[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 150 (2004), Part 13]
[Senate]
[Pages 17050-17051]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




            WASTEWATER TREATMENT WORKS SECURITY ACT OF 2003

  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I rise today in opposition to the 
Wastewater Treatment Works Security Act of 2003.
  In the wake of September 11, 2001, I believe that it is imperative 
that the Nation takes every reasonable action we can to prevent 
terrorism, create effective response and recovery mechanisms, and find 
ways to minimize any impacts should an event occur.
  The Congress has a key role in facilitating these actions by 
establishing authorities for Government agencies, establishing the 
legal framework in which homeland security improvements will occur, and 
appropriating adequate funding for the homeland security mission. 
Protecting our Nation's critical infrastructure is a major piece of our 
homeland security strategy.
  The water sector has been identified as an element in our Nation's 
critical infrastructure since the issuance of Presidential Decision 
Directive 63 (PDD-63), issued in by President Clinton in May 1998, 
which was the first major governmental action focused on reducing the 
vulnerability of our Nation's critical infrastructure.
  At that time, and in each document outlining homeland security 
responsibilities since that time, the Environmental Protection Agency, 
EPA, was designated as the lead for water infrastructure protection.
  The security needs are significant in the water and wastewater 
sectors. There are over 16,000 publicly owned treatment works in the 
United States, serving almost 190 million people. These industrial 
facilities use large quantities of toxic chemicals in their treatment 
and disinfection processes. They are located near population centers 
and other critical infrastructure. A chemical accident would pose a 
serious threat. In addition, collection systems run beneath every city 
and town in America, creating potential corridors for travel or 
opportunities for access.
  There are also serious public health risks associated with a 
disruption or service failure at a wastewater treatment plant. 
Treatment works clean wastewater that comes from our toilets, showers, 
and sewers and send it back into our rivers, streams, lakes, and 
oceans. Those same bodies of water are our drinking water sources. 
Without proper treatment, we would see the public health effects of the 
same type of water-borne disease outbreaks such as cholera that we saw 
in Iraq earlier this year due to the failure of wastewater treatment 
plants.
  I believe that the Congress should take the risk to wastewater 
treatment plants seriously. Unfortunately, S. 1039, the Wastewater 
Treatment Works Security and Safety Act, provides security for our 
Nation's wastewater infrastructure in name, only.
  First, this bill is a rollback of current law requiring vulnerability 
assessments and emergency response plans at drinking water utilities. 
In 2002, the Congress passed H.R. 3448, the Public Health and 
Bioterrorism Preparedness Response Act of 2002, P.L. 107-188. This act 
requires community water systems to conduct vulnerability assessments 
and develop an emergency response plan that incorporates the results of 
the vulnerability assessment. Vulnerability assessments are to be 
submitted to EPA. The threats posed by drinking water and wastewater 
facilities are similar. These plants are often colocated. It makes no 
sense to adopt weaker standards for one sector of the industry than the 
other. The Bioterrorism Act ensures that water systems take basic 
action to first identify and then address security needs.
  Second, S. 1039 increases wastewater security in name only. It does 
not require the most basic security precautions--completion of a 
vulnerability assessment and the incorporation of the results into a 
treatment works' emergency response plan. Under the provisions of S. 
1039, we do not know if individual publicly owned treatment works will 
choose to complete a vulnerability assessment because there is no 
requirement to do so. We do not know if they will incorporate their 
findings into emergency response plans that are designed to protect 
communities surrounding those plants because there is no requirement to 
do so. These most basic actions are not too heavy a burden for the 
wastewater treatment industry to bear.
  S. 1039 also does not require, and may actually preclude, the 
submission of vulnerability assessments that are completed to the 
Federal Government--a serious obstacle in the Department of Homeland 
Security's ability to perform its mission. Providing the results of a 
facility's vulnerability assessment and its emergency response plan to 
the Federal Government is a vital step both to ensure that 
vulnerability assessments are completed in critical infrastructure 
sectors and to ensure that the Federal Government has all of the 
information it requires to secure the Nation against a potential 
terrorist attack.
  The President's National Strategy for Homeland Security, issued in 
2002, states, ``A complete and thorough assessment of America's 
vulnerabilities will not only enable decisive near-term action, but 
guide the rational long-term investment of effort and resources.'' Not 
only does DHS plan to use vulnerability assessments to evaluate threat 
information and provide warnings, but also to allocate resources. I 
agree that one of the most efficient ways to spend limited resources is 
to dentify where we are vulnerable and where we are threatened, then 
target resources to the cross-section of those two areas.
  Under S. 1039 as reported, it is unclear where DHS will get the 
information they require to complete a national vulnerability 
assessment and make resource allocation decisions that will increase 
the level of security

[[Page 17051]]

in our Nation. What is clear is that DHS is likely to receive only 
partial information, if any, from a subset of wastewater plants that 
voluntarily choose to complete a vulnerability assessment and that 
voluntarily choose to share the information they collect. Without the 
best, most up to date, accurate information available, DHS will be 
unable to fully perform its mission.
  In addition, elected officials in Congress have a constitutional 
oversight role over Federal agencies and the laws they implement. Under 
S. 1039, Congress will not be accountable to the public for the purpose 
or implementation of this law--Congress will not be able to request or 
access information from the Federal agencies because the agencies will 
not have such information.
  At the beginning of this Congress, I introduced the Wastewater 
Treatment Works Security and Safety Act, S. 779. This legislation 
mirrors existing law for drinking water systems. It requires all 
wastewater utilities to conduct vulnerability assessments and to 
develop or modify emergency response plans to incorporate the results 
of the vulnerability assessments. It requires that these documents be 
presented to the EPA for review, and it includes significant security 
measures designed to protect this information from unauthorized 
disclosure. It authorizes $185 million for assistance in completing 
vulnerability assessments, for immediate security improvements, and for 
assistance to small treatment works. It authorizes $15 million for 
research to identify threats, detection methods, and response actions. 
This bill will clearly enhance the security of our Nation by taking 
real actions to improve the security of wastewater treatment works.
  The Federal Government has a responsibility to protect the American 
people. If S. 1039 becomes law, the Federal Government will not know if 
publicly owned treatment works will voluntarily conduct a vulnerability 
assessment, if they will voluntarily implement the security needs 
identified, or if they will incorporate the results into their 
emergency response plans, and there will be no way of finding out. The 
Department of Homeland Security's mission to increase the security of 
the country will be hindered. I believe that S. 1039 fails to take 
responsible, basic steps to protect our wastewater infrastructure 
security from terrorist attack, putting Americans at risk.
  I urge my colleagues to oppose this legislation and support my 
alternative bill, S. 779.

                          ____________________