Free Cross Motion [Dispositive] - District Court of Federal Claims - federal

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 1 of 107

Fact Sheet: DHS and OPM Final Human Resource Regulations
Release Date: 01/26/05 00:00:00 The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is establishing a new Human Resource Management System to ensure the Department can continue to attract, retain, and reward a workforce that is able to meet the critical mission entrusted to it by the American people. As outlined in the final regulations, issued jointly by the Secretary and the Director of the Office of Personnel Management (OPM), the system provides greater flexibility and accountability in the way employees are paid, developed, evaluated, afforded due process, and represented by labor organizations.

The DHS mission demands unprecedented organizational agility to stay ahead of determined, dangerous, and sophisticated adversaries. The mission demands that employees and supervisors work together as never before. Achieving such unity requires an integrated HR system for the Department--a system that assures maximum flexibility and accountability. That system must value and reward high performance, teamwork, commitment to learning and excellence, and selfless service. It must also facilitate communication and collaboration at all levels of the Department. The Secretary and the Director are committed to ensuring that these goals are met. This was the fundamental challenge faced in designing this new system -- to strike a balance between mission-essential flexibility and protection of core civil service principles. The new Human Resource Management System, referred to as MAXHR, will help DHS meet its critical mission needs by:
z z

The Case for Change

z

z z z z

Reinforcing the commitment to employees and the pledge to preserve fundamental merit principles, to prevent prohibited personnel practices, and to honor and promote veterans' preference; Implementing a pay-for-performance program that will replace the General Schedule with market-based pay bands, in which employee pay progression is solely driven by performance and/or competency attainment--not longevity; Benchmarking positions in new DHS occupational clusters with other similar positions in the marketplace to establish minimum and maximum rates of pay for pay bands--ensuring DHS' ability to compete for top talent. Annual compensation surveys will be used to establish ranges of pay for covered DHS employees; Training DHS managers to set clear performance expectations and to link employee performance objectives to organizational goals; Expanding management rights that are non-negotiable to ensure DHS' ability to respond to operational needs; Preserving collective bargaining but reducing the number of situations in which bargaining is required; and Streamlining adverse actions and appeals processes for DHS employees, ensuring the Department's ability to effectively deal with performance and conduct issues, including standard notification and response periods, while retaining due process protections.

Key Elements of the Human Resource Management System Classification
z z z z

Simplified system Occupational clusters based on similarity of work, qualifications, marketplace and competencies Pay bands based on level of work within each cluster Pay ranges set by occupational cluster, band

Compensation
z z z z z

Performance replaces longevity as basis for individual pay increases Employees rated less than fully successful do not receive pay increases Pay ranges based on labor market (national and local), budget, etc. Compensation Committee (including union representatives) advises Secretary Additional detail provided for promotion, demotion, pay retention, etc.

A237
1

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 2 of 107

Performance Management
z z z z z

Individual expectations aligned with organizational goals Ratings will reflect meaningful distinctions in employee performance System results in improved organizational accountability Less emphasis on paper and more attention to manager-employee interaction Performance Improvement Periods no longer required

Labor Relations
z z z z z z

Non negotiable management rights expanded to assure ability to act Bargaining on procedures prohibited, but management required to confer Limited bargaining on the impact of a management action Expedited collective bargaining with impasse resolution Homeland Security Labor Relations Board (HSLRB) established to ensure mission focus, provide one-stop dispute resolution Judicial review provided

Adverse Actions
z z z z z

Due process preserved Single process for performance and conduct Streamlined 15-day notice/10-day reply period Initial Service Periods (trial periods) of up to 2 years for designated positions Mandatory Removal Offenses (MRO) to be identified

Appeals
z z z z z z z

Due process preserved Merit Systems Protection Board (MSPB) and arbitration retained Burden of proof changed to single "preponderance" standard MSPB procedures streamlined Mitigation permitted only when penalty is wholly without justification Mandatory Removal Panel established for MROs to ensure mission focus Judicial review provided

Important Facts
z z z z z z z z

Employees' pay and benefits will not be reduced as a result of transition to the new system. Commitment to DHS employees to preserve fundamental merit principles, to prevent prohibited personnel practices, and to promote veterans preference is unchanged. Employees may grieve performance ratings and appeal unacceptable ratings that result in adverse actions. Employees' right to organize and bargain collectively is retained. Process for continuing collaboration offers additional opportunities for employee representatives' involvement and participation. Definitions of what constitutes an adverse action are retained. No changes have been made to EEOC-related appeals. Ongoing program evaluation will guide continuous improvement efforts and measure results.

Who is Included in the Human Resource Management System?

The vast majority of DHS civilian employees (approximately 110,000) will be covered by most of the elements included in the Human Resource Management System. However, some employees in the Department will not be affected by

A238

2

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 3 of 107

these new regulations, or will only be covered by certain elements:
z z z z z

Transportation Security Administration is not included in any elements of the System. Emergency Preparedness & Response Stafford Act Employees are not included in any elements of the System. Secret Service is excluded from labor relations, and the Uniformed Division is not included in pay and classification elements of the System. Inspector General employees are not included in any elements of the System. Wage Grade employees are not included in pay and classification in initial implementation.

In addition, the Senior Executives (SES) will be covered by a government-wide pay-for-performance system. It is important to note that employees not included in the Human Resource Management System right now may be included at a future date.

