On July 29, 2008, the Senate Subcommittee on Employment and Workplace Safety held a hearing to examine whether OSHA is adequately enforcing its National Emphasis Program for combustible dust. 

The Subcommittee focused on the recent accident at the Imperial Sugar Refinery in Port Wentworth, Georgia on February 7, 2008, when 13 employees were killed and approximately 40 more were injured. After its investigation, OSHA issued citations alleging 69 willful and 51 serious violations at the facility and proposed more than $5 million in penalties. The House responded to this accident by passing the Combustible Dust Explosion and Fire Prevention Act of 2008 earlier this year. While OSHA Assistant Secretary Edwin Foulke highlighted OSHA’s current efforts to improve workplace safety with respect to hazards posed by combustible dust during this hearing, other witnesses discussed the deficiencies in OSHA’s current enforcement plan as well as possible solutions to protecting workers from future accidents.   

Secretary Foulke testified specifically about OSHA’s investigation of the Imperial Sugar accident as well as its efforts, in general, to protect employees who are exposed to combustible dust hazards. As for the investigation, Secretary Foulke stated that Imperial Sugar’s failure to comply with existing OSHA standards directly contributed to the explosion. In particular, he mentioned that OSHA discovered large quantities of combustible dust throughout the facility, a common result from poor housekeeping practices. The investigation concluded that a spark ignited this dust and created a primary explosion. The primary explosion then caused accumulated dust to become airborne, which then created a series of secondary explosions. OSHA concluded that Imperial Sugar management knew it had not been monitoring its dust accumulations for many years and was also aware of the hazards caused by combustible dust.   

On March 14, 2008, OSHA initiated an inspection of Imperial Sugar’s Gramercy, Louisiana refinery and discovered large quantities of combustible dust in the power mill. After Imperial Sugar did not take immediate action, OSHA posted an imminent danger notice and temporarily shut down the powder mill facility. Furthermore, OSHA issued 49 willful and 42 serious violations with proposed penalties of more than $3.7 million.  This proposed penalty, combined with the $5 million Port Wentworth penalty, resulted in the third highest proposed penalty in the agency’s history. 

Secretary Foulke also discussed the agency’s National Emphasis Program (NEP) on combustible dust. The NEP provides for increased enforcement of OSHA’s existing combustible dust standards, along with educational and outreach efforts for employers and employees. The NEP focuses on workplaces where combustible dust hazards are likely to be found and provides a list of materials that can generate combustible dust. Among the standards Secretary Foulke listed as part of the combustible dust rules, he emphasized OSHA’s Housekeeping (29 CFR 1910.22) and Electrical (29 CFR 1910.307) standards as the most critical. The Housekeeping standard helps prevent significant amounts of combustible dust from accumulating, which in turn reduces the likelihood of secondary explosions. The Electrical standard helps ensure that electrical ignition sources are not present in environments where combustible dust may become airborne. 

In addition, Secretary Foulke provided an update on the NEP. As of early July, OSHA and its state plan partners have opened 326 inspections under the combustible dust NEP. On June 6, 2008, OSHA sent a memorandum to all Regional Administrators and State Designees that all sugar refineries (beet and sugarcane) in the federal jurisdiction will be inspected under the NEP. OSHA also distributes compliance guidance to employers and employees for its combustible dust rules, including a 2005 Safety and Health Information Bulletin Combustible Dust in Industry:  Preventing and Mitigating the Effects of Fire and Explosions, e-Tools on its website, and an 80-page publication entitled Guide for Protecting Workers from Woodworking Hazards.  Furthermore, OSHA has been training its staff on combustible dust hazards. In December 2007, the OSHA Training Institute developed a three and one-half day course on Combustible Dust Hazards and Controls, which more than 100 federal and state OSHA personnel have completed. OSHA also provides refresher courses on combustible dust rules and hazards for its employees. 

Finally, Secretary Foulke mentioned that OSHA plans to take the following steps with respect to its combustible dust standards: (1) clarify how the OSHA Hazard Communication standard applies to combustible dust; (2) update the General Industry Housekeeping provision, 29 CFR 1910.22; (3) amend the Housekeeping requirement to state that it applies to accumulations of dust that contribute to an explosion hazard; and (4) consider other options upon the completion of the combustible dust NEP. 

The hearing also included testimony from John S. Bresland, Chairman and CEO of U.S. Chemical Safety & Hazard Investigation Board; Amy Beasley Spencer, Senior Chemical Engineer of the National Fire Protection Association; Richard W. Prugh, Senior Process Safety Specialist of Chilworth Technology, Inc.; and Imperial Sugar Company Vice President for Operations Graham H. Graham.

Bresland testified about the Imperial Sugar explosion as well as other explosions recently, a polyethylene dust explosion at West Pharmaceutical Services in Kinston, North Carolina and a resin dust explosion in CTA Acoustics in Corbin, Kentucky. The U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) determined that all three explosions could have been prevented if the companies had followed the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) recommendations for controlling dust hazards. Bresland stated that OSHA needed to develop a new standard, an emphasis program, and an awareness campaign of the risks and hazards associated with combustible dust. 

Beasley testified that the NFPA believes that OSHA is not doing enough to protect workers and should develop regulations that incorporate the relevant NFPA codes and standards. Beasley requested that the Senate ensure that OSHA mandates its combustible safety through the use of NFPA codes and standards.

Prugh testified that OSHA can improve its current enforcement mechanism and provided five documents that could serve as models or recommendations for new OSHA results regarding combustible dust.