Panel rejects stricter measures to protect chemical plants

Controversial amendments to a Senate chemical security bill were shot down Wednesday, including provisions that would have required chemical facilities to use safer technologies and prevented states from passing laws that are stiffer than federal regulations.

The bill would give the Homeland Security Department authority, for the first time, to regulate all facilities that make, process, store or sell chemicals. The Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee was unable to move through all amendments to the bill Wednesday and plans to continue the markup at a later date.

But members debated and voted on a few of the most controversial amendments, including one from Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs ranking member Joseph Lieberman, D-Conn., and Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., that would have required chemical facilities deemed by the Homeland Security Department as posing the highest risk to use safer technologies.

Lieberman said the requirement would probably apply to about 360 out of 15,000 facilities in the country. But the amendment would allow facilities to make a case to the department that using safer technologies would pose a significant financial hardship or would not be technically feasible.

The amendment failed by an 11-5 vote, which did not split along party lines.

Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Chairwoman Susan Collins, R-Maine, and Sen. Tom Coburn, R-Okla., led the opposition. "I simply don't think it's an appropriate role for government ... to dictate specific industrial processes," Collins said. "We don't have the expertise to do that and we shouldn't do that."

Coburn said the amendment would create a "litigation nightmare" between chemical facilities and the government.

"This reminds me of Soviet-style mandates for how we'll do things," he said. "If this is in the bill, I will do everything I can to make sure this bill never moves."

A Lieberman aide said he plans to reintroduce the amendment if the bill makes it to the Senate floor.

An amendment by Sen. George Voinovich, R-Ohio, that would have prevented states from passing their own laws regulating the chemical industry was defeated by a 9-7 vote, which also did not break along party lines. The bill permits state and local governments to pass their own laws.

Voinovich argued, however, that there should be a single national standard for the chemical industry that pre-empts state and local government authority. He said his amendment would allow state and local authorities to apply to the Homeland Security Department for permission to pass their own regulations.

Regulating chemical plants should be considered a national defense matter, he said, adding that the federal government already has other laws that pre-empt state and local authority. "This is a war type of atmosphere that we're in, so it's within the jurisdiction of the federal government," he said.

Collins led opposition to the amendment. "On balance, I come down on preserving the rights of state and local governments to legislate in this area," she said.

Another amendment by Voinovich that would have recognized security standards already in place at some chemical plants also was defeated by an 8-8 vote.

According to Collins, the amendment could have allowed chemical facilities at U.S. seaports that are now regulated by the Coast Guard to be exempt from meeting other security requirements in the bill. "It would create an unfair and unequal playing field," she said.

Stay up-to-date with federal news alerts and analysis — Sign up for GovExec's email newsletters.
Close [ x ] More from GovExec

Thank you for subscribing to newsletters from
We think these reports might interest you:

  • Sponsored by G Suite

    Cross-Agency Teamwork, Anytime and Anywhere

    Dan McCrae, director of IT service delivery division, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)

  • Data-Centric Security vs. Database-Level Security

    Database-level encryption had its origins in the 1990s and early 2000s in response to very basic risks which largely revolved around the theft of servers, backup tapes and other physical-layer assets. As noted in Verizon’s 2014, Data Breach Investigations Report (DBIR)1, threats today are far more advanced and dangerous.

  • Sponsored by One Identity

    One Nation Under Guard: Securing User Identities Across State and Local Government

    In 2016, the government can expect even more sophisticated threats on the horizon, making it all the more imperative that agencies enforce proper identity and access management (IAM) practices. In order to better measure the current state of IAM at the state and local level, Government Business Council (GBC) conducted an in-depth research study of state and local employees.

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    The Next Federal Evolution of Cloud

    This GBC report explains the evolution of cloud computing in federal government, and provides an outlook for the future of the cloud in government IT.

  • Sponsored by LTC Partners, administrators of the Federal Long Term Care Insurance Program

    Approaching the Brink of Federal Retirement

    Approximately 10,000 baby boomers are reaching retirement age per day, and a growing number of federal employees are preparing themselves for the next chapter of their lives. Learn how to tackle the challenges that today's workforce faces in laying the groundwork for a smooth and secure retirement.

  • Sponsored by Hewlett Packard Enterprise

    Cyber Defense 101: Arming the Next Generation of Government Employees

    Read this issue brief to learn about the sector's most potent challenges in the new cyber landscape and how government organizations are building a robust, threat-aware infrastructure

  • Sponsored by Aquilent

    GBC Issue Brief: Cultivating Digital Services in the Federal Landscape

    Read this GBC issue brief to learn more about the current state of digital services in the government, and how key players are pushing enhancements towards a user-centric approach.


When you download a report, your information may be shared with the underwriters of that document.