[Federal Register Volume 66, Number 99 (Tuesday, May 22, 2001)]
[Notices]
[Pages 28213-28216]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 01-12719]


=======================================================================
-----------------------------------------------------------------------

DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION

Coast Guard

[USCG-2001-9267]


Approval for Experimental Shipboard Installations of Ballast 
Water Treatment Systems

AGENCY: Coast Guard, DOT.

ACTION: Request for comments.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

[[Page 28214]]

SUMMARY: The Coast Guard is requesting comments about how to provide 
incentives to further develop ballast water treatment (BWT) 
technologies and reduce the potential for introducing nonindigenous 
species (NIS) to the waters of the United States via discharged ballast 
water. Ideally, vessel owners and operators given approval to install 
prototype BWT systems would be considered to be in compliance with the 
first set of future BWT requirements, when they are implemented. 
Depending on the information received, we may begin developing the type 
of incentives outlined in this notice.

DATES: Comments and related material must reach the Docket Management 
Facility on or before July 23, 2001.

ADDRESSES: To make sure your comments and related material are not 
entered in the docket more than once, please submit them by only one of 
the following means:
    (1) By mail to the Docket Management Facility, (USCG-2001-9267) 
U.S. Department of Transportation, room PL-401, 400 Seventh Street SW., 
Washington, DC 20590-0001.
    (2) By delivery to room PL-401 on the Plaza level of the Nassif 
Building, 400 Seventh Street SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 
p.m., Monday through Friday, except Federal holidays. The telephone 
number is 202-366-9329.
    (3) By fax to the Docket Management Facility at 202-493-2251.
    (4) By electronic means through the Web Site for the Docket 
Management System at http://dms.dot.gov.
    The Docket Management Facility maintains the public docket for this 
notice. Comments and material received from the public will become part 
of this docket and will be available for inspection or copying at room 
PL-401 on the Plaza level of the Nassif Building, 400 Seventh Street 
SW., Washington, DC, between 9 a.m. and 5 p.m., Monday through Friday, 
except Federal holidays. You may also find this docket on the Internet 
at http://dms.dot.gov.

FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: For questions on this notice, call Dr. 
Richard Everett, Project Manager, Office of Operating and Environmental 
Standards (G-MSO), Coast Guard, telephone 202-267-0214. For questions 
on viewing or submitting material to the docket, call Dorothy Beard, 
Chief, Dockets, Department of Transportation, telephone 202-366-5149.

SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:

Request for Comments

    We invite you to provide your views on: The program described in 
this notice; new and other approaches not identified in this notice; 
the potential impacts of such a program (including possible unintended 
or unanticipated consequences); and, any supporting or relevant data or 
information that you would like the Coast Guard to consider during the 
development of an approval program. Please explain your views as 
clearly as possible, describe any assumptions used, and provide copies 
of data or technical information used to support your views. If you 
submit comments and related material, please include your name and 
address, identify the docket number for this notice (USCG-2001-9267), 
indicate the specific section of this document to which each comment 
applies, and give the reason for each comment. You may submit your 
comments and material by mail, hand delivery, fax, or electronic means 
to the Docket Management Facility as indicated under ADDRESSES. Please 
submit your comments and material by only one means. If you submit them 
by mail or hand delivery, submit them in an unbound format, no larger 
than 8\1/2\ by 11 inches, suitable for copying and electronic filing. 
If you submit them by mail and would like to know they reached the 
Facility, please enclose a stamped, self-addressed postcard or 
envelope. The Coast Guard will consider all comments received during 
the comment period.

Why Is the Coast Guard Asking for Comments?

