nfpa - report of the committee on this committee …...versions of section 2-1.1(a) of nfpa 59a) has...

Report o f the Committee on

Liquefied Natural Gas

Richard A. Hoffmann, Chmr Hoffmann & Feige, Inc., NY [SE]

Theodore C. Lemoff , Nonvoting Secretary Nat'l Fire Protection Assn., MA

Robert Arvedlund, U.S. Federal Energy Regulatory Commission, DC [E]

Dennis K. Boone, Metropoli tan Transit Authority (METRO), TX [U] Christopher Bourne, Mass Dept. of Telecommunicat ions and

Energy, MA [E] Robin G. Charlwood, Acres Int'l Ltd., WA [SE] Per E. Duns, CBI Technical Services Co., IL [M]

Rep. Steel Plate Fabricators Assn., Inc. Thomas J. Felleisen, U.S. Coast Guard, DC [E] James J. Gaughan, American Bureau of Shipping, NY [E] Alan D. Hatf ield, c / o British Gas, TX [U] Richard J. Henderson , Union Gas Ltd., Canada [U] Mike M. Israni, U.S. Dept. o f Transportation, DC [E] Jay J. Jahlonski, HSB Professional Loss Control, TX [I] Paul C. Johnson , Distrigas of Massachusetts Corp., MA [U]

Rep. American Gas Assn. Stanley T. Kastanas, Boston Colonial Gas, Essex & Energy North

Caslos, MA [U] Rep. American Gas Assn.

Hugh F. Keepers, Texas A&M University System, TX [SE] Nicholas A. Legatos, Preload Inc., NY [M]

Rep. American Concrete Inst. James P. Lewis, Project Technical Liaison Assoc., Inc., TX [SE] Alex Pastuhov, AVP Corp., MA [SE] Kenneth L Paul, Chart Industries, Inc., NH [M] Gilford W. Poe, Mobile Exploration and Producing Technical

Center, TX [U] Rep. American Petroleum Inst.

James J. Regan, Starr Technical Risks Agency Inc., IL [I] Michael F. Schmidt , Ansul Incorporated/Tyco, WI [M]

Rep. Fire Equipmenl Mfrs. Assn. Shinichi Shimizu, Tokyo Gas Co. Ltd., Japan [U] James H. Stannard, Jr., Stannard & Co., GA [SE] Norm J. Trnsler, BC Gas Utility Ltd., Canada [U]

Alternates

Start Ballance, BC Gas Utility Ltd., Canada [U] (Alt. to N. Trusler)

Jeffrey P. Beale, CH-IV Corp., MD [SE] (Ah. toJ . H. Stannard)

"Dale R. Edlbeck, Ansul Inc. /Tyco, WI [M] (Alt to M. F. Schmidt)

Scott C. Nason, Chart Industries, Inc., NH [M] (Alt. to K. L. Paul)

Michael R. Schuller, Pitt-Des Moines, Inc., PA [M] (Alt. to P. E. Duus)

Nonvoting

Swapan Kumar Hazra, Hindustan Aegis LPG Bottling Co., Ltd., India [M]

Staff Liaison: Theodore C. Lemof f

Committee Scope: This Commit tee shall have primary responsibility for documents on safety and related aspects in the liquefaction of natural gas and the transport, storage, vaporization, transfer, and use of liquefied natural gas.

This li.~t represent.~ the membership at the time the Committee was balloted on the text of this edition. Since that time, changes in the members'hip may have occurred. A k~ to classifications i,~ found at the front of this book.

This port ion of the Technical Committee Report of the Committee on Liquefied Natural Gas is presented for adoption.

This Report on Comments was prepared by the Technical Commit tee on Liquefied Natural Gas and documents its action on the comments received on its Report on Proposals on NFPA 59A, Standard for the Production, Storage, and Handling o f Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG), 1996 edition, as published in the Report on Proposals for the 2000 November Meeting.

This Report on C ommen t s has been submitted to letter" ballot of the Technical Committee on Liquefied Natural Gas which consists o f 25 voting members. The results o f the balloting, after circulation of any negative votes, can be found in the report.

Additionally, the following individuals stated the following with reference to the errata shown at the end of this report.

Mr. Trusler stated: Section 11-3.2(I) Delete the words "as detailed in Section 8.4" as per the

recommendat ion in the June 21 memo. The original CSA reference was "lost" in the restructuring of the seed document . Section 11-3.3.1

The errata list proposes changing the reference from 8-3.3.1(c) to 11-3.3.1 (c). The correct reference is 11-3.3(c), not 11-3.3.1(c). Section 11-4.5.2

In sub-section (c), second sentence, the current word is "checked" and it should be "chocked". (Note that this change is specifically for subsection (c). Tire use of the word "checked" in o ther subsections is correct.) Section 11-5.1.2

The first reference should be changed from 8-5.6.5 to 11-5.6.4, not 11-5.6.5. The second reference should be changed from 8- 5.1.1 to 11-5.1.1. Section 11-5.2.2(a)

There are two references that need to be changed. I would suggest 8-5.1.1 be changed to 11-5.1.1 as per the errata list, but 8- 5.5.2 should be changed to 11-5.5.1 and not to 11-5.1.1 as per the errata list. Section 11-5.5.1 (c) (3)

The June 21 memo recommended a more specific reference to Section 9-1.2 instead of the general reference to Chapter 9. Section 11-5.5.1 (c) (4)

There are two words missing. I r ecommend inserting the words "Section 9-1.2" between the words "with" and "shall". Section 11-5.5.1 (h)

The subject reference is no longer an issue if the wording changes in the Letter Ballot are approved. Section 11-6.1 (b) (3)

The references to 8-5 and 8-3 should be 11-5 and 1 l-3. Section l l-6.1(b) (4)

The reference to Section 8-4 is no longer appropriate. (See c o m m e n t under Section 11-3.2.(I) above.) I suggest subsection (4) read "LNG transfer procedures".

Mr. Edlbeck stated:

Paragraph Current Reference 11-3.3.1 8-3.3.1(c)

11-4.5.2 Chocked

Add 11-5.1.2 8-5.1.1

Corrected Reference 11-3.3.1(c) This should be 11-3.3(c) Checked These are reversed, the corrected verbage should be chocked. 111-5.1.1

373

N F P A 5 9 A - - N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 0 R O C

(Log #1) 59A- 1 - (2-1.1(b)): Reject SUBMITTER: Robert Arved lund , Federal Energy Regulator C o m m i s s i o n COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 59A~t3 RECOMMENDATION: Add text to read as follows:

I propose that the sentence "At least one all-weather vehicular road shall be orovided." be added on the end of the new Section 2- 1.1(b). SUBSTANTIATION: The above sen tence (which is in prior versions o f Section 2-1.1(a) of NFPA 59A) has been left ou t in the new draft. This issue o f an all-weather vehicular road was specifically voted on in the last past on at least two separate occasions and on all occasions it was decided by commi t t ee vote to leave the "all-weather vehicular road" language in NFPA 59A. It should not be removed by editorial change . COMMITI'EE ACTION: Reject. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: T h e concerns o f the submi t te r are covered in 2-1.1 (b), which recognizes that some plants may not have nearby fire depa r tmen t s to assist in fire f ight ing activities. It is also noted that some facilities are offshore. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE O N COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 21 NEGATIVE: 2 N O T RETURNED: 2 Charlwood, H e n d e r s o n

EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: ARVEDLUND: I am voting negative to NFPA's rejection o f my

proposal. I still believe that the sen tence At least one all-weather vehicular road shall be provided." should be added on the end o f Section 2-1.1(b). T he rationale for rejecting this sen tence (which the Commi t tee has specifically voted to leave in place on at least two past occasions) does no t address the conce rn (i.e. an all- weather road) which is the focus o f the proposal. W h e t h e r a p lant has a local fire d e p a r t m e n t nearby is moo t to the issue. Most

~ lants in fact do not rely on local fire depa r tmen t s to physically ght an LNG fire. They are used for o the r purposes . However,

they still need to get there and they are not the only emergency type vehicles that need to get to a p lant quickly; e.g. medical, police, and o the r emergency related groups.

More importantly, there is the distinct possibility that p lant personne l may have to quickly evacuate a site. An all-weather access /egress road jus t simply makes sense to serve this purpose as well.

Offshore facilities may be a reason for reques t ing a Waiver but is no t justif ication for rejecting this proposal . To date, there are no offshore LNG facilities in the Uni ted States that do no t have an all- weather access /egress road a n d / o r will be required to have one, If and when a totally offshore LNG facility is proposed, this issue can be decided on a case-by-case basis (as it has been in a past case).

ISRANI: I agree with Rober t Arvedlund ' s c o m m e n t to leave the "all-weather.vehicular road" language in NFPA 59A.

(Log #CC15) 59A- 2 - (2-1.1 (b)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Commi t t ee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43 RECOMMENDATION: Revise 2-1.1 (b) to read:

(b) All-weather accessibility to the plant for pe r sonne l safety and fire protect ion shall be provided except where ,,daen provisions a re made ~,n gite. for personne l safety and fire orotec t ioa are provided on the site in accordance with cbao te r 9. SUBSTANTIATION: The paragraph is revised to recognize that where all weather accessibility is no t provided, on site provisions for personne l safety and fire protect ion mus t be specially cons idered . COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE O N COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 22 NEGATIVE: 1 N O T RETURNED: 2 Charlwood, H e n d e r s o n

EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: ISRANI: See my Explanat ion o f Negative Vote on C o m m e n t 59A-

1 ( L o g # l ) .

(Log #CCI) 59A- '3 - (2-4): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Commi t tee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59A43 RECOMMENDATION: Delete Section 2-4 substi tute the following:

2-4.1 Designers and fabricators o~" LNG facilities shall have compe t ence in the design or fabrication o f LNG containers, process equ ipmen t , refr igerant storage and hand l ing equ ipment , loading and un load ing facilities, fire protect ion equ ipmen t , and o the r componen t s of the facility.

2-4.2 Supervision shall be provided for the fabrication o f and for the acceptance tests o f facility componen t s to the ex ten t necessary to ensure that they are structurally sound and otherwise in compl iance with this s tandard.

2-4.3* Soil and general investigations shall be made to de te rmine the adequacy of the in tended site for the facility.

A-2-4.3. See ASCE 56, Subsurface Investigation for Design and Const ruc t ion o f Founda t ion for Buildings, and API 620, Design and Const ruct ion o f Large, Welded, Low-Pressure Storage Tanks, Append ix C, for fu r ther information.

2-4.4 Designers, fabricators, and constructors of LNG facility e q u i p m e n t shall be compe ten t in the design, fabrication, and cons t ruc t ion o f LNG containers , cryogenic equ ipmen t , p iping systems, fire protect ion equ ipmen t , and o the r c o m p o n e n t s o f the facility. Supervision shall be provided for the fabrication, construct ion, and acceptance tests of facility c o m p o n e n t s to the ex ten t necessary to ensure that the facilities are structurally sound and otherwise in compl iance with this s tandard. SUBSTANTIATION: The commit tee believes that the existing text in the 1996 edition is preferred. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 23 NOT RETURNED: 2 Charlwood, H e n d e r s o n

COMMENT O N AFFIRMATIVE: TRUSLER: There appears to be unnecessary duplicat ion

between Sections 2-4.1, 2-4.2 and 2-4.4. I ~uggest the editorial staff a t t empt to remove this dupl icat ion as it may cause confusion.

