DS Assistant Secretary Nominee Gets a Hearing

I missed this when it happened, but the Senate Foreign Relations Committee held a hearing on October 18 for four State Department nominees. One of them was Michael Evanoff, the nominee for Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security. Senator Isakson (R-Georgia) presided.

You can view the hearing on the Committee's website, here.

In Evanoff's prepared remarks, which come at the 12 minute mark in the hearing video, he ended with a pitch for completion of the much-needed but long-delayed-by-shameless-Congressional-infighting-over-whose-district-will-get-it Foreign Affairs Security Training Center.

After several years of delays, the FASTC is at last under construction at Fort Pickett, Virginia. See this for some background.

"I will also put special focus on the continued overhaul and refinement of security training for Department of State employees. This includes intensive specialized training for all DS agents and the on-going expansion of the Foreign Affairs Counter Threat (FACT) course for all employees working overseas under the authority of the Chief of Mission. It also includes the completion of the Department’s Foreign Affairs Security Training Center (FASTC) at Fort Pickett, Virginia. Once fully up and running, this state-of-the-art facility will allow DS to provide more efficient and effective hard skills training – such firearms, explosives, antiterrorism driving techniques, and defensive tactics – for roughly 10,000 students annually."

Upon hearing that, Isakson at once made a weak swipe at FASTC, asking Evanoff to consider the inadequate and inappropriate law enforcement training centers that already exist in Georgia instead of a new purpose-built one in Virginia. Much later on in the hearing, at the 44 minute mark, Senator Kaine (D-VA) made an equally weak motion in support of FASTC at Fort Pickett. The long battle over which state will get FASTC is apparently over now, but some hard feelings remain.

The first question Evanoff received came from Isakson. At the 35 minute mark, Isakson asked this very broad question: does Mister Evanoff know of any effort made since the Benghazi reviews and Accountability Review Board report “to build up and beef up security diplomatically?"

Yes, Senator, he knew of several. I can think of one, too: that dedicated state-of-the-art training center will eventually be completed at Fort Pickett despite years of obstruction by you and some of your fellow Congressmen. 

In Ft. Pickett vs FLETC, Virginia Is Now First and Goal

Update at 6:40 PM - The GAO's report is now available on line here. Thank you again, anonymous commentator!

It's 44 pages and I haven't read it yet, but it starts great. The first sentence of the summary "What GAO Found" reads "GAO evaluated four Department of State (State) Bureau of Diplomatic Security (DS) requirements that GAO determined were critical in the selection of a site for a training facility and found that Fort Pickett, near Blackstone, Virginia, fully met all four while the Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers (FLETC) campus in Glynco, Georgia, did not fully meet any."

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The GAO audit report that Rep. Ed Royce requested "to review the proposals put forward by the Department of Homeland Security (“DHS”) and the Department of State (“State”) to determine which proposal meets the State’s security training requirements in the most effective, efficient, and timely manner" has now been completed. According to the AP, it found that State's proposal for a training center at Ft. Pickett, Virginia, is the better choice. I say "according to the AP" because Rep. Royce is - again, according to the AP - sitting on the report and preventing its release to the public.

So, basically this development gives Virginia a first down somewhere inside Georgia's ten yard line. The question now is whether Virginia can carry the ball into the end zone before Rep. Royce interferes with the play.

The AP report is here, 3 years post-Benghazi, audit favors Virginia over Georgia for delayed Diplomatic Security site. These are GAO's key findings:

The Government Accountability Office's 38-page report, released to key members of Congress and federal agencies, bolsters the Virginia bid.

Sending all the agents to Georgia instead of Virginia could cost U.S. taxpayers up to $736 million more over the next 50 years, according to the report, a copy of which was obtained by The Associated Press. It also criticized the Georgia cost estimate for not being comprehensive, fully documented, accurate or credible.

-- snip --

"Spending money on something that doesn't meet our requirements is not going to be a good investment," Assistant Secretary of State Gregory Starr shot back. The Georgia site, he argued, lacks facilities for the type of weapons the agents use and would force staff to travel to and from a bombing range 60 miles away.

The GAO says Fort Pickett would consolidate almost all of Diplomatic Security's training for high-threat posts, which involves firearms, driving and explosives training and is currently scattered in 11 locations over seven states. It says the base can host nighttime exercises, which staff conducts 190 days a year, whereas limitations apply in Georgia. And it says the Virginia option benefits from proximity to Washington, a requirement stemming from the post-Benghazi, Accountability Review Board's report.

