Chemical Safety Board's Future Uncertain as Hurricane Season Approaches

Source: Chemical Safety

Storms are inevitable in the world.  How various countries and nations prepare for them is a unique trait.  Here in the United States the main agency is Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).  The United States is a 'reactionary' nation rather than a 'proactive' nation.  Instead of preparing for a disaster, the disaster occurs and then an evaluation happens after which a political sparring match occurs and finally funding arrives.  Yes, I am being negative.



On top of all of that negativity is that there are dangers posed by corporations which have chemicals that need to be regulated and inspected before a storm occurs.  That agency is is the Environmental Protection Agency which has been lacking to say the least.  Therefore, the 'reactionary' method will employ the Chemical Safety Board.   Recently, the head of which has resigned leaving the direction uncertain -- which is not good -- while entering storm season.

Chemical Safety Board

In order to understand the importance of the Chemical Safety Board, here is a short introduction from Wikipedia:

The U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board, generally referred to[1] as the Chemical Safety Board or CSB, is an independent U.S. federal agency charged with investigating industrial chemical accidents. Headquartered in Washington, D.C., the agency's board members are appointed by the president and confirmed by the United States Senate. The CSB conducts root cause investigations of chemical accidents at fixed industrial facilities.[2] 

The U.S. Chemical Safety Board is authorized by the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1990 and became operational in January 1998. The Senate legislative history states: "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." Congress gave the CSB a unique statutory mission and provided in law that no other agency or executive branch official may direct the activities of the Board. Following the successful model of the National Transportation Safety Board and the Department of Transportation, Congress directed that the CSB's investigative function be completely independent of the rulemaking, inspection, and enforcement authorities of the Environmental Protection Agency and Occupational Safety and Health Administration. Congress recognized that Board investigations would identify chemical hazards that were not addressed by those agencies.[3]

As I mentioned above, the Chemical Safety Board is a 'reactionary' step in the process of solving problems.  The Environmental Protection Agency is charged with implementing regulations for keeping safe track (including storage) of chemicals used in industry.  Although, over the last year and a half, EPA director Scott Pruitt has carried out 'historical' cuts as discussed in a previous post on this site.  The dismissals at the EPA has put the safety of the citizens of this nation at greater risk due to the inability to regulate industries and their safe keeping of chemicals along with dangerous practices in the pursuit of saving money for shareholders.  This should be concerning.



Now, according to recent reporting by Politico Energy, heading into hurricane season (or storm season), the nation is in greater danger as shown below:

CSB FAULTS HURRICANE PREP AT CHEMICAL PLANTS: The U.S. Chemical Safety Board said Thursday that chemical plants need to better prepare for hurricanes and potential floods after releasing findings from its investigation into an explosion at the Arkema chemical plant during Hurricane Harvey last summer. "Our investigation found that there is a significant lack of guidance in planning for flooding or other severe weather events," CSB Chairperson Vanessa Allen Sutherland said. "... As we prepare for this year's hurricane season, it is critical that industry better understand the safety hazards posed by extreme weather events."

— Speaking of hurricane season: This year's hurricane season is not expected to be quite as bad as last year, Pro's Ben Lefebvre reports. NOAA forecast a 75 percent chance that this year's hurricane season will be at-or-above normal levels for major storms. The likelihood is that 10-16 named storms will form, with up to four of those liable to become major hurricanes. Read more.

That reporting was over a week ago.  Last Tuesday, reporting from "The Scientist" followed up with more bad news regarding the last safety net -- Chemical Safety Board:

Vanessa Allen Sutherland will resign next month as chair of the US Chemical Safety & Hazard Investigation Board. With the vacancy, the board will drop to having only three members—two short of the standard five, C&EN reported earlier this week (May 22).

“The remaining board members will be required to vote on an interim executive, unless and until the White House nominates and the Senate confirms a new Chairperson,” the board, usually referred to as the Chemical Safety Board (CSB), says in a statement. However, that nomination is in doubt, C&EN notes, as the Trump administration has twice tried to shut down the CSB altogether.

This is not great news for the fate of the Chemical Safety Board.  Especially, heading into hurricane season.  The Chemical Safety Board is an agency which each of us should watch closely since the fate of the organization directly impacts our well-being.  Below, a video and excerpt will serve as evidence of the importance of the last chance (reactionary) organization for ensuring safety among industries.

