Sloppy mess faces owners

Ship operators are increasingly seen as a prime target for tough environmental regulations, especially in the USA. One particular challenge is the demand to segregate out hazardous wastes. Unfortunately such actions depend on the definition of hazardous waste, and this is impacting on operations, especially those of cruise ships.

While some waste products, such as chemicals from dry cleaning plants, have long been recognised as hazardous, whether other products fall into the same category is not always clear. To overcome this aspect, the definition of hazardous waste is constantly being widened, causing additional difficulties and costs for ship owners. Remarks Florida?s environmental department: Hazardous waste is usually anything that is flammable, corrosive or toxic but it usually also includes solvents and oils, and may include other substances. Notes NCL: Virtually everything these days can be defined as hazardous waste with all the implications that has for our operations.

It is also part of the philosophy in the USA that companies disposing of hazardous wastes ashore are responsible for them for the rest of their life. According to the Florida State Environmental Board this simply allows the Federal Government to trace any company which has had hazardous waste material disposed of in the USA. Under the regulations even if material is properly disposed of by a qualified company in an authorised landfill or other site, any subsequent pollution that can be traced to the originator – regardless of the elapsed time – makes that company liable.

Another aspect that is causing concern is the various environmental regimes affecting operations in US waters. In theory the US Coast Guard is responsible for policing pollution incidents at sea, while the Environmental Protection Agency has federal responsibility for all regulations in the USA. The next regulatory level is that of the individual state, each of which has its own department or board. In addition to that, individual ports may also have views on matters of waste disposal.

Shipowners feel that this is a source of confusion and irritation. Comments P&O/Princess Cruises: It is getting harder and harder, with California?s regulations far tougher than elsewhere. NCL believes there is an overlap between the authority of the federal EPA and the various state environmental departments. From its perspective it would prefer all environmental regulations relating to international ship operations to be co-ordinated by the EPA. However, Florida?s environmental department argues that this is already the case. Notes the department: We don?t do what the EPA says, but it is their show and they control the regulations.

Unfortunately, this is true. While the EPA does have an overview – and there is sufficient room to argue about the clarity of its regulations – each state makes its own environmental legislation which cannot be less onerous than the federal requirements. Herein lies the problem, since the USA is founded on the proud principle of each state?s independence. Every state gives environmental regulations a different slant and priority to suit its own needs. The result is a confusing patchwork that challenges any shipowner, especially if they wish to visit different ports.