Global Pr
oject T
Global Ballast Water
Management Programme
ask For
ce (GPTF)
Third Meeting
Global Project Task Force (GPTF)
Third Meeting
Proceedings
GOA, INDIA, 16-18 JAN 2002
Proceedings
.dwa.uk.com
Global Ballast Water
Management Programme
More Information?
el (+44) 020 7928 5888 www
Programme Coordination Unit
Global Ballast Water Management Programme
International Maritime Organization
4 Albert Embankment
London SE1 7SR United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0)20 7587 3247 or 3251
est & Associates, London. T
Fax: +44 (0)20 7587 3261
Web: http://globallast.imo.org
A cooperative initiative of the Global Environment Facility,
United Nations Development Programme and International Maritime Organization.
Cover designed by Daniel W
Global Project Task Force (GPTF)
Third Meeting
Goa, India: 16-18 January 2002
Proceedings
___________________________________________________________________________
International Maritime Organization
Published in November 2002 by:
Programme Coordination Unit
Global Ballast Water Management Programme
International Maritime Organization
4 Albert Embankment
London SE1 7SR, UK
Tel +44 (0)20 7587 3251
Fax +44 (0)20 7587 3261
Web http://globallast.imo.org
The correct citation of this report is:
Global Ballast Water Management Programme. 2002. Global Project Task Force (GPTF), Third Meeting, Goa,
India, 16-18 January 2002: Proceedings. IMO London
__________________________________________________________________________________________
The Global Ballast Water Management Programme (GloBallast) is a cooperative initiative of the Global Environment Facility (GEF),
United Nations Development Programme (UNDP) and International Maritime Organization (IMO) to assist developing countries to reduce
the transfer of harmful organisms in ships' ballast water.
The opinions expressed in this document are not necessarily those of GEF, UNDP or IMO.
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Contents
Group photograph.................................................................................................................2
Provisional Agenda...............................................................................................................3
Briefing Papers and Submissions .......................................................................................5
Agenda Item 2: PCU Progress Report.........................................................................................7
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports ...................................................................................14
Brazil...................................................................................................................................................... 14
China...................................................................................................................................................... 23
India ....................................................................................................................................................... 27
Islamic Republic of Iran......................................................................................................................... 33
South Africa........................................................................................................................................... 39
Ukraine .................................................................................................................................................. 43
Agenda Item 4: Ballast Water Risk Assessment......................................................................53
Agenda Item 5: NGO/Industry Information Papers ..................................................................61
INTERTANKO...................................................................................................................................... 61
IUCN...................................................................................................................................................... 62
Agenda Item 6: Proposed IMO/Pilot Country MoUs.................................................................64
Agenda Item 7: Port Baseline Surveys......................................................................................68
Agenda Item 8: Ballast Water Management and Control Training Package .........................71
Agenda Item 9: Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement .....................................................74
Agenda Item 9(b): Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement Ballast Water Sampling ...77
Agenda Item 10: Legislation & Regulations .............................................................................79
Agenda Item 11: Regional Replication & Cooperation ............................................................82
Agenda Item 12: Resourcing & Financing ................................................................................85
Agenda Item 13: TV Documentary .............................................................................................87
Agenda Item 14: GloBallast Advanced......................................................................................90
Appendix 1: List of Participants
Appendix 2: Minutes of the Meeting
Appendix 3: Project Implementation Plan (PIP) (January 2002)
Appendix 4: Introductory Presentation Agenda Item 4
1
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Group photograph
2
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Provisional Agenda
Wednesday 16 Jan
Conference Room, Hotel Cidade de Goa (GloBallast team only)
AM: Bilateral meetings PCU/Pilot Countries
PM: Consultant's presentation and planning discussions on forthcoming Risk Assessment (tentative).
Thursday 17 Jan:
Conference Room, National Institute of Oceanography (full GPTF - commences 09:00).
Opening Addresses
Administrative matters
1. Adoption of the Agenda
2. PCU Progress Report & Revised Project Implementation Plan.
3. Country Status Reports, progress to date and forthcoming activities.
a) Brazil
b) China
c) India
d) Iran
e) South
Africa
f) Ukraine
4. Consultant's presentation and discussions on forthcoming Risk Assessment (if not possible on
Weds).
Friday 18 Jan:
Conference Room, National Institute of Oceanography (full GPTF - commences 09:00).
5. NGO/Industry information papers regarding involvement in the ballast water issue.
6. Information on the proposed IMO/Pilot Countries MoUs
7. Port Baseline Surveys
8. BWM training package
9. Compliance Monitoring & Enforcement
9 (b). Ballast Water Sampling
10. Legislative Review
11. Regional Cooperation & Replication
12. Resourcing & Financing
13. TV Documentary
14. GloBallast Advanced
3
Briefing Papers and Submissions
Agenda Item 2:
PCU Progress Report
For the Period 1 January to 31 December 2001
General Comments
During the reporting period, the PCU achieved most of the objectives assigned by the 2nd GPTF
meeting and outlined in the revised Project Implementation Plan (PIP).
Some activities were delayed due to a number of factors outside of the PCU's control, including:
· Changes in basic assumptions in the design of the programme, in particular shifting by IMO
of the likely date for a diplomatic conference to consider the new Convention from 2001 to
late 2003.
· Internal IMO administrative procedures.
· Limited PCU human resources.
· A massive surge in demand for services from external clients both in developing regions
currently covered by the programme and in new regions.
Programme Coordination Unit
Programme Management
The PCU continued to manage the programme in accordance with the set of internal guidelines agreed
in 2001.
Operative meetings of the PCU staff were held periodically for workload planning.
The first UNDP/GEF Project Implementation Review (PIR) was completed in August. It found that
progress towards development objectives is excellent, and that the level of achievement of immediate
objectives has been in general highly satisfactory.
Human Resources
The Principal Administrative Assistant left to pursue further studies at the end of his initial 12 month
contract in April 2001 and a series of temporaries were engaged until filling of the post in September
2001.
Use of consultants for short-term activity-specific assignments increased although administrative
delays in the recruitment of consultants continued to be experienced.
7
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
In order to supplement PCU human resources approaches were made to Norway and Germany for the
recruitment of an Associated Professional Officer (APO) as provided in the original Project
Document, paragraph 121. Discussions are continuing and alternative suppliers are also being
sought.
It has become clear during the last two years that PCU workload requires a second administrative
assistant. This will be met in 2002 through engagement of temporaries.
Communication & Information Clearing House
A new programme brochure `Stopping the Ballast Water Stowaways' was produced and distributed
globally, drawing a positive response and significant requests for more copies.
A second round of the posters produced in 2000 was printed and distributed globally.
A review of the effectiveness and client-satisfaction with the awareness materials produced to date
was conducted through a stakeholder questionnaire and significant positive feedback was received. A
new poster design was commenced based on this feedback.
Brazil and Ukraine were provided with poster designs in Portuguese and Ukrainian.
All awareness materials produced to date were made available globally as PDF files on the GloBallast
website.
Procurement, cataloguing and archiving of publications for the IMO Library Ballast Water Collection
continued, and the collection was expanded by over 400%. This was achieved using PCU staff
resources and there is a need to internalise this function within the IMO library itself.
A further four issues of Ballast Water News were produced (one per quarter), with a global hardcopy
circulation of 15,000 plus posting on the GloBallast web site (http://globallast.imo.org). Requests to
be added to the mailing list increased significantly and the newsletter was expanded from 8 to 12
pages to accommodate adequate coverage of global events. Significant positive feedback to the
newsletter was received from a variety of stakeholders.
A series of technical articles on ballast water matters prepared by the PCU were published in a
number of specialist international publications (e.g. PEMSEA Tropical Coasts, Shipping World &
Shipbuilder, Loydds List).
The PCU continued to actively procure and distribute reports, publications and other documents on
ballast water and invasive marine species to the Country Focal Points in all Pilot Countries, to assist
them with building-up in-country information resources.
Maintenance and updating of the Ballast Water Treatment R&D Directory, both in hard copy and the
web-based database, lapsed due to the departure of the Principal Administrative Assistant and delays
in recruiting a permanent replacement.
The GloBallast website continued to be maintained and developed on an ad-hoc basis as staff-time
allowed, but requires a major update, upgrade and expansion to meet the needs of users, as identified
by the CHM review (see below).
A strategic review of the PCU's information Clearing House Mechanism (CHM) was carried out
through a consultancy and the review report will be received and considered in late January 2002.
This is seen as being a major, core function of the PCU by most stakeholders. Recommendations with
significant resource implications are expected.
PCU Travel
During the reporting period, PCU staff undertook significant duty travel in order to fulfil workplan
objectives. This included:
8
Agenda Item 2: PCU Progress Report
! Legal Workshop, Malmo, Sweden.
! APEC Workshop, Hobart, Australia.
! International Ballast Water Conference, Singapore.
! Support mission to Brazil.
! ROCRAM meeting, Ecuador.
! Baltic Workshop, Tallinn, Estonia.
! Black Sea Conference, Odessa, Ukraine.
! SIGTTO meeting, Bracknell, UK.
! WMU lectures, Malmo, Sweden.
! GISP Workshop, Copenhagen, Denmark.
! Mnemiopsis Workshop, Baku, Azerbaijan.
! Port Survey Planning and Training, Saldanha, South Africa.
! ICES/IOC/IMO Meeting, Barcelona, Spain.
! Planning Mission, I.R. Iran.
! ROPME Meeting, Bahrain.
During the year, the PCU began to implement a policy of requesting CFPs or CFP-As to represent the
PCU at international meetings where this is more beneficial. This started with the CFP-A for Brazil
representing the programme at the 2nd International Conference on Marine Bioinvasions in New
Orleans in April 2001 and nomination of the CFP-A for South Africa to present a paper on behalf of
the PCU at the 11th International Conference on Aquatic Alien Species being held in Alexandria, USA
in February 2002.
In-country Coordination Arrangements
In-country co-ordination arrangements, including CFPs, CFP-As and CPTFs appear to be functioning
effectively. It is now necessary to begin regional replication of these arrangements.
Global Coordination Agreements
The GPTF remains the primary forum for global co-ordination of the programme. Arrangements for
the 3rd GPTF meeting were completed by the CFP and CFP-A of the host country India, supported by
the PCU.
Risk Assessment & Port Baseline Surveys
The PCU progressed the Risk Assessment consultancy tender to the point of contract commencement
but was delayed by IMO administration. This has caused a significant `domino-effect' delay to the
whole programme. IMO approval has now been received, more details are contained in the Briefing
Paper for agenda item 4, and the lead risk assessment consultant (Dr Rob Hilliard) will brief all
parties during the meeting.
9
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
By the end of November 2001 training and support had been provided by the PCU to all six Pilot
Countries in Port Baseline Surveys and all countries had completed the field sampling component of
their surveys. This represents a major practical achievement for the programme and a material
implementation of an important element of the IMO ballast water Guidelines. Each country now
needs to complete sample identification, analysis and reporting. Further details are provided in the
Briefing Paper for agenda item 7.
Ballast Water Management Measures
The PCU and the UN Train-Sea-Coast Central Support Unit have initiated development of the
training packages based on Train-X methodology. Further details are provided in the Briefing Paper
for agenda item 8.
In March 2001 the PCU convened the 1st International Ballast Water Treatment R&D Symposium
followed immediately by the 1st International Ballast Water Treatment Standards Workshop, at IMO
headquarters in London. Both events proved highly successful and have been used by the MEPC
Ballast Water Working Group as a catalyst and basis for progressing the development of standards,
which remains one of the major obstacles to finalising the new Convention.
After nearly two years of the programme, is considered that the six Pilot Counties need to make
greater efforts to implement basic ballast water management measures, as clearly described in the
IMO Guidelines (A.869(20)).
Compliance, Monitoring and Enforcement
A CME Scoping Study was conducted in the latter half of 2001. Further details are provided in the
Briefing Paper for agenda item 9.
Legislation and Regulations
The legislative review project is substantially complete. Further details are provided in the Briefing
Paper for agenda item 10.
Regional Cooperation and Replication
The PCU and Ukraine GloBallast team held the 1st Regional Conference for the Black Sea. A
Regional Action Plan (RAP) was approved by all Black Sea countries and funding proposals are being
developed for the RAP.
The PCU with support from the Estonian Government held a Regional Workshop for the Baltic Sea
and a Regional Action Plan and funding proposals are under development.
The PCU is now working with the I.R Iran and the ROPME Secretariat to hold the next Regional
Conference in the Gulf (ROPME Sea Area).
10
Agenda Item 2: PCU Progress Report
Ad-hoc regional activities have been undertaken for the African, Asia/Pacific, South Asia and South
American regions (e.g. presentations at various regional meetings). After nearly two years of the
programme, the Pilot Counties now need to focus more on progressing regional replication.
The PCU has formed cooperative links with various other regional bodies, including the Caspian
Environment Programme (CEP), the Helsinki Commission (HELCOM), the South Pacific Regional
Environment Programme (SPREP), Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), Regional
Cooperation Among Maritime Authorities of South America (ROCRAM) and the Mediterranean
Action Plan (MAP).
Further details are provided in the Briefing Paper for agenda item 11.
Resources and Financing
In accordance with the Project Implementation Plan (PIP), the PCU has been seeking supplementary
sources of support and funds for the programme. Approximately US$630,000 worth of additional
funding and support-in-kind has already been secured by the PCU, from the IMO Technical
Cooperation Fund, the UN Division of Ocean Affairs and Law of the Sea, the Government of
Singapore and the shipping industry. The following additional prospects have been identified to date:
· Potentially up to Euro 5 million for the Baltic Sea/ Black Sea/Eastern Europe from the EU.
· Potentially significant funding from the US State Department for the Eastern Baltic.
· Potentially significant funding from the GEF Baltic Sea Regional Project for the Baltic.
· Potentially US$500,000 from APEC for Asia/Pacific.
· An Associate Professional Officer (APO) to supplement PCU staff resources from Germany
or Norway.
The PCU is working with relevant organizations to develop the proposals further.
The status of in-country self- financing issues will is to be reported by the Pilot Countries.
Further details are provided in the Briefing Paper for agenda item 12.
Revision of PIP and
12 month Extension of the Programme
The analysis of the first two years of the GloBallast Programme has led to a number of conclusions,
two of which have a primary impact on the implementation process:
The exchange of the initial assumptions; and the need for continuous coordination and a standardized
approach to the activities in the six participating countries.
In 1997/1998, when the initial project document was elaborated, the international community was
planning to adopt a regulatory regime for ballast water transfers by 2001 or at the latest 2002. Under
this assumption the activities of the project were structured to achieve two main development
objectives:
11
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
To increase adherence to the current IMO voluntary guidelines on ballast water management; and to
assist the participating countries to prepare for the implementation of the anticipated IMO mandatory
regime when it comes into force.
Due to the complexity of the issue the negotiations between IMO Member States took longer than
expected and the adoption of the Convention was postponed until late 2003. A Diplomatic Conference
is provisionally scheduled for October 2003.
Whereas the activities related to the first objective have been successfully completed, or in some cases
are currently under development in advanced stages, the situation is different for the activities relating
to the second objective. In the absence of the Convention, it was premature to tackle activities such as
Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement and National Ballast Water Management Plans. Legislative
Review and Training and other similar activities had to be limited to the requirements of the existing
voluntary guidelines. The time gap created between the scheduled end of GloBallast in March 2003
and the possible adoption of the new Convention has also raised concern and risks losing the
unprecedented momentum of concerted international action precipitated by the project.
The analysis of the first two years has also revealed the need for continuous coordination and
monitoring. The length of time required for administrative procedures to initiate the various activities
and the complexity of the logistics required for their implementation combined with limited human
resources have prevented PCU from progressing all activities in parallel as initially planned. The need
to ensure standardized approaches in countries situated all around the globe with such different sizes
and diversified geo-climatic and politico-administrative conditions imposed flexible time schedules
and determined several adjustments in the initial indicative work plan. Some countries made
representations that more time is needed in order to implement all programme activities.
During the reporting period a number of new activities emerged from the implementation process or
have been recommended by various stakeholders. Those include the second international ballast water
treatment R&D Symposium, an international workshop on ballast water sampling technologies,
advanced clearing house mechanisms, an enhanced television documentary and a conference to
establish medium term strategic directions to name but a few.
The figures available to date and the estimations made for the end of year 2001 have shown that the
planned disbursements were under US$ 3 million and the actual disbursements approximately US$1.6
million which gives a timing of disbursement of a bit more than 53%, meaning that the project is
under spent.
After thorough consideration of all the above aspects and based on the indications received from IMO
and UNDP-GEF the PCU has reviewed the Project Implementation Plan and budget in accordance
with the provisions of sub-section 6.6.2 paragraph 1 of the UNDP Programme Manual, and elaborated
the Revision D of the initial project document which is hereby attached (at Appendix III) for your
consideration and approval.
The present substantive revision covers the period until 29 February 2004, reflects the adjustments of
the "Revised Indicative Three Year Workplan (July 2000)" and incorporates the newly recommended
activities all in the initially approved overall budget.
GloBallast Advanced
The shift in the likely timing of the new ballast water Convention Diplomatic Conference from 2001
to late 2003 combined with an increasing demand from developing regions for programmatic support
and technical assistance, have raised the need to extend the GloBallast Programme for another five
years beyond the nominal end of the current phase (originally March 2003, now March 2004).
12
Agenda Item 2: PCU Progress Report
This subsequent phase, covering the period April 2004 to April 2009, has been called GloBallast
Advanced. The PCU has prepared a Discussion Paper as a starting point for stakeholder consultation.
The initial draft has been reviewed by UNDP/GEF and an updated draft will be presented in detail
under agenda item 14.
13
Agenda Item 3:
Country Status Reports
For the Period 1 January to 31 December 2001
Brazil
Introduction
The year 2000, first year of the project, was expended structuring the Programme within the country,
culminating with the elaboration of the National Workplan at the end of November. Thus, the
development of the activities only start in January 2001 and just a small part of the available budget
was already used (15.4%). Moreover, several components of the Programme do not initiate yet.
Therefore, it is proposed here an extension of 12 months on the timeline originally established to the
project, using the remaining funds without any increasing. This extension will allow a complete
implementation of the project and also will cover the period between March 2003 and the
accomplishment of the Diplomatic Conference expected to be hold during the second semester of that
year.
This report aims to present a summary of the expenditures done during the year 2001 in the ambit of
the GEF/UNDP/IMO GloBallast Programme, as well as a timetable of disbursement for the period
January 2002 to March 2004.
1
Deposits on the imprest account
Considering some national regulations, a bank account could not be opened in the name of IMO
unless it was registered at a Brazilian National Register of Legal Entities. This option was set aside
and the Brazilian Navy's Admiral Paulo Moreira Institute of Marine Studies (IEAPM), on a co-
operative basis with the Ministry of Environment, opened an imprest account to receive the funds
repassed by the Finance and Budget Section of IMO.
The Table 1 shows the amount credited on the project's imprest account, totalling USD$ 88,931.20
(R$220,751.30 after deduction of bank taxes). This value summed with the salary paid for the
Country Focal Point Assistant along 13 months (USD$ 21,794.44) is equivalent to USD$ 110,725.64
that correspond to 15.4% from the total of USD$ 718,333 available for the national workplan
implementation.
Table 1 List of deposits and tax incurred
Deposit Amount
Exchange
Banco do Brasil
Barclays Bank
Net Deposit
Date
(USD$)
Rate
Tax (USD$)
Tax (USD$)
(R$)
(R$ / USD$)
11/01/2001 8,000.00
4.28 1.9510
58.03 15,486.41
30/05/2001 10,000.00
4.34
2.3570
116.00 23,286.36
10/07/2001 22,000.00
4.21
2.4810
50.00 54,447.50
07/11/2001 48,931.20
0.00
2.6090
50.00 127,531.05
Total 88,931.20 12.83 -
274.03
220,751.30
14
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports - Brazil
2 Monthly
Reports
The first deposit of USD$ 8,000 in January 2001 was a credit on the IEAPM account to reimburse the
expenses done with the workshop for preparation of the National Workplan held on November 2000.
These expenses were object of a specific financial report. The first actual deposit on the imprest
account occur at the end of May 2001 and since that monthly reports have been prepared by IEAPM's
staff with the assistance from the CFP-A.
A particularity of these reports that should be considered is the great variation underwent by the
exchange rate between US Dollars and Brazilian Reais during the last 12 months. The Figure 1
illustrate this fluctuation and the gaps between values that convert deposits (done in US Dollars) on
credits in Reais, and values employed to calculate the debits in US Dollars in the monthly reports.
These numerical variation, in which to same amount in Reais is assigned different quantities in
Dollars on bookkeeping monthly records, can lead to difficulty in calculate balance in the budget
lines.
3.0
2.5
D$
Deposits
US
/
Reports
R$
2.0
1.5
00
/
00
/
00
01
01
01
01
v
/
0
1
r
/
0
1
/
01
i
/
0
1
l/
0
1
t
/
0
1
/
01
/
01
out/
ju
nov
dez
j
a
n/
fe
ma
abr
ma
j
u
n/
ago/
se
out/
nov
dez
Months
Figure 1 Exchange rate variation (Nov/2000 Dec/2001)
The criterion adopted to select the exchange rate between currencies for the monthly financial reports
was established as the value of this rate at the last working day of each month (Table 2).
Table 2 Exchange rates used on monthly financial reports
Rate
Month
(R$/USD$)
June / 2001
2.3041
July / 2001
2.4305
August / 2001
2.5509
September / 2001
2.6705
October / 2001
2.7063
November / 2001
2.5279
December / 2001
2.3196
Source: Central Bank of Brasil
The Table 3 presents a summary of monthly expenditures, by budget line, along the year 2001. A
quick look at the figures reveals that the following activities do not have disbursement until now:
15
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
1.B.3: Support CPTF Meetings
4.2: In-Country
Training
5.2:
Ballast Water Sampling Equipment
5.3:
CME Personnel and Training
5.4:
Implement CME Systems
6.2:
RPTF Meetings and Study Tours
7.1:
National Resourcing and Financing
Table 3 Summary of monthly expenses by budget line (2001)
Activity Jan/01 Feb/01 Mar/01 Apr/01 May/01 Jun/01
3,904.36 1,942.22 1,866.05
1,812.73
1,691.88
1,655.11
1.B.2 (1)
- - -
-
-
141.92
1.B.3 -
-
-
-
-
-
1.B.4 8,000.00
-
-
-
-
-
2.4 -
-
-
-
-
-
2.5 -
-
-
-
-
-
3.1 -
-
-
-
-
-
3.2 -
-
-
-
-
-
4.2 -
-
-
-
-
-
4.3 -
-
-
-
-
-
5.2 -
-
-
-
-
-
5.3 -
-
-
-
-
-
5.4 -
-
-
-
-
-
6.1 -
-
-
-
-
-
6.2 -
-
-
-
-
-
7.1 -
-
-
-
-
-
Subtotal ( 2) 8,000.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
0.00
141.92
Total 11,904.36
1,942.22
1,866.05
1,812.73
1,691.88
1,797.03
Activity Jul/01 Ago/01 Sep/01 Oct/01 Nov/01 Dec/01 Total
1,619.89 1,522.70 1,522.70
1,364.42
1,399.54
1,492.84 21,794.44
1.B.2 (1)
38.75 492.95 453.83
3,418.29
1,962.43
81.50 4,194.25
1.B.3 -
-
-
-
-
-
0.00
1.B.4 -
-
-
-
-
-
8,000.00
2.4 1,251.92
1,815.46
-
-
-
-
3,067.38
2.5 -
-
-
3,6.95
9,921.36
172.87
10,131.18
3.1 -
-
-
812.92
-
812.92
3.2 3,085.80
1,082.94 98.30
-
37,665.75
1,149.14
43,081.93
4.2 -
-
-
-
-
-
0.00
4.3 332.52
4,623.76 -
2,405.24
7,562.98
-
14,924.50
5.2 -
-
-
-
-
-
0.00
5.3 -
-
-
-
-
-
0.00
5.4 -
-
-
-
-
-
0.00
6.1 -
-
-
3,272.85
-
-
3,272.85
6.2 -
-
-
-
-
-
0.00
7.1 -
-
-
-
-
-
0.00
Subtotal ( 2) 4,708.99 8,015.11 552.13
7,550.83
57,112.52
1,403.51 87,485.01
Total 6,328.88
9,537.81
2,074.83
8,915.25
58,512.06
2,896.35
109,279.45
Note:
(1) The 1st line shows the CFP-A salary that is paid directly by IMO and the 2nd line shows the expenses to support
CFP-A office and activities withdraw from the imprest account.
(2)
Subtotal excluding CFP-A Salary.
16
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports - Brazil
3 Budget
Revision
Based on the analysis of the previous table, a revision on the National Workplan budget is proposed.
The Table 4 condenses these reallocations which are justified on the next items.
Table 4 Reviewed budget
Activities
Budget (USD$)
Proposed Difference
N W P
Spend
Balance
allocation
1.B.2: Support CPTF and CFP Assistant
110,000
25,988.69
84,011.31 84,011.31
0.00
1.B.3: Support CPTF Meetings
24,000
0.00
24,000.00 12,000.00 +12,000.00
1.B.4: Develop/Implement National Workplans
110,000
8,000.00 102,000.00 102,000.00
0.00
2.4: Country Communication Workshops
20,000
3,067.38
16,932.62
0.00 +16,932.62
2.5: Implement Country Communication Workplans
90,000
10,131.18
79,868.82 96,801.44 -16,932.62
3.1: Ballast Water Risk Assessment
4,000
812.92
3,187.08
3,187.08
0.00
3.2: Port Baseline Surveys
67,000
43,081.93
23,918.07 23,918.07
0.00
4.2: Education and Training Packages
30,000
0.00
30,000.00 30,000.00
0.00
4.3: Legislation and Regulations
25,000
14,924.50
10,075.50 10,500.00
-424.50
5.2: Ballast Water Sampling Equipment
10,000
0.00
10,000.00 10,000.00
0.00
5.3: CME Personnel and Training
80,000
0.00
80,000.00 80,000.00
0.00
5.4: Implement CME Systems
40,000
0.00
40,000.00 40,000.00
0.00
6.1: Form Regional Programme Task Forces
10,000
3,272.85
6,727.15
6,727.15
0.00
6.2: RPTF Meetings and Study Tours
90,000
0.00
90,000.00 90,000.00
0.00
7.1: National Resourcing and Financing
8,333
0.00
8,333.00 19,908.50 -11,575.50
Total 718,333 109,279.45 609,053.55 609,053.55
0.00
3.1. Support CPTF Meetings (Activity (1.B.3)
Under the National Workplan USD$ 24,000 is available to support the holding of CPTF meetings. As
long as the remaining time for the project is 27 months, it is considered that a total of 4 meetings
during the programme lifetime will be sufficient, giving a total of USD$ 12,000, based on an estimate
of USD$ 3,000 per meeting
3.2. Country Communication Workshop (Activity 2.4)
The meeting was held in July 2001 at the auditorium of the Directorate of Port and Coasts. From this
workshop was adopted the document "National Communication Workplan" as reference for the
activities related to awareness raising. The costs involved in the event realisation (Table 5) were much
smaller than the USD$ 20,000 made available. In such a way the remaining USD$ 16,932.62 can be
transferred to the activity 2.5 "Implement Country Communication Workplan".
Table 5 Workshop costs
Description USD$
Support Material
63.09
Coffee-break meals (juice, biscuit, cookies, tidbits, ...)
37.24
Lunch (16 persons)
70.36
DSA
Ministry of Environment - CFP Representative
277.10
Ministry of Environment - ASSCOM Representative
166.26
Ministry of Transport - ASSCOM Representative
166.26
Ministry of Science and Technology - ASSCOM Representative
166.26
National Sanitary Surveillance Agency - ASSCOM Representative
166.26
IEAPM Representative
166.26
Airfares (5 Brasília Rio de Janeiro Brasília)
1,788.29
Total
3,067.38
Note: ASSCOM: Communication Accessory.
17
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
3.3. Port Baseline Surveys (Activity 3.2)
The compilation of existing information and previous studies on the distribution of biota in the port
(including presence of introduced species, composition, abundance and space-time distribution of the
biota of the study area) is concluded under final edition.
The port biota survey was undertaken with success during the months of November and December,
following the guidance provided by the CRIMP Protocols, with the advice of an international
consultant. The expenditures with the field stage are presented in Table 6.
Table 6 Disbursement with port baseline survey
Expenditures USD$
Sampling November
December
Plankton
1,837.49
-
Benthos (natural substrate)
1,578.78
-
Benthos (artificial substrate)
1,979.35
-
Soft Substrate
1,977.93
-
Fish
5,940.42
-
Restitution
-
-1,412.45
Subtotal
11,901.53
Diving
Main dive team
5,504.17
-
Photo diver
640.85
388.00
Diver natural substrate
356.03
-
Subtotal
6,889.05
Vessels
Diadorim (IEAPM)
9,256.70
-
Santa Ursula University
5,047.67
-
Subtotal
14,304.36
DSA 2,850.10
2,173.59
Subtotal
5,023.69
Transportation 696.23
-
Subtotal
696.23
Total
38,814.85
Note: exchange rates: Nov/2001 USD$1 = R$2.5279; Dec/2001 USD$1 = R$2.3196
The total expenditures done until now under this budget line come at USD$ 43,081.93. Under the
National Workplan USD$ 67,000 are available, remaining for the next phase USD$ 23,918.07. The
Table 7 describes the activities that will be developed nationally by Brazilian marine biologists and
oceanographers. International taxonomists will be contacted as needed to identify exotic species. It is
impossible to foresee the costs of these experts that are not committed to the project at present,
possibly leading to necessity of future supplementation for this activity.
Table 7 Expected payments
Activity Detail
R$
USD$
Compile existing information 2nd /2 parcel (8 × R$ 1,050)
8,400
3,652.17
Plankton analysis
3,000
1,304.35
Benthos (natural substrate)
3,000
1,304.35
Fine sorting and taxonomy
Benthos (artificial substrate)
3,000
1,304.35
Fish analysis
3,000 1,304.35
Sediment analysis
Granulometry/organic matter (R$100 × 21 sites)
2,100
913.04
Cysts analysis
R$ 210/sample × 102 samples
21,420
9,313.04
HPLC analysis
Dinoflagellate toxins
6,000
2,608.70
Material for the collections
bottles, fixatives, reagents, herbarium material
4,600
2,000.00
Contingency
8,892
3,865.90
Total
55,012 23,918.07
Note: estimated exchange rate USD$1 = R$2.30
18
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports - Brazil
3.4. Legislation and Regulation (Activity 4.3)
This activity is nearly ended. The Brazilian delegates attended in November 2001 the workshop on
legal aspects of ballast water management and control. These expenses, jointly with the first parcel of
the Local Legislative Consultant (LLC) contract, totalize USD$ 14,924.50 (Table 8). Considering the
available funds for this activity of USD$ 25,000, an amount of USD$ 10,075.50 is remaining.
The LLC submitted her final report that is now under approval process. The second and the third
parcels of the contract, corresponding to R$ 24,150, will be paid up in the first quarter of 2002. The
equivalent sum in US Dollars will depend on the exchange rate at the date, and can be estimated in
USD$ 10,500. Therefore, it might be necessary a supplementation (Table 9).
Table 8 Disbursement with legislation review
Description USD$
Meeting in Rio de Janeiro
DSA (CFP Representative)
166.26
DSA (LLC)
166.26
Airfares
566.37
BW Legal Aspects Workshop (Malmö, Sweden)
DSA (LLC)
531.67
LLC airfare
2,405.24
DSA (CFP Representative)
1,820.82
CFP Representative airfare
5,210.49
Consultant payment
1st /3 parcel
4,057.39
Total
14,924.50
Table 9 Expected payments
Consultant payment
R$
USD$(1) USD$(2)
2nd /3 parcel
10,350
4,500
4,312.50
3rd /3 parcel
13,800
6,000
5,750.00
Total
24,150 10,500 10,062.50
Note: estimated exchange rate (1) USD$1 = R$2.30 (2) USD$1 = R$2.40
3.5. Regional Co-operation and Replication (Activities 6.1 and 6.2)
A first step was given in initiate regional cooperation in South America with the participation of the
GloBallast CTA and the Brazilian CFP-A at the ROCRAM meeting on October 2002. The Table 10
shows the costs incurred of partaking in this event. Considering the available funds of USD$ 10,000
for the activity 6.1, the remaining balance is USD$ 6,727.15.
Table 10 - Disbursement with ROCRAM meeting
Description R$
USD$
DSA (CFP-A)
2,374.56
877.42
Airfare (Rio de Janeiro - Guayaquil - Rio de Janeiro)
6,482.75
2,395.43
Total
8,857.31
3,272.85
The following actions will be developed under activity 6.2 "RPTF Meetings and Study Tours":
a) Contract a qualified consultant, experienced with environmental management, that will assist the
Country Focal Point of Brazil on several tasks concerning the implementation of this component,
including the conduction of the regional meeting and preparation of the Regional Action Plan
document;
19
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
b) The consultant and the CFP-A will travel to Brasília to discuss at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs
aspects of regional cooperation and the arrangements for meeting;
c) Undertake missions across South America. Considering the number of countries involved, ideally
the visits will be scheduled in two goes and will consist of two days in each country and one day
travel to the next country.
d) Hold a Conference on ballast water management assembling maritime, port and environmental
officials from the countries in Brasilia. The Conference will be developed along one day and a
half.
The Regional Programme Task Force will count with 6 countries, according to following criteria:
· Uruguay and Argentina activities being developed jointly in The Global Programme of
Action for the Protection of Marine Environment from Land-Based Activities (Southwest
Atlantic);
· French Guyana boundary aspects and adjacent mangrove ecosystem (Mangrove
Cooperation Project / States of Pará and Amapá);
· Chile articulation with other regional programmes of recognised importance; and
· Peru and Colombia - boundary aspects.
The Table 11 and Table 12 are used on calculations to estimate the expenses involved with the
activity of regional cooperation, summarised on Table 13.
Table 11 Economic class round trip airfare to Rio de Janeiro (approximate value)
From USD$
From USD$
Bogota (Colombia)
1,829 Lima (Peru)
1,537
Buenos Aires (Argentina)
851
Montevideo (Uruguay)
797
Cayenne (French Guyana)
2,617 Santiago (Chile)
1,205
Table 12 DSA for cities included on regional cooperation
City USD$
City USD$
Bogota (Colombia)
108
Lima (Peru)
213
Buenos Aires (Argentina)
243
Montevideo (Uruguay)
147
Cayenne (French Guyana)
143
Santiago (Chile)
223
Table 13 - Expected payments
Item Description USD$
a) Consultant
60 days
8,000
b) Contact with Ministry of Foreign Affairs
Airfares
2 persons x 2 travels
1,600
DSA
2 days x (2 persons x 2 travels)
500
b) Missions (1 person)
Airfares
2 travels
9,000
DSA
6 countries x 3 days
3,230
c) RPTF meeting in Brasília (20 persons)
Hall (equiped)
2 days
180
Coffee-break
3 ( US$3.5/person )
210
International Airfares
12 tickets ( 2 per country )
18,000
Domestic Airfares
12 tickets ( Rio Brasília Rio )
4,800
Delegates' DSA
12 persons (3 days)
4,284
Subtotal
49,804
d) Contingency
40,196
Total
90,000
Note:
a) DSA in Brasília: USD$ 119
b) Airfare Rio de Janeiro Brasília Rio de Janeiro: USD$ 400
20
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports - Brazil
3.6. National Resourcing and Financing (Activities 7.1 and 7.2)
A vital objective of the programme is identify and appraise, during its lifetime, long term resourcing
and financing arrangements to implement, in a national ambit, ballast water management measures.
The development of programme's activities itself is given the basis to this evaluation, mainly the
review of "Legislation and Regulations".
The available funds for this activity is US$ 8,333 to each country. Part of the remaining balance from
the activity 1.B.3 "Support CPTF Meetings" (USD$ 12,000) can be applied to address in-country
sustainable resourcing and financing mechanisms. This activity would require consultation with
several government segments related to port activities and with the shipping industry.
Expenses with the participation at the Donors Conference will done under be this budget.
Conclusion
In view of the remaining funds, the programme's extension is feasible. The challenge set in this
moment is distribute the several activities, during the next 27 months, in a coherent way with the
initial objectives of the GEF/UNDP/IMO Programme and the current situation of the future Ballast
Water Convention development.
Besides the activity 4.3 "Legislation and Regulations" that is almost concluded, other activities
initiated during the year 2001 are expected to be complete along the year 2002 as:
· 3.1 "BW Risk Assessment" contract approved of international consultants to carry out the
ballast water risk assessment.
· 3.2 "Port Baseline Survey" species analysis will begin in January and the final report is
expected to ready by December.
· 4.2 "Education and Training Packages" package now under development by the TSC
programmes, planned to be delivered in the middle of the second semester.
· 6.1/6.2 "Regional Replication" regional conference to be convened late 2002.
On other hand, implementation of awareness raising activities contained in the communication
workplan should be developed in a continuous way until the end of the programme.
The situation related with the component 5 "Compliance, Monitoring and Enforcement" is quite
different from the activities outlined above. Currently the countries only have voluntary guidelines.
Even after the expected Diplomatic Conference, planned to the second semester of 2003, there will be
a period before the Convention enter into force. Thus, the definition of what management measures
implement still can retard.
The present revision of the National Workplan budget will certainly need a new examination in the
future. Continuing the implementation the workplan, probably it will be realised that some
components are overestimated and others underestimated. An example of the first case could be the
BW sampling equipment with USD$ 10,000 (activity 5.2). Also, some budget lines are apparently
unbalanced as "Education and Training Packages" (activity 4.2) with USD$ 30,000 and "In-country
CME Personnel and Training" with USD$ 80,000 (activity 5.3).
Finally, the guidance from the Programme Coordination Unit, with advice from the Global Project
Task Force, will be essential in the use of more realistic estimates to comply with all activities and
timelines.
21
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
4 Timeline
Table 14 - Brazilian National Workplan Schedule Summary
Workplan
Tasks to be undertaken
2002 2003
2004
Total
Component
I II III IV I II III IV I
National
· Support CPTF and
9,335 9,335
9,335
9,335
9,335
9,335
9,335
9,335 9,331 84,011
CFP Assistant (1.B.2)
Workplan
· Support CPTF
- 3,000
-
3,000
-
3,000
-
3,000
- 12,000
Meetings (1.B.3)
· Develop / Implement
- 25,500
-
25,500
-
25,500
-
25,500
- 102,000
National Workplans
(1.B.4)
Comm.
· Country
- -
-
-
-
-
-
- - 0
Educ. and
Communication
Awar.
Workshops (2.4)
Raising
· Implement Country
10,756 10,756
10,756
10,756
10,756
10,756
10,756
10,756 10,753 96,801
Communication
Workplans (2.5)
Risk
· Ballast water risk
2,137 350
350
350
-
-
-
-
- 3,187
assessment (3.1)
Assessment · Develop port baseline
6,000 6,000
6,000
5,918
-
-
-
-
- 23,918
survey (3.2)
BW
· Training course in
- -
-
30,000
-
-
-
- -
30,000
Management
application of IMO
Measures
voluntary guidelines
(4.2)
· Contract consultants to
10,500 -
-
-
-
-
-
- -
10,500
review existing
legislation (4.3)
Compliance · Ballast Water
- -
10,000
-
-
-
-
- -
10,000
Enforcement
Sampling Equipment
&
(5.2)
Monitoring
· Training of Personnel
- -
-
40,000
-
40,000
-
- -
80,000
(5.3)
· Implement CME
- -
-
-
8,000
8,000
8,000
8,000
8,000
40,000
Systems (5.4)
Regional
· Form cooperative
3,727 3,000
-
-
-
-
-
-
- 6,727
Activities
relationships with
neighbouring countries
(6.1)
· Assist the
8,000 7,000
7,000
30,000
7,600
7,600
7,600
7,600 7,600 90,000
establishment of RPTF
and held a workshop
(6.2)
Res. &
· Develop/implement in-
- -
-
-
2,500
2,500
2,500
2,500
9,908
19,908
Financing
country resourcing and
financing (7.1)
Total
50,455 64,941
43,441 154,859
38,191 106,691
38,191
66,691 45,592 609,052
22
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports - China
China
The GloBallast Programme has been implemented successfully under the National Workplan. Since
the 2nd GPTF Meeting, which was held in December 2000, the following activities have been carried
out.
