3

Hazard Identification Methods and Results

There are hazards associated with any activity, but analysts cannot begin to evaluate them until they know what the hazards are. As defined previously, a hazard is a physical or chemical characteristic of a material, system, process, or plant that has the potential for causing harm. Thus, hazard identification involves two key tasks: (1) identification of specific undesirable consequences and (2) identification of material, system, process, and plant characteristics that could produce those consequences. The first task is relatively easy, but it is essential because it defines the scope of the second task. Undesirable consequences can be broadly classified as human impacts, environmental impacts, or economic impacts. Within these broad classifications, there may be specific consequence categories as illustrated in Figure 3.1. Each of these categories can be further subdivided by the type of damage they

Adverse Consequences

Human Impacts
Consumer injuries Community injuries On-site personnel injuries Unit personnel injuries Loss of employment Psychological effects

Environmental Impacts
Off-site contamination
air

Economic Impacts
Property damage Inventory loss Production outage Poor product quality/ yield Lost market share Legal liability Negative image

water soil On-site contamination

air

water
sou

Figure 3.1 Adverse consequences resulting from process hazards.

result in (e.g., toxic exposure, thermal exposure, overpressure, mechanical force, radiation, electrical shock). Thus, the more precisely the consequences of interest are defined, the easier it will be to identify hazards. For example, there may be a thousand hazards with potential human impacts, but only two that could result in serious off-site injuries. Once the consequences of interest are defined, the analyst can identify those system, process, and plant characteristics that could be a hazard of interest. It is essential that the hazard identification technique be thorough enough to identify all the important hazards. However, if the approach does not provide some discrimination between more important and less important hazards, then subsequent hazard evaluation attempts will be overwhelmed by the sheer number of potential hazards to be examined. Common methods for hazard identification include analyzing process material properties and process conditions, reviewing organization and industry process experience, developing interaction matrixes, and applying hazard evaluation techniques. 3.1 Analyzing Material Properties and Process Conditions There is a body of knowledge on which any proposed or existing process is based. An important part of this process knowledge is data on all of the chemicals used or produced in the process. This information is the foundation of all hazard identification efforts. Typical material properties that are useful in hazard identification are listed in Tkble 3.1. In addition to the information an organization has developed about a specific material, there are many other public information resources (such as those listed in Tkble 3.2 and in the reference section of this chapter) that can provide information about material properties.1"4 Some of the best resources are the chemical manufacturers and/or suppliers; they can provide product literature, access to their chemical experts, and material safety data sheets (MSDSs). In addition, there may be a specific industrial group or association, like the Chlorine Institute, that will provide detailed information about safely handling specific types of chemicals. Even if there is not a specific industrial group, there may be information available from professional and industrial organizations like the American Institute of Chemical Engineers, the American Petroleum Institute, or the Chemical Manufacturers Association. There are many published sources of chemical data. Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials, Seventh Edition is one frequently used reference, as are the databases maintained by the Chemical Abstracts Service and the AIChE Design Institute for Physical Property Data (DIPPR).5"9 Government agencies and funded organizations like the U.S. Coast Guard, the Environmental Protection Agency, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and the World Bank have also published chemical data.' 11 Specific legal limits applicable to certain chemicals are included in federal, state, and local legislation and regulations.12 An initial hazard identification can be performed by simply comparing the material properties available from these diverse resources to the consequences of interest. For example, if an analyst is concerned about the consequences of a fire, he or she can identify which process materials are flammable or combustible. The analyst could then classify all of those materials as fire hazards and perform more detailed hazard evaluations.

