Blast Rocks GA. Sugar Refinery
Transcription
Blast Rocks GA. Sugar Refinery
IFW Industrial Fire World Blast Rocks GA. Sugar Refinery BITTER SWEET Photo Courtesy of U.S. Coast Guard P.O. BOX 9161, COLLEGE STATION, TX 77842 PRSRT STD US POSTAGE PAID Permit #204 Bollingbrook, IL Volume MJ2008.pmd 23, 1 No. 3 May-June 2008 X ,T s e: ing r u s p is S his Big t n oi in Als ire F ry e fin e lR Oi 4/24/2008, 3:58 PM T O M O R R O W ' S T E C H N O L O G Y F O R T O D AY ' S D E M A N D S Imagine your new high-tech industrial apparatus equipped with fully-automatic foam proportioning while delivering pinpoint accuracy at all flows – at the simple push of a button! Envision a direct-injection system that provides the choice of plain water or any injection percentage, at each individual outlet. One that allows more water flow, doesn’t re-circulate foam, and can be calibrated and tested within hours without consuming costly concentrate. The future is here today – AccuMax! To learn more, contact us at 800-533-9511. www.foampro.com IFW CONTENTS DEPARTMENTS 6: COVER STORY BITTER SWEET BY ANTON RIECHER Photo courtesy of Georgia Insurance & Safety Fire Commissioner On February 7, 2008, a massive explosion and fire at a sugar refinery northwest of Savannah, GA, caused 13 deaths and left others critically injured with burns. The blast was likely fueled by combustible sugar dust. 5: Deadly Dust Even small accumulations of combustible dust in industrial settings can result in fiery tragedy. 14: One Seven System In Europe, industrial fire brigades are beginning to pay real attention to the advantages of compressed air foam. 16: Fluorine Fundamentals DuPont introduces fluorinated compounds that reduces the environmental impact of Class B foam. 18: Curtain Call Retired Chief Bob Wood receives the Connie Award at the 23rd annual IFW Conference 19: Trouble on Refinery Road A February 2008 explosion at an oil refinery in Big Springs, TX, registered 2.1 on the Richter scale. 7: Dust Storm Williams Fire & Hazard Control extinguishes Georgia silo fires involving a sugary fire medium. 23: Petroblast Blast-resistant modules designed for refining & petrochemical sites. 24: Explosion Proof Gas detectors limit risks while giving operators needed flexibility. 31: Nine Time Champs Alyeska responders cinch annual Alaskian firefighter competition. 33: Witches Brew Chemical Safety Board releases study on Apex, N.C., hazmat fire. 36: Weyerhaeuser/Eaton Partner Companies work together to reduce the risk of arc flash. Technical Consultant Louis N. Molino, Sr. Incident Log Editor Jason Marsh Hazmat Contributor John S. Townsend, Ph.D. EMS Contributor Bill Kerney Education Contributor Attila Hertelendy Risk Contributor John A. Frank Publisher David White Editor Anton Riecher Circulation Manager Gloria Thompson Marketing Manager Lynn White Associate Editor Kendra Graf Marketing Representative Sherrill Miller MAY-JUNE 2008 Volume 23 Number 3 4: Dave’s Notes By David White The cheap prices we pay for goods in the first world is often at the cost of safety in the third world. 13: Industry News • CSB video details Texas blast • OSHA fines Texas refinery • OSHA renews foundry alliance • Pipeline corp. wins API award 27: Incident Log 28: Focus on Hazmat By John Townsend Fire fighting foams are being challenged by a new fuel — ethanol. 30: Risk Assessment By Jeffrey Roberts The nuts and bolts of ensuring that a fire pump will operate during a fire. 32: EMS Corner By Bill Kerney How to deal with death on the job. 34: Industrial Service Directory 37: New Products 38: Spotlight Ads INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD® SINCE 1985 (ISSN 0749-890X) P.O. Box 9161/540 Graham Rd. College Station, TX 77842/45 (979)690-7559 FAX (979)690-7562 E-MAIL [email protected] WEB SITE www.fireworld.com Industrial Fire World, March-April 2008, Volume 23, No. 2. Industrial Fire World (ISSN 0749-890X) is published bimonthly by Industrial Fire World, Inc., P.O. Box 9161, College Station, Texas 77842. (979) 690-7559. Fax: (979) 6907562. E-mail: [email protected]. All rights reserved under International Convention. Copyright © 2007 by Industrial Fire World Inc., all rights reserved. Industrial Fire World is a registered trademark of David White Investments, Inc., College Station, Texas. The design and content are fully protected by copyright and must not be reproduced in any manner without written permission of the publisher. Bulk rate postage paid at Fulton, MO, and additional mailing offices. Subscription rates: USA, one year $29.95, two years $49.95, and three years $59.95; Canada and foreign, add $20 per year postage. Single copies $6. Back issues available at $6 a copy plus postage. Payment must accompany orders for single copies. All inquiries regarding subscription problems, change of address and payments, call (979) 690-7559. Please allow six to eight weeks for your first subscription copy to be shipped. Please state both old and new addresses when requesting an address change and notify us at least six weeks in advance. (If possible enclose subscription address label.) Industrial Fire World is edited exclusively to be of value for people in the industrial fire protection field. Subscriptions are reserved to those engaged in the area of industrial fire protection and related fields or service and supply companies’ personnel. Address advertising requests to Marketing Director, Industrial Fire World, P.O. Box 9161, College Station, Texas 77842. (979) 690-7559. Advertising rates and requirements available on request. Editorial Information: Industrial Fire World welcomes correspondence dealing with industrial fire and safety issues, products, training and other information that will advance the quality and effectiveness of industrial fire and safety management. We will consider for publication all submitted manuscripts and photographs. All material will be treated with care, although we cannot be responsible for loss or damage. Submissions should be accompanied by a stamped, self-addressed envelope. (Any payment for use of material will be made only upon publication.) Industrial Fire World assumes no responsibility for the return of unsolicited manuscripts or photographs. Industrial Fire World reserves the right to refuse any editorial or advertising material submitted for publication. Information and recommendations contained in this publication have been compiled from sources that are believed to be reliable and representative of the best current opinion on various topics. No warranty, guarantee, or representation is made by Industrial Fire World as to the absolute validity of sufficiency of information contained within the publication. Industrial Fire World assumes no responsibility for statements made by contributors. Advertising in Industrial Fire World does not imply approval nor endorsement by Industrial Fire World. Printed in the USA. CPC publication number 40801529. Postmaster: Send address changes to Industrial Fire World, P.O. Box 9161, College Station, Texas 77842. For subscription inquiries call: (979) 690-7559. MAY/JUNE 2008 MJ2008.pmd 3 4/24/2008, 3:58 PM 3 DAVE’S NOTES Safety comes no cheaper overseas First World safety too costly for many Third World plants By DAVID WHITE U .S. companies relocate their plants overseas for many reasons. They can hire workers at very low wages, such as 30 cents an hour in China. Companies don’t have to pay any employee benefits. They don’t have to pay foreign taxes when they export their products back to us. And, most wicked of all, they don’t have to comply with safety and environmental regulations. To an injured worker or a grieving family, the only acceptable industrial casualty figure is zero. Absolutes are rarely achieved in any human endeavor, but that is no excuse not to try. The problem is that some countries do not try as hard as others, and it is reflected in the prices we pay for goods. According to Standard & Poor, China is in a position to overtake Japan as the largest economy in the Asia-Pacific region and become the second-largest global economy within the next five years. Yet, in 2005, about 127,000 people in China died in workplace accidents with at least 17 incidents with death tolls exceeding 30. As the country has racked up more than two decades of near double-digit annual economic growth, the number of accidents in factories and mines has also multiplied. Some consider the Chinese injury and fatality numbers to be a low ball estimate at best. Plant managers, fearing government fines and possible closure, often pay the families of dead workers not to report deaths. Of course, a poor industrial safety record and lack of openness in reporting casualties is much harder to hide with the advent of the Internet and cell phones. China is not alone in sacrificing safety for profit. A Finnish study states that India has an annual industrial fatality rate of 11.4 people per 100,000 workers. Overall, Asian nations excluding China and India have an average industrial accident fatality rate of 21.5 per 100,000. The study credits the U.S. with a fatality rate of 5.2 people per 100,000. Think of American industry in terms of the immense quantities of materials processed, much of which is, in raw form, toxic, corrosive, flammable and even explosive. As prominent 4 MJ2008.pmd industrial emergency responder Dwight Williams is fond of observing, these folks “aren’t making cake batter.” Yet, given the enormous scale and inherent risks, the incidence of death and injury is remarkably low. U.S. Department of Labor statistics state that out of 5,702 work-related fatalities reported in 2005, only nine percent were from exposure to harmful substances and environment. Three percent were from fires and explosions. More people died at work as the result of assaults and violent acts such as homicides. Now take into consideration that of those 5,702 fatalities, only 393 were directly engaged in manufacturing. The construction business alone killed 1,186 people in 2005. In an ordinary month, the Industrial Fire World website might list as many as 200 industrial emergencies worldwide of sufficient interest to gain press notoriety. Only 20 or so of these incidents involve fatalities. No doubt this unscientific sampling under represents the true casualty figure, but it gives us some basis for comparison. So is the U.S. too cheap or too expensive when it comes to protecting workers? After any major industrial incident, OSHA, the Chemical Safety Board or the NTSB produces a scathing report demanding that, for example, any refinery with Type X pressure vessel be inspected and extensive revisions be made. That is their job, to look at the safety and ignore the dollars. But at some point some corporate bean counter will work the numbers and determine that making said revisions is simply too costly. The decision is made to shut down the facility and move the operation to the Third World. Goodbye jobs, hello cheaper goods. I personally have spent much of the last two years visiting many foreign countries. Most of them are very modernized in the way that an American or any First World visitor might consider comfortable. But, at the same time, I can assure you these countries do not observe anything approaching OSHA or EPA standards, or the standards enforced by any European regulatory agency. With regard to safety, the playing field is anything but level. That is not likely to change anytime soon. Still, with the global village continuing the shrink, it will become increasingly hard to hide the human cost behind the consumer savings. At some point, the unsafe practices of our trading competitors will catch up with them. Bad PR is not fatal in the same way as flash fires and toxic vapor, but it can significantly hurt the bottom line where most companies live. INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 4 4/24/2008, 3:58 PM DEADLY DUST foundry that made cast aluminum and aluminum alloy automobile wheels – killed an additional eight workers. Angela Blair of the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board served as lead investigator for a report on combustible dust fires and explosions released by the CSB in 2006. She said investigators soon realized that the phrase “dust explosion” was not part of the common vernacular in industry. “People do not comprehend that dust will explode,” Blair said. “In those first investigations, we spent a lot of energy explaining and convincing people what dust was capable of doing.” Updating the statistics used in that report, there have been 348 dust explosion and fire incidents in U.S. industry since 1980. Those incidents resulted in 132 fatalities and 780 injuries. Including the Feb. 7 sugar By Anton Riecher refinery explosion in Port Wentworth, GA, at least eight of those incidents ack when Grandma cooked over an open flame were defined as “catastrophic,” involving multiple fatalities and significant it was common knowledge – never use flour community economic impact. Citing the CSB dust explosion report, Rep. John Barrow, D-GA, to extinguish a grease fire. Use baking soda or and Rep. George Miller, D-CA, chairman of the House Education and salt. Better yet, put a lid over the pan. But never, Labor Committee, have announced plans to introduce a bill to force never use flour. It might mean placing the kitchen and, quite possibly, Grandma at risk for a fiery dust OSHA to issue new regulations governing industrial dust. A hearing on the issue was scheduled for March 12 in the wake of a sugar refinery explosion. As a highly dispersed dust, flour can ignite. Flour is explosion in Port Wentworth, GA, on February 7 that killed 12. Ed Foulke Jr., head of OSHA, visited the Port Wentworth blast site a starch which, like other carbohydrates such as sugar, burns very easily. About two ounces suspended in a on March 3 to announce that federal inspections would be carried out at cubic yard of air is enough to create an intense flash hundreds of plants where combustible dust is a workplace hazard. fire. If the dust cloud ignites within a confined space, OSHA mailed 30,000 companies with regard to combustible dust dangers. the situation can become explosive. According to the CSB report, the two most common fuel types Flour is not the only dust that poses an airborne threat. Most solid involving dust explosions and fires were the food products industry organic materials, as well as with 24 percent and the many metals and some lumber and wood products DUST BLAST ROCKS SAVANNAH nonmetallic inorganic industry with 15 percent. • Georgia sugar refinery explosion kills 13 - Page 6 materials, will burn or However, chemical manufac• Williams F&HC extinguishes sugar silo fires - Page 7 explode if finely divided and turing accounted for 12 dispersed in sufficient percent of these fires and concentrations. Combustible dusts can be intentionally manufactured explosions. The rest were distributed among the primary metal industries, powders, such as corn starch or aluminum powder coatings, or may be eight percent; rubber and plastic products, eight percent; electric services, generated by handling and processing solid combustible materials such eight percent; fabricated metal products, seven percent; equipment as wood and plastic pellets. manufacturing, seven percent; furniture and fixtures, four percent; and Polishing, grinding, transporting and shaping many of these materials others, seven percent. can produce very small particles, which can easily become airborne and The CSB’s combustible dust hazard study serves as a primer of settle on surfaces, crevices, dust collectors and other equipment. Even basic concepts about dusts and dust explosions. It states that a key seemingly small amounts of accumulated dust can cause catastrophic factor in the three 2003 dust explosions studied by the CSB was that damage. The explosion that devastated a North Carolina plant in 2003 workers and managers were often unaware of dust explosion hazards or and killed six workers was caused by dust accumulations that, for the failed to recognize the serious nature of those hazards. most part, were less than a quarter of an inch. THE EVENTS And yet, the respect that Grandma had for flammable dust in her Each of the three 2003 explosions investigated by the CSB provide kitchen is not shared by all corners of modern industry. The dust threat is most often identified with flour mills and grain elevators. Grain elevator case studies of the different ways dust becomes a devastating hazard. In explosions throughout the 1970s, including five elevator explosions in all three cases, the CSB determined that the companies involved failed December 1977 that killed 59 people, led to much research and stricter to adhere to relevant NFPA standards. In the North Carolina incident, the rubber compounding process Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) standards. But the aforementioned plant that exploded in 2003 produced rubber involved freshly milled rubber strips dipped into a slurry of syringe plungers and other pharmaceutical devices. Two other polyethylene, water and surfactant to cool the rubber and provide an catastrophic dust explosions that same year – one at a Kentucky plant anti-tack coating. Continued on Page 11 specializing in acoustic insulation for cars and the other at an Indiana Even small amounts of accumulated dust can result in fiery tragedy B MAY/JUNE 2008 MJ2008.pmd 5 4/24/2008, 3:58 PM 5 On February 7, 2008, a massive explosion and fire at a sugar refinery located northwest of Savannah, GA, caused 13 deaths and left many others critically injured with severe burns. The blast was likely fueled by combustible sugar dust. By Anton Riecher 6 MJ2008.pmd O ne emergency responder to a massive combustible dust explosion February 7 described the collapsed interior of a four-story packing facility at an industrial refinery near Savannah, GA., as being like the inside of the World Trade Center after the 9/11 terrorist attack. However, this particular refinery did not specialize in products normally considered hazardous. The explosive responsible for the devastating blast was refined sugar. Tod Heil, a team leader with the Georgia Search and Rescue (GSAR) Coastal Task Force, said the risk of a secondary collapse existed for responders throughout the search for possible survivors in the refinery ruins. “We’ve got several different types of collapse – pancake collapse, lean to collapse,” Heil said. “The lean to collapse provides void spaces where the floors have hinged down and there are places of refuge where there could be possible victims.” Unfortunately, rescue requires survivors. Eight fatalities were pulled from the rubble after the blast and fires. By mid-March, further fatalities among the hospitalized had pushed the death toll to 13 with six survivors listed in critical condition. Dozen more were injured from the more than 100 workers who were present at the time of the explosion. It took one week to extinguish the last smoldering sections of the damaged refinery. Williams Fire & Hazard Control, a Texas-based team of industrial firefighters renown for extinguishing large INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 6 4/24/2008, 3:59 PM Below, an aerial photo of the smoldering refinery in Port Wentworth, GA., taken the afternoon after an explosion. Fires burned for almost a week in two of three sugar storage silos damaged in the blast. Attempts to extinguish the silos using helicopter water drops failed. Dust Storm Williams F&HC beats different fire medium T Photo Courtesy of U.S. Coast Guard diameter flammable liquid storage tank fires, successfully applied their talents to fires lingering in two 80-foot (24 meter) storage silos. Port Wentworth (GA.) Fire Chief Greg Long served as incident commander throughout the emergency. The prompt, effective action that responders took in the first moments of the disaster saved 85 percent of the surrounding industrial complex, he said. No evacuation beyond the plant gates was required. “We contained the fires to the areas in which it originated,” Long said. “It never spread to the other buildings. That’s the reason why they will be able to rebuild.” TAKING CHARGE Port Wentworth, population 4,000, is located on the Savannah River in northwest Chatham County, just outside the city of Savannah. Long became chief 19 months before the sugar refinery explosion. His department consists of five paid firefighters, including Long, and 14 volunteers. The two fire stations are staffed from 7 a.m. to 7 p.m., seven days a week with volunteers answering calls after hours. exas-based Williams Fire & Hazard Control’s usual forte is extinguishing flammable liquid fires in storage tanks measuring hundreds of feet in diameter. But the intense, stubborn fires after a