U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

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

Fax: (202) 512–2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402–0001

87–739 PDF 2003

S. Hrg. 108–82

INVESTING IN HOMELAND SECURITY, CHALLENGES

ON THE FRONT LINE

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

APRIL 9, 2003

Printed for the use of the Committee on Governmental Affairs

(

(II)

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Chairman 

TED STEVENS, Alaska 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio 

NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota 

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania 

ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah 

PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois 

JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire 

RICHARD C. SHELBY, Alabama 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

MARK DAYTON, Minnesota 

FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey 

MARK PRYOR, Arkansas

MICHAEL D. BOPP, Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

TIM RADUCHA-GRACE, Professional Staff Member 

JOYCE RECHTSCHAFFEN, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

MICHAEL A. ALEXANDER, Minority Professional Staff Member 

DARLA D. CASSELL, Chief Clerk 

(III)

C O N T E N T S 

Opening statements: Page 

Senator Collins ................................................................................................. 1

Senator Carper ................................................................................................. 3

Senator Lautenberg .......................................................................................... 9

Senator Durbin ................................................................................................. 14

Senator Pryor .................................................................................................... 29

Prepared statement: 

Senator Lieberman ........................................................................................... 41

WITNESSES 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9, 2003

Michael J. Chitwood, Chief of Police, Portland, Maine Police Department ........ 7

Jeffrey Horvath, Police Chief, Dover, Delaware Police Department ................... 11

Edward P. Plaugher, Fire Chief and September 11 Incident Commander 

at the Pentagon, Arlington County Fire Department, Virginia ....................... 13

Captain Chauncey Bowers, Firefighter-EMT-Paramedic, Prince George’s 

County Fire Department, Maryland on behalf of the International Association of Fire Fighters (IAFF) ................................................................................ 15

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF WITNESSES

Bowers, Captain Chauncey: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 15

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 53

Chitwood, Chief Michael J.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 7

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 43

Horvath, Chief Jeffrey: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 11

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 47

Plaugher, Chief Edward P.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 13

Prepared Statement ......................................................................................... 50

APPENDIX

Chart entitled ‘‘Federal Allocation of FY03 Homeland Security Funds, One 

Size Formula Doesn’t Fit All’’ submitted by Senator Collins ........................... 63

Chart entitled ‘‘ODP State Homeland Security Grant Program Fiscal Year 

2003 Funding Allocations’’ submitted by Senator Collins ................................ 64

Chart entitled ‘‘Illinois Community Homeland Security Needs’’ submitted by 

Senator Durbin ..................................................................................................... 65

Chart entitled ‘‘Tangled Web of Federal Homeland Security Grant Programs’’ 

submitted by Senator Collins .............................................................................. 68

Public Safety Wireless Network Program, ‘‘The Report Card on Funding 

Mechanisms for Public Safety Radio Communications,’’ Final, August 2001, 

submitted by Mr. Plaugher ................................................................................. 69

Responses to Post-Hearing Questions submitted by Senator Lautenberg for 

the Record from: 

Mr. Chitwood .................................................................................................... 111

Mr. Horvath ...................................................................................................... 114

Mr. Plaugher ..................................................................................................... 116

Mr. Bowers ........................................................................................................ 118

(1)

1The chart entitled ‘‘Federal Allocation of FY03 Homeland Security Funds, One Size Formula 

Doesn’t Fit All’’ appears in the Appendix on page 63. 

INVESTING IN HOMELAND SECURITY, 

CHALLENGES ON THE FRONT LINE 

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 9, 2003

U.S. SENATE, 

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:35 a.m., in room 

SD–342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Susan M. Collins, 

Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

Present: Senators Collins, Carper, Lautenberg, Durbin, and 

Pryor. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN COLLINS 

Chairman COLLINS. The Committee will come to order. 

Today, the Committee begins a series of hearings on how the 

Federal Government can best help our States, communities, and 

first responders protect our homeland. Last year, the Senate spent 

nearly 3 months on the Homeland Security Act, yet the law contains virtually no guidance on how the Department is to assist 

State and local governments and first responders with their homeland security needs. 

In fact, the 187-page Homeland Security Act mentions the issue 

of grants to first responders in but a single paragraph. There is no 

guidance on how Federal dollars should be spent or how much 

money should be allocated or to whom it should be allocated. Those 

decisions were left to another day, and today is that day. 

As we embark on this effort to improve homeland security grant 

programs, there is no more important group to hear from than our 

first responders who serve on the front lines protecting our communities. After all, when disaster strikes, it is our police officers, our 

firefighters, and our emergency medical personnel who answer the 

calls for help. 

We must invest in additional homeland security resources for our 

first responders. Just as our first responders stand by to protect 

our communities, they deserve a Federal Government that stands 

by them. 

The current structure of ‘‘one-size-fits-all’’ homeland security programs, however, is not doing the job.1 The needs of our States and 

first responders vary widely and are as diverse as the people who 

2

1The chart entitled ‘‘ODP State Homeland Security Grant Program Fiscal Year 2003 Funding 

Allocations’’ appears in the Appendix on page 64. 

live there. We must make sure that Federal assistance is sufficiently flexible to meet these differing needs. 

When I met with Maine’s emergency management officials a few 

weeks ago, they told me that the structure of many homeland security grant programs hinders their efforts to help first responders 

secure communities across our State. As you can see from this 

chart, the current Homeland Security Grant Program, administered by the Office for Domestic Preparedness—or ODP—is part of 

the problem.1

ODP provides funding for training, equipment, exercises, and 

planning based on a uniform, predetermined formula for every 

State. That may sound good, but let us look at the impact of this 

formula. 

The exact same percentage of each State’s funds is allocated for 

training, equipment, exercises, and planning, thus, leaving no room 

to accommodate different priorities. In each and every State, for example, 70 percent of the Federal funds must be spent for equipment, 7 percent must be spent for planning, 5 percent must be 

spent for training. In allocating funds in this manner, the Federal 

Government is effectively saying that Maine must spend exactly 

the same portion of its homeland security dollars on training as 

Hawaii or Delaware. Moreover, States cannot transfer surplus 

funds from one category to another to meet their needs. 

Maine’s officials, for example, told me that they need more funding to train first responders to use the equipment purchased under 

the ODP grant program. The regulations, however, prohibited 

Maine from transferring surplus exercise dollars to train first responders in using the new equipment. Thus, in some cases, we may 

see communities with up-to-date, complex equipment, but lacking 

the training to use it most effectively. This defies common sense. 

I believe States should have the flexibility to spend homeland security dollars where they are most needed. To allow flexibility in 

homeland security funds that have already been appropriated, but 

remain unspent, I will introduce legislation later today that authorizes the Secretary of Homeland Security to grant waivers to allow 

States to use funds from one category, such as training, for another 

purpose, such as purchasing equipment, or whatever the need may 

be. 

I have also introduced legislation that would move the Office for 

Domestic Preparedness from the Border and Transportation Security Directorate to Secretary Ridge’s office where it belongs. By elevating ODP’s stature, I hope to begin the process of establishing a 

centralized location to help support our first responders. 

Let me take this opportunity to commend Secretary Ridge for his 

efforts to promote flexibility as he has worked to incorporate nearly 

two dozen agencies into the new Department of Homeland Security. But Secretary Ridge can only play the hand that Congress has 

dealt him, and we have left him a couple cards short. 

These hearings are intended to provide this Committee with the 

information to assess whether the current structure of grant programs is getting the right resources to the right people. The witVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:36 Aug 19, 2003 Jkt 087739 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6633 C:\DOCS\87739.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PHOGAN
3

nesses will address many of the roadblocks in our grant programs, 

including the lack of flexibility I have described, difficulties in communication and coordination. The hearings will also focus on what 

some have referred to as a tangled web of existing programs that 

is very difficult for States and local communities to penetrate. 

In the omnibus funding bill, as well as the supplemental appropriations legislation passed just last week, we put a down payment 

on the needs of our communities. The increased funding of programs such as the FIRE Act and the State Homeland Security 

Grants are important steps forward in providing adequate resources to our communities. 

I look forward to hearing from our witnesses today. We have a 

very distinguished panel of first responders, and it is my hope that 

they will work with us so that we can build a stronger and better 

homeland security partnership to better serve our Nation in the 

months and years ahead. 

It is now my great pleasure to call upon Senator Carper, from 

Delaware, for any opening remarks that he might have, and I am 

pleased that he could join us today. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARPER 

Senator CARPER. Thank you, Madam Chairman. I am delighted 

to be with you, as always. I like that, ‘‘a couple of cards short.’’ 

That is pretty good. 

I used to say that to him when he was governor of Pennsylvania. 

‘‘You are a couple of cards short, my friend.’’ I will not tell you 

what he said in response. [Laughter.] 

I am delighted to be here with you, and the legislation that you 

will be introducing later today, I believe I get to have the pleasure 

of being your lead—your token Democrat. 

Chairman COLLINS. The lead and most important co-sponsor, and 

I thank you for that. 

Senator CARPER. I am pleased to be a part of your team again. 

To our witnesses, thanks for joining us and welcome. We are especially pleased that Chief Jeff Horvath is here from Dover, and 

sitting back there on our right, the audience’s left, is the Mayor of 

Dover, Jim Hutchinson, whom we affectionately call Hutch. He 

knows a thing or two about policing himself, having been a police 

chief in his youth, which was not too long ago. Hutch, it is great 

to have you here. 

I have a longer statement I would like to ask unanimous consent 

be entered into the record, and I would like to just give you a 

shorter statement now. 

Chairman COLLINS. Without objection. 

Senator CARPER. I will be mercifully brief for our witnesses so we 

can hear what you have to say. 

I want to, again, welcome Chief Horvath today and to ask you 

to extend to the men and women you lead at the Dover Police Department, give them our very best. 

Dover is our capital city. Some people say it is the third-largest 

city in Delaware. I do not know. Dover and Newark, which is the 

home of the University of Delaware, are about the same size. Our 

largest city is Wilmington, which only has about 75,000 people, so 

we are not a State with a large population. We have got a lot of 

4

smaller towns, and Dover is right in the middle of our State, and 

it is a really neat place. 

Chief Horvath brings a tremendous amount of real-world experience that I think can be valuable as this Committee considers the 

Federal Government’s relationship to first responders, and Chief 

we are glad you are here and grateful for the work that you and 

your men and women do every day, not just the people of Dover, 

but really for our State and all of the folks who visit our State capital. 

When this Committee worked last year under the previous 

Chairman—what was his name? [Laughter.] 

Chairman COLLINS. The movie star? 

Senator CARPER. Joe Lieberman, that was his name. We created 

the Department of Homeland Security, and I think all of my colleagues hoped that what we were setting up would help the Federal Government to be better able to prevent and to respond to terrorist attacks. 

As of March 1, last month, we have in place the skeleton of an 

organization that should be able to pull together under one roof information on threats and vulnerabilities, and to use that information to improve security and to prepare first responders like those 

that are arrayed before us today. 

I look forward to working with my old colleague, Governor Ridge, 

now Secretary Ridge, and all of our colleagues here on this Committee to making sure that the Department of Homeland Security 

works the way it was meant to work. 

No matter how well Secretary Ridge does his work on the Federal level, we will not be much safer than we were on September 

10, 2001, unless our first responders are better prepared to do their 

work on the local level. And while homeland security should certainly be a shared responsibility, it is vitally important that the 

Federal Government does its part to provide each State with 

enough first-responder aid to ensure that its citizens are adequately protected. 

I would like to see the Federal Government’s financial commitment to homeland security increase overall, but as the Senator 

from the first State, from Delaware, I would especially like to see 

us fulfill our obligation to less-populous States. 

How many people live in Maine these days? We have about 

800,000. 

Chairman COLLINS. One point two million. 

Senator CARPER. OK. 

Chairman COLLINS. Was that a quiz just to see if I knew my 

State well? [Laughter.] 

Senator CARPER. I understand the need to give larger States, especially those with densely populated urban areas, enough money 

to protect their larger populations, but no State, including our 

States, should be less safe than our neighbors because we happen 

to have a smaller population. 

The Federal Government should be working to bring every State 

and locality to the point where they are capable of responding effectively to any potential threat. By distributing first-responder aid to 

States based largely on population, however, I fear that we may 

fail to do just that. 

5

The current formula for distributing first-responder aid ignores 

the fact that Delaware, small in population, though it is, is located 

in the Northeast corridor between New York and Washington, it ignores the fact that Delaware is home to a major port, to a major 

oil refinery, to a number of chemical plants, and that every day 

scores of ships make their way up and down the Delaware River, 

which is part of Delaware, by the way, and a lot of them come into 

the Port of Wilmington. We have scores of trains that ply their way 

up and down the Northeast corridor, trucks that make their way 

throughout I–95 to destinations up and down the East Coast. 

The formula currently used also ignores the fact that Chief 

Horvath here, and the officers he leads, work every day to protect 

a major asset for our country, and that is the Dover Air Force Base 

facility that is playing a crucial role in the War in Iraq, as we help 

provide part of the air bridge between the United States and the 

Middle East. 

