Any water facility security legislation that advances through the House this year may focus on requiring water utilities to update existing vulnerability assessments and emergency response plans, according to a “backgrounders” document from the House Energy and Commerce Committee’s Republican staff that circulated around Capitol Hill in January.
The document summarizes several high-priority issues that will be on the agenda of each Energy and Commerce subcommittee this year. Notably, it explains that the Environment and Economy Subcommittee will have a chance to build on the water security regulations put in place by the Bioterrorism Act of 2002, but recommends that any legislation “should only require water utilities to update and submit their vulnerability assessments and site security plans” which utilities were required to complete under the Bioterrorism Act of 2002. The mention of “site security plans,” which were not required by the Bioterrorism Act, may actually be a reference to emergency response plans, which detail how water systems would react to emergency situations.
The document goes on to make clear that so-called “inherently safer technology” mandates from the federal government will not be a component of any water security bill offered by the Committee majority. Specifically, the document warns against providing EPA with additional regulatory authority “that deviates greatly from the security mission authorized by Congress.”
Any Energy and Commerce activity on a water security measure will probably not begin this year until after the House Homeland Security Committee announces its plans on legislation to extend the Department of Homeland Security’s Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS), from which water systems are exempt. In the past, members of the Homeland Security Committee have argued that the water and wastewater exemption should end, but at a February hearing Rep. Daniel Lungren (R-Calif.), chairman of a key subcommittee, proclaimed himself “agnostic” on whether water systems should be subject to CFATS. This comment may suggest unwillingness on the part of Homeland Security Committee Republicans to engage in a jurisdictional dispute over water security regulation, thus providing the Energy and Commerce Committee with undisputed authority to craft a drinking water security bill.
Similarly, a planning document released by the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee in January also noted plans to conduct oversight of wastewater facility security, which is under jurisdiction of the panel.