Advanced search Help
Searching for terms: EXACT: "Moteff, John D." in: author
Clear all search criteria
Only 2/3! You are seeing results from the Public Collection, not the complete Full Collection. Sign in to search everything (see eligibility).
-
Critical Infrastructure Information: Disclosure and Homeland Security [Updated January 29, 2003]
From the Summary: "One of the findings of the President's Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection, established by President Clinton in 1996, was the need for the federal government and owners and operators of the nation's critical infrastructures to share information on vulnerabilities and threats. Among the strategies to help owners and operators share information with the federal government was a proposal to exempt the information they share from disclosure under the Freedom of Information Act (FOIA). Three of the nine exemptions provide possible protection against the release of critical infrastructure information: exemption 1 (national security information); exemption 3 (information exempted by statute); and exemption 4 (confidential business information). Public interest groups argue that the language in the House bill is far too broad and would allow a wide range of information to be protected from disclosure (including information previously available under FOIA), and that existing FOIA exemptions and case law provide sufficient protections."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.; Stevens, Gina Marie
2003-01-29
-
Critical Infrastructures: What Makes an Infrastructure Critical? [August 30, 2002]
From the Summary: "The Bush Administration's proposal for establishing a Department of Homeland Security includes a function whose responsibilities include the coordination of policies and actions to protect the nation's critical infrastructure. However, the proposal did not specify criteria for how to determine criticality or which infrastructures should be considered critical. Over the last few years, a number of documents concerned with critical infrastructure protection have offered general definitions for critical infrastructures and have provided short lists of which infrastructures should be included. Critical infrastructures now include national monuments (e.g. Washington Monument), where an attack might cause a large loss of life or adversely affect the nation's morale. They also include the chemical industry. Essentially the federal government will have to try to minimize the impact on the nation's critical infrastructure of any future terrorist attack, taking into account what those impacts might be and the likelihood of their occurring, and will set priorities for critical infrastructure protection based on a consistent methodology and an approach that will allow it to balance the cost and expected benefits."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.; Copeland, Claudia; Fischer, John
2002-08-30
-
Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy, and Implementation [Updated May 6, 2003]
From the Summary: "The nation's health, wealth, and security rely on the production and distribution of certain goods and services. The array of physical assets, processes and organizations across which these goods and services move are called critical infrastructures (e.g. electricity, the power plants that generate it, and the electric grid upon which it is distributed). Computers and communications, themselves critical infrastructures, are increasingly tying these infrastructures together. There is concern that this reliance on computers and computer networks raises the vulnerability of the nation's critical infrastructures to 'cyber' attacks. In May 1998, President Clinton released Presidential Decision Directive No. 63. The Directive set up groups within the federal government to develop and implement plans that would protect government-operated infrastructures and called for a dialogue between government and the private sector to develop a National Infrastructure Assurance Plan that would protect all of the nation's critical infrastructures by the year 2003. While the Directive called for both physical and cyber protection from both man-made and natural events, implementation focused on cyber protection against man-made cyber events (i.e. computer hackers). Those advocating the need for greater cyber security felt that this was a new vulnerability not fully appreciated by system owners and operators in either the private or public sectors. However, given the impact of the September 11 attacks on the communications, finance, and transportation infrastructures, physical protections of critical infrastructures may receive more attention."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2003-05-06
-
Comments on Coordination of Homeland Security Science and Technology [March 31, 2008]
"Coordination of Homeland Security Science and Technology is, according to its foreword, a 'descriptive baseline for homeland security research and development measures across the federal government ... developed with the cooperation of [other] federal agencies" and is a "first step in developing a more prescriptive plan.' Coordination of Homeland Security Science and Technology asserts that the baseline contained within the document ' will be used to provide an overarching strategy for addressing the science and technology needs for homeland security.' It is not a national homeland security R&D policy or a national homeland security R&D strategic plan. It is a compilation of science and technology requirements, gaps, strategic goals, and agency roles, responsibilities, accomplishments and ongoing activities, apparently inferred or extracted from a variety of existing strategies, plans, directives, and other sources."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.; Shea, Dana A.; Morgan, Daniel (Daniel L.)
