Government Executive - Authors - Greg Seigle

Justice Department slow to get anti-terrorism funding to states

Greg Seigle — Wed, 24 Apr 2002 00:00:00 -0400

Only $68 million of the $145 million budgeted for the last two fiscal years and none of the $122 million set aside for fiscal 2002 has been disbursed, leaving $199 million in federal coffers, officials said.

The funds are intended to help 50 states and five U.S. territories--Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa and the North Mariana Islands--plus the District of Columbia prepare for any future terrorist attacks employing weapons of mass destruction, officials said.

Justice officials said they expect to begin issuing the remaining $77 million of the fiscal 2000 and 2001 funds in coming months, and possibly to begin sending out portions of this fiscal year's $122 million within the calendar year.

"Some [jurisdictions] are likely to receive [this year's funds] in future fiscal years because of the amount of time it has taken" for them to complete their plans and applications, said Glenda Kendrick, spokeswoman for the department's Office of Justice Programs.

While neither Justice nor any single state or jurisdiction appears solely to blame for the delay, department officials acknowledged that their grant application process is laborious and say the intended recipients have been slow to complete paperwork.

"There were states that didn't apply for the 1999 money until 2000, 2001 or even 2002," Kendrick said, referring to the three-year equipment program the department started in 1999 and, after the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks, continued for this year. For fiscal 2003 the program is being shifted to the Federal Emergency Management Agency.

"It was a very complex process that we asked them to do," Kendrick continued. "Some states would say too complex."

"It can be a lengthy process," David Hess, another department spokesperson, said, adding that the final state completed its application recently. "It requires some pretty intensive and comprehensive collection of information."

As of Oct. 17, when Attorney General John Ashcroft wrote to governors asking them to complete grant applications by Dec. 15 with assurances that Justice would be quick to approve them, only Utah, which was preparing for the 2002 Winter Olympics, had met all the federal requirements and received its full funding, officials said.

In order to receive the federal funds, states and jurisdictions must first assess their WMD threats, an evaluation endorsed by their governor--or, in the case of the District of Columbia, the mayor--then submit equipment requirements to Justice officials for review. Once approval is given states and jurisdictions must then fill out the "complex" Justice grant application forms, department officials said.

Besides the 23 states that have received fiscal 2000 and 2001 funds, the other 27 have already filed their applications with Justice, with only two awaiting department approval, according to Hess. Payments to those 27 have been delayed mainly because they only recently filed their applications, he said.

The funds are expected to pay for such protective gear as gas masks and suits, communications equipment and biological, chemical and radiological detection and decontamination devices, they said.

Specifically forbidden are purchases of vehicles and trailers, everyday computer equipment or firearms and ammunition, according to a Justice "application kit" obtained by Global Security Newswire.

Because the department's "state domestic preparedness equipment program" is geared to equip first responders--such as firefighters, police, ambulance crews and doctors--Justice urges that states funnel the money to the local level, the application document says.

]]>

Homeland security office to unveil national strategy in June

Greg Seigle — Thu, 11 Apr 2002 00:00:00 -0400

If approved by Bush, the strategy would provide a roadmap for the multitude of federal, state and local agencies involved in homeland defense, many of which have been competing against each other for the same roles and resources, the official said during a wide-ranging speech sponsored by the Monterey Institute of International Studies.

Although the speech was off the record, an Office of Homeland Security spokeswoman gave Global Security Newswire permission to report the official's remarks.

"It tries to be a national strategy, not just a federal strategy. We try to speak not just for the federal executive branch but for everyone in America," the official said.

"We need to distribute it across many different actors," he said, referring to the plethora of "different, disconnected, variously located and sized" federal, state and local organizations that participate in homeland security.

"It will at least lay out a plan, a sort of format that people can see, hopefully agree to, accept and then use to organize their own activities."

Any strategy put forth by Homeland Security Director Tom Ridge will not have executive power because Ridge does not hold a Cabinet position, but if Bush backs the plan, as analysts expect, it will likely carry a lot of influence.

Bush administration officials have proposed spending $38 billion on homeland security in fiscal 2003, including $6 billion for bioterrorism, $2 billion for border security and $3.5 billion for first responders.

First responders, including International Association of Firefighters officials scheduled to testify before the Senate Appropriations Committee Thursday, have been clamoring for the proposed funds--and demanding some sort of national guidance on how to best prepare for terrorist and weapons of mass destruction attacks.

