Documente Academic
Documente Profesional
Documente Cultură
EI12/059
First edition
XXX 2013
Published by
ENERGY INSTITUTE, LONDON
The Energy Institute is a professional membership body incorporated by Royal Charter 2003
Registered charity number 1097899
and the
JOINT INSPECTION GROUP
Joint Inspection Group Limited is a company limited by guarantee not having a share capital
Company Number 4617452 registered in England and Wales
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
The Energy Institute (EI) is the leading chartered professional membership body supporting individuals and
organisations across the energy industry. With a combined membership of over 13,500 individuals and 300
companies in 100 countries, it provides an independent focal point for the energy community and a powerful
voice to engage business and industry, government, academia and the public internationally.
As a Royal Charter organisation, the EI offers professional recognition and sustains personal career
development through the accreditation and delivery of training courses, conferences and publications and
networking opportunities. It also runs a highly valued technical work programme, comprising original independent
research and investigations, and the provision of EI technical publications to provide the international industry
with information and guidance on key current and future issues.
The EI promotes the safe, environmentally responsible and efficient supply and use of energy in all its
forms and applications. In fulfilling this purpose the EI addresses the depth and breadth of energy and the energy
system, from upstream and downstream hydrocarbons and other primary fuels and renewables, to power
generation, transmission and distribution to sustainable development, demand side management and energy
efficiency. Offering learning and networking opportunities to support career development, the EI provides a home
to all those working in energy, and a scientific and technical reservoir of knowledge for industry.
This publication has been produced as a result of work carried out within the Technical Team of the
Energy Institute (EI), funded by the EIs Technical Partners. The EIs Technical Work Programme provides
industry with cost-effective, value-adding knowledge on key current and future issues affecting those operating in
the energy sector, both in the UK and internationally.
For further information, please visit http://www.energyinst.org.uk
The EI gratefully acknowledges the financial contributions towards the scientific and technical
programme from the following companies:
The Joint Inspection Group (JIG) is the leading internationally recognised forum where experts in all aspects of
the aviation fuel supply industry can come together to establish and enhance standards for the safe handling and
quality control of aviation fuels globally. The JIG Standards are recognised and endorsed by all parties with a
stake in the industry.
The primary purpose of JIG is to ensure that the standards for aviation fuel handling and quality control and
aircraft fuelling operations ensure safe and reliable operations, are continuously updated taking into account
developments in technology and lessons learned, and that they are rigorously followed at JIG operations around
the world.
Currently the JIG standards are applied at about 180 of the worlds major airports where there are shared fuel
storage and handling facilities, including Heathrow, Frankfurt, Paris, Sydney, Singapore, Johannesburg,
Amsterdam, Istanbul, Dubai, and Hong Kong. JIG Standards are also applied at many of the member companies
own operations, typically the smaller regional airports where the facilities are not shared, and used as a reference
by many other airport operators. As a result some 2500 locations around the world work to the JIG Standards
with approximately 40 % of the worlds aviation fuel supplied through facilities that follow JIG Standards.
JIG Ltd gratefully acknowledges the financial and technical support from its Member Companies:
Copyright 2013 by the Energy Institute, London and the Joint Inspection Group Limited:
The Energy Institute is a professional membership body incorporated by Royal Charter 2003.
Registered charity number 1097899, England
All rights reserved
Joint Inspection Group Limited is a company limited by guarantee not having a share capital
Company Number 4617452 registered in England and Wales
No part of this book may be reproduced by any means, or transmitted or translated into
a machine language without the written permission of the publishers.
ISBN 978 0 85293 637 5
Further copies can be obtained from:
Portland Customer Services, Commerce Way, Whitehall Industrial Estate, Colchester CO2 8HP, UK.
t: +44 (0)1206 796 351 e: sales@portland-services.com
SAI Global - ILI Publishing, Index House, Ascot, Berks, SL5 7EU, UK
Tel: +44 (0)1344 636300, Fax: +44 (0)1344 291194, www.ili.co.uk & www.i2isolutions.net e: standards@saiglobal.com
Electronic access to EI publications is available via our website, www.energyinstpubs.org.uk.
Documents can be purchased online as downloadable pdfs or on an annual subscription for single users and companies.
For more information, contact the EI Publications Team (pubs@energyinst.org.uk)
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
CONTENTS
Page
Legal notices and disclaimers ................................................................................................
Foreword...................................................................................................................................
Acknowledgements .................................................................................................................
1 Introduction, scope, application and important definitions..............................................
1.1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................
1.2 Scope ...................................................................................................................................
1.3 Application ...........................................................................................................................
1.4 Important definitions .............................................................................................................
2 Aviation fuel quality assurance and traceability ................................................................
2.1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................
2.2 Quality assurance system ....................................................................................................
2.3 Traceability ...........................................................................................................................
2.4 Quality assurance organisation............................................................................................
2.5 Document retention requirements ........................................................................................
3 Management of change/new processes .............................................................................
3.1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................................
3.2 Principles .............................................................................................................................
3.3 Management of change process ..........................................................................................
3.4 MoC process implementation ..............................................................................................
3.5 Specific changes ..................................................................................................................
3.6 Example review process ......................................................................................................
4 Sampling and testing of aviation fuel .................................................................................
4.1 General sampling principles .................................................................................................
4.2 Normative documents ..........................................................................................................
4.3 Sampling and samples terminology ..................................................................................
4.4 Sampling tanks for batching, certification or recertification ..................................................
4.5 Sampling tanks in any marine vessel ...................................................................................
4.6 Sample testing .....................................................................................................................
5 Laboratories ..........................................................................................................................
5.1 Laboratory quality assurance requirements .........................................................................
5.2 RCQ testing .........................................................................................................................
5.3 Authorised signatories .........................................................................................................
5.4 Test method validation .........................................................................................................
5.5 Software and computer system validation ...........................................................................
5.6 Equipment calibration ..........................................................................................................
5.7 Document control (standards and specifications) ................................................................
5.8 Training ................................................................................................................................
5.9 Retention samples ...............................................................................................................
5.10 Sample handling and sample containers at laboratories ...................................................
5.11 Data integrity management ................................................................................................
5.12 Documentation ...................................................................................................................
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
Annex A
Annex B
Annex C
Annex D
Annex E
Annex F
Annex G
Annex H
Annex I
Annex J
Annex K
EI12/059
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
FOREWORD
This publication has been prepared by an EI/JIG Working Group, under the direction of the
EI Aviation Committee and the JIG Operations Committee.
EI/JIG 1530 is intended to provide a standard to assist in the maintenance of aviation fuel
quality, from its point of manufacture to delivery to airports. It provides mandatory provisions
and good practice recommendations for the design/functional requirements of facilities, and
operational procedures.
This publication is intended for adoption worldwide, by any company or organisation involved
in the refining or handling of aviation fuel upstream of airports. This includes those
companies/organisations responsible for the design, construction, operation, inspection or
maintenance of refineries, pipelines, marine vessels, coastal/inland waterway barges, road
tankers, rail tank cars or storage installations, aviation fuel testing laboratories and
inspection companies.
This publication uses the word shall to denote mandatory provisions, compliance with which
is considered essential for the maintenance of aviation fuel quality. The word should is used
to denote provisions considered to represent good practice. Note: If companies/
organisations choose to follow this publication, it is recommended that all of its provisions
(mandatory and good practice) are adopted.
Whilst written in the context of the legislative and regulatory framework generally applicable
in the European Communities, the provisions set out in this publication can similarly be
applied in other countries providing national and local statutory requirements are complied
with. Where the requirements differ, the more stringent should be adopted.
The EI and JIG are not undertaking to meet the duties of employers to warn and equip their
employees, and others exposed, concerning health and safety risks and precautions, nor
undertaking their obligations under local and regional laws and regulations.
Nothing contained in any EI/JIG publication is to be construed as granting any right, by
implication or otherwise, for the manufacture, sale, or use of any method, apparatus, or
product covered by letters patent. Neither shall anything contained in the publication be
construed as insuring anyone against liability for infringement of letters patent.
This publication is intended to assist those involved in the refining, distribution and supply of
aviation fuel. Every effort has been made by the EI and JIG to assure the accuracy and
reliability of the data contained in this publication; however, EI and JIG make no
representation, warranty, or guarantee in connection with this publication and hereby
expressly disclaim any liability or responsibility for loss or damage resulting from its use or
for the violation of any local or regional laws or regulations with which this publication may
conflict.
Suggested revisions are invited and may be submitted to the Technical Department, Energy
Institute, 61 New Cavendish Street, London, W1G 7AR (technical@energyinst.org) or to the
Joint Inspection Group (via www.jigonline.com).
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
This publication was prepared by representatives of the following, on behalf of the Energy
Institute Aviation Committee and the Joint Inspection Group Operations Committee.
Air BP Limited
Air TOTAL International
Central European Pipeline Management Agency
Kuwait Petroleum International Aviation Company Ltd.
ExxonMobil Aviation International Ltd.
SGS
Shell Aviation Ltd.
The participation and contributions of technical representatives of the following are greatly
appreciated in the development of this publication:
To be added
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
INTRODUCTION
For many decades those involved in aviation fuel manufacture and handling have worked to
ensure that all fuel delivered to airports is fully on-specification, clean and dry, and fit-forpurpose.
In various regions worldwide, this activity was undertaken by a relatively small number of
integrated oil companies or National Oil companies, working to company proprietary
manuals. This situation has significantly changed in recent years, with a diverse range of
companies and organisations having responsibility for aviation fuel manufacture and
distribution to airports.
The need to highlight the availability of industry standards for the management of aviation
fuel quality throughout the supply chain has been recognized by the International Civil
Aviation Organization (ICAO), which has issued Doc 9977 Manual on civil aviation jet fuel
supply. This has been issued to the civil aviation authorities of the 191 Member States of
ICAO.
Industry stakeholders have recognized the need to document the key mandatory provisions
that are considered essential for the maintenance of aviation fuel quality from its point of
manufacture through (sometimes complex) distribution systems to airports. In addition, good
practice recommendations and informative material have been provided, based on existing
company operating materials, and collective industry specialist knowledge developed over
many years of safe and efficient operations. This forms the content of this publication.
While this publication establishes mandatory provisions and good practice
recommendations, all companies/organisations involved in maintaining aviation fuel quality
are encouraged to seek continuous improvement in their operations.
The overriding philosophy implicit in this document is that, at each step in the fuels journey
from refinery to airport, all the parties involved, from its initial production to subsequent
storage and handling, have a shared responsibility for maintaining the quality and
cleanliness of the fuel at that point in the supply chain, and should not expect the parties
further downstream to remedy any deficiencies.
It should be noted that maintaining aviation fuel quality relies upon the involvement of
competent and experienced practitioners. This publication has been prepared for use by
such individuals only.
1.2
SCOPE
This publication provides mandatory provisions and good practice recommendations for
maintaining aviation fuel quality in refineries and in storage, distribution and transport
systems including those delivering to airports, covering:
facilities design and construction,
product manufacture,
batching,
testing,
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
release,
storage and handling,
receipt and discharge,
quality assurance requirements, and
operational procedures.
APPLICATION
This publication is intended for adoption worldwide, by any company or organisation involved
in the manufacturing, testing, blending or handling of aviation fuel upstream of airports. This
includes those companies/organisations responsible for the design, construction, operation,
inspection or maintenance of refineries, pipelines, marine vessels, coastal/inland waterway
barges, road tankers, rail tank cars or storage installations, aviation fuel testing laboratories
and inspection companies.
The requirements and recommendations detailed in this publication incorporate those
previously published as JIG 3 Standards for aviation fuel quality control and operating
procedures for supply and distribution facilities (Issue 11, January 2012) and are in
alignment with those in API Recommended Practice 1595 Design, construction, operation,
maintenance and inspection of aviation pre-airfield storage terminals and API
Recommended Practice 1543 Documentation, monitoring and laboratory testing of aviation
fuel during shipment from refinery to airport.
Throughout this publication the words shall, should and may are used to qualify certain
requirements or actions. The specific meaning of these words is as follows:
shall is used when the provision is mandatory
should is used when the provision is recommended as good practice
may is used where the provision is optional
Companies/organisations wishing to claim compliance with this publication are required to
meet all of the mandatory provisions of the relevant chapter(s). All companies/organisations
are also encouraged to follow the provisions which are recommended as good practice.
In the case of existing facilities that do not comply fully with mandatory provisions of this
publication, steps shall be taken to make the improvements necessary to facilities and/or
procedures. The goal should always be full compliance. Where full compliance has not been
achieved, it shall be demonstrated that the combination of existing facilities and the quality
assurance procedures applied to them (based on a full risk assessment) are capable of
always meeting the objective of delivering only clean, dry, on-specification fuel. Risk
10
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
assessments shall be clearly defined and documented, and available for auditing purposes.
The reliance on the combination of existing facilities and quality assurance procedures shall
not be considered as a permanent means of complying with mandatory provisions of this
publication.
1.4
IMPORTANT DEFINITIONS
1.4.1 On specification
Aviation fuel specifications contain a table (or tables) of fuel property requirements, with their
minimum and/or maximum allowable values. However, in addition to the table of properties,
aviation fuel specifications contain numerous requirements related to permitted materials
(both fuel components and additives), quality assurance, management of change, testing
and documentation (traceability), and cleanliness, which are designed to ensure that fuel
delivered into aircraft is fit-for-purpose.
A declaration of on specification or meeting the specification means meeting the
various maximum/minimum limits for fuel property tests and also satisfying all other
aspects of the specification such as material composition, approved additives, quality
assurance, management of change, cleanliness, traceability, etc.
1.4.2 Glossary of terms and abbreviations
A glossary of terms and abbreviations used in this publication is included as Annex A.
11
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
INTRODUCTION
The potential consequences of a failure to supply the correct, on-specification and fit-forpurpose fuel to aircraft are such that it is essential for every organization in the supply chain
from refinery to airport to have an effective, documented and auditable aviation fuel quality
assurance system. The system shall be designed to ensure the provision and maintenance
of appropriate facilities, equipment and competent personnel for the safe and
uncontaminated production and delivery of aviation fuels.
2.2
12
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
13
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Name and address of testing laboratory, including telephone and fax numbers and e-mail
address;
Batch number or unique identifier;
Quantity of fuel in each component in the batch;
Properties tested including specification limit, test method and result of test including
comparison checks;
Name and position of authorised test certificate signatory or electronic signature, and
Date of testing.
TRACEABILITY
Traceability for aviation fuel indicates the ability to track any batch of fuel in the distribution
system back to its original point of manufacture. This requires certification documentation
(RCQs and/or CoAs, RTCs and RCs), with information on additive concentration and content
of hydroprocessed and synthetic components (if required by the specification).
14
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
To avoid the need to view excessive documentation at each point in the supply chain,
traceability may be fulfilled by listing on the CoA (or on a cross-referenced attached
document see Figure 1) all the component batches that make up the new batch that the
CoA represents.
Batch Make-Up Record
Batch Number:
Tank Number:
Quantity:
Grade:
Date Sampled:
Quantity
(Litres/USG)
Batch
Number
Test Cert.
Number
Import
Release Note
litres/USG
Consignor
Location
Receipt
Date
Consignee
Location
Delivery
Date
Initial
Stock
New
Product
Received
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
Loss/(Gain)
Total
Litres/USG
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
Loss/(Gain)
Inspectors
Number
Method of Despatch
Export
Release Note
Signed
15
EI12/059
16
EI12/059
Scenarrio 3
17
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
The flow chart in Figure 2 indicates the documentation that is required at each stage of
delivery.
18
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
2.4
EI12/059
Every manufacturing, storage and distribution location shall have a product quality
assurance organisation. The specific details of such an organisation may vary according to
the nature of the operating unit. Within the organisation, individuals shall be nominated for
specific roles, authorised and documented (nomenclature may vary according to local
requirements). At each level of the structure, records shall be kept of the responsible
individuals in the succeeding level together with details of training received. As a minimum
the organisation shall include a site product quality manager and nominated personnel
responsible for tasks critical to the product quality assurance system.
2.4.1 Site Product Quality Manager
At each site that manufactures, blends, stores or handles aviation fuel there shall be a
nominated site product quality manager responsible for the efficient and effective operation
of the quality assurance system at that site.
As a minimum, the Site Product Quality Manager shall be accountable for:
Implementation of correct quality assurance procedures;
Maintenance of satisfactory documentation;
Only releasing product that meets the appropriate specification), and
Training of all staff at the site who are nominated to undertake tasks critical to the
product quality assurance system.
2.4.2 Personnel with duties that include tasks critical to the product quality assurance
system
All staff whose duties include tasks critical to the product quality assurance system shall be
nominated, documented and fully trained in such tasks.
See Annex B for additional requirements for staff responsible for the signing of documents
supporting the release of product (authorised signatories).
2.4.3 Training requirements
The manager of the operation is responsible for defining training and competency
requirements for the personnel under their control. The manager shall ensure that all
personnel have appropriate job descriptions and are adequately trained. The training records
shall be well documented including details of theoretical and practical content, how
competency is assessed and signed off, when training was first accomplished and when
refresher training is required.
New personnel (permanent and temporary) shall be thoroughly trained in all operations and
procedures that they will be called upon to perform in the course of their duties. Existing
personnel called upon to undertake new tasks shall be similarly trained before undertaking
the new task without supervision. Existing personnel shall also be observed periodically
when carrying out tasks, and refresher training provided when necessary.
The following components are important to appropriately assess the competence
requirements of personnel:
the experience, knowledge and skills required in each position;
any legal and other requirements applicable to the role, and
differing levels of responsibility, ability, language skills and literacy and risks associated
with the Job Description/ role
Specific consideration shall be given to the competencies required for the following roles:
19
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Aviation quality control documents shall be kept for certain minimum periods to provide
adequate history and reference. The following retention requirements specify minimum
periods, but local regulations or external quality assurance requirements may require longer
retention periods. Records of all daily, weekly and monthly checks shall be retained for at
least 1 year. Records of all less frequent routine checks, filter membrane test results and
logbooks on all non-routine matters shall be retained for at least 3 years. Other maintenance
records shall be retained for at least 1 year, or longer if still relevant to equipment condition
(e.g., major repair work or extension(s) to facilities).
Supply and distribution depot logs - 12 months from last dated record.
Laboratory quality control and product testing records and certificates - 10 years.
Local and international inspections and follow-up - 3 years or until all recommendations
have been closed out if longer.
Filtration differential pressure and membrane filtration (Millipore) records - a minimum of
either 3 years or current and previous change-out if longer.
Storage tank cleaning and maintenance records - life of tank + 6 years. If the tanks are
buried underground, these records shall be kept indefinitely.
Depot design, modification and major maintenance - life of depot + 10 years.
Underground pipeline design, modification and testing records - life of installation + 10
years.
20
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
3 MANAGEMENT OF CHANGE/NEW
PROCESSES
3.1
INTRODUCTION
Both DEF STAN 91-91 and ASTM D1655 highlight the need for refineries to conduct a
Management of Change (MoC) evaluation to include the impact of process changes,
including refinery process chemicals, on jet fuel performance to ensure that the finished fuel
remains fit-for-purpose. The industry recognized that product performance needed to be
included in MoC processes following a serious incident in Australia in 1999 where the
breakthrough of a refinery process chemical into the finished aviation fuel caused several
aircraft incidents, despite the fact that the finished fuel was in complete compliance with all
specification test limit requirements. Both specifications also require a MoC evaluation for
any changes in facilities and/or operating procedures at manufacturing locations, storage
installations and distribution systems to ensure product integrity is maintained.
The basic requirements of an MoC process are detailed in this chapter. Although it is
intended to be specifically applicable to refinery operations, the principles of MoC shall be
applied to all operations/installations downstream of refineries.
More detailed information can be found in ISO 31000 Risk management - Principles and
guidelines.
3.2
PRINCIPLES
All temporary and permanent changes shall be evaluated before the change is implemented,
and managed to ensure that risks arising from changes remain at acceptable levels.
There are practical reasons for managing change because when a change is introduced,
there may be increased risk of the fuel not meeting the specification requirements.
Implementing a MoC process provides a system to evaluate, authorize and document
changes and ensure proper closure after the changes are complete.
The process should apply to all permanent and temporary changes to organisation, staffing,
systems, procedures, equipment, products materials or substances.
The process requires competent personnel fulfilling clearly defined roles and responsibilities
with clearly defined technical authority levels for the approval of changes. Note: Personnel
with wide ranging areas of expertise should be involved so that all the hazards and
consequences can be listed and worked through.
Appropriate training, support and competency assessments should be provided for those
with accountabilities in the MoC process.
A register of all MoCs initiated should be established and used.
3.3
The management of change process shall consider as a minimum the following before the
change is implemented:
21
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
An action plan shall be developed, with assigned responsibilities and timelines identified,
and the change process documented.
For the review of the MoC process, see example in 3.6. The team should include all the
necessary knowledge and competency for the change proposal being evaluated/assessed.
Once approval for the change is given, a pre-implementation review should be carried out to
ensure that the plans and resources associated with implementing the change are in place.
Once the change has been made, a post implementation review shall be carried out to
ensure that all the actions have been completed and that the documentation, in particular
that defining procedures, has been updated.
3.4
It has been documented in a number of incident investigations that the following activities
help support an effective MoC system:
a) Recognise change
Define safe limits for process conditions, variables, and activitiesand train personnel to
recognize significant changes. Combined with knowledge of established operating
procedures, this additional training will enable personnel to activate the MoC system
when appropriate.
b) Apply multidisciplinary and specialized expertise when analyzing changes
c) Hazard screening and risk analysis
Use appropriate hazard and risk analysis techniques.
d) Authorize changes at a level commensurate with risks and hazards.
e) Communicate the essential elements of new operating procedures in writing
f) Communicate potential hazards and safe operating limits in writing.
g) Provide training in new procedures commensurate with their complexity.
h) Conduct periodic audits to determine if the program is effective
3.5
SPECIFIC CHANGES
Specific changes that may have to be managed include, but are not limited to:
a) Change in crude or crude mix. Note: Although not necessarily communicated to the
crude user, it has been known for changes in oil field chemicals to impact aviation fuel
quality.
b) Introduction of new process(es) or product streams, or suspension of existing processes.
c) Change in process (change in hydroprocessing severity, catalyst exchange).
d) Change in process additives e.g. anti-corrosion additives.
e) Change in use of pipelines and tanks (see Annex C for specific requirements) impacting
e.g. segregation effectiveness, mixing/homogeneity, residence time, sampling facilities.
f) Importing of finished aviation fuel or blending components.
22
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
g)
h)
i)
j)
k)
3.6
EI12/059
An example process for crude and/or process additive changes is shown in this section. It is
based on a series of questions, all of which have to be answered. Other processes may be
equally acceptable. If any of the questions are answered with a Yes, record the required
action/mitigation measure.
Note: Further questions may need to be added to those listed.
Q1
Does the change relate to different processing or the use of different feedstock(s) to
produce jet?
Yes: go to Q2, Appearance. No: go to Q18, Additives.
Appearance
Q2 Could the change affect the visual appearance of the fuel?
- colour including tint, clear and bright.
Q3
Could the change affect the particulate content of the fuel new lines/pumps/risk of
surface active agents or condition of tank coatings?
Composition
Q4 Will the fuel still consist of a mixture of components approved by the relevant fuel
specification(s)?
HSE
Q5 Will the fuel meet relevant HSE requirements?
- MSDS (change required? benzene, toluene etc.)
- will hazard classification and labelling requirements be affected?.
Energy content/combustion
Q6 Are there any adverse effects on the energy content/combustion of the fuel?
- specific energy, density, smoke point, aromatics content.
- could any parameter become borderline/affect consistency of manufacture? Does
borderline need to be defined?
Flow properties
Q7 Are there any adverse effects on fuel cold flow properties?
- distillation, paraffin (alkane) composition, viscosity, freeze point (test product using
all approved methods)
- could any parameter become borderline/affect consistency of manufacture?
Fuel handling system compatibility
Q8 Could there be any issues concerning compatibility with aviation fuel supply systems,
airframes or aircraft engines?
- total acidity, copper strip corrosion, mercaptans and total sulphur, aromatics for seal
swell, metals content.
23
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Fuel stability
Q9 Are there any issues concerning storage stability?
- existent gum, unsaturated species.
- oxidation tests?
- need to change anti-oxidant treat-rate?
Q10 Are there any issues of fuel thermal stability?
- JFTOT, high levels of N, S and O containing organic molecules e.g. indoles,
metals e.g. copper
- Change in breakpoint/borderline fuel?
Water separation
Q11 Is there any impact on water separation equipment e.g. filter/coalescers etc.?
- surfactants present, MSEP test
Lubricity
Q12 Is there any impact on fuel lubricity?
- heavily hydrotreated fuels, ultra-low sulphur fuels
- need for BOCLE testing?
Additives
Q13 If manufacture involves the utilisation of a new refinery stream, are any additives used
on the production units?
- are the additives approved for jet fuel?
- if unapproved additives are used, how will these be removed?
- what verification of control will be applied?
General considerations
Q14 Will the product meet the requirements of the relevant aviation fuel specification?
Q15 Will the product, if jet fuel, meet all fit-for-purpose requirements of the relevant aviation
fuel specification? (for further information see ASTM D4054).
Q16 Will the new product be fungible with standard product and acceptable for transport
route e.g. pipeline approval/specifications?
Q17 Will the product fall within the range that is typical as referenced in the CRC Aviation
fuels handbook?
Additives
Q18 Is the additive approved by the specification? Yes: go to Q19. No: go to Q21.
Q19 Are there any issues concerning additive shelf life?
Q20 Is the additive injection system reconciliation and record keeping satisfactory?
Non-approved additives
Q21 Is there relevant experience in the use of the additive? Identify chemicals that might be
increased, changed or introduced by a process change. (These are chemicals not
normally found in crude oil, or used in certified aviation fuel). Keep chemistry details in
a database to facilitate future assessments.
Q22 Is the traceability of the additive known? Use knowledge of refinery processes to
24
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
predict the flow path and fate of each refinery process chemical, based on
chemical/physical properties (e.g. boiling point, thermal decomposition temperature,
partition coefficients, etc.).
Q23 What is the potential impact on the specification properties and the fitness for purpose
of the jet fuel? The probability of breakthrough into the finished jet fuel, and the
consequence or impact of the chemicals on fuel performance should be fully risk
assessed and assigned an overall risk category. It shall identify whether additional
control/mitigation strategies are needed to reduce risk to an acceptable level.
Q24 What quality critical controls will be implemented? Establish corrective actions if the
process falls outside of control limits (e.g. if thermal decomposition in a hydrotreater is
the primary control, define operator response in the event of an unplanned
hydrotreater shutdown, such as divert unit feed out of the jet system to distillate
system)
Q25 Are there any issues concerning additive shelf life?
Q26 Is the additive injection system reconciliation and record keeping satisfactory?
25
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
4.1.1 It should be kept in mind at all times that the general goal of sampling is to obtain a
test aliquot that is representative; this is defined in ASTM D4057 as:
3.1.1.18 representative samplea portion extracted from the total volume that
contains the constituents in the same proportions that are present in that total
volume.
When the word composite is used to describe a sample, considerable caution should be
exercised, as the general term does require qualification in order to be specific. The type of
composite made and hence tested has a significant impact on the results obtained. This is
true for all hydrocarbons but has a special significance where aviation fuels are concerned
(see Table 1).
The various test methods developed for aviation fuels have specific instructions for
sampling. At the time of writing, the number of samples required for simple certification /
recertification / batching is both large and in many cases, impractical. Work is under way to
rationalise the situation, but the user should be aware that these very detailed and specific
requirements exist.
4.1.2
Samples should be drawn in duplicate sets, one for analysis one for retention. It may
be necessary in some circumstances, in shared systems or because of commercial
agreements, to draw three or more sets, but in general two sets should be sufficient.
4.1.3
The use of appropriate containers is vital to any successful sampling exercise. The
preferred containers are epoxy lined cans fitted with a secure threaded closure or new
borosilicate glass bottles fitted with polycone type closures. Containers made from other
materials may be suitable; see ASTM D4306 for advice. Because of the sensitivity of some
test results to the UV content of light, dark glass bottles, as well as clear glass bottles, are to
be kept in stock for use when sampling jet fuel.
4.1.4
Before use, all bottles and cans shall be thoroughly rinsed at least three times with
the fuel to be sampled to remove any residual chemicals on the inner surfaces.
Note: Laboratory preparation of sample bottles/cans should include rinsing with aviation fuel
of known quality that is within specification. It is not recommended for sample containers to
be washed using detergents owing to difficulties in ensuring that detergent residues are
removed.
4.1.5
4.1.6
4.1.7 Only 100% natural fibre ropes or stainless steel cables should be used when
sampling aviation fuel. In both cases, when new they may retain surfactants used in
manufacturing and so before their first use they shall be soaked in fuel for at least 12 hours,
washed off in fresh, on-grade aviation fuel and then allowed to dry whilst hanging. This will
avoid any sample failure due to rope or chain contamination during the sampling process.
Note: If metal cables are used for sampling they require bonding to the storage structure.
26
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
4.1.8 All samples should be clearly labelled with the location and source, the date and time
of sampling, a unique reference number, the sample type, the grade of fuel, the batch
number and a means of identifying who drew the sample. The label shall be printed and
filled in with ink that does not run when exposed to either water or hydrocarbon.
Whenever samples are drawn, sufficient ullage shall be left in each bottle or can to
allow for safe handling of the sample (usually ca. 5 % of total volume, one inch or 2.5 cm is
enough).
4.1.9
NORMATIVE DOCUMENTS
Automatic sampler
27
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
Bottom sample
Bottom water sample
Closed sampling
Composite sample
EI12/059
28
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Drain sample
Line sample
Lower sample
Middle sample
Open Sampling
Portable sampling
device (PSD)
Representative
sample
Restricted sampling
Running sample
Sample handling
Suction-level sample /
outlet sample
29
Test po
ortion
Top sample
Ullage
Upper s
sample
vapourr-lock valve
e/
vapourr control va
alve
Key
1 top sample
2 surfa
ace of fuel
3 skim sample
4 uppe
er sample
5 middle sample
EI12/059
manner that 1
1.5 times th
he dead volume betweeen the bu
ulk liquid
and
d the samplle point is drawn
d
off firrst and dispposed of be
efore the
sam
mple for use
e / analysis
s is drawn. On aviationn turbine fuel tanks
fitte
ed with this type of sam
mple facility
y the volumee between the bulk
liqu
uid and the sample point shall be marked neext to each sample
poin
nt.
The
e portion off a sample or subsample that is introduced into the
ana
alytical test apparatus
A spot
s
sample
e obtained 150 mm below
b
the ttop surface
e of the
liqu
uid (see Figu
ure 3).
The
e empty capacity left in a fixed volume sample
rece
eiver/contaiiner above the liquid su
urface
a spot sample
e taken at a level of one-sixth of the depth of liquid
belo
ow the top ssurface (see Figure 1)..
a de
evice fitted to the top of
o vapour-tig
ght or presssure tanks to permit
manual measu
urement an
nd/or samp
pling operattions to be carried
out without losss of pressure.
6 sucttion level or o
outlet sample
7 lowe
er sample
8 botttom sample
9 sum
mp sample
4.4
SAMPLING
G TANKS FOR
F
BATCH
HING, CER
RTIFICATIO
ON OR REC
CERTIFICAT
TION
ank or tank
ks, due connsideration shall be
4.4.1 When designing a sampling regiime for a ta
o:
given to
30
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
a) Tank design: aviation turbine fuel can layer, stilling wells can, if circulation is slow, hold
unrepresentative fuel, and access may be limited. The sampler shall take into account
the basic requirement that the sample submitted for test shall be representative of the
bulk liquid.
b) The test to be performed. As stated earlier certain specific test methods call for samples
to be drawn in a special manner or placed into a specific container. This is particularly
important when a marginal or failed laboratory test has been reported and a fresh
sample is being drawn to validate the finding.
c) The commercial agreements to be satisfied. It may be that contractual agreements are in
place that require extra samples to be drawn from tanks and either placed on board the
ship, retained for a specific time or forwarded to some third party for testing. It is
important that the sampler is aware of any such contractual stipulations before the
sampling regime is drawn up.
4.4.2
The basic set of samples to be drawn from any bulk fuel storage tank will consist of:
a) Firstly, a spot sample from the water drain taken to establish that all free water has been
drained off.
b) Either a 1 litre or 1 USQ clear glass bottle from each of the upper, middle and lower
levels of the bulk liquid.
c) Either a 5 litre or 1 US Gallon running sample drawn and placed into an epoxy lined can.
Note, as stated in 4.1.3, such samples should be drawn in duplicate at least, and further
sets may be required in line with contractual or other conditions prevailing in the specific
circumstances.
4.5
4.5.1 When designing a sampling regime for a tank or tanks on board a marine vessel, due
consideration shall be given to:
a) Tank design: on board ships, access may be limited. The sampler shall take into account
the basic requirement that the sample submitted for test shall be representative of the
bulk liquid. It is important that the sampler appreciates and guards against contamination
of samples drawn under closed loading conditions through vapour lock valves as the
under deck guide tubes are known to pose issues with respect to both particulates and
residual additive contamination.
b) The test to be performed. As stated earlier, certain specific test methods call for samples
to be drawn in a special manner, or placed into a specific container. This is particularly
important when a marginal or failed laboratory test has been reported and a fresh
sample is being drawn to validate the finding.
c) The commercial agreements to be satisfied. It may be that contractual agreements are in
place that require extra samples to be drawn from tanks and either placed on board the
ship, retained for a specific time or forwarded to some third party for testing. It is
important that the sampler is aware of any such contractual stipulations before the
sampling regime is drawn up.
4.5.2 The basic set of samples to be drawn from any marine vessel will consist of either a
1L or 1 USQ, clear glass bottle running sample from the bulk liquid in each tank. If, due to
closed loading, running samples cannot be drawn, the Upper, Middle and Lower samples of
500 ml or 1 pint may be substituted. If the vessel or parcel consists of less than four ships
tanks, quantities shall be doubled to allow sufficient volumes to be composited.
Note, as stated in 4.1.3, such samples should be drawn in duplicate at least, and further sets
may be required in line with contractual or other conditions prevailing in the specific
circumstances.
31
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
When making up a MTC, running samples from a maximum of seven compartments can be
combined.
4.6
SAMPLE TESTING
Sample containers
32
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Recertification testing
33
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Jet fuel
Avgas
Appearance/Colour
Saybolt Colour
Distillation
Flashpoint
Density @ 15C
Freezing Point
Corrosion (copper)
Existent Gum
Lead Content
Note 1
Note 2
Note 3
34
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
In circumstances where more than one new batch is received into a tank:
the comparison shall be based on calculated values taking into account the amount of
each batch in the tank;
if more than three new batches are received into a tank, the contents of the tank shall be
tested against all the requirements of the specification to produce a CoA. In such cases
no comparison with previous data is required.
4.6.7 Periodic test
Test requirements for the Periodic Test are as shown in Table 3.
Sample quantity required:
Jet Fuel: 3 litres (3 USQ) minimum (Upper, Middle, Lower samples x1 litre (1 USQ) to
make a composite)
Avgas:
3 litres (3 USQ) (Upper, Middle, Lower samples x1 litre (1 USQ) to make a
composite)
Table 3: Periodic test requirements
Test
Jet Fuel
Avgas
Appearance/Colour
Saybolt Colour
Distillation
Flashpoint
Density @ 15oC
Corrosion (copper)
Existent Gum
Lead Content
Note 1
MSEP
Thermal Stability
35
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Field tests
Jet fuel
Avgas
Colour (visual)
Water (visual)
36
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
37
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
5 LABORATORIES
5.1
Appropriate quality assurance processes for laboratory activities are detailed in a large
number of standards, as listed in Part A of EI Guidance on development, implementation
and improvement of quality systems in petroleum laboratories. Specific requirements for
petroleum laboratories are described in Part B of EI Guidance on development,
implementation and improvement of quality systems in petroleum laboratories; and ASTM
D6792 Standard practice for quality system in petroleum products and lubricants testing
laboratories.
Laboratories engaged in the testing and certification of aviation fuels shall adopt quality
control and assurance standards establishing and maintaining a documented quality system
that is appropriate to the testing facilities.
To support the documented system the laboratory should:
comply with EN ISO/IEC 17025 on General requirements for the competence of testing
and calibration laboratories; and
participate in external quality assurance schemes (EQA).
In addition to establishing and maintaining a documented quality system that is appropriate
to the testing activities, the laboratory shall:
a)
b)
c)
d)
e)
f)
g)
h)
i)
j)
k)
Have managerial staff with the authority and resources needed to discharge their duties
and meet the requirements of the standards in the quality manual.
Have a technical manager or leader who is accountable for technical operations.
Specify and document the responsibility, training and authority of all personnel who
manage, perform or verify work affecting the validity of the aviation fuel analysis.
Have written job descriptions for personnel: to include responsibilities, duties and skills;
have a documented training programme for qualifying all technical laboratory personnel,
and have a documented programme to ensure technical qualifications are maintained
through continuing education.
Maintain records on the relevant qualifications, training, skills and experience of the
technical personnel involved in all aspects of aviation fuel testing and certification.
Follow written analytical procedures approved by the laboratory management/technical
manager.
Have a standard operating protocol for each analytical technique used that follows
current editions of the methods detailed in the relevant fuel specification.
Use equipment suitable for the methods employed and as detailed in the relevant fuel
specification.
Follow a documented programme to ensure that instruments and equipment are
properly maintained. New instruments and equipment, or instruments and equipment
that have undergone repair or maintenance, shall be calibrated before being used in
testing of aviation fuel. Written records or logs shall be maintained for maintenance
service performed on instruments and equipment.
Participate in comparative testing through statistically meaningful cross
check/correlation schemes such as those run by the EI and ASTM. This shall include
performance assessment by a designated and competent person, and the
implementation of measures to improve performance. For further information see EI
Guidelines on development, implementation and improvement of quality systems in
petroleum laboratories.
Record all basic data used to generate a test result.
38
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
RCQ TESTING
Certification testing of product from refinery tanks to confirm that the fuel is on specification,
and enable the issue of a RCQ, can be carried be out by a laboratory owned/operated by the
refinery operator, or by a third party laboratory. However, in all cases the refinery is
accountable for the reported results and certification.
5.3
AUTHORISED SIGNATORIES
The laboratory shall implement a documented process for authorising signatories for
reports/certification for aviation fuel analysis for release to clients/third parties.
The key requirements of the process are:
Having a documented process for qualification as an authorised signatory
Needing to maintain an up to date Data Release Signature Register
Having an auditable record of a checking/validation procedure.
For further information see Annex B. For details of electronic signatures see 9.6.3.
5.4
Test Method validation confirms that the analytical procedure employed for a specific test is
suitable for its intended use.
For all methods the laboratory shall satisfy itself that the degree of validation is adequate for
the required purpose, and that the laboratory is able to match any stated performance data.
For routine analysis, a Statistical Quality Control (SQC) plan should be developed. This plan
should ensure that the method, together with the equipment, delivers consistently accurate
results. It is recommended that SQC should be implemented through LIMS and provide a
basis for interactively scheduling, recording and checking analytical results against quality
standards.
For further information, see EI Guidelines on development, implementation and improvement
of quality systems in petroleum laboratories, section 5.6 Assuring the validity of test results.
5.5
Validation of laboratory computer systems and software should be carried out when the
software is developed, configured, or customized by the user.
For further details on validation for different software and system risk categories see
EUROLAB Management of computers and software in laboratories with reference to
ISO/IEC 17025:2005.
39
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
5.6
EI12/059
EQUIPMENT CALIBRATION
Laboratories shall ensure adequate equipment function and performance before and during
sample measurement.
Laboratories shall have a documented programme for calibration and verification of
instruments and equipment. Where available and appropriate, standards traceable to
Certified Reference Materials (CRMs) shall be used for the calibration.
Where traceability to CRMs is not applicable, the laboratory shall provide satisfactory
evidence of correlation of results through check samples and proficiency schemes.
For further information on the use of reference materials, see EI Guidelines on development,
implementation and improvement of quality systems in petroleum laboratories, section 7 The
use of reference materials in method calibration, validation and quality control.
The frequency of the calibration shall be documented for each instrument requiring
calibration. Equipment should be labelled with the status, as well as the dates of last and
next calibrations.
5.7
Only those test methods specified in the relevant aviation fuel specification shall be used for
certification testing.
Laboratories shall have in place a process to ensure only latest/current versions of test
methods and fuel specifications are used/followed.
Note: IP Standard Test Methods and ASTM Test Methods may be updated regularly
throughout the year, not only when collectively published in the annual Standard Test
Methods volumes.
For proper and consistent use, staff shall be provided with access to the latest issue of
standards and specification(s).
Where supplementary instructions, such as use of particular models of instrument or
information on local SQC, are to be followed, the laboratory shall ensure that the option
chosen will be selected consistently, irrespective of the person doing the selecting.
5.8
TRAINING
Attaining and maintaining competence of staff is critical to ensuring the quality of work being
undertaken in the laboratory. Management shall be responsible for ensuring that staff have
the appropriate education, qualifications, training, experience and/or demonstrated skills,
required to carry out testing, calibration and other skilled tasks.
A training procedure shall be established that includes:
a. An Induction process.
b. Identified trainers.
c. Detailed individual training and assessment records for each method signed by trainee
and trainer confirming competence.
d. A record of what is covered in any training and applicable training sample results.
e. Regular reassessment of individual operators to identify training needs.
f. Procedures for retraining if method changes or after issues with correlation schemes.
g. Levels of competence and how each one is achieved:
i.
Technician
40
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
ii.
iii.
iv.
EI12/059
Authorised Signatories
Trainer
Quality assurance manager
A designated person shall be responsible for keeping staff training records up-to-date.
For further information, see EI Guidelines on development, implementation and improvement
of quality systems in petroleum laboratories, section 8 Training and competence
requirements of staff.
5.9
RETENTION SAMPLES
Retention samples are required to be kept by the owners of the facilities. If retention samples
are to be kept by a laboratory, sealed, epoxy-lined cans should be used. If bottles are used,
they shall be kept in the dark.
Retention periods should be established to suit local regulations. As a minimum, retention
samples for each tank shall be available for the current and the previous product batch
(typical retention periods are 90 days for refineries/laboratories and 30 days for direct supply
storage installations). Retention samples shall be sealed and clearly labelled with the date,
tank and batch number.
5.10
In the event that a laboratory receiving samples considers the samples as inappropriate, the
customer shall be notified immediately.
Procedures shall be established to maintain sample integrity, in particular if portions of the
original sample are transferred to other sample containers prior to testing. ASTM D4306
Standard practice for aviation fuel sample containers for tests affected by trace
contamination details the preferred sample containers and their preparation.
For further information, see EI Guidelines on development, implementation and improvement
of quality systems in petroleum laboratories, section 5.4 Sample handling at the laboratory
prior to analysis.
5.11
In the event that a laboratory test result does not meet specification, the steps in Annex E,
Figure E.1 or E.2 (depending on whether the relevant test method has a precision
statement) shall be followed.
In the event of a dispute over a reported test value, the guidelines presented in the most
recent version of ISO 4259 Petroleum products - Determination and application of precision
data in relation to methods of test should be used to determine the acceptance or rejection
of the sample.
Laboratories shall have in place a procedure for investigating and documenting any disputed
results. This procedure should require analysis of the data, allocation of resources for
corrective actions, and conclusions.
5.12
DOCUMENTATION
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
42
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
6 REFINERIES: MANUFACTURE
6.1
This chapter describes the overall philosophy and objectives applying to aviation fuel
manufacture, the necessary controls to be put in place, and the precautions to be taken, to
ensure that only fully on-specification and fit-for-purpose aviation fuel is produced by the
refinery and supplied into the downstream distribution system.
It is not the intention of this chapter to prescribe, in detail, how to manufacture aviation fuels
in a refinery using various processing units.
ON-SPECIFICATION
Fuel specifications contain a table (or tables) of fuel property requirements, with
their minimum and/or maximum allowable values. However, in addition to the
table of properties, fuel specifications also contain numerous requirements
related to permitted materials (both fuel components and additives), quality
assurance, management of change, testing and documentation (traceability), and
cleanliness, which are designed to ensure that fuel delivered to aircraft is fit-forpurpose.
A declaration of on specification or meeting the specification confirms
that the various maximum/minimum limits for fuel property tests have been
met, and all other requirements of the specification have been satisfied.
For refineries manufacturing jet fuel, there is a key question that needs to be asked - is the
refinery confident that the product is manufactured to meet the full requirements of the fuel
standard or specification (and any additional contractual requirements)? For example:
What grade is being supplied?
What standard/specification for that grade is being used and is it the latest version?
Is/are the manufacturing process(es) suitable?
Is/are the manufacturing process(es) operated and controlled in such a way that
non-hydrocarbon species (including process additives) are kept out of the fuel?
Are only approved additives used? Are they dosed correctly?
Are there Management of Change procedures in place to assess the impact of process
and feedstock changes? Has the end use of the product been considered?
Is there adequate record keeping and documentation?
At every step in the process of manufacturing aviation fuel, the manufacturer should always
be aware of the end of use of the product, and of the potentially catastrophic consequences
that could ensue from poor quality fuel.
The requirements discussed in this chapter apply primarily to the manufacture of the main
grades of aviation turbine fuel Jet A-1 and Jet A. However, the philosophy behind them
and the principles invoked apply equally to other grades of aviation jet fuel, and aviation
gasoline (Avgas).
6.2
Refineries manufacturing aviation fuels shall ensure they have up-to-date copies of the
standard(s)/specification(s) against which they manufacture the product(s), and of the
laboratory test methods used to certify these products (refer chapter 5). Manufacturing
companies shall have a system in place such that whenever there is an amendment to or a
43
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
re-issue of a standard/specification and/or test method, the refinery will be informed of these
changes and copies of the latest documents will be supplied to the appropriate production
and laboratory focal point(s), together with an explanation of the impact of the changes and
the timeframe for their implementation.
The principal standards/specifications that apply to aviation turbine fuel manufacture are:
DEF STAN 91-91 Turbine fuel, kerosine type, Jet A-1, NATO code: F-35, joint service
designation: AVTUR, and
ASTM D1655 Standard specification for aviation turbine fuels (covers both Jet A and Jet
A-1 grades).
Copies of the specifications cited above can be obtained from the following authorities:
DEF STAN specifications
Ministry of Defence
Directorate of Standardisation
Kentigern House
65 Brown Street
Glasgow G2 8EX
UK
Phone
+44 141 224 2496
Fax
+44 141 224 2503
Website http://www.dstan.mod.uk/
(all DEF STAN specifications are freely available from this web site).
ASTM International specifications
ASTM specifications are published annually in the ASTM Book of Standards, Section 5
(in printed copy and CD). Copies are available from:
ASTM International
100 Barr Harbor Drive
West Conshohocken
PA 19428-2959
USA
Phone
+1 610 832 9585
Fax
+1 610 832 9555
Website http://www.astm.org/
As civil jet fuel supply arrangements became more complex, involving co-mingling of product
in joint storage facilities, a number of fuel suppliers developed a document which became
known as the Aviation Fuel Quality Requirements for Jointly Operated Systems (AFQRJOS),
Check List. The Check List represents the most stringent requirements of the DEF STAN
and ASTM specifications for Jet A-1, plus some handling related sections of the IATA
Guidance Material Part 3 applicable at time of delivery to aircraft. Thus, any product meeting
Check List requirements will also meet either DEF STAN 91-91 or ASTM D1655 Jet A-1
specifications.
The Check List is maintained on behalf of the industry by the Joint Inspection Group (JIG)
Product Quality Committee, comprising eight of the international aviation fuel suppliers BP,
Chevron, ENI, ExxonMobil, Kuwait Petroleum, Shell, Statoil, and Total. It is used as the
basis of their international supply of virtually all civil aviation fuels outside North America.
The AFQRJOS Check List can be downloaded from the JIG website
(www.jointinspectiongroup.org or www.jigonline.com).
Other national aviation fuel specifications exist that are approved by the major engine and
airframe manufacturers and are in use in some locations around the world. The choice of
44
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
fuel specification will be determined by the contractual conditions under which the fuel
produced in the refinery is purchased and supplied. EI 1530 references DEF STAN 91-91
and ASTM D1655 as its source specifications, but the requirements herein apply whichever
aviation fuel specification is employed in a refinery.
6.3
The fuel specification requirement is that aviation fuel shall consist only of hydrocarbons and
approved additives. Specifically, the Materials section of DEF STAN 91-91 (Issue 7) states:
Jet fuel, except as otherwise specified in this specification, shall consist predominantly
of refined hydrocarbons derived from conventional sources including crude oil, natural
gas liquid condensates, heavy oil, shale oil, and oil sands. (Note: conventionally refined
jet fuel contains trace levels of materials that are not hydrocarbons including oxygenates,
organosulphur and nitrogenous compounds).
Fuels containing synthetic components derived from non-petroleum sources are only
permitted provided that they meet certain requirements defined in the specification (see
chapter 11).
A large variety of hydrocarbons boiling in the kerosine boiling range can be manufactured in
a refinery but not all of these rundown streams may be suitable for jet fuel production.
There are no regulatory objections to the following components being used for jet fuel
production and they have traditionally been used without major concerns with respect to their
being fit for purpose:
Straight-run kerosine.
Wet treated/chemically sweetened kerosine (e.g. Merox, caustic treatment).
Hydrotreated kerosine (source: straight run or thermally cracked streams).
Severely hydrotreated or hydrocracked kerosine.
Other kerosine range components such as hydrotreated catalytically-cracked components
(including heavy catalytically cracked gasoline/naphtha and light catalytically cracked cycle
oils), straight run kerosine streams modified by extraction of either paraffins or aromatics,
and coker kerosene, while technically permitted under the specification wording, present an
increased risk to product integrity if incorrectly handled. The main concerns for the cracked
components, and blends which include them, are with their potentially poorer thermal and
storage stability (as a result of the degree of unsaturation and hence increased chemical
reactivity). This may not manifest itself as an issue until later in the distribution system.
Before seeking to utilise previously untested streams in final product, the refinery shall
conduct a Management of Change (MoC) process (see chapter 3), to include the generation
of data (including long-term thermal stability) necessary for assessment of the suitability of
the new component, including its impact on the airframe and engine.
Certain synthetic kerosine components are permitted in jet fuel manufacture but only after
they have undergone an approval process. Refer to chapter 11 for full details.
For fuel manufactured to DEF STAN 91-91 the percentage of each component (e.g. nonhydroprocessed, mildly hydrotreated, severely hydrotreated and synthetic) in a jet fuel blend
shall be reported on the RCQ.
Ultimately, when a refinery/manufacturer certifies a batch of fuel as meeting the
specification, it is taking responsibility for the composition of the batch (and subsequent
batching that relies on the RCQ). This is particularly significant when a refinery has imported
45
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
The continuous and effective monitoring of all refinery processes, including trend analysis, is
an essential requirement to ensure that the quality of the aviation fuel produced is always
acceptable. In addition, an effective Management of Change (MoC) process shall be
employed to assess the effects of proposed changes to refinery processes (involving
hardware/equipment, operating parameters, chemical usage, novel feedstocks, etc.).
Comprehensive records shall be kept to maintain a link between processing conditions and
final product quality. Such records could be of great significance to any investigation of an
aircraft incident where fuel quality might be called into question.
6.4.1 Controlling ingress of non-hydrocarbons
To satisfy the specification requirement that aviation fuels consist solely of hydrocarbons and
approved additives; refineries shall ensure that their manufacturing facilities and procedures
are such that non-hydrocarbon ingress and carry-over is controlled. These non-hydrocarbon
contaminants can be divided into two types:
Incidental* materials are chemicals and compositions that can occur in aviation fuels as
a result of refinery production, processing, distribution, or storage. Examples are refinery
process chemicals, FAME (biodiesel), and copper or other metals in soluble form. They
differ from adventitious materials (see the next definition) in that, once in the fuel, they
are homogeneous and cannot be easily removed. In refinery processing (and in multiproduct distribution systems), contamination of aviation fuel with trace levels of incidental
materials is unavoidable from a practical point of view. However, it is essential to design
facilities and to adopt practices to ensure that ingress of incidental material into aviation
fuel is eliminated, or minimised as far as practicable. Jet fuel specifications (e.g. ASTM
D1655, DEF STAN 91-91) are now beginning to include maximum limits for specific
incidental materials (e.g. FAME).
Adventitious* Materials are solid or liquid contaminants that can be picked up by
aviation fuels during storage and handling (including in refineries), and distribution.
Examples are rust, dirt, free (undissolved) water, salt and microbiological growths. Other
possible sources of particulate contaminants within the refinery include catalyst fines or
clay particles carried over from clay treaters. Unlike incidental materials (see the
previous definition), which are homogeneous, adventitious materials such as dirt, water
and rust are heterogeneous, and can be removed from aviation fuels by appropriate
settling and filtration/separation.
However, preventing adventitious material
contamination in the first place, by implementing appropriate design and construction of
facilities coupled with good operational and housekeeping practices in storage and
handling, should be the primary objective rather than relying on clean-up further
downstream. This is particularly true for microbiological contamination.
*Incidental (adj.) not essential; liable to happen
*Adventitious (adj.) coming from another source; accidental; casual
Contamination with non-hydrocarbon materials within a refinery can occur through either
mechanical/hardware or chemical routes, as described in 6.4.2 and 6.4.3.
46
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
6.4.2
EI12/059
Hardware integrity
Contamination of jet fuel with incidental or adventitious materials within the refinery can
occur due to deficiencies in the hardware. Examples are:
Poor housekeeping, including incorrectly fitted tank access chamber covers, worn seals
etc.
Leakage across heat exchangers due to corrosion
Wear debris from pumps
Leakage across valves allowing inter-product contamination
Undrainable low points in piping leading to contamination with water/rust.
Storage and handling facilities that do not comply with chapter 9.
Refineries shall have an appropriate maintenance and/or monitoring programme in place to
ensure hardware integrity so that such contamination does not occur.
When changes in refinery hardware/piping are being contemplated, a pre-construction
review should be carried out to ensure that unsuitable materials (e.g. copper and zinc) are
not used in locations where contact with aviation fuel is likely.
6.4.3 Refinery chemicals
Refinery chemicals and additives used in various manufacturing processes in the refinery
are not classed as approved additives for aviation fuel and therefore every effort shall be
made to ensure that they do not pass through into the finished product. Some generic
examples are shown in Table 5.
Table 5 Generic examples of refinery chemicals
Crude: flow/ pour point improvers, desalter chemicals, etc.
Process: corrosion inhibitor chemicals (amine based chemicals), chemical
scavengers, antioxidants, etc.
Leak Tracers: radioactive and non-radioactive tracer chemicals
Additives and chemicals in aqueous systems: (DI water / boiler feed water),
caustic treaters, etc., which can migrate into the fuel.
