Both labels meet ASME A13.1 – Scheme for the Identification of Piping Systems. Who can tell me… What does the top label, and what does the bottom label tell us? This is a NEW requirement from ASME A13.1-2020.
Our #1 RAGAGEP for labeling/marking piping that contains a hazardous material, ASME A13.1, saw a significant updates in 2020 and 2023. The major revisions include: revising the Scope, updating each of the definitions, expanding the Legend section, and revising both the Color section and Table 4.2-1, Designation of Colors adding a new paragraph to address
Respondent was the owner or operator of a pulp and paperboard manufacturing facility. At all times relevant to this Consent Agreement, Respondent was in charge of the Facility. At all times relevant to this Consent Agreement, Respondent produced, used, or stored chlorine at the Facility. Chlorine is a “hazardous substance” listed in 40 C.F.R. Part
Based on the feedback from other SAFTENG members, I have made this article public for the next 30 days. Much like the process safety debates around valve/equipment labeling, no RAGAGEP specifically requires a unique identifier on every valve or piece of equipment. Yet, labeling valves/equipment within the covered process is necessary to manage the process’s
EPA has found that major chemical accidents continue to occur from facilities that are not adequately managing the risks they pose to ensure the safety of their facilities and protect surrounding communities. Many of these communities have environmental justice concerns or face climate change-related hazards or both. Thousands of facilities nationwide make, use, and store
The Program 3 prevention program requirements under 40 CFR Part 68 are almost identical to the requirements of OSHA’s process safety management (PSM) standard. OSHA exempts certain industries from the PSM standard. Why does EPA not exempt those same industries from the CAA §112(r) risk management program requirements?
When selecting the worst-case release scenario for Program 2 and 3 processes as required by 40 CFR §68.25, a stationary source owner or operator must analyze the release scenario that results in the greatest distance to an endpoint. Does the “greatest distance to an endpoint” refer to the greatest total distance from the process (e.g.,
On Dec. 3, 2004, a 50,000-pound steel pressure vessel violently exploded at the southwest Houston Marcus Oil and Chemical facility. The pressure vessel contained flammable hydrocarbons such as hexane. The pressure vessel was a horizontal tank 12 feet in diameter, 50 feet long, and operated at a pressure of approximately 67 psi. Marcus Oil did
On January 15, 2008, a pressure vessel at a New Jersey foundry exploded, killing one 60-year-old worker instantly while injuring eight other workers with shrapnel. The pressure vessel in question was used to pressurize/depressurize molten aluminum to prevent/eliminate porosity from the metal. The incident occurred while two (2) workers, including the one who was killed,
In June 2008, a cylinder was dropped, and its top valve hit a concrete platform. The impact of the cylinder valve on the concrete caused the threads on the screw connection, which held the valve on the cylinder, to fail, resulting in complete separation of the valve from the cylinder. The cylinder’s internal pressure was
At 11:30 p.m. on March 19, 2009, Solus Industrial Innovations LLC employees from the third shift had just come to work. Their employer is a manufacturer of plastic conveyor parts. One employee (Employee #1) pointed out to the on-shift supervisor that there was a pool of water near an 80-gallon water heater that was being
In May 2009, a compressed air tank failed, blowing the bottom off of the tank and sending fragments flying into a concrete wall, puncturing the wall. The investigation following the incidentrevealed several serious problems with the condition of the tank, including severe corrosion and rust at the bottom of the tank, where it failed, and