Tkbte3.1 Common Material Property Data for Hazard Identification

Acute toxicity inhalation (e.g., LCLO) oral (e.g., LD50) dermal Chronic toxicity inhalation oral dermal Carcinogenicity Mutagenicity Tbratogenicity Exposure limits TLV PEL STEL IDLH ERPG Biodegradability Aquatic toxicity Persistence in the environment Odor threshold Physical properties freezing point coefficient of expansion boiling point solubility Physical properties (cont'd) vapor pressure density or specific volume corrosivity/erosivity heat capacity specific heats Reactivity process materials desired reaction(s) side reaction(s) decomposition reaction(s) kinetics materials of construction raw material impurities contaminants (air, water, rust, lubricants, etc.) decomposition products incompatible chemicals pyrophoric materials Stability shock temperature light polymerization Flammability/Explosivity LEL/LFL UEL/UFL dust explosion parameters minimum ignition energy flash point autoignition temperature energy production

Process conditions also create hazards or exacerbate the hazards associated with the materials in a process. For example, water is not classified as an explosion hazard based on its material properties alone. However, if a process is operated at a temperature and pressure that exceeds water's boiling point, then a rapid introduction of water presents the potential for a steam explosion. Similarly, a heavy hydrocarbon may be difficult to ignite at ambient conditions, but if the process is operated above the hydrocarbon's flash point temperature, a spill of the material may ignite. Therefore, it is not sufficient to consider only the material properties when identifying hazards; the process conditions must also be considered.

Tkble3.2 Professional and Industry Organizations Offering Process Safety Enhancement Resources
OrgantTatinfl Selected Examples of Programs Offered Health and Safety Referral Service Chemical Properties Referral Service Chemical Safety Manual for Small Business Hazard Communication Standard Information Laboratory Safety and Design Information Laboratory Safety Short Courses Center for Chemical Process Safety Design Institute for Emergency Relief Systems (DIERS) Design Institute for Physical Property Data (DIPPR) Loss Prevention Symposia (Health and Safety Division) Continuing Education Short Courses Center for Waste Reduction Tfechnology Emergency Response Planning Guidelines Workplace Environmental Exposure Level Guides Hygiene Guides (Tbxic Properties Surveys) Professional Development Seminars

ACS American Chemical Society 1155 16th St., N.W. Wishington, DC 20036 (202) 872-4600

AIChE American Institute of Chemical Engineers 345 E. 47th Street New York, NY 10017 (212) 705-7338

AIHA American Industrial Hygiene Association 345 White Pond Drive Akron, OH 44320 (216) 873-2442 Air and Waste Association P.O. Box 2861 Pittsburgh, PA 15230 (412) 232-3444 ANSI American National Standards Institute 11 West 42nd Street, 13th Floor New York, NY 10036 (212) 642-4900

<

<

< <

Exchange of Technical and Managerial Information About Air Pollution Control and Waste Management Books, Journals, and Videotapes Consensus Standards on Various Subjects Special Publications and Handbook Conference and Seminars on Emergency Technologies and Standards Development Monthly Newsletter - ANSI Newsletter

API American Paper Institute 1250 Connecticut Avenue N.W, Suite 210 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 463-2420

Process Safety Management Seminars

Source: Adapted from Tbble 14-1, Guidelines for Technical Management of Chemical Process Safety, AIChE, New York, 1989.

Tkble3.2 (cont'd)
Organization
API

Selected Examples of Programs Offered Process Hazards Management Task Force Process Hazards and Process Safety Seminars Technical Standards and Recommended Practices (e.g., Fire Protection, Facility Maintenance) Equipment Inspection Guides Operator and Maintenance Iteming Recommended Practice (RP-750) for Management of Process Hazards Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code National Board (Repair of Pressure Vessels and Safety Valves) Non-Destructive Testing Professional Development Courses System of Accreditation for Manufacturers of Equipment Tbchnical Publications Industry Advisory Board Continuing Education Courses in System Safety and Accident Prevention Seminars Safety Management Hazardous Waste Hydrogen Sulfide Risk Management Workshops Chemical Process Safety Audio-Visual Programs Introduction to System Safety Recognition of Accident Potential Standards Development Standard Technology Iteming Courses Continuing Tfechnical Education Publication Information Center CHETAH Program for Estimating Physical Properties
National Chemical Referral and Informational Center (including CHEMTREC) Community Awareness and Emergency Response (CAER) Management Guidelines Process Safety Management Survey Manager's Guide to Quantitative Risk Assessment Manager's Guide to Reducing Human Errors Facility Inspection and Safety Program Evaluation Responsible Care

