Last month Rep. Higgins (D,NY) introduced HR 3350,
Know the CBRN Terrorism Threats to Transportation Act. This bill would
require the production of a threat assessment of the transportation of
chemical, biological, nuclear, and radiological materials through United States
land borders and within the United States.
The DHS Secretary, acting through the Under Secretary of Intelligence
and Analysis, would be required to make the assessment within 90 days of the
enactment of this bill. It would then be required to be shared with DOT, DOE,
State and local officials and distributed to the network of fusion centers.
There is no discussion of the parameters of the types of
threats to be assessed and no funding is provided for conducting the
assessment. Neither is there an explanation as to why such an assessment is now
necessary.
Moving Forward
Rep. Higgins is the Ranking Member on the Counterterrorism
and Intelligence Subcommittee of the House Homeland Security Committee. Subcommittee
Chair King (R,NY) and Committee Ranking Member Thompson (D,MS) are both cosponsors
of this bill so there is definitely the political pull necessary to get this
considered in Committee. Since there are no funding provisions and no
regulatory actions required there is little in this bill that would prevent its
passage in the House. If it does make it to the floor it would certainly be
considered under the suspension of the rules process with minimal debate and no
amendments.
Commentary
I certainly think that an assessment of the potential
security threats against the transportation of chemical, biological and
radiological materials into and through this country would be a valuable thing.
I would be very surprised and disappointed if the TSA had not already done such
an assessment.
I am disappointed, however, that a bill of this sort does
not lay out the reasons that such an assessment would be appropriate and what
sorts of issues that Congress expects this assessment to include. Assuming that
there are no current specific indicators that anyone intends to attack such
shipments, the broad intent of this bill would be served by a simple statement
that there are currently no credible indicators of an intent to attack such
shipments. Such a report, even if puffed up with the typical bureaucratic
verbiage we have come to expect from intelligence agencies, would serve little
or no purpose.
What would serve a more useful purpose, both for
counter-terrorism planners and legislators, would be detailed look at what
materials currently in commerce could be useful as either an expedient weapon
of either mass destruction or mass hysteria or could be used to develop such
weapons. This would need to include a discussion of both the potential
consequences of the release/detonation of both the largest commercial shipping
container and the most common size shipping container of the materials and how
difficult it would be to effect such an attack.
A discussion of current efforts to prevent or mitigate such
an attack would also be useful for those tasked with assessing what new efforts
would need to be taken to lessen the threat. Also helpful would for such an assessment
to include a look at the potential types of attackers that would have special
skills or incentives to attack effect such attacks.
A detailed and more useful report of this type would probably
take more than 90 days to prepare, but it would serve to better inform both the
emergency response/planning community as well a potentially provide law makers
with the information necessary to consider potential legislative action that
might be required.
No comments:
Post a Comment