1
Awareness Raising Campaign Pave the Way forward
A nationwide awareness-raising campaign is the first thing first with a view to implementing the IMO
Resolution A.868(20). While most activities are carried out at the demonstration site, a nationwide
awareness campaign is very necessary for a country like China. Under the National Workplan, the
following activities have been carried out.
Translating and printing the Chinese /English version of IMO R.868(20) and disseminating
them to the marine industry nationwide
Under the Country's Communication Workplan, a Chinese/English version of IMO Resolution
868(20) has been prepared and 6400 copies of the Resolution have been printed. By now, 3600 copies
have been disseminated free of charge to the shipping industry and relevant organizations nationwide.
Such dissemination will continue under the plan. Some libraries of universities and research
organizations have include the Chinese/English A.868(20) in their lists. The book is also available on
board all COSCO ships and will be available on board ships of China Shipping, the two biggest
shipping companies of China.
Nationwide awareness raising seminars
Under the National Workplan, 8 seminars for education and awareness raising will be carried out
nationwide. Among the 8 seminars, 4 will be carried out in the North around the Bohai Sea where the
demonstration site of the programme is situated. The other 4 seminars will be held in the middle and
south of the country. Each seminar will be participated by about 60 people from those relevant
organizations and companies.
By now 3 of the seminars have been successfully held in Dalian and Tianjin respectively. The others
will be held soon. To support this activity the Government and relevant organizations provide the
accommodation and inter-city transport for the participants.
Presentation at relevant meetings and dissemination of news letters and posters
The CFP-A attended 3 national meetings on the protection of marine environment and delivered
presentation of introduction of ballast water issue and the GloBallast Programme. The 1st 4-page
ballast water news letter has been prepared and disseminated as the middle pages of the journal
"Transport and Environment Protection".
Opening of the web site
A web site under the name of "globallast-china.org" has been prepared and opened by the end of
December 2001.
2 Legislative
review
The legislative review on the implementation of IMO Guidelines has been completed. The contracted
Local Legal Consultant (LLC) submitted the report in time to the International Lead Consultant for
consideration on development of suggested model regulations on ballast water management. The
report was considered at the Legislative Workshop, which was held in Malmo, Sweden 15-17
November 2001.
23
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
The CFP and CFP-A has been participating in the recent amendments to the relevant instruments
relating to ballast water control. With a view to implementing IMO voluntary Guidelines, the Chinese
Government is planning to promulgate Regulations at Ministerial level late next year to implement the
relevant requirements of Resolution A868(20). This will be considered as a big success of the
GloBallast Programme in the country.
3 Case
study
The case study has been completed by Mr. John McLachlan-Karr, the contracted IMO consultant,
who visited Beijing and Dalian late August and early September 2001. During his stay, the Liaoning
MSA and the CFP-A provided technical support for information collecting. Two small meetings were
held in Beijing and Dalian respectively. The Consultant also visited the scientists and relevant
organizations in Dalian.
The CFP-A and Ms Xu Xiaoman from Liaoning MSA provided information clarification which is
considered necessary for him to finalize the mission report after the consultant left China.
4
Port Baseline Biota Survey in Dalian
The training and field workport for baseline biota survey has been completed. The laboratory work is
under way. Dr. Marnie Campbell visited China in August and September. She provided technical
training to the survey team and guidance for the field work. Sampling at 52 selected points have been
completed. The samples of organisms are sorted and protected for laboratory study.
5
Other activities
Development of Ship-specific Ballast Water Management Plan
The China MSA is helping the shipping industry in developing ballast water management plan for the
ships. It is expected that all ships of international voyages will be equipped with ballast water
management plan as required by Resolution A868(20).
Regional Cooperation
Efforts are making to contact the neighboring countries of North Korea, South Korea, Philippines and
Vienam. A meeting participated by the representatives from the above mentioned countries is planned
to be held in 2002 for exchange of information and sharing experience as ballast water control is
concerned.
6
Activities to be carried out
Under the National Workplan, the Programme will carry out the following activities:
· risk assessment of ships' ballast water;
· training of port and shipping personnel;
· monitoring of compliance and enforcement of ballast water management;
· regional cooperation; and
· three Country-specific activities.
24
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports - China
7
Country's in-kind support
By the end of 2001, the Chinese Government and relevant organizations have provided the following
in-kind support for implementing the GloBallast Programme in China.
Activity
Support by 31 Dec.
2001 (RMB)
CFP Office and facilities including part of the operation costs
RMB100,000
CPTF related costs, including the 1st CPTF Meeting, and relevant
RMB80,000
support from Liaoning MSA at the demonstration site.
Support to seminars and training, including accommodation and inter-
RMB65,000
city travel of the participants.
Collection of information for case study, and legislative review
RMB40,000
Support for Port Baseline Survey, including salaries of implementation
RMB100,000
team, office and labs.
Risk Assessment activities, including collection of ballast water
RMB15,000
reporting forms and data management.
Support from COSCO for bw treatment R&D
RMB150,000
Sub-total RMB505,000
(about US$60,000)
More in-kind support will be provided for the activities to be carried out in 2002.
8 Suggestions
Extension of the GloBallast Programme
Considering the progress made in implementation and delay of some activities, the programme may
be extended by six months based on the available budget. The 21 months from now to October 2003
would be sufficient to complete those activities, which are on-going.
Country-specific Activities
The implementation plans for the three country-specific activities under China's National Workplan
have been submitted to PCU for months. The organizations responsible for implementing the
activities are ready to start. The financial support from the shipping industry is available. PCU is
requested to approve, as appropriate, the implementation plans for the above-mentioned activities.
The National Workplan will be amended according to the decisions made at the GPTF 3.
Annexed is a table for the country's status in implementing the GloBallast Programme.
25
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Annex
Table for China's Country Status Report for Implementation of GloBallast Programme
Activity
Status by 31 Dec. 2001
Estimated
Budget for 2002
Country's in-kind
completion time
support by
31 Dec 2001
Routine operation of CFP
Normally Maintained
March 2003
US$40,000 RMB100,000
office
(October 2003)
CPTF Meetings and related
3 meetings held
March 2003
US$7,500 RMB80,000
activities
(Oct. 2003)
Communication and
40% completed
January 2003
US$35,000 RMB65,000
awareness-raising
(June 2003)
Case
Study Completed
RMB30,000
Risk Assessment activities,
Information collecting continued
TBD US$5,000
RMB15,000
including collection of ballast
Risk assessment on-going
water reporting forms and data
management.
Port Baseline Survey activities
Field work completed
October 2002
Already available
RMB100,000
Lab work started
Education/Training activities
Training organization is prepared.
Feb. 2003
US$20,000
Training material waited for.
(August 2003)
Legislative
Review
Completed
RMB10,000
Progress with National Ballast
Shipping companies begin to
January 2003
US$10,000
Water Management Plan
develop management plan.
(June 2003)
Proposal for amending present
Regulations made.
Compliance Monitoring and
To be started in 2002
January 2003
US$40,000
Enforcement activities,
(September 2003)
including ballast water
sampling.
Regional Cooperation and
To be started in 2002
January 2003
US$50,000
Replication activities Regional
(June 2003)
Cooperation and Replication
activities
Progress with national
National contribution continues.
contributions to the
programme/self financing
activities.
Country-specific activities
Ready to start, waiting for PCU's
Feb. 2003
US$80,000 RMB150,000
under National Workplan, not
approval.
(June 2003)
covered by Global PIP.
a) Red
tide
information to
captains.
b)
Research on the
impact of Chemical
treatment of ballast
water.
Development of new ballast
water treatment device, which
will start after the symposium
and workshop.
Other/Miscellaneous
Sub-total
US$287,500
RMB505,000
(About US$60,000)
26
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports - India
India
Progress of Global Ballast Water
National Workplan and
Management Programme in India
Communication Workplan finalised
and approved by CTA on 3rd April
2001
Presented by
Mr. S. Chakrabarty
CFP, India
Period : December 2000 to December 2001
Indigenous awareness raising 1st Indigenous quarterly
posters developed on May 2001 brochures developed in
and distributed
March 2001 and
Watch out
distributed
Bioinvasion
i
ne
Mar
2nd Indigenous quarterly brochures
Poster presentation given for 1st International
developed in December2001 and
Conference on Ballast water, at Singapore on
distributed
2nd November 2001
Other awareness raising material developed in
the form of New Year Calender for the year
2002
Awareness Raising Presentation
Administrative measures taken
$ Marine notices issued in June 2001 on
# 1st awareness raising presentation delivered at Cochin in July
implementation for the voluntary guideline
2001
of Ballast Water Management Measures
# 2nd presentation delivered at Vizag in August 2001
$ Received confirmation from the Shipping
# 3rd presentation delivered at Goa in September 2001
Companies on implementation of the
# 4th Presentation made at Mumbai to the Seafarers in
guidelines.
November 2001
# 5th presentation was made at Calcutta in December 2001
$ Issued instructions to all the Majors Ports
to collect ballast water data
27
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Administrative measures taken
CASE STUDIES
$ Apart from Mumbai and JNPT, Goa and Calcutta
Ports have started sending ballast water data.
$ Instructions issued to various Maritime Institutes
Mr. John Mac Karr IMO consultant on case
to include IMO voluntary guideline on Ballast
studies visited India in August 2001 Case
Water Management Measures into the course
syllabus for the seafarers
studies report has been finalized by Mr. John
Mac Karr which was scrutinized by National
$ Received confirmation from the Institutes on
Institute of Oceanography, Goa.
Compliance
$ Administrative measures taken to extend the
project to the other major ports
Port Baseline Survey
Legislation And Regulation
$ National Maritime Legal consultant hired and
# Dr. Marnie Campbell visited India in October 2001
approved by CTA in October 2001
for the Workshop on Port Baseline Survey
# Scientist of National Institute of Oceanography and
$ Prepared a draft of National legislative review for
Fishery Survey of India conducted Port Base Line
Dr. M. McConnell the IMO Consultant on ballast
Survey for JNPT and Mumbai Port in the month of
water Legislation
November 2001 for 10 days in presence of Dr.
Marnie Campbell
$ CFP & Legal Consultant attended the meeting at
Malmo in November 2001
# Results being analyzed at NIO & FSI
$ Final National draft legislative report accepted by
CTA on /12/2001
National Meetings Conducted
National Meetings Conducted
$ 2nd Lead Agency meeting at Delhi in
$ 3rd CPTF Meeting at Mumbai in January
January 2001
2001
$ 3rd Lead Agency meeting at Goa in
$ 4th CPTF meeting at Mumbai in March 2001
June 2001
$ 5th CPTF meeting at Mumbai in May 2001
International Meetings Attended
# Country Focal Point & Country Focal Point (A) attended 2nd Global
Task Force Meeting at IMO (London) on December 2000
Bangladesh
Myanmar
# CPTF Members attended R & D seminar at IMO (London) on
March'01
Thailand
# Scientists from National Institute of Oceanography and Fishery
Survey of India attended workshop on Port Base Line survey at
Sri Lanka
Malaysia
South Africa on April 2001
Maldives
Singapore
# Country Focal Point and Country Focal Point Assistant attended 1st
International conference on Ballast Water at Singapore on
November 2001
# Country Focal Point and Local Legal Consultant visited Malmo
(Sweden) for Legislative review meeting on November 2001
Regional Replication
28
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports - India
BUDGET AND FINANCE
Support CFP , CFPA, CPTF members
US $ 110,000
Hold CPTF meetings
US $ 30,000
Develop and Implement National Workplan
US $ 125,000
Communication Workshop
US $ 20,000
Implement Communication Workplan
US $ 90,000
Port baseline survey
US $ 50,000
In-Country Training
US $ 30,000
Legislation and Regulation
US $ 25,000
Ballast Water sampling equipment
US $ 10,000
CME Personnel and training
US $ 80,000
Implement CME System
US $ 40,000
Regional Project Task Force ; formation, meetings US $ 100,000
and tours
TOTAL
US $ 710,000
STATEMENT OF ACCOUNT
(FROM JULY 2000 TO DECEMBER 2001
Figures in US $
Amt
Amt
Amt
Available
Spent
Remaining
Meetings Support CFP `A',
110,000
30,652
79,348
CPTF Members
Hold CPTF Meetings
30,00
5,977
24,023
Develop and Implement
125,000
7,638
117,362
National Workplan
Communication Workplan
20,000
4,339
15,661
Implement Communication
90,000
12,705
77,295
Workplan
Port Base Line Survey
50,000
19,753
30,247
Legislation and Regulation
25,000
15,352
9,648
Regional Project Task Force
10,000
1,932
98,068
Total amount spent till date US $ 98,348.00
29
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
In-kind Contribution
from March 2000 to December 2001.
In Rupees
In US $
In-kind contribution for the Country Project
3,19,000
6,787
Task Force Meetings.
In-kind contribution for the Workshop
1,44,000
3,064
In-kind contribution for the Lead Agency
1,31,000
2,787
Meetings
In-kind contribution for the Presentation to
3,03,800
6,461
Stake Holders at various ports
In-kind contribution for the Port Base Line
1,44,000
3,097
Survey activity at Mumbai
In-kind contribution for the administrative and
20,04,800
42,655
logistic support to CFP & CFP [A]
Total
30,46,600
64,851
FORTHCOMING ACTIVITIES
# Awareness presentation will be undertaken for Chennai
Port in January 2002
# Awareness raising for city Schools & College will
commence in January 2002
# Awareness presentation will be undertaken for Kandla
Port in February 2002
# 2nd Indigenous posters will be designed in March 2002
# 1st R & D Workshop will be undertaken in March 2002
# 2nd set of Sampling will be undertaken for Mumbai &
JNPT waters in the Month of April 2002
# Technical workshop will be undertaken at Mumbai in the
month of April 2002
# 1st Regional Replication visit will be undertaken in the
month of April 2002
30
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports - India
Meetings & Workshops
Delegates Days Working
Delegates
Traveling
Conference Total in
US $
(No)
(No)
hours
Professional
Expenses charges
Rs.
per day
Rate (Rs.
(Rs.)
(Rs.)
3000/day)
1st CPTF
12
1
8
36,000
20,000
20,000
81,000
1,723
2nd CPTF
11
2
8
66,000
-
-
66,000
1,404
3rd CPTF
11
2
8
66,000
-
-
66,000
1,404
4th CPTF
9
1
8
27,000
-
25,000
52,000
1,106
5th CPTF
9
2
8
54,000
-
-
54,000
1,148
1st Workshop
11
2
8
66,000
-
-
66,000
1,404
2nd Workshop
13
2
8
76,000
-
-
78,000
1,659
1st Lead
3
1
8
9,000
25,000
25,000
15,000
319
Agency
2nd Lead
7
1
8
21,000
25,000
25,000
51,000
1,085
Agency
3rd Lead
5
1
8
15,000
25,000
25,000
65,000
1,383
Agency
Grand Total
5,94,000
12,635
Awareness Presentation
Delegates Days Working
Delegates
Traveling
Conference Total in
US $
(No)
(No)
hours
Professional
Expenses charges
Rs.
per day
Rate (Rs.
(Rs.)
(Rs.)
3000/day)
Kochi
4
2
8
24,000
2600
35,000
61,600
1,310
Vizag
3
2
8
18,000
2600
30,000
50,600
1,076
Goa
3
2
8
18,000
2600
35,000
55,600
1,182
LBS College
4
1
8
12,000
-
25,000
37,000
787
Kolkata
2
2
8
12,000
-
50,000
62,000
1,319
MTi
4
1
8
12,000
-
25,000
37,000
787
Port Baseline Survey
Days Working
Rate /day
Total in
US $
(No)
hours
(Rs.)
Rs.
per day
Boat
3
8
5,000
15,000
323
Labs
10
8
10,000
1,00,000
2151
Sr. Scientist
7
8
3,000
21,000
452
Tech. Staff
8
8
1,000
8,000
172
31
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Administrative & Logistic Support for CFP &CFP(A)
Days (No)
Delegates
Secreatrial
Total in
US $
professional
ass. Prof.
Rs.
rate
Rate Rs.
1000
CFP
378
3000
3000
11,34,000
24,128
Secr. Asst. for CFP
378
-
-
3,78,000
8,043
Other Office Supports (Hardware, Off.
-
-
-
4,92,800
10,598
Asst., Rent, etc.)
Month
Delegates
Total in
US $
(No)
professional
Rs.
rate
CFP - A
18
25,000
4,50,000
9,677
Others
18
-
40,000
860
32
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports - Iran
Islamic Republic of Iran
Location of Khark Island in the Persian Gulf
Country Project Task Force Members
Mr. H. Taymourtash MS General Director of Safety and Maritime Protection
Mr. V Yavari Ph.D. CFP-A
Mr. A Parhizi MS PSO
Mr. N Keivan Rad MS PSO
Mr. N Pourang MS Iranian Fisheries Organization
Mr. O Sedighi MS Department of Environment
Mr. A Farrokhnejad BS Off-shore Oil Company
Mr. M R. Kamza BS Off-shore Oil Company
Mr. M Khoramdel Vahed BS National Iranian Oil Company (NIOC)
Mr. M Bahrami BS National Iranian Tanker Company (NITC)
Mr. N. Amjadi Ph.D. Ministry of Health
Mr. A. Khojasteh MS PSO
Mr. F. Mashhoonn, BS Institute of Petroleum Industry,
Mr. G. Miraki, MS Fisheries Company
Mr. G. Hafezi BS Oil Exporting Terminal Co
Mr. D. Mansouri, MS Tarbiat Modaress University
Mr. H. Daneshgoo, BS PSO,
Mr. A. S. Torabizadeh BS National Iranian Shipping Lines Company
Mr. M. Sorosh, Ph.D. Ministry of health
Mr. M Zahedi, Ph.D, Local Legal Consultant
33
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
S$)
U
y
iture
d
a
l
tr
n
te (
t
u
Ac
Cou
Expen
to da
28,000 in kind
8,100 in kind
4,000 in kind
Nil
15,000 in kind
3,000 in kind
Nil
4,000 in kind
d
y
tr
et
i
es
n
g
Planne
Cou
Bud
(US$)
110,000 35,000
27,000 1,809
2,500 2,500
2000
Re-
allocated
from
activity
1.B.4
90,000 4,589
7000
re-
allocated
from
activit
1.B.3 and
1.B.4
.
ent, Fisheries
ramme.
m
awareness
abic.
University
0
00).
n
y
2
y
.
a
r
y
.
r various
y
fo
t
ential individuals from
ment of Environ
is in progress.
n
Globallast prog
hahid Chamra
s
i
cal and chemical
sk assessment.
d Febru
u
ture tasks.
e case stud
).
o
rt
r ri
of case studies.
r th
ress
y
An
r
oject to CPTF.
i
th p
related organizations and universities.
-2001
, Depa
uthor
st posters in Farsi and Ar
eek of S
w
u
ired fo
y
consultant
)
y
co-a
ation release o
biological, phy
hark Island.
hamran)
h
and PSO.
stud
advertising compan
Globalla
m
n
gs in Januar
o
rt of the p
U (March
s letter in prog
search
tion
ware req
y
consultant w
y
i
n
formation fo
w
Healt
e
r
k Island Port is continued (Since Jul
cs of the Persian Gulf.
d soft
escrip
ress rep
n
efficient
).
i
th the case
y
Ballast Water risk assessment team.
ef d
i
th a
s
papers infor
ctober
w
i
ce.
and Fifth Meetin
nalized the plan of action for the f
nal Workplan.
l approval of PC
g of case stud
e
signate in-countr
nal Communication Workplan.
O
d and distributed
s seminars on Globallast in
ne
oucher and n
dware an
te (bri
r
king w
o
-countr
f
br
r
th
i
es (
e fina
-
w
to Da
meetin
nization, Department of
Purchased office equipment.
Purchased office equipment for K
Set-up CFP-A off
Held the Fou
Presented complete prog
Discussed and fi
Developed Natio
Obtained th
Arranged
universities (Tehran and Shahid C
Orga
Nominated and d
Collected all available in-countr
Regular net
Developed Natio
Finalized contract w
raising activit
Designed, printe
Presented variou
National TV and
Preparation o
Set up stall of Globallast at the re
Collection of BWRF at Kha
Collection of existing information o
environmental characteristi
Formation of in
Installment of har
vered in PCU Status Report)
Progress
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
P
F
y
& C
i
es
a
t
e
r risk
me - I.R. Iran
activities co
CFP Assistant
r
y
eetings
TF &
count
a
llast w
y
specific activit
n - Global
v
i
t
y
Studies
y out b
t Program
w
ti
c
n
Table - 2001
A
Establish Lead Agenc
Support CP
Hold CPTF M
Develop & implement National
Workplan
Countr
Case
Implement
communication plan.
Carr
assessments
y
et
g
c
tivities sho
Bud
Line
In Countr
21.03
32.05
21.02
21.02
21.05
21.06
(x)
t
i
v
i
t
y
Ac
No.
1.B.1
1. B.2
1.B.3
1.B.4
2.3 32.07
3.1
ast Water Manageme
&
Status Report Summary
t
en
l
an
n
o
rkp
p
Global Ball
Country
(Only country relevant a
Wo
Com
1. Coordination
Management
1.B.4
2.
Communication
2.5
3. Risk
Assessment
34
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports - Iran
21,032
65,000 in kind
3,000 in kind
2,000 in kind
66,500
16,500
re-
allocated
from
activity
1.B.4
25,000 6,405
Nil Nil
Nil Nil
)
.
o
rkshop in
w
ions related to
d
interim
e
mbers (August
and consultant,
the
ional consultant
onference at
d Workshop,
C
at
at
epare
r.
w
a
te
r
eatment
y
mposium an
-country team m
ugust).
technical adviser
A
ant.
on TOR, pr
ballast w
ed to the intern
planning commenced.
s
ium and Workshop, London
t
S
l
tant.
rica (April).
y
(
and Model La
n
t of
e
n
for in
y
legislation and regulat
view
ubmitt
y
mpo
y
consu
the PCU
a
s s
Ballast Water T
y
,
South Af
i
th
w
s.
w
rkplan.
ant and based
w
ngs and initial
Ba
m
o
g
in-countr
r manageme
gislative re
La
eti
he BW Treatm
ational
e
a
l
o
cal legal consult
fo
rn
y
t
w
r
aining workshop
odel
re at t
a
w
y
surve
PBS t
i
th CME scoping stud
w
ber).
shop at Saldana
untry
s
t sampling phase of the surve
llected all existin
t
ion of PCU consult
and Model la
presented the le
uter soft
to the First Inte
m
o
rk
-countr
.
w
ove
N
working
and co
ed
y
s
is of samples in progress.
h
).
Attend PBS
Formation of in
Conducted in-co
Visit to the demonstration site along
to finalize sampling stations and w
Conducted the fir
Anal
Identification and appointment of
Review
Ballast Water
With the coopera
legislative report
Participated and
WMU.
Final legislative report and M
and PCU.
The issue discussed in CPTF me
Participated in the Ballast Water Treatment S
(Marc
Presented comp
London.
Submitted paper
Singapore (
Regular net
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
·
-
y
s
y
Train
rateg
,
st
a
seline Surve
ulgate IMO
legislative
monitoring
o
licy
mpling
personnel &
d
rt B
om
compliance,
a
ter sa
y
CME
.
ements.
y out Po
i
ew
Carr
Translate / pr
Guidelines
Assist PCU to develop/deliver
BW training package (UN
X)
Conduct National
rev
Develop National BW
management p
and plan.
Ballast w
equipment
In-countr
training
Implement
enforcement an
arrang
y
21.07
21.09
11.53
32.03
32.04
21.08
In Countr
42.01
32.02
21.11
3.2
4.1
4.3
4.5
5.2
5.3
4. Ballast Water
Management
Measures
4.2
5. Compliance
Enforcement &
Monitoring
5.4
35
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
2,500 in kind
110,000 Nil
me
h
program
C and
A
ballast
i
th Glo
s, ROPME, MEM
gional meeting.
e
rnational consultant throug
re
cooperate w
to
an int
onal organization
appointing
ganizations
regi
i
th major
c
t w
ent of these or
initial draft agenda for the first
m
f
an
ree
O.
MA
C
O
Developed conta
GA
Obtained ag
in the region.
Preparation o
Have commenced the process of
PCU.
·
·
·
·
·
·
ours
a
ter
y
T
l
ement in-
vities.
ments for the
nge
ngoing resourcing
TFs
etings & Stud
rra
RP
y
a
Form
RPTF Me
Develop and imp
countr
long-term, o
and financing of ballast w
management acti
y
32.09
In Countr
6.1 16.02
6.2
7.1
i
es
6. Regional
Activit
7. Resourcing &
Financing
36
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports - Iran
Forthcoming Tasks of the Project in 2002
Activity 1.B.3: Support CPTF Meetings
Tasks to be undertaken
Budget available
Time line
· Will hold the 6th, 7th, and 8th meetings of CPTF.
25,191 US$
6th CPTF Meet in March.
· Will present programme progress report of the project.
7th CPTF Meet in June.
· In the future CPTF meetings special emphasize will be
8th CPTF Meet in
given to country specific activities, regional cooperation
November
and replication, resourcing and financing.
Activity 1.B.4.2 Country specific activities A. The twin port approach
· Identification of twin port country
60,000 US$
July December
· Securing agreement from potential
· Drafting, negotiating and signing of mutual cooperation
agreement.
· Study tours by officials from Iran to the twin port
country.
· Training mission by experts from the twin port country to
Iran.
· Sharing of data on BWM.
· Opening and maintenance of communication channels.
Activity 1.B.4.2: Country specific activities, B. Physical Oceanography of Khark Island
· Initial, comprehensive literature and data search.
40,000 US$
March, 2002
· Identify experts to plan and supervise the study.
March, 2003
· Under take field studies addressing the dispersal of BW
(seasonal study)
discharged.
· Work towards development of a 3D hydrodynamic
model.
· Use results for BW management measures.
Activity 2.3: Case studies
· The final case study report will be reviewed by co-author,
Nil January
-
July
CPTF and CFP.
· The report will be distributed among authorities, NGO's
and other related parties.
· Based on feed back a seminar will be conducted on the
subject.
Activity 2.5: Implementation of country communication workplan
· Will continue various awarness raising programmes.
85,411 US$
January December
· Development of a web-site in Farsi and English.
· Holding of seminars.
· Distribution of news letters, pamphlets and posters.
· Media information release. Based on feed back a seminar
will be conducted on the subject.
37
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Activity 3.1: Ballast Water Risk Assesment
· With the coordination of PCU will arrange for the two
7,000 US$
March - July
weeks visits of international consultants.
Reallocated from
activities 1.B.3
· Will arrange meetings of consultant with port authorities,
and 1.B.4
maritime administration, fisheries and environmental
administration.
· Preparation of risk assessment model for Khark Island
Port.
· Training of country risk assessment team by the
international consultant.
· Preparation of workplan and arrangement for training of
relevant individuals by the members of local risk
assessment team.
· Preparation of risk assessment models for other major
ports of the country.
Activity 3.2: Port Baseline Survey
· Will conduct the second phase of the port baseline survey
45,468 US$
February December
as per the approved Workplan.
· Will carry out qualitative and quantitative analysis of
samples.
· Will submit the final report of the port baseline survey to
PCU.
Activity 4.3: Legislation and Regulation
· Obtain final approval of PCU on legislative report.
18,594 US$
February
· Prepare recommendation for immediate implementation
of IMO guidelines by [Res.A.868(20)] adoption of PSO
supreme council internal orders.
Activity 6: Regional Cooperation and Replication
· Appointment of international consultant through PCU.
100,000 US$
February - December
· Participation in the GAOCMAO meeting.
· Identification of potential RPTF members.
· Will conduct the 1st RPTF meeting, July.
· Will prepare RPTF workplan.
· Implementation of RPTF workplan.
38
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports South Africa
South Africa
CPTF Meetings
South Africa Status Report &
· 2nd meeting held in conjunction with
National Work Plan
launch function
· 3rd meeting planned immediately before
policy workshop
· DEAT to sponsor all CPTF meetings
thereafter
Country-Specific Activities
Country-Specific Activities cont.
· TOR developed for:
Planning initiated for:
Phytoplankton monitoring programme
· Testing of local BW treatment technology
· To include west and east coast stations
In conjunction with IMT
Phytoplankton case study
· Regional database development
· To include socio-economic impacts
Store data from activities, and feedback to managing
authorities
Pathogen characterisation study
· National port survey replication
· 3-month analysis of ballast water contents
National Ports Authority to cover costs
Communication/Awareness Raising
Risk Assessment Preparations
· Launch function
· Press releases
· Presentations
· Ballast water reporting forms
· Posters and
· Shipping movement data
pamphlets
· Species list compiled for Saldanha Bay
· Displays a t
aquariums
· Computer equipment purchased
· Magazine articles
· Television
documentary
· Website developed
Port Baseline Survey
Port Baseline Survey
· Field work completed in April
· Planning workshops and training
· Associated global workshop held
39
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Port Baseline Survey
Port Baseline Survey
· Papers presented on efficacy of CRIMP
protocols & need for replicate surveys
· National Ports Authority considering budget
for new surveys
· National taxonomy completed
· International taxonomy still
pending
Management Plan
Regional Co-operation
Development
· CFP-A presentation at oil pollution meeting of
WIO Island States in Cape Town
· Legislation review completed
· CFP-A presentation at WIOMSA symposium in
Tanzania
· Global policy development workshop
attended
· Local adaptation of ballast water reporting
forms
Regional Co-operation cont.
Other Duties
· CFP-A presentation at BENEFIT
· CFP-A and S.A. rep from IMT attended
conference in Namibia
R&D Symposium at IMO
· CFP presentation at meeting of Nairobi
· Hosted consultant during visit to assess
Convention in Mozambique
Clearing House Mechanism
· Interest generated from Nigeria
· CFP-A presentation on CRIMP protocols at
Singapore conference
National Workplan Development
National Workplan
· GloBallast meeting in Singapore
· New draft to include 4th year and new
activities
· Revisions based on PCU and CPTF
comments
· Budget & activities extended to 4 years
· Changes & new activities proposed
40
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports South Africa
Programme Co-ordination &
Programme Co-ordination &
Management
Management cont.
· Support for CFP-A
· CPTF meetings
· Programme running costs
Third meeting to be held in conjunction with
legal workshop, March 2002
Lead Agency to sponsor subsequent meetings
Available: $100000
Spent: $37000
Available:
$2000
Spent: $100
Programme Co-ordination &
Communication, Education &
Management cont.
Awareness Raising
· National Activities
National Workplan development workshop
· Consultant to help implement comm. Plan
Aureococcus case study
· Community outreach programme
Plankton monitoring
· New Programme displays
Pathogen characterisation study
· Printing of new posters
Testing of BW treatment technology
· Television documentary sponsored by `50/50'
Regional database development
· Magazine articles
Available:
$125000
Spent: $1500
Available: $106000
Spent: $19500
Ballast Water Risk Assessment
Port Baseline Survey
· Purchase computer equipment to support
· Data storage within regional database to be
global RA consultant
developed
· Student to log shipping data
· Workshop for local risk assessment team
· Overall costs less than planned
Skills transfer
($14400 extra originally allocated)
Develop plan for South African ports
Available:
$50000
Spent: $35600
Required: $10000 (Allocated from 1.B.3, 4)
Spent: $3850
Ballast Water Management Plan
In-Country Training
· Legislation review and development of
· Training for ship personnel, port authorities
recommendations
and other stakeholders
· Policy development workshop
· CME personnel and training
· Workshop to develop ballast water
Develop new TRAIN-X modules
management plan and measures (Saldanha)
Trainers workshop
· Implementation of CME systems
Available:
$110000
Spent: $0
Available: $65000
Spent: $17500
41
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Regional Co-operation &
Replication
Resourcing and Financing
· Awareness raising seminars/conferences
· Generic global study by PCU to suggest
· CFP-A to hold seminars/meetings in each
range of options
country to initiate RPTF
· National identification of self financing
mechanisms
· Regional workshop in Saldanha Bay
· Workshop to select appropriate national
· Two RPTF meetings
mechanisms to be implemented
· Regional port survey assistance
Available:
$2000
Spent: $0
Available: $120000
Spent: $1000
Budget 2002 cont.
Budget 2002
Activity
Cost
US$
Activity
Cost
US$
· Communication work plan
51000
· Support CFP Assistant
2520
· International taxonomists
10000
· CPTF meeting
1000
· Risk assessment workshop
6000
· Aureococcus case study
15000
· Policy development workshop
3000
· Initiate plankton monitoring
20000
· Production of policy document
5000
· Pathogen characterisation
20000
· Regional co-operation
37000
· Regional database development
35000
· Testing of BW treatment
5000
Total
210520
42
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports Ukraine
Ukraine
Just a little more than a year has passed since we discussed with you our national workplans and gave
our offers at 2nd GPTF meeting. Many of us already then understood that not all that looked well on a
paper would be implemented into life successfully. Practice brings its corrective amendments based
on life realities.
On experience of the implementation of the Programme tasks for the last year it is possible to say, that
some of them can hardly be unified. What I mean is that uniform application of the same methods to
perform the Programme task, let say in India and in Ukraine, is not always advisable. Nevertheless,
these tasks are carried out and, despite that the results appear to be different, the certain progress in
realization of the Program is obvious.
The activity of the Odessa Demonstration Site (Odessa DS) starting from a beginning of its work till
now we will consider according to well-known positions of Monthly Country Status Report.
Day-to-Day Management
Presenting our report on the 2nd GPTF meeting, we informed you about essential difficulties with
establishing of the Programme bank account and signing of Memorandum of Understanding between
IMO and our Ministry of Transport. Fortunately, these difficulties we managed to overcome.
The demonstration site is equipped with all necessary equipment and now we are ready to accept large
conferences and to develop lecture activity. Certain difficulties are posed by the fact that the building,
where Shipping Safety Inspectorate as Lead Agency currently housed is now under reconstruction.
This caused certain lacks in a work of communication.
Within the reported period we provided staying in Ukraine and sufficient work for five PCU
consultants (Messrs. Stephan Gollasch, Steve Raaymakers, leg Khalimonov, Mrs. Marnie Campbell
and Anona Ah Poe [-Poi-]). During their visits we repeatedly held our CPTF meetings. The successful
performance of this task is connected, first of all, that we managed to involve for this purpose many
people not directly connected to the Program, but interested in its successful implementation.
The performance of the tasks of the Program is connected with preparing of many reporting &
financial documents. That is to tell the truth takes a lot of time.
The organization of a regional conference required the efforts of many people. And this work is still
not completed. The full set of conference materials and its publication in two languages, English and
Russian, is under completion. Only recently the last reporting documents from the participants were
received.
Organization of CPTF Meetings
During reported time Odessa DS held five CPTF meetings. All meetings were dedicated to the
implementation of key Programme tasks. First one was devoted to establishment of CPTF and
distribution of key tasks between CPTF members. The second and third to different stages of
development of the National Workplan, explanations of contracting system under the programme. The
fourth meeting was a preparation activity to Port Baseline Survey. The fifth meeting was devoted to
activity under Clearinghouse Mechanism and coming Risk Assessment.
It is necessary to recognize that by virtue of different reasons, and first of all, because of hard work
schedule the number of active CPTF members has reduced, but those who stayed ready to perform
necessary work.
Each CPTF meeting has appropriate protocol which is regularly directed to PCU.
43
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Four of five CPTF meetings held as in-kind support from Ukraine.
GPTF related Activities
CFP and CFP-A are already participating successfully in the 3rd GPTF meeting.
Communication /Awareness Raising Activities
Starting its work Odessa DS found out the level of public awareness on a problem of transfer of
unwanted marine species and pathogens ships' ballast water. The result was that such in-formation is
available only to experts of marine biology, public health and epidemiologists. The wide public
knows about a problem practically nothing, and shipping representatives knew about it very little.
That is why it was decided to begin educational activity from wide coverage of all aspects of a
problem in mass media, via TV programmes, and in specialized press for seamen.
Big articles based on IMO materials and Institute of Biology of Southern Seas from Academy of
Sciences of Ukraine data, were published in magazines "Shipping", "Ports of Ukraine", "Emergency
Situations", Russian magazine "Navigation", practically in all popular newspapers of Ukraine and
Odessa region.
Interviews with CFP, marine scientists-biologists, materials about Port Baseline Survey in the Port of
Odessa, video reports about 1st Black Sea Conference on BW Management and Control were shown
in different TV programs.
Detailed reports on a problem, search of its solution, about role of international organizations, about
IMO activity in this respect, about GloBallast Program as a whole, and how Odessa DS is functioning,
were presented at the International Conference in Budapest (October, 2000), International Symposium
"Ecological Problems of the Black Sea" (November, 2001), 1st Black Sea Conference on BW
Management and Control (October, 2001).
For the reported period Odessa DS has distributed a number of posters about a problem developed by
PCU in London, and having translated them into Ukrainian printed them out and distributed at
national level.
GloBallast Programme has been identified and advertised in a set of National Library of Sea-man
currently published under aegis of Ministry of Transport of Ukraine and Shipping Safety Inspectorate
of Ukraine.
The other significant input into awareness raising will be made by advertising of East-European
GloBallast web-site which has been established under the following address in inter-net:
http:\\www.globallast.od.ua
It is also planned to design and produce posters and/or brochures specifically tailored to the culture
and society of Ukraine and the Black Sea region to be spread at regional level.
Risk Assessment Activity
Previously in ports of Ukraine, including Odessa port, collecting and processing of ballast data and
ships patterns did not carried out. Besides it there is a requirement in national legislation of Ukraine
about obligatory change of ballast for ships before entering to national waters, i.e. "blanket approach".
That is why it is possible to assume, that in port area all ships discharge ballast taken in Black Sea
between Bosphorus Strait and port of call. In these conditions the typical form of master report to port
authorities about ballast water loses very important for risk assessment information about primary
places of ballast up-take. Understanding this, we have entered into practice by the order of State
Department of Maritime and Inland Water Transport the requirement to provide such information to
44
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports Ukraine
port authorities under IMO BW re-porting form. Data regarding water ballast and ship patterns for
previous years is not available. We hope, that PCU consultant will take advantage of those data,
which we have up to this time, and this work will be duly performed.
To the present time Odessa DS has bought the necessary computer hardware and carry out the work
on selection of the experts to participate in national Risk Assessment Team.
Port Baseline Survey
It is should be recognized that Odessa DS proved to be the most ready for practical realization of this
activity of our Program. Institute of Biology of Southern Seas of Academy of Sciences of Ukraine
placed in Odessa, and its experts had wide practice of conducting similar re-searches.
In order to conduct researches according to the plan offered by PCU consultant Dr Marnie Campbell
and adjusted with the experts of institute, there has been purchased modern standard equipment from
GloBallast funds. Non-standard equipment, such as networks for collecting of zoo- and ichthy-
plankton, framework for collecting of fouling samples, pipes for ground sampling, trap for fishes and
Crustacea [krustaishia] / shellfish, was made in Odessa. Therefore preparations took a lot of time and
the first voyage of diving boat "Sprut" was on August 20, 2001. The works of research team on the
first point were made under coordination of Dr Campbell and with her invaluable help. Further works
were carried out in complete conformity with the international demands according to CRIMP Protocol
(Center for Research on Introduced marine Pests).
