The Task Force reviewed three organizational models for possible application at the Department of Defense or national levels. These included the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the Federal Emergency Management Agency, and the National Drug Intelligence Center. The following reviews are provided for reference only.
Surveillance, Research, Prevention Efforts In The Area Of Infectious Diseases:
Applicability Of CDC Experience To A
National Center For Information Systems Security
D.1.1 Introduction
In the United States, the threat of infectious disease is changing rapidly in conjunction with dramatic changes in global society and environment. Worldwide, there is explosive population growth with expanding poverty and urban migration which, with rapid environmental changes, is resulting in the emergence of new and the reemergence of previously controlled infectious diseases; international travel is increasing so that infectious microbes can easily travel across borders with their human or animal hosts. Diseases that arise in other parts of the world are repeatedly introduced into the United States, where they may threaten our national health and security.
The threats to the U.S. Information Technology (IT) infrastructure bear similarities to the emerging infectious disease threat to public health. In particular, the context of Information Warfare Defense is parallel to that in public health. IT infrastructure growth, changing technology and increasing network interconnectivity correspond to global population growth, environmental change and increased travel. The U.S. Government approach to the increasing public health threat, led by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), can provide lessons in responding to national IT security threats.
D.1.2 Background and Legislative History
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is an agency of the Public Health Service, in the Department of Health and Human Services. Its mission is to promote health and quality of life by preventing and controlling disease, injury, and disability. As the nation's prevention agency, the CDC accomplishes its mission by working with partners throughout the nation and the world.
The CDC formally came into being in a department reorganization in l980. In 1993, the organization officially became known as the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, but the commonly known abbreviation CDC remained.
The CDC traces its beginnings to l946 when the Communicable Disease Center was established as a Field Station of the Bureau of State Services in the Public Health Service. It took over the offices and some responsibilities of the DoD's Office of Malaria Control which was being disestablished. The primary mission was to work with the States in tracking and controlling the spread of communicable diseases in the United States.
The Center grew out of the general authority granted to predecessor organizations of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) That is, no specific legislation was required for its establishment. However, it is noteworthy that in l893 Congress mandated that state and municipal authorities report information weekly about the incidence of certain diseases to the Public Health Service. Currently, CDC general authority flows through the general authority given to the Secretary for Health and Human Services. Funding for studies on specific programs such as lead poisoning prevention, HIV, and breast cancer prevention are contained in various legislative acts.
CDC supports surveillance, research, prevention efforts, and training in the area of infectious diseases through its National Center for Infectious Diseases (NCID). Created in l98l, NCID is committed to the prevention and control of traditional, new, and re-emerging infectious diseases in the United States and around the world.
NCID accomplishes its mission of preventing illness and death from infectious diseases by focusing its resources in five areas:
D.1.3 Concept of Operations: The CDC Approach to the Global Threat of Infectious Disease
NCID Surveillance Activities
NCID collects, analyzes, and interprets reports of nationally notifiable infectious diseases and outbreaks submitted by state and local public health agencies and disseminates the findings. In addition to this traditional form of surveillance, the center uses supplemental, non-traditional systems to monitor trends in infectious diseases of public health importance. These systems include laboratory-based surveillance; population-based active surveillance; sentinel physician networks; hospital-based networks for surveillance of infections; analyses of national databases; and serosurveys and studies of special populations and settings. The Center also collaborates with international organizations and agencies in the global surveillance of selected pathogens.
Partnerships
NCID provides epidemiological, microbiologic, and consultative services to federal agencies, state and local health departments, medical and biomedical science institutions, schools of public health, health care providers, and the World Health Organization (WHO) and other international agencies.
D.1.4 Appropriate Analogies/Examples in the National Responses to the Threat of Infectious Disease
The similarities that the threats to the U.S. Information Technology (IT) infrastructure bear to the emerging infectious disease threat to public health suggest that the CDC experience can provide lessons in responding to national IT security threats. Below are elements of the CDC approach to the threat to U.S. public health which appear to apply to any formulation of a response to IT threats.
Formulating a National Strategic Response Plan
CDC's NCID strategic plan of 1994 has identified need to:
The Plan's goals are:
Goal I - Surveillance: Detect, promptly investigate, and monitor emerging pathogens? the diseases they cause, and the factors influencing their emergence.
Goal II - Applied Research: Integrate laboratory science and epidemiology to optimize public health practice.
Goal III - Prevention and Control: Enhance communication of public health information about emerging diseases and ensure prompt implementation of prevention strategies.
Goal IV - Infrastructure: Strengthen local, state, and federal public health infrastructures to support surveillance and implement prevention and control programs.
Similarly, the Federal Government must have a strategic plan to respond to
the increasing IT threat, a plan to:
The goals of such a plan could be expected to closely parallel those of CDC's NCID strategic plan:
Goal I - Surveillance: Detect, promptly investigate, and monitor Information Technology Infrastructure threats, and the factors influencing their occurrence.a national consortium of IT providers and users to promote rapid interchange of event occurrence information a near real time monitoring and assessment function
Goal II - Applied Research: Integrate private industry, standards body and government research and development to optimize public and private security practice. Support R&D in IT security. Establish effectiveness studies and disseminate results
Goal III - Prevention and Control: Enhance communication of industry and government information about emerging security threats and ensure prompt implementation of prevention and control strategies. Disseminate information. Support security implementation guidelines/ standards.
Goal IV - Infrastructure: Strengthen national and international infrastructures to support surveillance and implement prevention and control programs. Promote establishment of procedures and policies with supporting legislation and industry, government and intergovernmental agreements. Promote establishment of IT security centers (analogous to Carnegie Mellon's role in S/W process improvement) for research, standards development and training
Establishing an Information Exchange Infrastructure
The Information Network for Public Health Officials (INPHO) was initiated by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in 1992 as part of its strategy to strengthen the infrastructure of public health in the United States. The ultimate goal of INPHO is to improve the health of Americans through more effective public health practice. CDC's role in the INPHO initiative is to provide policy and technical assistance states can use to develop INPHO projects for their own public health needs.
The INPHO initiative addresses the serious national problem that public health professionals have lacked ready access to much of the authoritative, technical information they need to identify health dangers, implement prevention and health promotion strategies, and evaluate health program effectiveness. INPHO utilizes state-of-the-art telecommunications and computer networks to give state and community public health practitioners new command over information resources.
As the U.S. health care system shifts towards a managed care model, the role of public health agencies increasingly will center on the provision and use of information. Public health will be responsible for key functions that health care providers themselves cannot perform: l) systematic surveillance and assessment of health trends, 2) assurance that those in need receive health services, that health care is not excessively costly, and that community health goals are met, and 3) clarifying policy options and implications for public and private decision makers. INPHO helps states build strategic information partnerships between people and organizations that are critical to achieving~ these goals.
There are three essential components of the INPHO vision: linkage, information access, and data exchange. INPHO computer networks and software link local clinics, state and federal health agencies, hospitals, managed care organizations and other providers, eliminating geographic and bureaucratic barriers to communication and information exchange. Public health practitioners have unprecedented electronic access to health publications, reports, databases, directories, and other information. High speed communications capacity enables them to communicate and exchange data locally and across the nation on the full universe of public health issues. (The INPHO is described further in Attachment 1.)
