New CSB Video Titled “Fire in the Valley” documents the Bayer Cropscience accidental explosion at Institute, W.Va. site
Washington, DC, March 21, 2011 – The U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) today released a new safety video depicting events leading to the August 28, 2008, catastrophic explosion and fire at the Bayer CropScience facility in Institute, WV, that fatally injured two workers.
The video is entitled “Fire in the Valley,” a reference to the Kanawha River valley where numerous chemical facilities are located, including the Bayer plant that manufactures insecticides, near Charleston, West Virginia.
———–Ad———————
For easy to understand training programs on Hazardous Area Instrumentation, Safety Instrumented Systems, Gas Monitors and HAZOP, please click here
————————————
The video features a detailed computer animation showing how a series of errors and deficiencies during a lengthy startup process resulted in a runaway chemical reaction inside a residue treater pressure vessel. The CSB’s investigation found that operators were not adequately trained, new computer process equipment had not been fully checked out, and a critical safety interlock was bypassed to begin a chemical reaction.
Investigations Supervisor John Vorderbrueggen, P.E. discusses the CSB’s findings, “We found serious deficiencies in the company’s process safety management program. This resulted in a series of critical omissions during the startup that led to a runaway reaction and violent explosion.”
These events contributed to the over pressurization of the residue treater which ultimately exploded and careened into the methomyl pesticide manufacturing unit, leaving a huge fireball in its wake. Pieces of the vessel struck a steel-mesh covering surrounding a large tank of methyl isocyanate, a highly toxic chemical of concern to residents of the valley since 1984 when an accidental release of MIC in Bhopal, India, killed thousands.
In the video, CSB Chairperson Rafael Moure-Eraso says, “The communities surrounding Bayer CropScience have been concerned for decades about the MIC stored there. Its presence added even more gravity to the series of safety lapses the CSB investigation found to have preceded the tragedy. And when the accident occurred, the company refused to give out critical information to responders and the public.”
Ultimately, 40,000 area residents were requested to shelter-in-place the night of the accident. The video features comments by county and state officials on the initial refusal of Bayer to provide information to Metro 911 emergency response operators as well as resident’s concerns about chemical plant safety in the area. “Fire in the Valley” also details the key CSB safety recommendation that Kanawha Valley county authorities emulate the regulatory regime of Contra Costa County, California. There, chemical process safety experts regularly inspect the multitude of facilities throughout the county in a program that is paid for by a proportional levy on the plants. The program’s director, Randy Sawyer, comments in the CSB video on the success of the program.
Chairperson Moure-Eraso concludes the video saying, “Good communications between chemical plants, responders, and community leaders can help assure the safety of workers and residents during an emergency. But preventing accidents requires companies to have effective process safety management programs. The fact that accidents continue to occur shows the need for improved inspections and oversight whether at the federal or local levels.”
Bayer Cropscience Accident at Institute- CSB issues final report
Institute, West Virginia, January 20, 2011 – The U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) today released its final report on the August 28, 2008, Bayer CropScience pesticide manufacturing unit explosion that killed two workers and injured eight others. In a report scheduled for Board consideration at a public meeting this evening in Institute, the CSB found multiple deficiencies during a lengthy startup process that resulted in a runaway chemical reaction inside a residue treater pressure vessel. The vessel ultimately over pressurized and exploded. The vessel careened into the methomyl pesticide manufacturing unit leaving a huge fireball in its wake.
—————Advt—————–
For comprehensive training on Gas Detectors, Safety Instrumented Systems, Hazardous Area Instrumentation and HAZOP study please click here.
————————————-
The report found that had the trajectory of the exploding vessel taken it in a different direction, pieces of it could have impinged upon and possibly caused a release from piping at the top of a tank of highly toxic methyl isocyanate (MIC).