2008-03-31
-
Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy, and Implementation [Updated January 8, 2007]
"The nation's health, wealth, and security rely on the production and distribution of certain goods and services. The array of physical assets, processes and organizations across which these goods and services move are called critical infrastructures (e.g., electricity, the power plants that generate it, and the electric grid upon which it is distributed). The national security community has been concerned for sometime about the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to both physical and cyber attack. In May 1998, President Clinton released Presidential Decision Directive No. 63. The Directive set up groups within the federal government to develop and implement plans that would protect government-operated infrastructures and called for a dialogue between government and the private sector to develop a National Infrastructure Assurance Plan that would protect all of the nation's critical infrastructures by the year 2003. While the Directive called for both physical and cyber protection from both man-made and natural events, implementation focused on cyber protection against man-made cyber events (i.e. computer hackers). However, given the physical damage caused by the September 11 attacks, physical protections of critical infrastructures has received increased attention."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2007-01-08
-
Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy, and Implementation [Updated April 18, 2006]
"The nation's health, wealth, and security rely on the production and distribution of certain goods and services. The array of physical assets, processes and organizations across which these goods and services move are called critical infrastructures (e.g., electricity, the power plants that generate it, and the electric grid upon which it is distributed). The national security community has been concerned for sometime about the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to both physical and cyber attack. In May 1998, President Clinton released Presidential Decision Directive No. 63. The Directive set up groups within the federal government to develop and implement plans that would protect government-operated infrastructures and called for a dialogue between government and the private sector to develop a National Infrastructure Assurance Plan that would protect all of the nation's critical infrastructures by the year 2003. While the Directive called for both physical and cyber protection from both man-made and natural events, implementation focused on cyber protection against man-made cyber events (i.e. computer hackers). However, given the physical damage caused by the September 11 attacks, physical protections of critical infrastructures has received increased attention."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2006-04-18
-
Critical Infrastructures: Background and Early Implementation of PDD-63 [Updated June 19, 2001]
"The nations health, wealth, and security rely on the supply and distribution of certain goods and services. The array of physical assets, processes and organizations across which these goods and services move are called critical infrastructures (e.g. electricity, the power plants that generate it, and the electric grid upon which it is distributed or financial capital, the institutions that manage it, and the record- keeping and communications that move it from one institution to another). Computers and communications, themselves critical infrastructures, are increasingly tying these infrastructures together. There is concern that this reliance on computers and computer networks makes the nations critical infrastructures vulnerable to 'cyber' attacks. In May 1998, President Clinton released Presidential Decision Directive No. 63. The Directive sets up groups within the federal government to develop and implement plans that would protect government-operated infrastructures and calls for a dialogue between government and the private sector to develop a National Infrastructure Assurance Plan that would protect the nations critical infrastructures by the year 2003. PDD-63 identified 12 areas critical to the functioning of the country: information and communications; banking and finance; water supply; transportation; emergency law enforcement; emergency fire service; emergency medicine; electric power, oil, and gas supply and distribution; law enforcement and internal security; intelligence; foreign affairs; and national defense."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2001-06-19
-
Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy, and Implementation [June 7, 2010]
"The nation's health, wealth, and security rely on the production and distribution of certain goods and services. The array of physical assets, functions, and systems across which these goods and services move are called critical infrastructures (e.g., electricity, the power plants that generate it, and the electric grid upon which it is distributed). The national security community has been concerned for some time about the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to both physical and cyber attack. In May 1998, President Clinton released Presidential Decision Directive No. 63. The Directive set up groups within the federal government to develop and implement plans that would protect government-operated infrastructures and called for a dialogue between government and the private sector to develop a National Infrastructure Assurance Plan that would protect all of the nation's critical infrastructures by the year 2003. While the Directive called for both physical and cyber protection from both man-made and natural events, implementation focused on cyber protection against man-made cyber events (i.e., computer hackers). However, given the physical damage caused by the September 11 attacks, physical protection of critical infrastructures has received increased attention. […] In June 2006, the Bush Administration released a National Infrastructure Protection Plan. This Plan presents the process by which the Department of Homeland Security intends to identify those specific assets most critical to the United States, across all sectors, based on the risk associated with their loss to attack or natural disaster, and then to prioritize activities aimed at maximizing the reduction of those risks for a given investment. This report discusses in more detail the evolution of a national critical infrastructure policy and the institutional structures established to implement it. The report highlights five issues of Congressional concern: identifying critical assets; assessing vulnerabilities and risks; allocating resources; information sharing; and regulation."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2010-06-07