The limitations of FLETC Georgia for hard-skills training are absolute physical limits, like space, proximity, and location. Its training space is too small, its proximity to populated areas is too close, and its geographic location is too far from State’s training partners. I don’t see how those limits can be wished away. So long as GAO remains an honest broker in this matter, the objective argument over where to locate FASTC is over.

That leaves the political argument, which of course will not be settled until Rep. Royce gets what he wants or is beaten by a some stronger coalition of political interests.

Virginia has its own Congressmen and Senators. Why aren't they on the field blocking Royce?

Possible Tip-Off About FASTC Hard Skills Training Center at Fort Pickett?

Photo from State.gov

To review the situation, the administration wishes to construct a Foreign Affairs Security Training Center (FASTC) that would consolidate 'hard skills' training by the State Department and its partners at Fort Pickett in southside Virginia. Some members of Congress are trying to stop the project, ostensibly on grounds of economic efficiency, and would require the State Department to use the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) in Georgia for hard skills training. Both sides are currently awaiting the public release of a General Accountability Organization (GAO) report that evaluates the business case for building FASTC at Fort Pickett.

This week the Progress-Index, a local newspaper in the Fort Pickett area, interviewed and quoted a senior Diplomatic Security Service official for an article about the political impasse over FASTC. Well, hum, that's interesting. I presume the senior official had gotten official clearance to make those remarks. I further presume that State gets to review the expected GAO report before it goes public. Putting 2 + 2 together, I wonder whether DS is signalling with the interview that it knows the GAO will support building FASTC at Fort Pickett?

Here's the article, Report could speed up diplomatic training center at Fort Pickett:

State Department officials are hoping a soon-to-be released report will help end wrangling in Congress that has delayed construction on a diplomatic security training center at a National Guard base in Virginia.

Construction on the first phase of the facility at Fort Pickett, just over the Dinwiddie County border, was set to begin Aug. 1 with a completion date set for 2019. State Department officials have put that work on hold while they respond to Congressional requests for information.

-- snip --

Soon after the State Department finalized its selection of Fort Pickett last spring, some members of Congress cried foul. The Georgia site has been championed by members of Congress there, but also by Republican U.S. Rep. Ed Royce of California, chairman of the House Foreign Affairs Committee.

-- snip --

The State Department stands by its selection of Fort Pickett, saying its proximity to Washington, D.C., and rural location would allow it to conduct around-the-clock military-style training. The site is also within driving distance of Marine bases in Virginia and North Carolina that State Department personnel train with, as well as Navy special warfare forces that are stationed in Virginia Beach.

Stephen Dietz, executive director of the State Department's bureau of diplomatic security, said the Marines have told him that they can't afford to travel to Georgia for State Department training. He said the cost estimates for the southeastern Georgia site [FLETC} only have to do with construction, and don't include operation, maintenance or travel costs for State Department, military or intelligence agency personnel.

"If we were forced to go someplace else and train without our partners, there's no doubt in my mind we would be placing security at greater risk overseas because we did not train with the people we go to fight with," he said.

The article ends with this advice from the Mayor of Blackstone, Virginia, the town outside Fort Pickett:

"If you're banking your hopes on common sense and consensus in Washington, D.C., you stay up late at night worrying," said Mayor Billy Coleburn. "Who owes who favors? Who gets browbeaten behind the scenes. Those are things we can only imagine — what happens in smoke-filled rooms in Washington, D.C?"

100 percent correct, Mister Mayor. What, indeed, happens there? It could be that somebody knows what happened concerning the GAO and Fort Pickett, and maybe he just told us.

Hard Skills Training Center Is a Hard Sell to Senator Claire McCaskill

Yesterday's Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs hearing with the telltale name "Avoiding Duplication: An Examination of the State Department’s Proposal to Construct a New Diplomatic Security Training Facility" was one of the oddest hearings I've ever watched.

There was a weird combination of apathy - check out how few members attended this Full Committee Hearing - and anger. The anger came mostly from Claire McCaskill (D-MO), who was the only member to attend the hearing other than the majority and minority leaders and one Republican member, Joni Earnst of Iowa, who dropped in for just a few minutes.

Chairman Ron Johnson (R-WI) kicked things off and had the three panelists read their opening statements, which are available here. The panelists were:

• Gregory Starr, State Department Assistant Secretary for Diplomatic Security, who was there to get through a hostile hearing while he waits for support to come in the form of a Government Accountability Office (GAO) analysis of State's request to build a training facility.

• David Mader, Acting Deputy Director for Management and Controller, Office of Federal Financial Management, Office of Management and Budget. He was there to say as little as possible, but what he said supported the State Department's request.

