U.S. Response I:  Customs Official Defends Cargo Screening Policy

CongressDaily

WASHINGTON — President Bush’s top customs official yesterday defended the administration’s strategy to safeguard against terrorist attacks through cargo entering the United States, in the face of criticism from Democratic members of a House panel who charged the plan left serious breaches in the nation’s security (see GSN, June 12).

Robert Bonner, commissioner of the Bureau of Customs and Border Protection in the new Homeland Security Department, touted agreements with the host nations of 19 of the 20 largest-shipping ports to U.S. shores that allow U.S. Customs agents stationed overseas to prescreen containers identified as high-risk, in a hearing of the House Homeland Security Infrastructure and Border Security Subcommittee.

Senior subcommittee Democrat Jim Turner (Texas), however, charged that Customs was not vigilant enough in questioning entrants to the United States across its Mexican and Canadian borders, citing findings from GAO in which investigators were able to enter this country with forged identification.

Representative Edward Markey (D-Mass.) assailed Bonner because Customs does not screen U.S.-bound cargo traveling on passenger jets before it enters the United States.  Bonner replied that this was the jurisdiction of the Transportation Safety Administration, not Customs.

Of the 20 largest ports, the exception that has not signed an agreement under Custom’s Container Security Initiative is Kaohsiung, China, according to the Customs bureau.  In addition, Customs has no agreements with Latin American countries, but these might be targeted in a second phase of the program announced by Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge last week, Bonner said.

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  National Emergency Alert System Needs Improvements, Experts Say

Experts have said the United States needs to develop a better national emergency alert system to inform Americans about dangerous situations, such as a terrorist attack, USA Today reported today.

“If you get warned, it’s as much luck as anything else,” said Kenneth Allen, executive director of the Partnership for Public Warning, an organization of government emergency managers and industry executives.

The well-known Emergency Alert System, which broadcasts alerts via radio and television, is outdated and only functional in a small number of states, according to experts.  While the president has the ability to access thousands of television and radio stations to issue national warnings, the emergency alert system is less effective for state and local emergencies, according to USA Today.  Even if the president were to activate the system on a national level, which has never been done, it would only reach those people tuned in to a television or radio network that was broadcasting the alert.

“We live in a much more complex, diverse, mobile society, and we face threats that our grandparents never faced,” Allen said.  “They didn’t have chemical-truck spills or nuclear accidents or terrorists,” he said.

The Partnership for Public Warning and a U.S. Federal Communications Commission advisory committee have urged the development of a more advanced national alert system, USA Today reported.  For example, alert information could be delivered via cell phones, pagers and computers, along with television and radio.  In addition, computer chips could be installed in televisions and radios to make them automatically switch on when an alert is broadcast. 

The FCC advisory committee is expected to vote this week on recommendations for a more advanced system (Mimi Hall, USA Today, June 17).

Back to top

U.S. Response I:  Ten States to Get Additional Funds for First Responders

By Katherine McIntire Peters

Government Executive

WASHINGTON — The Homeland Security Department on Friday awarded nearly $400 million in grants to 10 states to help improve the emergency response capabilities of firefighters, police, emergency medical personnel and state and local governments.  The department has been under increasing pressure from Congress to more quickly move appropriated funds to state and local jurisdictions where the money is needed to shore up gaps in security.

Since March 1, the department has released more than $4.4 billion in grants to state and local governments and private sector organizations to enhance terrorism preparedness.  Grants have been made to fund equipment, training, planning and preparedness exercises for first responders; to enhance the physical security of critical infrastructure and urban mass-transit systems; to offset the costs of security during heightened threat periods; and to help states and cities develop regional responses to potential terrorist attacks.

The most recent grants were awarded to Texas ($78 million), Florida ($63 million), Illinois ($50 million), Washington ($30 million), Wisconsin ($28 million), Minnesota ($27 million), Louisiana ($25 million), Arkansas ($20 million), New Mexico ($17 million) and Maine ($15 million).

Back to top

U.S. Response II:  Homeland Spending Bill Approved in Closed Session

By Molly Peterson

CongressDaily

WASHINGTON — The House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee Thursday approved a $29.4 billion fiscal 2004 appropriations bill during a closed session, despite Democrats’ pleas to keep the meeting open to the public.