I look forward, Madam Chairman, to working with you. I especially am pleased with the new legislation that you will be introducing. 

Governors like to get Federal money, but we also like to get that 

Federal money with a reasonable amount of flexibility to use it in 

ways that make sense for our States. Just as Maine is different 

from Delaware is different from Arizona, we want to make sure 

that the monies that come to our first responders come in a way 

that allows us to use those dollars most effectively and appreciates 

the different challenges that each of our States represents. 

So, Madam Chairman, I am delighted that we are having this 

hearing. I am honored to be with you and pleased especially with 

our friends that have taken the time to be with us today. Welcome. 

Thank you 

[The prepared statement of Senator Carper follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR CARPER 

Thank you, Madam Chairman. I’d like to begin by welcoming Chief Jeffrey 

Horvath to the Committee. He is Chief of Police for the City of Dover, Delaware’s 

capitol city and also its third largest. He brings a tremendous amount of real world 

experience to this hearing that can be invaluable as this Committee considers the 

Federal Government’s relationship to first responders. Thank you, Chief, for the 

work you do every day to protect the citizens of Dover and for your contribution to 

our work today. 

When this Committee worked last year under Senator Lieberman’s leadership to 

create the Department of Homeland, I think all of my colleagues hoped that what 

we were setting up would help the Federal Government be better able to prevent 

and respond to terrorist attack. As of March 1, we have in place the skeleton of an 

organization that should be able to pull together under one roof information on 

threats and vulnerabilities and use that information to improve security and prepare first responders. I look forward to working with Secretary Ridge and all of my 

colleagues on this Committee in making sure the Department of Homeland Security 

works the way it was meant to. 

No matter how well Secretary Ridge does his work on the Federal level, however, 

we will not be much safer than we were on September 10, 2001 unless our first responders are better prepared to do their work on the local level. While homeland 

security should certainly be a shared priority, it is vitally important that the Federal Government does its part to provide each State with enough first responder aid 

to ensure that its citizens are adequately protected. I’d like to see the Federal Government’s financial commitment to homeland security increase overall but, as a Senator from Delaware, I’d especially like to see us fulfill our obligations to less populous States. 

6

I understand the need to give larger States, especially those with densely populated urban areas, enough money to protect their larger populations. No state, however, should be less safe than its neighbors simply because it has a smaller population. The Federal Government should be working to bring every State and locality 

to the point where they are capable of responding effectively to any potential threat. 

By distributing first responder aid to States based largely on population, however, 

I fear we will fail to do this. 

The current formula for distributing first responder aid ignores the fact that Delaware, small in population though it is, is located in the Northeast midway between 

New York and Washington. It ignores the fact that Delaware is home to a major 

port, oil refineries and chemical plants. It ignores the fact that Delaware everyday 

hosts scores of ships, trains and trucks on their way to destination up and down 

the East Coast. It also ignores the fact that Chief Horvath and his officers work 

everyday to help protect the Dover Air Force Base, a facility that is now playing 

a crucial role in the war in Iraq. 

In a story in today’s Wahsington Post, Secretary Ridge calls on Congress to create 

a new formula for distributing first responder aid that gives grater weight to risk 

and the presence of critical infrastructure and national icons. I applaud him for his 

efforts and hope that this Committee can work with him to draft a better formula. 

I also hope we can work with him to expand on the small-state minimum now used. 

A small-state minimum may mean that States like Maine and Delaware receive 

more first responder aid per-capita than more populous States like New York and 

California. When it comes to homeland security spending, however, per capita allocation is not a very meaningful measure of the effectiveness of the Federal aid program. Every state, big and small, must take certain steps and make certain expenditures in order to be even minimally prepared for a major attack. 

I look forward to working with Senator Collins and the rest of this Committee to 

ensure that the Federal first responder aid program takes risk into account without 

ignoring the needs of less populous States.

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you, Senator. 

The Committee will now proceed to hearing from our witnesses. 

We are very pleased today to have an outstanding panel of dedicated public servants who are first responders, including police 

chiefs, firefighters and emergency medical technicians and, in one 

case, a firefighter who plays both roles, which is common throughout our country. 

First, I would like to welcome my friend, Michael Chitwood, who 

is the police chief in Maine’s largest City of Portland, Maine. He 

has some 38 years of law enforcement experience, and I rely on 

him often in talking about the security challenges facing our country. I have no doubt that his advice will be very helpful to this 

Committee as we seek to craft legislation. 

Again, Chief, I want to thank you for all of the help that you 

have provided, for the outstanding leadership that you give the 

City of Portland’s police force and for taking the time to be here 

with us today. 

Mr. CHITWOOD. Thank you. 

Chairman COLLINS. Our second witness is going to be Jeffrey 

Horvath, who as Senator Carper has pointed out, serves as Dover 

Delaware’s police chief. He has moved steadily up the ranks, I understand, since joining the City of Dover in 1984 as a patrolman. 

His range of law enforcement experiences will help him to bring 

valuable perspectives to this hearing. And like Senator Carper, I 

am particularly interested in the relationship between the police 

force and Dover Air Base. That does add a whole new dimension 

to the threat facing Delaware, and I will be interested to hear from 

the witness on that issue. 

Our next witness that we will hear from is Chief Ed Plaugher—

right? Have I got it wrong? 

7

1The prepared statement of Mr. Chitwood appears in the Appendix on page 43. 

Mr. PLAUGHER. It is OK. 

Chairman COLLINS [continuing]. The fire chief of Arlington County, Virginia. He also offers the Committee a wealth of the knowledge in discussing homeland security programs. His 36 years of 

service began in February 1966. It is my understanding that the 

President has recently appointed the Chief as a Senior Advisory 

Committee Member to the Homeland Security Council. 

I would also point out that the chief served as the incident commander at the Pentagon on September 11, 2001. So he certainly 

brings firsthand experience of the role of first responders when a 

terrorist attack occurs. 

Finally, it is a great pleasure to welcome this morning Captain 

Chauncey Bowers, from Prince George’s County Fire and Rescue. 

Captain Bowers brings to the Committee a dual perspective as both 

an EMT and a firefighter, and I think that is very important. I always want to make sure we hear from the EMT community as well 

when we hear from first responders. So I thank you for being here 

as well. 

I would like to start with Chief Chitwood if you would proceed 

with your testimony, Chief. Thank you for being here. 

TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL J. CHITWOOD,1 CHIEF OF POLICE, 

PORTLAND, MAINE POLICE DEPARTMENT 

Mr. CHITWOOD. Good morning, again, to both you and Senator 

Carper. 

Senator Collins, from our many conversations, I know you understand many of Portland’s concerns, and I appreciate the opportunity to help you and other Members of the Committee understand the challenges facing our police department in the post-September 11 world. 

In the City of Portland, we employ 164 men and women, with 18 

unfilled positions at any one time due to vacancies or long-term 

leave. The effect that these unfilled slots have on my police department’s manpower, however, is minuscule when compared to the effect that the lack of coordination and information sharing by Federal agencies has on our policing efforts. 

The post-September 11 environment calls for new Federal-Statelocal partnerships. The Federal Government cannot, and should 

not, write a blank check to pay for round-the-clock surveillance of 

every possible terrorist target, but it should maximize Federal resources to coordinate Homeland Security’s information and manpower with those local governments. 

Based on our experiences in Portland, Maine, I am certain that 

improved coordination and cooperation by Federal agencies could 

off-set the increased local expenditures that have followed the tragic events of September 11. 

In Portland, policing imperatives of a post-September 11 world 

have caused taxpayers close to a million dollars in police staffing 

and overtime. Without a more thoughtful and significant Federal 

partnership, taxpayers will continue to pay more than their fair 

share, and the Federal Government will not get the most for its 

Federal dollars. 

8

Perhaps the best example of the need for better coordination is 

the joint Federal, State and local effort to protect the Portland 

International Jetport. Portland’s Jetport is a very busy traveling 

point, connecting travelers to most of the hub airports on the Eastern seaboard. 

In 2002, over 120,000 flights carried more than 1 million people 

through Portland, and as everyone knows, Portland played an unwilling and a most unwelcome role to the September 11 terrorist 

when two of the hijackers, Mohammad Atta and Abdul Alomari, 

used our airport to start their tragic journey. 

Prior to September 11, my department provided the Jetport with 

three officers from 5 a.m. until 10 p.m. Since September 11, the 

Federal Aviation Administration and the Transportation Security 

Administration, have significantly increased the police presence at 

the airport and now require that I provide 12 officers around the 

clock 24 hours a day. This represents approximately 2,270 8-hour 

shifts per year at a cost of about $1.2 million. We are willing and 

eager to provide manpower and resources to protect our community, but some of the requests by the FAA and the TSA just do not 

make sense. 

It has cost approximately, up to this day, $800,000 to meet the 

increased staffing needs at the airport, including the supplemental 

overtime requested by the FAA and the mandated TSA coverage, 

but the cost does not stop there. The extra hours Portland police 

officers spend at the airport often requires that the police department pay them overtime for their regular shifts, which is an additional $75,000, and these additional expenses do not account for 

the physical, emotional, and psychological toll taken on the officers. 

Excessive overtime takes its toll not only on the officers, but also 

on their spouses, their children, and their community. Excessive 

overtime can lead to increased risk for accidents and injuries, 

chronic fatigue, stress, and diminished decisionmaking ability. 

At the same time that I am required to increase my staffing at 

the Jetport by 600 percent, the Transportation Security Administration has hired over 160 new employees in Portland and has 

given them excellent training, and I think that they do a great job 

in protecting our airport. 

While the TSA monitors the Jetport with 160 employees, I have 

the responsibility for policing the Jetport, the waterfront, and the 

entire City of Portland with 164 people. If the TSA employees were 

given additional training, we could work with them to coordinate 

our efforts to secure the airport, decreasing police staffing needs 

and prevent additional costs. The point is that the Federal Government does not need to write more checks and spend more tax dollars if we work together in a coordinated fashion to force these 

agencies to be more proactive in partnering with us at a local level. 

Portland is home to a multi-use waterfront that serves as a gateway for cruise ships, oil tankers, fishing vessels, cargo carriers, and 

a pipeline. If these agencies fail to coordinate their effort, what will 

happen when my officers are asked to take an increased role in 

protecting Portland’s port or the tank farms? If the Coast Guard 

and the TSA took steps to coordinate their efforts, we would be 

able to provide additional protections with our existing manpower 

and with a minimal cost to both local and Federal Government. 

9

We should consider the following: 

One, utilizing TSA resources to supplement airport security and 

reduce the need for uniform officers; 

Two, enhance communication between Federal, State and local 

law enforcement agencies to pool information and eliminate duplication of effort; 

Three, increasing local participation in determining policing 

needs and identifying potential terrorist threats; 

Four, employing the National Guard units to assist with shortterm security needs in response to specific threats. 

Finally, with regard to new Federal resources for homeland security, we must make sure that they actually get to the local level 

in some coordinated fashion. So far we have received minimal additional resources to offset our increased expenditures. But, again, 

writing a check without any increased coordination of information 

or manpower makes little sense. It is doomed to fail. 

In your effort to revise the various homeland security programs, 

I urge you to look at the structure to make sure that you target 

resources in a flexible fashion to the local level and at the same 

time coordinate them with other Federal demands, such as increased staffing. 

I want to thank you again for the opportunity to testify before 

the Committee, and I look forward to answering any questions you 

may have. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you very much, Chief. 

I would like to stop our witness testimony right now and first see 

if the distinguished Senator from New Jersey, who has joined us, 

has any opening remarks that he would like to make. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LAUTENBERG 

Senator LAUTENBERG. I appreciate that, Madam Chairman, and 

just listening to the testimony of the police chief from Portland, 

outlines the problem in absolutely stark and clear terms, and all 

of our witnesses here, I am sure, would share similar stories. 

But I commend you, Madam Chairman, for holding this hearing 

on homeland security and the challenges our first responders face. 

It seems that is the area that is most obvious to community leadership, first responders, police, fire, emergency service personnel, and 

in some cases hazardous laboratory people. It has a direct effect. 

And I notice that the chief said, also, that he had openings, vacancies, that were not filled to begin with, and I thought that presented a clear picture. 

But a significant amount of responsibility authority for public security is delegated to State and local governments, but across the 

country State and local governments are facing their biggest budget crises in over 50 years. Consequently, police, firefighters, and 

other first responders to the problems are stretched to the limit 

trying to protect our communities. 

The cost of bolstering security, especially when the U.S. Attorney 

General and the Secretary of Homeland Security raised the national terrorist threat level, it can be enormous. 

I have often talked to the Secretary of Homeland Security and 

asked why release this data? Why send out these alarms if there 

is no solution to the problem? Do you want people to just sit home? 

10

That is hardly the answer. Should they carry on their normal activity? Well, yes, but also looking over their shoulders at the same 

time to make sure that if they see anything suspicious they help 

out. We ask them to do that in case of a kidnapping, in the case 

of a threat by an escaped prisoner, or a felon in the area. So there 

is no reason not to call for that. 