• Connie L. Patrick, Director, Federal Law Enforcement Training Center,, U.S. Department of Homeland Security. She was there to be the Committee's pet, the responsible and cost-conscious bureaucrat who is just very excited to run the best gosh-darn joint law enforcement training center in the land, and could efficiently support any agency's training needs but got stiffed by those diplomats who want to have a training center of their own.  

The weirdness started when Ranking Member Tom Carper (D-Delaware) gave his opening statement and decided to tell the panelists "a quick story."

In 2001, when I needed to buy a car, I test drove Porsches, Corvettes, and Mustangs, and I bought a Chrysler Town & Country Minivan. Well, yesterday, as I was driving than minivan across the Bay Bridge from southern Delaware, the odometer ran over 400,000 miles.

He seemed to be a kindly old man.

Chairman Johnson, unlike Ranking Member Carper, seemed to be a grumpy and suspicious old man, and one who gets confused easily. Apparently he's also a frustrated travel agent, since he challenged Starr on every nickle and dime of travel and lodging costs.

Now, Fort Pickett is how many miles away from your headquarters? Let’s see … making some quick calculations on a pad … that’s a nickel a mile for private vehicle reimbursement … What's that? Oh, you’ll use buses? Never mind.

Now, you claim you would have to spend 80 to 90 million a year in travel costs to FLETC in Georgia … dividing that by the annual number of trainees ... Mr. Starr, that’s way too much! That's not a believable number! Oh, that cost is for ten years? Never mind.

Now, did you include lodging costs at Fort Pickett in these estimates, Mr. Starr? Oh, using hotels, are you? You could probably get a deal, what with all those thousands of trainees you'll send. Never mind.

Starr got in a strong statement early on which was not refuted by anyone on the Committee or any other panelist:

“Our request for an advanced hard skills training location to provide specialized training is hardly unique. The Secret Service conducts advanced training at a purpose-built facility in Beltsville, Maryland; the Federal Air Marshals have a tailored facility for their needs in Atlantic City, New Jersey; and the Federal Bureau of Investigation Academy is located in Quantico, Virginia. A purpose-built facility allows us to tailor our training to the Department of State’s unique overseas mission and the global security realities our personnel face.”

Then Claire McCaskill pounced, all excited and waving her hands in the air for emphasis:

Mr. Starr, I have SO many questions! So MANY questions! What percentage of the guards around the world are foreign contractors as opposed to Marines?

Starr explained that local guards - those are the ones posted outside the perimeter - are always foreigners, and Marine Security Guards are not interchangeable with local guards. Anyway, the hard skills center isn't for training either of those groups.

McCaskill was having none of it. "The training you’re talking about is mostly perimeter training, right?"

Starr kept a poker face where a less experienced witness might have blurted out what the hell are you talking about?

McCaskill next took over Chairman Johnson's travel agent role and pointed out to Starr that a bus ride from Washington to Fort Pickett takes three hours, and a flight from Washington to FLETC in Georgia also takes three hours. So, obviously, the travel to either destination is identical. Try and talk your way out of that, Mr. Starr!

McCaskill next badgered Starr over the incredibly trivial matter of how long it will take to drive a busload of trainees from Fort Pickett to the local hotels where they will stay during training. She was strangely obsessed with whether it will take twenty minutes, thirty minutes, or even longer. As if it mattered.

At some point McCaskill stopped to take a breath, and Johnson asked the FLETC lady to brag about her facility. I heard something like this:

FLETC Lady: We have a wonderful police training center in Georgia!!! We’ve already got a cafeteria, gymnasium, library, training venues, classrooms, computer laboratories, dormitories, and recreational facilities. And we can build any kind of law enforcement training facility that anybody could possibly want.

Starr rebutted that:

We do law enforcement training for DS agents at FLETC. Hard skills, however, is not law enforcement training. FLETC is not what we need. It doesn’t have the space or the isolation to fire .50 caliber machineguns, fly large CH-53 helicopters, do explosive demonstrations, drive MRAPs, train at night, or train without causing noise and environmental problems. Ft. Pickett is where we can do all those things, and do them with our military partners such as Marine Security Guards, Marine Fleet Antiterrorism Security Teams, and Marine Security Augmentation Units, all of which are located in Virginia.

Johnson: What do you say about that, Mr. OMB Guy?

OBM Guy: Mr. Starr is correct.

Starr: FLETC’s entire campus is about the same size as what we would build, except at Ft. Pickett it would be on an active military training base where we could practice interoperability with our military partners and be surrounded by thousands of acres of buffer zone that would prevent any intrusion on the local community.

