I have tried to understand the basis for the International Institute of Ammonia Refrigeration’s (IIAR) set points they recommend in one of their Technical Bulletins and one of the ANSI/IIAR codes. Some background data to help understand this analysis:
I asked some ChemEs and MEs the following questions about relief valve testing. We come across some RV programs and practices that we feel fall short of following any RAGAGEPs and thought it would be helpful to hear from engineers who manage these programs on a daily basis. Here is my scenario, and their responses
So far we do NOT have all the facts of what happened at the Nuclear Power Plant in Japan when the earthquake and tsunami hit, but we have gotten some insight into what is supposedly occurring in the aftermath of these concurrent disasters, which very well may lead to even a larger disaster with much
by Jim Worman, Senior Staff Engineer with The National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors If you have contractors or on-site engineers doing pressure vessel inspections, this is one method they may choose. This article is VERY WELL written and is a MUST READ for those not formally trained in this method of inspection.
EPA is announcing the release of “Guidance for Conducting Risk Management Program Inspections under Clean Air Act Section 112(r)” (EPA 550-K-11-001, January 2011). This document updates and supersedes the “Guidance for Auditing Risk Management Plans/Programs under Clean Air Act Section 112(r)” of August 1999. The new document includes updated EPA policy on involvement of facility
LOPA is a Layer of Protection Analysis and is a type of PHA that looks at the actual layers of protection a particular scenario would have. As you know, process safety is built upon the fundamental concepts of prevention, threat, and mitigation. Hence, we want to prevent the scenario from even starting, but if we
After some good debate in a LinkedIn forum, I came to the conclusion that this practice should not be called an “industry practice” as there were a lot of people in the industry that did not do it and had never heard of it.
M-1 INTRODUCTION M-2 CORROSION M-3 MARKING ON THE VESSEL M-4 PRESSURE RELIEVING DEVICES M-5 STOP VALVES LOCATED IN THE RELIEF PATH M-6 INLET PRESSURE DROP FOR HIGH LIFT, TOP GUIDED SAFETY, SAFETY RELIEF, AND PILOT OPERATED PRESSURE RELIEFVALVES IN COMPRESSIBLE FLUID SERVICE M-7 DISCHARGE LINES FROM PRESSURE RELIEF DEVICES M-8 PRESSURE DROP, NONRECLOSING PRESSURE RELIEF
Updates and resubmissions require the owner or operator to review and revise all sections of the RMP as needed to bring the RMP up to date and the submission must be accompanied by a letter certifying that the entire RMP is true, accurate, and complete. The five-year anniversary date for resubmitting the RMP is reset
UPDATE 08/12/12 – Region 10 EPA has now publicly stated they are now aware of how this OR-OSHA change has impacted “ammonia retail businesses” (in the state of Oregon) RMP submittals! If you are an “anhydrous ammonia retail business” in the state of Oregon and had submitted an RMP, beware EPA may be paying you a
If your company is planning an expansion, retro-fit, grass roots facilities, or simply modifying a process unit, and the process hazard analysis (PHA) indicates you need a safety instrumented system (SIS) as a protective layer, then you need to comply with ANSI/ISA S84.01. Why? Because in February 1996, the “Application of Safety Instrumented Systems for
Many facilities believe putting a flange together is far easier than paying for a “certified weld” joinment. They see this as a low-risk, cost-saving solution, believing any “maintenance mechanic” can put a flange together. Hence, most LOPC events I have had in my time were due to a flange that was NOT assembled per ASME