(Log #5) 59A- 4 - (4-1.3): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Nicholas A. Legatos, Preload, Inc. COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 59A-34 RECOMMENDATION: None given. S UBS TANTIATION: NEHRP has been, and will con t inue to be, the source ("feeder") d o c u m e n t for IBC with regard to seismic analysis and design (Sections 1613 th rough 1623). In fact, in the mos t recent edi t ion of that d o c u m e n t (IBC 2000) those sections are a lmost identical to the co r respond ing sections in NEHRP 1997. [Note also that (1) the three found ing organizat ions of IBC (BOCA, ICBO, and SBCCI) are m e m b e r s o f BSSC, and (2) according to IBC's Preface, the technical con ten t o f the bui lding codes p romulga ted by those three organizat ions was the nucleus for the deve lopmen t o f that d o c u m e n t (IBC). At least one of those bui ld ing codes, UBC, derives its seismic provisions directly f rom NEHRP.]

The revised r ecommenda t i ons in Section 4-1.3 do not const i tute an expans ion or codification o f 59A's cu r ren t seismic requi rements . Rather, they simply upgrade those requ i rements to br ing t hem up to date with the latest deve lopments in seismic hazard analysis. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

Add a new Append ix B to read: Appendix B

Seismic Design of LNG Plants Note: This Appendix is no t a mandatory part o f this Standard

but provides addi t ional informat ion respect ing the objectives o f the design requi rements .

BI . In t roduct ion The purpose of Append ix B is to provide informat ion on the selection and use o f Opera t ing Basis Ear thquake (OBE) and Safe Shutdown Ear thquake (SSE) seismic recur rence levels. These two seismic recur rence levels form part o f the requ i rements o f this Standard for the design of LNG contamers , system componen t s required to isolate the conta iner and main ta in it in a safe shutdown condit ion, and any s tructures or systems the failure o f which could affect the integrity o f the above.

B2. OBE - Opera t ing Basis Ear thquake The Opera t ing Basis Ear thquake (OBE) is a probable ea r thquake to which the facility may be subjected du r ing its design life. All e lements of the facility

374


are des igned to withstand this event in accordance with convent ional eng inee r ing procedures and criteria, and therefore, the facility will remain in operat ion. The OBE is identified by a g r o u n d mot ion response spec t rum in which the spectral accelerat ion at any period, T, is equal to 2 / 3 o f the spectral acceleration o f the MCE g r o u n d motion. The MCE g round mot ion is def ined in Clause 4-1.3.1 and is the basis for the seismic zone maps incorpora ted in the NEHRP R e c o m m e n d e d Provisions for Seismic Regulat ions for New Buildings and O the r Structures (1997). While the MCE represents a g round mot ion with a 2 percent probability o f exceedance in 50 years, the probability o f exceedance for the OBE (that is, 2 / 3 of the MCE) varies, r ang ing from about 3 percen t to I0 percent in 50 years d e p e n d i n g on the seismic region. This is equivalent to mean recurrence intervals of 1641 to 475 years respectively. This also represents the level of seismic loading that will form the basis for the design us ing the appropr ia te Codes and normal stress levels.

B3. SSE - Safe Shutdown Ear thquake B3.1 The Safe Shutdown Ear thquake (SSE) is a rare ear thquake

of ex t reme magn i tude for the facility location. T he facility is des igned to conta in the LNG, and prevent catastrophic failure o f critical facilities u n d e r this cont ingency event. Plastic behavior and significant finite movemen t s and deformat ions , no t usually cons idered in convent ional eng inee r ing procedures , are possible. The facility is no t required to remain operat ional following the SSE event. Following such an event, the facility is expected to be inspected and repaired as necessary. The SSE is specified as being representat ive of a seismic g r o u n d mot ion that has a probability of exceedance riot greater than 0.02 percent per a n n u m (1 percen t in 50 years) but not greater than twice the OBE g r o u n d motion.

B3.2 The objective of the selection and use of the SSE is to )rovide a m i n i m u m level of public safety in the event of a very-low-

probability seismic event. It is recognized that the required probability level to achieve acceptable public safety will vary from project to project, d e p e n d i n g on such factors as location and popula t ion density. It is desirable to allow the owner flexibility in achieving the required level of public safety.

B3.3 The SSE level of seismic loading is to be used for a limit state check on the specified componen t s . The specified SSE is the m i n i m u m level of g r o u n d mot ion that mus t be used for the analysis. The actual level mus t be specified by the o w n e r and when used in conjunc t ion with o t he r considerat ions, such as location, siting, type of i m p o u n d i n g system, hazard control, local climatic condi t ions, and physical features, etc, it mus t be sufficient to ensure adequate public safety to the satisfaction of the regulatory authorit ies.* At the SSE level of seismic loading, pr imary c o m p o n e n t s o f the LNG conta iner are permit ted to reach the stress limits specified in clause 4-1.3.6. An LNG conta iner subjected to this level of loading mus t be capable of con t inu ing to conta in a full vo lume of LNG.

A risk analysis study is r e c o m m e n d e d . B3.4 The i m p o u n d i n g system must , as a m i n i m u m , be des igned

to withstand the SSE level of loading wile empty and the OBE level o f loading while ho ld ing the volume "V" as specified in clause 2- 2.2.1. The rationale is that should the LNG conta iner fail following an SSE, the i m p o u n d i n g system mus t remain intact and be able to conta in the con ten t s of the LNG conta iner when subjected to an aftershock. It is a s sumed that the s t rength of the af tershock can be reasonably represented by an OBE.

B3.5 Systems or componen t s , the failure o f which could affect the integrity o f the LNG container , the i m p o u n d i n g system, or the system c o m p o n e n t s required to isolate the LNG conta iner and main ta in it in a safe shu tdown condi t ion, mus t be des igned to withstand an SSE without risk to the above.

B3.6 The opera tor is required to install ins t rumenta t ion capable o f measu r ing g r o u n d mo t i on at the plant site. Following an ea r thquake p roduc ing g round mot ion equal to or greater than the design OBE g round motion, it is advisable that the opera tor o f the facility e i ther take the LNG conta iner out of service and have it inspected, or prove that the LNG conta iner componen t s have not been subjected to loading in excess o f the conta iner ' s OBE stress level and design criteria. For instance, if the LNG conta iner was partially full du r ing the seismic event, calculations may prove that the con ta ine r OBE stress levels are not exceeded.

B4. Design Response Spectra Using the OBE and SSE g round mot ions as def ined in B2 and B3.1 respectively above, vertical and horizontal design response spectra mus t be const ructed covering the entire range o f ant icipated d a m p i n g factors and natural per iods of vibration, inc luding the d a m p i n g factor and first-mode s loshing period o f vibration of the con ta ined LNG.

B 5. Other Seismic Loads B 5.1 Small LNG plants consis t ing o f shop-buil t LNG conta iners

and l imit ing process ing e q u i p m e n t should be des igned for seismic loading us ing the g r o u n d mot ion specified for the seismic zones adop ted by the NEHRP R e c o m m e n d e d Provisions for Seismic Regulat ions for New Buildings and O the r Structures (1997). Ei ther a s tructural response analysis should be per formed, or an amplif icat ion factor o f 0.60 shou ld be applied to the m a x i m u m des ign spectral acceleration, SDS, as def ined in Clause 4-1.3.8 to de t e rmine the loads on the vessels or piping.

B 5.2 All o ther structures, buildings, and process e q u i p m e n t mus t be des igned for seismic loading in .accordance with the NEHRP R e c o m m e n d e d Provisions for Seismic Regulat ions for New Buildings and O t h e r Structures (1997). COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The new append ix provides addit ional in format ion in line with the c o m m e n t o r s intent . N U M B E R OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE O N COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 23 NOT RETURNED: 2 Charlwood, Hende r son

(Log #5b) 59A- 5 - (4-1.3.1): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Nicholas A. Legatos, Preload, Inc. COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 59A-34 R E C O M M E N D A T I O N : ]~evise the second paragraph of 4-1.3.1 to read:

O n the basis o f this investigation, a probabilistic m a x i m u m cons idered ea r thquake (MCE) g r o u n d mot ion shall be the mot ion rcprczcr.tcd by a 5 percen t damped acce!c~tic.q re~pv.::.~c speetrmn- having a 2 percen t probability of exceedance within a 50 year period (mean recur rence interval of 2475 years), subject to the except ions in 4-1.3.1(a). : g h e ~ MCE g r o u n d mot ion. vertical and horizontal acv¢leration response spectra dcf iacd a~c.vc gha!! cc.vcr shall be cons t ruc ted covering the ent ire range of ant icipated d a m p i n g factors and natural periods o f vibration,. inc luding the d a m p i n g factor and first-mode s loshing period of vibration o f the conta ined LNG. The MCE spectral response accelerat ion for any period, T, shall be taken f rom that-the selected design spec t rum with a d a m n i n g that best renresents the s t ructure being investigated.

v

3pectra 3ha!! ~e de; 'e!opcd, ho;vcvcr The ordinates of the vertical response spec t rum shall no t be less than 75 percen t of those of the horizontal spec t rum. S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : None given. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle.

Accept the proposal with the following addit ional change: Revise the third pa rag raph of 4-3.1.3 to read:

. . . . . . . . t .~, t.~ a . . . . ~ ' ~ ~" . . . . . . . . . The ordinates o f the vertical response spec t rum shall no t be less than 75 percent 2/3 o f those o f the horizontal spect rum." COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The proposal clarifies the text. The addi t ional change is identical to the action to C o m m e n t 59A-6 (Log #2). N U M B E R OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE T O VOTE: 25 V O T E O N COMMITTEE ACTION:


C O M M E N T O N AFFIRMATIVE: TRUSLER: The referenced section in the second sen tence u n d e r

Commi t t ee Action should be 4-1.3.1, no t 4-3.1.3.

(Log #2) 59A- 6 - (4-1.3.1, 4-1.3.2): Accept in Principle S U B M r r r E R : Leslie Krusen , Phillips Pe t ro leum C o m p a n y COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43 R E C O M M E N D A T I O N : Delete Sections 4-1.3.1 and 4-1.3.2 in their entirety, and replace with the new sections as shown.

4-1.3 Seismic Design. 4-1.3.1 Seismic loads shall be cons idered in the design o f the

LNG con ta ine r and its i m p o u n d m e n t system. For all installations, except those provided for in 4-1.3.8, the opera tor shall perform a site-specific investigation to de te rmine the characteristics o f seismic g r o u n d mot ion and associated response spectra for the Ope ra t i ng Basis Ear thouake (OBE) and the Safe Shutdown

v

Ear thnuake (SSE). This site-specific investigation shall account for

375

NFPA 59A - - November 2000 ROC

the ~ regional s e i s m i c i t y ~ and geologyr; the expected recurrence rates and maximum magnitudes of events on known faults and source zonesr during the design life of the LNG • facilities;the location of the site with respect to these seismic sources; local subsurface geolom¢ of the site; and, attenuation of ground motion including Fnear source effects, if a n y ~

On the ~a~i~ .vf thi~ ]n;'e~figatien, a pmbaDliz:ic maximum..

spcc t r ' amh ; ' :nga

rc~pc, n~c ~pectr'am ~hal! nGt be !e~ than 75 perccnt of tho:e c.f the

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . , " . . . . . . . . . . . . . v . . . . . . . . . v . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2" ;2. Y'.