Key Boards/Committees Established by the Regulations
z

DHS Compensation Committee -- Comprised of 14 members, this body is responsible for making recommendations to the Secretary on the allocation of budget resources in the new compensation system. On an annual basis, the Committee will recommend market adjustments across occupational clusters, localitybased adjustments by occupation and location, and will review pay-for-performance payouts. The Committee provides oversight and transparency to the compensation process. Four seats are reserved for DHS labor organizations and OPM serves as an ex officio member. The DHS Under Secretary for Management serves as the chair.

z

Homeland Security Labor Relations Board (HSLRB) -- The HSLRB resolves issues between management and employee representatives, including the scope of bargaining, duty to bargain in good faith, negotiation impasses, and exceptions to arbitration awards involving exercise of management rights. Decisions of the HSLRB are final and binding. The Board is a single entity for the resolution of these labor management disputes. The Board will be composed of at least three members, appointed by the Secretary. Members must be independent, distinguished citizens of the United States who are well known for their integrity, impartiality, and expertise in labor relations, law enforcement, or national/homeland security or other related security matters. DHS labor unions will be asked to provide nominees for the Secretary's consideration.

z

Mandatory Removal Panel (MRP) -- A standing panel of three members well known for their integrity, impartiality, and expertise in labor or employee relations, or law enforcement/homeland security matters. The MRP will review employee appeals of removal actions taken as a result of the MRO provisions. The Panel, dedicated to the Department of Homeland Security, will provide expeditious handling of these very critical issues. Employees may appeal MRP decisions to the MSPB. DHS labor unions will also be asked to provide nominees for the Secretary's consideration.

Additional Key Program Aspects
z

DHS Communications Efforts -- DHS employees will be well-informed of program changes and when system changes are anticipated. The comprehensive communications program will include global emails, satellite broadcasts, and considerable use of DHS Web pages. An internal DHS newsletter provides a weekly update to all employees. Additionally, DHS leaders will be provided toolkits and other aids to facilitate discussions and interactions between management and employees on program changes.

z

Training and Leadership Development -- All DHS employees, supervisors, and executives will receive training on the new program throughout its implementation. HR professionals will also receive training on the deployment effort and new job skills that will be required over time as program changes take effect.

A239
3

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 4 of 107

What Has Not Been Decided?

DHS and OPM have intentionally patterned these regulations after the chapters in Title 5 they replace, providing broad policy parameters and leaving much of the detail to DHS implementing directives. Specific details of the Human Resource Management System that still need to be developed include:
z z z z z z

Identifying new occupational clusters and how DHS employees will be placed in these new job clusters; Establishing new pay ranges that will replace the current GS system; Establishing additional rules for performance management, pay administration and conversion of employees from the GS system; Identifying benchmark positions for which market surveys will be used to gauge DHS' competitiveness for purposes of establishing pay ranges; Drafting operating procedures for the Homeland Security Labor Relations Board; and Identifying Mandatory Removal Offenses.

These and other details will be addressed in DHS implementing directives. DHS employee representatives will have an opportunity to participate in this more detailed program design phase, as outlined under the "continuing collaboration" provisions of the regulations.

Using the framework established in the regulations, the new policies and procedures for labor relations, adverse actions, and appeals, including the formation of the Homeland Security Labor Relations Board, will occur after 30 but no later than 180 days from the issuance of the regulations. The DHS Secretary will make separate decisions regarding the effective dates of the rest of the regulations. The new programs will be implemented in phases to allow ample time for training and program evaluation. In particular, the majority of employees will have more than one year under the new performance management system before their pay is affected by performance decisions.

Implementation Highlights

Early in 2005
z z z

Communication outreach begins Detailed design work including continuing collaboration with employee representatives Meetings and focus groups held around the country

Spring 2005
z z

Manager and supervisor training begins Labor relations, adverse actions and appeals portions of the program become effective for all covered employees

Summer 2005
z

Performance management training for managers, supervisors and employees

Fall 2005
z

New performance management process begins

Early 2006
z

DHS Headquarters, Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection (IAIP), Science & Technology (S&T), Emergency Preparedness and Response (EP&R), and Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) --

A240

4

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 5 of 107

converted to new pay system; first rate range adjustment and performance pay-out scheduled for January 2007

Early 2007
z

U.S. Secret Service (USSS) and U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) -- converted to new pay system; first rate range adjustment and performance pay-out scheduled for January 2008 (note USCG performance pay-out in summer of 2008)

Early 2008
z

U.S. Customs and Border Protection (CBP), U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (CIS) -- converted to new pay system; first rate range adjustment and performance pay-out scheduled for January 2009

Program Background Information/Timeline

These final regulations represent a major milestone in an inclusive design process that was initiated over two years ago.
z z z z z z z

Homeland Security Act, November 25, 2002 DHS/OPM HR Design Team, April-September 2003 Senior Review Committee, July and October 2003 Proposed Regulations, February 2004 Public Comment Period, February-March 2004 Meet and Confer Process, May-August 2004 Final Regulations, January 2005

Design Facts
z z z z z z

80 DHS employees, supervisors, union representatives, and OPM representatives were members of the design team 64 nationwide focus groups and town hall meetings were conducted to gain input from employees in all major DHS components Over 65 public and private sector organizations and HR experts were contacted 52 options were created reflecting a range of alternatives, information, and ideas More than 3,800 public comments on the proposed regulations were received and analyzed by DHS and OPM staff before the regulations were finalized Over 30 days of "meet and confer" with employee representatives