FLETC Lady: Mr. Starr says he has to train with military partners. Well, I just so happen to be looking into using part of an old military base right in Georgia for a safe place to fire those heavy weapons. The Marine Corps is going to use it, too. Marine Corps? That sounds like the same military that Mr. Starr likes to train with so much.

For the wrap up, Chairman Johnson got out of the travel agent business and became all accountant.

Johnson: Mr. Starr, I demand a full and complete accounting of every possible cost and business case analysis for this decision before I agree with you that Ft. Pickett is the best choice.

Starr: Senator, the GAO is doing just such as study, at the request of the House Foreign Affairs Committee, and its report is due to be released in about one month. I’ve seen the draft, and I believe the GAO will support using Ft. Pickett.

Johnson: Mr. OMB Guy, what do you know about that?

OMB Guy: Mr. Starr is correct.

The hearing became a little clearer when I saw an updated WaPo piece with quotes from leaked OMB documents and allegations of nefarious doings by Deputy SecState Higginbottom:

In early 2014 it looked like the White House was going to scrap State’s plans for a multimillion-dollar, brand new diplomatic security training facility. Its budget analysts decided that the Georgia site was the cheaper option.

But then Deputy Secretary of State Heather Higginbottom got involved.

Higginbottom, previously deputy director of the Office of Management and Budget, reached out to her former OMB colleague, Steve Kosiak, who oversaw the national security and defense budget.

According to an OMB analysis and e-mails between Higginbottom and Kosiak, the White House initially decided expanding the Georgia location made more economic sense, according to documents obtained by the Loop.

“FLETC can meet the vast majority of State’s current requirements for access to facilities and course scheduling, training requirements, and life support services, all at a much lower estimated cost than Fort Pickett,” according to a late 2013 OMB cost analysis.

“While Fort Pickett would have an advantage for location and interagency synergies, the [OMB’s resource management office] does not believe that the difference is substantial enough to rule out FLETC… FASTC at FLETC would ultimately have more capabilities than FASTC at Fort Pickett at a lower cost.”

It is not at all clear to me that the training facilities that FLETC was asked to cost out in 2013 are the same ones that State now plans to build at Ft. Pickett. As stated during the hearing, State's soft skills training will remain in existing in-house facilities for efficiency, rather than move to Georgia as per the FLETC proposal. And, as the FLETC Lady acknowledged, her facility in Georgia can't support night training, use of heavy weapons and helos, or interoperability with State's military partners. Is there really an apples-to-apples comparison that favors FLETC?

The WaPo article goes on:

State’s proposal would cost approximately $413 million, which is a dramatically scaled back version of an original $1 billion plan. FLETC claims it could develop the same facility for half that.

Yet, despite the cheaper construction price tag, State argues that the money spent flying diplomats and their spouses to Georgia for hard skills security training would eventually surpass the savings. Plus, it’s less efficient since much of their soft skills training occurs in Washington and Virginia.

State also contends that the Virginia site allows the diplomats to train alongside Marines at Quantico, who serve as embassy security.

State merely “contends” that the Virginia site would allow for joint DOS-Marine training and the Georgia site would not? Well, Quantico isn’t moving to Georgia. It’s more like State pointed out the obvious.

It was odd that Johnson and McCaskill didn’t touch on the WaPo’s allegation that State's Higginbottom improperly influenced the former OMB guy. Maybe they see it as water under the bridge by now, because the current OMB guy said this in his opening statement:

As part of OMB’s efforts to encourage the State Department to consider alternatives to new construction, OMB facilitated analysis of the Fort Pickett and FLETC options. OMB reviewed detailed proposals submitted by both the State Department and FLETC and coordinated interagency efforts to achieve a common understanding of the capabilities and requirements of each proposed facility. In addition, OMB facilitated further discussion between the State Department and FLETC concerning whether FLETC could provide the full suite of training courses and synergies the State Department was seeking to fulfill State’s diplomatic personnel security training needs. This was coupled with an effort by OMB to have the State Department closely review its cost estimates for construction of FASTC. Even prior to this review, the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security was re-evaluating its plans in order to focus on hard skills training, de-scoping the original proposal from an over $900 million facility to a $413 million facility focusing on hard skills training, such as training with heavy weapons, explosives, and armored vehicles. These savings made FASTC construction more competitive and represented a better value for the taxpayer.

Presumably the GAO report will say the same. Maybe McCaskill will have updated her bus schedules by the time the committee reconvenes.

Foreign Affairs Security Training Center Remains Homeless

I don't know if there's any truth to it, but the rumor around town is that Representative Edward Royce thinks foreign affairs types can get all the high-threat security training they need by playing Grand Theft Auto in online training modules. "Why do you need to build a real training center when a role playing game like GTA has evasive driving, shooting, bomb awareness, and surveillance detection in a variety of simulated environments?" he may have asked."

