American Board for Certification in Homeland Security
(ABCHS)
CHS Level I
Understanding Homeland Security and Its Impact on National
Security
COPYRIGHT
This ABCHS presentation is copyrighted material and as such, any
reproduction, distribution, and/or further use of this material is strictly
prohibited without the express written approval and consent of
The American Board For Certification In Homeland Security.
© 2010 The American Board for Certification in Homeland Security
A Unit of The American College of Forensic Examiners Institute
Certified in Homeland Security: Level I
Course Description
CHS-I is an entry-level course and the first of a five-part series of credentialing courses of the
ABCHS program. CHS-I is specifically designed to establish an entry-level exposure, broad overview, and
basic understanding of homeland security and its impact on national security. The participant in this and
subsequent CHS credentialing courses will build both a vocabulary of terms and knowledge base used in
the fields of Homeland Security and Disaster Preparedness.
The student will come away with an understanding of the events precipitating the formation of
the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and its roles and responsibilities as they
apply to national security. The formation of DHS, its organizational structure, its mission, and the various
Homeland Security Presidential Directives that guide it will also be discussed.
Additionally, the student will be exposed to the resources within the Department of Homeland
Security and will understand the means to utilize these in their day-to-day lives and in the performance
of their duties on the job as homeland security professionals.
It is critical to understand DHS and all of the agencies within before embarking on further
certification training. This course will be the foundation for all Certified in Homeland Security (CHS)
courses
Course Objectives
As a result of successfully completing this CHS-I course, the student will be able to:
1. Describe homeland security before and after September 11, 2001;
2. Discuss the Office of Homeland Security;
3. Explain how DHS came into existence;
4. Recognize the impact that homeland security has on national security; and
5. Demonstrate an understanding of the organization and structure of DHS.
Key Words
Department of Homeland Security, Natural Disasters/Hazards, Man-made Disasters/Hazards, Homeland
Security, Disaster Preparedness, Weapons of Mass Destruction
Audience
Private industry and government (state and federal) employees responsible for security or working in
another area of the homeland security mission
Program Level of Instruction
Basic
Prerequisites
None; however, basic familiarization with the Global War on Terrorism and the current world situation
as it relates to global terrorism would be beneficial.
Student Advanced Preparation
None
CHS-I Course Table of Contents
Lesson 1 - 9/11 The Beginning of a New Era in the United States
Lesson 2 – The Aftermath and the 9/11 Commission Report
Lesson 3 – The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
Lesson 4 – Homeland Security Mission and Concepts
Lesson 5 – A Description of HSPD 01 through 03 Issued Shortly after 9/11
Lesson 6 – Threat Advisory Systems
Lesson 7 – HSPD 04 Through 05 Explained, and a Listing of Current DHS Principals by Functional Area of
Responsibility
Lesson 8 – Examination of Violent Non-State Agents
Summary
Appendix A – Current Principals of the Department of Homeland Security by Position
Appendix B – List of Homeland Security Presidential Directives (HSPD)
Note for Applicant
The majority of the material in this credentialing course is taken directly from various
documents from open sources, including those developed and published by the United States
government. For individuals who wish to become certified in the field of homeland security the best way
to study is to be directly exposed to the policies, procedures, concepts, rationale, and determinations
established by the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) and other governmental agencies.
The American Board for Certification in Homeland Security (ABCHS) feels strongly that such
study and exposure should be accompanied by relevant comments specific to recent events, insight into
ongoing efforts in homeland security as a discipline, and an impartial and unbiased analysis of the
current state of homeland security. Of course, this analysis should be consistent with the philosophy and
spirit of the efforts of the United States government and DHS as it goes about “Preserving Our
Freedoms, Protecting America.” You, the participant in this course, will periodically see the heading
“Insight and Analysis.” Comments and text that follow this heading represent
ABCHS knowledge that will guide you and help you understand the course material.
The advance of human freedom – the great achievement of our time, and the great hope of
every time – now depends on us. Our nation – this generation – will lift the dark threat of
violence from our people and our future. We will rally the world to this cause by our efforts, by
our courage. We will not tire, we will not falter, and we will not fail.”
—President George W. Bush
To the American People
September 20, 2001
Insight and Analysis: These are the words President George W. Bush spoke to the American people
a few days after the tragic events of 9/11. They were then, and are still to this day, a powerful beacon
that guides our nation in the “Global War on Terrorism” and against all who support acts of terrorism.
As you undertake your study of homeland security with the American Board for Certification in
Homeland Security (ABCHS), it is important to remember that our national security, and survival as a
people, depends largely on you. This burden is great . . . however, the alternative is unacceptable.
Sun Tzu, the famous Chinese general and war lord, penned the following words, which are found
in his classic work The Art of War, a work studied at our nation’s military academies: “If you know the
enemy and know yourself, you need not fear the results of a hundred battles. If you know yourself but
not the enemy, for every victory you will also suffer a defeat. If you know neither yourself nor the
enemy, you are a fool and will meet defeat in every battle.” Sun Tzu has been studied for centuries
because his axioms are as valid today on the modern battlefield as they were hundreds
of years ago. The United States of America cannot win the War on Terrorism unless we know both
ourselves, in this case the U.S. National Security Infrastructure, and the enemy we face.
As you progress through this entry-level CHS course, it is imperative for you to remember these
words from A Law Enforcement Guide to Understand Islamist Terrorism, published by the Counter
Terrorism Operations Center, LLC, located in Coral Springs, Florida:
“The events of 9/11 changed many lives as this horrendous event affected everyone in the
United States and the rest of the world. Most of us remember where we were that dreadful
morning. It was a day that reshaped American politics and American society. Our pursuit of
freedom is part of our genetics and is an irresistible calling. Our need for freedom
is not taught, rather it is engrained within us – it is who we are. The irony today is that our
freedom is being attacked in pursuit of destroying it and ultimately replacing it with an ancient
social order.”
Training and education are more than the simple relating of facts and the memorization of
dates, times, and places. They involve the learners’ exposure to this information in a coherent and
meaningful manner. They tell a story in such a way that it captures attention and lights a fire in them,
converting the “students” into life-long “practitioners” as they dedicate their lives to something greater
than themselves. In this case, the entry-level CHS course is training and education. With this in mind, let
us now begin this study of CHS Level I – “Understanding Homeland Security and Its Impact on National
Security.”
LESSON ONE — 9/11 THE BEGINNING OF A NEW AREA IN THE
UNITED STATES
Insight and Analysis: In the last century, the United States of America has been the victim of at least
two sneak attacks.
One of these was orchestrated by a foreign power (Japan in 1941, prior to our entry into World
War II), and another most recently on September 11, 2001 (9/11)—by a group of terrorists who wished
to destroy our way of life. The United States of America as a nation and its citizens as a people have
always been slow to anger. In fact, our history as a nation shows that up until World War II, a large
standing army was not the accepted norm in this country. That all changed in the 20th century at Pearl
Harbor.
Our history as a nation, since the beginning of the last millennium and the tragic events of 9/11,
has dramatically changed with regard to national security and homeland security: two interrelated yet
different aspects of the same goal—the protection of the United States of America. Until 2001, the term
“homeland security” had not been used. However, since its inception, it has now become an integral
facet of national security that once had the sole purview of a global perspective dealing with other
nation-states who wished America ill.
Today we face a new enemy: an enemy that at times operates outside the bounds of a national
entity, an enemy that does not have large standing armed forces with conventional weaponry (planes,
ships, large masses of land forces, etc.). Yet, our enemy is large in number, and their ranks grow every
day as the threat they pose to our citizens becomes more deadly and increasingly more viral.
This lesson will expose you to a new mind-set in national security—security of the homeland.
For in truth, homeland security is a testament to the fact that the battlefield of national security is no
longer the world outside our borders. It is now the homeland—our Homeland—and within the confines
these United States of America.
This lesson will first review the history of terrorism. Then it will look closely at a landmark
moment in American history, that forever changed the concept of homeland security.
Brief History of Terrorism
Insight and Analysis – This is to demonstrate that terrorism is not necessarily something new,
but it has in recent history changed much of the landscape of the American government. This
section is to provide an introduction to the history of terrorism, with a particular focus on
domestic incidents of the past 40 years. And to briefly examine what is meant by terrorism.
Introduction
Terrorism broadly defined is an act designed to elicit an action from a government or populous through
the use of fear or threat of violence. In this sense terrorism is hardly a new concept. From what is known
of the earliest Mesopotamian states of antiquity, it is believed that the first rulers held their lands
through the use of fear and intimidation. The French lived under what is now called the Reign of Terror
from September 1793 to July 1794. It was a period of time lasting more than 10 months when rival
factions put to death anyone who was deemed “an enemy of the revolution.” Maximilien Robespierre a
prominent French politician during the Terror stated “Terror is nothing else than justice, prompt, severe,
inflexible.” History has countless occasions of both despots and more democratic states maintaining
their hold through the use of terrorism in this broad sense.
Usually in the modern sense, terrorism is used to describe various types of asymmetric warfare.
Asymmetric warfare means that one side is considerably “stronger” than the other side. While many
people believe that most terrorists are crazy, it is usually the case that the terrorist’s actions follow an
internal logic, and are quite calculated. Their goals can range from bringing awareness to a cause, as
most eco-terrorism seeks to do, to trying to replace the government in power. The United States history
with terrorism certainly didn’t start with 9/11. It has been argued that the Boston Tea Party was an act
of terrorism, for example. A timeline of terrorist events of recent years would include
Timeline
1978-1995 The Unabomber – Ted Kaczynski, a recluse and technophobe sent 16 mail bombs
while active. His nickname was from the FBI and referenced the fact that his earliest targets
were Universities and Airlines
1995 Oklahoma City bombing – Timothy McVeigh and Terry Nichols detonated a car bomb at
the Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building in Oklahoma City. 168 people lost their lives in the blast,
and 680 others were injured. McVeigh bombed the government building in part as a protest
against the government’s handling of the situation in 1993 in Waco, Texas.
1996 Olympic Park bombing – Eric Rudolph placed improvised explosive devices at the main
square of the Olympic grounds in Atlanta, Georgia. 2 people died as a result of the blasts, and
111 people were injured. In statements made after his arrest were that he intended to
“confound, anger and embarrass the Washington government in the eyes of the world for its
abominable sanctioning of abortion on demand.”
2001 9/11 – The most devastating domestic terrorism incident to date. Approximately 3,000
people died due to the attacks.
2001 The Shoe Bomber – Richard Reid, a British citizen with ties to al Qaeda was subdued by
fellow passengers on American Airlines Flight 63 as he tried to light the fuse on a bomb
concealed in his shoe.
2002 The Beltway Sniper Attacks – Over the course of three weeks in October of 2002, a series
of coordinated sniper attacks in the Washington, D.C. metro area. The attacks were actually the
culmination of a series of attacks that began in Tacoma, Washington. The attacks were
perpetrated by John Allen Muhammad, and Lee Boyd Malvo who was only 17 at the time.
Malvo later claimed while in custody that the pair intended to kill six white people a day in
order “to terrorize the nation.”
2010 Times Square car bombing – A car bomb was discovered by two street vendors who then
reported it to police. The bomb was set by Faisal Shahzad stated that his intent had been “to kill
Americans.” He had activated the bomb, but it was able to be disarmed before it exploded. He
claimed to have received training from a terrorist camp in Pakistan.
2013 Boston Marathon bombing – Two bombs were detonated at the Boston Marathon killing
three people and injuring more than 260 others. Two Chechen brothers named Dzhokhar and
Tamerlan Tsarnaev were responsible for the bombing. Tamerlan was killed in a firefight with
law enforcement officers, and Dzhokhar was taken into custody. Dzhokhar has claimed that
they learned to make the bomb from an online al Qaeda magazine.
The Beginning: September 11, 2001
(From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/September_11_attacks)
The September 11 attacks (often referred to as September 11th or 9/11) were a series of
coordinated suicide attacks by al-Qaeda upon the United States on September 11, 2001. Nearly eighteen
years before, in 1993, the World Trade Center was the site of its first terrorist attack that would
ultimately pale in comparison to this new one. On that morning, nineteen al-Qaeda terrorists hijacked
four commercial passenger jet airliners. The hijackers intentionally crashed two of the airliners into the
Twin Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City, killing everyone on board and many others
working in the buildings. Both buildings collapsed within two hours, destroying nearby buildings and
damaging others. The hijackers crashed a third airliner into the Pentagon in Arlington, Virginia, just
outside Washington, DC. The fourth plane crashed into a field near Shanksville in rural Pennsylvania
after some of its passengers and flight crew attempted to retake control of the plane, which had
redirected toward Washington, DC by hijackers. There were no survivors from any of the flights.
Nearly 3,000 victims and the 19 hijackers died in the attacks. According to the New York State
Health Department, 836 responders, including firefighters and police personnel, have died as of June
2009. The 2,752 victims who died in the attacks on the World Trade Center included 343 firefighters and
60 police officers from New York City and the Port Authority. In the attacks on the Pentagon, 125 people
were killed. The overwhelming majority of casualties were civilians, including nationals of over 70
countries. In addition, there was at least three secondary deaths—those ruled by a medical examiner to
have died from lung disease due to exposure to dust from the World Trade Center’s collapse.
