Longview Pulp Plant

wanderingrichard said:
If what i've been reading is true, there is no regulating body on that type of tank, the only reponsible party for inspection and maintenence is the owning entity. Not USG, not the State. So, that raises the question of when the tank was last inspected or serviced.

I'll have to dig for the relevant article, so it might be a bit before i can add a link.
Click to expand...
Does Washington state have a state level department similar to Oregon’s DEQ or OSHA?
They would most likely be the ones visiting onsite for violations - storage, ground contaminants, maintenance and inspection records, etc. Oregon DEQ hands out some pretty hefty fines. In Oregon, Oregon OSHA may also have a hand as well.
 
FinLuver said:
Does Washington state have a state level department similar to Oregon’s DEQ or OSHA?
They would most likely be the ones visiting onsite for violations - storage, ground contaminants, maintenance and inspection records, etc. Oregon DEQ hands out some pretty hefty fines. In Oregon, Oregon OSHA may also have a hand as well.
Click to expand...

washingtonstatestandard.com

WA agencies lacked role inspecting failed chemical tank in Longview mill disaster • Washington State Standard

No state agency was responsible for inspecting the 900,000-gallon chemical storage tank that burst at a mill in southwest Washington this week, leaving 11 people presumed dead.
washingtonstatestandard.com washingtonstatestandard.com
 
wanderingrichard said:
If what i've been reading is true, there is no regulating body on that type of tank, the only reponsible party for inspection and maintenence is the owning entity. Not USG, not the State. So, that raises the question of when the tank was last inspected or serviced.

I'll have to dig for the relevant article, so it might be a bit before i can add a link.
Click to expand...
"Even before investigators arrived at the scene of a deadly chemical tank rupture at a Longview paper mill, federal and state records painted a troubling picture of the facility's environmental record.
Washington state regulators have taken formal enforcement action against Nippon Dynawave Packaging 18 times over the past decade for environmental violations, resulting in fines totaling $43,700, records show.
Among the most serious penalties, the company was fined $9,000 on two separate occasions. In February 2017, state regulators cited the company for exceeding air quality emissions limits for sulfur dioxide. Eighteen months later, in August 2018, the company was fined again, this time for releasing methanol into the air at levels above what its operating permit allows. More recently, in August 2024, the company was penalized for discharging excess solids into its treated wastewater and again releasing sulfur dioxide above permitted levels."
 
FinLuver said:
Does Washington state have a state level department similar to Oregon’s DEQ or OSHA?
They would most likely be the ones visiting onsite for violations - storage, ground contaminants, maintenance and inspection records, etc. Oregon DEQ hands out some pretty hefty fines. In Oregon, Oregon OSHA may also have a hand as well.
Click to expand...
Just read this headline…
US Chemical Safety Board to Investigate Fatal Tank Implosion at Longview Fiber Mill
 
Profit margins always the core obstacle to industrial safety, as shareholders and senior management are always resistant to investing in upgrades to 'dirty' industry plants unless absolutely forced to.
And with the current regressive cycle of 'windmills bad/coal good' and weakened environmental laws there is far less incentive to do so than in decades, regardless of the human cost.
 
RCF said:
washingtonstatestandard.com

WA agencies lacked role inspecting failed chemical tank in Longview mill disaster • Washington State Standard

No state agency was responsible for inspecting the 900,000-gallon chemical storage tank that burst at a mill in southwest Washington this week, leaving 11 people presumed dead.
washingtonstatestandard.com washingtonstatestandard.com
Click to expand...
The article states: "Since Tuesday, 23 dead fish, including carp, redfish and bluegill, have been collected near the mill by the Department of Ecology, said Courtney Serad, lead spill responder with the agency."

Maybe our native fisheries are suffering but if we can now stalk redfish on the Lower Columbia, I can get into that! Is that flats skiff from the Good Boat Deals thread still available?
 
Ok, maybe I'm misunderstanding something. The article @SurfnFish posted says the plant got fined multiple times, yet the article that @RCF posted says otherwise... which is pretty much what I'd read, too.

So, which narrative is right ?
 
wanderingrichard said:
Ok, maybe I'm misunderstanding something. The article @SurfnFish posted says the plant got fined multiple times, yet the article that @RCF posted says otherwise... which is pretty much what I'd read, too.

So, which narrative is right ?
Click to expand...
I think the misunderstanding is that the fines were for different pollution and public safety concerns which are regulated, versus the integrity of the tank that failed, which apparently is not regulated. From RCF’s article:

“At the state level, Washington’s Department of Ecology oversees the Nippon Dynawave’s water and air quality permits as well as hazardous waste, but those permits do not cover the integrity of storage tanks like the one that failed, said Anna Izenman, Ecology spokesperson.”
 
Matt B said:
The article states: "Since Tuesday, 23 dead fish, including carp, redfish and bluegill, have been collected near the mill by the Department of Ecology, said Courtney Serad, lead spill responder with the agency."

Maybe our native fisheries are suffering but if we can now stalk redfish on the Lower Columbia, I can get into that! Is that flats skiff from the Good Boat Deals thread still available?
Click to expand...
Chat GPT: Write me an article about the mill incident killing fish.
 
Clearly $43,700 in fines is nowhere near enough penalty to scare Nippon Dynawave Packaging to clean up their act. Penalties for environmental and safety violations are just the cost of doing business.
 
Canuck from Kansas said:
Clearly $43,700 in fines is nowhere near enough penalty to scare Nippon Dynawave Packaging to clean up their act. Penalties for environmental and safety violations are just the cost of doing business.
Click to expand...
That's kind of how all fines to big industries are. Just a cost of doing business.

