Fire breaks out at Chester County facility that manufactures explosives – WGAL

Industrial Fire at Chester County Explosives Facility Raises Environmental and Safety Concerns

An industrial fire at the Action Manufacturing Company, a facility producing explosives and munitions components in West Fallowfield Township, Chester County, has highlighted significant issues related to industrial safety, environmental management, and corporate responsibility. The incident brings into sharp focus the challenges of aligning industrial practices with several key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).

Incident Overview

• Event: A fire involving multiple explosives was reported at the Action Manufacturing Company.
• Location: 500 block of Bailey Crossroads Road, West Fallowfield Township, Chester County, Pennsylvania.
• Date and Time: The fire was reported at 3:10 a.m. and was extinguished by 3:30 p.m. on the same day.
• Immediate Outcome: No injuries were reported as a result of the blaze.

Emergency Response and Community Safety (SDG 3 & SDG 11)

The response to the fire underscores the critical importance of community safety and preparedness, directly aligning with SDG 11 (Sustainable Cities and Communities) which aims to make human settlements safe and resilient, and SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) which seeks to reduce illnesses and deaths from hazardous chemicals and pollution.

Hazardous Material Containment

• Due to the confirmed presence of hazardous and explosive materials, the Chester County hazmat team was dispatched.
• Responding fire crews were instructed to stage away from the immediate scene to ensure their safety.
• Following consultation with a company representative, the tactical decision was made to allow the building to burn as the safest course of action, minimizing the risk of uncontrolled explosions and protecting human life.

Impact on Community Well-being

• The facility’s location near the Lancaster County line places surrounding communities at potential risk from industrial accidents.
• The successful prevention of injuries in this incident is a positive outcome, but it highlights the inherent risks that such facilities pose to achieving SDG 3’s target of ensuring healthy lives for all.

Corporate Accountability and Regulatory Compliance (SDG 12 & SDG 16)

The incident at Action Manufacturing Company, particularly in light of its history, raises profound questions about corporate adherence to regulations concerning responsible production and the effectiveness of institutional oversight, which are central tenets of SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production) and SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions).

History of Environmental Violations

1. According to U.S. Attorney’s Office documents, Action Manufacturing Company pleaded guilty in 2014 to the illegal storage of explosive hazardous waste at the same Chester County facility.
2. This violation of environmental law and production standards resulted in the company agreeing to pay a $1.2 million fine.
3. The company was also sentenced to a five-year term of probation and a special assessment.

Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

• SDG 12 (Responsible Consumption and Production): The company’s past conviction and the current fire incident indicate a significant failure in the environmentally sound management of chemicals and wastes throughout their life cycle, a key target of SDG 12.
• SDG 16 (Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions): This event calls into question the long-term effectiveness of past penalties and the strength of regulatory institutions in ensuring ongoing corporate accountability and preventing the recurrence of hazardous practices.
• SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth): The fire raises concerns about workplace safety protocols within the hazardous materials industry, a crucial component of ensuring safe and secure working environments for all workers under SDG 8.

Conclusion and Path Forward

The fire at the Action Manufacturing facility serves as a critical case study on the intersection of industrial activity, environmental safety, and public health. While the immediate emergency response successfully prevented any loss of life, the incident, compounded by the company’s history of non-compliance, demonstrates a clear divergence from the principles of sustainable development. A thorough investigation is required to determine the cause of the fire and to re-evaluate the company’s safety and waste management protocols to ensure they align with the objectives of creating safe, resilient communities (SDG 11) and promoting responsible production patterns (SDG 12).

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Analysis

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

1. SDG 1: No Poverty

   • The article discusses the opening of a “Code Blue” shelter by Lifepath Christian Ministries in York to provide a place for people to stay overnight during cold weather. This directly addresses the need for social safety nets for the most vulnerable populations, a key component of poverty reduction.

2. SDG 2: Zero Hunger

   • The article highlights the uncertainty of SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) benefits due to a government shutdown. It states that “about 42 million Americans, including 2 million here in Pennsylvania, depend on SNAP to buy food,” directly connecting the issue to food security and the fight against hunger. The mention of the “Hunger Can’t Wait” campaign further emphasizes this connection.

3. SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

   • The negotiation between HACC (Harrisburg Area Community College) and its teachers’ union is a clear example of issues related to decent work. The article notes that the unionized faculty “haven’t had a raise in three years” and are asking for back pay, which pertains to fair wages and equitable working conditions.

4. SDG 12: Responsible Consumption and Production

   • The main event, a fire at an explosives manufacturer, and the company’s history are directly related to this goal. The article mentions the company “pleaded guilty in 2014 to storing explosive hazardous waste illegally.” This incident and the company’s past actions highlight failures in the environmentally sound management of hazardous materials and waste, which is a core focus of SDG 12.

5. SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

   • This goal is relevant through the legal actions taken against the Action Manufacturing Company. The article states the company “agreed to pay a fine of $1.2 million and faced a five-year term of probation” for its illegal storage of hazardous waste. This demonstrates the role of strong institutions (the U.S. Attorney’s Office) in holding corporations accountable and ensuring justice.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

1. Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all.

   • The “Code Blue” shelter is a form of social protection for the poor and vulnerable, providing essential services (shelter) during periods of extreme cold. The article mentions it “gives people a place to stay overnight if you need one,” which aligns with implementing social protection measures.

2. Target 2.1: By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people… to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round.

   • The discussion on SNAP benefits directly relates to this target. SNAP is a primary mechanism in the U.S. for ensuring access to food for low-income individuals. The threat to its funding during the government shutdown puts the achievement of this target at risk for the “42 million Americans” who depend on it.

3. Target 8.5: By 2030, achieve full and productive employment and decent work for all… and equal pay for work of equal value.

   • The teachers’ union’s demand for a raise after three years without one, while other non-union staff received one, is a direct effort to achieve fair and equal pay. The union’s negotiation for “back pay” is an attempt to rectify past wage disparities and ensure their work is valued appropriately.

4. Target 12.4: Achieve the environmentally sound management of chemicals and all wastes throughout their life cycle… and significantly reduce their release to air, water and soil.

   • The article’s focus on the fire at an explosives manufacturer and its past conviction for “storing explosive hazardous waste illegally” directly points to a failure to meet this target. The fire itself represents an uncontrolled release of hazardous materials into the environment, and the past crime is a clear violation of principles for the sound management of waste.

5. Target 16.6: Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.

   • The legal case against Action Manufacturing, resulting in a “$1.2 million” fine and probation, is an example of an institution (the justice system) holding a corporate entity accountable for its actions. This process is fundamental to developing effective and accountable institutions that enforce laws and regulations.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

1. Indicators for SDG 1 (Target 1.3)

   • Mentioned Indicator: The number of people served by social protection programs. The article states, “Last year’s code blue shelter served 305 people in the York community.” This is a direct measure of the reach of this specific social safety net.

2. Indicators for SDG 2 (Target 2.1)

   • Mentioned Indicator: The number of people relying on food assistance. The article specifies “about 42 million Americans, including 2 million here in Pennsylvania, depend on SNAP to buy food.” This figure serves as a key indicator of food insecurity.
   • Mentioned Indicator: The amount of food aid provided by non-governmental efforts. The article notes that a campaign helped provide “more than 240,000 meals,” quantifying the response to food insecurity.

3. Indicators for SDG 8 (Target 8.5)

   • Implied Indicator: Wage stagnation and pay equity. The statement that the unionized faculty “haven’t had a raise in three years, while other staff members not in the union did” implies an indicator related to the frequency of wage adjustments and the disparity in pay increases between different employee groups.

4. Indicators for SDG 12 (Target 12.4)

   • Mentioned Indicator: Number of incidents of non-compliance with hazardous waste regulations. The company’s 2014 guilty plea for “storing explosive hazardous waste illegally” is a specific instance that can be tracked.
   • Mentioned Indicator: The fire itself at a facility with “hazardous materials” is an indicator of a failure in safe industrial processes and environmental management.

5. Indicators for SDG 16 (Target 16.6)

   • Mentioned Indicator: The value of fines and penalties for corporate malfeasance. The article mentions the company agreed to “pay a fine of $1.2 million” and faced a “five-year term of probation,” which are quantifiable measures of institutional accountability.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: wgal.com