Combustible Dust Testing

Laboratory testing to quantify dust explosion and reactivity hazards

Safety Data Sheets

Develop critical safety data for inclusion in SDS documents

Gas and Vapor

Laboratory testing to quantify explosion hazards for vapor and gas mixtures

Classification of hazardous materials subject to shipping and storage regulations
Testing and consulting on the explosion risks associated with devices and processes which use or produce hydrogen
Safety Data Sheets

Develop critical safety data for inclusion in SDS documents

Thermal Stability

Safe storage or processing requires an understanding of the possible hazards associated with sensitivity to variations in temperature

Adiabatic Calorimetry
Data demonstrate the consequences of process upsets, such as failed equipment or improper procedures, and guide mitigation strategies including Emergency Relief System (ERS) design
Reaction Calorimetry
Data yield heat and gas removal requirements to control the desired process chemistry
Battery Safety

Testing to support safe design of batteries and electrical power backup facilities particularly to satisfy UL9540a ed.4

Safety Data Sheets

Develop critical safety data for inclusion in SDS documents

Cable Testing
Evaluate electrical cables to demonstrate reliability and identify defects or degradation
Equipment Qualification (EQ)
Testing and analysis to ensure that critical equipment will operate under adverse environmental conditions
Water Hammer
Analysis and testing to identify and prevent unwanted hydraulic pressure transients in process piping
Acoustic Vibration
Identify and eliminate potential sources of unwanted vibration in piping and structural systems
Gas & Air Intrusion
Analysis and testing to identify and prevent intrusion of gas or air in piping systems
ISO/IEC 17025:2017

Fauske & Associates fulfills the requirements of ISO/IEC 17025:2017 in the field of Testing

ISO 9001:2015
Fauske & Associates fulfills the requirements of ISO 9001:2015
Dust Hazards Analysis
Evaluate your process to identify combustible dust hazards and perform dust explosion testing
On-Site Risk Management
On-site safety studies can help identify explosibility and chemical reaction hazards so that appropriate testing, simulations, or calculations are identified to support safe scale up
DIERS Methodology
Design emergency pressure relief systems to mitigate the consequences of unwanted chemical reactivity and account for two-phase flow using the right tools and methods
Deflagrations (Dust/Vapor/Gas)

Properly size pressure relief vents to protect your processes from dust, vapor, and gas explosions

Effluent Handling

Pressure relief sizing is just the first step and it is critical to safely handle the effluent discharge from an overpressure event

FATE™ & Facility Modeling

FATE (Facility Flow, Aerosol, Thermal, and Explosion) is a flexible, fast-running code developed and maintained by Fauske and Associates under an ASME NQA-1 compliant QA program.

Mechanical, Piping, and Electrical
Engineering and testing to support safe plant operations and develop solutions to problems in heat transfer, fluid, flow, and electric power systems
Hydrogen Safety
Testing and consulting on the explosion risks associated with devices and processes which use or produce hydrogen
Thermal Hydraulics
Testing and analysis to ensure that critical equipment will operate under adverse environmental conditions
Nuclear Safety
Our Nuclear Services Group is recognized for comprehensive evaluations to help commercial nuclear power plants operate efficiently and stay compliant
Radioactive Waste
Safety analysis to underpin decomissioning process at facilities which have produced or used radioactive nuclear materials
Adiabatic Safety Calorimeters (ARSST and VSP2)

Low thermal inertial adiabatic calorimeters specially designed to provide directly scalable data that are critical to safe process design

Other Lab Equipment and Parts for the DSC/ARC/ARSST/VSP2 Calorimeters

Products and equipment for the process safety or process development laboratory


Software for emergency relief system design to ensure safe processing of reactive chemicals, including consideration of two-phase flow and runaway chemical reactions


Facility modeling software mechanistically tracks transport of heat, gasses, vapors, and aerosols for safety analysis of multi-room facilities


Our highly experienced team keeps you up-to-date on the latest process safety developments.

Process Safety Newsletter

Stay informed with our quarterly Process Safety Newsletters sharing topical articles and practical advice.


With over 40 years of industry expertise, we have a wealth of process safety knowledge to share.

Recent Posts

Sleeping With The Enemy: Combustible Dust and Authorities Having Jurisdiction (AHJ), P2

Posted by Fauske & Associates on 01.15.14

by Tim Cullina, Senior Consulting Engineer, Fauske & Associates, LLC

In Part one of this series, "Close Encounters..." I discussed who is the authority having jurisdiction or AHJ.  I concluded that there are many AHJs and for discussion purposes, divided them into three kinds of people: permit people, doing business people, and inspectors. (Yes, inspectors are people,  too.) I did forget to include a simple statement to the effect of "NFPA is not your AHJ."

Authority Having Jurisdiction"Getting in bed with the AHJ" has that conspiratorial connotation at the least, and smacks of inappropriate exchanges of, shall we say, favors.  That's far from what I suggest with the title.  And, thinking of the permit people and inspectors as the "enemy", well, that's just old school.  Old school is not a bad thing, but a lot of new learning opportunities have come up since then. 

