Pubdate: Mon, 02 Dec 2002 Source: New York Times (NY) Copyright: 2002 The New York Times Company Contact: http://www.nytimes.com/ Details: http://www.mapinc.org/media/298 Author: Eric Lichtblau Bookmark: http://www.mapinc.org/find?203 (Terrorism) F.B.I., UNDER OUTSIDE PRESSURE, GETS INSIDE PUSH WASHINGTON, Dec. 1 - Just two weeks after imploring the F.B.I. to make counterterrorism its top priority, the director of the agency has warned his agents in even stronger terms that he will not tolerate "bureaucratic intransigence" as an obstacle to change. The Federal Bureau of Investigation's ability to adapt to change "is now being tested in the extreme," the director, Robert S. Mueller III, wrote in an internal memorandum on Friday. "Change will be needed in many areas and needed quickly. Bureaucratic intransigence cannot be an impediment or excuse." Mr. Mueller's message to employees comes as the bureau is facing stepped-up pressure from leading members of Congress to shore up its counterterrorism operations. Two senior members of the Senate Judiciary Committee - Patrick J. Leahy, Democrat of Vermont, and Charles E. Grassley, Republican of Iowa - wrote to the Justice Department last week, saying they had serious concerns about the F.B.I.'s ability to lead the fight against terrorism and about its treatment of some agents who have voiced criticisms internally. The senators questioned whether the F.B.I. had been truthful about its progress in recasting its counterterrorism operation. And two members of the Senate Intelligence Committee, Senator Richard C. Shelby, Republican of Alabama, and Senator Bob Graham of Florida, the departing Democratic chairman, expressed concern today about the agency's ability to recast its mission from traditional law enforcement duties to intelligence functions. "I think the F.B.I. is being challenged big time today," Mr. Shelby said on "Fox News Sunday." "They're moving from a police - a federal police agency to an intelligence agency. It's a big cultural change." The complaints of Senators Leahy and Grassley were spurred in part, they said, by a front-page article in The New York Times on Nov. 21 that detailed the frustrations of senior F.B.I. officials in getting some field offices to make counterterrorism their main priority. The senators demanded access to two memorandums quoted in the article, from Mr. Mueller and Bruce J. Gebhardt, the deputy director, which the F.B.I. has refused to give them, as well as any other internal documents dealing with a "lack of focus" in counterterrorism efforts. In his memorandum, Mr. Gebhardt told field office chiefs he was "amazed and astounded" by the failure to commit essential resources to the fight against terrorism and said they must instill a sense of urgency in their agents. Mr. Mueller's agencywide memorandum stated unequivocally that counterterrorism had to be the top priority and that local field offices could no longer establish distinct agendas. In his most recent memorandum, a copy of which was obtained by The Times, Mr. Mueller characterized the effort to refocus the bureau's mission as "the re-engineering initiative." He said the bureau must work to identify areas in need of change, make them a priority, pull in senior executives to accomplish the task, and ensure accountability. Without such an overarching plan, he wrote, worthwhile ambitions can "end up abandoned in frustration or done poorly." Mr. Mueller said that while the F.B.I. faced "a level of new expectations unprecedented in its history," he was confident that it could meet the high expectations. The new push comes seven months after Mr. Mueller announced a counterterrorism reorganization that included a restructuring of the management hierarchy at F.B.I. headquarters and a redeployment of some 400 personnel who had been working nonterrorism investigations like narcotics and white-collar crime. Roughly a quarter of the F.B.I.'s 11,000 agents are now working counterterrorism, officials say. But there have been nagging doubts about whether the plan is working. Members of Congress appeared willing to give Mr. Mueller a lengthy grace period to put the reorganization plan in place, and many Republicans as well as senior officials in the Bush administration say they remain confident Mr. Mueller can get the job done. A senior Justice Department official said today that while there was clearly room for improvement in the F.B.I.'s counterterrorism work, "from our perspective, there's been a huge sea change in how the F.B.I. is operating in the last year," with several suspected terror cells around the country disrupted. But in recent weeks, senior Democrats as well as a few Republicans have begun to voice increased skepticism about whether the F.B.I. has made enough progress in its ability to collect and analyze intelligence, identify terrorism suspects and disrupt possible plots. Some officials question whether agents trained in solving bank robberies, kidnappings and drug deals can embrace their new role. Bush administration officials have even begun to discuss whether there is a need to create a superagency for domestic intelligence, a move that could gut the F.B.I.'s existing counterterrorism authority. Senator Graham said on "Fox News Sunday" that a new organizational structure was needed. Mr. Graham pointed to the "fundamental difference" between a law enforcement agency like the F.B.I., which works to solve crimes that have already occurred, and an intelligence agency, which works to prevent crimes. "I don't know whether you can blend those two different cultures into a single agency," he said. Law enforcement officials have also floated the idea of closing some of the F.B.I.'s more than 400 satellite offices, and perhaps even a few of its 56 larger field offices, to move more agents to counterterrorism. An F.B.I. official who demanded anonymity said that the bureau was continuing to review staffing and organizational issues as part of the counterterrorism push but that no plan to close any offices was foreseen. That official, as well as Congressional officials, noted that any effort to close a field office would require approval from Congress and would undoubtedly face stiff opposition from members whose hometown F.B.I. presence was threatened. The letter sent Wednesday from Mr. Leahy, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and Mr. Grassley, a ranking Republican, who together wield significant influence in oversight of the F.B.I., represents the latest salvo in the stepped-up attacks on the bureau from Congress. The senators said they were deeply troubled by the apparent contradiction between the F.B.I.'s internal frustrations over the pace of reforms and its public pronouncements that it was getting the job done. Mr. Leahy and Mr. Grassley noted that the Justice Department and the F.B.I. had attacked the findings of a study by Syracuse University