,.~ p graund me.iron aa .~m..~., in ~ 1 . 1 O - F

. . . . . . "a. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ ' ~ T : . . . . . . . E . . . . . . . 72,.

accclcratic.n at ~h~rt peric.d~) taken a~ l.Sg, and the value c.f El I

-;;here the LNG facility is Ic, cated. 4-1.3.2 The LNG container and its impounding system shall be

designed for ..... ~ . . . . '~ ^~-~:~: . . . . . . . . "~ ~ * ; ~ - the Operati:-g

ground motions defined as follows: (a) The OBE ground motion shall be the motion represented by

a ~,~,.~a . . . . . . . . . ~ * ; ~ 5% damped response spectr~'~ a having a 10 Dercent ~robabilitv of exceedance within a 50 year period (mean) return interval of 475 years) with the following stinulation. If the SSE ground motion is governed by the deterministic criteria in the Exceotion under 4-1.3.2(b), then the OBE ground motion shall not be less than 1/2 of the SSE_in which the :pectra! accc!eratic.n

~ t h e MCE ground_m~fi~n defined "n ~ L 3 L (b) The SSE ground motion shall be the motion represented by 5 percent damped acceleration response s p e c t r ~ a having a 4-~

percent probability of exceedance withiu a 50 year period (mean return interval of 40-7~ 2475 years), hc,vc;'cr the spectra!

. . . . . . . . . . v . . . . . . . ~, . . . . ~" . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . subiect~ to the following exceDtion.

Excention: If the ordinate of this 5% damped nrobabilistic SSE resoonse spectrum at the fundamentaion Deriod (T,} of the

=

impulsive mode of the tank-fluid-foundation system exceeds the corresponding ordinate of the deterministic limit of 4-1.3.2(b) (1}. the SSE ground motion shall be taken as the deterministic limit or the deterministic SSE ground motion of 4-1.3.2(b} (2). whichever is greater at period Tt~

(1) The deterministic limit shall be taken the resDonse sDectrum defined in Section 4-1.3.2 of the NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures. 1997 edition, Part 1 - - Provision (FEMA 302l.

(2) The deterministic SSE ground motion shall be calculated as 150 percent of the median 5 percent damped response spectrum

r¢~tal0ng from a characteristic earthouake on a known active fault within the region.

Where the structure, structural system, or componen t being designed warrants a damping factor other than 5 % of critical, the OBE and SSE response spectra determined as described above shall be adjusted accordingly.

Both horizontal component and vertical componen t OBE and SSE response spectra shall be developed, however, the ordinates of the vertical-component response spectra shall not be less than 50 percent of those of the corresponding horizontal-component response snectra. SUBSTANTIATION'- 1. First paragraph of 4.1.3.1. - This paragraph was ambiguous in parts and omitted a few details that should be included.

2. Vertical MCE in 4-1.3.1. - Observation: The proposed minimum vertical-to-horizontal componen t ratio, V/H, is 0.75 as stated in the 3rd paragraph of 4-1.3.1 This requirement is too severe. When the seismic sources are not close to the site, as for example in shallow crustal tectonic environments in areas where the active faults are farther than 10-20 km, the V / H is around 1/2 at all oscillator periods• A similar ratio has been observed for subduction-zone earthquakes~ The V / H ratio can exceed 0.75 (and even 1.0) when the site is close to active faults, but even in this situation, the existing database of near-field ground motions clearly shows that these relatively large ratios are confined to

'oscillator periods T<0.2 sec. Recommendation: Make the minimum V / H ratio "50 percent"

instead of "75 percent." Commentary: This recommendat ion is supported by studies of

Abrahamson and Silva (1997), Campbell (1997), Dames & Moore (1995), and Kawashima et al (1985).

3. SSE Level in 4-1.3.2 - Observation: The proposed probabilistic definition of the SSE is ground motion with a "1 percent probability of exceedance within a 50-year period (mean return interval of 4,975 years)" This probability level is twice the level in the current and previous editions of NFPA 59A, which state the mean recurrence interval as 10,000 years. However, it is still too small considering the low risk that stationary LNG storage containers actually pose to human life and the environment compared to other structures. For example, high rise buildings designed for continuous human occupancy have a much higher probability of human injury or death in the event of seismic- reduced failure,.yet they are designed to much less stringent seismic criteria.

Furthermore, the probability associated with the SSE in the Canadian LNG standard (Z276-94) is five times higher (5 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years). To our knowledge there is no other foreign LNG standard (Japanese or British) that has a stated or inferred exceedance probability level (or associated return interval) as low as 1 percent in 50 years.

In areas of high seismic hazard, the ground motions corresponding to low probabilities of exceedance can greatly exceed levels that are realistic based on deterministic calculations. This observation was the reason for the deterministic limit in the 1997 NEHRP, but it is only directly applied to the OBE in the proposed NFPA 59A.

Recommendation: Increase the probability level associated with the SSE from 1 percent in 50 years to 2 percent in 50 years. Limit the SSE according to deterministic criteria similar to those in 4- 1.3.1 as discussed in Items 5 and 6 below. Correct the error in 4- 1.3.1 (b) so that the "50 percent" becomes "150 percent", consistent with the 1997 NEHRP provisions.

Commentary: With this revision, the MCE can be eliminated because it is also defined as ground motion with a 2 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years. In addition to the technical reasons for the revision, this change would reduce the text and simplify the procedure. The paragraphs dealing with the limiting ground motions based on deterministic calculations can be retained with appropriate modification to 4-1.3.1(a), (b), and (c). The revision would also make Section 4-1.3. more consistent with the 1997 NEHRP and upcoming 2000 NEHRP.

Despite this consistency in the ground-motion definitions between the recommended revisions to the SSE in the NFPA 59A and the MCE in the NEHRP provisions, the associated seismic loads computed with the recommended revisions to the SSE will still be significantly greater than those computed with the NEHRP provisions. In the NEHRP provisions the design ground motion is 2 /3 the MCE ground motion. This 2 /3 reduction factor is not included in the NFPA 59A procedure. In addition, the NEHRP allows further reduction in seismic load through the use of Response Modification Coefficients, R which are typically associated with the ductility of the structure. The 1997 NEHRP lists R values of 1.5 to 3.0 depending the type of tank, fonndation

376

N F P A 59A ~ N o v e m b e r 2000 R O C

and anchorage (see Table 14.2.1.1 of 1997 NEHRP). Typically, these factors are not considered in the determinat ion of SSE seismic loads for LNG tanks. Damping ratios (-7%) slightly higher than the nominal 5 percent ratio have been used but these ratios typically reduce the impulsive load of the tank-fluid system by less than 15 percent.

4. OBE Leve in 4-1.3.2. - Observation: The proposed definition of the OBE is "2/3 of the spectral acceleration of the MCE." Notwithstanding the revision to the SSE recommended in Item 3 above, this OBE definition should be revised.

Recommendat ion: Retain the current definition of the OBE to be ground motions with a 10 percent probability of exceedance in 50 years (or equivalently ground motions with a mean recurrence interval o f 475 years) with the stipulation that if the SSE ground motion is governed by the deterministic criteria in 4-1.3.1(a), (b), and (c), then the OBE shall not be less than 1/2 of the SSE.

Commentary: There is no persuasive reason to abandon the present definition of the OBE, which to our knowledge, has not caused any major concerns in the industry. (A similar s tatement cannot be made for the present 10,000-yr definition of the SSE). It should be noted that the damping ratio (-3%) used in the calculation of OBE im.pulsive loads is typically less than the nominal 5 percent ratm. The 3 percent ratio results in impulsive seismic loads approximately 20 percent greater than those Obtained from the 5 percent damping ratio. Furthermore, the strict performance criteria for the OBE implicitly prohibit the use of Response Modification Coefficients, R, to reduce the seismic load.

The motivation for redefining the OBE as 2 /3 the MCE may have been due to the fact that the design ground motion in the 1997 NEHRP is defined as 2 /3 o f the MCE (2 percent- in-50 year or deterministic limit) ground motion. However, the resulting NEHRP design motion is in tended for safety design, not an operational basis design. The safety design for a LNG tank is adequately covered by the SSE requirements, as proposed in Item 3 above.

5. Deterministic Criteria in 4-1.3.1 - Observation: The deterministic criteria for limiting the ground motions, as proposed in 4-1.3.1(a), (b), and (c), will be difficult to apply in situations when the two spectra being compared intersect at one or more oscillator periods. This possibility may arise when the median 5 percent damped, site-specific deterministic spectrum multiplied by 1.5 (4-1.3.1(b)) is compared with the deterministic limit spectrum (4-1.3.1(c)). It may also arise when the site-specific probabilistic spectrum from 4-1.3.1(a) is compared with the deterministic spectrum from 4-1.3.1(b). In these cases, one spectrum will be greater than the o ther in one or more period ranges but not greater than the o ther over the entire period range. For example, suppose the probabilistic spectrum exceeds the deterministic spectrum in a narrow period band that is of no consequence to the seismic load calculation. Unless the engineer ing seismologist communicates this problem with the structural designer, the proper selection of the appropriate spectrum will not be obvious.

Recommendat ion: Insert a phase that specifies the comparison is to be made at the oscillator period corresponding to the fundamental impulsive period (T I ) o f the system.

Commentary: The r ecommended revision will remove the ambiguity. If there is some concern that such a provision would eliminate consideration of the fundamental sloshing mode, it is noted that the sloshing per iod is usually greater than the largest oscillator per iod incorpora ted into most strong mot ion attenuation equations that would be used in the probabilistic or deterministic gruund-motiou calculations. Therefore, the comparisons cited above cannot be made at these long oscillator periods in any case.

6. Deterministic Limit Definition in 4-1.3.1(c) . - Observation: This definition is poorly written because it does not clearly indicate how the site class amplification factors are to be used in the construction of the limit spectrum. The phrase "using an Importance Factor,I, of 1.0" fur ther confuses the definition and is not necessary.

Recommendat ion: Define the deterministic limit spectrum as 1.5 F a at short per iods .and 0.6F v / T at intermediate periods, where F a and F v are obtained from Tables 4-1.2.4a and 4-1.2.4b, respectively, in the 1997 NEHRP. The F v is to be de termined from the S s > 1.25 column in Table 4.1.2.4a, whereas, the F,. is to be de termined from the S l >-0.5 co lumn in Table 4-1.2.4.b.

References: Abrahamson, N. and Silva, W, 1997, Empirical response spectral at tenuation relations for shallow crustal earthquakes: Seismological Research Letters, vol. 68, No. 1, Seismological Society of America, p. 94-127.

Campbell, K. 1997, Empirical near-source attenuation relationships for horizontal and vertical components of peak ground acceleration, peak ground velocity, and pseudo-absolute

acceleration response spectra: Seismological Research Letters, vol. 68, no. 1, Seismological Society of America, p. 154-179.

Darnes& Moore, 1995, Development of Attenuation Equations for Computing Earthquake Ground Motion at Stiff Soil Sites Within Deep Basins: Report to Joint Industry Participants, August.

Kawashima K., Aizawa, K. and Takahashi, K., 1985, Attenuation of peak ground motions and absolute acceleration response spectra of vertical earthquake ground motion: Proc. JSCE Structural Eng. /Ear thquake Eng., v. 2, no. 2, p. 169-176. COMMITrEE ACTION: Acceot in Principle,

1. Revise the third paragraph of 4-1.3.2 (a) to read: (a) The OBE shall be represented by a g round motion response

spectrum in which the spectral acceleration at any period T, shall be equal to 2 /3 of the spectral acceleration of the MCE ground motion defined in 4-1.3.1. The OBE ground mot ion need not exceed the motion renresented bv a 5 % damned acceleration resoonse soectrum having a 10 oercent probability of exceedance within a 50 year period.