For currently used additives the probability of breakthrough into the finished jet fuel, and the
consequence or impact of the chemicals on fuel performance should have been risk
assessed and appropriate control/mitigation procedures established.
If chemicals are changed or their concentrations increased, a MoC (chapter 3) shall be
carried out.
Note that refinery process chemicals, which have been risk assessed and a no-harm level or
non-detect level established, are classified as Incidental Materials in aviation fuel
specifications.
6.4.4 Process controls
Experience has shown that aircraft fuel-related problems can often be traced back to refinery
processing deficiencies. Table 6 shows examples of the fuel properties most likely to be
compromised by different refinery processes.
47
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Hydrotreatment/
hydrocracking
Wet treatments
Caustic wash
(including use of
sweetening unit
without reactor step)
Merox and similar
sweetening units
Sulphuric acid
Colour
Acid/base number (caustic
carryover)
Water separation
properties, colour,
conductivity response
Salt content
Likely causes
Crude selection
Impurities
Carryover from salt dryer due to
improper operation or maintenance
(see Annex F)
Insufficient steam stripping.
Insufficient or mis-applied
antioxidant
Insufficient hydrotreatment of
cracked components
Change of catalyst
Insufficient water wash
Impurities, surfactant formation
Deficiencies in caustic quality.
Insufficient water wash.
Spent clay treaters (see Annex G).
Carryover from salt dryer due to
improper operation or maintenance
(see Annex F)
6.4.4.1 Hydroprocessing
Hydroprocessing is a general term used to describe processes where the combination of a
catalyst and high pressure hydrogen is used to remove non-hydrocarbon species (principally
sulphur and nitrogen) from jet fuel process streams and to saturate olefins. Specific
processes in this category are hydrotreating, hydrofining and hydrocracking.
EI12/059
The the
ermal oxida
ative stability
y of jet fue l can degra
ade in distribution if reeactive components
(such a
as cracked
d stocks) have
h
been
n insufficien
ntly hydrotrreated. Acccordingly, cracked
blending compone
ents should be qualified
d for inclusio
on in jet fue
el (see 6.3) and controlled with
defined operating envelopes
e
and
a quality monitoring..
Severe hydrotreatiing can reduce the lub ricity of jet fuel
f
and this can resultt in excessiive wear
in aircra
aft fuel pum
mps and con
ntrols. Seve
erely hydrop
processed components
c
s are define
ed in the
DEF ST
TAN 91-91 specification as thosse petroleum
m derived hydrocarbo
h
ns that hav
ve been
subjecte
ed to a hyd
drogen parrtial pressurre of greate
er than 7 000 kPa (700 bar or 1 015
0
psi)
during manufacturre. Although
h the fuel sspecification
ns permit the use of LLubricity Im
mproving
Additive
e (LIA) to re
emediate lo
ow lubricity resulting frrom severe hydotreatm
ment, this approach
is not p
preferred be
ecause LIAs
s, being su
urface active
e chemicals
s, are easilyy lost from the fuel
during downstream
m distribution. The prreferred me
ethod for remediation
r
n is to bac
ck blend
straightt-run kerosin
ne, which will
w contain n
naturally oc
ccurring spe
ecies that im
mpart lubricity to the
fuel. Th
he BOCLE test (ASTM D5001) can
n be used to
o monitor je
et fuel lubriccity.
ment
6.4.4.2 Wet treatm
Wet tre
eatments in
nclude swe
eetening p rocesses or
o simple w
washes to remove im
mpurities
from straight-run process
p
stre
eams and neutralise acidity.
a
Swe
eetening prrocesses employ a
catalystt suspended
d in a causttic solution in a reactorr vessel to convert
c
merrcaptans (w
which are
the sou
urce of bad odour and corrosivity
c
i n the fuel) into relative
ely harmlesss disulphide
es. If the
feedsto
, the proce
ock does no
ot require sweetening
s
essing unit can be opperated with
hout the
reactor stage as a simple caustic wash.
One of the most widely
w
used sweetening
g process is the causttic based M
Merox (Me
ercaptan
Oxidatio
on) processs, which has a long hisstory of producing satis
sfactory quaality jet fuel. Merox
treated kerosine where cau
ustic is rep
placed by ammonia has led too problems
s during
subsequent aviatio
on fuel transportation and is therefore nott acceptablle for aviattion fuel
producttion due to ammonia
a
ca
arry-over in
nto the finish
hed productt.
49
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
It is essential that the wet treatment unit and its ancillary components (e.g. salt dryer, clay
treater) be managed and operated exactly in accordance with specific instructions of the unit
manufacturer. Deviations from the recommended unit operating parameters can lead to
product quality problems.
For sweetening units, proper caustic addition to the reactor is critical in preventing carryover
of the caustic beyond the settling stage, even with a water wash step directly downstream.
The degree of recycling of used caustic also needs to be carefully controlled. Monitoring
caustic treating effectiveness helps meet clay treater feed MSEP targets (see Annex G).
6.4.4.3 Salt dryer management
Refineries with processes involving a salt dryer step are at risk of delivering fuel containing
dissolved salt in water (which can precipitate out as particulate contamination, or degrade
the performance of downstream filtration) unless they are managed effectively. There have
also been well-documented examples of salt carry-over onto aircraft with serious
consequences for aircraft fuel system performance (refer to International Air Transport
Association: Guidelines for Sodium Chloride Contamination Troubleshooting and
Decontamination of Airframe and Engine Fuel Systems. 2nd edition, February 1998). There
is currently no requirement in the jet fuel specification to test for salt; however refineries
should have systems in place, e.g. monitoring of salt dryer operation, periodic testing of fuel
samples, etc. to ensure that salt content does not exceed a defined limit (see Annex F).
Refineries shall ensure that only salt types and grain sizes that are recommended by the unit
manufacturer are used.
6.4.4.4 Clay treater management
Clay treaters are commonly used to remove low levels of surfactant materials that might
stabilize water emulsions and/or disarm coalescers in the distribution and supply system.
Active clay also removes thermally unstable hetero-compounds such as pyridines and
quinolines and can improve Saybolt colour. Although polar materials prefer to adsorb onto
clay, they can be released by the presence of materials having greater polarity. Proper
function of a clay bed requires dry fuel and therefore clay treaters are often preceded by salt
dryers. Performance is primarily monitored by measuring the MSEP upstream and
downstream of the clay treater. The MSEP should be higher downstream unless the value is
about 98 or higher for the upstream value, where it is acceptable for the upstream and
downstream values to be the same. For further information see Annex G. Refineries shall
only use clay types recommended by the unit manufacturer.
6.4.5 Process monitoring
Table 7 provides a list of the laboratory tests that are typically undertaken to monitor the
effectiveness of the refining process. For example, if the amount of sulphur, nitrogen or
water has increased there may be a processing or feed related change that requires
attention. If undetected, this may lead to a product quality issue. Obtaining such baseline
information will make it easier to troubleshoot in the event of a product quality problem.
Where a processing unit is brought into Aviation fuel service from a different product, a
documented procedure shall be in place and additional product testing may be required.
It is recommended that these measurements are obtained from samples taken downstream
of the processing units.
50
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Typical Frequency
MSEP
3/week
Colour
1/week
1/week
Nitrogen
1/week
Basic Nitrogen
1/week
Sulphur
1/week
Mercaptan sulphur
1/week
Thermal stability
1/week
Acidity
1/week
Metals
1/month
51
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Colour can be a useful indicator of fuel quality. Darkening of fuel, a change in fuel colour,
or an unusual colour may be the result of product contamination or instability.
Changes in Saybolt Colour from the original RCQ for the batch would usually be cause
for investigation as follows:
Initial Saybolt Colour at Point of Manufacture
>25
25, but 15
<15
Significant Change
>8
>5
>3
Usually colour problems stem from the presence of nitrogen species in the product. If
colour is a problem, check the following:
1. Nitrogen levels
2. Fresh hydroprocessing catalysts
3. Some Antioxidants when exposed to UV light (quinone formation)
4. Cracked stocks entering the jet fuel pool
6.5
Setting strict rules for slops processing is very difficult because of variations in refinery
configuration and slops composition. It is the responsibility of the refinery to define
procedures that ensure that finished fuels meet the specification requirements and are fit-forpurpose as defined in 6.4.5.1. Particular attention should be paid to the increasing volumes
of oxygenate-containing biofuels (ethanol, FAME) in the system.
Processing refinery, or chemical slops or recycling off-grade fuels that are defined as natural
hydrocarbons may be permitted when producing jet fuel, but shall be assessed on a caseby-case basis. This demonstration shall include a risk assessment that examines the likely
impact on the aviation turbine fuel produced. An acceptable risk assessment involves
knowing the nature of the slops, their concentration in the crude and an estimate of how it
may affect jet fuel production. Documentation of the risk assessment shall be kept.
Chemical slops may contain oxygenates which may affect water shedding properties and,
secondly, chemical slops may not be products derived from conventional sources of
hydrocarbons and may contain unknown elements. Some gasoline components may be high
in aromatics, which can cause discolouration of jet fuel, and are not recommended. In
practice, some refiners limit the proportion of slops to 3%v on crude to avoid metal poisoning
of catalyst systems.
Refineries are also advised to be extremely cautious when processing marketing returns
which may contain trace chemicals and unapproved additives used in marketing operations
(e.g. lead, oxygenates, bio-fuel components, cracked components, silicones).
6.6
52
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
6.7
EI12/059
DOCUMENTATION
53
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
SCOPE
This chapter provides guidelines on the use of aviation fuel additives during the refinery
production of aviation fuel batches and, when necessary, subsequent additions in
downstream supply installations. Guidance is given on the controls that shall be set up and
the procedures that shall be adopted to ensure that the correct additive is added at the
appropriate concentration.
This chapter does not address the usage of process chemicals/additives used during the
manufacture of jet fuel in a refinery and the attendant risk of carryover into finished fuel
batches. This important aspect is covered in chapter 6.
7.2
INTRODUCTION
Chemical additives can be used in jet fuels for one of two reasons:
a) to prevent degradation of the fuel itself (e.g. the use of antioxidants to prevent oxidation)
b) to enhance a particular fuel property (e.g. the use of static dissipater additive to increase
electrical conductivity)
Some aviation fuel additives are added only in refineries (e.g. antioxidants) while other
additives may be added in the refinery or further downstream in supply installations (e.g.
static dissipater additive). In either case, the same rules apply.
The use of additives in aviation fuels is carefully controlled and limited because of the
potential for undesirable side effects. Under certain circumstances additives can affect the
ability to maintain fuel cleanliness during shipment and handling, or may adversely impact
the aircraft fuel system and turbine engine operation or maintenance.
Only qualified additives of defined composition and amount approved by the airframe and
engine manufacturers, and cited by the relevant fuel specification authority, may be used.
Note, additives are identified by their appropriate RDE/A/XXX number cited in DEF STAN
91-91. At the point of addition, the amount of additive added shall be recorded in the
appropriate documentation. Additives not listed in the appropriate aviation fuel specification
are not permitted.
Specifications define the requirements for additives in the following manner:
Mandatory - Shall be present between defined minimum and maximum concentration or
property limits.
Optional - May be added up to maximum concentration or property limits.
By Agreement - May be added only with agreement of the user/purchaser within
specified limits.
The International fuel specifications are very prescriptive on what additives can be used and
how they should be added to the fuel (e.g. see clause 4 of DEF STAN 91-91).
Refineries, and supply installations that inject aviation fuel additives, shall have a system in
place that ensures that only approved additives are used, and that the correct dosage rates
are adhered to.
The method of addition shall be covered by appropriate on-site procedures (this includes
ship tanks). The procedures shall also cover control of the quantity and type of material
54
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
used, with timely reconciliation of volume used to confirm addition rate. A system of additive
batch recording shall be in place to allow traceability of additive batches in the finished
aviation fuel.
7.3
TYPES OF ADDITIVE
7.3.1 Antioxidants
Antioxidants are added to aviation fuel to prevent peroxidation during storage. Straight-run
fuels do not normally require the addition of antioxidant additive because they tend to
contain naturally occurring antioxidant species. These species are removed from the fuel
during hydroprocessing, leaving the fuel vulnerable to peroxidation. Consequently,
antioxidant additives are normally added only to hydroprocessed fuels.
Antioxidants are mandatory in Jet A-1 certified to DEF STAN 91-91 but optional in Jet A/Jet
A-1 certified to ASTM D1655, for fuel components that have been hydro-processed (i.e.
manufactured using a catalytic hydrogen process such as hydro-treating, hydro-fining,
hydro-cracking, etc.).
Antioxidants are mandatory in synthesized components as defined in the ASTM D7566
specification.
Antioxidants shall always be added after hydro-processing or
synthesizing as near to the point of manufacture (at plant rundown) as
possible (this is a specification requirement for Jet A-1 meeting DEF
STAN 91-91 and for synthetic components as defined in ASTM D7566),
and definitely before the fuel has had a chance to meet with oxygen,
e.g. in the component rundown tank.
The purpose of this requirement is to prevent the initiation of the free
radical chain reactions which lead to peroxide formation in the fuel.
Later addition of antioxidant, when these chain reactions may have
already started, is of limited effectiveness.
Where a finished fuel comprises a blend of several different components, the requirement for
mandatory addition of a qualified antioxidant at a concentration of 17.0 to 24.0 mg/L applies
only to the portion of the blend that has been hydro-processed. For fuel (or fuel component)
which has not been hydro-processed, addition is optional but shall not exceed 24.0 mg/L.
These concentrations do not include any solvent used to dissolve the active ingredient.
The antioxidants listed below are qualified for use in Jet A/Jet A-1:
2,6-ditertiary-butyl phenol [Qualification ref: RDE/A/606]
2,6-ditertiary-butyl-4-methyl phenol [Qualification ref: RDE/A/607]
2,4-dimethyl-6-tertiary-butyl phenol [Qualification ref: RDE/A/608]
75% min. 2,6-ditertiary-butyl phenol, plus 25% max. mixed tertiary and tritertiary-butyl
phenols [Qualification ref: RDE/A/609]
55% min. 2,4-dimethyl-6-tertiary-butyl phenol, plus 15% min. 2,6-ditertiary-butyl-4-methyl
phenol; remainder as monomethyl and dimethyl tertiary-butyl phenols [Qualification ref:
RDE/A/610]
72% min. 2,4-dimethyl-6-tertiary-butyl phenol, 28% max. monomethyl and dimethyltertiary-butyl phenols [Qualification ref: RDE/A/611]
Antioxidants have no known side effects that adversely affect fuel properties.
55
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
It should also be noted that maximum loading velocities into road and rail tankers for aviation
fuels, both with and without SDA, should be in accordance with the constraints laid down in
the EI Model Code of Safe Practice Part 21 Guidelines for the control of hazards arising from
static electricity, or API RP 2003 Protection against ignitions arising out of static, lightning,
and stray currents to avoid hazards related to electrostatic charging.
7.3.3 Metal deactivator additive (MDA)
Metal Deactivator Additive (MDA) [Qualification ref: RDE/A/650] may be added to jet fuel
where dissolved trace catalytic metals, notably copper, have caused the fuel to fail the
ASTM D3241 Standard test method for thermal oxidation stability of aviation turbine fuels
(often referred to as the Jet Fuel Thermal Oxidation Test). MDA comprises N,Ndisalicylidine-1,2-propanediamine, a chelating molecule that wraps itself around trace metal
atoms in the fuel and thus shields the fuel from their catalytic propensity.
The use of MDA is optional and experience has shown that a dosage rate of 1.0 mg/L or less
(active ingredient) is usually sufficient to recover thermal stability successive higher treat
rates can be used as necessary, but shall not exceed 2.0 mg/L. Cumulative addition of MDA
shall not exceed 5.7 mg/L active ingredient.
Where the thermal stability fails the specification limit, the refinery should determine whether
the cause is due to metal contamination by analysing the fuel for trace levels of Copper,
Cadmium, Iron, Cobalt and Zinc. Where metallic contamination is unproven, i.e. below 10
ppb, it is NOT recommended to use MDA to recover the thermal stability unless a clear
explanation is found for the failure. However, MDA may be used to recover thermal stability
provided that the Thermal Oxidation Test is determined before and after MDA addition and
reported on the test certificate. Prior to MDA addition, a laboratory blend of the fuel with the
proposed level of MDA should be made and a Thermal Oxidation Test carried out to confirm
the effectiveness of this addition.
7.3.4 Lubricity improver additive (LIA)
The use of Lubricity Improver Additive (LIA), formerly known as Corrosion Inhibitor/Lubricity
Improver (CI/LI), is optional in commercial jet fuel to improve the lubricity of severely
hydroprocessed fuel components. However, it may not be a practical solution to inject LIA in
the refinery to correct poor lubricity because the additive may be depleted from the fuel by
adsorption onto tanks and pipeline walls in the downstream distribution system before it
reaches the aircraft. A preferable solution, where necessary, is to improve the lubricity of
severely hydroprocessed fuel by blending in the refinery with other, higher lubricity,
components such as Merox processed or other straight-run kerosine.
Lubricity improver additives are controlled by MIL-PRF-25017 and DEF STAN 68-251. Both
of these specifications have an associated Qualified Products List (QPL).
The use of LIA is mandatory in military grades of fuel covered by specifications MIL-DTL83133, MIL-DTL-5624, DEF STAN 91-87 and DEF STAN 91-86.
57
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
58
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
59
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Biocidal additives are available for use under strictly controlled conditions, usually by
the aircraft operator - they are not to be used for preventative maintenance purposes.
ASTM D1655 lists biocides as an acceptable additive class; however they are not
cited as acceptable additives in DEF STAN 91-91. Biocides are used to kill
microbiological growth in hydrocarbon fuels. Owing to the time required for treatment
to be effective, biocides are normally used when the aircraft is left standing filled or
partially filled with treated fuel, such as during scheduled maintenance. The fuel may
then be used by the operator in accordance with both airframe and engine
manufacturers requirements. In most cases, any treatment other than in the aircraft
itself will render the fuel unfit for use and require downgrading or disposal.
Two biocide additives have been approved for use Biobor JF and Kathon FP 1.5.
Turbine engine and airframe manufacturers service manuals shall be consulted for
specific details on approved products and permitted conditions for use. In addition,
any restrictions or prohibitions due to local laws and regulations shall be understood
before biocide use is considered.
As noted in 7.3.5, DiEGME has been found to have biostatic effects in some
situations.
7.4
60
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
b) Every container shall be examined for damage or possible contamination during transit.
Leaking or damaged containers shall be quarantined.
c) If a container is seen to be leaking, receipt shall be refused and the container returned to
the supplier.
d) With a damaged drum, an assessment shall be made to determine if the damage is
acceptable (e.g. small dents), or if it is serious enough to require decanting of the
product into a new container. (Note: some additives require special containers and
unlined steel may not be suitable, so procedures shall state the type of container to be
used for the specific additive). If decanting is not practicable, the damaged container
should be returned to the supplier.
e) If markings on containers are damaged and indistinct or illegible, the contents shall be
regarded as suspect and unless the identity can be unambiguously established, the
product shall not be used. Markings still legible but becoming faded or indistinct shall be
re-marked.
An appropriate Material Safety Data Sheet (MSDS) shall be supplied by the additive
manufacturer. Relevant precautions/information on the MSDS, such as potential hazards,
personal protective equipment and disposal of unwanted material, shall be incorporated into
written procedures and training.
7.5
STORAGE PROCEDURES
7.6.1 Containers
Containers should be inspected for leakages at regular intervals, preferably monthly.
Markings shall be renewed as necessary to maintain clear identity of product and batch.
61
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Shelf life only applies to originally packed containers under normal storage conditions.
The shelf life depends on the additive type. The suppliers recommendations shall be
followed.
Where original containers are opened and/or decanted into storage/injection tanks, the
potential for degradation and contamination of the additives shall be minimized.
This may be achieved, for example, by:
appropriate vessel sizing, (additive batch size in relation to throughput);
dedicated transfer systems;
storage conditions (exposure to sunlight, humidity), and
routine sampling including visual assessment should be carried out to confirm that there
is no degradation or contamination of the product in storage. If any evidence of
contamination is found, the supply of the additive shall be discontinued (refer to 7.6).
7.8
PERIODIC TESTING
Only FSII requires periodic testing to detect any deterioration in quality. Stadis 450, LIA and
MDA are sufficiently stable not to require it. The testing requirements depend on how the
FSII has been stored, in accordance with 7.8.1 and 7.8.2.
7.8.1 Sealed containers
FSII, when stored in its original sealed containers, should retain its quality for a period of at
least 12 months in temperate climates and not less than 6 months in tropical climates, and
does not need to undergo periodic testing.
7.8.2 Storage/injection tanks
Every six months a sample shall be taken from any FSII storage tank where the stock has
been held static, i.e. stock to which no replenishments have been made and irrespective of
whether or not any withdrawals have been made. As a minimum the testing in Table 8 is
required.
Table 8 Minimum requirements for testing of FSII in storage tanks
Test Method
Limit
D 1613
Max 0,09
IP 139 (Note)
Relative Density, 20C/20C D 891 or D 4052
1,020-1,025
or Density at 15C, kg/litre
IP 189
1,024-1,028
Water Content, mass %
D 1364, IP 356
Max 0.10
Note: Weight of sample 50g, and concentration of KOH 0.05 molar
Total Acidity, mg KOH/g
7.9
ADDITIVE DOSING
7.9.1 General
Additive dosing is difficult because:
62
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
63
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
The simplest and most effective method to control the amount of additive added and to
obtain a homogeneous blend in the fuel is injection into a flowing stream of fuel using:
a flow-controlled piston pump with variable stroke
a meter to measure the amount of additive injected
7.9.3.1 Additive injection General
After initial commissioning, the injection equipment shall be tested at regular intervals
(typically every 6 months) to verify the correct dosage is being delivered. On completion of
commissioning/maintenance/verification, varying the stroke of the injection pump shall be
controlled. This may be achieved by sealing/locking of the adjustment control. Note:
electrical conductivity is sensitive to temperature variations and adjustments to the controls
may be required more frequently when injecting SDA.
Controls/procedures shall be used to ensure the additive tank always contains sufficient
additive.
7.9.3.2 Additive injection FSII-specific
Owing to its poor solubility in aviation fuel, FSII requires mixers and/or turbulent flow at the
point of injection to assure homogeneity. Consequently, for FSII, the only effective method of
addition is in-line injection. At the time of FSII injection, the jet fuel and FSII should be as dry
as possible to facilitate homogenization.
FSII impairs the effective removal of free water from fuel using conventional water removal
technology such as two stage filter/water separators and filter monitors with water absorbent
elements. If FSII is injected into the fuel at any point upstream of delivery into aircraft, the
filter used shall be a filter/water separator type specifically approved for this duty (Category
M or M100). Under no circumstances can filter vessels fitted with filter monitor elements
(water absorbent elements) be used with fuel containing FSII, owing to interactions between
the additive and the water adsorbent media.
Note: The addition of FSII may reduce the fuel conductivity.
7.9.3.3 Additive injection other additives
As with FSII, LIA should be added at Supply Installations (and Airports) by in-line injection
only.
If addition/re-addition of SDA is a regular requirement at an installation, this method shall
also be used.
This is also the best way to add MDA but, as dosing with MDA is a one-off and infrequent
occurrence, it is unlikely that suitable injection equipment will be in place.
7.9.3.4 Other methods of addition
If additive addition is not a regular requirement and in-line injection is not possible, other
methods are acceptable but they may only be used:
for SDA and MDA additions
provided mixing is good enough to give a homogeneous blend
provided satisfactory mixing is confirmed
One of the methods a) to h) shall be used for SDA and MDA additions when continuous
inline injection is not possible:
a) Add additive preferably as a number of incremental doses during the receipt period on
the receipt line or while carrying out a tank to tank transfer
64
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
b) Add the additive via the return line of the quick flush draining vessel while the product is
being received.
c) Add to the reception tank before receiving fuel. Circulation may be required to obtain a
homogeneous blend.
d) If fuel in a storage tank needs to be treated and the only option is by pouring the
prediluted additive through the top of the tank, extended circulation or mixing will be
required to obtain a homogeneous blend.
e) If fuel in a ships tank needs to be treated during loading, and the only option is by
pouring the prediluted additive through the top of the tank, this should be after the first
foot of the tank has been loaded.
f) For fuel receipts from ships and rail tank cars, add directly to ship/rail tank car
compartments before discharge so that turbulence during discharge completes the
mixing.
g) Where it is found to be necessary to add SDA to individual bridger / rail tank cars, special
attention shall be paid to the amount, as the volume of SDA to be added is small and
there is an increased risk of overdosing. Prediluted SDA should be added to the
compartment prior to loading of the fuel.
h) Confirm mixing is satisfactory:
- for SDA additions, by measuring fuel conductivity at upper/middle/lower levels in tank
- for MDA additions, by carrying out JFTOT on composite of upper, middle and lower
samples.
Consideration should be given to the need to pre-dilute the required amount of additive with
fuel to facilitate mixing.
7.10
65
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Since it is not easy, or always possible, to monitor additive dosage rates by measuring
additive content in the fuel, it is essential that dosages are verified by reconciliation of
volumes of additive used with volumes of fuel dosed.
7.10.2 Segregation and grade marking of fuel containing FSII or LIA
Fuel containing FSII or LIA shall be treated as a different grade, requiring the usual
dedication and segregation from all other fuel grades. (Fuel containing SDA or MDA does
not normally need to be dedicated/segregated).
There are no generally agreed-upon grade names and markings for fuels containing LIA or
FSII additives. Grade markings need to be unambiguous and simple. Unless there is a local
or national convention, the grade marking for the fuel without additive should be used
together with the abbreviated name of the additive, for example:
Jet A-1 to which FSII has been added would become Jet A-1/FSII
Jet A with LIA would be Jet A/LIA
7.10.2 Material safety data sheets for additive-containing fuels
Additives are present in aviation fuels at such low concentrations that a special MSDS for
the additive treated fuel is not normally required. FSII is the exception because any water
drained from a tank storing fuel with FSII can contain almost 50% FSII. Users, including
employees and agents as well as customers, need to be aware of this so precautions can be
taken. Appropriate MSDSs shall be available at all locations where FSII additives are
present in fuels.
In addition, any location involved with the handling or addition of other additives to fuels shall
have on-site the MSDSs for those additives.
7.11
RECORDS
Records shall be maintained so that all aspects of additive addition can be checked including
confirmation that the correct additive was added in the required amount (including blend and
reconciliation records), traceability to a particular container of additive (including additive
CoAs) and any calibration of injection pumps.
For refinery additions, the amount(s) added shall be recorded on the RCQ. For additive
dosing when re-batching at supply installations, the amount(s) added shall be recorded on
the CoA. When additive is injected as fuel is dispatched from an installation, the amount
added shall be recorded on the Release Certificate.
66
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
GENERAL
8.1.1 Batch
Quality assurance for aviation fuels is based on two key concepts: batches and traceability.
The principle of an identifiable batch and creation of defined batches is a requirement of the
international aviation fuel specifications; see, for example, clause 5.1 in DEF STAN 91-91.
A batch of fuel is defined as a distinct quantity of jet fuel that can be characterised by one set
of test results.
It is essential that refineries and storage installations ensure batches are homogenous so
that test results are representative of the product supplied. Homogenous is defined as the
density not varying by more than 3,0 kg/m across the batch. Special care shall be taken to
ensure homogeneity of synthetic fuel blends particularly where the component densities are
significantly different.