### This page was last modified on 01/26/05 00:00:00

A241
5

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 6 of 107

THE DEPARTMENT
OF

HOMELAND SECURITY

President George W. Bush
June 2002

A242

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 7 of 107

THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
The President's most important job is to protect and defend the American people. Since September 11, all levels of government have cooperated like never before to strengthen aviation and border security, stockpile more medicines to defend against bioterrorism, improve information sharing among our intelligence agencies, and deploy more resources and personnel to protect our critical infrastructure. The changing nature of the threats facing America requires a new government structure to protect against invisible enemies that can strike with a wide variety of weapons. Today no one single government agency has homeland security as its primary mission. In fact, responsibilities for homeland security are dispersed among more than 100 different government organizations. America needs a single, unified homeland security structure that will improve protection against today's threats and be flexible enough to help meet the unknown threats of the future. The President proposes to create a new Department of Homeland Security, the most significant transformation of the U.S. government in over a half-century by largely transforming and realigning the current confusing patchwork of government activities into a single department whose primary mission is to protect our homeland. The creation of a Department of Homeland Security is one more key step in the President's national strategy for homeland security. Immediately after last fall's attack, the President took decisive steps to protect America from hardening cockpits and stockpiling vaccines to tightening our borders. The President used his maximum legal authority to establish the White House Office of Homeland Security and the Homeland Security Council to ensure that our federal response and protection efforts were coordinated and effective. The President also directed Homeland Security Advisor Tom Ridge to study the federal government as a whole to determine if the current structure allows us to meet the threats of today while anticipating the unknown threats of tomorrow. After careful study of the current structure coupled with the experience gained since September 11 and new information we have learned about our enemies while fighting a war the President concluded that our nation needs a more unified homeland security structure. In designing the new Department, the Administration considered a number of homeland security organizational proposals that have emerged from outside studies, commissions, and Members of Congress. The Department of Homeland Security would make Americans safer because our nation would have: One department whose primary mission is to protect the American homeland; One department to secure our borders, transportation sector, ports, and critical infrastructure; One department to synthesize and analyze homeland security intelligence from multiple sources; One department to coordinate communications with state and local governments, private industry, and the American people about threats and preparedness; One department to coordinate our efforts to protect the American people against bioterrorism and other weapons of mass destruction; One department to help train and equip for first responders; One department to manage federal emergency response activities; and More security officers in the field working to stop terrorists and fewer resources in Washington managing duplicative and redundant activities that drain critical homeland security resources.

A243

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 8 of 107

THE ORGANIZATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
The Department of Homeland Security would have a clear and efficient organizational structure with four divisions: Border and Transportation Security Emergency Preparedness and Response Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Countermeasures Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection

BORDER AND TRANSPORTATION SECURITY R R O
The Department would unify authority over major federal security operations related to our borders, territorial waters, and transportation systems. It would assume responsibility for operational assets of the Coast Guard, Customs Service, Immigration and Naturalization Service and Border Patrol, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service of the Department of Agriculture, and the recently created Transportation Security Administration allowing a single government entity to manage entry into the United States. It would ensure that all aspects of border control, including the issuing of visas, are informed by a central information-sharing clearinghouse and compatible databases.

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE
The Department would oversee federal government assistance in the domestic disaster preparedness training of first responders and would coordinate the government's disaster response efforts. FEMA would become a central component of the Department of Homeland Security, and the new Department would administer the grant programs for firefighters, police, and emergency personnel currently managed by FEMA, the Department of Justice, and the Department of Health and Human Services. The Department would also manage such critical response assets as the Nuclear Emergency Search Team (Department of Energy) and the National Pharmaceutical Stockpile (Health and Human Services). Finally, the Department would integrate the federal interagency emergency response plans into a single, comprehensive, government-wide plan, and ensure that all response personnel have the equipment and capability to communicate with each other as necessary.

CHEMICAL, BIOLOGICAL, RADIOLOGICAL AND NUCLEAR COUNTERMEASURES M L GC U E E R
The Department of Homeland Security would lead the federal government's efforts in preparing for and responding to the full range of terrorist threats involving weapons of mass destruction. To do this, the Department would set national policy and establish guidelines for state and local governments. It would direct exercises and drills for federal, state, and local chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) attack response teams and plans. The result of this effort would be to consolidate and synchronize the disparate efforts of multiple federal agencies currently scattered across several departments. This would create a single office whose primary mission is the critical task of protecting the United States from catastrophic terrorism. Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear Terrorism. The Department would be the lead agency preparing for and responding to chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear terrorism, including agroterrorism. The Department would unify three of America's premier centers of excellence in this field, including the Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (Department of Energy). The Department would
THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY P E D C I Y 2

A244

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 9 of 107

also manage national efforts to develop diagnostics, vaccines, antibodies, antidotes, and other countermeasures. Science and Technology. In the war against terrorism, America's vast science and technology base provides us with a key advantage. The Department would press this advantage with a national research and development enterprise for homeland security comparable in emphasis and scope to that which has supported the national security community for more than fifty years. The new Department would consolidate and prioritize the disparate homeland security related research and development programs currently scattered throughout the Executive Branch. It would also assist state and local public safety agencies by evaluating equipment and setting standards.

INFORMATION ANALYSIS AND INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION E O O R
Intelligence and Threat Analysis. The Department would fuse and analyze intelligence and other information pertaining to threats to the homeland from multiple sources including the CIA, NSA, FBI, INS, DEA, DOE, Customs, DOT and data gleaned from other organizations. The Department would merge under one roof the capability to identify and assess current and future threats to the homeland, map those threats against our current vulnerabilities, issue timely warnings, and immediately take or effect appropriate preventive and protective action. An important partner with the Department's intelligence and threat analysis division will be the newly formed FBI Office of Intelligence. The new FBI and CIA reforms will provide critical analysis and information to the new Department. Protecting America's Critical Infrastructure. The Department would be responsible for comprehensively evaluating the vulnerabilities of America's critical infrastructure, including food and water systems, agriculture, health systems and emergency services, information and telecommunications, banking and finance, energy (electrical, nuclear, gas and oil, dams), transportation (air, road, rail, ports, waterways), the chemical and defense industries, postal and shipping entities, and national monuments and icons. Working closely with state and local officials, other federal agencies, and the private sector, the Department would help ensure that proper steps are taken to protect high-risk targets.

OTHER KEY COMPONENTS
State/Local Government & Private Sector Coordination. The Department would consolidate and streamline relations with the federal government for America's state and local governments. The new Department would contain an intergovernmental affairs office to coordinate federal homeland security programs with state and local officials. This new Department would give state and local officials one primary contact instead of many when it comes to matters related to training, equipment, planning, and other critical needs such as emergency response. Secret Service. The Department would incorporate the Secret Service, which would report directly to the Secretary. The Secret Service would remain intact and its primary mission will remain the protection of the President and other government leaders. The Secret Service would also continue to provide security for designated national events, as it did for the recent Olympics and the Super Bowl. The White House Office of Homeland Security and the Homeland Security Council. The White House Office of Homeland Security and the Homeland Security Council will continue to play a key role, advising the President and coordinating a vastly simplified interagency process.

THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY P E D C I Y 3

A245

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 10 of 107

Non-Homeland Security Functions. The new Department would have a number of functions that are not directly related to securing the homeland against terrorism. For instance, through FEMA, it would be responsible for mitigating the effects of natural disasters. Through the Coast Guard, it would be responsible for search and rescue and other maritime functions. Several other border functions, such as drug interdiction operations and naturalization, and would also be performed by the new Department.

INTERIM STEPS
The President using the maximum legal authority available to him created the Office of Homeland Security and the Homeland Security Council in the weeks following the attack on America as an immediate step to secure the homeland. Since then, the government has strengthened aviation and border security, stockpiled more medicines to defend against bio-terrorism, improved information sharing among our intelligence agencies, and deployed more resources and personnel to protect our critical infrastructure. The White House Office of Homeland Security will continue to coordinate the federal government's homeland security efforts and to advise the President on a comprehensive Homeland Security strategy. The current components of our homeland security structure will continue to function as normal and there will be no gaps in protection as planning for the new Department moves forward. Preliminary planning for the new Department has already begun. The formal transition would begin once Congress acts on the President's proposal and the President signs it into law. The President calls on Congress to establish the new Department by the close of their current session with full integration of the constituent parts occurring over a phased-in period.

SPECIFIC EXAMPLES OF HOW THE NEW DEPARTMENT WILL MAKE AMERICA SAFER
L V R R I C EXAMPLE: REMOVING BARRIERS TO EFFICIENT BORDER SECURITY

Currently, when a ship enters a U.S. port, Customs, INS, the Coast Guard, the U.S. Department of Agriculture, and others have overlapping jurisdictions over pieces of the arriving ship. Customs has jurisdiction over the goods aboard the ship. INS has jurisdiction over the people on the ship. The Coast Guard has jurisdiction over the ship while it is at sea. Even the Department of Agriculture has jurisdiction over certain cargoes. Although the Coast Guard does have the authority to act as an agent for these other organizations and assert jurisdiction over the entire vessel, in practice the system has not worked as well as it could to prevent the illegal entry of potential terrorists and instruments of terror. Consider this scenario: if the Coast Guard stops a ship at sea for inspection and finds there are illegal immigrants on the ship, the Coast Guard relies on the INS to enforce U.S. immigration law and prevent their entry. If the Coast Guard finds potentially dangerous cargo, it relies on Customs to seize the dangerous cargo. Unfortunately, these organizations may not always share information with each other as rapidly as necessary. So, instead of arresting potential terrorists and seizing dangerous cargo at sea, our current structure can allow these terrorists to enter our ports and potentially sneak into our society. The system might also allow the dangerous cargo to actually enter our ports and threaten American lives.

THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY P E D C I Y 4

A246

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 11 of 107

Under the President's proposal, the ship, the potentially dangerous people, and the dangerous cargo would be seized at sea by one Department that has no question about either its mission or its authority to prevent them from reaching our shores. EXAMPLE: PROTECTING OUR NATION'S CRITICAL INFRASTRUCTURE Nearly five million Americans live within a five mile radius of the most hazardous chemical facilities in the nation. Right now there is no single agency in the government whose core mission is to protect against and respond to an attack on one of these major facilities. Consider the current homeland security apparatus facing a non-citizen that intends to enter our nation and attack one of our chemical facilities. At our border, INS, Customs, Border Patrol, the Coast Guard, and others share jurisdiction over preventing this person's entry. These government organizations may or may not share information, which makes it possible that this potential terrorist might slip through the cracks. Currently, at least twelve different government entities oversee the protection of our critical infrastructure. These many government entities may or may not share all information, and state and local governments must work with twelve separate contacts just to help protect their local infrastructure. Under the President's proposal, the same Department that analyzes intelligence data on the potential terrorist who wants to attack the chemical plant would also be the same Department that can simultaneously alert our border security operatives, alert all of our hazardous materials facilities to ensure that they are prepared to meet this specific new threat from this specific terrorist, and alert all of the affected communities. EXAMPLE: COMMUNICATING TO THE AMERICAN PEOPLE A E C I E R N O L Currently, if a chemical or biological attack were to occur, Americans could receive warnings and health care information from a long list of government organizations, including HHS, FEMA, EPA, GSA, FBI, DOJ, OSHA, OPM, USPS, DOD, USAMRIID, and the Surgeon General not to mention a cacophony of state and local agencies. There is currently no single organization with operational responsibility that could communicate with the American people in a clear, concise, and consistent voice. Consider another recent example. Information was provided to local law enforcement entities by multiple U.S. government organizations about potential threats to the Brooklyn Bridge, apartment complexes, shopping malls, the Statue of Liberty, subways and public transit systems, our oil and gas infrastructure, and our financial system. Under the President's proposal, a single government Department would communicate with the American people about a chemical or biological attack. The new Department would also be the organization that coordinates provision of specific threat information to local law enforcement and sets the national threat level. The new Department would ensure that local law enforcement entities and the public receive clear and concise information from their national government. Citizens would also have one Department telling them what actions if any they must take for their safety and security.

THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY P E D C I Y 5

A247

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 12 of 107

I D E N V M T L N R T EXAMPLE: INTELLIGENCE SHARING AND COMPREHENSIVE THREAT ANALYSIS

Multiple intelligence agencies analyze their individual data, but no single government entity exists to conduct a comprehensive analysis of all incoming intelligence information and other key data regarding terrorism in the United States. There is no central clearinghouse to collect and analyze the data and look for potential trends. Under the President's proposal, the new Department would contain a unit whose sole mission is to assemble, fuse, and analyze relevant intelligence data from government sources, including CIA, NSA, FBI, INS, DEA, DOE, Customs, and DOT, and data gleaned from other organizations and public sources. With this big-picture view, the Department would be more likely to spot trends and would be able to direct resources at a moment's notice to help thwart a terrorist attack. EXAMPLE: DISTRIBUTION OF KEY PHARMACEUTICALS Potassium Iodide (KI) is a drug that helps prevent thyroid cancer in the event of exposure to radiation. The drug must be taken within hours of exposure for maximum effectiveness. Currently, if you live within a ten-mile radius of a nuclear power facility, the distribution of Potassium Iodide is regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission (NRC). The NRC is responsible for getting people this crucial drug, even though the NRC's actual mission is to license nuclear facilities, not provide emergency supplies to the greater population. Outside the ten-mile radius of the nuclear facility, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) is responsible for regulating the distribution of Potassium Iodide. The Department of Health and Human Services controls the national pharmaceutical stockpiles that are to be sent rapidly into emergencies. And other government agencies would control evacuation of the emergency zone. To make matters even more confusing, if you happen to live within a ten-mile radius of a nuclear weapons facility, the Department of Energy controls the distribution of the Potassium Iodide. In the event of radiation exposure, states must currently work with three separate government organizations to distribute critical pharmaceuticals, organizations whose jurisdictions are divided by an invisible ten-mile border. Consider this possible scenario: the NRC and the state decide to distribute Potassium Iodide to everyone within the ten-mile radius. FEMA, however, disagrees with the state and decides against distributing the drug outside the ten-mile radius. In the middle of the NRC, FEMA and state decision process, the state and local governments decide to begin an evacuation. In the ensuing chaos, many exposed individuals might not receive the critical drugs they need. Under the President's proposal, one Department would be responsible for distributing Potassium Iodide to citizens exposed no matter where they live. There would no longer be an artificial ten-mile barrier to treatment. This same single Department would also be responsible for coordination with state and local officials on immediate evacuation from the emergency zone.

BRIEF HISTORY OF GOVERNMENT REORGANIZATION
History teaches us that critical security challenges require clear lines of responsibility and the unified effort of the U.S. government. History also teaches us that new challenges require new organizational structures.
THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY P E D C I Y 6

A248

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 13 of 107

For example, prior to 1945, America's armed forces were inefficiently structured with separate War and Navy Departments and disconnected intelligence units. There were no formal mechanisms for cooperation. After World War II, the onset of the Cold War required consolidation and reorganization of America's national security apparatus to accomplish the new missions at hand. America needed a national security establishment designed to prevent another attack like Pearl Harbor, to mobilize national resources for an enduring conflict, and to do so in a way that protected America's values and ideals. In December 1945, only months after America's decisive victory in World War II, President Harry Truman asked Congress to combine the War and Navy Departments into a single Department of Defense. President Truman declared, "it is now time to take stock to discard obsolete organizational forms and to provide for the future the soundest, most effective and most economical kind of structure for our armed forces of which this most powerful Nation is capable. I urge this as the best means of keeping the peace." President Truman's goals were achieved with the National Security Act of 1947 and subsequent amendments in 1949 and 1958. The legislation consolidated the separate military Departments into the Department of Defense with a civilian secretary solely in charge, established a Central Intelligence Agency to coordinate all foreign intelligence collection and analysis, and created the National Security Council in the White House to coordinate all foreign and defense policy efforts. This reorganization of America's national security establishment was crucial to overcoming the enormous threat we faced in the Cold War and holds important lessons for our approach to the terrorist threat we face today.

THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY P E D C I Y 7

A249

Organization of the Department of Homeland Security
Secretary* Deputy Secretary

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Secret Service

State, Local, and Private Sector Coordination

Border and Transportation Security Emergency Preparedness and Response Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Countermeasures Preparedness Mitigation Response Recovery

Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Infrastructure Protection

Border Security

Document 120-6

Transportation Security

Science & Technology Development Chemical Biological / Agricultural

Physical Assets Telecommunications and Cybersecurity Threat Analysis

Coast Guard

Immigration Services

Filed 12/21/2007

Visa Processing

Radiological / Nuclear

Management

Human Capital

Information Technology Procurement

Page 14 of 107

A250

Finance

*Legal / Congressional / Public Affairs included in Office of the Secretary

Major Cabinet Departments and Agencies Involved in Homeland Security BEFORE Reorg.
OVP OSTP NSC OHS DPC NEC OMB ONDCP

Vice President

President

PC PB NSTAC

WH Counsel

Agriculture NH National Security Coast Guard TSA FAA NC D FHA FinCEN Regional Offices ATF N OSH National Preparedness OFAC FLETC TVCS Justice Programs ODP Secret Service Customs Criminal Division Enforcement 94 U S Attorneys NAD CDC Planning & Assistance

Commerce

HHS

FEMA

Transportation

Treasury

Justice

State

Defense

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF
JCS Political Affairs Western Hemisphere Mexico Desk Canada Desk Counterterrorism Management NORTHCOM NORAD JTF-CS Policy SOL C & Homeland

Food Safety

ndustry & Security

APH S

C AO

ARS

N ST

Forest Service

USPHS

FDA

OEP

Document 120-6
Personnel O PR Consular FB Reserve Affairs Visa Office NGB

NDMS

C nterior OSWER NPS Police CEPPO B A Police FC RC OERR BLM Police OAR OR A OECA NE C NRC OPPTS ORD OW FCC FWS Police Buildings Service Protective Service Disaster Services Technology Service EPA GSA

Energy

VA

CT Division CSTs NDPO Hospitals N PC Labor NS OSHA DEA Marshals Service USPS Material Command SBCCOM Border Patrol DOMS Medical Command MRMC USAMR D CB RF DDR&E NBC Defense USUHS AFRR DTRA C3 D SA NCS U S Army USMC AT&L Health Affairs

CA

DA

National Labs

CTC

NRO

NNSA

Filed 12/21/2007

NPC

NSA

N MA

Army ntelligence

BW R&D

NR

Navy ntelligence

DOE ntel

USAF ntelligence

ncident Respons e Teams

Page 15 of 107

A251

DOT nte

Marine ntelligence

Appropr at ons Armed Serv ces Governmenta Affa rs Inte gence

F nance

Jud c ary

Commerce, Sc ence, & Transportat on Agr cu ture, Nutr t on, & Forestry

Veterans Affa rs
Financial nstitutions Transportation nfrastructure and Nuclear Safety Energy National Parks Water and Power Technology Terrorism and Government nformation Research Nutrition and General Legislation Marketing nspection and Product Promotion nternational Security Proliferation and Federal Services (USPS) Oversight of Government Management Restructuring and the District Personnel mmigration

