U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

National Institute of Justice

R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f

National Institute of Justice

Jeremy Travis, Director

continued...

DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE

OFF ICE OF JUSTICE PROGRAMS

BJA NI J OJJDP BJS OVC

Inventory of State and Local Law

Enforcement Technology Needs to

Combat Terrorism

January 1999

Issues and Findings

Discussed in this Brief: An inventory of State and local law enforcement agencies from the 50 States

and the District of Columbia that

is being used to determine the technologies needed by these agencies to

combat terrorism. The inventory, conducted through interviews and focus

groups involving State and local law

enforcement officers and others who

coordinate agency responses to terrorist incidents, is the first phase in

a two-phase project sponsored by

the National Institute of Justice (NIJ)

under the Anti-Terrorism and Effective Death Penalty Act of 1996.

Key issues: Terrorist acts and the

ability of the United States both to

prevent incidents and to deal with

them effectively when they occur are

issues of increasing concern in the

country today. Recent incidents have

shown that the United States is at

risk from parties and individuals

abroad and within its borders. Recognizing the need to identify, document, and respond to shortfalls in

State and local capabilities to combat terrorism, Congress, through the

Act, charged NIJ with determining

State and local law enforcement

technology needs for handling terrorist activities and with developing

technological solutions to respond to

those needs.

Key findings: Participants in the

project provided researchers with a

firsthand perspective of the

Recent acts of terrorism within the

United States, such as the bombings of

the World Trade Center in New York City

and Centennial Olympic Park in Atlanta,

have focused attention on the ability of

law enforcement to manage these incidents and investigate individuals and

groups suspected of planning or executing terrorist acts. Of particular concern is

the gap between technologies available to

and used by law enforcement—especially

State and local agencies—and the advanced technologies used by persons and

groups planning terrorist acts.

To improve the ability of law enforcement

agencies to fight terrorism, Congress enacted the Anti-Terrorism and Effective

Death Penalty Act of 1996. The Act

charged the National Institute of Justice

(NIJ) with the task of determining what

technologies are needed by State and

local law enforcement agencies to combat

terrorism. To fulfill this task, NIJ sponsored a survey of State and local law

enforcement officials and representatives

of other groups that could be involved

in preventing and managing terrorist attacks. The project was to be carried out

in two phases: Phase I involved an inventory of the technology needs of State and

local law enforcement, with respondents

from all 50 States and the District of

Columbia, while Phase II will involve

analyses of those needs to determine

whether existing or developing technology

can fulfill them or whether new technologies are required. This Research in Brief

presents findings from Phase I of the

project, identifying the most frequently

mentioned needs as well as issues related

to fulfilling them.

Methodology

In 1997, to identify unmet technology

needs, researchers conducted interviews

and formed focus groups involving State

and local law enforcement officers and a

small number of other individuals (e.g.,

emergency management officials) who

coordinate agency responses to terrorist

incidents—108 interviews and group discussion sessions altogether. A total of 195

individuals representing 138 agencies

from 50 States and the District of Columbia took part. They represented a wide

variety of urban and rural jurisdictions

and a broad segment of State and local

law enforcement entities, including transit police, sheriffs’ departments, city police, and State bureaus of investigation.

(See exhibits 1 and 2.)
2

R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f

technology tools required by law enforcement agencies to combat terrorism. On the basis of participants’

statements, researchers made the

following observations:

● The counterterrorism needs of

State and local law enforcement

agencies across the country are similar, with minor regional variations.

● In terms of technologies available,

law enforcement agencies often are

not as well equipped as the terrorists

they may face.

● A key issue for State and local

law enforcement agencies is the

affordability of new and existing

technologies.

● Terrorist acts can expand the

scope of routine police functions, creating a need for new technologies.

● Many of the capabilities used to

combat terrorism also are needed to

combat crime in general.

● State and local law enforcement

agencies are aware that entities at

all levels must cooperate to combat

terrorism effectively, requiring

improved information and communications technologies.

