Order Code RS21270
Updated December 9, 2002
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Homeland Security and Counterterrorism
Research and Development: Funding and
Organization
Genevieve J. Knezo
Specialist, Science and Technology Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
Summary
Questions concerning whether the government is adequately prepared to conduct
research and development (R&D) to counter terrorism have focused on priority-setting,
coordination, and the need to link R&D to terrorist threats. Since September 11, 2001,
planning and coordination mechanisms have been developed in the White House’s
Office of Homeland Security (OHS) and Office of Science and Technology Policy
(OSTP), and in individual agencies. P.L. 107-296, the Homeland Security Act of 2002
(H.R. 5005) consolidates some federal R&D programs in a new Department of
Homeland Security (DHS). DHS’s R&D funding responsibilities are estimated to total
over $800 million annually. Funds have not yet been appropriated for DHS for FY2003.
P.L. 107-305 (H.R. 3394), funds new cybersecurity R&D to deal with terrorist attacks.
Current policy issues focus on implementation, and deal with coordination of priority-
setting between DHS, other agencies, and existing R&D coordination bodies; and
mechanisms for congressional oversight of homeland security and counterterrorism
R&D. This report will be updated as events warrant.
Funding for Federal Counterterrorism R&D
The $3 billion FY2003 budget request for counterterrorism R&D is about two and
one-half times the amount appropriated for FY2002. According to the Office of
Management and Budget’s (OMB) Annual Report to Congress on Combating Terrorism,
FY2002,1 about $2.905 billion – or 5.5% of the request for combating terrorism for
FY2003 – was for R&D to develop technologies to deter, prevent or mitigate terrorist
acts. See Table 1. Since most FY2003 appropriations have not been enacted, the current
1 OMB, Annual Report to Congress on Combating Terrorism, FY2002, June 24, 2002,
http://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/legislative/combating_terrorism06-2002.pdf. See also: White
House, Securing the Homeland, Strengthening the Nation, 2002 and CRS Report RL31576,
Federal Research and Development Organization, Policy, and Funding for Counterterrorism.
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

CRS-2
continuing resolution continues funding at the FY2002 level for most R&D. See Table
2 for an estimate of DHS R&D funding.

Table 1. Research and Development to Combat Terrorism, By
Agency, FY2000-FY2003 (Request), Dollars in Millions
Emergency
FY2000
FY2001
FY2002
FY2003
Agency
Response
Actual
Actual
Enacted
Request
Fund
Agriculture (USDA)
$37.3
$51.7
$83.9
$91.3
$48.4
Commerce (DOC)
9.6
0
6.3
0
20.0
Energy (DOE)
59.7
66.2
64.9
19.0
99.8
Environmental Protection
unavailable
0
2.8
1.5
75.0
Agency (EPA)
Health and Human
109.7
102.8
119.1
180.0
1,770.9
Services (DHHS)
NIH, $1.75B;
CDC, $40M;
FDA, $50M
Justice (DOJ)
45.2
11.4
66.1
0
36.1
National Science
unavailable
7.0
7.0
0
27.0
Foundation (NSF)
National Security
190.0
298.9
385.5
11.0
767.2
Transportation (DOT)
50.7
50.2
58.3
64.0
59.3
Treasury
2.1
1.2
1.1
0
1.1
Total
$511.3
$589.4
$795.2
$366.8
$2,905.23
Sources: OMB, Annual Report to Congress on Combating Terrorism, FY2001, p. 27 for column labeled
FY2000. The rest of the data is from the FY2002 OMB report, op. cit., p. 26.
The FY2003 funding request for agency programs was described in OMB’s FY2002
terrorism report. Highlights are summarized below, beginning with the largest programs.
The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), with 60% of the FY2003 R&D
funding request, manages most of the federal civilian effort against bioterrorism. The
FY2003 request for national security counterterrorism R&D, at 26% of the total, was
largely for the Department of Defense (DOD), for war fighting applications and
bioterrorism, and for the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency. The Technical
Support Working Group (TSWG), a State Department/DOD group that identifies,
prioritizes, and coordinates interagency and international R&D to combat terrorism and
helps develop new technologies, would also receive $49 million and some funding
transferred from other agencies. The Department of Energy’s (DOE) R&D includes
federal laboratories’ work dealing with improving security; materials used in weapons of
mass destruction, especially nuclear weapons; anthrax detection/treatment for buildings;
detection of airborne toxic agents, genomic sequencing, DNA-based diagnostics, and
microfabrication technologies. The Environmental Protection Agency’s (EPA) R&D
focuses on “research for better techniques for cleaning up buildings contaminated by
biological agents ....” The Department of Agriculture’s (USDA), Agricultural Research
Service’s counterterrorism R&D focuses on plant, pest, and animal diseases. In the
Commerce Department, R&D at the National Institute of Standards and Technology
(NIST) focuses on protecting information systems.
Development of Priority-setting and Coordination Mechanisms
Counterterrorism R&D involves most scientific and technical disciplines, and major
areas of application, such as weaponry, communications, health, and transportation.
Homeland security R&D is a subset of counterterrorism R&D, which also includes