Online security training could be the only kind that some U.S. embassy staff will get before heading to high-threat overseas posts. The long awaited Foreign Affairs Security Training Center might get a home someday, or it might not, depending upon the whims and vote-trading of a few key members of Congress such as Royce. If it does not, then the State Department will continue to have to lease eleven separate training facilities, and they will still not be enough to meet increased training requirements. 

Efforts to create a consolidated security training facility for the State Department go back to 1993. In 2008, State sent a report to Congress making the case for a dedicated facility, but our elected representatives did not act. For the past two years, efforts have focused on creating a facility at Fort Pickett in southern Virginia.

State's website gives this background on the effort to acquire a training facility for its specialized needs:

To [improve training efficiency, decrease operating costs, and provide priority access to training venues which meet current facility standards], the U.S. Department of State is establishing the Foreign Affairs Security Training Center (FASTC). The Department has invested considerable time and effort over the years in reviewing over 70 properties with the U.S. General Services Administration, including the Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Georgia, before identifying 1,500 acres of publicly-owned land within Fort Pickett, Virginia. Over the last two years, the U.S. Department of State has worked extensively to conduct environmental studies at Fort Pickett, begin negotiations for land use agreements, secure community support and ultimately reassess and reduce the scope of the FASTC project. The cost for a hard-skills exclusive facility at Fort Pickett, as verified by an independent construction cost estimator, is estimated to be $461 million. Some funding has already been appropriated, and the Department continues to look for opportunities to further reduce these costs.

This facility will be dedicated to providing consolidated hard skills security and life saving training to the foreign affairs community. This training develops the practical skills necessary to operate in today’s overseas environment. Hard skills training allows the foreign affairs community to learn how to detect surveillance, provide emergency medical care, increase identification skills to recognize improvised explosive devices (IED), participate in firearms familiarization, and perform defensive/counterterrorist driving maneuvers. Such training improves security and life safety for the protection of U.S. personnel operating abroad.

Providing increased security and survival training to all personnel headed to high threat overseas posts isn't just a good idea, it's also one of the ways State is implementing the Benghazi Accountability Review Board's recommendations.

Surely, no Congressman would refuse to provide State with the means to implement those recommendations.

Shirley, I jest. Because three key Congressman are doing just that.

According to The Daily Signal (a publication of The Heritage Foundation) of June 25: Price to Avoid Another Benghazi? House Leaders Question $461 Million Training Center:

In a series of letters beginning in December 2013, Republicans Edward Royce of California, Michael McCaul of Texas, and Jeff Duncan of South Carolina pushed the White House Office of Management and Budget to consider less expensive alternatives.

The House also included specific language in a bipartisan bill to require the Obama administration to conduct an independent feasibility study comparing the Fort Pickett plan with other options.

A spokesperson for the State Department’s Bureau of Diplomatic Security told The Daily Signal that the agency, in conjunction with the U.S. General Services Administration, reviewed more than 70 sites before deciding on several parcels on the Fort Pickett property straddling Chesterfield and Nottoway counties.

The Republican lawmakers focus on one particular rejected alternative in their letters to OMB: The Department of Homeland Security’s offer to expand its Federal Law Enforcement Training Center in Glynco, Ga.

The Georgia facility already has lodging, weapons ranges, and driving tracks among other features that meet State’s needs, wrote Royce, chairman of the Committee on Foreign Affairs; McCaul, chairman of the Committee on Homeland Security; and Duncan, chairman of the Subcommittee on Oversight and Management Efficiency.

The bipartisan bill says this:

SEC. 107. PROHIBITION ON USE OF FUNDS RELATING TO SECURITY AND TRAINING FACILITY.

No funds under this Act are authorized to be appropriated for any new Department of State security and training facility, including the proposed Foreign Affairs Security Training Center, for which there is not a completed, independent feasibility study that has been provided to the appropriate congressional committees, verifying that safety and security training for all Department personnel who require such training cannot reasonably be provided at the existing Federal Law Enforcement Training Facility.

Nowhere does the bill define what an "independent" feasibility study would be. But then, why bother? Obviously, Representative Royce just wants his preferred option - FLETC in Glynco, Georgia - to be used rather than to have a dedicated facility purpose-built for State elsewhere. That bit about an independent study ... verifying ... reasonably be provided ... etc., is just a trio of politicians playing us some chin music. They must have their reasons for tossing this bone to FLETC, but they aren't about to say what those are.    

