Advanced search Help
Resource Type or Special Collection is LLIS Collection
Clear all search criteria
Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
U.S.-China Counterterrorism Cooperation: Issues for U.S. Policy [July 15, 2010]
From the Summary: "After the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, the United States faced a challenge in enlisting the full support of the People's Republic of China (PRC) in the counterterrorism fight against Al Qaeda. This effort raised short-term policy issues about how to elicit cooperation and how to address PRC concerns about the U.S.-led war (Operation Enduring Freedom). Longer-term issues have concerned whether counterterrorism has strategically transformed bilateral ties and whether China's support was valuable and not obtained at the expense of other U.S. interests. The extent of U.S.-China counterterrorism cooperation has been limited, but the tone and context of counterterrorism helped to stabilize--even if it did not transform--the closer bilateral relationship pursued by President George Bush in late 2001. China's military, the People's Liberation Army (PLA), has not fought in the U.S.-led counterterrorism coalition. The Bush Administration designated the PRC-targeted 'East Turkistan Islamic Movement' (ETIM) as a terrorist organization in August 2002, reportedly allowed PRC interrogators access to Uighur detainees at Guantanamo in September 2002, and held a summit in Texas in October 2002."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Kan, Shirley
2010-07-15
-
U.S.-Mexican Security Cooperation: The Mérida Initiative and Beyond [August 16, 2010]
From the Summary: "In recent years, U.S.-Mexican security cooperation has increased significantly, largely as a result of the development and implementation of the Mérida Initiative, a counterdrug and anticrime assistance package for Mexico and Central America that was first proposed in October 2007. With the recent enactment of the FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act (H.R. 4899/P.L. 111- 212), Congress has provided almost $1.8 billion for the Mérida Initiative. Congress provided $248 million of that funding to Central America and included an additional $42 million for Caribbean countries. However, Congress has dedicated the vast majority of the funds--roughly $1.5 billion--to support programs in Mexico, with an emphasis on training and equipping Mexican military and police forces engaged in counterdrug efforts. Escalating drug trafficking-related violence in Mexico and the increasing control that Mexican drug trafficking organizations (DTOs) have over the illicit drug market in the United States have focused congressional attention on the efficacy of U.S-Mexican efforts and related domestic initiatives in both countries. With funding for the original Mérida Initiative technically ending in FY2010 and new initiatives underway for Central America and the Caribbean, the Obama Administration proposed a new four-pillar strategy for U.S.-Mexican security cooperation in its FY2011 budget request. That strategy focuses on (1) disrupting organized criminal groups; (2) institutionalizing the rule of law; (3) building a 21st century border; and (4) building strong and resilient communities. The first two pillars largely build upon existing efforts, whereas pillars three and four broaden the scope of Mérida Initiative programs to include new efforts to facilitate 'secure flows' of people and goods through the U.S.-Mexico border and to improve conditions in violence-prone border cities. The Administration's FY2011 budget request includes $310 million for Mérida programs in Mexico."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Seelke, Clare Ribando; Finklea, Kristin M.
2010-08-16
-
Border Security: U.S.-Canada Immigration Border Issues [Updated December 28, 2004]
"The United States and Canada are striving to balance adequate border security with other issues such as the facilitation of legitimate cross-border travel and commerce, and protecting civil liberties. Congress has taken action to improve border facility infrastructure, increase the number of border patrol agents and immigration inspectors at the northern border, and provide these officials with additional technologically upgraded equipment. Congress has also taken action to track the entry and exit of foreign visitors by mandating an automated entry/exit system, however, its anticipated implementation at the northern border may not have an adverse impact on travel as most Canadian nationals will be exempt from the requirements of the system. Moreover, there have been several bi-national initiatives aimed at making the border more secure while facilitating travel. These initiatives are outlined in a 30-point plan, which was signed by officials from both countries in December 2001."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Seghetti, Lisa M.
