PSOB to Move on 9/11 Related Exposure Cases; NAPO in the News; Pressure on Judiciary Committee to Respond to ECPA Concerns Prior to Markup; 2016 Lobby Day: Legislative Update & NAPO’s Annual Legislative Recognition Luncheon

April 11, 2016

Click to view PDF

 

PSOB to Move on 9/11 Related Exposure Cases

The Public Safety Officers’ Benefit (PSOB) Office released a Notice to Claimants on April 6^th stating that “effective immediately” the Office will be implementing a protocol for determining PSOB claims submitted for law enforcement officers, firefighters, and other first responders whose deaths and disabilities have been linked to exposure from their response efforts to the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

The PSOB will work collaboratively with the World Trade Center Health Program (WTCHP) and the Victims Compensation Fund (VCF), enacted by the James Zadroga 9/11 Health and Compensation Act of 2010, to determine PSOB 9/11 exposure claims based on the WTCHP medical certifications and VCF determinations.  By relying on the determinations of the WTCHP and the VCF, the PSOB Office states that it will be able to process a significant number of 9/11 related claims.

The PSOB Office states that under its current regulations it is unable to process claims that do not have a WTCHP or VCF certification.  For these remaining 9/11 related claims, the Office is developing a process to allow them to be determined using the methodology established by the WTCHP.  It will have to put this methodology into regulations, on which they have just begun working.  Given the length of time needed to go through the federal regulatory process, it most likely will not be until 2017 that the PSOB Office will be able to process and determine these remaining 9/11 cases. This is unfortunate, as most of these cases pre-date the Zadroga Act and the establishment of the WTCHP and VCF – these are cases that have been pending at the PSOB Office for at least 6 years.  There are cases that have been pending since 2008.

There is a backlog of 175 9/11 health-related death and disability claims at the PSOB Office. NAPO finds this deplorable. While we appreciate that the PSOB Office is finally acting on these claims using accepted and respected methodology, NAPO cannot understand why it has waited so long to collaborate with the WTCHP and VCF.  Since the passage of the Zadroga Act in 2011, NAPO and other stakeholder organizations have been pressing the PSOB Office to work with the WTCHP and VCF in determining the 9/11 related claims.  It is unacceptable that the PSOB Office sat on these claims for so long before taking the logical step to partner with the WTCHP and VCF to determine these cases. 

NAPO is participating in a PSOB Stakeholder Meeting on April 11^th and will raise these concerns with the Office leadership. We will work to ensure that the 9/11 cases are promptly reviewed and determined and we will put pressure on the PSOB Office to publish the new regulations as soon as possible so the remaining cases are not left in limbo for another year or two.

The Notice to Claimants on the protocol for determining PSOB claims involving 9/11 exposure can be viewed here.  If you have any questions, please contact Andy Edmiston at aedmiston@napo.org.

 

NAPO in the News 

On April 5th, NAPO Executive Director Bill Johnson was quoted in a NBCNewYork.com I-Team report entitled “Port Authority Cops Say Surprise Terror Drills Pose Danger to Officers, Public”. The article focused on a security drill the Port Authority of New York and New Jersey conducted at a New Jersey train station where two suspicious men were taking pictures of security cameras.  Unbeknownst to the public or the Port Authority police officers responding to the call, the two men were Port Authority security analysts conducting a drill. 

The report quoted a letter Johnson sent on behalf of NAPO to Port Authority Executive Director Pat Foye:  “By intentionally perpetrating a hoax terrorist surveillance of a target, the CSO [Office of the Chief Security Officer] personnel inexcusably placed themselves and the greater public at risk by their deliberate provocation of a police response.” 

The full article is available online.

*** 

On April 4^th, Johnson was quoted in a WRAL.com article entitled “More two-man patrols after solo officer killed Alabama man.”  The article reported on the decision by the Montgomery, Alabama police chief to increase two-officer patrol units in high crime areas of the city after a white solo officer shot and killed a black man in February.  Chief Ernest Finley stated that the increase in two-officer patrols was for officer and public safety. The article references NAPO’s advocacy efforts regarding two-officer patrols and quotes Johnson on the benefits of such a policy:

“The National Association of Police Organizations advocates for increased use of two-officer police patrols. Executive director Bill Johnson said they are ‘safer’ across the board for officers but also enable officers to interact more comfortably with the community. Johnson said he's not familiar with the specifics of the Smith case but believes two-officer patrols are less likely to ‘worry about being alone in a potentially volatile situation.’

