U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

26–164 PDF 2017

S. HRG. 115–47 

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT IN INDIAN COUNTRY: 

IMPROVING FEMA’S FEDERAL–TRIBAL 

RELATIONSHIP WITH INDIAN TRIBES 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

FEBRUARY 8, 2017 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs 

( 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS 

JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota, Chairman 

TOM UDALL, New Mexico, Vice Chairman 

JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming 

JOHN MCCAIN, Arizona 

LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska 

JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma 

STEVE DAINES, Montana 

MIKE CRAPO, Idaho 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

MARIA CANTWELL, Washington 

JON TESTER, Montana, 

AL FRANKEN, Minnesota 

BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii 

HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota 

CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada 

T. MICHAEL ANDREWS, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

JENNIFER ROMERO, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on February 8, 2017 ......................................................................... 1 

Statement of Senator Cantwell .............................................................................. 3 

Statement of Senator Cortez Mastro ..................................................................... 31 

Statement of Senator Franken ............................................................................... 4 

Statement of Senator Hoeven ................................................................................. 1 

Statement of Senator Lankford .............................................................................. 29 

Statement of Senator Murkowski ........................................................................... 4 

Statement of Senator Tester ................................................................................... 3 

Statement of Senator Udall .................................................................................... 2 

WITNESSES

Amparo, Alex, Assistant Administrator for Recovery, Office of Response and 

Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of 

Homeland Security ............................................................................................... 5 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 7 

Begaye, Hon. Russell, President, Navajo Nation .................................................. 12 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 13 

Chavarria, Hon. J. Michael, Governor, Pueblo of Santa Clara ............................ 16 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 18 

Desautel, Cody, Natural Resources Director, Confederated Tribes of the 

Colville Reservation ............................................................................................. 25 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 27 

APPENDIX

Hansen, Jeff, Director, Office of Emergency Management, Choctaw Nation 

of Oklahoma, prepared statement ...................................................................... 47 

Response to written questions submitted to Alex Amparo by: 

Hon. Heidi Heitkamp ....................................................................................... 56 

Hon. James Lankford ....................................................................................... 57 

Hon. Tom Udall ................................................................................................ 49 

(1) 

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT IN INDIAN 

COUNTRY: IMPROVING FEMA’S FEDERAL– 

TRIBAL RELATIONSHIP WITH INDIAN 

TRIBES 

WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2017 

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:57 p.m. in room 

628, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John Hoeven, 

Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN HOEVEN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA 

The CHAIRMAN. We will now commence the oversight hearing on 

Emergency Management in Indian Country: Improving FEMA’s 

Federal-Tribal Relationship with Indian Tribes. 

The Committee is holding this important hearing on emergency 

management in Indian country. It is timely to begin this conversation now. 

The winters can be hazardous in many parts of the country. With 

the spring comes the thaw and often flooding. My home State of 

North Dakota is a good example. In other parts of the country, oftentimes it is tornadoes or battling fires. 

Some Indian reservations in North Dakota, most notably the 

Spirit Lake Indian Reservation and the Turtle Mountain Band of 

Chippewa, have received major disaster declarations due to spring 

flooding. 

Tribes around the country experience other types of emergencies 

and disasters. These hard hit communities face a long road to recovery. It is incumbent upon the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency, FEMA, to effectively assist in that recovery and to get an 

early start on efforts to reduce the impacts of future disaster risks. 

Tribes can seek emergency aid for emergency declarations directly from the President, instead of going through the States. This 

is designed to help with timely requests and timely assistance to 

hard hit communities. 

Today, we will hear from the witnesses regarding these events 

and the Federal response, as well as recommendations for improving emergency management and the Federal-tribal relationship. 

Before we turn to our witnesses, I want to ask Vice Chairman 

Udall if he has an opening statement? 

2 

STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO 

Senator UDALL. Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you for calling this oversight hearing so quickly into the 

new Congress. Tribal disaster declaration authority is critical to 

tribal governments across the country. 

I look forward to working with you on this issue and others that 

require deliberate and focused congressional oversight. 

Before I begin my opening remarks, I would like to welcome and 

thank the tribal witnesses, two of whom represent tribes from my 

home State of New Mexico. Both Governor Chavarria of the Santa 

Clara Pueblo and President Begaye of the Navajo Nation have 

shown strong leadership and dedication to tribal self determination 

and self governance, particularly in managing natural disasters on 

their tribal homelands. 

In 2015, 3 million gallons of toxic mine water swept downstream 

into the Navajo Nation’s lands following the rupture of the Gold 

King Mine in Colorado. As President Begaye can attest, we still do 

not know the full impacts of this environmental disaster that sent 

polluted water into the Animas and San Juan Rivers and through 

the Navajo Nation. 

The Federal Government response to Gold King has been one of 

the most frustrating things I have seen the Navajo Nation go 

through in my time in Congress. In response, working with a bipartisan group of colleagues, we enacted the legislation last year to 

prioritize government reimbursements and to fund and authorize 

long term water quality monitoring. 

Now the Federal Government is denying liability for personal 

damage claims, including for Navajo farmers. This is unacceptable 

to me. We are now again working on new legislation to compensate 

individuals who lost crops and suffered other damages from the 

spills. 

In Santa Clara Pueblo, the Las Conchas fire, one of the largest 

in New Mexico history, destroyed thousands of acres of Pueblo’s 

traditional lands. Subsequent severe flooding destroyed thousands 

more. The damage was extensive and devastating to the tribe’s 

canyon and scorched the tribe’s watershed. 

I have seen the aftermath of this disaster firsthand and I know 

the watershed restoration project is a major challenge. 

As a result of this catastrophic wildfire, the Pueblo has been 

forced to make five disaster declarations seeking assistance from 

the Federal Government since 2011. I am proud to say that I supported both the Santa Clara Pueblo and Navajo Nations’ emergency declaration requests and letters to the President. 

I look forward to hearing about their experience with disaster relief and its impacts. I also look forward to hearing the FEMA witnesses describe the recently issued Tribal Pilot Guidance and the 

agency’s plans for further implementation of the Act. 

Since the enactment of the Tribal Stafford Act in 2013, tribes 

have been able to request emergency or major disaster declarations 

directly from the President and independent of States. For many 

years, tribes were forced to rely on their State governor to make 

these requests on their behalf in order to receive Stafford Act assistance, assistance that is vital to tribal governments for proVerDate Mar 15 2010 11:16 Jul 12, 2017 Jkt 026164 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 S:\DOCS\26164.TXT JACK
3 

tecting the health and safety of their citizens in the wake of emergency or major disasters. 

I strongly support the parity created by the Tribal Stafford Act 

for tribal and State governments and their concurrent ability to 

seek disaster assistance directly from the President. 

I understand that there are tribal State coordination issues that 

could result in inadequate Federal assistance for both sovereigns. 

I look forward to hearing from FEMA and the tribal witnesses 

today about what actions have been taken to ensure that tribes and 

States coordinate closely on decisions to request emergency or disaster declarations. 

Federal assistance that supports tribal efforts to respond to and 

recover from an incident that overwhelms tribal capabilities must 

be effective. That is why I signed onto a Government Accountability Office request to study tribal disaster declaration issues. 

This request includes ways to build and strengthen tribal capacity to request major disaster declarations and manage associated 

funding. I expect the result of this study to inform further bipartisan discussions among my Committee colleagues on how we can 

work together to assist tribal governments in protecting public 

health, safety and property in the event of a major disaster in Indian country. 

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Vice Chairman Udall. 

Are there other opening statements before we turn to the witnesses? Senator Cantwell. 

STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON 

Senator CANTWELL. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to welcome 

my constituent and witness, Mr. Cody Desautel from the Colville 

Tribe who is with us here today and thank him for coming. 

The Colville Tribe, along with Washington State, has been front 

and center in two years of devastating fires in 2014 and 2015. We 

lost 863,000 acres during that time period. In 2015, the Tunk Block 

and North Star fires devastated the Confederated Tribe of the 

Colville Reservation and they lost 259,000 acres of commercial 

timberland which held a billion board feet of salable lumber resulting in a 20 percent loss of their general operating revenues. 

If there is any tribe in America that can tell you the devastating 

impacts of these natural disasters and fires, it is the Colville Reservation. 

Thank you, Mr. Desautel, for being with us and being a witness 

at today’s hearing. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Tester. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA 

Senator TESTER. Very quickly, thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The Black Feet Tribe just declared a state of emergency because 

they received five feet of snow last night. To rub salt in the wound, 

they are predicting 50 mile an hour winds tomorrow. They will get 

help from the State. 

4 

I only bring this up because of the timeliness of this hearing. 

They are going to be calling and will be needing help. You know 

what happens with 5 feet of snow and 50 mile an hour winds. You 

also know what happens when it gets above 32 degrees and you 

have that kind of snow melt. 

Thank you all for being here. I especially want to thank the 

tribes. 

The CHAIRMAN. Do other Senators have opening comments? Senator Murkowski. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA 

Senator MURKOWSKI. You gave me an opening. I said we need to 

get to the witnesses. 

Mr. Chairman, I too want to thank you for the timeliness of this 

hearing. Alaska is pretty legendary for the disasters we have 

whether they are earthquakes, floods, fires, mudslides or volcanoes. 

We kind of do it all. 

One of the things I am hoping to have discussion about today, 

I really appreciate the witnesses, is what we are calling a slow 

moving disaster. That is a reality we are facing in Alaska as we 

are seeing communities threatened by storms, flooding, coastal erosion, the thaw of our permafrost and the impact to our communities that are considering relocation, asking for assistance with relocation to protect their families and their way of life. 

The infrastructure is being severely damaged whether it is the 

water systems, maybe not water at all, peoples’ homes are literally 

falling into the ocean due to coastal erosion and more are in danger. There are schools and community buildings that are at risk. 

Two of the communities that are facing substantial danger right 

now are the Yupik community of Newtok and Kivalina and the 

Inupiat community up on the Chukchi. Both of these communities 

have recently applied for major disaster declarations due to severe 

storms, flooding and many of the issues I mentioned. 

Yet both of these communities were denied because they did not 

fit the contours of the Stafford Act. It is something that as we are 

talking about disasters, I think we need to recognize that we have 

disasters as Senator Tester has just mentioned with the weather 

that is coming and then we have these disasters that we see coming at us and perhaps not in an immediate forceful way but the 

force of the looming danger to our communities is very, very real. 

I thank you for the opportunity to discuss these important issues 

today and look forward to the comments from today’s witnesses. 

The CHAIRMAN. Do other Senators have comments before we turn 

to the witnesses? Senator Franken. 

STATEMENT OF HON. AL FRANKEN, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you, Chairman Hoeven and Vice Chairman Udall for holding this hearing and thank you to all of our witnesses for your testimony. 

Before I begin my remarks, I want to take a moment to recognize 

Senator Barrasso for his leadership as chairman and Senator Tester for his as well in the last Congress. 

5 

To our new Chair and new Vice Chairman, I look forward to continuing to work with you in this new Congress. 

This hearing is an opportunity to shine a light on the very important relationship between FEMA and the tribes. I will touch on 

this a bit more in my questions but I am particularly interested to 

hear about FEMA’s relationship with the Prairie Island Indian 

community. 

Prairie Island sits on a floodplain in the Mississippi River. It is 

also approximately 600 yards from two nuclear reactors and nuclear waste storage facilities. The members of the Prairie Island 

community live with a constant concern of radiation exposure. 

In my State, it is very important that FEMA is prepared for anything and that it continues to coordinate its emergency management plans with Prairie Island. 

Thank you again, Mr. Chairman and Vice Chairman Udall. To 

all the witnesses, I look forward to your testimony. 

The CHAIRMAN. Do any other Senators wish comment before we 

proceed to the witnesses? 

Our witnesses today are: Mr. Alex Amparo, Assistant Administrator for Recovery, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal 

Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland 

Security; Mr. Milo Booth, National Tribal Affairs Advisor, Office of 

External Affairs, Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. 

Department of Homeland Security; the Honorable Russell Begaye, 

President, Navajo Nation, Window Rock, Arizona; the Honorable J. 

Michael Chavarria, Governor, Pueblo of Santa Clara, Espan ̃ ola, 

New Mexico; and Mr. Cody Desautel, Natural Resources Director, 

Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, Nespelem, Washington. 

I want to remind the witnesses that your full written testimony 

will be made a part of the official hearing record. If you would, 

please keep your opening statements to five minutes each so that 

we proceed to questions. 

With that, we will begin with Mr. Amparo. 

STATEMENT OF ALEX AMPARO, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR 

FOR RECOVERY, OFFICE OF RESPONSE AND RECOVERY, 

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, U.S. 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; ACCOMPANIED BY: 

MILO BOOTH, NATIONAL TRIBAL AFFAIRS ADVISOR, OFFICE 

OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS 

Mr. AMPARO. Good afternoon and thank you, Chairman Hoeven, 

Vice Chairman Udall, and members of the Committee. 

It is my pleasure to be here today with our National Tribal Advisor, Mr. Milo Booth. Thank you for the opportunity to provide you 

an update on FEMA’s efforts since we last testified in the summer 

of 2014. I am excited to talk with you about how we have progressed. 

FEMA has a long history of working within our authority to fully 

embrace the nation-to-nation relationship between the U.S. Government and federally recognized tribes. Prior to 2013, as mentioned, tribes had to seek disaster assistance through State declarations. 

6 

Thanks to the authority provided to us by Congress with the passage of the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act, tribes now have the 

option to request a declaration from the President directly. 

At FEMA, we applaud this change which properly reflects tribal 

sovereignty and we work very hard to further our agency’s relationship with tribes. I am pleased to share with you that FEMA has 

released the Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance which provides 

new specifically designed criteria for evaluating a tribe’s request 

for a declaration and takes into account the unique effects of tribal 

nations and conditions. 

This guidance was shaped by extensive outreach and communication with our tribal partners. This included three rounds of tribal 

consultation comprised of 140 listening sessions nationwide. Each 

round of consultation averaged 500 participants representing approximately one-third of all federally-recognized tribes. 

By the end, we had received more than 2,000 comments which 

we, as an agency carefully reviewed and responded to on our 

website. Most importantly, this input was vital in shaping the pilot 

guidance that has been released. 

In addition to the development of the declaration guidance, 

FEMA has undertaken many actions to build and improve relationships with our tribal partners. We have hired a national tribal advisor and a tribal specialist at our headquarters to help lead this 

activity. 

We ensured that each of our ten regions has at least one tribal 

liaison to work in building that relationship in the field with tribes 

individually on a regular basis. They help coordinate a variety of 

services that FEMA can provide to tribes including technical assistance, grant opportunities, exercise training and others. When disaster strikes, we also deploy from our cadre of tribal specialists 

who are on call. 

I tell you from my more than 20 years experience in emergency 

management that effective emergency management at its core is 

based on relationships, understanding mutual capacities and the 

needs of communities. From this foundation, we then enhance disaster preparedness through targeted planning, training and exercises. 

FEMA’s Emergency Management Institute and the Center for 

Domestic Preparedness, two of our main training facilities, have 

developed tribal-specific training. For example, in 2016, more than 

1,000 tribal emergency managers and first responders were trained 

in these facilities. 

In fact, in just a few weeks at the Center for Domestic Preparedness, we will host the second annual tribal nations training week 

which includes multiple courses for training first responders, followed by a full scale integrated exercise. Last year, over 157 tribal 

emergency managers and 46 tribal nations participated. 

Outside of our training facilities, FEMA is also facilitating more 

large scale exercises to support building tribal response capabilities. Last year, FEMA Region 10 in the Northwest conducted the 

Cascadia Rising, a four day earthquake and tsunami exercise. 

Twenty-four tribes in Washington, Oregon and Idaho participated 

in various ways ranging from tsunami evacuation drills to full integration in local emergency operations centers. 

7 

What I have outlined today illustrates just a part of our commitment to federally-recognized tribal governments. 

Thank you for the opportunity to talk to you about the work the 

men and women at FEMA have done. FEMA continues to be committed to our partnership and collaboration with tribes. 

There is still much work for us to do. We recognize that and remain committed to Indian country and working with this Committee and our tribal partners to learn, evolve and help build a 

more resilient America. 

Thank you for your time and I look forward to the questions of 

this Committee. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Amparo follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ALEX AMPARO, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR RECOVERY, 

OFFICE OF RESPONSE AND RECOVERY, FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Introduction 

Good afternoon, Chairman Hoeven, Vice Chairman Udall, and members of the 

Committee. I am Alex Amparo, Assistant Administrator with the U.S. Department 

of Homeland Security’s (DHS) Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 

Thank you for this opportunity to meet with you today to discuss ways in which 

FEMA is improving relationships with federally recognized Indian tribes. 

FEMA is committed to our partnership and collaboration with federally recognized Indian tribes, and to providing support in their preparation for, protection 

against, mitigation of, response to, and recovery from all hazards and disasters. 

FEMA has a strong tradition of engagement with federally recognized Indian tribal 

governments (tribal governments). However, since the passage of the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act (SRIA) in 2013, the agency has dedicated additional resources 

to ensuring that tribal governments are fully woven into the fabric of our mission. 

Today, I can tell you that FEMA recognizes the unique relationship between Indian Country and the Federal Government, and the unique conditions that affect 

Indian Country. We work side-by-side with our tribal partners on all aspects of our 

mission, and we continue to posture ourselves to better support our tribal partners 

at any time. To reinforce how we recognize these important relationships, I would 

like to specifically outline FEMA’s approach as described in: (1) FEMA’s Tribal Policy; (2) FEMA’s Tribal Consultation Policy; and, (3) FEMA’s Tribal Declaration Pilot 

Guidance. 

FEMA’s Tribal Policy 

The U.S. Government has a unique nation-to-nation relationship with federally 

recognized tribal governments based on the Constitution of the United States, treaties, statutes, executive orders, and judicial decisions. In 2016, FEMA updated its 

agency-wide tribal policy. The policy outlines a framework for nation-to-nation relations with federally recognized tribal governments that recognizes tribal sovereignty, self-governance, and the general trust relationship, consistent with applicable authorities. 

Key principles of our policy include: 

A. Recognizing the unique nature of each tribal community and the need to 

work with all members of tribal communities, FEMA commits to building 

strong and lasting partnerships with tribal governments to assist in preparing for all threats and hazards, including those unique to tribal communities. 

B. FEMA will respect and support the unique status of sovereign tribal governments by engaging in meaningful dialogue that will assist tribal communities 

with any emergency management needs, which fall under the authority of 

FEMA. 

