Despite the recent cancellation of an advanced technology program to automate the collection and analysis of potential biological threats in the nation’s major cities, the bio-terror threat is real and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) remains committed to the current BioWatch program while exploring alternatives for improvement, department officials said on Wednesday.
The DHS Office of Health Affairs (OHA) and the Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate are jointly developing requirements for a systems approach to next-generation bio-detection, Kathryn Brinsfield, acting assistant secretary of OHA, and Reginald Brothers, under secretary of S&T, said in their joint prepared statement for a House panel.
OHA and S&T are “now completing a plan to test both currently available technologies and solutions, and to look at indoor and outdoor applications,” Brinsfield told the House Homeland Security Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications Subcommittee.
In late April Homeland Security Secretary Jeh Johnson canceled the Gen-3 next-generation program that was being developed and tested under the BioWatch program, which currently consists of aerosol sample collectors distributed in various locations in more than 30 major urban areas. The current system, known as Gen-2, is manually intensive in that it requires samples to be retrieved on a daily basis and then taken to a laboratory for analysis, a process that creates a 12- to 36-hour lag from the time a biological agent is released until detection.
The goal of the Gen-3 program had been to essentially create a laboratory-in-a-box so that the collection and analysis could be done automatically several times a day and produce a detection result and alert within four to six hours of the release of an agent, enabling local health authorities to respond more quickly to a bio-threat.
Brinsfield said that OHA recommended that the Gen-3 program be canceled after it its assessment of an Analysis of Alternatives performed by the Institute for Defense Analyses (IDA) determined that there would not be “an overwhelming benefit to justify the cost of a full technology switch, including a one-for-one replacement and expanded coverage to new jurisdictions.” She pointed out that OHA’s assessment of the AoA “suggested that an autonomous detection capability would be a valuable addition to current BioWatch operations in certain circumstances.”
Brothers, who became head of the S&T office about six weeks ago, said that OHA and his office will be examining making incremental improvements to the Gen-2 system in the near-term while looking at long-term solutions for a “distributed, networked sensor agnostic architecture with the potential capability well beyond what the department initially envisioned with the Gen-3 acquisition.”
The House Appropriations Committee on Wednesday approved its version of the FY ’15 Homeland Security spending bill that recommends $86.9 million for BioWatch, $2.2 million above the request, for continuing operations and to begin replacing aging equipment so that the current capabilities can be maintained. A draft report accompanying the spending bill says that the current system, which was deployed more than 10 years ago, is nearly the end of its estimated life-cycle and will require “recapitalization or replacement to prevent system failures.”
The appropriators say they support efforts for the next-generation bio-detection capabilities and want DHS to brief them on plans to upgrade current systems and potential technologies that can be developed and deployed later.
S&T is also looking at creating an Apex program, Beyond BioWatch, that would include a partnership with OHA and other “national bio-defense stakeholders to work toward an implementation of an integrated national systems approach to bio-detection.” Apex programs are rare and are requested by DHS components to address high-priority problems relatively quickly.
Brinsfield and Brothers stated that biological threats such as bio-terrorism, pandemics, and plant and animal diseases remain homeland security risks. Rep. Susan Brooks (R-Ind.), chairman of the subcommittee, said that the bio-terror threat is “real,” based on a hearing her panel held in February and a subsequent classified briefing. She added that the IDA says the threat hasn’t changed since 2001.