Establish a national advisory board composed of Federal, State, and local public health officials and representatives of public and private medical care providers as an adjunct to the new office, to ensure that such issues are an important part of the national strategy - Improve health and medical education and training programs through actions that include licensing and certification requirements - Establish standards and protocols for treatment facilities, laboratories, and reporting mechanisms Clarify authorities and procedures for health and medical response - Medical entities, such as the Joint Commission on Accreditation of Healthcare Organizations, should conduct periodic assessments of medical facilities and capabilities Promote Better Research and Development and Create National Standards That the new office, in coordination with the Office of Science and Technology Policy, develop a comprehensive plan for RDT&E, as a major component of the national strategy That the new office, in coordination with the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) establish a national standards program for combating terrorism, focusing on equipment, training, and laboratory processes Third Report-For Ray Downey Our Third Annual Report to the President and the Congress builds on findings and recommendations in our First and Second Annual Reports delivered in 1999 and 2000. It reflects a national strategic perspective that encompasses the needs of all three levels of government and the private sector. It seeks to assist those who are dedicated to making our homeland more secure. Our recommendations fall into five categories: • Empowering State and Local Response by ensuring the men and women on the front line of the war against terrorism inside our borders have the tools and resources needed to counter the murderous actions of terrorists; • Enhancing Health and Medical Capacities, both public and private, to help ensure our collective ability to identify attacks quickly and correctly, and to treat the full scope of potential casualties from all forms of terrorist attacks; • Strengthening Immigration and Border Controls to enhance our ability to restrict the movement into this country, by all modes of transportation, of potential terrorists and their weapons and to limit severely their ability to operate within our borders; • Improving Security Against Cyber Attacks and enhancing related critical infrastructure protection to guard essential government, financial, energy, and other critical sector operations against attack; Clarifying the Roles and Missions for Use of the Military for providing critical and appropriate emergency response and law enforcement related support to civilian authorities. Mister Chairmen, I should note that the substance of all of the recommendations contained in the third report were approved by the panel at its regular meeting held on August 27 and 28, 2001-Tuesday the 28th being exactly two weeks prior to the attacks of September 11. Although we thoroughly reviewed those recommendations subsequently, the panel unanimously agreed that all were valid and required no supplementation prior to publication. The recommendations contained in that report, listed below in summary form, are discussed in detail in the body of the report, and further supported by material in the report appendices, especially the information from the nationwide survey of State and local responders covering an array of preparedness and response issues. State and Local Response Capabilities Increase and accelerate the sharing of terrorism-related intelligence and threat assessments Design training and equipment programs for all-hazards preparedness Dedesign Federal training and equipment grant programs to include sustainment components Increase funding to States and localities for combating terrorism Consolidate Federal grant program information and application procedures Design Federal preparedness programs to ensure first responder participation, especially volunteers cies Establish an information clearinghouse on Federal programs, assets, and agen Configure Federal military response assets to support and reinforce existing structures and systems Health and Medical Capabilities Implement the AMA Recommendations on Medical Preparedness for Terrorism Fully resource the CDC Biological and Chemical Terrorism Strategic Plan Fully resource the CDC Laboratory Response Network for Bioterrorism Fully resource the CDC Secure and Rapid Communications Networks Develop standard medical response models for Federal, State, and local levels Increase Federal resources for exercises for State and local health and medical entities Establish a government-owned, contractor-operated national vaccine and therapeutics facility plies Review and recommend changes to plans for vaccine stockpiles and critical sup Develop a comprehensive plan for research on terrorism-related health and medical issues Review MMRS and NDMS authorities, structures, and capabilities Develop an education plan on the legal and procedural issues for health and medical response to terrorism Develop on-going public education programs on terrorism causes and effects Immigration and Border Control tees" Create an intergovernmental border advisory group Fully integrate all affected entities into local or regional "port security commit Ensure that all border agencies are partners in intelligence collection, analysis, and dissemination Create, provide resources for, and mandate participation in a "Border Security Awareness" database system Require shippers to submit cargo manifest information simultaneously with shipments transiting U.S. borders Establish "Trusted Shipper" programs Expand Coast Guard search authority to include U.S. owned-not just "flagged"-vessels Expand and consolidate research, development, and integration of sensor, detection, and warning systems Increase resources for the U.S. Coast Guard for homeland security missions Negotiate more comprehensive treaties and agreements for combating terrorism with Canada and Mexico Cyber Security Include private and State and local representatives on the interagency critical infrastructure advisory panel Create a commission to assess and make recommendations on programs for cyber security Establish a government funded, not-for-profit entity for cyber detection, alert, and warning functions Convene a "summit" to address Federal statutory changes that would enhance cyber assurance Create a special "Cyber Court" patterned after the court established in FISA Develop and implement a comprehensive plan for cyber security research, development, test, and evaluation Use of the Military Establish a homeland security under secretary position in the Department of Defense Establish a single unified command and control structure to execute all military support to civil authorities Develop detailed plans for the use of the military domestically across the spectrum of potential activities Expand