Chemical plants remain vulnerable to terrorists: A call to action

Environmental Health Perspectives

Volumn 114, Issue 9, 2006, Pages 1307-1311

  Lippin, Tobi Mae ^a   McQuiston, Thomas H ^b   Bradley Bull, Kristin ^a   Burns Johnson, Toshiba ^a   Cook, Linda ^b   Gill, Michael L ^b   Howard, Donna ^c   Seymour, Thomas A ^d   Stephens, Doug ^b   Williams, Brian K ^e  

^a New Perspectives Consulting Group Inc   (United States)

^b Tony Mazzocchi Center for Safety Health and Environmental Education   (United States)

^c USW   (United States)

^d USW   (United States)

^e USW   (United States)

Author keywords

Anti terrorism; Chemical plant security; Emergency response; Hazardous materials; Prevention

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; CHEMICAL INDUSTRY; DANGEROUS GOODS; DISASTER; DISASTER PLANNING; EMERGENCY HEALTH SERVICE; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH; FINANCIAL MANAGEMENT; HAZARD ASSESSMENT; HEALTH CARE PLANNING; HEALTH CARE SYSTEM; HUMAN; INTERPERSONAL COMMUNICATION; LAW; LEADERSHIP; OCCUPATIONAL SAFETY; POLICY; PRIORITY JOURNAL; TERRORISM; THREAT; TRADE UNION; UNITED STATES;

ANIMALS; CHEMICAL INDUSTRY; CIVIL DEFENSE; DISASTERS; EMERGENCY MEDICAL SERVICES; ENVIRONMENTAL EXPOSURE; HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES; HUMANS; NATURAL DISASTERS; SECURITY MEASURES; TERRORISM; UNITED STATES;

