The media loves to give the public a good story and with June 21, 1999, fast approaching, the chemical industry needs to be poised to give the press a positive one. On that date, in accordance with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) risk management program (RMP) rule, approximately 2,000 chemical plants will be required to submit an RMP plan. The regulation specifies that the RMP plan must contain, among other information, a detailed assessment of the consequences of an accidental release at each covered process, along with details of a potential worst-case scenario involving regulated toxics and flammable substances onsite. This information has the potential to frighten a plant’s neighbors and create an untenable working environment in the community.
With so much at stake, it is puzzling why many companies are doing little to prepare the local press for the information that will soon become public. This may stem from the industry’s long-standing mistrust of the media. The good news about the RMP rule is that it could serve as the catalyst for improved relations between the chemical industry and the news media. The bad news is that both are going to have to learn a new set of rules.
Before the RMP rule, a chemical company’s communications with the local media took place on two levels—routine and crisis. Routine communications involved press releases about personnel changes, a donation to refurbish a local park, or even emergency planning activities. Crisis communications only happened when the news was bad, such as a chemical leak, an accident at the plant or an overturned truck.
Unfortunately for industry and the media, impressions often are formed from interactions that take place during a crisis. In the past, company officials have felt burned by reporters who displayed a lack of understanding about the chemicals and processes involved; and reporters misinterpreted an official’s reluctance to speculate on the cause of an accident as an attempt to cover up.
Crisis communications also are characterized by confusion. Both spokespersons and reporters tend to be unprepared for the situation they face. In addition, the facts that are needed to present a complete story often are not yet known. The company’s first obligation is to mitigate the incident, while the media believes its role is to warn the public, no matter how sketchy the facts. This is not an environment conducive to producing lasting friendships.
The irony of RMP is that it forces both the chemical company and the press to view the results of a worst-case scenario—a potential crisis situation—as a routine story. However, unlike when a real emergency occurs, there is time to prepare. Spokespersons can be trained and provided with all of the facts and reporters are not under pressure to file an incomplete story. While this does not take the sting out of the information that industry must disclose to the public, it does create an opportunity to incorporate some common sense into the message.
Getting Ready for RMP
The first steps a company must take to prepare for communicating its RMP plan are internal. The firm first must determine its level of credibility with the local press by performing a thorough self-assessment. This involves asking questions like, "how well, and under what circumstances, have we communicated in the past?"
If the relationship has been based on sending the occasional press release, odds are the company is not well known in the newsroom. On the other hand, if the media’s sole experience with the company stems from a prior accident, it is safe to say that the press knows a great deal more about the risk associated with the company than the safety programs it has in place.
The self-assessment also should include some research. The news media routinely uses databases such as Lexis-Nexis to provide background on subjects they cover. These public databases can be accessed for a fee and companies should use them to review the same material that the press gathers when preparing a story.
A related, but equally important, facet of this research involves searching the Internet to find out what is listed about the company. There are many Web sites, both public and private, devoted to dispensing information about a chemical company’s products, toxic releases and environmental compliance history. Many of these sites are searchable by zip code and company officials may be dismayed to find their facilities are typically characterized as "polluters," regardless of their actual compliance history.
Another early step involves appointing RMP spokespersons within the company. These individuals should be high-ranking officials with a thorough knowledge of the firm’s products and processes—preferably plant managers or even the company president. If the spokespersons have not already received media training, they should be enrolled. There are many high-quality programs available, such as the one offered by SOCMA, that teach the important skills of message development and on-camera interview techniques. Once the company has compiled its dossier and selected and trained its messengers, the substantive work can begin.
Steps to Communicating RMP Data
While this discussion so far has focused on the media, the company needs to be aware that there are many other important stakeholders that must be informed. An effective RMP strategy will involve all stakeholders concurrently. Another key point is that the message needs to be consistent. The press can be expected to ask a plant’s neighbors how they feel about a company’s worst-case scenario.
It is important to note that each company’s strategy will be unique. Companies should be wary of consultants that offer a one-size-fits-all solution. A firm’s accident history, location, product line, and public relations sophistication will all factor into its approach. However, there are steps that should be taken by all companies, including:
• Identify the media that should be notified of company news, including all radio and television news directors, and newspaper editors (daily and weekly). Also, include reporters who cover pertinent beats such as environment and business and look for non-traditional sources like the local Chamber of Commerce and homeowners association newsletters.
• Send press releases about routine company news, such as personnel announcements, implementation of safety programs and business briefs, to acquaint the media with the firm. A company should not introduce itself to the press with its worst-case scenario.
• Brief the local emergency planning committee (LEPC) and include them in RMP communication planning. This will add credibility to the facility’s emergency planning procedures. Fire and police chiefs are considered to be objective sources and they can be allies, but they can also present big problems. Many public relations disasters begin because of disputes with emergency responders. Look for any potential conflicts between the LEPC and company personnel, then work to resolve them.
• Contact other area companies that are preparing for RMP implementation to coordinate messages, conduct joint events or share the cost of media training and outreach activities.
• Begin to develop printed materials that describe the facility’s risks and emphasize safety systems and training. Involve the technicians who are developing the RMP plan because public messages must be technically accurate and consistent. Materials should be "tested" on internal audiences (such as the LEPC or community advisory panel) to receive feedback before they are distributed to the community and the press.
• Conduct public events prior to communicating RMP data. Plant tours, safety training, chemistry education programs and household product stewardship sessions make interesting features for the media that tend to produce positive coverage.
The RMP message should be well rehearsed before it is disseminated. It must be thorough and respectful of the audience’s intelligence, but not so technical that only an engineer can understand it. It should refer to familiar end products to demystify the chemicals involved and explain safety systems, emergency planning procedures and overall management systems such as Responsible Care®, and ISO 9000/14000.
If a company does not have a full-time public relations department, has a history of accidents or has an acrimonious relationship with the press or the community, it should seek assistance from a consultant with experience in the chemical industry and risk communication.
RMP poses the greatest communications challenge the chemical industry has faced since it was required to begin reporting toxic releases in 1988. EPA plans to make RMP plans publicly available once they are submitted and various public interest groups and community organizations are poised to interpret them. A company’s ability to meet this challenge depends on the work it does in advance. It is not too late to begin, but it soon will be.
For more information on crisis and RMP communication, contact Ed Armstrong at (202) 721-4163, or e-mail: earmstrong@socma.com
This article was previously published in Chemical Process Safety Report.
