Trump Proposes to Eliminate Chemical Safety Board

[autigeremt 6,599]

http://www.ercweb.com/resources/viewtip.aspx?id=8574

 

The CSB is an independent agency whose sole mission is to investigate accidents in the chemical industry and to make recommendations to prevent future accidents and improve safety. For over 20 years, the CSB has conducted hundreds of investigations of high consequence chemical incidents, such as the Deepwater Horizon and West Fertilizer disasters. The Agency’s investigations and recommendations have had an enormous effect on improving public safety. CSB’s recommendations have resulted in banned natural gas blows in Connecticut, an improved fire code in New York City, and increased public safety at oil and gas sites across the State of Mississippi. The CSB has been able to accomplish all of this with a small and limited budget. However, the President has proposed to eliminate this tiny, but effective agency in the 2018 budget.

In a statement released after the release of the President’s proposed budget, CSB's Chairperson Vanessa Allen Sutherland said, “The U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) is disappointed to see the President’s budget proposal to eliminate the agency. The American public is safer today as a result of the work of the dedicated and professional staff of the CSB. As this process moves forward, we hope that the important mission of this agency will be preserved.”

 

[TexasTiger 12,831]

2 hours ago, autigeremt said:

http://www.ercweb.com/resources/viewtip.aspx?id=8574

 

The CSB is an independent agency whose sole mission is to investigate accidents in the chemical industry and to make recommendations to prevent future accidents and improve safety. For over 20 years, the CSB has conducted hundreds of investigations of high consequence chemical incidents, such as the Deepwater Horizon and West Fertilizer disasters. The Agency’s investigations and recommendations have had an enormous effect on improving public safety. CSB’s recommendations have resulted in banned natural gas blows in Connecticut, an improved fire code in New York City, and increased public safety at oil and gas sites across the State of Mississippi. The CSB has been able to accomplish all of this with a small and limited budget. However, the President has proposed to eliminate this tiny, but effective agency in the 2018 budget.

In a statement released after the release of the President’s proposed budget, CSB's Chairperson Vanessa Allen Sutherland said, “The U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB) is disappointed to see the President’s budget proposal to eliminate the agency. The American public is safer today as a result of the work of the dedicated and professional staff of the CSB. As this process moves forward, we hope that the important mission of this agency will be preserved.”

 

Your thoughts? Good? Bad? Likely impact?

[icanthearyou 4,462]

14 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Your thoughts? Good? Bad? Likely impact?

More money for weapons.

[autigeremt 6,599]

37 minutes ago, TexasTiger said:

Your thoughts? Good? Bad? Likely impact?

I think it's bad. I expect to see more safety failures in the future because of this. The U.S. Chemical Safety Board investigates all aspects of safety when it comes to chemical production, releases and impacts in this country. Trump is trying to make America "Polluted" Again!

[autigeremt 6,599]

Here's their web page...it doesn't take long to see the positive impact that they have.

http://www.csb.gov/

 

[AUcivE09 582]

I have seen the work and had to participate in conjunction with them before. There are already many safeguards in place that make them a bit redundant - TierII reporting, RMP's for hazardous chemicals, OSHA, NRC, EPA, along with the facilities themselves.Typically they come in after an event has occurred and rely on data provided by others to make their assessments. They would be most useful at smaller facilities with little resources, but are typically just more red tape and hold up larger companies who are better qualified to make there own assessments and corrections. The threat of lawsuits are much greater to them than the threat of the CSB.

Their mission statement: "The principal role of the new chemical safety board is to investigate accidents to determine the conditions and circumstances which led up to the event and to identify the cause or causes so that similar events might be prevented." This is SOP for all accidents at every facility. It is typically written into every plan they keep on site with much greater detail! While the CSB has a federal platform to get findings and information out to others - there is no way this information will not find its way to other agencies and be passed along to other facilities. They are similar to the NTSB, however, I would be much more alarmed if it was the NTSB going away. Transportation disaster typically bring in many different parties who could be at fault. In the event of a chemical accident everything rides on the facility.