Before the fiscal 2003 funds are distributed, Office of Homeland Security officials want to make sure there is a national strategy in place that tries to avoid the current overlaps, oversights or redundancies among the various federal, state and local players, the official said.

"Right now what we're seeing is confusion about who's supposed to do what," the official said.

"We have an argument between the federal government and the states and the local governments on who should pay for different and new activities under homeland security, and of course everyone wants the other guy to pay."

The competition, the official said, includes not only struggles between different agencies within the "federal family" but also among various offices within agencies.

In Congress there are varied committees that "oversee the exact same thing," and there are competitions within the state, municipal and county governments across the country, the official said.

White House officials, he said, "have an argument with the private sector about who's supposed to kick in and incur this cost. Should it be borne by the general revenue or should it be borne by a customer base for a product?

"I've been astonished at how much of my time is spent on resource issues--who's going to pay what?" the official added. "After about a month or two, post-Sept. 11, all of a sudden these sort of green eyeshades came out and took over the debate."

]]>

Feds could make bioterror 'impossible,' expert says

Greg Seigle — Tue, 09 Apr 2002 00:00:00 -0400

Global Security Newswire yesterday.

Tara O'Toole, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Civilian Biodefense Strategies, said infectious diseases will probably never be eradicated, but their use as weapons of mass destruction could be virtually eliminated if the United States invests sufficient resources into the public health sector in the next two or three decades.

"If we figure out enough counters to the threats [so] that it would be impossible to use a biological weapon as a weapon of mass lethality," O'Toole said during a wide-ranging interview.

"Twenty years from now, [if terrorists] have a disease that can kill everybody, I'm going to be able to take that disease the first time it hits, diagnose it, take it apart, and figure out the cure and the vaccine within 24 hours," she said.

Such drastic and unprecedented improvements to both public health agencies and health care providers could only result if President Bush implements a national defense policy that places biological defense as a top priority, injecting large amounts of cash that would still only be a fraction of budgets given to the Defense Department and homeland security efforts, O'Toole said.

"We can do this. We are America. We are the best in bioresearch," O'Toole said. "We have enormous advantages in terms of talent and infrastructure."

The $2.2 billion the United States is providing for biological defense this year is deceptively low funding, mainly because $1 billion of those funds are earmarked for diluting and creating more smallpox vaccine, O'Toole said.

Once that $1 billion for vaccines is lopped off, only $700 million is going to the nation's 5,000 hospitals--funds that need to be divided among the 50 states, she said.

"It sounds like a lot of money but it's nothing compared to the need," O'Toole said.

"We've got the Department of Defense Secretary [Donald Rumsfeld] saying that what he worries most about is bioterrorism. Then the next word is that we're spending $700 million for bioterrorism preparedness? Let's get in the same ballpark," she said.

"The increase in the [Defense] budget this year that Bush is asking for is $48 billion," she added. "Not only that, we've got to come from a standing start. This is not a budget that's been nourished throughout the Cold War to some degree of minimal competency. This is public health. It has been starved for the past decades. It doesn't have the fundamental talent that the military has been able to attract."

Attracting "the best and brightest" minds into the field of biological defense is one of O'Toole's main goals.

A recent American Hospital Association report said it would cost $12 billion for all U.S. hospitals to achieve the "rudimentary capability" to handle a biological weapons attack.

Another study in Maryland after a high-rise fire found that all of the state's hospitals combined could provide only 100 ventilators on a given day.

"Seven hundred million dollars is not a huge amount of money. It sounds like an enormous amount of money in terms of public health. [But] $10 million would go very quickly in Maryland," O'Toole said.

Because 36 states are currently mired in a recession and have hiring freezes, states such as Maryland are simply shuffling resources from one area to another, O'Toole said.

The United States, she said, needs to get "the laws changed so you can hire people through more svelte, less agonizing routes … there have to be new conduits for bringing in the talents."

]]>

Nuclear security agency needs management improvements, panel says

Greg Seigle — Fri, 29 Mar 2002 00:00:00 -0500

Management plans recently announced by NNSA Administrator John Gordon, a retired Air Force general, could bolster morale and productivity of the three-year-old agency, but more must be done to meet today's needs, including the hiring of its own chief financial officer, according to John Foster, head of a congressionally mandated panel on the U.S. nuclear weapons.