And when you see the task that we have and the amount of 

funding that is required, 170,000 people in the Homeland Security 

Department, $33 billion in budgets, stretching across 22 departments of government, it is a significant task in just shaping the 

process. And then allocating the funds and getting the communities 

to cooperate is a very difficult thing, but we have to do it. 

So when we have these alerts, I am told, and this is no military 

secret or intelligence secret, that the reason that is done, the reason they send out the amber, the yellow or whatever, is to alert the 

local folk—the governors, the police chiefs, those who are heads of 

departments of emergency response. 

Well, I would have hoped they could have done it neater and not 

scared everybody because, again, there is nothing we can do. We 

have to conduct our lives normally, and that is the objective. 

Last week, I met with the people from the New Jersey State Association of Chiefs of Police to discuss the tremendous pressure on 

local police and fire departments. After nearly 2 years of excessive 

overtime, growing State deficits, limited Federal budgets, we need 

to bring relief to the communities that have sent first responders 

to the wars. Their costs can mean large holes in their security, as 

well as the financial costs, which are very tough to recover in periods of significant deficits in States and communities across the 

country. 

Another problem, which I am attempting to address through legislation, it arises when a jurisdiction’s first responders serve in the 

National Guard or the Reserve and they get called to active duty 

for 6 or more months, and that is happening with more and more 

frequency, now that the war with Iraq is underway. 

According to the Police Executive Research Forum, nearly onehalf of all law enforcement agencies surveyed have lost personnel 

to military call-ups. Reserves are a crucial component of our armed 

forces, but call-ups should not undermine our ability to respond to 

the need to protect communities against terrorist acts, national disasters and other emergencies at home. 

The bottom line is that protecting our country in the wake of 

September 11 will take people, equipment and other resources, and 

we cannot boost homeland security on the cheap. Unfortunately, 

since September 11, there has been a lot of talk about homeland 

security, but at every single turn, it has taken the effort of both 

Democrat and Republican Senators to try to provide additional 

funding to offset State and local governments’ increased homeland 

security expenditures. 

So thank you, again, Madam Chairman, for your command of 

this Committee and for your diligence in dealing with the subjects 

that are in front of us, and I appreciate the fact that I am serving 

with you here and have the opportunity to participate this morning. 

11

1The prepared statement of Mr. Horvath appears in the Appendix on page 47. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you, Senator. We will now turn to 

Chief Horvath for his statement. 

TESTIMONY OF JEFFREY HORVATH,1 POLICE CHIEF, DOVER, 

DELAWARE POLICE DEPARTMENT, 

Mr. HORVATH. Madam Chairman Collins, Senator Carper, and 

Senator Lautenberg, thank you for inviting me to appear before 

you today. 

I commend you for calling this important hearing. Today, the 

challenges on the front line are great. Investments are needed 

more than ever before. 

I believe that Delaware has one distinct advantage over most 

other States in that it is very small. Due to Delaware’s small size, 

the law enforcement community is able to form a very close relationship, and we are able to communicate with each other on a regular basis. The Dover Police Department currently hosts monthly 

meetings for the Delaware Police Chief’s Council and each police 

agency in the State is usually represented at the meetings by either the Agency’s chief or by a chief’s representative. 

I only provide this information to let you know that while I cannot speak for all of the agencies in the State of Delaware, I know 

that the concerns that I will express in this statement are shared 

by many other agencies in Delaware. 

Delaware’s governor, Ruth Ann Minner, is the lead Democratic 

governor for homeland security and delivered a nationwide weekly 

radio address on Saturday, April 5. In her address, Governor 

Minner stated, ‘‘Here at home, Senator Ridge, the President’s head 

of the Homeland Security Department, tells us there is risk of another terrorist attack. We do not know when or where the next attack will come, but we do know who will protect us when it does: 

Our police, firefighters, public health and emergency medical personnel. They are our neighbors, our family, our friends, and like 

our troops, they are ready to risk their lives for us. They are our 

hometown security.’’

I could not agree with this statement more, and I think it indicates how important it is for the Federal Government to work with 

the State and local agencies across this country to achieve our 

homeland security goals. 

Since September 11, police departments have been asked to do 

more for their communities than ever before; walk the beat, be on 

guard against terrorists, secure critical infrastructures. Despite all 

the good works of the new Department of Homeland Security, the 

burdens of security for the hometown fall heaviest on local police 

departments. 

There are more than 700,000 police officers and sheriffs in this 

country, compared with nearly 11,000 FBI agents. Police chiefs and 

sheriffs are called upon more and more to protect us against the 

new threats from abroad. 

Local budgets are incredibly tight, and I could truly state that 

the Dover Police Department is in a position that we may have to 

cut certain programs and services to our citizens if the city is unable to find other revenue sources in the future. All of this is occurVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:36 Aug 19, 2003 Jkt 087739 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 C:\DOCS\87739.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PHOGAN
12

ring while we are tasked with new homeland security demands. All 

of this is happening while the FBI has been told to necessarily 

refocus its resources. 

Recently, it was reported that the FBI has plans to mobilize as 

many as 5,000 agents to guard against terrorist attacks during hostilities with Iraq. The FBI’s criminal surveillance operations would 

be temporarily suspended. Local police will be called upon to pick 

up the slack once the FBI is forced to pull almost half of its agents 

out of traditional crime-fighting work. 

One of the top concerns for law enforcement in Delaware is that 

we are not receiving funds in a timely fashion. I have met with 

James E. Turner, III, the director of the Delaware Emergency 

Management Agency. He advised me that DEMA just recently received fiscal year 2002 funding in December 2002, and they are 

currently finishing up an application for fiscal year 2003 funding. 

Once again, I will state that Delaware is in an advantageous po- sition due to its small size. DEMA is receiving $3.6 million in fiscal 

year 2003 for homeland security, which will be used for Delaware’s 

police, fire, EMS, and HAZMAT agencies. The Delaware Police 

Chief’s Council is currently working to provide DEMA with a comprehensive plan on how the funding that it designated for law enforcement should be spent. 

This will hopefully ensure that all police agencies in Delaware 

will receive their fair share of the funding, but you need to know 

that resources do not go directly to local police departments. They 

cannot be used to hire new police, they cannot be used to pay overtime expenses that we incur each and every time Secretary Ridge 

changes the alert level. They can be used to purchase equipment, 

but not by me. I have to wait for a statewide plan to be developed, 

and then I have to hope that a fair share of those funds will filter 

to my department. 

I feel it is also important to point out that many police departments serve in jurisdictions that are unique to the area and may 

place differing demands on that department. For instance, the 

Dover Air Force Base is located within the city limits of Dover. The 

Dover Air Force Base is an asset to the State of Delaware and to 

the City of Dover, but there are increased homeland security demands placed on the Dover Police Department due to its location. 

Dover is also home to the Dover Downs International Speedway. 

The event at the speedway brings in approximately $150,000 additional civilians into Dover two times a year. 

Federal assistance should be provided to local law enforcement 

for training needs, equipment needs and personnel costs. I also 

agree with the position of the International Association of Chiefs 

of Police in that it is important to distinguish between the assistance funds that will be provided to State or local law enforcement 

from programs administered by the Department of Homeland Security and those provided from the existing programs at the Department of Justice. 

Both programs provide funds to law enforcement agencies, but 

they address different, but equally important, areas of need. In 

other words, there is a concern in the law enforcement community 

that new assistance programs are being funded at the expense of 

traditional law enforcement assistance programs, such as the 

13

1The prepared statement of Mr. Plaugher appears in the Appendix on page 50. 

COPS program, the Local Law Enforcement Block Grant program 

and the Byrne Grant program. Homeland security programs are 

not duplicative programs, they are complementary programs. Effective anti-crime programs are effective anti-terrorism programs. 

This year, for the second budget cycle in a row, it has been proposed to eliminate the COPS hiring program. COPS is the only initiative in the entire Federal Government that targets its resources 

directly towards police. There is no middle man. Dover has added 

several police officers to its authorized strength in the past, and we 

will be adding four more in July 2003 using COPS funding. This 

is a tremendous resource to the City of Dover and its citizens. 

I also feel that communications between Federal, State and local 

governments need to improve. There have been many times, since 

September 11, that I have learned that State and local law enforcement have been put on a higher alert status by watching the news. 

We were never given a call and never received a written notice of 

the increased threat level. I know that this is true for many law 

enforcement agencies in the State of Delaware. I will state, however, that communications seem to be slowly improving in this 

area. 

Communications also need to improve in regards to funding for 

homeland security. Law enforcement needs to be made aware of 

new and additional funding without actually having to search for 

it. Many times the demands of police work and the needs of our 

jurisdictions do not allow the necessary time required to stay on 

top of this very important aspect of homeland security. 

In closing, I would like to thank everyone for inviting me to this 

hearing and allowing me to speak. It has been an honor and a 

privilege. I would be pleased to try to answer any questions at the 

appropriate time. 

Thank you. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you, Chief. 

We will now turn to Chief Plaugher. 

TESTIMONY OF EDWARD P. PLAUGHER,1 FIRE CHIEF AND SEPTEMBER 11 INCIDENT COMMANDER AT THE PENTAGON, ARLINGTON COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT, VIRGINIA 

Mr. PLAUGHER. Good morning. 

Chairman COLLINS. Good morning. 

Mr. PLAUGHER. Madam Chairman and Members of the Committee, I am Edward Plaugher, Chief of the Arlington County, Virginia, Fire Department, and begin by thanking you for having me 

here today. 

I have submitted for the record a statement which I will not 

read, but at this time would like to bring to the Committee’s attention several key points. 

First, I appear today on behalf of front-line service providers 

across our Nation. First responders have, and will continue to be, 

on the front lines for homeland security. Assuring that each citizen 

is protected, to the highest degree possible, is the responsibility of 

today’s first responders. 

14

Congress, because of this need, has designed, over recent years, 

a multi-layer, multi-department funding stream. Utilizing this approach has led to total confusion and, in most cases, a total lack 

of action. We, as a Nation, cannot afford this confusion and, most 

importantly, we cannot afford this lack of action. 

I ask that a streamlined, direct approach be undertaken. The 

system that I envision would recognize that the effects of terrorism 

attacks occur locally and that we must maximize our collective efforts to prevent terrorism, reduce risk and design preparations that 

respond effectively, that the programs are locally focused and are 

designed to build upon existing resources. 

Key to this effort is citizen participation and preparedness. I request that at least 10 percent of all Federal funding be utilized to 

encourage our citizens to participate in our protection efforts. We 

need to strengthen our citizen-based preparedness. 

In addition, the private sector capability in this Nation is enormous. We must find a way that the private sector resources, and 

in particular those in the construction industry, are utilized in an 

effective and efficient manner. They can, and will, and are usually 

willing to assist the responders. 

However, we need to provide a structure that folds the public 

and private resources into an incident command structure that will 

enable every community to leverage its resources into an effective 

homeland security program. 

Regional preparedness, however, holds the key. Federal funding 

needs to leverage its effectiveness by using a regional approach. 

Local governments must build a baseline of capacity and should 

not be forced to have redundant basic resources. As an example, 

each region must assure that adequate hospital surg beds are 

available and that surg medical support staff are also available. 

This lends itself to a regional resource-sharing solution. 

Federal programs that mandate target goals for preparedness, 

however, are the key. Just like the real issue is not homeland security, but how to be secure in an open society, preparedness is not 

about buying protective suits, but about developing systems that 

are needed to support the first responders. 

In summation, I would like to ask that Congress simplify, to the 

extent possible, make sure that we have a national standard of preparedness, a national strategy, and that the private and citizen sector of our community be folded into the process. Assuring the Nation is ready to respond to homeland security needs must be simple, straightforward and accomplished without delay. 

I look forward to your questions at the appropriate time. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you very much, Chief. 

Before turning to Captain Bowers, I want to call on Senator Durbin to see if he has any opening comments that he would like to 

make. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR DURBIN 

Senator DURBIN. Madam Chairman, thank you for this hearing, 

and I am sorry I stepped in a few moments late, but I wanted to 

come. I think this is critically important, and I think we face two 

challenges: 

15

1The prepared statement of Mr. Bowers appears in the Appendix on page 53. 

First, how to respond to the reality of terrorism when we know 

that the world is more likely to call 911 than their Senator’s office 

if something happens; and, second, how do we do it in a context 

where we are dealing with the largest Federal deficit in the Nation’s history and most State and local governments are facing the 

largest deficits they have seen in recent memory? 

It is an extraordinary challenge. I am glad you are having this 

hearing, and I think that your goal of more flexibility in transferring these funds is something that will be important to my State 

and many others. 

Thank you. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you very much, Senator. 

Captain Bowers, thank you for being here. You may proceed. 

TESTIMONY OF CAPTAIN CHAUNCEY BOWERS,1 FIREFIGHTEREMT-PARAMEDIC, PRINCE GEORGE’S COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT, MARYLAND, ON BEHALF OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE FIGHTERS (IAFF) 

Mr. BOWERS. Good morning, Chairman Collins and Members of 

the Committee. 