Homogeneous batches of the finished product shall be tested against the requirements of
the specification. Results shall be reported on the appropriate certificates (RCQ, CoA, RTC).
It is not acceptable to average on-line analysis results or use other statistical results in the
reporting.
8.1.2 Point of manufacture
Depending on refinery configuration, product may be blended directly from the production
units into a batch tank, transferred from a rundown tank or imported. In any case, once the
batch tank is filled, the product shall be fully segregated and allowed to settle before
sampling and testing. Sampling shall be in accordance with chapter 4.
8.1.3 Storage installations
Storage installations receive aviation fuel via diverse supply routes that may be dedicated or
non-dedicated. Detailed receipt procedures are outlined in 8.3. As for refineries and other
points of manufacture, once the batch tank is filled, the product shall be fully segregated and
allowed to settle before sampling and testing. Sampling shall be in accordance with chapter
4.
8.2
67
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
As this operation is not regularly carried out, a Management of Change procedure shall be
followed, and particular attention shall be given to the selection of the discharge line and
connection to the aviation fuel batching tanks. Jet fuel should be unloaded via a dedicated
pipeline, however if this is not possible then robust operational procedures shall be
implemented in order to manage effectively any risk to jet fuel quality. These operational
procedures should provide clear instructions regarding interface management and product
sequencing.
Each receipt of jet fuel shall be accompanied by the necessary documentation whose
conformance shall be verified before receipt. This documentation shall include a RCQ, and if
applicable a CoA and/or a RTC, and a RC.
The refinery shall verify that the jet fuel to be imported meets the requirements of the
relevant aviation fuel specification with particular attention paid to material composition and
additive content.
There are two possible scenarios for the storage of jet fuel import batches, requiring different
batching and certification procedures:
1. The import batch is mixed in tank with another certified jet fuel batch or batches.
2. The import batch is mixed in tank with an uncertified refinery batch (rundown batch).
Scenario 1:
The product shall be subject to a Recertification Test if received via a non-dedicated vessel
or a non-segregated system. Alternatively a CoA shall be issued citing a new batch number.
Note: It is not acceptable for a RCQ to be issued. The information relating to additive
concentration, hydro-processed content and synthetic components (if present) shall be
available on the original RCQs (if compliant with DEF STAN 91-91) which will be referenced
on the CoA.
Scenario 2:
A RCQ shall be issued.
8.3
RECEIPT PROCEDURES
8.3.1
Documentation
8.3.1.1 Any transfer of product to and from storage installations shall be supported by a
Release Certificate (RC).
8.3.1.2 Each receipt of aviation fuel shall be accompanied by a RCQ, a CoA and/or RTC
(whichever is applicable), covering the batch showing the fuel grade and confirming that it
meets the relevant specification. Batch number, density and other relevant information may
be communicated electronically in advance of the RCQ.
A record shall be maintained of the RC etc, and batch number, quantity and receiving
tank(s), together with the results of all tests carried out.
For fungible pipeline systems (i.e. pipeline systems with multiple input and delivery points
where fuel to the same specification is interchangeable) it may not be possible, for each
batch delivered ex-pipeline, to provide a CoA which identifies the originating refinery.
However, even in this situation, the pipeline operator shall have original RCQs and volume
data for all batches entering the system so that the authenticity of all product can be
assured.
68
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
8.3.2
EI12/059
Receipt general
8.3.2.1 At storage installations handling only aviation fuels, each grade should be received
via dedicated lines.
8.3.2.2 At storage installations handling multiple products, aviation fuels should be received
via dedicated lines. Where this is not possible, aviation fuels shall only be received via
segregated, white product cargo lines. Jet fuel should be received via lines reserved for
middle distillates (kerosene, gasoil, automotive diesel). Note: if the middle distillate contains
bio-components, the requirement for FAME testing shall be assessed (as described in
4.6.8). Aviation gasoline should be received via lines reserved for light distillates (gasoline,
special solvents, etc).
8.3.2.3 Wherever possible, product-to-product pumping should be adopted, without the
introduction of water to separate products or to clear lines handling aviation fuels. If lines
handling aviation fuels have to be left full of water, it should be fresh or suitably buffered (pH
neutral) water.
8.3.2.5 When receiving multi-product cargoes the discharge sequence should be arranged to
minimise the effects of interface contamination of the aviation grades. Leading and trailing
product interfaces shall be diverted into non-aviation storage or slop tanks.
8.3.2.6 One or more tanks shall be segregated for receipt of product, checked for water, and
any water removed before receipt begins. More than one vessel may be discharged into the
same tank.
8.3.2.7 Prior to product receipt, the outlet valves/lines shall be closed, sealed or locked either
physically on site or remotely via a control system to ensure unreleased product is not
inadvertently delivered from the tank during receipt.
8.3.2.8 Stock reconciliation is an important part of quality control when receiving aviation
fuels. Differences between delivered and received volumes shall be investigated carefully as
they may indicate that contamination or adulteration/theft has occurred.
8.3.3
8.3.3.1 Before receipt starts, it shall be ensured that all valves are set correctly and that the
pumping sequence, timing, quantities and relevant densities are known. In the case of
pipelines that are not used regularly, it shall be ensured that all low points have been
drained, and if there is a chance that water has remained in the line, copper corrosion testing
should be performed on received fuel.
8.3.3.2 During the pumping of the product, samples shall be drawn as close as possible to
the Custody Transfer Point (CTP), as a minimum approximately 1 minute after liquid starts to
flow, approximately half way through the pumping period, approximately 5 minutes before
pumping is due to be completed, and at any change of batch. Each of the samples should
be subjected to a Control Check (and conductivity if SDA has been added to the fuel
upstream of this point). Results from the Control Check shall be documented.
8.3.3.3 If large amounts of water or solid contaminants, or abnormal density is noted, the
flow shall be stopped if possible, or diverted to a slop tank, and the pumping station of the
pipeline notified. Delivery into the storage tank shall only be resumed after clearance has
been given by the installation manager.
69
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
8.3.4.1 Before receipt starts, it shall be ensured that all valves are set correctly and that the
pumping sequence, timing, quantities and relevant densities are known. In the case of
pipelines that are not used regularly, it shall be ensured that all low points have been
drained, and if there is a chance that water has remained in the line, copper corrosion testing
should be performed on received fuel.
8.3.4.2 Procedures similar to 8.3.3.2 and 8.3.3.3 shall be enforced but with samples drawn
as close as possible to the CTP approximately 1, 3 and 10 minutes after liquid starts to flow,
every two hours, approximately 5 minutes before pumping is due to be completed, and at
any change of batch, Additional testing of samples drawn during the transfer may be
performed to ensure that no cross-contamination has occurred.
8.3.4.3 The most important quality protection measure in multi-product pipeline movements
is the method of handling product interface cuts. Care should be taken to ensure that the
leading and trailing interface between the products handled in the pipeline are directed into
non-aviation storage.
8.3.4.4 To limit the degradation of jet fuel due to interface comingling or pipeline pick-up,
leading and trailing consignments should be one of the following products, listed in order of
preference.
light distillate feedstock (naphtha);
middle distillates;
motor gasoline.
Pipeline drag reducing additives (DRAs) may be present in these non-aviation products and
it is essential that strict controls are in place to avoid any contamination of jet fuel with DRAs.
The injection of DRA into other products preceding a jet fuel parcel should be stopped
sufficiently in advance of the jet fuel interface to avoid any possibility of the jet fuel picking up
even traces of DRA.
8.3.4.5 In the case of jet fuels, where there is a possibility of contamination with gasoline,
flash point may need to be measured on pump-over samples depending on parcel size,
length of pipeline and knowledge of the supplying location pipeline configuration.
8.3.4.6 Certain product additives are known to be harmful to aviation fuels because of their
surface active properties. When products containing these additives precede aviation fuel
pipeline consignments, there is a danger that the resultant pick-up can lead to quality
problems.
Where harmful additives are known to be included in products intended for transportation
within multi-product pipelines carrying aviation products, the carrier company should be
requested to exclude the additives from the product entering the pipeline and injection
should take place after the break-out points.
70
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
8.3.4.7 When the pump-over is complete, it shall be checked that the correct quantity has
been received. Inlet lines and valves of the relevant storage tanks shall be closed, sealed or
locked either physically on site or remotely via a control system.
8.3.5
Aviation fuels should, whenever possible, be delivered to storage by dedicated vessels and
be discharged through completely grade-segregated systems.
A dedicated vessel is one which transports exclusively one grade of product in all cargo
compartments and which has transported the same grade during the previous three journeys
(refer to EI HM50 Guidelines for the cleaning of tanks and lines for marine tank vessels
carrying petroleum and refined products for more detailed guidance). A vessel that uses
cargo tanks for ballast on return journeys, irrespective of the previous cargo carried, shall be
treated as a non-dedicated delivery system.
Ocean tankers (vessels greater than 20 000 tonnes deadweight) shall not be considered
dedicated under any circumstances due to the complex nature of their compartments and
piping arrangements. (Note: ships under 20,000tones are not necessarily dedicated).
8.3.5.1 Procedures before discharge
(a)
The vessels papers shall be checked to ensure that all documents are readily
available. Documents to be checked are:
(i)
RC;
(ii)
RCQ, CoA and/or RTC (whichever is applicable)
(iii)
Bill of Lading;
(iv)
Ullage report;
(v)
Recertification Test results on the ships loaded samples if applicable (see
10.1.5), which may be transmitted to the receipt location by fax or email;
(vi)
Inspectors (Surveyors) Report from load port, including previous cargo and
cleaning procedures;
(vii)
Inventory of samples;
(viii) Loading plan (if available)
(b)
A check shall be made to ascertain that all of the deck cargo accesses of the vessel
are closed and secured.
(c)
If the ullage in any compartment differs greatly from the loading figures shown on the
ullage report (more than +/- 0,2%), the ships Master should be consulted. If no
satisfactory explanation is obtained, the suspect compartment should not be
discharged and the supplying company should be advised. Fuel in the suspect
compartment may be unloaded only if the results of a Recertification Test carried out
on a Composite Sample from the compartment are satisfactory.
(d)
All vessel cargo tanks shall be checked for the presence of water using a suitable
water finding paste. If significant levels of water are observed the ships Master and
the supplying company concerned shall be advised promptly. Contingency plans,
agreed with supplying companies, should be available to deal with this situation.
These should include discharge plans to minimise the amount of water contamination
and, if possible, requesting the vessel to strip the bottom from each compartment.
(e)
A 1-litre (1 USQ) Running Sample shall be taken from each compartment and
checked according to the Control Check. If satisfactory results are obtained and the
corrected density at 15C is within 3kg/m3 of the results reported on the RC, product
can be accepted. For dedicated inland waterway vessels it is permissible to combine
up to three compartments for the Control Check.
The conductivity of these samples should also be checked so that, if necessary,
static dissipater additive can be added during discharge in a manner that ensures
adequate mixing with the product (see 7.9.3.4).
71
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
(f)
(g)
EI12/059
If the results of the Control Check are not satisfactory, the supplying company
concerned shall be advised, a letter of protest shall be served on the ships Master,
and the vessel shall not be discharged unless and until agreed by the receiving
location. Contingency plans, agreed with the supplying companies, should be
available to deal with this situation.
Additional Multiple Tank Composite Samples for retention shall be prepared using
suitable containers and sealed in the presence of the ships Master or his
representative. These samples need not be tested unless the quality of the
consignment is subsequently questioned. They shall be retained at the installation
until at least 2 days after complete exhaustion of the relevant batch(es).
Establish with the responsible Ships Officer the sequence of off-loading different
products, pumping procedures, etc., taking account of the following product quality
requirements:
Avoiding contaminating aviation fuels with other products.
Avoiding contaminating aviation fuels with water.
8.3.6.1 On arrival at the installation the road tanker or rail tank cars should be checked to
ensure that the seals (on manlids and on outlet and filling points) are intact and that the
grade markings on the sides and at the outlets are correct. A copy of the RC (see example in
Annex D) and, where the road tanker or rail tank cars are not grade dedicated, details of the
previous load carried and the cleaning certificate shall be checked before receipt of the
product.
8.3.6.2 Any trace of free settled water in compartments shall be drained off. If a sample fails
the Appearance Check, a minimum settling time of 5 minutes should be observed, the line
72
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
flushed and a fresh sample taken for another Appearance Check. If the sample fails the
Appearance Check the product should not be discharged until further assessment confirms it
is appropriate to do so. In such cases, the supply source concerned should be notified. If the
product is rejected, the reason for the rejection should be entered on the road tanker or rail
tank cars RC.
8.3.6.3 Drain samples shall be drawn from each compartment and checked according to the
Control Check. Up to three compartments on any one road tanker or rail tank car may be
combined for density determination. The corrected density shall agree within 3 kg/m3 with the
results of the batch density of the product in the tank from which the vehicle is loaded and
reported on the RC. If the difference in corrected standard reference temperature density
exceeds 3 kg/m3, the vehicle shall not be discharged unless a satisfactory explanation is
obtained from the supplying location (for example density differences due to tank layering or
a change of batch during loading) and confirmed in writing as soon as possible. Written
records of the results of all checks, including the determined and corrected density figures
shall be kept.
Where road tankers with compartment discharge lines manifolded together are in use,
obtaining representative samples from each compartment can be a difficult and timeconsuming process. In some cases, individual sample lines from the bottom of each
compartment can simplify the procedure. Alternatively, the following procedure shall be
followed:
Open the manifold outlet and ensure that the manifold is empty.
Open fully the foot valve of the first compartment (preferably the one furthest from the
manifold outlet) for sufficient time to flush a 5-litre sample through the manifold into a
sampling container. Perform a Control Check on this sample.
Repeat this procedure for each compartment in turn.
8.3.6.4 Where rail tank cars are not equipped with valves for draining low points, alternative
procedures and equipment should be used to ensure effective removal of free water and
sediment and to provide samples for a Control Check.
8.3.6.5 After discharge the compartments should be checked to ensure that they are empty
and to verify that the correct quantity has been discharged.
8.3.6.6 Inlet lines and valves of the relevant storage tanks shall be closed, sealed or locked
either physically on site or remotely via a control system.
8.4
73
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
74
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
8.4.3
EI12/059
Product testing
8.4.3.1 General
Provided upper, middle and lower samples are clear and bright and within the density
difference described in 8.4.2, a composite sample shall be prepared for RCQ, CoA, RTC
testing or a Control Check.
If tank layering is a regular issue for a location, measures such as tank mixers should be
used to produce a homogenous batch.
8.4.3.2 Tanks supplied by dedicated and segregated systems from rundown units in
refineries or where synthetic jet fuel is blended
After the product has been received through separate lines into batching tankage, sampling
and RCQ testing shall be carried out as described in 8.4.3.2 a) to c):
(a)
If Upper, Middle and Lower Samples are homogeneous, a Composite Sample shall
be prepared for RCQ testing or, for synthetic jet fuel blends, a CoA.
(b)
After satisfactory certification test results have been obtained and the product has
settled for the minimum settling period, it may be released following the release
procedures in 8.4.4.
(c)
Record all results.
It shall be noted that the procedure for layered tank release (described in 8.4.3.4) is not
acceptable for refineries and other points of manufacture blending synthetic fuels.
8.4.3.3 Tanks at a Terminal supplied by a dedicated and segregated system
Where product is received via fully segregated systems and a dedicated pipeline,
coastal/inland waterway vessel or road/rail tank car, product shall be batched and a Control
Check shall be carried out.
(a)
If Upper, Middle and Lower Samples demonstrate the tank is homogeneous, a
Composite Sample shall be prepared for a Control Check.
(b)
The observed density at the standard reference temperature shall be compared with
the expected value based on the known batch densities of the receipts made into the
tank. If the observed and expected densities differ by less than 3 kg/m3 then release
procedures can be followed.
(c)
If the observed density differs by more than 3kg/m3 from the expected value, there
could be a problem, and the matter requires further investigation and communication
with potential fuel receivers. See procedure for layered tank release (described in
8.4.3.4 (c) and (d)).
Note: Layered tank release is not acceptable for refineries and where synthetic jet
fuel is blended.
(d)
Record all results.
8.4.3.4 Tanks at a Terminal supplied by a non-dedicated and/or non-segregated system
After the product has been received through separate lines into receipt tankage, sampling
and certification or recertification testing shall be carried out.
(a)
If Upper, Middle and Lower Samples are homogeneous, a Composite Sample shall
be prepared for laboratory testing, i.e. certification or Recertification Test.
(b)
After satisfactory certification or Recertification Test results have been obtained and
the product has settled for the minimum settling period, it may be released following
procedures in 8.4.4. If the results are not satisfactory then the batches shall remain
quarantined until further testing has established that the fuel is acceptable, or
downgraded to non-aviation use.
75
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
(c)
EI12/059
If Upper, Middle and Lower Samples demonstrate the tank is not homogeneous
(indicating layering within the tank), then the following tests shall be carried out on
each sample:
Jet fuel: Density, Flash Point, Initial Boiling Point, End Point
Avgas: Density, RVP, Octane Rating (lean mixture), End Point.
A Composite Sample shall then be prepared for laboratory testing, i.e. certification or
Recertification Test.
(d)
8.4.3.5 In storage installations where fuels contain SDA, measure the conductivity and
temperature on completion of settling.
8.4.3.6 When RCQ, CoA or RTC is required, additional 5-litre Composite Samples shall be
prepared for each tank and these samples shall be retained. The samples can be retained
by the storage installation, Laboratory or Inspection Company. A record of retention sample
custody should be maintained. Retention periods should be established to suit local
regulations. As a minimum retention samples for each tank shall be available for the current
and the previous product batch (typically 60 days) to accommodate the use date. Suitable
sealed containers (see chapter 4), clearly labelled with the date, tank and batch number,
shall be used.
8.4.4 Product release
The decision to release product shall be based not only on the laboratory certifying
compliance with the relevant fuel specification and it being fit-for purpose, but also on fuel
having been handled in accordance with this publication. This includes production and/or
storage and/or the transportation operation departments (usually considered as Oil
Movements) confirming that the product was produced and handled under normal conditions
(note possible impact of abnormal conditions on product quality, see chapter 3), samples
were representative, valve positions and line ups were set correctly, tanks settled, drained,
etc.
8.4.4.1 Product release procedure
Product shall not be released from storage for delivery until:
Product has been settled in accordance with 8.4.2 and tested in accordance with 8.4.3.
Results of RCQ, CoA, RTC or Control Check testing (whichever is applicable), show the
assigned batch number, are compliant with the specification limits and requirements and,
in storage installations, meet the requirements of Recertification Testing (where
applicable).
Any water and/or sediment collected at the bottom of the tank has been drained.
All required tests and checks have been completed and results recorded.
76
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
After satisfactory completion of the steps above, a RC (see Annex D) shall be prepared and
approved by an authorised person and the status of the tank (see 8.4.1) shall be changed
from settling to released. This includes controls on the status of inlet lines and valves
(closed) and outlet lines and valves of the relevant storage tanks. The operation shall be
recorded.
If conductivity of Jet A-1 is below an acceptable level it may be necessary to add static
dissipator additive during product transfer (see chapter 7).
8.5
To ensure that acceptable levels of conductivity are achieved at airport depots it may be
necessary to add SDA to Jet A-1. The minimum acceptable conductivity level should be
established by the manager, taking into account the typical reduction in conductivity
experienced between the storage installation and the airport(s) and the options for adding
SDA downstream of the storage installation. Further details can be found in chapter 7.
8.5.1 If the documentation for a receipt by pipeline or from a road tanker or rail tank car
indicates that the conductivity may be low, but within specification, the conductivity should be
checked on a sample drawn at the start of the receipt and static dissipater additive added if
necessary.
8.5.2 If the conductivity of samples drawn from coastal/inland waterway vessels before
discharge is low, it may be necessary to add SDA.
8.5.3 When additive is blended into aviation fuel, written procedures for quality control,
documentation and safe handling shall be prepared and applied. Items normally covered
include:
(a)
Additive received to be clearly identified as a grade approved by the fuel
specification.
(b)
Each receipt to be accompanied by documentation verifying identity.
(c)
The additive batch documentation to be checked for validity before release for
blending.
(d)
Released additive to be held in a clearly designated storage area. Storage and
handling procedures are to be in accordance with the manufacturers
recommendations.
(e)
Only qualified operators to decant additive, refill the blending equipment and/or adjust
the injection rate. The addition rate, taking account of any pre-dilution of the additive,
to be monitored at regular intervals.
(f)
The effectiveness of blending to be verified by taking Upper, Middle and Lower
Samples, after tank contents have settled, and checking each sample for
conductivity.
8.5.4 The amount of SDA required shall take into account the maximum cumulative
concentration permitted by the relevant fuel specification, and the amount of additive already
introduced upstream. The total quantity of SDA that has been added to each batch of Jet A-1
shall be recorded on the RTC or RC.
8.5.5
8.6
OFF-SPECIFICATION PRODUCT
Product that does not meet the aviation fuel specification parameters or is not fit for purpose
shall be considered off-specification. Any off-specification product shall not be released as
aviation fuel.
77
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
8.7
EI12/059
DOCUMENTATION
78
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
GENERAL PRINCIPLES
The application of robust procedures and facility design principles is essential to ensure that
aviation fuels do not become contaminated, are clean and dry, on-specification and fit for
their intended purpose.
9.1.1 Any new installation, or modification or extension to existing facilities shall be
designed and constructed in accordance with recognized industry standards for aviation
fuels.
9.1.2 Tanks and pipework at storage installations shall be designed and maintained to
preserve the integrity of the product.
9.1.3 Facilities used for storage of aviation fuels shall be segregated from facilities storing
and handling other products. There shall also be segregation between certified and
uncertified aviation fuels at a refinery, and between batched and unbatched aviation fuels at
storage installations. The grade-segregation requirement for pipelines may not be
achievable for receipts from or deliveries into multiproduct pipelines, or where non-dedicated
pipe work is used for the discharge or loading of mixed cargoes on coastal/inland waterway
or seagoing vessels. This is only acceptable where the system is so designed as to facilitate
the detection and appropriate downgrading of product interfaces, and where there is
segregation between the tank pipework and the multiproduct infrastructure (e.g. manifold)
used to separate the products. In storage installations that handle biofuels and/or biofuel
components (FAME, ethanol), extra precautions need to be taken to avoid crosscontamination of aviation fuels.
9.1.4 All tanks and pipework at storage installations shall be made of materials which are
inert to the product. The thermal stability of jet fuels can be degraded by the presence of
very low concentrations of copper, or by finely divided particulate matter. Zinc and cadmium
are two other metals that adversely affect product quality although their impact is less than
that of copper and iron. Consequently, copper or cadmium alloys, cadmium plating,
galvanized steel, zinc rich internal coatings or plastic materials shall not be used in
applications in contact with aviation fuel. Materials such as stainless steel, carbon-steel or
aluminium shall be used.
Pipework, vessels and tanks shall be fabricated from either carbon steel, internally epoxylined carbon steel or from stainless steel. These restrictions also apply to piping or
components used for drain or sample lines, pressure gauge tappings, or any other small
parts of the facilities in contact with the fuel.
Assurance that product integrity is maintained with lined components should be achieved by
following the requirements of EI 1541 Performance requirements for protective coating
systems used in aviation fuel storage tanks and piping. The materials should be qualified
against EI 1541 and soak tested accordingly. If any special materials like glass fibre resins,
concrete, etc. are to be used for lining, repairing or re-bottoming tanks, the operator shall
satisfy itself that these materials will have no effect on the properties of the fuel to be stored
79
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
and the fuel has no adverse effect on the materials. Testing according to EI 1541 section 2.2
should be adopted.
9.1.5 Individual commissioning procedures shall be developed and performed for all new
facilities, and for extensions/modifications to existing facilities. Commissioning procedures
shall be in accordance with recognised industry standards. All commissioning procedures
shall be written for each facility, addressing site-specific requirements and hazards. The
commissioning procedures shall be reviewed by a competent person. The commissioning
procedures shall assign specific responsibilities for each activity to an individual and include
a permit to work system and a sign-off procedure. Records documenting the different tasks
and steps shall be maintained.
All of the piping, fittings, pumps, valves, additive injection system, filters, tanks and other
equipment intended for use with aviation fuels shall be pressure tested (for strength and
integrity), thoroughly cleaned, soak tested and flushed until they meet defined acceptance
criteria before they are used with aviation fuels.
Minimum fuel quality acceptance criteria are:
a successful pass of pressure strength and integrity tests;
a successful pass on a post-lining and pre-soak test;
a successful pass for soak test laboratory analysis results;
successful flushing at maximum pump capacity;
acceptable fuel samples (visually clear and bright and water-free) drawn from tank
bottoms, filter sumps, pipeline drain points and any other sampling location, and
signed-off by an authorized person that facilities are suitable for the receipt, storage and
onward transport of aviation fuel.
9.1.6 A set of critical drawings of the storage installation shall be available on site. The
minimum requirements are to have drawings showing:
General Layout - showing the key elements of the site (tanks, traffic flow, process areas,
civil structures).
Piping & Instrumentation Diagram (with shutdown functions incorporated or shown
separately in a Cause and Effect Chart)
A Process Flow Diagram.
Drainage System Layout - a P&ID should also be created if the layout drawing does not
show the function clearly.
Critical drawings shall be updated after any modification or system change.
An example of a process flow diagram is shown schematically in Figure 6.
Insert example
80
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
9.1.7 Instructions for performing the product receipt and delivery/filling operations shall be
easily available or clearly displayed for reference by the persons operating the equipment.
9.1.8 Pump start/stop switches at product receipt and loading areas and emergency
shutdown buttons should be safely accessible and clearly identified.
9.2
The requirements of this section apply to the storage of aviation fuel, and also of
components such as straight run, wet treated, hydroprocessed and synthetic kerosines, or
Avgas component streams before they are blended in finished product tanks. Although such
component tanks mainly exist at refineries, they also occur at terminals that blend synthetic
with conventional jet fuel.
9.3.1 Number and size
The number and size of tanks should be sufficient for the location volume turnover to provide
adequate working capacity and to allow for settling, testing and tank cleaning requirements.
9.3.2 Preventing dirt and water ingress
Tanks shall be designed to avoid ingress of water and dirt.
9.3.3 Vent requirements
Free vent devices should be installed for jet fuel storage tanks, unless otherwise specified by
local legislation. Where the expected operating temperature range will be close to or exceed
the flash point of jet fuel, an internal floating roof should be fitted. Pressure/vacuum relief
valves shall be installed for above-ground tanks storing Avgas. Free vent devices may be
used for buried Avgas tanks. Screens to prevent the ingress of foreign bodies should have a
coarse mesh with minimum 5 mm (0,25 in.) holes. Note: Local legislation may also require
the use of flame arresters.
9.3.4 Roof type
New tanks, or tanks brought into aviation fuel service, shall have fixed roofs.
It should be noted that existing tanks may have open floating roofs, which are much more
prone to rainwater ingress and fine rust and dirt particle generation via abrasion in the rim
seal area.
81
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
If there is a requirement for open floating roof tanks to stay in use, appropriate facilities
and/or procedures shall be in place, e.g. the use of triple rim seals, to ensure that rainwater
and dirt entering the system do not get transferred with the product, or have an impact on
product quality. In the longer term, floating roof tanks should be converted or replaced.
9.3.5 Tank water, sediment and sampling management system
Tanks shall have a means for effective removal of water and sediment. Tanks should have
slope down bottoms to a centre sump with a fixed water draw-off line. Horizontal tanks
should be installed with a continuous slope of 1:50 minimum, and vertical tanks should have
a cone-down bottom with a continuous slope of 1:30 minimum to a centre sump.
