Water discharge guidelines tighten for shipping industry

After a giant ship arrives at Norfolk Southern Corp.'s Pier 6 coal terminal in Norfolk, it releases ballast water stored in its hull in order to remain stable as its holds are loaded. Rain may wash off its deck. The crew cooks and cleans with water stored on board.

Starting Dec. 19, discharges of such water "incidental to the normal operation of a vessel" in U.S. waterways will require a permit under the Clean Water Act.

The new permits will affect hundreds of vessels operating at the port of Hampton Roads. Military vessels are exempt.

Approximately 70,000 domestic and foreign-flagged vessels will need the new Vessel General Permit, said Ryan Albert, a scientist with the Environmental Protection Agency's Office of Water in Washington.

The permit regulates 28 types of discharges, including deck runoff from rain or cleaning, ballast water used to stabilize ships and "gray water" from showers, sinks and laundry machines, among a host of other discharges previously exempt from permitting. Each type of discharge has its own set of rules.

Details of the permit are still being finalized, Albert said.

"Everything in this permit is designed to reduce discharge of pollutants or other constituents into any U.S. waters," he said. "We are proposing, finalizing, a permit that we think will be environmentally protective while not placing an undue burden on these vessel owners and operators."

Vessels are required to comply with the terms starting Dec. 19 and will be automatically covered by the permit. However, those that weigh more than 300 gross registered tons or that can carry more than 8 cubic meters (2,113 gallons) of ballast water must submit a Notice of Intent by September to remain covered by the permit. The EPA is creating an electronic system to make that process easier, Albert said.

Local businesses are preparing to comply, said Arthur W. Moye Jr., executive vice president of the Virginia Maritime Association, which has more than 400 member companies. The association co-hosted a breakfast in October to brief its members on new environmental regulations.

"I have not received any indications of any severe monetary impact," Moye said. "Our industry is just trying to stay ahead of the curve and address these regulations as they're proposed or as they're implemented."

Maersk Line Ltd., a Norfolk-based affiliate of A.P. Moller-Maersk Group, has been preparing to comply with the new rules, some of which it already follows, spokesman Kevin Speers said in an e-mail. Maersk's U.S.-flagged commercial vessels call on the port of Hampton Roads three or four times per week.

Maersk Line "sees minimal impact on our business and operations because the requirements reflect best practices that we already employ," Speers wrote. "To ensure full compliance, we are focused on training our crews on the requirements and ensuring that we meet the terms of the new record-keeping guidelines."

The new vessel discharge permits stem from a 2005 ruling by a U.S. District Court in Northern California. That court threw out an EPA regulation that excluded such incidental discharges from permitting.

The Vessel General Permit reinforces some Coast Guard regulations while also adding some measures to protect the environment and prevent the introduction of invasive species into U.S. waterways, Albert said.

That's been a major problem in places such as the Great Lakes, where scientists believe exchange of ballast water by vessels from Europe brought non-native zebra mussels in the late 1980s. They have since proliferated, causing ecological problems and clogging industrial pipelines.

The problem has reached Virginia. In 2006, the state paid about $365,000 to eradicate a population of zebra mussels found in a quarry in Prince William County. Ballast water did not cause that incident.

To help prevent ballast discharges from causing more infestations, the Coast Guard requires vessels to have a ballast water management program. The new permits expand those requirements but do not expressly prohibit exchange of the water in U.S. waterways, Albert said.

For example, the terms require vessel operators to seal empty ballast tanks or flush them with saltwater to help kill any invasive species. Regulations also encourage vessel operators to exchange ballast water out at sea if it can be done safely.

"It requires permittees to take additional steps to minimize the threat from ballast water discharge," Albert said.

Compliance will cost the water transportation and fishing industries a total of between $7.1 million and $25 million per year, the EPA estimates. That cost includes record keeping and ballast water management programs.

The cost of noncompliance: up to $32,500 per day per violation under the Clean Water Act. That could add up quickly for a commercial vessel that has 29 or 30 discharge points, said Bill Anderson, an environmental lawyer and partner with the Washington office of the Williams Mullen law firm.

And those costs will be passed onto customers, he said.

"The ship owners and operators are going to have higher costs," Anderson said. "No question about it, shipping rates could go up."

Kathy Adams, (757) 446-2583, kathy.adams@pilotonline.com