American Petroleum Institute 1220 L. St., N.W. Washington, DC 20005 (202) 682-8000

ASME American Society of Mechanical Engineers 345 E. 47th Street New York, NY 10017 (212) 705-7722

ASSE American Society of Safety Engineers 1800 E. Oakton Street DesPlaines, IL 60018 (708) 692-4121

ASTM American Society for Testing and Materials 1916 Race Street Philadelphia, PA 19103-1187 (215) 299-5400
CMA Chemical Manufacturers Association 2501 M Street, N.W. Washington, DC 20037 (202) 887-1100

Tkblc3,2 (cont'd)
Organizatioo Chemical Industry Safety and Health Council Alembic House 93 Albert Embankment London SE1 7TU Chemical Industries Association, Ltd. Alembic House 93 Albert Embankment London SE1 7TU Chlorine Institute, Inc. 2001 L Street N.W, Suite 5 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 775-2790 Compressed Gas Association 1725 Jefferson Davis Hwy., Suite 104 Arlington, VA 22202 (703) 979-0900 FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency 500 Street Washington, DC 20472 (202) 646-3923 Fertilizer Institute 501 2nd Street N.E. Wishington, DC 20002 (202) 675-8250 HMAC Hazardous Materials Advisory Council 1110 Vermont Ave. N.W, Suite 250 Washington, DC 20005 (202) 728-1460 Selected Examples of Programs Offered Codes of Practice for Chemicals with Major Hazards: Chlorine, Ethylene Dichloride, Ethylene Oxide, Hydrogen Chloride (Anhydrous), and Phosgene

Code of Practice for the Storage of Anhydrous Ammonia

Guidelines for Chlorine Storage and Handling Publications on Enhancing Safety in Manufacturing, Shipping, Handling, and Storage of Chlorine Guidelines for Compressed Gas Storage and Handling Iteming, Seminars, and Videos Handbook on Compressed Gas Safety Posters Handbook of Chemical Hazard Analysis Procedures Emergency Management Activities Disaster Assistance Coordination Public Awareness and Education Programs Emergency Management Institute Co-Sponsor of the Annual Fertilizer Safety School

Publications of Standards Monthly Newsletter Hazardous Material 181 Docket Basic and Advanced Courses on: Transportation of Hazardous Materials and \toste FAA Certification Course on Air Transportation of Dangerous Goods (FAA-ICAO Approved) Educational Services Video Conferences Self-Study Courses

.2 (cont'd)
Organization IChemE The Institution of Chemical Engineers 165-171 Railway Terrace Rugby, Warks CV 21 3HQ (0788) 78214 TX: 311780 IEEE Institute of Electrical/Electronic Engineers 345 E. 47th Street New York, NY 10017-2394 (212) 705-7900 NACE National Association of Corrosion Engineers 1440 South Creek Drive Houston, TX 77084 (713) 492-0535 Selected Examples of Programs Offered Loss Prevention Bulletin (Case Histories) Information Exchange Training Modules Conference on Major Accident Prevention

IEEE Transactions on Reliability Special Issues: Chemical Process Reliability, Safety, and Risk Management Journals and Conference Publications Tfechnical Activities Guide

Guidelines for Protecting Piping and Equipment from Corrosion

NAM National Association of Manufacturers 1331 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Suite 1500 North Lobby Washington, DC 20004-1703 (202) 637-3000

Case Histories of Accident Causes and Prevention Computer Analysis of Accidents (NAM Safe System) Process Hazard Management Standard Review Process Hazard Task Force Hazard Training Task Force Risk Management Committee

