Combating Terrorism: Comments on H.R. 525 to Create a President's
Council on Domestic Terrorism Preparedness (09-MAY-01,		 
GAO-01-555T).							 
								 
This testimony discusses the Preparedness Against Domestic	 
Terrorism Act of 2001 (H.R. 525). To improve federal efforts to  
assist state and local personnel in preparing for domestic	 
terrorist attacks, H.R. 525 would create a single focal point for
policy and coordination--the President's Council on Domestic	 
Terrorism Preparedness--within the Executive Office of the	 
President. The new council would include the President, several  
cabinet secretaries, and other selected high-level officials.	 
H.R. 525 would (1) create an executive director position with a  
staff that would collaborate with other executive agencies to	 
assess threats, (2) require the new council to develop a national
strategy, (3) require the new council to analyze and review	 
budgets, and (4) require the new council to provide oversight of 
implementation among the different federal agencies. In addition 
to H.R. 525, there are other proposals that would create a single
focal point for terrorism. Some of these proposals place the	 
focal point in the Executive Office of the President and others  
place it in a lead executive agency. Both locations have	 
advantages and disadvantages.					 
-------------------------Indexing Terms------------------------- 
REPORTNUM:   GAO-01-555T					        
    ACCNO:   A00972						        
  TITLE:     Combating Terrorism: Comments on H.R. 525 to Create a    
             President's Council on Domestic Terrorism Preparedness           
     DATE:   05/09/2001 
  SUBJECT:   Emergency preparedness				 
	     Terrorism						 
	     Proposed legislation				 
	     Interagency relations				 
	     Strategic planning 				 

******************************************************************
** This file contains an ASCII representation of the text of a  **
** GAO Testimony.                                               **
**                                                              **
** No attempt has been made to display graphic images, although **
** figure captions are reproduced.  Tables are included, but    **
** may not resemble those in the printed version.               **
**                                                              **
** Please see the PDF (Portable Document Format) file, when     **
** available, for a complete electronic file of the printed     **
** document's contents.                                         **
**                                                              **
******************************************************************
GAO-01-555T
     
Testimony Before the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings,
and Emergency Management, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives

United States General Accounting Office

GAO For Release on Delivery Expected at 2: 00 p. m. Wednesday, May 9, 2001
COMBATING TERRORISM

Comments on H. R. 525 to Create a President?s Council on Domestic Terrorism
Preparedness

Statement of Raymond J. Decker, Director, Defense Capabilities and
Management

GAO- 01- 555T

Page 1 GAO- 01- 555T Combating Terrorism

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee: We are pleased to be here to
discuss a bill introduced by Representative Gilchrest of the full committee-
the Preparedness Against Domestic Terrorism Act of 2001 (H. R. 525). The
bill would create a new President?s Council on Domestic Terrorism
Preparedness to coordinate and increase the effectiveness of federal efforts
to assist state and local emergency response personnel in preparation for
domestic terrorist attacks.

We view this hearing as a positive step in the ongoing debate about the
overall leadership and management of programs to combat terrorism and the
nation?s effort to reach consensus on the best approach. As you know, there
are several other proposals to improve overall management of programs to
combat domestic terrorism. While H. R. 525 proposes several changes to the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, 1 our
comments, as agreed with your staff, are limited to a discussion of subtitle
C that creates the new council. Many of the issues we raise should be
familiar to the subcommittee because of our recent testimony before you on
H. R. 525 and related bills and proposals. 2

We agree with the basic purpose of H. R. 525 to improve federal assistance
to state and local personnel in preparing for and responding to domestic
terrorist attacks. We also agree in principle with major actions required by
the bill. Based upon the problems we have identified during five years of
GAO evaluations, these major actions include the need to (1) create a single
high- level federal focal point for policy and coordination, (2) develop a
comprehensive threat and risk assessment, (3) develop a national strategy
with a defined outcome to measure progress against, (4) analyze and
prioritize governmentwide budgets to identify gaps and reduce duplication of
effort, and (5) coordinate implementation among the different federal
agencies. There are other proposals similar to H. R. 525 that would create a
single focal point for terrorism. Some of these proposals place the focal
point in the Executive Office of the President (like H. R. 525) and others
place it in a Lead Executive Agency. Both locations have potential
advantages and disadvantages.

