aptec technology consulting · 2019-04-19 · aptec report - the jilin baoyuanfeng poultry...

APTEC Technology Consulting

Keywords: poultry processing plant fire, China, slaughterhouse fire, industrial accident, industrial designing, industrialsafety, chicken, broiler

3?8K�$8GG<E<;�8K

&@C@E��8FPL8E=<E>

FE�&LE<��APTEC Technology Consulting is located at C-60, Amaltas, Alstonia Estate, Sigma IV, Greater Noida 201308, India.This name and APTEC are the registered property of Alok's Poultry Technology Private Limited.��Telefax +91 120 4251620 �� Website http://aptec.in ��e-mail [email protected]

�()1�0%/.02�)1�)-�25.�/!021 8�2(%�&)012�!$$0%11%$�2.�$%1)'-�/0.&%11).-!+1��2(%�1%#.-$�2.�2(%�/3"+)#�!2�+!0'%�%/.02�$!2%$ �3+7 ��%4 ��$!2%$��3'312��

APTEC Report - The Jilin Baoyuanfeng Poultry Processing Plant Fire - Page 1

1.0 PrefaceMy report of the event discussed in the following pages is divided into two parts. The first, in this section,is analytical, reconstructing the event and its antecedents, for possible use by design professionals, inparticular to those concerned with poultry processing. The second part, to be uploaded shortly, makesgeneral suggestions on how safety enforcement officials can implement some simple rules to makeworkplaces and public places safer.

2.0 Déjà VuOn 3 September, 1991, in the North Carolina town of Hamlet, USA, a fire in a poultry further processingplant owned by Imperial Foods killed 25 workers.

The story is detailed, among others, in two videos andtwo text reports on the internet1 referenced here. In thelight of these, the Jilin event evoked in me a deep sense ofdéjà vu. Workers at Jilin Baoyuanfeng poultry processingplant at Mishazi, Jilin Province, Manchuria, (JBPPP)probably experienced a sense of despair similar to theHamlet workers on the morning of June 3, 2013. Lockeddoors, a maze of large rooms separated by moveablewalls, equipment laid out in a series of zigzag workflowlines, boarded windows to prevent theft of chicken,insufficient safety inspections or compliance, narrowcorridors, poorly marked or blocked emergency exits,toxic thick black smoke from the combustion of thermalinsulation – they were all common to both tragedies!

But between these events there are differences, too. TheHamlet plant was nearly a century old, having servedearlier for the production of ice cream, before ImperialFoods converted it 11 years earlier for its final role. Thetotal area of the plant was 2790 sq metres, was singlestoried and there were only 90 workers inside the buildingat the time of the fire. Designers of the Hamlet plant hadnot had prior experience of poultry processing plant firesand so they had not anticipated or prepared for it. Theirimpression was that such plants did not contain much in-flammable stuff except for some packing materials. But a fire did take place, and it was traced to a failedhydraulic hose of the oil heating system in a Stein fryer. Unknown to them, partition walls (possiblysandwich panels) were also combustible.

JBPPP, on the other hand, was built as a green-field project in 2009. Knowledge of poultry processing plantfires was already available to designers, but was ignored. JBPPP had 395 workers trapped in the fire, whichoccurred in a modern steel building having a total of nearly 17,000 sq metres floor area - 1.7 hectares, orsix times as large as Hamlet, making rapid escape many times more difficult and time-consuming than theHamlet fire.

A month before Hamlet, a Tyson plant performing identical functions with twice Hamlet’s capacity atArkansas, also coincidentally had a hydraulic system failure in the oil heating system of its Stein fryer.There were no fatalities, but the similarities were uncanny. The US Fire Administrations’ report2 followingthe Hamlet disaster compares the fire safety paradigms at both plants and offers constructive instructionsfor designers and consultants. It includes mention of fire prevention SOP’s put in place by Tyson. Soalthough since 1991 there have been many fires in poultry processing facilities worldwide, they have hadminimum fatalities. These suggestions have been discussed in my second report on the subject

�)'30%1�� %DG<I@8C�"FF;J�,C8EK�8K�$8DC<K9<=FI<�K?<�=@I<�� IFG�:<@C@E>�@J�98I<CP�FM<I��D<KI<J�?@>?� ��

Poultry processing, specifically, is rapidly becoming mechanized and institutionalized in the third world.This recent event should become a wake-up call for all such developmental efforts. We also need to learnwhy lessons learnt in USA, so readily available on the internet, should fail to benefit the entire globalcommunity.

Following fires in sandwich panel buildings in the UK, and elsewhere, the Building ResearchEstablishment in the UK and the Association of British Insurers developed the Loss Prevention StandardsLPPS 1181, writes Professor James Lygate, Principal Investigator at IFIC Forensics3. All this has seriousimplications for not only designers and consultants but also leading suppliers of systems and equipment forthe processing industry who claim to be at the cutting edge of technology.

Part two of this report covers these aspects for general safe construction not only in new poultry processingfacilities being created in the third world, but the whole gamut of industrial and public spaces which maybe prone to fire-related fatalities. It also draws a clear distinction between building codes and standards andobjectives aimed at loss prevention. The latter relate to safety of workers and rescue personnel, but make noclaims on reduction of possible financial consequences and insurance.

3.0 Dawn of June 3 at Mishazi in Jilin Province, ManchuriaContrary to news reports, although the JBPPP facility (coordinates 44.136184,125.487696) may beadministratively under Dehui, it is physically situated very close to the city of Changchun, North of theChangha Road (102 National Road) connecting Changchun-Mishazi-Dehui, just beyond the hamlet ofMishazi, about 100 kilometres North-east of Changchun and a short distance from a toll station. Mention ofDehui in almost all news stories may have been triggered by the initial report that JBPPP was one of theimportant processors in the Dehui area where the leading processor Jilin Deda was located.

3.1 The FacilityJBPPP is a new green-field processing plant set up in

2009, designed to process 12,000 birds per hour probablyon 2 shift basis4, to account for some 67,000 tonnes (2010official data on website) of processed chicken per year, andemploying 1200 workers (although only 411 of them hadsigned formal work contracts5). The company also ownedchicken feed plants. Pictures published in the news mediareveal details of extensive manual and semi-automaticsecondary processing, i.e. production of bone-less andbone-in portions.

As of the end of 2010, it had sales of $38 million. An April3013 job advertisement online posting, says the companyhad grown to $58.7 million sales in 2011 and was, at thattime, hiring 200 additional workers. In recent years Chinahas had to progressively shut down its "wet market"poultry retail system due to the spread of the AI virus –more recently the H7N9 strain – putting her poultryprocessing infrastructure under strain. So it is conceivablethat this plant’s unofficial capacity may be higher than theofficial figure. More on this subject in the next section.

Only one picture shows packaged RTE food produced atthis facility. This amounts to inconclusive evidence aboutthe facility producing RTE products.

3.2 The IncidentAt 0606 hrs on June 3, 2013, as the plant was undergoing a shift change, an electric short circuit started afire leading to three large explosions. There were some 395 workers at site. 121 were killed, 77hospitalized, with most of them treated for smoke-induced injuries. News reports said that an electric fire ina workers’ rest area ignited a concentration of leaked ammonia.

�)'30%1 ��0?<�LGG<I�G@:KLI<�J?FNJ�8�GIF989C<G8:B@E>�D8K<I@8C�I<:<@GK�>8K<��0?<�9FKKFD�G@:KLI<K8B<E�=IFD�8:IFJJ�K?<�?@>?N8P�E<8I�K?<�D8@E�>8K<8I<8�J?FNJ�K?<�8;D@E�9L@C;@E>�FE�K?<�C<=K�

The fireball raced through the processing hall (cut-up, de-boning and packing hall) rapidly (3 minutes, bysome accounts), leaving very little time for workers to flee. Simultaneously with the explosion the powerwent out, leaving workers to panic and trample over each other as they sought exits.

The accident was neither notified by an audible alarm, nor were the passageways lit up by any kind ofemergency lighting systems. Air extraction systems or negative air flow systems automatically operable inthe event of an accidental ammonia release, if they existed, failed and smoke rapidly concentrated withinthe building. Fire extinguishers were probably installed, but were not used because of panic, lack ofemergency drills and training, and failure of lights. To add to the mayhem, the complicated layout,inadequate and inconveniently placed exits, and possibly locked exits resulted in lots of deaths. Nor werelessons leant - according to one worker there was an earlier fire three years ago, also involving ammonia,ignited by a cigarette.

Significantly, this fire occurred a week after Smithfield Foods Inc, America’s largest pork processor,announced an acquisition deal by the Chinese pork processor, Shuanghui International Holdings Ltd, as asolution to recent lackluster performance of the pork market in USA. Recent news of deliberations over thisdeal indicate that the main objections raised against this acquisition were not the poor Chinese record onplant safety and lack of compliance with existing standards, but strategic concerns about Chinese control ofpork meat supplies within USA.