The 104-page evaluation of the Fort Pickett site that was done by top-tier architecture and planning firms working for State and GSA spells out exactly why FLETC's Glynco campus doesn't meet the requirements for a Foreign Service training site. It completely fails the key criteria for site selection.

First, it's too small and too crowded. The FLETC Glynco campus is located on the edge of the city of Brunswick, Georgia, two miles off of Interstate 95. The entire FLETC site occupies 1,600 acres, all of which are in use with programs for dozens of different agencies. State's mandatory criteria for a training site require at least 1,500 acres for its exclusive use, as well as the ability to conduct 24/7 operations without causing noise or other conflicts with adjacent uses or communities.

Second, it's too far away. State's criteria also include a proximity of not more than four hours driving time from Diplomatic Security headquarters within the cosmopolitan neighborhood of Rosslyn, in Arlington, Virginia. ["Cosmopolitan" in this instance is a relative term meaning that in Rosslyn you don't smell the stench of pulp mills.] That distance also affords proximity to Washington DC and to vital training partners such as the U.S. Marine Corps.

In addition to those site selection criteria, allow me to point out that FLETC is a police academy. The training facilities its website boasts of - the "library, interviewing suites, mock court rooms, computer forensics laboratories, and other laboratories for fingerprinting and identifying narcotics" - are of exactly no use whatsoever for the type of security and survivability training the State Department must provide to personnel going to overseas diplomatic posts. It's apples and oranges.

And yet, despite all the reasons there are to not use FLETC for foreign affairs security training, FLETC is the only place that will satisfy a clique of Congressmen.

What really annoys me isn't the backroom deal-making between Congressmen so much as their blatant hypocrisy over the issue of embassy security. The same Representative Royce who blocks funding for a satisfactory security training center doesn't hesitate to call others to accept responsibility and accountability for accomplishing tasks which he won't support. As in, 'The security of our people overseas is my highest concern' ... BUT ... I won't  approve more funds for overseas security. Or, 'It is vital that the State Department provide more security training for all personnel going to high threat posts' ... BUT ... I don't see why that should cost anything. 

For example, in this New York Times story that follows up on post-Benghazi recommendations, U.S. Takes Steps to Add Security at Embassies:

By late this summer [of 2013], the State Department plans to send dozens of additional diplomatic security agents to high-threat embassies, install millions of dollars of advanced fire-survival gear and surveillance cameras in those diplomatic posts, and improve training for employees headed to the riskiest missions.

The price tag for the security improvements proposed after the attack on the diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, last Sept. 11 has reached $1.4 billion to meet the most urgent needs, including additional personnel. But diplomats and lawmakers say it will take years and billions more dollars to fully carry out the changes called for by the independent review panel that investigated the assault, which killed four Americans and touched off a highly charged political debate about the Obama administration’s ability to ensure the security of overseas outposts.

That "independent review panel" is the Benghazi Accountability Review Board, and one of the things it recommended was increased security and survivability training, i.e., a Foreign Affairs Security Training Center.

The NYT quotes Representative Royce displaying his "but" on the issue of those recommendations:

“It remains to be seen how well the State Department implements the board’s recommendations,” said Representative Ed Royce, a California Republican who leads the House Foreign Affairs Committee. “But for any changes to succeed, they must embrace responsibility and accountability at senior levels, which hasn’t happened in this case.”

Apparently, monkeys will fly out of Representative Royce's but before he embraces responsibility and accountability for himself in the matter of those ARB recommendations.

Foreign Affairs Security Training Center Might Get A Home Someday, But Where?

It's Congressional jump ball, VA versus GA

The Foreign Affairs Security Training Center (see the FASTC project fact sheet) has been a vital need in search of a location for many years now. So I was pleased to see a press release by Virginia's Senator Kaine applauding the announcement that Fort Pickett in Blackstone, Virginia, "has been chosen" as the FASTC site.

Wonderful news! Only, nothing followed that announcement. No confirmation, no congressional vote, no funds, not even a press release from the State Department itself. The "announcement" consists, so far, of nothing except a statement made by SecState Kerry:

In response to a question from Senator Kaine last week during a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing, Secretary of State John Kerry said, “The Department is 100 percent determined that Fort Pickett is the best site … The coordination with the Defense Department and the Intelligence Community - Fort Pickett is the site.”

Well, now, just last December, U.S. Representative Jack Kingston of Georgia sent SecState Kerry a letter telling him that he knows of a better site than Fort Pickett:

The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center can more than handle security training for the State Department and save taxpayers millions of dollars in the process, the congressman whose district includes the center in Glynn County says.

