Abstract: At approximately 10:00 a.m. on October 10, 1996, Employees #1 through #13 and a coworker, of a small candle manufacturing facility, were taken to a nearby hospital suffering from nausea, headache, and dizziness. One among this group had also fainted. An additional six employees from the responding ambulance company complained that the odor was strong, and two ambulance attendants experienced severe enough symptoms to warrant treatment and observation. The Los Angeles County Fire Department conducted a HAZMAT investigation and determined that the source of the chemical exposure was a nearby fiberglass shop. CAL/OSHA initiated an investigation on October 11, 1996. The business next to the candle manufacturer was a fiberglass shop, which used styrene, a very odorous substance. The fiberglass shop had moved in less than a month before the accident, and the candle shop employees objected to the new styrene odor. When the candle shop was inspected, no significant amounts of hazardous chemicals were found, and the employer/employee interviews did not identify any process done in the candle shop that would lead to a serious airborne exposure. The fiberglass shop was north of the candle shop, in the same building. The ventilation systems were not connected, and firewalls between the businesses extended from the floor to the ceiling. The owner stated that on the date of the incident he had used 20 oz of styrene to manufacture some motorcycle fairings. He also said that the prevailing winds were such that the exposure could not have been from his use of styrene. The back doors of both of the shops were routinely left open and were about 50 feet apart. According to the weather data maintained by a nearby airport, the winds were blowing from north to south, which would have brought the styrene odors from the fiberglass shop into the candle shop. It is difficult to imagine how 20 oz of styrene could lead to problems with 14 people, who were 50 feet away in another room of the same building, and that vapors would remain in the vicinity long enough to be detectable by the ambulance attendants and fire responders. The candle manufacturer's response to the chemical exposure was not inappropriate, but the employer did not have an operable safety program and was cited for not being in compliance with T8CCR 3203(a).