Trust and HoltraChem

No doubt HoltraChem Manufacturing Co. had all sorts of good reasons for operating a train last November with inadequate brakes. But after listening to its many and various explanations for its series of spills, leaks, collisions and accidential emissions, those reasons aren’t very interesting anymore.

The Occupational Safety and Health Administration discovered in March that the HoltraChem train that was misrouted into a stationary tank car being loaded with chlorine was missing one of its four brake cylinders. The cylinder had been removed sometime earlier for repair, but replacing it before putting the train back into service or at least telling the train operator apparently did not occur to anyone in a position to do something about it. The collision resulted in 1,300 pounds of chlorine liquid and 340 pounds of chlorine gas being spilled.

A debate about whether the train could have stopped in time if it had its brakes in top working order is meaningless. What is important is that the producer of a dangerous chemical has such a poor communication process that one person there could have part of a train’s brakes removed and another could operate the train without knowing it. Worse, when HoltraChem conducted its own review of the accident, apparently it didn’t check the train’s maintenance log and notice that the cylinder was missing.

By several accounts, HoltraChem is trying mightily to improve its environmental and safety practices and is spending a considerable sum to do so. Its president, Bruce Davis, was cooperative in tightening mercury laws during the last legislative session. Its employees say they are committed to reducing the number of accidents.

But how is the public supposed to put its trust in this company — as it must if HoltraChem is to continue producing and shipping caustic soda and chlorine — when the company too often makes serious mistakes that look even worse upon examination?

The government’s answer has been to fine HoltraChem into compliance. Perhaps that will work. Better would be a long-term demonstration by the company that shows the public that the culture there has changed and that explanantions no longer are necessary.