Classification of major hazard sources in tank areas
Thread Content
GB18218-2018 states that the tank farm is divided into separate units using the fire dike surrounding the tank area as a boundary. Does this refer to the fire dikes of each tank group within the tank area, or rather to the boundary defined by the outer perimeter of the fire dikes in the entire tank area? If it is the former, with each tank group serving as a unit of division, wouldn’t it be possible for people to arrange several tank groups adjacent to each other, thereby dividing a hazardous substance whose total amount exceeds the critical level, in order to circumvent the regulations regarding major hazard sources?
This post was last edited by altpage on 2022-6-12 at 15:21. A tank farm is divided into several tank groups based on functionality and the properties of the materials stored there; each tank group is equipped with dikes as required and meets the safety distance specifications. So how is it possible to avoid vulnerabilities related to major hazard sources? The simple term “safety distance” entails substantial investment costs for businesses; who would be willing to incur high expenses related to land use and construction just to reduce the risk level of a particular major hazard? Even if companies are willing to do so, a greater safety distance ultimately results in greater safety, which regulators are more inclined to accept.
As long as the conditions are met, it can be divided
It’s not a major hazard source, which is good for everyone