I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc For reasons of economy, this document is printed in a limited number. Delegates are 

kindly asked to bring their copies to meetings and not to request additional copies.

INTERNATIONAL MARITIME ORGANIZATION

IMO 

E

 

MARINE ENVIRONMENT PROTECTION 

COMMITTEE 

57th session 

Agenda item 2 

MEPC 57/2/4

 7 September 2007

 Original: ENGLISH

HARMFUL AQUATIC ORGANISMS IN BALLAST WATER 

Basic Approval of Active Substance used by GloEn-PatrolTM 

Ballast Water Management System 

Submitted by the Republic of Korea 

SUMMARY

Executive summary: This document contains non-confidential information for 

Basic Approval of the Active Substance produced by the 

GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water Management System in accordance 

with the Procedure for approval of ballast water management systems 

that make use of Active Substances (G9) adopted by resolution 

MEPC.126(53) 

Action to be taken: Paragraph 6 

Related documents: BWM/CONF/36; MEPC 53/24/Add.1; MEPC 56/2/2 and 

BWM.2/Circ.10 

Introduction 

1 Ballast water management systems which make use of Active Substances or Preparations 

containing one or more Active Substances shall be approved by the Organization under 

regulation D-3.2 of the BWM Convention. 

2 The Procedure for approval of ballast water management systems that make use of Active 

Substances (G9), adopted by resolution MEPC.126(53), defines the principal aspects to be 

documented by data or testing (MEPC 53/24/Add.1, annex 4, paragraph 4.2.1) and some basic 

principles for risk evaluation (MEPC 53/24/Add.1, annex 4, paragraph 5.3). According to 

section 6 of the Procedure (G9), the Organization should evaluate the information provided in 

the application. 

3 According to BWM.2/Circ.10, proposals for approval of ballast water management 

systems that make use of Active Substances are to be submitted to Marine Environment Division 

of the Organization to be reviewed by the GESAMP-Ballast Water Working Group. In the 

meantime, a document on the proposal for approval containing all the non-confidential data 

related to the respective ballast water management systems that make use of Active Substance 

needs to be submitted to MEPC 57. 
MEPC 57/2/4 - 2 - 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

4 The competent authority in the Republic of Korea has verified the application dossier 

prepared by PANASIA CO., LTD. and believes it to satisfy the data requirements of 

the Procedure (G9). 

 

5 The Republic of Korea therefore submits the non-confidential part of the applicant’s 

dossier in the annex of this document to the Organization for evaluation according to the 

Procedure (G9). The complete dossier will be made available to the experts of the 

GESAMP-Ballast Water Working Group with the understanding of confidential treatment. 

 

Action requested of the Committee 

 

6 The Committee is invited to consider the proposal for approval and decide as appropriate. 

*** 
MEPC 57/2/4 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

ANNEX 

PROPOSAL FOR APPROVAL OF 

GloEn-PatrolTM BALLAST WATER MANAGEMENT SYSTEM 

1 INTRODUCTION

PANASIA CO., LTD. has developed a modular ballast water management system that operates 

in-line during the uptake of ballast water. The first stage is a filter that was specially designed for 

ballast water applications. It significantly reduces the sediment load from the ballast water and 

also removes some of the micro-organisms. The filter is installed on the discharge side of the 

ballast water pumps and is fully automatic in terms of its operation and cleaning without 

affecting the filtration process, and flushing water is returned into seawater in situ. The UV unit 

employs high-intensity, medium-pressure ultra violet (MPUV) lamps to destroy living 

micro-organisms present in the liquid being treated. 

During deballasting, the filter unit is by-passed. The ballast water is treated again by the UV unit 

only to destroy any organisms which might have regrown in the tanks during the voyage. 

This is suitable for both retro-fitted installations and installations on new builds. 

During 2005, 2006, and 2007, many experimental studies were conducted, on the PANASIA’s 

GloEn-PatrolTM System to evaluate the biological efficacy on natural plankton seawater 

communities and laboratory-made algal cultures. The pilot plant is, therefore, designed to treat 

water as it passes through the system. The flow rate designed for the pilot plant is from 50 m3

/hr 

up to 250 m3

/hr (up to 300 m3/hr) controlled by a butterfly valve. GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water 

Management System used for the pilot test consisted of a filter unit, a UV unit, and a Monitoring 

and Control Panel (called the “Control Panel” hereinafter). 

.1 Filtration system as a pre-treatment: 

• Flow rate: 250m3/hr 

• Filtration degree: 50 micron 

• Working pressure: 2.5 bar 

• Max. working pressure: 10 bar 

• Material 

- Filter housing: SS 316L 

- Filter screen: SS 316L 

- Cleaning mechanism: SS 316L 

.2 UV Disinfection system as a main treatment installed with: 

• UV Reactor (SS316L, flow rate: 50-65m3/hr) 

• Medium pressure UV lamps 

• UV monitor 

• Temperature sensor 

• Automatic washing wiper for quartz sleeves 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 2 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

2 IDENTIFICATION 

2.1 Terms and definitions 

2.1.1 GloEn-PatrolTM is the commercial name of the Ballast Water Management System 

developed by “PANASIA CO., LTD.”. This system is composed of filtration modules configured 

in parallel as a pre-treatment process, followed by a UV irradiation process equipped with a 

medium pressure ultraviolet (MPUV) lamp as a main treatment process. 

2.1.2 “Ballast Water” means the treated seawater through the GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water 

Management System. 

2.1.3 “Treated Water” is the seawater treated by the GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water 

Management System. 

2.1.4 “Pre-treated Water” is the seawater treated by only a filtration system which is a 

pre-treatment part of the GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water Management System. 

2.1.5 “Ballast Water Discharge” means the ballast water as would be discharged overboard 

through the GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water Management System again. 

2.1.6 “Active Substance” means a substance or organism, including a virus or a fungus that has 

a general or specific action on or against harmful aquatic micro-organisms and pathogens. 

In the GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water Management System, the MPUV process produces 

a “Photon” as the only “Active Substance,” which is completely responsible for inactivating all 

harmful aquatic micro-organisms and pathogens present in the ballast water 

(de Mora et al., 2000; Anderson et al., 2003). 

2.1.7 “Preparation” means any commercial formulation containing one or more Active 

Substances including any additives: 

The GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water Management System does not intentionally add any 

“Preparation” besides UV light. 

Not applicable. 

2.1.8 “Relevant Chemical” means transformation or reaction products that are produced during 

the treatment process or in the receiving environment and may be of concern to the aquatic 

environment and human health when discharged. 

The GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water Management System regards only Hydroxyl Radical (•OH) as 

a “Relevant Chemical”. However, the amount of •OH produced in the system is extremely small 

(de Mora et al., 2000; Zepp, 1987; Brezonik and Fulkerson-Brekken, 1998; Vaughan and 

Blough, 1988). 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 3 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

2.2 Background for determining the “Active Substance” and “Relevant Chemicals” in 

the GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water Management System. 

2.2.1 “Active Substance” (Photon) 

2.2.1.1 The GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water Management System was designed to disinfect all 

kind of harmful aquatic micro-organisms and pathogens present in seawater. The key method of 

this system to inactivate harmful aquatic micro-organisms and pathogens is the use of direct 

photolysis with the MPUV irradiation process. The MPUV lamp used in this system generates 

photons that have a polychromatic wavelength (200~300 nm), which makes it possible 

to kill all kinds of marine microbes that have this specifically sensitive wavelength 

(Giese and Darby, 2000). 

2.2.1.2 Since the general definition of “Active Substance” is a substance or organism, 

including a virus or a fungus that has a general or specific action on or against harmful aquatic 

micro-organisms and pathogens, “Photon” is defined as the “Active Substance” in the 

GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water Management System. 

2.2.2 Relevant chemical (•OH) 

2.2.2.1 Through the sunlight (especially UV light) exposure of natural water, •OH could be 

formed photochemically by a variety of mechanisms. The absorption of light by DOM (dissolved 

organic matter) initially results in the formation of a single excited state species (DOM*) that 

subsequently decays through a series of photophysical and photochemical pathways producing 

•OH (de Mora et al., 2000): 

DOM + hv Æ DOM* ÆÆ •OH 

2.2.2.2 Another route of •OH production is the irradiation of nitrate in its long-wavelength 

absorption band (maximum 302 nm), resulting in •O-

 production as an intermediate. The 

produced •O-

 is rapidly protonated to its conjugate acid, •OH (Zepp, 1987; Brezonik and 

Fulkerson-Brekken, 1998; Vaughan and Blough, 1998): 

NO3

-

 + hv Æ Æ •OH 

2.2.2.3 As described above, it can be expected that the MPUV light could generate •OH 

through the same mechanisms. Therefore, •OH is defined as the “Relevant Chemical” in the 

GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water Management System. 

2.3 Test strategy of “Treated Water” by “Active Substance” and “Relevant Chemical” 

2.3.1 Basic Characteristics Testing 

During the MPUV process, the characteristics of seawater might be changed by attacks of the 

“Active Substance” and “Relevant Chemical.” To investigate this possibility, the basic 

characteristics (i.e., Ions, TOC and UV absorbance spectrum, Specific UV Absorbance) of 

seawater were compared with the “Treated Water” by the MPUV process. No change was 

observed. This confirms that the “Treated Water” is absolutely the same as the “Pre-treated 

Water.” Therefore, tests on the toxicity of the “Treated Water” are not regarded as mandatory. 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 4 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

2.3.2 Other Oxidants Residual Testing 

According to the literature, the reactions of •OH with Br- and Cl- lead to the formation of 

hypochlorous acid/hypochlorite ion (HOCl/OCl-) and hypobromous acid/hypobromite ion 

(HOBr/OBr-) (Zehavi and Rabani, 1972; Jayson and Parsons, 1973), which are relatively stable 

in water. In addition, the combination of •OH or naturally caused reactions (e.g., natural water 

exposed to sunlight) can produce a rather stable oxidant, hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) (Buxton et 

al., 1988, Cooper et al., 1988; de Mora et al., 2000). To investigate the possibility of their 

productions, residual concentrations of HOCl/OCl- and HOBr/OBr- in the “Treated Water” were 

measured using the Total Residual Oxidant (TRO) analysis method (Perrins et al., 2006). 

For H2O2 analysis, the fluorometric method was used with the specifically devised H2O2-analyzer 

(Lazrus et al., 1985; Oh et al., 2005). HOCl/OCl-

 and HOBr/OBr- were not detected in the 

“Treated Water” (see appendix). In the case of H2O2, a trace of residual H2O2 was detected in the 

“Treated Water”, but it was very close to the detection limit (MDL= 10 μg/L), which is not 

considered to be problematic in the marine aquatic environment. 

2.3.3 By-products Formation Testing 

The HOCl/OCl-

 and HOBr/OBr- could react with dissolved organic matters (DOM) in seawater, 

forming several harmful halogenated organics such as Thrihalomethanes (THMs), 

Haloacetic acid (HAAs), and others (Westerhoff et al., 2004). To investigate the possibility of 

their production, suspected halogenated organics in the “Treated Water” were measured with 

proper analytical methods (Standard method 20th, 1999). As a result, none was detected in the 

Treated Water (see appendix). 

As described above, both the “Active Substance” (Photon) and “Relevant Chemical” (•OH) must 

be not residual in both of “Ballast Water” and “Ballast Water Discharge”, therefore, they don’t 

affect the marine aquatic environment. Also, the “Treated Water” must not affect the marine 

aquatic environment. Therefore, this proposal includes documents and references to justify this. 

2.4 Abbreviations used in the proposal 

BWMS Ballast Water Management System 

DOC Dissolved organic carbon 

DOM Dissolved organic matter 

HAAs Haloacetic acids 

H2O2 Hydrogen peroxide 

HOBr Hypobromous acid 

HOCl Hypochlorous acid 

IMO International Maritime Organization 

•OH Hydroxyl radical 

OBr- Hypobromite ion 

OCl- Hypochlorite ion 

IUVA International Ultraviolet Association 

LPUV Low-pressure ultraviolet 

MPUV Medium-pressure ultraviolet 

NOM Natural organic matter 

SUVA Specific UV absorbance 

TOC Total organic carbon 

TRO Total residual oxidant 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 5 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

THMs Trihalomethanes 

TSS Total suspended solid 

USEPA United States Environmental Protection Agency 

UV dose Ultra Violet dose 

mJ/cm2 milli Jule per centimeter square 

mW sec/cm2` milli Watt second per centimeter square 

M Mole per litre 

M-1S-1 Per Mole per second 

ug/L Microgram per litre 

2.5 Advantages and validity for use of the MPUV-based GloEn-PatrolTM 

2.5.1 Polychromatic wavelength of MPUV lamp 

There are two main types of UV inactivation technology mostly in use: low-pressure (LP) and 

medium-pressure (MP). LPUV lamps emit UV lights at 254 nm, whereas MPUV lamps could 

produce UV of a higher intensity and over a broader range of wavelengths than LPUV lamps. 

