The House Homeland Security Committee is scheduled to mark up chemical security legislation later this week. The Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006 (H.R. 5695), introduced by Rep. Daniel Lungren (R-CA) last month, currently has ten cosponsors. Critics of the bill, including a number of environmental and public interest groups, charge that it would actually lead to less security for our nation's chemical plants.

According to a letter from 36 environmental, labor and public interest organizations sent to committee members on July 18, H.R. 5695 is deficient because it:

• Does not require the use of safer technologies to eliminate preventable disasters;

   

• Preempts states and localities from establishing more protective programs;

   

• Contains no meaningful role for workers in developing security plans;

   

• Does not cover drinking water facilities that use hazardous chlorine gas; and

   

• Requires only the high risk plants selected by Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to submit security plans for approval.

The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee passed chemical security legislation (S. 2145) on July 14. Critics contend that while S. 2145 is far better than the House bill, it also lacks key provisions to ensure that safer technologies are implemented when feasible and some level of public accountability.

Environmentalists and safety advocates have pressed Congress for several years to establish a uniform chemical security program that encourages industrial facilities to move away from using and storing large volumes of hazardous chemicals. Research indicates that in many cases, where safer production methods exist, use of hazardous chemicals pose a wholly unnecessary risk to workers and surrounding neighbors. The EPA estimates more than 100 chemical plants are close enough to major urban centers to each put more than a million people at risk in the event of an accidental or terrorist-related 'worst-case' chemical release.

Sens. Frank Lautenberg (D-NJ) and Barack Obama (D-IL) have proposed The Chemical Security and Safety Act (S. 2486), which would require chemical plants to consider inherently safer technologies to reduce or remove the potential danger to the community. So far, however, the Senate has largely ignored the proposal. The House will have an opportunity to vote on requiring the use of inherently safer technologies in a provision similar to the Lautenberg-Obama bill, which is expected to be offered as an amendment to H.R. 5695.