Kingston supports strong training programs for State Department personnel but is opposed to spending an estimated $1 billion on the development of a Foreign Affairs Security Training Center - or FASTC - at Fort Pickett at Blackstone, Va.

- snip -

Funding for a new training facility was included in a budget submitted by the State Department for the new fiscal year in October, but it was taken out after Kingston and members of the U.S. Senate questioned the lack of a feasibility or impact study.

"As you know, a variety of federal agencies have sought to establish new, separate training centers for their agencies over many years - sometimes inspired by members of Congress whose states they viewed as the ideal setting, other times by an earnest desire to provide the best training possible," Kingston wrote Kerry.

Say, Representative Kingston wouldn't be one of those members of Congress who views his own state as the ideal setting for FASTC, would he? I sure hope he's one of the other kind, the earnest ones. I always assume the best of our elected representatives.

I hope Senator Kaine tips this political jump ball his way. The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center is probably a wonderful place to learn handcuffing skills and such, as you can see from the training programs described here, but that isn't at all what foreign affairs security training is supposed to be about.

Support the FASTC? Who, Me?

The Washington Times has an article today following up on yesterday's announcement that the State Department will no longer seek to create a Foreign Affairs Security Training Center on Maryland's Eastern Shore. It quotes two Maryland politicians, Senator Barbara Mikulski and Governor Martin O'Malley, who were both early supporters of the FASTC project but are now in full back-pedal mode.

The federal government's selection, and then withdrawal, of the Maryland site created some awkwardness for politicians, who initially courted the project but clumsily backtracked after residents complained that the federal government was dismissing their concerns, misrepresenting its plans and withholding key information.

Read the article here.

Foreign Affairs Security Training Center (FASTC) Update

As recently as June 7th there were local media reports about the State Department's confidence in its plans to construct a consolidated hard skills training center on Maryland's Eastern Shore - "The department is conducting an environmental assessment it hopes to complete in the coming weeks. The department will then work toward breaking ground."

But those plans had been running into local opposition all along (see this for background), and the State Department was on the losing side of a recent court order for additional disclosure.

Today, the State Department ran up the white flag and surrendered:

After further analysis, the Department of State (DoS) and General Services Administration (GSA) have determined that the Hunt Ray/CrismerFarm in Queen Anne’s County will no longer be considered for the proposed DoSForeign Affairs Security Training Center. DoS and GSA remain committed to a robust and transparent public engagement process and value the input from the citizens of Queen Anne’s County and the leadership of both Federal and local representatives on behalf of the community throughout this process.

As DoS increases its workforce and presence in unstable regions of the world, the need for a consolidated training center for DoS' Bureau of Diplomatic Security is even more important to ensure the safety and security of our civilian employees and partners. DoS and GSA are actively engaged in a site selection process and look forward to opening this essential national security facility and being good neighbors.

Report on the Consolidation of Diplomatic Security Training (May 2008)

My post of yesterday about the law suit that has been filed by a community group in southern Maryland, in regard to the government's plans to construct a hard-skills security training center for State Department use, mentioned a government report on the consolidation of Diplomatic Security Training.

Here is a link to that report, courtesy of the Department of State itself.

I have no direct interest in the matter of where the Foreign Affairs Security Training Center eventually gets established. However, I can see why that report interests the community groups that filed suit, because it makes clear that as of May 2008 the Department of State desired to consolidate its security training at Bill Scott Raceway in Summit Point, West Virginia. That choice would make sense since the Department has been using BSR for driving and firearms training for 25 years, it is reasonably convenient to Washington DC, and the Department already has interim facilities there.

The report mentions due diligence, engineering, architectural and cost-benefit studies, as well as a Fiscal Year 2009 budget request, for acquiring and developing a 240-acre plot adjacent to BSR as a consolidated training site. It even has schematics of that plot and how it would be integrated with BSR and the existing interim facilities.

But, in late 2009, the Department announced that its best option for a consolidated training center is to create a whole new facility, for substantially more money, at a location that is farther away than BSR, and where there is no existing infrastructure to build on.

No one ever explained to the public why the Summit Point option was taken off the table during 2009.

Maryland Group Sues Over Foreign Affairs Security Training Center

Local citizens in southern Maryland have not gone along quietly with the federal government's plans to build a hard-skills training center for Diplomatic Security in their bucolic community. They have forced the government to hold a series of public meetings on the matter, but that did nothing to overcome their objections. Now, they are going to take the government to court.

The Queen Anne's Conservation Association (QACA) is suing to force the Department of State and the General Services Administration to release documents relating to the selection of a site in Queen Anne's County for construction of the Foreign Affairs Security Training Center (FASTC). The Association had previously filed a Freedom of Information Act request for those documents, but received no reply.

