Evoqua launches compact version of BWMS
JUNE 2, 2016 — Warrendale, PA, headquartered Evoqua Water Technologies is launching a compact version of its SeaCURE ballast water management system (BWMS). The compact SeaCURE BWMS, which will be on display
JUNE 2, 2016 — Warrendale, PA, headquartered Evoqua Water Technologies is launching a compact version of its SeaCURE ballast water management system (BWMS). The compact SeaCURE BWMS, which will be on display
MAY 26, 2016 – Alfa Laval says that it is continuing to move swiftly towards the submission of a U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) type approval application for its Alfa Laval PureBallast 3.1
MAY 18, 2016 — The U.S. insistence on setting its own type approval standards for ballast water management systems has drawn some harsh industry criticism. Rear Adm. Paul Thomas, U.S. Coast Guard
As designers, builders, vendors, owners and operators seek direction on meeting new and forthcoming regulations, ABS’ goal is to provide practical solutions that meet the requirements in a safe manner.
Services are based on a strong foundation of research and real-world experience from engineers and surveyors. But one of the most important factors is feedback from members and clients. The information they provide is vital to the process of continually improving ABS Rules, Guides and technical advisories.
Recently, ABS brought together 15 shipping companies to discuss lessons learned as early adopters of ballast water management regulations. This forum was different from many other meetings hosted by ABS – our role was to serve as facilitator of a larger industry discussion on how to safely, effectively and efficiently meet these important environmental requirements.
Sharing technical lessons learned will prove invaluable in the long term. As regulators begin to enforce requirements and class societies deliver appropriate standards and technical advice, industry will be able to take the necessary steps to comply.
TECHNICAL SPECIFICATIONS
A key area throughout the discussion was the need to develop appropriate technical specifications during Ballast Water Management System (BWMS) selection.
Topics discussed included integrating the BWMS into overall ship’s automation systems, software modifications as this new technology matures, and the potential impact of a BWMS on the performance of a ship’s auxiliary systems.
In general, participants agreed shipowners need to ensure the technical specifications are thorough, must identify responsible parties, and should carry out some type of operational test to make sure the equipment, when delivered, is able to operate for an entire ballast cycle. A strong recommendation from all the owners was to think carefully about the degree of integration between the new and existing systems, with the prevailing wisdom being that simpler is better.
DESIGNING, INSTALLING AND COMMISSIONING
During the course of the forum, several case studies were discussed to review lessons learned from recent projects. These case studies covered various types of vessel for retrofit and new construction projects, delivering key lessons learned to help inform future efforts.
While each experience was unique to individual vessels and system types, common problems included prefabricated piping errors, software issues and insufficient electrical power for auxiliary systems. Participants commented that 3D scanning and the use of experienced pipe fitters would reduce installation delays.
OPERATION, IN-SERVICE SUPPORT, AND MAINTENANCE CHALLENGES
Important operational concerns also were discussed during the forum. Adequate system testing during commissioning often was prevented due to delivery schedules, which in turn impacted post-delivery operations. Participants reported piping leakage issues, sensor and instrument failures, frequent software modifications and irregular vendor service as opportunities for improvement in the process. Many of the issues discussed could be addressed through diligent installation planning and a solid post-installation operating/troubleshooting strategy.
Participants focused on the importance of an agreement with the shipyard or installation contractor that includes sufficient testing to indicate the BWMS will achieve the discharge standards during the first year of operation.
Modification of computer-based controls software was also a significant concern because changes could invalidate the type approval certificates. ABS Steel Vessel Rules also cover requirements for software modifications. Concerns were also raised that the systems, particularly on tankers, precluded load and discharge of ballast by gravity and frequent filter backflushing, both of which increase operational cycle times.
LOOKING TO THE FUTURE
Forum participants agreed that the lessons learned should be shared with industry peers and regulators. It is imperative to bring together knowledge and experience to develop sustainable technologies and practices.
Looking to the future, ABS will host follow-on discussions to continue our efforts to aide industry and serve as the nexus for information sharing.
In our role as a trusted advisor to industry on environmental, operational and efficiency issues, ABS strives not only better inform our own standards but also to aid industry in closing the gap between compliance with new regulations and the sustainable use of technology.
FEBRUARY 11, 2014 — A new crane ship designed by Netherlands based Royal IHC\will feature the Wärtsilä Aquarius UV Ballast Water Management System (BWMS). The first vessel of this design is currently
JANUARY 19, 2016 — Back in November, it looked like IMO’s Ballast Water Management (BWM) Convention looked like it had finally achieved the necessary ratifications to enter into force. Turns out it
Norway’s Optimarin, which claims to be on the brink of full USCG approval of its UV based system, says the decision is good news.
The Coast Guard has told UV system manufacturers that it will not accept the Most Probable Number (MPN) testing method in its approval process. The MPN methodology evaluates organisms on the basis of “viable/unviable,” with most UV systems depositing “unviable” organisms back into the water – meaning they are still alive but cannot reproduce.
The USCG says that FDA/CMFDA test, which judges life forms as “living/dead,” must be the standard for approval.
Optimarin says that having systems with USCG approval is imperative for any shipowner wanting to discharge ballast in U.S. waters after January 1,2016.
“This is a clear indication to the industry that USCG wants absolute certainty with regard to standards – they do not want living organisms deposited in their territory,” comments Tore Andersen, Optimarin’s CEO. “MPN is acceptable for IMO, but that won’t be any consolation to shipowners with global fleets that want the flexibility of sailing in and out of U.S. waters.”