The United States responded to the attacks by launching the War on Terror, invading
Afghanistan to depose the Taliban that harbored al-Qaeda terrorists. The United States also enacted the
USA PATRIOT Act. Many other countries also strengthened their anti-terrorism legislation and expanded
law enforcement powers. Some American stock exchanges stayed closed for the rest of the week
following the attack and posted enormous losses upon reopening, especially in the airline and insurance
industries. The destruction of billions of dollars’ worth of office space caused serious damage to the
economy of Lower Manhattan.
The damage to the Pentagon was cleared and repaired within a year, and the Pentagon
Memorial was built adjacent to the building. The rebuilding process has started on the World Trade
Center site. In 2006, a new office tower was completed on the site of 7 World Trade Center. In place of
the Twin Towers, a memorial was erected. Complete with two large reflective pools, set in the towers’
footprints, an arbor of trees, and a museum to commemorate the lives of those lost on 9/11, the
memorial opened on the 10th anniversary of the attacks. Ground was broken for the Flight 93
National Memorial on November 8, 2009, and the first phase of construction was completed by the 10th
anniversary.
One Review Questions
As a result of having completed Lesson One, you should be able to answer the following questions:
1.) How many aircrafts were involved in the attacks of 9/11?
2.) How many terrorists were involved in the attacks of 9/11?
3.) Why did Eric Rudolph bomb the Olympic games in 1996?
4.) What “Act” did Congress and the President sign into law as a result of 9/11?
LESSON TWO — THE AFTERMATH AND THE 9/11 COMMISSION REPORT
Insight and Analysis: Following the aftermath of the events of 9/11, there was a change in the way
the United States looked at security. The perspective was still a “global” one, but now there was an
internal perspective as well—and it was dubbed “homeland security.” This was a “C-change” in thought
process at the federal government level, and it has filtered down to the state and local levels all across
the nation as a result of the 9/11 Commission Report.
With the nation in fear of another attack, the President and Congress commissioned a study of
our national security with an emphasis on the security of the landmass of the United States proper. The
study which was conducted by the 9/11 Commission determined that a reorganization of our federal
infrastructure with regard to security needed to be accomplished under a new federal department – The
United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS).
As you continue through this lesson, pay particular attention to the differences between pre
9/11 homeland security (which was “national security”) and post 9/11 homeland security with regard to
the functional areas of responsibility, reporting chain-of-command, the issuance of Excutive Order (EO)
13228 in October 2010, and the Homeland Security Presidential Directive # 1 (HSPD-1) with respect to
the creation of “The Office of Homeland Security.” EO 13228 and HSPD-1 set the stage for the
“redirection” of the priorities pertaining to “home land security,” ultimately leading to the creation of
DHS.
The 9/11 Commission Report
About the Commission
(From http://www.9-11commission.gov/ )
The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also known as the 9-11
Commission), an independent, bipartisan commission created by congressional legislation and the
signature of President George W. Bush in late 2002, is chartered to prepare a full and complete account
of the circumstances surrounding the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks, including preparedness for
and the immediate response to the attacks. The Commission is also
mandated to provide recommendations designed to guard against future attacks.
The Commission has released its final report available in bookstores nationwide and from the
Government Printing Office.
(From http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/about/index.htm)
Hearings
(From http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/hearings/index.htm)
The Commission periodically held public hearings to offer a public dialogue about the Commission’s
goals and priorities. The Commission also sought to learn about work already completed and the state of
current knowledge
Commission Members
(From http://govinfo.library.unt.edu/911/about/bios.htm)
Thomas H. Kean Chair
Slade Gorton
Lee H. Hamilton Vice Chair
Bob Kerrey
Richard Ben-Veniste
John F. Lehman
Fred F. Fielding
Timothy J. Roemer
Jamie S. Gorelick
James R. Thompson
Statement by the President
(From http://www.9-11commision.gov/about/president.htm)
Today I have signed into law H.R. 4628, the “Intelligence Authorization Act for Fiscal Year 2003,”
which authorizes appropriations to fund United States intelligence activities, including activities
essential to success in the war against global terrorism. This Act also establishes the National
Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States to examine and report on the facts and causes
relating to the September 11th terrorist attacks. The Commission will build upon the work of the
congressional joint inquiries to carefully examine the circumstances surrounding the
attacks and the lessons to be learned from them. I expect that the Commission’s final report will contain
important recommendations for steps that can be taken to improve our preparedness for and response
to terrorist attacks in the future.
The executive branch shall implement sections 325, 334, and 826 of the Act, and section
8H(g)(1)(A) of the Inspector General Act of 1978 as enacted by section 825 of the Act, relating to
submission of recommendations to the Congress, in a manner consistent with the President’s
constitutional authority to supervise the unitary executive branch.
Many provisions of the Act, including section 342 and title VIII, establish new requirements for
the executive branch to disclose sensitive information. As I have noted in signing last year’s Intelligence
Authorization Act and other similar legislation, the executive branch shall construe such provisions in a
manner consistent with the President’s constitutional authority to withhold information the disclosure
of which could impair foreign relations, the national security, the deliberative processes of the
Executive, or the performance of the Executive’s constitutional duties.
The executive branch shall construe subsections 501(d) and (e), relating to the number and
activities of military personnel deployed abroad, in a manner consistent with the President’s
constitutional authority as Commander in Chief of the Armed Forces.
GEORGE W. BUSH
THE WHITE HOUSE,
November 27, 2002
Homeland Security before September 11, 2001
(From https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=37027 )
Before the establishment of the Department of Homeland Security, homeland security activities
were spread across more than 40 federal agencies and an estimated 2,000 separate Congressional
appropriations committees and accounts.
Insight and Analysis: In short, some of these 40 federal agencies and departments that were tasked
with the function of protecting the nation fell mostly to:
• The Department of Agriculture (DA – i.e., protecting the nation’s food supply)
• The Department of Defense (DOD – i.e., the military … the Army, Navy, Marine Corps,
and Air force who were and still are charged with “Homeland Defense” – Reactive, and
which is different from “Homeland Security” – Proactive)
• The Department of Justice (DOJ)
• The Department of Transportation (DOT – i.e., The Coast Guard protecting our
waterways and coast lines belonged to DOT prior to the creation and stand-up of DHS)
• The Department of Treasury (i.e., The Immigration and Naturalization Service –
INS/Border Patrol and Secret Service – protecting the nation’s borders , monetary
system and solvency. These all belonged to the Treasury prior to DHS)
• The Central Intelligence Agency (CIA – Intelligence and Espionage Activities)
• The National Security Agency (NSA – Intelligence Gathering Activities)
• The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI – i.e., a component of DOJ)
Each of the 40 federal agencies that dealt with securing the homeland also had other primary missions.
In short, there was no one arm of government tasked with the sole responsibility of homeland security.
Then in February 2001, the U.S. Commission on National Security/21st Century (Hart-Rudman
Commission) issued its Phase III Report, recommending significant and comprehensive institutional and
procedural changes throughout the executive and legislative branches in order to meet future national
security challenges. Among these recommendations was the creation of a new National Homeland
Security Agency to consolidate and refine the missions of the different
departments and agencies that had a role in U.S. homeland security. This report and study began in
1998, and in March 2001, Representative Mac Thornberry (R-TX) proposed a bill H.R. 1158, National
Homeland Security Agency Act to create a National Homeland Security Agency.
The bill combined FEMS, Customs and Border Patrol, and several other infrastructure offices
into one agency with sole responsibility for homeland security activities. Hearings were held but the bill
never saw the light of day.
This, then, was how The United States of America organized itself in relation to homeland
security as it passed from the 20th century and entered into the 21st—just prior to the attack of 9/11.
Homeland Security after September 11, 2001
(From https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=37027 )
A mere 11 days after the horrific terrorist attack on America, then President George W. Bush
addressed the American people and made a commitment to form a national department of homeland
security within the executive branch. The President also announced he would appoint cabinet-level
persons to serve as his Homeland Security Advisory Council. President Bush appointed Vietnam veteran,
and former Pennsylvania Congressman, Governor Tom Ridge (R PA) as the nation’s first Chief of
Homeland Security.
Executive Order 13228, issued on October 8, 2001, established an entity within the White House
to determine homeland security policy. The Office of Homeland Security (OHS) within the Executive
Office of the President was tasked to develop and implement a national strategy to coordinate federal,
state, and local counter-terrorism efforts to secure the country from and respond to terrorist threats or
attacks. The Homeland Security Council (HSC), composed of Cabinet members responsible for
homeland security- related activities, was to advise the President on homeland security matters,
mirroring the role the National Security Council (NSC) plays in national security.
The Office of Homeland Security
(From https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=37027 )
The first Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD-1) further delineated the organization
and mission of the Homeland Security Council. Future HSPDs recorded and communicated presidential
policy with regard to homeland security.
On March 21, 2002, President Bush issued Executive Order 13260, establishing the President’s Homeland
Security Advisory Council (PHSAC). Members of the PHSAC served as advisors to the president on homeland
security matters and represented the private sector, academia, professional service associations, federally funded
research and development centers, non government organizations, state and local governments, and other related
professions and communities. The PHSAC held its first meeting on June 12, 2002.
EO 13260 requires the PHSAC to renew its charter every two years. After the creation of DHS, the Council
rechartered itself as the Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC) and became an advisory committee to the
Secretary of Homeland Security. The Secretary’s HSAC held its first meeting on June 30, 2003.
One month after the September 11 attack, Senator Joseph Lieberman (D-CT) introduced S. 1534,
a bill to establish Department of National Homeland Security, co-sponsored by Senator Arlen Specter (RPA). Following the recommendations of the Hart-Rudman Commission, the bill intended to unite the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, the U.S. Customs Service, Border Patrol, Coast Guard, and
agencies responsible for critical infrastructure protection in a Cabinet-level department. The language
was similar to H.R 1158 introduced in the House by Mac Thornberry (R-TX) on March 21, 2001. Although
hearings were held on the Lieberman bill, there was no further action taken.
On June 6, 2002, President Bush addressed the nation and proposed the creation of a
permanent Cabinet-level Department of Homeland Security to unite essential agencies charged with
protecting the homeland. He outlined four essential missions that corresponded to the four proposed
divisions in the department:
•
•
•
•
Border and Transportation Security - Control the borders and prevent terrorists
and explosives from entering the country;
Emergency Preparedness and Response - Work with state and local authorities
to respond quickly and effectively to emergencies;
Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Countermeasures - Bring
together the country’s best scientists to develop technologies that detect biological,
chemical, and nuclear weapons to best protect citizens; and,
Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection - Review intelligence and
law enforcement information from all agencies of government and produce a single
daily picture of threats against the homeland.
One month after signing Executive Order (EO) 13267, which set up a transition planning office to
begin setting up the Department of Homeland Security, the White House released the first ever draft of
a “National Strategy for Homeland Security.”
This first draft of the strategy outlined three (3) primary objectives:
• Prevent terrorist attacks within the United States;
• Reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism; and
• Minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur.
In addition to providing one of the first post 9/11 definitions of “homeland security,” the
National Strategy also provided direction for homeland security functions of federal government
departments and agencies. It also suggested steps that state, local, and tribal governments; private
companies and organizations (i.e. non-government organizations NGOs); and individual Americans could
take to improve security.
On June 24, 2002, Representative Dick Armey (R-TX) introduced the President’s proposed
legislation for the department to the House of Representatives as H.R. 5005. After amendments in
Committee, the bill passed the House by recorded vote (295 to 132) on July 26, 2002. The Senate passed
the bill with amendments on November 19, 2002, by a vote of 90 to 9.
The National Strategy for Homeland Security
(From https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=37027 )
Finally, on July 16, 2002, after several drafts, the White House released the finalized “National
Strategy of Homeland Security.” As stated above, this National Strategy for Homeland Security was the
first such document undertaken in our nation’s history. The 90-page report officially defined Homeland
Security as “a concerted National effort to prevent Terrorist Attacks within the United States, reduce
America’s vulnerability to Terrorism, and minimize the damage and recover from attacks that do occur.”
The report ultimately divided Homeland Security Functions into six areas:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
Intelligence and Warning
Border and Transportation Security
Domestic Counterterrorism
Protecting Critical Infrastructure
Defending Against Catastrophic Terrorism
Emergency Preparedness and Response
“Terrorism A Documentary History” (10)
President George W. Bush signed the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296) into law
on November 25, 2002. The Department of Homeland Security became operational on January 24, 2003,
60 days after the Homeland Security Act was passed. On that same day, Tom Ridge was sworn in as the
first Secretary of Homeland Security. An early DHS organization chart was posted on the DHS website on
January 24, 2003. Along the bottom are the original five directorates: Border and Transportation
Security, Emergency Preparedness and Response, Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection,
Management, and Science and Technology.
Lesson Two Review Questions
As a result of having completed Lesson Two, you should be able to answer the following questions:
1.) What were the six areas of the “National Strategy of Homeland Security” as proposed by the
President on July 16, 2002?
