Important Notice: Our web hosting provider recently started charging us for additional visits, which was unexpected. In response, we're seeking donations. Depending on the situation, we may explore different monetization options for our Community and Expert Contributors. It's crucial to provide more returns for their expertise and offer more Expert Validated Answers or AI Validated Answers. Learn more about our hosting issue here.

Has OSHA taken a position with regard to the elimination of safety devices based on “trained operators”?

0
Posted

Has OSHA taken a position with regard to the elimination of safety devices based on “trained operators”?

0

Response 10: Your scenario addresses a requirement in ANSI/IIAR 2 related to the control of an over-pressure hazard created when equipment containing liquid ammonia (NH3) is isolated. Isolated equipment has potential to be over-pressured due to thermal expansion effects of the liquid which can result in rupture and loss of containment from the equipment (liquid expansion hazard). As you mentioned, ANSI/IIAR 2 contains requirements to address this hazard. Given the serious nature of the liquid expansion hazard, you question whether the administrative control alternative listed in ANSI/IIAR 2 1999, Section 7.3.4 is adequate to control this hazard. You also question whether OSHA accepts administrative controls exclusively when engineering controls, i.e., safety devices, are also identified as a control measure for the same hazard/condition. It is important to understand that the ammonia refrigeration industry, through ASHRAE 15, ASME 31.5 and ANSI/IIAR-2, has identified this liquid expans

What is your question?

*Sadly, we had to bring back ads too. Hopefully more targeted.

Experts123