Similarly, the Federal Government might promote or sponsor systematic information and data exchange among national, state and local IT users and providers to respond to the increasing IT threat.
Convening an Inter-Agency Working Group to Recommend U.S. Government Actions
A U.S. Government interagency working group was convened on December 14, 1994, to consider the global threat of emerging and re-emerging infectious diseases. The working group was established under the aegis of the Committee on International Science, Engineering, and Technology Policy (CISET) of President Clinton's National Science and Technology Council. Dr. David Satcher, the Director of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), chaired the CISET working group, which included five sub-groups with co-chairs from CDC, the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), the Department of Defense (DoD), and the State Department. The working group's membership, which included representatives from more than 17 different Government agencies and departments, reviewed the U.S. role in detection, reporting, and response to outbreaks of new and re-emerging infectious diseases and made a number of recommendations which are described in Global Microbial Threats in the 1990s, published in late 1995 by the President's National Science and Technology Council.
As with the National Science and Technology Council's Government interagency working group on the global microbial threat, a multi-agency Government advisory panel to recommend U.S. Government responses to the IT threat might be appropriate.
Forming Partnerships for Interaction, Cooperation. and Coordination
Effective public health policy results from interaction, cooperation, and coordination among a wide range of public and private organizations and individuals. Particularly critical to this process are CDC's partnerships with state and territorial health departments; other federal agencies; professional organizations; academic institutions; private health care providers; health maintenance organizations and health alliances; local community organizations; private industry; and international partners, including the World Health Organization (WHO) and international service organizations and foundations. Each of these partners play an integral role in the cooperative efforts required to safeguard the public's health from emerging infectious disease threats.
CDC partnerships at the federal level have been helpful in confronting infectious diseases of public health importance in the United States. For example, CDC and NIH developed improved diagnostic tests for Lyme disease and various fungal infections. CDC has also worked closely with FDA and USDA in controlling emerging food-borne illnesses. Recent CDC collaborations with EPA have been instrumental in recognizing and controlling water-borne outbreaks of giardiasis and cryptosporidiosis in several states.
In addition, CDC has often joined forces with USDA and DoD to control or prevent vector-borne infectious disease threats. Such cooperative efforts were used successfully to address potential mosquito-borne illness following Hurricane Andrew in Florida and Louisiana in 1992.
Clear, well-established lines of communication and responsibility between appropriate personnel in federal agencies, such as CDC, NIH, EPA, FDA, USDA, DoD, and others, are essential to the development of efficient, cost-effective prevention and control strategies. Such links help eliminate costly duplication of effort and focus limited federal resources on the early recognition and timely control of new infectious disease problems.
Similarly any U.S. Government effort to meet the IT threat would require active, long-term partnerships among Federal agencies and with elements of the IT industry.
Assume International Leadership
The CDC is actively promoting U.S. leadership in the development of an international partnership to address emerging infectious diseases. This leadership role is a natural one for the United States since American business leaders and scientists are in the forefront of the computer communications and biomedical research communities that must provide the technical and scientific underpinning for disease surveillance. The United States maintains more medical facilities and personnel abroad than any other country, in terms of both civilian and military, and public and private sector institutions. Furthermore, American scientists and public health professionals have been among the most important contributors to the international efforts to eradicate smallpox and polio.
Similar arguments would support U.S. leadership in the formulation of a global response to what will surely become a global IT threat.
D.1.5 References
Addressing Emerging Infectious Disease Threats: A Prevention Strategy For The United States, 1 994.
Global Microbial Threats in the 1990s, 1995.
CDC's Information Network for Public Health Officials (INPHO):
A Framework for Integrated Public Health Information and Practice.
Baker EL, Friede A, Moulton AD, Ross DA.
J Public Health Management Practice, 1995; 1(l):43-7.
CDC's Information Network for Public Health Officials (INPHO):
A Framework for Integrated Public Health Information and Practice
Contents
* Summary* Vision and Goals
* Why We Need Better Communication
* (Box) INPHO: The Vision, the Need, the Basic Concepts
* Three Key Concepts
* CDC Strategies
* The INPHO Project and the Systems Approach
* References
* Footnotes
* About the Authors
Summary
To strengthen the public health infrastructure, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) initiated the Information Network for Public Health Officials (INPHO). CDC INPHO has three goals: ( l ) to make communication among public health practitioners throughout the United States easy, (2) to make information accessible, and (3) to make secure data exchange as swift and smooth as contemporary technology will allow. Based on a systems approach to supporting the core functions of public health, CDC INPHO achieves its goals by creating a flexible and user-responsive infrastructure of open communications and information exchange.
"Where is the wisdom we have lost in knowledge? Where is the knowledge we have lost in information?" T.S. Eliot, The Rock
Vision and Goals
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) initiated the Information Network for Public Health Officials (INPHO) in 1992 as part of its strategy to strengthen the infrastructure of public health in the United States. [1] The vision driving CDC INPHO is that of a new, integrated public health information system based on a state-of-the-art telecommunications network linking the public health community and providing seamless exchange of information (see the box titled, " INPHO: The Vision, the Need, the Basic Concepts "). When fully deployed, CDC INPHO will become the common pathway for public health practitioners throughout the United States -- at the community, state, and national levels alike -- to exchange information with each other, with CDC, and with colleagues globally. As a result, every public health worker in the United States should be linked to every other public health worker through telecommunications technology.
CDC INPHO has three goals: (1) to make communication easy, (2) to make information accessible. and (3) to make secure data exchange as swift and smooth as contemporary technology will allow. Achieving those goals will involve a variety of activities in the states, depending on the status of their public health information strategy, telecommunications networks, end-user priorities, and other factors. Similarly, the CDC role will vary from state to state to serve the needs of their public health agencies. All INPHO activities, however, will focus on building a common public health information network linking all public health practitioners across the nation.
Why We Need Better Communication
A particularly insightful way to conceptualize the value of improved public health information comes from Harlan Cleveland, author of The Knowledge Executive: Leadership in an Information Society.[2] Cleveland makes the distinction between data, information, and knowledge. Data are undigested observations and unvarnished facts -- basically the raw material of public health. Information is organized data. In public health, however, information typically is assembled not by the practitioners who are the end users but by others who are often in remote, centralized agencies. Knowledge, in turn, is the product of information the end user organizes, internalizes, and integrates with everything else she or he knows from experience, study, or intuition. Knowledge, ultimately, is the best guide to our practice of public health. What public health professionals are interested in is creating access to information that will expand our knowledge base and guide our work.
In thinking about developing an information network for public health officials, CDC focused on four critical needs (see the box ):
* Connecting a fragmented system. Everyone familiar with the Institute of Medicine report on the future of public health recognizes its diagnosis that the public health system is in disarray.[3] This clearly indicates the need to take action that will [re] connect the elements of the fragmented system. One way of doing this is through telecommunications technology.
* Linking public health professionals. Many public health professionals operate in significant isolation. One way to break down isolation is by connecting public health professionals through telecommunications technology. Two examples are CDC's WONDER/PC electronic mail and forums and the national telecommunications network CDC has created as part of the Public Health Leadership Institute.
