Aggressive Plan Launched to Deal with Combustible Dust
Monday, March 31, 2014 @ 11:15 AM
Prince George, B.C. – Combustible dust and sawmill safety will be the focus of an aggressive coordinated plan that has been developed following a meeting of industry, labour, WorkSafe BC and the provincial government.
“All of us agree that the overarching concern here is every worker has the right to a safe workplace and to come home safe at the end of their shift" reads the statement signed by all who attended the session last Friday.
The plan includes the following work:
- Sawmill employers, organized labour, and WorkSafeBC will launch an awareness campaign on workers' rights in refusing unsafe work. A toolbox kit on the issue will be provided by WorkSafeBC to employers, health and safety committees, and health and safety representatives in all sawmills.
- WorkSafeBC will double the size of the designated inspection team to 20 and launch further sawmill inspections during Phase 4 of their Sawmill Inspection Initiative. The focus of this phase will be on companies which were found to be out of compliance, particularly in Phase 3, but all sawmills will be included
- A team of technical experts will be established by industry and supported by WorkSafeBC to help all mills on compliance with the Workers Compensation Act and the occupational health and safety regulation.
- The Manufacturers' Advisory Group, made up of a dozen companies which account for about 75% of B.C.'s lumber production, has developed a Dust Mitigation and Control Audit protocol and is offering it to mills of every size throughout B.C.
- At organized labour's request, this Audit Tool will be reviewed by all parties to evaluate it as an enforceable standard. WorkSafeBC has agreed to lead that discussion.
- WorkSafeBC will write to the 61 sawmills with combustible dust compliance issues during Phase 3 to set expectations for the next round of inspections. Where there is repeat non-compliance, WorkSafeBC Officers will consider penalties.
- WorkSafeBC is currently reviewing its Occupational Health and Safety Policy with a focus, at this stage, on high-risk violations and the consequences for non-compliance. The elements that can lead to a dust explosion will be included.
The work doesn’t stop here, as all who attended this session, which was held on Friday of last week, have agreed to attend a further session scheduled for tomorrow at the COFI conference in Kelowna.
Comments
How about explosion proof motors!
How about explosion proof heating systems.
Elimination of potential sparks
Elimination of dust in contained space.
Just a few ideas
I agree with you He Spoke. But that would be common sense.
Expensive!
But it can be done.
There are lots of ways to improve the build up of sawdust, but it costs employers money. I am sure some bean counters have crunched the numbers and decided a human life or two isn’t worth it.
“WorkSafeBC will double the size of the designated inspection team to 20 and launch further sawmill inspections during Phase 4 of their Sawmill Inspection Initiative.”
Wow, so there was just 10 safety inspectors that were covering all the various workplaces in the whole province!
Note to self: Lack of sufficient WorkSafe BC safety inspectors was one of a number of contributing factors that caused the two sawmill explosions.
Deductive logic: By doubling the number of safety inspectors the Provincial Government is admitting there was not enough safety inspectors before, and at the time of, the sawmill explosions!
How many years did the mills affected, operate without any problems? How many other sawmills operated with bug-killed pine during these years? How many times has a sawmill cut a dry fir that is punky? The dust just flies as its chopped up just big enough to fit into the conveyor. I don’t think we have the answers as to why these mills just happened to explode. I still think there is more to it than just dust. Why haven’t any other so called non compliance mills exploded?
I think the inspectors or investigators are just guessing. Have they been able to reproduce the results in a lab setting?
Just wondering.
The new Lakeland sawmill has many new dust mitigation features built into it.
Peeps: “Deductive logic: By doubling the number of safety inspectors the Provincial Government is admitting there was not enough safety inspectors before, and at the time of, the sawmill explosions”
Or, if tey were to keep the number of inspectors the same, you would be complaining that the government doesn’t take the issue seriously enough to do anything about it. Classic no-win situation.
Anyway, doubling the number of inspectors will accomplish little in real terms. Exploring suggestions like the ones posted by HeSpoke is probably the better approach.
The only thing that can prevent this from happing again is the people on the floor !
“Note to self: Lack of sufficient WorkSafe BC safety inspectors was one of a number of contributing factors that caused the two sawmill explosions.”
You really don’t get it do you peeps!