training and exercises in relevant military units and with Federal, State, and local responders Direct new mission areas for the National Guard to provide support to civil authorities Publish a compendium of statutory authorities for using the military domestically to combat terrorism Improve the military full-time liaison elements in the ten Federal Emergency Management Agency region Status of Our Recommendations Mr. Chairman and Members, I can tell you that, according to our most recent count, of the 79 major policy recommendations made by the Advisory Panel in the first three reports, at least 64 have now been adopted in whole or in major part. One major recommendation from our fourth report, for an intelligence fusion center, was adopted by the President in his State of the Union address and has now become the Terrorist Threat Integration Center (TTIC). Having said that, there are other recommendations that continue to need to be addressed, and some that could still use additional resources or policy direction. Fourth Report-Implementing the National Strategy Strategy and Structure • That the President create an entity that will become the all-source fusion and That the new DHS have the necessary capability and authority to perform the critical infrastructure vulnerability and warning functions envisioned in its enabling legislation • That the President clearly define the responsibilities of DHS and other federal entities before, during, and after an attack has occurred, especially any authority for directing the activities of other federal agencies • That the President direct a restructuring of the Federal interagency mechanisms to ensure better coordination within the federal government, and with states, localities, and the private sector, to avoid confusion and to reduce unnecessary expenditure of limited resources at all levels And to repeat an earlier recommendation of the panel: • That each House of the Congress establish a separate authorizing committee and related appropriation subcommittee with jurisdiction over Federal programs and authority for Combating Terrorism/Homeland Security. I will be happy to address any questions that Members may have concerning those recommendations. Use of the Military The panel continues to address issues involving the use of the military inside the United States for various responses to terrorism. In its next report, the panel will make recommendations dealing with: • Command and control issues involving the new U.S. Northern Command (NORTHCOM) • Developing a more comprehensive, coordinated process to identify the potential needs of States and localities, as well as other Federal agencies, for military support against terrorist attacks • Additional authority for use of the National Guard in a Title 32 status • New roles and missions for certain National Guard units • Better training and exercise programs for military units for performing homeland missions • Better structure and policies for DoD civilian oversight of the military • Clarification, consolidation, and explanations of laws for use of the military domestically Health and Medical The panel continues its efforts to address the important issues in health and medical planning, preparedness, and response to terrorism and will make recommendations on the following subjects: • Sustaining and prioritizing resources to improve the public health and medical infrastructure • Exercising and training health and medical response entities in the larger emergency management context of terrorism response including exercising the use of the National Pharmaceutical Stockpile Centralizing, coordinating, and simplifying Federal information on resources, best practices, and research for state and local access • Implementing the full range of research to improve health and medical detection of and response to terrorist attacks • Developing and operationalizing the laws and regulations for health and medical response to a terrorist attack including the clarification of the Health Insurance Portability and Accountability Act (HIPAA) guidelines and the rules for quarantine Defining who is in charge in response to a bioterrorist attack • Developing a strategic information plan for educating and communicating with the public and the media before, during and after an attack Improving intelligence collection related to health and medical issues • Establishing a national vaccine strategy • Responding to the threat of a smallpox attack Critical Infrastructure Protection For the Fourth Report, the panel has expanded its consideration beyond cyber security to include issues of physical protection of critical infrastructure. It will make CIP recommendations in the following areas: • Federal reimbursement for certain costs incurred by States, localities, and the private sector for improvements to infrastructure security • Improved training, standards, and protocols for government and private sector responders, to include facilities, responder equipment, and communications compatibility and interoperability • More comprehensive and concise policies and enhanced capabilities for intelligence and information sharing involving critical infrastructure among government entities and with the private sector • Improvements in security measures for and in the screening of non-passenger cargo aboard commercial aircraft Development of significantly enhanced security measures for general aviation aircraft, passengers, and facilities • Expanded research and development into CIP security measures Comprehensive revamping of Federal laws to address privacy, freedom of information, liability, anti-trust, indemnification, insurance, and related issues • Enhanced security for agriculture and the food supply structure Agroterrorism The panel once again addresses the issue of Agroterrorism, and will make recommendations in the following areas: • Developing threat assessments for potential terrorist attacks against U.S. agriculture Including Agroterrorism as an Emergency Support Function in the principal Federal response plan • Improving processes for testing for and identifying agroterrorism attacks • Creating a system of fair compensation for losses due to an attack Enhancing education, training, and exercises on attacks to agriculture We must develop processes that help us understand better how we set priorities for homeland security. We must answer some fundamental questions about preparedness, including the overarching one: "Preparedness for what"? Without a firm grasp on how to answer that question, how will we know that we have out priorities set forth correctly, and that the expenditure of scarce resources at every level of government is appropriate. A more educated and enlightened assessment of the threats we face is critical to answering that basic question. An integral part of that issue is the absolute necessity to have national standards for how entities at all levels of government and in the private sector