routinely track repeated deficiencies
                   or detect deficiency trends by individual companies,
                   flag nations, or classification societies. Second, the
                   Coast Guard needs to provide additional training on
                   international safety standards for its inspectors; some
                   inspectors told GAO that they lack sufficient knowledge
                   to uniformly enforce these standards.

              3.   International standards contain limited training
                   requirements for crew members responsible for fighting
                   shipboard fires. Since 1979, the IMO has recommended,
                   but not required, that fire squad members receive
                   additional training in fighting shipboard fires. Few
                   of the eight cruise ship companies GAO reviewed had
                   implemented all of IMO's recommendations, and they
                   varied greatly in the training they required.

              4.   International standards for emergency information
                   aboard cruise ships are limited and unclear. Emergency
                   information to facilitate safe passenger evacuation is
                   often confusing and incomplete. The Coast Guard has
                   considered taking a more comprehensive approach to
                   improving emergency standards but has not obtained the
                   consensus of Coast Guard groups working separately on
                   U.S. positions on such standards.

                                         35









          GAO recommends that the Secretary of Transportation direct the
          Coast Guard to: (1) petition the IMO to amend international
          cruise ship safety standards to require strengthened safety
          oversight by flag nations and classification societies and
          improved f'ire fighting training and emergency escape information
          and (2) develop a better system for collecting and analyzing
          cruise ship safety examination results. For further information,
          contact Mr. Kenneth M. Mead, Director, Transportation Issues,
          U.S. General Accounting Office, Washington, DC 20548, (phone:
          (202) 512-2834).





















































                                          36

























                                      APPENDIX











                      International Maritime Organization (IMO)









                               Piracy and Other Crimes











          Source:


          IMO News (Number 1: 1993)
          International Maritime Organization
          4 Albert Embankment
          London SE1 ?SR
          United Kingdom





                            Piracy and --other primes -

                            The International Maritime Organization is best known for its work in the fields of maritime
                         safety and pollution prevention. But over the years it has been given many other responsibilities
                           by its 136 Member Governments, including a significant role in thefight against crime at sea.
                                                            This article looks at some of these activities.


                                                                   problem of maritime fraud (see below)          ing the location and circumstances of
                      Piracy and armed                             said that attacks in the West Africa re-       the incident.
                                 robbery                           gion could be dated back to about 1970.           Finally, it requests the IMO Council
                                                                   Other incidents had occurred in South-         to keep the matter under review and taKe
                                                                   east Asia, particularly in the Phillip         such further action as it may consider
                   Until recently it seemed that piracy was        Channel between Indonesia and Singa-           necessary in the light of developments.
                   one crime that had been successfully            pore. Some incidents had been reported            Although the number of incidents of
                   beaten. In the popular mind it is associ-       in other regions, such as South America        piracy and armed robbery has declined
                   ated with the faT-off days of the 17th          and the Caribbean.                             in some areas, in others the problem has
                   century when ships flying the skull and            After discussing the matter the MSC         become more serious. In November
                   crossbones plundered their way around           prepared a draft text which was then           1991, therefore, the IMO Assembly
                   the Caribbean.        But evidence from         submitted to the 13th IMO Assembly in          adopted a second resolution on the sub-
                   many pans of the world shows that pir-          November 1983. It was adopted as As-           ject (A.683(17)). It notes "with great
                   acy is far from being a thing of the past.      sembly resolution A.545(13).                   concern the still increasing number of
                      During the last ten years, IMO has              The resolution notes with great con-        incidents involving piracy and armed
                   received reports of more than 400 separ-        cem the increasing number of incidents         robbery against ships and the increasing
                   ate incidents of piracy, but the actual         involving piracy and armed robbery and         violence against personnel on board
                   total is certainly much higher. The at-         recognizes the grave danger to life and        such ships."
                   tacks have ranged from incidents in             the grave navigational and environmen-            The resolution then invites Govern-
                   which the pirates have simply taken             tal risks to which such incidents can          ments to increase their efforts to sup-
                   money and valuables from the crew and           give rise.                                     press acts of piracy and armed robbery
                   the ship's safe to cases where the entire          It then "urges Governments con-             "as a matter of the highest priority".
                   cargo has been stolen (and in some              cemed to take, as a matter of highest          Neighbouring States are invited to co-
                   cases the ship as well). Usually only the       priority, all measures necessary to pre-       ordinate their actions and Governments
                   threat of violence is used but there have       vent and suppress acts of piracy and           are urged to make available to ships
                   been injuries and sometimes crew mem-           armed robbery from ships in or adjacent        transiting their waters information on
                   bers have been murdered.                        to their waters, including strengthening       incidents and the methods used by at-
                      Piracy was first brought to IMO's at-        of security measures."                         tackers. Governments are urged to en-
                   tcntion in 1983, when the MSC was                  'Me resolution "invites Governments         courage ships flying their flag to give
                   asked by Sweden to consider a situation         concerned and interested organizations         prompt information to coastal auth-
                   that was described as "alarming."               to advise shipowners, ship operators,          orities about any attacks and to take ap-
                      The Swedish note pinpointed the              ship masters and crews on measures to          propriate precautionary measures when
                   coast of West Africa as the main trouble        be taken to prevent acts of piracy and         entering waters where piracy is known
                   spot. Ships that were at anchor offshore        armed robbery and min@irnize the effects       to be a problem.
                   while waiting for a berth in pon were           of such acts." It further invites Govern-         IMO is requested to send information
                   being attacked, usually at night, by            mcnts and organizations concerned to           about piracy to Member Governments
                   armed robbers travelling in fast motor          inform IMO of action taken to imple-           and the industry and to examine the
                   launches.                                       ment the aims of the resolution and rec-       possibility of providing technical assist-
                      The International Maritime Bureau            ommends bovernments concerned to               ance support to Governments, for
                   (IMB). which was established by the             inform IMO of any act of piracy or             example by organizing seminars and
                   International Chamber of Commerce               armed robbery committed against a ship         workshops.
                   (ICQ in 1979 initially to tackle the            flying the flag of their country, indicat-        Since May 1991 IMO has been ana-


