MEC&F Expert Engineers

Wednesday, December 3, 2014

THE ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS OF DIESEL EXHAUST/DIESEL PARTICULATE MATTER




THE ADVERSE HEALTH EFFECTS OF Diesel Exhaust/Diesel Particulate Matter
Diesel engines provide power to a wide variety of vehicles, heavy equipment, and other machinery used in a large number of industries including mining, transportation, construction, agriculture, maritime, and many types of manufacturing operations. The exhaust from diesel engines contains a mixture of gases and very small particles that can create a health hazard when not properly controlled.

Diesel-powered equipment is often used in underground mines.  Photo courtesy of MSHA

What is Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM)?
·            DPM is a component of diesel exhaust (DE) that includes soot particles made up primarily of carbon, ash, metallic abrasion particles, sulfates and silicates.
·            Diesel soot particles have a solid core consisting of elemental carbon, with other substances attached to the surface, including organic carbon compounds known as aromatic hydrocarbons.

Who can be exposed to DE/DPM?
Occupations with potential exposure to DE/DPM include miners, construction workers, heavy equipment operators, bridge and tunnel workers, railroad workers, oil and gas workers, loading dock workers, truck drivers, material handling operators, farmworkers, long-shoring workers, and auto, truck and bus maintenance garage workers.

Most heavy-and medium-duty trucks are equipped with diesel engines, as well as equipment used in mines; buses, locomotives and ships; heavy equipment such as bulldozers and tractors; and other types of equipment such as bucket lifts and generators. Miners and other workers in the vicinity of diesel powered equipment may be exposed to DE/DPM.



What are the health effects of DE/DPM?
·            Short term exposure to high concentrations of DE/DPM can cause headache, dizziness, and irritation of the eye, nose and throat severe enough to distract or disable miners and other workers.
·            Prolonged DE/DPM exposure can increase the risk of cardiovascular, cardiopulmonary and respiratory disease and lung cancer.
In June, 2012, the International Agency for Cancer Research (IARC) classified DE (including DPM) as a known human carcinogen (Group 1).

Heavy equipment operators can be exposed to diesel exhaust at construction sites.  Photo courtesy of NESCAUM

How can exposures to DE/DPM be controlled?
Engineering controls are the most effective strategy for minimizing worker exposure to DE/DPM. A combination of controls is often required. Examples include:
·            Performing routine preventive maintenance of diesel engines to minimize emissions,
·            Installing engine exhaust filters,
·            Installing cleaner burning engines,
·            Installing diesel oxidation catalysts,
·            Using special fuels or fuel additives (e.g., biodiesel),
·            Providing equipment cabs with filtered air, and
·            Installing or upgrading main or auxiliary ventilation systems, such as tailpipe or stack exhaust vents to capture and remove emissions in maintenance shops or other indoor locations.

Administrative controls refer to changes in the way work tasks are performed to reduce or eliminate the hazard. Examples include:
·            Limiting speeds and using one-way travel routes to minimize traffic congestion,
·            Prohibiting and/or restricting unnecessary idling or lugging of engines,
·            Restricting the amount of diesel-powered equipment and total engine horsepower operating in a given area and ensure that the number of vehicles operating in an area does not exceed the capacity of the ventilation system, and
·            Designate areas that are off-limits for diesel engine operation and/or personnel travel.




What standards are in place to protect miners and other workers from exposures to DE/DPM?
Miners are covered by the Mine Safety and Health Administration (MSHA). Workers in general industry, agriculture, construction and maritime industries are covered by the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).
MSHA currently enforces DPM standards at underground metal/nonmetal mines and at underground coal mines.

Underground Metal/Nonmetal Mines
·            A miner's personal exposure to DPM must not exceed 160 micrograms per cubic meter (μg/m3) of total carbon (TC) when measured as an 8-hour time-weighted average.
·            Feasible engineering and administrative controls are required to reduce a miner's exposure to or below the permissible exposure limit (PEL).
·            Respiratory protection must be used to supplement feasible engineering and administrative controls if such controls do not reduce a miner's exposure to the PEL, the engineering or administrative controls are infeasible, or the engineering and administrative controls fail to produce a significant reduction in DPM exposure.
·            When respiratory protection is required, an air-purifying respirator equipped with a filter that meets one of the following: certified by NIOSH under 30 CFR Part 11 as a high-efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter; under 42 CFR Part 84 as 99.97% efficient; or certified by NIOSH for DPM.
·            Rotation of miners to comply with the PEL is prohibited.
·            Evaluation of a miner's medical ability to wear a respirator and transfer rights for miners unable to wear respirators.
·            Other requirements include:
o     Fueling practices, including sulfur content and fuel additives,
o     Maintenance of diesel-powered equipment,
o     Limits on engine emissions,
o     Annual training for miners,
o     Exposure monitoring,
o     Recordkeeping, and
o     Miners' and former miners' rights to access certain records related to their own exposures.


