Statement of G. Tracy Mehan, III
Assistant Administrator for Water
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Before the Subcommittee on Fisheries, Wildlife and
Water
Senate Committee on Environment and Public Works
June 17, 2003
Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the
Committee. I am Tracy Mehan, Assistant
Administrator for Water at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). I appreciate and welcome this opportunity to
discuss the provisions of S. 525, and to consider the continuing challenges
ahead to protect water quality, human health and the environment against
invasive species.
INTRODUCTION
The Environmental Protection Agency shares the
Subcommittee’s concerns about protecting the Nation’s waters against invasive
species. We commend the Subcommittee
and others for bringing attention to the problems and threats created by
invasive species. As you may know, I came
to EPA from Michigan, the Great Lakes State, where interactions among over 160
known aquatic invaders have severely affected the local ecosystem
structure. Introductions can create new
competition, change trophic levels, alter habitat and impact species interaction. Invasive species have become one of the
greatest threats to U.S. waters and ecosystems. In fact, invasive species are regarded by biologists worldwide as
the second greatest threat to biodiversity, behind habitat loss. Invasive species are also a costly economic
problem, causing the United States billions of dollars worth of damage each
year.
The complexity of the freshwater, estuarine and marine
ecosystems, combined with the increased rate of unwanted introductions and more
susceptible environments, contributes to making invasive species a major
challenge in U.S. waters. Invasive
species can successfully invade aquatic ecosystems through a wide variety of
pathways, including but not limited to vessel activities, aquaculture, aquarium
trade, fish stocking, live bait, and research activities.
Most recently, vessels have been the major focus for
invasive species issues. As ballast
water is drawn into a ship, living organisms are removed from their native
water environment and brought on board the vessel. Then these organisms may be discharged into a new
environment. Survival in a new
environment is based on a number of physical, chemical and biological factors,
such as temperature, salinity, and the presence of other organisms that might
prey upon the invaders. Advanced ship
technology is also playing a role in invasive species survival by allowing
ships, and any hitch-hiking organisms, to travel faster and farther. It is estimated that more than 10,000 marine
species (e.g., zebra mussel, Asian clam, green crab) are transported each day
in ballast water, allowing new invasions to occur regularly in coastal
waters.
Other vessel vectors that are of great importance are
hull fouling, i.e., organisms attached to the hull, and No Ballast on Board or
(NOBOB) vessels. NOBOB vessels contain
sediments and water slurry that is unpumpable and may get resuspended and
discharged. Studies indicate that NOBOB vessels can carry viable organisms in
the sediment and residual ballast water, creating additional opportunities for
the establishment of invasive species.
Over the past 9 years, approximately 85 % of all ships entering the
Great Lakes via the St. Lawrence Seaway have been NOBOB vessels. The remaining 15% of the vessels entering
the Great lakes were required to perform ballast water management. However, the Great Lakes are still being
invaded by non-indigenous species, at an average of one invader every eight
months. Approximately fifteen new
species have invaded the Great Lakes since mid oceanic exchange of ballast
water was mandated in 1993. This is the
same number of invasions that occurred during the 1970s and 1980s, indicating
that current ballast water management efforts are not completely effective. Overall, the current rate of invasions in
the Great Lakes is 66 percent higher than one hundred years ago.
The impacts of invasive species are immediate and
often irreversible. If left unchecked,
the number, density, and rates of species transfers are expected to increase,
and along with them, impacts on our ecosystem, socio-economic well-being, and
human health. Prevention, reduction,
and eradication are all integral parts of dealing with invasive species. Prevention is critical to success, as once
invasive species have become established, eradication is often not an
available or successful tool.
In order to be most effective, we need an integrated national
response. We need management programs,
including regulatory and non-regulatory approaches, rapid response efforts,
early-warning systems, development of control technologies, research,
monitoring and education. Aggressive
efforts are vital, otherwise introductions will continue to destroy our native
environments and our coastal resources.
EPA ACTIVITIES
Faced with the scope and magnitude of this threat, our
collective efforts to develop policies, conduct research and make programmatic
decisions, informed by rigorous scientific and technical studies, are
crucial. The control of invasive species
is important to EPA, and we look to our partners in the U.S. Coast Guard, other
Federal agencies, States and Tribes, and the port and shipping industries to
move expeditiously to help us meet this major challenge to the health of our
nation’s coastal and ocean resources.
We look forward to expanding our partnerships as we make progress
against these invaders.
EPA continues to work with the Aquatic Nuisance
Species Task Force, chaired by U.S. National Ocean and Atmospheric Agency
(NOAA) and U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS), and the National Invasive
Species Council on issues ranging from the national and international control
of ballast water discharges to the regional management and control of
individual invasive species. As a member of the U.S. delegation on the
Marine Environment Protection Committee to the International Maritime
Organization, EPA is helping to negotiate an international ballast water treaty
and standard to address ballast water discharges from ocean-going vessels.