My name is Chauncey Bowers, and I am a firefighter-EMT-paramedic with the rank of Captain in the Prince George’s County Fire 

Emergency Medical Services Department. I am here representing 

the Nation’s 260,000 professional firefighters and EMS personnel 

who are members of the International Association of Firefighters. 

To those of us in the fire service, September 11 changed the 

world. It is in the memory of the 343 firefighters lost on September 

11 that we are committed to ensuring that firefighters have the resources to protect our communities and our Nation. 

In the current environment, fire departments are facing the dual 

pressures of homeland security and reduced resources caused by 

local budget deficits. This is a recipe for disaster. We need a national commitment to homeland security preparedness. We must 

work to ensure that every fire department in America has the resources to protect our citizens. 

While much of this work needs to focus on the unique challenges 

posed by weapons of mass destruction, we cannot overlook other 

dangers. The worst terrorist attacks on our Nation, including the 

tragedies of September 11 and the Oklahoma City bombing, were 

carried out with conventional weapons. 

The first and foremost need of the fire service is adequate personnel. Both OSHA and the National Fire Protection Association, 

the consensus standards-making body of the fire service, have 

issued standards for safe fire ground staffing. Unfortunately, most 

fire departments do not comply with these safety regulations, often 

leading to tragic consequences. 

Even after September 11, short staffing is common in every part 

of the country. In Maine, for example, not a single fire department 

complies with the NFPA standards. Portland and Old Orchard 

Beach are among the communities considering laying off firefighters. While this staffing crisis must ultimately be addressed at 

the local level, there is much that the Federal Government can do, 

16

and I must take a moment to commend both Chairman Collins and 

Ranking Member Lieberman for helping to point the way. 

Your leadership in working to create a Federal grant program to 

aid firefighters is deeply appreciated by every firefighter in this 

Nation. It is on their behalf that I thank you. The SAFER Act, as 

this grant proposal is known, provides grants to local fire departments to fund the hiring of 75,000 additional firefighters. 

Fire departments would apply for 4-year grants that would contribute towards the cost of hiring these new firefighters. Local jurisdictions would then be required to retain the firefighter position 

for at least one additional year. 

The second need of the fire service is equipment. An IAFF study 

found shortage of personnel protective equipment, respirators, and 

communications equipment. A FEMA study had similar findings. 

Approximately, 57,000 firefighters lack personal protective clothing. One-third of firefighters are not equipped with self-contained 

breathing apparatus and many fire departments do not have 

enough portable radios to equip more than half of the firefighters 

on shift. 

To address these concerns, the International Association of Firefighters endorses full funding of both the FIRE Act and the First 

Responder program. The FIRE Act provides grants directly to local 

fire departments for basic needs. The First Responder program provides grants to States and localities for the purchase of specialized 

terrorism equipment. 

Training is the third major need. Firefighters need training in 

fire suppression, emergency medical services, rescue, hazardous 

materials and weapons of mass destruction response. A FEMA 

study found that 27 percent of fire department personnel involved 

in providing emergency medical services lacked any formal training 

in those duties. Incredibly, 73 percent of fire departments failed to 

meet Federal regulations for hazardous materials response training. 

One of the obstacles to training that has arisen over the past 

year is that many jurisdictions lack the funds to back-fill positions 

of firefighters assigned to training. Even in places where funds are 

available, many fire departments do not take advantage of these 

opportunities because they cannot afford the overtime pay for the 

firefighter who is filling in for their colleague while at training. 

To address the need for training, we urge Congress to fully fund 

both the FIRE Act and the programs run by the Office for Domestic 

Preparedness. The FIRE Act can be used for most basic training, 

including emergency medical services, and the Office for Domestic 

Preparedness programs provides some of the world’s best weapons 

of mass destruction response training. 

Fire departments provide 80 percent of emergency medical services in the United States, and we are the largest provider of prehospital emergency care. Fire-based emergency medical services 

featuring cross-trained, multi-role firefighters is the most effective 

delivery system for emergency medical services. 

When we talk about the fire service, you are talking about emergency medical services. As a firefighter and paramedic, I can tell 

you firsthand that virtually all of the needs of the fire department 

apply to the emergency medical services arena. Fire-based EMS 

17

providers need additional personnel, equipment, and training, and 

like the fire service, terrorism poses new challenges for EMS. 

EMS providers need training in detecting the telltale signs of biological and chemical exposure and identifying the symptoms of specific pathogens or agents while protecting themselves from these 

hazards. Fire-based EMS providers also need training and equipment to decontaminate and treat large numbers of victims that 

may result from these incidents. 

Finally, on the issue of program structure, the International Association of Firefighters sees no conflict between the FIRE Act and 

the First Responder program. The FIRE Act, again, funds the basic 

needs of the fire departments locally. The First Responder program 

is for terrorism response. It is imperative that both programs are 

fully funded and remain separate and distinct. 

As Congress evaluates these programs, the International Association of Firefighters offers the following comments: 

Many of our fire service colleagues feel that FEMA must continue to operate the FIRE Act. We share those concerns. However, 

if the decision is made to move the program to the Office for Domestic Preparedness, we strongly urge Congress to require ODP to 

administer the program in the current manner and retain the following three key principles: 

First, enhance homeland security by addressing basic fire department needs; 

Second, the grants must be provided directly to local fire departments, where they will translate into equipment, training, and personnel; 

Finally, continue the peer-review process, utilizing firefighters 

and determining where this money can best be spent. 

We also urge adequate funding for the First Responder program, 

however, we feel that grants should either be provided directly to 

local agencies or local communities or the States should be required 

to send 90 percent of the funding to localities within 30 days. 

Further, the definition of a first responder is overly broad. In a 

community’s emergency response plan, the funding to train and 

equip first responders must be targeted to fire, police, and EMS. 

In conclusion, firefighters are the linchpin to an effective homeland security. We will respond when the next alarm rings, but our 

ranks are thin. The Federal Government must provide the resources to ensure that another September 11 does not happen. 

Firefighters need sufficient staffing, the right equipment and the 

proper training to do our job safely and effectively. 

Thank you for this opportunity to present the view of the International Association of Firefighters, and I will be happy to take 

questions at the appropriate time. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you very much, Captain. 

Chief Chitwood, I want to start my questions with you. You mentioned in your testimony that the City of Portland has incurred 

costs of some $800,000 since September 11 for increased staffing at 

the airport, and as I understand it, that increased staffing is federally mandated by the requests you are getting from FAA and TSA; 

is that correct? That this was not an action taken by the city on 

its own, but rather in response to Federal requests? 

Mr. CHITWOOD. Correct, Senator. 

18

Chairman COLLINS. Has the city and your police department received any funding from the Federal Government to help cope with 

that enormous hit on the city’s budget? 

Mr. CHITWOOD. With respect to the monies that are spent at the 

airport, through the Jetport Enterprise Fund and through the mandate of TSA for personnel, we have been reimbursed for those particular monies. 

For the flip side of that, for all monies that are spent to fill the 

shifts that are left open because we are at the Jetport, no. 

Chairman COLLINS. And that is your point about the increased 

overtime that the department is incurring because its officers are 

at the airport, rather than perhaps controlling the streets of Portland? 

Mr. CHITWOOD. That is correct. 

Chairman COLLINS. That cost is being borne by the city without 

any reimbursement from the Federal Government? 

Mr. CHITWOOD. That is correct. 

Chairman COLLINS. I am interested in the comments that all of 

you have made about whether the funding that we are providing 

for homeland security actually makes it down to the local police department, the local fire department, to EMTs because that is our 

intent. We have appropriated literally billions of dollars for homeland security, but is it making its way down to the local level? 

Chief Plaugher. 

Mr. PLAUGHER. Absolutely not. As I talk to my colleagues around 

the Nation, the frustrations just continue to mount. The bureaucracy is just consuming the energy, consuming the monies, and at 

the end of the stream is very little, if any, monies. 

In my community, for the years—and I hope I get the right years 

because it has taken so long I am actually forgetting what years 

we are involved with—I think the first set of monies, through some 

of the State and local assistance programs was in Federal year 

1999, and then 2000, 2001, 2002. 

We just recently got a block of monies from I think it was 2000, 

2001, 2002. By the time it got to us, it was such small monies that 

we could only use it for one purpose, and that was to buy regulators for our firefighters because our current regulators failed to 

pass the test and were not effective against chemical and biological 

agents. So we were forced to then buy regulators for that purpose 

because of our needs and the subway system in the Washington 

metropolitan area. 

So, again, when it did come to us, it was in such small amount 

that it only could go for one purpose and one purpose only. And because it was a regulated program, we could only use it to buy 

equipment. Now, we did have a need, but if, in fact, we did not 

have a need for that, we would have been forced to have said back 

to the State that we were unable to use this money because it was 

very specifically regulated for one purpose and one purpose only. 

So there is not flexibility, and the amount that comes out at the 

end of the stream is very small. 

Chairman COLLINS. I think the lack of flexibility is an excellent 

point because you know best what your needs are, and I think it 

is one reason we are seeing these unspent balances, also, in the 

monies that the States have received. 

19

Mr. PLAUGHER. In the Commonwealth of Virginia, we participated, as mandated by the Department of Justice program, we participated in the assessment, a risk assessment and risk hazard. We 

were not, as we participated in that, we did not particularly agree 

with the outcome, but had no choice but to accept the State’s outcome. As a matter of fact, in the State’s list of hazards, in the Commonwealth of Virginia, the Pentagon was at the bottom of the third 

page, and each page had about 75 to 80 target hazard properties 

on it. So it was not even rated high on the list of target hazards. 

And so that would have meant we would have, using that formula, 

we would have received no Federal funding for an obvious national 

symbol, national hazard. 

So, again, these programs have been very convoluted, they are 

difficult to follow, they are difficult to work with in the State systems, and so where they are intended for the first responders, it 

usually is not getting there. 

The last study that was done, by a private institute, found that 

less than 2 cents actually ended up in the first responders’ hands, 

2 cents on the dollar. 

Chairman COLLINS. That is a major disappointment and a major 

problem and one reason that I wanted to convene this hearing. 

Captain Bowers, aside from fire grants which, as you pointed 

out, was a preexisting program and goes directly to fire departments, are you receiving homeland security money as a result of 

these billions of dollars that we are appropriating? 

Mr. BOWERS. Well, I would have to echo the chief’s comments, 

that process is very slow and cumbersome, and the money is a long 

time coming in the end. When you opened this hearing, you made 

some comments about restrictions on use of the money and restructuring to put this in a central location. I think your efforts in that 

area are 100 percent on target. 

Some of the problems that we have experienced is when a grant 

is applied for, we may identify Item A, but by the time that is approved and we are ready to purchase equipment, there may be a 

new item, Item B, that is now available, but in order to switch 

from Item A, which we specified in the application, to Item B, there 

is an entire bureaucratic process to get that approved. That, again, 

delays the amount of time it takes us to have the equipment. 

Having these programs in a central office will also eliminate the 

problems that we face now, where sometimes it goes through the 

State, sometimes it goes directly to a Federal agency, and the 

guidelines and the management of these grants are different for 

each and every program. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you. My time has expired, but I just 

want to give Captain Horvath a chance to respond to the same 

question of whether the money is getting down to the local police 

department in Dover. 

Mr. HORVATH. I will quote him when he said, ‘‘Absolutely not,’’ 

because my police department has not seen any of it, and that is 

the quick answer. We keep hearing of this money, and no one can 

tell us when it is coming, when we are going to get it. 

And then it has to go through DEMA, which for part of the process I think is a good thing because, Delaware being small, again, 

I keep harping on that, but we are putting together a plan to give 

20

to them on what equipment first responders should have in their 

cars with them so all police officers in the State will have the same 

equipment. It will work together. We can go and help another jurisdiction out and actually share equipment if we have to. That part 

of it is a plus. 

But there are other needs that each police department needs, 

and each police department may have different things in their jurisdiction, as I mentioned. They may have different needs. It would 

be nice if the money was more flexible and if some of the money 

could directly come to the police departments themselves and not 

through a middle man, so to speak. 

Chairman COLLINS. And, finally, Chief Chitwood, you mentioned 

some reimbursement for the airport costs, but obviously we have 

a major port in Portland. Are you receiving Federal funding directly to the police department to assist with those costs? 

Mr. CHITWOOD. No, we are not. In fact, to answer that question, 

if I could expand on my answer, over the years, starting in 1994, 

any time we needed money for a policing program, we always had 

to apply to the State, who received the grants directly from the 

Federal Government. And any time we made a request, our request 

was either filled partially or not filled at all. 

Subsequently, I think the Federal Government did one of the 

best things for law enforcement that I have ever seen in my 38 

years, and that was allow the local police departments to articulate 

a particular need directly to the Federal Government, and the following programs that I am talking about were the Universal Hiring Grant, which supplied police departments across the country, 

with the COPS program, the Officers in Schools program. 

You fill out an application, you articulate your need, the Federal 

Government sends you the money, you hire the officers. There is 

no bureaucracy, there is no breakdown. We look at other block 

grants that we can apply directly to the Federal Government to enhance technology in our organization. For the last 7 years, we 

apply for these grants once a year. After we articulate a need, we 

get those monies, no middle man. We do not have to deal with the 

State bureaucracy, directly with the Federal Government. 

