In this personal injury case, a refinery heater damaged beyond repair during a hurricane was being dismantled when sparks from the cutting tool ignited oil spilling from the heater tubes. We were asked to identify the cause and responsibilities for the incident, which required our review of regulations, industry standards, and company/contractor safe work practices. Baker & O’Brien presented our opinions in an expert report and provided deposition testimony supporting the dispute resolution.

Welding, cutting, grinding, and other tasks that generate sparks are categorized as “hot work” activities. In hydrocarbon industrial settings, hot work activities require permits to control work and effectively manage the risk of explosion and fire. Regulations, industry standards, and company safe work practices have been established to safeguard against the hazards associated with these activities.

A refinery contracted with an industrial services provider to dismantle a crude oil heater damaged beyond repair by a recently passed hurricane. The contractor was permitted to use a reciprocating saw as an alternative to hot work to dismantle the convective section of the heater that still contained crude oil hydrocarbons. The reciprocating saw was slow work, so the contractor chose a power tool with a cutting wheel for much quicker work. Unfortunately, when sparks from the cutting wheel ignited oil spilling from the heater tubes, it burned a worker who was on an adjacent side of the heater.

Baker & O’Brien was engaged to identify the incident’s cause and responsibilities. We reviewed the company and contractor safe work procedures and compared them to the relevant regulations and industry standards. We evaluated the issuance of the permit to work, the effectiveness of the identified permit risk controls, and the communications between the refinery and contractor workers.

We determined that a combination of regulations, industry standards, and company safe work practices delineates the responsibilities of the parties involved in the incident. The absence of effective procedures is rarely an incident cause. Rather, failure to adhere to its procedures and risk controls is more likely to be an incident cause. We presented our opinions in an expert report and provided deposition testimony supporting the dispute resolution.