devastating explosion at a sugar refinery in Port Wentworth, GA., presented a different kind of challenge. Savannah area responders handled the structural fire fighting after the February 7 blast that wrecked nearly 20 percent of the sprawling refinery and eventually claimed 13 lives. However, high temperature fires inside two 40-foot (12 meter)-wide, 100foot (30.4 meter)-tall sugar silos defied local efforts, including massive water drops from a helicopter. Williams F&HC’s proven track record extinguishing silo fires involves contents ranging from coal to shredded tires. The Port Wentworth incident gave the company a chance to prove its technique against a powdery target that normally does not qualify as volatile. Company spokesman Brent Gaspard said an attendee at last year’s XTREME Industrial Fire & Hazard Training School contacted Williams F&HC lead firefighter Chauncey Naylor about tackling the persistent silo fires that burned five days. “This fellow asked Chauncey if Williams F&HC had ever put out a sugar fire,” Gaspard said. “Chauncey said no. When asked if we had ever put out a silo fire. Chauncey said yes. Basically, that’s how we got the job.” Naylor and the Williams F&HC team arrived in Port Wentworth on the afternoon of Feb. 12. Of the three sugar silos surrounded by the collapsed structure of what had been the refinery’s packaging area, two had the tops blown off and were burning at nearly 4,000 degrees F (2,200 degrees C) inside. Concerns about further collapses, including the impact of continuous water drops on the silos, made a ground operation impossible. “Chauncey determined that an over-the-top application was the way to go,” Gaspard said. “Our guys did a lot of their work from a basket lifted by a crane.” Bringing adequate water to the fire proved to be the first challenge. Naylor brought in a new Williams F&HC product, a 4,000 gpm (15,000 lpm) submersible pump called The NHancer. Continued on Page 10 MAY/JUNE 2008 MJ2008.pmd 7 4/24/2008, 3:59 PM 7 explosion and fire ripped through the refinery’s packing area, a four-story structure built around the storage silos. In this area, processed sugar was bagged then sent off to the railcars to be transported. The U.S. Chemical Safety Board, which has launched a major investigation, has preliminarily concluded that the explosion was caused by combustible sugar dust. When dust builds to dangerous levels in industrial worksites, it can become fuel for fires and explosions. Combustible dust can come from many sources, such as sugar, flour, feed, plastics, wood, rubber, furniture, textiles, pesticides, pharmaceuticals, dyes, coal and metals. Photo Courtesy of U.S. Coast Guard Rushing to the scene of the The demolished packaging area of refinery complex surrounded three decapitated sugar silos. explosion Long first spotted the Equipment includes a Pierce Contender pumper, a heavy duty rescue rising column of smoke from 3½ miles (5.6 kilometers) away. The unit, a first responder squad, a Bean Class A pumper, an E-One pumper weather was clear and calm, with most of the smoke rising straight up. and a 5,800 gallon (22,000 liter) water tanker. While en route, he wasted no time calling in help from neighboring The sugar refinery is a 160-acre industrial site on the south shore of agencies. the Savannah River on the Georgia-South Carolina border. Employing “I brought in Garden City and the airport fire department, both of about 400 workers, the refinery in Port Wentworth produces more than which border us,” Long said. “I also called the Pooler Fire Department 14 million hundredweight of sugar annually. and, of course, the Savannah Fire Department, which is a large municipal Founded at the same site in 1917, the refinery predates the department.” incorporation of the city by 40 years. On the southside of the refinery Firefighters from Port Wentworth’s closest fire station, only a mile is an elementary school, a church and residential neighborhoods. Other (1.6 kilometers) away, were already on scene. plants and housing lie west of the refinery and, to the east, is the “They reported numerous fires, heavy smoke and structural Georgia Port Authority. collapse,” Long said. “Triage was being set up for a large number of “Generations of families have worked there,” Long said. “Moms and casualties. They were also trying to set up accountability.” dads worked at the sugar refinery, then their children.” Firefighters were not able to immediately assess the extent of the But despite all the history that binds the sugar refinery to Port damage to the refinery, he said. Wentworth, Long’s fire department only became responsible for providing “You’ve got five-story structures in front of two-story structures,” fire protection at the facility six months before the explosion. The Long said. “Because of the way the refinery is laid out you just can’t refinery is in an industrial area of Chatham County that cannot be see the whole facility at once.” incorporated into any city without legislative action by the state. Mainly affected was a four-story structure used for packaging, located “So while the refinery is now in my fire district, it is not in my city,” in the center of the refinery. Heavy flames were apparent on the third Long said. “We were still in the process of working with them to complete and fourth floors with spot fires on the second floor. Fire raged in four a pre-plan.” or five different locations on the first floor. Lids had blown off two Although no formal mutual aid association exists covering the sugar storage silos. A packing area in front of the distribution warehouse Savannah region, Long said area fire chiefs and emergency agencies have was also showing heavy fire. recently been increasingly conscientious about working together to Beside the area affected by the collapse, responders were concerned provide aid to neighboring responders when needed. about 150,000 gallons (570,000 liters) of diesel fuel in storage on site. “I’ve been able to work very well with all the other chiefs,” he said. “Most of what we did that first night was just trying to contain the “We’ve done a lot of multi agency training. We’re able to know what fire,” Long said. “We were concerned about the collapse and the amount resources are available to us within the three surrounding counties.” of water that we were throwing into the area while trying to conduct Long needed almost all those resources in Chatham, Effingham and search and rescue.” Bryan counties to deal with the events of February 7. At 7:19 p.m., an Most of the employees caught in the blast were able to escape 8 MJ2008.pmd INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 8 4/24/2008, 3:59 PM afterward with only minor problems with debris. “If they had debris on them it was only a small amount,” Long said. “Basically, they were just able to walk out of the heavily damaged areas, thanks mainly to the safety equipment employees were required to wear – hard hats, safety glasses and safety boots. Still, there were a lot of burn injuries to the chest and leg areas.” Responders spent the early minutes of the emergency quickly moving the walking wounded into a safe zone away from the collapsed structure. “We had an outstanding response from local medical personnel,” Long said. “When the call went out it was just past shift change at the three area hospitals, including the Level One trauma center in Savannah. We had a trauma surgeon and nurses transported to the scene.” Only three miles (4.8 k) away, the headquarters for a local ambulance service dispatched their supervisors as well as personnel to the scene. All of this was done within the first 20 minutes of the emergency, Long said. Despite the number of different departments involved, radio inoperability was not a problem. The entire region uses an 800 trunking system. “We had five fire ground channels that were assigned to us and seven different frequencies we were operating off of,” Long said. “We had just installed a new dispatching system in January. We had four different dispatchers assigned to us.” NIMS Most emergency situations are handled locally, but when a major incident happens help may be needed from other jurisdictions, the state and the federal government. The National Incident Management System was developed so responders from different jurisdictions and disciplines can work together better to respond to natural disasters and emergencies, including acts of terrorism. NIMS benefits include a unified approach to incident management; standard command and management structures; and emphasis on preparedness, mutual aid and resource management. “We put NIMS into immediate effect,” Long said. “The other departments fell in line based on their backgrounds and basic qualifications. There were no egos, no problems and no communications issues.” Arriving in those early minutes were personnel and apparatus from the nearby fire departments. Most important were the big aerial apparatus supplied by the Savannah Fire Department, Long said. But water to supply the arriving apparatus was not immediately available. “The blast damaged the water line to the refinery’s fire suppression system,” Long said. “We had to bring tug boats in on the Savannah River. Equipped with pumps, they were able to supply the aerials by drafting from the river.” The Savannah area does not have a fully operational heavy fire fighting fire boat. However, safely conducting search and rescue operations would require even more water than that. Locating a distant hydrant still working, Long asked Effingham County firefighters to organize a tanker shuttle. “They were able to bring us five 3,500 gallon (13,200 liter) tankers,” he said. “We put a pumper at the hydrant and then got the water department to increase the water flow. We were able to keep a 75-foot (23 meter) aerial ladder operational for seven hours. Effingham County shuttles water better than anybody I’ve ever seen.” Twenty-eight separate fire suppression operations and search and rescue missions were completed the first night thanks largely to a consistent water supply, Long said. Responders commandeered an office at the refinery to establish an incident command post. “That gave us room to stretch out the diagrams and set up the accountability officer, the logistics officer and the planning officer,” Long said. “Each one was given their own quadrant inside this large room. We were able to better coordinate and know exactly what was going on throughout the entire refinery.” A second incident command tasked with search and rescue operations was established next to the first. “Teams were assigned to section commanders,” Long said. “Each commander was assigned a very limited, specific area to search, and then told to report back. While conducting search and rescue they were also making damage assessments. We were able to pull seven more employees out.” Helicopter landing zones were soon established to bring in medical flights from as far away as Augusta. Long was also able to activate medical resources from adjoining counties. “We had 56 EMS units at our disposal,” he said. “Seven of the injured were flown immediately and 47 more transported by ground transport, all within the first 58 minutes of the emergency.” Accountability with regard to identifying those rescued and missing was established within two hours. A separate area of the incident command center was set aside for the refinery manager and shift superintendent to coordinate accountability, dispatching plant personnel to area hospitals to obtain the names of patients transported. “The Joseph M. Still Burn Center in Augusta is the regional burn center for Georgia and it is about two hours away,” Long said. “Several of the severely burned were flown to Augusta, so it took that much time to get some accountability.” Another delay in establishing the employees present at the time of the blast related to problems with the refinery’s electronic accountability system. “Whenever an employee comes to work their name goes into an electronic database,” Long said. “The problem was that the power station on scene was blown. So we had to take their electronic files to another location to be downloaded.” Aside from refinery workers, two contractors had personnel on the scene. Contacting supervisors for those companies to establish accountability also took several hours. By comparison, the search for the missing took many days. For GSAR, the regional urban search and rescue team, the refinery fire and collapse was only the second time the team had been activated. The first time was an out-of-state operation related to Hurricane Katrina. Rescuers used search dogs and special cameras lowered into voids in the collapsed structure. Four days later, smoldering fires continued to hamper efforts to find at least two missing workers. To combat the silo fires, a helicopter used by Chatham County for mosquito control and wildland fire fighting made more than 120 water drops using a 120-gallon (450 liter) bucket. The attempt proved unsuccessful. “The pilot was very precise, dropping the water right into the opening from about 10 feet (3 meters) above the silos,” Long said. “It just MAY/JUNE 2008 MJ2008.pmd 9 4/24/2008, 3:59 PM 9 WILLIAMS F&HC Continued from Page 7 Because the on site fire water tank was depleted, the firefighters were forced to draft from the nearby Savannah River. “Even though the pump was a couple of thousand feet away we were able to supply the entire fire water response needs from the river,” Gaspard said. “The NHancer sat in the river and brought the water to two supply pumps. The supply pumps were used in relay to increase and maintain pressure for fire response. We laid down Double 5 large 7¼-diameter fire hose to initiate the response.” Firefighters were able to maintain a pressure of 150 psi (10 B) before elevation, he said. The NHhancer was lowered from a crane and its depth constantly monitored by the crane operator. “There is a six-to-eight foot (1.8 to 2.5 meter) differential in the tides of that river, so what he did is basically elevate and lower that pump with the rising and lowering of the water,” Gaspard said. Working closely with local contractor Savannah Bridge and Crane, Williams F&HC fabricated standpipes next to the collapsed building. “That allowed us to get the large diameter hose up and over debris adjacent to the silos, working the hose up the adjacent stairwell tower,” Gaspard said. With the first burning silo, firefighters took a standard Williams F&HC 95 gpm (360 L) Foam Wand, an unmanned device designed to expand and deliver foam into remote, hazardous areas, and fabricated an extension with an Elkhart distributor nozzle on the end. Normally, wasn’t enough water for the temperatures we were fighting. Most of it would steam off before it actually hit.” Of the two 40-foot(12-meter)-diameter silos involved, one was filled to 55 feet (16 meters) and other to 75 feet (23 meters). Thermal imaging showed that a 10 to 12 foot layer at the top was burning at 4,000 degrees F (2,200 degrees C). The water dumps were only able to lower that temperature to 2,800 degrees F (1,500 degrees C). By Wednesday the 13th, the area left to be searched had been narrowed to roughly 200 square feet (60 meters) in what had formerly been a second-floor break room. Meanwhile, Williams F&HC prepared to attack the silo fires using special equipment flown in from Texas. “We do have a good plan that we do believe is going to be effective,” said Chauncey Naylor, emergency service v.p. for Williams F&HC. Using pumps capable of 6,000 gpm (22,700 L), the Williams F&HC team planned to clamp monitor nozzles at the top of the silos and shoot foam and water into the fires below. The result lowered the temperature at the top of the stored sugar to 70 degrees F (21 degrees C). The last fires in the refinery were extinguished on Thursday. That night responders found the body of the refinery’s packaging manager, the last of eight workers missing after the initial explosion to be found. In total, Port Wentworth firefighters spent eight days on duty at the refinery. Still, it was at least 20 days before the department got back to a normal schedule, Long said. “If the investigators want to go into certain areas of the damaged refinery that are still dangerous our firefighters are escorting them.” CONCLUSION On March 12, CSB board member and interim executive William E. 10 MJ2008.pmd the Foam Wand hangs over the rim of a burning tank. In this case it was lowered deep into the burning silo. An application rate of 0.5 percent was used. “It was very effective,” Gaspard said. In tribute to the contribution made by local firefighters, Port Wentworth Fire Chief Greg Long was given the honor of opening the valves that initiated the silo fire response. Operations moved to the next burning silo immediately adjacent to the refinery’s stairwell tower. Williams F&HC personnel fabricated special brackets that allowed firefighters to secure two mini-Daspit monitors to the tower as well as a full-sized Daspit to apply water and foam applications into the silos from above. Full sized Daspits are usually secured to the rim of large diameter storage tanks to deal with rim fires and vapor suppression. “The Daspit shooting down into that second burning silo was elevated almost 100 feet (30.4 meters) off the ground,” Gaspard said. “At that elevation you’re going to lose some pressure. Yet we were maintaining more than 100 psi (45 K), enough to maintain multiple attacks.” When tackling crude oil fires, Williams F&HC firefighters employ a technique known as “the tease.” That technique came into play at Port Wentworth. “The top layer of crude, possibly as deep as three or four feet, will be above the boiling point of water somewhere between 400 and 500 degrees F (200 to 260 degrees C),” Williams F&HC CFO/ chairman Dwight Williams once explained. “If the monitor stream Wright testified before the U.S. House of Representatives Education and Labor Committee in support of a comprehensive standard for combustible dust, as recommended by the CSB’s 2006 Combustible Dust Hazard Study. Regular cleaning and removal of accumulated dust, using safe and proper methods — commonly referred to as housekeeping — is important for reducing the likelihood of dust explosions, Wright said. Before the explosion the Port Wentworth refinery had a regular housekeeping and cleanliness program to maintain food quality and safety and to protect workers from slips and other injuries. Dust explosions in sugar refineries have happened before. In November, an explosion blew out windows and started a fire at a historic sugar refinery on Baltimore’s Inner Harbor. No serious injuries were reported. Authorities report that employees were working on a dust collection unit at the time of the explosion. However, the explosion in Port Wentworth took that potential risk to a new level. “This is the first time as far as we have been able to discover that an explosion of this size has occurred in an industrial sugar refinery,” Long said. Debate continues at the state and federal level over the risk of combustible dust explosions and the possible need for new regulations. Yet, as much as possible, the owners of the Port Wentworth refinery had been diligent in preparing to deal with an emergency of such magnitude if it ever happened, Long said. “Their records were up to date and accurate,” he said. “They were adamant that they should be as prepared as they could be for such an incident.” INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 10 4/24/2008, 3:59 PM hits the hot crude all at once it would jump right out of the tank.” The solution is to work the stream back and forth across the surface, slowly bringing the temperature down. “That’s what we did in Port Wentworth because the structure of those silos used concrete,” Gaspard said. “Chauncey didn’t want any vapor expansion going on inside, blowing those walls apart.” Local firefighters employing water drops were only able to bring the temperature in the silos down from 4,000 degrees F (2,200 degrees C) to 2,800 degrees F (1,500 degrees C). At the end of the Williams F&HC operation, the temperature in the silos was only 62 degrees F (16 degrees C). In total, Williams F&HC spent one afternoon for site assessment DEADLY DUST Continued from Page 5 As the rubber dried, fine polyethylene powder drifted on air currents to the space above a suspended ceiling. While the visible production areas were kept extremely clean, the powder accumulated above the suspended ceiling, providing fuel for a devastating secondary explosion. The plant’s safety review process when the compounding system was designed and modified never addressed the dust explosion hazard. MSDS for the polyethylene slurry included no dust explosion