The Social Network & Community JUST for Firefighters
hazmat grounding and bonding
Hey guys and gals,
Just a quick question. What is the best way to ground and bond a damaged flamable liquid tanker to transfer to another tanker. And how do you do it in the winter when the ground is frozen and there is three feet of snow.
Just a quick question. What is the best way to ground and bond a damaged flamable liquid tanker to transfer to another tanker. And how do you do it in the winter when the ground is frozen and there is three feet of snow.
Replies to This Discussion
-
Permalink Reply by lutan1 on
-
I spent 6 years in the petroleum industry servicing and installing bowsers- unless things have changed, you should only need to ground from the overturned tanker to the transfer pump and then from the transfer pump to the "new" tanker.
If there is further grounding required, then surely the snow can be cleared and a stake banged into the ground. Be guided by the Oil companies- they're the experts and will have all these systems in place. I doubt very much it'd be up to the FD to handle the transfer other than provision of fire protection...
-
Permalink Reply by FETC on
-
Well the use of bonding and grounding to the earth has been ceased in the US Civilian Airport Industry, the FAA only requires the fuel tanker to bond to the aircraft without any earth grounding. Not sure as to why the codes changed or when, or even why the military still does both, so I guess you would need to ask an industry expert on that.
Like lutan said, the transfer of fuel should be handled by a contractor or hazmat mediation company anyways, so I am not sure if your question what is the requirement for the FD approval before any said transferring of fuel, as the context of your post appears as though you might be doing it yourself as the FD?
-
-
One of the crappier jobs we used to have to do was tank transfers at petrol stations.
Operators may want to transfer their remianing leaded into another tank to freee that tank up for another product. Storage tanks could be as big as 60,000 litres!(and may be bigger now- it's been a long time since I was in the industry)
I say crappier jobs, becasue they take forever to do, you use ARO Pumps which are as noisy as hell, the pumps need high volume air compressors to run, so even more noise, the fuel stations were still "live" (Still in operation) so you had to be on the lookout for smokers, cars in the vicinity, pedestrians wanting to come and watch what you're doing, etc.
ARO Pumps can do over 1000 litres per minute- http://www.aropumprange.com/PX30X.html
-
Permalink Reply by Ben Waller on
-
Grounding and bonding is still the standard as taught by the U.S. petroleum transporting industry.
Here are a few examples of commercially available grounding and bonding equipment and training;
http://www.srbrowne.com/static_grounding.shtml
http://www.signet-experience.com/Grounding%20&%20Bonding.htm
http://www.nwhazmat.com/hazmat-equipment.html
http://www.licensedelectrician.com/Store/IA/2008_Soares.htm
http://www.safetylca.org/t/vrf.asp?loc=t&tag=t4&pg=vrf.asp&...
Grounding and bonding is a required hazmat technnician professional qualification in the NFPA 472 standard as well.
OSHA has referenced NFPA standards in addition to their own, or where OSHA standards are not as specific as the NFPA standards since at least 1999. Here's a grounding and bonding example from OSHA's web site; http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTER...
My department jointly operates the local hazmat team with one of our neighboring departments. All of our hazmat technicians are qualified in grounding and bonding for flammable liquids transfer as part of initial technician certification. We use a Megger meter to determine the adequacy of the grounding field, and attach the meter to a series of electrical cables and galvanized steel grounding rods.
If snow is a problem, shovel the snow clear of the grounding field and drive the grounding rods in the cleared area. If the ground is too frozen to drive the rods, use long concrete drill bits and drill holes in the ground, then insert the grounding rods in the holes. Use an intrinsically safe drill (read "pneumatic drill") with non-sparking drill bits, if possible. If that's not possible, use an atmospheric monitor to ensure that the grounding field is not exposed to flammable vapors. The grounding field connectors should start from the grounding field and work toward the flammable liquids container so that any static electricity spark is directed as far away from the container as possible.
If you don't have a hazmat team or the flammable liquid is being transferred by a hazmat cleanup/salvage company, the fire chief should still remain as the IC. No flammable liquids transfer should begin until approved by the IC. The IC should not approve the transfer process until the containers are adequately grounded, adequately bonded to each other, and non-sparking or intrinsically safe pumps are used.
Per SARA Title III, 1910.120, hazardous materials are not a hazmat team problem, they're a fire department problem, regardless of the level of hazmat response provided by the individual fire department.
-
-
OSHA has referenced NFPA standards in addition to their own, or where OSHA standards are not as specific as the NFPA standards since at least 1999. Here's a grounding and bonding example from OSHA's web site; http://www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/owadisp.show_document?p_table=INTER...