2004-12-28
-
Project BioShield: Legislative History and Side-by-Side Comparison of H.R. 2122, S. 15, and S. 1504 [August 27, 2004]
From the Summary: "Few effective countermeasures currently exist to deal with chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear terror agents. In early 2003, the Bush administration proposed Project BioShield to stimulate the development of such countermeasures and to procure them for the Strategic National Stockpile (SNS). Congress considered three bills that incorporated much of the administration's proposal: S. 15 (Gregg), H.R. 2122 (Tauzin), and S. 1504 (Gregg). H.R. 2122 passed the House on July 16, 2003. S. 15 passed the Senate on May 25, 2004 in an amended form similar to H.R. 2122. This version of S. 15 passed the House on July 14, 2004. President Bush signed S. 15 into law as the Project BioShield Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-276) on July 21, 2004. Although many of the details of Project BioShield changed during Congressional consideration, all the proposals shared similar key provisions. Each bill would have provided expedited hiring, procurement, and grant awarding procedures for bioterrorism-related products and services. Each bill would have provided a market guarantee for countermeasure producers by allowing the Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) to contract to procure countermeasures still in development. Thus, several years before a company plans to be able to deliver a countermeasure, the company would have been assured that if they successfully develop the countermeasure the government is obligated to purchase a set amount of it at a set price. Each bill would have authorized the HHS Secretary to allow the emergency use of countermeasures that lack Food and Drug Administration approval. Congress changed many important aspects of the Administration's proposal."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Gottron, Frank
2004-08-27
-
Water Infrastructure Needs and Investment: Review and Analysis of Key Issues [December 21, 2010]
"Policymakers are giving increased attention to issues associated with financing and investing in the nation's drinking water and wastewater treatment systems, which take in water, treat it, and distribute it to households and other customers, and later collect, treat, and discharge water after use. The renewed attention is due to a combination of factors. These include financial impacts on communities of meeting existing and anticipated regulatory requirements, the need to repair and replace existing infrastructure, concerns about paying for security-related projects, and proposals to stimulate U.S. economic activity by building and rebuilding the nation's infrastructure. [...] This report identifies a number of issues that continue to receive attention in connection with water infrastructure investment. It begins with a review of federal involvement; describes the debate about needs; and then examines key issues, including what is the nature of the problems to be solved, who will pay, and what is the federal role, and questions about mechanisms for delivering federal support. Congressional and Administration activity on these issues since the 107th Congress also is reviewed. (For detailed information on legislative activity in the 111th Congress, see CRS [Congressional Research Service] Report R40098, 'Water Quality Issues in the 111th Congress: Oversight and Implementation,' and CRS Report RS22037, 'Drinking Water State Revolving Fund (DWSRF): Program Overview and Issues.)'"
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Tiemann, Mary; Copeland, Claudia
2010-12-21
-
Water Infrastructure Projects Designated in EPA Appropriations: Trends and Policy Implications [October 28, 2010]
"Congressional action to designate funds within appropriations legislation for specified projects or locations has been increasing in recent years as a way to help communities meet needs to build and upgrade water infrastructure systems, whose estimated future funding needs exceed $630 billion. Such legislative action has often been popularly referred to as earmarking. This report discusses appropriations for water infrastructure programs of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), focusing on such designations in the account that funds these programs. Information on the programmatic history of EPA involvement in assisting wastewater treatment and drinking water projects is provided in two appendixes. Congressional appropriators began the practice of supplementing appropriations for the primary Clean Water Act (CWA) and Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) assistance programs with grants for individually designated projects in FY1989. These designated project grants are often referred to as earmarks or as STAG grants. Since 1989, of the $56.8 billion appropriated to EPA for water infrastructure assistance, more than 13% ($7.4 billion) has gone to designated project grants. Notably since FY2000, appropriators have awarded such grants to a larger total number of projects, resulting in more communities receiving such assistance, but at the same time receiving smaller amounts of funds, on average."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Copeland, Claudia
2010-10-28
-
Vulnerability of Concentrated Critical Infrastructure: Background and Policy Options [Updated September 12, 2008]
This is an updated report from the Congressional Research Service on how concentrated critical infrastructure is especially vulnerable to natural disasters and attacks. "'Critical infrastructure' consists of systems and assets so vital to the United States that their incapacity would harm the nation's physical security, economic security, or public health. Critical infrastructure is often geographically concentrated, so it may be distinctly vulnerable to events like natural disasters, epidemics, and certain kinds of terrorist attacks. […] Congress has been examining federal policies related to the geographic concentration and vulnerability of critical infrastructure. […] The 110th Congress is considering additional policies which may affect critical infrastructure concentration. […] Congress and federal agencies also have adopted policies affecting the capacity and location of critical infrastructure, including prescriptive siting, economic incentives, environmental regulation, and economic regulation. Some federal policies have been developed specifically to address perceived threats to critical infrastructure. […] Some analysts may argue that little government intervention is necessary to alleviate geographic vulnerabilities of critical infrastructure because the private sector will adjust its practices out of its own financial interest. However, if Congress concludes that federal intervention is needed, it may employ a number of policy options to encourage geographic dispersion (including eliminating policies that encourage concentration ), ensure survivability, or ensure that effective infrastructure recovery capabilities are in place to mitigate impacts of concentrated infrastructure disruption. Addressing geographic vulnerabilities may call for a combination of options. Congress may also consider whether other legislative proposals with the potential to affect critical infrastructure development -- directly or indirectly -- are likely to relieve or exacerbate geographic vulnerability."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Parfomak, Paul W.
