Introduction | When Safety Meets Operational Reality January 2026 — by Emily Henry, PE (SC) , CFSE, Functional Safety Group Manager — This is the third installment in The PHA Recommendation Playbook, a series intended to help process safety managers, EHS leaders, and facility managers navigate the practical challenges of resolving PHA recommendations. In Part 1, we examined how resource constraints can stall progress . In Part 2, we explored how technical complexity  can turn seemingly simple recommendations into multi-layered engineering efforts. In this article, we focus on a challenge that often emerges after solutions are identified and budgets are approved: scheduling and operational disruptions. Many PHA recommendations are fairly straightforward and are not technically difficult to implement. The challenge for implementation is typically timing. Commissioning equipment related to Safety recommendations often can require plant outages, temporary process changes, or reduced throughput. Production schedules, however, are rarely flexible. When commissioning equipment related to safety recommendations conflicts with operational demands, recommendations can remain open far longer than intended. This tension is not a sign of poor management. It is a structural reality in many regulated facilities. How organizations navigate it determines whether PHA recommendations become a source of frustration or a driver of long-term resilience.   Scheduling and Operational Disruptions in PHA Recommendations | Why Timing Becomes the Constraint Scheduling and operational disruptions refer to the practical limitations that prevent PHA recommendations from being implemented without affecting production. Unlike administrative actions or procedural updates, many recommendations require physical changes to equipment, controls, or processes. These changes often cannot be completed while a unit is running. Implementation may require planned outages or partial shutdowns, temporary workarounds to maintain production, or coordination with existing maintenance and turnaround schedules. In facilities with continuous operations, even short interruptions can have downstream effects on supply commitments, staffing, and revenue. These challenges are especially common in environments where production peaks are seasonal or where outage windows are limited and planned years in advance. Safety recommendation implementation due dates may conflict with commercial commitments, customer demand, or contractual obligations. As a result, recommendation implementations are often deferred not because they are unimportant, but because there is no scheduled outage during which to complete the work. It is important to recognize that these challenges are structural. They cannot be resolved with documentation alone. A justification memo does not create an outage window. A tracking spreadsheet does not reduce production pressure. Addressing scheduling conflicts requires coordination, planning, and leadership alignment.   The Cost of Deferral | When PHA Recommendations Stay Open Too Long When PHA recommendations are repeatedly deferred due to scheduling conflicts, risk compounds over time. OSHA expects recommendations to be resolved in a timely manner or to have clear documentation explaining why they remain open. While operational constraints may be valid, they are rarely sufficient on their own if delays persist without a plan for resolution. During audits, an insufficient deferral explanation for an incomplete recommendation action such as “open due to operations” would likely invite follow-up questions. Auditors want to understand what interim safeguards are in place to mitigate unresolved risk, whether the issue is being actively managed, and when resolution is expected. Without evidence of intent and resolution planning, deferrals can be interpreted as avoidance of addressing risk. From a safety perspective, prolonged deferral means operating with known unmitigated risks for extended periods. Over time, deferred recommendations can normalize the presence of known risk, particularly when scheduling constraints repeatedly delay implementation. Thus, the urgency of the recommendation basis fades due to stopgap measures seemingly serving a mitigative purpose even though the underlying risk remains. Operationally, deferring action items can create larger problems later. Work that could have been completed during a short outage may require a longer shutdown once conditions change. Deferred recommendations also increase maintenance burden and can contribute to fragile operations where unplanned events have outsized consequences. Avoiding disruption today often leads to greater disruption later.   Balancing Production Demands and PHA Resolution Internally Facilities that manage scheduling challenges effectively tend to be more successful at integrating safety recommendation work into their process. Facilities that practice intentional schedule management often treat safety as part of their operational planning rather than a separate obligation. This starts with early coordination. When PHA recommendations are identified, they should be reviewed alongside maintenance plans and turnaround schedules as soon as possible. Understanding which recommendations require equipment during the downtime allows teams to align resolution efforts with existing outage windows rather than waiting until conflicts arise. Phased implementation can also reduce impact. In some cases, recommendations can be partially implemented during normal operations, with final steps completed during an outage. While it is not always possible, this approach can reduce downtime and spread work more evenly. Leadership alignment around closing PHA recommendations plays a critical role. Safety, operations, and production teams must share ownership of outcomes. Communication around PHA Risk gap closure requirements should focus on operational consequences, not just regulatory language. Framing recommendations in terms of reliability, uptime, and asset protection often resonates more effectively than compliance alone. Resolving PHA recommendations should not be treated as extra work layered on top of production. It serves as a pathway to resilience in operations in the long run.   