-
Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy, and Implementation [Updated February 10, 2003]
"The nations health, wealth, and security rely on the production and distribution of certain goods and services. The array of physical assets, processes and organizations across which these goods and services move are called critical infrastructures (e.g. electricity, the power plants that generate it, and the electric grid upon which it is distributed). Computers and communications, themselves critical infrastructures, are increasingly tying these infrastructures together. There has been growing concern that this reliance on computers and computer networks raises the vulnerability of the nations critical infrastructures to 'cyber' attacks. In May 1998, President Clinton released Presidential Decision Directive No. 63. The Directive set up groups within the federal government to develop and implement plans that would protect government-operated infrastructures and called for a dialogue between government and the private sector to develop a National Infrastructure Assurance Plan that would protect all of the nations critical infrastructures by the year 2003. While the Directive called for both physical and cyber protection from both man-made and natural events, implementation focused on cyber protection against man-made cyber events (i.e. computer hackers). However, given the physical damage caused by the September 11 attacks and the subsequent impact on the communications, finance, and transportation services, physical protections of critical infrastructures is receiving greater attention."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2003-02-10
-
Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy, and Implementation [Updated December 17, 2002]
"The nations health, wealth, and security rely on the production and distribution of certain goods and services. The array of physical assets, processes and organizations across which these goods and services move are called critical infrastructures (e.g. electricity, the power plants that generate it, and the electric grid upon which it is distributed). Computers and communications, themselves critical infrastructures, are increasingly tying these infrastructures together. There has been growing concern that this reliance on computers and computer networks raises the vulnerability of the nations critical infrastructures to 'cyber' attacks. In May 1998, President Clinton released Presidential Decision Directive No. 63. The Directive set up groups within the federal government to develop and implement plans that would protect government-operated infrastructures and called for a dialogue between government and the private sector to develop a National Infrastructure Assurance Plan that would protect all of the nations critical infrastructures by the year 2003. While the Directive called for both physical and cyber protection from both man-made and natural events, implementation focused on cyber protection against man-made cyber events (i.e. computer hackers). However, given the physical damage caused by the September 11 attacks and the subsequent impact on the communications, finance, and transportation services, physical protections of critical infrastructures is receiving greater attention."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2002-12-17
-
Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy, and Implementation [Updated July 18, 2002]
"The nations health, wealth, and security rely on the production and distribution of certain goods and services. The array of physical assets, processes and organizations across which these goods and services move are called critical infrastructures (e.g. electricity, the power plants that generate it, and the electric grid upon which it is distributed). Computers and communications, themselves critical infrastructures, are increasingly tying these infrastructures together. There has been growing concern that this reliance on computers and computer networks raises the vulnerability of the nations critical infrastructures to 'cyber' attacks. In May 1998, President Clinton released Presidential Decision Directive No. 63. The Directive set up groups within the federal government to develop and implement plans that would protect government-operated infrastructures and called for a dialogue between government and the private sector to develop a National Infrastructure Assurance Plan that would protect all of the nations critical infrastructures by the year 2003. While the Directive called for both physical and cyber protection from both man-made and natural events, implementation focused on cyber protection against man-made cyber events (i.e. computer hackers). Those advocating the need for greater cyber security felt that this was a new vulnerability not fully appreciated by system owners and operators in either the private or public sectors. However, given the impact of the September 11 attacks on the communications, finance, and transportation infrastructures, physical protections of critical infrastructures is receiving greater attention."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2002-07-18
-
Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy, and Implementation [Updated December 14, 2001]