C. FEMA acknowledges the inherent sovereignty of tribal governments, the general trust relationship with the federal government, and the nation-to-nation 

relationship between the U.S. Government and tribal governments as established by the U.S. Constitution, statutes, treaties, court decisions, executive 

orders, regulations, and policies as the foundation of this policy. 

8 

In updating this policy, FEMA conducted tribal consultation in 2016, to facilitate 

tribal feedback on the proposed policy revisions. FEMA held 23 separate events nationwide consisting of 18 regional in-person listening sessions, two national 

webinars, and three tribal association conference presentations during the tribal 

consultation period reaching more than 300 tribal participants. FEMA received 

more than 100 comments in-person and through email, which the agency adjudicated to finalize this revised policy. 

For FEMA, this consultation effort on the updated FEMA Tribal Policy represented a significant outreach. To accomplish this FEMA developed structures 

throughout the agency to support improving our relationships with federally recognized Indian tribal governments. In 2014, FEMA hired a National Tribal Affairs Advisor, Milo Booth (Tsimpshian from the Metlakatla Indian Community in 

Metlakatla, Alaska), to lead the Tribal Partners Branch (TPB) at FEMA headquarters. In 2016, Margeau Valteau (Navajo from Window Rock, Arizona) joined the 

TPB as a tribal specialist. 

FEMA tribal liaisons, located in our regional offices, are the first resource and 

point of contact for tribal nations that have questions or require technical assistance 

on agency programs. Following the federal recognition of the Pamunkey Indian 

Tribe in 2016, FEMA added a Regional Tribal Liaison to FEMA Region III giving 

each FEMA regional office at least one tribal liaison supporting tribal affairs. While 

these tribal liaisons are a critical piece to our outreach and work with tribal governments, it is important to know that all FEMA employees who administer our various programs are available to assist in delivering programs and resources to Indian 

Country. 

In addition to Tribal Affairs staffing, FEMA’s Emergency Management Institute 

(EMI) provides training to tribal governments and their employees to develop their 

emergency management capabilities. During fiscal year 2016, EMI delivered 55 tribal courses to 763 tribal attendees and 94 other partners. The tribal curriculum 

courses are delivered by a team of instructors who are selected for their extensive 

experience working with and for tribal governments in emergency management and 

the majority of the instructors are tribal members. In addition to providing tribal 

curriculum courses on the EMI campus in Emmitsburg, Maryland, EMI also provides these courses off-site, traveling out to Indian Country to reach tribal communities directly. EMI currently has planned 21 courses on their 2017 schedule, and 

will likely increase course deliveries as the year progresses. 

FEMA’s Center for Domestic Preparedness (CDP) provides training to tribal emergency responders. In fiscal year 2016, CDP hosted its first Tribal Training Week 

and trained 157 tribal emergency responders from 46 tribal nations. During the 

week, CDP conducted five courses followed by an operational Integrated Capstone 

Event full-scale exercise. In 2016, 793 tribal first responders completed courses at 

the CDP, a 245 percent increase from 2015. This year CDP will host the 2017 Tribal 

Nations Training Week from March 19 to 25. 

Exercises 

In addition to providing training, FEMA also coordinates exercises with tribal nations to examine and validate capabilities critical to their readiness. 

In September 2015, in Great Falls, Montana, more than 100 people came together 

to simulate the response to crude oil train derailment on the Blackfeet Nation. 

FEMA’s National Exercise Division coordinated the exercise, Montana Operation 

Safe Delivery, along with Blackfeet Nation, the State of Montana, and FEMA Region VIII staff. This is one of three in a nationwide series of exercises and the only 

one to take place on a tribal nation. The goal of the exercise was to examine and 

confirm the capabilities needed to respond to, reduce the effects of, mitigate the consequences of, and recover from a train derailment involving crude oil. The two-day 

seminar and tabletop exercise brought together all seven tribal nations in Montana 

to participate in and learn from a simulated volatile incident. 

In June 2016, FEMA Region X conducted a four-day functional earthquake and 

tsunami exercise, Cascadia Rising. At least 24 tribes in Washington, Oregon, and 

Idaho participated in various ways ranging from tsunami evacuation drills to full 

integration in the local Emergency Operations Center. During Cascadia Rising, 

FEMA exercised its internal capacity to respond to multiple direct disaster declarations from tribal governments. 

Tribal participation continues to improve our discussions about pre-landfall hurricane preparedness as well. For the third year in 2016, tribal emergency managers 

participated in FEMA’s annual hurricane preparedness video teleconference with 

FEMA leadership and state emergency management directors in hurricane-prone 

areas. 

9 

By both providing staff resources at the national and regional level, as well as 

mission critical training opportunities for tribes, FEMA gains a better understanding of the unique circumstances that affect tribal governments and identifies 

creative solutions to these unique challenges to better partner with tribal governments and emergency management professionals to serve the needs of disaster survivors. 

FEMA Tribal Consultation Policy 

FEMA’s Tribal Consultation Policy governs precisely how we engage Indian tribes 

in meaningful consultation. It was developed and issued pursuant to E.O. 13175 of 

November 6, 2000, Consultation and Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments 

and Presidential Memorandum, Tribal Consultation (74 Fed. Reg. 57881) that direct 

agencies to engage in regular and meaningful consultation and collaboration with 

tribal officials in the development of federal policies that have tribal implications, 

and to strengthen the government-to-government relationship between the United 

States and Indian tribes. 

The current consultation policy was signed in August 2014, and outlines the specific roles and responsibilities for various FEMA officials, as well as a detailed outline on how consultation is achieved and when it takes place. As a result of this 

policy, if a tribal government was not consulted on an existing policy or action by 

FEMA that they determine affects their community or has tribal implications, they 

may contact the National Tribal Affairs Advisor and request to be a consulting 

party. Much like how the FEMA Tribal Policy was updated, we anticipate updating 

the FEMA Tribal Consultation Policy in 2017. We look forward to engaging our tribal partners during the comment period to ensure that our update reflects the evolving needs of Indian Country. 

Underlying FEMA’s work and mission is the whole community approach that reinforces that FEMA is only one part of our nation’s emergency management team. 

We must leverage all of our collective team resources in preparing for, protecting 

against, responding to, recovering from, and mitigating against all hazards. Tribal 

nations are critical components in our whole community, and our commitment to addressing their needs is evident in our strategic priority to be survivor-centric in mission and program delivery. To further survivor-centric outcomes, FEMA leadership 

adopted a ‘‘cut the red tape’’ posture to focus on the needs of survivors and to develop and execute programs and policies with survivors’ perspectives in mind. 

FEMA recognizes that the consistent participation and partnership of tribal governments is vital in helping FEMA achieve its mission, so an ongoing dialogue with 

tribal governments and periodic updates of our policies is key to ensuring these 

goals are met. 

FEMA’s Tribal Declaration Pilot Guidance 

On January 29, 2013, President Obama signed into law the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act of 2013 (P.L. 113–2) (SRIA), one of the most significant pieces of legislation impacting disaster response and recovery since the Post-Katrina Emergency 

Management Reform Act of 2006. 

Section 1110 of SRIA, ‘‘Tribal Requests for a Major Disaster or Emergency Declaration under the Stafford Act’’ authorized federally recognized Indian tribal governments (tribal governments) the option to request a Stafford Act emergency or 

major disaster declaration independent of the state if they chose to do so. As amended, the Stafford Act now better reflects the sovereignty of tribal governments and 

acknowledges FEMA’s nation-to-nation relationship with tribal governments. This 

new authority also requires the President to ‘‘consider the unique conditions that 

affect the general welfare of Indian tribal governments’’ when issuing regulations 

to implement this new authority. FEMA developed a phased implementation to ensure consideration of the unique needs of tribal governments, which are further outlined below. 

In consultation with federally recognized tribal governments, we are working 

thoughtfully and deliberately to develop regulations that best reflect the unique situation of tribal governments. Therefore, FEMA began implementing the new authority in three phases: (1) use of adapted state regulations; (2) implementation of 

pilot guidance; and (3) final rulemaking. 

Immediate Use of Regulations 

Immediately after SRIA’s enactment, FEMA used existing state declaration regulations and criteria to process declaration requests from tribal governments. Since 

the passage of SRIA, there have been eight major disasters declared in Indian Country: The Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (North Carolina), the Navajo Nation 

(Arizona, New Mexico, and Utah), the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (North Dakota 

and South Dakota), the Karuk Tribe (California), the Santa Clara Pueblo Tribe 

10 

(New Mexico), which has received two disaster declarations, the Soboba Band of 

Luiseno Indians (California), and the Oglala Sioux Tribe of the Pine Ridge Reservations (South Dakota). Through these declarations, Public Assistance, Individual Assistance, and Hazard Mitigation Grant Program funding is being provided directly 

to the tribal governments. 

On February 14, 2013, the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (EBCI) submitted 

a request for a declaration due to severe weather which resulted in flooding, road 

damage, and landslides in the EBCI Qualla Boundary and associated lands. A Major 

Disaster Declaration was signed on March 1, 2013, as the first direct federal to tribe 

disaster declaration under SRIA. The tribe’s existing relationship with the state of 

North Carolina and the FEMA Region IV Tribal Liaison was strengthened and additional connections with FEMA were created during the event. These connections allowed less turmoil for the tribe when performing multiple processes and mission 

support in an environment of inexperienced applicants. Lessons learned included 

clarification and guidance regarding policies and procedures on tribal declarations 

and the need for more cultural awareness by FEMA staff. 

In August 2015, the President declared a disaster for the Oglala Sioux tribe as 

a result of severe storms, straight line winds, and flooding. As part of the assistance 

made available through the disaster declaration, FEMA and the Oglala Sioux Tribe 

completed a permanent housing construction mission that delivered 196 manufactured homes, and repaired an additional 107 homes on the tribe’s Pine Ridge Indian 

Reservation. The housing mission was part of the first ever Presidential major disaster declaration for Individual Assistance granted directly to a tribal nation. The 

agency hired 25 local tribal members to assist in that effort and their roles were 

vital in the success of the mission. In addition, following the disaster, eleven tribal 

members joined the FEMA Reservist program. 

FEMA gathered critical information, best practices, and process challenges that 

have informed the development of the Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance that 

serves as a comprehensive resource for tribal governments on Stafford Act declarations, disaster assistance, and related requirements. 

Pilot Guidance Development 

FEMA’s disaster declaration regulations were developed to evaluate states’ capacity and their need for supplemental disaster assistance. Since these parameters may 

not be indicative of a tribal nation’s ability to respond and recover from a disaster, 

FEMA augmented its procedures and criteria to reflect the capacity and needs of 

tribal governments. Before entering the rulemaking process, FEMA intends to utilize the pilot period to inform the development of regulations, ultimately leading to 

final regulations which reflect the unique needs of tribal governments. 

Tribal participation and input was critical to the development of the Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance. In 2013, FEMA initiated tribal consultation to inform the 

development of the first draft guidance. FEMA hosted 26 listening sessions nationwide. FEMA sent written correspondence from the FEMA Administrator to all 567 

federally recognized tribes, and issued advisories to national and regional tribal organizations and associations to advise them of the consultation. FEMA regional and 

headquarters leadership presented at numerous tribal conferences to provide an 

overview of the declaration process and to solicit feedback. 

In 2014, FEMA conducted 60 listening sessions around the country, from Northern Alaska to Montana, Oklahoma to Florida, and to Maine with 540 participants 

and 220 tribes represented. Through these listening sessions, FEMA gathered more 

than 1,000 comments on the first draft guidance as well as strengthened relationships with tribal governments. We learned more about the challenges that tribal 

communities face, the response and recovery capabilities of tribal governments, and 

their understanding of Stafford Act assistance. FEMA regions have been extremely 

proactive in meeting consultation requests of Native Alaskan Villages and Indian 

tribal governments. For instance, FEMA Region X senior staff flew to Alaska to consult with the Aleut Communities of St. Paul and St. George Islands. 

The second draft of the guidance was posted to the Federal Register for a 90-day 

public comment period that ended in April 2016. In addition to posting in the Federal Register, FEMA conducted additional consultation over the 90-day period with 

over 500 tribal officials representing 178 federally recognized tribal governments 

through participation in 54 listening sessions nationwide. Nearly 800 comments 

were received and adjudicated. The final Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance is a culmination of all of the interaction and feedback through consultation with tribal governments that has occurred over the past several years. In total, FEMA received 

over 2,000 comments and conducted 140 listening sessions nationwide. 

The pilot guidance describes the process by which tribal governments will use to 

request Stafford Act declarations, during the pilot period, and the criteria FEMA 

11 

will use to evaluate direct tribal declaration requests and make a recommendation 

to the President. It is the culmination of over three years of tribal consultation and 

development of multiple drafts of the guidance. The guidance incorporates key 

changes based on comments FEMA received from tribes. These changes include the 

establishment of a Public Assistance minimum damage amount for tribal declarations of $250,000; the addition of historic preservation as a demographic factor that 

may influence the impacts of a disaster; expansion of eligibility under the Individuals and Households Program to include non-enrolled tribal community members, 

when requested by the tribal government; and modifying and adding definitions of 

terms. 

The extensive consultation FEMA conducted with tribal governments in the development of the Tribal Declaration Pilot Guidance was not only valuable in informing 

what the pilot would look like, but also was invaluable to improving our understanding of the needs and unique characteristics of Indian Country. Additionally, it 

serves as a good example of FEMA’s commitment to improving our relationships 

with tribal governments. 

Additional Ongoing Initiatives to Support Tribal Governments 

The Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration (FIMA) supports tribal governments by providing direct assistance and support in the development of FEMA 

approved Hazard Mitigation Plans and guidance in the development of projects for 

Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) grants. Hazard mitigation planning enables 

tribal governments to identify risks and vulnerabilities associated with natural disasters, and develop long-term strategies for protecting people and property from future hazard events. FIMA currently uses regional and headquarter resources to provide outreach and technical assistance to tribal governments in support of these activities. FIMA developed guidance documents, outreach materials and provided 

training opportunities to educate tribal governments in developing hazard mitigation plans and grant applications, and provided technical assistance to tribal governments applying for, and developing HMA Grants for projects including development of hazard mitigation plans. FIMA also developed resources to assist tribal governments with accessing the eGrants System, and applying directly to FEMA for 

HMA Grants. In the past two years a portion of the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant 

funds have been set-aside for tribal applications. Tribal nations occupy three of the 

ten non-FEMA positions on the External Stakeholders Working Group that was 

formed to increase engagement and transparency with external (non-federal) partners. 

In 2016, FIMA conducted tribal consultation on the Tribal Mitigation Planning 

Guidance that guides agency officials in the interpretation of regulatory requirements in their review and approval of tribal mitigation plans. The underlying regulatory requirements for tribal mitigation planning in 44 CFR Part 201 have not 

changed. The goal of this update was to simplify and streamline the document, introduce a set of Guiding Principles for Tribal Mitigation Plan Review, and to improve alignment with similar state and local guidance on mitigation planning. 

Conclusion 

The development and update of FEMA’s Tribal Policy, Tribal Consultation Policy, 

and Tribal Declaration Pilot Guidance shows just part of our commitment to supporting federally recognized tribal governments in their preparation for, protection 

against, mitigation of, response to, and recovery from all hazards and disasters. The 

agency continues to seek feedback from our tribal partners and to improve how we 

can engage and work with them. 

We look forward to our continued collaboration to further support tribal governments as they build their emergency management capabilities. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Mr. Amparo. 

It is my understanding your opening remarks will cover both 

yourself and Mr. Booth. Mr. Booth, did you have anything to add? 

Mr. BOOTH. Yes, sir. 

Good afternoon, Chairman Hoeven and Vice Chairman Udall. 

I fully support everything that Mr. Amparo has said. I look forward to any questions this Committee may have. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you. 

Next is the Honorable Russell Begaye. 

12 

STATEMENT OF HON. RUSSELL BEGAYE, PRESIDENT, NAVAJO 

NATION 

Mr. BEGAYE. Thank you, Chairman. Also, congratulations for 

taking on this important position for Indian Nations across America. Senator Udall, thank you for assuming that responsibility as 

Vice Chair of this important Committee. 

I am Russell Begaye, President of the Navajo Nation. First, I 

want to talk about the Gold Kind Mine spill. 

On August 5, we saw the river that feeds into our Nation turn 

yellow as orange juice. It passed the City of Durango. I asked that 

all of our irrigation systems be cut off to all of our farmland on our 

Nation. The river runs 200 miles on the Nation so we immediately 

cut off the source that would contaminate our land, our river and 

our water. 

That was done and we had 200 Navajo Nation employees and 

volunteers assist in the response but no FEMA employee was on 

the ground with our people that responded. 

On October 2, 2015, we declared an emergency. We made an application to FEMA. FEMA denied us 18 days later on October 20, 

2015. In its denial, FEMA said, ‘‘The vast majority of the response 

and recovery efforts for this event fall under the authorities of 

other Federal agencies.’’ 

I met with then Secretary Vilsack from USDA who was willing 

to help. I met with the Secretary of Health and Human Services. 

They were willing to come and assist us through the HHS facilities 

but both of them were told not to get involved with this disaster 

because they were not the lead agency. 

EPA told these Federal agencies not to assist the Navajo Nation 

because EPA was the lead agency for this. Because of that, USDA, 

HHS and other Federal agencies did not come alongside the Navajo 

Nation to help us. 

That needs to change because anytime disasters occur, all Federal agencies should use their resources to help Indian tribes like 

the Navajo Nation in the Gold King Mine spill with their disaster. 

If that had happened, I know that today farmers would be farming 

their land. Now they are reluctant to open up the water system because they feel the contaminants are still in the river, still on the 

banks, still in river banks and the river beds. 

To this day, a lot of farmers are reluctant to use the water 

source. That is the livelihood of our farmers. Not a single farmer 

to date has been compensated for their loss. We are saying look at 

the policy. Let all Federal agencies be released to help in any disaster situation. 

We would also like to say that because of the resources we have, 

we are always stretched thin. I urge Congress to review FEMA’s 

funding for tribes so that our people can be better served in event 

of a disaster. 

When you compare this to the BP oil spill, why did FEMA and 

other Federal agencies engage in that situation, yet shy away from 

the Gold King Mine spill? EPA is the only one that came and monitored and looked at the river but FEMA was not there because we 

believe they were told to back off because EPA was the lead agency. 