(Editors Note: MIC is the same chemical that has killed thousands of people in the infamous Bhopal gas disaster. To think that it could have happened even 25 years later in the US is telling)
The accident occurred during the startup of the methomyl unit, following a lengthy period of maintenance. The CSB found the startup was begun prematurely, a result of pressures to resume production of the pesticides methomyl and Larvin, and took place before valve lineups, equipment checkouts, a pre-startup safety review, and computer calibration were complete. CSB investigators also found the company failed to perform a thorough Process Hazard Analysis, or PHA, as required by regulation.
This resulted in numerous critical omissions, including an overly complex Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) that was not reviewed and approved, incomplete operator training on a new computer control system, and inadequate control of process safeguards. A principal cause of the accident, the report states, was the intentional overriding of an interlock system that was designed to prevent adding methomyl process residue into the residue treater vessel before filling the vessel with clean solvent and heating it to the minimum safe operating temperature.
Furthermore, the investigation found that critical operating equipment and instruments were not installed before the restart, and were discovered to be missing after the startup began. Bayer’s Methomyl-Larvin unit MIC gas monitoring system was not in service as the startup ensued, yet Bayer emergency personnel presumed it was functioning and claimed no MIC was released during the incident.
Here is an animated video of the likely sequence of events that occured.
CSB Chairperson Dr. Rafael Moure-Eraso said, “The deaths of the workers as a result of this accident were all the more tragic because it could have been prevented had Bayer CropScience provided adequate training, and required a comprehensive pre-startup equipment checkout and strict conformance with appropriate startup procedures. This would have revealed multiple dangerous conditions and procedures that were occurring at a time when the company wanted to restart production of a key pesticide product. Startups are always a potentially hazardous operation, but to begin with computer control systems that have not been checked, while bypassing safety interlocks, is unacceptable.”
The investigation report makes recommendations to the company and its Institute plant, to the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), and several West Virginia agencies. Citing a highly successful county program to ensure refinery and chemical plant safety in Contra Costa County, California, the CSB report recommends the West Virginia Department of Health and Human Resources establish a “Hazardous Chemical Release Prevention Program” that would have the authority to inspect and regulate such plants, and make public its ongoing findings.
Dr. Moure-Eraso said, “I believe a state and county-run program like this would go a long way to making chemical operations safer in places like the Kanawha Valley. OSHA and EPA, have limited resources and cannot be everywhere at once. However, local jurisdictions can put together highly effective and targeted inspection and enforcement programs, funded by levies on the plants themselves. The accident rate in Contra Costa County has dropped dramatically, and last year in fact they had no significant accidents, thanks, in my view, to this program.”
CSB Investigations Manager John Vorderbrueggen noted that a major contributing factor to the accident was a series of equipment malfunctions that continually distracted operators. “Human factors played a big part in this accident, and the absence of enforced, workable standard operating procedures and adequate safety systems meant that mistakes could prove fatal. For example, operators were troubleshooting several equipment problems and during the startup, inadvertently failed to prefill the residue treater vessel with solvent. A safety interlock was designed to stop workers from introducing highly-reactive methomyl, but it was bypassed as had been done in previous operations with managers’ knowledge. Once the chemical reaction of the highly concentrated methomyl started, it could not be stopped, and the temperature and pressure inside rose rapidly, finally causing an explosion.”
Board Member John Bresland, who was CSB chairman at the time of the Bayer accident, noted the confusion that resulted in the community’s emergency response following the explosion at 10:33 p.m. “The Bayer fire brigade was at the scene in minutes, but Bayer management withheld information from the county emergency response agencies that were desperate for information about what happened, what chemicals were possibly involved,” Mr. Bresland said. “The Bayer incident commander, inside the plant, recommended a shelter in place; but this was never communicated to 911 operators. After an hour of being refused critical information, local authorities ordered a shelter-in-place, as a precaution.”
“Proper communication between companies and emergency responders during an accident is critical,” said Mr. Bresland, adding, “The community deserved better, especially considering the amounts of hazardous chemicals, in use and being stored at various chemical facilities in the Kanawha River valley.
The CSB report notes that two workers and four volunteer firefighters required examination for possible exposure to toxic chemicals.
