RIL plan to supply jet fuel to Mumbai airport using OMC pipelines faces hurdles
State-owned fuel marketers are pushing back against a regulatory suggestion to allow Reliance Industries Ltd (RIL) to use their pipelines to sell jet fuel at the Mumbai airport. Currently, the three public sector oil marketing companies — Bharat Petroleum Corp. Ltd (BPCL), Hindustan Petroleum Corp. Ltd (HPCL) and Indian Oil Corp. Ltd—fuel all aircraft at Mumbai’s Chhatrapati Shivaji International Airport through two pipelines from their refineries. RIL had written to the Petroleum and Natural Gas Regulatory Board (PNGRB) in November 2016 to declare these pipelines “common carriers” which would allow it to access them. On 4 May this year, the board suggested the same in a notice seeking public opinion, but OMCs are not giving up without a fight. BPCL and HPCL say PNGRB did not consult them, and does not have the authority to impose any direction. “Though BPCL owns the pipeline, PNGRB has not heard BPCL’s view on the matter. The ATF pipeline is outside the scope and purview of the PNGRB Act and as such, PNGRB does not have the jurisdiction to declare the ATF pipeline as a common carrier,” said BPCL in its reply. A common carrier system implies that the capacity in a pipeline over and above the owner’s own requirement can be made available to any other entity if not fully utilized by the owner. This can be done on an annual contract basis. Officials from HPCL and BPCL said on the condition of anonymity that if need be, they will have to take the legal route on this matter. RIL and BPCL did not reply to an email sent. HPCL declined to comment. A 2002 government notification says a pipeline less than 300 km is granted right of use treating it as a “captive pipeline”. “Therefore, pipelines such as BPCL’s ATF pipeline which is 15 km long (being a pipeline of a length of less than 300 km) is a captive pipeline, a dedicated pipeline and therefore outside the scope and ambit of a common carrier and beyond the jurisdiction of the PNGRB,” said BPCL in its reply to PNGRB. At present, the entire ATF demand of 1.4 mmtpa (million metric tonnes per annum) at the Mumbai airport is met by the three OMCs. Indian Oil, along with BPCL and HPCL, has a joint venture company called Mumbai Aviation Fuel Farm Facility Pvt. Ltd for the ATF supply. Airlines at the Mumbai airport consume more than a fifth of the India’s total jet fuel requirement. RIL plans to ship ATF from its Jamnagar refinery to the Pirpau Jetty in Trombay, and then use the pipelines to transport the fuel to the airport. RIL in its 2016 letter to PNGRB had said that in the absence of competition, airlines are not able to enjoy the benefit of competitive prices. “The three oil marketing companies are enjoying a monopoly to the exclusion of all other ATF marketing companies (OMCs) in the supply of ATF at the Mumbai airport. This resulted in entry barrier to other authorized ATF suppliers. It has deprived the airlines’ customer of the benefit of effective competition at the airport in effect impacted the cost to passengers at large.” According to the letter, BPCL has 70.8% of capacity remaining in its pipeline. Josh Martin Womens Jersey
Rovuma LNG Phase 1 Development Plan Submitted to Government of Mozambique
Mozambique Rovuma Venture has submitted the development plan to the government for the first phase of the Rovuma LNG project, which will produce, liquefy and market natural gas from the Mamba fields located in the Area 4 block offshore Mozambique. The plan details the proposed design and construction of two liquefied natural gas trains which will each produce 7.6 million tons of LNG per year. ExxonMobil will lead construction and operation of natural gas liquefaction and related facilities on behalf of the joint venture, and Eni will lead construction and operation of upstream facilities. As the Rovuma LNG project progresses, every effort will be made to actively build the local workforce and supplier capabilities in Mozambique. “We are excited to be progressing the Rovuma LNG project, working with the government and leveraging the expertise and capabilities of all of the partners,” said Liam Mallon, president of ExxonMobil Development Company. “The Rovuma LNG Project is moving forward swiftly,” said Stefano Maione, Eni’s executive vice-president for the Mozambique Program. “The size of the project makes it not only an important investment in the country, but also supports economic growth and