It is recognised that optimum designs for large diameter tanks may include a cone-up tank
bottom with a minimum of three radial sump drain points. Irrespective of tank design, dip
hatches shall be positioned above each drain point to enable water measurement.
It is recognized that existing storage tanks may have different bottom types such as flat,
cone up or sloped to one side. These tank bottom types make complete water removal much
more difficult, as often undrainable areas of water exist and therefore significantly increase
the risk of microbiological contamination.
In case of flat, cone up or sloping to one side bottom types, appropriate equipment and
procedures shall be in place to provide effective water draining. Examples of how this could
be achieved include ring draining lines, additional draining lines into identified low points
after bottom level scaling, or large volume flushing at high flowrates. The effectiveness of the
draining procedures could be determined by taking true bottom samples with a bottom dip
sampler from opposite sides of the draining line.
The drain line shall be fitted with a suitable, preferably self-closing (spring-loaded or
equivalent) valve for the draining of water and sediment. The line shall be of a diameter
appropriate for the size of the tank.
Tank draining systems shall allow safe and efficient fast-flush water draining of the storage
tank through the sump. The fast-flush line shall also incorporate a sample point to enable a
flowing sample to be taken. To allow recovery of the drained product, and for water to be
drawn off at high flow rates, tank drain lines should lead into large capacity receiving
vessels. This enables the site to over-flush without product loss, as the product can be
returned via an appropriate return system. Vessels should be designed with cone down
bottoms and a drain valve to enable the removal of water before returning the product to the
tank. An example of a suitable design is shown in Figure 7.
82
D
DRAFT EI/JIG 153
30 FOR STAKEHO
OLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
P
Please submit anyy comments to mh
h@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
F
Figure 7 Exam
mple of a suitab
ble design of prroduct recovery
y vessel
83
EI12/059
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
9.3.6 Lining
At least the bottom and first metre of the walls of all new tanks, tanks classified as delivering
directly to airports, and tanks that are brought into jet fuel service (converted from other
products) shall be coated internally. Full lining is considered best practice. A light-coloured
epoxy material, confirmed as being compatible with aviation fuels in accordance with EI
1541 Performance requirements for protective coating systems used in aviation fuel storage
tanks and piping shall be used. Zinc rich coatings shall not be used.
Where existing tanks that are classified as direct delivery are not lined, a plan shall be
developed to line them (at least the bottom and first metre of the walls) as soon as
practicable.
For existing indirect delivery tanks, consideration should be given to the benefits of lining.
Fully lining a tank facilitates the maintenance of product quality/cleanliness and protects
against corrosion. Note: Dirt and water are less likely to adhere to lined tank walls and
bottoms, settle out more easily, and can then be removed during tank draining. With lined
tanks, the risk of microbiological growth is reduced, tank cleaning is less time consuming
and possibly less frequent and downstream filter life is likely to be longer. The requirements
of 9.3.6 are shown schematically in Table 9.
Table 9 EI/JIG 1530 requirements for internal lining of storage tanks
Tank scenario
Existing tanks that deliver directly Lining of the bottom and first 1 metre of walls. If not
to airports
currently the case, upgrade as soon as practicable
Tanks brought into jet fuel service
Existing tanks that do not deliver No lining requirement, but consider the benefits of
directly to airports
lining
9.3.7 Separate inlet and outlet tank lines
All tanks shall be fitted with separate inlet and outlet pipe work systems. This is to ensure
that only fully batched/certified product is delivered.
Where existing tanks have a common inlet/outlet line, a plan shall be developed to upgrade.
Until the upgrade is completed, procedures shall be in place to ensure that the line is flushed
clear of unbatched product before delivery and to ensure that the line is filled only with
certified product. All line clearings shall be downgraded or diverted to product tankage and
shall be rebatched and recertified before release.
The accumulation of water in inlet or outlet tank line low points is not acceptable. Where this
occurs, it will either require draining from the low point or high velocity flushing on a regular
basis. The frequency of flushing should be determined by documented experience.
9.3.8 Positive segregation
The operation of valves on tanks shall provide assurance that inlet and outlet valves are
counter-locked or interlocked so that the inlet cannot be open (even slightly) or reopen once
the outlet valve is opened. Examples of how this can be achieved are preferably IT control of
motor-operated valves (MOVs), physical blocking with chains or Castell or similar locks, or
84
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
85
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
9.3.10 Markings
Tanks and pipelines shall be clearly numbered and marked with the grade stored in
accordance with EI 1542 Identification markings for dedicated aviation fuel manufacturing
and distribution facilities, airport storage and mobile fuelling equipment and, show the date of
the most recent internal inspection and cleaning. If IT systems provide sufficient detailed
monitoring of these intervals, labelling on tanks is not required. Flow directional arrows shall
be indicated on all pipe work.
Tanks that contain or have contained leaded products in the past shall be labelled
accordingly on the tank access chamber(s).
9.3.11 Access/entry point
A means of tank entry for personnel shall be provided to enable gas freeing and cleaning
operations.
9.3.12 Gauge hatches
Gauge hatches shall be provided to enable sampling and tank dipping.
9.4
9.4.1 General
At strategic points in the transfer of product to and from storage tanks, provision shall be
made for improvement and maintenance of product cleanliness by the use of filtration and
monitoring equipment, which shall be specified in quality control procedures.
Downstream locations have an expectation of acceptable fuel cleanliness (product free from
water and solids) over and above the basic RCQ requirements i.e. clear and bright. In
principle, problems of dirt or water contamination should be addressed as close to their
source as possible, to eliminate or minimize the likelihood of supply disruptions or quality
complaints from product recipients.
For information on maintaining aviation fuel cleanliness see EI 1550.
9.4.2 Microfiltration systems and vessels, mesh strainers
Microfiltration systems are those that comply with the performance requirements of EI 1581
5th edition (for filter/water separators), EI 1583 Laboratory tests and minimum performance
levels for aviation fuel filter monitors 6th edition (for filter monitors) or EI 1590 Specification
and qualification procedures for aviation fuel microfilters 2nd edition (for microfilters).
All new vessels for microfiltration systems shall meet the requirements of EI 1596. All
existing vessels in service shall be assessed against the requirements of EI 1596 as part of
the process to establish whether they remain fit for purpose or require upgrading (see EI
1550 for further information).
Mesh strainers (often referred to as filters) are not controlled by an industry standard, but are
often used to provide protection for pumps by capturing any coarse debris in a system.
Users should satisfy themselves that materials used in strainers are compatible with jet fuel.
Note: Clay treatment is sometimes incorrectly referred to as filtration. For further details see
Annex B.
9.4.3 Into-storage filtration
It is recommended that filter/water separators meeting EI 1581 5th edition should be installed
86
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
at into-storage locations. For road and rail receipt points handling Avgas only, a five micron
microfilter may be installed instead of a filter/water separator. The use of into-storage
filter/water separators at pre-airfield terminals is a recommendation of API 1595.
9.4.4
9.4.4.1 For deliveries to another storage installation upstream of an airport, mesh strainers
(when used for product quality purposes) of at least 60 micron nominal rating (200
mesh/linear inch) shall be installed at road or rail tank car loading points and at entry into
lined delivery pipelines. Microfiltration is not required when delivering to an intermediate
storage installation or when transferring fuel at a refinery from an indirect tank to a direct
service tank (see 9.4.4.2). However, if microfiltration is installed, it shall be well maintained
and monitored.
9.4.4.2 For jet fuel deliveries directly to airport service tanks, filter/water separators meeting
EI 1581 5th edition shall be installed as the minimum filtration requirement at road or rail tank
car loading points or entry into delivery pipelines. Where this is not currently the case, an
upgrade plan shall be developed and implemented as soon as practicable. Note: It was a
former JIG 3 requirement for the filtration system to be either a microfilter meeting EI 1590
2nd edition, or a FWS. It is no longer considered acceptable to use microfilters, as they are
not designed for water removal.
For Avgas deliveries directly to airport service tanks, a filter/water separator meeting EI 1581
5th edition, a filter monitor meeting EI 1583 6th edition or a microfilter meeting EI 1590 2nd
edition shall be installed as the minimum filtration requirement at road or rail tank car loading
points or entry into delivery pipelines.
9.4.5 Filtration system installation requirements
For information on the selection of microfiltration systems for specific applications see EI
1550.
Planning of a new filtration system installation, or modifications to an existing one, shall
include, as a minimum, consideration of:
Provision of sufficient working areas around vessels and their associated work platforms;
Inclusion of isolation valves in adjacent pipework to facilitate vessel maintenance and
element changeout;
Provision in the pipework either side of each microfiltration vessel of a suitable sampling
point for fuel quality assessment and filter membrane testing.
The inclusion in all vessels of air eliminators, as there is a risk of internal fire or explosion
if product is pumped into a vessel that contains air. All vessels shall also be fitted with
thermal/pressure relief valves. The outlet pipework from air eliminators and
thermal/pressure relief valves shall be routed to suitable spill containment. Air eliminators
should be maintained in accordance with filter manufacturers recommendations. This
pipework has to be open all the time and therefore any isolation valve shall be wiresealed in the open position during normal operation.
Provision to always ensure the slow filling of vessels after maintenance to prevent
element damage, internal fire or explosion during filling (see EI 1596 and EI 1550 for
further information).
Provision of high and low DP alarms, preferably automatic, or preset lockout switches set
in the system that trigger an investigation or stop the fuel transfer.
Pipework design and fuel flowrate to provide adequate time for relaxation of electrostatic
charge between a filter and the inlet to a storage tank or vehicle, for systems handling
fuel that does not contain SDA.
87
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Provision of protection from adverse weather conditions for personnel undertaking vessel
inspection/maintenance activities.
Ensuring that fuel flows in the intended direction through the vessel.
Ensuring that vessels and/or associated pipework are earthed/grounded.
Ensuring that vessels do not inadvertently drain when fuel is static.
Vessel design in accordance with EI 1596.
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
torque wrench that positively confirms torque setting (click stop type) and adjusted in
accordance with the element manufacturers recommendations. Elements showing any
abnormalities (e.g. damage, leopard spotting) shall be replaced, and the cause
investigated. Separator elements shall be inspected and tested in accordance with the
manufacturers recommendations.
If blanking plates/dummy elements have been fitted, these shall be checked in
accordance with the manufacturers recommendations (or at least annually) for correct
fit/torque and absence of leakage/bypass.
The results of the inspection shall be recorded.
After opening for inspection or filter element changeout, recommissioning procedures
shall ensure that the vessel is refilled very slowly to allow entrapped air to vent and to
ensure that no damage is caused to the installed elements.
For further information see EI 1550.
Note: Non-routine filter vessel inspections may be necessary, to check for abnormalities
such as element seal leakage, etc., if abnormal amounts of solids or water are found in
fuel downstream of the filter.
89
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
For filter monitors with 150 mm (6 in) nominal diameter elements in accordance with
manufacturers instructions.
After three year service life (provided the changeout differential pressure has not been
reached).
9.4.9 Records
Records shall be kept of at least:
all daily drainings including Appearance results;
weekly differential pressure readings including any necessary investigation results; and
filter membrane test results to enable trend monitoring.
Records shall be kept of filter maintenance, including at least:
the number and type of new elements installed;
differential pressure before and after change;
throughput since previous change;
reason for change and any relevant details, condition of elements and internal vessel,
preferably including element and vessel photographs.
An example of a suitable form is shown in Figure 8.
9.4.10 Mesh strainers
Mesh strainers shall be fitted with a sample point and shall be drained at least weekly.
Mesh strainers shall be opened and cleaned at least annually.
9.4.11 Differential pressure gauges
All differential pressure gauges shall be tested every 6 months. For piston type gauges, a
check for correct zero reading and for free movement throughout the full piston travel is
adequate. A record of all checks shall be maintained. All inaccurate or defective gauges
shall be replaced.
9.4.12 Filter element installation/filter vessel commissioning
For information on the installation and commissioning of filter elements see EI 1550.
90
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
91
or
Filter
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
9.5
EI12/059
Storage procedures
92
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
9.5.2
EI12/059
Tank cleaning
9.5.2.1 General
Tank cleaning frequency is dependent on a number of variables, including whether or not the
tank is lined (epoxy coated), the cleanliness of incoming product, the type of tank roof, the
type of tank bottom and ease of draining. Consequently, the cleaning interval for storage
tanks depends on their specific configurations. In principle, the better the design of the tank
the longer the cleaning interval.
It should be noted that there may be other unforeseen factors that have an impact on the
cleanliness of tanks (e.g. breakthrough of a clay treater) which will necessitate immediate
tank cleaning.
Note: The specified cleaning frequencies in Table 10 and 11 should not be confused with the
tank integrity inspection frequency, which is normally determined by other factors, e.g. local
authorities or engineering/corrosion considerations.
Note: Tank cleaning is a hazardous operation and all Permit-To-Work (PTW), confined
space entry, and Job Hazard Analysis (JHA) procedures shall be adhered to.
Specific safety precautions shall be in place when cleaning Avgas tanks or tanks that have
or had contained leaded products in the past. For further information see EI Model code of
safe practice Part 16 Tank cleaning safety code.
9.5.2.2 Evidence and risk assessment
Tank cleaning intervals for direct or indirect locations shall be clearly defined using the
criteria in Table 12 and documented (including photographs where safe to take them), to
facilitate auditing. Historic tank cleaning records and inspection records shall be meaningful
and maintained. Where such information is not available, the cleaning intervals in Table 10
shall apply.
9.5.2.3 Direct delivery locations
For storage installations directly supplying airports the cleaning intervals in Table 10
(conventional tank designs) or Table 11 (for tanks with additional design features) shall apply
as a maximum.
Table 10 - Cleaning intervals for storage installations with conventional tank designs
directly supplying airports
Low Risk
Medium Risk
High Risk
Cone
down/Cone
up/Sloping
Cone
down/Cone
up/Sloping
Flat
Flat
Roof type
Fixed
Floating*
Fixed
Floating*
Microbiological
testing
Yearly
6 monthly
3 monthly
Monthly
Maximum
tank
cleaning interval
5 years
5 years
3 years
2 years
Bottom type
* Floating roofs increase the risk of water and dirt/rust contamination and are considered
undesirable for aviation fuel storage. They should be taken out of aviation fuel service or
converted into fixed roofs.
93
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Where storage installations directly supplying airports are lined and/or have multiple draining
points, or for storage tanks at refineries where the fuel is hydroprocessed, the cleaning
intervals in Table 11 may be acceptable where convincing and continuing evidence (as
described in Table 12) can be provided that these longer periods do not influence product
cleanliness.
Table 11 - Cleaning intervals for storage installations with additional design features
directly supplying airports
Low Risk
Medium Risk
High Risk
Cone
down/Cone
up/Sloping
Cone
down/Cone
up/Sloping
Flat
Flat
Roof type
Fixed
Floating*
Fixed
Floating*
Microbiological
testing
Yearly
6 monthly
3 monthly
Monthly
Bottom type
5 years if:
tank lined, or
Maximum tank
cleaning interval
10 years if
tank lined
5 years
multiple
drain points,
or
2 years
in refineries,
product is
hydroprocessed
9.5.2.4 Indirect delivery locations
Where storage installations do not supply directly to airports the maximum tank cleaning
intervals should be in line with the ones for direct deliveries, but may be risk assessed under
the provision that convincing and continuing evidence (as defined in Table 12) is available to
show that the cleaning interval does not influence product cleanliness.
The only exception is for high high risk category tanks with floating roofs where a
maximum cleaning interval of 5 years shall apply.
Table 12 - Criteria for establishing tank cleaning intervals
Dirt levels being within established cleanliness levels/trends. Defined by testing of
bottom or sump samples (Gravimetric or colorimetric (including filtration time) and/or
particle counts).
Water levels being within established cleanliness levels/trends. Defined by:
Taking water drain samples and checking visually for systematic absence of
excessive rust, other debris, microbiological growth or surfactant contamination;
Taking bottom or sump fuel samples and testing for microbiological activity (to
confirm Acceptable results)
Previous tank cleaning records showed that tank internal surfaces were clean (before
flushing the tank), i.e. the inspections did not reveal microbial growth or build up of
sediment exceeding approximately 20% of the tank bottom surface.
Fuel cleanliness downstream indicates the absence of excessive contamination, e.g.
filters having good element service life, good Millipore results or low particle counts.
94
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Bringing tanks (and associated pipework and equipment) into aviation fuel
service
Tanks and associated pipework and equipment shall only be brought into aviation fuel
service if in compliance with the requirements in this chapter.
Tanks and associated pipework and equipment shall be emptied and cleaned prior to initial
filling with aviation fuel.
Before the initial tank contents can be released a Recertification Test and a thermal stability
test shall be carried out on a Composite Sample, the results of which shall be satisfactory.
Where tanks were previously in service with a fuel containing lead, additional quality
protection measures are necessary and specialist advice should be sought. Additional
testing will be necessary, including analysis for trace lead content or colour.
95
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
DOCUMENTATION
96
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
97
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Local and international inspections and follow-up - 3 years or until all recommendations
have been closed out if longer.
Filtration differential pressure and membrane filtration (Millipore) records - a minimum of
either 3 years or the last two change-outs if longer.
Storage tank and filter cleaning and maintenance records - life of tank
Storage installation design, modification and major maintenance - life of installation
Underground pipeline design, modification and testing records - life of installation.
98
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Additionally the details of the ship cargo tank internal coating material, the existence of any
copper-containing metals in the tank, the tank washing system (hot fresh water, steam,
detergents), the inert gas (IG) system, the slops storage and disposal system, shall also be
considered as part of the selection process, as these may impact on the quality of the
transported cargo.
10.1.3 Suitability assessment before selection
In addition to the selection process, details specific to previous cargoes, cargo tanks
cleaning, etc. also need to be assessed. Although it remains the responsibility of the ships
Captain to present the ship in a condition suitable for loading the intended cargo, the
organisation chartering the ship should also satisfy itself that all the cleaning carried out to
effect a grade change is adequate to protect the integrity of the aviation fuel to be loaded
(refer to EI HM50 for more detailed guidance). This information shall be readily available to
all parties with an interest in the transport of the fuel.
The following provides guidance on minimum acceptance criteria to be used.
Cargo tanks with zinc coatings or zinc silicate linings, or with copper heating coils or
other copper-containing components, should not be used for transportation of jet fuel
because of the potential adverse impact on fuel thermal stability. Where this is
unavoidable, specialist advice shall be sought regarding additional testing requirements ,
e.g. thermal stability testing at elevated temperatures prior to loading and discharge,
and, where applicable, measurement of copper content prior to discharge.
Segregation shall be provided between cargo and ballast tanks. If more than one product
or grade is to be carried, segregation shall also be provided between the grades. This
includes compartments, pipework, pumps, valves, and other physical installations on
board where cross-contamination can occur. This also includes the IG system, which
may be achieved by isolation or flow direction (e.g. aviation fuel before other cargoes).
Closed Loading (inert gas system) vessels are subject to specific procedures being in
place at both loading and discharge ports to ensure that fuel quality is monitored. These
procedures shall include the requirement for the inspector and/or the ships Master to
confirm that the vessel is clean and dry and suitable for the transportation of jet fuel.
Inert gas system: Guidance on the design, operation and maintenance of inert gas
systems can be found in American Bureau of Shipping documents Pub 131 Guide for
inert gas system for ballast tanks and Pub 24 Guidance Manual for Material Selection
and Inspection of Inert Gas Systems. At the time of writing these could be downloaded
from www.eagle.org
All cargo tank hatches/openings shall be watertight. Hatches and sea valves which
access the cargo tanks shall be capable of being locked and sealed in the closed
position.
New build and refurbished vessels shall not be accepted for the carriage of aviation fuel
as the first cargo due to the high risk of product contamination.
As a minimum, all new build and refurbished vessels shall have been pre-conditioned in
accordance with Annex C before carrying aviation fuel.
For any vessels that have previously carried other products but never aviation fuel, for
the first aviation fuel cargo, a Recertification Test plus thermal stability test shall be
carried out on the multiple tank composite sample after loading. This documentation
shall be supplied to the receiver of the fuel before the ship can be discharged, unless
otherwise agreed with the receiver of the fuel.
100
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
The documentation specifying in detail the last 3 cargoes carried by the vessel
(including, where possible, any additives / dyes / stabilizing chemicals contained in the
previous cargoes or added on board the vessel) shall always be checked, and be
available to the receiver of the fuel.
Note many jet fuel cargoes are carried in chemical ships, and EI HM50 may not
address all circumstances encountered in such cases. Other reference databases may
need to be consulted for guidance.
Where it is identified that a gas oil or diesel cargo is listed on the last 3 cargoes, checks
shall be carried out to establish if the cargo contained a bio component. If this cannot be
firmly established then it shall be assumed that bio component was present.
EI HM50 recommends that cargoes of B15 or greater should not have been carried in
the previous three cargoes.
If cargoes of less than B15, but greater than B5, have been carried in the last three
cargoes, the recommendations of EI HM50 should be followed. In addition, FAME testing
should be carried out on the loaded cargo, and be within the specification limit, before
discharge commences.
Where it is identified that there has been addition of dye on the vessel in the last two or
three cargoes, there is the risk of dye transfer from the roof of the tank in transit, and of
sample contamination with dye residues when using closed-operations valves.
Particular notice shall be taken of any previous cargoes that may have contained high
risk species such as metal ions (such as are found in some octane and cetane
improvers), surfactants, luboils containing metallic modifiers , dyes etc. as each of these
poses specific risks to the cargo.
All the details obtained from the ships records shall be listed in a single document (cargo
tank history report) and this document shall be dated, signed and stamped by the ships
officers confirming that the details recorded are correct. The records shall include, for
each tank on the ship, details of:
Based on the information supplied, risks shall be assessed and an initial loading plan
commensurate with any identified risk prepared. (Guidance may be obtained from EI
HM50). Should any of the details listed above not be provided, all stakeholders with an
interest in the loading of the aviation fuel shall be informed of any data deficiencies
immediately and loading shall not proceed until all interested parties have agreed a
process to address the deficiencies in the tank history records
101
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
limitations prevent access to the tanks, a statement of facts clearly noting the inability to
make a visual examination of tanks, lines, pumps, etc. shall be issued instead.
Regardless of which document is issued they shall be countersigned by the responsible
ships officer.
It should be confirmed that the IG system is operating satisfactorily. Records for the
previous two weeks that the IG was operational should be obtained from the ships
officers and the IG readings at the time of loading noted in the inspectors report. These
should preferably show detailed logs with O2 levels, flow rates and even SOx levels on a
constant monitoring basis. As a minimum daily checks of the running system and
random tank samples taken using an O2 meter shall be available. The inspector should
ask if the IG to and from the aviation fuel containing tanks is separated from any other
parcels on board and whether it will remain so for the whole voyage. Should any of the
details listed above not be provided, all stakeholders with an interest in the loading of the
aviation fuel shall be informed of any data deficiencies immediately, and loading shall not
proceed until all interested parties have agreed a process to address the deficiencies in
the records.
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
from each compartment, a multiple tank composite sample prepared, and the following
properties measured. The results shall be compared with the results of the product being
loaded:
appearance/visual colour; (Note: Colour in this context is the visual observation of
fuel colour from water white to pale straw and not the Saybolt Colour)
density;
flash point (jet fuel only);
freezing point.
To minimize the volume at risk, where possible, it is recommended that the first foot
loading be limited to two or three tanks as far away as possible from the ships manifold
in order to flush the maximum pipework. Samples from these limited numbers of tanks
can be tested fairly quickly and if any problems are detected, remediation done without
too much waste or delay. If the first three tanks pass, first foots can be loaded into the
other nominated tanks and testing performed on them.
To avoid unnecessary delays to vessels, the loading may re-start following satisfactory
density, appearance and visual colour comparisons with the shore tank and jetty line test
results. The results of the flash and freeze point tests shall be compared with the shore
tank results. If they differ by more than 3C for the flash or freeze point between
measured and expected results, contamination should be suspected and further
investigations shall be carried out.
After completion of loading, the ships tanks shall be sampled and three, 5 litre (5 USQ),
weighted multiple tank Composite Ships Samples shall be prepared, using suitable
containers (as defined by ASTM D4306); those required for retention shall be sealed.
These samples may cover, as well, contractual requirements but are considered as
minimum sample numbers. One sample, which need not be tested unless the quality of
the consignment is subsequently questioned, shall be retained at the supplying location
for at least one month. The second sample shall be provided to the ships Master for
retention on the ship. The third sample should be used for Recertification Testing to
confirm the quality of the product on board the vessel. The Recertification Test analysis
should not delay the departure of the vessel. However, the results of the test should be
made available to all interested parties (e.g. buyer and seller) promptly, but certainly
before the vessel is discharged.
Before departure, it shall be ensured that tank hatches and covers are closed and
secured.
All quality and loading documents should be presented to the Ships Master or his
representative either in hardcopy or electronically.
Results of the quality checks shall be recorded and reported.
103
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
difficult to take during line transfer operations, first foot samples should be taken for Control
Check.
Attention should be paid to the suitability of individual cargo tanks for the storage of aviation
fuel.
Hoses used for the transfer of fuel shall be maintained in good condition and regularly
inspected internally and externally for wear, degradation and cleanliness. A record of use
and maintenance checks shall be maintained. It is strongly recommended that hoses are
dedicated to jet fuel use and marked in accordance with EI 1542. Where this is not possible,
they shall only be used for transfer of white oil without bio components.
Fuel testing requirements apply to all points in the supply chain, including floating storage
and transfers at sea, and shall be treated in the same manner as for an Intermediate
Terminal. Each floating storage cargo tank shall be treated and tested as an individual shore
tank. Note that each tank should be segregated from other cargoes onboard any vessel.
After each receipt into a ships tank on the floating storage, samples shall be taken in
triplicate and sealed, and one set tested as soon as possible. Traceability through mass
balance calculation shall be established and documented throughout any offshore
movements.
Because of the difficulty of traceability and testing at the time of transfer onto a ship, as a
minimum, a CoA based on one of the triplicate samples drawn from the floating storage
vessel shall be provided, prior to the cargo being discharged. In addition, samples from the
receiving vessel shall be tested and the fuel recertified, prior to the cargo being discharged.
These requirements preserve traceability.
Consideration should also be given to undertaking microbiological testing (see EI Guidelines
for the investigation of the microbiological content of petroleum fuel and for the
implementation of avoidance and remedial strategies).
Following receipt into floating storage, or after a ship-to-ship transfer, Recertification or CoA
Testing shall be conducted. If more than three new batches, including any tank heel and any
co-mingling in the delivery vessel, are received into a tank, Recertification Test comparison
becomes difficult and possibly meaningless, and therefore the contents of the tank shall be
tested against all the requirements of the Specification, i.e. CoA.
Compile a batch make-up record. This record shall include, as a minimum:
a) The Batch Number (following successful testing)
b) The tank number
c) Volume in the tank
d) The grade of fuel stored
e) The sampled date
f) The laboratory Test Certificate Number
g) Heel Batch Number and Test Certificate Number
h) Received fuel volume(s), Batch Number(s), Test certificate Number(s), received fuel
Release Note(s), the consigning refinery/depot and receipt date
An example is shown in Figure 1.
10.2
PIPELINE TRANSPORTATION
10.2.1 Introduction
Pipelines provide an efficient means of transporting aviation fuel (as well as other petroleum
products) and form an important part of many distribution systems.
104
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Pipelines may transfer different petroleum products, and interface comingling between them
and pipeline pick-up from one product to another due to adhesion to pipeline walls is
routine. Robust operational procedures are therefore required to ensure risks to jet fuel
quality are effectively managed.
