Order Code RS21270
Updated February 5, 2003
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Homeland Security and Counterterrorism
Research and Development: Funding,
Organization, and Oversight
Genevieve J. Knezo
Specialist, Science and Technology Policy
Resources, Science, and Industry Division
Summary
Following the 2001 terrorist attacks, planning and coordination mechanisms for
research and development (R&D) to counter terrorism were developed in the White
House’s Office of Homeland Security, Office of Science and Technology Policy, and
in individual agencies. Subsequently, P.L. 107-296, the Homeland Security Act (H.R.
5005), consolidated some R&D and coordination in the Department of Homeland
Security (DHS). DHS’s FY2003 R&D funding was requested at $761 million, and at
$1 billion for FY2004. Funds have not yet been appropriated for FY2003. P.L. 107-
305 (H.R. 3394) authorized new cybersecurity R&D to deal with terrorist attacks.
Policy issues include implementation of the laws; coordination of priority-setting among
DHS, other agencies, and existing R&D coordination bodies; and appropriations. This
report will be updated as events warrant.
Funding for Federal Counterterrorism R&D
Federal funding for counterterrorism R&D has increased substantially in the last
three years. The President’s Office of Science and Technology (OSTP) estimated the
FY2004 budget request for all federal R&D to combat terrorism at $3.2 billion.1 The new
Department of Homeland Security will manage about one-third of this budget. The $2.9
billion FY2003 budget request for counterterrorism R&D was 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, 5.5% of
the FY2003 budget request for combating terrorism was for R&D. See Table 1. Since
1 See [http://www.ostp.gov/html/budget/2004/2004.html]. See also CRS Report RL31576,
Federal Research and Development Organization, Policy, and Funding for Counterterrorism;
and CRS Report RL31354, Possible Impacts of Major Counter Terrorism Security Actions on
Research, Development, and Higher Education.
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

---

CRS-2
most FY2003 appropriations have not been enacted, the current continuing resolution
continues funding at the FY2002 level.
Table 1. Research and Development (R&D) to Combat Terrorism, By
Agency, FY2000-FY2003 (Request), Dollars in Millions
Emergency
Response
FY2000
FY2001
FY2002
Fund,
Agency
Actual
Actual
Enacted
FY2002*
FY2003 Request
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 Agency
(EPA)
unavailable
0
2.8
1.5
75.0
1,771.1 (NIH,
$1.75B; CDC,
Health and Human
$40.0M; FDA,
Services (DHHS)
109.7
102.8
119.1
180.0
$50.0M)
Justice (DOJ)
45.2
11.4
66.1
0
36.1
National Science
Foundation unavailable
7.0
7.0
0
27.0
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
$2,905.2
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.
*Funds were included in the FY2002 emergency supplemental appropriations law, P.L. 107-38
Highlights of the FY2003 R&D funding request were described in OMB’s FY2002
terrorism report and are summarized below, beginning with the largest programs. The
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), with 60% of the FY2003 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), including the Defense Advanced Research Projects
Agency (DARPA). The Department of Energy’s (DOE) R&D includes R&D on security,
materials, detection of toxic agents, genomic sequencing, DNA-based diagnostics, and
microfabrication technologies. The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) focuses on
toxic materials research. The Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) counterterrorism
R&D focuses on plant and animal diseases. In the Commerce Department, R&D at the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) deals with protecting information
systems. There is also the Technical Support Working Group (TSWG), a State
Department/DOD group that coordinates interagency work on new technologies to combat
terrorism (funding requested at $49 million for FY2003).
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), and,
as one of its four directorates, a Directorate on Science and Technology, headed by an
Under Secretary. DHS estimates its R&D funding for FY2003 at $761 million. This has