The main UV spectra from MPUV that have a damaging effect are UV-C (200-280 nm), 

UV-B (280-315 nm) and UV-A (315-400 nm), and in some cases it has been known that MPUV 

is superior to LPUV since the DNA of microbes has its maximum absorption at both 200 nm 

and 265 nm. The GloEn-PatrolTM system uses the MPUV lamp to maximize the disinfection 

efficiency of seawater (de Mora et al., 2000). 

2.5.2 MPUV as a solution of photorepair 

Another critical problem of LPUV is photorepair after exposure to LPUV (Sanz et al., 2007); no 

significant photorepair has been reported using MPUV. Because the broader wavelengths emitted 

by MPUV not only damage DNA but also cause damage to other molecules, including the repair 

enzyme. With these concerns in mind, we used the MPUV type in the GloEn-PatrolTM ballast 

water treatment system. 

2.5.3 MPUV as a solution of organism re-growth 

Irradiation with UV light is highly effective and has been used for decades to reduce or eliminate 

various micro-organisms (Dobbs and Rogerson, 2005). For ballast water, UV light has been 

successful in the laboratory and on a larger scale. However, if the improperly “Treated Water” 

stays in the tank open to air, the water’s fate must be considered. So-called re-growth has been 

reported after UV treatments. To solve this problem, the ballast water is treated by the 

GloEn-PatrolTM again during deballasting. 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 6 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

2.5.4 Guarantees for the MPUV based GloEn-PatrolTM as a clean process for the 

ballast water treatment 

The summary of specific advantages for the MPUV-based GloEn-PatrolTM is as follows: 

• UV is the most environmentally friendly way to reduce the number of viable 

micro-organisms, without polluting the local seawater ecology. 

• No biocide chemicals are required. 

• No toxic by-products are formed. 

• No corrosion problems are found in ballast tanks. 

• The process requires little maintenance and is easy to handle. 

• The use of medium-pressure lamp technology allows small space requirements. 

• It involves minimum operating costs and maximum operating safety. 

Also, internationally recognized associations, International UV Association (IUVA) and the 

USEPA, guarantee water treatment by UV irradiation as a clean process. 

The IUVA describes the UV technology as shown below: 

Since UV is light, it travels through air and water at the speed of light, and when the UV 

source is turned off, the UV is gone. There are no residuals, and the water that has 

been exposed to UV is the same as it was before exposure, and certainly the water is 

not radioactive. UV water disinfection units are designed to provide enough of a 

UV dose so that any pathogenic micro-organisms in the water are rendered inactive. What 

happens is that the UV is absorbed by the DNA in micro-organisms; the DNA is damaged 

so that the organism cannot reproduce. Cells that cannot reproduce cannot cause disease. 

The good thing about UV is that it does its job while the water is passing through the 

unit, but after the water has passed through, it has been disinfected, but its water 

quality has not changed. (Quotation source: http://www.iuva.org/public/faqs.php) 

Also, the USEPA regards the UV technology as a clean technology that does not form 

any specific harmful by-products. 

Disinfection using a UV system is well-known as a clean process that does not generate 

disinfection by-products, according to the rule (Stage 2 Disinfectants and Disinfection 

By-products Proposed Rule (Stage 2 DBPR)) regulated by the EPA, which addresses 

risks from microbial pathogens and disinfectants/disinfection by-products (D/DBPs). 

The Stage 2 DBPR focuses on public health protection by limiting exposure to DBPs, 

specifically total trihalomethanes (TTHM) and five haloacetic acids (HAA5), which can 

form in water through disinfectants used to control microbial pathogens. 

However, this rule will apply to all community water systems (CWSs) and 

non-transient non-community water systems (NTNCWSs) that add a primary or 

residual disinfectant other than ultraviolet (UV) light or deliver water that 

has been disinfected by a primary or residual disinfectant other than UV. 

(Quotation source: http://www.epa.gov/safewater/stage2/index.html) 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 7 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

2.5.5 As described above, “the Advantages and validity for use of the MPUV based 

GloEn-PatrolTM” clearly indicate that the effect to the marine aquatic environment by the 

MPUV-based GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water Management System is actually out of concern. 

But in order to reconfirm the safety of the ballast water discharge treated by the GloEn-PatrolTM

system, several tests with ballast water were performed. 

2.6 Test methods 

For this proposal, tests with “Pre-treated Water” and “Treated Water” (defined as 

“Ballast Water”) collected from the pilot plant were performed to find out if there were any 

changes in the water characteristics between the samples. For these tests, all analyses were done 

according to standard methods (or equivalent). 

The pilot plant testing is accredited by 1KEMTi, 2KICT and 3YIEST for chemical analysis of the 

samples. The data on quality assurance are provided in QAPP. 

2.7 Alternatives to testing and non-submission of data 

Both photon and •OH defined, as the “Active Substance” and “Relevant Chemicals”, 

respectively, have non-residual properties. Chemical analysis and toxicological testing with them 

are impossible. 

2.7.1 Active Substance (Photon)

The measurement of photonic energy was carried out with a sensor equipped on the MPUV 

system. The measured photonic energy was compared to data obtained from documents or 

references explaining the naturally caused phenomenon in seawater (e.g., sunlight irradiation) 

and experimental results performed by other UV systems. 

2.7.2 Relevant Chemical (•OH) 

•OH residual testing of ballast water was conducted with the ballast water treated by the pilot 

plant. The residual •OH could be indirectly measured by measuring the decay rate or 

decomposed concentration of the •OH probe compound. In this test, p-chlorobenzoic acid 

(pCBA), which rapidly reacts with only •OH (rate constant, k = 5×109

 M-1s

-1), was used as a 

probe compound to detect •OH (Buxton et al., 1988): 

pCBA + •OH Æ kOH,pCBA = 5 x 109

 M-1s

-1

The YIEST has a specific duty in •OH residual testing, employing a specifically designed 

experimental method based on its accumulated experience in that field. 

 

1

 Korea Environment & Merchandise Testing Institute. 2

 Korea Institute of Construction Technology. 

3

 Onsei Institute of Environmental Science & Technology. 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 8 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

3 DATA-SET OF PHOTON AND HYDROXYL RADICAL 

3.1 Identification of the Substance or Preparation 

The proposal for approval of an “Active Substance” or a “Preparation” should include a chemical 

identification and description of the chemical components even if generated onboard. A chemical 

identification should be provided for any “Relevant Chemicals.” 

3.1.1 Active Substance 

3.1.1.1 The MPUV-based GloEn-PatrolTM produces photons as an only Active Substance that 

is available to kill and inactivate micro-organisms. The definition of the “Photon” is a particle of 

electromagnetic radiation that travels at the speed of light, used to explain phenomena that 

require light to behave as particles rather than as waves. Because the photons are only available 

upon turning on the MPUV lamp, there must be no residual photons in both “Ballast Water” and 

“Ballast Water Discharge”. 