Hurricane Season Approaches

Hurricane season is upon us according to some accounts.  The question naturally arise as to whether we (as a nation) have improved our disaster preparedness from last Hurricane Season -- when Hurricane Harvey, Hurricane Irma, and Hurricane Maria ripped through some states.  According to Politico Energy, Hurricane season is not going to go well for FEMA as shown below:

THE STORY OF THE HURRICANES: With just days until the June 1st start to hurricane season, a POLITICO investigation into FEMA found numerous low-income families were denied funding from the agency because they lived within a flood zone and failed to carry flood insurance — a legal requirement that many of them were unaware of.

POLITICO’s Danny Vinik reports this morning from Texas’ Kashmere Gardens — a historically African-American neighborhood in Houston that is still trying to recover from Hurricane Harvey — and the hodgepodge of programs that help middle-class neighborhoods bounce back, but leave many poor and minority areas behind. He found that many families struggle with language issues and are inexperienced in dealing with the federal bureaucracy, leaving them to navigate a system that even FEMA officials agree is overly complicated.

And while more federal money is on the way to Texas, it may take a year or more after Harvey struck to reach communities like Kashmere Gardens, which are desperately trying to rebuild, Danny writes. Yet, the problems in Houston aren’t surprising to FEMA experts and others familiar with the complicated quilt of programs designed to help those in need of disaster assistance. “This is a recurring and systemic problem that we find with the delivery of federal recovery dollars,” said Fred Tombar, the senior adviser for disaster recovery at the Department of Housing and Urban Development from 2009 to 2013. Read more here.

AND IN PUERTO RICO: The mayor of one of the island's largest cities worried about the upcoming storm season and how another hit to its fragile power grid could throw the U.S. territory back into the dark. “I’m afraid we are not prepared to receive another [hurricane],” Ponce Mayor Maria Meléndez told Pro’s David Beavers during a visit to Washington last week. “The electricity system will fall down again if we don’t manage it more rapidly.” Read that story here.

Hurricane Harvey ripped through the Houston area to produce massive problems for the area.  People have the impression that the area has recovered completely - which is anything but the truth.  Although, even during a good economic time in Houston, problems were widespread within the real estate industry.  News accounts after the devastation caused by Hurricane Harvey detailed house buyers experience and the added costs of 'flood insurance.'  Here is the page (index) for the coverage of Hurricane Harvey by NPR.



On top of the damage done to the housing sector was damage done to the corporations.  In particular, a chemical corporation by the name of Arkama in Houston suffered catastrophic losses due to chemicals which were destroyed while being stored in unstable conditions.  This resulted in a giant explosion and the release of toxic chemicals into the air for the residents of the surrounding community to suffer health problems from breathing the air in their houses and communities.  The chemical Safety Board was charged to carry out an investigation.  Here is a 13 minute video produced to explain the findings of the investigation of Arkama in Houston (Texas):

Wow.  The video above drives home the importance of the Chemical Safety Board.  Investigating a disaster after the occurrence is super important for the prevention of future disasters.  If the government is short on resources, then who is going to investigate the problem?  Furthermore, who is going to make recommendations on future practices which can be funded by Congress and passed on to regulatory agencies for future prevention of such disasters?



The importance of chemical safety regulation cannot be overstated.  Chemical safety is saddled on each of us.  Which sounds rather discouraging.  Although, the safety of the public is at risk.  Therefore, if you encounter a dangerous situation in any industry which handles chemicals, say something.  Here is a minute long video which demonstrates the simplicity of chemical safety:

Chemical safety impacts all of us at some fundamental level.

Conclusion...

The uncertainty surrounding the Chemical Safety Board should be unsettling to each of us.  Any attempt to dismantle this extremely important organization is a threat to each of us.  Therefore, the status of the organization is important to track.  If the government attempts to shut this down, as the public, we should ensure that there is an equivalent resource in place to investigate disasters and generate future reports on prevention of future disasters.



Related Blog Posts:



Ralph Nader: Has Corruption Become Institutionalized?

Hurricane Harvey Drops Enough Rain On Houston To Fill 560 Dallas Cowboy Stadiums


Puerto Rico Crops Devastated By Hurricane Maria

Democrats Question EPA Adminstrator Scott Pruitt On Historical Job Cuts At EPA


Environmental Groups Question Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Cuts


What Does An Official Letter From The White House Requesting Funds For Hurricane Harvey Look Like?


Wasteful Water Use Tied To 'Education and Poverty' - Really?


