Since September 11, 2001, legislators,government agencies, and industry have been working to prevent terrorist attacks involvinghazardous chemicals. (2) In the 109th Congress, forexample, H.R. 2651 would establish or increase penalties for criminal or terrorist activities aroundports and marine vessels. S. 1052 includes provisions to increase general port security, includingports in foreign countries. In response to the overall security environment, Congress is likely to seeka broader understanding of hazardous chemical marine shipments and efforts to secure them. Maritime Terrorism and Hazardous Chemical Cargo

Marine shipments of hazardous chemical cargo are potentially attractive terrorist targetsbecause these chemicals are acutely toxic or highly combustible, and are shipped in large volumes. This report uses the EPA/RMP chemicals as the basis for marine cargo hazard analysis. Hazardous Marine Cargo Statistics

The Army Corps of Engineers (ACE) maintains statistics of marine commerce in U.S. waters. Thesehazardous chemicals accounted for 2% of total U.S. waterborne cargo tonnage. Over 100,000 marine shipments of EPA/RMP hazardous cargo passed through U.S.waterways in 2003. (32) Based on these statistics,the average waterborne shipment of most of the EPA/RMP hazardous chemicals would be ofsufficient volume to require an off-site risk management plan under the EPA's rules if the samequantity of chemical was stored on land. Some port facilities producehazardous cargo. Of these 113 ports, the top 30 handledapproximately 95% of EPA/RMP hazardous cargo tonnage. The plans also address how federal, state, and local resources will bedeployed to prevent terrorist attacks. (58) The Coast Guard has used these assessments in augmentingsecurity of key marine assets and in developing the agency's new maritime security standards underthe Maritime Transportation Security Act of 2002 (MTSA, P.L. 107-295 ). ports." Available studies and anecdotal evidence suggest that these shipments maybe attractive terrorist targets and, if successfully attacked or used as a weapon, could causecatastrophic injuries among the general public. The MTSA gives the Coast Guard clear and far-ranging authority overthe security of hazardous marine shipping. As oversight of the federal role in marinechemicals security continues, Congress may raise questions concerning terrorism risk uncertaintyand efforts by federal agencies and the private sector to rigorously evaluate that risk. Congressionalpolicy makers may also analyze whether the Coast Guard, other government agencies, and theprivate sector have sufficient resources to secure hazardous chemical cargo commensurate with thatrisk and whether current security measures will be effective against a terrorist attack. Since a marineattack is possible even under tight security, evaluating the emergency response capabilities of coastalcommunities exposed to chemical shipping hazards may be of interest as well. In addition to these specific issues, Congress may assess how the various elements of U.S.hazardous chemicals marine security fit together in the nation's overall strategy to protect the publicfrom hazardous chemicals and cargo. Reviewing how these security priorities and activities fit together to achieve common goals couldbe an oversight challenge for Congress.
Since the terror attacks of September 11, 2001, the nation has been working to improve thesecurity of hazardous chemicals transportation. Marine shipments of hazardous chemical cargo maybe attractive terrorist targets because of their large volume and inherent toxicity or flammability. Anecdotal evidence and international events suggest that terrorists may have both the desire andcapability to attack such shipments in U.S. waters. Building on existing legislation, Congress isanalyzing the security of hazardous chemical marine shipments and deciding whether to strengthenrelated federal security efforts. H.R. 2651, for example, would increase penalties for criminal orterrorist activities around ports and marine vessels. S. 1052 includes provisions to increase generalport security, including foreign port security.
Drawing on marine commerce data from the Army Corps of Engineers (ACE), CRS hasanalyzed marine shipments of acutely toxic or combustible chemicals as defined underEnvironmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulations. According to this analysis, over 100,000marine shipments (54 million tons) of chemicals potentially capable of causing mass casualties(injuries or deaths) among the general public passed through U.S. waters in 2003. These chemicalshipments accounted for 2% of U.S. marine cargo tonnage and were shipped through 113 U.S. ports. The top 30 ports handled 95% of this hazardous chemical tonnage. Most marine shipments ofhazardous chemicals are much larger than such shipments on land; they would be of sufficientvolume, on average, to require an off-site risk management plan under EPA rules if the samequantity of chemical was stored at a chemical plant.
The Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA, P.L. 107-295 ) and the International Shipand Port Facility Security Code give the Coast Guard far-ranging authority over the security ofhazardous marine shipping. The agency has developed port security plans addressing how to deployfederal, state, and local resources to prevent terrorist attacks. Under the MTSA, the Coast Guard hasassessed the overall vulnerability of marine vessels, their potential to transport terrorists or terrormaterials, and their use as potential weapons. The Coast Guard has employed these assessments toaugment marine assets security and develop new maritime security standards.
As federal oversight of hazardous chemical marine security continues to evolve, Congressmay raise questions concerning terrorism risk uncertainty and efforts by federal agencies and theprivate sector to rigorously evaluate that risk. Congress may assess whether responsible federalagencies and private sector entities have in place sufficient resources and effective measures tosecure hazardous chemical marine cargo from terrorist attack. Congress may also evaluate theemergency response capabilities of coastal communities exposed to chemical shipping hazards. Determining how hazardous chemical marine security fits together with other homeland securitypriorities to achieve common security goals could be an oversight challenge for the 109th Congress.
This report will be updated as events warrant.