Foreign Prohibitions on Longshore Work by U.S. Nationals

DEPARTMENT OF STATE

Bureau of Economic and Business Affairs

[Public Notice 2396]

22 CFR Part 89

Foreign Prohibitions on Longshore Work by U.S. Nationals

AGENCY: Bureau of Economics and Business Affairs, State.

ACTION: Final rule.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: In accordance with the Immigration and Nationality Act of

1952, as amended, the Department of State is issuing a rule updating

the list, of longshore work by particular activity, of countries where

performance of such a particular activity by crewmembers aboard United

States vessels is prohibited by law, regulation or in practice in the

country.

effective DATE: June 13, 1996.

ADDRESSES: Office of Maritime and Land Transport (EB/TRA/MA), Room

5828, Department of State, Washington, D.C. 20520-5816.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: Richard T. Miller, Office of Maritime

and Land Transport, Department of State, (202) 647-6961.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Section 258 of the Immigration and

Nationality Act of 1952, 8 U.S.C. 1288, determines that alien crewmen

may not perform longshore work in the United States. Longshore work is

defined broadly to include ``any activity relating to the loading or

unloading of cargo, the operation of cargo-related equipment (whether

or not integral to the vessel), and the handling of mooring lines on

the dock when the vessel is made fast or let go, in the United States

or the coastal waters thereof.'' The Act goes on, however, to define a

number of exceptions to the general prohibition on such work.

Section 258(b)(2), in what is known as the ``Exception for Safety

and Environmental Protection,'' excludes from the definition of

longshore work under this statute ``the loading or unloading of any

cargo for which the Secretary of Transportation has, under the

authority contained in chapter 37 of title 46, United States Code

(relating to Carriage of Liquid Bulk Dangerous Cargoes), section 311 of

the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. 1321), section 4106

of the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, or section 105 or 106 of the

Hazardous Materials Transportation Act (49 U.S.C. App. 1804, 1805)

prescribed regulations which govern--(A) the handling or stowage of

such cargo, (B) the manning of vessels and the duties, qualifications,

and training of the officers and crew of vessels carrying such cargo,

and (C) the reduction or elimination of discharge during ballasting,

tank cleaning, handling of such cargo.''

Section 258(c), in what is known as the ``Prevailing Practice

Exception,'' exempts particular activities of longshore work in and

about a local port if there is a collective bargaining agreement

covering at least 30 percent of the longshore workers in the area that

permits the activities or if there is no such collective bargaining

agreement and the employer of the alien crew files an appropriate

attestation, in a timely fashion, that the performance of the activity

by alien crewmen is permitted under the prevailing practice of the

particular port. The attestation is not required for activities

consisting of the use of an automated self-unloading conveyor belt or

vacuum-actuated system on a vessel unless the Secretary of Labor finds,

based on a preponderance of evidence which may be submitted by any

interested party, that the performance of such particular activity is

not the prevailing practice in the area or that certain labor actions

are underway.

Section 258(d), the ``State of Alaska Exception,'' provides

detailed conditions under which alien crewmembers may be allowed to

perform longshore activities in Alaska, including the filing of an

attestation

[[Page 29942]]

with the Secretary of Labor at least 30 days before the performance of

the work setting forth facts and evidence to show that the employer

will make a bona fide request for U.S. longshore workers who are

qualified and available, will employ all such workers made available

who are needed, and has informed appropriate labor unions, stevedores,

and dock operators of the attestation, and that the attestation is not

intended to influence an election of bargaining representatives.

Finally, Section 258(e), in what is known as the ``Reciprocity

Exception,'' allows the performance of activities constituting

longshore work by alien crew aboard vessels flagged and owned in

countries where such activities are permitted by crews aboard U.S.

ships. The Secretary of State is directed to compile and annually

maintain a list, of longshore work by particular activity, of countries

where performance of such a particular activity by crewmembers aboard

United States vessels is prohibited by law, regulation, or in practice

in the country. The Department of State (hereinafter the Department)

published such a list as a final rule on December 27, 1991 (56 FR

66970), corrected on January 14, 1992 (57 FR 13804). An updated list

was last published on December 13, 1993 (58 FR 65118).

At the request of the Committee on Foreign Affairs of the House of

Representatives, the Government Accounting Office (hereinafter the GAO)

reviewed the Department's criteria and methodology for compiling the

list of countries in the past. The GAO concluded that ``with relatively

small changes in how it obtains information and determines which

countries to place on the list, State can significantly improve its

data collection and decision-making procedures.'' With respect to the

statute's use of the phrase ``in practice'', the GAO concluded that

differing interpretations were legally supportable and observed that

the interpretation being followed tended to maximize the number of

countries granted a reciprocity exception.

