Connect with us

Mass Flowmeter

MFM bunker value chain question TR48 compliance findings of VPS

Lloyd’s Register FOBAS, Endress+Hauser, Fratelli Cosulich, Metcore International and more comment on 28% non-compliance of TR48 for Singapore MFM bunker deliveries.

Admin

Published

on

5a813ffad2b35 1518419962

A group of stakeholders representing various aspects of the bunker supply value chain in Singapore have risen to comment on a recent find by fuel testing and inspection firm Veritas Petroleum Services (VPS) regarding TR 48 compliance on mass flowmeter (MFM) bunkering.

A VPS circular recently said the company’s MFM Quick Screen service found 28% of MFM bunker deliveries at Singapore not in compliance to TR 48 standards when taking into account 23 parameters.

It also pointed out the average discrepancy to be a shortage of 67 metric tonnes (mt) per investigation, following further checks.

“VPS' findings seem to suggest the situation now is worse than before MFM was mandated in Singapore when we used to carry out manual tank gauging for bunker measurements, which is a misleading statement to make,” says Douglas Raitt, the regional consultancy manager at bunker fuel analysis and advisory service firm Lloyd’s Register FOBAS, Singapore.

“The 28% non-compliance rating of TR48 can cover all manner of sins. It is unclear whether the figure includes lack of compliant paperwork on tankers, short deliveries, incorrect meter readings, or others. The 28% statistic should be meaningfully broken down for a clearer explanation to the industry at large.”

Raitt also pointed an issue in VPS’ findings of an average 67mt fuel shortage after investigations.

“What was the basis to claim the short loadings? Were these calculated using manually sounded figures from the receiving vessel’s bunker tanks and compared to meter readings? This is not clear in the VPS circular. In any case, comparing vessel sounding figures with meter reading delivery figures is not in line with TR48. It is common knowledge [in the bunkering industry] that a receiving vessel’s fuel tanks are not necessarily reliable reference points.

“If we are calculating the 67mt difference from the receiving ship’s fuel tanks you are actually comparing arbitrary and manually obtained measurements against the true measurement obtained by mass flowmeters.”

Darrick Pang, Managing Director of MFM consultancy firm Metcore International and bunker surveying firm Metcore Inspection Services was curious about VPS’ figures.

“It will be interesting to understand how the shortage quantity [67mt] mentioned from VPS’ investigations are established including the criteria to determine a 28% failure to comply with TR48," he says.

“As we know, all MFM systems installed on bunker tankers in Singapore have undergone a very comprehensive and rigorous testing process in accordance with TR48:2015 in order to obtain approval for custody transfer operations by MPA.

“What is happening in the field might not be visible to an analyst, therefore it is critical to have bunker surveyors with the trained knowledge  in order to secure the measurement integrity of the whole operation. This is something that Metcore Inspection Services place a lot of emphasis on from the beginning.”

The findings, meanwhile, did not deter Singapore bunker supplier Fratelli Cosulich in using MFM technology for bunkering operations, says the CEO and Board Member of the Fratelli Cosulich Group of Companies.

“We [Fratelli Cosulich] have full trust on the accuracy of MFM and we regularly verify the accuracy of our equipment to make sure that our clients receive the correct quantity,” he told Manifold Times.

“I cannot comment on VPS claims specifically because very rarely we have had a VPS surveyor on board our vessels.

“In order to correctly interpret VPS’s findings it is absolutely necessary to know what irregularities they specifically talk about.

“It is very important for example to differentiate between substantial irregularities [e.g. inaccurate quantity supplied] from ‘formal’ irregularities [e.g. a missing signature or a procedure not 100% followed].”

The Business Process consultant for bunkering and fuel supply chain at MFM manufacturer Endress+Hauser (E+H), meanwhile, believes VPS’ report can be further improved.

“From a meter vendor point of view, we encourage professional initiatives from surveying companies who have decided to move ahead with the MFM technology to support the bunkering industry,” says Mohamed Abdenbi.

“In fact, in today’s fast pace tech world, the early adopters can be the leaders of tomorrow. VPS is one of those companies that have identified this opportunity and started offering their MFM evaluation service offerings to their customers.

“However, we have several times been asked for help to look at VPS quick screening reports and found out that they lacked clarity and understanding of the MFM system as well as the bunker operation procedures. The report quality has to be improved and maintained over time.

“We also would like to emphasize that at the end only manufacturer specialists who understand the MFM system can correctly interpret the signals and the reaction of the system in details.

“After all we could imagine that third party specialists are trained and certified by the manufacturer themselves for analysing recorded MFM data.”

Seah Khen Hee, a Singapore industry pioneer who led the MFM project and is instrumental in developing the principles, requirements and procedures of TR48:2015, believes relevant industry stakeholders should meet VPS for "further dialogue".

"I have been very encouraged by the positive feedbacks and comments from across the shipping and bunkering communities on TR48:2015 since its recent implementation," he says.

"After the VPS Circular came out, the industry would like to understand how VPS arrived at their findings on non-compliance and discrepancies. 