And I truly believe that when you look at homeland security, if 

the departments who could articulate the greatest threat risk could 

apply directly to the Federal Government and receive those monies, 

whether they are any one of our four organizations or across the 

country, and like it has been said, each community has a different 

need. And I think once you articulate that need to the Federal Government, then those monies could be supplanted directly to the department. 

For example, in Maine, Portland has a much more need than 

Bethel would have, but yet, under the formula, everybody would be 

getting the same amount of money vis-a-vis the State guideline. 

And I think that having the ability to apply directly, articulate the 

need, look at the threat-risk assessment, and then those monies go 

directly to the department, I believe that the needs of the localities 

could be filled in a very quick and professional way where they 

could be spent to protect our communities. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you. Senator Carper. 

Senator CARPER. Thanks, Madam Chairman. 

21

I have some specific questions I want to ask a bit later of Chief 

Horvath, as it relates to the Dover Air Force Base and the relationship that you have with the folks that are providing the security 

at the base and how that affects your responsibilities and those of 

your department. 

Before I do that, let me ask a general, broader question. A lot 

of times when we have a hearing like this, it is helpful to me, and 

I hope to our Committee Members, to hear where you agree, and 

sometimes we hear different messages from different parts of the 

country. It will be very helpful to know the major points, as you 

listened to the testimonies of your colleagues at the desk, where do 

you agree in terms of what steps we should be taking in the Congress, Legislative and Executive Branches? Where do you see a 

consensus and major priority points of agreement? 

Captain Bowers, we have a beach in Delaware named after you, 

Bowers Beach. That is the home of the Heartbreak Hotel, a legendary place. [Laughter.] 

If you ever come to Delaware, visit your beach. 

Mr. BOWERS. I will. 

Senator CARPER. Go to the Heartbreak Hotel. 

But the major areas that you are agreeing, as to how they relate 

to an action agenda for us. 

Mr. BOWERS. Well, the first has got to be that the money is not 

making it to the local level. That is foremost. I think we also agree 

that the process needs to be streamlined, and Chief Chitwood just 

hit it right on the nail. We need to streamline that process so that 

the need can be articulated and funded. 

And, finally, I think another major area that we all agree is if 

we can get those things done, then the first responders at the local 

level will have the equipment, the training, and the personnel that 

they need to respond to these threats in a coordinated fashion. 

That is also key, that it be coordinated. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. 

Is it Mr. Plaugher? 

Mr. PLAUGHER. Plaugher, yes, sir. 

Senator CARPER. We will learn that name before this hearing is 

over. 

Mr. PLAUGHER. Thank you, sir. [Laughter.] 

I think the captain is absolutely on target. When we go through 

the State process, what comes out the end was not what was intended, oftentimes. And it needs to be, as the chief at the end of 

the table was talking about earlier, it needs to be a straight direct 

to the local governments. That is where the protection is going to 

occur. That is where the response is going to occur. 

The States, however, have needs, and I cannot dismiss that. We 

work in a Nation that is the United States, and the States have 

a key role in this process, as I am sure you are very aware. And 

so I am not trying to dismiss the absolute needs of the various 

States, and the State resources and the State coordination effort 

that is absolutely critical in homeland security. 

But for the Federal Government, through its programs, to tie the 

hands of the State officials, when I asked the State coordinators, 

How come this system is the way it is? They say, We have no option. This is the mandate. This is the program, and if you want the 

22

little bit that comes out at the end, you have got to do X, Y and 

Z. 

And so, again, Senator, there is no flexibility in the program, and 

the poor State coordinators, they feel very frustrated. As a matter 

of fact, yesterday, I received a letter from the commonwealth security coordinator, the former lieutenant governor, John Hager. He 

sent a letter back to the Northern Virginia Regional Planning Commission—it is now called the Northern Virginia Commission—that 

is trying to undertake a regional effort. 

Because of the complexities of the D.C. region, the three States’ 

involvement, we prefer to use a regional effort. And we had requested that our Federal funds come to a regional program for preparedness. We are actually trying to create a system called a 

MIST, which is a Mobile Incident Support Team, to bolster the 

communities’ resources from the 3-hour to 6-hour, 3-hour to 12-

hour response window because most local governments can do 2 to 

3 hours. After that, they need additional resources, very specific resources for a catastrophic incident, and so we have requested this 

MIST, and we wanted to do it regionally. 

The bottom line of the letter that came back from the former 

lieutenant governor was we do not have that latitude. We do not 

have that flexibility, and so again we feel like we are constrained. 

You ask us to come up with solutions, we come up with solutions. 

We think they are straightforward and make good sense for our 

particular needs, but the program does not allow it. So, again, frustrations prevail. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. Chief Horvath. 

Mr. HORVATH. I agree with what both of them have said. I think 

some of the money from the Federal Government has to be earmarked to come directly to the Agency. I also agree with what the 

chief just said, some of it has to go to the State. I tried to say that 

in my statement where the money is going to DEMA, and it is 

going to be spread out equally among the police departments, and 

I think that is a good thing the way that is being used because we 

will all be on the same page when we are responding to these incidents. 

I also agree that the money has to be flexible in how it can be 

spent, but we also have to justify how we spend it. We have to be 

held accountable. And one of the big things, I think, the money has 

to get to us quicker. I mean, September 11 was 2001, and my department and his department, we have not received any money, 

and we are getting ready to come up on September 2003. 

Senator CARPER. Two wars will have intervened. 

Mr. HORVATH. Excuse me? 

Senator CARPER. Two wars will have occurred during the time 

from those events of September 11. All right. Thank you. 

Mr. Chitwood. 

Mr. CHITWOOD. I agree. I mean, it is funny. I have not had the 

opportunity to even speak to these gentlemen, and it is like we 

each wrote a piece of what we were going to write. So there are 

commonalities across the board. 

I just would emphasize once again that the Federal Government, 

through the Department of Justice and their programs, have already established, in my opinion, from a law enforcement perspecVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:36 Aug 19, 2003 Jkt 087739 PO 00000 Frm 00026 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 C:\DOCS\87739.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PHOGAN
23

tive, a way to get the monies to the local departments across the 

country and responsibility for spending those monies in a way that 

protects each community. 

You do not have to rewrite the process. It is here. It is there, and 

I think that if that would continue, as we face a new world of terrorism, I believe that will work that way. I really do. 

Senator CARPER. Thanks. 

Madam Chairman, will there be a second round of questions? 

Chairman COLLINS. Yes, there will be. 

Senator CARPER. I will be back. Thanks very much. 

Chairman COLLINS. Senator Lautenberg. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

You have presented us with several problems as we listened to 

the testimony. It has been very enlightening, and I thank each one 

of you for your contribution. 

One thing stands out pretty sharply, and tell me if I am misinterpreting what has been said or intimated here, and that is if 

you are requested, as in the case of your department, Chief 

Chitwood, to put people at the airport, is that a mandate? Forget 

about whether or not it is a good idea. I mean, we are assuming 

it is a good idea. Is that a mandate that you put 12 officers out 

there to cover the responsibility they want you to cover? And do 

you pay for it out of your regular budget? 

Mr. CHITWOOD. The officers that are assigned to the airport are 

paid out of two funds. One is what they call Jetport Enterprise 

Fund, which basically is monies that the airline carriers and other 

vendors in the airport, that use the airport, put into a pool, and 

then the other monies, a portion is paid for by the Federal Government, either TSA and/or FAA. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. So that does not cost you anything, realistically. 

Mr. CHITWOOD. No, sir. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. And in every case, Chief Horvath, or our 

fire department people, if you are asked to put people at the airport 

or another sensitive place, do you always get compensated for that? 

Mr. HORVATH. No, sir. I can speak for the Dover Police Department. We have increased security, obviously, around Dover Air 

Force Base. It is part of the request, and part of it you hit on. It 

is a good idea, and I think we have a responsibility to the people 

we protect to act on our good ideas. That is absolutely a good idea. 

The Federal Government, the base does not offer us financial assistance, and quite frankly we have not expected them to. They are 

a good neighbor, and we try to serve. It is an increased burden on 

the police department, and it would be nice if there were funds 

available to provide overtime for that protection, for the perimeter 

checks, and the other things that we do. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Well, is it fair to say that even discounting 

that obligation or that cooperation, that your costs have gone up 

just generally significantly since we have been on the alert, we will 

call it? 

Mr. HORVATH. A lot of times, speaking for myself, if you looked 

at the budget, you probably could not see it, but what we have 

done is taken officers from other units and put them out doing seVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:36 Aug 19, 2003 Jkt 087739 PO 00000 Frm 00027 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 C:\DOCS\87739.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PHOGAN
24

curity checks at various times. So now you are taking away services that you normally would offer. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. Would render. 

Mr. HORVATH. Just to give you an example of an impact we have 

had, we use our Speed Enforcement Unit to do a lot of the checks 

while they are working. We do not do speed enforcement in Dover 

to raise revenues. We do it to enforce compliance to the law. 

We have this year, in 2002, seen a decrease in traffic tickets 

issued and a substantial increase in traffic accidents within the 

city limits. Now, I think there is some connection there. Maybe it 

is not all due to the perimeter checks, but I know our guys are 

doing less enforcement, and it is showing. 

Senator LAUTENBERG. There is a cost whether it is just in dollar 

amounts or reduced coverage that otherwise would be afforded. I 

called my hometown in New Jersey and spoke to the chief there, 

whom I know, and they, out of about 100 officers, they only had 

2, and I am now talking about first responders because I have introduced a bill to reimburse those communities that lose first responders to the military who are away for more than 6 months because it is very tough in communities, I do not care what State you 

are in, to simply go to the taxpayers and say, ‘‘Hey, you know, we 

need another $200,000. Your share is $200 a year’’ or something of 

that nature. 

So I introduced a bill that says if someone is away 6 months, and 

the community is not able to recover the costs for paying them—

now, some communities, and I think, Madam Chairman, this was 

mentioned here at one meeting, and it surprised me, and I have 

been around for a couple of wars, and one I fought in myself, but 

let us not have a guessing game. [Laughter.] 

It was not too recent. Anyway, the fact of the matter is that I 

always thought that in law, when people were Reservists and 

called up, that there was an automatic requirement that the employer, whomever it was, was required to pay some compensation, 

and that is not the case at all. Many companies do not do it, and 

many communities do not do it. And that is a burden, I think, that 

ought to be borne nationally by the taxpayers of the country because it does not matter whether you come from New Jersey, if you 

are in Iraq, you are out there protecting everybody, and so it is 

with all of your States as well. 

But I was struck by something that I saw, and that is the differences, and this requires a lot of review. In Baltimore City, Maryland, more than 150 members of the police department have been 

called up to serve in the military. It is almost 15 percent of the 

total force. Well, I think that we ought to make sure that they have 

enough people to take care of their basic requirements, their everyday requirements. A city like Baltimore is a complicated city, a big 

city. 

But, also, Madam Chairman, I noted something else in the distribution here that talks about Homeland Security Grants, and it 

shows each of the States, and it shows the per-capita contribution 

that is made. And, of course, I looked to New Jersey, and Chief 

Horvath said there is some advantage to being small. Well, we are 

small, but we are crowded and small, and we have almost 8.5 million people now in the State, and we get $1.69, and without picking 

25

1The Illinois community survey appears in the Appendix on page 65. 

on any other States present, there is quite a difference in the size 

of the distribution. So it is pretty obvious that we have to look at 

the formula and make sure that we are doing the right thing. 

So, Madam Chairman, you are doing the right thing here. We 

have to make sure that the protection we afford our citizens from 

enemies abroad is not any greater than the protection we afford 

our citizens from enemies within our borders or our communities. 

We cannot ask the cities and towns across America to give up a 

part of what they have to do normally to send people overseas. And 

I want to support the war effort. I mean, there is no doubt about 

that, but we have to make sure that these communities get compensated for the extra costs they incur. 

Thank you very much, to all of the witnesses. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you, Senator. Senator Durbin. 

Senator DURBIN. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman, and 

thank you for this hearing. 

I would like to ask consent that a survey that has been assembled by my staff of Illinois communities and the experience that 

they have had be made part of the record of this Committee hearing.1

Chairman COLLINS. Without objection. 

Senator DURBIN. It shows much of what has been said by the 

witnesses today: Clear need unmet by Federal funds and also some 

complications, which I would like to get into in just a moment. 

It strikes me that if you step back from where we are and assess, 

as Chief Horvath and others have, 2 years after September 11, that 

you have to put it in the context, and the context that I see facing 

you as firefighters, and police and other first responders I alluded 

to in my opening remarks. 

Unless you are an unusual community in America, you are facing 

a budget crunch. That probably is an annual occurrence for most 

of you, but made even worse by the recession, which has reduced 

local revenues and State revenues, and so you are being forced to 

deal with deficit situations, a hiring freeze, cutbacks in the context 

of this conversation. 