The researches were carried out by 10 experts under supervision of Scientific and Research Institute
of Biology of Southern Seas during three autumn months. For this time at 50 sampling points of
Odessa Port have been taken the samples of:
· Macrobenthos of fouling samplings - 339;
· Macrozoobenthos from dredged samplings - 129;
· Meiobenthos - 29 of fouling samplings and 31 dredged samplings;
· Zooplankton - 73;
· Tubes with soil samplings - 132 (44 for definition of cyst, granulometric content and organic
substances in soil);
· Microbialogic fouling samples - 14;
· Ichthyology samples - 18;
· Ichthyology samples in: vertical haul - 59, drag-net haul - 8;
· Samples of shellfish and fishes by traps - 40;
· Samples for definition of sea fungi: in soil - 33, in water - 66, in foulings - 231.
There have been taken 8 cassettes of video material under water.
Hydro and hydro-chemic parameters of seawater in 50 sampling points of Odessa Port have been
studied, about 90 measurements of sea flows and water transparency were made.
All samples have been submitted to the specialists of the Institute of southern Seas to be processed
(definition of a species structure, scoring of a number and biomass of marine organisms, collecting of
invasive species). For the present time it is possible to say, that a number of introduced species are
found in samples. These species such as Mnemiopsis leidyi, Beroe ovata, Rithropanopaeus harrisii
tridentatus etc. have been discovered in Black Sea during previous years. But there have been found
a naked branchial type of molluscum. And now this kind is being identified as well as the region of its
possible origin.
45
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
On the basis of collected samples there are preparing a special demonstration stand which will
familiarizes the experts and wide public with introduced species of Black Sea, as well as with donor
areas, places of their origin. Video material made during hydrobiological sampling will be taken for a
scientific and popular films about exotic species in Black Sea. A number of articles on this problem
have been already developed for scientific and awareness rising purposes.
Preliminary results of Program implementation as for port baseline survey activity in Odessa port
were presented at 1st Black Sea Conference on BW Management and Control in October, 2001. There
have been presented reports "Black Sea Invaders and ecological problems" (aca-demician Yu.
Zaitsev) and "Biological aspects of implementation of GloBallast Program" (Messrs. B. Alexandrov
and N. Berlinskyy).
It is planned to conduct in future the next similar survey in spring / summer period of year 2002, and
then, if the founders of the Program will agree with our proposals and if there will be a financial
support for this purpose, it is planned during spring / summer of 2003 to hold base survey in
extremely vulnerable area of the Black Sea that is delta of Danube river together with our Romanian
scientists and colleagues. So, the practical decision for extremely important problem on protection of
Danube river biosphere reserve will be combined with replication of Odessa DS experience via the
framework of regional cooperation.
Education/Training Activities
Odessa DS has developed two-hour educational lecture in Russian about a problem of water ballast,
its management onboard and in port intended for marine educational institutions, training centres of
seamen, and also for senior classes of secondary schools and lyceums. A typical lecture at Odessa
Post-Diploma Training Centre of Seamen is now preparing.
It is among nearest plans of our DS to adapt these lectures for special biological educational
institutions and training courses for ports personnel.
To increase a level of knowledge about a problem a newly established web-site of East European DS
in three languages (English, Russian and Ukrainian) will help. The personnel of Shipping Safety
Inspectorate will support it in the long term, and also has taken a special training within the
framework of this task.
Legal Activities.
As on others Demonstration sites, the second half of this year was devoted to activity connected with
the analysis of national legislation and development of proposals on its adaptation to IMO Guidelines
provisions and future convention.
To perform this work it was required to carry out the analysis of more than forty national legislative
acts, to study positions of shipping industry representatives (shipping companies and ports),
ecological and anti-epidemic control bodies, marine medicine, marine biology science. Based on such
analysis the frame proposals were made.
In this connection I would like to express our appreciation for those volume of work, which managed
to be executed by Ballast Water Working Group within intersession period. In case our working group
realizes all plans, a number of planned documents of the national legislation will be accepted
internationally. Those will be Ballast Water Management Guidelines (Regulation B-1), Guidelines on
Sampling (Article 15 (1) (b)), Sediment Management Guide-lines (Regulation B-5 (2)), Model Ballast
Water Management Plan etc. Thus, the task of implementing these documents into the national
legislation will be essentially simplified.
The work on the analysis of national legislation proved to be of most help to us. Having done this
work, we start to develop concrete documents and amendments according to our plans. Taking into
46
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports Ukraine
account the mentioned work of BW Working Group, it is expedient to wait of final results of its work
for the subsequent development of real national documents.
Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement (CME) Activities.
The CME system in a part of compliance of BW sampling procedures from ships' tanks in Odessa
port, their transportation, storage and laboratory analyses, has not been established in Odessa DS. BW
sampling is carried out by State Inspection on Protection of Black Sea, which is authorized based on
their own instruction to issue permissions to ships to discharge water ballast in port area.
Entering into force of the International Guidelines on BW Sampling procedures will give Odessa DS
sufficient base for establishment of efficient CME mechanism.
Regional Cooperation and Replication Activities.
During last year the most Odessa DS activities were concentrated on this issue. Chronological activity
of Odessa DS may be presented in the following way.
In June 2001 the letter with the information on purposes and tasks of GloBallast Program and with the
offer to consider opportunities of cooperation with Odessa DS as Programme representative in a
region has been directed to Maritime Administrations of six countries of Black Sea region. With
Odessa DS and PCU involvement a first version of Regional Action Plan to minimize the transfer of
unwanted marine species and pathogens in ships' BW and draft of Resolution to enter it into force
were developed.
Within July-September a special PCU regional consultant (Mr. . Khalimonov) and CFP-A Mr. S.
Limanchuk have made a tour visits to regional countries (except Turkey) and held a number of
meetings with maritime and ecological public of these countries. These meetings were aimed at
introducing on the purposes and tasks of GloBallast Program, possible regional cooperation, and
consideration of draft Resolution and RAP. The idea of regional cooperation was unanimously
supported by all countries.
As a result of huge preparatory work, involved IMO responsible persons, all GloBallast PCU staff,
dozens of enthusiasts from Odessa DS and Shipping Safety Inspectorate of Ukraine, the 1st Black Sea
Conference on BW Management and control Regional conference of the countries of the Black sea
on a problem of management and control was held in Odessa from October 10 till October 12, 2001.
The conference was attended by more than 50 officials from all countries of the region representing
the most different interested organizations, by representatives of shipping industry, scientific circles,
mass media. The conference was opened and closed by the Secretary General of IMO, Mr. William
O'Neil.
The conference considered draft of Regional Action Plan and Resolution, reviewed possible
amendments to them, listened to opinions of all participating delegations and as a result both
documents were accepted unanimously.
The outcomes of the conference were presented by Ukraine on 47. A full set of conference
materials in English / Russian languages now is almost ready and will be available on our web-site.
Progress with national contributions to the Programme / self-financing activities.
Among Programme activities carried out as in-kind support from Ukraine are the following:
47
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Activity
Task undertaken
In-kind, US$
1.B.3: Support CPTF Meetings
Four CPTF meetings held
4 x 2820 = 11 280
1.B.4: Develop/Implement National
Development of 1st version of National
10 000
Workplan for Ukraine
Workplan
1.B.4 (b): National/Regional Co-
Providing office venue, furniture,
12 000
ordination Centre Black Sea Centre
communication, commodities, etc. for
for Information &Training on Ballast
Odessa DS
Water Management.
1.B.4 (d): Ballast water treatment
BW treatment technologies (time of
1 000
technology.
specialists)
1.B.4 (c): Institutional strengthening of Administrative support of marine
1 000
marine laboratory facilities in Odessa.
laboratories
2.2: Generic Communication,
Communication activities, GloBallast
2 000
Education and Awareness Raising
data bank, advertising posters, press
Materials
releases, etc.
2.3: Case Studies
Administrative support for Case
Not assessed
Studies consultant
2.4: Country Communication
National Communication Workshop to
2 820
Workshops and Work plans
develop National Communication
Workplan
2.4: Country Communication
Development of National
5 000
Workshops and Work plans
Communication Workplan
2.5 (a): Awareness Raising Seminars
GloBallast Seminar for marine
6 200
biologists (Odessa, Nov 2000)
2.5 (b): National/Regional web site
Support web-site
500
2.5 (e): Video and TV documentary
Press publications and TV meetings
1 500
2.5 (f): Country-specific awareness
Translation of posters, organization of
500
raising materials.
printing, etc.
3.1: Ballast Water Risk Assessment
Collecting information and establishing
500
GloBallast team
3.2: Port Baseline Surveys
Administrative support, day-to-day
14 000
management and transport under Port
Baseline Survey
4.3: Legislation and Regulations:
National legislation regarding BW has
5 000
been collected and primary processed
Total
73 300
Country-specific activities under National Workplan, not covered by Global PIP.
One of directions of Odessa DS activity, not covered by Global PIP, is consideration of the
perspective proposals of national scientists and inventors on technical &technological methods of
ballast water treatment and maintenance of control procedures on ballast operations onboard a vessel.
For the time being a number of technical developments has been collected and systematized. Our DS
is ready to organize an independent expertise of proposed decisions. The delay was caused by the
absence of international criteria for efficiency estimation of treatment systems. We understand that it
is a quite objective reason, but thus we should note that the interest of the developers (some of whom
have a rather original and perspective solutions) to GloBallast Program and to its possible support
gradually dies. We don't want to lose contacts with talented people, and consequently again we
48
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports Ukraine
addressing PCU with the offer to give their principal agreement to carry out a preliminary estimation
of submitted proposals based on the minimal "tool set" of criteria, which we will develop by
ourselves. Selected most perspective 1, 2 or 3 developments will wait till official estimation according
to IMO criteria, which, as we hope, will be accepted by 2003.
Other duties assigned by CFP/PCU.
Among other duties carried out by CFP, the biggest difficulties are posed by the necessity in dealing
with reporting &financial documents. It is not truth to state that it is complex, but it takes lot of time.
The required understanding in all links of the financial and economic relations has appeared only in
the end of the first year of work.
Odessa port baseline survey
Prolongation / extension
Except scheduled monitoring surveys in Odessa port on 50 points, the Odessa GloBallast
Demonstration Site (DS) finds it necessary to extend these researches. The reasoning for this is that
Black Sea belongs to the kind of sharply expressed climatic annual changes. This seasonal variability
causes change of characteristic flora and fauna in warm-water period (April-September) and cold-
water period (October-March). The surveys held under GloBallast Programme were in cold-water
period and revealed more than ten exotic species introduced with ballast waters of ships. The proposal
of our DS consists in financing of additional survey in Odessa port during warm-water period In
particular, it will allow to find many from not registered kinds of seaweed, as well as invertebrates
and fishes. At the same time, the collecting of all data (roughly up to 200 samples of plankton and
benthos), will require additional time and facilities for their processing, that does not enter into the
volume of financing from the Ukrainian side. On our account, to process the samples taken in warm-
water period will require about 10 months, and financing is - 12 thousand dollars. Filming in the
warm-water period is scheduled on April - June 2002. The experts of the Institute of Biology of
Southern Seas are ready to start processing of samples together with the end of works under the cold-
water period. Thus, the final report on the second stage of port baseline survey in Odessa port can be
finished in February 2003.
Port survey activity under GloBallast programme in 2003.
Another important feature of Black Sea basin being under certain influence of a significant river
outlet, is lays in the presence of water areas with low salinity which has its influence on adaptation of
newly introduced species (plants and animals). The ports of Azov Sea - Mariupol, Taganrog and
others are belonged to the ports with low salinity and have other composition of aquatic organisms. In
this connection while choosing the field for future survey the factor of desalting should be taken into
account. More than 53 % of fresh water outlet into the Black Sea and more than 70 % into its
northwest part is determined by Danube river the second-largest river of Europe. The annual outlet
of Danube exceeds 220 cubic meters. Bilateral Romanian-Ukrainian Biosphere Reservation is situated
in Danube delta. In 1999 this reservation with the total area of more than 600 thousand square km
received a UNESCO Certificate World Heritage. Under this status this territory is a unique one, and
bilateral Reservation is number five in the world. According to data obtained by our specialist there
are a number of introduced species in the reservation. These species posed the threat not only to
traditional kinds of craft, for example fishing, but also to the existence of unique kinds of flora and
fauna which determined the unique status of this region. In particular, the following species have been
discovered here: a Miya mussel and Dutch crab which have already pressed indigenous species of
Danube aquatic delta. More recently (from 1997) in the Romanian part of Danube delta in sea lagoons
Raselm and Sinoe, there have been found the Chinese rough-legged crab which was delivered here
with ships' ballast waters. In Ukrainian part this kind was registered in 1998.
49
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
It should be taken into account that there are strong shipping patterns between Black Sea and Danube
via three canals on Romanian territory and it is planned to establish navigation in Ukrainian part of
Danube mouth with intensity of not less than 2 vessels per hour. It will inevitably resulted in essential
increase of risk of new introductions into this unique ecosystem. Also it is important to note, that the
existing international programmes and projects, such as TACIS from the EU for Danube lakes,
projects of WWF on water areas management, etc. do not provide organization of special monitoring
for introduction of new species and their interaction with local flora and fauna. As the navigation will
start the risk of new introductions will increase because of obligatory discharge of BW as the ships
transfer from he water of high density to water of low density (that is from sea water to river water).
It is proposed to organize in 2003 express survey in Danube water area of Romania and Ukraine.
Within this activity the following tasks to be achieved:
· Estimation of real risk for introducing of exotic species into marine and river environment of
Danube mouth;
· Estimation of current influence of exotic species on an indigenous flora and fauna of Danube
mouth reservation;
· To provide training of Romanian experts and organize a port survey monitoring for BW
introductions in Romanian waters;
· Elaboration of recommendations / guidelines on risk assessment in fresh water territories of
Black Sea.
Other/Miscellaneous.
It is not in a practice of such forums to waste time on trifles, so let's hope that all details will be set
along the way.
Dear colleagues! The PCU statement regarding the possibility to prolong the term of GloBallast
Programme implementation and the necessity in relevant amendment to national workplan has caught
us to certain level unawares. But nevertheless we did this job and hope that with PCU help and advise
this revised plan will be approved.
Activity Summary
Activity Tasks
Undertaken
1. Development and producing official forms of the CPTF of Ukraine;
Day-to-day
2. Bank
imprest
account established;
management/administration/
3. Provided relevant support for five PCU consultants travel to Ukraine
reporting
(S.Gollasch, S.Raaymakers, M.Campbell, O.Khalimonov, A.Ah Poe).
4. Equipment for DS bought.
1. Five
CPTF
meetings held;
Organisation of CPTF meetings
2. CPTF meetings' Protocols prepared.
1. Participation in three GPTF meetings;
GPTF related activities
2. Participation of CFP of Ukraine (Mr. V. Rabotnyov) in the Int. GEF
Conference, Budapest, October 2000.
50
Agenda Item 3: Country Status Reports Ukraine
Activity Tasks
Undertaken
1. Article by S Limanchuk in the newspaper "Moryak of Ukraine" ( 39,
40, September 2000);
2. Article by V. Torsky and A. Sagaidak in the journal "Ports of Ukraine" (
5, October 2000);
3. Participation in the Int. Symposium: The Black Sea Ecological Problems
Communication/Awareness
(speaker - Mr. V. Rabotnyov);
Raising activities
4. Short-term Local Consultant prepared a typical lecture under Activity 2.5
(c): Awareness-raising of the ballast water issue in High and Secondary
Education.
5. GloBallast posters translated and prepared for publication;
6. Numerous publications on BW problem in national and Odessa mass-
media about 1st Black Sea Conference on BWM and control.
Risk Assessment activities,
1. Provided necessary help to S. Gollasch, IMO consultant, in collecting data
including collection of ballast
on ballast water load in ports of Ukraine.
water reporting forms and data
2. Risk Assessment Team is established and prepared to obtain necessary
management.
training
1. Draft contract with Odessa Sea Trade Port (Odessa STP) concerning hiring
of the venue for port laboratory developed;
2. Participation in the S. Africa training (Port Survey Training, Saldanha, 17-
23 April 2001, prof. Yuvenaly Zaitsev, National Academy of Sciences of
Ukraine, and Mr. Mykola Pavlenko, Ministry of Ecology and Natural
Port Baseline Survey activities.
Resources of Ukraine);
3. Prepared and started Port Baseline Survey in Odessa port. Development of
Port Baseline Survey Sampling Plan with Dr. Marnie Campbell, PCU
consultant.
4. First phase of Survey passed.
1. Web-design courses for Lead Agency staff taken. Web-site to be
Education/Training activities.
established in January 2002.
1. LLC contract signed and LLC provided with necessary help from Lead
Agency.
Legal activities.
2. Participation in preparation of LLC report.
3. Participation and presentation of LLC report in Malmo meeting.
Progress with National Ballast
1. NWPU approved on 22 April, 2001;
Water Management Plan
2. NWPU amendments prepared in a view of GloBallast Phase II.
Compliance Monitoring and
Enforcement activities,
including ballast water
1. CME contacts established according to Mr. Raaymakers message.
sampling.
1. Information letters about the problem of unwanted marine species and with
propositions to cooperate with Odessa DS sent to Marine Administrations
of Black Sea countries and to international regional organizations.
2. Tour of GloBallast consultant (O.Khalimonov) and CFPA (S.Limanchuk)
Regional Cooperation and
to Bulgaria and Romania (1-6 July, 2001).
Replication activities.
3. Tour of GloBallast consultant (O.Khalimonov) and CFPA (S.Limanchuk)
to Russia and Georgia (July, September, 2001).
4. 1st Regional Conference on BW Management and Control for Black Sea
countries held in October 10-12, 2001.
5. Conference Report prepared and disseminated via internet.
51
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Activity Tasks
Undertaken
1. In-country Communication Workshop to develop National
Communication Plan held;
2. Development of the first version of NWPU while 2nd and 3rd CPTF
meetings;
Progress with national
3. Organization of the seminar on the problem of unwanted marine species
contributions to the
for marine science community of Odessa;
programme/self financing
4. Collecting
data
on
national legislation;
activities.
5. Provided office venue and furniture for the CFPA;
6. Shipping industry (association of ports of Ukraine, association of pilots of
Ukraine, association of shipowners of Ukraine) involved to the 1st Black
Sea Regional Conference on Ballast Water Management and Control (10
to 12 October 2001);
7. Articles and video reports in national / local mass-media prepared.
Country-specific activities
1. Propositions of the scientists of Ukraine concerning ballast water treatment
under National Workplan, not
collected.
covered by Global PIP (add
2. Interdepartmental meeting (port authorities, shipping companies,
rows if necessary).
classification societies, marine science community) on problems of sea
pollution by ballast waters hold on May 29, 2000 in Odessa.
Other duties assigned by
Country Focal Point/ PCU
1. Provided office venue and equipment for the CFPA.
1. Translation of PCU documents, final draft of NWPU into Russian (for the
Other/Miscellaneous
need of the CPTF of Ukraine);
2. Translation of conference materials
52
Agenda Item 4:
Ballast Water Risk Assessment
Background
All Pilot Countries were briefed on the forthcoming Ballast Water Risk Assessment at the 2nd GPTF
meeting in December 2000 and the draft ToR were circulated to all members of the GPTF for review and
comment, before finalization. The ToR are attached again for information/reference.
In July 2001 the PCU issued an invitation to tender to undertake the Ballast Water Risk Assessments to
seven companies as follows:
CSIRO-CRIMP (Australian institute)
SERC (US institute)
DNV (Norwegian company)
DENIS PATERSON AND ASSOCIATES (independent consultant)
URS (US company with global offices)
LING (Lithuanian, Irish, Norwegian, German consortium)
NIO (Indian institute)
Tenders were received from DNV, URS, LING and NIO.
In identifying suitable consultants to invite to tender, all GloBallast Pilot Countries were requested to
advise the GloBallast PCU of suggestions, bearing in mind the Selection Criteria in the ToR.
A four person technical evaluation panel was formed comprising the GloBallast Chief Technical Adviser
(Dandu Pughiuc) and Technical Adviser (Steve Raaymakers) plus two independent external evaluators
(Mr Tim Wilkins from INTERTANKO and Mr Iain Chadwick from OCIMF).
Each panel member evaluated the four tenders received against a uniform set of Selection Criteria and
completed a standard Tender Evaluation Form. Total price was not assessed and the score was set at zero
as the budget was set at US$250,000 and provided to the tenderer's prior to tendering. The evaluation
was based primarily on the technical ability of the tenders to meet the ToR, within the available budget.
There was unanimous agreement amongst the panel that URS was the winning tender.
The PCU progressed the risk assessment consultancy to the point of contract commencement but was
delayed by IMO administration. This has caused a significant `domino-effect' delay to the whole
programme. IMO approval has now been received, and the lead risk assessment consultant (Dr Rob
Hilliard) will brief all parties with a detailed presentation.
Action Required
CFP/CFP-A in each country, through CPTF, to ensure all available data as listed below is complied and
ready for provision to the consultants during their first country visits later this year.
53
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
· Copies of all IMO Ballast Water Reporting Forms collected for the Demonstration Site to date.
· The nature and content of any databases already established at the Demonstration Site for the
IMO Ballast Water Reporting Forms.
· Any other data on ballasting/de-ballasting patterns in and around the port, including locations,
times, frequencies and volumes.
· All available shipping data, particularly on where ships arrive from (source ports) and depart to
(destination ports).
· All available data on the distribution of environmental resources in and around the port, including
any existing coastal resource atlases and Geographic Information Systems (GIS).
· All available data on physical, chemical and biological conditions in and around the port.
· All available data on known introduced marine species in and around the port, including the
results to date from the Port Baseline Surveys.
CFP/CFP-A in each country, through CPTF, to identify and assemble in-country risk-assessment team
comprising personnel from port authority, maritime administration, environment administration and/or
marine scientists (up to 10 people) to work with the risk assessment consultants, receive training in the
risk assessment methodology and to conduct the risk assessments in future. This should include
identification of a lead agency and lead person for the risk assessment who will be responsible for
housing, operating and maintaining the associated computer hardware, software and databases.
CFP/CFP-A in each country to provide all necessary assistance to the risk assessment consultants in
arranging their country visits and in-country activities.
54
Agenda Item 4: Ballast Water Risk Assessment
Consultants' Terms of Reference
Activity 3.1: Ballast Water Risk Assessments
6 Demonstration Sites
1. Introduction & background
The International Maritime Organization (IMO), with funding provided by the Global Environment
Facility (GEF) through the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), has initiated the Global
Ballast Water Management Programme (GloBallast).
This programme is aimed at reducing the transfer of harmful marine species in ships' ballast water, by
assisting developing countries to implement existing IMO voluntary guidelines on ballast water
management (IMO Assembly Resolution A.868(20)), and to prepare for the anticipated introduction
of an international legal instrument regulating ballast water management currently being developed by
IMO member countries.
The programme aims to achieve this by providing technical assistance, capacity building and
institutional strengthening to remove barriers to effective ballast water management arrangements in
six initial demonstration sites. These six sites are Sepetiba, Brazil; Dalian, China; Mumbai, India;
Kharg Island, Iran; Saldanha, South Africa and Odessa, Ukraine. The initial demonstration sites are
intended to be representative of the six main developing regions of the world, as defined by GEF.
These are respectively, South America, East Asia, South Asia, Middle East, Africa and Eastern
Europe. As the programme proceeds it is intended to replicate these initial demonstration sites
throughout each region.
2. The need for the risk assessments
The development objectives of the programme are to assist countries to implement the existing IMO
voluntary ballast water management guidelines and to prepare for the introduction of a new
international legal instrument on ballast water.
The current IMO ballast water management guidelines offer states significant flexibility in
determining the nature and extent of their national ballast water management regimes. This flexibility
is warranted given that nations are still experimenting with approaches. A port state may wish to
apply its regime uniformly to all vessels which visit, or it may wish to attempt to assess the relative
risk of vessels to valuable resources and apply the regime selectively to those which are deemed of
highest risk.
The uniform application option offers the advantages of simplified programme administration in that
there are no "judgement calls" to be made or justified by the port state regarding which vessels must
participate and which need not. In addition, the system requires substantially less information
management demands. Finally, it offers more protection from unanticipated invaders, and overall
protection is not dependent upon the quality of a decision support system which may not be complete.
The primary disadvantages of this approach are: 1) additional overall cost to vessels which otherwise
might not need to take action, and 2) more vessels will be involved in undertaking the measures, and
therefore the port state will need to monitor compliance from a greater number of vessels.
Some nations are experimenting with systems to allow more selective applicability based upon
voyage-specific risk assessments because this approach offers to reduce the numbers of vessels
subject to ballast water controls and monitoring. The prospect of reducing the numbers of ships to
which the program applies is especially attractive to nations that wish to eliminate introductions of
target organisms such as toxic dinoflagellates. More rigorous measures can be justified on ships
deemed to be of `high risk' if fewer restrictions are placed on low risk vessels. However, this
approach places commensurate information technology and management burdens on port state and its
55
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
effectiveness depends on the quality of the information supporting it. The approach may also leave
the country/port vulnerable to unknown risks from non-target organisms.
For countries/ports which choose the selective approach, it will be essential to establish an organized
means of evaluating the potential risk posed by each vessel entering their port, through a Decision
Support System (DSS). Only in this way can they take the most appropriate decision regarding any
required action concerning that vessels' ballast water discharge. The DSS is a management system
that provides a mechanism for assessing all available information relating to individual vessels and
their individual management of ballast water so that, based upon assessed risk, the appropriate course
of action can be taken.
Before a pilot country decides on whether to adopt the `blanket' (i.e. all vessels) approach or to target
specific, identified high risk vessels only, a general, first-past risk assessment needs to be carried out.
This should look at shipping arrival patterns and identify the source ports from which ballast water is
imported. Once these are identified, source port/discharge port environmental comparisons should be
carried out to give a preliminary indication of overall risk. This will greatly assist the port state to
assess which approach to take.
The GloBallast programme, under Activity 3.1; will support these initial , `first-past' risk assessments
as a consultancy on contract to the PCU. This is important for establishing the level and types of risks
of introductions that each port faces, as well as the most sensitive resources and values that might be
threatened. These will differ from site to site, and will determine the types of management responses
that are required.
The PCU risk assessment consultants, in conducting the risk assessment in each pilot country, will
work with and train country counterpart(s) and include them in the study process as part of the
capacity building objectives of the programme, so as to allow each country to undertake its own risk
assessments in future.
3. Scope of the risk assessments
A Risk Assessment will be undertaken for each of the ports of:
· Sepetiba, Brazil;
· Dalian, China;
· Mumbai, India;
· Kharg Island, Iran;
· Saldanha, South Africa and
· Odessa, Ukraine.
The Risk Assessments will apply to all ship movements into and out of these ports based on shipping
data for the last 10 years (or longer if available).
4. Services required & tasks to be undertaken
The GloBallast PCU requires a suitably qualified and experienced consultancy team to undertake the
ballast water risk assessments. The consultancy team will undertake the following Tasks, for each
demonstration site:
Task 1: Resource Mapping
Identify, describe and map on Geographic Information System (GIS) all coastal and marine resources
(biological, social/cultural and commercial) in and around the demonstration site that might be
impacted by introduced marine species.
56
Agenda Item 4: Ballast Water Risk Assessment
Task 2: De-ballasting/Ballasting Patterns
Characterise, describe and map (on GIS) de-ballasting and ballasting patterns in and around the ports
including locations, times, frequencies and volumes of ballast water discharges and uptakes.
Task 3: Identify Source Ports
Identify all ports/locations from which ballast water is imported (source ports).
Task 4: Identify Destination Ports
Identify all ports/locations to which ballast water is exported (destination ports).
Task 5: Database - IMO Ballast Water Reporting Form
Establish a database at the nominated in-country agency for the efficient ongoing collection,
management and analysis of the data collected at the demonstration site according to the standard
IMO Ballast Water Reporting Form, and the data referred to under Tasks 2, 3 and 4.
Task 6: Environmental Parameters
Characterise as far as possible from existing data, the physical, chemical and biological environments
for both the demonstration site and each of its source and destination ports.
Task 7: Environmental Similarity Analysis
Using the data from Task 6 and an appropriate multivariate environmental similarity analysis
programme, develop environmental similarity matrices and indices to compare each demonstration
site with each of its source ports and destination ports, as the basis for the risk assessment.
Task 8: High Risk Species
Identify as far as possible from existing data, any high risk species present at the source ports that
might pose a threat of introduction to the demonstration site, and any high risk species present at the
demonstration site that might be exported to a destination port.
Task 9: Risk Assessment
For each demonstration site, assess and describe as far as possible, the risk profile for invasive marine
species being both introduced from its set of source ports and exported to its set of destination ports,
and identify the highest risk source and destination ports, using the outputs of Tasks 1 to 8 and based
on the environmental similarity indices developed under Task 7.
Task 10: Training & Capacity Building
While undertaking the risk assessment, provide training and capacity building to the in-country risk
assessment team (up to 10 people) in the risk assessment methodology, including use of database
established under Task 5 and the multivariate environmental similarity analysis programme
established under Task 7.
Task 11: Information Gaps
Identify any information gaps that limit the ability to undertake these Tasks and recommend
management actions to address these gaps.
5. Methods to be used
The consultants should clearly outline in their Tender how each Task will be achieved. These should
comply with but are not necessarily restricted to the following:
57
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Site Visits:
The consultants will undertake an initial one week (5 working days) visit to each demonstration site to
hold discussions with the CFP, CFP-A, port authority, maritime administration, environment
administration, fisheries/marine resources administration, marine science community and shipping
industry, to identify and obtain information and data for the various Tasks, establish a working
relationship with the in-country risk assessment team, conduct a site familiarisation to the
demonstration site (port) and to identify information gaps.
The consultants will undertake second 8 to 10 working day visit to each demonstration to install the
GIS, database and multivariate environmental similarity analysis programme and to provide training
and capacity building in their use and the overall risk assessment methodology to the in-country risk
assessment team.
Coordination:
The consultants will maintain close consultation and cooperation with the PCU Technical Adviser
(TA), who will manage this consultancy, and with the Country Focal Point (CFP) and CFP Assistant
(CFP-A) in each pilot country, who provide the primary contact point for all in-country activities and
for accessing in-country information and data.
Tasks 1& 2:
This will be restricted existing data only, field surveys are not provided for in the budget. The CFP
and/or CFP-A will compile as much existing information as possible in relation to Tasks 1 and 2 to
provide to the consultants.
The consultants should identify and evaluate any existing in-country databases and GIS for use in
these Tasks. The GIS should be tailored to suit the country's circumstances while ensuring user-
friendliness and consistency across all sites.
Tasks 3 & 4:
This will be restricted to existing data only. The CFP and/or CFP-A will compile as much existing
information as possible in relation to Tasks 3 and 4 to provide to the consultants. However, the
consultants should identify potential additional sources of data for these two tasks, including records
held by port authorities, shipping agents, customs agencies and similar, that may not have been
identified/compiled by the CFP/CFP-A.
Task 5:
The consultants should identify and evaluate any existing in-country databases for use in this Task.
The database should be tailored to suit the country's circumstances while ensuring user-friendliness,
consistency with the IMO Ballast Water Record Form and consistency across all sites.
Task 6:
This will be based on existing data only. The consultants should clearly outline in their Tender what
parameters will be used, and how the data for these parameters will be collected from the source and
destination ports.
Task 7:
The consultants should clearly outline in their Tender what multivariate environmental similarity
analysis programme will be used, and how it will be used.
58
Agenda Item 4: Ballast Water Risk Assessment
Task 8:
The consultants should clearly outline in their Tender how this Task will be achieved, including how
relevant national and international invasive marine species records and databases will be accessed.
Task 9:
The consultants should clearly outline in their Tender how the outputs of Tasks 1 to 8, and in
particular Task 4, will be used to produce the risk profiles for each demonstration site, and what form
these will take.
Task 10 & 11:
The consultants should clearly outline in their Tender how these Tasks will be achieved.
6. Time frame, end product and reporting procedure
· The risk assessments will be conducted for each of the six demonstration sites in the second
half of 2001 and into the first half of 2002. A detailed workplan and timeline will be
proposed by the consultant in their Tender and the precise timing for each site will be refined
through consultation with each country, once the contract is awarded.
· The end product of this consultancy will be the establishment of the databases, GIS's,
multivariate environmental similarity analysis programmes and risk assessment outputs at
each demonstration site, including training in their use.
· There will also be a report for each demonstration site which addresses as fully as possible all
of the Tasks under section 4, consistent with all parts of these Terms of Reference and the
consultancy contract. Results presented should be supported by maps, figures, diagrams and
tables here useful.
· Each report should be submitted to the PCU in draft form first, for review by the PCU and
the demonstration site risk assessment team. The final report for each site will be submitted
to the PCU within one month of the consultants receiving review comments.
· The PCU may arrange for peer review of the draft reports, to ensure scientific credibility and
quality control.
· The final reports should be submitted to the PCU in both hard-copy and electronic form,
including figures, images and data, ready for publication. The PCU will publish each final
report in both English and the main language of the pilot country (if different).
7. Selection criteria
· Cost effectiveness.
· Demonstrated record of meeting deadlines and completing tasks within budget.
· Extensive experience with the issue of introduced marine species.
· Extensive experience with the issue of ballast water.
· Extensive experience with risk assessment in relation to introduced marine species and ballast
water.
· Demonstrated abilities in literature search and review and in identifying and obtaining
reports, publications, information and data from sometimes obscure and difficult sources.
59
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
· Demonstrated skills in information analysis and synthesis.
· Experience in working in developing countries.
· Experience in training and capacity building in developing countries.
· Ability of the proposed methods and workplan to complete all Tasks satisfactorally.
8. Content of tenders
The Tender should include the following:
· Total lump-sum price in US$D.
· Detailed cost break-down for all Tasks in US$ (NB. Total budget must not exceed
US$250,000 and cost-effectiveness and competitiveness within this budget forms a primary
selection criteria).
· Detailed workplan and provisional timeline for all Tasks outlined under section 4 above.
· Details of the methods proposed to achieve all Tasks, framed against each Task under section
4 above and consistent with section 5 above.
· CV's of each consultancy team member (maximum of 3 pages per person) (consultancy teams
should be kept as small as possible).
· Details of the consultancy's professional indemnity and liability insurance and quality
assurance procedures.
Further information
Steve Raaymakers
Technical Adviser
Programme Coordination Unit
Tel +44 (0)20 7587 3251
Fax +44 (0)20 7587 3261
Email sraaymak@imo.org
60
Agenda Item 5:
NGO/Industry Information Papers
INTERTANKO
Story of the Alternative
Solution...INTERTANKO 2001
Progress and Activities
MARTOB Project
· Temp., de-oxygenation, UV/US combo., ozone,
during 2001
oxicide and hurdle technology
· Move towards the testing stage, 2002
· Presentation at MEPC (IMO)
· Shipboard trials
Ballast Water Exchange
Living with the Regulations
Teekay Concept
Clarification, explanation, illustration,
· Natural bal ast water exchange
demonstration...frustration!
· Testing of new concepts on members
Australian DSS
vessels...legislative drawback & Catch 22!!
· AMSA/AQIS website has been essential
Developments on new buildings
· Piping and pumping arrangements, enhanced
tank design etc.
· Enhancing safety and environmental
effectiveness
Working with the Regulators
and finally...
Development of Standards for IMO
remember that a solution to this
Ballast Water Correspondence Group Work
problem could be worth
US initiatives going the same way
· Notice for Comments on `Standards'
USD694million a year
· Notice for Comments on `On-board trials'
Europe?
· The Marine Strategy
USD30.5billion
61
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
IUCN
GloBallast GEF/UNDP/IMO Project
GloBallast GEF/UNDP/IMO Project
3rd Global Project Task Force Meeting (GPTF) Meeting: Goa India,
3rd Global Project Task Force Meeting (GPTF) Meeting: Goa India,
16th 18th January 2002
16th 18th January 2002
IUCN - the World Conservation Union
% Headquarters in Switzerland.
% 7 Regional Offices;21 Country Offices and 14 Project
Vision: A just world that values and conserves nature
Offices, based mostly in developing countries
% As a membership organisation, IUCN acts as a strong
Mission Statement:
voice for states, governments and NGO's.
% 6 expert Commissions global network of 900
To influence, encourage and assist societies throughout
technical, scientific and policy experts make a massive
the world to conserve the integrity and diversity of
volunteer contribution to conservation
nature and ensure that any use of nature is equitable
and ecologically sustainable.
% (CEM;EC;EE;SP;EL;WCPA;WCD)
GloBallast GEF/UNDP/IMO Project
GloBallast GEF/UNDP/IMO Project
3rd Global Project Task Force Meeting (GPTF) Meeting: Goa India,
3rd Global Project Task Force Meeting (GPTF) Meeting: Goa India,
16th 18th January 2002
16th 18th January 2002
IUCN in the Regional Context:
% IUCN Asian Regional Coastal and Marine Programme
(ARCAM)
% IUCN's Asian operations cater for approx. half the
Unions activities.
%To assure policy and technical linkages to global
partners and debates;
% ARD Management body of the IUCN Secretariat
% ARO (Bangkok) support to country offices and
%To develop strategic alliances at the regional level;
regional programmes
% 8 country offices (Bangladesh; Cambodia; Lao PDR;
%To organise regional networks around key
Nepal; Pakistan; Sri Lanka; Thailand and Vietnam)
programme technical issues
GloBallast GEF/UNDP/IMO Project
GloBallast GEF/UNDP/IMO Project
3rd Global Project Task Force Meeting (GPTF) Meeting: Goa India,
3rd Global Project Task Force Meeting (GPTF) Meeting: Goa India,
16th 18th January 2002
16th 18th January 2002
ARCAM Programme 6 thematic areas:
% The ARCAM recognises the severity of the rapid spread
% Critical Ecosystems
of Marine Alien Invasives
% Integrated Coastal Zone Management
% Crowns of Thorns Star-fish
% Sustainable Use of Coastal and Marine Resources
% Increased Global Trade (e.g. Aquarium) and
% Marine Protected Areas
introduction of species in ballast water
% Species Threatened, Migratory and Invasives
% Controlling marine invasives thereby becomes not only
% Information and Awareness
a national concern but requires collaboration between
Complementary and will utilise potential inter-linkages
countries in the region regarding management
between thematic areas and synergies with member-
strategies and mitigation measures
partnership arrangements.
GloBallast GEF/UNDP/IMO Project
GloBallast GEF/UNDP/IMO Project
3rd Global Project Task Force Meeting (GPTF) Meeting: Goa India,
3rd Global Project Task Force Meeting (GPTF) Meeting: Goa India,
16th 18th January 2002
16th 18th January 2002
ARCAM Focus on Invasives:
Regional Biodiversity Programme, Asia
Established in 1996 to assist with the implementation of
% Development of a `black list' of key invasives
the CBD in Asia
% Assistance to Risk Assessment, including development
% In situ-conservation (Article 8)
initiatives
AIS the problem lies largely unquantified and poorly
% Development and Implementation of regional invasive
documented, it is increasingly being recognised that
species action plans
alien invasive species are having a profound impact on
% IUCN Species Programme/GISP/AIS Specialist Group
Asia's native biodiversity. The RBP is focusing
attention on enhancing capacity to identify, prevent and
control these species
62
Agenda Item 5: NGO/Industry Information Papers - IUCN
GloBallast GEF/UNDP/IMO Project
GloBallast GEF/UNDP/IMO Project
3rd Global Project Task Force Meeting (GPTF) Meeting: Goa India,
3rd Global Project Task Force Meeting (GPTF) Meeting: Goa India,
16th 18th January 2002
16th 18th January 2002
How may IUCN assist with Globallast?
IUCN's objectives in attending this meeting:
% Information Needs large number of countries etc
% Addressing the extinction crisis is the prime mandate of IUCN. W e
involved in various aspects of this issue -however
can best deal with issues of this kind by working in partner
organisations therefore we are keen to maintain a working
there appears to be a lack of coordination
relationship with IMO in this matter.
% Dissemination of Information
% We would like to show our support to initiatives such as Globallast
% Technical Research
and would like to lend our support and willingness to participate in
future programme planning and development
% Educational Materials - Establishment of
% IUCN supports this Intelligent approach to mutual problem solving
Education/Communications networks e.g links to
and would like to extend the support of its network of 40 +
IUCN AIS Specialist Group web-site
regional and country offices located in virtually every region
where marine AIS problems are of concern.
