U.S. Response:  Laws Still Needed to Address Chemical Plant Security, GAO Says

By Mike Nartker
Global Security Newswire

WASHINGTON — While a successful terrorist attack on a U.S. chemical plant could cause massive damage, there are currently no laws that explicitly require such facilities to assess their vulnerability to a terrorist attack or to implement security measures to defend against them, the General Accounting Office said in a report yesterday (see GSN, Jan. 16).

There are 15,000 U.S. facilities that use or store 140 toxic and flammable chemicals that have been identified as posing the greatest risk to humans if released, according to the report.  A successful terrorist attack on one of these plants, many of which are located in populated areas, could result in massive casualties and economic damage, the report says. 

For example, the Environmental Protection Agency has identified 123 facilities where, in a worst-case scenario, a release of a toxic cloud could put more than 1 million people at risk of exposure, the report says.  There are about 700 facilities where a toxic release at each could threaten about 100,000 people and about 3,000 facilities where a release at each could threaten at least 10,000 people.

For all the potential risks, however, the United States has not conducted a comprehensive assessment of the vulnerabilities of the U.S. chemical industry to terrorist attacks, the GAO report says.  The Justice Department in May submitted an interim report to Congress concerning security observations at 11 chemical facilities.  The department has still not submitted to Congress, however, a comprehensive final report on the vulnerabilities of the U.S. chemical industry, which was required in August, the GAO report says.

A Justice spokesman told Global Security Newswire today that the final version of the vulnerability report is being screened for sensitive information.  There might also be a need to include the Homeland Security Department in the screening process, because chemical plant security is under its jurisdiction, the spokesman said.

The GAO also warned that there are currently no laws explicitly requiring chemical facilities to conduct their own vulnerability assessments and to implement security measures to defend against such an attack.  There are some safety requirement laws applicable to chemical facilities that might help reduce the potential effects of an intentional toxic release, such as legislation requiring chemical facilities to implement measures to reduce the risk of an accidental release, the report says.  The EPA has determined that Clean Air Act could be interpreted in such a way to provide authority to address facility security, but has chosen not to do so because of litigation concerns and a belief that chemical plant security would be better addressed through specific legislation, it says.

In its report, the GAO praised the U.S. chemical industry for undertaking a number of voluntary measures to address security concerns, such as developing vulnerability assessment guidelines.  These voluntary measures developed by industry organizations, however, reach only a small number of the 15,000 total facilities, the report says.  It also warns that the industry faces significant challenges that could require federal assistance, such as obtaining adequate information on the terrorist threat level and in determining security measures appropriate for the level of threat.

To effectively address chemical security concerns, the GAO recommended that the EPA and the Homeland Security Department develop a national chemical security strategy.  This strategy should identify high-risk facilities, detail the roles of each U.S. agency working with the chemical industry, develop information-sharing mechanisms and develop a legislative proposal that would require chemical facilities to quickly conduct vulnerability assessments and, if needed, implement security measures to address such vulnerabilities.

Capitol Hill Action

The Senate began work last year on legislation to address some of the concerns noted by the GAO in its report.  The Environment and Public Works Committee in July unanimously approved the Chemical Security Act, introduced by Senator John Corzine (D-N.J.).  The bill would have required the EPA and Homeland Security to identify high-priority chemical plants based on the chemicals they produce or store and their proximity to populated areas.  Once such plants had been identified, the two agencies would then be required to develop regulations requiring the plants to develop vulnerability assessments and implement response plans.  Plants would have up to year after the regulations’ release to develop vulnerability assessments and up to 18 months to develop their response plans.

While the panel unanimously approved the bill, the full Senate failed to act before the congressional session ended.  Corzine reintroduced the bill in January with minor technical changes.

 Corzine, in a statement yesterday, reiterated the need for legislative action to address chemical plant security and noted the similarities between the GAO’s recommendations and his bill.

“When it comes to homeland security, we can’t rely on voluntary programs.  Instead Congress and the administration need to act quickly to establish federal requirements to ensure that chemical facilities act promptly and consistently across the country,” Corzine said.  “These facilities must be required to assess their vulnerabilities, improve their security and use the safest possible technologies.  This is what my legislation would require and it’s consistent with the GAO’s recommendation.  It’s common sense,” he added.

The GAO report might “provide an impetus” for Congress to take action on chemical plant security, Corzine spokesman Darius Goore told GSN today, adding that no hearings have yet been set for the bill.  Goore also said he hoped the report would push the Bush administration to make the issue, and Corzine’s bill, a higher priority.  If the White House were to do so, it would help push Congress to act, he said.   

The Senate environment committee considers chemical plant security to be a “top priority” and hearings on the issue will likely be held in the next few months, a committee spokesman told GSN today.

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP