HR 2892 to President Obama

This afternoon the Senate Appropriations Committee posted a press release on their web site announcing that HR 2892 had passed today in the Senate by a vote of 79 to 19. The bill now goes to the President for signature. The President effectively has 10 days to sign the bill to avoid having the Department of Homeland Security budget tied up in another potential continuing resolution. For the chemical community the most important provision in this bill is, appropriately, §550 that extends the current CFATS authorization until October 4th, 2010. The Administration proposed this provision in their DHS budget request to allow Congress to continue working on the development of permanent authorizing legislation. I’ll do a detailed look at the other provisions of the legislation that will apply to the chemical security community at a later date.

HR 2892 Back to Senate

The Senate will begin consideration of HR 2892, the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act 2010, this morning. While passage of conference reports is usually a formality, the inclusion of language in this Conference Report that allows for transfer of the Guantanamo Detainees into the United States for trial might cause problems for this bill. There has been significant opposition to bringing detainees from Gitmo into the United States for any reason among Republicans and moderate Democrats. State side trials for some of the detainees is a key part of the Obama Administration’s plan for the closure of the Guantanamo Bay facility, so it will be interesting to see if Sen. Reid can hold together a coalition of Democrats and moderate Republicans to get a cloture vote on the debate for this bill. LATE NOTE (8:26 am - 10-20-09): There will be no cloture vote necessary on the HR 2868 Conference Report. Yesterday’s Congressional Record Daily Digest (pg D1194) includes the following description of today’s planned proceedings:

“A unanimous-consent-time agreement was reached providing that at approximately 11:30 a.m., on Tuesday, October 20, 2009, Senate begin consideration of the conference report to accompany H.R. 2892, making appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security for the fiscal year ending September 30, 2010, with debate on the conference report limited to three hours and 15 minutes”.

HR 2892 Status Update 10-14-09

Yesterday afternoon the Conference Committee on HR 2892, the Homeland Security Appropriations Bill for FY 2010, filed their report (H Rept 111-298) on their reconciled version of that Bill. While an official version is not yet (as of 8:30 am EDT) available on either the Library of Congress or Government Printing Office web sites, both of the Appropriations Committees and the House Rules Committee have a hand marked-up version posted on their web sites. From a chemical security community perspective, the only thing interesting in this report is the expected provision extending the life of the current CFATS authorization until October 4, 2010. What is an interesting coincidence is the fact that the extension is found in §550 of this legislation, the same section number that was used for the initial CFATS authorization in the FY2007 appropriations bill. As I noted in a Twitter posting yesterday, the House Rules Committee will be meeting today to consider the Conference Report. This meeting will set the ground rules for the floor debate and voting procedures for HR 2892. The Committee web site notes that this is an ‘emergency’ meeting. This almost certainly indicates that the leadership intends to bring the resulting resolution and this bill to a vote tomorrow. I have seen nothing indicating when the Senate intends to take up the bill for a final vote, but it is sure to come quickly.

HR 2892 Conference Complete

On Wednesday evening the Conference Committee for the DHS 2010 Appropriations bill, completed their work on reconciling the two versions of HR 2892 passed by the House and Senate. While the formal detailed report on the results of their deliberations has not yet been published, they have published a summary of the conference agreement. The agreement splits the difference on the amount budgeted for DHS operations for FY 2010; a total of $42.776 billion. There were a number of provisions included in the reconciled bill that directly impact the chemical security community. They include:

Funding for 100 new surface transportation security inspectors (TSA); A $25 million increase over FY 2009 funding for CFATS including a 168 person increase in staffing; A one year extension for CFATS; A $50 million increase (over requested) in Rail/Transit Security Grants; and A $50 million increase (over requested) in Port Security Grants.

Until I can see the actual revised bill (which might be available on Friday) I can’t tell what odd-ball provisions might have been added to the bill (like the hate crimes legislation that was added to the DOD appropriations bill or the continuing resolution that was added to the legislative appropriations bill). I haven’t heard of anything being added but you can’t tell until you read the final bill. I’ll let you know what I find when I get my hands on a copy of the bill.

HR 2892 Status 10-01-09

Today at 10:18 am EDT the House took up the matter of HR 2892 and the issue of the Senate’s version of the bill. The House declined the Senate’s amendments and agreed to a conference committee. They voted to provide the following instructions to the conferees:

1) Recede to subsection (a) of section 567 of the Senate amendment; 2) Insist on subsections (b) and (c) of section 552 of the House bill; 3) Recede to the Senate position on subsections (a) and (d) of section 552 of the House bill; and 4) Not record their approval of the final conference agreement unless the text of such agreement (as such term is used in clause 12(a)(4) of rule XXII of the Rules of the House of Representatives) unless the text of such agreement has been available to the managers in an electronic, searchable, and downloadable for for at least 72 hours prior to the time described in such clause.

