We are nothing after our death. Let us donate our body organs for the poor.

Be not afraid of anything. You will do marvelous work The moment you fear, you are nobody - Swamy Vivekananda

If you think safety is expensive, try an accident... - O.P.Kharbanda

Preventable accidents, if they are not prevented due to our negligence, it is nothing short of a murder - Dr. Sarvepalli Radha Krishna, 2nd President of India

Zero accidents through zero unsafe behaviors. Do not be complacent that there are no accidents. There may be near miss accidents (NMAs). With luck/chance, somebody escaped knowingly or unknown to the person. But, we can't be safe, if we depend upon the luck.

Safety culture is how the organization behaves when no one is watching.

We make No compromise with respect to Morality, Ethics, or Safety. If a design or work practice is perceived to be unsafe, we do not proceed until the issue is resolved. - Mission statement by S&B Engineers & Consultants Ltd. http://www.sbec.com/safety/

Human meat gets least priority - A doctor's comment on accidents

CSB video excerpts from Dr.Trevor Kletz, http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XQn5fL62KL8

Feb 14, 2009

Risk = Probability (???) x SEVERITY

Yesterday I read a news item that a US satellite Iridium-33 in use collided with a Russian satellite Cosmos 2251 that is no longer in use on Tuesday (10.02.2009) at 0455 GMT at 790 km height above Siberia. It seems that this type of accident happened for the first time. There are more than 17000 man-made objects at present in the space. I went through internet and found that the probability of such collision is once in tens of years and the debris now generated can reduce this probability to once in a year or so as there are some more satellites in the same altitude and the total debris may hinder space craft movement in the future.

Now, the question is not about space but on the events on the earth.

In any factory, accidents keep occurring. When somebody (normally safety officer / advisor) points out about unsafe acts / unsafe conditions in the shop floor / factory premises and asks for correction, the usual reaction is, a staring look and then the reply comes, "oh, we have been doing this for the last few years / we are doing like this from the beginning / who is expert -you are me - you safety people does not know any thing other than talking / I can't do - you come and do / so on...

How true are the words of the famous safety professional Trevor Kletz -

Corporates do not have memory.

We have done this way 100 times is not acceptable unless an accident on 101st time is acceptable.

We never imagined that satellite collision is possible. But, it happened. Where the chances are remote, still it happened and where the chances are high in our activities in the shop floor, we do not want to correct our selves.

If we see the accident history in any factory, after the accident, the usual sheepish answer from the injured or his colleagues or manager is that it happened for the first time, the person is experience, skilled, safety conscious, near retirement, he doesn't want to take official leave and will take personal leave for the period away from duty due to accident, so on.

In spite of all the above qualities, still accidents occurred, then imagine what can happen to others. It is the attitude that requires correction rather than any thing else.

When somebody narrates their own experience, people listen attentively, appreciate him that he came clean and after coming out from the room the listeners do the same old things. This is why accidents keep occurring again and again, if not to the same person / or same shop floor, they will be occurring somewhere else to some body else.

We love short cuts and feel that we are above all others, accident does not occur when we are working.

One of my colleague, who retired 4 years ago, used to tell in all his training classes, that we should leave the organization with same organs as we had when we joined.

Yes, it is true that no body wants to lose their organs and suffer. But, momentary decision without thought for consequences will lead to accidents.

Rarely, does the type of accident will be new in any factory that is few years old. May be after the accident, corrective actions are taken. But after few years, the corrected systems will be replaced because people forget the reasons for safe guards in place and meddle with the systems. They want to prove to their bosses that they are inventors and soon after their will be accidents and shop floor persons will be suffered. But, the so called inventor would have got his promotion or pay rise and even would have left the organization.

So, every body should work seriously on the hazards at the shop floor, let the probability is however less. Nobody says there is no (zero) probability of occuring for an accident. In fact the word probability it self gives meaning of some uncertainty. Hence, if the severity / consequence from even from remote probable event is not acceptable, without looking for chance of occurrence, we should eliminate all those hazards and make our work place safer.

Risk assessment and actions should concentrate more on consequence rather than on probability and make life safer for persons.

