Homeland Security

Status Brief
History/Origins:

Developmental Milestones/Developments to Date:

Current Assessment/State of the Field:

Problems/Challenges:

Proposals:

Web Resources

Department of Defense Influenza Pandemic Preparation and Response Health Policy Guidance

Department of Health and Human Services, “Local Pandemic Influenza Preparedness: Vaccine and Antiviral Drug Distribution and Dispensing“, September, 2009. https://www.hsdl.org/homesec/docs/oig/nps36-092109-02.pdf&code=9eab8e33f5e3cb46bec3f2325982fba2

In a 2008 review of State pandemic influenza operating plans the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) stated that states were “doing well” with vaccination plans.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) provided states with guidelines for planning vaccine distributions
The 8 planning areas outlined are: Receiving & Staging, Dispensing, Tracking, Vulnerable Populations, Priority Groups, Security, Storage, and Transportation.
“Selected localities had not addressed in their planning documents most of the vaccine and antiviral drug distribution and dispensing components and preparedness items identified in HHS pandemic influenza guidance.”
“All selected localities conducted exercises related to vaccine and antiviral drug distribution and dispensing; however most did not create After Action Reports and Improvement Plans for these exercises.”
“All selected localities collaborated with community partners to develop and exercise their plans to distribute and dispense vaccines and antiviral drugs during an influenza pandemic.”
The HHS provided several recommendations in this article.

Flu, Vaccination, Homeland Security

1996

Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996, http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=104_cong_public_laws&docid=f:publ132.pdf

The Antiterrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996 was signed into public law on April 24, 1996, and was brought upon by the bombing in Oklahoma City which occurred the previous year ”Title V- Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical Weapons Restrictions”
PL 104-132, Sub. B Sec.511 “The Congress finds that—(1) certain biological agents have the potential to pose a severe threat to public health and safety;(2) such biological agents can be used as weapons by individuals or organizations for the purpose of domestic or international terrorism or for other criminal purposes;(3) the transfer and possession of potentially hazardous biological agents should be regulated to protect public health and safety; and(4) efforts to protect the public from exposure to such agents should ensure that individuals and groups with legitimate objectives continue to have access to such agents for clinical and research purposes.”
(b) CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT.—Chapter 10 of title 18, United States Code, is amended— (1) in section 175(a), by inserting ‘‘or attempts, threatens, or conspires to do the same,’’ after ‘‘to do so,’’;(2) in section 177(a)(2), by inserting ‘‘threat,’’ after ‘‘attempt,’’; and (3) in section 178— (A) in paragraph (1), by striking ‘‘or infectious substance’’ and inserting ‘‘infectious substance, or biological product that may be engineered as a result of biotechnology, or any naturally occurring or bioengineered component of any such microorganism, virus, infectious substance, or biological product’’; (B) in paragraph (2)— (i) by inserting ‘‘the toxic material of plants, animals, microorganisms, viruses, fungi, or infectious substances, or a recombinant molecule’’ after ‘‘means’’; (ii) by striking ‘‘production—’’ and inserting ‘‘production, including—’’; (iii) in subparagraph (A), by inserting ‘‘or biological product that may be engineered as a result of biotechnology’’ after ‘‘substance’’; and (iv) in subparagraph (B), by inserting ‘‘or biological product’’ after ‘‘isomer’’; and (C) in paragraph (4), by inserting ‘‘, or molecule, including a recombinant molecule, or biological product that may be engineered as a result of biotechnology,’’ after ‘‘organism’’.
(d) REGULATORY CONTROL OF BIOLOGICAL AGENTS- (A) “The Secretary shall, through regulations promulgated under subsection (f), establish and maintain a list of each biological agent that has the potential to pose a severe threat to public health and safety.”… (B) “In determining whether to include an agent on the list under subparagraph (A), the Secretary shall- (i) consider- (I) the effect on human health of exposure to the agent; (II) the degree of contagiousness of the agent and the methods by which the agent is transferred to humans; (III) the availability and effectiveness of immunizations to prevent and treatments for any illness resulting from infection by the agent; and (IV) any other criteria that the Secretary considers appropriate; and (ii) consult with scientific experts representing appropriate professional groups.”

Law, Homeland Security

2002

Homeland Security Act of 2002, Public Law 107-296, 116 Stat. 2135, 6 U.S.C. 101 et seq., November 25, 2002.

“An act to establish the Department of Homeland Security, and for other purposes.”
The establishment of the Executive department and its mission, the Secretary and its functions, and the duties of other officers.
Contains a directorate for information analysis and infrastructure protection, and covers access to information. Critical infrastructure information and designation of a critical infrastructure protection program. Provisions for information security through enhanced cybersecurity.
Science and technology in support of homeland security, involving the Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency, and the utilization of Department of Energy facilities.
Includes Directorate of Border and Transportation Security. United States Customs Service establishment, budget requests, and allocation of resources by the Secretary, along with several miscellaneous provisions including agricultural inspection functions, explosive detection systems, and transportation security measures.
Immigration enforcement functions including the establishment of the bureau of Border Security as well as the Bureau of Citizenship and Immigration services.
Emergency preparedness and response such as nuclear incident response. Covers use of national private sector networks in emergency responses.
Supports anti-terrorism by fostering the Effective Technologies Act of 2002.
Transferred the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms to the Department of Justice.

Law, Homeland Security, Cybersecurity

2003

Osterholm, Michael T.,”SARS: How effective is the state and local response?“, Hearing before the Permanent Subcommittee on Investigations, May 2003, pgs 14-16.

“There is a critical need for our country to prepare its homeland security against human-made and Mother Nature-made biological attacks.”
“There is a growing threat of emerging infections and use of biologic agents as a form of terrorism.”
“Federal agencies such as the Department of Heath and Human Services, and Department of Homeland Security have been responding to such threats.”
“The United States has fortunately been lucky as compared to places like Toronto, Canada, who has seen the worst of the SARS pandemic.”
Their country is experiencing impacts on mortality rates, as well as economic and social impacts.”
“SARS is a disease transmitted via respiratory route that has now seeded itself in a sufficient number of humans which could make elimination impossible.”
“It is imperative that we coordinate the roles of Federal, State and local agencies.”
“We also need to understand the capabilities of our health care delivery systems and the private sector in responding to this problem.”

Bioterrorism, Pandemic, SARS, Quarantine, Canada, Homeland Security

2004

Gluodenis, Thomas, “Homeland security and bioterrorism applications” Medical Laboratory Observer, February 2004.

“Biological weapons or bioweapons — typically, pathogenic organisms and their toxic products — constitute a particularly pernicious threat” (Pg. 1)
“Unless suspicions are aroused and appropriate measures taken to sample contaminated environments, the presence of such agents is not usually confirmed until they produce symptoms in compromised individuals.” (Pg. 1)
“At present, two approaches have been widely adopted for identifying organisms by characterizing their DNA; real-time polymerase chain reaction (PCR) and endpoint PCR.” (Pg. 1)
“Organisms can be packaged in ways that mask their identity and produce sets of symptoms that are not sufficiently characteristic early on for rapid and” (Pg. 3)
“The logical next step would be better integration of the individual operations of DNA isolation, amplification, and microfluidic-based analysis.” (Pg. 4)

Bioterrorism, Homeland Security, Biodefense, CDC

Bush, George, W., “Homeland Security Presidential Directive-12,” August 27, 2004

“Wide variations in the quality and security of forms of identification used to gain access to secure Federal and other facilities where there is potential for terrorist attacks need to be eliminated. Therefore, it is the policy of the United States to enhance security, increase Government efficiency, reduce identity fraud, and protect personal privacy by establishing a mandatory, Government-wide standard for secure and reliable forms of identification issued by the Federal Government to its employees and contractors.”
“In order to do so, the President suggests that the Secretary of Commerce to establish a Federal standard for secure and reliable forms of identification. After the establishment of such a standard, the President calls for the heads of executive departments and agencies to create a program to ensure that identification issued by their departments and agencies meet the standard. The heads of executive departments and agencies, ‘shall require the use of identification by Federal employees and contractors that meets the Standard in gaining physical access to Federally controlled facilities and logical access to Federally controlled information systems.’”

Homeland Security, Personnel Reliability

Intelligence Reform and Terrorist Prevention Act of 2004 Public Law 108-458. 118 STAT. 3638. December 17, 2004.