"The panel's view is that Gen. Gordon has kind of a mess on his hands," Foster told the House Armed Service's special oversight panel to assess the reliability, safety and security of the U.S. nuclear stockpile last week.

"The opinion that you find expressed at the laboratories, and to some extent at the plants, is that the functional processes that are imposed on them is worse now than it was when NNSA was established," Foster said. "It's very disturbing … the panel has difficulty trying to understand why with all the money and the tasks that need to be done, we can't get on with it."

The agency is slated to receive about $8 billion as part of the $21.9 billion Energy is requesting for fiscal 2003, funds that must be put to good use to secure and improve "a weapons complex that has atrophied to a point not fully appreciated by many," Foster said.

"We have tied up the management of the company--of the laboratories and the plants, performing endless studies and reviews in order to see whether or not we can do this or do that. Things we used to do in the matter of a week now can take months," Foster told lawmakers.

"It is just incredibly process-oriented. And these processes do not add to safety or security. In fact, in some cases they actually hurt the situation," Foster added. "The weapons program has, in the view of the panel, reached a watershed. Confidence in the nuclear test pedigree is deteriorating."

The agency should hire a chief financial officer who can address all of the agency's bureaucratic requirements, reporting not only to Congress and the Defense Department but also Energy, he said. In addition, the agency must create a resource plan that explains just how it will address the challenges faced by the stockpile stewardship program, which oversees the safety, security and reliability of the U.S. nuclear stockpile, Foster said.

If NNSA is unable to makes these changes, Congress should take further action to strengthen its mandate and provide the support it would need, Foster said, stopping short of saying NNSA should become a completely separate entity from Energy.

A chief NNSA financial officer, Foster said, will free Gordon from the "struggle" to report to the chief financial officer for the department--and from reporting to Congress, Defense and the National Weapons Council.

Gordon has created a reorganization plan that will take time to show results, according to a March 15 letter to Foster from Everett Beckner, NNSA deputy administrator for defense programs, obtained by Global Security Newswire.

"The report indicates dissatisfaction with the progress of the NNSA and its degree of autonomy, and recommends that if the rate of progress is inadequate that Congress should examine alternatives for managing the weapons program," Beckner wrote.

"Apparently, the panel feels that the Office of the Secretary of Energy has been deficient in support National Nuclear Security Administration, or otherwise hard to deal with," Beckner continued. "In fact the secretary has been very supportive of all issues brought before him by Gen. Gordon."

Last month Gordon told the special oversight panel that the agency plans to take several steps to streamline and improve operations, including consolidation of headquarters resources and reshuffling decision-making processes with the creation of a new management council.

Foster said the reorganization plan put forth by Gordon could improve the performance of the agency, but only if it is followed very closely.

Foster's panel recommends that "every option" be considered to meet the "unprecedented challenge" facing U.S. nuclear laboratories and production facilities, whose inefficiency wastes up to $1 billion a year, Foster said.

"If he is very forceful and one will not stand for deviations, then … the panel's view is that he can make it," Foster said.

Regardless, more reorganization must occur than what Gordon has planned thus far, Foster said.

In its final report, the Foster panel is expected to recommend that Energy and the NNSA:

Establish clear lines of authority, responsibility and accountability, definitions that are buttressed by the presence of chief financial officer.
Work with Defense to define the strategic direction, priorities and deliverables for the weapons program.
Rebuff detailed "how to" directives from government officials in functional areas such as environmental safety and health, security and program work.
Identify and reduce costs of staff activities.

According to Foster, the agency should also work with Defense to strengthen the Defense Threat Reduction Agency's programs for understanding weapons' effects, create systematic annual assessment of Defense's delivery platforms and integrated nuclear systems that parallel the processes for the weapons stockpile, and reassess the need for certain weapons requirements in view of the latest Nuclear Posture Review, especially those relating to hostile environments. ]]>

'First responders' to terrorism seek federal strategy, equipment

Greg Seigle — Wed, 06 Mar 2002 00:00:00 -0500

The United States should also ensure that first responders possess equipment that is lightweight, mobile and easy to use, federal, state and local officials told the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Military Procurement.

With the White House fiscal 2003 budget requesting $3.5 billion for first responders--a figure Congress is expected to approve, or perhaps boost--officials want to ensure the funds are not squandered on the "wrong" equipment and that limited personnel resources are not wasted on incomplete or redundant training.

