Ballast water, International Maritime Organization

BWMS Self-Monitoring Tech Debated at MEPC 69

Denmark have proposed the self-monitoring of ballast water management systems for indicative compliance with the Ballast Water Management Convention and its guidelines to the International Maritime Organization’s (IMO) 69th Marine Environment Protection Committee (MEPC).

Although the Danish Proposal failed to gain has failed full support from Member States, parts of the Proposal will be sent to the IMO’s Ballast Water Review Group for further discussion.

The Proposal submitted by Denmark read as follows:

4/10 Self-monitoring of ballast water management systems for indicative compliance with the Ballast Water Management Convention and its guidelines

Denmark provides a further basis for discussion of the proposed change of a BWM.2/Circ.43 on Amendments to the Guidance for Administrations on the type approval process for ballast water management systems in accordance with Guidelines (G8) by providing information on a continuously operating self-monitoring device for ballast water management systems known as the bw-monitor in-line system (see bw-monitor.com).

The sponsors propose that the self-monitoring system of a BWMS should include parameters indicative to the proper functioning or failure of the BWMS which may include parameters specific to the methodology applied and biological parameters to assess the functionality of the system. Denmark states the ballast water -monitor in-line system offers such self-monitoring facilities applicable for most BWMS regardless of the technologies applied.

The Feedback From Member States

The Japanese delegation stated that flow rate and temperature, amongst other factors, should be considered for any self-monitoring technology. They highlighted that monitoring is challenging due to large quantities of ballast water in short period. In summary they concluded that more information and more data, including verification, is needed for this issue to progress further.

Spain voiced that they wanted to give consideration to the proposal and the viability of the technology. They suggested that Denmark could introduce the proposal to see whether it is viable or not.

India rejected the proposal, saying that it did not support Denmark’s proposal for real time monitoring as the think it is “premature”.

Australia agreed and stated that it didn’t think that the proposal should go forward at the moment.

The Bahamas representative highlighted that– in paragraph 9 of the Proposal, Denmark talks about what a self-monitoring system should include and therefore suggested that the group should consider paragraph 9 alone. In conclusion they stated that self-monitoring should not be included as a concept at this MEPC and confirmed support for more information to be provided by Denmark at MEPC 70.

Intertanko also supported the notion that it is too early to think about self-monitoring now, deeming it too premature. They suggested that perhaps Denmark should provide a more detailed proposal outlining parameters in the next meeting to enable more information and not a blank canvas.

Marshall Islands also confirmed that it believes this Proposal is too premature.

MEPC Chairman, Mr Arsenio Dominguez has proposed that Denmark’s self-monitoring Proposal be sent to the review group and for the review group to advise accordingly. Therefore, Paragraph 9 will be submitted to the review group for further discussion in relation to Item 12, Annex VI.