Knowing that there are many potential AHJs with myriad authority is nice.  And, knowing what each AHJ can require of you and your enterprise is a necessity.  More importantly, understanding what your AHJ knows and what your AHJ can do for your enterprise is equally important.  Going back to NFPA 654, we find the AHJs coming into play about 23 times or so, not counting definitions and the annex. What are these AHJs doing?

For the most part, the AHJs are determining, judging, applying and approving "something that you have proposed" as acceptable to [themselves] the authority having jurisdiction. 

I would not say they lessen a safety or equipment requirement, but they can approve an acceptable alternative approach to address a hazard, rather than the standard or code-stated requirement also known as the "prescriptive remedy"In a perfect world, the AHJs would be the Solomon-like, risk-referees.  They could answer many questions, including: Is this good enough?  That is, if you dared to ask.

In the real world they are just like the rest of us, limited by the scope of their knowledge, and not necessarily the experts that will propose a cost-effective remedy.  For better (or worse), they are the referees that approve or deny.  But all too often, they are not asked.

No one wants to hear, "No."  And, you know ...stuff happens.  I think that approach may be defended by the old saw, "better to ask forgiveness, than ask permission".  But we cannot let that thinking impair safety. 

CollaborationAsking can be as simple as requesting a variance to a specific code or standard requirement.  For more complex alternatives this may entail performing a study or analysis of the hazards beforehand to establish an argument that the alternative is as effective as the prescriptive remedy.  This approach, at its simplest level, is called "equivalency".  It is also a good "anti-No" strategy.  It is in your best interests to work with your AHJ.

NFPA allows equivalency and states at the beginning of each dust standard that; "Nothing in the standard is intended to prevent the use of systems, methods, or devices of equivalent or superior quality, strength, fire resistance, effectiveness, durability, and safety over those prescribed by this standard."  However, this alternate system, method, or device needs to be approved for the intended purpose by the appropriate AHJ.  This sounds fair enough, but can it grant authority to AHJs that do not even know they have this added authority, or are not prepared to use it?  Then, what do you do?

How do we know what is equivalent?  That is a good question and a hard question.  Let’s look at the goal of a requirement first.  Speaking generally, the goal is to prevent an undesirable and in many cases an unacceptable event, such as a combustible dust explosion.  Therefore, we need to understand the science behind hazard.  We need to determine the risks, a combination of the severity and frequency of the outcome.  And, we need to know how to both prevent and mitigate the event to create options.  Of course, you would expect that the alternative will also provide a benefit in either cost or flexibility, or else you would likely go with the prescribed remedy in the first place.  What you should not do is nothing.

There is also the performance-based option.  It is equivalency on steroids.  Here you detail and propose an alternate approach that works (performs) just as well as the prescriptive remedies. It requires, "documented analysis with all calculations, references, assumptions, and sources from which material characteristics and other data have been obtained or on which the designer has relied for some material aspect of the design per Chapter 5 of NFPA 101, Life Safety Code."

So, what really is the difference?  I look at it this way.  Equivalency can be requested for a minor change of an individual piece of equipment, or to accommodate design or material change, etc.  Equivalency opens the door for the performance-based option.  But, the performance-based option is more akin to rewriting your own standard so you can end up at the same place, protected. 

And, what if your AHJ does not know or understand the appropriate NFPA standard?  First verify that you have the correct AHJ.  Second, retain firm control of your authority.

Remember, you, the owner or operator, are the most powerful AHJ.  Just do the right thing.

Recall again that sage of common sense, Pogo, who said, "We are confronted with insurmountable opportunities".  Take advantage of the situation, ask questions. Ask your favorite consultant. Ask the AHJ. Ask Fauske & Associates, LLC (FAI).  We employ scientists and engineers engaged in the science of flammability, explosibility, and hazard assessments. Our field engineers have helped clients with combustible dust problems in the Chemical, Pharmaceutical, Agricultural, Energy, and Food industries, as well as a few project less easily defined.   They can help you assess your hazards, examine your alternatives, identify equivalences, and help you make your case.

But what if you are the AHJ?  Still, ask FAI.  Or ask the petitioner of a variance or equivalence to ask FAI.  In NFPA 654, Chapter 5, Performance-Based Design Option, Section 5.1.2 Independent Review: "The authority having jurisdiction shall be permitted to obtain an independent third party review of the proposed design."  

collaboration 2Combustible Dust and the Authorities having Jurisdiction (AHJ), Part 3,” based on the Poe tale of a confused and inaccurate account of events that have become public, leading to discussion and disbelief. As a result, the narrator wishes to clear up the facts as well as he can in his own account.

Yes, indeed, we are confronted with insurmountable opportunities.

Fauske and Associates, LLC, (FAI) can provide to your efforts navigating applicable NFPA, OSHA, and EPA standards. Our experts in Combustible Dust Explosion and Fire Hazard Evaluation, Process Hazard Analysis (PHA), Hazard Identification Risk Analysis, Consequence Analysis, Safer Process Scale-up, Process Safety Program Development, and Relief System Design Review are always here to help. For more information, please contact Jeff Griffin at or 630-887-5278.

 Subscribe to FAI's Quarterly "Process Safety News"

Topics: Combustible Dust, Process Hazards Analysis


Is My Dust Combustible?

A Flowchart To Help You Decide
Download Now