“To reform the intelligence community and the intelligence and intelligence-related activities of the United States Government, and for other purposes.”
Reform of the intelligence community, including establishment of the Director of National Intelligence, National Counterterrorism Center, National Counter Proliferation Center, and National Intelligence Centers, and improvement of education for the intelligence community.
Improvement of intelligence capabilities of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and information on security clearances.
National strategy for transportation security, including aviation security provisions for the use of biometric or other technology. Includes advanced airline passenger prescreening, deployment and use of detection equipment at checkpoints, improvement of screener job performance, the use of federal air marshalls, and extension of authorization of aviation security funding. Air cargo security initiatives, and maritime security provisions are also included.
Border Protection, immigration, and Visa matters, involving the Advanced Technology Northern Border Security Pilot Program. Increases border and immigration enforcement, provides visa application requirements, and covers treatment of alins who commi acts of torture, extrajudicial killings, or other atrocities.
Terrorism Prevention Acts. Provides additional semiannual reporting requirements under the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978. Includes the “Stop Terrorist and Military Hoaxes Act of 2004” as well as the “Weapons of Mass Destrution Prohibition Improvement Act of 2004” and “Prevention of Terrorist Access to Destructive Weapons Act of 2004.”
Implementation of 9/11 Commission Recommendations, such as to do with diplomacy, foreign aid, military in the war on terrorism, terrorist travel and effective screening, homeland security, and many others.

Law, Homeland Security

2005

Lichtblau, Eric, “Senate makes Permanent Nearly All Provisions of Patriot Act, With a Few Restrictions” NYT, July 30, 2005, A11

Homeland Security

2006

Sullivan, Eileen, “DOD Sees Larger Role in Disaster Support if Civilian Responders Can’t Handle Job“, CQ HOMELAND SECURITY, May 15, 2006.

“The Department of Defense will have a larger role in providing civil support during disasters or catastrophes, but only if local, state and federal civilian responders do not have the resources or expertise to handle the disaster themselves.”
“DOD cautions that there should not be too much reliance on military support during disasters, because military assets – first and foremost – exist for DOD’s national security mission and may not be available for domestic response.”

Military, Emergency Response, Law Enforcement, Homeland Security

Berger, Matthew, E., “Lawmakers Uneasy About White House Plan for Combatting Pandemic Flu,” CQ Homeland Security, May 16, 2006.

Jursidiction for HHS & DHS.
“DHS in charge of law and order.”
supplies and distribution: masks, vaccinations, response.

Vaccination, Law Enforcement, Homeland Security

Sullivan, Eileen, “DoD, DHS Insist Nation Well-Prepared to Withstand Another Hurricane” CQ HOMELAND SECURITY, May 23, 2006.

National Guard not stretched too thin, more resources available in case of a disaster
State and Local governments to be primary managers with help if needed from federal government and military

Military, Emergency Response, Homeland Security

CBP Media Services, “Container Security Initiative 2006-2011 Strategic Plan“, CUSTOMS AND BORDER PROTECTION, August 2006: http://www.cbp.gov/linkhandler/cgov/trade/cargo_security/csi/csi_strategic_plan.ctt/csi_strategic_plan.pdf

primary system of global trade = containerized shipping, protected from terrorists
pre-screen containers posing a potential threat before leaving foreign ports for US
began in January 2002
Goals: identify high risk containers through intelligence, prescreen and evaluate containers before shipped, use X-ray, Gamma ray, and radiation detection devices to prescreen, and use more secure containers to identify containers tampered with
44 ports worldwide use CSI as of August 2006
“The World Customs Organization, the EU, and the G8 support CSI expansion and have adopted resolutions to introduce and implement security measures and non-intrusive inspection standards similar to CSI at ports throughout the world.”
part of CBP’s mission to “prevent terrorists and terrorist weapons from entering the US” through maritime containers
“Examinations of cargo or persons do not require search warrants, probable cause, or particularized suspicion” * hope to have around 70 ports use CSI by 2010

Homeland Security, Export Control, Law Enforcement, CBP, Interdiction, CSI

Field, Kelly, “Federal Agencies Should step Up Oversight of Sensitive Academic Research, GAO Says,” THE CHRONICLE OF HIGHER EDUCATION, Dec 6, 2006.

Licensing for foreign students accessing “sensitive technologies”

Oversight, Academia, State Department, SEVIS, Homeland Security, Export Control

2007

Container Security Initiative (CSI), GLOBALSECURITY.ORG, 2007: http://www.globalsecurity.org/security/ops/csi.htm

cargo containers in our ports are potentially threats to security as they can hold nuclear weapons that can be detonated
“terror in a box”
Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT) -“shippers commit to improving the security of their cargo shipments, and in return, they receive a range of benefits from our government” -however, shippers who have promised to take security measures don’t usually get cargo searched and it is not determined whether they actually carried out the security measures.
CSI screens containers that pose a risk before they depart for US ports of entry by using intelligence information -screening process done by CBP (Customs & Border Patrol) officials
US has a reciprocal program with other nations who send their officials to the US to oversee that cargo going to their home country is secure
CBP has bilateral agreements shares info with CSI participants globally

Homeland Security, Nonproliferation, Export Control, CB, CSI

Fox, Jon, “Auditor Cites Progress Resolving Flaws in Biowatch Program,” Global Security Newswire, February 8, 2007

Department’s biological agent detection system in more than 30 cities has been overhauled after years of poor management
launched in 2003 it tests for roughly 20 pathogens that might be released by terrorists
more than 15 positives attributed to natural causes.

Biodefense, Homeland Security, Biowatch

2008

Snyder, Michael and Sobieski, Thomas, “Decontamination Operations in a Mass Casualty Scenario” Joint Force Quarterly. 2008.

“principles of decontamination that also apply to a nuclear detonation scenario: expect a 5:1 ratio of unaffected to affected casualties, decontaminate as soon as possible, disrobing is decontamination: top to bottom, more is better, water flushing generally is the best mass decontamination method, after known exposure to a liquid agent, first responders must self-decontaminate as soon as possible to avoid serious effects” (Pg. 2)
“DSCA environment require special considerations by military CBRN planners in the following areas: determining who needs to be decontaminated, multisite operations, integration of decontamination operations with other plans, disposition of runoff, disposition of personal effects, accountability, crowd control.” (Pg. 3)
“It is reasonable to assume that not everyone within the evacuation zone would be contaminated. Identifying those who are “clean” would greatly reduce the resources needed and expended” (Pg. 3)
“To respond to the magnitude of need, several mass decontamination sites probably would be established around the plume perimeter.” (Pg. 4)
“Successful decontamination operations include planning initial medical triage and follow-on medical care, as well as providing subsequent transport, clothing, food, and shelter to all those who process through prescreening.” (Pg. 4)
“Keeping large groups orderly is essential for effective mass decontamination operations. Local law enforcement would vector victims to the various mass decontamination sites established upwind of the blast and outside the projected plume path.” (Pg. 4)

Decontamination, Emergency Response, Bioterrorism, Public Health, Homeland Security, Quarantine

Editors, “Disaster Planning for Schools” Journal of the American Academy of Pediatrics. 2008. http://pediatrics.aappublications.org/content/122/4/895.full.pdf+html. Last Checked October 4, 2012.

“Schools that are well prepared for an individual emergency involving a student or staff member are more likely to be prepared for complex events such as community disasters. Individual emergencies are covered in a separate policy statement from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP).”
“There are 55 million US children enrolled in kindergarten through 12th grade, attending 17 000 public school districts and 29 000 private schools. Children spend a large part of their time in school, so whether a large-scale crisis occurs during school hours, before or after school, or off the school campus, the school district plays an important role in the unfolding of events.”
“The guidelines are intended to give schools, school districts, and communities the critical concepts and components of good crisis planning, stimulate thinking about the crisis-preparedness process, and provide examples of promising practices. These guidelines focus on 4 stages of planning: mitigation and prevention; preparedness; response; and recovery. These school-focused guidelines are also designed to complement and integrate with the complex system of emergency preparedness in the greater community locally, regionally, and nationally.”
“In a 2004 survey of more than 2100 superintendents, most (86.3%) reported having a disaster-response plan, but fewer (57.2%) had a plan for prevention. Most (95.6%) had an evacuation plan, but almost one third (30%) had never conducted an evacuation drill. Almost one quarter (22.1%) had no disaster plan provisions for children with special health care needs, and one quarter reported having no plans for postdisaster counseling. Almost half (42.8%) had never met with local emergency medical services (EMS) ofﬁcials to discuss emergency planning.”
“School facilities are often designated as disaster evacuation shelter sites. These venues provide shelter for many who have lost their homes as a result of disaster and also provide an opportunity for school ofﬁcials to assess family and child needs. Likewise, disaster recovery centers operated by FEMA are set up in heavily affected communities to support the reestablishment of infrastructure and the provision of food, supplies, health care, and human services. It is recommended that school district ofﬁcials, including mental health professionals, be present in all disaster recovery centers to disseminate information and provide guidance for parents seeking support for their children.”
“Each community has idiosyncratic elements that predispose it to possible crises such as tornadoes, earthquakes, hurricanes, toxic chemical hazards, radiation, and community violence. Pediatricians should have an ofﬁce-based disaster plan that reﬂects these hazards and not only be prepared to treat the medical outcomes of these crises but also be aware of the school district’s attempts to prepare for these unique disaster issues.”

