Senators Introduce Bill to Require Assessments, Planning at Chemical Facilities

Fifteen Senate Democrats, joined by the body's one independent, are sponsoring a homeland security bill with provisions to increase security at certain chemical facilities and wastewater treatment plants.

The measure (S. 6), introduced Jan. 7 by Senate Minority Leader Thomas Daschle (D--S.D.), would require certain industrial facilities using or manufacturing toxic chemicals to take additional steps to assess their vulnerability to terrorist activities and to increase security.

Democrats attempted in the 107th Congress to pass legislation requiring security measures at chemical facilities but were unsuccessful amid strong opposition from several industries, including the chemical and agricultural sectors (227 DEN A-1, 11/25/02  

Daschle's bill is based on the legislation (S. 1602) introduced in the 107th Congress by Sen. Jon Corzine(D-N.J.), according to a summary of S. 6. Corzine is a sponsor of S. 6.

Under the new measure, the Environmental Protection Agency, in consultation with the Justice Department, would be required to identify high-priority facilities.  Their ranking would be based on the severity of the threat they pose and their proximity to population centers, according to the summary.

Facilities classified as high priority would be required within a year of promulgation of the law to conduct a vulnerability assessment.  Six months after completing the assessments, the facilities would have to submit to EPA response plans for improving security and using so-called inherently safer technologies, such as less toxic chemicals, the summary stated.

The plans would be submitted for review to EPA, a procedure that proved to be a sticking point in the 107th Congress.  Joining Daschle and Corzine in introducing the bill were Sens. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), Joseph Biden (D-Del.), Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.), Carl Levin (D-Mich.), John Rockefeller (D-W.Va.), Joseph Lieberman (D-Conn.), Daniel Akaka (D-Hawaii), Patty Murray (D-Wash.), Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.), Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.), James Jeffords (I-Vt.), and Harry Reid (D-Nev.).

Republicans Oppose Certain Measures

Some Senate Republicans who opposed Corzine's measure said EPA does not have the resources to review the potentially 15,000 plans, and that the Department of Homeland Security should be the lead agency.

Sen. James Inhofe (R-Okla.), the incoming chairman of the Senate Environment and Public Works Committee, said in late 2002 that while chemical site security would be a priority in the 108th Congress, he would seek to pass a bill under which the Homeland Security Department would receive the response plans.

EPA officials have also expressed concern that the agency would not be able to effectively review all of the plans.

EPA Supports Legislative Action

An agency official told BNA Jan. 9 that while EPA still believes "we need to have a bill to require facilities," specifically the 15,000 facilities already required to submit risk management plans, "to do vulnerability assessments and address the vulnerabilities identified," the agency "thinks having all 15,000 facilities send plans to the federal government and be reviewed is not feasible."

The official said EPA would like to see legislation "require facilities to certify that they have done the assessments, and they are addressing their vulnerabilities, and allow either for third-party audits or, to the extent that resources allow, have EPA do some spot checks on that."

Inhofe is also opposed to provisions that would require the use of inherently safer technologies, according to the Republican source.

"That is a debate [Inhofe is] willing to have, but that is a separate debate" from security at facilities, the source said.

The EPA official, however, said facilities "ought to look at whether they can make processes safer as part of any overall effort to reduce vulnerabilities," adding, "we would expect they would do that."

But the official said to require a facility to use a certain technology would be unrealistic. "Who is going to decide which technology is truly safer, and which is better in a particular process?"

Corzine Plans to Introduce Measure

A spokesman for Corzine said Jan. 9 that the senator is likely to introduce his own legislation similar to S. 1602.

"We are totally optimistic we can get something done" in the current session, said Darius Goore, the Corzine spokesman.  Whatever gets approved will probably be a modification of Corzine's original measure, he said, but "both Republicans in the Senate and in the administration have said we need to" address chemical site security, and "we need to do so legislatively, so we feel pretty confident we can get something done."

Daschle's homeland security bill also includes a provision that would require certain wastewater treatment plants to assess their vulnerability to terrorism and develop emergency response plans.

The bill would authorize funds for EPA grants for certain security enhancements and research, according to the summary

By Meredith Preston

Copyright © 2003 by The Bureau of National Affairs, Inc., Washington D.C.