1 42 USC section 5121 et. seq. 2 Combating Terrorism: Observations on
Options to Improve the Federal Response

(GAO- 01- 660T, Apr. 24, 2001). Summary

Page 2 GAO- 01- 555T Combating Terrorism

To improve federal efforts to assist state and local personnel in preparing
for domestic terrorist attacks, H. R. 525 would create a single focal point
for policy and coordination- the President?s Council on Domestic Terrorism
Preparedness- within the Executive Office of the President. The new council
would include the President, several cabinet secretaries, and other selected
high- level officials. An Executive Director with a staff would collaborate
with executive agencies to assess threats; develop a national strategy;
analyze and prioritize governmentwide budgets; and provide oversight of
implementation among the different federal agencies.

In principle, the creation of the new council and its specific duties appear
to implement key actions needed to combat terrorism that we have identified
in previous reviews. 3 Following is a discussion of those actions, executive
branch attempts to implement them, and how H. R. 525 would address them.

In our May 2000 testimony, we reported that overall federal efforts to
combat terrorism were fragmented. 4 There are at least two top officials
responsible for combating terrorism and both of them have other significant
duties. To provide a focal point, the President appointed a National
Coordinator for Security, Infrastructure Protection and Counterterrorism at
the National Security Council. 5 This position, however, has significant
duties indirectly related to terrorism, including infrastructure protection
and continuity of government operations. Notwithstanding the creation of
this National Coordinator, it was the Attorney General who led interagency
efforts to develop a national strategy.

H. R. 525 would set up a single, high- level focal point in the President?s
Council on Domestic Terrorism Preparedness. In addition, H. R. 525 would
require that the new council?s executive chairman- who would represent the
President as chairman- be appointed with the advice and consent of

3 Our related reports and testimonies are listed in appendix I. 4 Combating
Terrorism: Comments on Bill H. R. 4210 to Manage Selected Counterterrorist
Programs (GAO/ T- NSIAD- 00- 172, May 4, 2000). 5 In May 1998, the President
established the Office of the National Coordinator for Security,
Infrastructure Protection and Counterterrorism within the National Security
Council, which is tasked to oversee a broad variety of relevant policies and
programs. H. R. 525 Would

Address Key Actions Needed to Combat Terrorism

H. R. 525 Would Create Single Focal Point in New Council

Page 3 GAO- 01- 555T Combating Terrorism

the Senate. This last requirement would provide Congress with greater
influence and raise the visibility of the office.

We testified in July 2000 that one step in developing sound programs to
combat terrorism is to conduct a threat and risk assessment that can be used
to develop a strategy and guide resource investments. 6 Based upon our
recommendation, the executive branch has made progress in implementing our
recommendations that threat and risk assessments be done to improve federal
efforts to combat terrorism. However, we remain concerned that such
assessments are not being coordinated across the federal government.

H. R. 525 would require a threat, risk, and capability assessment that
examines critical infrastructure vulnerabilities, evaluates federal and
applicable state laws used to combat terrorist attacks, and evaluates
available technology and practices for protecting critical infrastructure
against terrorist attacks. This assessment would form the basis for the
domestic terrorism preparedness plan and annual implementation strategy.

In our July 2000 testimony, we also noted that there is no comprehensive
national strategy that could be used to measure progress. The Attorney
General?s Five- Year Plan represents a substantial interagency effort to
develop a federal strategy, but it lacks desired outcomes. 7 The Department
of Justice believes that their current plan has measurable outcomes about
specific agency actions. However, in our view, the plan needs to go beyond
this to define an end state. As we have previously testified, the national
strategy should incorporate the chief tenets of the Government Performance
and Results Act of 1993 (P. L. 130- 62). The Results Act holds federal
agencies accountable for achieving program results and requires federal
agencies to clarify their missions, set program goals, and measure
performance toward achieving these goals.

6 Combating Terrorism: Linking Threats to Strategies and Resources

(GAO/ T- NSIAD- 00- 218, July 26, 2000). 7 In December 1998, the Attorney
General published the classified Five- Year Interagency Counterterrorism and
Technology Crime Plan. An annual update is to be published reporting on
accomplishments. H. R. 525 Would Require

Threat and Risk Assessment

H. R. 525 Would Require Council to Develop National Plan

Page 4 GAO- 01- 555T Combating Terrorism

H. R. 525 would require the new council to publish a domestic terrorism
preparedness plan with objectives and priorities, an implementation plan, a
description of roles of federal, state and local activities, and a defined
end state with measurable standards for preparedness.

