Terror alert system is too vague, congressional researchers say

The color-coded system used by the Homeland Security Department to warn of potential terrorist attacks suffers from being too vague and from failing to provide specific information on appropriate protective measures, according to a Congressional Research Service report released last week.

The Homeland Security Advisory System, established last year, uses five color levels to indicate various potential threats-green, representing a "low" risk of attack; blue, representing a "guarded" risk; yellow, representing an "elevated" risk; orange, representing a "high" risk; and red, representing a "severe" risk. Homeland Security uses information provided by various agencies, including the CIA, FBI, the National Security Agency and the Defense Department, to set the alert level.

Since the advisory system was launched, the level has been raised from yellow to orange four times, according to the report prepared by Congress' public policy research service. Currently, the terrorism threat alert level stands at yellow.

In its report, CRS warned that the advisory system is too vague on the nature of the potential terrorist threat, leading to concerns that the public may begin to disregard it. Each time the alert level was elevated, officials cited intelligence information as the cause, but offered no specifics, the report says. In addition, no specific governmental facilities, regions, states or private companies were identified as being at special risk, it says.

CRS has suggested to Congress that it instruct the Homeland Security Department to use the advisory system to provide specific warnings to targeted locations or entities to the extent possible, according to the report. Homeland Security could also issue general warnings, without using the advisory system, to notify state and local governments and the public, the report says.

For each of the five alert levels, the advisory system provides a set of appropriate protective measures, but these are only identified for U.S. agencies, according to the report. The system does not recommend protective measures for states, cities or the general public, it says. The report suggests that Congress should do more to establish protective measures for states, localities and the general public, even through legislation, if necessary. It warns, however, that a list of general measures may be less effective than those developed by state and local governments themselves.

Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., criticized the advisory system Monday, warning that he might introduce legislation to change the system if the Homeland Security Department does not act.

"The terror alert system may be contributing to the very panic and confusion in our society that the terrorists seek to generate," Lautenberg said in a press statement. "What the American people want are serious protective measures, rather than window dressing," he added.

Lautenberg is the author of an unanimously approved amendment to the fiscal 2004 Homeland Security appropriations bill that would require Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge to provide Congress with a list of reforms for the advisory system by late October.

A Homeland Security spokesman said yesterday that the department is "well aware" that the advisory system needs revision.

"We are well aware that it is a brand new program that will need to continually be refined," Homeland Security spokesman Gordon Johndroe was quoted by The Washington Post as saying. "Communicating threat information even to security personnel is a new and developing field for this country," he said.