warning. Workers had not been trained about the potential hazard. Despite inspections by OSHA, firefighters, an insurance underwriter and an industrial hygienist, the dust hazard remained unidentified. Electrical equipment above the suspended ceiling was not rated for use around combustible dust as required by the National Electric Code. “Even a seasoned expert in the control of combustible dust hazards would have been hard pressed to recognize that problem because the working area wasn’t dusty,” Blair said. “If that expert had spent two or three hours and seen those workers constantly wiping up, he might have started to think about what was in that dust.” No specific source of ignition for the explosion was determined. “When we investigated in North Carolina, everyone we interviewed said the same thing – ‘There is no way dust did this,’” Blair said. “Six months later when we made our public presentation, we took a half teaspoon of the powder that caused it and set off a tiny dust explosion on stage. That finally got it through to them.” In Kentucky, the manufacturing process began by impregnating a fiberglass mat with phenolic resin and then used air to draw the resin into the fiberglass webs, the CSB report states. On the day of the explosion, a curing oven left open because of a temperature control problem likely ignited the combustible resin dust stirred up by workers cleaning the area near the oven. The CSB found that the building was not designed to prevent or minimize secondary dust explosions, such as using fire walls to separate production lines. Dust had accumulated in dangerous amounts throughout the production areas, in vent ducting and in dust collector housings. Workers routinely used compressed air and brooms to clean production lines, creating clouds of resin dust. Again, an MSDS failed to communicate that the material posed a dust explosion hazard. Although the Kentucky Office of Occupational Safety and Health had inspected the facility, no citations regarding combustible dust had been issued. The facility had never been inspected and equipment requisition, one day for set up and complete extinguishment and a final day for break down and return home. Williams F&HC was even able to help local firefighters deal with the last of the lingering structural fires. “The municipal responders were dealing with a lot of little ground fires because of all the paper used in packaging the sugar,” Gaspard said. “They were having to go back and put these fires out a second or third time.” Williams F&HC provided foam for the municipal foam truck using the pump system. The results were immediate. “Getting foam into their response methods made a big difference,” Gaspard said. “Their mission was finished.” by the state fire marshal. The Kentucky explosion killed seven workers and injured 37. In Indiana, one worker died and several others were injured in an explosion involving equipment used to re-melt scrap aluminum. The scrap was chopped into small chips, pneumatically conveyed to the scrap processing area, dried and fed into a melt furnace. Transporting and drying the chips generated dust that was pulled into a dust collector. The CSB determined that the explosion likely originated in the dust collector, which had not been adequately vented or cleaned, and was located too close to the aluminum scrap processing area. The collector was not designed or maintained to prevent dust explosions, nor to prevent spread through the ducting. When the dust accumulated, a large fireball emerged from the furnace. Dust had not been cleaned from overhead beams and other structures, leading to a secondary explosion. “The dust collector was not properly located,” Blair said. “It was too close to the building. The explosion wave propagated quickly back into the building where the people were.” Locating the collector further away might have meant more time for a sensor-controlled quick closing isolation valve, if one had been installed, to activate as the flame front moved through the system. Isolation valves direct an explosion to a benign location, minizing its effect. Previous dust fires at the facility had gone uninvestigated. The Indiana Occupational Safety and Health Administration had not identified dust explosion hazards during previous facility inspections. Strangely enough, the 2006 CSB report focusing on these three incidents and others was followed by an uncharacteristic lull in major dust explosions – until Port Wentworth. “The reason it has been so long is likely not simply because industry is doing a better job,” Blair said. THE SCIENCE The classic fire triangle consists of fuel, oxygen and ignition. A dust explosion requires two additional elements – dust suspension and confinement. Suspended dust burns more rapidly, and confinement allows for pressure buildup. Without suspension or confinement, an explosion is not possible. Further, the concentration of suspended dust must be within a particular range to explode, somewhat like the flammability range of vapors. The lowest amount of dust in air that will explode is referred to as the minimum explosible concentration. NFPA defines a combustible dust as any finely divided solid material that is 420 microns or smaller in diameter. The particle size of table salt MAY/JUNE 2008 MJ2008.pmd 11 4/24/2008, 3:59 PM 11 is around 100 microns. Finer particles are more explosive because they have large surface areas relative to their weight, allowing them to rapidly react with oxygen when dispersed. Other factors that influence explosiveness include moisture, ambient humidity, oxygen, dust particle shape and the dust concentration. Many solid or bulk materials may not be explosive but may generate combustible dusts through handling or processing. Plastic pellets shipped from a polyethylene plant rarely pose an explosion hazard until they are handled and generate small particles as part of a different process. Likewise, aqueous solutions of a combustible material may try to produce a combustible dust. Dust explosions can either be primary or secondary. A primary dust explosion occurs when a dust suspension within a container, room or piece of equipment is ignited and explodes. The secondary explosion occurs when dust accumulated on floors or other surfaces is lofted and ignited by the primary explosion. The blast wave from the secondary explosion can cause accumulated dust in other areas to become suspended in air, which may generate additional dust explosions. “A primary dust explosion typically occurs inside a piece of equipment,” Blair said. “Secondary explosions are often caused by poor housekeeping, accumulations that are not cleaned up.” Depending on the extent of the dust deposits, a weak primary explosion may cause very powerful secondary explosions. However, the initiating event for a secondary dust explosion might not be a dust explosion at all, the CSB report states. The best way to prevent secondary dust explosions is to eliminate the dust. Good housekeeping, designing and maintaining equipment to prevent dust leaks, using dust collectors, eliminating flat surfaces where dust can accumulate and sealing hard-to-clean areas can effectively prevent secondary dust explosions. The CSB warns that proper equipment and techniques to clean combustible dust accumulations must be used. Care must be taken to minimize dust clouds, and use only vacuum cleaners approved for combustible dust locations. Several of the incidents studied by the CSB involved dust explosions that spread through pipes or vent ducts, from one piece of equipment to other equipment or other areas of the facility. Pressure can increase as the explosion moves from one location to the next, increasing the damage. “One way to eliminate dust accumulation is to have a dust collector,” Blair said. “Suction hoods over the equipment serve as point collectors, sucking up the dust from various locations in the plant, transporting it through duct work to some kind of device separating the dust from the air, either a filter unit, a cycling separator or a bag house filter.” In moving the dust, the collection system concentrates it in various locations. This can become fuel for a potential explosion. Constant maintenance is required to prevent the collection system from becoming a source of danger instead of safety. If the worst happens, the system must be designed to deal with it. “It has to have explosion venting,” Blair said. “It must be vented properly and vented to a safe location. Putting it most simply, the way you vent a dust collector is to put a big blowout panel on it that flies open when an explosion happens.” NFPA standards for dust collectors consider the risk of propagation, with recommendations to provide isolation valves or distance to minimize chances of a dust explosion spreading. 12 MJ2008.pmd NFPA’s two principal voluntary consensus standards to prevent and control dust explosion risks are NFPA 654 and NFPA 484. NFPA 654 details the hazards of combustible dusts, specifies building construction requirements and the type of equipment to use in dusthandling operations. It addresses selection and design of protective systems by referencing other NFPA standards. NFPA 654 recommends analyzing processes for hazards, controlling dust and ignition sources, constructing the building to address dust hazards and training employees. NFPA 484 applies to fine particles of metals, including aluminum. It is distinct from NFPA 654 because the nature of metallic dusts makes them exceptionally vulnerable to ignition. Once ignited, metal dusts release a large amount of energy, making some of the protective systems required by NFPA 654 inappropriate. NFPA 484 details equipment design and explosion protection systems. It also requires that management systems address combustible dust hazards. Other NFPA standards related to combustible dust explosion hazards include NFPA 61 (fires and dust explosions in agricultural and food processing facilities), NFPA 68 (deflagration venting), NFPA 69 (explosion prevention systems), NFPA 70 (National Electric Code), NFPA 499 (classifying dust processing locations for electrical equipment installation), NFPA 655 (prevention of sulfur fires and explosions) and NFPA 664 (wood processing and woodworking facilities). In regard to NFPA 499, some categories of dust are electrically conductive. Current can pass through a layer of such dust causing short circuits or arcs. “Our report did not recommend any changes in the NFPA standards,” Blair said. “The explosions we investigated were potentially preventable had the NFPA standards been implemented the way they were written.” The only comprehensive OSHA standard that addresses combustible dust hazards is the 1987 Grain Handling Facilities Standard that has effectively reduced the risk of dust explosions in grain handling. OSHA lacks a comprehensive standard to require general industry to implement the dust explosion prevention and mitigation measures embodied in NFPA fire standards. “Although OSHA has cited employers for dust explosion hazards, most OSHA enforcement activities related to combustible dust hazards have been in response to incidents, rather than focusing on prevention,” the CSB report states. Most states adopt one of two national fire codes – the IFC or UFC – which incorporate, through NFPA consensus standards, principles and practices that can help prevent and mitigate combustible dust explosions. While the technical guidance in the NFPA standards is widely considered to be effective, the U.S. fire code system allows states to adopt only parts of it and local jurisdictions to adopt different codes from the states. Implementing comprehensive changes or improvements to effectively tackle the problem of dust explosions on a national scale is difficult, the CSB report states. Code enforcement often varies across states and smaller jurisdictions. Training programs for fire inspectors do not generally cover combustible dust hazards. CONCLUSION It does not come marked with a hazmat placard. You might be able to write your name in it, but otherwise it seems invisible. Dust is common and inevitable in many work environments. The best way to eliminate the danger of a combustible dust explosion is through engineering design and by enforcing work practices and guidelines. INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 12 4/24/2008, 3:59 PM INDUSTRY NEWS CSB video details 2005 Texas City blast T hree years after the explosion that killed 15 workers and injured 180 others at an oil refinery in Texas City, TX, the U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) released a new, comprehensive safety video that describes the causes of the accident and key safety lessons. The new 56-minute video, Anatomy of a Disaster, is available for viewing in the Video Room of the CSB’s website, Safetyvideos.gov. DVDs of the video will be provided at no charge through the online request form at CSB.gov. The accident occurred on March 23, 2005, during the startup of the refinery’s octane-boosting isomerization unit, when a distillation tower and attached blowdown drum were overfilled with flammable liquid hydrocarbons. Because the blowdown drum vented directly to the atmosphere, there was a geyser-like release of flammable liquid, forming a vapor cloud that spread rapidly through the area. A OSHA fines Texas refinery T he U.S. Department of Labor’s Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) has cited a Port Arthur, TX, refinery, proposing penalties totaling $101,750 for alleged safety violations. OSHA issued the citations in April alleging 13 serious, two repeat and one other-than-serious violation following an investigation that began Oct. 16, 2007. The inspection was initiated as part of OSHA’s National Emphasis Program for petroleum refineries. The refinery has about 830 employees. “We are pleased that (the refinery) has expressed a willingness to take quick, corrective actions in resolving the safety and health violations,” said Dean McDaniel, OSHA’s regional administrator in Dallas. Serious violations include failing to implement accurate process safety information, provide employees with accurate operating procedures, have an adequate system in place to advance recommendations from process hazard analysis and correct equipment deficiencies. A serious violation is one with potential to serious physical harm to employees when the employer knew or should have known of the hazard. diesel pickup truck that was idling nearby ignited the vapor, initiating a series of explosions and fires that swept through the unit and the surrounding area. Fatalities and injuries occurred in and around occupied work trailers, which were placed too close to the isomerization unit and which were not evacuated prior to the startup. The safety video includes a new nine-minute 3-D computer animation of the sequence of events that led to the explosion, as well as sections describing BP’s safety culture, the human factor safety issues that contributed to the accident, and the importance of safe equipment design and trailer siting. The video also features interviews with key members of the CSB investigative team, who completed the 341-page public report on the causes of the accident approved by the Board. Board Member William Wright discusses safety recommendations from the accident and key safety lessons from the Board’s investigation. OSHA renews foundry alliance T he Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) and the American Foundry Society (AFS) recently renewed their Alliance, with a continued goal of providing safety and health information related to personal protective equipment, heat stress, and reducing and preventing exposure to silica among employees in the metalcasting industry. ”OSHA and AFS have made significant accomplishments over the past two years,” said Assistant Secretary of Labor Edwin G. Foulke, Jr. “Our Alliance will continue to work together to provide AFS members and metalcasting businesses with free guidance and training resources to protect the well-being of employees in the foundry industry.” Through the Alliance, AFS developed a manual that provides information to help control the potential hazards of respirable crystalline silica. AFS also developed a guide on personal protective equipment and special clothing for foundry operations to help reduce the risks of exposure to foundry hazards. OSHA and AFS representatives spoke at conferences and meetings including the AFS Environmental Health and Safety Conference and the 111th Metalcasting Congress. AFS continues to serve on the editorial boards of OSHA Safety and Health Topics pages regarding Control of Hazardous Energy (Lockout/Tagout); Heat Stress; Lead; Powered Industrial Trucks; Silica, Crystalline; and Ventilation. Pipeline Corp. wins API award A PI awarded its 2007 Distinguished Award for Outstanding Safety and Environmental Performance to the Portland Pipe Line Corp. in April. This is API’s highest safety and environmental performance award for pipeline operators. Mark Hurley, President of Shell Pipeline and Chair of API’s Pipeline Committee, presented the award at API’s Pipeline Conference in Orlando, FL. Portland won the Distinguished Award in the small operator category. No large operator won the Distinguished Award this year. However, Marathon Pipeline LLC received the Special Recognition Award for a Large Operator in recognition of the company’s continued strong environmental and safety performance. Maine-based Portland Pipe Line Corporation operates a crude oil pipeline and terminals. It won the Distinguished Award for its sustained achievement of zero injuries, zero vehicle accidents, and zero spills in each of the previous three years, as well as its set of initiatives, management systems, and actions taken to accomplish this. Environmental Performance Awards went to CITGO Pipeline Company, Equistar Chemicals, LP – Equistar Pipelines, Genesis Energy, Inc., Portland Pipe Line Corporation and Marathon Pipeline LLC. Occupational Safety Performance Awards went to the Portland Pipe Line Corporation and Koch Pipeline Company, LP. MAY/JUNE 2008 MJ2008.pmd 13 4/24/2008, 3:59 PM 13 Photos Courtesy of Gimaex At left, the Gimaex One Seven compressed air foam system mounted on an industrial fire truck, at right, in use in Blaichach, Germany. The One Seven system is unique in that it can be built-in, retrofitted or used as a portable system. One Seven System European industry embraces CAF systems I n Europe, industrial fire brigades are beginning to pay real attention to the advantages of compressed air foam systems, in particular the One Seven® fire extinguishing system manufactured by Gimaex International, operating in Germany, France and now America. In Germany, Robert Bosch GmbH, part of the Bosch Group, manufactures ABS antilock braking systems, the ESP electronic stability program for automotive braking systems, and sensor and ignition coils for gasoline engines at its Blaichach location. The facility is home to an eco-friendly 100-year-old hydroelectric power plant. After extensive research, Bosch chose to protect its Blaichach facility with a new Gimaex TLFA 1000 fire fighting truck equipped with a One Seven® system. The system can produce 8,000 liters (2,114 gallons) of One Seven® foam using 1,000 liters (250 gallons) of water, 7,000 liters (1,800 gallons) of air and three liters (.79 gallon) of One Seven® foam concentrate. Making air aspirated foam is largely a matter of hydraulics. However, compressed air foam systems merge hydraulics with pneumatic technology to produce a richer, thicker, higher-quality fire fighting foam and extend the reach of the unit’s nozzle. CAFS, long accepted as an important tool in wildland fire fighting, is gaining ground in other areas of the fire service, including industrial fire fighting. Aspirated nozzles create finished foam at the working end of the hose. By use of an eductor or direct injection, air is sucked into the nozzle causing the pressurized combination of foam solution and water to exit as foam. With CAFS, the process starts much earlier. Foam is produced by combining pressurized air with water and foam concentrate at the unit’s pump. When it exits the hose under pressure, the foam has a rich, thick consistency most often compared to shaving cream. Compared to foam aspirated at the nozzle, CAFS foam has an almost microscopic bubble structure that makes it long lasting and able to stick to vertical surfaces such as threatened exposures. Energy from the air 14 MJ2008.pmd compressor greatly extends the discharge reach. Because the hose is mostly filled with air instead of water, it weighs less and is easier to move. Pressure loss due to elevation is drastically reduced. The system is also extremely