COMPLIANCE INFO_2022 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Dart Container Corporation In-Service AST Inspection Report Formal External Inspection of AST-1 Page 3 1.7. The Tank was located on a concrete foundation and equipped with saddle/pad plate supports. The joints between the supports and the Tank were completely welded together. The supports and welds appeared to be in fair condition. Minor coating failure and surface corrosion was observed by the inspector. The Tank appeared to be anchored to the foundation. Condor recommends removal of the damaged coating and external corrosion followed by the application of a new protective coating on the Tank supports. 1.8. Secondary containment was provided by a concrete berm surrounding the Tank. Leaks from the Tank would be captured by the secondary containment structure. The SPCC Plan approximates secondary containment capacity at 16,585 gallons. Measurements collected by Condor resulted in a secondary containment capacity of 16,495 gallons, which was generally consistent with the SPCC Plan secondary containment capacity. Spill prevention for this Tank is achieved by limiting maximum product capacity to less than 90 percent of total tank capacity. See Section 1.9.5 for more information about overfill prevention. The Tank was elevated on a concrete pad providing a suitable Continuous Release Detection Method (CRDM). 1.9. Ancillary equipment was inspected for condition and operability. 1.9.1. Piping, piping supports, and piping connections were inspected for visible signs of leakage or stress such as severe corrosion, rusted bolted connections, or other severe degradation where visible. The configuration of the Tank’s top ports is shown in Photo 4 and Photo 5. Fill and withdrawal connections were located on the top of the Tank. Product staining around the fill pipe connection to the Tank was observed by the inspector and shown in Photo 6. The source appeared to be leaking fittings. The inspector observed evidence of a Tank seepage at the drain port on the west Tank head (Photo 7). The source appeared to be the drain plug. Evidence of a leak in the dispenser piping was observed on the north side of the Tank (Photo 8). The source appeared to be leaking fittings. Another leak was observed under the fuel dispenser unit on the piping in the secondary containment area (Photo 9). Pipe brackets were welded to the shell of the Tank. The brackets appeared to be added after the initial construction of the Tank. Welds of the brackets did not match the welds on the Tank seams or ports. The addition of the pipe brackets do not to appear to have significantly affected Tank integrity, based on visual inspection. Condor recommends repairing leaking equipment and cleaning the exterior of the Tank and dispenser equipment to be able to identify an ongoing leak. Removal of the damaged coating and external corrosion from the piping followed by the application of a protective coating is also recommended. 1.9.2. Requirements found in UL 142, were used to evaluate the Tank’s operational and emergency venting. The following are Tank venting observations: • Normal venting must be sized with a diameter no smaller than the maximum diameter of the system piping. Maximum diameter of the fill piping was 3 inches; thus, the required minimum diameter of the normal vent should also be 3 inches. The inspector observed a Morrison Brothers 2-inch diameter normal/operational vent (updraft vent) installed on the Tank. The inspector could not access the vent due to its location on the roof (Photo 10). Condor