UNCLASSIFIED

COMMISSION SENSITIVE

~.
MEMORANDUM FOR THE RECORD

Event: Interview wittd l··(1)QT OIG)

Date of Interview: Friday, November 7, ·2063···· . -v-.
""'--.

.....

:::::;;:U::
Date of MFR: November 21, 2003

~~?~\\:.
S . I N"""!9/11 Persorial Privacy

de one /:,:>;:".: ..

Location: Via Telephone - GSA Col1fetenc~.;R9oin.../ ".

Participants _Non-Commissi911f / /.I~om~{' ; 'cei'i~;-;'i""""!o'-'\. ======:b
participants _ Commissioii:Dana:Wyd~, Miles.
•• ,/ .-::/ ,.:
tara, JoM Aziar~lo :' i ;':
\.','
\. \. ....

_________________
-::-:.~::.~-----------.~.~;~.-------------.7'.::------------~/-------~----?------j~..:."\~\::-----------
, lWalked into ~~iiJI office in Atlanta, GA and saidthat ~e hruHrif<mnation
relevant to the COIl}~ission's work. ¥ agent from the Atlanta office (na1n~?}.,phoned.
Kevin Shaeffer?-.~· eventually Te~ 8 was put in contact witli \i: I \'"\....
I ~iat~that he is an auditor with the Insp~tor General's ~ffice at th~·~~artment
ofTransportati?n. He is currently stationed in] Z . Fr?9' tol I I
D'he was with the DOT:Ins ector General's:office 1nWa:shln ,on D.C. Before
joining DOT in (When
asked ifhe retired fromthere he stated, "I didn't get to retire.")

In 2001 the IG~s 9-frtce initiated an audit regarding the FAA.' s decision to decommission
its long range ~.riinary radars. I ./Ian FAA employee Air Traffic Services, i*
was reportedly involved in the decision to/de~ommission the radars.) The IG study was
to look at the proposal from a perspective of cost effectiveness, safety and scheduling.
I lWasbrought into the project as'a technical expert, because of his knowledge of
radar systems. The proj ect manager w~ Don Pierra, who has since left the FAA and is
with ATF in Tampa, Florida. I tNaS. involved in the project, and Alexis
Stefani, the Assistant Inspector General
:
for auditing,
"\.
was in charge of it. :

At the start of the projectl I'~otfrom the FAA

a CD that showed long range radar
coverage at 5,000, 10,000 and 15,000 feet. The"~Cp showed that, i~ the area west of D.C.
(on the West Virgina/Ohio border), there were not'gaps in radar coverage above 15,000
feet, but above 10,000 feet there were gaps in cov,~rage.1 [also obtained from the
FAA Command Center a map of typical air traffic-routes. Putting the two pieces of
information together, he concluded that there was alot of traffic going through areas
where there were primary radar gaps. If an aircraft 'lQstits beacon code, then passenger
safety could be in danger because of the gaps in priniary
\ - coverage.
.

9/11 Working-level
Employee
COMMISSION SENSITIVE, 1
UNCLASSIFIED
 /:.)~
9/11 Per S 0 na 1 Pr i va c y
UNCLAssIFmri//\\\:.> ..
CO:M:MISSIQN··SENSiTNE .......
1// / / ~.....
~,' ,::;.' ! : ',', '

Ibe. did~ot return to work

immediately thereafter (Dm: u,Jlc1e'arho~Jon9::ii wb out) .. ~\ .
: ' ....

i~e
" "

Just after 9/11 th~re~!IS a hearingohCapibll Hill whert ~iibe~an questioned

Monte Belger.and Ken Meade about theevents of9/11.:: \. ......said'that Mr. Meade
did not 19low specifics ofthe,IG audit ¢td the radar/gap issue, ut after the hearing Mr.
c::::JWent to his boss and said they should tell Congress about the..gaps in-radar
coverage. ..../ ,/:,:::/ ! r \ ....\ '. \ ...

In April of 2002 th~~was a decision meeting wiui Alexis Stefum regarding tI1eproject
report.l ~'aid that the rtport was going to/ conclude that because of cost.the long
range radars could be deco~.issioned. At the meeting Ms. Stefani expressed her....,
concern that if too much detail were included in the report it would have to be classified.
For whatever reason, the report was never issued. (DJH: ~c1ear\why) , \--.
:/ ....
: ! \ "

FAA did not addres~:·i~.s:long range radar gap Pfoblems.

.... .... !
controller' is: the brother-in-law of a c~-worker 0
""'--;""':"'The In((y/bontroller to1 . ecently tha-·t..... ---..&;.;;;;;,;;,;;;.;.;;.a.--.i~-

unacceptable. .........
, .
r----If~tliined the original FAA CD showing the long range coverage and gaps.

I Iprefers not to reveal his name. However, he stated that he would expose his
name and risk losing his job in order to avoid another aircraft disaster,' //

DJH: Ifwe pursue this matter, we will probably need to speak again t~ land
clarify his view on (1) why the report was never issued, and (2) whowithin the FAA was
aware - prior to 9/11 - of these radar gaps. .'

9/11 Law Enforcement

Sensitive

COMMISSION SENSITIVE 2
UNCLASSIFIED