The investigation examined the potential consequences of a hypothetical trajectory of the careening residue treater vessel that would result in its hitting the heavy steel mesh ballistic shield surrounding the above-ground MIC tank. The analysis – using blast pressure and impact energy calculations – concluded that the shield would have protected the MIC tank from a residue treater vessel hit. However, the CSB found, had the residue treater struck the shield structure near the top of the frame, the displaced frame could have contacted an MIC pipe, which might have resulted in an MIC release into the atmosphere.
Chairperson Moure-Eraso said, “Any significant MIC release into the atmosphere along the Kanawha valley could have proven deadly, and that concern has been legitimately expressed for decades in the community. This potential was reduced when Bayer announced last year it would no longer store MIC above ground; it will be reduced to zero in approximately 18 months when the company has announced it will end MIC production and use at the Institute facility – the only place in the country still storing large quantities of MIC.”
Dr. Moure-Eraso continued, “Bayer’s decision to end pesticide production using MIC was, I understand, done for its own business reasons. But for whatever reasons, the eventual elimination of this chemical will enhance safety in the Kanawha Valley, for workers and residents alike, and is a positive development in my view.”
BP releases investigation report into Deepwater Horizon accident
Sep 09, 2010- BP released their own internal investigation report yesterday into the Deepwater Horizon oil rig explosion, fire, sinking and then massive oil spill caused by the rupturing of the pipeline riser several thousand meters below the ocean surface of the Macondo well. However, there is no one cause that has been listed, but rather several contributing causes have been mentioned. Some of the key noteworthy points in the report are listed below.
Our own comments are highlighted below (in bold italics).
1. Weaknesses in cement design and testing.
2. Failure of the shoe-track barrier in isolating hydrocarbons. The investigation team has reportedly found some clues that identify how the shoetrack cement and the float collar allowed hydrocarbon ingress into the production casing.
3. Acceptance of the negative pressure test before establishing the well integrity-here BP has pointed fingers at the Transocean rig crew as well as at BP’s own rig leadership which “incorrectly” interpreted the test results.
4. Influx was not recognized until the hydrocarbons were in the riser.Apparently almost 40 minutes before the crew started taking action, increase in drill pipe pressure data could be seen-which was not apparently noticed.
5. Wrong actions on diverting the fluids exiting the riser to the Mud-Gas separator, rather than to the overboard diverter line.
6. Once diverted to the Mud-Gas Separator, the fluids got vented onto the rig itself, where it these fluids may have found an ignition source and exploded
7. Failure of the Fire & Gas System to prevent ignition-this point seems a bit debatable, because an F & G system cannot “prevent” a fire from occuring really- all it does it to measure any gas leaks or fires and extinguish them. Apparently the hydrocarbons went into unclassified areas like engine rooms where it could find potential sources of ignition.
Incidentally this is a similar phenomenon that was observed in the infamous Buncefield, UK accident where a large explosion took place.
8. Lastly the Blow Out Preventer (BOP) did not seal the well. The control pods that were supposed to act did not work, a guess is that they got damaged due to the fire and explosion. Consequently a critical solenoid operated valve did not operate. What is more startling and damning however, is that the control pod batteries had inadequate charging, due to which the Solenoid valve did not operate-this is most certainly an oversight by the maintenance personnel who were in charge of the Control & Instrumentation systems on the rig.
Finally the report mentioned that the investigation revealed potential weaknesses in the inspection and maintenance regimes.
Though there will be several more investigation reports from different agencies like the Coast Guard, the US Chemical Safety Board and others, the initial BP investigation does seem to have covered a lot of ground. It raises questions about hazardous area classification, especially on an oil rig where the classification of areas that are classified and “safe” or “non-hazardous” seems a bit arbitrary. If one cannot know which areas of the rig would have the presence of hydrocarbons then there is no point in classifying-one should designate all areas as hazardous, although with different risk profiles such as Zone 1, Zone 2 and so on.
