Shell
Home | This Week's Contents  |  C&EN ClassifiedsSearch C&EN Online

 
Related Stories
LAWSUIT FILED OVER TERRORISM STUDY
[C&EN, Mar. 18, 2002]

THE VANISHING RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN
[C&EN, Feb. 25, 2002]

Antiterrorism At The Plant Gate
[C&EN, Nov. 26, 2001]

How Safe Is Safe?
[C&EN, Nov. 5, 2001]

Terrorism At The Plant Level
[C&EN, Sept., 24, 2001]

Terrorism Trumps Internet Access
[C&EN, July 3, 2000]

Related Sites
Washington Post

American Chemistry Council

E-mail this article to a friend
Print this article
E-mail the editor
 
 
 
 
 
 
 Table of Contents
 C&EN Classifieds
 News of the Week
 Cover Story
 Editor's Page
 Business
 Government & Policy
 Science/Technology
 Concentrates
  Business
  Government & Policy
  Science/Technology
 Education
 ACS News
 Calendars
 Books
 Digital Briefs
 ACS Comments
 Career & Employment
 Special Reports
 Letters
 Newscripts
 Nanotechnology
 What's That Stuff?
 Pharmaceutical Century

 Hot Articles
 Safety  Letters
 Chemcyclopedia

 Back Issues

 How to Subscribe
 Subscription Changes
 About C&EN
 Copyright Permission
 E-mail webmaster
NEWS OF THE WEEK
THREAT ASSESSMENT
March 18, 2002
Volume 80, Number 11
CENEAR 80 11 p. 8
ISSN 0009-2347
[Previous Story] [Next Story]

Worst-Case Scenario For Chemical Plant Attack

LOIS EMBER

A slide presentation prepared by a medical officer in the Army Surgeon General's Office concludes that a terrorist attack on a U.S. chemical plant in an urban area could result in millions of casualties. This worst-case scenario was presented at a governmental staff meeting last fall, but reported by the Washington Post just last week.

The aim of the meeting, held two months after Sept. 11, 2001, was to develop casualty estimate methodologies and medical responses to a terrorist attack, says Lyn Kukral, a spokeswoman in the Surgeon General's Office.

The Post pegged the worst-case scenario at up to 2.4 million people killed or injured--close to the number estimated by chemical companies themselves. Kukral couldn't confirm with the medical officer, who was out of the country, how this number was derived. But she tells C&EN, "The number is probably based on an actual worst-case analysis done by an office in the U.S. Army Medical Command," of which the surgeon general is a part.

Also not confirmable is a midrange casualty estimate of 903,400 from an explosion at a chemical plant that the Post quotes from the slide presentation. Again, Kukral believes this number was "developed by one of our offices" and is not derived from data developed under EPA risk management plans.

Chris VandenHeuvel, an American Chemistry Council spokesman, says, "We don't know what the [Army] numbers are based on, so it is difficult for us to respond." However, he adds, the chemical industry "understands that it is an integral part of the nation's critical infrastructure and could be potentially targeted by terrorists. We need to do everything feasible we can to make our facilities as safe and secure as possible."

[Previous Story] [Next Story]



Top


Chemical & Engineering News
Copyright © 2002 American Chemical Society


Home | Table of Contents | News of the Week | Cover Story
Business | Government & Policy | Science/Technology
Chemical & Engineering News
Copyright © 2002 American Chemical Society - All Right Reserved
1155 16th Street NW • Washington DC 20036 • (202) 872-4600 • (800) 227-5558


CASChemPortChemCenterPubs Page