As I continue my efforts to educate the safety profession in process safety and, more specifically, on the differences between welded pipe joints versus flanged pipe joints, this topic usually comes up. The big question that is the 800-pound gorilla in the room is… If both welded and flanged joints are allowed in our flammable […]
This week, I am doing my intermediate 3-day process safety training course for a new client whose process HHC/EHS is Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG); however, this process is VERY different than the other clients I have whose HHC/EHS is LPG. My clients are END-USERS of LPG; this facility is NOT the user of the LPG;
I am teaching my 3-Day Intermediate Process Safety course this week, and one of the popular exercises we do on Day 1 is the “Vehicle Safety Challenge.” It is designed to teach students to begin thinking about Layers of Protection within the PREVENT-PROTECT-MITIGATE model. Five students in four (4) groups have 15 minutes to
One of the top questions we get regarding contractor safety is, “Do I have to evaluate, orientate, and audit subcontractors working for a contractor we hired?”. OSHA’s latest revision of their PSM CPL answered this question. Is the host employer of a PSM-covered facility responsible for the safety of subcontractors?
On December 14, 2023, OSHA published its revised Compliance Directive for Process Safety Management standard 1910.119, effective January 26, 2024. This new version is in Q7A format and was done nicely, although there are a number of things in the answers that I am sure will be challenged. I have highlighted some of the interesting
Sweating the “small stuff” matters in process safety management. Meeting the details of our chosen RAGAGEPs matters! Although I am often told, “That is a picky audit finding,” it is what it is. Far too many facilities believe that designing their process piping to be bolted flange assembly vs. welded joints is somehow easier; in
We have discussed the critical role of “torque” in constructing our chemical processes. I catch a lot of flack for my insistence on this critical function, for which I am genuinely surprised. But our piping design and construction RAGAGEP (ASME B31.3) is pretty clear on the matter, and now OSHA and EPA have “caught on”
Another pressuring test “gone bad”. I want to remind anyone who wonders how to DEFINE and QUANTIFY a “safe distance” when piping is being pressure tested, especially when that test is a “pneumatic” test. ASME PCC-2–2022, Repair of Pressure Equipment and Piping, Mandatory Appendix, 501-III, Safe Distance Calculations for Pneumatic Pressure Test is an EXCELLENT resource to
On August 27, 2016, at about 8:26 a.m., a railroad tank car sustained a 42-inch long crack in its tank shell shortly after being loaded with 178,400 pounds of liquefied compressed chlorine at the Axiall Corporation Natrium plant in New Martinsville, West Virginia. Over the next 2.5 hours, the entire 178,400-pound chlorine load was released,
I think most businesses are familiar with “backup power” sources, from battery packs on exit signs and egress lighting to UPSs on servers for their IT needs. But for facilities that store, handle, and process hazardous materials AND with safety systems associated with the storage, handling, and processing of those HAZMATs, there are some additional
NFPA 497 has added TWO (2) NEW figures to establish classification areas around Pressure Relief Valve (PRV) vents. The classification areas of the sources in several figures in Section 5.11 have been removed to eliminate confusion. This change is significant in two (2) ways:
