Combustible dust standard identified as ‘Most Wanted’

CSB Business Meeting to Vote on Key Safety Recommendations and Initiate "Most Wanted" Program - Public Meeting - Events | the U.S. Chemical Safety Board

Thursday, July 25, 2013

CSB Business Meeting to Vote on Key Safety Recommendations and Initiate "Most Wanted" Program

All Day Event

The U.S. Chemical Safety Board will meet publicly to consider the status designations of seven key safety recommendations issued to the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA.) The Board will also consider selection of the agency's first "Most Wanted Safety Improvement."

TIME AND DATE:  July 25, 2013, 9:30 a.m.- 4:30 p.m. EDT.

PLACERonald Reagan Building and International Trade Center, Horizon Room, 1300 Pennsylvania Avenue View of the damage to temporary office trailers caused by the 2005 BP Texas City Refinery explosion and fire N.W., Washington, DC 20004.

OVERVIEW OF ACTIVITIES:

From 9:30 a.m. until 12:15 p.m., the Board will consider designating the following recommendations to the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) with the status "Open- Unacceptable Response":  
  1. Recommendation No. 2001-05-I-DE-R1: This recommendation calls upon OSHA to ensure coverage under the Process Safety Management (PSM) standard, at 29 CFR 1910.119, for atmospheric storage tanks that could be involved in a potential catastrophic release as a result of being interconnected to a covered process with 10,000 pounds of a flammable substance. This recommendation was issued pursuant to the CSB's investigation of the 2001 atmospheric tank explosion at the Motiva Delaware City Refinery.
  2. Recommendation No. 2005-04-I-TX-R9: This recommendation calls upon OSHA to revise the PSM standard to require management of change reviews for organizational changes (e.g. mergers, acquisitions) that could impact process safety. This recommendation was issued pursuant to the CSB's investigation of the March 2005 BP Texas City Refinery Fire and Explosion.
  3. Recommendation No. 2010-07-I-CT-UR1:  This recommendation calls upon OSHA to issue a fuel gas safety standard for both general industry and construction. This recommendation was issued pursuant to the CSB's investigations of the February 2010 incident at Kleen Energy in Middletown, CT, and the June 2009 explosion and ammonia release at ConAgra in Garner, NC.
Beginning at 1:30 p.m. EDT, the Board will consider and vote on the status designations of four recommendations to OSHA related to the issuance of a general industry standard for combustible dusts:  
At the conclusion of the meeting CSB Board Members are expected to designate an OSHA general industry standard for combustible dust as the CSB's first “Most Wanted Chemical Safety Improvement” issue.  

PUBLIC COMMENTS:

During both the morning and afternoon sessions, members of the audience will have an opportunity to provide comments on the pending actions to be voted by the Board.  Speakers should assume that their presentations will be limited to five minutes or less, and may submit written statements for the record.

MEETING MATERIALS:

Federal Register Notice (78 FR 41908, July 12, 2013)
Press Release: "CSB Announces Public Meeting in Washington to Vote on Key Safety Recommendations and Initiate Most Wanted Program" (July 15, 2013)
Meeting Agenda (Coming Soon!)
Summaries of staff evaluations to be presented

RELATED MATERIALS:

Board Order 46, which establishes the CSB's Most Wanted Chemical Safety Improvements Program.
Frequently Asked Questions about the CSB's Recommendations

Comments

  1. It is very well explained and really fire problems should be solved at very first priority in industries

    ReplyDelete
  2. I've been writing an article on fire protection in Toronto and I've found a lot of very interesting things while researching it. I feel that more people should be aware of the danger of fires.

    ReplyDelete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

The Fire Triangle, Fire Tetrahedron and Dust Explosion Pentagon

Are Spices Flammable?

Functional Safety Audit vs. Functional Safety Assessment