Washington, DC, September 26, 2006--Chemical plants, long considered vulnerable to terrorist attacks, could be shut by the government if they failed to adopt stricter security measures under legislation rapidly moving through Congress.
Negotiators could sign off on the new security controls as early as Monday, with passage by the U.S. House of Representatives and Senate likely by the end of the week.
Under the proposed legislation, the Department of Homeland Security would gain the authority to require "high-risk" chemical plants to tighten plant security.
Among security steps companies could devise are fences and other barriers, cameras, photo IDs for workers, more guards and screening for incoming shipments.
The chemical industry legislation, which Democrats and some environmental groups have portrayed as toothless, was being attached to a larger domestic security spending bill the Republican-controlled Congress wants enacted before lawmakers head home next week to campaign for reelection.
Following the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks on the United States, President George W. Bush and Congress mainly focused on tightening airport security. In the meantime, experts have argued that American chemical plants, railroads, ports and mass transit have been left largely unguarded against attacks that could threaten millions.
But the proposed security controls would lapse after three years, unless Congress passed new legislation. And U.S. waste water treatment facilities, also thought to be vulnerable to attack, would be exempted from the pending measure, according to lobbyists familiar with the legislation.
The U.S. chemical industry embraced the Republican measure as a "fair compromise that will give DHS strong authority to secure America's chemical facilities," according to Jack Gerard, head of the American Chemical Council, who said his industry has already spent $3 billion enhancing security.
Dow Chemical the largest U.S. chemical maker, also praised the bill.
But Democrats on Capitol Hill pounced on the measure as a "backroom deal" drafted by Republicans and industry. A group of House Democrats said the legislation fails to get chemical companies to switch to safer manufacturing technologies and exempts many high-risk facilities from government oversight.
Rick Hind, a legislative director with Greenpeace, said the initiative was "unacceptable because it fails to protect millions of Americans" who live near chemical plants."
Hind complained the legislation would set no criteria to identify high-risk plants and fails to set government deadlines to review plant security plans. If plant shutdowns were ever imposed, Hind said, they likely would be brief and would "mask" light civil penalties for violators.
Patricia Sinicropi, legislative counsel for the Water Environment Federation, representing workers at municipally owned waste water facilities, said her industry sought exemption from DHS oversight. Currently, the Environmental Protection Agency oversees security at waste water plants and "we urged them (Congress) to maintain that regime."
However, Congress would have to pass separate legislation, unlikely this year, strengthening EPA's authority to impose tougher security controls.
