Water Resources Development Act Of 2007--Continued

Floor Speech

WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 2007--Continued -- (Senate - May 15, 2007)

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Mr. CARDIN. Mr. President, this amendment would restore the authority of State and local governments to protect the environment and public safety of the sitings of liquefied natural gas, LNG, terminals within their own State. The amendment is drafted to be an amendment to the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899, which gives the Army Corps authority on section 10 permits. The current law on the siting of LNG plants basically allows the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission to site without the consultation or approval of State or local governments. This amendment is an effort to restore federalism to the process of siting LNG plants.

There are now dozens of proposals to site new LNG plants in the United States. Some are being suggested to be sited near population centers, which raises serious concern about public safety.

Let me point out that LNG plants and the tankers that bring in the natural gas are very much targets of terrorism. Richard Clarke, a former Bush administration counterterrorism official, said LNG plants and tankers are ``especially attractive targets'' to terrorists. The risks are great. We know LNG plants can spark pool fires, which are high-intensity fires, extremely difficult to extinguish. CRS has reported in the last six decades there have been 13 serious accidents involving LNG plants, including one in the State of Maryland in 1979 that had a fatality associated with it.

Maryland has one of the six LNG plants in our country, and there is a proposal to add another LNG plant in Maryland. AES Sparrows Point LNG and Mid-Atlantic Express intend to site a new LNG plant at Sparrows Point in the Baltimore metropolitan area. This is right in the middle of a population center. It is opposed by the congressional delegation. It is opposed by the Governor. It is opposed by the county executive in the jurisdiction in which the LNG plant is to be sited. It is unacceptable public safety, an economic and environmental risk. Yet there has been no consideration given by the individuals who want to site this plant to the concerns of local government. It is totally up to FERC to make the decision, and that is wrong. State and local governments should have a meaningful opportunity to participate in decisions of siting LNG terminals. That is exactly what this amendment would do.

I see the distinguished chairman of the Environment and Public Works Committee on the Senate floor. I respect her judgment as to the importance of moving forward on this bill. This amendment, because it hasn't been cleared, could add some difficulty to that process. It is within the jurisdiction of the Environment and Public Works Committee on which I serve, and I hope our committee would hold hearings on this issue and consider another vehicle which may be more appropriate than the bill currently before us to deal with the appropriate input of State and local governments on the siting of LNG plants. We have a responsibility to do that. We have a responsibility to our communities. We have a responsibility for public safety. We have a responsibility to make sure it is done right. Allowing FERC to do that without the input of State and local government is wrong.

I hope there will be another opportunity that I will be able to either have a public hearing or an opportunity to discuss this amendment further.

I am pleased several of my colleagues have expressed interest in the amendment. This certainly will not be the last time I will have an opportunity to talk about it.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source