Current Status of Leak Detection System Evaluations

advertisement
Current Status of Leak Detection System
Evaluations Under EPA’s
Environmental Technology Verification
Program
Advanced Monitoring System Center
Joe Carvitti and Anne Gregg
Battelle Memorial Institute
Presented September 21, 2010
22nd National Tanks Conference
Presentation Overview
• Environmental Technology Verification (ETV) Program Overview
• Leak Detection Verification Test Objectives
• Automatic Tank Gauging (ATG) Test and Quality Assurance Plan
(TQAP) Considerations
• ATG TQAP Development
• ATG TQAP Implementation
1
EPA ETV Program Overview
Advanced Monitoring Systems (AMS) Center
• ETV - Voluntary program that provides decision-makers with
credible test data on technology performance without comparison
or judgment
• Credible and fair
– Meets EPA and ETV quality system requirements; open and
transparent, third-party verification
– Peer reviewed process
• AMS Center operated by Battelle - Verifies technologies that
monitor, sample, and characterize in a variety of matrices
– Addresses technology sustainability: recycling, waste streams,
etc.
– Improves the state of environmental science and data
2
ETV Overview
• EPA
– Owns the ETV process and guides its use, conducts outreach,
technical and quality assurance (QA) support/reviews
• Stakeholder-based verification process with support of technical
panel and vendor panel
– Prioritize technology categories and identify test parameters
– Review reports/test plans/protocols
– Members include federal, state, academia, and industry
• Collaborators
– Technology buyers, users, developers, vendors, and “enablers”
(consultants, government, regulators, financiers, etc.)
– Identify (or provide) sources of funding or in-kind support
3
ETV Verification Process
EPA, verification organizations,
stakeholders*
(*Over 300 active stakeholders)
With stakeholders
and technical
panel, develop test
protocols, qualityassurance test
plans
Conduct
technology
testing**
AND
Identify priority
technology categories
ETV Outreach
Identify
vendors,
collaborators
Write verification report
www.epa.gov/etv
**Vendor reviews and approves test plan before testing begins.
4
AMS Center Facts and Statistics
• 149 verified technologies, 37 test/quality assurance
plans (TQAP) to date
• Stakeholder driven participation in:
– Air and water advisory groups
– Ad-hoc technical panels (as needed for TQAP
development)
• Published first international joint ETV verification
protocol (ETV Canada) and first international joint
ETV verification test with Nordic Water Technology
Verification Center (EU/Denmark)
5
Leak Detection Verification Test
Objectives
• Review current EPA test protocols to identify areas
that may be affected by ethanol-blended fuels
• Develop an ETV TQAP to be used to verify the
performance of underground storage tank leak
detection technologies with ethanol-blended fuels
• Provide recommendations for updating the protocols
to address new fuels
6
ATG TQAP ConsiderationsUnderlying Technical Issues
• What are the important principles?
– Petroleum and ethanol have very different chemical and
physical properties - technologies that operate based on
these properties may not function properly in a new
environment (examples: density, conductivity, refractive
index)
– Petroleum and water do NOT mix, so if water enters the
tank, it will fall to the bottom immediately. On the other
hand, water and ethanol DO mix - so water ingress will not
become evident until the fuel “phase separates” - at which
point the fuel is unusable.
7
ATG TQAP ConsiderationsPerformance Requirements
• ATG requirements are defined in 40 CFR 280, Subpart D
– Must be capable of detecting a leak of 0.20 gallon per hour with a
probability of (at least) 95%, while operating at a false alarm rate of 5%
or less
– Must conduct inventory reconciliation (IR)
- Measure the height of the liquid to the nearest 1/8 inch
- Declare a leak on the basis of the IR if the discrepancy exceeds 1% of the
flow-through plus 130 gallons on a monthly basis
– Must measure any water in the bottom of the tank at least once a
month to the nearest 1/8 inch
- Determine the minimum water level that the system can detect
- Determine the smallest change in the water level that the system can