                                                                                        9








          lysing all reports of piracy and armed       channels are often very narrow and shal-     orities and where necessary can also
          robbery and summaries are presented to       low and the traffic heavy (some 40,000       alert neighbouring States to the danger.
          the MSC for consideration. While this        ships a year pass through the Malacca           The circular further recommends the
          has helped to identify the areas where       Straits).                                    use of the SafetyNet system established
          the problem is greatest, the number of          At the MSC meeting Governments            by the International Maritime Satellite
          incidents is still alarming and in April     were invited to help organize seminars       Organization (INMARSAT) and other
          1992 the MSC noted that attacks were         with the aim of adopting joint plans of      means of communications are provided
          becoming more ferocious. Apart from          action on a regional basis and were also     under the global mariLne distress and
          the danger to the crew who are the vic-      asked to nominate authorities within         safety systern (GMDSS), which came
          tims of an attack, the navigational and      their Administrations to handle reports      into effect in February 1992.
          environmental dangers can scarcely be        received.                                       Despite these actions, piracy remains
          exaggerated.                                   In August the Secretary -General, Mr       a serious threat and in November 1992
            In some cases the crews of ships have      Wil ham A. O'Neil, sent out a circular to    the Secretary -General told the IMO
          been tied up and the ship left to steam      IMO's 136 Member States proposing            Council that he planned to establish a
          ahead at full power with nobody in con-      further action. In particular, Govern-       special working group to tackle the
          Lrol while the robbers make their escape.    ments were asked to use the communi-         problem in South-east Asia. Mr O'Neil
          A ship in such circumstances is a threat     cations system established by the 1979       told the Council that the, problem is now
          to everything that lies in its path and the  International Convention on Maritime         so great that drastic measures need to be
          possibility of a collision occurring is      Search and Rescue (SAR) to provide           taken if it is to be overcome.
          very real. If the ship happens to be a       assistance to ships involved in attacks.        Further details of the planned work-
          fully laden oil tanker then there is an      This can be done by enabling masters         ing group were given to the MSC when
          equally strong possibility of a major        whose ships are threatened to contact        it met in December 1992. Mr O'Neil
          pollution disaster. Ibis danger is per-      the nearest rescue co-ordinaLion centre      told the Committee that the working
          haps the greatest in the waters of South-    (RCC). This in turn can pass the infor-      group would prepare a report outlining
          east Asia, where the navigational            mation to the nearest anfi-piracy auth-      the problem    in the Strait of Malacca,








                                                                                                           N











                                                                       F














          7k.






          Ute at sea can often be hazardow. BL# in recent years attacks by pirates and armed robbers hove provided an additional threat in some
          parts of the world



