|
Washington, DC—Today, Congresswoman Richardson applauded the Homeland Security Committee for passing the several year awaited Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Act of 2009, legislation that will protect our nation from a terrorist attack by making critical infrastructure more secure, enhance the security of chemical facilities and help rebuild our economy.
Congresswoman Richardson was successful in getting a whistle blower protection provision included into the bill. The provision would authorize the Secretary of Homeland Security to impose civil penalties on employers who retaliate against employees for reporting safety concerns to regulatory authorities.
“When it comes to the security of our chemical facilities, the employees who work onsite are the ‘First Preventers,’” Congresswoman Richardson said. “We depend on them to be competent, vigilante, and pro-active. We owe them the assurance that they will not be penalized for reporting irregularities, incompetence or any act that might jeopardize the safety of the workers and surrounding communities.”
Congresswoman Richardson’s district includes the Port City of Long Beach and is home to four major oil refineries and several gas treatment and petrochemical facilities.
A full copy of the statement is below:
CONGRESSWOMAN LAURA RICHARDSON, OF CALIFORNIA
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
STATEMENT IN SUPPORT OF
AMENDMENT IN NATURE OF SUBSTITUTE (ANS)
TO H.R. 2868
“CHEMICAL FACILITY ANTI-TERRORISM ACT OF 2009’’
MARKUP HEARING
JUNE 18, 2009
311 CANNON
Mr. Chairman, I move to strike the last word. I rise to express my strong support for the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Act of 2009, as amended by the ANS (“Amendment in the Nature of a Substitute”).
I support this legislation because it will enhance the security of our nation’s chemical facilities and lessen the vulnerability of one of our most critical sectors to a terrorist attack. Specifically, this legislation:
1. protects our nation by making critical infrastructure more secure;
2. helps my district by enhancing the security of its many chemical facilities; and
3. helps our economy by providing greater protection to one of the nation’s major job creating sectors and by providing incentives to spur production and technological innovation.
I also support the ANS because it protects workers who identify and report violations affecting the safety and security of chemical facilities to management or regulatory authorities from retaliation and reprisal.
Mr. Chairman, I want to thank you for working with me to incorporate into the ANS a provision I offered that authorizes the Secretary to impose civil penalties on employers who retaliate against employers for reporting safety concerns to regulatory authorities. [See ANS, §2103(a)(1)(B) (iv)].
When it comes to the security of our chemical facilities, the employees who work in them are the “First Preventers.” We depend on them to be competent, vigilante, and pro-active. We owe them the assurance that they will not be penalized for doing their jobs properly. That is why I am pleased the ANS also incorporates a provision I offered requiring facility owners to certify in writing their knowledge of the protections provided whistleblowers and the Secretary’s power to protect them. [See ANS, §2107(b)(3)].
Mr. Chairman, eight years ago this September 11 terrorists attacked our country and inflicted incalculable damage to our people, economy, and national psyche. We responded to the horror and trauma of that day by resolving to honor the victims and heroes of 9-11 by doing all we can to protect our homeland and our people from any future attack.
The creation of this great Committee is an expression of that resolve. And through the years this Committee has answered the call, first under the leadership of former Chairmen Chris Cox and Peter King (now the Ranking Member King), and now, under the visionary and inspired leadership of Chairman Thompson of Mississippi.
Legislation produced by this Committee like the Transportation Security Act and the SAFE Ports Act has made our airports safer and our seaports less vulnerable than they were eight years ago. And the Chemical Bill we will report out today will make chemical facilities less inviting targets to terrorists and saboteurs.
There is a simple answer for those who question the timing or need for a comprehensive legislation to safeguard chemical facilities --
-- The poison gas leak at Union Carbide’s Bhopal plant in 1984 that killed 10,000 people within 72 hours, and more than 25,000 people since, was an accident! Imagine the carnage that could result from an intentional act of terrorism or sabotage.
Mr. Chairman, the chemical industry employs nearly a million Americans and it accounts for nearly $600 billion of the GDP. More than 70,000 industrial, consumer, and defense-related products – from plastics to fiber optics – are produced by the nation’s chemical facilities.
The economic and strategic value of the chemical industry makes it an attractive target to terrorists because many chemicals, either in their base form or when combined with others, can cause significant harm to both humans and the environment if misused.
My congressional district is home to the Port City of Long Beach, several major oil refineries, and many gas treatment and petrochemical facilities. It is, as they say in the military, a “target rich environment.”
So I am not willing to wait. The time has come for us to approve legislation that puts in place the necessary protections and authorizes the necessary resources to keep our chemical facilities secure. This bill does that.
Chemical facilities determined by the Secretary to be at risk are required to conduct a Security Vulnerability Assessment (“SSV”). Based upon that assessment, the facility must then develop and implement a Site Security Plan (“SSP”), which is subject to review, approval, and inspection by the DHS Office of Chemical Facility Security.
The legislation also authorizes the DHS Secretary to require, where appropriate, that chemical facilities in the highest risk tiers implement “methods to reduce the consequences of a terrorist attack” by utilizing “inherently safer technologies” (IST). And it authorizes the Secretary to award $225 million in grants to provide technical assistance and funding to finance the capital costs incurred in transitioning to inherently safer technologies.
I indicated at the outset, the legislation provides protections to our first line of defense: chemical facility workers who conscientiously report safety and security concerns to management where appropriate or to regulatory officials if necessary.
Finally, Mr. Chairman, it suffices to state that this legislation is a balanced and pragmatic response to critical security need. I support the ANS and urge all members to do likewise.
Thank you and I yield the balance of my time.
###
|