2.) What office of government was the precursor to DHS?
3.) Who was the first Secretary of Homeland Security?
1. What mechanism of public policy (i.e., law) established DHS as a department of the United
States’ government?
2.
LESSON THREE — THE UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Insight and Analysis: The creation of the United Stated Department of Homeland Security (DHS)
required the largest reorganization of the federal government in over 30 years and resulted in the
standing-up of the third largest government department with over 200,000 employees, some who were
granted “Powers of Arrest, Confiscation, Detention, Inspection, and Interrogation.”
This effort, which was in part a result of several 9/11 Commission recommendations, did not
simply add an additional department and cabinet post to the federal bureaucracy, it actually caused a
massive reorganization and shift of responsibility within the entire federal government.
This lesson will show that more than a dozen federal agencies were either eliminated, renamed
(sometimes referred to as “Legacy Agencies”), or moved (sometimes referred to as “Child Agencies”)
into DHS as a result of its creation. Early on this caused some angst within these groups that has since
dissipated as new individuals (sometimes referred to as “New Generations”) enter the civil service
system as DHS Employees. The Secret Service, formally a part of the Treasury, and the Coast Guard,
formally a part of The Department of Transportation, were moved under the command-and-control of
DHS, just to mention a few.
The Customs Service was eliminated, as was the Immigration and Naturalization Service and the
Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service. These entities were all consolidated and placed under DHS
in a new organization called “The Customs and Border Protection Agency” (commonly referred today as
simply “CBP”). The CBP agents are those armed individuals wearing new blue uniforms and now very
visible at our nation’s airports. They also operate the nation’s POEs (Ports of Entry – “Border Crossing”).
However, they are not to be confused with employees of the TSA (Transportation Security
Administration) who are commonly referred to as “airport screeners.”
The TSA is one of the new agencies created along with “Customs and Immigration Enforcemnt”
(ICE). These entities were all given new and different powers to protect the homeland against terrorist
attacks. It appears that only the U.S. Border Patrol, whose agents still wear their signature Olive Drab
(OD) uniforms, went mostly unchanged, but now this entity falls directly under the Department of
Homeland Security.
At first the reorganization was slow to take effect, and still today there are a few in the
government who question the wisdom of all these changes. However, no one should question the
concerted efforts and “Dedication-to-Duty” of those men and women in DHS, who are charged with
keeping us safe from terrorist attacks, as well as the effects of other catastrophic events and
emergencies that might befall the nation and its people.
(From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Homeland_Security )
United States
Department of Homeland Security
Formed: November 25, 2002
Jurisdiction: United States
Headquarters: Nebraska Avenue Complex
38°56′17″N 77°4′56″W38.93806°N 77.08222°W
Employees: 240,000 (2010)
Annual budget: $60.8 billion (FY 2013)
Agency Excutives:
o
Jeh Johnson, Current Secretary
Child Agencies:
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
U.S. Customs and Border Protection
Federal Emergency Management Agency
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement
Transportation Security Administration
United States Coast Guard
National Protection and Programs Directorate
United States Secret Service
Website
www.dhs.gov
(From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Department_of_Homeland_Security)
The United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is a Cabinet department of the
United States federal government with the primary responsibilities of protecting the territory of the
United States from terrorist attacks and responding to natural disasters.
Whereas the Department of Defense is charged with military actions abroad, DHS works in the
civilian sphere to protect the United States within, at, and outside its borders. Its stated goal is to
prepare for, prevent, and respond to domestic emergencies, particularly terrorism. On March 1, 2003,
DHS absorbed the Immigration and Naturalization Service and assumed its duties. In doing so, it divided
the enforcement and services functions into two separate and new agencies: Immigration and Customs
Enforcement and Citizenship and Immigration Services. Additionally, the border enforcement functions
of the INS, the U.S. Customs Service, and the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service were
consolidated into a new agency under DHS: U.S. Customs and Border Protection. The Federal Protective
Service falls under the National Protection and Programs Directorate.
With more than 200,000 employees, DHS is the third largest Cabinet department, after the
Departments of Defense and Veterans Affairs. Homeland security policy is coordinated at the White
House by the Homeland Security Council. Other agencies with significant homeland security
responsibilities include the Departments of Health and Human Services, Justice, and Energy.
The creation of DHS constituted the biggest government reorganization in American history and
the most substantial reorganization of federal agencies since the National Security Act of 1947, which
placed the different military departments under a secretary of defense and created the National
Security Council and Central Intelligence Agency. DHS also constitutes the most diverse merger of
federal functions and responsibilities, incorporating 22 government agencies into a single organization.
The next major catastrophe that befell the United States after the events of 9/11 was Hurricane
Katrina, followed a few days later by Hurricane Rita in 2005. These two major natural disasters tested
the concept of the Department of Homeland Security and its subordinate agencies, and especially the
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). After the disasters were over, the results were mixed
and triggered a major rethinking of homeland security as well as reorganization within the Department,
as far as it pertains to Critical Infrastructure and Critical Resources (CI/CR). The result was the creation of
The National Response Framework (NRF), a comprehensive, “all-hazards” approach to disasters and
emergencies at the federal, state, and local levels.
This resulted in FEMA reporting directly to the Secretary of Homeland Security as opposed to
the President, and the newly adopted NRF categorizing national disasters and emergencies into three
categories of catastrophic events as follows:
Catastrophic Events
1. Natural (involving weather and “Acts of God”)
2. Man-made/Unintentional (involving accidents/HAZMAT incidents, etc.)
3. Terrorism (involving planned attacks)
Post-Katrina Department of Homeland Security
(From https://www.hsdl.org/?view&did=37027 )
On October 4, 2006, as part of the Homeland Security FY2007 Appropriations Bill (Public Law
109-295), the President signed into law the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act. The act
established new leadership positions within the Department, brought additional functions into the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, and created and reallocated functions within the Department.
Specifically, the act renamed the Under Secretary for Federal Emergency Management as the
Administrator of FEMA and elevated the position to the deputy secretary level. The Administrator was
designated the principal advisor to the President, the Homeland Security Council, and the Secretary for
all matters relating to emergency management and can be designated by the President to serve as a
member of the Cabinet in the event of disasters. FEMA was legislatively protected as a distinct entity in
the Department and is subject to reorganization only by statute.
The Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act transferred to FEMA all functions of the
Preparedness Directorate, including the Office of Grants and Training, the United States Fire
Administration (USFA), and the Office of National Capital Region Coordination. The Office of
Infrastructure Protection, the National Communications System, the National Cybersecurity Division,
and the Office of the Chief Medical Officer remained in the Preparedness Directorate.
On October 13, 2006, Congress passed the Security Accountability For Every Port Act, or SAFE
Port Act of 2006 (Public Law 109-347). The act authorized the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office
(DNDO) and completed the reorganization of FEMA, transferring the Radiological Preparedness Program
and the Chemical Stockpile Emergency Preparedness Program to FEMA.
To implement and complement the changes in FEMA mandated by the Post-Katrina
Management Emergency Reform Act of 2006 and the SAFE Port Act of 2006, the Department
reorganized FEMA and made other organizational changes.
The reorganization placed national preparedness functions formerly in the Preparedness
Directorate and legacy FEMA preparedness programs, except those within the U.S. Fire Administration,
in a new National Preparedness Division in FEMA, which became responsible for policy, contingency
planning, exercise coordination and evaluation, emergency management training, and hazard
mitigation. Both disaster and non-disaster grant programs within FEMA were colocated
within a Grant Program Directorate.
The Preparedness Directorate was renamed the National Protection and Programs Directorate
(NPPD) and retained some preparedness elements not transferred to FEMA, including the Office of
Infrastructure Protection; the Office of Cyber Security and Telecommunications combined with National
Communications System and new Office of Emergency Communications and renamed the Office of
Cyber Security and Communications; and the Office for State and Local Government Coordination,
renamed the Office of Intergovernmental Programs.
In addition to these security reforms that were being made to bolster infrastructure and security in the postKatrina landscape, resolutions were passed that gave the Department of Homeland Security greater oversight on
critical industries in the private security sector. In 2007, H.R. 5441 allocated and appropriated better funding for
the emergency operations of the Department of Homeland Security in private security concerns such as chemical
facilities, borders and tunnels, and research and development.
DHS Departments and Components
(From http://www.dhs.gov/organizational-chart )
What follows is a graphic representation and listing of the various Directorates and Divisions
within Directorates that comprise The United States Department of Homeland Security, to include an
explanation of their respective missions:
Directorate for National Protection and Programs
(From http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/editorial_0794.shtm)
The Directorate for National Protection and Programs works to advance the Department’s riskreduction mission. Reducing risk requires an integrated approach that encompasses both physical and
virtual threats and their associated human elements.
Divisions
Federal Protective Service (FPS): FPS is a federal law enforcement agency that provides integrated
security and law enforcement services to federally owned and leased buildings, facilities, properties, and
other assets.
Office of Cybersecurity and Communications (CS&C): CS&C has the mission of assuring the
security, resiliency, and reliability of the nation’s cyber and communications infrastructure.
For more information see the more in depth view of the CS&C here
Office of Infrastructure Protection (IP): IP leads the coordinated national effort to reduce risk to
our critical infrastructures and key resources (CIKR) posed by acts of terrorism. In doing so, the
Department increases the nation’s level of preparedness and the ability to respond and quickly recover
in the event of an attack, natural disaster, or other emergency.
Office of Risk Management and Analysis (RMA): RMA serves as the Department’s Executive
Agent for national risk management and analysis.
US-VISIT uses innovative biometrics-based technological solutions—digital fingerprints and
photographs—to provide decision-makers with accurate information when and where they need it.
Directorate for Science and Technology
(From http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/editorial_0530.shtm )
The Directorate for Science and Technology is the primary research and development arm of the
Department. It provides federal, state and local officials with the technology and capabilities to protect
the homeland.
Divisions
The Borders and Maritime Security Division develops and transitions tools and technologies that
improve the security of our nation’s borders and waterways, without impeding the flow of commerce
and travel.
The Chemical and Biological Division works to increase the nation’s preparedness against
chemical and biological threats
through improved threat awareness, advanced surveillance and detection, and protective
countermeasures.
The Command, Control, and Interoperability Division develops interoperable communication
standards and protocols for emergency responders, cyber security tools for protecting the integrity of
the Internet, and automated capabilities to recognize and analyze potential threats.
The Explosives Division develops the technical capabilities to detect, interdict, and lessen the
impacts of non-nuclear explosives used in terrorist attacks against mass transit, civil aviation, and critical
infrastructure.
The Human Factors Behavioral Sciences Division applies the social and behavioral sciences to
improve detection, analysis, and understanding and response to homeland security threats.
The Infrastructure and Geophysical Division focuses on identifying and mitigating the
vulnerabilities of the 18 critical infrastructure and key assets that keep our society and economy
functioning.
Directorate for Management
(Fromhttp://www.dhs.gov/department-componentseditorial_0096.shtm)
The Directorate for Management is responsible for Department budgets and appropriations,
expenditure of funds, accounting and finance, procurement; human resources, information technology
systems, facilities and equipment, and the identification and tracking of performance measurements.
Divisions
The Office of Policy
(From http://www.dhs.gov/department-components)
The Office of Policy is the primary policy formulation and coordination component for the
Department of Homeland Security. It provides a centralized, coordinated focus to the development of
Department-wide, long range planning to protect the United States.
The Office of Health Affairs
(From http://www.dhs.gov/department-components )
The Office of Health Affairs (OHA) - serves as the Department of Homeland Security’s principal authority
for all medical and health issues. OHA provides medical, public health, and scientific expertise in support
of the Department of Homeland Security mission to prepare for, respond to, and recover from all
threats. OHA serves as the principal advisor to the Secretary and the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) Administrator on medical and public health issues. OHA leads the Department’s
workforce health protection and medical oversight activities. The office also leads and coordinates the
Department’s biological and chemical defense activities and provides medical and scientific expertise to
support the Department's preparedness and response efforts. OHA comprises the Health Threats
Resilience Division, and The Workforce Health and Medical Support Division.
For more information see http://www.dhs.gov/office-health-affairs
Office of Intelligence and Analysis
(From http://www.dhs.gov/department-components and http://www.dhs.gov/about-officeintelligence-and-analysis )
The Office of Intelligence and Analysis is responsible for using information and
intelligence from multiple sources to identify and assess current and future threats to the United States.
The Office of Intelligence and Analysis (I&A) is a member of the national Intelligence Community (IC) and
ensures that information related to homeland security threats is collected, analyzed, and disseminated
to the full spectrum of homeland security customers in the Department, at state, local, and tribal levels,
in the private sector, and in the IC. I&A works closely with Department component intelligence
organizations as well as state, local, tribal, and private-sector entities to ensure non-traditional streams
of information are fused with traditional IC sources to provide a complete assessment of threats to the
nation.
The Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis, in the capacity of Chief Intelligence Officer
(CINT), implements a mandate to integrate the Department’s intelligence components and functions—
the DHS Intelligence Enterprise (IE)—by driving a common intelligence mission.
