Store Class III Liquids in IBC Up to 40-feet High?

10/6/2021

We have a project that has Class III liquids in Non-metallic IBC (Intermediate Bulk Containers).

NFPA 30 Tables 16.5.2.9 and 16.5.2.10 list storage requirements for Class III liquids in Nonmetallic IBCs. Stacked IBCs are limited to two-high (~8 feet), and in racks, only single and double row racks are allowed.

Under Section 12.8, these containers may be protected as "high storage of Class IV commodities" through NFPA 13, provided that the volume is limited to 13,750 gal (Class IIIB).

Does this mean that under NFPA 13, IBCs can be stacked up to 40-feet with 45-feet ceilings as per Table 23.3.1, or in multiple-row racks up to 40-feet high with 45-feet ceilings as per Table 23.5.1?

Or similar configurations as per Chapter 22 (CMSA)?

Provided the volume limit is not exceeded, of course.

Sent in anonymously for discussion. Click Title to View | Submit Your Question | Subscribe

5 Comments

Franck

10/6/2021 07:44:43 pm

I don’t know where you found the reference that class IIIB in IBC can be considered as a class IV commodity. In the last edition of NFPA 30, 12.8 is for limited quantities of liquids in limited size containers only, with strict organization of the storage.

IBC are housing large quantities of combustible oil in a plastic container that will melt quickly in a fire and contribute to a large uncontrollable spill fire in addition to a 3 dimensional fire in the racks if not protected with the limitation of chapter 16.

To protect them as class IV up to 40 ft in racks would most probably lead to the complete loss of the building and its contents.

Behavior is not the same as with metal drums where only a limited quantity should be involved when the sprinkler protection will be operational.
Plastic IBC is a real excessive fire hazard and their use is usually not recommended in processing areas / storage areas, unless they are stored in approved dedicated fire safety cabinets (with appropriate retention means provided).

Most of NFPA 30 requirements in chapter 16 are for metallic IBC.There is a good reason for discouraging the use of non metallic IBC.

Pete D

10/6/2021 08:10:01 pm

I too cannot find the reference you are making re: 12.8 in 30 allowing Class III liquids to be protected using Class IV commodity criteria from the 13 standard. The only thing remotely close to this applies to miscible liquids that are in a low concentration aqueous solution. Look, this is just friendly advice. NFPA 30 is one of the more difficult standards to navigate, and one with a high severity of outcome if it's not used properly. You can get into real trouble by cherry-picking information from one section without being sure that the conditions of that section apply to your storage scenario and that other sections are also satisfied. This is true even for engineers who have been doing it for a long time. That to say, if you don't know what you're doing, a couple of answer on a blog are probably not going to steer you in a safe direction. I would contract a consultant engineer with flammable liquids experience for your project.

Alex

10/6/2021 08:26:00 pm

I agree with Pete here. This is a complicated design question that can have large consequences if designed incorrectly. I would reach out to a code consultant or, like Pete mentioned, an engineer with experience in flammable liquids to assist from start to finish of the project.

Best of luck!
Alex

Bob

10/7/2021 08:33:33 am

I too agree with Pete's guidance. Another "issues" with liquid storage where various Code and AHJ details collide (e.g., specific product characteristics, packaging, storage arrangements, fire / environmental containment, building codes, etc.) is that often the various Code sections that may be applicable have to be prioritized and acted on sequentially relevant to the situation. Unlike many general Code issues where one just takes the worst case scenario from each section, often with liquids, the underlying principles that would define the “worst case” vary between Codes and cannot be resolved neatly and engineering judgement and AHJ approval comes into play.

Joshua Freedman

10/18/2021 02:16:54 pm

I am going to piggyback onto what the guys before said that I dont know where in NFPA you are referencing and as an inspector, sometimes some allowances are made by the City or State that are not allowed by NFPA or FM, etc but when it comes to really high hazard stuff like that, I really recommend you follow FM 7-29 that lays out the requirements quite clearly for you. If you design to FM, you wont have to worry about their insurance or really anyone else coming back to them saying it isnt enough.

Store Class III Liquids in IBC Up to 40-feet High?

Leave a Reply.

ALL-ACCESS

SUBSCRIBE

COMMUNITY

YOUR POST

PE EXAM

FILTERS

ARCHIVES

PE PREP SERIES