Marine Australia Databases, Y2K UPDATE, APPROACH OF AMSA

Australia - Y2K Update - Approach of the Australian Maritime Safety Authority

l,ike many industries, the shipping industry has recognised that a co-operative approach is required to tackle the Y2K problem. As a result, the Department of Infrastructure recently hosted a seminar which was attended by a wide cross-section of the industry including representatives of the Australian Maritime Safety Authority ("AMSA"). Of particular interest were the comments by AMSA as to how they intended to deal with the problem in Australian Ports.

The Chief Executive Officer of AMSA, Clive Davidson, issued Marine Notice 3/99 regarding the Y2K issue on 13 April 1999. Whilst a Marine Notice is a statement of policy and does not carry the force of law, AMSA's David Harrod confirmed that the Notice represented the way AMSA intended to act on the Y2K issue in exercising their ship safety inspection and survey responsibilities under the SOLAS Convention and the Navigation Act 1912 (Cth).

The Notice stated that AMSA would follow the Code of Good Practice contained in IMO Circular 2121. This Code provides a number of questionnaires designed to be given to ship owners and operators prior to their ships entering port. The questionnaires contained in the Notice we adapted from those in the IMO Circular.

Contingency Plans

While AMSA is endeavouring to ensure that all ships are Y2K compliant, they realise that this is not going to be possible. Therefore, they intend to look for evidence that ship owners have introduced a risk based contingency plan in the event that something goes wrong. AMSA will also be looking for evidence that the contingency plan has been tested and that the ship's crew are aware of its content. AMSA also stressed that the Y2K problem is linked to other computer-based problems in that the critical date is not just 1 January 2000, but also 9 September 1999 (database stop date) and 29 February 2000 (leap year).

Ship Inspections and Warning Notices

AMSA has indicated that they will be sending their surveyors onto ships from I July 1999 with the adapted questionnaire. If the ship owner states that they are not Y2K compliant and do not have a tested contingency plan in place, then a warning notice will be issued. Once a warning notice has been issued, if a ship intends to return to Australian waters during the critical time period, then it will be expected that a contingency plan will be in place. If there is no evidence of a contingency plan, a ship may be detained until the end of the critical time period. As mentioned above, the authority for detention will be the application of the Code of Good Practice under SOLAS and the Navigation Act.

Possible Detention

Where a ship enters Australian waters for the first time during a critical date period, AMSA will hand them the questionnaire. If they cannot show evidence of a tested risk management system, they may be detained The detention will only occur if they pose a risk to other ships or the environment. Detention of a vessel is seen as a last step. The detention will only last until the end of the date critical period and should not represent a problem for ship operators with a proven Y2K contingency plan.

Clarification

Due to misinformation and concern in the industry, AMSA has indicated that there are a number of things they will not do as part of their Y2K procedure including:

AMSA will not arrest ships, as it has no power to do so;

AMSA will not detain ships outside a critical date period, and will only detain during the period where the risk warrants it;

AMSA will not advise ships not to enter port;

AMSA will not examine ships in overseas waters;

AMSA will not conduct compliance inspections; it will only ask if ships are compliant;

AMSA will not certify that ships are Y2K compliant.

Compliance Procedures

Ship operators should be prepared to show a Y2K logbook which details the level of Y2K compliance for the ship and the contingency plans in place in the event of a failure of systems. Ship operators should also ensure that crew are aware of procedures and able to carry out the actions contained in the contingency plan. Complying with the Code of Good Practice and the standards required by the Australian authorities will stand the company in good stead for other ports around the world. AMSA indicated that the Code is the basis for policies of many other international shipping centres including The Netherlands, Germany, Greece and Singapore. It was noted that other ports, including Singapore and Rotterdam, are going further than Australia and may prevent ships entering their ports unless they are satisfied of compliance.

Conclusion

It is clear that questions asked of ship operators by authorities in Australia will be similar to those being asked by authorities in other centres. In this regard it is important that ship operators have a Y2K contingency plan in place and their crews are aware of the procedures and action plans. In the absence of an appropriate plan, ships risk detention during critical time periods.

*For further information please call:

David Roylance, Melbourne Tel +61 3 9205 2014

Robert Springall, Melbourne Tel +61 3 9205 2015

Gavin Vallely, Melbourne Tel +61 3 9205 2023

web www.mmb.com.au

The above article on the Year 2000 computer problem as it affects the Australian marine industry is reproduced from the July 1999 (Issue No.12) edition of the Newsletter Transport & Trade Update of Middletons Moore & Bevins, Lawyers.

Note from Middletons Moore & Bevins: "This newsletter is intended to provide a general summary and should not be relied upon as a substitute for legal advice"