"Boiler Tank" (sic) explodes in Mexico Tequilla Plant 9

[MJCronin]

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/ar...o-leaving-six-workers-dead-three-injured.html

==============================================================
SIX DEAD --- Many injured - an OSHA preventable, yet repeated tank accident
==============================================================

Looks like somebody was welding on a flammable liquid FB storage tank ...We shall see

"Emergency Relief Vents" .... we don't need no stinkin' Relief vents on our repurposed tank !! ...

https://www.hazardexonthenet.net/article/206633/Explosion-at-Mexican-tequila-plant-kills-five.aspx

(Expect a lot more of this in the continental USA if the Repubs win in November ... and destroy OSHA & CSB)

Your thoughts ??



MJCronin
Sr. Process Engineer

 

[JStephen]

Liquid storage tanks don't normally have relief vents sized for combustion in the tank. Quite often, they will have emergency vents, but those are sized to relieve vapors generated by fire exposure, not for combustion in the tank itself. I couldn't get the video to play, but didn't see anything to indicate the tank was repurposed, either.

 

[FacEngrPE]

https://i.dailymail.co.uk/1s/2024/07/24/18/87721091-13668563-image-a-37_1721842380389.jpg[/URL]]The boiler tank was being welded by workers who were contracted through a third-party when it exploded. The impact of the blast ejected the tank to an empty lot next to the José Cuervo factory

This sounds like a fuel / air explosion in a tank ignited by welding. An easy mistake if you do not have the correct safety gear on site to ensure the tank atmosphere is not explosive / ignitable.

As the tank is called a "boiler tank", and that the tank is located in a distillery, I can guess that the tank might have a heating coil, and might be used to distill something, but the normal use of the tank is unlikely to have initiated this event.

 

[TugboatEng]

MJ, notice the country this occurred in and notice where so many of their working aged men are going. Neutering OSHA may not be as much of a problem as the mass importation of workers that don't even know what OSHA is.

 

[1503-44]

Not limited to OSHA regulations. Boeing and everyone else has a potentiol get out of jail card. Free, except for the cost of the judge. Welcome to the 3rd world.

--Einstein gave the same test to students every year. When asked why he would do something like that, "Because the answers had changed."

 

[RVAmeche]

But think of the profits.

 

[cranky108]

The issue is not Neutering OSHA, as much as OSHA, and other ABC government entities, creating laws that congress expressly did not give them power to do. Tug, I agree some of what OSHA does is good, but we need to call it out when they get out of bounds.

But none of this applies outside the US.

 

[SnTMan]

These agencies not only make laws, but they adjudicate them and enforce them. No separation of powers, no checks and balances here.

The problem with sloppy work is that the supply FAR EXCEEDS the demand

 

[TugboatEng]

Air Resource Board enters the chat.

 

[1503-44]

Congress makes law.
Regulations are agency interpretations of the law that should keep you within the intent of the law.
Any regulatory requirement could be challenged in court and still can be.

What Changed
Courts may not defer to an agency’s interpretation of the law just because it (the law) might be ambiguous. Instead, from now on, the Supreme Court said that judges “must exercise their independent judgment” when ruling on cases involving agency rules, regulations, guidance, or other actions. This signifies a major shift, putting much more oversight and accountability in the hands of judges. Now, judges will be freer to impose their own readings of the law — giving them broad leeway to upend regulations on health care, the environment, financial regulations, technology and more.

Unelected judges will independently decide questions on how the law will be interpreted. So in other words, judges will now make the regulations. Judges can strike down rules based on their own policy preferences. Until now, a court had to let the agencies’ interpretations stand as long as they fell within the realm of reasonability, even if the judge didn’t think it was the best reading. Now the judges can do what they like. IMO, that's exactly like you asking me, if you should have brain surgery. I know best. No matter if I know nothing. My no-nothing ruling is just simply far better than your 100-doctor medical opinion.

The courts now have exclusive power over every open issue—no matter how expertise-driven or policy-laden—involving the meaning of regulatory law. The courts are now the country’s administrative czar. Please explain how that makes things better. You have only removed the experts from the decision process. See how well you do when I remove your brain entirely.

If you think it's bad now, wait and see what engineering marvels will result from judges independent decisions on design and operating issues, how long it will take to get any decision at all, what you will do in the meantime and if the judges design is worse or better than yours, if it works, or just simply blows up in your face. So, let's see what the courts have up their sleeves for the FAA certification process, the Nuclear Regulatory Commission, FDIC, SEC, FDA.... and if all judges are of the same opinion. Of course not. Leading to chaos in the lower courts until SCOTUS imposes their solution. Again Unelected political appointees, again with no first hand experience in anything likely to be of relevance to any of these types of cases, being briefed by lawyers of similar qualifications.

The only thing I can think of that could be worse is Congress trying to write laws so specific that nothing is left to interpretation by either agencies or courts. Just increase the CFRs by a 1E9 factor, not written by any persons knowledgeabl in the fields, with the possible exception of lobbyist's biased contributions.

Boeing better get used to their planes only being allowed to fly within the US borders.


--Einstein gave the same test to students every year. When asked why he would do something like that, "Because the answers had changed."

 

[TiCl4]

(Expect a lot more of this in the continental USA if the Repubs win in November ... and destroy OSHA & CSB)

Not limited to OSHA regulations. Boeing and everyone else has a potentiol get out of jail card.

There's too much hand-wringing on political issues here. Is this an engineering forum or not? Besides, you are completely misplaced on what government agency regulates and audits pressure vessels and boilers. In the US, it is the States that perform this function, not the Federal government.

