US House passes chemical security bill with IST provision intact

Nick Snow
OGJ Washington Editor

WASHINGTON, DC, Nov. 9 -- The US House approved a chemical and water security bill with a provision requiring inherently safer technology (IST) by 230 to 193 votes on Nov. 6, despite objections from the petroleum and other industries.

Two major oil industry trade associations immediately criticized the bill, HR 2868, which now heads to the Senate. National Petrochemical & Refiners Association Pres. Charles T. Drevna said by including the IST provision, the House is “sending a clear signal that it wants to put the federal government in a position to dictate chemical practices and procedures to chemical engineers.”

Drevna said, “While IST may be a great political sound bite, it is not a panacea for security. IST is not a technique; it is a philosophy developed by professional chemical engineers. Unfortunately, the IST concept has been hijacked by politically activists in a thinly veiled attempt to further their own agenda.”

Drevna said IST actually is governed by physics and engineering laws, not politics and emotion. “Forcing the switching of chemicals for certain processes may simply shift, and potentially increase, risk at facilities and in their surrounding communities,” he warned.

The American Petroleum Institute issued a statement saying that it joins the agriculture, trucking, and other industries in opposing the bill and supporting reauthorization of current federal security standards, which have been successful since their enactment 3 years ago.

“If the bill passed by the House today becomes law, it would go beyond the current protection requirements and endanger jobs and increase the risk of our operations,” the statement said. “The bill would create a mandate for government-selected changes to our operations, which is not consistent with a risk-based approach.”

Sought removal
In a Nov. 4 letter to House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) and Ranking Minority Member John A. Boehner (R-Ohio), API, NPRA, the International Liquid Terminals Association, National Propane Gas Association, Petroleum Equipment Suppliers Association, and Petroleum Marketers Association of America joined the National Association of Manufacturers, US Chamber of Commerce, and 19 other trade associations seeking the IST provision’s removal.

They said the US Department of Homeland Security should be focused on making the nation more secure and protecting US citizens from terrorist threats, instead of having to make engineering or business decisions for chemical plants.

As floor debate began the afternoon of Nov. 5, the bill’s sponsor, Homeland Security Committee Chairman Bennie G. Thompson (D-Miss.) said Titles II and III of HR 2868 close a major security gap by establishing a program for drinking water and wastewater facilities to complement DHS’s existing Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards program.

The bill also requires all plants that are part of the CFATS program to determine and adopt the best methods to reduce the consequences of a terrorist attack, Thompson said. This IST provision “simply incorporates this best practice into how all tiered facilities integrated security into their operations,” he said, adding, “Additionally, HR 2868 strengthens CFATS by adding enforcement tools, protecting the rights of whistleblowers, and enhancing security training.”

Simply extending the program’s existing authority for 3 years “flies in the face of testimony that we received about gaps in CFATS and would be a rejection of all the carefully tailored security enhancements in the bill,” Thompson said.

Beyond chemicals
Peter T. King (R-NY), the committee’s ranking minority member, said HR 2868’s IST provision would create confusion and unnecessary expenses, cost jobs, and stifle the private sector. “We should keep in mind that we’re not just talking about large chemical plants, but we’re also talking about institutions such as colleges and hospitals which will have to incur these costs,” King said.

King said the current law is working, and that DHS did not ask for an extension of its authority. “I believe that we took…an admirable concept of enhancing chemical plant security, and have allowed concepts and ideas regarding the environment…[to] have too large an influence on this bill,” he said.

Bill Pascrell Jr. (D-NJ), a committee member, said the bill was long overdue, noting that his home state is the location of what the FBI considers the most dangerous 2 miles in America with several large chemical plants near residential areas along the New Jersey Turnpike. State law requires chemical plants to conduct safer technology assessments “and believe it or not, our state is not only safer for it, but the sky hasn’t fallen on the chemical companies in New Jersey,” he said. Such state authority should not be preempted in federal legislation, he added.

But Charles W. Dent (R-Pa.) said New Jersey’s law requires IST assessments, but not implementation, and that HR 2868 would go much farther. DHS already is required to assess plants’ vulnerabilities and has completed about a third of the estimated 6,000 assessments, he noted. “Adding these IST assessments will be enormously costly,” he said. IST assessments also are designed to deal with workplace safety issues, not plant security, he added.

