Capitol Hill: National Bio-surveillance Center: Fully operational or not?
Robert Hooks
Based on July 16 testimony before the House Committee on Homeland Security’s Emerging Threats, Cybersecurity, Science and Technology Subcommittee, the answer clearly depends on the meaning of the phrase "fully operational."
At the hearing, Subcommittee Chairman James Langevin (D-RI) declared himself "concerned" by "lingering problems," and cited estimates predicting that "we are still two years away from having the full participation of federal, state, local, tribal, private sector and international partners that a robust bio-surveillance capability requires."
Deputy Assistant Secretary for WMD & Biodefense in the DHS’s Office of Health Affairs, Robert Hooks, duly noted that it is "incredibly difficult to predict and prevent a biological attack," and that "interagency cross-domain bio-surveillance capability is a difficult and complicated task that has not been previously attempted."
NBIC has "formalized" bio-surveillance relationships with a "number of federal partners," Hooks added, and is in the process of obtaining formal agreements with others. At this point, NBIC has established a "first version" of a National Bio-surveillance Integration System, the plan that will describe how senior officials and others will collaborate and proceed in the event of a biohazard event.
In a statement, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) reported that DHS has "made progress" in meeting the "fully operational" deadline, but noted also that "it is unclear what operations the center will be capable of carrying out" by the Sept. 30 deadline. For example, according to the GAO, a new IT system upgrade at the center has been completed; however, "NBIC will need to train its employees to use that system…. DHS officials expect that NBIC will complete the training in early 2009."
- Add your comment
- trackback url: http://www.gsnmagazine.com/cms/trackback/912-3
