Order Code RS21270
Updated April 19, 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 about $761 million,
and at $1 billion for FY2004. FY2003 funding was appropriated in P.L. 107-8. Policy
issues include implementation; 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 about 6
times the FY2000 amount The new Department of Homeland Security will manage about
one-third of this budget. 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.
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
Table 1. Research and Development (R&D) to Combat Terrorism, By
Agency, FY2000-FY2003 (Request), Dollars in Millions
Emergency
FY2000
FY2001
FY2002
Response Fund,
FY2003
Agency
Actual
Actual
Enacted
FY2002*
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;
Health and Human
CDC, $40.0M;
Services (DHHS)
109.7
102.8
119.1
180.0 FDA, $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
The FY2003 request for R&D to combat terrorism was described in OMB’s FY2002
terrorism report and is summarized below, beginning with the largest programs. The
Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), with 60% of the total, manages most
of the federal civilian effort against bioterrorism. The FY2003 request for national
security
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) counterterrorism R&D includes work 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) 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. The Technical Support
Working Group (TSWG)
, a State Department/DOD group, coordinates interagency work
on new technologies to combat terrorism (funding requested at $49 million).
Creation of a Department of Homeland Security and Other Laws
The Homeland Security Act of 2002, P.L. 107-296, November 25, 2002, created the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and, as one of its four directorates, a
Directorate on Science and Technology. DHS estimated its R&D funding for FY2003 at
$761 million. The FY2004 request is about $1 billion, with $803 million for the S&T
directorate, mostly for development leading to technologies. Funding for R&D programs
transferred from other agencies is estimated to total about $200 million. See Table 2.
AAAS estimates FY2003 R&D appropriations at $669 million, categorized by directorate
as follows: Border and Transportation Security, $110 million (plus Coast Guard, $23
million); Information Analysis and Infrastructure, $15 million; and Science and
Technology, $521 million. (AAAS, “DHS Opens Doors, Proposes $1.0 Billion for R&D,”
March. 4, 2003, (http://www.aaas.org/spp/rd/].)

CRS-3
Table 2. DHS’s Estimated 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
Biological Countermeasures and
$365 million
Defense. Analysis Cntr.
$420 million
the 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
$90 million
and Assessments
not applicable
not applicable
Standards (for responder
$25 million
detection devices and
equipment)

not applicable
not applicable
Conventional Missions (RDT&E
$55 million
for border/transportation
security and for emergency
preparedness)

Homeland Security Institute
not available
University Programs, Homeland
$62 million
University Center for
not available
Security Institute, rapid
Homeland Security
prototyping
Contracts with other
not available
FFRDCs
HSARPA and Acceleration
$500 million was
Advancing and Harnessing
($350 million)*
Fund for R&D
authorized for the fund
Science and Technology,
includes HSARPA

Total Requested for DHS
$561 million
Total Requested for DHS S&T
$803 million
S&T
Funding Transferred From Other Agencies to DHS for Other R&D Activities
Coast Guard R&D, from
$24 million, + 10% of
Coast Guard R&D, from DOT
[$24 million
DOT
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,
Not available, previously
Included under “Border and
$65 million
from 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
$113 million
Facilities/Equipment in DHS
$165 million
DHS
Grand Total Requested for
Grand Total Requested for DHS
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. Dr. Charles McQueary, an engineer, recently retired as President of General
Dynamics Advanced Technology Systems, was confirmed on March 19, 2003, to this position.
Among his 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 advise and recommend research. Members are to include
representatives of emergency first-responders, citizen groups, economically disadvantaged
communities, and experts in emergency response, research, engineering, business, and
management. 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 from
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. DHS has responsibility for
Coast Guard and Transportation Security Administration (TSA) R&D. The DHS Secretary is
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.”
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, to support innovative
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 to be established. Regarding
intramural R&D, the Under Secretary may use any federal laboratory and may establish a
headquarters laboratory to “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), which was transferred
from DOE. A Technology Clearinghouse was authorized to transfer information about
innovative solutions for homeland security and will coordinate with TSWG.
Among the functions of the Special Assistant to the Secretary, created by Sec. 102 of P.L.
107-296 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