"The nations health, wealth, and security rely on the production and distribution of certain goods and services. The array of physical assets, processes and organizations across which these goods and services move are called critical infrastructures (e.g. electricity, the power plants that generate it, and the electric grid upon which it is distributed). Computers and communications, themselves critical infrastructures, are increasingly tying these infrastructures together. There is concern that this reliance on computers and computer networks raises the vulnerability of the nations critical infrastructures to 'cyber' attacks. In May 1998, President Clinton released Presidential Decision Directive No. 63. The Directive set up groups within the federal government to develop and implement plans that would protect government-operated infrastructures and called for a dialogue between government and the private sector to develop a National Infrastructure Assurance Plan that would protect all of the nations critical infrastructures by the year 2003. While the Directive called for both physical and cyber protection from both man-made and natural events, implementation focused on cyber protection against man-made cyber events (i.e. computer hackers). Those advocating the need for greater cyber security felt that this was a new vulnerability not fully appreciated by system owners and operators in either the private or public sectors. However, given the impact of the September 11 attacks on the communications, finance, and transportation infrastructures, physical protections of critical infrastructures may receive more attention."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2001-12-14
-
Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy, and Implementation [February 21, 2014]
"The nation's health, wealth, and security rely on the production and distribution of certain goods and services. The array of physical assets, functions, and systems across which these goods and services move are called critical infrastructures (e.g., electricity, the power plants that generate it, and the electric grid upon which it is distributed). The national security community has been concerned for some time about the vulnerability of critical infrastructure to both physical and cyberattack. In May 1998, President Clinton released Presidential Decision Directive No. 63. The Directive set up groups within the federal government to develop and implement plans that would protect government-operated infrastructures and called for a dialogue between government and the private sector to develop a National Infrastructure Assurance Plan that would protect all of the nation's critical infrastructures by the year 2003. While the Directive called for both physical and cyber protection from both man-made and natural events, implementation focused on cyber protection against man-made cyber events (i.e., computer hackers). Following the destruction and disruptions caused by the September 11 terrorist attacks in 2001, the nation directed increased attention toward physical protection of critical infrastructures. Over the intervening years, policy, programs, and legislation related to physical security of critical infrastructure have stabilized to a large extent. However, current legislative activity has refocused on cybersecurity of critical infrastructure. This report discusses in more detail the evolution of a national critical infrastructure policy and the institutional structures established to implement it. The report highlights two primary issues confronting Congress going forward, both in the context of cybersecurity: information sharing and regulation."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2014-02-21
-
Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy, and Implementation, CRS Report for Congress
"Prior to September 11, critical infrastructure protection was synonymous with cyber security to many people. Consequently, much of this report discusses cyber related activities and issues. However, the terrorist attacks of September 11, and the subsequent anthrax attacks, demonstrate the need to reexamine physical protections and to integrate this into an overall critical infrastructure policy. To the extent this happens, this report will capture it. However, specific physical protections associated with individual infrastructures is beyond the scope of this report."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2006-02-04
-
DHS Appropriations FY2016: Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery [September 8, 2015]
"This report is part of a suite of reports that discuss appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for FY2016. It specifically discusses appropriations for the components of DHS included in the third title of the homeland security appropriations bill--the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD), the Office of Health Affairs (OHA), and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Collectively, Congress has labeled these components in the appropriations act in recent years as 'Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery.' The report provides an overview of the Administration's FY2016 request for Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery, and the appropriations proposed by Congress thus far. Rather than limiting the scope of its review to the third title, the report includes information on provisions throughout the proposed bill and report that directly affect these functions. Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery is the second largest of the four titles that carry the bulk of the funding in the bill. The Administration requested $6,222 million for these components in FY2016, $267 million more than was provided for FY2015. These three components make up 15.0% of the administration's $41.4 billion request for the department in net discretionary budget authority, and the proposed additional funding is 15.5% of the total net increase requested. Most of the proposed net discretionary increase is for NPPD ($157 million, or 10.5% more than last year) and its work in cybersecurity and communications. The administration also requested an additional $6.7 billion not reflected above for the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in disaster relief funding, as defined by the Budget Control Act (BCA, P.L. 112-25)."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Painter, William L.; Moteff, John D.; Lister, Sarah A. . . .
