From the U.S. Government Accountability Office, www.gao.gov Transcript for: Response to Electromagnetic Risks Description: Audio interview by GAO staff with Chris Currie, Director, Homeland Security and Justice Related GAO Work: GAO-16-243: Critical Infrastructure Protection: Federal Agencies Have Taken Actions to Address Electromagnetic Risks, but Opportunities Exist to Further Assess Risks and Strengthen Collaboration Released: April 2016 [ Background Music ] [ Narrator: ] Welcome to GAO's Watchdog Report, your source for news and information from the U.S. Government Accountability Office. It's April 2016. A world without electricity sounds like the setting of a summer blockbuster, but electromagnetic pulses or EMPs pose real risks to the national power grid. A team led by Chris Currie, a director in GAO's Homeland Security and Justice team, recently reviewed federal efforts to address electromagnetic risks. GAO's Jacques Arsenault sat down with Chris to talk about what they found. [ Jacques Arsenault ] Can you help me understand EMPs and maybe separate fact from science fiction? What is an EMP, and what can cause them? [ Chris Currie ] Basically there's two types of electromagnetic risks, man-made and natural. A nuclear EMP is the burst of electromagnetic radiation from a nuclear bomb which can disrupt or destroy electronic equipment. When most people talk about EMP they're referring to what we call a high-altitude EMP. So in this scenario, a nuclear device is detonated anywhere from 25 to 250 miles above the earth's surface. It's not intended to cause physical damage to the earth or casualties. Instead, the blast interacts with the atmosphere to create an intense electromagnetic pulse that can disrupt computers, damage electronics, and also cause damage to electrical infrastructure such as big transformers, for example. In addition to man-made EMPs though, certain natural solar weather events can cause similar damage to electric infrastructure. These are called geomagnetic disturbances or GMDs. The damage really depends on the size of the disturbance but, for example, in 1989, a major GMD caused portions of the grid in Quebec to collapse and left about 6 million people without power for 9 hours. [ Jacques Arsenault ] Okay, so with an EMP, what kinds of risks are we talking about? Is this a minor inconvenience like losing power in a thunderstorm, or is this really the Mad Max scenario? [ Chris Currie ] Well, that's a really good question. That's a difficult one to answer definitively, too. As I mention in the 1989 Quebec example, EMPs or solar weather could lead to power outages over broad geographic areas. It's difficult to know the exact impacts of a high-altitude EMP because one has never been detonated over a populated area. Also, it depends on the size of the weapon and how high it's detonated. For example, in our report we have a map explaining this, and noted that an EMP detonated at 300 miles above the U.S. could impact the entire country. The major concern though that keeps folks up at night is the threat to the electric grid and the potential loss of power for a long period of time. You can imagine that power outages even for a matter of days or weeks could cause economic disruption and really bad impacts to public health and safety. [ Jacques Arsenault ] Well let me ask you then, what's the federal government's role here? Are federal agencies doing something to address these risks? [ Chris Currie ] They are. Right before the 9-11 attacks, Congress actually recognized the potential threat of these EMPs and established an EMP commission to study the risks. And one thing the commission identified, as we did in our work, is that no one federal agency has responsibility for addressing EMP. It's just not clear who's supposed to do what. For example, various agencies are involved such as Homeland Security, Energy, and Defense. These agencies take it very seriously and there have been some efforts to address EMPs, but they've been pretty sporadic and disparate. For example, one of the biggest, most critical parts of our electric infrastructure are large transformers. They're expensive, they're difficult to replace, and they're hard to find. So there have been some studies and efforts to look at how do we more quickly replace those transformers. Also, the White House recently issued a national space weather strategy to help strengthen coordination and focus on the naturally-occurring GMDs. [ Jacques Arsenault ] So then, could agencies be doing more or coordinating better? [ Chris Currie ] In short, yes. While agencies like DHS and DOE are not required to implement the commission's recommendations that I mentioned, much of what the commission suggested they do are responsibilities they already have under existing authorities for protecting national critical infrastructure. For example, the commission recommended they assess and prioritize the most critical assets to the grid which is something that the Homeland Security Department and the Energy Department are already required to do. [ Jacques Arsenault ] So given those responsibilities then, what recommendations is GAO making in this report? [ Chris Currie ] We made a few recommendations in this report. First, and maybe the most important recommendation, was for the Department of Homeland Security to identify who within the Department is responsible for EMPs. And then communicate this to its federal partners. We also recommended though that DHS use existing risk assessment programs to collect information on electromagnetic risks. And this is important because you know this can help determine the likely impacts of an EMP, which will help determine if additional actions are needed. Lastly, we recommended that the federal agencies coordinate with industry partners to identify R&D priorities and help identify potential mitigation strategies. [ Jacques Arsenault ] Finally, for those of us living on the grid, what would you say is the bottom line of this report? [ Chris Currie ] Well, it's a natural reaction to be very scared when you hear the details of an EMP and their potential effects. Life without power for a long period of time could get really, really bad. However, this is just one of the threats we face and there are many, many others. We face threats from severe weather, traditional terrorist attacks, and things like that. So what's most important is that DHS really weigh the risks of an EMP versus these other risks and take appropriate action. [ Background Music ] [Narrator:] To learn more, visit GAO.gov and be sure to tune in to the next episode of GAO's Watchdog Report for more from the congressional watchdog, the U.S. Government Accountability Office.