In our December 1997 report, we reported that there was no mechanism to
centrally manage funding requirements and to ensure an efficient, focused
governmentwide approach to combat terrorism. 8 Our work led to legislation
that required the Office of Management and Budget to provide annual reports
on governmentwide spending to combat terrorism. 9 These reports represent a
significant step toward improved management by providing strategic oversight
of the magnitude and direction of spending for these programs. Yet we have
not seen evidence that these reports have established priorities or
identified duplication of effort as the Congress intended.

H. R. 525 would require the new council to develop and make budget
recommendations for federal agencies and the Office of Management and
Budget. The Office of Management and Budget would have to provide an
explanation in cases where the new council?s recommendations were not
followed. The new council would also identify and eliminate duplication,
fragmentation, and overlap in federal preparedness programs.

In our April 2000 testimony, we observed that federal programs addressing
terrorism appear in many cases to be overlapping and uncoordinated. 10 To
improve coordination, the executive branch has created organizations like
the National Domestic Preparedness Office and various interagency working
groups. In addition, the annual updates to the Attorney General?s Five- Year
Plan track individual agencies? accomplishments. Nevertheless, we have still
noted that the multitude of similar federal programs have led to confusion
among the state and local first responders they are meant to serve.

8 Combating Terrorism: Spending on Governmentwide Programs Requires Better
Management and Coordination (GAO/ NSIAD- 98- 39, Dec. 1, 1997). 9 National
Defense Authorization Act for fiscal year 1998, P. L. 105- 85, section 1051.

10 Combating Terrorism: Issues in Managing Counterterrorist Programs

(GAO/ T- NSIAD- 00- 145, Apr. 6, 2000). New Council Would

Analyze and Review Budgets

New Council Would Coordinate Implementation

Page 5 GAO- 01- 555T Combating Terrorism

H. R. 525 would require the new council to coordinate and oversee the
implementation of related programs by federal agencies in accordance with
the domestic terrorism preparedness plan. The new council would also make
recommendations to the heads of federal agencies regarding their programs.
Furthermore, the new council would provide written notification to any
department that it believes is not in compliance with its responsibilities
under the plan.

Federal efforts to combat terrorism are inherently difficult to lead and
manage because the policy, strategy, programs, and activities to combat
terrorism cut across more than 40 agencies. Congress has been concerned with
the management of these programs and, in addition to H. R. 525, two other
bills have been introduced to change the overall leadership and management
of programs to combat terrorism. On March 21, 2001, Representative
Thornberry introduced H. R. 1158, the National Homeland Security Act, which
advocates the creation of a cabinet- level head within the proposed National
Homeland Security Agency to lead homeland security activities. On March 29,
2001 Representative Skelton introduced H. R. 1292, the Homeland Security
Strategy Act of 2001, which calls for the development of a homeland security
strategy developed by a single official designated by the President.

In addition, several other proposals from congressional committee reports
and various commission reports advocate changes in the structure and
management of federal efforts to combat terrorism. These include Senate
Report 106- 404 to Accompany H. R. 4690 on the Departments of Commerce,
Justice, and State, the Judiciary, and Related Agencies Appropriation Bill
2001, submitted by Senator Gregg on September 8, 2000; the report by the
Gilmore Panel (the Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities
for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction, chaired by Governor
James S. Gilmore III) dated December 15, 2000; the report of the Hart-
Rudman Commission (the U. S. Commission on National Security/ 21st Century,
chaired by Senators Gary Hart and Warren B. Rudman) dated January 31, 2001;
11 and a report from the Center for Strategic and International Studies
(Executive Summary of Four CSIS Working Group Reports on Homeland Defense,
chaired by Messrs. Frank

11 H. R. 1158 is based upon the report of the Hart- Rudman Commission. H. R.
525 Is One of

Several Proposals to Provide a Single Focal Point

Page 6 GAO- 01- 555T Combating Terrorism

Cilluffo, Joseph Collins, Arnaud de Borchgrave, Daniel Goure, and Michael
Horowitz) dated 2000. 12

The bills and related proposals vary in the scope of their coverage. H. R.
525 focuses on federal programs to prepare state and local governments for
dealing with domestic terrorist attacks. Other bills and proposals include
the larger issue of homeland security that includes threats other than
terrorism, such as military attacks.

