Unconfirmed Minutes of ATC – ATIEL Code of Practice Alignment Group
Date: 26September 2012
Place:Chevron Oronite, Paris
Present:ATIEL BOI/VGRA/VMI:
Chris Paddon (BP)
Jan Smithers (Shell)
Katty Hoste (Chevron)
ATC COPAG:
Ian Wilby (Lubrizol)
Tom Cunningham (Infineum)
Jeanne Goldstein (Chevron Oronite)
Christophe Rouet (Chevron Oronite)
Guest:
Jeff Clark (ERC-TMC)
Chair:Ian Wilby
Reporter: Chris Paddon
Agenda:
- Welcome, Anti-trust
- Apologies
- Minutes meeting 18 July 2012
- Action items meeting 18 July 2012
- OM 646 Data Collection
-Progress (report from Jeff Clarke)
-Statistical evaluation
-Next steps
- Date and place of next meeting
- Welcomeand Antitrust
Ian Wilby welcomed the members and re-confirmed the anti-trust statement to those present.
Chair and secretary appointment: Ian Wilby agreed to chair the meeting and Chris Paddon agreed to take the meeting minutes.
- Apologies
Adri van de Ven (Kuwait Petroleum)
Philippe Galvin (ExxonMobil)
Ian Bell (Afton)
- Minutes of previous meeting (8THJuly2012, Shell, UK)
The minutes were approved without any changes.
- Action Items from previous meeting
Action 1: Adri to send ATIEL antitrust document to Jan Smithers for reference as anew member of the committee.
Status: Complete
Action 2: Adri/Ian W to supply reference numbers for the relevant confidentialityagreements for inclusion in the protocol.
Status: Complete
Action 3: Adri/Ian W to circulate the final edited version of both the template andprotocol following the on-line review in the meeting.
Status: Complete
Action 4: Ian Wilby to set up teleconference discussion with ATC members to collate feedback before 10THAugust.
Status: Complete
Action 5: Adri van de Ven to circulate relevant documents to ATC members of AACoPAG.
Status: Complete
Action 6: Ian Wilby to confirm Oronite are willing to host AA CoPAG on 26THSeptember.
Status: Complete
- OM646 Data Collection
-Progress report
Jeff Clarke (ERC-TMC) indicated that 4 different companies had provided data so far and that in total there were ca. 30 data points.
Three points were raised by Jeff in relation to the data collection:
a)The formal base oil trade names are not being used in all cases with for example, Chevron Group II being used instead of ‘Chevron Neutral Oil 600R’.
<ACT>Jeff Clarke to clarify with the data providers the formal base oil trade name to avoid ambiguity.
<ACT>AACOPAG to edit the protocol following the OM 646 data collection conclusion with explicit examples of appropriate ways to name base oils (and additives – see below)
<ACT>Adri van de Ven to share TU5 statistical evaluation with Jeff Clark to provide input and guidance on the process and analysis expectations gained from this evaluation to aid the current OM 646 programme.
b)The formal additive (DI package) names are not being used in every case and/or it is not completely clear whether some data points belong to a common additive family.
It was reiterated that where changes to an additive package result in no change in performance as deemed by the data provider (through technical judgement) or where the change is within minor mods. (ATC-CoP) then data points can be grouped under the same ‘additive family’ as defined in the protocol.
c)Dispersant types: Jeff asked whether these should be treated as separate variables. For example, whether differentiation within DVMs or NDVMs classes should be taken into consideration.
It was agreed that for this purpose, differentiation between DVM or NDVM should initially be taken into consideration as a true variable in the statistical evaluation. Then further differentiation between DVMs should be made.
-Statistical evaluation
Discussion around what factors are treated as variables ensued. Base oil physical and compositional factors are to be taken account of and are of primary concern in this evaluation for intra-slate purposes.Ian Wilby reiterated the purpose and importance of maintaining focus on the intrastate guideline development.Additive family, DVM or NDVM are to be included as variables as above. PPD type is not to be included as a variable although should questions around particular data points be raised then additional data may help explain the observation(s).
-Next Steps/Timeline
a)Final call for data points to be sent this week (WC: 24-09-2012)
<ACT> Ian Wilby to request ATC members for any further OM 646 data points. Chris Paddon on behalf of Adri van de Ven to request Susan Hancock (ATIEL Secretary) to send a request to ATIEL members for any further OM 646 data points. Agreed deadline: 02-10-2012
<ACT> Jeff Clarke to share coded data with AACOPAG after 02-10-2012
b)Data evaluation to be completed by 02-11-2012
<ACT> Ian Wilby to arrange a teleconference/face-to-face meeting for November 2012 to discuss the data output.
c)Target date for completion of the OM 646 statistical programme: 31-12-2012
- Date of next meeting
<ACT> Ian Wilby to confirm date and location for next meeting (as above)
Meeting Close
Confidential to ATIEL and ATCPage 1