Item 9b Study

Po
0" Slear- .Ie
CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY
PHASE 1A
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment 





JULY 2009

ENSR AECOM

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
Table of Contents

Table of Contents ............................................................................................................................ ii 
Figures............................................................................................................................................ iii 
Tables ............................................................................................................................................. iv 
Executive Summary ........................................................................................................................ 2 
Introduction and Methodology ....................................................................................................... 7 
Seattle-Alaska Cruise Industry ....................................................................................................... 8 
Northwest Cruise Ship Association............................................................................................. 9 
Memorandum of Understanding between NWCA and State of Washington ........................... 10 
Alaska Discharge Standards ......................................................................................................... 14 
Current Cruise Vessel Wastewater and Biomass Operations ....................................................... 15 
Advanced Wastewater Treatment Systems (AWTS) ................................................................ 15 
Type II MSDs ............................................................................................................................ 16 
Characterization of Cruise Ship Biomass ..................................................................................... 18 
Disposal of Cruise Ship Biomass .............................................................................................. 18 
Chemical Properties of Biomass Generated .............................................................................. 18 
Biomass Management in Scandinavia .......................................................................................... 25 
Cruise Vessel Wastewater and Biomass Operations .................................................................... 26 
On board Wastewater Treatment ............................................................................................... 26 
Alternatives to Open-Ocean Discharge of Cruise Ship Biomass .................................................. 26 
Incineration ................................................................................................................................ 26 
Shore Transfer ........................................................................................................................... 26 
o   Direct Discharge to Tanker Truck - This alternative involves pumping biomass from on
board storage tanks directly to tanker trucks positioned on the pier. Vessel to tanker discharge
occurs through flexible hoses. ................................................................................................... 27 
Existing Port of Seattle Shoreside Operations .............................................................................. 27 
Feasibility of Shore Transfer of Biomass ..................................................................................... 32 
Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
Direct Discharge to Barge ......................................................................................................... 36 
Direct Discharge to Tanker Truck ............................................................................................. 36 
Direct Discharge to Piping on Pier ............................................................................................ 37 
Cruise Industry Wastewater Management in Scandinavia ........................................................... 38 
Copenhagen Malm Ports, Denmark ........................................................................................ 40 
Port of Oslo, Norway ................................................................................................................ 41 
Port of Helsinki, Finland ........................................................................................................... 42 
Port of Stockholm, Sweden ....................................................................................................... 42 
Future Alternatives for Biomass Disposal .................................................................................... 44 
Conclusion .................................................................................................................................... 46 
References ..................................................................................................................................... 47 
Figures
Figure 1. Growth in Port of Seattle Cruise Ship Usage from 1999 to 2009 (est.) ......................... 9
Figure 2. MOU Boundaries.......................................................................................................... 13
Figure 3. Schematic of biological-chlorination Type II MSD (Source: EPA 2007) .................... 18
Figure 4. Chemical Comparison of Cruise Ship Biosludge and Treatment Plant Solid Waste: All
Selected Metals ............................................................................................................................ 22
Figure 5. Chemical Comparison of Cruise Ship Biosludge and Treatment Plant Solid Waste:
Lowest Concentration Metals ...................................................................................................... 23
Figure 6. Chemical Comparison of Cruise Ship Biosludge and Treatment Plant Solid Waste:
Lowest Concentration Metals ...................................................................................................... 23
Figure 7. Chemical Comparison of Cruise Ship Biosludge and Treatment Plant Solid Waste:
Mid-High Concentration Metals .................................................................................................. 24
Figure 8. Chemical Comparison of Cruise Ship Biosludge and Treatment Plant Solid Waste:
Highest Concentration Metals...................................................................................................... 24
Figure 9. Vessel Mooring Lines (Terminal 30) ............................................................................ 28
Figure 10. Rendering of T-91 Gangways .....................................................................................28
Figure 11. Crew Gangway (Pier 66) ............................................................................................ 28
Figure 12. Baggage Loading (Pier 66) .........................................................................................29
Figure 13. Baggage Loading and Crew Gangway .......................................................................29

Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
Figure 14. Utility Connection (Terminal 30) ...............................................................................30
Figure 15. Shore Power Connection (Terminal 30) ..................................................................... 30
Figure 16. Typical Bunker Oil Truck ........................................................................................... 30
Figure 17. Pier Access (Pier 66) .................................................................................................. 31
Figure 18. Baltic Sea Wastewater Reception Facility Locations .................................................41
Tables
Table 1. Seattle/Alaska Homeport Industry .................................................................................. 12 
Table 2. Summary of Washington State Department of Ecology Information Regarding NWCA
Cruise Ships, Wastewater Treatment and Biomass Management ................................................ 17 
Table 3. Cruise Ship Chemical Data Summary ............................................................................ 19 
Table 4. Summary of Cruise Ship and King County Biomass Concentrations ............................ 21 
Table 5. Wastewater Reception Facilities at Ports in the Baltic Sea ............................................ 43 











Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY         Port
DRAFT PHASE 1A STUDY
01 Seattle
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment

Section 1 
Executive Summary

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
Executive Summary
At the request of the Port of Seattle Commission, this study was initiated to compile data
and provide an initial assessment of the feasibility to transfer, via on shore infrastructure,
biomass generated by cruise vessels to King County's wastewater treatment system. For
the purpose of this study, biomass refers to the partially treated solids residuals from the
on-board wastewater treatment process.
On February 16, 2007, the Port of Seattle Commission passed a motion that included the
above request. In April 2007, the King County Council passed a complementary motion
directing the County's Wastewater Treatment Division to work with the Port of Seattle to
study the potential for processing marine cruise industry-generated wastewater through
the County's wastewater treatment system.
The intent of this study is to gain an understanding of the impacts to the vessels' on-board
infrastructure, pier-side operations, and facility on shore infrastructure in order to
determine the feasibility of storing biomass on-board cruise vessels and off-loading it at
the pier.
Over the past ten years, there has been significant growth in the number of cruise vessels
and number of passengers going through the Port of Seattle. In the 2008 season, the Port
welcomed 210 ship port calls and an estimated 886,039 passengers.
The Northwest Cruise Ship Association, which provides a variety of services for member
cruise lines, entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the Washington
Department of Ecology in April 2004, (Amendment No. 4 signed May 19, 2008) aimed at
improving the treatment of waste discharges from cruise ships operating in Washington
waters. This MOU established boundaries within which discharge limitations are
established.
Currently, all but one of the cruise vessels operating from Port of Seattle facilities use onboard
Advanced Wastewater Treatment Systems (AWTS) that treat sewage and
greywater in a combined system. The biomass generated by this treatment is currently
discharged 12 nautical miles from the shoreline coast outside of Washington State waters
and the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary, in compliance with international law
and the MOU.
Alternatives to open-ocean discharge of cruise ship biomass include on-board
incineration and shore transfer. While half of the cruise vessels that were surveyed
incinerate residual solids, only three vessels incinerate all biomass, and an additional
vessel incinerates 50-75% of its biomass.

