Shipping News, No. 3: Update
New York Harbor Region
Friday, January 7, 2000

See also: Shipping News; Shipping News: Update; Shipping News, No. 2; Shipping News, No. 2: Update; Shipping News, No. 3.

On January 6, the Secretary of the U.S. Department of Transportation issued a press release stating that all U.S. maritime facilities are working smoothly following the rollover period, http://www.usia.gov/cgi-bin/washfile/display.pl?p=/products/washfile/latest&f=00010702.glt&t=/products/washfile/newsitem.shtml

-- Harbor Guy (HarborGuy@OnThe.Waterfront), January 07, 2000

Answers

Sorry for the duplicate posts, my code was off in the previous links.

-- Harbor Guy (HarborGuy@OnThe.Waterfront), January 07, 2000.

Y2K "glitch"?

-- Think It (Through@Pollies.Duh), January 07, 2000.

Thanks Harbor Guy. Nice to know that our ports handled rollover OK, and that you also previously confirmed cranes, etc were working. Interesting that the Coast Guard placed restrictions on 156 ships due to non-compliance. I wonder if that had a bearing on the reduced traffic you noticed? And, has traffic picked up, now?

-- Margaret J (janssm@aol.com), January 07, 2000.

Harbor Guy- Thank you for your updates. Could read up on #2 and #3 only now, because our Service Provider in Western NM had problems with their routers since yesterday, and I could not get on the Internet for more than a day. Maybe the light traffic you observed on 1-5 was due to the restrictions put on the 156 vessels? Anyway, will continue to look for your reports! Thanks again!

-- Swissrose (cellier@azstarnet.com), January 07, 2000.

Margaret and Swissrose:

The Secretary provides overall good news regarding shipping; yet the following phrase from the introduction to the press release begs comment:

During the New Year's weekend, the U.S. Coast Guard issued port restrictions for 156 vessels that limited their ability to enter or leave U.S. ports for failure to demonstrate Y2K compliance.

With respect to part the first of the above, I would think that since there are more than 156 different ships that visit U.S. ports each year, the USCG of necessity is now involved in a continuing vetting process regarding inspection and documentation of the Y2K compliance of all vessels approaching U.S. ports.

Part the second of the above is somewhat confused: How does one "limit the ability" of an 850-foot non-Y2K-compliant vessel to enter or exit a port? Either it enters and exits, or it doesn't. It seems to me the meaning intended (or obliterated) is that of "conditional entry and exit" being granted to non-Y2K-compliant ships. One possible condition that I related in a previous post would be to bring a ship to port in a dead tow; another possible condition (which unusual situation I have already noted this week) would be the complete clearing of channels before permitting a ship to transit.

I have no doubt the USCG is executing its mission well. Nevertheless, a measure of strangeness hangs like a fog over the waters of New York Harbor.

This Evening's Quote from The Barges: "It's backed up like the BQE [Brooklyn-Queens Expressway] out here."

-- Harbor Guy (HarborGuy@OnThe.Waterfront), January 08, 2000.