ISO TC 197 & SC 1 Standards Activity and 2025 Plenary Meeting — Torrance, California

by Mhamed Samet, FCHEA

The International Organization for Standardization (ISO) continues to advance hydrogen safety and infrastructure standardization through its Technical Committee 197 (Hydrogen Technologies) and Subcommittee 1 (Hydrogen at Scale and Horizontal Energy Systems). As of late 2025, ISO/TC 197 has published nine new standards and maintains an active ballot schedule, reinforcing the committee’s pivotal role in enabling global hydrogen deployment.

Published Standards in 2025

The committee’s expanding catalogue of hydrogen safety and infrastructure standards includes:

  • ISO 19880-7 (WG 31 – Rubber O-Rings)

  • ISO 17268-1 (WG 5 – Connection Devices Part 1)

  • ISO 24078 (Hydrogen in Energy Systems – Vocabulary)

  • ISO 22734-1 (WG 34 – Hydrogen Generators Using Water Electrolysis – Safety)

  • ISO 19881 (WG 18 – Gaseous Hydrogen Land Vehicle Fuel Containers)

  • ISO 19880-5 (WG 22 – Dispenser Hoses and Hose Assemblies)

  • ISO 19880-2 (WG 19 – Dispensers and Dispensing Systems)

  • ISO 14687 (WG 27 – Fuel Quality Product Specification)

  • ISO 19882 (WG 18 – Thermally Activated Pressure Relief Devices – TPRDs)

Active Ballots and Ongoing Work

Ongoing technical ballots and drafts under development highlight the committee’s forward-looking scope:

  • ISO 13985 (WG 1 – Liquid Hydrogen Land Vehicle Fuel Storage System) — ballot closes November 14, 2025

  • ISO/DTS 15916 (WG 29 – Basic Safety Considerations) — U.S. comment deadline November 21, 2025

  • ISO/CD 19885-3 (WG 24 – Gaseous Hydrogen Fueling Protocols) and ISO/CD 19870-2/-3/-4 (SC 1 – GHG Methodologies for LH₂, NH₃, and LOHC Transport) — closed August–September 2025

  • Scope expansion and title revision for ISO 21087 (JWG 7 between TC 197 and TC 158) — ballot closed October 1, 2025

  • New Project (ISO/NP 19880-11) – Gaseous Hydrogen Fueling Stations – Part 11: High-Pressure Liquid Hydrogen Pumps — U.S. comment deadline November 3, 2025

2025 Plenary Meeting — Torrance, California

The ISO/TC 197 and ISO/TC 197/SC 1 Plenary Meeting will take place from December 8–12, 2025, in Torrance, California (United States).This in-person session will gather working group leaders, national delegations, and industry liaisons to coordinate technical progress, review ballot outcomes, and establish 2026 priorities.

The tentative schedule includes:

  • Monday, AM: WG 21 – Compressors | WG 31 – O-Rings | SC 1/AHG 3 – Shipping Interoperability

  • Monday, PM: WG 22 – Hoses | WG 37 – Mobile Fueling Stations | WG 24 – Fueling Protocols (All Day)

  • Tuesday, AM: SC 1/WG 4 – Water Electrolyzers in Electricity Grid Services | SC 1/WG 2 – Aerial Vehicle LH₂ Storage | SC 1/AHG 2 – H₂ and High Blends

  • Tuesday, PM: Strategic Planning Meeting

  • Wednesday: SC 1 Plenary

  • Thursday – Friday: TC 197 Plenary

ISO/TC 197 and SC 1’s 2025 activity underscores a maturing global consensus on hydrogen system design and lifecycle governance. With new publications, ongoing ballots, and the December plenary in California, ISO continues to provide the technical foundation for a safe, scalable hydrogen economy.

To view ISO/TC 197 and SC 1 committee details and meeting schedule, click here for more information.

 

EPA Proposes Changes to PFAS Reporting Requirements — Compliance Timeline Shifted

by Mhamed Samet, FCHEA

On November 10, 2025, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released a proposed rule titled “EPA Proposes Changes to Make PFAS Reporting Requirements More Practical and Implementable, Reducing Regulatory Burden,” affecting manufacturers and importers of per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) under the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA).

