David A. Douin
Executive Director
Richard L. Allison
Assistant Executive Director – Administrative
Charles Withers
Assistant Executive Director – Technical
Paul D. Brennan, APR
Director of Public Affairs
Wendy White
Publications Editor
Brandon Sofsky
Manager of Publications
CONTENTS
SUMMER 2013
VOLUME 68
NUMBER 2
20
BOARD OF TRUSTEES
The haunting images in
BLOWBACK underscore
the devastation of pressure
equipment failure. Here,
an unidentified woman
crouches in the rubble of
the New London School
Explosion of 1937.
Jack M. Given Jr.
Chairman
Joel T. Amato
First Vice Chairman
Gary L. Scribner
Second Vice Chairman
David A. Douin
Secretary-Treasurer
John Burpee
Member at Large
Christopher B. Cantrell
Member at Large
Donald J. Jenkins
Member at Large
Milton Washington
Member at Large
ADVISORY COMMITTEE
George W. Galanes, P.E.
Representing the welding industry
Lawrence J. McManamon Jr.
Representing organized labor
Peter A. Molvie
Representing boiler manufacturers
Kathy Moore
Representing National Board stamp holders
Brian R. Morelock, P.E.
Representing boiler and pressure vessel users
Michael J. Pischke
Representing pressure vessel manufacturers
Robert V. Wielgoszinski
Representing authorized inspection agencies
(insurance companies)
The National Board of Boiler and
Pressure Vessel Inspectors was organized
for the purpose of promoting greater
safety by securing concerted action and
maintaining uniformity in the construction,
installation, inspection, and repair of
boilers and other pressure vessels and their
appurtenances, thereby ensuring acceptance
and interchangeability among jurisdictional
authorities empowered to ensure adherence
to code construction and repair of boilers and
pressure vessels.
The National Board BULLETIN is published
three times a year by The National Board of
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors, 1055
Crupper Avenue, Columbus, Ohio 432291183, 614.888.8320, nationalboard.org.
Postage paid at Columbus, Ohio.
Points of view, ideas, products, or services
featured in the National Board BULLETIN do
not constitute endorsement by the National
Board, which disclaims responsibility for
authenticity or accuracy of information
contained herein. Address all correspondence
to the Public Affairs Department, The
National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel
Inspectors, at the above address.
© 2013 by The National Board of Boiler
and Pressure Vessel Inspectors. All rights
reserved. Printed in the USA. ISSN 08949611. CPN 4004-5415.
On the Cover:
Paul Brennan's BLOWBACK is a comprehensive, must-have resource that educates and calls
attention to the importance of pressure equipment safety. In the interview, Brennan discusses
the book's backstory, the target audience, and how lessons learned from our past can greatly
influence a safer future.
COVER STORY
20 BLOWBACK
An Interview with the Author
FEATURES
3 2012 Report of Violation
Findings
6 Non-Code Boilers Are No
Bargain at any Price
12 High-Performance Teams
14 The 82nd General Meeting Miami, Florida - 2013
18 Furnace Explosions in
Automatically Fired Boilers
DEPARTMENTS
2 Executive Director’s
Message
10 Inspector’s Insight
28 Pressure Relief Report
30
32
34
35
Profile in Safety
Updates & Transitions
Training Matters
Training Courses and Seminars
36 The Way We Were
nationalboard.org
26 National Board BULLETIN
Index
Please Recycle
This Magazine
Remove Cover And
Inserts Before Recycling
DEPARTMENT
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR'S MESSAGE
Safety Is an Open Book
BY DAVID A. DOUIN, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Communication.
It’s how we interact with
one another. And as it relates
to safety, communication can
also be the difference between
life and death.
In today’s electronic
world, information moves
at the speed of light.
Checking one’s cell phone
has become the new national
preoccupation. Always
looking to see what’s ahead, we sometimes neglect to reflect
and appreciate what is in the rearview mirror: our past. And
yet it is our past that defines who we are today and the relative
importance of our life’s work.
Simply put, the general public knows very little about
who we are or what we do. Yes, they know some faceless
individuals are responsible for installing and maintaining
the pressure equipment that impacts their daily lives. But
they are unaware for the most part of what it takes to keep
this same equipment from blowing up: regular inspections,
well-thought-out codes and standards, and the dedication
of highly qualified professionals.
This absence of identity is due in no small part to our
failure to be more forthright with the general public. By
forthright, I don’t mean seeking a public pat on the back.
The general population needs to understand the dangers
associated with indifference, and we are the only individuals
qualified to urge public caution.
There are countless pressure equipment publications
catering to those within our industry. But curiously, precious
few appeal to the general population. Until now.
The recent General Meeting in Miami marked the
introduction of a new National Board publication. And, it
should be noted, a unique publication for our industry.
BLOWBACK is the new book authored by National
Board Public Affairs Director Paul Brennan. Only out
for a few weeks, it is being heralded by individuals both
inside and outside the pressure equipment industry for the
exceptional way it ties the potential dangers of everyday
household pressure-retaining items to those affecting the
2
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
massive equipment found in manufacturing facilities and
power plants. Linking the familiar with the unfamiliar
provides the reader a way to identify the larger issues with
something to which they can easily connect. More important,
the book carries a straightforward cautionary message for
those otherwise unaware.
As Captain Gene Cernan, the last man on the moon, said
of BLOWBACK: “Paul Brennan’s superb anthology makes
a compelling case for vigilance around all ‘live’ pressure
equipment. And he does it in a way that is both educational
and entertaining.”
While BLOWBACK is great for the lay person, it is
also of considerable value to those of us in the pressure
equipment industry. At the General Meeting, a number of
people commented on how much they learned by reading
BLOWBACK. And many of these were seasoned professionals
having quite a few years of experience. Granted, one book
won’t immediately solve our industry's identity issues. But it
is a good start. And as with any tool designed to accomplish
a specific task, its usefulness depends on how it is employed.
And this is where you come in.
By collectively reaching out to thought leaders and
making this book accessible to anyone demonstrating a
casual or concerted interest in our industry, we can lay the
foundation for a broader understanding of our safety issues.
This includes, but is not limited to, the news media, elected
officials, supervisors, young people, family, etc. And don’t
forget your local library.
Given the anonymous nature of our jobs, being proactive
is one of a limited number of options available to us. That’s
why your participation is critical.
We urge you make effective use of all the information
tools at your disposal, including BLOWBACK.
We can give you a hammer. But you have to swing it
yourself.
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
FEATURE
BULLETIN
2012 Report of Violation Findings
T
he new National Board Annual Violation Tracking Report identifies specific violations (per device type)
commonly found on five types of pressure equipment during jurisdiction-required inspections. The following
data reflects the reporting period of 7/1/2012 – 12/31/2012 (third and fourth quarters of 2012) as reported
by participating member jurisdictions.
The revised Violation Findings program was launched in July 2012 and captures a clearer picture of problem
areas and trends related to boiler and pressure vessel operation, installation, maintenance, and repair. The data also
identifies problems before unsafe conditions occur. This report serves as an important source of documentation for
jurisdictional officials, providing statistical data to support the continued funding of inspection programs.
Overall Totals for Each Type of Pressure Equipment
Type of
Pressure Equipment
Total Number
of Inspections
Total Number of
Violations
Percent of
Violations
High-Pressure/High-Temperature Boilers (S)(M)(E)
38,684
2,622
6.8%
Low-Pressure Steam Boilers (H)
29,892
3,517
11.8%
Hot Water Heating/Supply Boilers (H)
131,805
13,942
10.6%
Pressure Vessels (U)(UM)
105,674
2,898
2.7%
30,404
2,369
7.8%
336,459
25,348
7.5%
Potable Water Heaters (HLW)
Totals
NUMBER OF JURISDICTION REPORTS: 63
High-Pressure / High-Temperature Boilers (S)(M)(E)
Device Type
Number of
Violations
Rate
1) Safety Relief Devices
444
1.1%
2) Low-Water Cutoffs/Flow Sensing Devices
145
0.4%
3) Pressure Controls
66
0.2%
4) Temperature Controls – Operator or High Limit
39
0.1%
5) Burner Management
269
0.7%
6) Level Indicators – Gage Glasses, Bulls Eyes,
and Fiber Opticals
202
0.5%
98
0.2%
1,359
3.5%
7) Pressure/Temperature Indicators
8) Pressure-Retaining Items (PRI) / Boiler-Piping, Pumps, Systems
Valves, Expansion Tanks
Summary:
• Number of Jurisdiction Reports: 63
• Total Number of Inspections: 38,684
• Total Number of Violations: 2,622
• Percent Violations: 6.8%
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
3
BULLETIN
FEATURE
Low-Pressure Steam Boilers (H)
Number of
Violations
Rate
1) Safety Relief Devices
592
2.0%
2) Low-Water Cutoffs/Flow Sensing Devices
273
0.9%
3) Pressure Controls
267
0.9%
83
0.3%
5) Burner Management
361
1.2%
6) Level Indicators – Gage Glasses, Bulls Eyes,
and Fiber Opticals
268
0.9%
98
0.3%
1,575
5.3%
Number of
Violations
Rate
Device Type
4) Temperature Controls – Operator or High Limit
7) Pressure/Temperature Indicators
8) Pressure-Retaining Items (PRI) / Boiler-Piping, Pumps, Systems
Valves, Expansion Tanks
Summary:
• Number of Jurisdiction Reports: 63
• Total Number of Inspections: 29,892
• Total Number of Violations: 3,517
• Percent Violations: 11.8%
Hot Water Heating/Supply Boilers (H)
Device Type
1) Safety Relief Devices
2,925
2.2%
840
0.6%
98
0.1%
4) Temperature Controls – Operator or High Limit
1,324
1.0%
5) Burner Management
1,706
1.3%
6) Level Indicators – Gage Glasses, Bulls Eyes,
and Fiber Opticals
379
0.3%
7) Pressure/Temperature Indicators
558
0.4%
6,112
4.6%
2) Low-Water Cutoffs/Flow Sensing Devices
3) Pressure Controls
8) Pressure-Retaining Items (PRI) / Boiler-Piping, Pumps, Systems
Valves, Expansion Tanks
Summary:
• Number of Jurisdiction Reports: 63
• Total Number of Inspections: 131,805
• Total Number of Violations: 13,942
• Percent Violations: 10.6%
4
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
Pressure Vessels (U)(UM)
Device Type
1) Safety Relief Devices
Number of
Violations
Rate
1,486
1.4%
NA
NA
3) Pressure Controls
8
<0.1%
4) Temperature Controls – Operator or High Limit
7
<0.1%
11
<0.1%
5
<0.1%
142
0.1%
1,239
1.2%
2) Low-Water Cutoffs/Flow Sensing Devices
5) Burner Management
6) Level Indicators – Gage Glasses, Bulls Eyes,
and Fiber Opticals
7) Pressure/Temperature Indicators
8) Pressure-Retaining Items (PRI) / Boiler-Piping, Pumps, Systems
Valves, Expansion Tanks
Summary:
• Number of Jurisdiction Reports: 63
• Total Number of Inspections: 105,674
• Total Number of Violations: 2,898
• Percent Violations: 2.7%
Potable Water Heaters (HLW)
Device Type
1) Safety Relief Devices
Number of
Violations
Rate
674
2.2%
24
0.1%
2
<0.1%
46
0.1%
5) Burner Management
431
1.4%
6) Level Indicators – Gage Glasses, Bulls Eyes,
and Fiber Opticals
NA
NA
7) Pressure/Temperature Indicators
404
1.3%
8) Pressure-Retaining Items (PRI) / Boiler-Piping, Pumps, Systems
Valves, Expansion Tanks
788
2.6%
2) Low-Water Cutoffs/Flow Sensing Devices
3) Pressure Controls
4) Temperature Controls – Operator or High Limit
Summary:
• Number of Jurisdiction Reports: 63
• Total Number of Inspections: 30,404
• Total Number of Violations: 2,369
• Percent Violations: 7.8%
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
5
BULLETIN
FEATURE
Non-Code Boilers Are No Bargain at Any Price
By Daniel Clemens, Vice President, Pemberton Fabricators, Inc., and the Electro-Steam Generator Corporation
A
lthough steam generation has
been around since the first
century A.D., more and more
industries are finding creative ways to
use this proven technology. Not only is
steam incredibly efficient, it is perhaps
the “greenest” technology available.
