Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan 

 i 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

ii

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan 

 iii 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

List of Figures .............................................................................................................................ix

List of Tables...............................................................................................................................ix

Foreword...................................................................................................................................... xi

Executive Summary ................................................................................................................ xiii

PART I – What We Want the ISE To Be.................................................................................. 1

Chapter 1 – Introduction............................................................................................................ 3

1.1 Purpose and Scope............................................................................................. 3

1.2 Definitions ........................................................................................................... 5

1.2.1 Terrorism Information..................................................................................... 5

1.2.2 Information Sharing Environment .................................................................. 6

1.3 Background......................................................................................................... 6

1.4 Today’s ISE....................................................................................................... 10

1.5 Overview of the Future ISE ............................................................................... 11

Chapter 2 – Information Sharing Strategy, Roles, and Needs ......................................... 15

2.1 Information Sharing Strategy............................................................................. 15

2.2 Organizational Roles, Missions, and Responsibilities ....................................... 15

2.3 Information Sharing Needs of ISE Participants ................................................. 16

2.3.1 Federal Department and Agency Needs...................................................... 17

2.3.2 State, Local, and Tribal Government Needs................................................ 18

2.3.3 Private Sector Organization Needs.............................................................. 19

2.3.4 Foreign Partner Needs................................................................................. 20

2.3.5 Information Privacy and Civil Liberties Needs.............................................. 21

Chapter 3 – ISE Operational Concept ................................................................................... 23

3.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 23

3.2 The Information Sharing Environment............................................................... 23

3.2.1 The Current (“As-Is”) Environment............................................................... 23

3.2.2 The Future (“To-Be”) Environment............................................................... 26

3.3 Federal Level Elements and Functions ............................................................. 27

3.3.1 The National Counterterrorism Center......................................................... 27

3.3.2 Federal Departments and Agencies ............................................................ 28

3.3.3 Interagency Threat Assessment and Coordination Group ........................... 29

3.4 State, Local, and Tribal Level Elements and Functions .................................... 29

3.4.1 State and Major Urban Area Fusion Centers............................................... 30
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

iv

3.5 Information Sharing Evaluation Environments .................................................. 30

3.6 Cross-Domain Sharing...................................................................................... 31

PART II – How We Intend to Structure the ISE.................................................................. 33

Chapter 4 – ISE Implementation Overview......................................................................... 35

4.1 Two-Phase Implementation Approach .............................................................. 35

4.2 ISE Governance................................................................................................ 36

4.2.1 General........................................................................................................ 36

4.2.2 The Program Manager................................................................................. 37

4.2.3 The Information Sharing Council ................................................................. 38

4.2.4 ISC Subcommittees and Working Groups ................................................... 38

4.2.5 HSC and NSC Decision Process ................................................................. 39

4.2.6 Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board................................................. 39

Chapter 5 – ISE Operational Capabilities ............................................................................ 41

5.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 41

5.1.1 ISE Enabling Policy and Business Processes ............................................. 41

5.1.2 Overarching ISE Capabilities ....................................................................... 41

5.1.3 Two-Phased Approach ................................................................................ 42

5.2 Alerts and Notifications...................................................................................... 43

5.2.1 Implementation Actions................................................................................ 43

5.3 Easier User Access........................................................................................... 43

5.3.1 Access Control............................................................................................. 44

5.3.2 Implementation Actions................................................................................ 44

5.4 Information Discovery and Search .................................................................... 45

5.4.1 Enterprise Search ........................................................................................ 45

5.4.2 Implementation Actions................................................................................ 46

5.5 Security ............................................................................................................. 46

5.5.1 ISE Security Requirements.......................................................................... 46

5.5.2 Common IT Security Framework ................................................................. 47

5.5.3 Cross-Domain Solutions .............................................................................. 50

5.5.4 Implementation Actions................................................................................ 50

5.6 Collaboration..................................................................................................... 51

5.6.1 Implementation Actions................................................................................ 51

5.7 Electronic Directory Services ............................................................................ 52

5.7.1 Blue Pages .................................................................................................. 52

5.7.2 Yellow Pages ............................................................................................... 52

5.7.3 Green Pages................................................................................................ 52

5.7.4 White Pages ................................................................................................ 53

5.7.5 Implementation Actions................................................................................ 53
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan 

 v 

Chapter 6 – Architecture and Standards............................................................................... 55

6.1 Introduction ....................................................................................................... 55

6.2 ISE Enterprise Architecture Framework and Profile .......................................... 57

6.2.1 IRTPA and Presidential Memorandum Requirements ................................. 57

6.2.2 Presidential Memorandum Observations and Recommendations ............... 57

6.2.3 ISEEA Framework ....................................................................................... 58

6.2.4 FEA-ISE Profile............................................................................................ 60

6.2.5 Implementation Actions................................................................................ 61

6.3 ISE Standards................................................................................................... 63

6.3.1 Review of Presidential Guideline 1 Developments ...................................... 63

6.3.2 Background of IIP Task 1.1 Findings and Observations .............................. 64

6.3.3 Progress to Date.......................................................................................... 65

6.3.4 Department and Agency Functional Standards Implementation .................. 67

6.3.5 Implementation Actions................................................................................ 68

Chapter 7 – Sharing with Partners Outside the Federal Government............................ 71

7.1 State, Local, and Tribal Governments............................................................... 71

7.1.1 Implementing the Framework ...................................................................... 71

7.1.2 Implementation Actions................................................................................ 73

7.2 Private Sector.................................................................................................... 75

7.3 Foreign Partners ............................................................................................... 77

PART III – Major Challenges ................................................................................................. 81

Chapter 8 – Promoting a Culture of Information Sharing ................................................ 83

8.1 Promoting a Culture of Information Sharing ...................................................... 83

8.2 ISE Training Plan .............................................................................................. 84

8.2.1 “Core” Training............................................................................................. 84

8.2.2 Department and Agency Specific Training................................................... 86

8.3 Implementation Actions..................................................................................... 87

Chapter 9 – Protecting Information Privacy and Civil Liberties in the ISE .................. 89

9.1 Background....................................................................................................... 89

9.2 ISE Information Privacy Guidelines................................................................... 89

9.3 Implementation Actions..................................................................................... 91

Chapter 10 – Terrorism Information Handling................................................................... 93

10.1 Classified Terrorism Information ....................................................................... 93

10.1.1 Personnel Security Practices ....................................................................... 93

10.1.2 Certification and Accreditation (C&A) Practices........................................... 93

10.1.3 Implementation Actions................................................................................ 94
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

vi

10.2 Sensitive But Unclassified Information .............................................................. 94

10.2.1 Specific Implementation Action.................................................................... 96

Chapter 11 – ISE Enabling Activities .................................................................................... 97

11.1 ISE Performance Management......................................................................... 97

11.1.1 Progress to Date.......................................................................................... 97

11.1.2 Next Steps ................................................................................................... 98

11.1.3 Performance Management Report............................................................. 100

11.1.4 State, Local, Tribal, and Private Sector Performance Management .......... 100

11.2 ISE Planning, Programming, and Budgeting................................................... 101

11.2.1 Progress to Date........................................................................................ 101

11.2.2 Next Steps ................................................................................................. 103

PART IV – Conclusions and Recommendations .............................................................. 105

Chapter 12 – Managing ISE Implementation .................................................................... 107

12.1 Managing ISE Policy, Business Processes, and Technology.......................... 107

12.1.1 ISE Policy and Business Process Management ........................................ 107

12.1.2 ISE Technology Management.................................................................... 107

12.2 ISE Technical Project Management ................................................................ 108

12.2.1 Overall Roles and Responsibilities ............................................................ 108

12.3 Monitoring ISE Implementation ....................................................................... 109

Chapter 13 – ISE Expansion and Future Management Structure................................... 111

13.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................... 111

13.2 Expansion of ISE beyond Terrorism Information............................................. 111

13.3 Future ISE Management Structure.................................................................. 112

Chapter 14 – Additional PM Recommendations and Summary of Actions................ 115

14.1 Additional PM Recommendations ................................................................... 115

14.1.1 Synchronize ISE Performance Report with ISE Implementation Phases... 115

14.1.2 Delegation of Authority............................................................................... 115

14.2 Summary of ISE Implementation Actions........................................................ 116

APPENDICES .......................................................................................................................... 129

Appendix 1 – IRTPA Requirements Compliance............................................................. 131

Appendix 2 – Section 1016 of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention 

Act of 2004....................................................................................................... 133

Appendix 3 – Presidential Memorandum of December 16, 2005................................... 141

Appendix 4 – Definitions ...................................................................................................... 149
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan 

 vii 

Appendix 5 – Acronyms......................................................................................................... 155

Appendix 6 – ISC Membership............................................................................................ 159
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

viii

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan 

 ix 

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure ES-1. ISE Goals ..............................................................................................................xiv

Figure 1.1-1. ISE Implementation Plan Roadmap ................................................................... 4

Figure 1.5-1. ISE Goals............................................................................................................... 12

Figure 3.2-1. Conceptual Basis for the ISE.............................................................................. 27

Figure 3.6-1. ISE Security Level Domains............................................................................... 31

Figure 4.1-1. Two-Phase ISE Implementation Approach..................................................... 35

Figure 4.2-1. ISE Implementation Governance Roles and Responsibilities....................... 37

Figure 6.2-1. ISE Enterprise Architecture (ISEEA) Framework and FEA Mapping......... 58

Figure 6.2-2. ISEEA Framework Documentation Package................................................... 61

Figure 6.3-1. CTISS Framework ............................................................................................... 66

Figure 7.1-1. Approved Guideline 2 Framework .................................................................. 71

Figure 12.2-1. ISE Technical Project Management .............................................................. 109

LIST OF TABLES

Table ES-1. Status of Recommendations Submitted to the President in Accordance 

with the Presidential Information Sharing Guidelines and Requirements .............xvii

Table 14.2-1. Phase 1 Implementation Actions .................................................................... 117

Table 14.2-2. Phase 2 Implementation Actions .................................................................... 123
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

x

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan 

 xi 

FOREWORD

While it is often said—with good reason, but some exaggeration—that the first casualty 

in battle is the battle plan, there is no doubt that the plan is essential to get the forces 

ready for battle. This is what battle plans are designed to do: prepare for the effort, not 

control its every step. With this in mind the Program Manager for the Information 

Sharing Environment (PM-ISE) submits this Implementation Plan as the preparation for 

making a fully functional and useful Information Sharing Environment a reality for the 

struggle against terrorism. As such, it joins similar efforts in other areas to prepare for 

this struggle, such as the National Implementation Plan and the National Infrastructure 

Protection Plan. 

The PM-ISE staff and the members of the Information Sharing Council (ISC) who 

worked so hard to write and edit this plan believe this plan will set us on the right path 

and help us through the initial phases of the effort. But we are all realistic enough to 

know we will need to be flexible over the coming three years as we carry out our work. 

This recognition is reflected in the limited (three-year) period covered by the plan, and in 

the specificity for the first year and more general planning for the final years. 

No one can doubt that the pace of technology and the many basic changes and reforms 

we are proposing will force adjustments as we move forward. But move forward we 

must, and will. The plan represents the views of the 17 member agencies of the Federal 

government participating in the ISC, and is the product of many long hours of 

deliberation, discussion, and debate. It also reflects the perspectives of our colleagues 

in State, local, and tribal governments and the private sector to whom we went for 

additional advice and assistance. 

We believe this plan can take us forward to meet the goals set by the Congress in the 

Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA), and by the 

President in his memorandum, Guidelines and Requirements in Support of the 

Information Sharing Environment, of December 2005. 

This process does not end with the publishing of the plan. The plan prepares for the 

start of the real work—the implementation of the ISE. Those of us who worked to 

produce it are committed to developing all aspects of ISE outlined in these pages. We 

think it will lead to the single strategic goal that we all share and that President Bush 

articulated when he signed the IRTPA, “The many reforms in this act have a single goal: 

to ensure that the people in government responsible for defending America have the 

best possible information to make the best possible decisions.” 

Thomas E. McNamara 

Program Manager, Information Sharing Environment 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

xii

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan 

 xiii 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Strengthening our nation’s ability to share terrorism information constitutes a 

cornerstone of our national strategy to protect the American people and our institutions 

and to defeat terrorists and their support networks at home and abroad. Recognizing 

the need to go beyond individual solutions to create an environment—the aggregation 

of legal, policy, cultural, organizational, and technological conditions—for improving 

information sharing, Congress passed and the President signed the landmark 

Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA). The Act requires the 

President to establish an Information Sharing Environment (ISE), “for the sharing of 

terrorism information in a manner consistent with national security and with applicable 

legal standards relating to privacy and civil liberties.” It also requires designation of a 

Program Manager for the Information Sharing Environment (PM-ISE). The PM-ISE, in 

consultation with the interagency Information Sharing Council (ISC), is charged with 

planning and overseeing the ISE's implementation and management. Among other 

duties, the PM-ISE is responsible for assisting the President in submitting to Congress 

an ISE Implementation Plan (ISE IP) that addresses eleven requirements set forth in 

Section 1016(e) of IRTPA. 

This plan responds to those eleven requirements and describes the actions the Federal 

government intends—in coordination with its State, local, and tribal (SLT), private 

sector, and foreign partners—to carry out over the next three years. 

Vision for the Future ISE 

Today’s ISE consists of multiple sharing environments designed to serve five 

communities: intelligence, law enforcement, defense, homeland security, and foreign 

affairs. Historically, each community developed its own policies, rules, standards, 

architectures, and systems to channel information to meet mission requirements. Prior 

to 9/11, the need for coordinated and trusted interagency partnerships was not 

universally recognized and thus gaps and seams existed in the sharing of information 

across all levels of government. 

The highest priority in creating the ISE must be on facilitating, coordinating, and 

expediting access to protected terrorism information. This future ISE requires a vision 

based on national policies, priorities, and partnerships, and a clear understanding of the 

operating framework, roles, and responsibilities for effective information sharing. 

We envision a future ISE that represents a trusted partnership among all levels of 

government in the United States, the private sector, and our foreign partners, to detect, 

prevent, disrupt, preempt, and mitigate the effects of terrorism against the territory, 

people, and interests of the United States of America. Realizing this vision will impact 

the numerous organizations participating in the ISE and will require achievement of the 

following six goals. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

xiv

Figure ES-1. ISE Goals 

The operating environment that flows from this vision and these goals will draw upon 

existing systems and capabilities, observe and respect the roles and responsibilities of 

participating Federal entities, and mandate a coordinated, collaborative approach to 

appropriate terrorism information sharing among all ISE participants. This environment 

will create a powerful national capability to share, search, and analyze terrorism 

information across jurisdictional boundaries and provide a distributed, secure, and 

trusted environment for transforming data into actionable information. The resulting 

environment will also recognize and leverage the vital roles played by State and major 

urban area information fusion centers, which represent crucial investments toward 

improving the nation’s counterterrorism capacity. 

The ISE must incorporate all types of data, at all levels of security. This includes 

structured and unstructured data and finished intelligence products. Ultimately, the goal 

is to integrate terrorism information from multiple sources and to provide maximum and 

appropriate access to such information. In this way, the ISE will meet the needs of all 

ISE participants by creating a more unified, coordinated environment. It will take 

advantage of and connect existing information sharing capabilities and organizational 

structures at all levels of government. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan 

 xv 

Underpinning this vision is a risk management approach to ensure that the ISE will 

protect this information at least to the same degree of security and assurance it receives 

today. Achieving this objective requires the development of policies, business rules, and 

technologies that balance the imperative to share with national security needs and the 

requirement to protect privacy and civil liberties. Further, the ISE will leverage ongoing 

Federal security initiatives; introduce auditing, authentication, and enforcement 

mechanisms to ensure a high degree of trust; and stimulate the development of 

technologies to improve security and access. 

One point implicit in this vision and articulation of ISE goals warrants particular 

emphasis: The ISE has been designed and will be driven and implemented by the 

needs and missions of all participants, and technology will be used to enhance ISE 

operations. The ISE will not result in the construction of one government-wide computer 

system containing all terrorism information. To the contrary, and as stated, technology 

will play the role of facilitating, improving, and expanding information sharing in 

response to the counterterrorism needs of ISE participants. 

Progress to Date 

Transforming today’s ISE is a complex undertaking. Today’s ISE—and the ISE of the 

future—exist in a dynamic, unpredictable threat environment. As threats change, 

technologies evolve, and information needs shift, the ISE must prove resilient and 

adaptable. The Federal government and its partners have not been standing still over 

the past five years. Far from it—we have substantially improved our nation’s ability to 

share terrorism information, as demonstrated by the following six major 

accomplishments. 

First, the Federal government has constructed a strong legal and policy foundation upon 

which to improve information sharing. For his part, the President issued Executive 

Orders (E.O.) 13311, 13356, and 13388 (which replaced E.O. 13356), each of which 

successively strengthened the sharing of terrorism information across the Federal 

government. In addition, on December 16, 2005, the President issued a Memorandum 

to the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies on the Guidelines and 

Requirements in Support of the Information Sharing Environment, which specified tasks, 

deadlines, and assignments necessary to further the ISE’s development. The President 

also adopted the majority of information sharing recommendations put forth by the 

Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding Weapons of 

Mass Destruction (the WMD Commission). Meanwhile, Congress enacted two laws in 

addition to IRTPA that provided the Federal government with greater authority for 

sharing information: The Uniting and Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate 

Tools Required to Intercept and Obstruct Terrorism (USA PATRIOT) Act of 2001 and 

the Homeland Security Act of 2002.
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

xvi

Second, the establishment and maturation of the National Counterterrorism Center 

(NCTC) provides the Federal government an essential institution to develop an ISE fully 

capable of facilitating the flow, analysis, and integration of terrorism information. 

Third, this legal and institutional foundation is complemented by measurable Federal 

progress in coordinating actions in the field. At the direction of the President, the NCTC 

produced the National Implementation Plan (NIP) for the War on Terror to further 

delineate Federal Department and Agency tasks to implement National Security 

Presidential Directive (NSPD)-46/Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD)-15. 

At the same time, the Departments of Justice (DOJ), Homeland Security (DHS), 

Defense (DoD), and State (DOS) and the Director for National Intelligence (DNI) have 

enhanced their field operations and technical capabilities and strengthened their 

working relationships with SLT, the private sector, and foreign partners. 

Fourth, States and localities have created and invested in fusion centers and charged 

those centers with collecting, analyzing, and sharing terrorism information. The 

collaboration between fusion centers and with the Federal government marks a 

tremendous increase in the nation’s overall analytic capacity that can be used to 

counter terrorism. 

Fifth, the PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC and Federal departments and agencies, 

has advanced a number of important initiatives to remove impediments to, and create 

new capabilities for, sharing terrorism information. These include establishing an Initial 

Operating Capability (IOC) for Electronic Directory Services (EDS); fostering a culture of 

information sharing through training and incentives; and compiling a working inventory 

of existing resources (policies, procedures, programs, systems, architectures, and 

standards) for terrorism information sharing. 

Sixth, the PM-ISE and the ISC have assisted in the compliance of, or complied with, all 

of the Presidential Information Sharing Guidelines and Requirements. The status of the 

recommendations being submitted to the President, in accordance with these 

Information Sharing Guidelines and Requirements, is summarized in the table below. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan 

 xvii 

Table ES-1. Status of Recommendations Submitted to the President in Accordance with the 

Presidential Information Sharing Guidelines and Requirements 

Guideline or 

Requirement Title Recommendation Status 

Requirement 1 Leveraging Ongoing Information Sharing Efforts in the 

Development of the ISE 

Substantial Progress 

Task 1(a): Completed 

Task 1(b): Completed 

Task 1(c): Due Dec. 2006 

Guideline 1 Define Common Standards for How Information is Acquired, 

Accessed, Shared, and Used Within the ISE 

Substantially Completed 

Guideline 2 Develop a Common Framework for the Sharing of Information 

Between and Among Executive Departments and Agencies and 

State, Local, and Tribal Governments, Law Enforcement 

Agencies, and the Private Sector 

Completed 

Guideline 3 Standardize Procedures for Sensitive But Unclassified 

Information 

In Progress 

Guideline 4 Facilitate Information Sharing Between Executive Departments 

and Agencies and Foreign Partners 

Completed 

Guideline 5 Protect the Information Privacy Rights and Other Legal Rights of 

Americans 

Completed 

Requirement 2 Promoting a Culture of Information Sharing In Progress 

ISE Implementation 

A dual imperative exists: to improve the sharing of terrorism information by taking 

immediate steps to improve ISE functionality and to simultaneously lay the foundation 

for ISE transformation and implementation. Consequently, this plan adopts a twophased approach: Phase 1 (those actions to be completed by June 2007) and Phase 2 

(actions to be completed in the period between June 2007 and June 2009). Specific 

implementation actions are contained throughout the ISE IP and are grouped into seven 

priority areas to include: ISE Operational Capabilities, Architecture and Standards, 

Sharing with Partners Outside the Federal government, Promoting a Culture of 

Information Sharing, Protecting Information Privacy and Civil Liberties in the ISE, 

Terrorism Information Handling, and ISE Enabling Activities. At the end of this threeyear period, a strong and effective ISE should be functional in all of the areas outlined in 

this ISE IP. These areas are described in further detail below. 

ISE Operational Capabilities 

Enhancing the operational capabilities available to support ISE participants’ business 

processes and functions is a major priority in both phases of implementation. The areas 

of emphasis include, but are not limited to: improving the access to and sharing of 

terrorism-related alerts and notifications; enhancing the ability of recipients of terrorism 

information to better search information databases; and improving collaboration across 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

xviii

all level of government. The objective is to add value to current and future processes in 

three dimensions: 

1. Offering a suite of sharing and collaboration tools, subscription and 

notification services, and other common services; 

2. Discovering and identifying data and services resident in other venues that 

should be added to the ISE; and 

3. Providing the policies, processes, and technical means for introducing new 

capabilities into the ISE. 

In Phase 1, activities will focus on identifying existing or emerging technologies or 

programs that may be appropriate for ISE adoption. Therefore, Phase 1 will identify 

standards and best practices, from both business process and technology perspectives, 

that can be leveraged in the ISE. Pilot programs, such as the Sensitive but Unclassified 

(SBU) Mobility Pilot for wireless access, will be closely monitored to identify policy, 

process, and technical lessons learned that could advance the plan for implementing 

the ISE sooner and better. Phase 2 will primarily concentrate on planning for, adopting 

and integrating these existing and emerging technologies. It will also include an 

incremental technology and capability review, comparing existing technologies and tools 

against the emerging needs of ISE users. 

Architecture and Standards 

Creating a fully functional ISE involves constructing, integrating, and maintaining 

information resource infrastructures across Federal and SLT entities with 

counterterrorism missions and establishing the mechanism for sharing, as appropriate, 

with our private sector and foreign partners. These information resources include 

personnel, equipment, funds, and information technology (IT). The current Federal 

approach to managing information resources involves use of strategic management 

tools—such as enterprise architectures—to help organizations understand the 

interrelationships of their missions and IT processes. Planning, integration, and 

implementation activities affecting information resources, both internal and external to 

agencies, are also effectively achieved through well-defined, conforming processes 

using common standards. 

The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, is developing an ISE Enterprise Architecture 

(ISEEA) Framework and Federal Enterprise Architecture-ISE Profile, along with the 

Common Terrorism Information Sharing Standards (CTISS). These initiatives help 

establish an overarching architecture and standards program from which to build a 

nationwide, integrated ISE. Once implemented, they will facilitate the sharing of analytic 

products and other information by all ISE participants. In both cases, these efforts 

represent starting points. During Phase 1, the PM-ISE will continue to generate versions 

of the ISEEA and CTISS, publishing products designed to define processes and 

standards. During Phase 2, the PM-ISE will continue to utilize existing processes with 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan 

 xix 

Federal department and agency senior leadership, the Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB), the Office of the DNI (ODNI), DoD, the National Communications 

System, and the Committee on National Security Systems to ensure Fiscal Year (FY) 

2009 enterprise architecture reviews and information resource investment budget 

requests incorporate ISEEA and CTISS requirements. Moreover, the PM-ISE will work 

with DHS, DOJ, and other Federal agencies to help State and major urban area fusion 

centers implement the ISEEA Framework and CTISS for eventual migration to SLT 

government infrastructures. 

Sharing with Partners Outside the Federal Government 

Realizing the full potential of the ISE requires sharing across all its participating 

organizations. Significant progress has been made in improving sharing with partners 

outside the Federal government. Specifically, the Attorney General and the Secretary of 

Homeland Security, in consultation with the PM-ISE, the ISC, and Federal departments 

and agencies, have established a Presidentially-approved framework (pursuant to 

Presidential Guideline 2) through which terrorism information can be shared in a 

distributed, decentralized, and coordinated manner between and among participating 

Federal, SLT, and private sector entities. Several steps were taken to improve 

integration of non-Federal participants into the ISE. The ISC has established a SLT 

Subcommittee and a Private Sector Subcommittee that serve as forums to address 

implementation issues related to SLT governments and the private sector respectively. 

Similarly, the interagency Foreign Government Information Sharing Working Group, led 

by the Department of State (DOS), prepared recommendations for the President to 

facilitate terrorism information sharing with foreign partners and allies, pursuant to 

Guideline 4. 

Phase 1 will center on activities to stimulate the development of the SLT fusion center 

network, complete initial efforts to implement elements of the Guideline 2 framework 

across SLT governments and the private sector, and take the steps called for in the 

Guideline 4 recommendations to improve sharing with foreign partners. The second 

phase will fully implement the Guideline 2 framework, including further development of 

the fusion center network, and take further steps to protect U.S. information given to 

foreign partners and to protect foreign information provided to the United States while 

allowing for maximum dissemination. 

Promoting a Culture of Information Sharing 

As Congress recognized in IRTPA, there exists a need to develop a culture that 

promotes information sharing across the ISE. Accordingly, the PM-ISE and ISC are 

developing initiatives, including training and performance measurements that will 

stimulate the development of this culture and that will build trust among ISE participants. 

For example, Federal departments and agencies responsible for handling terrorism 

information designated an accountable senior official to provide direct, agency-wide 

oversight authority for planning, developing, and implementing all aspects of the ISE. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

xx

Further, an ISE training program will include a core training curriculum, common to all 

Federal departments and agencies, combined with department- and agency-specific 

training. Another element will be a process to review agency rules, regulations, or 

directives to identify and revise any such guidance that unnecessarily impedes terrorism 

information sharing. 

During Phase 1, a core training module will be developed that will serve as the common 

educational baseline for the ISE. Additionally, a structure that offers incentives for 

adopting the ISE culture will be developed, reviewed, and measured. During the second 

phase, department- and agency-specific training and training guidelines for SLT 

governments will be developed. Phase 2 will also concentrate on ensuring that 

personnel responsible for handling terrorism information complete approved training 

programs, new employees complete information sharing training, and departments and 

agencies recommend modifications to internal policies needed to accommodate the ISE 

training, incentive, and accountability requirements. 

Protecting Information Privacy and Civil Liberties in the ISE 

In accordance with Presidential Guideline 5, the Attorney General and the DNI, in 

coordination with the PM-ISE and the heads of Federal departments and agencies, 

developed Privacy Guidelines, approved by the President, for Federal departments and 

agencies to ensure that the information privacy and other legal rights of Americans are 

protected in the development and use of the ISE. Specifically, these guidelines call for 

Federal departments and agencies to comply with current laws, regulations, and 

policies related to protected information and to adopt any internal policies required to 

ensure that their access to and use of protected information is consistent with the 

authorized purpose of the ISE and the need for privacy and other legal protections. 

During Phase 1 of ISE implementation, each Federal department and agency will 

ensure at least one ISE Privacy Official has been designated. To ensure cross-agency 

coordination, the PM-ISE will also establish and designate a chair for the ISE Privacy 

Guidelines Committee. During Phases 1 and 2, the Committee will provide assessments 

of the ISE privacy and civil liberties protections as part of the annual ISE performance 

report. 

Terrorism Information Handling 

The ISE will rely on standardized, consistent policies and procedures for handling 

classified and unclassified terrorism information. The simplification of personnel 

clearance processes and the adoption of community-wide certification and accreditation 

policies and standards address the modification of security practices related to 

classified, national security information. At the same time, the standardization of SBU 

designations and markings is essential to ensure that the future ISE promotes and 

enhances the effective and efficient acquisition, access, retention, production, use, 

management, and sharing of unclassified information while also ensuring its appropriate 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan 

 xxi 

and consistent safeguarding. A Coordinating Committee has been created to complete 

the recommendation for standardizing SBU procedures, in accordance with Presidential 

Guideline 3. 

For classified information, Phase 2 efforts will, on an ongoing basis, monitor and assess 

progress of ISC members in meeting the security clearance processing requirements of 

Section 3001 of IRTPA; support Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) efforts to 

facilitate compliance with E.O. 12958, as amended, and its implementing directives; and 

support and leverage ODNI-led efforts to overhaul existing criteria and processes for 

certifying and accrediting Intelligence Community IT systems. 

For unclassified information, in Phase 1, the Guideline 3 Coordinating Committee will 

submit recommendations for SBU standardization through the White House policy 

process to the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and Counterterrorism 

(APHS-CT) and the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs (APNSA). 

ISE Enabling Activities 

ISE performance management and planning, programming, and budgeting are 

necessary to enable the ISE. Performance management across the ISE requires a 

collaborative effort between the PM-ISE, ISC, and the ISE participants. ISE 

performance management will include ISE-wide goals and measures, while also 

integrating the performance goals, measures, and targets specific to individual 

departments and agencies. Dedication of specific funds and resources is also required 

to transform the current ISE into one that better facilitates protected access to terrorism 

information across ISE participants. Specific funding estimates, strategies, and 

proposals will need to be assessed, prioritized, cross-walked, and carefully integrated to 

achieve an overarching budget plan that can accomplish the two-phased 

implementation approach proposed in this plan. 

During Phase 1, Federal departments and agencies will take several actions to develop 

and implement information sharing and terrorism-related goals, measures, and 

outcomes. The PM-ISE will also support OMB, which will provide Federal departments 

and agencies with budget guidance, and will begin planning for subsequent budget 

cycles. 

Managing ISE Implementation 

This plan contains nearly 100 short- and long-term actions to improve the sharing of 

terrorism information. To manage the ISE, the PM-ISE needs to monitor implementation 

progress, make mid-course adjustments, and elevate important issues to senior levels 

when they cannot be resolved. To ensure this plan is executed and coordinated 

properly, the PM-ISE will take several actions, to include: 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

xxii

1. Work with the ISC to obtain advice and recommendations and to gain 

Federal department and agency concurrence through its members; 

2. Establish ISC Subcommittees and Working Groups to analyze complex 

issues and propose solutions; 

3. Prioritize implementation actions to respond dynamically to changing 

conditions and ISE performance; 

4. Conduct ISE Performance Reviews to set goals and measures to assess 

capabilities for sharing terrorism information; 

5. Conduct operational exercises to test and evaluate information sharing 

capabilities; 

6. Sponsor evaluation environments to identify new requirements, performance 

elements, capabilities, and standards; and 

7. Compile an Annual Performance Report per the requirements of IRTPA to 

advise Congress on ISE performance. 

Recommendations 

Beyond these actions, the PM-ISE makes four major recommendations in this plan: 

Recommendation 1: IRTPA defines the ISE as “an approach that facilitates the 

sharing of terrorism information . . .” IRTPA requires the PM-ISE, in consultation 

with the ISC, to recommend whether, and under what conditions, to expand the 

ISE to include other intelligence information. Pursuant to this Implementation 

Plan, and consistent with Guidelines 2 and 3 of the Presidential Information 

Sharing Guidelines, the ISE will facilitate the sharing of “terrorism information,” as 

defined in IRTPA Section 1016(a)(4), as well as the following categories of 

information to the extent that they do not otherwise constitute “terrorism 

information”: (1) homeland security information as defined in Section 892(f)(1) of 

the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. § 482(f)(1)); and (2) law 

enforcement information relating to terrorism or the security of our homeland. 

Such additional information includes intelligence information. 

The PM-ISE recommends deferring a decision to further expand the ISE to 

include additional intelligence information until policies, business practices, and 

systems are sufficiently mature to evaluate the impact of including such 

additional information, and revisiting the topic in the first annual ISE Performance 

Report (see Recommendation 3 below). 

Recommendation 2: Continue the PM-ISE for three years. IRTPA requires that 

the PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, recommend a future management 

structure for the ISE, including whether the position of the PM should continue to 

remain in existence. Given that this plan contains actions through June 2009, the 

PM-ISE recommends continuation of the PM-ISE and ISC for the three years 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan 

 xxiii 

covered by this plan to ensure its full implementation and to provide a fully 

operational ISE. This decision to continue the PM-ISE should be reviewed 

annually over the three-year period. 

Recommendation 3: ISE Performance Report. The PM-ISE recommends that the 

President request the first ISE Performance Report, required by the IRTPA, be 

submitted to Congress at the end of June 2007, at the one-year mark for the plan 

and in time to inform the development of department and agency budgets. 

Subsequent reports would then be submitted at the end of June of each year 

thereafter. 

Recommendation 4: Delegation of Authority. The need to grant the PM-ISE 

government-wide authority to issue procedures, guidelines, functional standards, 

and instructions for the management, development, and operation of the ISE, 

and options for doing so, should be considered. Such issuances would need to 

be consistent with the policies and directives issued by the President, the DNI, 

the Director of OMB, and other heads of departments and agencies having the 

authority to issue ISE policies and directives. Such issuance authority would not 

change or abrogate the authorities of the heads of such Federal departments and 

agencies, and all issuances would be coordinated through the ISE governance 

process described in Section 4.2 of this Implementation Plan. The delegation 

could be made consistent with the Presidential memorandum of June 2, 2005, 

and be through the DNI to the PM-ISE. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

xxiv

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 1 

PART I – WHAT WE WANT THE ISE TO BE
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

2

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 3 

Chapter 1 – Introduction 

1.1 Purpose and Scope 

Improving information sharing constitutes a cornerstone of our national strategy to 

protect the American people and our institutions and to defeat terrorists and their 

support networks at home and abroad. The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks 

Upon the United States (the 9/11 Commission) identified a breakdown in information 

sharing as a key factor contributing to the failure to prevent the September 11, 2001 

attacks on the United States. In the past five years, the Congress and Executive Branch 

have taken numerous steps to improve sharing of terrorism information among Federal 

departments and agencies, with State, local, and tribal (SLT) governments and, where 

appropriate, private sector and foreign partners. Despite this progress, the challenge 

enunciated by the 9/11 Commission remains: “The biggest impediment to all-source 

analysis—to a greater likelihood of connecting the dots—is the human or systemic 

resistance to sharing information.” 

In December 2004, Congress passed and the President signed the Intelligence Reform 

and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (IRTPA).1

 Section 1016 of IRTPA requires the 

President to establish an Information Sharing Environment (ISE) “for the sharing of 

terrorism information in a manner consistent with national security and with applicable 

legal standards relating to privacy and civil liberties.”2 Moreover, IRTPA defines the ISE 

to mean “an approach that facilitates the sharing of terrorism information.”3

IRTPA also requires the designation of a Program Manager for the Information Sharing 

Environment (PM-ISE) “responsible for information sharing across the Federal 

Government” to oversee the implementation of and manage the ISE.4;5 Working in 

consultation with the Information Sharing Council (ISC),6

 an interagency advisory body 

for Federal departments and agencies with counterterrorism missions, the PM-ISE’s 

responsibilities include: 

 

1 Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004, Public Law No. 108-458 (December 17, 2004). 

2

 Ibid. Section 1016(b)(1)(A) of IRTPA. 

3

 Ibid. Section 1016(a)(2) of IRTPA. 

4

 Ibid. Section 1016(f) of IRTPA. 

5

 Note with respect to the PM-ISE, the President's June 2, 2005 Memorandum on Strengthening Information Sharing, Access, and 

Integration- Organizational, Management, and Policy Development Structures for Creating the Terrorism Information Sharing Environment 

states that "the DNI shall promptly designate the PM, and all personnel, funds, and other resources assigned to the PM, as part of 

the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (ODNI) pursuant to section 103(c)(9) of the National Security Act of 1947 and shall 

administer the PM and related resources as part of the ODNI throughout the initial 2-year term of the PM's office." 6 IRTPA, Section 1016(g). See Section 4.2.3 and Appendix 6 for a more detailed description of the roles, responsibilities, and 

membership of the Information Sharing Council. 
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

4

1. Planning for and overseeing the implementation of, and managing, the ISE; 

2. Assisting in the development of policies, procedures, guidelines, rules, and 

standards as appropriate to foster the development and proper operation of 

the ISE; and 

3. Assisting, monitoring, and assessing the implementation of the ISE by 

Federal departments and agencies to ensure adequate progress, 

technological consistency and policy compliance, and regularly report 

findings to Congress.7

Among other duties, the PM-ISE is responsible for assisting the President in submitting 

an Implementation Plan for the ISE to Congress that addresses eleven specific 

requirements in Section 1016(e). In January 2006, the PM-ISE produced an Interim 

Implementation Plan (IIP) that partially responded to the eleven 1016(e) requirements. 

