Chemical Safety and Hazard Analysis - Assignment Example

Who would you want on your accident investigation team, and why? Aside from the independent investigatorsfrom the US Chemical Safety Board, American Petroleum Institute, American National Standard Institute (ANSI), US Department of Labor, Occupational Safety and Health Administration, I would also want representatives from the academe dealing with matters on chemical and industrial engineering, from state department dealing with concerns on ecology, of non-government organization or civil society concern on extractive industry, the Department of Energy (DoE) with its Chemical Safety and Hazards Investigation Board. First, the academe and civil society can also provide adequate recommendations for stringent quality control in the management of industry’s contracted workers and could also help uncover aspects about the laxity of the company in sending off these workers to conduct sensitive repairs in the absence of security measures such as the use of gas mask and oxygen tanks so they could not breath the toxic from nitrogen within the site. With several cases of death, accidents, and injuries due to nitrogen asphyxiation, it’s dubious if the company administrators feign ignorance of the ill-effect in inhaling nitrogen. Sufficient protection should have been accorded to these workers and their death could have not happened due to this extreme negligence of the company. Lessons from these experiences can be taught in school and with ecologists too. The Chemical Safety and Hazards Investigating board as the regulatory body of the state could also well-provide measures to increase and monitor regularly the competence and conformity of extractive industry 2. What type of evidence do you think would be wise to collect in this scenario? The type of evidences that will be wise to collect in this scenario are as follows: (a) documentary evidences such as work permit and contracts of the hired workers including that document attesting that the site is safe for workers to venture with their tasks and expertise there; (b) records and affidavits generated from interviews from witnesses and rescue teams who had direct contact of the victims; (c) records and affidavits generated from interview of the management and operation team of the company; (d) ) records and affidavits generated from interview and medical findings of the attending physician at the hospital; ( e ) records and affidavits generated from interview with officials designated in the quality and control management; (f) interview of the executives of company’s management; (g) interview and forensic information of the autopsy of the dead workers from the hospital where they were declared dead; and , (h) photos and video records if there are any from the site of the incident or from the company. 3. What would you interview and why? Provide a description of the sequence of the events. As earlier discussed in the preceding questions the following persons will be subjected for comprehensive and thorough investigations based on the literal sequence of enumeration of interviews: (a) the witnesses and rescue team who assisted in the retrieval of the bodies of the victims from the space confines of the reactor; (b) the management and operation team of the company to gather substantial records about the contract, the nature of the job of contracted employees, and to determine if the company strictly followed the safety regulatory prescription before workers are allowed to work in dangerous areas of the industry; (c ) the attending physician at the hospital; ( f) officials designated in the quality and control management of the company; (g) the executives and human resource managers of company; (g) the attending physician and forensic experts; and (h) and, other relevant information provider from the company whose testimonies and insights are indispensable in completing the investigation. 4. Describe some of the most obvious contributing causes. Do any of these contributing causes appear to be flaws in the contractor’s or Valero’s safety management systems? Based on the video presentation of the CSB investigators, the most obvious cause of death of the workers was their asphyxiation after inhaling nitrogen from the work site. But this could have been avoided if the company was not extremely reckless by sending these workers to a dangerous worksite without equipping them with necessary gadget to protect them from danger, injuries and their death (U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board , 1998). They should have been informed that they are going to repair a part of the company which is technically emitting nitrogen which could possibly cause their death in case of inhalation and thus, must require their extraordinary diligence to secure their very selves by bringing with them along a gas masks and oxygen for safe breathing. These safety gadgets should have been provided by the management of the company before they are allowed to undertake their assignment (National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, 1987). 5. Do you think the Chemical Safety Board’s recommendations go far enough, or would you recommend additional corrective actions While we commend the transparency of the Chemical Safety Board in their reports and findings I believe it’s enough that the causes of the workers’ death are merely determined. It should be recommended that an appropriate penalty should be accorded to the company for recklessly violating the standard on safety for workers in extractive industry or refinery. It is very clear from the investigation that the company failed to properly inform workers about the danger being confronted by these workers while undertaking their jobs (U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board , 1998). The CSB should also ask the academe and the civil society to partake in educating people involved in this kind of job including those who are indirectly affected by the emission of nitrogen in the air. The Valerio Company should be held fully accountable for the death of these employees and the state as the regulatory body should undertake measures to mandate these industries to dutifully comply the standard regulations in working inside dangerous extractive companies. Part of the recommendations should be to compel regulatory bodies to conduct periodic evaluation of the quality control management of Valerio Company to ensure that policy standards intended for labour health and safety are genuinely adhered. References National Institute of Occupational Safety and Health, (1987). A Guide to Safety in Confined Spaces, Atlanta, GA. Publication no.87 p. 113. U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board , (1998). Summary Report: Nitrogen Asphyxiation, Union Carbide Corporation, Report No. 1998-05-I-LA., Washington, DC. U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board , (2005). Valero Refinery Asphyxiation Incident Videodocument, Washington, DC, US. Read More