When Scheduling Conflicts Signal the Need for External Support Not every scheduling challenge requires outside help, but some situations benefit from additional perspective. Many PHA providers conclude their involvement once recommendations are issued. Internal teams are then left to reconcile safety needs with operational realities on their own. An experienced external partner  can help when scheduling complexity escalates. They can assist with developing implementation plans that minimize downtime, sequencing work to align with production constraints, and identifying opportunities where a single outage can address multiple recommendations. Partners that offer project management oversight add another layer of value. Coordinated scheduling, clear milestones, and defined accountability help keep resolution efforts moving, even when timelines extend across months or years. This structure reduces the risk of recommendations being forgotten or deprioritized as operational pressures shift. The right partner does not add friction. They provide clarity. They help establish a clear path from identified risk to operational resilience, even when timing is constrained.   Proactive Planning to Reduce Scheduling and Operational Disruption Many scheduling challenges can be reduced through proactive planning. During PHA sessions or revalidations, recommendations likely to require outages should be flagged early. This allows teams to assess feasibility and begin planning before production schedules are finalized. Including operations leadership in early discussions is essential. Their insight into outage availability and process constraints can shape more realistic implementation plans. Building safety-driven work into long-range maintenance planning also reduces the likelihood of last-minute conflicts. Documentation is equally important. Clearly recording why actions are deferred, what interim safeguards are in place, and how resolution will occur demonstrates intent and control. This documentation supports audit defensibility and helps maintain internal alignment. Scheduling challenges are not excuses for inaction. They are planning problems that can be addressed with foresight and coordination. From Risk to Resilience | When Smart Scheduling Strengthens Operations Facilities that address scheduling challenges deliberately often see benefits beyond compliance. Emergency shutdowns become less frequent. Outage scope and duration are better controlled. Confidence in the compliance posture improves because risks are actively managed rather than deferred indefinitely. Trust also improves across the organization. Operations teams trust that safety decisions consider production realities. Safety teams trust that execution timelines are realistic. Leadership trusts the results because progress is visible and defensible. Well-planned PHA recommendation resolution does not disrupt operations. It stabilizes them.   The Takeaway | Safety Shouldn’t Be an Operational Surprise Scheduling and operational disruptions are among the most common and underestimated barriers to closing PHA recommendations. They sit at the intersection of safety and production, where priorities often compete. Treating safety work as an interruption makes resolution harder. Treating it as a planned investment in uptime and reliability changes the conversation. When scheduling is addressed strategically, PHA recommendations stop feeling like a cost of doing business and start delivering measurable value. Whether handled internally or with trusted external support, the objective remains the same: defensible improvements, reduced risk, and a facility that emerges stronger, not just compliant.

Introduction | What is UL 508A? November 2025 - Erich Zende —  Industrial control panels are the backbone of modern plants. When those panels are built and labeled to UL 508A, inspectors and insurers have a clear basis for acceptance, and your maintenance team gains documentation that simplifies future changes. This article explains what UL 508A covers, where it fits with NEC and OSHA rules, how Short-Circuit Current Rating (SCCR) is established, what regulations changed in 2025, and what to ask a UL 508A control panel fabrication shop before you place an order. UL 508A  is the North American product safety standard for industrial control panels used in ordinary (non-hazardous) locations, operating at 1000 volts or less. The standard defines construction methods, component suitability, spacings, markings, and required documentation so a panel can be evaluated as “suitable” by Authorities Having Jurisdiction (AHJ). In practice, UL 508A sits alongside the National Electrical Code and OSHA rules. NEC Article 409  requires industrial control panels to be marked, including a Short-Circuit Current Rating (SCCR), and be installed so that the available fault current does not exceed the marked value. OSHA 1910.303  requires electrical equipment to be “approved,” which is shown through listing, labeling, or a field evaluation by a Nationally Recognized Testing Laboratory.   What Does UL 508A Cover? Construction and wiring UL 508A prescribes wiring methods, spacings, and clearances that prevent shock and arcing. It defines when and how to use overcurrent protection, disconnecting means, and the enclosure types required for the environment. It also mandates that markings must be present on the nameplate and drawings. Component suitability Components inside the panel must themselves be suitable. UL 508A references a companion document, commonly called Supplement SA  (now published as a separate UL document), that lists acceptable component standards and conditions of acceptability. For example, UL 489  molded-case circuit breakers are permitted for branch protection, while UL 1077  supplementary protectors are not a substitute for branch circuit protection. Marking and documentation A UL 508A panel must include required markings  such as voltage, full-load current, and SCCR, and deliver drawings and a field wiring diagram the installer can follow. What UL 508A does not cover Some electrical assemblies look similar to control panels but fall under different standards. Examples include UL 891 switchboards, UL 845 motor control centers, and fire alarm control units covered by UL 864. Additionally, panels with intrinsically safe circuit extensions into hazardous locations will refer to UL 698A.   