A number of IIP actions—many of which also responded directly to the President’s 

December 16, 2005, Memorandum that set forth Guidelines and Requirements in 

Support of the Information Sharing Environment—have already been completed, and 

the others will be accomplished by December 2006. 8;9

Building on work already completed, this ISE Implementation Plan (ISE IP) responds to 

all eleven IRTPA 1016(e) requirements, and represents a comprehensive plan for 

improving the ISE in the coming three-year period. 10 Figure 1.1-1 portrays the top level 

organizational structure of the ISE Implementation. 

Figure 1.1-1. ISE Implementation Plan Roadmap 

 

7

 Ibid. Section 1016(f)(2)(A) of IRTPA. 

8

 Throughout the remainder of this plan, this memorandum and its contents will be referred to as “Information Sharing Guidelines

and Requirements." 

9

 See Appendix 3. Note: this Presidential memorandum contains two requirements and five guidelines: Requirement 1—Leveraging 

Ongoing Information Sharing Efforts in the Development of the ISE; Information Sharing Guidelines; and Requirement 2—Promoting a 

Culture of Information Sharing. The five guidelines include: Guideline 1—Define Common Standards for How Information is Acquired, 

Accessed, Shared, and Used Within the ISE; Guideline 2—Develop a Common Framework for the Sharing of Information Between and Among 

Executive Departments and Agencies and State, Local, and Tribal Governments, Law Enforcement Agencies, and the Private Sector; Guideline 

3—Standardize Procedures for Sensitive But Unclassified Information; Guideline 4—Facilitate Information Sharing Between Executive 

Departments and Agencies and Foreign Partners; and Guideline 5—Protect the Information Privacy Rights and Other Legal Rights of 

Americans.

10 See Appendix 1 for a complete list of the eleven IRTPA Section 1016(e) requirements. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 5 

1. Part I (Chapters 1-3) provides the foundation for the ISE IP, describing the 

ISE vision, goals, and operational framework to institutionalize and improve 

the sharing of terrorism information among ISE participants; 

2. Part II (Chapters 4-7) outlines a two-phased implementation approach for 

the actions contained in the plan and describes the structural details for how 

the ISE will support the needs of ISE participants; 

3. Part III (Chapters 8-11) highlights the major information sharing challenges 

facing ISE participants and articulates strategies for addressing them over 

the next three years; and 

4. Part IV (Chapters 12-14) describes how the PM-ISE will use the ISE IP to 

manage the ISE by setting and adjusting priorities and regularly assessing 

implementation progress. This part also presents the PM-ISE 

recommendations. 

Appendices to this plan provide more detailed background and reference material, 

including a detailed glossary and list of acronyms. 

1.2 Definitions 

IRTPA definitions of terrorism information and the Information Sharing Environment

create the boundary conditions for the plan. These definitions describe the types of 

information to be accessed, shared, and disseminated and by what means. This Section 

also includes a definition of ISE participants drawn from language contained in IRTPA 

and multiple Presidential directives. In addition to framing the vision, strategy, and 

individual implementation actions in this plan, these definitions inform the PM-ISE’s 

statutory requirement to recommend whether, and under what conditions, the ISE 

should be expanded to include other intelligence information. 

1.2.1 Terrorism Information 

IRTPA defines “terrorism information” as: 

All information, whether collected, produced, or distributed by intelligence, law 

enforcement, military, homeland security, or other activities relating to— 

(A) the existence, organization, capabilities, plans, intentions, 

vulnerabilities, means of finance or material support, or activities of 

foreign or international terrorist groups or individuals, or of domestic 

groups or individuals involved in transnational terrorism; 

(B) threats posed by such groups or individuals to the United States, 

United States persons, or United States interests, or to those of other 

nations; 

(C) communications of or by such groups or individuals; or 
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

6

(D) groups or individuals reasonably believed to be assisting or associated 

with such groups or individuals.11

1.2.2 Information Sharing Environment 

IRTPA calls for the creation of an “information sharing environment.” Specifically, the 

enactment requires the President to: create an environment for the sharing of terrorism 

information in a manner consistent with national security and with applicable legal 

standards relating to privacy and civil liberties; designate the organizational and 

management structures that will be used to operate and manage the ISE; and 

determine and enforce the policies, directives, and rules that will govern the content and 

usage of the ISE.12 IRTPA further requires that the ISE provide and facilitate “the means 

for sharing terrorism information among all appropriate Federal, State, local, and tribal 

entities, and the private sector” and to the greatest extent practicable consist of “a

decentralized, distributed, and coordinated environment” that: 

1. Connects existing systems where appropriate, provides no single points of 

failure, and allows users to share information among agencies, levels of 

government, and, as appropriate, the private sector; 

2. Ensures direct and continuous online electronic access to information; 

3. Facilitates the availability of information in a form and manner that facilitates 

its use in analysis, investigations, and operations; 

4. Builds upon existing systems capabilities currently in use across the 

Government; 

5. Employs an information access management approach that controls access 

to data, rather than just systems and networks, without sacrificing security; 

6. Facilitates the sharing of information at and across all levels of security; 

7. Provides directory services, or the functional equivalent, for locating people, 

organizations, and information; 

8. Incorporates protections for individuals’ privacy and civil liberties; and 

9. Incorporates strong mechanisms to enhance accountability and facilitate 

oversight, including audits, authentication, and access controls.13

1.3 Background 

In the past five years, the Executive Branch has taken significant steps toward 

advancing our nation’s ability to share terrorism information. Through Executive Orders 

(E.O.) 13311 and 13356, the President provided the foundation for improving 

 

11 Ibid. Section 1016(a)(4) of IRTPA. 12 Ibid. Section 1016(b)(1) of IRTPA. 13 Ibid. Section 1016(b)(2) of IRTPA. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 7 

information sharing. On October 25, 2005, the President added to this foundation by 

issuing E.O. 13388, Further Strengthening the Sharing of Terrorism Information to 

Protect Americans, which states that the head of each Executive agency that possesses 

or acquires terrorism information “shall promptly give access to the terrorism information 

to the head of each other agency that has counterterrorism functions, and provide the 

terrorism information to each such agency” unless otherwise directed by the President, 

consistent with statutory responsibilities of the agencies providing and receiving such 

information, Attorney General guidelines, and other applicable law. In addition, the 

President has adopted the majority of information sharing recommendations put forth by 

the Commission on the Intelligence Capabilities of the United States Regarding 

Weapons of Mass Destruction (the WMD Commission).

For its part, Congress enacted three laws providing the Federal government with 

greater authority and additional tools for sharing information: The Uniting and 

Strengthening America by Providing Appropriate Tools Required to Intercept and 

Obstruct Terrorism Act of 2001 (USA PATRIOT) Act, the Homeland Security Act of 

2002, and IRTPA. 

These legislative and policy advances were furthered by the President’s establishment 

of the National Counterterrorism Center (NCTC)14 and the Terrorist Screening Center, 

which have both illustrated the potential that can be realized by integrating existing 

information sharing capabilities. The Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of 

Homeland Security (DHS), and Department of Defense (DoD) have also enhanced their 

field operations and technical capabilities, strengthening their working relationships with 

other ISE participants. These combined activities form a strong foundation to further 

improve the sharing of terrorism information. 

More recently, two additional Presidential actions have enhanced this foundation, 

identifying a set of expectations with which Federal departments and agencies must 

comply, and synchronizing and aligning ongoing information sharing efforts to improve 

response to overall U.S. counterterrorism strategies and objectives. First, consistent 

with IRTPA, Section 1016(d), the President issued the Information Sharing Guidelines 

and Requirements, which identified specific tasks, deadlines, and assignments 

necessary to further the ISE development. Second, at the direction of the President, the 

NCTC produced the National Implementation Plan (NIP) for the War on Terror to further 

delineate Federal department and agency tasks to implement National Security 

Presidential Directive (NSPD)-46 and Homeland Security Presidential Directive 

(HSPD) -15. 

For their part, many States and localities emphatically moved to create and invest in 

fusion centers in the post-9/11 environment. These fusion centers now play a prominent 

role in collecting, analyzing, and sharing terrorism information. Individually, these 

centers represent vital assets for collecting terrorism-related information. Collectively, 

 

14 Reference Executive Order 13354 (August 27, 2004), National Counterterrorism Center. 
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

8

their collaboration with the Federal government, with one another (State-to-State, Stateto-locality), and with the private sector represents a tremendous increase in both the 

nation’s overall analytic capacity and the multi-directional flow of information. It is 

important to note that these centers are not homogenous—considerable variations exist 

in terms of operations and mission focus (e.g., homeland security, law enforcement, 

emergency response). To date, more than 40 such centers have been established 

across the United States, and significant effort has gone into developing and adopting 

standards to facilitate easier information access, sharing, and use.15

To capitalize on this collective progress, the PM-ISE and Federal departments and 

agencies took a number of important steps in the past year that are making a positive 

impact on the nation’s ability to share terrorism information: 

1. Implementing an Initial Operating Capability (IOC) for Electronic Directory 

Services (EDS) across Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI) and 

Secret networks. The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, and as required 

by IRTPA, delivered electronic directory services that enabled certain ISE 

participants to access an organizational directory (“blue pages”) that provides 

24/7 contact information for those organizations that possess or acquire 

terrorism information;16

2. Capturing the inventory of existing terrorism information sharing resources 

(policies, procedures, programs, systems, architectures, and standards). 

Consistent with Presidential Requirement 1(a), the PM-ISE completed a 

working inventory of these resources, which form the basis for some of the 

specific implementation actions in this plan; 

3. Developing a framework through which terrorism information can be shared 

between and among Federal and SLT governments and the private sector. 

Consistent with Presidential Guideline 2, the Attorney General and the 

Secretary of Homeland Security, in consultation with the PM-ISE, the ISC, 

and other Federal departments and agencies, have established a 

Presidentially-approved framework that will strengthen the sharing of 

terrorism information across these jurisdictional boundaries and will 

coordinate Federal efforts with those at the State and local levels;17

4. Addressing issues related to sharing Sensitive but Unclassified (SBU) 

information. In accordance with Guideline 3, the Secretary of Homeland 

Security and the Attorney General have captured an inventory of Federal 

government SBU procedures and conducted work towards formulating 

recommendations for standardizing marking and handling procedures for 

homeland security information, law enforcement information, and terrorism 

 

15 For example, Fusion Center Guidelines: Developing and Sharing Information and Intelligence in a New Era (Washington, DC: 2005). 

Developed in collaboration by the Department of Justice (DOJ), Department of Homeland Security (DHS), and members of the 

DOJ’s Global Justice Information Sharing Initiative and DHS’s Homeland Security Advisory Council.

16 See Chapter 5 for further details. 17 See Chapter 7 for a fuller discussion of Guideline 2. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 9 

information (efforts to complete the Guideline 3 recommendations 

continue);18

5. Facilitating and strengthening the sharing of terrorism information with 

foreign partners. In accordance with Presidential Guideline 4, the Secretary 

of State and the interagency Foreign Government Information Sharing 

Working Group, in coordination with the PM-ISE, developed 

recommendations approved by the President to facilitate terrorism 

information sharing with foreign partners and allies;19

6. Ensuring the protection of privacy and civil liberties. Consistent with 

Presidential Guideline 5, the Attorney General and the Director of National 

Intelligence (DNI), in coordination with the PM-ISE and the heads of Federal 

departments and agencies that possess or use intelligence or terrorism 

information, developed privacy guidelines approved by the President for the 

ISE;20

7. Fostering a culture of information sharing across the Federal government

and with all ISE participants regardless of their organizational affiliation. In 

accordance with Presidential Requirement 2, the PM-ISE and ISC members 

are developing initiatives, including training and performance measurement, 

that will stimulate the development of this culture and that will build trust 

among ISE participants; 

8. Testing and fielding operational demonstrations that illustrate the benefits of 

sharing information. The PM-ISE is actively working with Federal 

departments and agencies to field tangible demonstration projects that 

support the ISE participants. An example is a joint project with the Federal 

Bureau of Investigation (FBI) to upgrade its existing wireless infrastructure to 

function as a test bed for evaluating advanced SBU wireless technologies 

and capabilities. The objective is to transmit federally held terrorism 

information into a usable form to Federal, State, and local counterterrorism 

personnel through wireless devices, including laptops and personal 

electronic devices; and 

9. Assisting the Records Access and Information Security Policy Coordination 

Committee (RAIS PCC) to review and possibly update E.O. 12958, Classified 

National Security Information. WMD Commission Recommendation 9.7 

called for proposed standards to simplify and modernize the information 

classification system with particular attention to implementation in a networkcentric ISE.21

 

18 See Chapter 10 for a fuller discussion of Guideline 3. 

19 See Chapter 7 for a fuller discussion of Guideline 4. 20 See Chapter 9 for a fuller discussion of Guideline 5. 21 Note details of the proposed E.O. 12958 (April 17, 1995) amendments are documented in: Records Access and Information 

Security PCC, Proposed Amendments to E.O. 12958 Responding to WMD Commission Recommendation 9.7 As of June 9, 2006 (PCC: 

Washington, DC, 2006). 
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

10

1.4 Today’s ISE 

The ISE must enable all levels of government, the private sector, and our foreign 

partners to fill vital roles in preventing, preparing for, and quickly responding to terrorist 

threats and attacks. Mission-oriented information sharing solutions must support the 

analysis of disparate pieces of information and their translation into concise, actionable, 

and, where possible, unclassified formats. Further, these solutions must ensure the 

appropriate access to—and the sharing, integration, and use of—terrorism information 

by ISE participants. Despite growing recognition that State and local fusion centers 

represent a critical component of our nation’s counterterrorism efforts, no national 

strategy or protocols define how Federal departments or agencies will collaborate with 

these centers. Accordingly, each center has developed its own way of interfacing with 

the various Federal departments and agencies involved in terrorism prevention and 

response. At the same time, those same Federal departments and agencies have 

established protocols with different fusion centers in a manner that varies across the 

States. 

Historically, terrorism information sharing occurred in multiple sharing environments 

designed to primarily serve the intelligence, law enforcement, defense, homeland 

security, and foreign affairs communities. 22 Each community developed its own policies, 

rules, standards, architectures, and systems to channel information to meet mission 

requirements.23 Accordingly, few coordinated and collaborative processes existed to 

address information sharing, and there emerged gaps in sharing. 

Identifying and rectifying these gaps is a highly complex undertaking. Today’s ISE—and 

the ISE of the future—exist in a dynamic, unpredictable threat environment. As threats 

change, information needs shift, and technologies evolve, the ISE must prove resilient, 

sustainable, and adaptable. To their great credit, over the past five years all levels of 

government, the private sector, and our foreign partners have taken concrete steps to 

strengthen the nation’s ability to share terrorism information. These steps include 

revisions to existing policies and procedures and development of new policies and 

guidelines; creating and investing in information fusion centers at all levels of 

government; funding and fielding new collaborative capabilities and programs that allow 

ISE participants to share with one another; and implementing systems, architectures, 

and standards to provide solutions for ISE users that enable them to access, share, and 

analyze terrorism information. 

Despite this progress, significant hurdles in the current or “As-Is” ISE remain that 

prevent it from delivering the full range of functions and services needed by ISE 

participants. 24 Accordingly, a robust information sharing framework is required to 

 

22 For the purposes of the ISE IP, the term “homeland security community” includes the Department of Homeland Security and 

those agencies with public health and welfare, emergency response, transportation, fire, and emergency management. 

23 In actuality, some Federal departments and agencies belong to more than one Community. For example, the FBI is part of the law

enforcement community but has an element that is part of the Intelligence Community. 

24 See Section 3.2.1 of this plan for a more detailed description of today’s ISE. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 11 

address these deficiencies and to establish an integrated approach through which ISE 

participants coordinate and share terrorism information—vertically between levels and 

horizontally within each level. 

1.5 Overview of the Future ISE 

Transforming the current ISE into one that facilitates improved coordination and 

expedited access to protected terrorism information by all levels of government and, 

when appropriate, the private sector and foreign partners is a national imperative. This 

transformation requires a vision to clearly define the framework, roles, and 

responsibilities for future information sharing around which national policies, priorities, 

and partnerships coalesce. The vision for the ISE is: 

A trusted partnership between all levels of government in the United States, the 

private sector, and our foreign partners, to detect, prevent, disrupt, preempt, and 

mitigate the effects of terrorism against the territory, people, and interests of the 

United States of America by the effective and efficient sharing of terrorism 

information. 

Flowing from this vision is the requirement for an operating environment that draws 

upon existing systems and capabilities, empowers Federal departments and agencies in 

the fulfillment of their assigned roles and responsibilities, builds the analytic capacity 

and technical methodologies that enable all ISE participants to improve the sharing and 

analysis of information, and mandates a coordinated, collaborative, and interconnected 

approach to sharing terrorism information. 

This operating environment also recognizes the important role played by State and local 

fusion centers and, while assisting them in meeting certain thresholds of capability and 

complying with all applicable privacy laws, integrates those fusion centers into a 

national information sharing structure. Ultimately, this framework is intended to improve 

the flow of terrorism information, broaden the connectedness of all ISE participants, 

enhance the nation’s overall analytic capacity, and clarify roles, responsibilities, and 

reporting expectations. Further, this operating environment recognizes the “all-crimes 

and all-hazards” nature of State and local sharing, where SLT organizations may share 

and fuse together multiple types of information to address a variety of needs including 

law enforcement, preparedness, and response and recovery. In many instances, this 

information may not initially be recognized as terrorism information, but may be 

information that could ultimately prove crucial in preventing, preparing for, or responding 

to terrorism. The ISE focus on terrorism information will not impede or interrupt these 

additional fusion center functions. 

To be effective, the ISE must meet six goals (see Figure 1.5-1 below). 
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

12

Figure 1.5-1. ISE Goals 

To realize these goals, the ISE must be structured in a more unified, coordinated 

manner to empower ISE participants to capitalize on enhanced information sharing 

capabilities and functions. Specifically: 

1. For the President, and his advisors, it must provide complete, accurate, and 

valid information drawn from multiple sources upon which to base policy and 

operational decisions; 

2. For Federal departments and agencies, it must provide new sources of 

information from other Federal, SLT, private sector, and foreign partners in a 

secure, trusted environment that protects information and sources and 

methods; 

3. For SLT governments, it must create a recognizable Federal focus for 

federally coordinated terrorism information, one that generates more tailored, 

actionable information and improves situational awareness at all levels and 

supports the development of a true national analytic capacity; 

4. For the private sector, it must establish a coordinated source—across 

Federal, State, local, and tribal boundaries—for access to terrorism 

information, alerts, warnings, and situational awareness; 

5. For foreign partners, it must create an environment in which terrorism 

information provided to or received from foreign governments is appropriately 

and adequately safeguarded and is made available, as appropriate to 

Federal departments and agencies; 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 13 

6. For individuals, it must protect information privacy and other legal rights of 

Americans; 

7. For all ISE participants, it must create an environment where users rely on a 

clearly defined set of institutionalized authorities, roles, and responsibilities 

and trusted systems, not the traditional emphasis on personal relationships; 

and 

8. For all ISE participants, it must create common certification and accreditation 

and other security policies and standards that allow for the efficient 

implementation of technology solutions. 
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

14

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 15 

Chapter 2 – Information Sharing Strategy, Roles, and Needs 

2.1 Information Sharing Strategy 

In the aftermath of the September 11, 2001, attacks and the ensuing War on Terror, 

multiple groups examined terrorism and homeland security issues, and produced 

recommendations to strengthen the sharing of terrorism information. 25 The 

recommendations included creating a distributed, decentralized, and trusted information 

network with equivalent or greater levels of security; facilitating better sharing of 

terrorism information across Federal agencies with collection, analysis, and 

dissemination authorities, roles, and responsibilities; reducing impediments to the multidirectional flow of information across Federal, SLT, private sector, and foreign partners; 

and sorting out the myriad of legal, policy, organizational, cultural, and technical barriers 

to sharing. Consistent with those recommendations, IRTPA and the Presidential 

Information Sharing Guidelines and Requirements call for creating an ISE to provide 

and facilitate the means for sharing terrorism information among all appropriate Federal 

agencies, SLT governments, and the private sector through the use of policy guidelines 

and technologies.26

The strategy for achieving this vision involves using all authorities, resources, programs, 

and capabilities available to ISE participants to execute this plan as effectively as 

possible and to promote a culture where sharing terrorism information is a core value. 

While IRTPA largely focuses on Federal departments and agencies sharing terrorism 

information with one another or with non-Federal ISE participants, the resulting 

environment—the aggregation of the legal, policy, cultural, organizational, and 

technological conditions that influence terrorism information sharing—holds the promise 

of greatly improving information sharing among all ISE participants (e.g., Federal-toState, State-to-State, State-to-locality, government-to-industry, Federal government-toforeign ally). Only through the coordinated efforts of Federal, SLT, private sector, and 

foreign partners can the ISE realize this full potential. 

2.2 Organizational Roles, Missions, and Responsibilities 

Under the direction of the DNI, the PM-ISE and Director of the NCTC, in coordination 

with the heads of relevant Federal departments and agencies, reviewed and identified 

the respective missions, roles, and responsibilities of those executive departments and 

agencies with regard to terrorism information sharing, in accordance with Requirement 

1(b) of the Presidential Information Sharing Guidelines and Requirements. To 

accomplish this task, the NIP, in addition to responding to the priorities of NSPD-

 

25 The National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, the Markle Foundation’s report Creating a Trusted 

Information Network for Homeland Security, and numerous Government Accountability Office (GAO) reports examining Federal 

information sharing issues (e.g., GAO-06-15, GAO-06-497T, GAO-06-385, and GAO-06-383). 

26 IRTPA, Section 1016(b)(2). 
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

16

46/HSPD-15, addresses the deliverables called for in Requirement 1(b). At the direction 

of the President, NCTC led the effort and Federal departments and agencies 

coordinated and collaborated in its development. 

In addition, pursuant to Presidential Guideline 2, the Attorney General and the Secretary 

of Homeland Security developed recommendations that were approved by the 

President regarding the creation of a common framework for sharing terrorism 

information among Federal departments and agencies and SLT governments, law 

enforcement agencies, and the private sector. The NIP and Guideline 2 will be further 

leveraged when implementing the missions, roles, and responsibilities for the ISE. 

IRTPA also requires that this plan identify “the agencies that will deliver the 

infrastructure needed to operate and manage the ISE (as distinct from individual 

department or agency components that are part of the ISE).”27 Although it is possible 

that any ISE participant may be called on to provide infrastructure, the primary 

infrastructure providers for the five communities are as follows: 

• Intelligence Community—Director of National Intelligence; 

• Law Enforcement—Attorney General; 

• Defense—Secretary of Defense; 

• Homeland Security—Secretary of Homeland Security; and 

• Foreign Affairs—Secretary of State. 

In implementing the ISE, ISE participants should avoid unnecessary infrastructure 

duplication by participating in interagency agreements that promote shared use of ISE 

infrastructure by multiple departments and agencies. This includes leveraging ongoing 

infrastructure modernization activities, agency enterprise architecture efforts, and the 

Federal Enterprise Architecture (FEA).28 

2.3 Information Sharing Needs of ISE Participants 

By its nature, the ISE involves many diverse participants, each with their own 

responsibilities and needs for terrorism information. Each Federal department and 

agency, SLT government, the private sector, and foreign ally acquires, uses, and retains 

various types of terrorism information and operates within a set of established laws, 

policies, and business rules. In many instances, however, these laws, policies, and 

rules differ and create both real and perceived impediments to information sharing. ISE 

implementation will take into account ISE participants' needs and missions as outlined 

in the following sections. 

 

27 IRTPA, Section 1016(e)(10). 

28 FEA is a business-driven framework that defines and aligns Federal business functions and supporting technology using a set of

five common models (performance, business, services, data, and technology). See Chapter 6 for a fuller description of ISE 

architecture efforts. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 17 

2.3.1 Federal Department and Agency Needs 

At the Federal level, each department and agency involved in counterterrorism has its 

own mission and attendant information needs and maintains its own mission-specific 

criteria for identifying, assessing, and managing risks. In the current threat environment, 

however, there is a risk that seams in these missions may allow terrorist activity to go 

undetected. Consistent with IRTPA, the Presidential Information Sharing Guidelines and 

Requirements, and the NIP, objectives at the Federal level related to sharing terrorism 

information include: 

1. Managing the risks associated with broadly sharing terrorism information to 

address national and homeland security interests while protecting the 

information privacy and other legal rights of Americans as well as the 

information itself, including sources and methods; 

2. Promoting a culture that produces analysts from across the ISE who are 

aware of the need to share terrorism information and are trained in the legal, 

policy, security, and procedural issues; 

3. Utilizing technologies and business processes that maximize the 

effectiveness of sharing, analyzing, and disseminating terrorism information; 

4. Ensuring secure access to terrorism information and reliable communication 

(the accessible and reliable means by which terrorism information is 

transmitted); 

5. Connecting all levels of government and, as appropriate, the private sector to 

maximize the flow of information to facilitate its use in analysis, 

investigations, and operations; 

6. Making complete, tailored, timely, and validated terrorism information 

available to decision makers and operational personnel responsible for 

detecting, preparing for, identifying, and responding to threats; 

7. Ensuring the ISE facilitates and improves the transmission of maximum 

forewarning and situational awareness of terrorist activities to increase the 

time available to mount an effective national response; 

8. Leveraging current and developing new systems and capabilities to ensure 

direct, continuous online access to electronic directory services to link to 

analysts in a secure, trusted environment; and 

9. Treating the Federal government as a consumer as well as a supplier of 

terrorism information, recognizing that the Federal government requires 

access to SLT and private sector information as well as information from 

foreign sources. 
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

18

2.3.2 State, Local, and Tribal Government Needs 

Since 9/11, over 40 states and major urban areas have established statewide and 

regional fusion centers to deal with terrorist threats.29 Moreover, a growing number of 

localities, particularly in major urban areas, are establishing similar fusion centers to 

coordinate the gathering, analysis, and dissemination of law enforcement, public safety, 

and terrorism information. These fusion centers—and other SLT and regional 

initiatives—represent enormous financial, human, and technical resources at the State 

and local levels to combat the threat of terrorism. 

Recognizing the need to enhance information sharing with these centers, several 

Federal departments and agencies—including DHS, FBI, and DoD—launched efforts to 

develop strategies to incorporate these fusion centers into their information and 

intelligence activities. Most of these planning efforts, however, focused on how 

individual agencies collaborate with those centers.30 As these centers continue to 

proliferate, consume additional Federal, State, and local resources and investments, 

and grow in sophistication, there is a need to focus even greater attention on leveraging 

and connecting them together—through policy, business processes, and technology—to 

increase the nation’s overall analytic capacity.31

The needs of SLT governments continue to mount as they incorporate counterterrorism 

and homeland security activities into their day-to-day missions. Specifically, they need 

to ensure that personnel protecting local communities from a terrorist attack—or 

responding to an attack—have access to timely, credible, and actionable information 

and intelligence regarding individuals and groups intending to carry out attacks within 

the United States (including homegrown terrorists), their organization and financing, atrisk potential targets, pre-attack indicators, and other major events or circumstances 

requiring action by SLT governments. Thus, objectives of SLT governments related to 

sharing terrorism information include: 

1. Sharing information to address terrorism investigations in a manner that 

protects the information privacy and other legal rights of Americans; 

2. Fostering a culture that recognizes the importance of fusing all-crimes and 

all-hazards information to identify information that might provide indications 

of terrorist plots; 

3. Supporting efforts to detect and prevent terrorist attacks by maintaining 

situational awareness of threats, alerts, and warnings; 

4. Promoting the compatibility of homeland security strategies and Critical 

Infrastructure Sector Specific Plans with the ISE to ensure the security, 

 

29 State and Regional Intelligence Fusion Center Contact Information, National Criminal Intelligence Resource Center (March 8, 2006). 30 For example, DHS is developing a departmental strategy for collaborating with State and local fusion centers. The FBI is 

developing a strategy for linking the activities of its Field Intelligence Groups with those same centers. DoD is working through the 

National Guard and U.S. Northern Command with the fusion centers in support of its homeland defense mission. 

31 See Section 7.1 of this plan for more details on collaborating with fusion centers and next steps.
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 19 

resiliency, and prompt restoration of infrastructure operations (e.g., electric 

power, transportation, telecommunications, etc.) within a region, State, or 

locality; 

5. Working with the Federal government to determine the appropriate allocation 

of funding, capability development, and other resource decisions relating to 

the sharing of terrorism information; and 

6. Developing training, awareness, and exercise programs to ensure that the 

ISE is implemented in a way that better enables SLT personnel to recognize 

and address terrorist strategies, tactics, capabilities, and intent and to 

effectively manage attendant risks. 

2.3.3 Private Sector Organization Needs 

Private sector information represents a crucial element in both understanding the 

current threat environment and protecting our nation’s critical infrastructure from 

targeted attacks. Protecting the interconnected and interdependent U.S. infrastructure 

also requires a robust public-private partnership that provides the private sector with 

information on incidents, threats, and vulnerabilities, as well as protects private sector 

information in such a way that the private sector is willing to share it with government 

partners. The National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP), released recently by DHS, 

is the cornerstone document that creates a public-private partnership structure through 

which to affect a national implementation strategy for HSPD-7, Critical Infrastructure 

Identification, Prioritization, and Protection.

32

In today’s business world, corporate executives face competing pressures that include 

meeting global market demands, managing risks to their enterprise, protecting trade 

secrets and proprietary information, and limiting corporate and shareholder exposure to 

legal liabilities. As the owners and operators of the vast majority of the nation’s critical 

infrastructure, private industry has terrorism information of potential value to the 

government. At the same time, the private sector needs and seeks appropriate access 

to terrorism information for situational awareness, to manage risks to their enterprises, 

and to understand the national security implications posed by terrorist threats. 

The primary conduits for sharing terrorism information today are the Sector 

Coordinating Councils and sector-specific Information Sharing and Analysis Centers 

(ISACs) established by the NIPP, and the National Infrastructure Coordination Center. 

To date, however, sharing through these mechanisms has yielded mixed results. Four 

factors are frequently cited to explain the obstacles to the bi-directional flow of 

information with the private sector. First, significant distinctions among the seventeen 

critical infrastructure and key resources sectors as defined in HSPD-7 (e.g., regulatory 

regimes, number of players, willingness to collaborate) make it difficult to create a single 

 

32 HSPD-7 instructs Federal departments and agencies to identify, prioritize, and coordinate the protection of critical infrastructure 

to prevent, deter, and mitigate the effects of attacks. See Section 7.2 of this plan for more details on HSPD-7 and the NIPP.
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

20

approach to information sharing operations, structure, and processes. Second, the 

private sector reports that the demand from Federal, State, and local governments for 

critical infrastructure and other information since 9/11 has multiplied many times over, 

imposing more demands on industry to collect information and report it. Third, requests 

for such information are rarely coordinated or consistent, resulting in duplicative 

requests. Finally, from the private sector’s perspective, the interrelationships between 

Federal and SLT governments are ambiguous. Accordingly, objectives of the private 

sector related to sharing terrorism information include: 

1. Sharing information to manage risks to business enterprises and in a manner 

that protects the information privacy and other legal rights of Americans; 

2. Creating a national framework and culture for sharing information that 

rationalizes requests for terrorism information to the private sector and that 

adequately protects the risks and proprietary interests of corporations; 

3. Creating an integrated, trusted environment in which information can be 

shared, maintained, and protected; 

4. Ensuring access to the integration and analysis of data from multiple sources 

to provide industry with indicators of impending threats or current attacks; 

5. Receiving actionable alerts and warnings concerning specific industries that 

improve their situational awareness of terrorist threats and enable them to 

prioritize risks and security investments, and shape the development of plans 

to ensure the security, continuity, and resiliency of infrastructure operations; 

and 

6. Implementing policies and mechanisms that provide liability and antitrust 

protections to the private sector in connection with sharing information in 

good faith. 

2.3.4 Foreign Partner Needs 

Collaboration with foreign partners also is critical to our nation’s strategy to execute the 

War on Terror. Ensuring strong, effective cooperation with our foreign partners requires 

sharing terrorism information in many forms. In doing this, we must protect the privacy, 

civil liberties, and other legal rights of individuals; sensitive sources and methods; and 

law enforcement and national and homeland security equities. 

In return, the Federal government, in handling terrorism information obtained from 

foreign partners, must observe foreign government security and other requirements. 

Accordingly, objectives for sharing terrorism information with foreign partners include: 

1. Developing with foreign governments the practices, rules, cultures, and 

standard language for dealing with the information privacy and other legal 

rights of Americans; 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 21 

2. Maintaining the privacy and security restrictions of foreign governments, 

possibly through “tear line” approaches that maximize the distribution of 

foreign government information; 

3. Creating a central, electronically accessible repository of information on 

foreign government and international organization marking and handling 

regimes so that ISE participants can more readily understand the 

safeguarding and handling rules for different kinds of foreign government 

information; 

4. Developing appropriate common standards or protocols for electronic 

handling of foreign government information within the ISE to ensure that any 

necessary foreign government requirements are respected; 

5. Developing systems, training programs, and agency-specific disclosure 

procedures for foreign disclosure officers to make and expedite sharing 

decisions and to release classified information to foreign governments; 

6. Reviewing authorities and related issues created while determining 

standards for sharing SBU information with foreign partners; and 

7. Making information regarding foreign government protection of U.S. 

information more widely available and (where needed) providing foreign 

partners technical assistance on best practices for protecting U.S. 

information to increase the flow of terrorism information to foreign 

governments. 

2.3.5 Information Privacy and Civil Liberties Needs 

Protecting the information privacy and other legal rights of Americans remains 

paramount in establishing the ISE. In its report, the 9/11 Commission stated, “While 

protecting our homeland, Americans should be mindful of threats to vital personal and 

civil liberties. This balancing is no easy task, but we must constantly strive to keep it 

right.” E.O. 13388 requires that “To the maximum extent consistent with applicable law, 

agencies shall ... give the highest priority to ... the interchange of terrorism information 

between agencies... [and shall] protect the freedom, information privacy, and other legal 

rights of Americans.” With this in mind, ISE privacy and civil liberties objectives related 

to sharing terrorism information include: 

1. Reviewing and adopting policies and procedures for handling protected 

information within the ISE and clarifying ISE participant responsibilities as 

custodians of that information; 33

 

33 “Protected information” is information about U.S. citizens and lawful permanent residents that is subject to information privacy 

or other legal protections under the Constitution and Federal laws of the United States. For the Intelligence Community, protected 

information includes information about “United States persons” as defined in Executive Order 12333. Protected information may 

also include other information that the Federal government expressly determines by Executive Order, international agreement, or

other similar instrument to be covered by Presidential Guideline 5. 
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

22

2. Cataloguing agency data holdings to ensure that protected information that 

an agency makes available through the ISE has been lawfully obtained and 

made available consistent with authorized purposes; 

3. Implementing mechanisms to enable ISE participants to determine the nature 

of the protected information that an agency is making available and to ensure 

it is handled in accordance with applicable legal requirements; 

4. Adopting and implementing procedures to ensure the protected information is 

accurate and is not erroneously shared through the ISE; 

5. Implementing appropriate physical, technical, and administrative measures to 

safeguard protected information shared through the ISE from unauthorized 

access, disclosure, modification, use, or destruction; 

6. Developing policies and procedures for reporting, investigating, and 

responding to violations of policies and procedures regarding the handling of 

protected information; 

7. Training personnel authorized to share protected information through the ISE 

on their agency’s requirements and policies for the collection, use, and 

disclosure of protected information; and 

8. Designating an ISE Privacy Official to receive reports and coordinate agencyspecific privacy policies and procedures to ensure their consistency and 

compliance with ISE Guidelines. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 23 

Chapter 3 – ISE Operational Concept 

3.1 Introduction 

How we obtain, use, and share information is a major factor in our success in 

preventing terrorist attacks within the United States, reducing our vulnerabilities to 

terrorism, and minimizing the effects of any attacks that do occur. The following 

operational concept captures the ISE vision, goals, and attributes identified in Chapter 1 

and the information sharing needs of Federal agencies, SLT governments, the private 

sector, and foreign partners articulated in Chapter 2. Under this concept, the ISE will 

leverage the roles, responsibilities, and capabilities of individual ISE participants to 

develop and institutionalize a “shared” environment in which information becomes the 

true force multiplier needed for the effort to combat terrorism. 

The ISE will enable the rapid exchange of terrorism information whether collected, 

produced, or distributed by intelligence, law enforcement, defense, homeland security, 

foreign affairs, or other communities, including the private sector and foreign partners. It 

will provide access to and accommodate all types of data, including structured and 

unstructured data and finished intelligence products, at all levels of security. Whenever 

possible, the ISE will include data provided from multiple sources to build a composite 

picture of the terrorist threat. The following are general characteristics of terrorism 

information that will help in determining what should be shared within the ISE: 

1. Terrorism information as defined in IRTPA, including information that, when 

correlated with other data and analyzed, may identify terrorists and show 

patterns of terrorists or terrorism related activities; 

2. Information that is timely and can potentially influence actions to be taken; 

3. Information tailored to the needs of individual ISE participants—the right 

information provided at the right time, over the right pathways—to support 

the mission needs of ISE participants; and 

4. Information that can be exchanged within the system of rules established to 

protect that information, including sensitive sources and methods as well as 

the information privacy and other legal rights of Americans. 

3.2 The Information Sharing Environment 

3.2.1 The Current (“As-Is”) Environment 

Since 9/11, Federal departments and agencies have made significant progress toward 

establishing processes and protocols and developing technologies to support terrorism 

information sharing. More often than not, these efforts focused on creating capabilities 

critical to the counterterrorism missions of individual Federal departments and agencies. 
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

24

Over the past five years, Federal and SLT governments have taken major strides in 

each mission area. However, optimal performance requires a greater degree of 

coordination and integration than exists today. Decision-makers in Federal and SLT 

governments and the private sector require access to a broad spectrum of terrorism 

information to provide an integrated view that supports collaborative counterterrorism 

operations. Today’s “As-Is” environment does not consistently provide the optimal level 

of cross-community terrorism information sharing. 

Ultimately achieving the Future (“To Be”) state first requires a comprehensive 

understanding of the “As-Is” (or pre-IRTPA) environment. IRTPA and the Presidential 

Information Sharing Guidelines and Requirements point to six areas essential to the 

development of the ISE: 

1 Policies. Absent an overarching, cross-community policy for terrorism 

information access and sharing, individual policies evolved to meet the needs 

of Federal departments and agencies shaped by their respective statutory 

authorities and responsibilities. The result is a body of overlapping or 

independent policy regimes, inconsistent procedures for handling SBU 

information, and multiple forums at the Federal level, for SLT and private 

sector organizations; 

2. Procedures. No single framework for information priorities exists to guide the 

non-Federal counterterrorism community. The Office of the DNI (ODNI), FBI, 

and DHS have all launched efforts to address this particular shortfall. These 

efforts, however, have yet to be fully integrated to meet the needs of SLT and 

private sector organizations. Additionally, although warning and notification 

processes have improved, alert, tip, advisory, situational awareness, and 

warning systems are often incompatible and not well understood outside of 

individual agencies or communities; 

3. Programs. Each State conducts counterterrorism operations in a unique 

environment, often in accordance with its State-specific laws and regulations. 

The creation of statewide and major urban area fusion centers presents an 

important opportunity to create a unified Federal interface that can be 

customized to meet SLT government needs. In addition, these fusion centers 

have the potential to become integrated with the numerous Federal 

information sharing and access programs in the field. Finally, there is no 

integrated, community-wide, comprehensive training program for sharing 

terrorism information; 

4. Systems. There are robust national systems for sharing information at all 

classification levels, but these systems are not fully interoperable. In addition, 

terrorism information is often difficult to access because of wide variations in 

system-specific interfaces. These interfaces inhibit and sometimes prevent 

information indexing that would allow users to conduct meaningful database 

searches. In many cases, those who require the information do not even 

know that such systems exist. Finally, interoperability is achieved via system-
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 25 

to-system or application-to-application integration, not through “many-tomany” approaches to exchanging data that would enable disparate users and 

applications to manipulate the same data in ways that meet their respective 

objectives; 

5. Architectures. Federal departments and agencies appear to have made solid 

progress in developing enterprise architectures according to FEA guidelines. 

However, it is difficult to judge whether this progress is developmental versus 

functional. Also unclear is the extent to which individual agencies have 

focused business-process reengineering efforts on cross-organizational 

terrorism information sharing and access; and 

6. Standards. Strong initiatives to develop standards across the ISE are only 

beginning to be developed, and creating such standards is a multi-year effort 

that will need the continued alignment and consolidation as required by 

Presidential Guideline 1. For example, there are currently no uniform Internet 

web browser standards; common information protection standards are not 

used across the community; and, where standards have been established 

(e.g., the Intelligence Community Public Key Infrastructure standard), they 

may not be enforced. 

Considerable progress has been made towards improving terrorism information sharing 

and access capabilities among Federal departments and agencies, but much work 

remains to fully integrate these capabilities and create the ISE envisioned in IRTPA and 

the Presidential Information Sharing Guidelines and Requirements. 

In summary, the “As Is” information sharing environment described in these six 

functional areas is dominated by a variety of horizontal and vertical distribution paths 

that result from: 

1. Overlapping roles and responsibilities among organizations tasked with 

counterterrorism and security-related missions; 

2. Cultural, policy, and technological differences among organizations tasked 

with disparate missions; 

3. Policy, process, and procedural differences; 

4. Incompatible legacy systems; and 

5. The absence of universally adopted standards to facilitate the exchange of 

information. 

The lack of defined cross-jurisdictional agreements and clear organizational 

responsibilities led to an environment in which the flow of terrorism information was 

inconsistent across the Federal government, and was often limited and uncoordinated 

among various levels of government. In that environment, without common guidance on 

information sharing, Federal departments and agencies made independent decisions 

regarding the value and content of terrorism information to be shared, had limited ability 
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

26

to share important information broadly, and engaged in varying levels of participation 

with NCTC and the former Terrorist Threat Integration Center (TTIC). The result was 

multiple uncoordinated information products distributed among Federal departments 

and agencies and to SLT governments. More recently, NCTC has developed terrorism 

information sharing agreements with several Federal departments and agencies, and 

the NCTC Online (NOL) has enhanced the ability to share terrorism information across 

the Federal government. 

This stove-piped environment is a patchwork of mission-specific information sharing 

flows that can produce conflicting, confusing, or unusable information. The result is that 

the information sharing needs spelled out in Chapter 2 may not be met, especially those 

of State and local ISE participants. 

Significant strides have been made in bringing together Federal and State information 

sources through the NCTC, State and regional fusion centers, and other sharing 

initiatives such as the Joint Terrorism Task Forces (JTTF), Field Intelligence Groups 

(FIG), and ISACs. However, much more must be accomplished to facilitate sharing 

terrorism information in a way that can maximize efforts at the Federal and SLT levels to 

fuse and correlate terrorism information to strengthen counterterrorism and securityrelated efforts. For example, FIG activities that are integrated with and complement SLT 

activities will ultimately enhance fusion center efforts. 

The challenge remains to improve coordination of sharing within and across the five 

Federal communities with counterterrorism responsibilities—intelligence, law 

enforcement, defense, homeland security, and foreign affairs—and with SLT 

governments, the private sector, and foreign partners to achieve the coordinated, multiagency perspective necessary for comprehensive analysis as well as to ensure 

dissemination of the right information to the right people at the right time. 

3.2.2 The Future (“To-Be”) Environment 

The proposed ISE framework is designed to meet the needs of consumers of terrorism 

information at every level of government and, as appropriate, with the private sector and 

foreign partners and allies. It will enable the rapid exchange of terrorism information by 

creating a more unified, coordinated environment that reflects organizational realities 

while overcoming unnecessary barriers to information sharing. The ISE will offer a 

collaborative structure through which terrorism information is shared among ISE 

participants to support a number of different activities including: preventive and 

protective actions, immediate actionable response, criminal and counterterrorism 

investigative activities, event preparedness, and response to and recovery from terrorist 

attacks. To the maximum extent possible, the ISE structure will draw upon and integrate 

existing capabilities and systems. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 27 

At the Federal level, the ISE will affect the operations of a large number of agencies 

across five previously mentioned communities that process and use terrorism 

information. Figure 3.2-1 depicts the conceptual basis for the ISE at the Federal level 

and identifies ISE participants at the SLT levels of government, the private sector, and 

foreign partners. Strong and effective cooperation at each level, between mission 

partners, and between each of the organizations engaged is vital for success in the War 

on Terror. The ISE depicted in this model is intended to be inclusive—to support and 

facilitate terrorism information sharing between Federal departments and agencies, with 

SLT governments, with the private sector, and with foreign partners and allies. Chapters 

5 and 6 provide additional detail on the Federal ISE, and Chapter 7 extends these 

capabilities to SLT, the private sector, and foreign partners. Furthermore, as ISE 

implementation proceeds, the PM and the ISC will continue to develop the policies, 

business process, and capabilities required to fully realize this operational concept. 

Figure 3.2-1. Conceptual Basis for the ISE 

3.3 Federal Level Elements and Functions 

The Federal component of the future ISE will provide access to terrorism information 

using the three constructs described below. 

3.3.1 The National Counterterrorism Center 

The NCTC is the primary organization in the Federal government for analyzing and 

integrating all intelligence possessed or acquired by the Federal government pertaining 

to terrorism and counterterrorism (except for intelligence specific to domestic terrorism 

and domestic counterterrorism).34 Consistent with applicable law and the direction from 

the President, the NCTC may receive intelligence pertaining exclusively to domestic 

 

34 National Security Act of 1947, as amended (50 U.S.C. 402 et seq.). 
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

28

counterterrorism from any Federal or SLT government, or other source necessary to 

fulfill its responsibilities and retain and disseminate such intelligence.35

NCTC serves as the central and shared knowledge bank on known and suspected 

terrorists and international terror groups; ensures agencies, as appropriate, have 

access to and receive all-source intelligence support needed to execute their 

counterterrorism plans or perform independent, alternative analysis; and ensures that 

such agencies have access to and receive intelligence needed to accomplish their 

assigned activities. Any agency authorized to conduct counterterrorism activities may 

request information from the Center to assist it in its activities, consistent with applicable 

law and guidelines provided for the provision of and access to intelligence.36 NCTC 

enables the sharing of a wide spectrum of terrorism intelligence and related information 

among thousands of users in the Federal counterterrorism community through its 

secure web site, NOL that operates in separate security domains. 

3.3.2 Federal Departments and Agencies 

Figure 3.2-1 depicts the five communities that participate in the ISE at the Federal level 

and that also support the SLT and private sector framework developed in response to 

Presidential Guideline 2. The objective of this framework is to empower participating 

Federal organizations in the fulfillment of their respective roles and responsibilities, and 

ensure a coordinated, collaborative approach to sharing terrorism information with SLT, 

private sector, and foreign partners in the ISE. It will support and leverage the success 

of ongoing initiatives at each level of government, offer practical solutions to challenges 

that emerge en route to ISE implementation, and provide the multi-agency perspective 

necessary to achieve the objectives of information sharing. In addition, as the ISE 

matures, policy and technology will introduce additional data sets not currently included 

or available within these Federal communities. 

All Federal departments and agencies that possess or acquire terrorism information 

must provide access to such information to NCTC for analysis and integration in the 

broader context of the War on Terror unless prohibited by law or otherwise directed by 

the President. NCTC, in its capacity as the Federal entity with primary responsibility “for 

analyzing and integrating all intelligence pertaining to terrorism and counterterrorism,” 

will work in partnership with and in support of appropriate Federal departments and 

agencies, to enable the development of terrorism information products tailored to the 

needs of SLT governments. 37 Under the framework established for Presidential 

Guideline 2, Federal departments and agencies assigned mission-specific roles will also 

provide terrorism information to the newly formed Interagency Threat Assessment and 

Coordination Group (ITACG), which will facilitate the production of “federallycoordinated” terrorism information products intended for dissemination to State, local, 

 

35 National Security Act of 1947, as amended, Section 119(e)(1). 

36 IRTPA, Section 1021. 

37 IRTPA, Section 1021. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 29 

and tribal officials and private sector partners. Mission-specific information provided by 

existing, agency-specific channels (e.g., FBI, DHS, DoD) would continue to be 

disseminated in accordance with established procedures. 

3.3.3 Interagency Threat Assessment and Coordination Group 

Participants in the ITACG will engage in collaborative decision-making to ensure timely 

and effective production, integration, vetting, sanitization, and communication of 

terrorism information that cuts across multiple agencies to inform and empower State, 

local, and tribal partners. This information will be integrated from the maximum available 

sources. Consistent with the directives of Congress and the President to build upon 

existing systems and capabilities, the ITACG will be at the NCTC. DHS will assign a 

senior official to manage and direct the day-to-day activities of the ITACG. Decisionmaking authority regarding how various types of information will be disseminated to SLT 

officials and the private sector will be primarily shared between DHS and DOJ and will 

include other agencies as appropriate. 

DOJ and DHS will lead an effort to develop standard operating procedures to govern 

how best to integrate the activities of the ITACG with existing Intelligence Community 

(IC) production protocols. The ITACG will include representatives from DHS, FBI, DoD, 

and other relevant Federal organizations. A primary purpose of the ITACG will be to 

ensure that classified and unclassified intelligence produced by Federal organizations 

within the intelligence, law enforcement, and homeland security communities is fused, 

validated, deconflicted, and approved for dissemination in a concise and, where 

possible, unclassified format. When appropriate and practicable, reports disseminated 

to SLT governments will contain suggested action items. Although collocated with the 

NCTC, the ITACG will not be a part of NCTC and will not replicate or supplant the 

analytic and/or production efforts of the NCTC; nor is it intended to duplicate, impede, or 

otherwise interfere with existing and established counterterrorism roles and 

responsibilities. Information flow between Federal, SLT, and private sector partners will 

be consistent with processes and procedures defined in Presidential Guideline 2. 

3.4 State, Local, and Tribal Level Elements and Functions 

SLT-level components of the ISE are expected to build on current efforts to incorporate 

the functions of gathering, processing, analyzing, and disseminating terrorism 

information into their core missions. Designated fusion centers will serve as the primary 

points of contact within states or regions for further disseminating terrorism information 

consistent with DOJ/DHS Fusion Center Guidelines and applicable State, local, and 

tribal laws and regulations. The functions these centers perform—commonly referred to 

as “information fusion”—are now operational in more than 40 States and major urban 

areas across the United States. In the spirit of a federated or shared-responsibility 

approach to information sharing, the Federal government will work to leverage these 

initiatives to facilitate effective nationwide terrorism information sharing. Fusion centers 

will become the focus—but not exclusive focal points—within SLT governments for 
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

30

receiving and sharing terrorism information. This approach will require that the fusion 

centers achieve a baseline level of capability and comply with all applicable privacy laws 

as described in the recent Global/Homeland Security Advisory Council (HSAC) Fusion 

Center Guidelines—many of which have already been incorporated into the business 

processes of a number of existing fusion centers. 

3.4.1 State and Major Urban Area Fusion Centers 

The Federal government will promote the establishment of a nationwide and integrated 

network of State and major urban area fusion centers to facilitate effective terrorism 

information sharing. Consistent with their respective roles and responsibilities, Federal 

departments and agencies will provide terrorism information to SLT authorities primarily 

through these fusion centers. Fusion centers will collaborate with such organizations as 

the JTTFs, FIGs, and ISACs. 

Unless specifically prohibited by or subject to classification restrictions, these fusion 

centers may further customize federally supplied information for dissemination to meet 

intra- or interstate needs. It is envisioned that locally generated information that is not 

threat or incident related will be gathered, processed, analyzed, and interpreted by 

those same fusion centers—in coordination with locally based Federal officials—and 

disseminated to the national level via the FBI, DHS, DoD, or other appropriate Federal 

agencies. 

Where practical, Federal organizations will assign representative personnel to these 

fusion centers and, to the extent practicable, will strive to integrate and collocate 

resources. Furthermore, Federal organizations should undertake the efforts necessary 

to ensure that all personnel working within the framework understand its essential 

attributes and the necessity for close coordination and collaboration with Federal 

counterparts and SLT partners. Activities and responsibilities to be undertaken by State, 

local, and tribal governments, in consultation and/or coordination with Federal 

departments and agencies are described in Chapter 7. 

3.5 Information Sharing Evaluation Environments 

The IIP introduced the concept of information sharing evaluation environments as a cost 

effective approach for identifying requirements for ISE policies, business processes, 

capabilities, and standards, and as platforms to demonstrate and evaluate solutions to 

operational needs in a relatively controlled environment.38 The experiences of the NCTC 

contributed to the ideas that formed the basis for the “To Be” environment described in 

sections 3.2 and 3.3. The use of evaluation environments to address issues that are 

typical of those confronting the broader ISE will continue to serve as an important tool 

for refining and expanding on the ISE operational concept. Consequently, ISE 

implementation will continue to leverage the NCTC as a platform for developing and 

 

38 Office of the PM-ISE, The Information Sharing Environment Interim Implementation Plan, January 2006, page 10. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART I

 31 

evaluating solutions to Federal information sharing issues. In addition, DHS, DOJ, and 

the PM-ISE are in the final planning stages of an effort to identify a State or regional 

Evaluation Environment as a means of further developing the concepts outlined in 

section 3.4. 

3.6 Cross-Domain Sharing 

The Federal portion of the ISE will encompass policies, business processes, and 

technologies to ensure that terrorism information can be freely and transparently shared 

across three broad security domains—SCI, Secret, and SBU information as shown in 

Figure 3.6-1. 39 Since there are requirements for terrorism information in all three 

domains, the ISE must ensure that the two-way flow of terrorism information across 

these three domains is accomplished smoothly and securely to support information 

discovery and knowledge extraction. 

Figure 3.6-1. ISE Security Level Domains 

The ISE must provide a relatively seamless environment, recognizing there will be gaps 

created by the classification of information, the need to meet criteria for access to 

information, and the physical separation of existing networks. While cross-domain 

sharing is a difficult problem, an objective of the ISE will be to develop solutions that will 

support the exchange of information across the different security levels in the ISE with, 

to the extent possible, minimal need for human review. Cross-domain mechanisms will 

be designed to facilitate sharing and coordination between different classification levels. 

These mechanisms include, among others: 

1. Tearlines that enable the flow of information to a lower security domain by 

extracting portions shareable at that level; 

2. Controlled interfaces that provide automated, secure, two-way transfer of 

information between domains; 

 

39 Strictly speaking, the Secret domain includes all classified, non-SCI systems. The term “Secret” is used to reflect the fact that the 

vast majority of these systems operate at the Secret level. 
PART I Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

32

3. Information identifiers that inform users, when appropriate, that particular 

information exists but that is not available to them; 

4. Proxies that may be used by a higher-level domain user to access services 

at a lower level domain while complying with domain security requirements; 

and 

5. Organizational messaging that ensures a trusted exchange of organizational 

electronic messages between two domain levels. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 33 

PART II – HOW WE INTEND TO STRUCTURE THE ISE 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

34

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 35 

Chapter 4 – ISE Implementation Overview 

4.1 Two-Phase Implementation Approach 

Over the last six months, a number of important steps have been taken to improve the 

process of implementing and managing the ISE. In consultation with ISC members, the 

PM-ISE is developing a cross-agency enterprise architecture (EA) that will map ISE 

business processes and technology onto current agency enterprise architectures. This 

will help transform existing information resources and infrastructures to support 

information sharing across Federal organizations, SLT organizations, the private sector, 

and foreign partners. In addition, the completion of the initial phases of EDS has 

provided a working model for future ISE implementation efforts. Based on these efforts 

and the work to address the Presidential Information Sharing Guidelines and 

Requirements, there is now a better understanding of the steps needed to implement an 

improved ISE and the approach to carrying them out. 

Notwithstanding this progress, achieving the vision and goals set forth in Chapter 1 will 

entail significant changes to existing policies, business processes, and technical 

solutions across a complex environment, many of which will involve substantial efforts 

by ISE participants. Some changes may even require establishing new organizations 

and relocating others to achieve the degree of collaboration required. Such institutional 

changes will take time; they cannot be accomplished overnight. Therefore, the plan 

reflects an approach to develop the ISE incrementally over the next three years. 

Recognizing the need to improve the ISE quickly while simultaneously laying the 

foundation for more comprehensive implementation, this plan adopts a two-phase 

implementation approach as depicted in Figure 4.1-1. The two phases will overlap, with 

the initial work for some Phase 2 actions taking place in the latter months of Phase 1. 

Figure 4.1-1. Two-Phase ISE Implementation Approach 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

36

Phase 1 encompasses those actions scheduled for completion by June 2007. These 

steps are the first in a continuous process to improve the way terrorism information is 

shared across the Federal government; between Federal agencies and SLT 

governments; and, as appropriate, with private sector organizations and foreign 

partners. Phase 1 actions will address the highest priority information sharing 

requirements and will be sufficiently well defined so that work can begin immediately 

and be completed by June 2007. In general, these actions will be accomplished with 

currently planned and programmed resources, primarily by leveraging existing 

resources, infrastructure, and activities. However, some adjustments to FY 2007 plans 

and FY 2008 budget submissions will also be required. 

Phase 2 includes activities scheduled for completion between June 2007 and 2009. 

They will often require substantial design and implementation of business processes, 

supplemented in some cases by fundamental engineering work or incorporation of new 

technologies. Accordingly, this plan identifies specific Phase 2 actions but 

acknowledges that they are not currently defined at the same level of detail as those in 

Phase 1. Typically, Phase 2 activities will require additional planning and design before 

definitive plans and schedules can be developed. Moreover, Phase 2 activities will often 

require more significant funding requirements involving multiple ISE participants over 

several years. Therefore, as the first phase nears completion, the PM-ISE and the ISC 

will review and prioritize Phase 2 actions and recommend changes to the budgets for 

FY09 and the out years to ensure that all actions are adequately resourced. 

4.2 ISE Governance 

4.2.1 General 

Given the complexity of managing a two-phased ISE implementation, a sound 

governance structure is essential to ensure that these activities are carried out and that 

appropriate mid-course corrections can be made. The existing ISE governance 

structure is based on the principle that ISE issues should be resolved at the lowest 

organizational level wherever possible, but that, when necessary, an organized process 

is in place to elevate these issues for resolution, up to and including the Cabinet level 

and the President. 

In accordance with IRTPA, the President will “determine and enforce the policies, 

directives, and rules that will govern the content and usage of the ISE.”40 In consultation 

with the ISC, the PM-ISE is responsible for planning for, overseeing the implementation 

of, and managing the ISE, including monitoring and assessing progress, and for 

assisting in “the development of policies, procedures, guidelines, rules, and standards 

as appropriate to foster the development and proper operation of the ISE.”41

 

40 IRTPA, Section 1016(b)(1)(C). 

41 IRTPA, Section 1016(f)(2)(A)(ii). 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 37 

The ISC is integral to the success of the ISE—assisting and advising the President and 

the PM-ISE on establishing, implementing, and maintaining the environment, and 

ensuring coordination among Federal departments and agencies participating in the 

ISE. Although the PM-ISE is responsible for overseeing and monitoring ISE 

implementation, the Federal departments and agencies are responsible for performing 

actual implementation. Specifically, Federal departments and agencies perform two 

distinct aspects of ISE implementation: (1) implementing departmental policies, 

business processes, and systems that are part of the ISE and (2) implementing ISEwide activities for which the Federal department or agency may be designated as an 

Information Technology Implementation Agent (ITIA). Chapter 12 provides additional 

information on the roles and responsibilities of ITIAs. 

The PM-ISE regularly interacts with various ISE participants. Through this interaction, 

the PM-ISE attempts to secure agreement and establish common understanding among 

ISE participants referring any unresolved issues to the ISC for collaborative resolution. If 

necessary, matters may be further elevated to senior executive branch officials for 

consideration and resolution. The existing ISE governance structure is depicted in 

Figure 4.2-1 and described below. 

Figure 4.2-1. ISE Implementation Governance Roles and Responsibilities 

4.2.2 The Program Manager 

IRTPA requires that the PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, “assist, monitor, and 

assess the implementation of the ISE by Federal departments and agencies to ensure 

adequate progress, technological consistency, and policy compliance; and regularly 

report the findings to Congress.”42 In carrying out these responsibilities, the PM-ISE 

leverages current information sharing efforts across the government, and engages ISC 

 

42 IRTPA, Section 1016(f)(2)(A)(iii). 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

38

departments and agencies through regular communication, interaction, and inclusion in 

ISE decision-making processes. In June 2005, the President placed the PM-ISE in the 

ODNI, assigning the DNI the responsibility to exercise “authority, direction, and control 

over the PM.”43 The PM-ISE acts as the central agent to improve terrorism information 

sharing among ISE participants by working with them to remove barriers, facilitate 

change, and ensure that ISE implementation proceeds efficiently and effectively. To 

oversee ISE implementation actions, the PM-ISE has staff from across government and 

the private sector with experience in counterterrorism, information sharing, technology, 

and policy. 

4.2.3 The Information Sharing Council 

IRTPA and E.O. 13388 established the ISC, which is chaired by the PM-ISE and 

composed exclusively of designees of: the Secretaries of State, Treasury, Defense, 

Commerce, Energy, and Homeland Security; the Attorney General; the DNI; the 

Director of the Central Intelligence Agency; the Director of the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB); the Director of the FBI; the Director of the NCTC; and such other 

heads of Federal departments or agencies as the DNI may designate.44 The ISC 

advises the President and PM-ISE on developing policies, procedures, guidelines, roles, 

and standards necessary to establish, implement, and maintain the ISE. Additionally, it 

works to ensure coordination among the Federal departments and agencies 

participating in the ISE, and recommends means by which the ISE can be extended to 

allow interchange of information between the Federal government and appropriate SLT 

entities. A current list of ISC members is provided in Appendix 6. 

4.2.4 ISC Subcommittees and Working Groups 

The ISC may establish standing or ad hoc ISC subcommittees or working groups to 

address important issues requiring specialized expertise. In accordance with IRTPA, the 

ISC must consider input from persons and organizations outside the Federal 

government having significant experience and expertise in ISE-related matters.45

Accordingly, two standing subcommittees—one to address SLT information sharing, 

and the other dealing with information sharing with the private sector—have been 

established under the ISC. DOJ and DHS serve as co-chairs of both subcommittees.46

On April 27, 2006, the SLT subcommittee met to provide substantive input on how the 

Federal government can improve efforts to exchange terrorism information with SLT 

authorities. The results of this meeting helped shape the framework described in this 

plan for sharing with SLT governments. In addition, SLT officials have provided input on 

 

43 Presidential Memorandum, Strengthening Information Sharing, Access, and Integration - Organizational, Management, and Policy 

Development Structures for Creating the Terrorism Information Sharing Environment, June 2, 2005. 

44 IRTPA, Section 1016(g) and E.O. 13388. See Appendix 4 for further detail. 

45 Ibid., Section 1016(g)(3). 46 The subcommittees are composed of persons and entities outside the Federal government who provide the ISC with expert 

advice and guidance in accordance with Section 1016(g)(3) of IRTPA. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 39 

the framework for State and local support, standardization of SBU procedures, the 

implementation of EDS IOC, and the contents of this plan. 

4.2.5 HSC and NSC Decision Process 

In June 2005, the President formally established the Information Sharing Policy 

Coordination Committee (ISPCC), chaired jointly by the Homeland Security Council 

(HSC) and the NSC. The ISPCC is made up of representatives from Federal 

departments and agencies participating in the ISE and was established to address 

major information sharing policy issues, including resolving issues raised by the PMISE, and provide policy analysis and recommendations for decision by the Deputies or 

Principals of organizations represented on the HSC and NSC. The PM is a member of 

the ISPCC and participates in the HSC/NSC Deputies Committee on ISE issues. 

4.2.6 Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board 

The Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board (PCLOB) was established by IRTPA to 

ensure that an enhanced system of checks and balances is in place to protect individual 

privacy and civil liberties during the establishment and conduct of government efforts to 

protect the nation against terrorism.47 The PCLOB’s role is to provide advice to the 

President or to the head of any executive department or agency on the development 

and implementation of policies related to efforts to protect the nation from terrorism, 

including the ISE’s development, adoption, and implementation. 

 

47 IRTPA, Section 1061(a)(2). 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

40

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 41 

Chapter 5 – ISE Operational Capabilities 

5.1 Introduction 

This Chapter addresses key elements needed to enable the ISE’s operational 

capabilities. Since other portions of this plan—in particular those sections describing the 

efforts undertaken in response to the President’s December 2005 Guidelines—discuss 

the ISE from operational and process perspectives, this chapter focuses on the 

technical side of ISE implementation. More specifically, this chapter focuses on 

information technology services needed to enable maximum information sharing. It 

warrants renewed emphasis that, although this chapter describes technical approaches 

for achieving these capabilities, ISE development will be driven not by technology but by 

current and future business processes that support terrorism information sharing, 

combined with required policies and procedures. Put differently, the ISE will not result in 

the construction of a single interconnected computer system touching all levels of 

government and containing all terrorism information, but the ISE will use technology to 

the maximum extent possible to enhance information sharing. 

5.1.1 ISE Enabling Policy and Business Processes 

In order for the future ISE to become truly operational, policies must enable and 

authorize both the business processes and underlying technical solutions. These 

policies will be formulated in Phase 1. Underlying ISE business processes will affect ISE 

participants in both supply-side activities, such as production, reporting, and content 

management, and consumer-side activities, such as collaborative, analytical, and 

investigative functions. 

5.1.2 Overarching ISE Capabilities 

The ISE has three high-level overarching capabilities, each of which includes a sub-set 

of operational capabilities. The overarching capabilities, and the operational capabilities 

associated with each, are: 

1. The sharing environment and the associated business processes and 

policies currently in place. The ISE will be implemented in a manner that 

enables users, to the maximum extent possible, to access and exchange the 

information necessary to perform their counterterrorism responsibilities. This 

approach may include, for example, posting intelligence reports to a common 

site, searching for information on a particular individual or group, and 

exchanging viewpoints on the risk posed by a particular piece of information. 

This suite of common services will draw upon systems and processes 

already in place within the defense, homeland security, intelligence, foreign 

affairs, and law enforcement communities 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

42

2. The continuous process and capability for discovering and identifying 

essential data and services that should be added to the ISE. The discovery 

of new capabilities can be driven by evolving practices, tactics, techniques, 

and procedures within the counterterrorism communities or by introducing a 

new capability within Federal, SLT, or private sector organizations. 

3. The policies, processes, and technical means for introducing new capabilities 

into the ISE. 

5.1.3 Two-Phased Approach 

Phase 1 activities focus on identifying existing or emerging technologies and programs 

that may be appropriate for ISE adoption. Pilot programs, such as the SBU Mobility Pilot 

for wireless access at the SBU level, will be closely monitored to identify policy, 

process, and technical lessons learned that could be applied to the ISE. Additionally, 

Phase 1 will identify standards and technical and process-oriented best practices that 

can be codified to support the ISE business processes, and will involve adopting mature 

technologies and capabilities for immediate insertion into the ISE. It will conclude with 

the adoption of underlying technologies and development of a detailed plan for 

implementation, including goals, measures, and targets. Phase 1 activities will include: 

1. Identify and monitor pilots (e.g., SBU Mobility Pilot); 

2. Identify policies, business processes, standards, architectures, and 

technologies associated with ISE capabilities; 

3. Identify best practices and tools for sharing for inclusion in the initial and 

future implementation efforts; 

4. Incrementally adopt technologies; 

5. Develop goals and performance measures for specified outcomes; and 

6. Develop a detailed plan of action. 

The second phase will include adopting and integrating existing and emerging 

technologies identified in Phase 1. It will also include an incremental technology and 

capability review, comparing existing technologies and tools against the emerging 

needs of ISE users. Phase 2 activities will include: 

1. Integrating technologies identified in the first phase; 

2. Measuring for expected outcomes for improving Federal, SLT, and private 

sector counterterrorism operations; and 

3. Incrementally enhancing ISE capabilities. 

The ISE will result in certain common services being provided to users. The five 

communities will have to agree on those services as part of the ISE implementation. 

From an Information Technology (IT) perspective, the services may include: single sign-
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 43 

on at computer terminals and across multiple computer applications; customized 

subscription to areas of interest; provision of trusted and dependable security features; 

tools to measure the operational success flowing from the sharing of particular 

information; and means to locate subject matter experts around the globe.

The following subsections address these services from a technical perspective. The 

subsections have been written to assist those persons within departments and agencies 

who are responsible for assisting ISE implementation from a systems and IT 

perspective. 

5.2 Alerts and Notifications 

The ISE will have the capability to allow participants to provide and receive relevant 

alerts and notifications. Standard counterterrorism-related alerts and notifications will be 

delivered to the user’s desktop or mobile device through a subscription service that 

allows users to select from a list of available alerts (e.g., mission-area, role, or 

geographic responsibility). 

5.2.1 Implementation Actions 

During Phase 1 of ISE implementation: 

Action 1.1 The PM-ISE and ISC members will identify the alerts and 

notifications to be available to Federal and non-Federal ISE 

participants and the enabling policies and business processes 

necessary to implement the alert and notification capability. 

(Planned Completion: First Quarter, Calendar Year (CY) 2007) 

During Phase 2: 

Action 2.1 The PM-ISE and ISC members will identify the subscription and 

delivery technologies required to deliver the alert and notification 

capability, and develop a detailed set of requirements and Project 

Plan for implementing alert and notification requirements. (Planned 

Completion: Third Quarter, CY 2007) 

5.3 Easier User Access 

ISE participants must have the ability to access terrorism information to support their 

business processes in an unobtrusive and intuitive manner. This includes accessing 

terrorism information using existing terminal devices, such as Web interfaces, mobile 

terminal devices, and end user applications that support their ongoing activities. As 

directed by IRTPA, the objective is to provide users with access to more than systems 

and networks, but to the actual data. 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

44

Additionally, a single ISE sign-on into the environment will grant users access to data 

and services based on their individual user/terminal device combinations. A single user 

may access terrorism information through multiple different terminal devices depending 

on the user’s particular function, work environment, and mission. While the user may 

have full authorization to access data and services based on role and security 

clearances, the terminal device may not. 

Easier user access can be achieved by implementing an access control method that 

recognizes the terminal device (and its accreditation) and using an identification, 

authentication, and authorization service to grant individual users access to data and 

services that they have been authorized to access. This method of role- and 

technology-based access is based on a trusted and standard method of defining, 

issuing, and storing user identities. A centralized repository of user identities will be 

used for the identification-authentication-authorization process, regardless of the 

method of access. The identity repository will be a core ISE service provided by EDS. 

5.3.1 Access Control 

5.3.1.1 Levels of Access by Role 

The access control process must mediate access to resources (data and services) 

based on the user’s role. Roles must be defined and maintained using a standard 

process that is dynamic and updated in a timely manner. Defined roles must be mapped 

to sets of resources that support the business processes associated with those roles. 

5.3.1.2 Levels of Access by User Clearance and Accesses 

As ISE participants will have varying levels of clearances and access, the access 

control process must mediate access to resources based on the clearances of the 

individual users. Clearance information will be stored as a component of the user 

identity to facilitate this mediation. 

5.3.1.3 Levels of Access by Resource Classification 

A standard process for describing the classification of individual resources (e.g., 

applications, data repositories, and transport resources) will be implemented to grant 

access of resources to those users with appropriate roles, clearances, and access 

devices. 

5.3.2 Implementation Actions 

During Phase 1 of ISE implementation: 

Action 1.2 The PM-ISE and ISC members will identify existing technologies, 

capabilities, and programs (e.g., HSPD-12 and Federal Information 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 45 

Processing Standard [FIPS] 201) that provide easier user access, 

but still support identity management through audits, authentication, 

and access controls. The ISC will assess the technologies and pilot 

programs to determine whether or not the technologies support its 

user base and are suitable for ISE adoption. (Planned Completion: 

Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 1.3 The PM-ISE and ISC members will determine what ISE-wide 

identity management capabilities are practical and develop a 

detailed set of requirements and Project Plan for implementation of 

such capabilities in a time frame consistent with technology 

maturity and available budgetary resources. (Planned Completion: 

Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

5.4 Information Discovery and Search 

This capability will allow ISE users to discover the information they need without having 

to know in advance that the particular information exists or having to know its location. 

This capability will be designed to support the needs of a diverse user base with varied 

computer skills to search and discover information across the ISE. Examples of these 

types of search capabilities include: 

1. Searching for specific entities (people, places, or things); 

2. Searching for records (e.g., intelligence reports); 

3. Conducting multi-cultural name resolution; 

4. “Drilling-down” through other related data; 

5. Using personally identifiable information (e.g., fingerprints, photographs, 

biometrics, etc.) to discover the actual identity of suspects using multiple 

identities; 

6. Searching for queries previously performed by other users; 

7. Conducting basic and advanced searches; 

8. Supporting processing based on business rules (e.g., filtering, scoring, 

ranking of results); and 

9. Returning output from automated correlation and relationship services. 

5.4.1 Enterprise Search 

Enterprise search refers to the act of searching structured and unstructured content 

from throughout the enterprise to discover data, information, and knowledge wherever it 

exists. The enabling technologies are search engines, metadata standards, and 

network-accessible repositories. The ultimate goal is achieving a measurable level of 

“findability,” where the user searches all relevant data stores and receives the data he 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

46

or she seeks. Query results should also indicate when information is available, but the 

user or network does not have the required access privileges, consistent with 

appropriate protection of sensitive information. In such cases, contact information 

should be provided so the user can contact the data steward for potential release. The 

enterprise search capability will be a decentralized, distributed, and federated process 

that minimizes central repositories of data or metadata. 