Hea th, Educat on, Labor, & Pens ons

Energy & Natura Resources

Bank ng, Hous ng Urban Affa rs

Env ronment & Pub c Works

Defense

nterior

nternational Trade

Transportation

Committees with Homeland Security Jurisdiction
Aviation Communications Science Technology and Space Oceans Atmosphere and Fisheries Surface Transportation and Merchant Marine Consumer Affairs Foreign Commerce & Tourism

District of Columbia

Public Health

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Energy and Water Development

VA HUD and ndependent Agencies

Treasury Postal Service and General Government

Agriculture Rural Development FDA and Related Agencies

Commerce Justice State and the Judiciary Emerging Threats and Capabilities

SENATE HOUSE

Document 120-6

Labor Health and Human Services and Education

Appropr at ons F nanc a Serv ces

Ways & Means

Government Reform

Armed Serv ces

Jud c ary

Transportat on & Infrastructure Sc ence Resources Agr cu ture

Veteran's Affa rs

Inte gence Energy & Commerce

Defense

Health

Military Research and Development Livestock and Horticulture Research mmigration and Claims Energy Crime Terrorism and Homeland Security National Security Veteran's Affairs and nternational Relations Aviation Health Energy and Air Quality Oversight and nvestigations Commerce Trade and Consumer Protection National Parks Recreation and Public Lands Railroads Coast Guard Economic Development Public Buildings & Emergency Management Water Resources and the Environment

Filed 12/21/2007

District of Columbia

Trade

Energy and Water Development

Terrorism and Homeland Security

nterior

Capital Markets nsurance & Government Sponsored Enterprises

Transportation

Page 16 of 107

VA HUD and ndependent Agencies

Agriculture Rural Development FDA and Related Agencies

Commerce Justice State and the Judiciary

Labor Health and Human Services and Education

A252

Treasury Postal Service and General Government

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 17 of 107

Department of Homeland Security Major Components
The Department of Homeland Security would be funded within the total monies requested by the President in his FY 2003 budget already before Congress. There would be future savings achieved through the elimination of redundancies inherent in the current structure.
$(Millions) Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Countermeasures Civilian Biodefense Research Programs (HHS) Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (DOE) National BW Defense Analysis Center (New) Plum Island Animal Disease Center (USDA) FTE (1)

1,993 1,188 420 25 3,626

150 324 -124 598

Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Critical Infrastructure Assurance Office (Commerce) Federal Computer Incident Response Center (GSA) National Communications System (DoD) National Infrastructure Protection Center (FBI) National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center (DOE)

27 11 155 151 20 364

65 23 91 795 2 976

Border and Transportation Security Immigration and Naturalization Service (DOJ) Customs Service (Treasury) Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (USDA) Coast Guard (DOT) Federal Protective Services (GSA) Transportation Security Agency (DOT) (2)

6,416 3,796 1,137 7,274 418 4,800 23,841

39,459 21,743 8,620 43,639 1,408 41,300 156,169

Emergency Preparedness and Response Federal Emergency Management Agency Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Response Assets (HHS) Domestic Emergency Support Team (3) Nuclear Incident Response (DOE) Office of Domestic Preparedness (DOJ) (4) National Domestic Preparedness Office (FBI)

6,174 2,104 -91 -2 8,371 1,248

5,135 150 ---15 5,300 6,111

Secret Service (Treasury)

Total, Department of Homeland Security

37,450

169,154

Note: Figures are from FY 2003 President's Budget Request (1) Estimated, final FTE figures to be determined (2) Before fee recapture of $2,346 million. (3) Interagency group currently mobilized by the Attorney General in response to major incidents (4) Included in FEMA in FY 2003 President's Budget Request

A253

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 18 of 107

THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Terrorists today can strike at any place, at any time, and with virtually any weapon. This is a permanent condition and these new threats require our country to design a new homeland security structure. The United States faced an enormous threat during the Cold War. We created a national security strategy to deter and defeat the organized military forces of the Soviet bloc. We emerged victorious from this dangerous period in our history because we organized our national security institutions and prepared ourselves to meet the threat arrayed against us. The United States is under attack from a new kind of enemy one that hopes to employ terror against innocent civilians to undermine their confidence in our institutions and our way of life. Once again we must organize and prepare ourselves to meet a new and dangerous threat. Careful study of the current structure coupled with the experience gained since September 11 and new information we have learned about our enemies while fighting a war has led the President to conclude that our nation needs a more robust and unified homeland security structure. Mission of the New Department The mission of the Department of Homeland Security would be to: Prevent terrorist attacks within the United States; Reduce America's vulnerability to terrorism; and Minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur. The Department of Homeland Security would mobilize and focus the resources of the federal government, state and local governments, the private sector, and the American people to accomplish its mission. Organization The creation of the Department of Homeland Security would empower a single Cabinet official whose primary mission is to protect the American homeland from terrorism. The Department of Homeland Security would have a clear, efficient organizational structure with four divisions. Border and Transportation Security Emergency Preparedness and Response Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Countermeasures Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Even after creation of the new Department, homeland security will still involve the efforts of other Cabinet departments. The Department of Justice and the FBI, for example, will remain the lead law enforcement agencies for preventing terrorist attacks. The Department of Defense will continue to play a crucial support role in the case of a catastrophic terrorist incident. The Department of Transportation will continue to be responsible for highway and rail safety, and air traffic control. The CIA will continue to gather and analyze overseas intelligence. Homeland security will continue to require interagency coordination, and the President will still need a close adviser on homeland security related issues. Accordingly, the President intends a strong continuing role for the White House Office of Homeland Security and the Homeland Security Council.
THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY P E D C I Y 8

A254

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 19 of 107

ORGANIZATION OF THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Secretary* Deputy Secretary
State, Local, and Private Sector Coordination

