This paper examines the hierarchical structure and coordination mechanisms activated when a terrorist attack occurs in a U.S. city. It traces responsibilities from the mayor and local emergency manager through federal agencies including the Department of Homeland Security, FBI, and CIA. The paper reviews the National Response Framework (NRF) and National Incident Management System (NIMS) as standardized approaches to incident management, explores international nonproliferation efforts to prevent CBRN terrorism, and evaluates Texas's biological terrorism response plan, identifying strengths in its organizational clarity while noting the need for improved public communication.
When a terrorist attack is confirmed in a city, a clear chain of command must immediately activate. The mayor or city/county manager is charged with providing strategic guidance and coordinating resources during the emergency. As part of the mayor's responsibility for public safety, he or she must coordinate "preparation and training for effective response" and work with members of Congress and federal agencies to do so (NRF, 2014: 15).
In a confirmed act of terrorism, this coordination extends beyond natural disaster relief. The mayor and local government must work with the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, or the CIA not simply to provide assistance and relief to affected individuals, but also to gather intelligence on perpetrators and prevent further attacks.
The city's local emergency manager operates differently, holding "day-to-day authority and responsibility for overseeing emergency management programs and activities" such as damage assessment (NRF, 2014: 16). Department and agency heads assist the emergency manager in specific functions: providing food and supplies to displaced persons, dealing with environmental hazards, and constructing emergency shelters (NRF, 2014: 17-18). Beyond government organizations, emergency management also coordinates with non-governmental organizations (NGOs) that provide critical relief to residents, including local organizations and national entities such as the Red Cross.
Federal security documents issued by government agencies provide both general response protocols for terrorist attacks and specific guidance for particular attack types. Terrorists employ a wide range of weapons, from conventional means such as bombings and shootings to biological and cyber-attacks. Each attack type requires distinct response procedures, contingency planning, and interagency coordination. Emergency management must balance the need for standardized guidelines that can be widely implemented with the requirement for specific detail appropriate to different threats.
The National Incident Management System (NIMS) provides the foundational framework. "The purpose of the NIMS is to provide a common approach for managing incidents. The concepts contained herein provide for a flexible but standardized set of incident management practices with emphasis on common principles, a consistent approach to operational structures and supporting mechanisms, and an integrated approach to resource management" (NIMS, 2014). This flexibility within standardization allows local, state, and federal agencies to coordinate effectively regardless of the specific nature of the terrorist threat.
Addressing biological, chemical, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) terrorism requires far more than local or federal agency response. Nonproliferation is critical to reducing these threats. "Nonproliferation efforts have been a top U.S. priority for decades, reducing the amount of chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear (CBRN) material produced and stored by states, restricting the diversion of materials and expertise for illicit use, and preventing the trafficking of CBRN weapons and related material" (Chapter 4, Country Reports on Terrorism 2011).
Addressing these types of terrorism cannot be solved by any single governmental level or agency. Geopolitical negotiations at the international level are essential to reduce the risk of CBRN weapons falling into the hands of terrorist organizations. Although terrorists may still access some biological or chemical agents regardless of nonproliferation efforts, international agreements can reduce the severity and scope of the weapons available to them. Joint policing efforts between nations further limit terrorist access to these materials.
International organizations such as the United Nations play a vital role in coordinating responses to nuclear and radiological terrorism threats. One significant example is the Global Initiative to Combat Nuclear Terrorism (GICNT), co-chaired by the United States and Russia, which "is an international partnership of 83 nations and four official observer organizations dedicated to strengthening individual and collective capacity to prevent, detect, and respond to a nuclear terrorist event. Partners engage in multilateral activities and exercises designed to share best practices and lessons learned on a wide range of nuclear security and terrorism issues" (Chapter 4). These international partnerships recognize that terrorism prevention must operate at multiple scales simultaneously: local response, national coordination, and global nonproliferation.
"Evaluation of state-level biological attack response document"
Always verify citation format against your institution’s current style guide requirements.