                                                                          10







                   specify necessary navigational tech-           experts are expected to be submitted to          The great majority of r#,. at
                   ri@iques and recommend appropriate             the IMO Secretariat by the end of March        incidents have occurred in South-east
                   safety precautions and enforcement ar-         and a final report will then be prepared       Asia, with the Strait of Malacca being
                   rangements. The group would consist of         for the Secretary-General. This will in        the most dangerous area of all. Attacks
                   experts from counuies with particular          tum be submitted to the MSC, IMO's             reached a peak in 1991, when 200 inci-
                   interest in the area, including the littoral   senior technical body, which is holding        dents were recorded. Although fewer in-
                   States of Indonesia, Malaysia and Sin-         its 62nd session from 24 to 28 May.            cidents occurred in 1992, the danger
                   gapore.                                                                                       still exists and in December two officers
                      The working group held its first                                                           were murdered v hen their ship was at-
                   meeting at NO's London headquarters                      Piracy today                         tacked.
                   on Thursday, 14 January.                                                                        The type of attack appears to vary
                      The group is expected to 90 to South-       Although piracy has occurred      in many      from area to area. I  'n West AfrLa, for
                   east Asia at the end of February and its       parts of the world in recent years, the        example, most of tl"@ incidents reported
                   report will be considered by the MSC in        danger is greatest in three areas: South-      have involved ships it anchor, usually
                   May. Although the group will concen-           east Asia, West Africa and the north-          many miles off the mast, while waiting
                   trate on South-east Asia, and especially       east coast of South America. Of these,         for a berth in port. In some parts of
                   the Straits of Malacca, it is intended that    the South-east Asia region is currently        South Americ 3 attacks have taken place
                   its recommendations will be applicable         experiencing the most attacks.                 within port areas. In South-east Asia,
                   globally and not restricted to one axea.         The exact number is not known. Al-           however, neaTly all incidents have in-
                      The working group is expected to            though IMO has asked for details of at-        volved ships !hat are under way. The
                   consist of experts in the prevention       of  tacks on ships to be reported to the           attack invariably takes place at night
                   unlawful acts (United Kingdom); search         Secretariat, since 1991 only I I adminis-      and the pirates usual',, board the ship at
                   and rescue (United States); safety of na-      trations have sent in reports (most, in        the stem, which is tie nearest point to
                   vigation (Greece); radiocommunica-             fact, have come from non-govemmental           the bridge and crew. @:ommodation yet
                   tions    (Norway);      ships'     routeing,   organizations that have consultative           offers the best chanc - if getting aboard
                   navigational aids and vessel traffic ser-      status with IMO). This indicates that no       undetected. As they are equipped with
                   vices (Australia and Japan); and finan-        other countries have been affected by          fast motor boats the pirates have no dif-
                   cial implications (Netherlands).               piracy. But reports from other sources,        ficulty in overhauling ships which even
                      Representatives of the ftee littoral        such as the IMB, show that this is far         at full sea speed are slower than the
                   States (Indonesia, Malaysia and Singa-         from being the case.                           motor boats. GetLiP1 aboard is also
                   pore) will also panicipate and several            Up to the summer of 199 1. IMO had          made easier by the fact that many of the
                   non-govemmental organizations in con-          received reports of 256 acts of piracy and     ships attacked are low in the water be-
                   sultativc status with IMO will join the        armed robbery going back to the early          cause they are fully laden (oil tankers
                   working g7-oup. They include the IMB.          1980s. Between 30 September and 31             are especially easy targets for this rea-
                   the IntemaLional Shipping Federation           December 1991 a funher ten incidents           son).
                   (ISF). the Intemational Confederation          were reported. There were 36 incidents            In most cases the attackers are look-
                   of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU). the In-          reported between I January and 31 March        ing for cash and valuables that are easily
                   temational Association of Lighthouse           and anothex 38 from I April to 30 June.        transportable, such as watches, cameras
                   AuLhMties OALA) and the Intema-                Between I July and 30 September there          and similar items. 'Me contents of the
                   tional Federation of Shipmasters'Asso-         wem 27 attacks. By the end of 1992 the         ship's safe. which is usually located in
                   ciations (IFSMA).                              number of incidents reported to IMO had        the captain's cabin, are normally taken
                      The meeting on 14 January enabled           fisen to more am 400.                          as a matter of course. Within as little as
                   the group's temis of reference and re-            It is likely that the actual number of      30 minutes the attack is over.
                   lated matters to be discussed. During the      incidents is much higher than reported            In other cases, the attacked ship is
                   remainder of the month final tenns of          even to national authorities. In some          detained for a longer period, sometimes
                   ireference were prepared and discussions       cases losses in cash tenns are relatively      lasting for several days. This is so that
                   vmre held with the litloral States to de-      slight and a repon to the coastal auth-        the cargo, or the most valuable parts of
                   cide the programme of visits.                  orities could result in an investigation       it. can be unloaded into another ship.
                      During February the experts will be         being started that might require the ship      There have been a few isolated
                   briefed on the purposes of the mission         to remain in port while the crew are           incidents in which the ship u well as the
                   and final arrangements will be con-            interviewed. When it costs up to               cargo has been seized peffnanently.
                   firmed. The group is expected to leave         S25,000 a day to operate a ship the costs         Long-term and permanent seizures
                   for South-east Asia on 27 February and         to the owner of one day of interviews          usually indicate that the attack is care-
                   the mission itself is expected to last for     could well be far higher than the value        fully planned and involve a knowledge
                   about ten days. The reports of individual      of the goods stolen.                           of the ship and its cargo.


