comparemela.com

[inaudible conversations] the committee will come to order. There are thousands of federal buildings across the country that not only serve as workplaces for federal employees, but also host daily visitors who come to access important federal services and help keep our government functioning efficiently. These facilities face a range of security threats that put both people and property at risk. And of those threats are only continuing to grow. Threats related to domestic and International Terrorism and even disinformation are rising and according to the department of homeland security, can endanger our federal personnel and Critical Infrastructure. Todays hearing will focus on what actions are needed to secure the 9,000 federal facilities overseen by dhs federal protective services. The facilities host the mold of bold ofthe civilian and federal employees and are visited by 1. 4 million americans each and every day. Currently the federal facilities are secured through a twostep process. First, the Interagency Security Committee led by the cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency establishing the Security Standards at federal facilities. The federal protective service then uses those standards to see what Safety Measures can be improved. They identify risk to the federal facilities and then make recommendations as to how to navigate them. They conduct thousands of these assessments each and every year. They submit these assessments to federal agencies, recommending countermeasures like security cameras, Access Control systems and xray screening equipment. The tools make it easier to protect these facilities and the americans who use them every day. Unfortunately, these recommendations are rarely implemented. From 2017 to 2021, the submitted over 25,000 of these reports. Federal agencies completely ignored roughly half of those. What agencies didnt acknowledging the recommendations, the only approved 27 of the recommended security measures. Factors like cost and bureaucratic hurdles often make it easier to maintain current systems. In other words, we are getting very useful information about how to improve security, but its not being implemented to the extent that it should be. Todays hearing and our panel of witnesses will help us evaluate this problem. Our discussion today will also build on the executive order released on monday by the white house, which clarifies the role of the Interagency Security Committee and helps us update interagency roles and responsibilities to keep these facilities safe. We will examine the landscape of current threats and ways we can improve the assessment process and how to make federal agencies more responsive when they receive recommendations. If we improve this process we can make our federal facilities safer and more secure, and i look forward to this conversation. It is the practice of the committee to swear in witnesses, so if each of you would please rise and raise your right hand. Do you swear the testimony you will give before this committee will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth so help you god . Thank you. You may be seated. Our first witness is chris klein, the director of the federal protective service and the department of homeland security. In this role he oversees the safety and security of more than 9,000 federal facilities. Before joining dhs, he served for 20 years in the u. S. Army at a military police corps regimen. Welcome, director klein. You are recognized for your Opening Statement. Good morning chairman. Ranking member paul, distinguished members of the committee. As director of the federal protective service im honored to be here today to represent the man and women of the agency to discuss the missions in the state of the federal facilities security. A Law Enforcement component within dhs with nearly 1,230 federal employees and approximately 17,000 contracted protective Security Officers in the workforce. Of that number, nearly 850 are highly trained and dedicated Law Enforcement professionals who have the enormous responsibility of protecting the federal government infrastructure which includes employees, contractors and members of the public seeking Government Services from ranking from terrorist attacks to prohibiting interest items from entering federal facilities. Additionally we protect 264 congressional field offices including 16 field offices of the members of the committee. Now more than ever, the mission is critical to ensure the safety and security of the federal government. Over the past few years weve seen an increase in crimes and federal facilities and more importantly to federal civil servants. For example, early this year there was an incident at a federal facility where the motive was to harm federal employees. Our officers responded to the report of suspicious vehicles parked in front of the building. The officers immediately walked down the facility, shouldered the employee is in place and coordinated closely with local Law Enforcement. They fired a gun and responded officers and taken into custody without injury to anyone. This is one example of the important work done in close coordination with our state and local Law Enforcement partners to support our Law Enforcement mission as well as criminal intelligence hearings. With more federal employees returning to the brick and mortar offices, we likewise increased our presence in and around those facilities. These deterrent actions are in addition to the mitigation efforts highlighted by conducting the facilities assessments including countermeasure recommendations, implementation of the stateoftheart alert systems, screening equipment and armed Security Officers. Our contracted Security Officers augment thousands of facilities across the nation every day. They conduct a variety of security functions including business screening operations, perimeter patrols and operations. This year we prevented more than 15,000 dangerous