After giving notice on March 24, 1994 (59 FR 13904) that it was

updating the list, the Department issued a proposed rule on November

24, 1995 (60 FR 58026) with a revised list. The proposed rule reflected

changes in methodology recommended by the Government Accounting Office

and, in an effort to ensure that the list reflects restrictive

practices in foreign countries fully and accurately, standards for

reciprocity taking into account practices, whether or not required or

sanctioned by governments. In response, the Department received 79

written comments and oral demarches from two foreign governments.

Comments and Responses

General

Comment: Four commenters, all from U.S. labor unions, supported the

Department's interpretation of the term ``in practice'' as including

restrictive practices irrespective of government involvement. The

writers said that the rule would protect American longshore workers

from incursions by foreign mariners doing cargo handling as

distinguished from navigational duties. A number of commenters, on the

other hand, took exception to the proposal to consider private

activities when determining eligibility for the reciprocity exemption

and observed that the Government Accounting Office found the

interpretation used in previous rulemakings on this subject legally

supportable. Several of them asserted that the legislative history did

not support the proposed rule. They disputed the Department's

conclusion that the reciprocity provision is a limited exception.

Response: In its report, the GAO concluded that the statutory

phrase ``in practice'' is susceptible to differing interpretations and

noted that the language of the law and its legislative history could

support an interpretation under which privately negotiated collective

bargaining agreements would disqualify a country for a reciprocal

exception. On the basis of its review of the statute, the Department

concurs. The impact on the list of this change is modest, however; only

six countries have been added to the list solely because of private

collective bargaining agreements. The Department's conclusion that the

reciprocity exception is a ``limited exception'' is based on the

statutory scheme embodied in section 258, which prohibits longshore

work by alien seamen in general, and then enumerates specific, limited

circumstances, including on the basis of reciprocity, in which such

work may be performed.

Comment: One commenter said that the proposed rule would violate

U.S. treaty commitments with a number of countries, since many U.S.

treaties of Friendship, Commerce and Navigation accord vessels of the

other party national treatment and most-favored-nation treatment.

Response: While many U.S. treaties of Friendship, Commerce and

Navigation accord vessels of the other party, and nationals of the

other party engaged in commercial activity, national treatment and

most-favored-nation treatment, such treaties typically contain clauses

which subject the entry privileges granted therein to the immigration

laws of each party and deny any right to engage in gainful occupations

in contravention of limitations expressly imposed, according to

internal laws and regulations, as a condition of their admittance.

Comment: One commenter recalled that the definition in Section 258

of the Immigration and Nationality Act of longshore work differs from

the rules, regulations and practice in other countries and asserted

that application of the definition in the U.S. legislation to foreign

ships would hinder the sovereignty a flag state exercises over a ship

in its register. In this connection, several commenters expressed

concerns about U.S. citizens doing certain longshore activities, such

as handling of ships' stores, repairs to ships, midstream loading,

opening and closing of cargo hatches, and fueling, which, they said,

the crew traditionally carries out and can better do.

Response: The definition of longshore work contained in Section 258

is indeed broad, encompassing ``any activity relating to the loading or

unloading of cargo, the operation of cargo-related equipment (whether

or not integral to the vessel), and the handling of mooring lines on

the dock when the vessel is made fast or let go, in the United States

or the coastal waters thereof.'' Under this broad definition, the

Department is directed in the law to maintain the list of countries

``by particular activity.'' Only those particular activities restricted

in a foreign country will be restricted in the United States. Thus, in

no case will the application of the law provide for restrictions

broader than those applied by the foreign country in which the ship in

question is flagged or owned. Similarly, practices traditionally

performed by ships' crews will not be restricted in the U.S. unless the

performance of such practices is restricted in a foreign country.

Comment: Several commenters expressed fear that the proposed rule

would increase the danger of accidents and environmental mishaps. The

writers said that transient port workers could not acquire the level of

experience and training necessary to operate sophisticated cargo

transfer equipment, which often differs from ship to ship. The

commenters expressed concerns that at the high rates of cargo discharge

the equipment makes possible, mishandling might cause serious injury to

personnel and create environmental hazards.

[[Page 29943]]

Response: The law does not give the authority to grant a

reciprocity exemption for safety or environmental concerns, except for

countries that regulate longshore activities in their ports and waters

on this basis. Congress separately addressed environmental and safety

issues regarding the handling of certain types of hazardous cargo in

Section 258(b)(2) discussed earlier.

