Time to Fix the Damage of Weakened Chemical Disaster Prevention Regulations

Management Program ◽

Disaster Prevention ◽

Protection Agency ◽

West Texas ◽

Risk Management Program ◽

Agency Risk ◽

The U.S

The Trump administration weakened regulations through changes on rules that have been improved during the Obama years. An example is the reversal in 2019 of the improvements to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Risk Management Program, Chemical Disaster Prevention Rule. In 2013 a catastrophic explosion of ammonium nitrate in West, Texas, provided the impetus to improve the original regulations after an investigation of its consequences. The justification for reversing the improvements was provided by one of the three federal investigations conducted by the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives which alleged, without proof, that the West Texas explosion was caused by arson and thus nonpreventable. This commentary reviews the details of this reversal and recommends that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, now under the Biden Administration, resurrect its 2016 Risk Management Program chemical disaster rule in order to prevent future chemical facility catastrophes.

Air-Toxic Clusters Revisited: Intersectional Environmental Inequalities and Indigenous Deprivation in the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Regions

Race and Social Problems ◽

10.1007/s12552-019-09260-5 ◽

2019 ◽

Vol 11 (2) ◽

pp. 161-184 ◽

Cited By ~ 10

Author(s):

Raoul S. Liévanos

Keyword(s):

Protection Agency ◽

Environmental Inequalities ◽

The U.S

DOCUMENTING THE U.S. LANDFILL/IMPOUNDMENT PERMIT: A GUIDE TO TECHNICAL RESOURCES. By Robert E. Landreth, Risk Reduction Engineering Laboratory, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Cincinnati, Ohio, 45268, U.S.A

Waste Management & Research ◽

10.1177/0734242x9000800147 ◽

1990 ◽

Vol 8 (1) ◽

pp. 307-312

Keyword(s):

Risk Reduction ◽

Protection Agency ◽

The U.S

The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Scientific Visualization Center

ACM SIGGRAPH Computer Graphics ◽

10.1145/142413.996911 ◽

1992 ◽

Vol 26 (3) ◽

pp. 178

Author(s):

Theresa Rhyne ◽

Lynne Petterson

Keyword(s):

Scientific Visualization ◽

Protection Agency ◽

The U.S

Standard Guide for Selection of Environmentally Acceptable Lubricants for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Vessel General Permit

10.1520/d8324 ◽

2021 ◽

Author(s):

Keyword(s):

Protection Agency ◽

The U.S ◽

Selection Of

Environmental Protection Agency Risk Assessment— Process and Toxicologic Pathology

Toxicologic Pathology ◽

10.1177/019262339702500113 ◽

1997 ◽

Vol 25 (1) ◽

pp. 68-71 ◽

Cited By ~ 5

Author(s):

Marion P. Copley

Keyword(s):

Risk Assessment ◽

Assessment Process ◽

Protection Agency ◽

Risk Assessment Process ◽

Agency Risk

REGULATING RISK: OVERSIGHT OF MICROBIAL PRODUCTS OF BIOTECHNOLOGY UNDER THE U.S. TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT

Journal of Environmental Assessment Policy and Management ◽

10.1142/s1464333299000259 ◽

1999 ◽

Vol 01 (03) ◽

pp. 329-347 ◽

Cited By ~ 2

Author(s):

REBECCA A. EFROYMSON

Keyword(s):

Genetically Engineered ◽

Institutional Constraints ◽

Toxic Substances ◽

Protection Agency ◽

Microbial Products ◽

Toxic Substances Control Act ◽

Risk Oversight ◽

The U.S

The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) is the legislation used by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to regulate releases of genetically engineered microorganisms. The rule defining the scope of the notification requirements for releases of microbial products of biotechnology was published in April 1997. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had some latitude regarding the extent to which various categories of microorganisms would be regulated, but the agency was constrained by requirements of TSCA and an interagency agreement about how to regulate products of biotechnology. This paper investigates the extent to which the scope of oversight is based on risk. A risk-based rule is defined as one where the reporting requirements are based on potential for exposure or expected adverse effects. The evolution of the rule is described, and risk-based components are discussed. In conclusion, the scope of oversight of microbial releases is determined to be based on risk to the extent that legislation and institutional constraints permit.