Ballast water regulations and the move toward concentration‐based numeric discharge limits

Abstract

Ballast water from shipping is a principal source for the introduction of nonindigenous species. As a result, numerous government bodies have adopted various ballast water management practices and discharge standards to slow or eliminate the future introduction and dispersal of these nonindigenous species. For researchers studying ballast water issues, understanding the regulatory framework is helpful to define the scope of research needed by policy makers to develop effective regulations. However, for most scientists, this information is difficult to obtain because it is outside the standard scientific literature and often difficult to interpret. This paper provides a brief review of the regulatory framework directed toward scientists studying ballast water and aquatic invasive species issues. We describe different approaches to ballast water management in international, U.S. federal and state, and domestic ballast water regulation. Specifically, we discuss standards established by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), the U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and individual states in the United States including California, New York, and Minnesota. Additionally, outside the United States, countries such as Australia, Canada, and New Zealand have well-established domestic ballast water regulatory regimes. Different approaches to regulation have recently resulted in variations between numeric concentration-based ballast water discharge limits, particularly in the United States, as well as reliance on use of ballast water exchange pending development and adoption of rigorous science-based discharge standards. To date, numeric concentration-based discharge limits have not generally been based upon a thorough application of risk-assessment methodologies. Regulators, making decisions based on the available information and methodologies before them, have consequently established varying standards, or not established standards at all. The review and refinement of ballast water discharge standards by regulatory agencies will benefit from activity by the scientific community to improve and develop more precise risk-assessment methodologies.

Ballast water management in Canada: A historical perspective and implications for the future

“…As of 6 January 2015, 43 States representing 32.54% of the world shipping tonnage have ratified the BWMC [39]. Although Canada ratified in April 2010, the USA has not yet ratified the BWMC, and is considered unlikely to do so despite the fact that they already established concentration-based ballast water discharge limits in 2012, equivalent to those proposed by the IMO [1].…”

Four routes to better maritime governance

“…The United States has gone further. It requires that any foreign ballast water dumped in its waters by commercial vessels must meet the IMO standards, but coastal states may set controls, too 5 . California has proposed the most stringent limit: no detectable living organisms more than 50 micrometres across.…”

Marine invasive species in the Arctic

“…However, not until 12 months after 30+ maritime countries, representing 35% of the global shipping merchant tonnage, ratify the convention can it enter into force as an international treaty (Albert et al 2013). Although the IMO began seeking international protections against ballast water-borne invasions in the 1980s ), it was not until 2004 that numerical discharge standards were considered internationally (i.e., specific concentrations of viable biotic propagules of 3 size classes: >50um minimum dimension, >10um and <50um minimum dimension, and certain indicator microbes; Albert 2013).…”

“…Although the IMO began seeking international protections against ballast water-borne invasions in the 1980s ), it was not until 2004 that numerical discharge standards were considered internationally (i.e., specific concentrations of viable biotic propagules of 3 size classes: >50um minimum dimension, >10um and <50um minimum dimension, and certain indicator microbes; Albert 2013). Currently, the United States via the U.S. Coast Guard and U.S. Environmental Protection Agency have assumed the BWM Convention's socalled "D-2 Ballast Water Performance Standards" as the basis for ballast water management and discharge (see Albert 2013 for a more detailed analysis of international BW regulations).…”