EID: 33748456286     PISSN: 00916765     EISSN: 15529924     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1289/ehp.8762     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. American Chemistry Council. 2002. Protecting a Nation: Homeland Defense and the Business of Chemistry. Arlington, VA:American Chemistry Council.
2. Beierle TC. 2002. The quality of stakeholder-based decisions. Risk Anal 22(4):739-749.
3. Belke J. 2000. Chemical Accident Risks in U.S. Industry - A Preliminary Analysis of Accident Risk Data from U.S. Hazardous Facilities. Washington, DC;U,S. Environmental Protection Agency
4. CBS News, 2003. U.S. Plants: Open to Terrorists. Available: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/11/13/60minutes/main583528.shtml [accessed 7 April 2006].
5. Corzine JS. 2005 Statement of Senator Jon S. Corzine before the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 27 April 2005. Chemical Attack on America: How Vulnerable Are We? Available: http://hsgac.senate.gov/_files/CorzineHSGACtestimony.pdf [accessed 7 April 2005).
6. Crowl DA, ed. 1996. Inherently Safer Chemical Processes: A Life Cycle Approach, New York American Institute of Chemical Engineers.
7. Department of Justice. 2000. Department of Justice Assessment of the Increased Risk of Terrorist or Other Criminal Activity Associated with Posting Off-Site Consequence Analysis Information on the Internet. Available: http://permanent.access.gpo.gov/lps9890/lps989D/wvw.usdoj.gov/ criminal/april18final.pdf [accessed 21 June 2006].
8. DHS. 2004a. National Response Plan, December 2004, Washington, DC:Department of Homeland Security, Available: http://www.dhs.gov/ interweb/assetlibrary/NRPbaseplan.pdf [accessed 21 June 2006].
9. DHS. 2004b, National Incident Management System. Washington, DC:Department of Homeland Security. Available: http://www.dhs.gov/ interweb/assetlibrary/NIMS-90-web.pdf [accessed 21 June 2006].
10. DHS. 2005, Interim National Infrastructure Protection Plan. Washington, DC:Department of Homeland Security.
11. Falkenrath RA. 2005. Statement of Richard A Falkenrath, Visiting Fellow, the Brookings Institution, before the United States Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 27 April 2005. Chemical Attack on America: How Vulnerable Are We? Available: http://hsgac.senate.gov/_files/SHSGACTestimonyonHazmat042705.pdf [accessed 21 June 2006].
12. GAO. 2003a. Homeland Security: Voluntary Initiatives Are Under Way at Chemical Facilities, but the Extent of Security Preparedness Is Unknown. GAO-03-439. Washington, DC:U.S. General Accounting Office. Available: http://ww.gao.gov/new.items/d03439.pdf [accessed 20 June 2006].
13. GAO. 2003b. Hospital Preparedness: Most Urban Hospitals Have Emergency Plans but Lack Certain Capacities for Bioterrorism Response. GAO-03-924. Washington, DC:U.S. General Accounting Office.
14. GAO. 2006. Homeland Security: DHS Is Taking Steps to Enhance Security at Chemical Facilities, but Additional Authority Is Needed. GAO-06-150. Washington, DC:U.S. General Accountability Office. Available: http://www.gao.gov/new.items/d06150.pdf [accessed 21 June 2006].
15. Hood E. 2004. Lessons learned? Chemical plant safety since Bhopal. Environ Health Perspect 112:A352-A359.
16. Israel BA, Checkoway B, Schulz A, Zimmerman M. 1994 Health education and community empowerment: conceptualizing and measuring perceptions of individual, organizational and community control, Health Educ Q 21:149-170.
17. Kahn Fl, Amyotte PR. 2003. How to make inherent safety practice a reality. Can J Chem Eng 81:2-16.
18. Kletz TA. 1996. Inherently safer design: the growth of an idea. Process Saf Prog 15(1):5-8.
19. Mary Kay O'Connor Process Safety Center. 2002a. 2001 Assessment of Chemical Safety in the United States. MKOPSC Report 2002-01, Available http://ncsp.tamu.edu/Assessment%20REPORT.pdf [accessed 7 April 2006].
20. Mary Kay O'Connor Process Safety Center, 2002b. Measuring and Understanding Public Trust and Awareness to Prevent Chemical Incidents. MKOPSC Report 2002-04. Available: http://ncsp.tamu.edu/AssessmentRoports/ 2001_Assessment_Reports/SurveyReport.pdf [accessed 7 April 2006].
21. McQuiston TH. 2000. Empowerment evaluation of worker safety and health education programs. Am J Ind Med 38:584-597.
22. McQuiston TH, Zakocs A, Loomis D. 1998. The case for stronger OSHA enforcement: evidence from evaluation research. Am J Public Health 88(7):1022-1024.
23. Merritt CW. 2005. Testimony of the Chairman of the U S. Chemical Safety and Hazard Investigation Board before the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 27 April 2005. Chemical Attack on America: How Vulnerable Are We? Available: http://hsgac.senate.gov/_files/MerrittHSGACTestimony42705.pdf [accessed 7 April 2006].
24. National Infrastructure Protection Center. 2003a. Homeland Security Information Update. Information Bulletin 02-001. Available: http://www.nipc.gov/publications/infobulletings/2003/ib03-001.htm [accessed 7 February 2003]