2008-09-12
-
United Arab Emirates (UAE): Issues for U.S. Policy [March 10, 2011]
"The UAE's [United Arab Emirates] relatively open borders, economy, and society have won praise from advocates of expanded freedoms in the Middle East while producing financial excesses, social ills such as prostitution and human trafficking, and relatively lax controls on sensitive technologies acquired from the West. The UAE government is authoritarian, although it allows substantial informal citizen participation and consensus-building. The openness of its society and its economic wealth have allowed the UAE to largely avoid the popular unrest in the Middle East thus far. [...] Partly because of substantial UAE federal government financial intervention and ample financial reserves, the political and social climate remained calm through the 2008-2009 global financial crisis and recession. The downturn hit Dubai emirate particularly hard and called into question its strategy of rapid, investment-fueled development, especially of luxury projects. Many expatriate workers left UAE after widespread layoffs, particularly in the financial and real estate sectors, and the decline affected property investors and the economies of several neighboring countries, including Afghanistan. The downturn also touched Afghanistan in the form of major losses among large shareholders of Kabul Bank, Afghanistan's largest private banking institution. At the outset of 2011, however, some economists were becoming more optimistic that Dubai emirate was poised for a rebound. For the Obama Administration and many in Congress, there are concerns about the UAE oversight and management of a complex and technically advanced initiative such as a nuclear power program. This was underscored by dissatisfaction among some members of Congress with a U.S.-UAE civilian nuclear cooperation agreement. The agreement was signed on May 21, 2009, and submitted to Congress that day. It entered into force on December 17, 2009. However, U.S. concerns about potential leakage of U.S. and other advanced technologies through the UAE to Iran, in particular, are far from alleviated."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Katzman, Kenneth; Motivans, Mark
2011-03-10
-
U.S.-Mexican Security Cooperation: The Mérida Initiative and Beyond [January 31, 2011]
"In recent years, U.S.-Mexican security cooperation has increased significantly, largely as a result of the development and implementation of the Mérida Initiative, a counterdrug and anticrime assistance package for Mexico and Central America that was first proposed in October 2007. With the enactment of the FY2010 Supplemental Appropriations Act (P.L. 111-212) in July 2010, Congress has provided almost $1.8 billion for the Mérida Initiative. Congress provided $248 million of that funding to Central America and included an additional $42 million for Caribbean countries. However, Congress dedicated the vast majority of the funds--roughly $1.5 billion--to support programs in Mexico, with an early emphasis on training and equipping Mexican military and police forces engaged in counterdrug efforts. Escalating drug trafficking-related violence in Mexico has focused congressional attention on the efficacy of U.S-Mexican efforts. Reducing violence associated with organized crime (including drug trafficking), which, by Mexican government estimates, has resulted in more than 34,600 deaths since President Felipe Calderón took office in December 2006, has remained a focus of the Mérida Initiative. [...] The 112th Congress is likely to continue funding and overseeing the Mérida Initiative, as well as examining the degree to which the U.S. and Mexican governments are fulfilling their pledges to tackle domestic problems contributing to drug trafficking in the region. Congress may also examine the degree to which the Administration's new strategy for the Mérida Initiative complements other counterdrug and border security efforts. Given current budget constraints, Congress may also debate how best to measure the impact of current and future Mérida Initiative programs."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Seelke, Clare Ribando; Finklea, Kristin M.