2                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Draft Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
Like the Alaskan cruise industry, growth of the Scandinavian cruise industry has greatly
increased over the past decade. The Baltic Sea receives between 250 and 300 cruise ships
each year. Most of the wastewater is discharged into the Baltic Sea, mainly in
international waters. According to the international convention (MARPOL 73/78 and
Annex IV), ships may discharge black water beyond 12 nautical miles from the shore line
and greywater beyond 3 nautical miles from the shore line into the Baltic Sea. The
massive blooms of blue-green algae along the shorelines of the Baltic Sea are the most
visible evidence of this environmental problem.
Baltic cruise ship wastewater management information was collected from the
Copenhagen Malm Ports in Denmark, the Port of Oslo, Norway, and the Port of
Helsinki, Finland, and Port of Stockholm, Sweden. No distinction was made by these
ports in the management of wastewater versus the management of biomass. The
information provided by the Scandinavian ports will, however, help the Port of Seattle to
evaluate various shore transfer approaches and learn from the experiences of the Baltic
ports.
Shore transfer involves transferring wastewater or biomass from on-board storage tanks
to a shore facility for treatment. Methods by which this can occur include:
o  Direct discharge to tanker truck
o  Direct discharge to barge
o  Direct discharge to piping on pier
At a minimum, it was determined that the following requirements must be met for shore
transfer to be practical at the Port of Seattle:
1.  Vessels must have the ability to store biomass on board. Two cruise vessels
that currently home port at the Port of Seattle have the capacity to store seven
days accumulation of biomass. The remaining vessels that currently homeport in
Seattle carry from 3.3 to 6.6 days of accumulated biomass. A typical homeport
itinerary out of Seattle is a 7-day cruise, but some are 10 to 14-day cruises.
2.  The biomass must be pumpable. Biomass currently being stored on board
Seattle cruise vessels ranges from 80-98% liquids and is therefore pumpable.
3.  The vessels must be configured to pump ashore. Of the 10 vessels with an on-
site Advanced Wastewater Treatment System (AWTS), nine report that they have
at least some ability to transfer biomass ashore. More information is required to
determine what specific modifications would be required to support regular and
consistent shore-side transfer.
3                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Draft Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
4.  The vessels must have engineering crew available to oversee the transfer
operations. This study did not evaluate the feasibility of this requirement.
5.  The operation must be completed within the time the vessel is in port. Vessels
are in port for about 10 hours. Following Customs and Border protection
regulations and various operations requirements, the available time for unloading
and off loading is approximately 7 hours.
Significant efforts are underway by industry to achieve more effective environmental
performance in waste disposal from ships. One option currently under evaluation is a
Plasma Arc Waste Destruction system as an alternative to shipboard incineration. In
addition, marine gasification technology is being developed, that will result in creating
usable energy as a by-product.
There is currently no single viable option for managing biomass created on board Seattlebased
cruise ships. Additional studies, if found to be necessary, would further evaluate
the feasibility of existing and developing technology for biomass from cruise ships.
Based on the data compiled for this report, the following primary conclusions have been
drawn:
Shipboard capacity for biomass varies. Two cruise vessels that homeport in
Seattle can hold a week's worth of biomass on board, with the rest having the
capacity to carry three to six days' worth of biomass.
Biomass is pumpable and could be transferred on shore.
On shore transfer would have significant impacts to pier-side operations. The
extent of these impacts would vary by vessel, dock facility, volume of biomass
discharged, and method chosen for transfer to shore facilities. The variety of
activities occurring on the pier that would have an impact to shore-transfer of
biomass include mooring lines, passenger and crew gangways, utility connections,
bunker oil trucks on the pier, and required access for emergency vehicles. In
addition, the vessel doors and apron space must be kept clear for off loading and
loading of luggage and the stores loading.
The option with likely the least impact to pier-side operations would be discharge
to a marine barge. The challenges associated with this option, however, include
the synchronization of the off-shore transfer of biomass with the six hour vessel
fueling process, generally through a common break in the vessel hull; and the
effort and expected cost of securing barges designed to hold the biomass (not
evaluated in this study).
4                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Draft Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
Proceeding with a significantly changed mechanism than that currently used for
managing biomass would require more study associated with the feasibility and cost of
vessel retrofits as well as whether there are environmental benefits to off loading biomass
at the Port of Seattle.
If the Port determines that on shore transfer of biomass could become a viable alternative,
additional phases of this study would include:
1.  On board visits of at least three vessels to determine biomass storage capacity,
pumping capacity, shore transfer capability and rate(s) etc.
2.  Meetings with crew to better understand shore transfer and waste treatment
operations and vessel system functions.
3.  Preliminary engineering cost estimates for modifications of vessels surveyed.
4.  Meetings with shore side terminal operator to discuss impacts and mitigation for
on-pier impact(s).
5.  Preliminary engineering cost estimates for pier-side modifications and additional
infrastructure.










5                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Draft Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY         Port
DRAFT PHASE 1A STUDY
01 Seattle
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment

Section 2 
Introduction and Methodology
Seattle-Alaska Cruise Industry
Alaska Discharge Standards
Current Cruise Vessel Wastewater and Biomass Operations
Characterization of Cruise Ship Biomass

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
Introduction and Methodology
On February 16, 2007, the Port of Seattle Commission passed a motion containing numerous
environmental initiatives. The fourth item in this motion states:
The Commission recognizes the significant economic benefit to the region of having cruise ships homeport in
Seattle. The Commission supports the growth of the cruise ship industry in Seattle as well as efforts to
enhance water quality and the marine environment. The Commission directs staff to prepare a budget and
work program to evaluate the feasibility, environmental impact, cost/benefit and possible funding sources of
building additional infrastructure to support the cruise ship industry in Seattle, including proposals to
facilitate off loading of biosolids and hazardous waste. Work program elements will include convening a
meeting or series of meetings beginning in the first half of 2007 on this topic, to include relevant Port staff,
cruise ship industry officials, Department of Ecology officials, county and city public utilities and health
officials, other relevant experts, and community and environmental group representatives.
In April 2007, the King County Council passed a complementary motion (No. 12498) which
directed the King County Wastewater Treatment Division to work cooperatively with the Port
of Seattle and other affected agencies to undertake a study of the potential for processing
marine cruise industry-generated wastewater through the County's wastewater treatment
system. This work culminated in the August 2007 report titled "Cruise Ship Wastewater
Management Report" prepared by the King County Wastewater Treatment Division. This
study did not address biomass.
That study provided several recommendations and the following conclusions:
1.  There is no identified benefit of channeling wastewater from cruise ships to the regional
conveyance and treatment system.
2.  The South Treatment Plant could receive and incorporate biomass into the existing
treatment process without any expansion or modification of the South Treatment Plant.
King County recycles all of its biosolids.
For the purpose of this study "biomass" refers to the partially treated solids residuals from the
on board wastewater treatment process. Partial treatment on board ships involves separating the
solids from the liquid fraction.
The work provided herein represents on-going efforts by the Port of Seattle to address issues
identified in the February 16, 2007 Commission motion. Through discussions with Port staff
and in recognition of the public attention to this issue, a decision was made to assemble and
provide information as it is obtained, rather than wait until all potential studies are complete.
As such, the work included herein is intended to be the initial part of a potentially larger study
that may be required to fully assess the impacts and benefits of alternative means to managing
biomass on cruise vessels calling at Port facilities.

7                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
If authorized by the Port of Seattle Commission, future phases of this study might include the
following additional phases; the scope of each subsequent phase would be evaluated and
authorized individually.
Phase 1B  Engineering Evaluation of On board Systems and Viable Alternatives
Phase 2  Environmental Impacts/Benefits and Cost/Benefit of Potential Implementation
and financial impacts of implementing viable solutions identified in Phase 1
In general, this Phase 1A Report has been assembled through review of existing reports and
compilation of existing data. Existing reports reviewed included Department of Ecology reports
documenting prior sampling accomplished on Puget Sound cruise vessels as well as available
US EPA reports on cruise vessel on board treatment systems.
Treatment vendors and cruise ship operators were consulted to gain an understanding of how
waste is being treated and handled by the vessels. A survey was sent to the cruise ships to
gather specific information about types of treatment systems employed, disposal practices, and
vessel specifics including storage capacity. The vessel operators were also asked if their vessels
were equipped with a means of transferring biomass ashore, and if not, whether a retrofit was
feasible. A copy of the survey sent to the Cruise Lines is included in the Appendix.
Initial assessment of the impacts to on board and dock-side infrastructure of alternative biomass
off loading methods is generally based on the professional experience of the Port and
Consultant team (KPFF Consulting Engineers, ENSR/AECOM, and the Glosten Associates)
and their collective knowledge of Pier 91, Pier 66 and vessel infrastructure. Further detailed
engineering analysis would be conducted as part of Phase 1B for those alternatives considered
viable.
Seattle-Alaska Cruise Industry
The Port of Seattle (POS) has experienced significant growth both in the number of vessels
taking call at the port as well as the number of passengers embarking from the POS.





