[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 45 (Thursday, March 15, 2007)]
[House]
[Pages H2600-H2601]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




           CHEMICAL FACILITY SECURITY IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 2007

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Texas (Ms. Jackson-Lee) is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise today to introduce 
the Chemical Facility Security Improvement Act of 2007.
  It is my hope that this act will improve upon the current legislation 
authorizing the Department of Homeland Security to regulate security 
practices at the Nation's chemical facilities.
  On October 5, 2006, H.R. 5441, FY07 Department of Homeland Security 
Appropriations Act became law (P.L. 109-295). Section 550 of that bill 
granted the Department of Homeland Security the authority to promulgate 
interim regulations for chemical facility security.
  Although not required for interim regulations, the Department put out 
an Advance Notice of Rulemaking and requested public comments. Parts of 
the proposed regulations caused concern, prompting comments from myself 
and several of my colleagues in Congress. The intention of this bill is 
to address four areas of concern: Preemption of State laws, use of 
specific security measures, information protection, and private rights 
of action.
  The most concerning piece of the proposed regulation occurred when 
the Department decided to go far beyond congressional intent and assert 
the right of the Secretary to preempt any State or local law; H.R. 5441 
was silent on the issue of preemption of State laws, and other major 
chemical security legislation considered in the 109th Congress--
specifically H.R. 5695 and S. 2145--protected State laws from 
preemption in most cases.
  This bill will protect State laws by allowing no Federal funds to be 
used to approve a site security plan unless the facility meets or 
exceeds security standards established by the State or local 
government.
  H.R. 5441 restricted the Secretary from requiring the use of any 
particular security measure. The use of specific security measures 
could, however, prove necessary to lower the risk posed to and by the 
chemical facility in certain cases. This bill removes this restriction 
and would allow the Secretary to require the use of specific security 
measures where necessary.
  According to the proposed regulations, the Department seeks to create 
a new class of security information called Chemical-Terrorism 
Vulnerability Information (CVI). The creation of new classes of 
protected information is not desirable, and this bill would require 
Vulnerability Assessments and Site Security Plans to be treated as 
Sensitive Security Information (SSI). SSI is the same information 
classification currently used for Vulnerability Assessments and Site 
Security Plans required by the Coast Guard under the Maritime 
Transportation Security Act, under which chemical facilities located at 
ports are currently regulated.

[[Page H2601]]

  H.R. 5441 also restricted the right of a private citizen to sue a 
facility or the Department to force the facility to adopt and enforce 
the security measures. I feel that private suits are sometimes 
necessary to force a Federal agency to enforce regulations passed by 
Congress. Given the proliferation of signing statements made by 
President Bush in the past, we should not assume that congressional 
intent will be automatically followed.
  Regulations that preclude American citizens from access to judicial 
action run counter to our values. We should be empowering the citizens 
of this country to help protect the homeland, not restricting them from 
doing so.
  I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.

                          ____________________