2011-01-31
-
War in Afghanistan: Strategy, Operations, and Issues for Congress [March 9, 2011]
"In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the United States launched and led military operations in Afghanistan in order to end the ability of the Taliban regime to provide safe haven to al Qaeda and to put a stop to al Qaeda's use of the territory of Afghanistan as a base of operations for terrorist activities. [...] In late 2010, NATO [North Atlantic Treaty Organization] and the Afghan government agreed to pursue a key medium-term goal: the transition of lead responsibility for security to Afghans throughout the country by the end of 2014. The U.S. government has stated its intention to begin drawing down some U.S. forces from Afghanistan in July 2011, and also to maintain a long-term strategic partnership with Afghanistan beyond 2014. Strategic vision for Afghanistan is still, many would argue, a work in progress. President Karzai has consistently stressed the theme of 'Afghan leadership, Afghan ownership.' President Obama has consistently stressed the core goals of the United States: to disrupt, dismantle, and defeat al- Qaeda in Afghanistan and Pakistan, and to prevent their return. Yet for the U.S. government, fundamental issues remain unresolved. These include (1) determining the minimum essential conditions required for Afghanistan itself to be able to sustain stability with relatively limited international support; (2) defining the appropriate combination of U.S. efforts, together with other international resources, over time, required to achieve those minimum conditions; and (3) balancing U.S. national security interests in Afghanistan and the region against other imperatives, in a constrained fiscal environment. This report, which will be updated as events warrant, describes and analyzes (1) the key players in the war in Afghanistan; (2) the strategic outlooks of the Afghan government, the U.S. government, and NATO; (3) the threats to the security and stability of the Afghan state and its people; (4) the major facets of the current effort: security, governance and anti-corruption, development, reconciliation and reintegration, and transition; (5) mechanisms in place to measure progress; and (6) critical issues that Congress may wish to consider further."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Dale, Catherine
2011-03-09
-
Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response: The SAFER Grant Program [Updated September 10, 2008]
This is an updated report from the Congressional Research Service on the SAFER Grant Program. "In response to concerns over the adequacy of firefighter staffing, the Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response Act -- popularly called the 'SAFER Act' -- was enacted by the 108th Congress as Section 1057 of the FY2004 National Defense Authorization Act (P.L. 108-136). The SAFER Act authorizes grants to career, volunteer, and combination local fire departments for the purpose of increasing the number of firefighters to help communities meet industry minimum standards and attain 24-hour staffing to provide adequate protection from fire and fire-related hazards. Also authorized are grants to volunteer fire departments for activities related to the recruitment and retention of volunteers. […] To date, the Bush Administration has requested zero funding for SAFER in all years of the program's existence. […] The FY2009 budget justification stated that the federal government already spends 'billions of dollars in annual support to train, exercise, and equip state and local public safety personnel, including firefighters, so that they are adequately prepared to respond to a terrorist attack or other major incident.' […]Facing the 110th Congress is the issue of whether or not -- and if so, to what extent -- the SAFER program should be funded. The Administration has consistently requested no funding for SAFER, arguing that localities should be solely responsible for funding firefighting personnel. Fire service advocates counter that the inability of many local fire departments to meet minimum standards for personnel levels could lead to inadequate response to different types of emergency incidents, substandard response times, and an increased risk of firefighter fatalities."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Kruger, Lennard G.
2008-09-10
-
Department of Homeland Security: Budget in Brief Fiscal Year 2005
"The Fiscal Year 2005 budget for the Department of Homeland Security builds upon the significant investments to date that improve our safeguards against terrorism, while also sustaining the many important departmental activities not directly related to our fight against terrorism. The President's budget clearly demonstrates the continuing priority placed on Homeland Security in requesting total new resources for FY 2005 of $40.2 billion. This is an increase of 10% above the comparable FY 2004 resource level. This includes all sources of funding, such as discretionary and mandatory appropriations, offsetting collections from user fees, and trust funds."
United States. Department of Homeland Security
2005
-
Trends in Terrorism: 2006 [July 21, 2006]
"On April 28, 2006, the Department of State sent to Congress its annual report
on global terrorism: Country Reports on Global Terrorism 2005. The 262-page
report provides an annual strategic assessment of trends in terrorism and the evolving nature of the terrorist threat, coupled with detailed information on anti-terror cooperation by nations worldwide. The report and underlying data portray a threat from radical Jihadists that is becoming more widespread, diffuse, and increasingly homegrown, often with a lack of formal operational connection with al Qaeda ideological leaders such as Osama Bin Laden or Ayman al Zawahiri. Three trends in terrorism are identified in the Department of State report which are independently reflected in the work of analysts elsewhere. First is the emergence of so called 'micro actors,' in part spurred by U.S. successes in isolating or killing much of al Qaeda's leadership. The result is an al Qaeda with a more subdued, although arguably still significant, operational role, but assuming more of an ideological, motivational, and propaganda role. Second is the trend toward 'sophistication'; i.e. terrorists exploiting the global flow of information, finance, and ideas to their benefit, often through the internet. Third is an increasing overlap of terrorist activity with international crime, which may expose the terrorists to a broad
