ICS suggests IMO BW Convention can be addressed by IMO MEPC

ICS suggests that the proposed MEPC Resolution might take into account the following provisions and understandings:

Before the Convention enters into force

1. Agreement should be sought amongst Parties so that the G8 Guidelines will be given a mandatory status, as soon as possible after the Convention enters into force and amendments can be adopted;

2. A comprehensive and exhaustive review of the G8 type-approval Guidelines should be undertaken and that this review of the G8 Guidelines should commence before the Convention enters into force; and

3. In the interim, the existing G8 guidelines would apply, on the understanding that they will be fully adhered to pending any change to mandatory status as soon as possible after the Convention enters into force.

After the Convention enters into force

4. ‘First generation’ type-approved equipment, installed in good faith prior to the Convention entering into force and before the G8 Guidelines have been reviewed and amended, should be grandfathered for the life of the ship, and a new category of ‘gross non-compliance’ be defined and applied to these systems to allow for some variation in treatment efficacy during normal operation;

5. Agreement should be sought amongst Parties so that, as soon as the Convention has entered into force, the agreed fixed period moratorium on non-compliance penalties during the sampling and analysis ‘test period’ will be viewed as an experience-building phase, not as a vehicle to ban type approved equipment already fitted;

6. During the fixed period moratorium as has been agreed, penalties should be limited to deliberate attempts at non-compliance;

7. It should be recognised that many perceived problems would be avoided if, as soon as the Convention enters into force:

• Convention Article 9 ‘Inspection of Ships’ was amended by repositioning 1.c ‘sampling of ships ballast water’ to paragraph 2 which determines actions following ‘clear grounds’.
• This is to show that inspection for compliance should start with the type- approval of the equipment and records of its correct operation. Only after clean grounds for non- compliance have been established should sampling of ballast water by port State Control be necessary or appropriate. This would bring PSC inspection criteria in line with all other regulations; and
• That clarification is needed that the port State control regime is intended to monitor for diligent application of the BWM Convention provisions. It is not intended to penalise owners who in good faith have fitted and conscientiously operate type-approved equipment correctly.

ICS fervently hopes that MEPC 66 will consider the adoption of a resolution along the lines described above. Following the adoption at MEPC of such a resolution then the ICS Board will be invited to review its position on recommending ratification.

The new ICS Position Paper, prepared by the ICS Board of Directors, is being communicated to maritime administrations by ICS’s member national shipowners’ associations, and can be found here.