Apparent in the Preliminary Regulatory Analysis document accompanying the NPRM contains 

analysis that would seem to clearly indicate that the USCG does not believe that the proposed 

regulations would apply to inland towing vessels and barges. 

Specifically, on page 37 of that document, the USCG explains: 

We have not included the following vessels in the affected 

population that would incur additional costs from the proposed 

BWDS based on consultation with the ballast water program 

personnel and USCG expertise: ... 

Vessels less than or equal to 100 ft. Vessels in this size range 

typically operate in more sheltered environments and do not load 

and discharge ballast. Their stability characteristics generally 

accommodate the amount and type of cargo they carry, precluding 

the need to use ballast water as a stability enhancer. 

Some towing vessels (tugs towing behind and general). These 

vessels do not carry cargo and, thus, do not experience drastic 

changes in draft that would affect their stability characteristics. 

Therefore, they do not typically load and discharge ballast water. 

River vessels. Rivers are usually very sheltered environments 

having limited wind and wave spectra. While current conditions 

play a very large role in sailing and towing characteristics, 

ballasting is not generally used to improve these. The operations of 

the river barge trade make installed ballast water systems very rare 

and loading and discharging ballast water through void tank main 

deck openings, without installed piping and pumps, would be a 

costly and extremely time-consuming evolution. 

On page 12 of this analysis the USCG states: “Approximately 7,575 vessels from the current 

vessel population, of which 2,616 are U.S. vessels, would be required to meet the BWDS” – a 

statistic which would clearly indicate that the USCG does not believe that inland river towboats 

and barges should, or even would be subject to the new standards. 

This USCG preliminary analysis obviously recognizes and agrees with our industry’s ballasting 

practices. In particular our barges and towboats simply do not discharge ballast water. Further, 

any inland river towboat owned or operated by McGinnis which would carry ballast water would 

use only potable water when ballasting or they are otherwise expressly prohibited by company 

policy from exchanging ballast water in different Captain of the Port Zones. Unfortunately, the 

text of the NPRM is not as clear on these points as the supporting documentation, so additional 

clarification in the final rule would be beneficial. 

To the extent that the USCG decides to apply the new standards to inland towboats or barges, the 

final rule should provide the inland towing industry with sufficient flexibility to comply with the 

2 
3 

new standards by means other than installing expensive treatment systems. Those alternative 

options should include the use of potable water as ballast or company policies expressly 

prohibiting the exchange of ballast water in different Captain of the Port Zones. 

Thank you for kindly considering these comments. 

Sincerely, 

Russell E. Painter 

Regulatory Affairs Manager 

cc: Jennifer Carpenter, AWO