13 

Also, on August 3 through August 5, 2016, the evening of August 

3, I was given a call and told that there was a flood coming 

through the Town of Shiprock. Homes were being washed away 

and vehicles were floating down the river. A huge disaster took 

place in the City of Shiprock. 

Again we submitted an application to FEMA declaring a major 

disaster on August 21, 2016. On October 12, 2016, FEMA denied 

our application because FEMA determined that ‘‘The impact to individuals and households from this event was not of such severity 

and magnitude to warrant supplemental Federal disaster assistance.’’ 

We are saying when is it disastrous enough for FEMA to come 

and help? In this case, these homes were washed away and the vehicles were hanging off the trees two or three days later. 

We are asking and appealing that more details about the impact 

and factors applied by FEMA for individual assistance be clarified. 

FEMA again denied the appeal we made by simply reaffirming 

their original conclusion. 

FEMA’s response was short and general and did not explain how 

they reached the decision. We are saying we need more guidance 

and clarity from FEMA when they deny assistance to Indian tribes 

which encounter disasters. 

Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Begaye follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. RUSSELL BEGAYE, PRESIDENT, NAVAJO NATION

Ya ́’a ́t’e ́e ́h Chairman Hoeven, Ranking Member Udall, and Members of the Committee. My name is Russell Begaye. I am the elected President of the Navajo Nation. Thank you for this opportunity to present testimony to discuss the Navajo Nation’s experience in working with Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). 

I want to talk about two request for declarations that we worked on during my administration: a request for emergency declaration relating to the Gold King Mine 

spill in August 2015 and a request for a major disaster declaration concerning the 

Shiprock Flooding that occurred in August of 2016. Unfortunately, both of these requests for declarations were denied. We hope to provide testimony that will prevent 

tribes in similar situations from being denied federal emergency management resources in times of need. 

Gold King Mine, August 2015 

As this Committee is aware, on August 5, 2015, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and its contractors triggered a release of at least three million 

gallons of toxic mine waste in the waters directly upstream of the Navajo Nation. 

The toxic waste flowed into the Animas River and the San Juan River. The San 

Juan River runs approximately 250 miles along the northern border of the Navajo 

Nation. Thirteen Navajo Chapters were affected. Upon notice of the spill, the Navajo 

Nation took action immediately to shut down all intakes into the Shiprock, Upper 

Fruitland-Cambridge and Hogback irrigation canal systems. The Navajo Nation Department of Emergency Management (‘‘DEM’’) identified livestock watering points 

in the affected area. Our teams worked with the BIA to haul water and set up water 

tanks at these watering points. The Navajo Nation DEM provided ranchers and 

farmers information about safe water intake for livestock and for preserving crop 

fields. The Navajo Nation’s EPA monitored water quality at eleven strategic points 

along the San Juan River. The Nation’s DEM activated the Emergency Operations 

Center (EOC) to coordinate the Nation’s response to this toxic spill. In all, approximately 200 Navajo Nation DEM and Navajo EPA employees and volunteers assisted 

in the response to this disastrous federal EPA-triggered spill. No federal FEMA employees were ever on the ground. 

The Nation submitted its FEMA application for an emergency application on October 2, 2015. FEMA notified the Nation on October 20, 2015 that it denied our application for an emergency declaration. FEMA’s justification for the denial was that 

the agency determined that ‘‘the vast majority of the response and recovery efforts 

14 

for this event fall under the authorities of other federal agencies.’’ The ‘‘other federal 

agency’’ referred to by FEMA was the USEPA, the agency responsible for causing 

the emergency situation, and with a strong self-interest in minimizing the response 

in order to minimize potential liability for its actions. Despite this strong conflict 

of interest, the Obama administration designated USEPA as the lead federal agency 

for spill response. We believe the designation of the USEPA as the lead agency 

blocked assistance from other federal agencies including FEMA and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). For example, in discussions with FEMA staff, we 

were informed that FEMA’s ‘‘federal mission’’ does not include livestock and crop 

fields, and livestock and crop fields were the most affected by the toxic spill. FEMA 

staff also informed us that USDA assistance for livestock and crop fields are provided under major disaster declarations, not under emergency declarations. When 

we reached out to the USDA we were informed their regulations prohibited them 

from assisting us here because the livestock and crop fields were impacted by an 

emergency, not a major disaster. As you know, the USEPA recently declared that 

they are not legally responsible for the spill—just days before the Obama administration left office. The bottom line is that the USEPA caused this spill, and our Navajo people who have suffered greatly as a result of the spill have yet to be compensated for their damages. 

In addition to the above roadblocks, we were also informed that FEMA does not 

generally get involved in emergency assistance when an actual or potentially liable 

party is involved, as was the case with the Gold King Mine spill. 

In regards to FEMA and other agencies lack of involvement in the Gold King 

Mine spill, we ask whether FEMA applies this policy selectively because it is our 

understanding that FEMA provided assistance during the BP oil spill that occurred 

in the Gulf of Mexico where many federal departments became involved and there 

were liable parties. Why did President Obama’s FEMA engage in the BP-caused 

Gulf of Mexico spill, yet shy away from the USEPA-caused Gold King Mine spill? 

We ask the Committee to explore the difference in assistance and response between 

these two cases. 

FEMA’s denial of an emergency declaration also effectively denied the Nation assistance for its people through counseling services. We received many requests from 

the local chapters and individuals for counseling services. We would have applied 

for counseling services assistance from the U.S. Department of Health and Human 

Services (DHHS) for those affected by the spill as well as responders to the spill. 

However, when we requested this assistance from DHHS, it informed us that it can 

only provide this service if an emergency declaration is made and approved by 

FEMA. We request this policy be reviewed—our people should not be denied access 

to federal counseling services that would normally have been available under different political circumstances. 

Our Navajo DEM is made up of only 3 employees. When a disaster occurs, they 

must take the lead in organizing the response. This is a lot of work and yet at the 

same time, they have to make assessments, develop all the documentation, and submit all the required documents to FEMA. As such, our resources are stretched thin. 

Comparable State emergency departments are made up of 50 or more people. I 

imagine that a smaller Tribe than the Navajo Nation, who has limited or no resources will have even greater difficulty in getting any type of declaration approved 

by FEMA. I therefore urge Congress to review FEMA funding for Tribes so that our 

people can be better served in the event of a disaster. Our emergency response 

teams should have the same resources as State teams, and Congress can help ensure this parity. 

Because the USEPA caused this spill, it effectively prevented FEMA from taking 

the lead and engaging with the Navajo Nation. The USEPA then denied our claims 

a year-and-a-half after the spill and only days before the Obama administration left 

office. I find it appalling that a federal agency can cause a spill, testify before this 

Committee that it takes full responsibility, then prevent FEMA from engaging, then 

finally deny liability. This should never be allowed to happen again. 

Shiprock Flooding, August 2016 

From August 3–5, 2016, flooding occurred in northwest Shiprock, New Mexico on 

the Navajo reservation. Three hours after the rainstorm reached its peak, residents 

in the affected area began calling public rescue agencies who responded immediately. Individuals and families were evacuated to the Shiprock Chapter (‘‘Chapter’’) House. Red Cross had supplies and bedding set up in the Chapter House. The 

local emergency response team, entitled the Shiprock ALERT Team, set up a command post in the Chapter House. DEM provided technical assistance to the 

Shiprock ALERT Team. In the early morning of August 6th, breakers and water 

lines were shut down; roads were cleared of flood debris so that residents and resVerDate Mar 15 2010 11:16 Jul 12, 2017 Jkt 026164 PO 00000 Frm 00018 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\26164.TXT JACK
15 

1The 6th factor applies primarily to states. 

cuers could travel in and out of the area. A loader and bar screen was used to clear 

flood debris from the demolished houses. Trash bins were donated so that debris 

could be quickly removed, thus reducing risks to public health. Donations were 

being continuously received at the Chapter and distributed to affected residents. 

Temporary housing was found for those whose homes had washed away. Public 

meetings were held at the Chapter House to keep the community regularly informed. The Nation’s Division of Health staff assisted affected residents by providing them with safety and health information and monitoring them for days. 

The primary area where flooding occurred was approximately three square miles. 

Twenty-seven homes were affected and all were surveyed for damage by DEM and 

FEMA. Ten were deemed to be affected but habitable, two had minor damage and 

five sustained major damage. Ten homes were destroyed. Eleven vehicles were destroyed and five of these washed away. The damage to the affected families was documented and estimated at $967,516. Five months after the flooding seven families 

have been re-settled, nine families continue living in temporary homes, three have 

been provided trailers by the Navajo Nation, one person is homeless, one family purchased their own home, and one family is renovating their home to make it habitable. 

The Navajo Nation submitted its FEMA major disaster declaration application on 

September 21, 2016. On October 12, 2016, FEMA denied our application because 

FEMA ‘‘determined that the impact to individuals and households from this event 

was not of such severity and magnitude as to warrant supplemental federal disaster 

assistance.’’ The Nation appealed FEMA’s denial on November 9, 2016. Our appeal 

emphasized the individual assistance factors applied by FEMA pursuant to 44 CFR 

206.48(b): (1) concentration of damages, (2) trauma, (3) special populations, (4) voluntary agency assistance, and (5) insurance. 1 On November 28, 2016, FEMA notified the Nation that its appeal was denied. The denial simply reaffirmed FEMA’s 

original conclusion that the ‘‘impact to individuals and households from this event 

is not of the severity and magnitude as to warrant supplemental federal assistance.’’ 

The original FEMA denial stated only that the impact to the individuals and families was not severe enough and the magnitude was not sufficient enough. In our 

appeal, we gave more details about the impact experienced by the affected individuals and families in accordance with the factors applied by FEMA for individual assistance. Nonetheless, FEMA denied our appeal on the same basis of insufficient severity and magnitude. 

The Nation requests clearer guidance from FEMA to Indian tribes who apply for 

individual assistance. Because FEMA did not explain how and why it reached the 

conclusion that it did, we can only speculate about the basis of their conclusion with 

questions such as the following. Was the 3 square-mile area not of sufficient magnitude? Given the census population numbers we included for the Shiprock community, were 21 families not sufficient to warrant a declaration? Were the estimated 

total damage costs of $967,516 not severe enough or of sufficient magnitude? The 

Nation does not know what thresholds apply under each factor that FEMA considers 

in deciding whether a major disaster event qualifies for federal assistance. In addition, the Nation wonders whether the scope of the disaster response might have 

worked against a declaration decision because the locally-based Shiprock ALERT 

Team functioned as the primary responder, not the Nation’s DEM. Shiprock ALERT 

Team was right there in the community and could respond immediately and coordinate services for rescue, repair, and aid. Because the affected area was a residential 

area, the flooding did not impact any government operations or facilities. This experience with unclear guidance from FEMA about its individual assistance determinations leads us to request that FEMA provide clear guidance for Indian tribes with 

respect to applications for individual assistance. 

The Nation also recommends that FEMA consider a class of disaster relief that 

would allow for assistance for individuals who have disaster damages that are localized in scope even if tribal government functions and facilities are not affected. 

Given the limited resources of all types for Indian tribes, even a localized disaster 

event will greatly challenge the internal resources of most Indian tribes. 

Other Declarations 

Prior to my Presidency, there were two other Navajo Nation declarations approved by FEMA. One declaration was for a freeze that occurred across the Navajo 

Nation around December 2012 to January 2013. The Nation had filed a request for 

a major disaster declaration and FEMA approved the declaration. This declaration 

was filed shortly after the Stafford Act was changed to allow Indian tribes to file 

16 

declarations for themselves rather than go through the state. Navajo was one of the 

first few tribes to file pursuant to this new law. 

The other declaration was made as a result of severe storms, flooding and 

mudslides that occurred in New Mexico from July through September of 2013, but 

this assistance did not come from Navajo’s own declaration. Initially, from our understanding, Navajo was denied assistance from FEMA because the cumulative 

amount of Navajo’s documented damages did not exceed the $1 million threshold. 

In the alternative, the Nation filed as a subgrantee of the State of New Mexico 

under their declaration since their cumulative damages would then exceed the $1 

million threshold. The tribal threshold has since been reduced to $250,000, which 

now makes it easier for tribes to receive assistance. 

If you need further information on these declarations, we can provide it upon your 

request. 

Conclusion 

FEMA recently published a Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance dated January 

2017. We provided comments to the draft of this guidance. However, at this time, 

we are working to see if any of our comments were incorporated into that Guidance. 

When the flooding and the Gold King Mine spill occurred, we did not have this guidance and we had to rely on specialized expertise and navigate the complex maze 

of federal regulations. Since it is in the pilot phase, we shall see how this will help 

us out in the future. 

The Nation places a spotlight on the difficulties Indian tribes confront when attempting to apply for emergency declaration assistance, especially when federal 

guidelines and regulations require criteria that do not apply to an emergency event 

such as the toxic spill that contaminated the San Juan River and yet caused damage to vitally important tribal resources. As a result, many of the individual farmers 

and ranchers affected by the toxic spill remain uncompensated almost two years 

after the event. The fact that farmers have not been compensated for their EPAcaused losses and the fact that FEMA was prevented from engaging is absolutely 

unacceptable. I commend this Committee for focusing on tribes’ difficulties in obtaining disaster assistance from the Federal Government. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, President Begaye. 

We will now turn to Governor Chavarria. 

STATEMENT OF HON. J. MICHAEL CHAVARRIA, GOVERNOR, 

PUEBLO OF SANTA CLARA 

Mr. CHAVARRIA. [Greeting in native tongue.] 

Out of respect, Mr. Chairman, Vice Chairman and members of 

the Committee, my name is Michael Chavarria, Governor for Santa 

Clara Pueblo. 

In my native Santa Clara, I just asked the Chairman, out of respect, to speak on behalf of my Pueblo in Santa Clara and for an 

invitation to testify this afternoon before this Committee. 

In the last 20 years, the Santa Clara Pueblo has faced and overcome numerous natural disasters. In 2011, as Vice Chairman, I 

mentioned we were devastated with the Las Conchas fire. 

The fire caused damage to our forests and lands which is our 

pharmacy. The Santa Clara Creek is a biological classroom. Most 

of our Santa Clara Canyon, which is our spiritual sanctuary, has 

a 25.9 mile burn scar across our traditional lands. The burn scar 

destabilized the land and left our community vulnerable to 

flashfloods and mudslides. 

While FEMA and other Federal agencies have undertaken significant efforts to protect our people and our lands, that threat still 

remains. Our lands remain unstable and our prone to the imminent threat of flooding. 

However, we are thankful to those Federal agencies for coming 

to our aid and continue to partner for the resilience of flooding for 

Santa Clara Pueblo. 

17 

As mentioned, we had five presidential disaster declarations. We 

have two or three as a sub-grantee to the State of New Mexico and 

as Stafford amendments were made, we have two direct disaster 

declarations for Santa Clara Pueblo. 

There are serious financial considerations in choosing whether to 

proceed as a sub-grantee or as a direct grantee. As a sub-grantee 

to the State, we are responsible for 12.5 percent of that cost. However as a direct grantee, we are obligated to meet 25 percent of 

that cost while the Federal Government through FEMA covers the 

remaining 75 percent. 

With five presidential disaster declarations, Santa Clara has 

been responsible for tens of millions of dollars in cost sharing 

matches which has placed a tremendous burden on our already 

limited tribal budgets and has taken away from other social programs for our elders and children. 

One of the things I have recommended is adjusting the cost 

share thresholds to be more responsive to the financial needs of the 

tribe. Santa Clara took that opportunity by writing to Mr. Tony 

Robinson, Regional Administrator on September 26, 2014 pursuant 

to 44 CFR Subsection 206.47 about a reduction in the local cost 

share. ‘‘Yes, this request could be authorized but must be approved 

by the President.’’ 

With this, we are approved at a 10 percent cost share reduction. 

This is very vital because we are not wealthy financially. However, 

we are wealthy with our traditions, our culture and our religion. 

An important thing is our Native language which is the glue that 

holds together our culture and traditions. 

Because the devastation was so huge in November 2013, Santa 

Clara became the first tribal government to request and receive 

disaster recovery assistance under the National Disaster Recovery 

Framework, the NDRF. 

The NDRF is used to create a comprehensive federally-led strategy to the build the community’s resiliency to future flooding. The 

National Disaster Recovery Framework incorporates a recovery 

support strategy which enables the tribes to maximize their resources by enabling the tribes to coordinate with Federal, State 

and non-governmental organizations through a systematic approach that is mutually beneficial. Most importantly, it respects 

our sovereignty. 

I have submitted a written statement for this hearing. It contains the background of the fire, the impacts and continued threats 

to our existence as Santa Clara Pueblo. Most important is a graph 

that was provided by the Corps of Engineers that shows on any 

given day, we face a 100-year flood event. 

Pre-fire, it was 5,000 cubic feet per second. Because no more 

vegetation was there, we are now prone to a 21,000 cubic feet per 

second flood event within our canyon because of the altered hydrology. 

This is very important. Five minutes is not really enough time 

to go into full detail about our challenges. However, I would like 

to recommend that we support Stafford amendments which promote self determination and better reflect the unique governmentto-government relationship that exists between FEMA and tribal 

nations. 

18 

Second, we recommend the creation of a BIA emergency response 

fund that will be equipped to provide tribes with emergency funding to address short and long term disaster recovery and prevention efforts. 

Third, we also recommend additional funding for effective fire 

prevention treatment such as fuel breaks, hazardous fuel reduction 

projects which could then provide our lands with greater protection 

and reduce the need for extensive costly fire suppression efforts. 

Fourth, we support the expansion of land management programs 

such as the Tribal Forest Protection Act that empowers tribal governments to act as caretakers of those Federal lands adjacent to 

our reservation and partnering the tribes to protect the trust resources is very vital. 

Finally, we support the FEMA Tribal Declaration Pilot Guidance 

as a valuable addition to the Federal toolbox. It reflects the diverse 

voices of Indian country including our own and is responsive to our 

concerns. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. I now 

stand for any questions you may have at this time. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Chavarria follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF HON. J. MICHAEL CHAVARRIA, GOVERNOR, PUEBLO OF

SANTA CLARA


208a1.eps
19 


208a2.eps
20 


208a3.eps
21 


208a4.eps
22 


208a5.eps
23 


208a6.eps
24 


208a7.eps
25 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Governor Chavarria. 

Now we will turn to Director Desautel. 

