2013 Photo of the Week #3 (Falls)
This material has been provided by the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection Chemical Accident Prevention Program. This is an EXCELENT SOURCE of reliable information regarding PSM/RMP procedural needs, but it is provided by a STATE AGENCY and may not meet/exceed federal agency expectations. I find it very hard to think that Federal OSHA or EPA would not
During a PSM/RMP audit this week with my “Partner in Safety”, Unwin Company, Mr. Bob Johnson shared this GREAT worksheet and explanations from the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection Chemical Accident Prevention Program. The purpose of this extensive data form is to assist facilities with the compilation, organization and evaluation of the information that is required to
EPA has cited a “chemical distributor” $3,600 with RMP General Duty Clause citations using the International Fire Code as the RAGAGEP. EPA took issue with the facility’s storage of nitric acid (Chemical Abstract Services (“CAS”) Number 7697-37-2), sulfuric acid (CAS No. 7664-93-9), and hydrochloric acid (CAS No. 7647-01-0), all of which are extremely hazardous substances (EHS)
On or about May 3, 2011, EPA conducted an inspection of a water treatment plant to determine compliance with Section 112(r) of the CAA and 40 C.F.R. Part 68. Information collected during the inspection showed the facility exceeded the threshold quantity for chlorine, thus the facility is subject to the requirements of Section 112(r) of
http://www.usfa.fema.gov/downloads/pdf/coffee-break/cb_fp_2013_3.pdf
Many THANKS to my NEWEST and RENEWING Corporate Partners in Safety… since 2011 since 2007 since 2012 since 2012 2013 Fatality Tracker Electrical 1 (2012 = 68) (2011 = 81) (2010 = 90) (2009 = 100) Forklift/Manlift 2 (2012 = 52) (2011 = 84) (2010 = 110) (2009 = 88) Mining* 8 (2012
If you are an RMP site and have updated your RMP Submittal in the past couple of years you may have noticed a slight discrepancy in some of the data. In fact, the EPA guidance documents are also out-of-date with the ERPG-2 level for Ammonia still is being shown as 200 ppm. I am not
Although the agreement does NOT state the EHS involved, I am going to make a strong assumption that it is Chlorine. This inspection netted a whopping $980 in fines. Here are the elements allegedly violated:
Many THANKS to my NEWEST and RENEWING Corporate Partners in Safety… since 2011 since 2007 since 2012 since 2012 2013 Fatality Tracker Electrical 1 (2012 = 68) (2011 = 81) (2010 = 90) (2009 = 100) Forklift/Manlift 2 (2012 = 52) (2011 = 84) (2010 = 110) (2009 = 88) Mining* 8 (2012