10.2.1.1 Definition of a pipeline
A pipeline can be considered as a long tube, made up of one or many conduit sections, that
connects installations such as terminals/depots, refineries, jetties etc. Pipeline systems
include associated installations such as pumping stations, valves, reception and delivery
terminals, metering stations, quality control stations and interconnection stations with other
pipeline systems.
10.2.1.2 Construction and commissioning
The quality of steel used for pipelines is described in national or international specifications,
and is typically agreed to by local/national authorities. Specifications define, for each
diameter, the standard thickness of the pipe and the manufacturing tolerance. Technical
specifications for welds are very detailed.
To protect against corrosion when buried, steel pipelines are frequently either cathodically
protected or have an electrically isolated coating.
Commissioning of pipelines should be in accordance with ASME B31.4 Pipeline
transportation systems for liquid hydrocarbons and other liquids and API Recommended
Practice 1110 Pressure testing of liquid petroleum pipelines.
10.2.2 Product compatibility in multi-product pipelines
The preference is for jet fuel to be transported in pipelines dedicated to jet fuel but, for
logistical reasons, pipelines may have to be operated as multi-product pipelines. Multiproduct pipeline operation is dominated by interface management requirements (including
management of the transmix).
The products listed in Table 14 shall not be transported in pipelines that transport jet fuel:
Table 14 Products that shall not be transported in multi-product pipelines that carry
jet fuel
-
Neat oxygenated chemical products (organic acids, alcohols) and other surface active
products, or those that have a high content of surface active components
Chemical products that could downgrade the thermal stability of jet fuel (e.g. products
with peroxides, low levels of lead, iron, copper or nickel) or products that could
develop free radicals in the conditions of transport
The products listed in Table 15 are acceptable, as leading and trailing consignments, for
transport in multi-product pipelines that also transport jet fuel. When adjacent to a parcel of
jet fuel, these products have been found to limit the degradation of jet fuel due to interface
comingling or pipeline pick-up. They are listed in Table 15 in order of preference:
Table 15 Products that are acceptable as leading or trailing parcels when
transporting jet fuel in multi-product pipelines
-
105
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Within refineries or terminals, jet fuel shall be handled in such a way as to prevent
contamination with other products between the tank and pipeline ingress. Where the use
of non-dedicated pipework within the refinery/terminal is unavoidable, procedures shall
be in place to adequately flush the pipework of other products prior to receiving or
delivering jet fuel. With non-dedicated systems, particular attention shall be given to
eliminating potential contamination from dead legs, manifolds, meter proving loops, etc.
106
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Jet fuel quality shall be maintained from the egress point of the pipeline to the terminal or
airport storage tanks. Consideration needs to be given to pipeline contents, manifolds,
dead-legs, valves, pumps, etc. all of which have given rise to product quality incidents.
Receipt facilities shall be capable of dealing with the pressure, flowrate and volume of jet
fuel from the pipeline.
10.2.3.2 Equipment
a) Receipt and export lines shall be fitted with sampling points, which should be installed
as close as possible to the CTP. It is preferable for in-line samplers, either automatic or
manual, to be used. A capability to measure density at 15C or API gravity is also
required. This could be achieved by the use of an in-line densitometer, automated
densitometer or hydrometers and thermometers.
b)
c)
d)
The potential impact of equipment on the maintenance of jet fuel quality should be
assessed by the pipeline operator. Such issues include:
- The creation of a register to record all sources of potential cross-contamination, even
at low levels. Equipment that should be inspected includes: manifolds, pumping
stations, separation valves, dead-legs, meters, fixed prover loops, etc.
- Inspection and compliance with operational protocols (flushing of the installation,
dead-legs, boosters, etc.) associated with the equipment and control of their
effectiveness in preventing contamination, even at low level.
- The potential for downgrading off-specification product. Further investigations shall
be conducted and corrective measures identified and implemented (definitive
modification of the infrastructure, strengthening of the operating procedures, etc.).
10.2.3.3 Samples
a) Before loading or transfer by pipeline, the issuing tank shall be checked by the depot
operator for free water, and any free water found shall be drained. All low points on
transfer or loading pipeline systems shall be checked by the depot operator for free
water and any free water found shall be drained.
b) For traceability and quality purposes every parcel of jet fuel in the pipeline should be
sampled, automatically or manually. These samples shall be retained for a defined
period and managed as specified in the pipeline operating procedures.
c) For receipt from or delivery into a single grade pipeline, during the pumping of the
product, samples shall be drawn as close as possible to the CTP approximately 1
minute after liquid starts to flow, approximately half way through the pumping period,
approximately 5 minutes before pumping is due to be completed, and at any change of
batch. Each of the samples shall be subjected to a Control Check (and conductivity if
107
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
SDA has been added to the fuel upstream of this point). Results from the Control Check
shall be documented.
d) If large amounts of water, solid contaminants or abnormal density are noted, the flow
shall be stopped if possible, or diverted to a slop tank, and the pumping station of the
pipeline notified. The transfer into or from a storage tank shall only be resumed after
clearance has been given by the installation manager.
e) For receipt from or delivery into multi-product delivery systems, procedures similar to
those in 10.2.3.3 (c) shall be enforced but with samples drawn as close as possible to
the CTP approximately 1, 3 and 10 minutes after liquid starts to flow, every two hours,
approximately 5 minutes before pumping is due to be completed, and at any change of
batch, Additional testing of samples drawn during the transfer may be performed to
ensure that no cross-contamination has occurred.
The most important quality protection measure in multi-product pipeline movements is the
method used for handling product interface cuts (see 10.2.6). Care should be taken to
ensure that the leading and trailing interfaces between the products are directed into nonaviation storage. Adequate sampling procedures assist in the detection of these interfaces.
a) The pipeline operator may draw spot samples manually. These samples are
representative only of the product at the exact time they are taken but may help in
determining if the product is contaminated.
b) In fungible pipeline systems, or those managed as a banking system, there should be a
retained sample for each delivered parcel. Moreover, if the pumped batch is split into two
or more receiving tanks at any one location, it is recommended that the sampling
operation should be split in the same manner, to obtain a sample for each receiving tank.
If there are multiple export or receipt batches, each one should be subject to individual
sampling.
c) Operating procedures shall be established and recorded to define the processes to be
followed if sample analysis carried out by the shipper or pipeline operator during transfer
indicates a deviation outside of the fuel specification limits or exceeding the acceptable
differences during Recertification testing (see Annex D). These should include a
notification procedure to the relevant parties, remedial action plans, and defined
authorities for remedial product release. The action plans may include items such as
layered tank release, continued receipt into other tankage, blending, pump backs, etc.
10.2.3.4 Responsibility for aviation fuel quality maintenance - documentation
The quality of the product when introduced into the pipeline is the responsibility of the
shipper. To enable the pipeline operator to monitor and maintain the quality and traceability
of the fuel, the shipper shall release the following documents to the pipeline operator, before
any transfer starts:
Reference numbers of the shipping tank(s)
Respective volumes of the shipping tank(s)
RCQ(s), CoA(s), RTC(s), RC(s) for the shipping tank(s).
This Certificate will mention the reference of the shipment as it appears on the pumping
plan given by the pipeline operator to the shipper
This Certificate will be signed by an official authority of the shipper, or by a
subcontracted inspection authority
This documentation shall also be sent to the receiving terminal(s)
108
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Product introduced into a pipeline from a tank may differ from the certified batch because of
the connection lines and manifolds between the tank and the pipeline ingress point. The line
content between the tank and the ingress point shall also be covered by a RCQ, CoA or
RTC and be listed on the RC. The principle is that all line content is covered by one or more
Certificates.
In fungible and non-fungible pipeline systems, and where the original identity of the jet fuel
batch is recorded and maintained from the shipping point to the point of delivery, pipeline
operators shall manage a system to transfer the RC, RCQ, and/or CoA and/or RTC from the
ingress terminal to the egress terminal before the delivery of the product.
In fungible pipeline systems and where the original identity of the jet fuel is lost, the pipeline
operator shall ensure that all jet fuel batches being transferred into the pipeline meet the
appropriate specification. At the egress point of the pipeline a full certification test shall be
completed and a CoA issued.
10.2.4 Route setting
Pipeline operators shall check the position of all relevant valves when setting up (i.e. prior to
the movement) to ensure the correct route as detailed in the site specific procedure between
the ingress and egress CTPs of the pipeline. For other valve position monitoring controls at
refineries and terminals see chapter 8.
10.2.5 Quality control requirements for simultaneous pumping
In the case of simultaneous pumping from two pipelines into a single pipeline, a Control
Check shall be carried out. The measured density of the downstream product shall be
compared with the calculated volumetric average densities of both upstream products.
Rebatching after simultaneous pumping is mandatory before direct delivery to airport depots.
10.2.6 Interface management
In a multi-product pipeline, where jet fuel is in contact with other refined products, the
pipeline operator shall manage the transmix, in particular at the points of delivery, and shall
take appropriate measures to maintain the jet fuel integrity, and its conformity with the
specification. The time when the pipeline is stopped or operated at low flow rates should be
reduced to a minimum to avoid increasing the transmix volume at the head and tail of the
products.
When handling multi-product batches, the sequence should be arranged to minimise the
effects of interface contamination of the aviation fuel.
To mitigate the risk of contamination of jet fuel and to minimise the volume of the transmix to
be downgraded or re-treated, the following sequencing of product in contact with jet fuel is
recommended:
Any product in which the total quantity of transmix can be downgraded, without
compromising the quality of the mixed product (i.e. petrochemical naphtha).
Product that does contain bio-component measured by the appropriate test method. For
this type of product, a risk assessment will need to be conducted and specific operating
procedures implemented by the pipeline operator. A leading and/or trailing buffer batch
(containing no bio-component) should be employed, the volume of which shall be
established by experimentation / trial, which shall be downgraded.
109
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
During receipt, leading and trailing product interfaces shall be diverted into non-aviation
storage or slop tanks.
Pipeline operators should undertake risk assessments and implement mitigation measures
within their operating procedures to ensure that the quality of jet fuel parcels is not
compromised by inter-product contamination.
Control measures may include testing for specific sensitive characteristics of jet fuel
(depending on the other transported products, characteristics such as flash point or freezing
point could be tested from in-line samples), and/or contamination tests such as particle
content, water content, MSEP or FAME content.
The cutting shall be based on density measurement and (where applicable) colour. Local
procedures shall be established to ensure that only jet fuel enters jet fuel receipt tanks.
These will need to take into account the position of the density measurement equipment,
valves, signal delays, flow rates, buffer and interface volumes etc.
Equipment used to manage interface cutting may comprise the following:
densitometers, installed far enough upstream of the manifold to allow sufficient time to
receive the information and to command the shutting and opening of the appropriate
valves
colorimeters to confirm the information given by the densitometers
manifolds, to lead any non-jet fuel products in their correct direction, to direct
contaminated product into slop tanks, and to direct the neat jet fuel into jet fuel tanks.
There is a requirement for these manifolds to be designed and operated so as to avoid
cross-contamination of the jet fuel.
Re-injection from slop tanks or interfaces into jet fuel is not permitted.
10.2.7 Pipeline pigging operations
Pipeline operators are required to implement pigging procedures on a regular basis, or when
needed depending on transported product cleanliness, and legal requirements for the
maintenance of pipeline integrity.
In multiproduct pipelines no pigging operation shall take place in jet fuel. This prevents
potential contamination of jet fuel by other materials removed from pipeline walls, and issues
with particulates.
In dedicated jet fuel pipelines, the operator will have to undertake pigging in jet fuel. The
operator shall ensure procedures are in place to handle the pigged cloud that will be
generated. This may include segregation and/or disposal as well as additional settling times
or filtration.
10.2.8 Jet fuel additivation
Pipeline operators shall not inject into jet fuel any additives during transport of the jet fuel
through the pipeline system, unless by specific and documented request from the receiving
client. Where additive injection is authorised, refer to chapter 7 for required information on
handling and injection.
110
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
10.3
EI12/059
10.3.1 Construction of road tankers, rail tank cars and loading facilities
10.3.1.1 Rail tank cars
a) The tanks of rail tank cars shall be constructed of carbon steel, stainless steel or
aluminium. For carbon steel construction the tank shall be internally coated with an
approved epoxy coating complying with EI 1541. New rail tank cars, and those that have
had major maintenance activities performed, shall be pre-conditioned and soak tested in
compliance with Annex C.
b) Design shall be such that fuel is protected from the ingress of dirt and water during
transit. Tanks shall be equipped with bottom drains to facilitate the clearance of water
and sediment, and drawing of samples. Rail tank cars should be dedicated to one grade
of aviation product and be provided with couplings chosen to give the maximum practical
degree of grade security. Where rail tank cars are fitted with more than one size/design
of discharge coupling, the unused one shall be sealed or, preferably, removed.
c) Clear grade markings shall be painted on or affixed to rail tank cars. The EI fuel grade
naming and colour coding system as detailed in EI 1542 should be used. The
appropriate grade markings, (e.g. "JET A-1", "Avgas 100LL") shall be prominently
displayed on both sides of rail tank cars. Grade markings shall also be clearly visible at
the rail tank car discharge connections.
d) Rail tank cars used for supply to airport depots should be internally coated with an
approved epoxy coating complying with EI 1541.
10.3.1.2 Road tankers
a) Road tankers shall be constructed of aluminium alloy, stainless steel, or carbon steel.
For carbon steel construction the tank shall be internally coated with an approved epoxy
coating complying with EI 1541. New road tankers, and those that have had major
maintenance activities performed, shall be pre-conditioned and soak tested in
compliance with Annex C. Each tank compartment shall have a drain line and suitable
valves to facilitate the drawing of samples and drainage of water. The sample lines
should not be manifolded together. Where sample lines are manifolded procedures shall
be in place to ensure representative samples of each compartment can be taken without
cross contamination from other compartments.
b) All tank access chamber and dip point covers shall be sealed completely against the
ingress of water or dirt.
c) Filling and discharge points should be provided with couplings of a size and type chosen
to give the maximum practical degree of grade security. Where vehicles are fitted with
more than one size/design of discharge coupling, the unused one shall be sealed or,
preferably, removed. (See also 10.3.1.4). Where grade selective couplings are not
employed, procedures shall be in place that provide the same degree of grade protection
as grade selective couplings.
d) Clear grade markings shall be painted on or affixed to the vehicle. The EI fuel grade
naming and colour coding system detailed in EI 1542 should be used. The appropriate
grade markings, (e.g. "JET A-1", "Avgas 100LL") shall be prominently displayed on both
sides of the vehicle. Grade markings shall also be clearly visible at the vehicle discharge
connections.
111
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Jet fuel
Avgas
Avgas
Kerosine/JP-8/TS1
Jet A/A-1
*It should be noted that diesel/gas oil not declared as a bio fuel may contain FAME at
concentrations up to 7%.
112
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Cleaning Procedure A:
The tank, pipework, and where installed, meter, pump and filter, shall be completely drained
until no liquid remains (drainings to be downgraded to non-aviation use). Internally inspect
each compartment through the tank access chamber to ascertain that it is clean and dry. If
sludge or dirt is present, it shall be removed.
Cleaning Procedure B:
The tank, pipework, and where installed, meter, pump and filter, shall be completely drained.
Introduce flushing product to cover the foot valves (flushing product shall be the new grade
to be loaded or, for Avgas, should preferably be unleaded motor gasoline); hold for 10
minutes. The tank and pipework shall be completely drained until no liquid remains
(drainings to be downgraded to non-aviation use). Internally inspect each compartment
through the tank access chamber to ascertain that it is clean and dry. If sludge or dirt is
present, it shall be removed.
The intention of these procedures is to confirm that the next grade can be loaded safely and
delivered in an uncontaminated condition. If these procedures fail to satisfy this requirement
then flushing in the case of procedure A or further flushing in the case of procedure B of the
compartments may be required. If the vehicle tank cannot be left in a suitable condition for
filling by using procedures A or B, then the tank shall be gas freed and thoroughly cleaned.
Detergents or cleaning chemicals shall not be used.
In circumstances where the above procedures are not permitted due to automatic loading
and/or vapour recovery systems, then local procedures that meet these additional
requirements shall be developed.
Cleaning Procedure C:
Either the tank shall be gas freed and thoroughly cleaned, or the tank shall carry a buffer
load (motor gasoline or kerosine) followed by grade change procedure A or B as required.
The first cargo of Jet A-1 loaded after a cleaning/buffer load shall be tested for FAME to
validate the change of grade procedure.
Steam cleaning may be considered equivalent to the procedures above.
10.3.3 Loading of road tankers and rail tank cars
10.3.3.1 General
a) The preferred method of loading both rail tank cars and road tankers is bottom loading.
In addition to the safety issue of working at height, bottom loading through grade
selective couplings provides a higher degree of grade protection.
b) Where top loading is employed, systems can be used that assist in
eliminating/minimising incorrect grade loading. This can be by the utilisation of swipe
card systems (IT controls), density checking and procedural controls, etc.
c) Rail tank cars and road tankers shall be inspected to ensure that they are clean and free
of water before loading. To avoid working at height, this may be done by checking the
low points of each tank compartment and draining any traces of water or particulates.
For dedicated road tankers which are bottom loaded via selective couplings this
inspection shall be performed once only at the first loading of the day. When loading is
carried out with non-selective couplings this check shall be undertaken before each
loading. Where rail tank cars and or road tankers are top loaded, the cleanliness can be
113
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
checked from the tank top access. This shall only be undertaken from a purpose-built
gantry providing safe access.
d) If water, and/or heavy residue is identified, the tank(s) shall not be filled and the shipper
of the fuel informed and a report submitted to relevant parties. Checks of the tank top
manway access, and other possible points of contamination ingress, shall be made, the
results recorded and findings included in the submitted report.
10.3.3.2 Loading
a) Rail tank cars and road tankers shall be loaded via hoses complying with the
requirements of the latest issues of EI 1529 Aviation fuelling hose and hose assemblies
(grade 2), or ISO 1825 type C (semi-conductive) or equivalent. Pantograph loading
systems are also acceptable.
b) On completion of rail tank car or road tanker loading, the product shall be allowed to
settle for a minimum of 5 minutes. The rail tank car or road tanker sump/low point shall
then be drained of any water and sediment and a sample taken for an Appearance
Check. Drain sample buckets and metal containers used for fuel draining shall be
bonded to the rail tank car or road tanker prior to and during the draining operation, and
to the receiving vessel/tank when decanting. The use of plastic or galvanised containers
is not permitted.
c) Where local legislation prohibits open sampling, alternative procedures/equipment e.g.
water/particulate/density sensors or closed sampling systems, that provide the same
degree of grade protection as open sampling shall be in place.
d) The above actions and results shall be recorded.
e) Before dispatch, all tank compartment openings shall be secured, preferably sealed and
a check made that the tank is correctly grade marked.
10.3.4 Documentation and records
a) Prior to deliveries, a copy of the latest supplying tank RCQ, CoA, or RTC shall be
provided to each receiving location.
b) All shipments by rail tank car or road tanker shall be accompanied by a Release
Certificate. The RC shall contain details of the fuel specification, supplying tank number,
the fuel batch number, rail tank car or road tanker number, the loaded quantity at
standard temperature, water free statement and, where applicable, the quantity of SDA
added and the measured conductivity on loading. It shall also contain details of the
supply and receiving locations and contain a unique identification number/document
serial number. The document shall be signed by an Authorised person representing the
supplying location.
c) Where tank changes occur during loading, two Release Certificates may be required.
Each location shall record the pipeline volume from each tank to the loading point. The
rail tank car or road tanker that is loaded with the interface volume shall have two RCs
issued defining the volume loaded from each supply tank.
d) Copies of the documentation shall be retained for a minimum of 1 year.
114
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
10.3.5 Samples and sample retention for driver controlled loading and delivery
A daily line sample of 1 litre (1 USQ) shall be taken from the issuing tank and retained for 1
week. When a second tank is placed on issue in any one day, a further line sample shall be
taken and retained.
10.4
10.4.1 General
If aviation product is to be supplied in drums, Intermediate Bulk Containers (IBC) or ISO tank
containers, the requirements of 10.4.1 to 10.4.3 shall be applied.
To meet these requirements, locations where drums or IBCs are filled or ISO tank containers
are loaded shall have documented procedures and systems in place to ensure quality (as
well as health, safety and environmental) considerations are adequately managed. These
should include:
Procedures for the inspection of new and used drums, IBCs and ISO tank containers,
including defined rejection criteria.
Systems to ensure adequate control of any drum or IBC flushing, cleaning and waste
disposal.
Procedures to ensure drum or IBC filling or ISO tank container loading is carried out
safely, including consideration of manual handling requirements, bonding, fire hazards
and spill hazards.
Procedures for the storage and release of product in drums or IBCs and ISO tank
containers.
Recognition of any statutory requirements applicable to drum and IBC filling and ISO
tank container loading operations.
10.4.2 Drums and IBCs
Drums are typically of 210 litres (55 USG) capacity, and of a design to protect against
mechanical damage to the lining. Drums should comply with ISO/ANSI MH2a or ISO 157502. IBCs are rigid reusable containers up to 1 500 litres (396 USG) capacity. Drums and IBCs
can be used either for international transportation by sea, rail or road or for use as temporary
storage.
10.4.2.1 Materials of construction
Drums used for storage of aviation fuel shall be manufactured from steel. They shall be lined
with a suitable lacquer or lining meeting EI 1541.
Under no circumstances shall internally galvanised drums or plastic drums be used.
Any material used for the sealing/seaming of the bottom and top of drums shall be
compatible with aviation fuel.
Any sealing material used in the manufacture of drum closures and bungs shall be
compatible with aviation fuel.
IBCs used for storage of aviation fuel shall be manufactured from stainless steel or
aluminium. Under no circumstances shall internally galvanised IBCs or plastic IBCs be used.
10.4.2.2 Filling equipment
The filling system for each grade of product shall be fully segregated to provide complete
protection against cross-contamination. The product grade name and colour code shall be
clearly displayed on all filling equipment, tanks, pipelines, etc. (in accordance with EI 1542).
115
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Since aviation fuel in drums or IBCs will normally be supplied directly to aircraft (and may not
be filtered during fuelling), filling equipment for Avgas or jet fuel shall include a filtration
system as used for into-plane filtration, i.e:
A filter monitor meeting EI 1583, 6th edition, or
A filter/water separator meeting EI 1581, 5th edition,
or for Avgas only, a microfilter meeting EI 1590, 2nd edition.
NOTE: filter monitors shall not be used with jet fuels containing FSII.
Filling shall be accomplished in such a way as to avoid "splash" filling, for example by use of
a stand pipe. The drum or IBC shall be bonded to the filling equipment and/or grounded
through the rollers or through a dedicated grounding strap beneath the drum or IBC being
filled.
10.4.2.3 Quality control
Provided that product is available for Release as defined in chapter 8, then no further testing
is required before filling begins.
Every empty drum or IBC (including those that are new) shall be examined internally before
filling to ensure that it is in a satisfactory condition, i.e. clean and free from rust, water,
manufacturing oils or other contaminants and, for drums, free from lining defects.
Before filling, drums shall be colour coded (in accordance with EI 1542) and, for drums and
IBCs, clearly marked with the grade of fuel, specification to which the aviation fuel was
manufactured, batch number, filling date, date of retest (if applicable), quantity, filling
location and 'leaded fuel' statement if applicable.
After filling, a Control Check shall be carried out on a representative number of drums or
IBCs. The drums or IBCs chosen shall include the first and last one filled, and the first and
last ones when there is a change in fuel batch. Drums or IBCs shall be sealed immediately
after filling with grade-marked tab seals.
All consignments of drums or IBCs released shall be covered by a Release Certificate.
10.2.2.4 Re-Use of drums or IBCs
A drum or IBC may be re-used provided that:
In the past it has only been used for the grade of aviation fuel with which it is to be refilled.
The interior is inspected, rinsed and found to be satisfactory. Only the grade of fuel with
which it is to be filled shall be used for rinsing and the fuel downgraded to non-aviation
use afterwards.
For a lined drum, the lining is free of any damage, cracking, flaking etc.
A record of inspection is maintained.
All labelling is updated.
Whenever an aviation fuel drum or IBC is to be filled with a non-aviation product, the old
grade marking and colour identification shall be completely obliterated before refilling.
10.4.2.5 Storage
Whenever possible, the use of well-ventilated buildings is recommended for storage.
Storage outside of buildings is acceptable, provided that a means of protection against
environmental exposure (precipitation, sunlight) is provided.
116
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Drums should be stored horizontally with bungs below the liquid level. The bottom drums
shall be held in position (e.g. by wedges) to prevent collapse of stacks. Where this is not
possible, drums may be stored upright (typically on pallets) provided that they are stored
under cover, or stored with drum top covers for not more than 3 months (before release).
IBCS should be stored upright (typically on pallets) and under cover.
Consignments should be stored in separate batches to facilitate periodic inspection, and
issued in rotation according to filling date, preferably first in first out.
Drums and IBCs shall be inspected for leakage after filling, initial storage and monthly
thereafter. Markings shall be checked and renewed as necessary to maintain clear identity of
the information listed in 10.4.2.3.
Batches remaining in stock twelve months after the filling date, and at six monthly intervals
thereafter, shall be sampled and the product subjected to a Periodic Test.
10.4.2.6 Sampling and testing
If a batch of packaged stock requires a Periodic Test, the number of containers to be
sampled, and the actual number of Composite Samples required for laboratory testing shall
be in accordance with Table 16.
Table 16 - Number of samples to be drawn and analysed
Number of drums/IBCs
Number of composite
samples analysed
1-3
All
1
4-64
4
2
65-125
5
3
126-216
6
3
217-343
7
3
344-512
8
3
513-729
9
3
730-1000
10
4
1001-1331
11
4
As an example, if there are 250 containers in a batch, samples will be drawn from 7
containers at random. Of these 7 samples, three random (but identifiable) samples should
be mixed to form one Composite Sample, two others mixed to make another sample, and
the remaining two to make a third sample, thus giving a total of THREE Composite Samples
to be actually analysed, as indicated in the table.
Where the results of testing are unsatisfactory, the batch shall be quarantined and the issue
investigated .
10.4.3 ISO Tank Containers
10.4.3.1 Definition
This section details the use of ISO IMO Type 1 tank containers in the capacity range of 20m3
to 50 m3. They can be used either for international transportation by sea, rail or road or for
use as temporary storage.
117
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
118
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Grade to be loaded
Jet fuels
Avgas
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
*
A: The ISO tank container shall be drained completely until no liquid remains (drainings to
be downgraded to non-aviation use). The ISO tank container shall be internally inspected
through the tank access chamber to ascertain that it is clean and dry. If sludge or dirt is
present, it shall be cleaned out.
The intention of procedure A is to allow Product Quality Inspectors to be satisfied that the
next grade can be loaded safely and delivered in an uncontaminated condition. If the ISO
tank container cannot be left in a suitable condition for filling by using procedure A, then it
shall be gas freed and thoroughly cleaned. Detergents or cleaning chemicals shall not be
used.
In circumstances where procedure A is not permitted due to automatic loading and/or
vapour recovery systems, then local procedures which meet these additional requirements
shall be developed.
B: The ISO tank container to be gas-freed and subjected to cleaning following specialist
advice. Detergents or cleaning chemicals shall not be used.
*Specialist advice is required on a case by case basis. Issues to consider include
surfactancy, water solubility, presence of trace metals, presence of additives, presence of
nitrogen-containing components, whether it is a hydrocarbon. This assessment will either
conclude that specialist cleaning is required, or that the ISO tank container is to be
rejected as not suitable.
