Chemical Facilities Anti-Terrorism Standards Program: Addressing Its Challenges and Finding a Way Forward, Hearing Before the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies of the Committee on Homeland Security, House of Representatives, One Hundred Twelfth Congress, Second Session, March 6, 2012 [open pdf - 345KB]
This is the March 6, 2012 hearing on "The Chemical Facilities Anti-Terrorism Standards Program: Addressing Its Challenges and Finding a Way Forward," held before the U.S. House Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies. From the opening statement of Daniel E. Lungren: "I wish to thank Under Secretary Beers, Director Anderson, and Deputy Director Wulf for your cooperation in providing our committee with a detailed briefing on the challenges facing the MPPD's [sic] [National Protection and Programs Directorate] Infrastructure Security Compliance Division, ISCD, on February 7. I must say that I was upset when I learned about the widespread mismanagement training and recruiting failures in the CFATS [Chemical Facilities Anti-Terrorism Standards] compliance division, which we now are learning about more than 5 years after the program was authorized. Some examples cited were 4,200 site security plans submitted to ISCD with no plans being finally approved, workers hired without appropriate skill levels, no adequate training program for chemical inspectors having been established, supervisors selected based on personal relationships rather than leadership or managerial ability and experience. The leaked Anderson memo also stated that the Congressional mandate forced development of the CFATS program at an impractical pace, the inference seemingly being that the accelerated pace pushed by Congress resulted in poor program implementation, inappropriate hirings, and wasteful expenditure of taxpayer funds. Now, Congress directed the Secretary in our 2007 DHS appropriations bill to develop a regulatory framework within 6 months to address the security of U.S. chemical facilities. I believe that was a shorter period than we had envisioned in the bill that we worked on in this subcommittee. However, this short time line was an expression of Congressional urgency and concern regarding the threat to our chemical facilities, and I don't believe it really was a hard deadline. But nonetheless we wished to urge upon the Executive Branch our concern at that time in the hope that this would be expedited." Statements, letters, and materials submitted for the record include those of the following: Daniel E. Lungren, Yvette D. Clarke, Bennie G. Thompson, Rand Beers, Penny J. Anderson, David Wulf, William E. Allmond, IV, Timothy J. Scott, and David L. Wright.
Serial No. 112-74
Government Printing Office: http://www.gpo.gov/