“We are very concerned EPA has decided to abandon a collaborative and data-driven process which has helped decrease chemical related incidents by nearly 80 percent since RMP was adopted,” said Kimberly Wise White, ACC’s vice president of regulatory and scientific affairs. “Instead, the agency has decided to remove important regulatory safeguards and impose unworkable mandates that could jeopardize the safety of facilities that provide vital contributions to critical sectors.”
ACC stressed that while it supports some of the final rule, including EPA’s approach to root-cause analysis of process safety incidents, it has several concerns. These include requiring the broad sharing of detailed information about specific chemical hazards at facilities, removing safeguards put in place after the 9/11 attacks and potentially posing a national security threat.
“We do not believe EPA has adequately addressed these serious concerns or identified sufficient public benefit to the increased disclosure requirements,” ACC said.
The costs of compliance will increase significantly thanks to the requirement, ACC said, and the scope of the rule has expanded since the comment period closed. It added the public should have had more opportunity to comment on major changes before the rule became final, especially given the cost.
“The agency has not provided sufficient evidence to justify these new requirements, nor has it adopted a more targeted approach to further enhance safety as suggested by ACC and other stakeholders,” White said. “Unfortunately, EPA has doubled down on its flawed approach, vastly expanding the scope of questionable new requirements. We urge EPA to withdraw its rule and focus on building on the success of the current programme.”