opens new opportunities for Mozambicans.” A final investment decision by the Area 4 joint venture parties is scheduled in 2019, with LNG production expected to commence in 2024. Marketing activities are progressing, with negotiations on sales and purchase agreements underway, targeting completion in parallel with the development plan approval process. Rovuma LNG is operated by Mozambique Rovuma Venture S.p.A., an incorporated joint venture owned by ExxonMobil, Eni and CNPC, which holds a 70 percent interest in the Area 4 concession alongside its partners Galp, KOGAS and Empresa Nacional de Hidrocarbonetos E.P. (ENH), each of which hold a 10 percent interest. Charles Mann Jersey
Does petroleum ministry consider itself ‘God’, asks SC
Does the Petroleum Ministry consider itself to be ‘God’ or a ‘super government’ and think that the “unemployed” judges are at their mercy, an anguished Supreme Court bench observed on Monday. The scathing remarks by a bench of Justices Madan B Lokur and Deepak Gupta came when the top court was informed that the Ministry of Petroleum and Natural Gas (MoPNG) had only yesterday apprised the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC) about the issue of ban on import of pet coke, which is used as industrial fuel. The court, which was hearing a matter relating to air pollution in the Delhi-National Capital Region (NCR), slapped a fine of Rs 25,000 on the MoPNG for “laxity”. The top court also imposed a cost of Rs 0.1 million on the Delhi government for not filing a status report giving a time-line for removal of traffic bottlenecks on several corridors in the city. The strong observations against MoPNG came when Additional Solicitor General (ASG) A N S Nadkarni, appearing for the Ministry of Environment, Forest and Climate Change (MoEF&CC), told the bench that they had received a response from the MoPNG on the issue only yesterday. “Is MoPNG a God? Are they God? They would respond whenever they want? Tell them to change their name from MoPNG to God.” “Is MoPNG a super government? Is it above the Government of India? What is the status of MoPNG, tell us. Why are they not complying with any order,” the bench asked. When the ASG said their affidavit was ready and he should be allowed to file it during the day, Justice Lokur shot back, “If they (MoPNG) do not feel like complying with the orders, they do not comply, and think that the unemployed judges of the Supreme Court will give them time. Are we supposed to be at the mercy of MoPNG?” The bench allowed the ASG to file the affidavit during the course of the day, but said “we are surprised by the attitude of the MoPNG in taking their own time in responding to the MoEF’s communication. The delay is entirely because of the laxity of the MoPNG”. It said if the cost of Rs 25,000 is not deposited by the MoPNG with the Supreme Court Legal Services Authority on or before July 13, it would enhance the amount of fine. The bench then fixed the matter for hearing on July 16. During the brief hearing, advocate Aparajita Singh, assisting the court as an amicus curiae, said the MoPNG was supposed to respond to the communication on the issue of ban on import of pet coke and supply of natural gas. Regarding the Delhi government not filing a status report on removal of traffic bottlenecks in the national capital, the bench said that as per its May 10 order, the Delhi government was supposed to file it within six weeks but they have not filed it yet and no lawyer on their behalf was present during the proceedings. The court referred to the orders passed by it and said it appeared that Delhi government was not concerned about them. On May 10, Delhi government had told the court that six task forces have been set up to look into the issue of traffic bottlenecks in several corridors in Delhi. It had said that such corridors were classified under categories A, B and C and steps were being taken with respect to 11 out of 28 corridors falling under category A. During the hearing today, the amicus told the bench about the issue related to the tenure of the court-mandated Environment Pollution Control Authority (EPCA). On being asked, the ASG told the bench that EPCA’s tenure was scheduled to end on July 4 this year which has been extended by three months through a government order. The court was hearing the matters arising out of a PIL filed in 1985 by environmentalist M C Mehta who had raised the issue of air pollution in the Delhi-NCR. Johnathan Joseph Jersey