Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Homeland Security topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee advances bill to shield critical‑infrastructure and homeland‑security records from public disclosure
Summary
The House Government Operations Committee on April 8 advanced HB1640 to keep certain critical‑infrastructure and homeland‑security information confidential, with members raising questions about definitions and safeguards; Legal Services and Homeland Security officials said the measure focuses on records whose release would reveal security capabilities and that terrorism is defined by TCA 39‑13‑803.
The House Government Operations Committee advanced House Bill 1640 on April 8, approving a measure that would make specified records about critical infrastructure and homeland‑security threats confidential and refer the bill to the calendar and rules committee.
Sponsor Chairman Eldridge told the committee the bill is intended to "protect the state's critical infrastructure and related homeland security information from public inspection and disclosure," and listed categories to be held confidential, including records identifying critical infrastructure, documented threats or attacks, terrorism‑related threat information and sensitive information received from federal, state, local and private partners.
Committee members pressed legal and agency witnesses on the bill's scope and safeguards. Doug Garrett of the Office of Legal Services told the committee that language some members cited appears in the Senate version of the bill and is not in the House‑introduced draft, noting the House would have to concur to include that Senate language. "The language that is being referred to ... is actually in the Senate contained in the Senate version of the bill currently which is not in the house version," Garrett said.
Graham Tutor, director of legislation at the Tennessee Department of Safety and Homeland Security, and Lee Dotson, assistant commissioner for the Office of Homeland Security, said the confidentiality provisions are intended to apply narrowly to information whose disclosure would reveal security capabilities, analytical tradecraft, operational methods or specific threat indicators. Dotson told the committee the bill references the state statute defining terrorism: "It's referenced in the bill. It's defined as 39‑13‑803 in TCA."
Several members voiced concern about potential overreach. Representative Clemons asked who would determine whether conduct met the terrorism definition and whether state and federal definitions could conflict; Representative Fritts said his experience in federal work made him wary of broad secrecy provisions being misused. Committee members and witnesses said the bill contains specific carve‑outs — for example, it does not prohibit disclosure of investigations into alleged law‑enforcement misconduct, does not require redaction of judicial records such as affidavits or charging instruments, and does not withhold records of state or local costs tied to private partners. Witnesses also said the Office of Homeland Security would release basic information about arrests in relevant cases and would report annually to the General Assembly on threats against public officials.
The clerk reported the committee vote as "10 eyes, 1 nay, and two present not voting." The bill was reported off to calendar and rules.
The committee hearing included a legal clarification that the text some members referenced is in the Senate version of the legislation and not currently in the House introduced bill; any change to add that language would require further action by the House. The committee did not take final floor action; HB1640 will proceed to the next steps in the legislative process.
What happens next: HB1640 was sent to calendar and rules; committee witnesses said they would follow up on outstanding questions about statutory definitions and provide requested clarifications to members.
