The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has issued a proposed rule that would rescind planned changes to its Risk Management Program adopted in the wake of the West, Texas, fertilizer disaster that killed 15 people.

On Thursday, EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt signed the proposed rule, which would rescind several amendments proposed by the Obama administration in January 2017, including requirements for third-party audits and incident investigations at chemical facilities regulated by the agency. Mr. Pruitt had opposed the rule in his position as attorney general in Oklahoma prior to being named the head of the EPA.

The EPA is also planning to modify planned amendments relating to local emergency coordination, emergency exercises and public meetings and to change the compliance dates for these provisions, according to an agency statement on Thursday.

The agency said it is proposing these changes to address potential security risks associated with new information disclosure requirements, which opponents of the rule cited as a concern. The EPA also said the new proposed rule would address concerns about unnecessary regulations and regulatory costs and a lack of coordination between the EPA and the U.S. Occupational Safety and Health Administration, which is engaged in similar rulemaking.

The agency also said its proposal was related to the finding by the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives that the West Fertilizer Co. incident was caused by arson and not an accidental chemical incident. The fire and explosion at West Fertilizer killed 12 emergency responders and three civilians, injured more than 300 other people, destroyed more than 500 homes and left a crater 93 feet wide and 12 feet deep in its wake.

The West, Texas, disaster led to then-President Barack Obama’s April 2013 executive order directing agencies such as the EPA to strengthen their preparation and response to chemical safety incidents, which culminated in multiple actions, including the proposed EPA Risk Management Program amendments.

But the Trump administration delayed enforcement of the regulation as it considered reconsideration petitions, which led a group of 11 state attorneys general to sue the EPA in July 2017 over the delay.

The disaster also spurred the development of a proposed emergency responder preparedness program standard for OSHA consideration by the National Advisory Committee for Occupational Safety and Health's subcommittee for emergency response and preparedness. That rulemaking effort had also stalled under the Trump administration, but was unexpectedly added back to the agency’s agenda last week.

The EPA’s proposal drew swift reaction from multiple organizations.

The Washington, D.C.-based BlueGreen Alliance, a coalition of labor unions and environmental organizations, denounced the EPA’s proposal to “weaken” the rule, which put in place “common-sense steps to improve safety at chemical facilities,” according to a statement published on Thursday. Executive Director Kim Glas called the action “disheartening” and said that Mr. Pruitt had “failed miserably” in leading EPA’s mission to protect human health and the environment.

But the Washington, D.C.-based American Chemistry Council, which opposed the program amendments, issued a statement Thursday praising the EPA’s new proposal.

“EPA’s proposal fixes the serious problems created by misguided changes that were hastily adopted during the final days of the Obama Administration,” Mike Walls, vice president of regulatory and technical affairs, said in the statement. “It also reflects the feedback the agency received regarding those changes from a wide range of stakeholders, including the regulated community, Congress, attorneys general and local officials.”