25. National Infrastructure Protection Center. 2003b. Homeland Security Information Update. Information Bulletin 03-003. Available: http://www.nipc.gov/publications/infobulletings/2003/ib03-003.htm [accessed 12 February 2003].
26. OECD. 2003a. Guiding Principles for Chemical Accident Prevention, Preparedness and Response: Guidance for Industry (Including Management and Labor), Public Authorities, Communities and Other Stakeholders. Paris:Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. Available: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/10/37/2789820.pdf [accessed 7 April 2006].
27. OECD. 2003b. Guidance on Safety Performance Indicators. OECD Environment, Health and Safety Publications Series on Chemical Accidents, No. 11. Paris:Organisation for Economic Co-Operation and Development, Available: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/60/39/21568440.pdf [accessed 7 April 2006].
28. OSHA (Occupational Safety and Health Administration). 1992. Process Safety Management of Highly Hazardous Chemicals. 29 CFR 1910.119(c)(2). Fed Reg 57:6403. Available: http:/www.osha.gov/pls/oshaweb/ owadisp.show_document?p_table=STANDARDS&p_id=9760 [accessed 7 July 2006].
29. PACE. 2004. PACE International Union Survey: Workplace Incident Prevention and Response Since 9/11. Nashville, TN:Paper, Allied-Industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers International Union. Available: http://hsgac.senate.gov_files/Erwinattachment.pdf [accessed 21 June 2006].
30. Poje G, 2005. Testimony of Gerald Poje, Ph.D, before the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 13 July 2005, Chemical Facility Security: What Is the Appropriate Federl Role? Available http://hsgac.senate.gov/_files/Poje7l305.pdf [accessed 7 April 2006].
31. Prine C. 2002. Chemicals pose risks nationwide:P ittsburgh Tribune-Review (Pittsburgh, PA), 5 May: A1. Available: http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/news/specialreports/ potentialfordisaster/s_69664.html [accessed 21 June 2006].
32. Prine C. 2003. Chemical sites still vulnerable. Pittsburgh Tribune-Review (Pittsburgh, PA) 16 November: Al. Available: http://www.pittsburghlive.com/x/pittsburghtrib/s_165518.html [accessed 21 June 2006].
33. Purvis M, Herman M, 2005. Needless Risk: Oil Refineries and Hazard Reduction. Washington, DC:U.S. PIRG (Public Interest Research Group) Education Fund. Available: http://www.uspirg.org/reports/ needlessrisk.pdf [accessed 21 June 2006].
34. Reason J. 1999. Human Error. New York:Cambridge University Press.
35. Reason J. 2000. Managing the Risk of Organizational Accidents, Burlington, VT:Ashgate Publishing.
36. Renner P. 2004. Systems of safety and active worker participation strategies for a safe workplace: the philosophical and structural underpinnings of the Labor Institute, and the Paper, Allied-industrial, Chemical and Energy Workers International Union, accident prevention programs. N Solutions: J Environ Occup Health Policy 14:125-137.
37. Rudman WB, Clarke RA, Metzl JF. 2003. Emergency Responders: Drastically Underfunded, Dangerously Unprepared. Report of an Independent Task Force Sponsored by the Council on Foreign Relations. New York:Council on Foreign Relations. Available: http://www.cfr.org/content/publications/ attachments/Responders_TF.pdf [accessed 21 June 2006].
38. State of New Jersey. 2005, Administrative Order No. 2005-05, Available: http://www.nj.gov/dep/nowsrel/2OD5/05_0115ao.pdf [accessed 21 June 2006].
39. Stephan R. 2005. Statement of Mr. Robert Stephan, Acting Undersecretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection and Assistant Secretary for Infrastructure Protection, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, before the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, 15 June 2005. Is the Federal Government Doing Enough to Secure Chemical Facilities and Is More Authority Needed? Available: http://hsgac.senate.gov/_files/TestimonyStephan.pdf [accessed 21 June 2006].
40. Stephenson JB. 2005. Homeland Security: Federal and Industry Efforts Are Addressing Security Issues at Chemical Facilities, but Additional Action Is Needed. Testimony before the U.S. Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, 27 April 2005. Chemical Attack on America: How Vulnerable Are We? Available: http,//hsgac.senate.gov/_files/GAOTESTIMONY05631TJohnStephenson.pdf [accessed 21 June 2006].
41. U. S. EPA (U.S. Environmental Protection Agency). 1990. The Clean Air Act of 1990, a Primer on Consensus Building Sec, 112(r)(6). Washington, DC:Government Printing Office.
42. S, Senate ccmmittee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. 2005. Chemical Attack on America: How Vulnerable Are We? Available: http://hsgac.senategov/ index.cfm?Fuseaction=Hearings.Detail&HearinglD=230 [accessed 21 June 2006].