Key Changes in the Proposed Rule
The EPA’s announcement introduced significant modifications to the 2023 PFAS reporting regulation, including:
- Extended submission deadlines to January 11, 2026, for most entities and July 11, 2026, for small businesses importing PFAS-containing articles.
- Delayed rollout of the reporting software system, citing limited resources and agency budget constraints.
- Streamlined reporting obligations and reduced scope for certain uses, narrowing the total number of PFAS subject to reporting.

Implications for Industry and Risk Management
These changes provide additional time for data collection and verification while reducing immediate administrative burdens. However, organizations are encouraged to maintain PFAS oversight as a compliance and sustainability priority due to continuing environmental and regulatory scrutiny.

The EPA’s proposal marks a shift in both reporting timing and regulatory expectations. While extended deadlines offer relief, affected companies should remain proactive in preparing data systems and compliance documentation to meet final rule requirements.

Click here for more information regarding this matter.

CHS and CHBC Release California-Focused Safety Report

By Aidan Dennehy, FCHEA

The Center for Hydrogen Safety (CHS) and the California Hydrogen Business Council (CHBC) jointly released Hydrogen Safety Considerations for California, a comprehensive hydrogen safety report focused on California. Published on October 14th, the report underscores the importance of education, training, and transparent communication for ensuring the safe expansion of hydrogen production, delivery, storage, and use across California’s growing clean energy economy.

The information presented in this report was primarily gathered from CHS’ internal research and the Hydrogen Safety Panel (HSP), a U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) affiliated group which supports the commercialization of fuel cell technology. Since 2003, the HSP has conducted over 700 project reviews, developed more than 250 FAQs, created 16 safety guidelines, and established over 100 best safety practices. The report consists of eight sections, including an outline of existing hydrogen uptake, a comparative hydrogen safety analysis, an application-based review of safety considerations and standards, and policy recommendations.

The report identifies both strong momentum and clear challenges in advancing hydrogen safety. Survey data show that 70% of Californians are comfortable with hydrogen as an energy source, the highest among Hydrogen Hub states, yet nearly half report limited knowledge about its properties or use. The state currently operates 27 miles of dedicated hydrogen pipelines and is testing up to 20% hydrogen blends in natural gas systems, one of the nation’s first regulated blending efforts. With over 60 public hydrogen fueling stations and flagship projects like the San Bernardino ZEMU train and the Sierra Northern fuel cell locomotive, California continues to lead in hydrogen deployment. However, the report stresses that this growth must be matched by consistent permitting, regulatory alignment between the state and Federal governments, and expanded workforce training to ensure that safety standards evolve alongside the rapid pace of hydrogen adoption.

This report serves as both a technical reference and a policy guide, supporting energy stakeholders as California advances its hydrogen infrastructure.

To read the full report from CHS and CHBC, click here.

CHS Webinar on Fostering a Healthy Safety Culture

By Aidan Dennehy, FCHEA

Sometimes overlooked, a healthy culture is a crucial part of any safety strategy for fuel cell and hydrogen systems. On September 16th, the Center for Hydrogen Safety (CHS) hosted a presentation, titled Safety Culture in Hydrogen: Lessons Learned, Leadership, and Lasting Impact, which highlighted the importance of culture and described methods to foster one which places safety first. The presentation was delivered by Nick Barilo (Executive Director, CHS), David Moore (President & CEO, AcuTech Group), and recently retired Tom Drube (Vice President of Engineering, Chart Industries).

The speakers emphasized that safety culture is an organization-wide mindset which prioritizes safety above all else, not just a matter of complying with regulations and best practices. The presenters outlined a model of strong leadership, and made the following recommendations which are aimed at fostering a healthy safety culture:

Strong Leadership

Leaders should set an example from the top-down, signaling that safety is a core value rather than a box-ticking exercise. In more than one case study discussed by the presenters, dangerous mistakes were made when management appeared to prioritize timeliness and efficiency over safety.