"Far too many departments across the nation lack even the most basic levels of training, equipment and manpower," said Peter Gorman, a New York Fire Department captain who represents the International Association of Firefighters. "The needs are tremendous and can no longer be borne solely by local jurisdictions. The federal government must help shoulder this burden."

"We desperately need the federal government's assistance in setting standards, evaluating equipment and sharing that information with local law enforcement," said Washington, D.C., police Chief Charles Ramsey.

"In large departments such as ours, training represents a monumental undertaking," Ramsey continued. "Our ability to adequately train our officers and to respond effectively to terrorist attacks would be vastly enhanced by the development of training standards."

The Federal Emergency Management Agency now operates a national training center in New Mexico for first responders--firefighters, police, ambulance crews, doctors and other local emergency officials--but only a limited number of emergency crews are able to attend these seminars.

The center also does not set a national strategy for first responders, nor does it follow up on groups who have gone through its program, the officials testified.

"Without clear goals, we risk undermining ourselves while wasting our precious resources," said Edward Plaugher, chief of the Arlington County Fire Department in Virginia, which oversees the Pentagon and other key federal facilities.

"We as a nation have to date lacked a comprehensive national strategy with respect to our preparedness effort," he added. "We believe that a strategy should be developed and adopted that includes a single point of contact for first responders."

Federal officials echoed the sentiments of their local counterparts, testifying that first responders would benefit from national guidance for training and equipment purchases.

Police and emergency crews of all sorts need to be taught to at least recognize and report potential incidents involving weapons of of mass destruction, not only react to them, officials said.

"Saturating first responders will not equate to improved capability," said John McBroom, director of the office of emergency operations for the Energy Department's National Nuclear Security Administration. "They must be given capability to detect radiological materials and provided with timely technical information and evacuation advice."

The NNSA maintains 28 teams of radiological specialists dispersed through the country and 10 prototype "Tricorders" devices that, when placed near a suspect item, can collect information that can be transmitted for radiation analyses by an on-call expert. The Tricorders will soon be sent to selected FBI bomb squads across the country for further testing, McBroom said.

NNSA leaders believe the Tricorder may provide the "needed link between the first responder and national response assets," he said.

Emergency personnel should also benefit from a host of other new high-tech devices, including wearable technologies such as small radiation detectors used by U.S. Customs inspectors and thermal sightings and Global Positioning System units currently being battle-tested by U.S. Special Operations troops in Afghanistan, said subcommittee Chairman Curt Weldon, R-Pa.

"This is the first step in ending the shortcomings for our domestic defenders," said Weldon, who served as volunteer firefighter chief before election to Congress. "It is truly ridiculous that we spend millions of dollars to develop technology for our military … and we don't share the same lifesaving technology with our domestic defenders."

The preparedness of various states, cities and localities for a terrorist attack varies drastically, a gap that must be closed by standardized training and monitoring overseen by a single federal government agency, the officials testified.

At a bare minimum, every firefighter, police officer and emergency medical provider should be trained in the basics of an attack involving a weapon of mass destruction, said Plaugher. Firefighters in particular need to undergo such training because their current training for fires and other emergencies sometimes conflicts with how they should respond to a terrorist incident, he added. Such training should also not leave smaller municipalities out, officials said.

"There have been millions of dollars allocated for the training, equipping and exercising of response teams in our largest cities, however, little has reached rural and suburban America where the threats are as real and as dangerous," said William Jenaway, chief of fire and rescue services of King of Prussia, Pa.

"These non-metropolitan areas are where our water supplies reside, our basic industry and food production lie, and where much of our electrical power and natural resources are," Jenaway added.

Much of the federal funds slated for first responders should also be used to purchase basic equipment such as gas masks, chemical and biological protection suits and decontamination equipment, officials testified.

"Other equipment needs include explosive mitigation devices, including bomb suits and containment vessels, chemical and biological threat detection equipment to accurately sample and monitor the environment, and specialized vehicles for transporting personnel and equipment into and through contaminated areas," said Ramsey.

While much of the $3.5 billion White House officials have earmarked for first responders will surely be spent on equipment, much of it should also go toward training--the standards of which should be established federal specialists, officials said. Any such training programs should also have follow-on activities so that first responders retain what they've learned, the officials said.

