  
| 
| ||||||||||||
Senator: Bill would prevent chemical plants from becoming WMDs
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- Claiming that chemical plants haven't been able to adequately protect themselves from terrorists, a Maine senator is planning to introduce legislation Monday that would set mandatory security standards and shut down plants that don't comply. Terror experts have long argued that urban chemical plants could be used as stationary weapons of mass destruction, and there are more than 100 plants in the country that could each endanger a million or more residents if breached. The accidental 1984 gas leak in Bhopal, India, killed about 3,800 people. Until now, the U.S. government has depended on the individual companies to assess and address their own vulnerabilities. "This bill is the most comprehensive, toughest bill that has ever been drafted in this area," said Sen. Susan Collins, R-Maine, who chairs the Homeland Security Committee. The bill, which is co-sponsored by Sen. Joseph Lieberman, D-Connecticut, gives the secretary of homeland security the authority to shut down a high-risk plant, she said. The bill also allows the Department of Homeland Security to set baselines, and it requires vulnerability assessments, site security plans and emergency response plans. "What we tried to avoid is telling companies exactly how to achieve those standards," Collins said. Greenpeace USA criticized the bill because it doesn't require that plants replace what Greenpeace considers extremely hazardous chemicals -- such as chlorine -- with safer ones, a strategy known "inherently safer technology," or IST. "We're not happy with this at all. It's extremely weak," Greenpeace campaigns director Lisa Finaldi said. Collins dismissed the Greenpeace criticism, saying that there will be "some groups on the far left and some industry groups that don't like the bill." The government shouldn't tell plants to replace certain chemicals because the government isn't qualified to make those types of decisions, Collins said. Instead, Homeland Security will set the standard, and the companies will decide how to achieve that standard. If that means using a less hazardous chemical, so be it, Collins said. "I think that is a more cost-effective way to achieve the goals. It avoids a one-size-fits-all approach." The American Chemistry Council has yet to take a position on the bill because it hasn't been thoroughly examined, spokesman Marty Dubin said, adding that the council supports mandatory security requirements in general. However, Dubin said, the language in the bill about substituting safer technologies will "raise a lot of red flags." The bill does not prohibit states from enacting stricter standards as long as they don't undermine or nullify the federal guidelines, Collins said. "If a state feels that it has unique vulnerabilities, it should be allowed to go beyond the federal law," she said. CNN's Jeanne Meserve and Mike M. Ahlers contributed to this report. 
|
| ||||||||||||
| © 2007 Cable News Network. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved. Terms under which this service is provided to you. Read our privacy guidelines. Contact us. Site Map. |
 |
|
External sites open in new window; not endorsed by CNN.com
Pay service with live and archived video. 
