# Presentation: 548677

## California Ballast Water Management and Control Program - Update

**California Ballast Water Management and Control Program - Update**

**Maurya B. Falkner**
**California State Lands Commission**
**Marine Facilities Division**

**WRP Annual Meeting - September 2003**

## Ballast Water Management for Control 

**   ****Established:**
** ****Mandatory, Statewide, Multi-Agency **
**  ****Ballast Water Management and Control Program**
**  ****Emphasizing Research and Development**
-  **Applies to all vessels that enter CA waters after **
**  ****operating outside the West Coast EEZ.**

**Ballast Water Management for Control **
**of Nonindigenous Species AB 703**

**Notes:**
IN AN ATTEMPT TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF FOREIGN BALLAST WATER RELEASED IN 
CALIFORNIA WATERS AND FUTURE NAS INTRODUCTIONS
	CALIFORNIA LAWMAKERS IN CONSULTATION WITH:
	INDUSTRY
	STATE AND FEDERAL AGENCIES
	ENVIRONMENTAL ORGANIZATIONS

CREATED AB703
SIGNED INTO LAW IN OCTOBER 1999  
Sunsets 1/1/2004
ESTABLISHES:
	MANDATORY, STATEWIDE, MULTI-AGENCY 	PROGRAM, EFFECTIVE 1/1/200

## Agency Responsibilities

***	*****Collect per Vessel Voyage Fee**
**	****  **
*** ******State Water Resources Control Board***
***	*****Evaluate Alternatives to Mid-Ocean Exchange**
**	****Prepare Report to Legislature**
***California Department of Fish & Game***
**	****Conduct Baseline Biological Inventory**
**	****Prepare Report to Legislature**
*** ******California State Lands Commission***
***	*****Establish per Vessel Voyage Fee**
**	****Implement an Inspection and Monitoring Program**
**	****Prepare Report to Legislature**

_**Agency Responsibilities**_

**Notes:**
AGENCY RESPONSIBILITY

## AB 703 Program Summary by Agency

**BOE**
-  	Collection of per voyage Fee
-    Implemented self-reporting program
-    > 95% Fee submission
**SWRCB**
-    No treatment options currently approved
- Recommendations
-    Continue BWE
-    Identify alternative technologies
-    Consider shoreside treatment
-    Support Demonstration Projects

**Notes:**
BOE

SWRCB – Alternative Technology Report
Required to evaluate potential alternative treatment technology available to the maritime industry
Primarily a literature review – no one or combination of treatment technologies approved for use in California
Very few systems have been evaluated in a comprehensive manner, many still in conceptual/experimental stage.
Shore side treatment systems should be considered for some vessel classes or specific companies

SWRCB also contributed to the West Coast Demonstration Project – by supporting the 2 ship board evaluations of the treatment system on the Sea Princess

## AB 703 Program Summary - Cont.

**CDFG-OSPR**
- 	Identified 747 organisms
-     Primarily from NW Atlantic, NW Pacific
- 	and NE Atlantic
**    **Recommendations
- 	Ongoing surveys for NAS
-  	Identify introduction pathways
-  	Refine Taxonomy
- _http://www.dfg.ca.gov/ospr/organizational/scientific/exotic/exotic%20report.htm_

**Notes:**
CDFG-OSPR – biological surveys
Primary sites (7) – main commercial harbors
Secondary sites (13) – small harbors and embayments along the entire coast of California

Identified 747 organisms that are NAS (~300 cryptogenic)
Positive relationship between port size and number of organisms
NAS identified from all over the world, but primary source is NW Atlantic, NW Pacific and NE Atlantic

Recommendations
Continue with NAS surveys filling gaps identified under current program – and to determine effectiveness of ballast water control measures
Conduct studies to identify introduction pathways – mechanism for introduction could not be determined.  Many species are thought to have arrived via multiple pathways.  Additional research could help develop prevention measures that target the most problematic vectors.
Refine taxonomy – many species were identified as cryptogenic – primarily because of the lack of information about the species’ origin.

