Train Protection Warning

Early evidence suggests that the accident would have been prevented by the installation and correct operation of a Train Protection Warning System (TPWS)... 

The introduction of the Train Protection and Warning System (TPWS) to help prevent trains colliding if a red signal is passed at danger. 

Chemicals — storage, handling, transportation, spills, disposals, amounts used, labeling, toxicity or other harmful effects, warning signs, supervision, training, protective clothing and equipment, hazard communication requirements. 

These alternatives nonetheless can also serve to simplify the protection of trade secret information. For example, lists of substances found in the workplace can be posted on bulletin boards with specific warnings as to the secret nature of the information. Some employers include this information in training booklets rather than posting them. In other cases, employers may label hazardous chemicals with coded information, the meaning of which can be made available to employees on request. These are only examples of alternatives that can simplify trade secret problems. No single approach is likely to be ideal for every workplace. 

Copyright 2001, National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA 02269. This warning system is intended to be interpreted and applied only by properly trained individuals to identify fire, health, and reactivity hazards of chemicals. The user is referred to a certain limited number of chemicals with recommended classifications in NFPA 49 and NFPA 325, which would be used as a guideline only. Whether the chemicals are classified by NFPA or not, anyone using the 704 systems to classify chemicals does so at their own risk. 

To offset this, U.S. chemical/biological (CB) defense materiel must not only provide a protective system equivalent to or better than that of any potential enemy but the physiological and logistics burdens must be such as to permit long-term use. To cope with the hazards of any potential CB-threat environment requires the development of an integrated CB defense system. This system must contain items for individual protection, collective protection, decontamination, warning and detection, and safe devices and concepts to achieve realistic training. 

Annex II to directive 1999/92/EC describes additional minimum requirements, which comprise organizational measures (i.e. written instructions, training of workers, a system of permits to work, warning signs) and criteria for the selection of technical equipment and protective systems, depending on the classification of zones. 

However, operating procedures and training, or other warning, caution, or written advisory forms, are not to be used as the only risk reduction method for critical hazards. Acceptable procedures may include the use of personal protective equipment. 

Engineering design should strive for elimination of hazards. Only when elimination, substitution, or engineering controls are not feasible should rehance on physical barriers, warning systems, training, and personal protective equipment be considered. 

A chemical spill is probably the most common accident in the laboratory, and in most cases can be cleaned up by laboratory personnel with minimal effort or risk. According to the requirements of the OSHA Hazard Communication Standard, laboratory personnel are required to be trained in the risks associated with the chemicals with which they are working and should know when it is safe to clean up a minor spill. Workers should be especially sure to be familiar with the risks and the corrective actions to be taken in an emergency for chemicals labeled on the container DANGER or WARNING. If personal protective equipment is needed, personnel required to wear it must receive appropriate training in how to use and maintain the equipment. 

---