economical as to the amount of water and foam concentrate used. One Seven® is a highly efficient fire extinguishing medium using minimal volumes of water. By adding the unique One Seven® foam concentrate and pressurized air to the water, one drop of water volume expands to form seven foam bubbles. The surface area of a water droplet is thereby distributed on the surface of seven foam bubbles. The expanded surface area embodies helpful characteristics. The One Seven® extinguishing foam has been effectively used in portable applications for years. The portable systems range in size, providing an appropriate system for any fire fighting application. More than one third of Gimaex employees are in volunteer fire departments, assuring a constant feedback of operational know-how, recent experience and comprehensive knowledge. Gimaex’s One Seven® is the combination of a specially constructed system and a specially developed foam concentrate. The foam concentrate is a micro-cellular, homogenous structure with reproducible characteristics that includes: - A large surface area which provides a strong cooling capacity (-50 degrees F[10 degrees C]/sec). - High energy content that provides high velocity and deep penetration. The slight surface tension and high penetrating capacity of the medium even at low mixing ratios produces a rapid and deep penetration into the fuel, cooling the interior of the fuel to prevent reignition. - Adhesive properties that cool the fuel, not the flames. - Strong wetting capability that penetrates the fuel. - Environmentally friendly and biodegradable. Continued on Page 26 INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 14 4/24/2008, 3:59 PM DuPont introduces short-chain fluorine-efficient products for producing surfactants that reduce the environmental impact of Class B fire fighting foams FLUORINE FUNDAMENTALS By ANTON RIECHER 16 MJ2008.pmd P erformance rather than environmental impact continues to be the deciding factor when choosing between fluorinated versus fluorine-free fire fighting foam, said a DuPont Chemical executive introducing of a new line of fluorotelomer products. Thomas H. Samples, Surface Protection Solutions global business manager for DuPont Chemical Solutions Enterprise, said the new Capstone products reduce to less than the current published limit of detection the biopersistent compounds (or entities) that have plagued fluorine compounds in fire foam. “It’s pretty important to know that the performance of the foam is going to extinguish the fire in such a way that it will not reignite, better protecting the firefighters,” Samples said. “The debate is about how much performance people are willing to give up in order to use fluorine-free alternatives.” Introduced in March, DuPont’s Capstone products are available as fluorinated compounds for use in surfactants utilized to manufacture existing brands of fire fighting foams. Within the next 18 months, repellants and surfactants made from Capstone will also be offered for use in manufacturing home furnishings, leather goods, paper packaging and textiles. “Our products are surfactants that are added to products like aqueous film forming foam (AFFF) to provide the film forming capabilities such as properties of extinguishment and that prevent burnback,” Samples said. No plans exist for DuPont to directly compete in the fire fighting foam market. As the largest global manufacturer and supplier of fluorotelomers such as Capstone, DuPont plans to adapt its entire product line by year-end 2010 to utilize short-chain chemistry, a scientific process that reduces the potential for trace impurities in fluorinated compounds at the molecular level. Short chain molecules can not break down to PFOA in the environment. Traditional fluorotelomer - based products involve substances where the fluorochemical portion is made up of a mixture of perfluorinated chain lengths that range in length from six to 16, with the majority containing eight. In DuPont short-chain fluorotelomers, the fluorochemical portion is made up of six or fewer perfluorinated carbons. Despite the difference from traditional fluorotelomer products, DuPont Capstone is extremely compatible with other brands of fluorinated compounds being used in fire foams. Capstone will be listed on existing global regulatory clearances, including the United States (the Toxic Substances Control Act) and Europe (the European Inventory of Existing Commercial Substances). However, in the U.K. and other parts of the globe, fluorine-free fire fighting foams are being touted as the solution to environmental issues linked to fluorinated compounds. Dr. Stephen H. Korzeniowski, Surface Protection Solution technical manager for DuPont, said fluorine-free foams have some limits in burnback resistance when compared to current AFFF-based foams. This is particularly true in Class B fires such as large volume petroleum fires, foams without fluorine cannot deliver the performance possible with fluorine foam. “The debate is really about how quickly you put the fire out and does it stay out?” he said. “Can you save the property and equipment and protect the firefighters? If you’ve got a refinery with gasoline or crude, how do you save those goods, what we refer to as value in use?” Fluorine-free fire foams have environmental questions as well. While not as environmentally persistent as fluorinated compounds, the fluorine free foams have proven to be toxic to aquatic life, Korzeniowski said. Fluorinated compounds, while effective as key ingredients in AFFF foams, have been an environmental flashpoint for foam makers since INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 16 4/24/2008, 3:59 PM It’s pretty important to know that the performance of the foam is going to extinguish the fire in such a way that it will not reignite, better protecting the firefighters. The debate is about how much performance people are willing to give up in order to use fluorine-free alternatives. Thomas H. Samples, Surface Protection Solutions global business manager, DuPont Chemical Solutions Enterprise early this decade. One major foam manufacturer, 3M, abandoned production in 2000 due to the environmental persistence and bio-accumulation properties of perfluorooctanyl sulfonate (PFOS), a specific compound resulting from a 3M process known as electrochemical fluorination. “With respect to the 3M product, there was a potential for biopersistence in the environment, meaning availability for biouptake and a long period of accumulation in biota,” Korzeniowski said. “With the compounds we’re introducing and the ones we’ve had on the market, the relative biopersistence is much, much lower. In fact, the uptake and clearance from organisms is very fast compared to the other alternatives.” As opposed to electro-chemical fluorination, DuPont and other companies making fluorinated compounds for use in fire foam utilize a process known as telomerization that is free of PFOS. 3M stopped production of PFOS-based foam agents in 2002. Regulations prevent the manufacture of new PFOS-based foam agents, but do not restrict the use of existing stocks. However, the European Union and Canada are proposing to ban the use of existing PFOS-based fire foam stocks within the next five years. Prompting DuPont’s move to short-chain chemistry in its fluorotelomer products is perfluorooctanoic acid (PFOA) found at trace levels as an unintended byproduct. PFOA, also persistent in the environment, has been detected at low levels (average 5 ppb) in the blood of the general population. It has been studied extensively in an occupational setting where potential exposure can be significantly higher than that of the general population. “DuPont believes the weight of evidence indicates that PFOA exposure does not pose a health risk to the general public,” DuPont literature states. “To date, there are no human health effects known to be caused by PFOA, although study of the chemical continues.” As an alternative to abandoning fluorinated compounds in fire foams, significant effort is being made to develop technologies to recover fire water runoff and treat it to extract the spent fire fighting agents, Korzeniowski said. Another step is to reduce the use of fluorinated foam in training exercises as opposed to actual fire fighting. Economic factors point to a healthy future for fluorinated fire fighting foams, Samples said. First, a tremendous amount of infra structure is being built with regard to oil production and refineries. Likewise, a tremendous amount of infra structure is going up with regard to oil alternatives such as alcohol and bio fuels, Samples said. “The polar solvents require alcohol resistant AFFF products,” he said. “That infra structure growth is driving demand for the synthetic foams.” Also, regions such as Eastern Europe, the Middle East and China are moving to stricter standards in protecting their industrial facilities, driving demand for these products even higher, Samples said. According to Korzeniowski, fluorinated fire fighting foams still have a strong chance at surviving increasingly stringent regulation, thanks to organizations such as the Fire Fighting Foam Coalition. Yet, there will be situations in the future where choosing fluorine free foam will be the preferred alternative. “We need to be realistic,” Korzeniowski said. “There is going to be a place for fluorine free chemicals. What has yet to be defined is what that place will be.” Samples said DuPont continues to put the end user of its fluorotelomer products first, considering the risks they face. “We’ve heard loud and clear from industry that we need to deliver performance as well as environmental sustainability,” he said. “That’s our intent.” MAY/JUNE 2008 MJ2008.pmd 17 4/24/2008, 3:59 PM 17 CURTAIN CALL Robert Wood receives annual Connie Award D edicated to assisting emergency responders from behind the scene, Robert Wood from Lumberton, TX, received the Connie Award at the 23rd Industrial Fire World Emergency Responder Conference & Exposition. Although Wood retired from Chevron in 1989, he continues to help emergency responders save lives and property. He serves on the Beaumont Emergency Services Training Complex Board of Directors and the Hardin County Emergency Services District #2 (Lumberton Fire and EMS) board, and he is a founding member of Sabine Neches Chiefs Association. Wood also helped found industrial fire training at Emergency Safety Training Institute (ESTI) at Texas A&M University and served as an instructor and advisory board Wood member, retired Chief Henry Smith with ESTI said. “We weren’t this large a group, but all the guys worked together real well and they knew each other,” Wood said. “When we had an emergency, we didn’t worry as much about what was right, what was wrong, what was legal and what wasn’t then. We would just respond. Of course, we didn’t have a lot of these rules and regulations we’ve got today, but we helped each other.” Since serving as fire chief for Gulf, which became Chevron, Wood has seen the development of industrial emergency response firsthand. His most valuable lesson learned is to know the strengths and backgrounds of team members to best use their talents in an emergency. 18 MJ2008.pmd “I had the idea to pick the people with different talents,” Wood said. “That way any emergency you go to, there is someone there who has some background and knowledge in that area. They might have some medical talents, accounting skills, equipment maintenance or people skills. We needed people who spoke foreign languages, which is very important to us with ships from all over the world docking at our terminal. Whatever we needed, we just took it and used it. When something happens in the night or on the weekends, you don’t have time to call people from town to come out and respond to take care of you. If you’ve got a big leak, you’ve got to stop it as quickly as possible.” Wood remembers the days when industry and agriculture worked hand in hand. The plant cafeteria provided slop for hogs on the premises, cattle grazed in the area surrounding the levies and an on-site ice house provided the ice blocks to preserve butchered cattle used in the cafeteria. He keeps current with the needs, expectations and direction that the field strives to achieve. His continued involvement through professional organizations and experienced colleagues helps keep training relevant and timely and provides new leaders a realistic perspective for managing the challenges of the day. The Connie Award, created to honor the memory of Roberts Company, Inc. co-owner Connie Gross, annually recognizes an individual for his or her commitment to supporting the fire and emergency response industry by taking responsibility for the tasks and relationships that are not always evident to the masses. INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 18 4/25/2008, 9:45 AM On February 18, 2008, an explosion rocked a 70,000-barrels-per-day oil refinery in Big Springs, TX, destroying a propylene recovery unit and igniting a catalytic cracker and three storage tanks. Trouble on Refinery T Rd. Photo Courtesy of Texas Forest Service oo many municipal firefighters have not been given the opportunity to learn more than that an oil refinery is as alien territory. A confusing maze of coolers, blowers, boilers, columns, compressors, exchangers, filters, heaters, pipes, pumps, tanks, valves and vessels confront responders whenever some overwhelming emergency beckons them to help the in-house brigade. Fortunately, Chief Tommy Sullivan of the Howard County (TX) Volunteer Fire Department is familiar with the inner workings of refineries. Before becoming chief, Sullivan worked at the 70,000-barrels-per-day refinery in Big Springs, TX, for six years, serving on its Red Hat fire brigade and training with Williams Fire & Hazard Control. On February 18, Sullivan put all that experience to good use. A thunderous explosion registering 2.1 on the Richter scale rocked the Big Springs refinery, destroying a propylene recovery unit, igniting other unit fires and at least three storage tanks. “As soon as I stepped out the door I knew it was By ANTON RIECHER MAY/JUNE 2008 MJ2008.pmd 19 4/24/2008, 3:59 PM 19 fire units by radio. The Howard County VFD has 10 stations. Out of the 18 pieces of apparatus that Howard County owns Sullivan summoned 12, including four engines, a Telesquirt with a 50-foot (15.2 meter) ladder and a quick attack mini pumper. Closest to the refinery is the fire station at Sand Springs, 3.2 miles (5.1 k) away. “I got the pumper truck there with a FEMA grant,” Sullivan said. “I designed it just for the refinery. It’s 40 feet long, has a 2,000 gpm (7,500 liters per minute) pump rated at 1,500 (5,700 lpm) for draft, it has LDH (large diameter hose) foam discharge, 3,000 gallons (11,000 liters) of water and 110 gallons (416 liters) of ThunderStorm® 1x3 foam.” PRESIDENT’S DAY The second truck at the Sand Springs station is equipped with a In the future, Presidents’ Day may be treated with much more reverence in Big Springs. Thanks to the federal holiday, the refinery was compressed air foam system. Both trucks were out of the station within three minutes of the blast. “We have a pager system “Having worked at the refinery and experienced some smaller explosions, I for our volunteers,” Sullivan knew immediately what it was,” said Howard County (TX) Fire Chief Tommy said. “Also, in the last Sullivan. “Nothing else could hit with that kind of overpressure. couple of years I’ve given my firefighters radios. When operating with a skeleton crew the morning of the explosion, greatly we are on the scene we have 100 percent fire ground communications. If reducing potential injuries and death. Almost three minutes before the blast, the refinery summoned off- you’re just on pagers, they can hear you but they can’t talk to you.” duty Red Hats in response to a Level 1 release from the polypropylene The department completed a switch from analog to digital unit, Sullivan said. That escalated to a Level 3 emergency, meaning communications only three months ago, he said. immediate evacuation of the refinery. Interstate 20 runs past the front of the refinery. Within half a mile (.8 “It was just a few seconds later that the shift foreman yelled on the k) of the scene, Sullivan discovered that debris hurled by the explosion radio for everyone to run and take cover,” Sullivan said. “Then the had shut down traffic. The Midland Reporter-Telegram reported that a vapor cloud lit off.” woman driving past the refinery was injured when glass on her vehicle That happened at 8:12 a.m. Sullivan, drinking coffee at his kitchen shattered from the blast. table almost two miles away, thought that a truck had driven through “There were grates measuring four feet by eight feet (1.2 m by 2.4 his house. m) long lying in the middle of the road, steel beams, plywood with nails “Having worked at the refinery and experienced some smaller in it, all kinds of stuff,” Sullivan said. “I moved onto the north service explosions, I knew immediately what it was,” he said. “Nothing else road and got close to the refinery fence. The bigger debris had gone past could hit with that kind of overpressure.” the fence so it left me enough room to get by.” The blast cut communications with the refinery, leaving them unable No walking wounded were waiting when responders arrived. The to even dial 911, Sullivan said. En route to the site, he began dispatching four refinery workers injured in the blast had already been taken to area hospitals. From the main gate, Sullivan said he could see the windows had been blown out of the administration and training buildings. In some cases, parts of walls were missing. Also damaged was the refinery firehouse. Responders on duty at the time of the blast were unable to immediately reach their pumper and 50-foot (15 meter) Telesquirt. “They had to rip the doors off the station just to get the fire trucks out,” Sullivan said. “They were just able to get the Telesquirt out when I got there. They were working to get the pumper out.” The guard at the front gate, hired by Sullivan when he served as the refinery’s supervisor of security, was still at her post when he arrived. She advised him that a fire truck was needed at the refinery’s cat cracker as soon as possible. “The cat cracker is south of the Photo Courtesy of Texas Forest Service polypropylene unit, probably about Local fire departments attack one of three stubborn tank fires ignited by the explosion. bad,” Sullivan said. “I’d never seen a mushroom cloud rise above the refinery before.” On-site emergency operations were divided between two groups – the refinery brigade who took on the process leaks, and regional responders from Howard County, Big Springs and Snyder who fought the tank fires. Sullivan took charge of the regional response. “I said, ‘I will not get you hurt,’” Sullivan said. “I discussed it with all the firefighters, not just the officers. I told them what we were going to do and what to expect.” 