## AB 703 Program Summary - Cont.

**CSLC**
**Ballast Water Reporting Form**
-   92% Submitted Required BW Form
-    96% Complied with mandatory management requirements
**  **Continued Problems
- 		Delinquent forms** (~10%) **
**	****	**Late forms** (~10%)**
**      ****	****	**Inaccurate or incomplete forms** (~35%)**
**      ****	****	**Violations of management requirements** (~4%)**
**Vessel Inspections**
-     3884 Vessel inspections completed
-     532 Violations (13% Operational)

**Notes:**
Summary Stats – Ballast Water Reporting Form
92% of QV submitted BW Form
Based on those forms, 96% complied with the mandatory requirements
73% retained BW on board – this number has remained fairly constants over the 2.5 years
Approximately 27% of the vessels are discharging BW.  

Number of vessels discharging unexchanged ballast water has increased, from 4% to 6% (cumulative 4%) over the past 2.5 years.  Pattern is complex
Carquinez saw a decrease( 14% to 5%), Oakland remained basically the same (30% to 35%), while San Diego showed an increase (10% to 30%).
We continue to have ~10% of the vessels failing to file. 10% of those filed are more than 10 days late, and 35% of the forms received are inaccurate or incomplete.  Translates to lots of follow-up by staff.
CSLC - Inspections
Our inspectors conducted over 3800 inspections on over 2000 different vessels. Vessel inspections are chosen in a stratified random fashion, and a risk-based system, in addition to random sample. 

Inspectors are instrumental in educating the crew on the proper procedure for filling out and filing the form.  
Outreach and Education is a very important role.

## CSLC - Summary - Cont.

**Demonstration Project**
-     Grant from USFWS and Port of Oakland
-     Two vessels (container and passenger)
-     Preliminary results look promising
**Fee establishment**
-    Technical Advisory Group (TAG)
-    > 95% Fee submission
**Advanced Approval Program**
-   Working with USCG
-   Three applications submitted (one active).

**Notes:**
CSLC – Demonstration Project
Funds from USFWS and Port of Oakland to retrofit and evaluate treatment systems on two vessels.  SWRCB supported 2 evaluation voyages on one vessel (Sea Princess).  Preliminary results look promising.
Second vessel (RJ Pfieffer) completed two ship-board evaluations this summer (July 2003).  Report expected late 2003 or early 2004.
BOE & CSLC - Fee 
Working with the TAG (made up of members of the maritime industry – shipping, associations, port authorities, regulators, and environmental organizations) we have set the appropriate fee amount.  The fee amount is determined by the number of expected qualifying voyages annually, the expected submission rate and the cost of the overall program.  Initially, the fee amount was set at 600, early in 2000 the fee amount was dropped to 400.  In 2002, BOE and CSLC met with the TAG and recommended that the fee amount be further decreased to 200 – this was as a result of high compliance (>95%) and the fact that the Act was scheduled to sunset in January 2004.  However, we did warn the TAG that the fee would like increase with any reauthorization of the BW Program.

## http://www.slc.ca.gov

**Notes:**
Based on three 2.5 years worth of data – the following recommendations were made in CSLC’s legislative report.

## During the 2003 California Legislative Session

- Assemblyman Nation introduced AB 433 - “Marine Invasive Species Act”
- Sponsored by The Ocean Conservancy
- The bill continues and enhances the ballast water management program
- that began in 2002.
- The purpose of the bill is to move the state expeditiously toward
- the elimination of the discharge of nonindigenous species into the
- waters of the state or into waters that may impact the waters of the
- state, based on the best available technology economically achievable

## AB 433 - The Marine Invasive Species Act

**Many provisions of current law (AB 703) remain:**
- Sunset provision – January 1, 2010
- Fee based
- Safety Exemption
- Reporting and record keeping
- Continued biological surveys
- Ecological studies
- Coordination with Technical Advisory Group

