Choice Ballast Solutions senior compliance engineer Debra DiCianna and Glostens’ director of research & development Kevin J Reynolds discussed the alternatives to ship-board ballast water treatment systems under IMO and US Coast Guard compliance scenarios in our webinar
The webinar was the fourth in Riviera Maritime Media’s Ballast Water Webinar Week, part of our ongoing series of webinars. Previous webinars discussed system selection (’Navigating the BWMS system selection maze’), the revised G8 compliance (’What revised G8 requirements mean for the owner/operator’) and supply chain logistics issues in ’Overcoming bottlenecks on BWMS retrofit installation and operation’.
Ms DiCianna opened the ’Alternatives to shipboard ballast water treatment systems’ webinar with a definition of the topic. She noted two broad themes. The first is the alternative to complying with regulations without having a ballast water treatment system on board the ship.
Alternatives to an onboard ballast water treatment system in the USA include using municipal fresh water or municipal waste-water treatment. Both of these are largely theoretical. “There are no onshore treatment facilities in the US,” said Ms DiCianna. Other alternatives include mobile systems such as Damen InvaSave and Glostens oneTank system, which is currently under development.
Mr Reynolds said his company’s mobile oneTank system has been tested on a number of vessels and vessel types. Discussion of the new technology prompted several questions from attendees of the webinar.
Is the Damen InvaSave system type-approved for the USA? It is not USCG type-approved, but it does not have to be. Once the ballast water leaves the ship, it becomes classed as waste water and subject to the local port and jurisdiction rules.
Regarding the use of oneTank: does the liability shift from ship to oneTank? Mr Reynolds said oneTank is used on the ship under control of the vessel master and so the ship retains liability.
The second theme was that of BWMS failure and contingency planning.
Ms DiCianna said, “We do have to look at alternatives because problems will occur. The Ballast Water Management Plan should have a contingency plan. Why? Because when the ballast water system fails to work, it is one of the first things the US Coast Guard will ask.”
When polled regarding a ballast water contingency plan, over half the respondents either did not have a contingency plan or did not know if one was in place. See the full results from the attendee polls below.
Does your Ballast Water Management Plan include a section on contingency measures?
Do you know of a vessel with an installed BWMS that experienced problems that required ’alternative’ treatment?
If the answer to the previous question was yes, what was the treatment?
Ms DiCianna summed up her key takeaways from the webinar in the form of a reminder of the importance of planning.
“The alternatives to treatment are limited and the important thing to focus on is having a contingency plan. A contingency plan can be amended to a Ballast Water Management plan. As it is not a requirement in the Convention it does not require approval. We (Choice Ballast Solutions) have provided contingency plans for many ships,” she said.
Mr Reynolds concurred.
“You have to provide the spare parts and training for the crew to handle a contingency. I hope everyone now has a clear idea: contingency is something that is unplanned, alternative is something you plan for because it is the right fit for you,” he said.
You can view the webinar, in full, in our webinar library.
And you can sign up to attend upcoming webinars on our events page.
Top left: Glostens director of research & development Kevin J Reynolds. Top right: Choice Ballast Solutions senior compliance engineer Debra DiCianna