Surviving the OSHA Audit: Common Sense Solutions

Imagine for a moment it’s Monday morning. You’ve just arrived to work and you’re enjoying your first cup of coffee. Unexpectedly, you receive a call from the receptionist. The U.S. Occupation Safety and Health Administration (U.S. OSHA) has just arrived and they’d like to meet you to discuss a safety complaint they’ve received from an employee. Your day just got a little bit more complicated! So, what should you expect during the OSHA visit? What questions should you ask and perhaps more important, what should you avoid? What will OSHA want to see during their visit? Will they ask you for paperwork? Do you have that paperwork?

Within this book, respected OSHA consultant, David A. Casavant takes you behind the curtain and reveals exactly what happens during an OSHA inspection, rules for behavior during the audit and perhaps more importantly, what you can do now to comply with the often-complicated U.S. OSHA regulations. This essential guide simplifies complex regulatory law, provides commonsense strategies for compliance and should be included in every safety professional, risk manager, or attorney’s toolbox.

The author of the book, David A. Casavant is the Executive Director of the Sustainable Workplace Alliance, a 501(c)(3) not‐for‐profit organization dedicated to Health & Safety in the workplace. He is an authorized OSHA 500 & 501 trainer and in 2007, 2008 and 2010 his organization was awarded the prestigious Susan Harwood training grant from the U.S. OSHA. He has been a featured speaker at World WorkPlace, American Management Association, Rockhurst University, NeoCon, SkillTV, Total Facility Management Forum and the NFM&T conference. Additionally, Mr. Casavant has written hundreds of business related articles. His articles can be found in a number of trade publications including the Facility Management Journal, Buildings, PlantServices, SkillTV and Building Operating Management.

Soft cover, 313 pages
Copyright © 2017
ISBN 978-0-9987437-0-7

You can order the book through the American Society of Safety Engineers website.

Technology to prevent rail disasters is in our hands

Author: Chris Bachmann, Assistant professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Waterloo

As the trial of the 2013 Lac-Megantic rail disaster begins, new policies and practices that aim to employ better technology could help avoid similar disasters in the future.

The Transportation Safety Board (TSB) found more than 18 distinct causes and contributing factors in the Lac-Megantic derailment investigation, which makes the likelihood of this type of accident seem nearly impossible.

An unattended 74-car freight train carrying crude oil ran away and derailed, resulting in the deadly fire and explosion in Lac-Mégantic, Quebec, in July 2013. (Photo Credit: CBC)

Yet other derailments in Canada involving dangerous goods would soon follow in 2014 in Plaster Rock, N.B. and Clair, Sask., and two incidents in 2015 in Gogama, Ont.

This suggests that we must be mindful of the connection between human interactions and technology and how each will continue to underlie many causes and contributing factors of future incidents.

As a civil engineering professor who researches transportation infrastructure, dangerous goods and risk, I see several new developments and changes to technology and policy that can help to reduce future accidents.

Safer tank car standards

The type of tank cars involved in the Lac-Megantic accident (“Class 111”) were known to be vulnerable to failure, even in low-speed accidents (e.g., Cornwall, Ont. in 1999).

After Lac-Megantic, Canada and the United States developed a more robust tank car standard, Class 117. This new standard features improved puncture resistance, structural strength and fractural resistance.

Despite these improvements, Canadian and U.S. regulations will still allow Class 111 tank cars to be used for the transport of certain dangerous goods until mid-2025.

Even so, Canada accelerated the phase-out of the older Class 111 tank cars from being used for crude oil service in Canada as of Nov. 1, 2016, under Protective Direction 38.

Enhanced braking

In addition to new tank car standards, the U.S. is requiring enhanced braking standards on trains carrying flammable goods.

Any train with a continuous block of 20 tank cars loaded with a flammable liquid, or 35 or more tank cars loaded with a flammable liquid dispersed throughout a train, must have a functioning two-way end-of-train (EOT) device — an electronic unit that can be mounted on the end of a freight train instead of a caboose — or a distributed power (DP) braking system, which spreads braking across different points throughout a train.