I know there are a lot of letters thrown around above if anyone is interested in what they are or how they tie in to the function of the CSB. My opinion - the CSB is a bit of a feel good agency that can provide value - but it is a lot like adding lightweight rims to a sports car (sorry - best I could do).

[icanthearyou 4,462]

2 hours ago, AUcivE09 said:

I have seen the work and had to participate in conjunction with them before. There are already many safeguards in place that make them a bit redundant - TierII reporting, RMP's for hazardous chemicals, OSHA, NRC, EPA, along with the facilities themselves.Typically they come in after an event has occurred and rely on data provided by others to make their assessments. They would be most useful at smaller facilities with little resources, but are typically just more red tape and hold up larger companies who are better qualified to make there own assessments and corrections. The threat of lawsuits are much greater to them than the threat of the CSB.

Their mission statement: "The principal role of the new chemical safety board is to investigate accidents to determine the conditions and circumstances which led up to the event and to identify the cause or causes so that similar events might be prevented." This is SOP for all accidents at every facility. It is typically written into every plan they keep on site with much greater detail! While the CSB has a federal platform to get findings and information out to others - there is no way this information will not find its way to other agencies and be passed along to other facilities. They are similar to the NTSB, however, I would be much more alarmed if it was the NTSB going away. Transportation disaster typically bring in many different parties who could be at fault. In the event of a chemical accident everything rides on the facility.

I know there are a lot of letters thrown around above if anyone is interested in what they are or how they tie in to the function of the CSB. My opinion - the CSB is a bit of a feel good agency that can provide value - but it is a lot like adding lightweight rims to a sports car (sorry - best I could do).

If they are "better qualified", why did they have an "event"?

[AUcivE09 582]

12 hours ago, icanthearyou said:

If they are "better qualified", why did they have an "event"?

Accidents happen. Even to the best of people/facilities. Major chemical facilities have a lot going on where small variations could cause issues. I have many places I walk around with emergency respirator just for this reason. It is not that you expect something to happen - but understanding something could happen. Places with EHS's (extrememly hazardous substances) already have plans in place to protect workers and to notify the community/authorities.

To understand what led to the event you first have to understand the process. This is why the CSB leans heavily on others to provide them data. Not to mention they do not work independently of the EPA and OSHA. By the time they figure out the process, most facilities would already have the reasons the "event" occurred and the solution to prevent it from re-occurring. Many times the CSB will even contract consultants to handle the work for them.

In short - better qualified does not mean there will be no event.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

26 minutes ago, AUcivE09 said:

Accidents happen. Even to the best of people/facilities. Major chemical facilities have a lot going on where small variations could cause issues. I have many places I walk around with emergency respirator just for this reason. It is not that you expect something to happen - but understanding something could happen. Places with EHS's (extrememly hazardous substances) already have plans in place to protect workers and to notify the community/authorities.

To understand what led to the event you first have to understand the process. This is why the CSB leans heavily on others to provide them data. Not to mention they do not work independently of the EPA and OSHA. By the time they figure out the process, most facilities would already have the reasons the "event" occurred and the solution to prevent it from re-occurring. Many times the CSB will even contract consultants to handle the work for them.

In short - better qualified does not mean there will be no event.

That was never the question.  Events should trigger an independent assessment.  As you stated, some of these companies handle extremely hazardous chemicals.

[homersapien 11,366]

1 hour ago, AUcivE09 said:

Accidents happen. Even to the best of people/facilities. Major chemical facilities have a lot going on where small variations could cause issues. I have many places I walk around with emergency respirator just for this reason. It is not that you expect something to happen - but understanding something could happen. Places with EHS's (extrememly hazardous substances) already have plans in place to protect workers and to notify the community/authorities.