Dimensional Analysis Of Statistics And Large Numbers - Index Of Blog Posts


Science Topics, Thoughts, and Parameters Regarding Science, Politics, And The Environment!

Find A Better Solution Instead Of Searching For A Way To Cheat The System

Working for a university has certainly shed light on the educational process at the post-high school level for me.  What never ceases to amaze me is the choices that students make in their effort toward achieving a good grade in a given class.  Rather than studying and working problems, a certain fraction of students will actually spend a large amount of time trying to figure a way to cheat in the course.  Of course, this does not apply to all students.  This begs the following questions:


1) What happens to these students in life?


2) What type of jobs do they pursue in life?



I will not pretend to have the answer to either.  Can I offer suggestions based on history?  Why not?  In the paragraphs below, I offer a couple of different routes taken by such students.  First, let me say that I do not believe these types of students are not above average students per se.  Alternatively, the students might be a bit misguided in their efforts.  Maybe that is by choice?  If so, that behavior will translate throughout their lives.

Cheating The System

Most of us know that to go down the path of 'cheating the system' is wrong and not stood for by most in the community.  When you look at large companies like Takata airbags or Volkswagen -- which both have been involved in scandals with the automobile, one cannot help what is the root of the problem.


Why do I mention this now?



Recently, I was reading an open letter by the famous activist lawyer Ralph Nader to Attorney General Loretta Lynch titled "Prosecution or Guilty Pleas for Corporate Crime".  The essence of the letter is centered around holding car automobile companies and other large corporate CEO's and upper management held accountable for crimes committed.



Volkswagen:

Ditlow called the Volkswagen diesel case one of the most egregious corporate crime cases in history.

“This is one of the most egregious corporate crimes I have ever seen,” Mr. Ditlow said. “When the Environmental Protection Agency set tough new standards for diesel engines, Volkswagen quickly discovered that its technology wouldn’t meet the new standards. But, what they did is, instead of sending their engineers to work, designing a new system to clean up the diesel, they sent their engineers to work developing a computer program that would instruct the diesel engine to only work the emission controls during the test procedure. And, when the diesel is out in the real world on the highway, to turn off the emission controls. So, in order to do this you have to have engineers who deliberately programmed into the computer system a cheat device, which would turn off the emission controls. Clear knowledge. Clear intent. And they got caught.”

Ditlow said that “in the U.S. there are nearly 500,000 of these diesels with the cheat devices on them.”

“Across the world there are many millions, as many as 11 million vehicles in every country, polluting the atmosphere, causing adverse health effects. And, one study here in the U.S. said that there be as many as 60 deaths due to this corporate crime by Volkswagen.”

If that was not a corporate crime then I do not know what is.



Takata Air Bag:

On Takata, Mr. Ditlow said this: “Up through the year 2000, almost every airbag inflator made worldwide, including by Takata, used sodium azide as a propellant. Very stable. If it broke down it just simply degraded and there were no adverse effects. If you had to replace it, you had to replace it. But, what Takata did in the beginning of 2001 was to change the propellant to ammonium nitrate, an incredibly powerful explosive. It’s what Terry McVeigh used to bring down the government office building in Oklahoma City. It’s what a lot of terrorists in the Mideast are using in the improvised explosive devises. And so, yet this propellant that Takata used, it was known to degrade, known to explode, they put it into the airbag inflator to save, once again, a few pennies per inflator. And so, they knew immediately, once these inflators were put into production that they were failing, they were exploding, and when they exploded they sent the shrapnel of the housing into the occupant compartment. And, if you’re behind the steering wheel and you had no other choice at that time, you are very likely to be killed or seriously injured.”

Wow!



In either case, the decision to cheat the system was not made at the engineering level as we have found out as these two scandals have carried out in the popular news.  Ralph Nader includes this fact in his open letter:

“The government in the U.S. the governments throughout Europe and the rest of the world  …  send the responsible executives to jail,” Ditlow said. “This is not something that a rogue engineer did. This is something that management approved, because, you cannot sell a car unless you get it certified by EPA. And, top management always looks at that. Because, if it can’t sell the car, you’re not going to make money. And, the way they made money this time was they cheated.”

These two incidents cause the public to view the corporate world with a large degree of skepticism in their practices.  When the corporations do not have the best interest in mind of  the consumer (as far as safety is concerned), then the confidence in the corporation is lost by the public and the bottom line of the company ultimately suffers.

One Bad Apple Is Unlikely ...