Furthermore, any train with 70 or more loaded tank cars containing flammable liquids travelling at speeds greater than 48 km/h must be operated with an electronically controlled pneumatic (ECP) braking system by May 1, 2023.

In short, these technologies enable more controlled braking behaviour through a more responsive and uniform application of brake pressure. Benefits would include shorter stopping distances, lower risks of derailment and lower pile-up effects in the event of a derailment.

More information sharing

Technology also allows more information sharing for better decision-making. For example, Protective Direction No. 36 in Canada requires railways to provide municipalities with dangerous goods reports, including information on the number of unit trains, percentage of railway cars transporting dangerous goods, information on their nature and volume and number of trains.

This information is intended to inform emergency planning and responses.

The U.S. is also requiring more accurate classification of unrefined petroleum-based products to ensure proper classification, packaging and record-keeping through a documented sampling and testing process. This information is to be made available to the Department of Transportation upon request.

Human factors

The technology to prevent rail disasters is in our hands — just as it was in 2013. While these and future technologies are likely to reduce the risks of transporting dangerous goods across Canada and the United States, the interactions between humans and other elements of the system — the “human factors” — will remain predominant.

As we now know in the Lac-Megantic accident, the train carrying 7.7 million litres of crude oil sped toward the small Quebec town at 104 km/h before derailing, killing 47 people in the resulting fire and explosions on July 6, 2013.

Hours before derailing, the train was parked and left running on the main track in Nantes, Que., awaiting departure. But shortly after the engineer parked the train, a locomotive engine caught fire and was turned off by the Nantes fire department.

Without power from the running locomotive engine, air slowly leaked from the air brake system. An insufficient number of handbrakes were applied and the train eventually began rolling downhill on its final journey toward Lac-Megantic.

Some of the causes and contributing factors in the Lac-Megantic rail disaster were not technical failures so much as they were failures of humans to properly interact with technology: To properly maintain a locomotive engine, to have knowledge of interactions between locomotive engines and air brake systems and to properly set and test the effectiveness of handbrakes.

Although technical standards were less stringent in 2013, technology did not fail us. In many of the causes and contributing factors of Lac-Megantic, it is evident that we failed to understand and interact with our technology.

______________________________

This article was originally published on The Conversation. Disclosure information is available on the original site. To read the original article:

https://theconversation.com/technology-to-prevent-rail-disasters-is-https://theconvers

About the Author

Chris Bachmann is an Assistant professor, Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Waterloo.  His research interests include the interaction between transportation and economics, trade, energy, transportation network resiliency/criticality/robustness/vulnerability, risk, dangerous goods movement, transport economics, transport project and policy evaluation.

ASL wins pollution response vessel orders

ASL Shipyards in Singapore has won a contract to build three pollution response vessels, whose design leans heavily on escort tug architecture. Western Canada Marine Response Corp ordered the three response vessels to protect Canada’s west coast.

ASL Spill Response Vessel

The vessels will increase offshore spill response capabilities for the Trans Mountain pipeline expansion project. ASL will build these vessels to Robert Allan’s BRAvo 2500 design, which uses elements of the naval architect’s experience in designing escort tugs.

These 25 m vessels will be pollution response platforms custom-designed to meet the formidable environmental conditions and demanding requirements of Canada’s west coast.

They will act as a mothership to other smaller vessels during the response to spills, and be capable of deploying containment equipment, transferring components between vessels, and will store oil in internal tanks or offload oil into barges.

These vessels will have Caterpillar C9.3 main engines and two Caterpillar C4.4 service generator sets. They will be classed by Lloyd’s Register and built to meet Transport Canada requirements.

Robert Allan worked on the design of these vessels, including the use of computational fluid dynamics, since the start of this year. It used its designs for the RAstar series of offshore escort tugs for the hull form and hull sponsons. The vessels will have large bilge keels, twin skegs and a bulbous bow.