Like I’ve said in previous posts sawmills train their employees how to fight fires. In that training they are told about dust explosions. The fact that the companies are denying that they didn’t know this could happen is a cop out! For employees that were trained in fire fighting to say they didn’t know dust could explode is a cop out too!
So the company knew the risks, the employees that were trained to fight fires knew the risks yet some how this is Worksafes fault.
The questions people should be asking after Babine blew up is why didn’t Lakeland and it’s employees make sure it didn’t happen there. To say we didn’t know is a lie!
Scanky fir is a dream to run compared to beetle kill Give more. The right mount of dust with an ignition source creates a boom! Eliminate one and no boom!
“I think the inspectors or investigators are just guessing. Have they been able to reproduce the results in a lab setting?”
The answer is yes! Anyone with a box with a candle in it can create similar effects. The guy that goes around and does fire fighting training has such a box! Light the candle, sprinkle alittle household flour in a opening at the top and Woof!
Wow, ten (10) WorkSafe BC safety inspectors for the whole province, well that explains the pathetic number of “stop work orders” in BC compared to Newfoundland & Labrador!
Number of Stop Work Orders Issued by WorkSafeBC, from their 2012 Annual Report:
2008- 95
2009- 77
2010- 81
2011- 65
2012- 84
Number of Stop Work Orders Issued by Newfoundland & Labrador Occupational Health and Safety, from their Inspection Activity Report 2008 – 2012
2008- 824
2009- 702
2010- 827
2011- 1,009
2012- 1,081
Kind of “pathetic” comparing the two, wonder which province cares more about worker safety than the other?
http://www.servicenl.gov.nl.ca/ohs/statistics.html
Too bad our city doesn’t have a dust “mitigation” plan. Get right on it.
Hmmm, it’s interesting how different people will read different things when reading the same things!
The article states “WorkSafeBC will double the size of the designated inspection team to 20”.
This suggests to me that the “designated inspection team” that was formed to deal with Combustible Dust and Sawmill Safety will be increased from 10 safety inspectors a team of 20!
This seems like a good things to me, but my good buddy Peeps criticizes the article by suggesting “Wow, so there was just 10 safety inspectors that were covering all the various workplaces in the whole province!”
I reread that article and it doesn’t seem to suggest that to me that there are only 10 safety inspectors covering ALL of the VARIOUS workplaces in the WHOLE province!
Peeps then further suggests “Wow, ten (10) WorkSafe BC safety inspectors for the whole province, well that explains the pathetic number of “stop work orders” in BC compared to Newfoundland & Labrador!”
I’m confused! Nowhere in the article did it state that there were only ten(10) safety inspectors for the whole lumber industry, or only ten(10) covering all of the various workplaces in the whole province! It just seems to suggest to me that the current designated inspection team, a team set up to focus on Combustible dust and sawmill safety will be increased from 10 to 20 members. Again, this seems like a good thing to me!
I find it very difficult to believe that WorkSafeBC only had 10 safety inspectors on staff, 10 for ALL industries in the ENTIRE province! 10, only 10!!
I thought that Peeps only dealt with “Facts” and “Truths”. Seems to me that the “Truths” might be being stretched a bit and the “Facts” might be twisted a bit to supports his view of the world.
But I could be wrong!
I’m not sure why Peeps keeps regurgitating those stop work ‘statistics’ in thread after thread when Socredible clearly explained elsewhere why comparing those numbers are misleading at best and bogus at worst.
Mind you, Peeps never misses a chance to blame government for everything, so here’s another opportunity.
It is up to the employers to give the workers a safe environment to work in, it is up to work safe to make sure the employer is doing just that.
People#1; reread the article. “Designated” is the key word. Of course there are more than 10 inspectors in BC, you’re just looking for an angle to bash the Government. As for comparing Stop Work Orders??? So what if Newfoundland gave out more, maybe that shows that workers & companies work harder at safety than Newfoundland.
NoWay: Flour dust certainly. I wonder why they would use flour instead of sawdust? You get an explosion too if you use coffeemate but that isn’t sawmill dust either.
The last round of dust inspections by WorksafeBC was carried out by ‘teams’~ two inspectors instead of one, who descend on a mill together ~ and both of whom would not normally be inspecting mills in the area assigned to them. Or inspecting mills at all. And I think this is what Worksafe is going to double, when they do their next round of dust inspections.
