Enemalta had no option but to accept four consignments of fuel oil with a higher sulphur content than laid down in the contract because it would otherwise have had to shut down part of the power stations, the corporation's head of generation, Peter Grima, said this evening.

He was replying to questions by the members of the Public Accounts Committee, which is discussing oil procurement procedures following a report by the Auditor-General.

Mr Grima said supplier Trafigura, which has since been blacklisted by Enemalta, blamed the off-spec deliveries on the shortage of such fuel oil because of the tsunami in Japan and the uprising in Libya.

Mr Grima explained that according to EU directives, Malta has to have a 90-day stock of fuel oil, but not necessarily on the island.

The fact that Trafigura supplied four consignments with more sulphur had no impact on Enemalta's or Malta's emissions targets. There were times when the consignments of fuel would have been less than 0.7 per cent sulphur and others when the sulphur content was higher. However, over a whole year, the average sulphur content of fuel supplied was 0.7 per cent. Enemalta never paid extra for the fuel oil with a lower sulphur content, which was more expensive.

Mr Grima insisted he was not involved in the computation of the $250,000 fine imposed on Trafigura for breaches of contract but stressed that the subsequent consignments were under 0.7 per cent sulphur content.