The cooperation I think would be a model, and my knowledge of that is incomplete as well, as I have not worked on ballast water.
I do know there was some disjunct in the early days when some was optional and some was required and there were different standards, but I think it's been converged very well. I would look to that as a model for cooperation in this area.
I would argue that perhaps there has not been enough assessment. Again, we can say that we're doing the right thing, but unless we rigorously apply scientific standards to assess whether the result has been efficacious, do we have the result we're looking for? It's hard to judge that.
My bigger concern.... And it's a bit hard, because I've mostly been studying Great Lakes species that have been dispersing away from the Great Lakes into interior waters. What we have here as your principal concern at this moment is the opposite when they are coming from other watersheds into the Great Lakes. There you have many different points of entry, many state, provincial, and national jurisdictions. I'll use as a small case Lake Memphremagog in Quebec, which was very concerned about zebra mussels at one time. I believe the Vermont side wanted to install boat washing stations, a really rigorous approach to making sure there would be no chance they would come in that way. But then the Quebec side had nothing going on. So it seemed pretty futile. If you don't have that kind of coordination, it makes it a pretty futile effort.