* Leading and responding to health reform. Clearly, the public health community is in the information business and specifically in the business of providing information to the communities that public health serves.
* Activating public health for the health reform environment. As health reform advances-- whether legislated in Washington and the states or propelled by market forces--public health needs to ensure that its core functions continue to be performed.
INPHO: The Vision, the Need, the Basic Concepts |
The Vision * An integrated telecommunications network linking the public health The Need * Connecting a fragmented system The Basic Concepts * Linkage |
Three Key Concepts
CDC INPHO embodies three concepts key to generating the data, information, and knowledge to address the needs outlined above (see the box). Linkage is the first key concept. Here CDC is active on several fronts. CDC is working with state and local. health agencies to build local and wide-area networks -- actual physical construction of networks, supported in some cases through outside resources. Second, CDC is expanding "virtual networks" through the use of CDC WONDER PC, a software system that allows public health professionals to communicate across the globe through electronic mail and that also provides unprecedented access to data and information maintained in CDC's large public health databases.[4,5] Third, CDC is emphasizing the strategy of connecting to the Internet. CDC encourages each state to identify ways to connect with the Internet and have access to the information superhighway.
In partnership with the Georgia Division of Public Health, CDC is implementing an INPHO project to electronically link all parts of the public health system -- the state health agency, district health departments, and county health departments. CDC is providing those offices access to the CDC information bases and other sources of information that the state public health agency and its project partners deem valuable. CDC will work with additional states in a similar manner beginning in late 1994, emphasizing development of network capabilities and applications defined by the states themselves. CDC also is linking its information system initiatives with its Distance Learning Program. A clear linkage exists between the INPHO concept of an information network and the notion of a public health training and distance learning network for public health professionals.
The second key concept is information access. CDC generates a large body of information that is published in various forms, but not always in the form most accessible to end users. In this respect, the CDC INPHO is focused on improving practitioners' access to existing and future CDC information bases. The principal approach is to expand the number of information bases accessible through the CDC WONDER PC system. Areas that warrant particular mention are (l.) The prevention guidelines database, (2.) The training resource directory that will enable public health professionals to identify upcoming training offered by CDC and other organizations, and (3.) On-line access to the Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, complete with tables and graphs.
CDC is not attempting to expand access to information exclusively through the CDC WONDER PC system. Public health professionals currently access information in many other ways and from many other sources that have great value. It is CDC's hope that its own efforts will help public health professionals maximize their use of multiple access routes so they can achieve access to the information they want as rapidly as possible.
Exchange of data and information is the third key INPHO concept. Many different types of data are involved, among them health status data, health risk information, and particularly data on health care services. As the era of health care reform advances, it will be vital for public health to have rapid, electronic access to health care services information from personal care providers. One important issue is that of automating data entry. Many health departments do not have access to automated data entry systems. Protecting personal privacy and ensuring confidentiality may be one of the most important issues of all. The structure of the data exchange system also is important. Currently, public health has many disparate data systems in place and needs to look to a more integrated approach.
As the era of health care reform advances, it will be vital for public health to have rapid, electronic access to health care services information from personal care providers.
Finally, as health care reform becomes reality, related information systems are being created. It is essential that the public health community understand the implications of those systems and ensure that they generate information to support and enhance the ongoing core functions of population-based health assessment and assurance.
David Satcher, CDC Director, has identified the obstacles public health faces in fulfilling the concept of data and information exchange:
First, public health agencies at the local, state, and federal levels have a fragmented set of public information systems that threaten to overwhelm the capacity of state and local health departments to respond to the information needs they face.
Second, there is variable access to technology. Some health departments do not have or cannot make ready use of the telecommunications technologies that the INPHO project envisions.
Third, the issue of confidentiality is significant not only as a complex policy issue but also for its symbolic, perceptual importance. The American public is legitimately concerned about issues of confidentiality. The public health community must address this concern squarely and responsively.
Fourth, public health does not have a wealth of existing integrated systems on which to model its own integrated information initiative. The lack of precedents clearly presents an obstacle but, at the same time, a professional challenge to "reinvent" public health using a "bootstraps" approach that draws on the creativity and energy characteristic of the public health profession. [6]
CDC Strategies
How is CDC confronting these obstacles? To address the problem of fragmented information systems, Martha Katz, CDC's Associate Director for Policy, Planning, and Evaluation, formed a collaborative committee in 1993 that drafted the Report on Public Health Information and Surveillance Systems.[7] The report contains a set of recommendations for action toward integrated health surveillance and information systems that was issued for review and reaction by state and local public health agencies in the spring of 1994. Initial responses were gathered during the March 1994 first annual CDC INPHO conference held in Atlanta, Georgia, and attended by public health representatives from across the nation.
CDC is also working with states to support network development and address the obstacle of variable access to contemporary technology. The Georgia INPHO project is an invaluable prototype for the nation. CDC is mobilizing funding and other resources to help other states initiate similar projects that speak to their specific needs. CDC will support "knowledge transfer" from Georgia and the succeeding INPHO states.
In 1994, CDC organized a confidentiality work group and charged it to assess the legal and technological dimensions of the issue and to develop recommendations and guidelines for protection of confidentiality in the context of integrated information and health surveillance systems.
CDC's approach to dealing with the lack of precedents has two parts. The first is to proceed with the state INPHO projects and to learn from their experience. Second, and of equal importance, is to learn from the complementary projects that a number of state and local public health agencies have underway. These projects focus directly on integrated information systems, data exchange across categorical program lines, data exchange with hospitals and managed care providers, and other issues integral to the INPHO vision. A key role that CDC can play is to disseminate to the national public health community the innovations, successes, and lessons learned by innovative local and state projects.
The INPHO Project and the Systems Approach
A central tenet of systems thinking, as represented, for example, in the work of Peter Senge, is that today's solutions create the issues of tomorrow.[8]
This insight is germane to the CDC INPHO initiative. It cautions that the goal of INPHO should not be to increase the sheer volume of data and information available to public health professionals. Instead, it is to increase their ability to generate and access the information and knowledge they need to guard the health of the public.
Information overload, already a reality in the lives of many public health professionals, threatens to become the leading occupational disease in the 21st century. Unfocused electronic information systems are a threat, not a boon, to public health. The rainfall of electronic mail that seemingly descends on users' computers overnight is a telling symptom. Surgeon General Joycelyn Elders recently remarked that a symptom of information overload is that the quantity of information in her professional life sometimes prevents her from enjoying the work that she knows in her heart she truly values.
Confronted with the challenges of the 1990s and the 21st century, the public health community ultimately needs wisdom on which to base its decisions and choices of action. Harlan Cleveland defines wisdom as "Integrated knowledge, information made super useful by theory which relates bits and fields of knowledge to each other, which in turn enables us to use the knowledge to do something." [2 (p.23)] Only the human mind can synthesize wisdom from data and information. The vision of CDC INPHO necessarily is more modest.
The key to building successful, integrated public health information systems is to focus on a vision consistent with the core mission and core functions of the profession. CDC INPHO is based on a systems approach to supporting the core functions of public health. It does that by creating a rich, flexible, and user-responsive infrastructure of open communications and information exchange. The CDC INPHO team is developing specific, valuable software and computer/telecommunications networks. The heart of the initiative, however, is the conceptual framework it provides for truly integrated health assessment and assurance both within the public health community and in conjunction with the evolving health care sector.