NFPA National Fire Protection Association One Batterymarch Park Quincy, MA 02269 (617) 770-3000

Consensus Standards Related to Fire and Explosion Prevention Fire Safety Seminars Training Materials

NICS National Institute for Chemical Studies 2300 MacCorkle Ave., S.E. Charleston, WV 25304 (304) 346-6264

Chronic Health Effects Study Voluntary Reduction of Routine Emissions Community Safety Assessment Program Emergency Response Database Citizens Guide for Environmental Issues

Ikble3.2 (cont'd)
Organization Selected Examples erf Programs Offered CAMEO software for emergency response management Accident Prevention Manual for Industrial Operations Safety Video Programs Instruments and Controls Fire Safety Hazard Communications Accident Investigation Safety Training Institute Newsletters Injury Data

NSC National Safety Council 444 N. Michigan Avenue Chicago, IL 60611-3911 (312) 527-4800

SOCMA Synthetic Organic Chemical Manufacturers Association 1330 Connecticut Ave. N.W, Suite 300 Washington, DC 20036 (202) 659-0060

Worker Training and Certification

SPI The Society of the Plastics Industry 1275 Street N.W, Suite 400 \\fcshington, DC 20005 (202) 371-5200

Publications on Plastics Safety, Accident Prevention, and Health Hazards Seminars and Workshops

SRA Society for Risk Analysis 8000 Westpark Dr., Suite 130 McLean, VA 22102 (703) 790-1745 SSS System Safety Society 5 Export Drive, Suite A Sterling, VA 22170 (703) 450-0310

Conferences on Risk Analysis Journals

System Safety Society Journal Standards for System Safety Educational Programs Co-Sponsor of Conferences and Symposia Programs to Broaden the Application of System Safety

Tible 3.2 (cont'd)

Organization TAPPI Tfechnical Association of Pulp & Paper Industry Technology Park/Atlanta P.O. Box 105113 Atlanta, GA 30348-9990 (404) 446-1400 Selected Examples of Programs Offered Publications TAPPI Journal Conference Proceedings Technical Information Self-Study Courses Videotapes Human Resource Development Committee Conferences, Seminars, and Short Courses

World Bank International Bank for Reconstruction and Development 1818 H Street, N.W. \\fcshington, DC 20433 (202) 458-1234

Techniques for Assessing Industrial Hazards: A Manual (Stock No. 10779)

United States Coast Guard Washington, DC 20593 (202) 426-9568

Chemical Hazard Response Information System (CHRIS)

United States Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Administration Wishington, DC 20210 (800) 488-7087

Safety and Health Guide for the Chemical Indsutry Consultation Services for Employers STAR Program

United States Department of Transportation Washington, DC 20590 (202) 366-4000

DOT Guidelines

United States Environmental Protection Agency 401 M Street S.W. Washington, DC 20460 (202) 260-2090

Hazardous Material Guidelines Technical Guidance for Hazard Analysis, NRT-1

Considering the process conditions may also enable an analyst to eliminate some materials from further evaluation as significant hazards. For example, a material may have a flash point greater than 400 If the material is only present at ambient temperature and atmospheric pressure, then it may not be considered a significant fire hazard that warrants further evaluation. However, when identifying hazards, it is important to consider both normal and abnormal process conditions. Consider the following three cases: A pyrophoric material is normally processed with an inert gas blanket. The material warrants further evaluation as a fire hazard because there are many potential abnormal events that could expose the material to air. A combustible liquid is processed at high pressure. The material warrants further evaluation as a fire hazard because it could create a flammable mist if accidentally sprayed into the air. A monomer is normally processed at relatively low temperatures and pressures. The material warrants further evaluation as an explosion hazard because it could undergo uncontrolled polymerization if a high temperature upset occurred.