Emergency Response, Homeland Security, Public Health

Cheadle, Shawn. “Are you up to Date on Export Compliance?” Military Microwaves Supplement. 8. August, 2008

“To export defense articles or technical data, companies must remain compliant with regulations enforced by the US State Department (State), US Customs Agency, Department of Commerce (Commerce), the Office of Foreign Asset Controls (OFAC), Homeland Security, and the Census Bureau among others.” – page 8
“Technical data is defined as follows by the EAR: information that is required for the design, development, production, manufacture, assembly, operation, repair, testing, maintenance or modification of controlled items requiring a license to export.” – page 9
“The penalties for exporting without a license may be severe, including both criminal and civil penalties to the corporation and even the individuals involved.” – page 9
“US companies found guilty of violating the various laws will generally be debarred from exporting for three years, and may be debarred for much longer.” – page 9
“The State Department uses both the Arms Export Control Act (AECA) and the International Traffic in Arms Regulations (ITAR) to control exports.” – page 9
“Primarily, under the EAR, you must classify your products against the Commerce Control List to see if they have an Export Control Classification Number (ECCN) or will be designated as “EAR99.”” – page 14
“Just because you have classified products as EAR99 does not necessarily mean that the products may ship as no license required (NLR). You still must consult several prohibitions checklists to determine whether a license is nevertheless required.” – page 14
“All records associated with the review of each export, re-export, deemed export, or exports conducted under a license exception, should be retained by the company and the responsible individuals for five years from the date the item is exported” – page 18

Export Control, Compliance, Military, Homeland Security, State Department, Information Policy

2009

Editors, “Local Pandemic Influenza Preparedness: Vaccine and Antiviral Drug Distribution and Dispensing” Department of Health and Human Services, September, 2009. https://www.hsdl.org/homesec/docs/oig/nps36-092109-02.pdf&code=9eab8e33f5e3cb46bec3f2325982fba2

In a 2008 review of State pandemic influenza operating plans the Assistant Secretary for Preparedness and Response (ASPR) stated that states were “doing well” with vaccination plans.
The Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) provided states with guidelines for planning vaccine distributions
The 8 planning areas outlined are: Receiving & Staging, Dispensing, Tracking, Vulnerable Populations, Priority Groups, Security, Storage, and Transportation.
“Selected localities had not addressed in their planning documents most of the vaccine and antiviral drug distribution and dispensing components and preparedness items identified in HHS pandemic influenza guidance.”
“All selected localities conducted exercises related to vaccine and antiviral drug distribution and dispensing; however most did not create After Action Reports and Improvement Plans for these exercises.”
“All selected localities collaborated with community partners to develop and exercise their plans to distribute and dispense vaccines and antiviral drugs during an influenza pandemic.”
The HHS provided several recommendations in this article.

Homeland Security, Flu, Vaccination, Pandemic

Cetron, Marvin J. & Davies Owen, “Ten Critical Trends for Cybersecurity”, 1 September 2009 Futurist Last checked February 24, 2011.

“Technological advances and greater connectivity may be making our systems less rather than more secure.” *‘“Cybersecurity is the soft underbelly of this country,…”’
“McConnell does not worry…hackers or spies will steal classified information from computers owned by government or the military… He is afraid they will erase it and thereby deprive the United States of critical data…”
“January 2008, a CIA analyst told American utilities that hackers had infiltrated electric companies in several locations outside the United States.”
“Information warfare will be a significant component in most future conflicts.”
“Repeated reports that Chinese computer specialists have hacked into government networks in Germany, the United States… show that the threat is not limited…”
“Information warfare in military planning and operations will expand greatly in the next two or three decades.”
“The growing domination of technology is the ultimate foundation for cyberwar.”
‘“Coordinated cyberattacks at multiple levels will be capable of knocking out the macro(national defense systems), meso (local power grids), and micro (starting an automobile) simultaneously.”’
‘“National-security interventions and general hell raising, it is time to plan, design, and execute over the next five to seven years a replacement for the internet.”’
“Disrupt essential information or communications systems,… government agency. Or military unit could be dead in water…”
“Our major concern is no longer weapons of mass destruction, but weapons of mass disruption.”

Cybersecurity, China, Homeland Security, Military

Nuzzo, Jennifer, Biosecurity and Bioterrorism. Volume 7, Number 1, 2009 http://www.upmc-biosecurity.org/website/resources/publications/2009/biomemo/2009-03-27-develop_natl_biosurveillance.html

“Homeland Security Presidential Directive 21 (HSPD-21) and other policies have underscored the strategic importance of developing and maintaining a national biosurveillance program in order to maintain situational awareness during catastrophic health events.”
“The absence of clear national biosurveillance objectives and implementation plans has contributed to several problems:
1. The creation of hundreds of separate surveillance programs that serve a range of purposes, many of which are duplicative or have overlapping missions, and most of which are not interoperable.
2. An inability for agencies or programs to assess or prioritize information from existing systems or to pursue the addition of new data streams. Agencies are struggling to figure out whether it is better to engage in a “more data, faster is better” approach or whether it would be more effective to pursue fewer, more meaningful data streams.
3. A lack of understanding of the specific “mission space” and objectives of state and federal agencies that are involved in biosurveillance.”

Homeland Security, Biosurveillance, Bioterrorism, Biosecurity

Editors. “The Future of CFATS.” Professional Safety, Volume 54 Issue 10. 18. October 2009.

”The Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorist Standard (CFATS) is up for renewal in October 2009 and Congress is working to renew the standard.” – page 18
”The regulation requires affected businesses to identify chemicals within their facility that are listed by Department of Homeland Security as potentially dangerous to national security in certain doses or situations, and create a security plan focused on keeping these chemicals from being used by terrorists.” – page 18
”Under CFATS, a company must register and submit a Top-Screen assessment to determine whether it is a high risk facility.” – page 18
”If DHS determines that it is a high risk facility, the company must then submit a security vulnerability assessment (SVA) using the agency’s online assessment tool to analyze a series of scenarios designed to elicit vulnerability and off-site consequence information.” – page 18
”Determining whether a facility deserves to be classified in a particular tier is based primarily on the properties of the chemicals listed in DHS’s Appendix A, which lists 322 chemicals of interest, as well as other site-specific factors reported in the Top-Screen and SVA.” – page 18
”Because DHS’s current authority to regulate through CFATS sunsets in October 209, the House Committee on Homeland Security is reviewing and attempting to enhance the current legislation by incorporating new stipulations.” – page 18

Chemical, Homeland Security, Public Health

Johnston, David, “2 in Chicago Held in Plot To Attack In Denmark,” NYT A17, Oct. 28, 2009.

“The most serious charges, conspiracy to murder and maim in a foreign country, were filed against David Coleman Headley, who was born in the United States, lived in Pakistan and now resides in Chicago.”
“Mr. Rana is a businessman who was born in Pakistan and is now a Canadian citizen living legally in Chicago [is charged with providing material support.”
“Davis S. Kris …said the case was a reminder of the threat posed by international terrorism organizations.”

Jurisdiction, Law Enforcement, Homeland Security

Strohm, Chris., “Cargo Scanning Requirement Should Be Reconsidered, U.S. Official Says” Global Security Newswire. April 2, 2009. http://www.nti.org/gsn/article/cargo-scanning-requirement-should-be-reconsidered-us-official-says/ Last Checked May 16, 2013

“A senior U.S. Homeland Security Department official told lawmakers yesterday it is time for Congress to reconsider a legal mandate created by Democratic lawmakers that requires all cargo containers to be scanned for weapons of mass destruction at foreign ports before they are shipped to the United States.”
“The mandate, which Democrats put in a massive 2007 homeland security bill with much fanfare, requires the department to ensure that all U.S.-bound containers are scanned abroad by 2012. At the time, critics complained that the mandate was a “bumper-sticker” security solution that was unrealistic.”
“Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano told lawmakers in late February that meeting the deadline was not feasible, mainly because technology does not exist to do such comprehensive scanning and because obtaining political agreements with other countries is problematic.”
“Jayson Ahern, acting commissioner of Customs and Border Protection, told the House Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee yesterday that the mandate “needs to be thoughtfully reconsidered.””
“Lawmakers said they have many questions about how best to secure cargo containers but did not scold Ahern over his comments, indicating a growing acceptance on Capitol Hill that the mandate needs to be relaxed. Homeland Security Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman David Price (D-N.C.) said “the dilemma” presented by Ahern is “compelling” and needs to be addressed by Congress.”
“”The question is, absent a ‘100 percent solution,’ are current programs adequate to mitigate risk?” Price asked. “If not, what needs to be done?” He added “there’s no question” that ensuring cargo security “is a serious issue.””