Comment: Several commenters highlighted the practical difficulties

of applying a rule to longshore activities that take place in private

terminals, many of which are in remote areas where no shoreside labor

is available or where there may be no port facilities at all.

Response: The Department notes that the ``Prevailing Practice

Exception'' described above would appear to cover the circumstances

described by these commentators. In those cases where the Department

obtained particular information about practices in private terminals,

that information has been reflected in the list of countries.

Implementation Procedures

Comment: One commenter said that the survey was too limited because

it did not take general labor laws into account. Another commenter

expressed the fear that the standardized methodology developed by the

Department would generate inaccurate findings and overlook local rules

in foreign countries affecting specialized vessels. The writer noted

that appropriate procedures for specialized ships may not exist in many

smaller countries where such ships rarely call. The commenter doubted

whether the follow-up procedures would be thorough enough to make

accurate or fair determinations. Another commenter recommended a

provision for periodic review to account for changes in longshore work

resulting from technological change. Noting some activities enumerated

in the list, another commenter asked for a procedure to secure official

interpretations of authorized longshore work exemptions for nations

generally listed as ineligible for the reciprocity exception. Several

commenters worried that the proposed rule would overburden U.S.

immigration inspectors by making them responsible for interpreting

differing customs and practice in each port.

Response: The GAO report urged the Department to develop

standardized methodology to ensure consistent treatment of countries.

The Department has made every effort to obtain full and accurate

information about the countries listed, including general labor laws

where they affect the performance of longshore work by U.S. seamen, and

is prepared to investigate information supplied by interested parties

and adjust the list accordingly. The Department is required to update

the list annually. The Department's goal is to maintain the list in a

fashion that reflects laws, regulations and practices in foreign

countries as accurately as possible. Where technological change results

in a change in such laws, regulations or practices, that will be

reflected in the list. The responsibility for interpreting the list and

authorizing or denying the performance of activities by alien members

of foreign ships' crews in specific instances lies with the Immigration

and Naturalization Service (INS). The Department is prepared to assist

the INS in cases where more detailed information about specific

practices in foreign countries would be useful in their determination.

While the expansion of the list of countries in which restrictions have

been found may change the determination by the INS in specific cases,

it is not anticipated that the workload of the INS would expand

significantly as a result.

Comment: One commenter noted that the Department has not placed

countries about which it has no information on the list. The writer

said that any country should be on the list unless the country can

conclusively demonstrate its eligibility for a reciprocity exemption.

Response: The law directs the Department to maintain a list of

countries where restrictions exist. The Department is not in a position

to assume such restrictions absent specific information.

Comment: One commenter said that countries whose ships are

currently prohibited from calling on U.S. ports should be put on the

list in case the prohibition ends during the life of the Department's

rule.

Response: The Department is prepared to consider the situation with

respect to such countries at the time their ships become eligible to

enter U.S. waters, and revise the list if necessary.

Comment: One commenter questioned the Department's decision not to

survey laws, regulations and practices in countries, dependencies and

other geographic entities with a population of less than 5,000 people.

The writer noted that there is nothing in the statute or the

legislative history to support this.

Response: The Department does not believe that it has omitted areas

whose ships are likely to call in the United States. Interested parties

are encouraged to provide the Department with information concerning

longshore rules, regulations or practices in areas not on the list.

Economic Impact

Comment: Several comments questioned the rationale and methodology

leading to the Department's conclusion that the benefits of the

proposed rule for U.S. longshore workers and seamen outweigh the

benefits to U.S. businesses under the previous interpretation. The

writers generally agreed that the law is intended to protect the jobs

of U.S. longshore workers but contended that the proposed rule would

require longshore workers in many situations where they are not needed.

Many commenters feared that the proposed rule would have a negative

impact on business, in particular for shippers of bulk commodities and

exporters of timber products. Other comments suggested that the

proposed rule would have an impact on the budgets of state and local

governments in the snow belt by raising the transport costs of road

salt, a heavy bulk commodity whose transport costs can exceed the

initial acquisition costs. Some comments also expressed concern that

the rule would discourage technological innovation. One suggested that

the proposed rule would give foreign competitors an advantage in the

world market by diverting modern, more efficient vessels to other

countries.

