A program that has quietly monitored Austin’s air for biological threats for decades will continue after uncertainty about federal funding put it at risk, Austin Public Health officials say.
Austin is one of around 30 American cities that participate in the federal BioWatch program, which was launched in response to concerns about biological threats such as anthrax during the first George W. Bush administration. It is intended to detect pathogens that might be released in attempted bioterrorism attacks and give authorities time to mount a response — although some have long criticized the effectiveness of the program.
APH oversees the program locally, monitoring the air for biological threats 365 days a year. It heightens operations during major events like the Austin City Limits music festival and South by Southwest.
“We consider it an early warning system or early event detection system,” said Janet Pichette, chief epidemiologist at Austin Public Health. “The sooner we're able to identify [a threat], the sooner we are able to respond and make sure that we can get medical countermeasures out to people if need be.”
Historically, local BioWatch funding has come from a U.S. Department of Homeland Security grant that passed through the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality. But at a briefing to Travis County commissioners in early June, Pichette said TCEQ had informed APH it would halt operations by the end of May due to a hiccup in federal funding. Some other cities with BioWatch programs had already paused operations due to stalled grants, she said.
“TCEQ hasn’t been paid by the feds since January,” she told commissioners.
Despite the funding pause, APH continued BioWatch monitoring operations during June in hopes that funding would resume.
In July, TCEQ told Austin Public Health that it would resume funding temporarily through August. William Malm with APH said DHS then asked if the local agency would be interested in assuming TCEQ's role as a grant recipient. The program will continue with direct funding from DHS beginning in September, Malm said.
The reason for the change in funding is unclear. Representatives for TCEQ directed KUT News’ questions about the grant to DHS. DHS did not respond to questions about the funding or the future of the BioWatch program.
How effective is BioWatch?
Back in June, Pichette said BioWatch was an important tool in Austin’s defensive toolbox. She believes an early detection of a dangerous pathogen through BioWatch could give the city an extra 24 hours or more to prepare and respond.
"I feel like it's added some level of protection to the community that nobody is aware of," Pichette said.
However, an audit by the Office of the Inspector General for DHS in 2021 found that the BioWatch program had major deficiencies and did not adequately serve as an early warning system for biological attacks.
"I feel like it's added some level of protection to the community that nobody is aware of."Janet Pichette, chief epidemiologist at Austin Public Health
The Bipartisan Commission on Biodefense, an independent agency primarily composed of former government officials, has consistently called for the program to be shuttered and replaced with more effective technology.
“The technology that's under the hood, so to speak, with this program is more than 20 years old at this point,” said Robert Bradley, policy principal with the Bipartisan Commission on Biodefense.
The program’s current technology is only able to test for a handful of known pathogens, according to the OIG’s audit. Bradley also said the technology currently in use requires a human to physically retrieve a filter from the field and bring it back to the lab for testing — a process that can take up to 36 hours. In that time, people may have already begun reporting symptoms if a bioattack had actually taken place, he said.
While BioWatch has detected pathogens over the years, none of those detections have resulted in a credible threat that necessitated evacuation or other public precautions.
“We do think that you could turn off this program tomorrow … and we are no less capable of identifying a biological attack," Bradley said.
Previous administrations have announced intentions to upgrade BioWatch technology, but none of those plans have come to fruition. Bradley said he is unsure what the Trump administration’s plans are for the program, although it has indicated that research and development for biodefense technology will move to DHS’ Science & Technology Directorate. It is currently overseen by the DHS Countering Weapons of Mass Destruction Office, which the administration plans to dissolve.
Bradley said he hopes for a discussion about how best to allocate biodefense funding, including talks with local stakeholders so an upgraded system could be tailored to their needs.
“How can we best support their decision making with this money?” he said. “We're talking about at least 80 million a year that's going toward this program nationwide. How can we leverage these dollars and get the most bang for our buck?”