range of law enforcement countermeasures."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Perl, Raphael
2006-07-21
-
Transportation Security: Issues for the 109th Congress [Updated June 23, 2006]
"The nation's air, land, and marine transportation systems are designed for accessibility and efficiency, two characteristics that make them highly vulnerable to terrorist attack. While hardening the transportation sector from terrorist attack is difficult, reasonable measures can be taken to deter terrorists. The focus of this issue brief is how best to construct and finance a system of deterrence, protection, and response that effectively reduces the possibility and consequences of another terrorist attack without unduly interfering with travel, commerce, and civil liberties. Aviation security has been a major focus of transportation security policy following the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001. In the aftermath of these attacks, the 107th Congress moved quickly to pass the Aviation and Transportation Security Act (ATSA; P.L. 107-71) creating the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) and mandating a federalized workforce of security screeners to inspect airline passengers and their baggage. The act gave the TSA broad authority to assess vulnerabilities in aviation security and take steps to mitigate these risks. The TSA's progress on aviation security has been the subject of considerable congressional oversight over the past four years. Aviation security policy and programs continue to be of considerable interest in the 109th Congress."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Peterman, David Randall
2006-06-23
-
Terrorism Preparedness: A Catalog of Federal Assistance Programs [December 27, 2001]
Congress has authorized a limited number of programs specifically designed to assist state and local governments with preparing for terrorist attacks, particularly
those involving weapons of mass destruction. Congress also authorizes several general assistance programs that states and localities may use for terrorism
preparedness. At present, several agencies administer preparedness programs, including the
Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, and Justice, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and others. Congress authorizes the agencies to provide technical assistance and monetary grants for emergency planning, training,
and equipment acquisition. Federal preparedness programs can be arranged into the following categories:Emergency management and planning; Training and equipment for first responders; Weapons of mass destruction and hazardous materials; Law enforcement, and Public health and medical community.
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Canada, Ben
2001-12-27
-
United States Fire Administration: An Overview [January 3, 2011]
"The U.S. Fire Administration (USFA)--which includes the National Fire Academy (NFA)--is currently housed within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The objective of the USFA is to significantly reduce the nation's loss of life from fire, while also achieving a reduction in property loss and non-fatal injury due to fire. The United States Fire Administration Reauthorization Act of 2008 (H.R. 4847/S. 2606) was signed into law on October 8, 2008 (P.L. 110-376). P.L. 111-83, the FY2010 Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, provided $45.588 million for USFA, the same level as the Administration's proposal. The Administration's FY2011 budget proposal requested $45.930 million for USFA, an increase of 0.7% from the FY2010 level. The House Appropriations Subcommittee and the Senate Appropriations Committee both matched the Administration request for the USFA. The Continuing Appropriations and Surface Transportation Extension Act, 2011 (P.L. 111-322) funds USFA at FY2010 levels through March 4, 2011. As is the case with many federal programs, concerns in the 112th Congress over the federal budget deficit could impact budget levels for the USFA. Debate over the USFA budget has focused on whether the USFA is receiving an appropriate level of funding to accomplish its mission, given that appropriations for USFA have consistently been well below the agency's authorized level. An ongoing issue is the viability and status of the USFA and National Fire Academy within the Department of Homeland Security."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Kruger, Lennard G.
2011-01-03
-
United States Fire Administration: An Overview [August 6, 2010]
"The U.S. Fire Administration (USFA)-which includes the National Fire Academy (NFA)-is currently housed within the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). The objective of the USFA is to significantly reduce the nation's loss of life from fire, while also achieving a reduction in property loss and non-fatal injury due to fire. The United States Fire Administration Reauthorization Act of 2008 (H.R. 4847/S. 2606) was signed into law on October 8, 2008 (P.L. 110-376). P.L. 111-83, the FY2010 Department of Homeland Security appropriations bill, provided $45.588 million for USFA, the same level as the Administration's proposal. The Administration's FY2011 budget proposal requested $45.930 million for USFA, an increase of 0.7% from the FY2010 level. The House Appropriations Subcommittee and the Senate Appropriations Committee both matched the Administration request for the USFA. In the 111th Congress, debate over the USFA budget focuses on whether the USFA is receiving sufficient funding to accomplish its mission, given that appropriations for USFA have consistently been well below the agency's authorized level. An ongoing issue is the viability and status of the USFA and National Fire Academy within the Department of Homeland Security."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Kruger, Lennard G.
