Incident Report

Subject:                       Bund/Dyke Fires Response Strategy

Date of Email reporting Incident:   Fri 07/12/2007

Report Detail:

We are finding Oil & Petrochemical installations are increasingly using Medium Expansion Bund Pourers at 35-50:1for rapid coverage of large bunded areas and also small congested ones, since the foam is bulky yet fluid enough to penetrate between pipes and keep valves, flanges and pipes cool buried below the foam blanket. Experience has shown they work most effectively with protein based foams which are more sticky and adhere better to the vertical walls of bunds and tanks, but they also work well with polymer based AR-AFFFs. We have done tests in 50mph winds using FP foams and it sticks to the bund floor and tank shell, and can be built up to depths of around 1 metre. They can be effective at minimizing escalation of an incident also by minimizing the risk of splashing fuel into other areas or under pipes, and are increasingly being used to replace hand monitors which are too forceful to provide fast control and works better than low expansion foam at covering gravel often used across the floor of bunded areas.

Angus MEX Bund Pourers were also used very effectively during the Buncefield incident for bunded area protection, and our hand MEX nozzles (effectively smaller flow versions) were also used to foam tanks before pumping out salvaged product from those involved in the incident, to avoid the risk of flashbacks or re-ignition should the roof collapse when the liquid support (fuel) was removed.