"Relevant experts should meet VPS for further dialogue and assist with positive progress.

"Bunker surveyors have an important role to play in providing vigilance to the MFM bunkering process, especially on metrology and security requirements and metering procedures.

"Indeed, all industry users of TR48 need to correctly understand and properly apply TR48 for best outcomes. 

"More can be done to reach out to the shipping and bunkering industries worldwide on training and education."

Related: VPS, CMA CGM collaboration evaluates Singapore MFM compliance

Published: 12 February, 2018
 

Continue Reading

Mass Flowmeter

TFG Marine advances global MFM rollout with two US Gulf bunker barges

“Buffalo B414” and “Buffalo B304”, were recently fitted with the equipment, with both supply barges receiving ISO 22192 certification for their newly installed MFMs last month.

Admin

Published

on

By

TFG Marine advances global MFM rollout with two US Gulf bunker barges

Global marine fuel supply and procurement firm TFG Marine on Wednesday (2 September) said it continued to expand mass flow meter (MFM) technology across its US Gulf Coast bunker fleet.

The company said two more vessels, Buffalo B414 and Buffalo B304, were recently fitted with the equipment.

“Both supply barges received ISO 22192 certification for their newly installed MFMs last month, giving customers greater confidence in bunker quantity measurement while supporting a more accurate, transparent and efficient delivery process,” TFG Marine said in a social media post. 

“This marks the latest step in TFG Marine’s ongoing investment in technology and best practice across its global bunkering operations, and forms part of a broader push by our North America team to help drive progress across the region’s bunkering industry.”

Last year, TFG Marine announced it reached a key milestone in its global digitalisation programme with the installation of an ISO 22192-compliant MFM on the Buffalo 404, a barge on time charter from American bunker barge company Buffalo Marine Service Inc.

This was the first ISO-certified MFM-equipped bunkering barge operating in the US Gulf.

The installation was part of TFG Marine’s wider strategy to equip close to 90% of its global bunkering fleet with MFMs by 2026 as a commitment towards improving data integrity, streamlining operations and strengthening trust in marine fuel transactions.

Related: TFG Marine installs first ISO-certified mass flow meter on US Gulf bunkering barge

 

Photo credit: TFG Marine
Published: 4 September, 2026

Continue Reading

Biofuel

Report: GCMD outlines practical approach to quantity assurance in marine biofuel supply chains

GCMD releases a new report, highlighting a practical approach to help shipowners verify that they receive both the total quantity of fuel and the renewable content contracted.

Admin

Published

on

By

Report: GCMD outlines practical approach to quantity assurance in marine biofuel supply chains

The Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation (GCMD) on Thursday (27 August) released its report, Quantity assurance in marine biofuel supply chains, outlining a practical approach to help shipowners verify that they receive both the total quantity of fuel and the renewable content contracted. 

The approach draws on evidence from GCMD’s end-to-end marine biofuel supply chain trials conducted under commercial operating conditions.

Biofuels are purchased not only for their energy content, but also for the renewable content and emissions reductions they represent. The renewable fraction determines the green premium and underpins GHG accounting and regulatory compliance, yet blend ratios, such as B24 or B30, are typically supplier-declared rather than independently verified. Closing this verification gap will strengthen confidence in marine biofuel transactions.

Ensuring reliable measurement of total quantity transferred

Mass flow meters (MFMs) have become the preferred method for custody transfer, as they provide a transparent and auditable basis for determining the quantity of fuel transferred.

However, adding fatty acid methyl ester (FAME) to conventional marine fuels, such as Very Low Sulphur Fuel Oil (VLSFO) or High Sulphur Fuel Oil (HSFO), can reduce the final blend’s viscosity, potentially pushing it outside the validated operating range of the MFM installed on the bunker barge. To maintain measurement integrity, the viscosity of the final blend should therefore be assessed under the actual transfer conditions against the applicable MFM operating range. This can be managed through appropriate transfer-temperature control or by using MFMs that have been validated for broader ranges.

Verifying the renewable fraction in biofuel blends

Verifying the renewable fraction requires appropriate analytical methods. FAME-based blends can be verified through compositional analysis, while hydrotreated vegetable oil (HVO)-based blends require radiocarbon analysis because renewable and fossil hydrocarbons cannot be distinguished through compositional testing. 

Interpreting analytical measurements, however, is not straightforward. Neat FAME may contain up to 3.5% non-ester material, so the measurable FAME content of a finished BXX blend may not exactly match its declared blend ratio.

Laboratory methods also have finite measurement precision. A difference between a measured result and a declared blend ratio therefore does not necessarily indicate incorrect blending or under-delivery.

Together, the three pillars of GCMD’s quality, quantity, and GHG emissions abatement assurance framework address whether the fuel is fit for use, delivers the claimed emissions reductions, and contains the contracted fuel quantity and renewable content. 

Professor Lynn Loo, CEO of GCMD, said: “Buyers need confidence that they have received both the fuel and the renewable content they paid for. This report provides a practical, evidence-backed basis for verifying renewable fuel claims, protecting commercial value and supporting credible GHG accounting as marine biofuel use scales.” 