5.4.2 Implementation Actions 

During Phase 1 of ISE implementation: 

Action 1.4 The PM-ISE and ISC members will investigate existing or emerging 

capabilities that discover data and information within the Federal 

government and industry. The initial implementation of enterprise 

search will apply a search engine to index both structured and 

unstructured data. This activity will include the evaluation of several 

ongoing pilot programs using technologies that integrate data 

across heterogeneous networks and data stores to enhance the 

“findability” of relevant information and the interoperability of data 

and information. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

During Phase 2: 

Action 2.2 The PM-ISE and ISC members will develop a detailed project plan 

for implementing the enterprise search technologies selected in 

Phase 1. (Planned Completion: Third Quarter, CY 2007) 

5.5 Security 

5.5.1 ISE Security Requirements 

Access and security are integral to many of the capabilities delineated in this Chapter. 

In such an environment, all ISE participants expect that information they provide will be 

protected and used appropriately, that information they access will be valid and 

accurate, and that ISE users will be vetted and authenticated. Access and security must 

accommodate two types of information. The first is information the Federal government 

produces and over which it maintains originator control. The second is information that 

flows to the Federal government for which it becomes the custodian, although others 

may govern the information’s distribution and use (e.g., State and local proprietary 

information provided by the private sector, foreign information provided by foreign 

partners). Requirements for addressing access to and security of such information 

include: 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 47 

1. Adopting policies, standards, architectures, and practices for IT security and 

trusted access control, including a common framework of IT security risk 

management processes across all security domains; 

2. Adopting a standardized reciprocal security clearance and visitor request 

system in the Federal government to eliminate delays in passing clearances; 

3. Revising the use of originator controls on terrorism information to promote a 

culture of information sharing; 

4. Standardizing and creating interoperable identity management and access 

management systems, thereby reducing the number of separate computers, 

accounts, and logons required to access terrorism information across 

systems, domains, and networks; and 

5. Creating a standards-based universally accessible repository of access 

authorization information that is current, complete, valid, and sufficient to 

explicitly associate individuals and terminals with their respective discrete 

access privileges. 

In general, the discussion in this Section focuses on two attributes for the ISE required 

by IRTPA. First, to the greatest extent practicable, the ISE must employ an information 

access management approach that controls access to data in addition to systems and 

networks, without diminishing security.48 Second, to the greatest extent practicable, the 

ISE must facilitate the sharing of information at and across all levels of security.49

5.5.2 Common IT Security Framework 

The actions specified in this Section are designed to ensure that ISE security addresses 

the following IRTPA requirements: 

1. Transitioning the ISE from a system- or application-centric model to one that 

is data-centric. In terms of security, this means that terrorism information will 

eventually be tagged with security-relevant metadata (e.g., XML markings) 

that provide confidence that access control decisions are consistent with 

overall security policy and each ISE user’s access privileges.50

2. Ensuring that ISE security features operate effectively in all three security 

domains—SCI, Secret, and SBU (see Chapter 3)—and that streamlined 

approaches for exchanging information across domains are developed and 

deployed. Clearly information at the higher levels may require more stringent 

controls. Wherever possible, however, ISE IT security techniques and 

practices should operate uniformly across the three domains and be usable 

by organizations at all levels of government. The ISE must have a common 

 

48 IRTPA, Section 1016(b)(2)(E). 

49 IRTPA, Section 1016(b)(2)(F). 

50 See the discussion on ISE common standards in Chapter 6. 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

48

Federal IT security and risk management framework—potentially extensible 

to the State and local levels—that can protect information wherever it is 

collected, processed, stored, or disseminated. 

Traditionally, Federal IT security policy has mandated separate standards and 

processes for protecting national security systems that are different from those for 

protecting other Federal government IT systems. A “national security system” is defined 

as: 

Any information system (including any telecommunications system) used or 

operated by an agency or by a contractor of an agency, or other organization on 

behalf of an agency— 

(i) the function, operation, or use of which— 

(I) involves intelligence activities; 

(II) involves cryptologic activities related to national security; 

(III) involves command and control of military forces; 

(IV) involves equipment that is an integral part of a weapon or weapons 

system; or 

(V) ... is critical to the direct fulfillment of military or intelligence missions 

[but does not include a system that is to be used for routine 

administrative and business applications]; or 

(ii) is protected at all times by procedures established for information that have 

been specifically authorized under criteria established by an Executive Order 

or an Act of Congress to be kept classified in the interest of national defense 

or foreign policy.51

The law requires, however, that “to the maximum extent feasible... standards and 

guidelines [for other Federal systems] are complementary with standards and guidelines 

developed for national security systems.”52 The sharp distinction between national 

security systems and other Federal systems was a reasonable approach when separate 

intelligence and military systems were easy to define and clearly distinct from other 

systems. In the context of the ISE, however, this line is blurred. Expanded use of tearlines means that the same information will exist in multiple forms in different parts of the 

ISE. Employing different security guidelines and standards to protect this information 

becomes increasingly difficult and costly. 

It is not uncommon for single departmental or agency security teams to support both 

national security and non-national security systems. In so doing, they may employ 

multiple sets of security policies, procedures, standards, and guidelines that generate 

 

51 44 U.S.C. Section 3542(b)(2). 

52 44 U.S.C. Section 3543(a)(3). 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 49 

implementation complexity, impose higher costs, and result in inconsistent and 

incompatible levels of protection. This problem also exists across Federal departments 

and agencies because different criteria are used to develop security policy and certify 

and accredit systems. These criteria must be better aligned across security domains 

and communities of interest. 

Although certain aspects of IT security, such as cryptographic standards, will always be 

more stringent for national security systems, most of the fundamental access control 

policies can operate across all security domains. The increasingly important concept of 

role-based access controls, for example, can be implemented identically on both 

national security and non-national security systems. 

The ISE must adopt a unified risk management and IT security framework that serves 

all five of its communities. The framework should have the following characteristics: 

1. A risk management approach that aims to achieve appropriate levels of

security. This approach must recognize that unauthorized disclosure of 

terrorism information is a risk to be managed rather than one that can be 

avoided. This applies to both technical and human-oriented risk 

management; 

2. A data-centric approach, as required by IRTPA; 

3. Common security controls, including standards for access control and audits 

that can be adopted by and be made available to all Federal ISE participants 

where appropriate. Although these standards should recognize that the three 

domains might have different requirements in some cases, the intent—

consistent with direction in the Federal Information Security management Act 

(FISMA)—is to apply compatible standards and guidelines for national 

security systems and non-national security systems where possible. 53 These 

controls will be identified during the development of the IT common security 

framework.

4. Common standards flexible enough to support the diversity of missions and 

security needs. They must be sufficiently rigorous and robust to meet all 

needs, allowing for unique security requirements within the standard 

framework; 

5. Common streamlined processes for certification and accreditation of IT 

systems, including full reciprocity of certification and accreditation (C&A) 

determinations among ISE participants; and 

6. Common human- and computer-readable security markings that conform to 

ISE common standards (see Chapter 6). 

 

53 Ibid. 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

50

5.5.3 Cross-Domain Solutions 

The overarching requirement in order to generate terrorism information at the lowest 

possible security level—unclassified, wherever possible—is the ability to securely 

exchange information across security domain boundaries. Trusted, two-way crossdomain solutions (CDS) play an integral role in meeting this need. CDSs are available 

today, but existing approaches have failed to keep pace with growing requirements and 

changing technology. Based largely on searches of textual information, these solutions 

do not typically support a robust exchange of graphic or multimedia information, and 

almost always require human review as part of the high-low transfer process. These 

approaches must be improved to meet ISE needs. 

In March 2006, the Chief Information Officers (CIOs) of the IC and DoD established a 

DoD/IC Cross Domain Management Office (CDMO) to ensure that CDSs are available 

to meet IC and DoD needs at acceptable levels of cost, schedule, and risk. While this is 

a promising initiative, it must be expanded beyond DoD and IC to fully encompass the 

needs of all ISE participants. 

5.5.4 Implementation Actions 

During Phase 1 of ISE implementation: 

Action 1.5 The PM-ISE and the ISC will work with the CDMO to establish a 

process to ensure that cross-domain solutions developed through 

this office meet the needs of ISE participants. (Planned Completion: 

First Quarter, CY 2007) 

During Phase 2 of ISE implementation: 

Action 2.3 The DNI CIO and the CIOs of DoD, DHS, DOJ, and the Department 

of State (DOS) will work with the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST), the National Security Agency (NSA), and the 

Committee on National Security Systems (CNSS) to develop a 

common IT security framework for the ISE as described in Section 

5.5.2. DOJ and DHS will ensure that this framework addresses the 

requirements of SLT CIOs. The results of this effort will be 

presented to the PM-ISE and ISC for incorporation into ISE 

implementation priorities. (Planned Completion: The PM-ISE and 

ISC members will develop a detailed project plan for implementing 

the technologies selected in Phase 1. (Planned Completion: Third 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 2.4 Federal departments and agencies will implement the common IT 

security framework developed in Phase 2 across the ISE. (Planned 

Completion: Third Quarter, CY 2008) 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 51 

Action 2.5 Federal departments and agencies will deploy CDSs developed by 

the CDMO across the ISE to provide two-way cross-domain 

transfers of terrorism information with minimal human review. 

(Planned Completion: Third Quarter, CY 2008) 

5.6 Collaboration 

The ISE will also provide a secure mechanism to allow participants to share multimedia 

data and information. Additionally, ISE users will be able to find communities of interest 

through searches or ISE recommendations based on user activities and behaviors. 

Collaborative environments can be either enduring, such as the ongoing sharing of 

information on a particular target or target methodology, or ad hoc, such as mission 

planning, investigation, or course-of-action development. The ISE’s collaboration 

requirements include: 

1. Enabling the broadest collaborative efforts by making collaboration tools 

accessible to all ISE users; 

2. Providing a mechanism and process for the user to easily create a 

community of interest; 

3. Delivering capabilities for a user to publish multimedia information to a 

community of interest; 

4. Providing capabilities for a user to retrieve multimedia information from a 

community of interest; 

5. Providing a mechanism for a user to search for and find a relevant 

community of interest; 

6. Employing a cross-domain chat capability; and 

7. Creating a common workspace application. 

5.6.1 Implementation Actions 

During Phase 1 of ISE implementation: 

Action 1.6 The PM-ISE and ISC members will identify existing collaborative 

tools that are used and operational in the counterterrorism or other 

analytic or investigative communities and review the feasibility of 

adopting common tools for use across the ISE. (Planned 

Completion: First Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 1.7 The PM-ISE and ISC members will develop requirements to 

implement new and emerging collaborative technologies. (Planned 

Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

52

5.7 Electronic Directory Services 

IRTPA required the ISE, to the greatest extent practicable, to provide “directory 

services, or the functional equivalent, for locating people and information.”54 The first 

ISE service deployed to meet this requirement was the EDS, a collection of directories 

that enable ISE users to search for and locate people, organizations, data, and services 

related to the counterterrorism mission. It is envisioned that SLT information will be 

available to users, but it is currently undefined how data will be made available or if it 

will be centrally stored and accessed. Implicit in EDS is support for various business 

processes such as communication and collaboration. The major directory services to be 

delivered and enhanced are blue, yellow, green, and white pages. 

5.7.1 Blue Pages 

EDS Blue Pages provide contact information for counterterrorism-related watch centers, 

sorted by organizational hierarchy. They are similar to a telephone book’s “Blue Pages” 

listing. Blue Pages are generally available to anyone who has access to the SCI and 

Secret security domains. However, some filtering of Secret network users and enclaves 

may be conducted to limit what organizational hierarchy and contact information is 

made available to certain users. 

5.7.2 Yellow Pages 

EDS Yellow Pages are an expanded set of Blue Page organizational contacts that are 

further enhanced by attaching attributes that describe organizational roles, 

responsibilities, and expertise. A user can search the attributes to provide a customized 

list of counterterrorism-related organizations and associated contact information. Not all 

users will be able to view or search all organization attributes. In addition, similar to the 

Blue Pages, some filtering of Secret network users may be conducted. 

5.7.3 Green Pages 

EDS Green Pages provide a searchable listing of counterterrorism-related information 

sharing resources, systems, and data repositories to support users searching for 

specific data and capabilities. The Green Pages provide system descriptions and 

technical and operational contact information for gaining access. EDS Green Pages will 

also support the provisioning of common services by including technical descriptions 

that will facilitate using web services or other technologies to add systems to the ISE. 

 

54 IRTPA, Section 1016(b)(2)(G). 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 53 

5.7.4 White Pages 

EDS White Pages provide names and at least one method of contact for named 

personnel. Additional contact information may include phone numbers, email 

addresses, and postal addresses. For urgent needs, an alternate 24/7 method of 

contact may be included. An ISE user can locate contact information for an individual by 

entering a first and last name. When ISE users want to contact individuals with 

particular roles, responsibilities, or expertise, they will use the Yellow Pages search 

capability to identify an organization or office that has individuals with the desired 

capabilities. A White Pages-like directory will also support ISE-wide identity 

management, authentication, and authorization services that will provide multi-level 

access capability for different classes of ISE users as described in Section 5.3. This 

access control and identity management capability may be independent from the EDS 

White Pages, based upon further investigation. 

5.7.5 Implementation Actions 

During Phase 1 of ISE implementation: 

Action 1.8 The PM-ISE and the ISC members will implement EDS Blue, 

Yellow, and Green Pages in the SCI, Secret, and SBU security 

domains. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 1.9 The PM-ISE and the ISC members will implement EDS White 

Pages in the SCI and Secret security domains. (Planned 

Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

During Phase 2 of ISE implementation: 

Action 2.6 For Sections 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.6, and 5.7, the PM-ISE and ISC will 

review the status in all areas and reassess Phase 2 Actions. 

(Planned Completion: Ongoing with a first progress check to occur 

by First Quarter, CY 2008) 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

54

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 55 

Chapter 6 – Architecture and Standards 

6.1 Introduction 

A fully functional future ISE requires the construction, integration, and maintenance of 

information resource infrastructures across Federal departments and agencies, SLT 

governments, the private sector, and foreign partners. Information resources are 

information and related resources, such as personnel, equipment, funds, and IT.55 To 

plan for and manage information resources, the Federal government currently uses 

strategic management tools, including EAs. The U.S. House Committee on Government 

Reform, in defining EAs, stated, “Successful public and private-sector organizations 

have used such architectures as best practices for effective business and technology 

transformation.”56 Similarly the Government Accountability Office maintains, “An 

enterprise architecture provides a clear and comprehensive picture of an entity, whether 

it is an organization (e.g., a Federal department) or a functional or mission area that 

cuts across more than one organization.”57 Planning, integration, and implementation 

activities affecting information resources, both internal and external to organizations, are 

also effectively conducted through well defined, conforming processes using common 

standards. OMB Circular A-130 states that agencies must use or create an EA 

Framework, and they are expected to adopt and enforce standards to support the entire 

EA.58

A business process-driven ISE Enterprise Architecture (ISEEA) Framework, including 

an FEA Profile, and a functional standards development approach are being used to 

implement the ISE across Federal information resources, consistent with OMB FEA 

Framework guidelines. Furthermore, this approach defines the connection for 

information resources of SLT governments, the private sector, and foreign partners, and 

leverages and integrates the diverse landscape of existing policies and management 

processes across the Federal government. This approach coordinates activities with 

agency CIOs who are responsible for ensuring agency compliance with, and the 

prompt, efficient, and effective implementation of, information policies and the 

management of information resources within their respective agencies.59 This approach 

also recognizes that national security systems, physically and managerially isolated 

from the majority of civil systems in these agencies, provide support to intelligence and 

military operations. Current legislation affecting Federal information resources and 

information security acknowledges the “unique needs” and “longstanding statutory 

 

55 44 U.S.C. 3502(6). 

56 U.S. House Committee on Government Reform, Report 107-787: E-Government Act of 2002 (U.S. Government Printing Office: 

Washington, DC, 2002), p. 48. 

57 U.S. Government Accountability Office, Report GAO-06-219 (U.S. Government Printing Office: Washington, DC, 2005), 7 

58 Office of Management and Budget, Circular A-130 (OMB: Washington, DC, 2000), p. 15-16. 59 44 U.S.C. 3506(a)(3). 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

56

treatment of military and intelligence mission-related systems and classified systems.”60 

As such, the DNI CIO has a responsibility to manage activities relating to the IT 

infrastructure and EA requirements of the IC; the DoD CIO has a responsibility to 

manage IT and national security systems supporting the activities of the U.S. Military;

and the Secretary of Homeland Security has the responsibility to oversee management 

of the National Communications System (NCS), those national security and private 

sector infrastructures supporting national security and emergency preparedness 

(NS/EP) telecommunications.61

A challenge to building an integrated, functional ISE is the diversity and distinct 

separation of information resources and policies affecting Federal and SLT agencies, 

the private sector, and foreign partners. Implementation of the ISE will be driven by the 

needs and missions of all participants, and technology will be used to enhance ISE 

operations. To be effective, the ISE must cross diverse domains and supporting 

infrastructures, including private sector, civil, and national security systems. 

To begin to address this transformational challenge within Phases 1 and 2 and to 

recognize existing authorities as required by Section 1016 of IRTPA, programmatic 

processes, and best practices, the PM-ISE is developing, with the ISC, a business 

process-driven, cross-agency EA Framework Document (ISEEA Framework). This 

approach will include, within the ISEEA Framework, a description of the structure of the 

ISE’s associated business processes, information flows and relationships, services, and 

high-level data packet descriptions and exchange relationships. The ISEEA Framework 

will provide guidance at a level of detail greater than that provided by the FEA 

Framework, but will not drive down into the operational level, which is the level 

appropriate for individual departments and agencies to include in their EAs as they 

implement the ISE. 

In addition to an ISEEA Framework, an FEA-ISE Profile will be developed that 

describes how department and agency participants use their EAs to connect to the ISE. 

The ISEEA Framework and FEA-ISE Profile will be communicated to departments and 

agencies through OMB’s Federal Transition Framework (FTF) process. Maximum use 

of existing EA processes is an essential element of ISE implementation. While policy 

may not exist to address all necessary processes to provide connection points for 

individual SLT governments, the private sector, and foreign partners, the artifacts 

created by this approach can serve as guidelines on how their critical resources also 

interoperate with and within the ISE. 

 

60 U.S. House Committee on Government Reform, Ibid., p. 77; National Security Act of 1947, as amended, 50 U.S.C. 403-3g(c)(1); 10

U.S.C. 2223(a). 

61 Executive Order 12472 (April 3, 1984), Section 1, as amended by Executive Order 13286 (February 28, 2003), Section 46. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 57 

6.2 ISE Enterprise Architecture Framework and Profile 

6.2.1 IRTPA and Presidential Memorandum Requirements 

IRTPA directs the ISE Implementation Plan to provide a description of the functions, 

capabilities, resources, and conceptual design of the ISE. IRTPA further requires a 

description of how the ISE impacts the EAs of participating agencies.62 Similarly, the 

December 2005 Presidential Memorandum directs that the ISE be built on existing 

Federal government resources that include standards, systems, and architectures.63

Together the ISEEA Framework and its associated FEA-ISE Profile, driven by business 

processes derived from ISE operational concepts, describe and map ISE business 

processes and technology into Federal information resources, and identify the 

connection points for information resources of SLT governments, the private sector, and 

foreign partners. The pages that follow describe the ISEEA Framework process and 

impacts of this approach, through the FEA-ISE Profile, on ISE participant EAs. 

6.2.2 Presidential Memorandum Observations and Recommendations 

In response to IRTPA and the direction in the December 2005 Presidential 

Memorandum to evaluate existing information sharing resources (IIP Task 1.1), the PMISE reviewed existing information sharing resources and observed that though robust 

national systems exist for sharing information of varying security classification levels, 

they are not interoperable within and between classification levels. The PM-ISE 

reviewed a wide range of architecture initiatives related to information sharing, including 

the DoD Global Information Grid (GIG), the Department of Energy Corporate Systems 

Information Architecture and Office of Intelligence Architecture Initiatives, the FBI EA, 

the Intra-DOJ Information Exchange Architecture, and the DOS Technical Infrastructure 

Architecture. The review observed that Federal departments and agencies have made 

solid progress in developing EAs according to the FEA, the business-driven framework 

for the Federal government. However, it was difficult to judge whether this progress was 

developmental in nature or was actually functional. Additionally, it was unclear whether 

departments and agencies were focusing business process reengineering efforts on 

cross-organizational terrorism information sharing. 

To begin to address these issues, the PM-ISE recommended using an EA development 

checklist, consistent with the Federal Enterprise Architecture's Assessment tool, as an 

objective evaluation tool to assess whether agency EAs were compatible with 

information sharing objectives. To address information security, it was recommended 

cross-domain solutions, supporting multiple security classification levels, should extend 

to the broader information sharing community. 

 

62 IRTPA, Section 1016(e)(1)-(2). 

63 Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Guidelines and Requirements In Support of the Information Sharing 

Environment (White House: Washington, DC, 2005), Section 1. 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

58

6.2.3 ISEEA Framework 

An ISEEA Framework based on the FEA Framework and aligned to ISE requirements is 

shown in Figure 6.2-1 below. The ISEEA Framework consists of an Architect’s View 

with four partitions (Business, Data, Applications and Services, and Technical), which 

are mapped to the five FEA Reference Models (Business, Performance, Data, Service 

Component, and Technical). While Figure 6.2-1 shows the relationship of the ISEEA 

Framework to the FEA through the Architect’s View, it also provides further detail in the 

Implementer’s View on the seven business process-driven architectural models of the 

ISEEA. The Implementer’s View contains mappings to implementation processes to aid 

departments and agencies with ISE-related information resource investment planning 

and implementations. Both the Architect’s View and Implementer’s View are discussed 

in detail below. As part of the ISE development process, the PM-ISE will continue to 

develop, define, and refine the Architect’s and Implementer’s Views of this ISEEA 

Framework through the ISEEA Working Group (ISEEAWG), comprised of EA 

representatives from ISC organizations. 

Figure 6.2-1. ISE Enterprise Architecture (ISEEA) Framework and FEA Mapping 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 59 

The Architect’s View of the ISEEA Framework consists of four partitions. 

1. The Business Partition presents the business activities and processes 

supporting the ISE mission. These descriptions are at a level that connects 

the high-level FEA Framework to the detailed business process provided in 

department and agency EAs. 

2. The Data Partition defines high-level descriptions and categories of data that 

will be shared in the ISE. Agency and department EAs will provide the 

detailed data descriptions through their EAs. 

3. The Applications and Services Partition describes the high-level applications 

and common services that support the ISE business processes. 

4. The Technical Partition characterizes hardware, operating systems, 

programming, and network solutions used across the ISE. This view will not 

specify solution requirements for the ISE participants, but will be an artifact 

driven by the departments and agencies in the implementation of the ISE. 

These four partitions are mapped to the five FEA Reference Models to enable tracking 

of the development of the ISEEA Framework across agencies using existing OMB 

policies and processes regarding department and agency EAs and budgetary 

processes. 

While the FEA provides the necessary mapping of the ISEEA Framework into Federal 

civil systems, the ISEEA Framework, as a subset of the FEA Framework, will also 

provide an architectural mapping into national security systems. The ISEEA Framework 

will integrate with the Intelligence Community Enterprise Architecture (ICEA), the 

Department of Defense Enterprise Architecture (DODEA), and the NCS Committee of 

Principals (COP) Continuity Communications Enterprise Architecture (CCEA), which will 

integrate the terrorism information sharing capabilities from these architectures into the 

overall ISE. New policies, as needed, should clarify that the ISEEA Framework and 

FEA-ISE Profile will be promulgated uniformly to all Federal information sharing 

resources through EA and information resource lifecycle processes. This should include 

appropriate protections of information including sources and methods uniquely 

associated with these national security systems. 

SLT government EAs are anticipated to integrate with the ISEEA Framework through 

architecture policy and development processes established with the fusion centers (see 

Section 3.4). As such, the PM-ISE suggests that existing SLT EAs begin incorporating 

the ISEEA Framework and the FEA Framework to improve and speed connection of 

these architectures into the ISE. 

As shown in Figure 6.2-1, the Implementer’s View of the ISEEA Framework is 

composed of seven architectural models for the ISE shared environment. 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

60

1. The Policy and Governance Model provides the means for implementing and 

promulgating the necessary ISE issuances and standards for establishing 

and transforming the ISE. 

2. The Agency Services Model includes those services specific to a given 

agency that provides external access to internal agency data and 

capabilities. 

3. The Common Services Model includes those services that by their nature 

must be common across agencies (e.g., search, warning notification, and 

security) or that are provided to reduce unnecessary duplication of effort 

(e.g., data translation). 

4. The Transport Model documents the hardware, software, and transport 

media that provide the path for the transmission and reception of data. 

5. The Shared Data Model provides a controlled vocabulary and exchange 

structure for the information to be shared. 

6. The User Applications Model includes applications, developed by a 

department or agency, to provide counterterrorism business process needs 

capability using the ISE with access to required information and services 

provided external to that agency. 

7. Information Assurance, consistent with attributes in the FEA Security and 

Privacy Profile, provides the means for managing those standards and 

designs that allow access to information by authenticated users while 

assuring the integrity, availability, and privacy of that information, and 

protecting sources and methods of collection. 

Collectively, these models, all taken together, provide the building blocks for the 

development of capabilities and configurations that meet the requirements and vision of 

the ISE. Overall the ISEEA Framework, defined in concert with the FEA Framework, the 

ICEA, the DODEA, and the CCEA, establish a broad architecture to support an interconnected, nationwide, and international ISE capability. 

6.2.4 FEA-ISE Profile 

As Figure 6.2-2 shows, the ISEEA artifacts include the ISEEA Framework Document 

and the FEA-ISE Profile (modeled after other existing FEA Profiles). The FEA-ISE 

Profile is a framework that cuts across the interrelated FEA reference models providing 

guidance to Federal departments and agencies for use in implementing the ISE. 

Departments and agencies will incorporate ISE capability needs into their EAs and 

subsequently develop or enhance department or agency systems to deliver ISE 

capabilities. Access to ISE participant data will be provided via methods such as the 

provisioning of data into the ISE shared space or, as appropriate, access to department 

or agency systems and data repositories. ISEEA Core components will be assigned to 

specific department or agencies to implement and make available to all ISE participants. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 61 

Specifically, the implementing agencies will develop detailed specifications for these 

components and implement them based on the ISEEA Framework and the FEA-ISE 

Profile. 

Figure 6.2-2. ISEEA Framework Documentation Package

6.2.5 Implementation Actions 

As previously described, the ISEEA Framework and FEA-ISE Profile will provide the 

ability for the PM-ISE, in conjunction with the ISC, to advise on implementing elements 

of department and agency EAs in a manner that achieves the overall goal of terrorism 

information sharing. This guidance will leverage existing EA processes and 

documentation to enable cross-agency information sharing. 

6.2.5.1 Phase 1 Actions 

During Phase 1 of ISE implementation: 

Action 1.10 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will publish a preliminary 

version of the ISEEA Framework Document providing the models 

with major portions of the ISE and their attributes. (Planned 

Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2006) 

Action 1.11 OMB, in the FEA Business Reference Model (BRM), will include 

“Information Sharing” as a new government sub-function, BRM 

code 143, with the “Information and Technology Management” Line 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

62

of Business, BRM code 404. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, 

CY 2006) 

Action 1.12 The PM-ISE will work with NSA, NIST, the DNI/CIO, and the CNSS 

on incorporating network security and information assurance 

policies and practices for the ISEEA Framework and associated 

functional standards. (Planned Completion: First Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 1.13 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will publish a fully 

documented ISEEA Framework Document and an FEA-ISE Profile. 

The development process will be worked in collaboration with the 

OMB, department and agency CIOs, and ISC members. (Planned 

Completion: First Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 1.14 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will develop a 

configuration management process for the control and 

management of updates to the ISEEA Framework Document and 

FEA-ISE Profile. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2006) 

Action 1.15 OMB, in the FEA Reference Models, will add the ISEEA Framework 

and the FEA-ISE Profile as compliance requirements in the Federal 

Transition Framework, a catalog of cross-agency initiatives, and the 

FEA Program: Enterprise Architecture Assessment Framework, the 

maturity assessment guide for Federal EAs. (Planned Completion: 

First Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 1.16 DHS will work with the PM-ISE to review existing policies and 

procedures for ascertaining relevant and effective approaches to 

migrate the ISEEA Framework models and attributes into the 

private sector. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

6.2.5.2 Phase 2 Actions 

During Phase 2 of ISE implementation: 

Action 2.7 Departments and agencies will introduce the ISEEA Framework 

and the FEA-ISE Profile into their EA planning affecting 

investments beginning execution in FY 2008. Agencies that have 

been identified to provide ISE Core services and transport 

components will include these into their planning. The DNI CIO and 

the DoD CIO will introduce the ISEEA Framework and FEA-ISE 

Profile elements into their EAs affecting national security 

investments beginning execution in FY 2008. Agencies will also 

incorporate ISEEA Framework attributes in their information 

resource lifecycle processes, to include capital planning and 

investment control (CPIC) processes. The Common Terrorism 

Information Sharing Standards (discussed in section 6.3) will 

provide the source of functional standards for information sharing in 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 63 

the FEA’s Technical and Data Reference Models. (Planned 

Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 2.8 The PM-ISE, working with the NCS Manager, will coordinate and 

monitor the incorporation of the ISEEA Framework and the FEAISE Profile into the NCS and the CCEA planning affecting 

investments beginning execution in FY 2008. (Planned Completion: 

Fourth Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 2.9 OMB will publish a new version of the Federal Transition 

Framework and the FEA Program: EA Assessment Framework 

incorporating the ISEEA Framework and the FEA-ISE Profile. 

(Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 2.10 OMB will conduct FY 2009 EA reviews, including those affecting 

national security systems, and ensure these reviews demonstrate 

incorporation of the ISEEA Framework and the FEA-ISE Profile 

across Federal agencies. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, 

CY 2008) 

Action 2.11 The PM-ISE will work with DHS to promote, coordinate, and 

distribute the ISEEA Framework for incorporation by the private 

sector into new technology and products supporting terrorism 

information sharing. Consistent with the National Infrastructure 

Protection Plan, these efforts will incorporate requirements and 

actions specified in Sector-Specific Plans. (Planned Completion: 

Third Quarter, CY 2008) 

Action 2.12 The PM-ISE will work with DOJ, DHS, and other Federal agencies 

to coordinate and implement the ISEEA Framework and FEA-ISE 

Profile elements into the fusion centers initially as translation 

infrastructures to SLT governments. As SLT government 

infrastructures transform to integrate more directly with the ISEEA 

Framework, the requirement for continuing to operate and maintain 

translation infrastructures will be reduced. (Planned Completion: 

Fourth Quarter, CY 2008) 

6.3 ISE Standards 

6.3.1 Review of Presidential Guideline 1 Developments 

The Presidential Information Sharing Guidelines and Requirements direct that the ISE 

will be built upon existing Federal government resources and be based on common 

standards.64 Specifically, Presidential Guideline 1 directs the DNI, in coordination with 

the Secretaries of State, Defense, Homeland Security, and the Attorney General, to 

 

64 Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Guidelines and Requirements In Support of the Information Sharing 

Environment (2005), Section 1. 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

64

develop and issue common standards for addressing how terrorism information will be 

acquired, accessed, shared, and used within the ISE. These standards must maximize 

the acquisition, access, retention, production, use, management, and sharing of 

terrorism information within the ISE. This must also be consistent with the protection of 

intelligence, law enforcement, protective, and military sources, methods, and activities.65

In response to this direction, the PM-ISE has developed a construct for developing and 

releasing ISE standards and has identified initial ISE standards addressing two priority 

functional information sharing business processes. This construct is presented in 

Common Terrorism Information Sharing Standards (CTISS), Version 1.0, which defines 

processes, standards bodies, and implementation strategies for improving the 

standardization of information sharing products and activity in the ISE. 

6.3.2 Background of IIP Task 1.1 Findings and Observations 

In response to IRTPA, Section 1016(e) and the Presidential Memorandum, the Office of 

the PM-ISE produced the ISE IIP to serve as a roadmap for developing the 

comprehensive implementation plan for the ISE. Task 1.1 of the IIP required a 

compilation of existing resources within the Federal government, including standards. 

The PM-ISE observed that strong standards initiatives across the entire ISE community 

do not exist, and activities to create usable standards will still be multi-year efforts. 

Furthermore, the PM-ISE noted that uniform Internet web browser standards do not 

exist, and common information protection standards are not used across the 

community. With regard to implementation, the PM-ISE observed that there has been 

little consensus to date regarding the selection of standards and monitoring of their 

adoption. The IIP tasked the DNI, in coordination with the Secretaries of State, Defense, 

Homeland Security, and the Attorney General, to develop and issue government-wide 

common standards. These standards should promote the maximum distribution of and 

access to terrorism information, while safeguarding such information and protecting 

sources and methods, and should specify methods for government-wide adoption and 

implementation of these standards.66

Standards have an important role in ensuring consistency of business process and 

infrastructure development, and they are key decision-making factors when considering 

future architectures and investments. Standards provide the critical functional and 

technical bridge between disparate information sources and those related communities 

of interest responsible for carrying out the counterterrorism mission. While Federal law 

promotes the use of voluntary consensus standards, terrorism information sharing 

business process requirements present new and unique challenges that may require a 

combination of both government-developed standards and voluntary consensus 

standards. 67 For the ISE, the functional standards defined under the following CTISS 

process document the unique rules, conditions, guidelines and characteristics of 

 

65 Ibid., Section 2. 

66 Office of the PM-ISE, The Information Sharing Environment Interim Implementation Plan, Ibid., Section 3.5. 

67 15 U.S.C. 272. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 65 

business processes, production methods, and actual products supporting terrorism 

information sharing. These functional standards apply to ISE participants and their 

infrastructures that will interconnect into the ISE. 

6.3.3 Progress to Date 

In April of 2006, the PM-ISE established a working group, comprised of standards 

experts from ISC departments and agencies, to define common standards that support 

how terrorism information is acquired, accessed, shared, and used. A product of this 

working group, the Common Terrorism Information Sharing Standards (CTISS), Version 

1.0, provides the framework for developing and implementing business process-driven 

ISE functional standards for use universally across all levels of government, the private 

sector, and foreign partners. These standards also support the domains of intelligence, 

law enforcement, homeland security, foreign affairs, and defense. 

As shown in Figure 6.3-1, the CTISS Framework provides traceability from the domains 

of terrorism information and information security, through applicable operating concepts 

and architecture models, down to ISE functional standards for publishing. As shown in 

the figure, the Framework provides a relational mapping of standards categories, 

governing standards bodies, and core standards for use across the community. This 

Framework follows five strategic goals for the CTISS program: 

1. Establish a self-governing standards adoption process; 

2. Engage foreign and private sector partners; 

3. Ensure the process is compliant with statutes, executive orders, and ISE 

policies; 

4. Leverage published commercial standards when appropriate and available; 

and 

5. Define standards that are performance-driven. 

The highest level of the Framework identifies the terrorism information domains, or 

interest areas, for sharing across all levels of government, the private sector, and 

foreign partners: intelligence, law enforcement, homeland security, foreign affairs, and 

defense. Security domains span the Framework and address security classification 

designations for information sharing. The standards categories (Metadata, Data, 

Exchange Protocols, and Services) provide key differentiations for existing or newly 

developed standards. The Metadata standards category describes those standards 

providing the searchable characteristics of information (data descriptions about actual 

data). The Data standards category focuses on the actual information content to be 

shared. The Exchange Protocols standards category addresses how the information is 

to be shared across systems and networks. Finally, the Services standards category 

describes the uniform business processes, common services, and activities supporting 

information sharing. Further implementation details for using the CTISS Framework can 

be found in CTISS, Version 1.0.
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

66

Figure 6.3-1. CTISS Framework 

Two functional standards are also documented in CTISS, Version 1.0 and ready for 

implementation across the agencies. These standards address priority information 

sharing business-process issues: tearlines and terrorist watchlists. For future functional 

standards, the PM-ISE and the ISC will prioritize standards requirements considering 

such factors as critical need, existing standards maturity, and technical and budgetary 

feasibility. Other standards not noted, like geospatial, will be incorporated as identified 

priority business processes that need to be supported. The PM-ISE and the ISC will 

also review implementation cost impacts on existing and planned investments, including 

operations, with affected agencies, and document these potential impacts in the 

recommendations for functional standards implementation. CTISS publishing processes 

will distribute standards to affected ISE agencies, and the PM-ISE proposes that NIST 

have the designated role as publishing agent for ISC-approved CTISS functional 

standards. This designation follows consistently with the role NIST currently has for 

selecting and publishing standards across Federal government civil systems. However, 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 67 

current Federal policy does not assign NIST the exclusive role of generating standards 

for national security systems, and as such the CTISS publishing approach will include 

coordination with the Offices of the DNI/CIO, the DoD CIO, the NCS Manager, and the 

CNSS as well. In conjunction with publishing these standards, the PM-ISE and the ISC 

will also set deadlines and high-level milestones for implementation. 