This ‘outside team’ idea was supposed to ensure that prior inspections by a ‘local’ Worksafe inspector who normally covers a certain region was not still overlooking dust accumulations that might potentially pose a problem.
In the mind of the Worksafe hierarchy, at least, who have to please their political masters.
Who want dust found, even if it’s in areas where the likelihood of it ever causing the slightest problem is extremely remote, if not outright impossible. (Because one, or more, of the five conditions in Worksafe’s own dust explosion pentagram are absent).
The impression this creates is that rules, or the interpretation of same, are being made up at random for political purposes. Which I have no doubt whatsoever is clearly the case.
Give more the beetle killed sawdust is like flour! When it is cold outside and the mill shuts down the ventilation system to keep the heat in, the dust just hangs in the air like a fog. You can hardly see across the mill it is so dense . Misting and ventilation systems help but that is usually the first thing turned off when the temperature drops.
Open flame or an electrical spark is not the only thing that will cause dust to explode.You could be blowing dust off of equipment with an air hose causing static electricity which could cause it to explode also.
Peeps is not probably aware of that unique device long used in smaller Newfoundland sawmills, (as well as many mills in Australia and New Zealand, and called there a “breast bench”.)
I’m not sure what the Newfies call their version of it, but it’s similar to a ‘bolter’ ~ an over-sized table saw, where the operator both guides and propels a short log entirely by hand through a circular saw. As the piece gets smaller, his hand gets ever closer to the blade. But at least by then it’s got a flat surface on it, and not likely to roll, either kicking back or putting his paw into the blade.
If you remember that old TV series “The Waltons”, the type of sawmill John-boy’s old man and grandpa were operating resembled one of these set-ups.
There are absolutely no safety features on them whatsoever.
Shortly after World War Two was declared in 1939, Britain requested Canada and Newfoundland, (which was then a separate country), each raise and send over a “Forestry Corps”, with equipment to log and mill timber in Scotland. To help augment lumber sent from Canada, which took up a lot of space on ships. Shipping space that could then be used to haul more vital cargoes.
When the Canadian Forestry Corps arrived and saw what their Newfoundland counterparts were using for ‘mills’, they were horrified at anyone having such a death wish ~ and this in an era where workplace safety ideas were not widely practiced or enforced.
So if there’s way more ‘Stop Work Orders’ issued in Newfoundland than here, that may well be one reason why.
More fact and truths: BC is above the national average for workplace deaths and ranks 3rd in Canada for the most workplace accidents per 100,000 workers.
“So, according to the study, the following is the ranking of workplace fatalities by jurisdictions in Canada:
1.The Territories (NT, NU, YT) – 27.4 deaths per 100,000 workers
2.Newfoundland & Labrador – 11.7 deaths per 100,000 workers
3.British Columbia – 8.9 deaths per 100,000 workers
4.Alberta – 8.0 deaths per 100,000 workers
5.Ontario- 6.5 deaths per 100,000 workers (below national avg.)
6.Nova Scotia – 6.1 deaths per 100,000 workers (below national avg.)
7.Quebec – 6.0 deaths per 100,000 workers (below national avg.)
8.Saskatchewan – 5.6 deaths per 100,000 workers (below national avg.)
9.Manitoba – 4.5 deaths per 100,000 workers (below national avg.)
10.New Brunswick – 3.4 deaths per 100,000 workers (below national avg.)
11.Prince Edward Island – 1.5 deaths per 100,000 workers (below national avg.)”
Yup, we sure are working hard at making workplaces in BC safer.
More facts and truths Peeps? Once again, not an original thought in your head!! Funny how you seem to be ignoring your earlier facts and truths!
Your comparison of workplace fatalities provides only a small snapshot. Does this study consider such things as geographical terrain, road systems or climate to name but a few variables? Of course not, it is only a narrow view from a narrow mind.
Why don’t you impress us with the number of fatalities, employment sector by employment sector on a national basis. How do our factory workers compare to those in other jurisdictions? Our farm workers? Our forestry workers, our miners, our truck drivers, our public sector workers, our railroad workers, etc.
Once again, you choose to ignore your errors and instead focus on your agenda!
But, I could be wrong!
