Quantcast
  • E-mail
  • Print
  • Comment
  • Font Size
  • Digg
  • del.icio.us
  • Discuss article

Make Sure Chem Plants Protected ; State, Feds Should Make Security Happen Quickly

Posted on: Wednesday, 3 August 2005, 09:01 CDT

Nearly four years after 9/11, the issue of protecting the nation's chemical plants is finally bubbling to the top of the anti- terror to-do list. It took too long, but the news is at least encouraing.

Even better is that New York State appears to be ahead of Washington in acknowledging the dangers and acting to reduce them. With many chemical plants in urban areas, the risks in this populous state are high. Western New York, especially Niagara Falls, is an area of primary concern.

The Bush administration and the industry, itself, believe some level of federal regulation is necessary, as much as anything to avoid a patchwork of state regulations. Consistent federal rules are preferable, but until the Bush administration comes up with serious standards, we are glad to see New York taking charge.

Complying with a state law passed last year, the state Office of Homeland Security is reviewing the vulnerability of plants across the state. Later, it expects to recommend improved security at certain plants, backed by the legal authority to enforce the changes.

Little in the way of homeland security is more urgent than diminishing the threat to chemical plants. The federal Department of Homeland Security lists about 3,400 such facilities, and says an attack on 297 of them could put at least 50,000 people at risk, in each location.

Other facilities also require better protection, including ports and nuclear plants. But chemical plants are especially vulnerable, partly because they are generally part of the private sector and are less easily regulated than, say, an airport. It's good to see Washington giving this matter the attention it has long needed. Now, it needs to stay focused.


Source: Buffalo News

More News in this Category


Related Articles



Rating: 2.8 / 5 (10 votes)
Rate this article:
1/52/53/54/55/5

User Comments (0)

Comment on this article

Your Name
Text from the image
Comment
max 1200 chars
* All fields are required