For oil containment, they will have Kepner self-inflating offshore booms stored on a large powered reel and a Current Buster 4 sweep system. BRAvo 2500 vessels will have an aft swim platform that allows easy access to the water surface for recovering and deploying equipment with the vessel’s crane.

 

U.S. Instructor Training Aims To Reduce Hazmat Shipping Incidents

Hazardous Materials Instructor Training is now available at no cost in 12 states to help reduce transportation incidents involving undeclared hazardous materials.

The training is offered by the Texas A&M Engineering Extension Service (TEEX) thanks to a $708,000 grant from the U.S. Department of Transportation (DOT).  The goal of the grant from DOT’s Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration is to enhance the safe transport of hazardous materials by highway, rail, water and air.  During the next 12 months, TEEX plans to offer 48 classes in cities that are adjacent to major interstate shipping highways and trucking hubs.

The TEEX training will provide instructors with information to help them develop a systematic training program that ensures a hazmat employee has familiarity with the general provisions of the hazardous materials regulations, Also, the training will ensure an employee is able to recognize and identify hazardous materials, has knowledge of specific requirements applicable to functions performed by the employee, and has knowledge of emergency response information, self-protection measures, and accident prevention methods and procedures.

“It is vital that these materials be properly packaged, labeled and stowed for transportation or they could pose significant threats to transportation workers, carrier operators, emergency responders and the general public,” said Jeff Bowman, Environmental Training Manager with the TEEX Infrastructure Training and Safety Institute. The training will help companies meet their safety goals and reduce hazmat incidents caused by human error, he added.

This course will also assist employers in developing a systematic program that ensures employees can recognize and identify hazardous materials and are knowledgeable of emergency response information, self-protection measures, and accident prevention methods and procedures, Bowman said.

About The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
The Pipeline and Hazardous Materials Safety Administration develops and enforces regulations for the safe, reliable, and environmentally sound operation of the nation’s 2.7 million mile pipeline transportation system and the nearly one million daily shipments of hazardous materials by land, sea and air.

About The Texas A&M Engineering Extension Service
TEEX is an internationally recognized leader in the delivery of emergency response, homeland security and workforce training and exercises, technical assistance, and economic development. Last year, TEEX served more than 168,000 people from every U.S. state and territory and 82 countries worldwide. TEEX makes a difference by providing training, developing practical solutions, and saving lives.

SOURCE: The Texas A&M Engineering Extension Service

TURI Publishes Nanomaterials Fact Sheet

Recently, the Toxics Use Reduction Institute (TURI), a research, education, and policy center established by the Massachusetts Toxics Use Reduction Act of 1989, published a nanomaterials fact sheet.  The fact sheet is part of a series of chemical and material fact sheets developed by TURI that are intended to help Massachusetts companies, community organizations, and residents understand the use of hazardous substances and their effects on human health and the environment.  The fact sheet also includes information on safer alternatives and safer use options.

According to the fact sheet, TURI researchers have started a blueprint for design rules for safer nanotechnology.  The design rules include five principles, which together follow the acronym SAFER, as shown below.  The principles focus on aspects such as modifying physical-chemical characteristics of the material to diminish the hazard, considering alternative materials, and enclosing the material within another, less hazardous, material.  The fact sheet notes that other researchers have proposed other more specific design rules, which include avoiding chemical compositions of engineered nanomaterials that contain known toxic elements, and avoiding nanomaterials with dimensions that are known to possess hazardous properties.

Design Principles for SAFER Nanotechnology

  1. Size, surface, and structure: Diminish or eliminate the hazard by changing the size, surface, or structure of the nanoparticle while preserving the functionality of the nanomaterial for the specific application;
  2. Alternative materials: Identify either nano or bulk safer alternatives that can be used to replace a hazardous nanoparticle;
  3. Functionalization: Add additional molecules (or atoms) to the nanomaterial to diminish or eliminate the hazard while preserving desired properties for a specific application;
  4. Encapsulation: Enclose a nanoparticle within another less hazardous material; and
  5. Reduce the quantity: In situations where the above design principles cannot be used to reduce or eliminate the hazard of a nanomaterial, and continued use is necessary, investigate opportunities to use smaller quantities while still maintaining product functionality.

