Coast Guard Publishes Draft Ballast Water Regulations

The U.S. Coast Guard is about to publish proposed regulations pertaining to ballast water handling in U.S. waters.  The official publication happens tomorrow, but the rule can be downloaded here (it is 180 pages, so be warned before printing).  This action is entitled a Notice of Proposed Rule Making or NPRM.

Highlights:

This NPRM would require that all vessels that operate in U.S. waters, are bound for ports or places in the U.S.,and are equipped with ballast tanks, install and operate a Coast Guard approved ballast water management system (BWMS) before discharging ballast water into U.S. waters. This would include vessels bound for offshore ports or places.

During the phase-in period for the phase-one standard, ballast water exchange (BWE) would remain as a ballast water management (BWM) option for vessels not yet required to meet the BWDS. At the end of the phase-one phase-in schedule, the option of using BWE would be eliminated. From that date forward, all vessels would be required to manage their ballast water through a Coast Guard approved BWMS and meet either the proposed phase-one or phase-two discharge standard, as applicable, or retain their ballast water onboard.

The Coast Guard acknowledges that testing is not yet technologically feasible and that Phase II is 1000 times more stringent than Phase I.  Hence, it is temporally phasing the implementation to allow for testing to become more technologically practical.

There has been much criticism over the Coast Guard's handling of its authority to deal with invasive species in ballast waters, particularly in the Great Lakes.  See my posts here, here, here.

Comments:

To submit your comment online, go to http://www.regulations.gov and click on the "submit a comment" box, which will then become highlighted in blue. Insert “USCG-2001-10486” in the Keyword box, click"Search", and then click on the balloon shape in the Actions column.

Comments

[Don Mitchel]

Dear Sirs, It is important to remember that when addressing the Coast Guard about ballast water , that although sadly the military has found it necessary to intervene to protect America’s water from invasive species, human bacterial pathogens and virus being dumped in our water by domestic and international private enterprise, our country is a democracy. The largest elected legislative voice of the people has already spoken with overwhelming resolve. It was because one Senator, Senator Boxer believes that control of pathogens in water distributed by ballast dumping, capable of spreading to all Americans was a states rights issue. She did not want Federal policy to over ride her states rights. To understand her position you have to look at the time line for new standards that were passed with H.R.2830 vs. her states laws. As no action was taken by the Senate in 2008 and it is now close to 2010 her objections should have less relevance. To believe that because the Coast Guard is asking for public opinion through their forum that their decisions will reflect the wish’s of the American people is to not understand what our democracy is or should be.
Sincerely,
Don Mitchel

[Don Mitchel]

Dear Sir, Having read dialog from discussion by the house of representatives the day before h.r.3619 passed, it is a bad day for our country when they describe how ballast water was omitted from this bill because they were cognizant, that in the previous Congress the Senate was not able to address ballast water. Scientist know that new microbes will be released from Arctic ice melting and from mining and exploration in the deep Sea Bed, along with the new technologies able to create designer algae s capable of acting as hosts to pathogens and virus. Still our politicians do not mention this as a human health problem. It has been reported that the Senate is going to address the Law of the Sea Treaty soon. To not address these issues before they consider ratification will be locking our country in an agreement that will not protect our health and environment from destruction in the coming generations
FROM the web site of the house- " Last year, I worked closely with Chairman Oberstar to include a title on Ballast Water Management in the Coast Guard bill, which would have created a uniform national standard for ballast water treatment. The goal was to have no living organisms in ballast water discharged by ships after 2013.
Although I would have liked this bill to once again include a provision on ballast water management, I am cognizant that this provision may be one of the reasons this bill has been held up in the Senate."

Please let the Coast Guard know that although we are happy with their interest in ballast dumping, not to portray their forum as being representative of what the American people want. The will of the American people can only be expressed in our democracy through legislative efforts by our elected officials.
Sincerely,
Don Mitchel