---

CRS-3
not yet been appropriated. The FY2004 request is about $1 billion, with $803 million for
the S&T directorate, mostly for development leading to technologies. See Table 2.
Table 2. DHS’s R&D Funding
R&D Program or Unit
FY2003 Funding
FY2004 Budget Categories
FY2004 Budget
Established by DHS
Request
New Funding
Nat’l. Bio-Weapons
Presidential request at $420
Biological Countermeasures and the
$365 million
Defense. Analysis Cntr.
million
new National Biodefense Analysis and
Countermeasures Program
not applicable
not applicable
Radiological/Nuclear
$137 million
Countermeasures
not applicable
not applicable
Chemical/High Explosives
$65 million
Countermeasures
not applicable
not applicable
Threat and Vulnerability Testing and
$90 million
Assessments
not applicable
not applicable
Standards (for responder detection
$25 million
devices and equipment)
not applicable
not applicable
Conventional Missions (RDT&E for
$55 million
border/transportation security and for
emergency preparedness)
Homeland Security Institute
not available
University Programs, Homeland
$62 million
University Center for Homeland
not available
Security Institute, rapid prototyping
Security
Contracts with other FFRDCs
not available
HSARPA and Acceleration Fund
$500 million was authorized
Advancing and Harnessing Science
($350 million)*
for R&D
for the fund
and Technology, includes HSARPA
Total Requested for DHS S&T
$561 million
Total Requested for DHS S&T
$803 million
Funding Transferred From Other Agencies to DHS for Other R&D Activities
Coast Guard R&D, from DOT
$24 million, + 10% of
Coast Guard R&D, from DOT
[$24 million
HSARPA’s Acceleration
estimated]
Fund for R&D
NISAC, from DOE
$20 million
NISAC, from DOE
[$20 million,
estimated]
Other R&D, from DOE
Not available, previously
Other R&D, from DOE
not available
estimated at $100 million
Plum Island, from USDA
$25 million
Plum Island, from USDA
[$25 million
estimated]
TSA Aviation Security, from
Not available, previously
Included under “Border and
$65 million
DOT
estimated at $130 million
Transportation Security”
DHS R&D Funding by Character of Work
Basic Research in DHS
$47 million
Basic Research in DHS
$47 million
Applied Research in DHS
$64 million
Applied Research in DHS
$126 million
Development in DHS
$537 million
Development in DHS
$663 million
Facilities/Equipment in DHS
$113 million
Facilities/Equipment in DHS
$165 million
Grand Total Requested for DHS
Grand Total Requested for DHS
R&D
$761 million
R&D
$1,001 million
Source: Data in roman is estimated by CRS. Data in italics is from OMB, Analytical Perspectives, Budget, FY2004, pp. 183-184 or the
DHS budget at [http://www.dhs.gov/dhspublic/display?theme=47&content=426]. Information in [ ] is based on conversations with OMB
staff, 2/4/03. Totals may not add due to rounding and non-reported data. Interviews with OMB staff indicate that S&T funding is to be
managed by the S&T Directorate, which might also manage some of the other transferred R&D funding. These funding details are subject
to change as additional information is made available.
*This cross-cutting category consists of funding from programs above that were already counted in the $803 million total.

---

CRS-4
Pursuant to P.L. 107-296, most of DHS’s research, development, test, and evaluation (RDT&E)
is under jurisdiction of the Under Secretary for Science and Technology (S&T), created by Title
III. On January 10, 2003, Dr. Charles McQueary, an engineer, recently retired as President of
General Dynamics Advanced Technology Systems, was nominated to this position. Among the
Under Secretary’s responsibilities are to: coordinate DHS’s S&T missions; in consultation with
other agencies, develop a strategic plan for federal civilian countermeasures to threats, including
research; except for human health-related R&D, conduct and coordinate DHS’s intramural and
extramural R&D and coordinate with other federal agencies to carry out DHS R&D; establish
national R&D priorities to prevent importation of chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear and
related weapons and terrorist attacks; collaborate with DOE regarding using national
laboratories; collaborate with the Secretaries of Agriculture and of Health and Human Services
to identify select agents (but not to assume their responsibilities to enforce select agent rules);
develop guidelines to disseminate DHS’s research and transfer technology; and support U.S.
S&T leadership. The law authorized a 20-member Homeland Security Science and Technology
Advisory Committee to provide advice and recommend research. Members, appointed by the
Under Secretary, who may use the National Research Council for assistance in selection of
members, are to include representatives of emergency first-responders, citizen groups,
economically disadvantaged communities, and experts in emergency response, research,
engineering, business, and management consulting. To the extent possible, DHS’s research is
to be unclassified.
Title III transferred to DHS 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 was mandated to 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. Since the
Coast Guard and Transportation Security Administration (TSA) were transferred to DHS, DHS
has responsibility for their R&D. The DHS Secretary was given responsibility to collaborate
with the DHHS Secretary in setting priorities for DHHS’s human health-related R&D on
“countermeasures for chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear and other emerging
terrorist threats.”
Several analysis and evaluation units were authorized in DHS. Pursuant to Title III, the
Under Secretary may establish or contract with one or more Federally Funded R&D Centers
(FFRDC) for independent analysis of homeland security issues. A Homeland Security
Advanced Research Projects Agency (HSARPA) will administer an Acceleration Fund,
authorized at $500 million in FY 2003, to support homeland security RDT&E in businesses,
FFRDCs, and universities. Extramural funding is to be competitive and merit-reviewed, but
distributed to as many U.S. areas as practicable. One or more university-based centers for
homeland security is required to be established and has to meet 15 specific criteria. Regarding
intramural R&D, the Under Secretary may use any federal laboratory and may establish a
headquarters laboratory. Selection criteria for a headquarters laboratory are to be determined
in consultation with the National Academy of Sciences and other experts. DHS’s Office for
National Laboratories will “network” federal laboratories. A Homeland Security Institute
FFRDC was authorized to: conduct risk analysis and policy research to determine
vulnerabilities of, and alternative security approaches for, critical infrastructures; 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),

