FOR
IMMEDIATE RELEASE
March
20, 2002
Lieberman
Seeks Answers From Ridge On Homeland Security Improvements
Letter
Asks About National Strategy; Improved Communications,
Coordination Between Agencies
WASHINGTON - Governmental Affairs Committee Chairman
Joe Lieberman, D-Conn., who has introduced legislation to
create a National Department of Homeland Security, is asking
Presidential Advisor Tom Ridge to detail his work to improve
the security of the United States.
In a letter to Homeland Security Advisor Ridge, dated
March 19, 2002, Lieberman seeks information about Ridge’s
efforts in three broad categories: the re-organization of
government agencies to improve homeland security, the security
of the nation’s critical infrastructure, and the security of
government information systems.
The letter follows 12 hearings the Governmental Affairs
Committee conducted last fall on the government’s response
to bioterrorism; aviation, port, and rail security; the local
role in homeland security; and protection of the nation’s
critical infrastructure.
Below is a copy of the Ridge letter:
March
19, 2002
The Honorable Tom Ridge
Homeland Security Advisor
The White House
1600 Pennsylvania Avenue
Washington, DC 20502
Dear Governor Ridge:
Over the past five months, the Senate Committee on
Governmental Affairs has conducted a series of twelve hearings
on homeland security – including the government’s response
to bioterrorism; aviation, port and rail security; the local
role in homeland security; and the protection of our
nation’s critical infrastructure.
Throughout these hearings, several important themes
have emerged. Specifically, we heard about the need for:
•
improved communication among the agencies and between
the public and private sectors;
•
better coordination of response efforts among all
responsible entities;
•
the resolution of conflicts between competing agency
priorities (for example, the competing needs of criminal
investigations vs. protection of public health); and
•
a comprehensive national strategy that identifies the
homeland security responsibilities of all relevant public
entities.
I am following up with you to determine what is being
done to address these issues. Please provide me with responses
to the following questions by April 1, 2002.
Over the coming weeks, of course, we will be following
up with you on the status of other key homeland security issue
areas.
Organization
for Homeland Security
I believe strongly that a Department of Homeland
Security is necessary to effectively secure our borders,
prepare for and respond to a terrorist attack, and protect our
critical infrastructure.
A Department of Homeland Security would enable us to
bring under one Cabinet Secretary’s authority critical
functions that are now spread across the bureaucracy.
Thus far, the Administration has not embraced this
approach. Even
so, I am encouraged by public reports that you recognize the
need for a border management agency.
I would appreciate additional information about your
work on the border management agency, as well as your efforts
to improve operations of key border agencies and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) within the existing
organizational structure.
1.
With respect to your recently publicized efforts to
create a border management agency, please describe:
•
the primary shortcomings in the present organizational
structure our nation uses to secure its borders, and
•
the vulnerabilities our country is exposed to by the
absence of the kind of border management agency which you have
proposed.
2.
Please describe the Office of Homeland Security’s (OHS)
efforts to improve cooperation and day-to-day coordination
between the Border Patrol, the U.S. Customs Service, the
Immigration and Naturalization Service, the U.S. Coast Guard,
and other federal agencies involved in securing our border
from dangerous cargo, conveyances, and people.
What are the most critical operational issues that you
believe should be addressed by these agencies?
3.
Please describe how OHS perceives the role of FEMA in
implementing OHS’s agenda.
Is the role of FEMA being enhanced?
If so, how? Please
also describe any actual or potential conflicts or areas that
require greater coordination between FEMA and other agencies
involved in the federal response to terrorism and OHS’s
efforts to improve coordination.
4.
The Administration’s Budget states that it seeks to
nearly double spending for homeland security needs in FY 2003
to $37.7 billion. To
what extent does this figure represent wholly new spending, as
opposed to continuing costs that were not previously
classified as "homeland security" expenses? How was
it determined which programs would be designated as
"homeland security" for purposes of this Budget?
Moreover, additional resources will not be enough if a
comprehensive plan is not in place to ensure that these funds
are spent wisely and with accountability.
Please state when the Administration’s strategy to
combat homeland security threats will be completed and
submitted to the Congress. How will it coordinate responses
both within the federal government and between the federal
government and state and local authorities?
Who will be in charge of response efforts under this
plan and what authority will be used to direct the actions of
others?
5.
The Executive Order establishing your duties as
Assistant to the President for Homeland Security states that
you are to play an integral role in the homeland security
budget process, by advising OMB on the funding levels for
homeland security programs and, before OMB forwards a proposed
annual budget submission to the President, certifying that the
funding levels are adequate.
News reports on March 5, 2002 indicate, however, that
you recently declined a bipartisan invitation to testify on
the homeland security budget, on the ground that you are an
adviser to the President and are not serving in a
Senate-confirmed position.
Your decision not to testify hampers Congress’s
ability to explore thoroughly the Administration’s plan to
combat terrorism and increase national preparedness from a
comprehensive perspective.
How do you propose that Congress exercise its
responsibility to oversee this critical process, and your key
decision-making role, without your guidance and insight?
How does the Administration plan to ensure that its
priorities and spending on homeland security remain
accountable to Congress and therefore to the American public
on a comprehensive rather than piecemeal basis? Moreover, if
the OHS strategic homeland security plan is not completed
until this summer, as news reports indicate, how will Congress
be able to effectively evaluate the Administration’s
proposed funding for homeland security efforts without this
information?
6.
In most if not all cases, state and local officials
will be the first responders to terrorist attacks.
Any effective preparedness and response effort must
recognize the critical role of these first responders, utilize
existing response networks and integrate State and Federal
assets into a consistent whole.
What has the Administration done to ensure that state
and local authorities have meaningful input into the
development of its comprehensive strategy to combat homeland
security threats? More specifically, what has the
Administration done in the strategy development process to
ensure coordination with and participation by state and local
first responders in each of the key threat areas?
7.
At several of the Committee’s hearings last fall,
witnesses raised concerns regarding communication problems
between federal agencies and between the federal government
and state and local agencies, and conflicts that arose due to
competing priorities among agencies, such as the needs of
criminal investigators vs. those charged with protecting
public health. How
will you better address the needs of first responders, to
ensure that they have the information they need on a real time
basis? What
structure has been put in place to ensure that all relevant
entities are receiving the same information and that
information is flowing in all necessary directions,
up and down the chain as well as across all relevant
federal offices and agencies?
Who will have the authority to ensure that all
responders can accomplish their missions and can do so without
impeding the efforts of others?
8.
On March 12, 2002, you announced plans to unveil a new
color-coded threat advisory system that is designed to provide
better information regarding OHS’ assessment of the current
threat level, from low to severe, that the country is
experiencing. The
reports state that each code will trigger different levels of
readiness and preparedness by states and federal agencies.
However, in order for agencies and for state and local
authorities to be truly ready to respond to possible terrorist
events, they need more specific information regarding the
nature of the threat in addition to the level of risk
associated with it. While
I am mindful of the need to avoid disseminating information
that could compromise a criminal investigation or impede
efforts to foil terrorist activity, what steps is OHS taking
to provide more general information to those who may be first
responders in the event of an attack?
For example, is OHS coordinating with the intelligence
agencies to forward information they may receive regarding a
possible bioterrorist threat to other federal agencies, like
Customs, and to state and local authorities so that they can
be on the alert to detect and respond to a specific kind of
attack? Please
explain what steps OHS is taking in each of the key threat
areas.
Critical
Infrastructure Protection
1.
As we examine how best to protect this nation’s
critical infrastructure, it has become clear that we must
define what constitutes our critical infrastructures.
Additionally, there must be a government-wide effort to
identify each agency’s key infrastructures.
What steps have been taken since last October to
identify the nation’s key critical infrastructures?
What are the nation’s key critical infrastructures?
2.
At the Committee’s September 12, 2001 hearing,
Roberta Gross, NASA Inspector General, testified on the
Presidential Decision Directive 63 (PDD 63) report prepared by
the President’s Council on Integrity and Efficiency.
