—————————Advt———————————

For a practical guide to Hazardous Area Classification, why don’t you download an excellent ebook available here? Free preview.

——————————————————————

hazardous waste processing, handling, and storage facilities. The Board also recommended that fire protection codes be revised to require companies to determine safe distances between occupied buildings and potentially hazardous areas.

This is because in the accident, flammable and explosive vapors of a solvent Tetrahydrafuran (THF) leaked and traveled some distance away from the processing area to an area that apparently was not classified as a hazardous area. These flammable vapors found anignition source and exploded, devastating the facility and the neighborhood too.

Read the entire report here (given below).

The accident occurred on May 4, 2009, when flammable vapor was released from a waste recycling process, ignited, and violently exploded. The blast seriously injured two workers and damaged 20 nearby residences and five businesses. CSB investigators found that the north wall of the lab and operations building – where the victims were injured – was less than 30 feet from the waste recycling processing area where the flammable vapor was released.

CSB Chairman Rafael Moure-Eraso said, “This accident should not have happened. Our report notes that OSHA cited the company for inadequate attention to process safety management practices in the handling of flammable liquids. But in case of an accident, I believe it is absolutely critical that buildings at chemical facilities be sited safe distances from process equipment to maximize the safety of workers. We are making recommendations that would help ensure that operating areas with occupied buildings such as control rooms be sufficiently separated from process areas containing flammable liquids and gases that have the potential to explode.”

The Board issued a recommendation to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), which develops codes and standards for industry, urging NFPA to require companies to perform engineering analyses to determine safe separation distances between buildings occupied by administrative and other personnel not essential to process operations, and buildings housing the potentially hazardous process equipment.

The Board also revised a previous recommendation to the Environmental Technology Council, a hazardous waste industry trade group, to petition the NFPA to develop a standard specific to hazardous waste treatment, storage and disposal facilities. This would include guidance on reducing the likelihood of fires, explosions, and releases of hazardous waste.

Dr. Moure noted, “The Environmental Technology Council did not respond adequately to our 2007 recommendation, which we issued following an explosion and massive fire at the Environmental Quality hazardous waste facility in Apex, North Carolina, to work for more stringent standards in the hazardous waste industry. I strongly urge the industry to act now. These facilities, by their nature, contain wide varieties of flammable and toxic materials that can cause significant injury to workers and threaten the well being of nearby communities. Facility owners and operators need stricter technical requirements to improve the safety of life and property.”

The report notes that after a normal run of the tetrahydrafuran (THF) solvent recovery process at the Veolia facility, the unit operator began a routine shutdown. Completing the process required blowing nitrogen back through the circulation piping to clean it, prior to closing valves.

CSB lead investigator Johnnie Banks said, “At the time of the shutdown, witnesses reported hearing the sound of a sudden, loud vapor release and smelling a very strong odor of THF solvent which knocked several employees to their knees. It was a matter of just a couple of minutes until the highly flammable vapor ignited.”

The vapor drifted to the laboratory and operations building and found an ignition source inside the building. A worker in the control room reported being enveloped in a fireball that went through the building. The first explosion knocked over a bank of lockers, severely injuring an employee and pinning him underneath.

Because of the extensive fire damage, the CSB was unable to conclusively determine the exact initiating event for the vapor release, concluding one of two possible scenarios likely occurred. In the first scenario, air may have been drawn into a tank containing THF residue and peroxides, causing increased pressure in the tank and forcing flammable vapor from the tank to escape through a manway cover or a vacuum breaker.

In the second possible scenario, CSB investigators believe a line hose, intended to send pressurized nitrogen into a different tank, may have instead been connected to a tank containing unprocessed, flammable liquid. When the nitrogen was applied, it forced flammable vapor out through the tank vent. In either scenario, the vapor drifted to the operations building and ignited, causing the injuries.

In addition to issuing recommendations to NFPA and the hazardous waste industry, the Board also issued recommendations to Veolia, which is rebuilding the plant. The CSB called on the company to restrict occupancy in buildings in close proximity to the operating plant to personnel trained in the safe operation and orderly shutdown of the plant. The Board also called on the Center for Chemical Process Safety, a division of the American Institute of Chemical Engineers, to revise control room siting guidelines to address the characteristics of all Class 1B flammable liquids.

The stopping of the oil leak has brought cheers to the states that border the Gulf of Mexico, but the news is being treated with cautious optimism. Observers are not sure whether the cap can last and whether the leak has really stopped.

‘I think it is a positive sign,’ President Barack Obama said carefully when asked about the oil flow after he made a statement about Wall Street reform’s passage in the Senate. ‘We’re still in the testing phase. I’ll have more to say about it tomorrow.’

Bobby Jindal, the Governor of Louisiana was also cautious in commenting. He said that he was “cautiously optimistic” about the plugging. But, he said, ‘Work to revitalise our coast won’t be done until our waters and our shores are completely clean and our wildlife, our communities and our coastal industries are 100 percent restored.’

Let us all hope that the new containment cap does its job well and so the task of cleanup can really begin in  earnest.

