SPCC, Secondary Containment for Piping 2

[LakeNormanTiger]

All,
Can anyone point me in the right direction regarding the requirements for secondary containment for facility piping.

The piping varies in size and is steel/metal pipe. Some of the pipe has threaded fittings, some is welded.

Thanks for all your help.
LNT

 

[bimr]

Note sure what you are looking for. However, a general discussion of secondary containment piping is included in the US Army piping manual (EM 1110-1-4008). If you do not find what you are looking for, please post again.

http://140.194.76.129/publications/eng-manuals/em1110-1-4008/c-8.pdf

 

[LakeNormanTiger]

bimr,
Thanks for the post. I read over a couple of the pages, but I dont think this is what I am looking for. But thank you anyways.

I am looking for the regulations (EPA / Clean Water Act / SPCC) that dictate what the requirments for secondary containment are for "piping" between equipment and tanks, regarding oil based products. I believe I understand what the regulations are for tanks that support the piping. But I am still unsure what the requirements are for the piping. In a earlier post (3 yrs ago). Another Engineer was looking for the exact same thing. He eluded to the fact that he might not need contaiment for the piping, but really did not expand on why or what requirments he had uncovered. If anyone out there is familar with this topic and can help, I would appreciate it.

Currently I have spent the day looking over EPA guidances trying to find some information on this topic and have come up dry. My plan, is to first understand the requirments for the "piping" regarding secondary containment. Then I want to suggest a solution for the owner, who thinks they might have a problem, based on the requirements.

Again thanks for the help.

 

[bimr]

There is no definitive requirement for secondary containment in the SPCC regulations. The need for secondary requirements has to be determined based on the application. The general secondary containment requirement is intended to address the most likely oil discharge from any part of a facility and it allows for active and passive secondary containment

"In determining the method, design, and capacity for secondary containment, you need only to address the typical failure mode, and the most likely quantity of oil that would be discharged. Secondary containment may be either active or passive in design.”

http://www.epa.gov/OEM/docs/oil/spcc/spcc_rule_amendments_nov09.ppt#329,47,Revision

to General Secondary Containment Requirement

As an example, if you have a bermed impoundment and the site flows drain and are contained by the impoundment, you do not need secondary containment. The impoundment serves as secondary containment.

If you have no drainage impoundment, and the leakage from a pipe can drain directly into a river, then you need secondary contaimnent on the piping.

If you spell out your application, then someone can give you an opinion.

 

[highstakes]

Looking for any applicable EPA rule for secondary containment requirement for piping in general and not related to SPCC..

 

[bimr]

highstakes,

The EPA regulations are typically directed towards the waste stream. Therefore, there are regulations for handling waste products but not regulations for chemical products. The idea is that if a particular product is valuable, it is assumed that the user will not unnecisarily waste the product into the environment.

 

[highstakes]

Thanks, bimr.