Is Enough Done To Stop Explosive Dust?

Sugar Plant Blast In February That Killed 13 Is The Latest Preventable Tragedy

(CBS)  You might not think of sugar, corn, or metal as materials that can cause a catastrophic explosion in a factory, but when they're ground into dust-and suspended in the air-all it takes is a small spark to set off a major disaster. As correspondent Scott Pelley reports, devastating dust explosions at American factories are more common now than ever.

Since 1980, there have been at least 350 such explosions in the U.S., killing 133 people and injuring hundreds more. There are at least 30,000 factories in the nation vulnerable to dust explosions, and yet, some top federal safety officials tell 60 Minutes the government agency whose job it is to protect workers is ignoring a tried-and-true way to prevent those explosions.

---

On the night of Oct, 29, 2003, the Hayes Lemmerz factory in Huntington, Ind., exploded in a ball of fire. The plant made wheels for cars, and federal investigators said aluminum dust had piled up and detonated.

Thirty-three-year-old Shawn Boone was a mechanic at the plant. His sister, Tammy Miser, got a call with word that her brother was seriously injured. "Shawn and a couple of his co-workers were in the furnace room. And there was an explosion. And then there was a second more intense blast," she remembers.

Asked what happened to him, Tammy tells Pelley, "He laid on the building floor. And the aluminum dust actually continued to burn through his flesh."

Tammy says her brother had third and fourth-degree burns on 92 to 100 percent of his body. She says the doctors said there wasn't any hope. "That his internal organs were burned beyond repair. They wouldn't even bandage him. They said that the only solution we had was to take him off of life support."

Shawn Boone was one of 15 people killed in dust explosions that year. It was a turning point for Carolyn Merritt, who was then the head of the Chemical Safety Board, the federal government's own experts who find the cause of the nation's worst industrial disasters.

Merritt ordered the most comprehensive investigation ever done on dust explosions. Her conclusion: hundreds of industries create huge amounts of lethal dust and aren't even aware of the risk. "If this material were gasoline, there would be no doubt in any owner's or operator's mind what needed to be done," Merritt tells Pelley.

Asked if that would be an emergency, Merritt says, "Absolutely."

"Is dust, functionally, the same thing?" Pelley asks.

"It has the same power if a dust explosion occurs," Merritt explains.

"Can you just explain to me how it is that the dust is explosive, I mean, what’s going on here?" Pelley asks,

"Okay, if you take an ear of corn, you're not gonna be able to light it with a match. But if you grind that into a powder, the smaller the particle size, the more explosive it is. Metal dust. People don't think metal can burn. But you turn it into a fine powder, and you have a very explosive and flammable material," she explains.

Even a thin layer of dust, once airborne, can be ignited by the smallest spark-a machine being plugged in or a forklift scraping the ground.

One explosion, also in 2003, at West Pharmaceutical Industries in Kinston, N.C., showed just how insidious the problem can be. Because it was a drug company, the factory floor was immaculate. But plastic dust was hidden above the workers' heads.

"We know that as much as two inches of dust had accumulated in the ceiling, probably about a ton of material. That makes for a powerful explosion," Merritt says.

Hours after the blast employees were still trapped inside; seven died and scores were injured. Merritt's investigation concluded that OSHA-the government agency created to safeguard workplaces-had no effective regulation on its books to deal with explosive dust. And she found that OSHA inspectors routinely overlooked the hazard.

Merritt tells Pelley OSHA had been at that worksite before the explosion and that they didn't find any dust issues.

[lifesaver01]

To rf35 you should really listen to the story before you make comments like the one you made to usmwf about blame you obviously have some connection to those who don''t care who dies or how. If you dare to claim that Tammy is pushing blame. You are just trying to get a negative rise out of her which will not happen. She doesn''t have time to waist fighting the negative which would explain how shes gotten so far with doing the right thing not for herself but for others. You might want to try that yourself someday.

[lifesaver01]

To rf35 you should really listen to the story before you make comments like the one you made to usmwf about blame you obviously have some connection to those who don''t care who dies or how. If you dare to claim that Tammy is pushing blame. You are just trying to get a negative rise out of her which will not happen. She doesn''t have time to waist fighting the negative which would explain how shes gotten so far with doing the right thing not for herself but for others. You might want to try that yourself someday.

[lifesaver01]

I thought I''d wait for a couple days to give the public a chance to respond on this issue before doing it myself. And after doing so all I can say is I''m shocked at the comments of those who don''t understand the need for the government to step in. To them all that can be said is I pray that understanding for them does not have to wait until they themselves are affected. Above all else I want Tammy to know how very proud of her we all are. Heres a woman who on a daily basis does all she can to assure that others will not have to survive the reality of loosing a loved one this way. Or any other way that lives are lost in preventable workplace tragedies. I would also like to express my gratitude to CBS & 60 minutes for covering this very important story and I hope that they continue to investigate further into the far too many injustices of all workplace fatalities. For more information on Tammy''s efforts please visit United Support & Memorial for Workplace Fatalities & The weekly toll.
Mary Vivenzi
usmwf.org
Transforming Tragedy Into Prevention.