**Notes:**
What’s the same
Sunset provision – January 2010
Fee based – “polluter pays” – with a maximum per voyage fee ($1000)
Safety exemption –Though seldom used little under current program, it is an important component.
Reporting and record keeping expanded to include coastal traffic – CSLC will work with other Pacific Coast states in an attempt to develop a regional plan.  CA and OR are currently working on a pilot program to share data.  If successful, WA, AK and BC (Canada) will be incorporated.
Continued use of USCG reporting form.
Technical Advisory Group – representatives from maritime industry (ship owners, agents, port authorities, pilots, etc.), environmental organizations, regulatory agencies, other stakeholders.

## New for AB 433

Removed most exemptions
Reporting required for all port calls 
Expanded to include coastal traffic 
Regulations developed by January 1, 2005
Experimental Technology Advanced Approval Program
Regulations developed by July 1, 2005
Report recommending potential discharge standards
Report due January 31, 2006
Report evaluating other possible ship-mediated vectors
Report due March 1, 2006
Biennial reports to Legislature
Beginning January 2005

**Removed most exemptions**
**Reporting required for all port calls **
**Expanded to include coastal traffic **
- Regulations developed by January 1, 2005
**Experimental Technology Advanced Approval Program**
- Regulations developed by July 1, 2005
**Report recommending potential discharge standards**
- Report due January 31, 2006
**Report evaluating other possible ship-mediated vectors**
- Report due March 1, 2006
- Biennial reports to Legislature
- Beginning January 2005

**Notes:**
Exemptions removed include - TAPS Trade Tankers, Passenger vessels with approved system, and “same location”

Reporting for all port calls – estimate nearly 9000 vessel calls annually.
Pacific Coast Region -  vessels traveling within 200 NM from between 154 W longitute and 25 N latitude (Cooks Inlet Alaska to Baja peninsula.

Already working with USCG on AAP for ET.  Currently have received applications for 3 different vessels.  Only one application is active.  Expect a new application tomorrow.

Though the Commission’s report recommended setting standards, due to the present uncertainty – the new bill calls for a report recommending performance standards and a revisit by the legislature.

Hull fouling and other ship-mediated vectors need to be evaluated and appropriate management options developed.

## What’s New - Cont.

**Formalized Coordination/Partnership with Federal Agencies**
-   **Experimental Technology Advanced Approval **
**   ****Program**
**  ****Recommendations on discharge standards**
**	**
**  ****Coordination/consultation on research**
**	**
**  ****Data sharing**

**Notes:**
Working with USCG to develop a standard process to evaluate new technologies 
Report to legislature on performance standards.
Money dedicated to research (incorporated into budget) – coordinate with other state and federal funding sources
Pilot project integrating CA and OR databases.  If successful, WA, AK and Canada to join in. 

## AB 433 – Program Costs and Fee Program (estimated)

**Fee amount will depend on:  Number of QV’s, compliance, **
**and surplus dollars in existing Fund**
- 	_Agency__	__         Year 1 Costs_
- 	CSLC-MFD		1.41 million
- 	CDFG-OSPR	1.13 million
- 	SWRCB		0.20 million
- 	BOE			0.40 million
**Includes funds to support research, biological surveys, fee collection, **
**regulation development, overall program implementation, etc.**
- Fee to be assessed at _first port or place_ of call in California
- Estimated cost: $400 to $600/voyage

**Notes:**
The following is a draft estimate of program costs for AB 433 – based on existing language.

Under the new program – we expect to assess a fee on ~7200 vessel voyages annually
Increased inspections
Increased education and outreach
Program implementation, regulation development (coastal traffic, advanced approval for experimental treatment technology, research (alternative treatment technology, other ship-mediated NIS vectors, standards development), biological surveys, fee collection, and other 

## Slide 14

## For additional information contact:

- Maurya B. Falkner
- 916-574-2568
- _[falknem@slc.ca.gov](mailto:falknem@slc.ca.gov)_
- http://www.slc.ca.gov