]]>

Transportation official says strike at U.S. port would ripple across globe

Greg Seigle — Wed, 27 Feb 2002 00:00:00 -0500

A terrorist attack involving even a single ship might force Transportation Secretary Norman Mineta to abruptly close all 361 U.S. ports, said William Schubert, the Transportation Department's maritime administrator.

Grounding air transportation for four days last year as a result of the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks cost businesses billions in lost revenue and forced the federal government to bail out airlines. Those events would pale in comparison to a seaport shutdown, Schubert told the Senate Judiciary Subcommittee on Technology, Terrorism and Government Information.

"We would have to shut our ports down for four months just to check all the containers," Schubert said, referring to the tens of thousands of 40-foot containers stacked at U.S. ports on any given day. "If anything would ruin our economy, that would."

The few lawmakers present at the hearing, including those who represent the nation's largest ports in New York and Los Angeles, agreed that ports are extremely vulnerable to weapons of mass destruction attacks. These concerns are accentuated by predictions that container cargo traffic, which constitutes 90 percent of global trade, could double or triple within 20 years.

"If it comes to commerce or protection, protection will always come first," said Sen. Dianne Feinstein (D-Calif.), whose state has three of the busiest ports in the country, Los Angeles, Long Beach and Oakland.

"I don't mind our ports being shut down for four months if that will prevent a nuclear explosion. That's nothing," she said.

Terrorists Likely to Shield Weapons

Meanwhile, any nuclear bomb smuggled into a U.S. port in a shipping container would probably be encased in lead, shielding it from inspectors' handheld radiation detectors, Customs Service assistant commissioner Bonni Tischler told the subcommittee.

If terrorists or agents of any country ever try to sneak a nuclear bomb into a U.S. seaport-a realistic scenario considering that on a daily basis drugs, weapons, material goods and even people are smuggled into the country in shipping containers-they would likely conceal its radiation emissions with lead casing, Tischler said.

"If it's shielded, you're not going to pick it up" with the 4,000 handheld radiation detectors currently used by customs inspectors throughout the country, Tischler said. "So I think we need lead detectors."

Customs inspectors do use X-ray devices to scan containers-readings that would detect lead casings-but these contraptions are large, cumbersome, crane-like devices only used on a small percentage of the 6 million containers shipped into the United States each year.

While it has been frequently reported that inspection rates for containers are only 2 percent, Customs Commissioner Robert Bonner said the figures are higher. Rates are even up to 10 percent with Canadian goods, under the belief terrorists might try to smuggle weapons of mass destruction into the United States through Canadian ports of entry, Bonner said.

Shipping containers offloaded at Canadian and U.S. ports could soon wind up almost anywhere in the United States after being trucked or railroaded from a seaport without even being opened. Any containers that contain hidden nuclear, biological or chemical weapons could then be detonated or released at some unsuspecting site.

In the past decade the shipping industry has spared safety for profits, said Feinstein.

"Everything has been to speed trade, let it go through, ask questions later," Feinstein said. "I agree with [Tischler] on the shielding, and I agree with the need for more X-rays."

]]>

New agency aims to improve flow of anti-terror information

Greg Seigle — Wed, 20 Feb 2002 00:00:00 -0500

Details of the new agency remain scarce, but it is headed by former National Security Adviser John Poindexter, who holds a doctorate in information technology and has long pushed for greater data flow among pertinent agencies, officials said yesterday.

The agency has several goals, among them to solve the cultural problem of getting secretive organizations such as the CIA, FBI and Defense Intelligence Agency to share information, officials said.

Representatives from these organizations are currently "working like crazy" to create a new supercomputer system that would make it easier for them and the other 30 federal agencies that collect classified data to cull and share information, a U.S. official said last week.

"It's not going as well as it could. We're looking for ways to improve," Special Assistant to the President Frank Cilluffo told Global Security Newswire after delivering a speech at a bioterrorism conference.

"We are coming up with ways to fuse the information so as not to jeopardize the sources and methods," from which the data was obtained, Cilluffo said. "It's a push-pull process. There is no easy answer."

A major hurdle, he said, is persuading the CIA, FBI and a host of other secretive agencies to not only open up and share information, but to understand each other's needs--hence, each other's cultures.

Currently the Customs Service and other organizations on the front lines of the war on terrorism are not linked to the databases of the CIA--a gap the new agency wants to fill to prevent more terrorists from entering the United States.