H. R. 525 would attempt to resolve cross- agency leadership problems by
creating a single focal point within the Executive Office of the President.
The other related bills and proposals would also create a single focal point
for programs to combat terrorism, and some would have the focal point
perform many of the same functions. For example, some of the proposals would
have the focal point lead efforts to develop a national strategy. The
proposals (with one exception) would have the focal point appointed with the
advice and consent of the Senate. However, the various bills and proposals
differ in where they would locate the focal point for overall leadership and
management. The two proposed locations for the focal point are in the
Executive Office of the President (like H. R. 525) or in a Lead Executive
Agency.

Table 1 shows various proposals regarding the focal point for overall
leadership, the scope of its activities, and it?s location.

12 Another congressionally mandated commission, the National Commission on
Terrorism chaired by Ambassador Paul Bremer, is not included in our analysis
because it was primarily focused on international terrorism and did not
address domestic terrorism.

Page 7 GAO- 01- 555T Combating Terrorism

Table 1. Proposals to Create a Focal Point for Overall Leadership and
Management of Programs to Combat Terrorism Source of proposal Focal point
for overall leadership Scope of responsibilities Location of focal point

H. R. 525 President?s Council on Domestic Terrorism Preparedness Domestic
terrorism preparedness Executive Office of the

President H. R. 1158 Cabinet- level head of proposed

National Homeland Security Agency

Homeland security (including domestic terrorism, maritime and border
security, disaster relief and critical infrastructure activities)

Lead Executive Agency (National Homeland Security Agency)

H. R. 1292 Single official to be designated by the President Homeland
security (including

antiterrorism and protection of territory and critical infrastructures from
unconventional and conventional threats by military or other means)

To be determined based upon the President?s designation

Senate Report 106- 404 Deputy Attorney General for Combating
Counterterrorism Domestic terrorism preparedness

(crisis and consequence management)

Lead Executive Agency (Department of Justice)

Gilmore Panel National Office for Combating Terrorism Domestic and
international terrorism

(crisis and consequence management)

Executive Office of the President

Hart- Rudman Commission Cabinet- level head of proposed

National Homeland Security Agency

Homeland security (including domestic terrorism, maritime and border
security, disaster relief, and critical infrastructure activities)

Lead Executive Agency (National Homeland Security Agency)

Center for Strategic and International Studies Assistant to the President or
Vice

President for Combating Terrorism Homeland Defense (including domestic
terrorism and critical

infrastructure protection) Executive Office of the

President Source: GAO analysis of various proposals.

Based upon our analysis of legislative proposals, various commission
reports, and our ongoing discussions with agency officials, each of the two
locations for the focal point- the Executive Office of the President or a
Lead Executive Agency- has its potential advantages and disadvantages. An
important advantage of placing the position with the Executive Office of the
President is that the focal point would be positioned to rise above the
particular interests of any one federal agency. Another advantage is that
the focal point would be located close to the President to resolve cross
agency disagreements. A disadvantage of such a focal point would be the
potential to interfere with operations conducted by the respective executive
agencies. Another potential disadvantage is that the focal point might
hinder direct communications between the President and the cabinet officers
in charge of the respective executive agencies.

Alternately, a focal point with a Lead Executive Agency could have the
advantage of providing a clear and streamlined chain of command within an
agency in matters of policy and operations. Under this arrangement, we

Page 8 GAO- 01- 555T Combating Terrorism

believe that the Lead Executive Agency would have to be one with a dominant
role in both policy and operations related to combating terrorism. Specific
proposals have suggested that this agency could be either the Department of
Justice (per Senate Report 106- 404) or an enhanced Federal Emergency
Management Agency (per H. R. 1158 and its proposed National Homeland
Security Agency). Another potential advantage is that the cabinet officer of
the Lead Executive Agency might have better access to the President than a
mid- level focal point with the Executive Office of the President. A
disadvantage of the Lead Executive Agency approach is that the focal point-
which would report to the cabinet head of the Lead Executive Agency- would
lack autonomy. Further, a Lead Executive Agency would have other major
missions and duties that might distract the focal point from combating
terrorism. Also, other agencies may view the focal point?s decisions and
actions as parochial rather than in the collective best interest.

H. R. 525 would provide the new President?s Council on Domestic Terrorism
Preparedness with a variety of duties. In conducting these duties, the new
council would, to the extent practicable, rely on existing documents,
interagency bodies, and existing governmental entities. Nevertheless, the
passage of H. R. 525 would warrant a review of several existing
organizations to compare their duties with the new council?s
responsibilities. In some cases, those existing organizations may no longer
be required or would have to conduct their activities under the supervision
of the new council. For example, the National Domestic Preparedness Office
was created to be a focal point for state and local governments and has a
state and local advisory group. The new council has similar duties that may
eliminate the need for the National Domestic Preparedness Office. As another
example, we believe the overall coordinating role of the new council may
require adjustments to the coordinating roles played by the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, the Department of Justice?s Office of State and
Local Domestic Preparedness Support, and the National Security Council?s
Weapons of Mass Destruction Preparedness Group in the policy coordinating
committee on Counterterrorism and National Preparedness.