UL 508A in the Code Landscape NEC Article 409 Panels must be marked and installed per 409.110 and related sections . The installer must verify that the available fault current at the point of installation does not exceed the marked SCCR. Failure to match these values is a common reason for red tags. OSHA “approved” equipment OSHA 1910.303 requires equipment to be acceptable only if “approved,” which means listed, labeled, certified, or otherwise determined to be safe by a recognized body. AHJs and insurers often expect a listed panel or a field evaluation report.   SCCR: What It Is and How It Is Established Short-Circuit Current Rating (SCCR )  is the maximum fault current a panel can safely withstand. NEC 409 requires it to be marked on the panel. It is established by UL 508A Supplement SB, which provides the methodology. This typically involves: Identifying the weakest link among power circuit components. Applying tables and tested combinations to determine each component’s rating. Considering current-limiting devices that can raise the overall SCCR. Marking the resulting SCCR on the nameplate and drawings. Design strategies to Raise SCCR Common approaches include using current-limiting fuses, tested combination motor controllers, and terminal blocks meeting the appropriate use groups and spacing.   Component Selection Under UL 508A A compliant panel uses components that are UL Listed or UL Recognized, following the conditions given in the component’s file. Supplement SA explains which standards apply, such as UL 489 circuit breakers, UL 98 disconnects, UL 1059 terminal blocks, and the UL 60947 family for many motor controllers. Underwriter’s Laboratory’s Product iQ tool  can help you verify the status of parts and to capture the specific conditions of acceptability in your bill of materials.   What Changed in 2025: Key UL 508A Revisions On June 26, 2025, UL published a revision to UL 508A that introduces several notable updates: Control circuit voltage limits are now defined at 120 Vac and 250 Vdc, aligning with NFPA 79 practices. Emergency stop requirements were adjusted, making E-Stop a function that may be required depending on the control scheme. Disconnecting means requirements for industrial machinery sections were clarified. Table SB4.1 received a correction for controllers rated 601 to 1000 V. UL 1059 terminal block requirements and overload protection for group motor applications were updated. UL maintains a “ future effective dates ” page so designers can see when new provisions take effect relative to publication. How UL 508A Certified Panels Add Business Value Smoother inspections Panels built and labeled to UL 508A provide a recognized basis for acceptance by AHJs and insurers, which reduces project risk and rework. Risk reduction A correctly established SCCR and appropriate protective devices add resiliency to an operation and reduce the likelihood of catastrophic faults and extended downtime. Simpler maintenance Standardized markings and documentation help technicians troubleshoot and make changes with confidence.   UL 508A in Fire and Gas Applications Panels that host Fire and Gas instrumentation , shutdown logic, and alarm interfaces are often constructed to UL 508A when they are installed in ordinary locations. If your design extends intrinsically safe circuits into hazardous areas, evaluate UL 698A for the related panel requirements. For dedicated fire alarm control units and accessories, reference UL 864. It is important to remember that functional safety for Safety Instrumented Systems is addressed by standards like IEC 61511; UL 508A covers panel construction and does not confer a SIL.   Understanding UL 508A Specification Language A typical clause example for a UL 508A specification will often read similar to this example: “Industrial control panels shall be UL 508A Listed. Provide nameplate marking with SCCR ≥ 65 kA at the service entrance. Enclosures shall meet NEMA 4X. Use UL 489 for branch protection and a UL 98 main disconnect. Use UL 1059 terminal blocks rated for field wiring. Provide documentation and labeling per NEC 409.110.”     Common Pitfalls to Avoid Treating UL 1077 supplementary protectors as branch circuit protection. Leaving the SCCR blank or below the available fault current at the installation point. Using terminal blocks that do not meet the correct use group for field wiring or spacing.   UL 508A Control Panel Deliverables Checklist Example Nameplate with SCCR and required electrical data Field wiring diagram and complete schematics Torque charts, conductor sizes, and protective device settings Bill of materials with component standards and conditions of acceptability   What to Ask a UL 508A Certified Panel Fabrication Shop Before Purchase When you engage a UL 508A panel fabricator , confirm both certification and methodology. Additional questions that are worth asking could include: What is your UL 508A shop file number and audit cadence under the Industrial Control Panel Shop Program? Do you have experience with NFPA 79 panels and, when relevant, UL 698A work for hazardous interfaces? How do you establish and document SCCR and what strategies do you use to reach higher ratings when the site’s available fault current is high? How do you track component suitability and conditions of acceptability, and how are those captured in the BOM and drawings? Can you support AHJ field evaluations when a listed panel needs on-site verification?   