63
Agenda Item 6:
Proposed IMO/Pilot Country MoUs
Background
GloBallast is a complex project involving the three UN organisations and six national governments.
The international transfer of funds and the expectation that each participating party will carry out
various activities to fulfil certain obligations, as outlined in the Project Document, need to be reflected
and supported by written agreements. This will provide a legal basis and mandate for cooperation
between the executing agency (IMO) and the Lead Agencies in each participating country. This is
most effectively and efficiently achieved through a simple Memorandum of Understanding (MoU) or
Memorandum of Agreement (MoA) between IMO and the Government/Lead Agency of each
participating country.
Accordingly, approximately two years ago during the preparatory phases of the project, such a
document was drafted by IMO for consideration by governments. This MoU has now been amended
to reflect feedback received from some participating countries and a final draft is now available
(Attachment I) for consideration by participating countries for signing. The participants who did not
concluded yet their MoUs are encouraged to review the draft and propose further amendments that
would reflect the specific situation in their respective countries.
Benefits
The benefits of such an MoU include:
· Clear definition of the roles, responsibilities and obligations of each party.
· Provision of a clear mandate for the project at the national level.
· A basis for the Lead Agency in each country to secure support from other national
government bodies, including treasury, for the implementation of in-country programme
activities.
Action Required
The Lead Agencies in each participating country need to review the final draft MoU and progress to
signing it in conjunction with IMO.
64
Agenda Item 6: Proposed IMO/Pilot Countries MoUs
Final Draft MoU
Memorandum of Understanding
between
Ministry of Transport of Ukraine
and
The International Maritime Organization (IMO)
This Memorandum of Understanding is concluded between the Ministry of Transport of Ukraine
[address] and the International Maritime Organization (hereinafter referred to as "IMO") for the
implementation and execution of the GEF/UNDP/IMO Project on "Removal of Barriers for the Effective
Implementation of Ballast Water Control and Management in Development Countries" (Project No.
GLO/99/G31/ All G/19) (hereinafter referred to as the "Project").
Preamble
The Ministry of Transport of Ukraine and IMO,
Desiring to achieve the overall objective of this Project, which is to assist developing countries
to reduce the transfer of harmful organisms from ship ballast water, and more specifically to implement
the existing IMO voluntary guidelines and prepare for the anticipated IMO regulatory regime on ballast
water,
Considering that the Global Environment Facility (GEF) has allocated US$7,392,000 for this
Project for a three-year period from March 2000 to February 2003, UNDP is the GEF
Implementing Agency for the project and IMO is the UNDP Executing Agency for the Project,
Recognizing that the commitment and support of the beneficiary participating countries is
required to assure the successful implementation and execution of the Project,
Have agreed as follows:
Article 1: Objectives
1.1
The Parties to this Memorandum of Understanding agree to work together to implement and
execute the Project and to perform their reciprocal obligations in accordance with the terms established
by the Project document attached hereto (as amended if applicable).
Article 2: Undertaking by IMO
2.1
The IMO, as executing agency for the Project, has established a Project Co-ordinating Unit
(PCU) at IMO Headquarters in London. The PCU consists of one Chief Technical Adviser (CTA), one
Technical Adviser (TA) (a communication specialist), and one Administrative Assistant. The PCU will
be responsible for the day-to-day activities of the Project, and will report to the Director, Marine
Environment Division, IMO. IMO will report to the United Nations Development Programme; IMO will
also provide staff support for the project activities and office space for PCU.
2 .2
The Project Co-ordinating Unit (PCU) will:
.1 throughout the life of the Project, cover the salary, including travel costs, of one assistant to
the national Focal Point throughout the Project;
65
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
.2 provide technical assistance and guidance to the national Focal Point in the execution of
theProject on both national and regional basis in accordance with the Project Document;
.3 finance the consultancy contracts and pay the costs of the activities related to
implementation of the Project;
.4 assist and provide financial support for organizing the national and/or regional meetings in
accordance with the Project Document;
.5 procure and finance the equipment necessary for the implementation of the Project;
.6 cover the costs for reporting and evaluating the Project; and,
.7 assist and provide financial support for the establishment of the Regional Task Forces
(RPTFs).
Article 3: Undertaking by the Ministry of Transport of Ukraine
3.1
The Ministry of Transport of Ukraine will:
.1 designate the organization to act as Lead Agency and appoint a Country Focal Point (CFP)
for the Project;
.2 in co-operation with the PCU, the CFP will select a competent person to act as Assistant to
the Country Focal Point. The Lead Agency will provide office space for the Assistant;
.3 release the Country Focal Point from his normal duties to attend meetings and participate in
other activities related to the implementation of the Project (all travel costs incurred in this
respect will be covered by the project);
.4 develop port and country-specific programmes of action based on the model provided by
PCU;
.5 provide free access to information required for the implementation of the Project;
.6 authorise, subject to adequate prior notification and formal clearance, site visits by technical
experts to support the implementation of the Project;
.7 provide financial and in kind support for the activities of the Project, especially covering
local expenditure;
.8 support the risk assessment activities, the port baseline surveys and academic research on
subjects related to ballast water issues; and,
.9 ensure co-ordination between the different agencies involved in the ballast water issues
(environment, transport, fisheries, etc.).
Article 4: Implementation
4.1
During the development of the Project, the Lead Agency shall inform the PCU, through the Focal
Point, of any other national or regional organizations to be involved in the project implementation.
4.2
The Ministry of Transport of Ukraine, through the Focal Point and IMO, through the PCU, shall
keep each other mutually informed of all relevant developments related to the Project through official
correspondence.
66
Agenda Item 6: Proposed IMO/Pilot Countries MoUs
4.3
To ensure adequate follow-up and co-ordination of the work plan, regular national and regional
meetings shall be arranged by the Country Focal Point, with assistance from the PCU, for the Country
Project Task Force and the Regional Project Task Force.
Article 5: Amendments
5.1
Any amendment to the present MOU must be confirmed in writing between the Ministry of
Transport of Ukraine and IMO.
Article 6: Entry into force and expiry of the Memorandum of Understanding
6.1
This Memorandum of Understanding will enter into force upon signature by the parties
hereto. The duration of the present Memorandum of Understanding will be linked to the period
necessary for the implementation of the Project. It will expire no later than 28 February 2003, or such
other date as IMO and the Ministry of Transport of Ukraine shall agree in writing.
Article 7: Settlement of disputes
7.1
Any dispute between the parties to this MOU concerning the interpretation or applications of this
Agreement shall be settled amicably. However, if the parties fail to reach a settlement the dispute shall be
settled, finally, by arbitration in accordance with the United Nations Commission on International Trade
Law (UNCITRAL) arbitration rules as at present in force.
Article 8: Termination
8.1
This Memorandum of Understanding may be terminated by both sides with a minimum of 60
days notice in the event of non-performance of any of its clauses or force majeure.
In witness hereof the duly accredited undersigned affix their signature.
Made in duplicate in the English language.
[City]
[day]
[date]
[year]
On behalf of
On behalf of
International Maritime Organization
Ministry of Transport of Ukraine
..........................................
...........................................
67
Agenda Item 7:
Port Baseline Surveys
Background
It is not possible to manage and control introduced marine species unless you know what they are and
where they are. The IMO Guidelines (A.868(20)) encourage Port States to undertake biological
surveys and monitoring in their ports. The results can be used to control introduced species and to
advise ships of areas or times to be avoided in taking on ballast, so as to minimise the uptake and
transfer of these species.
As part of its objective of assisting developing countries to implement the IMO Guidelines, the
GloBallast programme is supporting each of its six Pilot Countries to conduct port baseline surveys.
It is highly desirable that port surveys for introduced marine species are conducted according to
standardised, uniform methods. This helps to ensure quality control and a basic minimum standard,
and allow inter-comparability of data. Such standardisation is extremely important when dealing with
a global industry such as shipping and the transboundary movement of species, which requires a high
level of international cooperation and coordination.
Fortunately for GloBallast, the Australian Centre for Research on Introduced Marine Pests (CRIMP)
developed standard port survey protocols in 1996. They have been tried and tested in Australia since
then, during which 25 ports have been surveyed for introduced marine species. The protocols were
revised and republished this year (Hewitt & Martin 2001).
GloBallast selected the CRIMP Protocols for application at its six Demonstration Sites, on a trial
basis. They will be considered for possible adaptation as international port survey protocols (see
below). They have also been adopted by the University of Wales for UK ports, the Smithsonian
Environmental Research Centre at various locations in the United States and the New Zealand
Ministry of Fisheries for a comprehensive series of surveys throughout NZ.
Status
The first port survey was conducted at Saldanha, South Africa in April 2001. This included training
marine scientists from the other Pilot Countries. Since April the GloBallast Port Survey Coordinator,
Dr Marnie Campbell, visited the other 5 Pilot Countries to provide further training to each country's
port survey team, and to assist with finalising their survey plans and sampling designs. She then
visited each country a second time to assist and advise during the actual field sampling.
By the end of November all six Pilot Countries had completed the field-sampling component of their
surveys. This represents a major practical achievement for the programme and a material
implementation of an important element of the IMO ballast water Guidelines.
The establishment by GloBallast of biological baselines and port survey capabilities at six major ports
in the main developing regions of the world represents a positive step forward in global understanding
of invasive marines species. When linked with similar surveys being conducted in developed
68
Agenda Item 7: Port Baseline Surveys
countries, they provide an important building block for a much-needed global early-warning system
for detecting, tracking, recording and reporting marine bio-invasions.
Next Stages
Each country now needs to complete sample identification, analysis and reporting. Final reports for
each of the surveys will be published by GloBallast.
The capacity-building aspect of this GloBallast activity means that each country now has a fully
trained team and institutional arrangements for carrying out surveys for introduced marine species,
according to standardised procedures. The challenge remains for each country to build on the
baselines and implement ongoing, long-term monitoring programmes, for all ports in their
jurisdiction. The Pilot Countries could also lead neighboring countries in regional port survey
networks.
It is also vital that survey results are fed into national, regional and global databases. These must be
linked to communication and reporting systems that allow the international shipping industry to be
alerted to outbreaks of harmful species, so as to manage their ballast operations.
In order to progress these matters, the PCU is planning to convene the 1st International Port Survey
Workshop in July 2002. This would involve the Port Survey team leaders and deputies from the
GloBallast Pilot Countries plus other countries that are active in this area, including Australia, New
Zealand, the UK and the USA. The purpose of the workshop would be:
· For each country to present papers on their respective approaches to ports surveys and results
to date, and to allow discussion and debate on comparing methods and results.
· To initiate greater global coordination and cooperation on this issue, including sharing of
expertise, experiences and data.
· To revise the CRIMP Protocols and adapt them into truly International Port Survey
Guidelines for formal publication and dissemination by the PCU.
· To establish uniform data recording and reporting standards and determine global database
requirements.
· To explore the establishment a global network of marine taxonomists to support port surveys.
· To develop a foundation for a global port survey and early-warning system for detecting,
tracking, recording and reporting marine bio-invasions.
Subject to agreement from Brazil, one possible venue for this workshop would be the IEAPM Marine
Institute in Arraial do Cabo. For cost-effectiveness reasons, this workshop would be held back-to-
back with the 1st International Ballast Water Sampling Workshop that is also planned by the PCU for
July 2002 (see Agenda Item 9).
Action Required
Each country to complete sample identification, analysis and reporting.
Ideally, each country to build on the baselines and wherever possible to implement ongoing, long-
term monitoring programmes, for all ports in their jurisdiction, and to lead neighboring countries in
regional port survey networks.
69
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Each country to ensure that survey results are fed into national, regional and global databases, linked
to communication and reporting systems that allow shipping to be alerted to outbreaks.
GloBallast PCU to organize the 1st International Port Survey Workshop for July 2002.
70
Agenda Item 8:
Ballast Water Management and Control
Training Package
Background
Training and education was identified in the IMO Ballast Water Guidelines as one of the most
effective ways to minimize the introduction of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens. The latest
version of the "Draft Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and
Sediments" also requires that officers and crew engaged in ballast water management and control be
properly trained in this respect.
Activity 4.2 of the Project Implementation Plan provides for the development and delivery of training
packages using the UN Train-X decentralised course development and sharing system. The initial
delivery of the training package will serve as validation of the course and the validated course
packages will be sent to training units in each Pilot Country for adaptation according to the Train-X
methodology and subsequent national/regional delivery.
Training and education should include instructions on the application of ballast water and sediment
management procedures and maintenance of appropriate records and logs in accordance with the IMO
Guidelines. The governments of the six Pilot Countries should be encouraged to ensure that their
marine training and educational organisations include these instructions in their syllabus and specific
training requirements will be incorporated in the certification procedures.
Activity Description
During the 2nd GPTF Meeting in December 2000, general consensus was reached on the need for such
training and the members of the task force identified the TRAIN-SEA-COAST (TSC) Programme as
most appropriate to coordinate the development of the training package. TSC is a training network in
the field of coastal and ocean management with extensive experience in using the Train-X
methodology. The programme, which is funded by the GEF, has 14 training centres worldwide with
two of the most efficient course developing units located in two of the GloBallast Pilot Countries
Brazil and South Africa. UNDP has recommended TSC as the best qualified programme for this
purpose as it combines the technical knowledge on coastal zone management with the necessary
pedagogical skills in Train-X methodology.
Expected benefits of the partnership between the GloBallast Programme and TSC global training
network as a vehicle to address GloBallast related training priorities include:
· Enhanced responsiveness to current and future manpower and training needs of GloBallast
towards the implementation of IMO Guidelines and the anticipated Ballast Water Convention.
· High quality training standards for the development and delivery of the training package at
various locations.
71
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
· Standardized approach to the training needs of the six Pilot Countries consistent with the
provisions of IMO Guidelines and requirements of the future Convention.
· Local capacity building for developing, adapting and delivering the training package.
· Participation in the Train-X sharing network and possible dissemination of the GloBallast
concepts worldwide.
· Active and direct cooperation between different GloBallast activities and their training
components.
· Cost-effectiveness in the short and long terms.
The Education and Training Project was approved in mid-2001and the CFPs in Brazil and South
Africa were advised to contact the TSC course developing units in their countries and initiate the
training package development. The estimated budget for course development was $109,000. The
remaining US$173,000 were allocated for validation, adaptation of the courses and delivery of the
training package.
It was agreed that the TRAIN-SEA-COAST/GloBallast course will be prepared jointly by TSC/Brazil
located in the Federal University of Rio Grande and TSC/Benguela Current located in the University
of Western Cape in Cape Town, South Africa. The course developers were requested to provide draft
work programmes and tentative schedules for the training development activities. A plan for the
allocation of the resources, based on the initial project document, was preliminarily agreed upon. The
work programme was discussed by TSC New York and GloBallast PCU in order to set up
coordination mechanisms and facilitate effective communication. Some delays were encountered
because of the replacement of the team leaders of the two course developing units.
On the occasion of his visit to Brazil the GloBallast CTA had a two day meeting with the TSC
Coordinator, Ms Stella Vallejo, and the TSC/Brazil staff to review the work done so far and plan for
the next stages of the course developing process. During the two working sessions the following
activities have been carried out:
· Revision of the proposal presented by TSC/Brazil for the development of the training
modules of the course.
· Evaluation of the information available for the development of the modules and identification
of relevant contacts with port authorities and other specialists.
· Identification of the "target populations" for the various modules, including key
characteristics, responsibilities and experience.
· Discussions on the problem analysis and job analysis questionnaires developed by TSC
Brazil.
· Redrafting the plan of activities in accordance with the outcome of the discussions.
· Establishment of the necessary administrative arrangements for further implementation of the
project.
It was unanimously agreed that the training package needs to reflect the lessons learned during the
implementation of the other activities and to ensure active and direct cooperation among the various
components of the GloBallast Programme. To ensure consistency with the rest of the GloBallast
activity the PCU provided copies of the TOR and reports on the sub-projects developed to date and
advised the CFPs to maintain permanent links with the course developers in order to update them on
latest developments.
72
Agenda Item 8: Ballast Water Management and Control Training Package
It was also agreed that each course development unit would undertake a preliminary study that
includes population analysis and problem analysis according to the Train-X methodology. Both
course development units will undertake a common job analysis and design of curriculum during a
coordination meeting provisionally scheduled for March 2002 in Brazil. In order to avoid duplication
the two units will discuss and agree on the modules to be developed by each unit and other collateral
tasks related to the completion of the training package. Each unit will develop the design of the
assigned modules and materials independently and TSC/Benguela Current will assemble the modules
in the final training package. Finally, it was agreed to maintain permanent communication between
the two course development units and ensure coordination of the work through TSC New York and
GloBallast PCU.
Action Required
The following action is required for the further implementation of the Education and Training
Activity:
· GloBallast PCU together with TSC New York to organise the coordination meeting for the
development of the job analysis and design of curriculum.
· CFPs in cooperation with the course development team leaders to identify the Subject Matter
Experts (SME) required for the development of the various modules.
· GloBallast PCU together with TSC New York to identify the international experts required
for the final review of the training package.
· CFPs, through their CPTFs, to identify the appropriate training institutions and experts for the
adaptation and delivery of the training course.
· CFPs, through their CFP Assistants to identify the most appropriate location and organise in
co-operation with the course development units the delivery of the course.
· Pilot Countries' Governments to be encouraged to ensure that their marine training and
education organizations include ballast water management and control procedures in their
syllabus.
· Pilot Countries' Governments to be encouraged to include knowledge of duties regarding the
control of pollution of the sea by harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens in their training
requirements for certificates.
· The meeting is invited to comment on the Education and Training activity and to provide
advice as appropriate.
73
Agenda Item 9:
Compliance Monitoring and
Enforcement
Background
Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement (CME) is one of the key components of the GloBallast
Programme. Under the initial assumptions by 2001/2002 the new international Convention was
supposed to have been adopted and participating countries could commence CME activities based on
the position of the envisaged Convention. Now that the diplomatic conference for the adoption of the
Convention has been provisionally re-scheduled for late 2003 the CME component has had to be
restructured.Although some countries found it difficult to enforce the existing IMO Ballast Water
Guidelines (A868(20)) prior to the adoption of a new Convention, it was felt useful to initiate, at an
early stage, the development of a set of measures to ensure CME of country/port specific ballast water
management arrangements. The initial measures could then be assembled in a CME system, which
will help to determine the extent of compliance with both the new Convention and country specific
ballast water management requirements.
Because of the importance of this component and its association with the rest of the activities of the
GloBallast programme a `Scoping Study' was commissioned to provide advice on what constitutes a
CME system, the key steps to design it and details on how this may be achieved.
Key Elements of a CME System
Each of the six Pilot Countries is in the process of establishing ballast water management (BWM)
measures for their Demonstration Sites consistent with IMO Guidelines. To ensure that these
measures are effective it is essential to ascertain whether a vessel has met the requirements, to obtain
relevant information about the BWM of the respective vessel and to have the ability to ensure that the
vessel complies with the established requirements.
An examination of existing CME systems used worldwide resulted in the following elements that
should be considered prior to the establishment of a national CME:
· Requirement for ships to collect and record information about their BWM practices
(i.e. uptake, management enroute and discharge);
· Means for ships to transmit this information to the Port State's BWM regulatory authority and
receive directions from them;
· Provision for examination/auditing of the ships' official log books or other official records to
ascertain compliance with the BWM requirements of the Port State;
· Ability by the appropriate authority to take ballast water and sediment samples and carry out
any necessary testing;
74
Agenda Item 9: Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement
· Legal provision for `enforcement', where necessary, for non-compliance with the required
BWM requirements; and
· Requirement for notification of arrangements to IMO.
A CME System should also satisfy the following criteria:
· Be safe for all personnel involved;
· Be environmentally acceptable;
· Be practicable;
· Allow for the introduction of new ballast water treatment options and other relevant
technologies;
· Be flexible enough to be adapted to local existing systems and conditions including
accommodation of in-country research initiatives;
· Be capable of expansion to allow for future additional CME considerations;
· Not be unnecessarily costly, inconvenient or cause undue delay to shipping;
· Be scientifically justifiable; and
· Be transparent and accountable.
Benefits for the GloBallast Programme
The overall objective of the GloBallast Programme is to assist countries in reducing the transfer of
harmful marine species in ships' ballast water by helping them to implement the IMO Guidelines and
to prepare for the implementation of the anticipated Convention. In this context the benefits of
developing a national CME system include:
· Enhanced protection of coastal waters against invasive species;
· Establishment of a comprehensive database on ballast water discharges, patterns of the
shipping currents, periodicity, main sources of invasive species and other accurate and readily
available information;
· Use of country-specific compliance monitoring measures as an important research tool that
can be used to assess the relative efficiency of BWM options;
· Establishment of in-country well-trained teams of inspectors;
· Comprehensive manuals that fully inform the shipmasters and the ship personnel of the
requirements of the system and how it operates; and
· Sound basis for replication of the ballast water management measures at a regional level.
Action Required
The scoping study has been completed in late 2001 and is now available for all the Pilot Countries.
· The Pilot Countries are invited to comment on the scoping study and to adapt the suggested
approaches to their needs and national requirements;
75
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
· The Pilot Countries should familiarize their port authorities with the components of the CME
as described in the IMO Guidelines, Resolution A.868(20), and pave the way for the
implementation of the anticipated Convention;
· As sampling procedures represent an important component of the CME system, PCU should
organize an international workshop to debate this topic and for participants to share their
experience in the experimentation of various techniques worldwide (see Agenda item 7);
· PCU should initiate the development of a generic CME System to be tailored by each Pilot
Country to its needs after the adoption of the future Convention.
76
Agenda Item 9(b):
Compliance Monitoring and
Enforcement
Ballast Water Sampling
Background
Sampling of ships' ballast water may be carried out for a number of useful purposes, including:
· To assess compliance with open-ocean ballast water exchange requirements (compliance
monitoring and enforcement).
· To identify potentially harmful species carried in ballast water (risk assessment).
· To better understand the biology and chemistry of ballast water (scientific research).
The GloBallast PIP allocates US$10,000 to each pilot country for the purchase of ballast water
sampling equipment, in order to allow the countries to undertake the above activities at the
Demonstration Sites.
Because ballast water sampling equipment and methods have been in a phase of development, with
different countries and parties around the world trialing different approaches, the PCU has advised the
Pilot Countries to hold-off on purchasing equipment until some form of international standard and
guidelines for ballast water sampling are established.
A number of guidelines for ballast water sampling are now available. These include:
· A practical manual on ballast water sampling published by the Cawthron Institute in New
Zealand in 2000.
· A review of ballast water sampling methods published by the Centre for Research on
Introduced Marine Pests (CRIMP) in Australia in 1999.
· An international calibration exercise for ballast water sampling conducted under the EU
Concerted Action Programme on ballast water in 1999.
· A report from the Ballast Water Sampling Correspondence Group established by the IMO
MEPC Ballast Water Working Group in 2000.
· Sampling methods used by individual scientific institutions such as the Smithsonian
Environmental Research Centre (SERC) in the USA.
· Sampling methods used by various regulatory agencies such as the US Coast Guard and
similar agencies in other countries.
· Proceedings of the IMO floating workshop on ballast water sampling in the Black Sea.
One of the GloBallast Pilot Countries, Brazil, has initiated an experimental ballast water sampling
programme at nine ports in the country, through its health authority, aimed at assessing the presence
of pathogens in ballast water. The IEAPM marine institute in Arraial do Cabo has developed
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
significant expertise in ballast water sampling and Brazil may be in a position to lead the other
GloBallast Pilot Countries on this issue, as South Africa did with the Port Surveys.
Next Stages
In order to progress these matters, the PCU proposes to convene the 1st International Ballast Water
Sampling Workshop in July 2002. This would involve two relevant specialists from each of the
GloBallast Pilot Countries plus experts from other countries that are active in this area, including
Australia, Canada, Germany, Israel, New Zealand, the UK and the USA. The purpose of the
workshop would be:
· For each party to present papers on their respective approaches to ballast water sampling and
results to date, and to allow discussion and debate on comparing methods and results.
· To initiate greater global coordination and cooperation on this issue, including sharing of
expertise, experiences and data.
· To review the various ballast water sampling guidelines and standards that are currently
available (as outlined under 1.4 above) and adapt them into International Ballast Water
Sampling Guidelines for use by the GloBallast Pilot Countries and formal publication and
dissemination by the PCU.
· To provide practical training to the delegates from the GloBallast countries in standardised
ballast water sampling methods, to allow them to purchase the necessary equipment and
develop and implement ballast water sampling programmes on return to their home countries.
Subject to agreement from Brazil, one possible venue for this workshop would be the IEAPM Marine
Institute in Arraial do Cabo. For cost-effectiveness reasons, this workshop would be held back-to-
back with the 1st International Port Survey Workshop that is also planned by the PCU for July 2002
(see Agenda Item 7).
Action Required
Each country to consider this proposal and provide comments to the PCU.
If countries agree, PCU to organize the 1st International Ballast Water Sampling Workshop for July
2002.
78
Agenda Item 10:
Legislation & Regulations
Background
One of the main development objectives of the GloBallast Programme is to assist countries in
implementing the IMO Ballast Water Guidelines adopted as Assembly Resolution A.868(20).
Section 3 of these guidelines provides that member States shall determine the extent to which they
apply within the State's jurisdiction and section 11.2 of the guidelines provides that member States
have the right to manage ballast water by national legislation. It therefore follows that the Programme
needs to assist countries to review and develop their regulatory regimes with a view to implementing
the Guidelines.
In addition, IMO Member States are currently developing an international legal instrument, for the
regulation of ballast water. It is anticipated that the text of this new legal instrument will be ready to
be considered by a diplomatic conference of IMO member States in late 2003. The second main
development objective of the GloBallast Programme is to assist countries to prepare for the
implementation of the new legal instrument. It therefore follows that the Programme needs to assist
countries to review and prepare their regulatory regimes with a view to implementing the new legal
instrument.
The GloBallast Programme provides for this assistance through Activity 4.3: Legislation and
Regulations. Under this Activity US$25,000 is available to each of the six Pilot Countries and
US$30,000 is available for global advice and coordination.
Activity Description
The Legislative Review Project began in February 2001, with the hiring of a Lead Legal Consultant.
The Country Focal Points (CFP) in the six Pilot Countries had primary responsibility for identifying
and hiring Local Legal Consultants (LLCs). The LLCs prepared detailed legislative reviews,
recommendations and, where appropriate, draft legislation based on a research design prepared by the
Lead Consultant, who also provided ongoing review and advice.
Once the six national legislative reviews were completed, a two day intensive Workshop was held in
early November 2001. The Workshop was organized and facilitated by the Lead Consultant and
hosted by the World Maritime University at its premises in Malmö, Sweden. The Workshop had 16
participants: the LLCs and their CFPs, a member of the GloBallast Programme Co-ordination Unit,
and an Observer from the MEPC Ballast Water Working Group working on the question of standards.
The Workshop was designed to provide an opportunity for the Project's legal team and CFPs to
compare and exchange experiences and ideas in order to develop recommendations on how to address
the problem of ballast water transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens. Each of the LLCs
and their CFPs presented and commented on their findings, recommendations and draft legislation.
These presentations were followed by lengthy discussion and debate on a number of core strategic
issues, which led to the development of recommendations on regulatory design options and practices.
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
The outcome of the Workshop discussion will be reflected in the Final Project Report of the Lead
Consultant.
The final phase of the Project is close to completion and involves a Final Report comprising the full
text of all six national legislative reviews, background legal analysis and commentary on key legal
instruments that relate to national implementation of both the Guidelines and the future IMO
Convention, recommendations and model legislation. The Final Report will be lengthy and a decision
was made to deal with the question of publication format and dissemination as a separate matter.
The Project performed several overlapping and interdependent functions including:
· data collection (creating a legal baseline or survey) to assist the six Pilot Countries and other
countries in each region;
· development and analysis of regulatory design options for the Pilot and other countries to
assist in implementing various facets of the IMO Guidelines. The legislative review will also
be a necessary step for any country in order to effectively implement the anticipated IMO
Convention for the Control and Management of Ships' Ballast Water and Sediments;
· building legal expertise and capacity in the six Pilot Countries and, in some cases, the region.
This objective was achieved through the use of the locally-based Legal Consultants who
worked with the CFPs and consulted with other potentially interested agencies and interests.
The project served to develop and transfer legal knowledge and cultivate locally-based legal
expertise. A number of the LLCs are also academics and respected researchers affiliated with
educational and research institutions and will, in turn, share these ideas and information with
colleagues and students;
· generation of new knowledge and ideas for further research and broader comparisons
regarding legal and administrative systems, particularly amongst countries that are moving to
the integrated management approach to ocean related activities. This exchange and
comparison began with the Malmö Workshop.
The Project developed a number of Best Practices recommendations and draft legislation that attempts
to respond to this complex issue. Among the most important recommendations are the following:
· Each port should be encouraged to develop a strategic plan for managing its response to the
problem of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens that may be transported on ships either
in ballast water or sediments or other parts of the ship (i.e., hull and equipment fouling). This
can include protocols for necessary interagency and inter country communications (i.e.
fisheries, quarantine etc.), laboratory testing, training for inspectors or others involved in
rapid risk assessment, sediment disposal options, port surveys, data collection to identify
organisms in the water that may be hazardous to others if taken up in ships' ballast water,
contingency arrangements and possible eradication or containment strategies, in the event of
an introduction;
· It is suggested that implementation of current flag State responsibilities to prevent the spread
of harmful aquatic organisms will lay a strong foundation for the future convention. There is
no potential conflict with the future convention created by voluntarily putting in place
national requirements to begin to implement flag State responsibilities before the convention.
These would include requiring vessels to develop and apply a ballast water management plan
(perhaps on the basis of the INTERTANKO/ICS Model Ballast Water Management Plan) that
can be adjusted, as appropriate, for the ship, if and when new technology becomes available,
and relevant ballast water documentation and reports, crew training and precautionary uptake
practices (called supplementary practices in the proposed convention). Once the
technological solution is developed and the convention is in force, then the administrative and
industry transition to implementing a certificate-based system will be relatively smooth;
80
Agenda Item 10: Legislation & Regulations
· The agency identified for portship interaction, document filing and other communication
should be in a position to do so efficiently with a minimum of delay or other administrative
burden on ships. In particular, reporting to multiple agencies should be avoided. For example,
consolidated or comprehensive reporting, ideally electronically, for quarantine, ballast water
and other Facilitation Committee (FAL) documents is suggested. These agencies should
ensure that any requirements are reported to IMO and, if possible, to pertinent industry
databases. In addition the agency designated to carry out or to supervise the administration of
inspections and other enforcement activities should seek, as much as possible, to do so on a
whole ship basis with multi-skilled inspectors or co-ordinated teams to check for quarantine,
ballast water, MARPOL related inspections, anti-fouling system monitoring and other port
State control related inspections;
· Legislation requiring documentation and application of a ballast water management plan
should recognize safety-related concerns for ships that may use mid-ocean exchange. In
general, ports should not prohibit entry for vessels that do not have the requisite
documentation or have not applied ballast water management. However, these vessels may be
subject, if deemed necessary, to inspections and sampling and contingency requirements
before permission is given to conduct deballasting operations and should be liable for any
direct costs of these inspections (polluter pays basis). A compliance agreement option based
on industry co-regulation should be available and encouraged for ships with a good history of
accurate reporting and environmental protection;
· Current debate over ship safety and viability of mid-ocean exchange and standards for
treatment suggests that national responses should avoid entrenching any particular treatment
or management method in legislation, or at least provide for future alternative equally
acceptable practices. A reference to the IMO Guidelines may be sufficient for these purposes
in that the Guidelines contemplate alternative methods of treatment. This will also
accommodate a future certificate based approach;
· States that are part of regional arrangements should work co-operatively to develop a
regionally agreed approach, perhaps on a first port of call basis, to protect the marine
ecosystem. Any regionally adopted approach should seek to ensure consistency with the
Guidelines and the developing international convention.
Action Required
· PCU will take necessary action in accordance with the recommendations made by the GPTF
for the publication of the Final Report as part of the GloBallast Monograph Series;
· PCU will prepare an INF document to be submitted to MEPC 47 on the outcome of the
activity;
· The legislative reviews can be seen as case studies that provide solutions and ideas to respond
to diverse legal, economic and administrative systems. Pilot Countries may use this response
to promote further development of their national legislation and of the anticipated IMO
Convention;
· The Pilot Countries are expected to disseminate the conclusion of the Legislative Review
Project regionally with the aim of improving regulatory responses to the problem of ballast
water transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens and to ensure a standardized
approach;
· The Pilot Countries will continue with the cross-fertilization of ideas initiated during the
Malmö Workshop by exchanging views and information in the GloBallast network.
81
Agenda Item 11:
Regional Replication & Cooperation
Background
The design of the GloBallast Programme is based on the use of initial Demonstration Sites located in
Pilot Countries, followed by replication of the Demonstration Site activities in each region as the
programme develops. This is to be effected in part through the establishment and support of Regional
Task Forces to increase regional awareness and provide a framework for regional cooperation.
Being common for all regions this objective has a higher priority for those that, due to economic,
geographic, oceanographic and/or ecological conditions are more vulnerable to the introduction and
spread of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens. In view of this plus the fact that regional
networks for cooperation are already in place for the Black Sea (Odessa Demonstration Site, Ukraine)
and the ROPME Sea Area (Kharg Island Demonstration Site, Islamic Republic of Iran) it was agreed
to launch the GloBallast regional initiatives in these two enclosed seas.
Black Sea Conference
The 1st Black Sea Conference on Ballast Water Management and Control was held in Odessa,
Ukraine from 10 to 12 October 2001. The Conference was organized by the Government of Ukraine
and the GloBallast PCU and included engagement of a consultant with strong IMO credentials and
regional familiarity (ex MED Director Mr Oleg Khalimonov). Some months prior to the Conference
the IMO Secretary-General wrote to the Transport Ministers in all Black Sea Coastal States (Bulgaria,
Georgia, Romania, Russian Federation, Turkey and Ukraine). This was followed-up with a visit to all
countries by the Consultant and the Ukraine CFP-A. This strategy proved instrumental in securing
highest level political support and official approval of the Regional Action Plan from all countries.
The Conference was attended by all the Black Sea Coastal States and by observers from regional
governmental and non-governmental organizations.
The objectives of the Conference were to:
· enhance regional awareness and cooperation in the field of ballast water management and
control;
· consider and endorse the draft of the Regional Action Plan (RAP); and
· agree on the machinery for implementation of the RAP including an appropriate coordination
mechanism.
The opening of the Conference was followed by technical presentations by representatives of the
GloBallast Programme and the regional scientific community, which provided comprehensive
information on the programme-related activities, and a review of the research and development
aspects of the ballast water management and control in the region.
Agenda Item 11: Regional Replication & Cooperation
Substantial time was allocated to the national presentations by the Black Sea countries. Each of the
presentations contained comprehensive data and statistics relevant to a specific country's maritime
and environmental conditions as well as the description of national policies and practical
arrangements aimed at the protection of the marine environment and measures to control the
introduction of unwanted species into new locations.
One of the most important themes of the Conference agenda was consideration of the RAP. The draft
Plan was jointly developed by the Focal Points of the Black Sea countries, the GloBallast PCU and
consultant and the Odessa Demonstration Site. The principal objectives of the RAP are to:
· provide a framework for specific regional activities under the GloBallast Programme;
· facilitate the preparatory process in the region for the introduction of the new IMO
Convention; and
· enhance the regional cooperation utilizing the existing regional bodies, established under the
Istanbul Commission and the GEF Black Sea Environment Programme.
The RAP lists principal actions to be undertaken by the States and administrations concerned, defined
arrangements for future cooperation and outlined possible funding sources for the implementation.
The Conference unanimously adopted the Resolution which in its four operational paragraphs:
· approved the RAP;
· requested the Istanbul Commission to undertake the coordination of activities under the RAP;
· called for countries to attach priorities to the implementation of the appropriate IMO
instruments; and
· requested GEF, UNDP and IMO to extend the GloBallast activities in order to facilitate the
introduction of the forthcoming Convention.
The PCU is now working to identify potential sources of funding for RAP implementation and
preliminary discussions with the EU hold some promise.
Baltic Regional Workshop
The Baltic Sea countries of Estonia, Latvia, Lithuania, Poland and Baltic Russia are nominally
included in the Eastern European Region of the GloBallast Programme. However, as the are
separated from the Odessa Demonstration in the Black Sea by over 1,500 km of land they had not
benefited from the programme. At a general invasive species workshop in Copenhagen in April 2001
several of these countries observed this fact and requested assistance from the GloBallast PCU.
The PCU was able to secure US$27,000 from the IMO Technical Cooperation Fund to hold the Baltic
Regional Workshop on Ballast Water Management in Tallinn, Estonia, from 22 to 24 October 2001.
The Estonian Government provided significant organizational and logistical support for the workshop.
The Baltic Workshop had similar objectives and format to the Black Sea Conference, although it had
more of a technical than a political focus. Another key difference was the presentation of practical
project proposals by the participating countries and the presence of potential donors (Helsinki
Commission, GEF Baltic Sea Regional Project, US State Department, EU, Germany and Sweden).
The Workshop adopted a resolution similar to that for the Black Sea and the PCU is now working to
identify potential sources of funding for technical project implementation. Preliminary discussions
with the EU and US State Department hold some promise.
83
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Gulf Regional Conference
In March 2001 the PCU and Iran CFP made presentations to a meeting of ROPME member countries
in Bahrain, which initiated regional interest. The PCU is now working with the I.R Iran and the
ROPME Secretariat to hold the next Regional Conference for the Gulf (ROPME Sea Area) in Tehran
in early/mid 2002.
The PCU and I.R. Iran are also working with the Gulf Area Oil Companies Mutual Aid Organization
(GAOCMAO) to hold a regional ballast water seminar in Dubai in the last week of February 2002,
which will be fully sponsored by the regional oil industry.
Other Regions
Ad-hoc regional activities have been undertaken for the African, Asia/Pacific, South Asia and South
American regions (e.g. presentations at various regional meetings). After nearly two years of the
programme, the Pilot Countries now need to focus more on progressing regional replication.
The PCU has formed cooperative links with various other regional bodies and sister GEF-IW projects,
including the Caspian Environment Programme (CEP), Partnerships for Environmental Management
in the Seas of East Asia (PEMSEA), the Helsinki Commission (HELCOM), the South Pacific
Regional Environment Programme (SPREP), Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), Regional
Cooperation Among Maritime Authorities of South America (ROCRAM) and the Mediterranean
Action Plan (MAP).
84
Agenda Item 12:
Resourcing & Financing
Background
In accordance with the requirements of the Project Implementation Plan (PIP), the PCU has been
seeking supplementary sources of support and funds for the programme.
Progress
To date, the following additional funding and support-in-kind has been secured by the PCU:
· Approx. US$500,000 worth support-in-kind from the UN Division of Ocean Affairs and Law
of the Sea to assist development of the Train-X ballast water management training modules.
· US$24,000 in funds from the IMO Technical Cooperation Fund for the Baltic Regional
Workshop on Ballast Water Management.
· Approx. US$60,000 worth of support-in-kind from the international shipping industry and
R&D community who covered their costs to present and participate in the 1st International
Ballast Water Treatment R&D Symposium & Standards Workshop.
· Approx. US$7,000 in staff-time from the World Maritime University for the Legislative
Review project.
· Approx. US$5,000 worth of support-in-kind from IMO to host the 1st International Ballast
Water Treatment R&D Symposium & Standards Workshop.
· Approx. US$2,500 in discount on ballast water training videos from Videotel for distribution
to Pilot Countries.
· Approx. US$1,000 in discount on publications from International Chamber of Shipping &
INTERTANKO for distribution to Pilot Countries.
· Approx. US$1,500 in travel support from the Global Invasive Species Programme (GISP) to
allow participation in their Baltic Regional Workshop.