None of these instructions have any affect on the chemical security provisions of the bill. The provision for the one year extension of the CFATS program remains unchanged. At 11:46 am EDT the Speaker appointed the following members of the Appropriations Committee to represent the House in the conference committee: Price (NC), Serrano, Rodriguez, Ruppersberger, Mollohan, Lowey, Roybal-Allard, Farr, Rothman (NJ), Obey, Rogers (KY), Carter, Culberson, Kirk, Calvert, and Lewis (CA). No word yet on when we can expect the conference report.

DHS Budget Status – 09-22-09

There is an interesting article on GovExec.com about the potential for a continuing resolution this year as none of the budget bills have yet been passed. The House Rules Committee is scheduled to hold a hearing late this afternoon on a CR, allowing for consideration in the House as early as tomorrow. The DHS budget bill (HR 2892) is one of five (out of 12) that has been passed in both the House and Senate, but in different versions. This means that a conference committee has to meet and iron out the differences allowing a common bill to go back for a final vote in both houses. The Senate appointed their members of the conference committee back in July, but the House has, as of yet, failed to do that. The GovExec.com article notes that conference committee meetings could start this week. Passage of HR 2892 is important to the chemical security community because it includes a one year extension of the CFATS authorization. Without that extension it is likely that the current chemical security program would come to a screeching halt on October 2nd (it expires on the 4th but that is a Sunday). A continuing resolution with CFATS wording would certainly bridge the time between October 4th and the passage of HR 2892 if that passage is late. Actually, as I understand the DHS position, they will continue the CFATS program under a continuing resolution even if it does not include specific CFATS language. Their lawyers reason that since both versions of HR 2892 contain exactly the same CFATS extension language, it is inevitable that the final version of HR 2892 will extend CFATS. Thus a continuing resolution would express the will of Congress to extend CFATS. There should be no reason that HR 2892 could not be reconciled and brought to a successful floor vote in both houses before September 30th. The two versions are not that far apart. In fact, I do not understand why the conference committee has not already met, but then I am not privy to the machinations of the House leadership.

HR 2868 Status – 07-31-09

As everyone expected neither the House Judiciary Committee nor the House Energy and Commerce Committee got around to holding hearings on HR 2868 prior to the House departure for a five week working vacation. One of the last acts of the House leadership last Friday was to grant both committees ‘an extension for further consideration’ on that bill with a new completion date of September 30, 2009. Since the House returns to Washington on September 8th, this should provide both committees with an adequate amount of time to hold an appropriate hearing and to mark-up the bill. Neither committee is expected to make major changes, though I do expect that the Energy and Commerce mark-up will include language exempting water treatment facilities from coverage. This would only make sense given their introduction of HR 3258 providing for security at those facilities. One additional point that I’ll include here so as to avoid having another very short blog on a similar subject; the DHS budget bill (HR 2892) has not yet been passed and signed into law. This means that the current CFATS authorization still terminates shortly after October 1st. Both the House and the Senate have passed differing versions of the bill. The Senate has appointed their conference committee members (on July 9th) but the House has yet to do so. I have not heard anything about why Pelosi has yet to name the conferees. Until a conference committee can meet to iron out the differences between the two bills (and both houses pass the conferenced bill) there is still no guarantee that CFATS will be allowed to continue. While most observers assume that the CFATS provision will remain in the bill (there has been no significant opposition), it is not certain that the bill will be passed before October first. In that case a continuing resolution would be necessary. I have heard from at least a couple of lawyers that such a resolution would keep CFATS in effect even if it is not specifically mentioned, but it would still be disheartening for the fine folks over at Infrastructure Security Compliance Division and open the door to potential legal challenges.

HR 2892 Status Update 07-13-09

The Government Printing Office web site now has the Senate passed version of HR 2892 available on its web site. A quick review of that version produces no surprises. There are some new section numbers for items of interest to the chemical security community. First, the section that extends the CFATS program authorization until October 4th 2010 is now §551. Second, the provisons that I reported on yesterday related to clarifying the SSI classification rules is now found in §564. Rescission of NPPD Funds There is a section that I haven’t mentioned before on the funding side of this bill that might be of interest. It is one of many of the sections in the General Provisions (Title V) portion of the bill that rescinds unspent monies from previous budgets. These are mainly housekeeping measures necessary for keeping the financial books straight. Section 556 rescinds $8 million from the “unobligated balances of prior year appropriations made available for National Protection and Programs Directorate ‘Infrastructure Protection and Information Security’”. The NPPD is the parent agency for the CFATS program. It is not clear from this short paragraph in the budget, but some portion of that money comes from the money appropriated in earlier budgets for CFATS inspectors that have not yet been hired. Most of the problems that NPPD has been having with their hiring processes have been related to the way the funding for the Department has been done at the last minute (and in some cases after the last minute) for the last couple of years of the Bush Administration. This was due to the conflicts between the Republican Administration and the Democratic Congress. Early passage of the FY 2010 budget will help to alleviate that problem.