● Of particular concern to State and

local law enforcement agencies is

their ability to deal with weapons of

mass destruction, especially those

involving nuclear, biological, or

chemical hazards.

● An issue of growing importance

to law enforcement agencies is their

ability to combat cyberterrorism.

Target audience: Federal, State,

and local policymakers; law enforcement officers and administrators;

emergency management officials;

and technology development

specialists.

Issues and Findings

continued...

Research staff, with the assistance of the

four regional offices of NIJ’s National

Law Enforcement and Corrections Technology Center (NLECTC) system, selected

potential participants. Care was taken

to ensure representation of law enforcement disciplines specifically relevant to

counterterrorism efforts, such as bomb

disposal, SWAT (special weapons and

tactics), intelligence, and mass transit security units. To the extent possible, selection of agencies and, in some instances,

individuals was based on their particular

expertise in combating terrorism—

those that had taken part in large-scale

exercises dealing with terrorism, had

experienced a terrorist incident, or were

assigned a leading role in combating

terrorism. In addition, researchers interviewed experts on combating terrorism to

gain their insights and advice on research

design and reviewed relevant literature to

derive additional background information

on tactics, techniques, and existing technology available.

In the sessions, interviewers asked participants to describe the technology capabilities needed to combat terrorism that their

agencies lacked, in terms of 11 functions

drawn from the interviews with terrorism

experts and the literature review:

Jurisdiction Number

n=138

U.S. Park Police 1

Regional 4

State 46

Local 87

 Cities with populations of

 more than 200,000 (33)

 Counties with populations of

 more than 200,000 (18)

 Smaller jurisdictions (36)

Exhibit 1: Profile of Represented

Jurisdictions

● Intelligence.

● Surveillance (a special subset of

intelligence).

● Command, control, and communications (C3

).

● Site hardening and security (protecting

buildings, facilities, and outdoor events

from terrorist attacks and reducing site

vulnerability to attack and damage).

● Detecting, disabling, and containing

explosive devices.

● Defending against cyberterrorism—

attacks using computers or computer

networks (a special subset of site hardening and security).

● Defending against weapons of mass

destruction—specifically, nuclear,

biological, and chemical (NBC) devices.

● Apprehending and disarming terrorists.

● Forensics and investigations.

● Public information.

● Crowd and riot control.

A 12th function—training—was added

because many participants mentioned its

importance during the interviews and

group discussions.

Most Frequently Cited Needs

Participants in the interviews and group

discussions noted more than 100 unmet

technology needs; the 15 most cited are

listed in Exhibit 3. Needs are ordered by

the number of times they were cited during the interviews and group discussions;

the number of times they were cited by

participants as among their five most

important needs also is shown.1

By far, the most commonly expressed need

was for ready access to current intelligence. Participants specifically noted the

need for a national terrorism intelligence

database housed on a secure information
3

R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f

infrastructure. Such a database must be

accessible to all State and local law enforcement officials.

Improved means to detect and analyze

explosive devices was also mentioned

as a major need. The most important

requirement expressed was the ability

to verify the presence of an explosive;

analyzing the nature of a device was of

secondary importance. In addition, the

ability to “look into” a device more accurately to determine what it is and how

it was constructed was of major interest.

Of emerging concern was the threat

posed by explosive devices possibly

containing chemical or biological

agents; improved means for detecting

NBC hazards was frequently mentioned by participants. Requirements

for equipment included portability

(preferably handheld or wearable

equipment), affordability, and responsiveness to a wide range of hazards.

Such tools could allow additional time

for responding to NBC hazards. In addition, participants wanted the ability

to identify the nature of the hazard

(e.g., the type of chemical agent) more

precisely.

Also cited was the need for better

NBC protective gear (including masks,

gloves, and suits) for first responders;

the key issue involved affordability.

