The chemical fire in Apex underscores the importance of
protecting communities from releases of highly toxic chemicals. The fire at
Environmental Quality, a hazardous and chemical waste disposal facility, prompted
the evacuation of 17,000 residents and sent 28 people to the emergency room
with respiratory problems. The Apex fire
follows other recent chemical accidents (http://www.csb.gov/index.cfm?folder=current_investigations&page=index),
two in North Carolina, and raises the question of how best to protect public
health in the event of a dangerous release of toxic chemicals.
The best way to limit
toxic chemical releases is to reduce toxic chemical use. Safer alternatives to toxic chemicals can
protect the public from chemical accidents and terrorist attacks, and are
surprisingly widely available. According to a report prepared for EPA (found at
http://www.epa.gov/ceppo/pubs/stockholmpaper.pdf) four toxic gases (chlorine
gas, anhydrous ammonia, hydrogen fluoride and sulfur dioxide) account for 55%
of the chemical processes that pose off-site consequences to surrounding
communities. A recent U.S. PIRG report (http://uspirg.org/uspirg.asp?id2=23724)
found that all four chemicals have readily available and proven safer
alternatives that are cost effective. Reducing or eliminating the use of toxic
chemicals in production processes also impacts the production, transport and
disposal of these dangerous substances.
Congress just passed
up its chance to reduce toxic chemicals.
In July of this year, the House Homeland Security Committee passed
bipartisan legislation (H.R. 5695) requiring chemical sources to evaluate the
availability of safer technologies and chemicals to replace more dangerous
chemicals.
The legislation encouraged chemical companies to switch to
safer technologies and chemicals when available and cost effective, and was
based on numerous recommendations from government experts. For example, the National
Research Council asserted that “[t]he most desirable solution to preventing
chemical releases is to reduce or eliminate the hazard where possible, not to
control it.”
Unfortunately, last week Congress voted to approve a
contentious scaled-down and temporary chemical security program that displaced
the comprehensive House legislation. President Bush signed the temporary
program into law this week. The scaled-down security program is valid for three
years and limits federal oversight to chemical plants that present a “high
risk.” The government is also prohibited from requiring any specific security
improvements, including the evaluation or use of safer technologies; measures
that both secure chemical plants from deliberate attacks and reduce the threat
of deadly accidents.
Congress needs to
revisit its inadequate chemical security measure. In the meantime, North
Carolina can follow the lead of several other states
(NJ, NY, MD) that have adopted chemical security protections of their own.
