Compromise on Chemical Security - September 30, 2002 Vol. 3 No. 20

September 30, 2002 Vol. 3 No. 20:

Published: 09/30/2002

Printable Version
Email to a Friend

Compromise on Chemical Security

There have been plans to offer Sen. Jon Corzine’s (D-NJ) Chemical Security Act as an amendment to the Senate’s bill to establish a new department of Homeland Security. However, since the homeland bill has been taking so long in the Senate there is a strong probability that no controversial amendments are going to be allowed. Facing such a situation, there is tremendous pressure to water down Sen. Corzine’s bill to make it palatable for everyone. Sen. James Inhofe (R- OK) appears to be the lead for negotiating a compromise with Corzine. Unfortunately, the compromises being discussed go so far that they may make the bill essentially useless.

The most significant changes being considered are:

1) Within the vulnerability assessments required by the bill, inherently safer technologies may be demoted from a required consideration to one item on a list of things facilities may examine.

2) The entire responsibility for the program may be placed within the new department of Homeland Security rather than within the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Although EPA has the most experience with chemicals plants, it may be relegated to a consulting role on the program with no responsibility in certification or approval of the assessments.

3) New provisions may be added that would allow prior standards, such as industry programs or protocols, to be deemed sufficient to fulfill the bill’s assessment requirements. This may allow facilities to avoid doing the government assessment by getting approval for less strict industry association efforts.

While the three proposed changes listed above seem to be the most troublesome, there are additional possible changes that also raise concerns. One alteration might exempt water treatment facilities that conduct bio-terrorism assessments from these chemical security assessments. Another new provision may allow for de-listing of toxic chemicals from the assessment.

Neither the compromise nor any of the provisions are finalized; however, as the end of this congressional session approaches, negotiations are moving fast and furious.