Scientists dispute Sierra Chemical claims about blast

RENO, Nev. - Seismologists told a federal safety board Wednesday a deadly blast at a Nevada explosives manufacturer began in a building where workers were handling chemicals and could not have started where the company claims it did.

But a lawyer for Sierra Chemical Co. accused the U.S. Chemical Safety Board of bungling the investigation and insisted the explosion that killed four workers and injured three on January 7 was ignited in a building absent of workers.

The site of the initial explosion near Mustang goes to the heart of state and federal inspectors claims that inadequate worker training and safety inspections helped cause the blast that left a crater 40 feet wide, broke windows a mile away and shook seismic needles at the University of Nevada, Reno.

Sierra Chemical is appealing a $1 million fine from the state for alleged safety violations and faces a wrongful death suit filed by families of the victims.

Ken Smith, who directs seismic operations at UNR's Seismological Laboratory, was among those who testified Wednesday before the Chemical Safety Board in Washington D.C.

"Air waves unambiguously demonstrate that the northern of the two explosions occurred first," the seismologists said in a draft report the board's investigative team presented to board members Wednesday at a hearing in Washington D.C.

That means the first explosion occurred in Booster Room 2, where workers were mixing explosives, followed seconds later by a second explosion in the PETN Building that housed chemicals used in the mixtures, board spokesman Bill Riley said.

The report said the estimate was good within 1 meter.

"They pinpointed right where the blast took place. There is no question about which building went first," Riley told The Associated Press from Washington.

The draft report sent to the board on Wednesday said the explosion likely was triggered when a worker started a blade in a mixing bowl unaware that an explosive mixture had been left there the night before.

"The investigation of this accident revealed that many essential elements of process safety management were missing or deficient," the investigative report said.

Among other things it cited:

- inadequate analysis of hazardous risks

- inadequate training of workers,

- lack of written operating procedures

- no systematic safety inspection or auditing program

Bruce Laxalt, a lawyer representing Sierra Chemical, said at a news conference here Wednesday that the board's investigation was "less than thorough."

"We are just disappointed that the board has steadfastly refused to have a sit-down with our experts and have a frank exchange of reviews of the evidence," Laxalt told AP in a telephone interview afterwards.

He said he had not seen the seismologists' evidence.

"We are going solely from the blast distribution," Laxalt said.

"There is simply no way the debris could have ended up where it undoubtedly did end up if the PETN room did not go first," he said.

Laxalt said the company's appeal of the $1 million state fine probably won't be heard before state safety and health officials before next year.

archive