
Experts linked outdated tests, weak enforcement and crew training gaps to persistent oily waste discharge risks and underused flocculation technology
In Riviera’s webinar, Oily waste: challenges, issues and remedies held on 29 October 2025, H2O LLC technical specialist Matthew Adams and Marinfloc sales and production manager Fredrik Andersson warned that outdated rules, weak enforcement and poor training continued to undermine oily water separator (OWS) performance.
Mr Adams framed the issue in terms of seamanship and regulation and reminded delegates that nearly all modern OWS units were built to IMO MEPC 107(49), designed to deliver effluent at or below 15 ppm oil content.
“The OWS or the oily water separator serves as the first line of defence in preventing accidental oil discharges into the sea,” he said, but added this depended on crews understanding discharge limits, special areas and oil record book requirements, and on vessels keeping oil content monitors (OCMs) correctly calibrated.
He identified three recurring causes of accidental discharge: weak understanding of IMO discharge rules; inadequate maintenance and training; and neglected OCM calibration.
Mr Adams stressed that inspectors increasingly expected crews to demonstrate competence of the equipment itself.
Regular operation, basic housekeeping and scheduled maintenance, supported by genuine calibration certificates from authorised dealers were presented as minimum expectations rather than best practice.
Mr Andersson focused on enforcement gaps and fuel changes and noted that satellite monitoring had detected tens of thousands of oil slicks over the past quarter century, yet only a tiny fraction had been investigated.
“When no one checks, compliance becomes optional,” he said, warning this encouraged the continued use of bypasses and outdated systems.
At the same time, he noted, bilge water composition had been transformed by low-sulphur fuels, methanol, LNG, biodiesel, modern detergents and advanced lubricants, while type-approval tests still relied on 1990s fuel samples.
According to Mr Andersson, static separator designs certified under MEPC 107(49) struggled with this dynamic bilge water, and the absence of updated test protocols removed incentives to develop and certify improved designs.
He argued that flocculation offered a practical retrofit and newbuild option, allowing treatment systems to be tuned to changing bilge chemistry. “The solutions for pollution exist,” he said. “There are no excuses.”
Polls during the webinar underlined the technological and regulatory pressure points.
Asked which factor most significantly impacted OWS performance with modern fuels, 55% of respondents selected “increased emulsion stability from fuel blends”, with 27% pointing to biological contamination and surfactants and 18% to temperature-dependent viscosity variations.
In a second poll, 54% said MEPC 107(49) test protocols should be updated ’urgently’ to reflect current fuel types, while 41% favoured an update with grandfathering for existing equipment. The organiser did not disclose the number of respondents for either poll.
In closing remarks, Mr Adams again highlighted crew competence and the risk of fraud around calibration certificates.
Mr Andersson urged operators and manufacturers to act ahead of formal rule changes.
Both panellists linked improved training, proactive maintenance and the adoption of proven treatment technologies to reduce legal exposure and to achieve a measurable reduction in oily waste discharges.
Events
© 2026 Riviera Maritime Media Ltd.