Open Letter to EPA on the Prevention of Chemical Plant Disasters
November, 2011 Dear Administrator Jackson, We were very encouraged by the October 26, 2011 decision by the National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC), to recommend that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) use the “general duty clause” of the 1990 Clean Air Act to prevent chemical disasters. As you know this amendment, also known as the “Bhopal amendment,” obligates chemical facilities to prevent catastrophic chemical releases. Once the EPA accepts the NEJAC recommendations, new prevention standards could eliminate catastrophic chemical hazards to millions of people living down wind of ultra-hazardous chemical facilities. Historically, Environmental Justice communities that live the closest to these facilities are more likely to be communities of color, indigenous communities and low income households. These risks represent a major environmental injustice that has persisted for decades even after the 1984 disaster at a Union Carbide plant in Bhopal, India proved how catastrophic a chemical accident could be. Implementing the Clean Air Act’s prevention authority will not only eliminate accidental hazards but will also address fatal flaws in the chemical security law administered by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). That law prohibits the DHS from requiring the use of safer chemical processes. The DHS law also exempts thousands of chemical facilities that the Clean Air Act covers, such as water treatment plants and most refineries and other port facilities. Using the Clean Air Act’s prevention authority is also consistent with the recommendations of the EPA and DHS to Congress which urged the use of safer chemical processes at high risk chemical facilities and eliminating the exemptions in the current chemical security program. In 2002 the EPA drafted a proposal to use the Clean Air Act’s general duty clause to make high risk chemical facilities “inherently safer by reducing quantities of hazardous chemicals handled or stored, substituting less hazardous chemicals for extremely hazardous ones, or otherwise modifying the design of processes to reduce or eliminate chemical hazards.” Tragically, with pressure from the petro-chemical lobby, the Bush adminstration scuttled the EPA proposal. On June 21, 2011 more than 100 national and local organizations sent identical recommendations to President Obama. Given the availability of many safer cost-effective chemical processes, there is no reason why millions of Americans should continue to be exposed to these catastrophic risks. We look forward to working with you, your staff and EPA Regions to implement a chemical disaster prevention program that eliminates these unecessary hazards. Thank you. Sincerely, CC: EPA Regions
No signatures yet. Be the first one!
Comment