[scomule777]

amazing & W is gonna Veto , is anyone surprised??

[doomscribe]

Cal/OSHA, which is California''s version of OSHA for California workers, has it''s own law on the books for Combustible Dust safety (http://www.dir.ca.gov/Title8/5174.html) and Combustible Metals (http://www.dir.ca.gov/Title8/5175.html) which references existing NFPA safety standards. California workers are protected, and California employers have been cited for failure to comply. Step up to the plate, Feds. You don''t even have to reinvent it from scratch, NFPA and California have done it for you.

[jdk1951]

While OSHA certainly is asleep at the switch, given how many inspectors they have, they only get to any plant once every 5 years. These companies certainly know the risk better than anyone. Today''s (June 10)Dilbert is particularly to this point. Check www.dilbert.com and look at it.

[exguru]

It is clear to me that 99.9% of the posters are clueless about explosion hazardous areas. Building codes and regulations and NFPA 70 are pretty solid and cover the basis. OSHA inspectors are not building inspectors or licensed electricians. They use guidelines developed by OSHA in Washington to perform their job. OSHA in Washington should be held responsible for the guidelines they publish.
OSHA should take full responsibility for the errors and misrepresentations of equipment suitability in OSHA 1910.178, which allows untested and uncertified equipment in explosion hazardous areas. OSHA knows that all authority having jurisdictions use this guideline to determine suitability, yet it does not appear that they ever bothered reading UL583 and UL558 to verify NFPA 505 claims of equipment suitability.
To all the authority having jurisdictions I suggest to read the equipment ID tag before allowing the use of equipment in explosion hazardous areas. If the equipment ID tag lists an explosion hazardous area, it can be used in that specific area. However, if an OEM is unwilling to list a hazardous area rating on the ID tag, than the equipment is probably not designed, build, tested and certified for this purpose.

[tigerloose-2009]

I am a building inspector for a large jurisdiction. I was assigned to a new post and on my first visit I closed a paper products factory that is state of the art and only seven months old at the time. This factory is several hundred thousand square feet and the investment must be well over $20,000,000.00. From the roof sheathing to the floor, every horizontal surface except the floor was covered with a 1/2" to 3/4" layer of fine dust. None of the electrical system is classified dust tight and virtually none of the machinery is UL listed. Obviously the government was not doing it''s job until I showed up. It is up to the building dept. to ensure that what is being built is safe and the fire dept. to ensure that it remains safe.
OSHA is a joke to us. We never see OSHA until after the accident. I have had no dust training since I was a child in the farm town of Rochelle IL. Heck, I inspect carnivals with no training. Oddly enough my supervisor is way upset that I closed the factory. But hey, my mother loves me and right away she said please stay out of that factory and check your truck every morning for bombs.

[tigerloose-2009]

I am a building inspector for a large jurisdiction. I was assigned to a new post and on my first visit I closed a paper products factory that is state of the art and only seven months old at the time. This factory is several hundred thousand square feet and the investment must be well over $20,000,000.00. From the roof sheathing to the floor, every horizontal surface except the floor was covered with a 1/2" to 3/4" layer of fine dust. None of the electrical system is classified dust tight and virtually none of the machinery is UL listed. Obviously the government was not doing it''s job until I showed up. It is up to the building dept. to ensure that what is being built is safe and the fire dept. to ensure that it remains safe.
OSHA is a joke. We never see OSHA until after the accident. I have had no dust training since I was a child living in a farm town fifty years ago. Heck, I inspect carnivals with no training. Oddly enough my supervisor is way upset that I closed the factory. But hey, my mother loves me and right away she said please stay out of that factory and check your truck every morning for bombs.

[trumpetcr]

This is one of the shallowest segments I have seen 60 Minutes broadcast. If you don''t know enough about a subject to present a responsible program, don''t do it.

This is not an OSHA problem. OSHA doesn''t exist to perform research. 50 years ago the aluminum industry recognized that there was an explosion hazard involving molten aluminum and water in casting operations. The Aluminum Association initiated extensive testing to determine the causes and make recommendations to prevent explosions. That''s what is needed in every industry whose processes produce oxidizable dust.

And by the way, only oxidizable airborne dusts in certain densities have explosive potential. To all those people living along dusty roads that you scared to death last night, you should apologize.

[dan19491]

Dust is a result of the process, it can be minized with controles, the danger never goes away.

All processes that handle grain, food, coal, or wood, have some dust generated. Even plants that manufacture shoes & dog food have some explosion potential.