weapons including more than 500 firearms from entering federal facilities. I also want to highlight that over the past year weve delivered modernized and improved deescalation in antibias training to the Law Enforcement officers. Together with the modern approach the public or policing that focuses on individual bad actors to better protect First Amendment rights and of the the abilityof citizens to peacey protest. Whatever threats the country may face, i want to assure the committee that we continue to stand ready to protect our homeland. I was appointed to my role as director almost one year ago. Since then, i visited the offices across the country spoken with hundreds of employees and witnessed firsthand the commitment they have to the mission. My number one priority is to hire and retain a highly skilled workforce. Like most Law Enforcement agencies across the country however, we are experiencing staff challenges with one out of every four positions currently unfilled. To address these challenges we dramatically increased our retention recruitment and hiring efforts, focusing on hiring candidates to bring valuable insight and experience into our organization. To retain our officers, i look for all avenues to continue to be relentless in pursuing equity for our officers. This includes the recently announced Retention Center that begins this next pay period for the uniformed officers. In closing i would like to note the president is lying on monday in order that strengthens the work in the interagency committee. We believe the new executive order will enhance the Department Agencies acceptance and implementation of the security assessment countermeasures. Additionally the executive order names the director and as a primary member of the ifc be giving a role in using your expertise to shape riskbased resource informed decisions about government security. I would like to thank the committee for expressing interest in the role and federal facility securities and allow me the opportunity to represent the workforce and to testify on the Critical Role we play in the nations overall security. I look forward to any questions you may have. Thank you. Our next witness is dave, the acting director of the government accountabilitys Office Physical infrastructure team. He oversees work on the Property Management and the u. S. Postal service. Previously he serves on the Natural Resources and Environmental Team and before joining the gao in 2004 he worked on the House Appropriations committee. Great to have you here. You are recognized for your Opening Statement. Thank you chairman peters, Ranking Member paul and members of the committee. Im pleased to be here today to discuss the work on Agency Efforts to secure federal facilities. Twenty years ago, we placed federal properties on our highrisk list in part due to threats to federal facilities. Recent instances demonstrate that a security and federal in federalbuildings remains a hk area. Given that, it is critical that agencies implement appropriate countermeasures to address the vulnerabilities and that there is effective oversight of these efforts. The ifc plays a key role in entering federal facilities have such countermeasures in place. In particular they establish Security Standards and oversee Agency Compliance with the standards. For its part it uses the standards to conduct security assessments at the protected facilities and recommends countermeasures to help the agencies address vulnerabilities. The agencies are then responsible for deciding whether to approve of the recommendations were to accept the risk of not doing so. This past may, we completed a review of this process. What we found is that agencies only approved about 30 of the fps recommendations over the past seven years and implemented even less. Agency officials cited a number of reasons for the rate including cost and budget considerations as well as the feasibility of implementing certain recommendations. We also found agencies didnt respond to more than half of the recommendations even though they are required to do so by the standards. Officials cited a number of reasons for this nonresponse rate including not having enough time to consider recommendations resisting the risk do not accept them. At the time of the report, they had taken steps to assess Agency Compliance with its policies and standards. Specifically, in 2019, they begin using an annual questionnaire that asks the agencies to selfreport on whether they end of their enterr individual facilities comply with the standards. Theyve also begun a process for verifying agencies selfreported compliance by selecting a subset of agencies and facilities to review. However it wasnt assessing whether they were implementing at the facilities or documenting the decisions of not doing so. We reported that without this information, on the implementation staff, half of the recommended countermeasures the federal government might not have reasonable assurance that the facilities are secure. As a result, we recommended that they improve the oversight of security measures by one assessing the implementation of the recommended countermeasures and number two, identifying the recommendations where agencies document the acceptance of risk. To its credit they agreed with our recommendations and have taken steps to implement them specifically they plan to update the annual questionnaire to improve its oversight of agencies implementations of the recommended countermeasures. In addition, it plans to verify that selected agencies documented their acceptance of risk for countermeasures they did not implement. These are positive steps. Completing these efforts may provide a greater level of assurance that federal facilities arent meeting Security Standards and also provide congress with useful information on the extent to which federal facilities have addressed security vulnerabilities. In conclusion, the security of the federal facilities remains a high