Don Pedro's Ballast Water Convention Summary

Please note : Every link on this page opens in a new window. If your "Pop-up killer" is too efficient it can also stop new windows. When this happens, please press "Ctrl" and click on the link you want.

The International Convention for the Control and Management of Ships Ballast Water and Sediments was adopted in London on Feb. 13, 2004.

Entry into Force

12 months after ratification by 30 states representing 35% of world merchant shipping tonnage. Summary of Status (= signatures) of the coming Ballast Convention.

In 2007 it was decided by IMO to postpone the coming into force until 2011 because the convention wasn't enforceable. On July 17, 2009, IMO's Marine Environment Protection Committee ( MEPC59 ) decided that sufficient technologies were available for ships constructed in 2010 and therefore no changes to the Assembly Resolution A.1005(25) were needed. This means the implementation of the International Ballast Water Management Convention will not be further delayed.

Object

To prevent, minimize, and ultimately eliminate the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens through the control and management of ships' ballast water and sediments.

Parties (Port or flag state administrations) are given the right to take more stringent measures than prescribed by the convention when consistent with international law.

Reception Facilities

Ports and terminals where cleaning or repair of ballast tanks occur will have adequate reception facilities to receive sediments.

Survey, Certification, and Inspection

Ships are required to be surveyed and certified, and may be inspected by Port State Control officers and/or surveyors who can:
- inspect the Ballast Water Record Book, and/or
- sample the ballast water.
The ship can be prevented from discharging its ballast if it's deemed to present a threat to the environment, without the ship thereby being unduly detained or delayed.

Requirements

Ships are required to have onboard and implement a Ballast Water Management Plan approved by the Administration.

Whenever possible, all ships using ballast water exchange, should do so at least 200 nautical miles from nearest land in water at least 200 metres deep. The absolute minimum being 50 nautical miles. Special areas designed for ballast water exchange may be provided.

Get convention text from IMO. The Ballast Water Convention is available in

( Chinese ) from Xu Xiaoman.

Additional ballast water information / Up-dates:

(Capt. Don Pedro): One can draw a conclusion from the convention text, that water tanks segregated from the sea, i.e. fresh water and permanent ballast water tanks not in direct contact - via pipe lines and valves - with the sea, are not included in the ballast convention. You should, however, keep a record on when and where the permanent ballast tanks have been filled - just in case you have to discharge them by any reason.

Ship Ballast Water Management Worldwide Updates
Starting November 01, 2009 the International Ballast Water Management rules are applied also in the Arabian Gulf.
The state of Victoria in Australia brought its Domestic Ballast Water Policy into force on July 01, 2004. Other Australian States and Territories have some protection from International ballast water through Federal legislation since July 01, 2001. See overview of Ballast Water Management in Australia.

The controls are based on the requirement that the Master must obtain written permission from Australian quarantine officer before discharging ballast water in any Australian port.
US Coast Guard has produced a report "Ballast Water Management for the Control of Aquatic Nuisance Species in the Waters of the US". It is available from IMO as "Navigation and Vessel Inspection Circular No. 07-04, CH-1". The report is in pdf-format, 80 pages, 1.44 MB. If your computer doesn't support the Acrobat/pdf reader you can download Adobe Reader 8.0 for free (128 MB).
According to an US Government Accountability Office Report, ballast water exchange still remains the only practical method of avoiding transporting invasive species from one world region to an other (2005).
On February 18, 2010, a New York ( US ) Appeals Court upheld state regulations requiring ships to replace their ballast water at least 50 nautical miles offshore from its waterways to prevent bringing in dangerous, invasive species saying the federal Clean Water Act permits a state to add conditions to federal vessel discharge permits.

EPA's New Ballast Rules

The rules for other incidental discharges except for ballast ( gray water, deck washings, bilge water, etc. ) are discussed on Ship Emissions.

The state of California (USA) new Ballast Water regulations were enforced starting March 22, 2006

. The new regulations apply to vessels arriving in California carrying ballast water from another port or place in Pacific Coast Region and are in addition to those concerning ports or places outside the region.

Because of the Californian judge's decision (2006) the EPA has developed National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permits under the Clean Water Act for the discharge of pollutants incidental to the normal operations of vessels. This potentially implicates all vessels, both commercial and recreational, that have discharge incidental to their normal operation, such as: deck runoff, gray water, etc. ( Federal Register, June 21, 2007 ).

The California court decision led EPA to prepare their permit system, which was to come into force before Christmas 2008. It's said to concern all vessels, both commercial and recreational greater than 79 feet ( 24 metres ) of length at the waterline. USCG is on their part following their own rules which gives a higher limit for stricter rules of 100 feet ( 30 metres ). The 24 metre rule is same as what MCA, UK uses. The rules will be applicable out to the traditional 3 miles of US territorial waters.