Getting the CIA, DIA and other intelligences agencies to work in harmony with the FBI, Customs and other law enforcement agencies is a difficult task due to their different mindsets, Cilluffo said.

"One wants to string [suspects] up and the other wants to string them along," he said.

]]>

HHS begins sending out bioterrorism funds

Greg Seigle — Fri, 15 Feb 2002 00:00:00 -0500

Hospitals, laboratories and first responders will begin to receive $220 million of the funds over the holiday weekend, with the remaining $880 million to be distributed this spring, Thompson told the Senate Budget Committee Thursday.

Starting March 15, state and local recipients are to begin presenting plans on how to spend the money, plans which need to be approved by their governors, then the Health and Human Services Department, Thompson said.

The final 80 percent may not reach states until May, department spokesman Bill Pierce said.

The $1.1 billion is not intended to purchase equipment such as fire trucks and chemical and biological protection suits, but is earmarked for the purchase of communications systems that link with the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention public health alert network, Pierce said.

Some senators, however, expressed displeasure that state and local authorities have to "jump through hoops" to obtain the funds, which officials said are sorely needed to prepare U.S. cities and states for any bioterrorism attacks.

"I'm troubled, not baffled, that the Department of Health and Human Services is only releasing 20 percent of the $1.1 billion," said Sen. Robert Byrd, D-W.Va. "Why are the states forced to run this bureaucratic red tape gauntlet before receiving the remaining 80 percent?"

Thompson said his department is not sending out all the money immediately because state and local authorities need time to absorb the funds--and to come up with a "complete, comprehensive plan" to prepare for bioterrorism attacks in the United States.

"We will see more biological attacks, period," said Sen. Bill Frist, R-Tenn., the Senate's only serving medical doctor.

Overall, this year's HHS budget includes $2.9 billion for various bioterrorism programs, much of it intended to give first responders the basic capabilities to respond to and handle a biological attack. Another $4.3 billion is slated for next year in the fiscal 2003 White House budget proposal.

Byrd was clearly upset that the $15 billion he proposed for bioterrorism preparation this year did not appear in the White House budget request.

Byrd's fiscal 2002 proposal had been approved by the Senate Appropriations Committee but "was basically killed on the floor," Jim Dobbs, Byrd's deputy press secretary, said.

If White House officials had not opposed his $15 billion proposal, which would have been in addition to the $40 billion in emergency supplemental funds rushed through Congress after Sept. 11, "we'd have that money right now," Byrd said.

President Bush, Byrd said, believed it was "too large and too early."

"We want to make sure that money gets out there … for surge capacity and so on," Thompson testified.

"We're anxious to get the money," said Lt. Aaron Osgood, head of special operations for the Portland, Maine, fire department. "We really need it quickly."

]]>

CIA, FBI developing intelligence supercomputer

Greg Seigle — Tue, 12 Feb 2002 00:00:00 -0500

Global Security Newswire yesterday. Under a directive issued by President Bush, and overseen by Office of Homeland Security officials, CIA and FBI officials are "working like crazy" to create a comprehensive database that could used by various federal and, in some cases, state agencies, officials said.

"They're trying to push more data and resources to the agencies and people in the field that otherwise wouldn't have them," a U.S. official said, referring to a data-mining system that could be used by the 32 federal agencies that collect classified information.

"There are several communitywide data-mining architectures that are being looked at to allow information sharing among the intelligence and law enforcement communities," the official continued. "A lot of it is tied to the homeland security initiatives."

The federal government is spending $155 million this year for "information and intelligence sharing," with $722 million more requested in next year's White House budget proposal, according to Homeland Security Office spokesman Gordon Johndroe.

"The goals are to tear down the information stovepipes," Johndroe said yesterday, referring to the long-held practice of various agencies to keep data to themselves. "Information stays in one pipe, and now we're going to tear down those stovepipe walls."

Key Move

The creation of a new data-mining base, one capable of collecting unprecedented amounts of information that could be distributed to an array of agencies, has been viewed as the key move needed to prod the CIA, FBI and other secretive organizations to truly open up and work more closely and effectively together, officials and analysts said.

The sharing of a single database by the various agencies could allow U.S. authorities to better monitor terrorists and their financial support structures--and the companies and countries that participate in the spread of weapons of mass destruction, they said.

