PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · May 13, 1999
Chemical Safety Information and Site Security Act of 1999 - Prohibits off-site consequence analysis information (portions of risk management plans submitted by certain stationary sources under the Clean Air Act evaluating worst-case or alternative scenario accidental releases of extremely hazardous substances) from being available under Federal freedom of information provisions. Bars Federal employees from making such information available in an electronic form, except as otherwise provided by this Act. Authorizes the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to make such information available in an electronic form to State or local government employees for official use only. Directs the Administrator, in response to any request for such information, including requests for risk management plans, to provide such information but only in paper form. Permits the Administrator, at the request of a State or local government officer, to provide information submitted for the stationary sources in the State in which such officer serves for official use only. Allows State or local employees to make such information available to the same extent as Federal employees are so allowed. Requires the Administrator to ensure that all risk management plans are publicly available in paper or electronic form for inspection, but not copying, during normal business hours. Permits such plans to be available in electronic form only if such form does not provide an electronic means of ranking stationary sources based on off-site consequence analysis information. Authorizes appropriations. Permits the Administrator to make such information publicly available in an electronic form that excludes information concerning the identity or location of the sources for which the information was submitted. Prohibits Federal, State, or local government employees from making such information publicly available in such form except as authorized by the Administrator. Imposes criminal penalties on Federal, State, or local government employees who knowingly violate a restriction or prohibition established by this Act. Permits the Administrator to collect and maintain records that reflect the identity of persons seeking access to information under this Act only to the extent that such actions are relevant and necessary to accomplish an EPA purpose required to be accomplished by statute or executive order. Prescribes a parallel provision for records collected by State or local agencies. Permits off-site consequence analysis information to be available in any form for official use of Federal contractors. Makes contractors subject to the same restrictions and sanctions applicable to Federal employees under this Act. Sets forth parallel provisions regarding State and local government contractors. Authorizes the Administrator to withhold, or prevent the release of, off-site consequence analysis information if the release may present an imminent and substantial endangerment to human health or welfare or the environment. (Sec. 3) Permits the Attorney General, subject to the availability of appropriations, to review industry practices regarding site security and the effectiveness of this Act. Authorizes the Attorney General to submit periodic recommendations to Congress relating to the enhancement of site security practices and the need for continued implementation or modification of this Act.
People & committees
Rep. Bliley, Tom [R-VA-7] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Crime.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology.
Subcommittee Hearings Held.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.
Referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Government Reform, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Government Reform, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Government Reform, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Referred to the Committee on Commerce, and in addition to the Committees on Government Reform, and the Judiciary, for a period to be subsequently determined by the Speaker, in each case for consideration of such provisions as fall within the jurisdiction of the committee concerned.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Jun 3, 2026. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.1790 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.1790 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.1790 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.1790 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.