Last month Rep. Joyce (R,PA) introduced HR 3318, the Emerging
Transportation Security Threats Act of 2019. The bill would require the
Transportation Security Administration (TSA) to “establish a task force to
conduct an analysis of emerging and potential future threats to transportation
security” {§2(a)}. No
specific funding for the task force is authorized in the bill.
Emerging and Future Threats
The Task Force analysis would include emerging and potential
future threats posed by the following {§2(b)}:
• Evolving tactics by terrorist organizations that
may pose a catastrophic risk to an aviation or surface transportation entity.
• Explosive and explosive devices or attacks
involving the use of explosives that may cause catastrophic damage to an
aviation or surface transportation system.
• Chemical or biological agents being released in
either aviation or surface transportation systems.
• Cyberthreat actors seeking to undermine confidence
in transportation systems or cause service disruptions that jeopardize
transportation security.
• Unmanned aerial systems with the capability of
inflicting harm on transportation targets.
• Individuals or groups seeking to attack soft
targets, public areas, or crowded spaces of transportation systems.
• Inconsistent or inadequate security screening
protocols at last point of departure airports with direct flights to the United
States.
• Information sharing challenges within the Federal
Government and among partner governments.
• Information sharing challenges between the
Administration or other relevant Federal agencies and transportation
stakeholders, including air carriers, airport operators, surface transportation
operators, and State and local law enforcement.
• Growth in passenger volume in both the aviation and
surface transportation sectors.
Threat Mitigation
The bill would subsequently require the TSA to develop “a
threat mitigation strategy for each of the threats examined in such analysis” {§2(c)}. This would
include:
• Assigning appropriate resources of the Administration
to address such threats, based on calculated risk; or
• Provide recommendations through the Department of
Homeland Security to the appropriate Federal department or agency responsible
for addressing such threats.
TSA would also be required to improve stakeholder engagement
and provide a briefing to Congress.
Moving Forward
Joyce and his cosponsor, Rep. Rogers (R,AL) are both members
of the House Homeland Security Committee (and Rogers is the Ranking Member of
that Committee), so there is a reasonable chance that this bill could be considered
by the Committee.
There is nothing in the bill that would engender any
specific political or business opposition to the bill; study and report bills
seldom do. I suspect that the bill would receive substantial bipartisan support
in Committee. With such support the bill would be considered by the full House
(if there were enough political influence to move the bill forward) under the
suspension of the rules process.
Commentary
Joyce’s staff did a good job of ensuring that the language
of the bill provided nearly equal coverage to threats against both airline and
surface transportation assets. Unfortunately, the language is clearly focused
on passenger transportation, and calls for scant scrutiny of freight transportation
(either air or ground) or pipeline security. This is especially true when it
comes to the one reference to chemical threats.
With that in mind, I would like to offer the following
changes to some of the ‘elements’ of the threat that are be considered by the
threat analysis in §2(b)
(Highlighted words are added):
(1) Evolving tactics by
terrorist organizations that may pose a catastrophic risk to an aviation or
surface transportation entity including freight transportation in both modes.
(2) Explosive and explosive
devices or attacks involving the use of explosives that may cause catastrophic
damage to an aviation or surface transportation system or cause a release of hazardous industrial chemicals
in surface freight transportation.
(4) Cyberthreat actors seeking
to undermine confidence in transportation systems or cause service disruptions
that jeopardize transportation security or cause catastrophic damage to a hazardous material or
fuel pipeline.
The other problem that this bill ignores is the lack of
specific authority provided to TSA to issue security regulations for surface
transportation or the failure of TSA to implement the few regulations that it
has been authorized to issue. With that in mind I would re-do paragraph (e) to
read:
(e) BRIEFING TO CONGRESS.—The
Administrator of the Transportation Security Administration shall brief the
Committee on Homeland Security of the House of Representatives and the
Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation of the Senate on: the
results of the analysis required under subsection (a) and relevant mitigation
strategies developed in accordance with subsection (c).
(1) The results of the analysis required under subsection
(a);
(2) The relevant mitigation strategies developed in
accordance with subsection (c);
(3) The status of current rulemakings authorized by
Congress that might address the threats identified in subsection (a); and
(4) What rulemaking authorities that TSA or other Federal
agencies might need from Congress to appropriately apply the mitigation
strategies developed in accordance with subsection (c).
Posts