Well, just shut them all down, Peeps. Then everyone will be perfectly safe, won’t they? Don’t let anyone do anything ~ ’cause there’s danger in all of it. Why even if you stopped a mill and cleaned up completely after cutting every log there’d still be risk of injury or pre-mature death. From inhaling dust maybe, or overheating in your haz-mat suit, or working up a sweat and catching a cold, or something.
By the way, got any statistics on how many deaths per 100,000 workers in some of those ‘Workers’ Paradises’ where the philosophy of similar left-wing thinkers to yourself holds sway?
Where those evil corporations are non-existent, and profit has been outlawed, and everyone always works safely,(or, if they don’t, have no one other than themselves to blame ~ for who else could they blame then)?
What’s the statistics for the Chinese coal mines, for instance? They’re not owned by some multi-national ‘corporation’, hell bent on immolating innocent workers in pursuit of ever greater profits. They’re property of the “People’s” Republic. Owned by the workers themselves ~ in name anyways.
Don’t usually watch Suzuki’s “Nature of Things” program, but I did catch one episode a few years ago where he was profiling a worker owned co-operative sawmill and furniture plant in Mexico.
Quite interesting. Workers unloading logs off a truck by standing under them and rolling them towards themselves with peavies, jumping out of the way before they get crushed. No hard hats, high vis-vests, steel-toed boots ~ wouldn’t do them any good anyways. Big pine came down on poor old Manuel, no more labor. Morte.
Mill was run by flat belts driven off a line shaft. Not a guard on one of them. Loose fitting clothing worn by the workers, ’cause of the heat down there, I guess, just waiting to be caught by a belt, or a shaft, and tear poor Juan all to pieces. Must happen, used to here.
Didn’t look like anyone swept up any dust. Til they couldn’t do their jobs, I guess. Then they’d have to clean it up. Wonder if they keep statistics on deaths and injuries down there? Maybe you could find out and report back to us.
Anyone else notice how some on this discussion board pose nothing but questions and provide very few answers?
I think some of these individuals delusionally think that asking question after question after question is a form of debate, which it is not of course!
âNever argue with stupid people, they will drag you down to their level and then beat you with experience.â ~ Mark Twain
Peeps: “Anyone else notice how some on this discussion board pose nothing but questions and provide very few answers?”
Few answers that you like, maybe.
Another comment on my comment by JB. What a surprise!
I was going to add a comment. Upon reflection, I decided not to. My reasons are quite simple:
This story/post was about “an aggressive coordinated plan that has been developed following a meeting of industry, labour, WorkSafe BC and the provincial government.”
Seemed like a good news story! At least it did to me! Somehow we have gotten away from the good news in this story. That’s a shame as I would think that some people would be “happy” with this announcement. Any efforts and all efforts to increase work place safety are or should be good news “happy” stories!
So, in an effort to bring some happiness back to this story, I would like to perhaps put a smile on some people’s faces. So, I thought that I would regale all of you with one of my talents. For those of you that don’t personally know me, I do “impressions”!
So, I’d like to do one now and hopefully it might make some people happy!! Hold the applause until I’m done, please!
Here’s my impression of Peeps:
“Blah, blah, blah, Blah, blah, blah, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, BLAH, blah, blah!
Blah, blah, blah, Blah, blah, BLAH! Blah, blah, blah and finally Blah, blah, blah”
How was that??
What answers have you provided People#1? You are asked questions probably because you have set yourself up as an authority on a subject that you have little to no experience. Posters are questioning your credibility.
detoe43, let me answer for Peeps! I promise that you won’t be able to tell the difference:
Blah, blah, blah! Blah, blah, blah, BLAH! Blah Blah Blah! BLAH! Blah!!
My post on March 31 2014 4:56 PM provides statistical data that compares another province’s safety compliance track record with BC’s. It contains “credible” information from a “credible” source.
My post on March 31 2014 9:34 PM provides statistical data on where BC ranks on workplace related deaths with the rest of the country. It contains “credible” information from a “credible” source.
In fact; I make sure most of my comments are supported by, and contain links to, “credible” information from “credible” sources.
I may not comment as much as gus, but like gus, I do my fair share of research before I post my comments. I state my opinions and back them up with credible sources, it’s the classic form of debate. If people can’t keep up, they can always resort to the type of response and infantile behavior so prominently displayed by HG.
Yes, but Gus is retired.
As in, he doesn’t need a job any longer.
Peeps, let’s be honest here ok??
