LP Briefing - Ballast Water Management

LOSS PREVENTION BRIEFING FOR NORTH MEMBERS
SHIPS / FEBRUARY 2012
Ballast Water Management

Contents
Ballast Water and its Threat to the Worlds Oceans .......... 1 Examples of Invasive Species............................................ 2 Background to the Convention ......................................... 2 Ballast Water Management Convention ............................ 3 Alternative National Regulations ........................................ 5 Ballast Water Exchange Methods...................................... 6 Ballast Water Treatment .................................................... 8 Alternative ballast water management options ................ 11 Interpretation, Application and Enforcement .................... 13 What Next? ..................................................................... 14
Ballast Water and its Threat to the Worlds Oceans

The introduction of invasive marine species into new environments by ships' ballast water has been identified as one of the greatest threats to the seas of the world. Many experts consider that invasive marine species pose a greater threat to the environment than oil pollution. This is because the effects tend to increase over time and be irreversible, whereas the effects of oil pollution decrease over time and the environment can eventually recover. For thousands of years ships have carried ballast to ensure stability, trim and structural integrity. Originally ships used solid ballast in the form of rocks, sand and later metal but, as ships and technology developed, water took over because it is easier to load and discharge and therefore more efficient and economical than solid ballast. However, a potentially serious problem arises when ballast water contains marine life. The spread of marine life is normally controlled by natural barriers such as temperature and land masses but widespread use of water as ballast, development of larger and faster ships and rapidly increasing world trade means these natural barriers are increasingly being by-passed. The transfer and introduction of invasive marine species into new environments can cause severe human health, economic and/or environmental impacts and the effects in many areas of the world have already been devastating. Currently the economic damage caused by invasive species is estimated to be in excess of $100 billion annually.
Disclaimer The purpose of this publication is to provide a source of information which is additional to that available to the maritime industry from regulatory, advisory, and consultative organisations. Whilst care is taken to ensure the accuracy of any information made available no warranty of accuracy is given and users of that information are to be responsible for satisfying themselves that the information is relevant and suitable for the purposes to which it is applied. In no circumstances whatsoever shall North be liable to any person whatsoever for any loss or damage whensoever or howsoever arising out of or in connection with the supply (including negligent supply) or use of information. Unless the contrary is indicated, all articles are written with reference to English Law. However it should be noted that the content of this publication does not constitute legal advice and should not be construed as such. Members should contact North for specific advice on particular matters
North of England P&I Association.The Quayside, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 3DU, UK Telephone: +44 191 2325221 Facsimile: +44 191 261 0540 Email: loss.prevention@nepia.com www.nepia.com
Copyright North of England P&I Association Limited 2012

Examples of Invasive Species
European Zebra Mussels
European Zebra Mussels in north America foul all available hard surfaces in huge numbers, displacing native aquatic life and altering habitats, ecosystems and food webs. It has caused severe fouling problems on infrastructure and vessels and the economic costs in the USA alone since 1989 have been estimated at more than US$1 billion.
North American Jellyfish

North American Jellyfish in the Black, Azov and Caspian Seas reproduce rapidly by feeding excessively on zooplankton, which alters the food webs and ecosystems. It contributed significantly to the collapse of the Black Sea and Azov Sea fisheries in the 1990s with massive economic and social impact, and it now threatens to have a similar impact in the Caspian Sea.
Background to the Convention

In 1992 the United Nations conference on environment and development was held in Rio de Janeiro. The conference called on the International Maritime Organization (IMO) and other international bodies to address the problem of ballast water. The IMO responded in 1997 by adopting the Guidelines for
Red tides
Harmful algal blooms in many areas of the world can cause massive kills of marine life, foul beaches and have a severe impact on tourism and recreation. Some species may contaminate filter feeding shellfish which, if eaten by humans, can cause severe illness and death. As a result many fisheries have closed with significant economic losses.
the control and management of ships ballast water, to minimise the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens. These included minimising the uptake of
organisms during ballasting, cleaning ballast tanks on a regular basis, avoiding unnecessary discharge of ballast and introducing ballast water management procedures. The International Chamber of Shipping (ICS), the International Association of Independent Tanker Owners (INTERTANKO) and classification societies are among those which have published model ballast water management plans, giving practical guidance for implementation of the IMO guidelines. However, progress towards an effective solution on a voluntary basis has been slow so the world summit on sustainable development in 2002 called for an acceleration in the introduction of measures to control invasive marine species in ballast water. By February 2004 the IMO response was adopted and published as the International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships Ballast Water and Sediments commonly referred to as the Ballast Water Management Convention, which will be discussed in this briefing.
Asian Kelp
Asian Kelp in southern Australia, New Zealand, USA, Europe and Argentina grows and spreads rapidly, displacing native algae and marine life, altering habitats, food webs and ecosystems, and fouling infrastructure and vessels.

