LASTFIRE November 2001 - NIFV

LASTFIRELarge Atmospheric Storage Tank FiresSummary/UpdateNovember 2001

In-House Experience & Expertise•Hands-on Emergency Incident Experience•Fire Science Knowledge•Fire Research•Fire Systems Operational Knowledge•Fire Systems Engineering•International Standards Committee members•Qualified Trainers•Fire Effects Modelling•Comprehensive Applications Expertise•Process Knowledge•QRA/HAZID/HAZOPs•AutoCAD Capability/Hydraulic Calculations•Emergency Exercise Management

Experience in more than40 countriesPolarTemperateDesertTropical

LASTFIRELarge Atmospheric Storage Tank Fires

LASTFIREPROJECT SPONSORS Agip Petroli BP Conoco DEA Elf Exxon MOL Mobil OMV PetroFina Repsol Saudi Aramco Shell Total Veba WRG

LASTFIREPROJECT STRUCTURESponsors’Steering GroupProjectCo-ordinatorProjectWorking GroupExternal Information SourcesOperatorsTank BuildersSeal ManufacturersDetection SuppliersProtection SuppliersFire FightersLegislatorsInsurers

LASTFIREOBJECTIVES Determine current levels of risk Establish Design & OperationalPractice & make knowledge availablethroughout industry Establish techniques to determine site-specific levels of risk and identifyappropriate & cost-effective riskreduction measures

LASTFIREIgnition SourcesHazardous MaterialsFireScenarioAnalysisFIRE HAZARD MANAGEMENTIncident DescriptionsEvaluate AlternativePrevention, Protection& Mitigation MeasuresCompare RiskReductionOptionsFormalisationLegislationDefineFHMPolicyEquipment MaintenancePreplanningExercisesFire TrainingUpdateImplementCONSEQUENCESLife SafetyEnvironmentFIRE ENGINEERINGBusiness InterruptionFIRE MODELLINGAsset ValueCOST BENEFIT ANALYSISOther IssuesHAZOPQRAINCIDENT EXPERIENCEDESIGN STANDARDSCODES OF PRACTICE

LASTFIREBRAINSTORMING MEETINGS Firefighters Tank Builders SealManufacturers Operators Risk Analysts Detection Suppliers Protection Suppliers ExtinguishantSuppliers Insurers Legislators

LASTFIREIncidentFrequencySurveyPROJECT DELIVERABLESFoamReviewRiskReductionOptionsDirect inputIndirect inputFireScenarioAnalysisCompare RiskReductionOptionsDefineFHMPolicyImplementEscalationMechanismAnalysisRisk Workbook

LASTFIREMAIN PROJECT CONCLUSIONSFires in open top floating roof tanks shouldnot represent major risk to life safety or theenvironment if managed to preplannedstrategyMost cost effective risk reduction is goodfire related inspection & maintenancePrescriptive requirements cannot beuniversally appliedSite specific risk based policies should bedevelopedSlide 1 of 4

LASTFIREMAIN PROJECT CONCLUSIONSFire incident probability & associated riskis relatively lowRimsealfires are most common scenario.They are unlikely to escalate to full surfacefires in well maintained tanksLightning is most common ignition sourceCorrelations between rimseal firefrequency & thunderstorm frequency havebeen developed. Typical frequency forNorthern Europe sites is 1x10 -3 /tank yearSlide 2 of 4

LASTFIREMAIN PROJECT CONCLUSIONSGeneric event frequencies for fires otherthan rimseal fires are:-Fire TypeSpill on roofSmall bund fireLarge bund fireFull surface fireFrequency3x10 -5 /tank year9x10 -5 /tank year6x10 -5 /tank year3x10 -5 /tank yearSlide 3 of 4

LASTFIREMAIN PROJECT CONCLUSIONSDetailed design of detection & protectionsystems is often incorrect due to lack ofoperational experience in design housesIncident response strategies must be developedprior to incident with regular exercises &trainingFHM policies should be developed from sitespecific analysis, but risk reduction options mostlikely to be cost effective are:-Secondary sealsFire retardant rimseal materialIndependent high-high alarmLinear heat detectionExtended discharge rimseal foam systemWalkways allowing foam application by handlinesSlide 4 of 4

FLOATING ROOF TANK FIRE SCENARIOSRimseal FireSpill on Roof FireFull Surface FireBund FirePontoon Explosion

LASTFIREPROJECT DATABASE Data processed from 16 companies Completed questionnaires received from 164sites in 36 countries Data from 2420 tanks >40m diameter in useduring 1981-19951995 Average age of tanks reviewed - 27.1 years Sample represented 33909 tank years ofoperation

