Ballast water crisis abated, debate shifts to EPA

   New York State’s Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) said Thursday it will modify ballast water treatment rules that shipping executives said were unachievable with current technology.
   Had the standards gone into effect next year as originally scheduled, advocates for the industry said ships calling the Port of New York and New Jersey or using the St. Lawrence Seaway would have been subject to fines and citizen lawsuits even though they would not have been able to buy equipment that met the DEC requirements. (For background, see this earlier article in American Shipper.)
   In comments filed this week with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, EPA DEC Commissioner Joseph Martens indicated that New York will pursue a uniform, national ballast water standard that will leave in place the EPA’s current standards in New York for the remainder of EPA’s current Vessel General Permit through December 2013.  
   Ballast water treatment systems are designed to prevent the spread of aquatic invasive species by filtering out and killing marine life in ballast tanks with chemicals or ultraviolet light.
   “New York remains concerned about the introduction and spread of invasive species in the state’s waterways and we hope that a strong national solution can be achieved,” DEC Commissioner Joe Martens said. “At the same time, shipping and maritime activity is critical to New York state and international commerce. A technically feasible national standard which recognizes the critical economic role played by our waterways is the only viable way to address the spread of destructive aquatic invaders through ballast water.”
   Steve Fisher, Executive Director of the American Great Lakes Ports Association, said the decision by the state “effectively eliminates the unworkable ballast water rules” put in place during the administration of former N.Y. Gov. David Paterson. He said by making the change current Gov. Andrew Cuomo was “protecting jobs and supporting the thousands of Americans who make their living in the maritime industry.”
   Fisher said under the old rules, by August 1, 2013, all vessels operating in New York waters would have been required to install environmental technology that can clean or treat ballast water to meet a water quality standard 100 times stronger than standards established by the International Maritime Organization (IMO) in 2004.
   He said no technology exists to meet that requirement nor a requirement that any vessel built after January 2013 install a ballast water treatment system to a level not 100, but 1,000 times stronger than the IMO standard. No technology exists to meet that requirement.”
   But the debate about what is an appropriate ballast water treatment standard is far from over. Instead it has shifted to the federal level, where the EPA has been soliciting comments on proposed vessel general permit standards, for the period December 2013 through December 2017.
   Marteens told the EPA New York still wants tougher standards. He said New York does not believe IMO 02 Discharge Standards proposed by EPA “provide an effective or adequate standard to address the known risks of aquatic invasive species, nor does it reflect best available control technology. Moreover, we believe other aspects of your proposal can and should be strengthened to provide needed protection of the marine environment.”
Marteens proposed adopting a national standard with the following key elements:

• a 100 times IMO discharge standard implemented by June 1, 2016;
• a voluntary discharge standard of 10 times IMO by June 1, 2014;
• grandfather until 2024 vessels deploying 10 times IMO systems prior to June 1, 2014;
• continue to require ballast water ocean exchange and flushing; and
• require the use of any reasonable and effective management practices to limit aquatic invasive introductions prior to 2016.

   A coalition of environmental groups including the National Resources Defense (NRDC), Great Lakes United, Alliance for the Great Lakes, National Wildlife Federation, and Northwest Environmental Advocates called on the EPA to strengthened the proposed permit.  
   “The EPA’s new proposed permit isn’t tough enough to prevent the next harmful invader from slipping into our waters,” said Thom Cmar, attorney with the Natural Resources Defense Council. “The Clean Water Act provides the tools to finally slam the door on invasive species stowing away in vessels’ ballast tanks, but EPA is still not proposing the strong federal standards we need to fully protect the Great Lakes and other economically valuable but vulnerable watersheds throughout the country.”
   The groups assert that the permit still leaves the Great Lakes and other U.S. waters vulnerable to the introduction and spread of invasive species—and does not adhere to the Clean Water Act. The groups are asking the EPA to:

• Adopt a zero-discharge standard for invasive species
• Adopt the most protective technology standards nationwide
• Develop standards for lakers, ships that ply the Great Lakes
• Develop a faster implementation timeline to implement new technology standards

    John Berge, vice president of Pacific Merchant Shipping Association (PMSA) told EPA that its ballast water rules should be consistent and harmonized with those being developed by the U.S. Coast Guard.     
   He said the proposed vessel general permit “correctly adopts the implementation schedule for existing vessels with construction dates prior to January 1, 2012, ” but says “the proposal for installation of treatment technology for newbuilds with construction dates on or after January 1, 2012 is not reflective of the state of existing treatment technology testing and verification and will be impossible to meet for those vessels now under construction or starting construction in the near future.”
   He said the proposal “requires treatment systems to be compliant with the D-2 standard as demonstrated using the ETV testing protocol. To our knowledge, no treatment systems have yet been verified using the ETV protocols and the limited resources available from independent testing facilities suggests that it will take considerable time for treatment systems to demonstrate compliance under the proposed VGP provisions. With the very real
potential for qualifying newbuilds entering service by the end of 2012, it will be impossible for ship owners to determine compliant systems for installation. “
    The U.S. Chamber of Shipping said in comments it is not the unwillingness of vessel owners to purchase and install compliant ballast water treatment systems (BWTS), “but rather the inability to purchase systems that are deemed compliant under the requirements set forth in the proposed VGP (vessel general permit) and expected interim final rule to be issued by the US Coast Guard. Lack of type certifications acceptable to the US government places owners in the unfortunate position of spending millions of dollars on a BWTS that while type certified by another IMO member state, is not recognized as compliant in the US. The US should either recognize other national type certifications or delay US implementation of the requirements until sufficient type certifications are issued and systems are available for purchase.” — Chris Dupin