Underground Coal Mines
·            DPM emissions of diesel-powered equipment are restricted to the levels indicated below based on laboratory tests on the engine exhaust:
o     Permissible Equipment - 2.5 grams/hour
o     Heavy-Duty nonpermissible - 2.5 grams/hour
o     Light Duty nonpermissible - 5.0 grams/hour or EPA standards
·            MSHA laboratory testing establishes the level of DPM filtration required on specific diesel engines.
·            Coal mine operators are required to:
o     Perform weekly examinations of diesel equipment and perform maintenance with certified mechanics,
o     Use low sulfur fuel,
o     Provide training to miners annually on DPM risks and controls used at the specific mine,
o     Maintain exhaust gas concentrations at or below established standards, and
o     Provide ventilating air where diesel engines are operated.



General Industry, Agriculture, Construction and Maritime Operations
Substance
PEL
Carbon Monoxide (CO)
50 ppm
Nitric Oxide (NO)
25 ppm
Nitrogen Dioxide (NO2)
5 ppm (ceiling)
The Occupational Safety and Health Administration does not have a a permissible exposure limit (PEL) for DPM. However, OSHA has PELs for other components of diesel exhaust. Monitoring for these gases can provide an indication of the presence of DE, and can be of help in evaluating the effectiveness of engineering and administrative controls implemented to minimize the potential for exposure to DE when working with or around diesel-powered equipment.

Where can I get additional information?
The links below can be used to access additional information regarding diesel regulations and technical information on control measures.
The EPA recommends strategies for reducing diesel exhaust on their website.

Contacts
MSHA:
For questions, information or advice:
·                     Metal/Nonmetal Mine Safety and Health, Division of Health, Reginald J. Richards, DrPH, CIH, (202) 693-9632, richards.reginald.j@dol.gov
·                     Coal Mine Safety and Health, Division of Health, Robert A. Thaxton, (202) 693-9515, thaxton.robert@dol.gov
To report an emergency, fatality or catastrophe, or to file a confidential hazard complaint, contact your nearest MSHA district or field office, visit www.msha.gov, or call MSHA at 1-800-746-1553.
OSHA:
For questions, information or advice, to report an emergency, fatality or catastrophe, or to file a confidential complaint, contact your nearest OSHA office, visit www.osha.gov, or call at 1-800-321-OSHA (6472).



PIPELINE SAFETY: GIRTH WELD QUALITY ISSUES DUE TO IMPROPER TRANSITIONING, MISALIGNMENT, AND WELDING PRACTICES OF LARGE DIAMETER LINE PIPE



Pipeline Safety: Girth Weld Quality Issues Due to Improper  Transitioning, Misalignment, and Welding Practices of Large Diameter Line Pipe


AGENCY: Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration (PHMSA); DOT.

ACTION: Notice; issuance of advisory bulletin.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

SUMMARY: PHMSA is issuing an advisory bulletin to notify owners and operators of recently constructed large diameter natural gas pipeline and hazardous liquid pipeline systems of the potential for girth weld failures due to welding quality issues. Misalignment during welding of large diameter line pipe may cause in-service leaks and ruptures at pressures well below 72 percent specified minimum yield strength (SMYS). PHMSA has reviewed several recent projects constructed in 2008 and 2009 with 20-inch or greater diameter, grade X70 and higher line pipe. Metallurgical testing results of failed girth welds in pipe wall thickness transitions have found pipe segments with line pipe weld misalignment, improper bevel and wall thickness transitions, and other improper welding practices that occurred during construction.  A number of the failures were located in pipeline segments with concentrated external loading due to support and backfill issues. Owners and operators of recently constructed large diameter pipelines should evaluate these lines for potential girth weld failures due to misalignment and other issues by reviewing construction and operating records and conducting engineering reviews as necessary.