3.3 What It Means to The Design ProfessionalBesides management deficiencies and use of their Guanxi or cronyism with local safety authorities todisregard safety rules, what concerns us here are the design aspects of the facility. I believe, that asprofessionals engaged in designing poultry processing facilities, and as technology leaders in the art ofpoultry processing, we can make some observations from these circumstances which may help us makebetter and safer facilities. What also concerns us here is a better understanding of local cultural habits andnorms that can render even the best and safest machine design futile.

I treat this as an opportunity for an industrial designer, appropriate especially for India and a number ofgrowing economies where lack of standards, cronyism with the authorities leading to compromise ofworker welfare and safety, by-passing existing safety features on machinery and plain bad designing are thenorm, and will likely stay so for a long time.

4.0 Stated Causes of the IncidentTo make my analysis, I have carefully examined eight independent news stories (there are many others, butthey essentially repeat earlier stories) in the public domain. I then made a frequency distribution study ofstated causes of the disaster or those leading to the disaster. Based on the emerging evidence I thenscrutinized over 70 photographs downloaded from Google’s graphic store to reconstruct the event and drawinferences.

�!"+%�� 8 �%/.02%$��!31%1�.&�2(% �3-%�� )1!12%0

,FJJ@9C<�:8LJ<J�;<J@>E�9<?8M@FLI8C��FG<I8K@FE8C�J?FIK:FD@E>J�:LCC<;�=IFD�<@>?K��@E;<G<E;<EK�GL9C@J?<;�8::FLEKJ� �.5��(%��)0%��0)')-!2%$ �-&%0%-#%

�� "@I<�D8P�?8M<�FI@>@E8K<;�@E�8�CF:B<I�IFFD �� "@I<�JK8IK<;�8K��)�=FCCFN@E>�8E�<OGCFJ@FE��/DFB<�HL@:BCP�=@CC<;�K?<�8@I �� "@I<�<C<:KI@:8CCP�JG8IB<;�@EKF�C<8B@E>�8DDFE@8 �DDFE@8�;<J@>E@E>�� DDFE@8�>8J�C<8B �DDFE@8�;<J@>E@E>�� 0?I<<�C8I><�<OGCFJ@FEJ�N<I<�=FCCFN<;�9P�8�=@I< �DDFE@8�;<J@>E@E>� �.#!+��.,,3-)27��-4.+4%,%-2�!-$��%1/.-1%

�� FCC8K<I8C�@EALI@<J�@E�8;A8:<EK�KFNEJ?@G "8:@C@K@<J�E<8I9P�� ;@<;�8GGIFO�� <J:8G<;�JFD<��F=�N?FD�I<:<@M<;�@EALI@<J��I<J@;<EKJ�F=�E<8I9P�?8DC<K�N<I<

<M8:L8K<;�=FCCFN@E>�C<8B8><�F=�8DDFE@8"8:@C@K@<J�E<8I9P

�� =@I<=@>?K<IJ�N<I<�GI<JJ<;�@EKF�J<IM@:< D8EP�;F:KFIJ�8E;�ELIJ<J "8:@C@K@<J�E<8I9P�� L@C;@E>�N8J�:?8II<; S�K?<�=@I<�KFFB��?FLIJ�8E;��=@I<=@>?K<IJ�KF�;FLJ< "8:@C@K@<J�E<8I9P� �%+%4!-2��+!-2��.-1203#2).-��%!230%1

�� /K<<C =I8D<�D8@ECP�J@E>C<�JKFI<P�9L@C;@E> N@K?�D8EP�8;AF@E@E> ?LKJ�N8J�D8;<�F=�GI<=89I@:8K<;�:FE:I<K<N8CCJ�8E;�?8;�8�:FIIL>8K<;�@IFE�IFF=�N@K?�@EJLC8K@E>�J8E;N@:?�G8E<C�=8CJ<�:<@C@E>�8E;�N8CC�@EJLC8K@FEJ�8E;GC<EKP�F=�G8IK@K@FE<;�@EK<IE8C�NFIBIFFDJ

%E:FE:CLJ@M< � �� :FEJKIL:K@FE�;<K8@CJ8E8CPQ<;�@E�K?@J�I<GFIK

�� ,C8EK�9L@CK�N@K?�:FD9LJK@9C<�D8K<I@8CJ /8E;N@:?�G8E<CJ�� *F�FE<�?8;�K@D<�KF�LJ<�=@I<�<OK@E>L@J?<IJ �E8CPQ<;�@E�K?@J�I<GFIK�� "@I<�<E>LC=<;�K?<�9L@C;@E>�@E��D@ELK<J "@I<98CCJ�=IFD�J<8K�F= =@I<�� %E?8C8K@FE�F=�KFO@:�>8J �E8CPQ<; @E�K?@J�I<GFIK�� /KIL>>C<; �� KF�I<8:?�<O@K �E8CPQ<;�@E�K?@J�I<GFIK

� �!7.32��%2!)+1

�� CLKK<I<;�C8PFLK �E8CPQ<;�@E�K?@J�I<GFIK�� $8;�KFF�=<N <J:8G<�IFLK<J �E8CPQ<;�@E�K?@J�I<GFIK�� *8IIFN�8E;�:I8DG<;�<O@K�IFLK<J �E8CPQ<;�@E�K?@J�I<GFIK�� ,<FGC<�KI8DGC<;�<8:?�FK?<I�@E�K?<@I�9@;�KF�<O@K�K?IFL>?�K?<�J@E>C<�FG<E�;FFI �E8CPQ<;�@E�K?@J�I<GFIK�� !DGCFPJ��NFIB<IJ�9LK�FECP��N<I<�9<C@<M<;�KF�9<�8K�K?<�J@K<�8K�K?<�K@D<�F=�K?< =@I< �E8CPQ<;�@E�K?@J�I<GFIK�� %E�8�J@D@C8I�8::@;<EK�NFIB<IJ�;FID@KFIP�=8:KFIP�8E;�GIF;L:K�N8I<?FLJ<�N<I<�@E�K?<�J8D<�9L@C;@E> �E8CPQ<;�@E�K?@J�I<GFIK�� KFEE<J�F=�:?@:B<E�G<I�;8P��+I��KF��9@I;J�JC8L>?K<I<;�G<I�?FLI (8PFLK�:8G8:@KP�I<M@<N<;�� 0@>?K�C8PFLK�@EJ@;<�K?<�GC8EK �E8CPQ<;�@E�K?@J�I<GFIK�� $@>?�ELD9<I�F=�<DGCFP<<J S�?@>?�D8EGFN<I�;<EJ@KP �E8CPQ<;�@E�K?@J�I<GFIK�� /FD<�;FFIJ�N<I<�KFF�=8I�KF�I<8:? �E8CPQ<;�@E�K?@J�I<GFIK�� FDGC@:8K<;�@EK<I@FI�JKIL:KLI<�F=�K?<�9L@C;@E>�8E;�@KJ E8IIFN�:FII@;FIJ E8IIFN�<O@KJ�:8LJ<;�EFK�FECP

G8E@:�KF�<O@K�9LK�8CJF�?8DG<I<;�I<J:L<�<==FIKJ�E8CPQ<;�@E�K?@J�I<GFIK

�� /K8DG<;<�<EJL<; �E8CPQ<;�@E�K?@J�I<GFIK �"1%-2��!&%27��%!230%1

�� ,8E@:�<M8:L8K@FE�=FCCFNJ�JFD<FE<�J?FLK@E>�U.LE 8N8P�V�EFK�8E�8C8ID�J@I<E�8J�FE<�NFLC;�<OG<:K� <J@>E�� *FK�<HL@GG<;�N@K?�8GGIFGI@8K<�=@I<�J8=<KP�8E;�<D<E:P�D<8JLI<J )8E8><D<EK�� (8:B<;�<OK@E>L@J?<IJ )8E8><D<EK�� (8:BJ�98J@:�<D<E:P�<HL@GD<EK <J@>E�)8E8><D<EK�� *F�<D<E:P�C@>?K@E> <J@>E�� ,C8EK�N<EK�;8IB�8E;�JDFB<�9@CCFN<;�8IFLE; <J@>E ��:89C<�GFJ@K@FE@E>�� 0?<�C@>?KJ�N<EK�FLK��:8LJ@E>�G8E@:�8E;�JK8DG<;< <J@>E ��:89C<�GFJ@K@FE@E>�� ,FN<I�N8J�:LK�F==�8=K<I�K?<�=@I<�JK8IK<; <J@>E ��:89C<�GFJ@K@FE@E>�� (8O�J8=<KP�EFID�<E=FI:<D<EK )8E8><D<EK�� ,FFI�NFIB<I�KI8@E@E> )8E8><D<EK�� *F�<M8:L8K@FE�;I@CC�FI�KI8@E@E>�KF�NFIB<IJ )8E8><D<EK�� ,I<�<O@JK@E>�J8=<KP�=<8KLI<J�FE�D8:?@E<J�=I<HL<EKCP�9PG8JJ<;�@E�K?<�@EK<I<JK�F=�JG<<;�8E;�GIF;L:K@M@KP �FDGIFD@J<�8E;�>I<<; �6)21��.#*%$�.0��+.#*%$

