Tuesday, October 25, 2011

Workplace Safety Toolkit

Workplace Safety Toolkit

Workplace Safety Is No AccidentAn Employer's Online Toolkit to Protect stakeholders.
Safety begins with corporate culture. This site is an excellent resource for your plant safety and health program.
It contains worksheets, checklists and information on a host of subjects related to health and safety including:

Foundational concepts such as Safety Policy, Job Descriptions, Safety Committees.

Concepts and Applications about how and why accidents happen, framework for safety culture, OSHA Fact Sheet and checklist, accident analysis and reporting.

And other Concerns and Issues such as ADA Compliance, pathogens, building maintenance, confined spaces, construction, drug free workplace, electrical safety, emergency action planning, ergonomics, fleet safety, food safety, hazardous and toxic substances, housekeeping, lockout/tagout, mold and mildew, off site assignments, portable power tools, PPE, security, workplace stress, and workplace violence.

Make sure and check it out. This site has the tools you need to help promote your safety culture, and keep your personnel safe.

Tuesday, October 18, 2011

Is Your Woodworking Plant OSHA Safe?

From the Woodworking Network blog, a good article on OSHA press releases in which wood products firms have been cited for serious, repeat and/or willful safety and health violations.

What is your corporate safety culture like?

Only serious "continuous significant improvement", and benchmarking best engineering practices to your health and safety program will prevent these type OSHA violations and citations.  Ignorance and negligence of current NFPA Standards for combustible dust, dust collection and other safety practices is what causes OSHA to have to police your business.

Like Rich in this article, I shake my head every time I read one of these stories or press releases, and it is almost a daily occurrence.  The shame is that many of the events in these stories could have been prevented!

My business is in the field of combustible dust, and helping protect process conveying systems, and dust collection systems from fires and explosions. My primary focus is in prevention, and providing and applying fire and explosion prevention and protection systems. Our purpose is helping our clients and customers prevent process fires and explosions - "Saving Production - Saving Lives!"

From my point of view, business should be able to police itself, and has a moral obligation to protect its most valuable asset - human capitol, and not just employees, but all stakeholders who come onto your property.  Because of negligence by a few, now OSHA has to police our manufacturing community.

This is the kind of stuff that keeps me up at night. I have actually had plant managers tell me they would rather have their plant burn down rather than invest in appropriate safety systems to protect their production, people, and reputation!  I have seen the catastrophic effects and loss of life as a result of this type attitude toward safety. To me this type attitude is willful negligence.  Safety systems and procedures aren't an empty expense to your business, but part of your production systems, a valuable asset to help keep you in business, and your people safe. They are insurance.

My goal is to leave the the process industries safer then when I started.  Let me help you protect your process from fires and explosions. We are here to help.

-Jeff Nichols

Is Your Woodworking Plant OSHA Safe?

By Rich Christianson | 08/07/2011 2:00:00 AM
I don't think that owners and managers of woodworking businesses lie awake at night thinking of ways to make their plants more dangerous for their employees. Yet, it is also apparent that some woodworking business owners and managers could do more to make their shops a safer work environment.

This is why I shake my head every time I see an OSHA press release in which a wood products firm has been cited for serious, repeat and/or willful safety and health violations. Are managers of these plants that callous or is OSHA simply overzealous?

Considering the long list of potential hazards in a typical woodworking operation -- machine guarding; wood dust as both respiratory and combustible dust issues, noise pollution, eye safety, VOC emissions from finishes and adhesives, etc. -- it's almost impossible not to imagine that on any given day, any wood operation could be cited by an OSHA inspector for one or more health and safety violations. And the preceding list doesn't even include administrative requirements such as maintaining Material Safety Data Sheets on file, developing a hazardous communications program and providing workers with regular safety training.

Callous or Picked on?My head is still shaking after posting an OSHA press release about Northeastern Wisconsin Wood Products of Pound, Wi, which was recently cited for 18 alleged health and safety citations, including 13 willful violations, which OSHA defines as "one committed with intentional knowing or voluntary disregard for the law's requirements, or with plain indifference to worker safety and health."