· The Government of Singapore and the shipping industry for participation in GPTF meetings.
· Support-in-kind from the Government of Estonia for the Baltic Regional Workshop.
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Prospects
The following additional prospects have been identified to date:
· Potentially up to Euro 5 million for the Baltic Sea/ Black Sea/Eastern Europe from the EU.
· Potentially significant funding from the US State Department for the Eastern Baltic.
· Potentially significant funding from the GEF Baltic Sea Regional Project for the Baltic.
· Potentially US$500,000 from APEC for Asia/Pacific.
· Potentially, an Associate Professional Officer (APO) to supplement PCU staff resources from
Germany or Norway.
The PCU is working with relevant organizations to develop the proposals further.
The status of in-country self-financing issues will is to be reported by the Pilot Countries.
86
Agenda Item 13:
TV Documentary
Background
During the design (PDF-B) phase of the GloBallast Programme the global lack of awareness about
invasive marine species and the ballast water `problem' was identified as perhaps the most significant
barrier to effective implementation of ballast water control and management measures. Accordingly,
one of the major `barrier removal' activities of the Programme is an intensive effort in communication
and awareness raising. Outputs to date include:
· The PCU web site.
· Production and global distribution of a brochure `Stopping the Ballast Water Stowaways'.
· Production and global distribution of a set of three posters.
· Provision of the poster designs in Portuguese and Ukrainian to Brazil and Ukraine.
· Production of 7 issues of Ballast Water News (one per quarter), with a global hardcopy
circulation of 15,000 plus posting on the GloBallast web site (http://globallast.imo.org).
· Making all awareness materials produced to date available globally as PDF files on the
GloBallast website.
· Publishing a number of articles in specialist international publications (e.g. PEMSEA
Tropical Coasts, Shipping World & Shipbuilder, Lloyds List).
· Giving lectures and seminars to a broad range of audiences at a number of events around the
world.
· An extensive range of in-country communication activities under each Pilot Country's
Communication Plan, including workshops, seminars, media coverage and production of
country-specific awareness-raising materials.
Review of Effectiveness
A review of the effectiveness and client-satisfaction with the awareness materials produced to date
was conducted by the PCU in 2001, through a stakeholder questionaire, and significant positive
feedback was received. A strategic review of the PCU's information Clearing House Mechanism
(CHM) was also carried out through a consultancy in late 2001 and the review report will be received
and considered in late January 2002. This is seen as being a major, core function of the PCU by most
stakeholders.
Responses and requests for further information from various stakeholders surged in the second half of
2001 and it is clear that this effort has had a major impact in addressing the `lack of awareness
barrier.'
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
However, the target audience has been quite restricted to date, focussing on maritime administrations
and the marine science, environmental and shipping communities. This focus has been intentional but
as awareness amongst these sectors is now increasing it is time to widen the focus and target a much
broader global audience, through use of the mass media, and in particular television. This in turn will
greatly assist efforts to raise awareness at the political level as well.
It is considered that the most effective use of TV would be to secure partnership with a global cable
network that specialises in natural history/environmental documentaries such as Discovery Channel or
National Geographic. This would be a major `coup' for the Programme.
Outline of the Documentary
The purpose of this documentary will be to:
· Raise global awareness about invasive marine species and the ballast water `problem'.
· Promote the initiatives being carried out by GEF, UNDP, IMO, the Pilot Countries and the
shipping industry to address this problem, through GloBallast.
The documentary will educate, entertain and motivate a wide range of television viewers by showing:
· The world's oceans/seas/and lakes as they are rarely seen including exotic shorelines and
marine ecosystems of the six Pilot Countries.
· Some of the great ports of the world (as represented by the Demonstration Sites) and the ships
that use them.
· The people of the GloBallast Programme (all parties, including the Pilot Countries, shipping
industry and NGO reps, IMO, UNDP and GEF) working to protect the world's aquatic
environment.
· Drama of the conflict between global trade and marine conservation, the race against time,
survival and the impacts on the economy, human health and recreation.
· Science and the marine biology behind the invasions, species survival and real solutions to
complex problems.
Style
The style of the documentary will be up-beat and capture the beauty, drama and scale of the seas, the
ships, the exotic ports and the marine life. The human side to the story will be emphasised and the
pace of each episode will be fast moving and illustrated by strong visual action. The photographic
style will use spectacular underwater, surface shots and aerial scenes by experienced underwater,
nature and documentary cinematographers. All footage will be shot with digital video cameras, Sony
Digital (Mini DV) and DVCAM.
The host team will interview GloBallast personnel, (including from the Pilot Countries, shipping
industry and NGO reps, IMO, UNDP and GEF), researchers, ships captains, sailors, fishermen and
coastal peoples and other crusty characters involved in the issues. Interviews will be short and to the
point and mostly overlaid with illustrative video action.
The documentary will feature all new video footage captured by a film team during several months of
travel and research. Included will be footage of marine bio-invasions identified to date.
88
Agenda Item 13: TV Documentary
The documentary will end on a positive note, highlighting the cooperative initiatives and global and
regional coalitions of the GloBallast programme and the prospects offered by the new IMO BW
Convention and technological solutions.
Action Required
The PCU has commenced planning for this documentary and has begun to assemble the necessary
production team, and is developing a strategy to begin negotiations with Discovery and National
Geographic channels.
It is considered that a total budget of at least US$500,000 will be required, in order to produce a
documentary of the necessary quality. It is suggested that GloBallast contribute US$200,000 as
`seed' funding, re-allocated from within the existing budget, and that the PCU raise the rest from
external sources as co-financing. Some major shipping companies should be invited to sponsor the
project as co-financers and provide technical input to the content and message.
The Pilot Countries will be expected to provide any in-country footage that they have already
collected plus assist with in-country logistics, arranging interviews with key personnel etc once the
project commences.
Agreement is sought from the Pilot Countries for the PCU to proceed with this proposal.
89
Agenda Item 14:
GloBallast Advanced
Synopsis
The introduction of marine species to new environments, including through ships' ballast water, is
considered to be one of the greatest threats to the world's coastal and marine environments. The
Global Ballast Water Management Programme (GloBallast) is an international technical cooperation
Programme executed by the International Maritime Organization (IMO), with funding provided by the
Global Environment Facility (GEF), through the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP).
GloBallast commenced in March 2000, originally with a three-year timeframe, until March 2003. This
has now being considered for extension by 12 months until March 2004, within the available budget.
The Programme's Development Objectives are to assist developing countries to:
· reduce the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens in ships' ballast water,
· implement existing IMO ballast water management Guidelines, and
· prepare for the implementation of a new international ballast water Convention.
The Programme is working to achieve these objectives through six initial Demonstration Sites,
located in the six main developing regions of the world, with a view to regional replication over time.
The Programme is designed so that at the end of the initial implementation phase it will provide the
foundation for an ongoing, sustainable technical cooperation programme to assist developing
countries to implement the new Convention, further development of integrated, regional mechanisms
and a global coordinaton and information clearing-house mechanism established at IMO.
IMO has committed to funding a permanent professional position within the secretariat to coordinate
these functions after the end of the current phase of GloBallast. However, the broader scope of this
Programme is beyond IMO's mandate and additional resources are required if the demand for these
services from developing countries is to be met. Sustainable continuity of the Programme will
maximise the substantial benefits achieved in the current phase.
The original timeframe assumed that the new international ballast water Convention would be adopted
by IMO member countries in 2001, allowing a smooth transition between the regional replication and
Convention implementation objectives of the Programme. However, ongoing negotiations between
IMO member countries and the complexity of the issue have shifted the date of likely Convention
adoption to late 2003. Once the Convention is adopted, it may take some time (possibly another five
years) for full ratification and entry-into-force.
This shift in the likely timing of the adoption of the new Convention, creates an opportunity for the
GloBallast Programme to further enhance its effectiveness and undertake advanced work to assist
developing countries to prepare for Convention implementation. In its first two years of operation
(2000-2001) GloBallast has identified an overwhelming demand from developing countries for
ongoing programmatic support for regional replication and technical assistance activities. It is
imperative that the unprecedented momentum of concerted international action precipitated by
GloBallast to date, be exploited to maximum benefit through the development and implementation of
a subsequent five year phase, covering the period April 2004 April 2009.
Agenda Item 14: GloBallast Advanced
GloBallast Advanced provides a programmatic framework for the sustainable continuity of the Global
Ballast Water Management Programme. It is designed to build on the regional approach established
during the initial phase of the Programme and therefore seeks to achieve regional implementation of
international arrangements for ballast water control and management. It is also based on the principle
of integrated implementation, and seeks to establish strategic alliances with other organizations and
programmes that are seeking to address the problem of invasive marine species. It also seeks to
integrate ballast water management activities with other coastal and marine management programmes,
thereby increasing cost-effectiveness and creating inter-programme synergies.
It is envisaged that GloBallast Advanced will constitute a cooperative initiative of the GEF, UNDP,
IMO, other UN agencies such as UNEP, IOC, WHO and FAO, international environmental NGOs,
international shipping industry, various regional organizations, sister GEF projects and IMO member
countries.
Purpose of the discussion paper
This Discussion Paper clearly outlines the need for GloBallast Advanced, the nature of the
programmatic response required, and the structures, mechanisms and resources needed for effective
and timely delivery. The Paper is intended simply to stimulate discussion and consideration of the
likely form that GloBallast Advanced might take. It provides the basis for consultations with all
stakeholders, with a view to developing more detailed plans and proposals.
Nothing in this Discussion Paper should be seen as concrete, and more defined project proposals will
be developed in light of stakeholder feed-back and consistent with the requirements of donors and
sponsors, including those identified at the planned GloBallast "Strategic Directions" conference in
2002/03.
The Draft Discussion Paper represents suggestions from the GloBallast PCU only.
1 Introduction & Background
The introduction of invasive marine species through ships' ballast water and other vectors has been
identified as one of the four greatest threats to the world's oceans. The global economic impacts of
marine bio-invasions have not been firmly quantified, but national and species-specific case studies
indicate that they are likely to be in the order of tens of billions of US dollars. IMO has responded to
this threat by:
· forming a Ballast Water Working Group under its Marine Environment Protection Committee
(MEPC),
· adopting Guidelines for the control and management of ships' ballast water to minimize the
transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens (Assembly Resolution A.868(20)), and
· developing a new international legal instrument on ballast water management, to be
considered by an IMO Diplomatic Conference in 2003.
IMO has also joined forces with the Global Environment Facility (GEF) and the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP) to implement the Global Ballast Water Management Programme
(GloBallast). The Development Objectives of this technical cooperation programme are to assist
developing countries to:
91
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
· reduce the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens in ships' ballast water,
· implement existing IMO ballast water management Guidelines, and
· prepare for the implementation of a new international Ballast Water Convention.
The Programme is working to achieve these objectives through a three-person Programme
Coordination Unit (PCU) at IMO in London and six initial Demonstration Sites, located in six Pilot
Countries. These represent the main developing regions of the world, as follows:
Table 1: GloBallast Demonstration Sites
Demonstration Site
Pilot Country
Region Represented
Dalian China Asia/Pacific
Khark Island
IR Iran
The Gulf (ROPME Sea Area)
Odessa Ukraine Eastern
Europe
Mumbai India
South
Asia
Saldanha South
Africa
Africa
Sepetiba Brasil South
America
Activities being carried out at these sites include:
· Establishment of national Lead Agencies and Focal Points for ballast water issues.
· Employment of Country Focal Point Assistants.
· Formation of cross-sectoral/inter-ministerial Country Task Forces.
· Communication and awareness raising activities.
· Ballast water risk assessments.
· Port biota baseline surveys.
· Ballast water sampling.
· Training in implementation of the IMO Ballast Water Guidelines.
· Assistance with national ballast water legislation and regulations.
· Training and technical assistance with compliance monitoring and enforcement.
· Assistance with developing national ballast water management strategies and action plans.
· Assistance with developing self-financing and resourcing mechanisms.
As the Programme develops, it is intended that successes at the initial Demonstration Sites will be
replicated through regional programmes.
GloBallast was commenced in March 2000, with a three-year timeframe, until March 2003. In 2001 it
became apparent that an additional 12 months is required in order to allow all planned activities to be
implemented, and the workplan and budget have been revised to extend the Programme until March
2004, within the available budget. As we approach the mid-point of the Programme, significant
progress has been made by the GloBallast Programme Coordination Unit (PCU) at IMO in London
and each of the six Pilot Countries, in achieving the Programme's objectives and workplans.
92
Agenda Item 14: GloBallast Advanced
2 The Need for GloBallast Advanced
The GloBallast Programme is designed so that at the end of the initial implementation phase it will
create the foundation for:
· an ongoing, sustainable technical cooperation programme to assist developing countries to
implement the new Convention,
· further development of integrated, regional mechanisms, and
· a global coordinaton and information clearing-house mechanism established at IMO.
IMO has committed to funding a permanent professional position within the secretariat to coordinate
these functions after the end of the current phase of GloBallast. However, the broader scope of this
Programme is beyond IMO's mandate and additional resources are required if the demand for
technical assistance from developing countries is to be met. It is a design objective of the original
Programme that the substantial benefits achieved in the current phase are to be maximized through
sustainable continuity of the Programme.
The original timeframe for the GloBallast programme assumed that the new international ballast water
Convention would be adopted by IMO member countries in 2001, allowing a smooth transition
between the regional replication and convention implementation objectives of the Programme.
However, ongoing negotiations between IMO member countries and the complexity of the issue have
shifted the date of likely Convention adoption to late 2003. Once the Convention is adopted, it may
take some time (possibly another five years) before ratification and entry-into-force provisions are
met.
This shift in the timing of the adoption of the new Convention delayed to some extent the
implementation of the current phase, but at the same time creates an opportunity for the GloBallast
Programme to further enhance its effectiveness and undertake advanced work to assist developing
countries to prepare for Convention implementation.
A number of countries have voiced concern that GloBallast will end before the new Convention enters
into force, and there will be an ongoing need for the provision of technical assistance to countries and
regions in the implementation of the new convention.
To date, an unprecedented momentum of concerted international action has been precipitated by the
GloBallast Programme. There is an overwhelming demand from developing countries for ongoing
programmatic support for regional replication and technical assistance activities. A number of
countries and regions have expressed strong interest in joining the Programme, including the
Mediterranean region, the Pacific Islands Region, the Caspian Sea region, the Eastern Baltic
countries, several South American countries and several African countries. This interest is increasing
almost daily.
It would be a major loss if the momentum that has been generated by the Programme to date, is not
exploited to maximum benefit through the development and implementation of GloBallast Advanced.
GloBallast Advanced provides a programmatic framework for the sustainable continuity of the Global
Ballast Water Management Programme, ensuring that maximum benefits accrue from the foundation
work achieved in the initial phase.
93
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
3 Aims and Objectives
The Aims and Objectives of GloBallast Advanced should be a logical extension of the initial
Programme, with a greater regional focus and more emphasis on integrated management, as follows:
Aim
To assist developing countries to reduce the transfer of harmful aquatic organisms and pathogens in
ships' ballast water.
Objectives
To assist developing countries to:
· build regional partnerships towards effective implementation of international arrangements
for ballast water control and management.
· develop and implement national and regional integrated invasive marine species strategies
and action plans.
· integrate regional ballast water and invasive marine species programmes with other marine
and coastal environmental management arrangements.
4 Timeframe
The scope and workplan for GloBallast Advanced is broader and larger than that for the initial
programme. Should the new ballast water Convention be adopted in late 2003, it may take some time
(possibly another five years) before ratification and entry-into-force provisions are met. GloBallast
Advanced is therefore critical to ensure rapid and effective implementation of the new Convention in
developing countries, and a five (5) year timeframe is required, commencing April 2004 (the
transition from the initial programme to Advanced should be seamless).
5 Regional
Implementation
The main focus of GloBallast Advanced will be on regional implementation of the new Convention,
both within the developing regions represented by the initial six Demonstration Sites and in new
regions which have not benefited from the programme to date.
The ballast water problem has a high degree of specificity, due to the fact that invasive marine species
do not recognise national boundaries and that the shipping industry also crosses jurisdictional
boundaries in the conduct of trade. If the new Convention is only implemented by one or a few
countries, it will not be effective. All countries in various regions must work together in order for the
Convention to work.
The foundations of the regional approach are being laid by the initial Programme, in the following
regions:
94
Agenda Item 14: GloBallast Advanced
· Africa
· Asia/Pacific
· Eastern Europe
· The Gulf (ROPME Sea Area)
· South America
· South Asia
In GloBallast Advanced, new regions will need to be added, and two of the initial regions will be split
into more logical technical cooperation units, as follows:
· Asia/Pacific into separate East Asia and Pacific Islands regions.
· Eastern Europe into separate Baltic Sea and Black Sea regions, and inclusion of the Caspian
Sea in activities covered by the Black Sea region.
Additional new regions will be incorporated as follows:
· Mediterranean Sea.
· Red Sea and Gulf of Aden.
· Wider Caribbean.
The GloBallast Advanced workplan will focus on providing institutional strengthening, capacity
building and technical assistance in each of these regions, to replicate the successes of the original
Demonstration Sites and to develop regional and national activities to implement the new Ballast
Water Convention and other invasive marine species programmes.
This will be effected through Regional Invasive Marine Species Task Forces (RIMS Task Forces),
which build on the regional frameworks established by the initial phase of the Programme and its
Regional Project Task Forces (RPTFs). The RIMS Task Forces will be supported by Regional
Invasive Marine Species Coordinators (RIMS Coordinators), funded by the Programme and seconded
to relevant existing regional organizations (refer section 9).
6 The Need for Integration
It is increasingly recognised that it may be more effective and efficient to take a more holistic,
integrated approach to the management of invasive marine species. Countries that are advanced in
this field have already adopted this approach. For example the Australian National Ballast Water
Management Programme has become the Australian Invasive Marine Species Programme, addressing
all vectors and pathways. The New Zealand ballast water management arrangements are mandated
under a holistic biosecurity regime rather than sector-specific maritime legislation. The US ballast
water programme falls under the integrated Aquatic Nuisance Species Programme.
In addition, various international guidelines on the management of invasive species promulgate an
holistic, integrated approach, including those published by the Global Invasive Species Programme
(GISP), the World Conservation Union (IUCN) and technical groups under the Convention on
Biological Diversity (CBD).
The GloBallast Programme seeks to address invasive marine species carried by one vector only,
ballast water. This in part reflects the mandate of IMO, which does not extend to non-shipping
sectors, and also the need to `get it right' for one vector first. It is not appropriate for IMO to take on
the roles and responsibilities of other organizations, however IMO should seek to cooperate and
collaborate as far as possible with other related programmes and activities.
95
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
It is worth noting however, that the GloBallast Programme and the IMO ballast water regime are not
entirely sector-specific. Compared with the invasive species management activities under the CBD,
the GloBallast concept is at the same time narrower and broader than the CBD. It is narrower in that
it seeks to address one vector only. But it is broader in that it seeks to protect all resources and values
from invasive species, including ecology, economy and human health, and not just one resource, such
as biodiversity.
Never the less, GloBallast Advanced should follow the international trend in best practice approaches
and begin to adopt a more holistic, integrated approach to the management of invasive marine species,
while retaining its technical focus on ballast water management. This can be achieved in a number of
ways:
· liasing, coordinating and collaborating more closely with other international groups working
on the issue of invasive marine species, such as GISP, IUCN, and United Nations
Environment Programme (UNEP) and its CBD, the International Council for the Exploration
of the Seas (ICES), the Intergovernmental Oceanographic Commission (IOC), the UN Food
and Agriculture Organization (FAO) and the World Health Organization (WHO),
· developing national and regional ballast water arrangements as part of broader national and
regional invasive marine species strategies and action plans,
· deploying RIMS Coordinators to each developing region to develop these strategies and
action plans and provide the necessary technical assistance (see section 9),
· building on the regional frameworks established by the initial phase of the Programme by
developing the Regional Project Task Forces (RPTFs) into more holistic, integrated RIMS
Task Forces, and
· forming a strategic alliance with GISP, IUCN and/or UNEP for the employment and
deployment of the Regional IMS Coordinators, and for funding the development and
implementation of the regional strategies and action plans.
A strategic alliance between IMO/GloBallast and GISP, IUCN and/or UNEP will provide an
extremely powerful global mechanism to address invasive marine species in a meaningful way.
7 Institutional
Arrangements
The institutional arrangements for GloBallast Advanced should comprise:
· A PCU at IMO headquarters in London (see section 9).
· A RIMS Coordinator in each developing region of the world, hosted by existing regional
marine environmental programmes (e.g. existing GEF `sister' programmes or UNEP Regional
Seas offices - see section 9)
· A Global Task Force (GTF) based on the model used in the initial programme, comprising all
stakeholders, meeting annually or as needed to review and approve PCU workplans and
progress, and provide advice and guidance to the programme,
· A RIMS Task Force in each region, comprising all stakeholders, to oversee the development
and implementation of the regional strategies and action plans, derived from the Regional
Project Task Forces (RPTFs) established under the initial programme.
96
Agenda Item 14: GloBallast Advanced
8 The Role of the Original Pilot Countries
GloBallast Advanced will focus on assisting the development of regional frameworks, rather than
national activities. However, the Country Focal Points (CFPs) and Country Project Task Forces
(CPTFs) established in the six Pilot Countries in the initial phase should be used as a model for
national-level activities under GloBallast Advanced. Developing countries should be encouraged to
adopt similar national arrangements through the RIMS Task Forces.
The initial six Pilot Countries should continue to play a significant role in GloBallast Advanced,
representing a source of expertise developed through the capacity building activities of the original
Programme. The expertise established in the Pilot Countries could be contracted as consultants under
GloBallast Advanced, to advise and assist neighbouring countries in their respective regions, to
chair/facilitate the RIMS Task Forces, to host study tours to their Demonstration Sites and to assist
and advise with the development of Regional Strategies and Action Plans. The CFPs and their
Assistants can be considered potential resources for the envisaged RIMS Coordinators.
While it is strongly expected that the Pilot Countries will become self-financing in terms of national
ballast water management activities at the end of the initial phase of GloBallast, they will require
funding under GloBallast Advanced for these extra-national, regional leadership activities.
9 Human
Resources
One of the "conditions" of GEF funding for GloBallast, is that IMO will establish and maintain an
ongoing in-house programme management, technical assistance and global information clearinghouse
and communication capability for ballast water management matters. This includes at least one
permanent professional position funded from the regular IMO budget.
It is expected that the significant workload of the GloBallast PCU during the current Programme will
increase with regional replication and Convention implementation activities in GloBallast Advanced.
Given this increased responsibility and commitment, one professional position is totally insufficient to
meet the demand for GloBallast Advanced. As broader commitment to the PCU is beyond the
mandate and resources of IMO, additional human resources are therefore required.
These comprise an extension and expansion of the current PCU at IMO headquarters in London, the
placement of RIMS Coordinators in each developing region of the world, and the provision of
ongoing support to the CFPs in the Pilot Countries to assist the development of regional
arrangements. Further details of the human resources required are given below.
Programme Coordination Unit (IMO London)
The current PCU requires evolution in order to meet the demands of GloBallast Advanced. The
Programme Manager (PM) and his/her Principal Administrative Assistant (PAA) should be permanent
IMO positions, according to IMO's commitment under the original project design. All other PCU
staff should be fixed term IMO programme officers, funded by the Programme and engaged for an
initial three years with a possible extension of two further years (GloBallast Advanced having a
timeframe of 5 years). The Maritime Adviser could be seconded from the shipping industry, as part
of its support for the Programme.
The required re-organization of the PCU is outlined below.
97
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Chief Technical Adviser
Principal Administrative
Assistant
Technical Adviser
Associate Professional
Consultants
CFP Assistants
Officer (not filled)
(as required)
(6 Pilot Countries)
Figure 1: GloBallast PCU - Current Organizational Structure
Programme Manager (D1)
Principal Administrative
Communication
Assistant (G7)
Coordinator (P5)
Administrative Assistant
(G4)
Scientific Adviser (P4)
Maritime Adviser
Consultants
RIMS Coordinators
(Industry Seconded)
(as required)
(P3)
Figure 2: GloBallast PCU Advanced Organizational Structure
Each of the PCU positions is described in more detail in Appendix One.
Regional Invasive Marine Species (RIMS) Coordinators (11 Developing Regions)
As the main focus of GloBallast Advanced will be on regional cooperation and replication, through 11
developing regions, the placement of RIMS Coordinators in each of these regions is necessary.
Experience shows that regional programmes will not be developed and effectively implemented if
human resources are not dedicated to coordinating the necessary tasks.
For cost-effectiveness and integrated management reasons, the RIMS Coordinators should be based
within existing regional marine environment programmes (e.g. GEF `sister' programmes and/or
UNEP Regional Seas programmes). The foundation of this integrated, regional implementation
approach has been established in the current Programme. For example in developing the first
GloBallast Regional Action Plan (RAP) for the Black Sea, the Istanbul Commission/Black Sea
Environment Programme is responsible for coordinating implementation of the RAP. Integrating
GloBallast with existing regional mechanisms helps to reduce administration costs and create inter-
programme synergies. National implementation responsibility remains with individual countries.
The main role of the RIMS Coordinators will be to coordinate the development and implementation of
Regional IMS Strategies and Action Plans in each region. These should be holistic, integrated
98
Agenda Item 14: GloBallast Advanced
regional programmes to address IMS from all vectors, not just ballast water. These include other
ship-based vectors such as hull fouling, plus non-shipping vectors (see section 6).
A strategic alliance should be formed between GloBallast and GISP, IUCN and/or UNEP for the
employment and deployment of the RIMS Coordinators and the funding and implementation of the
regional strategies and action plans. This alliance will provide an extremely powerful global
mechanism to address invasive marine species in a meaningful way.
The RIMS Coordinators should be funded by the GloBallast Advanced (salary, initial equipment grant
and basic regional travel budget), under the strategic alliance developed with GISP, IUCN and/or
UNEP. They will be provided with office facilities and supported by the relevant host organization
(including administrative and infrastructure support). However, they will be responsible for
identifying and securing sources of funding for the development and implementation of the Regional
IMS Strategies and Action Plans, within each region.
The RIMS Coordinators should be IMO employees at the P3 level, engaged for an initial three years
with a possible extension of two further years.
Table 2: Locations of RIMS Coordinators.
Region Host
Organization
Location
Geographical
Coverage
Africa ?
? Africa
Baltic Sea
HELCOM
Helsinki, Finland
HELCOM member
countries
Black Sea & Caspian Sea Black Sea Environment
Instabul, Turkey
All Black Sea and
Programme
Caspian Sea littoral
States.
East Asia
PEMSEA
Manila, Philippines
PEMSEA member
countries
Mediterranean REMPEC
Malta
REMPEC member
countries
Pacific Islands
SPREP
Samoa
SPREP Island member
countries
Red Sea & Gulf of Aden
PERSGA
Jeddah, Saudi Arabia
PERSGA member
countries
ROPME Sea Area
ROPME-MEMAC
Bahrain
ROPME member
countries
South Asia
SACEP
Colombo, Sri Lanka
SACEP member countries
South America
?
?
South America
Wider Caribean
REMPIETC-Carib
Curacao
Wider Caribbean
10 Activities & Workplan
The Workplan for GloBallast Advanced is a logical extension of the activities carried out in the initial
Demonstration Sites, with a regional, rather than a Pilot Country or Demonstration Site, focus.
At the end of the current Programme (March 2004) the initial Pilot Countries should be sufficiently
advanced in ballast water management arrangements to become self-sufficient and not require further
assistance from GloBallast. As stated under Section 8 above, the expertise established in the initial
Pilot Countries could be contracted as consultants under GloBallast Advanced to advise and assist
neighbouring countries in their respective regions.
99
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
The Advanced Workplan can be divided into two components; Global (PCU) Workplan and Regional
Workplans. General outline or `Skeleton' Workplans are presented in Tables 3 and 4 below. These
will need to be developed further.
Table 3: Global (PCU) Workplan* (5 year period April 2004 April 2009)
Activity Description Responsible Officer
Budget (US$)*
Human Resources
Employ/manage PCU staff
IMO/PM
PM and PAA
IMO regular
budget.
AA: 250K
CC: 700K
SA: 700K
MA: Industry.
Hardware Procure
necessary
additional
PM 50K
hardware for reorganized PCU.
Communication &
Further develop and maintain
CC
500K
Information Clearing
CHM, including; Web Site,
House (CHM)
Directories & Databases and
Quarterly Newsletter.
Further develop extension,
outreach and awareness raising
materials/activities, with
greater focus on mass media.
Global Task Force
Arrange Annual GTF Meetings PAA
400K
Regional Support
Support the establishment of
PM/all PCU.
Staff time and
Activities.
the RIMS Coordinators.
travel (see travel
budget below).
Support the establishment of
RIMS Task Forces.
Support the development and
implementation of Regional
IMS Strategies and Action
Plans.
Ballast Water Risk
Establish standardised
SA & MA
100K
Assessment
international protocols for
carrying out risk assessments.
Assist regions to conduct risk
Staff time and
assessments.
travel (see travel
budget below).
Port Baseline Surveys,
Assist regions to conduct
SA & CC
Staff time and
Global Invasions Database surveys.
travel (see travel
and Reporting System.
budget below).
Establish global early warning
150K
system for invasions and
outbreaks.
100
Agenda Item 14: GloBallast Advanced
Table 3 continued . . .
Activity Description Responsible Officer
Budget (US$)*
Ballast Water Treatment
Maintain Ballast Water
SA & MA
Staff time.
Treatment R&D Directory.
Organize biannual International
100K
Ballast Water Treatment R&D
Symposiums.
Administer International
200K
system for evaluation and
approval of new ballast water
treatment technologies
(establish International Exerts
Panel).
Compliance Monitoring & Assist and coordinate the
SA & MA
Staff time and
Enforcement (CME)
regional delivery of the model
travel (see travel
CME `tool box' developed in
budget below).
the initial Programme.
Further develop the model
Staff time.
CME `tool box' in line with the
new Ballast Water Convention
and technological
developments.
Develop and maintain directory
Staff time.
of national and regional CME
systems, and input to CHM.
Conferences, Workshops
Attend/present at relevant
PM/all PCU
Staff time and
and Meetings
conferences, workshops and
travel (see travel
meetings.
budget below).
Liaison, Coordination and
Link with other relevant
PM/all PCU.
Staff time and
Collaboration with Other
programmes such as GISP,
travel (see travel
Programmes.
IUCN, UNEP CBD etc
budget below).
Programme Evaluation &
Carry out regular, periodic
PM
Staff time and
Review
evaluation and review of the
travel (see travel
programme at both the global
budget below).
and regional levels.
Travel
Travel as required to undertake PM/all PCU
500K
the above activities.
Total:
3,650,000.
* Indicative only. Workplan and budget needs to be developed in detail.
101
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Table 4: Regional Workplan* (5 year period April 2004 April 2009)
Activity Description Responsible Officer
Budget (US$)*
Human Resources
Employ/establish RIMS
PCU PM with
2M
(11 x P3)
Coordinator in each region (UN support from host
P3 level or equivalent)
organization.
Hardware Procure
necessary
hardware
RIMS Coordinator
10K per RIMSC x
(computer etc) for RIMS
and host organization. 11 = 110K.
Coordinators
Resourcing & Funding
Identify and secure resourcing
RIMS Coordinator
Staff time and
and funding from multilateral
travel (see travel
agencies, bilateral donors,
budget below).
regional development banks,
private industry and other
sources for development and
implementation of the RIMS
Strategy and Action Plan.
Communication
Develop and implement
RIMS Coordinator
50K per region x
regional CHM, including; Web
11 = 550K.
Site, Directories & Databases
and Quarterly Newsletter.
Develop and implement
regional extension, outreach
and awareness raising
materials/activities
Regional IMS Task Force
Establish RIMS Task Force.
RIMS Coordinator
200K per region x
11 = 2.2M.
Arrange/support RIMS
Taskforce Meetings
Regional IMS Strategy
Coordinate the development
RIMS Coordinator
Staff time and
and Action Plan
and implementation of the
travel (see travel
Regional IMS Strategy and
budget below).
Action Plan.
Initial Pilot Countries to advise Initial Pilot
150K per country
and assist regional efforts.
Countries.
x 6 = 900K
Conferences, Workshops
Attend/present at relevant
RIMS Coordinator
Staff time and
and Meetings
regional conferences,
travel (see travel
workshops and meetings when
budget below).
clearly necessary/of benefit to
the Programme.
Liaison, Coordination and
Link with other relevant
RIMS Coordinator
Staff time and
Collaboration with Other
regional programmes.
travel (see travel
Programmes.
budget below).
Travel
Travel as required to undertake RIMS Coordinator
50K per region x
the above activities.
11 = 550K
Total
6.31M
* Indicative only. Workplan and budget needs to be developed in detail.
102
Agenda Item 14: GloBallast Advanced
11 Budget and Funding
The budget required for GloBallast Advanced as indicated above comes to US$3.65 million for the
PCU Workplan over five years and US$6.31 million for the Regional Workplans over five years,
bringing the total budget required to US$9.96 or US$10 million. (NB: This is indicative only.
Workplan and budget needs to be developed in detail).
The proposed budget appears to be very reasonable as it covers the entire GloBallast Advanced five
year programme, compared with the initial allocation of US$7.39 million for three years. Considering
that regional GEF projects such as PEMSEA have received funding exceeding US$16 million, the
proposed budget is both realistic and achievable.
UNDP GEF has indicated that up to US$6 million might be available from GEF for GloBallast
Advanced, subject to the normal GEF application and evaluation procedures, and the securing of
substantial co-financing.
Clearly, additional sources of funding need to be identified and secured. The PCU is working on this,
and the Strategic Directions/Donors Conference planned for 2002/03 will play an important role in
this regard.
Potential additional sources of support for GloBallast Advanced that should be explored include:
· The international shipping and port industries.
· Regional Development Banks.
· Regional organisations such as EU, APEC, ASEAN etc.
· National Development Cooperation Agencies in developed countries.
· IMO Technical Cooperation Fund.
· Other UN agencies (e.g. UNEP, WHO, FAO).
· Environmental NGOs (e.g. IUCN, WWF).
· Philanthropic foundations (e.g. Packard Foundation).
103
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Appendix 1: PCU Position Justifications
These notes explain the background, need and main duties of each GloBallast Advanced PCU
position. The justifications are based on a considered evaluation of the workload of the current PCU
and the likely workload associated with the implementation of GloBallast Advanced. Detailed
Position Descriptions needs to be developed for each position.
Programme Manager (PM)
The Programme is currently managed by a Chief Technical Adviser (CTA). However, this role
demands a programme management rather than a technical advisory focus. The position needs to be
freed from detailed technical functions and day-to-day supervision of individual activities to focus on
overall management and delivery of the Programme, workload planning and programming,
performance monitoring and reporting, financial management, strategic planning and high-level
stakeholder liaison.
In keeping with the original design of the GloBallast Programme and IMO's commitment that a
permanent capability will be established at IMO to provide ongoing technical assistance in the ballast
water area, the Programme Manager will be a permanent IMO position funded from the regular IMO
budget (at D1 level).
Communication Coordinator (CC)
The original GEF/UNDP Project Document clearly identifies the need for broad-band awareness-
raising, a global information clearinghouse mechanism (CHM) and other communication functions as
being one of the highest priorities of the Programme, and one of the main functions of the PCU.
The demand for this communication function is increasing exponentially and will only continue to
increase as the new Ballast Water Convention is adopted and implemented. When considering the
plethora of ballast water initiatives manifesting at all levels and in all sectors globally, a truly effective
CHM is vital if a standardised global regulatory regime is to be adopted and implemented.
To achieve this, the original project design supports the CTA with a `Communication Specialist'.
This position is nominally responsible for:
· developing and maintaining a contacts database,
· developing and maintaining an information resource centre, clearinghouse and
communication function,
· producing an information bulletin (newsletter),
· developing and maintaining a web-site,
· developing education and awareness raising programme, and
· liasing with other organizations.
In practice the `Communication Specialist' role is being effected by a Technical Adviser (TA) who, in
addition to the above, is also handling:
· representation of the programme and IMO at various international meetings,
· chairing/co-chairing of various international working groups/task forces (e.g. ICES/IOC/IMO
working group),
· provision of scientific and technical advice to countries and stakeholders,
104
Agenda Item 14: GloBallast Advanced
· development and management of consultancies and contracts,
· Programme planning and management functions,
· significant travel and support to the pilot countries, and
· other duties way beyond the scope of the position description.
It is necessary to split this workload and engage a dedicated Communication Coordinator for all
global CHM, awareness-raising and other communication functions. The other non-communication
functions carried out by the current TA would be reallocated to the new positions of Scientific
Adviser and Maritime Adviser (see below).
The high level of responsibility and technical competence of this position requires that it be
designated as P5, funded from the Programme budget.
Scientific Adviser (SA)
During the current phase of GloBallast there has been a significant demand from stakeholders for a
high level of scientific expertise within the PCU, in areas such as:
· the ecological impacts of invasive marine species,
· biological field surveys for invasive marine species,
· risk assessment methodologies,
· the technical effectiveness of ballast water management and treatment technologies,
· the development of technical standards and performance criteria,
· ballast water treatment R&D, and
· ballast water sampling procedures and protocols.
A crucial role of the PCU is to undertake global reviews on these scientific issues, identify current
world's best practice and establish and maintain databases and directories, organize international
meetings and workshops, develop guidelines and manuals, review and evaluate scientific and
technical projects, proposals and reports, and provide and coordinate advice to pilot countries and
other stakeholders on these matters.
The demand for this function is increasing exponentially and will only continue to increase as the new
Ballast Water Convention is adopted and implemented, as GloBallast Advanced begins to undertake
regional replication activities and more countries plan and conduct scientific and R&D activities.
In addition, in order to achieve relevant requirements of the existing IMO Ballast Water Guidelines
and the new Ballast Water Convention, a global system of ongoing port surveys needs be
implemented with all major ports in the world using a standardised approach. Results should be fed
into a global database of marine introductions. This should be linked to a communication system
which allows the international shipping industry to be alerted to outbreaks of harmful species, and to
manage their ballast operations accordingly. It would also be used by port and government
authorities.
There may also be a requirement to administer the new international system for the evaluation and
approval of new ballast water treatment technologies, currently being developed within the context of
the new Ballast Water Convention. PCU will need to be strongly supported by scientific expertise.
Finally, IMO and the GloBallast PCU are increasingly expected to liaise and collaborate with other
international groups working on the issue of invasive marine species, such as ICES, IOC, FAO,
WHO, GISP, IUCN, UNEP and its CBD. Such collaboration is vital to developing a more integrated,
holistic response to the threat of invasive marine species (refer section 6). Many of the approaches
105
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
being taken by these groups are scientific and most of their senior personnel are scientists. It is
necessary for IMO and the PCU to be able to `speak their language.'
These functions cannot be carried out unless adequate scientific/technical expertise exists within the
PCU. Clearly, the workload and the specialised expertise required demands a dedicated Scientific
Adviser. A P4 level would be appropriate for this position, funded from the Programme budget.
Maritime Adviser (MA)
Ballast water management is a shipping issue and maritime expertise and experience is therefore a
core component of any ballast water management programme.
One of the outputs of the current phase of GloBallast will be modular training courses, designed for
use in training the maritime industry (both shipboard and port-side personnel) in ballast water
management, consistent with the current IMO Ballast Water Guidelines and the new Ballast Water
Convention. Once these training packages are available, the provision and coordination of advice and
assistance will be necessary for their global implementation.
A crucial role of the PCU is to undertake global reviews on the maritime aspects of ballast water
management; identify current world's best practice and establish and maintain databases and
directories; organize international meetings and workshops; develop guidelines and manuals; review
and evaluate maritime technical projects, proposals and reports; and provide and coordinate advice to
pilot countries and other stakeholders on these matters.
In the context of the likely requirements to administer the new international system for the evaluation
and approval of new ballast water treatment technologies, maritime / seafaring expertise will be
crucial for the smooth implementation of the anticipated Convention.