�� )FJK�<J:8G<�IFLK<J�N<I<�CF:B<; )8E8><D<EK� <J@>E�� FCK<;�;FFIJ )8E8><D<EK�� /FD<�<O@KJ�N<I<�CF:B<;�=IFD�FLKJ@;<�8J�N<CC )8E8><D<EK�� CC�9LK�FE<�;FFI�N<I<�CF:B<; )8E8><D<EK�� /@E>C<�LECF:B<;�<O@K�=IFD�GFIK@FE@E>�?8CC )8E8><D<EK� <J@>E�� !D<E:P�<O@K�8K�NFIBJK8K@FE�:FLC;�EFK�9<�FG<E<; <J@>E�� +ECP�8�J@;<�;FFI�N8J�FG<E�K?<�FK?<I�<O@KJ�9<@E>�CF:B<; )8E8><D<EK�� FFIJ�N<I<�CF:B<; )8E8><D<EK� �!&%27��$,)-)120!2).-�!-$��!51

�� (F:8C�8LK?FI@K@<J�GI8@J<;�K?<�GC8EK�=FI�@KJ�<:FEFD@:�IFC<�@E�K?<�:FDDLE@KP��%K�N8J�:8CC<;�8DFE>�KFG��8>I@:LCKLI8C GIF:<JJ@E>�:FDG8E@<J

�IFEP@JD

�� 1EE8D<;�>FM<IED<EK�8LK?FI@K@<J�J?8I<�=8LCK �IFEP@JD�� 0FF�DL:?�CF:8C �� IFEP@JD�� ?@E8�?8J�8�I8=K�F=�� C8NJ�FE�NFIBGC8:<�J8=<KP �IFEP@JD�� FIILGK@FE�8E;�:IFEP@JD�N@K?�CF:8C�9LI<8L:I8KJ �IFEP@JD�� !:FEFD@:�:FE:<IEJ�FM<II@;<�J8=<KP �FDGIFD@J<�8E;�>I<<;�� /8=<KP�I<GC8:<;�9P�GIF;L:K@FE�8E;�<EP�<==@:@<E:P �FDGIFD@J<�8E;�>I<<;� �/%#)!+��.)-21

�� )8JJ@M<�<:FEFD@:�GIFK<:K@FE@JD�N?@:?�?8J�JKPD@<;�K?<�GIFM@E:<�J�<:FEFD@:�>IFNK? /G<:@8C�,F@EK�� ?@E<J<�NFIB<IJ�:8EEFK�<==<:K@M<CP�LE@FE@Q< /G<:@8C�,F@EK�� 0?<�8::@;<EK�:FD<J�ALJK�8�N<<B�8=K<I��D<I@:8TJ�C8I><JK�GFIB�GIF:<JJFI�/D@K?=@<C;�"FF;J�%E:�8EEFLE:<;

8�;<8C�KF�9<�8:HL@I<;�9P�K?<��?@E<J<�GFIB�GIF:<JJFI�/?L8E>?L@�%EK<IE8K@FE8C�$FC;@E>J�(K;/G<:@8C�GF@EK

In the rest of this article, we will assume that although these observations may or may not be completelytrue, they do reflect the general perception and where they have been based on reportage of interviews andon-the-spot physical observations, some or most, of the above causes may be taken as true for the purposeof my analysis.

5.0 Design and Construction

Refer to Figure 5. The hut in the forefront (West end) probably served as one of the dispatch sheds. Under thefirst window to the right of its solitary door, one can see a wheeled trolley. Figures 5 and 17 show this andanother wheeled trolley, which were probably used to ship out finished goods cartons into dispatch trucks. Thatthe floor level of this dispatch bay is at road height probably mandated loading with the help of a fork lift. Notvisible in this picture, there is another dispatch door – on the North side.

5.1 General Layout DrawingWith the help of Google Maps, plausibility checks and a careful examination of over 70 photographs, it ispossible to create an Autocad drawing of the plant.

Such a drawing may still be as much as 10-15% in error on actual dimensions, however, it does permitreview of the circumstances leading to the incident and evaluation of my analysis by other designprofessionals. Such a drawing has been made by me. It appears as Figure 23. It shows the entire 10 hectarefactory plot. I would welcome alternative interpretations and views from readers of this article.

�)'30% ��<I@8C�2@<N�F=�K?<�GC8EK�8=K<I�K?<�=@I<�?8;�9<<E�:FEKIFCC<;�8E;�>L8I;J N<I< GFJK<;�FE�@KJ�G<I@D<K<I� 0?@J�G@:KLI< J?FNJ�K?8K�K?<*FIK?�?8C=�F=�K?<�9L@C;@E>�N8J :FDGC<K<CP >LKK<;�K?FL>?�K?<�/FLK?�?8C=�<O:<GK�=FI�K?<�:<EKI8C�I@;><�I<D8@E<;�JL9JK8EK@8CCP�@EK8:K� !O:<GK=FI�K?<�<EKI8E:<�?LK�@E�K?<�:<EKI<�K?<I<�N8J�FECP�FE<�FK?<I�;FFI �FE�K?<�I@>?K� N?@:?�?8J�9<<E�F9J:LI<; @E�K?@J�G@:KLI< 8J�8�I<JLCK�F=�I<J:L<8:K@M@K@<J 8E; K?<�<EK@I<�=IFEK�F=�K?<�9L@C;@E>�N8J�:CFJ<;�KF�KI8==@: S�K?<�C8NE >@M@E>�8DGC<�K<JK@DFEP�KF�K?@J�9P�9<8I@E>�EF�J@>EJ�F=�=FFKG8K?J��(@>?K�KI8==@:�N8J�?FN<M<I�GFJJ@9C<�FM<I�K?<�GC@EK?�GIFK<:K@FE�JB@IK@E>�K?<�9L@C;@E>�� %E�K?<�98:B�I<GI<J<EK@E>�K?<�!8JK�<E;�8I<�K?<�:8EK<<E �

8�DLCK@�JKFI<P�9L@C;@E>��K?<�9F@C<I�8E;�:?@DE<P�8E;�K?<�9CL<�;FD<�C@B<�JKIL:KLI<�@J�FE<�F=�KNF�-LFEJ<K�?LKJ��@E�K?<�:FDGC<O�

Towards the West end,behind the three multi-storey administrativebuildings and the parkinglots, are three huts-probably a hostel foressential staff. Near themain gate lies a time-keeperor security guard hut, andbehind it, within a greenbelt, is a long bluemotorcycle shed. The Southend of the main processbuilding also shows fourpathways for workers’ entryinto the main plant.

The East end houses a mix of sheds, RCC buildings and some structures which defy analysis. The biggestshed appears to be the live bird unloading porch – the road passes right through it – which is how it shouldbe. The clear existence of an effluent treatment area at the extreme East end of the plot precludes any doubtthat this indeed is the live bird arrival end. There is even a gap in the East side fence for dumping effluentsludge into nearby farm land and there is evidence of such dumping in Figure 24.

This being the case, the East end would normally not contain any delivery gates, nor purpose-constructedworkers’ exits, except possibly a canteen. But a canteen for so many workers would almost certainly be amulti-storey structure connected to the main process area with a covered passageway which could also beuseful as an escape destinations, provided the interconnecting doors were left open. The ground floor ofthis canteen building might serve as the central refrigeration plant. A likely candidate is the buildingmarked Bldg 03 in Figure 23. The East end also houses the boiler – a chimney appears there in severalphotos, as in Figure 5.

�)'30% � 0?@J�M@<N�K8B<E�=IFD�K?<�D8@E�>8K<�J?FNJ�K?<�9LEK@E>J�DFKFI:P:C<�J?<;9F@C<I�:?@DE<P�8E;�:8EK<<E�9L@C;@E>�FE�K?<�=8I�!8JK�<E;

5.2 Slope of Terrain and Number of FloorsThe land slopes from the West towards the East and North-East. While there is no plinth separation on the Westside – the road being at the same height as the plant floor - the East end is substantially higher and has sets ofsteps leading in (Figures 7, 8, 11 and 12). Since bird arrival end should have a plinth of approximately 1200mmabove the road, one can conclude that a natural slope has been used advantageously in the design.

The main process building has a plinth of approximately 17000 square metres (140m x 120m). It has a peakheight of 14-15 metres (Figure 21) and an average height at the North and South ends, of between 7 and 8metres. Assuming that the inside floor was level throughout, the building houses some 185,000 cubicmetres of workspace. Above this general floor space would be a false (drop) ceiling at approximately 6metres, which would create a plenum to carry utility pipelines and cables. Many pictures show thedelaminated false ceiling panels still dangling precariously at approximately this height.

In deciding whether this plant had a uniformly level floor and therefore one single work floor with a false(drop) ceiling at approximately 6 metres, we have to contend with the rather large slope of the land at theNorth-East end as evident from Figures 7, 8, 11 and 12. If this is true, then above the ground floor at theseends would be an additional floor which could serveas a service area or workers’ rest rooms. Somecredence is granted this hypothesis in Figure 20which shows what appears to be a pair of insulatedvessels in an area having guy wires – the existenceof guy wires suggesting that this space was not aregular workplace but possibly a service facility, offworker limits.