This is very attractive to many common
industries across the United States,
including the food processing industry,
food preparation (restaurant) industry,
mechanical industry, medical/
pharmaceutical industry, the wine/
beverage industry, hotel/fitness clubs,
sanitation/janitorial services, and car
washes, just to name a few.
These industries require “point
of use” steam generation supplied
by either mobile or stationary electric
steam generators. For example, a
small winery can purchase a mobile
industrial steam generator for multiple
applications at a single facility, such as
cleaning and rejuvenating previously
used barrels; sanitizing storage tanks;
sanitizing/sterilizing wine transport
lines and bottling lines; sanitizing the
facilities, including floors, walls, and
drains; as well as controlling humidity
in wine cellars. On the other hand, a
fitness club might purchase a stationary
unit to generate steam for a steam room.
In either case, these units are relatively
compact and can be installed or stored
in a small, out-of-the-way location.
Customers in the above-listed
industries understand that they need
steam. When they purchase a “steam
generator,” they typically don’t realize
that the steam is actually produced in a
6
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
boiler with working pressures ranging
from 15 to 200 psi.
The overwhelming majority of
jurisdictional authorities in the United
States have specific requirements
for all boilers used in commercial
applications. They are to be designed
and manufactured in accordance with
the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
(ASME B&PVC) and registered with the
National Board (NB). ASME Section I
covers steam boilers whose working
pressure is in excess of 15 psi (marked
with the S, M, or E designator), and
the boiler external piping is covered in
ASME B31.1. ASME Section IV covers
steam boilers whose working pressure
does not exceed 15 psi (marked with
the H designator).
Unfortunately, there seems to
be a bit of a Catch-22 regarding noncode boilers. It is perfectly legal for
an importer/manufacturer to sell a
non-code boiler to an end user in the
United States. It is perfectly legal for
an end user to own a non-code boiler.
The potential problem surfaces when
an end user attempts to install and
operate a non-code boiler. He could be in
violation of jurisdictional requirements
and may be prevented from operating
his equipment. Since the inspector only
has the authority to address violations
with end users, the manufacture and
sale of non-code boilers to end users
in the United States is able to continue.
The challenge for boiler inspectors is
to consider unconventional locations
and uses for steam and proactively
look for smaller and possibly portable
steam generators/boilers. Making
this challenge even more difficult is
the fact that end users may not make
the connection that an electric steam
generator is, in fact, a boiler.
DIRECT COMPARISON: ASME
CODE-STAMPED UNIT VS.
NON-CODE BOILER
To illustrate some of the safety
concerns, a steam generation unit
containing a non-code boiler was
procured and direct comparisons were
made with a steam generation unit
containing an ASME code-stamped
boiler. It should be noted that this
specific unit would not be allowed to
operate in most jurisdictions within the
United States, but it is assumed that it
is/was legal in its country of origin and
possibly in other countries outside of
the United States.
STAMPING AND NAMEPLATE
The easiest way to determine
whether a boiler is manufactured in
accordance with the ASME code and
registered with the National Board is
by first looking at the stamping and
nameplate. The ASME mark, the ASME
designator, and the NB mark will be
clearly visible. The non-code boiler
does not exhibit the ASME mark, the
ASME designator, or the NB mark
as shown in Figure 1. Additionally,
this specific unit does not exhibit
information that is vital for the safe
operation of the boiler, such as the
maximum allowable working pressure
(MAWP).
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
FIGURE 1. Non-Code Nameplate
(The manufacturer’s name and location have been obscured.)
SAFETY VALVES AND
DISCHARGE PIPING
When comparing the safety valves
of the two units, several differences
were noted. First, on the ASMEstamped unit, the safety valve (shown
on the left and center in Figure 2)
possessed a nameplate including the
following critical information: ASME
V designator, NB stamp, set pressure,
and capacity. The safety valve on the
non-code unit (shown on the right)
had no ASME designator or NB stamp.
Secondly, the safety valve on the
non-code unit did list a numerical
value, but it did not clearly identify
whether it was the set pressure or
the flow capacity. Due to the unclear
markings on this safety valve, one
cannot be sure that it is appropriately
sized or even if its intended application
is steam service.
Thirdly, on the ASME-stamped
unit, the safety valve had a handle for
manual lift testing, while the safety
valve on the non-code unit had none.
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
Without a means for manual lift testing,
the operator or inspector has no way
to safely test the safety valve to ensure
proper operation.
Finally, the ASME-stamped safety
valve had seal wires incorporated at
critical points to prevent tampering
with pressure and flow adjustments.
The other safety valve did not exhibit
seal wires or any other method to
prevent tampering.
Equally as important as the safety
valve is the discharge piping. ASME
Sections I and IV are very clear that
when discharge piping is used, the
internal cross-sectional area shall not
be less than the full area of the valve
outlet. On the non-code boiler, the ¾”
outlet was reduced with a ½” reducer.
A second reduction occurred as an even
smaller-diameter, thin-walled copper
tube was used for the discharge piping
(see Figure 3). For the actual numbers
in this situation, see the chart on page 8.
The requirement of ASME Section
I, PG-71.3, is crucial because a reduction
of the outlet area can drastically increase
the backpressure on the safety valve
and prevent adequate pressure relief.
In direct contrast, the ASME codecompliant unit had ¾” schedule 40 for
its discharge piping.
FIGURE 2. Safety Valves
Manual lift
handle.
Nameplate clearly
indicates ASME & NB
marks, set pressure,
and capacity.
Seal wires
to prevent
tampering.
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
7
BULLETIN
FEATURE
WELD QUALITY
In order for a boiler to possess the
ASME mark and S, M, or E designator,
an authorized inspector inspects the
quality of the welds while the boiler
is being manufactured. Figures 4, 5,
and 6 are photographs of the inside of
a non-code boiler. The circumferential
weld attaching the head to the shell is
not a full-penetration weld. The area of
interest is identified by example “A” in
Figures 4 and 5. ASME Section I would
require a full-penetration weld at this
joint given the same configuration and
thickness.
The longitudinal weld identified
by example “B” in Figures 4 and 6
is also not a full-penetration weld.
ASME Section I would require a fullpenetration weld at this joint as well.
OTHER OBSERVATIONS
The non-code boiler did not meet
the requirements of ASME CSD-1
concerning dual safety controls. In fact,
it possessed no pressure controls at
all. While the boiler may have met the
requirements for its country of origin,
many US jurisdictional authorities
mandate compliance with CSD-1.
CONCLUSION
We find ourselves in an economy
where the bottom line can sometimes
take precedence over quality and
safety. Many unsuspecting users are
purchasing non-code boilers based
solely on cost. It is unfortunate for
the end user, because with the boiler
discussed in this article, a jurisdictional
boiler inspector had no choice but to
“red tag” the unit, citing:
“As the unit is non-ASME,
along with being unable to
verify pressures or capacities
of the boiler or the safety
valve, and the safety valve
being necked down, I cannot
8
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
Item
Inside Diameter
(in)
Cross-Sectional
Area (in2)
% Reduction of
Cross-Sectional Area
Maximum ID of Outlet
0.744 measured
0.435
0
½” Reducer
0.435 measured
0.149
65.7
Thin-Walled Copper
Tubing
0.228 measured
0.041
90.6
FIGURE 3. Non-code safety valve installation with reducer
and copper tubing (insulated).
FIGURE 4. Examples of welds on the inside of a non-code boiler.
A – Circumferential
Weld
B – Longitudinal
Weld
Camera inserted
this way to
photograph inside
of boiler
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
FIGURE 5. Weld is
NOT full-penetration
at shell and head
joint.
authorize operation of that
steam generator and ask you
to keep it out of service until
final disposition of the issue.”
In this situation, a boiler that
seemed to be a bargain based on price
alone was actually the most expensive
option. Although some jurisdictional
authorities may allow the use of
non-ASME stamped boilers if prior
approval is granted, most do not.
Unfortunately, in this example, the
end user owns nothing more than an
expensive doorstop.
It is easy for potential buyers
to educate themselves on this issue.
The National Board publishes a
synopsis of jurisdictional laws as
well as contact information for each
local jurisdictional authority in
NB-370, National Board Synopsis of
Boiler and Pressure Vessel Laws, Rules
and Regulations. This publication
can be found in PDF form at www.
nationalboard.org/SiteDocuments/
NB-370.pdf.
We are fortunate that there are
inspectors who take an active role in
public safety across the United States,
but their task is monumental. The type
of boiler discussed in this article can
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
FIGURE 6. Weld is
NOT full-penetration
at longitudinal joint.
BUYER’S CHECKLIST
Equipment must meet jurisdictional
requirements.
Potential buyers with questions
relating to boilers can reference NB370, National Board Synopsis of Boiler
and Pressure Vessel Laws, Rules and
Regulations (www.nationalboard.org/
SiteDocuments/NB-370.pdf). Better yet,
they can contact their local jurisdictional
authority.
ASME certification mark and Section
I designator (S, M, or E) or Section IV
designator (H).
Safety valve appropriately sized,
rated for steam use, and having required
certification marks.
Section I boiler external piping in
compliance with ASME B31.1.
Equipment registered with the
National Board (National Board mark
and number are present).
Meets ASME CSD-1 when required
by the jurisdiction.
be very small and may not always be
located by jurisdictional authorities, so
getting the word out to potential buyers
is important. Hopefully, as buyers
become more informed, they will
purchase ASME code-stamped boilers
to ensure compliance with jurisdictional
requirements for public safety.
Daniel Clemens has over two decades of
design and fabrication experience. He is vice
president of Pemberton Fabricators, Inc., and
the Electro-Steam Generator Corporation,
which specializes in “point of use” electric
dry steam generation for a variety of
commercial and industrial processes and
applications.
Acknowledgements:
Special thanks to Robert Murnane, Amit
Gupta, John Swezy, Frank North, Robert
Price, and David Corey.