Thompson said: “What we’re looking at now is an opportunity to go into facilities that don’t, in many, instances have security assessments. If we make security assessments, then we will identify those vulnerabilities those facilities and help them correct them. Bad people would love to get into facilities with vulnerabilities and do them harm. What we’re trying to do is help those facilities create the capacity to be secure.”

Concerns addressed
Gene Green (D-Tex.), who supported the bill, said chemical and other facilities in his district have invested $8 billion to improve their security since 2001 and are fully complying with CFATS provisions which have not been fully implemented. He noted that he had some concerns when HR 2868 was introduced but that many of these were addressed when the bill went through the Energy and Commerce Committee.

“First, granting the [Homeland Security] secretary authority to mandate a facility to perform a ‘method to reduce a consequence of a terrorist attack,’ or IST, raises questions as to whether, or how, to involve government agencies like DHS that have few, if any, process safety experts, chemical engineers, and other qualified staff,” Green said in extended comments. “We worked to include a fair and transparent technical appeals process…that requires DHS to examine such decisions with facility representatives as well as with experts knowledgeable in the fields of process safety, engineering, and chemistry.”

The scope of facilities nationwide that would potentially be affected by IST requirements was substantially reduced by focusing exclusively on chemical facilities in populated areas subject to a release threat, Green said. DHS also would not be able to mandate IST if it was not feasible or if the facility would no longer be able to continue operating at that location, he said.

The original bill also contained language which unnecessarily duplicated chemical facility regulations under the Marine Transportation Security Act, according to Green. He said it now states that the US Coast Guard will be the main enforcement entity for MTSA facilities; explicitly states that the Coast Guard will be the primary consultant should the Homeland Security secretary consider mandating IST on an MTSA facility; ensures that MTSA facilities would not have to perform additional background security checks under CFATS requirements, and identify the Transportation Worker Identification Credential as satisfactory for the bill’s CFATS requirements.

Green said the bill also contains a new provision under which a worker can petition DHS to reconsider whether he or she poses an actual security threat; limits citizen lawsuits to compelling DHS to act under the law or report potential violations, but not sue private companies; and streamlines drinking water and wastewater provisions by placing EPA in charge of their implementation and enforcement.

‘Substantial compromises’
Green maintained, “HR 2868 is far from perfect, but it includes substantial compromises to permanently extend chemical and water security regulations while reducing duplicative regulatory standards, increasing worker protections, and providing important safeguards to chemical facilities and water systems.”

But Joe Barton (R-Tex.), the Energy and Commerce Committee’s ranking minority member, said the bill goes beyond reasonable requirements for vulnerability assessments, site security plans, and emergency response plans which have been part of many industries’ security programs for years.

“I’m an industrial engineer and understand plant processes and chemical processes to some extent,” he said. “I think we’re very blessed in this country to have a robust chemical industry, much of which is located in Texas and Louisiana. If this bill becomes law, my projection is [that] within 10 years or so, many of those facilities are going to be closed down and inoperable, tens of thousands of jobs are going to be lost, and our chemical industry is simply going to move onshore.”

HR 2868 is not about preventing terrorist attacks, but simply sets up a regime under which DHS and EPA employees who know little about chemical processes make key technical decisions, Barton said. “As if this was not enough, this legislation weakens the protections traditionally given to high-risk security information by treating need-to-know information like environmental right-to-know data,” said Barton. “I’m for transparency in government, but why should we give the terrorists who we’re trying to prevent attacking these facilities almost an open book to go in and, under these open meeting requirements and open records requirements, get information that could allow them to concoct schemes to destroy these very facilities?”

Republican amendments to preempt state laws, to strike the IST provision and simply extend the existing CFATS program, and to remove language allowing citizens to sue DHS to compel enforcement were defeated on Nov. 6 before the bill’s final vote.

Contact Nick Snow at

Related Articles

EPA approves Magellan’s Corpus Christi splitter project

12/12/2014 The US Environmental Protection Agency has issued a final greenhouse gas prevention of significant deterioration construction permit to Magellan Pr...