8                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
900,000                                                          250

800,000

200
700,000

600,000
150         Number of
Passengers
500,000

400,000    Passengers                                                              Vessels
Vessels
100
300,000

200,000
50

100,000

0                                                      0
1998      2000      2002      2004      2006      2008      2010
Year
Figure 1. Growth in Port of Seattle Cruise Ship Usage from 1999 to 2009 (est.)

In the 2008 season, the Port of Seattle welcomed an estimated 210 cruise ship port calls and
over 886,000 passengers (Port of Seattle, 2008). This industry has been steadily expanding
since its inception in 1999, when only 6 cruise ships and 6,615 passengers left Seattle bound for
Alaska.
The POS operates as a "homeport" and more specifically, what is commonly called in the
cruise industry a "turnaround port." Seattle-Alaska cruises originate from the POS where they
disembark and embark passengers as well as provisioning (food, fuel, etc.) for their voyages.
Table 1 summarizes the Seattle-Alaska cruise industry for 2008 as well as what is planned for
2009. In general, ten ships originate their cruises to Alaska from Seattle, three each on Friday,
Saturday, and Sunday and one every other Thursday from two POS dock locations. In 2008,
those dock locations were Terminal 30 and Pier 66. In 2009, Terminal 91 replaced Terminal 30
dock for cruises vessels.
Northwest Cruise Ship Association
The Northwest Cruise Ship Association (NWCA) is a not-for-profit organization founded in
1986 to provide security services to member lines (Northwest Cruise Ship Association, 2008).
Its role has since been expanded to include government relations on legal and regulatory issues.
The Association often works with local organizations to mitigate concerns regarding the cruise
industry. In addition, it funds economic and environmental studies and works with government

9                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study 7/23/2009


CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
agencies on cruise-related issues. Member lines of the NWCA that embark from Seattle include
Celebrity, Holland America, Norwegian, Princess, and Royal Caribbean cruise lines.
Memorandum of Understanding between NWCA and State of Washington
In April 2004, the NWCA, the Port of Seattle, and the Washington Department of Ecology
entered into a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) to formally acknowledge and implement
common environmental goals, policies, and waste management practices within the boundaries
of the MOU. The current boundaries of the MOU include Puget Sound, the Strait of Juan de
Fuca south of the international boundary with Canada, and three miles from shore on the west
side of the state (see Figure 2). The original MOU has been amended several times since 2004.
The most recent amendment (No. 4) was signed on May 19, 2008.
(http://www.ecy.wa.gov/programs/wq/wastewater/cruise_mou/FINALamendment4MOU051908.pdf). 
The MOU established the following definitions used in this report:
"blackwater" means waste from toilets, urinals, medical sinks and other similar
facilities.
"greywater" includes drainage from dishwasher, shower, laundry, bath, galley drains
and washbasin drains.
"residual solids" include grit or screenings, ash generated during the incineration of
sewage sludge, and sewage sludge, which is solid, semi-solid, or liquid residual
generated during the treatment of domestic sewage in the treatment works. Sewage
sludge includes, but is not limited to, domestic septage; scum or solids removed in
primary, secondary or advanced wastewater treatment processes; and material derived
from sewage sludge.
Blackwater and greywater are subject to MOU defined waters which includes Puget Sound up
to the Canadian border and coastal waters up to three miles off the shoreline coast of
Washington. For "residual solids," the MOU boundaries are extended to 12 nautical miles from
shoreline coast and from the entire Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary.
The MOU does not specifically define the terms "biomass" or "biosolids". In this report,
"biomass" refers to the partially treated solids residuals from the wastewater treatment process.
The partial treatment on vessels involves separating the solids from the liquid fraction. Ship
biomass typically contains more liquid than shore-side produced "biosolids". Cruise ship
generated biomass is considered a subset of the "residual solids" term defined in the MOU.
The MOU cites the cruise industry as recognizing Washington's fragile marine environment
and commits to help protect the environment by establishing specific requirements for
wastewater and hazardous waste management for the industry. The MOU also authorizes the

10                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
Department of Ecology to inspect one vessel per season to verify compliance with the
provisions of the MOU.
The MOU prohibits discharge of untreated blackwater, untreated greywater, or solid waste
within waters subject to the MOU and prohibits discharge of oily bilge water if not in
compliance with applicable federal and state laws. Discharges of effluent from on board
treatment of blackwater and greywater are allowed within the boundaries of the MOU if certain
reporting, recordkeeping, and monitoring requirements are met. However, as stated earlier, the
discharge of residual solids is prohibited in waters subject to this MOU, within 12 nautical
miles from shore and within the entire boundaries of the Olympic Coast Marine Sanctuary.
This results in no discharge of residual solids to Washington State waters.













11                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY                               Port=~
DRAFT PHASE 1A STUDY                                                of Seattle
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment
Table 1. Seattle/Alaska Homeport Industry
2009 (Planned)
Day     Cruise Line       Vessel     Terminal  ETA   ETD  Pax Count  LOA   Itinerary  Arriving From Next Port
Thursday   Princess        Pacific Princess          T91    0600    1600     670     594    14 Day      Victoria Ketchikan
Friday     HAL            Zaandam               T91     0700    1700     1432     778     7 Day      Victoria   Juneau
Friday     Royal Caribbean    Rhapsody of the Seas       T91     0700    1600     1998     916     7 Day      Victoria   Juneau
Friday     Celebrity         Infinity                 P66    0600    1600     2050     965     7 Day      Victoria   Juneau
Saturday   HAL           Amsterdam             T91    0700    1700     1380     781     7 Day      Victoria   Juneau
Saturday   NCL           Norwegian Star          P66    0600    1600     2240     965     7 Day  Prince Rupert Ketchikan
Saturday   Princess        Golden Princess          T91    0600    1600     2600     950     7 Day      Victoria   Juneau
Sunday   HAL          Westerdam           T91    0700    1600    1916    936    7 Day     Victoria   Juneau
Sunday   NCL          Norwegian Pearl         P66    0600    1600    2380    965    7 Day     Victoria   Juneau
Sunday   Princess       Star Princess          T91    0600    1600    2600    950    7 Day     Victoria Ketchikan
2008
Day     Cruise Line       Vessel     Terminal  ETA   ETD  Pax Count  LOA   Itinerary  Arriving From Next Port
Friday     HAL            Amsterdam              T30    0600    1600     1380     781     7 Day       Victoria   Juneau
Friday     Royal Caribbean    Rhapsody of the Seas       130    0600    1600     1998     916     7 Day   Prince Rupert   Juneau
Friday     Celebrity         Infinity                 P66    0600    1600     2050     965     7 Day       Victoria   Juneau
Saturday   HAL           Oosterdam             130    0600    1600     1848     936     7 Day      Victoria   Juneau
Saturday   NCL           Norwegian Star          P66    0600    1600     2240     965     7 Day  Prince Rupert Ketchikan
Saturday   Princess        Golden Princess          130    0600    1600     2600     950     7 Day      Victoria   Juneau
Sunday   HAL          Westerdam           130   0600    1600    1916    936    7 Day     Victoria  Juneau
Sunday   NCL          Norwegian Pearl         P66    0600    1600    2380    965    7 Day     Victoria  Juneau
Sunday   Princess       Star Princess          130   0600    1600    2600    950    7 Day     Victoria Ketchikan
Notes:     ETA - Estimated Time of Arrival
ETD - Estimated Time of Departure
Pax Count - Passenger Count
LOA - Length Overall


12                                                  Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Draft Phase 1A Study, December 30, 2008

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port0"
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                                Seattle



