Every time that I have attempted to engage you in a reasonable and rational debate, for whatever reason you have consistently retreated to places unknown!
You consider yourself an expert, that is if being able to “google” the topic of the day is able to make anyone an expert, and yet you are unwilling to debate when faced with reason and logic!
So, if you won’t engage me and others in a debate, at least let me enjoy poking fun at your self-proclaimed superior intellect!!
Those are not answers People, those are stats that like another poster has suggested, do not paint an accurate picture. If you had truly researched your subject you would find that there are myriad factors that contribute to worker fatality, that there is no right wing, evil empire conspiracy out to get ” the little guy”. You would have found biggest factors in workplace injury & fatality are age, inexperience & substandard training.
What answers can you provide that would make working in a hazardous environment safer? Don’t kid yourself, these are environments where the hazards are real & cannot entirely be eliminated.
Here is a couple of answers peeps! Two sawmills have blown up so replace all electrical equipment with explosion proof equipment or move it out of the hazardous area. Treat the sawmill the same as an oil refinery. That will reduce one source of ignition. All employees shall be responsible for making sure the plant is inspected everyday not just when Worksafe shows up. That will significantly reduce the risk of this ever happening again.
A lot of deaths related to logging each year peeps! BC does a lot of logging.
In the ‘real world’ we have a forest industry that has just come through one of the worst lumber markets since the Great Depression.
A substantial number of formerly viable sawmills have closed, many permanently, while those that managed to stay open bled ‘red ink’ profusely.
Many were only able to carry on at all by the forbearance of their bankers. Who, with an optimism not notably characteristic of that breed towards unprofitable enterprises, allowed those favored by their financial largesse to run substantial overdrafts.
Now I don’t know how many of you have ever managed a business at the level where you are the one who has to deal with a banker to obtain the money you need to operate, as well as fund any expansions or improvements to your business. Not many, I strongly suspect, from the nature of comments on here.
It might be highly enlightening to you if you had. But, unfortunately, few of you will ever have that experience. And I say “unfortunately”, in the sense that you will therefore not gain from the experience in an ‘educational’ sense.
Not that it is something that is a very pleasant or desired experience. For in the palm of his hands, your banker holds the power of life and death over what may have been your life’s work. And it’s “all in the numbers”, as they say.
You may find that his concerns are similar but yet somewhat different from your concerns. He may sympathise entirely with your desire, for instance, to keep your plant open, and keep your crew working, so you don’t lose key people and be at a disadvantage in replacing them when markets turn and you’re ‘in the black’ again.
He may feel it’s a real tragedy that the mountain pine beetle was allowed to decimate your projected timber supply, shortening substantially the life expectancy of your plant. Especially if you still owe him money on it. And it’s part of the collateral security for your loans.
And he may have great empathy that, in regards to this timber, you’ve been ordered by the government to “use it, or lose it ~ and if you don’t you’ll get nothing else in future.”
But there is a substantial difference, in the final analysis, between him, and you.
He is purely a ‘numbers’ man at heart. His concern is on what is often termed “the bottom line.” More correctly, just a little bit above that ‘bottom line’. For it’s here, in your financial statements, will be found whether there was ‘enough’ profit in what you’re doing to repay what you’re asking him to lend you. On top of what you already may owe him.
And while he may have had great forbearance with you so far, realising full well the cause of your precarious position was due to extenuating circumstances, his forbearance is not unlimited.
How do you think he’s going to react when you tell him now, in the interests of workplace safety and to forestall the still somewhat unproven possibility of any dust explosions likely being caused by not having explosion proof motors and sealed switch gear, you’d like another, well, who knows how much money, to replace all the motors and switches in your plant?
Is WorksafeBC going to ‘make’ him fund you? In the interests of workplace safety? Is Ms. Christy going to insist that funds be made available, regardless of any businesses ability to repay them, that this happen? Are the concerned citizens, the ‘armchair experts’ so ready to form a lynch mob and string up the callous, profit grubbing employer going to come forward and demand the banks finance installation of explosion proof motors, et al, OR ELSE? In a pig’s eye, they are. So tell me, oh great gurus of everything safe, just where else IS the dough going to come from? Are YOU prepared to pony up for it, to pay for the demands of ‘society’? I didn’t think so.
Comments for this article are closed.