To understand what led to the event you first have to understand the process. This is why the CSB leans heavily on others to provide them data. Not to mention they do not work independently of the EPA and OSHA. By the time they figure out the process, most facilities would already have the reasons the "event" occurred and the solution to prevent it from re-occurring. Many times the CSB will even contract consultants to handle the work for them.

In short - better qualified does not mean there will be no event.

But unlike internal investigations, the CBS are independent of the company.  

I understand that, generally speaking, most companies recognize it's in their best interest to prevent accidents and to review them if they happen, but there's value to the industry and to the general public in having each incident reveiwed by an independent public investigator, especially if there are liability issues.   

[AUcivE09 582]

To respond to both of you - that is also the job of the EPA and OSHA. They even say as much on their page. CSB never shows up alone. There is some value, but it is minimal. These companies are never left to investigate themselves, however, they usually provide all the data and the responses. Now instead of 3 agencies and consultants reviewing the data there will only be 2 agencies and the consultants. CSB agency has only been around since 1998. 

[AUcivE09 582]

It is also worth noting that the head of the agency was forced to resign due to mismanagement. Even during the short history of this agency you can debate their actual effectiveness.

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/head-of-u-s-chemical-safety-board-resigns/

Not that one guy and 5 years of delayed investigation and high attrition (mean less skilled workers) should define their place, but it does not help promote a positive image of necessary agency. I honestly just found out about this and it helps explain why they relied so heavily on contractors given the high attrition. 

[autigeremt 6,599]

I believe they provide a valuable service. As a responder I like their role outside of EPA and OSHA because those agencies are not as effective in this arena in my opinion. 

PMSHA does a better job with Chemical Safety than the EPA and OSHA. Looking at the proposed budget by the WH it looks like they are ready to squeeze the EPA and cut funding to the states which will hurt ADEM even more. The Wild Wild West could be back when it comes to illicit discharges of hazardous materials. 

[AUcivE09 582]

CSB does not deal with illicit discharges. Curious, as a first responder - what is your relationship to the CSB? BTW - ADEM is already back to twice a year inspections of Major sources. The squeeze is not affecting them as much as we are led to believe by some.

On 3/21/2017 at 11:28 PM, autigeremt said:

I believe they provide a valuable service. As a responder I like their role outside of EPA and OSHA because those agencies are not as effective in this arena in my opinion. 

PMSHA does a better job with Chemical Safety than the EPA and OSHA. Looking at the proposed budget by the WH it looks like they are ready to squeeze the EPA and cut funding to the states which will hurt ADEM even more. The Wild Wild West could be back when it comes to illicit discharges of hazardous materials. 

 

[autigeremt 6,599]

19 hours ago, AUcivE09 said:

CSB does not deal with illicit discharges. Curious, as a first responder - what is your relationship to the CSB? BTW - ADEM is already back to twice a year inspections of Major sources. The squeeze is not affecting them as much as we are led to believe by some.

 

My comment about illicit discharges was in reference to the funding squeeze. And you comments about ADEM responses to those discharges is no correct. Go look at the number of lawsuits on the books awaiting trial where ADEM isn't adhering to the Clean Water Act in regards to enforcement, fines and litigation. A lot of their issues stem directly from a lack of funding and the ability to keep good inspectors or hire the number needed to do the job. And ADEM doesn't inspect twice a year. They come by my Large Quantity Generator of Hazardous Waste facility once a year only. We manage over a 1,000 waste streams from nominal hazards to a pin drop kills hundreds.

As for CSB, their findings from investigations provide information to insure a safer climate for the manufacture, delivery/transport and handing of hazardous chemicals which in turn provides a safer environment for the first responder community. Less means more (safety) in our line of work. Every layer of oversight dealing with these types of materials is a good thing.

[maxwere 82]

Why would CSB not be a private consulting institution if it need exist at all?

[homersapien 11,366]

3 hours ago, maxwere said:

Why would CSB not be a private consulting institution if it need exist at all?