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
9
DEPARTMENT
INSPECTOR’S INSIGHT
How Clean is "Clean Enough"?
BY JOHN HOH, SENIOR STAFF ENGINEER
“Cleanliness and welding” – two words many people would say have nothing in common. In fact, they may
say “welding and dirty” is a better match. Perhaps this opinion is based upon images of smoke rising from
a welding arc, or the welder’s clothing looking as if it escaped the laundry room. As someone who welded
almost every day in a previous career, I can appreciate that viewpoint. I tried not to look like the Peanuts
comic strip character Pig Pen, but the location of the weld joint sometimes required a close relationship with
dirt and grime.
The weld joint itself – that’s where
even if a backing strip was used. Not only would it aid in a
weld over rust, paint, dirt, oil, etc., but
of any contamination being drawn into the weld. Why is
cleanliness matters. Sure, it’s possible to
the weld quality will suffer as a result.
Some E6010, E6011, and E6013 shielded
metal arc welding (SMAW) electrodes are
advertised as being “designed” to weld
over some surface contamination. While there is no reason
to doubt their ability to do so, I would question the overall
quality of the deposited weld metal.
close fit-up of the backing, it would eliminate the possibility
the ASME code so specific in this area? It is a commonsense
approach for minimizing causes of poor quality welds. Other
possible causes include base metal issues (chemistry or subsurface defects), filler metal issues, and welder training/
technique. If surface contamination is removed, that is one
less obstacle in the pursuit of the perfect weld.
Before getting too carried away with
Useful Welding Terminology
what is possible, let’s concentrate on
Correct or Code Term
what is permitted, and why.
The ASME Boiler & Pressure
Vessel Code, Section I, PW-29.3 and
Section VIII, Div. 1, UW-32(a), have
very similar requirements for base
metal preparation prior to welding.
For example, UW-32(a) states, “The
surfaces to be welded shall be clean
and free of scale, rust, oil, grease,
slag, detrimental oxides, and other
deleterious foreign material.” That
a shiny, silver-gray appearance. For
a joint welded from one side, this
would require cleaning the opposite
surface adjacent to the weld root.
Backside cleaning would be necessary
10
Stick
GTAW
Gas Tungsten Arc Welding
TIG (tungsten inert gas), Heliarc (trademark)
GMAW
Gas Metal Arc Welding
MIG (metal inert gas), wire welding
FCAW
Flux-Cored Arc Welding
Flux-core, wire welding
DCEP
Direct Current Electrode Positive (DC+)
Reverse polarity
DCEN
Direct Current Electrode Negative (DC-)
Straight polarity
Submerged Arc Welding
Sub-arc
All processes
every possible contaminate. When
the surfaces to be welded should have
Shielded Metal Arc Welding
SMAW electrode holder
words, appears to cover just about
applied to carbon steel, this means
SMAW
SAW
statement, especially the last three
Common or Slang Term
Work clamp
Stinger
Ground clamp
There are two common methods for starting the arc in GTAW:
1) High frequency (sometimes called “high freq”) does not require touching the electrode to
the work piece.
2) Scratch start requires touching the electrode to the work piece.
_____________________________________________________________
Processes using a shielding gas, such as GTAW or GMAW, will have a regulator/flowgauge or
regulator/flowmeter attached to the shielding gas cylinder. N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
Surface cleanliness can affect some welding processes
more than others. The gas tungsten arc welding (GTAW)
process is probably the most sensitive to surface contamination.
The SMAW process with low hydrogen-type electrodes can
exhibit problems with surface contaminates. Processes using
higher amperage, such as gas metal arc welding (GMAW) spray
transfer or submerged arc welding (SAW), may tolerate very
slight surface contamination, but there is no guarantee. UW-
32(c) states the requirements in UW-32(a) “are not intended
to apply to any process of welding by which proper fusion
and penetration are otherwise obtained and by which the
weld remains free from defects.” Since this stops well short
of endorsing any specific welding process, an inspector could
require proof of compliance. That would probably involve
extensive radiographic and/or ultrasonic examination. If that
type of examination was not otherwise required by the code,
this would entail added expense, and if unacceptable defects
This light coating of rust, adjacent to the tack weld, formed after
the weld was made. A wire brush will easily remove it prior to final
welding.
layer on the surface of aluminum can provide a dramatic
example of why cleanliness is so important. When welded,
the aluminum material will melt at a lower temperature than
the surface oxidation layer. When this is happening, it has
the appearance of a crust over the molten aluminum. This is
very similar to the effect mill scale has on carbon steel if not
removed prior to welding. If carbon steel has been allowed
to get wet, either by direct application of water or storage
in an environment with high humidity, rust is a very real
possibility. It can range from a light discoloration (or patina),
to thick flakes that noticeably diminish the material thickness
when removed. Rust, like mill scale, will be removed by
mechanical means.
If the surface contamination consists of oil or grease,
The weld bevel and backing strip have been cleaned prior to welding.
The mill scale is above and below the weld bevel at the jagged line.
Note the color difference between clean carbon steel and the mill
scale.
were discovered, the weld would have to be repaired – more
expense. Rather than gamble on meeting the requirements of
UW-32(c), it would seem that a thorough cleaning would be
the better option.
Carbon steel commonly used in boiler and pressure vessel
construction will have varying degrees of mill scale on the
surface. Mill scale will be dark gray in color with a dull finish.
The most reliable method of removal is by mechanical means
(machining, grinding/sanding, scraping, or wire brushing).
no amount of wire brushing will remove it completely – it
will just be relocated. A solvent is the preferred method of
removal, but the solvent must be selected carefully so as not to
create another problem. Water is another surface contaminant
that must be removed prior to welding. Attempting to
remove water by blasting it with compressed air is usually
unsuccessful. Again, it is simply being moved around and the
compressed air may introduce additional moisture. Wiping the
surface with absorbent material (rags, towels, etc.) will work
fine until it is saturated; then it’s back to moving it around.
Heat is usually the best method for removing water from
metal. It doesn’t take much – just enough to make it evaporate
a few inches on either side of the center line of the weld joint.
How clean is “clean enough”? I learned long ago that
Many people will start with the least aggressive method, such
it only takes a little more effort and time to do the job right.
mill scale is uncooperative. The scale may appear to be very
welded is a good investment. Barring any other problems, it
as wire brushing, and move on to an abrasive method if the
thin, but it will adversely affect the welding process. Although
it is not mill scale, the very thin, almost invisible oxidation
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
A few extra minutes spent cleaning the surface that’s to be
could save a significant amount of time in rework and repairs.
And what they say is true – time is money.
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
11
BULLETIN
FEATURE
High-Performance Teams
By James R. Chiles
G
roups, committees, teams – when you hear your boss talking up such opportunities, you might be
inclined to put the kibosh on the idea, thinking of pointless hours in some airless meeting room.
According to popular lore about horses and camels, committees succeed only in screwing things up.
response teams outnumber the professional ones, even if the
But I'm a fan of committees and work teams . . . some
former don't last very long.
of them. In the summer 2011 BULLETIN, I made a pitch for
Here's an umbrella description of rapid response teams:
companies to set up root cause analysis (RCA) teams and use
Rapid
response teams come together during a crisis to bridge a
them on a regular basis. A well-directed, well-picked RCA
short-lived, risky gap that has opened between supplies and needs.
team not only solves old problems, it squelches new ones.
Note that short-lived doesn't mean unimportant. Crisis gaps,
Let's look at another species of high-performance
if ignored or botched, can destroy a company's reputation,
groups – the rapid-response team – and identify a few
drive it to bankruptcy, or cost hundreds of lives.
pillars of success. From reality shows, we know that rapidThe good news is that after decades of such emergencies,
response teams include emergency medical technicians, law
many good sources of information are at hand for companies
enforcement tactical units, SEAL teams, Coast Guard rescue
and agencies that want to plan for crises in their field. One
crews, and accident investigators who keep their go-bags
of them is a handbook published in 2004 and available free
packed. And many more dedicated teams operate with less
online: The Better the Team, The Safer the World: Golden Rules
fanfare: urban search and rescue, industrial firefighters,
of Group Interaction in High-Risk Environments.
railroad derailment contractors, and
Supported by the Daimler Benz Foundation
“Aircraft on Ground” teams that repair
and re-insurer Swiss Re, it's an evidencejumbo jets in remote locations. These are
based study with rules of thumb about how
professionals, trained and equipped, like
to prepare teams to handle problems in three
players on a Major League baseball team.
settings: airliner flight decks, hospitals, and
So why do the rest of us need to know
nuclear power plants.
about the subject? The reason is that many
The handbook's usefulness extends well
rapid response teams are improvised affairs
beyond
those three settings and holds more
often mobilized to cope with an in-house
principles than I can cover here, but let's look
crisis. To continue the baseball analogy,
at a summary of three of them.
these teams would be made up of fans right
out of the bleachers, sometimes with scant
Plan for the Worst to Bring Out the Best
training. And the methods they employ
(Recommendation 11)
may be rather low-tech. One example of this
This is about preparing for the “really bad
occurred in the days following Superstorm
day” with plans, training, and equipment. In
Sandy. In an effort to keep emergency Mr. Chiles writes
rooftop generators running for Peer 1, a extensively
about Inviting Disaster I wrote about a 1989 incident
in which an out-of-control ship was bearing
web-hosting company in lower Manhattan,
technology
and
down on the dredge Essex, then anchored in a
a group mobilized a “bucket brigade.”
history.
Contact
him
channel with steel cables. It was threatening to
Teams carried diesel fuel, five gallons at a
overrun the dredge, but Essex's crewmembers
time, up 17 flights of stairs, until city power at j.chiles2015@gmail.
had anticipated that particular what-if. They
returned. This may seem like an extreme com or at his blog:
pulled out an emergency hydraulic cutter and
case of amateur rapid response, but I'd
Disaster-wise.
freed themselves from the web of cables.
wager that the number of ad hoc rapid
12
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
After the 1999 mass shooting at Columbine High School,
during which police responders were hampered by fire
sprinklers they couldn't shut off, school districts learned to
prepare a “crisis response box” that contained master keys,
utility shutoff instructions, and detailed building plans. The
idea of preparing a crisis box has since spread to thousands
of risk-aware businesses and agencies.
Crisis box or not, it's smart for a rapid response team
to start by planning for the worst case, then work up from
there. That's one lesson from a successful response by Magna
Exteriors & Interiors to a 2011 fire at its plastic-molding plant
in Howell, Michigan. The plant was a “Just in Time” supplier
of parts to sixteen giant auto-assembly plants, and those
plants would begin slowing or even shutting down within
one day of not receiving their parts; therefore, every minute
would count if Magna was to meet contractual obligations for
piece count and quality. Magna’s response had to begin while
the plant was still on fire – and before its condition could be
known. Company president Bob Brownlee wisely began by
assuming the worst case, a complete loss of the facility. He
ordered two other Magna plants in Illinois and South Carolina
to ramp up to 24-hour production, and he directed two other
plants in Mexico to make space for production tools of the
kind the Howell plant had been using, which would travel
by flatbed truck. But in case something could be salvaged,
he also mobilized a rapid-response team of millwrights,
electricians, engineers, toolmakers, and computer experts.