REFERENCES
1. Roper, W.L. "Strengthening the Public Health Infrastructure." Speech to Association of State and Territorial Health Officials. Atlanta, Ga.: Centers for Disease Control, May 1990.
2. Cleveland, H. The Knowledge Executive: Leadership in an Information Society. New York, NY: Truman Talley Books, E.P. Dutton, 1985.
3. Institute of Medicine. The Future of Public Health. Washington, D.C.: National Academy Press, 1988.
4. Friede, A., Reid, J.A., Ory, H.W. CDC WONDER: A Comprehensive Online Public Health System of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. American Journal of Public Health, 1993; 83: 1 ,289-94.
5. Friede, A., Rosen D.R., Reid, J.A. CDC WONDER/PC: Cooperative Processing for Public Health Informatics. Journal of the American Medical Informatics Association, 1994; 1 :303312.
6. Address to the "First INPHO Workshop: Creating the Public Health Information Highway," Atlanta, Georgia, March 29,1994.
7. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. A Report on Public Health Information and Surveillance Systems. Atlanta. Ga.: CDC, 1994.
8. Senge, P.M. The Fifth Discipline: The Art and Practice of the Learning Organization. New York, N.Y.: Doubleday Currency, 1990.
Footnotes
This article is adapted from an address given by Edward L. Baker, M.D., M.P.H., Director, Public Health Practice Program Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, at the "First INPHO Workshop: Creating the Public Health Information Highway," in Atlanta, Georgia, March 29, 1994.
The authors wish to acknowledge the contributions made by a number of parties at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), universities, and public health agencies. The concepts, mission, and vision underlying the CDC Information Network for Public Health Officials (INPHO) have been shaped by members of the CDC INPHO lead team. They are Mr. James Seligman, Drs. Patrick O'Carroll, and Howard Ory, Information Resources Management Office; Ms. Barbara R. Holloway, Drs. Edwin Kilbourne. Donna Stroup. and Demetri Vacalis, Epidemiology Program Office; and Mr. Thomas Lacher and Mr. Wallace Wilhoite, Public Health Practice Program Office. The following members of the Georgia INPHO Project Steering Committee have also contributed in shaping our approach: Dr. Karen Chapman, Georgia Division of Public Health; Dr. Kathy Minor, Ms. Melissa Alprin, and Ms. Gail Horlick, Emory University School of Public Health; Drs. Dan Ward and Hartmut Gross, Medical College of Georgia; and Mr. Richard K. Snelling and Mr. Keith Bernhardt, Georgia Center for Advanced Telecommunications Technology. The Robert W. Woodruff Foundation has given generous support to advance the Georgia INPHO project and the national CDC INPHO initiative.
This material was developed in the public domain. No copyright applies.
About the Authors
Edward L. Baker, M.D., M.P.H., serves as Director of the CDC Public Health Practice Program Office. The mission of this office is to strengthen the public health system through information systems development, distance learning, leadership development, community planning, and systems research. Prior to taking this position, Dr. Baker served as Deputy Director and Assistant Director of the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH), a CDC component, from 1985 to 1990. In that capacity, he provided leadership in occupational health surveillance and in development of the OSHA standard for prevention of blood-borne disease in the workplace.
Andrew Friede, MD., M.P.H., is the Chief of the Public Health Information Systems Branch, Information Resources Management Office, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). He joined CDC's Information Resources Management Office in 1987 where he has led a large group in development of CDC WONDER/PC, an integrated information and communications public health information system that provides access to some 40 databases for 3,000 users as well as specialized features used by many CDC surveillance programs. Dr. Friede is also a principal participant in the CDC INPHO project.
Anthony D. Moulton, Ph.D., Robert W. Woodruff Health Sciences Center, Emory University, is an assistant to the Information Network for Public Health Officials (INPHO) initiatives of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and the Georgia Division of Public Health.
David A. Ross, Sc.D., is Assistant Director for Information and Communication Services in the Public Health Practice Program Office, CDC. Dr. Ross is directing the CDC Information Network for Public Health Officials (CDC INPHO) program.
FEMA Experience:
Applicability To The
National Center For Information Systems Security Assurance
D.2.1 Background
FEMA is an independent federal agency with more than 2,600 full time employees: at FEMA headquarters in Washington D.C., at regional and area offices across the country, at the Mount Weather Emergency Assistance Center, and at the FEMA training center in Emmitsburg, Maryland. FEMA also has nearly 4,000 standby disaster assistance employees who are available to help out after disasters. Often FEMA works in partnership with other organizations that are part of the nation's emergency management system. These partners include state and local emergency management agencies, 27 federal agencies and American Red Cross.
FEMA's Mission is to provide leadership and support to reduce the loss of life and property and protect our nation's institutions from all types of hazards through a comprehensive, risk-based, all-hazards emergency management program of mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery.
FEMA accomplishes its mission through a very broad range of activities, including:
In particular, FEMA fully or partially funds emergency management programs and staff in all 56 states and territories, and helps design and equip emergency operations in thousands of localities. An important objective of this assistance is effective preparedness through planning. Emergency Operations Plans are updated periodically and submitted to FEMA for review.
D.2.2 Concept of Operations
The Federal Emergency Management Agency's Federal Response Plan (for Public Law 93-288, as amended) describes FEMA's Concept of Operations to address the consequences of any disaster or emergency situation in which there is a need for Federal response assistance under the authorities of the Stafford Act. It is applicable to natural disasters; technological emergencies involving radiological or hazardous material releases; and other incidents requiring Federal assistance under the Act
The Response Plan describes the basic mechanisms and structures by which the Federal government will mobilize resources and conduct activities to augment State and local response efforts. To facilitate the provision of Federal assistance, the Plan uses a functional approach to group the types of Federal assistance which a State is most likely to need under twelve Emergency Support Functions (ESFs). Each ESF is headed by a primary agency, which has been selected based on its authorities, resources and capabilities in the particular functional area. Other agencies have been designated as support agencies for one or more ESF based on their resources and capabilities to support the functional area. The twelve ESFs serve as the primary mechanism through which Federal response assistance will be provided to assist the State in meeting response requirements in an affected area. Federal assistance will be provided to the affected State under the overall coordination of the Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO) appointed by the Director of FEMA on behalf of the President.
Federal assistance provided under P.L. 93-288, as amended, is to supplement State and local government response efforts. ESFs will coordinate with the FCO and the affected State to identify specific response requirements and will provide Federal response assistance based on State-identified priorities.
Each ESF will provide resources using its primary and support agency authorities and capabilities, in coordination with other ESFs, to support its missions. ESFs will allocate available resources to each declared State based on priorities identified in conjunction with the State and in coordination with the FCO. If resources are not available within the declared State, the ESF will seek to provide them from a primary or support agency area or region. If the resource is unavailable from an area or region, the requirement will be forwarded to the appropriate ESF headquarters office for further action.
