Business Managers Report

Dear Editor

I confess that when my copy of the Bulletin arrives I get a certain amount of excitement that that some might consider worrying. I have found it informative and interesting, however, I have some concerns over the accuracy of its articles. I recognise that the APEA is not part of Reuters and it also has an interest in selling advertising space, but I am sure that many of your readers like me have had the tendency to accept the articles as being accurate.

I now feel that I need to return to the age-old principle of reading between the lines and accepting that some articles contain halftruths or incomplete information.

As an enforcement officer I believe it is important that we get the facts as accurate as possible.

Incorrect Information

A recent article on "Mobile Phones" pertaining to be a warning issued by Shell, was also confirmed in a HSE release to EHO's. At last I thought, we have substantiated information from an oil company and the HSE on this issue. This was to be short lived as the Trading Standards " TS Link" was to inform us that the story was just Chinese whispers!

Incomplete Information

The "Contaminated supply Incident" article this month begs more answers to the following questions:

1) Licence conditions insist on daily monitoring, why did this not find the loss earlier ? With a hole the size of a ten pence piece this must have been leaking for some time?

2) Was too high a tolerance being used in their calculations?

3) At what stage were the losses reported to the Petroleum Officer? Were there on-going problems? closed off and the tank more closely monitored when the 5000 discrepancy was first found?

5) Was the site being operated by inefficient or untrained staff?

6) What of oil company area management checks?

7) Having worked on many tank gauge systems I can understand the 5,000 litres loss, but once corrected the 400 litres loss should still have been investigated. Was the 400 loss an acceptable loss or should further monitoring have taken place before putting the system back into use?

8) I believe BP use a third party to monitor some of their sites, if this was the case at this site it why was it not mentioned along with Marconi?

9) This might raise more questions about the reliability of third party monitoring. What is the time scale in finding a leak for these companies? And in the event of a major leak are they culpable?

10)A competent person monitoring wetstock should be able to recognise a pattern in gains and losses on their own site daily, how long before a third party company notifies the site of any irregularities and concerns?

11)Finally, a "Breakdown in communications" cannot be acceptable where there is a suspected petroleum leak. Petrol losses must be considered as of the highest priority. "Did we not learn anything from the "Bontddu Incident"?

Some sites have systems such as a submerged turbine pump in one tank linked to other tanks using inefficient siphon systems also linked by vapour recovery to all the other tanks on site, how accurate are their tank gauge systems with continual pressure variation? and how well are they understood by engineers let alone forecourt staff and enforcement officers?

In concluding I believe there is no Due Diligence defence for petrol contamination of the ground and water supplies and therefore prosecution is quite likely to have a satisfactory result against the polluter. But even though the Environment Agency had a satisfactory prosecution in this case, incidents like this should not be allowed to happen.

We are now in the 21st century and perhaps its time to insist on an age limit to tanks and pipe work or even insist that all tanks over twenty years old to be replaced with double skin tanks. Perhaps the Government could subsidise new tanks to protect our water supplies rather than tanks to fight wars.

Colin Brewer Swindon Wiltshire

Recent comments from an attendee on a APEALPGcourse:

Dear Editor

An excellent training course well presented and first class trainers. Now I know what DSEAR is - arriving in shortly.

Accommodation great and really convenient for air travellers.

The Association appears to be developing by leaps and bounds in a very professional way - well done and thank you for all your help and efficient administration.

I like it when the airport is near by.

Charlie Morrison City Inspector Derry City Council

Incident at Versailles

explosion took place, Jose was not running after his cat as he told Police and as reported in our columns. In fact he was working on the LPG tank on his 4x4. It was a toolkit, found near the vehicle, which made the investigators suspicious.

After a days questioning at the Versailles Regional CID, Jose Morais Dias was charged on Tuesday with the involuntary destruction of goods belonging to third parties due to the effects of an explosion caused by failing to meet safety and care obligations.

The 35 year old builder, around whom a great spirit of solidarity was created following the LPG explosion which damaged forty chalets in and around the Rue d'Evereux in Mitry-Mory on 9th November last, is now suspected of accidentally causing the incident. He has been freed on bail, a development that caused great astonishment amongst the residents in the area of the Rue d'Evereux.

According to the first part of the enquiry after the He found that the tank was too big.