After a 9-7 party-line vote to close the meeting, the panel approved the spending bill by voice vote, according to a committee spokesman who declined to provide any other information about what occurred during the closed session.

The spokesman said the decision to close the meeting to the public was based on a “longstanding practice” of excluding the public from subcommittee sessions that deal with “sensitive” information, mainly in the areas of defense, energy and water.

But Democrats argued that the homeland security spending provisions did not include any classified or sensitive information.

“The only thing we do when we close a meeting is deny the public [information] that I think they have a right to,” said David Obey (D-Wis.), the Appropriations Committee’s senior Democrat.

Democrats also charged that the Homeland Security Department has not been forthcoming with information about its activities.  Representative Martin Olav Sabo (D-Minn.) said he was “very concerned” about the department's “lack of structure” in providing Congress with “even the most basic information.”

Obey said he detected “some kind of arrogance” among Homeland Security officials with regard to sharing information with Congress.  “I think they have an obligation to respect the fact that Congress has the power of the purse,” Obey said.

The $29.4 billion package approved Thursday would be an increase of more than $1 billion over President George W. Bush’s 2004 budget request and $535 million over 2003 levels, according to Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Harold Rogers (R-Ky.).

Programs for first responders would be funded at $4.4 billion under the bill, which is $888 million more than Bush requested.  The legislation also provides nearly $5.2 billion for the Transportation Security Administration, which is a $360 million increase over Bush’s request.  Another provision would fund border security programs at $9 billion, which is a $400 million increase over 2003 levels.

But Obey said the Coast Guard and many other agencies need more money to protect the nation from terrorist threats.  Obey said Democrats had originally planned to offer an amendment adding $500 million to the spending package, including $100 million for Coast Guard activities.

Obey said “substantial incompetence” among Homeland Security Department personnel had prompted him to think twice about offering the amendment.  “There is such a legitimate concern about the ability of the agency to use its money effectively ... that I’m hesitant to appropriate one dime,” Obey said.

He also complained during the open portion of the meeting that Democrats have been “systematically shut down” in their attempts to offer alternatives to GOP-favored legislation to include more low-income families in the child tax credit.  “We’ve seen this time and time again,” Obey said.

Back to top

U.S. Response:  Washington to Expand Container Security Initiative

The United States plans to station teams of inspectors at major seaports in Muslim countries and other strategically located ports, to help prevent terrorists from smuggling weapons of mass destruction into the United States, the New York Times reported today (see GSN, March 17).

The move is the second stage in the Container Security Initiative, which initially sought to station U.S. inspectors at the 20 largest international seaports, according to the Times.  In the new stage of the initiative, the Untied States will station inspectors in up to 25 additional seaports, which will be chosen on the basis of cargo volume and their location in countries or regions where terrorism poses a heightened threat, said Robert Bonner, commissioner of customs and border protection in the Homeland Security Department.

“We will be expanding to important parts of the Islamic world,” Bonner said.  “We will be looking more strategically,” he added.

Homeland Security plans to station inspectors in Dubai, United Arab Emirates; Malaysia, Turkey and other Islamic nations, officials said.

In addition, Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge yesterday signed an agreement with Thai Prime Minister Thaksin Shinawatra to station inspectors at the port of Laem Chabang as part of the first stage of the initiative, according to the Times.

The expansion of the Container Security Initiative reflects concerns that al-Qaeda and other terrorist groups might attempt to smuggle a weapon of mass destruction into the United States in one of the millions of cargo containers that enter the country each year, Bonner said.

“I’m not prophesying anything,” Bonner said.  “But I do have concern that we need to have this security system in place as fast as we possibly can,” he said (Philip Shenon, New York Times, June 12).

Bush Administration to Fully Fund U.S. Port Security Program

Meanwhile, the Bush administration yesterday said it would fully fund Operation Safe Commerce, an $85 million program that would track cargo containers entering seaports serving New York, Los Angeles and Seattle, according to the Associated Press (see GSN, May 20).

