Lieberman on DHS Budget

Earlier this week Sen. Lieberman (I, CT), the Chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Operations Committee sent his annual letter to the Chairman of the Senate Appropriations Committee presenting his views on the President’s budget request. There were only two areas in the letter that addressed issues of specific interest to the chemical security community. Sen. Lieberman supported the President’s requested increase for the TSA surface transportation security program. While most of this was directed at passenger rail protection it continued funding for last year’s planned increases for surface transportation security inspectors. Part of their job will be the enforcement of the TSA’s freight rail security program. The other area of interest to our community is the funding for the chemical security program. Lieberman supports the budget request for $105 million for the chemical security program (both CFATS and the pending ammonium nitrate regulations). Specifically the letter states:

“I strongly urge the Committee to provide at least that amount for the program. The Department is currently entering the most intensive phase of the program – reviewing the proposed security plans of the riskiest chemical facilities and conducting site inspections. It is critical the Department continue to receive adequate funds to conduct this work and acquire additional expertise with which to evaluate and advise on security at the varied enterprises that use and store dangerous chemicals.”

Interestingly, there is no mention in Lieberman’s letter of the President’s request for another one-year extension of the current CFATS authorization. Of course, last year there was little or no discussion of a similar extension request that was ultimately included in the FY 2010 DHS budget. While the Chairman’s views of the DHS budget do not control how the Appropriations Committee will write the actual legislation, the fact that he is actively supporting the Administration on these areas almost ensures that these provisions will make it into the bill drafted by the Appropriations Committee.

Lieberman Weighs in on CFATS Spending

Last week Sen. Lieberman (I, CT), the Chairman of the Senate Homeland Security Committee, sent a letter to the Chairman and Ranking Member of the Senate Budget Committee outlining his thoughts on the Department of Homeland Security budget. It is a rather lengthy letter, as one would imagine given the breadth of DHS operations. There is one paragraph in that letter that refers to Chemical Site Security and I will reproduce it here in its entirety:

“I am pleased that the Department continues to move ahead with the critical chemical Facility Anti-terrorism Standards or CFATS program. This is a critical and long overdue effort to enhance security at facilities, some in or near densely populated areas, that make or use hazardous chemicals and could prove inviting targets for terrorists. As Congress examines how best to reauthorize this program, it is essential that it receive adequate funding to continue the work of soliciting and reviewing facility security plans and beginning site inspections. Last year, DHS saw a significant funding increase for the CFATS program to $73 million, and we need to maintain and expand those resources in the coming fiscal year.”

This comment is important because Congress keeps programs and funding in separate categories. The legislation for re-authorizing CFATS will be separate from the bill authorizing DHS to spend money on CFATS. Lieberman will have a significant role in the Senate in the re-authorization process, but will have less direct control over the budgeting process. The fact that he is asking for a generic increase in the spending for CFATS may indicate that he thinks that the reauthorization will not greatly expand the program. Finally, there are some people that believe that simply continuing the funding for CFATS will be the easiest way for Congress to deal with the reauthorization issue. The $73M+ is a relatively small amount of money in the overall DHS budget and it would probably draw little attention in the overall debate on that budget. An actual reauthorization bill, with the almost certain inclusion of some sort of IST language, may be too controversial to get through a closely divided Senate.