    The problem of how to reduce the threat of introducing foreign 
organisms to the waters of the U.S. via ballast water discharged from 
vessels is complex. A number of factors contribute to the complexity of 
this issue, including: The relative volumes and pumping rates involved 
in ballasting operations; the great variability in voyage durations and 
routes; and the great variability in the physical, chemical, and 
biological make up of the ballast water carried by the vessels that 
operate in U.S. waters.
    Under paragraphs (a) and (b) in section 1101 of the Nonindigenous 
Aquatic Nuisance Prevention and Control Act (Pub. L. 101-646), as 
amended by the National Invasive Species Act of 1996 (NISA) (Pub. L. 
104-332), Congress directed the Coast Guard to issue regulations and 
guidelines on ballast water management practices to prevent the 
introduction of NIS to U.S. waters via the discharge of foreign water 
from ballast tanks of ships. Specifically, these regulations are to 
identify mid-ocean ballast water exchange (BWE), or environmentally 
sound alternative ballast water treatment (BWT) methods determined by 
the Coast Guard to be as effective as BWE in preventing and controlling 
infestations of aquatic nuisance species, as acceptable BWT 
technologies. These regulations are contained in 33 CFR part 151, 
subparts C and D; we issued these regulations on May 17, 1999 (64 FR 
26672).
    The development of effective BWT technologies, capable of 
significantly reducing the probability of introducing foreign organisms 
via ballast water discharges, is essential. The NISA explicitly directs 
that such technologies must be ``as effective as (BWE).'' Currently, 
the actual ``effectiveness'' of BWE in reducing the threat of 
introductions is not well resolved. Concerns have been voiced that 
exchange as a practice will be inherently difficult to quantify. 
Furthermore, because safe exchange using existing ballast water systems 
is not practicable on all voyages, exchange is not capable of providing 
a sufficient level of protection against the introduction of unwanted 
foreign organisms. An increasing number of alternative BWT technologies 
are being developed and tested at small, bench-top, or dockside scales. 
However, complete evaluation and refinement of the capabilities of such 
systems requires ship-scale installations that are tested for longer 
periods of time under a wide range of conditions.
    As on-board installation and testing costs are likely to be 
significant, vessel owners are understandably reluctant to participate 
in on-board testing projects without assurances that installed 
experimental systems will be accepted for some specified time should 
regulations come into effect during the testing period.
    The Coast Guard is considering developing a program that would 
allow vessel owners to apply for advance, conditional approval of 
experimental BWT systems installed and tested on board their operating 
vessels. Even though only a limited number of the experimental systems 
would be approved, the program would help nurture the establishment of 
collaborative partnerships between technology developers and vessel 
owners while standards and requirements are being developed. If we 
approve an experimental BWT system under the terms of the program, it 
would be considered to meet the requirements of the first set of future 
regulations regarding BWT.

[[Page 28215]]

Are There Any Particular Questions the Coast Guard Is Interested in 
Having Answered?

    While we welcome comments on every aspect on this approval program, 
to help us ensure that studies are conducted according to well-
established principles of experimental design and analysis, we 
encourage opinions on what specific protocols should be included in the 
studies associated with the program.

What Are the Details Being Considered for This Program for Approval 
of Experimental Shipboard Installations of BWT Systems?

    The basic procedures and conditions envisioned for the approval 
program are as follows:

Approval Process

    Applications for approval of experimental BWT systems would be 
accepted and reviewed as follows:
     Applications for advance approval of experimental ballast 
water treatment systems would be accepted at any time.
     Within 10 working days of receiving an application, 
applicants would be sent (via surface mail, e-mail, or facsimile 
transmission) a notice of the completeness of the application package. 
Applicants with incomplete submissions would be sent an explanation of 
deficiencies. Incomplete application packages would be returned 
(provided a self-addressed label and sufficient postage are included), 
or if deficiencies are minimal, held for 30 days in order to allow the 
applicant to correct the deficiencies.
     Formal, full reviews of supporting data and proposed study 
plans would be completed within 45 days of receipt of the application.
     Formal reviews would be conducted by panels of biologists 
and engineers with expertise in experimental investigations of biota 
associated with ballast water, water treatment technology, naval 
architecture, and marine engineering.
     The review panels would provide recommendations to the 
Coast Guard on the acceptability of the supporting evidence and study 
plans submitted with each application.
     The Coast Guard would accept or reject each application on 
the basis of reviews by Coast Guard staff and the recommendations of 
the review panel.

Criteria for Review

    Applications for approval of experimental ballast water treatment 
systems would be evaluated on the completeness of the following 
information:
     A letter of commitment from the owner of the specified 
vessel, the manufacturer or developer of the treatment system, and the 
principle investigators conducting the tests, stating their intents to 
carry out all components of the study plan for which they are 
responsible.
     Documentation stating that the residual concentrations of 
any primary treatment chemicals or chemicals that occur as disinfection 
by-products meet all applicable local, state, federal, and tribal 
requirements.
     Documentation from preliminary, smaller scale, experiments 
that demonstrates the potential of the system to significantly reduce 
the threat of introducing nonindigenous species via ballast water 
discharges. The results would demonstrate a taxonomic breadth of 
effectiveness across a suite of organisms such as bacteria, 
phytoplankton (including dinoflagellates and diatoms), heterotrophic 
protists, rotifers, copepods (cyclopoid and harpacticoid; larval, post-
larval, and adult life stages), mollusc larvae, polychaete larvae, 
mysids, decapod crustaceans (crabs and shrimp; larval, post-larval; and 
adult), and fish.
     Preliminary and proposed testing experiments would control 
for confounding factors and include statistical analyses that include 
formal power analyses (a determination of the ability of a particular 
statistical test to actually detect a difference among the data) for 
each statistical test.
     A statement with explanations of the scalability of 
preliminary experiments.
     A detailed study plan that:
    1. Is organized according to a standardized format (to be 
developed).
    2. Experimentally compares the effectiveness of the treatment 
system to the effectiveness of a specified mode of ballast water 
exchange.
    3. Evaluates the effectiveness of the treatment system over a range 
of operational (including the cumulative hours of operation, volumes 
treated, and time since the experimental tanks were last cleaned of 
sediment) and environmental (including abundance of organisms, organic 
and inorganic ``load'', temperature and salinity of water, sea surface 
characteristics) conditions during operations.
    4. Identifies explicit hypotheses about limiting conditions of the 
specified ship and route.
    5. Assures that samples would be representative of the flow or 
volume from which they are taken.
    6. Contains a detailed quality assurance and/or quality control 
plan.