Ridge announced the decision in a letter to Senator Patty Murray (D-Wash.), who had placed a hold on the nomination of Clay Johnson, a friend of U.S. President George W. Bush, to the No.2 position in the Office of Management and Budget.  Murray had placed the hold on Johnson’s nomination to protest a White House proposal to cut $28 million from the program (Matthew Daly, Associated Press/Philadelphia Inquirer, June 12).

Back to top

Threat Assessment:  U.S. Nuclear Plants Near Airports May Be at Risk of Airplane Attack

Thousands of small airports are close to U.S. nuclear power plants, raising concerns that terrorists might attempt to attack a nuclear plant using a hijacked aircraft, USA Today reported today (see GSN, May 13).

While security at major U.S. airports has been increased since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, there is little to no security at most of the 18,000 “general aviation” airports that handle smaller aircraft, according to USA Today.

“What would prevent some terrorist or criminal from taking a Learjet from a small airport?” said security consultant Jalal Haidar, senior vice president of Aerospace Services International.  “They have no security measures.  They’re a loophole in the overall aviation security system,” Haidar said.

According to USA Today, more than 6,200 airports and heliports are within 60 miles of nuclear plants.  Every U.S. nuclear plant is located within less than 20 miles of at least one public airport.

Nuclear power plant operators have said, however, that most planes based at airports near nuclear plants are to small to cause the release large amounts of radiation (see GSN, Dec. 30, 2002).  The concrete around a plant’s nuclear reactor would shield it from damage, and a crash attack on other sections of a plant would not result in a massive radiation release, they said.

There is increased concern that a plant’s spent fuel pool might be more vulnerable to an attack using a hijacked aircraft because their roofs are often made of corrugated metal or concrete that is less thick than that of a reactor shell, according to USA Today (see GSN, Jan. 31). 

“It’s more difficult than a World Trade Center target but not beyond the capabilities of any commercial airline pilot,” airline pilot Marc Feigenblatt said, noting that an airplane attack on a spent fuel pool is possible.  “It’s also not beyond the capabilities of a Sept. 11 terrorist with some degree of training in a commercial aircraft,” he said.

Nuclear plant operators have said that commissioned studies indicate that while an airplane crash would damage a spent fuel pool, it would not result in a radiation release.

After the Sept. 11 attacks, the U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission began a study as to the possible effects of an aircraft crashing into a nuclear power plant.  The study remains uncompleted, though it has “the highest priority,” said NRC security chief Alan Madison, adding that science “does take time” (Gary Stoller, USA Today, June 11).

The fear that terrorists might attempt to crash an aircraft into a nuclear site did not originate with the Sept. 11 attacks, according to USA Today.  In 1972, three hijackers took control of a passenger flight during a stop in Birmingham, Ala., and threatened to crash the plane into a U.S. nuclear weapons plant in Oak Ridge, Tenn.  The plane got as close as 8,000 feet above the site before the hijackers’ demands were met, USA Today reported.

The hijackers were later arrested and imprisoned in Cuba after flying the plane to Havana.  They were returned to Alabama in 1980, where they were sentenced to 20 to 25 years in prison each.  Then have since been released (Gary Stoller, USA Today II, June 11).

Back to top

Australian Response:  Canberra Revises Threat Alert Level System

Australia has implemented a new terrorism threat alert level system, with four levels of alert replacing the existing three classifications, Australian Prime Minister John Howard said today (see GSN, Dec. 16, 2002).

The new system includes an “extreme” alert level in addition to the existing low, medium and high classifications.  The new level indicates that a terrorist attack is imminent or that one has already occurred, according to Agence France-Presse.

The revised system will more accurately inform the public about any potential terrorist threat and help remove confusion, Howard said, adding that the system was not revised because of any new threat information.

“We don’t have any information additional to what we have previously received that has led to the reclassification,” Howard said.  “I don’t want people to be concerned that we’ve got some new information and that we’re preparing the ground to release that by ordering the (new) classifications,” he said (Agence France-Presse, June 11).

Back to top

About Newswire  |  Contact National Journal  |  Re-Use Guidelines

HOME  |  CONTACT US  |  GET INVOLVED  |  SITE MAP