3.1.1.2 The information required by IMO as listed below is not applicable for Photon. 

.1 the Trade name (where relevant); 

.2 the chemical (IUPAC) name; 

.3 the CAS number; 

.4 the UN number and proper shipping name (where relevant); 

.5 the Molar mass; 

.6 the empirical formula; 

.7 the structural formula; 

.8 the classification in accordance with the UN GHS system; 

.9 the purity of the technical material and identification of impurities (chemical name 

and CAS-numbers, etc.); and 

.10 the identity of any stabilizers or necessary additives. 

3.1.2 Relevant Chemicals

3.1.2.1 The by-product that the MPUV-based GloEn-PatrolTM system might produce when 

reacting with ballast water has been determined to be only •OH. 

3.1.2.2 The following information for •OH (hydroxyl radical) deemed to be a “Relevant 

Chemicals” is as follows (NDRL/NIST Solution Kinetics Database, 2005): 

.1 the Chemical (IUPAC) name; InChI=1/HO/h1H 

.2 the CAS number: 3352-57-6 

.3 the Molar mass: 17.01 (g/mol) 

.4 the empirical formula: HO 

.5 the structural formula: O* H and 

.6 the classification in accordance with the GHS system 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 9 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

3.1.3 Other Chemicals

According to Procedure (G9), where the processes might produce by-products not deemed to be 

“Relevant Chemicals” by the applicant, a justification for such a conclusion should be provided. 

3.1.3.1 The MPUV-based GloEn-PatrolTM system might produce other chemicals such as 

HOCl/OCl-

, HOBr/OBr-, THMs, HAAs, other halogenated organics, and H2O2 due to the 

possibility of •OH production during MPUV irradiation. The information on each chemical 

defined as “Other Chemical” is as follows: 

3.1.3.1.1 HOCl/OCl-

 

HOCl is a weak acid (pKa = 7.5 at 25 oC), which partially dissociates to OCl-: 

HOCl = H+ + OClThe ratio of HOCl to OCl-

 may be calculated from the expression: 

log([HOCl]/[OCl-

] = 7.5 – pH 

The sum of the three species – Cl2, HOCl, and OCl- – is commonly referred to as free available 

chlorine (FAC), and the concentrations of the individual species and their sum are usually 

expressed in units of mg/L as Cl2. The species of chlorine present in water will depend on the 

total concentration of chlorine, pH, and temperature (Letterman, 1999). 

3.1.3.1.2 HOBr/OBr- (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypobromite) 

Hypobromous acid (HOBr) is a weak, unstable acid. It occurs only in solution and has chemical 

and physical properties that are very similar to those of HOCl. 

In aqueous solution, HOBr partially decomposes into the hypobromite anion OBr− and the proton H+. 

The salts of HOBr are also called HOBr. Just as the acid, these salts are unstable and when 

evaporated or boiled to dryness, they undergo a disproportionation reaction, yielding the 

respective bromate and bromide salts. 

3.1.3.1.3 THMs 

Trihalomethanes (THM) are a group of four chemicals that are formed along with other 

disinfection by-products when chlorine or other disinfectants used to control microbial 

contaminants in drinking water react with naturally occurring organic and inorganic matter in 

water. The trihalomethanes are chloroform, bromodichloromethane, dibromochloromethane, and 

bromoform. The EPA has published the Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection By-products Rule to 

regulate total trihalomethanes (TTHM) at a maximum allowable annual average level of 80 parts 

per billion. This standard replaced the standard of a maximum allowable annual average level 

of 100 parts per billion in December 2001 for large surface water public water systems. 

The standard became effective for the first time in December 2003 for small surface water and all 

ground water systems (http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/icr/gloss_dbp.html). 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 10 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

3.1.3.1.4 HAAs 

Haloacetic acids (HAA5) are a group of chemicals that are formed along with other disinfection 

by-products when chlorine or other disinfectants used to control microbial contaminants in 

drinking water react with naturally occurring organic and inorganic matter in water. 

The regulated haloacetic acids, known as HAA5, are: monochloroacetic acid, dichloroacetic acid, 

trichloroacetic acid, monobromoacetic acid, and dibromoacetic acid. The EPA has published the 

Stage 1 Disinfectants/Disinfection By-products Rule to regulate HAA5 at 60 parts per billion 

annual averages. This standard became effective for large surface water public water systems in 

December 2001 and for small surface water and all ground water public water systems in 

December 2003 (http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/icr/gloss_dbp.html). 

3.1.3.1.5 H2O2

Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2) solutions are clear, colourless, and water-like in appearance, and can 

be mixed with water in any proportion. At high concentrations, H2O2 has a slightly pungent or 

acidic odor. H2O2 has a molecular weight of 34.02 and is nonflammable at any concentration. 

Its Chemical Abstracts Service Registry Number is 7722-84-1 (www.h2o2.com). 

3.1.3.2 But the other chemicals mentioned above were found to be not produced or 

detected at insignificant level during the GloEn-PatrolTM system (see appendix). Therefore, 

the other chemicals do not need to be considered in terms of toxicity in this proposal.

3.2 Data on effects on aquatic plants, invertebrates, fish, and other biota, including 

sensitive and representative micro-organisms 

For the “Active Substance”, “Relevant Chemical” and “Treated Water”, data are presented and 

discussed either on the basis of toxicological tests or existing toxicological knowledge for each 

end point listed. 

Required data 

Active 

substance 

(Photon) 

Relevant 

chemicals 

(•OH) 

Treated 

Water c

3.2.1 Acute aquatic toxicity Not 

necessary 

3.2.2 Chronic aquatic toxicity Not 

necessary 

3.2.3 Endocrine disruption - 

3.2.4 Sediment toxicity Not 

necessary 

3.2.5 Bioavailability/biomagnification/bioconcentration - 

3.2.6 Food web/population effects 

N.A.a N.A.b

- 

- : Not required 

N.A.: Not applicable 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 11 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

a. The photon has no chance to be exposed to aquatic plants, invertebrates, fish, and other 

biota, including sensitive and representative micro-organisms. Therefore, all tests for 

effects on aquatic plants, invertebrates, fish, and other biota, including sensitive and 

representative micro-organisms are “Not Applicable” due to the non-residual 

characteristics of the photon.

b. •OH has a very short in vivo half-life of approx. 10-9 sec and a high reactivity. This makes 

•OH a very dangerous compound to the organism. •OH can damage virtually all types of 

macromolecules: carbohydrates, nucleic acids (mutations), lipids (lipid peroxidation) 

and amino acids (e.g., conversion of Photo m-Tyrosine and o-Tyrosine) 

(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxyl_radical). 