The Department IE comprises I&A and the intelligence elements of:
U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS),
U.S. Coast Guard (USCG),
U.S. Customs and Border Protection Agency (CBP),
U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), and
U.S. Transportation Security Administration (TSA)
I&A is also the Executive Agent for the Department State and Local Fusion Center Program. The
Under Secretary leads several additional activities for the Department, such as information sharing,
stewardship of National Security Systems, and management of classified information systems security.
Homeland Security Intelligence Analytic Priorities
I&A seeks to optimize the Department’s capability to collect and analyze intelligence and
information and produce finished analyses tailored to the needs of our key customers. I&A provides the
country’s leaders at all levels of government with a timely, actionable, and complete understanding of
homeland security threats to facilitate informed decision-making, policies, and appropriate operational
responses.
I&A is guided by the IC’s key principles: a commitment to change the intelligence culture from
“need to know” to “responsibility to provide”; a strong, common direction for the enterprise;
enhancement of their core capabilities of requirements, analysis, and dissemination; a renewed sense of
purpose and accountability for their efforts; and an aggressive commitment to attracting and retaining a
diverse, innovative, and world-class workforce. As important, we pursue our mission with respect for
the Constitution and for the civil rights, civil liberties, and privacy of the American people.
I&A has five analytic thrusts aligned with the principal threats to the homeland addressed by the
Department.
1. Threats related to border security. They look at all borders—air, land, sea, and virtual—and
analyze a range of interlocking threats to include narcotics trafficking, alien and human
smuggling, money laundering, and other illicit transnational threats. They also monitor foreign
government initiatives that affect border security.
2. Threat of radicalization and extremism. The top priority is radicalized Islam (Sunni and
Shia groups), but they also look at radicalized domestic groups. I&A does not monitor known
extremists and their activities; instead, they are interested in the radicalization process—why
and how people who are attracted to radical beliefs cross the line into violence.
3. Threats from particular groups entering the United States—groups that could be
exploited by terrorists or criminals to enter the homeland legally or to bring in harmful
materials. I&A further focuses on travel-related issues of interest to the Department, such as
visa categories and the Visa Waiver Program.
4. Threats to the homeland’s critical infrastructure and key resources (CIKR). I&A
integrates all source intelligence from the IC with information from critical infrastructure owners
and operators, and, collaboratively with state and local fusion centers, provides a
comprehensive tactical and strategic understanding of physical and cyber threats to the critical
infrastructure, including threats from nation-states, international (such as al-Qaeda) and
domestic terrorism(such as Ku Klux Klan), and criminal activities. These threat assessments are
integrated with other assessments of infrastructure vulnerabilities and the consequences of an
incident to define all hazard infrastructure risk for risk-based prioritization and decision making.
5. Weapons of mass destruction and health threats. I&A evaluates and establishes a
baseline of the actors, their claims, and their plans to conduct attacks involving chemical,
biological, radiological, and nuclear materials against the homeland. They also support
homeland-focused analysis of global infectious disease, public health, and food, agricultural, and
veterinary issues. They provide tailored analytical support on these threats to their state, local,
and tribal partners as well as members of the public health, technical, scientific, medical, and
response communities.
State and Local Fusion Centers
The Department’s partners at state, local, and tribal governments and the private sector gather
information outside the boundaries of the IC. Simultaneously, their information needs are not always
recognized by traditional IC agencies. To meet their own all-threats, all-hazards information needs,
many states and larger cities have created fusion centers, which provide state and local officials with
situational awareness.
Fusion centers are the logical touch-points for the Department to access local information and
expertise as well as provide them with timely, relevant information and intelligence derived from allsource analysis. The result is a new intelligence discipline and tradecraft that gives us a new, more
complete understanding of the threat. The Department provides personnel and tools to the fusion
centers to enable the National Fusion Center Network.
Office of Operations Coordination and Planning
(From http://www.dhs.gov/department-components )
The office of Operations Coordination and Planning is responsible for monitoring the security of
the United States on a daily basis and coordinating activities within the Department and with governors,
Homeland Security Advisors, law enforcement partners, and critical infrastructure operators in all 50
states and more than 50 major urban areas nationwide.
Organization
(From http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/editorial_0797.shtm)
Information is shared and fused on a daily basis by the two halves of the Office that are referred
to as the “Intelligence Side” and the “Law Enforcement Side.” Each half is identical and functions in
tandem with the other but requires a different level of clearance to access information. The Intelligence
Side focuses on pieces of highly classified intelligence and how the information contributes to the
current threat picture for any given area. The Law Enforcement Side is dedicated to tracking the
different enforcement activities across the country that may have a terrorist nexus. The two pieces
fused together create a real-time snapshot of the nation’s threat environment at any
moment.
Through the National Operations Center, the Office provides real-time situational awareness
and monitoring of the homeland, coordinates incidents and response activities, and, in conjunction with
the Office of Intelligence and Analysis, issues advisories and bulletins concerning threats to homeland
security, as well as specific protective measures. The NOC – which operates 24 hours a day, seven days a
week, 365 days a year—coordinates information sharing to help deter, detect, and prevent terrorist acts
and to manage domestic incidents. Information on domestic
incident management is shared with Emergency Operations Centers at all levels through the Homeland
Security Information Network (HSIN).
Federal Law Enforcement Training Center
(From http://www.dhs.gov/department-componentsand http://www.fletc.gov)
The Federal Law Enforcement Training Center (FLETC) provides career-long training to law
enforcement professionals to help them fulfill their responsibilities safely and proficiently.
The FLETC serves as an interagency law enforcement training organization for over 80 federal
agencies. The FLETC also provides services to state, local, tribal, and international law enforcement
agencies. The FLETC is headquartered at Glynco, Georgia, near the port city of Brunswick, halfway
between Savannah, Georgia, and Jacksonville, Florida. In addition to Glynco, the FLETC operates two
other residential training sites in Artesia, New Mexico, and Charleston, South Carolina. The FLETC also
operates a non-residential, in-service re-qualification and advanced training facility in Cheltenham,
Maryland, for use by agencies with large concentrations of personnel in the Washington, DC area. The
FLETC has oversight and program management responsibilities at the International Law Enforcement
Academies (ILEA) in Gaborone, Botswana, and Bangkok, Thailand. The FLETC also supports training at
other ILEAs in Hungary and El Salvador.
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office
The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) works to enhance the nuclear detection efforts
of federal, state, territorial, tribal, and local governments, as well as the private sector to ensure a
coordinated response to such threats. DNDO was founded on April 15, 2005 with the signing of
NSPD 43 /HSPD 14. It is a jointly-staffed, national office established to improve the Nation’s
capability to detect and report unauthorized attempts to import, possess, store, develop, or
transport nuclear or radiological material for use against the Nation, and to further enhance
this capability over time. DNDO is the primary entity in the U.S. government for implementing
domestic nuclear detection efforts for a managed and coordinated response to radiological and
nuclear threats, as well as integration of federal nuclear forensics programs. Additionally,
DNDO is charged with coordinating the development of the global nuclear detection and
reporting architecture, with partners from federal, state, local, and international governments
and the private sector
Strategic Objectives
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
Develop the global nuclear detection and reporting architecture
Develop, acquire, and support the domestic nuclear detection and reporting system
Fully characterize detector system performance before deployment
Establish situational awareness through information sharing and analysis
Establish operation protocols to ensure detection leads to effective response
Conduct a transformational research and development program
Establish the National Technical Nuclear Forensics Center to provide planning, integration, and
improvements to USG nuclear forensics capabilities
More information can be found at http://www.dhs.gov/about-domestic-nuclear-detectionoffice
Transportation Security Administration
(From http://www.dhs.gov/department-components )
Following September 11, 2001, the Transportation Security Administration (TSA) was
created to strengthen the security of the nation’s transportation systems and ensure
the freedom of movement for people and commerce. Today, TSA secures the nation’s
airports and screens all commercial airline passengers and baggage. TSA uses a risk-
based strategy and works closely with transportation, law enforcement and intelligence
communities to set the standard for excellence in transportation security.
For more information about the mission, the TSA’s layers of security, and innovations
they have implemented to increase security visit http://www.tsa.gov
United States Customs and Border Protection Agency
(From http://www.dhs.gov/department-components )
United States Customs and Border Protection (CBP) is responsible for protecting our nation’s
borders in order to prevent terrorists and terrorist weapons from entering the United States, while
facilitating the flow of legitimate trade and travel.
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services
(From http://www.dhs.gov/department-components)
United States Citizenship and Immigration Services (USCIS) is responsible for the administration
of immigration and naturalization adjudication functions and establishing immigration services policies
and priorities.
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement
(From http://www.dhs.gov/department-components)
United States Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), the largest investigative arm of the
Department of Homeland Security, is responsible for identifying and shutting down vulnerabilities in the
nation’s border, economic, transportation, and infrastructure security.
United States Coast Guard
(From http://www.dhs.gov/department-components)
The United States Coast Guard (USCG) protects the public, the environment, and U.S. economic interests
in the nation’s ports and waterways, along the coast, on international waters, or in any maritime region
as required to support national security. In times of peace and war, the USGC has become an essential
organization in protecting the country's security interests within the Department of Homeland Security.
Federal Emergency Management Agency
(From http://www.dhs.gov/department-components and
http://www.fema.gov/pdf/about/brochure.pdf)
The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) prepares the nation for hazards, manages
Federal response and recovery efforts following any national incident, and administers the National
Flood Insurance Program. The Congressional Act of 1803 was the earliest effort to provide disaster relief
on a federal level after a fire devastated a New Hampshire town. From that point forward, assorted
legislation provided disaster support. In 1979, FEMA was established by an executive order, which
merged many of the separate disaster-related responsibilities into a single agency. Since then, FEMA has
dedicated itself to the mission of helping communities nationwide prepare for, respond to, and recover
from natural and manmade disasters—a mission strengthened when the agency became part of the
Department of Homeland Security (DHS) in 2003. As of November 2007, FEMA had responded to more
than 2,700 presidentially declared disasters.
United States Secret Service
(From http://www.secretservice.gov/index.shtml )
United States Secret Service (USSS) - The United States Secret Service is a federal law
enforcement agency with headquarters in Washington, D.C., and more than 150 offices
throughout the United States and abroad. The Secret Service was established in 1865, solely to
suppress the counterfeiting of U.S. currency. Today, the agency is mandated by Congress to
carry out dual missions: protection of national and visiting foreign leaders, and criminal
investigations. Before the creation of DHS the Secret Service fell under the Department of
Treasury, but was transferred when DHS was created.
The Secret Service Division was created on July 5, 1865 in Washington, D.C., to suppress
counterfeit currency. It is believed that at one time, as much as 1/3 of all US currency was
counterfeit 1. Chief William P. Wood was sworn in by Secretary of the Treasury Hugh McCulloch.
Secret Service responsibilities were later broadened to include "detecting persons perpetrating
frauds against the government." This appropriation resulted in investigations into the Ku Klux
Klan, non-conforming distillers, smugglers, mail robbers, land frauds, and a number of other
infractions against the federal laws. In 1901 as a reaction to the assassination of President
William McKinley the Secret Service was informally tasked with protecting the president. In
1902 the Secret Service assumed full-time responsibility for protection of the President. Two
operatives were assigned full time to the White House Detail. Overtime these protection duties
were expanded to include the Vice President, presidential families, past presidents, presidential
candidates, visiting heads of state, and foreign embassies.
For more information see http://www.secretservice.gov/index.shtml
Cyber Security a growing concern
Recently there has been a growing concern for the area of homeland security has been cybersecurity.
This includes securing the internet, and government websites, as well as the communications grid as a
whole. This is why we want to take a deeper look at the CS&C and its constituent parts.
Office of Cybersecurity and Communications (CS&C) – A part of the National Protection and
Programs Directorate, is responsible for enhancing the security, resilience, and reliability of the
Nation’s cyber and communications infrastructure. CS&C works to prevent or minimize
disruptions to critical information infrastructure in order to protect the public, the economy,
and government services. CS&C leads efforts to protect the federal “.gov” domain of civilian
government networks and to collaborate with the private sector—the “.com” domain—to
increase the security of critical networks. In addition, the National Cybersecurity and
Communications Integration Center (NCCIC) serves as a 24/7 cyber monitoring, incident
response, and management center and as a national point of cyber and communications
incident integration.
1
http://clinton2.nara.gov/WH/kids/inside/html/spring98-2.html
Additionally CS&C is the sector-specific agency for communications and information
technology.
CS&C accomplishes its mission through its five divisions.
• Office of Emergency Communications (OEC)– Was established by Congress in 2007 in
response to communications challenges witnessed during the attacks on September 11,
2001 and during Hurricane Katrina. The OEC partners with emergency communications
personnel and government officials at all levels of government to lead the nationwide
effort to improve emergency communications capabilities.
• National Cybersecurity and Communications Integration Center (NCCIC) - serves as a
centralized location where operational elements involved in cybersecurity and
communications reliance are coordinated and integrated. NCCIC partners include all
federal departments and agencies; state, local, tribal, and territorial governments; the
private sector; and international entities.
