Changes in Stage 2 Vapor Recovery Rules for Gasoline Dispensing Facilities

 By Joe Hoch, chief, Regional Pollutants & Mobile Sources Section, Bureau of Air Management
Stage 2 vapor recovery systems on gasoline dispensers have been required in southeastern Wisconsin for decades. That will be changing due to a May 16, 2012 finding by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) that onboard refueling vapor recovery (ORVR) technology is in widespread use throughout the motor vehicle fleet. This finding by EPA allows states, including Wisconsin, to no longer require Stage 2 vapor recovery.

Stage 2 vapor recovery is a control technology located at individual gas stations. The system involves capturing and controlling gasoline vapors when a vehicle is being fueled at the pump. The system uses special dispensing nozzles that collect the vapors and pump them back into the storage tank below ground, instead of releasing them into the air.
Newer vehicles are equipped with ORVR control technology. This essentially serves the same purpose as Stage 2 vapor recovery. Fuel vapors from the vehicle gas taking are captured during refueling and travel to an activated carbon pack canister within the vehicle, which absorbs the vapor.
The Department of Natural Resources (DNR) has been working collaboratively with the Department of Safety and Professional Services (DSPS) throughout the Stage 2 vapor recovery decommissioning process and has developed the following forms (PDF) to assist gasoline stations considering decommissioning:

• Question and answer document
• Decommission notification form

In addition, DNR has developed a draft State Implementation Plan (SIP) to address the change in the Stage 2 Vapor Recovery requirements. The purpose of the SIP is to get formal approval from EPA for the proposed discontinuation of the program. A copy of the draft SIP can be found at http://dnr.wi.gov/topic/AirQuality/. DNR will hold a public hearing on this document on October 8, 2012 in Waukesha and will be accepting public comment on it until October 12, 2012.

Why Scary Lab Accidents Happen

By Enrico Uva | September 10th 2012 02:00 AM

If a chemist has never been in a lab accident, he has been lucky. Of course luck is more likely to come to those whose mentors have learned from bad experiences and to those who have taken preventive measures seriously, despite their anal nature. Chemical reactions create products with behaviors that differ from those of the ingredients. That's what makes them intriguing, and it's also what makes them potentially dangerous. No matter how simple and controllable a reaction seems on paper, when it's carried out in real life, the exact conditions determine its rate. And when gases or acids acquire too much kinetic energy, no one wants eyes, lungs and flesh in their way.

As an adolescent I played with my chemicals more than my instructors did. Rarely did they carry out demonstrations while lecturing. Seldom did they deviate from the tight parameters of cookbook labs. So I unconsciously associated accidents with amateurs or with large scale industrial processes. But after a freshman year of chemistry, I got my first summer job in the lab after a metallurgical company did not rehire a chemistry student previously involved in a serious analytical lab accident.   (More.....)

ANSI/NFSI B101.6-2012 Standard Released

Aug 31, 2012

Titled "Standard Guide For Commercial Entrance Matting In Reducing Slips, Trips And Falls," it addresses mats and runners in commercial facilities.

The American National Standards Institute B101 Committee on Slip, Trip and Fall Prevention has released the latest in its line of walkway safety standards: ANSI/NFSI B101.6-2012, "Standard Guide For Commercial Entrance Matting In Reducing Slips, Trips And Falls." It will help building managers eliminate slip-and-fall hazards including dirt, moisture, and contaminants. (More...)