Perspectives: From the Editor

Turmoil Takes a Toll on Chemical Safety Board

Disagreements and turnover undermine Chemical Safety Board’s efforts

By MARK ROSENZWEIG, Editor in Chief

The U.S. Chemical Safety Board (CSB), Washington, D.C., is an independent federal agency with an important mission — to investigate chemical accidents and make recommendations, based upon its findings, to the companies involved and regulators to prevent such accidents from happening again. Unfortunately, internal divisions, including conflicts between the board and chairperson Rafael Moure-Eraso (see: “Obama Tackles Safety Board Vacancies"), board vacancies and staff turnover, are hobbling its effectiveness.

Most chemical companies make safety a top priority. However, some firms still treat safety as an afterthought or just “talk the talk.” Such attitudes and safety lapses can lead to serious accidents when process upsets and human errors occur.

Indeed, significant safety incidents continue to arise all too regularly — such as the April 2013 explosion at the fertilizer storage and distribution facility of West Fertilizer, West, Texas (see: “Defuse Dust Dangers”), and the August 2012 fire at Chevron’s Richmond, Calif., refinery (see: “CSB Report: Chevron Ignored Safety Procedures Prior to Refinery Fire.")

However, the CSB hasn’t acquitted itself well so far this decade. It only has 11 investigations currently underway; six of these involve incidents that occurred in 2009 and 2010. According to the CSB, Congress’ request to investigate the Deepwater Horizon incident in the Gulf of Mexico siphoned substantial resources from other efforts and significantly contributed to the current backlog. In addition, the CSB’s funding has remained stagnant. Nevertheless, the failure to issue reports in a timely manner seriously undermines their value.

The Inspector General of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, which has oversight over the CSB, issued a critical report, “U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board Needs to Complete More Timely Investigations,” in July 2013. It cites five reasons for the failure, including “a backlog of investigations without documented plans for resolution” and “an average investigative staff turnover rate of 15%.” The report also makes nine recommendations, including “revise and publish annual and individual action plans” and “review investigations open for over three years and develop a close-out plan.” The CSB agreed with six of the nine recommendations.

The CSB’s Board should consist of five people, but only had three at the start of this year: Moure-Eraso, Mark Griffon and Beth Rosenberg. Nominees to fill the vacancies — Richard Engler and Manuel Ehrlilch Jr. — haven’t yet been confirmed by the Senate. Engler’s name was put forward in December 2012 and Ehrlich’s in January 2014. In early June, Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.) put a hold on their confirmation until the CSB provides records requested by the EPA’s Inspector General that it so far has refused to submit.

Making matters worse, Rosenberg resigned suddenly in May. She and Griffon had complained that Moure-Eraso had disregarded or inappropriately over-ruled majority decisions of the Board and generally had marginalized the Board’s role. For instance, in comments included in a June 2014 Congressional staff report “Whistleblower Reprisal and Management Failures at the U.S. Chemical Safety Board,” Griffon notes: “The latest attempts by the majority of the Board to have a public business meeting to get a status report on open investigations was effectively blocked by the Chairman through a procedural maneuver.”

Employees responsible for investigating incidents also have suffered at the hands of the CSB management and this has led to high turnover, according to that report. It states: “Witnesses told the Committee that CSB personnel who disagree with Moure-Eraso and his management style risk losing their jobs.”

The report concludes: “The actions of a select few—Chairman Moure-Eraso, Managing Director Daniel Horowitz, and General Counsel Richard Loeb—have compromised the Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board’s mission and left the agency in disarray. Their actions, ranging from belittlement of staff and micromanagement of CSB investigations, to prohibited personnel actions and improper staff directives, are simply unacceptable. These practices must change without delay.”

That report was written by staff of Rep. Darrell Issa (R-Calif.), chair of the Committee on Oversight and Government Reform, and Rep. Lamar Smith (R-Tex.), chair of the Committee on Science, Space and Technology, so I, for one, wouldn’t regard it as completely impartial. However, it clearly is more evidence that the CSB needs fixing.
 
The country and our industry deserve — and should demand — a CSB that can achieve its mission.


rosenzweigweb.jpgMARK ROSENZWEIG, Editor in Chief of Chemical Processing, can be e-mailed at mrosenzweig@putman.net.

More from this perspective...

Title

What price is right?

Minimizing costs is only one part of the economic equation for profitability.

09/27/2005

SOCMA makes a momentous move

Replacing Responsible Care is anything but irresponsible.

10/25/2005

Vaaler Award Winners

Editor in Chief Mark Rosenzweig congratulates the winners for CP's annual Vaaler awards, given to the products and services that most improve the operations and economics of plants.

11/27/2005

Let’s heat up efforts to save energy

Ample opportunities to boost efficiency certainly exist at most plants.

12/21/2005

Hard lessons worth sharing

Editor-in-Chief Mark Rosenzweig writes that the causes of two incidents should get attention from other processors.

01/24/2006

Savor your slide rule

This long-time symbol of engineering has retained its value, says Editor in Chief Mark Rosenzweig in his monthly column.

02/20/2006

Repair your maintenance program

Take a fresh look at how to improve staff productivity and skills.

02/28/2006

Protect the perimeter and the process

A visit to Honeywell's Geismar plant reminded Editor in Chief Mark Rosenzweig how to integrate security and control.

04/12/2006

Typewriters send a somber message

Lack of skilled technicians and parts can doom otherwise useful equipment.

06/07/2006

Let’s cut through barbed wireless

Divergent standards could snag efficient deployment of devices.

06/16/2006

New edition of pre-eminent handbook released

For more than 70 years, if one reference has epitomized what chemical engineering is all about it’s been "Perry’s Chemical Engineers' Handbook." Now, a new edition — the first in a decade — has just come out.

12/10/2007

Deflect a double whammy

Consider new options for tackling economic and environmental concerns.

02/04/2008

From the Editor: ICI fades into history

One of the greatest names in the chemical industry is disappearing

06/02/2008

Chemical Safety Board Gets Rebuke

Recent report points to failings and necessary remedial actions

10/10/2008

Give An Enduring Gift | Rosenzweig's Ramblings December 2008

Donating time and expertise can transform the lives of people in the developing world.

02/24/2009

Rosenzweig's Ramblings January 2009 : How Should Industry Tackle Threats?

New report promotes inherently safer technology for hazardous facilities.

04/09/2009

Rosenzweig's Ramblings March 2009: Spend Slack Time Smartly

You finally may have a chance to focus on a variety of worthwhile projects.

04/09/2009

Go outside for internal standards

06/01/2004

The Lark provides a serious lesson for the chemical industry

The key to the long-term vitality of a chemical corporation does not lie in its business acumen, but in its ability to continue to make innovative chemicals. Editor in chief Mark Rosenzweig says executives should show more enthusiasm for this process.

03/10/2005

Take safety up a notch

There’s still room to improve industry’s good safety performance, says Editor in Chief Mark Rosenzweig in his monthly column. Mechanical integrity programs generally need more attention.

08/25/2005