While participants wanted protective

outerwear and masks offering improved wearability and dexterity, they

remarked that they would settle for

functionality equivalent to that of

currently available gear, but only if it

cost less. Because of the high cost of

currently available gear, most agencies

would not have enough suits to field

more than a token force if a significant

incident were to occur.

Command, control, and communications (C3

), another area frequently

mentioned by participants, involves the

ability to communicate information and

data and to direct and coordinate the

activities of individuals and organizations (particularly first responders) to

achieve a common goal. The cost of

improving communications security

so that plans and intelligence are not

compromised was considered a major

shortfall. Participants noted that, even

in fairly large agencies, only a small

number of personnel—usually those

involved in counterdrug operations—

have access to secure communications.

A second C3

 need cited was for

multiagency, multijurisdictional compatibility of communications equipment, enabling agencies to remain in

contact at an incident scene. Incident

commanders, line officers, and others

from various agencies (e.g., the local

SWAT team, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Drug Enforcement Administration, and State and county police)

at an incident scene must be able to

communicate with other departments

without worrying about how to contact

them, which would require an operator-friendly communications system.2

Other technology needs mentioned

dealt with disarming and disabling

explosives, defending against weapons

of mass destruction, apprehending and

disarming terrorists, crowd and riot

control, and surveillance.

The need for improved bomb robots

for sensing, disrupting, and removing

explosive devices was cited frequently.

Participants sought a wide range of

improvements, such as greater dexterity in picking up and handling objects,

the ability to carry more weight,

two-way communications to speak to

people at risk, the ability to climb

stairs, built-in detectors and disrupters, and a lower cost.

Nonlethal capabilities for apprehending

terrorists and for crowd and riot control

Exhibit 2: Profile of Participating Agencies

Agency Number

n=138

Police departments 48

State police, highway patrols, departments

of public safety, bureaus of investigation, etc. 37

Sheriffs’ departments 23

County police departments 9

State emergency management agencies 7

Transit authorities, airport police, port

authorities (including one regional entity) 5

Regional coalitions, law enforcement associations 3

City emergency management 1

District attorney 1

State attorney general 1

State department of communications 1

State department of justice 1

U.S. Park Police 1
4

R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f

Exhibit 3: Most Frequently Cited Technology Needs

Need Function Total Top

Times Five*

Mentioned

National intergovernmental

information system with current

intelligence on terrorism

Improved means of detecting

explosives

Improved and more readily available

secure communications

Improved means of detecting and

categorizing nuclear, biological, and

chemical threats

Improved interagency communications

Improved robots for disarming and

disabling explosive devices

Improved affordable protective gear

Improved nonlethal weapons

Improved “see-through-the-wall”

capability

Improved long-range video monitoring

Improved detection and tracing

mechanisms and countermeasures

for cyberattacks

Improved electronic listening devices

Improved training to combat terrorism

Improved containment vessels and

vehicles for explosive devices

Improved night vision devices

Intelligence 58 47

Detecting, disabling, and 58 21

containing explosive devices

Command, control, and 53 19

communications

Defending against weapons 51 24

of mass destruction

Command, control, and 48 26

communications

Detecting, disabling, and 47 9

containing explosive devices

Defending against weapons 45 16

of mass destruction

Apprehending terrorists; 40 8

crowd and riot control

Surveillance 34 18

Surveillance 34 13

Defending against cyber- 33 4

terrorism

Surveillance 32 15

Training 31 18

Detecting, disabling, and 31 6

containing explosive devices;

defending against weapons

of mass destruction

Surveillance 30 15

* Indicates the total number of times mentioned as being among an agency’s top five needs.

also were cited by participants. Ideally,

this capability would enable State and

local law enforcement officers at a remote location to incapacitate individuals and groups covertly and almost

instantaneously, for up to 20 minutes.

One of the surveillance needs involved

the ability to “see through walls”—being

able, from a remote location, to locate

individuals in a room, to differentiate

between terrorists and hostages, and

to determine whether individuals are

armed and where armed individuals are.

