The Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction was established by Section 1405 of the National Defense Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 1999, Public Law 105–261 (H.R. 3616, 105th Congress, 2nd Session) (October 17, 1998). That Act directed that a federally funded research and development center provide research, analytical, and other support to the Advisory Panel during the course of its activities and deliberations. RAND has been providing that support, under contract from the Department of Defense, since the Advisory Panel’s inception. A full description of the Advisory Panel’s deliberative process, research methods, and work plan appears as Appendix C. This Second Annual Report is a document of the Advisory Panel, not a RAND publication. It was prepared and edited by RAND professional staff and is being submitted for review and comment within the U.S. Government Interagency process. It is not copyrighted but does contain material from copyrighted sources. Copies of the report may also be obtained via the Internet at: http://www.rand.org/organization/nsrd/terrpanel About RAND RAND’s mission is to improve policy and decisionmaking through research and analysis. Though RAND confronts different policy challenges over time, its principles remain constant. RAND research and analysis aim to: • Provide practical guidance by making policy choices clear and addressing barriers to effective policy implementation. • Develop innovative solutions to complex problems by bringing together researchers in all relevant academic specialties. • Achieve complete objectivity by avoiding partisanship and disregarding vested interests. • Meet the highest technical standards by employing advanced empirical methods and rigorous peer review. • Serve the public interest by widely disseminating research findings. Second Annual Report to The President and The Congress Of the A DVISORY PANEL TO ASSESS DOMESTIC R ESPONSE CAPABILITIES FOR T ERRORISM INVOLVING WEAPONS OF MASS D ESTRUCTION III.I. TOWARD A NATIONAL STRATEGY FOR COMBATING TERRORISM 15 December 2000 THE ADVISORY PANEL TO ASSESS DOMESTIC RESPONSE CAPABILITIES FOR TERRORISM INVOLVING WEAPONS OF MASS DESTRUCTION James S. Gilmore, III December 15, 2000 Chairman To Our Readers: James Clapper, Jr. Vice Chairman I am pleased to provide the Second Annual Report of the L. Paul Bremer Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Raymond Downey Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction, as our Richard Falkenrath Congressional mandate requires. George Foresman Contemplating the specter of terrorism in this country is a William Garrison sobering—but critically necessary—responsibility of government Ellen M. Gordon officials at all levels. It is a truly "national" issue that requires James Greenleaf synchronization of our efforts—"vertically" among the federal, William Jenaway state, and local levels, and "horizontally" among the functional constituent stakeholders. The individual capabilities of all William Dallas Jones critical elements must be brought to bear in a much more Paul M. Maniscalco coherent way than is now the case. That fundamental tenet John O. Marsh, Jr. underlies our work over the last two years. Kathleen O'Brien M. Patricia Quinlisk We are impelled by the stark realization that a terrorist attack on Patrick Ralston some level inside our borders is inevitable and the United States must be ready. We are similarly convinced, however, that much William Reno of the legitimate fear associated with the prospect of a terrorist Joseph Samuels, Jr. attack can be substantially reduced. Kenneth Shine Hubert Williams Improving our ability to address the threat and reducing the fear Ellen Embrey* of citizens and government leaders is possible if—and only if— we are willing to take bold action as a nation. Specifically, we must: * U.S. Department of Defense Representative • craft a truly "national" strategy to address the threat of domestic terrorism—conventional, cyber, chemical, biological, radiological and nuclear—from the perspectives of deterrence, prevention, preparedness and response; • empower a senior authority to be in charge of our overall planning and preparation in the Federal Executive Branch, with special emphasis on preserving our civil liberties in a time of emergency; James S. Gilmore, III • consolidate the Congressional approach to legislation Chairman governing domestic preparedness for such attacks; James Clapper, Jr. • Vice Chairman concentrate much more serious attention on state and local concerns and capabilities; and L. Paul Bremer Raymond Downey • strengthen functional capabilities across all levels of Richard Falkenrath government for intelligence collection and information George Foresman sharing; planning; training, equipping and exercising; research and development; health and medical; and across William Garrison all first responder stakeholders—fire, law enforcement, Ellen M. Gordon emergency medical services and emergency management. James Greenleaf William Jenaway These five imperatives represent the major themes in this report. We stress in the strongest terms that their implementation must William Dallas Jones always hold in strict regard the preservation of our Constitution Paul M. Maniscalco and the complete protection of our civil liberties. We steadfastly John O. Marsh, Jr. adhere to the bedrock principle that these considerations must Kathleen O'Brien always transcend what might be more efficient or expedient. M. Patricia Quinlisk It is clear to us that our nation collectively will have to make Patrick Ralston some significant resource commitments and overcome daunting William Reno technological challenges if we are successfully to confront this Joseph Samuels, Jr. threat in all dimensions. I submit, however, that our most Kenneth Shine imposing challenge centers on policy and whether we have the Hubert Williams collective fortitude to forge change, both in organization as well as process. We are convinced the changes we recommend are Ellen Embrey* essential to ensure the safety and security of our nation. * U.S. Department of Defense Representative Respectfully, James S. Gilmore, III Governor of Virginia Chairman Please address comments or questions to: RAND 1200 South Hayes Street, Arlington, Virginia 22202-5050 Telephone 703-413-1100 FAX 703-413-8111 The Federally-Funded Research and Development Center providing support to the Advisory Panel Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction CONTENTS Letter from the Chairman Contents................................................................................................................................ i Executive Summary ............................................................................................................ii Chapter One—Forging a National Strategy........................................................................ 1 Identifying the Ends of Strategy: National Goals ....................................................... 5 Developing the Means of Strategy: Program Structure and Priorities........................ 6 Chapter Two—Getting the Federal House in Order ........................................................... 7 Improving Federal Executive Branch Coordination ................................................... 7 Improving Coordination in the Congress.................................................................. 16 Chapter Three—Improving Functional Capabilities......................................................... 19 Collecting Intelligence, Assessing Threats, and Sharing Information...................... 19 Planning, Coordinating, and Operating Cooperatively............................................. 23 Training, Equipping, and Exercising......................................................................... 29 Improving Health and Medical Capabilities ............................................................. 32 Promoting Better Research and Development and Developing National Standards..................................................................... 36 Enhancing Efforts to Counter Agricultural Terrorism .............................................. 39 Providing Cyber Security Against Terrorism............................................................ 40 Conclusion......................................................................................................................... 45 Table of Appendices.......................................................................................................... 46 List of Key Recommendations................................................................ Inside Back Cover i Advisory Panel to Assess Domestic Response Capabilities for Terrorism Involving Weapons of Mass Destruction Executive Summary We have been fortunate as a nation. The terrorist incidents in this country— however tragic—have occurred so rarely that the foundations of our society or our form of government have not been threatened. Nevertheless, the potential for terrorist attacks inside the borders of the United States is a serious emerging threat. There is no guarantee that our comparatively secure domestic sanctuary will always remain so. Because the stakes are so high, our nation’s leaders must take seriously the possibility of an escalation of terrorist violence against the homeland. The continuing challenge for the United States is first to deter and, failing that, to detect and