PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 17, 1999
Chemical Security Act of 1999 - Bars the public disclosure of off-site consequence analysis submissions under the Clean Air Act for a period of one year after this Act's enactment. Defines an "off-site consequence analysis submission" as a portion of a risk management plan submitted to the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency by stationary sources of certain hazardous substances. Permits disclosure of such information for official use only. Prescribes penalties for violation of such prohibition. Directs the Administrator, after June 21, 1999, to make information from risk management plans, including information from off-site consequence analysis submissions, publicly available in a form which excludes information concerning the identity or location of covered stationary sources. Requires owners or operators of such sources to convene a meeting with community representatives, employees and contractors working at such sources, and local emergency planning committees and other emergency responders to discuss measures necessary to prevent, and protect such sources from, attacks by terrorists and other criminals. Provides for certifications to the Federal Bureau of Investigation by such owners or operators that such meetings have been held. Directs the Attorney General to review and report to Congress on the vulnerability of covered stationary sources to criminal and terrorist activity, current industry practices regarding site security, security of transportation of extremely hazardous substances, and this Act's effectiveness. Provides for biennial updates of such report and for recommendations for reducing such vulnerability through inherently safer practices and site security and the need for additional legislation. Requires the Comptroller General to report to Congress on the health and environmental effects of public disclosure of information. Requires, as part of such report, an examination of the reductions in toxic chemical releases associated with reporting requirements of the Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986. Authorizes appropriations.
People & committees
Rep. Green, Gene [D-TX-29] · D–TX
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.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Health and Environment.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Government Management, Information and Technology.
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.2257 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.2257 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.2257 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.2257 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.