Warning signs of weak leadership include a lack of time or resources for operators to perform safety-critical tasks.

Integration

Safety protocols and considerations should be embedded in every task, decision, and process. Rather than bending the rules to apply them to new or different cases, safety procedures should be developed on a case-by-case basis.

Warning signs of poor integration for management include not referencing or updating    producers and documentation, and for operators include feeling pressured to make too many exceptions to the rules

Communication & Trust

Individuals across all levels of an organization should openly and regularly exchange information related to safety. This includes normalizing questioning and learning, meaning stakeholders should feel empowered to ask questions and challenge assumptions when they see an issue or lack clarity.

Alongside communication, leaders and operators should have confidence in each other work and commitment to safety. Workplaces with defined responsibilities, open communication, and safety-oriented strong leadership tend to foster trust.

If managers are not receiving feedback from operators, or operators are not engaging in discussions on near misses and failures, an organization should improve its communication.

Continuous Improvement

While tempting, managers and operators should never rest on their laurels. Continuous improvement is crucial for safety, meaning a proactive and ongoing commitment to adapting and enhancing safety protocols. This is especially true in the rapidly evolving hydrogen space.

A safety culture lacking continuous improvement may see its management fail to look beyond existing key metrics and its operators attempt to modify or ‘game’ the interpretation of these metrics.

Five Levels of Process Safety Maturity

A helpful way to conceptualize an organization’s safety culture progress is to think of it in terms of levels of maturity. Ranging very immature to highly mature, the following safety levels provide a way to measure and compare an organization’s safety culture

Barilo, Moore, and Drube urged organizations to view safety culture as a continuous journey, requiring constant improvement and collaboration. Even with proper safety controls, a weak or negligent safety culture can result in avoidable and dangerous mistakes.

To access the full presentation and learn more about safety culture, click here. 

New Research Attributes Most Hydrogen Processing Plan Failures to Design Errors

By Aidan Dennehy, FCHEA

A new study from researchers at New York University (NYU) and University College London (UCL) systematically examines hydrogen accidents, identifying what differentiates them from conventional industrial failures. The article was authored by Dr Yutao Li (Research Fellow in Hydrogen Safety, UCL), Dr Jose Terero (Head of the Department of Civil, Environmental and Geomatic Engineering, UCL), and Dr Augustin Guibaud (Assistant Professor of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, NYU) and published in the peer reviewed International Journal for Hydrogen Energy. Based on an analysis of 295 incidents, the article concludes that only 15% were directly caused by hydrogen, attributing the majority to general industrial failures which impact all hydrocarbons.

The study categorizes the causes of hydrogen system failures into five three groups: hydrogen specific, non-hydrogen specific, and unknown. Non-hydrogen specific causes represented 59% of the cases examined. Of these, human error was the most prevalent, accounting for over 16% of total incidents, followed by design issues (15%) and component malfunction (13%). Hydrogen specific causes were responsible for 15% of the total incidents, with hydrogen induced corrosion (5%) and high-pressure environments (7%) making up most hydrogen-caused accidents. The remaining 26% of accidents were classified as having unknown causes, with the authors noting that the majority can likely be attributed to hydrogen’s low minimum ignition energy.

The researchers found that hydrogen’s properties rarely initiated incidents on their own. Instead, the root causes often stemmed from system-level failures, where general safety principles were improperly applied to hydrogen’s unique characteristics. The report highlights that “hydrogen’s distinct behavior requires design-specific approaches rather than direct adaptation of existing hydrocarbon standards.”

To improve safety outcomes, the researchers recommend that future hydrogen projects integrate risk-based design principles, enhanced sensor networks, and redundant safety barriers capable of detecting and mitigating leaks before ignition occurs. They also emphasize the importance of embedding hydrogen safety education into engineering curricula and crafting hydrogen-specific safety strategies wherever hydrogen is in use. Dr Guibaud noted that “if we can distinguish between what is general and what is hydrogen-specific, we can focus regulation and design standards on the right problems.”

To read the full article, click here.

