Angela Griffith : Investigations are still ongoing to determine details on what caused the April 17, 2013 explosion in West, Texas (the subject of a previous blog). The death toll has risen to at least 14, including 10 emergency workers. Around 200 are believed to be injured. The deaths were caused by the explosion of the site AND the proximity of the victims to the site. The emergency workers were on-site fighting a fire (which was the ignition source of the explosion), but many of those injured had no real reason to be in such a proximity that they would be injured.
Warning systems and emergency notifications may have resulted in some of the non-emergency response victims getting out of harm's way. However, warning systems and notifications like those required for other industrial sites including oil refineries and chemical plants are not required at fertilizer plants. The plant owner did not comment on emergency management plans for the site. Senator Barbara Boxer of California will attempt to determine if those requirements need to be strengthened.
However, even if a warning system had provided sufficient protection to keep nearby citizens from harm, the property damage would have been extensive. Many properties – including homes and schools – nearby were severely damaged in the blast. This has led some to believe that there should be an enforced geographical buffer between these types of industrial facilities and other types of facilities, like homes and schools. The mayor of West has suggested that the plant be rebuilt away from populated areas.
More and more concerns are being raised about the safety of the plant itself – and the safeguards that could have prevented this explosion. Despite the large amount of potentially explosive ammonium nitrate stored at the plant, the plant did not have a sprinkler system or fire barrier (which may have prevented the fire from igniting the fertilizer).
Industrial plants such as these are regulated by a host of state and federal agencies, including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The EPA required a worst-case scenario from the West site, which identified a release from an anhydrous ammonia storage tank. The risk of fire or explosion, and the storage of ammonium nitrate were not identified in the scenario, provided in 2011. (The facility was fined in 2006 for not filing its risk management plan.)
Please continue reading "Emergency Plan Could Have Saved Lives in TX Plant Explosion" by Angela Griffith