Response: In the Department's view, the economic rationale for

Section 258 rests on the fact that all of the longshore workers or

seamen to whom benefits may accrue are U.S. citizens, while the

businesses that may pay higher costs, and their consumers, are often

foreign. In those cases where the effect of the law is, ceteris

paribus, to shift work from foreign crews to U.S. longshore workers,

there will be an obvious gain for the U.S. economy. In those cases

where the shift to U.S. longshore workers results in higher loading or

unloading costs, but the activity continues at the same levels, for

example in the case of the import of road salt, there may still be an

overall net gain for the U.S. economy as a whole. From a macroeconomic

point of view, increased costs to American businesses, municipalities,

or consumers would be offset by the increased income and spending of

U.S. longshore workers or seamen; in those cases where at least part of

the increased cost was borne by foreign entities, there would be a net

gain for the U.S. economy as a whole. A number of companies have raised

the possibility of job losses or other external negative effects in the

United States. While it is certainly possible that application of the

law could result in higher shipping

[[Page 29944]]

costs in certain trades, and that such higher costs could affect the

level of those trades, in general the Department found such concerns to

be based on worst case scenarios focusing solely on the reciprocity

exception while disregarding other measures that might be taken to

reduce costs. For example, in a number of cases, concerns were

expressed about the loss of a reciprocity exception in industries and

situations where, in the Department's view, a ``Prevailing Practice

Exception'' would almost certainly apply. This is particularly likely

in the case of bulk shippers operating in private ports or terminals.

In other cases, one or another of the other exceptions in section 258

may apply.

In cases where no exception applies, other measures that may be

available to businesses to mitigate any negative effects from this

ruling include the employment of U.S. citizens aboard foreign-owned or

flagged vessels to perform the work in question, the use of U.S. flag

ships, and the reflagging of vessels in countries eligible for the

reciprocity exception. In all cases, companies will be able, at a

minimum, to utilize the collective bargaining process to seek cost

structures that maximize the collective economic benefit for all

concerned.

With respect to fears that companies might have to employ

unnecessary labor, the Department notes that Section 258 is quite

explicit in prohibiting the performance of work by alien seamen. The

intent is to substitute U.S. labor for foreign labor, not to add

unnecessary labor, although this would be allowed on a reciprocity

basis if it were an accepted practice in the foreign country in

question.

As to the possible diversion of modern more-efficient vessels to

other countries, companies may wish to explore provisions in the

Immigration and Naturalization Act which allow foreign workers with

specialized skills to work in the United States. The Department notes,

for example, that operators of specialized equipment connected with the

log trade have entered the United States, after appropriate

determinations, with specialized visas other than those issued to crew

members. The Department is of the view that such workers do not fall

within the scope of Section 258, which relates specifically to persons

eligible to enter the United States under section 101(a)(15)(D)(i).

With respect to the specific industries about which questions were

raised, the Department notes that in some cases it was possible to

confirm information supplied about alleged restricted or unrestricted

practices in foreign countries. Where necessary in these cases, the

list of countries has been adjusted.

Specialized Vessels

Comment: Many comments highlighted the effect of the proposed rule

on specialized vessels. Noting the special training required for the

safe and efficient operation of equipment aboard these ships, several

commenters requested a blanket exemption for self-unloading bulk

vessels and log carriers.

Response: The Department does not have the authority to grant a

blanket exception for self-loading/unloading bulk vessels or log

carriers, or, indeed, any specific class of ships. Country-specific

reciprocity exceptions of this type were sometimes possible, however.

The Department notes that the law refers specifically to vessels with

self-unloading conveyor belts and vacuum-actuated systems in discussing

the ``Prevailing Practice Exception.''

Comment: One commenter contended that the law was not intended to

apply to passenger vessels.

Response: The Department agrees, based on language in the

Conference Report, that the law was not intended to apply to passenger

vessels.

Status of Individual Countries

Canada: A large number of comments discussed Canada's eligibility

for a reciprocity exception. Referring to the historically close links

and free trade commitments between Canada and the U.S., several

comments called for a blanket exemption for the entire country. One

commenter contended that Canada has a general regulation that the

Canadian Government might not be enforcing which requires an employment

validation for foreign crew members. The writer called for placing

Canada on the list because of this legal requirement. Many comments

went into great detail about practices in different parts of Canada.

Twenty-six commenters stressed the importance of maintaining an

exception for Canadian bulk vessels in the Great Lakes. They warned

that elimination of the exception would hurt the special trade

relationship between the United States and Canada by raising transport

costs for a variety of bulk commodities. A number of them noted that

the crews of U.S. bulk ships in Canadian Great Lakes ports are free to

carry out longshore work. The writers offered technical suggestions

about the exception in the listing for that region. Another commenter

reported that a collective bargaining agreement in Vancouver, British

Colombia prevents the use of belt self-unloading vessels.