One or more disasters may affect a number of States and regions concurrently. In those instances, the Federal government will conduct multi-State response operations; for each declared State, an FCO will be appointed to coordinate the specific requirements for Federal response and recovery within that State. Under multiple State declarations, ESF departments and agencies will be required to coordinate the provision of resources to support the operations of all of the declared States.
D.2.3 Legislative History/Authorities
In 1988, Public Law 93-288 was amended by Public Law 100-707 and retitled as the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (Public Law 93-288, as amended). The Stafford Act provides the authority for the Federal government to respond to disasters and emergencies in order to provide assistance to save lives and protect public health, safety, and property.
In providing response assistance under the Federal Response Plan, Federal departments and agencies are covered under the authorities of P.L. 93-288, as amended. Under P.L. 93-288, the President may direct any Federal agency to utilize its authorities and resources in support of State and local assistance efforts. This authority has been further delegated to the Director, FEMA. the Associate Director, State and Local Programs and Support (SLPS), and to the FEMA Regional Directors in carrying out the provisions of the Stafford Act.
Response by departments and agencies to lifesaving and life protecting requirements under the Plan has precedence over other Federal response activities, except where national security implications are determined to be of a higher priority. Support from departments and agencies will be provided to the extent that it does not conflict with other emergency.
D.2.4 Relationships with Other Government Agencies
General Information
Numerous federal agencies and departments are partners in the nation's emergency
management system. In planning, they participate in training exercises and
conduct a variety of activities to help the nation prepare for disasters.
For example, the Federal Communications Commission and the Commerce Department's
National Weather Service provide on-going warning and disaster tracking services.
In a catastrophic disaster, FEMA coordinates the federal response, working
with 27 federal partners and the American Red Cross to provide emergency
food and water, medical supplies and services, search and rescue operations,
transportation assistance, environmental assessment, and more. The National
Disaster Medical System is a partnership set up to provide emergency medical
services in a disaster, involving FEMA, the Department of Health and Human
Services, the Department of Defense, the Veterans Administration, as well
as public and private hospitals across the country.
Relationships with Other U.S. Government Agencies
The Federal Emergency Management Agency's Federal Response Plan provides standing mission assignments to the designated departments and agencies with primary and support responsibilities to carry out Emergency Support Functions (ESFs). Federal departments and agencies designated as primary agencies serve as Federal executive agents under the FCO in accomplishing the ESF response missions. Upon activation of an ESF, a primary agency is authorized, in coordination with the Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO) and the State, to initiate and continue actions to carry out the ESF missions described in the ESF Annexes to the Plan, including tasking of designated support agencies to carry out assigned ESF missions.
At the national level, primary agencies are responsible to plan and coordinate with their support agencies for the delivery of ESF-related assistance. Primary agencies are responsible for preparing and maintaining the ESF annexes and appendices to the Plan to reflect the policies, procedures regarding assistance to be provided, and associated responsibilities of the designated primary and support agencies.
Support agencies will assist the primary agencies in preparing and maintaining ESF annexes and appendices, developing national and regional operating procedures, and providing support for ESF operations.
EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTION #1: TRANSPORTATION
The purpose of this Emergency Support Function (ESF) is to provide for the coordination of Federal transportation support to State and local governmental entities, voluntary organizations, and Federal agencies requiring transportation capacity to perform disaster assistance missions following a catastrophic earthquake, significant natural disaster, or other event requiring Federal response.
PRIMARY AGENCY: Department of Transportation
SUPPORT AGENCIES:
EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTION #2: COMMUNICATIONS
The purpose of this Emergency Support Function (ESF) is to assure the provision of Federal telecommunications support to Federal, State, and local response efforts following a Presidentially declared emergency, major disaster, extraordinary situation and other emergencies under the Federal Response Plan. This ESF supplements the provisions of the National Plan for Telecommunications Support in Non-Wartime Emergencies, hereafter referred to as the National Telecommunications Support Plan (NTSP).
PRIMARY AGENCY: National Communications System
SUPPORT AGENCIES:
EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTION #3: PUBLIC WORKS AND ENGINEERING
The purpose of this Emergency Support Function (ESF) is to provide Public Works and Engineering support to assist the State(s) in needs related to lifesaving or life protecting following a major or catastrophic disaster.
PRIMARY AGENCY: Department of Defense; U.S. Army Corps of Engineers
SUPPORT AGENCIES:
EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTION #4: FIREFIGHTING
The purpose of this Emergency Support Function (ESF) is to detect and suppress wildland, rural, and urban fires resulting from, or occurring coincidentally with, a catastrophic earthquake, significant natural disaster or other event requiring Federal response assistance.
PRIMARY AGENCY: Department of Agriculture; Forest Service
SUPPORT AGENCIES:
EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTION #5: INFORMATION AND PLANNING
Information and Planning: collect, process and disseminate information about a potential or actual disaster or emergency to facilitate the overall activities of the Federal government in providing response assistance to an affected State.
PRIMARY AGENCY: Federal Emergency Management Agency
SUPPORT AGENCIES:
EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTION #6: MASS CARE
The purpose of this Emergency Support Function (ESF) is to coordinate efforts to provide sheltering, feeding, and emergency first aid following a catastrophic earthquake, significant natural disaster or other event requiring Federal response assistance; to operate a Disaster Welfare Information (DWI) System to collect, receive, and report information about the status of victims and assist with family reunification supplies to disaster victims following a disaster.
PRIMARY AGENCY: American Red Cross
SUPPORT AGENCIES:
EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTION #7: RESOURCE SUPPORT
The purpose of this Emergency Support Function (ESF) is to provide logistical/resource support following a catastrophic earthquake, other significant natural disaster or other event requiring Federal response.
PRIMARY AGENCY: General Services Administration
SUPPORT AGENCIES:
EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTION #8: HEALTH AND MEDICAL SERVICES
The purpose of this Emergency Support Function (ESF) is to provide United States Government coordinated assistance to supplement State and local resources in response to public health and medical care needs following a significant natural disaster or man-made event. Assistance provided under ESF #8 - Health and Medical Services, is directed by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) through its Executive Agent, the Assistant Secretary for Health (ASH), who heads the United States Public Health Service (PHS). Resources will be furnished when State and local resources are overwhelmed and medical and/or public health assistance is requested from the Federal Government.
PRIMARY AGENCY: Department of Health and Human Services; U.S. Public Health Service
SUPPORT AGENCIES:
EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTION #9: URBAN SEARCH AND RESCUE
The purpose of this Emergency Support Function (ESF) is to describe the use of Federal Urban Search and Rescue (US&R) assets following an event requiring a Federal response, including locating, extricating and providing for the immediate medical treatment of victims trapped in collapsed structures.
PRIMARY AGENCY: Department of Defense
SUPPORT AGENCIES:
EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTION #10: HAZARDOUS MATERIALS
The purpose of this Emergency Support Function (ESF) is to provide Federal support to State and local governments in response to an actual or potential discharge and/or release of hazardous materials following a catastrophic earthquake or other catastrophic disaster.
PRIMARY AGENCY: Environmental Protection Agency
SUPPORT AGENCIES:
EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTION #11: FOOD
The purpose of this Emergency Support Function (ESF) is to identify, secure, and arrange for the transportation of food assistance to affected areas following a major disaster or emergency or other event requiring Federal response.