I. Background

The Federal pipeline safety regulations in 49 CFR Parts 192 and 195 require operators of natural gas transmission, distribution, and hazardous liquids pipeline systems to construct their pipelines using pipe, fittings, and bends manufactured in accordance with 49 CFR Sec. Sec.  192.7, 192.53, 192.55, 192.143, 192.144, 192.149, 195.3, 195.101, 195.112, and 195.118 and incorporated standards and listed design specifications. This involves reviewing the manufacturing procedure specification details for weld end conditions for the line pipe, fitting, bend, or other appurtenance from the manufacturer to ensure weld end conditions are acceptable for girth welding.
During the 2008 and 2009 pipeline construction periods, several newly constructed large diameter, 20-inch or greater, high strength (API 5L X70 and X80) natural gas and hazardous liquid pipelines experienced field hydrostatic test failures, in-service leaks, or in-service failures of line pipe girth welds. Post-incident metallurgical and mechanical tests and inspections of the line pipe, fittings, bends, and other appurtenances indicated pipe with weld misalignment, improper bevels of transitions, improper back welds, and improper support of the pipe and appurtenances. In some cases, pipe end conditions did not meet the design and construction requirements of the applicable standards including:


·         American Petroleum Institute (API), Specification for Line Pipe--5L, (API 5L), 43rd (including Table 8--Tolerance for Diameter at Pipe Ends and Table 9--Tolerances for Wall Thickness) or 44th editions for the specified pipe grade;
·         API 1104, 19th and 20th editions, Welding of Pipelines and Related Facilities;
·         American Society of Mechanical Engineers (ASME) B31.8, Gas Transmission and Distribution Piping Systems or ASME B31.4 Pipeline Transportation Systems for Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids; and
·         Manufacturers Standardization Society of the Valve and Fittings Industry, Inc. (MSS) MSS-SP-44-1996 Steel Pipeline Flanges and MSS MSS-SP-75-2004 Specification for High-Test, Wrought, Butt-Welding Fittings.


Post-incident findings were that in some cases the pipe and induction bend girth weld bevels were not properly transitioned and aligned during welding. In some cases, the girth weld pipe ends did not meet API 5L pipe end diameter and diameter out-of-roundness specifications. Many of the problematic girth welds did not meet API 1104 misalignment and allowable ``high-low'' criteria.  Some girth welds that failed in-service had non-destructive testing (NDT) quality control problems. NDT procedures, including radiographic film and radiation source selection, were not properly optimized for weld defect detection and repairs. This was particularly the case where there were large variations in wall thickness at transitions. In some situations, NDT procedures were not completed in accordance with established API 1104 and operator procedures.
Many of the integrity issues with transition girth welds were present on pipelines being constructed in hilly terrain and high stress concentration locations such as at crossings, streams, and sloping hillsides with unstable soils. These girth welds had high stress concentrations in the girth weld transitions due to the combination of large variations in wall thickness and improper internal bevels with inadequate pipe support, poor backfill practices and soil movement due to construction activities.



II. Advisory Bulletin ADB-10-03

To: Owners and Operators of Hazardous Liquid and Natural Gas Pipeline Systems.
Subject: Girth Weld Quality Issues Due to Improper Transitioning, Misalignment, and Welding Practices of Large Diameter Line Pipe.
 Advisory: Owners and operators of recently constructed large diameter pipelines should evaluate these lines for potential girth weld failures due to misalignment and other issues by reviewing construction and operating records and conducting engineering reviews as necessary. 

The assessments should cover all large diameter, 20-inch or greater, high strength line pipe transitions and cut factory bends or induction bends installed during 2008 and 2009, and should include material specifications, field construction procedures, caliper tool results, deformation tool results, welding procedures including back welding, NDT records, and any failures or leaks during hydrostatic testing or in-service operations to identify systemic problems with pipe girth weld geometry/out-of-roundness, diameter tolerance, and wall thickness variations that may be defective.
The reviews should ensure that pipelines were constructed in compliance with the Federal pipeline safety regulations in 49 CFR Parts 192 and 195. Operators of natural gas transmission, distribution, and hazardous liquids pipeline systems are required to use pipe and fittings manufactured in accordance with 49 CFR Sec. Sec.  192.7, 192.53, 192.55, 192.143, 192.144, 192.149, 195.3, 195.101, 195.112, and 195.118 and incorporated standards and listed design specifications.