20 MJ2008.pmd INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 20 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM an eighth of a mile (1.3 k),” Sullivan said. “The blast at the polypropylene unit had touched off the cat cracker. It was burning about 170 feet (52 meters) above the ground.” The blast also damaged the refinery’s alkalization unit, wastewater holding tank and asphalt plant, all of which were located between the polypropylene unit and cat cracker, he said. Pre-planning called for responders to stage in the parking lot of the refinery. After a radio conference between Sullivan and the Big Springs fire chief, it was decided to stage the Big Springs responders across the interstate. Meanwhile, Sullivan ordered his Sand Springs pumper with a five-person crew to report to the main gate. “My guys fight hydrocarbons all the time,” Sullivan said. “Our response area includes the oil field outside the city of Big Springs. It was decided that I should take my people in first and get control of the cat. That was the most important thing at that point. With the experience my guys had, it was decided that we could do a better job.” A nasty surprise awaited the Howard County and Red Hat responders. After laying five-inch LDH to the nearest hydrant, it was discovered that the damage to the firehouse had left only one diesel fire pump working. Worse, the blast had sheared off many of the refinery’s hydrants, allowing water to flow freely. “I used the 3,000 gallons (11,300 liters) of tank water that I brought with me,” Sullivan said. “We only had 30 pounds (13.6 kilograms) of pressure from the available hydrant. The deck gun had a smooth bore tip and foam built into it. We started at 1,000 gallons (3,800 liters) a minute of foam at 110 pounds (49.8 kilograms) of pressure. We were 100 feet (30 meters) away and still managed to hit the cat at 170 feet (52 meters) above ground.” The foam brought the fire under control and Photo Courtesy of Texas Forest Service the residual coming off the tower extinguished the Local responders hit gasoline storage tank fire with Williams F&HC monitor. ground spill, he said. However, it was only a (6 meters) tall and 60 feet (18 meters) long. matter of time before the tank water was exhausted. The blast had sheared off the piping beneath the tanks, resulting in a “We pulled some handlines and set up some 2½–inch (63 mm) monitors,” Sullivan said. “After we had the top knocked, we eased back direct gravity-fed fire. With the Big Spring engine handling structural and used the different portable ground monitors with foam while we cooling with its monitors, Sullivan used his pumper to feed foam to a 2½-inch (63 mm) handline and a 1¾-inch (42 mm) handline, both using were building up water in the tank and pressure.” The refinery had an unoccupied northside firehouse with no pump HydroChem nozzles from Williams F&HC. Using ThunderStorm® foam, the handlines gained control of the in it. Sullivan dispatched his minipumper to that location to begin drafting raw water from the Colorado River Municipal Water District. ground spill, reducing the intensity of the fire beneath the bullet tanks “That minipumper will pump 1,000 gallons (3,800 liters) a minute despite the difficulty of a beam blocking direct access. Two options existed – extinguish the fire with the HydroChem and with the LDH intake and discharge,” Sullivan said. “So I used it to start charging the northside loop system to help get some more pressure. hope it does not re-light, or get close enough using foam to see if any The hydrants that were sheared off were on the downstream side. If we surviving valves could be used to block the fuel. At about one hour and could boost the pressure, we could pick it up on our end and not let it 15 minutes into the emergency, Sullivan chose the latter. “Zach Johnson, one of my firefighters, is actually an employee of go down the downstream side so much.” About 30 minutes into the emergency, water pressure was sufficient the refinery,” Sullivan said. “We were using him as a liaison between us, for a Big Spring engine to position on the southwest corner of the cat our attack operations and the shift foreman. We notified the foreman cracker. To the east of the cat cracker are the refinery’s gasoline cooling that we had located some valves on the bullet tanks where the fuel was towers. Underneath them are two bullet tanks, each measuring 20 feet dropping.” MAY/JUNE 2008 MJ2008.pmd 21 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM 21 The foreman advised the firefighters it was safe to use the valves. The fire went out and firefighters secured the area. Three tank fires were next on the priority list. Tanks 115 and 116 were 100-foot (30 meter) storage tanks containing gasoline. Nearby was Tank 157, an 80-foot (24 meter) tank containing asphalt. “I knew I was going to need a Big Gun monitor, a jet ratio controller (JRC) and at least 4,000 gallons (1,500 liters) of foam concentrate staged in that area before we could do anything,” Sullivan said. Before that could happen, the regional responders got an unexpected opportunity to rehab. “By the alkalization unit we could see a mist or fog,” Sullivan said. “Having worked at the refinery, I knew it had to be acid vapors. We evacuated and notified the refinery that we could see a vapor release.” More than one and half hours later, the leaking situation stabilized. Owing to the amount of damage on-site, the refinery had set up an incident command center nearly one mile southeast, Sullivan said. The refinery notified Sullivan that he was in charge of operations on the storage tank extinguishment. To help him, he had an additional Big Spring engine and crew assigned to him. After returning to the burning tanks, the first step by Sullivan was to remove downed power lines and poles to grant easier access to the area. “We got the electrical representative to make sure everything was clear, then pulled out the K12 saw and sliced through the lines,” Sullivan said. “I could see that all the primary lines were down. When these guys tell me that the line is dead and we can cut it, I believe them.” HELP FROM MIDLAND By now, reinforcements from Midland, 40 miles away, were on scene. A Midland engine, together with refinery firefighters, was deployed to the alkalization unit on the northwest side of the refinery. A Quint from Midland assisted Big Spring responders at the cat cracker in dealing with small fires from unpressurized fuel. With the rest of the refinery secure, Sullivan concentrated on Tank 115. Working with plant personnel, he managed to block in all the sheared hydrants save for one. The Colorado River Municipal Water District increased water pressure to the refinery by an additional 20 pounds (1.38 BAR). Water pressure throughout the refinery improved significantly. “To me, 115, 116 and the asphalt tank were like dumpster fires,” Sullivan said. “They’ll be there when you get to them. If you have a failure, you have your dike. They are by themselves in an area where they won’t set anything else off.” Having trained at the annual Williams F&HC foam workshop, Sullivan employed the classic ‘Footprint’ methodology. His relationship with Williams F&HC traces back to a March 1993 crude oil tank fire that he responded to in the oilfields south of Howard County. Unfortunately, that tank dramatically boiled over, forcing responders to flee. “That’s when I changed,” Sullivan said. “I used to handle a tank fire by just hanging a stinger on the edge. I changed all operations on crude oil tanks and everything else.” His work with the refinery Red Hats gave him the opportunity to attend the annual Williams F&HC foam workshop in 1995. “That gave me knowledge about the Big Guns,” Sullivan said. “It taught me about using distance and big water to my advantage. It also taught me about the right kind of application rates.” A Williams F&HC 2x6 Gun monitor belonging to the refinery was moved into position. Drawing from the refinery’s stockpile of ThunderStorm®, Sullivan assembled 1,500 gallons (5,700 liters) of concentrate on trailers and moved six totes of concentrate by forklift. “I met with the mutual aid we had from Big Spring and Synder and explained how we were going to do this,” Sullivan said. “They didn’t 22 MJ2008.pmd have any idea how to use it, let alone hook it up. But they also said we will follow you and do what you tell us.” During application only minimum personnel were allowed at the 2x6 Gun – an officer, one firefighter working the monitor up and down, and another firefighter working it left to right. Sullivan himself took up a position at the JRC beside the foam trailers. Sullivan’s pumper from Sand Springs provided the pressure. “We were at the 6 o’clock position dropping the foam right in the middle, getting that footprint on the fire,” he said. “Before, using stingers mounted on the side of the tank, the reaction was nowhere as positive.” Tank 115, standing upwind, came first. Much of the tank shell above the product line collapsed from the heat. After it was extinguished with product saved, firefighters turned to Tank 116, making application from the west side of the tank. “We had flame collapse in about 12 minutes,” Sullivan said. “We then spent 24 minutes cooling. There was a lot of hot metal in there and we didn’t want it to re-light.” Tank 157 required different tactics. Positioning to the south of the tank, Sullivan flowed water onto the ground to judge the flow pattern. “The water was coming back toward us so I had backhoes brought in to build diversion dikes,” Sullivan said. “Asphalt will froth 99 percent of the time, so you have to be careful. I didn’t want to have a fire flow of burning asphalt coming toward my equipment and people.” Once the diversion dikes were ready, Sullivan had volunteers waiting for a chance at monitor duty. “I had some Big Spring firefighters on the 2x6 Gun,” Sullivan said. “What better time for them to get experience.” First, firefighters put a full minute of foam flow into the dike for vapor suppression. Next was the “tease.” Foam was applied to the burning asphalt for about three seconds, inviting a violent reaction. “This gives me steam conversion, but I still have active flames,” Sullivan said. “So I give it about 20 to 30 seconds before putting another 10 to 15 seconds of teasing. It all turns to steam. I pulled the 2x6 Gun off of the asphalt again, letting it put foam on the dike. The tank never frothed over or boiled over.” Handlines cooled the bottom three-quarters of the tank shell. With the contents stabilized, the object was to bring down the temperature of the metal. In less than seven minutes from the start of application with the 2x6 Gun, the asphalt tank extinguished. “Just to the north we had the asphalt line and some hydrocarbon still burning,” Sullivan said. “We just turned the 2x6 Gun around and ran it up through there for about three minutes, shoving 2,000 gpm(750 lpm) of foam up through that alleyway. That put all of it out.” Final extinguishment at the refinery was achieved in 10 hours, Sullivan said. Some plant officials had predicted it would take at least two days. Since the refinery is in the Howard County VFD’s jurisdiction, Sullivan agreed to keep a pumper and five-person crew on hand throughout the night. “There were some small places burning inside the refinery that we didn’t want to go into because of the danger to the responders,” Sullivan said. “We let those small fires burn out.” TAKING CHARGE During the course of the emergency, the only evacuation outside the refinery was at a carbon plant to the northwest. An evacuation of a twomile radius of the refinery was considered. Residential neighborhoods are only about 500 feet (150 meters) from the refinery’s west fence. As chief, Sullivan said he usually gets to make decisions rather than actually fight fires. At the Big Springs refinery fire, things were different. “With this one, I actually had to take charge of operations directly,” he said. “When you get close to tanks this big, it is really intimidating.” INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 22 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM for API Recommended Practice 752. RP 752 has prompted many safety engineers to relocate substandard buildings outside the process areas. Due to poor logistics, operation changes can significantly increase expenditures caused by overruns and time delays. MBI’s Blast Resistant Buildings have proven to be a viable solution for providing the safest enclosure for your employees and equipment. In turn, blast resistant buildings allow your operations to move back into process areas, cutting down on inefficiencies and unwarranted costs. MBI’s blast resistant buildings can be acquired for permanent applications, or can be leased for turn-around projects. Two level 10,800 square foot Petroblast building in Alberta. PETROBLAST Company designs blast-resistant modules for the refining & petrochemical industries M BI, a world leader in designing and manufacturing modular steel blast resistant buildings and complexes, in cooperation with world-renowned engineering firms and experts in the field of, ‘design of structures to resist blast loading,’ has produced Petroblast 5.0 and Petroblast 8.0 blast-resistant modules. In doing so, MBI provides the optimal permanent building solution BLAST RESISTANT BUILDING OPTIONS At MBI we are accustomed to an extensive range of applications, which allows us to be better equipped to satisfy your needs. A few options that you have on the blast resistant Petroblast buildings are: • Any blast resistant rating from 1 psi. to 25 psi is feasible • Standard Designed blast resistant buildings (Petroblast 5.0 & 8.0) • Custom layouts/Construction • Multi-module blast resistant complexes • Stackable (two-level designs) • Custom furnishings and equipment • Electronically classified equipment • Positive Pressurization • Fire and Gas detection • Communications cabling • Architectural exterior finishing Every Petroblast building comes with the required Manufacturer’s Data Report, per OSHA’s National Emphasis Program and the PSM Mechanical Integrity standard. For more information, contact Petroblast at (337) 735-9245 or visit www.blastresistantbuildings.com. MAY/JUNE 2008 MJ2008.pmd 23 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM 23 Today’s gas detectors limit risks to workers while giving operators enough flexibility for safety & efficiency Explosion Proof I By ROBERT ZUIDERVELD PYROBAN CORP. Pyroban’s Gascheka™ gas detection system For more information about Pyroban flammable gas detection contact Pyroban at (973)748-0760 or visit their web site link at www.fireworld.com/incident_logs/incident_log2.php 24 MJ2008.pmd n the wake of several highly publicized explosions and fires in the refining and fuel storage industries where vapor leaks were followed by ignition, management is asking how can safety measures be improved to prevent mobile equipment operating under hot work permits or within the fringes of the classified areas from creating another disaster? Heavily regulated by governments throughout the world, refineries and similar energy industries have a responsibility to ensure that any explosion risk is kept to a minimum. Within the US, refineries have been required to comply with codes and regulations for the use of powered industrial equipment in explosion hazardous areas. However, due to code interpretation and explosion hazardous areas rating variances, adequate levels of regulations and worker protection have not been established. This means that workers at many refineries today still remain at risk. To start a fire and/or explosion requires three constituents to come together; an oxidizer, a hazard (gas/vapor) and an ignition source. While it is not possible to eliminate the oxidizer (air), it is possible to plan processes and protect equipment to limit, wherever possible, the chances of the hazard getting in contact with an ignition source. However, it is a matter of fact that when it comes to the control of mobile equipment, many responsible for site operations lack the experience, site discipline or budget to enforce safe and acceptable practices in terms of the control of mobile equipment movement. Before examining how to better manage the movement of mobile equipment under work permits or in “low” risk areas, we should agree in areas formally classified as an explosive hazard, the equipment used should be designed and certified to operate safely in those areas. Again referring to codes and regulations, if an area is classified as Class 1, Division 1 or Zone 1 certified, then only equipment certified to EX Class 1, Division 1 or Zone 1 codes and regulations should be used in those areas. For Division 2 or Zone 2 hazardous areas equipment should at least be tested and certified according to the codes and regulations applicable to equipment used in those areas. Insisting that only Division 1, Zone 1, Division 2 or Zone 2 certified equipment can be allowed to operate in the refinery is often neither practicable nor desirable. Imagine insisting that a 100-ton mobile crane required for a maintenance job must be converted to fully explosion proof before being permitted to operate on site. I doubt any rental company can afford to keep an explosion proof crane on standby for the occasional job in an explosion hazardous area. The same thing applies to personnel carriers, vans, tractors, tankers, mobile compressors and generator sets operating inside the refinery perimeter not being permitted INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 24 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM into formally classified areas without first being made fully explosion proof. In these situations most refineries rely on the use of hot work permits and a risk management processes. In most cases the person(s) responsible for issuing the work permit have the relevant experience and the authority to manage the risk involved with the task at hand. How can you limit the chances of the hazard and the ignition source from coming together? When diesel powered equipment is used, it is common to insist that an engine over-speed air shutdown valve and an exhaust spark arrestor are installed. Provided these components are correctly fitted and correctly serviced, they should alleviate some of the many ignition sources to be found on a forklift truck, crane, tanker, compressor or gen-set. But what about the other ignition sources such as electro-static releases, flame flashback through the inlet system or flame emission (not sparks) from the engine exhaust and sparks from any electrical equipment such as alternators, lighting, instrumentation or engine management systems? What about the potential of hot surfaces causing auto-ignition? Who will ensure that the over-speed valve has been correctly calibrated before the operation begins? And if so, how will the operator of the crane, truck or van know whether the area immediately surrounding his equipment has reached an explosive gas or vapor level? Besides working under a hot work permit, it is common practice for the operator to carry a handheld gas detector. But who or what procedure ensures that the gas detector has been specifically calibrated against the gases and vapors that could potentially be released into the operating area? Does the gas detector always remain with the equipment and its operator throughout the permit process or does the operator stray away from the equipment? A handheld gas detector relies on an operator to ‘kill’ the equipment before the equipment ignites the explosive atmosphere that has developed unexpectedly. Unfortunately it is an undeniable fact that most accidents are caused by human failure or response time. One could rely on gas detection systems monitoring the site, but it would be necessary to ensure that sufficient gas detector points cover all areas where mobile equipment is operating, because if not, the hazard and ignition source may combine before appropriate action can be taken. A better approach may be to have the equipment and its ignition sources ring fenced by dedicated gas detectors that will automatically shutdown the gen-set or compressor when flammable gases or vapors are detected, however if the equipment is mobile, such as cranes or vans, the process becomes rather impracticable. Besides that, how do you prevent equipment that has automatically shutdown from being restarted before it is safe to do so? Relying on engine over-speed valves, fixed gas detectors and handheld gas detectors may have been the traditional reactive protection methods of yesterday. However, with today’s powered industrial equipment relying on sophisticated electronics, the use of over-speed valves and the limitations of relying on handheld gas detectors being held by infallible workers does not appear the way to improve facility safety going forward. Today’s pro-active gas detection technologies limit the risks to workers and at the same time allow the operator the flexibility they need to perform their job safely and efficiently by: • Ensuring that the equipment which is operated has its own integral gas detection system that will only allow the equipment to function when the immediate area surrounding the equipment is free of flammable gas or vapor. • Ensuring that before the operation begins the equipment performs a forced automatic gas test to ensure it is calibrated correctly. • Ensuring that equipment which is operated has its own integral gas detection system which shuts down the equipment automatically and immediately when an unexpected increase in flammable gas or vapors is detected in the immediate area surrounding the equipment. • Ensuring that if shutdown does occur that any restart is controlled by a person in charge of facility safety. • Installing protection systems that are simple to fit, simple to use, simple to maintain and, most importantly, designed to isolate most of the ignition sources from explosive atmospheres. Even though the technology is available for those who need it, it is the safety culture and corporate mindset that needs adjustment. Appointing the appropriate budgets and implementing new safety programs are fundamental to accomplishing real change. With the right mindset, some investments, minor equipment modifications and fine tuning of the site process & permit schemes, significant progress in equipment safety can be made in relatively short time. This will not only reduce the risks of fire and explosions, but also protect people, their investments and our environment MAY/JUNE 2008 MJ2008.pmd 25 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM 25 One Seven Continued from page 14 The One Seven® Class A Foam Concentrate was developed to have the best moisture penetration ability even at a low mixing ratio of just 0.3 percent. The Draves Test proves this highly effective moisture penetration. A one inch by one inch piece of canvas fabric is dropped into a foam solution with One Seven® Class A foam concentrate and is fully saturated in 28 seconds. Competing foam solutions take more than two full minutes to fully saturate the fabric with the same testing parameters. Class B One Seven® (AFFF) foam agent has an additive rate of 0.5 percent. Class B alcohol resistant foam agent has an additive rate of 0.6 percent. One Seven® has demonstrated that it effectively Photo courtesy of Gimaex operates more quickly, with substantially less water consumption and practically without the A One Seven unit in place aboard a fire truck serving a tire plant in Germany. usual water damage. It is ready for use quickly and requires no technical efforts by the operator. The design of the plastics and chemicals are important for tire production at the Pirelli plant in Germany. Since 2005, the fire brigade at the Pirelli plant has system guarantees a constant foam quality with simple operation. At Blaichach, the One Seven® foam system was mounted on a four- used the One Seven system. The Pirelli fire truck integrates a 3,000 liter wheel chassis with a compact wheelbase of only 3,620 mm (11.8 feet). (750 gallons) water tank and a 200 liter (50 gallons) Class A foam tank The vehicle includes a 1,000 liter (250 gallons) water tank and a 200 liter with the One Seven system. In 2006, the system was used to extinguish major fires in two separate (52.8 gallon) foam tank. That foam tank is divided into 150 liters (38 gallons) of Class A and 50 liters (12.5 gallons)of Class B. supermarkets nearby, convincing the local municipal brigade to also Blaichach is not alone in choosing the One Seven® system. Rubber, purchase the system. 