2010-08-06
-
Urban Search and Rescue Task Forces: Facts and Issues [April 24, 2006]
"Since the early 1990s, Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) Task Forces have been certified, trained, and funded by the federal government. Twenty-eight task forces are located in 19 states. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials may call out the task force (or forces) in closest proximity to the disaster to help locate and extricate victims from collapsed buildings and structures. The task forces represent a partnership involving federal, local government, and private sector experts. Most recently, USAR teams received considerable publicity, and reportedly achieved life-saving results, in their mission to Haiti after the earthquakes of early 2010. Legislation pending before Congress would affect the USAR system in two ways. First, H.R. 119 would designate a New Jersey task force to be part of the system. Other legislation (H.R. 706 and H.R. 3377) would establish statutory authority and federal funding for a USAR response system. Members of Congress will consider FY2011 funding for the task forces during the second session of the 111th Congress, and may elect to debate issues associated with the deployment of USAR task forces to foreign countries."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Bea, Keith
2006-04-24
-
Urban Search and Rescue Task Forces: Facts and Issues [March 16, 2010]
"Since the early 1990s, Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) Task Forces have been certified, trained, and funded by the federal government. Twenty-eight task forces are located in 19 states. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) officials may call out the task force (or forces) in closest proximity to the disaster to help locate and extricate victims from collapsed buildings and structures. The task forces represent a partnership involving federal, local government, and private sector experts. Most recently, USAR teams received considerable publicity, and reportedly achieved life-saving results, in their mission to Haiti after the earthquakes of early 2010. Legislation pending before Congress would affect the USAR system in two ways. First, H.R. 119 would designate a New Jersey task force to be part of the system. Other legislation (H.R. 706 and H.R. 3377) would establish statutory authority and federal funding for a USAR response system. Members of Congress will consider FY2011 funding for the task forces during the second session of the 111th Congress, and may elect to debate issues associated with the deployment of USAR task forces to foreign countries."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Bea, Keith
2010-03-16
-
Chemical Facility Security: Reauthorization, Policy Issues, and Options for Congress [December 10, 2010]
"The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has statutory authority to regulate chemical facilities for security purposes. This authority expires in December 2010. The 111th Congress is taking action to reauthorize this program, but the scope and details of its reauthorization remain an issue of congressional debate. Some members of Congress support an extension, either short or long term, of the existing authority. Other members call for revision and more extensive codification of chemical facility security regulatory provisions. The tension between continuing and changing the statutory authority is exacerbated by questions regarding the current law's effectiveness in reducing chemical facility risk and the sufficiency of federal funding for chemical facility security. [...] The Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111-83) extended the existing statutory authority through October 4, 2010, and provided DHS with additional chemical facility security funding relative to FY2009. The Continuing Appropriations Act, 2010 (P.L. 111- 242) extended the statutory authority through December 3, 2010. P.L. 111-290 extended the statutory authority through December 18, 2010. The House of Representatives passed H.R. 2868, an authorization bill which addresses chemical facility, water treatment facility, and wastewater treatment facility security. This legislation includes provisions of H.R. 3258 and H.R. 2883. H.R. 2868 has been ordered reported with an amendment in the nature of a substitute favorably by the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs. The Senate bill ordered reported differs significantly from the House-passed version. Members have introduced other bills in the 111th Congress to address security at chemical facilities and other facilities that possess chemicals. S. 2996/H.R. 5186 would extended the existing authority until October 4, 2015, and establish chemical security training and exercise programs. H.R. 2477 would extend the existing statutory authority until October 1, 2012. H.R. 261 and S. 3599 would alter the existing authority. S. 3598 would authorize EPA [Environmental Protection Agency] to establish certain risk-based security requirements for wastewater facilities. In addition, draft legislation is reportedly under development by the Department of Homeland Security."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Shea, Dana A.