New Research Investigates the Use of Pressure Safety Valves for Liquid Hydrogen

By Aidan Dennehy, FCHEA

Researchers from the Korea Electrotechnology Research Institute in Changwon, South Korea, published a new study aimed at improving the safety and stability of pressure safety valves (PSVs) in liquid hydrogen systems. The authors developed a new safety evaluation device to test the performance of PSVs under the cryogenic and high-pressure conditions which are typical of liquid hydrogen systems. Their findings, published in the peer-reviewed journal Results in Engineering, provides new experimental evidence supporting the efficacy of PSVs in liquid hydrogen systems with several important caveats.

PSVs are a safety device designed to prevent pressurized equipment, such as tanks and pipelines, from experiencing excessive internal pressure. PSVs typically achieve this by monitoring pressure levels and automatically releasing pressure when a certain threshold is reached. They work by using a spring-loaded mechanism; when pressure on the inlet side rises above the set limit, the spring tension is overcome, the valve opens, and hydrogen is discharged to a safe location. In liquid hydrogen systems, PSVs also manage boil-off gas (BOG), which occurs when liquid hydrogen vaporizes due to unavoidable heat transfer. Previous studies on PSVs in cryogenic applications often relied on substitutes like liquid nitrogen or helium. This study evaluated PSVs using actual liquid hydrogen, providing evidence which is directly applicable to liquid hydrogen systems.

The researchers cautioned that these findings are limited by the inability of their evaluation device to reach the working temperature of liquid hydrogen. However, the use of actual liquid hydrogen in their experiment still included dynamics, such as BOG and cryogenic cooling, which substitutes cannot reproduce. The authors recommend that future studies employ better insulation, modified piping, and enhanced cryogenic leak tests to lower the valve temperature.

To read the full peer-reviewed article, click here.

Overview of Safety Considerations for Hydrogen Storage at Ports

By Aidan Dennehy, FCHEA

Researchers at Concordia University in Montreal, Canada, published an overview of safety considerations for hydrogen storage systems located at ports. The article, Hydrogen storage systems at ports for enhanced safety and sustainability: a review, was published in the peer-reviewed journal Marine Development. The study assesses the benefits and risks of a wide range of storage options: compressed gas, cryogenic liquid, cryo-compressed, ammonia, solid-state hydrides, and underground storage. After outlining these options, the article discussed ways to plan for and prevent hydrogen storage issues at port.

The review went on to highlight ways to manage hydrogen storage risks at ports through preparedness. Regular inspections, risk assessments, and engineering controls, such as double-sealed tanks and fire-resistant materials, form the foundation of safety. New tools such as AI-driven predictive maintenance and robotics can further strengthen monitoring and emergency response. The authors discussed the value of quantitative risk assessment (QRA) models, which are structured method of analyzing safety risks using numerical data rather than just qualitative judgments. They recommend a storage capacity and pressure-based QRA developed by Correa-Jullian and Groth in 2022 and a liquid hydrogen storage specific fault tree-based QRA developed by Le et al. in 2023, both published in the International Journal of Hydrogen Energy. In the event an incident does occur, ports must coordinate closely with fire and medical services, deploy dedicated suppression systems, and ensure worker protection.

As the demand for hydrogen increases in marine environments, ports around the world must prepare safe and efficient storage mechanisms.

To read the full report, click here

New Study Conducts High-Level Hazard Analysis for Pink Hydrogen Production

By Aidan Dennehy, FCHEA

Researchers from the University of Sheffield released a new paper in the peer-reviewed International Journal of Green Energy, presenting one of the first systematic hazard analyses of the production of pink hydrogen. The article, titled High-level hazard analysis for pink hydrogen production, addresses the unique and complex safety challenges posed when using nuclear systems in the hydrogen production process. Initially identifying 26 high-risk scenarios through research and team discussions, the authors were able to reduce the number to 2 by implementing the recommended mitigation methods. 

Pink hydrogen is produced through water electrolysis using a nuclear power plant's process heat and electricity, offering a pathway for zero greenhouse gas emissions. The technology often relied upon in pink hydrogen production is Solid Oxide Electrolysis Cells (SOEC), which operate at high temperatures (500°C to 1000°C), a range compatible with typical nuclear reactor outlet temperatures.

