Serious petrochemical incidents are a rare occurrence; even those brigades who provide cover for fire and emergencies within the petrochemical industry have a limited opportunity to build up experience of such incidents.
As a direct result operational personnel are themselves unlikely to gain very much experience in dealing with petrochemical fre fighting. It is therefore imperative that systems are put in place to ensure the personal safety of personnel who are likely to be committed to this infrequent but hazardous activity.
Key Risk Control measures that need to be included to ensure ‘Fire Fighting’ safety must be preplanned and will include, Risk Assessment, liaison, pre-determined attendance of resources, local
procedure and collaboration and specialised operational information.
Training your personnel
For training to take place there needs to be a purpose-built fire training ground that will offer operations and emergency response personnel both onsite and municipal, a suitable and acceptable standard of live fire training using long-established worldwide tried-and-tested fire sirmulations.
Such equipment provides the student (trainee or otherwise) with the opportunity to face realistic spill and pressure-fed fire scenarios to gain confidence and competence in their own ability, to enhance leadership and teamwork in a controlled, safe environment.
As members of management, do we send operatives to recognised fire schools out of the many located in the UK and abroad - or should we provide our own onsite training ground?
Which is the most cost-effective?
I recall my own experiences many years ago as a firefighter when my introduction to hydrocarbon fires was nothing more than 45 gallon drums cut in half, fuelled by gasoline, ignited and extinguished with foam and dry powder fire extinguishers. Thankfullly, we have come a long way since then.
Training & its costs
Management will always question training costs. Sending operatives on any course costs money with travel, hotel and cost of the specific course.
Is it justified? Is the answer to send a selected few and on their return require them to pass on what they have learnt to others?
In some cases this maybe acceptable, however, there is no substitute for real live fire experience, understanding the behaviour of hydrocarbons under fire conditions, experiencing the extremes of heat, noise and smoke. This is a massive learning curve to combine with the benefits of teamwork.
So, who do we train? This includes all company personnel depending on their responsibilities (ie. office staff, laboratory, catering) who would receive training in first-aid, the use of fire extinguishers, fire blankets, hose reels.
Process operatives, maintenance personnel and fire response teams would require more specialist training, (i.e. hose handling, fire monitors, breathing apparatus and use of foam equipment).
Combined with the ‘hands-on’ approach, there is a need for specific training of key personnel such as unit supervisors, managers and those persons who have to respond in those vital first 5 to 15 minutes, the key decision makers.
Syndicate training and introduction of case studies encourages good class involvement, strategies learnt that maybe enhanced on the fire training ground. Specialist courses for control room personnel are also of paramount importance. The time to iron difficulties is on the training ground - not at the incident.
Exchangers, towers & pipe racks
Training should be conducted at least once every year followed by refresher courses over an agreed period. This is company policy in many cases, however cutting costs may result in training being carried out every two years (questionable).
Should a decision be made to provide an onsite fire training ground, where do we start and what is required? It is essential that we provide realistic fire simulators, equipment that operatives are familiar with - e.g. pumps, exchangers, towers, pipe racks, drums, and valves.
Where do we obtain this hardware and at what cost? Look no further than the disinvested equipment site. 
Construction choose an area well distanced from operational plant, an area of at least a minimum of 300ft x 300ft suitably graded for drainage.
Look at two options: (a) an area to be concreted entirely to a minimum depth of 6” with graduated slope or (b) an area covered with pea shingle, again graded to allow the run-off of contaminated water to an oil separator bay. If pea shingle is used, consider the provision of concrete paths to enhance the use of wheeled extinguishers and portable monitors.
Having selected a suitable area, we need to look at water supplies. Can we utilise an existing fire main or will it necessitate the provision of a water tank or water pond?
An existing firemain will provided a minimum of 8 bar pressure which is ideal. Providing a water tank or pond will require a means of pressurising the system.
Again, looking at cost, do we install a fixed pump or utilise existing towable fire pumps (2000 gpm, 8000-litre) providing flexibility both on the fire training ground and - if required - at the emergency incident? Such a system is used most effectively at the Refinery Terminal Fire Company in Corpus Christi, Texas.
It is accepted worldwide that to control a major process unit fire, cooling is a top priority utilising major water streams (master streams) with a variety of large capacity nozzles. On a fire training ground strong emphasis is placed on teaching valving-down operations, encouraging leadership and enhancing the value of teamwork using water and foam.
The ideal fire training ground will provide both pressure-fed fire simulators, pumps, pipe racks, exchangers, drums, towers etc and also an area where first aid fire fighting can be conducted primarily using fire extinguishers, hose reels and fire blankets.
Fuel supply
Creating realistic fire scenarios with pressure fed and spill fires, a decision has to be made on what fuel source should be used: supplies of Naphtha, Diesel, LPG may be decided upon, each individually sourced.
We can provide permanent installations - e.g. LPG drum and a 2-tonne capacity compliant with all standards designed to deliver liquid LPG to simulators.
A pressure vessel to store Naphtha/Diesel with associated pumps or a vessel that can be pressurised by water or rely on mobile tanker supply may also be supplied. Whichever method is chosen, a fuel control system should be installed to ensure strict control is maintained at all times. Fuel lines should be tagged and when systems is in use, radio contact should be maintained continuously from fire ground to control panel.
Fire simulators
On industrial fire training grounds simulators vary, however, there is a similarity when it comes to pumps, exchangers, drums and structures. The aim is to provide a challenge to students, present them with a combination of liquid spill and pressure fed fires requiring fire suppression and valving down behind water screens both at grade and elevation.
I have highlighted the need for understanding the behaviour of hydrocarbons under fire conditions. The hazard of ‘Boil-Over’ phenomena, associated with crude oil, can be demonstrated simply using a 45 gallon drum with a pre-burn; it is essential for emergency response personnel to understand this.
You can demonstrate the Liquid Petroleum Gas (LPG) hazard from liquid spillage and vapour formation - requiring control and vapour dispersal using water monitors and vapour dispersion fan sprays -  with a simple Jet Engine design simulator.
Students have the opportunity to practice dispersion and diverting a gas cloud and gain ignition, priority cooling and isolation experience.
A pressure fed and running fire simulator, three-dimensional fire requiring the action of valving down behind a water screen, a dry powder application and final suppression using foam can also be achieved.
Pipe rack and pump fires, a common occurrence, can be presented on the training ground with typical simulators fuelled by Napttha and LPG. Spill fires and pressure fed fires presented simultaneously, require cooling, and valving down with final suppression using dry powder\foaming. This who experience enhances our main aim: leadership, command and teamwork.
Storage tank and bund area fire simulators are few and far between. Apart from the recent demonstrations held in Finland, two sites that do stand out, one located at Gesip, Vemon, France and one on Das-lsland UAE, provide excellent hands-on experience for emergency response personne.
Understandably, environmental restrictions on smoke emissions has put immense pressure on fire training grounds resulting in a swing to using LPG fuel.
This is now the preferred option for fire simulators and clean burn systems supported by burn-time restrictions. With such restrictions accepted, ‘hands-on’ live fire training which exposes students to heat, smoke and noise has to be top priority for industrial and municipal firefighters.

Printer friendly version

Email this article to a friend

Bookmark this

---