2010-12-10
-
Homeland Security: Navy Operations - Background and Issues for Congress [Updated November 22, 2005]
"The Department of Defense (DOD), which includes the Navy, has been designated the lead federal agency for homeland defense (HLD), while the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which includes the Coast Guard, has been designated the lead federal agency for homeland security (HLS). Several Navy activities contribute to HLS and HLD. The Navy's HLS and HLD operations raise several potential oversight issues for Congress, including Navy coordination with the Coast Guard in HLS and HLD operations."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
O'Rourke, Ronald
2005-11-22
-
Emergency Supplemental Appropriations Legislation for Disaster Assistance: Summary Data FY1989 to FY2005 [January 9, 2006]
"This report provides summary information on emergency supplemental appropriations enacted after major disasters since 1989. More recently, Hurricane Katrina made landfall on the Gulf Coast of the United States on August 29, 2005, as a Category 3 hurricane after passing over South Florida as a Category 1 hurricane on August 25, 2005. In response, on September 2, 2005, President Bush signed into law a $10.5 billion supplemental appropriations measure, P.L. 109-61, which provided disaster assistance funds for the affected areas. On September 9, 2005, the President signed into law a second supplemental measure totaling $51.8 billion in appropriations, P.L. 109-62. The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) administers most of these funds."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Murray, Justin
2006-01-09
-
National Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility: Issues for Congress [Updated November 15, 2007]
"The agricultural and food infrastructure of the United States is potentially susceptible to terrorist attack using biological pathogens. In addition to the effects of such an attack on the economy, some animal diseases could potentially be transmitted to humans. These diseases are known as zoonotic diseases. Scientific and medical research on plant and animal diseases may lead to the discovery and development of new diagnostics and countermeasures, reducing the risk and effects of a successful terrorist attack. [...]. Homeland Security Presidential Directive 9 tasks the Secretaries of Agriculture and Homeland Security to develop a plan to provide safe, secure, and state-of-the-art agriculture biocontainment laboratories for research and development of diagnostic capabilities and medical countermeasures for foreign animal and zoonotic diseases. To partially meet these obligations, DHS has requested Congress to appropriate funds to construct a new facility, the National Bio- and Agro-Defense Facility (NBAF). This facility would house high-containment laboratories able to handle the pathogens currently under investigation at PIADC, as well as other pathogens of interest. Six candidate sites have been identified, one of which is Plum Island. The DHS plans to select the site in 2009 and open NBAF in 2015. The final construction cost will depend on the site location and has been estimated to range between $648 million and $939 million, significantly exceeding 2005 baseline projections. Additional expenses, such as equipping the new facility, relocating existing personnel and programs, and preparing the PIADC facility for disposition, may exceed an additional $100 million."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Gottron, Frank; Shea, Dana A.; Monke, James
2007-11-15
-
Passenger Rail Security: Overview of Issues [Updated May 26, 2005]
"In the current atmosphere of heightened concern about terrorism, the March 11, 2004 bombing of commuter trains in Madrid intensified congressional interest in reducing the risk of attacks against passenger rail operations in the United States. The 9/11 Commission characterized the federal emphasis on aviation security spending as 'fight[ing] the last war,' noting that 'opportunities to do harm are as great, or greater, in maritime or surface transportation.' This report summarizes the challenges of securing passenger rail systems, options for making decisions about security funding, industry requests for funding, and legislative initiatives. It does not address the security of freight rail operations. However, since some passenger rail operations use the same track and facilities as freight rail, these topics cannot be completely separated."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Peterman, David Randall
2005-05-26
-
Nuclear Power Plants: Vulnerability to Terrorist Attack [February 4, 2005]
"Protection of nuclear power plants from land-based assaults, deliberate aircraft crashes, and other terrorist acts has been a heightened national priority since the attacks of September 11, 2001. The Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC) has strengthened its regulations on nuclear reactor security, but critics contend that implementation by the industry has been too slow and that further measures are needed. Several provisions to increase nuclear reactor security are included in the Energy Policy Act of 2005, signed August 8, 2005. The law requires NRC to conduct 'force-on-force' security exercises at nuclear power plants at least once every three years and to revise the 'design-basis threat' that nuclear plant security forces must be able to meet, among other measures. This report will be updated as events warrant."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Behrens, Carl E.; Holt, Mark
2005-02-04
-
Virus-Serum-Toxin Act: A Brief History and Analysis [January 3, 2005]
"The Viruses, Serums, Toxins, Antitoxins, and Analogous Products Act (21 U.S.C. 151-159), also known as the Virus-Serum-Toxin Act (VSTA), is intended to assure the safe and effective supply of animal vaccines and other biological products. The act and its applicable regulations are administered by the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). The VSTA was enacted in 1913, and revised once in 1985. A 2002 law affected the VSTA by transferring border and import inspection functions from USDA to the Department of Homeland Security."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Monke, James
2005-01-03
-
Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy ('Mad Cow Disease') and Canadian Beef Imports [Updated March 11, 2005]
"Bovine spongiform encephalopathy (BSE, or 'mad cow disease) is a degenerative, fatal disease affecting the nervous system in cattle," and rarely occurs in North America. Three reported cases from Canadian cattle-one in 2003 and two in 2005- spurred the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to ban Canadian beef imports during the years of reported disease, only to subsequently create controversial regulatory policies. A lawsuit was filed in April 2004 by the group, Ranchers-Cattlemen Action Legal Fund United Stockgrowers of America, which asked for a temporary restraining order of USDA policy allowing import of Canadian bovine products, claiming inconsistent relaxations on the import ban. Filings by the Canadian Cattlemen for Fair Trade in August 2004 and the American Meat Institute in December 2004 claimed the import bans discriminatory and unfounded. U.S. Federal courts took action in resolving these and other lawsuits that stymied the USDA's rulemaking efforts. Regulations pertaining to Canadian cattle and beef imports were unclear at the time this report was published. "This report, which will be updated if significant developments ensue, provides a narrative chronology of selected U.S. actions after the discovery of BSE in North America, presenting in sequence this often confusing chain of events. The report focuses on USDA's steps to reopen the U.S. border to Canadian beef, and concludes with a discussion of USDA's actions in the context of APA [Administrative Procedure Act] rulemaking procedures."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Becker, Geoffrey S.; Copeland, Curtis W.
