Respondent is the owner and operator of the petroleum refinery. Respondent has filed RMPs with EPA since June 21, 1999, with its most recent filings on April 22, 2015, April 23, 2020, and September 2, 2020. The Facility has 14 Program 3 covered processes at the Facility. Each of these 14 covered processes has greater […]
Way back in February 2016 I introduced many of you to ISA-RP12.12.03, Standard for Portable Electronic Products Suitable for Use in Class I and II, Division 2 for the first time and I received many e-mails, texts, and phone calls about those 2016 posts. Although the posts were speaking to smaller electronic devices, most notably “fitness
This is awesome. Cavitation has been the end of many pumps in my career and the causes of some significant LOPC events, but to see it be created and watch it in clear pipes and pumps is the way to learn. This short video should be in every operator’s training!!
This 2020 LOI rescinds the letter issued on July 25, 2019, to Ms. Hill, by removing the parenthetical in the second paragraph of the background section. This is an interpretation regarding a possible conflict on the minimum separation distance between aboveground liquefied petroleum gas (LPG) containers and buildings in OSHA’s 29 CFR § 1910.110 –
Someone requested OSHA to address the growing field of virtual reality safety and health training. Their letter constitutes OSHA’s interpretation ONLY of the requirements herein, and may not be applicable to any questions not delineated in the original correspondence. Your paraphrased questions and our responses follow. Question: We have been told online, commercially available, training
OSHA’s latest position on testing electrical gloves is very enlightening! For example, even if the gloves are simply electrically tested and then returned to storage, OSHA regards the gloves as being issued for use! This is a new one on me, but in their latest LOI they discuss the following scenario: gloves got tested on
No, the employer is not required to include findings and recommendations from the facility siting study report in the same PHA worksheet or recommendations log to comply with 29 CFR § 1910.119(e)(5) and 29 CFR § 1910.119(e)(7).
As I always say, we can not discuss MOC and PSSR as if they are separate systems… they go hand in hand 99% of the time. That is what I want to discuss: how a PSSR requirement defines how we manage our MOC system. We have discussed many times there are ONLY TWO (2) occasions
At approximately 4:00 a.m. on March 29, 2020, an employee was installing a blind on a flange on a reactor. Then, the probe stem fell inside of the reactor, and the employee tried to fish it out. Using a ladder, the employee went inside the reactor that was NOT cleared for entry because the reactor
Buckle up buttercup… the political winds in DC are shifting and with this comes “opportunities” – man how I hate politics! For those of you who may have thought that the RMP Amendments from the final year of the President Obama administration were long gone – THINK AGAIN! On Friday (12/4/20), the U.S. Court of
On the plate heat exchanger, a machined nut backed off on the flange bolt that holds the gasket in place. This caused part of the gasket to blow out resulting in ammonia (NH3) to leak into the machine room. The machinery room alarm was activated. Upon inspection, the following failures were found:
The word “potential” is defined by Merriam-Webster as: existing in possibility : capable of development into actuality In OSHA’s PRCS standards (both 1910 and 1926 versions) it uses the word “potential” when talking about atmospheric hazards; especially when we are talking about RECLASSIFYING a PRCS to a NON-PRCS using 1910.146(c)(7) or 1926.1203(g) 1926.1203(g)(1) If the permit