The 13 willful violations cited against Northeastern Wisconsin Wood Products, including failure to provide workers with ear and eye protection;; lack of machine guards and guard rails; and accumulations of combustible dust;, carry penalties totaling $360,000 in proposed fines.

What makes this case particulary disconcerting is that OSHA had cited this firm for violations as early as 2006 and again in a follow-up inspection in 2007. In May 2010 the company was issued a secretary of labor petition for summary enforcement and granted 30 days to work with a Wisconsin state consultation service to abate the violations. According to OSHA, the consultation service fired the client "due to a lack of cooperation by the company."

When OSHA inspectors returned to the plant in January of this year, they identified the 18 violations, many of which OSHA noted were for the same safety and health issues it had originally written the company up for in 2006.

Incredible. Five years after being told where it was deficient in employee health and safety and many of the same problems continued to persist.

Adding insult to injury, OSHA this time also cited the company for a repeat safety violation carrying a proposed penalty of $7,920 for failing to provide potable water for drinking, plus three serious violations for failing to periodically inspect energy control procedures, use group lockout devices and train employees in electrical safety.

I would hope that Northeastern Wood Product managers have answers to explain their apparent disregard or inability to correct the deficiencies pointed out by OSHA inspectors.

'Worst Case Scenario'Northeastern Wood Products is hardly alone and as bad as it seems, another wood product company's predicament stands out in my mind as "the worst case scenario."

You may recall reading Woodworking Network's report about Phenix Lumber of Phenix City, AL, which was fined $1.9 million by OSHA willful violations in June "for egregious and other safety violations, including exposing employees to amputation and fall hazards." OSHA said while investigating the report of an employee who lost a finger in Phenix Lumber's planer mill, it learned of a second employee who had lost part of his hand working in the mill.

In citing Phenix Lumber for 24 willful violating, OSHA noted that the company had been been cited 77 times by the safety agency for serious safety and health violations since 2007, including for machine guard and lock-out/tag-out problems that if corrected might have prevented the amputation injuries.

The $1.9 million in proposed penalties was lumped on top of $439,400 in OSHA fines that Phenix Lumber received for relative to a fatal forklift injury and the case of a worker who was critically injured in a debarker machine accident.

Phenix Lumber issued a statement that it "has continued to significantly improve its safety and health program especially over the past year. Specifically, it has continued to revise its safety policies and procedures and to address OSHA concerns, has trained and retrained all of its employees and managers including the OSHA 10-hour safety training course, has provided additional personal protective equipment to all its employees and is providing weekly safety talks to all employees."

Maybe if Phenix Lumber had "continued to significantly improve its safety and health program" beginning after the initial OSHA violations in 2007, one or more of the tragedies at its plant would have been averted.

The bottom line is that while OSHA has a relatively small inspection crew, and many wood shops never see hide nor hair of an OSHA inspector, an OSHA inspection is just an accident or whistle from a disgruntled current or ex-employee away. And once a company is on OSHA's radar it remains there for years to come. Just ask the managers at Northeastern Wisconsin Wood Products and Phenix Lumber.

As the old saying goes, "Safety is no accident." Be sure to do regular audits of your operation to be OSHA safe, including meeting all of the record and reporting requirements. It's a huge task, but one that when done should help you sleep better.

Read more of Rich Christianson's blogs.

Sunday, October 16, 2011

So you want to build a biomass plant?

So you want to build a biomass plant? - - the portal for timber, logs and woody biomass

In this article from, Paul Janz with Ausenco Sandwell in Vancouver, BC gives you a quick overview of all the complexities involved.

A Beginners Guide to the Project Development Process

With the current emphasis on producing `green energy from biomass and the subsequent government grants and subsidies available to promote the idea, a lot of well-meaning but inexperienced entrepreneurs are promoting the construction of plants that will process biomass into one form or another.

There are some basic steps that all projects go through, from concept to start-up, whether the `builder is new to the process or whether it is a company with a well formulated plan for development. Following is a brief description of the project development process.

