OSHA Compliance

Verifying my “ground” has less than 10 ohms resistance

Verifying that grounding and bonding systems meet a specific resistance threshold—such as the common 10 ohms target for flammable liquid processes—requires a systematic approach to ensure both accuracy and technician safety. The following procedure outlines the steps for performing a static ground-resistance test using a dedicated ground-resistance tester (Ohmmeter). This procedure applies to the periodic

OSHA’s LOTO Periodic Inspections requirements

The 2008 revisions to the LOTO Compliance Directive (CPL 02-00-147) did a great service in advancing a 30+ year-old standard in an area that badly needed clarification: Periodic Inspections under 1910.147(c)(6). I am sure there will be folks who will dissect this, looking for every “out” they can find to not do these safety-critical audits,

Are forklift charging areas “hazardous locations” due to hydrogen off-gassing?

Forklift battery charging areas are NOT automatically classified as Hazardous (Classified) Locations, but they can easily become one if ventilation is inadequate. And I have seen more charging areas without engineered ventilation than I have with the proper ventilation. The hazardous classification hinges entirely on the facility’s ability to prevent the accumulation of hydrogen gas.

What chemicals require hydrostatic relief valves on piping?

While virtually any liquid trapped in a “blocked-in” section of pipe can cause a rupture due to thermal expansion, specific chemicals are strictly regulated by OSHA 1910.119 (PSM) and NFPA 30 because of their volatility or toxicity. The requirement for a hydrostatic relief valve (HRV) is generally triggered by the chemical’s physical state (liquefied under

Ammonia refrigeration processes below 10K MUST STILL meet ANSI/ASHRAE 15 Engineroom Ventilation

This is not the first time I have addressed this matter. Still, somehow, somewhere, a dirty little lie has been circulating among ammonia design and installation contractors that somehow an engine room handling less than 10,000 pounds of anhydrous ammonia (NH3) is incapable of presenting an explosion hazard, thus no need for any engineered ventilation. 

Is “grounding” or “bonding” or BOTH “grounding & bonding” to safely transfer flammable liquids?

I am sure this article will ruffle a few feathers, but honestly, I am surprised and disappointed by that. But I do a lot of work in flammable liquid processing, and this topic always comes up during audits, PHAs, and accident investigations. Some folks will swear that only grounding is “required.” They get this from

Understanding why “bonding and grounding” may not be enough protection when handling non-conductive flammable liquids

In the world of flammable liquids processing, we have two (2) types of flammable liquids: Members can read all my articles on how these flammable liquids get classified as “conductive” vs. “non-conductive. This post is to explain HOW and WHY the traditional “bonding and grounding” used in the transfer of flammable liquids may be inadequate

Scroll to Top