Further, I believe, looking at standard layouts ofsimilar capacity plants (Figure 22), that the givenfloor area was more or less comparable for primaryprocessing at 12,000 birds per hour. But the fact thatthe natural slope of the land could have alloweddivision of the building into two stories at the Eastand North East ends appears to lend credence to therepeated comment about the complexity of thisplant’s interior. If the floor space was augmented bymaking part of the shed double storied, then theproduction capacity could very conceivably bemuch larger than officially stated.

5.3 Work FlowTypically the East end of the building would bemostly devoted to primary processing (i.e. arrival,killing, de-feathering, evisceration, chilling andmaturation. Live birds arrive at the East end, and theprocess continues in a linear pattern till the workflow reaches the West end or close to that end of thebuilding. Work flow would then takes a U bend,double back-and-forth in a zigzag fashionincorporating the portioning, de-boning and packingareas till it reached the central ridge of the building.

The next line of workspaces running essentiallyunder the central ridge of the building andeffectively transporting the product from South toNorth, would consist of portioning, de-boning,trimming of portions and packing them.

North of the this would be the product stores. Sincethe news stories speak of fresh chilled supplies being the principal produce of this facility, the stores wouldbe typically at -1 to +4 degrees C. The entire workspace after maturation would be held at +12 degrees C.

0?<�GC8EK�GIF989CP�I8E�IFLE;�K?<�:CF:B�N@K?�KNF�GI@D8IPGIF:<JJ@E>�J?@=KJ �JC8L>?K<I�LG�KF�:8I:8JJ�:?@CC@E>� F=��?FLIJ<8:?�8E;�K?I<<�J<:FE;8IP�GIF:<JJ@E>��:LK�LG�;<�9FE@E>�8E;G8:B@E>��0?@J�NFLC;�D8B<��NFIB�J?@=KJ�@E�8CC�FI�:FEJ@;<I@E>K?8K�K?<�GI@D8IP�J?@=K�E<<;J�C<JJ�D8EGFN<I�=FLI�IFL>?CP<HL@M8C<EK�D8EGFN<I�J?@=KJ�F=��G<IJFEJ�<8:?��/F�8K�8EPK@D<�K?<�D8O@DLD�ELD9<I�@EJ@;<�K?<�GC8EK�NFLC;�9<�KNFJ?@=K�<H@M8C<EKJ S�@�<��G<IJFEJ��0?<�GC8EK�NFLC;�ILE�IFLE;K?<�:CF:B�N@K?�GFJJ@9C<�FM<IC8GJ�9<KN<<E�GIF;L:K@FE�J?@=KJ8E;�8�:FLGC<�F=�?FLIJ�=FI�:C<8E@E>�9<KN<<E�K?<D�GIF989CPKN@:<�8�;8P

�)'30%1 � �� !JK@D8K@E>�J?@=K�:8G8:@KP�8E;�GIF989C<ELD9<I�F=�NFIB<IJ�GI<J<EK�@E�K?<�GC8EK�8K�K?<�K@D<�F=�K?<�=@I<�0FG�G@:KLI<�J?FNJ�8�&�/?8:BC<�/KFIB�C@E<�FI�@KJ�:CFE<�N@K?K?<�I<D8@EJ�F=�8�9<CK�:FEM<PFI��FKKFD�G@:KLI<�J?FNJKI@DD@E>�K89C<J�F=�KPG@:8C�?<@>?K��DD�8II8E><;�<E;�KF<E;��"8CJ<��;IFG��:<@C@E>�@E�K?<�9FKKFD�G@:KLI<�@J�8K8GGIFO@D8K<CP��D<KI<J�89FM<�""(�

North of the central ridge the shed has two longitudinally running sets of roof monitors, possibly provided withglazing and vents (Figures 22 and 23). That they do have vents is evident from the large amount of thick blacksmoke apparently issuing out of these vents in Figure 3 and 4. Going to the East of this part of the shed, you willsee a long and narrow rectangular structure which appears to be a building housing a row of refrigerationcompressors. This fits in with the theory that the fire apparently started in the West half of the building asindicated by the more extensive damage to that side and that this narrow structure or the ground floor of the RCCbuilding adjacent to it housed the compressors.

Figure 10 shows the mangled remains of a semi-automatic cut-up line called the “Japanese Cut-up Line” orthe “J-Shackle Line” in the industry. A central belt conveyor stands immediately below an overheadconveyor line (“T” track - remains and ceiling supports for which are visible in the foreground) Arrangedalong both sides of the belt conveyor are rows of work platforms called Lady-Lane Trim Tops. However,these J Shackle Lines are not enough for the extensive product finishing carried out at this plant as Figure 9shows lines of manual trimming and finishing tables arranged according to workflow.

5.4 Construction Materials - Sandwich PanelsFigure 13 shows some design details. Prefabricated RCC exterior walls with doors and windows, sandwichpanels above that, joining it to the roof eaves. The most common cores in sandwich panel construction are

�)'30%�� 0?<�!8JK�J@;<�F=�K?<�9L@C;@E>��K?<�I<8I�@E�"@>LI< ��J<IM<J�=FI�8II@M8C�F=�C@M<�9@I;J�%E�K?<�89FM<�G@:KLI<J�PFL�:8E�J<<I<J:L<�8KK<DGKJ�9<@E>�D8;<�=IFD�FE<�JL:?�98PJ�8=K<I�K?<�=@I<D<E�?8M<�BEF:B<;�FG<E�K?<�;FFI�=IFD�FLKJ@;<��0?<�IFF=�F=�K?<�98PJ?<CK<I��"@>LI<��@J�>FE<�GIF989CP�9CFNE�F==�8E;�K?<�?<8K�J@>E8KLI<�FE�K?<�J?<<K�D<K8C�N8CC�F=�"@>LI<��J?FNJ�K?8K�K?<@EJLC8K@FE�N8J�FE�=@I<�=IFD�N@K?@E��*FK@:<�K?8K�K?@J�98P�?8J�8�9@>�GC@EK?�

�)'30% ��0?@J�G@:KLI<�>@M<J�8�>FF;�@;<8�F=�K?<�IFF=�?<@>?K�8K�K?<�/FLK?�<E; SJFD<��D<KI<J��%K�8CJF�>@M<J�8�>FF;�M@<NF=�K?<�GI<=89�:FEJKIL:K@FE�N@K?�=@O<;�N@E;FNJ�

expanded or cross-linked expanded polystyrene (EPS, EXPS), polyurethane (PUR), poly-iso-cyanuratefoam (PIR), glass wool, mineral wool or rock fibre. EPS, PIR and PUR are all combustible.

Mineral, glass or rock woolsystems with combustibleadhesives or organic bindersused to adhere the metal facingsto the core are also combustibleto some extent although theyproduce small amounts of energyin a fire. PIR’s are fire retardantvariants of polymer sandwichpanels which “perversely tendsto emit more and thicker smokewhen they burn”, says Prof J.Lygate8, writing on June 11about the incident. Besidescarbon particles, smoke from PIRand PUR fires consist ofhydrogen cyanide, oxides ofnitrogen, and carbon monoxide,all of these being extremelytoxic.

The commonest criticisms of EPS panels in fire relate to thedelaminating of the outer skins exposing the core and its failureto stay in place instead of collapsing and the fire spreading withinthe panel. Electric cables, which are placed over the false (drop)ceiling, come down with the collapsing panels. This is probablywhat happened at JBPPP, leading to power outage immediatelyafter the fireball raged through the building. If there was anemergency lighting cabling, that also failed probably because itscabling also ran atop the panels.

It is fairly established that sandwich panels will not start fires,nor will they be the first to combust. They will burn when the panel delaminates and the core is exposeddirectly to flame. This happens readily in horizontally placed panels through thermal de-lamination of thesheets.

Once they ignite, the fire within the metal skins spreads undetected and rapidly (at 0.5 metre per second)through the polymer zone (which, the illustration in Figure 15 shows, forms a continuity through adjacentpanels), reaching other parts of the building in a flash. And after a fire gets established within the sheets,extinguishing it is difficult as water jets cannot reach thecombustion zone.

As part of its service to users of sandwich panels, the InsulatedPanel Council Australasia Ltd (IPCA) has now put in place avoluntary industry code of practice to improve the performanceof fire-retardant EPS panels. It is interesting that some of theresearch has been embarked upon by IPCA in conjunction withseveral Asian institutions including the City University of HongKong and University of Science and Technology of China.