While participants expressed a need to

see through standard interior residential

walls, they ideally wanted the ability to

see through the heavier construction

found in exterior residential walls and

the exterior and interior walls of commercial buildings.

Another surveillance need was for

improved long-range video monitoring.

High-resolution, unobtrusive remote

devices that could be left in place were

of particular interest. Related to this

capability, participants saw a need for

unattended, unobtrusive aerial vehicles

(UAVs) and stealthy manned aircraft

and helicopters to carry such equipment.

In addition, participants noted a need

for improved electronic listening

devices. Such devices should be covert—ideally, undetectable—to avoid

endangering State and local law enforcement officers and compromising

an operation.

Also mentioned was the need for improved night vision devices. Among the

key attributes desired were improved

affordability, resistance to light flares, a

broader field of vision, sharper images,

telescopic capability, and better depth

perception and color resolution.

Defense against cyberterrorism was another area addressed: Needs included

tools for preventing intrusion, detecting

and defending against it, and tracking

attacks to their points of origin. Most

agencies represented in the project had

little expertise with cyberterrorism, and

many participants believed the Federal

Government and private sector would

handle this problem, much as the Federal Government is expected to manage

acts of terrorism involving nuclear

weapons.
5

R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f

In explosive device remediation, the

need for improved containment vehicles and vessels was cited. Participants felt that these vessels also should

be designed to prevent the release of

any chemical or biological agents

present. For investigative purposes,

they also wanted devices capable of

containing the fragments of an exploding device within a vessel and more affordable devices. (One bomb technician

noted that his agency’s containment

vessels cost $100,000 each; as a result,

too few were available, resulting in unacceptable response times.)

The need for more available and higher

quality training for State and local law

enforcement officers on how to combat

terrorism was discussed. Among the

technology training needs cited were

the following:

● Computer-based general training (to

reduce the need for, and thus the time

and costs associated with, live training).

● Computer-based specialized training (e.g., for bomb technicians).

● Computer-based models to rehearse

realistic hostage rescue scenarios.

Live training (e.g., combat marksmanship courses) often requires specialized

sites far from an agency’s office or other

work location. Ideally, computer-based

training, which can be conducted in an

individual’s office or in a nearby room,

could replace much live training.

Conclusion

On the basis of the findings of the inventory, researchers made the following observations on the current status

of what State and local law enforcement agencies need to investigate and

manage terrorist acts and the individuals and groups who cause them.

Similarity across regions

The technology needs expressed were

remarkably similar across the country,

with minor regional differences. For

instance, some agencies in mountainous areas have problems with communications line of sight, while agencies

in jurisdictions with flat, open terrain

experience difficulty undertaking

covert surveillance operations.

Affordability

Affordability appears to be an

overarching concern of State and local

law enforcement agencies. Many participants stated that they lacked critical equipment and materials because

their agencies cannot afford them; as a

result State and local law enforcement

often are not as well equipped as the

terrorists they may face. For instance,

State and local officials may have only

286- or 386-processor personal computers, while their adversaries are

equipped with the latest Pentium®-

based models.

It appears, at this point, that many

of the needs participants mentioned

could be met using existing technologies. For example, improved night

vision devices, improved armored

vehicles, and mobile fax machines

all are available now; the question is

whether agencies can afford them.

Many participants suggested that

technology-sharing be more frequently

employed as one means of making

equipment more affordable.

Critical deficiencies

State and local law enforcement are

particularly concerned about their

ability to handle nuclear, biological,

and chemical (NBC) devices and other

weapons of mass destruction. Again,

affordability is a barrier; many participants mentioned the difficulty of

defending expenditures for equipment

that might rarely, if ever, be used. A

large number observed that they must

rely on the Federal Government to

manage NBC threats. Another problem

is that agencies often do not fully

understand the nature of NBC threats

and the training required to deal with

them. For instance, federally sponsored initiatives to help State and

local governments prepare to deal with

a weapon of mass destruction have

focused on emergency services and

fire personnel and senior managers

rather than law enforcement line

officers.

