Washington, D.C. --- Pointing to the fact that 11 chemical plants in the New Jersey area are at risk of a terrorist attack that could affect more than one million people, U.S. Rep. Frank Pallone, Jr. (D-NJ), a senior member of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, yesterday reintroduced legislation that would improve security and reduce hazards at these facilities and hundreds of others around the nation.

"More than three years have passed since 9/11 and Congress has yet to seriously address the need to secure our nation's chemical plants," Pallone said. "We're finally seeing some movement in the Senate, but the Bush administration and the House Republican leadership can no longer afford to drag their feet on chemical security. It's time that we take serious action to reduce the threat of an attack on a chemical facility, which would endanger millions of lives."

Pallone's legislation would use several factors to identify high priority facilities, including: the severity of harm that could be caused by a release, proximity to population centers, threats to national security or critical infrastructure, threshold quantities of substances of concern that pose a serious threat, and other safety factors that the EPA Administrator considers appropriate.

Since he first introduced this legislation in the House in 2002, Pallone has been trying to get the Republican leadership and Republicans on the House Energy and Commerce Committee to conduct a congressional hearing on chemical security. While the Senate held a hearing last month devoted exclusively to chemical security, the New Jersey congressman remains frustrated that House Republicans continue to ignore this very real security risk.

In 2003, the U.S. General Accounting Office (GAO) released a report, done at the request of Pallone and U.S. Rep. John D. Dingell (D-MI), ranking Democrat on the House Energy and Commerce Committee, that found, with regard to terrorist threats, that no federal agency has assessed the extent of security preparedness of chemical plants; and, no federal requirements are in place to require chemical plants to assess their vulnerabilities and take steps to reduce them.