[Updated] Panama Prepares Accession to Ballast Water Convention

Panama has announced that it has begun the process of accession to the Ballast Water Management (BWM) Convention

 

Seatrade Maritime News reports the process of enacting the required laws is expected to take two to three months.

 

Panama's formal accession will definitely see the Convention enter into force internationally after 12 months.

 

“The [shipping] industry needs some certainty of the entry into force of the BWM Convention,” said Fernando Solorzano of the Panama Ship Registry.

 

Earlier this month, the IMO announced that, while now very close, the tonnage criteria for the BWM Convention to enter into force had not been met despite recent accessions.

 

Forty-seven countries have now ratified the convention, substantially more than the 30 required, but their combined fleets comprise, at most, 34.56 percent of global tonnage, with 35 percent required for entry into force.

 

Shipowners have been encouraged to install the necessary equipment and establish operational procedures in accordance with IMO regulations and standards, so that the BWM Convention can be implemented rapidly and effectively upon entry into force. Amendments to the Convention, to be implemented after it enters into force, will be considered at the next meeting of the Marine Environment Protection Committee, in April 2016. 

 

Thomas Bayer, Sales Director - BALPURE BWT for De Nora Water Technologies, says: “With some accommodations regarding the retrofit timeline that IMO has provided, I think there is a very high chance that now Panama, as well as a few other countries, will finally sign up for the IMO convention. Even though no shipowner likes added regulations, as it is added cost, there is no value for shipowners in dragging out the uncertainty about when they will have to install equipment. With U.S. Coast Guard regulations moving ahead, there is no benefit for operators if IMO is further delayed.”

 

Jad Mouawad of Mouawad Consulting says shipowners should take the news about Panama seriously and start planning “yesterday.”

 

Technicalities in the wording of the convention’s implementation dates mean it is necessary to change it after it has entered into force, but it is probably too late for MEPC 69, so most probably MEPC 70, says Mouawad. “These changes won’t solve the underlying problems with the implementation of the Convention: the lack of competence and knowledge on how to install and operate equipment correctly,” says Mouawad.

 

“The only solution to that which is practical is that Port State Controls are not very strict in the first years after entry into force. Class societies must train their surveyors to do a proper job when commissioning systems, as they will be the first line of defence for proper implementation (today they are not), and MEPC must start giving replies to practical questions when they occur. For example, treatment of water during stripping operations, which applies to a very large number of ships, and where MEPC has so far failed to give guidance on how to do it.”

 

The other major problem is the U.S. Coast Guard and EPA regulations, says Mouawad. Shipowners that have trades with the U.S. (especially the many shipowners that have installed UV-based systems), are currently left in doubt about their choice of system. “It is not fair,” says Mouawad. “Almost 50 percent of the ships worldwide must use UV and the decision of the U.S. Coast Guard has left them with no choices whatsoever.

 

“Even UV-based system makers claiming to manage the U.S. Coast Guard requirements are silent on the UV transmittance they can operate in which makes me believe that we are talking about 60 percent and upwards. This number is high and practically useless to very many ships.”

 

The challenge that regulators seem to forget is not whether a system can meet the discharge standards, but whether it does so onboard ships, he says. “We don’t want ballast water management; we want ballast water management on board ships. More stringent discharge standards, complex equipment, wrong installations, wrong operations make ballast water management onboard ships impossible.”