All of the companies I have worked with try to do good house keeping, good equipmnet maintance & good training. In many companies, in a dust enviroment, if anyone is on a job site with even a LIGHTER in their pocket,they may be fired on the spot. Training of employees is esential. If an OSHA inspector goes to a site that makes saidd oil, Hexane gas is present. He better know whathis is or he is not a good inspector. He cannot ignore the MSDS data available,by federal law, to everone on site.

Goverment regulations will always be insuficent to overcome a poor company attitude. But good companies can ocasionally have a motor spark cause a blast, that is why good companies limit access to especially dusty areas.

[rf35]

...without regulations on things like this, there''s no incentive to improve...
Posted by jsnbase at 12:07 AM : Jun 09, 2008

If a multi-million dollar factory is not incentive enough to keep dust down, I don''t see how a law will be expected motivate these businesses. I would hypothesize that the companies are unaware, at corporate level, that there are problems. The supervisors and managers on the floor are the failure point here. I would also expect, based on places I have worked, that appropriate safety regulations from the HQ are written. Whether or not they are followed is another first-line supervision issue.

CBS is falling once again to the standard of tabloid reporting. I doubt more than 30 minutes of solid research went into this story. As a member of a more responsible media outlet, I know when something is cobbled together as a quick filler. Not sure how this even made it to the Internet in this condition. I guess they are obligated to post everything from the TV whether it%u2019s good, bad, or ugly.

USMWF, I am truly sorry for your loss, but don%u2019t blame the government or expect them to legislate for a problem that is, in harsh reality, relatively tiny. Your need to lash out indicates more therapy is called for. As many others have stated, the insurance industry is in the best position to force changes. They could pressure for better upper-management oversight to ensure dust is under control.

[uropinesuks]

minor issue; Carolyn Merritt states "...the smaller the particle size, the more explosive it is." Actually, the smaller the more combustible it is. The more saturated an environment is with dust , the more explosive it is.

I can not understand why Scott Pelley would not pose the question, either to the retired inspector or the head of OSHA, why no comments are made on inspections as to the saturation of dust?

It seems obvious to any intelligent being that Bush''s laissez faire government is woefully inadequate as to regulatory affairs. The head of OSHA is the epitome of ''hands-off'' appointments. However, requiring industry to do more does not always translate in higher prices for the consumer. We pay it in higher insurance rates to keep that industry solvent when factories are exploding everywhere.

Stop applying taxes to corporate profit, but rather to corporate revenues (incomes). The former is economically inefficient and the latter is societally responsive.

[uropinesuks]

minor issue; Carolyn Merritt states "...the smaller the particle size, the more explosive it is." Actually, the smaller the more combustible it is. The more saturated an environment is with dust , the more explosive it is.

I can not understand why Scott Pelley would not pose the question, either to the retired inspector or the head of OSHA, why no comments are made on inspections as to the saturation of dust?

It seems obvious to any intelligent being that Bush''s laissez faire government is woefully inadequate as to regulatory affairs. The head of OSHA is the epitome of ''hands-off'' appointments. However, requiring industry to do more does not always translate in higher prices for the consumer. We pay it in higher insurance rates to keep that industry solvent when factories are exploding everywhere.

Stop applying taxes to corporate profit, but rather to corporate revenues (incomes). The former is economically inefficient and the latter is societally responsive.

[bobwhiterwi]

refuse to take the risk of dust explosions seriously. Many manufacturers will not spend the money on this equipment until forced to do so by either a government agency or their insurance company. Safety standards have been developed by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) but so far they are only RECOMMENDATIONS. This is where the government could help. These recommendations need to be added to the building code as REQUIREMENTS. This would put teeth into the law that is needed to motivate the manufacturers who are willing to overlook safety to save a buck.

[bobwhiterwi]

refuse to take the risk of dust explosions seriously. Many manufacturers will not spend the money on this equipment until forced to do so by either a government agency or their insurance company. Safety standards have been developed by the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) but so far they are only RECOMMENDATIONS. This is where the government could help. These recommendations need to be added to the building code as REQUIREMENTS. This would put teeth into the law that is needed to motivate the manufacturers who are willing to overlook safety to save a buck.

[cockapoo8]

There''s even an economic incentive to remove dust. At least underground there is. Water attracts dust like a magnet, until it gets heavy and drops down to the gutter, where it flows to get extracted. So they use what they call "atomizers". Just water shot out a tiny nozzle at high pressure to create this mist.

[cockapoo8]

Ventilation. Ventilation is the key factor in dust removal. The higher the cfm, the better.

[figanootz]

It is ridiculous to blame the government for this problem. The fault rest squarely on the companies involved. They know what is right and what is wrong yet the choose to do wrong because it cost money to clean up the dust. When are people going to learn the government will never be able to protect you. You have to look out for yourself.

[figanootz]

It is ridiculous to blame the government for this problem. The fault rest squarely on the companies involved. They know what is right and what is wrong yet the choose to do wrong because it cost money to clean up the dust. When are people going to learn the government will never be able to protect you. You have to look out for yourself.