DH B5 DOD Misc Fdr- Stapled Emails Re DOD NORAD Withholding Docs- After Action Reports- Hijack Exercises

8/14/2019 DH B5 DOD Misc Fdr- Stapled Emails Re DOD NORAD Withholding Docs- After Action Reports- Hijack Exercises

1/5

Page 1 o f2

Dana HydeFrom: Dana Hyde [dhyde 9-11commission.gov]Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 9:48 AMTo: [email protected]; [email protected]: John Farmer; John Azzarello; Miles Kara; Dan Marcus; Steve DunneSubject: FW: DoD Follow Up & Outstanding Documents

Pat/Janet:I amforwarding the email I sent on September 8, 2003, which highlights the documents as of that date that wereoutstanding or required follow-up. I spoke to Janet this morning about Item #2 - thecontinuation of theNEADStranscript. As you know, we are scheduled to visit NEADS next week. Our experience with the FAA hasunderscored the importance of having all relevant documents before flying out to various locations to interviewrelevant personnel. Because of the Commission's deadline, we do not have time to revisit these facilities onceadditional information is discovered. I understand you have some technical difficulties with respect to thistranscript, but please understand that we asked for it (for the second time) 5 weeks ago; I would hate to have todelay our NEADS trip once again because it is not available. As I informed Janet, transcribing the tapes for anadditional hour should be sufficient to go forward with our interviews, although, consistent with our requests toother agencies, wewould like the final transcript to be continued until 1200.Also, at your earliest convenience, please provide us with an update on where we stand on the other items.Thank you. Dana.

Original MessageFrom: Miles Kara [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, October 20, 2003 9:34 AMTo: [email protected]: FW: DoD Follow Up & Outstanding DocumentsPer requestOriginal MessageFrom: Dana Hyde [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, September 08, 2003 12:00 PMTo: [email protected]: [email protected]; 'Miles Kara'; [email protected];[email protected]: DoD Follow Up & Outstanding DocumentsPat-Per our conversation Friday, outlined below are items that are either outstanding or a follow-upfrom documents we have received thus far. Thank you for your assistance if following up onthese matters. Please let me know if you have any questions. Dana(1) NORAD After-Action Report(s) (Request No. 1-10): In response to this request(according to the DoD index), DoD has submitted Documents #NCT0016262-16359 andDocument #11166-11171(although this document may be mislabeled). We are seekingfrom NORAD ALL documents that could be fairly characterized as an after-action report.This would include all documents that summarize, analyze, evaluate or discuss NORAD'sresponse to the events of 9/11. It would also include all interviews with NORAD personnelthat were involved in NORAD's air defense operation on 9/11. If there are no further

2/17/2004


2/5

Page 2 of 2

documents from NORAD that fit this description, please confirm it to us in writing.(2) NEADS Transcript (Document #NCT0000049-0000130): This document is a transcriptfrom multiple voice recorders at NEADS on 9/11. For whatever reason, the transcript cutsoff around 10:15 am. Our question is whether the tapes and/or transcript continuedrecording after 10:15 am, and if not, why not. If there are recordings beyond this point, wewould like to receive a tape and/or transcript of them.(3) Col. Scott Materials (Request No. 1-10): We spoke to Janet about this issue Fridayafternoon and this morning. I understand that Col. Scott faxed her some materials over theweekend which we will be receiving soon. We'll await the delivery of those documents toassess whether this request has been completed.(4) Atlantic City Fighters: In the documents we have received thus far we have seen variouscryptic references to fighters that NORAD may have scrambled (or attempted to) out ofAtlantic City. Before requesting all of the documents from Atlantic City, we are looking toanswer the basic question, "Did NORAD call upon fighters and/or other assets from AtlanticCity on the morning of 9/11?" If so, then I will formulate a request for the Atlantic City

documents we need. If not, then we will simply seek clarification of this issue in ourinterviews.(5) Rules of Engagement (Request No. 1-5): This request asked for the NORAD ROEconcerning hijackings in effect on 9/11/0. We neglected to ask for (and need) the ROEs ineffect post-9/11. Specifically, the New York Times and other papers reported onSeptember 27, 2001 ("A Nation Challenged: The Military; Generals Given Power to OrderDowning of Jets") that "President Bush had authorized two midlevel Air Force generals toorder commercial airliners that threaten American cities shot down..." We are seeking alldocuments related to this change in the Ru les of Engagem ent, as well any subsequentchanges that may have occurred since that time. Please let me know if you have anyquestions regarding this request.(6) Call Lists for Various Conferences (Request Nos. 1-3,1-1): At the NMCC briefing welearned about the various conferences that took place on 9/11 (i.e. Significant EventConference and Air Threat Conference), as well as the new conferences that have beendeveloped since then (Domestic Event and Domestic Threat). We are seeking the JCS listof standing participants for these calls, both now and in effect on 9/11. That is, we needthe list of agencies (and numbers) that would have been called on 9/11 to participate in theSignificant Event and Air Threat Conferences, as well as the call list today for the DomesticEvent and Threat Conferences.(7) NORAD Exercises (Request Nos. 11&12): In these requests we asked for the

"intelligence scenarios" and "briefing papers" for various DoD and NORAD exercises. Weare in the process of reviewing these materials but it appears that we are lacking some ofthe "intelligence scenarios" for specific exercises; if that turns out to be the case I will followup with you on specifics. However, we also need (and neglected to specifically request)the "lessons learned" from these exercises.Thank you again. Dana