However, similar to the photon, it is impossible for the “Relevant Chemical”, •OH, to be 

exposed to aquatic plants, invertebrates, fish, and other biota, including sensitive and 

representative micro-organisms due to its short lifetime. The •OH residual testing 

provides clear evidence (see appendix). Therefore, all tests for effects on aquatic plants, 

invertebrates, fish, and other biota, including sensitive and representative 

micro-organisms are “Not Applicable” due to the short lifetime. 

c. As described in section 2.5, under the headline “Advantages and validity for Use of the 

MPUV-based GloEn-PatrolTM,” the “Treated Water” does not contain any toxic matter 

showing the same characteristics as the “Pre-treated Water”. This fact was confirmed by 

measuring several halogenated chemicals in the “Treated Water”, which caused harmful 

effects on marine ecosystems and human health (see appendix). Therefore, it was 

determined that toxicity testing for “Treated Water” was “Not Necessary”. 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 12 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

3.3 Data on mammalian toxicity 

Required data 

Active 

substance 

(Photon) 

Relevant 

chemicals 

(•OH) 

Treated 

Water 

3.3.1 Acute toxicity 

3.3.2 Effects on skin and eye 

3.3.3 Repeated-dose toxicity 

3.3.4 Chronic toxicity 

3.3.5 Developmental and reproductive 

 toxicity 

3.3.6 Carcinogenicity 

3.3.7 Mutagenicity/genotoxicity 

3.3.8 Toxicokinetics 

N.A.a N.A.b - 

- : not required 

N.A.: Not applicable 

a. Since the photons generated in the MPUV reactor are never exposed on the mammalian, 

all tests for effects on mammalian are “Not Applicable”. 

b. •OH disappears from the “Treated Water” as soon as it leaves the MPUV reactor due to 

its short half-life (see appendix). Therefore, all tests for effects on mammalian are 

“Not Applicable”. 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 13 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

3.4 Data on environmental fate and effect under aerobic and anaerobic conditions

Required data Active substance 

(Photon) 

Relevant 

chemicals 

(•OH) 

Treated Water

3.4.1 Modes of degradation (biotic; 

 abiotic) N.A. N.A. - 

3.4.2 Bioaccumulation, partition 

 coefficient, octanol/water 

 partition coefficient 

N.A. N.A. - 

3.4.3 Persistence and identification 

 of the main metabolites in the 

 relevant media 

N.A. Extremely short 

half-lifea - 

3.4.4 Reaction with organic matter N.A.b

 N.A.c None 

3.4.5 Potential physical effects on 

 wildlife and benthic habitats N.A. N.A. None 

3.4.6 Potential residues in seafood N.A. N.A. - 

3.4.7 Any known interactive effects None None - 

- : not required 

N.A.: Not applicable 

a. The half-life of •OH is close to 10-9 sec in water. 

b. A photon reacts with organics at relatively slow rates, and the reaction rate is dependant 

on the chemical properties of matter, such as quantum yield, molar extinction coefficient, 

and photolysis fraction (Bolton, 2001). For the case of DOC, a significantly high UV dose 

is required for its reduction (Buchanan et al., 2004). 

c. •OH reacts with organics at extremely high rates ranging 108

~1010 M-1s

-1 (Buxton et al., 1988). 

These reactions of •OH with organics are possible under the continuously •OH-produced 

condition, which can be provided by advanced oxidation processes (AOPs), such as 

ozone/high pH, ozone/H2O2, UV/H2O2, ozone/UV, UV/TiO2, gamma-ray, sonication, 

(Photo) Fenton, etc. (Arbon et al., 1994; Kang and Hoffmann, 1998; 

Park et al., 2001; Moraes et al., 2004; Garoma and Gurol, 2005; Oh et al, 2005; 

Chen et al., 2006). In general, these AOPs can produce high amounts (10-9~10-11 M) of 

•OH. So, it should be noted that the amount of •OH produced from the MPUV irradiation 

of seawater is significantly low, at most 10-13~10-15 M, which is not a significant level to 

affect any change in background organics present in seawater. 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 14 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

3.5 Physical and chemical properties for the Active Substances and the treated ballast 

water 

Required data Active substance 

(Photon) 

Relevant 

chemicals 

(•OH) 

Treated Water 

3.5.1 Melting point N.A. - - 

3.5.2 Boiling point N.A. - - 

3.5.3 Flammability (Flash point) N.A. N.A. - 

3.5.4 Density (relative density) N.A. N.A. 1.008 g/mL 

3.5.5 Vapour pressure, vapour 

 density N.A. N.A. - 

3.5.6 Water solubility/dissociation 

 constant (pKa) N.A. N.A./11.9a

 - 

3.5.7 Oxidation/reduction 

 potential (ORP) N.A. 2700 mVb

 368.3 mVc

3.5.8 Corrosivity to the materials 

 or equipment of normal ship 

 construction 

N.A. N.A. - 

3.5.9 Auto-ignition temperature N.A. N.A. - 

3.5.10 Explosive properties N.A. N.A. - 

3.5.11 Oxidizing properties N.A. Non-selectived 

Various routese - 

3.5.12 Surface tension N.A. - - 

3.5.13 Viscosity N.A. - - 

3.5.14 Thermal stability and 

 identity of relevant 

 breakdown products 

N.Af - - 

3.5.15 Reactivity towards container 

 material N.A. N.A. None 

3.5.16 pH - - 7.9 

3.5.17 Salinity - - 30.9 ‰

3.5.18 TOC, DOC, % particulate 

 material - - 2.3 mg/L, 1.7 

mg/L, 0.024% 

3.5.19 Other known relevant 

 physical or chemical hazards N.A. N.A. None 

- : not required 

N.A.: Not applicable 

a. It is of little importance at the pH values that prevail in biological systems, but it must 

be mentioned that at high pH the •OH deprotonates as the following equilibrium 

(Weeks and Rabani, 1996; Poskrebyshev et al., 2002): 

•OH + OH- ↔ O-

• + H2O pKa = 11.9 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 15 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

b. •OH shows the highest ORP value compared to the other oxidants summarized in the 

table below: 

Oxidants ORP (V)

•OH 2.70 

Ozone 2.07 

H2O2 1.77 

KMnO4 1.67 

ClO2 1.50 

HOCl 1.36 

c. The ORP value of “Treated Water” is almost the same as that (378.2 mV) of “Pre-treated 

Water”. The ORP of most tap water in the USA is between 200 and 600 mV 

(http://www.ionwaystv.com/phbasics.html). 

d. The hydroxyl radical (•OH) is one of the most powerful oxidizing agents known 

(E ̊ = +2.7 V in acid solution) and reacts with most organic compounds at almost 

diffusion- controlled rates (Letterman, 1999; Bolton, 2001). 