EPA is also assisting the Coast Guard in the
development of mandatory ballast water management regulations and in the
development of standards for ballast water discharge. These regulations are vital to our ongoing efforts to prevent
invasions from ballast water discharges.
EPA has helped to prepare the environmental analysis for the management
rule, and we will be assisting in the development of the EIS for the standards
rule. This spirit of cooperation is not
only mutually beneficial to our agencies, it enhances our ability to address
this difficult problem.
EPA’s Office of Research and Development (ORD), in
partnership with other agencies and organizations, is involved with numerous
invasive species research activities, including developing models which could
help to identify which ecosystems are more susceptible to invasions. These models are being developed to identify
the multiple stressors on a particular ecosystem that could increase its
vulnerability.
The Environmental Technology Verification (ETV)
Program is another example of our cooperative efforts with Coast Guard and the
private sector. The Coast Guard is
interested in developing testing protocols to support its efforts to establish
treatment standards and the certification of ballast water treatment
systems. Such treatment systems may
allow for safer alternatives to the current practice of open ballast
exchange. The ETV Program will test new
ballast water treatment and management technologies as they become available in
the market. This EPA program was
created as a means to accelerate the acceptance of new environmental
technologies in the marketplace through the independent verification of vendor
performance claims of any treatment system for any discharge of concern.
EPA also has developed partnerships for continued research
and action regarding invasive species.
The partnerships involve State and local resource management agencies,
non-profits, the National Estuary Program (NEP), and universities. The NEPs, in particular, have numerous
activities that play a key role in targeting many of the challenges from
invasive species. NEPs have established
partnerships in education and outreach, and have contributed to the development
of rapid assessments and baseline inventories for invasive species. NEPs also have played an integral role in
developing model monitoring and rapid response programs for invasive
species. EPA has used Clean Water Act
Funding for these and other activities that address invasive species. We believe this is consistent with Section
101 (a) of that Act, which states, “The objective of this chapter is to restore
and maintain the chemical, physical, and biological integrity of the Nation’s
waters.”
Partnerships and collaborative efforts are key to
combating invasive species. I am encouraged
by the multi-faceted opportunities for partnerships that we have within EPA,
among Federal agencies, with the States and Tribes, and with multiple industry
and community representatives.
S. 525
The bill under consideration by this Subcommittee
introduces many actions intended to help address the issue of invasive
species. For example, the bill
addresses the risk of invasion through vectors other than ballast water. The bill also acknowledges EPA’s expertise
and involvement in responding to the challenge.
The goals and concepts behind the actions set forth in
S. 525 are beneficial to combating invasive species. However, the time lines and authorizations provided are of
significant concern. An average rule
can take 4 to 7 years to complete and that does not take into account the
complexity of the invasive species issue.
The bill introduces many actions in addition to the new
regulations. If possible, the actions
should be prioritized to appropriately use the authorized funding in the bill. As the bill stands now, it will be difficult
to complete all of the actions, without at least full appropriation of the
authorized funding.
The bill appears to identify many of the same actions
for a number of different agencies.
Although agencies need to work together to combat the issues of invasive
species, different agencies should have different responsibilities so as not to
duplicate work efforts. In addition to
the duplicative work efforts, it is difficult to determine which agency has the
primary role in some of the actions.
The bill provides for sediment management in
transoceanic vessels to be included as a best management practice. The bill also recognizes the importance of
addressing potential introductions of invasive species from no-ballast-on-board
(NOBOB) vessels, particularly in light of the volume of such vessels in the
Great Lakes.
The bill also addresses the issues of ballast water
standards. Specifically, it sets an
interim standard of 95 percent removal, which we believe raises a number of
technical issues. Removal relies on
laboratory testing which raises technology maintenance and durability
issues. Percent removal also does not
adequately address large volume discharges, because discharging 5 percent of a
tanker ship’s volume could still release millions of organisms per liter. We believe that the standards should be
based on concentration and size of organism, similar to discussions with the
international community. Having an
interim and a final standard could have the unintended effects of stalling
development of a final standard or misdirecting technology development away
from more environmentally protective approaches. EPA is also concerned that the Bill identifies and designates
both EPA and the Coast Guard as regulating authorities, one for each
standard. EPA and the Coast Guard would
like the opportunity to work further with the Subcommittee in order to clarify
specific agency roles, and define a
more appropriate schedule, and discuss the need for an interim standard. We would also be happy to provide further
technical assistance on this bill. We
also note that new spending authorized by this bill that is not currently
included in the President’s Budget, and as such, these actions must be
considered within existing priorities.
CONCLUSION
Tremendous progress
has been made by EPA and our many Federal, State, Tribal, local, and
private partners in cleaning up our waters over the last decade. EPA’s experience in addressing difficult
issues regarding the health of our environment can help us protect them from
these harmful invaders. We at EPA
appreciate your support and commitment to these vital goals, and look forward
to continuing a collaborative effort to protect and restore our Nation’s
waters.
This concludes my prepared remarks. I would be happy to address any questions you may have at this time.