tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29911320.post8694457145407097931..comments2023-10-21T10:08:25.005-04:00Comments on Women, Unions, and Our Stories: Update from USMWF on Combustible Dust Standardsbendygirlhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00354763484076446134noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29911320.post-65363299298584559552008-07-01T14:37:00.000-04:002008-07-01T14:37:00.000-04:00Hi Joe,You bring up some excellent points. In the ...Hi Joe,<BR/><BR/>You bring up some excellent points. In the big picture, yes OSHA should ensure that the NFPA combustible codes are enforced that are referenced in the ICC, International Fire Code and the NFPA, Uniform Fire Code. <BR/><BR/>The current OSHA General Duty Clause will achieve this through industry standards of care referenced in the NFPA combustible dust codes.<BR/><BR/>Yet at the local jurisdictional level this is where the problem arises with the combustible dust aspect of the facility not being addressed by the building and fire inspectors concerning life safety and structural integrity of the building. Workplace safety is under the umbrella of the it's parent, life safety of the building.<BR/><BR/>The issue of workplace safety is currently confused with building and fire safety concerning combustible dust. Especially when topics of explosion venting, spark suppression and detection are suppose to be incorporated into the building design of the manufacturing facility that utilizes combustible particulate solids that generate combustible dust<BR/><BR/>Same with shootings at workplaces, this is a local law enforcement/crime prevention jurisdictional issue. Not OSHA, but thats a whole topic of debate in itself<BR/><BR/>Cranes are an entirely different situation. OSHA needs to be involved there since the crane is not part of the building when the project is completed.<BR/><BR/>Thanks for your feedback. Constructive thought-provoking debate like this is what needs to be pursued in the prevention of future preventable combustible dust fires and explosions that plague our nation's economically troubled manufacturing sector.John Astadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13183032143746688649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29911320.post-67978746653840192582008-07-01T14:04:00.000-04:002008-07-01T14:04:00.000-04:00Hi John,I have been an avid reader of your blog, a...Hi John,<BR/><BR/>I have been an avid reader of your blog, and have read your recent post <A HREF="http://dustexplosions.blogspot.com/2008/06/osha-combustible-dust-blame-game.html" REL="nofollow">OSHA Combustible Dust Blame Game</A>, and agree that the NFPA standard should be the utmost regulation that employers must adhere to, unfortunately their combustible dust standards are not, and when one agencies standard is neglected and there are employees who's well being are a direct responsibility of their employers, OSHA should hold the governance in such matters.<BR/><BR/>It is understandable that OSHA is quite underfunded and does not have enough inspectors, but if that is the case then we need to do more work to change that fact.Same with matters of local governance. So the question is who needs to do more to prevent this from happening? Even in your conclusion in the article I linked to above you leave off with 2 questions. This is a confusing issue and we need change to stop this from happening again, not scapegoats.<BR/><BR/>"Would combustible dust explosions occur if current fire codes followed the references to the NFPA combustible dust codes?"<BR/><BR/>Maybe OSHA should be the body that makes sure those codes are enforced. They still are the Government overseer of employee health, if a job site were to have shootings once a week, where workers were at risk, would that be a local issue? Eventually I would expect OSHA to be involved there also. It would be easy to grant OSHA a hands off on any such job risk, if you can point the finger to a different agency, why have OSHA investigate construction accidents in New York when there is a NYC Department Of Buildings?<BR/><BR/>And I understand there is a tremendous difference between a flour and a Acetylene explosion, one standard does not cover both fuels.<BR/><BR/>Please don't take this as arbitrary, just trying to help people same as uniongal and yourself.<BR/><BR/>JoeJoe638NYChttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13306379897904771367noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29911320.post-82650996518641070872008-07-01T11:00:00.000-04:002008-07-01T11:00:00.000-04:00Thats okay, go ahead and follow the spin that it's...Thats okay, go ahead and follow the spin that it's primarily an OSHA problem. Blame OSHA for everything that will fix the problem.<BR/><BR/>Is OSHA the first-responder to arrive at a plant explosion or fire in conjunction with conducting fire inspections for life safety, structural integrity, and mission continuity? Of course not. This is a local and state jurisdictional issue, not federal.<BR/><BR/>Mixing apples and oranges when comparing agricultural grain facilities to manufacturing plant facilities. They are separate entities that have similar combustible dust issues.<BR/><BR/>Read the CSB Dust Hazard Study, which concludes that many fire inspectors have no specific knowledge concerning combustible dust as outlined in the fires codes that the States have adopted,which all make reference to the NFPA combustible dust codes<BR/><BR/>Confusing workplace safety with building life safety and structural integrity deviates from the prevention of future combustible dust fires and explosions.John Astadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13183032143746688649noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29911320.post-92114354076851684362008-07-01T10:39:00.000-04:002008-07-01T10:39:00.000-04:00Gotta disagree on that one. You're implying that ...Gotta disagree on that one. You're implying that the local fire inspectors aren't doing their jobs, are you also then inferring that the same was the case for grain explosions?<BR/><BR/>When it deals with workers and the lives and safety of those workers, it's not just a local issue especially where the commerce of these industries is international in nature rather than between states.<BR/><BR/>I think of this issue much the way USDA regulates the meat industry (and that's an entirely other topic) or how the EPA regulates environmental hazards. OSHA is charged with workplace safety and combustible dust is a workplace hazard.bendygirlhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00354763484076446134noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-29911320.post-47300071384159416412008-07-01T09:32:00.000-04:002008-07-01T09:32:00.000-04:00If the fire codes were adhered to such as the NFPA...If the fire codes were adhered to such as the NFPA, Uniform Fire Code or the ICC, International Fire Code. Which both make reference to NFPA combustible dust codes then most combustible dust fires and explosions would not occur. This is not an OSHA issue, which is mistakenly portrayed in the media with the political spin but instead a local jurisdictional issue. Are the fire inspectors knowledgeable of the complex aspects of combustible dust?<BR/>http://dustexplosions.blogspot.com/John Astadhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13183032143746688649noreply@blogger.com