Shell UK sentenced over gas blast in Norfolk

-

Energy giant Shell UK Limited has been ordered by Ipswich Crown Court to pay a total of £1.24million in fines and costs over the explosion and fire at its Bacton gas terminal in Norfolk in 2008.

Experts from the Health and Safety Executive (HSE) said it was only good fortune that no one was killed or seriously injured in the February 28 blast.

Investigators traced the cause of the explosion to a leak of highly flammable hydrocarbon liquid into a part of the plant responsible for treating waste water before discharging it into the sea.

The leak was caused by the failure of a corroded metal separator vessel, which allowed water contaminated with the highly flammable condensate to enter a concrete storage tank where it was heated by an electric heater. The heater’s elements were exposed within the tank, raising the surface temperature significantly causing the explosion and fire.

HRreview Logo

Get our essential weekday HR news and updates.

This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.
Keep up with the latest in HR...
This field is hidden when viewing the form
This field is hidden when viewing the form
Optin_date
This field is hidden when viewing the form

 

The explosion blew the concrete roof off a buffering tank within the plant, hurling concrete and metal debris over a large area and sucking a nearby drain out of the ground. After investigating the incident HSE and Environment Agency (EA) jointly prosecuted the firm over safety, environmental control and pollution-prevention failures at the plant leading to the explosion.

Ten appliances from Norfolk Fire Service attended the scene and the court heard it was fortunate at the time of the explosion that daytime plant personnel were returning to offices to prepare for shift handovers.

Shell UK had failed to close the sea gate until about an hour after the fire started. It also failed to notify the Environment Agency, as required, meaning that valuable advice on environmental protection during the incident or its aftermath was not available to either Shell or the fire service – an emergency response priority first identified in 2004. The delay in notification also meant an assessment of environmental harm was not possible.

At an earlier hearing Shell pleaded guilty to seven charges covering safety, environmental control and pollution-prevention failures at the plant which led to the blast.

Shell UK was fined a total of £1milllion and ordered to pay £242,000 costs.

After sentencing, HSE Inspector Steve Johnson, said:

“The fact no-one was seriously hurt in this incident was solely down to good fortune as the company’s internal report acknowledges. Shell UK neglected basic maintenance leading up to the explosion.

“Our investigation found key components had been failing for some years and the company knew this, yet there had been no appreciation of the potential for an incident such as this.

“In particular there had been no attempt to assess the risk that arose from condensate entering the water treatment plant despite the fact that the plant was not designed to handle highly flammable liquids like condensate.

“The investigation revealed significant failings in the safety management system operating on the plant and hopefully other operators will take note of the outcome of this incident and maybe review their own procedures.”

Latest news

Helen Wada: Why engagement initiatives fail without human-centric leadership

Workforce engagement has become a hot topic across the boardroom and beyond, particularly as hybrid working practices have become the norm.

Recruiters warned to move beyond ‘post and pray’ as passive talent overlooked

Employers risk missing most candidates by relying on job boards as hiring methods struggle to deliver quality applicants.

Employment tribunal roundup: Appeal fairness, dismissal reasoning, discrimination tests and religious belief clarified

Decisions examine appeal failures, dismissal reasoning, discrimination claims and religious belief, offering practical guidance on fairness, causation and proportionality.

Fears of AI cheating in hiring ‘overblown’ as employers urged to rethink assessments

Employers may be overstating concerns about AI misuse in recruitment as evidence of candidate manipulation remains limited.
- Advertisement -

More employees use workplace health benefits, but barriers still limit access

Many workers struggle to access employer healthcare support due to confusion, costs and unclear processes.

Gender pay gap in tech widens to nine-year high as AI roles drive salaries

Women in IT earn less as salaries rise faster in male-dominated AI and cybersecurity roles, widening pay differences.

Must read

HR guide to implementing a global employee rewards, recognition or benefits scheme

Research has shown that the issues of culture and engagement are top priority for organisations looking to integrate globally dispersed or virtual teams.

Ira Gaberman & Sarah Helm: Upskilling employees now for long-term competitiveness

Upskilling is often seen as something that happens organically through an employee’s time in their role. However, proactive training is vital.
- Advertisement -

You might also likeRELATED
Recommended to you