2015-09-08
-
Federal Research and Development Funding: FY2016 [February 11, 2016]
"President Obama's budget request for FY2016 included $145.694 billion for research and development (R&D), an increase of $7.625 billion (5.5%) over the estimated FY2015 R&D funding level of $138.069 billion. The request represented the President's R&D priorities. Funding for R&D is concentrated in a few departments and agencies. Under President Obama's FY2016 budget request, seven federal agencies would have received 95.6% of total federal R&D funding, with the Department of Defense (DOD, 49.5%) and the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS, 21.3%) accounting for more than 70% of all federal R&D funding. The largest increases in agency R&D funding in the President's request would have gone to the Department of Defense (DOD, up $4.670 billion, 6.9%), Department of Energy (DOE, up $861 million, 7.3%), and the Department of Commerce (DOC, up $601 million, 39.4%). Legislation targeted the R&D budgets of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, National Science Foundation, and DOE Office of Science seeking to double them from their FY2006 levels. The America COMPETES [Creating Opportunities to Meaningfully Promote Excellence in Technology, Education, and Science] Act aimed to double funding over 7 years, and the America COMPETES Reauthorization Act of 2010 over 11 years. The President's FY2016 budget requested increases for these accounts, as it did in the President's FY2015 and FY2014 requests. It departs from earlier Obama and Bush Administration budgets that explicitly stated the doubling goal. Enacted funding for FY2015 for these accounts represents a compound annual growth rate of 3.25% since FY2006, a rate that would result in doubling in 22 years."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Sargent, John F.; Esworthy, Robert; Johnson, Judith A. (Judith Ann), 1957- . . .
2016-02-11
-
DHS Appropriations FY2016: Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery [April 18, 2016]
From the Summary: "This report is part of a suite of reports that discuss appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for FY2016. It specifically discusses appropriations for the components of DHS included in the third title of the homeland security appropriations bill-the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD), the Office of Health Affairs (OHA), and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). Collectively, Congress has labeled these components in the appropriations act in recent years as 'Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery.' The report provides an overview of the Administration's FY2016 request for Protection, Preparedness, Response, and Recovery, and the appropriations proposed by Congress in response, and those enacted thus far. Rather than limiting the scope of its review to the third title, the report includes information on provisions throughout the proposed bill and report that directly affect these functions."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Painter, William L.; Moteff, John D.; Lister, Sarah A. . . .