Finally, the GloBallast PCU is increasingly expected to liaise and collaborate with international
shipping industry groups. It is necessary for the PCU to be able to `speak their language.'
These functions cannot be carried out unless adequate maritime expertise exists within the PCU.
Most of these functions are currently carried out by the existing CTA and TA. Clearly, the workload
and the specialised expertise required demands a dedicated Maritime Adviser. It is suggested that the
potential for this position to be seconded from the shipping industry, as part of its support for the
programme, be explored.
Principal Administrative Assistant and Administrative Assistant (PAA and AA)
Currently, the PCU is serviced by a single Principal Administrative Assistant. Experience has shown
the workload requires two assistants. To date, this has been partially addressed by short-term use of a
temporary assistant during peak workload periods in implementing the Programme.
With an expanded PCU and workplan, Advanced will require at least two full-time administration
staff. At least the PAA position should be funded from the regular IMO budget, in support of the PM,
which is a permanent IMO position and requires administrative support.
106
Appendix 1:
List of Participants
Appendix 1: List of Participants
Brazil
Mr Robson José Calixto
Coastal & Marine Management Adviser
Tel: +55 61 317 1156
Integrated Coastal and Marine Management,
Fax: +55 61 224 2466
Ministry of Environment
Email: robson-jose.calixto@mma.gov.br
Esplanada dos Ministerios, Bloco B, Sala 829,
Brasilia DF, CEP: 70.068-900, Brazil.
Mr Eduardo Sales Novaes
Country Focal Point, Brazil
Tel: +55 61 317 1204
Ministry of Environment
Fax: +55 61 226 8050
Esplanada dos Ministerios, Bloco B,
Email: eduardo.novaes@mma.gov.br
8 andar, Brasilia DF, CEP: 70.068-900, Brazil
Alexandre de C. Leal Neto
Country Focal Point Assistant, Brazil
Tel: +55 21 3870 5674
Diretoria de Portos e Costas
Fax: +55 21 3870 5674
Rua Teófilo Otón, 4
Email: aneto@dpc.mar.mil.br
Rio de Janeiro RJ, CEP: 20.090-070
Brazil
China
Mr Zhi Guanglu
Director, Dept. of Ship Safety & Pollution Prevention
Tel: +86 10 6529 2588
China Maritime Safety Administration
Fax: +86 10 6529 2875
11 Jianguomennei Ave,
Email: glzhi@sina.com
Beijing 100736, Peoples Republic of China
India
Mr Sanjoy Chakrabarty
Country Focal Point, India / Deputy Chief Surveyor
Tel: +91 22 261 3303
Directorate General of Shipping
Fax: +91 22 261 3655
Jahaz Bhavan, WH Marg, Mumbai 400 038, India
Email: sanjoy@dgshipping.com
Mrs Geeta M. Joshi
Country Focal Point Assistant, India
Tel: +91 22 261 3651-54 X282
Directorate General of Shipping
Fax: +91 22 261 3655
Jahaz Bhavan, WH Marg, Mumbai 400 038, India
Email: geeta@dgs.dgshipping.com
1
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Islamic Republic of Iran
Mr Hassan Taymourtash
Country Focal Point, Iran / Director General of Maritime
Tel: +98 21 880 9555
Protection Dept.
Fax: +98 21 880 9367
Ports and Shipping Organization, Ministry of Road and
Email: taymourtash@ir-pso.com
Transportation.
751 Enghelab Ave, Tehran 159966 1464,
Islamic Republic of Iran
Dr Vaheed Yavari
Country Focal Point Assistant, Iran
Tel: +98 63 242 30550 or
Ports and Shipping Organization, Ministry of Road and
+98 61 133 9857
Transportation.
Fax: +98 63 242 30551
751 Enghelab Ave, Tehran 159966 1464,
Email: yavarivahid@hotmail.com
Islamic Republic of Iran
South Africa
Dr Lynn Jackson
Country Focal Point, South Africa / Deputy Director
Tel: +27 21 402 3344
Marine Pollution Division
Fax: +27 21 421 5342
Department of Environmental Affairs & Tourism (DEAT) Email: ljackson@mcm.wcape.gov.za
Private Bag X2, Roggebai 8012, Cape Town,
South Africa.
Mr Alexander Adnan Awad
Country Focal Point Assistant, South Africa
Tel: +27 21 402 3365
Department of Environmental Affairs & Tourism (DEAT) Fax: +27 21 421 5342
Private Bag X2, Roggebai 8012, Cape Town,
Email: adawad@mcm.wcape.gov.za
South Africa.
Ukraine
Mr Roman Bashtannyy
State Inspector
Tel: +380 482 685 868
Cargo and Environment Safety Control Division
Fax: +380 482 685 868
Shipping Safety Inspectorate of Ukraine, Ministry of
Email: rabotn@te.net.ua
Transport
29 Prospeckt Shevchenko, 65058 Odessa, Ukraine.
Mr Sergey Limanchuk
Country Focal Point Assistant, Ukraine
Tel: +380 482 685 868
Shipping Safety Inspectorate of Ukraine, Ministry of
Fax: +380 482 685 868
Transport
Email: rabotn@te.net.ua
29 Prospeckt Shevchenko, 65058 Odessa, Ukraine.
2
Appendix 1: List of Participants
Panel
Mr Michael Julian
Chairman, Marine Environment Protection Committee,
Tel: +61 (0)2 6279 5614
International Maritime Organization
Fax: +61 (0)2 6279 5009
25 Constitution Avenue, GPO Box 2181, Canberra City
Email: Mike.Julian@amsa.gov.au
ACT 2601, Australia
Mr Philip Reynolds
Consultant, UNDP/GEF International Waters
Tel: +1 914 472 5490
C/o 5 Robin Hill Road, Scarsdale, NY 10583,
Fax: +1 914 472 5490
USA
Email: philreynolds60@hotmail.com
Mr Jean Claude Sainlos
Senior Deputy Director, Sub-Division for Pollution
Tel: +44 (0)20 7587 3142
Response and TC Co-ordination
Fax: +44 (0)20 7587 3261
Marine Environment Division, IMO
Email: jsainlos@imo.org
4 Albert Embankment, London, SE1 7SR,
United Kingdom
Observers
Mr Roger Lankester
Friends of the Earth International, Oceans Division
Tel: +44 (0)1277 353 450
22 Marks Close, Ingatestone, Essex CM4 9AR,
Fax: +44 207433 3716
United Kingdom
Email: lankcenguk@connectfree.co.uk
Mr Tim Wilkins
Environment Manager, Marine & Env't Section
Tel: +44 (0)20 7648 9686
International Association of Independent Tanker Owners
Fax: +44 (0)20 7626 7078
The Baltic Exchange, 38 St Mary Ave, London EC3A
Email: tim.wilkins@intertanko.com
8BH, United Kingdom
Dr Robert Hilliard
Principal Marine Environmental Scientist
Tel: +61 8 9221 1630
URS Dames & Moore
Fax: +61 8 9221 1639
Level 3 Hyatt Centre, 20 Terrace Road,
Email: robert_hilliard@urscorp.com
East Perth, WA 6004, Australia
Dr Vidhisha Samarasekara
Regional Marine Programme
Tel: +94 1 694 094/682 418
IUCN, 53 Horton Place, Colombo 7, Sri Lanka
Fax: +94 1 682 470
Email: vidhisha@sltnet.lk
IMO Officer
Mr Maw Tun
Work Programme and Budget Officer, Finance and
Tel: +44(0)20 7463 4028
Budget Section
Fax: +44 (0)20 7587 3210
Administrative Division, IMO
Email: mtun@imo.org
4 Albert Embankment, London, SE1 7SR,
United Kingdom
3
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
GloBallast PCU
Mr Dandu Pughiuc
Chief Technical Adviser
Tel: +44 (0)20 7587 3247
Programme Coordination Unit
Fax: +44 (0)20 7587 3261
Global Ballast Water Management Programme
Email: dpughiuc@imo.org
International Maritime Organization
4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR
United Kingdom
Mr Steve Raaymakers
Technical Adviser
Tel: +44 (0)20 7587 3251
Programme Coordination Unit
Fax: +44 (0)20 7587 3261
Global Ballast Water Management Programme
Email: sraaymakers@imo.org
International Maritime Organization
4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR
United Kingdom
Mrs. Christine Gregory
Principal Administrative Assistant
Tel: +44 (0)20 7463 4198
Programme Coordination Unit
Fax: +44 (0)20 7587 3261
Global Ballast Water Management Programme
Email: cgregory@imo.org
International Maritime Organization
4 Albert Embankment, London SE1 7SR
United Kingdom
Country Task Force Members, India
Dr A.C. Anil
Scientist
Tel: +91 832 221322 X4404
National Institute of Oceanography
Fax: +91 832 223340
Dona Paula, Goa 403 004, India
Email: acanil@darya.nio.org
Mr Thekkekere Narayan
Principal, Maritime Training Institute
Tel: +91 22 570 1342
The Shipping Corporation of India Ltd.
Fax: +91 22 570 338
52C, Adishankaracharya Marg. Powai,
Email: rajamari@hotmail.com
Mumbai 400 072, India
Capt. Anant Karkare
Assistant Harbour Master
Tel: +91 22 261 2563
Mumbai Port Trust
Fax: +91 22 261 2404
Port House, Shoorji Vallabhdas Marg., Ballard Estate,
Email: arkarkare@bom7.vsnl.net.in
Mumbai 400 038, India
Mr Ja Kishen Dhar
Vice Principal
Tel: +91 22 375 7045
LBS College of Advanced Maritime Studies &
Fax: +91 22 373 9785
Research
Email: jkdhar@hotmail.com
Sewri, Mumbai, India
4
Appendix 2:
Minutes of the Meeting
Appendix 2: Minutes of the Meeting
Wednesday 16 January
Conference Room, Hotel Cidade de Goa (GloBallast team only)
Bilateral meetings PCU/Pilot Countries. The meetings were also attended by the UNDP-GEF
representative, the Chairman of MEPC and IMO representatives.
Thursday 17 January
National Institute of Oceanography, Dona Paula, Goa
Opening Session was addressed by:
Mr S Chakrabarty, Country Focal Point, India
Mr M P Pinto, Secretary, Ministry of Shipping, Government of India.
Dr D T Joseph, General Director of Shipping, Government of India.
Shri Shaikh Hassan Haroon, Hon. Minister for Environment, Industries & Cultural Training, Goa
State.
Dr E Desa, Director National Institute of Oceanography.
Mr Michael Julian, Chairman, Marine Environment Protection Committee, IMO.
Mr Phil Reynolds, Representative, UNDP GEF.
Mr Jean-Claude Sainlos, Senior Deputy Director, Marine Environment Division, IMO.
Mr Dandu Pughiuc, Chief Technical Adviser, GloBallast Programme, IMO.
Agenda item 1: Adoption of the Agenda
The agenda was adopted
Agenda item 2: PCU Progress Report & Revised Project Implementation Plan
A comprehensive progress report was presented by the PCU covering the period 1 January to 31
December 2001. The PCU was congratulated on the significant achievements in 2001, although it was
noted that actual expenditure was below the planned expenditure for the programme to date. PCU
explained that some important payments for activities undertaken in 2001 are due early in 2002 and
the real expenditure is higher than that which appears in the report.
The Chairman of MEPC commented that a financial analysis comparing actual with planned
expenditure would be useful, and that the progress report should be presented in tabular format,
comparing the status of each activity against the approved Project Implementation Plan (PIP). PCU
informed that a financial audit and a Project Implementation Review were performed in year 2001. It
was agreed that these would be included as part of future PCU progress reports.
The Chairman of MEPC noted that PCU workload had prevented the Ballast Water Treatment R&D
Directory and the GloBallast web-site from being updated. He stated that these were most useful core
functions of the PCU and that additional human resources should be engaged if necessary to ensure
that they are maintained and updated regularly.
As a more general comment the Chairman of MEPC stressed that the objective of GloBallast is to
assist developing countries selected as demonstration sites to implement the IMO Resolution
A.868(20) so that they are ready when the Convention is adopted and later when it enters into force.
1
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
The PCU presented a revised PIP (Revision D) incorporating a 12-month extension (from March
2003-March 2004) to activities, within the available budget.
All countries plus UNDP-GEF expressed their support for the proposed 12-month extension.
South Africa congratulated the PCU and noted that the South African currency had been devalued to
such an extent that despite significant activity, funds available under their National budget are almost
the same as their original budget. They may be able to release national funds for specific PCU
activities and consultants under the 12-month extension.
The PCU advised that countries should revise their National Workplans based on Revision D of the
PIP and submit these to the PCU for review as soon as possible.
The UNDP-GEF representative suggested further exploring the possibility of co-operating with
IUCN, which could be an appropriate independent reviewer for the ballast water treatment standards
developed by IMO and feed back comments from the "consumer's" perspective. He further stated that
in revising their National Workplans, countries should clearly show savings achieved and delays
incurred, compared to the original Workplans.
South Africa requested the PCU to advise the new total amount of funds available to each country for
their revised National Workplans, given the 12-month extension to the PIP and the re-allocation
required to fund the extension. The PCU undertook to provide this by the end of the meeting.
The session Chairman concluded that all countries and UNDP supported the proposed 12 month
extension and requested comments on the revised PIP be forwarded to the PCU by the first of March
2002. On the basis of these comments and the revised country workplans and budgets discussed under
Item 3 below, the PCU would prepare a revised PIP and project budget revision for submission to
UNDP/GEF.
Item 3: Country Status Reports, progress to date and forthcoming activities
All six Pilot Countries presented Country Status Reports for the period 1 January to 31 December
2001, and outlined their draft revised National Workplans, incorporating the proposed 12 month
extension. Brazil, India and South Africa informed the meeting of significant funding allocated by
their Governments to support activities related to ballast water management and control.
UNDP-GEF and the session Chairman congratulated the countries on the significant achievements in
2001, although it was noted that total country actual expenditure was after two years in some cases
about 16% of planned expenditure for the programme to date.
UNDP-GEF stated that countries needed to plan expenditure more specifically, and that governmental
contributions need to be made clearer, with details of all in-kind and cash contributions to the
programme. UNDP and GEF will be looking for clear demonstration of in-country contributions in
future reports. It was also suggested that future reports should include comparison between the
countries' implementation.
Iran extended an invitation to host the 5th GPTF in Tehran. The offer was well received.
The session Chairman congratulated all countries on their presentations, and requested that revised
National Workplans, reflecting Revision D of the PIP, be forwarded to the PCU for review by the first
of March 2002.
Item 4: Consultant's presentation and discussions on forthcoming Risk Assessment
The PCU introduced Dr Rob Hilliard of URS Consultants, who had been selected through the IMO
tender process to conduct and provide training and capacity building in Ballast Water Risk
Assessments for each demonstration site.
2
Appendix 2: Minutes of the Meeting
Dr Hilliard gave a presentation on the proposed risk assessment methodology (see Appendix 4) and
outlined the steps required of each country in preparation for the forthcoming country visits by the
URS Risk Assessment team.
The session Chairman requested countries to take note of these requirements and closed the meeting
at 19:05.
Friday 18 January 2002
Meeting commenced 08:30
Agenda Item 14 - GloBallast Advanced
This agenda item was brought forward as two key participants, Mr Michael Julian and Mr Jean
Claude Sainlos, would be leaving in the early afternoon.
The PCU outlined the GloBallast Advanced concept as described in the Draft Discussion Paper.
South Africa commented on the need to strengthen regional platforms for coordinating all marine
issues, and stated that the proposed Regional Coordinators could be linked with existing Regional
Seas Programmes. It was also stated that Africa was too large to be treated as a single region under
GloBallast Advanced, and comprised at least two regions (east and west), with two existing
agreements (Nairobi Convention and Abidjan Convention).
The IMO representative commented that IMO is negotiating a new memorandum of understanding
with the UNEP Regional Seas Programme, which might be of benefit to GloBallast Advanced.
The PCU commented that the UNEP Regional Seas Programme was only one of several existing
regional structures and mechanisms through which GloBallast Advanced activities might be delivered.
Others include `sister' GEF IW projects such as PEMSEA and Black Sea Environment Programme
(which also corresponds to a UNEP Regional Seas Programme). The PCU suggested that it would be
important to take a `region by region' approach and select the optimum arrangement for each region.
The Friends of the Earth International (FOEI) suggested that the OSPAR region be included. The
PCU noted that OSPAR comprises developed countries that are not eligible for GEF assistance and to
whom GloBallast is looking for support. Linkages with OSPAR and similar regions will be developed
along such lines.
Iran suggested that the present regions should have an important role in the future programme by
expanding to include other vectors. The PCU commented that the Programme will remain focussed on
Ballast Water but should be linked with other programmes that address other vectors, through
strategic alliances with bodies such as IUCN, UNEP, GISP etc.
The Chairman of MEPC stated that the concept of GloBallast represented a totally new approach in
IMO's history through providing technical assistance to countries prior to the Convention coming into
force and the response from the Pilot Countries was particularly encouraging. IMO is all about the
implementation of IMO Conventions. Further funding from GEF for GloBallast Advanced would be a
significant boost to addressing this problem on a global scale. He also recommended that GloBallast
Advanced should be planned to last for a period of 3 to 4 years.
In his statement the representative of UNDP-GEF emphasized the need for sustainability and sound
management of the human resources if a request for continuation of GloBallast is to be considered by
the GEF. He reminded the participants that GloBallast has started with CFPs nominated and funded
by the participating governments, which ensured sustainability beyond the life of the project. He
3
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
advised to identify similar CFPs in the targeted regions and consider recruiting national assistants if
needed. He also advised to redraft the document based on the comments provided by the participants.
He suggested that a review of the draft GloBallast Advanced document be undertaken by the
independent evaluator appointed to carry out the mid-term review of the current project and that the
final text be agreed upon during the next GPTF in Dalian, China. The UNDP-GEF representative was
of the view that if the projected Strategic Directions/Donor Conference endorses the final proposal,
the document will gain substantial credibility and the chances of it being approved by the GEF
Council will increase significantly.
Brazil offered to host the Strategic Directions/Donor Conference in March 2003.
The session Chairman requested all parties to provide detailed comments on the GloBallast Advanced
Draft Discussion Paper to the PCU by 20 February and concluded by noting the general agreement for
GloBallast Advanced Phase, oriented towards regional replication in parallel with the use of the
existing national capacities. He did not exclude the possibility of UNEP hosting the regional co-
ordinators from a cost effectiveness point of view, and mentioned similar co-operative arrangements
between IMO and UNEP in the Mediterranean Region (REMPEC). He stressed the fact that ballast
water issues fall under IMO's mandate and IMO will have to assist its Member States in the
implementation process even after the adoption of the anticipated Convention.
Agenda Item 6: Information on the proposed IMO/Pilot Countries MoUs
The PCU presented a paper on this subject.
Several Pilot Countries commented on the status of their MoUs.
The session Chairman concluded that most countries were close to concluding their MoUs and
encouraged the CFPs from Brazil and India to expedite the process in their countries.
Agenda Item 7: Port Baseline Surveys
The PCU presented a paper on this subject, including the proposed International Port Survey
Workshop planned for Brazil in July 2002.
Brazil confirmed its willingness to host the workshop, subject to obtaining approval from the Lead
Agency, and suggested July might be re-considered as it is holiday time in Brazil. The new data for
this meeting will be communicated in due time
The other pilot countries supported the proposed workshop.
India mentioned the need for ballast water sampling en route. The PCU stated that there was a
significant body of information already and there was no need to duplicate work already done, and
that this issue would be considered in more detail under agenda item 9(b).
South Africa and Iran stated that assistance is needed in developing an international network of
taxonomists to assist the port survey work. The PCU stated that it was intended to develop this further
at the Port Survey Workshop and encouraged the CFPs to share their own networks through the
GloBallast web site.
The UNDP-GEF representative suggested that the Biological Diversity division of GEF could be a
resource for biodiversity/taxonomy.
IUCN offered its support with regard to surveys and marine taxonomists. The contribution to science
from these surveys would be a great service and IUCN would value being involved.
The session Chairman concluded that the PCU should proceed with this activity.
4
Appendix 2: Minutes of the Meeting
Agenda Item 8: BWM training package
The PCU presented a paper on this subject reporting on the status of this activity.
FOEI stated that the intention is not to train the seafarers directly but to develop training courses to
train the trainers (in existing maritime training centres). In turn they will address the seafarers through
the traditional channels.
The Chairman of MEPC emphasized that the intention of this activity is to provide training material to
the numerous maritime training establishments in the countries hosting demonstration sites. He also
stressed the importance of training the shore personnel responsible for implementing the IMO Ballast
Water Guidelines.
The PCU confirmed this and stated that every 3 to 5 years seafarers stay ashore and receive refresher
courses. The BW training courses could be incorporated in this.
The UNDP-GEF representative stated that the objective was a standardized course which would not
be instructor dependent. The first course will be trialed in one location, with participation by all Pilot
Countries and subsequently adapted in the remaining countries. He emphasized that the port side of
the course is equally important and suggested establishing clear deadlines for the next phases of this
activity.
The PCU stated that it is important to bear in mind that the STCW Convention provided the IMO
framework for seafarer training and anything developed by GloBallast must be consistent with STCW
developments.
The session Chairman concluded that the PCU should proceed with this activity.
Agenda Item 9: Compliance Monitoring & Enforcement
The PCU presented a paper on this subject, and referred to the CME Scoping Study Report which was
circulated to all participants. This provides the raw material for a CME system.
INTERTANKO emphasized the need for a harmonization of BW sampling methods.
The PCU stated that all parties should provide comments on the CME Scoping Study Report to the
PCU by the end of March.
The Chairman of MEPC requested that the final report eventually be submitted to the Ballast Water
Working Group of MEPC, for its information. He indicated that MEPC 48 is expected to agree upon
many of the issues currently under debate.
UNDP-GEF stated that the progress of the new Convention and CME are linked. May need to re-
schedule this activity in the PIP for year 2003.
The session Chairman concluded that the PCU should proceed with this activity.
Agenda Item 9 (b): Ballast Water Sampling
The PCU presented a paper on this subject, including the proposed International Ballast Water
Sampling Workshop planned for Brazil in July 2002 to be held back-to-back with the Port Survey
Workshop for cost efficiency reasons.
Brazil confirmed its willingness to host the workshop, and suggested July might be re-considered as it
is holiday time in Brazil.
The other pilot countries supported the proposed workshop.
5
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
FOEI stated that ship-design expertise should be included in the workshop to provide advice how best
to access ballast tanks for optimum sampling and that sampling at the point of discharge should be
included.
The session Chairman concluded that the PCU should proceed with this activity.
Agenda Item 10: Legislative Review
The PCU presented a paper on this subject, stated that an Information Paper has been submitted for
MEPC 47, and that the full Final Report would be available soon.
FOEI inquired about the possibility of translating the precautionary approach in the legal framework.
The Chairman of MEPC suggested that the precautionary approach will be dealt with in a similar
manner as it was in the Anti-fouling Convention.
The PCU stated that it was each country's prerogative to determine how it would implement the
review findings within its jurisdiction. The issue of how the delay in Convention adoption from 2001
to 2003 affects this activity would need to be considered.
Some Countries expressed a need to employ their Local Legal Consultants at some time in the future
for further work on this issue. The PCU advised that the CFPs had delegation to engage such
consultants within the established guidelines.
Agenda Item 11: Regional Cooperation & Replication
The PCU presented a paper on this subject.
The discussion regarding regional linkages reported under agenda item 14 were confirmed.
India informed the meeting that there was dialogue between India and SACEP.
The PCU stated that countries could select their partners based on existing regional structures,
practicalities and chances of success, and not on artificial divisions.
Iran stated that their region should be referred to as either `Persian Gulf' or `ROPME Sea Area'.
Brazil suggested that an international consultant should facilitate reaching an action plan. UNDP
suggested invitations to regional conferences could be extended to other Pilot Countries so that they
can gain experience.
Some countries queried what was intended under the `study tours' activity of the regional replication
component of the programme. The PCU advised that the original intention was to fund `study tours'
by personnel from neighbouring countries to each demonstration site, to enable them to learn from the
pilot countries. However, the PCU suggested that it might also be valuable for the programme to
partially fund a study tour for two representatives from each pilot country, to one of the developed
countries recognised as being advanced in ballast water management (e.g. Australia), with
supplementary support from that country.
UNDP-GEF noted the need for PCU to schedule to work with individual countries to jump-start
regional replication activities and strongly encouraged the CFPs to include clear timing in the
proposed regional activities included in the revised National Workplans.
The PCU suggested that for those pilot countries where there had been limited regional progress to
date, a more systematic approach be adopted. The lessons learnt in the Black Sea and Baltic Sea
should be considered, noting that each region is different.
6
Appendix 2: Minutes of the Meeting
Agenda Item 12: Resourcing & Financing
The PCU presented a paper on this subject.
The PCU stated that Case Studies had been completed for all six countries and would be published in
first quarter of this year. These could be used by the countries to raise political awareness and
engender financial support from government.
The PCU noted that the Black Sea had been successful in reaching agreement on the Regional Action
Plan but needed financial resources to implement. There was a plan to approach EU to obtain funding.
India suggested that PCU needed to develop models for resourcing and financing.
The PCU advised that it proposed to award a consultancy in early 2002 to review resourcing and
financing mechanisms and develop models for potential use of countries during and beyond the life of
the Programme.
IUCN suggested they might help in providing an environmental economist for this study.
UNDP stated that a strategy for co-funding was needed at country level, developed by each CFP. The
Donor Conference should only endorse what has already been agreed with the donors.
The Chairman of MEPC, who was due to leave, commented that the meeting had been very
productive and thanked the PCU and India. He asked that MEPC be kept informed, as the programme
was assisting not just the developing countries and assured the participants that he will continue to
promote GloBallast from his office.
The IMO representative, who was also due to leave, congratulated everyone on their work for success
of the meeting and was impressed by the volume of work achieved by the PCU and the pilot
countries. He stated that Ballast Water is high on IMO's agenda and this GEF Project is part of the
strategy of IMO to address the issue.
The last session of the meeting was chaired by the UNDP-GEF representative.
Agenda Item 13: TV Documentary
The PCU presented a paper on this subject.
Several countries supported the concept in principle, subject to various issues being addressed.
South Africa expressed concerns about the level of the budget required (US$500K).
The PCU stated that if the Programme provided US$200K in seed-funding, a further US$300K would
be sought from co-financiers. Approximately US$80K of the seed-funding could come from re-
allocation of the PCU communication budget, and each country could allocate US$20K from its
national budget to make up the $200K.
INTERTANKO stated that it has investigated producing documentaries in the past and that the
proposed budget seemed realistic. INTERTANKO also stated that it supported the concept and would
consider co-sponsoring production.
Several countries stated that in order to support this activity, the documentary would have to be
produced in their languages as well as English (e.g. dubbed or sub-titles) and available for broadcast
on their national networks.
UNDP-GEF stated that copyright must remain with the programme or UNDP-GEF would not fund it.
UNDP-GEF also advised that an arrangement had been entered into with National Geographic
Channel to produce a documentary on the UN Atlas of the Seas project, under which copyright
remained with the UN. This provides a potential model.
7
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
FOEI representative suggested that the TV documentary will contain aspects that can appeal to the
spiritual and cultural traditions of the target audience.
It was agreed that the PCU would develop the project document to address these comments, and re-
circulate for all parties to consider further. In the meantime, each country would reserve US$20K
from its national budget for potential use for this activity.
Agenda Item 5: NGO/Industry information papers regarding involvement in the ballast
water issue
Presentations were received from INTERTANKO, IUCN and FOEI.
A feature of the INTERTANKO presentation was the design of open bow vessels as a potential
alternative to ballast exchange at sea.
A feature of the IUCN presentation was general endorsement and support for the GloBallast
Programme and identification of areas of potential collaboration between IUCN and the Programme.
The PCU agreed to follow this up with IUCN.
Other matters
As a general comment the FOEI representative stated that whether the GloBallast Project has had a
significant impact on preventing the introduction of harmful aquatic organisms would only be known
in the long term. In the case of ballast water introductions perhaps the journey will have been more
important than the arrival.
The UNDP-GEF representative and session Chairman summarized the discussions on the future time
schedule by stating that the independent evaluation of the programme by UNDP-GEF would be
sometime in September 2002. An additional agenda item on this subject would be needed for the next
GPTF. He also stressed that an exact date for the 4th GPTF in China is urgently needed. With regard to
resourcing and financing he suggested that it would be necessary to visit individual donors. If the
Strategic Directions/Donor Conference is in 1st quarter 2003, the donor mission should be in
December 2002. An appropriate consultant may be able to help with this. PCU was advised to draft a
budget description and Terms of Reference for the conference consultant.
PCU informed that the revision of the PIP and budget to account for the 12 month extension leaves a
total of US$636,000 available for each country, and advised CFPs to revise their National Workplans
accordingly, including reserving US$20K for the documentary. PCU thanked all parties and
especially India for ensuring a highly productive meeting and made a plea to the CFPs to submit their
revised National Workplans and budgets as soon as possible.
The session Chairman expressed his satisfaction with the substantial achievements of GloBallast and
the very productive meeting, which was described as a real success. He also addressed a vote of
thanks to the representatives of the host country and to the PCU for their efforts in organizing the
meeting.
8
Appendix 3:
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
(January 2002)
UNITED NATIONS DEVELOPMENT PROGRAMME
Global Project with participation of the governments of:
Brazil, China, India, Iran, South Africa, Ukraine
Project Number: GLO/99/G31/D/1G/19
Project Title:
Removal of Barriers to the Effective Implementation of Ballast Water Control and Management Measures
in Developing Countries
Project Short Title:
Global Ballast Water Management Programme (GloBallast)
The project document for this project (signed 2 February 2000) is hereby reviewed to reflect:
1. The revision of the Project Implementation Plan (PIP) and the project budget to reflect the
extension of the duration covered by the project document until 29 February 2004 and the
changes made to the "Revised Indicative Three Year Workplan" (July 2000) and to incorporate
the newly recommended activities in accordance with the recommendations of the 16-18 January
2002 Global Project Task Force Meeting held in Goa, India (revision D); (see revised PIP,
Attachment 1).
2. The revision of the project budget to correspond with the revised PIP (see budget in Attachment
1).
Current Budget (A)
US$ 6,720,000
Revised Budget (B)
US$ 6,720,000
Net increase/decrease
US$ 0
Current AOS (A)
US$ 672,000
Revised AOS (B)
US$ 672,000
Net increase/decrease
US$ 0
On
behalf
of:
Signature
Date
Name/Title
UNDP
______________ ________ Andrew
Hudson
Principal Technical Adviser
International Waters
IMO
______________ ________
Koji
Sekimizu
Director,
Marine Environment Division
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
(January 2002)
A cooperative initiative of
the Global Environment Facility, the United Nations Development Programme and the
International Maritime Organization
.
Project Implementation Plan (PIP )
Table of contents
1. Introduction & Background .........................................................................................................................1
2. Development Objectives..............................................................................................................................1
3. Immediate Objectives ..................................................................................................................................2
4. Programme Components, Outputs and Activities........................................................................................2
5. Workplan....................................................................................................................................................18
6. Budget & Budget Notes .............................................................................................................................20
i
Project Implementation Plan (PIP )
1. Introduction & Background
A full description of the GEF/UNDP/IMO project `Removal of Barriers to the Effective Implementation of
Ballast Water Control and Management Measures in Developing Countries' (hereafter referred to by its
short-title of `Global Ballast Water Management Programme') is contained in the UNDP Project
Document GLO/99/G31/A/1G/19. That document outlines the following elements of the project:
A. Context;
B. Strategy;
C. Development Objectives; Immediate Objectives; Outputs and Activities;
D. Inputs;
E. Risks and Prior Obligations;
F. Institutional
Framework,
Coordination and Administration;
G. Monitoring, Reporting and Evaluation;
H. Legal Context;
I. Work Plan; and
J. Budget
It was endorsed by the six pilot countries (Brazil, China, India, Iran, South Africa and Ukraine), approved
by the GEF Council and signed by UNDP and IMO in 1999.
With the establishment of the Programme Coordination Unit (PCU) at IMO and the commencement of
project execution, one of the first tasks of the PCU has been to review the Project Document and to
develop from it a practical Project Implementation Plan (PIP). The PIP is based on the Project Document
but updates the Outputs and Activities components of section C and sections I. Workplan and J. Budget.
The other sections of the original Project Document are not repeated in the PIP. The Project Document
should be referred to in relation to those sections.
The PIP is intended to improve programme delivery by streamlining and rationalising implementation as
far as possible. The original Project Document is found to be too complex and repetitive for day-to-day
implementation purposes of the PCU and Country Project Task Forces (CPTFs). Some components and
activities present significant opportunities for streamlining (e.g. the original Project Document repeats the
establishment of in-country Lead Agencies and Country Focal Points in both Activities 1.A.5 and 1.B1,
whereas the PIP rolls these into a single Activity 1.B.1. Original Activities 1.B.2, 2.1 and 2.2 have been
integrated to form part of a new Component 2).
Some of the proposed activities required reconsideration from a technical perspective, and other activities
that are essential to the success of the programme were not included in the original Project Document (e.g.
risk assessment and port baseline surveys). The PIP requires a re-allocation of budget to accommodate
these updates, whilst staying within the overall original budget and programme design. .
2. Development Objectives
The broad development objectives of the programme are:
In the long-term;
· assist developing countries to reduce the transfer of harmful organisms from ships' ballast water.
In the nearer term;
· increase adherence by these countries to the current IMO voluntary guidelines on ballast water
management, and
1
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
· assist these countries to prepare for the implementation of the IMO mandatory regime when it
comes into force.
3. Immediate Objectives
In order to achieve the broad development objectives, the programme has a number of Immediate
Objectives, which are reflected in the programme Components and linked to specific Outputs and
Activities. These are:
· Objective 1: Establish effective programme coordination, management and support mechanisms at
the national, regional and global levels.
! Objective 1.A: Establish a Programme Coordination Unit (PCU) and a Global Information &
Communication Network at IMO.
! Objective 1.B: Establish and support a Lead Agency, Country Focal Point and multi-sectoral
Country Project Task Force (CPTF) in each country.
! Objective 1.C: Establish and support a Global Project Task Force to review the programme
and to advise the general directions to be followed.
· Objective 2: Develop and implement communication, education and awareness-raising
programmes and activities about ballast water threats and solutions at the port, national and
regional level, for each demonstration site.
· Objective 3: Undertake an initial risk assessment and information gap filling exercise at each
demonstration site to provide a clearer understanding of the level and types of risks of
introductions that each port faces, as well as the most sensitive resources and values that might be
threatened, and the management responses required.
· Objective 4: Develop and implement generic and country/port specific plans, with defined ballast
water management measures, to increase compliance with IMO guidelines and protect identified,
country specific most sensitive values at risk.
· Objective 5: Develop and implement generic and country/port specific compliance monitoring and
enforcement programmes, to increase compliance with IMO guidelines and protect identified,
country specific most sensitive values at risk.
· Objective 6: Where appropriate, establish and support Regional Project Task Forces to increase
regional awareness and cooperation and eventual replication of programme results across each
region.
· Objective 7: Identify and secure opportunities for self-financing of the programme during its life-
time and for the sustainable continuation of IMO, Global, regional and national efforts to
implement IMO ballast water management provisions.
4. Programme Components, Outputs and Activities
In order to achieve the seven Immediate Objectives, the programme is divided into seven equivalent
Components, each with a set of Outputs and Activities, as described below and the following Summary
Tables.
2
Project Implementation Plan (PIP )
Component 1: Programme Coordination & Management
No programme can be effective without coordination and management mechanisms. For this programme,
coordination and management mechanisms are divided into 3 sub-components; 1.A: Programme
Coordination Unit, 1.B: In-Country Coordination Arrangements and 1.C: Global Coordination
Arrangements.
Sub-component 1.A: Programme Coordination Unit
The first step towards implementing the programme is to create an IMO based Programme Coordination
Unit (PCU). The PCU will ensure effective programme coordination and support (information,
communications, expert assistance, program implementation capacity and evaluation and assessment) and
bring cohesiveness and consistency to programme implementation through the establishment of a global
support system .
This sub-component, among other things, creates within the IMO in London a PCU comprised of two (2)
professionals, an Associate Program Officer (provided a donor can be found), requisite administrative and
technical support and backstopping support from the permanent staff of the IMO. The work of the PCU is
supported by the programme over the four years of the programme on a declining basis. It is particularly
important that IMO be centrally involved as they create for the programme, as noted by the GEF STAP
review, access to officials and programs in countries where many ships are registered, such as Panama,
Liberia, and Norway, whose positions, along with classification societies, will be crucial for the
development of future regulations.
While the IMO is committed to assisting in co-financing the creation of an effective PCU and to endeavor
to sustain that presence after programme completion, development and implementation of pilot programs
at the country and port level, are not part of IMO's mandate. Without the GEF intervention, the needs
outlined in this programme proposal will not be met. The relationship between IMO regular activities and
the GEF/UNDP/IMO programme appears as in Annex II of the initial Project Document.
Sub-component 1.B: In-Country Coordination Arrangements
Work undertaken during the PDF-B phase of the programme (GLO97/G41) found that no country's single
agency had been given or had assumed lead responsibility for work related to the ballast water issue.
Without delegation or assumption of leadership on the part of any specific agency, it is impossible to
address the issue effectively or at all. One of the priority recommended barrier removal activities is the
creation of a Lead Agency in each pilot country that has overall responsibility for development of the port-
specific and country-specific strategies that are the principal objective of this programme. The Lead
Agency, through a Country Focal Point (CFP), would be responsible for the creation and convening of the
necessary inter-ministerial and multi-sectoral Country Project Task Force (CPTF) and would also be
responsible for the development and implementation of the necessary informational, educational and
participation activities that are key to programme success. Provision of GEF resources would enable
recruitment of a CFP Assistant in each country to assist in the coordination and implementation of
programme activities.
Sub-component 1.C: Global Coordination Arrangements
The Global Project Task Force (GPTF) will be the highest advisory body of the project. This will
comprise representatives of GEF, UNDP, IMO and the six participating countries. The shipping industry,
environmental NGOs and possible other parties that are able to contribute to the programme in a
meaningful way will also be invited. The GPTF will meet once a year, and be hosted either by IMO or one
of the pilot countries. The PCU will act as the Secretariat to the GPTF.
Component 2: Communication, Education and Awareness Raising
The most significant barrier to action on ballast water transfer has been identified within the PDF-B
process, and by other observers, as the lack of awareness about the existence and potentially catastrophic
3
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
consequences of the introduction of unwanted organisms. Without adequate information on the actual and
potential seriousness of impacts, actions to remediate the problem will not be taken.
The PCU will assume an important role in the activities related to this component through the coordination
and communication of real-life case studies that demonstrate the threats and impacts posed by introduced
marine species. These case studies will be as relevant as possible to the six demonstration sites. They will
be undertaken by consultants on contract to the PCU, with significant input and support from each
CFP/CPTF. Communication of the case studies to all stakeholders will receive highest priority.
The participating countries are likely to have few if any education and awareness raising materials to
address or describe problems associated with unchecked ballast water releases. Increasingly, however,
there is a growing body of case studies, research, control programs, and public education and information
programs that have been and continue to be developed in countries such as Argentina, Australia, Canada,
Israel, New Zealand, Brazil and the United States. The PCU will make maximum use of existing case
studies and public information and education programmes to generate generic communication, education
and awareness raising materials, for use by the pilot countries and others, and will be able to `tailor'
materials to meet country-specific needs.
In addition, each pilot country should develop a country/port specific communication workplan. This will
be done through a country communication workshop, to be held in each pilot country early in the
programme. These workshops will be assisted by the PCU (in particular the Technical Adviser, who has
primary responsible for communication matters in the PCU), and involve the CFP and relevant members of
the CPTF, as well as national authorities on communication, education, public participation and
community consultation.
Significant resources will be made available by the programme for the implementation of each country's
communication workplan. In addition, the Information/Communication Network established by the PCU
under Activity 1.A.3 will play a major part in Component 2 as well.