STATEMENT OF CODY DESAUTEL, NATURAL RESOURCES 

DIRECTOR, CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE COLVILLE 

RESERVATION 

Mr. DESAUTEL. Good afternoon, Chairman Hoeven, Vice Chairman Udall, and members of the Committee. I appreciate the opportunity to testify today. 

My name is Cody Desautel and I am the Natural Resources Director for the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation. The 

tribe appreciates the opportunity and would like to share our important issues and experiences working with FEMA during disasters. 

The Colville Reservation covers approximately 1.4 million acres. 

The reservation is slightly larger than the State of Delaware by 

area. About half of the tribe’s members live on our reservation. 

Of the 1.4 million acres, more than 900,000 are forested and of 

those 900,000 forested acres, over 660,000 our part of our commercial cut base which we rely on for timber production and revenue 

that supports our tribal government. 

I am going to address three issues. The first will be the catastrophic fires we had in 2014 and 2015 and later a windstorm 

event we had in 2012. 

The catastrophic fires are explained in my written statement. In 

eastern Washington, we saw the worse fire season in the State’s 

history in 2014 and 2015. In 2014, four fires collectively referred 

to as the Carlton Complex, burned 256,000 acres in communities 

near the Colville Reservation. 

While damage to the Colville Reservation was comparatively 

small and limited to our inhabited rangeland, our tribal personnel 

assisted local governments in the suppression and recovery efforts. 


208a8.eps
26 

The Carlton Complex fire burned more than 300 homes and other 

structures and affected life and property throughout two watersheds. 

In 2015, the Colville Tribes endured the most destructive fire on 

an Indian reservation in recorded history. The North Star and 

Okanogan Complex fires collectively burned more than 255,000 

acres on the Colville Reservation, nearly 20 percent of the total 

land base, and approximately one-fourth of the commercial timber 

land. 

Approximately 800 million board feet of timber we think was 

burned but further inventory work is ongoing to fully assess the 

damage of that fire season. 

The 2015 fires statewide resulted in the deaths of three firefighters, a non-firefighting fatality and 21 injuries, and ultimately 

burned more than 1 million acres in the State. The Okanogan Complex fire surpassed the 2014 Carlton Complex fire as the largest 

fire in Washington State history. 

2015 marked the first year ever that Washington State officials 

asked residents to volunteer to assist in fighting wildfires. 

For both the 2014 Carlton Complex and the 2015 fires, the President issued PDDs that authorized public assistance for both the 

Colville Tribes and the affected local governments. In both cases, 

however, FEMA denied Governor Inslee’s requests for assistance 

for homeowners under FEMA’s Individual Assistance Program. 

The tribe then submitted its own separate request for Individual 

Assistance for on-reservation residents. FEMA denied that request 

as well. 

The second point is catastrophic wildfires should be treated differently by FEMA. Neither FEMA nor the Stafford Act adequately 

addresses the full extent of damage caused by massive, catastrophic wildfires, especially for Indian tribes. 

In the next few years to Colville Tribe’s single largest task will 

be replanting trees burned during the 2015 wildfire season. The 

only dedicated funding source for replanting is BIA funds which 

are somewhat limited, as I am sure you know. The BIA has a statutory obligation to replant Indian forests but its annual average reforestation budget is approximately $3.4 million. In comparison, 

the tribe’s request for rehabilitation funding was roughly $20 million. 

This would cover planting of less than 11,000 acres for all tribes 

nationwide. I think just in 2015, there was half a million acres of 

Indian forests burned. 

For catastrophic fire events, FEMA should provide immediate assistance for fire suppression, stabilization and landscape rehabilitation. For Indian forestland, FEMA should also provide resources for 

replanting in light of the United States’ trust obligations to reforest 

Indian forestland. 

One approach would be to create a separate disaster declaration 

category for catastrophic fire events. This concept was included in 

Title IX of the House-passed Resilient Federal Forests Act of 2015. 

As a third point, FEMA should re-examine its criteria to ensure 

rural tribal communities are treated fairly. One of FEMA’s criteria 

for evaluating requests for individual assistance is concentration of 

damages. 

27 

FEMA has never explained why it denied the Washington State 

and Colville Tribes’ requests for individual assistance for the 2014 

or 2015 fires. The tribes believe the fact that much of the damage 

was widespread over a large geographic area was the primary reason for the denial. 

Rural areas like the Colville Reservation are inherently prone to 

a lower concentration of damages based on population density but 

often suffer more damage than metropolitan areas. This was the 

case with the affected residents of the Colville Reservation, many 

of whom lost access to health care and other essentials due to extended road closures. 

Other tribal members lost their livelihoods when cattle and 

rangeland burned, which are damages that have persisted and will 

continue long after the fires were extinguished. 

The new FEMA Pilot Guidance for Tribal Disaster Declaration 

did not affect how FEMA applies concentration of damages to 

tribes. We believe FEMA should amend this guidance to issue new 

guidance that makes clear that rural Indian tribes will not be denied assistance based on concentration of damages. 

This concludes my testimony and I would be happy to answer 

any questions the Committee may have. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Desautel follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CODY DESAUTEL, NATURAL RESOURCES DIRECTOR, 

CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE COLVILLE RESERVATION

Good afternoon, Chairman Hoeven, Vice Chairman Udall, and members of the 

Committee. My name is Cody Desautel and I am the Natural Resources Director 

for the Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation (‘‘Colville Tribes’’ or the 

‘‘CCT’’). I appreciate the opportunity to testify on improving FEMA’s relationship 

with Indian tribes. 

My testimony today will focus on three issues: (1) the impact of three major disasters on the Colville Reservation during the past five years, including two massive 

wildfires; (2) why catastrophic wildfires should be treated differently by FEMA and 

under the Stafford Act; and (3) the need for FEMA to re-examine its criteria for 

evaluating disaster declarations for rural tribal communities. 

Background on the Colville Tribes and Major Disasters on the Colville Reservation 

Although now considered a single Indian tribe, the Confederated Tribes of the 

Colville Reservation is a confederation of twelve aboriginal tribes and bands from 

across eastern Washington State. The present-day Colville Reservation is in northcentral Washington State and was established by Executive Order in 1872. The 

Colville Reservation covers approximately 1.4 million acres and its boundaries include parts of Okanogan and Ferry counties. The CCT has more than 9,400 enrolled 

members, making it one of the largest Indian tribes in the Pacific Northwest, and 

the second largest in the State of Washington. About half of the CCT’s members live 

on or near the Colville Reservation. Of the 1.4 million acres that comprise the 

Colville Reservation, 922,240 acres are forested land, and 660,000 of the forested 

acres are commercial timber land. 

The Colville Tribes has endured three major disasters during the past five years. 

The first occurred in July 2012, when a major wind storm and flash flood toppled 

trees, destroyed power lines and tribal infrastructure, and blocked or damaged roads 

over an area of several hundred thousand acres. Although damage occurred reservation-wide, the community of Keller was most heavily affected by the storm. Homes 

were lost or damaged, and residents with undamaged homes were left without 

power for extended periods. The community water infrastructure was damaged by 

uprooted trees, and rural residents outside of the Keller community were without 

power for even longer. The Keller disaster occurred before the tribal amendments 

to the Stafford Act became law and the CCT worked with the State of Washington 

to ensure that the state included damage to the Colville Reservation as part of its 

request for a Presidential Disaster Declaration (PDD). President Obama issued the 

28 

PDD, which enabled the Colville Tribes and other affected jurisdictions to obtain assistance through FEMA’s Public Assistance program. 

Two years later, in 2014, four fires, collectively referred to as the ‘‘Carlton Complex’’ fires, burned 256,108 acres in communities near the Colville Reservation. 

While the Colville Reservation damage was comparatively small and limited to 

uninhabited rangeland, CCT personnel assisted local governments in the suppression and recovery efforts. The Carlton Complex fire burned more than 300 homes 

and other structures and affected life and property throughout two watersheds. 

Most recently, in 2015, the Colville Tribes endured the most destructive fire on 

an Indian reservation in recorded history. The North Star and Okanogan Complex 

fires collectively burned more than 255,000 acres on the Colville Reservation—nearly 20 percent of the total land base. Approximately one-fourth of the commercial 

timber land on the Reservation burned or was affected, which included 788 million 

board feet of timber. These two fires were part of the worst wildfire season in Washington state history that saw more than 121 fires ignited during a four-day period 

from August 10–14, 2015. 

The 2015 fires statewide resulted in the deaths of three firefighters, a non-firefighting fatality, 21 injuries, and ultimately burned more than 1 million acres. The 

Okanogan Complex fire surpassed the 2014 Carlton Complex fire as the largest fire 

in Washington state history. 2015 marked the first year ever that Washington state 

officials asked residents to volunteer to assist in fighting wildfires. 

For both the 2014 Carlton Complex and the 2015 fires, Washington State Governor Inslee requested, and President Obama issued, PDDs that authorized Public 

Assistance for both the Colville Tribes and the affected local governments. In both 

cases, however, FEMA denied the Governor’s requests for assistance for homeowners under FEMA’s Individual Assistance program. Following FEMA’s denial of 

the Governor’s Individual Assistance request for the 2015 fires, the Colville Tribes 

submitted its own separate request for Individual Assistance for on-reservation residents. FEMA denied that request as well. 

Catastrophic Wildfires Should be Treated Differently by FEMA and in the 

Stafford Act 

Currently, neither FEMA nor the Stafford Act adequately addresses the full extent of damage caused by massive, catastrophic wildfires. While FEMA did establish 

an ‘‘Erosion Threat Assessment Reduction Team’’ to assess post-fire rehabilitation 

needs, the funding for carrying out most of those activities must be secured from 

other sources. Funding for immediate landscape stabilization can be charged to the 

Department of the Interior’s Wildland Fire Management program, but longer term 

Burn Area Rehabilitation funding is extremely limited for Indian tribes nationwide, 

as are funds for replanting. 

In the next few years, the single biggest task will be replanting trees burned during the 2015 wildfire season. Although the Colville Tribes has and continues to seek 

alternative funding sources, the only dedicated federal source of replanting funds for 

Indian forests are BIA forestry funds. The BIA has a statutory obligation to replant 

Indian forest land but its average annual reforestation budget is approximately $3.2 

million for tribes nationwide. 

The BIA’s entire $3.2 million budget would cover planting of less than 11,000 

acres. Relying only on BIA funds would mean the hundreds of thousands of acres 

of forest land on the Colville Reservation may not be replanted for decades, if ever. 

In contrast to the obstacles the CCT must endure given the limitations of the BIA’s 

reforestation budget, the U.S. Forest Service is already implementing its plans to 

replant the 9,095 acres of national forest land affected by the 2014 and 2015 fires. 

The CCT has traditionally relied on forest products and stumpage as primary 

sources of revenue to fund tribal government programs. The long-term damage to 

the CCT’s economy and government will be felt for decades unless replanting can 

take place soon. The loss of forest lands will also have a lasting cultural impact on 

the Colville Tribes and its members. The fires devastated big game populations, cultural plants, and culturally significant sites reservation-wide. 

FEMA programs do not address the full extent of the damage caused by catastrophic fire events, including fires on non-Indian federal lands. FEMA should provide immediate assistance for fire suppression, stabilization, and landscape rehabilitation. For Indian forest land, FEMA should also provide assistance for replanting 

in light of the United States’ statutory obligations to reforest Indian forest land. 

One approach would be to create a separate disaster declaration category for catastrophic fire events, like what was included in Title IX of the House-passed Resilient 

Federal Forests Act of 2015 (H.R. 2647). That provision would have authorized the 

President to declare a major disaster for wildfires on federal lands (including Indian 

trust lands) and authorized FEMA to aid the Departments of the Interior and AgriVerDate Mar 15 2010 11:16 Jul 12, 2017 Jkt 026164 PO 00000 Frm 00032 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\26164.TXT JACK
29 

culture for extraordinary wildfire suppression costs that exceed the 10-year average. 

The scope and severity of fire events continues to grow and this type of solution is 

needed to ensure that both Indian and non-Indian communities can fully recover 

from massive fire events. 

FEMA Should Re-examine its Criteria to Ensure Rural Tribal Communities 

are Treated Fairly 

One of FEMA’s criteria for evaluating requests for Individual Assistance is concentrations of damages. As stated in FEMA regulations, ‘‘High concentrations of 

damages generally indicate a greater need for Federal assistance than widespread 

and scattered damages throughout a State.’’ 44 C.F.R. § 206.48(b)(1). The FEMA 

pilot guidance for tribal disaster declarations did not modify this criterion or otherwise change how FEMA applies it to tribes. 

FEMA has never publicly articulated the basis for its denials of the Washington 

state and Colville Tribes’ requests for Individual Assistance for the 2014 and 2015 

fires. Based on discussions with local officials and our congressional delegation, 

however, we believe that the fact that much of the damage was widespread over a 

large geographic area was the primary reason for FEMA’s denials. 

Rural areas like the Colville Reservation are inherently prone to a lower concentration of damages based on population density. However, the economic, social, 

agricultural, and cultural damages from major disasters often impact rural communities much more severely than in metropolitan areas. This was the case with the 

affected residents of the Colville Reservation, many of whom lost access to health 

care and other essentials due to extended road closures. Other tribal members lost 

their livelihoods when cattle and rangeland burned, which are damages that have 

persisted and will continue long after the fires were extinguished. 

In the 114th Congress, members of the Washington state congressional delegation 

introduced the ‘‘Individual Assistance Improvement Act of 2015’’ (H.R. 4243), which 

would have waived the concentration of damages criterion for rural communities in 

certain instances. Until a permanent legislative or administrative fix can be made, 

FEMA should amend existing guidance or issue new guidance that makes clear that 

rural Indian tribes will not be denied assistance based on concentration of damages. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Director Desautel. 

With that, we will turn to questions. The Chairman and Vice 

Chairman will save their questions until the end, at least for this 

hearing. That could change from hearing to hearing. That is how 

we will start. We will start with Senator Lankford. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES LANKFORD, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA 

Senator LANKFORD. Thank you very much. 

I appreciate all of you being here and appreciate your testimony 

and the conversation on this. This is a pilot program that has very 

far reaching implications. As this dais has heard me say before, 

Oklahoma is a little different in the way we handle reservation and 

non-reservation areas. 

As a non-reservation State, there is a tremendous amount of area 

that is historic tribal area where there are no businesses in trust 

or lands in trust or tribal headquarters that are there. My question 

really relates to this program and how this would work and function. 

It is my understanding that for a tribe to make a disaster declaration, it is $250,000 worth of damage. For a State to make a 

declaration, it is $1 million. Is that correct? 

Mr. AMPARO. Senator, you are referring to what is termed as a 

‘‘minimum damage amount.’’ For States, it is a $1 million damage 

amount. For tribes, it is $250,000 but that is not a threshold as if 

you have $250,000, there is a guarantee for a declaration. 

In the pilot, this is part of the comments we have received in our 

listening sessions, the $1 million for tribes was just too high. 

30 

Senator LANKFORD. So how do you deal with areas of overlap? 

For instance, we have many communities where we may have a 

city and county that would have issues; you would also have tribal 

areas within that same historic area. What accounts for overlap in 

an area like Oklahoma where we are a non-reservation location? 

Mr. AMPARO. There is coordination with Albert Ashwood, the 

State Director of Emergency Management in Oklahoma, close coordination with our regional office, Region 6 out of Denton, Texas, 

with the tribes and the State, the tribes and the State being the 

eligible entities to be grantees. 

There are situations where we have seen even tribes that did not 

have land but had infrastructure that was damaged that worked 

closely with the State on a declaration request. I would tell you the 

way that overlap is adjudicated is through coordination between 

the State and our regional office. 

Senator LANKFORD. Let me ask about the pilot, the functioning 

of it. 

We are approaching the end of it in many ways as we look on 

the horizon at 2020. Is that the end of the pilot program? 

Mr. AMPARO. We do not have an official end to the pilot program. 

It has taken us several years of consultation with tribes to develop 

the pilot guidance. It is now in effect. It will be in effect for at least 

two years at which time we would evaluate through data collection 

what our findings are and what future changes we would make to 

guidance. 

Senator LANKFORD. What metrics are you using at this point to 

be able to determine that? As you say you are putting it out to 

them; you have two years to evaluate it. Do you already have those 

metrics in place to see what you want to try to achieve? 

Mr. AMPARO. I think Senator Murkowski mentioned a couple of 

the issues we have with the two declarations requests that came 

through. There were different types of events. They were unique in 

the way they are. 

We continue to hear comments from Indian country on things 

that may not have been contemplated where we have put the guidance out. We are open to those in this pilot period to account for 

them. 

I think just a sheer number of how many declarations were 

granted versus ones that were not, it is not our measure. We would 

like to be able to is compare a period of time under this pilot guidance to a period of time that we were not under this pilot guidance 

and look to see what the findings are and be open to what the data 

tells us. 

Senator LANKFORD. Mr. President? 

Mr. BEGAYE. Thank you, Senator. 

We are asking this Committee to make that disaster balance a 

permanent designation of $250,000 because it really is difficult for 

communities and rural areas to reach that $1 million threshold 

that we had to abide by earlier. 

Now with this new guidance, we are asking the Committee to keep that at $250,000 as the amendment for damages. 

Senator LANKFORD. Let me ask a question as well. Is there any 

properties, locations or structures that are excluded from a disaster 

declaration? If a tribe says these are sacred lands and here is a cerVerDate Mar 15 2010 11:16 Jul 12, 2017 Jkt 026164 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\26164.TXT JACK
31 

tain building, there is a house of worship, or there is a meeting 

place or a business, is there any type of structure that FEMA 

would say we do not recognize and will not allot funds to that? 

Mr. AMPARO. No, sir. Quite the contrary, we work very closely 

with the tribes. We have environmental and historic preservation 

experts. We also look to the tribes to provide us some of the cultural experts on tribal lands. 

In the declarations we have worked specifically with the Oglala 

Sioux Tribe in a large disaster, our reliance on tribal expertise is 

immense. That is the direction in which we are moving. 

Senator LANKFORD. Just clarification, sacred lands, houses of 

worship, meeting spots, all of those would be included? 

Mr. AMPARO. Yes, sir, as tribal infrastructure. 

Senator LANKFORD. Thank you. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Cortez Masto. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, 

U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Mr. Amparo and Mr. Booth, thank you very much. Thank you all 

for joining us. I have a specific question that impacts my State of 

Nevada. 

