The USCG’s recent announcement about the MPN method has far reached implications to the marine industry, particularly for shipowners. A new website has been launched by a group of concerned organizations to help educate and dispel any misunderstandings about the MPN method.
USCG’s rejection of the MPN method represents a significant divergence between U.S. and IMO standards – one that will leave shipowners without a practical UV-based option for vessels trading in U.S. waters. The costs, installation complexity and equipment availability will all be adversely impacted, and ultimately leave ship owners with few, if any, cost-effective, chemical-free options.
6 Reasons the USCG Needs to Accept the MPN Method
1. Ballast water management systems that render organisms non-reproductive and harmless meet the spirit and letter of the Nonindigenous Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act (NANPCA), National Invasive Species Act (NISA), and USCG Final Rule.
2. UV-based ballast water management systems are safe, well-established for protecting human health and the environment, more “green” than other systems, and, as of today, the only systems that have been submitted for USCG Type Approval.
3. UV-based ballast water management systems are the most effective for use in fresh water, as they are not adversely impacted by salinity.
4. MPN is an appropriate test method for all ballast water management systems, and is widely-recognized as accurate, practical, and protective. The vital stain method is not practicable or applicable for UV.
5. Accepting the MPN method will harmonize U.S. and international ballast water regulations, and benefit the shipping industry.
6. Accepting the MPN method is consistent with the USCG’s public representations, and will promote innovation and competition
The new site http://mpnballastwaterfacts.com/ provides compelling reasons why the USCG should reconsider its decision on the MPN method.
