Overlapping Maritime Enforcement Jurisdictions May Cause Confusion for Shippers

In particular, the EPA and Coast Guard have some conflicting jurisdictions.

Overlapping jurisdictions in enforcing environmental regulations in the U.S. means that ships looking to comply may face a complicated set or requirements, according to the Swedish P&I Club. 

"Because of the USA's geographic expanse, and its multiple governmental entities' concurrent or overlapping jurisdiction in maritime and environmental matters, it is impossible to concisely summarize the various laws and regulations that impact a ship in USA waters," said David J. Farrell, Jr, admiralty attorney with Farrell McAleer & Smith LLP.

Both the U.S. Coast Guard and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) are tasked with enforcing regulations, but the latter's emphasis on violation enforcement means that the EPA can often come down harder on non-compliance on a case-by-case basis, Farrell said. 

"While the U.S. Coast Guard is able to recognize the importance of maritime commerce as part of its broad mission, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's narrower focus on the environment alone can result in harsh treatment of commercial violators – including ships," he said. 

Both agencies also have regulations regarding ballast water treatment, with requirements that often overlap and result in inefficiencies, Farrell said.

On top of that, 25 states in the U.S.currently have individual restrictions regarding ballast water, which Farrell expects will confuse ships even further. 

Instead, he suggests that one uniform national framework regarding ballast water would be the best solution, adding that the U.S. domestic shipping industry is currently lobbying Congress to make such changes a reality.

Early this year, it was reported that the EPA had increased its maximum fine for Emission Control Area (ECA) non-compliance to $25,000 per violation, per day.