Component 3: Risk Assessment.
After communication, education and awareness raising, the next foundation for the programme at the
port/country level is to conduct port-specific Ballast Water Risk Assessments for each demonstration site.
This is important for establishing the level and types of risks of introductions that a particular port faces, as
well as the most sensitive resources and values that might be threatened. These will differ from site to site,
and will determine the types of management responses that are required.
The current IMO ballast water management guidelines offer states significant flexibility in determining the
nature and extent of their programmes. This flexibility is warranted given that nations are still
experimenting with approaches. A pilot country may wish to apply its programme uniformly to all vessels
which visit or it may wish to attempt to assess the relative risk of vessels to valuable resources and apply
the programme selectively to those which are deemed of highest risk.
The uniform application option offers the advantages of simplified programme administration in that there
are no "judgement calls" to be made or justified by the host country/port regarding which vessels must
participate and which need not. In addition, the system requires substantially less information
management demands. Finally, it offers more protection from unanticipated invaders, and overall
protection is not dependent upon the quality of a decision support system which may not be complete. The
primary disadvantages of this approach are: 1) additional overall cost to vessels which otherwise might not
need to take action, and 2) more vessels will be involved in undertaking the measures, and therefore the
host country/port will need to monitor compliance from a greater number of vessels.
Some nations are experimenting with systems to allow more selective applicability based upon voyage-
specific risk assessments because this approach offers to reduce the numbers of vessels subject to ballast
water controls and monitoring. The prospect of reducing the numbers of ships to which the program
applies is especially attractive to nations that wish to eliminate introductions of target organisms such as
4
Project Implementation Plan (PIP )
toxic dinoflagellates. More rigorous measures can be justified on ships deemed to be of `high risk' if
fewer restrictions are placed on low risk vessels. However, this approach places commensurate
information technology and management burdens on the host country/port and its effectiveness depends on
the quality of the information supporting it. The approach may also leave the country/port vulnerable to
unknown risks from non-target organisms.
For countries/ports which choose the selective approach, it will be essential that each demonstration site
establish an organized means of evaluating the potential risk posed by each vessel entering their port,
through a Decision Support System (DSS). Only in this way can they take the most appropriate decision
regarding any required action concerning that vessels' ballast water discharge. The DSS is a management
system that provides a mechanism for assessing all available information relating to individual vessels and
their individual management of ballast water so that, based upon assessed risk, the appropriate course of
action can be taken.
Before a pilot country decides on whether to adopt the `blanket' (i.e. all vessels) approach or to target
specific, identified high risk vessels only, a general, first-past risk assessment should be carried out. This
should look at shipping arrival patterns and identify the source ports from which ballast water is imported.
Once these are identified, source port/discharge port environmental comparisons should be carried out to
give a preliminary indication of overall risk. This will greatly assist the government to assess which
approach to take. The programme will support these initial , `first-past' risk assessments as a consultancy
on contract to the PCU. The CFP/CPTF, including the local port and shipping industry, will play a key
role in providing data on shipping movements, source ports, ballast water management patterns, and
coastal and marine resources and environmental conditions. The PCU consultant, in conducting the risk
assessment in each pilot country, will identify country counterpart(s) and include them in the study process
as part of the capacity building objectives of the programme, so as to allow each country to undertake its
own risk assessments in future.
It is also necessary to conduct baseline port biota surveys in each demonstration site. This is vital for
assessing existing natural conditions and the presence or absence of introduced marine species. Such
surveys are fundamental to the programme. The programme will support initial baseline surveys in each
port, through provision of an expert to assist in survey design and to provide in-country training, and
through provision of US$50K per demonstration site. The PCU will also provide standardised port survey
protocols, including for data management. Actual in-country work should be undertaken by the in-country
marine science community (a member of the CPTF). Once the initial baseline surveys are conducted with
programme support, they should be conducted on an ongoing basis, as a long-term biological monitoring
programme for the port. This will allow any existing introductions to be tracked and managed and any
new introductions to be detected and responded to. This ongoing effort will have to be resourced in-
country.
All outputs of Component 3 will be vital for identifying information gaps and defining and clarifying the
nature of the threats posed by ballast water introductions and the most sensitive resources and values at
risk at each demonstration site. This component is therefore vital to shaping the development of each
country's response to the issue.
Component 4:
Ballast Water Management Measures
The essence of this programme is twofold. First it is intended to result in the development of a generic,
developing country based, ballast water management measures which can be adopted in other countries.
Second, and to the extent possible, the programme will facilitate the development of country and port
specific measures, including national legislation, to achieve effective ballast water management consistent
with IMO provisions. Work undertaken in the PDF-B phase of the programme and a review of existing
ballast water control programs is indicative of the overall strategy that should form the basis for
programme development. Ballast water management measures should seek to avoid the adverse economic,
environmental, and human health impacts of unwanted, introduced marine species. Such measures should
5
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
make provision to avoid unwanted introductions by minimizing their risk of entry, establishment, and
spread in country receiving waters while simultaneously minimizing impediments to trade.
Development and implementation of the actual ballast water management measures that are necessary to
minimise the risk of introduced marine species constitutes the `backbone' of the programme at each
demonstration site. It is these measures that will produce the practical benefits of the programme, in order
to achieve the near-term development objectives of the programme:
· To increase adherence by countries to the current IMO voluntary guidelines on ballast water
management, and
· To assist countries to prepare for the implementation of the IMO mandatory regime when it comes
into force.
Ballast water management measures that are developed and implemented at each demonstration site should
therefore initially be consistent with the IMO voluntary guidelines (A.868(20)) and eventually adopt the
provisions of the IMO mandatory regime as it comes into being. Fortunately, the IMO voluntary
guidelines already contain recommended ballast water management measures, and these are supported by
Model Shipboard Ballast Water Management Plans already developed by industry. There is no need to
develop new measures. What is required is to adapt these measures to local situations and develop
activities to implement these measures at each demonstration site effectively. It is of paramount
importance that nothing is developed or implemented that is inconsistent with the standardised IMO
regime, and that activities are coordinated across all demonstration sites.
To this end, the programme contains a number of activities. These include broad distribution and
communication of the current IMO voluntary guidelines and other existing templates and models to all
stakeholders (Activity 4.1), and the development and delivery of education and training packages to Lead
Agency, port and shipping personnel on how to implement these (Activity 4.2). This will make use of the
UN Train-X decentralized course development and sharing system to help participating countries create
and adapt course packages which, together, will form a targeted education and training programme.
This component also includes resourcing for a review of existing legislation and regulations relating to
ballast water in each pilot country, providing recommendations on what each country needs to do to
implement any necessary regulatory changes (Activity 4.3).
In addition, under Component 4 the programme will sponsor a Global Research and Development
Symposium (Activity 4.4). This is because existing ballast water management and control methods do not
currently provide adequate protection from marine introductions, even when fully implemented. Research
and development (R&D) of new ballast water treatment technologies is urgently required. There are
currently a range of R&D projects underway by various groups around the World. These are often not
well coordinated and some duplication may be occurring. They may also be focussed on conditions
prevailing in developed rather than developing countries. An important objective of the programme is to
act as a central coordination point, clearing house and knowledge broker for such research, and to ensure
that at least some of this R&D is targeted towards the needs of developing countries. The R&D symposium
will bring leading authorities on ballast water R&D together, along with pilot country representatives; to
review current state of knowledge, enhance networking, communication and cooperation between R&D
groups and the programme participants, encourage R&D groups to establish R&D projects in partnership
with the pilot countries, establish PCU as central coordination point, clearing house and knowledge broker,
help shape R&D agenda to suit developing countries' needs and communicate outcomes to all
stakeholders.
Finally, the National Workplans developed under Activity 1.B.4 will include provision for the
implementation of country/port specific ballast water management measures.
6
Project Implementation Plan (PIP )
Component 5: Compliance Monitoring and Enforcement
Effective implementation of country/port specific ballast water management measures is not possible
without compliance monitoring and enforcement (CME) systems.
It is essential that, as each country assesses what it deems to be the most appropriate array of control
options, effective CME is established to accomplish two objectives. First, monitoring will be important
for each country to measure the extent of compliance with the established requirements. Without
monitoring to inform of successful compliance, replication of programme results may not be warranted.
Second, country-specific compliance monitoring can serve as an important research tool that can be used to
assess the relative efficacy of ballast water management options in a variety of situations, as represented by
the six demonstration sites. Thus effective monitoring can both inform and form the ongoing effort to
minimize the global risks associated with the ballast water transfer of organisms.
Fortunately, the existing IMO guidelines and related templates and models such as the
ICS/INTERTANKO model shipboard ballast water management plan already provide some of the basic
components of a compliance monitoring system. In addition, many countries such as Australia, Canada,
the EU, New Zealand and the USA already have well developed compliance monitoring systems. The
programme will utilise these to develop generic CME systems based on the existing IMO guidelines and
the draft Convention currently being developed by the IMO Marine Environment Protection Committee.
However, each country will have to assume responsibility for resourcing and financing CME activities
after the adoption of the anticipated Convention.
Component 6:
Regional Cooperation & Replication
The countries and ports that have chosen to participate in the programme are taking an important first step
to facilitate local and national compliance with the current IMO guidelines and expected new international
legal instrument. Ports are competitive and it is possible that a port participating in the programme will
enact certain requirements that will make other regional ports more attractive to shippers. Regional or
Sub-Regional initiatives will be necessary to minimize the possibility that participating ports will be
penalized in any way for their programme participation. Further, the programmes that will be developed in
each of the six participating countries and ports should to the extent possible be replicated across the
region. The formation of the Regional Project Task Forces (RPTFs) is intended to facilitate this process.
Component 7: Resources and Financing
This programme is intended to provide the resources necessary to catalyse national, regional and global
action in response to the ballast water issue. It will run for a set time only. Each country and region will
have to assume responsibility for resourcing its ballast management arrangements progressively as the
programme proceeds, and over the longer term when the programme is completed. A Donor conference is
scheduled towards the completion of the programme to establish the benchmarks and medium and long
term strategies regarding Ballast Water Management and Control.
This will be progressed through two Activities, Activity 7.1: National Resourcing and Financing and
Activity 7.2: Global Donor Conference. The former will focus on breaking dependence on donors and
will review the opportunities for self-financing of programme components and future ballast water
management arrangements at the national level, on an ongoing basis, pinpointing the potential economic
sources and mechanisms. These will be based on the principles of user-pays and polluter pays. The latter
will comprise a donor conference using the on-going GEF programme as leverage for the creation of
necessary additional donors and the securing of loans, and confirm IMO's support for the continuation of
post-programme activity from its regular budget.
7
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
.
re
e
d.
itu
r
x 4
.
u
rn
f
out,
4/y
yrs
budget)
e
quir
s,
4
r
og.
t as r
lish.
n
,
lay
on.
ent.
or
o
mm
i
b
u
tion,
cti
e/database and
m
e
x p
, c
IT
desig
r
e
view visits to each
4 yrs.
Budget Notes
O (
dwar
3 sub-components; 1.A:
e
r for
IM
ced supp
i
eld
f
ced
m
t/har
y
/y
into
programme implementation
costs to estab
p
ilation,
am
m
.
ares, DSA etc over
to
inting and distr
ogr
Salary/benefits.
Paid by
Salary/benefits.
Outsour
PCU &
etc
IMO
Co
pr
yrs
For library colle
Outsour
suppor
web-site develop
Airf
Pr
countr
: 00
e
:
50
:
100
A: 600
A
T
S$K)
PA: 214
CT
o
tal: 1009
Total: 50
costs: 40
r
avel: 200
Total: 80
T
Total: 150
T
Total: 200
i
ssions: 80
m
a
ry 2002)
Cnsltnts: 195
m
Web/internet: 5
Newsletter
Other
Docs purchase: 5
v
al.
E
mechanisms are divided
n
e
ss and consistency
Budget (U
S Tr
a
ting.
s.
a
gement
g
.
p
.
es oper
e
nts
es (Janu
NGO'
n
m
y,
unctionin
Partners
gover
ndustr
tion and man
)
,
I
ements.
(PCU) to bring cohesive
e
view procedur
U
Hardwar
Other
and institutions (es
Australia, USA and
E
a
tional .
Arrang
on Unit
r
k established and f
t
i
e
s
FP &
P, CPTF
g
ramme, coordina
i
nation
ordinati
:
s
Netwo
e
evaluation and r
t.
m
s and Activiti
t
eria
is pro
Coord
am
with C
DP
ogr
U,
O with CF
suppor
F
PCU established and oper
I
n
fo/Com
Pr
Responsible Par
,
UN
UNDP, consultants
RPT
O,
t
Success Cri
·
·
·
IMO
IMO/PC
UNDP support.
PCU/IM
&
PCU
I
M
n ms. For th 1.C: Global
e
nt
other
m
e
view.
f
ective
p
r
ove
IMO based Programme Co
/RPTF and
u
n
c
tioning;
o
r ef
F
m
T
it
o
r i
e an
ation site.
ry f
P
a
g
e
ment mechanis
Arrangements and
onstr
s
)
.
ng C
ation sites and
evaluation and r
m
m
to creat
s
.
o
m
s
necessa
u
n
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s
a
n
d
d
a
t
a
t
r
a
n
s
f
e
r
onstr
m
m
r
oups.
entation.
e
is
established and f
I
n
fo/Co
m
m
m
o
m
e
r
e
view visits.
r
dination & Manageme ation and man oordination
r
dination Un
d at each de
r
k (
c
m
ple
a
m
to dem
e
chanis
din
y
C
y
stem.
including attendi
am
tr
echanis
O an
m
e
i
m
unications g
m
e
with input fr
M
avel
ogr
m
on
m
tr
o
le,
am
e
nt
m
ong all stakeholder
tim
including
i
ce at I
f to
tion r
r
ogr
u
n
icati
p
ramme Coo
unication Netwo
n
et co
m
dina
ramme Coo without coor .B: In-Coun
g
a
nagem
and am
)
m
m
staf
or
o
r assessing the successes and areas f
e
enting the progr
l
obal support s
m
oves over
-
up off
m
e
plication,
aphies.
e
s for
pr
A
T
a
n
g
e annual pr
e
co
r
y
f
m
Pro
a g
and
m
ces:
C
s
.
(
m
Unit, 1
plem
and set
v
aluation and Review.
Arr
effectiv
am
E
im
a
nce i
A)
o
l
der
e
tion between
m
(
T
and bibliogr
ogr
m
s
necessa
esses.
dination
ation and Co
ation and co
k
eh
t
e
r.
m
dina
f
or
a
n Resour
entation and r
ogr
r
e
view outco
can be
ent 1.A:
l sta
U Travel
n wards
m
rdware
hardware
C
t
of pr
o
g
r
a
m
e
coor
e
per
e
Assistant (PA)
n
form
f
o
rm
g al
e
pr
m
m
e
PCU staff:
m
y
outsourced services
plem
e
chanis
y newslet
m
t
ep to
establishment of
echnical Advisor
on
m
e
1: Hu
3: I
collection
5: Pr
am
am
m
am
unicate
t s
A.2: Ha
e
im
A. 4: P
m
:
:
ary
ogr
m
ffective coor
ogr
1.A.
echnical Advisor
1.A.
m
n
d
am
e
b site/web links/databases/inter
i
br
eetings.
1.A.
ogr
uts
Pr
E
Pr
i
ties
uit and hir
Chief T
T
Progra
Necessar
am
W
Quarterl
L
m
Co
ogr
i
t
h
i
n
a
Summary Tables
Revised Programme Components, Output
COMPONENT 1: Prog No programme Programme Coordination
Sub-compo The firs through th Outp · · ·
Activ
Activity
Recr
·
·
·
·
Activity 1.
Organise physical
Activity
Develop the in
pr
w
·
·
·
Activity 1.
Provide resources to enable PCU
destinations as par
other
Activity
Establish the
as the pr
·
8
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
y
y
tr
tr
t
s
.
t
or
a
l
ner
e
r cos
u
pp
al Coun
to cov
s
.
a
r
e
a
n
d s
yr
e
n
ts
s
t
a
n
t
a
n
d ge
m
d
w
si
r 4
u
lti-sector
to develop &
implementing coun
ern
As
F
ce har
ort fo
o
t
e
s
f
fi
e
eting costs.
int, m
h CFP
t CPT
ent wkplans
g
and
m
r
y
,
o
u
d
g
e
t
n
plem
B
Country gov
S
a
la
f
o
r
eac
CPTF supp
Basic
Suppor
im
e
lopin
4
y
Focal Po
0
dev
Nil
79
9
4
230
230
37
t
r
y.
rt:
l:
7
370K
ountr
ta
137,
688,
coun
To
, C
p wkplans:
ch
S$K)
o
tal: 137,
ea
y
.
(U
tings:
T
im
&
o
tal: 688,
in
m
T
F
e
sponsible for
o
u
n
tr
Agency
e
l
y
Dev
e r
h c
Budget
CPT
ead
try.
L
f
e
c
tiv
a
ef
coun
y
arties ar
i
ng
y
p
tion
each
s.
tr
f
f
e
c
t
i
v
e
l
y
i
n
eac
in
F
T
b
er
f
unc
ely
e
m
and
UNDP Countr
e
s
,
CP
e
r
s
.
m
ti
o
n
i
n
g e
F
In-coun
ed
O,
mb
at
effectiv
ffic
f
u
nc
Partners
Suppo
I
M
O
me
CPT
i
ng
a
ngements. Without
n
d
F
P
d
e
s
i
gn
e
d a
U
U
e all
stry
n
arr
f
unction
C
C
a
n
d
n
gag
with
n
d
a
tio
nnot succeed.
and
pport.
i
t
h
P
includ
fer P
d
p
l
a
te
ca
c
y
a
n
d
C
a
n
t e
ed
e
n
ts
e
n
t
,
indu
).
m
su
IMO a
te w
to
an
r
i
a
:
en
st
m
a
r
t
i
e
s
:
t
.
n
m
ps (re
es
tem
si
ern
P,
na
di
in
r
ite
Ag
As
P
TFs
el
over
g
r
ou
id
o
v
i
d
e
y
coordin
UNDP
h
CF
o
or
s C
ead
FP
u
ppor
develop
e
n
t
.
es
L
C
CPTF for
r
t
.
C
GO
r
t
.
DP s
t
o
c
a
nt g
F
Gu
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
P
U and
U wit
FP
T
p
l
em
U pr
-countr
S
u
cc
·
·
·
R
Country gov
P
C
P
C
UN
C
suppo
relev
a
n
d
N
CP
CPTF
im
P
C
suppo
e in emonstration sites
t
s
,
of
the d
u
re
the
y
,
nat
a
t
i
v
e
of
on effectiv
in
ent
t
es
.
pr
ent,
r
a
ngemen en countr
of each
o
p
m
s
-
s
e
c
t
o
r
al
or re
e
pend
)
vel
r
os
e
ni
entation
d
FP
s
e
de
each country
C
y.
tr
nd c
or
m
p
l
e
m
i
ties.
l
a
CFP
a
m
m
dination Ar vitally
o
int (
ements in each
the
try i
oning in
a
c
h
coun
activ
o
c
a
l P
e
i
n
i
s
t
e
r
ia
by
d
a
rrang
m
t
ant's
f
o
r
progr
-coun
r-
y
Coor
a
l
c
y
in
sis
te
i
b
le
w.
en
n
t
.
h
a
i
re
and functi
o
untry F
sta
t
r
y.
U
n
f
o
r
in
activities.
C
country.
belo
s
si
b
e
in
n
d c
PC
F
P As
ld
spons
7
e programme is
al
n
d
t
h
a
t
ag
A
coun
t to
C
Re
each
o
r
k
pla
to
th
institution
2
ach
e.
r
tl
is
Shou
g
e
n
cy a
at
t in
s
e
r
e
gion
g
e
n
cy a
e
P
f
r
o
m
ents
an
P
TF and
try.
opri
s
i
gh
.
CF
t
in
e
a
d
A
er
p
on
e
nts established
F
a
n
d CFP
d
t
e
sho
g
e.
p
pr
o
r
k
pl
a
t
i
o
n
a
l
W
m
m
e
a
d
A
i
s
t
an
ort C
ov
and oth
P
TF Meetings
h L
mina
nga
s
a
/e
o
u
se
pp
e
etings
a N
m
ent 1.B: In-Countr
Ass
h
ce
is
c
y
an
o
r
t CPT
no
su
e
a
c
h
coun
of the L
and
ent
n
upporting r
rrange
en
ect
ort C
ll
rt
i
o
n
a
l
W
a
s
tabl
in
u
nder Co
Ag
c
y
to
e to
g
e
n
cy a
tation
n
gs.
plem
and s
E
S
upp
y
CFP
P
'
s
to
en
i
es
1:
P
TF
e
ad
2:
.
3
:
Supp
d
A
en
eeti
suppo
4: Nat
im
C
t
t
h
e ca
m
:
B.
B.
CF
/
IMO sel
Ag
r
a
mm
B.
n
d
ti
vit
s:
es
t
e
L
deplo
U
U to
ach
ead
og
1
.
B
r
m
eet a
ple
o
ld m
1.
In-country
E
P
C
L
Pr
Fo
m
t
h
e Lea
i
m
H
PC
nt ac
put
gna
t
i
v
i
ti
si
va
Sub-compo
c
ti
vity 1.
c
ti
vity 1.
c
ti
v
ity
e
v
e
l
o
p a
le
Successful implementation of
Project Task For
work plans
Out
·
Ac
A
De
A
Hire and
·
·
·
·
Activity
·
·
·
A
D
re
9
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
e
d.
e
quir
s
.
40K per
The
and
ear
i
es.
4 y
oups as r
for
countr
e
ar
eeting costs
o
t
e
s
m
ating
eeting/y
r
e
spondence gr
u
d
g
e
t
n
m
e
eting.
B
1
m
Travel &
cor
a
rticip
160
oups: 80
o
tal: 240
i
t
e
d.
T
S$K)
eetings:
inv
(U
m
F
Adv gr
be
F
.
GPT
P
T
Budget
G
EF, UNDP, IMO and the six p
a
y
will also
b
y
the
G
ed
st
ssi
es of
a
y
s
n
tativ
meaningful w
i
s
e
d
and
ese
Partners
I
ndustr
NGO's
Sponsor
y adv
el
p
rise repr
f
e
c
tiv
ef
programme in a
is
.
UNDP,
l
com
e
NGOs,
r
i
a
:
a
r
t
i
e
s
:
th
mme
y,
ra
etariat
CFPs,
is wil
r
ite
s.
s C
ndustr
bute to
es
P
r
og
p
rises
I
t.
Th
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
P
m
O,
S
u
cc
·
R
PCU secr
Co
I
M
Sponsor
ojec
contri
pr
le to
the
a
l
y of
oups as
y
gr
ments y bod that are ab
a
nge advisor parties
est
t
her
e
and advise the gener
m
entation.
am
m
tion Arr e high ble o
and technical advisor
ple
th
r
ogr
.
e
i
m
F)
m
scientific
am
e
view the p
o
m
i
v
ely.
r
ogr
al Coordina
ce (GPT
p
b PTF) will beG (
e
ffect
For
oups.
e
s for
ng
a
sk
ulate and r
m
m
y
gr
Force
i
o
ni
Seek advice fr
i
ronmental NGOs and possi
e
etings
oject T
outco
to for
F
Task
F
ent 1.C: Glo
GPT
n ect y, env
l
owed.
ed and funct
and advisor
F
m
un GPT
Proj
unicate
al
.
1: Global Pr
C
GPT
:
m
s:
P
TF for
es
1.
ganize and hold m
m
G
e
d.
Form
Or
Co
put
t
i
v
i
ti
s
tablish and r
ections to be fol
Sub-compo The Glob shipping industr Out ·
Ac
Activity
E
dir
r
e
quir
·
·
·
10
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
n
y
rl
.
s
i
n
g
ting
a
n
d
ng.
is
2.
e
s
s
ary.
li
ti
es
2.
&
al
a
n
d
ing
a
n
d
ing
nec
f
a
ci
ongoi
rtant, ea
n
ess rai
e
t
s
.
po
h
er
a
d
e
of ex
c
t
i
v
ity
e and
o
r
k
plans
are
l
o
p
e
d
m
n
ally us
l
o
p
e
d
n
ally us
A
is
arch, prep
studies,
p
cos
p Nation
w
n
g.
ve
)
.
ve
sio
sio
s
) w
s of
e
rt
eir W
to be
e
lo
rese
th
ely im
es
li
e
r
(s
es
i
er(
e
exp
nd a
in
s raisi
b
e
de
r
of
b
e
de
r
of
u
t
p
ut
O
o
t
e
s
us
s to
p
uppl
o
to dev
supp
s to
p
u
m
s,
/
I
M
try worksho
with
x
trem
al
unicate case
i
on a
i
al
uced
i
al
uced
n
a
l
s
m
i
al
al
m
a
ter
od
e
rn
a
ter
od
a
ter
e
rn
m
r
s was poor to non-existent i
n
e
u
d
g
e
t
n
B
M
pr
ext
M
pr
e
x
ter
Maxi
m
int
Fees/travel to
co
I
n
-coun
Countries
budgets
ducat
awarenes
6
ce:
3
35
s
: 46
l:
4
ti
on:
6
65
i
on, e
ta
Total: 3
113,
1
3
,
335
1
7
,
665
enta
517,
is seen as a
/
p
r
odu
acts: 102
o
tal: 102
To
T
l:
5
S$K)
Wkshp
e
m
ta
ue
u
n
i
cat
o
tal: 1
d
ucation and
T
pl
To
e
d
.
(U
Contr
Im
l
a
st water transfe
ss
, e
Develop
e i
mm
Design/develop: 3
bal
s
.
f
co
d
e
v
e
lop
Budget
der
rs of
ess of th
e
n
t o
unication
r
k
plans
.
nge
m
m
,
,
s
t
a
k
e
h
ol
ted
d wo
en
MEPC,
US
i
ence.
US
i
ence.
d to
m
O-
i
es with
i
es with
Os,
o
u
p
s
.
Os,
o
u
p
s
.
te
an
gr
gr
e
v
e
lop
ple
PC,
NG
NG
u
t
t
h
e da
o
d
u
c
e
d
.
h
e
ld
E
i
m
y
,
IM
e
ral awaren
unica
pr
countr
-
M
countr
t
ry,
unity
t
ry,
unity
h
e d
d
dress com
m
s
m
m
d
m
i
al
is t
o
a
he
r
k
s
hops
r
k
p
l
ans
Partners
I
ndustr
Australia, EU,
other
r
e
levant exper
IMO
Australia, EU,
other
r
e
levant exper
I
ndus
c
o
m
I
ndus
c
o
m
i
on abo
of gen
e t
is
a
ter
at
bl
a
n
d co
m
wo
wo
e
l
t.
t.
ities
s
ta
d
te
t
i
o
n
p
le
ica
s
.
s
n
d
u
ppor
u
ppor
w lev
m
un
u
n
i
cation
u
n
i
cation
ier
s a
programm
d
e
n
tity e
m
ie
onsultants
mm
mm
d
lo
e i
u
ppl
C
r
i
a
:
o
m
a
r
t
i
e
s
:
o
v
a
l activ
u
d
i
e
s co
ountr
i
t
h
PCU s
i
t
h
PCU s
n
g
t
h
a
t
i
n
form
a
mm
n
al supplier
e.
w
w
n
an
r
ite
n
al s
a
nage.
t.
ndi
io
s C
ogr
a
se st
e
n
e
r
i
c c
x
ter
m
out.
at
es
Pr
C
G
Country co
Country co
exter
e
IMO, c
r
s
t
o
us
ry
/
CPTF
/
CPTF
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
P
U,
U,
n
a fi
S
u
cc
·
·
·
·
·
R
PCU,
P
C
c
a
rry ou
P
C
o
t
he
PCU
car
CFP assist.
CFP
CFP
ness Raising (CEAR)
included in the
t
e
d i
d
e
d
b
a
rrier rem
l
s
are
of inform
en
ns is
a
l
a
teria
e resul
ack
mm
t
rategies
e
ner
m
tal and
s
m
is l
solutio
i
n
g
e
n
reco
Activities are
i
a
l
s
is
t to
nd standards for
m
n.
.
Th
a
ter
ra
n
a
n
cluding
ng
a
io
r
o
g
r
a
m
potential
n
ess
elev
at
s
,
in
/r
s
i
n
g M
enviro
n
r
t
i
c
ip
s.
h
e p
p
r
i
o
rity
i
c,
o
action
e
followi
tries, resulting in increased
Rai
m
r
kplan
pacts and
essing the issue in g
s
a
n
d aware
wo
cused o
u
n
i
t
y
pa
o
r
k
p
l
an
se of t
o
f
th
e
n
es
n
s.
e
y, the
its im
ar
t
i
o
n
econo
(fo
s
mm
b
a
rrier t
w
n
o
rkplans
ngl
guages.
u
nication
co
t
i
o
n W
o
r
k
pla
ipating coun
e
and addr
uding logo, stationary
d
n
d A
m
ica
o
r
y
pha
i
ssue,
m
lan
a
j
o
r
n
s.
o
rdi
s
& W
m
un
am
le
ductio
m
3.
r
at
, incl
t
i
o
n, educa
p
r
o
d
u
c
t
s
.
t
r
ating the
co
water
partic
t
i
o
n a
tro
al
a
ti
o
n
W
a m
dress. On
ogr
itab
her
o
m
o
ns
in
r
a
i
s
i
n
g
an
o
rkpla
unication, Education and Aw
unica
r
epa
su
i
v
i
t
y
2.
unic
d
entity
d
uca
m
ted
ad
E
,
in
e
m
m
to
ballast
.
e
i
a
n
d ot
d
a
ter
n Workshop
n
a
tion
c
o
mm
ies
ns
s
f
Act
a
r
e
n
ess
ti
o
n
a
l
C
o
m
i
n
t
h
e w
s
titu
e
m
t
i
o
n,
et
the
y
tr
m
c
tio
e
lop
w
C
d
ica
ta
p
hl
n
g
t
h
e p
country. Acc
enting the pr
i
ne
un
neri
en
u
n
i
catio
l
o
p Na
ge
coun
n
d
a
u
t
p
u
t
s o
ti
o
n
al
u
ri
con
ramm
m
es
to dev
a
ve
plem
in
o
e
Identit
pam
l stakeholders.
mm
o
nta
pilot
d
ies.
m
d
s,
m
o
m
e
pr
u
r
e.
al
ion
de
Na
Co
at
.
en d
p
r
og
eness about
m
e
n
t progra
C
id
ent
ti
es c
m
i
c
nge of
O an
sl
o
s
t
er
g
ers of ballast w
e
s).
t
i
o
n of
ak
e
try
country
d
uc
ops
ongst all stakeholders in
a ra
l p
e
ntary.
ti
vi
rt
tries, and
ner
e broch
m
e
nt to i
ple
s
ed
il
isa
plem
m
r
ogra
m
ac
U, IM
m
Case Studies.
dan
r
k
sh
de
un
f
th
it
Ge
h
each
o
r
k
s
h
o
p
s -
a
rdi
t
i
o
na
cu
unicate to
Coun
e ut
Im
m
:
2:
oduce
r
a
mm
w
r
ation sit
y out case stu
4:
in
wo
5:
s:
mm
i
t
i
e
s
f
o
r
e
e
vel of awar
m
es
2.
y
PC
and
og
d
uca
and prepare case studies
o
ld
2.
ent the
r
k
un
y
co
L
raised a
co
o
pr
e b
St
Pr
E
TV do
Carr
Co
tiv
Plan
H
I
n
c
l
ud
put
o
nst
e
m
t
i
v
i
ti
U t
m
ac
pl
COMPONENT 2: Com Wo man priority o activities in each
c
ti
v
ity
c
ti
vity 2.
c
ti
v
ity
Out
·
Ac
Activity 2.1: P
Design and i
application.
A
P
C
for us
·
·
·
·
Activity 2.3:
Review
public healt
de
·
·
A
Workshop
and
·
·
·
A
I
m
11
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
c
h
i
es.
s
e
)
.
m
i
ght be
t
ake
v
ey
am
F
m
y
existing
v
ey
s
ogr
nts for ea
at
an
me
building of
y
sur
ss
sts to under
s, including
r
otocols and
d
es field
archiving and
op costs.
lues th
llow
e
annual sur
o
i
ng pr
part of general,
s.
e
nt
parts.
p
m
c
ountr
k
sh
v
ey
CFP and CPT
t,
inclu
futur
u
rvey
o
t
e
s
n
cludes travel to countr
Additional fund
por
Risk Asse
y
counter
up sur
e
d for
r
e
s and va
introduced marine species.
This will a
u
re s
travel and co
s. I
ng PCU,
p
l
i
ng, analysis,
ting.
te
.
fut
u
d
g
e
t
n
aining and capacity
o
set-
ain/advise in-
m
r
avel and wor
sourc
ce of
B
Fees,
the risk assess
tr
countr
T
tr
team
50K per
sa
r
e
por
r
e
quir
(
s
hould be an ong
No explicit costs,
ongoi
activities.
T
st Wa
re
ace for
5
pl
000
000
400
400
Nil
50K
in
Balla
y
costs:
16,
ce or absen
e
for the port
t
e
m
acts: 26
acts: 100
s: 391,
c
i
fic
m
S$K)
o
st sensitive
Sys
o
tal: 281,
o
tal: 491,
T
Contr
v
ey
T
te.
(U
e m
I
n
-
c
ountr
sur
e presen
st
s
.
PCU contr
1
t port-spe
as th
g program
a
t
i
o
n si
tr
Budget
duc
e
ll
and th
s
i
t
e
.
o
ns
m
o
f
i
l
l
gap
i
o
n
d t
O
t
(e.g.
at
to con
, as w
tr
h de
)
.
nditions
monitorin
f
i
ne
i
es
aces
ons
Country
Country
e
l is
for eac
h dem
e
d
i
es with por
UNDP
e
s
/
WHO/FA
UNDP
e
s
countr
y
lev
port f
c
t
i
v
i
t
i
e
s
de
e
d.
a
tural co
p
let
ffic
ffic
o
r
eac
m
n
d a
Partners
IMO/
O
Countr
survey experience
Australia, USA
IMO/
O
Other
advanced in surveys..
d f
requir
term biological
p
lete
y
port/countr
s
u
rveys co
e
i
d
e
n
ti
f
i
e
d
a
y
that are
ota
ent.
ps
t.
e
nt com
advise.
r
t
ake.
p
ga
ng/advice.
science
TF
to.
Gr
plem
nde
r
i
a
:
o
n
a
r
t
i
e
s
ps
and industr
aini
ati
s
t.
a
r
i
ne
ent.
i
n
e port bi
Gr
F'
Adv.
suppor
ductions that a particular
e
sponses
r
ite
a
s
s
e
s
s
m
a
nage.
a
nage.
y
m
F
s C
i
sk
a
sel
m
Adv.
m
Sci.
unity im
t.
t.
e
sponded
es
R
B
I
n
f
o
rm
F
F
m
e
s
p
o
n
s
i
b
l
e
P
m
of intro
S
u
cc
·
·
·
R
PCU
GPT
Consultants u
CFPs/CPT
assist/suppor
PCU
GPT
advise.
Consultant tr
I
n
-
c
ountr
co
CFP/CPT
PCU with CPF/CP
suppor
PCU with host countr
suppor
the programme at th
is is vital for assessing existing n
Th
risk assessm
y
,
risks
management r
on an ongoing basis, as a long-
nd
m
tected and r
n
ing
otocol.
site.
o
st
.
pes of
pes of
war
m
d
pr
ly
ty
e
nt
r
otocol.
e
to address
the
m
y
current ballast
d
p
t
foundation for
and ty
the
m
d ear
e
conducted
n
tr
s
tanding of the
standar
ill those gaps.
e
l
a
m
a
nage
an
well as
m
eats on the econo
andar
lev
e
monstration
v
ey
troductions to be de
progr
er under
the
aces, as
and the
and adopt
w in
building of cou
oductions.
a
r
i
ne science capability
and adopt st
d will determine
s
in each d
y and introductions at each site a
y
m
l/global sur
y
ne
d in
e
view of all activities to ascertain
ess raising, the nex
an
ng r
amme, and should b
s
have a clear
clude
e
thodology
m
c
ountr
e
giona
r establishing the
site, an
in
be threatened,
ntity, quality and sources of
odiversit
existing and potential thr
e
thodology
ent
bi
in-
p r
awaren
fo
to
holder
e to detect intr
m
f
i
ne the activities needed to f
lo
are
i
ght
aining/capacity
s
.
m
s
.
m
site and use source port/discharge port
o
rkshop
e the
tr
v
ey
W
and
ities
ssment
n
in
and de
y
portant
m site
o
rt biota survey
aining of
o
g
r
a
m
t sur
tr
3.2 and ongoi
im
n
clude
s to deve
Asse
r
i
sk assessm
pr
por
c
ation
er fro
Activ
introductions that each port f
v
ey
onstratio
v
ey
ed and managed and
e
nt and all stake
Risk
e
nt.
u
m
m
u
m
m
s inc.
o
rt Surve
,
edu
conduct p
This is
t
Sur
ack
i
sks of
t sur
r
a
ter
ation regarding the qua
e
ss
tr
e
d.
a
n health. I
x
isting data on native
a
nagem
m
e
por
te.
y
to
following
e
e optim
e
e optim
m
each de
p
arisons to determ
t survey
ation Gap Filling
ational P
ese will diff
e fundamental to the progr
be
c
tivities 3.1 and
e
quir
at
Baseline Surveys
a
st Por
term
m
s ar
to
the
com
ation gaps at each site
m
n
tern
.
Th
e
cessar
y,
ine/agr
ine/agr
:
Ballast W
unicate findings to stakeholder
unicate findings to stakeholder
of A
t
s.
m
:
Port
m
t
ake por
:
Infor
ental
ent, and hu
m
m
4
:
I
s:
es
m
par
m
ent long-
m
n
GloBall
.
onstration si
All levels of
level and types of
sensitive resources and values that
r
e
sponses r
Deter
Undertake risk ass
Co
Deter
Under
Co
put
o
n
m
m
t
i
v
i
ti
plem
c
tivity 3.
ste
COMPONENT 3: Risk Assessment After communication dem threatened It is also n Such survey introductions Accordingl
Out ·
Ac
Activity 3.1
Review existing inform
water discharges
environ
envir
counter
· ·
·
Activity 3.2
Undertake review of
im
·
·
·
Activity 3.3
Use outputs
existing infor
A
Build o
sy
12
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
es
r
e
d o
e
d for
national
t objectiv
8
(20)) and
management
y
-
e
quir
aining
s constitutes the
is develop
l
.
titutions).
ces r
es (A.86
y
of tr
thing
e
sour
(
25K/countr
y
.
ees/trave
training courses in each st
ballast water
ced.
c organism
y
.
ng deliver
avel
-term developmen
y
guidelin
d
g
deliver
e
nde
nce that no
Budget notes:
Outsour
Postage etc.
Contract f
Run wkshp.
Deliver 1
countr
Additional r
ongoi
courses.
Fees/tr
consultants and ins
Fees/travel.
m
ed.
ful aquati
K
e the near
20
for ongoin
dn: 30
i
bution: 2
Total: 22
o
tal: 300
t
ain recom
e
velop new measures. What is required is to
stem
e
thods: 50
T
o
tal: 185K
S$K)
m
aining: 180
T
to achiev
a
mount importa
r
anslatios:
Distr
-
X
tion of harm
y con
endations consider
se dev wkshp: 70
Nat tr
with sy
m
Cr
o
cal cnsltnts: 155K
Advice/coor
loca
m
ed,
udget (U
Dev T
L
is of par
e
co
B
alread
no need to d
me, in order
o
n
sistent with the IMO voluntar
e is
s.
ulgated.
deliver
y
and r
k
of trans
e
c
ely. It
o
m
b
site
pr
rogram
tiv
countr
y
guidelines
y
.
Ther
effec
e
loped and
each
y
.