Container Security, Homeland Security

Editors,”Napolitano Says U.S. Cannot Meet Cargo-Screening Goal” Global Security Newswire. December 3, 2009. http://www.nti.org/gsn/article/napolitano-says-us-cannot-meet-cargo-screening-goal/ Last checked May 16, 2013

“U.S. Homeland Security Secretary Janet Napolitano yesterday said her department would be unable to meet a terrorism security measure’s 2012 deadline for checking all U.S.-bound ship cargo for WMD materials, Agence France-Presse reported”
“As a result of insufficient technology and the high expense associated with scanning the 10 million cargo containers that enter the country annually, Napolitano would request an extension of the congressionally imposed deadline, she told lawmakers.”
“In order to implement the 100 percent scanning requirement by the 2012 deadline, [the Homeland Security Department] would need significant resources for greater manpower and technology, technologies that do not currently exist, and the redesign of many ports,” Napolitano said.”
“These are all prohibitive challenges that will require the department to seek the time extensions authorized by law,” she said.”
“The 100 percent scanning requirement was intended to ensure that no chemical, biological or nuclear weapons could be brought in through the U.S. port system, which many analysts consider a security vulnerability.”
“”Expanding screening with available technology would slow the flow of commerce and drive up costs to consumers without bringing significant security benefits,” Napolitano said in testimony to the Senate Commerce, Science and Transportation Committee.”
“The U.S. Government Accountability Office issued a report yesterday that faulted Homeland Security’s Customs and Border Protection office for failing to conduct “a feasibility analysis of expanding 100 percent scanning” of foreign ports participating in the U.S. Secure Freight Initiative as mandated by Congress.”
“Until scanning technology is improved and no longer disrupts trade, “requiring the scanning [of] all U.S.-bound cargo, regardless of risk, at every foreign port is misguided and provides a false sense of security,” said Senator Susan Collins (R-Maine.”

Container Security, Homeland Security

2010

”’ CBP Media Services”’, “Container Security Initiative: just the facts”, Port Technology International, 2010, [http://www.porttechnology.org/images/uploads/technical_papers/PT37-08.pdf] Last checked on April 15, 2013
*”In the aftermath of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001, US Customs Service, now US Customs and Border Protection, began developing antiterrorism programs to help secure the United States.”
*”CSI addresses the threat to border security and global trade that is posed by potential terrorist use of a maritime container to deliver a weapon.”
*”Currently, approximately 90 per cent of all transatlantic and transpacific cargo imported into the United States is subjected to prescreening.”
*”58 CSI ports are currently operational.”
*”CSI is a deterrent to terrorist organizations that may seek to target any foreign port. This initiative provides a significant measure of security for the participating port as well as the United States.”
*”If terrorists were to carry out an attack on a seaport using a cargo container, the maritime trading system would likely grind to a halt until seaport security is improved. Those seaports participating in the CSI handle containerized cargo far sooner than other ports that haven’t taken steps to enhance security.”
*”If a shipment has already been jointly examined by US and the host country’s customs officials, that is one less shipment that CBP officers will have to worry about at a US port.”
*”The advantages of inspecting containers at the earliest possible point in the supply chain is of benefit to a CSI port. The integrity of the shipment is better ensured by using pre-arrival information and non-intrusive inspection equipment at foreign port locations, thus expediting their clearance upon arrival in the United States”
*[[CSI]], [[Container Security]], [[Homeland Security]]
”’Rucker, Phillip”’ “TSA tries to assuage privacy concerns about full-body scans”,The Washington Post, Technology, Special Reports, 10 January 2010 [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/01/03/AR2010010301826.html?sid=ST2010010301836] Last Checked 11/5/2010
*”Federal authorities, working to close security gaps exposed by the thwarted Christmas Day terrorist attack on a Detroit-bound airliner, are multiplying the number of imaging machines at the nation’s biggest airports. The devices scan passengers’ bodies and produce X-ray-like images that can reveal objects concealed beneath clothes.”
*”Forty units are in use at 19 airports, including Reagan National and Baltimore-Washington International Marshall airports. The Transportation Security Administration said it has ordered 150 more scanners to be installed early this year and has secured funding for an additional 300.”
*”Passengers selected for a full-body scan can decline, but if they do, they must submit to full-body pat-downs by a TSA officer.”
*”The technology was introduced a couple of years ago, but U.S. airports have been slow to install the machines, partly because of privacy concerns raised by some members of Congress and civil liberties groups.”
*”Passengers walk through the machines fully clothed; the resulting image appears on a monitor in a separate room and conceals passengers’ faces and sensitive areas.”
*”The issue is almost certain to be the subject of debate when Congress reconvenes this month. The House approved a bill in the summer limiting the use of full-body scanners, but the Senate has yet to take up the matter.”
*”Experts say, explosives can go undetected even in a full-body screening if potential terrorists conceal them in body cavities.”
*”The TSA has tried to assuage privacy concerns by saying that the digital images produced by the machines would be deleted after passengers clear checkpoints. But critics are not reassured.”

*[[Homeland Security]], [[Scanning]]
”’Markoff, John”’, “Google Asks Spy Agency for Help With Inquiry Into Cyberattacks,,”February 5, 2010, New York Times, [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/02/05/science/05google.html]. last checked 12/10/11
*”Google has turned to the National Security Agency for technical assistance to learn more about the computer network attackers who breached the company’s cybersecurity defenses last year, a person with direct knowledge of the agreement said Thursday.”
*” By turning to the N.S.A., which has no statutory authority to investigate domestic criminal acts, instead of the Department of Homeland Security, which does have such authority, Google is clearly seeking to avoid having its search engine, e-mail and other Web services regulated as part of the nation’s “critical infrastructure.”
*” Systems designated as critical infrastructure are increasingly being held to tighter regulatory standards.”
*”On Jan. 12, Google announced a ‘new approach to China,’ stating that the attacks were ‘highly sophisticated’ and came from China.”
*”At the time, it gave few details about the attacks other than to say that a theft of its intellectual property had occurred and that a primary goal of the attackers had been to gain access to the Gmail accounts of Chinese human rights activists.”
*”A number of computer security consultants who worked with other companies that experienced attacks similar to those of Google have stated that the surveillance system was controlled from a series of compromised server computers based in Taiwan.”
*”An N.S.A. spokeswoman said, ‘N.S.A. is not able to comment on specific relationships we may or may not have with U.S. companies,’ but added, the agency worked with “a broad range of commercial partners’ to ensure security of information systems.’
*”’This is the other side of N.S.A. — this is the security service that does defensive measures,’ said the specialist, James A. Lewis, a director at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. ‘It’s not unusual for people to go to N.S.A. and say ‘please take a look at my code.’ ‘ ”
*” On Thursday, the organization [Electronic Privacy Information Center] filed a lawsuit against the N.S.A., calling for the release of information about the agency’s role as it was set out in National Security Presidential Directive 54/Homeland Security Presidential Directive 23 , a classified 2008 order issued by President George W. Bush dealing with cybersecurity and surveillance.”
*”The relationship that the N.S.A. has struck with Google is known as a cooperative research and development agreement, …. These were created as part of the Federal Technology Transfer Act of 1986 and are essentially a written agreement between a private company and a government agency to work together on a specific project.”
*”In addition to the N.S.A., Google has been working with the F.B.I. on the attack inquiry,…”
*[[Cybersecurity]], [[Hacker]], [[Law Enforcement]], [[China]], [[Taiwan]], [[Classified]], [[Law]], [[Homeland Security]]
”’Editor”’ “Bill seeks to bolster U.S. ability to fight bioterror.”, Homeland Security Newswire, 24 June 2010 [http://homelandsecuritynewswire.com/bill-seeks-bolster-us-ability-fight-bioterror] Last Checked 9/26/2010
*”Representatives Peter King (R-New York) and Bill Pascrell (D- New Jersey) last week introduced HR 5498 — the Weapons of Mass Destruction Prevention and Preparedness Act of 2010 — described as a “comprehensive approach to improving America’s biodefense capabilities” — to bolster the U.S. defenses against future bioterror attacks.”
*”Nick Rees writes that a house panel was told last week by experts on biological agents that efforts made by the government to allow information sharing and interagency collaboration as a means of addressing bioterrorism has failed to date. HR 5498 aims to reverse that trend by, in part, requiring the director of national intelligence to produce and administer a National Intelligence Strategy for Countering the Threat from WMD…”
*”This bill addresses the full-range of homeland security considerations associated with the WMD threat — it not only authorizes programs to enhance our nation’s prevention, deterrence, and preparedness capabilities but also bolsters our diction, attribution, response and recovery capabilities”
*”Biosecurity and biodefense stakeholders would see their relevant intelligence and information sharing techniques integrated nationally by DHS under the legislation. Additionally, DHS would be called on to coordinate with other federal agencies to create biennial bioterrorism risk assessments.”
*”Participation in the National Biosurveillance Integration Center, which currently only carries voluntary interagency participation, would become mandatory under the bill, bringing together disparate agencies from the medical, public health and environmental fields, among many others.This participation would ensure that data on biothreats would be made available to not only federal but also local agencies.”