•
•
Stakeholder Engagement and Cyber Infrastructure Resilience (SECIR) division acts as
DHS’ primary point of engagement and coordination for national security/emergency
preparedness (NS/EP) communications and cybersecurity initiatives, for both
government and industry partners, and is the Executive Secretariat for the Joint
Program Office for the NS/EP Communications Executive Committee. CS&C relies on
SECIR to streamline coordination and engagement with external partners, while
leveraging capabilities and subject matter experts in order to meet stakeholder
requirements.
Federal Network Resilience (FNR) - Director John Streufert and Deputy Director Danny
Toler manage four branches (within the Office of Cybersecurity and Communications)
that address critical cybersecurity requirements.
o
o
o
o
•
Requirements and Acquisition Support (RAS) supports the long-term strategic prevention of
attacks against Federal Civilian Executive Branch (FCEB) networks.
Network and Infrastructure Security (NIS) optimizes an agency’s network services into a
common solution for the federal government.
Cybersecurity Assurance (CA) assesses the state of operational readiness and cybersecurity
risk across FCEB.
Cybersecurity Performance Management (CPM) provides oversight and operational support
for the FCEB departments and agencies in their compliance with the Federal Information
Security Management Act (FISMA)
Network Security Deployment - The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) Office of
Cybersecurity and Communications (CS&C) works collaboratively with public, private,
and international entities to secure cyberspace and America’s cyber assets. CS&C
established the Network Security Deployment (NSD) Division in support of that mission.
NSD provides development, acquisition, deployment, operational, and customer
support to satisfy the Department’s mission requirements under the Comprehensive
National Cybersecurity Initiative (CNCI). Specifically, NSD’s mission is to improve
cybersecurity to federal departments, agencies, and partners by developing the
technologies and establishing the services needed to fulfill CS&C’s cybersecurity
mission.
For more information see http://www.dhs.gov/office-cybersecurity-and-communications
Privacy office
The balance that any democratic government necessarily faces in today’s environment is balancing the
need for security with a respect for individual citizen’s privacy. Recognizing that, the amended homeland
security act called for the creation of the Privacy Office.
Privacy Office: The Department of Homeland Security Privacy Office is the first statutorilyrequired privacy office in any federal agency, responsible for evaluating Department programs,
systems, and initiatives for potential privacy impacts, and providing mitigation strategies to
reduce the privacy impact.
The Privacy Office’s mission is to protect all individuals by embedding and enforcing privacy
protections and transparency in all DHS activities. They work with every component and
program to ensure that privacy considerations are addressed when planning or updating any
program, system or initiative. Additionally they strive to ensure that technologies used at the
Department sustain, and do not erode, privacy protections. The Privacy Office uses the DHS
Fair Information Practice Principles (FIPPs) as our policy framework to enhance privacy
protections by assessing the nature and purpose for all personally identifiable information (PII)
collected to fulfill the Department's mission.
Find more information at http://www.dhs.gov/about-privacy-office
Lesson Three Review Questions
As a result of having completed Lesson Three, you should be able to answer the following questions:
1.) How many types of catastrophic events does FEMA recognize/identify as national disasters and
emergencies? (Hint: These are listed in the NRF.)
2.) What are these disasters and emergencies (by name) as listed in the NRF?
3.) In what ways are these disasters and emergencies different?
4.) What organization was created in 1865 to combat counterfeiting?
LESSON FOUR – Homeland Security Mission and Concepts
Insight and Analysis: It is important to note that the homeland security concept and mission are
dynamic concept that have grown and changed over time. And they will necessarily continue to change
as the world, and the threats to the nation change. One of the Department of Homeland Security’s
strengths is that it has changed and adapted to an ever changing threat environment.
Learning Goal – To understand the 5 basic missions that the Department of Homeland Security
is tasked with, and to understand the three basic ideas that underlie the departments approach
to homeland security.
The three key concepts at the core of a comprehensive approach to homeland security as
described in the first Quadrennial Homeland Security Review (QHSR) released in 2010 were
•
•
Security: Protect the United States and its people, vital interests, and way of life;
Resilience: Foster individual, community, and system robustness, adaptability, and
capacity for rapid recovery; and
•
Customs and Exchange: Expedite and enforce lawful trade, travel, and immigration.
The Executive Summary and text of the 2010 QHSR can be found at
http://www.dhs.gov/publication/2010-quadrennial-homeland-security-review-qhsr
Homeland Security Mission
The five basic missions regarding homeland security, as outlined in the 2014 QHSR are
Prevent Terrorism and Enhance Security. Preventing terrorist attacks on the Nation is and
should remain the cornerstone of homeland security. Since the last quadrennial review in 2010,
the terrorist threat to the Nation has evolved, but it remains real and may even be harder to
detect. The Boston Marathon bombing illustrates the evolution of the threat. Through the U.S.
Government’s counterterrorism efforts, we have degraded the ability of al-Qa’ida’s senior
leadership in Afghanistan and Pakistan to centrally plan and execute sophisticated external
attacks. But since 2009, we have seen the rise of al-Qa’ida affiliates, such as al-Qa’ida in the
Arabian Peninsula, which has made repeated attempts to export terrorism to our Nation.
Additionally, we face the threat of domestic-based “lone offenders” and those who are inspired
by extremist ideologies to radicalize to violence and commit acts of terrorism against Americans
and the Nation. These threats come in multiple forms and, because of the nature of
independent actors, may be hardest to detect. We must remain vigilant in detecting and
countering these threats. Given the nature of this threat, engaging the public and private
sectors through campaigns, such as “If You See Something, Say Something™” and the
Nationwide Suspicious Activity Reporting Initiative, and through partnering across federal,
state, local, tribal, and territorial law enforcement will, over the next four years, become even
more important.
Secure and Manage Our Borders. We must continue to improve upon border security, to
exclude terrorist threats, drug traffickers, and other threats to national security, economic
security, and public safety. We will rely on enhanced technology to screen incoming cargo at
ports of entry and will work with foreign partners to monitor the international travel of
individuals of suspicion who seek to enter this country. We will continue to emphasize riskbased strategies that are smart, cost-effective, and conducted in a manner that is acceptable to
the American people. We must remain agile in responding to new trends in illegal migration,
from Central America or elsewhere. Meanwhile, we recognize the importance of continuing
efforts to promote and expedite lawful travel and trade that will
Enforce and Administer Our Immigration Laws. We will continually work to better enforce our
immigration laws and administer our immigration system. We support common-sense
immigration reform legislation that enhances border security, prevents and discourages
employers from hiring undocumented workers, streamlines our immigration processing system,
and provides an earned pathway to citizenship for the estimated 11.5 million undocumented
immigrants in this country. It is indeed a matter of homeland security and common sense that
we encourage those physically present in this country to come out of the shadows and to be
held accountable. Offering the opportunity to these 11.5 million people—most of whom have
been here 10 years or more and, in many cases, came here as children—is also consistent with
American values and our Nation’s heritage. We will take a smart, effective, and efficient riskbased approach to border security and interior enforcement and continually evaluate the best
use of resources to prioritize the removal of those who represent threats to public safety and
national security.
Safeguard and Secure Cyberspace. We must, over the next four years, continue efforts to
address the growing cyber threat, illustrated by the real, pervasive, and ongoing series of
attacks on our public and private infrastructure. This infrastructure provides essential services
such as energy, telecommunications, water, transportation, and financial services and is
increasingly subject to sophisticated cyber intrusions which pose new risks. As the
Federal Government’s coordinator of efforts to counter cyber threats and other hazards to
critical infrastructure, DHS must work with both public and private sector partners to share
information, help make sure new infrastructure is designed and built to be more secure and
resilient, and continue advocating internationally for openness and security of the Internet and
harmony across international laws to combat cybercrime. Further, DHS must secure the Federal
Government’s information technology systems by approaching federal systems and networks
as an integrated whole and by researching, developing, and rapidly deploying cybersecurity
solutions and services at the pace that cyber threats evolve. And finally, we must continue to
develop cyber law enforcement, incident response, and reporting capabilities by increasing the
number and impact of cybercrime investigations, sharing information about tactics and
methods of cyber criminals gleaned through investigations, and ensuring that incidents
reported to any federal department or agency are shared across the U.S. Government. In
addition, the Federal Government must continue to develop good working relationships with
the private sector, lower barriers to partnership, develop cybersecurity best practices, promote
advanced technology that can exchange information at machine speed, and build the cyber
workforce of tomorrow for DHS and the Nation.
Strengthen National Preparedness and Resilience. Acting on the lessons of Hurricane
Katrina, we have improved disaster planning with federal, state, local, tribal and territorial
governments, as well as nongovernmental organizations and the private sector; prepositioned a
greater number of resources; and strengthened the Nation’s ability to respond to disasters in a
quick and robust fashion. Seven years after Katrina, the return on these investments showed in
the strong, coordinated response to Hurricane Sandy. We must continue this progress.
For more information see the text of the 2014 QHSR which can be found here
http://www.dhs.gov/publication/2014-quadrennial-homeland-security-review-qhsr
Human Trafficking
Blue Campaign - Human trafficking is a form of modern-day slavery, and involves the use of force, fraud,
or coercion to exploit human beings for some type of labor or commercial sex purpose. Every year,
millions of men, women, and children worldwide—including in the United States—are victims of human
trafficking. Victims are often lured with false promises of well-paying jobs or are manipulated by people
they trust, but instead are forced or coerced into prostitution, domestic servitude, farm or factory labor,
or other types of forced labor.
The U.S. Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is responsible for investigating human trafficking,
arresting traffickers and protecting victims. DHS initiates hundreds of investigations and makes
numerous arrests every year, using a victim-centered approach. DHS also processes immigration relief
through Continued Presence (CP), T visas, and U visas to victims of human trafficking and other
designated crimes. In 2010, DHS launched the Blue Campaign, unifying the DHS components to more
effectively combat human trafficking through enhanced public awareness, training, victim assistance,
and law enforcement investigations. By expanding our collaboration within the department, as well as
among domestic and international governments, law enforcement, non-governmental organizations,
and the private sector, DHS is helping to protect victims from being trafficked both within the United
States and around the world.
Chapter 4 Sample Questions
As a result of having completed Lesson Three, you should be able to answer the following questions:
1) What year was the first QHSR done?
2) The goals outlined in the first Quadrennial Homeland security review are what?
3) What is the Blue campaign?
4) How many and what are the missions of homeland security as outlined in the second QHSR?
LESSON FIVE — A DESCRIPTION OF HSPD 01 THROUGH 03 ISSUED SHORLTY
AFTER 9/11
Insight and Analysis: The following lesson consists of Homeland Security Presidential Directive 1
through Homeland Security Presidential Directive 3, commonly referred to as simply HSPD-1 through
HSPD-3. These, along with HSPD-4 and HSPD-5 (which is covered in the next lesson), are considered by
many in the government to be the most important Homeland Security Presidential Directives due to the
fact that they came out shortly after and were directly in response to the attacks of 9/11.
HSPD-1, HSPD-2, and HSPD-3 in part establish and outline the composition and function of “the
Homeland Security Council.” The Council still exists today in a form and fashion with most of the
principals listed on the following page as members. However, since the creation of DHS and the
elimination of “the Office of Homeland Security,” the Secretary of Homeland Security has been added as
a Council Member.
While reviewing HSPD-1, HSPD-2, and HSPD-3, please note that this is the development and
conceptual policies initially put in place by our nation’s political leadership in an effort to combat
terrorism and acts of terrorism aimed against the United States. HSPD-2 specifically addresses
immigration in response to terrorism affected against the nation since all 19 hijackers on 9/11 were
foreign nationals, yet in this country legally. For the record, and as a matter of undeniable fact,
immigration has become central to our efforts in “The War on Terrorism,” and as such, has
come to the forefront of our national dialogue in recent years. HSPD-3 addresses the Homeland Security
Advisory System (HSAS), which was much maligned when first instituted, but now has been generally
accepted as a means to alert state and local authorities, as well as their citizens, of both the precise
status of the country’s security posture, as well as, and perhaps even more importantly, the potential for
another pending terrorist attack. The HSAS is covered in Lesson Five.
HSPD-1: Organization and Operation of the Homeland Security Council Explained
“I hereby establish a Homeland Security Council (the “Council”), which shall be responsible for
advising and assisting the President with respect to all aspects of homeland security. The Council shall
serve as the mechanism for ensuring coordination of homeland security-related activities of executive
departments and agencies and effective development and implementation of homeland security
policies.” With these words on October 29, 2001, President George W. Bush signed the first definitive
security document for the United States and appointed as its founding council members:
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
The President (Primary Member)
The Vice President (Primary Member)
The Secretary of Defense (Primary Member)
The Attorney General (Primary Member)
The Secretary of Health and Human Services
The Secretary The Secretary of the Treasury
of Transportation (Primary Member)
The Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (Primary Member)
The Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (Primary Member)
The Director of Central Intelligence (Primary Member)
The Assistant to the President for Homeland Security (Primary Member)
Other officers of the executive branch as the President may from time to time designate
The Chief of Staff, the Chief of Staff to the Vice President, the Assistant to the President for National
Security Affairs, the Counsel to the President, and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget
also are invited to attend any Council meeting. The Secretary of State, the Secretary of Agriculture, the
Secretary of the Interior, the Secretary of Energy, the Secretary of Labor, the Secretary of Commerce,
the Secretary of Veterans Affairs, the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency, the
Assistant to the President for Economic Policy, and the Assistant to the President for Domestic Policy
shall be invited to attend meetings pertaining to their responsibilities. The heads of other executive
departments and agencies and other senior officials shall be invited to attend Council meetings when
appropriate.