reliably measure
8
ATG TQAP ConsiderationsExisting and Legacy Equipment
Various ATG Technologies Use Different Operating Principles
Technology Type
Operating Principle
Magnetostrictive Probe
A wire sensor inside a stainless steel rod detects the presence
of a magnetic field, which indicates the height of a float.
Ultrasonic Probe
A sensor detects sound wave echoes reflected from an
interface of water/fuel or fuel/air to calculate the liquid level
based on the speed of sound in the media.
Mass Buoyancy Probe
The buoyancy of a probe is detected on a load cell and
compared to the tank geometry to calculate the liquid level.
Mass Measurement
Probe
Mass data is transferred to a load cell and compared to the
tank geometry to calculate the liquid level.
Capacitance Probe
Detection is based on the dielectric property of the stored
liquid.
Water Level Float (part Buoyancy of float allows the signal generated (e.g., magnetic
of the magnetostrictive field) to coincide with the top of the liquid layer based on the
technology)
liquid density in comparison to float density.
9
ATG TQAP ConsiderationsTechnical and Vendor Panels
Technical Panel
Name
Andrea Barbery
Greg Baretta
Jim Barnette
Mark Barolo
Michael Doucette
Mike Eck
Laura Fisher
Jerry Flora
Sam Gordji
Kevin Henderson
Brad Hoffman
Steve Howell
Curt Johnson
Mike Juranty
Kevin Keegan
Brian Knapp
Fran Kremer
Ed Kubinsky
Bill Moore
Kristy Moore
Mark Morgan
Marcel Moureau
Mohamed Mughal
Shaheer Muhanna
Marcia Poxson
Stephen Purpora
Bob Renkes
Peter Rollo
Erik Sirs
Tim Smith
Willo Smith
Jim Weaver
Ken Wilcox
John Wilson
Andrea Zajac
Affiliation
Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OUST)
Engineering Consultant Bureau of Storage Tank Regulation (WI)
SIGMA
OUST
Northeast Tank Services
Army Environmental Command
UST Leak Prevention Unit (California)
JDF Consulting
SSG Associates, University of Mississippi
Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality
Tanknology
National Biodiesel Board (NBB), MARC-IV Consulting Inc.
Alabama Department of Environmental Management
NH Department of Environmental Services Waste Management Divi
Tanknology
American Petroleum Institute (API)
USEPA Office of Research and Development (ORD)
Crompco, LLC
UT Department of Environmental Quality, Division of Environmental
Response and Remediation
Renewable Fuels Association (RFA)
Petroleum Marketers Association of America (PMAA)
Marcel Moreau Associates
Army Environmental Command (AEC)
Georgia Department of Natural Resources
Michigan Dept of Environmental Quality
Protanic
Petroleum Equipment Institute (PEI)
Delaware Natural Resources and Environmental Conservation
Region 10
OUST
7-11
USEPA National Exposure Research Laboratory/ORD
Ken Wilcox Associates, Inc. (KWA Associates)
USEPA Robert S. Kerr Environmental Research Center
Michigan Department of Environmental Quality
Vendor Panel
Name
Affiliation
Randy Barnes
Alert Technologies
Ken Cornett
Veeder-Root
Tom D'Alessandro
OMNTEC Mfg., Inc.
Howard Dockery
Simmons
John Levy
Pneumercator Company, Inc.
Douglas Mann
VISTA Leak Detection, Inc.
Dan Marston
Franklin Fueling Systems
Bob Moss
Veeder-Root
Bill Nelson
Franklin Fueling Systems
Kent Ried
Veeder-Root
Lorraine Sabo
Franklin Fueling Systems
George Thuemling
Varec, Inc.
Larry Tripp
AMETEK APT
Jim Walton
OPW Fuel Management Systems
Greg Young
Vaporless Mfg., Inc.
10
ATG TQAP ConsiderationsProspective Scales of Testing
• Laboratory scale (100 to <5,000 gal)
– At Battelle West Jefferson laboratories
• Field scale (1,000s to 10,000s of gal)
– Out-of-service (OOS) tanks under or above ground
- Controlled conditions
- Testing consultant site or private/government-owned OOS tank site
– In-service fueling stations, underground tanks
- Actual operating conditions
- Service stations where the technologies are installed
11
ATG TQAP ConsiderationsOther Technical Questions
• Numerous technical questions were discussed in Technical and
Vendor Panel meetings
– How can volume changes or ingress of miscible materials be
evaluated?
– Can a three-phase separation occur? How can it be evaluated?
– What nominal levels of alcohol blends should be considered?
– How does biodiesel impact ATG performance?
– Do current simulated leak methods work for blended fuels?