*[[Homeland Security]], [[ Biosecurity ]], [[WMD]]
”’Chase, Katie Johnson.”’, “Lawsuit challenges airport full-body scanners” The Boston Globe, Home/Buisness, August 4 2010[http://www.boston.com/business/articles/2010/08/04/lawsuit_challenges_airport_full_body_scanners/] Last Checked 11/15/2010
*”A privacy advocacy group is suing the Department of Homeland Security to suspend the use of the controversial full-body scanners employed at airports across the country.”
*”The machines, which use X-rays or radio frequency energy to detect weapons and explosives beneath passengers’ clothing, have been much criticized because of privacy concerns.”
*”In the lawsuit, filed last month, the Electronic Privacy Information Center in Washington, D.C., said the slightly blurred but accurate pictures of passengers’ naked bodies produced by the machines are the equivalent of a ‘digital strip search.'”
*”The suit says the program, run by the Transportation Security Administration, which is part of the Department of Homeland Security, violates the Privacy Act and the Administrative Procedure Act.”
*”The program also violates the Religious Freedom Restoration Act, the lawsuit says, referencing religious laws about modesty.”
*”Court documents allege the scanners also violate the Fourth Amendment by having passengers undergo ‘a uniquely invasive search without any suspicion that particular individuals have engaged in wrongdoing.'”
*”The TSA declined to comment on the lawsuit, but spokesman Greg Soule said the agency is exploring ‘additional privacy protections through automated threat detection.’”
*”The TSA is working with technology companies to develop software that would show a generic paper-doll-like figure instead of an actual image of a passenger’s body — and transmit images only when a threat is detected.”
*”The TSA plans to keep the current scanners in place until less invasive software is available.”
*”This will not solve the privacy issues, said Marc Rotenberg, executive director of the Electronic Privacy Information Center, because the images of travelers’ naked bodies are still being captured by the machine.”
*”According to the TSA, the scanners’ ability to store images is used for testing purposes only and is disabled before they are installed in airports.”
*”Officials at Logan International lobbied for the airport to be the first to have the full-body scanners installed. The TSA aims to deploy as many as 450 machines this year — adding to the 50 that were already in place at airports around the country — following the attempted terrorist attack on a Detroit-bound flight on Christmas Day. And Logan is now pushing to be the first to implement the less invasive scanning software.”
*”And a group of University of California San Francisco scientists wrote to President Obama’s science adviser in April, stating that the dose of radiation from the X-ray scanners may be ‘dangerously high.'”

*[[Homeland Security]], [[Scanning]]
”’O’Connor,Anahad”’, “Airports Start Body Scans Next Month” The New York Times, NY/Region, August 10 2010 [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/07/nyregion/07scan.html?_r=3] Last checked 11/7/2010
*”The Port Authority of New York and New Jersey announced Friday that the scanners, which use imaging technology to display near-naked images of airline passengers, will be installed in the three major New York-area airports in September.
*”Exactly how many machines will be installed is unclear, but passengers leaving from La Guardia, Kennedy and Newark Airports can expect to be ushered through one as they pass through airport checkpoints. Passengers who do not want to be scanned, however, can opt to be patted down and walked through the standard metal detector.”
*”According to the Transportation Security Administration, at least 142 scanners are now in use at more than 40 airports, and the agency says it plans to have more than 450 in place by the end of the year.”
*”Proponents of the machines argue that they are necessary because standard metal detectors cannot detect nonmetallic explosives, which can be hidden in clothing. But critics say that terrorists can hide explosives in body cavities, where they cannot be detected by the scanners, and many worry that the machines will expose passengers to potentially harmful levels of radiation.”
*”The security administration has played down concerns about radiation, saying two-thirds of the scanners now installed use only minimal levels of radiation, while the remaining third use a form of radio wave technology.”

*[[Homeland Security]], [[Scanning]]
”’Editor”’, “Drive-by-full-body scanning”, Homeland Security Newswire, August 31 2010 [http://homelandsecuritynewswire.com/drive-full-body-scanning] Last checked 10/25/2010
*”Massachusetts-based American Science & Engineering is selling van-mounted backscatter X-ray detection system to law enforcement; these vans can be driven past neighboring vehicles to see their contents”
*”Joe Reiss, a vice president of marketing at Billerica, Massachusetts-based American Science & Engineering, told Andy Greenberg of Forbes that the company has sold U.S. and foreign government agencies more than 500 backscatter X-ray scanners mounted in vans. These vans can be driven past neighboring vehicles to see their contents.”
*”While the biggest buyer of AS&E’s machines over the last seven years has been the Department of Defense operations in Afghanistan and Iraq, Reiss says law enforcement agencies have also deployed the vans to search for vehicle-based bombs in the United States.”
*”The Z Backscatter Vans, or ZBVs, as the company calls them, bounce a narrow stream of X-rays off and through nearby objects, and read which ones come back. Absorbed rays indicate dense material such as steel. Scattered rays indicate less-dense objects that can include explosives, drugs, or human bodies. That capability makes them powerful tools for security, law enforcement, and border control.”
*”Greenberg notes that it would also seem to make the vans mobile versions of the same scanning technique that has riled privacy advocates as it is been deployed in airports around the country. The Electronic Privacy Information Center (EPIC) is currently suing DHS to stop airport deployments of the backscatter scanners, which can reveal detailed images of human bodies.”
*”‘It’s no surprise that governments and vendors are very enthusiastic about [the vans],’ says Marc Rotenberg, executive director of EPIC. ‘But from a privacy perspective, it’s one of the most intrusive technologies conceivable.'”
*”AS&E’s Reiss counters privacy critics by pointing out that the ZBV scans do not capture nearly as much detail of human bodies as their airport counterparts. The company’s marketing materials say that its ‘primary purpose is to image vehicles and their contents,’ and that ‘the system cannot be used to identify an individual, or the race, sex or age of the person.'”
*”the systems “to a large degree will penetrate clothing,” but he points to the lack of features in images of humans…”
*”EPIC’s Rotenberg is not persuaded, saying that the scans, like those in the airport, potentially violate the fourth amendment.”
*”Greenberg writes that TSA’s official policy dictates that full-body scans must be viewed in a separate room from any guards dealing directly with subjects of the scans, and that the scanners will not save any images. ‘Just what sort of safeguards might be in place for AS&E’s scanning vans isn’t clear, given that the company won’t reveal just which law enforcement agencies, organizations within the DHS, or foreign governments have purchased the equipment,’ he writes.”
*”Reiss says that the vans do have the capability of storing images. ‘Sometimes customers need to save images for evidentiary reasons,’ he says. ‘We do what our customers need.'”
*[[Law Enforcement]], [[Homeland Security]], [[Scanning]]
”’Editor”’ “Pentagon shifts $1 billion from WMD-defense efforts to vaccine development”, Homeland Security Newswire, 1 September 2010 [http://homelandsecuritynewswire.com/pentagon-shifts-1-billion-wmd-defense-efforts-vaccine-development] Last Checked 9/19/2010
*”The U.S. Defense Department has shifted more than $1 billion out of its nuclear, biological, and chemical defense programs to underwrite a new White House priority on vaccine development and production to combat disease pandemics, according to government and industry officials.”
*”The planned funding reduction ‘terminates essential CBRN [chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear] defense programs … required to meet high priority service needs, prevent casualties and protect against CBRN incidents.'”
*”An additional $442 million was trimmed through efficiency reductions mandated by Defense Secretary Robert Gates, for a total of $1.5 billion cut from the counter-WMD account over the five-year period, according to the draft memo.”
*”Defense Department projects under the budget-cutting ax include the development and acquisition of biological and chemical detection systems; gear to decontaminate skin and equipment after exposure; systems to coordinate military operations in a chem-bio environment; and protective clothing for military personnel entering toxic areas.”
*”‘By diverting $1 billion from nonmedical [chem-bio] defense programs to this medical vaccine facility on top of the OSD efficiency cuts, Weber threatens to return the military forces to a state of unpreparedness that we haven’t seen since 1996,’ said one longtime defense analyst, referring to the Office of the Secretary of Defense.”
*”the memo reportedly has since been superseded by another, more limited plea, which instead seeks restoration of less than one-third of the eliminated WMD-defense funds. The subsequent document also omits mention of the high-priority White House vaccine project, sidestepping what might be regarded as implicit internal criticism of the Obama funding priority on the Medical Countermeasures Initiative…”