5.5 The Quonset Hut DesignFigures 23 and 24 show the position of out-buildings andstructures. The buildings are of four basic designs – RCC multi-storey buildings, sloping steel sheet roof huts, unidentifiablestructures and semi-circular self-supporting steel sheet roofs. Ofthe last named, there are two Quonset Huts (1 and 2 in Figure 23). The Quonset Hut design, of WW-2vintage, was an improvement of the Nissen Hut first designed during WW-1. The design gets its name from

�)'30% ��08B<E�=IFD�K?<�!8JK�<E;�:CFJ<�KF�>8K<�� K?@J J?FNJ�:FEJKIL:K@FE;<K8@CJ� 0?<�J8E;N@:?�G8E<CJ�@E�K?@J�8E;�J<M<I8C�FK?<I�G@:KLI<J�?8M<�:FDGC<K<CP;<C8D@E8K<;� �<?@E;�K?<�D8@E�J?<;�PFL�:8E�><K�8�>C@DGJ<�F=�K?<�8;D@E�9L@C;@E>8E;�KF�K?<�<OKI<D< C<=K�K?<�IFN�F=�9LEK@E>J�8K�K?<�D8@E�>8K<�

�)'30%�� @8>I8D�J?FN@E>�:FEK@EL@KP�F=:FI<� D8K<I@8C�� /FLI:<�� %EJLC8K<;� ,8E<C�FLE:@C� �LJKI8C8J@8� (K;� �%,�� N?@:?:FDD<E:<;� ;<M<CFGD<EK� F=� 8� MFCLEK8IP:F;<�@E��KF�;<C@M<I�8�9<KK<I�G<I=FID@E>G8E<C�8E;�@E:I<8J<�=@I<�=@>?K<I�:FE=@;<E:<

�)'30%��-LFEJ<K�?LK�=IFD�K?< /<:FE;3FIC;�38I��*FK<�K?<�J<C=�JLGGFIK@E>�IFF=8E;�;FFI�8K�K?<�>89C<�<E;

the place where it was first constructed – Quonset Point in North Kingstown, Rhode Island, USA. It ismeant to be temporary, cheap and quick to erect, but it falls short of an ideal when used as an industrialshed.

Figure 16 is a vintage picture of one such hut. Notice thesemicircular top and absence of side walls, necessitating theconstruction of a dormer window for ventilation. It is my belief thatthis construction philosophy has influenced the design of severalhuts adjoining the main process shed at JBPPP. Note for instance,the light steel reinforcements of the roof in the product dispatchhut where it has been burnt off and the absence of doors (Figure 5)except at the gable end.

5.6 Emergency Exits and WindowsHaving examined the construction and layout details, we can nowmake an exhaustive listing of main doors. For goods movement:three at the West side, one on the North side and an unknownnumber of doors on the East side. Notice that the live bird delivery end shown in Figure 7 is being used forextraction of whole dressed carcasses. The arrival end ought not to have connection with the processed birdarea, but it does – further attesting to the possibility of a variety of interconnections within the work space.For the entry - and presumably emergency exit of workers - there are four well defined doors on the Southside as evident from Figures 14 and 23.

How many emergency exits are there? One door on the West side, not visible in Figure 5 (read also the textbelow Figure 5), three on the East side (Figures 18 and 19), maybe some on the North side for which wehave no evidence, material dispatch and packing material receipt doors (3 nos) and of course all four doorson the South, provided they remained open. Exit is also possible through the dispatch bays and live birdarrival end and possible utility line service gates. There is also the likelihood that the normal exit to thecanteen structure could serve as a getaway. But this gate would certainly be locked except at meal times.

�)'30%1�� 0?<�=@IJK�G@:KLI<�J?FNJ�=@I<=@>?K<IJ�CF:8K<;�@E�FE<�F=�K?<�98PJ�=FID<;�9P�K?<�J<M<I8C�89LKK@E>�J?<;J�8E;JKIL:KLI<J�KF�K?<�!8JK�<E;�F=�K?<�D8@E�GIF:<JJ�8I<8��0?<�FK?<I�G@:KLI<�K8B<E 8K�K?< 3<JK�<E; 9<=FI<�K?<�<EK@I<�N8CC�N8JKFIE�;FNE�8J�G8IK�F=�I<J:L<�<==FIKJ��"@>LI<��J?FNJ�JFD<�J@>EJ�F=�=@I<�8E; � 8�:FCC8GJ<;�IFF=�>LKK<I��0?@J�=FIDJ�KNFGFJJ@9C< <D<E:P�<O@KJ�FE<�F=�K?<D�8;;<;�8J�8E�8=K<IK?FL>?K S�K?<�?<@>?K�J?8G<�8E;�89J<E:<�F=�GIFK<:K@FE�8>8@EJK�I8@E8K�K?@J�;FFIN8P�JL>><JK@E>�K?8K�@K�FG<EJ�EFK�@EKF�K?<�GIF:<JJ�8I<8�9LK�@EKF�8E�@EK<IE8CCP�CF:8K<;�LK@C@KP�8I<8��

That brings us to windows. Buses and trains are required by law to have emergency exits. Some of the glasswindows can be opened for passengers to escape in the event of accidents. In Figures 5, 6, 13, 14, 17 and18, this plant appears to have a sufficient number of windows. Most of them remain intact, and almost allshow signs of being hermetically sealed against the escape of smoke. Except for the placement of windowsin the dispatch shed (Figure 5), which are too high for any escape attempt, most other windows could havebeen used for escape from the fire provided they could have been opened or smashed open. They were not:as evident from the photos, and none of them is broken, nor has any smoke traces.

What conclusions can we draw? Either the designers did not think of this or standard windows which canbe used as emergency exits are dimensionally incompatible with jigs and dies available with the localmanufacturers of precast concrete exteriors.

�)'30%� �� 0?<� 9LIEK� F==� IFF=� F=� K?<=@E@J?<;�>FF;J�;@JG8K:? J?<;�89LKK@E>�K?<D8@E�GIF:<JJ�J?<;�8K�K?<�3<JK�<E;��*FK<K?<�N?<<C<;�KIFCC<P


What was the most likely escape route? Almost certainly many workers escaped through the West sidedispatch door. If the fire started in the main building near the North East end, and gradually worked itsway into the front dispatch shed, then the progress of the fire followed the path of open doorways left byfleeing workers. What is the evidence? Figure 3 shows no smoke coming from the dispatch shed on theright – this picture being taken at the initial stages of the fire, while Figure 4 shows that workers escapingthrough this gate, probably leaving the interconnecting doors open, allowed the fire to follow them,completely gutting the dispatch shed by the time the fire died down, as shown in Figure 5.

Why does the South end not show any signs of fire? Or for that matter the East end? Probably becausethere were no open pathways for the fire to follow escaping workers (opened doorways) in these directions,or because there were not much combustible materials at these ends.

5.7 Refrigeration and Fresh Air MovementIn a large processing facility such as this, the use of a central refrigeration plant using ammonia is derigueur9. When one relies on fluorocarbons, one can consider distributed compressor locations – but notwith ammonia. Therefore, the one utility building you would expect to see close to the process shed, wouldbe the central ammonia compressor hall. Considering the dimensions of the processing shed, and thegenerally ubiquitous requirement of refrigeration throughout its extent, cost effective placement of thecentral refrigeration plant close to an outside edge of the shed would not make sense. The most costeffective, but imprudent, location for it would of course be somewhere in the centre of the shed!

Do we see any evidence that the refrigeration plant was inside the process shed? Possibly - if the unmarkedempty rectangular hall located between the two cut-up halls and just South of the grey box-like cold storein Figure 25 can be taken to be it. This location certainly appears to have the shortest distances to allsections requiring refrigeration - the water-chill bath (shown as a dark gray square), the two cut-up hallsand the cold store. On the other hand, if this is not true, can we locate it outside the shed from any of thepublished photos? No. not really. I have only very tentatively suggested that in such a situation the likelylocation of the central compressor complex would be at the North East end

There are no roof-mounted air extractors on the right side of the building – the left side, having sustainedmore burn damage, clearly had two ridges to provide extraction and north-light. If one assumes thatmovement of air out of the building is not natural but directed entirely on forced basis, then one must eitherascertain or eliminate the possibility of wells (or shafts open to the sky) within the building. The aerialphotograph in Figure 5 shows none, as does the Google map illustration in Figure 23. Air intakes, if theyexisted, can therefore be inferred to have been placed along the eaves. But as the majority of eaves havebeen dismantled, we can not be certain of this.

5.8 The Square Steel Building Layout MindsetFactory buildings and many public spaces such as shopping plazas and malls are now increasingly designedaround steel frame, corrugated steel roofs on trusses, prefabricated concrete exterior walls with built-indoor and window openings, and sandwich panels for internal walls and false (drop) ceilings.

For such constructions, structural engineers instinctively favour square plinths because it saves them a lotof design time even while they tom-tom the virtues of exterior surface area to volume ratio – i.e. highthermal efficiency – whether internal areas are to be cooled or heated, as necessitated by processconditions.

What are the facts? In a square design the designer encounters a lower degree of freedom to change thebuilding’s side dimension than in a rectangular design - you cannot change the dimension of one sidewithout simultaneously changing the dimension of all four sides. A square plinth also increases the distancebetween utilities such as a central refrigeration plant and target refrigeration zones within the building. Sosome of the savings in the building’s so called thermal efficiency does get neutralized – for example inincreased pump load in the refrigeration circuit. Additionally, for buildings which make extensive use ofammonia as refrigerant and install large amounts of sandwich panels in the interior, making buildingswithin buildings as it were, as commonly done in the food processing industry, not only do distances to exitincrease, but a greater potential exits for pockets to trap ammonia between the false (drop) ceiling and theroof sheet and elsewhere.

Further, once the structural imperative of square building is a given, the process flow is required to foldback and forth in a zigzag fashion until it is forced to fit into available spaces. Remember - the layout


principle in slaughterhouse design follows a cardinal rule – the dirtiest areas are always placed farthestfrom cleanest areas. Any attempt at repeated folding of process flow ignores this rule. To make amendsdesigners then resort to complicated air flow routes, completely compartmentalizing certain sections in theeffort and creating more pockets for leaked ammonia to get into and stay trapped.

Does a square building actually make a compact design, reducing the need for outlying external workspaces? I think not - take a look at the reconstructed layout in Figure 23. Seven or more structures wereadded at the East end to accommodate diverse plant functions that were probably not suitable within it.

Here the workers’ entry gates on the South side requires workers to also exit from these gates – all othergates have different functions. Imagine the complex exit routes when you consider that the straight distanceinto this 120m x 140m building could be as much as 100-150 metres, and that the actual escape distancescould be twice or thrice that amount because of zigzag placement of work flow. All these things result in amore hazard-prone design.

For comparison purposes, the heat efficiency of a building may be considered a function of its externalsurface area. You would instinctively imagine that a square building would have significantly less surfacearea than an equivalent building having a rectangular shape, given that their heights and material ofconstruction are similar.

To test this hypothesis in the context of this study, I made a comparison of two different building stylessuited for complete processing of 12,000 birds per hour. This comparison is presented in Figure 22. Thesquare design is based on a real, existing, poultry slaughterhouse. The modular design is my variant.

If we assume that both versions have an average height of 8.5 metres, then the external surface area of themodular version is actually only 5.6% more, even as its plinth area (usable space) is also higher by 5.5% incomparison with the square version!

But in actual fact, the average height of the square version would be more than 8.5 metres because of itsgreater length, necessitating a higher peak, given the same roof slope, and so its surface area advantagewould further diminish.

Then there are other issues to consider. In the modular design, the placement of parallel corridors providesshorter distances to exit, reduced number of consecutive doors to negotiate during exit, more usable spacewithin the building through use of corridors that can become the preferred locations for columns (resultingin higher thermal efficiency, as more columns can be placed outside the coldest areas) and shorter tie-beams between columns, which would further reduce construction cost.

You will also note in this comparison that the size of some of the functional areas in the compact designhave been made larger than necessary by the designer simply because there was nothing better to do withthe left-over space. Consider, for example, the unnecessarily large external access frontage and area of theingredients store!

But most importantly, in the context of this report, more corridors in the modular design mean morepotential emergency exits and more and shorter escape routes. In other words, by deviating from theconventional wisdom of square buildings, the modular variant presents an overwhelmingly safer, cheaperand better industrial building design.

6.0 Epilogue - Some Generalizations for the Specific SectorMy experience as a consultant in the third world is that customers do not like to pay for consultation andtechnical counselling. This is a deep-rooted cultural malaise. The responsibility for eventual technical andsafety suitability of a workplace is on “…others, whom we are paying so handsomely for equipment andtechnology!”. In other words – implicitly the process equipment suppliers, who, in their eagerness to sell,make sweeping claims. Such a promise or dependency may not be legally enforceable, but it is difficult todispel this notion as it constitutes a piece of cultural baggage.

�)'30%1 �� 0?<�=@IJK�G@:KLI<�F= K?<�@EK<I@FI�F=�K?<�9L@C;@E>�J?FNJ�K?<ID8CCP�@EJLC8K<;�I<=I@><I8K@FE�G@G@E>�8E;��I<J:L<�NFIB<IJ8I<�:LKK@E>�8N8P�JFD<K?@E>��#LP�N@I<�JK8PJ�JL>><JK�K?@J�D8P�EFK�9<�8�EFID8CCP�8::<JJ@9C<�J<:K@FE�FI�NFIB�8I<8��%E�K?<�J<:FE;G@:KLI<�I<J:L<�NFIB<IJ�8I<�JFD<N?<I<�:CFJ<�KF�K?<�?@>?�I@;><�N?@:?�AL;>@E>�=IFD�K?<@I�?<@>?K�8GG<8IJ�KF�9<�8IFLE;��D<KI<J��*FK<�K?<�;<C8D@E8K<; =8CJ<��;IFG��:<@C@E> J8E;N@:?�G8E<CJ�JK@CC�?8E>@E>�8K�8GGIFO@D8K<CP��D<KI<J�?<@>?K�


Do, or rather, can, leading technology sources actually deliver against this implicit understanding? Or arecustomers in the third world eventually left to their own devices to obtain technical assistance from othersuppliers, typically the more aggressive sellers of construction materials, such as, in this case, panelsuppliers polystyrene sandwich panels? Once again, “free of cost”? And what does this approach end upeventually costing customers and employees?

I believe, embedded within this unfortunate incident are caveats for everyone involved in the business ofcreating poultry processing plant design, constructing such plants and selling or providing machinery andtechnology to this sector. To sum up,

1 Technology and cultural milieu must be in synchrony. Culture is a slow moving, lumbering entity.Where technology remains alien or falls short of being fully absorbed, culture short circuits it andends up with the worst of both worlds.

2 The smart consulting designer picks and chooses, striking a delicate balance between the fruits oftechnology, the caveats of legislation and standards and the limitations of local culture.

3 Though he may not know the details, the smart salesman is aware of this delicate balance. He isnever aggressive, just circumspect when making promises.

4 For the markets it operates in and hopes to build a durable presence in, the smart management isaware of all these. After all, it knows that globalization also means a world where a stepladder thatdoes not carry a caveat against incorrect use, can land it in trouble.

------------------

For industrial plants in general in the food processing sector and authorities entrusted with the task ofimplementing standards and codes for industrial and public safety, the caveats that emerge from thisanalysis are the subject matter for the second part of this report, to be uploaded on this website shortly

Alok Raj

Figure 24. Google Map taken at coordinates 44.136184,125.487696 showing the Jilin Baoyuanfeng Plant

�)1#+!),%0� 0?<�8LK?FI��CFB�.8A�@J� @I<:KFI��,0!��8�:FDG8EP�@EMFCM<;�@E�;<J@>E�8E;�:FEJLCK@E>�NFIB�=FI�K?<GIF:<JJ<;�=FF;J�GFLCKIP�8E;�D<8K�GIF:<JJ@E>�@E;LJKI@<J�@E�/FLK?��J@8� $<�D8P�9< I<8:?<;�8K��FI8CFB�8GK<:�@E��0?<�M@<NJ�<OGI<JJ<;�?<I< 8I<�@E�K?<�@EK<I<JK�F=�K?<�@E;LJKIP�8E;�;F�EFK E<:<JJ8I@CP I<=C<:K�@;<8J�FI@EK<IGI<K8K@FEJ�8KKI@9LK89C<�KF�8EP�G<IJFE�FI�FI>8E@J8K@FE��%E�JF�DL:?�8J�I<8;<IJ�J<<B�KF�<O:<IGK�J<:K@FEJ�F=�K?@J�8IK@:C<�=FI;@J:LJJ@FE�FI�;@JJ<D@E8K@FE�GIFM@;<;�8CN8PJ�K?8K�K?<P�8:BEFNC<;><�K?<�FI@>@E8C�JFLI:<�J��K?<P�8I<�=I<<�KF�;F�JF�<M<E�8JDL:?�8J�K?<��LK?FI ;F<J�?@DJ<C=�HLFK<�N@K?�8:BEFNC<;><D<EK�8E;�K?8EBJ�;8K8�M@<NJ�8E;�@;<8J�=IFD�N@K?@E�K?<�GL9C@:;FD8@E� .<8;<IJ�8I<�N<C:FD<�KF�J<E;�K?<@I�:FDD<EKJ�:I@K@HL<J�F9J<IM8K@FEJ�8E;�JL>><JK@FEJ�KF�K?<�8LK?FI�8K8CFB�8GK<:�@E

�!)0� 1%��.2)#%��0?@J�;F:LD<EK�D8P�:FEK8@E�:FGPI@>?K<;�D8K<I@8C�N?FJ<�LJ<�?8J�EFK�9<<E�JG<:@=@:8CCP�8LK?FI@Q<;�9P�K?<:FGPI@>?K�FNE<IJ� %�9<C@<M<�K?8K�K?@J�EFK�=FI�GIF=@K�<;L:8K@FE8C�LJ<�FE�K?<�3<9�:FEJK@KLK<J�8�=8@I�LJ<�F=�K?<�:FGPI@>?K<;D8K<I@8C��8J�GIFM@;<;�=FI�@E�J<:K@FE��F=�K?<�1/��FGPI@>?K�(8N��%=�PFL�N@J?�KF�LJ< JL:?�D8K<I@8C�GFJJ@9CP :FGPI@>?K<;=FI�GLIGFJ<J�F=�PFLI�FNE�K?8K�>F�9<PFE;�=8@I�LJ<�PFL�DLJK�F9K8@E�G<ID@JJ@FE�=IFD @KJ�:FGPI@>?K�FNE<I��(<8;J�KFI<=<I<E:<;�D8K<I@8CJ�8I<�>@M<E�9<CFN