e. The following are possible reaction types (Bolton, 2001): 

- Abstraction of a hydrogen atom – usually with aliphatic hydrocarbon groups; for 

example: 

CH3OH + •OH Æ •CH2OH + H2O 

- Insertion – usually with unsaturated or aromatic hydrocarbon groups; for example: 

CHCl=CCl2 (TCE) + •OH Æ •CHCl-C(OH)Cl2 

- Electron transfer – usually with inorganics; for example: 

I- + •OH Æ •I + OH- 

- Radical-radical reactions – for example: 

HO2• + •OH Æ O2 + H2O 

- The •OH radical absorbs UV weakly (ε230 = 530 M-1cm-1; ε260 = 370 M-1cm-1). 

f. The applied UV dose in the MPUV system is 300 mJ/cm2 as a maximum condition. It is 

too small to break down any dissolved organics. Buchanan et al (2004) reported that more 

than 10,000 mJ/cm2

 is required for just 5% reduction of DOC. It should be noted that 

photonated by-products are not produced under the condition of the MPUV radiation in 

the system. 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 16 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

3.6 Analytical methods at environmentally relevant concentrations 

3.6.1 All chemical analyses were conducted according to standard methods and performed 

under supervision by the KEMTi, YIEST, and KICT. All data on quality assurance are provided 

in each test report. The tests were performed on the pilot scale system using natural seawater 

according to the QAPP. 

4 USE OF PHOTON AND HYDROXYL RADICALS 

4.1 Handling of photon and hydroxyl radicals

The photon and hydroxyl radicals (• OH) are produced from a specified number of MPUV 

lamps which is designed at specified flow rate for specified application. Furthermore, 

the UV dose is continuously monitored by a sensor equipped on the MPUV reactor and limited 

on fixed power by control panel. Since the photon and hydroxyl radicals are not residual in 

ballast water from all relevant tests, the maximum dosage (or maximum allowable discharge 

concentration) is not exceeded at any time. 

4.2 Procedures and use 

Not applicable. 

4.3 Hazard documentation and labelling 

Not applicable. 

5 MATERIAL SAFETY DATA SHEETS 

Not available. 

6 RISK CHARACTERIZATION 

6.1 Screening for persistency, bioaccumulation and toxicity 

The half-life of the “Active Substance” (photon) and the “Relevant Chemical” (•OH) is so 

extremely short (about 10-9 sec) and the •OH have no residual property. As referred to the 

Criteria for identification of PBT substances (see the Table in section 7.3), the 

“Active Substance” (photon) and the “Relevent Chemical” (•OH) produced from the 

GloEn-PatrolTM are not regarded as the PBT substance. Therefore, the assessment of PBT does 

not seem to be necessary. 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 17 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

6.2 Evaluation of the treated ballast water 

In this proposal, the ultimate purpose of the evaluation of the treated ballast water was to justify 

that toxicity testing on “The Treated Water” is not necessary. For that, several experiments were 

performed as follows (see detailed description in section 2.3): 

.1 Basic characteristics testing 

.2 Residual oxidants testing 

.3 By-products formation testing 

From the results, it was found that the “Treated Water” is absolutely same as the “Pre-treated 

Water.” HOCl/OCl- and HOBr/OBr- were not detected in the “Treated Water” (see appendix). 

In the case of H2O2, a residual trace of H2O2 was detected in the “Treated Water”, but it was very 

close to the MDL, which is never problematic in the marine aquatic environment (see appendix ). 

All suspected by-products were not detected in the “Treated Water” (see appendix). Because the 

fact that the “Treated Water” must never affect the marine aquatic environment was 

demonstrated by several experimental tests, it was determined that toxicity testing on the 

“Treated Water” was not necessary. 

Also, the report entitled “Laboratory Guidance and Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Review 

Criteria” by Washington State Department of Ecology (June, 2005) stated that toxicity test for 

the physical processes such as Filtration and UV radiation can be immunized. The description is 

as follows: 

Toxicity testing is needed to determine conditions when the potential for the biocide to 

harm receiving water micro-organisms is unacceptable. Solely physical ballast water 

treatment methods such as filtration, centrifugation, ultraviolet irradiation, or 

oxygen stripping are assumed to not need toxicity testing (Marshall, 2005). 

6.2.1 Determination of holding time 

This system is operated only during ballasting and deballasting and does not produce any oxidant 

to be required for holding. Therefore, consideration of the holding time of the treated ballast 

water is not necessary. 

6.3 Risk characterization and analysis 

Risk associated with “Active Substance” and “Relevant Chemicals” was systematically 

characterized based on theoretical reasoning with supported experimental data as shown below: 

6.3.1 Reaction with organic matter 

“Active Substance” (Photon) and “Relevant Chemical” (•OH) can react with organic matters, but 

it is possible just in the MPUV reactor not in the ballast water and the ballast water discharge due 

to their non-residual property. Therefore, the evaluation on the reaction with organic matter in 

seawater is not applicable (see section 3.4). 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 18 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

6.3.2 Characterization of degradation route and rate 

•OH could be formed during the UV process. However, the formed •OH is instantaneously 

scavenged by several specific chemical reactions with basic components present in seawater as 

described below (Jayson and Parsons, 1973; Zehavi and Rabani, 1972; Buxton et al., 1988; 

Hoigne and Bader, 1979): 

6.3.3 Calculation of the predicted environmental concentration of hydroxyl radicals 

The half-life of •OH is close to 10-9 sec in water. Therefore, although the •OH is formed in the 

MPUV reactor, all •OH disappear within a second during ballasting or deballasting. 

6.3.4 Assessment of potential for bioaccumulation 

Not applicable (see description under the section 3.4 “Data on environmental fate and effect 

under aerobic and anaerobic conditions”). 

6.3.5 Effects on aquatic micro-organisms 

Not applicable (see description under the section 3.2 “Data on effects on aquatic plants, 

invertebrates, fish, and other biota, including sensitive and representative micro-organisms”). 

6.3.6 Effects on sediment 

Not applicable since this system does not generate any inorganic precipitate. 

6.3.7 Comparison of effect assessment with discharge toxicity 

Not applicable (see description under the section 2.5, headline “Advantages and validity for use 

of the MPUV based GloEn-PatrolTM”). 

7 RISK ASSESSMENT 

7.1 Risk to safety of ship 

.1 increased corrosion: 

The GloEn-PatrolTM system does not produce any corrosive by-products, such as 

TRO and acidic compounds. It should be also noted that the ORP value of 

“Treated Water” is almost the same as that (378.2 mV) of “Pre-treated Water”. 

