Ballast Water Managemnet

A New Annex to MARPOL

MEPC progressed the development of legally binding framework which has been drafted to require the ships and port facilities under the jurisdiction of signatory parties to implement effective management and control of ballast water taken onboard so as to mitigate the risk of transferring non-indigenous aquatic organisms and pathogens between port States. MEPC, recognizing the need to take proactive steps to globally ensure the biological diversity of the world’s marine environment is of the view that a diplomatic conference should be held in 2000 to adopt a new annex to MARPOL.

A set of preliminary regulations for a new annex to MARPOL has been drafted and will likely incorporate a Code of technical requirements for managing the estimated 10 billion tons of ballast being transferred annually by 40,000 ships.

The draft regulations also include implementation guidelines for port States receiving ballast water. Currently, only one viable option to treat ballast water exists; exchanging ballast water taken on in ports with ballast water from deep open oceans. This alternative is effective due to the relative difference in salinity thereby creating an environment unsuitable for the aquatic organisms.

Enforcement Provisions

Agreement on the conditions for entry into force of a new annex has not been achieved, although there was some support for the usual provision of 15 States whose combined fleets constitute 50% of the gross tonnage of the world’s merchant fleet.

The entry into force provisions will be directly influenced by the nature and extent of obligations placed on the flag State by the regulations, with respect to the ships of its flag and, the port facilities under its jurisdiction, and the conditions associated with any exemption provisions.

Ballast Water Treatment

As presently drafted, the regulations provide a two tier approach for the ballast exchange option. Whenever a ship navigates in waters more than 500 meters in depth and 200 nautical miles from shore for periods greater than 48 hours, it must exchange its ballast water using the flow through method (three volume exchanges) or the sequential method (completely empty and refill the tank). If the trading route does not comprise the above sea conditions, then the master shall take every effort to minimize the uptake of potentially harmful ballast water; i.e., in periods of darkness, in shallow waters, or where propellers have stirred up sediment. It is intended that the draft annex will also include a model ballast water management plan which is under development by the International Chamber of Shipping.

Status of National Requirements

A questionnaire was drafted which is aimed at collecting information from port States relative to the requirements for managing, recording and verifying the treatment of ballast water taken on by ships. Preliminary information concerning ballast water treatment requirements by port States responding to an earlier questionnaire was presented and is summarized below:

Argentina - Since 1990, the port authorities of Buenos Aires have required that the ship’s ballast water be chlorinated prior to calling at their ports.

Australia - In cases where ballast water exchange has not been documented, ships are permitted to discharge taking into account the ballast water’s port of origin with respect to the risk to the port’s biological profile. If the biological risk to the port is excessive, then discharge is prohibited until samples of water are analyzed and found

Canada - Federal regulations do not yet require ships to undertake preventative measures to minimize the introduction of non-indigenous species. However, some ports are encouraging ship owners to undertake ballast water exchange before arrival. Marine Notices impose ballast discharge restrictions for certain areas (10 miles from within Grande Entree lagoon and Ilesdela Madeleine). Vancouver is the first Canadian port to mandate, as of January 1998, the performance of mid-ocean ballast water exchange and that documentary evidence be provided upon entry.

Chile - Ships coming from known zones which are affected by cholera or similar contagious epidemics, are requested to exchange ballast water at least 12 miles from the coast. In cases where ship board logs do not indicate that such an exchange has occurred,

England and Wales - Based on the responses received from 127 ports, 100 ports have no policy or regulations, 13 ports have published regulations focusing mainly on operational safety and only 5 ports apply Resolution A.868(20).

Hong Kong - As a port State, Hong Kong has not required compliance with Resolution A.868(20). However, Hong Kong has instructed the masters operating Hong Kong flag ships to comply with A.868(20) when a port State require preventative measures to be taken.

Ireland - Future regulations are being developed to incorporate IMO Assembly Resolution A.868(20).

Israel - As of 1996, Israel requires the master to complete and submit to the port representative a ballast water exchange report. Ships arriving at the port of Eilat must exchange their ballast outside the Red Sea and ships arriving at the Mediterranean ports of Israel, must exchange ballast in the Atlantic Ocean.

Netherlands - Ports in Rotterdam and the Chesapeake Bay, pending publication of research presently being carried out, will consider implementing Resolution A.868(20) which endorses the ballast water exchange option.

New Zealand - Recognizing that an immediate ban on ballast water discharge could introduce safety risks on board the ship, voluntary guidelines were put into place in 1992. The guidelines require discharge into a reception facility or that testing be carried out prior to discharge in the event that documented evidence is not presented attesting to mechanical and/or chemical treatment of ballast water if it originated for a known biological “hot spot”.

Panama - discharge of ballast water is prohibited in the Panama Canal.

United Kingdom - Ten on the 66 ports within the U.K. request that ships comply with IMO Assembly Resolution A.774(18) which entails a risk reduction approach principally via ballast water exchange. Four of the 66 ports reporting have adopted a national quarantine.

United States - In consultation with Canada, voluntary guidelines were issued for vessels entering the Great Lakes, which are in line with Resolution A.868(20). Compliance is estimated to be at 90% based on the enforcement provisions which are implemented via salinity checks of the ballast water. Since 1996, the U.S. published guidelines which urge all operators of ships entering the Great Lakes from beyond the 200 nautical miles EEZ (with water depths grater than 2000m) to treat their ballast water. By the end of 1998, an assessment of the level of compliance and of the option used to achieve compliance will be completed, in order to determine if ballast water exchange should be mandatory and the extent that regulations should be applicable to all U.S. waters and coastlines.