Designing for High SCCR and Maintainability Designing for high SCCR and maintainability begins with using current-limiting fuses and tested combination motor controllers to raise the panel’s SCCR without oversizing the assembly. Specify UL 1059 terminal blocks with the correct use groups and spacing and lay out the enclosure so power and control sections are separated, heat is managed, and service access is clear. These practices help reduce downtime throughout the panel’s life. Common Mistakes That Lead to Red Tags, Rework, or Downtime Marking an SCCR that is lower than the available fault current at the installation point. Misapplying supplementary protectors in place of branch protection. Using components without verifying their conditions of acceptability in Product iQ. Relying on outdated tables or assuming IEC ratings are equivalent to UL requirements in North America.   UL 508A vs Related Standards Topic Primary UL or IEC Standard When It Applies Industrial control panels in ordinary locations UL 508A General ICP product standard in North America Switchboards UL 891 Power distribution switchboards Motor control centers UL 845 MCC lineups Fire alarm control units UL 864 Life safety fire alarm equipment Panels with intrinsically safe circuit extensions into hazardous locations UL 698A ICPs related to hazardous locations Assemblies in IEC markets IEC 61439 Low-voltage switchgear and control gear assemblies Industrial machinery installation NFPA 79 / IEC 60204-1 Electrical equipment of machines   Frequently Asked Questions about UL 508A What does UL 508A mean? It is the safety standard used to evaluate industrial control panels for ordinary locations at 1000 V or less, including construction, components, markings, and documentation. Is UL 508A mandatory in industrial settings? There is no blanket federal law that makes it mandatory. In practice, AHJs and insurers often require listed equipment or a field evaluation. NEC 409 requires SCCR marking, and OSHA 1910.303 requires equipment to be “approved.” What is a UL 508A control panel? An assembly containing power and control components evaluated to UL 508A, installed in ordinary locations. It is not the same as a switchboard or Motor Control Center (MCC). What are the requirements for UL 508A certification? Use suitable components per Supplement SA, meet construction and spacing rules, establish SCCR per Supplement SB, apply required markings, and maintain documentation. Shops that participate in the Industrial Control Panel Shop Program  are audited and trained to apply the standard. What components are permitted in a UL 508A listed panel? Components must be UL Listed or UL Recognized for the intended use with appropriate conditions. Examples include UL 489 circuit breakers, UL 98 disconnects, UL 1059 terminal blocks, and UL 60947 motor controllers. What is SCCR and how is it established? SCCR is the panel’s withstand rating for short-circuit events. It is established using UL 508A Supplement SB tables and tested combinations, then marked per NEC 409. What are the benefits of using UL 508A listed panels? They streamline inspections, reduce risk through appropriate protective coordination and SCCR, and provide clear documentation for maintenance. What are the benefits of working with a UL 508A certified panel fabricator? Panel shops in the UL program have been audited and trained to apply the standard and can apply the UL certification mark under general coverage. What recent changes have happened in UL 508A? The June 26, 2025 revision adds control circuit voltage limits at 120 Vac and 250 Vdc, adjusts E-Stop expectations, clarifies disconnecting means for industrial machinery, corrects Table SB4.1, and updates terminal block and group motor overload provisions. What is the difference between UL and ISO? UL publishes and administers product safety standards and certifications for equipment. ISO publishes management system and other international standards that focus on how organizations operate. Ultimately, they address different scopes. What is the difference between IEC and UL 508A? IEC 61439 covers assemblies in IEC markets and IEC 60204-1 covers machinery. UL 508A is the North American product standard for ICPs. There is no one-to-one equivalency, so designs often need adaptation for each regime. What is the difference between UL 589 and UL 508A? UL 589, in its current joint form with ULC as CAN/ULC 589, covers single and multiple station heat alarms. It is unrelated to industrial control panel construction, which is covered by UL 508A. How do UL 508A and NFPA 79 interact? UL 508A governs panel construction and evaluation. NFPA 79 governs the electrical equipment of industrial machinery as installed and operated. Both are commonly applied . How do I verify a shop’s UL 508A capability or a component’s status? Ask for the shop’s UL file number and check UL Product iQ , which is the certification database used by engineers and AHJs.   What to Prepare Before You Talk to a UL 508A Control Panel Fabrication Partner Having the following items on hand before reaching out to a UL 508A certified control panel fabricator  can make the process both smoother and less time consuming.   Available fault current at the planned installation point and any utility short-circuit study excerpts. Target SCCR for the panel and any upstream device limitations. Environmental rating needs such as NEMA 4X, corrosion resistance, or temperature requirements. One-line diagram or power distribution sketch. Motor and heater loads, starting methods, and protective device preferences. Control circuit voltages and any safety relays or networked I/O. Interfaces to Fire and Gas, building fire alarm, or intrinsically safe circuits. Preferred vendor lists for breakers, disconnects, terminals, and PLC hardware.   The Takeaway If your industrial facility needs to procure or specify industrial control panels in North America, UL 508A is the product standard that aligns your design with the NEC and gives AHJs a clear basis for acceptance. Getting SCCR right, selecting suitable components, and understanding the 2025 updates reduces risk and smooths inspections. If you need a UL 508A-certified panel fabrication shop, aeSolutions maintains that capability and can integrate panels with Fire and Gas systems and other safety-critical applications, while keeping the focus on code compliance, maintainability, and operational resilience.