For the same reason suggestions aren't the same as regulations?

[AUcivE09 582]

On 3/24/2017 at 11:24 AM, autigeremt said:

My comment about illicit discharges was in reference to the funding squeeze. And you comments about ADEM responses to those discharges is no correct. Go look at the number of lawsuits on the books awaiting trial where ADEM isn't adhering to the Clean Water Act in regards to enforcement, fines and litigation. A lot of their issues stem directly from a lack of funding and the ability to keep good inspectors or hire the number needed to do the job. And ADEM doesn't inspect twice a year. They come by my Large Quantity Generator of Hazardous Waste facility once a year only. We manage over a 1,000 waste streams from nominal hazards to a pin drop kills hundreds.

As for CSB, their findings from investigations provide information to insure a safer climate for the manufacture, delivery/transport and handing of hazardous chemicals which in turn provides a safer environment for the first responder community. Less means more (safety) in our line of work. Every layer of oversight dealing with these types of materials is a good thing.

ADEM Air inspections are back to twice a year. The lawsuits are from activist groups who want the EPA to take over and they will not go anywhere because there have been no violations on ADEM's part - these were going on during my entire tenure there. ADEM has the numbers, but much like the CSB they are having issues keeping good employees. They still have a good core of senior staff, but in 5 to 10 years there will be a large turnover as many are set to retire (Water and Air). 

As a first responder you are most likely familiar with the Tier II inventory of max/avg quantities, location, and type of storage. Those are specifically generated each year for your safety. You should check out the RMP's (Risk Management Plans) that have done more good for the prevention of major accidents than ANY CSB investigation. I cannot argue that they provide a service (when it isnt being mismanaged) that is helpful, but it is redundant and all of "their findings" are provided by others in the first place. They are one of 3 groups that provide little more than oversight.

[AUcivE09 582]

On 3/24/2017 at 11:33 AM, maxwere said:

Why would CSB not be a private consulting institution if it need exist at all?

It will get absorbed somewhere. They are almost private as it is considering the consulting they use.

[autigeremt 6,599]

On 3/26/2017 at 8:52 AM, AUcivE09 said:

ADEM Air inspections are back to twice a year. The lawsuits are from activist groups who want the EPA to take over and they will not go anywhere because there have been no violations on ADEM's part - these were going on during my entire tenure there. ADEM has the numbers, but much like the CSB they are having issues keeping good employees. They still have a good core of senior staff, but in 5 to 10 years there will be a large turnover as many are set to retire (Water and Air). 

As a first responder you are most likely familiar with the Tier II inventory of max/avg quantities, location, and type of storage. Those are specifically generated each year for your safety. You should check out the RMP's (Risk Management Plans) that have done more good for the prevention of major accidents than ANY CSB investigation. I cannot argue that they provide a service (when it isnt being mismanaged) that is helpful, but it is redundant and all of "their findings" are provided by others in the first place. They are one of 3 groups that provide little more than oversight.

I'm familiar with Tier II reporting, EPCRA, etc. ADEM Air may go back to twice a year (we see them as well since we have a co-fired combustion incinerator on campus) but ADEM Waste Branch and others do not. A problem in Alabama is the fact that LEPC's do not do their prescribed job under law. Other groups are organized in ways that do not function as they are intended so I'm all about redundancy until something changes. 

As for ADEM there are some programs with one person (Medical waste for instance) who do not inspect. Water and Air do have a lot of turnover....most often because they are poorly funded, which goes back to my original issue with ADEM. They need more funding to keep good people. Once they get experience they leave and take that knowledge and training with them.

Activist groups wouldn't need to file lawsuits if ADEM and the state did their jobs more effectively in my opinion.

[icanthearyou 4,462]

On 3/24/2017 at 11:33 AM, maxwere said:

Why would CSB not be a private consulting institution if it need exist at all?

Bhopal