Combustible dust standard identified as ‘Most Wanted’

By -
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.

PLACE:  Ronald 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. najamonline4uJuly 17, 2013 at 10:03 PM

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

    ReplyDelete
  2. UnknownJuly 23, 2013 at 10:35 AM

    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

By -
Image
Fire Triangle From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Jump to: navigation , search The fire triangle. The fire triangle or combustion triangle is a simple model for understanding the ingredients necessary for most fires . [1] It has been replaced in the fire fighting and protection industry partially by the fire tetrahedron (see below). The triangle illustrates a fire requires three elements: heat , fuel , and an oxidizing agent (usually oxygen ). The fire is prevented or extinguished by removing any one of them. A fire naturally occurs when the elements are combined in the right mixture. Without sufficient heat , a fire cannot begin, and it cannot continue. Heat can be removed by the application of a substance which reduces the amount of heat available to the fire reaction. This is often water, which requires heat for phase change from water to steam. Introducing sufficient quantities and types of powder or gas in the flame reduces the amount of heat available for t...
Read more

Are Spices Flammable?

By -
Image
Is Cinnamon Flammable? - Science - ChefSteps Made from the dried bark of Cinnamomum verum , a tree indigenous to Sri Lanka, cinnamon's exotic perfume and subtle flavor come from its two major components: cinnamaldehyde and eugenol. These two chemicals are volatile, meaning they readily vaporize at temperatures comfortable to humans, which is in fact why cinnamon is so fragrant. But those same vapors are also highly combustible (indeed, combustion only happens in the presence of vapors), making cinnamon a highly flammable material under the right conditions. Now a cloud of cinnamon dust isn’t the kind of thing most people would consider dangerous, but add enough heat and you’ll quickly have an expanding ball of fire known as a dust explosion. For dealing with this situation, we can only recommend a good pair of running shoes. In fact, the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration issues warnings about cinnamon explosions in food manufacturing plants....
Read more

Functional Safety Audit vs. Functional Safety Assessment

By -
From Chemical Processing Don’t Confuse a Functional Safety Audit with a Functional Safety Assessment Understand the critical differences between the two essential evaluations By John Walkington, ABB Safety Lead Competency Centre Apr 19, 2017 Many people working in safety instrumented system (SIS) project development, execution, operation and maintenance treat a functional safety audit (FS Audit) and a functional safety assessment (FSA) as one and the same. So, based on this assumption, they simply ensure that such an activity is undertaken and perhaps signify the need to perform this evaluation at some point when it appears as a milestone on the project schedule. Moreover, often they call upon someone working on the project, who may or may not have had some previous experience in quality auditing, to deliver this audit/assessment. However, this is not a reasonable approach because the concepts for the audit and assessment markedly differ. An FS Audit provides...
Read more