                                                                                       I I








                                                                   *rnan, of the vessels involved               payment. There is a temptation simply
                 maritime fraud and                                  changed ownership just before the          to sell the goods elsewhere, for as high a
                             barratry                                incident or shortly afterwards. This       price as possible, thereby committing
                                                                     often involved a change of name,           yet another fraud.
                In the late 1970s, a number of curious               sometimes several times;                      A common fraud, in the 1970s, in-
                incidents at sea began to attract atten-           s there has been a geographic pattern.       volved the use of a "rust bucket" - an
                don. Some shippers in various parts of             The ICC gave an example of a typical         antiquated ship, usually in such poor
                the world complained that goods which           fraud in which "various of the parties          condition that it was fit only 3r scrap. It
                they had ordered and paid for had failed        could have made checks at one       point or    was often purchased especially for the
                to arrive. In other cases, over-insured         another but they did not. Everyone              purpose of the fraud.
                ships disappeared without apparent              showed too much trust."                            The ship would be over-insured and
                cause. Although the circumstances var-             The fraud worked like this: a buyer in       wherever possible a cargo would be ob-
                ied from case to case, each one involved        country A wanted to buy 15,000 tonnes           tained freight paid. Instead of delivering
                fraud, sometimes running into millions          Of steel round reinforcing bars. He ap-         the cargo, however, the captain (who
                of dollars.                                     proached a sefler in country B who              was either in collusion with the ship-
                    By 1979, according to the ICC, at           could not himself supply in time and so         owner or might actually be the ship-
                least three incidents were occurring            contracted a seller in country C; the sel-      owner) would take it to a different port,
                each month, with an average loss of $5          ler in C agreed to supply.                      preferably one where conditions were
                million. There was evidence that the               A letter of credit for over $5 million       such that it was unlikely that embarrass-
                problem was becoming more and more              was opened by the buyer in A in favour          ing questions would be asked, and sell it
                serious.                                        of the seller in C. Payment was to be           to a completely different party. The ship
                                                                made against production of various do-          would then be taken out to sea and scut-
                        How it operates                         cuments, including the bill of lading.          fled. This tragic loss would be reported
                                                                   The seRer in C was supplying from a          to the unfortunate shipper. The fraud-
                According to the ICC, frauds can be put         company in a fourth country (D). The            ster, meanwhile, would collect the
                into four main categories. They are             seller presented all the necessary docu-        money for delivering the cargo to the
                frauds committed:                               ments to the confirming bank in C and           original destination, the money for sell-
                    *by a trader against another trader,        received payment. Four months later the         ing it, and the insurance money fbi- tle
                    shipowner, bank or insurer-                 buyer in A had not received the steel           ship (and possibly the cargo as well). I e
                    ï¿½ by a shipowner or trader a;ainst in-      and made enquiries with the original            would cover his tracks by hiring a crew
                    surers;                                     company in B.                                   from such a wide range of courtfies
                    ï¿½ by a charterer against a shipowner;          The company in B found that the              (and dispersing them as soori as
                    *by a charterer or shipowner against        vessel on which the steel was supposed          possible) that it would be very dil .--ult
                    a trader.                                   to have been shipped was actually in D          to obtain proof that the sinking wL not
                    In most cases, the victim of the fraud      at the right time but did not load the          in fact accidental.
                is offered what appears to be an excel-         steel in question. The shipowner and               The scale of this type of fraud vas
                lent bargain - a ship at an extremely low       charterer were not involved in the fraud.       shown in a report published in 1979 by
                rate, goods at rock-bottom prices and so        The company in D knew nothing about             the Far East Regional Investigation
                on. The desire to take advantage of the         the affair and never had any dealings           Team (FERIT), a four-man unit set up
                "bargain" before it is too late makes him       with the seller in C.                           by the London-based Salvage Associ-
                willing to ignore normal checks and pre-           'Me documents were all forged and            ation and other bodies to examine a
                cautions.                                       the seller in C was untraceable. The            number of suspected hull and cargo
                    The ICC also found that the fraud           buyer in A had thus been defrauded of           frauds.
                cases it had investigated had a number          over $5 million.                                   The team looked into 60 recent h        'ip
                of features in common:                             Other frauds have other victims.             losses which had occurred in the '4r
                    *the majority of vessels involved           Sometimes a charter party is involved.          East over the previous 20 years and @fl_
                    were (a) over 15 years old, (b) on a        A shipper makes arrangements for his            cided that 48 of thes,: merited further
                    single-voyage charter, (c) owned by         goods to be shipped by another agent            investigations - 28 of them in the pre-
                    single-vessel owners (although in           who duly charters a ship by making a            vious two years alone.
                    some cases common management                down payment and arranging to pay the              The FERIT team concluded that 16
                    was established);                           rest in instalments. As soon as the             of the 28 incidents involved a ship being
                Note: -Barratry- his been defined to include any money from the shipper is received the         deliberately scuttled or otherwise being
                    fraudulentactontheW of the mister orcrew    agent disappears. The shipowner is then         involved in fraud. Of the incidents
                    of a ship committed to the prejudice of tier
                    ownen or underwriters, such as deliberately left with a shipload of goods which he is       which had occurred more than two years
                    casting her away, deserting her, selling her or legally obliged to deliver even though      before, at least I I were highly suspi-
                    even diverting her away from her proper
                    course with evil intent.                    he has only received part of the agreed         cious. In many cases, the ships were


