|
|
Report to the Chairman, Committee on Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate
December 2002
[…]
Officials Say Collaboration with State and Local Governments Increasingly
Effective, but Concerns Remain The administration has said that collaboration
with state and local governments and other entities is important to homeland
security effectiveness. In March 2002, the President issued Executive Order
13260 establishing the President’s Homeland Security Advisory Council
(Council) and Senior Advisory Committees for Homeland Security. According
to the administration, the Council and committees will provide opportunities
for state and local officials and emergency services, law enforcement, and
public health and hospital officials to share homeland security information
and advice. In addition, OHS officials said they met with state and local
first responders and elected officials to gather information and address concerns
about state and local homeland security issues. OHS also has hosted conference
calls with designated homeland security representatives from the states, territories,
and the District of Columbia for information exchanges.
In a July 2002 report on state and local homeland security actions, the Director of the Office of Homeland Security said that a key objective of the national homeland security strategy was to develop a framework ensuring vertical coordination between local, state, and federal authorities so actions are mutually supportive and communities receive the assistance they need to develop and execute comprehensive counterterrorism plans. This working group is part of the National Infrastructure Security Committee within DOT, with oversight from OHS, and includes representatives from the Customs Service, Departments of Defense and Commerce, DOE, DOJ, USDA, HHS; and other agencies.
The national, state, and local association officials we interviewed and information from these associations that we reviewed indicated that collaboration and support across all levels of government is vital to homeland security efforts. For example, in a recent position paper, the National Governors Association (NGA) said it viewed homeland security as a complex challenge that demands significant investment and collaboration among local, state, and federal governments, and integration with the private sector. Among other things, NGA said homeland security coordination must involve all levels of government, state and local governments need help and technical assistance to identify and protect critical infrastructure, and the federal government should provide adequate federal funding and support to ensure that homeland security needs are met. Officials representing the National Association of Counties (NACo) and the National League of Cities (NLC) told us that coordination efforts with OHS had been extensive and helpful. For example, NACo said efforts had been very beneficial in defining policy and operational needs at the local level, and matching federal efforts to those needs. NACo officials said that OHS officials were present at each of NACo’s Homeland Security Task Force meetings where homeland security policy recommendations were made. NACo officials said that OHS had worked closely with NACo in developing homeland security policies, operational plans, initiatives, the national strategy for homeland security, and the proposal for DHS. NLC officials said its involvement has included discussions of fiscal years 2002 and 2003 funding, criteria for the President’s first responder initiative, policy objectives for regional coordination, and resources targeted to local governments for domestic preparedness.
However, at the time of our interviews, the national associations voiced
some concerns about continued federal coordination and services. Both NACo
and NLC officials hoped the new DHS office dealing with state and local contacts
would allow the continued collaborative relationships they had experienced
with OHS. Both said that they support the use of state
homeland security task forces for DHS coordination with state and local governments.
NACo officials added that they would like the task forces to include local
representatives, such as first responders, so there is not undue emphasis
on state government concerns. NLC officials said the task forces should include
cities as well as regional officials where resources are shared locally. In
addition, NLC officials were concerned about other federal current or anticipated
initiatives, for example, (1) promised first responder funding has been delayed,
(2) federal standards or mandates might not be accompanied by funding or other
support, such as training, and (3) existing public safety and security programs
might not be adequately funded, with funds diverted to homeland security programs.
They further said local officials also would like more specific threat information
as part of the Homeland Security Threat Advisory System.
The new DHS legislation contains provisions that should help maintain federal
coordination. The legislation establishes within DHS’s Office of the
Secretary an Office for State and Local Coordination that will coordinate
DHS activities relating to state and local government. In addition, this office
is to develop a process for receiving meaningful input from state and
local governments to assist the development of the national strategy for combating
terrorism and other homeland security activities. At the department and agency
level, our interviews indicated that existing working relationships might
have aided homeland security work. FEMA, of course, has extensive relationships
with state and local governments. USDA officials told us that the department
has historically had strong, longstanding relations at the state and local
level. These relations have come through agricultural programs, land grant
colleges, and food safety activities. They believe these relationships have
made it easier to broaden the discussion to homeland security issues. In HHS,
HRSA took advantage of its relationship with the National Association of County
and City Health Officials (NACCHO) and the American Hospital Association to
receive input on designing the bioterrorism hospital preparedness program.
They believe the agency’s already developed relations with state and
local governments were critical in developing the hospital preparedness grant
program. CDC officials said they work with NACCHO, NGA, and the National Emergency
Management Association, along with other health associations, such as the
American Medical Association and the American Nurses Association, to increase
surge capacity at hospitals and other medical laboratories.
Collaboration with Private Sector Needs Greater Emphasis
Since September 11, federal government agencies have increasingly coordinated with the private sector on homeland security initiatives. The importance of federal and private sector partnerships have been recognized in the government’s Critical Infrastructure Protection effort, started in 1998, and the President’s National Homeland Security Strategy. The partnerships cover many areas, particularly critical infrastructure and border security. However, the partnerships require additional attention to address challenges with information sharing, business continuity, customer protection, business capabilities, and duplicative or burdensome governmental efforts.
Several federal agencies included in our study helped identify critical infrastructure
risks and assess security measures for private sector entities they provide
service to or regulate. This assistance involved efforts such as advisories,
inspections, and alerts. For example, the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
(FERC) said it issued a notice of proposed rule making regarding how to define
and protect critical energy infrastructure information, and is developing
the final rule. After September 11, FERC assessed all FERC-jurisdictional
dams, developed an E-mail system to alert all licensees, developed a security
program for hydro projects, and identified critical dams that require a higher
level of scrutiny. During operations inspections, FERC engineers annually
assess whether security measures are in place at all high and significant
hazard dams under FERC’s jurisdiction. FERC reported that it continues
to work with industry and other government representatives to address such
initiatives as cybersecurity and incident response and recovery to hydropower
and natural gas emergencies. Other agency examples include water facilities,
food supplies, and public health. EPA said it had been working to accelerate
the development of a waste and water vulnerability assessment tool to be used
at 16,000 public water facilities. Vulnerability assessments had already been
completed within major metropolitan areas and EPA had sent security alerts
to the facilities. USDA’s Food Safety Inspection Service has worked
with the food industry to help prevent biosecurity threats to the nation’s
food supply, ensure early detection of such threats, and assure containment
of pathogens. Moreover, in the public health sector, CDC said it has worked
in cooperation with private sector medical and hospital associations such
as the American Medical Association and the American Heart Association to
develop strategies to produce just-in-time information that enhances protection
and prevention via information technology, especially with
regard to safety for support workers.
Private sector association information also described government and private sector partnerships. For example, DOJ issued a chemical facility vulnerability assessment methodology, developed in cooperation with the DOE’s Sandia National Laboratories and with the assistance of chemical industry representatives. The American Chemistry Council (ACC) also said that it had partnered with EPA, the FBI, and others to organize regional security briefings around the nation. Its Chemical Transportation Emergency Center team had worked with the FBI’s Hazardous Materials Response Unit to improve coordination between the chemical industry and the FBI. ACC also signed an agreement with the National Infrastructure Protection Center (NIPC), a government and private sector partnership, to create the Chemical Sector Information Sharing and Analysis Center, aimed at sharing security-related information between NIPC and the companies that make and use chemical products. The American Bankers Association (ABA) noted that efforts to address money laundering and tracking, particularly with respect to terrorists and their supporters, could draw on the Department of the Treasury’s long history of public-private partnerships to establish policies and regulations to prevent and detect money laundering. After September 11, the National Food Processors Association said it established the Alliance for Food Security, a consortium of more than 130 industry associations and government agencies that addressed a wide range of potential threats and provided guidance.
Border security also has been the target of increased joint federal and private efforts. In our previous work, we described the Customs Service’s engagement with the trade community in a partnership program to protect U.S. borders and international commerce from acts of terrorism. In this initiative, U.S. importers enter into voluntary agreements with Customs to enhance the security of their global supply chains and those of their business partners. In return, Customs agrees to expedite the clearance of the members’ cargo at U.S. ports of entry.17. Under this program—called Customs-Trade Partnership Against Terrorism (C-TPAT)—Customs said businesses sign an agreement that commits them to actions such as conducting comprehensive self-assessments of supply chain security and developing and implementing programs to enhance supply chain security according to C-TPAT guidelines. Business benefits include a reduced number of border inspections and an emphasis on self-policing instead of Customs’ verification. According to Customs’ officials, 1,100 companies have agreed to participate in the program as of November 2002. C-TPAT is currently open to all importers, brokers, freight forwarders, and non-vessel owning common carriers as well as carriers involved in air, rail, and sea transportation and U.S.-Canadian border highway carriers. Customs plans to expand the program to port authorities, terminal operators, warehouse operators, and foreign manufacturers. Customs launched the C-TPAT program in April 2002.
