DOCUMENTATIONS / TRANSACTION WORKING PROCEDURES FOB ROTTERDAM PORT: FOB Rotterdam Tank to Vessel Injection Agreement Explained

A FOB Rotterdam fuel deal can look simple on paper: the seller has product in tank, the buyer verifies it, the product is injected, and payment follows. In practice, the transaction lives or dies by the documents, the inspection process, and the exact point where risk and money change hands.

A Tank-to-Vessel Injection Agreement, often shortened to TTVIA, is meant to control that handover. It sets out how petroleum product moves from the seller’s storage tank at Rotterdam to the buyer’s nominated vessel, or in some procedures, to the buyer’s leased storage before onward lifting.

This guide explains the common working procedure behind a FOB Rotterdam Tank to Vessel Injection Agreement, what each document is supposed to do, and where buyers, sellers, and intermediaries should pay close attention.

Rotterdam fuel transactions depend on tank access, timing, and verified product movement.

What a FOB Rotterdam tank-to-vessel deal means

In a FOB transaction, the seller is responsible for making the product available at the loading point and completing the agreed delivery obligations. The buyer normally arranges the vessel, shipping, and onward transport after the product is loaded.

At Rotterdam, many petroleum trades refer to product held in shore tanks. The product may be diesel, jet fuel, EN590, crude oil, or another refined product, depending on the contract. The buyer usually wants proof that the product exists, is available, and meets the contracted specification before paying.

A Tank-to-Vessel Injection Agreement is used when the agreed delivery method is injection from the seller’s tank into the buyer’s vessel. The agreement should identify:

• The seller’s tank or terminal details

• The buyer’s nominated vessel

• The product grade and quantity

• Inspection rules

• Injection timing

• Payment terms

• Responsibility for port, terminal, and inspection costs

• The documents required before and after injection

  
  

Some procedures mix tank-to-vessel injection with tank-to-tank injection, where the seller injects the product into the buyer’s leased storage tank before final payment or lifting. That difference matters. A buyer should never assume both mean the same thing. The agreement should say exactly whether the product moves into a vessel or into a buyer-controlled tank.

This article is for general information only. Petroleum trading contracts, letters of credit, bank instruments, and commission agreements should be reviewed by qualified legal, financial, and trade professionals before use.

The main documents in the transaction

The process described in many FOB Rotterdam procedures depends on a chain of documents. Each one has a purpose, but the value of each document depends on whether it can be verified through the claimed issuer, terminal, bank, or inspection company.

Document	Common purpose	Key check
ICPO	Buyer’s official purchase order	Must match product, quantity, price, and terms
Soft Offer	Seller’s initial offer	Should not replace a formal contract
TSA	Tank Storage Agreement	Must be verifiable with the tank farm or terminal
CI	Commercial Invoice	Should reflect only available product and agreed terms
NCNDA	Non-Circumvention, Non-Disclosure Agreement	Used to protect involved parties
IMFPA	Irrevocable Master Fee Protection Agreement	Sets commission structure for intermediaries
DTA	Dip Test Authorization	Allows inspection of product in tank
ATV	Authority to Verify	Lets the buyer verify key details
PPOP	Partial Proof of Product	Early proof pack before full performance
SGS Report	Inspection report	Must be fresh, authentic, and independently verifiable
Tank Receipt	Evidence of product held in tank	Should match tank, quantity, and product data
SPA	Sales and Purchase Agreement	Main contract for spot or monthly deliveries
SBLC or IRDLC	Bank payment security	Must match contract value, term, and draw conditions
MT103 TT	Wire transfer payment message	Used for final payment after agreed triggering event

The documents should line up. Product grade, quantity, tank location, batch numbers, validity dates, buyer name, seller name, and payment terms should not conflict from one paper to the next.

Step 1. The buyer issues the ICPO with proof of storage availability

The process starts after the buyer receives the seller’s Soft Offer. If the buyer accepts the basic commercial terms, the buyer issues an Irrevocable Corporate Purchase Order, known as an ICPO.

The ICPO should not be vague. It should state the product, quantity, origin if relevant, destination, price basis, payment terms, inspection process, and delivery method.

In the procedure described, the buyer also provides a Tank Storage Agreement as proof of storage availability. This is common when the product may be injected into the buyer’s leased tank, or when the seller wants confidence that the buyer has the logistics to receive product.