Feb 12, 2009

Location of industrial plants - safe distances

Two days ago, there was a fire and explosion incident at about 2100 hrs in a chemical factory that makes some product and supplies to well known pharmaceutical companies. As per the news item, two reactors out of fifteen exploded and the blast could be heard even 5-6 km away (my colleague who stays at this distance heard the sound, another one said he felt like someone above his apartment dragged cots). Two persons were injured and the fire was brought under control by state fire department in about 6 hours. The factory also housed about 50 gas cylinders and the adjacent factory has about 50 reactors. If the fire / blast fragments entered this adjacent factory, the consequence would have been severe, as reported. The plant though located in industrial area, is surrounded by residential buildings.

There were questions immediately about the wisdom of granting licence for setting up of factories in residential areas. Similar questions were raised even after the Bhopal incident in 1984.

This and such similar incidents always bring out few questions, like, which is first ?
The factory was set up first or residential buildings came up first?
In philosophy, a similar question is, seed first or (biological) plant first? OR egg first or chick first?

It is difficult to answer the philosophical questions as above. However, not so difficult for our question of factory or residential buildings, which is first? Even in the case of Union Carbide factory at Bhopal, as per the information available in various books, web sites, factory came up first. Shanties, hutments came up adjacent to the factory fence later. These habitats were not removed when they came up. The reason as mentioned in a famous book is that the management was also happy as cheap labour is available nearby. Apart from these, it is quite natural for development to take place near industrial set ups and this will lead to better realization of land and other properties.

In the case of accident mentioned at the beginning also, as is seen, the factory was set up in an industrial area about 7 years ago. However, by that time already the entire area is surrounded with thousands of residential buildings. Apart from this factory, there were other factories that were set up much before. I do not know whether at those times, the residential buildings existed or not. However, I am sure from hearsay that 35-40 years ago, this area was totally isolated from the city and is like a jungle and persons were afraid to reach other factories in the area after the sun set. Few less courageous persons used stay in side those factories in the night after their second shift (ends around 2200-2300 hrs) and go home only in the morning.

Now, these areas are so developed that it is difficult to get land and the price is as good as in the heart of the city, though these are located at about 10-15 km away from the railway station.

Then, the questions about why permission was granted look silly though the question about how safe is a safe distance for a factory remains. For this, the Environment Protection Act 1986 and the rules made under it will help. One has to prepare safety report and has to revise it atleast once in three years or if any additional information is available, it has to be revised even earlier also. Once, the distance of impact is known from toxic releases / fire / explosion, then a safe zone has to be maintained considering the future expansion of the factory as well as population growth in the area. However, preparation of safety reports are mandatory only when the chemical inventory / handled exceeds a threshold quantity. I feel, these limitations should be removed and should be made compulsory for chemicals of any quantity. If a factory is proposed to be set up, then impact distances and safe distances have to be determined and maintained for the chemicals, whatever be the quantity to be handled. Due consideration should be given to the domino effect that is effect of incidents in the proposed factory on the factories that are already in existence and if an incident occurs in the neighbouring factory due to the incident in the proposed factory, then what is the impact.

I also blame the greediness of people in the neighbourhood of the industrial areas. It is not correct to say that they do not know about factories. People spend so much time about genuiness of a property before purchase but care little about other factors. People buy vacant lands when they sense that some development activity is going to occur in the area, the activity can be any thing - setting up of factory / colleges / highway / railway station / etc. Then definitely, the greed is to also to be blamed when persons in residential areas are affected due to industrial activity in the neighbourhood, though the main blame goes to the factory management. When factories have to be set up, land should be enough for plant building area and this should be surrounded by forest cover upto the safe distance. The fence of the factory should be at the safe distance outer boundary. No expansion of factory should take place unless these two aspects are covered. If any violation occurs, the concerned persons should be tried by special courts, whether such expansion caused injury or not or plant operations are carried out without valid permissions.

When the profits are more compared to penalties, then people always prefer penalty. Here, I mean penalty in terms of money. If the penalty includes imprisonment or seizing of the total property of owners and their spouses (apart from the factory), then persons will not dare to do such acts.

Similarly, somebody puts up residential buildings within the impact distance, they should be demolished and persons responsible for granting permission should be taken to task.

Now, what to do with establishments already came up and later residential buildings came up.

Talk to concerned establishments for shifting to safe area in a reasonable time or if it is not feasible, then remove encroachments / take possession of residential and other buildings up to the safe distance as is done for expansion of roads / railway tracks. OR live with it and repeat the blame game as and when accidents occur.

Featured Post

Reduced my weight from 96 to 76 kg and tummy from 38-40 to 34-35 inches in about 9 months

I am working in the safety department of a government organization. As a part of the job, I used to go around and interact with person...