The Council shall meet at the President’s direction. When the President is absent from a meeting of
the Council, at the President’s direction the Vice President may preside. The Assistant to the President
for Homeland Security shall be responsible, at the President’s direction, for determining the agenda,
ensuring that necessary papers are prepared, and recording Council actions and Presidential decisions.
HSPD-2: Combating Terrorism Through Immigration Policies Explained
(From http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CPRT-110HPRT39618/pdf/CPRT-110HPRT39618.pdf)
The United States has a long and valued tradition of welcoming immigrants and visitors. But the
attacks of September 11, 2001, showed that some people come to the United States to commit terrorist
acts, to raise funds for illegal terrorist activities, or to provide other support for terrorist operations,
here and abroad. It is the policy of the United States to work aggressively to prevent aliens who engage
in or support terrorist activity from entering the United States and to detain, prosecute, or deport any
such aliens who are within the United States. This is now policy regarding immigration to the United
States, no more is the Untied States an open port for those wanting a new life, you have to
comply with heightened security and prove you have no hidden agenda in wanting to come to the Land
of the Free and Home of the Brave.
HSPD-3: Homeland Security Advisory System Explained
For more information see http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CPRT-110HPRT39618/pdf/CPRT110HPRT39618.pdf
On March 11, 2002, President George W. Bush signed Homeland Presidential Security Directive
3 (HPSD-3). This initiated the development of not only the “Homeland Security Advisory System” (HSAS)
designed to guide our protective measures when specific information to a particular sector or
geographic region is received but also the National Incident Management System as a national standard.
The Homeland Security Advisory System combines threat information with vulnerability
assessments and provides communications to public safety officials and the public. Securing Americans
from terrorist threats or attacks is a critical national security function. It requires extensive coordination
across a broad spectrum of federal, state, and local agencies to reduce the potential for terrorist attacks
and to mitigate damage should such an attack occur.
The Homeland Security Council (HSC) shall ensure coordination of all homeland security related
activities among executive departments and agencies and promote the effective development and
implementation of all homeland security policies.
HSC Policy Coordination Committees (HSC/PCCs) shall coordinate the development and
implementation of homeland security policies by multiple departments and agencies throughout the
federal government, and shall coordinate those policies with state and local government.
The HSC/PCCs shall be the main day-to-day format for interagency coordination of homeland
security policy. They shall provide policy analysis for consideration by the more senior committees of the
HSC system and ensure timely responses to decisions made by the President. Each HSC/PCC shall
include representatives from the executive departments, offices, and agencies represented in the
HSC/DC.
Eleven HSC/PCCs have been established for the following functional areas, each shall be chaired by
the designated Senior Director from the Office of Homeland Security:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
Detection, Surveillance, and Intelligence (by the Senior Director, Intelligence, and Detection)
Plans, Training, Exercises, and Evaluation (by the Senior Director, Policy, and Plans)
Law Enforcement and Investigation (by the Senior Director, Intelligence, and Detection)
Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) Consequence Management (by the Senior Director,
Response, and Recovery)
Key Asset, Border, Territorial Waters, and Airspace Security (by the Senior Director, Protection,
and Prevention)
Domestic Transportation Security (by the Senior Director, Protection, and Prevention)
Research and Development (by the Senior Director, Research, and Development)
Medical and Public Health Preparedness (by the Senior Director, Protection, and Prevention)
Domestic Threat Response and Incident Management (by the Senior Director, Response, and
Recovery)
Economic Consequences (by the Senior Director, Response, and Recovery)
Public Affairs (by the Senior Director, Communications)
The Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, at the direction of the President and in
consultation with the Vice President, the Attorney General, the Secretary of Health and Human Services,
the Secretary of Transportation, and the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, may
establish additional HSC/PCCs, as appropriate.
The Chairman of each HSC/PCC, with the agreement of its Executive Secretary, may establish
subordinate working groups to assist the PCC in the performance of its duties. The Vice President may
attend any and all meetings of any entity established by or under this directive.
Lesson Five Review Questions
As a result of having completed lesson Five you should be able to answer the following questions:
1.)
2.)
3.)
4.)
What is the stated objective/purpose of HSPD-1?
What is the stated objective/purpose of HSPD-2?
What is the stated objective/purpose of HSPD-3?
What role (i.e. mechanism) does the Homeland Security Advisory Council serve?
LESSON SIX — THREAT ADVISORY SYSTEMS – HISTORY AND CURRENT
Insight and Analysis: In this lesson, you will be exposed to the details of the two advisory systems
that have been used in the United States. The first system implemented was the Homeland Security
Advisory System (HSAS). The second and current advisory system, adopted in 2011, is the National
Terrorism Advisory System (NTAS). The NTAS was introduced because it was recognized that more
specific threat warnings would give more information to the public, and it was recognized that ALL
Americans have a stake in the Nation’s security, and thus should be alerted to heightened risks. To show
the DHS’s adaption to the times, alerts from the NTAS are issued over a variety of channels including
social media channels. The system places greater emphasis on everyone reporting suspicious activity
they may see. An in-depth examination of the HSAS is presented because it is important for certificants
to know both how the current advisory system was developed and the theory behind the previous
system.
Homeland Security Advisory System
The HSAS was instituted in direct response to the terrorist attacks of 9/11. The HSAS has five levels of
threat—severe, high, elevated, guarded, and low. Each level of threat is distinguished/ designated by a
specific color—red, orange, yellow, blue, and green, respectively. It is the federal government’s
mechanism for alerting the nation and keeping its citizenry informed as to the current terrorist threat
and is considered the standard in this area.
When it was first introduced in 2002 (i.e., HSPD-3 signed on March 11, 2002), it was criticized as
“not effective” due to its composition and construction. Individuals criticized it for its use of color and
the fact that it had five threat levels. However, over the years since 9/11, it has been accepted as a
primary alert and advisory tool in the arsenal against terrorism, and now every state and many local
jurisdictions (cities, counties, villages, towns, townships, boroughs, and parishes) have accepted it as an
instrument by which they, too, can advise their citizens as to the current threat.
You will learn as you proceed through this lesson that along with the various Levels in the HSAS
as declared by the DHS, there are corresponding protective actions that the federal government advises
and recommends state and local governments take in response to said level declared in anticipation of
and as an imminent attack is uncovered. These actions are relayed to the states and local communities
via the Homeland Security Network that exists in every state, as well as in the majority of our local
governments.
As in life, nothing is perfect. However, the Homeland Security Advisory System has and continues to
prove itself effective in advising the nation of the status of the terrorist threat. For more information on
the HSAS, see: http://www.emd.wa.gov/plans/documents/HomelandSecurityPresidentialDirective.pdf
The Homeland Security Advisory program came out of the HSC/PCC teams and the following is a brief
overview of each:
•
•
•
Homeland Security Threat Advisories contain actionable information about an incident
involving, or a threat targeting, critical national networks or infrastructures or key assets. They
could, for example, relay newly developed procedures that, when implemented, would
significantly improve security or protection. They could also suggest a change in readiness
posture, protective actions, or response. This category includes products formerly named alerts,
advisories, and sector notifications. Advisories are targeted to federal, state, and local
governments, private sector organizations, and international partners.
Homeland Security Information Bulletins communicate information of interest to the nation’s
critical infrastructures that do not meet the timeliness, specificity, or significance thresholds of
warning messages. Such information may include statistical reports, periodic summaries,
incident response or reporting guidelines, common vulnerabilities and patches, and
configuration standards or tools. It also may include preliminary requests for information.
Bulletins are targeted to federal, state, and local governments, private sector organizations, and
international partners.
Color-coded Threat Level System is used to communicate with public safety officials and the
public at-large through a threat-based, color-coded system so that protective measures can be
implemented to reduce the likelihood or impact of an attack. Raising the threat condition has
economic, physical, and psychological effects on the nation; so, the Homeland Security Advisory
System can place specific geographic regions or industry sectors on a higher alert status than
other regions or industries, based on specific threat information.
(From http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CPRT-110HPRT39618/pdf/CPRT-110HPRT39618.pdf )
These are the five Threat Conditions. From lowest to highest, the levels and colors are explained and are
as follows:
RED/Severe: Severe Risk of Terrorist Attacks
Orange/High: High Risk of Terrorist Attack
Yellow/Elevated: Significant Risk of Terrorist Attacks
Blue/Guarded: General Risk of Terrorist Attacks
Green/Low: Low Risk of Terrorist Attacks
Insight and Analysis: What follows is the original language that established the Homeland Security
Advisory Program, later called the Homeland Security Advisory System (HSAS).
(From http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CPRT-110HPRT39618/pdf/CPRT-110HPRT39618.pdf)
The greater the perceived risk of a terrorist attack on United States interests the higher, the threat
condition will be set by the Attorney General in consultations with the Assistant to the President for
Homeland Security. (Insight and Analysis: Threat conditions were originally set by the by the
Attorney General in consultation with the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security; however,
the Secretary of Homeland Security assumed this function since the creation of DHS.) Except in exigent
circumstances, the Attorney General shall seek the views of the appropriate Homeland Security
Principals or their subordinates, and other parties as appropriate, on the threat condition to be
assigned. Threat conditions may be assigned for the entire nation, or they may be set for a particular
geographic area or industrial sector. Assigned threat conditions shall be reviewed at regular intervals to
determine whether adjustments are warranted.
For facilities, personnel, and operations inside the territorial United States, all federal
departments, agencies, and offices other than military facilities shall conform their existing threat
advisory systems to this system and henceforth administer their systems consistent with the
determination of the Attorney General with regard to the threat condition in effect.
The assignment of a threat condition shall prompt the implementation of an appropriate set of
protective measures or the specific steps an organization shall take to reduce its vulnerability or
increase its ability to respond during a period of heightened alert. The authority to craft and implement
protective measures rests with the federal departments and agencies. It is recognized that departments
and agencies may have several preplanned sets of responses to a particular threat condition to facilitate
a rapid, appropriate, and tailored response.
Department and agency heads are responsible for developing their own protective measures
and other antiterrorism or self-protection and continuity plans, and resourcing, rehearsing,
documenting, and maintaining these plans. Likewise, they retain the authority to respond as necessary
to risks, threats, incidents, or events at facilities within the specific jurisdiction of their department or
agency, and, as authorized by law, to direct agencies and industries to implement their own protective
measures. They shall continue to be responsible for taking all appropriate proactive steps to reduce the
vulnerability of their personnel and facilities to terrorist attack.
Federal department and agency heads shall submit an annual written report to the President,
through the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security, describing the steps they have taken to
develop and implement appropriate protective measures for each threat condition.
Governors, mayors, tribal leaders, and the leaders of other organizations are encouraged to
conduct a similar review of their organizations protective measures.
The decision whether to publicly announce threat conditions shall be made on a case-by-case
basis by the Attorney General in consultation with the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security.
Every effort shall be made to share as much information regarding the threat as possible, consistent
with the safety of the nation. The Attorney General shall ensure, consistent with the safety of the
nation, that state and local government officials and law enforcement authorities are provided the most
relevant and timely information. The Attorney General shall be responsible for identifying any other
information developed in the threat assessment process that would be useful to state and local officials
and others and conveying it to them as permitted consistent with the constraints of classification.
The Attorney General shall establish a process and a system for conveying relevant information
to federal, state, and local government officials, law enforcement authorities, and the private sector
expeditiously. The Director of Central Intelligence and the Attorney General shall ensure that a
continuous and timely flow of integrated threat assessments and reports is provided to the President,
the Vice President, Assistant to the President and Chief of Staff, the Assistant to the President for
Homeland Security, and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs. Whenever possible
and practicable, these integrated threat assessments and reports shall be reviewed and commented
upon by the wider interagency community.
A decision on which threat condition to assign shall integrate a variety of considerations. This
integration will rely on qualitative assessment, not quantitative calculation. Higher threat conditions
indicate greater risk of a terrorist act, with risk including both probability and gravity.
Despite best efforts, there can be no guarantee that, at any given threat condition, a terrorist
attack will not occur. An initial and important factor is the quality of the threat information itself. The
evaluation of this threat information shall include, but not be limited to, the following factors:
1.
2.
3.
4.
To what degree is the threat information credible?
To what degree is the threat information corroborated?
To what degree is the threat specific and/or imminent?
How grave are the potential consequences of the threat?
