Page 35

environment Hyde Guardian is one of the systems named to the Coast Guard’s Alternate Management Systems list

Looking for cLarity

on ballast water management U.S. Coast Guard, EPA move ahead with implementing ballast water management requirements

S

hipowners now have more clarity than they did just a few weeks ago on what they will need to do comply with regulations requiring them to equip ships with Ballast Water Management (BWM) systems. There are two major imperatives driving this requirement. One is U.S. law, currently in effect. The other is the IMO sponsored Ballast Water Management Convention. The BWM Convention requires all ships to manage their ballast water according to standard D-1 (exchange) or D-2 (treatment), following a phase-in schedule given in Regulation B-3. The convention was adopted in February 2004 with entry into force coming 12 months after ratification by 30 States, representing 35 percent of world merchant shipping tonnage. As of last month, ratification was still short of the tonnage target by some 6 percent. More countries could soon sign on, however, because IMO’s Marine Environmental Protection Committee (MEPC) last month took a number of actions that were in line with an INTERTANKO-led joint proposal made last year. Among the actions was a rescheduling of the International Ballast Water Management Convention implementation dates that should provide a more realistic timeframe for ships installing ballast water management systems (BWMS), a trial period for port state control and new guidance on BWMS type approvals. A draft resolution, which will now go to the IMO Assembly session

By Nick Blenkey

being held November 25 to December 4, 2013, recommends that ships constructed before the entry into force of the Convention not be required to comply with regulation D-2 until their first renewal survey following the date of entry into force of the Convention. The aim of the draft resolution is to clarify uncertainty in relation to the application of regulation B-3, through the application of a realistic timeline for enforcement of regulation D-1 (ballast water exchange standard) and regulation D-2 (ballast water performance standard), upon entry into force of the Convention.

U.S. REQUIREMENTS Meantime, all of this may be of small help to shipowners trading in or to U.S. waters. The U.S. has not ratified the BWM Convention and the U.S. Coast Guard and EPA are moving ahead on implementing the ballast water management requirements of the U.S. Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act of 1990 (NANPCA), which is very much U.S. law and in effect. The good news is that the U.S. requirements are not totally out of line with those of the Convention. Regardless of whatever schedules are agreed under the Convention, and regardless of what flag they fly, most ships trading between international and U.S. waters will be required to fit a ballast water management system in accordance with the schedule shown in Table I. June 2013 MARINE LOG 33

June 2013 Marine Log Magazine  
June 2013 Marine Log Magazine