Dangote Fights Back… NMDPRA Letter Shows Regulator Approved Refinery’s In-house Laboratory for Products’  Testing

Emmanuel Addeh in Abuja

As Dangote Refinery fights back allegations by Nigerian Upstream and Downstream Petroleum Regulatory Authority (NMDPRA) that its refined products are inferior to imported ones, a letter seen by THISDAY has shown that the regulatory authority approved the firm’s in-house laboratory for the testing of crude oil products.

The official communication dated March 28, 2024 and addressed to Dangote Petroleum Refinery & Petrochemicals, Lekki, said the laboratory had satisfied the minimum requirement for accreditation.
The matter is coming to the fore after a public altercation between the managers of the facility and NMDPRA as to the quality of products churned out from the $19 billion refinery.

President of Dangote Group, Aliko Dangote, had Saturday said products refined at the facility, the world’s largest single train refinery, were of superior quality compared to imported equivalents and met international standards.
Dangote insisted on testing other diesel products, alongside Dangote’s diesel at the refinery’s state-of-the-art laboratory.
Earlier, the diesel samples procured from two well-known filling stations near Eleko junction, along the Lekki Epe Expressway, overseen by some visiting lawmakers, revealed that Dangote’s diesel had a sulphur content of 87.6 ppm, whereas the other two samples showed sulphur levels exceeding 1800 ppm and 2,000 ppm, respectively.

Dangote emphasised that the findings debunked claims made by Chief Executive of NMDPRA, Farouk Ahmed, who recently asserted that imported diesel surpassed domestically refined products.
Ahmed had alleged that Dangote refinery and other modular refineries, like Waltersmith and Aradel, produced diesel with sulphur content ranging from 650 to 1200 ppm, a statement criticised by many Nigerians as a tactic to favour imported products over local ones.
But the letter signed by Executive Director, Heath, Safety Environmental & Community, NMDPRA, Mustapha Lamorde, on behalf of Ahmed, stated that the accreditation covered analyses of crude oil, Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG), naphtha, gasoline, HHK/ATF, and AGO or diesel only handled/produced in the refinery.

The letter read, “Reference is made to the inspection exercises carried out on your laboratory facility by the officers of the Authority on 19 October 2023, 19 December 2023 & 1 9— 22 March 2024 respectively.
“The report of the inspections revealed that your laboratory has satisfied the minimum requirement in terms of equipment and personnel to render an in-house Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC) of petroleum/petroleum products.

“Consequently, an interim accreditation (Phase l) is granted to your laboratory on the condition that the accreditation covers analyses of Crude Oil, LPG, Naphtha, Gasoline, HHK/ATF, and AGO only) handled/produced in your refinery.
“Therefore, upon completion of other sections of the petroleum laboratory and subsequent relocation, re-installation, and calibration of equipment designated for these sections. You are required to re-invite the Authority for verification inspection and accreditation audit for the Wet Chemistry section of the facility (Phase Il accreditation audit), the letter stated.

“Additionally, the phase Ill scope of the laboratory accreditation which includes the polypropylene laboratory, chemical store, sample retention room, bottle washing room, and the ongoing civil work at the exterior part of the facility, NMDPRA said, shall be re-inspected for accreditation.
“You are expected to invite the Authority for inspection/audit of these sections (Phase Ill accreditation audit), and subsequently the final audit and accreditation of the entire facility.

“Furthermore, you are required to submit an electronic copy of your activity report in a Microsoft Excel format quarterly to hsec@nmdpra.gov.na alongside the hard copies. The activity report as a minimum should contain: Status of your laboratory equipment ll. Types of analyses conducted, and test methods used and number and batch(s) of samples analysed.”
The letter also said any personnel changes (analysts), or test methodology should be reported to the Authority in writing within two weeks before the date of such changes.
Failure to comply with any of the conditions in the approval, it stressed, will attract appropriate consequent management action.