I have written extensively about pressurized containers in the fire safety arena catastrophically failing and leading to injuries. But this event is new to me. I have no idea what “detonators” are used for in a fire protection system; can anyone who does this for a living explain? UPDATE: Many THANKS to everyone for sending me more info. The source of the explosion was fire suppression...

Under the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the statutory authority to set phase-out dates for ozone-depleting substances (ODS) and to evaluate potential risks posed by proposed ODS substitutes. Under the terms of the Montreal Protocol on Substances that Deplete the Ozone Layer, EPA promulgated regulations to phase out the production of Halon 1301....

A manufacturer and distributor of specialty silicone chemicals will pay $1.3 million in penalties after an explosion and fire at its Waukegan plant in May 2019 claimed the lives of four (4) workers.  The Occupational Safety and Health Administration reached a settlement agreement with the company after an investigation revealed the facility failed to ensure electrical equipment complied with OSHA standards....

I know we hear a lot about using injury rates as a leading indicator/predictor of how well the SMS is functioning. I am one of those voices! But I have always held stead fast that our lagging indicators can play a key role in painting a picture of SMS weaknesses. I have always liked how MO-OSHA does their state “injury data analysis” and it is a model every workplace should follow…...

Many types of industrial equipment can potentially produce an explosive oil mist if a fault develops. This includes almost all equipment where oil is under pressure, such as hydraulic systems, pressurised lubrication, oil-based heat transfer systems among others. These are in widespread use and appear in many industries, such as service plant rooms and production facilities. As part of controlling...

HSE has identified inconsistencies in the application and supervision of welding of safety-critical metallic components. Such shortcomings have led to failures with high consequences such as fatalities. A study was carried out to identify common causes of these and to highlight priority areas for improvement of weld quality in industry. Cases were assessed from within HSE’s historical investigations...

I first wrote about this API 510 requirement in July 2019, and now OSHA seems to have caught on to this requirement; this year, they issued their first Citation against this requirement. Of course, the citation was related to a PSM-covered process. Here is the API 510 requirement for newly installed pressure vessels and the OSHA citation resulting from failing to perform these “pre-use”...

Employee #1, a firefighter, was performing a pressurized hose test on a 4-inch fire hose. The employee was standing at the pump panel of the fire truck next to the discharge point where the hose was connected by a 2.5-inch double female adapter to the 3.5-inch fitting on the truck. The hose was being brought up to a pressure of 300 pounds per square inch. As the hose filled to approximately 150 pounds...

On November 3, 2006, Employee #1, a firefighter/paramedic, was the designated pump operator during the performance of an annual hose test. The pump on the fire department apparatus was utilized to perform the test. Near the conclusion of the 5-minute 400 psi test, while Employee #1 was reducing the pressure in a hose being tested, it failed near the pump discharge connection. The elbow connected to...

On September 20, 2018, an employee was performing a pressure test of a residential sewer line when he was struck in the eye by a small piece of a pneumatic quick connection of a pressure test kit. … HomeRead More »

There are very good reasons why workers are required to be a “safe distance” from equipment that is being “pressure tested”. These safe distance requirements apply to BOTH pneumatic and hydrostatic pressure testing. Had these distances been honored/respected, a component failure during the pressure test may cause damage, but not an injury! On August 26, 2019, a 58-year-old contractor...

On April 21, 2020, Employees #1 and #2, 37 and 63, were conducting a pressure test on a chiller. Employees #1 and #2 were unaware there was pressure in the chiller. When they began removing the 1/2″ nuts off the bolts holding the flange in place… … HomeRead More »