Have a Goal List that is Short and Sticky
(Recommendation 2)
This is about goal clarity: making sure everybody on
the response team knows about the current goals. This is
drawn from intensive care units that found a daily goal
sheet, posted at each patient's bedside, focused team efforts
and hastened recovery. I mention this because while a crisis
response usually begins with goal clarity (as in, “Fix Problem
X right away, without collateral damage”), as the hours and
days go by, things are likely to get more complicated . . . trees
growing to block that initial view of the forest.
Back to Magna Exteriors. Just two days after the embers
cooled at its Michigan factory, Bob Brownlee's rapid-response
team of industrial experts appeared to be well underway
in restoring some functionality there, and getting Howell's
450 employees back to work. A third of the plant was a total
loss, and the rest of the plant suffered from destroyed wiring,
smoke-blackened production lines, and a collapsed roof, but
the tools were repairable. As cranes lifted roof girders off the
shop floor, workers removed production equipment for rush
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
delivery to a nearby repair contractor. By Saturday, emergency
generators restored lighting and limited production runs got
underway, so as to re-establish quality standards. Moods
lifted, along with the crane hooks.
But that same night, Brownlee realized that his key
managers were spread too thin, having to supervise both
the building fixes and the production restart. On Sunday
he ordered them to concentrate on production and delegate
everything else. Here's how Brownlee described the course
correction to a plastics trade journal: “Everybody was still
running around. So I said, 'You go here, and you go there,
and do nothing else.' ” It made a difference: by the following
Tuesday, less than one week after the fire started, the Howell
plant was meeting 80% of customer demand, and emergency
production at other Magna plants picked up the rest.
Teamwork Tips (Recommendations 1 and 5)
Studies of airline crew-pairings show that if crew
members had worked together on previous flights, and if they
felt comfortable asking questions and striving for clarity, they
were better able to cope with the unexpected. Indicators of
good group dynamics included open discussion of problems
and how to solve them; and the use of the plural first person,
as in “We should be getting ready for . . .”.
One way a company can build such team-member
familiarity in advance of an in-house emergency is to pick out
potential problem-solvers ahead of time and try them out as
part of an internal root cause analysis team. Because surprise
is your enemy, such a team should also spend time getting to
know risks encountered at operations functionally similar to
your own – which could be in another industry altogether. For
example, if your factory plans to rely on a bank of emergency
diesel generators to keep operating after a storm, a few hours
spent reading trade journals about hospitals and data centers
will point out the most common reasons for generators to fail,
such as old and contaminated fuel, floodwaters immersing
critical components, or refueling trucks that can't reach the site.
Finally, here's a tip for managers facing an in-house
emergency that is not part of the Golden Rules handbook: if
you activate a rapid response team, remember the care-andfeeding part. Team members may need protective equipment,
and they'll certainly need food, water, and time to rest. While
the Peer 1 storm response got headlines for its stair-climbing
team of employees and even customers, the company also
hired contract workers to give its volunteers a break. And in
regional emergencies such as floods and hurricanes, workers
need to know that family members are safe. Don't neglect
such details, or a promising start can fall apart.
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
13
BULLETIN
FEATURE
The 82nd General Meeting
MIAMI, FLORIDA-2013
W
ith his winning smile, trove of recordbreaking NFL feats, and inspiring
accomplishments off the gridiron, former
Pittsburgh Steelers’ star Hines Ward won over
General Meeting participants during his dynamic
keynote address at the Opening Session on Monday
morning.
Following Mr. Ward, a panel of industry
experts addressed the assembly during the
General Session, beginning with Kenneth Balkey
of ASME, who discussed the role of safety in the
“energy grand challenge.” Next, Ron Kent of KB
Inspection Services spoke on the topic of manual
weld examinations using phased array ultrasonic
testing. Rounding out the session was National
Board Director of Public Affairs Paul Brennan who
shared exclusive material not included in the newly
released book, BLOWBACK: An Anecdotal Look at
Pressure Equipment and Other Harmless Devices That
Can Kill You.
Later in the afternoon, Fred Bull of HSB Global
Standards spoke on inspection quality from an AIA
14
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
perspective, and George Galanes of Diamond Technical
Services, Inc., spoke on recent catastrophic failures of hightemperature/high-pressure power boiler components.
Capping off the program were David Peterson of the
Cincinnati Insurance Company who spoke on the anatomy of
a catastrophic boiler accident, and Robert “Buddy” Dobbins
of Zurich Services Corporation, who addressed biogas and
the hidden costs of going green. Narrative accounts of each
presentation will be available on the National Board website.
With colorful and vibrant Miami as the backdrop, guests
at this year’s General Meeting explored the sights, sounds,
and flavors of this destination hotspot. Tours included an
afternoon excursion in Miami’s distinctive Art Deco Historic
District; a VIP tour of the new state-of-the-art Marlins
Ballpark; and shopping, eating, and sightseeing in exciting
Little Havana. The week ended with a splash as guests were
treated to an elite Miami mansion water tour aboard the
Floridian Princess yacht, followed by an exclusive farewell
performance by comedic legend Gallagher, who entertained
guests during the Wednesday Evening Banquet with his
infamous Sledge-O-Matic hammer and plenty of watermelon.
It was a smashing conclusion to a successful week.
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
Reetz Named 2013 Safety Medal Recipient
North Dakota Chief Boiler Inspector Robert Reetz was presented with the 2013 National Board Safety Medal
award at the 82nd National Board/ASME General Meeting in Miami, Florida.
As one of the National Board’s most active members, Mr. Reetz has served on the Board of Trustees as first vice
chairman for two terms; as chairman of the Task Group on National Board Bylaws, the Task Group on Definitions
of a Jurisdiction, and the Task Group on Budget. Since 1992, he has served as chairman of the Standing Committee
on Constitution and Bylaws. He also served on no less than 11 National Board committees, including the National
Board Inspection Code (NBIC).
In his home jurisdiction, Mr. Reetz is responsible for the adoption of the NBIC, registration of pressure vessels,
licensing of historic boilers, and establishing of an anhydrous ammonia inspection program.
He celebrates 30 years as a National Board chief inspector on September 1.
Jack Given (left) and David Douin (right) present the 2013 Safety Medal Award to Robert Reetz.
Krasiun Elected as National Board
Honorary Member
Brian Krasiun, former National Board member
from Saskatchewan, was elected honorary member at
the October 2012 Members’ Meeting and was presented
with a commemorative plaque at the General Meeting.
Mr. Krasiun was chief inspector for the Province of
Saskatchewan from 2005 to 2011.
Brian Krasiun (center) presented with commemorative plaque
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
15
BULLETIN
16
FEATURE
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
17
BULLETIN
FEATURE
Furnace Explosions in Automatically
Fired Boilers
By Robert Ferrell, Senior Staff Engineer
A furnace explosion is caused by an uncontrolled ignition of fuel. Whether it occurs in a forced-air furnace or a
boiler combustion chamber/furnace, the cause and potential to create harm by fire is essentially the same.
B
oiler casings enclosing the
furnace are typically more
robust than a casing for a sheet
metal air furnace. This may make the
damage and related dangers caused
by an explosion in a boiler furnace
seem less severe. The occurrence of an
uncontrolled fuel ignition is dangerous
nonetheless.
We in the boiler industry are
familiar with the beginning of the
industrial revolution and the steam
explosions that occurred as a result of
a lack of understanding of design and
operation of pressure equipment. The
combustion sides of the units were
controlled by firemen who monitored
solid fuel fires. A fireman manually
controlled the fuel and air input to
control heat input.
In today’s automatically fired
boilers, combustion is controlled using
electrical impulses to sense and drive
combustion equipment. A fireman isn’t
constantly monitoring and controlling
the combustion equipment because the
controls and safety devices do it. The
key to safe operation of automatically
fired equipment is understanding
the requirements and limitations of its
controls and safety devices.
A number of prescriptive codes
and standards have addressed the
minimum requirements for controls
and safety devices for automatically
fired equipment. The National
Board Inspection Code (NBIC) Part 1,
Installation, has harmonized with
these standards to provide a more
unified requirement for inspectors
to use to verify a proper and safe
installation.
NBIC Part 1, Installation, prescribes controls and safety device installation for boilers. Here is an example for power
boilers:
yy Paragraph 2.5.2 – Fuel systems shall be installed following jurisdictional, manufacturer, and industry standards.
(Most jurisdictions mandate CSD-1 Controls and Safety Devices for Automatically Fired Boilers or Z21.13/CSA 4.9 GasFired for Low Pressure Steam and Hot Water Boilers and NFPA 85 Boiler and Combustion Systems Hazards Code requirements.)
yy Paragraph 2.5.3.1 – Electrical wiring must meet national or international standards.
yy Paragraph 2.5.3.2 – Remote emergency shutdown switch must be located outside the boiler room door.
yy Paragraph 2.5.3.3 – Controls and heat-generating apparatus shall meet nationally or internationally recognized standards and shall be labeled by an organization certifying it meets those standards.
yy Paragraph 2.5.4 – Ventilation and combustion air shall maintain at least 19.5% oxygen, shall size and interlock ventilators to ensure sufficient combustion air.
(Heating boilers are addressed with similar requirements in Section 3 of NBIC Part 1.)
When the prescribed controls and safety devices are adjusted properly by the technician, the ignition, main fuel combustion,
and purging of the combustion chamber will consistently operate safely. These controls must be monitored and tested
routinely to ensure they are functioning correctly.
18
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
The most common cause of a furnace explosion is:
Starting a boiler when the furnace has fuel in it.
yy Did the fuel valves leak through while the unit was shut down?
xx
Be careful of pressurized oil fuel transfer loops. Oil can back feed through the return line, nozzle, and
finally into the furnace/combustion chamber.
xx
O-rings on gas safety shut-off valves can dry out, crack, and leak.
yy When it was shut down, did the unit go through the proper timed post-purge to reduce concentrations of
combustibles that have settled in the combustion side of the unit?
yy Did the unit go through the proper pre-purge cycle before pilot ignition?
xx
ASME’s Controls and Safety Devices for Automatically Fired Boilers (CSD-1) and UL Standards 234, 296, 795,
2096, require four volume combustion air changes in 90 seconds in the fire side before introducing pilot
ignition. That volumetric air both dilutes and cools combustibles in the furnace to prevent an uncontrolled
ignition.
Flame failure and subsequent re-ignition during the combustion cycle.
yy If the burner went out on flame failure:
xx
Did the combustion air source change and is the quantity of combustion air still sufficient?
xx
For oil burners, has the spray pattern of the burner changed because of a change in nozzle pressure
(clogged), change in pump pressure (too high or too low), or change in atomizing media pressure?
xx
For #5 and #6 oil, check the oil heaters for proper temperature setting.
xx
For gas burners, has the gas pressure changed? Check the gas pressure switches and the regulator.
xx
What is indicated on the primary control and limit circuit?
xx
Did something change in the exhaust vent? Damper closed?
xx
Investigate the cause of the flame failure before restarting the burner.