This updated training course covers all aspects of Hazardous Area Instruments and Controls, with changes to the IEC standards and ATEX directives fully reflected in the course contents. The original Hazardous Area Instrumentation training course was very well received by engineers and technicians in oil & gas, chemical processing, pulp & paper, power and other industries, as also by engineering consultants, contractors and even regulatory authorities. The updated version of this course is even better than the earlier version. Furthermore, the updated version will be available free of cost, to all customers of Abhisam Software who have purchased the earlier version within the past one year.
This new version of the Hazardous Area Instrumentation training course consists of the following six modules.
1. Basic Concepts
2. Classification (Area Classification, Material Classification and Temperature Classification)
3. Methods of protection (including explosionproof, intrinsic safety, increased safety, pressurization and other methods)
4. Using Fieldbus in hazardous areas (covers entity, FISCO, high power trunk, amongst other topics)
5. Certification and Labeling
6. Inspection and Maintenance

Though the module names are the same as the earlier version, the content has been revised to a great extent. The changes in the IEC standards and the ATEX directives have been included in the relevant modules, so that this course is now all that you need to have for becoming a pro as regards Instrumentation and Control systems in Hazardous Areas. These modules contain several topic pages containing Flash based animations, actual photographs of hazardous area instruments and equipment, rich graphics and easy to understand text, so that the subject becomes very easy to learn. Engineers and technicians who work in the process industries are sometimes intimidated and confused by the array of standards, systems and acronyms that are used by experts in hazardous areas. This course makes it all so very easy to understand that after completing it one can easily apply the various hazardous area concepts and standards to actual workplaces to enhance the safety of assets and people. The course is also available in an online LMS based system which would be ideal for corporations, universities and training institutes, who may wish to train large numbers of people in this subject. All training reports including learner login times, modules accessed, scores obtained on tests and other data can be made available in a spreadsheet for training records and tracking. Learners can also take an online test and qualify for a certificate at no additional charge. As a limited time bonus, Abhisam Software is also giving away a copy of their popular ebook “Practical Guide to Hazardous Area Classification” alongwith this updated course. For more information about the updated course please click here .

The  most interesting aspect is that Abhisam Software says that if somebody has purchased the earlier version of the course within the past one year, then they may be eligible for a FREE upgrade.

For an excellent training course on Gas Detectors including how to select, use and maintain them, please click here
————————————————-

Hot work is defined as welding, cutting, grinding, or other spark-producing activities that can ignite flammable substances.  To date in 2010, the CSB has learned of 15 serious hot work-related fires and explosions that caused six reported fatalities and numerous injuries.
Dr. Moure said, “I am saddened by this accident and disturbed that such fatalities continue to occur. The CSB is vitally concerned about hot work accidents and this was expressed in our important safety bulletin and safety video, both issued within the past few months.”
According to information gathered by the CSB from the fire department and the company, a worker was standing on a ladder, welding on the side of a tank partially filled with a mixture of water and flammable hydrocarbons.  Sparks ignited flammable vapor and the worker was thrown off the ladder, suffering fatal injuries.
The company stated that although it has a hot work permit system and had provided safety training to the victim, there was no monitoring for a flammable atmosphere before or during the welding. ( What a joke-how can anybody issue a permit when they haven’t measured the flammable gas concentration in the area-do they expect a piece of paper will actually prevent an accident?!). While current OSHA standards prohibit hot work in an explosive atmosphere, OSHA does not explicitly require the use of combustible gas detectors.
There have been more than 60 fatalities since 1990 due to explosions and fires from hot work activities on tanks.  In seven of the 11 accidents discussed in the bulletin, no gas testing was performed prior to or during the hot work activities.  In the remaining cases, monitoring was conducted improperly.
Dr. Moure said, “There is no secret to preventing these accidents.  Companies should require effective monitoring of the atmosphere before and during all welding or other spark-producing activities near tanks that may contain flammable liquids or gases. Monitoring should be frequent or continuous and performed at multiple locations to assure that no flammable vapor is present which could be ignited.  Monitoring the atmosphere and following the other six key lessons in our bulletin can help avoid these tragedies.”

————————-Advt—————————–
For excellent  Instrumentation training courses, please click here

————————————————————-

The fire had resulted in 11 fatalities and destruction of oil worth millions., plus a lot of collateral damage was caused to an adjacent factory. The fire had raged on for several days and had was very difficult to control and extinguish.

Well, now the investigation into the accident is over and nine officers have been found guilty of gross negligence. The investigation speed was surprisingly fast (look at how the Bhopal case went on for decades before resulting in convictions) and nine officers of the company, including a General Manager, have been arrested on charges of gross negligence. Such arrests, will hopefully, instill enough respect for Industrial Safety in organisations that pay only lip service to the philosophy of safety.

As in most other cases of accidents, the result of the mishap occuring was the end result of a lot of events, not just the result of one event. Look at what facts were dug out and presented by the investigation team:

• Non working Public Address System
• Non implementation of Emergency Response Procedures-so the police control room was informed of the accident after ONE HOUR after the accident
• Apparent non working of any automation system that was supposedly installed at the facility to prevent overfilling

This means that if a plant or facility is well designed by competent engineers and also well maintained, then it will automatically ensure safety. However the operations of the systems that have been installed years ago need to be checked at least every year by third parties (as is the practice in many countries). For sure this being done for mechanical items like pressure vessels and safety relief valves, but is it being done for Instrumentation and Control Systems, or other systems like Public Address Systems? The sooner this is done seriously, we will have lesser chances of such accidents-be it the BP Deepwater Horizon spill or the Jaipur tank farm fire.