2016-04-18
-
Risk Management and Critical Infrastructure Protection: Assessing, Integrating, and Managing Threats, Vulnerabilities and Consequences [Updated January 19, 2007]
"The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296) and other Administration documents have assigned the Department of Homeland Security specific duties associated with coordinating the nation's efforts to protect its critical infrastructure, including using a risk management approach to set priorities. Many of these duties were delegated to the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection (IA/IP) Directorate, now called the Preparedness Directorate. Risk assessment involves the integration of threat, vulnerability, and consequence information. Risk management involves deciding which protective measures to take based on an agreed upon risk reduction strategy. Many models/methodologies have been developed by which threats, vulnerabilities, and consequences are integrated to determine risks and then used to inform the allocation of resources to reduce those risks. For the most part, these methodologies consist of the following elements, performed, more or less, in the following order: identify assets and identify which are most critical; identify, characterize, and assess threats; assess the vulnerability of critical assets to specific threats; determine the risk (i.e., the expected consequences of specific types of attacks on specific assets); identify ways to reduce those risks; and prioritize risk reduction measures based on a strategy."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2007-01-19
-
Risk Management and Critical Infrastructure Protection: Assessing, Integrating, and Managing Threats, Vulnerabilities and Consequences [Updated February 4, 2005]
"The 9/11 Commission recommended that efforts to protect various modes of transportation and allocation of federal assistance to state and local governments should be based on an assessment of risk. In doing so, the Commission was reiterating existing federal policy regarding the protection of all the nation's critical infrastructures. The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296) and other Administration documents have assigned the Department of Homeland Security specific duties associated with coordinating the nation's efforts to protect its critical infrastructure, including using a risk management approach to set priorities. Many of these duties have been delegated to the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection (IA/IP) Directorate. [...] The IA/IP Directorate has been accumulating a list of infrastructure assets (specific sites and facilities). From this list the Directorate is selecting assets that have been judged to be critical from a national point of view. The Directorate intends to assess the vulnerability of all the assets on this shorter list. According to Directorate officials, vulnerability assessments and threat information are considered when determining the risk each asset poses to the nation. This risk assessment is then used to prioritize subsequent additional protection activities. The IA/IP Directorate's efforts to date, however, raise several concerns, ranging from the process and criteria used to populate its lists of assets, its prioritization strategy, and the extent to which the Directorate is coordinating its efforts with the intelligence community and other agencies both internal and external to the Department."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2005-02-04
-
Risk Management and Critical Infrastructure Protection: Assessing, Integrating, and Managing Threats, Vulnerabilities and Consequences [September 2, 2004]
"The 9/11 Commission recommended that efforts to protect various modes of transportation and allocation of federal assistance to state and local governments should be based on an assessment of risk. In doing so, the Commission was reiterating existing federal policy regarding the protection of all the nation's critical infrastructures. The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296) and other Administration documents have assigned the Department of Homeland Security specific duties associated with coordinating the nation's efforts to protect its critical infrastructure, including using a risk management approach to set priorities. Many of these duties have been delegated to the Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection (IA/IP) Directorate...The IA/IP Directorate has accumulated a list of 33,000 infrastructure assets (specific sites and facilities). From this list the Directorate has selected 1,700 assets that have been judged to be critical from a national point of view. The Directorate intends to assess the vulnerability of all 1,700 assets. According to Directorate officials, vulnerability assessments and threat information are considered when determining the risk each asset poses to the nation. This risk assessment is then used to prioritize subsequent additional protection activities. The IA/IP Directorate's efforts to date, however, have raised several concerns, ranging from the process and criteria used to populate its lists of assets, its prioritization strategy, and the extent to which the Directorate is coordinating its efforts with the intelligence community and other agencies both internal and external to the Department. This report will be updated as needed."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2004-09-02
-
Critical Infrastructures: What Makes an Infrastructure Critical? [Updated January 29, 2003]
Over the last few years, a number of documents concerned with critical infrastructure protection have offered general definitions for critical infrastructures and have provided short lists of which infrastructures should be included. The Bush Administration's proposal for establishing a Department of Homeland Security includes a function whose responsibilities include the coordination of policies and actions to protect the nation's critical infrastructure. Essentially, the federal government will have to try to minimize the impact on the nation's critical infrastructure of any future terrorist attack, taking into account what those impacts might be and the likelihood of their occurring. At the very least, a growing list of infrastructures in need of protection will require the federal government to prioritize its efforts.