Threat Conditions and Associated Protective Measures
The world has changed since September 11, 2001. We remain a nation at risk to terrorist attacks
and will remain at risk for the foreseeable future. At all threat conditions, we must remain vigilant,
prepared, and ready to deter terrorist attacks. The following threat conditions each represent an
increasing risk of terrorist attacks. Beneath each threat condition are some suggested protective
measures, recognizing that the heads of federal departments and agencies are responsible for
developing and implementing appropriate agency-specific protective measures:
1. Low Condition (Green). This condition is declared when there is a low risk of terrorist attacks.
Federal departments and agencies should consider the following general measures in addition to the
agency-specific Protective Measures they develop and implement:
•
•
•
Refining and exercising as appropriate preplanned protective measures;
Ensuring personnel receive proper training on the Homeland Security Advisory System and
specific preplanned department or agency protective measures; and
Institutionalizing a process to assure that all facilities and regulated sectors are regularly
assessed for vulnerabilities to terrorist attacks, and all reasonable measures are taken to
mitigate these vulnerabilities.
2. Guarded Condition (Blue). This condition is declared when there is a general risk of terrorist
attacks. In addition to the protective measures taken in the previous threat condition, federal
departments and agencies should consider the following general measures in addition to the agencyspecific protective measures that they will develop and implement:
• Checking communications with designated emergency response or command locations;
• Reviewing and updating emergency response procedures; and
• Providing the public with any information that would strengthen its ability to act appropriately.
3. Elevated Condition (Yellow). An Elevated Condition is declared when there is a significant risk of
terrorist attacks. In addition to the Protective Measures taken in the previous threat conditions, federal
departments and agencies should consider the following general measures in addition to the protective
measures that they will develop and implement:
• Increasing surveillance of critical locations;
• Coordinating emergency plans as appropriate with nearby jurisdictions;
• Assessing whether the precise characteristics of the threat require the further refinement of
preplanned protective measures; and
• Ιmplementing, as appropriate, contingency and emergency response plans.
4. High Condition (Orange). A high condition is declared when there is a high risk of terrorist attacks. In
addition to the protective measures taken in the previous threat conditions, federal departments and
agencies should consider the following general measures in addition to the agency-specific protective
measures that they will develop and implement:
• Coordinating necessary security efforts with federal, state, and local law enforcement agencies
or any National Guard or other appropriate armed forces organizations;
• Taking additional precautions at public events and possibly considering alternative venues or
even cancellation;
• Preparing to execute contingency procedures, such as moving to an alternate site or dispersing
their workforce; and,
• Restricting threatened facility access to essential personnel only.
5. Severe Condition (Red). A severe condition reflects a severe risk of terrorist attacks.
Under most circumstances, the protective measures for a severe condition are not intended to be
sustained for substantial periods of time. In addition to the protective measures in the previous threat
conditions, federal departments and agencies also should consider the following general measures in
addition to the agency-specific protective measures that they will develop and implement:
• Increasing or redirecting personnel;
• Assign emergency response personnel;
• Monitoring, redirecting, or constraining transportation systems; and,
• Closing public and government facilities.
National Terrorism Advisory System
The National Terrorism Advisory System, or NTAS, replaces the color-coded Homeland Security Advisory
System (HSAS). This new system will more effectively communicate information about terrorist threats by
providing timely, detailed information to the public, government agencies, first responders, airports and
other transportation hubs, and the private sector.
It recognizes that Americans all share responsibility for the nation’s security, and should always be aware
of the heightened risk of terrorist attack in the United States and what they should do.
NTAS Alerts
Imminent Threat Alert
Warns of a credible, specific, and impending terrorist threat against the United States.
Elevated Threat Alert
Warns of a credible terrorist threat against the United States.
After reviewing the available information, the Secretary of Homeland Security will decide, in
coordination with other Federal entities, whether an NTAS Alert should be issued.
NTAS Alerts will only be issued when credible information is available.
These alerts will include a clear statement that there is an imminent threat or elevated threat. Using
available information, the alerts will provide a concise summary of the potential threat, information
about actions being taken to ensure public safety, and recommended steps that individuals,
communities, businesses and governments can take to help prevent, mitigate or respond to the threat.
The NTAS Alerts will be based on the nature of the threat: in some cases, alerts will be sent directly to
law enforcement or affected areas of the private sector, while in others, alerts will be issued more
broadly to the American people through both official and media channels.
Sunset Provision
An individual threat alert is issued for a specific time period and then automatically expires. It may be
extended if new information becomes available or the threat evolves.
NTAS Alerts contain a sunset provision indicating a specific date when the alert expires - there will not
be a constant NTAS Alert or blanket warning that there is an overarching threat. If threat information
changes for an alert, the Secretary of Homeland Security may announce an updated NTAS Alert. All
changes, including the announcement that cancels an NTAS Alert, will be distributed the same way as
the original alert.
Terrorism Information
Terrorism information and intelligence is based on the collection, analysis and reporting of a
range of sources and methods. While intelligence may indicate that a threat is credible, specific
details may still not be known. As such, Americans should continue to stay informed and
vigilant throughout the duration of an NTAS Alert.
Each alert provides information to the public about the threat, including, if available, the
geographic region, mode of transportation, or critical infrastructure potentially affected by the
threat; protective actions being taken by authorities, and steps that individuals and
communities can take to protect themselves and their families, and help prevent, mitigate or
respond to the threat.
Citizens should report suspicious activity to their local law enforcement authorities. The “If You
See Something, Say Something™” campaign across the United States encourages all citizens to
be vigilant for indicators of potential terrorist activity, and to follow NTAS Alerts for information
about threats in specific places or for individuals exhibiting certain types of suspicious activity.
Visit www.dhs.gov/ifyouseesomethingsaysomething to learn more about the campaign.
Alert Announcements
NTAS Alerts will be issued through state, local and tribal partners, the news media and directly to the
public via the following channels:
• Via the official DHS NTAS webpage – http://www.dhs.gov/alerts
• Via email signup at – http://www.dhs.gov/alerts
• Via social media
Facebook – http://facebook.com/NTASAlerts
Twitter – http://www.twitter.com/NTASAlerts
Via data feeds, web widgets and graphics
•
•
•
http://www.dhs.gov/alerts
The public can also expect to see alerts in places, both public and private, such as transit hubs, airports
and government buildings.
•
Lesson Six Review Questions
As a result of having completed Lesson Six, you should be able to answer the following questions:
1. How many threat levels did the HSAS have?
2. How does the HSAS distinguish between the threat levels?
3. What system replaced the HSAS? Why?
4. What are three channels that an individual may find out about a terrorism alert, under the
NTAS?
LESSON Seven — HSPD-4 THROUGH HSPD-5 EXPLAINED
Insight and Analysis: In this final lesson, you will be exposed to Homeland Security Presidential
Directives (HSPD) 4 and 5, as well as being provided a list of the principals within the Department of
Homeland Security by their Functional Areas of Responsibility.
HSPD-4 outlines and addresses one of the most emotional issues related to future acts of
terrorism directed against The United States of America—Weapons of Mass Destruction, commonly
known as WMD. One of the purposes of terrorism is to cause terror, and the prospect of a WMD attack
against this country is a terrifying thought for several reasons. First, and foremost, among the general
populous of The United States there is a sense of helplessness when faced with the prospect of a WMD.
People can run out of collapsing buildings, dodge bullets to a certain extent, and get behind cover; but
many today ask, “What does you do to protect yourself against a WMD? Where do you run?” These
questions will not be answered herein—rather they will be addressed in the CHS-IV course. Secondly,
the vast majority of civilians in the county also feel that when it comes to WMD, no matter what you do
or where you run, you cannot survive. Of course this is not true. This will also addressed in the CHS-IV
course. So, here we have it: terrorists creating an atmosphere of terror. In part, this is exactly what they
want to accomplish. You should immediately realize that the best protection against WMD is knowledge,
preparedness, and training. Survival is possible when faced by WMD. It is hoped that you will see this as
you progress through the complete series of ABCHS courses.
HSPD-4: National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction Explained
(From http://www.fas.org/irp/offdocs/nspd/nspd-17.html)
Weapons of mass destruction (WMD)—nuclear, biological, and chemical—in the possession of hostile
states and terrorists represent one of the greatest security challenges facing the United States. The
United States must pursue a comprehensive strategy to counter this threat in all of its dimensions.
An effective strategy for countering WMD, including their use and further proliferation, is an
integral component of the National Security Strategy of the United States of America. As with the war on
terrorism, our strategy for homeland security, and our new concept of deterrence, the United States
approach to combat WMD represents a fundamental change from the past. To succeed, we must take
full advantage of today’s opportunities, including the application of new technologies, increased
emphasis on intelligence collection and analysis, the strengthening of alliance relationships, and the
establishment of new partnerships with former adversaries.
WMD could enable adversaries to inflict massive harm on the United States, our military forces
at home and abroad, and our friends and allies. Some states, including several that have supported and
continue to support terrorism, already possess WMD and are seeking even greater capabilities, as tools
of coercion and intimidation. For them, these are not weapons of last resort, but militarily useful
weapons of choice intended to overcome our nation’s advantages in conventional forces and to deter us
from responding to aggression against our friends and allies in regions of vital interest. In addition,
terrorist groups are seeking to acquire WMD with the stated purpose of killing large numbers of our
people and those of friends and allies -- without compunction and without warning. Below is the
National Security Strategy the United States will be taking as outlined by President Bush on September
17, 2002:
“We will not permit the world’s most dangerous regimes and terrorists to threaten us with the
world’s most destructive weapons. We must accord the highest priority to the protection of the
United States, our forces, and our friends and allies from the existing and growing WMD threat.”
HSPD-5: Management of Domestic Incidents Explained
On February 28, 2003, President Bush signed Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5 with
the purpose of enhancing the ability of the United States to manage domestic incidents by establishing a
single, comprehensive national incident management system.
To prevent, prepare for, respond to, and recover from terrorist attacks, major disasters, and
other emergencies, the United States government is to ensure that all levels of government across the
nation have the capability to work efficiently and effectively together, using a national approach to
domestic incident management. In these efforts, with regard to domestic incidents, the United States
government treats crisis management and consequence management as a single, integrated function
rather than as two separate functions.
The Secretary of Homeland Security is the principal Federal official for domestic
management. Pursuant to the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the Secretary is responsible for
coordinating federal operations within the United States to prepare for, respond to, and
recover from terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies. The Secretary shall
coordinate the federal government’s resources utilized in response to or recovery from terrorist
attacks, major disasters, or other emergencies if and when any one of the following foru
conditions applies:
1.) A federal department or agency acting under its own authority has requested the assistance of
the Secretary;
2.) The resources of state and local authorities are overwhelmed and federal assistance has been
requested by the appropriate state and local authorities;
3.) More than one federal department or agency has become substantially involved in responding
to the incident; and;
4.) The Secretary had been directed to assume responsibility for managing the domestic incident by
the President.
For more information see http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/CPRT-110HPRT39618/pdf/CPRT110HPRT39618.pdf
Lesson Seven Review Questions
As a result of having completed Lesson Seven, you should be able to answer the following
questions:
1.)
2.)
3.)
4.)
What does the acronym WMD stand for?
How many types of WMD are there?
What are the types (and names) of WMD?
Who is the current Secretary of Homeland Security?
LESSON EIGHT – EXAMINATION OF VNSA
Insight and Analysis – Many of the man made threats that populate the homeland security
environment today are made up of what have been termed Violent Non-State Actors (VNSA).
These are individuals who pose a threat to the government or society in general, that are not
state organizations such as a sanctioned military body. A description of each of the classes of
VNSAs will be given with a description of identifying characteristics and a brief assessment of
how serious a threat each type of VNSA is to homeland security in the current environment.
VNSAs
One of the current major threats to homeland security include violent non-state actors (VNSA). Phil
Williams in an overview paper 2 identified six types of VNSAs.
1) Warlords – Tend to be charismatic individuals able to exercise control over an area due to
troops loyal to them instead of the state. Warlords typically seek power and resources in order
to maintain control of their territory. Of the six types, warlords are the least threatening to
homeland security at this time, due to a strong central government. Usually warlords are found
in places where the central government is either weak, or destabilized.
2) Militias – A militia is an irregular armed force operating within the territory of an established
state. Militias can be bound by a charismatic leader, or a shared ethnic group, ideology, or
religious affiliation. In weak states militias may be in service to the state directly or indirectly.
Often they lack formal military training but may be effective non conventional fighters. They are
most commonly found when a group sharing some form of common identity feel they do not
receive adequate protection from the state. In the United States militias most commonly form
from a group of individuals who feel disenfranchised by the current system. Several militias have
formed of Sovereign Citizens, a loose grouping of individuals who identify as being free of any
legal constraints, and who do not recognize the authority of the Federal Government over them.
The FBI has deemed them a domestic terrorist organization 3. One such militia was the Montana
Freemen, a group of freemen who engaged in an extended standoff with law enforcement
officials.
3) Paramilitary Groups – Williams admits that it is often hard to determine a difference between
paramilitary groups and militias, but suggests that the distinction may come from the fact that
paramilitary groups are usually politically recruited and operated. This was the case for the
United Self-Defense Forces of Columbia (AUC). The group was recruited by the Columbian
government to supplement the regular army fighting insurgent organizations and drug cartels.