Read the complaint here, and a press release from the Queen Anne's Conservation Association here.

The Association's spokesman says they have already informally obtained a “Report on the Consolidation of Diplomatic Security Training” and found that it contains some new information - new to the public, that is - which raises questions about the selection of Queen Anne's County for the FASTC. In fact, he says the Report indicates the government originally preferred Summit Point, West Virginia, which is one of the locations where the State Department currently conducts training. The Association would like to find out why Summit Point was dropped from the government's plans.

That sounds like a reasonable request to me.

Opposition Continues to Foreign Affairs Security Training Center

Local opposition to State Department plans for construction of a Foreign Affairs Security Training Center on Maryland's rural Eastern Shore appears to be hardening. The Washington Times had a story two days ago about the latest public meeting on the matter, a meeting which did nothing to satisfy local opponents.

For more than three hours, officials from the State Department Bureau of Diplomatic Security and the General Services Administration patiently answered questions and withstood scathing comments that revealed an opposition and distrust rivaling the most confrontational displays in last year's health care town-hall summits.

When it was over, few opinions had been swayed.

-- snip --

"We have been treated by the GSA [General Services Administration] and the State Department as if we're a bunch of backwood hicks who don't know what's good for us," said Centreville resident Sveinn Storm, a local activist who has taken a prominent role in opposing the center.

"In reality, we are mainstream America. We're angry about wasteful projects that are going to ensure that our children and grandchildren won't be able to climb out of the pit of debt that projects like this are digging for them. We are absolutely livid at the treatment that we've received."

-- snip --

Complaints range from concerns that the facility would overwhelm country roads or create too much noise to a fear that it would contribute to suburban "sprawl" or drive away game birds from this popular hunting area.

In opposing the project, County Commissioner Eric Wargotz, a Republican who is running for Ms. Mikulski's Senate seat, said zoning restrictions would limit a private developer to building about 150 to 200 town houses on the site, but the federal government is not bound by similar restrictions.

"This flies in the face of all the efforts this state has made toward smart growth and planning," he said.

-- snip --

A January public meeting intended to address local concerns ended up prompting an angry letter to GSA acting Administrator Stephen R. Leeds from Ms. Mikulski, who said agency representatives treated her constituents "with a disregard that borders on arrogance."

"They displayed a shocking, inexcusable and inexplicable lack of preparation, which has resulted in threat of lawsuits, widespread anger and what I fear now is an implacable opposition to the project," she wrote, adding that the GSA's inability to answer basic questions gave the appearance of a lack of transparency. "It is hard to imagine how your team could have done a worse job in explaining this important project to the community."

-- snip --

The State Department has persisted, with mixed results, in its effort to make the case that the facility will be good for the community. Officials have posted plans, maps and the answers to dozens of frequently asked questions on their Web site.
They have arranged bus tours to military and civilian facilities with similar missions as the proposed training center and staged explosives demonstrations to make their case to skeptical residents, politicians and reporters that the facility will not be as intrusive as they think.

In some cases, the efforts have only provided ammunition to the opponents, who have filed numerous Freedom of Information Act requests, securing project documents and details. Mr. Storm traveled with a video camera to New Mexico to visit a security training facility with a similar mission to document the town's disenchantment with the federal facility it invited on the promise of jobs and economic growth.

You can read more about the objections of local residents at Citizens for Greater Centreville.

Foreign Affairs Security Training Center: Last Chance For Comments

As previously noted, there are plans to build a new Foreign Affairs Security Training Center at a site on Maryland's Eastern Shore. Today, the U.S. General Services Administration (GSA), which is the State Department's agent in this matter, announced three February public meetings to address public concerns and inform the local community about the project.

Reportedly, GSA has decided that it did not adequately address concerns raised at the previous four or five public meetings, so it has extended the time allowed for public comment until February 19th.

Two public forums will be held at the Queen Anne’s County High School Auditorium, on Saturday, February 6th (3:30-5:30pm) and again on Wednesday, February 10th (6:00-8:00pm). In addition, there will be a small group workshop at the same location on Saturday, February 6th (1:00-3:00pm).

There has been significant local opposition to this development project so far (read about it here), so these last public forums ought to be well attended and lively.

New DS Training Center Site Plan

A site schematic diagram for the planned Foreign Affairs Security Training Center has been released to the public.

The site development looks fine, but the remote location - on Maryland's Eastern Shore - will probably make it impossible for DS agents to do day trips there for routine training tasks like firearms requalifications.