I'd suggest that this is not applicable in this case- my interpretation is that they're talking about portable fuel cans (We call them jerry cans- not sure if it's the same in the USA) which grounding is a major issue if not used correctly.
Bulk storage tanks (road tnakers) are a totally different thing- they're specifically designed to transport and deliver/recieve the product into or out of them.
When they transfer out of them, they earth from the tanker to the in ground tank. When transferring into them, they earth from the external source to the tanker.
Per SARA Title III, 1910.120, hazardous materials are not a hazmat team problem, they're a fire department problem, regardless of the level of hazmat response provided by the individual fire department.
I'm not familiar with the document or where to access it, and I'm not certain what you're suggesting, however the transfer of the fuel (As Stomper is asking) is not a FD problem- FD's are not set up with the correct tools or training to do this sort of work. (Is that what you're suggesting- I'm not sure I understand exactly what you're saying in that paragraph...)
-
-
I should clarify, you can't use any old pump to do a fuel transfer- you need a pump such as the ARO pump I referenced below. (I'm not suggesting this is what you've said Ben, I'm just clarifying my post)
-
-
lutan,
I'm aware of the size of the container differences. What I was pointing out is that if OSHA references NFPA standards in one area, they'll do it in others, size of the container notwithstanding. My team grounds and bonds for any "reportable quantity" of fuel transfer at an emergency scene, or in smaller quantities if we think the hazards warrent G&B. Reportable quantities generally are single containers of 55 gallons or larger, but may involve multiple smaller containers.
The SARA Title III reference states that the Fire Chief or his highest-ranking designee is the Incident Commander of any incident involving a release involving a "reportable quantity" of hazardous materials. It doesn't matter if the Fire Chief has any hazmat training or not. It doesn't matter if the Fire Chief's department has a hazmat team or not. The fire department, not the hazmat team, is in charge in the U.S. There are a couple of exceptions - the Coast Guard is in charge if the release involves a navigable waterway, but in the vast majority of cases, the fire department is in charge. That makes the hazmat operation the fire department's responsibility.
Why was the law written in this way? It's because the hazmat team might not be from that jurisdiction. It could be a regional team, a mutual aid team, a private clean-up company, or a railroad's own hazmat team. The SARA Title III law puts the local fire department in charge because the fire department's community is the one that has to live with the consequences of whatever happens during the hazmat response and cleanup. Outside agencies usually don't have the same level of interest in resolving hazmat incidents as do the local firefighters, and especially the fire chief. The fire department doesn't have to do technician-level Hot Zone interventions such as fuel transfers for the scene and everything in it to be their problem.
To put it another way, the hazmat cleanup company may have tactical responsibility for transferring the fuel, but the Fire Chief has the strategic responsibility. Legally (at least in the U.S.) the strategic level hazmat responsibility (fire department) trumps the tactical-level responsibility (hazmat team) every time. In other words, it doesn't matter who owns the tools or who uses them, the Fire Chief is still in charge, and thus has the ultimate responsibility. That makes the entire hazmat scene his (or her) problem, not the hazmat team's problem.
I understand how this can get confusing, particularly to those who aren't familiar with the SARA Title III legislation.
-
Permalink Reply by Stomper on
-
Thanks for all the replies guys, Good information. I should have clarified a little better what I meant. I was talking about grounding and bonding a damaged tanker to have it transfered to another tanker.
I am a member of a hazmat team and I am a hazmat technician at the company for which I work. The major hazardous materials that we have trucked in by tanker truck is propane (tons of it) and sulfuric acid(also tons of it). We have never had an incident with either of the products. We would not do the transfer of the product, that would be up to the supplier, and it has been past practice to let the supplier do the grounding and bonding if needed.
I have just returned from the western canadian hazmat symposium. One of the speakers had this to say:
As the fire department or hazmat responder responding to an incident it is your cheif that is in charge of the scene. So why would'nt you want to do the grounding and bonding(with proper training of course). As soon as the leak is stopped, if there is one, the next step is ground and bond the problem tanker. Once the transfer tanker arrives ground and bond it to the same grounding feild.Static electricity is created by frictio, the friction of the fluid through the hose and it is present throughout the tanker and the fluid itself. It takes time to discharge static electricity, how much time, there is no way of telling. The longer you wait the more s.e is dicharged.
This made perfect sence to me. Although we would not do the trasfer of the material, would it not make sence to do the grounding and bonding. We are still in charge of the incident, so why not do what we can to secure a safe scene and if that means more training so be it. After all, if things are done right and safe we all go home at the end of the day.
© 2024 Created by Firefighter Nation WebChief.
Powered by