aeSolutions Erich Zende helps his FIRST Robotics Team with their robot. Nice pants Erich! Pictures courtesy of FRC Flash 1319 As insightful as conventional high school career aptitude surveys with pen and paper can be — hands-on, real world experience is instrumental in shaping capable young minds. Add high stakes adrenaline and stiff competition to the equation, and FRC Flash 1319 Robotics Team emerges as a fusion between the three. This FIRST (For Inspiration and Recognition of Science and Technology) Robotics team hails from Greenville, SC and competes in state and national level field games under the adept guidance of mentor and aeSolutions SIS FEL Specialist, Erich Zende. We conducted an informal interview with Erich at the close of the team’s regular season to discern a better understanding of the year-round volunteer effort he lends so much of himself to . aeSolutions: What is your role on the FRC Flash 1319 team? Erich Zende: I am the Lead Mechanical Design Mentor and Drive Team Coach for the robotics team. I lead the students through the design, prototype, and build phases during a six-week build season, and I also advise students on the safe use of tools and other safety procedures. Pictures courtesy of FRC Flash 1319 aeSolutions: The advisory role concerning proper tool usage and safety procedures makes sense, given that safety is one of the fundamentals that embodies the spirit of aeSolutions. How much of your personal resources (time, money, energy) do you invest per season? Erich Zende: During the build season I meet with the students for roughly 30 hours a week, for six weeks, and during the weeks leading up to the competitions I meet with students somewhere between 20-30 hours. The majority of this time is spent practicing with a prototype robot along with packing spares and tools for the competition, as well as going over the presentations prepared by students for the judged technical awards at completion. Typically, FRC Flash 1319 competes at 2 or 3 select events. In total, I contribute an overall average of 250 hours give or take. In order to mentor to my fullest ability, I contribute 8-10 days of my time- off-with-pay, my hotel rooms expenses, occasional robot parts, and a trailer to transport the team’s robot. Pictures courtesy of FRC Flash 1319 aeSolutions: It goes without saying that you volunteer in multiple capacities. In regards to the season ending though, what does the “off-season” look like when the team isn’t gearing up for the building phase and qualifier competitions? Erich Zende: In the time period that we refer to as the “off-season,” I focus my time on recruiting and training new members. In regards to a combined effort, the team attends outreach events in addition to hosting several Lego League tournaments for the younger students interested in S.T.E.M. activities. Recently we hosted an event with one of our sponsors, the Synnex Corporation, to put on a STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Math) Girls Night Out. This was a Makerspace event created to inspire, empower and engage girls in grades 3rd to 8th in Greenville County. The goal was to help foster young girls’ appreciation for STEAM and raise STEAM awareness among parents. The event boasted an overall attendance exceeding 350 students. Aside from requested team demonstrations at Roper Mountain Science Center, we also take part in the IMAGINE Upstate Annual Festival; which showcases pre-K through 12th grade education and STEAM career pathways centered on having fun and hands-on learning. Pictures courtesy of FRC Flash 1319 aeSolutions: Given what you’ve told me, the season isn’t necessarily limited to building and competing for a span of a few months but rather it’s a year-round effort of recruiting, team building and spreading awareness. It’s clear what you give to the program and the impact you have on the malleable futures of these students, but what do you get out of this exactly? What keeps you coming back year after year? Erich Zende: There are many reasons why I continue to mentor. Although challenging for a variety of reasons, the rewards generally make it all a worthwhile endeavor each and every year. Speaking of years, this will be my 16th year as a mentor and 20th year participating in FIRST Robotics. To be more specific: I mentor because others mentored me. I mentor to hopefully aid and impact future generations of students who will be contributing members of our society. I learn something new every year, and I enjoy the competitive experience. I mentor because the robotics team is a creative outlet outside of my day job. And truly, I mentor because I yearn for my daughter to have a long-standing and well-developed STEM program to be a part of when she is older. Pictures courtesy of FRC Flash 1319 aeSolutions: Well said. Special thanks to Erich Zende for the continued efforts and contributions to this FIRST Robotics team. You have not only gone above and beyond for the robotics team, but you have also created a praiseworthy legacy that speaks to the very core of this company. More information on FIRST Robotics Click here to keep up with Erich Zende and the FRC Flash 1319, visit the team website Or follow them on social media: https://www.facebook.com/pg/FRCFlash1319 https://twitter.com/FRCFlash1319 https://www.instagram.com/frcflash1319/ https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCG40LSBnquEsIMQ2hyiyv8w #aesolutions

