International Chamber of Shipping: UN ballast water rule wastes billions
Time：2014-10-14
Browse：100
At the heart of the problem, says ICS, the big shipowners` group, is that owners of 70,000 ships will be expected to invest US$100 billion in new ballast water treatment systems before the rule is expected to come into force in 2016.
ICS said the big problem is that the equipment approval process that would have owners install gear only to have it judged substandard or face fines for not having it ready.
Owners and shipmanagers also fear the varying stringencies of various ballast water Port State Control inspection regimes, and the absence of any "grand fathering" clause that would allow existing equipment already installed or about to be fitted.
With other industry associations, ICS has submitted its documentary plea ahead of this week`s IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC) meeting in London from October 13 - 17, reported London`s Tanker Operator.
This takes the form of a committee resolution of the UN`s International Maritime Organisation, which would serve as a "gentlemen`s agreement" to grandfather in equipment installed, or contracted to be installed today.
At issue is the transport of ballast water from one region of the world and its discharge in another without killing the "invasive species" it might contain, and at the same time, without the poisons polluting, host waters and harming native aquatic life.
ICS believes there is now greater understanding of the industry`s concern that new equipment that had been type-approved in accordance under old IMO standards, might be regarded as non-compliant under the new rules.
"There was growing recognition that it was unreasonable to expect shipowners to invest millions of dollars without certainty that the equipment would not have to be replaced," said the ICS.
At first ICS was pleased when Canada had devised a compromise, but it did nothing to address the industry`s concern and would make implementation even more complex.
Simply to define and agree go a less stringent ballast discharge standard, known as an "accidence", could take several years of discussion at IMO, the ICS warned.