egulations continuedbeen very little research done on this but itis thought that excess alkalinity could be ascorrosive as excess acidity. The grade ofcylinder oil should therefore be matched tothe sulphur content of the fuel and bothowners and engine manufacturers mayhave to consider the possibility of dualcylinder oil systems.Annex VI puts the burden on bunkersuppliers to supply fuel which conforms withthe sulphur limits but the burden ondemonstrating compliance will be on shipsand their owners. The requirements tocover this aspect include retaining bunkerdelivery receipts, which will have to showthe sulphur content, of all fuels received for3 years and for the taking of what will beknown as ‘regulatory samples’ so that,should a port authority require it, it can betested to prove compliance. What is ofinterest is that IMO has decided that thissample should be taken by the continuousdrip method at the receiving vessel’s bunkerinlet manifold i.e. not on the bunker barge.Owners will also have to ensure that notonly do the crew properly segregate lowsulphur fuel but that they also properlydocument it and the change overprocedure so that the evidence is available.Retaining the documentary evidence andregulatory samples for the required periodmay require dedicated storage.Further information can be obtainedfrom The International Bunker IndustryAssociation : http// www.ibia.net...................................................................................................................................................................................UNITED STATES OF AMERICAUSCG enforcing ballast watermanagement regulationsFrom 13 August 2004, the USCG beganenforcing US ballast water managementregulations. The master, owner, operatoror person-in-charge of any ship equippedwith ballast water tanks that is bound forports or places in US waters must ensurethat complete and accurate ballast watermanagement (BWM) reports aresubmitted in accordance with 33 CFR151.2041, and signed BWM records arekept onboard the ship for a minimum oftwo years in accordance with 33 CFR151.2045. The final rule titled ‘Penaltiesfor Non-submission of Ballast WaterManagement Reports’ (33 CFR 151,subpart D, as amended 14 June 2004)implements a maximum US$27,500 a daycivil penalty and class C felony provisionsfor failing to submit BWM reports andfailing to maintain BWM records.The final rule also expands existing BWMreporting and record keepingrequirements to include all ships equippedwith ballast water tanks that transit toany US port or place of destination,regardless of whether the ship operatedoutside the exclusive economic zone (EEZ)of the US or the equivalent Canadianzone.We expect that the USCG captain ofthe port (COTP) will in most cases take atiered approach to enforcement actionsstarting with letters of warning (LOW),notices of violation (NOV), civil penalties,suspension and revocation (S&R), captainof the port orders and then, in a worst casesituation, criminal charges. Conversely,COTPs may also consider including superiorcompliance recognition programmes forthose operators who continuously showsuperior compliance with new or existingBWM requirements.The only ships that are exempt from themandatory BWM requirements under thefinal rule are:■■■Ships that operate exclusively withinone COTP zone;Crude oil tankers engaged in coastwisetrade; andShips of the Department of Defense,Coast Guard, or any of the armedservices as defined within 33 USC 1322(a) and (n).Details of sending the ballast watermanagement report form can be found onhttp://invasions.si.edu/nbic ■........................................................................................................................................................................................AUSTRALIACrew immigration clearance requirementsFrom 1 July 2004, the transitional period ofthe requirement for all crew of non-militaryships entering Australian waters to carry apassport and identity document forpresentation at immigration clearanceends.The identity document must show andconfirm the person concerned as a seafareremployed on that ship. The passport anddocument must be located on the ship as itenters Australia at a proclaimed port or aplace other than a proclaimed port, ifpermission for it to do so has been grantedby the Australian Customs Service.Under the Migration Act 1958 (Cth),authorised officers of the Department ofImmigration now have the authority toimpose a penalty on the master, owner,agent and charterer of a ship due to crewmembers' non-compliance. In one recentcase an infringement notice was <strong>issue</strong>d tothe local agent of a foreign ship for thefailure of a crew member to be inpossession of the required identitydocument. The agent has been finedAUS$5,000.00, which must be paid within28 days.In these circumstances it seems clearthat the Department of Immigration is nowdetermined to enforce the newrequirements regarding identificationdocuments. Therefore, care should betaken to ensure that all crew of nonmilitaryships entering Australian waterscarry with them the requireddocumentation ■8
ISPS – SHIP SECURITYA LOSS PREVENTION NEWS SUPPLEMENTSecurity – a shared responseGood security is teamwork – a responsibility for all onboard, not just a selectfew, to protect and secure their environment.This supplement illustrates just a few examples of the positive ways in which<strong>Members</strong>’ crews have responded to the need for onboard security and thepreventive measures used to tackle this ongoing, ever-evolving, problem.First line of defence – the gangwayRestricting the accessMonitoring visitors9Clear noticesFIRST LINES OFDEFENCE
Change language