Ballast Water Management Convention
The International Maritime Organization (IMO) adopted the Ballast Water Management Convention in 2004. The Convention provides regulations and technical standards for the control and management of ballast water and will enter into force 12 months after ratification by 30 states representing 35% of world merchant shipping tonnage. Although the initial adoption of the convention has been slow there are signs of the process accelerating with many countries preparing to adopt the convention in the near future. At present 33 states representing some 26.46% of world tonnage have ratified the Convention. The convention will have a significant effect on the design and operation of ships and it is vital for ship owners to start preparing for the installation of new equipment now. exchanging ballast water by the pump-through method, which is described below, pumping through three times the volume of each ballast water tank will be considered to meet the 95% volumetric exchange standard. Ships will not be required to deviate, delay the voyage or risk the safety of the ship, crew or passengers in order to comply with these requirements. However when a ship is required to conduct ballast water exchange and does not do so in accordance with the regulations, the reasons have to be recorded in its Ballast Water Record Book.
Exchange standards
All ships conducting ballast water exchange will be required, whenever possible, to perform the exchange at least 200 nautical miles from the nearest land and in water at least 200 metres deep. If a ship is unable to conduct ballast water exchange to meet these requirements, it must perform the exchange as far from the nearest land as possible, and in all cases at least 50 nautical miles from the nearest land and in water at least 200 metres deep. When neither of these requirements can be met, port State authorities may designate areas where ships can conduct ballast water exchange. In practice exchange is not achievable in some areas, for example the Baltic Sea.
Who will the Convention apply to?

The Convention will apply to ships flagged to states that have ratified it and to ships entering the jurisdictions of those states. The Convention will not generally apply to ships not designed or constructed to carry ballast water, ships only operating within one jurisdiction, naval ships and other state-owned ships, or ships with permanent ballast water in sealed tanks.
Ballast water management standards

The purpose of ballast water management is to prevent harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens travelling from one part of the world to the other. This can be achieved in one of two ways: by changing the ballast water during the voyage, or by treating the ballast water. The targets set by the Convention for these two methods are known as the ballast water exchange standard and ballast water performance standards respectively.
Ballast water exchange standard

The ballast water exchange standard is seen as an interim solution and requires that ships performing ballast water changes must exchange at least 95% of the volume of the ballast water in the ships ballast tanks. For ships

Ballast water performance standards
The ballast water performance standards require that ships reduce the concentration of harmful aquatic organisms, referred to as viable organisms, discharged from their ballast tanks. Although these specifications will not mean much to anyone except marine biologists, in practice they mean that the ballast water discharged has to contain no significant number of harmful aquatic organisms or pathogens. Treatment is discussed in more detail later in this briefing.
Timetable for compliance

Existing ships will need to comply with the requirements to exchange ballast water (exchange standards) from the date of ratification until January 2014 or 2016, depending on their ballast capacity (see table). Thereafter they will need to comply with requirements to treat ballast water (performance standards). Ships built after January 2009 have to comply with the performance standards by January 2012 or by January 2016 depending on their ballast capacity and when they were built. The table gives details of the current situation.
Date of Construction
Ballast Capacity From 1500 to 5000m
Comply with exchange standards (Reg D-1) Until January 2014
Comply with performance standards (Reg D-2) From January 2014
Before January 2009
< 1500m >5000m Until January 2016 From January 2016
January 2009 January 2010 After January 2010* January 2010 - January 2012 After January 2012
< 5000m < 5000m >5000m >5000m
Until January 2012
From January 2012 From January 2010
Until January 2016
From January 2016 From January 2012
*At MEPC 58 discussion on the availability of equipment to meet the compliance dates for vessels constructed during 2010 concluded without the granting of a period of grace. It is now the view that there are sufficient ballast water treatment technologies available to enable the compliance dates to be met.

