Port security funds will run out in 2013



Download 292.56 Kb.
Page9/12
Date15.08.2017
Size292.56 Kb.
#32635
1   ...   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12

PSGP




The purpose of PSGP


DHS ’12 (Port Security Grant Program, June 13, 2012, http://www.fema.gov/port-security-grant-program, JCC)

Port Security Grant Program (PSGP) provides funding for transportation infrastructure security activities to implement Area Maritime Transportation Security Plans and facility security plans among port authorities, facility operators, and state and local government agencies required to provide port security services. The purpose of the FY 2012 PSGP is to support increased port-wide risk management; enhanced domain awareness; training and exercises; expansion of port recovery and resiliency capabilities; and further capabilities to prevent, detect, respond to, and recover from attacks involving improvised explosive devices and other non-conventional weapons; and competitively award grant funding to assist ports in obtaining the resources required to support the National Preparedness Goal’s associated mission areas and core capabilities.

The PSGP is good because it protects high-risk port areas


GAO 11 (Port Security Grant Program, GAO, November 17, 2011, http://www.gao.gov/assets/590/587142.pdf, JCC

To strengthen the security of the nation’s ports against risks associated with potential terrorist attacks, DHS administers the Port Security Grant Program (PSGP) through its component agency, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The Coast Guard provides subject matter expertise to FEMA on the maritime industry to inform grant award decisions. The PSGP is to provide funding to the nation’s highest risk port areas additionally, ports often are not only gateways for the movement of goods, but also industrial hubs and close to population centers, presenting additional opportunities for terrorists intending to harm U.S. interests. They are also potential conduits for weapons prepared elsewhere and concealed in cargo designed to move quickly to many locations beyond the ports themselves. Further, cruise ships, tankers, and cargo ships present potentially desirable terrorist targets given the potential for loss of life, environmental damage, or disruption of commerce. Balancing security concerns with the need to facilitate the free flow of people and commerce remains an ongoing challenge for the public and private sectors alike.


PSGP solves while benefiting economy; Port of Oakland is example


Lindheim 09 (Dan, City Administrator, “Informational Report Regarding the City's Role in the Port of Oakland Application¶ for Port Security Grant Funds Under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act¶ of 2009 ("ARRA")”, 6/23/9, http://clerkwebsvr1.oaklandnet.com/attachments/22406.pdf, MS)

Community Benefits: Job Creation: The City of Oakland would benefit greatly by the ARRA PSGP because of the grant's focus on¶ job creation. Importantly, the grant has the potential to fund personnel for the proposed Oakland¶ Domain Awareness Center, for up to 36 months.¶ Increased Public Safety¶ Numerous public safety benefits would be derived from the ARRA PSGP grant. The Center will¶ eventually provide for 24/7 interoperability and coordination of prevention, preparedness,¶ response, recovery and mitigation efforts. It will also feed data, provide situational awareness¶ information to regional incident commands, and serve as a focal point for Transportation¶ Security Incident ("TSI") reporting. Furthermore, the Center would provide functionality and a¶ location where multiple agencies can access integrated regional capabilities and technologies¶ including sensors^ platforms, communications and information exploitation.¶ Enhancing Community Partnerships¶ The institutional framework of the Center provides the City of Oakland the opportunity to¶ establish new, and enhance existing, partnerships. This includes expansion of the existing¶ partnership between OPD, OFD, and the Port, as well as the creation of new partnerships and¶ coalitions.¶ The Oakland Police Department, Fire Department, Department of Information Technology¶ ("DIT"), the Office of Emergency Services, the Port of Oakland and Transportation Services¶ have all expressed interest in participating in this collaborative project.

PSGP still solves


Burnson 10 (Patrick, Executive Editor, “U.S. Port Security: A work in progress”, Logistics Management, July 2010, http://www.logisticsmgmt.com/images/site/LM1006_PortSecurtiy.pdf)

The AAPA endorses the current federal strategies¶ and supports even stronger protection measures,¶ but not without some caveats and suggestions.¶ “The Port Security Grant program (PSGP)¶ continues to be very valuable and serves as a¶ partner with the Department of Homeland¶ Security (DHS) to harden security at U.S.¶ ports and to protect our homeland,” says¶ AAPA president and CEO Curt Nagle. “But¶ the cost must be shared.”¶ The PSGP funds are primarily intended¶ to assist ports in enhancing maritime domain¶ awareness, enhancing risk management¶ capabilities to prevent, detect, respond to and¶ recover from attacks involving improvised¶ explosive devices as well as training and Transportation¶ Worker Identification Credential¶ (TWIC) implementation.