                                                                                     12








                    small and old and were carrying high-          limelight in itself had a beneficial effect,   with IMO, it is poss.,@-,, for repre-
                    value cargoes; the ships usually sank in       by alerting Governments and potential          sentatives of the Chamber (and the
                    deep water, in good weather and with no        victims to the danger. At the same time        IMB) to attend IMO meetings, send re-
                    loss of life.                                  the ICC set up the International Ma-           ports and contribute in other ways to
                       The most spectacular fraud involving        ritime Bureau specifically to counter          discussions and decisions relating to
                    a scuttling came in 1980 when the              maritime fraud and similar crimes.             fraud at sea.
                    213,928 dwt tanker Salem sank off the             The IMO Council recommended a                  The action taken by IMO, the cre-
                    coast of Senegal. It transpired that the       course of action which the Assembly            ation of the DAB and the general pub-
                    ship, which had changed its name twice         adopted in a resolution entitled "Bar-         ficity F, iven to mari time fraud all helped
                    shortly before the sinking, had been           ratry, unlawful seizure of ships and their     to check the practice - at least for a
                    chartered to carry cargo from the Per-         cargoes and other forms of maritime            time.
                    sian Gulf to Europe. On the way, how-          fraud" (A.504(XH)).                               But hy 1985, accor(ing to the IMB,
                    ever, the ship called at a port in South          The resolution noted the "important         the total cost of maritime fraud could
                    Africa and discharged most of the              and crucial role" which self-regulation        have re @Oed a staggering $13 billion a
                    193,000 tons of oil she was carrying.          by the relevant commercial and indus-          year: the Bureau itself had investigated
                       Fortunately, the Salem was spotted          trial interests must play in combating         cases in 1984 which totalled nearly
                    by another ship shortly before she sank        maritime fraud in all its forms.               $300 million and yet it estimated that it
                    and her crew were duly "rescued" be-              It noted approvingly the action taken       handled ordy two per cent of the crimes
                    fore they could be dispersed. It was esti-     by the ICC "and in particular the posi-        which to.)k place that year. Of the cases
                    mated that the cargo alone fetched $43         tive and constructive iWtiative taken to       investigated, incidentally, well over one
                    million while the insurance on the ship        set up the International Maritime              third of the total money involved was
                    could have come to another S24 million.        Bureau." It urged all interests and or-        lost through insurance frauds, with do-
                                                                   ganizations concerned to cD-operate            cumentany frauds a close second.
                                 IMO action                        with the IMB and the ICC in taking                Most w. thorities agree that the chief
                                                                   effective measures and exchanging in-          responsibi. ty for prevention rests with
                                                                   formation for the further prevention of        the buyer - who, by initiating the trans-
                    In November 1979 the IMO Assembly              maritime fraud.                                action, makes the whole fraud possible.
                    met for its I I th session. The delegate of       Governments were invited to "re-            More should be done to check that other
                    Lebanon described the problem as it af-        view the provisions in their national law      parties involved are honest and any ap-
                    fected his country and asked IMO to            relating to the prevention and sup-            parent 'bargains" should be viewed
                    develop counter-measures. Ms state-            pression of all forms of maritime fraud        with inunt-liate suspicion.
                    ment said: "Acts of criminal barratry          and to make such additions or improve-            In November 1987 the IMO Assem-
                    and unlawful seizure of ships have oc-         ments as may be necessary for the              bly adopted resolution A.600(15),
                    curred recently as a result of the con-        prevention and suppression of such acts        which set up the IMO Ship Identifica-
                    certed action of groups of shipowners.         and the safeguarding of the interests of       tion Number Scherne. The idea behind
                    charterers. masters. agents. merchants         all parties concerned, having particular       this is to make it impossible for a ship's
                    and so forth from various countries who        regard to:                                     original identity to be disguised by
                    agree together to divert a ship and its           (a) Administration of national regis-       changing its name and issuing a set of
                    cargo in order to hand over the latter to             try, including the transfer of          false documents. Under the scheme,
                    persons other than the lawful con-                    ownership or nationality or             every ship is assigned a permanent
                    signees. Such groups use various means                change of name of ships;                identification which will stay the same
                    in furtherance of their actions including         (b) Documehtary requirements, bear-         no matter how may times the ship's
                    the sale of the ship. changing its name,              ing in mind that measures relat-        name or flag is changed.
                    ownership and nag. or unloading it out,               ing to documentation must not              The number used is the same as that
                    side authorized ports, selling the ship               prejudice the facilitation of inter-    used by Lloyd's Register of Shipping
                    together with its cargo, and so forth.-               national maritime traffic and           when the ship is built or first appears in
                       This appeal met with a prompt re-                  trade; and                              the register itself, prefixed by IMO.
                    qxmw. Several other delegates at the              (c) Appropriate legal penalties for            While the scheme is relatively simple
                    Assembly described problems which                     acts of maritime fraud."                to implement, its effectiveness depends
                    they had experienced and the Assembly             Govcmments were also invited to             to a considerable extent on how widely
                    requested the IMO Council to study the         examine their national law-Worcement           it is implementea. By December 1992 it
                    problem as a matter of highest priority        procedures and resources, including the        had been implemented by eight coun-
                    and report back to the next session in         availability of appropriately trained per-     tries (Belgium, Canada, Germany, Pan-
                    November 1981.                                 sonnel, and to co-operate with each            ama, Saudi Arabia, St Vincent and the
                       The fact that the problem of maritime       other and other interests.                     Grenadines, Sweden and Vanuatu). It is
                    fraud had now been brought into the               As the ICC has consultative status          being implemented in seven others (the


