PEIMF Annual General Meeting – NOVEMBER 2012

Petroleum Enforcement Liaison Group (PELG)

Further to the last report of 30th August 2012, a task group has been set up under PELG, comprising Stakeholder representatives, including Petroleum Licensing Authorities, and a team from the Health and Safety Executive.

The first Task Group meeting took place on the 19th November when a number of proposals were put forward to replace the Petroleum (Consolidation) Act 1928 with a suitable alternative regime for maintaining safety. It was acknowledged that the Dangerous Substances and Explosive Atmospheres Regulations 2002 (DSEAR) provided the primary legislation, but there were certain prohibitions and reporting requirements, currently contained in the Model Conditions of Licence that would need to be picked up in supplementary regulations.

Consideration also had to be given to domestic storage to which DSEAR did not apply and there was the age-old problem of confusing legislation regarding the type, size and quantity of containers that could be filled as well as the quantity that could be stored. The Task Group is next due to meet on the 17th December and the full committee of PELG is due to meet on the 17th January 2013.

Oil Care Committee

PEIMF is represented on this committee because of the risk of pollution in certain contracting activities, particularly in the reprocessing of contaminated fuel, tank cleaning and tank lining. This committee run by the Environment Agency has been responsible for various initiatives to make consumers aware of the environmental damage, which can be caused by oil. The most significant of these being the successful campaign to get oil tanks labeled with the oil care notices. It also has a part to play in fuel distribution and contracting. Further funding is required to continue this valuable work and use of the Oil Care logo is available to companies willing to provide sponsorship. PEIMF members are invited to provide sponsorship for one year in return for continued use of the logo. Under the logo would appear the words ‘Sponsor of the Oil Care Campaign 2013’, which could continue to be used on documentation or advertising.

Introduction of E10 petrol

The Low Carbon Vehicle Partnership (LowCVP) has been co-ordinating the work to prepare for the introduction of E10 petrol. Throughout Europe fuel suppliers have been working with vehicle manufacturers to develop higher blends of bio-fuels in both petrol (EN228) and diesel (EN590). The reasons for this are that fuel suppliers have the European Fuel Quality Directive (FQD) to comply with and each EU member state has also set targets under the Renewable Energy Directive (RED). Both directives have a target date of 2020.

Currently, diesel has a maximum Bio-diesel content of 7% (B7) within the fuel specification EN590 and petrol has a maximum content of 5% Bio-ethanol (E5). EN 228 is undergoing a review to enable the introduction of up to 10% ethanol and to include the super grade of petrol, which is currently covered by BS7800. Once the revised EN 228 is published early in 2013, BS7800 will be withdrawn.

Three working groups were set up to prepare for E10. WG1 was charged with producing guidance for retailers and consumers. WG2.would produce guidance on consumer publicity and media communications and WG3 would produce guidance on vehicle compatibility.

Although this work is nearing completion, the Government is not backing an early introduction of E10, although it is recognised that some suppliers might want to introduce it as a niche product.

Bio-fuel problems

The problem of phase separation of ethanol blends continues to be a concern to retailers. A spate of such events in Scotland has led to publicity in one of the Scottish newspapers and follows on from the problems in the South West earlier this year. The Service Station Panel is currently reviewing the existing guidance for storage and sale of E5 and B5 to see if it needs any changes to make it suitable for higher blends. A number of PEIMF members are engaged in remediation measures that are proving quite costly for retailers, particularly the one retailer, who had carried out rectification, only to suffer the same fate after the next delivery.

Leave a Comment