|
|||||
|
|||||
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|||||
 |
 |
    |
|
|
|||
 |
|
||
|
|||
|
|
|
|
||||||||
|
U.S. Administration, Legislators, Industry Back New Federal Law on Chemical Security By Joe Fiorill WASHINGTON — New federal legislation is needed to better protect U.S. chemical facilities from terrorist attack, members of Congress, federal officials and industry representatives agreed today (see GSN, May 25). The Bush administration and the chemical industry should be commended for some successes in bolstering chemical plant security in the wake of the September 2001 al-Qaeda attacks, but new law is needed to ensure such steps extend to the whole industry, Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee members and witnesses said at a hearing this morning. “The consequences of an attack on one of these facilities could well dwarf the horror we witnessed on Sept. 11, 2001,” top committee Democrat Joe Lieberman (Conn.) said. Although committee Chairwoman Susan Collins (R-Maine) acknowledged that a “bipartisan legislative approach backed by the administration has not yet emerged,” Lieberman expressed confidence that Congress would pass legislation this year “that will diminish greatly our vulnerabilities in this particular area.” A Homeland Security Department official said at the hearing that Secretary Michael Chertoff believes existing government authority in the area is inadequate. “Considerable progress has been made through voluntary efforts, but ... further progress is required,” acting Undersecretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Robert Stephan told the senators. “We are currently assessing the need for a carefully measured, risk-based regulatory regime in this sector,” Stephan said. “Today, I can report on his behalf that Secretary Chertoff has concluded that from the regulatory perspective, the existing patchwork of authorities does not permit us to regulate the industry effectively. ... While most companies have been eager to cooperate with the department, it has become clear that the entirely voluntary efforts of these companies alone will not sufficiently address security for the entire sector.” “We will ... look forward to working with you in the coming weeks,” he told committee members, “on the particulars of proposed legislation.” The American Chemistry Council's 150 members, which together represent more than 80 percent of U.S. chemical production capacity, have implemented a voluntary post-Sept. 11 security code. Meanwhile, the federal government has been conducting assessments and helping to fund physical security improvements at hundreds of sites. Collins noted, however, that the Homeland Security Department has identified more than 3,000 chemical facilities where an attack could affect more than 1,000 people. “Only a fraction” of U.S. chemical sites, she said, are subject to federal regulation or subscribe to voluntary industry standards. In testimony prepared for a House of Representatives subcommittee hearing this afternoon, an American Chemistry Council official expressed support for federal legislation to improve security in the sector, provided the law “respect” council members’ “substantial, voluntary, at-risk expenditures implementing” the association's security code. “Not all chemical facilities are currently regulated under the” 2002 Maritime Transportation Security Act, council Security and Operations Managing Director Martin Durbin said. “Not all chemical facilities belong to ACC and [they] may not have taken the same kinds of aggressive steps that our members have taken, steps that have cost our members an estimated $2 billion since 9/11.” New law on the matter, Durbin said, should set national security standards, require vulnerability assessments and security plans at facilities and give Homeland Security oversight, inspection and enforcement authority.
| ||||||||||
Back to top