Figure 2. MOU BoundariesFigure 2. MOU Boundaries

13                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
Alaska Discharge Standards
Cruise ships that travel in Alaska waters, including all Seattle-based cruise vessels, are subject
to rigorous state and federal regulations regarding discharge of wastewater. Specific to Federal
rules, "Title XIVCertain Alaskan Cruise Ship Operations" applies to large commercial
passenger vessels only, which are defined as those vessels having more than 500 passengers.
Effluent standards are set for blackwater only and allow continuous discharge if secondary
treatment standards are met and compliance is demonstrated through semi-monthly sampling.
Until Federal law closed former "donut holes," areas greater than three nautical miles from
shore but within Alexander Archipelago provided an unregulated location for ships to discharge
raw sewage.
The U.S. EPA has begun the process of evaluating cruise ship wastewater discharge
requirements in Alaska. Beginning in 2008, vessels carrying 250 or more passengers have been
required to obtain a permit to discharge in Alaskan waters (Alaska DEC, 2008). This new
permit includes increased reporting to the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
(DEC) and more stringent effluent limitations for several water quality parameters, in
particular, copper.
All large vessels under the federal program (500+ passengers) must pay a third party sampler
and laboratory to take and analyze at least two samples of effluent per season. The U.S. Coast
Guard, which enforces the federal standards, requires large cruise ships that have been certified
for continuous discharge to sample twice per month. Crew members of small vessels are
permitted to sample only after proving to the DEC that their crew members have appropriate
background and training to perform wastewater sampling.
DEC approves the protocol and procedures used by industry samplers and laboratories and also
conducts audits. In addition, the DEC (or its contractor) takes its own wastewater samples in
Southeast and South Central Alaska.
Due to the overlap of the state and Federal law, large cruise ships have one of three options for
their wastewater discharge:
1.  Vessels may hold their wastewater and only discharge it once they are outside of Alaska
waters (roughly 3 nautical miles from shore but excluding former "donut holes"). The
wastewater from these vessels is not subject to the state-required sampling regime and
effluent standards.
2.  Vessels may discharge their wastewater when they are at least 1 nautical mile from
shore and traveling at a speed of at least 6 knots. The grey and blackwater must meet
the strict state effluent limits.

14                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
3.  Vessels may treat their wastewater with advanced on board wastewater treatment
systems that meet the stringent requirements that enable them to be certified by the U.S.
Coast Guard for continuous discharge.
Most large cruise ships operate under Option 1 or 3. Vessels typically only operate under
Option 2 while they are seeking certification from the U.S. Coast Guard for continuous
discharge (Option 3).
For a list of large cruise ships that have been allowed to continuously discharge as well as those
that hold wastewater, see http://www.dec.state.ak.us/water/cruise_ships/index.htm.
Current Cruise Vessel Wastewater and Biomass Operations
There are primarily two types of wastewater treatment systems on board cruise ships:
Advanced Wastewater Treatment Systems (AWTSs) and Type II Marine Sanitation Devices
(MSDs). A brief synopsis of the major operational features of each treatment system follows.
Advanced Wastewater Treatment Systems (AWTS)
AWTSs generally treat sewage and greywater in a combined system. EPA's Draft Cruise Ship
Discharge Analysis states, "These systems generally provide improved screening, biological
treatment, solids separation (using filtration or flotation), disinfection (using ultraviolet light),
and sludge processing as compared to traditional Type II MSDs." According to the EPA, 23 of
28 large cruise ships traveling in Alaskan waters were equipped with AWTSs as of 2006 (EPA,
2007). While these systems produce relatively clean effluent, they produce large amounts of
biomass. Respondents to the survey conducted for this study reported generating 15-40 metric
tons of biomass per day. A 2007 study conducted by King County estimated that cruise ships
in Puget Sound waters generate 35 tons (including water content) of biomass daily.
Modern AWTSs for cruise ships have several stages. First the black and greywater is
combined; next a screening process removes large solids and non-biodegradable material; and
then water enters a biological reactor where it is broken down by bacteria. Following the
bacterial breakdown it is necessary to clarify (remove solids) the water. The two main methods
applied on cruise ships are ultrafiltration (UF) or dissolved air floatation (DAF). Ultrafiltration
involves pumping water through a semi-permeable membrane under high pressure. The DAF
method involves dissolving air into the wastewater under pressure then allowing the air to come
out of solution at a lower or ambient pressure. When the air comes out of solution it forms tiny
bubbles that adhere to the suspended solids and carry them to the surface where they can be
skimmed. The last step of treating the clarified water is to sterilize it, typically with ultraviolet
light, before discharging it.
All but one of the cruise vessels that currently homeport at the Port of Seattle use AWTSs.

15                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
Table 2 shows the different systems utilized on cruise ships that have called at Port of Seattle
terminals since 2004 based on inspection reports prepared by the Department of Ecology.
Type II MSDs
Type II MSDs only treat blackwater. Currently, only one cruise vessel calling at Port of Seattle
facilities utilizes a Type II MSD. Most Type II MSDs use biological treatment and chlorination
for the treatment of sewage. Some cruise ships with Type II MSDs use only maceration
(breaking up of solids into small pieces) and chlorination when treating their sewage and do not
utilize biological treatment (EPA 2007). A screen is sometimes included for removal of grit and
other debris. Vessels utilizing Type II MSDs must hold their untreated greywater on board until
they are within an area where discharge is permitted.
Type II MSDs using biological-chlorination treatment work similarly to municipal wastewater
treatment systems. Figure 3 shows a simplified schematic of a biological-chlorination Type II
MSD.












16                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              0.( Seattle
Table 2. Summary of Washington State Department of Ecology Information Regarding NWCA
Cruise Ships, Wastewater Treatment and Biomass Management
HlIm
.Total        !~.SldU21 !
Cruise Line        ,Ship        IPersons WWTrea.tment system            Solids      20041.005       2007
200G
IDisposal Technique
ton Board:
I2008 I I Ecologv
I     Inspected
I
,Blackw.atar      Gra atef
CarnivalCruiuune l                                  -L-
,--
TSolids are
I             senile eN and-
IGWhOldin9.tankanddischarged>12 nm (2005
SolIds are
I       I,epan)removed.S1rainedand                         I
:                                                      !2005 2006
2779 :BioDuratRochem    MIlC9d wrth B'N I:~~i~~~ated (2006 & 2007   12   22                 2007 '
CelebntyCrulses                                                                  26   IS   11  i
3409  Hamannllazarus   None                       t  2    I    1
2800  ,Zenon        Mixed wllh fJN I                                21
2034  Unknown       Unknown   I                                 4
Cryslal Cruises        INONE