In our ongoing work, we have found that there is no consensus- either in
Congress, the Executive Branch, the various commissions, or the
organizations representing first responders- as to whether the focal point
should be in the Executive Office of the President or a Lead Executive
Agency. Developing such a consensus on the focal point for overall Passage
of H. R. 525

May Warrant Changes in Existing Organizations

Conclusion

Page 9 GAO- 01- 555T Combating Terrorism

leadership and management, determining its location, and providing it with
legitimacy and authority through legislation, is an important task that lies
ahead. We believe that this hearing and the debate that it engenders, will
help to reach that consensus.

This concludes our testimony. We would be pleased to answer any questions
you may have.

For future questions about this statement, please contact Raymond J. Decker,
Director, Defense Capabilities and Management at (202) 512- 6020.
Individuals making key contributions to this statement include Stephen L.
Caldwell and Krislin Nalwalk. GAO Contacts and

Staff Acknowledgment

Page 10 GAO- 01- 555T Combating Terrorism

Combating Terrorism: Observations on Options to Improve the Federal Response
(GAO- 01- 660T, Apr. 24, 2001).

Combating Terrorism: Accountability Over Medical Supplies Needs Further
Improvement (GAO- 01- 463, Mar. 30, 2001).

Combating Terrorism: Federal Response Teams Provide Varied Capabilities;
Opportunities Remain to Improve Coordination

(GAO- 01- 14, Nov. 30, 2000).

Combating Terrorism: Linking Threats to Strategies and Resources

(GAO/ T- NSIAD- 00- 218, July 26, 2000).

Combating Terrorism: Comments on Bill H. R. 4210 to Manage Selected
Counterterrorist Programs (GAO/ T- NSIAD- 00- 172, May 4, 2000).

Combating Terrorism: How Five Foreign Countries Are Organized to Combat
Terrorism (GAO/ NSIAD- 00- 85, Apr. 7, 2000).

Combating Terrorism: Issues in Managing Counterterrorist Programs

(GAO/ T- NSIAD- 00- 145, Apr. 6, 2000).

Combating Terrorism: Need to Eliminate Duplicate Federal Weapons of Mass
Destruction Training (GAO/ NSIAD- 00- 64, Mar. 21, 2000).

Critical Infrastructure Protection: Comprehensive Strategy Can Draw on Year
2000 Experiences (GAO/ AIMD- 00- 1, Oct. 1, 1999).

Combating Terrorism: Need for Comprehensive Threat and Risk Assessments of
Chemical and Biological Attack (GAO/ NSIAD- 99- 163, Sept. 7, 1999).

Combating Terrorism: Observations on Growth in Federal Programs

(GAO/ T- NSIAD- 99- 181, June 9, 1999).

Combating Terrorism: Issues to Be Resolved to Improve Counterterrorist
Operations (GAO/ NSIAD- 99- 135, May 13, 1999).

Combating Terrorism: Observations on Federal Spending to Combat Terrorism
(GAO/ T- NSIAD/ GGD- 99- 107, Mar. 11, 1999).

Combating Terrorism: Opportunities to Improve Domestic Preparedness Program
Focus and Efficiency (GAO/ NSIAD- 99- 3, Nov. 12, 1998). Appendix I: Related
GAO Products

Page 11 GAO- 01- 555T Combating Terrorism

Combating Terrorism: Observations on Crosscutting Issues

(GAO/ T- NSIAD- 98- 164, Apr. 23, 1998).

Combating Terrorism: Threat and Risk Assessments Can Help Prioritize and
Target Program Investments (GAO/ NSIAD- 98- 74, Apr. 9, 1998).

Combating Terrorism: Spending on Governmentwide Programs Requires Better
Management and Coordination (GAO/ NSIAD- 98- 39, Dec. 1, 1997).

Combating Terrorism: Federal Agencies? Efforts to Implement National Policy
and Strategy (GAO/ NSIAD- 97- 254, Sept. 26, 1997).

(350061)
*** End of document. ***