Hi-Tec - by how much?

Some product advertisements mention about manufacturing through computer based technology. Some bill boards for spectacle shops mention about computerized checkups and tests.Some new plants are known as hi-tech facilities.
In all these, what we understand is that they use some software or some techniques that run on computers. However, unless rigorous checks are not made to the software before its use, hi-tec can lead to complex problems, which we can't understand. For this, the programmer should understand fully the requirement, which should be specified by the engaging agency in clear terms. If there is no clarity in specifications and the understanding of the same by programmer is not checked, glitches may come later, which may develop in to unimaginable proportions.
What we start with hi-tec, also can become low-tec after sometime, when changes are made but not tested fully.
Management of change, i.e checking the modifications in an existing procedure for achieving the desired output, if not done properly can manage us later.
Some plant facilities started on PLC based operations initially will be suspended and reverted to manual mode because of the glitches. This is because of lack of clarity in what we want, what we conveyed to the developers/suppliers, and what we got. Hardware problems also can lead to similar situation. Sometimes, because of the complex operations involved in operating PLC based plants and poor training, managers revert to manual operations.
If we are overconfident that nothing will happen because a plant is hi-tec and leave the caution to the air, then also we may find surprises.
Hi-tec will be safe only when we address above issues.

Safety officer - not a replacement for plant jobs

Some plant managers are of the opinion that conveying their safety issues to safety officer ends their responsibility. They expect safety officer to attend safety issues and hold him / her responsible for not working on it.

It is like blaming the police for theft in their house, or fire department for fire in their house. Question arises at first place, why the theft/fire occurred. What are the lapses/deviations in the house. Instead of setting own house in order, if other agencies are blamed for their problems, they will remain unsolved.

Conveying safety issues to safety officer is also not a solution. Safety officer can only offer advice, but can not work on behalf of the plant, as he is not the owner of the plant and he does not have the authority or influence. As long as this realization does not dawn upon plant officials, safety issues continue to pileup. 

Responsibility for property damage in a fire

It is common to read in news papers about fire incidents, property damage and accusations of fire services for delay in reaching the incident. But, the main culprit is the owner/tenant of the premises. One should check what measures are taken by the owner/tenant of the premises. There would not have been any fire incident, had all precautions like storing of the materials properly, using proper electrical wiring, avoiding ignition sources, etc are followed and maintained. Similarly, fire detection, warning and protection system should be in place so that even in case of fire, the damage can be minimum. However, hardly any of these measures are taken or followed.
Every building should have sufficient ground storage water and sufficient distance around the building free from obstructions. However, greediness overtakes fire safety measures and all available space is used for creating some more commercial space. Having water for fire safety is not thought at all. All these failures are overlooked and fire department is accused for not reaching the fire incident place quickly.

Who is responsible for safety for works in your plant?

In an operating plant, various works of maintenance, civil, erection/commissioning of new equipment/facilities, house keeping, etc will be in progress under the supervision of in-charges for respective agencies. However, in case of any lapse with regards to safety or any incident/accident, question arises to decide who is responsible for the incident. Though, safety permits may be issued in the name of the executing agency, plant in-charge also should be held equally responsible as it is the work in his plant and is being done by other agencies because of his request. If any incident occurs, brunt is to be borne by plant officials, plant operations may have to be suspended and in worst case plant may be exposed to damage.

Hence, plant officials can't escape from responsibility to ensure safety during works executed by other agencies. 

Booze + smoking = death

It is reported in a local daily news paper that a person was burnt to death while boozing in his room. It is suspected that he did not put off the lighter/match stick/cigarette due to the intake of huge quantity of liquor and this would have caused fire and death.
Lessons:

1. Do not take liquor.
2. If you have to, do it with others
3. Limit your intake to your capacity, in worst case. 
4. Keep the company of a friend/relation who will not consume liquor at all.
5. Do not smoke.
6. If you have to do it in the presence of a person/relation, who will not take liquor.

Attrocities on females - action needed

Last few weeks, we are seeing agitations all over the country in protest against brutal acts of some fellows on a girl. Many institutions of government and non-government are proposing several actions to avoid such attrocities in the future. Government has set up a fast track court to hear the case. Companies that hire vehicles were advised to verify the details of cab drivers engaged before employing them for ferrying them to office / home. May be this should be done for all employees like it is done in important government institutions. 

A common helpline is also being proposed in some states to receive the calls from those in danger and provide necessary help.

Companies too can set up their own helpline or can form an association with other companies in the city and operate a helpline in the city of operation. Big companies can have their own helpline set up and link it to their head quarters also. 

Why some persons are engaged in such unacceptable acts is that there is no fear in them as they would not have seen the punishments. This can be seen from the appearance of similar news reports even after the first incident and uproar against it. 

No normal person goes against a speeding vehicle or a train as he is sure that it will over run him.

Such an awareness should be brought among all by awarding quick stern punishments so that nobody dares to commit such acts. Fear is the key and this only will work. Once culprits are known, then immediate punishment as per applicable law should be awarded and implemented. If somebody commits a mistake, they should be punished irrespective of other factors. Otherwise, loop holes will be taken to their advantage and crimes will continue to grow. There should not be any hesitation in this regard to save fellow human beings.