---

CRS-3
defense and foreign countermeasures R&D. There are many links between R&D
conducted to defend security at home and to defend security abroad. Legislative actions
dealing with organization of R&D in the new DHS responded to critiques about the
organization of domestic and foreign countermeasures R&D.
Coordination Mechanisms Before Authorization of DHS. Before
authorization of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in P.L. 107-296, which is
discussed below, counterterrorism R&D priority-setting and coordination depended upon
interagency committees for some topics and informal consultations among program
managers. The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) is a statutory office
within the Executive Office of the President; its Director advises the President and
recommends federal R&D budgets. OSTP’s Director chairs the National Security
Council’s Preparedness Against Weapons of Mass Destruction R&D Subgroup
(comprised of 16 agencies), which identifies gaps and duplication in R&D concerning
chemical, biological, nuclear, and radiological threats. OSTP manages the interagency
National Science and Technology Council (NSTC), which created an Antiterrorism Task
Force, with working groups on rapid response, biological and chemical preparedness,
nuclear and conventional explosives, “vital” infrastructure, and behavioral and
educational issues. OSTP has worked on interagency tasks concerning anthrax
detection/cleanup and the development of policy guidelines for agency regulations to
restrict access to research using biological “select agents,” and access to “sensitive but
unclassified” scientific information. Homeland Security Presidential Directive-2, October
29, 2001, required OSTP to help develop policy for foreign student visas, access to
“sensitive” courses, and advanced technology for border control. Pursuant to Executive
Order 13231, OSTP works with the interagency President’s Critical Infrastructure Board
to recommend priorities and budgets for information security R&D.
The Office of Homeland Security (OHS), in the Executive Office of the President,
created on October 8, 2001, by Executive Order 13228, did not list R&D among its major
responsibilities. The Homeland Security Council (HSC), also created then, was to
coordinate governmental homeland security activities. Its membership includes the heads
of some agencies responsible for counterterrorism R&D, such as the Secretaries of
Defense, Health and Human Services, and Transportation, but not the OSTP Director or
the Secretaries of Commerce and of Energy. R&D is a topic of one of the interagency
HSC Policy Coordination Committees; the committee head is OSTP’s assistant director
for national security. OSTP’s Director has testified that he interacts closely with OHS.
Neither OSTP or OHS have budgetary authority over federal agencies and departments.
The working group on bioterrorism prevention, preparedness, and response,
established by Section 108 of P.L. 107-188, the Public Health Security and Bioterrorism
Preparedness and Response Act of 2002, consists of the DHHS and DOD secretaries and
other agency heads. One of its functions is to recommend “research on pathogens likely
to be used in a biological threat or attack on the civilian population ....”
Critiques of Priority-Setting and Coordination Mechanisms Before
Authorization of a Department of Homeland Security. Some critics contended
that the conduct of effective counterterrorism R&D required better coordination than the
aforementioned groups could provide, and said that R&D priorities should reflect
intelligence and threat estimates, as well as balance between long-range and short-term
applied research and development to hasten deployment of technological responses. For