Furthermore, if one corporation has developed this technology to evade emissions testing in the United States, chances are the entire industry has followed suit.  Right about now, you may be thinking the following: "Mike, that is rather presumptuous to say don't you think?"


Yesterday, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) just release a statement accusing Fiat Chrysler of cheating on emissions testing too.  The article appeared in 'The Washington Post' under the title "EPA: Fiat Chrysler software enabled emissions cheating" contained a video shown below which is under 2 minutes in length and worth watching -- as parallels are drawn with Volkswagen.  Here the video below:

Another company cheating the system.  Imagine that?  Whenever I read an article like this on cheating the system, I wonder about the risk management personnel working at these companies.  The risk management employees have appeared over the decades referred to as "Bean Counters."   Bean Counters are defined by Merriam-Webster Online dictionary as:

a person involved in corporate or government financial decisions and especially one reluctant to spend money

The translation is a person who determines how to minimize risk or keep costs down dramatically.  One common calculation carried out over the years by bean counters is to determine the cost of a legal suit versus replacing the faulty part.  Meaning, considering accidents and potential deaths in a legal suit, is it cheaper to keep a faulty part on a car or change the part?  No company likes to admit that such calculations are ever carried out.  But, history shows that such calculations are carried out quite frequently.  Amazing.



Risk management is a field that the average person is not very familiar with.  An introduction to the field of 'risk management' is given below taken from the first two paragraphs of the 'Wikipedia' page:

Risk management is the identification, assessment, and prioritization of risks (defined in ISO 31000 as the effect of uncertainty on objectives) followed by coordinated and economical application of resources to minimize, monitor, and control the probability and/or impact of unfortunate events[1] or to maximize the realization of opportunities. Risk management’s objective is to assure uncertainty does not deflect the endeavor from the business goals.[2]

Risks can come from various sources including uncertainty in financial markets, threats from project failures (at any phase in design, development, production, or sustainment life-cycles), legal liabilities, credit risk, accidents, natural causes and disasters, deliberate attack from an adversary, or events of uncertain or unpredictable root-cause. There are two types of events i.e. negative events can be classified as risks while positive events are classified as opportunities. Several risk management standards have been developed including the Project Management Institute, the National Institute of Standards and Technology, actuarial societies, and ISO standards.[3][4] Methods, definitions and goals vary widely according to whether the risk management method is in the context of project management, security, engineering, industrial processes, financial portfolios, actuarial assessments, or public health and safety.

Is your head spinning after reading that paragraph?



If you are a visual person like myself, then the following example of 'risk management' will solidify the meaning in your mind.  Below is an example of the analysis done for the International Space Station by NASA taken from the 'Wikipedia' page for 'risk management':

Source: National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA):NASA Johnson Space CenterOrbital Debris Program Office - Orbital Debris Education Package

Shown above is a model of the International Space Station.  After the risk management team evaluated the structure, the resulting color coded model was generated.  The areas shaded in the color 'violet' are the areas with the lowest probability of impact.  Whereas, the areas shaded with the color 'red' indicate the points on the structure (space station) with the highest probability of impact.  

Models like the one generated by NASA above are generated by various industries for various products.  The decision comes down to changing the 'bottom line' (profit) for safety or absorbing the legal cost at a profit.  Whenever I think about a company caught up in a decision where consumer safety is pitted against profit, I would hope that consumer safety would win out.  Unfortunately, there are examples in history where this was not the case -- too many examples.

Furthermore, when one company engages in risky behavior, chances are others in the industry engage in the same type of fraud.  Again, from 'The Washington Post' article above:

“It is no surprise that the VW investigation has prompted enhanced focus on the automotive industry,” the University of Michigan law professor said. “When corporate misconduct occurs, it often reflects industry practice, not just the wrongdoing of a single company.”

The severe penalties levied against Volkswagen and, in particular, individual employees signals to companies that the Department of Justice intends to pursue and prosecute corporate decision-makers more intently than it has in years past, said Carl W. Tobias, a University of Richmond law professor. Deputy Attorney General Sally Q. Yates released a policy directive in September 2015 that said holding individual executives accountable is “one of the most effective ways to combat corporate misconduct.”

The first paragraph tends to confirm what has been said above.  Whereas the second paragraph tends to give us hope that more prosecutorial scrutiny in the decades to come will help minimize the bad actors (industry fraud).  With the current administration arriving in just over a week of President-elect Donald Trump, lets hope that we proceed forward with more restrictions to safeguard the consumers in our nation rather than turn back the clock.  It is up to each of us as consumers to keep a watch on any industry operating in the U.S. market.