26 MJ2008.pmd INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 26 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM INCIDENT LOG Underline Items Denote Fatality March 1 — Gimcheon, South Korea: Fire destroyed a phenol rosin factory, releasing phenol into the Nakdong River. March 1 – Sakai, Japan: Hydrogen fluoride gas leaking from a chemical plant affected more than 20. March 2 — Canton, OH: 4 responders were exposed to dehydrated lime at a steel plant fire. March 2 – Centralia, WA: 3 workers escaped an explosion and fire at a wood products plant. March 2 — Scranton, PA: A fire at a munitions plant started inside vents on the roof. March 3 – Malfetta, Italy: 4 workers died from breathing toxic sulfur fumes from a tank truck. March 3 – Scranton, PA: Fire damaged a munitions plant. March 3 – Shanghai, China: 2 steel plant workers suffocated upon entering a furnace filled with nitrogen. March 3 — St. Pie, Quebec: A plant specializing in wood gliders for furnishings caught fire. March 3 — Suzhou, China: Fire destroyed 3 production lines at an electronics plant. March 3 – Wansea, U.K.: An explosion injured 2 workers at an appliance factory. March 4 — Corpus Christi, TX: Oil leaking from a broken seal ignited at an petroleum refinery. March 4 – Nackawic, New Brunswick: A sulfur dioxide leak at a pulp mill injured 2. March 4 — Ochang, South Korea: A fire at a computer battery plant impacted worldwide supplies. March 4 — Taoyuan, Taiwan: Fire broke out on a production line for notebook computers. March 5 — Burlington City, N.J.: A 3,000-pound pipe rolled off a forklift, crushing a pipe foundry worker. March 5 — Prescott, WI: A railcar stopped on a bridge ruptured, spilling 20,000 gallons of antifreeze. March 6 — Cambridge, Ontario: Workers evacuated a plastic coating plant when fire broke out. March 6 — Ledyard, CT: A fire in a fire fighting water pump house injured a chemical plant worker. March 6 – McLaren Vale, Australia: 132,000 gallons of wine were lost when a fermenting tower collapsed. March 6 – Pasig City, Philippines: A steam tank at a coconut oil refinery exploded. March 6 — Struthers, OH: Fire broke out at an aluminum products plant. March 6 – Tokai, Japan: An explosion at a steel works injured 3 workers. March 7 — Kalinga Nagon, Philippines: A fire in the ferroalloys unit of a steel plant killed a worker. March 7 — Salisbury, N.C.: Fire ignited at a plant specializing in rubberized products such as hose. March 7 – Salton Sea, CA: Residents were evacuated after a derailed freight train spilled acid. March 8 – Cilacap, Indonesia: 3 oil refinery workers doing maintenance on a fin-fan cooler died in a fire. March 8 – Edmonton, Alberta: A worker at a hydrogen sulfide plant was found dead. March 8 – West Gippsland, Australia: Powdered milk stored in a four-story hopper caught fire. March 9 – Pimpri, India: An explosion in a chemical plant laboratory seriously injured an employee. March 10 – Oak Park Heights, MN: An explosion and fire rocked a power plant coal crusher. March 10 – Uruma, China: 4 people storing chemicals in a porcelain factory warehouse died in an explosion. March 10 – Windsor, Ontario: 5 auto plant workers were injured in a fire. March 11 – Attercliffe, U.K.: Hydrogen sulfide gas MJ2008.pmd 27 For Complete Incident Logs, Visit www.fireworld.com escaped from a waste management facility. March 11 – Bath, N.Y.: An explosion at a liquid propane storage facility injured 4 workers. March 11 – Milazzo, Italy: Fire broke out in the diesel section of an oil refinery. March 11 – St. Lambrecht, Austria: 2 workers were killed in an explosives plant accident. March 11 – Worcester, MA: Leaking ammonia forced workers at a grinding gears plant to evacuate. March 12 – Baton Rouge, LA: An oil refinery worker was killed. March 12 – Euless, TX: A fire ignited at a chemical plant. March 12 – Middle Swan, Australia: A machine fire caused major damage at a brick making plant. March 12 – Tangra, India: A fire injured 3 chemical plant workers. March 13 – Victoria, British Columbia: A fire gutted a fish processing plant. March 14 – Sarnia, Ontario: Residents sheltered in place after a benzene release at an oil refinery. March 14 – Smithers, British Columbia: An explosion and fire at a particle board plant injured 2. March 14 – Sterling, KS: Fire damaged a chemical plant. March 15 – New Hampton, IA: A fire at a feed plant did not reach fertilizer and other hazardous materials. March 16 – Fond du Lac, WI: Firefighters extinguished a furnace fire at an outboard motor plant. March 16 — Karachi, Pakistan: An 8-hour fire broke out in a refrigerator factory. March 17 – Byculla, India: 10 people were killed and 66 injured when fire broke out at an aerosol repackaging plant, part of a larger industrial estate. March 17 – Chicago, IL: Fire swept through a factory manufacturing zinc products for industry. March 17 – Knoxville, TN: Fire destroyed a sports manufacturing plant. March 17 – Koln, Germany: A ruptured ethylene pipeline ignited at a chemical plant. March 17 – Nizhny, Russia: An ammonia leak killed a refinery worker. March 17 – Pockwood, British Virgin Islands: A fire at a used oil dumpsite spread to a power plant. March 17 – Stolzenau, Germany: An explosion rocked a coating company. March 18 – Braithwaite, LA: Fluorosilicic acid leaked from a chemical plant storage tank. March 18 – Chiba, China: Fire broke out at a chemical plant. March 18 – Dormagen, Germany: A leak in an ethylene pipeline at a plastics plant ignited a fire. March 18 – Fredonia, WI: Nitric acid leaked from a chemical plant storage tank. March 18 – Spooner, WI: 2 workers were injured in a chemical plant explosion. March 19 – Barrancabermeja, Colombia: 4 refinery workers suffered burns in an explosion. March 19 – Bloomer, WI: A fire in a dust collection system damaged a plant specializing in insulation. March 20 – Andirin District, Turkey: 4 hydroelectric power plant employees were killed in an explosion. March 20 – Carefree, IN: Hydrochloric acid vapor escaped after an explosion at an engine plant. March 20 – St. Charles, IL: Sprinklers checked a fire at a high rack storage unit at a chemical plant. March 20 — Warren, PA: Fire broke out in the vacuum pump of an oil refinery combination unit. March 21 — Sherwood Park, Alberta: Fire destroyed a mushroom growing plant. March 22 – Sturtevant, WI: Large bags of polymer pellets ignited in a chemical plant warehouse. March 22 – Tilsonburg, Ontario: 2 fires happened within several days at an auto parts plant. March 22 – Valenzuela City, Philippines: A massive fire gutted a plastics plant. March 23 – Booneville, AR: Nearby residents evacuated due to ammonia after a packing plant blast. March 23 – Kiryat Gat, Israel: Explosions resulted as fire swept through a pesticide warehouse. March 23 – Levis, Quebec: More than 46,000 gallons of gasoline spilled at a refinery. March 23 – Torkham, Pakistan: An explosion killed 2 people and destroyed 33 oil tanker trucks. March 24 – Anaheim, CA: 12 firefighters were injured by toxic chemicals released at a dyeing plant fire. March 24 – Hawthorne, N.J.: Fire gutted the offices of a metal finishing factory. March 24 – Mineral Wells, TX: A portion of an electronic plant caught fire. March 24 – Port St. Lucie, FL: A chemical plant worker fell into a vat of bleach. March 25 – Aiken, S.C.: Rubble and wood from a remodeling project ignited at a finishing plant. March 25 – Texas City, TX: Oil refinery workers sheltered in place during a propane leak. March 26 – Bogata, Colombia: A fire destroyed a paint factory. March 26 – Cangrejera, Mexico: An explosion ignited a fire in a benzene storage tank. March 26 – Portsmouth, U.K.: A trash fire threatened a factory that makes smoke detectors. March 26 – Rockville, MD: Front-end loaders pulled apart burning paper bales at a paper mill. March 27 – Albany, KY: A massive fire spread through a charcoal plant warehouse. March 27 – Brookshire, TX: A flash fire burned 2 electronics plant workers. March 27 – Santa Maria, CA: Hydrogen sulfide gas leaked from a refinery pipeline. March 28 – Ahmedabad, India: A tanker truck fire spread to another vehicle and a nearby chemical plant. March 28 – Blanchester, OH: Fire scorched the exterior of an auto parts plant. March 28 – Fort Erie, N.Y.: A furnace explosion at a metals plant seriously burned a worker. March 28 – Mount Vernon, N.Y.: Flames raced through a chemical plant warehouse. March 28 – Tea, S.D.: Fire engulfed a pallet plant. March 29 – Baku, Azerbaijan: A 5-story building at a radio manufacturing plant was swept by fire. March 29 – Curtis Bay, MD: A mixing structure at a concrete plant caught fire and collapsed. March 29 – Gereshk, Afghanistan: 2 workers died in an explosion at a power plant. March 29 – Jackson Township, PA: Fire destroyed a packaging plant. March 30 – Lafayette, TN: Fire broke out at a plant specializing in foam backing for carpet. March 30 – Milwaukee, WI: Fire broke out at a plant specializing in corrugated and solid fiber containers. March 31 – Kanahpur, Bangladesh: 3 steel plant workers were killed in a boiler explosion. March 31 – Mumbai, India: A chemical plant reactor exploded, killing 2 workers. Visit www.fireworld.com for April listings MAY/JUNE 2008 27 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM FOCUS ON HAZMAT Foam – an additive and a system By DR. JOHN S. TOWNSEND F rom time immemorial mankind has used water to control fire. From the first time that some nameless aboriginal ancestor discovered that water would extinguish fire until the present day the basic principle of firefighting has been to “put the wet stuff on the red stuff”. This approach served well when virtually all combustibles were solids. There was the occasional bit of oil used as lamp fuel, various lubricants and of course the odd container of “spirituous liquors” that would burn but other than that there were very few flammable liquids in the every day environment and those that were around were present in rather small quantities. In the nineteenth century America, and the world, was geared to solid fuel. The industrial revolution had arrived but it was powered by the steam engine and that engine was nearly always fueled by coal or wood. All this changed in August of 1859 when Col. Edwin Drake brought in the first oil well at Titusville, Pennsylvania. Originally petroleum was used to produce “lamp oil” or kerosene to replace the scarce and more expensive whale oil then in use; gasoline was essentially a waste product since, because of its high volatility, it was prone to explosion and therefore deemed to unsafe for use in the wick type lamps of the day. Then, in 1898, the Duryea brothers hitched an Otto gasoline engine to a buggy to produce the first automobile in America and when Henry Ford introduced the Model T in 1903, liquid fuels were off to the races. The coming of the automobile and with it the introduction of large quantities of liquid fuels and lubricants into virtually every community opened up a whole new world for firefighters. For the first time they were being called on to deal with fires that could not be put out with ordinary water streams and, at first, there was nothing with which to meet this challenge. Liquid hydrocarbon fuels and most other organic liquids (carbon disulphide CS2 being the most common exception) are generally lighter than water; thus when water is applied to these materials they simply float to the top of the container and continue burning. If more water is applied the container may overflow and spread the fire. In addition, if the temperature of the burning liquid has exceeded the boiling point of the applied water it may flash into steam causing a “slop over” which again spreads the fire. The popular legend has it that the idea for firefighting foams came to an off-duty firefighter who noticed that the suds produced in the soapy water of his wife’s laundry tub floated on the surface of the water sealing it from the atmosphere. He reasoned that if he could apply soap suds to a hydrocarbon fire the water in the suds would remain on top of the liquid and smother the fire; thus fire foam was born. Regardless of their composition all foams are basically a system composed of three components: Water, a wetting agent or detergent and a gas (usually air). To obtain foam the three components must be mixed prior to application. This mixing can be done in two ways: 1.) the foaming agent or “concentrate’ can be mixed with water in a tank either when the tank is filled or when the apparatus arrives at the scene and it is determined that the nature of the fire is such that foam will be needed. This works well in the case of small, self contained first response units but it has the drawback that the tank has to be refilled periodically unless a backup engine can arrive before the onboard supply of premixed foam solution is exhausted. 2.) The concentrate is carried in a tank or container and added to the fire fighting water by means of an eductor or proportioning pump. This system has the advantage of being able to supply foam in a continuous stream, so long as the supplies of water 28 MJ2008.pmd and foam concentrate hold out. In either case the foam solution (foam concentrate and water) is aerated by passing it through some sort of air aspirating nozzle or by the application of compressed air as in a (“CAF” unit). The finished foam is then applied to the fire. Some of the original fire/foam was generated in 2½ gallons fire extinguishers. This was referred to as Chemical Foam. It was generated when two chemicals mixed together. The fire extinguishers had an inner chamber and an outer chamber. The chemicals were referred to as A & B. As long as the extinguisher was upright, things were normal. When the extinguisher was uprighted and turned upside down, the two chemicals would mix. The chemical reaction would do two things. One, it would create a chemical reaction that would create pressure which forced the foaming agents out the hose of the extinguisher. It also caused bubbles which were filled with Co2 gas. These extinguishers were very similar to the Soda Acid extinguishers of their day. The major difference was the foam extinguishers created bubbles so that the foam bubbles could foam over the surface of the flammable spill. They worked very well and because of the Co2 in the bubble, it helped to extinguish the fire. One major problem with both the Foam and the Soda Acid extinguisher was that the chemicals were very corrosive. Also the extinguisher containers were not pressurized and there was no standard requiring that they be hydro tested. Too many times when the extinguisher was pressurized by turning it upside down, the container shell would rupture from the pressure and kill or injure people. They also could not be used on electrical fires as the chemicals were good conductors of electricity. These types of extinguishers were banned about the late 1960’s. If any of these extinguishers seem to still be full of liquid, do not invert an old Soda Acid or Foam extinguisher. There is no way to know if the chemicals are still inside the extinguishers and the container could fail with terrible results. Since their original introduction, numerous “improved” foaming agents have been introduced. Some were developed for the sake of economy, others to deal with specialized situations; polar liquids such as alcohols are a classic example. Protein foams, originally based on hydrolyzed waste animal tissue from slaughter house operations in various glycols, were introduced because of their longevity, their cheapness and the fact that they would not harm plant life. They had one major drawback however; proteins are neutralized or “denatured” by non-polar solvents such as alcohol. The protein foams also had a short shelve life. If they were stored in a hot environment, their shelf life could be measured in months. As the “Age of Chemistry” developed, more and more non-polar chemicals were introduced into transit and the market place for use as solvents and chemical feed stocks. The first move away from the protein based foams was when the US Navy in cooperation with 3M Company developed AFFF (Aqueous Film Forming Foam) This foam contains some Fluro Florinated chemicals which cause the AFFF to form a very thin film on the surface of the fuel. The film was strong enough to prevent the fuel vapors from rising through the film. It worked very rapidly and that was one of its major reasons to exist. The Navy wanted foam that worked faster than the protein foams in use at the time. AFFF originally was used in conjunction with Dry Chemical, often referred to as a Twin Agent system. The AFFF world and the US Navy INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 28 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM were the original users of this new type of foam and fire fighting system. The next major users were the airport fire departments. The AFFF foams were not recommended by the NFPA 11 Standard for tank fire protection. Some resistance was political more that technical. In the late 1970s a 160 foot (50 meter) gasoline tank was extinguished. Due to this extinguishment and the results of many fire tests performed by 3M, the NFPA 11 Committee dropped the restriction on AFFF. In the 1980s the 3M Company purchased the rights from National Foam to manufacture a new type of foam called ATC. (Alcohol Type Concentrate). In just a few years the new type of foam became the foam of choice in the US and successfully extinguished most of the tank fires in the US and around the world. Today that foam is almost exclusively used in refineries and chemical plants around the world. Today the use of traditional foams is being challenged by a new fuel, Ethanol. Ethanol is in the process of being used in the majority of gasoline sold. The challenge that most fire departments have is that many of them use AFFF or emulsifier types of foams. None of them will work on 10 percent or 85 percent ethanol. To extinguish fires involving this fuel requires the use of AR types of foams or AR/AFFF. Foam consists of a lattice of tiny bubbles which are bound together by means of static, or magnetic, attraction and the weaker Van derVaal’s forces. As long as it is intact, this lattice has tremendous insulating power working in exactly the same way as does the foam insulation in a domestic refrigerator. Foam can be used as an insulting blanket. The normal challenge is that most foams will not adhere very well to vertical surfaces. As long as the foam is there, it insulates the surface very well from fire and heat. Along comes a new agent and system, called CAFS (compressed air foam system). This