LASTFIRESPILLS & INITIAL FIRE EVENTSLASTFIRELoss of containmentOntoroofSunkenroofIntobundRimsealInitial Fire EventSmallbundLargebundSpillon roofFullsurfaceNumberofIncidents553796553211Frequency( x 10 -3/tank year )1.61.12.81.60.090.060.030.03

LASTFIRERIMSEAL FIRE IGNITIONSOURCESNot recorded1Hot work on live tank252LightningTotal = 55

LASTFIRERIMSEAL FIRE FREQUENCYBY AREACountry/RegionNigeria SouthernEuropeNorthernEuropeNorthSaudiAmericaVenezuela Thailand SingaporeArabiaNumberoffiresTankyearsFrequency( x 10 -3 /tank year )Thunderstormdays per year7 13 15 9 2 3 2 1333 6247 15264 4611 159 224 1035 339221 2 1 2 13 13 2 0.3160 30 20 40 60 70 120 10

LASTFIREFULL SURFACE FIREANALYSISTotal of 6 full surface fires during 4 incidents☺ 1 escalation in 55 rim seal fires(Roof pontoons contained vapours and/or liquid)☺ 1 escalation in 2 bund fires impinging on tank shell☺ 1 escalation from a spill fire on the roof☺ 1 full surface fire in 37 sunken roofs incidents☺ Escalation to 2 downwind tanks in 1 full surface fire(Low boiling temperature fuel)☺ 1 boilover in 6 full surface fires

LASTFIRERISK REDUCTION OPTIONSOptions addressed:- Tank & Bund Design & Operation Incident Detection Fire Protection Systems Portable/Mobile Fire FightingEquipment Fire Response StrategiesFinal options chosen should be based on site-specific specific analysis

LASTFIRERISK REDUCTION OPTIONSFire related Tank Inspection Mechanical failure Electrical fittings Fire detection systems Fire protection systems Fire Fighting EquipmentIdeally, via a weekly walk-round checklist

LASTFIRERISK REDUCTION OPTIONSFire retardant rimsealTank RoofTank RoofFire retardant rimsealFire containmentNon fire retardant rimsealFire spread

LASTFIRERISK REDUCTION OPTIONSLinear Heat DetectorLinear Heat Detectorin rimseal areaTank RoofFIREFAULT1 2 3 4 5 6End-of-linedeviceSYSTEM ALARMFAULT SILENCEDSYSTEMHEALTHYRESETSILENCEALARMCONTROLENABLE

LASTFIRERISK REDUCTION OPTIONSLinear Heat Detector - specification considerationsEnvironmental & Operating conditionsNormally no zoning required on tankNormally do not require back-up detectorMonitor for integrityCare with routing onto tank roofInclude additional length for easier repairInclude test mechanism

Linear Heat Detector - detector locationGood location - detector close to top of seal

Linear Heat Detector - detector locationPoor location - detector away from top of seal

Rimseal Foam SystemsFoam appliedtorimseal area

Rimseal Protection Systems“One Shot Systems”Limited application timeMaintenance issues

Rimseal Protection SystemsExtended Discharge SystemsLonger application time

Rimseal Foam SystemsFoam Concentrate Proportioning SystemsFully Fixed SystemSemi Fixed System

LASTFIRERISK REDUCTION OPTIONSFoam Systems - Specification considerations Minimise system outlet blockage potential Cohesive foam discharge Foam dam higher than seal assembly Drain holes in foam dam Hydrant outlets at top of tank Ease of inspection/testing Correct proportioning at all possible flows Operator training

LASTFIRERISK REDUCTIONPreplanning FormaliseOperator actionsFirefighteractions Training Exercises Systems/Equipment maintenance Update

Full Surface Fire ResponseOptions•Burn Down•System Application•Monitor Attack

Full Surface Fire ResponsePump-out and Controlled Burndown

Pump-out and Controlled BurndownExample•Shell, New Jersey

Note:Cooling monitors only

Note tank height!!!

Pump-out and Controlled BurndownConsiderations• Smoke• Public Image• Incident Duration• Pump out capability• Spare tankage• Flow rates• Exposure Protection• Boilover Potential• Prior Acceptance by Authorities

Full Surface Fire ResponseFull Surface Foam System

Full Surface Foam SystemExample•OMV, Austria

Full Surface Foam SystemConsiderations•Manning Exposure Minimised•Response Time Minimised•Cost•System Maintenance / Testing•Reduced Flow Rates•Foam Flow Issues if Tank > 60m

Full Surface Fire ResponseMonitor Application

Monitor AttackExamples•Sunoco,Sarnia, , Canada•Orion, USA

Monitor attack started

Norco Fire, June 200183m diameterGasoline Fire

Monitor AttackConsiderations• Manning Requirements•Numbers•Competencies• Personnel Safety• Radiant heat• Boilover• Bund access / footing• Logistics• Foam supply• Water supply• Allowance for Foam Losses (60%)• Drainage Issues

Full Surface Fire ResponseOptionsWhatever one you choosePREPLAN&EXERCISE THEPREPLAN!!

