SAFTENG Has
- Over 17,500 categorized unsafe acts/conditions and accident/injury photos
- Over 1,400 ppt's & doc's
- Over 3,900 technical articles on Process Safety & Occupational Safety & Health matters
- Over 400 videos
CLICK HERE to Renew your Membership
CLICK HERE for a NEW Membership
CLICK HERE to see eligibility requirements for FREE Membership
If you have any questions, please contact me
I am proud to announce that have extended our”Partners in Safety” agreement for another year (2025).
CI Members, send me an e-mail to request your FREE SAFTENG membership.
March 26, 2011
One option for mitigating the static hazards associated with low conductivity liquids is to raise the conductivity of the liquid. This can be accomplished by either blending the low conductivity liquid with a conductive liquid (e.g., alcohol, ketone) or by adding a static dissipating additive into the low conductivity liquid.
When blending a low conductivity liquid with a conductive one, the...
Read More
March 26, 2011
Toluene is a widely used low conductivity flammable liquid. Toluene’s vapor pressure is such that one is assured of a flammable vapor/air mixture at the ambient temperatures found in most facilities. The Lower Explosive Limit (LEL) of toluene is 1% and is reached at a temperature of 40°F (4°C). The Upper Explosive Limit (UEL) is 7% and is reached at a temperature of approximately 98°F...
Read More
March 26, 2011
Improper handling of low conductivity liquids is a source of static energy that causes flammable vapor ignition. Low conductivity liquids will accumulate a static charge from liquid shear charging at the pipe or vessel wall. The charge in a low conductivity liquid can NOT be dissipated by grounding.
Low conductivity liquids are typically derived from distilling or fractionating hydrocarbon feedstocks....
Read More
March 26, 2011
This notice is to inform you of an increase in the number of hazardous materials (HM) incidents involvingAnhydrous Ammonia (NH3) and Liquefied Petroleum Gas (LPG)
…
HomeRead More »
Read More
March 26, 2011
In my line of work, I deal with a lot of fire departments. It almost never fails that I am told at least once while on scene that “all that OSHA stuff don’t apply to us”. In many cases this is a true statement; however, EPA has adopted OSHA’s Hazwoper standard (1910.120) and will enforce it when OSHA has no juridiction. But I also want to point out that in...
Read More
March 26, 2011
A fundamental requirement of using respirators is NO facial hair that could interfere with the respirator’s operation or the respirator’s fit. OSHA states:
1910.134(g)(1)(i) The employer shall not permit respirators with tight-fitting facepieces to be worn by employees who have:
1910.134(g)(1)(i)(A) Facial hair that comes between the sealing surface of the facepiece and the face or that...
Read More
March 26, 2011
Does your workplace use the handi-wipes for cleaning respirators? Do you feel this is compliant? After all it is a very common practice and how could it be so widely used if it is not compliant?????
…
HomeRead More »
Read More
March 26, 2011
Several recent accidents with fatal outcomes occurring during the discharge of logs and wood chips from ships in Swedish ports indicate the need to understand better the atmospheric conditions in holds and connecting stairways. The principal aim of the present study was to assess the air levels of oxygen and toxic gases in confined spaces following the sea transportation of logs and wood chips. The...
Read More
March 26, 2011
A post I made on another board regarding a discussion about what makes an atm a hazardous atm…
just exceeding a PEL does not make the atm hazardous under the PRCS std.
You are correct that OSHA has stated an atmosphere that contains a substance at a concentration exceeding a permissible exposure limit intended solely to prevent long-term adverse health effects is NOT considered to be a...
Read More
March 26, 2011
It appears we may be blending 1910.146(c)(5) and (c)(7) in our attempt to reclassify a PRCS to a non-permit status. We must follow (c)(7) in our reclassification efforts. It does sound as if our PRCS may be able to be reclassified; however, I am not familiar with the type of space or specific situation.
OSHA states in (c)(7) that a PRCS can be reclassified if it has NO known OR potential...
Read More
March 26, 2011
A space is a CONFINED SPACE when ALL THREE (3) of the following characteristics are true about the space:
Is large enough and so configured that an employee can bodily enter and perform assigned work; AND
it has limited or restricted means for entry or exit; AND
it is not designed for continuous employee occupancy
Once you have determined the space is a CONFINED SPACE, the next step is to determine...
Read More
March 26, 2011
A post I made in regards to “Fall hazards being part of a hazard making a space a PRCS”
Falls are NOT considered to be a hazard for consideration in evaluating a “confined space” for hazards that would make it a Permit-Required Confined Space.
See the MEMORANDUM FOR:
…
HomeRead More »
Read More