                                                                                        13








          Czech Republic, the Netherlands, the            tanker, because of the physical condi-          was to wam Member Governments of
          Slovak Republic, Spain, Switzerland,            tion of oil during loading, wMe some            the possibility of either deliberate or ac-
          the United Kingdom and the United               oil is inevitably lost through evapora-         cidental contamination of bunkers by
          States), and is under consideration in I I      tion during the course of the voyage.           crude oil. It recalled that the Guidelines
          other countries.                                There is therefore normally a slight dis-       on Surveys under the 1978 Protocol to
                                                          crepancy between the amount of oil              SOLAS require the examination of
                                                          shown on the bill of lading and the             cargo and bunker piping systems and
             The use of cargo                             amount of oil discharged at the receiv-         went on to urge Member Governments
                                                          ing temiinal. The difference normally           to advise surveyors to give special at-
                     oil as fuel                          allowed between ship and shore figures          tention during surveys to the possibility
                                                          is 0.5% of the total oil loaded - but this      of cross-connections between cargo and
          It would be impossible to use crude oil         can still be a considerable amount where        bunker piping systems.
          to power a motor car or an airliner. Fuel       a large cargo is concerned (about 1,000            Member Governments were also
          for such machines has to be carefully           tonnes on a 200,000 dwt ship).                  urged to advise shipowners and crew
          processed before it is usable. But crude           If a small amount of cargo is trans-         members of the need to carry out routine
          oil can power the engines of merchant           ferred to the bunkers, it is possible that it   checks on the flammability of bunker
          ships - including the tankers in which          will not be noticed.                            spaces and to further advise shipowners
          the crude oil is transported.                      The gains can be substantial. Fuel           and ship repairers that such a check
             To do so is, of course, theft, and           costs can represent as much as 60% of           should always be carried out before any
          therefore illegal. And it is also ex-           total running costs. According to a re-         "hot-work" is started in the region of
          tremely dangerous.                              port by the IMB in 1985 one ship sailed         bunker spaces.
             This is because most forms of crude          some 21,119 miles between October                  Whilst the Committee agreed that
          oil have a very low flashpoint (the tem-        1980 and April 1981 and used 8,600              random sampling of bunker tanks would
          perature at which the vapour produced           tonnes of fuel - an average of 2.5 miles        act as a deterrent against the deliberate
          by the liquid may be ignited). This is          per tonne. From May to Novernber 1982           use of crude oil cargo to supplement the
          often lower than ambient temperatures           the same ship sailed 19,947 miles and           oil fuel, it felt this would be difficult to
          and is one, reason why IMO has intro-           bought only 1.2 10 tonnes of bunker fuel        implement. However, the MSC urged
          duced strict regulations regarding the          - an average of 16.5 miles per tonne.           Member Governments to require the
          carriage of oil on board ships.                 With fuel costing S 180 a tonne, the ship       testing of a sample from the bunkers in
             There have been in the past several          saved nearly 7,000 tonnes of fuel - and         conjunction with the control procedures
          incidents in which ships have exploded          nearly SI.2_5 million.                          of the SOLAS Convention whenever
          during tank-cleaning, ballasting or other          In 1982 the Liberian Bureau of Man-          there are clear grounds to believe (due
          operations. The same could occur if             time Affairs carried out an investigation       to the odour of hydrocarbon vapours: in
          crude oil were mixed with fuel in the           into a number of incidents in which             the engine-room, irregularities in the
          bunker tanks or if fuel were to leak in         ships had apparently been using cargo           cargo or bunker pipework or otherwise)
          the engine-room.                                oil as a way of saving on fuel bills.           that a ship may be using crude oil cargo
             The International Convention for the            In February 1983 a report resulting          as fuel.
          Safety of Life at Sea (SOLAS), 1974,            from this investigation was submitted to
          requires (in chapter 11-2, regulation 15)       the MSC. This stated that low nash
          that -no fuel with a flashpoint of less         cargo oil (crude oil) had. in some cases,              Unlawful acts
          than 60 *C shall be used". although fuel        been transferred to bunker systems and
          with a flashpoint of not less than 43 -C        used as fuel.                                   against passengers
          may be used in emergency generators                The note said : -Tbe transfer has. in
          and other relaxations may be permitted          some known cases, been accomplished                        and crews
          on cargo ships under certain conditions.        by means of a cross connection between
          This regulation is intended to prevent an       cargo and bunker piping systems. Libe-          Concern    about unlawful acts which
          explosion taking place by banning the           ria believes that the practice described        threaten the safety of ships and the se-
          use of all fuels which are volatile             in previous paragraphs is more wide-            curity of their passengers and crews has
          enough to make an explosion possible.           spread than may be presently apparent           developed fairly recently. Since 1980
             But despite the dangers. the tempta-         and is a serious source of danger to ships      there have been cases of crews being
          tions for unscrupulous operators (who           and personnel both at sea and in port           kidnapped and ships being hijacked, de-
          do not. after all. have to travel on board      and also to port installations which ser-       liberately run aground or blown up by
          the ships concerned) to use cargo oil as        vice tankers.'                                  explosives. Passengers have been
          fuel are considerable.                             The MSC discussed this problem and           threatened and sometimes killed.
             It is very difficult to measure exactly      agreed on a circular which was sent out           In November 1985 the problem was
          the amount of cargo carried on an oil           in June 1983. The aim of the circular           considered by the 14th Assembly. A