HollandAmeficaune                 2027  IUnknO'Wn 2'   20
I
20   19    2007
!                I                  I~GOI;dsincineraled;&N
!~tidsdlschargedat"12           I
Noordirn        2718  IRochem8iofiUwion  Rochem LPRO Inm.                          21
I                                   IG"'ISOlidSinCinerated.fNV
,sohdsdischa,gedat:>12
I       i~~i'd;~ ~~~~a~es~a~~ls~~l
looeSlerdam       26'8 IRochemBio-fll1ration 'Rochem lPRO l~nl1o inCineration      21   21    21   21
ilaandam        2107  Zenon        Milll!dwllhfN./1               I    1    22    1
'Zulderdam        26'8  RochemBio-fillF.ltJon  Rochem LPRO                             1
2079  Zenon        MllaJdwllh fMI
!GWsolidslncineraled; eN
! !      jsolids discharged at >12 ! !
iWeslerdam       2648 :Rochem 8iofillration  Rochem LPRO rnm                      21      i~ :;roS
B. dam                        Zenon                             I
,
''''''
'654             Zenon
I
!Veendam     -L
1854  Zenon        Zenon                         2 !  2             2006
i        jsludge senllo sludge lank
I                            I        !anddischarged>12nmor
No.wegian C.uise Une    'Norwe ian Pea,1     42lJ :Scanshl        MixedwlIhe-N lisdliedandincinerated.                 20   22    2007
I        i~~fn~~t~~: ~~led and           I        I    I
:Norwe lanSlar                    'Mixed with fMI i~~~~:I:: and 70%,              17   2O!  21   22  I 21  1 2005 ; 2006
,
Iscreened solids and sludge
iheld in sludge lank (14S)
!Norwe ian Sun
I !
2952  Scanshi        MiX2d with fNI land dischar ed >12 nm.             20    o '
I           ii,          ,        jsludge senlto2 holding       i
!       Ilanksanddlscharged:>12      j
Norwe ian Dream    2.446  IScanshio       ,MlxedwllhfNI/ lnm                  12
i
2005
lsludge senllo Gludgelank
I !     , I
I~nd discharged >12 nmor
I_Norwe9i!!l..plrit     3600 I~       MixedwitilfNI/ lisdriedandincinerated.    20   18                 2005
Norwl!9ian Win!!.-Ll~Scanshp      Mixed with EMI-l-           I
I "  ISUdge from Hamworlhy
I~Slem MBR's is discharged     I
lal;>12 nm.while screened !    I
Princess Cruises                    36IiJ  ,HamwonhvBloreaclor MlxedwrthfNI/ !so~dsa'e Incineraled.                  21   21    2007
19udge from Hamwor1hy
!syslemM8R's is discharged
'Sun Princess       2820  ,Hamwol111 Bioreaclor Mixed with FNV I::~; ;~in:h~l:ra~::.en8d                21
ISlarP,incess      31nl :Unknown       Unknown                                    21
,                 j
ISudge from Hamworthy
!system M8R's is discharged     1
:HalThYonhYBIOr~aclor :MI~dwrthB'N I::~;~~:n~~~l.l~::ened
2850                                    1  j      20            2006
i 3,..,
'Sa hire Princess   I 3,..,
Re enl Seven Seas CflJises  'Seven Seas Mariner   1200  :H amwol1h Bioreaclor Mixed with fJN
Royal Caribbean Inlernalianal iRadlance of the Seas   3360  :UnknO'Wn       Unknown !
iSerenade of lhe Seas   2950  :Scanshi        MIX$dwdh f1.N I
19udge lseither incinerated
lor landed ashole in Vidooa
I~~pl~~::~~~~a~l~dge
Ifrom fN.Isystem is either
lincinel~o
~i: >
m           11 11 11
C
Z
1\
1"1
::n




fil ~N[ - N~.-PlmNG

==
MUUllllUill

[)I
S
lJ



..c                                                     CRUISE lERMfNAL BUILDING (B'UILDING~.f1
x
!Nllm ilOC"t~ IILlS'
W                            I
tll'.11G'
+i
l
o
,...0-
un
~I')
J I
GO
[,...
I
,,0)
""u
Jo
~r1,
Q/
..J In
[)I
[
o ~
L U
I  l
on                                                                  IIII l~[ - ~
-+        '!RKI~
>,./
o A
~~I!ld ON - lIIlllIJ
[ U
n ...,l
l0
VI
1)
F:.:
0.0
,...
~
10,Q
'::Ol                                                                                                    
I
~
~:P01[NIIAllOCATION roR ~: IlWU rRAm  ~~ ~ o~ 1o(
oJ 2
3u NOr[: SHIP ACmS PORr LOCArlONS     BIOMASS OFF LOADING         r=d~1 ~""-I--I
rl ,...    AR( ID[NTlmD IN rm rROM sourH        US:V~SS~l 8UNKrR
OIL
[J:~~;I~~:YCY
[GR(SS
~ND Or PIER AS PRIVIDW BY CRUIS[                                                              )ccle                      feel        l~rt~1eaIIl
OJ- ~~
: ~ mMINAlS Or mRICA.
I
:Dru~R(
I ;
BAGGAG[ DELIVERY        l:IJ : O[lIVmY TRUCK
nO,...
Z/ IIIJ                                                                       FIGURE 31 PIER 91 SHIP LAYOUr
~                         ~ : lUGGAGE/SIOR[S
11 _                                                                            Itt ; roRK lIri
"0ruU                        LOADING cms                                           CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY
,'(II        
"'" I CcmJ:trg EilgiriOOls
o~,                                              11111/2~~8
0::2             34                                                       Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
'-----------------------------------------------------"---------------
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study  Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009
'"'"-'=X
W
+-'
o'"--
C"J 0-
wo
0:: n
~I
00
c;::-
I
. CO
+-'0
:::J
ONO
i;'/
-.J  rn
0'
c
o .~
'"-- 
'"-- '--
00
>/
o >-.
<:-0
o
en:::J
BAGGAGE DELIVERY
= VESSEL BUNKER OIL
rn
E;g
= FLOWER VAN
0-0
"'OJ- rn
n 0
= FORK LIFT
~rn                                                                                                          = LUGGAGE/STORES
0)
rn                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                        LOADING  CAGES
OJ
'2
CJu
CJ
C'--J ......-;
r--
co (,-J
""iJ
Port of Seattle
>r:::::
0    CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY      Data Compilation and Initial Assessment   PHASE 1A STUDY                                      NOTE:  PHOTO TAKEN  FOLLOWING        NOTE:  POTENTIAL LOCATION  FOR                                                                                                                                           35
0
Z/            COMPLETION OF LOAD/UN-LOAD  BIOMASS OFF LOADING IS NOT                          FIGURE 32 PIER 66 SHIP LAYOUT
-0 8                                    OPERATIONS SHORTLY BEFORE         APPARENT.
CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY
0)0
+-' N VESSEL DEPARTURE.
C;/        Consulting(   Engineers                                                               NOT TO SCALE   11/1812008
0:::: ~I                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                I

