creating another operational unit in government that will then work with TTIC?

Mr. ENGLAND. Senator, I am not quite sure what you mean by an operational unit. We will have a separate analysis center to interpret the data that takes place outside in the TTIC. So the purpose of the TTIC, I mean, the benefit to us is that we rapidly stand up to a capability where we are part of the TTIC, so we participate. Think of it as part of the Department of Homeland Security, just like it is a part of all the other agencies working together with access to all the data. So we will have all the access that all the other agencies have to intelligence data.

We will have some additional analysis people and assessment people that are not in the TTIC that help relate that data to our infrastructure and also, frankly, to be able to discuss it with myself, Secretary Ridge, and other people.

Also, by the way, the question about dissemination of data, we do have to have processes in place to make sure that we do disseminate data to State and local first responders, and we are working with FBI in that regard right now. That is a very critical part of this also, to understand what data needs to be passed down throughout America.

Senator COLEMAN. Again, while I strongly support and understand the importance of trying to make sure we have a more efficient sharing of information and analysis of information, I would just again then raise the question, we have FBI out there. They do the analysis. We have CIA out there. Please, please, please let us make sure that we do not create another layer of intelligence analysis. Certainly you and Secretary Ridge need to have information analyzed brought to you so you can respond, but I just raise that concern again.

Mr. ENGLAND. You are absolutely right, sir. I can assure you that the intent is just the opposite, to make sure we take full utilization of the TTIC.

Senator COLEMAN. Following up then again with the responsibility that you and Secretary Ridge have to analyze-to receive information of the threat analysis and then articulate that to the public, is it the sense that-I am trying to understand its function here. Is the TTIC the agency then that will provide the underlying information and you then take that information and then come to a conclusion that we are at yellow or at orange and here is where we go from here?

Mr. ENGLAND. That will be one of the fundamental analysis base that we will use to assess the threats; that is correct, Senator. So that is the all-source data that will be available to us, and again, to the other agencies. So we will analyze that data, have full access to that data, and we will help assess that data along with the other agencies.

We will analyze, but largely we will assess. That is, what is the effect of that data on infrastructure and across America? What is the effect of that data? So when people talk about an analysis center, in my judgment it is really both analysis and assessment. We will do more assessment, less analysis, but we will have analysis people located within the center.

Senator COLEMAN. Thank you, Mr. Secretary. Finally, we are entering these are works in progress. We have entered a strange new world, unfortunately, post-September 11. Though we always like to take pride in our ability to do things the best, and I believe that is true about America, there are certainly other countries that have been dealing with these types of situations longer than we have. For us so often it was looking at foreign terrorist threats and now we have to understand and reflect upon the domestic terrorist threats, and the integration of foreign sources and domestic sources. Are there other models out there? Are there folks, Israel, or some other places that have dealt with this before, that are helping us shape this, or is this simply kind of a whole cloth concept that we have put together? Mr. Wiley from the CIA or anybody on the panel?

Mr. WILEY. Senator, there certainly are models and Israel, the United Kingdom, our partners in Western Europe to one degree or another have attempted to do this. No one, I think, has faced quite the challenge that we do in terms of scale; the size, the openness of our society are all things that contribute to a different environment. But both through the Intelligence Community, and I know the law enforcement community, my friend Ambassador Black in his exchanges, we are very much interested in drawing lessons from others and incorporating that in all facets of it, and I am sure the same is true for the Department of Homeland Security.

Mr. D'AMURO. I will just add to that, if I could, Senator. We have a very robust liaison program with a lot of different intelligence and law enforcement services across the world. The United States poses a unique situation as Winston has said. We have a Constitution. We operate within the Constitution. I think the beauty of the system that we have, in particular talking about the FBI, is that we have both the intelligence tools and the law enforcement tools in the same bag.

I do not mean to go back to Buffalo again but it is a prime example of how we are able-that was a pure intelligence collection operation. When we learned that one individual was overseas, we were able to dispatch individuals to interview this person. And when we learned through that interview that there were legal statements, legal problems with some of the statements that he made, that actual crimes had taken place, the Buffalo division within 24 hours was able to act very quickly and round up those individuals that we had under our intelligence investigation, and get them off the street and prevent a possible terrorist event.

