This is part of an ongoing series of blog posts about the
recently published 30-day
information collection request (ICR) published in the Federal Register by
DHS. This ICR would support the long overdue personnel surety program
requirements for the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS)
program. Earlier posts in the series include:
One of the controversial issues in the PSP has been the DHS
response to positive matches against the Terrorist Screening Database (TSDB).
Industry has long expected that DHS would immediately notify them if any of the
names that were submitted to the CFATS PSP returned a positive match against
the TSDB. That is not, however, the Department’s stance. They have consistently
stated that:
Regardless of the option, in the
event that there is a potential match, the Department has procedures in place
that it will follow to resolve the match and coordinate with appropriate law
enforcement entities as necessary.
Information Release
Controlled by Law Enforcement
In the earlier iteration of the proposal for the CFATS PSP
ISCD made it clear that whenever possible, they would notify the facility as
quickly as the investigative process allowed. There have been some people that
have interpreted this to mean that ISCD would be handling the investigation of
personnel with a positive match to the TSDB. That was specifically addressed in
this notice when DHS
replied:
The Department does not lead the
investigation of any affected individual with terrorist ties; rather the
Department supports law enforcement investigation activity.
Typically, since they own the TSDB and are responsible for
counter-terrorist investigations within the United States, the FBI will be the
lead investigative agency for most positive matches against the TSDB. Depending
on how someone was placed on the TSDB, another federal law enforcement agency
may take the lead. In any case, the lead investigative agency will be
responsible for deciding when the facility management may or may not be told
about a positive match by one of their employees.
The Department has made clear
they understand the point of view of the facility management:
The Department recognizes the
significant and vested interest the high-risk chemical facility or designee may
have in ensuring an affected individual with terrorist ties does not
successfully carry out a terrorist attack against or involving a high-risk
chemical facility.
The Department almost certainly understands that it will
look extremely bad if a terrorist attack is successfully carried out while the
Department knows that the individual has been listed on the TSDB as being a
suspected terrorist. It is in the best interest of the Department to provide
information to the facility management as quickly as possible so that a
potential threat can be removed from the facility. Still, the Department’s
hands may be tied by an on-going investigation being conducted by a law
enforcement agency
Other Programs
All other programs vetted through the TSA (and the TSA will
be doing the actual vetting of individual information against the TSDB) have a adjudication
program requirement where the individual must be informed if the TSA determines
that the individual is a security threat based upon any of the background
checks conducted by the TSA (the CFATS PSP is the only program that does not
have TSA doing criminal background checks in addition to the TSDB vetting).
In those cases there is no imminent danger that the
individual will be given unaccompanied access to a protected facility while the
background check process is proceeding. This almost certainly means that a
criminal investigation, if deemed necessary, would have already been initiated
and probably completed by the time that the individual is informed of fact that
issuance of the credential has been denied.
Perhaps ISCD should also take the same tack with respect to
the CFATS PSP; set up the program in a way that facilities could not allow
employees, contractors or visitors unaccompanied access to critical areas of the
facility until they have been notified by DHS that the vetting process has been
completed and that there is no indication of potential terrorist ties associated
with the individual. Industry has maintained, however, that that is not an
acceptable method of doing business and have routinely complained about the 48
hour notice requirement in the proposed program.
No comments:
Post a Comment