The fact sheet provides a summary of regulations concerning nanomaterials.  Massachusetts currently has no regulations specifically governing the use or release of nanomaterials.  At the federal level, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) primarily regulates nanomaterials under the Toxic Substances Control Act.

The fact sheet notes that as of 2017, companies using or manufacturing nanomaterials that have not been subject to pre-manufacture notices or significant new use rules will be subject to a one-time reporting and recordkeeping rule.

Confirming the Chemical Identity

Philip Tackett, a certified HAZMAT responder and a Product Manager at FLIR, discusses its latest tool for chemical identification

 

By Philip Tackett

Civilian and military responders face scenarios ranging from intentional chemical attacks and accidental hazardous material (HAZMAT) releases to natural disasters and environmental monitoring or remediation efforts.  Responders step on-scene with a diverse toolkit – sometimes small and other times extensive.  It is critical to stay familiar with the equipment in the kit, because no single chemical detection tool can provide answers for every scenario.

Colorimetric test kits are one of the most commonly used technologies for quickly collecting presumptive information about a chemical.  They are used to determine if a threat is present and determine its chemical class.  This information is important, but knowing the exact identity of a chemical can inform a safer response.  True chemical identity can provide information to responders and law enforcement officials beyond the initial threat, and lead to further discoveries to further safeguard the public.

Griffin G510

While some detectors only indicate the presence of a chemical, others specifically detect hazards in the presence of a complex chemical background, like a gas chromatograph mass spectrometer (GC/MS).  GC/MS is an incredibly sensitive and highly specific tool commonly used in laboratory environments.  It can sense trace level chemicals other equipment can’t, while also providing the ability to positively identify the chemical.  But chemical emergencies don’t just happen in laboratories – they can happen anywhere.

Real-time chemical detection and identification in the field is critical to the Chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosives (CBRNE) defense or HAZMAT response mission.  Confirmatory chemical identification enables responders to mitigate a threat and protect people and the environment from harm.

The most challenging aspects of taking gold-standard technology like GC/MS into the field is survivability in harsh environments and ease of use.  Significant technological advancements have led to the development of the FLIR Griffin G510 person-portable GC/MS system.  Its lab-quality detection performance, simple-to-use interface, and rugged construction are ideal for high-consequence response missions.

Response missions take place in complex environments that the GC/MS must withstand.  The Griffin G510 is completely self-contained in a 36-pound device, including batteries, carrier gas, vacuum system, injector, and heated sample probe.  It is also the first IP65-rated portable GC/MS.  This means it’s dust-tight and spray-resistant, which adds flexibility to decontamination procedures.  There is no 40-pound external service module like other portable GC/MS systems and no 20-pound external pump under the bench like those seen in a laboratory.  Batteries last up to four hours and are hot swappable, should the mission extend longer than expected, which eliminates the need for a power generator.  The Griffin G510 is designed from the ground up to operate outside of the lab.

Griffin G510 syringe injection

Hazmat technicians will dive into using the features that deliver lab-quality analysis.  First on-scene operators will appreciate that they don’t need a Ph.D. to use it.  Basic operator training is completed in only two hours, while expert training can be completed in a single day.  The user interface truly sets it apart from other portable GC/MS systems.  It’s streamlined design and guided controls help the user select the mode of operation.  First responders must perform quickly and with limited dexterity when wearing required PPE.  They are responsible for sample and data collection, and in some cases, real-time decision making.  The G510 alerts the operator with visual alarm confirmation both on the handheld probe, as well as the on-board 9” touchscreen.  The large touchscreen can be operated by a responder while wearing full personal protective equipment (PPE).

