ADVERTISEMENT
2 /3 FREE ARTICLES LEFT THIS MONTH Remaining
Chemistry matters. Join us to get the news you need.

If you have an ACS member number, please enter it here so we can link this account to your membership. (optional)

ACS values your privacy. By submitting your information, you are gaining access to C&EN and subscribing to our weekly newsletter. We use the information you provide to make your reading experience better, and we will never sell your data to third party members.

ENJOY UNLIMITED ACCES TO C&EN

Safety

EPA issues long-delayed chemical plant safety rule

Risk management requirements revised

by Jeff Johnson
December 28, 2016 | APPEARED IN VOLUME 95, ISSUE 1

[+]Enlarge
Credit: Mark Wingard/CSB
EPA’s safety regulation came in response to the 2013 fatal fire at a West, Texas, fertilizer warehouse.
Credit: Mark Wingard/CSB
EPA’s safety regulation came in response to the 2013 fatal fire at a West, Texas, fertilizer warehouse.

The Environmental Protection Agency has updated a 25-year-old regulation intended to reduce chemical plant accidents and protect communities, workers, and emergency responders.

The revision to EPA’s Risk Management Program (RMP) is part of a sweeping regulatory overhaul of federal industrial safety regulations ordered by President Barack Obama in 2013. Obama directed agencies to make changes in the wake of the deaths of 15 people, mostly emergency responders, in explosion of ammonium nitrate fertilizer at a fertilizer warehouse in West, Texas.

RMP provisions cover some 12,500 facilities that, according to EPA, reported 1,500 accidents over a recent 10-year period. These incidents involved nearly 60 deaths, 17,000 injuries, the evacuation of 500,000 people, and property damage of more than $2 billion.

Among changes, the new regulation calls for independent, third-party audits of companies after an accident or near-accident and consideration of inherently safer manufacturing approaches. However, the rule specifies that implementation of safer approaches may only occur when “practical.”

Much of the accident data would be kept from public view, but some would be generally available.

Scott Jensen, a spokesperson for the American Chemistry Council, an industry trade group, says, “We have some initial concerns regarding the rule’s auditing regime and safer [manufacturing] alternatives analysis requirements.”

The Coalition to Prevent Chemical Disasters, an organization of 120 community and environmental organizations and labor unions, is disappointed the regulation does not require inherent safety technologies.

The rule faces an uncertain future. President-elect Donald J. Trump’s pick to head EPA, former Oklahoma Attorney General E. Scott Pruitt, has opposed the RMP overhaul.

This regulation is the only one to emerge from the Obama-ordered review. It does not cover ammonium nitrate, the chemical that exploded in West, Texas.

Advertisement
X

Article:

This article has been sent to the following recipient:

Comments
Krishna Prasad K. N. (January 10, 2017 6:42 AM)
Third party Audit is a good method to invetigate an accident. Obviously, some secret data may come out, unintentionally. But, it will be in the larger interest. A lesson for the affected enterprice as well as others.
K.N.krishna Prasad, Chartered engineer; EHS consultant and trainer, Mysuru, India

Leave A Comment

*Required to comment