Two experts have raised concerns about the understaffing of the Risk Management Program (RMP). Rick Engler, a former member of the U.S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board until his retirement in 2020, stated that there are insufficient EPA staff to efficiently oversee the approximately 11,500 facilities included in the program.

He noted, “We have a regulatory framework with a completely inadequate testing force,” highlighting an issue that has persisted across multiple presidential administrations.

In its 2027 budget proposal, the Trump administration intends to eliminate funding for Engler’s former chemical safety board. The request is to zero out your funds.

Moreover, the administration plans to rescind a set of updates to the RMP regulations, many of which are set to become effective next year.

The Biden administration’s finalized rule changes require companies to enhance their preparedness for chemical incidents caused by natural disasters like hurricanes and introduce programs for employees to report issues anonymously. Facilities will also be tasked with assessing the feasibility of implementing safer technologies and processes, among other amendments.

The EPA stated: Facilities that handle hazardous materials already have obligations in place. These requirements aim to safely manage chemicals, identify potential hazards, and minimize accidental releases under the Clean Air Act, regardless of RMP participation.

An EPA spokesperson commented, “It’s challenging to determine whether compliance with the RMP rule could have prevented these incidents until we have an investigation report identifying the root cause.”

They added that the U.S. has made significant progress in reducing chemical accidents “without the excessive regulatory burden imposed by the Biden EPA’s 2024 rule,” noting “few studies show a direct correlation between the RMP rule and accident reductions.”

The Biden EPA also unveiled an online platform for the public to seek information about potentially hazardous locations under the RMP program, a resource that the Trump administration subsequently withdrew.

“In 2024, for the first time, the EPA developed a tool for the public to better understand the risks associated with local chemicals,” said Emma Cheese, senior attorney at Earthjustice, a nonprofit environmental law advocacy organization. “However, in early 2025, the EPA took this tool offline without any notice.”

Environmental advocates argue that this removal leaves communities unaware of the hazards posed by local chemicals. Nonetheless, the Trump administration claims the tool posed a national security threat.

“The Biden EPA disregarded warnings from national security experts about how the 2024 rule would heighten vulnerabilities of chemical facilities and other sensitive sites to potential attacks,” stated an EPA spokesperson.

The EPA proposed to restore tools using more limited data, but shutters remain closed for now.

Investigation into Washington Bombings Faces Defunding

The Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board is currently probing a tragic paper mill explosion in Washington state that resulted in 11 fatalities. A 900,000-gallon tank of white liquor used in paper production exploded, leaving seven individuals hospitalized.

A spokesperson from Nippon Dynawave stated the company is focused on recovery efforts while mourning the loss of lives.

“We are quickly assisting first responders in their search for our missing colleague,” the spokesperson remarked. “We are collaborating with our emergency response teams and unions and will provide more information soon.”

The Chemical Safety Board functions similarly to the National Transportation Safety Board, which investigates accidents involving aircraft and trains. Rather than a regulatory body, its purpose is to ascertain the facts surrounding chemical release incidents.

The Trump administration’s 2027 budget proposal represents a second attempt to reduce funding for the Chemical Safety Board, having made a similar attempt in 2026, which Congress countered by allocating $14 million to the board.

Officials have argued that the safety board’s functions overlap with the roles of the EPA and the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA).

“The CSB performs unannounced inspections of the chemical industry and proposes policies it lacks the authority to develop or enforce,” the budget justification states. “Such functions should remain under the jurisdiction of a government agency that can issue regulations.”

It remains uncertain whether the board will investigate the recent California incident, which concluded without injuries or fatalities. A spokesperson did not respond to queries regarding investigation plans or concerning the White House’s funding proposals for the board.

Regarding the Trump administration’s effort to repeal Biden-era reforms to the EPA risk management program, officials claim rescinding these reforms will yield benefits. The industry generates approximately $240 million annually without significantly altering risks.

The Trump EPA’s proposed risk management program aims to uphold all essential accident prevention measures while eliminating duplicative, contradictory, or unproven requirements that inflate costs and create confusion without enhancing safety outcomes, according to an EPA spokesperson.

In public comments, the American Petroleum Institute asserted that the rollback would erase “onerous” provisions that would escalate compliance costs.

The current program mandates that companies submit a comprehensive safety plan to the EPA, detailing safety measures, hazard assessments in case of accidental releases, and emergency response procedures.

The proposed changes seek to enhance communication regarding chemical risks to nearby communities, improve worker involvement in safety management programs, and incentivize the adoption of safer alternatives.

Stephanie Herron, organizing director of the Environmental Justice Health Alliance for Chemical Policy Reform, characterized these changes as “common sense baseline protections.”

These regulations also expanded the list of chemicals covered by the program.

The rollback proposed by the Trump administration is not final. Public comments regarding the proposed rules to rescind reforms were accepted until May 11, meaning the EPA must still consider feedback and address significant concerns.

During Trump’s first term, similar reform efforts initiated by the Obama administration were rescinded after a fertilizer explosion in Texas killed 15 people and injured more than 200. The chemical responsible for the explosion, ammonium nitrate, is not regulated under the RMP.

Engler noted, “There was a ping-pong effect of change,” referring to the continual back-and-forth shifts between Republican and Democratic administrations.

History of Violations at Southern California Plant

Methyl methacrylate (MMA), the chemical that posed an explosion risk at the GKN Aerospace plant in California last week, is not as widely used today and has been removed from the EPA’s risk management program. Inhalation of volatile organic compounds can lead to eye and skin irritation, coughing, wheezing, headaches, and shortness of breath.

When a 7,000-gallon tank of chemicals began overheating on May 21, there were fears that chemicals would escape into nearby neighborhoods. Fortunately, with the situation stabilized, the last 16,000 evacuated residents returned home on Tuesday.

Though the California facility is not part of the RMP, it has faced a history of enforcement actions from both local and state regulators, including violations related to above-ground petroleum storage and local water quality regulations.

Additionally, the company has settled approximately $910,000 with local air quality regulators over alleged violations.