In a drying workshop at a chemical plant, a gaseous release occurred on a 400-kg capacity: double-wall dryer undergoing cooling and containing pyrimidine. A whitish cloud with yellowish dots escaped from the workshop but dissipated within a few seconds. After oxygenation in the presence of water and a raw material catalyst, the manufacturing of 2,6 diamino 4 chloropyrimidine 1 oxide, used in cosmetics production, included a drying phase, in accordance with a process typically carried out at this plant. This incident might have been due to drying performed at an excessive temperature or resumption of the reaction after insufficient purification of the substance to be dried; the facility operator however did not favour this 2nd hypothesis. The alarm was triggered at 5 pm; 3 agents equipped with masks and protective clothing sprinkled the dryer to cool it down. Upon arrival of the fire-fighting crew at around 5:15, the device vent was placed in a soda scrubbing column; next, a nitrogen flush allowed inerting the dryer. After verifying the absence of any exothermic risk in the device, it was decided to dilute the chemical substance with 1000 litres of water. Dryer contents were then pumped and transferred into a tank. Extensive intervention resources were deployed, including 20 vehicles according to the press. No injuries were reported. A discharge containing hydrogen chloride, carbon monoxide and carbon dioxide undoubtedly took place. Administrative authorities noted the facts and proposed issuing a formal notice requiring the operator to adopt several measures, i.e. a thorough verification of the dryer prior to any restart, analysis of the substance being dried, accident appraisal (accidental chemical reaction, etc.). The particular manufacturing process was temporarily suspended. This accident generated widespread media attention.