Front view of furnace
Rear of muddrum looking
from right.
Conclusion
Use a burner adhering to ANSI standards. Use a qualified technician familiar with your particular type of burner. Use
the burner manufacturer’s /installing contractor’s test report to verify control operation is in acceptable parameters.
Purge the unit with fresh air before ignition of the pilot or main fuel.
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
19
BLOW
BULLETIN
COVER STORY
National Board Director of
Public Affairs Paul Brennan
AN INTERVIEW WITH THE AUTHOR
20
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
BACK
I
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
t was 20 years in the making, but the long-awaited
BLOWBACK has made its official debut.
Believed to be the first book on pressure equipment
not specifically written for engineers, BLOWBACK is
described as “an anecdotal look at pressure equipment and
other harmless devices that can kill you.” It features a rare
collection of short articles, seldom
seen photographs, and what the
author refers to as “a healthy
infusion of wisdom.”
Written by National Board
Director of Public Affairs Paul
Brennan, the newly released book
is available through the National
Board website and soon at
Amazon, as well as other popular
book distribution channels.
Recently, the BULLETIN
sat down with Mr. Brennan to
explore how the book came to
be and its unusual approach to
communicating the message of
pressure equipment safety.
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
21
BULLETIN
COVER STORY
WHAT WERE YOUR FIRST IMPRESSIONS OF THE
PRESSURE EQUIPMENT INDUSTRY WHEN YOU JOINED
THE NATIONAL BOARD 20 YEARS AGO?
Coming from a large electric utility company, I had a pretty
good idea of what to expect. I had worked with mechanical
engineers for most of my career. What I didn’t anticipate was the
stark difference in communications. Because of their obligation
to customers, utilities must be proactive in communicating with
all of their many publics. In the pressure equipment industry,
communications are more internal and pretty much limited
to the industry itself. Professionally, mechanical engineers in
our industry are very sharing. What they have accomplished
collectively to evolve the ASME Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code
and National Board Inspection Code is an outstanding testament
to the virtue of cooperation. These are individuals so dedicated
to and focused on safety that they tend to forget the importance
of relating to the general public. The industry’s indifference
toward being more communicative with the very people it
is trying to protect has generated a number of unintended
HOW WAS THE IDEA FOR A BOOK CONCEIVED?
Shortly after joining the National Board, I developed
a fascination with the many nuances involving pressure
equipment safety. Subsequently, I began collecting unusual
articles and researching stories on accidents. About 10 years ago,
I had more than enough material for a book. But as anyone who
has written a book will attest, it’s a big commitment. Over the
last five years, I have been writing chapters as time permitted.
Two years ago, I completed a draft and began the process of
chasing down photography and graphics to complement the
narrative. The whole project came together last year. While I’m
pleased BLOWBACK turned out as well as it did, it only includes
about five percent of the material I collected.
WHAT WAS THE INTENT OF THE SUBTITLE “AN
ANECDOTAL LOOK AT PRESSURE EQUIPMENT AND
OTHER HARMLESS DEVICES THAT CAN KILL YOU?”
No more than an effort to expand on the word blowback.
consequences. Foremost is a kind of public acceptance that
While some might chuckle at the intended contradiction, I
mere collateral damage. Secondly, it has fostered a sense of false
harmless under most circumstances. But it is also dangerous
equipment explosions are rare and whatever is impacted is
security that “It’ll never happen to me.” Lastly, I think public
apathy for understanding our industry has prompted an “out
of sight, out of mind” mentality. For many people, boiler and
pressure vessel technology went out with steam locomotives
and coal-fired furnaces.
see this statement as undeniable truth. Pressure equipment is
under adverse circumstances. I think that’s well chronicled in
the book.
WHAT IS BLOWBACK’S CENTRAL MESSAGE?
Simply stated: in the civilized world, pressure equipment
touches the lives of everyone, every day. That’s why it is
important to understand the potential seriousness of what
pressure-retaining items can do. BLOWBACK recounts a number
of sobering examples to underscore that message.
22
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
WHAT WAS THE BOOK’S OBJECTIVE?
impacting jurisdiction legislation. Without some type of tool to
visually complement verbal persuasion, we will never be able
Actually, there were two basic objectives. To command the
to provide a satisfactory answer to those who sardonically ask
of pressure equipment, and to effectively communicate those
That’s where BLOWBACK comes in. Contrasting the abundance
effort to pass a South Carolina boiler law in 2003, we discovered
today dramatically illustrates the importance and effectiveness
with the general citizenry or legislature. Absolutely nothing!
these laws does nothing but turn back the clock to a period no
website with the purpose of getting facts out to everyone who
BLOWBACK is distributed to those in positions of influence,
calling state legislators are pretty limited in terms of effectively
don’t think BLOWBACK is going to change the way people think
attention of those who would never even consider the dangers
“when was the last time you heard about a boiler explosion?”
dangers to the reader. When the National Board launched its
of accidents in past eras with the comparatively fewer incidents
there were no materials or tools to communicate boiler safety
of current laws and inspection practices. Failing to enforce
So we created a special issue of the BULLETIN and launched a
one, I think, wants to revisit. That said, I believe it is important
might benefit from a new state law. Simply writing letters and
particularly in the legislative community. Make no mistake: I
communicating messages of safety, particularly when there
overnight, but it is a start and it is an effective way to impart
cannot communicate unless it has the attention of the intended
better understand the safety message.
is no public clamor for legislative action. An organization
audience. Once accomplished, the message has to be such that it
engages that audience. We think BLOWBACK will do just that.
WHO SPECIFICALLY IS THAT AUDIENCE?
our viewpoint to a wide yet unsuspecting public needing to
SO, STATE LEGISLATORS ARE ALSO A TARGETED
AUDIENCE?
Yes. Both directly and indirectly. Directly in that I hope
Because it covers so many different types of pressure
BLOWBACK will be widely used to educate those who make
in our industry. But the targeted audience is much wider than
funding. Indirectly, I think citizen awareness and support is
is essentially anyone who can vote. Hopefully, the more people
critical jurisdiction policy. Competing with other organizations
safety efforts our industry puts forth on their behalf. It is that
book imparting your message and having the support of voters
equipment, BLOWBACK may not be as popular with the purists
crucial decisions on boiler and pressure vessel legislation and
pressure equipment professionals. The reader we are pursuing
helpful when we attempt to solicit assistance from those making
are exposed to our message, the more they can appreciate the
for a legislator’s attention requires finesse. Having an attractive
sense of importance of what we do to advance the cause of
are compelling ways to make your point.
safety that has been lost in recent years. To a significant degree,
that has impeded our ability to manage a number of issues
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
23
BULLETIN
COVER STORY
BLOWBACK GOES BACK TWO THOUSAND YEARS. WHY
WAS IT NECESSARY TO COVER THE ORIGINS OF STEAM
POWER?
WHY WERE SO MANY DIFFERENT EXAMPLES OF
PRESSURE-RETAINING ITEMS USED?
First off, I don’t think anyone would be interested in a
Because it’s essential to understand the extreme challenges
book full of boiler explosion stories and pictures. Secondly, I
In Greece during the first century A.D., the first mechanism to use
only happen in factories or industrial settings. Others look upon
and sacrifices that were necessary to get us where we are today.
steam was actually a toy called an aeolipile (e-oh-la-pile) or wind
ball. That simply constructed invention is the operational concept
that today powers sophisticated jet engines. Imagine, first century
A.D.! And here’s the irony: with significant potential to reduce
the amount of manpower required for work, the aeolipile was
never fully embraced by the Greeks because they had no need
for mechanical performance of labor. All of their work was
accomplished by slaves. Amazingly, the first serious use of wind
ball technology did not occur until the early 1600s. The rest
is history – one invention begat another invention and so on.
While a lot of industries boast rather dramatic origins, the early
years of the pressure equipment industry were distinguished
by centuries of death and destruction. I would wager there are
a lot of people in our industry who are unaware of the early
development of steam power as well as how organizations such
as Hartford Steam Boiler, ASME, and the National Board came
into existence. While it is important that our industry has an
believe a lot of people think pressure equipment explosions
this equipment as something their grandparents had in what
they used to call ‘cellars.’ Few fully understand that pressure-
retaining items are as important today as ever before. By making
cultural associations such as paintball games and beer kegs,
younger readers will hopefully begin to see there is reasonable
cause to be vigilant around items many would never suspect
as being dangerous. More important, it is paramount to handle
these items as if your life depended on it. I cited numerous and
varied examples with the goal of making the reader more aware
of his surroundings . . . his contemporary surroundings.
FOR THE MOST PART, BLOWBACK TAKES A RATHER
SERIOUS APPROACH. AND YET AT TIMES, THERE ARE
ALSO HUMOROUS OVERTONES. DOES HUMOR HAVE A
PLACE IN TALKING ABOUT SAFETY?
There is no schadenfreude or delight in the misfortune of
understanding of this turbulent history, it is more significant to
others in BLOWBACK. And there is nothing funny about death
of deaths caused by early pressure equipment technology and
nothing to compel the reader to venture beyond the first several
the reader that he, too, acknowledges the tremendous number
human error. Then and only then can the reader contrast how
improvements in technology, laws, and codes and standards
have today drastically cut the risk and potential of death.
and destruction. But an exclusively morbid tone would do
pages. Did I take liberties mocking those who deliberately blew
up a beer keg with dynamite? Indeed I did. How else could you
describe any person who would entertain such an irrational idea?
Did I have some fun at the expense of the human cannonball
who was afraid of flying? Guilty. And the couple who decided
to celebrate the Super Bowl by filling a balloon with acetylene?
Humorous references were intended to educate the reader.
While there are a number of light moments in the book, irony
should not be confused with humor. Most of the book’s victims
are treated with sensitivity and reverence.
24
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
SOME OF THE PASSAGES INVOLVING DEATH ARE
QUITE GRAPHIC. WAS THIS NECESSARY?
I think many authors struggle with how detailed they
should be when it comes to something violent. To me, it was
IT SOUNDS AS THOUGH QUITE A BIT NEEDS TO
BE ACCOMPLISHED IN ORDER TO EDUCATE THE
YOUNGER GENERATION.
Thirty or 40 years ago, boilers were still considered
a delicate balance to make an essential point with just enough
relevant by just about everyone. By the nature of their
find some of the material objectionable. We appropriately labeled
very few young people who can tell you what a boiler does,
is not fiction! The incidents in BLOWBACK took place in real
mechanical engineers would be lucky to identify a boiler
Among the ideas I sought to communicate, and one central to
high school student what a boiler or a pressure vessel is
equipment is an unspeakable way to die. And it can never be
him? Unlike the old days when a family had to feed coal
death, I’m sure some of the victims lived just long enough to
be nor does it require as much human attention. Creature
graphic content to overcome the sensitivities of those who might
shape, boilers were easily recognizable. Today, there are
those passages. But one thing readers should remember: this
let alone what it looks like. Today, some freshly graduated
life. Consequently, the graphic depictions were not gratuitous.
in a boiler room. And that is no exaggeration. Ask any
the book’s impact, is that being killed by a piece of pressure
and you are likely to get a blank stare. And who can blame
assumed death comes quickly. In the case of those scalded to
to a boiler, that boiler is no longer as visible as it used to
endure excruciating pain and the realization they might be
comfort is just a digital click away.
seconds or minutes from death. In the passages excerpted from
WILL THERE BE A SEQUEL?