Most people do not realize there are actually 32 Indian reservations and colonies that stretch across Nevada. Unfortunately, in 

January of this year, we had a severe flooding event in northern 

Nevada that impacted the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe. 

I have similar questions when it comes to the emergency declaration because I know under the Pilot Guidance you just released, 

there is a requirement that the emergency declaration can be made 

by the chief executive of the affected tribal government or governor 

of the State but it has to be made within 30 days of the occurrence 

of the incident. 

In my State, if the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe decides to work 

with the governor, who has not declared that emergency yet because they are still assessing the damage, can you address for me 

whether that 30 days is going to impact whether they are able to 

receive the funds or not or how you handle that 30 day timeline? 

Mr. AMPARO. Senator, the 30 day is a regulatory timeframe that 

we have. We are aware of the preliminary damage assessments 

that are underway along with the work the tribe and the State are 

working together on. Our commitment is to continue to work closely. 

The impetus behind the Tribal Declaration Guidance and the 

change to the Stafford Act through the Senate Recovery Act was 

to provide an option to the tribe, an option that they can go with 

a declaration in partnership with the State and that has occurred 

and continues to occur throughout the country. 

Quite frankly, that is a great partnership between tribes and 

States or tribes have gone directly to the President through this. 

That provides their option. That option still exists but our commitment is to work closely with the State and the tribe. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Just for clarification, if they do not get 

it within that 30 days, you are still willing to accept that declaraVerDate Mar 15 2010 11:16 Jul 12, 2017 Jkt 026164 PO 00000 Frm 00035 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 S:\DOCS\26164.TXT JACK
32 

tion and work with them to respond and provide the appropriate 

monetary response if possible? 

Mr. AMPARO. That is correct. I would say that the State and the 

tribe can request an extension prior to the end of the 30 days. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Okay. That could be normal course? 

Mr. AMPARO. Yes, ma’am. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Maybe this is something you can provide 

to me later. I would like to know how active the regional tribal liaison is for region 9, particularly leading up to the severe event. If 

you could provide that to me in writing after this that would be 

fantastic. 

Mr. AMPARO. I absolutely will, Senator. I would also take the 

time to say that among tribes, your State is among the greatest 

number participating in the flood insurance program as well. That 

is a good thing. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. You just dovetailed right into the next 

discussion. As we all know, the reauthorization of the National 

Flood Insurance Program is very important. We also know that 

participation in the program overall is low among Native American 

communities. 

Can you talk a little bit about what effort FEMA has undertaken 

to boost participation in this program and ensure that these communities have affordable flood insurance? 

Mr. AMPARO. Senator, I would like to be able to get back to you 

with more specifics but I will tell you what I do know. 

One, we announced yesterday consultation that will begin with 

Indian country on hazard mitigation planning review. That is an 

effort that we are undergoing to ensure that tribes have hazard 

mitigation plans in place prior to events from happening. 

In the same sense, part of my opening oral testimony has been 

to show you a bit about how agency has evolved as well. Working 

directly with tribes has increased our capacity internally. 

I believe in Region IX, your region, there is more than one regional tribal liaison. Now we are including in their body of work 

the responsibility to talk about all FEMA programs as we have 

interaction in both consultation but also in participation at one of 

our training institutes or outreach that we do to the tribes. 

We are providing information about the National Flood Insurance Program and what steps tribes can take to be active participants. 

Senator CORTEZ MASTO. Thank you very much. 

Mr. AMPARO. Thank you, Senator. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Murkowski. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I want to give a special shout out to Mr. Booth, who I understand 

hails originally from Metlakatla. 

Mr. BOOTH. That is correct, Senator. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. It is good to have you here. We appreciate 

your leadership. 

I mentioned in my opening comments the request from two villages. The Village of Nutok on December 24 applied for a presidential declaration of major disaster. They had destruction of their 

barge landing, sewage disposal systems, solid waste site, boat dock, 

33 

45 homes damaged and were concerned they will lose their water 

supply later this year. 

Again, the response to Nutok was that this request was denied 

because it did not fit the requirements of the Stafford Act. We recognize that Nutok’s request was unique. This slow moving disaster, 

as I mentioned, is unique to FEMA. 

Even more recent was Kivalina’s request. They submitted their 

application for major disaster declaration on January 15, 2017. It 

was denied on February 1. In that application for disaster, they 

cited severe storms, flooding, persistent erosion, storm led to shutdown of the airport and does not allow for opportunities for evacuations. 

Clearly, these are situations that anyone would look at and say, 

this is a disaster area. If it is not a disaster immediately, it is 

clearly a disaster in the making. 

The question I have today is they were not given a reason for the 

denial except that based on FEMA’s review of the major disaster 

declaration, it was not appropriate to address the situation in these 

communities. 

It kind of begs the question what is appropriate? What is 

FEMA’s path forward for communities whether it is Nutok or 

Kivalina today, Shishmaref or other communities tomorrow? If you 

can provide any information or any reasoning behind the denials 

to me and whether or not FEMA was able to offer anything else 

in terms of guidance or assistance? 

I am trying to understand whether there are written policies out 

there that guide FEMA with these slow moving disasters and 

where are we with situations as these communities are facing? 

Mr. AMPARO. Senator Murkowski, I will tell you that I agree with 

you. The situation of a slow moving disaster in the making is something not contemplated under the Stafford Act but it is a situation 

that we face, I think collectively ‘‘we.’’ 

In that vein, I will also say that situations like this would call 

for more than a single-pronged approach in terms of FEMA or Federal declaration and one that is more akin to a whole of government approach. 

We do have a hazard mitigation grant program to allow for taking efforts prior to a disaster to lessen the impacts of a disaster, 

yet even within that program, I think that would not solve the 

problem faced by the communities. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. Let me ask you then, because I agree with 

everything that you have said. One of the reasons that these applications were submitted, was recognized by the communities that 

these were unique, was because they have tried and have come 

looking for direct appropriations, an earmark. 

They have contacted the Corps trying to work through the Army 

Corps of Engineers and have basically been told, well, until you fall 

off the edge, there is no relief for you. 

When the Obama Administration announced its climate resilience grants last year, they thought ah ha, this is exactly where 

we can go and they made application through the Administration. 

Alaska villages got nothing from that. 

They said okay, you have the Stafford Act out there and if not 

there, where? Is this something that you will commit to me and to 

34 

our Alaska Native villages, not just the Alaska Native villages, but 

we have other communities as well that are in jeopardy, that we 

can be working through to define how we can address some of 

these threats before we see that loss of life, before we see an entire 

village wiped out? 

Mr. AMPARO. Senator, you have my commitment that I will work 

with you, your staff, and the Alaska Native villages on this issue, 

including bringing in other Federal agency partners that may be 

necessary. 

Senator MURKOWSKI. You are right. It does need to be a whole 

of agency approach. Again, we are looking for guidance and somebody to step up and take point because to this point in time, no 

agency has been willing to shoulder it. 

It is a significant task but it is one that I think we recognize we 

have to address. We are going to have to address more situations 

like this rather than less going forward. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Thank you, Senator Murkowski. 

Senator Cantwell. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

I would like to turn to Mr. Desautel’s comments as it relates to 

the impacts that rural communities are seeing and FEMA’s designation. Mr. Desautel mentioned how two requests by rural communities in our State were turned down by FEMA frankly because 

the way the definition works, it does not recognize rural communities. 

I do not know, Mr. Amparo, if you have any comments about that 

definition and how it came into place. Just so my colleagues know, 

this would be like saying Galena, Taos, Aspen or something does 

not have an impact because there is not a concentration when in 

reality, the impact to that community is just as devastating. 

The fact that it is a rural community, maybe based on tourism, 

maybe in our case, at least in Twisp and other aspects of the 

Carlton Complex fire, the workforce was basically unable to locate 

in the region. 

They continued to support the hotel and continued to support all 

this but because your definition says it has to have this concentration of population and this much assessment of housing damage 

across the population area, these communities do not get any help. 

Mr. AMPARO. My comments in this area would be that I do not 

believe it is the definition of a concentration of damage or is it an 

issue of rural vs. urban. It is more of what the aggregate damage 

and destruction was. 

The Stafford Act is for supplementary assistance when an event 

has exceeded the capacity of the tribe or the State. In the case of 

Colville, I do not have the damage assessments in front of me, I 

believe it was more the case of the damages in aggregate, not the 

fact that the damages occurred in an area that was rural. 

Senator CANTWELL. I am pretty sure they were pretty significant 

if he said there was 20 percent loss in revenue. Mr. Desautel, do 

you want to address that? 

Mr. DESAUTEL. We never really got a response as to why we were 

denied but that was our assumption. From a damages standpoint, 

we still do not know to this day. We have been working on getting 

35 

a full assessment for a year and a half but the damage was so vast, 

we still do not have a good handle on what that number might be 

as far as total economic loss or total resource damage. 

Senator CANTWELL. Is it in the hundreds of millions? 

Mr. DESAUTEL. I would guess it is north of $100 million. It is $100 million just in timber revenue. 

Senator CANTWELL. Okay, so pretty significant damage when 

that is your operating revenue for your government? 

Mr. DESAUTEL. Yes, ma’am. 

Senator CANTWELL. Pretty significant. 

I think, Mr. Amparo, I really do believe this Committee has to 

come back and address this or other committees because I think we 

are going to continue to see this kind of devastation. I do not think 

these trends are going to stop, whether it is flooding or fire. They 

are not going to stop. 

I think the point is that while you are thinking of it as the impact of damage, you have to think of it as a percentage of that 

rural economy. What happens in the State of Washington, a rural 

economy that exists on a major thoroughfare, is the anchor for the 

entire region is decimated and people cannot go to work because 

there is no housing. It becomes a problem. 

I wanted to touch, Mr. Desautel, on another related issue particularly since my colleague from Alaska is here and she and I have 

worked so hard on trying to get out a timber bill. 

One of the things I believe you have been able to do successfully 

on the Colville Reservation is the type of fuel reduction that has 

helped in protecting some of your timberlands by creating barriers 

and efforts to better manage the forest, is that correct? 

Mr. DESAUTEL. That is correct. We have done active forest management which was commercial type treatments that has reduced 

stocking and changed species composition for those acres so those 

acres are more resilient to fire. 

We have done other fuels type treatment, especially in those 

areas where we see risk to communities. We also see resources 

pulled when we have active fires. 

Senator CANTWELL. Even though we saw devastating seasons, 

you saw success in having done that kind of work. If we could do 

more of it in the future, it would be helpful to protecting our communities? 

Mr. DESAUTEL. Yes, I think you are exactly right. We have done 

a lot of it. We have not done enough of it. It is definitely a pace 

and scale thing that there are lots of acres that are growing into 

fire regime twos and threes, for those familiar with that, where 

they are very susceptible to insect, disease and fire. 

You need to make sure we are treating enough that we are keeping pace with that while making progress towards making those 

acres resilient for future fires and disturbance. 

Senator CANTWELL. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. Senator Franken. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, congratulations on heading up this Committee. 

As I mentioned in my opening statement, I am concerned about 

the Prairie Island Indian Community in my State. Prairie Island 

36 

Indian Community is located essentially on an island in the Mississippi River on the river’s floodplain. 

The nuclear reactor and the nuclear waste sites are located about 

600 yards from the nearest home on Prairie Island. The community 

is obviously concerned about the potential for emergency situations 

causes by either the power plant or by the flooding. This concern 

is exacerbated because there are few evacuation routes off the reservation. 

My question for both Mr. Amparo and Mr. Booth is basically, has 

FEMA consulted with the Prairie Island Reservation to develop an 

emergency preparedness plan? 

Mr. AMPARO. Senator Franken, I spoke earlier with our regional 

office out of Chicago, Region V. I have information that they have 

a very good relationship with the Prairie Island Community, specifically because of their proximity to the nuclear plant. 

Because of that, tribal government staff has hosted and participated in several of the FEMA tribal emergency training. Additionally, the community has participated in exercises that have been 

offered by our regional office as well. 

There are requirements as well from the nuclear power plant site 

to help host those types of exercises to ensure that the community 

is aware of hazards, evacuation planning and the like. 

Senator FRANKEN. So there are evacuation routes in place and a 

plan in place in case of an event? 

Mr. AMPARO. Yes, sir. I can get back to you with specifics on that 

plan and those evacuation routes. I do know having spoken with 

our regional office that there is a good working relationship with 

the community. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you. 

Obviously every tribe is unique and so is its relationship with the 

State government. In Minnesota, tribes and State government have 

a good working relationship when it comes to preparedness and relief from disasters. 

It is my understanding that the Tribal Stafford Act does not outline ways for the States to work collaboratively with tribes and obviously coordination between tribal and State governments is very 

important during disaster relief efforts and during the events. 

Can you speak, Mr. Amparo or Mr. Booth, to what FEMA does 

to foster the relationship between the States and the tribes? 

Mr. AMPARO. Yes, sir. I outlined a bit of what we went into just 

with the consultation for our Tribal Declaration Guidance in working with tribes. Prior to coming to work at FEMA, I worked with 

the State of Florida in emergency management. We worked with 

our Miccosukee and Seminole Indian tribes there. 

It is a relationship which we value because many times there are 

declarations or there are disasters that are not declared. I think we 

have spoken about several here today. The relationship between a 

State and the tribes pays dividends in helping disaster survivors 

where they are. 

We have hosted training sessions. The exercises that we do are 

both with tribes and with State partners, again valuing that. Last 

year, when we did the Cascadia exercise, the Cascadia subduction 

zone, we had 24 tribes participate along with three States, so they 

37 

were working jointly at the State level and also at the local emergency management level. 

Senator FRANKEN. I was wondering also about the counties. Obviously that coordination seems to be key to me because it is all 

hands on deck during an emergency. 

Mr. AMPARO. Locally is where the resources come first as well, 

whether it is a fire engine. 

Senator FRANKEN. Or getting electricity back up. 

Mr. AMPARO. That is right, so it is the Rural Electric Cooperative 

that is providing services. 

Senator FRANKEN. Thank you, gentlemen. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

The CHAIRMAN. This question is for either Mr. Amparo or Mr. 

Booth. 

President Begaye talked about when they had the mine disaster 

and the spill on the reservation that essentially FEMA took the position that all the other agencies were in there taking care of 

things. 

You talked about working with other agencies. Tell us how you 

work with those other agencies and when other agencies are involved, how do you make that decision to come in or not come? I 

want you to specifically respond to the situation Mr. Begaye described. 

In other words, there is a big difference between you coming in 

immediately and providing disaster assistance and relief assistance 

or taking the position, well, there are other agencies taking care of 

that, so we are not going to. 

I want you to respond to that and then I am going to ask President Begaye to kind of tell me what he thinks of that, how it works 

and how it should work. I will start with you. 

Mr. AMPARO. Sir, I am a Federal public servant and I am an 

emergency manager. When faced with situations like this, we certainly recognize where FEMA has authority to operate. Sometimes 

our assistance is not the emergency assistance, it is reimbursement 

assistance. It is dollars to help pay for what other agencies can provide. 

I certainly know that in the spill, the Environmental Protection 

Agency had jurisdiction but we do work as a interagency. I think 

that is what is expected of us as Federal servants. We work 

through what is known as the Emergency Support Function Leadership Group, the ESFLG, where we have all interagency partners 

there. We discuss the threats out there. 

It is also my understanding that in that spill, the Environmental 

Protection Agency set up a Unified Coordination Group. I can go 

back and get much more specifics and respond to you with much 

more clarity but I will tell you, at least from the posture of our 

agency, our agency’s leadership, we do see ourselves as a coordinating entity, even in ensuring that the right agencies get to be 

able to support the communities and individuals impacted by disaster. 

The CHAIRMAN. President Begaye, would you discuss how that 

worked on the ground and how you think it should work or could 

be improved? 

38 

Mr. BEGAYE. Yes. The response we got from FEMA, this is what 

they said, ‘‘The vast majority of the response and recovery efforts 

for this event, Gold King Mine spill, fall under the authorities of 

other Federal agencies,’’ which meant to us the U.S. EPA. 

I met with USDA and asked them, why aren’t you helping us? 

They said, ‘‘We were told that we are not the lead agency; that 

EPA is the lead agency and we are not to assist unless they ask 

us to come to the table.’’ 

I said, well, why can’t you just use your normal, regular responsibilities and help us clean out the ditches where the spill came in 

and just help us from that standpoint because we are talking about 

farmers and so forth? Why can’t you just come under your own program, not under EPA? 

We understand this whole dynamic that has taken place as far 

as EPA saying back off other Federal agencies; we are the lead in 

this disaster and we will ask you when we need you to come to assist Navajo Nation. 

We are asking that this policy change, that there be a definite 

‘‘collaboration among Federal agencies when any disaster occurs.’’ 

FEMA, HHS, or any Federal agency should come to assist in any 

type of major disaster, declaration or emergency declaration. 

I believe that needs to be clarified also because there is one category for major disaster declaration and then there is another category for emergency declaration. Under the major disaster, they 

will come and help assist farmers, ranchers with livestock and crop 

losses. Under emergency declaration, we understand they could not 

help in that instance. 

All of those need to be clarified. All Federal agencies need to be 

called on to assist in any disaster, especially in the magnitude of 

the Gold King Mine. 

The CHAIRMAN. Now I am going to go to Governor Chavarria and 

ask essentially the same question on the Pilot Guidance, if it is 

what it should be or if it should be modified. If so, how? 

Before I do, did you have any response, Mr. Amparo? 

In regard to President Begaye? 

I am very concerned. When a tribe or anyone else has to start 

trying to figure out which agency is going to help and each agency 

says, it is really that agency, it can be a very frustrating and difficult situation. Particularly in an emergency response, I am concerned about that. 

Mr. AMPARO. Senator, I have a response and I will tell you that 

I do have questions. I believe there is an exigency that a tribe must 

have the right answers when faced with a disaster. I agree with 

that. 

I also believe that, quite frankly, one of the things we are doing 

with our outreach, with our tribal liaisons, is to talk about what 

FEMA programs do and do not do, and what other Federal agencies can provide so that it is not when the disaster is at our doorstep that we are having that conversation. We can preplan and 

know ahead of time. 

There is more work. Part of my statement is to say that there 

is much more work for us to do, including our other Federal agency 

partners, to work with Indian country about what our programs 

39 

provide and how we can synchronize them so that they are efficient. 

The CHAIRMAN. President Begaye. 

Mr. BEGAYE. Just the word jurisdiction really implies that this 

is our responsibility. It is our jurisdiction and not yours. That language needs to be taken out. 