The new ballast water management rules from EPA has come under some criticism with strong suggestions that US government should ratify the International Ballast Convention to get same rules as rest of the world. Together with the new EPA regulation the states around Great Lakes and along St. Lawrence river are implementing their own different rules. As one of the locks is in New York state, that state has come up with some very strict rules. This all leads to a very complicated and contradictory collection of patches of different Ballast Management Control rules.

End of December 2008 EPA opened one of the first US Governmental websites especially for mobile users - http://m.epa.gov/. The new website will cover "Find environmental information by ZIP code" and "EPA news releases" and other information.

To add to all of this US President Bush on Oct. 3, 2008, signed the "Great Lakes Compact" with an effective date of power of Dec. 8, 2008. Main intention with this order is to control the spread on aquatic invasive species in the Great Lakes Area.

On Dec. 19, 2009 The District Court for the Northern District (US) approved to delay the effective date of the Vessel General Permit. New date was set to Feb. 06, 2009. Get more info on EPA website. All vessels - 79 feet or more in length - will be subject to the permit within 3 miles of the US coast, except recreational vessels.

The Ballast Water Regulations for the Great Lakes Seaway System are said to be the most stringent in the world. All ships arriving from beyond the exclusive economic zone are required to exchange their ballast at sea. The article includes further links to ballast water regulations in North America.

Michigan has got a new ballast water control law, which went into effect on Jan. 01, 2007 ( St. Lawrence Seaway ). Under the new law, oceangoing ships must obtain a Ballast Water Control General Permit in order to use Michigan ports in the Great Lakes. Get Michigan's Electronic Ballast Water Management Practices Report Form. When all these latest new rules are added to the patchwork that existed from before, the legal situation is growing extremely confusing.

Minnesota enacted its ballast rules in 2008, giving ships until 2016 to start treating ballast and adopting the less stringent IMO level of treatment. Minnesota's law goes further than Wisconsin's, however, by also applying to Great Lakes freighters that never enter the ocean.

Wisconsin regulators on November 19, 2009, released their final rules for ballast water treatment for ships in the Great Lakes, including changes giving ship owners an extra two years before the regulations take hold. ( same source as above ) These rules come into force during 2014 in the final plan for existing ships, although any new ship must be fitted by 2012. Ship owners must have their Wisconsin permit in hand, before entering Wisconsin waters at the start of the 2010 shipping season in February.

USCG guidelines on "Ballast Water Management" (07/2008) are amended by U.S. Coast Guard on Aug. 27, 2009, proposing national standards for regulating the release in port of ships' ballast water, which can introduce new, sometimes detrimental species to U.S. ecosystems. The limit would initially follow a formula used by the International Maritime Commission ( IMO ). The proposal is to be followed by a 90-day public comment period.

EPA's position about the USCG proposal is, if the Coast Guard and EPA propose different standards, the stronger one would be followed.

A Californian training institute has released software for training crew to handle EPA's Vessel General Permit inspection and reporting requirements.

Canadian Shipping Act ( 2001 - SOR/2006-129 ) [ 11 / 2008 ]: Ballast Water Control and Management Regulations apply to every ship in waters under Canadian jurisdiction ( including Great Lakes ) with a few specific exceptions.

Incoming foreign ships may exchange ballast water in the Laurentian Channel, when due to safety reasons it was not possible to do the exchange at open sea. Get chart of St. Lawrence channel with restricted areas marked.

Brazilian Navy has issued a new regulation regarding deballasting. This has already been sent to IMO and signatory countries. The new rules ( Norman-20 ) demands that any vessel bound to Brazilian ports have a managing plan of ballast water ( PGAL ). This requirement has been in force from June 30th, 2006.

The ballast water management plans should comply with IMO's "Draft Guidelines for ballast water management and the development of ballast water management plans ( G4 )" (Feb. 2005), with a standard format for a ballast water management plan. The document is in PDF format.

One big problem with ratification and implementation of the ballast convention is that in many countries the maritime sector is regulated by one authority, while the environment is overseen by another authority. These can often be both budgetary and otherwise in competition with each other.

Especially are these problems pronounced in Federal / Federated States - like USA, Germany, and Australia - where the Government ( Federal ) have one set of rules and the main authority, while the individual states can in some cases have different rules and the federal and state authorities local agencies are multiplied on state level.

In the Great Lakes, for instance Minnesota ( Duluth ) and then Michigan as well as Ontario ( Canada ) have each different rules. President Obama's new EPA Chief is reconsidering EPAs new rules, so they seem to be in "limbo". Although somebody can risk a fine for not immediately following them (!). The new chief has said "I don't have an answer for you today but I want to you know that's very much on my radar screen".

Links to Ballast Water Management and Invasive Species Control information websites are on Maritime Safety and Security Links page.

For information on Ballast Water Convention and pleasure craft including sailing yachts go to Seafarer's Links.

® Ballast Water Convention Summary