"It's not going to be easy to do this," said L. Paul Bremer, a former ambassador at large for counterterrorism who co-chaired a January Heritage Foundation report, "Defending the American Homeland," that deemed as "critical" more information sharing among intelligence agencies. "It isn't going to solve the problem, but it's going to make it more difficult for [terrorists] to enter the country," he said.

Prior to the Sept. 11 attacks that killed about 3,100 people, five of the 19 hijackers were on various government watch lists but were never detected prior to the airline attacks, Bremer said.

The creation of a database shared by various intelligence and law enforcement agencies is "the first step in the right direction," said Bud DeFlaviis, spokesman for Rep. Curt Weldon, R-Pa., who has been pushing for such a system.

"It will only improve the flow of information between the agencies," the U.S. official said. "In the post-Sept. 11 environment there's greater desire for more information."

Pooling Resources

The use of massive high-speed computers with cutting-edge software could allow a wide range of U.S. organizations to pool resources, enabling them to better monitor and prevent the movements of terrorists and those that participate in the proliferation of dangerous weapons, officials said.

Utilizing the types of supercomputers already used by private industry to conduct marketing research, the CIA, FBI and other investigative agencies should be able to move beyond Counterintelligence-21--an information-sharing system now being used but already considered outdated, analysts said. The new system would take advantage of a faster, more comprehensive database, they said.

The new system under development should "meet the needs of all the consumers," the U.S. official said. "A lot of it is driven by [Homeland Security Director] Tom Ridge's office. It's something [CIA and FBI officials are] working on continuously. They're continuously meeting, discussing and designing the new database."

"It's been the topic of discussion" during meetings between Ridge and President Bush, Johndroe said.

Casting a Larger Net

A new supercomputer "will only help the information flow between the agencies, particularly between the federal agencies and the state and local authorities," the U.S. official said. "It's going to help the people who need it the most--first responders, the military, whoever."

The officials and analysts have said that it could be dangerous for too many people to get their hands on classified information during the war on terrorism, a concern balanced by the need to get information to all pertinent officials, including state and local authorities.

There are ways to safeguard the information on a single database, so that data is shared only on a "need to know" basis, they said.

Currently when intelligence agencies share information they do not provide raw data. Instead they offer outside agencies their interpretations of such data, a slow, cumbersome and often incomplete process, analysts said.

To make the most of scarce resources, intelligence officials need to make their raw data available to pertinent agencies or officials, analysts added.

FBI officials would not comment, but the U.S. official said the major challenge in devising a new supercomputer is making sure it has all the proper safeguards needed to protect the vital information it provides.

"Intelligence agencies are very reluctant to put a lot of information on a database that can be shared," Bremer said. "There are very few home runs in counterintelligence. You win with a lot of bunts and singles."

]]>

Bioterror expert criticizes CDC, NIH for poor communication

Greg Seigle — Thu, 07 Feb 2002 00:00:00 -0500

Both the CDC and the NIH need to dramatically improve their communications with outside doctors and scientists--and key government officials--to best protect the United States from any biological attacks, Tara O'Toole, director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Civilian Biodefense Strategies, told Global Security Newswire.

Singling out the CDC for an "absolutely terrible" response to the anthrax epidemic last fall, when four anthrax-laden letters seriously infected 18 people and killed five, O'Toole said the CDC is "not big enough" to handle the responsibility of coordinating preparations for a biological weapons attack.

"I know there aren't enough human resources to create a plan, much less implement one," said O'Toole, who in recent months has briefed a host of leaders, including Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, on the major gaps in the public health care system.

O'Toole accused both the CDC and the NIH of being small, tightly knit organizations that rarely open up to outside circles--contentions denied by their officials.

"We're going to need a [wide-scale plan] to get the new talent in the system. We need an immediate infusion of seasoned professionals," said O'Toole, a former Clinton administration health official. "I hope we do it fast enough so we don't spend a truckload of money and not go anywhere and get discouraged."

The medical community is suddenly being swamped with funds--this year's federal budget is pouring about $2.2 billion into various bioterrorism prevention and protection programs, and White House officials want to almost triple that amount for fiscal 2003. The NIH's Institute for Allergy and Infectious Diseases is slated to receive $1.7 billion of the funds proposed for next year, a $1.4 billion jump from this year, and the CDC is due to collect $1.6 billion for its bioterrorism programs alone--$661,000 less than this year.

"We need to restructure organizations and create new organizations," O'Toole said. "We need a 21st century medical system. Simply refurbishing the [existing] system won't do."