foam is made by mixing a foam agent with air and water in the correct amounts. This foam is a very thick bubble and will adhere to vertical surfaces. If a fire department sprays the foam onto a tank shell, it will protect it very well from heat and flames for hours. It has been used very successfully in the wild fires out west. So if we apply a thick blanket of adherent foam to an iron beam or tank wall that is being subjected to extreme heat in a fire we may well delay or even prevent its weakening and/or collapse. This technique has been used to protect a tank of flammable liquid, adjacent to a conflagration, from radiated heat or flame impingement. If the blanket can be replenished as needed the temperature of the tank contents can be maintained at a safe level until the fire can be extinguished or the contents of the tank removed from the danger zone. That compressed foams will adhere to hot metal is a definite plus and makes it possible to apply foam blankets to vertical or near vertical surfaces where their function is to protect from heat rather than to smother the fire. The insulating qualities of foams can also be utilized to retard vaporization of volatile liquids. A thick foam blanket applied to the surface of a volatile liquid will protect against heating and, since the rate of vaporization and the vapor pressure are both proportional to the temperature of the liquid, diminish the concentration of hazardous or explosive vapors above the liquid. Firefighters are some of the world’s greatest innovators. Leave anything lying around a firehouse and, (if it is not nailed down) they will “acquire” the article and find a new and different use for it. Foams have been no exception. It wasn’t long after their introduction that firefighters began to find numerous uses for foams that were over and above what the original innovators had in mind. The very property that made foams necessary in the first place can be utilized to apply them to a tank fire. Water and “oil” (most hydrocarbons) do not mix and foam is lighter than “oil” and thus will float on top of it. So, if foam, containing entrained air, is injected near the bottom of an oil filled tank it will float to the surface. As the foam rises to the surface of the liquid the hydrostatic pressure becomes less and the air in the foam expands thus, when it gets to the surface, the foam has expanded and flows out over the surface of the oil forming a blanket that seals the oil from the atmosphere, cutting off the oxygen required to sustain combustion and effecting extinguishment. If a little pre-piping and preplanning (remember P5) are done, this procedure can be implemented from a remote location thereby keeping the response personnel out of harms way. The main difficulty encountered by those trying to implement this methodology in the past was the need for an apparatus that could generate and pump foam against the hydraulic head, i.e. back- pressure, generated by the tank contents. Additional experiments have been tried using foams in which the liquid component is something other than water for use on fires involving water reactive materials such as calcium carbide (CaC2) or metallic alkyls such as triethyl aluminum ( Al(C2H5)3. While the experimental foams have worked they are expensive to use and have not yet been proven practical for general use though some who are involved with rocket fuels have done work in this area. MAY/JUNE 2008 MJ2008.pmd 29 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM 29 RISK ASSESSMENT Reliable stationary fire pumps By JEFFREY R. ROBERTS/XL GAPS B ack in the January-February issue I discussed the changes in the 2007 version of NFPA 20 Standard for the Installation of Stationary Fire Pumps that could affect emergency responders. That article spelled out the requirements of NFPA 20 in regard to emergency responders being able to access the fire pump room in an emergency. This article is intended to get into some of the nuts and bolts of ensuring that the fire pump will operate during the course of a fire and be considered a reliable source of water. This article applies to electric motor driven fire pumps as diesel engine driven fire pumps will be discussed during the next issue. The intent of this article is to generate some thoughts around the proper assessment of electric motor driven fire pumps and their power supplies. When pre-planning a fire pump room there are three areas that need attention, first is access, can you gain access to the pump in an emergency situation? This was covered in the early mentioned article. It should be noted that electric motor driven fire pump rooms are not required to be sprinklered per NFPA 20. The second portion is the power supply itself, does it meet the necessary code requirements to be considered reliable? The last thing that needs to be considered is the controller/ automatic transfer switch, especially where it’s located and if it’s reliable. Chapter 9 of NFPA 20 spells out the acceptable power supply arrangements for electric motor driven stationary fire pumps. Some local jurisdictions have specific requirements as well, particularly in regards to high-rise buildings. Basically, to meet the intent of NFPA 20 and guarantee reliable electric power to the pump driver, there are a couple ways this can be accomplished, depending on your particular situation. It would be a good idea to ask for an electrical one-line diagram of the power supply. Have the building engineer go over it with you. One means of supply power is to have a dedicated source directly from the municipal provider. This would mean that it has to be protected from fire and other exposures. In some cases it may have to be encased in concrete with the idea being that it has a 2 hour exposure resistance. The exact specifications for this reside in NFPA 70, The Electrical Code. Also, some power supply cabling has been approved for this use as well. The important part of this power supply arrangement is the exact routing of the cabling as it could pass through the building which the fire pump/sprinkler systems protect. This could be detrimental to the fire pump if the sprinklers didn’t activate and the building structure collapsed therefore interrupting power to the pump when it needs it the most. The problem is compounded if emergency responders are in the building. Keep in mind that some facilities do manufacture their own power and if the supply leads meet the standard, this is considered adequate as well. Another power supply arrangement would be what is typically referred to as the campus arrangement where you have electrical feeds going to multiple buildings. This arrangement, and in the case where you cannot meet the dedicated power supply requirements, requires back-up emergency power supplies. Back-up emergency power supplies are also required when you have a building whose height is greater than the pumping capabilities of the fire department apparatus. One word of caution when dealing with the back-up power supplies is that you need to make sure that the generator has the capability of operating the fire pump under full load while operating the other emergency building features. The back-up power source typically supports the fire alarm system, the HVAC smoke removal system and emergency lighting. The generator is required to have enough fuel to operate more than eight hours. Also, be aware of the location of the ATS (Automatic Transfer Switch). NFPA 20 requires it to be located in the pump room. However, it’s not always located there. The location of this switch is important because if it fails to operate automatically, it can be operated manually. All the above mentioned items should be part of the fire department or emergency response team’s pre-emergency plan. Jeffrey R. Roberts, CFPS, is with XL GAPs. Contact him at jeffrey_roberts @swissre.com or at (504) 220-0057 30 MJ2008.pmd INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 30 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM NINE TIME CHAMPS Alyeska cinches annual firefighter competition T he Alyeska Fire/Rescue Brigade has won the coveted Alaska Firefighter Competition Governor’s Trophy for the ninth consecutive year. The competition was held in conjunction with the Alaska State Firefighter Association and Alaska Fire Chief Association’s joint conference in Valdez, Alaska. The theme of the conference this year was “Industrial and Municipal Departments Training Together to Protect Alaska’s Future.” The Alyeska Fire Brigade competition team consists of Alyeska Pipeline Service Company industrial technicians and Doyon Universal Services fire protection professionals employed at the Valdez Marine Terminal. Valdez is the terminus of the Trans Alaska Pipeline System which carries oil from Prudhoe Bay 800-miles to the marine terminal. Teams across the state compete in four events: fire extinguisher, ladder raise, selfcontained breathing apparatus and make and break. Points earned during the competition are then tallied up for the overall award, the Governor’s Trophy. The Alyeska team members include Brian Beauvais, Sean Wisner, Matt Smelcer, Justin Major, Steve McCann, Ken White and Jennifer Stubblefield. In the fire extinguisher event, the participant runs 50 feet (15 meters) in full turnout gear while test carrying a dry chemical extinguisher for use to snuff out a fire in and around a barrel of water that has a quart of gasoline on top. Once the fire is extinguished, the participant runs back 50 feet (15 meters). Smelcer snagged second place for the team. Alyeska blasted the ladder raise event for a perfect first place time. Beauvais, Wisner and Stubblefield raced 75 feet (23 meters) to a pole while carrying a 24-foot (7 meters) extension ladder, raised the ladder, tied the halyard and footed the ladder for Major who climbed to the top to sound the bell attached to the pole. Wisner secured first place in the self-contained breathing apparatus (SCBA) event. Wisner ran 75 feet (23 meters), donned his turnout gear and SCBA and was breathing air within a minute. White, McCann and Smelcer succeeded in grabbing another first place in the Make and Break. The make and break involves each participant coupling three 50-foot (15 meter) sections of hoses together, adding the nozzle, then racing past the 170 feet (52 meters) mark to uncouple the nozzle and hoses while racing to the hydrant connection. The Ayeska Fire/Rescue Brigade triumphed and secured the Governor’s Trophy, which was presented by the State Fire Marshall’s Office at the conference banquet. The Alyeska brigade has won the Governor’s Trophy 13 times since 1993. The Alyeska Fire Brigade Competition Team snagged the coveted Alaska Governor’s Trophy at the annual fire competition in Valdez, Alaska. Competition Team Members, from left to right, are Bud Jones, Chief Brian Major, Captain Sean Wisner, Brian Beauvais, Ken White, Captain Jennifer Stubblefield, Justin Major, Matt Smelcer and Steve McCann. Below, the firefighters compete in various events. MAY/JUNE 2008 MJ2008.pmd 31 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM 31 EMS Corner Death is too often part of living By BILL KERNEY/College of Southern Nevada T he topic of death and dying is one that is a common theme in the world of EMS, no matter where you work or which agency you work for. Adult medicine is full of death and dying patients at every turn and while it’s our job to fight the Grim Reaper I don’t think anyone expects to win all of the time. Patients come and patients go. Some live, but some die. No matter how hard we work or how good a job we do, the best of efforts do not matter. We all know this. When we lose a colleague, it’s like losing a member of the family. The “service” (Fire Extinguishment, EMS, and Public Safety, etc.) has always melded a tight bond among its members. It’s really just the nature of the beast I suppose. We depend on each other so intensely, both on and often off the job. Losing a member on or off the duty can be heartbreaking. When “Bobby” had all that belly pain, he always said it was the cook’s chili or some other such concoction he had eaten. Even when he was doubled over on the kitchen table at 3 AM, we never thought it was something he “could not handle.” It was not till we heard that he was in the hospital and that the surgeons had “opened him, and closed him” that we realized how serious it had been. I vividly remember pulling up in front of the firehouse several shifts later and seeing the purple bunting over the door. My heart sank. I knew he was dead. While ‘we’ had never been close, the mood amongst the brothers that day was somber at best. No one spoke about it. In fact, no one said very much at all the entire shift. When “Ralph” was last seen, people said that he looked terrible. Yet no one had the presence to say anything to “Ralph.” He was after all a consummate professional, a Paramedic with years of experience who knew his medicine as good as anyone. He would know if he was gravely ill or not, right? The point of both of these cases is that they probably did know something was seriously wrong. Denial is a very powerful emotion and one you will see in your friends, family, co-workers, and of course the patients that you are called to treat. That chest pain must be something ‘other’ than a heart attack….. “It’s the damn pepperoni pizza I had for lunch, or that pastrami sandwich. I know better than to eat that stuff.” Patients will often deny there is a problem, but the look on their faces (remember that “look of impending doom” from EMT Basic?) gives them away and tells a different story. DO NOT dismiss this observation nor should you force the patient to confront it head-on. Try a subtle approach to convince the patient that he should get ‘checked out’ just Miller joins IFW marketing staff S herrill Miller, a former senior accounts executive for DuPont, has joined Industrial Fire World as a marketing representative, announced IFW publisher David White. “We feel that Sherrill will make a significant contribution to IFW,” White said. After 22 years with DuPont, Miller retired as a senior accounts executive worldwide for pipeline coatings. Miller has 15 years experience in the fire service, including work for Akron Brass, Delta Safety (where he worked with Dwight Williams) and Boss Manufacturing. Miller has also taught at seven colleges, including Texas A&M, LSU and the University of Mississippi. 32 MJ2008.pmd to be sure. “Let’s take a ride over and see the Doctor, if it’s nothing, you will be home in time for dinner, what do you think? It’s better to be safe than sorry, right?” Plan in advance for resistance from the patient. The point is to never take “No” for the answer as to whether or not they will get assistance. Persistence is the key and you may need to “convince” the patient you are right. Gravely ill patients are often reluctant to face their own potential mortality and being prepared with this knowledge can only improve patient outcome. Your actions are critical in assisting this patient in his time of need. We have all been taught the “stages” in the Death and Dying lecture. Denial, anger and rage, bargaining and even acceptance are what to expect. Patients may present several of these emotional states, all in one call, and you must be flexible in all your care plans to anticipate these changes. The families and loved ones are also susceptible to the same feelings. A patient with a terminal illness may be very cognizant of his own impending demise and the family will hear nothing of it and refuse to face it or, in many cases, not even discuss it at all. Having arrived at the scene and asked the patient, “How are you feeling?” and getting the response, “Good, I’m dying, but otherwise doing well” gives you real pause in your EMS career. Many times the family is a bigger problem than the patient. The previous scenario had the family yelling, “You are not dying, now stop saying that!” The patient responds, “See, they just won’t listen to the doctors.” In these types of cases it may be just as important to the patient that you help care for his family as it is to meet his medical needs. I’m not saying that anything could have been different for “Bobby” or “Ralph.” Who knows how advanced their issues had been but sometimes you have to wonder if you had said something, could it have made a difference. When someone looks terrible and we ask how they are and we get the usual “I’m fine, how are you?” should we not press the issue and really inquire? Should I not say, “Wow, are you sure you are ok because you look like crap?” Now of course no one wants to hear that they “look like crap.” But even risking the possible, “Oh thanks, you don’t look so marvelous either!” I do not want the friend or loved one know my real concern! This simple concern might translate into a trip to the doctor just out of common prudence, especially when the person making the query has some experience in these observations. As the loved one, I may only have felt “fatigue” or felt “overly tired,” yet someone had the presence of mind to express real concern about my well-being. I just might listen, especially if my physical state was not really the norm and I was aware of it. This goes for co-workers as well, and supervisory personnel must also push for action in the presence of massive denial. Remember, if they look sick, they probably are and you should never dismiss this gut reaction of yours. “Ralph” died on March 19th and his memorial service was a week or so later. I could not go because I was in class that day, but I felt the loss of a long time colleague. Even if he was aware of his own possible demise, the loss was huge and he hid it well. Yes, he was always the consummate professional, right to the end. He taught us a sobering lesson, let’s not let his death be in vain. William R. Kerney, MA, EMTP-A, is a professor of emergency medicine at the College of Southern Nevada. INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 32 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM WITCHES BREW CSB releases study on N.C. hazmat fire I n a case study report released in April on the October 2006 fire at a hazardous waste transfer facility in Apex, N.C., the U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) called for a new national fire code for hazardous waste facilities and for improving the information provided to community emergency planners about the chemicals those facilities store and handle. The fire occurred on the night of Oct. 5, 2006, (see “Witch’s Brew” in the Jan.