6.3.4 Department and Agency Functional Standards Implementation 

Introduction of the CTISS into Federal agency information resource infrastructure and 

management processes will follow two implementation paths: investment-driven and 

priority-driven. The investment-driven path will target new systems (i.e., systems whose 

design is not finalized) or any system undergoing development, modernization and 

enhancement. Applicable CTISS functional standards will be published at the time of 

system design, or CTISS implementations will be scheduled that best meet the mission 

and functional needs of these affected systems. Timelines for implementation will be 

synchronized to fiscal year programming and budgeting cycles. Additionally, the CTISS 

process will introduce functional standards that are compatible for integration into the 

FEA and national security system EAs. In general, standards affecting architectures not

designated as national security systems will be coordinated through existing OMB 

processes. Standards affecting national security systems funded through the National 

Intelligence Program (NIP) will be coordinated through the ODNI and the CNSS, and 

standards affecting systems funded through the Military Intelligence Program (MIP) will 

be coordinated through the Office of the Secretary of Defense. Standards affecting the 

NCS will be coordinated through the NCS Manager and the NCS COP. 

The priority-driven path targets those critical business processes along functional areas 

and associated systems that require adoption within a near-term, fixed time period, 

potentially without immediate identified funding. For these standards, the PM-ISE and 

the ISC will set identified priorities and work with agencies to review cost impacts on 

existing and planned investments, documenting these potential impacts during 

standards selection. Priority-driven functional standards should be reviewed by 

agencies with assessments made concerning operational and programmatic cost 

impacts weighed with the benefits for improving information sharing across the ISE 

community. Departments and agencies should identify all impacts, to include those 

affecting operations, as soon as possible so they can determine feasible implementation 

strategies to minimize impacts while promoting the incorporation of new standards 

needed in these critical areas. 

The PM-ISE will work with the ISC, utilizing the White House policy process, to 

effectively implement the CTISS. New policy, where appropriate, should clarify that the 

CTISS will be promulgated uniformly to all Federal information sharing resources to 

include those designated as national security systems, with appropriate protections of 

information, and sources and methods uniquely associated with national security 

systems. This new policy should address the roles of DoD, the DNI, OMB, the PM-ISE, 

the ISC, the CNSS, the NCS, and Federal departments and agencies in implementing 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

68

CTISS. These policies, where appropriate, should expand upon legislation such as the 

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995, the Information 

Technology Management Reform Act of 1996, the E-Government Act of 2002, the 

Federal Information Security Management Act, and IRTPA to ensure that the CTISS is 

implemented uniformly across all Federal systems. 

Information sharing standards for non-Federal government agencies will be published 

as recommendations from the ISC, through the Attorney General and the Secretary of 

Homeland Security, for use by SLT governments, law enforcement agencies, and the 

private sector. As the ISE continues to evolve, organizations not in compliance with 

these standards may find it increasingly difficult to connect to the ISE. However, since 

these standards are being developed in collaboration with the National Information 

Exchange Model (NIEM), a joint Federal, SLT, and private sector standards group cosponsored by DOJ and DHS, standards consideration and adoption actions will reach a 

wide distribution of SLT and private sector organizations. Fusion centers, and their 

associated management policies and processes, will be central outreach elements to 

extend CTISS incorporation out to the State and local levels. Therefore, fusion centers 

are advised to follow CTISS and provide translations that enable ISE connectivity to 

those external participating systems not inherently compliant with CTISS. 

6.3.5 Implementation Actions 

6.3.5.1 Phase 1 Actions 

During Phase 1 of ISE implementation: 

Action 1.17 The PM-ISE will convene and chair a new working group, the 

CTISS Working Group (CTISSWG), with representatives from all 

ISC members, the NCS, NIST, and the CNSS tasked with selecting 

and issuing information sharing standards, approved through the 

ISC, and formally published by NIST. The CTISS may include new 

standards that agencies will introduce to affect on-going investment 

activities as project schedules and funding permit. Future funded 

investments incorporating the CTISS will be compatible with the 

FEA and national security system EAs, and identified in normal 

agency submittals to the OMB. The CTISSWG will issue CTISS 

recommendations to the ISC for information sharing standards for 

non-Federal government agencies. (Planned Completion: Fourth 

Quarter, CY 2006) 

Action 1.18 Departments and agencies will begin to incorporate the CTISS into 

investment planning, consistent with ISEEA Framework 

incorporation, with full CTISS incorporation into investments 

beginning execution in FY 2009. This will include both civil and 

national security system investments. Agencies will also 

incorporate the CTISS into information resource lifecycle processes 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 69 

to include CPIC processes. The CTISS will provide the source of 

functional standards for information sharing in the FEA’s Technical 

and Data Reference Models. (Planned Completion: Second 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 1.19 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will develop CTISS, 

Version 2.0 addressing additional processes, including those with 

foreign partners, and releasing priority functional standards 

supporting suspicious activity reports (SARs), cargo management 

and tracking, and general identity management. (Planned 

Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

6.3.5.2 Phase 2 Actions 

During Phase 2 of ISE implementation: 

Action 2.13 The PM-ISE and ISC members will work with standards bodies and 

published standards to expedite efforts to identify the critical gaps 

in available core standards needed for developing new CTISS 

functional standards. (Planned Completion: Third Quarter, 

CY 2007) 

Action 2.14 OMB will incorporate new standards from the CTISS into the 

Technical and Data Reference Models with standards compliance 

monitored and verified through the Federal Transition Framework 

and the FEA Program: Enterprise Architecture Assessment 

Framework. (Planned Completion. (Planned Completion: Third 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 2.15 OMB will publish a new version of the Federal Transition 

Framework and the FEA Program: EA Assessment Framework 

incorporating the current CTISS. (Planned Completion: Fourth 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 2.16 OMB will conduct FY 2009 EA reviews to verify incorporation of the 

CTISS requirements. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, 

CY 2008) 

Action 2.17 The PM-ISE will work with DOJ, DHS, and other Federal 

departments and agencies to implement the CTISS into fusion 

centers to assist them in implementing the CTISS for eventual 

migration into SLT government infrastructures, where appropriate. 

Published commercial standards will be leveraged to the maximum 

extent practical. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2008) 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

70

Action 2.18 The PM-ISE will work with the Department of Commerce, through 

NIST, to promote, coordinate, and distribute the CTISS Framework 

for incorporation by the private sector into new technology and 

products, where appropriate, supporting terrorism information 

sharing. (Planned Completion: Third Quarter, CY 2008) 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 71 

Chapter 7 – Sharing with 

Partners Outside the Federal Government 

7.1 State, Local, and Tribal Governments 

7.1.1 Implementing the Framework 

The framework depicted in Figure 7.1-1, developed in response to Presidential 

Guideline 2 establishes a coordinated, collaborative structure through which terrorism 

information is shared between and among participating Federal, SLT, and private sector 

organizations to support a variety of different activities, including preventive and 

protective actions, immediate actionable response, criminal and counterterrorism 

investigative activities, event preparedness, and response to and recovery from 

catastrophic events.68

Figure 7.1-1. Approved Guideline 2 Framework 

 

68 Guideline 2 of the Presidential Information Sharing Guidelines and Requirements requires the Attorney General and the Secretary of 

Homeland Security to submit to the President “a recommended framework to govern the roles and responsibilities of executive 

departments and agencies pertaining to the acquisition, access, retention, production, use, management, and sharing of homeland

security information, law enforcement information, and terrorism information between and among such departments and agencies 

and State, local, and tribal governments, law enforcement agencies, and private sector entities.” 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

72

This framework draws upon and integrates existing capabilities and systems and 

acknowledges the roles and responsibilities of DoD, DOJ, DHS, and the DNI, among 

others, to deter and prevent terrorism and protect the homeland. Because those roles 

and responsibilities often intersect, the framework establishes a coordinated and 

collaborative approach to ensure effective, efficient, and non-competing efforts to share 

terrorism information with SLT governments and the private sector. The framework, 

recognizing the important missions of statewide and major urban area fusions centers, 

integrates them as partners in the ISE. Therefore, each is required to meet a certain 

baseline level of capability and to comply with all applicable privacy laws. The 

framework also preserves and maintains the roles and responsibilities of participating 

Federal departments and agencies, and mandates a coordinated and collaborative 

approach to sharing terrorism information with SLT officials and the private sector. It 

supports and leverages the success of ongoing initiatives at each level of government 

and seeks practical solutions to challenges that emerge during ISE implementation. The 

“To Be” ISE will achieve the following desired outcomes: 

1. Improved coordination at the national level for the production and 

dissemination of terrorism information; and 

2. Shared responsibility between Federal and State governments for the timely 

processing and dissemination of information at every level to meet the needs 

of all end users. 

Chapter 3 describes the Federal, SLT, and private sector components and functions of 

the ISE. When fully implemented the framework will: 

1. Provide a Federal-level interagency capability to facilitate the fusing, 

validation, deconfliction, and dissemination of terrorism information to SLT 

authorities and the private sector; 

2. Encourage and enhance the collaborative environment at the SLT level by 

assisting in the development of State and major urban area fusion centers 

and establish a national, integrated network of these fusion centers; 

3. Ensure that Federal organizations operating at the State level put protocols 

in place to ensure that time sensitive and strategic threat information is 

effectively shared and used to support a broad array of critical infrastructure 

protection, prevention, response, and recovery activities; 

4. Establish a requirement where designated State and major urban area fusion 

centers operate at a baseline level of capability as defined by the 

Global/Homeland Security Advisory Committee Guidelines and in compliance 

with all applicable Federal laws and policies regarding the protection of 

information and privacy and other legal rights of individuals; 

5. Preserve existing “mission specific” channels of communication for each 

participating agency to use in fulfilling agency-specific mandates to report 

terrorism information to SLT governments, with communications designed to 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 73 

ensure the Federal government delivers coordinated, comprehensive, and 

useful information to SLT and private sector organizations; 

6. Ensure improved interoperable communications between Federal and SLT 

organizations; 

7. Foster an environment in which sharing terrorism information is a 

complementary rather than a competitive process; 

8. Establish a terrorism-information priorities framework to guide the gathering, 

analysis, and dissemination of law enforcement, public safety, and terrorism 

information; and 

9. Consolidate and standardize the numerous disparate alert, tip, advisory, 

situational awareness, and warning systems. 

This shared-responsibility approach to information sharing builds on our established 

Federal system to meet the needs of consumers of terrorism information at every level 

of government. It will enable the rapid exchange of terrorism information within a 

coordinated environment that reflects organizational realities while overcoming 

longstanding barriers to information sharing. It will ensure that information produced by 

Federal organizations within the intelligence, law enforcement, and homeland security 

communities is fused, validated, deconflicted, and disseminated in a concise and, 

whenever possible, unclassified format. And it will ensure information developed within 

the SLT framework is available to appropriate Federal organizations. 

7.1.2 Implementation Actions 

7.1.2.1 Phase 1 Actions 

Action 1.20 Within 30-days of approval of the proposed Guideline 2 framework, 

the PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will establish a Seniorlevel Advisory Group—consisting of ISC members or their 

designees—to ensure accountability, oversight, and governance for 

the effective operation of the framework. The advisory group will 

report the results of its oversight to the PM-ISE and the ISC. The 

advisory group will meet at least once per month during the first 

year of implementation. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, 

CY 2006) 

Action 1.21 Within seven days of approval of the proposed framework, there 

will be established an Implementation Team—comprised of 

representatives from DOD; DOI; DHS; FBI; NCTC; appropriate 

State, local, tribal, and private sector advocates; and the PM-ISE—

to develop an implementation plan for the Interagency Threat 

Assessment and Coordination Group framework and to ensure its 

timely execution. The implementation team will develop and 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

74

implement plans to notify SLT officials of the ITACG mission and 

responsibilities. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2006) 

Action 1.22 The ITACG Implementation Team will submit semiannual reports to 

the PM-ISE that identify successes and shortcomings in 

implementing and operating the ISE within the Guideline 2 

framework and outline steps to refine and improve the framework’s 

operation. (Planned Completion: Ongoing with first report due in the 

first quarter of CY 2007) 

Action 1.23 The PM-ISE will establish a Federal Fusion Center Coordination 

Group to identify Federal resources to support the development of 

a network of State-sponsored fusion centers charged to share 

information at all levels of the ISE and will recommend funding 

options. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2006) 

Action 1.24 DOJ and DHS will work with Governors or other senior State and 

local leaders to designate a single fusion center to serve as the 

statewide or regional hub to interface with the Federal government 

and through which to coordinate the gathering, processing, 

analysis, and dissemination of terrorism information. (Planned 

Completion: First Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 1.25 DOJ and DHS, to the extent possible and practicable, will assume 

the responsibility for technical assistance and training to support 

the establishment and operation of these fusion centers. (Planned 

Completion: First Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 1.26 Appropriate Federal departments and agencies will assess 

resources and develop and coordinate plans to assign 

representative personnel to State and local fusion centers. These 

representatives will work to the extent possible to further 

integrate—and where appropriate collocate—Federal and 

State/regional resources. (Planned Completion: First Quarter, 

CY 2007) 

7.1.2.2 Phase 2 Actions 

Action 2.19 The DNI will ensure that SLT and private sector ISE participants’ 

needs and priorities for terrorism information are addressed in the 

Intelligence Community’s requirements process. (Planned 

Completion: Ongoing with first progress report in the third quarter of 

CY 2007) 

Action 2.20 The Guideline 2 Senior-level Advisory Group will ensure each 

designated State and/or major urban area fusion center achieves a 

baseline level of capability and complies with all applicable Federal 

laws and policies regarding the protection of information and 

privacy and other legal rights of individuals. Semiannual progress 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 75 

reports will be provided to the PM-ISE and the ISC. (Planned 

Completion: Ongoing with first progress report in the third quarter of 

CY 2007) 

Action 2.21 Statewide and major area fusion centers will ensure locally 

generated terrorism information is communicated to the Federal 

government through appropriate systems identified by Federal 

officials as part of ISE implementation. (Planned Completion: 

Ongoing with first progress report in the fourth quarter of CY 2007) 

7.2 Private Sector 

An effective framework that ensures a two-way flow of timely, actionable threat 

information between public and private partners is essential in the War on Terror. As 

described in Section 2.3.3, private sector information represents a crucial element in 

both understanding the current threat environment and protecting our nation’s critical 

infrastructure from targeted attacks. The private sector owns and operates over eighty 

percent of the nation’s critical infrastructure, and is therefore a primary source and 

repository for relevant terrorism information. 69 Protecting our nation’s interconnected 

and interdependent infrastructure also requires a robust public-private partnership that 

provides the private sector with information on incidents, threats, and vulnerabilities, 

while protecting private sector information in such a way that the private sector is willing 

to share it with government partners. 

Efforts to improve sharing of terrorism information with the private sector are ongoing. 

These activities are based on the authority provided to the Secretary of Homeland 

Security by the Homeland Security Act of 2002 and HSPD-7, which define infrastructure 

protection responsibilities for DHS, sector-specific agencies, and other departments and 

agencies. Specifically, HSPD-7 instructs Federal departments and agencies to identify, 

prioritize, and coordinate the protection of critical infrastructure to prevent, deter, and 

mitigate the effects of attacks. In addition, the NIPP, released recently by DHS, is the 

cornerstone document that prescribes a national implementation strategy for HSPD-7 

and creates a public-private partnership structure through which to affect that strategy. 

All of the requirements and tasks identified in these documents require an efficient and 

effective two-way flow of information between Federal and SLT governments and 

private sector partners. 

The President also created the National Infrastructure Advisory Council (NIAC). 70 The 

NIAC is charged to improve the cooperation and partnership between the public and 

private sectors in securing critical infrastructures, and advises the President and 

Secretary of Homeland Security on policies and strategies that range from risk 

assessment and management to information sharing, protective strategies, and 

 

69 The Government Accountability Office estimated that the private sector operates over 80 percent in its report Homeland Security: 

Information Sharing Responsibilities, Challenges, and Key Management Issues, May 8, 2003. 

70 E.O. 13231 (October 16, 2001) as amended by E.O. 13286 (February 28, 2003) and E.O. 13385 (September 29, 2005). 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

76

clarification on roles and responsibilities between public and private sectors. In July 

2006, the NIAC approved a report and made recommendations to the President on 

private sector intelligence and information sharing that raised the same issues and 

reached the same conclusions as those of their State and local government 

counterparts. As a result, an effective terrorism information sharing framework must 

continue to: 

1. Build a trusted relationship between the Federal, SLT, and private partners to 

facilitate information sharing. In some cases, establishing such relationships 

may be difficult because sector-specific agencies may also have a regulatory 

role; 

2. Improve the two-way sharing of terrorism information on incidents, threats, 

and vulnerabilities. Most critical infrastructure sectors, like their SLT partners, 

are still concerned with the limited quantity and quality of information and the 

need for more specific, timely, and actionable information. Likewise, the 

Federal and SLT governments need to have policies in place that will ensure 

the protection of private sector vulnerability information that is shared with 

government partners. 

3. Integrate private sector analytic efforts into Federal and SLT processes, as 

appropriate, for a more complete understanding of our terrorism landscape. 

The private sector understands its processes, assets, and operations best 

and can be relied upon to provide the required private sector subject matter 

expertise. 

4. Establish baseline standards to enforce compliance with all applicable 

privacy laws as they pertain to information sharing with the private sector. 

The sharing framework developed in response to Presidential Guideline 2 now provides 

the strong foundation from which Government agencies at all levels can effectively and 

efficiently share information with the private sector. That said, this framework, while an 

essential step in the right direction, will not by itself ensure that all private sector 

terrorism information sharing needs are fully addressed. 

In recognition of the importance of private sector involvement in the ISE, the ISC 

established a standing Private Sector Subcommittee whose coordination mechanism 

will primarily be based on the NIPP sector partnership structure.71 Co-chaired by DOJ 

and DHS, this subcommittee will provide a forum to ensure that implementation actions 

related to the SLT and private-sector framework are completed and address privatesector issues. Specifically, during Phases 1 and 2 of ISE implementation: 

 

71 The subcommittee is comprised of persons and entities outside the Federal government who provide the ISC with expert advice 

and guidance in accordance with Section 1016(g)(3) of IRTPA. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 77 

Action 1.27 The Private Sector Subcommittee will produce a plan that 

implements elements of the framework as it affects the private 

sector. This plan must be consistent with statutes and Presidential 

direction and ensure that information and privacy and legal rights 

are adequately protected. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, 

CY 2007) 

Action 2.22 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will review the private 

sector sharing plan developed in Phase 1 and identify priorities for 

implementation. In addition, some of the recommendations are 

likely to entail issues requiring executive-level decisions or 

legislative changes. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, 

CY 2007) 

7.3 Foreign Partners 

Strong and effective cooperation with our foreign partners is a vital component of the 

global war on terrorism. Sharing of terrorism information between Federal departments 

and agencies and foreign partners and allies is therefore essential, and policies and 

procedures to facilitate this information access and exchange must be established. 

DOS established the Foreign Government Information Sharing Working Group in 

November 2005 to meet Presidential Guideline 4 requirements by providing 

recommendations for appropriate legislative, administrative, and policy changes to 

improve the sharing of terrorism information with foreign partners and allies, except for 

those activities conducted pursuant to sections 102A(k), 104A(f), and 119(f)(1)(E) of the 

National Security Act of 1947.72 The recommendations address bi-directional sharing of 

information with foreign governments, i.e., facilitating appropriate dissemination and 

protection of U.S. information given to foreign partners and also protecting information 

provided to the United States by foreign partners, while still allowing for maximum 

dissemination, when appropriate. The working group also recommended that the 

President issue a memorandum that provides specific steps that departments and 

agencies should take to develop an appropriate internal and international framework for 

information sharing with foreign partners. 

The implementation of the foreign government information sharing recommendations 

will occur over Phases 1 and 2 of the overall ISE development. Federal departments 

and agencies will begin implementing the Presidential Guideline 4 Working Group’s 

recommendations once they are approved by the President in the following priority 

areas: 

 

72 Presidential Guideline 4 excluded from the working group’s consideration and recommendations those activities conducted 

pursuant to Sections 102A(k), 104A(f), and 119(f)(1)(E) of the National Security Act of 1947. 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

78

1. Ensuring proper handling and protections of U.S. and foreign government 

classified, sensitive, and other restricted information; 

2. Ensuring that sharing with foreign partners and allies does not compromise 

privacy protections and is in accordance with requirements for sharing U.S. 

person information; 

3. Facilitating appropriate and timely sharing of terrorism information between 

the United States and foreign partners; 

4. Ensuring that agencies have necessary information regarding foreign 

government domestic regimes and practices; and 

5. Developing an appropriate international framework to facilitate information 

sharing while affording necessary protections. 

To implement these priorities, the following actions are recommended for Phase 1: 

Action 1.28 The Foreign Government Information Sharing Working Group, with 

coordination and assistance from the PM-ISE, will develop 

recommendations on Privacy Act systems of records notices and 

routine uses for the Guideline 5 Working Group. (Planned 

Completion: First Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 1.29 The Foreign Government Information Sharing Working Group, with 

coordination and assistance from the PM-ISE, will develop a 

checklist of issues that need to be taken into account in negotiating 

international agreements, including privacy protections and 

possible review procedures. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, 

CY 2007) 

Action 1.30 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will encourage bilateral and 

multilateral efforts whenever feasible and appropriate to develop 

“best practices” on terrorism information sharing (e.g., protocols on 

what to do if there is a “hit”). (Planned Completion: Ongoing with a 

first progress report in the second quarter of CY 2007) 

The following actions are also recommended for Phase 2: 

Action 2.23 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will ensure that all agencies issue 

internal procedures to expedite disclosure decisions, including clear 

written procedures on declassification and release of terrorism 

information to foreign governments. (Planned Completion: Second 

Quarter, CY 2008) 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART II

 79 

Action 2.24 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will ensure that agency Privacy Act 

systems of records notices and routine uses provide for terrorism 

information sharing with foreign partners. (Planned Completion: 

Second Quarter, CY 2008) 

Action 2.25 The ISC will develop appropriate common standards or protocols 

for electronic handling of foreign government information within the 

ISE to ensure that any necessary foreign government requirements 

are respected. (Planned Completion: Third Quarter, CY 2008) 

Action 2.26 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will encourage appropriate 

international standardization of technological and substantive 

marking and handling standards. (Planned Completion: Ongoing 

with a first progress report in the second quarter of CY 2008) 

Action 2.27 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will consider impact on U.S. persons 

when negotiating international arrangements that involve sharing 

information with foreign governments. (Planned Completion: 

Ongoing with a first progress report in the second quarter of 

CY 2008) 

Action 2.28 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will consider possible interaction with 

provisions of existing agreements when negotiating new 

international agreements (e.g., inconsistent promises, “most 

favorable” treatment). (Planned Completion: Ongoing with a first 

progress report in the second quarter of CY 2008) 

Action 2.29 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will ensure “foreign disclosure officers” 

or comparable approaches are adopted by all government agencies 

to make and expedite disclosure decisions and provide resources 

to support disclosure decisions (e.g., training, information, 

automation tools). (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2008) 

Action 2.30 Federal departments and agencies engaged in developing 

terrorism information sharing agreements and best practices and 

protocols, with coordination and assistance from the PM-ISE, will 

make both the registry and the text of all such agreements, as well 

as the texts of any best practices and protocols, available to other 

departments and agencies, including to the extent feasible, in 

electronic form, as part of the ISE. (Planned Completion: Fourth 

Quarter, CY 2008) 
PART II Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

80

Action 2.31 The PM-ISE will work closely with the ISC to ensure effective and 

efficient implementation of the Foreign Government Information 

Sharing Working Group recommendations. (Planned Completion: 

Second Quarter, CY 2009) 

Action 2.32 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will ensure agency authorities permit 

the full range of requirements for information sharing with foreign 

partners. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2009) 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART III

 81 

PART III – MAJOR CHALLENGES
PART III Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

82

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART III

 83 

Chapter 8 – Promoting a Culture of Information Sharing 

8.1 Promoting a Culture of Information Sharing 

In accordance with Section 1016 of IRTPA, Requirement 2 of the Information Sharing 

Guidelines and Requirements directed heads of executive departments and agencies to 

work to promote a culture of information sharing by: 

1. Assigning personnel and dedicating resources to terrorism information 

sharing; 

2. Reducing disincentives to such sharing; and 

3. Holding their senior managers and officials accountable for improved and 

increased sharing of such information.73

In order to implement an effective, widespread culture of information sharing, balanced 

with a need for security and the protection of privacy and civil liberties, Federal 

departments and agencies are working to complete the Presidentially-directed actions 

as described below. 

First, ISC member departments and agencies designated an accountable senior official 

to provide direct, agency-wide oversight authority for the planning, development, and 

implementation of all aspects of the ISE including policy, technology, budget, and 

management. In order to cultivate and promote the information sharing culture within 

their respective agencies, these senior officials: 

1. Provide accountability and oversight for terrorism information sharing within 

their departments or agencies; 

2. Work with the PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, to develop high-level 

information sharing performance measures for the department or agency to 

be assessed no less than semiannually; and 

3. Provide, through the department or agency head, an annual report to the DNI 

on best practices for and remaining barriers to optimal terrorism information 

sharing. 

At the same time information sharing responsibilities will permeate all levels of 

government, from chief executives to entry-level analysts. 

Second, Federal departments and agencies are developing guidelines, providing 

training and incentives, and holding personnel accountable for the improved and 

increased sharing of terrorism information (see Section 8.2). 

 

73 Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Guidelines and Requirements In Support of the Information Sharing 

Environment (2005), Section 3. 
PART III Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

84

Third, on an ongoing basis, Federal departments and agencies will bring to the attention 

of the Attorney General and DNI any restriction contained in a rule, regulation, executive 

order, or directive that significantly impedes the sharing of terrorism information and that 

such department or agency head believes is not required by applicable laws or to 

protect privacy and civil liberties. The Attorney General and DNI will review such 

restrictions and, if appropriate, jointly submit any recommendations for changes to such 

restrictions to the Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and 

Counterterrorism (APHS-CT), the Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs 

(APNSA), and the Director of OMB for further review. 

The success of an overarching information sharing culture will depend heavily on the 

establishment and maintenance of clear policy, authority, and guidance for the sharing 

of terrorism information and widespread application of training and incentives to share. 

In Phase 1 of the ISE development, departments and agencies will consider 

implementing incentives that may include: 

1. Monetary and non-monetary awards; 

2. Recognition within the department/agency of an office or an individual who 

developed an improved information-sharing practice; 

3. Inclusion in internal newsletters of information sharing accomplishments and 

the tangible end benefits that resulted; 

4. Development of awareness materials; 

5. Establishment of an annual Federal award for the agency or work unit that 

best fostered the culture of information sharing; and 

6. Sharing “best practices” regarding effective ways to educate and motivate 

their personnel, perhaps through the PM-ISE website. 

8.2 ISE Training Plan 

As discussed in Section 8.1, training is a crucial component of an improved culture of 

information sharing. The ISE training plan will be implemented through a “core” training 

program across all departments and agencies, combined with department/agencyspecific training. Collectively, these training elements will allow ISE participants to meet 

the ISE’s goals outlined in Chapter 1. 

8.2.1 “Core” Training 

“Core” refers to common goals that must be the same across Federal departments and 

agencies and should extend to SLT governments. This training module will draw from 

laws, regulations, and policies, including executive orders, Presidential directives, and 

Presidential memoranda, enabling all personnel in Federal departments and agencies 

participating in the ISE to: 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART III

 85 

1. Understand definitions of “information sharing environment” and “terrorism 

information”; 

2. Be familiar with the legal basis for information sharing and the roles of the 

PM-ISE and the ISC; 

3. Be familiar with the Guidelines To Implement Information Privacy Rights and 

Other Legal Protections in the Development and Use of the Information 

Sharing Environment (see Chapter 9); 

4. Understand the authorities and regulations that pertain to the IC, Federal law 

enforcement agencies, military and diplomatic communities, SLT 

governments, and private organizations that collect or receive terrorism 

information; 

5. Be familiar with efforts to integrate SLT governments and private sector 

information into the ISE; 

6. Understand and promote the culture of information sharing; 

7. Understand the requirement for collecting and handling terrorism information 

inside the United States; 

8. Be familiar with the format of and distribution controls for tear-lines derived 

from intelligence reporting and with the concept of “write-for-release”; 

9. Upon final approval of the standards for SBU information: 

a. Understand the definition of SBU and of similar controls; 

b. Know what should be SBU; and 

c. Know how SBU information may be used, shared, secured, transmitted, 

and released; and 

10. Be familiar with information assurance and computer security standards and 

protocols to implement the ISE. 

Due to its extensive background in training development and vast experience with 

distance learning, DOS’ Foreign Service Institute (FSI) has agreed to develop the core 

training module, which will serve as a common educational baseline for the ISE. This 

module will be jointly funded through the PM-ISE’s office with additional voluntary 

contributions from departments and agencies. Together with a working group of ISC 

training representatives, the PM-ISE will review the training module and ensure 

implementation across the ISE. 

All Federal department and agency personnel who are charged with sharing terrorism 

information, or supporting such sharing, will be required to take the core training. This 

includes but is not limited to: intelligence discipline and Federal law enforcement 

personnel and managers involved in collection, analysis, tasking, production, 

exploitation, and distribution of terrorism information, as well as information assurance 
PART III Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

86

and technology specialists, and members of Congressional liaison, public affairs, policy, 

and budget staffs. 

8.2.2 Department and Agency Specific Training 

In addition to the core training, departments and agencies will develop tailored training 

programs based on their unique business processes, missions, program, and policy 

needs. This specific training should enable personnel in Federal departments and 

agencies participating in the ISE to: 

1. Know the department or agency’s role in the ISE; 

2. Apply information sharing authorities and responsibilities pertaining to his/her 

department or agency and position; 

3. Understand Federal roles and responsibilities with regard to information 

sharing with SLT governments and the private sector; 

4. Know how to share information via the ISE, according to the department or 

agency’s role and authorities; 

5. Be able to properly mark information contributed to the ISE to convey the 

currency and reliability of the information and redistribution requirements; 

6. Know the information sharing tools available; 

7. Know the department or agency’s procedures for user access to information 

sharing tools such as EDS (White/Yellow/Blue/Green Pages) and 

responsibility for updating this information, NCTC resources, and Terrorist 

Screening Center (TSC) data; 

8. Know the roles and responsibilities of other ISE participants; 

9. Understand how to request terrorism information via the ISE; 

10. Know where to find points of contact that can answer questions regarding the 

ISE; 

11. Be familiar with incentives for information sharing and the requirement to 

include a performance evaluation element in annual performance appraisal 

reviews; and 

12. Know the department or agency’s procedures for handling “protected 

information.”74

 

74 The Guidelines To Implement Information Privacy Rights and Other Legal Protections in the Development and Use of the Information 

Sharing Environment apply to information about United States citizens and lawful permanent residents that is subject to information 

privacy or other legal protections under the Constitution and Federal laws of the United States (“protected information”). For the 

Intelligence Community, protected information includes information about “United States persons” as defined in E.O. 12333. 

Protected information may also include other information that the Federal government expressly determines by Executive Order, 

international agreement, or other similar instrument should be covered by the Guidelines. See Chapter 9. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART III

 87 

8.3 Implementation Actions 

During Phase 1 of ISE implementation: 

Action 1.31 The DOS FSI, supported by the working group of ISC training 

representatives, will develop the core training module that will serve 

as the common educational baseline for the ISE. (Planned 

Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 1.32 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will review departmental 

incentives for sharing of terrorism information and will measure 

their effectiveness. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, 

CY 2007) 

During Phase 2 of ISE implementation: 

Action 2.33 All Federal departments and agencies responsible for terrorism 

information sharing will develop tailored training programs based on 

their unique business processes, missions, program, and policy 

needs. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 2.34 DOJ, DHS, and FBI, in coordination with the ISC SLT 

Subcommittee and with guidance from the ISC training working 

group, will develop information sharing training guidelines for SLT 

governments. The guidelines will include the core training goals 

used by the departments and agencies represented on the ISC, as 

well as training specific to SLT and private sector operating 

environments and officers. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, 

CY 2007) 

Action 2.35 All Federal departments and agencies will provide the PM-ISE with 

a copy of their agency-specific training modules, as well as a count 

of the number and career categories of personnel who have 

received training on the ISE for inclusion in the President’s report 

on ISE performance. This information will continue to be submitted 

on an annual basis. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, 

CY 2008) 

Action 2.36 Federal departments and agencies will train newly hired personnel 

within six months of entrance on duty. Each executive department 

and agency will also include information sharing in performance 

appraisal reviews as appropriate. (Planned Completion: Fourth 

Quarter, CY 2008) 

Action 2.37 Federal departments and agencies will recommend modifications to 

internal policies, as appropriate, to accommodate the ISE training, 

incentive, and accountability requirements, including each will 

review its procedures for disciplining personnel who fail to adhere 
PART III Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

88

to security procedures regarding the handling and distribution of 

classified and controlled information. (Planned Completion: Fourth 

Quarter, CY 2008) 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART III

 89 

Chapter 9 – Protecting Information Privacy and Civil Liberties 

in the ISE 

9.1 Background 

IRTPA requires that the ISE incorporate protections for individuals’ privacy and civil 

liberties.75 IRTPA also requires the President to issue guidelines that protect privacy and 

civil liberties in the development and use of the ISE.76 Accordingly, in December 2005, 

the President issued guidelines that, among other things, directed the Attorney General 

and the DNI, in coordination with the heads of executive departments and agencies that 

possess or use intelligence or terrorism information, to: 

1. Conduct a review of current executive department and agency information 

sharing policies and procedures regarding the protection of information 

privacy and other legal rights of Americans; and 

2. Develop guidelines to be implemented by executive departments and 

agencies to ensure that the information privacy and other legal rights of 

Americans are protected in the development and use of the ISE, including in 

the acquisition, access, use, and storage of personally identifiable 

information.77

The Attorney General and the DNI completed the review, developed guidelines, and 

forwarded them to the President through the Director of OMB and the APHS-CT and 

APNSA. The final recommendations of the Attorney General and the DNI—Guidelines 

To Implement Information Privacy Rights and Other Legal Protections in the 

Development and Use of the Information Sharing Environment—are summarized in the 

next Section. 

9.2 ISE Information Privacy Guidelines 

The Guidelines describe the means by which Federal departments and agencies 

participating in the ISE will protect privacy and civil liberties in the development and 

operation of the ISE. Key features include: 

 

75 IRTPA, Section 1016(b)(2)(H). 

76 IRTPA, Section 1016(d)(2)(A). 77 Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Guidelines and Requirements In Support of the Information Sharing 

Environment (2005), Section (2)(e). 
PART III Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

90

1. Compliance with laws. The Guidelines state that all agencies shall, without 

exception, comply with the Constitution and all applicable laws and executive 

orders relating to protected information.78

2. Process-based approach. The Guidelines require each agency to implement 

an ongoing process for identifying and assessing the laws, executive orders, 

policies, and procedures that apply to the protected information that it will 

make available or access through the ISE. 

3. Specification of purpose. The Guidelines state that “protected information” 

should be shared through the ISE only if it is terrorism information, homeland 

security information, or law enforcement information.79 

4. Consistent with the criteria set forth in the guidelines, each agency is also 

required to: 

a. Identify its data holdings that contain protected information to be shared 

through the ISE, ensure protected information has been reviewed 

pursuant to the Guidelines, and establish mechanisms that allow ISE 

participants to determine the nature of the protected information so that 

such participants can handle the information in accordance with 

applicable legal requirements;

b. Implement data quality procedures;

c. Use appropriate security measures to safeguard information;

d. Implement procedures to hold personnel accountable for violations of 

policies, provide training to personnel, and enable effective reviews and 

audits to verify compliance with the Guidelines; 

e. Establish redress procedures consistent with the agency’s legal 

authorities and mission requirements to address complaints from 

persons regarding protected information about them that is under the 

agency’s control;

f. Implement guidelines via training, business process changes, and 

system designs; and

g. Facilitate appropriate public awareness of the Guidelines.

 

78 The Privacy Guidelines apply to information about United States citizens and lawful permanent residents that is subject to 

information privacy or other legal protections under the Constitution and Federal laws of the United States (“protected 

information”). For the Intelligence Community, protected information includes information about “United States persons” as 

defined in E.O. 12333. Protected information may also include other information that the Federal government expressly determines 

by Executive Order, international agreement, or other similar instrument should be covered by the Guidelines. 