The current medical system is based on a 1930s model, which resulted from former President Franklin Roosevelt's efforts to improve living conditions during the Great Depression. In 1988 the National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine issued a report highly critical of the system, but no major changes resulted.

O'Toole said that when the 1988 report came out the public health system was "glued together with Scotch tape, and since then things have grown worse."

New Information Network Needed

The United States needs a new national information network that scientists, doctors and researchers can not only tap into, but also use to send vital information in times of emergency, O'Toole said.

Any such information network "needs some national guidance--and it can't come from CDC," she said. "The CDC is not prepared to go big picture very fast."

During the recent anthrax outbreaks the CDC "did an awful job of allowing outside information" into its inner circle, O'Toole continued. "The political community was out of the loop during the early stages … and there was no clear process to identify the 'science problems,' as I call them. They didn't get better as events unfolded."

During the beginning of the anthrax attacks, Canadian researchers discovered that when an envelope containing anthrax spores was opened, the spores dispersed more widely and in much higher numbers than previously believed, according to the Wall Street Journal. The study also found that if tainted envelopes were not completely sealed, they could pose risks to postal workers who handled them.

The microbes "were going all over the room" of the Canadian researcher and "the CDC apparently wasn't aware of that until very late in the process," O'Toole said.

Outside bioterrorism experts "did not get called in until later in the game," O'Toole said, and then only for "last minute" conference calls during which "it wasn't clear who was in charge. Even those conversations were chaotic."

CDC officials refused several opportunities to comment the past couple days, leaving spokeswoman Sharon Hoskins to say she was unaware of any such problems.

NIH Doesn't Escape Criticism

Early this week, top NIH officials met with what Anthony Fauci, director of NIH's Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases, called "a very elite group of ad hoc advisers" to determine the research initiatives the institute will pursue with the more than $1.7 billion the White House is seeking.

NIH plans to spend $441 million for basic research into anthrax and smallpox, and how the human body reacts to them, Fauci said. Another $592 million would go towards the research and development of vaccines and drugs to prevent and treat those diseases, he said.

Fauci said $195 million would be slated for clinical research, with an additional $520 million used to build special facilities to conduct the research with the deadly agents.

O'Toole said Fauci and NIH officials merely met with "the feds" and that the group is approaching the threat of bioterrorism by only preparing for anthrax and a couple of other infectious diseases such as smallpox.

"That's wrong. We're talking about a thinking enemy," O'Toole said, arguing that NIH should research a wider range of deadly diseases that could be launched against the United States.

Concerning the $592 million earmarked for drug research and development, "NIH does not develop vaccines and antidotes. Private industry does," O'Toole said.

Fauci disagreed, however, saying that NIH is involved in "several" of the six or seven steps it takes to develop a new vaccine or antidote. "We develop the product and then partner with industry" to mass-produce and market it, Fauci said.

Rethinking Research Resources

Regardless of who develops drugs and antibiotics, both the CDC and the NIH should be more open to outside expertise, O'Toole said.

"The NIH needs to think about getting new people into this" bioterrorism research, she said. "A lot of scientists have some great ideas and will help in the near term, but they don't want to deal with NIH's lengthy and laborious grant process," which can take several months.

Fauci said that the NIH is utilizing its "remarkable accelerated review process," an expedited grant approval sequence used for research into AIDS and certain cancers. "We rely very heavily on outside expertise, blue-ribbon panels and such," he added.

O'Toole, however, said, "NIH is going to have to rethink how to solicit research and allow outside information …. To get top scientists in this game they need to make sure the money's going to stay and won't dry up in a year or two."

The infusion of money is unlikely to go away soon--in Congress there is talk of adding to the $6 billion President Bush has requested for the bioterrorism field for 2003. Health and Human Services Secretary Tommy Thompson has said the record funding merely represent a "down payment" on future expenditures.

"I'm surprised and pleased. They're finally putting their money where their mouth is," O'Toole said. "We're definitely going to need sustained investments over the next several years, at least a decade."

She added, however, "the science community will have a hard time absorbing so much money while taking a new direction …. We really need a strategy for some of these investments so we come out with come tangible results."

]]>

Soldiers put new high-tech weapons to the test in Afghanistan

Greg Seigle — Fri, 11 Jan 2002 00:00:00 -0500

Greg Seigle is a writer for Global Security Newswire. ]]>