These examples show how consideration of material properties and process conditions must be combined to identify process hazards. This approach is relatively quick and easy, and it can be applied to both new and existing processes.

3.2 Using Experience

Whenever possible, a company should use its own experience to supplement the hazard identification process.7'*3 Problems that have occurred demonstrate where hazards exist. However, basing hazard identification solely upon a company's (or even the industry's) experience is never fully satisfactory because many hazards may be overlooked. Good experience may only demonstrate that the hazards have been adequately controlled, not that hazards do not exist Assuming that something cannot happen simply because it has not happened is a very poor approach to hazard identification. The proper use of experience helps build a base of knowledge about the process that can be used in hazard identification activities. Analysts can always use knowledge of basic chemistry as the starting point. Then laboratory experiments may reveal the basic physical properties of a compound, its toxic effects, and its reaction kinetics. Computer software, such as ASTM's CHETAH1* program, can be used to predict the heats of reactions as well as the stability of new compounds.14 Pilot plant experience may reveal unexpected byproducts of the reaction, show that the process conditions must be changed to achieve optimum performance, and corroborate speculation on the effects of typical process contaminants.15 Even decommissioning a unit can add important process experience because it may reveal conditions that were not apparent (or not accessible) in the system during normal operation or unit shutdowns (e.g., evidence of incipient metal fatigue in a process application

Ikbte 33 Examples of Potentially Hazardous Chemical Compounds

Acids Aldehydes Alkaline metals Alkyl metals Amines Ammonia and ammonium compounds Azo and diazo compounds and hydrazines Carbonyls Chlorates and perchlorates Cyanides Epoxides Ethers Halogens Hydrocarbons Hydroxides Isocyanates Mercaptans Nitro compounds organic Organophosphates Peroxides and hydroperoxides Phenols and cresols Silanes and chlorosilanes

previously unknown to be vulnerable to cyclic fatigue failure). Tkble 3.3 lists several classes of chemical compounds that, based on industry experience, would warrant investigation as hazards. If the hazards of a well-established process are being investigated, then the analyst can review the operating experience of similar full-scale units. Where have emissions occurred? Why have emergency shutdowns occurred? What caused unscheduled outages? The answers to these and similar questions may point out hazards that are not obvious from an abstract review of the material properties and process conditions. If the organization's experience has been documented, it should be used just like any other source of data for hazard identification. If the experience has not been recorded, then it may be necessary to assemble a team of knowledgeable personnel to participate in the hazard identification process. It is usually more efficient if other hazard identification activities precede this team's review. Then the team can simply confirm that their experience matches, contradicts, or does not address the information gathered from other sources and they can point out any additional hazards that they have observed in the existing system(s). Even if the team members do not have specific experience with the chemical(s) of interest, they may have experience with similar materials that represent similar hazards.

33

Developing Interaction Matrixes

The interaction matrix technique, a simple tool for identifying interactions among specific parameters (including materials, energy sources, environmental conditions, etc.), is a structured approach to hazard identification. As a practical matter, the technique is usually limited to two parameters (as illustrated in Figure 3.2) because the number of potential interactions increases as more and more simultaneous interactions are considered. However, there is nothing to prevent the analyst from adding a third parameter, such as stable mixtures of chemicals, to show higher order interactions. For example, in Figure 3.2, Mixture 1 might be a mixture of Chemicals and D, and the table would show the interaction of Mixture CD with

Chemical A, Mixture CD with Contaminant 1, etc. Or the analyst could build an n-dimensional matrix if he or she believes many higher-order interactions are potentially significant and has the resources to investigate them in detail. Tb construct an interaction matrix, include all the materials of interest on each axis. Normally the matrix will exhibit bilateral symmetry, so it is only necessary to complete half the matrix (the unshaded area in the matrix portion of Figure 3.2) because Chemical A interacting with Chemical is the same as Chemical interacting with Chemical A. (However, Chemical A interacting with itself is a unique, potentially important reaction.) The matrix parameters should not be limited just to chemicals because other parameters could also introduce hazards to

Chemical A Chemical Chemical Z Pressure 1 Temperature 1 Temperature 2 Humidity 1 Pipe material Vessel material Gasket material

Contaminant 1 Contaminant 2 Acute Exposure Limit Chronic Exposure Limit Environmental Release Limit Waste Disposal Limit Figure 3.2 Typical interaction matrix.