PRIMARY AGENCY: Department of Agriculture
SUPPORT AGENCIES:
EMERGENCY SUPPORT FUNCTION #12: ENERGY
The purpose of this Emergency Support Function (ESF) is to facilitate restoration of the Nation's energy systems following a catastrophic earthquake, natural disaster, or other significant event requiring Federal response assistance. Power and fuel are critical to save lives and protect health, safety, and property, as well as carry out other emergency response functions.
PRIMARY AGENCY: Department of Energy
SUPPORT AGENCIES:
ù Department of Agriculture
ATTACHMENT 1
COMPENDIUM OF EMERGENCY AUTHORITIES AND DIRECTIVES
PUBLIC LAW 78-410, "PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT," SECTION 216, 42 U.S.C. 217 ---
This provision authorizes the President, in time of war or upon Presidential declaration of an emergency, to utilize the Public Health Service to the extent and in the manner that in his judgment will promote the public interest.
PUBLIC LAW 78-410, "PUBLIC HEALTH SERVICE ACT," SECTION 311 U.S.C. 243 ---
This provision authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services to develop (and may take such action as may be necessary to implement) a plan under which personnel, equipment, medical services, and other resources of the Public Health Service and other agencies under the jurisdiction of the Secretary may be effectively used to control epidemics of any disease or condition, as specified, and to meet other health emergencies or problems involving or resulting from disasters or any such disease.
PUBLIC LAW 78-410, "DEFENSE HEALTH SERVICE ACT," SECTION 319 ---
This provision authorizes the Secretary of Health and Human Services to take appropriate action to respond to a "public health emergency" resulting from disease, disorder, or other cause. The Secretary must consult with the Director of the National Institute of Health, Administrator of the Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Administration, Commissioner of the Food and Drug Administration, or the Director of the Center, for Disease Control before determining that an emergency exists, and he must act through that official in responding to the emergency.
PUBLIC LAW 81-774, "DEFENSE PRODUCTION ACT OF 1950, AS AMENDED," 50 U.S.C. 2061, TITLE I, SECTION 101(a) AND 101(b) ---
This provision authorizes the President to establish performance priorities and to allocate materials and facilities to promote the national defense.
PUBLIC LAW 93-288, AS AMENDED BY PUBLIC LAW 100-707, "ROBERT T. STAFFORD DISASTER RELIEF AND EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE ACT," NOVEMBER 23, 1988 ---
The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, P.L. 93-288 as amended, provides an orderly and continuing means of assistance by the Federal Government to State and local governments in carrying out their responsibilities to alleviate the suffering and damage which result from disasters. The President, in response to a State Governor's request. may declare an "emergency" or "major disaster," in order to provide Federal assistance under the Act.
The President, in Executive Order 12148, delegated all functions, except those in Section 301, 401, and 409, to the Director, Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). The Act provides for the appointment of a Federal Coordinating Officer who will operate in the designated area with a State Coordinating Officer for the purpose of coordinating state and local disaster assistance efforts with those of the Federal Government
PUBLIC LAW 95-124, "EARTHQUAKE HAZARDS REDUCTION ACT OF 1977," 42 U.S.C. 7701 AND 7704 ---
The Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977, as amended by P.L. 96472 and P.L. 99-105, provides for the establishment of the National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program (NEHRP) to reduce the risk to life and property from future earthquakes in the United States. FEMA is designated as the agency with primary responsibilities to plan and coordinate the NEHRP, which has five major elements: Hazard Delineation and Assessment; Earthquake Prediction Research; Seismic Design and Engineering Research; Preparedness Planning and Hazard Awareness; and, Fundamental Seismological Studies. Planning for the Federal response to a catastrophic earthquake is a major aspect of Preparedness Planning and Hazard Awareness under the NEHRP.
PUBLIC LAW 95-313, "COOPERATIVE FORESTRY ASSISTANCE ACT OF 1978" ---
This Act authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to assist in the prevention and control of rural fires through coordination among Federal, State, and local agencies; and to provide prompt and adequate assistance whenever a rural fire emergency overwhelms, or threatens to overwhelm, the firefighting capability of the affected State or rural area.
PUBLIC LAW 96-510, "COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT OF 1980," SECTION 104(i), 42 U.S.C. 9604(i) ---
More popularly known as "Superfund", CERCLA was passed to provide the needed general authority for Federal and State governments to respond directly to hazardous substances incidents.
PUBLIC LAW 101-640, "WATER RESOURCES DEVELOPMENT ACT OF 1990," TITLE III, SECTION 302, 5(A)(1), NOVEMBER 28,1990 ---
This Act amends 33 U.S.C. 701n)a)(1) by replacing the term "flood emergency preparation" to include "preparation for emergency response to any disaster" and includes a provision that "The emergency fund may be expended for emergency dredging for restoration of authorized projects for Federal navigable channels and waterways made necessary by flood, drought, earthquake, or other natural disasters."
UNITED STATES CONGRESS ACT OF JANUARY 5. 1905 AS AMENDED. 36 U.S.C. ---
The American National Red Cross Congressional Charter assigning the authority and responsibility for the American Red Cross to undertake activities for the relief of individuals suffering from a disaster.
COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 1934, AS AMENDED ---
This Act gives the Federal Communications Commission emergency authority to grant Special Temporary Authority on an expedited basis to operate radio frequency devices.
OLDER AMERICANS ACT OF 1965, AS AMENDED, SECTION 310, 42 U.S.C. 3030 ---
This provision authorizes the Commissioner of the Administration on Aging to reimburse States for social services provided to older Americans following a Presidentially- declared disaster.
FOOD STAMP ACT OF 1977, SECTION 5(h)(1), IMPLEMENTED BY PROPOSED FINAL RULEMAKING AT 46 CFR 8922 AND 46 CFR 8923 ---
Authorizes the Department of Agriculture to make food stamps available to low income households in any disaster situation in which normal channels of retail food distribution have been restored and the existing Food Stamp Program cannot handle applications from affected households. Food stamp assistance must be requested by a State.
INTERSTATE COMMERCE ACT, EMERGENCY RATES, 49 U.S.C. 10724 AND 11121 TO 11128 ---
These authorities allow the Interstate Commerce Commission (ICC) to authorize a common carrier to give reduced rates for service and transportation in an emergency. Further, these authorities permit the ICC to suspend any car service rule or practice, take action during emergencies to promote car service in the interest of the public and commerce; to require joint or common use of facilities when that action will best meet the emergency; to direct preferences or priorities in transportation, embargoes, or movement of traffic under permits; and to reroute traffic.