In addition, the value of TRO was not observed after treatment, which support that 

the GloEn-PatrolTM system is free of corrosion risk; 

.2 fire and explosion; 

.3 storage and handling of the substances; 

.4 contact with, or inhalation of, process products; and 

.5 noise. 

“Not applicable”
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 19 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

7.2 Risks to human health 

There is no risk to human health unless the UV light is directly exposed on the humans in an 

emergency, which is almost impossible in actual situations. But all operators should follow the 

manuals provided by the manufacturer. 

Health effects in humans 

UV Light Protection: The key to effectively reducing UV exposure is to properly shield the 

source and to require that users wear the appropriate personal protection. Personal protection that 

is appropriate includes welder’s masks, goggles, and face shields. EHS can provide information 

on the appropriate protection for the source in use. 

In the case of welding operations, the protection needed may also include area-enclosing curtains 

for the protection of bystanders. In addition, burn protection for the operator is important. 

Therefore, protection would include gloves, long-sleeved shirts and, possibly, a fire-resistant apron. 

First Aid: The symptoms of UV overexposure to the skin are well-known and characteristically 

called sunburn. However, the symptoms of overexposure to the eyes are not widely known. 

They are as follows: 

• a burning and painful sensation in the eye 

• a sensitivity to light 

• the sensation of a foreign object in the eye, sometimes described as sand in the eye 

• tearing 

These symptoms usually develop several hours after the overexposure occurred. If an eye or skin 

injury is suspected, the individual should be examined by a physician. 

7.3 Risks to the aquatic environment 

According to Criteria for identification of PBT substances, the Active Substance (Photon) and the 

Relevant Chemical (•OH) produced from this system are not regarded as the PBT substance since 

the half-life of the Active Substance (Photon) and the Relevant Chemical (•OH) ) is so extremely 

short (about 10-9 sec) and the •OH have no residual property. Therefore, the assessment of PBT 

does not seem to be necessary. 

Criteria for identification of PBT (Persistence, Bioaccumulation and Toxicity) substances 

Criterion PBT criteria 

Persistence Half-life: 

> 60 days in marine water, or 

> 40 days in freshwater*, or 

> 180 days in marine sediment, or 

> 120 days in freshwater sediment* 

Bioaccumulation BCF > 2,000 or 

LogPoctanol/water ≥3 

Toxicity Chronic NOEC < 0.01 mg/l *

 For the purpose of marine environmental risk assessment half-life data in freshwater and 

freshwater sediment can be overruled by data obtained under marine conditions. 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 20 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

8 ASSESSMENT REPORT 

In this proposal, the results of the analyses of the “Treated Water” include the water 

characteristics as well as chemical properties, compared with those of the “Pre-treated Water”. 

The results showed that all properties of the “Treated Water” were almost the same as those of 

the “Pre-treated Water”. This indicates that the “Treated Water” has no potential to contain any 

residual oxidants, including “Active Substance” and ”Relevant Chemicals,” any residual 

by-products, and any toxicity. 

All chemical analyses were conducted according to standard methods and performed under 

supervision by the KEMIT, YIEST and KICT. 

All samples for chemical analysis were obtained from the pilot-scale system developed by 

PANASIA CO., LTD. 

All data on quality assurance are provided in each test report. The tests were performed on the 

pilot scale system using natural seawater according to the QAPP in the confidential documents. 

Further testes on full-scale system will be also performed according to the QAPP. 

9 CONCLUSIONS 

The GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water Management System uses the MPUV process to inactivate all 

Harmful Aquatic Micro-organisms and Pathogens present in seawater. 

In this system, Photon and •OH are defined as “Active Substance” and “Relevant Chemical,” 

respectively. Because they have no residual property, it was not necessary to test their toxicity in 

the marine aquatic environment. 

This UV-based system is guaranteed by internationally recognized associations (i.e., the EPA and 

IUVA) as a clean process, which does not use any added chemicals and does not produce any 

toxic matter. Therefore, toxicity testing for the “Treated Water” defined as Ballast Water 

produced from this system may not be necessary. 

In order to confirm and justify this system, the PANAISA (the applicant) has developed a pilotscale system, and systematic experiments were performed with the “Treated Water” and the 

“Pre-treated Water”. 

The test strategy is as follows: 

• Basic Characteristics Testing: To investigate any change in the seawater before and 

after treatment, the basic characteristics (i.e., ions, TOC, UV absorbance scanning, 

and SUVA) of seawater were compared with the “Treated Water”. 

• Other Oxidants Residual Testing: To investigate the possibility of the production of 

any other oxidants, concentrations of residual HOCl/OCl-

, HOBr/OBr- and H2O2 in 

the “Treated Water” were measured. 

• By-products Formation Testing: The HOCl/OCl- and HOBr/OBr- could react with 

DOM in seawater. To investigate the possibility of the production of several harmful 

halogenated organics such as THMs, HAAs, and others, suspected halogenated 

organics in the “Treated Water” were measured. 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 21 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

The results clearly show that there is no potential of toxicity in the “Treated Water.” Therefore, it 

was determined that the GloEn-PatrolTM Ballast Water Management System can certainly 

produce safe “Ballast Water” in the marine aquatic environment as well as relevant ships and 

crews. 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 22 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

REFERENCES 

Anderson W.B., Huck P.M., Dixon D.G. and Mayfield C.I. “Endotoxin inactivation in water by 

using medium-pressure UV lamps” Appl. Environ. Microb. 69, 3002-3004 (2003). 

Arbon R.E., Mincher B.J. and Knighton W.B. “γ-Ray destruction of individual PCB congeners 

in neutral 2-propanol” Envrion. Sci. Technol. 28, 2191-2196 (1994). 

Bolton J.R. “Ultraviolet applications handbook” Bolton Photosciences Inc, Canada, 2001, 

pp 5, 12, 15, 19, 27-28. 

Brezonik P.L. and Fulkerson-Brekken J. “Nitrate-induced pholoysis in natural waters: Controls 

on concentrations of hydroxyl radical photo-intermediates by natural scavenging agents” 

Envrion. Sci. Technol. 32, 3004-3010 (1998). 

Buchanan W., Roddick F. Porter N. and Drikas M. “Enhanced biodegradability of UV and VUV 

pre-treated natural organic matter” Water Sci. Techol. 4, 103-111 (2004). 

Buxton G.V., Greenstock C.L., Helman W.P. and Ross A.B. “Critical review of rate constants for 

reactions of hydrated electrons, hydrogen atoms and hydroxyl radicals (•OH/•O-

) in aqueous 

solution” J. Phys. Chem. Ref. Data. 17, 513-886 (1988). 