Mr. Andersen notes that while the USCG is currently accepting vessels with approved Alternate Management Systems (AMS) based on testing by another flag state, can discharge ballast in that approval is good for only five years after the vessel’s compliance date.
“At that point, if they haven’t met the USCG’s own ‘instant kill’ standard, they will have to be changed,” says Mr. Andersen. “That’s a burden of potential cost and uncertainty that shipowners operating in today’s tight market shouldn’t have to contend with.”
He says that Optimarin, which has over 20 years of industry experience and installed the world’s first commercial BWT system in 2000, is the only UV manufacturer that is currently within “touching distance” of USCG approval.
Its technology successfully satisfying the FDA/CFMDA criteria during testing this year. Further tests in other water salinities are scheduled for spring 2016, after which point approval is expected later in the year.
Mr. Andersen says the system’s power is the key to its efficacy.
“Each of our system lamps has a 35 kW capacity, which is huge for a UV system. That power instantly kills invasive organisms and that’s exactly what USCG wants to see,” he says.
Optimarin has now sold over 350 of its systems to shipowners across the world, with more than 270 installed, over 60 of which are retrofits.
One major client of the business is Saga Shipholding. Optimarin signed a frame agreement with the open hatch bulk shipper in 2011 and has since gone on to install 26 systems, including eight newbuild installations, on a fleet that currently numbers 32 vessels. The remainder will receive their BWT units during 2016.
Eivind Holte, Senior Technical Manager Saga Shipholding (Norway), notes that Saga’s ships are frequent visitors to the U.S., servicing ports on both the West and East Coasts.
“I can’t overstate the importance of USCG approval to us,” he stresses, “it’s basically a ‘ticket to trade.’ We’re very happy that we chose Optimarin, for both their system’s technology and its compliance, with full USCG approval on the horizon.”
AMS accepted units, he says, present a “real risk.”
“They’re compliant now, but will they be in five years time? The cost of changing existing systems across a fleet to ensure compliance would be disastrous, just disastrous,” says Mr. Holte.
“Making the right choice for BWT systems is crucial,” he says. “Shipowners have to choose systems and suppliers they trust. We did, and that decision, now more than ever, looks to be completely correct.”
The Coast Guard’s Marine Safety Center has informed four manufacturers of ballast water management systems (BWMS) that are based on ultraviolet technology that the Most Probable Number (MPN) test method is not considered an equivalent alternative to the test method prescribed in the Coast Guard regulations on type approval of ballast water systems.
A Coast Guard review has concluded that the MPN test method does not measure the efficacy of the BWMS to the performance standard required by the regulations.
The regulations specifically require ballast water treatment systems to be evaluated based on their ability to kill certain organisms. Since the MPN method assesses the viability of an organism to colonize after treatment, it measures to a different standard than that required by the regulations.
In the Preamble to the Final Rule which implemented the ballast water discharge standard and the procedures for BWMS type-approval, the distinction between live/dead and viable/unviable was evaluated, explicitly discussed and the decision was made to use live/dead as the standard for evaluating the performance of BWMS. Since the MPN method does not measure performance to this standard, it is not an equivalent evaluation or test under the provisions of the regulations.
The Coast Guard says it is aware of other ultraviolet BWMS that are undergoing evaluation using the prescribed tests. As such, the tests required by the regulations and the Environmental Protection Agency’s Environmental Technology Verification, or ETV, Protocol are applicable and practicable for the evaluation of all systems.
As with all decisions made under the authority of Title 46 of the Code of Federal Regulations, this Marine Safety Center ruling is subject to appeal by the manufacturers. The Coast Guard will continue to evaluate this method through the ETV Technical Panel.
DECEMBER 4, 2015 — Evoqua Water Technologies and Drew Marine, have announced a partnership to provide a full compliance package for ballast water management. The partnership will center around Evoqua’s SeaCURE
It also announces a change to the terms of extended compliance dates the Coast Guard will issue to vessels.
Following is taken from the bulletin:
In all cases, a vessel’s “first scheduled drydocking” date for the purposes of compliance with the BWM implementation schedule is the date the vessel enters a drydock. For example, if a vessel enters drydock on or before December 31, 2015 and does not leave drydock until after January 1, 2016, the drydock is not considered the “first scheduled drydocking after January 1, 2016” for purposes of compliance;
An underwater inspection in lieu of drydocking (UWILD) is not considered the “first scheduled drydocking”; instead:
Extended Compliance Date
A vessel that discharges ballast water in waters of the U.S. after its original compliance date must comply with the requirements under 33 CFR 151.1512 or 151.2035 for approved BWM methods. However, the master, owner, operator, agent, or person in charge of a vessel may apply to the Coast Guard for an extended compliance date if they can document that, despite all efforts, compliance with the requirement under 33 CFR 151.1510 or 151.2025 is not possible.
The Coast Guard is revising the terms of extended compliance dates, and will issue a revised CG-OES Policy Letter 13-01. A vessel’s extended compliance date will now be the “next scheduled drydocking” after the vessel’s original compliance date. Existing extension letters will not be re-issued, but this change in terms will be made when a vessel applies for a supplemental extension. Information on applying for an extended compliance date is available at http://homeport.uscg.mil/ballastwater in the “Regulations and Policy Documents” sub-folder.
Access the bulletin HERE