____________________________________________________________
17. U.S. General Accounting Office, Container Security:
Current Efforts to Deter Nuclear Materials, New Initiatives, and Challenges,
GAO-03-297T (Washington, D.C.: Nov. 18, 2002).
_____________________________________________________________
The DHS Office of State and Local Coordination mentioned earlier may also
help improve coordination and collaboration with the private sector. It will
have responsibilities for coordinating with the private sector. In addition,
under the DHS legislation, the DHS Secretary is to appoint a Special Assistant
responsible for creating and fostering strategic communications with the private
sector, creating and managing private sector advisory councils, and developing
new public-private partnerships.
Partnership Issues Require Additional Attention
The federal government and private sector face many challenges in establishing
homeland security partnerships. In prior work, we stated that information-sharing
barriers with the private sector were a problem and noted that a number of
activities have been undertaken to build relationships between the federal
government and the private sector, such as NIPC’s InfraGard program,
the Partnership for Critical Infrastructure Security, efforts by the Critical
Infrastructure Assurance Office, and efforts by lead federal agencies to promote
the establishment of information sharing and analysis centers (ISAC). For
example, the InfraGard program
has expanded, providing the FBI and NIPC with a means of securely sharing
information and a forum for education and training on infrastructure vulnerabilities
and protection measures. In addition, NIPC said a new ISAC development and
support unit had been created, whose mission was to enhance private sector
cooperation and trust. NIPC indicates that ISACs had been established for
the chemical industry, surface transportation, electric power, telecommunications,
information technology, financial services, water supply, oil and gas, emergency
fire services, food, emergency law enforcement, and state and local governments.
The new DHS legislation contains provisions for information sharing and security
that may respond to some of these concerns. For example, the legislation includes
safeguards on voluntarily provided critical infrastructure information.
Federal officials and their private sector partners are faced with striking a reasonable balance between security efforts and business objectives. While the private sector supports homeland security efforts, it also is concerned that proposed federal mandates or guidelines might prove harmful to security or not adequately consider business needs. For example, the International Mass Retail Association (IMRA) had urged the Customs Service not to sign a recent rule requiring carriers to transmit manifest information 24 hours prior to a container being loaded on a ship. IMRA believed such a requirement might result in increased theft and tampering at the foreign port of lading. The National Association of Manufacturers (NAM) has supported administration smart border plans and attempts to improve cargo security. However, NAM believes that the government should carefully assess the impact of new cargo security measures on trade and business operations, ensuring that security benefits are commensurate with economic costs. The U.S. Chamber of Commerce has also highlighted the need for government and industry teamwork on border and transportation security that would allow businesses to stay competitive.
In addition, ABA highlighted limitations in bank capabilities in security efforts. For example, ABA noted that there are operational limitations to what a bank can do in reporting customer transactions. For example, ABA said banks can request information on who is the “beneficial owner” of an account or the ultimate recipient of a money transfer, but most often would have no way to investigate or confirm this information. Our work indicates that achieving the nation's homeland security goals will require considerable input and collaboration between and among the federal, state, and local governments. Restructuring federal agencies involved in homeland security to reduce overlap or conflicts in assistance provision will help to make activities and initiatives more effective, and will help to clarify lines of authority and ensure accountability in an emergency. Many stakeholders we interviewed indicated that working relationships between government levels have increased since September 11, as public sector organizations have worked more closely to identify risks and solve problems. While progress has occurred in this important area, state and local government organizations articulated that concerns remain with the level of collaboration in certain areas and with certain obstacles, such as access to critical data. Ultimately, the success of public sector collaboration is necessary to increase the likelihood that many homeland security initiatives can be sustained affordably over the long term.
Similarly, while progress has been made in improving collaboration between the public and private sectors, advances have not been made in some sectors where such work is necessary. The effective protection of the nation's critical infrastructure is vital to public safety and security, and efforts to achieve this goal cannot be accomplished by the government absent private sector assistance. A greater emphasis is required on the part of all stakeholders to find common ground, to eliminate obstacles, and tobuild strong working relationships in order to strengthen homeland security. DHS includes an Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Directorate that will have responsibility for assessments and protection plans for key resources and critical infrastructure. Part of that effort will include consultation and cooperation with state and local governments and the private sector. For example, the directorate will recommend protection measures in cooperation with state and local government agencies and authorities and the private sector.
