I am just curious as to how a plant containing 270 tons of ammonium nitrate, a dangerous chemical with the potential for large explosions (used in Oklahoma City), could be placed within 1/5 mile of a middle school and 1/3 mile of a high school? How did the town allow that and why did regulators not close it down?http://www.reuters.com/article/2013/04/18/us-usa-explosion-texas-idUSBRE93H02A20130418

Which was there first? I do not know, myself, but a good question, nonetheless.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Fertilizer_Plant_explosion

The plant has been there since 1962. No data on the schools.

Does it make much difference which came first? It's how they were both allowed to have been placed so close to each other that's the question.

Other notes - according to Wikipedia the plant was last federally inspected in 1985, and was cited for improper storage of CN3 and other violations. They were caught by the State commission for ammonia storage without a permit, which was then obtained but they had about twice as much on site as the permit covered (50t as opposed to 24t) had not (as required) disclosed to DHS that they had more than 1t of ammonium nitrate (the plant stored about 240t) - but the EPA had records. Still, the plant also told tge EPA there was no fire or explosion risk.

That looks to me like a failure of regulation.

No, it doesn't. Makes me wonder why Freeman started with that premise. Perhaps you could ask him?

Well, even if the plant was there first then all that means is the plant's owner should have been compensated through eminent domain. No way schools should have been allowed to have been placed so close to a plant making dangerous chemicals. Both the town's city council/mayor and state/federal regulators failed in their responsibilities