 |
May
16, 2003
Senator James
Inhofe
453 Senate Russell Office Building
Washington, DC 20510-3603
Dear Chairman
Inhofe:
The Alliance
for the Responsible Use of Chlorine Chemistry (ARCC), a coalition
of U.S. unions and companies concerned with jobs and investments
in the U.S. chlorine chemical industry, has closely followed the
congressional debate on U.S. chemical plant security. We support
Congress's effort to enact a strong security bill to help guard
U.S. workers, communities and facilities against acts of terrorism.
The Alliance
has written to Governor Ridge (in November 2001) and to Senate leaders
(in September 2002) on plant security issues.
As you craft
legislation, please consider the following key concerns:
The Department
of Homeland Security (DHS) should be empowered to establish national
chemical plant security guidelines and administer enforcement authority.
In accomplishing its mission, DHS should have authority to draw
on the expertise of other relevant federal agencies, including the
Chemical Safety Board, as appropriate.
We oppose "inherently
safer technology" mandates as part of the chemical plant security
guidelines. We believe this concept has less to do with increasing
plant security than with advancing an activist agenda aimed at crippling
the U.S. chemical industry. As you know, companies have already
instituted changes in response to security concerns. We understand
and accept that legislation under consideration will require further
changes. On the other hand, the controversial and thinly supported
effort to mandate wholesale technology changes appears to
be based on the false assumption that U.S. chemical and other manufacturing
facilities are inherently unsafe. We do not believe this is Congress's
intention in considering measures to strengthen chemical plant security.
We do believe that such a mandate would be used by environmental
activists to try to shut down U.S. plants for reasons unrelated
to security.
We believe
it is important that the definition of "first responders" be expanded
to include community representatives and key facility employees
who have expertise in health and safety.
America's enemies
must be denied access to sensitive information that could directly
assist them in selecting targets and carrying out attacks against
our people and our industries. In some cases, sensitive information
about plant sites should be communicated only on a "need to know"
basis. Obviously, the provision of such information is indispensable
to plant workers, their representatives, emergency responders and
other selected individuals in plant communities.
We understand
that balancing the "right to know" with security will not be easy
in every case. There are legitimate concerns in promoting and defending
the right to know. In particular, unions have been deeply involved
in expanding the U.S. right to know law to guarantee access to information
important for worker and plant community safety. However, under
the current circumstances, a distinction must be understood between
the risk of a catastrophic chemical plant accident in the United
States and the "real and credible risk" of a terrorist attack on
a facility. That distinction should be defined and applied to our
current security situation.
We appreciate
this opportunity to have our views considered by you and the Committee.
If your office has any questions, please contact ARCC's Executive
Director, Jim Byers, at 202-842-5000.
Sincerely,
 |
|
 |
|
John
J. Barry
Co-Chair, ARCC
President Emeritus
International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers
Co-Chair, ARCC
|
|
C.T.
"Kip" Howlett, Jr.
Co-Chair, ARCC
Executive Director
Chlorine Chemistry Council
|
CC: Members
of the Environment and Public Works Committee
|
|