In response, the Department has consulted extensively with U.S.

diplomatic posts in Canada, U.S. carriers operating into Canada, union

and industry officials, and the Canadian government. The widespread

existence of restrictive collective bargaining agreements at liner

terminals and public ports was confirmed, requiring the inclusion of

Canada on the list of countries with restrictive practices. However,

the technical corrections to the exceptions for bulk cargo at Great

Lakes ports were found to reflect actual practice and have been

incorporated in the list. Two U.S. operators of specialized self-

loading/unloading log carriers confirmed that they have been able to

operate in Canadian Pacific ports and waters without restrictions on

their U.S. crews, and an exception has therefore been added in this

regard. Exceptions were also added for a number of shipboard activities

found to be generally excepted in Canadian collective bargaining

agreements. Finally, U.S. carriers, Canadian government and industry

officials, and labor union officials advised the U.S. Consulates in

Montreal, Halifax and Vancouver that restrictions in collective

bargaining agreements do not apply to U.S. self-loading/unloading bulk

vessels calling on private terminals, so an exception was added for

these vessels at private terminals.

Chile: After reviewing the report from the U.S. Embassy in

Santiago, a commenter questioned the decision not to place Chile on the

list because of a provision in Chilean law allowing authorities to

restrict access to port areas by any person.

The Department acknowledges the existence of the law, but notes

that it does not require access to be restricted. According to

information provided by the U.S. Embassy in Santiago, access by U.S.

mariners is not restricted. Therefore, Chile has not been added to the

list.

Congo: A commenter notes that the U.S. Embassy in Brazzaville did

not find any restrictions on longshore work, but had reported in

response to inquiries to compile earlier lists that the Congo did

prohibit foreign mariners from carrying out longshore work.

The Department has asked the U.S. Embassy in Libreville Congo to

investigate further. Based on the most current information, Congo will

not be added to the list at this time.

France: One commenter noted that the U.S. Embassy in Paris did not

find any restrictions on longshore work, but had reported in response

to inquiries to

[[Page 29945]]

compile earlier lists that France had laws setting aside longshore

activities for local port workers.

At the Department's request, the U.S. diplomatic posts in France

investigated further and determined that French law does in fact

restrict longshore activities, with certain exceptions, to registered

workers employed by a stevedore company at a French port. France

therefore has been placed on the list.

Greece: The U.S. Embassy in Athens had reported that there were not

any restrictions on longshore work, but the Department received other

reports that local dockworkers have the exclusive right to do longshore

work.

The Department asked the U.S. Embassy in Athens to investigate

further. The Embassy has confirmed that foreign crew may not operate

shore-based equipment to load/unload a vessel, as a license is required

to operate such equipment. Greece is therefore being added to the list

of countries.

Greenland: The Government of Denmark reported that Greenland does

not possess a separate ship registry and asked that Greenland be

treated the same as Denmark for purposes of possible inclusion in the

list of countries.

The U.S. Embassy in Denmark confirmed the Danish Government's

report and provided information indicating that U.S. mariners were not

restricted in activities defined as longshore work in the statute.

Greenland has therefore been dropped from the list.

Italy: After reviewing reports from the U.S. Embassy in Rome, a

commenter questioned whether Italy should be placed on the list for

line handling. The commenter noted that Italian law does not consider

line handling as longshore activity and requires authorization by

government authorities. The commenter also questioned whether Italian

law only allows mariners from EU member countries to perform longshore

work.

At the request of the Department, the U.S. Embassy in Rome

investigated further and determined that certain longshore activities,

including cargo loading, discharge and transfer, may be performed by EU

and non-EU mariners with authorization from the national maritime

authority or port authority where a maritime office is not present.

Italian law, on the other hand, does not allow foreign mariners to

handle mooring lines on the dock or do other activities not immediately

related to cargo handling. Italy is therefore being added to the list.

Norway: A commenter noted that the U.S. Embassy in Oslo did not

find any restrictions on longshore work, but had reported in response

to inquiries to compile earlier lists that Norwegian laws not in force

restrict most longshore work to local port workers.

The Department has asked the U.S. Embassy in Oslo to investigate

further. Pending further information, Norway is not being added to the

list.

Oman: One commenter pointed out that information received in

response to the Department's questionnaire differed from that reported

in the past.

The Department has asked the U.S. Embassy in Muscat, Oman to

investigate further. Pending confirmation of its initial report, the

Department is not adding Oman to the list.

