General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDocuments show prior citations before blast at Tenn. facility
As investigators continue to comb through the wreckage of an explosion in Tennessee that left 18 people unaccounted for Friday, Nexstars WKRN has learned more about the company that operated the facility.
Accurate Energetic Systems is a defense and commercial explosives manufacturer. Documents revealed that there were several Tennessee Occupational Safety and Health Administration violations at the facility.
In 2019, the company received serious citations related to residue of cyclonite, an explosive powder, in areas where employees are permitted to consume food and drink. Cyclonite could result in central nervous system impairment. That same year, two employees experienced seizures and had the potential to be exposed to cyclonite while working in what documents called a Hot House. A discussion between an employer representative and a TOSHA representative evolved to a discussion about personal protective equipment.
The employer explained that employees were provided with the option to wear long sleeves in the work place but they do not want to go to the extreme with PPE because their cyclonite is coated with a wax and therefore it wouldnt be easily absorbed through the skin, the document reads, in part. The TOSHA representative explained that cyclonite has a skin designation and it is the employers responsibility to eliminate/reduce employees skin exposure.
The serious violation found that the employer had not ensured that surfaces in the break room including the table and microwave were kept free from the hazardous chemical cyclonite. In the end, the company settled with the state and paid $7,200 in fines, agreed to make several changes and reclassified the citations to other-than-serious.
https://www.wate.com/news/previous-violations-reported-prior-to-massive-explosion-at-middle-tennessee-facility-documents/
This is what happens when the government just "fines" a company. People die. How many times...

Walleye
(42,761 posts)So 18 people get vaporized.
Liberal In Texas
(15,699 posts)ProfessorGAC
(74,761 posts)So, it's not deregulation.
It's just slovenly management who didn't follow the law, despite the fact that there is insignificant cost in doing so.
Management chasing pennies seems to be the problem, not lack of regulation.
I'm a bit surprised they were cited because I expected lax application of regulation in that state. But, inspectors obviously there and followed the law, so I guessed wrongly on that.
Don't get me wrong; I'm an opponent of deregulation. But, I don't think that's to blame here.
Liberal In Texas
(15,699 posts)The plant blew up. Unless they were bombed the only reason a place like this blows up is because procedures, storage, unsafe equipment or a combination of those factors caused it. We may know if they find evidence in the debris. The place should obviously have had some kind of regulation to assure that lazy management wasn't cutting corners and running the place dangerously.
There were citations for health violations and chemical exposure of the employees. The fines on these companies are always too light. The only way to keep them from going back to business as usual is to make the fines painful.
ProfessorGAC
(74,761 posts)Liberal In Texas
(15,699 posts)Igel
(37,138 posts)Apparently AES has 7-8 distinct and separate facilities at the site (I think I read 8, but maybe it was 7). They produce military, industrial, and publicly commercial things that go "boom"--best way I know of putting it--ammo, munitions, commercial explosives.
This includes tons of TNT for the DOD, shaped plastic explosives for mining companies or for claymore mines, ammunition for law enforcement, hunting, and the military.
This was just one of the facilities. This one was allegedly just producing ammunition for hunting, LE, military ... one round is very much like another of the same size and weight.
Was *this* facility cited? If not, the citations are a problem but not immediately relevant; on the other hand, if it wasn't this facility that was cited, the fact that others were means it had been inspected and nothing citable was found.