79 These terms are defined in Section 13 of the Privacy Guidelines, and are also included in Appendix 4 of this plan. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART III

 91 

5. Governance Structure:

a. Makes clear that each agency’s senior official with overall agency-wide 

responsibility for information privacy issues shall directly oversee the 

agency’s implementation of and compliance with these guidelines;80

b. Requires each agency to designate an ISE Privacy Official;

c. Directs the PM-ISE to establish an ISE Privacy Guidelines Committee 

consisting of ISC members’ ISE Privacy Officials to work in consultation 

with the PCLOB; and

d. Requires each agency to prepare an ISE Privacy Protection Policy 

setting forth the implementation of the Guidelines. 

Consistent with standards and procedures that may be issued to govern participation in 

the ISE by SLT governments and private sector organizations, each agency shall work 

with the PM-ISE to ensure that non-Federal organizations seeking to access the 

agency’s protected information through the ISE have implemented appropriate policies 

and procedures that provide protections that are at least as comprehensive as those 

contained in the Guidelines. 

9.3 Implementation Actions 

During Phase 1 of ISE implementation: 

Action 1.33 Each agency will ensure that one or more ISE Privacy Officials are 

designated in accordance with paragraph 12.a of the privacy 

guidelines. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2006) 

Action 1.34 The PM-ISE will establish and designate a chair for the ISE Privacy 

Guidelines Committee. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, 

CY 2006) 

Action 1.35 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISE Privacy Guidelines 

Committee and the ISC, will establish a process for ensuring that 

non-Federal organizations participating in the ISE implement 

appropriate policies and procedures that provide protections that 

are at least as comprehensive as those contained in the 

Guidelines. (Planned Completion: First Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 1.36 The ISE Privacy Guidelines Committee will provide an assessment 

of the privacy and civil liberties protections of the ISE, including 

actions taken in the preceding year to implement or enforce privacy 

and civil liberties protections, to be included in the President’s first 

 

80 As designated by statute, Executive order, or as otherwise identified in response to OMB Memorandum M-05-08 dated February 

11, 2005. 
PART III Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

92

annual ISE performance report. (Planned Completion: Second 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

During Phase 2 of ISE implementation: 

Action 2.38 The ISE Privacy Guidelines Committee will provide an assessment 

of the privacy and civil liberties protections of the ISE, including 

actions taken in the preceding year to implement or enforce privacy 

and civil liberties protections, to be included in the President’s 

annual ISE performance report. (Planned Completion: Second 

Quarter, CY 2008 and 2009) 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART III

 93 

Chapter 10 – Terrorism Information Handling 

10.1 Classified Terrorism Information 

The handling of classified national security information is governed primarily by 

Executive Order 12958 and its implementing directives. According to the 9/11 and WMD 

Commissions, the sharing of terrorism information suffers from cumbersome and 

outdated information classification and personnel security policies and practices. Two 

ongoing initiatives address these limitations and promote the modification and 

reciprocity of security practices: simplification of personnel clearance processes, and 

the adoption of community-wide certification and accreditation policies and standards. 

10.1.1 Personnel Security Practices 

In response to Section 3001 of IRTPA, a number of initiatives are underway to 

streamline and simplify personnel security practices across the Federal government. 

E.O. 13381, Strengthening Processes Relating to Determining Eligibility for Access to 

Classified National Security Information, as amended, assigns to OMB responsibility for 

the government-wide initiative to make clearance processes uniform, centralized, 

efficient, timely, and reciprocal. Among the initiatives underway: the Office of Personnel 

Management is charged with developing and operating a government-wide security 

clearance database; government-wide standards for reciprocal recognition of 

clearances are under development; and the ODNI has initiated reviews at Federal 

departments and agencies to assess clearance adjudication practices and make 

recommendations to speed processes and further enhance reciprocity. The ISE must 

leverage these government-wide initiatives, as they are important elements for its 

successful implementation. The PM-ISE and ISC should regularly monitor progress of 

ISE participants in meeting the goals established in IRTPA Section 3001 as part of the 

ISE implementation process. 

10.1.2 Certification and Accreditation (C&A) Practices 

Inconsistent C&A policies and standards across individual departments and agencies, 

as well as communities, impede the speed and agility of today’s ISE, and could inhibit 

the development of the future ISE. In one effort to address this weakness, the IC is 

currently working with the defense community, as well as representatives from industry 

and academia, to overhaul outdated and non-scalable C&A processes. Reducing the 

time needed to certify and accredit systems, and promoting the reciprocity of C&A 

decisions, is central to this overhaul. Available and interoperable technical solutions that 

will enable the future ISE rely upon the development and implementation of enterprise, 

or community-wide, C&A policies and standards rather than those created locally for 

specific departments and agencies. 
PART III Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

94

10.1.3 Implementation Actions 

Actions relating to the handling of terrorism information address: modifications to 

personnel security practices, and the adoption of community-wide C&A policies and 

standards. 

10.1.3.1 Phase 2 Actions 

Phase 2 will include the following three implementation actions: 

Action 2.39 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, and OMB and the ODNI, 

will monitor existing performance measures and assess progress 

against the security clearance processing requirements of IRTPA 

Section 3001. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2009) 

Action 2.40 On an ongoing basis, the PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will 

support Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) efforts to 

facilitate compliance with E.O. 12958, as amended, and its 

implementing directives. (Planned Completion: Ongoing) 

Action 2.41 On an ongoing basis, the PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will 

work closely with ODNI-led efforts to overhaul current C&A policies 

and standards for the Intelligence Community and will evaluate the 

applicability of these policies and standards to the broader ISE. 

(Planned Completion: Ongoing) 

10.2 Sensitive But Unclassified Information 

Because the ISE crosses three security domains, it must support access to and 

handling of both classified and unclassified information. Wherever possible, classified 

terrorism information should be made available in unclassified versions to assure the 

widest distribution while still protecting sensitive sources and methods. However, the 

growing and non-standardized inventory of SBU designations and markings is a serious 

impediment to information sharing among agencies, between levels of government, 

and, as appropriate, with the private sector.81 Elimination of this impediment is essential 

to ensure that the future ISE promotes and enhances the effective and efficient 

acquisition, access, retention, production, use, management, and sharing of 

unclassified information while also ensuring its appropriate and consistent safeguarding. 

In his December 16, 2005 memorandum, the President provided direction to Federal 

departments and agencies on the standardization of procedures for handling SBU 

information. Specifically, Presidential Guideline 3 called on the Secretary of Homeland 

 

81 According to GAO report (GAO-06-385) Information Sharing: The Federal Government Needs to Establish Policies and Processes For 

Sharing Terrorism-Related and Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU) Information (GAO: Washington, DC, 2006), Federal agencies use at least 

56 different sensitive but unclassified designations (16 of which belong to one agency) to protect sensitive information. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART III

 95 

Security and the Attorney General—in coordination with the Secretaries of State, 

Defense, and Energy, and the DNI—to submit to the President for approval 

recommendations for the standardization of SBU procedures for homeland security 

information, law enforcement information, and terrorism information.82

These recommendations must include three elements: 

• Recommendations for government-wide policies and procedures to standardize 

SBU procedures; 

• Recommendations, as appropriate, for legislative, policy, regulatory, and 

administrative changes; and 

• An assessment—by each department and agency participating in the SBU 

procedures review process—of the costs and budgetary considerations for all 

proposed changes to marking conventions, handling caveats, and other 

procedures pertaining to SBU information. 

Efforts to formulate the required recommendations began immediately upon issuance of 

the Presidential Guidelines. It now continues under the auspices of a Coordinating 

Committee, chaired by the PM-ISE with HSC oversight, and composed of 

representatives from the departments of State, Defense, Justice, Transportation, 

Energy, and Homeland Security; ODNI; NSC; and OMB. These efforts have involved, 

and will continue to involve, consultation as appropriate with representatives from other 

affected departments and agencies, the ISOO, the Controlled Access Program 

Coordination Office (CAPCO), the ISC, and its State, Local, and Tribal and Private 

Sector Subcommittees. 

The Coordinating Committee will: 

• Clearly articulate the “Case for Action” as part of a general framework 

document that completes the requirements for Guideline 3; 

• Develop and adhere to a schedule that provides for completion of work by 

January 2007; 

• Maintain an explicit focus on homeland security information, law enforcement 

information, and terrorism information; and 

• Ensure all recommendations identify any effect on existing statutes and 

regulations or ongoing legislative and regulatory activities. 

 

82 Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Guidelines and Requirements In Support of the Information Sharing 

Environment (2005), Section (2)(c)(ii). 
PART III Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

96

10.2.1 Specific Implementation Action 

Action 1.37 The Guideline 3 Coordinating Committee will complete its work and 

submit recommendations for SBU standardization through the 

White House policy process to the APHS-CT and the APNSA. 

(Planned Completion: First Quarter, CY 2007) 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART III

 97 

Chapter 11 – ISE Enabling Activities 

11.1 ISE Performance Management 

Performance management is the process of managing and assessing an organization’s 

progress toward its strategic goals. Successfully used, the process and resulting 

information provide a foundation for guiding budget and resource allocation decisions; 

focusing employee endeavors as well as incentive and training programs; proposing 

organizational restructuring as appropriate; and recognizing program gaps and areas for 

further development. 

Performance management across the ISE requires a collaborative effort between the 

PM-ISE, ISC, and the ISE participants. The ISE is an integrating environment focused 

on the counterterrorism mission shared by its member organizations with the 

recognition that each department and agency has its own unique structure and 

responsibilities. As envisioned, ISE performance management will reflect this two-tiered 

structure by including ISE-wide goals and measures to evaluate the performance of 

cross-cutting ISE activities, while integrating the performance goals, measures, and 

targets specific to individual departments and agencies. As such, the ISE Performance 

Management Program should complement and enhance—not replace or subsume—

departmental or agency performance management efforts. 

11.1.1 Progress to Date 

In January 2006, the PM-ISE conducted an informal survey of ISE participants 

regarding terrorism information sharing goals and measures currently incorporated into 

their annual performance plans. In general, departments and agencies addressed 

information sharing issues within the context of each agency’s own counterterrorism, 

WMD, or homeland security production or business lines and had not yet begun to 

address information sharing as an enterprise-wide strategic goal. 

In late March 2006, the PM-ISE developed an action plan establishing a framework for 

all subsequent ISE performance management activities, which included: 

1. An overview of the ISE performance management process; 

2. A description of terminology to be used; and 

3. A description of how ISE performance management will relate to OMB’s 

initiatives for the President’s Management Agenda (PMA) and to 

performance management activities of individual departments and agencies. 
PART III Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

98

Since the IIP in January 2006 and the action plan (the response to IIP Task 10.1) in 

March 2006, a number of milestones that affect the approach to performance 

management have been realized. Achievements include progress on the ODNI’s 

National Intelligence Strategy (NIS), the NCTC’s substantive work to develop the 

National Implementation Plan, development of a strategy for communications and 

interaction between the Federal government and the SLT governments, and agreement 

on strategic goals for the ISE. 

It is important that the ISE Performance Management Program capitalize on progress 

already made by individual ISE participants. Therefore, Phase 1 of the Performance 

Management Program will be dedicated to the following goals:

1. Developing overarching ISE performance measures; 

2. Providing guidance to departments and agencies to assist in formulating 

agency-specific goals and measures; 

3. Providing training, incentives, and mechanisms for accountability for 

improved and increased sharing of terrorism information; 

4. Documenting progress made toward implementing the ISE during 2006 and 

2007; 

5. Working with ISE participants to reach a common understanding regarding 

ISE Performance Management Plan roles and responsibilities, as well as 

expectations for the ISE Performance Management Report; and 

6. Implementing and refining the ISE Performance Management Plan.

11.1.2 Next Steps 

With the overarching ISE strategic goals agreed to in Section 1.5, the next step is to 

develop the measures. As noted above, it is important to capture and capitalize on the 

progress already made by individual ISE members. Many programs and procedures 

already in place and functioning can often be replicated, expanded, or adapted to meet 

the larger ISE’s goals. 

In measuring progress against the strategic goals set for the ISE (see Section 1.5), in 

Phase 1 the PM-ISE will focus on: 

1. Discovery of readily adaptable systems, policies, and procedures; 

2. Establishment or improvement of qualitative feedback mechanisms between 

SLT governments and the Federal government; 

3. Protection of privacy and civil liberties; 

4. Establishing a mechanism to produce a uniform Federal message to SLTs, 

private sector, and foreign partners; 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART III

 99 

5. Core ISE training for all Federal personnel, available to SLT and private 

sector partners as applicable; 

6. Incorporation of information sharing as a specific strategic goal in Federal 

strategies; and 

7. Increasing the amount of data and the likelihood of finding relevant data 

through EDS. 

The performance management deadlines set by IRTPA are not aligned with the Federal 

government performance management cycle. As a result, the following are 

recommended actions in Phase 1: 

Action 1.38 To align timelines, the PM-ISE will work with ISC members and 

other partners to establish cut-off dates for the yearly ISE 

performance management reports. (Planned Completion: First 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 1.39 Federal departments and agencies will use their information 

sharing and terrorism-related FY06 goals, measures, and outcomes 

as input to the ISE Performance Management Report. (Planned 

Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

Federal performance management cycles revolve around the PMA. Performance 

management plans for the 2006-2007 PMA cycle are well underway, if not already 

completed, in most agencies. However, since the majority of changes and 

improvements required to meet IRTPA goals are related to policy and procedure, there 

is still adequate time to ensure that the ISE is fully addressed in Federal performance 

plans for FY07. The PM-ISE’s overarching goals for the ISE are broadly designed to 

encompass efforts underway or about to be implemented across Federal departments 

and agencies, SLT governments, and the private sector. The following are 

recommended actions: 

Action 1.40 Federal departments and agencies will reflect ISE goals in their 

individual performance management plans. (Planned Completion: 

First Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 1.41 Federal departments and agencies will specify support to the ISE 

as part of their strategic plans and performance management 

efforts for the 2006-2007 cycle. (Planned Completion: Second 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

Action 1.42 Federal departments and agencies will work with the PM-ISE to 

develop specific ISE-wide program outcome goals and measures 

(performance measures and threshold values), as appropriate, for 

the goals listed in Section 1.5. (Planned Completion: Second 

Quarter, CY 2007) 
PART III Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

100

Action 1.43 Federal departments and agencies will provide their mid-year 

reviews of goals and measures to the PM-ISE (mid-year reviews 

are required by the Information Sharing Guidelines and 

Requirements). (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

Significant sections of the NIP and the NIS contain major policy, procedure, and 

structural efforts intended to improve terrorism and related information sharing 

throughout the Federal government and with SLT and private sector organizations. 

Therefore, the PM-ISE will review interdependencies among the ISE, NIS, and NIP 

goals and measures. 

Action 1.44 The PM-ISE, in coordination with the ODNI, will illustrate 

interdependencies through a “crosswalk” of the ISE, NIS, and NIP 

goals and measures. The “crosswalk” will be completed by or 

before December 2006. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, 

CY 2006) 

In the normal course of strategic management, a Federal department or agency would 

perform a cost-benefit analysis on any new infrastructure, program, or system it was 

considering creating or adjusting to ensure the new effort would meet that agency’s 

mission needs. The requirement to build the ISE, however, is already codified in both 

public law and Federal policy. Performing a cost-benefit analysis of structures needed to 

advance the ISE would be an unnecessary additional step. Once the policy, procedural, 

and IT structure of the ISE is in place, cost-benefit analyses to determine the best 

course for improving the ISE will be examined. The PM-ISE, the ISC, and OMB will 

work together to determine the correct course of action on a case-by-case basis. 

11.1.3 Performance Management Report 

The annual ISE Performance Management Report is due from the President to 

Congress on a yearly basis. Following the framework outlined in this plan, Federal 

departments and agencies may expect a call for input into the annual Performance 

Management Report no later than 60 days before the PMA-prescribed deadline. 

11.1.4 State, Local, Tribal, and Private Sector Performance Management 

The Guideline 2 framework establishes a collaborative structure through which terrorism 

information will be shared between and among participating Federal, State, Local, 

Tribal, and private sector partners. The framework also defines a process for developing 

and establishing performance measures to assess progress in improving information 

sharing among these participants. 

Action 1.45 The PM-ISE and ISC members will develop performance objectives 

and measures, in cooperation with SLT and Private Sector 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART III

 101 

Subcommittees, to address progress against the Guideline 2 

framework. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

11.2 ISE Planning, Programming, and Budgeting 

The transformation of the current ISE into one that better facilitates, coordinates, and 

expedites protected access to terrorism information across ISE participants requires the 

dedication of specific funds and resources. While existing systems and capabilities will 

be drawn upon to build the proposed ISE, the implementation of many of the initiatives 

outlined in IRTPA and the Information Sharing Guidelines and Requirements will require 

the reprioritization of resources to support these activities. Specific funding estimates, 

strategies, and proposals will need to be assessed, prioritized, cross-walked, and 

carefully integrated to formulate an overarching budget plan that can achieve the twophased implementation approach presented in this plan. 

The intelligence, law enforcement, defense, homeland security, and foreign affairs 

communities that will utilize the ISE are funded through several different mechanisms. 

As a result, ISE-related budget proposals and recommendations will be integrated with 

the various timelines and requirements associated with these funding mechanisms to 

impact future Federal budget cycles. 

While certain execution year FY07 budget adjustments may be proposed to redirect 

resources to priority projects or activities, the bulk of Phase 2 activities will be expected 

to impact Federal departments’ and agencies’ FY08 and subsequent budget cycles. 

11.2.1 Progress to Date 

The PM-ISE, with support from OMB, has reached out to ISC departments and 

agencies to identify their FY06 and FY07 expenditures and planned investments for the 

programs, systems, and architectures that support terrorism information sharing. The 

information obtained from these efforts is being reviewed and analyzed by the PM-ISE 

and OMB, in combination with the working inventory of existing resources to identify 

overall ISE assets and investments, highlight redundant or overlapping investments and 

activities across agencies, and identify resource gaps for which focused investments 

could have significant impact for quick solutions and longer-term ISE operability. 

The results of an initial review of the information were used to assist the PM-ISE and 

OMB in the development of FY08 cross-cutting terrorism information sharing budget 

guidance to agencies, which has been provided to ISC departments and agencies. The 

PM-ISE and OMB have also announced their intent to conduct ISE program reviews 

covering departments' and agencies' planned investment on programs and projects 

supporting terrorism information sharing. As Presidential direction becomes available, 

and further definition regarding the roles and requirements of individual ISE participants 

solidify, Federal departments and agencies will develop budget estimates to address 

the implementation of the initiatives outlined in IRTPA and the Information Sharing 
PART III Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

102

Guidelines and Requirements. These estimates will address costs associated with, but 

not limited to: 

1. Departmental assessments of privacy policies and procedures regarding the 

retention of protected information, the modification of such procedures, and 

the cataloging of agency holdings; 

2. Architecture development, assessments, and alignment with the ISE 

Enterprise Architecture Framework; 

3. Recommendations for common standards implementation, including impacts 

on existing and planned investments at affected departments and agencies; 

4. Implementation of information assurance/security programs to provide user 

identity, access, auditing, protection, integrity, and availability related to 

terrorism information; 

5. Development or modification of systems, programs, and procedures for 

foreign disclosure officers to make and expedite sharing decisions and to 

release classified information to foreign governments; 

6. Creation of a national network of fusion centers and development of an 

Interagency Threat Assessment and Coordination Group at the NCTC to 

specifically address SLT and private sector needs; 

7. Development and implementation of mechanisms to provide liability and antitrust protections to the private sector for sharing information in good faith; 

8. System modification; purchase of security products; and reproduction and 

distribution of materials associated with new SBU policies, markings, and 

handling procedures; 

9. Training requirements and materials associated with changes in Federal 

government SBU designations, privacy, foreign government sharing, 

standards, and other information sharing activities; 

10. Hardware interfaces and software upgrades to existing networks and 

databases that will be accessible by SBU mobile devices, and potential 

procurement of the additional end devices; 

11. Hosting and interconnectivity of the EDS to respective agency databases; 

and 

12. Implementation of new policies and procedures at the Federal, State, local, 

and tribal government levels. 

As with the recommendations derived from the analysis of the Budget Data Request 

(BDR) and working inventory of existing resources, budget estimates concerning the 

implementation of IRTPA and the Presidential Information Sharing Guidelines and 

Requirements actions will be carefully reviewed by the PM-ISE and OMB—in 

consultation with the ISC—to determine how best to address and prioritize specific 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART III

 103 

recommendations in FY08 and subsequent budget cycles for the duration of the Office 

of the PM-ISE and any governance structure identified thereafter for this purpose. 

These recommendations will take into account potential impact on department- and 

agency-specific mission areas, and each proposed investment’s alignment with and 

contribution to ISE goals and requirements. 

11.2.2 Next Steps 

A plan for gathering information from SLT organizations on their current ISE-related 

resources, investment plans, and budgetary requirements to identify potential resource 

gaps will be developed and prioritized based on input provided by the ISC SLT 

Subcommittee. The plan will examine how existing grant processes can be leveraged to 

recommend priorities for funding as it relates to SLT ISE-related requirements identified 

through an overall gap analysis and, eventually, to facilitate the adoption of ISE-related 

policies, processes, and standards. Fusion centers are an integral part of the SLT 

framework, and resource issues associated with these centers are addressed 

specifically in Chapter 7. The PM-ISE will work through the NIPP framework to 

determine the appropriate mechanism to address private-sector resources, investment 

plans, and requirements. 

During the FY08 budget cycle, the PM-ISE will review the ISE investment strategy and 

begin planning for subsequent budget cycles. The following are recommended actions 

for Phase 1: 

Action 1.46 The PM-ISE will support OMB, which will provide Federal 

departments and agencies with budget guidance for FY 2008. 

(Completed: Third Quarter, CY 2006) 

Action 1.47 The PM-ISE will work with OMB during the fall budget process to 

review Federal departments’ and agencies’ investments with ISE 

priorities and OMB will provide additional budget guidance to 

departments and agencies, as appropriate. (Planned Completion: 

Fourth Quarter, CY 2006) 

Action 1.48 The PM-ISE, with support from OMB and the ISC, will begin 

planning for subsequent budget cycles. (Planned Completion: First 

Quarter, CY 2007) 
PART III Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

104

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART IV

 105 

PART IV – CONCLUSIONS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
PART IV Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

106

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART IV

 107 

Chapter 12 – Managing ISE Implementation 

12.1 Managing ISE Policy, Business Processes, and Technology 

Transforming the ISE requires the integration of critical policies, business processes, 

and technology components. A robust set of ISE policies will lay the foundation for the 

future ISE. Business processes will be developed based on this essential policy 

foundation. The combination of ISE policy and business processes will drive the 

necessary technology solutions. 

12.1.1 ISE Policy and Business Process Management 

IRTPA directs the President to “determine and enforce the policies, directives, and rules 

that will govern the content and usage of the ISE.”83 Presidential Requirement 1(c) 

directs the DNI to “direct the PM, in consultation with the ISC, to develop, in a manner 

consistent with applicable law, the policies, procedures ... needed to create the ISE,” 

which “shall be reviewed through the interagency policy coordination process, and shall 

be submitted ... by the DNI to the President for approval through the APHS-CT and the 

APNSA.”84 The PM-ISE has a broad, government-wide, responsibility to “plan for, 

oversee the implementation of, and manage the ISE,” but lacks the specific authorities 

to issue policies, standards, business processes, and procedures to implement changes 

directly. 85 In Chapter 14, the PM-ISE seeks to rectify this situation by recommending 

that the President delegate to the PM-ISE government-wide authority to issue 

procedures, guidelines, functional standards, and instructions for the management, 

development, and operation of the ISE. 

12.1.2 ISE Technology Management 

Departments and agencies align information resources to support their missions. The 

sharing of terrorism information is a vital part of these missions. For the ISE to succeed, 

terrorism information sharing and interoperability with the ISE need to be integral 

attributes of departments' and agencies’ overall information resource planning and 

enterprise architectures. The PM-ISE will work with the ISC and the CIOs of the ODNI, 

DoD, and other principal ISE stakeholders to communicate ISE requirements that may 

impact information resource planning. This will allow CIOs to appropriately integrate ISE 

requirements into their established information resource planning processes. 

 

83 IRTPA Section 1016(b)(1)(C). 

84 Memorandum for the Heads of Executive Departments and Agencies: Guidelines and Requirements In Support of the Information Sharing 

Environment (December 16, 2005), Requirement 1(c). 

85 IRTPA Section 1016(f)(2)(A). 
PART IV Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

108

12.2 ISE Technical Project Management 

This Section describes the project management construct for the technical 

implementation of the ISE. It also discusses the interface between the technical 

implementation and the policy and business process bodies when impediments to 

implementation are identified. This construct addresses only the set of common 

capabilities to support ISE mission users—not the ISE’s required participant-specific 

project management activities. However, as described in Section 4.2.3, the ISC is 

responsible for ensuring coordination among the Federal departments and agencies 

participating in the ISE and can, therefore, influence appropriate project management 

activities and coordination within specific agencies. 

12.2.1 Overall Roles and Responsibilities 

Feedback and involvement from mission users and IT managers are necessary to 

ensure that ISE solutions add value to the counterterrorism mission. Individual ISE 

implementation efforts to meet specified capability requirements must be coordinated 

across all participating departments and agencies. The approach that will be followed is 

modeled on the one used to implement EDS and is tailored to manage the additional 

complexity of the ISE. The primary players are the PM-ISE, ISC, ITIA, and teams that 

support mission validation and implementation coordination. These are each discussed 

in detail below. The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, provides overall direction. 

Each ITIA is responsible for management of focused implementation efforts within the 

constraints of the applicable, specified ISE requirements and PM-ISE direction. 

Consistent with direction from IRTPA to leverage existing resources, this project 

management structure uses IT governance structures and technical capabilities of 

participating organizations. Because most existing policy and technical coordination 

between participating agencies focuses on supporting internal requirements, 

interagency bodies must be created to support process and technical coordination 

specifically focused on the ISE. 

Accordingly, and as depicted in Figure 12.2-1, two types of teams will support the 

implementation of specific ISE capabilities or clusters of capabilities: Mission Validation 

Teams (MVT) will provide feedback and a basis for adjustments to capability 

requirements; and one or more Implementation Coordination Teams (ICT) will ensure 

that the detailed implementation strategies are viable. There may be multiple MVTs and 

ICTs clustered around functional capabilities or network security domains. The ITIA 

representative will chair the ICTs and will use that forum to issue guidance and direction 

to the participating departments and agencies. To ensure that mission requirements are 

being addressed, the ICTs will periodically recommend to the PM-ISE that a MVT 

should be formed to make an assessment from a user perspective. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART IV

 109 

Figure 12.2-1. ISE Technical Project Management 

12.3 Monitoring ISE Implementation 

In addition to playing an essential role in integrating critical policies, business 

processes, and technology components, the PM-ISE will employ the tools needed to 

monitor ISE implementation progress, make mid-course adjustments as required, and 

elevate important issues to the senior levels when they cannot be resolved by the PMISE. In carrying out these responsibilities, the PM-ISE will operate in accordance with 

the governance structure described in Chapter 4. To ensure that this plan is executed 

properly, the PM-ISE will employ a number of specific management tools, including the 

following: 

1. ISC Subcommittees and Working Groups: Interagency working groups are 

an effective mechanism for analyzing complex issues by experts and 

recommending solutions. All subcommittees and working groups formed to 

address terrorism information sharing issues must operate within the ISE 

governance structure. Accordingly, all working groups assigned to address 

actions identified in this plan will be established by and will report to the PMISE and the ISC. This approach will employ the ISE governance structure 

more effectively by focusing attention on a set of priorities, allowing more 

streamlined coordination, and providing a single management chain for 

addressing issues. 

2. Prioritization: While all the actions identified in this plan are important, they 

cannot all be performed simultaneously. The Implementation Plan’s two-
PART IV Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

110

phase approach already provides one level of prioritization, but the ISE must 

dynamically respond to changing conditions and regularly review and adjust 

priorities as needed. Therefore, in consultation with the ISC, the PM-ISE will 

regularly review all implementation actions and adjust ISE priorities as 

required. 

3. ISE Performance Reviews: Consistent with Presidential Requirement 2, 

departments and agencies will work with the PM-ISE to develop performance 

goals and measures that assess their capabilities in terrorism information 

sharing. At least semi-annually, the PM-ISE and the ISC will formally review 

progress in achieving the specific targets and performance goals for the ISE, 

and make adjustments as required.

4. Operational Exercises: While performance measures and milestones are 

necessary tools for managing the ISE, they are not sufficient. Periodic 

evaluation of ISE performance in an operational environment is also 

required. The PM-ISE will work with the departments and agencies 

responsible for conducting counterterrorism and homeland security exercises 

to ensure that information sharing capabilities are exercised and evaluated. 

Lessons learned through these exercises will be used to adjust ISE actions 

and priorities. As ISE operations mature in Phase 2 of ISE implementation, 

the PM-ISE will explore the use of modeling and simulation of ISE 

capabilities as a technique for determining ISE capabilities against 

operational scenarios. 

5. Evaluation Environments: To identify new requirements, performance 

elements, capabilities, and standards, ISE implementation must be grounded 

in practical applications. Chapter 3 described the use of Federal and State 

evaluation environments as one mechanism for testing implementation 

approaches and extracting lessons learned that could be applied across the 

ISE.86

 

86Office of the PM-ISE, Information Sharing Environment Interim Implementation Plan, January 2006, Section 3.2.2. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART IV

 111 

Chapter 13 – ISE Expansion and Future Management Structure 

13.1 Introduction 

Section 1016(e) of IRTPA requires the President to submit to Congress a report 

containing an Implementation Plan that includes the recommendations of the PM-ISE, in 

consultation with the ISC: 

1. Regarding whether, and under what conditions, the ISE should be expanded 

to include other intelligence information (IRTPA Section 1016(e), 

Requirement 9); and 

2. For a future management structure for the ISE, including whether the position 

of the PM should continue to remain in existence (IRTPA, Section 1016(e) 

Requirement 11). 

The PM-ISE recommendations are provided below. 

13.2 Expansion of ISE beyond Terrorism Information 

As described in Chapter 1, IRTPA specifically defines the ISE as “an approach that 

facilitates the sharing of terrorism information.” Accordingly, the IRTPA definition of 

terrorism information forms the foundation for the ISE described in this plan. 

Recognizing that it will be nearly impossible to predict exactly which types of 

information, insight, or expertise will be required to detect, prevent, prepare for, respond 

to, and mitigate the effects of a terrorist attack, the counterterrorism community requires 

a flexible, adaptable ISE that enables the sharing not only of “terrorism information,” but 

also of “homeland security information” and certain law enforcement information. The 

definition of “terrorism information” is similar to and overlaps in part with the definitions 

of “homeland security information” and “law enforcement information.” 87 All three types 

of information are necessary to the national effort to combat terrorism. While such 

overlapping terminology in legislation is not unique, it has been a significant 

complicating factor in the delineation of roles, missions, and responsibilities in carrying 

out the counterterrorism mission—a factor often referred to as the “lanes in the road.” 

Both Guidelines 2 and 3 of the Presidential Information Sharing Guidelines and 

Requirements recognized the above-mentioned overlap in definitions, and in the case of 

Guideline 2, the Presidential memorandum directed that a recommended framework be 

submitted to the President “to govern the roles and responsibilities of executive 

 

87 Homeland Security Act of 2002 (Public Law 107-296), § 892(f)(1), which is now codified as 6 U.S.C. §§ 101 et seq. There is no 

statutory or universally accepted definition of the term “law enforcement information” but for purposes of the ISE only, “‘law 

enforcement information’ means any information obtained by or of interest to a law enforcement agency or official that is both (A) 

related to terrorism or the security of our homeland and (B) relevant to a law enforcement mission...” 
PART IV Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

112

departments and agencies pertaining to the acquisition, access, retention, production, 

use, management, and sharing of homeland security information, law enforcement 

information, and terrorism information” between and among federal departments 

and agencies and State, local, and tribal governments, law enforcement agencies, and 

private sector entities.” Guideline 3 in turn directed that the recommendations for 

standardizing procedures for marking and handling SBU information should eventually 

apply to these same three types of information. This broadening of the ISE’s scope will 

enable the ISE to accomplish its national security objectives. 

Consequently, the PM-ISE recommends: 

1. Pursuant to this Implementation Plan, and consistent with Guidelines 2 and 

3, the ISE will facilitate the sharing of “terrorism information,” as defined in 

IRTPA section 1016(a)(4), as well as the following categories of information 

to the extent that they do not otherwise constitute “terrorism information”: (1) 

homeland security information as defined in Section 892(f)(1) of the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. § 482(f)(1)); and (2) law 

enforcement information relating to terrorism or the security of our homeland. 

Such additional information includes intelligence information. 

2. The PM-ISE recommends deferring a decision to further expand the ISE to 

include additional intelligence information until policies, business practices, 

and systems are sufficiently mature to evaluate the impact of including such 

additional information, and revisiting the topic in the first annual ISE 

Performance Report (see Recommendation 3 below). 

Should this recommendation be sustained, the actions described in this plan should be 

executed so they may accommodate a possible future expansion if such a decision is 

made. Furthermore, the PM, in consultation with the ISC, should reconsider this 

recommendation in June 2007, and each June thereafter, in conjunction with the 

development of the annual ISE Performance Report. 

13.3 Future ISE Management Structure 

The initial period of standing up the ISE will require substantial oversight and 

management, and it is now clear that this period will be longer than the two years 

originally allotted by IRTPA. Therefore, the PM-ISE recommends continuation of the 

PM-ISE and ISC for the three years covered by this plan to ensure its full 

implementation and to provide a fully operational ISE. Once up and running, the ISE 

may require less than the current PM-ISE effort to sustain it. 

In several important areas—budget, performance management, standards, and 

enterprise architecture—implementing the actions defined in this plan will require a 

concerted and coordinated effort over the next three years, through June 2009. The 

unique position of the PM-ISE allows him/her to serve as an objective, honest broker for 

the ISE, focused exclusively on the national goal of improving terrorism information 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART IV

 113 

sharing and collaboration. The PM-ISE can render objective views, help drive 

consensus, and align multiple activities into a functioning ISE. 

Furthermore, the ISC provides a useful forum for Federal departments and agencies, 

which carry out the actual work of ISE implementation, to advise the PM-ISE on 

priorities and resources and also assist in the development of departmental policies and 

procedures that affect ISE participants. The ISC has a significant role to play in ISE 

implementation through Phases 1 and 2 of this plan. As with the prior recommendation, 

however, the PM, in consultation with the ISC, should reconsider this recommendation 

in June 2007, and each June thereafter, in conjunction with the development of the 

annual ISE Performance Report. 
PART IV Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

114

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART IV

 115 

Chapter 14 – Additional 

PM Recommendations and Summary of Actions 

14.1 Additional PM Recommendations 

14.1.1 Synchronize ISE Performance Report with ISE Implementation Phases 

IRTPA, Section 1016(h)(1) requires that “[n]ot later than two years after the date of the 

enactment ... and annually thereafter, the President shall submit to Congress a report 

on the state of the ISE and of information sharing across the Federal Government.” In 

accordance with that schedule, the first ISE performance report would be due in 

December 2006. This plan describes a two-phase ISE implementation approach with 

the first phase ending in June 2007. The PM believes that the performance reporting 

cycle and the phases of the implementation process should be synchronized so that the 

performance report accurately reflects the status of the action for each implementation 

phase. Providing the first report in June 2007 will allow the initial evaluation of 

performance to be made on the basis of Phase 1 of this Plan—a natural point for 

reflection as Phase 2 begins. Moreover, adopting the June date for subsequent reports 

places ISE activities in alignment with the Federal Planning, Programming, and 

Budgeting process, thus better supporting the development of department and agency 

performance measures, initial assessments of Departmental programs under the 

Program Assessment Rating Tool (PART), and the development of department and 

agency budgets. Consequently, the PM recommends that the President request that the 

first ISE Performance Report be submitted at the end of June 2007—rather than 

December 2006—and at the end of June every year thereafter. 

14.1.2 Delegation of Authority 

As discussed in Chapter 12, the ISE requires the integration of critical policies, business 

processes, and technology components. Although IRTPA identifies the PM as 

“responsible for information sharing across the Federal Government,” neither IRTPA nor 

Executive Order 13388 specifically empowers any official below the President to issue 

the procedures, guidelines, functional standards, and instructions necessary for 

managing and overseeing ISE implementation.88

Accordingly, the need to grant the PM-ISE government-wide authority to issue 

procedures, guidelines, functional standards, and instructions for the management, 

development, and operation of the ISE, and options for doing so, should be considered. 