---

CRS-4
instance, some observers said that fragmentation of R&D weakened national security and
recommended that core R&D be consolidated in a homeland security agency (a position
taken by the Administration in its National Strategy for Homeland Security, July 2002)
or called for creation of a Secretary for Technology and a homeland security “think tank”
(for example, the National Academies in Making the Nation Safer: The Role of Science
and Technology in Countering Terrorism, June 2002). Others, such as the Brookings
Institution in a July 15, 2002 report, Assessing the Department of Homeland Security,
urged caution about moving R&D to a DHS since federal homeland security R&D
priorities were unclear.
Creation of a Department of Homeland Security and Other Laws
On November 25, 2002, the President signed the Homeland Security Act of 2002
P.L. 107-296, (H.R. 5005), which created a Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
The 107th Congress had considered previous versions of H.R. 5005 and other bills. With
respect to R&D, the bills differed on how much authority DHS would have to set
priorities for, and to fund, human-health terrorism-related R&D in the National Institutes
of Health; the extent of DHS’s responsibility to coordinate federal agency
counterterrorism R&D; the kinds of evaluation and analysis support units DHS should
have; which R&D programs would be transferred to DHS; and whether the DHS secretary
would be given biological select agent identification and monitoring responsibilities.
Most of the DHS’s research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E) is under the
jurisdiction of the Under Secretary for Science and Technology (S&T), the head of the
Directorate of Science and Technology (created by Title III). The Under Secretary’s R&D
responsibilities are: to coordinate DHS’s S&T missions; in consultation with other
agencies, to develop a strategic plan for federal civilian countermeasures to terrorist
threats, including research; except for human health-related R&D, to conduct and
coordinate intramural and extramural R&D to support DHS and to coordinate with other
federal agencies to carry out the department’s R&D; to establish national R&D priorities
to prevent importation of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and related weapons
and terrorist attacks; to collaborate with the Secretary of Energy regarding using national
laboratories; to collaborate with the Secretaries of Agriculture and Health and Human
Services to identify select agents (but not to assume their responsibilities to enforce select
agent rules); to develop guidelines to disseminate the department’s research findings and
transfer technology; and to support U.S. S&T leadership. Among the functions of the
Special Assistant to the Secretary, created by Sec. 102, are working with the private sector
and other federally funded R&D entities to develop innovative approaches to produce
technologies for homeland security.
Transferred to the DHS are DOE programs in: chemical and biological security R&D;
nuclear smuggling and proliferation detection; nuclear assessment and materials
protection; biological and environmental research related to microbial pathogens; the
Environmental Measurements Laboratory; and the advanced scientific computing research
program and activities at Lawrence Livermore National Laboratory. DHS will incorporate
a newly created National Bio-Weapons Defense Analysis Center and USDA’s Plum Island
Animal Disease Center, but USDA may continue to conduct R&D at the facility (Sec.
310). Since the Coast Guard and Transportation Security Administration (TSA) will be
transferred to DHS, DHS is responsible for their R&D. Sec. 304 gives the Secretary of
Homeland Security responsibility to collaborate with the DHHS Secretary in setting

---

CRS-5
priorities for DHHS’s human health-related R&D on “countermeasures for chemical,
biological, radiological, and nuclear and other emerging terrorist threats.”
Several R&D analysis, and evaluation units are created in DHS. Pursuant to Title III,
the Under Secretary may establish or contract with one or more Federally Funded R&D
Centers, (FFRDC) to provide independent analysis of homeland security issues. A
Homeland Security Advanced Research Projects Agency (HSARPA), is created to
administer an Acceleration Fund, authorized at $500 million in FY 2003, to award funds
to businesses, FFRDCs, and universities, for R&D and to test homeland security
technologies. Not less than 10% of the fund annually is to support Coast Guard R&D,
through FY2005. Extramural funding is to be competitive and merit-reviewed, but
distributed to as many areas of the United States as practicable. One or more university-
based centers for homeland security is to be established and have to meet 15 specific
criteria. Regarding intramural R&D, the Under Secretary may use any federal laboratory
and may establish a headquarters laboratory and additional laboratories. Selection criteria
for a headquarters laboratory are to be determined in consultation with the National
Academy of Sciences and other experts. A DHS Office for National Laboratories will
“network” the use of federal laboratories. A Homeland Security Institute is created as an
FFRDC to: conduct risk analysis and economic and policy research to determine
vulnerabilities of critical infrastructures and to assess the costs of alternative security
approaches; identify common standards to improve interoperability of tools for field
operators and first responders; and test prototype technologies. The Institute may use the
National Infrastructure Simulation and Analysis Center (NISAC), which is transferred
from DOE, and other units. A Technology Clearinghouse will support innovative
solutions to enhance homeland security; it is to coordinate with TSWG.
With respect to priority-setting, Title III of P.L. 107-296 authorizes a 20-member
Homeland Security Science and Technology Advisory Committee to provide advice and
recommend research areas important to security. Members, appointed by the Under
Secretary, assisted by the National Research Council, shall include representatives of
emergency first-responders, citizen groups, economically disadvantaged communities, and
experts in emergency response, research, engineering, business, and management
consulting. The Committee, which reports annually to Congress, will sunset after three
years; its meetings are exempt from the Federal Advisory Committee Act.
There are other provisions. To the extent possible, DHS’s research is to be
unclassified (Sec. 306). The DHS Secretary, in consultation with the National Security
Council and OSTP, is to establish uniform procedures for handling critical infrastructure
information that is voluntarily submitted to the Government and which will not be subject
to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. The law creates an Office of Science
and Technology in the National Institute of Justice, in the Department of Justice, and also
local technology centers to support training, and RDT&E for equipment to counter
terrorism (Sec. 232 and 235). A pilot program gives the DHS Secretary special acquisition
authority for basic, applied, and advanced R&D (Sec. 833). Homeland security R&D
information may be exchanged with other countries (Sec. 879). Sec. 1003 authorizes
NIST to conduct research on information security vulnerability and ways to improve it.
The DHS Under Secretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection may
establish a “NET Guard,’’ comprised of S&T volunteers, to assist local communities to
recover from attacks on information systems (Sec. 224). The OSTP Director is to report
to Congress on the effect of changes in visa procedures on the issuance of student visas

