|
For Immediate Release |
Contact: Michael Eagle |
Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Act Opinion EditorialBy Congresswoman Laura Richardson
|
|
Eight years ago this September, nineteen 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 nation and our people from any future attack. The creation of the Committee on Homeland Security is an expression of that resolve. Through the years the Committee has answered the call by creating balanced and pragmatic legislation such as the Transportation Security Act and the SAFE Ports Act which have made our airports safer and our seaports less vulnerable than they were eight years ago. It is in the same vein that the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Act of 2009 (CFAT) was passed by the Homeland Security Committee on June 23, 2009. The chemical industry employs nearly a million Americans and accounts for nearly $600 billion of the nation’s 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, especially given the destructive power of many chemicals housed in these facilities when misused. The CFAT protects our nation by making critical infrastructure more secure. Specifically, this legislation requires at-risk chemical facilities to conduct a Security Vulnerability Assessment and based upon that assessment to develop and implement a Site Security Plan. This plan is subject to review, approval, and inspection by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of Chemical Facility security. The legislation also authorizes the DHS Secretary to require that chemical facilities in the highest risk tiers implement methods to reduce consequences of a terrorist attack by utilizing inherently safer technologies. In addition, 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. While security of our chemical facilities should be a top priority, so too should the people who work in them. They are essentially our “First Preventers.” We depend on them to be competent, vigilant, and proactive. We owe them the assurance that they will not be penalized for doing their jobs properly. That is why on June 18, 2009, I found it an unquestionable necessity during the Homeland Security Meeting to include a whistle blower protection provision within the bill. This provision authorizes the Secretary to impose civil penalties on employers who retaliate against employees for reporting safety concerns to regulatory authorities. My congressional district is home to the Port City of Long Beach, several major oil refineries, and many gas treatment and petro chemical facilities. It is, as they say in the military, a “target rich environment,” which produced this remarkable legislation to secure our nation against terrorist attacks. Given the lives not only in my district, but across the nation, and the assets at stake, we cannot wait for legislation that puts in place the necessary protections to keep our chemical facilities secure. I am proud to be a member of the Committee that has taken action and I support organizations such as the Security Industry Association that advocate on behalf of the workers and the public as their objective and priority. ### |