Chen W.R., Sharpless C.M., Linden K.G. and Suffet I.H. “Treatment of volatile organic 

chemicals on the EPA contaminant candidate list using ozonation and the O3/H2O2 advanced 

oxidation process” Envrion. Sci. Technol. 40, 2734-2739 (2006). 

Cooper W.J., Zika R.G., Petasne R.G. and Plane J.M.C. “Photochemical formation of H2O2 in 

natural waters exposed to sunlight” Envrion. Sci. Technol. 22, 1156-1160 (1988). 

de Mora S., Demers S. and Vernet M. “The effects of UV radiation in the marine environment” 

United States of America by Cambridge University Press, New York, 2000, pp 104-107, 113, 

118, 206-209, 218-219, 229. 

Dobbs F.C. and Rogerson A. “Ridding ship’s ballast water of micro-organisms” Envrion. Sci. 

Technol. June 15, 259A-264A (2005). 

Garoma T. And Gurol M.D. “Modeling aqueous ozone/UV process using oxalic acid as probe 

chemical” Envrion. Sci. Technol. 39, 7964-7969 (2005). 

Giese N. and Darby J. “Sensitivity of micro-organisms to different wavelengths of UV light: 

Implications on modeling of medium pressure UV systems” Water Res. 34, 4007-4013 (2000). 

Hoigne J. and Bader H. “Ozonation of water: oxidation-competition values of different types of 

waters used in Switzerland” Ozone Sci. Engineer. 1, 357-371 (1979). 

Jayson G.G. and Parsons B.J. “Some simple, highly reactive, inorganic chlorine derivatives in 

aqueous solution” J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans. 1, 1597-1607 (1973). 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 23 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

Kang J.W. and Hoffmann M.R. “Kinetics and Mechanism of the sonolytic destruction of methyl 

tert-butyl ether by ultrasonic irradiation in the presence of ozone” 32, 3194-3199 (1998). 

Lazrus A.L., Kok G.L., Gitlin S.N., Line J.A. and Mclaren S.E. “Automated fluorometric method 

for hydrogen peroxide in atmospheric precipitation” Anal. Chem. 57, 917-922 (1985). 

Letterman R.D. “Water quality & treatment, A handbook of community water supplies: Chapter 

12 Chemical oxidation” Fifth Ed. AWWA, McGraw Hill Inc. 1999. 

Marshall R. “Laboratory Guidance and Whole Effluent Toxicity Test Refiew Criteria”, 

Washington State Department of Ecology, revised June, 2005. 

Oh B.S., Kim K.S., Kang M.G., Oh H.J. and Kang J.W. “Kinetic study and optimum control of 

the ozone/UV process measuring hydrogen peroxide formed in-situ” Ozone Sci. Engineer. 27, 

421-430 (2005). 

Park H.S., Hwang, T. M., Kang J.W., Choi, H.C., and Oh, H.J., “Characterization of raw water 

for the ozone application measuring ozone consumption rate.” Water Res. 35(11), 2607-261$, 

(2001). 

Perrins J.C., Cooper W.J., van Leeuwen J.H. and Herwig R.P. “Ozonation of seawater from 

different locations: Formation and decay of total recidual oxidant—implications for ballast water 

treatment” Mar. Pollut. Bull. 52, 1023-1033 (2006). 

Poskrebyshev G.A., Neta P. and Huie R.E. “Temperature dependence of the acid dissociadion 

conctant of the hydroxyl radical” J. Phys. Chem. A. 106, 11488-1149! (2002). 

Sanz E.N., Davila I.S., Andrade Balao J.A. and Quiroga Alonso J.M. “Modelling of reactivation 

after UV disinfection: Effect of UV-C dose on subsequent photoreactivation and dark repair” 

Water Res. 41, 3141-3151 (2007). 

Vaughan P.P. and Blough N.V. “Photochemical formation of hydroxyl radical by constituents of 

natural waters” Envrion. Sci. Technol. 32, 2947-2953 (1998). 

Weeks J.L. and Rabani, J. “The pulse radiolysis of deaerated aqueous carbonate solutions. 

I. Transient optical spectrum and mechanism II. pK for OH radicals” J. Phys. Chem. 70, 

2100-2105 (1996). 

Westerhoff P., Chao P. and Mash H. “Reactivity of natural organic matter with aqueous chlorine 

and bromine” Water Res. 38, 1502-1513 (2004). 

Zehavi D. and Rabani J. “The oxidation of aqueous bromide ions by hydroxyl radicals. A pulse 

radiolytic investigation” J. Phys. Chem. 76, 312-319 (1972). 

Zepp R.G. “Nitrate-induced photooxidation of trace organic chemicals in water” Envrion. Sci. 

Technol. 21, 443-450 (1987). 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 24 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

Cited Internet addresses 

1. http://www.iuva.org/public/faqs.php

2. http://www.epa.gov/safewater/stage2/index.html

3. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hypobromite

4. http://www.epa.gov/enviro/html/icr/gloss_dbp.html

5. www.h2o2.com

6. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydroxyl_radical

7. http://www.ionwaystv.com/phbasics.html

* * * 
MEPC 57/2/4 

ANNEX 

Page 25 

I:\MEPC\57\2-4.doc 

APPENDIX 

TEST REPORT ON ANALYSIS OF CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES IN SEAWATER 

Following is a summary of the chemical analysis of untreated and treated water. The sampling 

was supervised by YIEST and analysis was performed by KEMTi and KICT. 

Test result 

Test Detection limitations Before treatment After treatment 

Chloroform 0.0001 mg/L Not detected Not detected 

Dibromochloromethane 0.001 mg/L Not detected Not detected 

Bromodichloromethane 0.001 mg/L Not detected Not detected 

Bromoform 0.001 mg/L Not detected Not detected 

Chloroacetic acid 0.0005 mg/L Not detected Not detected 

Bromoacetic acid 0.0005 mg/L Not detected Not detected 

Dichloroacetic acid 0.0005 mg/L Not detected Not detected 

Tricholroacetic acid 0.0005 mg/L Not detected Not detected 

Bromochloroacetic acid 0.0005 mg/L Not detected Not detected 

Dibromoacetic acid 0.0005 mg/L Not detected Not detected 

1,1,1-Trichloroethane 0.001 mg/L Not detected Not detected 

Carbon tetrachloride 0.001 mg/L Not detected Not detected 

Tetrachloroethene 0.001 mg/L Not detected Not detected 

1,2-Dibromo-3-

Chloropropane 0.001 mg/L Not detected Not detected 

TOC 0.5 mg/L 2.2 2.4 

COD 1 mg/L 6 6 

TCE - Not detected Not detected 

TOX - 0.07 mg/L 0.03 mg/L 

____________