Ballast Water and the Columbia River:
Patterns and Reporting Compliance
Christina Simkanin and Mark Sytsma
Aquatic Bioinvasion Research and Policy Institute
• Five Major Ports
• Receives ≈ 1,700 arrivals a year
Portland 59%
Vancouver 16%
Longview 12%
Kalama 8%
Astoria 4%
Other 1%
Vessel Arrivals Statistics
• 51% from Domestic Ports
• 49% from Foreign Ports
• Majority of arrivals are Bulk Carriers
Vessel Type
Percentage
of Arrivals
Bulk Carrier
Vehicle Carrier
Barge
Container
General Cargo
Tanker
Other
47
13
13
10
8
7
2
Percentage of
Total BW
Discharge
80
1
1
7
9
1
0
• Discharge ≈ 6,300,000 m3 a year
• 22% of discharge from Domestic Ports
• 78% of discharge from Foreign Ports
Vessel Arrivals – last-port-of-call
Arrivals from: 3 oceans, 6 continents, 366 ports, 66 countries
From Dr. Ian Davidson, ABRPI
Salinity of Ballast Water Source Port
Riverine
4.30%
Unknown
2.99%
Estuarine
19.60%
Marine
73.11%
Figure from Noble et al., 2006
Unexchanged Ballast Water Discharge
• 91% of BW discharged is exchanged
• ≈ 567,000 m3 of unexchanged water a year
Required to Exchange
35%
CA
27%
Other
8%
Not Required to Exchange
65%
Lower Columbia River Survey
• 81 organisms introduced to the LCR since mid 1800’s
BW: 29 Invertebrates,
1 Aquatic Plant
HF: 8 Invertebrates
From Sytsma et al., 2004
Columbia River BW Regulations:
Management and Reporting
National Invasive Species Act:
Mandates Voluntary National BW
Program for Foreign arrivals
1996
97
98
99
2000
01
02
03
04
05
06
Columbia River BW Regulations:
Management and Reporting
National BW Program Established:
Exchange and Reporting Required for
Foreign Arrivals
1996
97
98
99
2000
01
02
03
04
05
06
Columbia River BW Regulations:
Management and Reporting
Washington Ballast Water Program:
Mandatory Exchange and Reporting for
Foreign and Domestic Vessels (exchange
exemption South of 50˚N to CR)
1996
97
98
99
2000
01
02
03
04
05
06
Columbia River BW Regulations:
Management and Reporting
Oregon Ballast Water Program:
Mandatory Exchange and Reporting for
Foreign and Domestic Arrivals (exchange
exemption between 40˚N - 50˚N)
1996
97
98
99
2000
01
02
03
04
05
06
Columbia River BW Regulations:
Management and Reporting
USCG Mandatory BW Program: Fines for
non-compliance, reporting for Foreign
and Domestic arrivals- Exchange for
Foreign arrivals only
1996
97
98
99
2000
01
02
03
04
05
06
Reporting Requirements for CR Arrivals
Foreign Arrivals Arrivals
Domestic/Coastal
USCG Regulations
• 24 hrs. advance of arrival
• USCG reporting form:
electronic/hardcopy
• National Ballast Information
Clearinghouse (NBIC)
OR-WA Regulations
• 24 hrs. advance of arrival
• USCG reporting form: hardcopy
• Merchants Exchange of Portland (PdxMex)
Figure from Ruiz et al., 2001
Ballast Water Management Reports
• Vessels submit BW Reports to the NBIC
and PdxMex
• NBIC receives, processes, and analyzes
National Ballast Water data.
• PdxMex reports are forwarded to State
Agencies: WDFW and ODEQ. Data is
entered and analyzed by WDFW and PSU
• Redundancy through duplication of effort
between the Federal and State Programs
Reporting Pilot Project
Aim: To demonstrate that through Federal and
State collaboration it’s possible to increase
the quantity and quality of ballast water
data received, and reduce the duplication
of effort thereby increasing efficiency.
• Utilize the already developed and standardized federal
data management program (NBIC)
• Utilize a regional contact (PSU) to follow-up on missing
or erroneous reports and inform vessels/agents on
reporting requirements.
• Quantify the differences in compliance rates between the
federal and state programs.
Columbia River Reporting Rates:
Local/State Level
Data Collection
• BW Reports from PdxMex
• Vessel arrivals database
• Agent Contact
• Record Keeping
• Quality Control
*Keep in mind that this data includes all of the ports on the
Columbia River, does not include Barges, and all state data
before 2005 was collected by the WDFW.