Secret Service

Border and Transportation Security Border Security Transportation Security Coast Guard Immigration Services

Emergency Preparedness and Response Preparedness Mitigation Response Recovery

Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Countermeasures Science & Technology Development Chemical Biological / Agricultural

Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection Infrastructure Protection Physical Assets Telecommunications and Cybersecurity Threat Analysis

Visa Processing Management Human Capital Finance Information Technology Procurement

Radiological / Nuclear

*Legal / Congressional / Public Affairs included in Office of the Secretary

Border and Transportation Security Securing our nation's air, land, and sea borders is a difficult yet critical task. The United States has 5,525 miles of border with Canada and 1,989 miles with Mexico. Our maritime border includes 95,000 miles of shoreline, and a 3.4 million square mile exclusive economic zone. Each year, more than 500 million people cross the borders into the United States, some 330 million of whom are non-citizens. The Department of Homeland Security would be responsible for securing our nation's borders and transportation systems, which straddle 350 official ports of entry and connect our homeland to the rest of the world. The tasks of managing our borders and securing our transportation systems are directly related indeed, at our international airports and seaports they are inseparable. The Department would manage who and what enters our homeland, and work to prevent the entry of terrorists and the instruments of terrorism while simultaneously ensuring the speedy flow of legitimate traffic. It would be the single federal Department in charge of all ports of entry, including security and inspection operations, and would manage and coordinate port of entry activities of other federal departments and agencies. The Department would lead efforts to create a border of the future that provides greater security through better intelligence, coordinated national efforts, and unprecedented international cooperation against terrorists, the instruments of terrorism, and other international threats. At the same time, it would help ensure that this border of the future better serves the needs of legitimate travelers and industry through improved efficiency.
THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY P E D C I Y 9

A255

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 20 of 107

The Department would lead work toward a state-of-the-art visa system, one in which visitors are identifiable by biometric information that is gathered during the visa application process. It would ensure that information is shared between databases of border management, law enforcement, and intelligence community agencies so that individuals who pose a threat to America are denied entry to the United States. It would also lead efforts to deploy an automated entry-exit system that would verify compliance with entry conditions, student status such as work limitations and duration of stay, for all categories of visas. To carry out its border security mission the Department would incorporate the United States Customs Service (currently part of the Department of Treasury), the Immigration and Naturalization Service and Border Patrol (Department of Justice), the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (Department of Agriculture), and the Transportation Security Administration (Department of Transportation). The Department would also incorporate the Federal Protective Service (General Services Administration) to perform the additional function of protecting government buildings, a task closely related to the Department's infrastructure protection responsibilities. The Department would secure our nation's transportation systems, which move people from our borders to anywhere in the country within hours. The recently created Transportation Security Administration, which would become part of the new Department, has statutory responsibility for security of all modes of transportation and directly employs airport security and law enforcement personnel. Tools it uses include intelligence, regulation, enforcement, inspection, and screening and education of carriers, passengers and shippers. Its present focus on aviation security will not slow the government's pace in addressing the security needs of other transportation modes. The incorporation of TSA into the new Department will allow the Department of Transportation to remain focused on its core mandate of ensuring that the nation has a robust and efficient transportation infrastructure that keeps pace with modern technology and the nation's demographic and economic growth. United States Coast Guard. In order to secure our nation's territorial waters, including our ports and waterways, the Department would assume authority over the United States Coast Guard, which would maintain its existing independent identity as a military organization under the leadership of the Commandant of the Coast Guard. Upon declaration of war or when the President so directs, the Coast Guard would operate as an element of the Department of Defense, consistent with existing law. The U.S. Coast Guard is charged with regulatory, law enforcement, humanitarian, and emergency response duties. It is responsible for the safety and security of America's inland waterways, ports, and harbors; more than 95,000 miles of U.S. coastlines; U.S. territorial seas; 3.4 million square miles of ocean defining our Exclusive Economic Zones; as well as other maritime regions of importance to the United States. The Coast Guard has command responsibilities for countering potential threats to America's coasts, ports, and inland waterways through numerous port security, harbor defense, and coastal warfare operations and exercises. In the name of port security specifically, the Coast Guard has broad authority in the nation's ports as "Captain of the Port." Recently the Coast Guard has worked to establish near shore and port domain awareness, and to provide an offshore force gathering intelligence and interdicting suspicious vessels prior to reaching U.S. shores. Immigration and Visa Services. The new Department of Homeland Security would include the INS and would, consistent with the President's long-standing position, separate immigration services from immigration law enforcement. The Department would build an immigration services organization that
THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY P E D C I Y 10

A256

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 21 of 107

would administer our immigration law in an efficient, fair, and humane manner. The new Department would assume the legal authority to issue visas to foreign nationals and admit them into the country. The State Department, working through the United States embassies and consulates abroad, would continue to administer the visa application and issuance process. The Department would make certain that America continues to welcome visitors and those who seek opportunity within our shores while excluding terrorists and their supporters. Emergency Preparedness and Response We cannot assume that we can prevent all acts of terror and therefore must also prepare to minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur. As September 11 showed, the consequences of terrorism can be far-reaching and diverse. The Department of Homeland Security would ensure the preparedness of our nation's emergency response professionals, provide the federal government's response, and aid America's recovery from terrorist attacks and natural disasters. To fulfill these missions, the Department of Homeland Security would build upon the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) as one of its key components. It would continue FEMA's efforts to reduce the loss of life and property and to protect our nation's institutions from all types of hazards through a comprehensive, risk-based, all-hazards emergency management program of preparedness, mitigation, response, and recovery. And it will continue to change the emergency management culture from one that reacts to terrorism and other disasters, to one that proactively helps communities and citizens avoid becoming victims. In terms of preparedness, the Department would assume authority over federal grant programs for local and state first responders such as firefighters, police, and emergency medical personnel. Various offices in the Department of Justice, the Department of Health and Human Services, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency currently manage those programs. In addition, the Department would develop and manage a national training and evaluation system to design curriculums, set standards, evaluate, and reward performance in local, state, and federal training efforts. The Department would continue FEMA's practice of focusing on risk mitigation in advance of emergencies by promoting the concept of disaster-resistant communities. It would continue current federal support for local government efforts that promote structures and communities that have a reduced chance of being impacted by disasters. It would bring together private industry, the insurance sector, mortgage lenders, the real estate industry, homebuilding associations, citizens, and others to create model communities in high-risk areas. The Department would have responsibility for federal emergency response efforts. It would lead our national response to a biological attack, direct the Nuclear Emergency Search Teams, Radiological Emergency Response Team, Radiological Assistance Program, Domestic Emergency Support Team, National Pharmaceutical Stockpile, and the National Disaster Medical System, and manage the Metropolitan Medical Response System. The Department would also coordinate the involvement of other federal response assets such as the National Guard in the event of a major incident. The consequences of a terrorist attack are wide-ranging and can include: loss of life and health, destruction of families, fear and panic, loss of confidence in government, destruction of property, and disruption of commerce and financial markets. The Department would lead federal efforts to promote recovery from terrorist attacks and natural disasters. The Department would maintain FEMA's procedures for aiding recovery from natural and terrorist disasters.
THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY P E D C I Y 11

