EPA proposes stricter rules on ballast water
TRAVERSE CITY, Mich. — The Environmental Protection Agency proposed stricter requirements Wednesday for cleaning ballast water that keeps ships upright in rolling seas but enables invasive species to reach U.S. waters, where they have ravaged ecosystems and caused billions of dollars in economic losses.
The new standards would require commercial vessels to install technology strong enough to kill at least some of the fish, mussels and even microorganisms such as viruses that lurk in ballast water before it’s dumped into harbors after ships arrive in port. Environmentalists whose lawsuits forced the EPA to implement rules in the first place said the new proposal is largely inadequate.
More than 180 exotic species have invaded the Great Lakes, about two-thirds of which are believed to have been carried in ballast water. Among them are zebra and quagga mussels, which have spread across most of the lakes and turned up as far away as California. Ballast water also has brought invaders to ocean coasts, including Asian clams in San Francisco Bay and Japanese shore crabs on the Atlantic seaboard.
Ballast water regulation has been debated in Congress for years but no legislation has passed because of disagreements over how strict the cleanliness standards should be.
The EPA refused for years to set rules for ballast water under the Clean Water Act, but the agency was ordered to do so by federal courts after environmental groups sued. The agency issued an industrywide permit in 2008 requiring shippers to exchange ballast water at sea or, if the tanks were empty, rinse them with salt water before entering U.S. territory. Environmentalists sued again, saying the requirement was too weak.
The EPA’s new draft permit lays out live-organism limits similar to those recommended by the International Maritime Organization in 2004, which shipping industry groups have said are achievable. The agency said its standard “is expected to substantially reduce the risk of introduction and establishment” of invasive species.
But environmental groups and some states contend those standards aren’t strong enough. By making those standards the basis of the proposed federal policy, “EPA is shrinking from its duty to make sure U.S. waters are fully protected,” said Thom Cmar, attorney for the Natural Resources Defense Council. “This draft permit is a half-step forward. EPA had an opportunity to solve this problem once and for all but this proposal doesn’t do that.”
The EPA permit would leave in place a patchwork of state policies that the shipping industry says is confusing and unworkable.
In New York, rules scheduled to take effect in 2013 would require limits 100 times stronger than the international ones, while California is phasing in standards 1,000 times tougher. Shippers and officials in those states disagree over whether existing technology could meet those demands.
The industry contends that if New York proceeds with its rule, it would slam the door on the Great Lakes’ international shipping because vessels from overseas must go through New York waters to reach the lakes.
The EPA’s rule would apply to commercial ships that are more than 79 feet long, exempting recreational and military craft.
The federal agency will take public comment for 75 days and issue a final permit in November 2012.
The Coast Guard also is developing ballast regulations, which are under review by the Office of Management and Budget and are expected to be released next year. A draft version also called for adopting the international standards but eventually setting tougher requirements.
The Republican-led U.S. House voted this month to impose the international standards and make it harder for either EPA or the Coast Guard to go further.