Increasing the Quantity of Data
Reporting Compliance/State Level
Percentage
Percentage
Arrivals Submitting Reports
Arrivals Not Submitting Reports
100
100
90
90
80
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
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 A M J J A S O N D J F M
2003
2003
2004
2004
2005
2005
Pilot Project
2006
2006
Increasing the Quality of Data
Reporting Compliance/State Level
Submitted
No Report
Late/Incomplete
100
100%
Percentage
90
80
80%
70
60
60%
50
40%
40
30
20%
20
10
0%
0
J JF FMMA AM MJ JJ JA AS SOON ND DJ JF FMMA AM MJ JJ JA AS SO ONND DJ JF FM MA AMMJ JJ JA AS SOON ND DJ JF FMM
2003
2003
2004
2004
2005
2005
Pilot Project
2006
2006
Effect of Local Follow-up with Agents
Submitted Before
Agent Contact
Submitted After
Agent Contact
Not Submitted
100%
90%
80%
70%
60%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Feb
Mar April May June July
2005
Aug Sept
Oct
Nov
Dec
Jan
Feb
2006
Mar
Columbia River Reporting Rates:
Federal Level
Daily Monitoring of Compliance:
• Hardcopy Reports: Faxed
• Web interface: Electronic Reporting
• Currently vessels which do not report Federally are not
contacted by the NBIC or PSU.
• Federal legislation requires that BW data is collected
from ships, or their agents, reporting directly to the NBIC
and not via an intermediary.
• Agents contacted for local follow-up are reminded of
Federal reporting requirements.
Web-Based System for Viewing
Electronic Submissions to the NBIC
Reducing Duplication:
Increasing Data Efficiency
Monthly Analysis of Compliance:
• Comparison of reports received by the State and the NBIC
• NBIC sends PSU monthly data records of the reports
received, which are downloaded into a PSU database
• Data not contained in these data records i.e. vessels which
reported to the state but not the NBIC (includes data gained
through local follow-up) are manually entered by PSU staff.
Federal - State Comparison
Federal
State
State w/follow-up
100
Percentage
80
60
40
20
0
J F MAM J J A S ON D J F MAM J J AS ON D J F MAM J J A S OND J F M
2003
2004
2005
Pilot Project Began Contacting
USCG
Increases
Penalties,
Agents
for Follow-up
Establishes coastal reporting
2006
Federal - State Comparison: Increased
Data Quality through Local Follow-up
Total Ballast Water Discharged (m3) in the
Columbia River Using Three Data Sources
2005
Jan.-June
July-Dec.
Year
a Federal
2,585,583
3,394,478
5,980,061
b State before follow-up
3,439,860
4,297,677
7,737,537
c State after follow-up
3,892,077
4,636,237
8,528,314
Percent change from a to b
(+) 33%
(+) 27%
(+) 29%
Percent change from a to c
(+) 51%
(+) 37%
(+) 43%
Results Summary:
Collaboration between the State and Federal
programs can lead to:
• Increased quantity and quality of reports/data
• Increased reporting compliance over time:
State level: YES
Federal level: ?
• Increased data efficiency
These results demonstrate the value of local/regional
follow-up to BW data quality; and by decreasing the
duplication of effort more time is available for analysis
and dissemination of results.
Conclusion
•The Columbia River now has one of the most
complete ballast water databases in the world
(95% of vessels reporting in 2005).
•Adds to the success of the other ballast water
programs on the West Coast:
•California in 2004, 97% of vessels reporting
(Faulkner et al., 2005).
•Washington, Puget Sound and WA Coastal
ports, in 2005, 88% of vessels reporting (WDFW,
2006).
For support and collaboration we thank:
This project is funded by the Pacific States Marine
Fisheries Commission. Assistance and cooperation
has been granted by the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality, The Merchants Exchange of
Portland, and the Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife.
For support and collaboration we thank:
This project is funded by the Pacific States Marine
Fisheries Commission. Assistance and cooperation
has been granted by the Oregon Department of
Environmental Quality, The Merchants Exchange of
Portland, and the Washington Department of Fish
and Wildlife.
Reducing Duplication:
Increasing Data Efficiency
Federal Compliance
Report Submitted
Reports Entered Manually
into database
100100
90 90
80 80
Percentage
Percentage
70 70
60 60
50 50
40 40
30 30
20 20
10 10
2004
2004
2004
2004
2005
2005
Aug
Aug
Sep
Sep
Oct
Oct
Nov
Nov
Dec
Dec
Jan
Jan
Feb
Feb
Mar
Mar
0
Jan
Jan
Feb
Feb
Mar
Mar
Apr
Apr
May
May
Jun
Jun
Jul
Jul
Aug
Aug
Sep
Sep
Oct
Oct
Nov
Nov
Dec
Dec
Jan
Jan
Feb
Feb
Mar
Mar
Apr
Apr
May
May
Jun
Jun
Jul
Jul
0
2006
2006