the international association; our epidemiologist is past president of her

professional organization.

Read our reports and you will understand what that expertise has meant to the policy recommendations that we have made, especially for the events of

September 11 last year.

In Memoriam

Those attacks continue to carry much poignancy for us, because they created an empty seat at our panel table. At a few minutes after 10 o'clock that morning, Ray Downey, Department Deputy Chief and chief-in-charge of Special Operations Command, Fire Department of the City of New York-the incident commander at the sceneperished in the collapse of the North tower of the New York World Trade Center. Although the impending disaster had to have been obvious to Ray following the prior collapse of the South tower, he knew and those around him knew their duty. With fearless disregard for their own personal safety, focused entirely on saving the lives of others, Ray and his colleagues all stayed at their post, doing their job. The result of that decision, clear now in retrospect, was the rescue of literally thousands of people from those towers. Ray and 342 of his colleagues paid the supreme sacrifice, and all humanity must acknowledge and be eternally grateful for their actions.

Our loss is tempered by the extraordinary opportunity that we had in being informed and counseled by Ray. Ray Downey served as a dedicated member of the Advisory Panel during its initial three-year tenure, bringing insightful first-responders' perspectives and consistently providing invaluable counsel based on his years of training. unequaled leadership, and exceptional experience in the field.

Ray was not only a nationally recognized leader, author, and lecturer on rescue, collapse operations, and terrorism emergency response. He readily responded to the call for help in Oklahoma City, Atlanta, and other disasters outside his home jurisdiction. Frank Keating is better than I at revealing just how much a hero Ray is to Oklahomans as be is to he own city. Ray was never one to talk about his accomplishments. It has only become more widely publicly known since September that Ray was the most decorated member in the entire history of the FDNY-21 times for valor.

Yet, with all of his professional responsibilities, Ray made time to spend with his family, never missing a major school or sporting event of his five children. To the very end, he continued that amazing record with his grandchildren. Two of his sons are now officers of the Fire Department of the City of New York. All five, as well as two of his grandchildren, spoke passionately and eloquently at Ray's memorial service of his total commitment to his family.

It was with great humility but also with great pride that we dedicated our third report to Ray Downey. That report was issued, totally coincidentally or perhaps providentially—on the same day that Ray's memorial service was held, December 15, 2001. On that day, thousands of firefighters and other first responders from New York and from all over the United States stood in frigid weather for more than three hours-in formation-outside Ray's small parish church on Long Island, while Ray's children and grandchildren, his colleagues, his commissioner, his mayor, his governor, and his

president all paid tribute to this remarkable American hero.

Our memorial epitaph to Ray was simple but never more profound:

Ray Downey

Husband... Father... Patriot... Hero...

Friend

And in the final, most courageous moments of his duty-filled life...

Brother to all Humanity

Ray, we salute you; we know that you are still with us in spirit. With a renewed

sense of profound commitment, we pledge on our honor that you and all the other victims

of the attacks will not be forgotten and that the loss we have all suffered will not have been in vain.

Our Continuing Mission

Chairmen and Members, our mission remains urgent and clear: we must continue

to bolster our capability to thwart terrorists wherever and whoever they are. Our collective call is to continue the momentum to secure our homeland and protect our citizens. While there is much more work to be done, I am confident that we will be successful. America's strength is in its people, our leaders, and our collective commitment, especially during times of crisis.

General Observations on Intelligence and Information Sharing

In the course of our deliberations, the Advisory Panel has been guided by several basic observations and assumptions that have helped to inform our conclusions and policy recommendations for improving our preparedness to combat terrorism.

First, all terrorism is "local," or at least will start locally. That fact has a lot to do, in our view, with the emphasis, the priorities, and the allocation of resources to address requirements. September 11 was further proof of that basic assumption.

Second, a major attack anywhere inside our borders will likely be beyond the response capabilities of a local jurisdiction, and will, therefore, require outside help

perhaps from other local jurisdictions, from that jurisdiction's state government or multiple state resources, perhaps from the Federal government, if the attack is significant enough to exhaust other resources. That principle was likewise validated last year.

Given those two factors, our approach to combating terrorism should be from the “bottom up”—with the requirements of State and local response entities foremost in mind.

Based on a significant amount of analysis and discussion, we have been of the view that few major structural or legal changes are required to improve our collective efforts; and that the “first order” challenges are policy and better organization—not simply more money or new technology.

Those principles have guided the panel's deliberations on policy

recommendations throughout its tenure. And they are nowhere more clear than in matters of intelligence and information sharing.

The chart attached to this testimony is an attempt to depict graphically the magnitude of the problem and the necessary interrelationships that must exist among entities at the local, State, and Federal levels. It shows that integration must exist both vertically and horizontally among various functions and the agencies that have responsibilities for executing those functions. That interrelationship clearly identifies just how important intelligence and information sharing really is to the entire process, across all functions, and at all levels. It also emphasizes our view that simplistic categories such as “crisis management" and "consequence management” do not adequately describe the full spectrum of functions or responsibilities. We are pleased that the new National Strategy for Homeland Security has eliminated the use of those terms.

Moreover, the Panel has further refined its discussion to include the critical need for elements of the private sector to be involved in the sharing of information, especially

where their roles have significant national security implications. Those interrelationships are not included in the attached chart.

Our Reports

In our first three reports, the advisory panel has, through its assessments and recommendations, laid a firm foundation for actions that must be taken across a broad spectrum of threats in a number of strategic and functional contexts to address this

problem more effectively.

First Report-Assessing the Threat

The Advisory Panel produced a comprehensive assessment in its first report of the terrorist threat inside our borders, with a focus on chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) weapons. The very thorough analysis in that report can be summarized: The Panel concludes that the Nation must be prepared for the entire spectrum of potential terrorist threats - both the unprecedented higher-consequence attack, as well as the historically more frequent, lesser-consequence terrorist attack, which the Panel believes is more likely in the near term. Conventional explosives, traditionally a favorite tool of the terrorist, will likely remain the terrorist weapon of choice in the near term as well. Whether smaller-scale CBRN or conventional, any such lower-consequence event—at least in terms of casualties or destruction could, nevertheless, accomplish one or more terrorist objectives: exhausting response capabilities, instilling fear, undermining government credibility, or provoking an overreaction by the government. With that in mind, the Panel's report urges a more balanced approach, so that not only higher-consequence scenarios will be considered, but that increasing attention must now also be paid to the historically more frequent, more probable, lesser-consequence attack, especially in terms of policy implications for budget priorities or the allocation of other resources, to optimize local response capabilities. A singular focus on preparing for an event potentially affecting thousands or tens of thousands may result in a smaller, but nevertheless lethal attack involving dozens failing to receive an appropriate response in the first critical minutes and hours.