Such issuances would need to be consistent with the policies and directives issued by 

 

88 IRTPA, Section 1016(f)(1); In Guideline 1, however, the President did delegate to “the DNI, in coordination with the Secretaries of 

State, Defense, and Homeland Security, and the Attorney General,” the authority to “issue ...common standards” for the ISE. See 

Information Sharing Guidelines and Requirements, paragraph 2.a. 
PART IV Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

116

the President, the DNI, the Director of OMB, and other heads of departments and 

agencies having the authority to issue ISE policies and directives. Such issuance 

authority would not change or abrogate the authorities of the heads of such Federal 

departments and agencies, and all issuances would be coordinated through the ISE 

governance process described in Section 4.2 of this Implementation Plan. The 

delegation could be made consistent with the Presidential memorandum of June 2, 

2005, and be through the DNI to the PM-ISE. 

14.2 Summary of ISE Implementation Actions 

This Implementation Plan sets forth operational details and implementation actions to 

create the ISE in Phase 1 (present to June 2007) and Phase 2 (June 2007 to June 

2009). These actions map to the six strategic goals listed in Chapter 1: 

1. Facilitate the establishment of a trusted partnership among all levels of 

government, the private sector, and foreign partners. 

2. Promote an information sharing culture among ISE partners by facilitating the 

improved sharing of timely, validated, protected, and actionable terrorism 

information supported by extensive education, training, and awareness 

programs for ISE participants. 

3. To the maximum extent possible, function in a decentralized, distributed, and 

coordinated manner. 

4. Develop and deploy incrementally, leveraging existing information sharing 

capabilities while also creating new core functions and services. 

5. Enable the Federal government to speak with one voice on terrorism-related 

matters, and to promote more rapid and effective interchange and 

coordination among Federal departments and agencies and State, local, and 

tribal governments, the private sector, and foreign partners, thus ensuring 

effective multi-directional sharing of information. 

6. Ensure sharing procedures and policies protect information privacy and civil 

liberties. 

Tables 14.2-1 and 14.2-2 summarize the actions for Phases 1 and 2 respectively. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART IV

 117 

Table 14.2-1. Phase 1 Implementation Actions 

Action 

Number Action Reference Alignment to ISE Goal(s) 

ISE Operational Capabilities 

Action 1.1 The PM-ISE and ISC members will identify the alerts and 

notifications to be available to Federal and non-Federal ISE 

participants and the enabling policies and business processes 

necessary to implement the alert and notification capability. 

(Planned Completion: First Quarter, Calendar Year (CY) 2007) 

43 2, 4, 5 

Action 1.2 The PM-ISE and ISC members will identify existing technologies, 

capabilities, and programs (e.g., HSPD-12 and Federal Information 

Processing Standard [FIPS] 201) that provide easier user access, 

but still support identity management through audits, authentication, 

and access controls. The ISC will assess the technologies and pilot 

programs to determine whether or not the technologies support its 

user base and are suitable for ISE adoption. (Planned Completion: 

Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

44 2, 4 

Action 1.3 The PM-ISE and ISC members will determine what ISE-wide 

identity management capabilities are practical and develop a 

detailed set of requirements and Project Plan for implementation of 

such capabilities in a time frame consistent with technology maturity 

and available budgetary resources. (Planned Completion: Second 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

45 2, 4 

Action 1.4 The PM-ISE and ISC members will investigate existing or emerging 

capabilities that discover data and information within the Federal 

government and industry. The initial implementation of enterprise 

search will apply a search engine to index both structured and 

unstructured data. This activity will include the evaluation of several 

ongoing pilot programs using technologies that integrate data 

across heterogeneous networks and data stores to enhance the 

“findability” of relevant information and the interoperability of data 

and information. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

46 2, 4 

Action 1.5 The PM-ISE and the ISC will work with the CDMO to establish a 

process to ensure that cross-domain solutions developed through 

this office meet the needs of ISE participants. (Planned Completion: 

First Quarter, CY 2007) 

50 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 

Action 1.6 The PM-ISE and ISC members will identify existing collaborative 

tools that are used and operational in the counterterrorism or other 

analytic or investigative communities and review the feasibility of 

adopting common tools for use across the ISE. (Planned 

Completion: First Quarter, CY 2007) 

51 1, 2, 3, 4, 

Action 1.7 The PM-ISE and ISC members will develop requirements to 

implement new and emerging collaborative technologies. (Planned 

Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

51 1, 2, 3, 4 

Action 1.8 The PM-ISE and the ISC members will implement EDS Blue, 

Yellow, and Green Pages in the SCI, Secret, and SBU security 

domains. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

53 1, 2, 3, 4 

Action 1.9 The PM-ISE and the ISC members will implement EDS White 

Pages in the SCI and Secret security domains. (Planned 

Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

53 1, 2, 3, 4 
PART IV Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

118

Action 

Number Action Reference Alignment to ISE Goal(s) 

Architecture and Standards 

Action 1.10 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will publish a preliminary 

version of the ISEEA Framework Document providing the models 

with major portions of the ISE and their attributes. (Planned 

Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2006) 

61 3,4 

Action 1.11 OMB, in the FEA Business Reference Model (BRM), will include 

“Information Sharing” as a new government sub-function, BRM code 

143, with the “Information and Technology Management” Line of 

Business, BRM code 404. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 

2006) 

61 3,4 

Action 1.12 The PM-ISE will work with NSA, NIST, the DNI/CIO, and the CNSS 

on incorporating network security and information assurance 

policies and practices for the ISEEA Framework and associated 

functional standards. (Planned Completion: First Quarter, CY 2007) 

62 3,4 

Action 1.13 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will publish a fully 

documented ISEEA Framework Document and an FEA-ISE Profile. 

The development process will be worked in collaboration with the 

OMB, department and agency CIOs, and ISC members. (Planned 

Completion: First Quarter, CY 2007) 

62 3, 4 

Action 1.14 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will develop a 

configuration management process for the control and management 

of updates to the ISEEA Framework Document and FEA-ISE 

Profile. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2006) 

62 3, 4 

Action 1.15 OMB, in the FEA Reference Models, will add the ISEEA Framework 

and the FEA-ISE Profile as compliance requirements in the Federal 

Transition Framework, a catalog of cross-agency initiatives, and the 

FEA Program: Enterprise Architecture Assessment Framework, the 

maturity assessment guide for Federal EAs. (Planned Completion: 

First Quarter, CY 2007) 

62 3, 4 

Action 1.16 DHS will work with the PM-ISE to review existing policies and 

procedures for ascertaining relevant and effective approaches to 

migrate the ISEEA Framework models and attributes into the private 

sector. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

62 1, 3, 4, 5 

Action 1.17 The PM-ISE will convene and chair a new working group, the 

CTISS Working Group (CTISSWG), with representatives from all 

ISC members, the NCS, NIST, and the CNSS tasked with selecting 

and issuing information sharing standards, approved through the 

ISC, and formally published by NIST. The CTISS may include new 

standards that agencies will introduce to affect on-going investment 

activities as project schedules and funding permit. Future funded 

investments incorporating the CTISS will be compatible with the 

FEA and national security system EAs, and identified in normal 

agency submittals to the OMB. The CTISSWG will issue CTISS 

recommendations to the ISC for information sharing standards for 

non-Federal government agencies. (Planned Completion: Fourth 

Quarter, CY 2006) 

68 3, 4 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART IV

 119 

Action 

Number Action Reference Alignment to ISE Goal(s) 

Action 1.18 Departments and agencies will begin to incorporate the CTISS into 

investment planning, consistent with ISEEA Framework 

incorporation, with full CTISS incorporation into investments 

beginning execution in FY 2009. This will include both civil and 

national security system investments. Agencies will also incorporate 

the CTISS into information resource lifecycle processes to include 

CPIC processes. The CTISS will provide the source of functional 

standards for information sharing in the FEA’s Technical and Data 

Reference Models. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 

2007) 

68 3, 4 

Action 1.19 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will develop CTISS, 

Version 2.0 addressing additional processes, including those with 

foreign partners, and releasing priority functional standards 

supporting suspicious activity reports (SARs), cargo management 

and tracking, and general identity management. (Planned 

Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

69 3, 4, 5 

Sharing with Partners Outside the Federal Government 

Action 1.20 Within 30-days of approval of the proposed Guideline 2 framework, 

the PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will establish a Seniorlevel Advisory Group—consisting of ISC members or their 

designees—to ensure accountability, oversight, and governance for 

the effective operation of the framework. The advisory group will 

report the results of its oversight to the PM-ISE and the ISC. The 

advisory group will meet at least once per month during the first 

year of implementation. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 

2006) 

73 1, 3, 5 

Action 1.21 Within seven days of approval of the proposed framework, there will 

be established an Implementation Team—comprised of 

representatives from DOD; DOI; DHS; FBI; NCTC; appropriate 

State, local, tribal, and private sector advocates; and the PM-ISE—

to develop an implementation plan for the Interagency Threat 

Assessment and Coordination Group framework and to ensure its 

timely execution. The implementation team will develop and 

implement plans to notify SLT officials of the ITACG mission and 

responsibilities. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2006) 

73 1, 3, 5 

Action 1.22 The ITACG Implementation Team will submit semiannual reports to 

the PM-ISE that identify successes and shortcomings in 

implementing and operating the ISE within the Guideline 2 

framework and outline steps to refine and improve the framework’s 

operation. (Planned Completion: Ongoing with first report due in the 

first quarter of CY 2007) 

74 1, 3, 5 

Action 1.23 The PM-ISE will establish a Federal Fusion Center Coordination 

Group to identify Federal resources to support the development of a 

network of State-sponsored fusion centers charged to share 

information at all levels of the ISE and will recommend funding 

options. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2006) 

74 1, 3, 5 

Action 1.24 DOJ and DHS will work with Governors or other senior State and 

local leaders to designate a single fusion center to serve as the 

statewide or regional hub to interface with the Federal government 

and through which to coordinate the gathering, processing, analysis, 

and dissemination of terrorism information. (Planned Completion: 

First Quarter, CY 2007) 

74 1, 3, 5 
PART IV Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

120

Action 

Number Action Reference Alignment to ISE Goal(s) 

Action 1.25 DOJ and DHS, to the extent possible and practicable, will assume 

the responsibility for technical assistance and training to support the 

establishment and operation of these fusion centers. (Planned 

Completion: First Quarter, CY 2007) 

74 1, 2, 3, 5 

Action 1.26 Appropriate Federal departments and agencies will assess 

resources and develop and coordinate plans to assign 

representative personnel to State and local fusion centers. These 

representatives will work to the extent possible to further integrate—

and where appropriate collocate—Federal and State/regional 

resources. (Planned Completion: First Quarter, CY 2007) 

74 1, 3, 5 

Action 1.27 The Private Sector Subcommittee will produce a plan that 

implements elements of the framework as it affects the private 

sector. This plan must be consistent with statutes and Presidential 

direction and ensure that information and privacy and legal rights 

are adequately protected. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, 

CY 2007) 

77 1, 3, 5, 6 

Action 1.28 The Foreign Government Information Sharing Working Group, with 

coordination and assistance from the PM-ISE, will develop 

recommendations on Privacy Act systems of records notices and 

routine uses for the Guideline 5 Working Group. (Planned 

Completion: Fist Quarter, CY 2007) 

78 1, 2, 5, 6 

Action 1.29 The Foreign Government Information Sharing Working Group, with 

coordination and assistance from the PM-ISE, will develop a 

checklist of issues that need to be taken into account in negotiating 

international agreements, including privacy protections and possible 

review procedures. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 

2007) 

78 1, 2, 5, 6 

Action 1.30 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will encourage bilateral and multilateral 

efforts whenever feasible and appropriate to develop “best 

practices” on terrorism information sharing (e.g., protocols on what 

to do if there is a “hit”). (Planned Completion: Ongoing with a first 

progress report in the second quarter of CY 2007) 

78 1, 2, 5 

Promoting a Culture of Information Sharing 

Action 1.31 The DOS FSI, supported by the working group of ISC training 

representatives, will develop the core training module that will serve 

as the common educational baseline for the ISE. (Planned 

Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

87 2 

Action 1.32 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will review departmental 

incentives for sharing of terrorism information and will measure their 

effectiveness. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

87 2 

Protecting Information Privacy and Civil Liberties in the ISE 

Action 1.33 Each agency will ensure that one or more ISE Privacy Officials are 

designated in accordance with paragraph 12.a of the privacy 

guidelines. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2006) 

91 6 

Action 1.34 The PM-ISE will establish and designate a chair for the ISE Privacy 

Guidelines Committee. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 

2006) 

91 6 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART IV

 121 

Action 

Number Action Reference Alignment to ISE Goal(s) 

Action 1.35 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISE Privacy Guidelines 

Committee and the ISC, will establish a process for ensuring that 

non-Federal organizations participating in the ISE implement 

appropriate policies and procedures that provide protections that 

are at least as comprehensive as those contained in the Guidelines. 

(Planned Completion: First Quarter, CY 2007) 

91 5, 6 

Action 1.36 The ISE Privacy Guidelines Committee will provide an assessment 

of the privacy and civil liberties protections of the ISE, including 

actions taken in the preceding year to implement or enforce privacy 

and civil liberties protections, to be included in the President’s first 

annual ISE performance report. (Planned Completion: Second 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

91 6 

Improved Terrorism Information Handling 

Action 1.37 The Guideline 3 Coordinating Committee will complete its work and 

submit recommendations for SBU standardization through the White 

House policy process to the APHS-CT and the APNSA. (Planned 

Completion: First Quarter, CY 2007) 

96 1, 2, 3, 5 

ISE Enabling Activities 

Action 1.38 To align timelines, the PM-ISE will work with ISC members and 

other partners to establish cut-off dates for the yearly ISE 

performance management reports. (Planned Completion: First 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

99 4 

Action 1.39 Federal departments and agencies will use their information sharing 

and terrorism-related FY06 goals, measures, and outcomes as input 

to the ISE Performance Management Report. (Planned Completion: 

Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

99 4 

Action 1.40 Federal departments and agencies will reflect ISE goals in their 

individual performance management plans. (Planned Completion: 

First Quarter, CY 2007) 

99 4 

Action 1.41 Federal departments and agencies will specify support to the ISE as 

part of their strategic plans and performance management efforts 

for the 2006-2007 cycle. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 

2007) 

99 4 

Action 1.42 Federal departments and agencies will work with the PM-ISE to 

develop specific ISE-wide program outcome goals and measures 

(performance measures and threshold values), as appropriate, for 

the goals listed in Section 1.5. (Planned Completion: Second 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

99 4 

Action 1.43 Federal departments and agencies will provide their mid-year 

reviews of goals and measures to the PM-ISE (mid-year reviews are 

required by the Information Sharing Guidelines and Requirements). 

(Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

100 4 

Action 1.44 The PM-ISE, in coordination with the ODNI, will illustrate 

interdependencies through a “crosswalk” of the ISE, NIS, and NIP 

goals and measures. The “crosswalk” will be completed by or before 

December 2006. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2006) 

100 4 

Action 1.45 The PM-ISE and ISC members will develop performance objectives 

and measures, in cooperation with SLT and Private Sector 

Subcommittees, to address progress against the Guideline 2 

framework. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2007) 

100 4, 5 
PART IV Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

122

Action 

Number Action Reference Alignment to ISE Goal(s) 

Action 1.46 The PM-ISE will support OMB, which will provide Federal 

departments and agencies with budget guidance for FY 2008. 

(Completed: Third Quarter, CY 2006) 

103 4 

Action 1.47 The PM-ISE will work with OMB during the fall budget process to 

review Federal departments’ and agencies’ investments with ISE 

priorities and OMB will provide additional budget guidance to 

departments and agencies, as appropriate. (Planned Completion: 

Fourth Quarter, CY 2006) 

103 4 

Action 1.48 The PM-ISE, with support from OMB and the ISC, will begin 

planning for subsequent budget cycles. (Planned Completion: First 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

103 4 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART IV

 123 

Table 14.2-2. Phase 2 Implementation Actions 

Action 

Number Action Reference Alignment to ISE Goal(s) 

ISE Operational Capabilities 

Action 2.1 The PM-ISE and ISC members will identify the subscription and 

delivery technologies required to deliver the alert and notification 

capability, and develop a detailed set of requirements and Project 

Plan for implementing alert and notification requirements. (Planned 

Completion: Third Quarter, CY 2007) 

43 2, 4, 5 

Action 2.2 The PM-ISE and ISC members will develop a detailed project plan 

for implementing the enterprise search technologies selected in 

Phase 1. (Planned Completion: Third Quarter, CY 2007) 

46 

2, 4 

Action 2.3 The DNI CIO and the CIOs of DoD, DHS, DOJ, and the Department 

of State (DOS) will work with the National Institute of Standards and 

Technology (NIST), the National Security Agency (NSA), and the 

Committee on National Security Systems (CNSS) to develop a 

common IT security framework for the ISE as described in Section 

5.5.2. DOJ and DHS will ensure that this framework addresses the 

requirements of SLT CIOs. The results of this effort will be 

presented to the PM-ISE and ISC for incorporation into ISE 

implementation priorities. (Planned Completion: The PM-ISE and 

ISC members will develop a detailed project plan for implementing 

the technologies selected in Phase 1. (Planned Completion: Third 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

50 

1,2,3,4,5 

Action 2.4 Federal departments and agencies will implement the common IT 

security framework developed in Phase 2 across the ISE. (Planned 

Completion: Third Quarter, CY 2008) 

50 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 

Action 2.5 Federal departments and agencies will deploy CDSs developed by 

the CDMO across the ISE to provide two-way cross-domain 

transfers of terrorism information with minimal human review. 

(Planned Completion: Third Quarter, CY 2008) 

51 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 

Action 2.6 For Sections 5.2, 5.3, 5.4, 5.6, and 5.7, the PM-ISE and ISC will 

review the status in all areas and reassess Phase 2 Actions. 

(Planned Completion: Ongoing with a first progress check to occur 

by First Quarter, CY 2008) 

53 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 

Architecture and Standards 

Action 2.7 Departments and agencies will introduce the ISEEA Framework and 

the FEA-ISE Profile into their EA planning affecting investments 

beginning execution in FY 2008. Agencies that have been identified 

to provide ISE Core services and transport components will include 

these into their planning. The DNI CIO and the DoD CIO will 

introduce the ISEEA Framework and FEA-ISE Profile elements into 

their EAs affecting national security investments beginning 

execution in FY 2008. Agencies will also incorporate ISEEA 

Framework attributes in their information resource lifecycle 

processes, to include capital planning and investment control 

(CPIC) processes. The Common Terrorism Information Sharing 

Standards (discussed in section 6.3) will provide the source of 

functional standards for information sharing in the FEA’s Technical 

and Data Reference Models. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, 

CY 2007) 

62 3, 4 
PART IV Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

124

Action 

Number Action Reference Alignment to ISE Goal(s) 

Action 2.8 The PM-ISE, working with the NCS Manager, will coordinate and 

monitor the incorporation of the ISEEA Framework and the FEA-ISE 

Profile into the NCS and the CCEA planning affecting investments 

beginning execution in FY 2008. (Planned Completion: Fourth 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

63 3, 4 

Action 2.9 OMB will publish a new version of the Federal Transition 

Framework and the FEA Program: EA Assessment Framework 

incorporating the ISEEA Framework and the FEA-ISE Profile. 

(Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2007) 

63 3, 4 

Action 2.10 OMB will conduct FY 2009 EA reviews, including those affecting 

national security systems, and ensure these reviews demonstrate 

incorporation of the ISEEA Framework and the FEA-ISE Profile 

across Federal agencies. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, 

CY 2008) 

63 3, 4 

Action 2.11 The PM-ISE will work with DHS to promote, coordinate, and 

distribute the ISEEA Framework for incorporation by the private 

sector into new technology and products supporting terrorism 

information sharing. Consistent with the National Infrastructure 

Protection Plan, these efforts will incorporate requirements and 

actions specified in Sector-Specific Plans. (Planned Completion: 

Third Quarter, CY 2008) 

63 3, 4, 5 

Action 2.12 The PM-ISE will work with DOJ, DHS, and other Federal agencies 

to coordinate and implement the ISEEA Framework and FEA-ISE 

Profile elements into the fusion centers initially as translation 

infrastructures to SLT governments. As SLT government 

infrastructures transform to integrate more directly with the ISEEA 

Framework, the requirement for continuing to operate and maintain 

translation infrastructures will be reduced. (Planned Completion: 

Fourth Quarter, CY 2008) 

63 1, 3, 4, 5 

Action 2.13 The PM-ISE and ISC members will work with standards bodies and 

published standards to expedite efforts to identify the critical gaps in 

available core standards needed for developing new CTISS 

functional standards. (Planned Completion: Third Quarter, CY 2007)

69 3,4 

Action 2.14 OMB will incorporate new standards from the CTISS into the 

Technical and Data Reference Models with standards compliance 

monitored and verified through the Federal Transition Framework 

and the FEA Program: Enterprise Architecture Assessment 

Framework. (Planned Completion. (Planned Completion: Third 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

69 3, 4 

Action 2.15 OMB will publish a new version of the Federal Transition 

Framework and the FEA Program: EA Assessment Framework 

incorporating the current CTISS. (Planned Completion: Fourth 

Quarter, CY 2007) 

69 3, 4 

Action 2.16 OMB will conduct FY 2009 EA reviews to verify incorporation of the 

CTISS requirements. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 

2008) 

69 1, 3, 4, 5 

Action 2.17 The PM-ISE will work with DOJ, DHS, and other Federal 

departments and agencies to implement the CTISS into fusion 

centers to assist them in implementing the CTISS for eventual 

migration into SLT government infrastructures, where appropriate. 

Published commercial standards will be leveraged to the maximum 

extent practical. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2008) 

69 1, 3, 4, 5 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART IV

 125 

Action 

Number Action Reference Alignment to ISE Goal(s) 

Action 2.18 The PM-ISE will work with the Department of Commerce, through 

NIST, to promote, coordinate, and distribute the CTISS Framework 

for incorporation by the private sector into new technology and 

products, where appropriate, supporting terrorism information 

sharing. (Planned Completion: Third Quarter, CY 2008) 

70 1, 3, 4 

Sharing with Partners Outside the Federal Government 

Action 2.19 The DNI will ensure that SLT and private sector ISE participants’ 

needs and priorities for terrorism information are addressed in the 

Intelligence Community’s requirements process. (Planned 

Completion: Ongoing with first progress report in the third quarter of 

CY 2007) 

74 1, 3, 5 

Action 2.20 The Guideline 2 Senior-level Advisory Group will ensure each 

designated State and/or major urban area fusion center achieves a 

baseline level of capability and complies with all applicable Federal 

laws and policies regarding the protection of information and privacy 

and other legal rights of individuals. Semiannual progress reports 

will be provided to the PM-ISE and the ISC. (Planned Completion: 

Ongoing with first progress report in the third quarter of CY 2007) 

74 1, 3, 5, 6 

Action 2.21 Statewide and major area fusion centers will ensure locally 

generated terrorism information is communicated to the Federal 

government through appropriate systems identified by Federal 

officials as part of ISE implementation. (Planned Completion: 

Ongoing with first progress report in the fourth quarter of CY 2007) 

75 1, 2, 3, 5 

Action 2.22 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will review the private 

sector sharing plan developed in Phase 1 and identify priorities for 

implementation. In addition, some of the recommendations are likely 

to entail issues requiring executive-level decisions or legislative 

changes. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2007) 

77 1, 3, 5, 6 

Action 2.23 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will ensure that all agencies issue 

internal procedures to expedite disclosure decisions, including clear 

written procedures on declassification and release of terrorism 

information to foreign governments. (Planned Completion: Second 

Quarter, CY 2008) 

78 1, 2, 5 

Action 2.24 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will ensure that agency Privacy Act 

systems of records notices and routine uses provide for terrorism 

information sharing with foreign partners. (Planned Completion: 

Second Quarter, CY 2008) 

79 1, 2, 5, 6 

Action 2.25 The ISC will develop appropriate common standards or protocols for 

electronic handling of foreign government information within the ISE 

to ensure that any necessary foreign government requirements are 

respected. (Planned Completion: Third Quarter, CY 2008) 

79 1, 2, 5 

Action 2.26 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will encourage appropriate 

international standardization of technological and substantive 

marking and handling standards. (Planned Completion: Ongoing 

with a first progress report in the second quarter of CY 2008) 

79 1, 2, 5 
PART IV Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

126

Action 

Number Action Reference Alignment to ISE Goal(s) 

Action 2.27 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will consider impact on U.S. persons 

when negotiating international arrangements that involve sharing 

information with foreign governments. (Planned Completion: 

Ongoing with a first progress report in the second quarter of CY 

2008) 

79 1, 2, 5, 6 

Action 2.28 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will consider possible interaction with 

provisions of existing agreements when negotiating new 

international agreements (e.g., inconsistent promises, “most 

favorable” treatment). (Planned Completion: Ongoing with a first 

progress report in the second quarter of CY 2008) 

79 1, 2 

Action 2.29 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will ensure “foreign disclosure officers” 

or comparable approaches are adopted by all government agencies 

to make and expedite disclosure decisions and provide resources to 

support disclosure decisions (e.g., training, information, automation 

tools). (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2008) 

79 1, 2, 5 

Action 2.30 Federal departments and agencies engaged in developing terrorism 

information sharing agreements and best practices and protocols, 

with coordination and assistance from the PM-ISE, will make both 

the registry and the text of all such agreements, as well as the texts 

of any best practices and protocols, available to other departments 

and agencies, including to the extent feasible, in electronic form, as 

part of the ISE. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2008) 

79 1, 2, 5 

Action 2.31 The PM-ISE will work closely with the ISC to ensure effective and 

efficient implementation of the Foreign Government Information 

Sharing Working Group recommendations. (Planned Completion: 

Second Quarter, CY 2009) 

80 1, 2, 5 

Action 2.32 Federal departments and agencies, with coordination and 

assistance from the PM-ISE, will ensure agency authorities permit 

the full range of requirements for information sharing with foreign 

partners. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2009) 

80 1, 2, 5 

Promoting a Culture of Information Sharing 

Action 2.33 All Federal departments and agencies responsible for terrorism 

information sharing will develop tailored training programs based on 

their unique business processes, missions, program, and policy 

needs. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, CY 2007) 

87 2 

Action 2.34 DOJ, DHS, and FBI, in coordination with the ISC SLT 

Subcommittee and with guidance from the ISC training working 

group, will develop information sharing training guidelines for SLT 

governments. The guidelines will include the core training goals 

used by the departments and agencies represented on the ISC, as 

well as training specific to SLT and private sector operating 

environments and officers. (Planned Completion: Fourth Quarter, 

CY 2007) 

87 2, 5 

Action 2.35 All Federal departments and agencies will provide the PM-ISE with 

a copy of their agency-specific training modules, as well as a count 

of the number and career categories of personnel who have 

received training on the ISE for inclusion in the President’s report on 

ISE performance. This information will continue to be submitted on 

an annual basis. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2008) 

87 2 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan PART IV

 127 

Action 

Number Action Reference Alignment to ISE Goal(s) 

Action 2.36 Federal departments and agencies will train newly hired personnel 

within six months of entrance on duty. Each executive department 

and agency will also include information sharing in performance 

appraisal reviews as appropriate. (Planned Completion: Fourth 

Quarter, CY 2008) 

87 2 

Action 2.37 Federal departments and agencies will recommend modifications to 

internal policies, as appropriate, to accommodate the ISE training, 

incentive, and accountability requirements, including each will 

review its procedures for disciplining personnel who fail to adhere to 

security procedures regarding the handling and distribution of 

classified and controlled information. (Planned Completion: Fourth 

Quarter, CY 2008) 

87 2 

Protecting Privacy and Civil Liberties in the ISE 

Action 2.38 The ISE Privacy Guidelines Committee will provide an assessment 

of the privacy and civil liberties protections of the ISE, including 

actions taken in the preceding year to implement or enforce privacy 

and civil liberties protections, to be included in the President’s 

annual ISE performance report. (Planned Completion: Second 

Quarter, CY 2008 and 2009) 

92 6 

Improved Terrorism Information Handling 

Action 2.39 The PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, and OMB and the ODNI, 

will monitor existing performance measures and assess progress 

against the security clearance processing requirements of IRTPA 

Section 3001. (Planned Completion: Second Quarter, CY 2009) 

94 2, 5 

Action 2.40 On an ongoing basis, the PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will 

support Information Security Oversight Office (ISOO) efforts to 

facilitate compliance with E.O. 12958, as amended, and its 

implementing directives. (Planned Completion: Ongoing) 

94 2 

Action 2.41 On an ongoing basis, the PM-ISE, in consultation with the ISC, will 

work closely with ODNI-led efforts to overhaul current C&A policies 

and standards for the Intelligence Community and will evaluate the 

applicability of these policies and standards to the broader ISE. 

(Planned Completion: Ongoing) 

94 2 
PART IV Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

128

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 129 

APPENDICES 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

130

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 131 

Appendix 1 – IRTPA Requirements Compliance 

IRTPA Requirement (Section 1016(e)) References 

1 A description of the functions, capabilities, resources, and conceptual design of 

the ISE, including standards. Chapters 1, 3, 5, and 6 

2 A description of the impact on enterprise architectures of participating agencies. Chapter 6 

3 A budget estimate that identifies the incremental costs associated with designing, 

testing, integrating, deploying, and operating the ISE. Chapter 11 

4 A project plan for designing, testing, integrating, deploying, and operating the 

ISE. Chapters 4 and 12 

5 

The policies and directives referred to in subsection (b)(1)(C), as well as the 

metrics and enforcement mechanisms that will be utilized. (Note: Subsection 

(b)(1)(C) states that, in the establishment of the ISE, the President shall, 

“determine and enforce the policies, directives, and rules that will govern the 

content and usage of the ISE.”) 

Chapters 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 

and 12 

6 Objective, system wide performance measures to enable the assessment of 

progress toward achieving the full implementation of the ISE. Chapter 11 

7 A description of the training requirements needed to ensure that the ISE will be 

adequately implemented and properly utilized. Chapter 10 

8 A description of the means by which privacy and civil liberties will be protected in 

the design and operation of the ISE. Chapters 2 and 9 

9 

The recommendations of the Program Manager, in consultation with the 

Information Sharing Council, regarding whether, and under what conditions, the 

ISE should be expanded to include other intelligence information. 

Chapter 13 

10 

A delineation of the roles of the Federal departments and agencies that will 

participate in the ISE, including an identification of the agencies that will deliver 

the infrastructure needed to operate and manage the ISE (as distinct from 

individual department or agency components that are part of the ISE), with such 

delineation of roles to be consistent with – (a) the authority of the Director of 

National Intelligence under this title, and the amendments made by this title, to 

set standards for information sharing throughout the Intelligence Community; and 

(b) the authority of the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General 

and the roles of the Department of Homeland Security and the Attorney General, 

in coordinating with State, local, and tribal officials and the private sector. 

Chapters 2, 3, and 12 

11 

The recommendations of the program manager, in consultation with the ISC, for a 

future management structure or the ISE, including whether the position of 

program manager should continue to remain in existence. 

Chapter 13 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

132

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 133 

Appendix 2 – Section 1016 of the 

Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 

SEC. 1016. INFORMATION SHARING. 

(a) DEFINITIONS.--In this section: 

(1) INFORMATION SHARING COUNCIL.--The term “Information Sharing Council’’ 

means the Information Systems Council established by Executive Order 13356, or 

any successor body designated by the President, and referred to under subsection 

(g). 

(2) INFORMATION SHARING ENVIRONMENT; ISE.--The terms “information 

sharing environment’’ and “ISE’’ mean an approach that facilitates the sharing of 

terrorism information, which approach may include any methods determined 

necessary and appropriate for carrying out this section. 

(3) PROGRAM MANAGER.--The term “program manager’’ means the program 

manager designated under subsection (f). 

(4) TERRORISM INFORMATION.--The term “terrorism information’’ means all 

information, whether collected, produced, or distributed by intelligence, law 

enforcement, military, homeland security, or other activities relating to-- 

(A) the existence, organization, capabilities, plans, intentions, vulnerabilities, 

means of finance or material support, or activities of foreign or international 

terrorist groups or individuals, or of domestic groups or individuals involved in 

transnational terrorism; 

(B) threats posed by such groups or individuals to the United States, United 

States persons, or United States interests, or to those of other nations; 

(C) communications of or by such groups or individuals; or 

(D) groups or individuals reasonably believed to be assisting or associated with 

such groups or individuals. 

(b) INFORMATION SHARING ENVIRONMENT.-- 

(1) ESTABLISHMENT.--The President shall-- 

(A) create an information sharing environment for the sharing of terrorism 

information in a manner consistent with national security and with applicable 

legal standards relating to privacy and civil liberties; 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

134

(B) designate the organizational and management structures that will be used to 

operate and manage the ISE; and 

(C) determine and enforce the policies, directives, and rules that will govern the 

content and usage of the ISE. 

(2) ATTRIBUTES.--The President shall, through the structures described in 

subparagraphs (B) and (C) of paragraph (1), ensure that the ISE provides and 

facilitates the means for sharing terrorism information among all appropriate Federal, 

State, local, and tribal entities, and the private sector through the use of policy 

guidelines and technologies. The President shall, to the greatest extent practicable, 

ensure that the ISE provides the functional equivalent of, or otherwise supports, a 

decentralized, distributed, and coordinated environment that-- 

(A) connects existing systems, where appropriate, provides no single points of 

failure, and allows users to share information among agencies, between levels of 

government, and, as appropriate, with the private sector; 

(B) ensures direct and continuous online electronic access to information; 

(C) facilitates the availability of information in a form and manner that facilitates 

its use in analysis, investigations, and operations; 

(D) builds upon existing systems capabilities currently in use across the 

Government; 

(E) employs an information access management approach that controls access 

to data rather than just systems and networks, without sacrificing security; 

(F) facilitates the sharing of information at and across all levels of security; 

(G) provides directory services, or the functional equivalent, for locating people 

and information; 

(H) incorporates protections for individuals’ privacy and civil liberties; and 

(I) incorporates strong mechanisms to enhance accountability and facilitate 

oversight, including audits, authentication, and access controls. 

(c) PRELIMINARY REPORT.--Not later than 180 days after the date of the enactment 

of this Act, the program manager shall, in consultation with the Information Sharing 

Council-- 

(1) submit to the President and Congress a description of the technological, legal, 

and policy issues presented by the creation of the ISE, and the way in which these 

issues will be addressed; 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 135 

(2) establish an initial capability to provide electronic directory services, or the 

functional equivalent, to assist in locating in the Federal Government intelligence 

and terrorism information and people with relevant knowledge about intelligence and 

terrorism information; and 

(3) conduct a review of relevant current Federal agency capabilities, databases, and 

systems for sharing information. 

(d) GUIDELINES AND REQUIREMENTS.--As soon as possible, but in no event later 

than 270 days after the date of the enactment of this Act, the President shall-- 

(1) leverage all ongoing efforts consistent with establishing the ISE and issue 

guidelines for acquiring, accessing, sharing, and using information, including 

guidelines to ensure that information is provided in its most shareable form, such as 

by using tearlines to separate out data from the sources and methods by which the 

data are obtained; 

(2) in consultation with the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board established 

under section 1061, issue guidelines that-- 

(A) protect privacy and civil liberties in the development and use of the ISE; and 

(B) shall be made public, unless nondisclosure is clearly necessary to protect 

national security; and 

(3) require the heads of Federal departments and agencies to promote a culture of 

information sharing by-- 

(A) reducing disincentives to information sharing, including over-classification of 

information and unnecessary requirements for originator approval, consistent 

with applicable laws and regulations; and 

(B) providing affirmative incentives for information sharing. 

(e) IMPLEMENTATION PLAN REPORT.--Not later than one year after the date of the 

enactment of this Act, the President shall, with the assistance of the program manager, 

submit to Congress a report containing an implementation plan for the ISE. The report 

shall include the following: 

(1) A description of the functions, capabilities, resources, and conceptual design of 

the ISE, including standards. 

(2) A description of the impact on enterprise architectures of participating agencies. 

(3) A budget estimate that identifies the incremental costs associated with designing, 

testing, integrating, deploying, and operating the ISE. 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

136

(4) A project plan for designing, testing, integrating, deploying, and operating the 

ISE. 

(5) The policies and directives referred to in subsection (b)(1)(C), as well as the 

metrics and enforcement mechanisms that will be utilized. 

(6) Objective, systemwide performance measures to enable the assessment of 

progress toward achieving the full implementation of the ISE. 

(7) A description of the training requirements needed to ensure that the ISE will be 

adequately implemented and properly utilized. 

(8) A description of the means by which privacy and civil liberties will be protected in 

the design and operation of the ISE. 

(9) The recommendations of the program manager, in consultation with the 

Information Sharing Council, regarding whether, and under what conditions, the ISE 

should be expanded to include other intelligence information. 

(10) A delineation of the roles of the Federal departments and agencies that will 

participate in the ISE, including an identification of the agencies that will deliver the 

infrastructure needed to operate and manage the ISE (as distinct from individual 

department or agency components that are part of the ISE), with such delineation of 

roles to be consistent with-- 

(A) the authority of the Director of National Intelligence under this title, and the 

amendments made by this title, to set standards for information sharing 

throughout the Intelligence Community; and 

(B) the authority of the Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney 

General, and the role of the Department of Homeland Security and the Attorney 

General, in coordinating with State, local, and tribal officials and the private 

sector. 