US needs more data before ending crude export ban, House panel told

12/11/2014 Much more environmental impact information is needed before the US can reasonably remove crude oil export limits, a witness told a House Energy and...

BOEM raises offshore oil spill liability limit to $134 million

12/11/2014 The US Bureau of Ocean Energy Management increased the liability limit for oil-spill related damages from offshore operations to $134 million from ...

Rosneft, Essar sign terms of oil supply agreement

12/11/2014 OAO Rosneft and Essar Energy PLC have signed key terms of an oil supply agreement in New Delhi. Rosneft said shipments to India may begin in 2015.

Barton introduces bill to remove US crude export limits


US Rep. Joe Barton (R-Tex.) introduced legislation that would remove US crude oil export limits that have been in place for nearly 40 years.

North Dakota producers face new vapor pressure standards

12/10/2014 North Dakota has approved new rail transportation safety standards for crude oil that stipulate operating standards for oil-conditioning equipment ...

Chevron, ONGC among companies awarded 15 exploration permits by New Zealand

12/09/2014 New Zealand’s government has awarded six onshore permits across the Taranaki, West Coast, and East Coast basins, and nine offshore permits across t...

Small subset of wells accounts for most methane emissions, researchers say

12/09/2014 A small subset of natural gas wells are responsible for most methane emissions from US natural gas production, said a study from the University of ...

Methane controls just part of complete climate strategy, speakers say

12/08/2014 Reducing oil and gas operations’ methane emissions is an essential, but far from the only, part of a comprehensive climate strategy, speakers at a ...

White Papers

AVEVA NET Accesses and Manages the Digital Asset

Global demand for new process plants, power plants and infrastructure is increasing steadily with the ...
Sponsored by

AVEVA’s Approach for the Digital Asset

To meet the requirements for leaner project execution and more efficient operations while transferring...
Sponsored by

Diversification - the technology aspects

In tough times, businesses seek to diversify into adjacent markets or to apply their skills and resour...
Sponsored by

Engineering & Design for Lean Construction

Modern marketing rhetoric claims that, in order to cut out expensive costs and reduce risks during the...
Sponsored by

Object Lessons - Why control of engineering design at the object level is essential for efficient project execution

Whatever the task, there is usually only one way to do it right and many more to do it wrong. In the c...
Sponsored by

Plant Design for Lean Construction - at your fingertips

One area which can provide improvements to the adoption of Lean principles is the application of mobil...
Sponsored by

How to Keep Your Mud System Vibrator Hose from Getting Hammered to Death

To prevent the vibrating hoses on your oilfield mud circulation systems from failing, you must examine...
Sponsored by

Duty of Care

Good corporate social responsibility means implementing effective workplace health and safety measures...
Sponsored by

Available Webcasts

On Demand

Optimizing your asset management practices to mitigate the effects of a down market

Thu, Dec 11, 2014

The oil and gas market is in constant flux, and as the price of BOE (Barrel of Oil Equivalent) goes down it is increasingly important to optimize your asset management strategy to stay afloat.  Attend this webinar to learn how developing a solid asset management plan can help your company mitigate costs in any market.


Parylene Conformal Coatings for the Oil & Gas Industry

Thu, Nov 20, 2014

In this concise 30-minute webinar, participants have an opportunity to learn more about how Parylene coatings are applied, their features, and the value they add to devices and components.


Utilizing Predictive Analytics to Optimize Productivity in Oil & Gas Operations

Tue, Nov 18, 2014

Join IBM on Tuesday, November 18 @ 1pm CST to explore how Predictive Analytics can help your organization maximize productivity, operational performance & associated processes to drive enterprise wide productivity and profitability.



Fri, Nov 14, 2014

US LNG Exports, the third in a trilogy of webcasts focusing on the broad topic of US Hydrocarbon Exports.

A discussion of the problems and potential for the export of US-produced liquefied natural gas.

These and other topics will be discussed, with the latest thoughts on U.S. LNG export policy.


Careers at TOTAL

Careers at TOTAL - Videos

More than 600 job openings are now online, watch videos and learn more!


Click Here to Watch

Other Oil & Gas Industry Jobs

Search More Job Listings >>
Stay Connected