Ballast water management plan
To implement the requirements of the ballast water management standards in practice, each ship will need a ballast water management plan that contains all the necessary information and instructions, including: procedures for disposal of sediments at sea and to shore reception facilities procedures for coordinating ballast discharge with state authorities designation of the officer onboard in charge of ensuring the plan is properly implemented details of reporting requirements. evidence of wrongdoing but instead on false entries in the oil record book. It is an offence to submit false records to federal officials in the USA and vessel/owners are fined on the basis of these false statements. Therefore log book entries detailing ballast operations must be true, complete, and accurate record of all ballasting activity that has taken place onboard.
Survey and certification requirements

Ships will require a number of surveys by their flag State to show that the ships construction and equipment, and management system, comply with the Convention requirements. All ships over 400 GT will require an International Ballast Water Management Certificate and will be subject to the following surveys: Initial survey before certification. Renewal survey at specified intervals. Intermediate survey within three months of either the second or third anniversary date of the certificate. Annual survey within three months of each anniversary. Additional survey after any change, replacement or significant repair.
The plan will obviously have to be drawn up specifically for each ship, and be written in the working language of the ship with a translation into English, Spanish or French.
Ballast water record book

Ships will have to keep a record of ballast operations to provide evidence that the required measures have been complied with. These may be kept in a separate record book, an electronic system or alternatively integrated into another record book or system. Operations that need recording include when ballast water is: taken on board circulated or treated discharged into the sea or a reception facility accidentally taken onboard or discharged
Certificates will be issued by the flag State and will be valid up to a maximum of five years, subject to the survey requirements above. A certificate will cease to be valid if there is a change of equipment or if there is a change of flag State.
Entries into the Ballast Water Record Book should include the date, time, volume, location, signature of the officer in charge, whether or not the ballast water management plan was implemented and any other general remarks. The Ballast Water Record Book will have to be kept onboard for a minimum period of two years after the last entry and then in the control of the company for at least another three years. Getting this aspect of the ballast water management system right is vital. There are likely to be parallele with the oily water separator prosecutions in the USA. Many of these prosecutions are not based around actual physical
Alternative National Regulations

Despite the efforts of IMO to develop and implement an international response through the Ballast Water Management Convention, many countries, sub national jurisdictions and even individual ports have developed or are developing their own national or local legislation relating to ballast water. Some of these national or local legislations are generally consistent with the IMO

Convention but others impose different and often more stringent requirements on ships. Inevitably this leads to confusion amongst owners, operators and seafarers. There may be conflicting requirements at different parts of a voyage which inevitably increase the risk of regulations being breached. The unilateral approach is a major concern because the shipping industry is probably the most international of businesses. One of the hallmarks of the success of the IMO is its standardised approach to shipping legislation, providing the industry with effective operational and commercial controls on an international basis. In an attempt to avoid unilateral approaches IMO participates in the Globallast programme, which aims to promote a standardised legal response to the Ballast Water Management Convention. Examples of countries that have implemented national legislation relating to ballast water include Australia, Brazil, Canada, New Zealand, Israel, Ukraine, and the USA. In addition, various individual states within the USA, and various individual ports around the world, such as Buenos Aires in Argentina have implemented local regulations. The latest local development that potentially has the biggest consequences for ship owners is the proposed legislation from the USA. This legislation, if enacted, will act in two ways, firstly it brings forward the date when new vessels are expected to comply with the D-2 treatment standard. All vessels constructed on or after 2012 will be expected to comply with the D -2 standard in US waters. Secondly, it seeks to introduce a more stringent treatment standard than that applied by IMO after 1st January 2016. A grandfathering clause is included in the legislation with the purpose of allowing vessels with type approved technology installed before 2016 to continue trading with this technology in place for a further 5 years past the proposed implementation date. At present we do not know what the outcome of the consultation process will be but a ruling is expected sometime in 2010.
Feedback request
In an effort to gather information on the developing situation with regard to ballast water management, North of England encourages contributions from members, correspondents or authorities that provide details of any problems encountered or of any local regulations relating to ballast water management that have been introduced by individual ports or countries. A table in the industry news website includes up to date information on the latest situation. Please click here.
Ballast Water Exchange Methods

The first phase of the IMO Convention is implementation of the ballast water exchange standard. This involves physically exchanging the existing ballast water in a ships tanks for clean ballast water. There are two main methods that can be used to accomplish this, sequential exchange and the pump-through or flow-through method.
Sequential exchange
This involves emptying the ships ballast water tanks at sea and refilling them with clean ballast water in sequence. In order to comply with the Convention, at least 95% of the ballast water must be exchanged.
Pump-through or flow-through exchange

This involves pumping clean ballast water into the bottom of each ballast tank via the suction head and allowing overflow water to exit through the air pipes or access hatches. Pumping through three times the volume of each ballast water tank will be considered to meet the 95% volumetric exchange standard.
Practical problems of compliance

Ballast water exchange has its limitations and there are a number of practical problems that must be overcome.

Exchange location requirements
There is no guarantee that the water will be clean in the location where ballast water is taken. The exchange standards require that whenever possible a ship should perform ballast water exchange at least 200 nautical miles from the nearest land, and in water at least 200 metres deep, because coastal and shallow waters are likely to contain greater concentrations of marine organisms and pathogens. If 200 nautical miles is not possible a ship must perform the exchange as far from the nearest land as possible but always at least 50 nautical miles from the nearest land and in water at least 200 metres deep. On many well-established trading routes, particularly within Europe and the Mediterranean, it will not be possible to meet either of the above location requirements. Port State authorities may designate areas for ships to conduct ballast water exchange but currently there are no such areas nominated. The Convention states that it will not be necessary for a vessel to deviate from its intended voyage or delay the voyage in order to comply with the location requirements but there may be occasions when a ship cannot comply and does not pass through a designated area. It is not clear what will be expected of a ship on such occasions. adopting a procedure for ballast water exchange, the risk assessment should consider all hazards including: effects on longitudinal strength internal dynamic stress from sloshing over-pressure under-pressure loss of structural strength loss of stability reduction or loss of manoeuvrability and navigational capabilities.
Many Classification societies are actively assisting ship owners in individual risk assessments and operational requirements for ballast exchange on individual ships under various conditions.
Safety
Even if a ship can comply with the location requirements for ballast water exchange some investigations have raised serious concerns for the safety of many existing ship types when using the pump-through or flow-through method. Air pipes are not designed to be exposed to high volumes of water being pumped for prolonged periods. Over-pressure, where tank tops and bulkheads of ballast spaces may suffer abnormal loading from pressures that were not incorporated into the original ship design. Under-pressure, where significant damage may occur when there is a large drop in pressure due to a rapid change in the contents of a tank.
Tank coatings
Another consideration that needs to be taken into account is the effect of increased ballast water exchange on the paint coating of a ships tanks. It is conceivable that if a ship carries out ballast water exchange more frequently, then the tanks will have to be re-coated at more frequent intervals. This could mean more time in dry-dock and increased paint and labour costs.
Responsibility of the master

The Convention stipulates that a ship will not be required to comply with the exchange requirements if the master reasonably decides that carrying out such an exchange would threaten the safety or stability of the ship, its crew or its passengers, because of adverse weather, ship design or stress, equipment failure or any other extraordinary condition. The masters decision not to comply must always be carefully considered since the local authorities at the ships next port of call may take the view that it was not reasonable.
Over-pressure and under-pressure can and should be considered in new ship design but many existing ships may need strengthening to avoid these problems. When

Ballast Water Treatment
The second phase of the IMO Convention is the implementation of the ballast water performance standards, which will be phased in to replace the exchange standard. Achieving performance standards involves treating the ballast water to reduce the concentration of viable organisms and indicator microbes to below specified levels. This treatment can be carried out as the ballast water is taken onboard, when it is stored in the ballast tanks, as it is being discharged, or a combination of any of these. There are a variety of systems that are currently being developed and tested, the majority of which include either one or a combination of the following treatment methods. Mechanical treatment relies on mechanical removal of organisms from the ballast water, by filtration or separation. Physical treatment involves physically treating the ballast water, for example using sterilisation by ozone, ultraviolet light, ultrasonic, pressure, oxygen removal, electric currents or heat treatment. Chemical treatment uses chemicals such as biocides to kill undesirable organisms in the ballast water. greater than or equal to 10 micrometres. In addition, certain organisms are classed as indicator microbes and their discharge must be limited to less than the following specified concentrations.
Toxicogenic Vibrio cholerae (O1 and O139): less than