Sierra Leone: One commenter pointed out that information received

in response to the Department's questionnaire differed from that

reported in the past.

In response, the Department reviewed conditions in Sierra Leone and

determined that the Sierra Leone Ports Authority is the only agency

designated by the government to engage in stevedoring services. Sierra

Leone has therefore been added to the list of countries in which there

are restrictions.

Vanuatu: Two commenters asserted that there are no government

rules, regulations or collective bargaining agreements restricting

longshore work by U.S. mariners in Vanuatu.

In response, the Department reconfirmed with the U.S. Embassy in

Port Moresby that actual practice in Vanuatu was restrictive in some

respects. Vanuatu has therefore been retained on the list, in slightly

modified form.

List of Subjects in 22 CFR Part 89

Aliens, Crewmembers, Immigration, Labor, Longshore and harbor

workers, Seamen.

For the reasons set out in the preamble, 22 CFR Chapter I is

amended as follows:

PART 89--PROHIBITIONS ON LONGSHORE WORK BY U.S. NATIONALS

1. The authority citation for part 89 continues to read as follows:

Authority: 8 U.S.C. 1288, Public Law 101-649 Stat. 4878

2. Part 89 is amended by revising Sec. 89.1 to read as follows:

Sec. 89.1 Prohibitions on Longshore work by U.S. nationals; listing by

country.

The Secretary of State has determined that, in the following

countries, longshore work by crewmembers aboard United States vessels

is prohibited by law, regulation, or in practice, with respect to the

particular activities noted:

Algeria

(a) All longshore activities.

Angola

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches

(2) Rigging of ship's gear, and

(3) Loading and discharge of cargo on board the ship if local labor

is paid as if they had done the work.

Argentina

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Cargo tiedown and untying,

(2) When a disaster occurs,

(3) Provision of vessel supplies, and

(4) Opening and closing of hatches.

Australia

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) When shore labor cannot be obtained at rates prescribed by

collective bargaining agreements,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(3) Rigging of ship's gear.

Bahamas

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of cargo related equipment on board the ship,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches,

(3) Rigging of ship's gear, and

(4) Use of specialized equipment which port workers cannot handle

alone, with the concurrence of the local longshore union.

Bangladesh

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of cargo-related equipment integral to the vessel

when there is a shortage of port workers able to operate the equipment

and with the permission of the port authority, and

(2) Opening and closing of hatches.

Belgium

(a) All longshore activities.

Belize

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of cargo related equipment,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(3) Rigging of ship's gear.

Benin

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

[[Page 29946]]

(1) Operation of cargo related equipment,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(3) Rigging of ship's gear.

Bermuda

(a) Loading and discharge of cargo using cranes and loading

equipment situated on the docks or wharves.

(b) Line handling on the docks.

Brazil

(a) All longshore activities at public terminals.

Bulgaria

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of cargo related equipment,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches,

(3) Rigging of ship's gear,

(4) Mooring and line handling, and

(5) Operation of special equipment and discharge of dangerous

cargo, with the preliminary authorization of the Port Administration

and Harbor Master.

Burma

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(2) Rigging of ship's gear.

Cameroon

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(2) Rigging of ship's gear.

Canada

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches,

(2) Cleaning of holds and tanks,

(3) Loading of ship's stores,

(4) Operation of onboard rented equipment,

(5) Ballasting and deballasting,

(6) Rigging of ship's gear,

(7) Exceptions in connection with bulk cargo at Great Lakes ports

only:

(i) Handling of mooring lines on the dock when the vessel is made

fast, shifted or let go,

(ii) Moving the vessel to place it under shoreside loading and

unloading equipment,

(iii) Moving the vessel in position to unload the vessel onto

specific cargo piles, hoppers or conveyor belt systems, and

(iv) Operation of cargo related equipment integral to the vessel.

(8) Operation of self-loading/unloading equipment and line handling

by the crews of bulk vessels calling at private terminals, and

(9) Operation of specialized self-loading/unloading log carriers on

the Pacific Coast.

Cape Verde

(a) All longshore activities.

China

(a) Handling of mooring lines.

Colombia

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exception: When local workers are unable or unavailable to

provide longshore services.

Comoros

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of cargo related equipment,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches,

(3) Rigging of ship's gear, and

(4) Other activities with government authorization.

Costa Rica

(a) Operation of equipment fixed to the ground.

Cote d'Ivoire

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(2) Rigging of automated ship's gear.

Croatia

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of cargo-related equipment on board the ship when

outside of port, and

(2) Operation of specialized unloading equipment.