---

CRS-5
which was transferred from DOE. A Technology Clearinghouse was authorized to support
innovative solutions to enhance homeland security; it is to coordinate with TSWG.
Other parts of P.L. 107-296 also deal with R&D and science and technology. Among the
functions of the Special Assistant to the Secretary, created by Sec. 102, is working with the
private sector to develop innovative technologies for homeland security. The DHS Secretary,
with the National Security Council and OSTP, is to establish uniform procedures to handle
critical infrastructure information that is voluntarily submitted to the Government in good faith
that will not be subject to disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act. The law codified
an existing Office of Science and Technology in the National Institute of Justice and also
authorized local technology centers to support training and RDT&E for equipment to counter
terrorism (Sec. 232 and 235). The DHS Secretary was given special acquisition authority for
basic, applied, and advanced R&D (Sec. 833). Sec. 1003 authorized NIST to conduct research
on information security vulnerability and improvements. The DHS Under Secretary for
Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection was authorized to establish a “NET Guard,’’
comprised of S&T volunteers, to assist in recovery from attacks on information systems (Sec.
224). OSTP’s Director was mandated to report to Congress on effects of changes in visa
procedures on the issuance of student visas (Sec. 428). According to Sec. 1712, OSTP’s
Director is to advise the President on homeland security, and to consult and cooperate with the
Office of Homeland Security (see below).
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.
Coordination Mechanisms Created Before Authorization of DHS
The Office of Science and Technology Policy (OSTP) is a statutory office in the Executive
Office of the President (EOP); its Director advises the President and recommends federal R&D
budgets. OSTP’s Director has chaired the National Security Council’s Preparedness Against
Weapons of Mass Destruction R&D Subgroup (comprised of 16 agencies), which helps plan
R&D relating to chemical, biological, nuclear, and radiological threats. OSTP manages the
interagency National Science and Technology Council (NSTC), which created an Antiterrorism
Task Force, and a Committee on Homeland and National Security to set R&D priorities for
biological and chemical preparedness, nuclear and conventional explosives counter measures,
border technologies, behavioral and educational issues, and so forth. OSTP’s interagency work
has focused on such topics as anthrax, 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
OHS, in the EOP, created on October 8, 2001 by Executive Order 13228, did not list R&D
among its responsibilities. The Homeland Security Council (HSC), also created then to
coordinate homeland security activities, includes as members the heads of DoD and HHS, but
not OSTP’s Director or the Secretaries of Commerce and of Energy. The interagency HSC
Policy Coordination Committees on R&D is headed by OSTP’s assistant director for national
security. Neither OSTP or OHS have budgetary authority over federal agencies.

---

CRS-6
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. Before passage of P.L. 107-296,
some critics alleged that effective counterterrorism R&D required better coordination than the
aforementioned groups could provide and that R&D priorities should reflect intelligence and
threat estimates, as well as balance between long-range and short-term applied R&D to hasten
deployment of technological responses. Some observers said that, to overcome fragmentation
of R&D, core R&D should 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). The Brookings Institution in Assessing the Department of
Homeland Security, July 15, 2002, urged caution about R&D in DHS since federal homeland
security R&D priorities were unclear.
Oversight Issues
The DHS is not yet fully operational. Many of its S&T activities are to be transferred to
the new department by March 1, 2003, and others by June 1, 2003, according to the
Administrations’s reorganization plan issued on Nov. 25, 2002.
Coordination of federal homeland security R&D may be an issue. DHS’s FY2004 R&D
budget request includes about $800 million for new programs and $200 million for transferred
programs; this is one-third of the federal budget request for R&D to combat terrorism. DHS’s
FY2003 appropriation has not yet been enacted (S&T was requested at $761 million). DHS has
some authority to coordinate and help set priorities for other federal homeland security R&D,
including human health-related R&D, through the Secretary and the Under Secretary. However,
the heads of other agencies that handle R&D have no formal role in DHS’s R&D priority-setting
and coordination processes and their role relative to the DHS Secretary remains to be
determined. DHS’s effectiveness in planning and coordinating R&D may depend upon its
ability to exert influence on other agencies and the quality of its interactions with existing
counterterrorism coordination mechanisms in OSTP, NSTC, OHS, and interagency committees.
Additionally, there is the issue of whether DHS scientists will be housed together
physically or will remain separate and operate essentially as a “virtual group.” Physical
proximity may promote mission effectiveness, but has the potential to separate DHS scientists
from their counterparts in other agencies and the possibility of distorting scientific
communication, which many say is essential to progress. There is also the issue of how
Congress will conduct oversight of the DHS’s multifaceted R&D activities, and, related to this,
the level of appropriations that will be made available to fund the authorized programs. In
addition, in response to criticism of P.L. 107-296, legislation has been introduced to revise
eligibility criteria so that more institutions can compete for funding for DHS’s academic-based
homeland security center (S. 28, S. 41, H.J.Res. 2).

---