Montara oil spill report will provide clues for handling BP inquiry

The Montara oil spill in the Timor Sea that lasted for three months in late 2009 was large but affected no countries directly and is certainly a long way from the Gulf of Mexico and BP.  However there are enough similarities for considerable media attention to be focused on the investigative report into the incident that was handed to the Australian Government on 17 June 2010.

The Australian Resources Minister, Martin Ferguson, acknowledged the receipt of the commission of inquiry’s final report but will not be releasing it yet.

Greens Senator Rachel Seiwert has said:

“The release of all information available to date is essential for the development of new regulatory and environmental procedures….  We need to be better prepared to respond to future disasters in our precious marine environment.”

Seiwert has at least acknowledged the global context of the report:

“Halliburton is reported to have carried out cementing work on both the Montara well and the US Deepwater Horizon well in the Gulf of Mexico. The failure of this cementing has been linked in the media to both spills.”

Speculation is that the report will recommend a “single national regulator for off-shore drilling” according to the Australian Financial Review (AFR) on 19 June 2010 (p5. not available online).   Continue reading “Montara oil spill report will provide clues for handling BP inquiry”

New nanotechnology safety papers

Safe Work Australia has released two research papers concerning safety sisues raised by nanotechnology.

An Evaluation of MSDS and Labels associated with the Use of Engineered Nanomaterials

Safe Work Australia advises that

“This report details findings from an evaluation of 50 Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDSs) and 15 labels for products containing engineered nanomaterials. Key findings in the report include:

Off shore drilling safety will change forever

The ramifications for corporate America and particularly, the oil industry, from the Gulf of Mexico oil spill are becoming clearer.  In his 15 June 2010, address to the nation, President Obama stated his financial and operational expectations of BP prior to his meeting the company’s CEO, Tony Hayward on 16 June.

In essence, BP will be required to fund compensation for the families of dead and injured workers and those who are suffering economic hardship as a result of action which the President described as “reckless”.  The distrust of BP was evident by the compensation fund, which is likely to be billions of dollars, being administered by a third party.

But the BP spill has changed the way that oil exploration and extraction will occur in American waters.   Continue reading “Off shore drilling safety will change forever”

OHS Canaries and Apathy

Guest author, Yossi Berger writes:

“What’s the point of tellin’ them the same thing over and over when nothin’ changes?  I open my mouth about safety again I could lose me job” he said, “Why would I bother?”[a]

Introduction

Words and names can be used as sneaky accomplices to construct popular or inaccurate narratives.  When such constructions are used as explanations of workers’ behaviour and presumed attitudes they can misdirect occupational health and safety (OHS) programs.  An example is the frequently heard ‘workers’ apathy’ explanation of poor OHS standards.  The important UK 1972 Robens Report on OHS noted:

”….our deliberations over the course of two years have left us in no doubt that the most important single reason for accidents at work is apathy”.[1]

It’s 2009 and some of this in various guises[b] still obscures simple facts at work.

I believe that choosing the banner of ‘apathy’[c] as an explanation of poor OHS standards was and continues to be inaccurate.   Continue reading “OHS Canaries and Apathy”

Smoke-related heart attacks decline in England but how so for hotel workers?

The British Medical Journal has released a report into the effects of smoke-free workplaces on the rate of heart attacks in the English population.  The report finds that a ban on smoking in workplaces has resulted in a 2.4% fall in heart attacks which equates to 12,000 people.  This is good news but it could have been better, or more relevant to workplace safety issues.

The study conclusion acknowledges that

“The considerably smaller decline in admissions observed in England compared with many other jurisdictions probably reflects aspects of the study design and the relatively low levels of exposure to secondhand smoke in England before the legislation.” [emphasis added]

Low levels of cigarette smoke may have been the reality across all workplaces but this is unlikely to have been the case in English pubs, from personal experience.

Research, similar to that undertaken above, would be very useful if it was to assess the cardiovascular disorder rate in hotel workers where the smoke-free obligation has existed since July 2007.  Hotel workers are a readily defined group who could not avoid exposure to second-hand tobacco smoke and a study of the health impacts of this sector could reinforce the wisdom of smoke-free legislation and could show how quickly a common social and public health hazard can be turned around.

The above study is good news, particularly for the 12,000 who may now have the chance to die from old age, but analysing a smaller, more targeted population sample in high exposure environments might have more international significance and application.

Kevin Jones

Independent safety investigation into BP’s Gulf disaster requested by Congress

On 8 July 2010 the United States government asked its Chemical Safety Board (CSB) to consider investigating the Gulf of Mexico oil spill.  It would be good news for safety and the environment for the CSB to take on this role.

Primarily, CSB is well placed to consider any issues concerning the safety management structure and culture of BP that may have contributed to the environmental disaster and the deaths of 11 workers on the rig.  As the CSB media statement outlines

“The CSB thoroughly investigated the BP Texas City refinery explosion of 2005 and issued a lengthy report and hour-long CSB Safety Video following our investigation, and as the letter from the committee chairmen states, we would be in a unique position to address numerous questions about BP’s safety culture and practices, and to answer the questions outlined in the House committee letter today.”

The letter from the chairman of the US Congress’ Committee on Energy and Commerce, Henry Waxman, has asked the CSB to consider the following questions

The advantages of integrated enforcement action

In the 1990s, WorkSafe Victoria (then the Occupational health and  Safety Authority) coordinated Hazardous Chemicals Audit Teams (HCAT).  I was one member of the administrative unit for HCAT.  This coordinated approach to inspection and enforcement had substantial merit and was very effective as the Auditor-General found in 1995.  I was reminded of this initiative by the simultaneous action taken by the Victorian Government against Mobil Australia, a subsidiary of ExxonMobil, on 3 June 2010.

The Environment Protection Authority (EPA) has

“…cancelled Mobil Refining Australia Pty Ltd’s accredited licence”.

The EPA media release quotes CEO John Merritt (formerly executive director of WorkSafe Victoria):

“In the absence of [an ongoing commitment to constantly improving their environmental performance], EPA has the power to cancel the accreditation…. EPA is less than impressed with Mobil’s track record in which there has been a number of incidents at the site all with the potential for environmental and community risk.

It is EPA’s belief that Mobil’s onsite practices have not demonstrated a high level of environmental performance to justify accreditation.” Continue reading “The advantages of integrated enforcement action”

Concatenate Web Development
© Designed and developed by Concatenate Aust Pty Ltd