Secondary Containment Testing Sumps, Buckets, Pans, Piping - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

1 / 13
About This Presentation
Title:

Secondary Containment Testing Sumps, Buckets, Pans, Piping

Description:

MD (spill buckets annually, sumps & dispenser pans every 5 years-required as of 3 years ago) ... No state guidance to contractors on recommended procedures so ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:100
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 14
Provided by: edkub
Category:

less

Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Secondary Containment Testing Sumps, Buckets, Pans, Piping


1
Secondary Containment Testing (Sumps, Buckets,
Pans, Piping)?
  • 20th Annual National
  • Storage Tanks Conference
  • Atlanta, GA
  • March 17, 2008
  • Presented by
  • Edward Kubinsky Jr.
  • Special Projects Manager
  • Crompco, LLC
  • ed.kubinsky_at_crompco.com
  • (800) 646-3161

2
What Types of Containment Systems are being
tested?
  • Spill Buckets
  • Tank Sumps
  • Dispenser Sumps
  • Piping Secondaries

3
Who is Requiring these systems to be tested?
  • The following states in Crompcos current
    coverage area are requiring containment testing
  • AL (spill buckets annually-new requirement)?
  • DE (spill buckets annually, new sumps dispenser
    pans every 3 years except if DW w/ IM and
    existing sumps pans every 3 years if used for
    release detection except if DW w/ IM - new
    requirement)?
  • FL (coming this year?)?
  • MD (spill buckets annually, sumps dispenser
    pans every 5 years-required as of 3 years ago)?
  • NH (spill buckets, sumps dispenser pans at
    installation only)?
  • OH (spill buckets, sumps dispenser pans every 3
    years as of 12/05)?
  • PA (spill buckets, sumps dispenser pans at
    installation only)?
  • Important Note Some owner/operators have
    recognized problems associated with containment
    systems and are conducting periodic containment
    testing and inspections proactively in areas
    where it is not required to test in order to
    prevent problems

4
Problems associated with containment testing from
the testers perspective
  • No manufacturer published recommended procedures
    or not readily available
  • No state guidance to contractors on recommended
    procedures so there are many variations of tests
    being performed (except MD who has issued a
    containment testing protocol that is required to
    be followed and AL has published guidance and
    developed a form)?

5
Crompco Test Data
  • Data being shared is inclusive of tests performed
    between 7/1/03 through 1/23/08

6
Explanation of Results
  • Prior to conducting sump and dispenser pan
    containment testing, technicians will thoroughly
    inspect the containment device, tighten boot
    clamps and attempt to repair any items that may
    cause a failure.
  • When conducting spill bucket testing, drop tubes
    will be removed and the tank riser will be sealed
    below the drain valve to prevent test water (if
    hydrostatic testing) from entering the tank and
    also prevent a failed test due to a
    non-functioning drain valve because the drain
    valve leaking into the tank does not compromise
    the integrity of the bucket.
  • When conducting secondary piping containment
    testing, all entry boots are inspected and
    tightened at the STP and dispenser ends

7
What were finding
  • Spill Buckets
  • 36,830 tests performed
  • 31,853 passing (86.5)?
  • 4,977 failing (13.5)?

8
Comments on Spill Buckets
  • Spill bucket data is inclusive of all tests
    performed. Several of Crompco's major customers
    have undergone large voluntary spill bucket
    replacement programs which included the
    installation and testing of a couple thousand new
    spill buckets which should be taken into
    consideration when viewing this data. We feel
    that without these proactive programs, the
    testing data would be significantly different
    indicating a much larger percentage of failing
    spill bucket tests.

9
What were finding(cont.)?
  • Tank Sumps
  • 10,686 tests performed
  • 8,339 passing (78)?
  • 2,347 failing (22)?

10
What were finding(cont.)?
  • Dispenser Sumps
  • 13,702 tests performed
  • 11,169 passing (81.5)?
  • 2,347 failing (18.5)?

11
What were finding(cont.)?
  • Piping Secondaries (line interstitial spaces)?
  • 6,453 tests performed
  • 5,386 passing (83.5)?
  • 1,067 failing (16.5)?

12
Comments for Discussion
  • Are we confident that the containment devices out
    there are being maintained and will contain a
    release when they occur?
  • What type of periodic testing and/or maintenance
    schedule would you recommend for containments (if
    any)?
  • How long is this equipment designed to last
    (forever)?
  • What can we do better?

13
THANK YOU!
  • Edward Kubinsky Jr.
  • Special Projects Manager
  • Crompco, LLC
  • 800-646-3161
  • ed.kubinsky_at_crompco.com
  • www.crompco.com
Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
About PowerShow.com