An Emergency Discussion With Richard Andrews

Dec 19, 2003 12:00 PM, Michael Fickes

           

Ranked among the world’s leading authorities on crisis and emergency management, Richard Andrews currently serves as the principal consultant on emergency management for the National Center for Crisis and Continuity Coordination (NC4). He is also a member of the President’s Homeland Security Advisory Council.
During a career spanning 20 years, Andrews has directed emergency response and recovery efforts for the California Office of Emergency Services, guided the development of the state’s Standardized Emergency Management System, and developed a counter-terrorism plan for California. Along the way, he managed California’s response to 19 national and 24 state disasters, including the Los Angeles Riots, major earthquakes, deadly firestorms and statewide floods.
He has also assembled counter-terrorism plans for Iowa and West Virginia and consulted on terrorism policy and information technology with the National Governors Association.
In March of 2002, President Bush appointed Andrews to the President’s Homeland Security Advisory Council, which advises the President on Homeland security matters concerning state and local governments and the private sector.
At NC4, a division of the Candle Corp., Andrews has embarked on a new challenge: Building Web-based technology capable of coordinating the way government and private business respond to emergencies. Recently, Andrews spoke with Government Security about this ambitious initiative.

GS: Government and business have collaborated for years about emergency response issues. What has been lacking in these efforts?

Andrews: There has never been a formal or systematic way for government and the private sector to interact day-to-day or even during a crisis. This issue came into focus during preparations for Y2K when there was a lot of interaction between business and government. It became obvious that the lack of formal systems posed potential problems. Many of our clients in the financial services community and other corporations with complex computer systems realized that while they were paying attention to their own systems, they were not sure what the government was doing, particularly the governmental entities in the communities where their businesses resided.

GS: What about the federal government’s Information Sharing and Analysis Centers on the Web. Don’t these centers enable public-private collaboration?

Andrews: These centers were set up to deal with critical infrastructure sectors such as water, power, telecommunications and financial services — which are 80 percent owned by the private sector. They included (Web-based) mechanisms through which these sectors could share information with others and with the government. They proved successful in some cases but not in others. In most instances, the information these centers carried was not timely. If you go to any of these (Web) sites, the information tends to be dated. Then came Sept. 11. Candle Corp. has many clients in the financial services community in lower Manhattan. Many of these clients were affected directly or through the interruption in infrastructure that caused delays in getting back into operation. In response, Candle Corp. created NC4. Our job is to try to establish formal technology networks and processes for sharing routine, as well as crisis information between business and government.

GS: By technology networks do you mean Web sites?

Andrews: Yes, application service provider or ASP Web sites. Businesses would subscribe annually to our ASP services, so our revenues will come primarily through subscriptions. The value we provide will be in consolidating and tailoring government information for individual companies that subscribe.

GS: Give me an example. Suppose I am the director of security for a financial services company in New York. I’m responsible for a half dozen facilities throughout the boroughs and perhaps in Newark. How will an NC4 ASP help me?

Andrews: Currently you receive information from government, but it is the same information that is blasted out to everyone through e-mail alerts and television news reports. Most of this information is of no value to you in managing security. When you subscribe to our system you would register your assets. What buildings does your company work in? Where are these buildings located? How large of a perimeter around the building do you want to protect? Then we would geo-locate your assets.
In your job as a security director, you may not care directly about a bomb threat at a bank in Brooklyn where you have no facilities. But you would care about a bomb threat, fire, hostage situation, gas leak or water-main break that occurs near one of your buildings. Our goal is to provide you with information relevant to your responsibilities. To do this, we solicit information from government agencies at all levels. They put the information into our ASP system, which then geo-locates events. The system matches the locations of events with client facilities and sends alerts to those who will be affected.

GS: How are the alerts sent?

Andrews: You can specify the system to send alerts to your computer, cell phone, pager or PDA. You can also specify who on your emergency response team will receive the alerts. You may want to notify the business continuity manager, the CEO, human resources and others. The system will cascade those notifications.

GS: So this is a better way to get information from government sources to businesses that may be affected by an event of some sort?

Andrews: Yes. Just as important, it is a way for government and business to coordinate their efforts. Suppose you decide that an event requires you to evacuate your building. By telling the system what you are doing, you will enable public agencies to do their jobs better. For example, if you are putting 7,000 people on the street, the police need to go to work on traffic control. Similarly, you can coordinate your actions with those taken by security directors in neighboring buildings. If you both send 7,000 people home at the same time, you will create a huge problem on the street.

GS: How far along are you in building this ASP system?

Andrews: This is very much a work in process. We’re piloting systems in New York and Los Angeles. In New York, the pilot participants include companies in the financial services community and the City’s law enforcement, fire and emergency management agencies. In Los Angeles, we’re dealing with 10 government agencies including law enforcement, fire, transportation, emergency services, ports and airports. On the business side, 25 companies are participating. These include businesses in the areas of financial services, aerospace, telecommunications and entertainment.