I like the system a lot of European countries use for fines - it's scalable with income for both people and corporations.
 
SurfnFish said:
Profit margins always the core obstacle to industrial safety, as shareholders and senior management are always resistant to investing in upgrades to 'dirty' industry plants unless absolutely forced to.
And with the current regressive cycle of 'windmills bad/coal good' and weakened environmental laws there is far less incentive to do so than in decades, regardless of the human cost.
Click to expand...
profit margins aren't an obstacle, that's like saying rolling is an obstacle to motor vehicle safety. profit is an incentive, and a good one. and it naturally creates the further incentive to prioritize safety in the best interest of profits - if the the cost of negligence is allowed to be realistic. when there's no oversight, or toothless costs assigned to negligence - it's negligence that is incentivized.
 
Matt B said:
The article states: "Since Tuesday, 23 dead fish, including carp, redfish and bluegill, have been collected near the mill by the Department of Ecology, said Courtney Serad, lead spill responder with the agency."

Maybe our native fisheries are suffering but if we can now stalk redfish on the Lower Columbia, I can get into that! Is that flats skiff from the Good Boat Deals thread still available?
Click to expand...
They were green fish before the spill…
 
dflett68 said:
profit margins aren't an obstacle, that's like saying rolling is an obstacle to motor vehicle safety. profit is an incentive, and a good one. and it naturally creates the further incentive to prioritize safety in the best interest of profits - if the the cost of negligence is allowed to be realistic. when there's no oversight, or toothless costs assigned to negligence - it's negligence that is incentivized.
Click to expand...
Having worked for multiple corporations at a senior level, and having owned a consulting company registered as a Delaware corporation, your logic does not compute.
Any cost to a company represents a reduction in profit whether booked as an operating expense or a capitol expense.
As to intent...I managed a project on a bay area Superfund site where the solvent TCE had permeated acres around a Siemans chip plant for decades. The company knew they had leaking underground storage tanks during a time they were making record profits. So instead of removing the tanks and preforming soil remediation, they continued to pay fines and fight against the clean-up in court. When they finally lost the case after a decade of legal battles they simply shut the plant down and put the land up for sale. When the company I worked for bought the property we spent a year and tens of millions on securing remediation clearance before we could get permits to develop the property.
Aside from a very few like Patagonia, corporations only view on doing the right thing is generating as much profit as possible for stockholders and executives. As to Longview, it's already been reported the physical plant has needed upgrading for decades, which the company did not want to perform as it would reduce profits. So they just kept paying fines until disaster struck.
 
Canuck from Kansas said:
Clearly $43,700 in fines is nowhere near enough penalty to scare Nippon Dynawave Packaging to clean up their act. Penalties for environmental and safety violations are just the cost of doing business.
Click to expand...
In Oregon, DEQ fines are heftier than safety fines, even after personal injuries. But, that’s not to say the those injuries don’t have an impact on a company, even larger ones.
A $45k hand injury could cost a company $1.5m in sales to recoup.
 
SurfnFish said:
Profit margins always the core obstacle to industrial safety, as shareholders and senior management are always resistant to investing in upgrades to 'dirty' industry plants unless absolutely forced to.
And with the current regressive cycle of 'windmills bad/coal good' and weakened environmental laws there is far less incentive to do so than in decades, regardless of the human cost.
Click to expand...
So true. If a company is producing a commodity, every single penny is tracked, and for way too many companies, anything that takes a speck of extra time, or relates to worker or environmental safety, or is anything above bare minimum, is counted as "extra" pennies that don't actually have to be spent.
SurfnFish said:
Having worked for multiple corporations at a senior level, and having owned a consulting company registered as a Delaware corporation, your logic does not compute.
Any cost to a company represents a reduction in profit whether booked as an operating expense or a capitol expense.
As to intent...I managed a project on a bay area Superfund site where the solvent TCE had permeated acres around a Siemans chip plant for decades. The company knew they had leaking underground storage tanks during a time they were making record profits. So instead of removing the tanks and preforming soil remediation, they continued to pay fines and fight against the clean-up in court. When they finally lost the case after a decade of legal battles they simply shut the plant down and put the land up for sale. When the company I worked for bought the property we spent a year and tens of millions on securing remediation clearance before we could get permits to develop the property.
Aside from a very few like Patagonia, corporations only view on doing the right thing is generating as much profit as possible for stockholders and executives. As to Longview, it's already been reported the physical plant has needed upgrading for decades, which the company did not want to perform as it would reduce profits. So they just kept paying fines until disaster struck.
Click to expand...
My experience too, with some areas around environmental pollution issues. Future dollars are always worth less than current dollars, so the playbook for maximizing current profit is always to delay and pay fines/do nothing until legally required to. Then donas little as you possibly can. Especially for anything that's considered a "commodity" where they watch every penny, it's a total race to the bottom for all worker and environmental endpoints.

People hate to hear it (me too), but most everything should be more expensive. It's cheap because you aren't taking care of the things you really probably should.
 
Nippon has only owned the place since 2016, when Weyerhaeuser got rid of it, I suspect to put some distance between themselves and this type of thing. I worked in there taking care of fire systems, and I worked in the other mills on the lower Columbia. They (weyco) did not compare well to their peers. Weyerhaeuser is now a real estate investment trust, they still run sawmills and I believe some plywood, but they sold off their chlorine production down there, and all the pulp and paper, you know, all the nasty dangerous stuff. Pass the risk on to someone else.
It's too bad these guys have put a stain on an industry in which there are some good responsible players. What's coming down from this incident is going to affect operations everywhere. I just hope it really makes us worker bees safer, and they don't just come up with another legal scheme to distance themselves from the risk they cause.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top