It is also quite likely, from the police side, that you are aware 

of the fact that the President’s new budget eliminates the COPS 

program. One of the things brought up to me by most of these police departments in Illinois is how valuable that program has 

been—direct assistance from the Federal Government for hiring 

the men and women we need on the street. 

Not coincidentally, incidently, in the 44 cities recently surveyed 

by one group, we found that as the Federal investment in law enforcement has gone down, crime rates are going up again, which 

we certainly do not want to see. 

But here you are facing State and local budget deficits, cutbacks 

and elimination of the Federal COPS program, cutbacks in the 

Byrne grant program, which a lot of law enforcement agencies have 

used as part of President Bush’s proposed budget. 

Now, a new factor, the activation of the Guard and Reserve. And 

in many of your communities, thank goodness, the local units of 

government have said we are going to make certain that this famVerDate 0ct 09 2002 10:36 Aug 19, 2003 Jkt 087739 PO 00000 Frm 00029 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 C:\DOCS\87739.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PHOGAN
26

ily is not going to face an economic hardship. We are going to make 

up the difference in salary. 

So now you have a new expense. The person is no longer there 

to provide firefighting services in law enforcement, but their salary, 

at least the difference in salary, is coming out of your budget. Then 

add on to this, perhaps, hiring freezes that are creating demands 

for more overtime pay. So you put all of that in context, and here 

is why I wanted to preface my question. 

Now, we are standing back and saying, ‘‘We want to prepare you 

to fight terrorism,’’ and I would imagine if I were in your shoes, 

the first thing you would say to me honestly is, ‘‘I have got to worry 

about having enough people in the squad cars, on the streets, in 

the fire departments. Certainly, we need gas masks, we need training, we need to know about bioterrorism, but I am dealing with the 

basics. Before you offer me a brand new computer, I need to put 

a roof on my house, and the rain is pouring in.’’

How do we parse this out? How can we say to you we want to 

give you add-on funds for new needs and requirements at a time 

when you are being hollowed out from within by all of the factors 

that I just mentioned? 

Chief Chitwood. 

Mr. CHITWOOD. That is a very difficult question to answer, and 

I will try and tell you what we are doing right now. 

As a result of the budget crisis that we are in, we are now eliminating programs. A foundation of what we do in Portland is community policing. And what I have had to do is I have had to—I 

have five centers—so I had to eliminate an officer in each center 

and put those officers on the front line. I had to reduce my DARE 

program. I had to reduce my Officer Friendly program. I took them 

out of the schools, put them answering 911 calls because that is 

our priority. People call 911, they expect somebody to arrive. 

Like Chief Horvath said with respect to his traffic, I had to reduce my Traffic Unit. I had to reduce my Drug Unit to put those 

officers on the street. Now, when we have the added manpower 

issue of having to follow and police the airport, I have the greatest 

percentage of my force working out at the airport, and I have this 

big void in what I do on the street. So that is what we are doing. 

With respect to this hearing, as I see the increased threats, we 

are in an orange alert, my expectation would be based on the alerts 

that soon we could be on a red alert. I hope not, but there is a 

strong possibility. 

Then, that leaves a tremendous hole on the waterfront, the pipeline, the cruise ships, and the oil tankers that go through our community, and I do not have the resources to do it. I just do not have 

the resources to do it. 

Earlier, when I talked about the void that I have with respect 

to 18 officers down, 9 are vacant positions due to vacancies. I have 

4 officers out on stress-related incidents, and when I look at what 

they made working overtime, they are the highest paid officers because they are working consistently. Three of them are out with 

heart attacks, and these guys are 41/42 years of age. 

Now, I am not a doctor, and I am not saying it is directly related, 

but the stress factors that are put on us to have to fill these slots 

has had a toll not only financially, but physically and emotionally. 

27

Senator DURBIN. Could I ask you, if I might, because my time 

has run out, but if each of the others could just comment very 

briefly on this question of whether or not you are seeing a 

hollowing out of your basic core of services, in firefighting and police, at a time when we are discussing add-on funds to fight terrorism and how you are going to cope with it. If you could just give 

me a brief response, I would appreciate that. 

Chief Horvath. 

Mr. HORVATH. The Dover Police Department is pretty lucky. We 

have only lost two sworn police officers to call-up duty by the military. However, we have several officers injured because it is a dangerous job, and they get injured. 

I agree with the chief. I have also had to decrease the size of two 

of my—I have lost a DARE officer to the Patrol Division, and I 

have lost a community policing officer to the Drug Unit. I refuse 

to decrease the size of my Drug Unit because that is one of our biggest problems in the city. 

The problem with it is, when a police officer leaves, and I have 

13 that can retire this calendar year, it takes about a year-and-ahalf to get an officer back on the road and trained properly, where 

he is an effective police officer replacing them. So those are problems that we are looking at in the future. 

But as far as the issue of homeland security, lucky I have most 

of my department there, but we are taking away from normal police duties to cover homeland security issues. A lot of people will 

call, one of their concerns is they would like to see a police officer 

drive through their neighborhood every once in a while. Well, that 

is not happening like it should. That is not happening like they deserve it to happen because we have them out doing security checks 

and checking other things in the city that I really will not get into 

for obvious reasons. 

But the issue of homeland security is pulling from the workforce 

of traditional police work, and it is taking it to another area, and 

it would be nice to be able to supplement that. 

Another issue of the funds that is really bothering us is we need 

training and equipment, and we are not getting it, and those issues 

need to be taken care of. 

Senator DURBIN. Chief Plaugher. 

Mr. PLAUGHER. Yes, Senator, you are right on target with your 

talking about the hollowing out. Every day I have to provide basic 

services of responding to heart attacks, and the threat of fire. We 

have requested repeatedly some Federal help to provide firefighters, the SAFER Act, the Fire Grant Act program, and that sort 

of thing. 

There is a critical need in every community for first response resources that has been brought before Congress repeatedly, and we 

continue to stress that we need those folks capable. 

Call-ups of the military have impacted. I have four firefighters, 

paramedics who are currently serving in the war effort in various 

capacities. I have to back-fill their absence with additional firefighters, and we are a community that does make up the differences in salaries and benefits to our employees because of our 

commitment to them and to the work that they do, both in the community and abroad. 

28

However, there is also something else that is occurring that is I 

think of major importance. The threat of terrorist attack in our Nation is working on our employees. I am currently now suffering the 

highest level of injuries in my department’s history. Yes, we are a 

community that was attacked on September 11, but it is starting 

to work at my fabric. It is starting to erode away at my capability 

to provide services because the stress is enormous, and when I say 

the stress is enormous, because they are not seeing Federal support 

for the programs that we are asking for. 

They see their chief out doing national efforts to make the resources available, but they are seeing nothing coming out the end 

of the stream, and so the frustrations just continue to mount, from 

their perspective, and again I am at the highest injury level ever 

in the history of my department, and that is an enormous cost to 

my community. So it is eroding other basic services. 

When we provide firefighters and paramedics on an overtime 

basis, more than likely I am removing resources from a human 

services program in the county because, in our community, public 

safety gets the highest priority. And so the spill-down effect is to 

the people who are most in need. 

So I, again, stress to this Committee, let us make this effort work 

so that our men and women who serve our communities as firefighters, and paramedics, and police officers see the product of the 

efforts so that, again, these stresses do not have the impact that 

it does. 

Mr. BOWERS. Senator, in response to the personnel part of your 

question, the SAFER Act is right on target. That will allow the 

communities to hire people and not bear the full weight of that cost 

until several years down the line. 

In response to the terrorist or weapons of mass destruction portion of your question, some of the things for the Fire Service that 

come under some of the other programs, equipment and training, 

those things will also strengthen our ability to respond to the normal or every-day occurrences that we have to deal with. So the 

SAFER Act will help us to bring more people on board. Strengthening our equipment and training will allow us to be better across 

the board. 

Also in terms of the personnel, you have heard it mentioned here 

by other colleagues, the stress that is related to the high levels of 

overtime and trying to make this work without adequate resources 

is another factor that we encounter. And we are different in the 

sense that if we require a certain number of people and a location, 

we have to maintain that. If somebody is off because they are sick, 

they have been deployed, we still have to put another person there. 

We simply cannot leave that spot vacant until the next time somebody reports to work. 

My final point is, locally, we have approximately eight people 

that have been deployed, with the worst case scenario of approximately 25 that may be deployed, and some of those people have notified us that they will be deployed for up to 2 years. 

Senator DURBIN. Thank you. Thanks, Madam Chairman. 

Chairman COLLINS. Senator Pryor. 

29

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR PRYOR 

Senator PRYOR. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

I want to thank the witnesses for being here today. I appreciate 

what all of you do every day. For the 4 years before I came here 

I was the Attorney General of my State, so I felt very much involved in the law enforcement community back home and in public 

safety issues across the board. 

Let me ask, just generally, of all four of you, one of the things 

we found on September 11 is that our various law enforcement, 

first responder organizations could not communicate with each 

other very well. It was not interoperable. My sense is that the Department of Homeland Security should take a lead in making that 

happen, but I would like to hear your thoughts on that. Is the Department of Homeland Security doing anything about that, and 

have we made any improvements in that since September 11? 

Mr. BOWERS. Yes, Senator. You are absolutely correct. Communications between agencies is a key factor. Right now we certainly 

have difficulties in that area. In fact, I am sitting next to the Chief 

from Arlington County, and if we had to go to the Pentagon today, 

we do not necessarily have a reliable way of communicating with 

his agency. We have to institute patchwork measures to try to get 

that to occur, so that is absolutely a key factor that needs to be addressed, not only in this area but across the country. Fire, police, 

emergency medical services, and your key responders, have to be 

able to talk to one another to mitigate these incidents in a quick 

and efficient manner. 

Senator PRYOR. Are you aware of anything the Department of 

Homeland Security is doing to bring that into being? 

Mr. BOWERS. I am aware of some local initiatives that are being 

worked on to try to address that issue. I am not aware today of any 

issues coming from the Department of Homeland Security. 

Mr. PLAUGHER. It is interesting, Senator, that you asked that 

question because tomorrow I am supposed to receive a brief from 

Homeland Security as a member of the Executive Committee of 

what is called PSWN, which is Public Safety Wireless Network program, that has been undertaken, a joint program by the FBI and 

Treasury for multiple years to try to address this issue of interoperability. So I would be better able to answer your question tomorrow after Homeland Security tells me what they intend. The 

word on the street is, is that they are trying to figure out an approach to something that we think is very straightforward, and 

that is that we need interoperability. We need it now. 

Congress, multiple years ago, asked the FCC to dedicate frequencies for public safety needs. That has not happened. We still 

do not have the frequencies necessary. So even if we had the resources to build a radio system, we do not have the frequencies 

available because of the problem with the FCC and what Congress 

has tried to do there. 

This is again a very complex issue, but at the end of it, we are 

still not where we need to be. 

Mr. BOWERS. As the Captain was saying, I cannot talk to his firefighters or paramedics in a catastrophic incident. 

30

1 ‘‘The Report Card on Funding Mechanisms for Public Safety Radio Communications’’, August 

2001, appears in the Appendix on page 69. 

Senator PRYOR. I would like for you, if you could, to give me a 

little update after your meeting tomorrow, and kind of tell us now 

where you sense that we are. 

Mr. PLAUGHER. I would be glad to. Combing the halls today are 

other Executive Committee members, and I am talking about 

combing the halls of Congress today because they are very concerned about what they are hearing is going to happen from Homeland Security. So we will be back to you, sir.1

Senator PRYOR. Great. Thank you. 

Mr. HORVATH. Sir, in Delaware, we do have the ability to, with 

our 800 megahertz system, due to our size again, to talk to each 

other if we all are told through dispatch to go to the same channel. 

My understanding is we can also communicate with all the fire departments in the State also. 

The concern there is, however—in most of the scenarios that we 

do, when we do tabletop exercises or real exercises, whether the 

weapon of mass destruction use, the system will probably be out, 

and there is no high-band backup to it any more. Most departments have gotten rid of their high-band radios, and if they still 

had them, we could not talk agency to agency like we could before. 

So, the short answer to your question, is yes, we can communicate with each other in certain situations. Sometimes it has to be 

county to county, whether you are on the repeater or not, but no, 

there is no backup system, and I am not aware of anything that 

Homeland Security is doing in Delaware in regards to that issue. 

Senator PRYOR. A follow up on that. Are you aware in Delaware 

whether the Federal Government can access your 800 megahertz 

system; do you know that? 

Mr. HORVATH. I am not aware of whether they can or not. I do 

not believe so. 

Mr. CHITWOOD. Senator, I will break the communication question 

down into two areas. Technology-wise, as a result of the government, through these grant processes, we have enhanced, I would 

say, I would give us an A plus in our technological communications 

between different departments, MED. On September 11 the alleged 

ringleader of this group of terrorists, Mohamed Atta, and one of his 

cohorts, Abdul Alomari, went through our airport on their way to 

this massive destruction that they were involved in. Initially, the 

communication issue between the local police department and the 

Federal Government was absolutely horrible, and particularly the 

FBI. And I have shared that locally and nationally since that date. 