Hazmat responders can use the Griffin G510 to analyze all phases of matter (solid, liquid, gas). Its integrated survey mode capability identifies vapor-phase chemical threats within seconds.  Its integrated split/splitless liquid injector enables responders to perform direct injection of organic liquids – an industry first.  This same injector also accepts other sampling tools, including solid-phase microextraction (SPME), off-the-shelf headspace analyzers, and the Prepless Sample Introduction (PSI) Probe.  The PSI-Probe directly accepts solid samples in their native form (such as soil and water-based materials).  The Griffin G510 reduces the burden of sample preparation for the operator and provides ultimate flexibility as the daily mission changes.

Hazardous environments demand the ultimate toolbox include confirmatory instrumentation like GC/MS. The Griffin G510 portable GC/MS redefines performance, ease of use, and value for the responder toolkit.

Griffin G510 – checking readout

The Ninth Circuit Reiterates That “Knowingly” Handling Hazardous Waste Without a Permit Is a General Intent Crime Under RCRA

By Richard E. Stultz

Max Spatig was convicted of knowingly storing and disposing of hazardous waste without a permit and sentenced by the U.S. District Court for the District of Idaho to 46 months in prison under 42 U.S.C. § 6928(d)(2)(A). See U.S. v Spatig (2017) 2017 WL 4018398.  At trial, Spatig had sought to introduce evidence on his diminished capacity arguing that he did not have the required state of mind for the offense.  The district court, however, granted the government’s motion in limine to exclude all such evidence because § 6928(d)(2)(A) under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) only required general intent and diminished capacity was not a defense to a general intent crime.

For years, Spatig had operated a business which used paint and paint-related materials.  Over time Spatig had accumulated several used containers of this material, some of which ended up on his residential property in Idaho.  In 2005, the county discovered the several containers and reported it to the Idaho Department of Environmental Quality (DEQ). Working with Spatig, DEQ collected and destroyed most of the containers.  In 2010, Spatig was again found to be storing used containers of paint and paint related materials on another of his properties.  This time the job was too big for local or state authorities so the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was notified.  The U.S. EPA determined that the waste was hazardous and that a cleanup was necessary. The U.S. EPA removed approximately 3400 containers and spent $498,562 on the cleanup.  The EPA charged Spatig with violation of § 6928(d)(2)(A) for knowingly storing and disposing of a hazardous waste without a permit from either DEQ or the U.S. EPA.

Paint cans at a property off the Archer-Lyman Highway near Rexburg, Idaho

Spatig appealed his trial conviction and argued on appeal that § 6928(d)(2)(A) required specific intent.  He also took issue with the district court’s enhancement of his base sentence arguing that the cleanup did not result in a “substantial expenditure.”  The Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals, however, disagreed with Spatig and affirmed the district court.

Under § 6928(d)(2)(A), a person may not “knowingly” treat, store or dispose of a hazardous waste without a permit.  According to the U.S. Supreme Court, “‘knowingly’ merely requires proof of knowledge of the facts that constitute the offense.”  The Ninth Circuit had also held that “knowingly” generally does not require specific intent.  In other words, a defendant’s particular purpose or objective is not required.  The Ninth Circuit previously rejected the argument that § 6928(d)(2)(A) required that a defendant know there was no permit for disposal.  The court held there that “knowingly” only required “that a defendant be aware that he is treating, storing, or disposing of something that he knows is hazardous.”  The court found that RCRA was a public-welfare statute and that “§6928(d)(2)(A) fits within a class of general-intent crimes that protect public health, safety, and welfare.”  Because § 6928(d)(2)(A) only requires general intent, the Ninth Circuit upheld the district court’s exclusion of evidence at trial of Spatig’s state of mind.

Spatig argued that his sentence enhancement was error because the cleanup did not constitute a “substantial expenditure” required under the federal sentencing guidelines (U.S.S.G. § 2Q1.2(b)(3)).  The Ninth Circuit refused to establish a bright-line rule but noted that sister circuits had found that expenditures under $200,000 were “substantial.”  In upholding the district court, the Ninth Circuit noted that in the instant case the $498,562 underestimated the total cost because it did not include the local agencies’ expenditures.

This holding underscores the long-standing general purpose of environmental laws to protect the public welfare. These statutes do not generally require specific intent—only knowing of the act is required.