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.; Copeland, Claudia; Fischer, John
2003-01-29
-
Critical Infrastructures: A Primer [August 13, 1998]
The nation's health, wealth, and security rely on the supply and distribution of certain goods and services. The array of physical assets, processes and organizations across which these goods and services move are called critical infrastructures. Computers and communications, themselves critical infrastructures, are increasingly tying these infrastructures together. There is concern that this reliance on computers and computer networks makes the nation's critical infrastructures vulnerable to "cyber" attacks, be they from mischievous teenage hackers or information warriors from foreign countries. In May 1998, the President released Presidential Decision Directive No. 63. The Directive organizes the federal government to develop and implement plans that would protect government-operated infrastructures and calls for a dialogue between government and the private sector to develop a National Infrastructure Assurance Plan that would protect the nation's critical infrastructures by the year 2003.
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
1998-08-13
-
Department of Homeland Security: FY2013 Appropriations [Updated June 21, 2013]
From the Document: "This report presents an analysis of the discretionary appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for fiscal year 2013 (FY2013). It compares the President's request for FY2013 funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the enacted FY2012 appropriations for DHS, the House-passed and Senate-reported DHS appropriations legislation for FY2013, and the final DHS appropriations legislation included in Division D of P.L. 113-6. It tracks legislative action and congressional issues related to these bills with particular attention paid to discretionary funding amounts. The report does not provide indepth analysis of specific issues related to mandatory funding--such as retirement pay--nor does the report systematically follow any other legislation related to the authorization or amendment of DHS programs, activities, or fee revenues."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Painter, William L.; Schwemle, Barbara L.; Bjelopera, Jerome P. . . .
2013-06-21
-
Department of Homeland Security: FY2015 Appropriations [Updated June 2, 2015]
From the Document: "This report describes and analyzes the discretionary appropriations for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) for fiscal year 2015 (FY2015). It compares the President's request for FY2015 funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), the enacted FY2014 appropriations for DHS, the House- and Senate-reported homeland security appropriations measures for FY2015, and the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act, 2015 (P.L. 114-4)."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Painter, William L.; Schwemle, Barbara L.; Bjelopera, Jerome P. . . .
2015-06-02
-
Advanced Spectroscopic Portal Program: Background and Issues for Congress [September 03, 2009]
"The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is charged with developing and procuring equipment to prevent a terrorist nuclear or radiological attack in the United States. At the forefront of DNDO's efforts are technologies currently deployed and under development whose purpose is to detect smuggled nuclear and radiological materials. These technologies include existing radiation portal monitors and nextgeneration replacements known as advanced spectroscopic portals (ASPs). Radiation portal monitors are used to detect radiation emitted from conveyances, such as trucks, entering the United States. Combined with additional equipment to identify the source of the emitted radiation, they provide for a detection and identification capability to locate smuggled nuclear and radiological materials. The ASPs currently under testing integrate these detection and identification steps into a single process. By doing this, DHS aims to reduce the impact of radiation screening on commerce while increasing its ability to detect illicit nuclear material. […]Laboratory and field tests of the ASPs, cost-benefit analyses, and other activities are under way to inform the Secretary's certification decision. Among the issues Congress faces are whether to further define the expected performance of the ASP systems through additional legislation; how to assess whether the ASP systems are technologically ready to be deployed; how to weigh the potential economic and security benefits of ASP deployment against its financial cost; and whether the certification process developed by DHS to establish a 'significant increase in operational effectiveness' is well founded."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.; Shea, Dana A.; Morgan, Daniel (Daniel L.)
2009-09-03
-
Advanced Spectroscopic Portal Program: Background and Issues for Congress [May 21, 2010]
"The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is charged with developing and procuring equipment to prevent a terrorist nuclear or radiological attack in the United States. At the forefront of DNDO's efforts are technologies currently deployed and under development whose purpose is to detect smuggled nuclear and radiological materials. These technologies include existing radiation portal monitors and nextgeneration replacements known as advanced spectroscopic portals (ASPs). Customs and Border Protection officers use radiation portal monitors to detect radiation emitted from conveyances, such as trucks, entering the United States. When combined with additional equipment to identify the source of the emitted radiation, they provide a detection and identification capability to locate smuggled nuclear and radiological materials. The ASPs currently under testing integrate these detection and identification steps into a single process. By doing this, DHS aims to reduce the impact of radiation screening on commerce while increasing its ability to detect illicit nuclear material."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.; Shea, Dana A.; Morgan, Daniel (Daniel L.)