---

CRS-6
(Sec. 428). According to Sec. 1712, homeland security is added to the list of topics on
which the OSTP Director advises the President, and OHS is added to the list of agencies
the OSTP Director consults and cooperates with. DHS’s R&D budget authority is
estimated at about $800 million. See Table 2.
Table 2. Estimate of DHS’s R&D Funding
R&D Program or Unit
FY2003 Funding Estimate
TSA Aviation Security, transferred from DOT
$130 million
$24 million, plus 10% of the Acceleration
Coast Guard R&D, transferred from DOT
Fund for R&D
NISAC, transferred from DOE
$20 million
Other R&D transferred from DOE
$100 million
Plum Island, transferred from USDA
$25 million
Unknown, requested by the President at
Nat’l. Bio-Weapons Def. Analysis Cntr.
$420 million; probably will be less
HSARPA and Acceleration Fund for R&D
Minimum of $500 million for the fund
Homeland Security Institute
Unknown
University Center for Homeland Security
Unknown
Contracts with other FFRDCs
Unknown
In other legislation, P.L. 107-305, “The Cyber Security Research and Development
Act,” (H.R. 3394), authorized $903 million over five years for new research and training
programs at the National Science Foundation and NIST for R&D and training to prevent
and combat terrorist attacks on private and government computers.
Oversight Issues
Several issues may surface in the 108th Congress relating to homeland security R&D.
One is coordination. DHS’s R&D budget authority (including the $500 million
Acceleration Fund) is estimated to total over $800 million (or more if the new Bio-
Weapons Analysis Center if funded). About $300 million is for existing transferred
programs; no FY2003 funds have been appropriated. DHS does not have direct authority
over defense, national security, or health R&D, the largest components of requested
FY2003 counterterrorism funding. However, it has some authority to coordinate and help
set priorities for federal agency R&D relating to homeland security, including human
health-related R&D, through the Secretary and the Under Secretary. Other federal agency
heads have no formal role in DHS’s R&D priority-setting and coordination processes and
their actual role relative to the DHS secretary remains to be determined. DHS’s
effectiveness in coordinating R&D outside the agency may depend upon its ability to exert
influence on other agencies and the quality of its interactions with existing coordination
mechanisms, such as those in OSTP, NSTC, OHS, and other interagency committees.
Another issue is whether scientists who will work for DHS (from federal laboratories and
in analysis/evaluation units) will be housed together physically or will stay separate and
operate essentially as a “virtual group.” While physical proximity may promote mission
effectiveness, it has the potential to separate DHS scientists from their counterparts in
other agencies and the possibility of distorting scientific communications which many
maintain are essential to progress. A third issue is how Congress will conduct oversight
of the DHS’s multifaceted R&D activities, whether in one oversight committee or by
splitting jurisdiction among existing committees, and, related to this, is the question of the
level of appropriations that will be made available to fund the authorized programs.

---