*[[Homeland Security]], [[Biodetection]], [[Biosecurity]], [[WMD]]

”’Editors”’. New Executive Order to Prompt Changes in Security Standards for Biolabs. Steptoe & Johnson LLP. September 3, 2010 [http://www.steptoe.com/publications-7140.html]
* “Following a comprehensive review of the nation’s preparedness for biological attacks, the Obama administration issued in July Executive Order 13546 (July 2, 2010) (the “EO”). This EO directs the departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services (HHS) to identify and implement ways to enhance the security of the nation’s sensitive biological laboratories.”
* “In addressing this issue, the President and Congress are responding in part to the Weapons of Mass Destruction Commission report issued in December 2008 warning Americans that a biological weapons attack likely will occur by 2013. That report contemplates something more destructive than the 2001 anthrax attacks that the FBI concluded were perpetrated by a U.S. Army researcher at Fort Detrick, Maryland.”
* “Some in Congress, however, believe that DHS should play a greater role in this process. Senator Lieberman, Chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, along with ranking member Susan Collins, thus have sponsored the Weapons of Mass Destruction Prevention and Preparedness Act (S. 1649). The Senate bill would charge DHS with drafting the new regulations identifying and tightening restrictions on the Tier 1 agents. DHS also would gain authority to conduct independent inspections of biological laboratories for compliance with the new Tier 1 provisions. Many advocates for the nation’s biological research labs have expressed skepticism toward the bill, however, and have argued that Agriculture and HHS possess the appropriate expertise and experience to oversee these matters.”
*[[Personnel Reliability]], [[Homeland Security]], [[Executive Order]]

”’Wyatt, Edward”’, “9 Years After 9/11, Public Safety Radio Not Ready,” September 6, 2010, NYT. [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/07/business/07rescue.html?pagewanted=1&_r=2] Last checked September 10, 2010.
*“Despite $7 billion in federal grants and other spending over the last seven years to improve the ability of public safety departments to talk to one another, most experts in such communications say that it will be years, if ever, before a single nationwide public safety radio system becomes a reality.”
*“Washington has turned to the development of the next generation of emergency communications, wireless broadband, which seeks to succeed where radio has failed.”
*“Administration officials acknowledge it will take years to build a nationwide public safety system. ‘We’re talking about an endeavor that will take 10 or so years to get completed,’ said one official. ‘We’re starting with a new generation of technology, and that gives us a much better chance to succeed than we had with the legacy systems.’”
*“Many of the issues that helped shape the current dysfunctional public safety radio networks threaten the creation of a uniform standard for wireless broadband communications.”
*“Disagreement, and the associated Congressional inquiries and lobbying, have stalled the development just as wireless phone companies are beginning to construct and deploy their fourth-generation, or 4G, networks.”
*“Building public safety networks at the same time as the commercial wireless networks, and sharing towers and fiber optic cables would save $9 billion in construction costs and billions more over the lifetime of the network, the F.C.C. says.”
*“Some Homeland Security officials fear that the debate over broadband is obscuring strides that have been made in linking voice systems, which will continue long into the future to be the dominant method of communication for public safety departments during emergencies. Meanwhile, the window to plan a next-generation broadband system is starting to close.”
*[[Emergency Response]], [[Homeland Security]]
”’Editor”’, “DHS Gives New York $18 Million for Radiation Detection System”, Homeland Security Newswire, 23 September 2010 [http://homelandsecuritynewswire.com/dhs-gives-new-york-18-million-radiation-detection-system] Last Checked 25 September 2010
*“DHS handed New York $18.5 million on Wednesday to keep the city’s prototype dirty-bomb detection system running.”
*“City cops and nearby police departments think it is vital, and have mounted a major coordinated effort to make it work, spending more than $70 million on the effort.”
*“New York lawmakers had to battle the Obama administration for the money, putting it in the federal budget last year after homeland security officials stripped it.”
*“The operation is run out of an operations center in the city, featuring more than 4,500 pieces of radiation detection equipment, many equipped with GPS locators.”
*“It is all aimed at sniffing out a nuke or dirty bomb before it can get across a bridge or tunnel and be detonated in the city.”
*“Terrorism experts warn that the Holy Grail for violent extremists is getting their hands on a weapon of mass destruction. Even a dirty bomb, which does little explosive damage, could be devastating to the city and economy if it contaminates vital areas with radiation.”
*[[Homeland Security]], [[Biodetection]], [[Bioterrorism]], [[WMD]]
”’Matishak, Martin”’, “Biodefense System Overhaul Was Necessary, HHS Secretary Says”, Global Security Newswire, 27 September 2010, [http://gsn.nti.org/gsn/nw_20100927_8250.php] Last Checked 28 September 2010
*“A planned $1.9 billion revamp of the nation’s medical countermeasure enterprise was overdue as government scientists were using decades old technology to confront new and emerging biological threats.”
*“Countermeasures are typically defined as drugs and vaccines that ward against chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear agents and emerging infectious diseases.”
*“Successful countermeasure development also has proven difficult because the private sector saw little financial benefit in producing biodefense medicines and vaccines for the government, according to Sebelius. The development process can be costly and there is little if any market for such products outside the public sector.”
*“Of the initial $1.9 billion investment, $822 million would be spent on initiatives designed to decrease the amount of time the government needed to make pandemic flu vaccines, while the Food and Drug Administration would receive roughly $170 to enhance its regulatory efforts.”
*“Another $678 million would go toward setting up one or more nonprofit organizations that could provide financial support to small firms working on new treatments, as well as provide the companies with new production systems and manufacturing of vaccines for times of high demand.”
*“Sebelius said the ultimate goal of the revamp was a ‘nimble, flexible capacity to produce medical countermeasures rapidly in the face of any attack or threat’ including a naturally occurring, yet previously unrecognized, infectious disease.”
*[[Homeland Security]], [[Biodefense]], [[Vaccination]], [[Biodevelopment]]

