In July, a batch of chemical plants in the United States received letters from the US Department of Homeland Security (DHS) one after another and were informed that the chemical facilities they used had entered the "high risk" list of terrorist attacks. Among them, more than 200 chemical plants or university laboratories have been initially identified as having the highest risk of terrorist attacks. This means that they will be subject to the most stringent regulations of the federal government and may even be fined or ordered to close due to non-submission of supervision. This "high-risk" list has shocked the American chemical industry.
Many companies with high-risk chemical facilities are concerned about this list. Jeg Gunnulfsen, senior manager of government relations at the American Association of Organic Synthetic Chemical Manufacturers, said: "My cell phone is ringing," and members of the association are constantly asking him for help in order to get out of trouble. He had to remind them that this is only a preliminary list and the final conclusion has not yet been determined.
Like the Association of Organic Synthetic Chemical Manufacturers, the Chemical Industry Committee of the United States has confirmed that this list has spread to its members. "When we first advocated a chemical safety plan, we estimated that all the members would be included in the risk list," said Scott Jensen, director of the US Chemical Industry Committee. He did not disclose how many members had received the DHS notification letter, but he pointed out that no one should be surprised by this.
Dow Chemical's chief security officer and director of global emergency services and security said that Dow has received several letters from DHS, but the exact number and grade cannot be disclosed.
It is reported that the notified chemical facilities were subdivided into four levels. Of these, 219 were in the top level of the highest risk, 756 were in the second level, 1712 were in the third level, and 4319 were in the fourth level. Being notified by the DHS means that its owner must complete a more detailed safety and vulnerability assessment report. Once this information is submitted, DHS will make a final assessment of each high risk facility and determine the final level. The final list will determine the safety measures that the facility must comply with, including installing perimeter enclosures or switching to low-risk chemicals or production processes.
Since September 11, 2001, terrorists may have used chemical facilities as a tool for large-scale attacks. This has become a real concern. In October 2006, the President of the United States signed a bill to grant DHS the authority to manage high-risk chemical facilities in the country. On March 6 this year, the US House of Representatives' Homeland Security Committee passed a new regulation on the safety of chemical plants - the 2008 Chemical Plant Counterterrorism Act. The act gives DHS permanent management authority over US chemical plants and other applications or facilities that store hazardous chemicals to ensure the safety of these plants and facilities.
The list was screened after DHS reviewed the data for 32,000 chemical facilities across the United States. It considered factors including the proximity of population centers, the volatility of chemicals at the site, and how chemicals were stored and disposed of. In addition to chemical plants, the list also includes some hospitals, universities, food processing plants that use chemical facilities, and a total of more than 7,000 units.
Robert Stephen, Assistant Secretary-General of DHS, said that DHS first compiled a list of approximately 320 "chemicals of interest" and determined how large the total amount of each chemical should be, then found use or storage. Facilities that have these chemicals are further analyzed to assess the expected impact of their chemical spills or explosions. He said: "We look at how these chemicals are packaged and stored; how they are shipped by containers, and whether they can be easily taken away by individuals, or need a crane or a large vehicle."
However, some people questioned the list because DHS relied on information provided by industry to assess it, rather than through independent information gathering. Steven admits that these materials were provided unilaterally by the company, but he stated that if companies provide false or incomplete information, they will be heavily punished.
Many companies with high-risk chemical facilities are concerned about this list. Jeg Gunnulfsen, senior manager of government relations at the American Association of Organic Synthetic Chemical Manufacturers, said: "My cell phone is ringing," and members of the association are constantly asking him for help in order to get out of trouble. He had to remind them that this is only a preliminary list and the final conclusion has not yet been determined.
Like the Association of Organic Synthetic Chemical Manufacturers, the Chemical Industry Committee of the United States has confirmed that this list has spread to its members. "When we first advocated a chemical safety plan, we estimated that all the members would be included in the risk list," said Scott Jensen, director of the US Chemical Industry Committee. He did not disclose how many members had received the DHS notification letter, but he pointed out that no one should be surprised by this.
Dow Chemical's chief security officer and director of global emergency services and security said that Dow has received several letters from DHS, but the exact number and grade cannot be disclosed.
It is reported that the notified chemical facilities were subdivided into four levels. Of these, 219 were in the top level of the highest risk, 756 were in the second level, 1712 were in the third level, and 4319 were in the fourth level. Being notified by the DHS means that its owner must complete a more detailed safety and vulnerability assessment report. Once this information is submitted, DHS will make a final assessment of each high risk facility and determine the final level. The final list will determine the safety measures that the facility must comply with, including installing perimeter enclosures or switching to low-risk chemicals or production processes.
Since September 11, 2001, terrorists may have used chemical facilities as a tool for large-scale attacks. This has become a real concern. In October 2006, the President of the United States signed a bill to grant DHS the authority to manage high-risk chemical facilities in the country. On March 6 this year, the US House of Representatives' Homeland Security Committee passed a new regulation on the safety of chemical plants - the 2008 Chemical Plant Counterterrorism Act. The act gives DHS permanent management authority over US chemical plants and other applications or facilities that store hazardous chemicals to ensure the safety of these plants and facilities.
The list was screened after DHS reviewed the data for 32,000 chemical facilities across the United States. It considered factors including the proximity of population centers, the volatility of chemicals at the site, and how chemicals were stored and disposed of. In addition to chemical plants, the list also includes some hospitals, universities, food processing plants that use chemical facilities, and a total of more than 7,000 units.
Robert Stephen, Assistant Secretary-General of DHS, said that DHS first compiled a list of approximately 320 "chemicals of interest" and determined how large the total amount of each chemical should be, then found use or storage. Facilities that have these chemicals are further analyzed to assess the expected impact of their chemical spills or explosions. He said: "We look at how these chemicals are packaged and stored; how they are shipped by containers, and whether they can be easily taken away by individuals, or need a crane or a large vehicle."
However, some people questioned the list because DHS relied on information provided by industry to assess it, rather than through independent information gathering. Steven admits that these materials were provided unilaterally by the company, but he stated that if companies provide false or incomplete information, they will be heavily punished.
Steam Superheater,Superheater In Boiler,Convection Superheater,Electric Steam Superheater
Jinan Boiler Group Co., Ltd. , https://www.jinanboiler.com