Montenegro’s oil companies have challenged the planned November 9 start of fuel marking, saying the legal conditions for the procedure have not been met. In a new letter to the Government of Montenegro and the ministries of finance and energy, the companies reiterated that marking cannot begin without safety approval for the proposed procedures and locations.
Representatives of all companies that own filling stations in Montenegro commissioned Radovan Popović, a court expert specialising in fire protection and explosive materials, to assess the proposed process independently. His assessment found that the procedure could not be applied as proposed until the Ministry of Internal Affairs (MUP) approved the safety of the process and each proposed site.
Popović said the documentation contained no approval from the competent authority for the locations, and did not set out the prescribed safety measures. He described the method as an “improvisation”, noting that tanker manufacturers had not designed vehicles for the process and had not fitted them with connections for adding the marker.
The draft rule envisages marking at border crossings and at the exit from the Port of Bar. Under the proposed method, tankers would be opened outdoors beside roads and traffic lanes used by travellers. Nanoparticle marker would then be poured into the tanks and the contents mixed to dissolve it in the fuel, according to the procedure reviewed by Popović.
The expert said flammable liquids could be handled only at locations identified as safe in advance and inspected and approved by the MUP. He described fuel as hazardous, volatile and highly flammable, and said it should not be handled at border crossings or other locations with large numbers of people moving through them. Popović also assessed the proposed sites as unsafe for the work.
Existing safety procedures require that nobody be within at least 15 metres of a tanker when it is opened, Popović said. He said tankers must be grounded to prevent ignition caused by static electricity and positioned on level ground. The procedures do not provide for mixing fuel, which is required under the proposed marking method.
The MUP has previously said it is not responsible for procedures related to fuel marking. Oil traders argue that, under the Law on the Transport of Dangerous Goods (ADR), the ministry is responsible for supervising the transport and handling of fuel. Popović said the MUP, through its Directorate for Protection and Rescue, oversees the movement of dangerous goods and should approve the process and every location where marking would take place.
The oil companies have previously said they would not accept the risks of opening tankers, adding and transferring marker, or mixing their contents without prior MUP approval and the technical conditions required for transporting and handling fuel. The companies’ latest letter again disputes the planned start date on those grounds.
Contract costs and EU standards
The European Commission has previously said the proposed procedure is contrary to European Union standards. It explained that fuel is marked in the EU only when it is exempt from duties or when duties are not paid in full. The system is intended to prevent such fuel from being sold commercially without the required duties being paid.
The Government signed a five-year contract in July with the selected private consortium for fuel marking. The consortium is expected to earn 0.7 cents per litre, or around 17 million euros over the contract period, according to the terms described in the available facts.
The marking cost is passed on to fuel importers, who were told during negotiations that the pricing regulation would be amended to recognise their higher costs. Consumers would ultimately pay for the process through higher fuel prices, according to the companies’ account of the cost arrangements.
A second consortium that took part in the tender has brought a case before the Administrative Court, and proceedings remain under way. The oil companies say the November 9 start should not proceed before the MUP has approved the safety of the proposed procedures and sites.
