Discuss below in a 150 words each:
1. We have realized the critical infrastructure information helps in facilitating great sharing among the owners and the operators of the critical infrastructure and the government entities with the infrastructure protection responsibilities, whereby reducing the vulnerability of the nation to terrorism.
Another asset could be an electrical production plant that is part of the overall energy sector. "The U.S. energy infrastructure fuels the economy of the 21st century. Without a stable energy supply, health and welfare are threatened, and the U.S. economy cannot function" (DHS, 2015). One piece of CII about this asset would be information such as ...how to disable, dismantle, or destroy, say, a high-energy electrical transmission tower. A terrorist could learn how to dismantle a piece of equipment within the electrical production plant that could then have cascading effects, induce chaos and discredit federal authorities. Your thoughts?
2. A representative said on Wednesday it would now release copies of MPs' invoices and receipts in redacted form if requested through the Freedom of Information Act. (Syal, 2015). The development means that Ipsa will be forced to spend more public money redacting personal information from the documents. It will also put more information into the public domain, which campaigners claim will improve scrutiny.
Another example of information that was obtained via The FOIA is much more related to Critical Infrastructure. "Former Idaho Gov. Cecil D. Andrus filed a lawsuit Tuesday against the U.S. Department of Energy to force the federal agency to comply with the federal Freedom of Information Act and publicly share information..." (Statesman Staff, 2015). Andrus wants information in regards to the shipment of spent nuclear fuel to The Idaho National Laboratory. While the shipment of spent fuel most definitely proves to be a threat, especially when terrorism is considered, Andrus wants the information. Andrus wants information, not about times and locations of shipments, but in regards to the waiver the company is trying to obtain. "The lawsuit comes after months of effort by Andrus to require DOE to provide relevant and timely information to the citizens of Idaho about its request for a "waiver" from the 1995 Batt Agreement that would allow the agency, in direct violation of the 20-year old agreement, to bring commercial waste to the Idaho lab" (Statesman Staff, 2015). Your thoughts?