"ROBERT T. STAFFORD DISASTER RELIEF AND EMERGENCY ASSISTANCE ACT (P.L. 93-288, AS AMENDED)," IMPLEMENTED BY FOOD DISTRIBUTION REGULATIONS, PARTS 250.1(b) AND 250.8(e) ---
These provisions allow any person/household temporarily displaced by a disaster to obtain USDA foods in congregate feeding provided by volunteer organizations such as the American Red Cross and the Salvation Army; no formal approval is required from USDA. Additionally, low income families can receive household distributions of food in situations where a Food Stamp Program is not available (e.g., commercial channels of trade are disrupted); formal USDA approval is required.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 10480, AS AMENDED, "FURTHER PROVIDING FOR THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE DEFENSE MOBILIZATION PROGRAM," AUGUST 14, 1953 ---
Part II of the Order delegates to the Director, FEMA, with authority to redelegate, the priorities and allocation functions conferred on the President by Title I of the Defense Production Act of 1950, as amended
EXECUTIVE ORDER 12148, "FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT," JULY 20, 1979 ---
Executive Order 12148 transferred functions and responsibilities associated with Federal emergency management to the Director, FEMA. Assigns the Director, FEMA, the responsibility to establish Federal policies for and to coordinate all civil defense and civil emergency planning, management, mitigation, and assistance functions of Executive Agencies.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 12472, "ASSIGNMENT OF NATIONAL SECURITY AND EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS TELECOMMUNICATIONS FUNCTIONS," APRIL 3, 1984 ---
Executive Order 12472 establishes the National Communications System (NCS). The NCS consists of the telecommunications assets of the entities represented on the NCS Committee of Principals and an administrative structure consisting of the Executive Agent, the NCS Committee of Principals, and the Manager. The NCS Committee of Principals consists of representatives from those Federal departments, agencies, or entities, designated by the President, which lease or own telecommunications facilities or services of significance to national security or emergency preparedness.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 12656, "ASSIGNMENT OF EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS RESPONSIBILITIES," November 18,1988 ---
Assigns emergency preparedness responsibilities to Federal departments and agencies.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 12657, "FEMA ASSISTANCE IN EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS PLANNING AT COMMERCIAL NUCLEAR POWER PLANTS," November 18, 1988 ---
Assigns FEMA and other Federal agencies certain emergency planning responsibilities related to commercial nuclear power plants.
EXECUTIVE ORDER 12777, "IMPLEMENTATION OF SECTION 311 OF THE FEDERAL WATER POLLUTION ACT OF OCTOBER 18, 1972, AS AMENDED, AND THE OIL POLLUTION ACT OF 1990," OCTOBER 18, 1991 ---
Refers to certain activities of the National Response Team and the Regional Response Team under the National Contingency Plan.
7 CFR, PART 250.1(B)(10)&(11) ---
Refers to Section 409 and 410 b of P.L. 93-288, as amended, Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, which reads, "The Secretary of Agriculture shall utilize funds appropriated under Section 32 of the Act of August 1935 (7 USC 612 c) to purchase food commodities necessary to provide adequate supplies for use in any area of the United States in the event of a major disaster or emergency in such area."
28 CFR, PART 65, "EMERGENCY FEDERAL LAW ENFORCEMENT ASSISTANCE"; FINAL RULE ---
These Department of Justice regulations implement the Emergency Federal Law Enforcement Assistance functions vested in the Attorney General by the Justice Assistance Act of 1984 (Public Law 98-473). Those functions were established to assist State and/or local units of government in responding to a law enforcement emergency. The Act defines the term "law enforcement emergency" as an uncommon situation which requires law enforcement, which is or threatens to become of serious or epidemic proportions, and with respect to which State and local resources are inadequate to protect the lives and property of citizens, or to enforce the criminal law. Emergencies which are not of an ongoing or chronic nature, such as the Mount Saint Helens volcanic eruption, are eligible for Federal law enforcement assistance. Such assistance is defined as funds, equipment, training, intelligence information, and personnel. Requests for assistance must be submitted in writing to the Attorney General by the chief executive officer of a State. The Plan does not cover the provision of law enforcement assistance. Such assistance will be provided in accordance with the regulations referred to in this paragraph [28 CFR Part 65, implementing the Justice Assistance Act of 1984] or pursuant to any other applicable authority of the Department of Justice.
40 CFR PART 300, "NATIONAL OIL AND HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES POLLUTION CONTINGENCY PLAN" (NCP) ---
The purpose of the NCP is to effectuate the powers and responsibilities for responding to non-radiological oil and hazardous substances discharges, releases, or substantial threats of releases as specified in the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, as amended, (CERCLA) and the authorities established by Section 311 of the Clean Water Act, as amended. The plan is required by section 105 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. 9605, and by section 31 l(c)(2) of the Clean Water Act, as amended, 33 U.S.C. 1321(c)(2).
44 CFR PART 322, AS AMENDED, "DEFENSE PRODUCTION: PRIORITIES AND ALLOCATION AUTHORITY (DMA-3)" ---
The Order delegates the functions of the Director, FEMA, under Title I of the Defense Production Act, as amended, to those offices and agencies named in Section 201 of Executive Order 10480 with respect to the areas of responsibility designated and to the Secretary of Transportation with respect to priorities and allocations for civil transportation services.
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION REPORT AND ORDER OF AUGUST 4, 1981 ---
This order modified parts 2, 90, and 99 of the Commission Rules and Regulations to establish a disaster radio response capability for local government and State radio services.
"FEDERAL RADIOLOGICAL EMERGENCY RESPONSE PLAN" ---
This document is to be used by Federal agencies in peacetime radiological emergencies. It primarily concerns the off-site Federal response in support of State and local governments with jurisdiction for the emergency. The Federal Radiological Emergency Response Plan (FRERP) provides the Federal government's concept of operations based on specific authorities for responding to radiological emergencies, outlines Federal policies and planning assumptions that underlie this concept of operations and on which Federal agency response plans were based, and specifies authorities and responsibilities of each Federal agency that may have a significant role in such emergencies.
"NATIONAL PLAN FOR TELECOMMUNICATIONS SUPPORT IN NON-WARTIME EMERGENCES," JANUARY 1992 ---
This plan provides guidance in planning for and providing telecommunications support for Federal agencies involved in emergencies, major disasters, and other exigencies, excluding war. DEPARTMENT OF DEFENSE DIRECTIVE 3025.1, "MILITARY SUPPORT TO CIVIL AUTHORITIES (MSCA)," 1992 ---
This directive outlines Department of Defense (DOD) policy on assistance to the civilian sector during disasters and other emergencies. Use of DOD military resources in civil emergency relief operations will be limited to those resources not immediately required for the execution of the primary defense mission. Normally, DOD military resources will be committed as a supplement to non-DOD resources which are required to cope with the humanitarian and property protection requirement caused by the emergency. In any emergency, commanders are authorized to employ DOD resources to save lives, prevent human suffering, or mitigate great property loss. Upon declaration of a major disaster under the provisions of P.L. 93-288, as amended, the Secretary of the Army is the DOD Executive Agent, and the Director of Military Support is the action agent for civil emergency relief operations. Military personnel will be under command of and directly responsible to their military superiors and will not be used to enforce or execute civil law in violation of 18 U.S.C. 1385 except as otherwise authorized by law. Military resources shall not be procured, stockpiled, or developed solely to provide assistance to civil authorities during emergencies.
FEDERAL PREPAREDNESS CIRCULAR 8, "PUBLIC AFFAIRS IN EMERGENCIES" ---
This Circular establishes the Interagency Committee on Public Affairs in Emergencies (ICPAE) to coordinate public information planning and operations for management of emergency information. The Circular was reviewed in draft by the ICPAE and will receive formal department and agency review.