(11) The recommendations of the program manager, in consultation with the 

Information Sharing Council, for a future management structure for the ISE, 

including whether the position of program manager should continue to remain in 

existence. 

(f) PROGRAM MANAGER.-- 

(1) DESIGNATION.--Not later than 120 days after the date of the enactment of this 

Act, with notification to Congress, the President shall designate an individual as the 

program manager responsible for information sharing across the Federal 

Government. The individual designated as the program manager shall serve as 

program manager during the two-year period beginning on the date of designation 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 137 

under this paragraph unless sooner removed from service and replaced by the 

President (at the President’s sole discretion). The program manager shall have and 

exercise government wide authority. 

(2) DUTIES AND RESPONSIBILITIES.-- 

(A) IN GENERAL.--The program manager shall, in consultation with the 

Information Sharing Council-- 

(i) plan for and oversee the implementation of, and manage, the ISE; 

(ii) assist in the development of policies, procedures, guidelines, rules, and 

standards as appropriate to foster the development and proper operation of 

the ISE; and 

(iii) assist, monitor, and assess the implementation of the ISE by Federal 

departments and agencies to ensure adequate progress, technological 

consistency, and policy compliance; and regularly report the findings to 

Congress. 

(B) CONTENT OF POLICIES, PROCEDURES, GUIDELINES, RULES, AND 

STANDARDS.--The policies, procedures, guidelines, rules, and standards under 

subparagraph (A)(ii) shall-- 

(i) take into account the varying missions and security requirements of 

agencies participating in the ISE; 

(ii) address development, implementation, and oversight of technical 

standards and requirements; 

(iii) take into account ongoing and planned efforts that support development, 

implementation and management of the ISE; 

(iv) address and facilitate information sharing between and among 

departments and agencies of the intelligence community, the Department of 

Defense, the homeland security community and the law enforcement 

community; 

(v) address and facilitate information sharing between Federal departments 

and agencies and State, tribal, and local governments; 

(vi) address and facilitate, as appropriate, information sharing between 

Federal departments and agencies and the private sector; 

(vii) address and facilitate, as appropriate, information sharing between 

Federal departments and agencies with foreign partners and allies; and 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

138

(viii) ensure the protection of privacy and civil liberties. 

(g) INFORMATION SHARING COUNCIL.-- 

(1) ESTABLISHMENT.--There is established an Information Sharing Council that 

shall assist the President and the program manager in their duties under this 

section. The Information Sharing Council shall serve during the two-year period 

beginning on the date of the initial designation of the program manager by the 

President under subsection (f)(1), unless sooner removed from service and replaced 

by the President (at the sole discretion of the President) with a successor body. 

(2) SPECIFIC DUTIES.--In assisting the President and the program manager in their 

duties under this section, the Information Sharing Council shall-- 

(A) advise the President and the program manager in developing policies, 

procedures, guidelines, roles, and standards necessary to establish, implement, 

and maintain the ISE; 

(B) work to ensure coordination among the Federal departments and agencies 

participating in the ISE in the establishment, implementation, and maintenance of 

the ISE; 

(C) identify and, as appropriate, recommend the consolidation and elimination of 

current programs, systems, and processes used by Federal departments and 

agencies to share information, and recommend, as appropriate, the redirection of 

existing resources to support the ISE; 

(D) identify gaps, if any, between existing technologies, programs, and systems 

used by Federal departments and agencies to share information and the 

parameters of the proposed information sharing environment; 

(E) recommend solutions to address any gaps identified under subparagraph (D); 

(F) recommend means by which the ISE can be extended to allow interchange of 

information between Federal departments and agencies and appropriate 

authorities of State and local governments; and 

(G) recommend whether or not, and by which means, the ISE should be 

expanded so as to allow future expansion encompassing other relevant 

categories of information. 

(3) CONSULTATION.--In performing its duties, the Information Sharing Council shall 

consider input from persons and organizations outside the Federal Government 

having significant experience and expertise in policy, technical matters, and 

operational matters relating to the ISE. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 139 

(4) INAPPLICABILITY OF FEDERAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE ACT.--The 

Information Sharing Council shall not be subject to the requirements of the Federal 

Advisory Committee Act (5 U.S.C. App.). 

(h) PERFORMANCE MANAGEMENT REPORTS.-- 

(1) IN GENERAL.--Not later than two years after the date of the enactment of this 

Act, and annually thereafter, the President shall submit to Congress a report on the 

state of the ISE and of information sharing across the Federal Government. 

(2) CONTENT.--Each report under this subsection shall include-- 

(A) a progress report on the extent to which the ISE has been implemented, 

including how the ISE has fared on the performance measures and whether the 

performance goals set in the preceding year have been met; 

(B) objective system-wide performance goals for the following year; 

(C) an accounting of how much was spent on the ISE in the preceding year; 

(D) actions taken to ensure that procurement of and investments in systems and 

technology are consistent with the implementation plan for the ISE; 

(E) the extent to which all terrorism watch lists are available for combined 

searching in real time through the ISE and whether there are consistent 

standards for placing individuals on, and removing individuals from, the watch 

lists, including the availability of processes for correcting errors; 

(F) the extent to which State, tribal, and local officials are participating in the ISE; 

(G) the extent to which private sector data, including information from owners 

and operators of critical infrastructure, is incorporated in the ISE, and the extent 

to which individuals and organizations outside the government are receiving 

information through the ISE; 

(H) the measures taken by the Federal government to ensure the accuracy of 

information in the ISE, in particular the accuracy of information about individuals; 

(I) an assessment of the privacy and civil liberties protections of the ISE, 

including actions taken in the preceding year to implement or enforce privacy and 

civil liberties protections; and 

(J) an assessment of the security protections used in the ISE. 

(i) AGENCY RESPONSIBILITIES.--The head of each department or agency that 

possesses or uses intelligence or terrorism information, operates a system in the ISE, or 

otherwise participates (or expects to participate) in the ISE shall-- 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

140

(1) ensure full department or agency compliance with information sharing policies, 

procedures, guidelines, rules, and standards established under subsections (b) and 

(f); 

(2) ensure the provision of adequate resources for systems and activities supporting 

operation of and participation in the ISE; 

(3) ensure full department or agency cooperation in the development of the ISE to 

implement governmentwide information sharing; and 

(4) submit, at the request of the President or the program manager, any reports on 

the implementation of the requirements of the ISE within such department or 

agency. 

(j) AUTHORIZATION OF APPROPRIATIONS.--There is authorized to be appropriated 

to carry out this section $20,000,000 for each of fiscal years 2005 and 2006. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 141 

Appendix 3 – Presidential Memorandum of December 16, 2005 

SUBJECT: Guidelines and Requirements in Support of the Information Sharing 

Environment 

Ensuring the appropriate access to, and the sharing, integration, and use of, information 

by Federal, State, local, and tribal agencies with counterterrorism responsibilities, and, 

as appropriate, private sector organizations, while protecting the information privacy and 

other legal rights of Americans, remains a high priority for the United States and a 

necessity for winning the war on terror. Consistent with section 1016 of the Intelligence 

Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (Public Law 108 458) (IRTPA), my 

Administration is working to create an Information Sharing Environment (ISE) to 

facilitate the sharing of terrorism information (as defined in Executive Order 13388 of 

October 25, 2005). 

Section 1016 of IRTPA supplements section 892 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 

(Public Law 107 296), Executive Order 13311 of July 29, 2003, and other Presidential 

guidance, which address various aspects of information access. On April 15, 2005, 

consistent with section 1016(f) of IRTPA, I designated the program manager (PM) 

responsible for information sharing across the Federal Government. On June 2, 2005, 

my memorandum entitled “Strengthening Information Sharing, Access, and Integration - 

Organizational, Management, and Policy Development Structures for Creating the 

Terrorism Information Sharing Environment” directed that the PM and his office be part 

of the Office of the Director of National Intelligence (DNI), and that the DNI exercise 

authority, direction, and control over the PM and ensure that the PM carries out his 

responsibilities under IRTPA. On October 25, 2005, I issued Executive Order 13388 to 

facilitate the work of the PM and the expeditious establishment of the ISE and 

restructure the Information Sharing Council (ISC), which provides advice concerning 

and assists in the establishment, implementation, and maintenance of the ISE. 

On June 2, 2005, I also established the Information Sharing Policy Coordination 

Committee (ISPCC), which is chaired jointly by the Homeland Security Council (HSC) 

and the National Security Council (NSC), and which has the responsibilities set forth in 

section D of Homeland Security Presidential Directive 1 and other relevant presidential 

guidance with respect to information sharing. The ISPCC is the main day-to-day forum 

for interagency coordination of information sharing policy, including the resolution of 

issues raised by the PM, and provides policy analysis and recommendations for 

consideration by the more senior committees of the HSC and NSC systems and 

ensures timely responses. 

Section 1016(d) of IRTPA calls for leveraging all ongoing efforts consistent with 

establishing the ISE, the issuance of guidelines for acquiring, accessing, sharing, and 

using information in support of the ISE and for protecting privacy and civil liberties in the 

development of the ISE, and the promotion of a culture of information sharing. 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

142

Consistent with the Constitution and the laws of the United States, including section 103 

of the National Security Act of 1947, as amended, and sections 1016 and 1018 of 

IRTPA, I hereby direct as follows: 

1. Leveraging Ongoing Information Sharing Efforts in the Development of the ISE. The 

ISE shall build upon existing Federal Government policies, standards, procedures, 

programs, systems, and architectures (collectively “resources”) used for the sharing and 

integration of and access to terrorism information, and shall leverage those resources to 

the maximum extent practicable, with the objective of establishing a decentralized, 

comprehensive, and coordinated environment for the sharing and integration of such 

information. 

a. The DNI shall direct the PM to conduct and complete, within 90 days after the 

date of this memorandum, in consultation with the ISC, a comprehensive 

evaluation of existing resources pertaining to terrorism information sharing 

employed by individual or multiple executive departments and agencies. Such 

evaluation shall assess such resources for their utility and integrative potential in 

furtherance of the establishment of the ISE and shall identify any unnecessary 

redundancies. 

b. To ensure that the ISE supports the needs of executive departments and 

agencies with counterterrorism responsibilities, and consistent with section 1021 

of IRTPA, the DNI shall direct the PM, jointly with the Director of the National 

Counterterrorism Center (NCTC), and in coordination with the heads of relevant 

executive departments and agencies, to review and identify the respective 

missions, roles, and responsibilities of such executive departments and 

agencies, both as producers and users of terrorism information, relating to the 

acquisition, access, retention, production, use, management, and sharing of 

terrorism information. The findings shall be reviewed through the interagency 

policy coordination process, and any recommendations for the further definition, 

reconciliation, or alteration of such missions, roles, and responsibilities shall be 

submitted, within 180 days after the date of this memorandum, by the DNI to the 

President for approval through the Assistant to the President for Homeland 

Security and Counterterrorism (APHS-CT) and the Assistant to the President for 

National Security Affairs (APNSA). This effort shall be coordinated as appropriate 

with the tasks assigned under the Guidelines set forth in section 2 of this 

memorandum. 

c. Upon the submission of findings as directed in the preceding paragraph (1(b)), 

the DNI shall direct the PM, in consultation with the ISC, to develop, in a manner 

consistent with applicable law, the policies, procedures, and architectures 

needed to create the ISE, which shall support the counterterrorism missions, 

roles, and responsibilities of executive departments and agencies. These 

policies, procedures, and architectures shall be reviewed through the interagency 

policy coordination process, and shall be submitted, within 180 days after the 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 143 

submission of findings as directed in the preceding paragraph (1(b)), by the DNI 

to the President for approval through the APHS-CT and the APNSA. 

2. Information Sharing Guidelines. Consistent with section 1016(d) of IRTPA, I hereby 

issue the following guidelines and related requirements, the implementation of which 

shall be conducted in consultation with, and with support from, the PM as directed by 

the DNI: 

a. Guideline 1 - Define Common Standards for How Information is Acquired, 

Accessed, Shared, and Used Within the ISE

The ISE must, to the extent possible, be supported by common standards that 

maximize the acquisition, access, retention, production, use, management, and 

sharing of terrorism information within the ISE consistent with the protection of 

intelligence, law enforcement, protective, and military sources, methods, and 

activities. 

Consistent with Executive Order 13388 and IRTPA, the DNI, in coordination with 

the Secretaries of State, Defense, and Homeland Security, and the Attorney 

General, shall develop and issue, within 90 days after the date of this 

memorandum, common standards (i) for preparing terrorism information for 

maximum distribution and access, (ii) to enable the acquisition, access, retention, 

production, use, management, and sharing of terrorism information within the ISE 

while safeguarding such information and protecting sources and methods from 

unauthorized use or disclosure, (iii) for implementing legal requirements relating 

to the handling of specific types of information, and (iv) that include the 

appropriate method for the Government-wide adoption and implementation of 

such standards. Such standards shall accommodate and reflect the sharing of 

terrorism information, as appropriate, with State, local, and tribal governments, 

law enforcement agencies, and the private sector. Within 90 days after the 

issuance of such standards, the Secretary of Homeland Security and the 

Attorney General shall jointly disseminate such standards for use by State, local, 

and tribal governments, law enforcement agencies, and the private sector, on a 

mandatory basis where possible and a voluntary basis where not. The DNI may 

amend the common standards from time to time as appropriate through the same 

process by which the DNI issued them. 

b. Guideline 2 - Develop a Common Framework for the Sharing of Information 

Between and Among Executive Departments and Agencies and State, Local, and 

Tribal Governments, Law Enforcement Agencies, and the Private Sector

Recognizing that the war on terror must be a national effort, State, local, and 

tribal governments, law enforcement agencies, and the private sector must have 

the opportunity to participate as full partners in the ISE, to the extent consistent 

with applicable laws and executive orders and directives, the protection of 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

144

national security, and the protection of the information privacy rights and other 

legal rights of Americans. 

Within 180 days after the date of this memorandum, the Secretary of Homeland 

Security and the Attorney General, in consultation with the Secretaries of State, 

Defense, and Health and Human Services, and the DNI, and consistent with the 

findings of the counterterrorism missions, roles, and responsibilities review under 

section 1 of this memorandum, shall: 

(i) perform a comprehensive review of the authorities and responsibilities of 

executive departments and agencies regarding information sharing with State, 

local, and tribal governments, law enforcement agencies, and the private sector; 

and 

(ii) submit to the President for approval, through the APHS-CT and the APNSA, a 

recommended framework to govern the roles and responsibilities of executive 

departments and agencies pertaining to the acquisition, access, retention, 

production, use, management, and sharing of homeland security information, law 

enforcement information, and terrorism information between and among such 

departments and agencies and State, local, and tribal governments, law 

enforcement agencies, and private sector organizations. 

c. Guideline 3 - Standardize Procedures for Sensitive But Unclassified 

Information

To promote and enhance the effective and efficient acquisition, access, retention, 

production, use, management, and sharing of Sensitive But Unclassified (SBU) 

information, including homeland security information, law enforcement 

information, and terrorism information, procedures and standards for designating, 

marking, and handling SBU information (collectively “SBU procedures”) must be 

standardized across the Federal Government. SBU procedures must promote 

appropriate and consistent safeguarding of the information and must be 

appropriately shared with, and accommodate and reflect the imperative for timely 

and accurate dissemination of terrorism information to, State, local, and tribal 

governments, law enforcement agencies, and private sector entities. This effort 

must be consistent with Executive Orders 13311 and 13388, section 892 of the 

Homeland Security Act of 2002, section 1016 of IRTPA, section 102A of the 

National Security Act of 1947, the Freedom of Information Act, the Privacy Act of 

1974, and other applicable laws and executive orders and directives. 

(i) Within 90 days after the date of this memorandum, each executive department 

and agency will conduct an inventory of its SBU procedures, determine the 

underlying authority for each entry in the inventory, and provide an assessment 

of the effectiveness of its existing SBU procedures. The results of each inventory 

shall be reported to the DNI, who shall provide the compiled results to the 

Secretary of Homeland Security and the Attorney General. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 145 

(ii) Within 90 days after receiving the compiled results of the inventories required 

under the preceding paragraph (i), the Secretary of Homeland Security and the 

Attorney General, in coordination with the Secretaries of State, Defense, and 

Energy, and the DNI, shall submit to the President for approval recommendations 

for the standardization of SBU procedures for homeland security information, law 

enforcement information, and terrorism information in the manner described in 

paragraph (iv) below. 

(iii) Within 1 year after the date of this memorandum, the DNI, in coordination 

with the Secretaries of State, the Treasury, Defense, Commerce, Energy, 

Homeland Security, Health and Human Services, and the Attorney General, and 

in consultation with all other heads of relevant executive departments and 

agencies, shall submit to the President for approval recommendations for the 

standardization of SBU procedures for all types of information not addressed by 

the preceding paragraph (ii) in the manner described in paragraph (iv) below. 

(iv) All recommendations required to be submitted to the President under this 

Guideline shall be submitted through the Director of the Office of Management 

and Budget (OMB), the APHS-CT, and the APNSA, as a report that contains the 

following: 

(A) Recommendations for government-wide policies and procedures to 

standardize SBU procedures; 

(B) Recommendations, as appropriate, for legislative, policy, regulatory, and 

administrative changes; and 

(C) An assessment by each department and agency participating in the SBU 

procedures review process of the costs and budgetary considerations for all 

proposed changes to marking conventions, handling caveats, and other 

procedures pertaining to SBU information. 

(v) Upon the approval by the President of the recommendations submitted under 

this Guideline, heads of executive departments and agencies shall ensure on an 

ongoing basis that such recommendations are fully implemented in such 

department or agency, as applicable. The DNI shall direct the PM to support 

executive departments and agencies in such implementation, as well as in the 

development of relevant guidance and training programs for the standardized 

SBU procedures. 

d. Guideline 4 - Facilitate Information Sharing Between Executive Departments 

and Agencies and Foreign Partners

The ISE must support and facilitate appropriate terrorism information sharing 

between executive departments and agencies and foreign partners and allies. To 

that end, policies and procedures to facilitate such informational access and 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

146

exchange, including those relating to the handling of information received from 

foreign governments, must be established consistent with applicable laws and 

executive orders and directives. 

Within 180 days after the date of this memorandum, the Secretary of State, in 

coordination with the Secretaries of Defense, the Treasury, Commerce, and 

Homeland Security, the Attorney General, and the DNI, shall review existing 

authorities and submit to the President for approval, through the APHS-CT and 

the APNSA, recommendations for appropriate legislative, administrative, and 

policy changes to facilitate the sharing of terrorism information with foreign 

partners and allies, except for those activities conducted pursuant to sections 

102A(k), 104A(f), and 119(f)(1)(E) of the National Security Act of 1947. 

e. Guideline 5 - Protect the Information Privacy Rights and Other Legal Rights of 

Americans

As recognized in Executive Order 13353 of August 27, 2004, the Federal 

Government has a solemn obligation, and must continue fully, to protect the legal 

rights of all Americans in the effective performance of national security and 

homeland security functions. Accordingly, in the development and use of the ISE, 

the information privacy rights and other legal rights of Americans must be 

protected. 

(i) Within 180 days after the date of this memorandum, the Attorney General and 

the DNI, in coordination with the heads of executive departments and agencies 

that possess or use intelligence or terrorism information, shall (A) conduct a 

review of current executive department and agency information sharing policies 

and procedures regarding the protection of information privacy and other legal 

rights of Americans, (B) develop guidelines designed to be implemented by 

executive departments and agencies to ensure that the information privacy and 

other legal rights of Americans are protected in the development and use of the 

ISE, including in the acquisition, access, use, and storage of personally 

identifiable information, and (C) submit such guidelines to the President for 

approval through the Director of OMB, the APHS-CT, and the APNSA. Such 

guidelines shall not be inconsistent with Executive Order 12333 and guidance 

issued pursuant to that order. 

(ii) Each head of an executive department or agency that possesses or uses 

intelligence or terrorism information shall ensure on an ongoing basis that (A) 

appropriate personnel, structures, training, and technologies are in place to 

ensure that terrorism information is shared in a manner that protects the 

information privacy and other legal rights of Americans, and (B) upon approval by 

the President of the guidelines developed under the preceding subsection (i), 

such guidelines are fully implemented in such department or agency. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 147 

3. Promoting a Culture of Information Sharing. Heads of executive departments and 

agencies must actively work to create a culture of information sharing within their 

respective departments or agencies by assigning personnel and dedicating resources to 

terrorism information sharing, by reducing disincentives to such sharing, and by holding 

their senior managers and officials accountable for improved and increased sharing of 

such information. 

Accordingly, each head of an executive department or agency that possesses or uses 

intelligence or terrorism information shall: 

a. within 90 days after the date of this memorandum, designate a senior official 

who possesses knowledge of the operational and policy aspects of information 

sharing to (i) provide accountability and oversight for terrorism information 

sharing within such department and agency, (ii) work with the PM, in consultation 

with the ISC, to develop high level information sharing performance measures for 

the department or agency to be assessed no less than semiannually, and (iii) 

provide, through the department or agency head, an annual report to the DNI on 

best practices of and remaining barriers to optimal terrorism information sharing; 

b. within 180 days after the date of this memorandum, develop and issue 

guidelines, provide training and incentives, and hold relevant personnel 

accountable for the improved and increased sharing of terrorism information. 

Such guidelines and training shall seek to reduce obstructions to sharing, 

consistent with applicable laws and regulations. Accountability efforts shall 

include the requirement to add a performance evaluation element on information 

sharing to employees’ annual Performance Appraisal Review, as appropriate, 

and shall focus on the sharing of information that supports the mission of the 

recipient of the information; and 

c. bring to the attention of the Attorney General and the DNI, on an ongoing 

basis, any restriction contained in a rule, regulation, executive order or directive 

that significantly impedes the sharing of terrorism information and that such 

department or agency head believes is not required by applicable laws or to 

protect the information privacy rights and other legal rights of Americans. The 

Attorney General and the DNI shall review such restriction and jointly submit any 

recommendations for changes to such restriction to the APHS-CT and the 

APNSA for further review. 

4. Heads of executive departments and agencies shall, to the extent permitted by law 

and subject to the availability of appropriations, provide assistance and information to 

the DNI and the PM in the implementation of this memorandum. 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

148

5. This memorandum: 

a. shall be implemented in a manner consistent with applicable laws, including 

Federal laws protecting the information privacy rights and other legal rights of 

Americans, and subject to the availability of appropriations; 

b. shall be implemented in a manner consistent with the statutory authority of the 

principal officers of executive departments and agencies as heads of their 

respective departments or agencies; 

c. shall not be construed to impair or otherwise affect the functions of the Director 

of the Office of Management and Budget relating to budget, administrative, and 

legislative proposals; and 

d. is intended only to improve the internal management of the Federal 

Government and is not intended to, and does not, create any rights or benefits, 

substantive or procedural, enforceable at law or in equity by a party against the 

United States, its departments, agencies, or entities, its officers, employees, or 

agencies, or any other person. 

GEORGE W. BUSH 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 149 

Appendix 4 – Definitions 

Agency The term “agency” has the meaning set forth for the term 

“executive agency” in section 105 of title 5, United States Code 

(i.e., an Executive department, a Government corporation, and 

an independent establishment), together with the Department of 

Homeland Security, but includes the Postal Rate Commission 

and the United States Postal Service and excludes the 

Government Accountability Office. [E.O. 13388 Section (6)(a) 

and 5 U.S.C. 105] 

Communities of 

Interest 

“Communities of Interest” (COI) are defined in the National 

Information Exchange Model (NIEM) CONOPS, October 2004, 

as a collaborative group of users who require a shared 

vocabulary to exchange information in pursuit of common goals, 

interests, and business objectives. 

Controlled 

Unclassified 

Information (CUI) 

As used in this plan, Controlled Unclassified Information (CUI) is 

defined as categories of unclassified information that require 

controls that protect it from public release, both to safeguard the 

civil liberties and legal rights of U.S. citizens, and to deny 

information advantage to those who threaten the security of the 

nation. 

Enabling Technology As used in this plan, the term “enabling technology” refers to 

any technological capability used to support ISE policies or 

business processes. [Chapter 5] 

Enterprise 

Architecture 

A strategic information asset base, which defines the mission, 

the information necessary to perform the mission and the 

technologies necessary to perform the mission, and the 

transitional processes for implementing new technologies in 

response to changing mission needs. [Endorsed definition from 

the Federal CIO Council] 

Enterprise Search As used in this plan, the term “enterprise search” is defined as 

the act of searching content to discover data, information, and 

knowledge wherever it exists. [Chapter 5] 

Federal Enterprise 

Architecture 

A business-driven framework that defines and aligns Federal 

business functions and supporting technology using a set of 5 

common models (performance, business, services, data, and 

technology). 

Foreign Partners As used in this plan, the term “foreign partners” refers to nonU.S. government organizations that participate in the ISE. The 

term “foreign governments” is a general term that includes 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

150

foreign governments and their sub-components, such as 

individual ministries or foreign provincial or local authorities. 

While this Plan focuses in particular on foreign governments, 

however, the same conclusions and recommendations may 

generally be applicable to other foreign information sharing 

partners. Such foreign partners include, for example, regional 

inter-governmental organizations such as the European Union 

(EU), international organizations composed of governments 

such as the United Nations (UN) and the International Criminal 

Police Organization (INTERPOL), certain other entities with 

recognized comparable international status and certain foreign 

private entities such as port operators, foreign airlines, and 

other logistics providers. [Foreign Government Information 

Sharing Working Group Report] 

Fusion Center A center established by State and local governments designed 

to coordinate the gathering, analysis, and dissemination of law 

enforcement, public-safety, and terrorism information. [Fusion 

Center Guidelines: Developing and Sharing Information and 

Intelligence in a New Era] 

Homeland Security 

Information 

Any information possessed by a Federal, State, or local agency 

that (A) relates to the threat of terrorist activity; (B) relates to the 

ability to prevent, interdict, or disrupt terrorist activity; (C) would 

improve the identification or investigation of a suspected 

terrorist or terrorist organization; or (D) would improve the 

response to a terrorist act. [Section 892(f)(1) of the Homeland 

Security Act (6 U.S.C. 482(f)(1))] 

Information Sharing 

Council (ISC) 

The term ‘‘Information Sharing Council’’ (ISC) means the 

Information Systems Council established by Executive Order 

13356, or any successor body designated by the President, and 

referred to under subsection 1016(g) of the IRTPA. [Extracted 

from IRTPA 1016(a)(1)] E.O. 13388, which superseded E.O. 

13356, established the Information Sharing Council. 

Information Sharing 

Environment (ISE) 

The terms ‘‘information sharing environment’’ and ‘‘ISE’’ mean 

an approach that facilitates the sharing of terrorism information, 

which approach may include any methods determined 

necessary and appropriate for carrying out this section [1016]. 

[IRTPA 1016(a)(2)] 

The ISE is to provide and facilitate the means for sharing 

terrorism information among all appropriate Federal, State, 

local, and tribal entities, and the private sector through the use 

of policy guidelines and technologies. [Extracted from IRTPA 

1016(b)(2)] 

To the greatest extent practicable, the ISE is to provide the 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 151 

functional equivalent of, or otherwise support, a decentralized, 

distributed, and coordinated environment that— 

(A) connects existing systems, where appropriate, provides no 

single points of failure, and allows users to share information 

among agencies, between levels of government, and, as 

appropriate, with the private sector; 

(B) ensures direct and continuous online electronic access to 

information; 

(C) facilitates the availability of information in a form and 

manner that facilitates its use in analysis, investigations, and 

operations; 

(D) builds upon existing systems capabilities currently in use 

across the Government; 

(E) employs an information access management approach that 

controls access to data rather than just systems and networks, 

without sacrificing security; 

(F) facilitates the sharing of information at and across all levels 

of security; 

(G) provides directory services, or the functional equivalent, for 

locating people and information; 

(H) incorporates protections for individuals’ privacy and civil 

liberties; and 

(I) incorporates strong mechanisms to enhance accountability 

and facilitate oversight, including audits, authentication, and 

access controls. [Extracted from IRTPA 1016(b)(2)] 

ISE Participant The term “ISE participant” is defined as any Federal, State, 

local, or tribal government organization; private sector entity; or 

foreign government organization that participates in the ISE. 

[Chapter 1] 

Law Enforcement 

Information 

For the purposes of the ISE only, any information obtained by or 

of interest to a law enforcement agency or official that is both 

(A) related to terrorism or the security of our homeland and (B) 

relevant to a law enforcement mission, including but not limited 

to information pertaining to an actual or potential criminal, civil, 

or administrative investigation or a foreign intelligence, 

counterintelligence, or counterterrorism investigation; 

assessment of or response to criminal threats and 

vulnerabilities; the existence, organization, capabilities, plans, 

intentions, vulnerabilities, means, methods, or activities of 

individuals or groups involved or suspected of involvement in 

criminal or unlawful conduct or assisting or associated with 

criminal or unlawful conduct; the existence, identification, 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

152

detection, prevention, interdiction, or disruption of, or response 

to, criminal acts and violations of the law; identification, 

apprehension, prosecution, release, detention, adjudication, 

supervision, or rehabilitation of accused persons or criminal 

offenders; and victim/witness assistance. [Extracted from the 

Recommendations for Presidential Guideline 2]

Local Government The term “local government” means-- 

(A) a county, municipality, city, town, township, local public 

authority, school district, special district, intrastate district, 

council of governments (regardless of whether the council of 

governments is incorporated as a nonprofit corporation under 

State law), regional or interstate government entity, or agency 

or instrumentality of a local government; 

(B) an Indian tribe or authorized tribal organization, or in Alaska 

a Native village or Alaska Regional Native Corporation; and 

(C) a rural community, unincorporated town or village, or other 

public entity. [Homeland Security Act of 2002, 6 U.S.C. 101] 

Outcome Measures Outcomes describe the intended result of carrying out a 

program or activity. They define an event or condition that is 

external to the program or activity and that is of direct 

importance to the intended beneficiaries and/or the public. For a 

tornado warning system, outcomes could be the number of lives 

saved and property damage averted. While performance 

measures must distinguish between outcomes and outputs, 

there must be a reasonable connection between them, with 

outputs supporting (i.e., leading to) outcomes in a logical 

fashion. [OMB A-11] 

Private Sector 

Partners 

As used in this plan, the term “private sector partners” includes 

vendors, owners, and operators of products and infrastructures 

participating in the ISE. 

Program Manager The term ‘‘program manager’’ means the program manager 

designated under subsection 1016(f) of the IRTPA, who is 

responsible for information sharing across the Federal 

Government and shall, in consultation with the Information 

Sharing Council, plan for and oversee the implementation of, 

and manage, the ISE. [Extracted from IRTPA 1016(a)(3) and 

1016(f)] 

Security Domains As used in this plan, the term “Security Domains” refers to three 

security levels—Sensitive Compartmented Information (SCI), 

Secret, and Sensitive but Unclassified (SBU)—across which the 

ISE must operate. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 153 

State The term “State” means any State of the United States, the 

District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the 

Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, the Commonwealth of 

the Northern Mariana Islands, and any possession of the United 

States. [Homeland Security Act of 2002, 6 U.S.C. 101] 

Terrorism 

Information 

The term “terrorism information” means all information, whether 

collected, produced, or distributed by intelligence, law 

enforcement, military, homeland security, or other activities 

relating to— 

(A) the existence, organization, capabilities, plans, intentions, 

vulnerabilities, means of finance or material support, or activities 

of foreign or international terrorist groups or individuals, or of 

domestic groups or individuals involved in transnational 

terrorism; 

(B) threats posed by such groups or individuals to the United 

States, United States persons, or United States interests, or to 

those of other nations; 

(C) communications of or by such groups or individuals; or 

(D) groups or individuals reasonably believed to be assisting or 

associated with such groups or individuals. [IRTPA 1016(a)(4)] 

United States The term “United States”, when used in a geographical sense, 

means any State of the United States, the District of Columbia, 

the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, 

American Samoa, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana 

Islands, any possession of the United States, and any waters 

within the jurisdiction of the United States. [Homeland Security 

Act of 2002, 6 U.S.C. 101] 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

154

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 155 

Appendix 5 – Acronyms 

APHS-CT Assistant to the President for Homeland Security and 

Counterterrorism 

APNSA Assistant to the President for National Security Affairs 

BDR Budget Data Request 

BRM Business Reference Model 

C&A Certification and Accreditation 

CAPCO Controlled Access Program Coordination Office 

CCEA Continuity Communications Enterprise Architecture 

CDMO Cross Domain Management Office 

CDS Cross Domain Solution 

CIO Chief Information Officer 

CNSS Committee on National Security Systems 

CONOPS Concept of Operations 

COP Committee of Principals 

CPIC Capital Planning and Investment Control 

CTISS Common Terrorism Information Sharing Standards 

CTISSWG Common Terrorism Information Sharing Standards Working 

Group 

CUI Controlled Unclassified Information 

CY Calendar Year 

DCMI Dublin Core Metadata Initiative 

DDMS DoD Discovery Metadata Specification 

DHS Department of Homeland Security 

DNI Director of National Intelligence 

DOC Department of Commerce 

DOD Department of Defense 

DODEA Department of Defense Enterprise Architecture 

DOJ Department of Justice 

DOS Department of State 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

156

EA Enterprise Architecture 

EDS Electronic Directory Services 

E.O. Executive Order 

FBI Federal Bureau of Investigation 

FEA Federal Enterprise Architecture 

FEAF Federal Enterprise Architecture Framework 

FIG Field Intelligence Group 

FIPS Federal Information Processing Standard 

FISMA Federal Information Security Management Act 

FOUO For Official Use Only 

FSI Foreign Service Institute 

FY Fiscal Year 

GAO Government Accountability Office 

GIG Global Information Grid 

HSC Homeland Security Council 

HSPD Homeland Security Presidential Directive 

IC Intelligence Community 

ICEA Intelligence Community Enterprise Architecture 

ICT Implementation Coordination Team 

IIP Interim Implementation Plan 

IOC Initial Operating Capability 

IP Implementation Plan 

IRTPA Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 

ISAC Information Sharing and Analysis Center 

ISC Information Sharing Council 

ISE Information Sharing Environment 

ISEEA Information Sharing Environment Enterprise Architecture 

ISEEAWG Information Sharing Environment Enterprise Architecture Working 

Group 

ISM Information Security Markings 

ISO International Organization for Standardization 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 157 

ISOO Information Security Oversight Office 

ISPCC Information Sharing Policy Coordination Committee 

IT Information Technology 

ITACG Interagency Threat Assessment and Coordination Group 

ITIA Information Technology Implementation Agent 

JTTF Joint Terrorism Task Force 

JXDM Justice XML Data Model 

MIP Military Intelligence Program 

MVT Mission Validation Team 

NCS National Communications System 

NCTC National Counterterrorism Center 

NIAC National Infrastructure Advisory Council 

NIEM National Information Exchange Model 

NIP National Implementation Plan 

NIP National Intelligence Program 

NIPP National Infrastructure Protection Plan 

NIS National Intelligence Strategy 

NIST National Institute of Standards and Technology 

NOL National Counterterrorism Center Online 

NSA National Security Agency 

NSC National Security Council 

NS/EP National Security and Emergency Preparedness 

NSPD National Security Presidential Directive 

OASIS Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information 

Standards 

ODNI Office of the Director of National Intelligence 

OMB Office of Management and Budget 

PART Program Assessment Rating Tool 

PCC Policy Coordination Committee 

PCLOB Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board 

PM Program Manager 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

158

PMA President’s Management Agenda 

RAIS PCC Records Access and Information Security Policy Coordination 

Committee 

SAR Suspicious Activity Report 

SBU Sensitive But Unclassified 

SCI Sensitive Compartmented Information 

SLT State/local/tribal 

SOAP Simple Object Access Protocol 

TSC Terrorist Screening Center 

TTIC Terrorist Threat Integration Center 

TWPDES Terrorist Watchlist Person Data Exchange Standard 

UDDI Universal Description, Discovery, and Integration 

U.S.C. United States Code 

WMD Weapons of Mass Destruction 

W3C World Wide Web Consortium 

XML Extensible Mark-Up Language 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan APPENDICES

 159 

Appendix 6 – ISC Membership 

Program Manager for the Information Sharing Environment (Chair) 

Central Intelligence Agency 

Department of Commerce 

Department of Defense – Joint Chiefs of Staff 

Department of Defense – Office of the Secretary of Defense 

Department of Energy 

Department of Health and Human Services 

Department of Homeland Security 

Department of the Interior 

Department of Justice 

Department of State 

Department of Transportation 

Department of the Treasury 

Director of National Intelligence 

Federal Bureau of Investigation 

National Counterterrorism Center 

Office of Management and Budget 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

160

This page intentionally blank. 
Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan 

 161 

This page intentionally blank. 
APPENDICES Information Sharing Environment Implementation Plan

162