Conclusion...

Just like the students that spend more time in and out of class trying to cheat on homework and exams, there will be corporations engaging in the same behavior.  Is this just a human trait?  To take the easy way out?  Turns out that the easy way out is to actually take the route that is truthful.  Be honest with yourself and your work.  Work hard.  Play hard.



With regard to corporate wrong doing, we all have a responsibility to our fellow American to watch out for such abuses and to report them when visible.  No one wins when someone dies as a result of a faulty part.  No one wins when consumers are sickened or injured by a poisoned product.  No one wins when a patient takes a pill (or medication) made with compromised ingredients sourced from unknown sources which leads to mass illness.  Regulatory agencies exist to actually ensure safety in consumer products.



The issue facing the nation at the moment is the lack of funding for such agencies which are greatly understaffed and under resourced.  Corporate entities understand this and have financial backing to send lobbyists to Washington to counter any regulatory proceedings from occurring.  What you and I have in the game is the end product.  Although, we also have a voice.  We have the ability to call our local representative or write a letter like the one above written by Ralph Nader.  Each of us has a responsibility to ensure safety -- keep this in mind.



Until next time, Have a great day!

Why Doesn't Pre-Regulation Of Consumer Products Exist?

Consumer products flood the marketplace and the screens on the devices that we carry with us on a daily basis.  This begs the following question regarding safety of consumer products released on the market:



But why are there more regulations regarding the safety of such products?



I really do not know the answer to this question.  If you are a reader who does know the answer or can shed some light on information (websites, books, journals, etc.) on the subject, please leave a comment.  At this point you might be asking yourself the following question:



Why is he concerned with the regulation of consumer products?



The reason is due to an article I read today about the efficacy of 'supplements' in 'The New York Times' article titled "Studies Show Little Benefit in Supplements".  Specifically, the excerpt that produced the thought was the following regarding regulation stated below:

The passage of the Dietary Supplement Health and Education Act of 1994 opened the floodgates to an industry that can bring these products to market without submitting any evidence to the Food and Drug Administration that they are safe and effective in people. The law allows the products to be promoted as “supporting” the health of various parts of the body if no claim is made that they can prevent, treat or cure any ailment. The wording appears not to stop many people from assuming that “support” translates to a proven benefit.

After 1994, sales of a very wide range of supplements skyrocketed, and because the law allowed it, many continued to be sold even after high-quality research showed they were no better than a placebo at supporting health. The government can halt sales of an individual product only after it is on the market and shown to be mislabeled or dangerous.

 The law seems to open up the door to the 'wild west' of supplements to which the world is exposed to.  A few years ago, I remember listening to a radio show where the regulator said of this law that the consumer is exposed to literally "whatever the manufacturer decides to put into the product.  The consumer could be buying dirt in a gel coating."  I was appalled to say the least.



This puts the safety and efficacy of a consumer product on the consumer.  Which, if the last sentence of each paragraph in the excerpt are picked out for the stand alone inspection below translates to:

The wording appears not to stop many people from assuming that “support” translates to a proven benefit.

And ...

The government can halt sales of an individual product only after it is on the market and shown to be mislabeled or dangerous.

I don't know about you, but I get a tingly feeling running down my spine when I read either sentence.  I can say that I as a consumer have confidence in the manufacturer that they would operate on 'good faith' to make a reliable product.



As I study more, I become more aware of how gullible I have been.  Although, the solution to such a matter involves the following question:


What alternative is there?



Education to start with.   In the case of supplements or vitamins, many consumers do not realize that the important active compounds (vitamins) in a supplement (some of which) are not digestible in the human body.  Therefore, you take a pill or drink a drink and pee the minerals and vitamins right out the other end.



Understanding that you can get the same nutrition from different fruits and vegetables along with with other food is crucial to the safety and health of yourself and your family.  Many manufacturers play on the inability of the consumer not to pay attention or ask questions about the efficacy of their product.



I will leave you with this thought.  Education can take you only so far.  At some point, you do have to live with the understanding that toxicity is a spectrum.  Every compound is a degree (a data point) on the spectrum of toxicity.  Although, the more education that you put forward toward understanding the consumer products and their effectiveness versus adverse effects, the better off you will be!



So, go educate thyself!



Have a great day!