Another concern is that State and local

law enforcement generally lack the ability to combat cyberterrorism effectively.

As the President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection noted:

Physical means to exploit physical

vulnerabilities probably remain the

most worrisome threat to our infrastructure today. But almost every

group we met voiced concerns about

cyber vulnerabilities and threats.

They emphasized the importance of

developing approaches to protecting

our infrastructures against

cyberthreats before they materialize

and produce major system damage.3

This is a multidimensional issue

involving a lack of appropriate equipment and software (often the result of

funding constraints) and a lack of

trained personnel. Also, this threat is

relatively new to State and local law

enforcement and has been viewed previously as mainly a private and commercial problem rather than a major

law enforcement concern.

Unique aspects of combating

terrorism

Terrorist acts are unique in that they

often expand the scope of routine police functions, thereby creating a need
6

R e s e a r c h i n B r i e f

for new technologies. A crime scene

covering several city blocks or a traffic

jam caused by a mass evacuation

would pose unique technology-related

challenges in forensics and traffic

management, respectively.

While State and local law enforcement

generally are able to manage more

common criminal acts using their own

resources, they realize that combating

terrorism requires cooperation among

Federal, State, and local law enforcement agencies as well as cooperation

between law enforcement and other

agencies, such as emergency management offices. This cooperation requires

improved information and communications technologies, particularly those

that facilitate access to and sharing of

intelligence among agencies.

For Further Study

The State and local law enforcement and

emergency response practitioners involved in this project identified many

areas in which funding and research

efforts can be focused. Phase II of the

project will address how the capability

needs mentioned by participants can be

met by either existing technologies or

technologies yet to be developed.

Findings and conclusions of the research reported here are those of the authors and do not

necessarily reflect the official position or policies of the U.S. Department of Justice.

This Research in Brief is derived

from a full report written by Hollis

Stambaugh, Chris Tillery, and Philip

Schaenman. Hollis Stambaugh is

Director, Investigation and Public

Protection Programs, TriData

Corporation; Chris Tillery is Director,

Counterterrorism/Force Protection,

System Planning Corporation; and

Philip Schaenman is President of

TriData Corporation.

This study was sponsored by the Joint

[Justice-Defense] Program Steering

Group, for NIJ, under contract number

MDA 972–93–C–0016 between System

Planning Corporation (of which TriData

Corporation is a wholly owned subsidiary)

and the Defense Advanced Research

Projects Agency.

This Research in Brief (NCJ 173384)

is available online through the

Justice Information Center Web site

(http://www.ncjrs.org) or the NIJ Web site

(http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij). Copies of

this document are available free from the

National Criminal Justice Reference

Service (NCJRS), at 800–851–3420,

Box 6000, Rockville, MD 20849–6000.

Copies of the full report are also available

from NCJRS through interlibrary loan or

for a small photocopying cost.

NCJ 173384

The National Institute of Justice is a

component of the Office of Justice

Programs, which also includes the Bureau

of Justice Assistance, the Bureau of Justice

Statistics, the Office of Juvenile Justice and

Delinquency Prevention, and the Office for

Victims of Crime.

Notes

1. The fact that, in many cases, the technology

to meet these needs already exists was not a

consideration in compiling categories. All

expressed needs for new technology were captured, but needs for additional existing equipment, such as more patrol cars, were not

considered.

2. While not specifically noted, key attributes

of such a system would probably include secure multimedia communications (e.g., voice,

data, video) enabling interagency datasharing

among mobile units and fixed sites.

3. Critical Foundations: Protecting America’s

Infrastructures: The Report of the President’s

Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection, Washington, D.C.: The President’s Commission on Critical Infrastructure Protection,

October 1997: 5.

PRESORTED STANDARD

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

DOJ/NIJ

PERMIT NO. G–91

U.S. Department of Justice

Office of Justice Programs

National Institute of Justice

Washington, DC 20531

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300