Chester Berry’s book on the Sultana, we quoted the survivors
word-for-word. And as raw as their descriptions of prison camp
life and the plight of those affected right after the explosion
Maybe in 20 years. Perhaps by then, there will be no
might have been, their dialogue was real. These had to be
such thing as a pressure vessel accident. If BLOWBACK
and circumstances. Younger readers should understand that
book, I’d better start tomorrow . . .
shared with the reader to build an appreciation of the times
pressure equipment explosions and resulting death are real.
Unlike a video game, there is no reset button.
was any indication of the time needed to write another
Paul Brennan is an industrial communications veteran
of 45 years. He is responsible for National Board’s external
and internal communications, government affairs, and the
annual General Meeting. He has served with the organization
since 1992.
A professional writer since the age of 19, Mr. Brennan
has published numerous articles on the subjects of marketing,
government relations, and communications. The awardwinning author has also lectured at colleges and universities
across the United States and addressed numerous national and
international professional groups and associations.
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
25
BULLETIN
FEATURE
National Board BULLETIN Index by Title
Executive Director's Message:
Inspector's Insight:
Fall 2012
Fall 2012
•
Performing Under Pressure: The Validation of Valves,
David A. Douin, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 2
Winter 2013
•
Safety: First Choice, Last Chance, David A. Douin, Vol.
68, No. 1, p. 2
Summer 2013
•
Safety Is an Open Book, David A. Douin, Vol. 68, No. 2,
p. 2
Feature Articles:
Fall 2012
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
2012 Registrations, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 3
A Collection for the Gages, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 12
Boiler External Piping (BEP) Part 2 – Feedwater Piping,
Steve Kalmbach, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 16
Phased Array Ultrasonics Now Replacing Radiography
for Small Bore Piping Welds, Mark Carte and Michael
Moles, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 8
Safety on Trial: 75-Ton Bottle Rocket Case Study, Rick
Smith, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 4
Testing...Testing...1,2,3...Expansion Project Complete, It's
Full Speed Ahead at the National Board Testing Lab,
Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 22
Testing...What's Not to Love? A tough world needs
tough tests, James R. Chiles, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 14
Winter 2013
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
A Learning Tool - ASME Code Case 2695, Robert
Schueler, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 6
Boiler External Piping (BEP) Part 3 – Blowoff Piping,
Steve Kalmbach, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 12
Data Mining, James R. Chiles, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 26
Forgotten, but not Gone: Investigation of an Inservice
Incident, John Hoh, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 17
National Board Synopsis Update, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 3
NBIC Ventilation and Combustion Air Requirements for
Boilers, Robert Ferrell, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 34
Stronger Evidence: Two New National Board Reports
Reveal Prevention, Report Accidents, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 18
The 82nd General Meeting-Miami, Florida, 2013, Vol. 68,
No. 1, p. 28
The National Board Owner-User Inspection
Organization Program: How it Benefits Industry, Chuck
Withers, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 4
Summer 2013
•
•
•
•
•
•
2012 Report of Violation Findings, Vol. 68, No. 2, p. 3
BLOWBACK: An Interview with the Author, Vol. 68,
No. 2, p. 20
Furnace Explosions in Automatically Fired Boilers,
Robert Ferrell, Vol. 68, No. 2, p. 18
High Performance Teams, James R. Chiles, Vol. 68,
No. 2, p. 12
Non-Code Boilers Are No Bargain at any Price, Daniel
Clemens, Vol. 68, No. 2, p. 6
The 82nd General Meeting, Miami, Florida-2013,
Vol. 68, No. 2, p. 14
•
It's Just a Fillet Weld, Robert Schueler, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 6
•
What is the Best Welding Process?, Jim Worman, Vol. 68,
No. 1, p. 8
Winter 2013
Summer 2013
•
How Clean is "Clean Enough"?, John Hoh, Vol. 68, No. 2,
p. 10
Pressure Relief Report:
Fall 2012
•
Implementing the New ASME Code Stamp: Challenges
for Pressure Relief Devices, Joseph F. Ball, Vol. 67, No. 3,
p. 20
Winter 2013
•
Pressure Relief Device Shipping and Handling: Proper
Packaging Matters, Joseph F. Ball, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 24
Summer 2013
•
Breaking Down the ASME Shop Review Procedure,
Joseph F. Ball, Vol. 68, No. 2, p. 28
Profile in Safety:
Fall 2012
•
Gary Scribner, Deputy Chief, State of Missouri, Vol. 67,
No. 3, p. 32
Winter 2013
•
Chris Fulton, Chief Boiler Inspector, State of Alaska, Vol.
68, No. 1, p. 32
Summer 2013
•
Rick Sturm, Chief Boiler/Pressure Vessel Inspector, State
of Utah, Vol. 68, No. 2, p. 30
Training Calendar:
Fall 2012
•
2012 Classroom Training Courses and Seminars, Vol. 67,
No. 3, p. 35
Winter 2013
•
2013 Classroom Training Courses and Seminars, Vol. 68,
No. 1, p. 39
Summer 2013
•
2013 Classroom Training Courses and Seminars, Vol. 68,
No. 2, p. 35
Training Matters:
Fall 2012
•
Student Evaluations Provide Constructive Feedback,
Kimberly Miller, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 34
Winter 2013
•
The 2013 Training Calendar Doesn't Disappoint,
Kimberly Miller, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 38
Summer 2013
•
26
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
Continuing Education: Why It Is Important to Our
Industry, Kimberly Miller, Vol. 68, No. 2, p. 34
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
Updates & Transitions:
Fall 2012
•
•
•
•
National Board Member Selected ASME PresidentNominee, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 30.
New NBIC Committee Chairman Elected, Vol. 67, No. 3,
p. 30
Colorado Springs Chosen Host for 84th General Meeting,
Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 30
Member Retirements, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 31
Winter 2013
•
•
New National Board Members, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 36
Member Retirements, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 37
Summer 2013
•
Three New Members Elected to National Board
Membership, Vol. 68, No. 2, p. 32
•
•
•
Call for 2014 Safety Medal Nominees and General
Meeting Presenters, Vol. 68, No. 2, p. 32
Cracroft, Gottsch Named 2013 Scholarship Winners, Vol.
68, No. 2, p.33
Board of Trustees Election Results, Vol. 68, No. 2, p.33
The Way We Were:
Fall 2012
•
La Catastrophe de la Gare Windsor, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 36
•
Did You Know? Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 40
•
Voyage of the Paddle-Steamer Providence, Vol. 68, No. 2,
p. 36
Winter 2013
Summer 2013
National Board BULLETIN Index by Author
Ball, Joseph F.
• Implementing the New ASME Code Stamp: Challenges for
Pressure Relief Devices, Vol. 67, No. 3,
p. 20 (fall 2012)
• Pressure Relief Device Shipping and Handling: Proper
Packaging Matters, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 24 (winter 2013)
• Breaking Down the ASME Shop Review Procedure, Vol. 68,
No. 2, p. 28 (summer 2013)
Carte, Mark
• Phased Array Ultrasonics Now Replacing Radiography for
Small Bore Piping Welds, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 8 (fall 2012)
Chiles, James R.
• Testing...What's Not to Love? A tough world needs tough
tests, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 14 (fall 2012) • Data Mining, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 26 (winter 2013)
• High-Performance Teams, Vol. 68, No. 2, p. 12
(summer 2013)
Clemens, Daniel
• Non-Code Boilers Are No Bargain at any Price, Vol. 68,
No. 2, p. 6 (summer 2013)
Douin, David A.
• Performing Under Pressure: The Validation of Valves,
Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 2 (fall 2012)
• Safety: First Choice, Last Chance, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 2
(winter 2013)
• Safety Is an Open Book, Vol. 68, No. 2, p. 2 (summer 2013)
Ferrell, Robert
• NBIC Ventilation and Combustion Air Requirements for
Boilers, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 34 (winter 2013)
• Furnace Explosions in Automatically Fired Boilers, Vol. 68,
No. 2, p. 18 (summer 2013)
Hoh, John
• How Clean is "Clean Enough"?, Vol. 68, No. 2, p. 10
(summer 2013)
Kalmbach, Steve
• Boiler External Piping (BEP) Part 2 – Feedwater Piping,
Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 16 (fall 2012)
• Boiler External Piping (BEP) Part 3 – Blowoff Piping,
Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 12 (winter 2013)
Moles, Michael
• Phased Array Ultrasonics Now Replacing Radiography for
Small Bore Piping Welds, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 8 (fall 2012)
Miller, Kimberly
• Student Evaluations Provide Constructive Feedback,
Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 34 (fall 2012)
• The 2013 Training Calendar Doesn't Disappoint, Vol. 68,
No. 1, p. 38 (winter 2013)
• Continuing Education: Why It Is Important to Our
Industry, Vol. 68, No. 2, p. 34 (summer 2013)
Schueler, Robert
• It's Just a Fillet Weld, Vol. 67, No. 3, p. 6 (fall 2012)
• A Learning Tool – ASME Code Case 2695, Vol. 68, No. 1,
p. 6 (winter 2013)
Smith, Rick
• Safety on Trial: 75-Ton Bottle Rocket Case Study, Vol. 67,
No. 3, p. 4 (fall 2012)
Withers, Chuck
• The National Board Owner-User Inspection Organization
Program: How it Benefits Industry, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 4
(winter 2013)
Worman, Jim
• What is the Best Welding Process?, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 8
(winter 2013)
• Forgotten, but not Gone: Investigation of an Inservice
Incident, Vol. 68, No. 1, p. 17 (winter 2013)
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
27
DEPARTMENT
PRESSURE RELIEF REPORT
Breaking Down the ASME Shop Review Procedure
BY JOSEPH F. BALL, P.E., DIRECTOR, PRESSURE RELIEF DEPARTMENT
One function of the National Board is
to act as the ASME designated organization
for activities related to overpressure
protection. This includes operating the
capacity certification program as outlined
in the ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code
(ASME B&PVC) and conducting reviews
of the quality assurance systems for all non-nuclear pressure
relief device manufacturing or assembler organizations.
Achievement of capacity certification and completion of a
successful review are both required for an organization to
receive authorization to use the ASME certification mark
on the pressure relief devices they intend to produce. The
National Board works closely with ASME staff on this
function, and each organization’s familiarity with the process
makes them sometimes lose sight of the complexity of the
procedures involved.
The review process occurs on a three-year interval. Often,
the company representative responsible for reviews may not
have had that responsibility the last time their review was
performed. Additionally, the application procedure is in an
ongoing process of being brought entirely online, which can
be a new experience for novice applicants. Finally, there are
two organizations involved (ASME and the National Board)
and each has its own requirements for the various steps in
the accreditation process. ASME Certificates of Authorization
(other than pressure relief devices) are handled solely by
ASME staff, which does streamline the process somewhat.