GS: Does this concept have any bearing on the federal government’s Homeland security efforts?

Andrews: Absolutely. Public-private coordination is a national issue. But businesses are located in local communities. So we’ve decided to start and prove the process locally. Eventually, we hope to have NC4 sites in all major metropolitan areas. The fundamental goal will be extending the reach of information to agencies at the federal, state, and local levels and to businesses. This can benefit Homeland security.
We also believe that corporate security people can use this kind of system to provide resources to law enforcement officials dealing with Homeland security issues by sending information back up the chain. Another point related to Homeland security: We’re building a routine day-to-day system that can be extremely useful during a major event. Because major events occur only rarely, emergency response systems tend to get a little rusty. By using this kind of system all the time, it will be more valuable during a major event.

GS: How does your work at NC4 relate to your role on the President’s Homeland Security Advisory Council?

Andrews: The original mission of the Council was to bring advice and guidance from an independent group to the Office of Homeland Security in the White House. In this regard, the Council has been helping to develop a national strategy for Homeland security. With the creation of the Department of Homeland Security, we have become an advisory council to Secretary [Tom] Ridge. Within the Council, there are several advisory committees. For example, I chair the Committee on Law Enforcement Emergency Services, Hospitals and Public Health. In this work, one of our concerns involves the sharing of information between business and government. For example, might intelligence information generated at the national level be shared with state and local authorities? Who will be cleared for this intelligence? What portion of this sensitive law enforcement information might be passed to corporate security people? And how will these people be vetted? In the end, NC4’s goals, as well as the goals of Homeland security, are all uncharted waters. But I think from the discussions that we have had in the Advisory Council, there is a general sense that a lot more information can be shared than we originally thought. The next problem will be deciding how to draw the lines.

Want to use this article? Click here for options!
© 2008 Penton Media Inc.

SUBSCRIBE

Select an Issue April 1, 2008 March 1, 2008 February 1, 2008 January 1, 2008 December 1, 2007 November 1, 2007 October 1, 2007 September 1, 2007 August 1, 2007 July 1, 2007 June 1, 2007 IP Security Supplement May 1, 2007 April 1, 2007 March 1, 2007 February 1, 2007 January 1, 2007 School Security December 1, 2006 November 1, 2006 October 1, 2006 September 1, 2006 August 1, 2006 July 1, 2006 June 1, 2006 May 1, 2006 April 1, 2006 March 1, 2006 February 1, 2006 January 1, 2006 December 1, 2005 November 1, 2005 October 1, 2005 September 1, 2005 August 1, 2005 July 1, 2005 June 1, 2005 May 1, 2005 April 1, 2005 March 1, 2005 February 1, 2005 January 1, 2005 December 1, 2004 November 1, 2004 October 1, 2004 September 1, 2004 August 1, 2004 July 1, 2004 July 1, 2004 June 1, 2004 May 1, 2004 April 1, 2004 March 1, 2004 February 1, 2004 January 1, 2004 December 1, 2003 November 1, 2003 October 1, 2003 September 1, 2003 August 1, 2003 July 1, 2003 June 1, 2003 May 1, 2003 April 1, 2003 March 1, 2003 February 1, 2003 January 1, 2003 December 1, 2002 November 1, 2002 October 1, 2002 September 1, 2002 August 1, 2002 July 1, 2002 June 1, 2002 May 1, 2002 April 1, 2002 March 1, 2002 February 1, 2002 January 1, 2002 December 1, 2001 November 1, 2001 October 1, 2001 September 1, 2001 August 1, 2001 July 1, 2001 June 1, 2001 May 1, 2001 April 1, 2001 March 1, 2001 February 1, 2001 January 1, 2001 December 1, 2000 November 1, 2000 October 1, 2000 September 1, 2000 August 1, 2000 July 1, 2000 June 1, 2000 May 1, 2000 April 1, 2000 March 1, 2000 February 1, 2000 January 1, 2000 December 1, 1999 November 1, 1999 October 1, 1999 September 1, 1999 August 1, 1999 July 1, 1999 June 1, 1999 May 1, 1999 April 1, 1999 March 1, 1999 February 1, 1999 January 1, 1999 December 1, 1998 November 1, 1998 October 1, 1998 September 1, 1998 August 1, 1998 July 1, 1998 June 1, 1998 May 1, 1998 April 1, 1998 March 1, 1998 February 1, 1998 January 1, 1998 December 1, 1997 November 1, 1997 October 1, 1997 September 1, 1997 August 1, 1997 July 1, 1997 June 1, 1997 May 1, 1997 April 1, 1997 March 1, 1997 February 1, 1997 January 1, 1997

This month in Access Control

• Opening Up About Door Closers
• An Enterprise Approach
• The Framework For Open Systems
• On A Higher Plane
• More from April's issue