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
Direct Discharge to Barge
This alternative would include use of marine barges to remove the biomass using similar
methodology to fueling cruise vessels. A marine barge would be positioned by tug alongside
the cruise vessel, a floating boom would deployed around the tug and barge to contain the off
load operations, and biomass would be transferred to the barge using on board pumps.
This scenario has the benefit of not impacting pier-side operations. It would, however, require
the purchase or lease of barges specifically designed and constructed for this unique use. An
analysis of the availability and cost of these barges was not included in this study. An
additional complexity of this scenario is that on most cruise vessels the location for biomass
transfer and vessel fueling occur at the same "break" or access door in the vessel hull. Due to
the size of the barges involved as well as the hazards and complexities of marine fueling
operations, current vessel configurations do not allow for simultaneously fueling the vessel
from a barge while also removing biomass to a second barge located in close proximity.
Fueling takes approximately six hours for each ship call, so it is not possible to stagger fueling
and biomass transfer onto barges. In order to accomplish a simultaneous transfer of fuel (on
board) and biomass (off load), modifications to on board piping systems including potentially
creating a new access break served by biomass piping would be required. Evaluation of the
cost and effort to create a new access break was not conducted as a part of this study. It is
unknown if regulatory agencies with oversight capacity of marine fueling operations would
have any concerns about the simultaneous fueling and biomass off loading.
Direct Discharge to Tanker Truck
Discharging various types of waste from ships to tanker trucks is a common practice in the
marine industry, such as in Scandinavia, as described in Section 2. However, due to pier-side
congestion during existing turnaround operations, specific challenges to the feasibility of this
practice at the Port of Seattle exist and are discussed below. It is anticipated that this alternative
for biomass transfer would have the largest impact on existing pier-side operations.
Emerald Services of Seattle has serviced the marine industry with vacuum trucks for a number
of years. They are currently located on East Marginal Way where they transfer waste via
pipeline directly to the South King County treatment facility. Emerald Services has a fleet of 11
'large' vacuum trucks and 12 'small' vacuum trucks. There are approximately four trucks with
a 6,500 gallon capacity, seven trucks with a 5,000 gallon capacity and 12 trucks with a 3,000
gallon capacity. All trucks are equipped with vacuum pumps. The large trucks are 50-60 feet
long.
The total biomass loads based on all vessels surveyed varied from 15,000 gallons per week to
74,000 gallons per week. The vessels with the two largest weekly generation quantities were
74,000 gallons each. If these are considered outliers and the remaining vessels are averaged, the
biomass off load volume is approximately 35,000 gallons.
36                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
Using the information gathered from speaking with Emerald Services an analysis was done to
determine how a series filling operation would work, and what the likely fill times would be to
transfer a week's worth of biomass from the surveyed vessels.
It is possible to unload biomass from a vessel in 7 hours or less with a total of three large trucks
using series loading. The three truck series loading scenario allows time for hooking up,
loading, unhooking, paperwork processing, transit to the unloading location, unloading, transit
back to the pier, and waiting in a queuing area to fill again. Using the data provided by the
vendor, it is estimated that one large truck can be filled continuously every 70 minutes. One
truck would be on the pier at all times, and one truck in-waiting at a designated queuing area.
A third truck would be in transit or unloading. The advantage of this scenario is that only one
truck would be on the pier for the entire 70 minute loading. The second truck, staged at a
queuing area, would be moved into position adjacent to the first truck (prior to the first trucks
departure) for the period of time required to connect hoses in order that the 70-minute cycle
time be realized.
One option for further exploration is loading biomass onto two trucks in parallel on the pier.
This scenario would double the total number of large trucks in the entire operation from three
to six and require two large trucks to be on the dock at all times, two trucks in the queuing area,
and two trucks off loading or in-transit. The loading rate would be twice what would be
required for single truck loading. According to Emerald Services, the vessels and the trucks are
configured with 3" quick disconnect fittings. Two large trucks loaded in one hour would mean
an average loading rate of 13,000 gallons per hour or 217 gallons per minute. This is not an
unreasonable flow rate for a 3" fitting, resulting in velocities of fewer than 10 feet per second.
However, loading two trucks in parallel would require modification to existing on board
systems as the vessels are not currently outfitted to support this type of dual pumping operation.
In addition, for this proposed operation to occur, it would be necessary to ensure that the ships'
pumps and piping are adequate for this pumping rate.
Direct Discharge to Piping on Pier
The location of biomass transfer varies by vessel due to the variable access port locations
where on board piping systems can deliver biomass to the shore. In order to accommodate this
variability of off load location, it would be most efficient if the shore-side pumps, required to
support off loading and transfer of biomass product to the remote storage facility, were
mounted on a chassis or similar device to allow efficient positioning at any of the unique off
load location required by each vessel. However, the need to service the variable discharge
locations on the vessels requires a similar ability to connect to the under-pier piping at several,
perhaps many, discrete locations through access points ("manholes") in the pier.

37                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
Creation of these access points through the pier deck would require structural analysis of the
pier to ensure all existing and proposed load conditions meet applicable codes. Over-water
construction work with a need to access areas under the pier increases the cost of such efforts.
To implement this method of biomass off loading, piping to transfer the biomass to an upland
facility would be placed under approximately 1,200 to 1,500 lineal feet of pier at both Pier 66
and Terminal 91. At both facilities, it is not anticipated that piping could be placed in upland
soils adjacent to the piers, as they are located below existing building structures or contain the
utility infrastructure necessary to support the current operations. At Terminal 91, for example,
the approximately 8 feet of soil area exists between the new cruise facility and the pier carries
several utilities including storm water, as well as potable and fire water supply to the building, 
leaving little room for additional pipes.
Under-pier piping requires thoughtful placement and protection to minimize damage from
floating debris, which can damage piping on a rising tide or in wave conditions. Potential
environmental issues associated with placement of biomass pipes under the pier, where they
could be damaged are unknown and would need to be evaluated. The Terminal 91 project did
not include any modifications to the pier. All construction was performed above the pier,
consequently under-pier piping was not considered for the project.
Due to the significant weight of storage tanks, it is not practical to store the biomass on the pier
structure itself. Accordingly, it would be necessary to develop storage areas for the biomass in
the upland areas adjacent to the cruise piers at either Pier 66 or Terminal 91. The specific
location for a storage facility would have to be determined. It is anticipated that such a facility
would require an area of sufficient size for storage tanks, discharge piping, and tanker truck
access. Due to the relatively small and constrained nature of Pier 66, this is an impractical
option.
The benefit of a direct discharge type of installation would be the smaller pier foot print area
required to support the biomass off loading which would likely have a similar lesser impact
(than tanker truck off loading) on current pier-side operations. The disadvantages of this type of
installation include the cost to purchase the pumping infrastructure, install the pipes under the
piers, and construct the storage facility. In addition, and as noted above, the exposed location of 
the pipes under the pier increases the risk of potential spills due to damage caused by floating
debris.

Cruise Industry Wastewater Management in Scandinavia 
Much like the Alaskan cruise industry, growth of the Scandinavian cruise industry has greatly
increased over the past decade. The Baltic Sea receives between 250 and 300 cruise ships each
year. The wastewater produced in these vessels is currently estimated to contain 113 tons of
38                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
nitrogen and 38 tons of phosphorus, substances that contribute to eutrophication in the Sea.
Most of the wastewater is still discharged into the Baltic Sea, mainly in international waters.
According to the international convention (MARPOL 73/78 and Annex IV), ships may
discharge black water beyond 12 nautical miles from the shore line and greywater beyond three 
nautical miles from the shore line. The massive blooms of blue-green algae along the shorelines
of the Baltic Sea are the most visible evidence of this environmental problem. A report on the
estimated nutrient load originating from ships' wastewater into the Baltic Sea found that
approximately 0.05% of the total nitrogen and 0.5% of the total phosphorus load in the Baltic
Sea is attributable to wastewater from cruise ships (Hanna-Kaisa Huhta et al, 2007). The
eutrophication in the Baltic Sea has created a sense of urgency on the part of the Scandinavian
countries to provide on shore transfer of wastewater to municipal treatment systems. While
there are environmental differences between the shallow Baltic Sea and the Puget Sound
region, the information provided by Scandinavian ports is expected to help the Port of Seattle to
evaluate biomass management approaches and learn from the experiences of the Baltic ports.
The Baltic Sea is a relatively shallow, enclosed body of water with minimal tidal exchange
surrounded by dense population. The Baltic Sea Area has been designated a Special Area under
the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution from Ships (1973, as amended by a
protocol in 1978  MARPOL 73/78). Such status is given to sea areas which, because of their
special oceanographic or ecological characteristics, are regarded as particularly sensitive to
environmental disturbances. As a result, regulations governing discharges of ship-generated
wastes have been enacted in the Baltic Sea area. All of the Baltic countries have agreed to the
establishment of a "no special fee" system under which ports charge reception and treatment
costs to all ships calling as part of their harbor fee, irrespective of whether a ship delivers any 
waste or not and irrespective of the type or amount of waste discharged. The Baltic countries
also agreed to a mandatory discharge of all wastes to port reception facilities before leaving
port. 
Due to the no special fee system, the Baltic seaports have invested in numerous waste reception
facilities (see Figure 9 and Table 5). Unfortunately, only some of the shipping companies
utilize these facilities. Those ships that utilize shore-side wastewater hook-ups have placed the 
ships wastewater treatment systems on "stand-by." Thus, separate biomass waste streams are
not being generated while at berth or out on the Baltic and all wastewaters are landed ashore.
Additional information on management of wastewater was collected as part of this study via email
correspondence with the Copenhagen Malm Ports in Denmark; the Port of Oslo, Norway;
the Port of Helsinki, Finland; and Port of Stockholm, Sweden, as described below. In all
instances, no distinction was made in the management of wastewater versus the management of
biomass. As stated earlier, ships that plan to discharge wastewater on shore typically do not
operate their wastewater treatment systems and thus no biomass is produced.