risk area. Having appropriate countermeasures in place is the first line of defense. The ifc is taking important steps to strengthen its oversight of Agency Actions on such countermeasures. However, sustained attention from the isc, fps, agencies and congress will be needed to best ensure the security of federal facilities going forward. Mr. Chairman, that concludes my Opening Statement and i would be happy to answer any questions the committee may have. The final witness is scott is the associate director of security programs with the cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency to bhs. In his role he helps lead efforts to secure the nations Critical Infrastructure and mitigate threats to a largescale public event. He has over 30 years of military and government experience including as a former naval aviator and as a senior policy advisor for the chief of naval operations. Welcome. You are now recognized for your Opening Statement. Good morning chairman peters, Ranking Member paul and members of the committee. As the associate director for security programs within the Cybersecurity Infrastructure security agencies, infrastructure security division, i appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today to share the Interagency Security Committees role in the Security Protection of federal facilities and its efforts to improve the preparedness and mitigate risk and collaboration with agency partners. On october 19, 1995, 6 months after the Oklahoma City bombing of the federal building, the president issued executive order 12977, creating the Interagency Security Committee or eisa to address the quality and effectiveness of security for federal facilities. Membership consists of senior level executives from 67 federal departments and agencies. This collective security subject matter expertise allows them to develop toptier Risk Management resources and to coordinate interagency solutions to problems that cannot be solved by individual departments and agencies alone. They are a Collaborative Forum that carries out its work by, with and through its members within a primary Governance Framework of subcommittees and working groups. These working groups which are provisional are tasked by the isc with clear objectives and defined deliverables. In march, 2003, the role of the chair transfer from General Services administration to the department of homeland security. Dhs delegated its responsibility to the cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency considering its role in helping to protect and secure the nations Critical Infrastructure. As you are aware on monday, november 207th, President Biden signed an executive order titled interagency security. The new executive order supersedes the executive order 12977 and reinforces the importance of a security. The new executive order outlines the following. Defines the duties and responsibilities to better balance the role with the central responsibility that departments and agencies have for federal securities specifies the requirement for the departments and agencies to designate a senior official with the executive order and to support facility Security Committees. Increase visibility and accountability by adding the requirement to submit a report detailing compliance results to the director and to the assistant to the president for National Security affairs. The standard provides and integrates a Single Source of security countermeasures and guidance on countermeasure customization. Members created the Risk Management process standard to provide a common method for all federal Facility Security stakeholders to guide Risk Assessments in a standardized way to help facility owners identify levels of protection needed to mitigate the risk. Further they validate the member Risk Assessment tools and Training Programs as meeting the processing standards. This helps to build individual organizational capabilities to successfully implement the guidance and conduct these assessments they use a Risk Assessment tool validated with the survey tool. Additionally they also validated the fiscal Security Training program located at the Training Center. This Training Program drains the personnel on how to conduct a Risk Assessment using the modified Infrastructure Survey tool. Was a member or representative of the isc i look forward to continuing to work closely with you and other members of the senate to keep our federal facilities and those who work at and visit them safe and secure. Thank you. Doctor klein, in may of 2023 dhs release and National Terrorism advisory system bulletin which warned of emerging threats regarding the 2024 election and domestic extremists violence. How will the implementation of the security recommendations help address and hopefully prevent these threats . You be more specific for the committee that we wonderful. Thank you very much german peters. The security countermeasures we recommend our discipline based on the standards by which the gold obtain the necessary level of protection to ensure the employees are safe in their workplace. Also conduct a threat assessment of that facility to determine local threats, national threats, International Threat and any threats may be associated with a specific agency thats located within the facility. We also work with the agencies on plans to enhance the protection of the facility based on the levels. All of this is used to determine countermeasures necessary to ensure protection of employees in the facility. The goal is reaching the necessary level of protection which is basically the minimum Security Standards to protect the facility is necessary whether it date today operations or during an elevation. Next question. In your written testimony, you will mention the significant role the federal protective service plays in countering threats posed by Unmanned Aircraft systems but however authorities to counter these Unmanned Aircraft systems is going to expire this coming