The other thing is right answers. To me, it should not be that. 

If you provide the right answers, we will help you. That should not 

be the response of FEMA. They should be coming alongside and 

helping us develop those applications because we do not know what 

the right answers are or what the right languages are. 

We need FEMA to come alongside and help us help those people 

who are losing homes, vehicles, farms, crops, irrigation and things 

like that. We need them to come alongside us and treat us as 

human beings. 

The CHAIRMAN. I think that is the key. Even if it is not a FEMA 

response, it is a FEMA responsibility to make sure that the agency, 

whoever is the responder, is taking care of things. That should be 

a FEMA role as well as direct response if you are not the direct 

responder. That is kind of what I am getting at here. 

Governor Chavarria, your thoughts? 

Mr. CHAVARRIA. I also feel that it is open to interpretation. Yes, 

we have the Pilot Guidance document but it comes with challenges. 

It is a new process for both the tribes and FEMA. We are the first 

tribe in Region 6 to utilize the Stafford Act amendments to allow 

the tribes to go direct. 

However, as the changes to the Stafford Act allows tribes to see 

that direct disaster declaration are promulgated, FEMA may be 

better served by implanting a training program that better communicates the regulatory requirements associated with being a direct 

guarantee. 

This would better enable the tribes to make an informed decision 

regarding FEMA’s assistance may it be for your public assistance 

or your individual assistance. Those are different categories that 

fall within FEMA. 

It is very important. It is not a catchall because FEMA is not the 

answer to all the disasters. You have the Corps, BIA, the Bureau 

of Reclamation, the Forest Service, and the Park Service. All these 

other agencies are out there but how do they fit in because the 

time of need is where that dollar needs to hit our communities. 

We have had bad experiences as sub-grantees. Our first disaster 

happened on August 21, 2011. We did not get the funds until almost a year later. By then, you have additional events. That is very 

important. Yes, there is a process. However, what is critical that 

starts off anything is your hazard mitigation plan. If you do not 

have a hazard mitigation plan, you do not even qualify. That is important. 

As the President said, the facts need to be addressed to all tribes 

and have a good understanding of the regulatory requirements because even though you do not meet that $250,000 threshold, you 

are not even eligible for financial assistance. That is hurtful and 

again, it is not a catchall. 

The best way that FEMA and tribes can really get together is sit 

down, have a training session, so both sides understand what the 

40 

roles and responsibilities are or what we are accountable for on 

both sides of aisle. 

The CHAIRMAN. Exactly right. We are on the front end of this, 

so it is building the process and making sure it works and fostering 

understanding. 

Mr. CHAVARRIA. Yes. 

The CHAIRMAN. Director Desautel, anything else along that line 

from your recent experience? 

Mr. DESAUTEL. One thing I think FEMA struggles with is in our 

area, when there were disaster declarations, they used the county 

records to assess value to try to get to that threshold but for trust 

properties, they are not assessed by the county so they do not have 

a good way to value resources whether it be homes or land damage. 

I think that is also something that needs to be assessed to determine what values are placed on tribal lands. If you do not have an 

accounting system like the counties have to document what the 

value is, it is really difficult for us to manage the process and show 

$250,000 worth of damages. 

The CHAIRMAN. Mr. Amparo, anything that you want to add to 

respond to that? 

Mr. AMPARO. Yes. I think that is a great point. It is one we heard 

very loud and clear. In our Tribal Declarations Guidance, we took 

that into account. Now we will go to the tribe and ask them to provide us that information. 

There has also been some great movement with the Oglala Sioux 

Tribe where they are working to get better numbers themselves. 

When we are active in a joint field office, we work with the tribe 

to help them either map the roads or help them get more but I 

would like to have our tribal advisor talk a little bit to the Governor’s comments and our efforts to better create an environment 

where we are sharing more information. 

Mr. BOOTH. Thank you, Mr. Amparo. 

Mr. Chairman and Mr. Vice Chairman, to address the Governor’s 

comments about training and integration with our rollout plan that 

we started last week, we started off with a national webinar/conference call. 

It continued this week at the United South and Eastern Tribes 

where we had our Tribal Consultation Coordinator for the Tribal 

Declarations Pilot Guidance give that presentation so we can collect those comments and get the word out. 

We are going to continue doing this as immediately as next week 

at the National Congress of American Indians’ Executive Winter 

Session and will continue as we move forward both at regional and 

national tribal associations. 

The CHAIRMAN. I think it is very important. Again, you are on 

the front end of the process. You need to create that understanding, get the good input and build the best approach you can 

with all the tribes. 

I apologize, Vice Chairman, for going over my time. I should have 

broken that up into two but I did not realize that some of my questions would go as long as they did. However, you go ahead and 

complete with any questions that you have. 

41 

Senator UDALL. That is the Chairman’s discretion. No problem 

there. It is good to finish your train of thought and get the points 

in. We really appreciate that. 

What the Chairman has outlined here is very helpful. His approach and my approach I think will be very similar in terms of 

trying to get to the situation where we get help in these disasters. 

Both tribal leaders have shown they want to do, Mr. Amparo, everything they can on the ground at the time of a tribal emergency 

to try to help their people. If there are situations where, for example in the Gold King Mine spill, the Navajo Nation had specific expenses they were expending as a part of this emergency. They 

wanted to have a relationship with the Federal agency to figure out 

whether or not they were going to be reimbursed, how they were 

going to be reimbursed, and what the timetable was going to be. 

Following up on some of what Chairman Hoeven said, it seems 

to me one of the issues here is the issue if EPA is supposed to be 

the lead, is EPA, in your opinion, capable of being lead in a disaster? I thought FEMA was the disaster agency. 

How does that happen all of a sudden with an agency like the 

EPA, because they happened to be the agency that caused the 

problem? As President Begaye said, here you had a mine that 

backed up, filled water and filled water and filled water and the 

EPA contractor punctured a hole in it and that caused the flood. 

That is what caused the flood and now they are in charge of the 

emergency. How does that happen? I am wondering do you assess 

or look at this and say, well, they know all about floods and disasters with mines and are capable of doing this? How do they get to 

be the lead? 

It seemed to me you are the lead in a way on a disaster. Let me 

tell you that when you have come into New Mexico, we have had 

disasters on reservation and off reservation. I have seen some very 

impressive work by FEMA. We had the Cerro Grande Fire in Los 

Alamos which wiped out 400 homes. FEMA was in there and you 

did some incredible work. 

Part of asking this question is trying to get to the heart of how 

do we get the very best response for Native communities when it 

comes to these disasters like both Governors have described? 

Mr. Amparo, can you answer that briefly because I do not want 

to go much over what the Chairman went. I know we are both busy 

here today. 

Mr. AMPARO. First, to the President, let me first say that there 

is no secret code in terms of asking the right questions. Our commitment from our regional office is to have our experts work with 

tribes on requests they make of us to ensure that we are reviewing 

documents for them prior to their submission. That is something 

we do. 

Second, to commend Governor Chavarria for speaking about a 

mitigation plan and talking about that being the start and where 

we need to go, that is an area that is refreshing for us because we 

know that understanding what vulnerabilities and risks are prior 

to event changes the outcome. 

Our commitment is to work with other Federal agencies, ultimately to support the tribe. We are going to continue to do that. 

42 

The Chairman mentioned that and I have questions. I will have 

to look more at it with our regional office but our commitment will 

be to work closely with the tribes and should an incident like this 

happen again, ensure that the outcomes are the ones that are expected. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you very much for that. 

President Begaye, I know you are an incredible champion for the 

Navajo people in terms of trying to deal with this disaster. You 

were everyplace. I believe you and some of your officials went to 

water tanks which were going to be provided for drinking water 

and it ended up that some of that was tainted with oil. You said, 

these cannot be for drinking water. 

I know how upset you are and you stated very well what happened. The new Guidance that has come out from FEMA, in your 

opinion, are we headed in the right direction on that? 

Mr. BEGAYE. Consultation is always a thing that we have to do. 

Having an advisory council is always the right thing to have. Having the right benchmarks, $250,000 against $1 million, is the right 

thing to do. Those are good starting points. 

The webinar, they are always helpful if we can have access to 

Internet. That is always a challenge for us, especially on Navajo 

when 30 percent of our people have access and 70 percent do not. 

We have those challenges. 

However, the new principle that they put in place, we made comments on it. We believe the consultation is really important. It is 

helping to clarify some of these terms I mentioned earlier, ‘‘major 

disaster declaration’’ versus ‘‘emergency declaration,’’ our actual liability partner or potential liability partner, what does that terminology mean, what are they? 

If we can answer those types of questions, we can better answer, 

especially when we apply for disaster assistance and we know what 

language to use, how to approach FEMA and other Federal agencies. I endorse that. I feel that is something we need. 

Having a tribal liaison person, of course, is always very helpful. 

Having a FEMA office on Navajo would be tremendously helpful. 

We are as big as West Virginia and we should have our own FEMA 

office located on Navajo Nation. That is how we can really resolve 

these issues. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you. 

President Begaye, for you and I, I think one of the frustrating 

things in this particular situation with EPA was that the EPA Administrator came out from the beginning. Now I am talking about 

the injury to the farmers that happened on the land. We have been 

to many of the same farms. She said from the beginning, ‘‘We take 

responsibility. We are going to take responsibility. We are going to 

make sure those farmers get paid for their damages.’’ 

That is the way we proceeded but there was a little glitch. Over 

here there was a little independent agency within EPA that has to 

make a decision on liability. About a year later, they tell us, sorry, 

you have to file a lawsuit and go to court. We were on one track 

and now we are on another track. 

You and I are working on legislation with your Washington office 

and with others. I would just ask you to urge the Committee, this 

43 

is your opportunity to tell the Committee why these folks should 

be compensated. 

You described what happened and how the Navajo people live an 

agricultural life and what they are doing out there and you would 

urge us because we need to pass legislation to help these farmers. 

This is really important. 

This is your opportunity to speak to the Committee as a whole. 

There are only two of us here but believe me, everyone else will 

hear it. 

Mr. BEGAYE. Thank you, Senator. 

When a Federal agency says we caused a spill, we will hold ourselves responsible and we will make sure that all the impacted people will be compensated, when that statement comes out of the 

mouth of a Federal agency, we expect that to happen. 

Just within the last few weeks, I got a letter that says we will 

not give you a dime. We will not help you because there is this 

Federal sovereignty that exists meaning that we cannot be sued, 

we cannot help you. 

None of our farmers have ever been helped. This is when a Federal agency says, we will hold ourselves responsible. When that 

statement is made, we expect and I believe this Committee will 

have to hold that agency’s feet to the fire to say you said that, it 

came out of your mouth in a Senate hearing, then you ought to pay 

up. 

These farmers are hurting. Not a single farmer has been compensated. That to me is criminal. That should never happen within 

the trust responsibility, trust relationship that we have, government-to-government relationship we have. 

Every one of those farmers today are still hurting, over a year 

and a half. None of them have been compensated. They are still out 

there. You and I visited, we have been out to the farms. They weep; 

they are crying, so the disaster is continuing. 

Farming is not just one crop. It is multiple crops, multiple seasons. When you cut off the water stream, when you are not able 

to use the water, we are talking about a disaster that lasts for two 

to three years. That is happening to our farmers today. 

I am asking this Committee to hold EPA’s word and let them 

compensate every one of our farmers that has been hurt. That is 

our priority. 

Of course we also, as tribal nations, need to be compensated for 

the work we have put in too because they said they did it and they 

would hold themselves responsible. To this day, they have not. 

That letter specially says, we cannot compensate you a penny. That 

is wrong. I am asking this Committee to step and hold EPA’s feet 

to the fire. 

Thank you. 

Senator UDALL. Thank you very much. I could not agree with you 

more. 

I have one final question for Governor Chavarria. Santa Clara 

has had five presidential disaster declarations. Three have been as 

a sub-grantee pursuant to requests made by the State of New Mexico and two issued directly to the Pueblo by the President. 

44 

How would you compare the two approaches? Can you explain to 

the Committee the advantages and disadvantages of each approach? Would you prefer to use one or the other in the future? 

Mr. CHAVARRIA. Let me start from the last and go back. I do not 

want to experience another disaster. It is a headache, it is time 

consuming but because of build up in terms of capacity and capabilities, we have shown that our tribe is capable of implementing 

and utilizing these Federal dollars to our best advantage. 

We even had the Office of OIG come out and do audits of the use 

of those funds. Those audits came back clean. 

For me, it is up to us as tribal leaders, the tribal council, as a 

direct grantee to have the opportunity to tell your own story. Identify your specific needs. Again, having that tribal mitigation plan 

is crucial. 

If you go with a sub-grantee, you are letting someone else tell the 

story for you, having the State tell the story and identify your 

needs, your infrastructure damage. Then you have to use their 

State mitigation plan. You absorb 25 percent of the cost if you go 

as a direct grantee. If you go as a sub-grantee, you are indebted 

for 12.5 percent of that cost. 

The most important thing is the technical support from the Federal agency which is FEMA. Another thing as a con, if you go as 

a sub-grantee, you do not get the 324 administrative costs. All the 

tribes still have administrative burdens, so we are not guaranteed 

those administrative costs. 

However, as the direct grantee, you are guaranteed 3.37 percent 

of the total cost to come down and help with administrative burdens. That is very important. We see that smaller projects receive 

quick funding responses from FEMA while the larger projects such 

as a permanent road and water control facilities remain mired in 

time consuming, quality assurance, quality control processes. 

While clearly important, these processes greatly lengthen the review time. Time is of the essence in preventing or mitigating a natural disaster. For Santa Clara Pueblo as we enter the monsoon season, we spend our days scanning the skies and read the weather 

reports, fearing the worst and praying for the best. 

Receiving funds that support recovery efforts prior to seasonal 

impacts and monsoons is imperative in breaking the cycle of continued damage. As our presidential disaster declaration experience 

demonstrates, in emergencies, project implementation is crucial to 

protecting lives, securing our communities and preventing repeated 

damage to key infrastructure of Santa Clara. 

As I mentioned, we are not wealthy financially. I have been 

asked to combine all five disaster declarations but I was told, no, 

because each disaster is its own disaster. I cannot combine all five 

when then helps me financially. 

Right now we are going through all disaster project worksheets 

and determining are these still feasible? If not, let us take that one 

back and give it to the Federal Government because ultimately it 

comes back to the cost match. 

Those are the things our staff is reviewing and determining but 

ultimately closing out these projects is essential because that is 

where reimbursement comes into play. 

45 

Senator UDALL. Thank you very much. Thanks to all of the witnesses. 

Thank you for your courtesies, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate it. I 

am sorry to run over. 

The CHAIRMAN. Absolutely. No problem at all. 

If there are no more questions for today, members may also submit written follow-up questions for the record. The hearing record 

will be open for two weeks. 

With that, I would also like to express my thanks to you, Vice 

Chairman, and to all of our witnesses. Thank you for being here. 

We appreciate it very much. 

With that, this hearing is concluded. 

[Whereupon, at 4:33 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(47) 

A P P E N D I X 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JEFF HANSEN, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT, CHOCTAW NATION OF OKLAHOMA

Good afternoon. Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, my name is Jeff Hansen and I am the Director of the Office of Emergency Management for the Choctaw 

Nation of Oklahoma. On behalf of our Chief, the Honorable Gary Batton, I thank 

you for this opportunity to provide testimony on FEMA’s role in Indian Country. 

It is my responsibility to ensure that the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma develops 

and maintains a robust Emergency Management Program for our tribal service 

area, for our tribal citizens, and for our neighbors. I have had oversight of the emergency management program for the past four years and have worked diligently to 

develop the capabilities necessary to respond to any potential disaster that may 

arise. Our capabilities have grown from a piece-meal response initiative to a coordinated effort through many departments within the Nation. We have reached many 

milestones in this time, but there is still more to do. 

The Choctaw Nation jurisdictional boundaries cover a 10 1⁄2 county-wide area in 

southeastern Oklahoma encompassing approximately 1 1,000 square miles. This 

mostly rural area has a Census 2010 population of 233,126. Of that, approximately 

42,000 are Choctaw tribal members. The Choctaw Nation shares governmental responsibilities for our citizens and our neighbors with state and various local units 

of government. Because our Indian Country lands were divided and distributed, in 

the form of fee-simple properties, to Choctaw Nation citizens in the late 1800s and 

early 1900s, we face a somewhat different approach to emergencies than do Indian 

tribes who have been able to maintain a contiguous reservation land base. Our tribal government responsibilities are necessarily intertwined with the governmental responsibilities of our neighboring towns, cities, counties and states. 

Not unlike the rest of Oklahoma, the Choctaw Nation has experienced and responded to numerous disasters. Annually, we face the potential for any number of 

emergencies, including ice storms, tornadoes, floods, hazardous materials releases, 

high winds, drought, wildfires, transportation incidents, to name a few. In every instance, the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma responds with both personnel and resources to address not only the needs of our people but also the non-tribal citizens 

within our jurisdiction. We have also responded to areas outside the Choctaw Nation to assist our fellow Oklahomans. It is our belief that we must all work closely 

in partnership with one another to provide the most good for the most people possible in times of disaster need. 

The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma applauds the work of this Committee, Mr. 

Chairman, and of the entire Congress on its effort to improve the Stafford Act 

through the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act. The ability for tribes to request a 

disaster declaration through the President of the United States is a remarkable step 

forward in the recognition of the Nation-to-Nation relationship and Trust Responsibility of the Federal Government and Indian Country. I believe the relationship between Tribes and specifically the Federal Emergency Management Agency have improved exponentially in recent years. However, there is still more work to be completed. 

With last month’s release of the Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance, we can see 

the culmination of several years of work toward active consultation with tribes 

throughout the country. FEMA held over 100 meetings around the country from 

2014 to 2016. I personally participated in at least 10 listening and consultation sessions through various settings. In every session, I heard Indian Country make our 

voices heard in regards to emergency management. According to FEMA, it received 

and adjudicated almost 2000 comments in regards to the Pilot Guidance during that 

time. As we progress through the pilot stage of this Pilot Guidance, there will be 

opportunity to review some of the issues that arise. However, FEMA should address 

some issues during the pilot phase of the Pilot Guidance. 

