This week the House and Senate return from their long
Memorial Day weekend. The summer break is fast approaching and there are lots
of important bills that should be completed by the time Congress leaves to
avoid the ‘heat of summer’. Surprisingly there are only three hearings of
potential interest and only one of those deals with an ‘important bill’.
Cybersecurity Markup
On Wednesday the House Homeland Security Committee will be
holding a markup
hearing to consider a number of bills, including the following
cybersecurity related bills:
• HR 5064, the “Improving Small
Business Cyber Security Act of 2016”;
• HR ___, the “Support
for Rapid Innovation Act of 2016”;
• HR ___, the “Leveraging
Emerging Technologies Act of 2016”; and
• HR ___, the “Cybersecurity
and Infrastructure Protection Agency Act of 2016”.
None of these bills as currently written deal with control
system security. The last bill is probably the most important in the long run
as it changes the organization of the National Protection and Programs
Directorate of DHS to the new more cyber focused ‘Cybersecurity and Infrastructure
Protection Agency’. I’ll go into more detail after the bill is formally
introduced.
FY 2017 DHS Spending
On Thursday the Homeland Security Subcommittee of the House
Appropriations Committee will hold a mark-up
hearing on their FY 2017 DHS spending bill.
FAST Act
The Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee
will be holding a hearing on “Implementation of the FAST Act”. This was the transportation
bill that was passed last December which included a number of provisions
concerning crude oil trains.
On the Floor
The Senate will resume consideration of S
2943, the FY 2017 NDAA. None of the amendments of potential interest to
readers of this blog (see here,
here,
and here)
have yet to be considered (and may never be considered given the large number
of amendments proposed). We will just have to wait and see.
On Wednesday the House will consider S
2276. According to the House Majority Leader’s web site the
House will actually be considering an amendment to the bill under suspension of
the rules. That amendment is likely to be the language from HR
4937, the version of the PIPES Act that came out of the House
Transportation Committee. There is a slight chance that it could be the
language from HR 5050, a version of the House Energy and Commerce Committee
that I have not reviewed here in this blog.
No comments:
Post a Comment