2. Revise 4-1.3.6 (c) to read: (c~ If an SSE event has occurred the tank shall be evaluated and

insoected in accordance with 11-5.5.5.1 (h). COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The commit tee reviewed the changes proposed in the comment , and believes that the proposed text addressed the majority of the concerns expressed in the comment . NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMrrFEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 23 NOT RETURNED: 2 Charlwood, Hender son

(Log #5d) 59A- 7 - (4-1.3.1(c)): Accept SUBMITrER: Nicholas A. Legatos, Preload, Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59A-34

I RECOMMENDATION: Revise 4-1.3.1(c) to read: (c) The deterministic limit on MCE ground motion shall be

taken as the response spectrum de te rmined in accordance with the n~nbui%air.g ~tr',:cture~ provisions of the NEHRP Recommended Provisions for Seismic Regulations for New Buildings and Other Structures, 1997 edit ion (FEMA) using an... SUBSTANTIATION: Comment is valid.

According to NEHRP and IBC, as well as all o ther previous codes, the Importance Factor, I, is invariably int roduced in the next phase of a seismic investigation, namely the structural design (Chapter 5 of NEHRP). The introduction of an importance factor of 1.0 in Subsection 4-1.3.1(c) is to affirm the premise that the value of 1.5 g that defines the upper limit o f the deterministic MCE ground motion is in fact the maximum value and need not be fur ther increased by an importance factor. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #5£) 59A- 8 - (4-1.3.2): Accept SUBMrrrER: Nicholas A. Legatos, Preload, Inc. COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59.4.-34

I ~ M M E N D A T I O N : The fourth paragraph of 4-1.3.2 may be I ~ - -

SUBSTANTIATION: Regarding the cited s tatement in the existing Section 4-1.3.1 that "the investigation shall include (among o ther parameters) the damping factors of the structural systems," the proposed draft revision of 59A achieves the same objective through Section 4-1.3.1 (second paragraph) in c o , u n c t i o n with 4-

(fourth paragraph). The purpose of specifying a 5 percent damped response

spectrum in the draft 4-1.3.1 is not to exclude o ther damping factors but to accurately define the MCE as represented in the new seismic hazard maps (which depict spectral response accelerations based on 5 percent damping) . This, in effect, defines the "basic" NEHRP response spectrum. This spectrum can then be modified as provided for in draft Section 4-1.3.2 to suit the damping characteristics of the particular structure being investigated. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25

377

N F P A 5 9 A ~ N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 0 R O C

VOTE O N COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 23 NOT RETURNED: 2 Charlwood, Hende r son

VOTE O N COMMITTEE ACTION: AFFIRMATIVE: 23 NOT RETURNED: 2 Charlwood, Hende r son

(Log #5c) 59A- 9 - (4-1.3.2): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Nicholas A. Legatos, Preload, Inc. COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 59A-34 RECOMMENDATION: Delete the fourth paragraph of 4-1.3.2 as follows:

SUBSTANTIATION: Deleted to avoid misunders tandu lg . COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: See Commi t tee Action on 59A-8 (Log #5a). NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE O N COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 23 N O T RETURNED: 2 Charlwood, Hende r son

(Log #5e) 59A- l 0 - (4-1.3.5): Accept SUBMITTER: Nicholas A. Legatos, Preload, Inc. COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 59A-34 RECOMMENDATION: Revise 4-1.3.5 to read:

4-1.3.5 The i m p o u n d i n g system shall, as a m i n i m u m , be des igned to withstand an SSE while empty and an OBE while ho ld ing the volume, "V," as specified in 2-2.2.1. After an OBE or an SSE there shall be no loss of c o n t a i n m e n t capability. S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : C o m m e n t is valid. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: T he c o m m e n t refers to the ROP ballot c o m m e n t p r o v i d e d by Mr. Duus. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE O N COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #5f) 59A'- 11 - (4-1.3.8): Accept SUBMITTER: Nicholas A. Legatos, Preload, Inc. COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 59A-34 RECOMMENDATION: Revise the defini t ion o f SDS as follows:

SDS = the m a x i m u m design spectral accelerat ion de t e rmined in accordance with the nc, nbui!~:.ng s:ructu:-e~ provisions o f the NEHRP R e c o m m e n d e d Provisions for Seismic Regulat ions for New Buildings and O t he r Structures, 1997 edi t ion (FEMA) us ing a n . . .

S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : C o m m e n t is valid. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The c o m m e n t refers to the ROP ballot c o m m e n t provided by Mr. Duus. NUMBER OF C O M M r I ~ E E MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE O N COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #5g) 59A- 12 - (4-1.3.8(c)): Accept SUBMITTER: Nicholas A. Legatos, Preload, Inc. COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 59A-34 RECOMMENDATION: Revise 4-1.3.8(c) to read:

(c) This m e t h o d of design shall be used only when the natural period, T, o f the shop-buil t con ta ine r and its suppor t ing system is less than 0.06 seconds. For periodz o f vibration greater than 0.06 seconds, the m e t h o d of design in 4-1.3.1 t h rough 4-1.3.5 shall be

v

S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : C o m m e n t is valid. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: The c o m m e n t refers to the ROP ballot c o m m e n t p r o v i d e d by Mr. Duus. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25

378

(Log #CC20) 59A- 13- (10-13, 10-14): Accept SUBMITTER: Technica l Commi t tee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43 RECOMMENDATION: 1. Revise 10-8.3 to read:

10-8.3 I m p o u n d i n g areas serving aboveground and m o u n d e d LNG conta iners shall have a m i n i m u m volumetric hold ing capacity "V," inc luding any useful holding capacity o f the drainage area and with allowance made for the d i sp lacement o f snow accumulat ion, o ther containers , and equ ipmen t , in accordance with the following. ... Rema inde r U n c h a n g e d .

2. Revise 10.10.1 to read: 10-10.1 Shop fabricated containers shall be pressure tested by the

manufac tu re r pr ior to s h i p m e n t to the installation site. The inner tank shall be tested in accordance with the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code. The ou te r tank shall be leak tested. Piping shall be acceptance tested in accordance with Ccc:':c,a ~ 6 ASME B31.3.

3. Revise 10-13 to read: 10-13 Fire Protection and Safety. The following requi rements

shall apply: Section 9-1, Section 9-2, 9-3.1, 9-3.4, 9-4,.4v-9-4:4, Sections 9-5, 9'-6, and 9-7.2 9-7.3, 9~ . ! , Section 99 , 9 !9.! , an A 9

4. Add a new 10-14 tO read: 10-14 Gas Detectors. An onera t in~ nortable flammable-~as

v .

indicator shall be readilv availible. S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : 1. The r equ i r emen t is clarified so that it is applicable only to aboveground and m o u n d e d containers.

2. Tes t ing should be in accordance with the vessel design s tandard.

3. Reference paragraphs updated. 4. The commi t tee believes that only one gas detector is needed

for Chapter 10 plants. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 22 NEGATIVE: 1 NOT RETURNED: 2 Chaflwood, Hende r son

EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: EDLBECK: I am voting negatively for C o m m e n t 59A-13 (Log

#CC20) because sect ion 3 of this c o m m e n t will remove some impor tan t safety requ i rements for design of facilities. Examples are removal o f r equ i rements to moni to r f lammable gas concent ra t ions (9-4.1), to control access to the facility (9-8.1), personnel safety (9-9), and purg ing (9-10).

(Log #CC21) 59A- 13a- (10-15): Accept SUBMrrTER: Technical Commi t t ee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows:

10-15 Operat ions and Maintenance 10-15.1" General . Each facility shall have written operat ing,

ma in tenance , and t ra ining procedures based on experience, knowledge of similar facilities, and condi t ions u n d e r which they will be opera ted . This section conta ins basic requ i rements and m i n i m u m s tandards for the safety aspects of the operat ion and ma in t enance of LNG facilities, as well as personnel training.

10-15.2 Basic Requirements. Each facility shall (a) have written p rocedures covering operat ion, ma in tenance ,

and training; (b) keep up-to-date drawings of p lan t equ ipmen t , showing all

revisions made after installation. (c) revise the plans and procedures as opera t ing condi t ions or

facility e q u i p m e n t require; (d) establish a written emergency plan; (e) establish liaison with appropria te local authori t ies such as

police, fire depar tment , or municipal works and inform them of the emergency plans and their role in emergency situations; and

(f) analyze and d o c u m e n t all safety-related malfunct ions and , incidents for the purpose of de t e rmin ing their causes and prevent ing the possibility of recurrence.

10-15.3 Documentat ion o f Operating Procedures .

N F P A 59A u N o v e m b e r 2000 R O C

10-15.3.1 Manual of Operating Procedures. Each facility shall have a written manua l of opera t ing procedures . The facility shall operate all c o m p o n e n t s in accordance with the manual . The manua l shall be accessible to opera t ing and ma in t enance personnel . . It shall be upda ted as requi red by changes in e q u i p m e n t or procedures .

10-15.3.2 Opera t ing Manual Contents . T he manua l shall include p rocedures for:

(a) the p roper s tar tup and shu tdown of all c o m p o n e n t s of the facility, inc luding those for an initial s tar tup o f the LNG facility that wil l 'ensure that all c o m p o n e n t s will opera te satisfactorily;

(b) purg ing and iner t ing componen t s ; (c) the proper cooldown of componen t s ; (d) that ensure that each control system is properly adjusted to

operate within its design limits; and (f) main ta in ing the vaporization rate, temperature , and

pressure so that the resul tant gas is within the design tolerance o f the vaporizer and the downst ream piping;

(g) de te rmina t ion of the exis tence o f any abnormal condi t ions and the indicate the response to these condit ions;

(h) ensu r ing the safety o f personnel and property while repairs are carried out whe the r or not e q u i p m e n t is in operat ion;

(i) ensu r ing the safe t ransfer o f hazardous fluids; (j) ensu r ing security at the LNG plant;

(m) mon i to r ing operat ion by watching or l is tening for warning alarms from an a t t ended control cen te r and by conduc t ing inspect ions on a p lanned , periodic basis.

10-1.3.3 Emergency Procedures . T he types o f emergenc ies shall include at least emergenc ies that are ant icipated from an opera t ing malfunct ion, s tructural collapse o f part o f the facility, pe r sonne l error, forces of nature, and activities carried on adjacent to the facility. Considera t ion shall include but not be limited to the following:

(a) Procedures for r e spond ing to control lable emergenc ies inc luding the notifying o f personnel and the use o f e q u i p m e n t that is appropr ia te for hand l ing o f the emergency and the shutdown or isolation o f various por t ions of the e q u i p m e n t and o the r applicable steps to ensure that the escape o f gas o f liquid is prompt ly cut off or reduced as m u c h as possible;

(b) Procedures for recognizing an uncontrol lable emergency and for taking action that will

(1) Minimize ha rm to the personnel at the facility and to the public; and

(2) Provide p r o m p t notification of the emergency to the appropr ia te local officials, inc lud ing the possible need to evacuate persons from the vicinity o f the facility;

(c) Procedures for coord ina t ing with local officials in the preparat ion o f an emergency evacuation plan that sets forth the steps necessary to protect the public in the event o f an emergency.