The Pilot Guidance allows the chief executive of a tribe to decide what direction 

the tribe would like to pursue in regards to a declaration. Specifically, the chief exVerDate Mar 15 2010 11:16 Jul 12, 2017 Jkt 026164 PO 00000 Frm 00051 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\26164.TXT JACK
48 

ecutive can either request a declaration directly to the federal government or request a declaration as a sub-grantee or recipient to the state. One of the most pressing issues with the ability for a tribe to decide whether to go directly to the federal 

government or through a state is the political landscape in which it functions. In 

the case of Indian tribes in Oklahoma, and many other ‘‘checkerboard’’ tribal nations, this issue can be tricky to navigate. Because we do not have contiguous lands, 

damages to our infrastructure can be very widespread. If the Choctaw Nation elects 

to go directly to the federal government for a declaration, our damages are removed 

from state calculations. This could lead to a situation where a particular county has 

reportable damages but fails to meet its individual county threshold without our 

damages included. While the tribe may receive a declaration, the county in which 

the damages occurred may not qualify for assistance. This could potentially leave 

a particular jurisdiction with a large amount of disaster related costs that it cannot 

afford. As a good neighbor, an Indian tribe must decide what is best for the whole 

community. Unfortunately, the county cannot go to the tribe as a sub-grantee in the 

same manner that the tribe can go to the state. That should be fixed with authority 

written into federal law. 

A second potential issue is with a tribe’s ability to handle the personnel and regulatory burden following a disaster. While this will depend upon a tribe’s capability, 

it is still relatively unknown what the current capability levels are within Indian 

Country emergency management. Many individuals have expressed the need for 

emergency management programs to grow within Indian Country; hard data supporting that need remains as anecdotal evidence. For many years, states have received funding through the Emergency Management Performance Grant program. 

Unfortunately, the manner in which the law was written prohibits Indian Country 

from directly participating in the program. States and territories use EMPG funds 

use in a variety of ways to support the implementation of the National Preparedness System by supporting the building, sustainment, and delivery of the core capabilities as defined within the National Preparedness Goal. The states and territories 

receive funds from this program based on a population-share basis. Each state determines how the money is spent. In most cases, tribes can apply to the state for 

funding. However, this is not always the case. Grant programs supporting the development of the core capabilities with tribal set-asides remain limited. The statute 

should be improved with more tribal set-asides. 

Lastly, FEMA has worked to expand its outreach to tribes through the appointment of full time Tribal Liaisons. While this effort has definitely improved relationships, a few FEMA regions remain limited in outreach capability due to large number of tribes and limited FEMA personnel. Within FEMA Regions 6, 9, and 10 there 

are a total of 478 tribes. Currently, Regions 6 and 9 have only one Tribal Liaison 

each while Region 10 has four Tribal Liaisons. The amount of travel required to engage this many tribes is daunting. Limited staffing at the FEMA regional offices 

that deal directly with tribes creates a roadblock in the tribes being able to develop 

their programs and have meaningful relationships with FEMA. 

We do not have all the answers but I would like to make some suggestions that 

will may help to move Tribal Emergency Management Programs and their relationship with FEMA forward. We would ask that this Committee persuade FEMA to 

look into the potential to have local jurisdictions request assistance as sub-grantee 

recipients to the tribes in the event they do not meet their threshold when a tribe 

receives a disaster declaration. This step would provide a more unified approach between the states and tribes as we assist our common communities in common disaster contexts. 

We would also ask that this Committee work within Congress to address funding 

opportunities for tribes within the emergency management field. The lack of available funding continues to be a major issue in the establishment and enhancement 

of emergency management core capabilities in Indian Country. Targeting to Indian 

tribes funds like those released in the EMPG program would allow tribes to begin 

building capacity and becoming an asset to local and state jurisdictions during a crisis. 

Lastly, we ask that this Committee urge FEMA to expand its Tribal Liaison program to assist in those regions where the majority of tribes reside. Additionally, 

funding for training opportunities through FEMA will assist in preparing tribal 

emergency management staff for the tasks associated with the declaration process 

and the regulatory paperwork to follow a disaster. 

Again, thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony to the Committee. It 

is an honor to be able to provide updates and background to the situations we face 

in Indian Country. The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma is committed to better preparing our communities for disasters and working with our partner agencies to reVerDate Mar 15 2010 11:16 Jul 12, 2017 Jkt 026164 PO 00000 Frm 00052 Fmt 6601 Sfmt 6621 S:\DOCS\26164.TXT JACK
49 

spond and recover. Your continued support is critical to the reduction of disaster impacts across all of Indian Country. Yakoke! 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. TOM UDALL TO

ALEX AMPARO

Question 1. What types of coordination efforts have there been to update Tribal 

on the process and requirements for requesting Stafford Act declarations? 

Answer. In coordination with FEMA’s National Tribal Affairs Advisor and FEMA 

Regional Tribal Liaisons, FEMA Recovery Directorate and Office of External Affairs 

Tribal Partners Branch hosted two national webinars/conference calls on the final 

version of the Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance, which included information on the 

process and requirements for requesting Stafford Act declarations. 

In addition, FEMA continues to provide briefings at national and Regional Tribal 

conferences and for individual Tribes when requested. 

Question 2. What actions has FEMA taken to help Tribes understand what Federal resources are available to build and maintain their emergency management capacity? 

Answer. FEMA is committed to partnering and collaborating with Federally recognized Indian Tribes, and to providing resources to support their preparation for, protection against, mitigation of, response to, and recovery from all hazards and disasters. 

FEMA established both a Tribal Policy and Tribal Consultation Policy that provide the framework for FEMA Tribal relations, and guides how the agency delivers 

technical assistance and programs tailored to the unique circumstances of Tribal 

communities. 

FEMA offers various resources to support Tribes. This includes: 

• Information Sharing and Program Support: sharing information with, and receiving feedback from Tribes on issues and resources that impact their communities; 

• Technical Assistance and Grant Opportunities: assisting Tribes with technical 

assistance and providing awareness of available grants that assist in building 

Tribal emergency management capability and capacity; 

• Training and Exercises: providing access to training at FEMA facilities and 

local Tribal venues to strengthen Tribes ability to respond to emergencies by 

addressing identified gaps and weaknesses; and 

• Tribal Consultation: working with Tribes to collect their feedback on potential 

FEMA Tribal policies and actions to ensure we are in compliance with EO 

13175. 

These areas, described in more detail below, ensure a consistent interaction with 

our Tribal partners and offers Tribes a platform to work with FEMA. 

Information Sharing and Program Support 

FEMA’s National Tribal Affairs Advisor (NTAA), in the Headquarters (HQ) Office 

of External Affairs, Tribal Partners Branch (TPB), is the senior advisor on Tribal 

issues to the FEMA Administrator and senior leadership. FEMA Regional Tribal Liaisons (RTLs) serve as the main points of contact for Tribal nations, and are directly 

contacted by Tribes for technical assistance or questions about available Federal resources. The NTAA engages regularly with the national Tribal associations to discuss policy issues with national implications for Tribes while RTLs regularly provide 

information to Tribal nations on FEMA programs, resources, and grant opportunities. They help coordinate technical assistance through various mechanisms—direct 

contact via meetings and calls with Tribal emergency managers on a regular basis, 

conference calls or webinars with Tribes in their regions or Regional Tribal associations, attending and presenting at Tribal conferences, and visiting and briefing 

Tribes in person. 

The HQ TPB hosts a monthly conference call with Tribal associations and organizations to discuss and share information to support emergency management efforts 

in Indian Country. In addition, FEMA’s Office of External Affairs includes Tribal 

partners when FEMA sends out advisories to notify when a grant application period 

begins or when there are other opportunities to engage or participate. FEMA’s Office of External Affairs also developed a ‘‘FEMA and Tribal Nations’’ pocket guide, 

which provides information and resources that may be helpful to Tribal partners. 

Distributed at Tribal conferences and meetings, the pocket guide explains the Agency’s policies related to Tribal engagement, outlines key FEMA programs and how 

50 

they specifically relate to Tribes, and provides contact information for the Agency’s 

Tribal liaisons. This active engagement and frequent contact allows our Tribal partners to have visibility on FEMA programs and services as they change and evolve. 

Technical Assistance and Grant Opportunities 

FEMA continues to improve its education, outreach, and technical assistance to 

Tribes to help them become more aware of available Federal resources such as technical assistance and eligible Federal grants. For example, FEMA provides technical 

assistance to Tribes on the Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment 

(THIRA), a process for jurisdictions to identify their greatest threats and hazards 

and ways to address them. Having a complete THIRA is a requirement for Tribal 

applicants applying for a Tribal Homeland Security Grant, which provides funding 

directly to eligible Tribes to strengthen their capacity to prepare for and respond 

to emergencies. 

The Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration (FIMA) supports Tribal 

governments by providing guidance, training, and technical assistance in the development and/or update of FEMA approved Hazard Mitigation Plans and in the development of Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA) planning and project grants. Hazard 

mitigation planning enables Tribal governments to identify risks and vulnerabilities 

associated with natural disasters, and develop long-term strategies for protecting 

people and property from future hazard events. 

Training and Exercises 

FEMA’s Emergency Management Institute (EMI) provides training to Tribal governments and their employees to develop their emergency management capabilities. 

FEMA through EMI, engages with Tribes to design courses that reflect Tribal needs 

and gaps in capabilities. EMI provides housing during the training and reimburses 

participants for their travel costs. In addition to providing Tribal curriculum courses 

at FEMA facilities, EMI also provides these courses off-site, traveling out to Tribal 

communities directly. To date, more than 3,000 certificates of completion have been 

issued for courses in the EMI Tribal Curriculum. EMI currently has planned 21 

courses on their 2017 schedule. Additionally, EMI provides Tribal emergency management officials access to 550 courses. 

FEMA’s Center for Domestic Preparedness (CDP) also provides training to Tribal 

emergency responders. In fiscal year 2016, CDP hosted its first Tribal Nations 

Training Week and trained 157 Tribal emergency responders from 46 Tribal nations. More than 150 Tribal emergency responders from 41 Tribal agencies across 

the country, trained at CDP during their second Tribal Nations Training Week from 

March 19–25, 2017. CDP worked closely with Tribal students to enhance their capability to respond to disasters and emergencies by taking one or more of the seven 

courses delivered during the week. 

In addition to providing training, FEMA also coordinates exercises with Tribal nations to examine and validate readiness capabilities. In September 2015, FEMA Region VIII and HQ TPB worked with seven Tribal nations to coordinate a simulated 

exercise as part of Operation Safe Delivery in response to a crude oil train derailment on the Blackfeet Nation Reservation. In June 2016, FEMA Region X conducted 

a four-day functional earthquake and tsunami exercise, Cascadia Rising, and 

worked with 24 Tribes in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. During these exercises, 

FEMA examined its internal capacity to understand and respond to the unique 

needs of Tribal governments. FEMA also invites Tribal governments in hurricaneprone areas to participate in FEMA’s annual hurricane preparedness video teleconference with FEMA leadership and State emergency management directors. 

Tribal Consultation 

FEMA’s Tribal Consultation Policy establishes how the agency engages Tribes in 

meaningful consultation to influence FEMA policies, programs, and the resources 

supporting these efforts. The NTAA and HQ TPB work closely with all FEMA programmatic offices and Regions to ensure that FEMA policies take into consideration 

the unique needs and capabilities of Tribes, and engages these offices to plan their 

Tribal consultation outreach. This consultation outreach effort is worked through 

the RTLs allowing an agency wide effort to give Tribes the opportunity to be involved in the developing process of FEMA’s policies, programs, and resources. The 

Consultation Policy provides an opportunity for Tribal governments to request Tribal consultation on a policy or action by FEMA that they determine affects their community or has Tribal implications. Tribal consultation is announced through in-person events, Tribal meetings, monthly conference calls with Tribes and other agencies, and through Intergovernmental Affairs advisories. 

51 

Tribal nations are a critical part of FEMA’s whole community effort to improve 

emergency management capabilities and capacity across the nation and we remain 

committed to working with Tribes on a nation-to-nation basis. 

Question 3. The disaster declaration process was developed for State governments, 

which generally have a larger tax base, receive more grant funds, and have decades 

of experience managing Federally declared major disasters. In comparison to the 

States, do Tribes have a similar level of Federal resources available to them to help 

manage the post-declaration recovery process? 

Answer. The Sandy Recovery Improvement Act (SRIA) of 2013 (SRIA) amended 

the Stafford Act to provide Federally-recognized Indian Tribal governments the option to make a direct request to the President for a major disaster or emergency 

declaration or to seek assistance under a state’s state declaration. Prior to SRIA 

State governments had primary access to Federal resources to help them manage 

the post-declaration recovery process, as compared to Indian Tribal governments. 

Today, due to SRIA, Tribes have direct access to FEMA response and recovery programs. In addition, our understanding is that there are other Federal government 

agencies that provide recovery resources to States and Tribes. 

Question 4. What assistance has FEMA offered, or could FEMA offer, to help enhance Tribal capacity to manage the recovery process? 

Answer. Technical assistance, through FEMA Regional Tribal Liaisons (located in 

all FEMA Regional offices), is one way that FEMA is working to overcome potential 

access issues. Before, during, and after disaster FEMA provides technical assistance 

and trainings to Indian Tribal governments on various administrative requirements 

for Stafford Act disaster assistance, including Preliminary Damage Assessments, administrative plans, mitigation plans, and grants management requirements. FEMA 

also provides field leadership to support Indian Tribal governments in addressing, 

organizing and managing disaster response and recovery activities through Federal 

Coordinating Officers and Federal Disaster Recovery Coordinators. 

Question 5. FEMA can authorize its crisis counseling program as part of an individual assistance package. Some IHS facilities also offer mental health services to 

Native Americans. How does access to mental health services at IHS affect FEMA’s 

recommendation to provide crisis counseling services in Tribal communities? 

Answer. States, territories and federally recognized Tribes can apply for grant 

funding for the FEMA Crisis Counseling Assistance and Training Program (CCP) 

in the wake of presidentially declared major disasters which have received a designation for Individual Assistance. As a supplemental program, CCP services are 

meant to supplement and not supplant or replace existing behavioral health (mental 

health and substance abuse) services. As part of the application, the grantee is 

asked to describe State/Tribal and local mental health services and explain why 

they cannot meet the disaster-related mental health needs caused or aggravated by 

the disaster. Once FEMA determines that the disaster overwhelmed the existing behavioral health capacity (including IHS capacity), the State/territory/Tribe may receive CCP grant funding. 

Question 6. Since the enactment of the Tribal Stafford Act, tribes have made 

twenty requests and the President has declared eight disasters in response. 

Describe each request and the basis for FEMA’s recommendation to approve or 

deny those requests. 

Answer. The President has sole discretion to approve emergency and major disaster declarations. For every request, in making a recommendation to the President, 

FEMA considers the Joint Preliminary Damage Assessment provided by the Tribe, 

whether the Tribal resources have been overwhelmed, and the extent to which Stafford Act programs can address the needs created by the event and provide supplemental assistance. 

Question 7. In its 2014 testimony, FEMA stated that it received eight direct Tribal 

requests and declared six major disasters. That is a seventy-five percent success 

rate. As of January 31, 2017, FEMA received twenty Tribal requests, and the President declared eight major disasters. That brings the overall success rate to forty 

percent since the enactment of the Tribal Stafford Act. 

Please explain the markedly lower rate of declared disasters since FEMA testified 

in 2014. 

Are states denied disaster assistance at the same or a similar rate as Tribes? 

Please explain and address any reasons for the disparity. 

Answer. Many Indian Tribal governments (Tribal governments) are less experienced than states with the disaster declaration process and Stafford Act programs. 

This has resulted in some Tribes seeking assistance for events that are either not 

eligible or cannot be readily addressed by Stafford Act programs (i.e. impacts to fishing, impacts of drought, erosion, etc.). There was a 47 percent approval rate for 

52 

Tribal declarations and 83 percent for state declarations (some of which included 

Tribal entities as recipients or sub recipients) during the period of January 29, 2013 

and January 31, 2017. We are continuing our outreach and education efforts to ensure that all Tribal governments have a comprehensive understanding of Stafford 

Act declarations. 

In addition, requests received prior to publication of the Tribal Declarations Pilot 

Guidance, were processed using the guidance for state declaration requests, including a $1 million threshold for Public Assistance and a per capita indicator. After 

three rounds of consultation with Tribes, FEMA published the Tribal Declarations 

Pilot Guidance, which provides unique factors, including a new minimum damage 

amount of $250,000, for FEMA to consider that better take into account the unique 

circumstances of Tribal governments. 

Question 8. FEMA noted in its 2014 testimony that the regulations may be illsuited to tribal requests because the regulations were designed for states. 

How does the Pilot Guidance account for the unique status of tribes? 

Does FEMA consider the federal trust responsibility when recommending a decision to the President? If so, how? 

Answer. FEMA acknowledges the trust responsibility of the federal government 

to federally recognized Tribal governments as established by specific treaties, court 

decisions, statutes, executive orders, regulations, and policies. Specifically, in recognition of this trust responsibility and as prescribed by Congress in the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act, FEMA is implementing the Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance (the Guidance) for direct emergency and disaster declarations. 

The Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance provides new, specially designed, criteria 

for evaluating an Indian Tribal government’s request for a disaster declaration, and 

takes into account the unique conditions that affect Tribal nations. This criteria was 

developed as a result of extensive consultation and listening sessions with Tribes. 

For example, the Public Assistance minimum damage amount of $250,000 for 

Tribal declarations (versus $1 million minimum for states). Absent extraordinary 

circumstances, when preliminary damage assessments indicate $250,000 in PA-eligible damage and costs, FEMA will then look holistically at the impacts to and capabilities of a Tribal nation to determine the need for supplemental federal assistance. 

In addition, the guidance provides for eligibility under the Individuals and Households Program for enrolled Tribal members, and at the request of the Tribal nation, 

members of the Tribal community who are not enrolled Tribal members. 

Question 9. FEMA testified in 2014 that it developed the Emergency Management 

Institute Tribal curriculum to help Tribes with their emergency response activities. 

Has the curriculum evolved since then, if so, how? 

Answer. Yes the curriculum continues evolving by including emerging policies, 

highlighting best practices and discussing case studies. Recently, FEMA’s Office of 

Response and Recovery delivered a presentation discussing the Tribal Declarations 

Guidance and provided an informational briefing, fact sheet, and frequently asked 

questions to each student. During the consultation period, FEMA staff utilized the 

course presentations as an opportunity to conduct consultation on the Declaration 

Guidance. 

Question 10. Has FEMA updated the curriculum to include the Pilot Guidance? 

