1

Brian ElliottSenior Project Officer for Environmental Protection

Developments in the Ballast Water Convention and its implications

INTERTANKO Lunchtime Seminar

London 10th October 2012

2

Ballast Water Convention and its implications

1. BWM Convention;

2. Timeline;

3. Challenges;

4. PSC and Sampling;

5. Post BLG 16;

6. MEPC 64;

7. Issues for the Ship owner; and

8. The Future.

3

The Agency's main objective:

“to provide technical and scientific assistance to the European Commission and Member States in the proper development and implementation of EU legislation on maritime safety, pollution by ships and security on board ships”

“Improve cooperation with, and between, Member States in all key areas”

“To foster technical cooperation and development and disseminate best practice in the Member States”

Ballast Water Exchange Standard- D1 Interim

4

Ballast Water Performance Standard- D2

5

How to achieve the performance standard?Type Approval

6

7

Timeline for Application of D1 and D2 Standards

8

Initial Challenges

• Large amount of ballast: very small D-2 Standard;• Biological sampling for PSC – first time;• Concerns;

• Uncertainty over performance of expensive new

equipment; • “Systems won’t deal with challenge or work in all environments”;

• Pure statistics looking for 100% surety;• Many samples of large volumes;

• Statistical response is burdensome/delay; • No guidance for PSC? How are they to sample?;• Want one test for PSC – legislative difficulties; • Bottleneck for fitting and retrofitting;

9

Initial Response

• •Introduction of:

• “Representativeness”;• Indicative/Detailed Sampling;• Gross non-compliance testing;

•Sampling methods: • developed through controlled research; • implications moving from type approval to testing for compliance;• Standardisation – Thresholds, confidence limits etc.

10

Initial Response 2

• Freedom of Port States;• Suite of Tests – Harmonisation;

•Formation of PSC Guidance; • Preparing for PSC; • Early – Paris MoU;

• Development of additional sampling Guidelines by CG;

“Guidance on ballast water sampling and analysis for compliance with the BWM Convention”

• A list of methodologies (to become standardised); • Pros and Cons of each methodology; • Submitted to BLG 16• Regular reviews of BWMS availability, including fitting.

11

Challenges raised at BLG 17

• Sampling for enforcement too robust;• G8 sampling includes;

• Averaging;• Acceptance of failed tests;

• Worries that type approval is not robust enough to:• Work in all environments;

• G8 has vague requirements; • Systems will not stand up to compliance sampling;

• Not enough systems to meet demand; • Not enough dry docks to facilitate fitting;• Calls for G-8 Guidelines on Type Approval should be reopened;

12

MEPC 64 • MEPC 64 – to look at whether G-8 should be reopened; • Listened to the concerns raised by industry;

• ICS paper and Liberia et al paper;• Big Debate; • IMO Member State diverse range of views;

• Opening G-8 to doing nothing;• Varying views on how to proceed;

• Varying viewpoints on whether there is a problem;• Lack of scientific evidence – need for case studies from the industry;

13

Type Approval • Misunderstanding; 1.5 .......Approval of a system is intended to screen-out management systems that would fail to meet the standards prescribed in regulation D-2 of the Convention. Approval of a system, however, does not ensure that a given system will work on all vessels or in all situations. To satisfy the Convention, a discharge must comply with the D-2 standard throughout the life of the vessel.

• Definition: official confirmation from a government or other body that a manufactured item meets required specifications.

• Approval installation on their own flag; • Approved systems do work biologically to the conditions they are tested in; • Never have a system that will work in extreme physical conditions such as the Yangtze, Mississippi or Paraguay; • New US Requirements: re-evaluation of type approvals for their flag and other ships visiting the US (Alternate Management Systems).

14

• MEPC 64 decided to: • Start work (Correspondance Group) to see if an Assembly resolution can be drawn up, focussing on existing vessels and potentially removing the retrospectivity of the Convention (may be Vienna Convention Issues); • Recommend that G-8 should not be reopened at the present time (noted in plenary after some disagreement);• Asked NACE and IPPIC to provide joint guidance on corrosion issues;• Called for further documented evidence of problems;

• Text and evidence calls for BLG 17

15

MEPC 64

• Provided vehicles for addressing the industries concerns;

• Resolution MEPC. 175(58)“Information reporting on Type approved ballast

water management systems”• Increases information on the Type Approval made public;

• Amendments to Circular BWM 2/Circular 28“Guidance for Administrations on the type approval process for ballast water management systems in

accordance with Guidelines (G8)”• Salinity, temperature sediment load, flow rate, harmonisation test facilities etc.

16

Why G-8 Cannot be changed

• Legal problems – States have placed Convention and Guidelines into law;• Will instantly form a two tier approval system for BWMS;• Will slow down the ratification rate;• Will deter further ratification; • May mean that certain approved BWMS may drop out of the market as capital investment dries up;

• Easier to change a circular as best practice developes;

17

EMSA’s Work in this Area

• PSC Guidance for Ballast Water; • Developing a sampling protocol and threshold for a “Gross non compliance” test;• Relationship between EC Biocide Regulations and type approval requirements for systems using active substances at IMO. • Ballast Water Action Programme;

• Risk assessment in implementation; • Information dissemination between EU Member States; • Interim guidance to reduce the risk of non-indigenous species movement through ballast water within the OSPAR Region.

18

EMSA’s Future

• EMSA Founding Regulations;• Established by Regulation (EC) No 1406/2002;• Prestige and Erica;• Subsequent amendments have refined and enlarged its mandate;

• 2012 Revision; • Response to oil pollution caused by oil and gas intallations; • Assist EC and EU MS;• Core and Ancillary Tasks;

• New Chief Executive: Markku Mylly;• New Head of Unit Environmental Protection;

• CO2 and EEDI; • LNG;• Ballast Water; • Ship Recycling;• Port Waste;

Issues for the Ship Owner • Be aware of application date for vessels; • Start investigating systems now:

– Systems available, which is best for your ships;• Likely use of the vessel, BW volume, discharge rate;

– Operational Costs;– Newbuild or retrofit;– Footprint: container or integral fitting; – Power requirements;– How to fit;– Visit installed systems,

• Don’t want to commit now – contract options for when you do;

• Testing on fitting and at regular intervals;• Ballast Water Management Plan Approval;

19

The Future• There is still uncertainty and misunderstanding over

the relationship between Indicative Analysis, Detailed Analysis and representative sampling;

• Still confusion, mis-interpretation and understanding of sampling, analysis, representative etc. etc.

• Ratification near? Need 6-7% Close?• Real problem – issue with G8 being dealt with – need

papers for BLG 17? • Start looking at this issue now – don’t get caught out

by quick ratification, logistical issues or the present negativity.

20

21

Thank you

Brian.Elliott@emsa.europa.euwww.emsa.europa.eu

Ballast water sampling with thanks to Mahle and GoConsult