Ashcroft, Whitman rankle Senators

WASHINGTON, Nov. 14 (UPI) -- Attorney General John Ashcroft and Environmental Protection Agency Director Christine Whitman left senators fuming Wednesday when they skipped a hearing on the federal government's role in protecting the nation's chemical facilities.

"Sadly, we note the absence of the EPA and Justice Department (at this hearing)," said Sen. Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., who chaired the Environment and Public Works subcommittee hearing. "They were invited and I have their nameplates in case they show up. Frankly, I'm at a loss why they wouldn't choose to comment on this issue."

The chemical industry, which is considered a potential terror target, has issued draft security guidelines and started efforts to educate its members on security issues, but some lawmakers feel the federal government should take a stronger role in mitigating threats of criminal or accidental release of deadly and common chemicals.

Sen. John Corzine, D-N.J., has sponsored legislation. Ashcroft and Whitman were asked, along with a handful of other witness, to attend the hearing and comment on his bill.

"I am frustrated that we haven't had participation from the EPA and Justice Department," said Corzine. "I suppose we can talk about (this issue) on CNN but not before Congress."

In a written statement, another committee member, Sen. Jim Jeffords, I-Vt, said, "The EPA and DOJ were invited to attend to today's hearing. Both agencies declined to send a representative. This concerns me. Last week, (Administrator Whitman) said the chemical industry is 'doing as good a job as they can do right now, and (that) they're very aware of where their vulnerabilities might be.' I appreciate knowing that but have not heard from EPA directly despite repeated briefing requests."

Corzine's bill would require EPA to designate certain chemical sources as "high priority categories" based on the severity of the threat they pose in the case of accidental or criminal releases. The EPA, in consultation with the Department of Justice and state and local officials, would require all companies falling into that category to enact measures preventing and controlling a chemical release. Anyone who knowingly violates or fails to comply with the EPA orders could receive monetary fines and imprisonment.

The bill sets a first-time penalty of as much as $25,000 and one year in prison. Subsequent violations could cost companies $50,000 per day and carry two years in prison.

One witness, Frederick Webber, president of the American Chemistry Council, opposed the measure. He said the chemical industry already is working with federal officials to beef up security. He also said Corzine's bill would duplicate existing regulations governing the industry.

Another witness, Paul Orum of the Working Group on Community Right-to-Know, a public interest group, said that Corzine's legislation would fill a gap in the nation's chemical safety laws.

"Currently, no federal law actively regulates the vulnerability zones that hazardous chemical facilities impose on surrounding communities in terms of size, intensity or population at risk," said Orum. "Nor does any federal law require firms to even examine safer alternatives."

To illustrate vulnerabilities, Orum told of a reporter who in 1999 gained entry to a Washington D.C. sewage treatment facility, which stored tons of poisonous chlorine and sulfur dioxide. The reporter, Orum said, was not stopped or asked for identification.

The same facility has removed many chemicals under dark of night since the Sept. 11, fearing an attack that could kill thousands of people if the poisonous fumes were released.

Orum also cited a news article about a professor who, before the Sept. 11 attacks, had purchased all the ingredients needed to make nerve gas. He noted that some commercial web sites let individuals who buy chemicals remain anonymous.