one colony-forming unit (cfu) per 100 millilitre or less than 1 cfu per 1 gram (wet weight) zooplankton samples.
Escherichia coli: less than 250 cfu per 100 millilitre. Intestinal Enterococci: less than 100 cfu per 100
millilitre.
Approval
The IMO developed a rigorous approval procedure in order to try to ensure that systems, once approved, would function as intended in the marine environment. The approval process requires extensive testing both ashore and afloat. In addition to the IMOs approval process systems should have type approval from a Flag administration. Any system chosen for installation onboard should be fully type approved, or be recognized as such, by the flag administration of the vessel in question. The number of type approved systems is increasing rapidly as manufacturers seek to get their systems approved.
The IMO has developed guidelines Guidelines for
approval and oversight of prototype ballast water treatment technology programmes governing the use of
the various treatment methods. Systems must also be safe in terms of the ship, its equipment and the crew and any active substances used to treat ballast water must be approved by the IMO. However, approval of the ballast management system actually used on a ship is by the ships flag State.
Choosing a system
The wide choice of systems and their different treatment methods and characteristics can be confusing. When choosing a system Members have many different factors to take into account some of which are discussed below. Choosing the correct system for a vessel is vital and may be particularly problematic on existing vessels.
Treatment standards
The number of viable organisms, discharged from ballast tanks should be reduced to the following levels: Discharge of less than 10 viable organisms per cubic metre greater than or equal to 50 micrometres in minimum dimension. Discharge of less than 10 viable organisms per ml less than 50 micrometres in minimum dimension and
Pumping capacity
The starting point for choosing a system is to look at only those systems that can achieve the pumping rates suitable for the vessels design and trade. Any systems that do not have sufficient pumping capacity need not be considered.

Space constraints
The space available to install the equipment in existing vessels will vary depending on ship type and design. It will therefore be necessary to very carefully consider if/where a system can be fitted onto the vessel. This can be a particular problem on small vessels, particularly small tankers where both space constraints and explosion proofing has to be taken into consideration. There are also issues with the use of the systems with the aft peak ballast tank on tankers.
Safety
The form of treatment could pose a potential risk to the safety of the crew, the ship, or its equipment. The crew will have to receive proper training for the safe operation of the ballast water management system. Any active substances will have to be stored and handled safely. Personal protective equipment may be required, onboard alarms and other associated safety equipment may be required with some systems.
Fleet profile
The same system will not be suitable for every ship even sister ships can have significant differences. As such each ship should be assessed individually to ensure that the system chosen for that ship meets the operational and installation requirements of that vessel.
Energy constraints
Ballast treatment is likely to be carried out at times when peak loading is experienced onboard. It is essential therefore that the energy requirements of each system are assessed against the limited amount of energy that can be produced by a ships generators.
Time constraints
A ballast water management system must be able to comply with the performance standards at the pumping capacity of a ships ballast pumps. If not, there could be significant delays loading and/or discharging cargo which could lead to problems with shippers or receivers and disputes between owners and charterers. Also some systems require time for the active substances to dissipate from the ballast water (e.g. Ozone based systems) and these may not be suitable for vessels engaged on shorter passages.

When to fit?
It is possible to fit some systems whilst the vessel is in service/at sea. This option will require considerable forward planning and is likely to be more expensive than installing the system during a planned dry dock. Where practicable it is likely to benefit Members to plan for the installation of the equipment during a dry dock or other repair period. It is expected that in the next few years the pressure on both supply and fitting capacity will increase. Therefore, costs may increase due to these supply/demand pressures. Peak demand is likely to be during 2017. The graph below, originally produced by Class NK, indicates the likely number of vessels applying the D-2 standard over the next few years.
Figure 1: Vessels Applying the D-2 Standard
Costs
There will be a high capital cost associated with the purchase and installation of the equipment. Purchase and installation costs will vary depending on the type of system chosen and the logistics involved in supplying and fitting the system to the vessel. Running costs will vary between the different systems. Manufacturers should have data available pertaining to the likely cost of treatment per cubic metre of treated ballast water.
strength of the company building the system. These systems are going to be onboard vessels for the next 20 30 years and it is worth examining the apparent strength of manufacturers that are under consideration in order that suitable servicing and the supply of spare parts over the lifetime of the system may be assured.
Reliability
Ballast water management systems have now been trialled and approved aboard working vessels. However, it remains to be seen if the widespread installation and use of such systems will provide the reliability in long term, day-to-day operation that is a vital factor with any shipboard equipment.
Operation and maintenance

