The UNDP-IMO GEF Project "Removal of Barriers to the Effective Implementation of Ballast Water Control and Management Measures in Developing Countries"

18　　　The status of the above project and steps planned for its completion were considered under paragraph 25 to 28 below.

Regulations and guidance for their implementation

19　　　The Chairman recalled the results of previous considerations by the Working Group regarding the development of legally binding provisions in the form of "regulations" and "implementation guidelines" thereto, ad developed so far (MEPC 41/9, annexes 1 and 2). Legally binding provisions set out in the rules would require that these be implemented in accordance with relevant options set out in the guidelines, or that prescribed activities shall be carried out taking full account of the guidelines.

20　　　The United States experts proposed a number of revisions to the draft regulations prepared so far. They further submitted in appendix thereto a"ballast water management code" replacing the originally planned "implementation guidelines". The Code comprised three parts:

Part A 　Ballast Water Management Practices
Part B 　Ballast Water Management Plans and Information
Part C 　Recommendations to assist in implementing the Appendix.

Parts A and B of the Code would contain mandatory provisions. whereas Part C was of a recommendatory nature.

21　　　The United States experts further pointed out that amendments to the Code annexed or appended to the set of regulations could; after approval by a two-thirds majority of Parties present at a meeting, enter into force after a certain period of time (e.g., 100 days) for all Parties except those which within that period of time had made a declaration that they were not able at that stage to accept the amendment(s). Such a tacit amendment procedure would ensure that new technical developments and management procedures could be incorporated without lengthy or cumbersome amendment arrangements. A precedence for such framework was IMO's STCW Convention 1978, as amended in 1995, and the Seafarer's Training, Certification and Watchkeeping Code (STCW Code).

22　　　The Working Group agreed to review the previously developed draft regulations, taking into account the model introduced by the United States, as well as the implementation guidance in the form of a Code, which would provide tools for implementing the regulations. The Working Group further agreed to use the text of resolution A.868(20) wherever appropriate in developing,the ballast water management legislation.

23　　　The representative from ICS expressed the view that flag State provisions have to be outlined in a distinct manner from those addressing port States, if possible through different instruments. The United States pointed out that the Working Group should produce one set of legislation applicable to both flag and port States. This should be complemented with different options, tools and measures, as well as recommendations set out in a Code appended to the regulations. The Chairman noted that the legal framework of ballast water management provisions would be decided upon by MEPC 42 in late 1998. In the meantime the Working Group would follow instructions as reiterated in Assembly resolution .868(20) regarding the development of a new Amex to MARPOL 73/783. Another lengthy discussion centred around the question of "deep sea voyages" and ballast water exchange at "deep sea areas". Even during long voyages ships may not cross "deep sea areas", e.g., from NW Africa to NW Europe. Such conditions would have to be taken into full account by port States. Other experts proposed the replacement of "Deep Sea" as defined in the United States proposal with "High Sea" according to UNCLOS provisions.

---

3 　　　The question regarding port State versus flag State requinrements was raised in various discussions throughout the meeting of the Working Group.

24　　　The draft text of a possible annex to MARPOL 73/78 as developed so far by the Working Group is shown in annex 1 to this report. In appendix thereto the proposed (and partly revised) text for a Ballast Water Management Code has been set out.


Removal of Barriers to the Effective Implementation of Ballast Water Control and Management Measures in Developing Countries

25　　　A GEF project to assist developing countries in carrying out efficient ballast water management control measures had been requested in 1994 by the Ballast Water Working, and in 1997 was submitted by UNDP to the GEF. After approval of a PDF Block B project grant in late 1997, IMO started to execute the project. The project proposal prepared by IMO had been introduced to the Ballast Water Working Group at MEPC 40 (MEPC 40/10/2). The activities carried out since that meeting in executing the project were presented by UNDP and IMO officers and by the consultants who had been involved at that stage. The outputs of this project are planned to include the following:

. 1　　　 a report identifying ballast water control and management alternatives for developing countries, and a strategy for removing barriers in order to allow effective implementation of these measures;

.2 　　　a report summarizing the consequences of ballast water transfer of exotic species, with an emphasis on health impacts, particularly on women and children;

.3 　　　the establishment of selected pilot demonstration sites, one in each of the world's development areas, initially confirmed by host countries and institutions, to test management approaches and barrier removal mechanisms; and

.4 　　　a full IMO/UNDP/GEF project document which should incorporate all of the above and outline a four-year implementation prograrnme.

26 　　　The Working Group recognized that the time schedule for carrying out the various tasks for completing the output elements mentioned above was very tight in that a full project proposal for submission to the GEF Council meeting in 1998 would have to be completed in July; a Project Steering Committee has to be established and its first meeting to be convened in early summer 1998.

27 　　　A report prepared by consultants reflecting the results of their visits to six developing countries in different regions of the world was considered by the Working Group. It was noted that in all these countries a total lack of control measures regarding ballast water discharges had been identified. There was also a lack of communication and co-operation among the involved parties, including research organizations, co-ordinated by different national administrative authorities. Poor support existed for scientific sampling of ballast water proposed for discharge. In the few cases where sampling was carried out, samples were taken at random from the surface of the tanks. Analytical facilities were often at universities situated at a long distance from port areas.

28 　　　The Working Group welcomed the information provided on the GEF Ballast Water Project. Several experts and representatives from port and shipping industries expressed their continuing willingness to support the project by providing their expertise and technical advice.

Ballast Water Management Plan

29 　　　The ICS expert informed the Working Group of the status of development of a model ballast water management plan which would assist shipowners and others who may be responsible fro developing an individual ballast water management plan for an individual ship or a class of ships. A plan should clearly outline the procedures to be followed and the records that are to be kept. it should further include a section on ballast water sampling Identifying sampling points and access points to tanks where samples could be taken.

30 　　　The Working Group further emphasized the necessity for maintaining a full and accurate ballast log reflecting a continuous history of ballast water that has been taken, in which tanks it had been carried and at which localities it had been discharged.

31 　　　The Chaiman requested ICS to identify sections of the Model Ballast Water Management Plan that could form an appendix to the Code considered under paragraphs 19 to 22 above.

Education and Awareness Material

32 　　　The Working Group was not able to consider this issue in detail because of lack of time. It welcomed the videotape submitted by the United States and requested all members of the Working Group to submit to the next meeting leaflets and other material prepared in the first instance for seafarers and personnel of port State authorities. Information distributed to the wider public would also be welcome The Working Group would consider the information at its sessions during MEPC 42 and 43.

Work Programme of the Ballast Water Working Group

33 　　　The Working Group prepared a programme outlining its tasks covering the period 1998-2000 (MEPC 41/WP.1 O). The Committee agreed in principle, to the schedule set out in the work programme shown at annex 2 to this report, subject to further consideration and confirmation at MEPC 42.

Action requested by the Committee

34 　　　The Committee is invited to approve the report of the Working Group.on Ballast Water which reflects the results of its meeting held during MEPC 41.

***

　

前ページ　　　目次へ　　　次ページ