Friday, October 14, 2011

Dust explosions explained | Characteristics, ignition and effects

Dust explosions explained | Characteristics, ignition and effects

From the Dust Explosion Info website a great article on characteristics of explosions,  explosion concentrations, ignition of dust clouds, and the effects of explosions.

This website is an excellent starting point for those wanting to know more about explosions, the physical characteristics of an explosion, the necessary conditions for an explosion to occur, potential ignition sources, dust explosion statistics, flammability, risk assessment, dust explosion prevention and protection, standards, and hazardous area classification.

Wednesday, October 12, 2011

OSHA Should Beware of Combustible Trust

Combustible Trust
From Material Handling and Logistics and the blog, is an interesting piece on why OSHA removed powered industrial trucks from the latest Combustible Dust status report in the rulemaking process.

OSHA Should Beware of Combustible Trust
Tom Andel
September 9th, 2011

That old line about the sliding scale of untruths—lies, damn lies and statistics—is fun to use when someone quotes a number to support their argument. How many times have you read an article that debunks a widely-believed statistic? A few years ago chocolate was bad for you. Too much sugar, caffeine and empty calories. Now the conventional wisdom is that chocolate is good for you. Its antioxidants will help you live to 150. That’s if you don’t get killed in an industrial dust explosion first.
That was another popular belief a couple years ago—that lift trucks were involved in many of the combustibe dust violations found by OSHA inspectors. That stat was reported in a status report OSHA published in 2009 on its Combustible Dust National Emphasis Program.

“Employers were cited for violations of personal protective equipment, electrical equipment for hazardous (classified) locations, first aid, powered industrial trucks, and fire extinguisher standards during these inspections,” the report stated. It documented this with a chart showing Powered Industrial Trucks responsible for 236 violations—third behind hazardous chemicals and Housekeeping.
Recently, John Astad, an expert on the hazards of combustible dust whom I’ve quoted in previous blogs, e-mailed me a new version of this report. It had the same chart, but the industrial trucks category was missing. He was concerned that, whether this were a mistaken or an intentional omission on OSHA’s part, that it could lower a user’s guard about the dangers of using spark-ignited engines in dusty environments and leave them vulnerable to citations.
Astad is sensitive to irregularities in OSHA stats, citing one in particular which states that 90% of combustible dust related incidents result in injuries or fatalities. This is diametrically opposed to his own research done in 2008 where he found that fewer than 10% of ComDust related incidents resulted in injuries or fatalities.
I checked with my source at OSHA, and after a little investigation, here’s what he found out about that chart from which the industrial trucks category was removed:
“After reviewing the data on which the bar chart was based, it was concluded that powered industrial trucks were involved in not 236 violations, but only 24 violations,” he told me. “In other words, 212 of the 236 combustible dust related violations attributed to powered industrial trucks had nothing to do with combustible dust. This error was rectified in our revision, in May of 2010.”
I share this with you as a reminder to keep that salt shaker handy next time you’re being fed statistics. Numbers go down easier with large grains of salt.

Monday, October 10, 2011

System Safety Skeptic - Lessons Learned

System Safety Skeptic - Lessons Learned

"Effective system safety efforts require learning from failure"

From Terry Hardy and the "System Safety Skeptic" Blog, an article on the lessons learned from the chemical explosion at the 1999 Y-12 Plant in Oak Ridge, TN.

Lesson Learned: Analyses after accidents often show that clues existed before the mishap occurred. Such clues frequently take the form of anomalies observed during the life cycle of a project. An anomaly is an apparent problem or failure that occurs during verification or operation and affects a system, a subsystem, a process, support equipment, or facilities. Anomaly or problem reporting and corrective action, therefore, can play an important role in system safety analyses. An effective anomaly report and corrective action process not only allows for the reporting of problems, but also implements a closed-loop process for finding and fixing the root cause of a problem. In the case of this accident, if the near misses had been properly reported and analyzed, this accident may have been prevented.