Administration Cites Lapse in Chemical-Security Effort as Reason to End Shutdown

None

Douglas P. Guarino, Global Security Newswire
See more stories about...
Douglas P. Guarino, Global Security Newswire
Oct. 7, 2013, 11:02 a.m.

WASH­ING­TON — The Obama ad­min­is­tra­tion is adding the clos­ure of the Home­land Se­cur­ity De­part­ment’s chem­ic­al se­cur­ity pro­gram to its list of reas­ons why Con­gress should end the par­tial gov­ern­ment shut­down that began last week.

The Chem­ic­al Fa­cil­it­ies Anti-ter­ror­ism Stand­ards pro­gram, which is in the middle of a multi-year ef­fort to ap­prove se­cur­ity plans for high risk chem­ic­al plants in the United States, ceased most op­er­a­tions last week as a res­ult of the con­gres­sion­al stale­mate over fisc­al 2014 spend­ing and health-care re­form, Glob­al Se­cur­ity News­wire re­por­ted. Con­gress has yet to per­man­ently au­thor­ize the CFATS pro­gram, so the fail­ure to pass a spend­ing bill means the ini­ti­at­ive not only lacks funds but also the leg­al au­thor­ity to op­er­ate.

“This un­der­scores the need for the shut­down to end, and for Con­gress to pass a per­man­ent reau­thor­iz­a­tion of the CFATS pro­gram,” DHS spokes­man Clark Stevens said in a state­ment to GSN. Stevens con­firmed that em­ploy­ees of the In­fra­struc­ture Se­cur­ity Com­pli­ance Di­vi­sion, which runs the chem­ic­al se­cur­ity pro­gram, have been fur­loughed.

However, “chem­ic­al fa­cil­it­ies should con­tin­ue to com­ply with the re­quire­ments of CFATS, in­clud­ing con­tinu­ing to com­ply with the ex­ist­ing and planned se­cur­ity meas­ures in any ap­proved site se­cur­ity plan or al­tern­at­ive se­cur­ity pro­gram,” Stevens said. A Demo­crat­ic Sen­ate aid pre­vi­ously told GSN the ad­min­is­tra­tion is mak­ing a leg­al de­term­in­a­tion that it is not the in­tent of Con­gress to can­cel the pro­gram, giv­en that pro­posed spend­ing bills in both cham­bers would have ex­ten­ded the ini­ti­at­ive.

The in­def­in­ite shut­down of the pro­gram, however, is caus­ing con­cern among law­makers re­gard­ing how the gov­ern­ment will im­prove safety and se­cur­ity in the wake of chem­ic­al dis­asters in Texas and Louisi­ana this year. The gov­ern­ment had just be­gun work un­der an ex­ec­ut­ive or­der Pres­id­ent Obama is­sued in re­sponse to the in­cid­ents. Chief among the con­cerns the or­der was meant to ad­dress was that the DHS pro­gram was un­aware of the Texas fa­cil­ity’s ex­ist­ence when it ex­ploded in April, killing 14 people and lev­el­ing nearby homes.

“Over the past few days, we have seen the harm­ful im­pact the fed­er­al shut­down has had across our na­tion, from fur­loughed fed­er­al work­ers to hal­ted pro­grams that im­pact mil­lions of Amer­ic­ans, in­clud­ing our chem­ic­al se­cur­ity pro­gram,”  Sen­at­or Thomas Carp­er (D-Del.) said in a state­ment to GSN. “As we saw earli­er this year with the tra­gic ex­plo­sions at chem­ic­al fa­cil­it­ies in Texas and Louisi­ana, it’s im­port­ant that we make sure that chem­ic­als are be­ing pro­duced, dis­trib­uted and stored in a man­ner that is both safe and se­cure.”

Pre­vi­ously, Rep. Ben­nie Thompson (Miss.), the top Demo­crat on the House Home­land Se­cur­ity Com­mit­tee,” called the CFATS shut­down an “un­con­scion­able … res­ult of Re­pub­lic­an games­man­ship.”

In­dustry sup­port­ers of the pro­gram also had strong words. Bill All­mond, vice pres­id­ent for gov­ern­ment re­la­tions at the So­ci­ety of Chem­ic­al Man­u­fac­tur­ers and Af­fil­i­ates, told GSN that as a res­ult of the shut­down, Con­gress would have to turn ques­tions re­gard­ing the pace of CFATS im­ple­ment­a­tion “back on it­self.”

Carp­er, who chairs the Sen­ate Home­land Se­cur­ity Com­mit­tee, said he would work with his col­leagues to not only end the par­tial gov­ern­ment clos­ure but also to en­sure that the CFATS pro­gram “isn’t as vul­ner­able to these reck­less shut­downs” in the fu­ture.

