September/October 1998 Inspectioneering Journal
Date September/October 1998
Volume  4
Issue 5
Return to Journal Index
Subscribe Today for Full Access

September/October 1998 Inspectioneering Journal Article Index

  • September/October 1998 Inspectioneering Journal
    By Bernie Weber at Det Norske Veritas

    Quality failure rate data have long been needed by the Chemical Process Industry. Unfortunately, the emphasis too often has been on the collection of data rather than on its uses . One must answer the question of what to do with the data once it has been collected. The type of information that would allow more effective continuous improvement is often collected without any real thought other than, "sounds like we should have it," or "we might need it someday." Data collection is typically driven by perceived data requirements, regulatory requirements, and data that make day-to-day work assignments more efficient or provide proof of work performed.

  • September/October 1998 Inspectioneering Journal
    By Greg Alvarado at Inspectioneering Journal

    I have observed through literally hundreds of discussions and reading numerous articles on risk-based approaches that at least one potential business pitfall is appearing when owner-operators choose to begin with a "Level 1" (very qualitative) approach. They may not have the confidence to take advantage of re-allocating resources from the "low" risk equipment to the "higher" risk equipment.

  • September/October 1998 Inspectioneering Journal
    By John Reynolds at Intertek

    In this first part of a two-part article, I will outline a process that our company uses to review and measure the effectiveness of our pressure equipment integrity management process. Then in Part 2, next issue, I will "fill in the blanks" on some specific issues that we measure.

  • September/October 1998 Inspectioneering Journal
    By Bruce A. Pellegrino at Sensor Networks, Inc.

    Faced with stricter OSHA regulations and increased competitiveness in the global market, process facilities have looked toward a technical solution, including man-less entry into vessels, pressure vessels, and tanks for their internal inspections.

  • September/October 1998 Inspectioneering Journal
    By Greg Alvarado at Inspectioneering Journal, and Paul Barringer at Barringer & Associates

    Inspection to determine mechanical integrity is important to verify that equipment is suitable for intended use, i.e. to prevent or minimize the consequences of catastrophic releases of toxic, reactive, flammable, or explosive chemicals as required by OSHA 1910.119 - Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals (and other jurisdictional codes).

Inspectioneering Journal

Explore over 20 years of articles written by our team of subject matter experts.

Company Directory

Find relevant products, services, and technologies.

Job Postings

Discover job opportunities that match your skillset.

Case Studies

Learn from the experience of others in the industry.

Event Calendar

Find upcoming conferences, training sessions, online events, and more.

Industry News

Stay up-to-date with the latest inspection and asset integrity management news.


Read short articles and insights authored by industry experts.


Commonly used asset integrity management and inspection acronyms.

Asset Intelligence Reports

Download brief primers on various asset integrity management topics.


Watch educational and informative videos directly related to your profession.

Expert Interviews

Inspectioneering's archive of interviews with industry subject matter experts.