While the group was initially recruited to help stabilize the nation, they turned to criminal
2
http://kms1.isn.ethz.ch/serviceengine/Files/ISN/93880/ipublicationdocument_singledocument/940949E4-4F984EB6-8CA6-C1EB878A3721/en/VNSAs.pdf
3
http://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/publications/law-enforcement-bulletin/september-2011/sovereign-citizens
activities including drug trafficking. These groups are currently consider a low threat to
homeland security.
4) Insurgencies – The Department of Defense has defined insurgencies as organized movements
aimed at overthrowing the constituted government through the use of subversion and armed
conflict. In some cases their goals may simply be to create an autonomous state. The Taliban for
example is an insurgent group. Additionally Sunni insurgents in Iraq worked for years to
destabilize the government there. It could also be argued that as soon as the Montana Freemen
tried to create an autonomous township they became a sort of insurgent group. Currently
insurgent groups are a lower threat in the United States but their power and allure often waxes
and wanes with a state’s financial status. And it is entirely conceivable that insurgent groups
could rise out of movements like the Sovereign Citizens.
5) Terrorist Organizations – Williams defines terrorist organizations as a group whose primary
tactic and defining characteristic is the use of terror against civilian populations. Al-Qaeda is by
far the most recognizable terrorist group worldwide, with many different organizations working
loosely together under the masthead. Some such as Hamas and Hezbollah do not focus solely on
attacks, but spend a considerable amount of funds creating public services such as schools and
hospitals. Hamas and Hezbollah are definitely terrorist organizations but their actions indicate
that often their motives are more complex than simple anarchy. Often the line between
terrorist organization and insurgency in many groups is arguable and often somewhat arbitrary.
Terrorist organizations remain a persistent threat to homeland security. One such group that
blurs the line between insurgency and terrorist organization is the Islamic State (IS), formerly
the Islamic State of Iraq and Syria. The organization has publicly released maps showing entirely
new borders, and claims to be the newest caliphate. The organization has even been denounced
by al-Qaeda for its extremist and violent views. Of particular concern is that in July of 2014 the
organization came into possession of 88 lbs of plutonium 4. They blur the line between
insurgencies and terrorist organizations because by their declarations they intend to remake the
regions of the Middle East, Central Asia, and Northern Africa into a set of new Muslim states,
but one of their primary tactics is use of terrorism.
4
http://www.nationalterroralert.com/2014/07/09/isis-seizes-88-pounds-of-uranium-from-mosul-universityreport/
6) Organized Criminal Enterprises and Youth Gangs – By far the most numerous and common of
the VNSAs. Criminal organizations are increasingly becoming transnational crime syndicates.
Such organizations include the Chinese Triads, the Italian Mafia, Japanese Yakuza, Mexican drug
cartels, Russian criminal organizations, and even Outlaw Motor Cycle Gangs. They are often
extremely pragmatic, seeking profit as their end goal, weighing the risks of a potential criminal
action with the expected reward. Criminal organizations vary greatly in both size and scope.
Russian gangs may engage in drug and human trafficking, counterfeiting, smuggling, and
extortion. While Mexican cartels focus much more narrowly on trafficking in narcotics. Crimes
such as narcotics trafficking can be a threat to homeland security when the criminal organization
works with terrorist organizations, providing funding for later terrorist activities. Human
trafficking is another area of particular interest to organizations such as DHS and the FBI.
However, unlike insurgencies criminal organizations rarely have an interest in destabilizing the
state. Youth gangs while often not a direct threat to national security, often put a strain on both
local and federal policing efforts. This reduces the overall manpower available to combat more
generalized threats such as terrorism.
Lesson Eight Review Questions
As a result of having completed Lesson Eight, you should be able to answer the following
questions:
1)
2)
3)
4)
What type of VNSA is most commonly found in the United States?
What group most commonly begins as a legitimate organization?
What type of VNSA was the Montana Freemen?
What other VNSA is most similar to a militia type VNSA?
SUMMARY
Prior to the attack of 9/11, the functional area of homeland security was divided among multiple
governmental agencies—none of which had sole overriding authority in the area, nor the total resources
internally to effectively prevent the catastrophic attacks that the United States suffered at the hands of
terrorists.
As a result of 9/11, however, the Office of the President and Congress both realized the need for
an overarching entity that would bring all the disparate disciplines and functions of homeland security
under one umbrella, under one roof in the form of a newly created department of government. This
new department needed to identify the four essential missions of homeland security as a function of
government—border and transportation security; emergency preparedness and response; chemical,
biological, radiological, and nuclear countermeasures; and information analysis and infrastructure
protection.
That overarching entity was the United States Department of Homeland Security (DHS), which is
currently the largest department in the “civilian” arm of the United States government (DOD/the
military excluded), tasked with the following functions: intelligence and warning, border and
transportation security, domestic counterterrorism, protecting critical infrastructure, defending against
catastrophic terrorism, and emergency preparedness and response.
DHS is not only concerned with potential and actual acts of terrorism. However, in the context
of 9/11 and at its basic and most elementary level, DHS is tasked with keeping the United States of
America free from attacks from terrorists and ensuring that if such attacks do occur that our mitigation
and recovery efforts are swift and effective. It does so via numerous and varying types of
administrations, agencies, divisions, offices, and security and emergency response and disaster services,
combined with paramilitary and law enforcement organizations, all dedicated to safeguarding and
protecting the United States of America—the homeland—as they go about “Preserving our Freedoms,
Protecting America.”
Appendix A
Current Principles by area of responsibility
(This information is current as of July 11, 2014)
(From http://www.dhs.gov/xabout/structure/gc_1157655281546.shtm)
Secretary, Jeh Johnson
Deputy Secretary, Alejandro Mayorkas
Chief of Staff, Christian P. Marrone
Executive Secretariat, Elisa Montoya
General Counsel, Stevan E. Bunnell
Military Advisor, Rear Admiral June E. Ryan
Under Secretary, Management (acting), Chris Cummiskey
Deputy Under Secretary for Management, Chris Cummiskey
Budget Director, Chip Fulghum
Chief Information Officer, Luke J. McCormack
Under Secretary, National Protection & Programs Directorate, Suzanne Spaulding
Deputy Under Secretary (acting), David Hess
Deputy Under Secretary for Cybersecurity, Phyllis Schneck
Assistant Secretary, Office of Cybersecurity and Communications, Andy Ozment
Assistant Secretary, Infrastructure Protection, Caitlin Durkovich
Director, Federal Protective Service, L. Eric Patterson
Director, Office of Biometric Identity Management (OBIM) (acting), Shonnie Lyon
Director, Office of Cyber and Infrastructure Analysis (OCIA), John F. Murphy
Under Secretary, Science & Technology, Dr. Reginald Brothers
Under Secretary, Office of Intelligence and Analysis, Francis X. Taylor
Principal Deputy Under Secretary for Intelligence and Analysis / CT Coordinator (acting), Kurt Reuther
Deputy Under Secretary for Plans, Policy and Performance Management, Glenn Krizay
Deputy Under Secretary for Analysis, Jennifer Lasley
Deputy Under Secretary for Enterprise and Mission Support, Michael Potts
Deputy Under Secretary for the State and Local Program Office, Scott McAllister
Assistant Secretary, Office of Policy (acting), Alan Bersin
Assistant Secretary, Office of International Affairs and Chief Diplomatic Officer, Alan Bersin
Assistant Secretary, Strategy, Planning, Analysis & Risk, Alan D. Cohn
Assistant Secretary, Private Sector Office (acting), Michael Stroud
Assistant Secretary, Office for State and Local Law Enforcement (vacant)
Assistant Secretary, Policy Implementation and Integration (Vacant)
Assistant Secretary, Office of Intergovernmental Affairs, Philip A. McNamara
Director, U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services, Leon Rodriguez
Commandant, U.S. Coast Guard, Admiral Robert J. Papp, Jr.
Commissioner, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, R. Gil Kerlikowske
Principal Deputy Assistant Secretary, U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE), Thomas S.
Winkowski
Deputy Director, Daniel Ragsdale
Administrator, Federal Emergency Management Agency, W. Craig Fugate
U.S. Fire Administrator, Ernest Mitchell Jr.
Director, U.S. Secret Service, Julia Pierson
Administrator, Transportation Security Administration, John S. Pistole
Citizenship and Immigration Services Ombudsman, Maria M. Odom
Officer for Civil Rights & Civil Liberties, Megan H. Mack
Director of the Domestic Nuclear Detection Office, Dr. Huban A. Gowadia
Director, Federal Law Enforcement Training Centers, Connie L. Patrick
Assistant Secretary, Office of Health Affairs/Chief Medical Officer (acting), Dr. Kathryn Brinsfield
Inspector General, John Roth
Assistant Secretary, Office of Legislative Affairs (acting), Brian de Vallance
Director, Operations Coordination and Planning, Richard Chavez
Chief Privacy Officer, Karen L. Neuman
Assistant Secretary (acting), Office of Public Affairs, Tanya Bradsher
Appendix B - List of Homeland Security Presidential Directives
(HSPD)
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
HSPD – 1: Organization and Operation of the Homeland Security Council. Ensures
coordination of all homeland security-related activities among executive departments
and agencies and promote the effective development and implementation of all
homeland security policies.
HSPD – 2: Combating Terrorism Through Immigration Policies. Provides for the creation
of a task force which will work aggressively to prevent aliens who engage in or support
terrorist activity from entering the United States and to detain, prosecute, or deport any
such aliens who are within the United States.
HSPD – 3: Homeland Security Advisory System. Establishes a comprehensive and
effective means to disseminate information regarding the risk of terrorist acts to
Federal, State, and local authorities and to the American people.
HSPD – 4: National Strategy to Combat Weapons of Mass Destruction. Applies new
technologies, increased emphasis on intelligence collection and analysis, strengthens
alliance relationships, and establishes new partnerships with former adversaries to
counter this threat in all of its dimensions.
HSPD – 5: Management of Domestic Incidents. Enhances the ability of the United States
to manage domestic incidents by establishing a single, comprehensive national incident
management system.
HSPD – 6: Integration and Use of Screening Information. Provides for the establishment
of the Terrorist Threat Integration Center.
HSPD – 7: Critical Infrastructure Identification, Prioritization, and Protection. Establishes
a national policy for Federal departments and agencies to identify and prioritize United
States critical infrastructure and key resources and to protect them from terrorist
attacks.
HSPD – 8: National Preparedness. Identifies steps for improved coordination in response
to incidents. This directive describes the way Federal departments and agencies will
prepare for such a response, including prevention activities during the early stages of a
terrorism incident. This directive is a companion to HSPD-5.
HSPD – 8 Annex 1: National Planning. Further enhances the preparedness of the United
States by formally establishing a standard and comprehensive approach to national
planning.
HSPD – 9: Defense of United States Agriculture and Food. Establishes a national policy to
defend the agriculture and food system against terrorist attacks, major disasters, and
other emergencies.
HSPD – 10: Biodefense for the 21st Century. Provides a comprehensive framework for
our nation’s Biodefense.
HSPD – 11: Comprehensive Terrorist-Related Screening Procedures. Implements a
coordinated and comprehensive approach to terrorist-related screening that supports
homeland security, at home and abroad. This directive builds upon HSPD – 6.
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
HSPD – 12: Policy for a Common Identification Standard for Federal Employees and
Contractors. Establishes a mandatory, Government-wide standard for secure and
reliable forms of identification issued by the Federal Government to its employees and
contractors (including contractor employees).
HSPD – 13: Maritime Security Policy. Establishes policy guidelines to enhance national
and homeland security by protecting U.S. maritime interests.
HSPD – 15: U.S. Strategy and Policy in the War on Terror. (Classified)
HSPD – 16: Aviation Strategy. Details a strategic vision for aviation security while
recognizing ongoing efforts, and directs the production of a National Strategy for
Aviation Security and supporting plans.
HSPD – 17: Nuclear Materials Information Program. (Classified)
HSPD – 18: Medical Countermeasures against Weapons of Mass Destruction. Establishes
policy guidelines to draw upon the considerable potential of the scientific community in
the public and private sectors to address medical countermeasure requirements relating
to CBRN threats.
HSPD – 19: Combating Terrorist Use of Explosives in the United States. Establishes a
national policy, and calls for the development of a national strategy and implementation
plan, on the prevention and detection of, protection against, and response to terrorist
use of explosives in the United States.
HSPD – 20: National Continuity Policy. Establishes a comprehensive national policy on
the continuity of federal government structures and operations and a single National
Continuity Coordinator responsible for coordinating the development and
implementation of federal continuity policies.
HSPD – 20 Annex A: Contuinity Planning. Assigns executive departments and agencies to
a category commensurate with their COOP/COG/ECG responsibilities during an
emergency.
HSPD – 21: Public Health and Medical Preparedness. Establishes a national strategy that
will enable a level of public health and medical preparedness sufficient to address a
range of possible disasters.
HSPD – 23: National Cyber Security Initiative. – Lays out the framework for a
Comprehensive National Cybersecurity Initiative
HSPD – 24: Biometrics for Identification and Screening to Enhance National