AYESHA RASCOE, HOST:
When a massive chemical tank imploded at a paper mill in Washington state last week, 11 people were killed. Just days earlier in Southern California, authorities ordered 50,000 people to evacuate when a tank filled with highly toxic chemicals was in danger of exploding. And last month, two people died after inhaling fumes from a chemical tank at a silver recovery plant in West Virginia. But the agency charged with investigating incidents like these is under threat. It's called the U.S. Chemical Safety Board. Rick Engler is a former member of that board and joins us now. Thank you for being with us.
RICK ENGLER: Hello.
RASCOE: The Chemical Safety Board is currently investigating the deadly incidents in Washington state and West Virginia. The Trump administration has asked Congress to eliminate the agency's budget, saying it, quote, "duplicates more than adequate capabilities of other agencies." Do you agree with that assessment?
ENGLER: Absolutely not. The CSB plays a vital and unique role. The Environmental Protection Agency and the Occupational Health and Safety Administration both are agencies that are involved with chemical safety in the prevention of these types of tragedies. But while the Trump administration says these agencies can make up for getting rid of CSB, the fact is that this administration is also gutting the funding and staffing of both OSHA and EPA. So it's quite hypocritical to argue that CSB's not necessary 'cause other agencies can do it while eliminating the resources, staffing and effectiveness of those agencies.
RASCOE: And is there something unique about the Chemical Safety Board's investigating capacity compared to these other agencies?
ENGLER: Well, CSB is the only agency that is charged by Congress from the Clean Air Act for investigating the underlying causes of major chemical incidents. Many people have heard of the National Transportation Safety Board, or NTSB. Well, the CSB plays a similar function of investigation and making recommendations for safety at facilities that use highly hazardous chemicals. No one would think of abolishing the NTSB, and yet here we go again with the administration proposing to eliminate the CSB. It's really a travesty.
RASCOE: It was striking that we saw two of these incidents with chemical tanks in just one week. How frequently do things like this happen?
ENGLER: Well, with major incidents that have substantial deaths and major evacuations, they happen, but they - you know, they're irregular. They're what are called low probability but high consequence events. So when they do happen, the consequences are terrible. Then people die, workers both in the plant, as well as sometimes people in surrounding communities. And the other consequence of these incidents is an economic one - that when industrial plants catch on fire, blow up, have major toxic releases, sometimes these facilities close forever, leading to mass layoffs and devastation for the people who worked in the sites and also the communities that surround them.
RASCOE: Well, the facilities in California and Washington state, they're both just blocks from residential neighborhoods. How much of the U.S. population lives near these dangerous chemicals?
ENGLER: Well, a substantial amount. I mean, one estimate is that over 177 million Americans live in what are called worst-case-scenario zones near facilities that use hazardous chemicals.
RASCOE: Well, I mean, that is extremely significant. Well, in your mind, what does need to be done specifically to make sure these disasters don't keep happening?
ENGLER: Well, one thing that needs to be done is that every facility should be evaluating its technology and processes on a periodic basis to determine whether they can transition to a safer technology or processes. And sometimes these steps are relatively straightforward, involving substituting safer chemicals. For example, in much of the paper industry, they have stopped using elemental chlorine - which is a highly dangerous chemical - and moved to safer substitutes. But the regulations that would require such evaluation are not in place, except for in limited cases, and now the Trump administration is moving forward to withdraw even those modest requirements. So what this administration is doing will further endanger both workers and communities across the nation.
RASCOE: That's Rick Engler, former member of the U.S. Chemical Safety Board and currently a consultant to the New Jersey Work Environment Council. Thank you so much for being with us.
ENGLER: Thank you. Transcript provided by NPR, Copyright NPR.
NPR transcripts are created on a rush deadline by an NPR contractor. This text may not be in its final form and may be updated or revised in the future. Accuracy and availability may vary. The authoritative record of NPR’s programming is the audio record.