For a pure tank-to-vessel transaction, the equivalent logistical proof may include vessel nomination details, charter confirmation, or terminal acceptance, depending on the transaction structure. If the procedure calls itself TTVIA but asks for a buyer’s leased tank, both sides should clarify the delivery path before signing anything.

Dip testing exists to confirm that the product in tank matches what was offered.

Step 2. The seller issues the commercial invoice

Once the buyer submits the ICPO and storage proof, the seller issues a Commercial Invoice for the quantity available in the storage tank.

The buyer signs the CI and returns it to the seller. At this stage, the buyer may also return signed copies of the NCNDA and IMFPA, including the agreed commission structure for all named intermediary groups.

The commercial invoice should not create confusion about payment timing. In many procedures, signing the CI confirms commercial acceptance, while final payment happens only after inspection and successful injection. That distinction should be written clearly.

A strong CI will normally include:

• Seller and buyer details

• Product name and specification reference

• Quantity and tolerance

• Unit price and total value

• Tank or terminal location if applicable

• Payment method

• Inspection and dip test references

• Validity period

• Bank details, if appropriate at that stage

  
  

The buyer should verify that the seller named on the CI is the same party authorized to sell and collect funds. If a different entity appears later in the payment chain, the contract should explain why.

Step 3. The seller issues the DTA and PPOP documents

After the CI is signed, the seller issues the Dip Test Authorization letter. The DTA allows the buyer, or the buyer’s appointed inspection company, to conduct a dip test of the product in the seller’s tank.

The procedure also calls for the buyer’s tank farm endorsement and a set of Partial Proof of Product documents. These may include:

• Authority to Verify

  
  

This gives the buyer permission to verify product, tank, or seller information through named channels.

• Product Passport

  
  

This describes the product, including quality, origin, batch, or movement details where applicable.

• Availability of Product endorsed

  
  

This confirms that the product is available under the seller’s control or claimed authority.

• Authority to Sell and Collect

  
  

This shows that the seller has the right to sell the product and receive payment.

These documents are useful only if they are current and verifiable. A buyer should not rely on scanned documents alone. Verification should happen through independent contact details, not only through phone numbers or emails supplied inside the document pack.

Step 4. The buyer orders SGS or another agreed inspector

The next step is inspection. The seller provides a complete DTA, often attached with a fresh inspection report and tank receipt. The buyer then orders SGS, or another mutually accepted inspection company, to conduct the dip test at the seller’s tank.

The procedure states that the dip test is at the buyer’s expense. That is common, but the contract should be precise about costs. It should say who pays for:

• Inspector attendance

• Tank access fees

• Sampling and laboratory analysis

• Port or terminal charges

• Waiting time

• Reinspection if results fail or are disputed

  
  

The dip test should confirm that the product exists in the stated tank and that it meets the agreed specification. The buyer should receive the inspection results directly from the inspection company or through a verified reporting channel.

A “fresh SGS report” should be treated carefully. Fresh usually means recently issued, but the contract should define acceptable report age. Product can move, tanks can change, and documents can become stale.

Inspection access must be controlled, documented, and matched to the agreed tank.

Step 5. Product injection happens after a successful dip test

After the dip test succeeds, the seller injects the fuel according to the agreed procedure.

This is the point where the wording must be exact. The title of the transaction refers to tank-to-vessel injection, which means product should move from the seller’s tank to the buyer’s nominated vessel. Yet the supplied procedure says the seller injects fuel into the buyer’s leased storage tank.

Those are different operations.

For tank-to-vessel injection, the agreement should cover vessel readiness, berthing, loading window, hose connection, quantity measurement, and the point where risk passes.

For tank-to-tank injection, the agreement should cover the buyer’s tank lease, tank capacity, terminal acceptance, inter-tank transfer approval, and post-injection tank receipt.

The seller should submit the full injection report to the buyer after the transfer. This report should match the inspected product, quantity, tank number, time of injection, receiving tank or vessel, and terminal records.

A clean transaction requires the physical movement and the documents to tell the same story.

Step 6. The buyer pays by MT103 TT wire transfer

Once the successful dip test and injection conditions are met, the buyer makes 100% payment by MT103 telegraphic transfer for the total product value.

The payment trigger should be clear. Parties should avoid wording that lets one side claim payment is due before the buyer has received the agreed inspection or injection evidence.