So the beauty of having both the intelligence tools and the law enforcement tools in an organization that has operated within the Constitution, I think, is one of the benefits of our systems.

Senator COLEMAN. Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chairman. Chairman COLLINS. Thank you, Senator Coleman. Senator Levin. Senator LEVIN. Thank you, Madam Chairman.

My major concern has been and continues to be, where will the principal responsibility for analyzing foreign intelligence rest? This has been a subject that Senator Coleman and I think others have made reference to today, and I believe our Chairman, as a matter of fact, specifically asked that question about the relationship between the CTC and TTIC. I am not satisfied with what I under

stand the answers were. I am sorry I could not be here to hear them in person but the report of those answers leaves me very unsatisfied.

It is a huge problem. There is a lot of information that we received prior to September 11 that was not analyzed, that fell through cracks. If we are going to diffuse responsibility instead of fuse it, we are going to have confusion instead of focused responsibility to analyze and I use that word precisely-foreign intelligence. Not domestic intelligence yet. I want to talk about intelligence.

Now on January 17-and by the way, one other thing: We will be lucky if we do this well once. We have got 17,000 pieces of intelligence coming into the CTC a week; 17,000 pieces of intelligence. The CTC produces 300 outgoing intelligence products a month, and they have got almost 300 analysts.

We have got to understand precisely the relationship between TTIC and CTC. We cannot blur that responsibility. We have got to focus it so that we can hold folks accountable if there are failures. Otherwise, CTC will say that was a TTIC responsibility, and TTIC will say that was a CTC responsibility, and we cannot have that situation.

I asked Secretary Ridge, on January 17 when he was before the Committee, the following question, will the principal responsibility to analyze foreign intelligence from all sources remain in the CTC? His answer was, that is correct.

Now I think the statute itself is unclear on that issue. The homeland security statute is unclear because it creates a new Undersecretary for Information Analysis and Infrastructure Protection inside the Homeland Security Department and gives that Undersecretary the responsibility to assess, which is what Deputy Secretary England just made reference to, receive, and analyze law enforcement information, intelligence information and other information from agencies of the Federal Government, State and local government agencies, and to integrate such information in order to identify and assess the nature and scope of the terrorist threats.

Given that language, I asked Secretary Ridge whether or not there is then confusion. Where is the principal responsibility to analyze those 17,000 pieces of foreign intelligence that come in every week? Is it going to be CTC or is it going to be Homeland Security? Now I ask the same question about TTIC because now we not only have a CTC which apparently is going to proceed unencumbered that is supposed to analyze all foreign intelligence from all sources, and has FBI sitting there, and has the Coast Guard sitting there, and all the other agencies at the CTC. And now we are going to have Homeland Security that has a statutory responsibility to analyze and now a TTIC responsibility, apparently in the CIA, to analyze what seems to me to be the same information coming from all sources as the CTC is analyzing.

We have got to be clear in statute and in practice where this responsibility lies and I repeat what I said, if we do this well once we will be very lucky. This is a huge challenge to put together 17,000 pieces of intelligence a month that come in, and to analyze it, and to connect the dots. The idea that we might do it twice or three times to me is wrong in terms of accountability and it is

wrong in terms of responsibility and it is wrong in terms of practicality.

Now let me start with you, Deputy Secretary England. Is the principal responsibility to analyze foreign intelligence going to remain in the CTC?

Mr. ENGLAND. Yes, sir.

Senator LEVIN. Then how is that different from the responsibility which we are giving to TTIC to do the analysis of all intelligence, foreign and domestic apparently? How is that different?

Mr. ENGLAND. Senator, we will basically collate resources so that all the data is available in one place.

Senator LEVIN. Is that TTIC or CTC?

Mr. ENGLAND. The TTIC itself will have access to all the source data.

Senator LEVIN. I know they will have access. Who is responsible to analyze all this intelligence coming in? Will it be TTIC or CTC? Mr. ENGLAND. My judgment is it will be CTC for the foreign intelligence. For domestic intelligence it will be the FBI. But in this facility we will then have people available with access to this data, access to conclusions that we can then analyze further, if necessary, because of data we may know in terms of homeland security, threats to America, whatever. So we would have in that facility access to ask additional questions, understand further, make additional assessments, etc. So it is a resource available for our analysts to be part of it, and also our people to assess that

Senator LEVIN. Wait a minute. For our analyst to be who is our?