Any system that is going to be installed onboard a ship must be easy to operate and maintain. The crew will have to be trained to use the system safely and to carry out basic maintenance. The easier it is to operate and maintain the better. Training should be provided by the companies that are developing the systems. The cost of and ease of supply of spares should also be taken into consideration. Another factor to be into account is the
10

Class approval
The fitting/retrofitting of these systems must be approved by Class. Class societies will pay particular attention to the safety critical aspects of the system and should be consulted during the design phase of the installation process. but requires further investigation and obviously an agreement with the major oil-exporting countries.
Sealed ballast water systems

The Convention does not apply to ships with sealed ballast water tanks. The idea is that the ballast tanks would be sealed with a small amount of water in them, which could then be transferred between tanks as required to adjust the ships trim. Obviously there are safety considerations and any such arrangement would have to be approved by the classification societies and comply with ship construction regulations. This option is most suitable for ships that only use ballast water for trim.
Alternative ballast water management options

The principal methods stipulated in the IMO Ballast Water Management Convention for preventing the transport of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens around the world in ballast water were explained on pages 4 and 5. However, the convention may allow other methods of ballast water management provided that they afford the same level of protection.
Naval architecture solutions

Ship design and construction solutions could be achieved by modifying existing ships or by incorporating in new ships. One such proposaluses dynamic water pressure from the bow to pump exchange ballast water while the ship is underway. Ballast tanks remain full throughout the process so structural and stability problems are apparently avoided. Another design, which has been tested by ClassNK is the non-ballast water vessel or NOBS which, through changing the hull form, precludes the need for ballast to be carried. The NOBS hull form is shown below.
Freshwater ballast
Ships loading at ports in major oil-exporting countries could provide an inexpensive source of freshwater for irrigation and industrial use by carrying freshwater ballast from the discharge ports and pumping it ashore as the cargo is loaded. This would appear to be a viable option
11

Sediments
When a ship takes on ballast water in a shallow area sediments containing marine organisms may also be pumped into the ballast tanks. These sediments accumulate in the ballast tanks and may provide a habitat in which organisms can survive and reproduce. This could potentially lead to the release of the same invasive species at multiple ports. Countries that are party to the Ballast Water Management Convention are required to ensure that adequate sediment reception facilities are provided in the ports and terminals where cleaning or repair of ballast tanks occurs. These reception facilities are intended to provide a safe disposal of sediments and operate without causing undue delay to ships. The Convention also includes regulations for sediment management onboard ships. All ships will be required to remove and dispose of sediments from ballast tanks in accordance with the provisions of the ships Ballast Water Management Plan. In addition, ships constructed from 2009 should be designed and constructed to minimise the uptake and entrapment of sediments, facilitate removal of sediments and provide safe access to allow for sediment removal and sampling. The obvious way to avoid the potential problems caused by sediments in ballast tanks is to limit their uptake and accumulation. This can be done without installing any additional equipment by: limiting the quantity of ballast water that is taken onboard in shallow areas, as far as this is practical and safe exchanging ballast water taken on in shallow areas as soon as possible before sediments have time to accumulate flushing the ballast tanks regularly using clean deep water manually hosing and removing sediment from ballast tanks wherever possible inspecting ballast tanks regularly. in ballast tanks not only reduces the risk of transferring invasive species, but it may also allow a ship to load more cargo, reduce fuel consumption, prolong the life of tank coatings and reduce corrosion, all of which are a benefit to the ship owner. In addition, many of the ballast water management systems that are being developed to comply with the IMO performance standards include a mechanical treatment stage some form of filtration or separation (see page 5). It may be the case that equipment installed now to reduce the amount of sediment can be modified or added to at a later date in order to comply with the IMO performance standards.
Shore-based reception facilities

