Ever heard anyone say, “PSM and RMP are identical except for the off-site consequence requirements”? There are a lot of similarities between the two chemical safety regulations, but the two are very much different in more ways than just the “off-site consequence requirements.” Most similarities are between RMP “Program 3 Prevention Program” and OSHA’s PSM […]
Toxic Chemicals Regulated under RMP that are also Regulated under PSM [Alphabetical Order – 78 Substances] Chemical Name CAS No. RMP Threshold Quantity (lbs.) PSM Threshold Quantity (lbs.) Acrolein [2-Propenal] 107-02-8 5,000 150 Acrylonitrile [2-Propenenitrile] 107-13-1 20,000 Not Regulated Acrylyl chloride [2-Propenoyl chloride] 814-68-6 5,000 250 Allyl alcohol [2-Propen-1-ol] 107-18-6 15,000 Not Regulated Allylamine [2-Propen-1-amine]
A “safety can” is an approved container of not more than 5-gallon (19 L) capacity having a spring-closing lid and spout cover so designed that it will relieve internal pressure whensubjected to fire exposure. Safety cans are commonly used where limited quantities of flammable and combustible liquids are required for manufacturing or research. The basicpurpose
The Massachusetts Department of Fire Services (DFS) has enacted the Hazardous Materials Processing regulation (527 CMR 33). The code was developed to help prevent the occurrence of incidents like the explosion in Leominster in 2005, the fire and explosion in Danvers in 2006 (see the CSB investigation), and the fire and explosion in Middleton in
MANY THANKS to my NEW & RENEWING “Partners in Safety”for their support! since 2006 since 2007 since 2012 since 2006 since 2010 2012 Fatality Tracker Electrical 11 (2011 = 81) (2010 = 90) (2009 = 100) Forklift/Manlift Mobile Equipment 8 (2011 = 84) (2010 = 110) (2009 = 88)
So this week my good friend “Jim” and I were talking about an “accepted practice” that has grown into an “industry practice” and how OSHA has definitely drawn the line on the “cord and plug” LOTO practice such that it does NOT include valves. This “practice” involves the concept of defining “exclusive control of an energy isolating
This week’s photo is a bit different. It is from my archives and one I use in my Flammable Liquids training courses. For those of have attended my training courses or a PHA’s on a flammable liquids process have seen my video of a very similar “tank launching” incident. The picture shows what happens when
OSHA recognizes that in some situations, violations of certain standards which require the employer to have a written program to address a hazard, or to make a written certification (e.g., hazard communication, personal protective equipment, permit-required confined spaces, and others), are perceived to be “paperwork deficiencies” rather than critically important implementation problems. In other circumstances,
Many THANKS to John Newquist, Assistant Regional Administrator at DOL-OSHA, for providing this presentation. Click Here to download (pdf)
In the USA, OSHA REQUIRES employers to “Fit Test” each worker who will wear a tight-fitting respirator. This includes all types of tight-fitting respirators, from half-face air purifying respirators to full-face supplied air respirators. The workers are also REQUIRED to be fit tested with EACH MAKE, MODEL STYLE and SIZE face piece they are medically qualified and
It is pretty common for PSM/RMP facilities to have a windsock or two on-site. However, the condition of these devices ranges from brand new to a piece of wire sticking up in the wind. In this posting, I want to offer some tips on how we should manage our windsocks as a “piece of critical