Let's not side-track from the actual engineering issue:

The boiler tank was being welded by workers who were contracted through a third-party when it exploded. The impact of the blast ejected the tank to an empty lot next to the José Cuervo factory

Agreed with FacEngrPe - an internal deflagration is not something that would be required to be considered by boiler code or any other applicable RAGAGEP, and there are very few vessels designed with internal deflagration in mind. This would be a failure of the hot work or LOTO system, by my guess.

 

[cranky108]

Are these the same experts that believe disturbed soil should be reseated to three blades of grass per square inch? The same experts that told wheat farmers they need several porta-potties per unit of land for the harvesters. Or I could go on, but the point is some of the experts are not very big picture people.
I have an OSHA cowboy inspection cartoon in my office that shows how over reaching they can be.
But life involves risks, and you can't fix all of them.

The sad point is the people who can't see the risks of what they are doing, or any concept of what the risks are.

 

[1503-44]

So you all say regulations are not part of engineering?

Pipeline regulation is not by states, railroad and interstate trucking transportation, Highway and Airport design are all by DOT/FAA/PHMSA/FHA. Marine Navigation. Coast Guard. Interstate commerce. Food and drugs, medical treatments by FDA. Security and Exchange, Banking, FCC, There are many things that the States have no reguations for at all, not to mention no capacity to regulate at all. Plus 52 sets of regulations won't fly well and increase their cost by way more than 52 times (I include DC and Puerto Rico.) Look at the volumes of CFRs. Now all subject to some judge's, or many judges, personal bias and interpretation. Most of you are downwind, or downstream of some other state and you all just got time transported to 1886.

Yes Cranky, the sad part of it is exactly why the regulations exist. Sure, some may seem silly, but you can contest those in court anyway. Except now you may be at a loss to explain if your treatment is working, or if its just the cocaine kicking in.


--Einstein gave the same test to students every year. When asked why he would do something like that, "Because the answers had changed."

 

[TiCl4]

1503-44

NO! You have it backwards. Regulations should NEVER be "part" of engineering. Engineering SHOULD be part of regulations. Adoption of engineering standards, like ASME BPVC, is a perfect example as engineering that becomes regulation. I am NOT saying that federal regulations are superfluous or can be abolished at will. I happen to think that federal regulations are quite important to our society.

I'm also saying that the case that was being discussed, which involves a boiler, IS the under the purview of states, most of which adopt ASME code as law.

All this political talk about OSHA and other agencies being abolished runs rather far afield from the original content. Your comment about pipeline regs, DOT regs, etc. is also off the mark. In this particular case, the governing regulation would be set by the state, not a federal agency.

If you want to discuss upcoming election impacts on regulations affecting engineering "Where is Engineering Going in the Next 5 Years" is a much better place to post. The main discussion here should be centered on internal deflagration, engineering considerations, etc. Not an upcoming election.

 

[TugboatEng]

Societies such as ASME, American Bureau of Shipping, UL, etc... are all privately operated and have competition. If they put out bad regulations, we can use different organizations. A recent personal example involved ABS. They were asking us to jump through unreasonable hoops with regards to acquisition of a component so we went to US Coast Guard for approval instead. They accepted ASME's rules for the same component.

Meanwhile, Air Resource Board tells me that I can no longer run my brand new engines that they approved 5 years earlier and require millions of dollars per vessel to replace.

 

[FacEngrPE]

OSHA is not effective in Tequila, Mexico

https://maps.app.goo.gl/UF4cVJ2NwZnDQXNL9

Mexico has a workplace safety regulator, Link. My Spanish is not good enough to decipher Mexico's boiler regulations, other than that they exist.

The only safety relief that is remotely applicable to this situation is a frangible tank roof.

https://youtu.be/PBiH5Ofd-dw.

This tank did not have a frangible roof, as that would have left the tank shell on the ground, and only the tank roof would have gone flying.

 

[Brian Malone]

TiC4 is correct. Some of you are taking this issue way out its scope. All the OSHA, ASME, ASTM, US state and federal regulations do not apply. FacEngr points it out - this happened in Mexico.

 

[cranky108]

But sadly, in many countries the regulations that do exist are often skirted with bribes to inspectors. I don't know about in this case, but with people hurt, I would tend to suspect so.
The issue maybe that professional society's tend to be international, but the documents may not be translated and usable outside English speaking countries. This maybe a gap that does not allow other countries to adopt these standards.

 

[JStephen]

Just to note- there have been tanks in the US that were blown up by people welding on them when they shouldn't have been- I remember seeing one or more CSB reports along these lines.
To the frangible roof- yes, that would have helped, although they aren't necessarily intended for that effect. Frangible roofs can be hard to achieve on small tanks like that, though.
I have seen a few silos that were to be designed with explosion panels adequate to vent a dust explosion, but have never seen that on a liquid tank.

 

[Heaviside1925]

Based on the articles I have read so far, there is not enough information to armchair quarterback this event. I think the term "boiler" may be a mistranslation, especially considering these articles are being written by people with non-technical backgrounds. The terms tank-boiler-vessel in different combinations and meanings are not very conclusive in translation, unless one knows the actually technical vernacular. (hoping a technical native Spanish speaker may chime in)
The only facts that seem to be evident is there was an explosion as a result of what is described as welding, on some sort of vessel/boiler/tank. As JStephen noted, this happens in the US as well. The explosion, in turn, caused a fire, which spread to other vessels.
A few comments: Alcohol fires are notoriously difficult to fight, due to alcohol's polar natural and its almost invisible daytime flame. Also, assuming Jose Cuervo is no different, typical distillation of spirits results in an extremely high proof (180-190 range) but is cut with water before bottling, so any bulk storage of the tequila likely had an extremely high ethanol content.