Fearing blasts, state to inspect small plants

DANVERS -- In hopes of preventing the kind of explosion that leveled a Danvers neighborhood last November, state officials outlined yesterday the first federally approved plan to inspect small chemical and hazardous waste plants that they said could pose "a significant danger to populations in the event of a problem or accident."

Teams from the state departments of fire services and environmental protection will join local fire officials to inspect 15 smaller plants in the next two months and 25 more by year-end. Owners who do not cooperate may face administrative search warrants.

The targeted plants were chosen based on how close they are to neighborhoods, the types or amounts of chemicals or waste materials they produce, and their inspection histories. Officials would not identify the plants to be inspected, but they said they are selecting those that pose the most danger among some 15,000 smaller plants across the state.

"We don't want to single out publicly, prior to inspection, any company or facility in a way that implies it is in any way unsafe or that its neighbors face any particular danger," said Ed Coletta, a spokesman for the state Department of Environmental Protection. "The identification of these 40 facilities is simply a way of prioritizing inspections. Only if we discover unsafe conditions and conclude that an enforcement action is warranted will we name a facility publicly."

Now, the state inspects 20 percent of larger plants annually and a few hundred smaller plants, Coletta said. Under the new plan, state and local officials will team up for the first time to inspect the potentially most dangerous smaller plants.

State officials would not say whether the targeted plants are among the 13 percent of all smaller plants that don't comply with hazardous waste storage and handling regulations, compared with 9 percent of larger plants.

"Massachusetts is the first state in the country to be allowed by [the US Environmental Protection Agency] to make a shift in inspections from large generators of hazardous waste to smaller ones," said Phillip Griffiths, undersecretary for environment at the state's Executive Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs. "The only way we can prevent [a similar explosion] from happening again is by going to the source of the danger and ensuring that all precautions that ought to be taken are taken."

As they announced the new Safe Neighborhoods Chemical Initiative, state officials confirmed preliminary findings from investigators that a build-up of chemical vapors inside a paint and ink factory early on Nov. 22 caused the blast that left hundreds homeless and damaged about 270 houses and businesses and 365 motor vehicles and boats.

At a press conference, State Fire Marshal Stephen D. Coan said the vapors probably were produced by the inadvertent heating of a tank of heptane, a highly flammable, colorless solvent used to produce inks. He said that investigators could not say what ignited the vapors, but that they ruled out other suspected causes of the explosion, including natural gas, methane gas, furnaces at the factory, underground chemical storage tanks, and a dust collection system.

Possible ignition sources include fans, space heaters, refrigerator and vending machine motors, and a furnace, he said. "Investigators believe that in all probability, the accumulation of heptane vapors set the stage for any one of these ignition sources to have triggered the explosion," Coan said.

He declined to identify the name of the employee or employees responsible for the leak of the flammable vapors or which of two companies using the building they were employed by and said no workers or companies will face criminal charges. The explosion, which was felt 25 miles away, leveled the building used by ink manufacturer CAI Inc. and Arnel Co., a custom paint maker. Both companies used highly explosive chemical solvents, investigators said.

"It is described and agreed to be a very serious, inadvertent accident that occurred," Coan said. "It was human error, most likely. But it's an accident, and it does not raise itself to the level of a criminal complaint."

The state findings were announced two days before the US Chemical Safety Board plans to release the results of its own investigation. Daniel Horowitz, a board spokesman, said the report would offer more detail about the explosion, but he declined to comment on specifics.

Officials at CAI, a privately held company, said they could not comment on the state report because they "have not been provided with the basis supporting their assumptions," and are still awaiting the federal report.

"Since the incident occurred, CAI has cooperated fully with investigators and has fervently sought the completion of an exhaustive investigation," the company said in a statement. "This complex explosion is considered unprecedented by virtually everyone."

Officials at Arnel Co. did not return calls seeking comment yesterday.

The explosion caused millions of dollars in damage and resulted in more than 200 insurance claims by homeowners and businesses. It cost the EPA $1.3 million to clear hazardous debris from the blast site.

By May 1, about 250 houses, 20 businesses, and one school had reported damage as a result of the explosion, investigators said. Officials temporarily shuttered 80 houses after the explosion; 47 of those have since been reoccupied. They ordered 16 of the houses and six businesses to be demolished.

In addition, investigators said, the explosion damaged or destroyed some 300 commercial and passenger vehicles and 65 boats.

Many of the residents who attended the press conference were incredulous when they heard that investigators have dismissed natural gas as a trigger for the explosion.

"I've done a lot of research on this, and I'm not impressed by this report," said Ann Marie Ruotolo, who said her house on Bates Street had about $25,000 in damage. "If you were there and experienced the blast, it was more of a sonic boom, a concussive type of explosion that would suggest it was caused by natural gas. I don't believe a chemical vapor in that confined space could cause such a huge explosion."

Ross Niciewsky, whose Riverside Street house sustained about $100,000 in damage, and other residents who live near the plant said they suspect a cover-up. "I think we're looking at politics at work," he said.

Lori Ataya, who hopes to return to her heavily damaged Bates Street house in two weeks, said she frequently smelled the odor of gas while walking her dog near the plant. "I absolutely think there's something wrong with these conclusions," she said. "They need to keep digging."

Coan, however, said that the state's conclusions are based on witnesses interviewed and evidence gathered by investigators, and that he stands by the report.

David Abel can be reached at dabel@globe.com.