AMERICAN RED CROSS DISASTER SERVICES REGULATIONS AND PROCEDURES, ARC 3003, JANUARY 1984 ---
This document details the delegation of disaster services program responsibilities to officials and units of the American Red Cross. Also defined are Red Cross administrative regulations and procedures for disaster planning, preparedness, and response.
AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS MASS CARE PREPAREDNESS AND OPERATION PROCEDURES AND REGULATIONS, ARC 3031 ---
This document details the Red Cross mass care preparedness and operating regulations and procedures.
AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS NATIONAL BOARD OF GOVERNORS DISASTER SERVICES POLICY STATEMENT, JULY 1, 1977 ---
This document outlines the basic policies of the American Red Cross disaster services program, and the disaster relief services to be provided by units of the American Red Cross on a uniform and nationwide basis.
STATEMENT OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY AND THE AMERICAN NATIONAL RED CROSS, JANUARY 22. 1982---
The statement of understanding between FEMA and the American National Red Cross describes major responsibilities in disaster preparedness planning and operations in the event of a war-caused national emergency or a peacetime disaster, outlines areas of mutual support and cooperation, and provides a frame of reference for similar cooperative agreements between State and local governments and the operations headquarters and chapters of the ARC.
D.3.1 Background and Legislative History
During the cocaine epidemic of the late 1980s, U.S. public opinion demanded greater Federal Government efforts to combat a nationwide drug problem. Members of Congress and the Executive Branch both reacted with pronouncements and policy moves. In 1988, the Office of National Drug control policy (ONDCP) was created and the Defense Department was given increased responsibility for counter-narcotics support actions. As policy makers attempted to cope with the increased public interest, the dimensions and dynamics of the situation were not fully understood, partially because of the lack of strategic intelligence regarding narcotics organizations. The National Drug Control Strategy of 1989 noted:
A comprehensive thrust against drug trafficking enterprises and organizations requires a different kind of intelligence....Greater emphasis needs to be devoted to automating this information for law enforcement purposes and analyzing it [and other data] to produce a better understanding of the structure and infrastructure of trafficking organizations and their allied enterprises.
In 1989 and early 1990, the ONDCP negotiated a constituency supporting the case for establishing a National Drug Intelligence Center (NDIC). In January 1990, the ONDCP publicly endorsed the NDIC and, in June 1990, the Administration introduced legislation to establish the organization. The NDIC outlined by ONDCP emphasized modernization of law enforcement intelligence rather than making narcotics intelligence the purview of the intelligence community as some critics had feared. The proposal envisioned the Center as a focal point for consolidating and coordinating relevant intelligence gathered by law enforcement agencies and analyzing it to develop a full understanding of the drug trafficking organizations. The processed intelligence would be distributed to Federal, State and local officials for use. NDIC would maintain computer databases, coordinate collection and tasking and assess interagency efforts. The NDIC was seen to be an interagency organization to include Treasury, State, Justice, and Defense assets. Supervision of the NDIC would be the responsibility of the Attorney General. The Intelligence Community's supporting role included foreign collection and methodological and technical assistance. The NDIC was envisioned as being a small, efficient organization in Washington, DC.
With the formal Administration proposal to create the NDIC, the field of action for forming it shifted to the Congress. The House passed the measure, but differences arose in the Senate concerning the need for and location of the Center. In the end, after significant Congressional negotiations and compromise, the NDIC was authorized. The compromise placed the NDIC in Johnstown, Pennsylvania, made the DOD the executive authority for the project, and restricted the Justice Department role in the Center itself to participation. A summary of relevant key dates and legislation is provided in Table 1. 1
__________
1. This paragraph abstracted from Executive-Legislative Relations in the Creation of the National Drug Intelligence Center, Donald J. Carey, LT., U.S. Navy, September 1991.
D.3.2 Concept of Operations
The multi-agency National Drug Intelligence Center is located in Johnstown, Pennsylvania. It is organized with a Director and three Deputy Directors. The Director is a Department of Justice position. The Deputy Director for Operations is a DEA position; the Deputy Director for Administration is an FBI position; and the Deputy Director for Technology is a DOD position currently filled by DIA. The staff of approximately 300 is composed of intelligence analysts (from Federal law enforcement agencies [LEAs]), special agents (from DOJ), technical experts (from DOD), administrative support, liaison staff from other agencies, and specialized contractor support. The Center also has a small liaison office in the Washington DC area to facilitate coordination.
Generally, the Federal LEAs have stand-alone terminals at the Center which can be used to receive data released to the Center and send material to the owning agency, but cannot directly access agency network systems or databases. However, the Center has made some progress in negotiating direct access in some cases. PCs in a designated Operational Research Center allow analysts access to open source material such as Reuters, AP, and Nexis/Lexis. Desktop PCs throughout the NDIC allow analysts to exchange information among themselves via a LAN, but they are not connected outside the facility. Analysts generally focus on specific organizations as targets. They correlate and fuse information on crop production and facilities, financial practices, chemical sources, transportation and distribution assets, communications and other topics to produce strategic organizational drug intelligence (SODI) pertaining to the infrastructure of a drug trafficking organization.
The Center both responds to specific requests for intelligence products and strives to develop and maintain a strategic organizational drug intelligence database, library and index system. The Center also has a deployable document exploitation team that can assist LEAs with reviewing, cataloging, analyzing and exploiting various documents which are seized in drug raids.
Senior personnel at the Center acknowledge that rivalry among the LEAs -- largely as a result of a "scoring system" that keys future funding to arrest and prosecution statistics adversely affects the degree of information sharing and coordination that is achieved today. However, they indicate a belief in a positive trend as the mutual confidence builds from personal interaction by representatives from the different agencies.
Table 1. A Summary of Milestones in Establishing the NDIC
1986
PL 99-570$ 1.7 Million approved for anti-drug measures. 1988 PL 11-463: Defense Appropriations Bill includes $ 300 Million for narcotics interdiction. 1989 PL 101-164: Authorized $ 3.18 Billion in new anti-drug funding 1990 January 1990: 1990 Drug Control Strategy released 1991 February 1991: 1991 National Drug Control Strategy released |
D.3.3 Relationships Between NDIC and Other Government Agencies
The NDIC has the responsibility for developing technical and organizational protocols (Memoranda of Agreement) required for access to information provided by other organizations. Technical protocols specify the hardware and software interfaces to allow NDIC access to the Agencies' information. Organizational protocols, documented in memoranda of agreement, specify restrictive procedures for accessing data and assure the protection by NDIC of both data source and success as specified by the originator of the information. The other Government agencies NDIC is working to establish protocols with to preclude duplication of effort and redundancy include: Treasury, U.S. Coast Guard, Immigration and naturalization Service, Customs Service, CIA, NSA, FBI, DEA and selected DOD organizations.
D.3.4 Relationships Between NDIC and International Agencies
Currently, NDIC has no direct relationships with international agencies such as Interpol or with law enforcement agencies of other nations, although they are deemed desirable. At this time, such relationships are the closely guarded province of other Federal agencies. This situation exists regarding State and local authorities as well such relationships are the province of the Federal law enforcement agencies.
D.3.5 Observations on Potential Lessons Learned and Pitfalls