HB 4100
Requires owners or operators of bulk oils or liquid fuels terminals to obtain a certificate of financial responsibility from the Department of Environmental Quality.
Take action
Record your position on this measure.
Sign in to record your position, submit testimony, or contact your legislator.
Sign in to take actionPublic sentiment
Support
94%
Oppose
6%
- Introduced
- Passed House
- Passed Senate
- To Governor
- Became Law
Bill overview
This bill requires owners and operators of bulk oil and liquid fuel terminals in Oregon to obtain a certificate of financial responsibility from the Department of Environmental Quality. This certificate ensures they can cover the costs associated with oil or fuel spills. The Environmental Quality Commission will establish rules for these certificates, and the Department of Environmental Quality must report on the Act’s implementation. The bill also preempts local governments from imposing stricter financial assurance requirements than those established by the state and declares an emergency, making it effective immediately upon passage.
Sponsors
Official sponsors from legislative records.
Primary sponsors
Arguments in favor
Reasons to support this legislation.
Supporters of the bill emphasize the need for financial assurances to mitigate potential environmental and health damages in case of accidents or disasters at the Critical Energy Infrastructure (CEI) Hub. They argue that major companies should be held accountable for cleaning up oil or fuel spills and preventing disasters that harm communities, wildlife, and ecosystems. The proposed Risk Bond Bill is seen as a crucial tool to improve the state's emergency response capabilities and protect taxpayers and state coffers. Supporters also advocate for requiring bulk fuel terminal owners or operators to obtain certificates of financial responsibility from the Department of Environmental Quality to ensure timely availability of funds for emergency response and recovery costs after a fuel disaster. By assuming financial responsibility, businesses can help prevent catastrophic failures and mitigate risks associated with the CEI Hub's location in Portland, Oregon.
Source: Testimony Summaries
Arguments opposed
Reasons to oppose this legislation.
Opponents of the proposed legislation express concerns that it is redundant and does not provide new coverage beyond existing laws. Specifically, Meghan Moyer highlights the need for financial assurance in emergency response situations, such as a Critical Energy Infrastructure (CEI) Hub spill or release, which would require immediate funding for Multnomah County. The Association of Oregon Counties also opposes preemptions in HB 4100, arguing that they would limit their ability to respond effectively to emergencies and create unnecessary litigation, ultimately hindering the counties' capacity to provide critical services during emergency situations.
Read the latest version inline or switch to a previous version.