Radio Problems Could Create a Deadly Silence
|
|
|
|
Radio problems could create a deadly silence By Michele
Marcucci, Sean Holstege, Ian Hoffman and Troy Anderson Staff writers
When terrorists slammed American Airlines Flight 11 into the World Trade Center's North Tower, a fireball of jet fuel shot out of the lobby elevator shaft, sending a commander of the Port Authority police diving for cover. Twelve minutes later, he radioed for evacuation of the entire World Trade Center. But his order never reached the towers' security or other emergency officials. Fractured and overloaded communications kept commanders from knowing where rescuers were and what was happening factors in why 421 rescuers died. "People watching on TV certainly had more knowledge of what was happening a hundred floors above us than we did in the lobby," Assistant Chief Peter Hayden of the Fire Department of New York told the 9/11 Commission. The events that day echoed what had happened in the 1993 World Trade Center bombing, the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing and the 2002 D.C.-area sniper attacks: Incompatible or inadequate communications slowed emergency response and were a major factor in the loss of life. Three years later, most California counties and cities are still using different radios, different airwaves and different coded languages. In Los Angeles County, officials have spent $6 million to buy equipment that gives some public safety agencies a limited ability to talk to one another in the event of a terrorist attack. Sales tax sought Sheriff Lee Baca and many other elected officials hope voters will approve a half-percent sales tax increase in November that would allow the purchase of a state-of-the-art "interoperability' system so first responders can talk to one another in a disaster. "The radios are not even built in the same universe," says John Miller, bureau chief of the Los Angeles Police Department's Critical Incident Management Bureau. "We have high band, low band, UHF, digital and analog. This (interoperability system) could turn those different radio bands into a party line that speaks one language." The inability to talk to one another in a terrorist attack is one of many homeland security problems identified in an investigation of California's homeland security efforts since 9-11. The investigation by the Oakland Tribune and the Daily News of Los Angeles, sister newspapers to the Press-Telegram, found that a disproportionate share of the billions in federal homeland security grants has been sent to states with few or no terrorist targets. In California, rural cities and counties received exponentially more money per capita than the Los Angeles region and Bay Area, where most terrorist targets are located. Thanks to the infusion of funds, California's public safety agencies are better equipped, but not necessarily for terrorism. Numerous cities and counties have wasted funds on purchases unrelated to terrorism, and officials have spent more time buying the latest counterterrorism gadgets than training how to prevent or respond to a terrorist attack. Local officials say they are working to solve many of the problems but are hamstrung by a lack of funds, manpower and resistance in Washington, D.C., and Sacramento. Los Angeles Mayor James Hahn says the entire Southern California region has received less federal homeland security money per capita than Wyoming. "It seems like it's politics as usual," Hahn says. "We're in a war with terrorists. This is just not another federal program. We ought to be assigning resources where we think our critical infrastructure needs to be protected." Leaders consulted Hahn says he and Police Chief William Bratton have spoken to President George W. Bush, Homeland Security Secretary Tom Ridge and members of Congress. "We get sympathy on the issue, but we've not seen the action that is required," Hahn says. "Ridge has made several speeches that he agrees that homeland security funding ought to be going to the nation's big cities. But what happens is, when they go to the Hill, they go along to get along. And the powerful senators back there, and committee chairs, like the formula the way it is." Bratton plans to lobby for more homeland security funds for the city during a trip this week to Washington. "We've always expressed concern with the funding formulas," Bratton says. "In areas that have a high concentration of terrorist targets, such as Los Angeles County, the funding formulas really do not treat us in an appropriate way." Bratton says the LAPD has received millions of dollars to improve its preparedness and response to terrorist attacks, but the money has come in one-time chunks for purposes such as training and equipment, rather than ongoing streams to pay the salaries of officers working the counter-terrorism beat. "One thing you don't get money for is personnel," Hahn says. "That's the big thing I hear from most mayors: 'It's nice to have money to buy equipment, but you need someone to operate it." "So far, Congress has been resistant to provide money to hire new bodies. Until that changes, it will be a big burden for local governments across the country." Personnel emphasized Baca and other officials say the sales tax measure, which would raise $560 million annually in the county, would allow law enforcement agencies to hire more than 5,000 officers and sheriff's deputies, vastly expanding the county's ability to prevent and respond to a terrorist attack. "The thing that is hanging out there is money for training," Baca says. "We just don't have enough, even with the federal dollars coming down. A lot of officers need more training in the type of attacks that could occur and what would be the most appropriate tactical response." Amy Zegart, a terrorism expert and assistant professor with the School of Public Affairs at the University of California, Los Angeles, says fixing the problems has a lot to do with having the courage to use common sense. "We will spend ourselves into bankruptcy if we continue the way we are going," Zegart says. "We can never really seal ourselves off from terrorist attacks. The challenge for officials is to figure out how to get the most protection for every dollar we can. And that means setting priorities at the national, state and local levels." The federal government has spent 20 times more money on aviation security than on port security since 9/11, Zegart says. "Twenty times more, even though global shipping accounts for an enormous component of our global economy, even though 95 percent of foreign trade is moved by ship and only 5 percent of shipping containers entering our country are inspected." Detectors needed Dr. Irwin Redlener, director of the National Center for Disaster Preparedness at Columbia University Mailman School of Public Health, says the ports need more radiological detectors that can pick up a portable nuclear bomb or "dirty bomb' materials. "There is a certain threshhold above which it's not worth trying to sneak stuff in a cargo hold," Redlener says. "We are currently below that threshold. If you can screen 10 percent of the containers coming in, that's enough deterrent to make it infeasible for a terrorist to smuggle a nuclear weapon. We are somewhere down around 5 percent. "The painful part of this is that to get from where we are now to the right threshhold is not that expensive. It's in the billion dollar range. It's a matter of choices." Randy Parsons, the special agent-in-charge of the FBI's Counterterrorism Unit in Los Angeles, says the FBI's Joint Terrorism Task Force operates at the ports and is working more closely than ever with port officials and the U.S. Coast Guard. "It's no secret that it would be a logical target because of the tremendous amount of cargo," he says. Parsons says terrorists are interested in obtaining suitcase-sized nuclear bombs, but experts differ on whether terrorists have the knowledge and training to set one off. In regard to developing communication systems that will allow first responders to talk to one another, officials across the nation have expressed frustration. "We're very slow off the gate here," says Glen Corbett, an associate professor of fire sciences at John Jay College of the State University of New York and a New Jersey fire captain. "They're relying on the state and local guys to handle it, and the Department of Homeland Security needs to play a much more active role." The Bush administration and state officials have encouraged local agencies to forge common radio systems. But federal and state officials have not offered a strategy for compatible radios, even though California has a storied history of disaster and communication problems. Deadly silence Firefighters have burned, police officers have been killed by friendly fire and civilians have died because public-safety agencies could not talk to one another. Federal and state officials also haven't decided what those systems should do or look like, leaving local agencies uncertain about venturing tens of millions of dollars on new radios, repeaters and towers. "We're trying to get a handle on that and figure out what our goals are," says Gary Winuk, California's chief deputy director for homeland security since 2001. Michele R. Marcucci, Sean Holstege and Ian Hoffman are reporters for the Oakland Tribune, while Troy Anderson is a reporter for the Daily News. Posted 9/10/2004
|
|
|