This article was first published on the Clark Hill website.

_________________

About the author

Richard E. Stultz brings over eighteen years of experience in the environmental, land development and petroleum industries to bear in his practice of law. In addition to his law degree, he also earned a Bachelor of Science in Petroleum Engineering. Richard’s practice is currently focused on environmental litigation.

Richard is experienced in law and motion filings and hearings. He is practiced in written discovery and legal research. Richard has even co-written a First Amendment argument submitted before the California Court of Appeal. He is familiar with California’s environmental laws and regulations.

While in law school, Richard interned at the Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office in the Real Property/Environment division. He researched and prepared a key memorandum regarding good will compensation in eminent domain.

U.S. EPA Evaluates Hurricane Harvey impact on U.S. Superfund Sites in Texas

In a September 8th update, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) and the Texas Commission of Environmental Quality (TCEQ) stated that the two agencies continue to get updates about the status of specific Superfund sites from the parties responsible for ongoing cleanup of the sites.  The TCEQ has completed the assessment of all 17 state Superfund sites in the area affected by Hurricane Harvey.  The two agencies reported that there were no major issues noted.  The TCEQ will continue to monitor sites to ensure no further action is needed in regards to the storm.

The U.S. EPA completed site assessments at all 43 Superfund sites affected by the storm.  Of these sites, two (San Jacinto and U.S. Oil Recovery) require additional assessment efforts.  Assessments of these sites will take several more days to complete.

Harris County, Texas Superfund Sites Map

 

The San Jacinto Waste Pits site has a temporary armored cap designed to prevent migration of hazardous material.  The U.S. EPA remedial manager is onsite and overseeing the assessment.  Crews continue to survey portions of the cap that are submerged.  There are some areas where rock has been displaced and the liner is exposed.  The potential responsible party has mobilized heavy equipment and is placing rock on different places on the armored cap to repair the defensive surface. The liner is in place and functional so we don’t have any indication that the underlying waste materials have been exposed. If we find a breach in the exposed liner, we direct the responsible party to collect samples to determine if any materials have been released. Also, the EPA has dive teams to survey the cap underwater if needed.

Work to improve conditions after the storm has continued at the U.S. Oil Recovery site to address flood water from the storm.  Nine vacuum truckloads of approximately 45,000 gallons of storm water were removed and shipped offsite for disposal.  No sheen or odor was observed in the overflowing water, and an additional tank is being used to maintain freeboard to keep water on-site.  The U.S. EPA has directed potential responsible parties or has independently started collecting samples at the 43 Superfund sites to further confirm any impacts from the storm.  The total number of Superfund sites increased from 41 to 43 with the addition of Rapides Parish, Louisiana and Waller County, Texas as disaster declared areas.  Sampling efforts of all 43 sites is expected to be completed early next week with sample results will be available soon.

New Method to Quickly and Cheaply Determine Metal Contamination at Sites

In a recent paper in the Journal of Environmental Pollution, researchers from Macquarie University in Sydney, Australia describe a new accurate, rapid and inexpensive method for assessing metal-contaminated sites.  The paper describes the results of in-field trials of the new method and comparison of it to lab results.

The new method uses a combination of portable X-ray Fluorescence technology (pXRF) – a popular on-site contamination-measuring system – with conventional laboratory analysis to accurately measure the extent and distribution of metal contamination at a site.

“Metal-contaminated sites are often haphazard when it comes to the distribution of metal contaminants, making it problematic for investigators when they are limited by the costs associated with analyzing a large number of samples in the lab.  As such, investigators are expected to attempt to characterize contaminated sites with a limited number of laboratory measurements to save on costs,” said lead author Marek Rouillon.

“On the other hand, when investigators are free to take a large number of measurements to determine the contamination at a site, they gain a greater understanding of the extent and distribution of the contamination, therefore lowering the risk of site misclassification,” Rouillon added.

As a result, the researchers wanted to develop a way to measure more samples using a rapid on-site measurement method that produced results in an accurate and more cost effective manner than current techniques allowed.