The full article is available online.

NAPO will continue to ensure our members’ voices are heard loud and clear on the Hill, with the Administration, and in the media. If you have any questions about the publication cited above, please contact Bill Johnson at: bjohnson@napo.org.

 

Pressure on Judiciary Committee to Respond
to ECPA Concerns Prior to Markup

NAPO and other law enforcement organizations continued to meet with Republican members of the House Judiciary Committee to make our concerns with H.R. 699, the Email Privacy Act, known and to gain support for proposed amendments to the bill prior to the scheduled Committee markup of the bill on April 13^th.

While NAPO does not object to the requirement for law enforcement to obtain a warrant for the contents of stored communications, H.R. 699 would do much more than that. NAPO believes that several other provisions of the bill would place an undue burden on law enforcement’s ability to gather evidence that can help solve crimes. Furthermore, the bill does not address the real and growing challenges faced by investigators and prosecutors in obtaining electronic evidence when they attain the required legal process.

After several weeks of meetings with staff and Committee members, we believe the Committee has heard and will respond to one of our major concerns with the bill: the unprecedented requirement for law enforcement to serve a warrant for electronic evidence directly on a customer or subscriber who is under investigation and describe details of the investigation.  We have asked the Committee to strike this language and we have been told that there is agreement to do so.

The other serious concern we have is that the bill does not contain sufficient exceptions to the warrant requirement for urgent situations like an imminent threat of physical harm, likely destruction of evidence, consent by a victim or a witness, or public safety emergencies that are not necessarily part of a criminal investigation (missing child, missing elderly adult).  We are continuing to work with the Committee to address this important issue.

NAPO will be attending the Committee markup on April 13^th to see if any of our suggested amendments to the bill are offered and agreed to. NAPO hopes that there is at least a serious debate over our concerns and what they mean to the ability of law enforcement to keep our communities safe. H.R. 699 has substantial bi-partisan support, despite the law enforcement community’s misgivings with the language, and is likely to pass out of the Judiciary Committee easily and move to the House floor for a vote.  NAPO will focus our attention on the Senate, which has yet to take up any ECPA-related legislation, to get ahead of the situation and ensure they are educated on our concerns.

NAPO will keep our members up to date on the outcome of the Committee markup and the status of this legislation.  If you have any questions about H.R. 699 or NAPO’s efforts, please contact Andy Edmiston at aedmiston@napo.org.

 

May 12, 2016
2016 Lobby Day: Legislative Update &
NAPO’s Annual Legislative Recognition Luncheon 

Please join NAPO on May 12th for our Legislative Day on Capitol Hill.  Use this opportunity to lobby Congressional Representatives and Senators on behalf of your members concerning the issues which affect law enforcement.  Prior to lobbying Capitol Hill, plan to attend NAPO’s Legislative Breakfast for an update on NAPO’s legislative priorities, results to date from the 114^th Congress, and to receive handouts to use during Hill visits.  While on Capitol Hill, be sure to stop by NAPO’s Legislative Luncheon in the Cannon Caucus Room, where several Congressmen and Senators will be recognized for their continued support of Law Enforcement.   

 

Schedule of Events

 

For assistance setting up your Capitol Hill appointments, contact Andy Edmiston, NAPO’s Director of Governmental Affairs, at (800) 322-6276 or aedmiston@napo.org, by May 2^nd.

 

The registration fee of $150.00 per person includes the Legislative Update Breakfast, Handouts, and the Legislative Recognition Lunch. Please contact Elizabeth Loranger, NAPO’s Director of Events, at (800) 322-6278 or eloranger@napo.org if you have any questions regarding the seminar or hotel arrangements.

NAPO has reserved a block of rooms at JW Marriott Hotel. Room rates are $239 per night.  To make your reservation, please call (800) 228-9290 and tell them you are with NAPO.  In order to receive the reduced rate, reservations must be made by April 20.  The hotel is expected to sell out, so please make your hotel reservations early.

 

Register online at www.napo.org or complete the registration form and return to NAPO at eloranger@napo.org or Fax to (703) 684-0515 by MAY 2^nd.

 

 

 

Please monitor NAPO’s website, www.napo.org, and Facebook page: National Association of Police Organizations, and follow us on Twitter at NAPOpolice for breaking news and updates.