Military Officer - December 2008 - (Page 54) governor, adjutant general, and emergency management director are the state’s operational folks. We create a transparent level of operations between the two. In most cases we locate all elements together so we’re looking at the same picture, listening to the same communications, talking to each other about the same events. You told Congress that NORTHCOM and NORAD, on average, monitor 12 to 20 potentially dangerous events a day. What kind of events? A tanker truck overturns carrying a chemical with a large potential effect. We would monitor that to determine if it is controllable or if our forces can help. When the [I-35] bridge collapsed in Minnesota [in] fall [2007], we dispatched Navy salvage divers to recover remains of individuals who were killed but unaccounted for. In our air defense role, we look for aircraft not complying with national airspace system rules and regulations. On virtually a daily basis, we scramble two air defense fighters to investigate a target. So far, all violations have involved a mechanical failure or personal buffoonery. But since [Sept. 11, 2001], we cannot afford not to investigate. You monitor other threats, too — to computer networks, water supplies, electrical grids, railroads, and ports? All of that is on our plate. We don’t necessarily have responsibility to enforce any of that. It’s a coalition effort, day in, day out. Forty-five federal agencies live in our headquarters — about 90 people integrated into our operations center and strategic planning. They keep parent organizations abreast of what we’re doing and help us gain their support. For example, port security is the 54 MILITARY OFFICER DECEMBER 2008 responsibility, day to day, of the Coast Guard within DHS. NORTHCOM is responsible for negating the threat of mining our ports. So we work together. Is this integration of 45 federal agencies duplicated anywhere else? As far as I know, we are the only place where we bring all of those [agencies] together to anticipate threats and be able to do something about them. You’ve testified to the importance of maintaining “global situational awareness.” How does NORTHCOM do that? Our partners mostly operate in an unclassified world. For example, the shipping industry uses its automated information system to report locations of ships, intentions to go to ports, what cargo they carry, and last ports of call. We tie into that and into the Federal Aviation Administration’s air picture, which we augment with military radars and aircraft. This and more allow us to create a common view of areas of responsibility. But we are not where we want to be just yet. We’ve got to get better in the maritime domain, for example. I can see big ships way better than I can see little ships. In the air domain, many of our radars are beginning to age. I don’t necessarily want to replace them with more fixed radar sites but [rather with] a combination of technologies. A more accurate picture at less cost would result from part satellite, part fixed radar, part passive detector, part radio frequency, or over-thehorizon technology. How have missile defense capabilities evolved since President Reagan’s vision of a “Star Wars” system? “Star Wars” was to be an umbrella that would keep us safe from any missile threat. The current missile defense initiative is to provide protection from rogue threats — countries not part of START [Strategic Arms Reduction Treaty] or nonproliferation efforts. It gives us an ability to defend ourselves if one of them chooses to attack with that kind of weapon. Missile interceptors are in different areas of the country, but the [entire] country is covered. We have an operational capability while we’re testing simultaneously. It’s very effective. What influence did the government’s slow response to Hurricane Katrina in 2005 have on NORTHCOM and the job it does today? It’s important to note that within a few days of Katrina, we sent more than 70,000 uniformed military to that operation. It was a huge effort and made a big difference. But the lesson of Katrina was we had not done the level of detailed planning needed to get the best use out of those forces, we had not done the integrated planning to tie federal capability into states’ response, [and] we had not done the planning that could have made forces available sooner. Since Katrina and its “lessonslearned” reports, we have spent an incredible amount of effort building confidence with governors and working on integrated planning with each state along the coast. Every day, I monitor their capability to handle up to a Category 5 hurricane. I can tell you where the shortfalls are and have authority then to say, for example, “They need six helicopters. So I’m going to have them ready to deploy.” Have you personally met with leaders in hurricane-prone states? Yes. We’ve developed a program not unlike [what] overseas commands establish for theater security cooperation. We have 49 states in our area
For optimal viewing of this digital publication, please enable JavaScript and then refresh the page. If you would like to try to load the digital publication without using Flash Player detection, please click here.