I believe that as a result of Homeland Security, increased participation by administration in the Federal level, that those types of 

barriers and those types of communication levels are much better, 

certainly much better than anything I have seen, but they still 

have a long way to go, as we look at this new way of policing our 

country. 

Senator PRYOR. Thank you. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you, Senator Pryor. 

I want to follow up on the communication issue that Chief 

Chitwood just raised. We are now at a state where we are at the 

31

Orange Alert Level. And I would like to ask each of you two questions related to that. First, how did you learn that we had gone to 

an alert level of orange? And second, does that system for communicating the increased alert status work better now? There were 

terrible problems in the beginning, which, Chief, you referred to as 

well. And I would like to just ask all of you those questions, starting with Chief Chitwood. 

Mr. CHITWOOD. The last level, the Orange Level, I had heard visa-vis TV, radio that we were at Orange, but I never saw anything 

vis-a-vis teletype. Probably 8 hours later we got a teletype, and I 

learned it from CNN. 

Chairman COLLINS. That is so troubling to me that still seems 

to be the source, with all due respect to CNN’s good reporting, but 

it just is extraordinary to me. 

Chief Horvath. 

Mr. HORVATH. I also learned about the alert from watching the 

news. If we did get a teletype 8 hours later, it was never brought 

to my desk. I do not think we did. I will say diagonally across the 

street from my office is the local FBI office in Dover, and communications have improved greatly over the past few months. There 

is a problem where information cannot be—it is something I did 

not bring up earlier, but I will bring it up now. I get things that 

cannot be told to me because it is top secret. And then you hear 

about it later on the news and you mention it, and they want to 

know how you know it because it is top secret. If the news can 

know it, I think the police departments and the fire departments 

across the country ought to know it. 

Chairman COLLINS. Well, that is something we can relate to 

when we have our classified briefings, and then go back to our offices and find out on the news what we just learned in the highly 

classified briefing. 

Chief, how did you find out? 

Mr. PLAUGHER. If my memory is correct, I think I was told by 

a friend who has a friend who has a wife that works as a clerk in 

a government office, and the government office was advised that 

they were going to the Orange Alert. So I went back to my emergency services coordinator and asked him the specific question, 

‘‘Are we at Orange Alert?’’ He did not know. He was going to have 

to go check. Then eventually we heard it on CNN, that we had 

been raised. As a matter of fact, to this day, there is no system to 

notify the fire departments of the United States about anything 

that happens on a national scale. We do not communicate. We do 

not even have a teletype system to talk to each other, so there is 

no communication network for us to receive alerts or inside information, or I should say information that we think is critical to our 

ability to be prepared. 

Chairman COLLINS. We clearly have a lot of work to do in that 

area as well. 

Captain, are you aware of how your department found out that 

we had moved to an alert status of Orange? 

Mr. BOWERS. We, too, discovered that by the television networks, 

so that seems to be a common thread here among all agencies, that 

the notification and change of the status filters out to us by the 

network television operations. 

32

Chairman COLLINS. That is just so troubling to me. I remember 

a State trooper telling me that on September 11 he heard about the 

attacks on the radio, and radioed in to his headquarters to try to 

find out whether any entity in Maine had been attacked. And he 

just—no one knew who to ask even. The communication structure 

is still very flawed it seems to me. 

One final question from me before I go to Senator Carper. All of 

you have mentioned the need for improved communication, and I 

think the exchange we just had illustrates that. During the debate 

on the Homeland Security Act, Senator Carper, Senator Feingold, 

and I proposed that there be a Federal liaison for first responders 

established in every State, who worked for the Department of 

Homeland Security, but would actually be stationed in each of the 

50 States. Unfortunately, that provision was dropped from the final 

version of the bill. Do you think it would be helpful to have a State 

liaison who worked for the Department of Homeland Security in 

each of the States so there would be a single contact point within 

your own States? Would that be helpful to you, Chief? 

Mr. CHITWOOD. I think it would. I think that any time you can 

communicate and give people knowledge, it goes a long way in assisting with whatever assets your particular community needs. I 

think that is what is needed, especially Homeland Security, being 

the umbrella of what we are going to do in the future in our country with respect to any type of terrorism type activity, so absolutely. I think it would be a plus. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you. Chief Horvath. 

Mr. HORVATH. I agree. I think it would be extremely helpful. It 

would be someone we could call when we have questions, someone 

they can call when they have important information to pass on, 

and it would be very helpful if I forget to watch the news and I 

could find out we are on a higher alert status. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you. Chief Plaugher. 

Mr. PLAUGHER. This is awkward for me, because in the Nation’s 

capital area, we do have a coordinator from Homeland Security for 

the Washington, DC immediate area. However, the only thing in 

the Commonwealth of Virginia, the Commonwealth of Virginia does 

not. So it is kind of an awkward situation, and we find that the 

coordinator that we have is just fabulous and is doing a spectacular 

job for the national capital area. So if you want to point to an example of how it can work and work really well, here is an excellent 

example for you. 

Chairman COLLINS. It is a great example. Thank you for sharing 

that. Captain Bowers. 

Mr. BOWERS. We are in that national capital area also, but I 

would also bring up a second part to your question. It is not only 

good to have that coordinator, I think, in every State, but that coordinator also needs to share particular information about what the 

threat may be, so that the departments can then plan and act appropriately to be prepared for that threat. So the single point of 

contact is excellent, but then the information flow needs to be there 

so that we can take the appropriate actions once we do receive the 

information. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you. Senator Carper. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you, Madam Chairman. 

33

To my colleague, Senator Pryor, he was asking questions earlier 

about the ability of various first responders to communicate with 

one another by radio. When I was governor, we funded an 800 

megahertz program that enables us to have communication between firefighters, volunteers, and paid firefighters, between police 

units, State and local police units, and also with paramedics and 

other first time responders. 

The question that you asked, one of the questions you asked was 

the ability of the relevant Federal agencies to participate in that. 

Brian Bushweller, who is sitting to the right of Dover Mayor Jim 

Hutchinson, was the secretary of public safety during my administration, and he was good enough to come up here to the dais to remind me that the Federal agencies who work full time in Delaware, including the FBI and others, do have access to 800 megahertz. They do have their radios and are able to participate as full 

partners in that. 

I understand when I was out of the room, meeting in the next 

room with some folks from our chemical industry in Delaware, who 

are very much involved in raising science education standards in 

our schools—and I apologize for sort of being in and out, but it is 

important for me to spend time with them too—but while I was out 

of the room, I understand that Senator Lautenberg may have asked 

questions of Chief Horvath with respect to Dover Air Force Base, 

and the nature of the duties that you have seen. So I am not going 

to ask about that. I said earlier that I would, but I think those 

questions have already been asked. 

Let me instead ask you if you will—and maybe not just Chief 

Horvath but others as well—to give us some examples of the introduction to this whole new set of Homeland Security responsibilities 

that have been delivered to you and expected of you. Just share 

with us again—some of you have already done this in your testimonies—but just concrete examples of how these new responsibilities have affected your department’s budget, do you pay more on 

overtime? Chief Plaugher was talking about levels of stress, and 

absenteeism, and medical leave. I would be particularly interested 

in this. A lot of our first responders are people who serve in the 

guard and reserves, who have been activated. We have holes in our 

units. Some cases you are paying, making up the difference between their previous pay and the pay that they receive in the military. How do you do that and at the same time hire and pay for 

new employees to fill the gaps here? Have you had to purchase new 

equipment? Some examples of new equipment that you have had 

to purchase because of these responsibilities. How do you pay for 

that? And those are just sort of the range of questions I have. You 

can sort of pick and choose if you want to. 

Chief Horvath, you want to take a shot at any of those? And then 

I would ask others to join in. 

Mr. HORVATH. Sure, thank you. First off, I would like to apologize for not knowing whether or not the Federal agencies could 

speak on our system. We have not had a situation where we have 

had to do that yet. Sorry about that. 

The new responsibilities about Homeland Security that we have 

done, as I touched on a little bit earlier, it has taken away from 

the traditional police services that we provide. We have been lucky 

34

not to have to increase the overtime by too much within the past 

6 months. Right after September 11, obviously, overtime was very 

high. And that is we have had to transfer money from other line 

items in the budget to pay the officers the overtime, so other things 

that you planned on buying, other services that you offer have suffered because of that. We have tried to reduce our overtime by requiring officers that are regularly scheduled in various units, patrol, community policing, selective enforcement, that type of work, 

that they are actually out doing Homeland Security issues instead 

of doing what I mentioned as regular traditional police work. So I 

think the community is losing out a little bit in that area. 

I also mentioned earlier I have reduced the number of officers in 

the community policing unit and in the DARE unit, to try to work 

with that issue. 

Answering your question about new equipment, we have not received any funds for new equipment, and we have not purchased 

new equipment other than we now have two bomb dogs that we did 

not have prior to September 11. We have—the city has accepted 

the cost of that. There was no money available at the time. We do 

have two new bomb dogs. I guess I would consider them equipment 

at this point, but as far as suits or item protective equipment, I 

think I can honestly say other than training for first responders on 

what to look for and how to move into a situation as far as protective equipment, we are no better prepared today than we were on 

September 10. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you, sir. 

Others, please, any examples that you would like to cite in response to my questions? 

Mr. CHITWOOD. From a law enforcement perspective, I have to 

mirror what the chief said. I mean I could take it in exactly the 

same way. The shifting of personnel to the airport in particular. 

We have developed a security plan. Every level of Homeland Security, we have additional responsibilities in our community. For example, right now we are in an area where we are looking at all 

phone service, gas, electric, water, in the city of Portland. We have 

to be specific in those substation areas, the work on that, something we normally would not do, but we take those line officers on 

the street to do these things. We have had several incidents on our 

port where the Coast Guard, through their vigilance, have notified 

us of individuals on the waterfront acting suspicious. We had to 

put officers down there, in particular cruise ships. In the cruise 

ship season, the boat lines that go into our different islands, delivering people and vehicles. So it has an impact basically on what 

we do in the normal traditional policing of answering 9–1–1 calls, 

policing geographical areas and investigating crime. Homeland Security needs has dissipated that particular strength. 

With respect to equipment and technology, I hate to be redundant, but I will. With the ability to apply for the Federal grants, 

as we have right now directly to the Department of Justice in their 

grant processes, we have been able to enhance our technology and 

training issues as they impact our department. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. I am not going to ask our other two 

witnesses to respond to that question. I do have one last question. 

It is a variation of the first question that I asked. And what I am 

35

going to ask you to do in closing for me, would be to say if we do 

nothing else here in Washington, Congress and the President, if we 

do nothing else to enable you to do your jobs better with respect 

to protecting the homeland; if you do nothing else, do this and do 

this next. What would that one thing be for each of you? If you do 

nothing else, do this, and do this next. What would that be? 

Mr. HORVATH. I will be glad to begin, Senator. Make the process 

straightforward and streamlined. It has to happen. We hear about 

these billions of dollars that are flowing to the first responders, and 

let me assure you, they are not flowing to the first responders. 

They are not getting where they are intended. The process needs 

to be simple, straightforward, and needs to be part of a national 

strategy to prepare our Nation, our communities, and it needs to 

be—I mean your own chart talks about the complexities of how to 

get the funding and that sort of thing. It is creating false expectations within our community. We have a public that thinks now that 

everything is going to be OK because the government has allocated 

billions of dollars. As you have heard here this morning, the first 

responder community has not changed since September 11. If anything, we are stressed out higher. We are facing higher demands. 

But yet no resources have flowed to us. And so, Senator Carper, 

please, if you can influence other members, your other colleagues 

of Congress to make the process not convoluted and straightforward. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. 

Mr. BOWERS. Senator, I would echo the same comment, that the 

process needs to allow the support to get down to the local level 

faster than it does today. The only other thing that I would add 

is that personnel are a key ingredient in that process. So any of 

the efforts that you are working on that would support the hiring 

of additional personnel are key, because that is going to help us reduce some of the overtime, some of the stress levels that are caused 

as staffing is reallocated to address Homeland Security issues. I 

think most departments have some level of funding available to 

provide basic equipment and other things, but if they have the people, they can make progress. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. 

Mr. HORVATH. Senator Carper, I think if you could just do one 

thing, I think it would be what they are saying, is to get us the 

funds, make it flexible, and make it so that we can do our job better and still offer our traditional police services. I will not try to 

say better what they just said. I agree with everything they just 

said. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. 

Mr. CHITWOOD. I agree with my cohorts. Let the Federal Government distribute funds wherever the needs are the greatest, through 

the grant programs that are already in place, that have worked 

and will continue to work as long as there is money, and/or create 

a separate pool of funds for the neediest cities with the highest 

threat risk. 

Senator CARPER. Thank you. 

That would seem to again Madam Chairman, that would seem 

to argue for the legislation that we will be introducing later today, 

providing the flexibility. 

36

1The chart entitled ‘‘Tangled Web of Federal Homeland Security Grant Programs’’ appears 

in the Appendix on page 68. 

Chairman COLLINS. Yes. 