february. Would you please explain why its so important extends authority . And what you believe the consequences could be if we do not extend this critical authority . Thank you very much sure. We appreciate the work of the Committee Members are cap included. For pursuing the extension of that out authority. It is critical for us to ensure the protection of federal facilities. Today we have a you a s operation in place at the headquarters of the department of homeland security. While some immobile system we use deployed to federal facilities during highrisk events. Like highrisk trials that may be going on around the country. We work with the faa to implement the restrictions and set up the program at that facility. For us, without that ability we have detected about 900 drones in and around federal facilities in 2019. That is a good number. Most of those are not targeted at federal facilities. The ones we have mitigated on christmas afternoon some got a new drone for christmas and they dont realize they are innate restricted airspace. This is an emerging threat across the country. We see what is going on in other parts of the world with drones and we think its critical that authority be continued and extended to the agencies that are mentioned in the draft legislation. But also to continue our operation critical federal facilities that we protect. Thank you mr. Maroney. In 2023 report found almost 70 of the countermeasures recommended by the federal fedel protective service to help secure buildings were it not, or not implemented by agencies. This committee needs to hear where the primary reasons why agencies in your estimation are rejecting, ignoring or failing to implement these recommended countermeasures . A number of reasons. On the side of not approving recommendations cost considerations might many officials, budgetary considerations. Many of these facilities are multitenant agency facilities. Each of those agencies need to provide funding to implement counter members that can add some level of difficulty. Sometimes our feasibility concerns the recommendations based on the standards some are based on their age or other space limitations that may not be possible to implement there. On the other side is even more concerning 55 of recommendations where there is no response from the committee. Arrange from the timeframe of 45 days from receiving the recommendation to make decisions but some agency said that was too tight of a timeframe for may complex countermeasure. Except risk of not recommendations they choose they do not want to formally note that. In the communication issues in this commitment is a collateral duty for officials on these committees. Sometimes they do not have the expertise and so responding to the recommendations could not be a higher party than it should be. Clearly it is a priority. Were going to have to work to make that so. A question for both of you is that i have and work on legislation that would require agencies to respond to the federal protective Service Security recommendations within 90 days. I want both of your opinion was such a requirement improve responsiveness . And Building Security in your estimation, will start with you. That is in line with our recommendations from earlier this year increased oversight particular the ones that are not responded to. Santa left for agencies to accept risk in the implement recommendations they lease should be responding and formally accepting risk for not going to do so, so yes. Is a very strong yes. Cox a very strong yes. Isc requirement is 45 days. We have heard from agencies i need more time. This is very complex. Need to coordinate with other agencies located in the multitenant facility. Ninety day requirement coming through legislation would definitely strengthen the agencies need to reply to those recommendations. Writes. Thank you. Center hassan you are recognize your question. Thank you center peters i want to thank you for having this hearing. Hopis you send our thanks back to your teams as well series of followup questions my questions are quite similar to senator peters. As he mentioned recently fbi director wray told this committee domestic violent extremism remains the most persistent terrorist threat to rome on security. Her spiked small groups often false information can you drill down warned that posed how they evaluate this risks especially multiple government agencies. How are yall handling that . And q thats a great question. It is an issue we think about every day. Not only the domestic violent extremism but the loan actors. A number of the Agencies Provide Services to citizens of the United States. There are times when the services when someone applies for a benefit it may be reduced or denied. People become upset about that. Thats the majority of threats we receive telephonically emailed summer in person and some are mailed to the snail mail. Were focused on this every day. As far as a security countermeasure recommendations thats all based on the security level level one through five. The fives of the highest risks facility the one is the lowest and the countermeasures that we are recommending based on standards based on the Risk Management process or to get them to the next level of protection. From a loan actor, is to protect his people inside the facility. Separate facilities how are they being asked to share that risk you are protecting for the highest risk entity, right . Yes, maam that is a good question that we hear a lot from the agencies. That might be five 10 different agencies. More public facing or threatened than other agencies in the building. They tenants of the agency will tell our folks in the facility Security Committee it is their fault. They are here they would move thats on the process we met we look at everyone in the building for whats the iconic value of the building of the Agency Within the building what kind of work to they do . That is how we determine the security level. But also