-Feb. 2007 issue of IFW) at a hazardous waste transfer facility on Investment Boulevard in Apex, a suburb of Raleigh, North Carolina. The facility was not staffed or monitored after hours, and no employees were present at the time of the fire. Emergency responders did not have access to specific information on the hazardous chemicals stored at the site and ordered the precautionary evacuation of thousands of Apex residents. The evacuation order remained in place for two days, until the fire had subsided. The CSB investigation found that a small fire originated in the facility’s oxidizer storage bay, one of six storage bays where different wastes were consolidated, stored, and prepared for transfer off-site to treatment and disposal facilities. Within the oxidizer bay were a number of chemical oxygen generators, which had earlier been removed from aircraft during routine maintenance at a facility in Mobile, Alabama. However, they had not been safely activated and discharged before entering the waste stream. Solid chlorine-based pool chemicals were stacked on top of the box containing still functional oxygen generators. Apex firefighters initially responded to a 911 emergency call from a resident driving past the facility, who reported observing a haze with a “strong chlorine smell.” When firefighters arrived, they discovered what was still a small “sofa-size” fire. But that fire spread quickly, most likely as the aircraft oxygen generators discharged, accelerating the blaze. “The only fire control equipment on-site consisted of portable, manually operated fire extinguishers,” said CSB Supervisory Investigator Rob Hall, P.E., who led the investigation. “The facility lacked fire walls and automatic fire suppression systems. As a result, the fire spread quickly into other bays where flammables, corrosives, laboratory wastes, paints, and pesticides were stored.” The bays were separated by sixinch-high curbs only designed to contain liquid spills. The facility was destroyed in the ensuing fire and explosions, which sent fireballs hundreds of feet into the air. About 30 people, including one firefighter and 12 police officers, required medical evaluation at local hospitals for respiratory distress and other symptoms that occurred as a plume from the fire drifted across the area. Hazardous waste facilities like EQ’s are regulated under the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). The investigation noted that RCRA regulations developed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) require facilities to have “fire control equipment” but do not specify what equipment and systems should be in place. In addition, there is no national fire code to define good fire protection practices for hazardous waste facilities. The CSB identified 22 other hazardous waste fires, explosions, and releases that have occurred at U.S. hazardous waste facilities in the past five years. More than a third had adverse community impacts, such as evacuations, orders to shelter, and transportation disruptions. Federal RCRA regulations require operators to “familiarize” local responders in advance concerning facility hazards, but do not describe what specific information must be shared about stored chemicals, or define the frequency of communications. Similarly, EPA regulations under the 1986 Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act do not require facilities to share information about hazardous wastes with local agencies, since those wastes are generally exempt from Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) rules requiring preparation of material safety data sheets (MSDSs). In fact, the investigation found that this facility had limited contact with the Apex Fire Department prior to the October 2006 fire. “Specific, accurate, up-to-date information on chemical hazards is essential to emergency response planning,” said CSB Board Member William Wark, who accompanied the investigative team to Apex in October 2006. “Communities have a fundamental right to know about stored hazardous chemicals that may affect their health and well-being. For first responders, having prompt access to such information is a matter of basic life safety.” The CSB report recommended the EPA require that permitted hazardous waste facilities periodically provide specific, written information to state and local response officials on the type, approximate quantities, and location of hazardous materials. The Board called on the Environmental Technology Council, a trade association representing about 80 percent of the U.S. hazardous waste industry, to develop standardized guidance on waste handling and storage to prevent releases and fires. The CSB also recommended that the council petition the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA)to develop a specific fire protection standard for the hazardous waste industry. The new standard should address fire prevention, detection, control, and suppression. Similar NFPA standards already exist for other industries, such as wastewater treatment. MAY/JUNE 2008 MJ2008.pmd 33 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM 33 INDUSTRIAL SERVICE DIRECTORY COMPRESSED AIR TESTING & CERTIFICATION TRACE ANALYTICS, INC. 15768 Hamilton Pool Rd. Austin, TX 78738 800/247-1024 • Fax 512/263-0002 [email protected] • www.airchecklab.com CONSULTING/TRAINING EMERGENCY SERVICES TRAINING 600 Marina Drive Beaumont, TX 77701 409/833-BEST • Fax 409/833-2376 FIRE & SAFETY SPECIALISTS INC. P.O. Box 9161 College Station, TX 77842 979/690-7559 • Fax 979/690-7562 INDUSTRIAL FIRE TRAINING CONSULTANTS P.O. Box 17947 • Nashville, TN 37217-0947 615/793-5400 • [email protected] www.iftcfire.com LSU FIRE & EMERGENCY CONSULTANTS 6868 Nicholson Drive Baton Rouge, LA 70820 800/256-3473 • Fax 225/765-2416 http://feti.lsu.edu • [email protected] NATIONAL FOAM - KIDDE FIRE FIGHTING 150 Gordon Drive Exton, PA 19341 24 Hr. Red AlertTM 610/363-1400 • Fax 610/524-9073 www.kidde-fire.com FIRE PROTECTIVE COATINGS OCEAN FIRE PROTECTIVE COATINGS Main P.O. Box 616 Niagara Falls, NY 14302-0616 716/278-0136 • Fax 716/282-2669 FOAM FIRE APPARATUS Ferrara Fire Apparatus, Inc. Holden, Louisiana Toll Free 800-443-9006 www.ferrarafire.com MARINE TURBINE TECHNOLOGIES 289 Louisiana Rd; Port of W. St. Mary Franklin, LA 70538 337/924-0298 “Exclusively in the Foam Business” — Sales & Service 1 Rossmoor Drive Monroe Township, NJ 08831 690/655-7777 • Fax 609/655-9538 E-mail — [email protected] NATIONAL FOAM - KIDDE FIRE FIGHTING 150 Gordon Drive Exton, PA 19341 24 Hr. Red AlertTM 610/363-1400 • Fax 610/524-9073 www.kidde-fire.com PIERCE MANUFACTURING 2600 American Drive Appleton, WI 54913 920/832-3231 • www.piercemfg.com SUTPHEN CORPORATION P.O. Box 0158 Amlin, OH 43002 800/848-5860 NATIONAL FOAM - KIDDE FIRE FIGHTING 150 Gordon Drive Exton, PA 19341 24 Hr. Red AlertTM 610/363-1400 • Fax 610/524-9073 www.kidde-fire.com WILLIAMS FIRE & HAZARD CONTROL P.O. Box 1359 Mauriceville, TX 77626 409/727-2347 • Fax 409/745-3021 FOAM EQUIPMENT FOAMPRO-HYPRO/PENTAIR WATER 375 Fifth Ave. N.W. New Brighton, MN 55112 FIRE APPARATUS HARDWARE HARRINGTON, INC. 2630 West 21st St. Erie, PA 16506 • 800/553-0078 814/838-3957 • Fax 814/838-7339 651/766-6300 • 800/533-9511 • Fax 651/766-6614 TSB LOSS CONTROL CONSULTANTS 3940 Morton Bend Road – Rome, GA 30161 706/291-1222 • Fax 706/291-2255 www.tsblosscontrol.com Industrial fire, hazmat & technical rescue training & consulting — An FM Global company WILLIAMS FIRE & HAZARD CONTROL P.O. Box 1359 Mauriceville, TX 77626 409/727-2347 • Fax 409/745-3021 FIRE APPARATUS CRASH RESCUE EQUIPMENT SERVICES P.O.Box 211506 Dallas, TX 75211 972/243-3307 Fax 972/243-6504 E-ONE 1601 SW 37th Ave. Ocala, FL 34474 352/237-1122 • www.e-one.com Register for the 2009 IFW Conference at www.fireworld.com 34 MJ2008.pmd TASK FORCE TIPS, INC. Valparaiso, IN 46383 • 800/348-2686 [email protected] • www.tft.com “An American Owned Company.” FIRE FIGHTING & HAZARD CONTROL WILLIAMS FIRE & HAZARD CONTROL P.O. Box 1359 Mauriceville, TX 77626 409/727-2347 • Fax 409/745-3021 FIRE PROTECTION KBS PASSIVE FIRE Fire Stop Coating & Penetration Seals 604/941-1001 Fax 604/941-1029 • www.KBSpassivefire.com Subscribe to IFW for 3 Years and Get a Free IFW Conference Pass www.fireworld.com TASK FORCE TIPS, INC. Valparaiso, IN 46383 • 800/348-2686 [email protected] • www.tft.com “An American Owned Company.” WILLIAMS FIRE & HAZARD CONTROL P.O. Box 1359 Mauriceville, TX 77626 409/727-2347 • Fax 409/745-3021 FOAM PUMPS Manufactured at: 800 Airport Road North Aurora, IL 60542 Sales Office: 503/659-4198 • Fax 503/659-4696 Register for the 2009 IFW Conference at www.fireworld.com INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 34 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM FOAM TESTING Compliance Testing Services 2357 Ventura Drive Suite 108 Woodbury, MN 55125 Toll Free: (866) 713-2299 Telephone: (651-917-0644 Fax: (651) 917-0646 email: [email protected] HARD SUCTION HOSE HOTELS COURTYARD BY MARRIOTT 3939 State Highway 6 South College Station, TX 77845 979/695-8111 • Fax 979/695-8228 Celebrating 80 Years of Hospitality Excellence TASK FORCE TIPS, INC. Valparaiso, IN 46383 • 800/348-2686 [email protected] • www.tft.com “An American Owned Company.” WILLIAMS FIRE & HAZARD CONTROL P.O. Box 1359 Mauriceville, TX 77626 409/727-2347 • Fax 409/745-3021 NOZZLES INTERNATIONAL FOG INC. 7027 N. Wabash Ave. Portland, OR 97217 503/939-9046 • www.infog.us 2355 IH-10 South — Beaumont, TX 77705 409/842-3600 • Fax 409/842-0023 e-mail: [email protected] TASK FORCE TIPS, INC. Valparaiso, IN 46383 • 800/348-2686 [email protected] • www.tft.com “An American Owned Company.” HAZMAT EMERGENCY RESPONSE EQUIPMENT RMC MEDICAL 3019 Darnell Road Philadelphia, PA 19154-3201 800/332-0672 • Fax 215/824-1371 www.rmcmedical.com HOLIDAY INN BEAUMONT PLAZA 3950 I-10 S & Walden Rd. Beaumont, TX 77705 409/842-5995 • Fax 409/842-7878 INCENTIVES/AWARDS/GIFTS SKEDCO, INC. 10505 SW Manhasset Drive Tualatin, OR 97062 503/691-7909 • Fax 503/691-7973 www.skedco.com 180 Franklin St. Framingham, MA 01702 www.firecatalog.com • 1-800-729-1482 Gifts, badges, & accessories for firefighters LDH EQUIPMENT 21 Commerce Drive Danbury, CT 06810 888/473-6747 • Fax 203/207-9780 HIGH FLOW BOOMS CRASH RESCUE EQUIPMENT SERVICES P.O.Box 211506 Dallas, TX 75211 972/243-3307 Fax 972/243-6504 HOSE/HOSE COUPLINGS HARRINGTON, INC. 2630 West 21st St. Erie, PA 16506 800/553-0078 814/838-3957•Fax 814/838-7339 NATIONAL FOAM - KIDDE FIRE FIGHTING 150 Gordon Drive Exton, PA 19341 24 Hr. Red AlertTM 610/363-1400 • Fax 610/524-9073 www.kidde-fire.com WILLIAMS FIRE & HAZARD CONTROL P.O. Box 1359 Mauriceville, TX 77626 409/727-2347 • Fax 409/745-3021 www.fireworld.com MJ2008.pmd 35 MONITORS NATIONAL FOAM - KIDDE FIRE FIGHTING 150 Gordon Drive Exton, PA 19341 24 Hr. Red AlertTM 610/363-1400 • Fax 610/524-9073 www.kidde-fire.com WILLIAMS FIRE & HAZARD CONTROL P.O. Box 1359 Mauriceville, TX 77626 409/727-2347 • Fax 409/745-3021 PROTECTIVE CLOTHING TASK FORCE TIPS, INC. Valparaiso, IN 46383 • 800/348-2686 [email protected] • www.tft.com “An American Owned Company.” MONITORS 103 S. Main St. Quakertown, PA 18951-1119 215/536-2991 • Fax 215/538-2164 P.O. Box 86 • Wooster, OH 44691 800/228-1161 • Fax 800/531-7335 [email protected] www.akronbrass.com [email protected] •www.quakersafety.com NATIONAL FOAM - KIDDE FIRE FIGHTING 150 Gordon Drive Exton, PA 19341 24 Hr. Red AlertTM 610/363-1400 • Fax 610/524-9073 www.kidde-fire.com Register for the 2009 IFW Conference at www.fireworld.com TASK FORCE TIPS, INC. Valparaiso, IN 46383 • 800/348-2686 [email protected] • www.tft.com “An American Owned Company.” RESCUE EQUIPMENT- CONFINED SPACE SKEDCO, INC. 10505 SW Manhasset Drive P.O. Box 3390 Tualatin, OR 97062 800/770-7533 • Fax 503/639-4538 www.skedco.com TRAINING SALT LAKE CITY ARFF TRAINING CENTER P.O. Box 22107 Salt Lake City, UT 84122 www.slcairport.com/arff • [email protected] MAY/JUNE 2008 35 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM Weyerhaeuser/Eaton partner to reduce arc flash risk D iversified industrial manufacturer Eaton Corporation today announced implementation of a plan to assist Weyerhaeuser Corporation in its efforts to reduce the risk of arc flash hazards. Arc flash prevention is a critical challenge for a wide range of industries and manufacturers globally. The strategic approach positions Weyerhaeuser as an innovator and industry leader on the issue of employee and facility safety. One part of this program is a recent effort to enhance safety, reliability, and productivity at Weyerhaeuser’s integrated paper mill in Springfield, Oregon. Personal safety, lost productivity, legal liability, equipment damage, and facility downtime are just some of the major risks of arc flash,” said Mike Longman, Eaton’s vice president, marketing and PowerChain Management. “We’re proud to partner with Weyerhaeuser and set the example for the right way to deal with the issue - before problems arise.” According to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), an arc flash occurs when an electric current passes through the air between ungrounded conductors or between ungrounded and grounded conductors. An arc flash produces some of the highest temperatures on earth and can create a devastating blast, resulting in serious injury, burns, and even fatalities. “Eaton’s turn-key approach gave us a very effective tool to use in our efforts to better protect our employees from electrical arc flash hazards,” said Warren Hopper, P.E. senior power advisor Weyerhaeuser, Springfield, Oregon, and manufacturing services manager - Weyerhaeuser Pulp, Paper and Packaging Manufacturing Operations. “In the process of addressing critical safety issues, Eaton’s solutions also enable us to reduce downtime, build efficiency and, ultimately, contribute to our bottom line.” Eaton teamed with Weyerhaeuser to provide the paper mill with new mini vacuum circuit breakers and integral trip units equipped with its patented Arcflash Reduction Maintenance SystemTM. These multiple trip settings allow incident energy on low voltage substation secondary main busses to be reduced from over 200 calories to less than four during maintenance. Maintenance personnel are now able to work on this equipment while energized, safely implementing mill lockout/tagout procedures. More substation upgrades are planned for the near future. This innovative approach used to dramatically reduce arc flash hazards in low and medium voltage substations is suitable for both new and existing applications. Weyerhaeuser Company, one of the world’s largest forest products companies, was incorporated in 1900. In 2007, sales were $16.3 billion. It has offices or operations in 13 countries, with customers worldwide. Weyerhaeuser is principally engaged in the growing and harvesting of timber; the manufacture, distribution and sale of forest products; and real estate construction, development and related activities. Additional information is available at http:// www.weyerhaeuser.com. Eaton’s electrical business is a global leader in electrical control, power distribution, uninterruptible power supply and industrial automation products and services. Eaton’s global electrical brands, including Cutler-Hammer®, MGE Office Protection Systems T, Powerware®, Holec®, MEM®, Santak and Moeller, provide customer-driven PowerChain Management® solutions to serve the power system needs of the industrial, institutional, government, utility, commercial, residential, IT, mission critical and OEM markets worldwide. Eaton Corporation is a diversified industrial manufacturer with 2007 sales of $13.0 billion. Eaton is a global leader in electrical systems and components for power quality, distribution and control; hydraulics components, systems and services for industrial and mobile equipment; hydraulics, fuel and pneumatic systems for commercial and military aircraft; intelligent truck drive train systems for safety and fuel economy; and automotive engine air management systems, power train solutions and specialty controls for performance, fuel economy and safety. Eaton has 79,000 employees and sells products to customers in more than 150 countries. For more information, visit www.eaton.com. Responders battle concrete plant blaze OSHA promotes training grants A T worker using a torch to cut metal ignited a plastic coating lining a rock bin at a concrete plant in Medley, FL, on April 22, a report issued by the Miami-Dade Fire Rescue (MDFR) states. It took 25 MDFR units and 100 firefighters 45 minutes to extinguish the blaze. Investigators and plant engineers were called in to assess the extent of the damage. Fortunately no injuries were reported. Responding units could see a giant column of smoke from over five miles away. When fire units arrived, they encountered heavy smoke billowing from a rock bin that was completely engulfed in flames. Fire crews immediately initiated a defensive fire attack by positioning aerial ladder trucks and applying water streams to adjoining rock bins, which were being 36 MJ2008.pmd threatened by impinging flames. Due to the potential for explosion and fire spread, hundreds of employees were evacuated from the plant. The worker involved stated that a spark from the torch ignited a plastic coating which lines the interior of the rock bin. He attempted to extinguish the fire with a fire extinguisher but the extinguisher was inoperable, the MDFR report states. A giant exhaust fan at the base of the rock bin fueled the flames by introducing air into the bin. The fire spread rapidly and consumed the structure. A brief statement issued by the owners of the plant referred to the fire as a “minor” incident that would not affect the production schedule. he Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) announced in March that it is seeking applications for Susan Harwood Training Grants to nonprofit organizations for training and education programs on safety and health topics. Nonprofit organizations, including community- and faith-based organizations, that are not state or local government agencies, are eligible to apply. The application deadline is May 23. Approximately $6.7 million is available for the Harwood targeted topic training grants. Applications for grants must be submitted electronically using http://www.grants.gov. INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD 36 4/24/2008, 4:34 PM EDITORIAL BOARD INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD Richard Coates Johnson Controls Joseph H. Gross Roberts Company, Inc. Kenneth Roxberry Premix Inc. Kendall C. Crawford Crawford Consulting Associates Mark A. Hawkinson BP America Production Co. Robert Stegall Rio Tinto Mineral Co. Jerry W. Craft Williams Fire & Hazard Control, Inc. John A. Meleta L.A. County Fire Dept. Capt. (Ret.) Thomas G. Talley Deep South Crane & Rigging Co. Woody Cole Calpine Corporation Larry Phillips Northwest Region Fire/Rescue Sherrie C. Wilson Dallas Fire Rescue/Emergency Management Rescue John A. Frank XL GAP Services Niall Ramsden Resource Protection International Robert J. Wood Chevron (Ret.) New Products MSA’S FIREHAWK® M7 RESPONDER MSA’s new FireHawk® M7 Responder Air Mask represents versatile SCBA protection that can quickly be transformed into a CBRN air-purifying respirator (APR) or a CBRN powered air-purifying respirator (PAPR). Just open or close the SCBA cylinder valve to convert to another mode—as your job changes from first response and rescue to scene management and remediation activities.This practical emergency respiratory protection system meets/exceeds the latest requirements of NFPA and NIOSH standards. In keeping with NFPA-2007 requirements, the FireHawk M7 Responder Air Mask includes: Patent-pending M7 PASS alarm designed to perform above the required 95 decibels at 500ºF, with highly reliable accelerometer motion sensor. • Electronics encased within hightemperature impact-grade polymer with hermetic sealing provide the highest protection against impact and water. For more information, contact MSA at 1877.MSA-FIRE or visit the MSA website at www.MSAFire.com/fireworld.html. DRAEGER FRT 1000 HONEYWELL X-SERIES Leading global safety equipment manufacturer Draeger Safety is introducing a new line of life-saving products for tracking downed firefighters. The company has entered into an exclusive manufacturing and supply agreement with Exit Technologies of Boulder Colorado, original developer of the Tracker FRT (Firefighter Rescue Transceiver) and ET (Egress Transmitter). The products were introduced this month at FDIC 2008 under the names Draeger FRT 1000 and Draeger ETR 1000. The Draeger FRT 1000 is a low-frequency 457 kHz radio transmitter and receiver both contained in the same handheld unit. It is worn on the SCBA belt during fireground operations in conjunction with an integrated or stand-alone PASS device. When the firefighter stops moving for 60 seconds, it sends an electromagnetic distress signal that can be tracked by others on the fireground that are also wearing a Draeger FRT 1000. The signal transmission can also be activated manually by the distressed firefighter while issuing a Mayday. For more information, contact product manager Greg Sesny at (412)788-5650. Honeywell Analytics announces a new detection-calibration kit — complete with the MicroDock II Test-Calibration Docking System. It offers customers and prospects a way to experience first-hand the company’s new X-Series line of durable, easy-to-use portable gas detection instrumentation, which has the capability of protecting an entire crew from toxic and combustible gas hazards. Honeywell Analytics offers a wide range of gas detection devices to suit all types of applications and industries. For more information about our products and services, visit www.honeywellanalytics.com, e-mail [email protected] or call toll-free 1 800 538-0363. Register for the 2009 IFW Conference at www.fireworld.com MAY/JUNE 2008 MJ2008.pmd 37 4/24/2008, 4:00 PM 37 SPOTLIGHT ADS July 2008: 8-11, 22-25 Entry Level Industrial Firefighter 8-11, 22-25 Industrial Fire Brigade Leader 15-18, 29-Aug 1 Advanced Exterior Industrial Firefighter August 2008: 12-15 12-15 19-22 Entry Level Industrial Firefighter Industrial Fire Brigade Leader Advanced Exterior Industrial Firefighter 38 INDUSTRIAL FIRE WORLD Order at www.fireworld.com/store MJ2008.pmd 38 4/24/2008, 4:01 PM DRAI N,ROLL,LOAD ® I NTRODUCI NGTHEROLLNRACKPOWERROLLER Rol l NRac k,LLC P . O.Box328 Mukwonago,WI53149 Phone :2623632030 Fax:2623632034 Emai l :i nf o@r ol l nr ac k. c om ® VI SI TUSONLI NE WWW. ROLLNRACK. COM FI RES ERVI CEI NNOVATI ON THUNDERSTORM® ATC AR-AFFF PERFORMANCE FOAM for Hydrocarbons & Polar Solvents -UL -EERC -API THUNDERSTORM ATC dominates ALL tests, proving itself in the laboratory as it has on the job time and time again ... THUNDERSTORM ATC AR-AFFF IT STANDS ALONE FOR MORE INFORMATION CALL 800-231-4613 OR VISIT ...WWW.WILLIAMSFIRE.COM SINCE 1980 RESP O N S E • E Q U I P M E N T • T R AINING IFW.indd 1 4/7/08 8:30:16 PM