National Academies Press: OpenBook
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×

ASSESSMENT OF APPROACHES FOR USING PROCESS SAFETY METRICS AT THE BLUE GRASS AND PUEBLO CHEMICAL AGENT DESTRUCTION PILOT PLANTS

Committee to Assess Process Safety Metrics for the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants

Board on Army Science and Technology

Division on Engineering and Physical Sciences

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
OF THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS

Washington, D.C.
www.nap.edu

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES PRESS
500 Fifth Street, N.W.
Washington, DC 20001

NOTICE: The project that is the subject of this report was approved by the Governing Board of the National Research Council, whose members are drawn from the councils of the National Academy of Sciences, the National Academy of Engineering, and the Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.

This study was supported by Contract No. W911NF-10-C-0066 between the National Academy of Sciences and the U.S. Army. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the views of the organizations or agencies that provided support for the project.

International Standard Book Number-13: 978-0-309-16345-3

International Standard Book Number-10: 0-309-16345-5

Limited copies of this report are available from

Board on Army Science and Technology

National Research Council

500 Fifth Street, N.W., Room 940

Washington, DC 20001

(202) 334-3118

Additional copies are available from

The National Academies Press

500 Fifth Street, N.W. Lockbox 285 Washington, DC 20055 (800) 624-6242 or (202) 334-3313 (in the Washington metropolitan area) Internet, http://www.nap.edu

Copyright 2011 by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.

Printed in the United States of America

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×

THE NATIONAL ACADEMIES

Advisers to the Nation on Science, Engineering, and Medicine


The National Academy of Sciences is a private, nonprofit, self-perpetuating society of distinguished scholars engaged in scientific and engineering research, dedicated to the furtherance of science and technology and to their use for the general welfare. Upon the authority of the charter granted to it by the Congress in 1863, the Academy has a mandate that requires it to advise the federal government on scientific and technical matters. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone is president of the National Academy of Sciences.


The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964, under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences, as a parallel organization of outstanding engineers. It is autonomous in its administration and in the selection of its members, sharing with the National Academy of Sciences the responsibility for advising the federal government. The National Academy of Engineering also sponsors engineering programs aimed at meeting national needs, encourages education and research, and recognizes the superior achievements of engineers. Dr. Charles M. Vest is president of the National Academy of Engineering.


The Institute of Medicine was established in 1970 by the National Academy of Sciences to secure the services of eminent members of appropriate professions in the examination of policy matters pertaining to the health of the public. The Institute acts under the responsibility given to the National Academy of Sciences by its congressional charter to be an adviser to the federal government and, upon its own initiative, to identify issues of medical care, research, and education. Dr. Harvey V. Fineberg is president of the Institute of Medicine.


The National Research Council was organized by the National Academy of Sciences in 1916 to associate the broad community of science and technology with the Academy’s purposes of furthering knowledge and advising the federal government. Functioning in accordance with general policies determined by the Academy, the Council has become the principal operating agency of both the National Academy of Sciences and the National Academy of Engineering in providing services to the government, the public, and the scientific and engineering communities. The Council is administered jointly by both Academies and the Institute of Medicine. Dr. Ralph J. Cicerone and Dr. Charles M. Vest are chair and vice chair, respectively, of the National Research Council.


www.national-academies.org

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×

COMMITTEE TO ASSESS PROCESS SAFETY METRICS FOR THE BLUE GRASS AND PUEBLO CHEMICAL AGENT DESTRUCTION PILOT PLANTS

OTIS A. SHELTON, Chair,

Praxair, Inc., Danbury, Connecticut

ROBERT A. BEAUDET,

University of Southern California, Pasadena

MAURICIO FUTRAN (NAE), Independent Consultant,

Westfield, New Jersey

J. ROBERT GIBSON,

Gibson Consulting, LLC, Wilmington, Delaware

RANDAL J. KELLER,

Murray State University, Murray, Kentucky

TIM OVERTON,

TOPS Consulting, Angleton, Texas

CAROL A. PALMIOTTO,

E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Company, Wilmington, Delaware

STYRON N. POWERS,

U.S. Foodservice, Rosemont, Illinois

Staff

BRUCE A. BRAUN, Director

JAMES C. MYSKA, Senior Research Associate

DEANNA P. SPARGER, Program Administrative Coordinator

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×

BOARD ON ARMY SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY

ALAN H. EPSTEIN, Chair,

Pratt & Whitney, East Hartford, Connecticut

DAVID M. MADDOX, Vice Chair, Independent Consultant,

Arlington, Virginia

DUANE ADAMS,

Carnegie Mellon University (retired), Arlington, Virginia

ILESANMI ADESIDA,

University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign

RAJ AGGARWAL,

University of Iowa, Coralville

EDWARD C. BRADY,

Strategic Perspectives, Inc., Fort Lauderdale, Florida

L. REGINALD BROTHERS,

BAE Systems, Arlington, Virginia

JAMES CARAFANO,

The Heritage Foundation, Washington, D.C.