“To achieve this, we decided to integrate the advantages of in-situ pXRF, an inexpensive measurement method that can be done on-site allowing investigators to collect real-time data, with the more thorough laboratory analysis technique of ICP–MS,” explained Rouillon.

The study, described in the Journal article, demonstrated that 20 second in-situ pXRF measurements can be corrected to align with a small subset of ICP–MS data, allowing for the accurate, rapid and inexpensive high resolution characterization of metal-contaminated sites.  The researchers found that sampling (not analysis) contributes the greatest uncertainty towards measurements, and should be estimated at each metal-contaminated site.

“Measuring contaminants in real-time using in-situ pXRF enables efficient, on-site decision making for further sampling, without the need to return to the site,” explained Professor Mark Taylor.  “This is an incredibly useful way to go about testing for metal contamination at a site.”

The researchers emphasize that the new method has several benefits including superior site characterization, greater soil-mapping resolution, reduced uncertainty around the site mean and reduced sampling uncertainty.

“Our in-situ pXRF/ICP–MS method not only generates superior site assessment information for more confident decision making, but is less expensive when compared to the current standard practice of merely sampling and off-site laboratory measurements,” concluded Professor Rouillon.

Forecast on Chemical Detection Equipment Market

Future Market Insights (FMI), is a market intelligence and consulting firm, recently issued a forecast report for the chemical detection equipment market.

In the view of FMI, a new era of chemical warfare and increased man-made threats is on the rise with the potential to cause harm.  The need for rapid identification of chemical or biological agents involved in any hazardous materials (Hazmat) is necessary to prevent incidents.

Chemical detection equipment are generally used to identify the presence and intensity of chemical agents in soil, air as well as water and to alert respective authorities and personnel to the existence of toxic or hazardous substances, so necessary action can be taken to prevent catastrophes, as it can be dangerous whether it is in a weaponized or non-weaponized form. Testing for the presence of these materials is necessary for production sites/industrial areas and exposed areas to prevent any incident.  Incidents from the past have resulted in the chemical industry to utilize reliable and high quality chemical equipment for monitoring of chemical plants and industries, hence increasing the demand for chemical detection equipment.

Rising threats from terrorist organizations have forced countries to use chemical detection equipment in all important sites, such as the airport, water distribution plant, nuclear power plant, tourist places and many other critical infrastructure facilities for the purpose of public safety. Chemical detection equipment is also used in facilities like nuclear power plant, chemical production facilities and various other industries to identify the presence and intensity of Radiation & chemical agents in soil, air as well as water.

Chemical Detection Equipment Market: Dynamics

Growth in the chemical detection equipment market is mainly due to an increase in terrorist threats, as well as increasing safety regulations.  The increase in production of hazardous materials for industrial applications has also increased the level of threat, due to accidents or misuse by terrorists.  Strict laws for buying and selling of hazardous chemicals and increased activities by law enforcements and safety and security administrations has led to growth of the chemical detection equipment market.  Awareness among people and stringent government regulations has created immense pressure on corporates to keep chemical detection equipment at their sites to ensure safety of the workforce.  As a result, usage of chemical detection equipment in many industries has consequently surged its demand globally.

On the other hand, the high price of this equipment and high operating cost (cost of the chemicals used in making detection equipment) are restraints to the growth of the global chemical detection equipment market.

Among the chemical detection equipment available in the market, equipment that is small, effective, simple and relatively cheap are in trend and hold the maximum market share.  Portable chemical detection equipment with infrared technology & Raman spectroscopy has already captured a major market share due to the above stated reasons.

Chemical Detection Equipment Market: Regional Outlook

North America is a major market for chemical detection equipment as continuous research and development is required in this field and the United States is a leader in the R&D of chemical detection technology.  The increase in terrorist threats and incidents related to chemicals in recent years has garnered much attention from people and governments all over the world.  The countries affected by terrorism are major markets for chemical detection equipment, such as India, the United Kingdom, Iraq, Afghanistan, etc.