the countermeasure that are put in place. Also develop your director client on the issue of reauthorizing dhs authority to counter threats posed by drones or ondemand aerial systems. It expires in february. I agree we need to extend that authority. But his threats from drones continue to grow i want to knoww whether your current authorities assuming we can extend them after february are sufficient for the unit any additional authorities to address emerging threats. Thank you maam its a great question right issue we are working with. Preventing emerging threats from 2013 the authority that we provided in their lungs the other vhs and d. O. J. Components is adequate for us to do our job or lousy secretary to make decisions to asses that will cover what facilities will be covered. We have another number of other facilities are planning to cover in the future. Right now at Saint Elizabeth the dhs headquarters 24 hours a day. Then that mobile system i mention of the ability to mooch other places based on the threat levels. What we have currently in the legislation is adequate for fds. Cannot speak on cbp coast guard or secret service. Sure i appreciate that. This question goes to both of you it is based on something he has testified too. Federal agencies as we talked about failed to implement most of the 32000 security recommendations made by fps in 2017 to 2023. Agencies failed to respond to more than half of the recommendations and according to gao they implemented fewer than 1800 recommendations made during the period is there any record of who specifically at any agency or on a facility Security Committee determines which recommendation will be implemented in a followup to that is who is responsible for the decision of facility will accept a certain level of risk and not implement a recommendation . I will begin with the facility level. Its multitenant facility its the facility Security Committee. The chair of that typically is some of the most Square Footage with respect to that facility. At the agency level we totally embrace an executive order that is a piece in the governance structure that we have not had that we have needed. So with that, and affect the senior official is also going to be responsible and accountable for the federal Security Committee at a local level is going to be the government structure we need to move forward. Consists when they got to the Facility Security assessment and a time frame ranges anywhere from a couple of days for a forl facility to a month reports facility. Those measures they are using in that tool are based on the physical security criteria for federal facilities. That database that we have has all of our federal facilities and has the agencies that the Square Footage, the cost of the countermeasure implementation. So we have that information the details of what is available we could work with your staff to determine what you need and get it to you. I think in a constructive way is who makes these determinations . What does it mean to be the person at an agency or Court Accepts the risks because they are implementing certain recommendations . I think we want to drill down a little bit on that i am out of time i will follow with you in writing about that. But thank you again for your work. Or holly or recognize your questions were. Thank you 12 the witnesses are being here for a director if i could just start with you. How familiar are you with the case of missouri versus biden . Facts im not very familiar. Im sorry go ahead for. I am aware of it but i do not know. You say you are aware of it what you aware of . I am aware of the context around misinformation, disinformation online. Missouri versus biden United States District Court in the United State Court of appeals. That rules in both cases the unitedstates government violatee First Amendment by coercing and censoring speech and using the biggest corporations in the world to do it. Im asking you about it because a large portion of the case concerns sis. Want to read some the relevant portions regular industry meetings with the platforms the social media platforms concerning moderation policy pushing them to adopt for dressing misinformation, disinformation and mall information. Also engage and switch boarding operations meaning officials acted as intermediaries for third parties by fording flight content from them to the platforms. Like the cdc for code related claims told the platforms whether certain election related claims are true or false. The court goes on and violated the First Amendment. Was the primary facilitator of the fbi interaction with social mita platform to change the policies. A frequent interactions with social media platforms to push them to adopt more restrictive policies and affirmatively told them repeatedly what content was true or false and what needed to be taken down. So the court found and there are findings in the opinion and the record that government acting through a series of agencies including the one you are home of used its power to go after First Amendment speech in a way that directly violates the First Amendment. Give a long record of government service. I cant imagine this is what you signed up today but let me ask you first. Describe the court in these cases. I work physical security the cybersecurity. I can in each and everyday folks gathering and events. Federal facilities, security, and the sectors make sure that security measures in place but that is my expertise. You are not meeting with the executives or counterparts in the social Media Companies at a scrub of the court . Good. Now let me just ask you, do you think this is consistent with the mission, the use of coercive power to try incense or american speech and it violates the First Amendment of the nicest constitution . Of knopp the way the agency i work for operates frequency saying is that how should operate . Because two courts have found it is how it is operating. And that is the problem for which you agree