PSGP does what it needs to, grant money not going elsewhere

http://www.firegrantshelp.com/search-grants/681072-port-security-grant-program-psgp/



The purpose of the FY 2012 PSGP is to create a sustainable, risk-based effort to protect critical port infrastructure from terrorism, particularly attacks using explosives and non-conventional threats that could cause major disruption to commerce. The PSGP provides grant funding to port areas for the protection of critical port infrastructure from terrorism. The PSGP funds are primarily intended to assist ports in enhancing maritime domain awareness, enhancing risk management capabilities to prevent, detect, respond to and recover from attacks involving improvised explosive devices (IEDs), Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, Explosive (CBRNE), and other non-conventional weapons, as well as training and exercises and Transportation Worker Identification Credential (TWIC) implementation.

PSGP proposed changes benefit port security programs in more ways


Loughin 12 (Ryan, Director Petro, Chemical & Energy Solutions for Tyco Integrated Security; provides security education to CFATS and MTSA-affected companies, “Port Security Grant Program Legislation Introduced”, Chemical Security, 6/6/12, http://community.chemicalprocessing.com/content/port-security-grant-program-legislation-introduced, M.S.)

U.S. House Representative Laura Richardson (D-CA) recently introduced two bills that would expand the ways grantees can use grant money awarded under the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s Port Security Grant Program (PSGP): H.R. 5802, the Port Security Equipment Act of 2012 and H.R. 5803, the Port Security Boots on the Ground Act.¶ H.R. 5802 would amend the PSGP authorizing statute to allow funding to be used not only for the acquisition, operation, and maintenance of security equipment but also for the replacement of such security equipment. This amendment would certainly make sense as the Maritime Transportation Security Act (MTSA) program is now nearly 10 years old and much of the security equipment initially purchased by chemical and petrochemical facilities for MTSA compliance may be outdated and require replacement.¶ H.R. 5803 would amend the PSGP authorizing statute to allow funding to be used for additional payroll expenditures for Coast Guard mandated security personnel, including “overtime and backfill costs...” incurred in support of other authorized PSGP expenditures. The bill however, would limit the amount of funding a grantee could use on those expenditures to 50 percent of the grant money received.¶ Placing a cap on the amount of funding that could be applied to personnel expenses may affect certain facilities that have used significant portions of their grant award for personnel. However, by expanding the ways grant money could be used to include overtime and backfill costs associated with supporting other PSGP expenditures, the amendment would likely benefit a larger portion of the affected population of grantees.

The USFG needs to invest more in seaports, and keep the PSGP


Gulf Coast Business ’12 (Investments in Seaports Essential, April 4, 2012, http://aapa.files.cms-plus.com/PDFs/Investments%20in%20seaports%20essential%20-%20al_com%20-%204-4-2012.pdf, JCC)

Many of our land and water connections are insufficient and outdated, affecting the ports' ability to move cargo efficiently. This hurts U.S. business, U.S. workers and our national economy. Federal investments in seaports are an essential and effective utilization of limited resources, paying dividends through increased trade and commerce, long-term job creation, secure borders, military support, environmental stewardship, and more than $200 billion in federal, state and local tax revenue. All of this raises the question: What must the nation do to ready its ports for the future? First, the federal government must make funding for dredging a higher priority; Congress must pass a Surface Transportation bill that results in more funding for port, freight and landside infrastructure, including the TIGER program; and Congress must not cut or eliminate the Port Security Grant Program or environmental programs, such as the Diesel Emissions Reduction Act that provides grants that ports use to lower pollutants from trucks, trains, ships and other "transient" sources.


Download 292.56 Kb.

Share with your friends:
1   ...   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   11   12



The database is protected by copyright ©ininet.org 2024
send message
    Main page
national association
private sector
focus should be
arms race