”’Editor”’, “Lawmakers Back Nuclear Weapons Budget Boost”, Global Security Newswire, 4 October 2010, [http://gsn.nti.org/siteservices/print_friendly.php?ID=nw_20101004_9386], Last Checked 4 October 2010.
*“A continuing budget resolution to keep the U.S. government operating through early December provides a $624 million boost in nuclear weapons funding for the new budget year beyond the amount appropriated in fiscal 2010.”
*“The resolution enables a significant boost in spending for work on the Chemistry and Metallurgy Research Replacement building at the Los Alamos National Laboratory in New Mexico.”
*“‘This bill is very good for Sandia and Los Alamos national labs because it strongly supports the key stockpile stewardship work they do,’ Senator Jeff Bingaman (D-N.M.) said in a press release. ‘It is a sign of how important the labs are and will remain to our national security.'”
*“The NNSA spending increase would ‘lend strong support’ to maintenance of the U.S. nuclear arsenal as lawmakers prepare to consider ratification of a new nuclear arms control treaty with Russia.”
*[[Homeland Security]], [[Nuclear]], [[Russia]]
”’Editors,”’ “NNSA Office of Emergency Operations Develops Cutting-Edge Nuclear Terrorism Software” National Nuclear Security Administration, October 18, 2010, [http://www.nnsa.energy.gov/mediaroom/pressreleases/software 13] Last accessed October 21,2010.
*”The National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA) today announced that its Office of Emergency Operations has developed and delivered a new X-ray image processing capability to the nation’s emergency response community. ”
*”X-Ray Toolkit (XTK) is an application used by field responders and NNSA Laboratory experts to acquire, process and analyze X-ray images obtained during a potential nuclear terrorism incident.”
*”XTK was designed for joint use by Explosive Ordnance Disposal (EOD) and NNSA Laboratory personnel during nuclear render safe operations, where specialized procedures, methods and tools prevent the detonation of a nuclear device. Previous software was converted for use from the medical diagnostic industry, not specifically designed for use by EOD experts.”
*”Accordingly, XTK provides for the intuitive and efficient transfer of data from the site of a potential incident to NNSA Laboratories. This allows for critical information to seamlessly transfer from field responders to NNSA nuclear security experts during a crisis situation.”
*[[Nuclear]], [[Homeland Security]]
”’Goodchild J.,”’ “DHS simulates terror attack in subway systems” CSO, October 18, 2010, [http://www.csoonline.com/article/626322/dhs-simulates-terror-attack-in-subway-systems?page=1 14] Last accessed October 21, 2010.
*”As part of an effort to enhance emergency response and security in the country’s transportation systems, DHS officials have been conducting a scientific study of airflow throughout the underground portion of the subway in both Boston and Washington.”
*”While Washington D.C. has the newest subway system in America, Boston’s MBTA subway system is the oldest of its kind in the country (Related: MBTA flaw disclosure: The students speak up). Inside the “T,” as it is known to locals, a scientific team placed equipment – electronic monitoring devices used to gather data on the behavior of airborne contaminants if they were to be released into the subway.”
*”To collect data on the behavior of airborne contaminants, the scientists released two types of innocuous tracer gases; sulfur hexafluoride and perfluoro-carbon. Both are stable, colorless, odorless, non-combustible gases that have been used extensively and safely as atmospheric tracers since the 1960s. The tracer gases cause no health risk or damage to materials and were released at low concentrations, according to DHS officials. However, the materials move like any chemical agent, and can give scientists a sampling of just how quickly an airborne contaminant can travel in a subway.”
*”Once an aerosol is released into the air, it takes awhile for it to settle,” explained researcher David Silcott, general manager of IBX Biodefense.”Once a train comes along, it pushes it down further into the system.”
*”The results will help MBTA authorities develop a plan to quickly detect an attack and shut down subways to limit the spread of contaminants. While the test is primarily to gauge behavior of chemical or biological agents, the study will also help researchers understand airflow characteristics for smoke or unintentional spills of chemicals or fuels, said Lustig. The results can help MBTA officials develop evacuation, ventilation, and other incident response strategies, too, she said.”
*[[Homeland Security]], [[Biodefense]]
”’Elliott, Dan”’, “Air Force Manual Describes Shadowy Cyberwar World”, 25 October 2010, Associated Press [http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20101025/ap_on_re_us/us_cyberwarfare_manual/print] Last Checked 26 October 2010.
*“A new Air Force manual for cyberwarfare describes a shadowy, fast-changing world where anonymous enemies can carry out devastating attacks in seconds and where conventional ideas about time and space don’t apply.”
*“The manual — officially, ‘Cyberspace Operations: Air Force Doctrine Document 3-12’ — is dated July 15 but wasn’t made public until this month. It is unclassified and available on the Internet.”
*“The manual explains how dependent the military and civil society have become on computer networks for communication, banking, manufacturing controls and the distribution of utilities.”
*“It also outlines the vulnerabilities of the Internet, including the relatively low cost of computers that could give an adversary a way to block, manipulate, damage or destroy a network.”
*“Much of the Internet’s hardware and software are produced and distributed by private vendors in other countries who ‘can be influenced by adversaries to provide altered products that have built-in vulnerabilities, such as modified chips.’”
*“Enemies can cloak their identities and hide their attacks amid the cascade of data flowing across international computer networks.”
*“Operating in cyberspace ‘may require abandoning common assumptions concerning time and space’ because attacks can come from anywhere and take only seconds, the manual says.”
*“Relentless attackers are trying to hack into home and office networks in the U.S. ‘millions of times a day, 24/7.’”
*“It dwells mostly on protecting U.S. military computer networks and makes little mention of attacking others. That could signal the Pentagon wants to keep its offensive plans secret, or that its chief goal is fending off cyberattacks to keep its networks up and running, analysts said.”
*“Overall U.S. military cyberwarfare operations will be the job of the U.S. Cyber Command, which began limited operations in May. It will have components from the Army, Air Force, Navy and Marines.”
*“Responsibility for civilian and government cybersecurity is less clear. Congress is debating between giving more power to the Homeland Security Department or the White House and the National Institute of Standards and Technology.”
*[[Cybersecurity]], [[Military]], [[Homeland Security]]
”’Keane, Angela Greiling and Park, Kyunghee”’, “The Terrorist Threat in Cargo Containers”, Bloomberg Business Week, November 4, 2010:
http://www.businessweek.com/magazine/content/10_46/b4203028783796.htm
* “By 2010 all US-bound cargo containers must be scanned for terrorist threats”
* “fewer than 1% of the 14.5 million cargo boxes reaching the US by water are scanned abroad for terrorist threats.”
* 90% cargo is carried by sea
* cost an issue in implementing scanning technology
* [[CSI]]
”’Toor, Amar”’, “New York Lawmakers Try to Ban Body Scanners From Airports”, Switched.com, November 19, 2010[http://www.switched.com/2010/11/19/body-scanners-ban-new-york-david-greenfield/] Last checked 11/30/2010
*”If city councilman David Greenfield gets his way, travelers passing through New York City airports will no longer be required to walk through body scanners before boarding their flights. Yesterday, Greenfield and six other council members introduced a legislative proposal which would prohibit all New York City-based TSA employees from using Advanced Imaging Technology, capable of seeing through a passenger’s clothes.”
*”As of last month, 341 such scanners were in use at 65 airports around the country, but the TSA is hoping to have a total of 1,000 machines in operation by the end of the year.”
*”Travelers are allowed to opt-out of the scans, but doing so would require them to undergo a vigorous pat-down, instead.”
*”Greenfield believes that these scans simply violate passenger privacy without providing any substantive benefits to airport security.”
*”A March report from the U.S. Government Accountability Office, however, claimed that advanced scanners may not have caught the infamous Christmas Day bomber, who boarded a plane with explosives packed in his underwear.”
*”Greenfield is hopeful that his measure will prompt other local lawmakers to take a similarly strong stand. The TSA has already come under fire from privacy groups like the Electronic Privacy Information Center, which is seeking federal action against the use of the scanners. Advocates have also organized a National Opt-Out day, on November 24th, to protest the TSA.”
*”Ultimately, though, federal law gives the TSA full authority over security at all U.S. airports, meaning that municipal bans may face an uphill battle.”
*”Still, Greenfield remains confident that local governments should have a greater say over what scanning techniques are employed at their airports — especially when said techniques involve such flagrant privacy violations.”
*[[Homeland Security]], [[Scanning]]
”’Editor”’, “ACLU Reports More Than 900 Complaints This Month Over “Enhanced” TSA Security Measures”, American Civil Liberties Union, Technology and Liberty, November 24 2010[http://www.aclu.org/technology-and-liberty/aclu-reports-more-900-complaints-month-over-enhanced-tsa-security-measures] Last checked 11/30/2010
*”The American Civil Liberties Union has received over 900 complaints in the month of November from travelers who have been subjected to the Transportation Security Authority’s (TSA) new “enhanced” screening procedures.”
*”The procedures include sending travelers through backscatter X-ray machines that produce naked outlines of travelers’ bodies and subjecting them to thorough pat-downs that include TSA agents touching their breasts and genitals on the outside of their clothing.”
*”Most of the complaints, which were submitted through an online form on the ACLU’s website, came from travelers who reported feeling humiliated and traumatized by the procedures.”
*”Some of the excerpts include: ‘The TSA agent used her hands to feel under and between my breasts. She then rammed her hand up into my crotch until it jammed into my pubic bone.’;’I cried throughout the groping and have had intrusive thoughts since. It was humiliating.’;’The procedure was violating, degrading, invasive and humiliating.’;’I do not feel safer. I feel violated.'”
*[[Homeland Security]], [[Scanning]]

”’Mckinley, James”’, ” Lapses in Use of Border Documents”, 22 December 2010, New York Times [http://www.nytimes.com/2010/12/22/us/22border.html?ref=homelandsecuritydepartment] Last Checked 20 February 2011.
*”A year and a half after the federal government strengthened rules on the documents needed to enter the country, millions of people are still being allowed to enter without passports or other hard-to-forge identification cards, a government audit has found.”
*”The inspector general for the Department of Homeland Security estimated this week that about 3.6 million people a year were still passing through customs without the required documents, and that about half of those were coming through the border crossings in Texas.”
*”Auditors found that hundreds of thousands of people were still being waved through by customs officers without being referred for a secondary inspection.”
*”Critics said the audit proved that the Obama administration had failed to fully carry out the stricter identification requirements mandated by Congress in response to the Sept. 11 attacks.”
*”If you are just letting them through without asking questions, then you are not implementing the program…. that’s a big security risk.”
*[[Homeland Security]], [[Mexico]]

