Chemical Facility Security: Regulation and Issues for Congress (CRS Report for Congress)
Premium Purchase PDF for $24.95 (22 pages)
add to cart or
subscribe for unlimited access
Pro Premium subscribers have free access to our full library of CRS reports.
Subscribe today, or
request a demo to learn more.
| Release Date |
Revised April 28, 2008 |
| Report Number |
RL33847 |
| Report Type |
Report |
| Authors |
Dana A. Shea, Resources, Science, and Industry Division; Todd B. Tatelman, American Law Division |
| Source Agency |
Congressional Research Service |
| Older Revisions |
-
Premium Revised Jan. 10, 2008 (20 pages, $24.95)
add
-
Premium Revised June 21, 2007 (19 pages, $24.95)
add
-
Premium Revised March 26, 2007 (18 pages, $24.95)
add
-
Premium Revised Feb. 16, 2007 (17 pages, $24.95)
add
-
Premium Jan. 31, 2007 (17 pages, $24.95)
add
|
Summary:
On April 9, 2007, the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) issued an interim final rule (72 Federal Register 17688-17745) on chemical facility security, implementing the statutory authority granted in the Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2007 (P.L. 109-295, Section 550). The regulations require chemical facilities possessing amounts and types of substances considered by the Secretary to be hazardous to notify DHS and undergo a consequence-based screening process. [â¦]. High-risk facilities are to be categorized into tiers based on risk, and those with higher risk must comply with more stringent performance-based security requirements. Under the interim final rule, high-risk chemical facilities are required to create and submit to DHS a vulnerability assessment; create and submit to DHS a site security plan, addressing the vulnerability assessment and complying with the performance-based standards; and implement the site security plan at the chemical facility. [â¦]. While the interim final rule states it may preempt future state and local chemical facility security regulations, the 110th Congress has narrowed such preemption to when federal regulations have an 'actual conflict' with state and local regulations. These regulations highlight key issues debated in previous Congresses. These issues include what facilities should be considered as chemical facilities; which chemical facilities should be considered as 'high-risk' and thus regulated; the scope of the risk-based performance standards for different tiers of high-risk chemical facilities; the appropriateness and scope of federal preemption of existing state chemical facility security regulation; and the availability of information for public comment, potential litigation, and congressional oversight.
