January 19, 2010 Occupational Safety and Health Administration Combustible Dust Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking RIN 1218-AC41 74 Fed.Reg. 54334 Comments of Imperial Sugar Company Imperial Sugar Company respectfully submits its comments to the Advance Notice of Proposed Rulemaking (ANPR) regarding combustible dust. Background: Imperial Sugar Company is one of the largest producers and marketers of refined sugar in the NAFTA region. The Company markets sugar and sweetener products under the Dixie Crystals(R), Holly(R), Imperial(R) and Wholesome Sweeteners(R) brands and under private labels. We also sell a variety of sugar products to industrial and foodservice customers. Our stock is traded on the NASDAQ Stock Market under the ticker symbol "IPSU." Imperial is based in Sugar Land, Texas, and operates sugar refineries in Port Wentworth, Georgia and Gramercy, Louisiana. We employ approximately 750 individuals across the Company. Imperial suffered a tragic explosion at its Port Wentworth, Georgia facility on February 7, 2008, which resulted in the deaths of fourteen employees and serious injuries to many more employees and contractors. We will always be grateful for the heroic efforts of the many people in the Port Wentworth and Savannah community who responded to this tragedy --- the fire and police and other emergency personnel who first responded at the scene, the medical personnel who saved lives and comforted the injured, and the many volunteers who contributed in so many ways to the recovery effort. Since February 7, 2008, we have rebuilt our Port Wentworth refinery, and it resumed full operations in November of 2009. We have invested tens of millions of dollars in safety equipment and processes not only at our re-built facility in Port Wentworth, but also at our facility in Gramercy. We have worked with recognized experts relating to combustible dust and safety to guide us in this process. It is our goal to become an industry leader in safety and health, and to sharing the lessons we have learned with other companies throughout the United States and North America. P. O. BOX 9 * SUGAR LAND, TX 77487-0009 * 281-491-9181 Imperial Sugar Company Comments to ANPR January 19, 2010 Page 2 We have learned a great deal in addressing the hazards of combustible dust, both from a perspective of re-building a facility from the ground up as well as retrofitting a century-old facility with added measures to address hazards of combustible dust. We are eager to share this knowledge and experience. Comments to ANPR We strongly support a combustible dust standard. We believe that there is still a low level of knowledge of the extent of hazards of combustible dust in industry, and we believe a standard that specifically addresses that hazard will assist in raising the level of awareness of hazard and how to manage it. In the attachment, we have provided specific answers to the questions in the ANPR, and our general comments are as follows. 1. We support a standard that is primarily a specification standard as opposed to a standard that is solely performance-based for the following reasons: a. The specification standard regarding combustible dust promulgated for the grain industry, at 29 C.F.R. ? 1910.272, appears to have successfully and fairly rapidly helped that industry address the hazards of combustible dust. b. Because of the low level of knowledge of the hazard that still exists within industry, we believe standard that is primarily a specification standard would better educate and guide employers on the specific measures to address the hazards of combustible dust, rather than a performance-based standard. c. We do not believe it is appropriate or practical to simply codify NFPA 654 or 61 as a combustible dust standard, because of the difficulties in interpreting and applying those standards. The NFPA standards provide excellent guidance in addressing combustible dust hazards, but they are consensus standards and sometimes vague and conflicting. We believe that a performance-based standard would lead to a de facto codification of these standards, and that a specification standard would better advance worker safety. We do, however, believe that elements of a new standard should be performance-based, to account for varying hazards across industries and to allow employers the ability to adapt new strategies to address hazards of combustible dust. 2. We believe that primary and secondary hazard controls are more effective than administrative controls, and should be required where feasible. 3. We believe that employers who have combustible dusts present need to conduct a thorough analysis of their workplaces to identify and avoid or limit potential ignition sources. 4. We support a requirement that industry perform their own testing of the explosible properties of dust in their workplace, and, as appropriate, provide that information to P. O. BOX 9 * SUGAR LAND, TX 77487-0009 * 281-491-9181 Imperial Sugar Company Comments to ANPR January 19, 2010 Page 3 downstream users via an MSDS. Our experience has been that the published information regarding explosible properties of combustible dust is often incorrect. 5. We support a standard that requires regular training on the hazards of combustible dust. We believe that the training requirements included in other OSHA standards are effective. We believe that a training requirement would serve to ensure continued hazard awareness within industry. As noted, we have provided answers to the questions listed in the ANPR in the attachment. We remain ready to provide any information that OSHA deems helpful in its rulemaking process. Thank you for the opportunity to provide these comments. Imperial Sugar Company ___________________________ By: Ronald L. Allen, CSP, PE Chief Safety Officer P. O. BOX 9 * SUGAR LAND, TX 77487-0009 * 281-491-9181