Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards Program Extension Act
Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding me this time, and I rise in support of H.R. 251, as amended by the other body. This amendment is far from ideal, but we have no other choice but to accept it. The most compelling reason…
Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding me this time, and I rise in support of H.R. 251, as amended by the other body.
This amendment is far from ideal, but we have no other choice but to accept it. The most compelling reason not to oppose this amendment from the other body to a bill we passed last week by 414 votes is that it expires at midnight tonight, and that means the ability to check our facilities goes away. It is very problematic.
Let me repeat that. By law, the authority to conduct inspections, protect security vulnerability information from terrorists, and help facilities with technical help to make them secure, it all disappears unless this bill is amended and passes the House and goes to the President.
We must, as 414 of us did last week, keep the existing CFATS program authority going. I am glad we have a chance to do that here.
The Chemical Facilities Anti-Terrorism Standards program was launched to surgically and directly address gaps in Federal law regarding terrorism and other intentional acts against high-risk facilities due to their use or possession of chemicals of concern and at levels of concern--most importantly, to ensure that antiterrorism was the focus and not a contentious regulatory arrangement.
CFATS was designed to foster collaboration between the government and regulated parties. This program and its operations have not been perfect, but CFATS appears to have vastly improved in the last 4 years due to committed leadership and a vision for continued success.
What troubles me, though, about the other body's amendment is it doesn't give CFATS much room to make more improvement. One of the major lessons to come out of the hearings we had in my committee on the CFATS program was that, from 2009 to 2014, 1-year authority extensions did not offer program stability and stagnated the program's improvement.
It is no surprise to me that CFATS made its largest program improvements when it had 4 years of authority and not just 1 year. Moreover, 1-year authority extensions froze private-sector compliance investments as plant security managers couldn't convince their companies that the program would exist in the next year--this, even as many regulated entities had their own trade association programs that were supposed to supplement the CFATS program.
I would have hoped the changes that we are making to this program would not stilt the hefty investments made by U.S. taxpayers to stand up this program or potentially strand the investment the private sector absorbs when Congress makes unexpected and rash decisions.
All that said, the CFATS program and its authority have earned the right to continue. I had hoped a full 2 years would be what the law would be and would also provide the Department of Homeland Security the ability to demonstrate that its improvement is not a mirage and that additional progress in its work can be achieved. But we cannot allow this program to expire.
Mr. Speaker, 83 percent of my House colleagues and more than 70 percent of the Senate were not Members of Congress on September 11, 2001--the chairman was and I was.
Antiterrorism efforts don't get the kind of attention they once did, and the fact that we have had no chemical terrorist incidents since CFATS' inception is not proof that terrorists aren't interested in targeting these facilities.
I want to thank my colleagues for their support of the program and the collaborative way we have worked together to keep this security program going.
I look forward to efforts to extend the CFATS program in this Congress. We need to ensure that these chemicals are kept secure, terrorists are kept at bay, and that freedoms are kept protected.
I urge all my colleagues to support H.R. 251.