Cyprus

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(2) Rigging of ship's gear.

Djibouti

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exception: Operation of cranes aboard ship.

Dominica

(a) All longshore activities.

Dominican Republic

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exception: Operation of equipment with which local port workers

are not familiar.

Ecuador

(a) All longshore activities.

Egypt

(a) Cargo loading and unloading activities not on board the ship.

El Salvador

(a) All longshore activities.

Eritrea

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exception: Opening and closing of hatches and rigging of ship's

gear if port labor is paid as if it had done the work.

Estonia

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) On-board mooring activities,

(2) Replacement of lines,

(3) Lifting and movement of ladders,

(4) Movement of vessel's equipment,

(5) Loading of food and vessel's equipment by cargo-related

equipment of the vessel, and

(6) Securing of general cargo, vehicles and containers to the

vessel.

Fiji

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of cargo related equipment, except for discharging

cargo,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(3) Rigging of ship's gear.

Finland

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions, when not related to cargo loading and discharge:

(1) Operation of cargo-related equipment,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(3) Rigging of ship's gear.

France

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Loading and discharge of the ship's own material and provisions

if done by the ship's own equipment or by the owner of the merchandise

using his own personnel,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches,

(3) Rigging of ship's gear,

(4) Operation of cargo-related equipment to shift cargo internally,

(5) Handling operations connected with shipbuilding and refitting,

and

(6) Offloading fish by the crew or personnel working for the ship

owner.

Gabon

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exception: All longshore activities if local workers are paid

as if they had done the work.

Georgia

(a) All longshore activities.

[[Page 29947]]

(b) Exception: All longshore activities if local workers are paid

as if they had done the work.

Germany

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(2) Rigging of ship's gear.

Ghana

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of cargo-related equipment,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(3) Rigging of ship's gear.

Greece

(a) Operation of shore-based equipment to load/unload a vessel.

Guatemala

(a) All longshore activities.

Guinea

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(2) Rigging of ship's gear.

Guyana

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of cargo-related equipment aboard ship,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(3) Rigging of ship's gear.

Haiti

(a) All longshore activities.

Honduras

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of cargo-related equipment,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(3) Rigging of ship's gear.

Hong Kong

(a) Operation of equipment on the pier.

Iceland

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exception: Operation of shipboard equipment and cranes.

India

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exception: Operation of shipboard equipment that local port

workers cannot operate.

Indonesia

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) With the permission of the port administrator, when no local

port workers with requisite skills are available, and

(2) In the event of an emergency.

Ireland

(a) All longshore activities.

Israel

(a) All longshore activities.

Italy

(a) Cargo loading, discharge and transfer without the permission of

the Maritime Administration or the local port authority, if no office

of the Maritime Administration is present, and a deposit for possible

use of port stevedoring services.

(b) Handling of lines on the dock and other longshore activities

not immediate related to cargo handling.

Jamaica

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of equipment integral to the vessel,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches, jointly with local port

workers, and

(3) Rigging of ship's gear jointly with local port workers.

Japan

(a) All longshore activities.

Jordan

(a) All longshore activities.

Kenya

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches,

(2) Rigging of ship's gear,

(3) In an emergency declared by the port authority, and

(4) Direct transfer of cargo from one ship to another.

Korea

(a) All longshore activities.

Kuwait

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions, when activities are declined by port workers:

(1) Operation of cargo-related equipment,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(3) Rigging of ship's gear.

Liberia

(a) Longshore activities on shore.

Lithuania

(a) The following activities in harbor:

(1) Loading and discharge of cargo,

(2) Maintenance of port equipment,

(3) Receiving and fixing of dock ropes to harbor equipment,

(4) Transportation of cargo within the port, and

(5) Warehousing and security.

(b) Exception: Opening and closing of hatches.

Madagascar

(a) All longshore activities.

Malaysia

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exception: Loading and discharge of hazardous materials.

Maldive Islands

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of cargo-related equipment aboard ship,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches,

(3) Rigging of ship's gear, and

(4) Other longshore activities within port limits, when authorized

by the port authority in cases when the port authority is unable to

provide longshore workers.

Malta

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(2) Rigging of ship's gear.

Mauritania

(a) All longshore activities on shore.

Mauritius

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(2) Rigging of ship's gear.

Mexico

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exception: Onboard activities if local workers are paid as if

they had done the work.

Micronesia

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation and rigging of gear which local port workers cannot

do, and

(2) When no qualified citizens are available.

Morocco

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of ship's gear which port workers cannot operate,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches,

(3) Rigging of ship's gear aboard ship, and

(4) Fastening and unfastening containers.