CRS-5
the Government in good faith that will not be subject to disclosure under the Freedom of
Information Act. DHS issued a proposed rule on this (see Federal Register, Apr. 15, 2003, pp.
18524 -18529). P.L. 107-296 codified an existing Office of Science and Technology in the
National Institute of Justice and authorized local technology centers to support training and
RDT&E for equipment (Sec. 232 and 235). The DHS Secretary was given special acquisitions
authority for basic, applied, and advanced R&D (Sec. 833). Sec. 1003 authorized NIST to
conduct R&D on improving information security. 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 (OHS). (See below for information about OHS.)
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 a new Committee
on Homeland and National Security to set help set R&D priorities in eight functional areas.
OSTP’s interagency work has focused on such topics as anthrax, regulations to restrict access
to research using biological “select agents,” access to “sensitive but unclassified” scientific
information, policy for foreign student visas, access to “sensitive” courses, and advanced
technology for border control. Pursuant to Executive Order 13231, OSTP was to work with the
interagency President’s Critical Infrastructure Board to recommend priorities and budgets for
information security R&D. The OHS had been created in the EOP on October 8, 2001 by
Executive Order 13228. It was replaced by the new Homeland Security Council (HSC), created
by P.L. 107-296, to provide policy and interagency guidance. It is unclear if the HSC Policy
Coordination Committee on R&D, created pursuant to Executive Order 13228, still functions.
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 said that effective counterterrorism R&D required better coordination than OHS,
OSTP, NSTC and other groups could provide, and that R&D priorities should reflect
intelligence and threat estimates, and balance between long-range and short-term R&D to hasten
deployment of technological responses. Some observers said that, to overcome fragmentation,
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

CRS-6
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 because homeland security R&D priorities were unclear.
Oversight Issues
Many DHS S&T activities were to be transferred to DHS by March 1, 2003, and others by
June 1, 2003, according to the Administration’s reorganization plan issued on November 25,
2002. According to Under Secretary McQueary in recent speeches and congressional
testimony,2 DHS S&T priorities include: intramural work in the National Laboratory for
Homeland Security; soliciting innovative ideas from academia and industry via work in
HSARPA; promoting standards for design and manufacture of homeland security technologies;
participating with TSWG to support prototyping of new technologies; and strategic R&D
partnerships with the academic community, including creation of a fellowship program at DHS,
with selection activities administered by the AAAS. Key DHS S&T initiatives focus on the
issues of border protection and monitoring (including prevention of illegal entry of a nuclear
device), biological protection (including working with the Centers for Disease Control and
Prevention to develop surveillance systems, and deployment of sensors to monitor the release
of pathogens and agents), and information analysis (including information analysis tools and
research in cybersecurity). It is unclear how DHS will set priorities for its support agencies,
including HSARPA, the university center(s), the Homeland Security Institute, and laboratories.
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 budget request for R&D to combat terrorism. DHS has some
authority to coordinate and help set priorities for other federal homeland security R&D,
including in human health. The extent of that responsibility remains to be demonstrated. The
heads of other agencies that handle R&D have no formal role in DHS’s R&D priority-setting
and coordination, and the role of the DHS Secretary in setting priorities for those agencies is
undetermined. DHS’s effectiveness in planning and coordinating R&D may depend upon the
Secretary’s ability to exert influence on other agencies and his interactions with existing
counterterrorism coordination mechanisms in OSTP, NSTC, and interagency committees.
There is the issue of whether DHS scientists will be housed together 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 are also issues of how Congress will conduct oversight of the DHS’s
multifaceted R&D activities, and the level of appropriations that will be made available to fund
the authorized programs. House and Senate appropriations hearings were held on April 10.
In response to criticism of P.L. 107-296, legislation was enacted (P.L. 108-7), to revise
eligibility criteria so that more institutions can compete for funding for DHS’s academic-based
homeland security center(s).
2 At Appropriations Committee hearings, Apr. 10, 2003 and in a presentation at the AAAS
Colloquium on Science and Technology, Apr. 11, 2003, Washington, D.C.