(a )The p rocedures and steps o f 10-15.3.3(c) shall include m e t h o d s o f advising the appropr ia te local offices o f the

(a) quant i ty and location o f fire e q u i p m e n t t h r o u g h o u t the facility;

(b) potential hazards at the facility; (c) c o m m u n i c a t i o n and emergency-control capabilities o f the

facility; and (d) the status o f each emergency.

(b) Normally, gas fires ( inc luding LNG) should not be ext inguished until the fuel source has been shut off, unless the fire would create more of a hazard than the gas dispersion.

10-15.3.4 Cooldown Procedure. 10-15,3.4.1 Each facility shall have procedures to ensure that the

cooldown of each system of c o m p o n e n t s that is u n d e r its control , and that is subjected to cryogenic tempera tures , is l imited to a rate and distr ibution pat tern that will main ta in the thermal stresses within the design limits o f the system du r i ng the cooldown period having regard to the pe r fo rmance o f expans ion and contract ion devices.

10-15.3.4.2 Each facility shall have procedures to check each cryogenic piping system that is u n d e r its control du r ing and after cooldown stabilization for leaks in areas where there are flanges, valves, and seals.

10-15.3.5 Purging. Purging procedures shall be developed that minimize the presence of a combust ib le mixture in p lant p ip ing or e q u i p m e n t when a system is be ing placed into or taken ou t o f operat ion. (ref 9-10.1 in NFPA 59A-1996)

10-15.4.5 Loading or Unloading Operations.

10-15.4.5.1 General. (a) At least one qualif ied person shall be in cons tan t a t t endance

while loading or un load ing is in progress. (b) Writ ten p rocedures shall be available to cover all t ransfer

opera t ions and shall cover emergency as well as normal opera t ing

procedures . They shall be kept up-to-date and available to all personne l engaged in t ransfer operat ions.

(c) Sources o f ignition, such as welding, flames, and unclassified electrical equ ipmen t , shall not be permi t ted in loading or un load ing areas while t ransfer is in progress.

(d) Loading and un load ing areas shall be posted with signs that read "no smoking".

(e) Where mult iple products are loaded or un loaded at the same location, loading arms, hoses, or manifolds shall be identified or marked to indicate the p roduc t or products to be hand led by each system.

(e) Prior to transfer, gauge readings shall be obta ined or inventory established to ensure that the receiving vessel canno t be overfilled. Levels shall be checked du r ing t ransfer operat ions.

(f) The t ransfer system shall be checked prior to use to ensure that valves are in the correct position. Pressure and t empera tu re condi t ions shall be observed du r ing the transfer operat ion, where appropria te .

10-15.4.5.2 Tank Car or Tank Vehicle. (a) While tank car or tank vehicle loading or un load ing

opera t ions are in progress, rail and vehicle traffic shall be prohibited, within 25 ft (7.6 m) o f LNG facilities, or within 50 ft (15 m) o f refr igerants whose vapors are heavier than air.

(b) Prior to connec t ing a tank car, the car shall be checked and the brakes set, the detai ler or switch properly posi t ioned, and warning signs or lights placed as required. The warning signs or lights shall no t be removed or reset until the t ransfer is comple ted and the car d isconnected.

(c) Unless required for t ransfer operat ions, truck vehicle eng ines shall be shu t off. Brakes shall be set and wheels checked prior to connec t ing for un load ing or loading. The eng ine shall no t be started until the truck vehicle has been d isconnec ted and any released vapors have dissipated.

(d) Prior to loading LNG into a tank car or tank vehicle that is not in exclusive LNG service, a test shall be made to de te rmine the oxygen con ten t in the container . If a tank car or tank vehicle in exclusive LNG service does not conta in a positive pressure, it shall be tested for oxygen content . If the oxygen con ten t in e i ther case exceeds 2 percent by volume, the con ta ine r shall no t be loaded until it has been purged to below 2 percent oxygen by volume.

10-15.5 Maintenance. 10-15.5.1 General. 10-15.5.1.1 Each facility opera tor shall carry ou t periodic

inspect ion or tests, or both, as required on every c o m p o n e n t and its suppor t system that is in service in its facility.

10-15.5.1.2 Except as provided in this Section and 10-15.5.6.5, the periodic inspect ions and tests referred to in 10-15.5.1.1 shall be carried out in accordance with generally accepted eng inee r ing practice and as of ten as is necessary to ensure that each c o m p o n e n t is in good opera t ing condi t ion.

10-15.5.1.3 The suppor t system or founda t ion o f each c o m p o n e n t shall be inspected at least annual ly to ensure that the suppor t system or foundat ion is sound .

10-15.5.1.4 Each emergency power source at the facility shall be tested month ly to ensure that it is operat ional , and annual ly to ensure that it is capable of pe r fo rming at its i n t ended opera t ing capacity.

10-15.5.1.6 Each facility operator shall ensure that when a , c o m p o n e n t is served by a single safety device and the safety device is taken out of service for ma in t enance or repair, the c o m p o n e n t is also taken out o f service.

10-15.5.1.7 Paragraph 10-15.5.1.6 shall no t apply where the safety funct ion of the device is provided by an al ternate means .

10-15.5.1.8 The facility opera tor shall ensure that where the opera t ion o f a c o m p o n e n t that is taken ou t o f service could cause a hazardous condit ion, a tag bear ing the words "Do Not Operate", or the equivalent thereto, is a t tached to the controls of the componen t . W h e n practical, the c o m p o n e n t shall be locked out.

10-15.5.1.9 Stop valves for isolating pressure or vacuum-rel ief valves shall be locked or sealed open . They shall no t be operated except by an author ized person.

10-15.5.1.10 O n each LNG container , no more than one stop valve shall be closed at one time, thus main ta in ing the relief of 10- 12-4.1.

10-15.5.2 Maintenance Manual. 10-15.5.2.1 Each facility opera tor shall prepare a written manua l

that sets out an inspection and ma in t enance p rogram for each c o m p o n e n t that is used in its facility.

10-15.5.2.2 The ma in t enance manua l for facility c o m p o n e n t s shall inc lude

(a) the m a n n e r of carrying out and the f requency of the inspect ions and tests referred to Sections 10-15.5.1.1 and 10- 15.5.1.2;

379

N F P A 5 9 A ~ N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 0 R O C

(b) a descript ion o f any o the r action in addi t ion to those referred to in Item (a) that is necessary to mainta in the facility in accordance with this Standard; and

(c) all p rocedures to be followed du r ing repairs on a c o m p o n e n t that is opera t ing while it is being repaired to ensure the safety of persons and property at the facility.

10-15.5.2.3 Each facility opera tor shall conduc t its ma in t enance ~rogram in accordance with its written manua l for facility c o m p o n e n t s .

10-15.5.3 Site Housekeeping. 10-15.5.3.1 Each facility opera tor shall keep the g rounds o f its

facility free fi'om rubbish, debris, and o ther materials that could ~resent a fire hazard.

10-15.5.3.2 Each facility opera tor shall ensure that the componen t s of its facility are kept free from ice and o ther foreign materials that could impede their per formance .

10-15.5.3,3 Each facility opera tor shall mainta in the grassed area of its facility so that it does not create a fire hazard.

10-15.5.3,4 Each facility opera tor shall ensure that fire-control access routes within its facility are unobs t ruc ted and reasonably main ta ined in all weather condi t ions .

10-15.5.4 Repairs. Repairs that are carried ou t on c o m p o n e n t s of its facility shall be carried ou t in a m a n n e r that ensures that the

(a) integrity of the c o m p o n e n t s is mainta ined, in accordance with this s tandard;

(b) c o m p o n e n t s will opera te in a safe manne r ; and (c) safety of personnel and property du r ing a repair activity is

main ta ined . 10-15.5.5 Control Systems, Inspection, and Testing 10-15.5.5.1 Each facility opera tor shall ensure that a control

system that is ou t of service for 30 days or more is tested prior to re turn ing it to service to ensure that it is in p roper workirig order .

(a) Each facility opera tor shall ensure that the inspect ions and tests in this Section are carried ou t at the intervals specified.

(b) Control systems that are used seasonally shall be inspected and tested before use each season.

(c) Control systems that are used as part of the fire-protection system at the facility shall be inspected and tested in accordance with the applicable fire code. T he following shall also apply:

(1) Moni tor ing e q u i p m e n t shall be ma in ta ined in accordance with ANSI /NFPA 72, and 1221;

(2) Fire-protection water systems, if required, shall be ma in ta ined in accordance with the applicable ANSI /NFPA 13, 13A, 14. 15, 20.22, 24, and 26;

(3) Portable or wheeled fire ext inguishers suitable for gas fires, preferably o f the dry-chemical type, shall be available at strategic locations, as de t e rmi ned in accordance with Chap te r 9, within an LNG facility and on tank vehicles. These ext inguishers shall be ma in ta ined in accordance with ANSI /NFPA 10; and

(4) Fixed fire ext inguishers and o ther fire-control that are installed in accordance witb shall be ma in ta ined in accordance with ANSI/NFPA l l , l lA, 12, 12A, 12B, 16, and 17.

(e) Relief valves shall be inspected and set po in t tested at least once every two calendar years, with inter~,als not exceeding 30 months , to ensure that each valve relieves at the proper setting.

(f) The external surf'aces of liquefied natural gas storage tanks shall be inspected and tested as set ou t in the ma i n t enance manua l for

(1 ) Inner tank leakage; (2) Soundness of insulation; and (3) Tank foundat ion hea t ing to ensure that the structural

integrity or safety of the tanks is not affected. (g) LNG storage plants, and in particular, the storage conta iner

and its foundat ion , shall be externally inspected after each major meteorological d is turbance to ensure that the structural integrity o f the plant is intact.

10-15.5.6 Corros ion Control. Each facility opera tor shall ensure that the requ i rements of 11-5.6 are met, if applicable. 10-15.5.7 Records.

10-15.5.7.1 Each facility opera tor shall mainta in a record o f the date and type of each ma in t enance activity per formed.

10-15.5.7.2 A record that is required to be kept u n d e r 10-15.5.7.1 shall be re ta ined for as long as the facility is in service.

10-15.6 Training. 10-15.6.1 Every facility opera tor shall develop, implement , and

mainta in a written t ra ining plan to instruct appropria te facility 3ersonnel with respect to

(a) Carrying out the emergency procedures that relate to their duties at the facility as set ou t ira the procedure manua l referred to in 10-15.3.3; and providing first aid;

(b) P e r m a n e n t ma in tenance , operat ing, and supervisory ~ersonnel with respect to

( l ) The basic opera t ions carried out at the facility;

(2) The characteristics and potential hazards of LNG and o the r hazardous fluids involved in opera t ing and main ta in ing the facility, inc luding the serious danger f rom frostbite that can result upon contact with LNG. or cold refrigerants;

(3) The me thods o f carrying out their duties o f main ta in ing and opera t ing the facility as set ou t in the manua l of operat ing and ma in t enance procedures referred to in Sections 10-15.5 and 10- 15.3;

(4) The LNG transfer procedures set ou t in Section 10-15.4; (5) Fire prevention, inc luding familiarization with the fire

control plan o f the facility, fire-fighting, the potential causes o f fire in an facility, the types, sizes, and likely consequences of a fire at an facility; and

(6) Recognizing si tuations where it is necessary for the person to obtain assistance in order to mainta in the security o f the facility.