LASTFIRELarge Atmospheric Storage Tank FiresFollow-Up Work

Lightning Protectionof Floating RoofStorage Tanks

Main Issues• Proprietary equipment no guarantee!• Sparking at seals very likely• Shunts not usually effective• Ensure earth lead effectiveness

Poor ShuntContactGood ShuntContact

Earth leads are important!

LightningProtectionSystem

LASTFIRELarge Atmospheric Storage Tank FiresRisk Workbook

Risk WorkbookConsequencesXRisk 1FrequencyAdd FEHM measureConsequencesXRisk 2FrequencyIf ( Risk 1 - Risk 2 ) > Cost of measure,then cost benefit achieved

LASTFIRERISK WORKBOOKCost Benefit AnalysisA Risk Reduction Option is cost beneficial if :-{( ) ( )}× γ - × γ × Pr >C withoutwithoutC withwithPrcontrolCost of implementa tionwhere:C without = Expected cost of incident without option in placeC with = Expected cost of incident with option in placeγ withoutwithout= Expected statistical frequency of the initiating event if optionis not implementedγ withwith= Expected statistical frequency of the initiating event if optionis implementedPr control = Probability that option will perform as requiredcontrol

An Easier Way….

Risk Workbook• Now updated• Computerised version available• 4 analyses• Rimseal Fire• Spill / Partial Surface Fire• Full Surface Fire• Bund Fire• Database• Help / Advice

IntroductionandGuidanceTank Identificationand SizeRisk MitigationOption Selection

Fighting Floating Roof TankRimseal Fires

• Made by Fire-fighters for Fire-fighters• Draws extensively from LASTFIREProject knowledge• Practical guide to fighting rimseal fires• Fire-fighting strategies outlined• Guidance on creating pre-fire plans forrimseal scenarios

Scenes from LASTFIREVideo - ‘Fighting FloatingRoof Tank Rimseal Fires’

Foam Fire Test ForStorage Tank Fires

Foam Fire Test For Storage TankFiresComprehensive test specification developedFoam fire test exclusively for tank applicationEntirely relevant test:Critical application ratesRealistic application methodsRealistic foam propertiesEasily set-upAdaptable to suit fireground needsProven to differentiate between foams

2.44m DiameterFire Test Pan

RealisticApplicationMethodsRealisticFoamProperties

‘System’Application

Rapid Knockdown but PoorSealing Capability

Excellent BurnbackResistance

Tank FirefightingWorkshop

Tank Firefighting WorkshopObjectivesTo provide general site familiarisationTo increase knowledge of tank fire scenariosTo review tank fire response strategy/tacticsOptionsStrategiesTo practice response tacticsFire Training GroundTank FarmTo review plans for tank Fire Hazard Management

Tank Firefighting WorkshopProgramme - Day 1Tank types and fire scenariosTank incident videosFirefighting foam and foam systemsTank Fire hazard management (FHM)Protection/detection systemsFire modellingPreplanningTankFire Response TacticsFuture Tank FHM

Terminal FamiliarisationExercise Overview and Safety FeaturesTraining Ground – rimseal fire simulatorTank Farm – response ExerciseDebriefTank Firefighting WorkshopProgramme - Day 2

On the TrainingGround

Rimseal FireFightingTactics

FullCircumferenceRimseal FirePartialCircumferenceRimseal Fire

2 Man Attack At All TimesUsing Foam Extinguishers

Rimseal FireResponseSimulator

Briefing Session

Dry Chemical Attack

Note Flashback!

Handheld Foam Extinguishers

Foam Handline

Tank Farm –Response Exercise

ExerciseBriefing

ExerciseBriefing

Water spray/cone willallow team to access windgirder/walkway.Spray handlines may needto move with team.

Avoid water diluting foamstream or foam application

More Information about LASTFIRE Deliverablesfrom:Resource Protection InternationalLloyd Berkeley Place, Pebble Lane, Aylesbury, BucksHP20 2JH, UKT: +44 (0) 1296 399311F: +44 (0) 1296 395669e-mail: ramsden@resprotint.co.ukwebsite: www.resprotint.co.uk