A257

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 22 of 107

Incident Management. The Department would work with federal, state, and local public safety organizations to build a comprehensive national incident management system for response to terrorist incidents and natural disasters. This system would clarify and streamline federal incident management procedures, eliminating the artificial distinction between "crisis management" and "consequence management." The Department would consolidate existing federal government emergency response plans namely the Federal Response Plan, the National Contingency Plan, the U.S. government Interagency Domestic Terrorism Concept of Operations Plan, and the Federal Radiological Emergency Response Plan into one genuinely all-hazard plan. In time of emergency, the Department would manage and coordinate federal entities supporting local and state emergency response efforts. Interoperable Communications. In the aftermath of any major terrorist attack, emergency response efforts would likely involve hundreds of offices from across the government and the country. It is crucial for response personnel to have and use equipment and systems that allow them to communicate with one another. The current system has not yet supplied the emergency response community with the technology that it needs for this mission. The new Department of Homeland Security would make this a top priority. Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Countermeasures The knowledge, technology, and material needed to build weapons of mass destruction are spreading inexorably. If our enemies acquire these weapons and the means to deliver them, they will use them potentially with consequences far more devastating than those we suffered on September 11. The Department of Homeland Security would lead the federal government's efforts in preparing for and responding to the full range of terrorist threats involving weapons of mass destruction. To do this, the Department would set national policy and establish guidelines for state and local governments. It would direct exercises and drills for federal, state, and local chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) response teams and plans. The result of this effort would be to consolidate and synchronize the disparate efforts of multiple federal agencies currently scattered across several departments. This would create a single office whose primary mission is the critical task of protecting the United States from catastrophic terrorism. The Department would be responsible for several distinct capabilities and institutions that focus on specific elements of this mission. The Department would unify much of the federal government's efforts to develop and implement scientific and technological countermeasures to CBRN terrorist threats. The Department would also provide direction and establish priorities for national research and development, for related tests and evaluations, and for the development and procurement of new technology and equipment to counter the CBRN threat. The Department would incorporate and focus the intellectual energy and extensive capacity of several important scientific institutions, including Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory (currently part of the Department of Energy) and the Plum Island Animal Disease Center (Department of Agriculture). The Department would unify our defenses against human, animal, and plant diseases that could be used as terrorist weapons. The Department would sponsor outside research, development, and testing to invent new vaccines, antidotes, diagnostics, and therapies against biological and chemical warfare agents; to recognize, identify, and confirm the occurrence of an attack; and to minimize the morbidity and mortality caused by any biological or chemical agent.

THE DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY P E D C I Y 12

A258

Case 1:05-cv-00142-NBF

Document 120-6

Filed 12/21/2007

Page 23 of 107

The Department would unify our defenses against agricultural terrorism the malicious use of plant or animal pathogens to cause disease in the agricultural sector. The Department would exclude agricultural pests and diseases at the border. It would strengthen national research programs and surveillance systems to shield agriculture from natural or deliberately induced pests or disease. Working with the Department of Agriculture and the Department of Health and Human Services, it would also that ensure rigorous inspection and quality assurance programs protect the food supply from farm to fork. Science & Technology Agenda. In the war against terrorism, America's vast science and technology base provides us with a key advantage. The Department would press this advantage with a national research and development enterprise for homeland security comparable in emphasis and scope to that which has supported the national security community for more than fifty years. This is appropriate, given the scale of the mission and the catastrophic potential of the threat. Many of the needed systems would be potentially continental in scope, and thus the technologies must scale appropriately, in terms of complexity, operation, and sustainability. This research and development would be driven by a constant examination of the nation's vulnerabilities, constant testing of our security systems, and a constant evaluation of the threat and its weaknesses. The emphasis within this enterprise would be on catastrophic terrorism threats to the security of our homeland that would result in large-scale loss of life and major economic impact. It would be aimed at both evolutionary improvements to current capabilities as well as the development of revolutionary new capabilities. The following are examples of the types of research and development projects that the Department would pursue with its scientific assets. · Preventing importation of nuclear weapons and material. The Department of Homeland Security would make defeating this threat a top priority of its research and development efforts. This nuclear denial program would develop and deploy new technologies and systems for safeguarding nuclear material stockpiles and for detecting the movement of those materials. In particular, it would focus on better detection of illicit nuclear material transport on the open seas, at U.S. ports of entry, and throughout the national transportation system. Detecting bioterrorist attacks. The anthrax attacks of October 2001 proved that quick recognition of biological terrorism is crucial to saving lives. The Department of Homeland Security would lead efforts to develop, deploy, manage, and maintain a national system for detecting the use of biological agents within the United States. This system would consist of a national public health data surveillance system to monitor public and private databases for indications that a bioterrorist attack has occurred, as well as a sensor network to detect and report the release of bioterrorist pat