Mr. ENGLAND. Department of Homeland Security will have some analysts in this facility, so we can understand the data in terms of our mission, which is to assess that data relative to threats to America.

Senator LEVIN. I understand the assessment and where it belongs and where it is. I just want to be real clear. What you just said is, principal responsibility to analyze information, intelligence relative to foreign intelligence will remain in the CTC; domestic intelligence will remain in the FBI. The reports from both of those entities will come to TTIC to do whatever it wants to do with the reports that come in from both CTC and from FBI; is that correct? Mr. ENGLAND. That is correct. That is my understanding.

Senator LEVIN. I think that is fine if it is clear, but I think we all have to be real clear now on where that responsibility lies and I would like to see either an executive order, or I would like to see a decision by the agencies involved, a joint decision placing the principal responsibility exactly where you said. And if it is not there, where is it? We cannot have unfocused location of the analysis responsibility of foreign intelligence and domestic intelligence. We cannot blur it. We cannot duplicate it. We will be making a tragic error if we do. Instead of fusing we will be confusing, and I think that is

Mr. ENGLAND. Senator, you and I agree on this. This is not an issue at all. I concur completely with your approach. I believe my colleagues do also. That is the approach that we are using for TTIC, so I do not believe we have any disagreement here at all.

Senator LEVIN. TTIC becomes a customer essentially. It has got the ability to do additional analysis, I understand, and it has a right to access anything it wants, I understand. But it is basically a customer of CTC and FBI when it takes the reports of foreign intelligence from CTC, domestic intelligence from FBI, fuses those reports, does whatever it wants with those reports, and then makes its own assessments. If it wants additional analysis it has the power to do additional analysis on its own. It can, I presume, task FBI or CTC to do additional analysis.

Mr. ENGLAND. Yes.

Senator LEVIN. But the principal responsibility is where you just identified. Is that your understanding as well, Mr. D'Amuro?

Mr. D'AMURO. Yes, Senator, it is. I will try to explain it real quickly and I know Mr. Wiley may want to jump in on this. The mission of the TTIC is to fuse threat information-to provide onestop analytical products for threat analysis to law enforcement, the Intelligence Community, everyone. It is an interagency function. All the agencies are at the table to include DOD, Homeland Security, the FBI, and the CIA. They will fuse that product and provide an analytical product with respect to threat analysis.

Mr. WILEY. I think Mr. D'Amuro has it exactly right, Senator. I think that, Senator, before you came in I said that one of the things about TTIC is that our intention is to build on those things that have been working well. The close collaboration between collectors and analysts, both within the agency at CIA and between CIA and the FBI, because I think that is one of the things that has been working well. We want to do precisely what you are talking about, is bring the analysis of foreign intelligence, whether it is collected overseas or collected inside the United States, together in a seamless fashion, just as you are saying. TTIC will be in a position-by virtue of having CIA people, FBI people, other Intelligence Community people, DHS people together in a position to do that. But I cannot be all things on day one, and will have to

Senator LEVIN. No, not on day one. Is its goal to duplicate CTC?
Mr. WILEY. Its goal is not to duplicate CTC.

Senator LEVIN. It is to take the product of CTC and FBI and to then act-to put those products

Mr. WILEY. Over time, Senator, I believe that a TTIC, if we make it work right, will absorb some of those analytic production responsibilities from CTC and from the FBI to create that single fused product that we have been talking about.

Senator LEVIN. Is that the ultimate goal?

Mr. WILEY. Yes, sir, I believe so.

Senator LEVIN. That is different then from what I was just told.
Mr. WILEY. I think it should be.

Senator LEVIN. I am not saying it should not. By the way, it is fine with me, so long as it is clear. But now that is very different from what Secretary England said.

Mr. ENGLAND. Senator, it is going to take time for this to evolve. This is still-I mean, we now have, I believe, a working concept, a structure of how we can go forward, greatly improve from where we are today. How this evolves I think is another question. We are a long way to get to that "evolutionary stage" and we are going to have it takes a period of time just to stand up this capability. So