2010-05-21
-
Statement on Critical Infrastructure Security [January 12, 2010]
"The federal government has taken on the responsibility of working with the owners and operators of critical infrastructure (both public and private) to determine which of their assets are the most critical to the nation as whole, to assess the vulnerability of these assets to a variety of threats, to determine the risks involved, to develop options for reducing those risks, and to implement the most cost-effective risk-reduction options. Although there is a range of regulatory intervention already in place across the various critical infrastructure sectors, national policy states that the federal government should strive to encourage owners and operators to take proactive, marketbased actions to protect these assets. However, the federal government is willing to intervene (through regulation or incentives) in those cases where owners and operators are unwilling or unable to adequately protect nationally critical assets. The federal government has also assumed the responsibility of assisting state and local governments and some private sector entities protect assets that are important locally, but which may not be critical to the nation as a whole. While many federal agencies play a role, Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD) No. 7 makes the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) the lead agency in coordinating this national effort."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2010-01-12
-
Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy, and Implementation [November 12, 2009]
"This report discusses in more detail the evolution of a national critical infrastructure policy and the institutional structures established to implement it. The report highlights five issues of Congressional concern: identifying critical assets; assessing vulnerabilities and risks; allocating resources; information sharing; and regulation. This report will be updated."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2009-11-12
-
Advanced Spectroscopic Portal Program: Background and Issues for Congress [March 25, 2009]
This Congressional Research Service (CRS) report analyzes the Advanced Spectroscopic Portal Program. "The Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO) of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) is charged with developing and procuring equipment to prevent a terrorist nuclear or radiological attack in the United States. At the forefront of DNDO's efforts are technologies currently deployed and under development whose purpose is to detect smuggled nuclear and radiological materials. These technologies include existing radiation portal monitors and nextgeneration replacements known as advanced spectroscopic portals (ASPs). Radiation portal monitors are used to detect radiation emitted from conveyances, such as trucks, that are entering the United States. Combined with additional equipment to identify the source of the emitted radiation, they provide for a detection and identification capability to locate smuggled nuclear and radiological materials. The ASPs currently under testing integrate these detection and identification steps into a single process. By doing so, DHS aims to reduce the impact of radiation screening on commerce while increasing its ability to detect illicit nuclear material."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.; Shea, Dana A.; Morgan, Daniel (Daniel L.)
2009-03-25
-
Critical Infrastructures: Background, Policy, and Implementation [Updated February 4, 2002]
"The nations health, wealth, and security rely on the production and distribution of certain goods and services. The array of physical assets, processes and organizations across which these goods and services move are called critical infrastructures (e.g. electricity, the power plants that generate it, and the electric grid upon which it is distributed). Computers and communications, themselves critical infrastructures, are increasingly tying these infrastructures together. There is concern that this reliance on computers and computer networks raises the vulnerability of the nations critical infrastructures to 'cyber' attacks. In May 1998, President Clinton released Presidential Decision Directive No. 63. The Directive set up groups within the federal government to develop and implement plans that would protect government-operated infrastructures and called for a dialogue between government and the private sector to develop a National Infrastructure Assurance Plan that would protect all of the nations critical infrastructures by the year 2003. While the Directive called for both physical and cyber protection from both man-made and natural events, implementation focused on cyber protection against man-made cyber events (i.e. computer hackers). Those advocating the need for greater cyber security felt that this was a new vulnerability not fully appreciated by system owners and operators in either the private or public sectors. However, given the impact of the September 11 attacks on the communications, finance, and transportation infrastructures, physical protections of critical infrastructures may receive more attention."
Library of Congress. Congressional Research Service
Moteff, John D.
2002-02-04