Learn how aeSolutions was able to help our clients overcome their unique and challenging difficulties. Also see the Industry, Geography, Unit Operation, Governing Autority of the site Project Success Stories Learn how aeSolutions was able to help our clients overcome their challenges. Custom SI-BMS Solution Enhances Reliability and Safety for Critical Pipeline Transportation Facility A critical pipeline transportation facility required a custom Safety Instrumented Burner Management System (SI-BMS) upgrade for their incinerator operations. The project involved implementing a SI-BMS compliant with NFPA 86, integrating alarm and first-out features, and establishing seamless communication with their existing Distributed Control System (DCS)... Read More Achieving a High-Risk Systems Overhaul on an Accelerated Schedule When TGES America, Ltd. needed a critical overhaul of the complex control system and instrumentation for the central utilities plant (CUP) of a specialty materials manufacturing plant, they turned to aeSolutions, a Siemens Solution Partner. Subsequently, due to the need to complete the project four months early, the planned cold cutover to the new systems had to be done as a hot cutover without disrupting production. TGES America, aeSolutions, and Siemens made it happen, much to the delight of the customer. Read More Multi-Fuel Boiler BMS Upgrade for Chlor Alkali Production Facility A multi-fuel boiler project for a chlor alkali production facility resulted in significant modernization and operational improvements. The client's legacy relay-based Burner Management System (BMS) was upgraded to a DeltaV CHARM Safety Logic Solver, providing enhanced visibility, safety, and operational flexibility. This project not only modernized the client's system but also ensured compliance with NFPA 85 codes and met all Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS) requirements. Read More Chemical Facility FEL3 & Detail Design Achieves PSM OSHA Compliance Under Total Installed Cost Budget | A Masterclass In aeSolutions’ Lifecycle Solutions Capabilities aeSolutions was tasked to provide Front-End Loading (FEL) and Detail Design for a newly acquired legacy agricultural chemical facility in order to meet full compliance with PSM OSHA 1910.119 standards and the client’s corporate safety requirements. Read More Designing and Implementing a Fire & Gas Detection System for a Hydrogen Production Plant aeSolutions was challenged to create an effective detection system that could handle the complexities of hydrogen's properties while ensuring the safety of personnel and the facility. Read More A Strategic Integration of SIS, BMS, and PSM in a Boiler Fuel Conversion Project Implementing Safety Instrumented Systems (SIS) and Burner Management Systems (BMS) within tight deadlines and supply chain disruptions is challenging. A recent project converting boiler fuel from coal to natural gas with a Safety Instrumented BMS met strict safety standards despite these hurdles. Read More Alarm Management for a Greenfield LNG Facility A Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) facility was being newly constructed (i.e., Greenfield) and the company wanted to conduct an alarm rationalization on the process prior to initial startup. Existing facilities (i.e., Brownfield) have the benefit of historical operating trends and data during a rationalization session to recognize whether setpoints are effective and which alarms might give troubles. Read More Pharma Company Detecting Natural Gas Leaks in Boiler House A pharmaceutical client determined they needed a natural gas leak detection and isolation system for a utility building based on a PHA recommendation. aeSolutions installed a combustible gas leak detection system to shut off the gas supply to the boiler, bringing the facility into compliance with the safety program requirements. Read More Large Specialty Chemical Company Reduces Alarm Floods A large specialty chemical company was facing alarm floods in their utility unit. With aeSolutions guidance, the site was able to effectively prioritize and reduce alarms through the rationalization process, which includes reviewing, validating, and justifying alarms needed for avoiding potential process upsets or abnormal deviations from normal operation. Read More Simplified, Cost-Effective, and Consistent Acidic Compound Detection New acid detector placement philosophy led to reduced maintenance , lowered costs, a reduced the likelihood of confusion during leaks, and helped create a uniform response strategy. Read More Energy Company Reduces Regulatory Compliance Costs Saving Almost $50 Million A client was facing a lengthy compliance process to upgrade a fleet of fired heaters. With aeSolutions guidance, the client reduced their compliance scope by 50%. Focusing on the NFPA 86 prescriptive design applicable to waste gas thermal oxidizers and applying our experience in Process Safety Management (PSM)... Read More Water Cannons Protect Community from Anhydrous Ammonia Leaks Client needed to reduce liability and risk associated with anhydrous ammonia storage tanks. aeSolutions provided a leak detection and suppression system that alerts personnel and provides the means to contain the resulting vapor cloud to the storage tank area using high-pressure, high-volume water cannons integrated with the control system. Read More Pharmaceutical Company Required Toxic & Combustible Gas Detection System A large-scale pharmaceutical manufacturing facility needed to develop and implement a gas detection system at their site to mitigate risk to personnel and