All the methods of ballast water management discussed elsewhere in this special edition have been shipboard solutions. A more straightforward solution for ship operators would be to discharge ballast water to a shore reception facility that is designed in accordance with IMO guidelines. Ships that are able to do this will not have to comply with the exchange and performance standards. One suggestion is that it would be more practical and cost-effective to build large reception facilities in each port than to try and install a ballast water management system onboard each ship. The advantages are that the potential problems of a shipboard ballast water management system will be avoided, but in practice there would also be a number of disadvantages with this option. Ships will have to pay to discharge ballast water and would have to rely upon the availability of shore based reception facilities, which may vary from port to port. Ships might have to wait for facilities to become available, which could lead to port congestion and delays. It might not be feasible to build facilities large enough to cope with the quantity of ballast water that is discharged at major ports, and smaller ports might not have the resources. Loading and discharging plans would have to be timed to fit with the de-ballasting sequence, which may not be feasible via shore facilities. Although shore-based reception facilities are unlikely to become widely available, a number of ports, such as San Francisco in the USA, have declared an intention to build them. Unless a ship is on a regular trade between specified ports with reception facilities, a shipboard ballast water management system will almost certainly be required.
There is also the option of installing additional equipment to reduce the amount of sediment that is taken onboard with ballast water. Equipment has already been developed which can significantly reduce the amount of sediment. Some ship owners are opting to install equipment on new buildings now because reducing the amount of sediment
12

Interpretation, Application and Enforcement
The Ballast Water Management Convention is intended to be a mandatory international legal regime to regulate and control ballast water. However, there are already a number of potential problems and concerns over how it will be interpreted, applied and enforced by flag and port States around the world. The Convention stipulates that any violation of its requirements within the jurisdiction of a ratifying State is prohibited, and that sanctions should be established under the law of the State which are adequate in severity to discourage violations. In practice this means that individual countries will interpret the regulations and decide what level of sanctions to impose if a ship does not comply with them. The level of sanctions are likely to vary widely around the world. In the event of a violation, the State where the incident occurs can either take proceedings in accordance with its own law or provide the relevant information and evidence to the flag State of the ship so that proceedings can be taken in accordance with flag State law. However, it is likely that most prosecutions for violation of the Convention will take place in the country where it occurs. In addition the authorities in the country where the incident occurs can take steps to warn, detain or exclude the ship. it. If a detailed inspection is carried out, the inspectors will not allow the ship to discharge any ballast water until it is confirmed that there is no threat to the environment, human health, property or resources.
Sampling
Routine sampling may be carried out by the appropriate authorities when a ship visits port to ensure that the ballast water is within the specifications required by the Convention. The IMO Guidelines for Ballast Water Sampling (G2 Guidelines) outline the procedures to be undertaken when sampling for the purpose of determining compliance of water treated by ballast water exchange and treatment. The guidelines recommend that samples be taken via the ballast discharge line, as near to the point of discharge as practicable, for the best representative sample. Samples should also be representative of the whole discharge and not just one tank. Alternatively sampling may be via sounding/air pipes, or manholes, or from pumps. Prior to testing for compliance with the D-2 standard, it is recommended that, as a first step, an indicative analysis of ballast water discharge may be undertaken to establish whether a ship is potentially compliant or non-compliant. This will allow the authorities to take immediate steps to mitigate the potentially harmful effect of ballast discharge whilst further sampling takes place. The Convention also states that time taken for analysing the samples is not to be used as a basis for unduly delaying the operation, movement or departure of the ship. If the sampling leads to results indicating that the ship poses a threat to the environment, human health, property or resources, then the ship will be prohibited from discharging ballast water until the threat is removed. At present introducing a practicable, valid sampling regime is proving something of a hurdle for the authorities as significant amounts of water (tonnes) are required to be sampled. Considerable effort is being directed towards sampling methodology and laboratories in the USA.
Inspection
Ships visiting ports in countries that have ratified the Convention will be subject to inspections to ensure that proper ballast water management is taking place. Any ship which is required to comply with the Convention can be subject to an inspection. Any inspection should initially be limited to confirming the ship has a valid Convention certificate inspecting the Ballast Water Record Book sampling the ships ballast water.
Interpretation
One of the major concerns about the introduction of the Ballast Water Management Convention is that it may be interpreted, applied and enforced differently between jurisdictions. The key to the success of IMO conventions has been that member states have interpreted, applied
However, a routine inspection may become a detailed inspection if a ship does not have a valid certificate or there are clear grounds for believing that the condition of the ship or its equipment does not correspond with its certificate, or the master or crew are not familiar with the ballast water management plan, or have not implemented
13

