What is LDAR? A Complete Guide to Leak Detection and Repair Programs

The implementation of a Leak Detection and Repair (LDAR) program allows facilities to control emissions from equipment leaks.

The EPA defines LDAR as:

"…a work practice designed to identify leaking equipment so that emissions can be reduced through repairs. A component that is subject to LDAR requirements must be monitored at specified, regular intervals to determine whether or not it is leaking. Any leaking component must then be repaired or replaced within a specified time frame."

Five Phases of an LDAR Program

Best practise LDAR programs have a minimum of five phases. These phases are completed by the facility on an ongoing basis, with each phase’s frequency and timing depending on factors such as components, changes to equipment, and regulatory requirements.

Video Credit: Thermo Fisher Scientific – Environmental and Process Monitoring Instruments

Common LDAR program phases generally include:

1. Identifying components
2. Defining potential leaks
3. Monitoring components
4. Repairing components
5. Maintaining consistent records

Phase 1: Identifying Components

Each regulated equipment component can be physically tagged with a unique ID number. These numbers are documented on a Piping and Instrumentation Diagram (P&I Diagram), with any exempt components also recorded.

It is necessary to update the site plot plan or equipment log after any changes. A procedure should also be in place to ensure that records are updated for any new equipment, replacements, or retired parts.

Phase 2: Defining Potential Leaks

The lowest leak definition can be employed in settings where multiple regulations or components are in place. This approach simplifies monitoring and lowers the chances of confusion.

This approach also ensures a robust margin of safety for workers monitoring components and those closest to potential fugitive emissions.

If workers or contractors are confused about which regulations apply, they could use the wrong leak definition for a particular component. This could cause leaks to persist and fail to be reported for repairs.

It is important to check with current regulations to confirm a facility is using the correct leak definitions.

Phase 3: Monitoring Components

An electronic and automatic data logger saves time, enhances accuracy, and ensures that an audit record is available.

It is advisable to periodically audit an LDAR program to confirm that all components are being monitored, required records are being maintained, and Method 21 procedures are being properly followed.

Routine monitoring and quality checks of LDAR data offer the assurance that a program is providing complete, accurate, and consistent results.

Video Credit: Thermo Fisher Scientific – Environmental and Process Monitoring Instruments

There have been cases where inspectors have discovered workers who seemed to cut corners on monitoring procedures. For example, records claiming a worker is monitoring around 1000 components per hour would mean less than five seconds spent checking one component.

Such data should prompt an investigation, because a worker moving too quickly along a monitoring route or skipping components will produce unreliable or even worthless data.

Phase 4: Repairing Components

Each facility should develop a timetable and protocol for repairing components. Once a leak is detected, a first attempt at repair should be made as soon as possible.

Installing ‘leakless’ valves and ‘seal-less’ components can reduce future fugitive emissions and remove the need for repeated repairs. It is also advised to increase the frequency at which recently repaired components are monitored in order to confirm that the leak was successfully repaired.

Phase 5: Maintaining Consistent Records

Internal and third-party audits of LDAR records should be scheduled on a regular basis. This ensures that users are effectively monitoring all regulated components.

The use of electronic monitoring and databases means that quality audits and records maintenance no longer require manually sifting through large amounts of paperwork. An auditing protocol should also include inquiries about new or revised regulatory requirements.

There is a risk of more severe issues occurring in instances where leaks are not repaired and reported as fixed promptly, or they are improperly recorded on a ‘Delay of Repair’ list.

Continuous Improvement: Upgrading the LDAR Program

Maintaining an effective LDAR program requires regularly reviewing and updating written protocols and records. There are 10 key tips to update an LDAR program.

1. Begin an audit of identified components and compare this against the current P&I diagrams and any equipment changes
2. Regularly review and update protocols for a written LDAR program
3. Perform an in-depth audit of monitoring data
4. Invest in new portable leak detection instruments
5. Upgrade calibration devices to tools able to automatically calibrate multiple detecting instruments
6. Mandate a training program for all relevant workers or contractors
7. Liase with industry associations and regulatory agencies around current or new compliance requirements
8. Adjust internal leak definitions where required
9. Review repair records and check the Delay of Repair list
10. Take an inventory of all portable detecting instruments and calibrators, confirm they work properly, perform preventative maintenance, and send malfunctioning units out for servicing where necessary

This information has been sourced, reviewed, and adapted from materials provided by Thermo Fisher Scientific – Environmental and Process Monitoring Instruments.

For more information on this source, please visit Thermo Fisher Scientific – Environmental and Process Monitoring Instruments.