Answer. Yes. Immediately after passage of the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act 

of 2013, the Tribal Curriculum course deliveries included a presentation segment for 

the Tribal Declaration Guidance. The presentation explained FEMA’s implementation plan for the authority. In addition, the students received the presentation, fact 

sheets, and frequently asked questions. Additionally, these documents were used 

outside of the course delivery materials for consultation during the development of 

implementation guidance. 

Since the Pilot Period commenced on January 10, 2017, the Emergency Management Institute initiated the development of appropriate training material to be incorporated into the Tribal Curriculum courses, and is currently assisting in the development of other complementary training material to be delivered by FEMA Regional Offices. In addition, Emergency Management Institute is developing Tribal 

Declaration reusable learning object content to be made open source available to the 

whole community for inclusion in other training. 

The Center for Domestic Preparedness (CDP) has a lasting commitment to Tribal 

Nations training. As part of an ongoing outreach effort, CDP hosted 157 Tribal students from 41 Tribes enrolled in five different training programs during the CDP 

2017 Tribal Nations Training Week, March 20–24, 2017. This is the second annual 

Tribal Nations Training Week which has proven to be a highly successful outreach 

tool focused on specific Tribal training needs. CDP invited members of the National 

Domestic Preparedness Consortium, Rural Domestic Preparedness Consortium, and 

53 

the Emergency Management Institute to make short presentations during the week. 

The week culminated with a fully operational mass casualty exercise featuring a 

multi-disciplinary response to a simulated disaster. 

Thus far in FY17, CDP has trained 266 Tribal Nations students for a total of 483 

course completions which is 5.8 percent of the resident training population. 

Question 11. Preparing a disaster declaration request is resource-intensive, and 

resources often get stretched thin during emergency response. 

What type of technical assistance does FEMA provide to Tribes while preparing 

their declaration requests? 

Does FEMA provide sample documents that would give Tribal officials an idea of 

what an ideal request would look like? 

Answer. Before, during, and after disaster FEMA provides technical assistance 

and trainings to Indian Tribal governments (Tribal governments) on various administrative requirements for Stafford Act disaster assistance, including Preliminary 

Damage Assessments, administrative plans, mitigation plans, and grants management. 

On March 21, 2017, a Cover Letter Template for Tribal governments was posted 

to www.fema.gov to assist Tribal governments in submitting declaration requests 

which meet the criteria outlined in the Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance. 

Each FEMA region has a Regional Tribal Liaison that works with the Tribes on 

requests for technical assistance, and can provide Regional resources prior to disasters to answer questions and guide them through the disaster declaration process. 

Both the region and HQ Tribal staff have facilitated many meetings with Tribal officials to discuss areas of concern and questions they may have on disaster programs 

and resources. 

Question 12. The Pilot Guidance stresses the importance of having emergency 

plans, mitigation plans, and administrative plans prepared in advance of disaster 

events. 

Please explain how tribes may successfully develop each plan and describe any 

best practices for developing each type of plan. 

Tribes have described preparation of these plans as both time and resource intensive. Please provide specifics on how FEMA provides technical assistance to assist 

tribes in preparing each type of plan. 

Answer. At the request of Indian Tribal governments (Tribal governments), training and technical assistance can be provided in a variety of ways, including training 

in-person (field delivered or in-residence at FEMA’s Emergency Management Institute), or remote, and online, for developing a Tribal Mitigation Plan, Public Assistance Administrative Plan, Hazard Mitigation Administrative Plan, Tribal Administrative Plan and how to complete the Other Needs Assistance Option Selection form. 

FEMA encourages Tribal officials to contact their Regional Tribal Liaison or FEMA 

Regional Recovery and Mitigation Planning staff to request technical assistance, if 

needed. We are also working with Tribes to develop other resources that can assist 

them in meeting the planning requirements, such as the Tribal Mitigation Planning 

Guidance (described below) which is now in consultation. 

Other Needs Assistance Administrative Option Selection form and Tribal 

Administrative Plan 

Prior to assistance being provided, FEMA must have a current, approved Other 

Needs Assistance (ONA) Administrative Option Selection form and Tribal Administrative Plan (TAP), if applicable, on file. The ONA Administrative Option Selection 

form is a standard FEMA form where the Tribal government elects which entity will 

administer ONA (FEMA, Tribe, or a joint effort) and establishes assistance limits 

for specific ONA items and maximum award amounts for transportation, funeral, 

and child care assistance. In situations where the Tribal government elects to administer ONA jointly with FEMA or by itself, the Tribal government must also submit an Administrative Plan, which outlines the procedures that the Tribal government will use to administer assistance. FEMA can assist in this decisionmaking and 

provide technical assistance in the development of these plans. 

FEMA Regional staff are the best point of contact for Tribal leaders when filling 

out their ONA forms or in developing a TAP. Many regions are currently conducting 

outreach to Tribal governments to assist them in navigating the ONA process. 

Tribal Mitigation Plan 

It is important that Tribes begin the process of developing or updating a mitigation plan, as far in advance as possible as the process can require longer than a 

year and possibly more than two years if the Tribal government seeks to fund the 

plan with a grant. Information on potentially available planning grants can be 

found on FEMA’s Hazard Mitigation Assistance website. 

54 

The steps involved in developing a mitigation plan include: 

1. Organization of resources—this includes the formation of the planning team 

and other partnerships and technical resources needed to move through the 

key planning steps. Some Tribes may have the capability and capacity to do 

this on their own. Others may choose to work with a consultant. Regardless, 

a strong Tribal planning team and process is the key to a successful mitigation program. 

2. Assessment of risk—identification of the potential hazards that could affect 

the Tribal area, and the people, property and other assets, that are potentially vulnerable to these hazards. 

3. Development of a mitigation strategy—the mitigation strategy is the heart 

of the plan. Based on the findings of the risk assessment, the Tribal government develops a course of action, including goals and actions to address the 

risks. This includes the prioritization of potential actions based on the Tribal 

government’s capabilities, (existing plans, programs, personnel, funding and 

other factors). 

4. Implementation, plan monitoring and plan updates: The Tribal government 

can bring the mitigation plan to life in a variety of ways, from implementing 

specific mitigation projects to integrating the mitigation actions into existing 

Tribal government programs and initiatives. It is important for the plan to 

remain current and relevant with respect to risk and Tribal capabilities. 

Periodic evaluations to assess changing risks and priorities will enable the 

Tribal government to ensure the plan continues to meet the Tribe’s needs, 

and help the Tribe prepare for a potential disaster. 

Tribal governments can find mitigation planning resources online, including the 

Tribal Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance, which includes some best practices. 

Regions can assist Tribes by connecting them with examples and some best practices and examples of Tribal mitigation plans can be found in the Homeland Security Digital Library, by using search terms ‘‘Tribal mitigation plan.’’ 

Hazard Mitigation Administrative Plans 

The Hazard Mitigation Administrative Plan is a procedural guide that details how 

the Tribal government will administer the HMGP. The Tribal government must 

have a current administrative plan approved by the appropriate FEMA Regional Administrator before receiving HMGP funds. The administrative plan may take any 

form including a chapter within a comprehensive Tribal mitigation program strategy. The Tribal government may forward an administrative plan to FEMA for approval at any time prior to or immediately after the request for a disaster declaration. An approved plan is a prerequisite of receiving HMGP funds and is used by 

FEMA in determining approval for and the amount of each grant. 

The Administrative Plan, must establish procedures to guide the following 13 activities, and FEMA will review the information provided to ensure proper documentation of each activity: 

1.Identify and notify potential sub applicants of the availability of HMGP funding. 

2.Provide, as applicable, potential sub applicants with information on the application process, program eligibility, and deadlines. 

3.Determine sub applicant eligibility, as applicable. 

4.Provide information for EHP and floodplain management reviews. 

5.Process requests for advances of funds and reimbursements. 

6.Monitor and evaluate the progress and completion of funded mitigation activities. 

7.Review and approve cost overruns. 

8.Process appeals. 

9.Provide technical assistance as required to sub recipients, as applicable. 

10.Comply with the administrative requirements of 44 CFR Part 206 and 2 CFR 

Part 200. 

11.Comply with audit requirements of 2 CFR Part 200 Subpart F. 

12.Provide quarterly progress reports to FEMA on funded mitigation activities. 

FEMA Mitigation regularly holds mitigation training courses at the Emergency 

Management Institute and disaster operation offices (JFO); provides updates and 

general information to national audiences at various stakeholder engagement meetings (e.g., National Emergency Management Association, HMA Workshop); and 

55 

hosts Regional meetings between FEMA Regions and Regional partners. Additionally, FEMA has written guidance in the Hazard Mitigation Assistance Guidance 

(published February 27, 2015) on the requirement and development of an administrative plan. 

Emergency Plans 

FEMA’s Tribal Curriculum course Emergency Management Framework for Tribal 

Governments does provide training in the development of emergency plans. Since 

the development of the course in 2012, FEMA has provided examples of Tribal 

Emergency Plans to course participants. 

Question 13. Please describe how the National Disaster Recovery Framework 

functions, including which agencies participate in the Framework, and the resources 

it may provide to a Tribe that requests Federal disaster recovery assistance. 

Are Tribes and States eligible for the same number and types of assistance under 

the Framework? Please list and describe any assistance that is unavailable to Tribes 

and any assistance only available to Tribes as sub-recipients of a State. 

Answer. The National Disaster Recovery Framework (NDRF) provides the architecture for organizing agencies to better leverage existing Federal programs and 

support, de-conflict Federally support activities, and maximize the impact of Federal 

funds and nongovernmental resources to meet Tribal and survivor needs. The 

Framework does not provide additional funding or resources beyond existing Federal 

authorities. 

In coordination with the Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO), the State or Tribal 

Coordinating Officer, and the community impacted, the Federal Disaster Recovery 

Coordinator (FDRC) will determine which additional Federal agencies are needed to 

support the recovery mission. The FDRC helps to serve as a single representative 

to facilitate identification of needs and provision of recovery resources from a variety 

of resources. In collaboration with the FDRC, six Federal departments and agencies 

coordinate Recovery Support Functions for core sectors: Economic; Health and Social 

Services; Housing; Infrastructure Systems; Natural and Cultural Resources; and 

Community Planning and Capacity Building. Additional information about the Recovery Support Functions, including lists of the participating agencies are available 

on FEMA’s website: https://www.fema.gov/recovery-support-functions. The FDRC will convene Federal recovery interagency and nongovernmental partners as a coordinating body in support of the impacted community, Tribe, or State’s 

recovery goals. Depending on the disaster requirements, agency representatives will 

deploy directly to the Joint Field Office and the area of impact to provide technical 

assistance to the Federal operation, assess the impacts, and develop a joint strategy 

for supporting the Tribe’s and/or State’s recovery goals. As part of the strategic solutions process, agencies identify programs under their own authorities that may be 

appropriate to assist the recovery goals of the impacted community. 

Note that some Federal program authorities are exclusive to Tribal governments, 

and some programs are only accessible through a State government. For instance, 

US Department of Housing and Urban Development, Environmental Protection 

Agency, Indian Health Service, and US Department of Transportation all have Tribal-specific programs for which a State would not qualify. Similarly, some non-disaster State pass-through programs, such as US Department of Health and Human 

Services Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, may be accessible if the 

Tribe applies to the State. Some agency authorities distinguish between States and 

Tribes, others do not. 

Question 14. Please describe how the Recovery Support Strategy relates to the 

Framework and how Tribal views are meaningfully considered during the Strategy’s 

development. 

Answer. Under the National Disaster Recovery Framework, the Federal Disaster 

Recovery Coordinator and activated Recovery Support Functions develop a Recovery 

Support Strategy (RSS) after a disaster to organize Federal support and resources 

to assist with local recovery priorities and goals. The FDRC and partner agencies 

engage local leaders and stakeholders to better understand Tribal, community, and 

State recovery goals. In essence, the RSS is a road map that determines how existing and available Federal resources will be used to support local recovery needs and 

priorities. 

For the Community of Galena, Alaska (which has both a city council and a Tribal 

council [Louden Alaska Native Village]), residents were invited to participate in two 

structured goal-setting sessions. Representatives from Federal and State agencies 

met directly with the community members to talk through issues, feasibility, funding options, and lessons learned from other communities, in order to help with the 

identification of possible projects. The representatives from Galena identified about 

200 possible projects, then selected about 30 priority projects. These projects became 

56 

the basis of the RSS (copy available upon request). Participating Federal agencies 

included US Army Corps of Engineers; National Renewable Energy Lab (US Department of Energy); Economic Development Administration (US Department of Commerce); FEMA; and US Department of Housing and Urban Development. State and 

Federal agencies collectively agreed to honor the project descriptions as written and 

not modify them without agreement from the community. 

For the Oglala Sioux Tribe (OST), the OST President identified the over-arching 

priorities of ‘‘Health, Housing, and Roads’’ for the Federal recovery strategic focus. 

The OST President designated the Tribal Coordinating Officer to work directly with 

the Federal partners, and designated specific Tribal department directors to work 

with the Federal agencies. The RSS for OST (copy available upon request) evolved 

from direct interaction between the Tribal leadership and Tribal department heads 

and the Federal agency representatives. Participating Federal agencies included US 

Department of Housing and Urban Development; US Department of AgricultureRural Development; US Army Corps of Engineers; US Department of Energy—National Renewable Energy Lab; and US Department of Transportation—Federal 

Highways Administration. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. HEIDI HEITKAMP TO

ALEX AMPARO

Question 1. What is FEMA’s plan for continuing dialogue with Indian Tribes during the Tribal declaration pilot program? 

Answer. In coordination with FEMA’s National Tribal Affairs Advisor and FEMA 

Regional Tribal Liaisons, FEMA Recovery Directorate and Office of External Affairs 

Tribal Partners Branch hosted two national webinars/conference calls on the final 

version of the Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance, which included information on the 

process and requirements for requesting Stafford Act declarations. 

In addition, FEMA continues to work with Regional Tribal Liaisons on nationwide 

Tribal engagement surrounding declarations and the Guidance and to provide briefings at national and Regional Tribal conferences and for individual Tribes, when desired. 

Question 2. How is the formula for tribal declarations different from state declarations? 

What methods did FEMA use to determine the formula? 

Answer. The Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance provides new, specially designed, 

criteria for evaluating a Tribal government’s request for a disaster declaration and 

takes into account the unique conditions which affect Tribal nations. This criteria 

was developed as a result of extensive consultation and listening sessions with 

Tribes. 

For example, the Public Assistance (PA) minimum damage amount of $250,000 for Tribal declarations (versus $1 million dollar minimum for States). Absent extraordinary circumstances, when preliminary damage assessments indicate 

$250,000 in PA-eligible damage and costs, FEMA will then look holistically at the 

impacts to and capabilities of a Tribal nation to determine the need for supplemental Federal assistance. 

Immediately following the first round of consultation for the guidance, FEMA pro- posed a figure of $1 million dollar requirement for PA for Tribes with populations 

greater than 10,000 members. For Tribes that had less than 10,000 members, they 

had to meet at $500,000 dollar requirement. For the second round of consultation, 

$300,000 was the proposed figure. During the final round of consultation, FEMA received feedback that the $300,000 was still too high for many Tribes, so the final 

Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance provides a minimum damage amount of 

$250,000. The $250,000 PA minimum damage amount is based on the average administrative cost to FEMA to administer a Tribal declaration. 

In addition, the guidance provides for eligibility under the Individuals and Households Program for enrolled Tribal members, and at the request of the Tribal nation, 

members of the Tribal community who are not enrolled Tribal members. 

It is also important to remember that the Guidance is only a pilot and may be 

adjusted following the end of the pilot period. 

Question 3. Given the change in the administration, how is FEMA working to 

make sure that all of the past accomplishments in setting up the pilot program are 

continuing to be used as a foundation for new goals? 

Answer. FEMA’s commitment to implementing the Tribal authorities under the 

Sandy Recovery Improvement Act (SRIA) has resulted in a culture shift in the way 

we work with Tribal governments and officials, and we engage with them on policies 

and actions that have substantial direct effects on Tribes. Throughout our programs, 

57 

we have instilled a practice of ensuring that Tribes are considered when we develop 

policy and that we consult when impacts are identified. These practices are in support of FEMA’s established Tribal Policy and Tribal Consultation Policy that provide 

the framework for FEMA Tribal relations and Tribal consultation, and guides how 

the agency delivers technical assistance and programs tailored to the unique circumstances of Tribal communities. These two policies are revised every four years 

to reflect new authorities and polices. The Agency created a Tribal Integration 

Group (TIG) focused on internal coordination and collaboration on Tribal engagement and consultation efforts across all program areas. 

In the development of the Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance, FEMA sought input 

from Tribal governments during three consultation periods, and received and adjudicated hundreds of comments to develop the Pilot Guidance. The Tribal consultation methods and Tribal engagement used and learned during the development of 

the Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance, serve as best practices for consultations 

going forward. The success of the effort solidified the consultation policy as the foundation for how to conduct Tribal consultation moving forward. The National Tribal 

Affairs Advisor, the Office of External Affairs’ Tribal Partners Branch, the Regional 

Tribal Liaisons, and the TIG will continue to work closely with all FEMA programmatic offices to ensure FEMA policies take into consideration the unique needs 

and capabilities of Tribes, that programs are adhering to the Tribal Policy, and that 

the agency is fully utilizing the Tribal Consultation Policy. 

RESPONSE TO WRITTEN QUESTIONS SUBMITTED BY HON. JAMES LANKFORD TO

ALEX AMPARO

Question 1. Under current law (42 USC 5122), the owner or operator of private 

nonprofit facilities damaged by major disasters may receive financial assistance for 

the repair, restoration, reconstruction, or replacement of the facility and related expenses. Private nonprofit facilities currently are defined, in part, to include ’’any private nonprofit facility that provides essential services of a governmental nature to 

the general public;’’ however, houses of worship are currently excluded. 

During the hearing I asked whether there are any properties or structures that 

are excluded from a disaster declaration, and in particular, houses of worship. You 

indicated that sacred lands and houses of worship, would be included as Tribal infrastructure. What if that Tribal infrastructure is used for sectarian instruction or 

worship? In that case, could that house of worship be a recipient of FEMA disaster 

aid? 

Answer. Even if the house of worship or other Tribal infrastructure is used for 

American Indian traditional religious and cultural practices, or for any other kind 

of sectarian instruction or worship, the facility may still be an eligible recipient of 

FEMA assistance. 

Æ