Conditions of Approval

     Experimental systems would be approved for use on 
specified ships operating on specified routes.
     Approval of an experimental system would lapse after 1 
year if the system was not installed or the testing begun as proposed.
     Experimental systems would be approved for use in all U.S. 
waters, including the Great Lakes and the Hudson River upstream of the 
George Washington Bridge.
     Systems approved under the experimental approval program 
would be considered to meet all BWT requirements promulgated by the 
Coast Guard for a period of 5 years, or until the first BWT standard is 
revised, whichever date is earlier. However, in the event that 
subsequent work reveals adverse effects on ecology or human health, the 
tests will be discontinued and the approval will lapse.
     Systems approved under the experimental approval program 
would be subject to all subsequent standards and regulations upon the 
expiration of the experimental approval period.
     Experimental approval would be contingent on adherence to 
a detailed study plan designed to test the effectiveness of the 
treatment system over a specified period of time. The study plan would 
be described completely in the application and agreed upon by the 
applicant and the U.S. Coast Guard.
     The experimental team would be required to submit 
quarterly status reports identifying tasks completed and unanticipated 
problems. An annual report documenting the work and results to date 
would be required after every 12 months of testing. A final report 
documenting the study findings and conclusions would be required no 
later than six months after the on-board testing is completed.
     Vessels receiving approval for experimental BWT systems 
would be subject to inspections by Coast Guard personnel to verify the 
presence and condition of experimental systems.
     The principle scientists and engineers responsible for 
conducting and analyzing the tests would attend and participate in a 
technical workshop during which the results of the study, along with 
other similar studies, would be presented and discussed. The workshops 
would be organized by the Coast Guard but travel costs and salary would 
be the responsibility of the participants.

[[Page 28216]]

Sample Timeline for Advance Approval Process

    Following is an example of a timeline for the approval of an 
experimental ballast water treatment system. For illustrative purposes, 
the timeline incorporates the development of a standard and regulations 
during the test period.

------------------------------------------------------------------------
               Date                                Action
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Submit (S).......................  Application package submitted and
                                    reviewed for completeness.
S + 10 days......................  Application package accepted or
                                    rejected for submission to review
                                    panel. If complete, application
                                    package submitted to independent
                                    review panel.
S + 45 days......................  Application approved or denied. Final
                                    approval pends agreement on study
                                    plan.
S + 90 days (A)..................  Study plan negotiated and agreed-upon
                                    by Coast Guard and applicant. This
                                    date is considered the Approval Date
                                    (A). Treatment system considered
                                    meeting regulatory requirements for
                                    5 years from this date.
Install (I)......................  Experimental system installed and
                                    adjusted; preliminary organization
                                    for study completed. Experimental
                                    work begins.
I + 3 months.....................  First progress report submitted to
                                    USCG.
I + 6 months.....................  Second progress report submitted to
                                    USCG.
I + 9 months.....................  Third Progress report submitted to
                                    USCG.
I + 12 months....................  Annual Report submitted to USCG.
                                    Study continues according to
                                    schedule, with quarterly and annual
                                    reports submitted to the USCG.
Standard/Reg.....................  First U.S. standard and regulations
                                    established for ballast water
                                    treatment. Operation of experimental
                                    system continues under study plan.
A + 5 years......................  Vessel must meet existing standard
                                    and regulations, regardless of date
                                    standard and regulations are
                                    promulgated.
------------------------------------------------------------------------

What Is the Coast Guard's Authority for Taking This Action?

    Under 16 U.S.C. 4711, the Coast Guard (acting on behalf of the 
Secretary of Transportation) is authorized to take this action.

    Dated: March 30, 2001.
R.C. North,
Rear Admiral, U.S. Coast Guard, Assistant Commandant for Marine, Safety 
and Environmental Protection.
[FR Doc. 01-12719 Filed 5-21-01; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-15-U