Last month Rep. Welch (D,VT) introduced HR 2044,
the Smart Building Acceleration Act. The bill would require the Secretary of
Energy to establish a Federal Smart Building Program that would implement smart
building technology and demonstrate the costs and benefits of smart buildings.
The bill is very similar to HR 5069 and S
2447 that were introduced in the 115th Congress; no action was
taken on either bill. Welch also proposed an
amendment to HR 8 in the 115th Congress that was similar to this
bill; it was not considered.
Differences in the New Bill
There were two additions made to this bill (as compared to S
2447). First, a definition was added for the new term ‘internet of things
technology solution’ {§3(6)}.
Then that new term was used in a new subparagraph (K) in the description of the
proposed research program in §6(b)(2):
(K) integration of internet of
things technology solutions, including measures to increase water and energy
efficiency, improve water quality, support real-time utility management, and
enable actionable analytics and predictive maintenance to improve building
systems long term viability; and
Moving Forward
Welch is a member {as is his single cosponsor, Rep.
Kinzinger (R,IL)} of the House Energy and Commerce Committee, one of the three
Committees to which this bill is assigned for consideration. With the new
Democratic leadership in the House, I think that it is more likely that this
bill will be considered in that Committee this session.
As with the earlier bills, I do not see anything in the
language of this bill that would cause any serious opposition especially since
there are no regulations proposed nor specific spending authorized. If the bill
is considered, I suspect that there will be substantial bipartisan support. The
biggest impediment to this bill getting to the floor of the House (most likely
under the suspension of the rules process) is the intra-committee infighting
over jurisdiction with the bill being referred to three committees. The Energy
and Commerce Committee is the only one likely to hold hearings, but it will
take some horse-trading with the other two committee chairs to bring the bill
to the floor of the House. I am not sure that the Chairman Pallone has enough
interest in this bill to call in the necessary favors from the other two
chairs.
Commentary
This bill includes the same vague cybersecurity language as
did the earlier versions. As I said in my earlier
post on S 2447, the research provision in §6(b)(2)(E) is likely to be the most important.
Having said that, I would like to propose a few changes that would address the
cybersecurity challenges that I identified in that earlier blog post.
First, I would add a definition of ‘cybersecurity’ to §3:
(7)
Cybersecurity – The term ‘cybersecurity’ means a set of actions, policies and
procedures established to reduce the cybersecurity risk (as defined in 6 USC
1501) to building information technology and control systems supporting the
smart building processes and specifically including the internet of things
technology solutions being implemented.
Next, I would propose an addition to the initial requirement
to establish the ‘Federal Smart Building Program’ by adding an information
sharing provision to §4(a):
(3)
to provide agencies a method of sharing information about smart building
technology.
Then, I would add language to the ‘leveraging existing
program’ requirements of §6
by adding a new paragraph specifically addressing cybersecurity information
sharing:
(b)
In coordination with the Director of the DHS Cybersecurity and Infrastructure
Security Agency, establish a mechanism for sharing information with
owners/managers of facilities identified as being part of the Smart Building
Program about the cybersecurity risks to building information technology and
control systems, specifically including newly identified vulnerabilities in the
components of those systems;
These changes would help to better address the cybersecurity
concerns about smart building technology without adding overly specific (and
subject to rapid change) cybersecurity requirements.
No comments:
Post a Comment