After any cleaning is carried out, a cleaning certificate should be prepared and be available
for review prior to loading.
10.4.3.5 Quality assurance
Provided that product is available for Release as defined in chapter 8, then no further testing
is required before loading begins.
The cleaning certificate, if applicable, should be reviewed.
The ISO tank container shall be inspected to ensure that it is clean and free of water before
loading. To avoid working at height, this may be done by checking the low points and
draining any traces of water or particulates.
On completion of loading the ISO tank container shall be checked by the fuel supplier for the
presence of free water and any found shall be removed.
After filling, ISO tank containers shall be clearly marked with the grade of fuel.
119
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Before dispatch, all ISO tank container openings shall be secured and sealed by the fuel
supplier.
All ISO tank containers released shall be covered by a Release Certificate.
120
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
INTRODUCTION
Traditionally, jet fuels have been produced using so-called conventional sources, defined in
the major jet fuel specifications as refined hydrocarbons derived from crude oil, natural gas
liquid condensates, heavy oil, shale oil, and oil sands.
Recently, fuel components produced from certain non-conventional sources, so-called
synthetic components, have been approved for inclusion in the two major jet fuel
specifications. Examples of these are:
1. materials produced by the Fischer-Tropsch processing of feedstocks derived from coal,
natural gas or biomass.
2. materials derived from the hydrogenation of vegetable oils
Note: Other feedstock sources and production methods are in the process of being approved
by the OEMs for eventual inclusion in the jet fuel specifications.
Synthetic fuel components derived from biomass are sometimes referred to as biojet;
however, this is more of a marketing name that a technical term.
To manage the introduction of jet fuels from non-conventional sources, ASTM D7566
Standard specification for aviation turbine fuel containing synthesized hydrocarbons was
developed. This specification defines the requirements for aviation turbine fuel containing up
to 50% synthesized hydrocarbons, and the quality of the synthesized blending components.
ASTM D7566 contains Annexes specific to each class of synthetic materials; Annex A
defines Fischer-Tropsch hydroprocessed synthesized paraffinic kerosine (SPK) while Annex
B defines synthesized paraffinic kerosine from hydroprocessed esters and fatty acids
(HEFA). Other Annexes will be added as other classes of synthetic components are
approved by the OEMs.
The established jet fuel specifications DEF STAN 91-91 and ASTM D1655 require that
synthesised hydrocarbons from non-conventional sources be approved by the OEMs and
listed in ASTM D7566 before they can be incorporated into commercial jet fuel.
Certification of a jet fuel blend containing synthetic components to ASTM D7566 is intended
only as a step to re-Certification to D1655 or DEF STAN 91-91, before product enters a
distribution system supplying an airport. It should be noted that once the fuel has been
certified to D1655 or DEF STAN 91-91 it should never re-enter the D7566 process.
11.2
Before any synthetic component can be considered for use in jet fuel, there is a requirement
for it to be submitted to the process defined in ASTM D4054 Standard practice for
qualification and approval of new aviation turbine fuels and fuel additives. Only after
successfully completing this process, together with any additional testing required by the
OEMs, can the component be approved by the OEMs and subsequently listed in ASTM
D7566, ASTM D1655 and DEF STAN 91-91.
The first synthetic fuel components to be individually approved by the OEMs and listed in
ASTM D1655 and DEF STAN 91-91 were coal-derived, Fischer-Tropsch materials produced
by the SASOL company in South Africa. Firstly, a synthetic iso-paraffinic kerosine (IPK) was
approved as a blending component for semi-synthetic jet fuel blends. This was followed by a
fully synthetic jet fuel, a blend of up to five synthetic streams (including aromatic fractions).
121
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
These approvals were obtained before the development of the ASTM D7566 specification
and it was the experience gained during this approval process that led to the development of
that specification.
The D7655 specification restricts the quantity of synthetic component to no more than 50%
by volume of the jet fuel blend. The synthetic components in themselves are not suitable for
use as jet fuel for a number of reasons:
low density, which can affect aircraft range
lack of aromatics, which can cause elastomeric seals in the aircraft fuel system to shrink,
leading to leakage
flat distillation curves, which can have an adverse impact on combustion performance in
turbine engines
Consequently, blending with conventional jet fuel is an essential requirement to remedy
these deficiencies.
[INSERT DIAGRAM/SCHEMATIC]
ASTM D7566 covers the manufacture of aviation turbine fuel that consists of conventional
and synthetic blending components. The word manufacture normally applies to the refinery
production of aviation fuels from conventional sources (crude oil, natural gas liquid
condensates, heavy oil, shale oil and tar sands) using conventional refinery processes (see
chapter 6). In the context of ASTM D7566, the word manufacture is used to refer to the
blending of synthetic and conventional fuel components to produce a synthetic fuel blend
(also referred to as semi-synthetic jet fuel).
Only those synthetic blending components described and listed in the ASTM D7566 and its
Annexes, ASTM D1655 Annex A1 and DEF STAN 91-91 Annex D (latest issue) are
permitted. The addition of an approved antioxidant additive (see 7.3.1) to all synthesized
components is mandatory. It shall be added to the bulk product prior to movements or
operations that will significantly expose the product to air and in such a way as to ensure
122
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Synthetic fuel blends are intended as drop in fuels that are completely equivalent to
conventional jet fuels in terms of aircraft operations. Consequently, storage and ground
handling procedures required for synthetic fuel blends are identical to those for conventional
jet fuel. Nevertheless, during their introductory period where they have been used in various
flight testing exercises, synthetic fuel blends have been handled in dedicated distribution
facilities while experience is gained.
123
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
ANNEX A (informative)
GLOSSARY OF TERMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
A.1
additives
adventitious
materials
approved additives
Appearance Check
Authorised
signatory
banking system
(pipeline)
batch; batched
material
batch tank
bio component
biojet
bonding
124
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
bottom sample
bridger
calibration
cathodic protection
or cathodically
protected
Certificate of
Analysis(CoA)
Certificate of Quality
(CoQ)
certified material
chemical water
detector
clay treater
colour
comingle,
comingling
compartment
competent person
EI12/059
125
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
contaminated fuel
contamination
Control Check
copper strip
corrosion test
custody transfer
Custody transfer
point (CTP)
dedicated
differential pressure
dipstick
direct delivery
distillation
drain line sample
Existent gum
FAME
fast flush
filter/coalescer
element
filter elements
EI12/059
126
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
flash point
floating suction
free water
freezing point
hazardous area
classification
Hydrokit
incident
incidental materials
indirect delivery
inspector/surveyor
interface cut
intermediate
terminal/storage
EI12/059
127
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
inter-product
contamination
(crosscontamination)
intrinsically safe
isolation
leak
line sample
low point (designated)
lower sample
Manufacture/
manufacturer
master meter
Mesh strainer
Microfilter,
(micronic filter)
microfiltration
EI12/059
128
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
Micro-separometer
(MSEP)
middle sample
Millipore
multiple-tank
composite sample
(ships, barges, etc)
multi-product
pipeline (MPPL)
non-dedicated
non-fungible system
(pipeline)
parcel
particulates
Periodic Test
Positive segregation
POZ-T
pressure, operating
pressure, test
prover tank
qualification
rebatching
EI12/059
129
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
Recertification Test
reconciliation
Refinery Certificate
of Quality (RCQ)
(Certificate of
Quality (CoQ))
relaxation time
Release Certificate
rundown tank
running sample
segregation/
segregated
separator element
service tank
EI12/059
130
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
settling time
smoke point
soak testing
static dissipater
additive (SDA)
static electricity
static storage/
static stock
storage installation
sulphur, total;
total sulphur
sump
surfactants (surface
active-agents)
tested material
thermal stability test
EI12/059
131
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
thief pump
traceability
transmix
ullage
unbatched
uncertified material
upper sample
Visi-jar
Visual Check
waste fuel
water defence
system
water dip
EI12/059
132
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
A.2
m
B5
B15
B100
CoA
CoQ
CRM
CTP
DP
DPK
DRA
EI
FAME
FSII
FWS
gpm
HEFA
HM
IBC
ISGOTT
JFTOT
kPa
LIA
LIMS
MBG
MoC
mg
mm
MPPL
MSEP
MTC
OEM
P&ID
ppm
pS/m
RC
RCQ
RTC
RDE/A/xxx
SDA
SPK
SQC
SWD
TRV
USG
USQ
micrometre
Biodiesel fuel containing 5 % FAME
Biodiesel fuel containing 15 % FAME
Pure FAME
Certificate of Analysis
Certificate of Quality (synonymous with RCQ)
Certified Reference Material
Custody Transfer Point
Differential Pressure
Dual purpose kerosine
Drag Reducing Additive
Energy Institute
Fatty Acid Methyl Ester
Fuel system icing inhibitor
Filter/water separator
U.S. gallons per minute
Hydroprocessed esters and fatty acids
Hydrocarbon Management (series of publications from the EI)
Intermediate Bulk Container (usually 1 m3)
International Safety Guide for Oil Tankers and Terminals
Jet Fuel Thermal Oxidation Test
kilopascal
Lubricity Improving Additive
Laboratory Information Management System
Microbiological growth
Management of Change
milligram
millimetre
Multi-product Pipeline
Micro-separometer
Multiple Tank Composite
Original Equipment Manufacturer
Piping and Instrumentation Diagram
parts per million; equates to mg/kg
picosiemens per metre
Release Certificate
Refinery Certificate Of Quality
Recertification Test Certificate
Numbering system used by UK MoD for identifying approved fuel
additives
Static Dissipater Additive
Synthetic Paraffinic Kerosine
Statistical Quality Control
Shell Water Detector
Thermal Relief Valve
US gallon
US quart
133
EI12/059
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
ANNEX B (normative)
AUTHORISED SIGNATORIES
B.1
DEFINITION
An authorised signatory is an individual who has been granted the written authority to sign
one or more classes of document on behalf of a corporation, company or other institutional
collective such as a partnership.
There is no such thing as an automatic right to sign documents on behalf of an organisation.
It may be that within the corporate structure, rights are granted to individuals as part of a job
description by law if the person is, for instance, the designated safety manager, but it should
be understood that the right to sign documents on behalf of a legal body is something that
has to be well controlled, and forms a fundamental part of corporate security, management
and liability control.
Signatories may come by their authorisations in a number of ways.
a) Pre-qualification may be necessary such as membership of a professional body (e.g.
licensed engineers, chemists, etc.). Whilst such prequalification may authorise the
person to sign certain documents in a general sense, there shall also be a written record
of such empowerment by the directors of the Corporation or through line management to
directors.
b) Authorisation may be granted on the basis of qualification, experience or skill level.
Typically this is the case with engineering and laboratory staff. These authorisations are
specific and are best kept time-bound and subject to renewal.
c) Authorisation may also be granted for specific limited purposes in response to
circumstance, for instance if the laboratory manager is unavailable due to vacation or
other commitments, a deputy may be authorised to sign various paperwork as the
alternate. It is important that such temporary or limited authorisations are fully
documented, strictly time and scope bound, and reviewed regularly.
B.2
AUTHORISATION PROCESS
The authorisation process shall be fully documented, including a simple registry of those
holding the signatory authority, any time- and scope limits, the date of authorisation, the
name(s) of those granting the authorisation, a counter signatory confirming the authorisation
and at least one specimen signature.
The registry is to be secure and shall be kept available for audit by a qualified custodian of
records.
Signatory records shall be maintained for 7 years after the signatory rights of an individual
expire.
Before a signatory is confirmed, a due diligence process, commensurate with the level of
authority, responsibility and risk placed on the corporation by the signature being affixed,
shall be carried out. The monetary, safety, commercial and legal risks shall be reviewed and
the process raised to an appropriate level of corporate management before any candidate is
authorised. The usual mechanism by which this is recorded is a series of countersignatures.
134
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
When setting up any authorisation scheme the following elements shall be addressed
a) The establishment of a registry of authorised signatories
b) The appointment of a custodian of records
c) The documentation of the minimum qualifications, training experience, etc. for candidacy
for authorisation
d) The appointment and registration of those at each level of the process who may confirm
a candidates qualifications and suitability
e) Senior management level approval of the scheme as a whole
f) Documentation of the workflow within the process
g) A timeline for the review of the scheme by an appropriate level of management
B.3
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
i) Rejected
ii) Trainee
iii) Application received pending review
iv) Authorised signatory (valid for 24 months from the time of acceptance)
f) The registry shall be subject to periodic corporate QA audit.
g) The registry and the registration process shall be reviewed with senior management
periodically.
136
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
ANNEX C (normative)
EQUIPMENT/INSTALLATION PRECONDITIONING PRIOR TO USE WITH
AVIATION FUEL
C.1
Pre-conditioning shall be carried out to ensure that fuel wetted surfaces of new and/or
refurbished equipment (after construction work and repairs) and facilities are suitable for use
with aviation fuel. This involves flushing (lined and unlined) to ensure the removal of welding
flux, valve grease, corrosion inhibitor fluids or other general debris, and for internally lined
systems, soak testing to ensure that there are no potential contaminants present in the form
of solvents from the coating/lining.
Soak testing is not necessary for unlined systems (aluminium, mild or stainless steel) where
commissioning and flushing procedures have been effective.
A soak test consists of filling the system being commissioned with the appropriate fuel grade
and leaving it to stand for a soak period. A retention sample of the fuel used is taken before
filling as a control. At the end of the soak period, fuel samples are taken from the system
being commissioned and submitted for laboratory testing. Test results are compared with the
fuel specification limits and with the original RCQ, CoA or RTC to look for differences and to
establish whether the system is suitable for use. If there is a concern that the test certificate
results are not representative of the fuel used for the soak test due to line content etc, it is
recommended that the retention (pre-soak) sample is analysed in parallel with the post-soak
sample.
C.2
APPLICATION
137
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Prior to use the tanks should be cleaned with a steam or hot water wash to remove any
residual welding fluxes, valve greases, corrosion inhibitor fluids etc. During this cleaning the
drain valves shall be left open to aid the removal of any contaminants. Following cleaning,
and before the first aviation fuel grade fuel is carried, an effective flushing procedure shall be
completed using the grade intended for service. The flushing quantity should be
downgraded.
All lined road and rail tank cars, regardless of the tank shell construction material, shall be
soak tested. The requirement to soak test new lined road tankers and rail tank cars can be
fulfilled by the manufacturer in accordance with this annex prior to delivery. However, if the
condition of the road tankers and rail tank cars upon initial inspection indicates possible
contamination, then a soak test shall be carried out before the unit is placed into service.
C.2.3 New/refurbished coastal/inland waterway barges and ocean vessels
Coastal/inland waterway barges and ocean vessels have pipework and pumping
configurations that may be difficult to adequately soak test and pipework sampling may not
identify contamination. While soak testing in accordance with this annex is typically
impractical for these types of vessels, new and refurbished vessels require pre-conditioning
prior to their first use for aviation fuel service.
As a minimum, all new or refurbished vessels shall be either soak tested in accordance with
this annex, or shall have transported white oil cargoes to a minimum of 80% of the cargo
tank capacity for a minimum fuel residence time of six days (50 % longer than minimum
required for soak testing) before carrying aviation fuel. When transporting aviation fuel for
the first time:
the ship tank inspection report shall be reviewed;
there shall be first foot testing of every compartment loaded;
A full CoA testing of a multiple tank composite sample (MTC) shall be carried out after
loading, and
A Recertification test of a multiple tank composite sample (MTC) shall be carried out
before discharge.
C.2.4 Existing fixed systems and equipment
Soak testing shall be conducted following major repair work or major modifications to
existing lined systems.
Major repair or modifications are typically defined as new lining material applied to more than
5% of the tanks coated surface area or surface area of existing piping. However following a
risk assessment by a competent person, different criteria may be applicable. Each entity
(tank or pipework) shall be treated as a separate element for the purposes of defining the
percentage area. After minor spot repairs to internal lining, re-commissioning involves
confirmation of acceptable hardness of the repaired lining area without soak testing.
Replacement or repaired equipment (pumps, filter vessels, valves etc.) do not generally
require soak testing prior to use because of the small internal fuel-wetted surface areas
compared with the total system. However, some equipment (e.g. fuel pumps) may be stored
and shipped with preservative oil or lined with a rust inhibitor to prevent corrosion. Small
amounts of these materials can result in the contamination of large volumes of fuel.
Confirmation that no undesirable materials are present on the internal surfaces, which come
in contact with the fuel, shall be obtained from the equipment supplier or repairing service
before installation.
138
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
SOAK QUANTITIES
The general principle is to maximize contact of the fuel with the surface area of the lined
system under test. In most cases this means filling the system with a large quantity of fuel.
C.4.1 Fully lined storage tanks
Filling fully lined storage tanks to the Normal Fill Level is recommended for soak testing.
However, as a minimum, there shall be sufficient fuel to cover the floating or fixed suction
and the receipt nozzle to allow for circulation through the piping system to flush out any
contaminants without pump cavitation.
C.4.2 Partially lined storage tanks
There shall be sufficient fuel to cover the floating or fixed suction and the receipt nozzle to
allow for circulation through the piping system to flush out any contaminants without pump
cavitation.
139
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Local circumstances may demand more (or less) stringent procedures, which should be
determined by a competent person, in line with the principles set out in this annex.
C.4.3 Pipelines
Supply Lines shall be filled completely.
C.4.4 Road tankers and rail tank cars
It is recommended that lined road tankers and rail tank cars are filled completely. However,
as a minimum, the level shall be sufficient to cover the inlet and outlet valves/suction.
C.4.5 Coastal/inland waterway barges and ocean vessels
Filling fully lined compartments to their Normal Fill Level is recommended. However, as a
minimum, there shall be sufficient fuel to cover the first foot. Note: The smaller the fuel
volume used the more stringent the soak test.
C.5
At the end of the soak period representative samples shall be obtained from appropriate
locations as outlined in C.5.1 and submitted for laboratory testing.
A minimum of 2 litres (2 USQ) is required for jet fuel or a minimum of 4 litres (1 USG) for
Avgas.
C.5.1 Sampling
C.5.1.1 General
In all cases it is important to ensure that the sampling point is clean and flushed prior to
taking the sample. Any accumulated solid matter (particulate) and/or free water should be
removed until the fuel is clear and bright. This is very important because sampling lines on
tanks are sometimes inadvertently overlooked during commissioning. Only approved sample
containers shall be used and the container shall be flushed and rinsed thoroughly with the
product to be sampled and allowed to drain before use.
C.5.1.2 Storage tanks
A Bottom Sample from the low point shall be used for horizontal and vertical tanks. A sample
taken from this location represents the most severe case as the fuel is in close contact with
the lining and any heavy contaminants are likely to be collected during sampling.
C.5.1.3 Pipework
Small piping configurations that can be circulated into a tank may be tested as part of the
tank soak test and not sampled/tested separately.
Larger supply piping networks shall have samples taken from each major section (e.g.
receipt & delivery lines) for separate testing. Samples should be taken from more than one
point and combined into a single composite sample.
C.5.1.4 Road Tankers and Rail Tank Cars.
A sample shall be taken from each compartment, preferably from the low point or outlet of
the tank.
C.5.2 Laboratory Testing
A selection of laboratory tests is carried out on the representative sample to determine the
quality of the fuel following the soak test. The fuel properties tested shall be compared with
the specification limits for the grade of fuel used and with the pre-soak test results for the
fuel used (either from the original certification or from testing a pre-soak sample). A
140
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
successful result requires that all tested properties are within the specification limits and
within the tolerance limits established for recertification. If any test result does not fully
comply with the applicable specification or falls outside the allowable variances, the product
shall be re-sampled and re-tested. If the fuel still fails to comply, it shall be removed and
downgraded to non-aviation use, the system re-filled with on-specification fuel and the soak
test repeated.
The required laboratory tests are shown in Table C.1.
Table C.1 Required laboratory tests
Test Method
ASTM
IP
Appearance
X
X
D4176
Existent Gum
X
X
D381
540
Water Reaction
X
D1094
289
MSEP
X
D3948
Conductivity
X
D2624
274
Saybolt Colour
X
D156
Thermal Stability *
X
D3241
323
Distillation **
X
X
D86
123
Flash Point
X
D56
170
* It is recommended that the Thermal Stability of the fuel used for Soak Testing has a
breakpoint of at least 275 deg C to allow for test precision
** Distillation by Simulated Distillation (ie IP406/ASTM D2887) may be used for further
investigation as it is more sensitive to residues/contamination
Jet Fuels
C.6
Avgas
SUMMARY
Table C.2 and accompanying notes provide a summary of the soak test requirements for
storage tanks, piping, ancillary equipment, vehicles and inland waterway/coastal barges/
marine vessels.
141
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Duration
Fuel
Volume
Fully Lined
Partially Lined
4-7 days
(Note 1)
4-7 days
Ancillary
Equipment
(Pumps,
valves,
meters filter
vessels, etc)
4-7 days
Enough product
to cover the
floating or fixed
(Note 2)
Sufficient to fill suction & the
Fill lines
to Normal fill receipt nozzle
completely
level
to allow
circulation of
product without
pump cavitation
Road
tankers &
rail tank cars
(fully lined).
Min 24 hours
Inland
waterway/co
astal barges,
marine
vessels (fully
lined)
4-7 days
Sufficient to
fill to Normal
fill level
See
comments in
text
Jet Fuel: Appearance, Existent Gum, MSEP, Conductivity, Saybolt Colour, thermal
Laboratory stability, Distillation & Flash Point
Testing
Avgas: Appearance, Existent Gum, Water Reaction & Distillation
Sample
Volume
Note 1: Applies to lining material meeting EI 1541 and covered by a 10 year joint material and
applications warranty from the manufacturer.
Note 2: Newly installed ancillary equipment (e.g. pumps, filter vessels, valves, control valves,
meters, sense tubing, water drain lines, etc.) should be soak-tested during the system soak test.
142
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
ANNEX D (normative)
EXAMPLE CERTIFICATES
D.1 Example form for Avgas recertification
Date:
Tank No:
Batch No:
Grade
Specification *ASTM D910
*DEF STAN 91-90
Property
Test
method
Spec
limits
Previous
Recert
(Heel)
New 1
RCQ/
CoA
New 2
RCQ/
CoA
New 3
RCQ/
CoA
Appearance
Lean Knock Rating
Tel Content, gPb/1
3
Density at 15 C, kg/m
Upper
Middle
Lower
Distillation
D2700
IP228
0.05
D1298
D86
10 % evaporated at C
40 % evaporated at C
50 % evaporated at C
90 % evaporated at C
End Point, C
Recovery, % vol
Loss, % vol
D323
4.5
Corrosion, Cu strip
IP154
Spec
limit
D381
Date
Where minimum/maximum limits are given, the Acceptable Difference values do not apply to
results below minimum or above maximum.
* Test methods in accordance with relevant specification.
143
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Property
Test
method*
Appearance
Spec
limits
Previous
Recert
(Heel)
New 1
RCQ/
CoA
New 2
RCQ/
CoA
New 3
RCQ/
CoA
C&B
Saybolt Colour
D156
Distillation
D86
Report
10 % evaporated at C
205 max
50 % evaporated at C
Report
90 % evaporated at C
Report
300 max
Residue, % vol
1.5
Loss, % vol
1.5
38 min
End Point, C
Flash Point, C
IP170
3
Density at 15 C, kg/m
Upper
Middle
Lower
D1298 775/840
3
3
3
3
Freezing Point, C
Corrosion, Cu strip
D130
1 max
Spec
limit
IP540
7.0 max
Spec
limit
Microseparometer (MSEP)
rating
D3948
70 min
Electrical conductivity,
pS/m at C
D2624
50 min
600 max
IP585
IP590
5.0 max
Spec
limit
Where minimum/maximum limits are given, the Acceptable Difference values do not apply to results below minimum
or above maximum.
* Test methods in accordance with relevant specification.
** FAME test limit may be revised in 2013.
144
Date
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
D.3 Example release certificate for road or rail tank cars for Jet A-1
145
EI12/059
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
D.4 Example release certificate for road or rail tank cars for avgas
146
EI12/059
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
D.5 Example release certificate for pipelines, ocean tankers, coastal/inland waterway
vessels
147
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
D.6 Example form for recording condition of tank interior fittings and coatings
Number
Terminal/Airport
1.
TANK DATA
Capacity
Tank Number
Vertical
Horizontal
Above Ground
m3/USG
Other
Semi-Buried
Buried
Date Constructed
Leaded/Unleaded
Extent of Lining
Date of Lining
Type of Repair
2. TYPE OF INSPECTION
By Entry
Without Entry
Dated
3. CLEANING METHOD
CONDITION
4. INSPECTION OF FITTINGS
Contents Gauge
Temperature Gauge
Level Alarms
Floating Suction/Swivels/Cables
Water Drain Facilities
Valves: Inlet
Outlet
P&V
Leak Detection System
Under-floor Valves
Other Fittings (Specify)
Quantity of Water
Comments
148
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
(b) Walls
(d) Roof
8. DIAGRAM
Horizontal Section
10. RECOMMENDATIONS
- The Tank is considered to be clean and satisfactory for the storage of aviation fuel
- The following actions should be completed before the Tank can be considered suitable for the
storage of aviation fuel:
Signed
Inspector
149
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
ANNEX E (normative)
DATA INTEGRITY MANAGEMENT FLOW
CHARTS
E.1 Introduction
This annex has been prepared to assist Laboratories and affected departments (e.g. Oil
Movements) understand and implement a process for releasing product (issuing certification
documents) based on analytical data.
It also provides additional information on interpretation of test results to aid understanding
the criteria for determining when product is on or off specification.
It is applicable to testing carried out in a single laboratory only; not to data supplied by
multiple laboratories.
The flow charts in Figures E.1 and E.2 outline the process to be used when interpreting
analytical data for product release decision-making.
E.2 Criteria for rejecting laboratory test data or for re-sampling
Data can only be rejected if there are justifiable reasons to do so. These include:
statistical reasons,
clear errors with the analysis that can be identified,
proof that the sample was not representative, or
concerns about the analytical performance of a particular laboratory or laboratories.
Re-sampling should only be carried out if there are valid reasons to suspect the integrity of
the sample received. These include:
incorrect sampling point used,
unsuitable sample container,
atypical product appearance,
unacceptable differences between test results for samples of the same material taken
from different sources, (e.g. tank upper, middle, lower), or
test results not consistent with plant process conditions or previous results on the same
material.
150
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Figure E.1 Data interpretation decision process for test methods with stated precision
151
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Figure E.2 Data interpretation decision process for test methods with no stated precision (e.g. thermal stability, copper strip etc)
152
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
ANNEX F (informative)
SALT DRYERS AND BULK WATER REMOVAL
AT REFINERIES
F.1 Salt Dryers
Salt dryers are used to remove water from fuel as an integral step in certain refinery
processes. A salt dryer comprises a bed of granular rock salt, NaCl, (although calcium
chloride or a mixture of the two is sometimes used) emplaced in a vessel. Its function is to
remove free water entrained in a hydrocarbon product as well as small amounts of dissolved
water. It is installed upstream of a product clay filter to protect the clay from premature failure
due to free water attack on the crystalline clay structure.
Salt dryers may be units measuring 10m or more in height. Salt consumption depends on
many factors but typically averages approximately 60 kg per 1000 m3 (20 pounds per 1000
barrels) of hydrocarbon product treated when operated at 38C (100F). It is essential that
the bed be monitored regularly and replenished before it is 50 % consumed.
Although the use of salt as a drying medium is effective, there are inherent risks with its use.