W. PETER CHERRY, Independent Consultant,

Ann Arbor, Michigan

EARL H. DOWELL,

Duke University, Durham, North Carolina

RONALD P. FUCHS, Independent Consultant,

Seattle, Washington

W. HARVEY GRAY, Independent Consultant,

Oak Ridge, Tennessee

CARL GUERRERI,

Electronic Warfare Associates, Inc., Herndon, Virginia

JOHN H. HAMMOND,

Lockheed Martin Corporation (retired), Fairfax, Virginia

RANDALL W. HILL, JR.,

University of Southern California Institute for Creative Technologies, Marina del Rey

MARY JANE IRWIN,

Pennsylvania State University, University Park

ROBIN L. KEESEE, Independent Consultant,

Fairfax, Virginia

ELLIOT D. KIEFF,

Channing Laboratory, Harvard University, Boston, Massachusetts

LARRY LEHOWICZ,

Quantum Research International, Arlington, Virginia

WILLIAM L. MELVIN,

Georgia Tech Research Institute, Smyrna

ROBIN MURPHY,

Texas A&M University, College Station

SCOTT E. PARAZYNSKI,

The Methodist Hospital Research Institute, Houston, Texas

RICHARD R. PAUL, Independent Consultant,

Bellevue, Washington

JEAN D. REED, Independent Consultant,

Arlington, Virginia

LEON E. SALOMON, Independent Consultant,

Gulfport, Florida

JONATHAN M. SMITH,

University of Pennsylvania, Philadelphia

MARK J.T. SMITH,

Purdue University, West Lafayette, Indiana

MICHAEL A. STROSCIO,

University of Illinois, Chicago

JOSEPH YAKOVAC, JVM LLC,

Hampton, Virginia

Staff

BRUCE A. BRAUN, Director

CHRIS JONES, Financial Associate

DEANNA P. SPARGER, Program Administrative Coordinator

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×

Preface

The Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives program was mandated to use nonincineration technologies to destroy the chemical weapons stockpiles at the Pueblo Chemical Depot (PCD) in Colorado and the Blue Grass Army Depot (BGAD) in Kentucky. These two storage sites together account for about 10 percent of the original U.S. chemical agent stockpile that is in the process of being destroyed in accordance with the international Chemical Weapons Convention treaty. Disposal operations at six other sites in the continental United States and Johnston Island in the Pacific near Hawaii have already destroyed over 80 percent of the stockpile. Incineration technology was used by the now closed disposal facility on Johnston Island, and at a facility in Pine Bluff, Arkansas, which has completed operations and has entered closure. Chemical neutralization (hydrolysis) technology was used to destroy bulk mustard agent and VX nerve agent at the now closed facilities in Aberdeen, Maryland, and Newport, Indiana, respectively. Disposal campaigns at the three other currently operating facilities, which use incineration technology, are nearing completion.

The Pueblo site contains the larger portion of the remaining stockpile inventory in the form of various mustard agent projectiles. While the Blue Grass inventory is relatively small, it is more diverse and contains both mustard agent in various projectiles and the nerve agents GB and VX in various projectiles and M55 rockets. The two facilities being built at these sites, the Pueblo and Blue Grass Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants (PCAPP and BGCAPP, respectively), will use chemical neutralization to destroy chemical agent, followed by different downstream processes to treat the resulting waste streams. PCAPP will use biotreatment to treat waste streams from chemical agent disposal, and BGCAPP will use supercritical water oxidation. PCAPP and BGCAPP will also employ a number of pieces of first-of-a-kind equipment. Both facilities have been designed using established engineering codes and principles and have incorporated lessons learned from the operation of earlier chemical agent disposal operations to ensure safe operation. PCAPP is currently under construction and is planned to start agent disposal operations in 2014. BGCAPP is also under construction, with operations to commence in 2018.

As part of its focus on safe operation of the planned facilities, the Program Manager for Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives asked the National Research Council (NRC) to conduct a study to offer guidance on the application of process safety metrics at PCAPP and BGCAPP. The committee that was assembled by the NRC held a number of meetings, virtual meetings, and teleconferences. It also visited the offices of staff working on the PCAPP and BGCAPP projects.

Among the process safety considerations discussed in this report is the applicability of the James Reason barrier model’s concept of layers of protection to the chemical processes being designed at PCAPP and BGCAPP. Also discussed extensively is the use of leading and lagging process safety metrics1 that could provide feedback on the effectiveness of controls to mitigate risks and minimize consequences of potential

1

“Leading metric” and “lagging metric” are defined in Appendix A.

Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×

incidents and, it is hoped, prevent incidents that might otherwise occur. Several recommendations are made to facilitate the development and application of process safety metrics at both sites.

As chair of this committee, I want to express my sincere thanks to the members of this committee. Their insights on safety culture, especially as it relates to process safety management, were invaluable in executing the statement of task. James Myska, senior research associate at the Board on Army Science and Technology, assisted Bruce Braun, director of the Board on Army Science and Technology, in running this study. Mr. Myska excelled at keeping the committee focused and ensuring that work was accomplished in a timely manner. C.T. Anderson, a safety and surety engineer at the Program Manager for Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives, was very helpful in providing timely responses to numerous committee requests for information. Raj K. Malhotra, deputy, Risk Directorate at the Chemical Materials Agency (CMA), approved committee access to records of incidents at CMA facilities to identify incident casual factors. This access was instrumental in allowing the committee to identify several leading process safety metrics. Lastly, I want to thank Deanna Sparger and Nia Johnson for their administrative and research support to the committee. Without their assistance, the preparation of the report would have been much more difficult.


Otis A. Shelton, Chair

Committee to Assess Process Safety Metrics for the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×

Acknowledgment of Reviewers

This report has been reviewed in draft form by individuals chosen for their diverse perspectives and technical expertise, in accordance with procedures approved by the National Research Council’s (NRC’s) Report Review Committee. The purpose of this independent review is to provide candid and critical comments that will assist the institution in making its published report as sound as possible and to ensure that the report meets institutional standards for objectivity, evidence, and responsiveness to the study charge. The review comments and draft manuscript remain confidential to protect the integrity of the deliberative process. We wish to thank the following individuals for their review of this report:

Scott Berger, American Institute of Chemical Engineers Center for Chemical Process Safety;

Deborah L. Grubbe, Operations and Safety Solutions, LLC;

Alexander MacLachlan, NAE, E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co. (retired);

M. Sam Mannan, Mary Kay O’Connor Process Safety Center;

James F. Mathis, NAE, Exxon Corporation (retired);

George W. Parshall, NAS, E.I. du Pont de Nemours and Co. (retired);

Ian Travers, United Kingdom Health and Safety Executive; and

Ronald Willey, Northeastern University.

Although the reviewers listed above have provided many constructive comments and suggestions, they were not asked to endorse the conclusions or recommendations nor did they see the final draft of the report before its release. The review of this report was overseen by Elisabeth M. Drake, NAE, MIT Laboratory for Energy and the Environment. Appointed by the National Research Council, she was responsible for making certain that an independent examination of this report was carried out in accordance with institutional procedures and that all review comments were carefully considered. Responsibility for the final content of this report rests entirely with the authoring committee and the institution.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page xiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×

Tables, Figures, and Box

TABLES

S-1

 

First-of-a-Kind Equipment and Processes That Could Pose Significant Challenges for PCAPP and BGCAPP,

 

2

2-1

 

Physical Properties of Nerve Agents,

 

14

2-2

 

Physical Properties of Mustard Agents,

 

14

2-3

 

Chemical Weapons Stockpile Stored at PCD,

 

17

2-4

 

Chemical Weapons Stockpile Stored at BGAD,

 

18

2-5

 

First-of-a-Kind Equipment and Processes That Could Pose Significant Challenges for PCAPP and BGCAPP,

 

21

3-1

 

Frequency of Causal Factors in the 81 Chemical Events Reviewed by the Chemical Events Committee in 2002,

 

24

3-2

 

Frequency of Causal Factors in the 121 Events at Chemical Agent Disposal Facilities Since 2001,

 

24

FIGURES

2-1

 

A 105-mm howitzer projectile,

 

15

2-2

 

A 155-mm howitzer projectile,

 

15

2-3

 

A 4.2-inch mortar cartridge,

 

15

2-4

 

An 8-inch projectile,

 

16

2-5

 

An M55 rocket,

 

16

2-6

 

PCAPP process flow chart,

 

17

2-7

 

BGCAPP process flow chart,

 

19

2-8

 

Overview of the systemization process,

 

22

4-1

 

Hierarchy of leading and lagging metrics illustrated by the James Reason barrier model (left) and the Pyramid model of incident categories (right),

 

28

4-2

 

Illustration of the Swiss cheese model,

 

28

4-3

 

Process flow diagram for agent neutralization,

 

33

4-4

 

Diagram of EBH,

 

34

BOX

4-1

 

Definitions of Tier 1-4 Process Safety Events from API Recommended Practice (RP) 754,

 

29

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×

This page intentionally left blank.

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×

Acronyms and Abbreviations

ACWA Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives

ANCDF Anniston Chemical Agent Disposal Facility

ANR agent neutralization reactor

ANS agent neutralization system

ANSI American National Standards Institute

APB agent processing building

API American Petroleum Institute

BGAD Blue Grass Army Depot

BGCAPP Blue Grass Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plant

BRS brine reduction system

BTA biotreatment area

CAM cavity access machine

CCPS Center for Chemical Process Safety

CMA Chemical Materials Agency

CSB Chemical Safety Board

EBH energetics batch hydrolyzer

EDT explosive destruction technology

ENR energetics neutralization reactor

ERB enhanced reconfiguration building

FOAK first of a kind

GB a nerve agent, also known as sarin

H mustard agent

HD distilled mustard agent

HSE United Kingdom Health and Safety Executive

HT mustard agent with an additive to lower its freezing point

IOD integrated operational demonstration

JACADS Johnston Atoll Chemical Agent Disposal System

LOPC loss of primary containment

LPMD linear projectile mortar disassembly

MOC management of change

MPT metal parts treater

MSM munitions storage magazine

MTU munitions treatment unit

MWS munitions washout system

NRC National Research Council

ORR operational readiness review

OSHA Occupational Safety and Health Administration

OTE offgas treatment system for EBH

OTM offgas treatment system for MPT

OTS offgas treatment system

PCAPP Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plant

PCD Pueblo Chemical Depot

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×

PMACWA Program Manager for Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives

PMD projectile mortar disassembly

PSI process safety incident

PSM process safety metrics

RCM rocket cutter machine

RO reverse osmosis

RSM rocket shear machine

SCWO supercritical water oxidation

SDU supplemental decontamination unit

SFT shipping and firing tube

SOP standard operating procedure

VX a nerve agent

WRS water recovery system

Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R1
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R2
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R3
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R4
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R5
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R6
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R7
Page viii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R8
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R9
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R10
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R11
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R12
Page xiii Cite
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R13
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R14
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R15
Suggested Citation:"Front Matter." National Research Council. 2011. Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants. Washington, DC: The National Academies Press. doi: 10.17226/13041.
×
Page R16
Next: Summary »
Assessment of Approaches for Using Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants Get This Book
×
Buy Paperback | $21.00 Buy Ebook | $16.99
MyNAP members save 10% online.
Login or Register to save!
Download Free PDF

The Department of Defense, through the Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives program, is currently in the process of constructing two full-scale pilot plants at the Pueblo Chemical Depot in Colorado and the Blue Grass Army Depot in Kentucky to destroy the last two remaining inventories of chemical weapons in the U.S. stockpile. These two storage sites together account for about 10 percent of the original U.S. chemical agent stockpile that is in the process of being destroyed in accordance with the international Chemical Weapons Convention treaty. Unlike their predecessors, these facilities will use neutralization technologies to destroy agents contained within rockets, projectiles, and mortar rounds, requiring the use of specially designed equipment.

As part of its focus on safe operation of the planned facilities, the Program Manager for Assembled Chemical Weapons Alternatives asked the National Research Council (NRC) to conduct a study to offer guidance on the application of process safety metrics at the Pueblo Chemical Depot and Blue Grass Army Depot. Process safety is a disciplined framework for managing the integrity of operating systems, processes and personnel handling hazardous substances, and operations by applying good design principles, engineering, and operating practices. Process Safety Metrics at the Blue Grass and Pueblo Chemical Agent Destruction Pilot Plants discusses the use of leading and lagging process safety metrics that could provide feedback on the effectiveness of controls to mitigate risks and minimize consequences of potential incidents.

The book makes several recommendations that will facilitate the development and application of process safety metrics at both sites.

  1. ×

    Welcome to OpenBook!

    You're looking at OpenBook, NAP.edu's online reading room since 1999. Based on feedback from you, our users, we've made some improvements that make it easier than ever to read thousands of publications on our website.

    Do you want to take a quick tour of the OpenBook's features?

    No Thanks Take a Tour »
  2. ×

    Show this book's table of contents, where you can jump to any chapter by name.

    « Back Next »
  3. ×

    ...or use these buttons to go back to the previous chapter or skip to the next one.

    « Back Next »
  4. ×

    Jump up to the previous page or down to the next one. Also, you can type in a page number and press Enter to go directly to that page in the book.

    « Back Next »
  5. ×

    Switch between the Original Pages, where you can read the report as it appeared in print, and Text Pages for the web version, where you can highlight and search the text.

    « Back Next »
  6. ×

    To search the entire text of this book, type in your search term here and press Enter.

    « Back Next »
  7. ×

    Share a link to this book page on your preferred social network or via email.

    « Back Next »
  8. ×

    View our suggested citation for this chapter.

    « Back Next »
  9. ×

    Ready to take your reading offline? Click here to buy this book in print or download it as a free PDF, if available.

    « Back Next »
Stay Connected!