Back to basics
ANDREW PERKS
Andrew Perks is a subject expert in ammonia refrigeration. Since undertaking his apprenticeship in
Glasgow in the 1960s he has held positions of contracts engineer, project engineer, refrigeration design
engineer, company director for a refrigeration contracting company and eventually owning his own
contracting company and low temperature cold store. He is now involved in adding skills to the ammonia
industry, is merSETA accredited and has written a variety of unit standards for SAQA that define the
levels to be achieved in training in our industry.
WHY ARE AMMONIA
REFRIGERATION SYSTEMS
CLASSED AS MHIs?
By Andrew Perks
We take a look at Major Hazard Installation (MHI) Regulations and the legal
requirements for ammonia refrigeration plants.
I
have recently been involved in drawing up emergency plans
for quite a few large ammonia plants. What surprises me, is
the lack of knowledge about hazards. So, I have broken into my
series on the role and application of refrigeration to bring you
something on MHI Regulations in an attempt to clear up the
legal requirements for ammonia plants.
Terence Thackwary of MHR Consultants, an approved
authorised inspection authority (AIA) for undertaking MHI plant
inspections, replied to my query as follows …
1.
2.
3.
According to the OHS Act, the definition of an MHI is as follows:
Major hazard installation means an installation:
a. where more than the prescribed quantity of any substance is or
may be kept, whether permanently or temporarily; or
b. where any substance is produced, used, handled, or stored in
such a form and quantity that it has the potential to cause a
major incident.
A site that has been registered as
an MHI also has the legal right to
determine what developments are
done in close proximity to the site.
The above definition determines that any refrigeration plant
that uses ammonia is considered an MHI and thus means it is
subjected to the MHI Regulations, which is part of the OHS Act,
explained Thackwary.
The Act specifies the following responsibility in terms of
who is responsible for when an MHI risk assessment needs to
be done:
www.hvacronline.co.za
Every employer, self-employed person, and user shall notify the
chief inspector, provincial director, and relevant local government
in writing of:
a. the erection of any installation that will be a major hazard
installation, prior to commencement of erection thereof; and
b. the conversion of any existing installation into a major hazard
installation, prior to such conversion.
Every employer, self-employed person, and user shall notify the
chief inspector, the local government, and the provincial director
within 60 days of the promulgation of these regulations of an
existing major hazard installation.
No employer, self-employed person, and user shall modify
an installation by increasing its storage, production capacity,
altering the process, or by effecting any other change that
may increase the risk of an existing major hazard installation,
without notifying the chief inspector, relevant local
government, and provincial director in writing.
It is imperative that the local authority be notified about the
installation or upgrading of an MHI.
The local authority has the following duties as per the Act:
1.
2.
Without derogating from the provisions of the National Building
Regulations and Building Standards Act, 1977 (Act No. 103 of
1977), no local government shall permit the erection of a new
major hazard installation at a separation distance less than that
which poses a risk to:
a. airports;
b. neighbouring independent major hazard installations;
c. housing and other centres of population; or
d. any other similar facility.
Provided that the local government shall permit new property
development only where there is a separation distance which will
not pose a risk in terms of the risk assessment.
Provided further that the local government shall prevent any
development adjacent to an installation that will result in that
installation being declared a major hazard installation.
Where a local government does not have facilities available to
control a major incident or to comply with the requirements
RACA Journal I January 2019
69