OSHA Fines Sherwin-Williams $290K for Garland Plant Explosion

The Cleveland-based paint giant is being charged for the explosion that occurred in August.

Kristen Kazarian, Managing Editor

February 7, 2024

2 Min Read
Sherwin-Williams fined for plant explosion violations
Sherwin-Williams was fined $161,310 just for the repeat violation.Image courtesy of Rattankun Thongbun / iStock via Getty Images

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) is fining Cleveland, OH-based Sherwin-Williams more than $290,000 for safety violations at the paint giant’s Garland, TX plant.

A massive fire and multiple explosions occurred at the Sherwin-Williams Garland plant in the overnight hours of Aug. 7, 2023.

Upon investigation, OSHA found nine violations, including a repeat violation. The repeat violation alone could cost the company $161,310. The other eight violations are $16,131 each.

Among the additional violations, OSHA reported:

  • Employees were exposed to fire and explosion hazards from unstable chemical reaction due to the improper storage of Luperox 26 A which was not stored in a temperature-controlled environment.

  • Relief valve PSV-5408 was not included in the relief system design or design basis associated with the pressure vessel CAT-5 written process safety information, which exposed employees to struck-by hazards.

  • The 2021 Process Hazard Analysis did not identify the hazards of self-reactive, thermally sensitive chemicals and potential for high ambient temperatures on vessel CAT-5 charged with organic oxidizers.

  • The employer did not address process equipment siting near the control room when it evaluated the facility siting in the Process Hazard Analysis.

  • The normal operating procedure, SQ4736P, did not list the operating limits, including specific upper temperature limits, for Luperox-26 (organic peroxide) used in CAT-5. As well, the employer did not address the consequences of deviation from operating limits.

  • The employer did not provide operator refresher training at least every three years or more often, if necessary. (This was listed as Citation #6 and #7.)

  • The employer did not establish written procedures for inspecting pressure vessels and piping systems and did not develop a mechanical integrity program for corrosion under insulation inspections.

  • Repeat violation for not inspecting processing equipment that exposed workers to hazards. This includes the piping from the vessels to the reactors, and reactors to tanks.

The Sherwin-Williams Co. has 15 days to contest the citations. If not, they will be final and the fee of $290,358 must be paid. The company must also return a sheet with listing the specific method of correction for each item on the citation and return it.

About the Author(s)

Kristen Kazarian

Managing Editor

Kristen Kazarian has been a writer and editor for more than three decades. She has worked at several consumer magazines and B2B publications in the fields of food and beverage, packaging, processing, women's interest, local news, health and nutrition, fashion and beauty, automotive, and computers.

Sign up for the Powder & Bulk Solids Weekly newsletter.

You May Also Like