10-15.6.2 Each facility opera tor shall develop, implement, and mainta in a written plan to keep personnel of its facility up-to<late on the funct ion of the systems, fire prevention, and security at the facility.

10-15.6.3 The plans referred to in 10-15.5.2 shall provide for" t ra ining sessions to update personnel at intervals that do not exceed two years.

10-15.6.4 Every facility opera tor shall mainta in a record for each applicable employee o f its facility that sets out the training given to the employee u n d e r this section.

10-15.6.5 A record that is required to be main ta ined u n d e r 10- 15.5.4 shall be kept for at least two years after the date that the employee ceases to be employed at the facility.

10-15.6.6 Each facility opera tor shall ensure that facility pe r sonne l

(a) Receive applicable t ra ining referred to in Section 10-15.6; and

(b) Have exper ience related to their assigned duties. 10-15.6.7 Any person who has not comple ted the training or

received exper ience set ou t in Section 10-15.6 shall be u n d e r the control of t rained personnel . SUBSTANTIATION: Chapte r 10 was originally in tended to be a free s tanding chap te r which could be extracted by o ther NFPA documen t s . In keeping with this philosophy, a new section on opera t ions and ma in t enance is added to Chapte r 10. The material is consis tent with the new Chapte r 11, Opera t ions and Maintenance . COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 22 NEGATIVE: 1 NOT RETURNED: 2 Charlwood, Hende r son

EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: EDLBECK: I am voting negatively for C o m m e n t 59A-13A (Log

#CC21) because the c o m m e n t removes impor tan t safety requ i rements and because it removes many references to specific paragraphs and sections of the s tandard. Removal o f the references makes this section ambiguous and open for misinterpretat ion.

(Log #3) 59A- 14- (Chapter 11): Accept in Principle SUBMITTER: Paul Gusti lo, Amer ican Gas Assoc COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59A43 RECOMMENDATION: We propose that the NFPA 59A commi t tee cons ider incorpora t ing more of Part 193, subparts F, G, H, I, a n d J ill lieu o f the CSA Z-276 O&M and training requi rements . We would welcome the oppor tuni ty to work with the commit tee in developing language to meet the needs o f the Canadian Standards Association, the Office of Pipeline Safety, and LNG operators in the U.S. and Canada. SUBSTANTIATION: Liquefied natural Gas (LNG) plants play an impor tan t peak shaving role in our member s ' gas distr ibution systems. Approximate ly 80 such facilities exist in the U.S, today. With the recent incorpora t ion of various design and construct ion sections of the 1996 edi t ion o f NFPA 59A, into Part 193, LNG Facilities: Federal Safety Standards, ou r m e m b e r s have a considerable sltake in the con ten t o f NFPA 59A. This has been increasingly impor tan t as the Office o f Pipeline Safety (OPS) moves towards adopt ing more o f NFPA 59A into Part 193.

Our main concern with the proposed 2001 edi t ion is the addit ion o f Chapte r 11 regard ing operat ions, ma in t enance (O&M), and t ra ining functions. Al though we are support ive o f the inclusion of these functions, we do not s~ppor t the general na ture of the

38O

• N F P A 5 9 A ~ N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 0 R O C

language included in the proposed 2001 edition, especially since this is the only chap te r that would be retroactive•

It appears that the language was taken directly from the Canadian Standards Association (CSA) s tandard Z-276 for LNG facilities. While this may be appropriate for the 3 LNG facilities in Canada, it is no t appropria te for the facilities in the Uni ted States. US operators have successfully been utilizing the O&M and t ra ining regulat ions in Part 193 for 20 years. Adopt ing wholesale changes would not be acceptable for US opera tors because it would no t only be b u r d e n s o m e and costly, bu t could possibly be less effective in address ing safety. For these reasons, AGA would no t suppor t the inclusion o f Chapte r 11, as current ly proposed in the NFPA 59A 2001 edition, into Part 193 if cons idered by OPS. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept in Principle. COMMITTEE STATEMENT: Refer to Commi t tee C o m m e n t s 59A- 15 (Log#CC3) , 59A-20 (Log #CC9), 59A-21 (Log # C C l l ) , 59A-16 (Log #CC14), 59A-27 (Log #CC17) an~ 59A-19 (Log #CC19) which incorporate the revisions r e c o m m e n d e d in this proposal. NUMBER OF COMMITrEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 23 N O T RETURNED: 2 Charlwood, H e n d e r s o n

(Log #CC3) 59A- 15 - (11-2): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Commi t t ee on L!quefied Natural Gas COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43 RECOMMENDATION: 1. Revise 11-2 (b) to read:

(b) ~ v . . . . . . . ~v re, date ~ drawings, charts, and records o f p lant equ ipment ;

2. Revise 11-2 (f) to read: (f) analyze and d o c u m e n t all safety-related ma!f'aact:c,~z and

i nc iden t s - cond i t i ons for the purpose o f de t e rmin ing their causes and prevent ing the possibility o f recurrence .

3 . • Add a new A-11-2 (f) to read: LNG plants u n d e r the jur isdic t ion o f the U. S. Depa r tmen t of

Transpor ta t ion u n d e r the Code o f Federal Regulat ions, 49 CFR Part 193 have a defini t ion of safety related malfunct ions in 49 CFR Part 191• SUBSTANTIATION: 1. (b) Revised for clarity.

2. (f) is revised for consistency with cu r ren t industry practice. 3. Append ix material added to provide guidance to users of the

Standard. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CC14) 59A- 16- (11-3.8): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Commi t t ee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43

I RECOMMENDATION: Add a new 11-3.8 to read: 11-3.8 Each LNG plant opera to r shall main ta in a record o f each

inspection, test, and investigation requi red by this section. These records shall be re ta ined for at least 5 years. SUBSTANTIATION: Record re ten t ion requ i rements are added to the opera t ing section for consistency with cu r ren t regulatory and industry practice. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CC7) 59A- 17- (11-5.1.4): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Commi t t ee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43 RECOMMENDATION: Revise text to read as follows:

11-5.1.4 Each emergency power source at the LNG plant shall be tested mon th ly to ensure that it is operat ional , and annual ly to ensure that it is capable of pe r fo rming at its i n t ended opera t ing capacity. SUBSTANTIATION: Revised for clarity. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


25

(Log #CC8) 59A- 18- (11-5.3.2): Accept SUBMITTER: Technica l Commi t t ee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43 RECOMMENDATION: Revise 11-5.3.2 to read:

11-5.3.2 Each opera t ing company shall ensu re that the

o f for ieen material con taminan t s o r ice shall be avoided or control led to mainta in the ooerat ional safety of e~ach LNG plant c o m p o n e n t • S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : It is no t practical to keep all c o m p o n e n t s completly free o f ice. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CC19) 59A- 19- (11-5.5.1(e)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Commi t tee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43 RECOMMENDATION: Revise 11-5.5.1 (e) to read:

(e) Stationary LNG tank relief valves shall be inspected and set po in t tested at least once every two calendar years, with intervals no t exceed ing 30 months , to ensure that each valve relieves at the p roper setting. All o the r relief valves protec t ing hazardous fluid c o m p o n e n t s shall be randomly inspected and set po in t tested at intervals not exceed 5 years plus 3 m o n t h s . SUBSTANTIATION: This revision reflects industry exper iences that are contrary to cu r ren t regulatory requi rements . These exper iences indicate that more damage has been done to relief valves in the excessive testing then in actual use. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 20 NEGATIVE: 2 ABSTENTION: 1 N O T RETURNED: 2 Charlwood, H e n d e r s o n

EXPLANATION OF NEGATIVE: ARVEDLUND: I have to admit that this part icular proposal

d idn ' t catch my at tent ion in the past but I have to vote negative for two reasons:

1. The inspect ion interval conflicts with the interval required by Section 193.2619(c) of the Depar tmen t of Transpor ta t ion regulat ions which state "Control systems in service, bu t not normally in opera t ion (such as relief valves and automat ic shu tdown devices), mus t be inspected and tested once each ca lendar year, but with intervals not exceeding 15 months. . ." Creat ing a NFPA' inspect ion interval less (and in fact far lower) than the DOT requ i r emen t doesn ' t seem t o m a k e sense. It should be revised to be consis tent with the DOT requi rements .

2. Yearly testing o f relief valves is s tandard practice in the LNG industry and has been incorporated as part o f normal regulatory inspections. I am unaware that testing relief valves once a year const i tutes excessive testing, as suggested in NFPA's substantiat ion. It is a good engineer ing , safety, and ma in t enance practice.

BOURNE: Currently, Part 193 requires all relief valves to be tested annual ly (193.2619(c): Control Systems [Maintenance] ) . This r equ i r emen t covers all control systems which are "...in service but not normally in operation.. .". There have been relief valve failures even with the annual ' tes t ing . AGA has not provided any statistics showing that valves have been replaced more frequent ly because o f damage due to annua l testing. Therefore , the Commi t t ee has no way to compare the cost savings with the added risk. I do not believe that the test interval should be increased to five years. EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION:

TRUSLER: The r e c o m m e n d e d revisions are a significant depar tu re from the cu r ren t CSA Z276 s tandard and cur ren t practice, at least in British Columbia. At BC Gas we comply with the cu r r en t r equ i rements and have not exper ienced difficulty to

381


date; therefore, ou r exper ience is contrary to the exper ience referenced in the Substantiation.

This issue will be reviewed by the Z276 O&M Subcommi t tee and if ou r Subcommit tee does not agree with the proposed 59A changes , we will table the issue for future jo in t discussion.

(Log #CC9) 59A- 20 - (11-5.5.1 (h)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Commi t t ee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43 RECOMMENDATION: Revise 11-5.5.5.1 (h) to read:

(h) If a potentially damag ing geophysical or meteorological event occurs,

1. the plant shall be shu t down as soon as is practical. 2. the nature and ex ten t o f damage , if any, shall be de te rmined . 3. the plant shall not be restarted until operat ional safety is

reestablished. SUBSTANTIATION: The r equ i r emen t is revised to provided clear pe r fo rmance language for deal ing with meteorological and

ophysical events. MMITTEE ACTION: Accept.

NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 22 ABSTENTION: 1 NOT RETURNED: 2 Charlwood, H e n d e r s o n

EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION: TRUSLER: My recollection is, at the J u n e 2000 meet ing , the

Technica l Commi t tee discussed the need for on site "seismic" ins t rumenta t ion and there was some discussion about removing this r equ i r emen t f rom the s tandard. Mr. Legatos, in his initial draft o f the revisions to Appendix B, removed the reference to on site seismic ins t rumenta t ion . However, it was poin ted out that the r equ i r emen t for on site seismic ins t rumenta t ion is still in the body of the d o c u m e n t (Section 4-1.3.11). Recognizing this, the balloted version o f Appendix B references the need for this ins t rumenta t ion (Section B3.6).

As long as this r equ i r emen t exists, I feel the cu r r en t wording for Section 11-5.5.1(h) is preferred. There is little poin t in having the ins t rumenta t ion if the opera t ing company hasn ' t p repared itself to use the data from it.

This issue will be reviewed by the Z276 O&M Subcommi t tee and if ou r Subcommit tee does not agree with the proposed 59A changes , we will table the issue for future jo in t discussion.

