This can be a sensitive topic at many facilities. I was raised to believe that whenever the pressure-retaining boundary is physically broken during line or equipment opening tasks, the line or equipment MUST be pressure- and leak-tested before being returned to service. I get a lot of hate mail and even more weird looks when […]
Does the fabricator of a B31.3 piping system still have to pressure test components that are manufactured to a standard listed in Table 326.1 when that standard states that the component is hydrotested as a requirement of the standard?
To quote the IFC committee, “the purpose of performance-based design criteria is to promote innovative, flexible and responsive solutions that optimize the expenditure and consumption of resources while preserving social and economic value.” Section 5001.3 Performance-Based Design Alternative is intended to be compatible with EPA’s RMP and OSHA’s PSM requirements, so it would reduce the burden
In the video, you can see the gas company employees placing the ladder and pulling the hose that runs from the unit with the pipe. In an instant, the hose apparently ruptured, and it shot out; even the final section of the hose, where the dispensing pump is located, was about to hit another worker,
10/28/25 UPDATE: Hydrogen (H2) FATAL Line Break RIP 𝙒𝙝𝙖𝙩 𝙝𝙖𝙥𝙥𝙚𝙣𝙚𝙙? The two deceased workers, identified as Mr K (43) and Mr A (50s), were subcontractors conducting scheduled maintenance on a hydrogen pipeline. The task involved inserting a blocking plate into a pipeline to isolate flow, a process requiring the loosening of flange bolts. The explosion
A pressure vessel at a food processing facility failed when a sight glass ruptured during an overpressure event, spraying hot liquid at 100 psi into the workspace. The vessel had been operating above its maximum allowable working pressure for weeks due to: Contributing factors included which left parts of the vessel unprotected from overpressure. The
Two (2) maintenance men at an electric power generation plant removed a check valve cover from a steam system. The section of the steam line was isolated and tagged, but it could not be vented or drained first. The section was only partially depressurized when the cover was loosened. When the employees removed all fasteners
At about 9:27 a.m. on September 5, 2008, Employee #1, was assigned to remove the cap of a check valve on a propane tank to connect a valve with a hose for a “pump down.” Instead, he removed the entire check valve, causing the rapid release of a large amount of liquid propane. The vapor
On July 26, 2006, Employee #1 performed a pneumatic leak test on a 6-in. diameter, Schedule 40, jacketed, steel pipe, after coworkers welded sections of it. Employee #1 then secured a test tree on the end of the pipe with an adjustable wrench, then pressurized the pipe, and checked it for leaks for ten minutes.
At 2:00 p.m. on March 15, 2018, Employee #1 was conducting a leak test. Sulfuric acid sprayed out and onto the employee. He suffered chemical burns to his legs and thighs and was hospitalized. Source: https://www.osha.gov/ords/imis/establishment.inspection_detail?id=1340616.015
Way too many have a serious lack of respect for the hazards a “Fire Watch” may face. I say this, because in my years of experience, I almost always find the “fire watch” role is assigned to the youngest, least experienced, and lowest paid person on the job. In many situations, these workers are NOT
At about 2:45 a.m. on March 13, 2001, Employee #1 and Employee #2, two operators, and Employee #3, a maintenance mechanic, were assigned the task of cleaning out a waste vessel, KD 502A. The three employees were removing the flange to the pot, and had removed several of the 44 bolts holding the flange, when
