A board of inquiry appointed by the Minister of Finance has concluded that Enemalta did not dispose of Mercaptan gas in the proper manner when it was destroyed by fire near Mgarr in 2009. The operation was carried out without the necessary permits.

However there do not appear to have been consequences on anybody's health.

Possible criminal action is time-barred.

The report was tabled in Parliament by Mr Fenech this evening.

The board of inquiry said that while it was rated as an immediate acute health hazard, ethyl mercaptan is not considered to be a delayed chronic health hazard. Also, it accumulates very little in the body of living organisms. Notwithstanding, there are potential serious health effects, however rare the more extreme effects may be, even for cases of inhalation of gases or fumes released by mercaptan.

From the hospital admission registers of Mater Dei Hospital, no records could be found about any admission cases of gas or fume inhalation on the dates when the mercaptan leakages and disposal incidents occurred, and no such cases were known to have been reported to any other health facility in the public sector.

Due to physical characteristics of ethyl mercaptan and the fact that these disposal and leakage incidents all occurred more than two years ago, it was unlikely that there still wassignificant ground residue of, and thus residual environmental risk from, this chemical at the said sites.

The board said there had 'evidently' been serious shortcomings in decisions and actions by EneMalta at different stages of the mercaptan events.

"However these should not be seen in isolation of the context and circumstances in which they took place. While not considered as justification, it is appreciated that there were several factors that may provide a fairer understanding and appreciation of the situations and dilemmas faced by the Enemalta management re this case."

In explained that in the perceived emergency situation that EneMalta found itself in, to have to dispose of the mercaptan in the summer of 2009, EneMalta contended that the burning of the mercaptan was carried out under as controlled conditions as there could possibly be in the circumstances.

"The burning of mercaptan by EneMalta through its contractor, though carried out with certain safety measures, cannot be deemed to have been done under the controlled conditions as referred to in Material Safety Data Sheets and corresponding standards of repute.

"Neither were the disposal and other activities by EneMalta concerning mercaptan undertaken according to all the prevalent local legislation at time, specifically as follows:
- The disposal of mercaptan by EneMalta and its contractor was not covered with a permit issued in terms of the Waste Management (Permit and Control) Regulations;
- The transportation of mercaptan as waste was not covered by a consignment note issued in terms of the Waste Management (Activity Registration) Regulations;
- No records seem to have been kept in terms of the Waste Management (Activity Registration) Regulations, with regards to the waste management activities which were arranged on behalf of EneMalta
- No permit was sought in terms of the Waste Management (Activity Registration) Regulations  for the storage of mercaptan as a hazardous waste on its premises, at least for the duration that the whole quantity of mercaptan was kept together in one site by EneMalta," the board said.

It added that if any Enemalta official is found responsible to committing an offence, that offence is legally deemed to have been done by EneMalta. However in this eventuality, any designated official of EneMalta is deemed to be vested with such responsibility on behalf of EneMalta.

It pointed out that a breach of the Waste Management (Permit and Control) Regulations renders one subject to a fine for a first offence. However with no such precedent as far as the Board of Inquiry was aware and subject to there being no such precedent, any offence committed by EneMalta now is barred by a lapse of prescription and thus no further criminal action is warranted. Likewise for the same reason, no criminal action is warranted with regards to offences allegedly committed also under the Waste Management (Activity Registration) Regulations.

Still, at its discretion, EneMalta may still opt to initiate disciplinary proceedings against any of its professional and other employees who are covered by the respective collective agreements and were directly involved in the disposal of mercaptan, subject to such disciplinary proceedings not taking into account any alleged "criminal offence" as this has now been barred by prescription. Consideration of serious offences of the type "gross negligence in performing one's duties", as listed in the stated collective agreements, may be applied.

"The institution of charges with regard to any breaches of the personal engagement contract agreements of any senior management officials directly involved in the decisions and actions related to the mercaptan case is also at the discretion of the EneMalta Board of Directors.

"The presence of concentrated ethyl mercaptan at EneMalta was an unintentional and unique occurrence which is unlikely to happen again to EneMalta, given that now the responsibility for LPG procurement in Malta has been taken over by a private gas operator, albeit the fact that the LPG is still presently being stored at the EneMalta Gas Division site in Qajjenza."

The board made the following recommendations:

- continuing capital investment at the Gas Division as long as this continues to operate
- engaging suitable professional staff, including with environmental credentials
- organising more tuition and practical training regarding hazardous operations
- improving management awareness about the various legal obligations that abound
- introducing an internal audit function, answering directly to the Enemalta Board
- ensuring that required approvals and permits are obtained in writing, and records kept
- coordinating better proactively with public partners and regulatory authorities
- assigning an official to specialise on dealing with the various regulatory authorities
- introducing an internal inventory records register for hazardous material substances
- creating an internal high-level health-and-safety committee, to meet on a regular basis

"Other than considering the implementation of the recommendations stated above, no further physical or other remedial actions are, presently at least, envisaged to be needed regarding either environmental or health effects resulting from the mercaptan disposals."