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

Wireless devices may get a shake up

Last month’s ISA Expo in Houston clearly showed how much attention wireless technology is attracting. However, concern about the reliability and life of batteries remains an issue. That’s why harvested or scavenged power is attracting interest.

10/31/2006

Who's the Odd Man Out?

Women now predominate in process industries publishing.

03/15/2012

Where are chemical engineers headed?

Will opportunities in today's "hot" sectors , such as pharmaceuticals and biotechnology, among others, allow chemical engineering to continue to thrive?

08/05/2004

What’s needed in process automation?

A recent survey of end users provides an extensive wish list

05/05/2008

What's in Store for Innovation?

Chemical industry executives share perspectives on priorities and issues

06/10/2014

What price is right?

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

09/27/2005

We’re starting the new year off right

The magazine and Web site are gaining significant enhancements. We’ve ratcheted up our efforts to identify ways of better serving you. As a result, we’re launching several features that we hope will make Chemical Processing and ChemicalProcessing.com even more valuable to you.

01/03/2007

We Need More Engineers in Congress

People with technical backgrounds likely can enhance legislation.

08/11/2010

We Need Another A.C. Gilbert

Toy maker knew how to interest children in science and engineering.

01/06/2010

We Must Improve Safety and Security

Better performance demands more than add-on equipment and software.

09/29/2011

We Can Learn a Lot from Dow Chemical

Taking a broader view can improve already impressive EH&S performance.

11/16/2010

Vendors Should See the Light

Maintenance staffs would welcome warning LEDs on equipment

04/15/2008

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

U.S. Lead in Science and Engineering Erodes

Biennial report points to gains particularly by Asian countries.

02/15/2010

U.S. Heads Toward Energy Independence

The chemical industry, for one, will benefit significantly.

02/04/2013

Typewriters send a somber message

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

06/07/2006

Turmoil Takes a Toll on Chemical Safety Board

Disagreements and turnover undermine Chemical Safety Board’s efforts

08/18/2014

Trevor Kletz Bequeaths Better Process Safety

British expert introduced and championed key concepts to avoid accidents.

11/19/2013

There's a New Buzz on Campus

A leading chemical company spurs academic research on traditional topics.

11/14/2011

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