Thomko Petro Chemical Blog

The National Petrochemical and Refiners Association (NPRA) expressed its concerns over some key language in the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Act of 2006, which was approved on a voice vote by the House Homeland Security Committee last week.

According to the NPRA statement, the legislation (HR 5695) includes amendments requiring facilities to implement what are sometimes incorrectly described as "inherently safer technologies" as well as a provision that allows states to adopt security measures that may differ from and actually conflict with federal regulations.

NPRA officials state that the bill does not take into account work already completed by the US refinery and petrochemical industries toward securing facilities against potential terrorist threats, and also stated the bill seems to go in the opposite direction.

The Committee adopted several amendments which give the Department of Homeland Security, state and federal agencies and even environmental activists the opportunity to dictate to owners and operators what chemical processes and technologies they should employ.        

Allowing state and local governments to require additional security measures that potentially conflict with federal laws also is problematic, and NPRA officials believe allowing individual states to impose competing regulatory requirements risks creating a confusing 'patchwork' of regulations that will also impede facility security protection efforts.

Despite concerns, NPRA and its member companies will continue to work with Congress on reasonable chemical security legislation that sets national standards for security and allows companies to manage their own facilities.

NPRA believes overly prescriptive regulations will smother initiative and complicate industry's basic task of making petroleum and petrochemical products that are critical to the nation's economic well-being.