# OSHA And NH3



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

From DTN...

Regards, Mike

http://www.dtnprogressivefarmer.com/dtnag/common/link.do?symbolicName=/free/news/template1&paneContentId=2003&paneParentId=70452&product=/ag/free/home/quickview&vendorReference=0702DAAC


----------



## rjmoses (Apr 4, 2010)

I read the article twice and didn't find what specific changes OSHA is talking about. Did I miss it?

A big difference between $20,000 and $2,100 estimated costs to implement. But that must be the difference between government dollars and our dollars.

Ammonium nitrate is not available hereabouts, If NH3 is stopped, that leaves just urea, 28/32, and livestock manure.

Ralph


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

rjmoses said:


> I read the article twice and didn't find what specific changes OSHA is talking about. Did I miss it?
> 
> A big difference between $20,000 and $2,100 estimated costs to implement. But that must be the difference between government dollars and our dollars.
> 
> ...


Don't think the mentioned it specifically Ralph, just safety measures it seems......it is nasty stuff to work around. The bigger question is what will happen to other forms of N if anhydrous is scaled back significantly.......


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

somedevildawg said:


> The bigger question is what will happen to other forms of N if anhydrous is scaled back significantly.......


They will double in price....

Regards, Mike


----------



## mlappin (Jun 25, 2009)

Vol said:


> They will double in price....
> 
> Regards, Mike


Spread more chicken poo. we had quit a bit of ground covered last spring wit hit, will be doing the other half of the ground where it was first spread and all the ground going to corn next spring we can get done.

Still had to side dress about 40 units of 28% LAN on though if I remember correctly.

I'm gonna double check and see if Dad already has next years fertilizer booked or not.


----------



## gearhartfarms82 (May 10, 2015)

Whats the big changes?


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

I tried to find out but no luck. It sounds like requiring excess flow valves so when a hose breaks it closes like a propane tank.


----------



## haybaler101 (Nov 30, 2008)

slowzuki said:


> I tried to find out but no luck. It sounds like requiring excess flow valves so when a hose breaks it closes like a propane tank.


Already had that on wagons for 30 years.


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

Looking around at other links it appears to be the Risk Management Plans, used to be a retailer exception which is nuts given the size of storage retailers have. They aren't usually expensive if you use the association templates but some consultants charge a lot of money to fill them out for you.

You more of less go through your site and do a code review of all your equipment, if you are up to snuff or exceed minimums, then based on numbers of tanks and the volumes of NH3 and location/population density of neighbours you figure who's going to be most effected, then you prepare emergency plans and evacuation planning/notification in case of leak/accident.

It looks similar to the LPG FSA/RMP/RSMP process. If your site is in a rural area with few neighbours, very little to do, about 1 hour work to comply. If you have tanks in town hard up against a hospital or old folks home or a school, you may never be able to make your facility compliant and they may shut you down.



haybaler101 said:


> Already had that on wagons for 30 years.


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

More....

Regards, Mike

http://www.agweb.com/article/anhydrous-dealers-preparing-for-osha-policy-changes--NAA-associated-press/


----------



## slowzuki (Mar 8, 2011)

Finally found what it actually is - the risk assessment stuff is already required, what's new is a process safety management section. For a simple distribution terminal there isn't much process to manage, you would document maintenance such as hose change outs and piping age etc but the process isn't really changed, products and pressure always the same.

Now the folks doing something with nh3, in some kind of blending or process, that is more complicated and could get quite costly.


----------



## luke strawwalker (Jul 31, 2014)

More kneejerk stupidity... typical gubmint...

The West, Texas explosion was a result of an old ammonium nitrate plant poorly maintained, built in the middle of nowhere when it started but then subsequently surrounded by homes and subdivisions thanks to developers and suburbanites, going up...

Not even the same type of fertilizer, but never let facts get in the way of a good crisis and it's "necessary* gubmint resolution...

Sometimes I think this country DESERVES to starve...

You can't fix stupid... maybe starving it out would help...

Later! OL JR


----------



## Vol (Jul 5, 2009)

luke strawwalker said:


> Sometimes I think this country DESERVES to starve...
> 
> You can't fix stupid... maybe starving it out would help...
> 
> Later! OL JR


I think your on to something there JR!

Regards, Mike


----------



## panhandle9400 (Jan 17, 2010)

I am lucky I guess ? I have my own nh3 storage tank and nurse trailers . I know here in my state a farmer is not under the rules such as a fertilizer seller . Leave it up to our worthless prez he is wrecking all of this country as he can.


----------



## haybaler101 (Nov 30, 2008)

Can't make NH3 too complicated or take it away completely, too many meth heads depend on it as an important part of the formula.


----------



## glasswrongsize (Sep 15, 2015)

> Can't make NH3 too complicated or take it away completely, too many meth heads depend on it as an important part of the formula.


Our meth-heads seem to be a little "smarter???" here, they've done a work-around and now have a couple of more options. NH3 makes the best dope, but the other way is "safer".

73, Mark


----------



## somedevildawg (Jun 20, 2011)

glasswrongsize said:


> Our meth-heads seem to be a little "smarter???" here, they've done a work-around and now have a couple of more options. NH3 makes the best dope, but the other way is "safer".
> 73, Mark


Now that's an oxymoron.......


----------



## glasswrongsize (Sep 15, 2015)

> Now that's an oxymoron.......


You're preaching to the choir brother!!! There wasn't one of them little smiley faces that was satisfactory to use to illustrate the amount of sarcasm used.


----------