– Is fuel temperature a necessary test variable?
– What number of tests is needed?
– Is the tank tightness QA from the Protocol acceptable?
– Should ground water level be monitored?
– Should “time to detection” be determined?
– Can results be extrapolated to other tank sizes?
– Is it necessary to investigate seasonal additives?
– Does the test design present any obvious or
inherent difficulties or technical limitations?
12
ATG TQAP DevelopmentKey Variables and Parameters
Variables and Performance Parameter Selection for
Evaluation is Critical to Test Outcome
Performance
Parameters
Accuracy
False alarm (fuel leak
detection only)
Sensitivity
Precision
Phase separation (water
ingress detection only)
Operational data
Dependent
Variables
Fuel leak
detection
Water ingress
detection
Independent
Variables
Fuel type (ethanol
content)
Fuel leak rate
Fuel height in tank
Fuel temperature
Water ingress
method/rate
13
ATG TQAP DevelopmentDesign Overview
•
•
•
•
Four sets of experiments
Bench scale preliminary experiments
Baseline experiments with pure gasoline
Water ingress
– 3 variables
-
Fuel type / alcohol content (5 levels)
Temperature (3 levels)
Fuel height (3 levels)
Ingress method/rate (3 levels)
• Fuel leak
– 4 variables
-
Fuel type / alcohol content (5 levels)
Temperature (3 levels)
Fuel height (3 levels)
Fuel leak rate (3 levels)
14
ATG TQAP DevelopmentProspective Variables
• Water ingress method
and rate
• Fuel alcohol content
– E0, E10, E17, E27, E85
– In fuel dump/quick; well
mixed
• Fuel leak rate
– Through fill pipe or large
hole/quick or semiconstant stream
• Fuel height
– Through a small hole in
the tank/slow and
constant; least mixed
• Temperature of fuel
– 0.0, 0.1, 0.2, gal/hour
– 20-25%, 50%, 90-95% full
– Initial temperature (Ti)
– Ti plus 5º F
– Ti plus 10º F
15
ATG TQAP DevelopmentAnticipated Test Facilities
Battelle’s West Jefferson, OH Facility can Support ETV Testing
JS-20 XP rated
support Building
JS-10 Blast rated
test Building
16
ATG TQAP DevelopmentStatistical Fuel Leak Test Matrix
Fuel Leak Rate, gallons per hour
Fuel
Height in
Tank (j)
Ti
20-25%
full
Starting Fuel Ethanol Content, percent
E10
0.0
0.1
0.2
Temperature, F
Temperature, F
Temperature , F
Ti+5
Ti+10
Initial
Ti+5
Ti+10
Initial
Ti+5
Ti+10
DUPE
50% full
DUPE
90-95%
full
20-25%
full
E17
DUPE
50% full
90-95%
full
DUPE
20-25%
full
E27
50% full
DUPE
90-95%
full
DUPE
20-25%
full
E85
DUPE
50% full
90-95%
full
DUPE
17
ATG TQAP DevelopmentStatistical Water Ingress Test Matrix
Water Ingress Method/rate
Fuel
Height in
Tank (j)
Instantaneous Ingress
Ingress Over 1-hour Period
Ingress over 2-hour Period
Temperature, F
Temperature, F
Temperature, F
Ti
20-25%
full
Starting Fuel Ethanol Content, percent
E10
Ti+5
Ti+10
Ti
Ti+5
Ti+10
Ti
Ti+5
Ti+10
DUPE
50% full
DUPE
DUPE
90-95%
full
20-25%
full
E17
DUPE
50% full
90-95%
full
DUPE
DUPE
DUPE
20-25%
full
E27
50% full
DUPE
DUPE
90-95%
full
DUPE
20-25%
full
E85
50% full
DUPE
DUPE
90-95%
full
18
Verification Test ImplementationGeneral Test Schedule
• Activity and Tentative Schedule
– Vendor recruitment and commitments (SeptemberOctober)
– Final TQAP approval by vendors and EPA (December)
– Testing preparations (October-December)
– Testing (January-March 2011)
– Data analysis and reporting (April-June 2011)
19
Verification Test ImplementationLogistical Issues
• Logistical issues are also being considered
– Where/how should we blend the fuel?
– How will the fuel be disposed/used after testing is
completed?
– How will randomization be accomplished?
– Must other test facilities be identified?
20
www.epa.gov/etv
Contact:
John McKernan
USEPA
26 W. Martin Luther King Dr.
Cincinnati, OH 45268
Email: [email protected]
Phone: 513-569-7415
Amy Dindal, Program Manager
Battelle Memorial Institute
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (561) 422-0113
Joe Carvitti, UST LD Project Manager
Battelle Memorial Institute
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (614) 424-4843
Tim Smith
USEPA, OUST
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (703) 603-7158
21
21
Download
Related flashcards
Demography

43 Cards

Population

41 Cards

Population

48 Cards

Environmental law

13 Cards

Water pollution

22 Cards

Create flashcards