The Occupational Health and Safety Authority has refused to clarify comments it sent to The Malta Independent on Sunday regarding fireworks in Marsaxlokk, where an LNG power station and accompanying Floating Storage Unit moored by 2015.
Last Sunday, this paper reported that a number of authorities were passing the buck on the issue of fireworks, which is considered by experts in the risk assessment business to be a “recipe for disaster” when let off so close to a natural gas facility. Currently, Marsaxlokk festa fireworks are let off from a beach near Hunter’s Tower, which is some 600 metres away from the power station and less than a kilometre from where the FSU will be moored.
A number of authorities, including Mepa, Enemalta as well as Parliamentary Secretary for Planning Michael Farrugia confirmed that the St Catherine’s fireworks factory in tas-Silg will not have to be relocated but left open the question as to whether the issue of fireworks had been considered at all during the preparatory stages leading up to the power station project.
Dr Farrugia even stated that the issue will be determined when the time comes, meaning when Marsaxlokk festa enthusiasts apply for the 2015 fireworks display. He also dismissed the idea of a separate study on fireworks near the LNG terminal, pointing out that Marsaxlokk was no stranger to fuel dumps and similar procedures would be followed.
LNG project has created unprecedented scenario
Fireworks permits are issued by the relevant local police stations, which sometimes consult with other authorities, including Mepa and the OHSA. But the LNG power station project has created an unprecedented scenario since it will be the first one of its kind in Malta. Several experts have already warned against the risks posed by a possible gas leak from the FSU or the onshore re-gasification unit. Some have said that all that would be needed for a large-scale disaster is a source of ignition. Fireworks, which burn at thousands of degrees Celsius, and even the burning debris they produce could very well be that ignition source. Sources close to the risk assessment industry have told this paper that, while the chances of a gas leak are remote such a scenario is not entirely impossible.
More questions than answers
During the past 10 days, this paper has tried to find out who would be ultimately responsible for issuing fireworks permits in Marsaxlokk after 2015 or if the practice would be stopped altogether, as claimed by former PN minister George Pullicino. But no single authority has given a clear and direct answer.
On Monday, OHSA Chief Executive Office Dr Mark Gauci told The Malta Independent on Sunday by email that “the operational permit will be issued in full consideration of all relevant aspects including the ones mentioned by this newspaper. All relevant rules related to safe distances shall be followed at all stages”.
When asked to clarify this comment, a spokesman for OHSA said that the “operational permit” actually refers to the fireworks permit, and not the power station permit. The spokesman confirmed that fireworks display permits are decided by district police but acknowledged that the LNG project created a new scenario. When this paper pointed out that it is trying to find out who will be responsible for approving or turning down fireworks permits once the LNG project is in place, the spokesman asked us to send a new question, which would be answered on the same day.
But somewhere along the line someone decided that the OHSA should not reply to our question. Instead of the promised reply, this paper received an email that read: “Further to our previous reply of the 17th March 2014, we have no further information to add.”
‘Advice cannot be given without relevant studies’
This paper also contacted Andrew Clifton, General Manager of the Society of International Gas Tanker and Terminal Operators (SIGTTO), who agreed that a detailed risk assessment on fireworks should be carried out.
This paper asked Mr Clifton whether it is advisable to let off fireworks at a distance of less than a kilometre from the FSU and less than 600 metres from the power plant. Mr Clifton said that “it is difficult to advise without knowing all the facts and conducting a detailed risk assessment. The type, range, height etc of the fireworks in use would have to be known as well as expected environmental conditions, safe distances etc.”
The SIGTTO General Manager also confirmed that “risks are increased when a cargo transfer is taking place” but insisted that “after 50 years of successful LNG shipping commercial operations, we can say that we have no doubt that these risks can be managed safely and reduced to an acceptable level by following industry best practice”.
Maritime expert reiterates calls for Maritime Impact Assessment
Maritime expert Ann Fenech also insisted that the issue of fireworks in Marsaxlokk Bay is a factor that needs to be examined. “I do not know if a gas cloud would survive the burning debris produced by fireworks let off nearby. This is something that needs to be addressed by experts.”
Dr Fenech, who is also president of the Nationalist Party’s Executive, also reiterated her call for a Maritime Impact Assessment – a study that would examine all accident scenarios, the effects and the responses needed. “It appears to be the intention that the Floating Storage Unit will be ATEX classified. ATEX is an EU Directive that aims to ensure that no ignition sources are located near flammable materials. But what would happen if there actually is an accidental ignition source near a gas release from the FSU? What if a collision between a ship and the FSU caused an ignition? This is what the experts need to answer.”
The maritime expert insisted that she is not coming to conclusions but nothing should be left to chance. Such as the possible weather effects on a vessel that will be permanently moored to a jetty, rather than anchored. “Everyone knows that weather conditions in Marsaxlokk can get ugly. Any seafarer will tell you that a ship like the FSU is best placed out of harbour in bad weather.” Dr Fenech pointed out that the sea in Marsaxlokk turns white in high waves, showing that the water level would be constantly rising and falling. The same would happen to any vessel moored inside the bay. “All these questions would be answered by a Maritime Impact Assessment. Mepa had promised one, but no such study was carried out and the Planning Authority will decide on the project permit tomorrow.
A Maritime Impact Assessment would also answer questions on how the FSU would affect port traffic, especially during refuelling (when a second LNG tanker will come alongside the FSU), and what could happen if a container ship bound for the Freeport suffered mechanical failure and drifted towards the FSU. Asked about what she thought of the idea that an FSU moored outside the harbour would increase the risks, she stated that this needs to be considered by a Master Mariner. She explained, however, that if the FSU is placed outside “it would obviously be placed out of the Freeport’s way and would be appropriately lit up like oil rigs situated in the middle of the sea. Such installations would be marked on navigational charts, they would be immediately be picked up by radar because of their size, they would be identified by Automatic Identification systems and would have an exclusion zone around them.”