NYT: Debate Over Chemical Plant Security Focuses on Strictness of Rules
By ERIC LIPTON
Published: September 21, 2006
WASHINGTON, Sept. 20 — After nearly five years of debate over whether the chemical industry should be required to protect plants better against a terrorist attack, a fierce struggle is going on behind the scenes in Congress to deal with what is considered one of the nation’s most serious vulnerabilities.
The clash, which could be resolved as soon as Thursday, is testing the balance of power not just between Republicans and Democrats, but also between rival Republicans in the House and the Senate and between environmentalists and the chemical industry, all of whom have dug in to defend their views.
But the Bush administration, the chemical industry, Democrats, Republicans and environmentalists do agree on one important point: voluntary measures put into place by the industry after the 2001 terrorist attacks are not enough....
***
As recently as Tuesday, it looked as if the chemical industry, with the assistance of Senator George V. Voinovich, Republican of Ohio, was on its way to winning approval for regulations that echoed almost word for word what the industry had been seeking.
Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff would have been authorized to establish regulations requiring security measures, but the regulations would have applied only to a sliver of facilities that manufacture, use or store toxic chemicals and that are deemed to have the “highest levels of security risk.”...Approval of the industry-backed measure is now in question because of objections raised by Senator Susan Collins of Maine, Representative Peter T. King of New York, and Senator Judd Gregg of New Hampshire, all Republicans who hold powerful positions....
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/21/washington/21chemical.html?hp&ex=1158897600&en=094cc5bdcc5b3488&ei=5094&partner=homepage
Printer-friendly format
Email this thread to a friend
Bookmark this thread
(1000+ posts)
Send PM |
Profile |
Ignore