Table 3.4 Other Parameters Commonly Used in an Interaction Matrix Process conditions such as temperature, pressure, or static charge Environmental conditions such as temperature, humidity, and dust Materials of construction such as carbon steel, stainless steel, and asbestos gaskets Common contaminants such as air, water, rust, salt, and lubricants Contamination from other materials handled in the same process equipment or area Human health effects including short-term and long-term exposure limits Environmental effects including odor thresholds and aquatic toxicity limits Legal limits for inventory, spills, or waste disposal

people or the environment. (For example, a compound might decompose explosively if exposed to temperatures greater than 100C.) Table 3.4 lists other parameters that may reveal potential undesirable consequences in an interaction matrix. Normally, it is adequate to list such additional parameters on only one axis of the matrix because analysts are interested only in the parameter's interaction with the process materials, not with other parameters. When constructing an interaction matrix, it is important to define what process conditions are being considered. Sometimes it is necessary to construct several interaction matrixes to account for both normal and abnormal process conditions. If only one matrix is constructed, the analyst should at least note the potential for hazardous interactions under other process conditions. Once the matrix is constructed, the analyst should examine the potential consequences associated with each interaction represented in the matrix (each rowcolumn intersection). If the consequences of the interactions are unknown, additional research or experimentation may be necessary. The type and severity of known consequences can be noted in the appropriate cell(s) of the matrix or in footnotes. (A single interaction may produce more than one type of consequence.) The results of the interaction matrix can then be compared to the consequences of interest to identify potential hazards that warrant further evaluation. Examples of interaction matrixes are included in Appendix A and in the references at the end of this chapter.4'9'11'16 3.4 Using Hazard Evaluation Techniques to Identify Hazards Many of the hazard evaluation techniques discussed in Chapter 4 can be adapted for hazard identification purposes. However, four of these techniques Checklist Analysis, What-If Analysis, What-ItfChecklist Analysis, and HAZOP Analysis are most commonly used for hazard identification. All of these approaches function with the same process knowledge and data (described in Table 3.1) used in the previous identification techniques. The results obtained are dictated by the type and quality of information used.

The Checklist Analysis technique provides a list of questions and issues that should be resolved for each chemical in the process and for the process as a whole. (Tkble 3.5 lists typical checklist items used for hazard identification.) The drawback of this technique is that no checklist can anticipate every potentially hazardous situation. The most thorough checklists also tend to be the longest, which makes them very tedious to complete. Nevertheless, checklists are appealing because they can be customized for a particular process or company and because they help ensure that analysts will review processes consistently. As long as the analysts are given the freedom to add their own insights to the review, checklists can be a very powerful hazard identification tool. The What-If and HAZOP Analysis techniques allow experts to use their experience more creatively. Each technique offers a different way for questions to be focused. Both methods, however, challenge the review team to create and answer a series of questions, thereby revealing the potential for undesirable consequences. Because the What-If and HAZOP Analysis techniques are creative processes, they are more likely to uncover unique or unexpected hazards in processes. However, unless the team leader is highly skilled and the team members have appropriate experience, important hazards may be overlooked. Thus, many companies combine Checklist Analysis and brainstorming approaches to take advantage of the rigor and consistency of the Checklist Analysis while retaining the flexibility and creativity of the brainstorming techniques. In general, it is not efficient to use these techniques for the sole purpose of hazard identification when there is adequate information for the team to perform both hazard identification and evaluation. However, when information is limited, as may be the case for newly developed processes or conceptual designs of new units, hazard evaluation techniques can be used to effectively identify hazards as long as the hazard analysts limit their study to a fairly general level of detail. The WhatIf/Checklist Analysis technique is the most widely used combination for hazard identification and evaluation and is described in Chapter 6; however, checklists can be combined with any of the methods covered in the Guidelines.