A question that comes up is how did the National Board
get involved in this process? Historically, this began when the
National Board initiated the testing of pressure relief valves
in the late 1930s. Before then valves were rated on empirical
equations. Those initial tests revealed startling deficiencies in
valve performance (valves flowed much less or much more
than expected). A paper presented at the National Board
General Meeting in 1936 proposed rules that later became
the basis for test requirements in the present ASME B&PVC.
When the test program started, the National Board
assumed the role of a certifying organization. It reviewed and
accepted test data and published a listing of certified valves,
28
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
titled Safety Valve Capacity Tests. This document, now called NB18: Pressure Relief Device Certifications, is still published and is
available on the National Board website. Because of the National
Board’s intimate involvement in this activity (which supports
the National Board membership by providing independent
certification of these important safety devices) the organization
took on the additional responsibility of conducting the quality
assurance reviews when the ASME code rules were expanded to
require code products to be produced by organizations holding
an ASME Certificate of Authorization. What was originally an
informal agreement between ASME and the National Board
has since been solidified into a formal contract where the duties
of each group are agreed upon.
With two organizations involved, newcomers to this
process sometimes have difficulty determining where ASME
stops and the National Board starts.
An outline of the process is as follows:
1. A company applies for the appropriate ASME Certificate
of Authorization through the ASME website at https://
login.asme.org/caconnect/home.cfm. When initially
entering into the system, a contact name and e-mail
address is required, which then becomes the company
contact. ASME certificate fees must be paid and an online
application completed. Part of the process includes printing
off a certification agreement which must be signed by a
company officer and then mailed or scanned and e-mailed
back to ASME.
2. Once ASME processes the application and makes sure all
components are in place, they then notify the National
Board and request that it perform the quality assurance
review.
3. At that time the National Board contacts the applicant
and requests an advance deposit for the shop review
costs. The capacity certification process is also initiated
(this can also be done earlier). For a manufacturer, the
initial phase of testing must begin before the review can
be scheduled. Once the deposit is received and capacity
certification is under way, the shop review can be scheduled
and conducted.
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
4. Following the shop review, production samples are
also tested. Once capacity certification of the designs
(representing the ASME certificates requested) has been
successfully completed, the National Board makes a
final recommendation to ASME to issue the certificate.
Most problems are encountered during renewal reviews.
ASME issues renewal notices approximately nine months
before the certificate expiration date. The renewal notice is
sent by email to the contact in their records. If that contact is
no longer at the company or has moved to another location,
delays can occur. Even if the correct person is notified, the need
to prepare application forms, get the appropriate signatures,
and process the payment of the certificate fee through
the company’s accounting department (an invoice can be
requested from ASME) can take up much of the allotted time.
Companies can request extensions from ASME, but ASME
requirements are based upon the applicant acting in a timely
manner. This includes receiving the renewal application and
certificate fee at least six months prior to the expiration date
and having a review date scheduled with the National Board.
When the renewal application and certificate fee are
received less than six months before the expiration date, or the
company has indicated they will not be ready for a review at least
10 weeks before the expiration, certificate extensions become
more difficult. For boiler and pressure vessel certificate holders,
an audit by the authorized inspection agency is required,
and there is a $2,000 charge for the extension. However, for
pressure relief device manufacturers or assemblers, there is
no authorized inspection agency, so the National Board and
ASME are still working on appropriate actions to be taken for
these organizations.
To avoid the need for extensions, the National Board recommends that pressure relief device certificate holders take the
following actions:
1) Apply when renewal notices are received. Start your paperwork and approval of fees as soon as the ASME notice is
received. Mark your calendar about nine months prior to the expiration date and follow up if you do not get a notice.
Although both ASME and the National Board send expiration notices, it is ultimately the responsibility of the certificate holder to ensure their certification does not lapse.
2) Be flexible with review dates. The National Board will request that you inform them of dates that are NOT good for
your company (usually based upon national holidays and personnel availability). A frequent problem that occurs is the
need for companies to reschedule a previously approved review date. The Pressure Relief Department is working to
try and schedule multiple organizations in one area at the same time to help control costs to the applicant, but this can
be a complex process.
3) Keep your contact information current. If the company contact person has changed, update the ASME contact information and inform the National Board.
4) Feel free to ask questions. The National Board Pressure Relief Department is always available to guide people through
the process and make your work (and ours) a bit easier.
Working together, the National Board, ASME, and certificate holders will accomplish the complex activities needed
to obtain or maintain ASME certification, ensure that this important certification does not lapse, and allow companies to
continue serving their pressure relief device customers.
Resources:
Description of the National Board Certification Program:
http://www.nationalboard.org/SiteDocuments/PRD/NB-501.pdf
ASME Notice on Requests for Extension of Expiration Date of Certificate(s):
http://files.asme.org/asmeorg/Codes/CertifAccred/Certification/14288.pdf
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
29
DEPARTMENT
PROFILE IN SAFETY
RICK STURM
BULLETIN Photograph by SAANS Photography
Chief Boiler/Pressure Vessel Inspector, State of Utah
Just listening to the Utah Chief
Boiler/Pressure Vessel Inspector speak,
one cannot help but notice how he longs
for the good old days. A time when you
could leave the back door unlocked. A
time when the dollar was still worth a
dollar. A time when a handshake was
less about a casual greeting and more
about a man’s word.
Although he admits he wouldn’t
forsake his current blessings, Rick
30
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
Sturm still thinks about his youth and the
wonderful times growing up in the Salt
Lake City suburb of Murray.
Rick was one of four Sturm children
brought up by his father, who worked for a
trucking company parts department, and
his mother, who worked for Utah’s social
services. For as long as he can remember,
the National Board member was always
interested in transportation. Or perhaps
more accurately, being transported.
The Utah official grins when he
talks about “hitching a ride” as a kid on
local trains crisscrossing the Utah desert
between the small cities outside of Salt
Lake City proper. And then there were
the dirt bikes.
“As a youngster, it seemed I was
always out riding my dirt bike on the miles
and miles of private roads around our
house. Probably some of the best times of
my life were spent riding those dirt bikes.”
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
When Rick was 12, tragedy struck
the Sturm household. “My father passed
away,” he reveals.
“My dad was a large influence in
my life,” Rick continues. “As a result, it
caused me a number of anger issues.”
To help her son better deal with his
resentment and feelings of abandonment,
Rick’s mother enrolled him in karate
classes to channel his hostility. “For five
or six nights each week, I rode my bike
to karate classes.”
Rick found the classes worth
pursuing. But to teach her son
responsibility, his mother encouraged
him to get a job to pay for the lessons.
Understanding he could make some
money while pursuing his interest in
motorcycle and automotive mechanics,
the Murray native welcomed the new
challenge. “I got a job as a mechanic
servicing anything that would run,”
he explains.
Rick entered high school with
a brown belt in karate as well as
considerable experience fixing cars.
“Back in high school, I really wanted
to become an automotive mechanic,”
Rick recalls.
Following graduation in 1986, the
Utah official attended the Universal
Technical Institute in Phoenix with
hopes of pursuing a career in auto
mechanics.
Returning to the Salt Lake City area
eleven months later, Rick went into
business with a friend from his karate
classes. “It was a mobile emissions
shop,” he explained. “While there was
too much business for one person, there
wasn’t enough for two.” The shop closed
after four months.
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
In 1988, the Utah National Board
member secured a position as a
journeyman mechanic for the state. It
was also at about this time that Rick
was asked by his cousins if he was
interested in servicing their heating
and air-conditioning trucks in the
evening. They didn’t have to twist
his arm.
“One night, I was asked to go out
and do some heating and air work,”
he explains. “With my mechanical
background, it wasn’t a stretch for me
to work on this type of equipment.”
If Rick had any reservations about
making the “stretch” to HVAC, it was
of little concern. “I really enjoyed
the diversity of the work,” he notes.
More important, he recognized an
opportunity.
“I could never imagine myself at
60 years old still professionally fixing
cars and trucks,” Rick emphasizes. So
after working six years for the state
during the day and his cousins at night,
the Murray native decided to look into
boiler inspection for the state.
“I had a number of conversations
with Jim [Parsell] and Pete [Hackford]
about becoming an inspector,” he
explains. “Pete gave me an old ASME
Section I book which I took home and
read into a tape recorder. I would listen
to the recording every day as I was
working on the state vehicles.”
In June of 1998, then-chief
inspector Hackford was given four
new inspection positions. “I passed my
commission exam on the second try
and was offered one of the openings,”
he beams. His first assignment: the oil
fields of Eastern Utah.
“In December of 1999, I moved
out to Roosevelt, a small town near an
Indian reservation in the Uintah Basin,”
he explains. “I worked primarily with
a lot of the oil operations. And although
I enjoyed the work, the long winters
and temperatures dipping as low as 20
below were a real challenge!”
It would be eight years before Rick
would move back to the Salt Lake City
area – to become Utah’s chief inspector.
“I was named to the position in
2007 and became a National Board
member shortly thereafter.”
Today Rick oversees four
inspectors to cover the state’s nearly
85,000 square miles. Additionally, he
and his staff are responsible for 29,600
boilers and 28,800 pressure vessels.
Rick says his fondness for days
past stems from growing up in Murray
with a good friend who would later
play a significant role in his life.
“Char and I grew up together. The
only thing separating us back then was
an irrigation ditch!” he wryly observes.
“My family was good friends with her
family. We even went hunting and
fishing together.”
When Rick began his job with the
state in 1988, he and Char would ride
to work each day. In 1990, Char and
Rick Sturm were married. They now
have three boys aged 21, 19, and 13.
Today, Rick describes himself as
a homebody with “home” being the
operative word. “I like coming home
each night and tinkering with my
vehicles,” he explains with a smile. “As
they say, home is where the heart is!”
And apparently one’s cars and
motorcycles. . . .
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
31
DEPARTMENT
UPDATES & TRANSITIONS
Three New Members Elected
to National Board Membership
Texas
Rob D. Troutt has been elected to National Board membership representing the state of Texas.
Mr. Troutt served in the US Army from 1988-1991. After his military career, he worked as a boiler/
chiller technician in the Oklahoma City metro area. In 2000, he joined with Dyn-Par at Tinker Air
Force Base as a boiler plant operations supervisor. In 2006, he became an authorized inspector for
Hartford Steam Boiler of Connecticut and worked in Texas, Colorado, Kansas, Oklahoma, New
Mexico, California, and China. In 2008, he became an inspection specialist for the state of Texas and
Rob D. Troutt
team leader for ASME and National Board joint reviews. Additionally, he served as an Oklahoma
County Reserve deputy sheriff from 1997-2002.
Oregon
Kevin Perdue has been elected to National Board membership representing the state of Oregon.
Mr. Perdue worked for FMC Corporation as a welder from 1974-1994. In 1994, he became employed
with M. E. Industries, an ASME Section VIII, Division 1, manufacturing plant specializing in filters
and filter separators for both the US military and commercial aviation. There he served as a welder
and certified welding inspector. In 2006, he took a position with the state of Oregon as a deputy
boiler inspector and remained in that position until assuming the role of chief boiler inspector in 2012.