We’re sure this is not the last that would be written on this subject, but it gives a good idea of the importance of two subjects-hazardous area classification and gas monitors
Have a look at the excellent training resources for both of these crucial topics here.
NFPA amends the Fuel Gas Code to prevent purging of pipelines using natural gas after Kleen explosion
Aug 11, 2010- The National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), through an emergency revision to the NFPA 2009 code, has prohibited the purging of gas pipelines by using natural gas. This is a direct fallout of the Kleen Energy accident investigation, after the US Chemical Safety Board concluded that the purging by natural gas led to the accident. The CSB had also appealed to standards and regulatory bodies like OSHA and NFPA to amend the codes that regulate natural gas piping and operations in view of these findings. We had reported all about it here.
The NFPA has now responded by issuing aTentative Interim Amendment to Section 54 of the Natural Gas Code. This can be downloaded from here.
(Note: The code specifically talks about installing a gas detector to detect the presence of natural gas-if you would like to know how to specify, select, install, calibrate and maintain these gas detectors, please click here)
The CSB was glad to hear about this and the agency has issued a statement reproduced below.
Here’s the CSB statement (in Italics)
————————–
Emergency Change to National Fuel Gas Code Addresses Cause of Fatal June 2009 Blast at ConAgra Slim Jim Plant in North Carolina
On February 4, 2010, I presided at a Chemical Safety Board public meeting in Raleigh, North Carolina, to present the CSB’s findings on the June 9, 2009, natural gas explosion at the ConAgra Slim Jim manufacturing plant in the nearby community of Garner.
That tragic and preventable accident cost four lives, injured 67 others, and led to a decision to close the plant, with the loss of hundreds of jobs in the region. The accident occurred during an operation to purge (or clear air) from a new steel gas-supply pipe that was connected to a newly installed industrial water heater. The pipe was connected at the other end to the building’s natural gas distribution system. During the purging operation, gas was allowed to flow through the pipe and exit through an open valve inside the utility room where the water heater was located. Due to difficulties in lighting the water heater, the purging operation was continued for an unusually long time, eventually causing gas to accumulate above the lower explosive limit inside the building. The gas contacted an ignition source and exploded, causing extensive sections of the large facility to collapse.
The CSB noted that the accident at ConAgra was but one of a number of similar explosions caused by an intentional, planned work activity that inadvertently led to a large and unsafe release of natural gas into a workplace.
At the time of the accident, indoor purging of natural gas systems was not prohibited under the National Fuel Gas Code, a key consensus code of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) that has been adopted by many states and localities across the country. At the February 4 public meeting, the Board voted to make urgent recommendations to NFPA and the International Code Council to prohibit indoor purging and require companies and installers to purge flammable fuel gases to safe locations outdoors, away from workers and ignition sources.
I am pleased that the NFPA made our recommendation a high priority and took immediate steps to improve the National Fuel Gas Code. Last week, on August 5, the NFPA Standards Council gave final approval to an emergency code change, known as a Tentative Interim Amendment, that will prohibit indoor purging of industrial gas lines operating at greater than two pounds per square inch gauge (psig) or meeting certain pipe size criteria. According to the NFPA, the new requirements are designed to require outdoor purging for industrial, large commercial, and large multifamily buildings.
These new provisions would have required the gas pipe at ConAgra to be purged outdoors, away from personnel and ignition sources. Under the new requirements, purging must be monitored using appropriate detection equipment to prevent a significant release of flammable gas. The new requirements are similar to new safety procedures developed and implemented by both ConAgra and the State of North Carolina in the months following the tragedy.
Outdoor purging is inherently safer than venting gas into a building. Had the gas pipe at ConAgra been safely purged outdoors, the explosion and resulting deaths and injuries could have been avoided.
I encourage all companies to study the new code recommendations and to purge flammable gases outdoors whenever possible. I urge the NFPA to ensure that a prohibition on indoor purging and other safeguards are permanently incorporated into the National Fuel Gas Code, and I thank the NFPA leadership and members for their positive actions to promote worker safety.
###












