LP Briefing - Ballast Water Management

7/29/2019 LP Briefing - Ballast Water Management

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/lp-briefing-ballast-water-management 1/14

LOSS PREVENTION BRIEFING FOR NORTH MEMBERS SHIPS / FEBRUARY 2012

North of England P&I Association. The Quayside, Newcastle upon Tyne, NE1 3DU, UK

Telephone: +44 191 2325221 Facsimile: +44 191 261 0540 Email: [email protected] www.nepia.com

Copyright ©North of England P&I Association Limited 2012

1

Ballast Water Management

ContentsBallast Water and its Threat to the World’s 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

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

Ballast Water and its Threat

to the World’s 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 usedsolid 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.







2

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 thanUS$1 billion.

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 byhumans, can cause severe illness and death. As a result

many fisheries have closed with significant economic

losses.

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.

North American Jellyfish

North American Jellyfish in the

Black, Azov and Caspian Seas

reproduce rapidly by feedingexcessively 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

ConventionIn 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

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.







3


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 some26.46% 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.

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 shipsand 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 ship’s ballast tanks. For ships

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 orrisk 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 waterat 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.







4

Ballast water performance

standards

The ballast water performance standards require thatships 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, dependingon 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 BallastCapacity

Comply with

exchangestandards

(Reg D-1)

Comply with

performance standards

(Reg D-2)

Before January 2009

From 1500 to

5000m³Until January 2014 From January 2014

< 1500m³

>5000m³Until January 2016 From January 2016

January 2009 – January

2010< 5000m³ Until January 2012 From January 2012

After January 2010* < 5000m³ From January 2010January 2010 - January

2012>5000m³ Until January 2016 From January 2016

After January 2012 >5000m³ From January 2012

*At MEPC 58 discussion on the availability of equipment to meet the compliance dates for vessels constructed during 2010concluded without the granting of a period of grace. It is now the view that there are sufficient ballast water treatmenttechnologies available to enable the compliance dates to be met.







5

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 thenecessary 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.

The plan will obviously have to be drawn up specifically foreach 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

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 keptonboard 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

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 ship’s construction and equipment, and

management system, comply with the Convention

requirements. All ships over 400 GT will require an

International Ballast Water Management Certificate andwill 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.

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.

Alternative National

RegulationsDespite 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







6

Convention but others

impose different and often

more stringent requirements

on ships. Inevitably this

leads to confusion amongstowners, 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. Inaddition, 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 ship’s

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 ship’s ballast water tanks atsea 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 volumeof 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.







7

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 shouldperform 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.

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.

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

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.

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 ship’s 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 master’s decision not to comply must always be

carefully considered since the local authorities at the

ship’s next port of call may take the view that it was not

reasonable.







8

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 eitherone 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 ballastwater.

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 ship’s flag State.

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

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 thanone 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 inorder 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 IMO’s 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 systemsapproved.

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.

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 vessel’s design and trade. Any systems

that do not have sufficient pumping capacity need not be

considered.







9

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/wherea 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 thesystem 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 ship’s generators.

Time constraints

A ballast water management system must be able to

comply with the performance standards at the pumping

capacity of a ship’s 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.







10

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 thaninstalling 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 beduring 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.

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 ballastwater.

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

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, itremains 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.

Figure 1: Vessels Applying the D-2 Standard







11

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 beconsulted during the design phase of the installation

process.

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 theworld 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.

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

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 ship’s 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.

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.







12

Sediments

When a ship takes on

ballast water in a

shallow area sedimentscontaining 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 ballasttanks 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 ship’s 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 sedimentremoval 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.

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

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 watermanagement 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 shipboardsolutions. 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 bea 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 befeasible 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.







13

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 severityto 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 theConvention 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.

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 initiallybe limited to

• confirming the ship has a valid Convention certificate

• inspecting the Ballast Water Record Book

• sampling the ship’s ballast water.

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

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 theballast 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 dischargewhilst 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 samplingregime 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.

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







14

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 withdifferent 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’.

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 doesnot 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 authoritieswill 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.

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

Member’s 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.

LP Briefing - Ballast Water Management

Documents

Transcript of LP Briefing - Ballast Water Management