Minneapolis Office
300 S. 4th St, Suite 750
Minneapolis, MN 55415
Phone: 612-348-1800
Apprx. Coords- -93.26508 44.97853
Although this doesn't have anything really to do with the Mineapolis office of the SS, I came across an interesting piece of information that I never knew. It comes from Twelfth Public Hearing of the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States, which was held on 17 Jun 2004. Thomas H. Kean was the chairman, but it was the remarks of Monte Belger, former acting deputy administrator for the FAA, that caught my attention. The exchange was about the lack of radar coverage during the 9/11 attacks. Here is an excerpt:
---------------------------------------------------
MS. GORELICK: I'd like to return to the question of the radars. As I understand it, the FAA had made a decision to phase out the primary radar system before 9/11. Is that correct?
MR. BELGER: That's correct.
MS. GORELICK: So if you'd actually implemented that before 9/11, we would have been completely blind with the transponders turned off. We would have had no visibility into where the planes with no transponders on were. Is that correct?
MR. BELGER: Not necessarily. The FAA's plan was to start de-commissioning some of the long-range radars, primarily those where we had some redundant coverage. We didn't plan to do anything that would affect our ability to see aircraft. But fundamentally, for operational financial reasons, and for costs associated for maintaining the old radars and the potential cost to replace those radars, the FAA did have a plan to start decommissioning some of the redundant -- my word -- long-range radars.
I don't believe -- Jeff is a -- Mr. Griffith is more of an expert than I, but I don't believe that any of our plans would have materially impacted that part of the country that we're talking about where these flights were. They're primarily in the more remote areas. But, yes, we did have plans to decommission long-range radars, fundamentally for financial reasons.
MS. GORELICK: So we made a decision at that point to, A, not address the holes in the primary radar system. As the chairman has adverted to, we know that one plane disappeared for a material and deadly period of time. And that decision was based on resources.
At the same time, we have the military carrying out its responsibilities, however one might define them, within the domestic United States, dependent upon -- largely dependent upon the FAA system. Is that right?
MR. BELGER: That's correct.
MS. GORELICK: And what I heard this morning from the military was a little disturbing, which is that we still have not resolved the issue of whose responsibility it is to maintain a radar system that would permit visibility across the country in a fairly effective way.
Can any of you address that question and tell us whether we should not be worried about this?
MR. BELGER: Well, I think it is a worry. I don't know personally the status today, but when I left the FAA, there was an ongoing discussion about who in the government was going to have the responsibility for funding and accountability for maintaining these radars and for purchasing new radars in the future.
You know, the FAA's radars are optimized for FAA's management of air traffic control purposes. The DOD has radars that are optimized for their purposes. Secret Service has radars that are optimized for their purposes and Coast Guard has radars for various reasons -- Customs, I should have said -- I meant Customs rather than Coast Guard -- has radars for their purposes, and they're optimized for their needs.
------------------------------------------------
OSIN- Why does the Secret Service need their own radar system? What are they used for? I'm wondering if they're used for some sort of anti-aircraft or anti-missle defense system. Another interesting item is that the military is dependent on the FAA within domestic routes, even in times of national crisis. Hmmmm.