1�8��$8DC<K��?@:B<E�,IF:<JJ@E>�,C8EK�"@I< NNN�IFI@>8J�:FD ?8DC<K�:?@:B<E�GIF:<JJ@E>�GC8EK�=@I<��?KDC��/<GK��9� $8DC<K

�?@:B<E�,IF:<JJ@E>�,C8EK�"@I< worldhistoryproject.org/1991/9/3/hamlet-chicken-processing-plant-fire;�8E; M@;<FJ�FE�5FL0L9<��:� )FAF*@OFE�8E;�&<CCF��@8=I8�R�$8DC<K��?@:B<E�,C8EK� @J8JK<;P��.F9<IK��FKK�,C8EK�"@I<J ��$8DC<K�*FIK? �8IFC@E8�8E;�*FIK?�(@KKC<�.F:B��IB8EJ8J F=�K?<�)8AFI�"@I<J%EM<JK@>8K@FE�,IFA<:K�:FE;L:K<;�9P�0I@ 8K8��FIGFI8K@FE�LE;<I�:FEKI8:K�KF�K?<�1E@K<;�/K8K<J�"@I<��;D@E@JKI8K@FE�"<;<I8C�!D<E:P)8E8><D<EK��><E:P�1/"��3<9�J@K<�8K�?KKG� �NNN�LJ=8�;?J�>FM 3%"%��"FI<EJ@:J S�0?<� 8E><IJ�F=�/8E;N@:?�,8E<C��L@C;@E>J�&LE<��9P�,IF=<JJFI�&8D<J�(P>8K<�,I@E:@G8C�%EM<JK@>8KFI�8K�%"%�"FI<EJ@:J�8E;�2@J@K@E>�,IF=<JJFI�F=�"@I<�%EM<JK@>8K@FE�8K�K?<�1E@M<IJ@KP�F=�!;@E9LI>?��%E=F��G<8B�D8IB<K@E>�:F�LB��CJF�GL9C@J?<;�FE%EJLI8E:<�%EJ@>?K ?KKG� NNN�@EJLI8E:<@EJ@>?K�:FD �8J�/8E;N@:?�,8E<C��FEJKIL:K@FE4/L:?�8�GC8EK <==<:K@M<CP�NFIBJ�IFLE;�K?<�:CF:B��E�<OGC8E8K@FE�F=�<==<:K@M<�J?@=KJ�@J�>@M<E�@E�"@>LI<J ��

5 <8;CP�=@I<�@E��?@E8�J�GFLCKIP�GC8EK�JG8IBJ�NFIBGC8:<�J8=<KP�:FE:<IEJ�<O:<IGK<;�=IFD�:?@E8;8@CP�:FD�:E�1G;8K<;��&LE��?KKG� NNN�N?8KJFEE@E>9F�:FD 60?<�<@>?K�JFLI:<J�I<=<I<E:<;�89FM<�8I<�� )8EP�/K@CC�0I8GG<;�@E��?@E8TJ�,FLCKIP�,C8EK�"@I< 3FIC;��*<NJ ��&LE<��

�)'30%�� %�:8D<�8:IFJJ�K?@J�G@:KLI<�8K�K?<�=8>�<E;�F=�DP�NI@K@E>�8E;�N?@C<�K?@J�=@E;�:FLC;�EFK�9< 8;<HL8K<CP LJ<;�@E�DP8E8CPJ@J�@K�;@;�J<IM<�8J�8�:?<:B�KF�JFD<�F=�DP�:FE:CLJ@FEJ� %�:8EEFK�I<8;�K?<�K<OK�9LK�DP�JLID@J<�89FLK�K?<�GI<J<E:<�F==FLI�;FFIJ�KF�K?<�/FLK?�K?<�<O@JK<E:<�F=�C@M<�9@I;�8II@M8C�8K�K?<�!8JK�8E;�K?<�GI<J<E:<�F=�8�N8I<?FLJ<�FE�K?<�*FIK?�J@;<8E;�JFD<�FK?<I�;<K8@CJ�8I<�:FIIF9FI8K<;�?<I<��%K�@J�8CJF�GFJJ@9C<�K?8K�K?<�<DGKP�I<:K8E>C<�ALJK�9<CFN�K?<�F9CFE>�:FC;�JKFI<8CFE>�K?<�KFG�<;><�@J�K?<�:<EKI8C�8DDFE@8 I<=I@><I8K@FE�GC8EK S�JL:?�8�?PGFK?<J@J�NFLC;�K<E;�KF�JLGGFIK�K?<�GFJ@K@FE�F=;<EJ<�JDFB<�<O@K@E>�K?<�9L@C;@E>�8K�K?<�:FDD<E:<D<EK�F=�K?<�=@I<�8J�J?FNE�@E�"@>LI<J��8E;��8E;�=@K�K?<�J?FIK<JK�;@JK8E:<:FE;@K@FE�KF�K?<�KNF�:LK�LG�?8CCJ�=C8EB@E>�@K�K?<�:FC;�JKFI<�8E;�K?<�;8IB�JHL8I@J?�N8K<I�:?@CC�8I<8�ALJK�9<CFN�@K�

� �(8O�/8=<KP��C8D<;�@E��?@E8�,FLCKIP�,C8EK�"@I<��?@E8�*<NJ�&LE< � �� 8�D� !0 �P �&8D<J�0��I<;;P� �3<@9F .<8:KJ 0F �?@E8 &@C@E ,FLCKIP�"8:KFIP�"@I<��8CCJ�"FI�.<J@>E8K@FE�+=�"8:KFIP +NE<I �P )@:?<CC<�"CFI:ILQFE &LE< �� ,)

��@CC�/K<M<EJFE 0?<�38CC�/KI<<K�&FLIE8C�&LE<��S(8O�/8=<KP��C8D<;�@E��?@E8TJ�,FLCKIP�,C8EK�"@I<! ��?I@JKFG??C@>?K�3FIB�/8=<KP��FE:<IEJ" ��?@E<J<�,FLCKIP�,C8EK�"@I<�'@CCJ�� S� 8M<�"LJ8IF�"FF;�,IF:<JJ@E>��&LE<��# �&@C@E�GFLCKIP�GC8EK�=@I<��B@CCJ��02�*<NJ �� *02�!E>C@J?$ �3@B@G<;@87��-LFEJ<K�?LK�@J�8�C@>?KN<@>?K�GI<=89I@:8K<;�JKIL:KLI<�F=�:FIIL>8K<;�>8CM8E@Q<;�JK<<C�?8M@E>�8�J<D@:@I:LC8I�:IFJJ�J<:K@FE��0?<�;<J@>E�N8J98J<;�FE�K?<�*@JJ<E�?LK�;<M<CFG<;�9P�K?<��I@K@J?�;LI@E>�3FIC;�38I�%��0?<�E8D<�:FD<J�=IFD�K?<@I�J@K<�F=�=@IJK�D8EL=8:KLI<�-LFEJ<K,F@EK�8K�K?<� 8M@JM@CC<�*8M8C��FEJKIL:K@FE��8KK8C@FE��<EK<I�@E� 8M@JM@CC<��8�M@CC8><�CF:8K<;�N@K?@E�K?<�KFNE�F=�*FIK?�'@E>JKFNE�.?F;<%JC8E;�1/��8�%9@;

9��M8JK�8DFLEK�F= :FDG8I8K@M< C@K<I8KLI<�FE <==@:@<E:P�<:FEFDP�8E;�J8=<KP�8JG<:KJ�F=�8DDFE@8�M<IJLJ�=CLFIF:8I9FEJ�<O@JKJ�@E�K?<�GL9C@:;FD8@E��!8:?�J@;<�8I>L<J�@KJ�:8J<�<E<K@:8CCP ��FE<�<OKFCC@E>�K?<�M@IKL<J�F=�8DDFE@8�8E;�K?<�FK?<I�?@>?C@>?K@E>�K?<�J8=<KP�F=�M8I@8EKJ�F==CLFIF:8I9FE�I<=I@><I8EKJ��0?8K�8DDFE@8�@J�KFO@:�8E;�:FD9LJK@9C<�@E�C8I><�:FE:<EKI8K@FEJ�8I<�E<M<I�;<E@<;�9P�<@K?<I�J@;<��LK�K?<�ALIP�@J8CI<8;P�@E S�=FI�C8I><�@E;LJKI@8C�8GGC@:8K@FEJ�8DDFE@8�@J�8E;�I<D8@EJ�K?<�I<=I@><I8EK�F=�:?F@:<�NFIC;N@;<�K@CC�K<:?EFCF>@:8C�;<M<CFGD<EKJ8CCFN�LJ�KF�LJ<�FI;@E8IP�8@I�8J�@KJ�=@E8C�I<GC8:<D<EK�

�:BEFNC<;><D<EK�F=�,@:KLI<J�=IFD�K?<�E<NJ�D<;@8�LJ<;�@E�K?@J�I<GFIK�"@>LI<�� 3FIC;�$@JKFIP�,IFA<:K � $8DC<K��?@:B<E�,IF:<JJ@E>�,C8EK�"@I<� NFIC;?@JKFIPGIFA<:K�FI> �� ?8DC<K�:?@:B<E�GIF:<JJ@E>

GC8EK�=@I<"@>LI<�� $8DC<K��?@:B<E�,IF:<JJ@E>�,C8EK�"@I< worldhistoryproject.org/1991/9/3/hamlet-chicken-processing-plant-fire;�8E; M@;<FJ�FE

5FL0L9<"@>LI<�� ?@E<J<��?@:B<E�"8ID�"@I<�'@CCJ��K�(<8JK��3FIB<IJ��2@;<F�FE�5FLKL9<

?KKG� NNN�PFLKL9<�:FD N8K:?�M�+�A:�P(O3�!"@>LI<�� <8;�@E��?@E8�J� <8;C@<JK��C8Q<�@E��5<8IJ�?KKG� NNN�9LJ@E<JJN<<B�:FD M@;<FJ �� ;<8;�@E�:?@E8J�

;<8;C@<JK�9C8Q<�@E��P<8IJ

Figure 5 (F:B<;�;FFIJ�8K�KFI:?<;�GFLCKIP�GC8EK�J?FN�?FN�C@KKC<�?8J�:?8E><;�=FI�D8EP��?@E<J<�NFIB<IJ �P��?I@JKFG?<I��F;<<E�0?<�JJF:@8K<;�,I<JJ�&LE<�� ?KKG� NNN�DFEKI<8C>8Q<KK<�:FD

"@>LI<�� 333�*<NJ�:E�?KKG� NNN�>FF>C<�:F�@E @D>I<J�H�A@C@EGFLCKIP=@I<�JK8IK��J8�4�9@N��9@?��K9D�@J:?�K9E@;��3�8G&?F>0PEE)��@D>I<=LIC�?KKG� NNN�D@C@K8IPG?FKFJ�E<K =FILDJ J?FNK?I<8;�G?G��"��G<FGC<�;<8;�@E��=@I<�@E��?@E8�;F:@;� "L�=��Q);'M?)�@D>LIC�?KKG� @�@D>LI�:FD �#O,�M>�AG>�N��?��<@�CM(-19 �(:#%I-=�J5�>�-�QFFD��M<;��K��I��J��@��

"@>LI<�� ?KKG� NNN�J:DG�:FD E<NJ :?@E8 8IK@:C< �� KNF�<O<:LK@M<J�A@C@E�GFLCKIP�GC8EK�8II<JK<;�FM<I�:?@E8J�;<8;C@<JK�9C8Q<"@>LI<�� IFN;�#8K?<IJ�KF�N8K:? 8J�=@I<=@>?K<IJ�J<8I:?�=FI�JLIM@MFIJ�8K�K?<��8FPL8E�GFLCKIP�GC8EK�K?8K�:8L>?K�=@I<�@E� <?L@�EFIK?�<8JK

�?@E8�J�&@C@E�GIFM@E:<�FE�&LE<�� ,$+0+��",�?KKG� NNN�JKI8@KJK@D<J�:FD 9I<8B@E>�E<NJ 8J@8 JKFIP A@C@E�=@I<�JLIM@MFIJ�;<J:I@9<�J<8�=C8D<J�:?8FJ��

"@>LI<�� 3FIBGC8:<�KI8><;@<J�:?8CC<E><��/8=<��?@E8� �P�4@E?L8�NI@K<I�(@�(8@=8E>��4@E?L8� ��&LE<��?KKG� <E>C@J?�G<FGC<;8@CP�:FD�:E �� ?KDC

"@>LI<�� 0?<�=@I<�;8D8><;�GFLCKIP�=8:KFIP�9L@C;@E>W ?KKG� NNN�:?8EE<CE<NJ8J@8�:FD E<NJ 8J@8G8:@=@: KNF�8II<JK<;�8=K<I�;<8;CP ��?KDC

"@>LI<�� ?KKG� E<NJ�P8?FF�:FD C@>?K9FO =@I<=@>?K<IJ�KIP�<OK@E>L@J?�=@I<�GFLCKIP�JC8L>?K<I?FLJ<�;<?L@�G?FKF��?KDC"@>LI<�� ?KKG� NNN�JK8J@8I<GFIK�:FD 9I<8B@E>�E<NJ 8J@8 JKFIP A@C@E�=@I<�G8E@:B<;�NFIB<IJ�J:I8D9C<;�J@E>C<�FG<E�<O@K�J8P�JLIM@MFIJ�

��&@C@E�=@I<��,8E@:B<;�NFIB<IJ�J:I8D9C<;�=FI�J@E>C<�FG<E�<O@K�J8P�JLIM@MFIJ ,L9C@J?<;�FE�&LE�� )"@>LI<�� "@I<�B@CCJ��8K�GFLCKIP�GC8EK�@E�EFIK?<8JK��?@E8��?I@JKFG?<I��F;<<E��JJF:@8K<;�,I<JJ "IFD�0?<� <KIF@K�*<NJ�

?KKG� NNN�;<KIF@KE<NJ�:FD 8IK@:C< �� *�0%+* ��@OQQ�6NPILM�4"@>LI<�� &@C@E�=@I<��?@E8�GFLCKIP�GC8EK�NFIB<IJ�;@;E�K�HL<IP�CF:B<;�;FFIJ <M<E�8=K<I�GI<M@FLJ�=@I< ,L9C@J?<;�FE�&LE��

?KKG� NNN�JK8J@8I<GFIK�:FD K?<�9@>�JKFIP 8J@8�I<GFIK :?@E8 JKFIP A@C@E�=@I<�:?@E8�GFLCKIP�GC8EK�NFIB<IJ�;@;EK�HL<IP�CF:B<;�;FFI�JK?8J?�J.8�)D)��;GL=

"@>LI<�� L@C;@E>��LJKI8C@8TJ�"LKLI<��FE=<I<E:<�!4,�* ! �,+(5/05.!*!�/�* 3%�$�,�*!(/ �+ !�+"�,.��0%�!%E;LJKIP�3FIB@E>��FCC89FI8K@M<CP�KF� <M<CFG�*F�.<>LC8KFIP�/FCLK@FEJ�2<IJ@FE��&F?E��C8DG<KK S�&F?E��C8DG<KK��FEJLCK@E>.FE�(8NJFE S��!+�@EJLC8K<;�,8E<C��FLE:@C��LJKI8C8J@8�(K;

"@>LI<�� 3@B@D<;@8�,@:KLI<J :FDDFEJ�N@B@D<;@8�FI> N@B@ �8K<>FIP�-LFEJ<K7?LKJ��D<I@:8E�KIFFGJ�D8I:?@E>�KF�HL8IK<IJ�@E�%I<C8E;��AG>

"@>LI<�� ?KKG� E<NJ�@E�DJE�:FD KFGJKFI@<J8I:?@M<�8JGO"@>LI<�� .<C8K@M<J�J:L==C<�N@K?�GFC@:<�8=K<I��?@E8�=@I<�B@CCJ��&LE<��)��P�)8O@D� LE:8E

?KKG� NNN�;8@CPJK8I�:FD�C9 *<NJ %EK<IE8K@FE8C �� &LE�� I<C8K@M<J�J:L==C<�N@K?�GFC@:<�8=K<I�:?@E8�=@I<�B@CCJ��8J?O�@OQQ�6O�+&�)� �0?<� 8@CP�/K8I��(<98EFE�*<NJ��?KKG� NNN�;8@CPJK8I�:FD�C9�

"@>LI<�� <8K?�KFCC�I@J<J�KF��@E�*!��?@E8�=@I<��4@E?L8� ��&LE<��"@>LI<�� ?@E8�=@I<�JLIM@MFIJ�K<CC�F=��J<8�F=�=C8D<J� ?KKG� E<NJ�G?�DJE�:FD KFG�JKFI@<J :?@E8�=@I<�JLIM@MFIJ�K<CC�F=�J<8�F=�=C8D<J��"@>LI<�� NNN�N?8KJFJ8EP8�:FD E<NJ7@D8><J ��&@C@E�GC8EK�=@I<"@>LI<�� <?L@�=@I<�/?8D<��"C8DD89C<�D8K<I@8CJ�JL9JK8E;8I;�� ,L9C@J?<;��&LE<�� ?KKG� NNN�9<JK�E<NJ�LJ

aptec technology consulting · 2019-04-19 · aptec report - the jilin baoyuanfeng poultry...

Documents