2/17/2004


3/5

Page 1 of 1

Dana HydeFrom: Aly, Stewart, Mr, DoD OGC [[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 2:22 PMTo: Dana Hyde; Aly, Stewart, Mr, DoD OGC; Downs, Pat, Ms, OSD-USDICc: Kevin Shaeffer; John Farmer; Miles Kara; John Farmer; Steve DunneSubject: RE: DoD Request No. 4, Item 11

Thanks for sending this in writing. I will forward it on and either identify documents that respond or someone wh ocan speak with authority. Acco rding to the tasking documents NOR DA sent me, this question wa s sent out fromNORAD to its subordinate units, but I will confirm this.Original MessageFrom: Dana Hyde [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Tuesday, November 18, 2003 10:26To: [email protected]; 'Downs, Pat, Ms, OSD-USDI1Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected];[email protected]; 'Steven Dunne'

Subject: DoDRequest No. 4, Item 11Stu/Pat:A s I ment ioned t o S t u t h i s m o r n i n g , i n o u r conversation w i t h M r . M erchant F r iday afternoon w e i n q u i r e dabout N O R A D ' s record keeping of exercise related documents p r i o r to 1998. T h e context for t h i sdiscussion was the Comm iss ion 's Reques t N o. 4 , I t e m #11 ("11. Intelligence scenarios an d brief ingpapers for all national military exercises, since January 1993, in w h i c h a p lane w as hijackedand/or used as a weapon an d wh ich involved any of the fol lowing D oD en ti ti es : N O R A D , JCS,an d Spec ial Op era tions Com m and (SO CO M ).") an d D o D ' s Respon se at Bates #239952-53 ("Weonly keep archives going back to 1998.").Mr. Merchant stated that his office only keeps computer\hard drive information related to NORADexercises dating back to roughly 1998, how ever other N OR AD components (i.e., Regions or Sectors)may keep exercise information dating back further than 1998. He was familiar w ith our request (above)and mentioned that NO RA D may have only checked at HO for such documents, and not gone out to theRegionsXSectors.Our question are (1) did NOR AD search all the R egions\Sectors for documents responsive to thisrequest, and (2) if so, are they any other documents responsive to this request that have yet to beproduced to the Commission? In other words, does the Commission have all documents responsive toRequest #11? I note that the Item is marked "green" on the DoD Index, and thus up until now weassumed it was complete.Thank you for your assistance in tracking this down. Dana

2/17/2004


4/5

Page 1 of2

Dana HydeFrom: Kevin ShaefferSent: Tuesday, February 17, 2004 2:15 PMTo: Dana HydeSubject: FW: NORAD: The "after action" game

Regards,Kevin"Never Forget"

Original MessageFrom: Dana Hyde [mailto:[email protected]]Sent: Monday, November 17, 2003 11:14AMTo: John Farmer; John Azzarello;Miles Kara; Kevin ShaefferSubject: NORAD: The "after action" gameAl-Miles and I participated in a phone conference with Stu Aly (DoDGC Office) andPunch Moulton (NORAD GC Office) Friday afternoon. The call was arranged atStu's recommendation and mostly involved Punch reciting his and NORAD'scommitment to get us everything we need. They provided us with an update onthe NEADS taping - one tape with very little data on it is reportedly in direcondition and being shipped to the manufacturer forduplication - while the bulkof the tapes should be in by today or tomorrow. As Miles reported, NEADS willbe creating transcripts of the tapes, but this process will take some time(thetapes will be produced by the subpoena deadline, with the possible exception ofthe aforementioned tape reel that I was told is 95% blank air). The one area ofthe conversation that concerned me related to our request for after actionreports.As you know, we have been round and round with NORAD on this issue. Priorto Stu being involved in our process, I spoke to Janet and Pat numerous timesabout what we meant by "after action" review (SeeRequest No. 1, Item 10).Indeed, because I felt uncomfortable that DoD (andparticularly NORAD) wasnarrowly defining the term, I wrote to Pat Downs on September 8 and offered thisfurther clarification:

(1) NORAD After-Action Report(s) (Request No. 1-10):... We are seekingfrom NORAD ALL documents that could be fairly characterized as an after-action report. This would include all documents that summarize, analyze,evaluate or discuss NORAD's response to the events of 9/11. It would also

2/17/2004


5/5

Page 2 o f2

include all interviews with NORAD personnel that were involved inNORAD's air defense operation on 9/11... ."In our conversation Friday I reiterated this notion (although I did not have theexact words in front of me). I said two things: first, it was my understanding thatDoD guidance (and probably more than one) specifically defines what is meantby an after action review, so that should be the first touchstone for interpretation;second, what we are essentially looking for is anything that evaluates orassesses the performance of the air defense operation on 9/11. As I listenedcarefully I once again heard that there is no "formal" after action review and thateach service is different so NORAD'sAAR may not look like the Navy's AAR orthe Air Force's etc. Bottom line - I got the distinct sense that we were involved ina word game, and that NORAD is trying to find a way to construe our requestsuch that some universe of materials does not fit the bill.What to do? I think we need to clarify the issue in writing to the DoD OGC,particularly in light of the subpoena. I don't know if the language above isappropriate, or if we should refer to DoD guidance (or perhaps do both) but Ithink we should have something formal on the record. How broadly we want togo and the specific language we use is important. There have to be documentsin NORAD that assess the performance that day, but maybe they are not in theform of an AAR. For example, the forms that personnel at NEADs filled out andplaced in folders. If there was some synthesis of that information (which youwould think there was) in my mind that would clearly qualify as an AAR. Whetherthe underlying forms constitute an AAR is more open to interpretation, and agood example of the situation that our clarifying language should address.In short, I'm looking for concrete suggestions on what our clarifying languageshould be, and how to approach the issue. Thanks - Dana

2/17/2004