One of the primary findings of this review was that
many agency infrastructure plans were incomplete.
What has been done to ensure that all federal agencies
develop plans to protect their key critical infrastructures?
Which entity in the federal government is responsible
for coordinating the completion of these plans?
Are these plans all now complete?
If not, which agencies have not submitted complete
plans and when will they be complete?
3.
The Committee’s first two hearings on the protection
of critical infrastructure occurred before President Bush
signed Executive Order 13228, establishing the Office of
Homeland Security and the Homeland Security Council, and
Executive Order 13230, addressing the protection of critical
infrastructure. Consequently,
the testimony at these hearings reflected some uncertainty
regarding the imminent changes in how the government would be
organized to protect critical infrastructure.
However, Administration officials recently announced
the imminent opening of a cyber security information
coordination center to coordinate the government’s response
to cyber attacks. According
to published reports, this center is intended to unite
elements of Cyberspace Security Advisor Dick Clarke’s
office, portions of the Critical Infrastructure Assurance
Office, and the analysis and warning section of the National
Infrastructure Protection Center. Precisely how are cyber
security responsibilities allocated now under this new
structure? Does
the Administration have plans for further reallocation and
refinement of these responsibilities?
4.
Because the private sector owns approximately 85% of
the critical infrastructure assets in the United States, it is
an extremely important partner in the protection of both
publicly and privately owned infrastructure.
PDD 63, which was issued in May of 1998, called for the
establishment of a public-private partnership involving a
number of complex relationships.
Federal agencies were designated to work with
particular infrastructure sectors in the development of
sectoral plans, which would then be integrated into a National
Infrastructure Assurance Plan.
The National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC)
was established in the FBI to be the point of contact for the
private sector for sharing information about threats,
vulnerabilities, incidents, and response.
Infrastructure sectors were to establish Information
Sharing and Analysis Centers (ISACs) to gather, analyze,
appropriately sanitize, and disseminate private sector
information to both industry and the NIPC.
At our Committee’s hearing on October 4, 2002,
witnesses reported that the record in establishing these
information-sharing relationships was mixed.
Have the strategies for information sharing changed
over the intervening half year? If so, how, and what has been
changed regarding these relationships? What progress has been
made in developing partnerships between the federal government
and the private sector?
Security
of Government Information Systems
1.
What will be the role of Homeland Security Advisor in
furthering the security of federal information security
systems? What
will be the role of the Cyberspace Security Advisor? How will
these two advisers relate and coordinate?
2.
In early October of 2001, the Administration published
a notice requesting information from industry about the
feasibility of building a secure, private network for critical
government services ("GovNet").
In a recent report, Howard Schmidt, vice chairman of
the Critical Infrastructure Protection Board, announced that
the Administration does not know whether it will go forward
with GovNet. The
Administration’s budget proposal would set aside $5 million
to study the feasibility of the GovNet concept through FY2003. Please describe the Administration’s plans and timing for
completing this evaluation and the criteria that will be used.
What alternatives to GovNet are under consideration?
3.
In its third annual report to the President and
Congress, issued in December 2001, the Advisory Panel to
Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving
Weapons of Mass Destruction (known as the Gilmore Commission)
recommended that the OHS develop and implement a comprehensive
plan for research, development, testing, and evaluation to
enhance cybersecurity. Please
describe in detail what the Administration is doing to obtain
the necessary research and development in the area of
information systems protection, including the nature of the
research and development and funding being committed and the
mechanisms in place to transition that technology.
4.
OMB’s recent report of agencies’ security
assessments revealed that many agencies have significant
deficiencies. OMB’s
report does not address the adequacy of agencies’ corrective
action plans, and OMB does not authorize agencies to release
this material to Congress or GAO.
How is the Administration assuring that adequate
corrective action plans are developed and implemented?
I look forward to your responses on these issues.
Please feel free to contact Susan Propper of my staff
at (202) 224-6599 if you have any questions.
Sincerely,
Joseph I. Lieberman
Chairman
### |