Note: GCMD’s report can be found here

 

Photo credit: Global Centre for Maritime Decarbonisation
Published: 27 August, 2026

Continue Reading

Interview

Exclusive: Caroline Yang takes helm on future of IBIA Asia

The newly appointed Chair of IBIA’s Regional Board – Asia, shares her plans to strengthen bunkering standards while promoting transparency and industry collaboration across key Asian maritime hubs.

Admin

Published

on

By

Exclusive: Caroline Yang takes helm on future of IBIA Asia

Caroline Yang, CEO of Hong Lam Marine Pte Ltd, outlines her plans for IBIA Asia in her first interview with Manifold Times since becoming Chair of the Regional Board – Asia:

MT: Why is IBIA important to the bunkering market in Asia?

IBIA Asia is amongst five regional boards operating under the umbrella of London-based IBIA Global. Its presence in Asia is vital because the region, excluding the Middle East, accounts for more than 50% of global bunkering volume.

While Singapore continues to maintain its strong lead as the world’s busiest bunkering port with almost 56 million mt of marine fuel delivered in 2025, several ports in China are showing to be strong bunkering ports as well; these developments take place on the back of a forecast for China to be amongst the leading suppliers of green fuels such as methanol.

Based on this alone, IBIA Asia has to play an important role in raising and addressing issues of suppliers and shipowners and the other parties in the regional bunkering eco-system.

MT: What is the overall state of bunkering standards at major Asian ports and how can IBIA elevate this?

Singapore is the clear leader in standards, acting as a “flag bearer” with established protocols including SS 600 for bunkering, SS 648 for bunker mass flow metering, SS 524 for quality management of bunker supply chain, TR 56 for LNG bunkering, and TR 80 for meter verification using master MFM.

While other Asian ports are adopting mass flow meters – a positive step – IBIA Asia’s role is to disseminate these best practices while maintaining deep respect for local operational realities and regulatory environments.

MT: As Chair of the Regional Board – Asia, what are your plans to make this happen? Are there any topics you will be focusing on?

The IBIA Asia regional board of 10 members from comes from a diverse group of suppliers, shipowners, bunker buyers, fuels testers and bunker tanker owners. Backed by a strong secretariat, we are committed to move the needle for bunkering in Asia.

Our initial strategy is outreach-driven, progressing beyond a Singapore-centric approach. For starters, the board will be concentrating on Hong Kong, Zhoushan, and Shanghai, with potential expansion to Japan and South Korea.

The core objective is to promote the quality, transparency, and integrity of bunkers lifted in Asia. This includes building on existing MOUs such as the collaboration with Hong Kong Shipowners Association (HKSOA) to explore alternative bunker fuels, and participation in regional maritime week programmes.

MT: Do you expect to encounter any challenges? What do you think are the solutions?

Challenges, without a doubt; these include macro-level standards and topical quality issues, such as those highlighted in a recent FOBAS report.

We are aware most solutions will not have instant results, but produce short-term, mid-term and long-term responses.

The solution lies in structured communication and feedback loops involving industry, regulators, and experts. Success requires an altruistic approach where stakeholders prioritise the health of the bunkering ecosystem to achieve win-win outcomes, even at the compromise of individual sectors.

MT: Is participation of local/regional IBIA members included within your plan? How will they be involved?

Member participation is the foundation of an association’s strength. The plan involves active outreach – meeting members where they operate and integrating them into meetings to ensure the board’s positions reflect representative industry views. We must push out credible, strong messages to encourage active engagement. If there is anyone in the maritime bunkering in these areas and reading this interview, reach out to us so we can start our conversations!

The Secretariat and some board members have scheduled to visit and attend bunkering events in Hong Kong and China. In November 2026, IBIA will participate in the Hong Kong Maritime Week by organising a one-day conference. We hope to be also participating in the Shanghai Pudong Maritime Conference and the 9th International Petroleum and Natural Gas Enterprises Conference (IPEC 2026), also known as the “Zhoushan Bunker Oil conference”, in late October.

MT: How will previous experience gained at SSA, ICS, MPA, SMF, and Hong Lam Marine contribute to your role at IBIA?

As CEO of Hong Lam Marine, our bunker tankers supply about 10% of bunkering volume in Singapore, so we are an involved and relevant stakeholder. My experiences in the above-mentioned organisations have taught me how to crystallise and articulate important issues, engage effectively with diverse stakeholders, and leverage on pre-existing professional connections to engage more effectively for IBIA Asia.

Related: IBIA announces Caroline Yang as new Regional Board Chair for Asia
Related: IBIA and Hong Kong Shipowners Association to collaborate on alternative bunker fuels
Related: FOBAS report warns of growing operational risks from ISO-compliant bunker fuels

 

Photo credit: Manifold Times
Published: 6 August 2026

Continue Reading
Advertisement

OUR INDUSTRY PARTNERS



Trending