Common payment trigger language may refer to:

• Successful dip test

• Product confirmation by independent inspector

• Completion of injection

• Receipt of full injection report

• Transfer into buyer’s tank or vessel

• Seller’s final invoice and supporting documents

  
  

After the seller confirms receipt of payment, the seller pays commissions to all intermediaries named in the IMFPA and protected under the NCNDA. The supplied procedure states that commission is paid within 24 hours after buyer payment confirmation.

Commission clauses should identify who gets paid, how much they get paid, what event triggers payment, and which bank details apply. Ambiguous commission structures often cause disputes after the commercial parties have already closed.

Step 7. The seller issues a draft SPA for monthly deliveries

After the spot lift or trial transaction, the seller may issue a draft Sales and Purchase Agreement for repeat and extension deliveries, sometimes called R&E monthly deliveries.

The SPA is the main contract for the ongoing relationship. It should not simply repeat the spot transaction. Monthly delivery contracts need greater detail because they create obligations over time.

A practical SPA should address:

• Monthly quantity and tolerance

• Delivery schedule

• Product specification

• Inspection procedure for each lift

• Pricing formula or fixed price

• Payment security

• Laycan or delivery windows

• Failure to perform

• Force majeure

• Governing law and dispute forum

• Commission protection

  
  

The buyer reviews the SPA, requests changes if needed, and approves the final contract only when it matches the operational reality at Rotterdam.

Step 8. The buyer issues SBLC or IRDLC for contract deliveries

For a 12-month delivery contract, the buyer may issue a bank instrument such as an SBLC or IRDLC. The procedure describes it as irrevocable, nontransferable, auto-revolving, and valid for the shipment value under the contract.

These terms matter.

An SBLC is a standby letter of credit. It usually works as payment security if the buyer fails to pay under the contract terms.

An IRDLC is an irrevocable revolving documentary letter of credit. In trade usage, it can support repeated shipments or monthly lifts, subject to agreed documents and bank wording.

The bank instrument must line up with the SPA. If the SPA says payment happens after dip test by MT103 wire transfer for each monthly quantity, the SBLC or IRDLC should support that payment structure rather than contradict it.

The buyer should work with its bank before agreeing to wording. Sellers should also confirm that the proposed instrument is acceptable to their bank. Bank instruments fail often because the contract language and bank language do not match.

For tank-to-vessel injection, vessel readiness is as important as product readiness.

Step 9. Later deliveries follow the SPA schedule

Once the SPA and payment security are in place, later deliveries start according to the contract schedule. The buyer pays after dip test by MT103 wire transfer for each monthly quantity, if that is what the SPA requires.

Each lift should have its own paper trail. Even if the commercial relationship continues smoothly, every monthly delivery should still show:

• Product availability

• Inspection authorization

• Inspection result

• Injection or loading record

• Invoice

• Payment confirmation

• Commission payment record where applicable

  
  

Repeat deliveries should not weaken controls. They should make controls easier because the process is already agreed.

Red flags to review before signing a TTVIA

FOB fuel transactions attract serious traders, but they also attract document-based fraud. A clean procedure should welcome verification.

Watch for these warning signs:

• The seller refuses independent verification of the tank or product.

• The buyer is asked to pay large upfront fees before access to meaningful proof.

• The tank farm can only be contacted through unverified private channels.

• Document names, quantities, or tank numbers change without explanation.

• The seller cannot show authority to sell and collect.

• The procedure calls for tank-to-vessel injection but later requires tank-to-tank steps.

• The inspection company report cannot be confirmed through the inspection company.

• Commission claims are unclear or keep changing.

• Payment is demanded before the agreed inspection and injection events.

  
  

A proper FOB Rotterdam procedure should reduce uncertainty. If each new document creates more confusion, the parties should pause and verify before moving forward.

A clear TTVIA is built on matching documents and matching movements

A FOB Rotterdam tank-to-vessel transaction depends on trust, but trust is not a substitute for verification. The buyer’s ICPO, the seller’s CI, the DTA, PPOP documents, inspection report, tank receipt, injection report, SPA, and bank instrument should all support the same commercial story.

The most important point is simple: the written procedure must match the physical delivery method. If the deal is tank-to-vessel, the agreement should center on vessel nomination and loading. If the deal involves buyer-leased storage, the documents should say tank-to-tank injection and define what happens next.

When the product, documents, inspection, payment, and commissions all align, the transaction has a workable path. If they do not, no signed procedure can fix the risk after the fact.