think thats a problem on federal courts find the First Amendment has been violated by federal agency using federal power to censor speech would you agree thats a problem . As i do not have the expertise to comment on that. Would you agree its a prominent in the first moments violated how about that . Yes. Would you agree its a problem in the federal government violates the First Amendment . Yes. When you say is not the agency is doing you would say this is not the sort of activity in the violation First Amendment is not what they ought to be doing is that fair to say . Im saying i do not have knowledge of that. Maxwell here i guess is my point to you. I appreciate the work you do in the long record of service. I think it is important this body sends the message to every agency that was involved in this it is a serious thing to violate the First Amendment of the nicest constitution it is a very serious thing. There is nothing more foundational to our democracy than the freedom of speech and what these courts found as the federal government systematic not accidentally not hopes he went too far, systematically over a period of months and years set out to violate the First Amendment speech of ordinary americans including those in my home state of missouri. To solve the record in fact my state brought the suit. Thats a pretty big deal and im pretty upset about it. Fear of the first person ive asked about it and i promise you will not be the last. But i want to send a message and maybe you can take this message back to your agency this is not acceptable behavior. Not by a longshot. If the federal government can tell people and use the most powerful corporations in the world, in the world, to shut down speech it does not like on a variety of topics elections, covid, school boards, the hunter biden laptop story, pick it there is so much censorship these courts have found. Weve got a serious problem they go straight to the heart of our democracy thats a serious issue for me. Director clyde let me ask you a question in my remaining few seconds but you noted in your written testimony fds projects federal facilities in the u. S. mexico border have i got that right . Yes, sir. Let me ask you given the unprecedented storage illegal immigration that we are seeing, let me ask you two things are time permitting. The first one is we have had multiple dhs whistleblowers who are special investigators and dhs come forward to my office and i think others and allege they were pulled off of their assignments investigating child abuse, child trafficking, fentanyl there pulled off at ofthat and sent to the southern border in order to perform in their words and menial tasks. I just want to do it in the officers to your knowledge been reassigned to the southern border to help with migrant processing . Yes, sir. We do have a number of officers that are supporting the southern border into locations. That is going on today. You say assisting with processing . Not processing let me explain. The goal is for us to support the Border Patrol so they can go back to the work of the border. Our officers are transporting people to hospital appointments, to medical visits, to Emergency Rooms date may need treatment. On the Border Patrol does have to that they focus on the border we are supporting them in escorting people to these appointments. If i could just ask where these folks coming from who are transporting make your agents where the being taken from if they are running people back and forth to the hospital and appointments and so forth . Its various locations throughout the country. For example . Boston, chicago for a. Over the otherwise but in those. Facility protection productive and pulled off federal Facility Protection to take migrants to appointments . Our goal is to support the Border Patrol for they have them supportus in a number of on the colonist to help you to provide its a very small number of officers that we are providing to them. Can you provide help or need for help were going to help them because they have helped us in the past for. Its important testimony director clyde im grateful youve given that. Sadly it tracks exactly with what whistleblowers and dhs have told us they are being asked to divide their been taken off of their assignments being asked to do exactly what you just described which is to run people back and forth. One agent said hes been asked to make sandwiches for illegal migrants. I have to say its kind of a problem when people are not investing Child Exploitation so they can make sandwiches and frankly your agents who providee absolutely Vital Security Services are being used to run people back and forth to appointments. That is outrageous but thats absolutely outrageous. Obviously its not your fault but i am sorry you are in that position. I registered in the borders in a state of crisis this is unbelievable but i think if your testamentary thank you, mr. Chairman i relayed some overtime. Thank you, senator holly. In your oversight of Agency Compliance with Security Standards, you rely on agencies to fill out questionnaires. However, his current questioners do not ask for information on the risk agencies take if they failed to respond or choose not to follow service recommendations. Why is that not account for these risks . Thank you sir. Currently in the benchmark questionnaires that we have at the agency level we qualify that as risk acceptance versus describing it as implementation of a countermeasure. At the facility level we actually do have that question. But we have been seeing in the compliance feedback that we have been getting weve been doing compliance now for two years. At the agency level only about 50 actually have the plans, policies, protocols in place that then cascade down to the facility level. Therefore the tenants at the local level are having that difficulty doing whats required due to lack of understanding and lack of training. Because of that, over the last year we have doubled