Refineries with wet treating units are particularly at a risk of delivering fuel containing
dissolved salt in water to airports, which can then precipitate out, or carry through into
hydrants and degrade the performance of downstream filtration.
There have been well-documented examples of salt carry-over onto aircraft with serious
consequences for aircraft fuel system performance (refer to IATA Guidelines for sodium
chloride contamination troubleshooting and decontamination of airframe and engine fuel
systems, 2nd edition, February 1998).
A salt drier is normally followed by a clay treater (refer Annex G), which should prevent any
salt carry-over from progressing into the finished jet fuel. However this depends entirely on
the correct operation and maintenance of both salt drier and clay treater. To ensure that only
on-specification jet fuel is produced in a refinery, it is essential that such processing units are
operated within the parameters set by the manufacturer(s) for those units. This is particularly
important with wet treating processes and the unit manufacturer will provide operating
parameters specific to the unit(s) installed.
There is currently no requirement in the jet fuel specification to test for salt; however
refineries shall have systems in place to ensure that no salt is carried over into finished jet
fuel, e.g. monitoring of salt drier operation, periodic testing of fuel samples, etc.
F.2 Handling bulk water at refineries (Industrial Coalescers)
It is common practice for refineries to use industrial coalescers for the removal of bulk free
water from aviation fuel. Typical designs include fibrous bed coalescers, sand coalescers,
and electrostatic coalescers.
F.2.1 Fibrous bed coalescers (e.g. dehydrators, hay packs, etc.)
These units typically utilize polypropylene felt or glass wool, although other media, such as
excelsior, steel wool or fibreglass wafers are also used. Fibre, of c. 50 m diameter, is used
to produce mats approximately 12 mm (0,5 in.) thick. These mats are layered to form a bed
about 60 cm (2 ft.) thick. A key advantage of the fibrous bed coalescer is its long service life
(typically 1-2 years). However, the media can be sensitive to contaminants and prone to
plugging (depending upon media density). In some vessel designs, the upstream mats or
wafers can be replaced to remove contaminants and extend the service life of the coalescer.
153
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Over the last decade or so, the use of a combination of hydrophobic and hydrophilic fibrous
materials has aided the removal of free water to very low levels (e.g., <20 ppm).
F.2.2 Sand coalescers
These units typically utilize 20-40 mesh, filter sand grade material which is washed, hard,
naturally occurring, and high in silica content (e.g., Ottawa sand). In this application, very
large beds (e.g. 3 m (10 ft.) diameter X 15 m (50 ft.) long) are required to provide the
required water removal capacity. Effluent typically exits the sand coalescer with less than
100 ppm free water. Key advantages of sand coalescers are their relatively low cost and
extremely long life (typically 2-4 years). Compared with fibrous bed coalescers, sand
coalescers are much less sensitive to contaminants in fuel. However, they are unable to
coalesce fine water droplets, have relatively large vessel sizes, and there is difficulty in
changing the sand. Designs of sand coalescers have evolved to minimize carryover of
separated water in the effluent.
F.2.3 Electrostatic coalescers
These units are often found at refineries as part of caustic and water washing processes.
They utilize high voltage (dc) electrodes to polarize and thereby aid coalescence of fine
water droplets, which would otherwise not settle under gravity, as they flow past the
electrodes.
F.2.4 Operation
Irrespective of the type of coalescer(s) used at a refinery, their operation should be in
accordance with manufacturers recommendations. They should be monitored to ensure that
their maximum rated flow is not exceeded and that any free water in effluent is at expected
levels. A means of establishing suitable service-life/change-out intervals should also be
implemented.
Consideration should also be given to the requirements for media changes, and the potential
impact of these on refinery operations.
154
EI12/059
ANN
NEX G (inform
mative
e)
CLA
AY TRE
EATER
RS
G.1
INTRODUC
CTION
155
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
Despite its large surface area, clay has a finite capacity to adsorb polar species. There is a
threshold above which the clay will not be able to remove the polar species: this is the
service life, or capacity, of the clay.
G.1.3 How is clay treatment applied?
This annex discusses the use of clay treatment in two distinct areas, a) as a component of a
refinery manufacturing process and b) in downstream distribution systems.
Clay treaters in downstream distribution systems are commonly vessels filled with
replaceable cartridges of clay. Clay cartridges are available as either bags or canisters for
installation in the large vessels. Compared with canisters, the bags are typically less
expensive, and contain more clay, but can be difficult to install and remove.
Clay treaters in refineries may utilise bulk clay.
The clay used in the bags and canisters is typically low volatile matter (LVM), 50 - 90 mesh,
attapulgite clay mined in Attapulgus, Georgia, USA. (Note coarser 30-60 mesh can also be
supplied). LVM clay has better water tolerance and therefore less tendency to cake or
agglomerate, compared with regular volatile matter (RVM) clay (used primarily in bulk units).
Initial differential pressure is typically low across a clay treater containing fresh clay
(approximately 5 psi). Use of clay with a larger mesh number (smaller clay particles and
more compact structure) causes higher initial and accumulated differential pressure
throughout its service life, however, it can provide substantially more capacity.
Aviation fuel flow through cartridge-type clay treatment units is typically 19 - 26 l/min (5 - 7
gpm) per 178 mm x 457 mm (7 in. x 18 in.) element. Lower fuel flow rates result in longer
contact times, which increases the effectiveness of clay treatment.
G.2
G.2.1 Purpose
Independent of the primary treating process used (e.g. hydroprocessing, caustic wash,
Merox), clay treating has significant benefits for jet fuel product quality. Refiners have
historically used clay treating as a final polish for jet fuel streams before they enter product
tankage. Effective clay treatment of jet fuel provides the following protection:
It guards against process upsets.
It removes undesirable trace materials, such as naphthenates originating from
processing or naturally occurring in the crude.
It helps ensure that product delivered into the downstream distribution system is of
suitable quality.
Clay acts as a safeguard for treatable product quality issues, especially when unit upsets or
feed fluctuations occur. However, it is important to appreciate that clay has limited capacity
under such stressed conditions. Severity and duration of process upsets determine the
impact on the clay, but the service life of clay will decrease if process upsets are long,
severe, or frequent. Therefore it is critical that clay treaters are not relied upon to
compensate for poor process control.
Clay treating is an essential part of the process to maintain product quality as jet fuel
feedstocks and component streams become more challenging.
G.2.2 Design
The size of a clay treatment vessel is dependent on the velocity of fuel flow through the
clay (bed velocity) and the residence time of the fuel in the clay. Manufacturers of the
156
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
units will provide recommendations, which for bulk clay units, typically involve a
maximum bed velocity of around 5,0 gpm/ft2 and a residence time of c.30 minutes. The
residence time needs to be sufficient to enable trace materials to be adsorbed onto the
clay.
Consideration should be given to the number of clay treaters necessary to maintain
operational flexibility during clay change-out in a vessel.
A vessel should ideally have a length to diameter ratio of at least 2.5 to facilitate
maintenance.
Vessels should be constructed of stainless steel, aluminium or carbon steel.
The clay treater inlet distributor (for the fuel) should be designed to ensure the maximum
use of the clay bed, avoiding preferential flow. Good distribution helps utilise the clay to
its maximum capacity. Slotted cylindrical distributors or perforated pipe ring or antennae
configurations are available. Note: Designs should ensure that clay loading is not
impeded.
Outlet collectors should incorporate a baffle, shield mechanism or mesh screen to help
protect against clay particulate being carried downstream of the clay treater.
Support grids (sometimes referred to as Johnson screens) within the vessel should be
well secured to make sure they do not move during loading or operation.
A means of ensuring relief in the event of a pressure surge should be incorporated.
One or more work platforms, including access steps and handrails, shall be provided to
facilitate clay loading and unloading, and to permit vessel inspection and maintenance.
Platforms shall not be welded or physically attached to the vessel.
157
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
predicted and varies widely for different feedstocks, ranging typically from 10,000 to 50,000
bbl/ton (1600 to 8000 m3/ton).
Monitoring the water content (Karl Fischer) of the clay treater feed should be considered to
protect the clay from water contamination.
In addition to operational data (temperatures, pressures, and flowrates), laboratory data from
fuel samples taken upstream and downstream of the clay treater are required for effective
clay treater performance monitoring, and to assess the need for clay changeout (at the end
of its service life). The most important test is ASTM D3948 Microseparometer (MSEP).
Comparing the MSEP values obtained from samples upstream and downstream of the
treater is an effective way to monitor the clay's ability to adsorb trace materials. If clay has
lost the ability to routinely improve MSEP values, clay changeout is necessary.
It is important that laboratory data are obtained routinely. This enables trend monitoring over
time, and also facilitates troubleshooting.
Note: Other laboratory tests are required to monitor the effectiveness of refining processes
(see 6.4.5 for further information). It is important that these measurements are obtained from
samples taken upstream of clay treatment, to avoid clay treatment masking a potential
problem.
G.2.6 Troubleshooting
The following are the most frequently experienced issues relating to clay treater operation.
Other issues (that may be detected downstream of clay treatment) typically result from
process upsets, a change in refining processes or a feed change. See 6.4.5.1 for refining
troubleshooting tips.
MSEP is low downstream of clay treatment, or MSEP is not improved by clay treatment
This is the most common product quality issue in jet fuel refining. Low MSEP values
downstream of clay treatment indicate that the ability of clay to adsorb trace materials has
been exhausted (the service life of the clay has been exceeded). The date of the last clay
changeout should be investigated.
NOTE: MSEP values upstream of clay treatment should also be reviewed to investigate
whether there is an issue with refining processes.
Thermal stability failure on fuel taken downstream of clay treatment
This is the second most common product quality issue with jet fuel. Although clay does not
consistently improve thermal stability, it should be capable of removing occasional trace
materials that contribute to thermal stability failures. Thermal stability failures downstream of
clay treatment are indicative of a refining process issue and exhausted clay.
High levels of particulates in the product
High particulate concentrations downstream of a clay treater are usually caused by free
water contamination upstream of the clay. Once a clay treater is contaminated with water the
clay cakes and can carry over into the fuel. If particulate levels are an issue in the product,
check the following:
a) Clay lifetime (change if necessary)
b) MSEP
c) Clay treater pressure differential
d) Particulates in the feed to the clay treater
e) Water (by Karl Fischer) in the feed to and product from the clay treater
f) Dryer operation
158
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
G.3
EI12/059
G.3.1 Purpose
Clay treaters can be used at terminals and airports to remove trace materials that can inhibit
water removal (by disarming filter/water separators). Clay treaters used in pipelines,
terminals, and airports are generally cartridge style units.
G.3.2 Design
Clay treatment vessels should be correctly sized for their intended application, in
accordance with manufacturers recommendations.
Consideration should be given to the number of clay treaters necessary to maintain
operational flexibility during clay change-out in a vessel.
A vessel should ideally have a length to diameter ratio of at least 2.5 to facilitate
maintenance.
All metal parts in contact with the fuel shall be free of vanadium, zinc, cadmium, copper
and their alloys. Vessels may be constructed of stainless steel, aluminium or carbon
steel.
A means of ensuring relief in the event of a pressure surge should be incorporated.
One or more work platforms, including access steps and handrails, shall be provided to
facilitate clay loading and unloading, and to permit vessel inspection and maintenance.
Platforms shall not be welded or physically attached to the vessel.
In addition to removing trace materials, clay treatment also removes additives such as
static dissipator (SDA) and lubricity improver additives, which may be required in the
fuel by specification or customer agreement. Therefore, clay treatment vessels should
be located upstream of any additive injection points, otherwise re-dosing may be
necessary.
G.3.3 Correct usage of clay treatment in distribution systems
It is essential that clay cartridges are installed properly, to ensure fuel cannot bypass the
clay.
Care is needed to ensure that the clay bags or canisters cannot suffer structural failure,
releasing clay into the aviation fuel stream. In some locations, it may be advisable to install a
microfilter immediately downstream of the clay treatment vessel to intercept any migrating
clay.
The effectiveness of clay treatment should be regularly monitored. This is best done by
making comparative measurements of fuel properties that relate to the presence of surfaceactive materials upstream and downstream of the clay treater:
1. Conductivity can be used if the upstream fuel value is significant (>25 pS/m);
downstream conductivity should be lower than the upstream value.
2. Water Separability: if measured by MSEP (ASTM D3948), the downstream value should
be higher (better separability) than that for the upstream fuel. For further information
refer to API 1595 (13.3 in first edition)
3. The differential pressure reading should be no more than 15 psi at rated flow (for
cartridge units), to confirm that bed plugging (blocking of the porous structure) has not
occurred.
If any of the conditions in 1-3 above are not met, then the clay bed is probably exhausted
and should be changed. Furthermore, one or more of the following observations from a
filter/water separator located downstream of a clay treater can also indicate that the clay bed
is exhausted:
Disarmed filter/coalescer (surfactants not being removed)
Significant volume of water drains (wet system/clay)
159
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
To maximise the life of clay cartridges, care should be taken to minimise exposure to water
and rust or other particulate matter. Water is attracted to the clay. Over time the water can
disarm the clay and potentially flush adsorbed surfactants from the clay into the aviation fuel
stream. Excessive water contact can also cause flow channelling and clay dispersion,
resulting in high particulate content in the downstream aviation fuel. If there is any chance of
high water content in the fuel to be clay treated, it is recommended that coarse water
separators or hay-packs should be used upstream of the clay treater.
Particulate matter can disarm the clay by occluding adsorption sites on the surface of, and
within, the clay structure. Exposure to rust or particulate matter also plugs the clay bed
increasing the differential pressure. If there is any chance of high particulate matter content
in the fuel to be clay treated, it is recommended that a microfilter should be installed
upstream of the clay treater.
160
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
ANNEX H (informative)
JET FUEL CONDUCTIVITY
H.1
PURPOSE
The purpose of this annex (the content of which was formerly published as JIG Bulletin 25) is
to provide information on jet fuel conductivity variations that can occur in the distribution
system, the impact of the additive Stadis 450 on water separation characteristics as
determined by the ASTM D3948 test (MSEP), and to offer suggestions on the optimum
location and method of addition of the additive.
H.2
Typically, undoped jet fuel has conductivity in the range 0 to 5 pS/m. The rationale for
increasing the conductivity by the addition of Static Dissipater Additive (SDA) is to speed up
the rate at which static charge can dissipate, thereby reducing the time for which a static
hazard might exist. The only SDA recognised by DEF STAN 91-91 is Stadis 450 produced
by Innospec1.
The presence of SDA does not prevent the generation of static charge; bonding is essential
when transferring jet fuel during activities such as sampling, loading or fuelling aircraft.
The requirement for conductivity (50-600 pS/m at the ambient temperature of aircraft
fuelling) in the Joint Fuelling Systems Check List comes from DEF STAN 91-91, but it is
acknowledged that the SDA may be injected downstream of the point of manufacture for
practical reasons. The ASTM D1655 specification for Jet A-1 has no mandatory conductivity
requirement; the use of SDA is optional.
It is a well-known phenomenon for conductivity to decrease as fuel moves through the
supply chain and this can lead to the need for re-doping between the refinery and the airport
fuelling operation. The DEF STAN 91-91 and ASTM D1655 specifications acknowledge this
by applying a 3 mg/L max limit for Stadis 450 on initial doping and a cumulative limit of 5
mg/L. DEF STAN 91-91 also recognizes that, because of losses in the distribution system,
the refinery may not be the best place to inject Stadis 450.
According to DEF STAN 91-91 (and hence also the Joint Fuelling Systems (AFQRJOS)
Check List), the conductivity limits need only be met at the point of aircraft fuelling at ambient
temperature. In the supply chain, it is permitted to certify that product meets the
requirements of the specification for all properties except conductivity.
At the skin of the aircraft, if the conductivity does not meet the minimum requirement cited
here, a temporary lower limit of 25 pS/m can be adopted (subject to user notification
requirements) to avoid supply disruption, provided that at the SDA injection point, the
conductivity at ambient temperature was over 50 pS/m. This is known as the Low
Conductivity Protocol and full details can be found in DEF STAN 91-91 (latest edition).
Note: The specification requirement for conductivity is at bulk liquid temperature. Laboratory
measurements are seldom at the same temperature as the bulk liquid, and hence may be
misleading. Where laboratory testing of samples for conductivity shows non-conforming
results, these shall be confirmed by in-situ measurement of the bulk liquid conductivity.
1
Other SDAs are currently being progressed through the industry approval process.
161
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
H.3
EI12/059
H.4.1 Stadis 450 may be injected into Jet A-1 at refineries. The advantages of this are that
refineries are often well equipped to inject additives and for some supply chains no further
dosing is required. However, this is not necessarily best practice because transport modes
from the refinery (such as multi-product vessels and pipelines) can cause significant and
unpredictable loss of conductivity. It is also worth noting that there is no requirement for a
defined conductivity level when handling jet fuel on multi-product ships or pipelines.
H.4.2 Initial injection of Stadis 450 should be done as close as possible to the airport,
preferably into storage directly upstream of a dedicated supply route to the airport. Injection
at the airport itself is an option, but only where the installation has capacity to deal with
problems such as over-dosing or unresponsive jet fuel. Also, the options for blending and
problem mitigation are usually limited at airports. Consequently, injection of Stadis 450 at
airports should be limited to fine-tuning conductivity levels where necessary to meet the
specification limits.
H.4.3 The optimum point for additive injection within a storage facility depends on the
specific local circumstances, and the principles outlined in H.4.3.1 H.4.3.2 are provided for
guidance.
H.4.3.1 Given that Stadis 450 is a surfactant and can increase dirt and water pick-up, it is
best to delay injection until after dirt and water removal. Injection during a receipt from a
multi-product tanker or pipeline into storage only makes sense if there is a high level of
confidence that the incoming product is consistently free from dirt and water. Unless this is
the case, it is better to wait until after the product has been settled and drained before
162
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
injection. Suitable injection schemes would be inline dosing during transfer from receipt to
delivery tanks or by tank recirculation.
H.4.3.2 Injection of Stadis 450 during delivery of product from a storage facility by dedicated
pipeline to an airport is not recommended. This is because airport depots are unlikely to
have the capacity to deal with problems such as overdosed or unresponsive jet fuel
(requiring facilities for further injection or blending).
H.4.4 Experience shows that the least effective place to inject Stadis 450 is in multi-product
marine vessels or inland waterway/coastal barges. Injection during loading will help disperse
dirt and water from the vessels tanks with little increase in conductivity. It is unacceptable to
manually add the additive to ships compartments using the closed loading access/sampling
tube. The concentrated Stadis 450 does not mix well and can lead to major dirt and water
problems, with limited conductivity improvement and/or the creation of non-homogeneous
batches. Both are very inefficient methods for using the additive.
H.4.5 It should also be noted that after SDA is added downstream of the point of
manufacture, there is no specification requirement to re-check the MSEP rating, and it is
therefore not mandatory to quote the MSEP rating on the Release Certificate.
163
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
ANNEX I (normative)
LONG-TERM STORAGE AND RETURN TO USE
I.1
INTRODUCTION
Many supply chains worldwide ensure that the fuel which enters them is uplifted to aircraft
within a relatively short timescale (several days to weeks). However, there are also
situations where fuel may be intentionally stored for a longer period; typically involving State
strategic storage, or for military applications.
Long-term storage is defined as product held in storage for longer than 6 months, with no
receipts or deliveries. Where product is stored with no receipts for longer than 6 months but
product continues to be delivered, see 9.5.1.5
I.2
Organisations involved in long-term storage shall have in place a documented process for
ensuring that aviation fuel product quality is maintained within acceptable limits, and a
documented process to ensure the fuel is fit for use prior to release. Key issues to consider
include:
The conditions of storage, and the likelihood that these may impact on product quality.
Whether fuel is going to be subsequently introduced into the market (in which case the
requirements of this annex are mandatory), or retained for use within a single
organisation, e.g. military.
Whether there have been any amendments/revisions to the fuel specification that the
fuel was originally certified to since entry into storage that will impact the suitability of the
fuel for release.
Whether testing is required periodically during storage to monitor potential deterioration
(e.g. six monthly).
Establishment of procedures/requirements for the maintenance of fuel cleanliness both
during storage, and its subsequent transfer out of storage.
Procedures to ensure stock rotation.
Before release, CoA testing shall be undertaken to confirm the product meets the current
requirements of the fuel specification. A comparison of the new CoA should be made with
the original CoA on entry to storage. Any significant differences shall be investigated prior to
release to confirm that the product is fit for use.
I.3
As noted in 2.2.7, DEF STAN 91-91 specifies that fuel supplied to an airport be supported by
a RCQ, CoA or RTC that is less than 180 days old (for drum stocks the certification is valid
for 12 months from filling date or last re-test date for the batch of drums). Should there have
been subsequent changes to the fuel specification since the date on the RCQ, CoA or RTC,
any additional testing required by the current specification shall be uindertaken at the time of
re-testing.
164
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
ANNEX J (informative)
REFERENCED PUBLICATIONS
The following publications are cited in this publication. Where the publications are
undated/without edition number; the latest available edition applies.
Airlines for America (A4A)
A4A 103 Standards for jet fuel quality control at airports.
API
Manual of Petroleum Measurement Standards Chapter 17.6 Marine measurement:
Guidelines for determining the fullness of pipelines between vessels and shore tanks
Recommended Practice 1110 Pressure testing of liquid petroleum pipelines
Recommended Practice 1543 Documentation, monitoring and laboratory testing of aviation
fuel during shipment from refinery to airport
Recommended Practice 1595 Design, construction, operation, maintenance and inspection
of aviation pre-airfield storage terminals
ASME2
B31.4 Pipeline transportation systems for liquid hydrocarbons and other liquids
ASTM International3
D56 Standard test method for flash point by tag closed cup tester
D86 Standard test method for distillation of petroleum products at atmospheric pressure
D156 Test method for saybolt colour of petroleum products (Saybolt chromometer method)
D381 Test method for existent gum in fuels by jet evaporation
D910 Standard specification for aviation gasolines
D1094 Test method for water reaction of aviation fuels
D1655 Standard specification for aviation turbine fuels
D2276 Standard test method for particulate contaminant in aviation fuel by line sampling
D2624 Test method for electrical conductivity of aviation and distillate fuels containing a
static dissipater additive
D2887 Standard test method for boiling range distribution of petroleum fractions by gas
chromatography
D3241 Standard test method for thermal oxidation stability of aviation turbine fuels
D3948 Test method for determining water separation characteristics of aviation turbine fuels
by portable separometer
D4054 Standard practice for qualification and approval of new aviation turbine fuels and fuel
additives
D4057 Standard practice for manual sampling of petroleum and petroleum products
D4171 Standard specification for fuel system icing inhibitors
D4176 Standard test method for free water and particulate contamination in distillate fuels
(Visual inspection procedures)
D4177 Standard practice for automatic sampling of petroleum and petroleum products
D4306 Standard practice for aviation fuel sample containers for tests affected by trace
contamination
D4952 Standard test method for qualitative analysis for active sulfur species in fuels and
solvents (Doctor Test)
D5001 Standard test method for measurement of lubricity of aviation turbine fuels by the
Ball-on-Cylinder Lubricity Evaluator (BOCLE)
2
3
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, 3 Park Avenue, New York, New York 10016-5990. www.asme.org
ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbour Drive, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania 19428, USA. www.astm.org
165
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
D5006 Standard test method for measurement of fuel system icing inhibitors (ether type) in
aviation fuels
D5452 Standard test method for particulate contamination in aviation fuels by laboratory
filtration
D5842 Standard practice for sampling and handling of fuels for volatility measurement
D5854 Standard practice for mixing and handling of liquid samples of petroleum and
petroleum products
D6792 Standard practice for quality system in petroleum products and lubricants testing
laboratories
D7524 Standard test method for determination of static dissipater additives (SDA) in aviation
turbine fuel and middle distillate fuelsHigh performance liquid chromatograph
(HPLC) method
D7566 Standard specification for aviation turbine fuel containing synthesized hydrocarbons
EI4
1529 Aviation fuelling hose and hose assemblies
1540 Design, construction, operation and maintenance of aviation fuelling facilities
1541 Performance requirements for protective coating systems used in aviation fuel storage
tanks and piping
1542 Identification markings for dedicated aviation fuel manufacturing and distribution
facilities, airport storage and mobile fuelling equipment
1550 Handbook on equipment used for the maintenance and delivery of clean aviation fuel
1581 Specification and qualification procedures for aviation jet fuel filter/separators, 5th
edition
1582 Specification for similarity for EI 1581 aviation jet fuel filter/separators, 2nd edition
1583 Laboratory tests and minimum performance levels for aviation fuel filter monitors, 6th
edition
1590 Specification and qualification procedures for aviation fuel microfilters, 2nd edition
1596 Design and construction of aviation fuel filter vessels
Guidance on development, implementation and improvement of quality systems in petroleum
laboratories
Guidelines for the investigation of the microbiological content of petroleum fuel and for the
implementation of avoidance and remedial strategies
HM50 Guidelines for the cleaning of tanks and lines for marine tank vessels carrying
petroleum and refined products
HM66 Guidelines for determining the fullness of pipelines between vessels and shore tanks
Model code of safe practice Part 16 Tank cleaning safety code
Model code of safe practice Part 21 Guidelines for the control of hazards arising from static
electricity
Multi-product pipelines: Minimum criteria to determine additive acceptability
IP Test Methods5
IP 123 Petroleum products Determination of distillation characteristics at atmospheric
pressure
IP 139 Petroleum products and lubricants - Determination of acid or base number - Colourindicator titration method
IP 170 Determination of flash point - Abel closed-cup method
IP 189 Crude petroleum and liquid or solid petroleum products - Determination of density or
relative density - Capillary-stoppered pyknometer and graduated bicapillary
pyknometer methods
IP 216 Determination of particulate contaminant of aviation turbine fuels by line sampling
(ASTM D 2276)
IP 274 Petroleum products Aviation and distillate fuels Determination of electrical
4
5
166
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
6
7
Joint Inspection Group, c/o 35 Abercorn Place, London, NW8 9DR, UK. www.jointinspectiongroup.org
Ministry of Defence Directorate of Standardization, Room 1138, Kentigern House, 65 Brown Street, Glasgow
G2 8EX, UK. www.dstan.mod.uk
167
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
EI12/059
US Military8
MIL-DTL-5624 Turbine Fuel, Aviation, Grades JP-4 and JP-5
MIL-PRF-25017 Inhibitor, Corrosion/Lubricity Improver, Fuel Soluble
MIL-DTL-83133 Turbine Fuel Aviation, Kerosine Type, JP-8 (NATO F-34), and JP-8+100
(NATO F-37)
MIL-DTL-85470B Inhibitor, Icing, Fuel System, High Flash. NATO Code Number S-1745
US Military, Commanding Officer, Naval Publications and Forms Center, 5801 Tabor Avenue, Philadelphia,
Pennsylvania 19120, USA.
168
DRAFT EI/JIG 1530 FOR STAKEHOLDER REVIEW. Copyright EI & JIG 2012
Please submit any comments to mh@energyinst.org by 4 January 2013
ANNEX K (informative)
UNIT CONVERSION FACTORS
The following conversion factors are used in this publication.
1 U.S. gallon
1 litre
1 Imperial gallon
1 litre
1 kg
1 lb
1 bar
1 bar
1 psi
1 psi
T F = 1,8 x T C + 32
3,785 litres
0,264 U.S. gallon
4,546 litres
0,220 Imperial gallon
2,205 lbs
0,454 kg
14,50 psi
100 kPa
0,069 bar
6,895 kPa
169
EI12/059