The reason for absta ining ra ther than rejecting is due to the pend ing Z276 discussion and the fact that the proposed wording isn ' t unacceptable; I simply feel it is unnecessar i ly vague as long as the r equ i r emen t for on site seismic ins t rumenta t ion exzsts.

(Log #CC11) 59A- 21 - (11-5•5•1 (4)): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Commi t t ee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43 RECOMMENDATION: Revise 11-5.5.1 (4) to read:

(4) Fixed fire ext inguishers and o ther fire-control that are installed in accordance with shall be ma in t a ined in accordance with ANSI/NFPA 11, l lA , 12, 12A, 12B, 16, and- 17 and 2001. SUBSTANTIATION : Reference to a new, relevant NFPA s tandard added. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


COMMENT ON AFFIRMATIVE: JOHNSON: Should "system" be inser ted after "f ine-control '?

Sentence is unclear on first reading. Perhpas moving list of s tandards will help. "...installed in accordance with ANSI /NFPA 11, l lA , 12, 12A, 12B, 16, 17, and 2001 shall be ma in ta ined in accordance with these s tandards.

(Log #CC13) 59A- 22 - (11-5.6.4): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Commi t t ee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43

I RECOMMENDATION: Revise 11-5.6.4 (b) and (e) to read: (b) Each cathodic protect ion systen~ rectifier or imnressed

cu r r en t system shall be inspected at least six t imes each calendar

year at intervals that do not exceed 2-1/2 m o n t h s to ensure that it is opera t ing properly.

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . . . ,o ,~.~, .~ . . . . . . . . . . .~ ,7 i / 2 month~.

::,~c "n :hc L N C p!a:-t . (¢) Where B c o m p o n e n t is nrotected from internal corrosion bv a

coat ing or inhibitors• mon i to r ing devices des igned to detect internal corrosion, such as counons or nrobes, shall be located where corrosion is mos t likelv to occur. Internal corrosion control mon i to r ing devices shall be checked at least two times each ca lendar year. and at intervals not exceeding 7 1 /2 months . S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : (b) Text is revised to be more specific

(e) Text is revised to deal only with ma in t enance issues. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


(Log #CC12) 59A- 23- (11-5.7): Accept SUBMITTER: Technica l Commi t tee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43 RECOMMENDATION: Revise 11-5.7.1 and 11-5.7.2 to read:

11-5.7.1 Each opera t ing company shall main ta in at-its-GNG plant a record o f the date and type o f each ma in tenance activity pe r fo rmed on each c o m p o n e n t o f the LNG plant inc luding a record o f the date that a c o m p o n e n t is taken ou t of, or placed into service for a oeriod o f not less than 5 years. Records shall be m ad e available du r ing business hours UDOn reasonable notice.

s~. 11-5.7.2 Each LNG Plant opera tor shall mainta in record~ of each

test, survey or insnect ion refluired bv this s tandard in sufficient detail to demons t r a t e the adeuuacv of corrosion control measures for the life o f the LNG facility. S U B S T A N T I A T I Q N : Flexibility is provided for operators on record location. A time frame for ma in t enance record re tent ion is added. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept• NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 22 ABSTENTION: 1 NOT RETURNED: 2 Charlwood, Hende r son

COMMENT ON AFFIRMATIVE: JOHNSON: Was it in tended that "at its LNG plant" be deleted?

Would it be more clear to move "for a period of not less than five years" to directly after "shall maintain"? EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION:

TRUSLER: This is a significant depar ture f rom the cu r r en t CSA Z276 s tandard and cu r r en t practice, at least in British Columbia. Consequent ly , I d o n ' t feel comfortable voting in favour of the p roposed changes until after the Z276 Technical Commi t tee has had an oppor tuni ty for review.

This issue will be reviewed by the Z276 O&M Subcommit tee and if ou r Subcommi t tee does not agree with the proposed 59A changes , we will table the issue fo r future jo in t discussion.

(Log #CC10) 59A- 24 - (A-6.9.1): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Commi t tee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43 RECOMMENDATION: Add a new A-6-9.1 to read:

A-6-9.1 The U. S. Code o f Federal Regulations, 49 CFR Part 192, Subpar t I, inc ludes corrosion protect ion requi rements . S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : Appendix text added for clarity. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


382

N F P A 59A m N o v e m b e r 2000 R O C

(Log #CC2) 59A- 25 - (A-9-1.2 (i)) : Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Commit tee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 59A-18

I RECOMMENDATION: Add a new A-9-1.2 (i) to read: A-9.1.2 (i). Plant fire brigades are not required by this standard.

Where the facility elects to have a fire brigade, NFPA 600 is required for protective equipment and training. S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : Appendix text is added for clarity. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE O N COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 23 NOT RETURNED: 2 Charlwood, Henderson

(Log #CC4) 59A- 26 - (A-11-3.6): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Commit tee on Liquefied 'Natural Gas COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43 RECOMMENDATION: Add text to read as follows:

A-11-3.6 For information on purging of piping systems, see Purging Principles and Practices, published by the American Gas Association. S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : Appendix material is added to reference a useful publication. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMMITTEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


COMMENT ON AFFIRMATIVE: TRUSLER: The reference to this AGA documen t is already

included in A-11-3.fi.2(a) o f NFPA 59A/F2000 ROP 12-13-99 Page 134.

( Log #CC 17) 59A- 27 - (Appendix C): Accept SUBMITTER: Technical Commit tee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT O N PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43 RECOMMENDATION: Add a new Appendix C, Securi ty . .

The following is repr inted from the Code of Federal Regulations, 49 CFR Part 193, SubpartJ . It is applicable to LNG plants in the Uhited States under the jurisdiction of the Depar tment of Transportat ion.

Appendix C-Security This appendix is extracted from the U. S. Code of Federal

Regulations, Title 49 Part 193, A p p e n d i x J - Security. The references herein are found in CFR 49, Part 193.

Sec. 193.2901 Scope. This subpart prescribes requirements for security at LNG plants.

However, the requirements do not apply to existing LNG plants that do not contain LNG.

Sec. 193.2903 Security procedures. Each opera tor shall prepare and follow one or more manuals o f

written procedures to provide security for each LNG plant. The procedures must be available at the plant in accordance with Sec. 193.2017 and include at least:

(a) A description and schedule of security inspections and patrols performed in accordance with Sec. 193.2913;

(b) A list o f security personnel positions or responsibilities utilized at the LNG plant;

(c) A brief description of the duties associated with each security personnel position or responsibility;

(d) Instructions for actions to be taken, including notification of o ther appropriate plant personnel and law enforcement officials, when there is any indication of an actual or a t tempted breach of security;

(e) Methods for de termining which persons are allowed access to the LNG plant;

(f) Positive identification of all persons enter ing the plant and on the plant, including methods at least as effective as picture badges; and

(g) Liaison with local law enforcement officials to keep them informed about current security procedures under this section.

Sec. 193.2905 Protective enclosures. (a) The following facilities must be sur rounded by a protective

enclosure: (1) Storage tanks; (2) Impounding systems; (3) Vapor barriers;

(4) Cargo transfer systems; (5) Process, liquefaction, and vaporization equipment ; (6) Control rooms and stations; (7) Control systems; (8) Fire control equipment; (9) Security communicat ions systems; and (10) A/ternative power sources.

The protective enclosure may be one or more separate enclosures surrounding a single facility or multiple facilities.

(b) Ground elevations outside a protective enclosure must be graded in a manner that does not impair the effectiveness of the enclosure.

(c) Protective enclosures may not be located near features outside of the facility, such as trees, poles, or buildings, which could be used to breach the security.

(d) At least two accesses must be provided in each protective enclosure and be located to minimize the escape distance in the event of emergency.

(e) Each access must be locked unless it is continuously guarded, During normal operations, an access may be unlocked only by persons designated in writing by the operator. During an emergency, a means must be readily available to all facility personnel within the protective enclosure to open each access.

Sec. 193.2907 Protective enclosure construction, (a) Each protective enclosure must have sufficient strength and

configuration to obstruct unauthorized access to the facihties enclosed.

(b) Openings in or under protective enclosures must be secured by grates, doors or covers o f construction and fastening o f sufficient strength such that the integrity of the protective enclosure is not reduced by any opening.

Sec. 193.2909 Security communications. A means must be provided for: (a) Prompt communicat ions between personnel having

supervisory security duties and law enforcement officials; and (b) Direct communicat ions between all on-duty personnel having

security duties and all control rooms and control stations. Sec. 193.2911 Security lighting. Where security warning systems are not provided for security

monitor ing under Sec. 193.2913, the area a round the facilities listed under Sec. 193.2905(a) and each protective enclosure must be illuminated with a minimum in service lighting intensity of not less than 2.2 lux (0.2 ft<SUP>c</SUP>) between sunset and sunrise.

Sec. 193.2913 Security monitoring. Each protective enclosure and the area a round each facility listed

in Sec. 193.2905(a) must be moni tored for the presence of unauthorized persons. Monitoring must be by visual observation in accordance with the schedule in the security procedures under Sec. 193.2903(a) or by security warning systems that continuously transmit data to an a t tended location. At an LNG plant with less than 40,000 m<SUP>3</SUP> (250,000 bbl) o f storage capacity, only the protective enclosure must be moni tored.

Sec. 193.2915 Alternative power sources. An alternative source of power that meets the requirements of

Sec. 193.2445 must be provided for security lighting and security moni tor ing and warning systems required under Secs. 193.2911 and 193.2913.

Sec. 193.2917 Warning signs. (a) Warning signs must be conspicuously placed along each

protective enclosure at intervals so that at least one sign is recognizable at night from a distance of 30 m ( 100 ft) from any way that could reasonably be used to approach the enclosure.

(b) Signs must be marked with at least the following on a background of sharply contrasting color:

The words "NO TRESPASSING," or words of comparable meaning. S U B S T A N T I A T I O N : The Standard provides, in Chapter 9, security requirements in performance language. The Appendix provides specific requirements applicable to LNG plants under the jurisdiction of the U. S. Depar tment of Transportat ion (Gode of Federal Regulations, CFR 49 Part 193). These requirements are provided here for the convenience of the user o f the standard. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. N U M B E R OF C O M M ~ MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:


383

N F P A 59A - - N o v e m b e r 2000 R O C

(Log #CC18) 59A- 28 - (Appendix D): Accept SUBMITrER: Technical Committee on Liquefied Natural Gas COMMENT ON PROPOSAL NO: 59A-43 RECOMMENDATION: Add a new Appendix D, Training.

The following is reprinted from the Code of Federal Regulations, 49 CFR Part 193, Subpart H. It is applicable to LNG plants in the United States under the jurisdiction of the Department of Transportation. Subpart H-Personnel Qualifications and Training

This appendix is extracted from the U. S. Code of Federal Regulations, Title 49 Part 193, Appendix H - Personnel Qualifications and Training. The references herein are found in CFR 49, Part 193.

Sec. 193.2701 Scope. This subpart prescribes requirements for personnel qualifications

and training. Sec. 193.2703 Design and fabrication.

For the design and fabrication of components, each operator shall use-

(a) With respect to design, persons who have demonstrated competence by training or experience in the design of comparable components.

(b) With respect to fabrication, persons who have demonstrated competence by training or experience in the fabrication of comparable components.

Set. 193.2705 Construction, installation, inspection, and testing. (a) Supervisors and other personnel utilized for construction,

installation, inspection, or testing must have demonstrated their capability to perform satisfactorily the assigned function by appropriate training in the methods and equipment to be used or related experience and accomplishments.