39                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
An additional information request for total off load time, logistical shore-side considerations 
(i.e., number of tanker trucks on the dock, etc.), and odor mitigation and system reliability has 
been made. Only limited information from the Port of Stockholm had been received at the time
of this publication and is provided below.
Copenhagen Malm Ports, Denmark
Copenhagen Malm Ports in Denmark utilize tanker trucks to collect wastewater from cruise
ships. After collection, the wastewater is pumped to the local municipal wastewater treatment
facility (e-mail correspondence with Leif Kurdahl, Copenhagen Malm Ports). Ships can
transfer waste to the tankers with no special fee if they meet the following conditions:
1.  The ship can deliver the sewage at the shipside at a pump capacity of 50 m3 per hour.
2.  Tankers can obtain unhindered access to and from the place of collection without delay.
3.  The ship is fitted with a standard flange.
Copenhagen Malm Ports charge a fee for disproportionately large amounts of waste (i.e. more
than 130 liters per person per day since the last port of call).











40                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port::?
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              0" Seattle



~NorwaY
'>
Sweden
I

Estonia


Latvia


Lithuania



Germany
Legend
o -National Capital
Poland
- City with Reception
Facility for Ship Waste

Figure 18. Baltic Sea Wastewater Reception Facility Locations
Port of Oslo, Norway
In Norway, the general rule is to discharge wastewater no less than 300 meters away from
shore (Correspondence with Lisbeth Petterson, Port of Oslo). However, there are several
protected areas in Norwegian waters that have more restrictive dumping rules (usually 12
nautical miles from shore). Despite less restrictive dumping rules, the Port of Oslo does offer
means of on shore disposal of cruise ship wastewater. The wastewater is collected via tanker
truck and then delivered to a local municipal treatment facility, but the exact method by which
41                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
the waste is collected is unclear. The Port of Oslo finances this service by charging all vessels a
waste fee, regardless of whether or not waste is disposed of on shore. This waste fee also
covers collection and disposal of garbage, recyclables, varnish waste, and bilge water (as long
as the amount of waste generated is considered reasonable given a ship's size and time at sea).
Port of Helsinki, Finland
The Port of Helsinki, Finland, has facilities for cruise ships to pump their wastewater to
municipal treatment systems (e-mail correspondence with Vuorivirta Kaarina, Port of
Helsinki). The Port of Helsinki recently extended its program for cruise ship wastewater
management in June 2008 (Voss, 2008). In order to make on shore discharge possible, the Port
of Helsinki built sewers and receiving bays at all cruise terminals and ferry docks that connect
to the city's sewer system and have a receiving capacity of approximately 100m/hr through
port-provided wastewater hoses.
Prior to 2008, the City of Helsinki enacted a separate charge for wastewater discharged into the
city sewer system. However, the Port recently formed a five-year agreement with Helsinki
Water (Helsingin Vesi) to establish a fixed fee regardless of the amount of water discharged,
enabling them to lower their prices and encourage cruise companies to use the system. The
long-term plan is to charge a standard fee for cruise vessels to discharge wastewater on shore,
and to reward the ship or company with the biggest increase in wastewater pumped into the
system at the end of the season with a discount on their discharge fees (Voss, 2008).
Port of Stockholm, Sweden
Like all ports in the Baltic Sea, the Port of Stockholm, Sweden, is regulated by maritime EU
rules and regulations that include a general port fee. The port has chosen to include waste
disposal service in the general port fee to encourage proper handling of wastewater (e-mail
correspondence with Melissa Feldtmann, Port of Stockholm). It should be noted that ships in
the Baltic do maintain the right to discharge their wastewater and biomass in international
waters (>12 nautical miles from shore). The Port of Stockholm does not use trucks to off load
the ships but has a sewage system in place with a number of connection points to transfer the
wastewater to municipal treatment facilities.
While the Port of Stockholm reports a high level of reliability with their wastewater reception
facilities, they have had continuous problems with hydrogenated sulfur compounds in the
wastewater forming into sulfuric acid. This mist above the water surface at the Port eats away
and corrodes the upper parts of the sewage pipes requiring a lot of maintenance. The Port is 
working with the ships to identify solutions to minimize the production of hydrogenated sulfur
in the ships' wastewater tanks. The Port also must maintain numerous different fittings to be
able to connect to the ships as there is not currently a standard fitting requirement. The Port of
Stockholm has also had odor complaints around wastewater off loading operations, although
the specific frequency of odor complaints was not reported.
42                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle

Table 5. Wastewater Reception Facilities at Ports in the Baltic Sea
Finland     Reception facility 
Hanko     ROPAX ships pump sewage straight into the sewer network. Ro-Ro ships can pump
sewage to a tank truck.
Helsinki     Etelsatama: 17 waste water reception points. Lnsisatama: 9 waste water reception
points.
Srnisten satama: 1 waste water reception point. Other harbor parts: totally 24 waste
water reception points. The waste water reception points are for passenger ships. The
port of Helsinki arranges waste water reception for cargo ships using the tank truck if
needed.
Inkoo
Ships can pump sewage to a tank truck.
Shipping
Kaskinen    Ships can pump sewage to a tank truck.
Naantali     Ships can pump sewage to a tank truck; there are waste stations for solid waste.
Oulu      Ships can pump sewage to a tank truck.
Pori        Ships can pump sewage to a tank truck; Ekokem Oy Ab collects oily waste.
Rauma     Ships can pump sewage to a tank truck.
Skldvik     Ships can pump sewage to a tank truck.
Turku      Silja and Viking Line ships pump the sewage straight into the sewer network. Other
domestic traffic has a possibility to use a tank truck by Hans Langh Oy.
Uusikaupunki  There are waste wells near the pier where ships can pump sewage. Ships can also pump
sewage to a tank truck.
Vaasa      In the passenger port there is a reception pipeline at ro-ro piers1&2. Ships can also
pump sewage to a tank truck.
Denmark 
Copenhagen  Sewage is pumped to the tank trucks and is then discharged into the municipal waste
water plant (biological and chemical waste water treatment).
Frederikshavn  Black water is pumped to the tank trucks and grey water is discharged into the
Frederikshavn's sewer network.
Rnne     Black water and grey water are pumped to the tank trucks. Part of the grey water is
discharged into the sewer network.
rhus      Private company collects sewage from ships.
Germany 
Sassnitz      No reception facilities for waste water. Sewage is pumped to the tank truck from a
local waste disposal company.
Latvia 
Ventspils     Sewage is transported to JSC Ventbunkers for treatment.
Riga       Sewage is transported to Riga Municipal Waste Water Treatment Plant.
Poland 
Gdansk     Sewage is discharged into the sewer network from the tank trucks (WUKO) and after 
that there are several treatment plants: mechanical-biological sewage treatment plant in
Port Pnocny, sewage treatment plant KOS 2x3 in Basen Grniczy, sewage treatment
plant Bioclere at Przemysowe Berth.
43                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
Gdynia     Sewage is pumped to the tank trucks.
Sweden 
Halmstad    Reception facilities only for oil sludge and bilge water.
Helsingborg   The passenger ships discharge sewage into the sewer network; other ships pump
sewage to the tank truck.
Kalmar     Local waste management company collects the sludge from ships. It is transported by
trucks to a terminal situated in the harbor.
Landskrona   Waste water is pumped into the sewer network.
Oskarshamn  No reception facilities.
Oxelsund   The type of reception facility is not described.
Slvesborg   Sewage is pumped to the tank trucks.
Ume     No reception facilities.
Waste water reception facilities in the ports in the year 2005 based on the inquiry results (Huhta
et al., 2007).
Future Alternatives for Biomass Disposal
A significant effort is underway by the cruise industry to develop innovative ways to achieve
better environmental performance in the disposal of waste from ships.
The company PyroGenesis, with support from the U.S. Navy and in cooperation with Carnival
Cruise Lines, has developed the Plasma Arc Waste Destruction System ( PAWDS ) as an
alternative to sh pboard incineration. According to website information, the system is scalablei
and has the option for energy recovery with system capacities ranging from 0.1 to 15m3/day.
The final product is an inert sand-like ash which can either be off loaded in-port or disposed of
at sea. The sys em has been in operation on Carnival Cruise Lines M/S Fantasy since 200t                                                3 and
is now operated solely by the vessel crew. The system handles 5m3/day of waste. PAWDS is
currently being marketed as Plasma King Waste Destruction System by Deerberg-Systems.
Scanship Environmental makes waste treatment and handling systems for a significant portion
of the cruise ship market, recently entered into an agreement with ITI Energy Limited to
promote, install, and support ITI's marine gasification technology. This technology allows the
transformation of difficult to-process feedstocks such as municipal solid waste and sewage
sludge into a gas clean enough to fuel an internal combustion engine. According to Scanship
the system will be on the market soon and will be suitable for new-build and retrofit markets.
While this may hold promise for future applications, more data from demonstration projects
will be needed to determine the viability of the technology.