Kevin Perdue
Milwaukee, Wisconsin
Paul M. Wilcox has been elected to National Board membership representing the city of Milwaukee,
Wisconsin. Mr. Wilcox earned an associate degree in heating, ventilation, and refrigeration from
Milwaukee Area Technical College. He also served in the US Air Force. From 1983-1997 he worked
as a heating, ventilation, air-conditioning, and refrigeration (HVAC/R) technician for multiple
contractors. In 1997 he joined the city of Milwaukee as a boiler inspector and remained in that position
until assuming the role of chief boiler inspector. Additionally, Mr. Wilcox has been a member of the
Refrigeration Service Engineers Society since 1985.
Paul M. Wilcox
Call for 2014 Safety Medal
Nominees and General Meeting Presenters
The nomination process for the 2014 Safety Medal Award is now under way. This award is the National Board’s highest honor
in recognition of outstanding contributions to boiler and pressure vessel safety. The recipient will be presented with the award in
Bellevue, Washington, at next May’s 83rd General Meeting. Submittal deadline is December 31, 2013.
Also, the National Board is now accepting submittals for General Meeting presentation speakers to address the General
Session on Monday, May 12, 2014. Boiler and pressure vessel professionals are invited to submit an abstract of no more than 200
words outlining the theme/topic of the presentation. Submittal deadline is October 1, 2013.
For complete information about both of these programs, visit the National Board website or email information@nationalboard.org.
32
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
Cracroft, Gottsch Named 2013 Scholarship
Winners
Jocelyn Cracroft of Idaho and Levi Gottsch of Montana have been named the 2013 National
Board Technical Scholarship recipients. Both students will receive $6,000 toward their academic
studies.
Ms. Cracroft is the daughter of Commissioned Inspector Randy Cracroft. She is pursuing
a double major in chemical engineering and chemistry at the University of Idaho, and a B.S. in
mathematics/physics from the College of Idaho.
In 2009, Cracroft signed with the College of Idaho’s women’s collegiate golf program and
began to study pharmacy. While there, she spent one year as captain of the women’s golf team
and became a Cascade Collegiate Conference Co-Medalist. In addition, she made the Dean’s List,
worked for the College of Idaho Food Bank, and participated in the school’s outdoor program.
For three summers she was a student worker at Agrium Conda Phosphate Operations Mine.
Jocelyn Cracroft
During her second summer there, she realized she wanted to change her major to chemical
engineering. “Most of the time we were completing miscellaneous acts of labor, but sometimes
the engineers would make us solve our own problems,” she explains. “I couldn’t help notice
minds working together and people coming up with new and more efficient ways to do things.
I became inspired.” In 2012, she transferred to the University of Idaho to pursue engineering.
Cracroft is on target to graduate in 2015.
Mr. Gottsch is studying mechanical engineering at Montana State University (MSU). He is
the son of Commissioned Inspector and former National Board member Tim Gottsch.
“Growing up, I always enjoyed building new things and solving problems. My favorite
subjects in school were the sciences, especially physics,” he explains. “At MSU I’ve studied under
professors from many different engineering departments, and the impression I’ve had is that
Levi Gottsch
mechanical engineers are useful to all types of engineering disciplines and possess versatility
in the work force.”
Gottsch served in active duty with the Navy from 2010-2011 and is currently a third class
petty officer in the Navy Reserve. He also holds a black belt in taekwondo and has served as a
volunteer instructor. In addition, he is a volunteer with Habitat for Humanity, is a member of
the Dean’s List, and participates in MSU’s ASME Chapter.
“When I get to the workforce – whether with an engineering company, furthering my Navy
career, or doing both – I look forward to working with others to accomplish a mutual goal.”
Gottsch’s long-term plan is to earn a PhD and teach engineering.
Board of Trustees Election Results
National Board members cast their votes at the 82nd General Meeting in Miami, Florida, on Tuesday, May 14, and re-
elected two members to the Board of Trustees.
Terms were up for Joel Amato, first vice chairman, and John Burpee, member at large.
Both members were re-elected and will serve another three-year term on the Board of Trustees.
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
33
DEPARTMENT
TRAINING MATTERS
Continuing Education: Why It
Is Important to Our Industry
What Does the
Inspector Need
To Do Today?
BY KIMBERLY MILLER, MANAGER OF TRAINING
First, reference NB-263, Rules
It
already know while learning what is new or
evolving.
Although some type of continuing
Technology.
is always changing.
Always
unfamiliar to them.
Consider
the
education has been required for commissioned
Te c h n o l o g y
has
National Board has taken continuing
automotive industry.
changed how a car's
engine operates – not just its overall
and endorsed inspectors in the past, the
education to the next level.
interior has changed to allow us to operate
our vehicles at the touch of a button.
So what does automotive technology have
on
specific
continuing
education or the commission and/
or endorsements you currently
hold, specifically Appendix 2,
reduced from once every three years to once
also modified to specific topics relevant
credentials.
commission and endorsement, and the
training catalog on the National
Board online training courses.
the Training Menu). Here you
every two years. The type of training was
diagnose the specific problem. Even a car’s
requirements
the
requirement means and how it
hood” and change out the carburetor or
“hook up” the engine to a computer to
for
Inspectors,
Continuing Education Requirements.
engaging in continuing education was
replace a few spark plugs. Instead, they
New Construction Commissioned
In January 2013, the time frame for
efficiency, but the technology it engages.
Technicians no longer simply “pop the
for National Board Inservice and
to the duties and responsibilities of each
delivery method was narrowed to National
Why?
Understand
what
the
new
will affect the renewal of your
Second, review the online
Board website (located under
will
find
currently
available
Quite simply, we wish to have a uniform
continuing education courses, the
topics. We wish to ensure inspectors are able
they cover, their presentation style,
perform their duties and responsibilities. And
will be covered, needed reference
depth of continuing education, providing for
length of the training.
inspectors worldwide.
to the Online Training Center
is an incident which may cause injury or
underscore the importance of continuing
where students create a user
changes to industry codes and standards
experience levels may vary, commissioned
to do with continuing education and the boiler
and pressure vessel industry?
and consistent delivery method of relevant
commission and/or endorsements
our auto technicians know how to keep
to maintain their proficiency in order to best
a course description and what
we wish to know all are receiving the same
materials, and the approximate
consistency among boiler and pressure vessel
Third, enroll! There is a link
Safety. As a society, we want to be sure
our technically-advanced cars running,
and in turn, keep us safe when we are on
the road. And in the boiler and pressure
vessel industry, we want our inspectors
to possess the knowledge required to
pinpoint potential problems before there
loss of life. We want them to recognize how
impact what they are seeing on the shop
floor or in the field. And we want them to
be familiar with changing technology and
the effect new technology may have on
methods, processes, materials, etc., related
to pressure equipment.
How do industries evolve if not through
continuing education? Verifying what they
34
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
It is the worldwide factor that may best
from the National Board website
education for our industry. Although their
account and enroll in continuing
inspectors – whether in North America, Asia,
or Europe – should be exposed to a consistent,
relevant form of continuing education. When
that occurs, the boiler and pressure vessel
industry can be assured of a high level of
proficiency, no matter who is inspecting their
equipment. In return, we as a global society
will know we are in safer hands.
education training. Under the
Online Training Center there
is a Catalog/Bundles tab – all
continuing education training is
listed under this tab. It is important
to note, all courses within a bundle
must be completed to receive
credit for the continuing education
when renewing the associated
credential.
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
TRAINING COURSES AND SEMINARS
DEPARTMENT
2013 Classroom Training Courses and Seminars
All training is held at the National Board Training Centers in Columbus, Ohio, unless otherwise noted. Class size
is limited and availability subject to change. Check the National Board website for up-to-date availability.
COMMISSION/ENDORSEMENT COURSES
(B/O)
(N) (I) (IC)
Authorized Inspector Supervisor Course
TUITION: $1,495
2.6 CEUs Issued
August 5-9, 2013
November 4-8, 2013
Authorized Nuclear Inspector Course
TUITION: $1,495
2.8 CEUs Issued
September 9-13, 2013
Authorized Nuclear Inservice
Inspector Course TUITION: $1,495
2.5 CEUs Issued
September 16-20, 2013
Inservice Commission Course
TUITION: $2,995
9.6 CEUs Issued
July 22-August 2, 2013
September 23-October 4, 2013
(A)
New Construction Commission and
Authorized Inspector Course
TUITION: $2,995
7.0 CEUs Issued
December 2-13, 2013
N AT I ON AL BOAR D . ORG
(C) Authorized Nuclear Inspector
(Concrete) Course
TUITION: $1,495
2.5 CEUs Issued
December 9-13, 2013
(NS) Authorized Nuclear Inspector
Supervisor Course
TUITION: $1,495
2.5 CEUs Issued
November 18-22, 2013
CONTINUING EDUCATION SEMINARS
(VR)
Pressure Relief Valve Repair Seminar
OFF-SITE TUITION: $1,595
September 23-27, 2013, Houston, TX
(RO) Boiler and Pressure Vessel Repair
Seminar
OFF-SITE TUITION: $895
October 15-17, 2013, Houston, TX
S UM M E R 2013 NATIONAL BOARD B U LLET IN
35
DEPARTMENT
THE WAY WE WERE
VOYAGE OF THE PADDLE-STEAMER PROVIDENCE
I
n the nineteenth century, boiler explosions were to riverboats what tornadoes are today to mobile homes. And so it
was in 1872. Following months of waiting for the Darling River to rise, the paddle-steamer Providence finally achieved
floatation and headed south with 200 bales of wool. Approaching Kinchega homestead in New South Wales, Australia,
the steamer’s boiler exploded, killing four crew members.
Force of the concussion not only split the boat’s hull, it launched an anvil and heavy hammer yards from the disaster
scene. Legend has it that before their fatal departure, the crew gathered at Menindee pub before returning to the paddler
and igniting the boiler for their long-awaited departure.
But was a failure to check the boiler’s low water level a result of the crew members’ intoxication?
Not according to Bob Butrims.
After examining the boiler in question in 1996, he concluded it was of faulty construction, which meant the Providence
“was a time bomb waiting to go off.”
So how was Butrims able to locate a historic yet damaged piece of pressure equipment more than 100 years later?
It can be found today where it landed: embedded along the Darling riverbank several hundred yards from where the
explosion occurred.
This account is an excerpt from National Board Public Affairs Director Paul Brennan’s book,
B L O W B A C K: An Anecdotal Look at Pressure Equipment and Other Harmful Devices That Can Kill You. Call 1-614-888-
8320 or visit www.nationalboard.org to order your copy.
36
N ATI ONAL B OAR D BU L L E TI N SUMMER 2 0 1 3
NATIONALBOARD .ORG
Headquarters, Training and Conference Center,
and Inspection Training Center
1055 Crupper Avenue
Columbus, Ohio 43229-1183
Phone 614.888.8320
Fax 614.888.0750
Testing Laboratory
7437 Pingue Drive
Worthington, Ohio 43085-1715
Phone 614.888.8320
Fax 614.848.3474
national board.org
Visit for Bulletin Archives