(b) Each operator must periodically determine whether inspectors performing duties under Sec. 193.2307 are satisfactorily performing their assigned function.

Sec. 193.2707 Operations and maintenance. (a) Each operator shall utilize for operation or maintenance of

components only those personnel who have demonstrated their capability to perform their assigned functions by-

(l) Successful completion of the training required by Secs. 193.2713 and 193.2717; and

(2) Experience related to the assigned operation or maintenance function; and

(3) Acceptable performance on a proficiency test relevant to the assigned function.

(b) A person who does not meet the req. uirements of paragraph (a) of this section may operate or maintain a component when accompanied and directed by an individual who meets the requirements.

(c) Corrosion control procedures under Sec. 193.2605(b), including those for the design, installation, operation, and maintenance of cathodic protection systems, must be carried out by, or under the direction of, a person qualified by experience and training in corrosion control technology.

Sec. 193.2709 Security. Personnel having security duties must be qualified to perform

their assigned duties by successful completion of the training required under Sec. 193.2715.

Sec. 193.2711 Personnel health. Each operator shall follow a written plan to verify that personnel

assigned operating, maintenance, security, or fire protection duties at the LNGplant do not have any physical condition that would impair performance of their assigned duties. The plan must be designed to detect both readily observable disorders, such as physical handicaps or injury, and conditions requiring

I professional examination for discovery. Sec. 193.2713 Training: operations and maintenance. (a) Each operator shall provide and implement a written plan of

initial training to instruct- (I) All permanent maintenance, operating, and supervisory

personnel- (i) About the characteristics and hazards of-LNG and other

flammable fluids used or handled at the facility, including, with regard to LNG, low temperatures, flammability of mixtures with air, odorless vapor, boiloff characteristics, and reaction to water and water spray;

(ii) About the potential hazards involved in operating and maintenance activities; and

(iii) To carry out aspects of the operating and maintenance procedures under Secs. 193.2503 and 193.2605 that relate to their assigned fimctions; and

(2) All personnel- (i) To carry out the emergency procedures under Sec. 193.2509

that relate to their assigned functions; and

(ii) To give first-aid; and (3) All operating and appropriate supervisory personnel-

(i) To understand detailed instructions on the facility operations, including controls, functions, and operating procedures; and

(ii) To understand the LNG transfer procedures provided under Sec. 193.2513.

(b) A written plan of~continuing instruction must be conducted at intervals of not more than two years to keep all personnel current on the knowledge and skills they gained in the program of initial instruction.

Sec. 193.2715 Training: security. (a) Personnel responsible for security at an LNG plant must be

trained in accordance with a written plan of initial instruction to: (1) Recognize breaches of security; (2) Carry out the security procedures under Sec. 193.2903 that

relate to their assigned duties; (3) Be familiar with basic plant operations and emergency

dProcedures, as necessary to effectively perform their assigned uties; and

(4) Recognize conditions where security assistance is needed. (b) A written plan of continuing instruction must be conducted

at intervals of not more than two years to keep all personnel having security duties current on the knowledge and skills they gained in the program of initial instruction.

Sec. 193.2717 Training: fire protection. (a) All personnel involved in maintenance and operations of an

LNG plant, including their immediate supervisors, must be trained in accordance with a written plan of initial instruction, including plant fire drills, to:

(1) Know and follow the fire prevention procedures under Sec. 193.2805(b);

(2) Know the potential causes and areas of fire determined under Sec. 193.2805(a);

(3) Know the types, sizes, and predictable consequences of fire determined under Sec. 193.2817(a); and

(4) Know and be able to perform their assigned fire control duties according to the procedures established under Sec. 193.2509 and by proper use of equipment provided under Sec. 193.2817.

(b) A written plan of continuing instruction, including plant fire drills, must be conducted at intervals of not more than two years to keep personnel current on the knowledge and skills they gained in the instruction under paragraph (a) of the section.

Sec. 193.2719 Training: records. (a) Each operator shall maintain a system of records which- (l) Provide evidence that the training programs required by this

subpart have been implemented; and (2) Provide evidence that personnel have undergone and

satisfactorily completed the required training programs. [[8]]

(b) Records must be maintained for one year after personnel are no longer assigned duties at the LNG plant.

Subpart H-Personnel Qualifications and Training Sec. 193.2701 Scope. This subpart prescribes requirements for personnel qualifications

and training. Sec. 193.2703 Design and fabrication. For the design and fabrication of components, each operator

shall use- (a) With respect to design, persons who have demonstrated

competence by training or experience in the design of comparable components.

(b) With respect to fabrication, persons who have demonstrated competence by training or experience in the fabrication of comparable components.

Sec. 193.2705 Construction, installation, inspection, and testing. (a) Supervisors and other personnel utilized for construction,

installation, inspection, or testing must have demonstrated their capability to perform satisfactorily the assigned function by appropriate training in the methods and equipment to be used or related experience and accomplishments.

(b) Each operator must periodically determine whether inspectors performing duties under Sec. 193.2307 are satisfactorily performing their assigned function.

Sec. 193.2707 Operations and maintenance. (a) Each operator shall utilize for operation or maintenance of

components only those personnel who have demonstrated their capability to perform their assigned functions by-

(l) Successful completion of the training required by Secs. 193.2713 and 193.2717; and

(2) Experience related to the assigned operation or maintenance function; and

(3) Acceptable performance on a proficiency test relevant to the assigned function.

384

N F P A 5 9 A m N o v e m b e r 2 0 0 0 R O C

(b) A person who does not meet the requirements of paragraph (a) of this section may operate or maintain a component when accompanied and directed by an individual who meets the requirements.

(c) Corrosion control procedures under Sec. 193.2605(b), including those for the design, installation, operation, and maintenance of cathodic protection systems, must be carried out by, or under the direction of, a person qualified by experience and training in corrosion control technology.

Sec. 193.2709 Security. Personnel having security duties must be qualified to perform

their assigned duties by successful completion of the training required under Sec. 193.2715.

Sec. 193.2711 Personnel health. Each operator shall follow a written plan to verify that personnel

assigned operating, maintenance, security, or fire protection duties at the LNG plant do not have any physical condition that would impair performance of their assigned duties. The plan must be designed to detect both readily observable disorders, such as physical handicaps or injury, and conditions requiring professional examination for discovery.

Sec. 193.2713 Training: operations and maintenance. (a) Each operator shall provide and implement a written plan of "

initial training to instruct- (I) All permanent maintenance, operating, and supervisory

p e r s o n n e l - (i) About the characteristics and hazards of LNG and other

flammable fluids used or handled at the facility, including, with regard to LNG, low temperatures, flammability of mixtures with air, odorless vapor, boiloff characteristics, and reaction to water and water spray;

(ii) About the potential hazards involved in operating and maintenance activities; and

(iii) To carry out aspects of the operating and maintenance procedures under Secs. 193.2503 and 193.2605 that relate to their assigned functions; and

(2) All personnel- (i) To carry out the emergency procedures under Sec. 193.2509

that relate to their assigned functions; and (ii) To give first-aid; and

(3) All operating and appropriate supervisory personnel- (i) To understand detailed instructions on the facility

operations, including controls, functions, and operating procedures; and

(ii) To understand the LNG transfer procedures provided under Sec. 193.2513.

(b) A written plan of continuing instruction must be conducted at intervals of not more than two years to keep all personnel current on the knowledge and skills they gained in the program of initial instruction.

Sec. 193.2715 Training: security. (a) Personnel responsible for security at an LNG plant must be

trained in accordance with a written plan of initial instruction to: (1) Recognize breaches of security; (2) Carry out the security procedures under Sec. 193.2903 that

relate to their assigned duties; (3) Be familiar with basic plant operations and emergency

procedures, as necessary to effectively perform their assigned duties; and

(4) Recognize conditions where security assistance is needed. (b) A written plan of continuing instruction must be conducted

at intervals of not more than two years to keep all personnel having security duties current on the knowledge and skills they gained in the program of initial instruction.

Sec. 193.2717 Training: fire protection. (a) All personnel involved in maintenance and operations of an

LNG plant, including their immediate supervisors, must be trained in accordance with a written plan of initial instruction, including plant fire drills, to:

(1) Know and follow the fire prevention procedures under Sec. 193.2805(b);

(2) Know the potential causes and areas of fire determinc~d under Sec. 193.2805(a);

(3) Know the types, sizes, and predictable consequences of fire determined under Sec. 193.2817(a); and

(4) Know and be able to perform their assigned fire control duties according to the procedures established under Sec. 193.2509 and by proper use of equipment provided under Sec. 193.2817.

(b) A written plan of continuing instruction, including plant fire drills, must be conducted at intervals of not more than two years to keep personnel current on the knowledge and skills they gained in the instruction under paragraph (a) of the section.

Sec. 193.2719 Training: records. (a) Each operator shall maintain a system of records which- (l) Provide evidence that the training programs required by this

subpart have been implemented; and (2) Provide evidence that personnel have undergone and

satisfactorily completed the required training programs. (b) Records must be maintained for one year after personnel are

no longer assigned duties at the LNG plant. SUBSTANTIATION: The Standard provides, in Chapter 9, training requirements in performance language. The Appendix provides specific requirements applicable to LNG plants under the jurisdiction of the U. S. Department of Transportation (Code of Federal Regulations, CFR 49 Part 193). These requirements are provided here for the convenience of the user of the standard. COMMITTEE ACTION: Accept. NUMBER OF COMM1TrEE MEMBERS ELIGIBLE TO VOTE: 25 VOTE ON COMMITTEE ACTION:

AFFIRMATIVE: 22 ABSTENTION: 1 NOT RETURNED: 2 Charlwood, Henderson

EXPLANATION OF ABSTENTION: EDLBECK: I am abstained from voting for Comment 59A-28

(Log #CC18) because I could not find any material relating to this comment.

Revise the following references, and correct errata, in Chapter 11:

Parahrraph Current Reference Corrected Reference I1-3.2(b) 8-3.6 11-3.6 11-3.2(c) 8-3.5 11-3.5 11-3.2(g) Chapter 8 Chapter 11 11-3.2(I) Figure 4-1.6.1 (see 4-1.6) 4-1.6 11-3.2(m) 8-3.4 11-3.4 11-3.3 8-3.2(k) 11-3.2 (k) 11-3.3.1 8-3.3.1 (c) 11-3.3.1 (c) 11-3.4.1 11-3.2 11-3 11-3.6.2 8-6 11-6 11-4.5.2 Chocked Checked 11-5.1.2 8-5.6.5 11-5.6.5 11-5.1.7 8-5.1.6 11-5.1.6 11-5.1.10 4-8.1 4-7.3 11-5.2.2(a) 8-5.l.1 and 8-5.5.2 11-5.1.1 11-5.5.1(d) 8-5.5.2.1 and 8-5.5.2.2 (b) and (c) 11-5.5.1 (h) 6-1.3 4-1.3 11-5.6.1 (b) 8-5.2 11-5.2 11-5.7.2 8-5.7.1 11-5.7.1 ll-6.1(a) 8-3.3 11-3.3 11-6.3 8-5.2 11-6.2 11-6.5 8-5.4 11-6.4 11-6.6(a) 8-6 11-6 11-6.7 8-6 11-6.6

385

nfpa - report of the committee on this committee …...versions of section 2-1.1(a) of nfpa 59a) has...

Documents