                                                                               14








                   proposal by the United States that            General Assembly, which called upon           facilities and individual ships to have a
                   measures to prevent such unlawful acts        IMO "to study the problem of terrorism        security plan and appoint a security of-
                   should be developed by IMO was sup-           aboard or against ships with a view to        ficer. The measures then go on to de-
                   ported and the Assembly adopted resol-        making recommendations on appropri-           scribe in considerable detail the way in
                   ution A.594(14), which notes "with            ate measures."                                which security surveys should be con-
                   great concern the danger to passengers           The MSC finalized the measures at          ducted and the security measures and
                   and crews resulting from the increasing       its September 1986 session. They are          procedures which should be adopted.
                   number of incidents involving piracy,         framed in sufficiently broad terms to en-     Another section covers security train-
                   armed robbery and other unlawful acts         able Administrations to make proper           ing. The final section stresses the im-
                   against or on board ships, including          use of them, taking into account their        portance of exchanging information.
                   small craft, both at anchor and under         local conditions and circumstances.              In November 1986 the Governments
                   way."                                         They state that Governments, port auth-       of Austria, Egypt and Italy proposed
                     The MSC was directed to develop,            orities, administrations, shipowners,         that IMO prepare a convention on the
                   on a priority basis, detailed and practical   ship masters and crews should take ap-        subject of unlawful acts against the
                   technical measures, including both            propniate measures to prevent unlawful        safety of maritime navigation. They
                   shoreside and shipboard measures, to          acts which may threaten passengers and        said that "such a convention@ has the aim
                   ensure the security of passengers and         crews. They are intended for appfication      to fill the gap in the present system re-
                   crews on board ships. The measures            to passenger ships engaged on intema-         garding the suppression of such acts. In
                   were to take into account the work of         tional voyages of 24 hours or more and        fact, while three universal conventions
                   the International Civil Aviation Organ-       the port facilities which service them.       deal with the safety of air navigation ...
                   ization (ICAO) in the development of          Although they are thus not intended for       Lhe safety of maritime navigation is not
                   standards and recommended practices           ferries and other passenger ships on          covered by any similar international in-
                   for airport and aircraft secunity.            short voyages, they can be used if ap-        strurrient."
                      In December    1985 there was further      propriate.                                       The Governments then explained
                   su pport  from    the United Nations             The measures stress the need for port      that the draft convention was to "pro-









                                                   @Y.