down on training the federal Security Committee members. We have virtual online training. We have in person training and also virtual instructor led training trying to get fsc members trained. But more importantly once we get the senior official designated for the agencies we will be able to increase the compliance aspect and not only the documentation of on implemented countermeasures but also ensuring the plan, policy, protocols are in place at each of the agencies and departments. Giving your not given this information this is problematic my followup question is do you think you have enough data to actually understand the risks agencies are facing right now . Or do you need more data to the assessment necessary to secure the facilities . That is exactly why we totally embrace the recommendations and are moving forward with changing the questionnaire and the benchmarks in 2024 during the compliance run direct you dont have the data you need right now . Up the full understanding of what exact countermeasures are being implemented weathers been documented in weather that supported by the Department Agency at that level. So clearly a major problem. Yes, sir. Yes. Director client, given the heightened threat environment and the need to ensure security, federal build workers and the public that shows up at those facilities every day, does the federal protective service in your estimation have enough uniformed officers to secure the bore portfolio . Great question. We are getting our mission done. We are using overtime dollars right now because we have officers staying later to protect our facilities and it remains a challenge for us. We are observing impact on employee morale. I am focused on ensuring we do not have a burnout factor within our Law Enforcement workforce. I mention previously my number one priority is to fill those vacancies. I did travel down to the Training Center earlier this year i met with the director and asked for additional seats for classes for the basic police academy. We now have eight classes through this year. By the end of this year we should film at least 75 or of vacant Law Enforcement positions. I dont to tell you more people right now i need to fill the vacant positions i have and evaluate how we are doing having all of our staff on board. Do we need more now that we know we have everyone on board can we determine if we need more people . The vacancies that are there you said you are increasing your training academies are you having difficulties recruiting folks to the service or is there a long line of folks wanting to raise her hand and serve . We are competing for the same person every other Law Enforcement agencys competing city, county, state, federal. We are all competing for the young vibrant person to become part of our agency. Right now it is a challenge to fill the seats. We are working backwards were filling the first classes first and working toward the other classes are reaching out to our candidates have applied for our positions are you available to go to school in this state or the state or the state. A number of folks we have recruited went to go to specific locations we may not have vacancies in those locations we are offering them locations nearby but they may want to go to one point thats where theyre from her thats with her family is or whatever the reason is thats for they want to go. We are going down that list of our people that we have in the pipeline. Here we have nearby. Its an all out effort within all of our managers to fill these classes and hire these people. I didnt mention retention earlier so during my oral statements we have officers leaving to go to other agencies and have Better Benefits than we do are they are retiring or resigning. I worked for my boss and intention re sensitives to keep them here we have a lot coming up in the next 14 months. Affecting facility including trials coming up the dnc, the election and the inauguration we need to make sure plenty of people available to respond and secure these facilities. Thats but with the does take effect next pay. Gs 12 and below. We think that will help us keep what we have on board we hired these other people. Retention is for everybody . Access for all of our Law Enforcement officers gs 12 and below. Is not for me. The folks are coming out because all the challenges you mentioned are highly competitive environment for Law Enforcement a lot of offers are out there for folks what is she retention rate for that newly graduated incoming folks how many are there year after trading . Training . A year after training 80 . We do federal Law Enforcement Training Center is very high standards on test scores and fitness scores. We do lose some people. , she looser training . 5 is not a huge number. So we are looking at age groups. Over the last five years to been focused on hiring veterans using the Veterans Hiring Authority to quickly bring them on board deserving of an opportunity to join the federal government when they have served overseas in iraq or afghanistan we have been hiring a lot of those folks. They are around 40 years old. They are little older than the people we are looking to recruit now. We need a new focus on the young vibrant recent College Graduates who have a different perspective on how to do things that old people like me. We are focused on hiring the new folks now our retention rate is 14 will is about 14 every year. We think that by offering the Retention Center for couple of years we fill the classes will allow us to keep them on board and some do go to other agencies that have a better benefit. Given your challenges to be fully staffed in the event the officers cannot respond to a developing incident there are sy not enough officers available how do you cooperate state and local Law Enforcement to make sure you are adequately responding . Could you walk us through your backup plan when bad things happen you need people where you get them . Absolutely. We have great