Safe driving measures - a record achieved

The state road transport corporation of Andhra Pradesh (APSRTC) received a trophy for better performance on road by its drivers after achieving accident record of 0.13 and 0.11 accidents per every lakh kilometers driven in the last two years. The corporation has 23000 buses that ferry about 1.2 crore passengers every day with 82 lakh kilometer coverage whereas in the country about 1.5 lakh buses ferry 7 crore passengers every day.

This low accident record was made possible by putting  a family photo of the driver along with breath analysis of drivers for alcohol before boarding. Also, the corporation sacked those drivers found in intoxicated condition.

This strong message of zero tolerance to drink driving has worked as per the words of Managing Director of APSRTC. 

From the above, we can see that tough measures to the extent of termination and encashing family sentiment result in better safety for the people. Similar measures should be taken by all industries and regulators should act tough on erring industries even by suspending/cancelling the licence so as to ensure a safe work place and environment.

http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/india/Better-drive-safe-wifes-watching/articleshow/17935143.cms

Loss from IOC Hazira fire - Rs 45 crores

In a blast and fire incident at the oil depot of Indian Oil Corporation (IOC) at Hazira on 05.01.2013 at about 1230 hr,  three persons were found dead (charred to death). It took 24 hr to extinguish the fire. Atleast 75 fire tenders and 30 water tankers of government and private organizations involved in fire fighting measures used 70 lakh liters of water and 80 lakh liters of foam. The fire incident after a blast reportedly happened during welding on tank no. 4 to arrest the leak. The tank contained about 55 lakh liters of diesel (or petrol ?). All three persons died were not regular employees and financial loss was estimated as Rs 45 crores.
The depot did not have any fire tender and its fire pump hose did not function at the time of fire incident.
Questions were raised about the reason for welding on the tank that contained diesel.
Earlier a fire in Jaipur depot on 29 Oct 2009 leading to 11 deaths and Rs 280 crore loss was attributed to not following normal safety procedures.
As per established safety procedures any where in the world, hot work will not be permitted unless the tank is emptied, washed to remove flammable material, tested for absence of flammables, tank is opened to avoid pressure buildup during hot work and safety work permit system is followed. Work will be carried out only under expert supervision.

As it is seen from the news reports, welding on diesel tank, absence/non-working of fire fighting system once again prove that Murphy's law holds good.


http://timesofindia.indiatimes.com/city/surat/3-killed-in-Indian-Oil-Corporation-Hazira-depot-fire/articleshow/17918547.cms
http://ibnlive.in.com/news/surat-fire-at-ioc-storage-tank-contained-2-killed-2-missing/314206-3-238.html

Do not permit permissible pollution

In many industrial areas, the surrounding atmosphere is filled with smell/odor of chemicals.  The residents in the area bear this and only when accidents take place, these residents and media complain about presence of chemicals, smell, health problems, etc. Otherwise, there will not be much coverage about the problems. 

Though, these pollutants are present below the AAQ limits, still they are a nuisance to the residents. Workmen may be exposed to pollutants below TLV because these limits are for occupational workers, and they are working knowingly that they have to work with chemicals. But, why the residents should bear the brunt even to a minor extent. 

Plants should be designed for effective 100% scrubbing and neutralization of all pollutants and discharge stacks are designed for release at highest level wherein the dispersion does not lead to even nuisance pollution. If this is not done, in the long run, industries may face the ire from local residents, NGOs, media, etc leading to restrictions/closure of their plants. 

In addition, industries should spend a part of their profits towards CSR activities to improve the life of local residents by providing facilities for drinking water, roads, schools, community centers, etc and educate them for leading a healthy life.

Manage Change before it manages you

I read above quotation somewhere and noted in a pocket diary. Today, while going through the book I found this again.
Many changes take place everywhere and we carry out those changes most of the times to meet immediate requirement rather than analyzing for hidden dangers (or side effects). My colleague's brother who was a scientist during his government service used to say, 'what is temporary today is permanent'.
Safety professionals will be facing problems in convincing the shop floor managers to carryout proper hazard analysis and many times, the reply will be that they need clearance to execute so and so job and later it will be removed or it will be taken up for study.
There were a number of examples listed by reputed safety professional Trevor Kletz in his books like, What Went Wrong, Still Going Wrong, Learning from Disasters, etc, where many incidents took place because of improper or no evaluation of hazards.  Management of change is an important aspect in industries without which, we may end up with unforeseen events.
Sometimes, even shop floor workers too will find safety department an obstacle to their production job because of questions raised on safety, though, if something wrong occurs, it is the safety professional who will be questioned for not being authoritative or not active.
Hence, whatever be the nature of change or modification proposed, let it be process parameters, raw materials, equipment, or its accessories, auxiliary services, supports, or even operators, one should carry out a detailed analysis for hazards, impact on operation due to lack of knowledge/training/behavior, etc and then only proceed if satisfied with the results.