MI Ballast Water Statute Upheld

Tuesday, November 25, 2008

The US Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit has upheld the permit requirement of the Michigan Ballast Water Statute as a valid exercise of state authority.

Plaintiff ship owners, shipping associations, port terminal, and port association had challenged the permit requirement and treatment system requirement of the state statute, asserting that they were preempted by federal law and violated the United States Constitution. The federal district court disagreed with these contentions and dismissed plaintiff’s complaint. Plaintiff’s appealed. The appellate court looked first at the standing of each of the plaintiffs. It recognized that the ship owners and shipping associations were directly impacted by the state law, but found that the other plaintiffs were not affected and thus lacked standing to challenge the law.

The court then examined the pleadings and found them wanting as to the challenge against the treatment system requirement. This requirement provides that each ship that intends to discharge ballast water during port operations in the state must treat its ballast water with an approved system prior to such discharge. In the pleadings, though, plaintiffs never alleged that any of their vessels would discharge ballast water into waters of the state of Michigan. Therefore, the court found that the plaintiff ship owners and shipping associations lacked standing to challenge the treatment system requirement because their vessels would not be covered by its provisions.

Finally, the court held that the state permit requirement was not preempted by federal law and that the state requirement was not barred by the US Constitution. The court noted that the state permit requirement was not onerous, requiring only the payment of $225 in fees and completion of several forms. In this circumstance, a state statute that is not preempted by federal law need only be rationally related to a legitimate government purpose; it need not provide a perfect solution. Fednav, Limited v. Chester, No.07-2083 (6th Cir., November 21, 2008).

(Source: Holland & Knight)

Maritime Reporter June 2015 Digital Edition
FREE Maritime Reporter Subscription
Latest Maritime News    rss feeds

Legal

New Binding Law of The Sea Agreement Advanced

WOC Sustainable Ocean Summit (Singapore, 9-11 November 2015) Will Enable Industry to Organize its Input to this Major New Ocean Treaty Development The U.N.

Oceans Can’t Take Any more: Researchers Fear Fundamental Change

Our oceans need an immediate and substantial reduction of anthropogenic greenhouse gas emissions. If that doesn’t happen, we could see far-reaching and largely

Teekay LNG Partners Declares Distribution

Teekay GP LLC, the general partner of Teekay LNG Partners L.P. has declared a cash distribution of $0.70 per unit for the quarter ended June 30, 2015. The cash distribution is payable on August 14,

 
 
Maritime Security Maritime Standards Pipelines Pod Propulsion Salvage Ship Electronics Ship Repair Ship Simulators Shipbuilding / Vessel Construction Winch
rss | archive | history | articles | privacy | contributors | top maritime news | about us | copyright | maritime magazines
maritime security news | shipbuilding news | maritime industry | shipping news | maritime reporting | workboats news | ship design | maritime business

Time taken: 0.1442 sec (7 req/sec)