relationships with our city county state and federal Law Enforcement partners throughout the country. We do not have officers in every city across the nation. We primarily staff are officers in the major metropolitan areas where theres a Large Community in that area. There are many instances where local Law Enforcement will respond to an incident at a federal facility there is no officer nearby. They will respond he may be there in an hour he may be there in 15 minutes depending upon how far as communes at a specific location. The city county and state and federal Law Enforcement Office Agents once the federal facility and the people in the facility that sidewalk, that street, that city belongs to another Law Enforcement agency. We have great partnerships with them. We do work with local Law Enforcement agency Issue Citations on example theres a federal crime for parking in handicapped zone. We leverage the local jurisdictions violation notice the site for local crime that weather may not be a federal crime and has been on the for now over 20 years and what do need to be focusing on . We got to get off the list. Its been on for 20 years there continues to be incident which makes it a highrisk area. Based on her ongoing work we continue to identify need for improvement. To the Agency Credit they have constructively addressed recommendations. I would agencies and security assessments. Have an ongoing review looking at addressing of challenges and security challenges will complete that in the fall and considerate where things stand in 2025. Things see progress in the open recommendations pulling at that weather to take off the high risk. Thank you. Critical infrastructure like the United States electrical grid is a vulnerable to physical as well as cyber that can disrupt transformers, electric transmission lines. The question cap can you explain how its mitigating the threats and how its mitigating to adopt health and secure this Critical Infrastructure in our country . Yes very timely question now that we are coming to the end of Critical Infrastructure and resilience. Just recently published a tool kit in collaboration with hhs for Public Health. Their work with the department of energy for well over 10 years. We have Security Advisors that will support the providers to do security assessments we are all familiar with what occurred back in 2013 we are totally in support of the Critical Infrastructure that follow that events. As weve seen recently with respect to the threats metcalf was a focused on the generation of electricity that we are now seeing eye distribution sites. With the ballistic type attacks. We are work with electricity providers for the Risk Management to see how to best mitigate the threats at the substations. Mention to Public Health help support of water wastewater with cybersecurity requirements. Back in march we released a cybersecurity performance goals are focused on the Information Technology speaks to many of the lifeline subsector cyber risks that they face. Talk about the vacancies and training. To try to supplement folks you have hired a number of contract to help protect facilities. When you hire contract folks, how you conduct oversight to ensure they have received the necessary to protect federal facilities that require usually additional training a contract guard. The program has been around i joined 21 years ago is in place before he joined. These of the papacy are federal facilities they are conducting screening operations, they are conducting secure operations around their federal security. They are staffing facility command centers to review monitors basically the first line of defense will enter the highest risks they have the pso at the entrances and the screen operation. They also ensure federal employees coming in have the required access media or id cards to get into the facility. Compliance assessment and inspections every year. We do this through post inspections were our inspectors will have assigned facilities in the protective Security Officers assigned to that building. We also had database all the Training Records are maintained and we can see that on a daily basis. It also alerts us offended this training requirements come out of date we do not allow that until the training requirements are fulfilled. I have 13 different training requirements that they have every year that they have to meet. And then also their suitability Background Investigation is almost identical to what most federal Law Enforcement officers are. We spend a lot of time overseeing these contracts we do a lot of these contracts throughout the country we are visiting with them every day. Right now this minute theres about 6250 protective Security Officers on duty across the country and our territories. We know how critical of her role they play in the defense and are protected facilities we spent a lot of time ensuring their Training Records are maintained their meeting all the requirements they are complying with the orders of the specific facility. Thank you. I want to thank each of our witnesses for being here today. I certainly appreciate your discussion and appreciate the men and women who work for your respective agencies keeping us safe each and every day. Protecting a federal facilities the americans use them every day is a fundamental to our National Security and this chairman of this committee and will work with my colleagues to find ways to ensure agencies take up the recommendations of the federal protective service and the strength and our security in those federal buildings. The record for this hearing were made open for 15 days until 5 03 for the submission of statements and questions for the record. This hearing is now adjourned. Clap [background noises] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible conversations] [inaudible con the securities and Exchange Commission discussed oversight and regulatorynf

© 2024 Vimarsana

comparemela.com © 2020. All Rights Reserved.