[[Page 29948]]

Mozambique

(a) All longshore activities on shore.

Namibia

(a) Longshore activities on shore.

Nauru

(a) All longshore activities.

Netherlands

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exception: Regular crew activities on board ship, including

operation of cargo-related equipment, opening and closing of hatches,

and rigging of ship's gear.

Netherlands Antilles

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of ship's gear,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(3) Rigging of ship's gear.

New Zealand

(a) All longshore activities.

Nicaragua

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exception: Shipboard activities if local workers are paid as if

they had done the work.

Pakistan

(a) Longshore activities on shore.

(b) Handling of mooring lines.

(c) Exception: Operation of equipment which dock workers are not

capable of operating.

Panama

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Rigging of ship's gear,

(2) Cargo handling operations with ship's gear, when port authority

equipment is not available to load or unload a vessel.

Papua New Guinea

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(2) Rigging of ship's gear.

Peru

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Handling of certain types of hazardous cargo, and

(2) Operation of shipboard equipment requiring special training.

Philippines

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Activities on board ship, except for loading and discharge of

cargo,

(2) Longshore activities for hazardous or polluting cargoes, and

(3) Longshore activities on government vessels.

Poland

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of cargo-related equipment,

(2) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(3) Rigging of ship's gear.

Portugal (including Azores)

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Military operations,

(2) Operations in an emergency, when under the supervision of the

maritime authorities,

(3) Security or inspection operations,

(4) Loading and discharge of supplies for the vessel and its crew,

(5) Loading and discharge of fuel and petroleum products at special

terminals,

(6) Loading and discharge of chemical products if required for

safety reasons,

(7) Placing of trailers and similar material in parking areas when

done before loading or after discharge,

(8) Cleaning of the vessel, and

(9) Loading, discharge and disposal of merchandise in other boats.

Qatar

(a) All longshore activities.

Romania

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of specialized shipboard equipment, and

(2) Loading and discharge of cargo requiring special operations.

St. Lucia

(a) All longshore activities.

St. Vincent and the Grenadines

(a) All longshore activities.

Saudi Arabia

(a) All longshore activities.

Senegal

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches,

(2) Rigging of ship's gear, and

(3) Cargo handling when necessary to ensure the safety or stability

of the vessel.

Seychelles

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(2) Rigging of ship's gear.

Sierra Leone

(a) All longshore activities.

Slovenia

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(2) Rigging of ship's gear.

Solomon Islands

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(2) Rigging of ship's gear.

South Africa

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(2) Rigging of ship's gear.

Spain

(a) All longshore activities.

Sri Lanka

(a) Longshore activities on shore.

Sweden

(a) Loading and discharge of cargo.

(b) Rigging of cargo nets, straps and wires to make ready for

loading by the crane.

(c) Cargo handling.

(d) Line handling on the dock.

Taiwan

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of cargo-related equipment which local longshoremen

cannot operate, and

(2) Opening and closing of hatches operated automatically.

Tanzania

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exception: All longshore activities if local workers are paid

as if they had done the work.

Thailand

(a) Longshore activities on shore.

(b) Exception: Longshore activities in private ports.

Togo

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Operation of cargo-related equipment on board the ship, and

(2) Opening and closing of hatches, upon the agreement of the port

officer on duty.

Trinidad and Tobago

(a) All longshore activities.

[[Page 29949]]

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches, if done automatically, and

(2) Rigging of ship's gear.

Tunisia

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exception: When the number of local dock workers is

insufficient or when the workers are not qualified to do the work.

Uruguay

(a) Stowing, unstowing, loading and discharge, and related

activities on board ships in commercial ports.

(b) Cargo handling on the docks and piers of commercial ports.

(c) Exception: Activities usually performed by the ship's crew,

including operation of cargo-related equipment, opening and closing of

hatches and rigging of ship's gear.

Vanuatu

(a) All longshore activities on shore.

Venezuela

(a) Longshore activities in private ports and terminals.

Western Samoa

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exceptions:

(1) Opening and closing of hatches, and

(2) Rigging of ship's gear.

Yemen

(a) All longshore activities.

Zaire

(a) All longshore activities.

(b) Exception: Operation of cargo-related equipment, when

authorized by the Port Authority.

Dated: May 16, 1996.

Alan P. Larson,

Acting Assistant Secretary, Economic and Business Affairs, Department

of State.

[FR Doc. 96-14821 Filed 6-12-96; 8:45 am]

BILLING CODE 4710-07-P