== 2011 ==
”’Constable, Pamela”’, “Homeland Security to add staff in Afghanistan”, 2 January 2011, The Washington Post [http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2011/01/01/AR2011010102278.html] Last Checked 20 February 2011.
*“Work will focus on supporting border control and training Afghan officials in anti-smuggling techniques, with special emphasis on stopping illegal shipments of bulk cash.”
*”The cash, drugs, precious gems, historic artifacts and timber smuggled out of Afghanistan are a huge drain on its economy, with hundreds of millions of dollars a year leaving the country illegally.”
*”The department plans to significantly bolster its activities in Afghanistan over the coming year, adding as many as 54 agents to the current contingent of 25.”
*[[Homeland Security]], [[Afganistan]]
”’Editors”’, “Export Control Reform Initiative: Strategic Trade Authorization License Exception,” 16 June 2011, Bureau of Industry and Security U.S. Department of Commerce [http://www.bis.doc.gov/news/2011/bis_press06162011.htm] Last Checked 2 August 2011.
*“U.S. Commerce Secretary Gary Locke today announced the next step in President Obama’s export control reform (ECR) initiative aimed at strengthening U.S. national security and ensuring the competitiveness of American companies abroad.”
*“The Department will implement today a new license exception, Strategic Trade Authorization (STA), that will facilitate exports between the United States and partner countries while enhancing the competitiveness of key industrial base sectors.”
*“The Export Control Reform Initiative aims to build higher fences around a core set of items whose misuse can pose a national security threat to the United States. By facilitating trade to close partners and allies, the Commerce Department can better focus its resources ensuring the most sensitive items do no end up where they should not.”
*”This new license exception will eliminate the need for U.S. exporters to seek licenses in nearly 3,000 types of transactions annually, affecting an estimated $1.4 billion in goods and technology”
*”The new license exception will . . . focus . . . resources on items that pose a significant national security risk and help facilitate U.S. exports.”
*“Items such as electronic components for use on the International Space Station, cameras for search and rescue efforts for fire departments, components for civil aviation navigation systems for commercial aircraft, airport scanners, and toxins for vaccine research will be eligible for the new license exception.”
*“At the same time, the license exception establishes new safeguards designed to ensure Department of Commerce approval is obtained before controlled items exported under the exception are re-exported outside of authorized destinations.”
*[[Export Control]], [[Nonproliferation]], [[Homeland Security]]
”’Matishak, Martin”’, “Homeland Security Cancels Troubled Radiation Detector Effort,” 26 July 2011, Global Security Newswire [http://gsn.nti.org/siteservices/print_friendly.php?ID=nw_20110726_7635] Last Checked 27 July 2011.
*“The U.S. Homeland Security Department has terminated the program to develop the next generation of radiation detection monitors.”
*”‘The [Advanced Spectroscopic Portal] will not proceed as originally envisioned. We will not seek certification or large-scale deployment of the ASP.’”
*“The agency spent roughly $230 million over five years attempting to develop and field the monitor system.”
*“The machines were designed to not only detect radiation but identify the nature of its source. Proponents claimed the devices, each with a price tag of around $822,000, would eliminate time-consuming secondary inspections to determine whether a material was dangerous.”
*“Homeland Security officials had expected to spend $1.2 billion to deploy 1,400 of the machines to scan cargo containers for potential nuclear or radiological weapons materials at U.S. points of entry.”
*“In the rush to field the technology, the department conducted poorly designed performance tests that undermined officials’ ability to ‘draw reliable conclusions’ about whether the costly new equipment would work as envisioned.”
*“The system was found to be susceptible to false alarms and other significant technical troubles.”
*“Despite that conclusion, the detection office and the department do not plan on abandoning the concept of such a system altogether.”
*“The department will deploy the 13 monitors that have been built and purchased to glean data that would help define requirements for a commercial competition to design and build a future spectroscopic portal.”
*“Four of the devices are already deployed.”
*“The agency will compensate for the absence of the new monitors in part with the deployment of new hand-held radiation detection devices called the RadSeeker.”
*“Dan Lungren (R-Calif.) repeatedly expressed concern that hand-held radiation detection devices and the department’s existing polyvinyl toluene portal monitors would not be enough to spot smuggled nuclear material at the nation’s ports.”
*“The decision also allows the department to focus more broadly on its global nuclear detection architecture, rather than ‘fixate’ on the ASP system.”
*“The detection architecture is the worldwide network of sensors, telecommunications, personnel and measures used to detect, identify and report the potential movement of illicit nuclear and radioactive materials or weapons.”
*[[Homeland Security]], [[Biodetection]], [[Export Control]]
”’Wolf, Kevin, J.,”’ “Retrospective Regulatory Review Under E.O. 13563,” Bureau of Industry and Security, Commerce, p. 47527, August 5, 2011.[http://www.bis.doc.gov/federal_register/rules/2011/76fr47527.pdf] Last checked 2/7/2012.
*” The Administration is implementing the reform in three phases. The first two phases involve short- and medium-term adjustments to the current export control system, with a focus on establishing harmonized control lists and processes among the Departments of Commerce, State, and the Treasury, to the extent practicable, in order to build toward the third phase of the single control list, licensing agency, information technology system, and enforcement coordination agency.”
*”A core proposal intended to bring about the initiative’s national security objectives is to transfer jurisdiction over less significant defense articles, principally generic parts and components, that are controlled by the regulations administered by the State Department to the export control regulations administered by the Commerce Department, which are more capable of having controls tailored to the significance of the item and the degree of risk associated with its export to different groups of countries.”
*”This plan will also significantly reduce the licensing and other collateral burdens on exporters and the government while at the same time harmonizing the system to allow for the eventual creation of a single list of controlled items administered by a single licensing agency.”
*[[Export Control]], [[State Department]], [[Homeland Security]]
”’Editors”’, “Congressional approval of cybersecurity bill looks promising,” Homeland Security Newswire[http://www.homelandsecuritynewswire.com/dr20111201-congressional-approval-of-cybersecurity-bill-looks-promising], December 1, 2011.
*“The Obama administration along with the Senate plan to pass a comprehensive cybersecurity bill that was first proposed in May 2011. The bill would make the Department of Homeland Security the primary agency in protecting government networks and the private sector.”
*“The bill now stands at the top of the Senate’s priority list, even among the impending November election and constant budget battles on Capitol Hill.”
*“Under the bill, critical infrastructure operators would be required to develop cybersecurity measures and security plans of action.
*[[Cybersecurity]], [[Law]], [[Homeland Security]]
”’Editors”’, “North Korea making missile able to hit U.S.”, The Washington Times. Dec 5th, 2011.
[http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/dec/5/north-korea-making-missile-able-to-hit-us/?page=3]
*“New intelligence indicates that North Korea is moving ahead with building its first road-mobile intercontinental ballistic missile, an easily hidden weapon capable of hitting the United States, according to Obama administration officials.”
*““We believe this new intelligence reiterates the need for the administration to correct its priorities regarding missile defenses, which should have, first and foremost, the missile defense of the homeland.””
*“Mobile missiles are difficult for tracking radar to locate, making them easier to hide. They also can be set up and launched much more quickly than missiles fired from silos or launchpads.”
*““North Korea has three paths to building ICBMs. One is using the Taepodong-2, with a range of up to 9,300 miles, as its main strategic missile. A second way is to further develop the ranges of existing missiles like the Musudan, and last is to “use the very large launch facility that is being constructed on the west coast of North Korea to launch a very large missile,” the cable said.”
*“North Korea also has a new solid-fueled short-range missile called the Toksa, with a range of 75 miles, and has sold a number of shorter-range Musudan missiles to Iran, the report said.”
*“Pressed for details, he said, “I don’t think it’s an immediate threat, no. But on the other hand, I don’t think it’s a five-year threat.””
*““They are developing a road-mobile ICBM. I never would have dreamed they would go to a road-mobile before testing a static ICBM. It’s a huge problem. As we’ve found out in a lot of places, finding mobile missiles is very tough”
*[[Nuclear]], [[Biosecurity]], [[Biodefense]], [[Bioterrorism]], [[Biotechnology]], [[Emergency Response]], [[Military]], [[Public Health]], [[CWC]], [[Russia]], [[North Korea]], [[Homeland Security]], [[Biodetection]]

Support the information project and gain access to the newer half of this page and each protected page by subscribing for 6 months at the rate of $5.00.

Support the information project and gain access to the newer half of this page and each protected page by subscribing for 6 months at the rate of $5.00.

6 Month All Access

Menu

Search

Your account

Subscriber Sign In

Search BsC