train, equip, and plan for, and then coordinate responses to attacks. We are still a long way from having any standards for a variety of these issue related to homeland security. Mister Chairman, in the panel's second report, submitted in December of 2000, we addressed this issue head on. We did so in the context of our recommendation at that time for the creation of an office in the White House, very similar but not exactly like the Office of Homeland Security (OHS) headed by my friend Tom Ridge. We called it the National Office for Combating Terrorism, rather than "Homeland Security." We would have placed some very specific responsibilities in that Office and in other entities for the development of national standards and for processes for research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) to further the implementation of those standards. Those recommendations are worth repeating. (To avoid any confusion, the references to the "National Office" and "Assistant Director" are to the specific construct that we recommended in 2000, not to anything that currently exists in OHS). We said in 2000: "Improve Plans for Research, Development, Test and Evaluation for Combating Terrorism" "The national strategy developed by the National Office for Combating Terrorism must contain a clear set of priorities for RDT&E. The program and budget authority of that office must be exerted to ensure effective application of Federal funds devoted to this purpose. "The White House Office of Science & Technology Policy should play a major role in the effort. We recommend that the Assistant Director for RDT&E and National Standards of the National Office for Combating Terrorism either enter into a formal relationship with OSTP or have appropriate members of the OSTP staff detailed to the National Office for Combating Terrorism on a rotational basis. "Wide varieties of equipment that have potential application for combating terrorism are available from commercial vendors. Nevertheless, many local responders have told us that some equipment they purchased does not meet the specifications described by the vendor. At present, no viable program is in place for testing and evaluating the effectiveness of equipment for combating terrorism. We recommend that the Assistant Director for RDT&E and National Standards develop equipment testing protocols and continue to explore the prospect of financial support from vendors for equipment live agent test and evaluation, leading to Federal certification, We recommend that the Assistant Director for RDT&E and National Standards develop, as part of the national strategy, a comprehensive plan for long-range research for combating terrorism; this should include better coordination among the National Laboratories. The focus of those efforts by National Laboratories should be dual- or multi-purpose applications. "The National Office for Combating Terrorism should also integrate other indirect, yet applicable, research and development projects into its information-dissemination process. For example, the Deputy Directorate for Operations (Combating Terrorism) within the Joint Staff provides executive seminars on its Best Practices Study for anti-terrorism and force protection. This program also collects information on "com» mercial off the shelf" resources and equipment to support its anti-terrorism mission. These studies and resources may not directly relate to policy and standards for com bating terrorism at the State and local level but may well contribute to State and local preparedness. "The top priorities for targeted research should be responder personnel protective equipment (PPE); medical surveillance, identification, and forensics; improved sensor and rapid-readout capability; vaccines and antidotes; and communications interoperability. "Develop National Standards for Equipment, Training, and Laboratory Processes "One of our basic assumptions is that no single jurisdiction is likely to be capable of responding to a major terrorist attack without outside assistance. That leads to the inescapable conclusion that the development of national standards is a critical element of any national plan. Firefighters or EMS technicians in the jurisdiction where an attack takes place must not be concerned that responders from other jurisdictions, providing "mutual assistance," will arrive with equipment of a different standard than local responders, even at risk of becoming casualties themselves. "We recommend that the Assistant Director for RDT&E and National Standards in the National Office for Combating Terrorism establish a national standards program for combating terrorism, focusing on equipment, training, and laboratory processes. The fundamental objectives for equipment standards will be nationwide compatibility, and dual-/ multi-purpose applications. For training, they will be interdisciplinary curricula, and training exercises based on realistic scenarios. For laboratories, the focus should be clear, strict protocols for identification, forensics, and reporting. The ultimate goal of the national standards program should be certification of the specific equipment, training, or laboratory and a recapitulation of certifications in a "Consumers Digest," for use by response entities nationwide. "We recommend that the National Institute for Standards and Technology (NIST) and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) be designated as Federal "co-lead agencies" for the technical aspects of standards development. The Executive Branch and the Congress should provide resources for the development of national standards, and Congress should be presented with a detailed budget request for that purpose at the earliest opportunity. In addition, the Interagency "Board for Equipment Standardization and InterOperability should be subordinated to the National Office for Combating Terrorism. "The Federal co-lead agencies should develop certification standards in coordination with appropriate Federal agencies and with advice from State and local response entities, professional organizations that represent response disciplines, and private and quasi-public certifying entities." Mister Chairman, those functions that we recommend now almost two years ago still need to be performed, now obviously more urgently that before. Unfortunately, we are still a long way from achieving any coherence in standards and testing, especially for "first responder" equipment and communications capability. It is still the case that the only "standards" available are what vendors say are the capabilities of their wares. We continue to need something like an "underwriters laboratory" for a wide variety of protective equipment and communications. We have before and will again recognize the efforts of the Interagency Board for Equipment Standardization and InterOperability, National Personal Protective Technology Laboratory (in the Chairman's home state of Pennsylvania) and the Technical Support Working |