Rust-Oleum: OSHA inspections and violations

Incident on Apr 28, 2010: Employee suffers burns in drum explosion

On April 28, 2010, Employee #1 was mixing a batch of paint for the spray can lin e. He had already added 2,593 pounds of acrylic resin, 1,644 pounds of xylene an d a 20-pound bag of silica. He was in the process of adding 880 pounds of alumin um paste. The paste was dumped into the top of the tank. Each drum of aluminum p aste weighed 220 pounds. As soon as the first drum was upended over the mixer lo ading port, a fireball erupted from the tank. Employee #1 was thrown back and he received 3rd degree burns to his face, shoulders, hands, and back. He also may have inhaled some of the hot air. He was airlifted to the Johns Hopkins Bayview Burn Center in critical condition. Several factors may have contributed to this incident. The drums of aluminum paste were not bonded and grounded during the du mping process; the ventilation system inside of the tank had not been turned on; Employee #1 was a temporary employee who was hired as a fork lift operator and not a mixer operator; he had only received training in forklift operations and l ockout/tagout; he had not received training in evacuation procedures, flammable liquid handling, incident reporting, fire extinguishers, or PPE; he was wearing a nylon windbreaker and had dreadlocks which could have created a static spark; the mixer blades were on medium agitation, the liquid in the tank was approximat ely 4 feet below the opening and a layer of solvent vapor could have been in the tank and near the dumping port. This vapor apparently was ignited by a static s park from one or more of the above sources.

Incident on Feb 6, 2009: Employee is burned in flash fire incident

On February 6, 2009, Employee #1 was mixing a batch of paint for the spray can l ine. He had already added 6,600 pounds of acrylic resin and two other flammable solvents. He was in the process of adding 400 pounds of ACEMATT TS 100 powder. T he powder was added by pouring 25 pound bags into the top of the tank. During th e addition of the third bag, a flash fire occurred, and the employee received se cond degree burns to his hands, arms, hair, and eyebrows. He was treated and rel eased from the hospital. This process had been done the same way for the last 8 to 10 years, according to the company. The micro powder was allowed to free fall four feet before hitting the solvent. The material safety data sheet for the po wder stated that precautionary measures against static discharges need to be tak en. The employer has grounding and bonding straps available when adding liquid i ngredients, but not when adding dry materials. Interviews with employees indicat ed that they were not instructed in the hazards of static associated with the po wder.

Incident on Oct 9, 2000 (fatal): Employee falls through floor opening

On March 12, 2002, Employee #1 fell 75.5 ft when a piece of 0.5 in. thick chipbo ard used to cover a 24-in. by 38-in. long floor opening broke. The cover was not marked or coded, was not secured to prevent displacement, and it did not comple tely cover the opening. He sustained injuries to his lower back, bruised ribs on the right side and an internal bruise above his right kidney. Employee #1 died.