• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Nitrogen Leak in Georgia that Killed 6 People:

K

Kyle B

Registered User
Joined
Jun 19, 2020
Messages
9
Location
3085 N Saratov Way, Kuna, ID 83634
I'm sure everyone has heard about the nitrogen leak in Georgia. As a contractor who specializes in medical gas installation and inspection, I'm really curious if anyone knows who the inspecting authorities are for these industrial piped gases and what kind of quality compliance procedures are required for these piped systems. It seems to me that these piped Nitrogen systems should fall under the same type of regulatory compliance that medical gases do, but I'm not seeing much in the NFPA about it.

I'd love to know your thoughts on this.
 
Kyle B said:
I'm sure everyone has heard about the nitrogen leak in Georgia. As a contractor who specializes in medical gas installation and inspection, I'm really curious if anyone knows who the inspecting authorities are for these industrial piped gases and what kind of quality compliance procedures are required for these piped systems. It seems to me that these piped Nitrogen systems should fall under the same type of regulatory compliance that medical gases do, but I'm not seeing much in the NFPA about it.

I'd love to know your thoughts on this.
Click to expand...


I would say they have to be tested.

When you are on the medical side, there are a few more eyes on the place.

Not sure what you are looking for. Until investigated, you do not know where the leak came from.

I hear more about ammonia leaks.
 
There is design/ installation requirements in the international fire code.

As Far as required testing, first it would be up to the ahj, than the contract, than the owner, or some sort of order like that.

Along with periodic testing requirements.
 
Yea after the system is first installed it has to be verified by an ASSE 6035 Bulk Gas Verifier, but I'm not seeing that they require any type of certified personnel to inspect them after that. In medical gas we have ASSE 6020 Medical Gas Inspectors, and they are required to inspect systems on an annual basis, but I do not see an equivalent in the NFPA 55 for cryogenics or bulk, and it seems to me that if a system failure is capable of killing 6 people and sending 23 others to the hospital then annual inspections should be mandatory at the national level, just like medical gas systems.
 
Section code 8.13.1.4 of the NFPA 55 says "cryogenic fluid storage systems should be inspected and maintained by a qualified representative of the equipment owner as required by the material specific requirements of chapters 9, 11, 13, and 16" But it also mentions that some of these things are determined by the AHJ...I guess the main point here is that I can't remember the last time 6 people died from a faulty medical gas system, yet we have higher regulatory standards, I would think that this incident will bring about more regulatory oversight in the cryogenics and bulk storage sector.
 
Not sure where you are going with this, you seem to be beating a dead horse. Its great that your medical gas jobs require checks on to of checks, but this is not the same. Let it go.

I watched the video, it was a gas leak in a chicken plant, essentially the same as an ammonia leak. We have to assume it was installed and inspected properly, this incident was quite possibly a maintenance issue.
 
I do not see any step up in enforcement

OSHA will look at the incident

I have not seen cities requiring much in the way of annual maintenance reports
 
The difference between a medical facility and a meat packing plant is the medical community anticipates problems whereas the meat packing industry does not. Most all users of dangerous things are on their own best behavior.

Take for example your average chemical plant. Not long ago there was a fire at a refinery which is smack dab in the middle of a metropolis. It was an inferno that burned for hours. The fire dept. was afraid. A plant employee was being interviewed by a TV reporter when he said, "Thank goodness the fire didn't get to the &%$#@ tank 'cause if it leaked everybody within a three mile radius would be dead."

So here's another bird shlt stained tank in the middle of a city that could kill a half million people....and the idiot announced the fact on TV. Talk about inspections....the military should be guarding it.

I haven't had much exposure to industrial gas or chemical storage/use. Every time I have reviewed an incident I have been dismayed at the simplest things that caused it.

But if it makes you feel any better...this accident pales in comparison to the carnage suffered by the employees of meat packing plants.
 
Ice's point reminds me of the huge NG tanks in downtown Los Angeles back in the 50's next to the then new fwy.
 
Don't see a way to enforce this here. NFPA 55 is not a referenced standard in the IBC only the in the IFC which was not adopted here. Maybe the same in Georgia?
 
Only 4 to 6 weeks old. Hope the contractor has good insurance.

Article says they get 2 to 3 trucks of nitrogen per day. Thats a lot. I would think there would be a way to recycle it.
 
e hilton said:
Only 4 to 6 weeks old. Hope the contractor has good insurance.

Article says they get 2 to 3 trucks of nitrogen per day. Thats a lot. I would think there would be a way to recycle it.
Click to expand...

With cyro thanking not
 
fatboy said:
Is Kyle perhaps looking for support for mandatory testing.........that his company may benefit from doing?
Click to expand...
Nope, I think Kyle is rightfully concerned that 6 people died in an accident that possibly could have been avoided with some oversight and regulations that would seemingly apply to the same materials and substances that he is used to dealing with in a different environment.
 
I agree, tragic loss, don't get me wrong. I was just floating an observation.

Attending code change hearings since 2006, and sitting on a code change committee, all to often I have seen code changes driven by any number of reasons. Loss of life is definitely is one of the top, and justifiably so.
 
e hilton said:
Not sure where you are going with this, you seem to be beating a dead horse. Its great that your medical gas jobs require checks on to of checks, but this is not the same. Let it go.

I watched the video, it was a gas leak in a chicken plant, essentially the same as an ammonia leak. We have to assume it was installed and inspected properly, this incident was quite possibly a maintenance issue.
Click to expand...

I am not in agreement with letting it go. Lessons can be learned from this with the potential to save lives for little costs.
 
I wasn’t suggesting the Georgia leak should be ignored, but his first 2 or 3 posts seemed to have the same line of discussion, that his trade has multiple levels of inspections and if his trade had done the Ga installation this would not have happened. As someone else pointed out, it was almost as if he was soliciting work.

I suspect there are many levels of checks and balances for liquid gas installations, considering the potential for dangerous consequences if something should happen. Like it did here. My brother worked as a plant engineer at an instant coffee manufacturer, and he gave me some interesting comments. They used one truck of nitrogen a day. He says one of the reasons the chicken factory goes through so much gas is that the gas probably comes in contact with the raw chicken and it’s thus contaminated. The coffee plant was able to recover about 90% of the gas they used, but the energy and equipment needed to get the last 10% was not economical. One danger in liquid gas piping is creating low places where the liquid could accumulate, and then be warmed by the process to the point of over-pressuring the piping and causing a rupture.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top