                                                                                                                                          N
                                                                                          _10-00
                           -V Mr1P__ W941",
                                                                    L
                                 Ar


                               PC
                    T117


                                                                           1,                                      .14.14



                        V









                   Cruise knefs have sornehrries been the subject of terrorist attocia. An IMO convention is intended to help suppress unlawful acts of ff* type



                                                                                     15








         vide for a comprehensive suppression of         there is also evidence that mariners              *measures to prevent drugs being
         unlawful acts committed against the             themselves take drugs in increasing                smuggled on board;
         safety of maritime navigation which en-         numbers. An article in the Proceedings             ways of improving the detection of
         danger innocent human fives, jeopard-           of the Marine Safety Council of August             drugs concealed on board;
         ize the safety of persons and property,         1986 showed that the number of                    *measures to discourage the abuse of
         seriously affect the operation of mari-         mariners in the United States found                drugs by seafarers and their
         time services and thus are of grave con-        guilty of drugs offences or voluntarily            involvement in trafficking;
         cern to the international community as a        surrendering increased from 301 in                 information about the types, nature
         whole." For this purpose and in line            1982 to 801 in 1985. The United States             and characteristics of those drugs
         with the above-mentioned conventions,           Coast Guard has proposed stringent new             most commonly smuggled;
         the draft convention submitted by the           measures to curb a problem which, apart           *education and training relating to
         Govenunents envisaged the absolute              from moral considerations, has serious             the risks involved in drug smug-
         and unconditional application of the            implications as far as maritime safety is          gling and drug abuse; and
         principle either to punish or to extradite.     concerned. There is no reason to believe           action to be taken by ship operators
            The proposal was unanimously ap-             that mariners of other nations are im-             and their employees when drugs are
         proved and work on the draft began at           mune to the problem.
         once.                                a,           One of the organizations most con-               found.
            The Council unanimously agreed               cemed about the growth in drug traf-              Work on the drugs problem conti-
         that the matter deserved urgent       action.   ficking is the Customs Co-operation           nued, with attention being paid to drug
         In March 1988 a conference was held in          Council (CCC), which over the years           and alcohol abuse by seafarers. The
         Rome which adopted the Convention               has prepared a variety of international       Sub-Committee on Stanaards of Train-
         for the Suppression of Unlawful Acts            measures to combat it. It works closely       ing and Watchkeeping prepared gui-
         against the Safety of Maritime Naviga-          with the United Nations Division of           delines which were approved by the
         don. It includes provisions for the abso-       Narcotic Drugs, the United Nations            MSC and issued as a circular in May
         lute and unconditional application of the       Fund for Drug Abuse Control and the           1992.
         principle either to punish or to extradite      International Narcotics Control Board.            This circular points out the import-
         persons who commit or who are alleged             In 1985 the CCC approached IMO to           ance of screening seafarers prior to their
         to have committed offences specified in         suggest exploring ways in which the           empioyment and also emphasizes the
         the Convention. A protocol extends the          two organizations might develop               need fcT rehabilitation, education and
         provisions of the Convention to unlaw-          measures to counter drug trafficking. It      counselling. It then establishes seven
         ful acts against fixed platforms located        was agreed that the subject should be         guidelines to be followed when setting
         on the continental shelf.                       placed on the agenda of the Facilitation      upa drug and alcohol abuse screening
            The two instruments both entered             Committee's next meeting. In the mean-        prof ume.
         into force on I March 1992.                     time the IMO Secretmiat began looking             A riumber of other United Nations
                                                         into the feasibility of developing guide-     bodie.: are also involved in drug preven-
                                                         lines for manners on how to prevent           tion I -oprammes and the circular refas
            Drug trafficking                             drugs being hidden on board ships, as         to some of these. including the Intema-
                                                         well as information on the type and na-       tional Labour Office, the World Health
                                                         ture of drugs and what to do when drugs       Organization and the United Nations In-
         In many countries today the drugs trade         are found. Another organization, the In-      ternational Drug Control Programme.
         is booming. More drugs are being con-           ternational Chamber of Shipping (ICS)         The circular says that any work or re-
         sumed and other crimes are also on the          (which has consultative status with IMO       search conducted by IMO in this field
         increase as drug addicts resort to vi-          and regularly attends IMO meetings)           will be shared with these organizations.
         olence to obtain the money to obtain            was also working with the CCC.                    It @ importance of drug control is
         their "fix".                                      The Facilitation Committee. which           shown by the actions being taken by a
            The most lucrative markets for drugs         met in March 1986, noted with ;-,Mat          number of other organizations in the
         are in the developed economies of Eur-          concern the alarming increase it. drug        shipping industry which attend IMO
         ope and North America. The drugs                abuse, in world-wide illicit drug traf-       meetings. The ICS, the International
         themselves are produced in South                ficking and the alarming increase in use      Associati in of Independent Tanker
         America and certain parts of Asia. To           by traffickers of commercial means of         Owners (INTERTANKO) and the Oil
         get the drugs from supplier to consumer         transport. including ships, to smuggle        Companies International Marine Forum
         is a complex operation. involving               drugs. It agreed to co-operaLe with the       (OCIMF) have all published guidelines
         various means of transport. But many            CCC and the-ICS on guidelines to com-         on the subject and these have been
         drugs go by sea.                                bat illicit drug trafficking.                 brought to the attention of IMO Member
            Drug smuggling is a crime in vir-              The guidelines were issued in early         States and other organizations involved
         tually every country in the world. but          1988 and include:                             in shipping.U


                                                                             16














































































                                               3 6668 00000 5977