Hazards identified

The high-level hazard analysis identified twenty-six significant high-risk scenarios arising from the coupling of nuclear energy and high-temperature SOECs. The primary concerns stem from the general highly flammable nature of hydrogen, which presents a constant risk of rapid fire or explosion within the production facility. The most critical scenarios involve the potential for a hydrogen incident to cause a cascading effect, compromising the integrity of the adjacent nuclear infrastructure.

Other major hazards included electrical failure and interference, which can disrupt sensitive control systems for both the electrolyzer and the reactor. The high operating temperatures exacerbate the risk of material degradation, such as embrittlement or thermal stress, which can lead to potential failures over time. One hazard which is unique to the combination of hydrogen and nuclear systems is the integration of nuclear process heat, which the SOEC uses to produce hydrogen. The integration must manage dynamic thermal conditions and the risk of nuclear contamination, which could cause thermal shock or endanger operators. Overall, the study found that pink hydrogen production systems feature many of the same risks as typical hydrogen production systems, which in some cases are worsened by the involvement of nuclear power.

Mitigation methods

The authors focused mitigation efforts on layered safety controls and pre-emptive design modifications, which successfully reduced the high-severity hazards from twenty-six to two. Many of the mitigation strategies mirrored those found in most hydrogen systems. The recommended safety controls included physically separating the hydrogen generation area from the nuclear material, incorporating gas detectors with automated shut-off features, and ensuring robust ventilation. The integration challenge, while serious, was mitigated using an intermediate Heat Exchanger (HEx) and coolants, which facilitate the transfer of heat from the reactor to the hydrogen generator while stabilizing the temperature and keeping the two physically separate.

Hydrogen leakage and high voltage electricity risks were the two high-risk hazards that the study was unable to eliminate by implementing safety controls. While not 100% effective, the study recommends managing these risk by using hydrogen-specific materials, pre-emptively maintaining system components, and diligent real-time monitoring.  

To read the full article in the International Journal of Green Energy, click here.

New Study Reviews Hydrogen Aviation Safety Challenges and Mitigation Strategies

By Aidan Dennehy, FCHEA

A new article published in the peer-reviewed journal Transport Economics and Management identifies safety challenges and mitigation strategies for utilizing hydrogen as an aviation fuel. Authored by researchers at the University of South Australia, the study systematically reviews 213 articles published between 2015 and 2025 to summarize the safety literature surrounding hydrogen in aviation and identify the associated risks and mitigation strategies. As the aviation industry moves closer to adopting hydrogen as an alternative fuel, this article offers valuable insights into how to best approach safety.

The use of hydrogen in aviation introduces safety concerns that differ from those of conventional jet fuel, such as hydrogen embrittlement, boil-off gas formation, and its low density. At the same time, traditional concerns such as flammability are amplified by hydrogen’s wide flammability range. The study addresses more than seven safety challenges and summarizes mitigation strategies outlined in the literature.

Hydrogen’s low density, wide flammability range, and tendency to degrade materials are several key challenges identified by this article, which are associated with the material properties of hydrogen. Even in its most dense state, hydrogen is significantly less dense than the hydrocarbon fuels typically used in aviation. This low density necessitates cryogenic storage systems and large tank volumes, which increases the opportunity for material degradation and boil-off-gas formation. To address this risk, the paper recommends ensuring high-quality insulation in cryogenic tank design to resist heat transfer and integrating metal hydrides to manage boil-off losses. Hydrogen has a very wide flammability range (between 4–75% by volume in air), which means it can ignite across a much broader range of air-to-fuel mixtures than conventional fuels. Furthermore, hydrogen has an extremely low minimum ignition energy, meaning that even a weak spark can cause combustion, increasing the likelihood of accidental ignition. These risks can be addressed by implementing emergency venting systems, using advanced leak detection sensors with automatic intervention triggers, and physically isolating ignition risks. Finally, hydrogen molecules' tendency to embrittle their surrounding materials can slowly degrade crucial components, potentially causing cracking or failure. The authors recommend using embrittlement-resistant materials such as titanium, using multi-layer storage systems, and carefully monitoring components for structural damage.