The day after the drama, the mains gas theory having been quickly rejected, it was a leak on the LPG tank on Jose Morais Dias's 4x4 which was suspected by Police. However the reason for such a leak remained very uncertain. Until the police learned that, on the day of the incident, the 4x4 left a garage. Wanting to get rid of the LPG tank and only run on petrol Jose Morais Dias had taken his vehicle to a repairer. The latter cut off the gas supply to the vehicle without removing the tank. Once home, finding that the LPG tank which he was no longer using took up too much space in the boot, the builder simply decided to remove it himself. Unfortunately it still contained gas. A leak was inevitable. LPG ran into the garage, which blew up probably due to an electrical spark. If this version which he hid from everyone is confirmed Jose Morais Dias could be in big trouble. Especially as regards his third party liability. The cost of the explosion has not yet been counted. But it is very large. "To me this does not change the solidarity created around the Dias family, declared the Mayor of MitryMory, Jean-Pierre Bontoux. Neither for his children or wife, who were nothing to do with it. Today it is a shocked family in need of help. The victims support association which has been formed is needed more than ever”.

Press Release - FPS 2003

The biggest event on the UK and Irish oil distribution industry calender - the FPS 2003 Exhibition & Conference - will be massively expanded for 2003.

FPS 2003 will cover nearly 7,000 sq m of exhibition space at the RDS International Exhibition & Convention Centre, Dublin. That is more than double the space taken for the 2002 event in Harrogate. For the first time, it will also run for three days - on 10, 11 and 12 April 2003.

Exhibitor numbers will also be well up. To date, more than 80 exhibitors have booked stands, and there are only a limited number of spaces left.

Vanessa Cook, Event Manager for the Federation of Petroleum Suppliers, says; “If you want to exhibit, don’t leave it too long or you might be disappointed. We are the most important event for the industry and we’re receiving enquiries daily.”

The event has grown over the last few years from a relatively small one with a handful of exhibitors to a highly professional show that nevertheless still offers good value for exhibitors and visitors alike.

Cook is confident that the delegate numbers will reflect the increased size of the event. “We have a huge amount of Irish interest and we have calls daily from FPS members in the UK and Ireland asking for information on flights and hotels. In fact some of the hotels are already full. With the event running through into the weekend and the appeal of Dublin, I think we might see a record number of delegates.”

For more information call Vanessa Cook on: +44 (0) 1565 631313 or visit www.fpsonline.co.uk

The Petroleum Equipment Institute is working on a campaign to try and make people aware of fires as a result of "static" (that is, static electricity) at petrol pumps. They have researched 150 cases of these fires.

The results were very surprising:

1) Out of 150 cases, almost all of them were women.

2) Almost all cases involved the person getting back in their vehicle while the nozzle was still pumping petrol, when finished and they went back to pull the nozzle out the fire started, as a result of static.

3) Most had on rubber-soled shoes.

4) Most men never get back in their vehicle until completely finished. This is why they are seldom involved in these types of fires.

5) Don't ever use mobile phones when pumping petrol.

NEVER get back into your vehicle while filling it with petrol. If you absolutely HAVE to get in your vehicle while the petrol is pumping, make sure you get out, close the door TOUCHING THE METAL, before you ever pull the nozzle out. This way the static from your body will be discharged before you ever remove the nozzle.

6) It is the vapors that come out of the petrol that cause the fire, when connected with static charges.

7) There were 29 fires where the vehicle was reentered and the nozzle was touched during refueling from a variety of makes and models. Some resulting in extensive damage to the vehicle, station, and the customer.

8) Seventeen fires that occurred before, during or immediately after the petrol cap was removed and before fueling began.

As mentioned earlier, The Petroleum Equipment Institute, along with several other companies now, are really trying to make the public aware of this danger. You can find out more information by going to www.pei.org, once here, click in the center of the screen where it says "Stop Static".

I ask you to please send this information to ALL your family and friends, especially those who have kids in the car with them while pumping petrol. If this were to happen to them, they may not be able to get the children out in time. Thanks for passing this along.

Prosecution in West Yorks

By Roger Marris

On 25 September 2002 an Explosives Inspector of the West Yorkshire Fire Service was asked by the Police to attend an incident at Middleton, Leeds where they had found a large quantity of fireworks during a search for stolen property. The fireworks amounting to over 800 kg were located in a domestic garage/out-building amongst many other items of storage. As the storage was suspected to be illegal and in the interests of public safety, the fireworks were seized and removed to a licensed explosives magazine store where they were held jointly by the Police and Fire Service as evidence.

At the time that the fireworks were seized, the occupier admitted to the Explosives Inspector that he had bought the fireworks for £2,600 at a Sunday market for the purpose selling on to the public during the forthcoming fireworks season.

The occupier was subsequently charged by the West Yorkshire Fire Authority with committing an offence contrary to section 5 of the Explosives Act 1875. At a hearing at the Leeds Magistrates Court on 27 November 2002, the defendant pleaded guilty to a charge of the unlawful storage of fireworks and was fined £200 with £500 costs being awarded to the Fire Authority.

According to the importer of the brand of fireworks involved, the normal retail value for the quantity in question was in the region of £7,500. No doubt the potential profit margin influenced the Magistrates when they imposed the £700 financial penalty on the unemployed defendant.