DANVERS — Attorneys for those who suffered damage from the 2006 Danversport blast are weighing whether chemical suppliers may share some of the blame.
The querying of chemical suppliers to the former Water Street ink and paint plant has been going on over the past several months, said Beverly attorney Jan Schlichtmann, who helped reach a settlement with ink maker CAI Inc. of Georgetown and paint and coatings maker Arnel Co. Inc. earlier this year.
"One of the things we are now pursuing, we invited the chemical suppliers to sit down and talk with the community and see if they have any responsibility," Schlichtmann said.
The settlement, approved by a Lawrence Superior Court judge last month, helped residents and "We are still sorting out who may be responsible for what," businesses, including those in the Danversport Trust, boat owners, insurance companies and others skirt a lengthy legal battle with Arnel and CAI.
The settlement will provide about $1 million for a few hundred who suffered losses from the Nov. 22, 2006, blast. The settlement also provided about $428,000 in attorney's fees and expenses, while insurers got $5.5 million out of the $7 million in insurance carried by CAI and Arnel.
Damages were on the order of $28 million to $30 million. The deadline to file claims is Nov. 30.
While the settlement released CAI and Arnel from further claims, it did not release those against vendors and suppliers.
Schlichtmann said he is working with Boston attorney Peter Lagorio to pursue chemical suppliers, as Lagorio also worked on the settlement.
While the attorneys have reached out to suppliers of volatile solvents, such as heptane, Schlichtmann could not name them.
"We are still sorting out who may be responsible for what," he said.
A U.S. Chemical Safety Board blast analysis, presented in May, found the most likely fuel for the explosion was a mixture of heptane and propyl alcohol in mixing tank 3.
Schlichtmann said the Chemical Safety Board found the plant had quantities of chemicals far in excess of what its permits allowed, and that may open up chemical suppliers to potential liability.