Hydrogen leakage, boil-off gas, and operational requirements all pose safety challenges related to its storage and handling when using hydrogen as an energy source in aviation. Hydrogen’s small molecule size and low density mean it is more prone to leakage, which increases the chance of ignition. In addition, heat leakage into a hydrogen tank can cause vaporization of the liquid hydrogen, thus increasing the tank pressure and potentially causing structural failure. Approaches such as pressure relief valves, fire suppression systems, and leak detection sensors are crucial. For aviation, the authors also recommend robotic or self-aligning refueling interfaces that maintain stable fuel flow and pressure. Boil-off gas forms when liquid hydrogen vaporizes, increasing tank pressure until it exceeds allowable limits, necessitating a venting event. Studies recommend the use of metal hydrides, which can capture and compress boil-off gas, and significant insulation for storage tanks to mitigate this risk. Finally, the operational requirements of refueling planes pose additional risks. The refueling process requires managing open connection points, with potentially misaligned pressures and an increased chance of ignition from static discharge. In addition, the presence of oxygen-enriched solidified air mixed with hydrogen increases the risk of explosion. The review recommends implementing purging procedures before and after connecting a refueling hose, designing a safety exclusion zone when refueling, and using risk assessment models to evaluate potential hazards.

The study highlights the need for the aviation industry to approach the adoption of hydrogen with a safety-by-design mindset, rather than simply retrofitting existing practices and infrastructure.

To read the full article in Transport Economics and Management, click here.

Hydrogen Safety Webinar for Domestic Heat Applications

By Aidan Dennehy, FCHEA

On October 8th, Mission Hydrogen hosted a webinar on hydrogen safety issues in home heating applications. The webinar was delivered by Megan Hine (Senior Business Development Manager, Dräger) and Jack Smith (Project Scientist, DNV). The use of hydrogen in heating applications such as boilers and stoves has the potential to bring hydrogen’s decarbonization benefits into the home. Smith and Hine discussed the findings from trials conducted at a purpose-built facility designed to put this use-case to the test.

Located at the DNV Spadeadam laboratory in Cumbria, the Hy4Heat project constructed a life-sized street to test home heating appliances that rely entirely on hydrogen. The project was designed to demonstrate the feasibility of running a boiler system on hydrogen and to identify new safety considerations that the use of hydrogen introduces.

Hine and Smith outlined how hydrogen can be safely used in domestic heating systems. Projects such as Hy4Heat represent a critical step toward certifying hydrogen-ready boilers and other appliances for consumer use. The comparative safety analysis with natural gas yielded important insights for system designers to consider.

Click here to access the full presentation from Mission Hydrogen, and here to read more about the Hy4Heat project.

Hydrogen Project Execution – Challenges and Best Practice

by Mhamed Samet, FCHEA

On September 17, 2025, Mission Hydrogen hosted a webinar titled “Hydrogen Project Execution – Challenges and Best Practice,” featuring Verena Lampret (University of Stuttgart) and Marvin Krüger (Wenger Engineering). The discussion focused on lessons learned from Germany’s WAVE H₂ project and the technical, logistical, and safety challenges of building large-scale hydrogen infrastructure.

Lessons Learned from Project Delivery
Key topics included design freezing, supplier validation, integrated permitting, and stakeholder engagement. The speakers shared detailed insights from EPCM delivery at the University of Stuttgart and Freudenstadt, including coordination across multiple media networks, evolving safety standards, and public engagement strategies.

Best Practices for Hydrogen Project Execution
Lampret and Krüger outlined best practices such as early design alignment, safety hierarchy prioritization, and close collaboration with authorities during approval processes. Wenger Engineering’s on-site experience underscored that hydrogen project success depends on proactive engineering, risk mitigation, and transparent communication.

Conclusion
The presentation demonstrated that effective project execution requires new mindsets combining flexibility, documentation discipline, and strong community relations—vital for reducing schedule risks and safety exposure in hydrogen infrastructure.

To access a recording of this webinar, click here.