T
y
.
i
s
e
the ris
onstration
m
s
of the p
r
e initially
o
luntar
n site
odels widely
i
ni
.
e
fit
efo
y
industr
Partners
I
ndustr
I
ndustr
dem
y
m
p
leted for
held.
m
m
l
ben
o
force
e IMO v
onstratio
ica
e
ment, and
e
loped b
industr
posiu
s
a
r
y
to m
s int
c
ross all
aining packages dev
m
should ther
, th
a
ulgate.
Sy
r
t
ake.
ces
pract
ly
e
views co
op.
t
i
e
s
r
o
m
/
CPTF
e
y
dev
ch dem
D
ent.
c
o
me
.
nde
ea
i
nated
e th
t
eria:
n
it
A, CPF
plem
water manag
O guidelines &
a
nage.
a
nage.
a
nage.
m
ducation and tr
e
gislation r
m
m
training institutes
IM
m
ures at
coord
I
M
E
L
Global R&
t.
i
that are ne
whe
U,
F
a
l
l
a
st
me
eas
are
ures
gi
·
·
·
·
demonstration site
Success Cri
Responsible Par
PCU
CFPs/CPTF's p
PCU
Consultant devel
Country
deliver.
WM
suppor
PCU
Consultants u
CPT
being. Fortunate
sures
t
will produc
eas
re
es on b
ese m
i
v
ities
e
Mea
t
act
r and
e
nt m
e
s into
ent th
,
O
andatory
tha
K
a
r
itim
easures tha
u
idelin
N
g
m
ted at each
ter Management Plan alread
A
y
m
O voluntary
it com
plem
T
a
nagem
R
M
e
s:
s
and other
ese m
im
e
, and
TE
ducation and
e IMO
i
m
N
entation of the
c
ountr
m
voluntary
es to
at each
S/I
It is th
ple
e
gime as
iti
s
in ballast water
I
C
r
ation sit
and in-
t water m
ented
m
&
ad agencie
as
IMO
tion of th
y
r
c
tiv
e
m
o
nst
o
r targeted e
pl
ganis
m
ball
on site.
ent
actical im
h
ipboard Ballast Wa
entation of the I
e
lop a
m
de
e
thodology
mandator
a
r
d
ised IMO reg
the
m
plem
e developed and implemen
m
onstrati
the curr
d
dev
d
s.
at
of aquatic or
n.
N-X
and validate.
aining units.
regulations relating to ballast wate
e i
e
ndations.
the actual
e
m
an
e stand
ourse packages f
port authorities, le
the implementa
e
asures are i
f
er
o
luntary Guidelines
o
del
m
that ar
y
a Model S
th
m
m
l and on the pr
o
r th
m
n of
for
O V
a
ckages
each d
e
r
es
of the IMO
e
nt
and
e
nera
ons
r
eco
ted b
i
t
u
ations
t
with
m
M
P
d crews,
egional tr
ent
e
at
y
countries to
epar
r
s an
ing UN TRAI
each country
m
m
a
l s
a
nage
e
gulati
m
a
ste
ple
d Training
i
c and adaptable c
m
r issue in g
national/r
d R
m
to loc
a
ter
to reduce the trans
O guidelines and standar
/ i
w
consider
M
y
by
e
stic legislation and
m
d implementatio
e
view existing legislation.
e program
adherence b
gener
t the provisions
ese are suppor
t
is inconsisten
slate/disseminate I
x
isting guidelines
er
ast wate
changes necessary f
consider
f
th
countries to pr
e
a
s
ures
ballast
e
ducation an
r
aining courses in
crease
adop
e m
'
s
to
onstration site
:
1
:
Tran
2
:
E
3
:
Legislation an
F
ally
ented tha
:
f
ective
m
e
nd any
To in
To assist
thes
uts
Ef
de
consistent with I
i
ties
Develop package,
training institutions.
Deliver t
Ongoing deliver
Consultant to r
CPT
plem
O guidelines and the anticipated Conventio
mm
COMPONENT 4: Ballast Water Management (BWM) Development an `backbone' o of the programme:
· · Ballast water management measu eventu measures, and th adapt im
c
tivity 4.
c
tivity 4.
c
tivity 4.
Outp
·
Activ
A
Model
Enhance use of
A
Develop and deliv
training of ship operators,
parties, on the ball
I
M
·
·
·
A
Review existing do
reco
guidelines.
·
·
13
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
o
r
st
nd f
s
.
.
m
of 1
ility
posiu
.
s to be fou
m
or
nt sym
entation of the plans to be a
m
posiu
s
pons
r
avel and holding
ple
Budget notes:
T
sym
Co-
subseque
10K.
Im
National responsib
:
60
m
Total: 60
Total: 10
S$K)
posiu
m
Sy
udget (U
B
.
e
nts.
n
m
unity
m
m
y
.
y
gover
D co
Partners
R&
I
ndustr
Countr
10
i
es
-
t
i
e
s
and assist countr
k
shop
p
late
Responsible Par
PCU plan and hold
wor
PCU & consultant develop
tem
to use it.
CFP Assistants/CPTFs
develop plans etc
,
e
nt
m
oker
r
eat
br
oups,
a
ter t
e
n
t
Plan
m
tween R&D gr
Manage
needs and
r
a
te
a
tion be
ing house and knowledge
ies'
W
n
tr
l
ans
clear
P
nt,
e
nt
leading authorities on ballast w
m
a
nd cooper
oping cou
n
t
r
i
es
akeholders.
e
nt
dination poi
unication
n
m
posium
m
m
ovide to cou
a
l coor
to bring together
co
e
s to all st
gover
D Sym
m
m
to develop a National Ballast
by
king,
Ballast Water Manage
D agenda to suit devel
outco
nal
oved
a
n
s
mposiu
ent state of knowledge,
ountry
p
late and pr
Global R&
p
late to develop National plans
unicate
e
n
t pl
:
4
4.
mm
4.5: Natio
plem
i
ties
r
e
view curr
enhance networ
establish PCU as centr
help shape R&
co
develop tem
use tem
get plans appr
im
D;
Component 4 continued. Activ Activity Hold a Global sy R& · · · · · Activity Assist each pilot c · · · ·
14
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
.
ce
m
y
to
e
sour
lop syste
countr
i
es to r
op costs.
.
y
s
t
ems
y
.
Countr
ter.
t
s
Budget notes:
Fees/travel to deve
10K/site.
Funds for initial training in each
countr
thereaf
20K is available per
initiate this.
Travel and worksh
forcemen
h
e anticipated Convention.
the
s: 120
acts: 20
ent: 60
ent
m
m
n
d
en
Total: 20
Total: 60
o
tal: 180
o
tal: 120
T
stem
T
Total: 50K
S$K)
ple
g a
Contr
quip
sy
E
o
r
k
shop: 50K
adoption of t
W
r
aining costs: 180
i
t
o
r
in
T
after
udget (U
s
B
e
m
ce mon
y
st
s
a
lia,
lian
E
i
es
M
i
c C
,
New
U
t comp
p
ling.
y
.
y
.
Countr
E
i
es advanced in
m
ou
sa
ealand and USA,
with
Partners
I
ndustr
I
ndustr
with relevant
experience Austr
Canada,
Z
Im
Countr
BW
ed to adapt gener
t
o
s
s
i
b
l
e
epar
ent.
m
y
o
t p
op
i
es pr
t
i
e
s
TF
ple
m
i
s
n
ce and suppor
t
es
t
eria:
chase/provide
e
lin
a
nage.
es.
m
ent.
e
sour
id
t.
Pilot countr
m
t.
ocedur
aining
O gu
Success Cri
·
Responsible Par
PCU
Consultant devel
pr
Lead Agency, CP
Suppor
PCU pur
equip
Lead Agency
recruit/designate personnel.
PCU r
tr
Lead Agency i
PCU suppor
PCU with host countr
suppor
M
e
I
e
nt
ent
m
m
use of
ops.
u
n
d
er th
n
dardised
i
cials for
o
nitoring at
s
h
m
off
force
.
r
and
n
g equip
fo
e
nt
m
o
rk
r
y
tio
lin
m
en
p
e
asures
liance
p
nv
m
niques
m
count
s
developed.
ement system.
tech
d enforce
CME syste
ted Co
shop
a
ter sa
stem
in co
o
nitoring and en
the
agement m
each pilot
m
ast w
ticipa
these
Work
ent Sy
O guidelines and other sta
ing international w
for use
n
M
s in
a
c
em
liance,
ling
ent
ent
em
p
p
tries in
m
m
o
nitoring an
m
f
the
m
un
n
for
s of I
m
ersonnel in
o
rds for ball
water man
E
p
quip
e
s,
by organiz
t co
o
n
t
ti
er Sa
t Co
monitoring and enforc
e
n
liance Monitoring and enforcement (CME)
Equip
liance
ilo
p
these
en
m
o
p
standa
p llast
ng
onnel & Training
d
and regions.
i
ng and
Systems.
li
ling e
m
m
Wat
P
p
p
ent CME Syst
ple
a
m
m
r
ation sit
m
m
ries
the
onitor
Sa
o
nst
ple
ational
fter
n
a
ter sa
m
ling equip
m
ce M
ter
p
t
relevant component
w
e
training of
p
e
count
ry CME Pers
e
signate co
de
m
t
e
a
ional Ballast
m
Agency to i
p
lian
the
and I
ch si
t
r
ain GloBallast
ho
m
a
s
t Wa
ll
c
ount
e
rnat
i
n
nt to ada
t at
a
ter sa
t
ea
In-
e
n
w
Adapt
Int
implementation of ba
i
c Co
a
m
to coordinat
e
1
:
Develop generic CME
.
2
:
Ba
3:
4:
m
5:
:
:
ods and
5
y
5.
y
5.
ste
y
5.
and establish inter
entation
uts
Gener
i
ties
Consulta
protocols to develop compliance,
i
ty
Purchase ballast
each site.
Lead agency to d
place
PCU
ballast
Support Lead
sy
e
t
h
m
i
vit
i
vit
i
vit
m
ple
COMPONENT 5: Com Effectiv
c
tivity 5.
Outp
·
Activ
A
·
Activ
·
Act
·
·
Act
·
Act
Review
and
i
m
15
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
r
pilot
e
nt
al level.
ast wate
TFs.
a
nagem
P
eetings
m
e
R
m
e Regional Project Task
s and
re business away from
f
o
ra where the ball
tour
Budget notes:
Travel to initiat
Study
e and activ
to no ballast water
iv
poor
537K
by
e
r controls to lu
in place and functioning at the region
international/IMO
r
avel: 100
o
tal: 100
T
S$K)
T
ion of effect
cies is
ast wat
ts abiding
i
es.
presence in
udget (U
.
Creat
l por
B
to ball
rd
g countr
i
es.
fective
r
e
giona
e
d lead agen
e
s
e
s
ites
ipatin
i
es
i
es
y
th
tic
p
eting
ul and ef
ulated.
m
e
nts in
e
nts in
par
o
rm
e
gional countr
o
rcef
f
inator in rega
r
n
m
n
m
through identifi
esented b
d
the
m
y
other
ste
Partners
Gover
r
e
gional countr
Gover
r
e
gional countr
e
yon
on denom
ed b
increasingly f
m
otected against co
ions sy
i
es
i
es
e pr
ploy
unicat
F Focal
F Focal
e
results b
m
E
E
e
st com
m
m
t
i
e
s
)/G
)/G
co
t
eria:
ation sites ar
e
outputs em
e
regions are an
m
m
ticipating Countr
ticipating Countr
t the low
alized
program
m
onstr
practices.
am
issue is being discussed and policy
throughout each region repr
ate
ogr
Success Cri
Dem
Pr
A form
Progra
Responsible Par
PCU/Par
(Lead Agencies
Points
PCU/Par
(Lead Agencies
Points/Port Officials
a
y adop
plic
re
sub-
efforts to
e
IMO
the regional
in
m
in the region m
al
am
e
gional or
e
nt
e
.
ogr
m
issue.
entation of
six r
am
e
m
i
es,
the experience of the
pl
instrum
r
ogr
i
m
tions capacity at
o
m
p
eting ports
n fr
successes at each demonstration site
s
are
unica
c
o
m
e
plication of pr
k
of the p
mm
e
nt in the
mmunications between RPTF and the
licate
m
ticipating countr
t and lear
ve
ted co
a
sk Force
a
tion on the ballast water
ces
par
t T
r
the wor
er
r
e
la
uppor
e
gional level r
ective co
e
r
x
tent to which
a
sk For
T
)
to s
e
eff
a
tion with
Fs
e e
Projec
t base fo
PT
e
gional coop
oject
R
ts.
i
onal
s
to ensur
ovisions.
ballast water
m
ces (
Reg
results.
of regional level invol
oing,
e
etings and ensur
to reduce th
e
gional suppor
echanis
e
lated pr
Regional Pr
r
i
es and por
Meetings and Study Tours
e of the programme is to rep
m
m
iate and in cooper
F
m
T
F
opr
P
For
R
1
oject Task For
2.
RPT
e
:
eased likelihood of r
onstration site
:
appr
objectiv
eation of a r
eation of
m
eation of an ong
6.
m
uts
Cr
I
n
cr
Cr
de
Facilitated process
ballast water r
Cr
level.
i
ties
am
eate as
ticipating count
c
tivity 6.
ovide for
ogr
COMPONENT 6: Regional Replication A key Forces will help demonstration sites. Outp · · ·
·
·
Activ
Activity
Cr
Regional Pr
par
A
Pr
pr
16
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
of
ies
e
,
n
tr
a
ncing
Regional
ping cou
=
E
the futur
=
M
F
erence.
C
RPT
for self-fin
of develo
the conf
nities
k
.
provisions into
ticipation
y
Focal Point.
nt
e
wor
Budget notes
.
Costs of
dination Unit.
opportu
me
m
8
ge
am
e
e Coor
na
Active par
ogr
m
d secure
r ma
Conf: 6
Total: 68
CFP = Countr
te
ence.
S$K)
g.
o
g
r
a
m
y
an
g
post pr
y
staff tim
Donor
entif
confer
id
l
l
a
st wa
s
identified.
ntinuin
m
Budget (U
I
n
countr
PCU = Pr
e
ness Raisin
ce.
to co
e
is to
m
s.
e
chanis
O)
s at the donor
Awar
M
r
s
.
e
n
t
IMO ba
&
ram
s.
nor
UNDP,
UNDP,
e
m
O,
O,
pl
ent Banks,
ent Banks,
o
ject Task For
nancing m
m
m
ducation
i
ncluding I
y
,
IM
e
gional
y
,
IM
e
gional
o
i
m
r
a
y
of do
n
ational Donor
n
ational dono
E
f
the prog
s (
,
R
,
R
s t
e
sted donor
B
B
e o
nor
ce and fi
oad ar
Partners
I
ndustr
W
Develop
National and
I
n
ter
I
ndustr
W
Develop
National and
I
n
ter
Global Pr
e
ffort
unication,
jectiv
m
m
i
onal
y
resour
p
ecific inter
n of a br
ents of do
GPTF =
itm
ent.
c
ountr
m
F
ticipatio
m
t
i
e
s
PT
wance.
plem
l
a
nd nat
t
eria:
all regions.
. CEAR = Co
y
e
ars, a vital ob
ona
e
nt
gi
o
m
Potential in-
I
d
entification of s
Active par
fr
Specific co
t and im
l
,
re
a
nagem
ies for 4
Success Cri
· ·
·
·
Responsible Par
PCU advise.
Lead Agency/C
suppor
PCU
Subsistence Allo
tr
oba
M
Gl
W
B
Daily
coun
=
e
gional
M
s
and
ating
l,
r
with IMO
nting the
W
ip
to consider
DSA =
-
p
ay
s,
.
B
t
i
o
n of IMO,
ce.
pinpoi
er
nor
a
r
tic
d future ballast
For
e p
i
n
ua
o
r
nationa
and identify
st Water
a
sk
g
basis,
c
ont
o
tential do
ble
ponents an
s in accordance
m
inciples of us
= Balla
oject T
e
nt
W
GEF and th
a
i
na
e identified f
y
Pr
m
e
co
m
B
s
ar
m
g
levies.
m
h
e
sust
range
g
ra
e
d on the pr
s
,
including p
Countr
through
pro
l level on an ongoin
der
echanis
e
nt ar
s
.
Bas
oject Review.
nd for t
m
m
m
CPTF =
a
i
nancing
t fees/shippin
oBallast Advanced concept,
e nationa
urces and Financing rovided
n
cing of
ite Review
a
nage
d F
anis
ent.
por
u
al Pr
nancing
m
ech
m
c
em
i
f
e
-
time
e
levant stakehol
ns.
= Ann
Tripart
s l
e
nts at th
n
for
m
E
=
t
water
e
nts.
y
resources p
ces and
based on the Gl
ng it
e
sourcing an
cing and fi
e
m
r
a
nge
potential for
TPR
i
ng &
etar
f
the programme.
ence of all r
a
ble: APR
(
s).
duri
allast,
a
ncing optio
T
e
sour
equir
i
c sour
e
nt ar
m
onitor
life o
m
mme
e
s
,
consider
confer
:
1
:
National R
2
:
Donor Conference
th
:
a
nage
s
in this
a
sk Force
pay
e
of GloB
cing and fin
m
ond
uts
Potential r
and global ballas
guidelines/r
i
ties
m
ony
p
liance M
m
COMPONENT 7: Reso In addition budg the progra bey
c
tivity 7.
c
tivity 7.
Outp
·
Activ
A
Review the opportunities for self-fina
water
potential econo
polluter
A
Hold Donor
the futur
r
e
sour
Acr
Co
Project T
17
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
REVISED INDICATIVE FOUR YEAR WORKPLAN (January 2002)
2000 2001
J F M A M
J J A
S O
N
D
J F M
A
M
J J A S O N D
PERSONNEL
Chief Technical Advisor
1.A.1
Technical Adviser
1.A.1
Consultancies: Short-term;
1.A.1
Miscellaneous
Consultancies: Info/Comms
1.A.3
Network
Consultancies: Develop Train-
4.2
X methodology
Administrative Assistant
1.A.1
MONITORING AND
EVALUATION
Evaluation: TPR, APR
1.A.5
missions
PCU travel and DSA
1.A.4
Travel to establish RPTFs
6.1
Travel, Donor Conference
7.1
CONTRACTS
Prepare Case Studies
2.3
Develop & implement National
1.B.4
Workplans
Support CPTFs including hiring
1.B.2
of assistants
Programme Identity & CEAR
2.1/2.
Materials + TV Doco.
Implement National Comms
2.5
Workplans
Conduct Risk Assessments
3.1
Coordinate Port Baseline
3.2
Surveys
Conduct Legislation/Regulation
4.3
Reviews
Develop CME Systems
5.1
Implement CME Systems
5.4
In-country CME Personnel &
5..3
Training
BWM Train-X course
4.2
development workshop
Deliver In-country BWM
4.2
Training (Train-X)
MEETINGS
CPTF 1.B.3
GPTF 1.C.1
Country Communication
2.4
Workshops
R&D Symposium
4.6
RPTF and Evaluation
6.2
Donor Conf.
7.2
Int. Port Survey Workshop
3.4
Int. BW Sampling Wkshop.
5.5
EQUIPMENT
Expendable Equipment (PCU)
1.A.2
BW Sampling Equipment
5.2
MISCELLANEOUS
Miscellaneous & Sundries
Reporting Costs
18
Project Implementation Plan (PIP )
2002 2003
2004
J F M A M J J A S O N D J F M
A M
J J A S O
N D
J F M
PERSONNEL
1.A.1
Chief Technical Advisor
1.A.1
Technical Adviser
1.A.1 Consultancies: Short-term;
Miscellaneous
1.A.3 Consultancies:
Info/Comms
Network
4.2 Consultancies:
Develop Train-
X methodology
1.A.1 Administrative
Assistant
MONITORING AND
EVALUATION
1.A.5
Evaluation: TPR, APR
missions
1.A.4
PCU travel and DSA
6.1
Travel to establish RPTFs
7.1
Travel, Donor Conference
CONTRACTS
2.3
Prepare Case Studies
1.B.4 Develop
&
implement National
Workplans
1.B.2
Support CPTFs including hiring
of assistants
2.1/2.
Programme Identity & CEAR
Materials + TV Doco.
2.5
Implement National Comms
Workplans
3.1
Conduct Risk Assessments
3.2
Coordinate Port Baseline
Surveys
4.3 Conduct
Legislation/Regulation
Reviews
5.1
Develop CME Systems
5.4
Implement CME Systems
5..3
In-country CME Personnel &
Training
4.2
BWM Train-X course
development workshop
4.2
Deliver In-country BWM
Training (Train-X)
MEETINGS
1.B.3 CPTF
1.C.1 GPTF
2.4 Country
Communication
Workshops
4.6 R&D
Symposium
6.2
RPTF and Evaluation
7.2 Donor
Conf.
3.4
Int. Port Survey Workshop
5.5
Int. BW Sampling Wkshop.
EQUIPMENT
1.A.2
Expendable Equipment (PCU)
5.2
BW Sampling Equipment
MISCELLANEOUS
Miscellaneous & Sundries
Reporting Costs
19
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
REVISED PROGRAMME BUDGET (US$) (January 2002)
Budget
Description/Activity
Act.
No.
Total 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Line
PERSONNEL
International Experts
11.01
Chief Technical Advisor
1.A.1
600,000
134,484
118,005
150,000
150,000
47,511
11.02
Technical Adviser
1.A.1
IMO
Consultants
11.51
Consultancies: Short-term; Miscellaneous 1.A.1 195,000
37,572
50,407
50,000
50,000
7,021
11.52
Consultancies: Info/Comms Network 1.A.3
150,000
21,344
42,321
43,167
43,167
11.53
Consultancies: Develop BWM Train-X
4.2
50,000
--
50,000
Administrative support personnel
13.01 Administrative
Assistant
1.A.1
214,000
23,904
50,390
60,000 60,000 19,706
Monitoring and evaluation
15.01
Evaluation: TPR, APR missions
1.A.5
80,000
46
22,536
20,000
20,000
17,418
Mission costs
16.01
PCU travel and DSA
1.A.4
200,000
42,867
34,617
45,000
45,000
32,516
16.02
Travel to establish RPTF's
6.1
60,000
27,979
24,288
7,733
0
16.03
Travel, Donor Conference
7.1
0
SUB-TOTAL PERSONNEL
1,549,000
288,196
342,564
425,900 368,167 124,173
CONTRACTS
21.01
Prepare Case Studies (PCU)
2.3
100,000
26,700
73,300
21.01
Prepare Case Studies (Pilot countries)
2.3
2,000
2,000
21.02
Develop & implement National Workplans
1.B.4
688,370
91,918
215,800 241,570 139,082
21.03
Support for CPTFs including hiring assistants 1.B.2
794,000
254,199
250,000 2,500
287,301
21.04
Programme Identity & CEAR Materials 2.1/2.2
116,335
27,264
50,000 25,736 13,335
21.05
Implement National Communication Plans
2.5
517,665
3,009
250,000
250,000
14,656
21.06
Conduct Risk Assessments (PCU)
3.1
265,000
265,000
21.06
Conduct Risk Assessments (Pilot Countries)
3.1
16,000
16,000
21.07
Coordinate Port Surveys (PCU)
3.2
100,000
100,000
21.07
Conduct Port Surveys (Pilot countries)
3.2
391,400
161,461
224,939
5,000
21.08
Conduct Legislation Reviews (PCU)
4.3
30,000
30,000
21.08
Conduct Legislation Reviews (Pilot Countries)
4.3
155,000
344
154,656
21.09
Reprint IMO BWM Guidelines
4.1
22,000
812
21,188
21.10
Develop CME Systems
5.1
20,000
20,000
21.11
Implement CME Systems
5.4
120,000
120,000
21.12
Develop National BWM Plan Template
4.5
10,000
10,000
SUB-TOTAL CONTRACTS COMPONENT
3,347,770
91,918
575,789 1,570,883 654,806 454,374
TRAINING/MEETINGS
32.01
Training
32.02
In-country CME Personnel & Training
5.3
180,000
80,000
100,000
32.03
Course Dev. Workshop BWM Train-X
4.2
70,000
34,285
35,715
32.04
Deliver In-country Training - BWM Train-X
4.2
180,000
29,268
75,000
75,000
732
Meetings
32.05 CPTF
1.B.3
137,230
1,703
7,860
70,000 50,000 7,667
32.06 GPTF
1.C.1
240,000
3,300
108,324
80,000 40,000 8,376
32.07
Country Communication Workshops
2.4
46,000
46,000
32.08
Global R&D Symposium
4.4
60,000
28,361
31,639
32.09
RPTF
6.2
537,000
291,480
101,030
144,490
32.10
Donor Conference (PCU)
7.2
50,000
50,000
32.10
Donor Conference (Pilot Countries)
7.2
18,000
18,000
32.11
Int. Port Survey Workshop
3.4
50,000
50,000
32.12
Int. BW Sampling Workshop
5.5
50,000
50,000
SUB-TOTAL TRAINING/MEETINGS
1,618,230
68,556
224,545
679,834 434,030 211,265
20
Project Implementation Plan (PIP )
Budget
Description/Activity
Act.
No.
Total 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004
Line
EQUIPMENT
41.01
Expendable Equipment (PCU)
1.A.2
50,000
52,664
-2,664
42.01
BW Sampling Equipment
5.2
60,000
4,935
22,151
32,914
SUBTOTAL EQUIPMENT
110,000
57,599
19,487 32,914
MISCELLANEOUS
51.01 Sundries
35,000
229
1,360 10,000 5,000
18,411
52.01
Reporting costs
30,000
322
179
10,000
19,499
53.01
Miscellaneous
30,000
8,377
10,000
10,000
1,623
SUB-TOTAL MISCELLANEOUS
95,000
551
9,916 30,000 15,000
39,533
TOTAL:
6,720,000
506,820 1,172,301 2,739,531 1,472,003
829,345
Executing Agency support 10%
672,000
GRAND TOTAL
7,392,000
21
REVISED BUDGET NOTES (New Budget Lines on right hand side)
Activity 1.A.1: Human Resources
US$1,009,000
Covers salary, benefits, travel for PCU, necessary
administrative/secretarial personnel, and international short-
term consultancies. The CTA absorbs nearly half the amount
in salary and benefits alone.
a)
Salary
for
CTA
US$600,000 11.01
b)
Salary for Administrative Assistant
US$214,000 13.01
c)
Salary and travel for short-term consultants who will assist
the CTA to get the programme off the ground
US$195,000 11.51
Activity 1.A.2: Hardware
US$ 50,000
41.01
Cost of IT equipment, office fittings and supplies, telephones
etc in PCU and field offices.
Activity 1.A.3: Info/Comms Network
US$150,000 11.52
Costs to establish web-site, global information clearing-
house and communication system, including hardware and
contracting in of consultant(s), plus production of quarterly
newsletter and procurement of publications for library
collection.
Activity
1.A.4:
PCU
Travel
US$
200,000
16.01
Airfares, daily subsistence allowance and other travel costs
for PCU travel throughout the programme.
Activity 1.A.5: Programme Evaluation & Review
US$80,000
15.01
Travel and other costs for UNDP, IMO etc for tripartite and
annual programme evaluations and reviews.
Activity 1.B1: Establish Lead Agencies and CFP's
In-country cost
Activity 1.B.2: Support CPTF's and CFP Assistants
US$794,000
21.03
Salary, benefits, travel and other costs for CFP Assistant in
each pilot country at UN local staff level plus general support
CPTF activities.
Activity
1.B.3:
CPTF
Meetings US$137,230
32.05
Funds to support basic meeting costs for CPTFs in each
country, based on US$3,000 per meeting, 10 meetings over 4
years for 6 pilot countries.
Project Implementation Plan (PIP )
Activity 1.B4: Develop & Implement National Workplans
US$688,370
21.02
US$125,000 per country to assist each CPTF in developing
and implementing its National Workplan for the programme.
It should be noted that the National Workplans will be
implementing many of the activities under programme
components 2 to 7, which have separate budgets, so total
resources available for National Workplan implementation
are significantly greater that the funds available under
Activity 1.B.4 alone.
Activity 1.C.1: Global Project Task Force
US$240,000
32.06
Travel, DSA and other costs for holding GPTF meetings,
based on $40,000 per meeting and 1 meeting per year for
three years, plus an additional $120,000 to cover the costs of
Advisory Group or Sub-Committee meetings that may be
required.
Activity
2.1:
Programme
Identity
US$3,000
21.04
Costs of engaging external suppliers to develop programme
logo, stationary and standards for application.
Activity 2.2: Comm, Education and Awareness Raising Materials
US$113,335
21.04
Costs of producing a range of communication, education and
awareness raising materials for use by PCU, IMO and pilot
countries in suitable formats and languages, including
standard slide presentations, brochures, educational posters,
pamphlets and other products. To be developed and
produced professionally using external suppliers but utilising
existing materials from countries that are advanced in this
area.
Activity
2.3:
Case
Studies
US$102,000
21.01
Contract fees for consultant to research and compile case
studies demonstrating the economic, ecological and human
health impacts of ballast water introductions plus costs of
publishing and communicating the case studies to all
stakeholders in the pilot countries.
Activity 2.4: Country Communication Workshops
US$46,000
32.07
$20,000 per country to hold national workshops to develop
National Communication Workplans, including in-country
strategies and activities for education and awareness raising
and public participation.
Activity 2.5: Implement National Communication Workplans
US$517,665
21.05
Approximately $86,,000 per country to assist with
implementing the workplans developed from activity 2.4.
23
Project Implementation Plan (PIP)
Activity 3.1: Ballast Water Risk Assessment
US$281,000
21.06
Consultancy fees and costs to undertake a ballast water risk
assessment for each demonstration site ($50,000 per port).
Each CPTF to support this task through provision of data and
information.
Activity
3.2:
Port
Baseline
Surveys
US$491,400
21.07
$100,000 consultancy fees and costs to design and coordinate
the surveys and provide in-country training. $391,400 to
support in-
country marine science community to undertake biota
surveys at each demonstration site.
Activity 3.3: International Port Survey Workshop.
US$50,000
32.11
Workshop costs.
Activity 3.3. Information Gap Filling
No explicit cost.
Most activities under the programme will identify
information gaps as a matter of course and the PCU with
support from the CPTFs will undertake ongoing review of all
activities to ascertain these and define activities needed to fill
these gaps.
Activity 4.1: Translate/Disseminate IMO Guidelines
US$22,000
21.09
The major focus of the programme is on assisting the pilot
countries to implement the IMO ballast water management
guidelines. In order to do this, the guidelines must be made
widely available. Costs of translating the guidelines and
distributing them.
Activity 4.2: BWM Education and Training Packages
US$300,000
It is necessary to train Lead Agency, port and shipping
personnel in each pilot country in ballast water management,
consistent with the IMO guidelines. This training has three
components:
Consultant to develop generic package, using TRAIN-X methodology: $50,000
11.53
Hold workshop to finalise course package:
$70,000
32.03
Deliver initial training course in each country and validate:
$180,000
32.04
Ongoing training to be in-country responsibility.
Activity 4.3: Legislation and Regulations
US$185,000
21.08
$25,000 per country for in-country consultants/institutions to review all
existing national and local legislation and regulations relating to ballast
water and recommend any changes required to mandate national ballast
water management arrangements developed under the programme.
$30,000 for expert advice and coordination on contract to PCU.
24
Project Implementation Plan (PIP )
Activity
4.4:
Global
R&D
Symposium
US$60,000
32.08
Costs of holding the symposium, inc. travel and DSA.
Activity
5.1:
Develop
CME
Systems
US$20,000
21.10
Consultant fees and costs to adapt relevant components of
IMO guidelines and other standard protocols to develop
compliance monitoring and enforcement (CME) generic
system.
Activity 5.2: Ballast Water Sampling Equipment
US$60,000
42.01
$10,000 per country to purchase standard ballast water
sampling equipment for use in CME activities.
Activity 5.3: In-Country CME Personnel and Training
US$180,000
32.02
To train CME personnel designated by Lead Agency/port
authorities in CME procedures and use of BW sampling
equipment.
Activity
5.4:
Implement
CME
Systems US$120,000
21.11
$20,000 per country to assist with implementing CME systems.
Activity 5.5: International Ballast Water Sampling Workshop
US$50,000
32.12
Workshop costs to review and establish standards fro BW
sampling equipment and methods and train GloBallast Pilot
Countries.
Activity 6.1: Form Regional Project Task Forces
US$60,000
16.02
Travel to establish RPTFs.
Activity 6.2: RPTF Meetings and Study Tours
US$537,000
32.09
Travel and other costs to hold RPTF meetings and for study
tours by personnel from neighbouring countries to the initial
demonstration sites.
Activity 7.2: Donor Conference US$68,000
32.10
Travel and other costs to hold conference.
25
Appendix 4:
Introductory Presentation
Agenda Item 4
Appendix 4: Introductory Presentation Agenda Item 4 )
GloBallast Programme
Ballast Water Risk Assessment
Risk = Type of Hazard x Chance (probability) of Occurrence
Activity 3.1
· To Define the Hazard --> Define the "End Point"...
- Discharge of BW containing viable (undamaged)
BALLAST WATER
organisms of any Non-Indigenous Species (NIS)...?
RISK ASSESSMENT
- Discharge of BW containing viable (undamaged)
NIS recognised as a potential pest ('Risk Species') or
Six Demonstration Sites
already known/declared a pest ('Target Species')...?
- Establishment of a local population of any NIS...?
- Establishment of a local population of any unwanted Risk
Project Consultant Manager: Dr Rob Hilliard
or Targeted Species...?
- A new NIS population actually causes an unacceptable
ecological, fishery or health impact and economic loss...?
Risk = Defined Hazard x Chance (probability) of it Occurring
Ballast Water Risk Assessment
· For the GloBallast 'First Pass' Risk Assessment,
the defined Hazard (= `End Point') is the:
Risk = Type of Hazard x Chance (probability) of it Occurring
· Determining the Chance of the defined Hazard
"Discharge of BW likely to contain viable (undamaged) life
occurring...
stages of at least one NIS that is considered a High Risk*
Species"
- For transfer of a High Risk species into a port, the
chance of establishment increases with:
* = a species considered capable of establishing a new
population at the port, with suspected or known `pest' and
- frequency of BW discharges sourced from ports in
`nuisance' credentials.
regions containing High Risk species;
[for some demonstration sites, the list of `High Risk'
- number of organisms per discharge, i.e. those
species will include taxa already being specifically
surviving BW uptake and tank confinement
'targeted' by some nations - e.g. Zebra mussel;
(depends on voyage length, tank size/locations, BW
Memniopsis comb jelly, some toxic dinoflagellates, etc]
exchange effectiveness, etc)
Types of BW Risk Assessment
- the Chance for these organisms to subsequently
establish a population and cause an impact,
· Qualitative Risk Identification ('low', 'medium',
also requires:
'high'). Based on subjective parameters drawn from
previous experience, scientific opinion, 'expert' inputs, etc.
- similar environmental conditions permitting survival,
growth, reproduction and successful recruitments.
· Semi-Quantitative Ranking of Risk (to minimise
-
subjectivity wherever possible; such as including a
an ability to increase in numbers, occupy habitats and
multivariate Environmental Similarity Analysis).
overcome / displace the native biota and
communities;
· Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA). For BWRA
- an ability to cause unacceptable changes and losses.
this requires emerging procedures requiring 'Target'
species, large amounts of data collation, and evaluation
and input of all uncertainties.
Four Objectives of the GloBallast
'First Pass' Risk Assessment
4) Providing information allowing the Pilot
Country to decide on the need and value of
adopting either:
1) Identify the trading routes and vessel types that
represent the Highest Risk of Introducing a Pest;
- a 'blanket' approach to BW management; or
2) Training and familiarisation In Risk Assessment
- a vessel/voyage specific and 'target species'
terminology, approach and methods;
approach.
3) Providing a 'Demonstration Tool' that allows each
NB. The 2nd approach is expensive to set up and
Pilot Country to undertake further risk
operate. Its effectiveness also needs to be proven
assessments in future, including for other ports in
(e.g. how to deal with a non-targeted, `surprise'
their country and region;
pest?). However the targeted approach does offer
potential long term cost savings in BW monitoring
and...
and management.
1
3rd Global Project Task Force (GPTF) Meeting Proceedings: Goa - India, 16-18 January 2002
Three Components Required for the
2) Determine the presence of High Risk species at
GloBallast First-Pass Risk Assessment
the source ports (or in the bioregion of the port if
there is inadequate port information).
1) Determine the 'Inoculation' Potential;
3) Determine the Environmental Similarity of the
· Sources, frequencies and quantities of BW
receival and donor ports (by multivariate
discharges;
analysis).
· Optional: Evaluate conditions affecting survival
of organisms during voyage:
- voyage duration and route,
Use the above information to identify the relative
- tank size and location,
risks for each port (with respect to each of its
- was BW exchanged?
main BW donor and destination ports)
- was BW treated?
Six Main Activities for achieving
the First-Pass Risk Assessment:
3) Collate the environmental data (10-15 parameters)
1) Establish GIS system and map the port's facilities,
for the port and each of its main source and
local marine habitats and resources, to show the
destination ports, for input to PRIMER database;
port's deballasting/ballasting patterns.
[use MS Excel]
= PCU ToR Task 6
[use ESRI Arcview 3.2] = PCU ToR Tasks 1,2
4) Undertake the Environmental Similarity Analysis
2) Establish a computer database that contains the
(by multivariate technique); then:
port's shipping and BW data (from the IMO BW
[use Primer 5.2.8]
= PCU ToR Task 7
Reporting Form plus port records), to use for
identifying the port's main BW Source Ports and
the BW Destination Ports.
[use MS Access 2000] = PCU ToR Tasks 2,3,4,5
Records, Raw Data
Computer Database
Input/edit
MS Access
Shipping Records
Interface
Ship & BW
5) Collate risk species distribution data and add to a
IMO BW Forms
GUI
Source File
RESULTS
world IUCN bioregion map on the GIS
Primer
Displayed on:
[with CSIRO input]
= PCU ToR Task 8
Port environmental
Multivariate
parameters
Risk
Port Map
Similarity
then:
Analysis
Coeficients
File
Risk species
distribution data
Digitise
6) Use the GIS to undertake and display the Risk
IUCN;
Bioregion
Maps
Map
Assessment, using the results from Activities 1-5.
Two
GUI
= PCU ToR Task 9
Map
Port charts, habitat
GUI
Files
maps, resources data
Output/Results/
Demo Interface
Digitise
Arcview 3.2 GIS
THE BWRA "COMPUTER ENGINE"
2nd Visit: (10 work days per port):
1st Visit (5 work days at each port):
Complete digitising of port map; install bioregional
map on GIS; add risk species to GIS database;
perform Environmental Similarity Analysis;
Install & check computer software; digitise port
undertake Risk Assessment; Evaluate Results;
map (as much as possible); review all relevant
Reporting.
data and databases; set up BWRF database;
identify information gaps and work required.
`Hands-on' use and training for the country's
BWRA team will be undertaken for all
activities during both visits.
It is hoped that a Reporting Workshop can be held in
Fremantle [Australia] for 3 reps from each Demo Site to
share, compare & debrief results and recommendations...
2
Global Pr
oject T
Global Ballast Water
Management Programme
ask For
ce (GPTF)
Third Meeting
Global Project Task Force (GPTF)
Third Meeting
Proceedings
GOA, INDIA, 16-18 JAN 2002
Proceedings
.dwa.uk.com
Global Ballast Water
Management Programme
More Information?
el (+44) 020 7928 5888 www
Programme Coordination Unit
Global Ballast Water Management Programme
International Maritime Organization
4 Albert Embankment
London SE1 7SR United Kingdom
Tel: +44 (0)20 7587 3247 or 3251
est & Associates, London. T
Fax: +44 (0)20 7587 3261
Web: http://globallast.imo.org
A cooperative initiative of the Global Environment Facility,
United Nations Development Programme and International Maritime Organization.
Cover designed by Daniel W