This is not the first time I have "beat up" on excess flow valves and the reliance on them as a "safeguard" in a PHA or process design.  Both EPA and OSHA are on record stating their displeasure of claiming these valves as a safeguard.  Now don't get me wrong, these devices WORK and WORK WELL when they are DESIGNED, INSTALLED, TESTED, and MAINTAINED per the manufacturer's requirements... and here lies the problem.  These valves MUST be included in the PSI - Safety Systems with the engineering (i.e. sizing) documentation, as well as reside in the MI program for inspection and testing.  Here is some language from one of the top manufacturer of these safety valves and we can see that these valves require a LOT of attention, which many facilities are lacking...

You have no rights to post comments

 
View 's profile on LinkedIn

 

 LinkedIn Group Button

facebookIcon

 

Partner Organizations

 Chlroine Institute Logo 100 years

I am proud to announce that

The Chlorine Institute and SAFTENG

have extended our"Partners in Safety" agreement

for another year (2024)

CI Members, send me an e-mail

to request your FREE SAFTENG membership

 

RCECHILL BW

  

kemkey logo

OHS Solutions logoCEMANE power association logo

 EIT LOGO

 

Member Associations

ASME logo

 

Screen Shot 2018 05 28 at 10.25.35 PM

aiche logo cmyk highres

Chlorine institute

 nfpa logo.5942a119dcb25

 

TOCAS

 

BLR Logo 2018

 

 

 

 

safteng man copy

 

 organdonor