and enforced convention requirements in a uniform manner. If this is not the case with the Ballast Water Management Convention and member states adopt a unilateral approach, then ships could potentially be faced with different rules and regulations in different jurisdictions, which could make compliance extremely difficult or perhaps even impossible. National and local regulations are already in place in some jurisdictions and although the majority are consistent with the Convention, some differ markedly. The ongoing delays in the entry into force of the convention can only exacerbate the current situation. Another concern is that the Convention could potentially be manipulated to suit the needs or objectives of individual people, local authorities, ports or countries. The criminalisation of seafarers for alleged pollution incidents creates a situation where there appears to be a tendency to consider a ship is guilty until proven innocent.
What Next?
Although the 2016 deadline appears to be a long way off Members would be prudent to begin preparations for the identification and installation of suitable equipment on their vessels immediately, if they have not already done so. Planning a phased installation across a fleet will enable the cost to be spread over several years and ensure that Members technical department is not faced with a capital intensive, time constrained, project in the run up to the implementation date. Depending on the outcome of the latest consultation process in the USA it may be that new vessels trading to USA will have to comply with the treatment standard as early as 2012. An industry news item will be posted on our website when the results of the consultation process in the USA are known. Below is appended a list of approvals granted by IMO to August 2011.
Detention
The Convention does stipulate that all possible efforts shall be made to avoid a ship being unduly detained or delayed and that, when a ship is unduly detained or delayed, it should be entitled to compensation for any loss or damage suffered. Unfortunately the Convention does not define what constitutes an undue detention or delay and this may very much depend upon the view of the local authorities that detained the ship and from which the ship would probably be seeking compensation. Ships could potentially encounter problems if they berth on arrival and the local authorities attend to carry out a normal inspection and take samples. As mentioned above, time for analysing samples is not to be used as a basis for unduly delaying the operation, movement or departure of the ship. But, if the initial analysis results indicate that the ship poses a threat, then the authorities will prohibit the ship from discharging ballast water until the threat is removed. In this case the ship will have no option but to wait for the full analysis results before they can start cargo or ballast operations. In a case where a ship is permitted to start cargo or ballast operations, but at a later date the analysis results are obtained and indicate that the ballast water does pose a threat, sanctions could be imposed against the ship.
14

LP Briefing - Ballast Water Management

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

LP Briefing - Ballast Water Management

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

LOSS PREVENTION BRIEFING FOR NORTH MEMBERS

SHIPS / FEBRUARY 2012

Ballast Water Management

Ballast Water and its Threat to the Worlds Oceans

Ballast Water Management

North American Jellyfish

Background to the Convention

Ballast Water Management

Who will the Convention apply to?

Ballast water management standards

Ballast water exchange standard

Ballast Water Management

Timetable for compliance

Ballast Capacity From 1500 to 5000m

Comply with exchange standards (Reg D-1) Until January 2014

Comply with performance standards (Reg D-2) From January 2014

Before January 2009

< 1500m >5000m Until January 2016 From January 2016

< 5000m < 5000m >5000m >5000m

Until January 2012

From January 2012 From January 2010

Until January 2016

From January 2016 From January 2012

Ballast Water Management

Survey and certification requirements

Ballast water record book

Alternative National Regulations

Ballast Water Management

Ballast Water Exchange Methods

Pump-through or flow-through exchange

Practical problems of compliance

Ballast Water Management

Responsibility of the master

Ballast Water Management

Toxicogenic Vibrio cholerae (O1 and O139): less than

The IMO has developed guidelines Guidelines for

Ballast Water Management

Ballast Water Management

Figure 1: Vessels Applying the D-2 Standard

Operation and maintenance

Ballast Water Management

Sealed ballast water systems

Alternative ballast water management options

Naval architecture solutions

Ballast Water Management

Shore-based reception facilities

Ballast Water Management

Ballast Water Management

Das könnte Ihnen auch gefallen