Ef­forts to pass le­gis­la­tion per­man­ently au­thor­iz­ing the pro­gram have gone nowhere in re­cent years, however. The Re­pub­lic­an lead­er­ship of the House En­ergy and Com­merce Com­mit­tee has ef­fect­ively blocked such bills, cit­ing con­cerns the pro­gram has not com­pleted site in­spec­tions and se­cur­ity plan re­views fast enough.

Labor and en­vir­on­ment­al groups, mean­while, have ar­gued the pro­gram lacks the teeth needed to en­sure fa­cil­it­ies are safe and se­cure, and have called on the En­vir­on­ment­al Pro­tec­tion Agency to fill the per­ceived void — a pro­spect strongly op­posed by in­dustry of­fi­cials.

Early in Ju­ly, DHS pro­gram head Dav­id Wulf ar­gued the ini­ti­at­ive had “turned a corner.” He noted that as of last Ju­ly, the ef­fort had only giv­en pre­lim­in­ary ap­prov­al to 50 site-se­cur­ity plans, con­duc­ted only 10 in­spec­tions and had not gran­ted fi­nal ap­prov­al to single se­cur­ity plan since the CFATS pro­gram was first au­thor­ized by Con­gress in 2007.

One year later, the pro­gram had pre­lim­in­ary ap­proved “up­wards of 500” se­cur­ity plans, con­duc­ted more than 50 in­spec­tions and gran­ted fi­nal ap­prov­al for 160 plans, he said.

However, later the same month, House Re­pub­lic­ans hin­ted this was not good enough. In a Ju­ly 22 let­ter threat­en­ing to try to re­duce funds for the pro­gram, GOP law­makers com­plained of a “back­log of ap­prox­im­ately 3,120 fa­cil­it­ies” where se­cur­ity plans still needed re­view.

What We're Following See More »
TAKING A LONG VIEW TO SOUTHERN STATES
In Dropout Speech, Santorum Endorses Rubio
1 days ago
THE DETAILS

As expected after earlier reports on Wednesday, Rick Santorum ended his presidential bid. But less expected: he threw his support to Marco Rubio. After noting he spoke with Rubio the day before for an hour, he said, “Someone who has a real understanding of the threat of ISIS, real understanding of the threat of fundamentalist Islam, and has experience, one of the things I wanted was someone who has experience in this area, and that’s why we decided to support Marco Rubio.” It doesn’t figure to help Rubio much in New Hampshire, but the Santorum nod could pay dividends down the road in southern states.

Source:
‘PITTING PEOPLE AGAINST EACH OTHER’
Rubio, Trump Question Obama’s Mosque Visit
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

President Obama’s decision to visit a mosque in Baltimore today was never going to be completely uncontroversial. And Donald Trump and Marco Rubio proved it. “Maybe he feels comfortable there,” Trump told interviewer Greta van Susteren on Fox News. “There are a lot of places he can go, and he chose a mosque.” And in New Hampshire, Rubio said of Obama, “Always pitting people against each other. Always. Look at today – he gave a speech at a mosque. Oh, you know, basically implying that America is discriminating against Muslims.”

Source:
THE TIME IS NOW, TED
Cruz Must Max Out on Evangelical Support through Early March
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

For Ted Cruz, a strong showing in New Hampshire would be nice, but not necessary. That’s because evangelical voters only make up 21% of the Granite State’s population. “But from the February 20 South Carolina primary through March 15, there are nine states (South Carolina, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Tennessee, Kentucky, Mississippi, and North Carolina) with an estimated white-Evangelical percentage of the GOP electorate over 60 percent, and another four (Texas, Kansas, Louisiana, and Missouri) that come in over 50 percent.” But after that, he better be in the catbird’s seat, because only four smaller states remain with evangelical voter majorities.

Source:
CHRISTIE, BUSH TRYING TO TAKE HIM DOWN
Rubio Now Winning the ‘Endorsement Primary’
1 days ago
WHY WE CARE

Since his strong third-place finish in Iowa, Marco Rubio has won endorsement by two sitting senators and two congressmen, putting him in the lead for the first time of FiveThirtyEight‘s Endorsement Tracker. “Some politicians had put early support behind Jeb Bush — he had led [their] list since August — but since January the only new endorsement he has received was from former presidential candidate Sen. Lindsey Graham.” Meanwhile, the New York Times reports that fueled by resentment, “members of the Bush and Christie campaigns have communicated about their mutual desire to halt … Rubio’s rise in the polls.”

Source:
ARE YOU THE GATEKEEPER?
Sanders: Obama Is a Progressive
21 hours ago
THE LATEST

“Do I think President Obama is a progressive? Yeah, I do,” said Bernie Sanders, in response to a direct question in tonight’s debate. “I think they’ve done a great job.” But Hillary Clinton wasn’t content to sit out the latest chapter in the great debate over the definition of progressivism. “In your definition, with you being the gatekeeper of progressivism, I don’t think anyone else fits that definition,” she told Sanders.

×