2005-03-11
-
Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy, and Implementation [June 7, 2010]
"The nation's health, wealth, and security rely on the production and distribution of certain goods and services. The array of physical assets, functions, and systems across which these goods and services move are called critical infrastructures (e.g., electricity, the power plants that generate it, and the electric grid upon which it is distributed). The national security community has been concerned for some time about the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to both physical and cyber attack. In May 1998, President Clinton released Presidential Decision Directive No. 63. The Directive set up groups within the federal government to develop and implement plans that would protect government-operated infrastructures and called for a dialogue between government and the private sector to develop a National Infrastructure Assurance Plan that would protect all of the nation's critical infrastructures by the year 2003. While the Directive called for both physical and cyber protection from both man-made and natural events, implementation focused on cyber protection against man-made cyber events (i.e., computer hackers). However, given the physical damage caused by the September 11 attacks, physical protection of critical infrastructures has received increased attention. […] In June 2006, the Bush Administration released a National Infrastructure Protection Plan. This Plan presents the process by which the Department of Homeland Security intends to identify those specific assets most critical to the United States, across all sectors, based on the risk associated with their loss to attack or natural disaster, and then to prioritize activities aimed at maximizing the reduction of those risks for a given investment. This report discusses in more detail the evolution of a national critical infrastructure policy and the institutional structures established to implement it. The report highlights five issues of Congressional concern: identifying critical assets; assessing vulnerabilities and risks; allocating resources; information sharing; and regulation."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2010-06-07
-
Emergency Communications: Broadband and the Future of 911 [April 27, 2010]
"Today's 911 system is built on an infrastructure of analog technology that does not support many of the features that most Americans expect to be part of an emergency response. Efforts to splice newer, digital technologies onto this aging infrastructure have created points of failure where a call can be dropped or misdirected, sometimes with tragic consequences. Callers to 911, however, generally assume that the newer technologies they are using to place a call are matched by the same level of technology at the 911 call centers, known as Public Safety Answering Points (PSAPs). However, this is not always the case. To modernize the system to provide the quality of service that approaches the expectations of its users will require that the PSAPs, and state, local, and possibly federal emergency communications authorities invest in new technologies. As envisioned by most stakeholders, these new technologies--collectively referred to as Next Generation 911 or NG9-1-1--should incorporate Internet Protocol (IP) standards. An IP-enabled emergency communications network that supports 911 will facilitate interoperability and system resilience; improve connections between 911 call centers; provide more robust capacity; and offer flexibility in receiving and managing calls. The same network can also serve wireless broadband communications for public safety and other emergency personnel, as well as other purposes."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moore, L. K. S. (Linda K. S.)
2010-04-27
-
Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy, and Implementation [Updated February 10, 2003]
"The nations health, wealth, and security rely on the production and distribution of certain goods and services. The array of physical assets, processes and organizations across which these goods and services move are called critical infrastructures (e.g. electricity, the power plants that generate it, and the electric grid upon which it is distributed). Computers and communications, themselves critical infrastructures, are increasingly tying these infrastructures together. There has been growing concern that this reliance on computers and computer networks raises the vulnerability of the nations critical infrastructures to 'cyber' attacks. In May 1998, President Clinton released Presidential Decision Directive No. 63. The Directive set up groups within the federal government to develop and implement plans that would protect government-operated infrastructures and called for a dialogue between government and the private sector to develop a National Infrastructure Assurance Plan that would protect all of the nations critical infrastructures by the year 2003. While the Directive called for both physical and cyber protection from both man-made and natural events, implementation focused on cyber protection against man-made cyber events (i.e. computer hackers). However, given the physical damage caused by the September 11 attacks and the subsequent impact on the communications, finance, and transportation services, physical protections of critical infrastructures is receiving greater attention."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2003-02-10