44                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY         Port
DRAFT PHASE 1A STUDY
01 Seattle
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment

Section 4 
Conclusion
References
Appendix









45                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
Conclusion
Based on the data compiled for this report, the following primary conclusions have been drawn:
There is currently no single viable option for managing biomass created on board
Seattle-based cruise ships.
Biomass capacity on board cruise vessels ranges from three days to one week, with two
ships having a full-week's capacity.
While biomass is pumpable and could be transferred on shore, there are significant
shore-side challenges that would have to be overcome to accomplish this.
On shore transfer would have significant impacts to pier-side operations. The extent of
these impacts would vary by vessel, dock facility, volume of biomass to discharge, and
method chosen to transfer to shore facilities.
An alternative on shore transfer option would be to discharge to a marine barge. The
most significant challenge with this option would be synchronization of the off-shore
transfer of biomass with vessel fueling, which is also done from marine barges,
generally through a common break in the vessel hull.
Prior to making the significant investment anticipated for a changed mechanism for managing
biomass, the Port of Seattle would have to first invest in additional study associated with the
feasibility and cost of vessel retrofits as well as whether there are environmental benefits to off
loading biomass at the Port of Seattle.







46                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
References
Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). "Division of Water, Cruise Ship
Program." Accessed September 28, 2008.
http://www.dec.state.ak.us/water/cruise_ships/index.htm 
Hamworthy. "Membrane BioReactor Grey and Blackwater Treatment." Accessed September
28, 2008 http://www.hamworthy.com/docGallery/415.PDF
Huhta, Hanna-Kaisa, Jorma Rytkonen & Jukka Sassi. "Estimating nutrient load from waste
waters originating from ships in the Baltic Sea Area" Espoo 2007. VTT Tiedotteita  Research
Notes 2370. 58 p. + app. 13 p.
Hydroxyl. "Hydroxyl Sea Clean." Accessed September 28, 2008 
http://www.hydroxyl.com/products_cleansea.php 
King County Department of Natural Resources and Parks Wastewater Treatment Division,
2008. 2007 Biosolids Quality Summary. Seattle, WA.
MEPC (Marine Environment Protection Committee), adopted 13 October 2006. Annex 26
Resolution MEPC.159(55), Revised Guidelines on Implementation of Effluent Standards and
Performance Tests for Sewage Treatment Plants. International Maritime Organization.
Northwest CruiseShip Association. "NWCruiseShip.org." Accessed September 28, 2008
www.alaska.nwcruiseship.org/ 
Port of Seattle. "Cruise Seattle." Accessed September 28, 2008
http://www.portseattle.org/seaport/cruise/ 
ROCHEM (n.d.). "Clearly Superior in Waste Water Treatment," Accessed September 28, 2008.
http://www.rochem.com/Home/home.html 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006a. Holland America Veendam Sampling Episode
Report. Washington, DC. http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/cruise_ships/veendam.html 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006b. Norwegian Star Sampling Episode Report.
Washington, DC http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/cruise_ships/finalstar.html 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006c. Princess Cruise Lines Island Princess Sampling
Episode Report. Washington, DC. http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/cruise_ships/island.html
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2006d. Sampling Episode Report Holland America
Oosterdam Sampling Episode 6506. Washington, DC.
http://www.epa.gov/owow/oceans/cruise_ships/oosterdam.html 
47                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY            Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment                              01 Seattle
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 2007. Draft Cruise Ship Discharge Assessment Report.
Washington, DC. 
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 40cfr133.102. Washington, DC.
Voss, Kelly. "The Port of Helsinki Current Environmental Projects. September 3, 2008"
Prepared for the Port of Seattle.















48                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

CRUISE VESSEL BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY         Port
PHASE 1A STUDY
01 Seattle
Data Compilation and Initial Assessment

Appendix 
Blank Survey  As Sent to Cruise Lines










1                            Cruise Vessel Biomass Management Study
Phase 1A Study, 7/23/2009

Port                              P.O. Box 1209
01 Seattle                            Seattle, WA U.S.A. 98111 
BIOMASS MANAGEMENT STUDY
The Port of Seattle is in the process of studying the feasibility of alternatives to open-ocean
discharge of cruise vessel biomass. The first step of this process is to gather information on
cruise vessels currently calling at the port. In support of this study, the Port of Seattle is
requesting that you please answer the following questions regarding the current methods for
handling biomass produced within the vessel. Please return the completed survey to Marie Fritz
(fritz.m@portseattle.org) no later than noon on July 16, 2008.
For the purposes of this study, "Biomass" refers to the partially-treated solids residuals from the
wastewater treatment process.
1. Cruise line and name of the vessel:

2. Type (make/model) of advanced wastewater treatment system(s) or marine sanitation device
(please include schematic of treatment system if available):

3. Identify on board waste water types that generate flow which enter the AWTS for treatment
(greywater, black water, etc.):

4. For each system identified above, provide the approximate quantity of blackwater and
greywater generated daily:

5. Identify the storage capacity of untreated wastewater within the vessel:

6. Identify the storage capacity of treated wastewater within the vessel:

7. Identify the daily treatment (process) capacity of the AWTS system (example  gallons or
cubic meters per day):

Port                              P.O. Box 1209
01 Seattle                            Seattle, WA U.S.A. 98111 
8. Identify the daily volume of biomass generated and the volume of biomass generated on a
normal cruise evolution (7-days):

9.  Estimated consistency of biomass (%liquid, % solid):

10. Identify the capacity of biomass that can be held on board and the method of storage (dry,
wet, in tanks, in containers, etc.).


11. What is the current method of biomass disposal?


12. In a normal cruise evolution (7-day voyage), how often is biomass discharged?


13. Is the point where biomass is discharged determined based on capacity or by vessel location?

14. If the vessel conducts shorter cruises (3-4 days), how often and where is biomass discharged?

15. Has the vessel's biomass ever been sampled for conventional pollutants or any other
parameters?

Port                              P.O. Box 1209
01 Seattle                            Seattle, WA U.S.A. 98111 
16. Is this vessel currently fitted to store and discharge biomass to a shoreside facility?

17. If "No" to question 16:
a) What would it take to modify the existing on board systems to allow discharge to a
shoreside facility?

b) Is the consistency of the biomass material conducive to pumping to a shoreside facility? 

18. If "Yes" to question 16:
a)  How is the biomass transferred shoreside (pumped, water-added then pumped,
vacuumed, etc.)?

b)  Identify company that receives the biomass shoreside and (if possible) the location where
the biomass is ultimately disposed:

c)  How long does it currently take to transfer biomass to the shoreside facilities?

19. If all or portions of the biomass is incinerated:
a)  Describe what portion of the biomass is incinerated (screened solids, etc.):

b)  How is this biomass transferred to the incinerator:

c)  How much time does it take to transfer and incinerate the biomass?

d)  How much fuel is consumed in the incineration of the biomass?

e)  How is the remnant ash (left over following incineration) typically disposed?

Limitations of Translatable Documents

PDF files are created with text and images are placed at an exact position on a page of a fixed size.
Web pages are fluid in nature, and the exact positioning of PDF text creates presentation problems.
PDFs that are full page graphics, or scanned pages are generally unable to be made accessible, In these cases, viewing whatever plain text could be extracted is the only alternative.