A veteran Democratic lawmaker accused the White House late last month of ignoring a law designed to help states evaluate the vulnerability of chemical facilities and related transportation of regulated substances to criminal and terrorist activity.
The ranking member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, John Dingell (D-Mich.), sent a letter to President George W. Bush accusing the administration of failing to comply with the Chemical Safety Information, Site Security, and Fuels Regulatory Relief Act (PL 106-40).
Dingell said that the 1999 statute, signed into law by then-president Bill Clinton, "requires the attorney general of the United States to evaluate the vulnerability of chemical facilities and related transportation of regulated substances to criminal and terrorist activity."
Dingell charged that the overdue report is something that current Atty. Gen. John Ashcroft "has failed to do for more than 6 months despite repeated reminders" from the congressman.
"The failure to complete, or even initiate, the evaluation leading to a final report has occurred, as numerous government reports and news media investigations have found chemical facilities extremely vulnerable to terrorist attack and the consequences of such an attack devastating to millions of Americans," Dingell wrote. "One government agency reportedly has found that there are 123 industrial facilities in 24 states at which an accident could expose more than 1 million people to highly toxic and potentially fatal chemicals."
A spokesman for the minority side of the House Energy and Commerce committee said the White House had not responded to Dingell's letter.
Congressional action
Last year Senate and House Democrats called upon Congress to give the Environmental Protection Agency new authority to require chemical plants to assess their vulnerabilities and take steps to reduce them.
Sen. John Corzine (D-NJ) sponsored legislation last summer requiring EPA to work with the Department of Homeland Security to establish security requirements for chemical plants and industrial facilities that store large quantities of hazardous materials. The petroleum and chemical industries opposed S. 1602, particularly the provisions that make EPA the lead federal agency. The American Petroleum Institute and others had argued that the proposal would require companies to conduct redundant vulnerability assessments and would unfairly expand EPA authority over air pollution guidelines (OGJ Online, Sept. 11, 2002).
In the House, identical legislation was introduced. Neither proposal became law. EPA, meanwhile, after consultations with the White House, chose not to set mandatory security plans.
Industry officials say there are no immediate plans by Republican leaders in either chamber to pursue legislation. But lawmakers that supported EPA having a lead in setting stronger chemical security measures last year may consider gathering support this year.