equipment from a potential combustible or toxic gas leak. The project progressed from the assessment stages of developing a gas detection philosophy to ultimately integrating an industrially designed GDS 1400 MK II panel for the gas detection control and alarm system. Read More Complex Hot Cutover of Large Natural Gas Processing Facilities Due to facility siting factors, control rooms of one of the world’s largest natural gas (NG) processing and compression facilities were relocated from a possible blast zone to a Blast Resistant Modules (BRMs). This complex cutover for personnel relocation needed to be accomplished without a shutdown (S/D) of either interdependent ... Read More Specialty Chemical Site’s Increasingly Complicated Cutover When a project that began with standard safety system upgrades quickly expanded to a much broader scope of engineering with tight deadlines, aeSolutions responded with an experienced engineering workforce to deliver above-quality expectations while meeting key deadlines. Read More “Fit for Purpose” Solution Reduces Planned Downtime by 66% aeSolutions’ hybrid safety system design enabled the client to maintain safe continuity of their fired equipment, meet NFPA compliance, and significantly lower planned downtime. Read More Protecting Personnel with Practical Gas Detector Placement A pharmaceutical company needed to implement gas detectors at their facility to protect personnel from potential leaks of toxic and combustible gases. aeSolutions evaluated the gas detector placement and number of detectors that would provide the earliest warning to personnel based on the expected dispersion and behavior of specific gas release scenarios. Read More Alarm System Rationalization and Safe Operating Limit for Energy Production A current client was adding a new energy production unit with an innovative process to an existing site and wanted to ensure the new design incorporated the site’s existing alarm management practices that were previously set up by the aeSolutions alarm management team. Read More

Discover how aeSolutions delivers cutting-edge process safety and industrial automation solutions across process industries like oil & gas, chemicals, pharmaceuticals, batteries, and more. Explore our expertise today! Industries Served — Solutions For Critical Industries — Ag Chem Battery Materials & Mineral Processing Chemical Manufacturing Energy & Power Generation Hydrogen Production & Processing Metals & Mining Processing Oil & Gas Production & Processing Petrochemicals & Hydrocarbon Processing Pharmaceutical & Life Sciences Manufacturing Renewable Fuels & Bioenergy Specialty Chemicals & Advanced Materials Utilities & Critical Infrastructure Ag Chem aeSolutions provides deep expertise in the control and process safety management for the agrochemical industry, ensuring production stability and compliance with stringent environmental and safety regulations. We help clients manage the processes and hazards associated with fertilizers, pesticides, and other agricultural chemicals, including the safe handling of anhydrous ammonia and highly reactive substances. Battery Materials & Mineral Processing The production of battery materials requires safe handling of critical minerals, chemical processing, and fire/explosion risk management. aeSolutions delivers expertise in thermal runaway prevention, gas detection, and process hazard analysis to help clients mitigate risks and maintain regulatory compliance in lithium, nickel, and cobalt processing operations. Chemical Manufacturing Chemical production involves hazardous materials, stringent regulations, and high-risk processes. aeSolutions provides process automation, burner management, fire and gas detection, and process hazard analysis (PHA) to improve safety, efficiency, and regulatory compliance in bulk and specialty chemical production. Energy & Power Generation Energy production facilities, including traditional power plants, cogeneration units, and emerging alternative energy facilities, face complex control and safety challenges. aeSolutions provides fire and gas system design, combustion control and safety, and process hazard analysis to help clients maintain stable control, mitigate risks, enhance system reliability, and comply with industry standards. Hydrogen Production & Processing The hydrogen industry faces flammability risks, high-pressure storage challenges, and evolving regulatory requirements. aeSolutions specializes in the control, fire and gas detection, explosion protection, and quantitative risk analysis (QRA) to support the safety and efficiency of blue, green, and gray hydrogen production and processing facilities. Read More Metals & Mining Processing Heavy industrial operations in metals refining, mineral extraction, and processing require robust control and safety solutions to address risks like combustible dust, high-temperature reactions, and hazardous material handling. aeSolutions provides dust hazard analysis (DHA), fire and gas detection, and process risk assessment to ensure safe and stable operations. Oil & Gas Production & Processing From upstream extraction to downstream refining, the oil and gas industry must navigate complex safety and regulatory challenges, including high-pressure systems, flammable materials, and mechanical integrity risks. aeSolutions delivers expertise in layers of protection analysis (LOPA), safety instrumented systems (SIS), and emergency relief system evaluation to enhance operational integrity and regulatory compliance. Petrochemicals & Hydrocarbon Processing Petrochemical plants handle highly hazardous chemicals that require advanced control and safety measures to maintain process stability and to prevent fires, explosions, and toxic releases. aeSolutions provides process automation, consequence modeling, relief system evaluation, and process safety engineering to improve reliability, protect personnel, and ensure compliance with safety regulations. Pharmaceutical & Life Sciences Manufacturing The pharmaceutical industry must balance product purity, process safety, and regulatory compliance while handling flammable solvents, high-potency chemicals, and strict environmental controls. aeSolutions delivers ventilation system design, containment strategies, and process hazard analysis (PHA) to support safe and compliant manufacturing. Renewable Fuels & Bioenergy Renewable fuel production — including biofuels, biogases, synthetic fuels, and waste-to-energy processes — introduces safety challenges such as combustion risks, toxic gas emissions, and complex reaction chemistry. aeSolutions provides process control, hazard identification (HAZID), fire and gas detection, and safety instrumented systems (SIS) design to mitigate these risks and enhance operational efficiency. Specialty Chemicals & Advanced Materials Specialty chemicals require precision in process control and stringent safety management to prevent hazardous incidents. aeSolutions provides continuous and batch control, process hazard analysis (PHA), fire and gas system design, and SIS implementation to protect personnel, optimize operations, and maintain regulatory compliance. Utilities & Critical Infrastructure Utility providers — including power generation, water treatment, and industrial gas distribution—must manage safety risks related to combustion systems, hazardous gas handling, and emergency response. aeSolutions delivers expertise in burner management systems (BMS), alarm management, and process safety engineering to ensure reliable and secure operations. Why aeSolutions? Trusted Go-To Partner for Our Clients' Tough Challenges Innovative, Sustainable Solutions to Create Client Value Professional Project Management to Drive Client Business Results Consistent Performance and Delivery on Our Commitments Recognized Extensively Credentialed Professionals (PE, CFSE, PMP) Active in Leadership of Professional Organizations (ISA, AIChE, CSIA) Involved in Development of International Standards & Industry Best Practices Deep Technical Acumen, Thought Leadership

Recordings of aeSolutions webinars on process safety, automation, and burner management / combustion systems. Subject Matter Experts sharing their industry experiences. Webinar Recordings A Tale of Two BPCS Credits, A Bayesian Case Study This case study examines the approach used for one client to justify two risk reduction credits on their robust BPCS interlock in two basic steps. The first step was to decide a reasonable probability of failure using a Failure Mode and Effects Analysis technique (FMEA). All relevant failure modes including the ubiquitous human component were examined. Next, plant operating history was reviewed and applied in a Bayesian analysis to determine the upper credibility (confidence) limit. The overall FMEA and Bayesian analysis process, including the "why," "how," and results will be provided. Presented by Keith Brumbaugh, P.E., CFSE • Principal Specialist - SIS FEL Identifying System Level Failures Using STPA Before They Occur The new hazard analysis method known as STPA - Systems Theoretic Process Analysis - and how it can help prevent accidents in the non-routine, abnormal, and transient operating states. Best Practices to Ensure My Risk Assessment is Trustworthy Part 3 of Trustworthy Risk Assessments, QRA, and Data Validation in Process Safety One of the most powerful features of the Safety Life Cycle (SLC) is validation of the Risk Assessment with actual performance data; this is the ‘cyclic’ aspect of the SLC. One of the largest sources of error in a Risk Assessment is applying generic “industry” data without validation, which can increase the frequency of incidents or the cost of controlling hazards. This final webinar of our three-webinar series shows how to leverage qualitative and quantitative methods to update Risk Assessment data including using probability distributions and confidence intervals. Capabilities of Quantitative Risk Assessment and Its Applications Part 2 of Trustworthy Risk Assessments, QRA, and Data Validation in Process Safety: Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA) represents the "sharpest pencil" in the Risk Assessment tool kit for quantifying risk and crediting safeguards for risk reduction. In this second webinar of our three-part series we present applications for QRA, its utility for modeling dependencies, conditions where QRA provides value over other risk assessment techniques, and application of QRA in Bowtie Analysis. Presented by Joe Veasey PE, CFSE Choosing a Risk Assessment Methodology Part 1 of Trustworthy Risk Assessments, QRA, and Data Validation in Process Safety The ANSI/ISA 61511 Safety Life Cycle starts with a Process Hazard Analysis (PHA) and a Risk Assessment. This first webinar of our three-part series details the purpose of Risk Assessment and examines the advantages and limitations of various methodologies including Risk Graph, Layer of Protection Analysis (LOPA), Quantitative Risk Assessment (QRA), and others. Presented by Joe Veasey PE, CFSE