With respect to the construction process, pipe, fittings, factory bends, and induction bends must be made in accordance with the applicable standards to ensure that weld end dimension tolerances are met for the pipe end diameter and diameter out-of-roundness. API 1104 specifies girth weld misalignment and allowable ``high-low'' criteria. API 1104--19th edition, Sec.  7.2, Alignment, specifies for pipe ends of the same nominal thickness that the offset should not exceed \1/8\ inch (3mm) and when there is greater misalignment, it shall be uniformly distributed around the circumference of the pipe, fitting, bend, and other appurtenance. ASME B31.4, Figure 434.8.6(a)-(2), Acceptable Butt Welded Joint Design for Unequal Wall Thickness and ASME B31.8, Figure I5, Acceptable Design for Unequal Wall Thickness, give guidance for wall thickness variations and weld bevels designs for transitions. API 5L, 43rd edition in Table 8--Tolerance for Diameter at Pipe Ends and Table 9--Tolerances for Wall Thickness, specifies tolerances for pipe wall thickness and pipe end conditions for diameter and diameter out-of-roundness. MSS-SP-44-1996 specifies weld end tolerances in Sec.  5.3--Hub Design, Sec.  5.4--Welding End, Figure 1--Acceptable Designs for Unequal Wall Thickness, and Figures 2 and 3; and MSS-75-2004 specifies weld end tolerances in Sec.  13.3 and Figures 1, 2, and 3 and Table 3--Tolerances.


Pipeline owners and operators should closely review the manufacturing procedure specifications for the production, rolling, and bending of the steel pipe, fittings, bends, and other appurtenances to make sure that pipe end conditions (diameter and out of roundness tolerances) and transition bevels are suitable for girth welding. Pipeline owners and operators should request or specify manufacturing procedure specification details for weld end conditions for the line pipe, fitting, bend, or other appurtenance from the manufacturer to ensure weld end conditions are acceptable for girth welding.
To ensure the integrity of the pipeline, field personnel that weld line pipe, fittings, bends, and other appurtenances must be qualified, follow qualified procedures, and operators must document the work performed. Operators should verify that field practices are conforming to API 5L, API 1104, ASME B31.4 or ASME B31.8 and operator procedures for weld bevel, pipe alignment, back welding, and transitions. 

If any bends are cut, the operator must have procedures to ensure that the pipe or bend cut ends are acceptable for welding in accordance with the listed specifications. Procedures, inspection, and documentation must be in place to ensure that when pipe, fittings, bends, and other appurtenances are welded, the field girth welds are made and non-destructively tested in accordance with 49 CFR Sec. Sec.  192.241, 192.243, 192.245, 195.228, 195.230, and 195.234. NDT procedures including film type and radiation source selection should be optimized for weld defect detection and repairs completed in accordance with established welding procedures. When there is a variation in wall thickness between line pipe and a segmented fitting, bend, or other appurtenance, consideration should be given to the installation of a segment of intermediate wall thickness pipe. Additionally, efforts should be taken to ensure pipe girth weld alignment is optimized by utilizing experienced and trained welders, suitable pipe and detailed procedures.


Each material component of a pipeline such as line pipe, fittings, bends, and other appurtenances must be able to withstand operating pressures and other anticipated external loadings without impairment of its serviceability in accordance with 49 CFR Sec. Sec.  192.143 and 195.110. In order to ensure pipeline integrity, the operator must take all practicable steps to protect each transmission line from abnormal loads while backfilling and other work continues along the right-of-way and to minimize loads in accordance with 49 CFR Sec. Sec.  192.317, 192.319, 195.246(a), and 195.252. Operators should give special attention to girth welds with variations in wall thickness when located in pipeline segments where significant pipe support and backfill settlement issues after installation may be present, specifically in hilly terrain and high stress concentration locations such as at crossings, streams, and sloping hill sides with unstable soils.

Even if no girth weld concerns are identified by reviewing construction records, if an operator has any knowledge, findings or operating history that leads it to believe that its newly constructed, high material grade, large diameter, line pipe segments contain these type girth weld transitions, the operator should conduct engineering reviews as described above with those operating pipelines to ensure that material, engineering design, and field construction procedures were in compliance with 49 CFR Parts 192 and 195. Failure to conduct engineering reviews and to remediate findings may compromise the safe operation of the pipeline.

Authority:  49 U.S.C. chapter 601 and 49 CFR 1.53.

Issued in Washington, DC, on March 18, 2010.
Jeffrey D. Wiese,
Associate Administrator for Pipeline Safety.
[FR Doc. 2010-6528 Filed 3-23-10; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 4910-60-P