Tkblc3.5 Examples of Checklist Questions Used in Hazard Identification

Is the material's flash point below 100 F? Is the material shock sensitive? Does the material polymerize? If so, what accelerates polymerization? Does the material react with water? Which material spills are reportable? Is the material toxic if inhaled? Does the process operate above any material's autoignition temperature? Is the vapor space of any vessel in the flammable range?

 3.6 Typical Hazard Identification Results List of flammable materials List of toxic materials and by-products List of hazardous reactions List of chemicals and quantities that would be reportable if released to the environment List of hazards (e.g., toxicity, flammability) associated with a system List of contaminants and process conditions that lead to a runaway reaction

3.5 Hazard Identification Results Usually hazard identification efforts result in simple lists of materials or conditions that could result in hazardous situations (such as those in Thble 3.6). An analyst can use these results to define the appropriate scope and select the appropriate technique for performing an HE study. In general, the scope and complexity of subsequent HE studies will be directly proportional to the number and type of hazards identified and the depth to which they are understood. And if the extent of some hazards is unknown (e.g., the effect of an incompatible heat transfer fluid leaking into the process), additional research or testing may be required before the hazard evaluation can proceed.

References 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. NFPA 704, Identification of the Fire Hazards of Materials, National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA, 1989. R. King and J. Magid, Industrial Hazard and Safety Handbook, NewnesButterworth's, London, 1979. M. Sittig, Handbook of Toxic and Hazardous Chemicals and Carcinogens, 2d ed., Noyes Publication, New York, 1985. L. Bretherick, Handbook of Reactive Chemical Hazards, 4th ed., Butterworth's, London, 1990. N. I. Sax and R. J. Lewis, Dangerous Properties of Industrial Materials, 6th ed., (ISBN 0442-28304-0), Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1984. W. E. Baker et aL, Explosion Hazards and Evaluation, (ISBN 0444-42094-0), Elsevier Science Publishing Co., Inc., New York, 1983. Guidelines for a Reactive Chemicals Program, 2d ed., Dow Chemical Company, Midland, MI, 1987. E A. Patty, Industrial Hygiene and Toxicology, 2d ed., John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1962.

9. 10. 11.

12. 13. 14. 15. 16.

NFPA 491M, Manual of Hazardous Chemical Reactions, National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA, 1986. Chemical Hazard Response Information System Manual (CHRIS), (Commandant Instruction MI6465, 12A, available from U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 20402), U.S. Coast Guard, \\fcshington, DC, 1984. H. K. Hatayama et al.,>4 Method of Determining the Compatibility of Hazardous Wastes, EPA-600/2-80-076, Municipal Environmental Research Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, OH, 1980. (Also available as publication PB80-221005 from the National Tbchnical Information Service, Springfield, VA 22161.) Book of Lists for Regulated Hazardous Substances, Government Institutes, Inc., Rockville, MD, 1990. Dow Chemical Company, Fire and Explosion Index Hazard Classification Guide, 7th ed., AIChE, New York, 1989. C. A Davies et al., CHETAH Version 4.4: Chemical Thermodynamic and Energy Release Evaluation Program, 2d ed., (ISBN 08031-1223-8), American Society for Tfesting and Materials (DS 51 A), Philadelphia, PA, 1990. J. C. Dove, "Process Safety An Integral Part of Pilot Plants," Plant/Operations Progress Vol. 7, No.4, October 1988. Handbook of Chemical Hazard Analysis Procedures (ARCHIE Manual), Federal Emergency Management Agency, Washington, DC, 1989.