last spring suggesting that the F.B.I. was devoting as much attention to nonterrorism cases after the Sept. 11 attacks as before. They said internal frustrations at the F.B.I. appeared to echo the study's findings. In addition, the senators disclosed that the Justice Department decided last month to cut the amount of information on F.B.I. cases that it would make available to researchers at Syracuse as part of their continuing study. "The answer for the Department and the F.B.I. is to address the legitimate concerns about their enforcement priorities, not to blind Congress and the public" by withholding information, the letter said. Officials at the F.B.I. and the Justice Department said they had not yet reviewed the letter and could not comment on the concerns raised in it. In another letter, sent to Mr. Mueller last Tuesday, Mr. Leahy and Mr. Grassley also criticized the department's handling of a personnel matter involving a report of retaliation against an F.B.I. unit chief. The agent, John Roberts, appeared with the F.B.I.'s permission on a "60 Minutes" episode last month. Mr. Roberts said on the program that there was a perceived double standard at the F.B.I. in its disciplining of senior officials versus rank-and-file agents, and Congressional officials say that soon after, supervisors upbraided him in front of other employees because of his comments. Supervisors also eliminated a position in the F.B.I.'s ethics units last month after two employees spoke with Congressional investigators about whether the agency had retaliated against Mr. Roberts, the senators said. The ethics staff reduction "contributes to the perception that the F.B.I. will not tolerate criticism from within its ranks," the senators said. And they said it came when the bureau needed more ethics staff members, not fewer, to train new agents who are being granted "greater powers to investigate American citizens and conduct domestic surveillance." F.B.I. officials declined to comment on the issues raised in the letter, and they said the question of retaliation against Mr. Roberts had been turned over to the Justice Department inspector general. A senior Justice Department official said today that while there was clearly room for improvement in the F.B.I.'s counterterrorism work, "from our perspective, there's been a huge sea change in how the F.B.I. is operating in the last year," with several suspected terror cells around the country disrupted. But in recent weeks, senior Democrats as well as a few Republicans have begun to voice increased skepticism about whether the F.B.I. has made enough progress in its ability to collect and analyze intelligence, identify terrorism suspects and disrupt possible plots. Some officials question whether agents trained in solving bank robberies, kidnappings and drug deals can embrace their new role. Bush administration officials have even begun to discuss whether there is a need to create a superagency for domestic intelligence, a move that could gut the F.B.I.'s existing counterterrorism authority. Senator Graham said on "Fox News Sunday" that a new organizational structure was needed. Mr. Graham pointed to the "fundamental difference" between a law enforcement agency like the F.B.I., which works to solve crimes that have already occurred, and an intelligence agency, which works to prevent crimes. "I don't know whether you can blend those two different cultures into a single agency," he said. Law enforcement officials have also floated the idea of closing some of the F.B.I.'s more than 400 satellite offices, and perhaps even a few of its 56 larger field offices, to move more agents to counterterrorism. An F.B.I. official who demanded anonymity said that the bureau was continuing to review staffing and organizational issues as part of the counterterrorism push but that no plan to close any offices was foreseen. That official, as well as Congressional officials, noted that any effort to close a field office would require approval from Congress and would undoubtedly face stiff opposition from members whose hometown F.B.I. presence was threatened. The letter sent Wednesday from Mr. Leahy, chairman of the Judiciary Committee, and Mr. Grassley, a ranking Republican, who together wield significant influence in oversight of the F.B.I., represents the latest salvo in the stepped-up attacks on the bureau from Congress. The senators said they were deeply troubled by the apparent contradiction between the F.B.I.'s internal frustrations over the pace of reforms and its public pronouncements that it was getting the job done. Mr. Leahy and Mr. Grassley noted that the Justice Department and the F.B.I. had attacked the findings of a study by Syracuse University last spring suggesting that the F.B.I. was devoting as much attention to nonterrorism cases after the Sept. 11 attacks as before. They said internal frustrations at the F.B.I. appeared to echo the study's findings. In addition, the senators disclosed that the Justice Department decided last month to cut the amount of information on F.B.I. cases that it would make available to researchers at Syracuse as part of their continuing study. "The answer for the Department and the F.B.I. is to address the legitimate concerns about their enforcement priorities, not to blind Congress and the public" by withholding information, the letter said. Officials at the F.B.I. and the Justice Department said they had not yet reviewed the letter and could not comment on the concerns raised in it. In another letter, sent to Mr. Mueller last Tuesday, Mr. Leahy and Mr. Grassley also criticized the department's handling of a personnel matter involving a report of retaliation against an F.B.I. unit chief. The agent, John Roberts, appeared with the F.B.I.'s permission on a "60 Minutes" episode last month. Mr. Roberts said on the program that there was a perceived double standard at the F.B.I. in its disciplining of senior officials versus rank-and-file agents, and Congressional officials say that soon after, supervisors upbraided him in front of other employees because of his comments. Supervisors also eliminated a position in the F.B.I.'s ethics units last month after two employees spoke with Congressional investigators about whether the agency had retaliated against Mr. Roberts, the senators said. The ethics staff reduction "contributes to the perception that the F.B.I. will not tolerate criticism from within its ranks," the senators said. And they said it came when the bureau needed more ethics staff members, not fewer, to train new agents who are being granted "greater powers to investigate American citizens and conduct domestic surveillance." F.B.I. officials declined to comment on the issues raised in the letter, and they said the question of retaliation against Mr. Roberts had been turned over to the Justice Department inspector general. - --- MAP posted-by: Jo-D