Senator CARPER. And it would also seem to argue for the idea of 

the proposal that you and Senator Feingold and I worked on establishing one person in each State as a key point of contact. That is 

interesting. Thank you very much. That is all. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you, Senator Carper. Senator Pryor. 

Senator PRYOR. Thank you. Let’s follow up on what we were talking about here just a few moments ago, and I think pretty much 

it is unanimous that the one thing we need to try to do is make 

sure this money is getting out to first responders. 

Chief Chitwood, I believe it was you that said we have in existence the Department of Justice system that I think most of you all 

are familiar with about getting equipment, grants, and etc. I know 

in Arkansas we utilize that very heavily for our first responders. 

But let me ask this just generally to everyone. What is the problem? Why is it not getting through? I mean is it red tape? Is it just 

because we have a new department that is getting started and getting rolling, and it just has not gotten there yet? I mean, what is 

the problem? 

Mr. CHITWOOD. I think it is a combination of factors. When you 

look at your chart, the Tangled Web of Federal Homeland Security 

Grant Programs, that kind of says it all.1

I also believe that—and it has been mentioned here, especially 

by the Senators. When we look at the budget crisis, and with all 

due respect to Senator Carper, when he was Governor, my experience shows that when funds go through the State, there is a bureaucratic nightmare that is created, that those resources do not 

get to the most neediest or to the people who need it right away. 

Obviously, the State—and we have a wonderful Governor in the 

State of Maine, but he has other priorities, the State Police, Department of Corrections, and sometimes that money gets shifted 

around to different programs that do not impact on first responders, whether they be fire, police or MED–Q. I think that is why it 

is important that we as leaders in our particular fields or our communities, can reach out to the point, the source of contact, and that 

is the Federal Government, and say, ‘‘Hey, here is a process. This 

is what we need, and then you hold us accountable for what we 

do.’’

Senator PRYOR. That is how the DOJ system has worked, right, 

that you apply directly to DOJ? 

Mr. CHITWOOD. Basically. 

Senator PRYOR. So in other words, you think that the State is an 

unnecessary step? 

Mr. CHITWOOD. No. I think that the State has to be part of the 

process. I just believe that there may be too much emphasis on the 

State. I know what I need in Portland. If you send money to the 

State. Now I have to articulate my need to the State, and maybe 

I will get it. But if I apply, based on experience and past history, 

directly to the Federal Government, I articulate the need, I am audited on what I get from them. I can proceed to go forward, and 

that process, in my 38 years of experience and the last 19 years 

37

as a police chief, that really works. It has done more to enhance 

the quality of professionalism in policing throughout the country, 

and I believe that is how it works, and I am sure it could work just 

like with the fire and other first responders. 

Senator PRYOR. I would like to hear from the other three. Do you 

all agree with what he said? 

Mr. BOWERS. Yes, I agree, Senator, but I also have a couple other 

points. The problems that we experience are the restrictions on the 

use of the funds. The maze of applications that are out there for 

the various grants that are eligible to apply for, and the fact that 

there is not one consistent process to request money from the Federal Government. 

So those are some of the major factors that we have to deal with, 

and all of those end up with their own version of bureaucracy or 

red tape. 

Senator PRYOR. All that sounds very fixable to me. 

Mr. PLAUGHER. Senator, we have talked about the issue with 

Brown Nissal earlier today. But right to the point, there are several programs that have worked and worked exceptionally well, the 

COPS program within law enforcement, the FIRE Act program 

within the fire community from the U.S. Fire Administration. They 

are simple. They are straightforward. They go to localities. They 

have some local matches required to make sure there is a commitment for follow-through. There are also audits and that sort of 

thing. But yet when it comes to homeland security, protecting our 

citizens from the threat of terrorists which we know are real, it is 

not if but when the next attack will occur. We are now in a convoluted process that at the end stream, very little or anything is 

at the end point where it needs to be, which is on the front lines 

to the firefighters, the paramedics and the law enforcement members of our community. It seems like somehow we are not learning 

our own lessons. We have programs that work well. We have COPS 

programs. We have FIRE Act programs, but yet again, we are all 

deeply concerned about our safety from threat of homeland security, from the threat of terrorism. Yet we will not even go to the 

successful programs and emulate them, or copy them for this. 

We at the local level, we are absolutely befuddled. We are sitting 

here trying to figure out what happened. Where did the disconnect 

go? The only thing we can say is, ‘‘It is Washington politics.’’ Wow. 

That cannot happen here, folks. We are on a new world, new 

threats. We have got to stop the Washington politics. We have got 

to get the money where it needs to be, and that is to local communities. Do States have needs? Absolutely. Our States are in the 

worst fiscal condition that they have been in in many decades. 

Should we address their emergency management needs? Absolutely. 

So I am not saying that a slice of it should not go to the States 

to bolster their needs, because States are key to the process, but 

let us make it simple, straightforward and effective. Thank you for 

the question, sir. 

Senator PRYOR. You bet. 

Mr. HORVATH. I agree with most things said. I will say that, as 

I said earlier, I think some of the money needs to come directly to 

the police department, similar to how the COPS grant works. I will 

38

say in Delaware’s defense though, that they have always done a 

very good job of administering some grant monies out there 

through the criminal justice counsel. I think, as I mentioned earlier, what they are doing with DEMA, distributing some of the 

money through DEMA would be good, but I do not think all of it. 

But through that, all the police departments in Delaware are going 

to be on the same page with the same protective equipment, which 

I think is a good idea. 

So I am a little mixed. I think some of the money needs to come 

directly to us. Some of it needs to go to the State and have them 

deal it out. 

Senator PRYOR. Yes. I can see a real common sense role the State 

can play to provide oversight in the framework. That would be 

great. 

One last question for you. You mentioned Washington politics a 

moment ago, and I know one of the contentious issues here—I 

think this was a little bit before my time here. I think most of this 

discussion happened late last year, about homeland security and 

unions and labor organizations. I am not trying to put words in 

people’s mouths, but out around the country I think the question 

really was, are these law enforcement unions and other firefighters’ 

unions, etc., would they be a help or a hindrance when it comes to 

homeland security? That was, like I said, a fairly contentious 

issues that the Congress dealt with last year. I would like to hear 

your thoughts on that. If I could just start with you, because not 

only are you on the front line, so to speak, but you are also administrators and you deal with these personnel issues all the time. 

Mr. BOWERS. I think that they would be a help from the standpoint of unions are basically going to fight for the appropriate resources in a jurisdiction, and they are also going to work to keep 

management honest. The bottom line is, to respond to any of these 

conditions that we have talked about today, in the very beginning 

of that incident, you need the appropriate people with the right 

equipment, with the training to carry out that mission. What we 

have today is a situation where in a lot of jurisdictions we do not 

have the number of people that we need. We lack equipment and 

we lack training to deal with some of these specific things that we 

were talking about related to homeland security. So from that perspective, I think that the unions could actually be quite a benefit 

to helping get this done. 

Senator PRYOR. OK. 

Mr. PLAUGHER. I think that we have had a new day in our Nation, as I was talking about deep concern about homeland security 

and homeland preparedness. We have had the best cooperative, collaborative effort between the International Association of Fire 

Chiefs and the IAFF, the International Association of Fire Fighters 

ever in the history of the two organizations. It has been a model 

program that focuses on the fire fighters’ safety, the community’s 

safety. We have passed new national standards that again encompassed the needs of community based upon local assessments and 

local concerns. I think that there is not a barrier there. I think 

there is a joint effort of deep concern about making sure that adequate resources are within your community, sir. 

39

Mr. HORVATH. I agree with both Captain Bowers and Chief 

Plaugher, what they have stated, and I really cannot add too much 

more to it. 

Senator PRYOR. OK. 

Mr. CHITWOOD. The union issue has not been a concern in the 

city of Portland. I mean my department has two unions, PBA and 

SOA—PBA for police officers, SOA for superiors. I know that the 

TSA has 160 employees in our city. I have had the opportunity to 

see what they do. They are non-union. They do a great job. They 

hire the people they want to hire, and I do not see it as a negative 

or a positive. They are just doing what they do best, and they have 

an excellent presence. More than I have, but there has been no impact with respect to unionization or not. 

Senator PRYOR. Thank you. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you, Senator. 

I want to thank my colleagues for joining me this morning for 

this very important hearing. 

Most of all I want to thank our witnesses. You truly have given 

us extraordinarily helpful testimony. I also want to take this opportunity to thank you on behalf of this panel for the extraordinary 

work that you are doing, each and every day in your communities. 

We are very grateful to you. It is why I wanted to hear first from 

those who are on the front lines as we seek to tackle this issue. 

You have given us a number of very practical suggestions, and I 

am confident that working together we can come up with legislation that will achieve our goal of making sure that the money that 

we are appropriating does get to you, and helps you in a way that 

makes our Nation more secure. We want to make sure that our 

folks who are on the front lines receive the equipment, the training, the staffing, and the planning that they need to be as effective 

as possible. 

So your suggestions were excellent, and we will continue to work 

with you, and I thank you very much for taking the time to be here 

today. 

Finally, I also want to thank my staff, which has worked very 

hard in putting together this hearing, and to announce that our 

next hearing on the issue of homeland security and first responder 

funding is scheduled to take place on Thursday, May 1. At that 

time we will hear from Secretary Ridge—you have given us a lot 

of issues to raise with him—as well as State and local governments, and that will help address the issue of how do we make 

sure the money flows down to the local level and to local fire, police 

and emergency medical personnel, who really need it. So we are 

looking forward to that hearing as well. 

The record for this hearing will remain open for 15 days for the 

submission of additional statements or questions. 

Before I adjourn the hearing, I just want to turn to my two colleagues to see if they have any closing remarks? 

Senator CARPER. I think, Madam Chairman, you have given a fitting benediction to a most informative and extraordinarily helpful 

hearing, and to that benediction I would simply just say amen. 

Chairman COLLINS. Thank you. This meeting is now adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 11:43 a.m., the Committee adjourned.] 

(41)

A P P E N D I X 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR LIEBERMAN 

Madam Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing on the challenges facing the 

first responders on whom we depend to protect our homeland. 

This hearing comes almost 19 months after the September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks awakened our nation to the absolute necessity of fully supporting the men and 

women who are on the front lines of this struggle. That day demonstrated that 

when our country is attacked, it is the police, fire fighters, and emergency management technicians who will be the first to the scene of a disaster, risking their own 

lives to save others. 

But the attacks and subsequent events have also demonstrated that, in some crucial ways, those heroic first responders are not getting the support they need and 

deserve from the Federal Government. We now know that many of our first responders have not received the training or equipment they need, that they cannot 

communicate with one another during emergencies, and that in many places, their 

ranks are simply not strong enough—in part because many reservists and Guardsmen were called up to help fight the war in Iraq—to do the job we have asked them 

to do. 

This is shameful. It must end. We’ve made some slight progress in the past few 

months—some of the resources promised many months ago are finally available. But 

from sea to shining sea, first responders continue to tell us that we still have not 

provided nearly enough to make sure that they are well trained, staffed, and 

equipped to meet the challenges they face. 

Right now, too many first responders are being forced to tread water and wait 

for the Federal lifeline. The city of Los Angeles has identified more than $70 million 

in overtime expenses it has incurred since the September 11 attacks. The city has 

already spent nearly $200 million beefing up security at its airport and shipping 

port, as well as upgrading police, fire, and health departments. Even so, Jack Weiss, 

an L.A. City councilman, says that the city is as vulnerable now as it was 17 

months ago. 

New York City’s Police Department, faced with a more complex and demanding 

job than ever, is operating with 4,000 fewer men and women than 2 years ago. And 

many of the officers and supervisors who would be first to respond to an incident 

still have not received any special equipment or training to respond to an attack 

with unconventional weapons. 

The story is the same in Massachusetts, where a survey by The Boston Globe

found that the 10 largest police departments have 424 fewer officers than they did 

a year ago and will lose at least 50 more by July 1 as a result of State budget cuts 

in local aid. 

In Arkansas, the Governor has stated that there is no way they can do the job 

of protecting homeland security with current resources, or without more Federal aid 

than is currently in the pipeline. The biggest single need, he identified, is to upgrade emergency communications for first responders because in a terrorist attack, 

or even a natural disaster like a tornado or flood, the various jurisdictions that 

would respond don’t have the ability to communicate. 

In my own State of Connecticut, New Haven Mayor John DeStefano Jr., President 

of the National League of Cities, says the city has only been able to outfit about 

10 percent of its 300 firefighters with protective equipment for responding to a 

chemical or biological attack. What are we waiting for? 

The International Association of Firefighters, whom we will hear from today, has 

consistently told us that the nation’s fire departments need more troops, better technology, and more training to adequately protect our people. The National Association of Police Organizations tells a similar story—stating that homeland security 

funding must be increased to alleviate officer layoffs and overtime, and improve 

42

technology to combat terrorism. Remember, terrorism isn’t our police officers’ only 

job. They also need to keep fighting domestic crime. 

The bottom line, Madam Chairman, is that, with State and local budgets in their 

biggest crisis since World War II, police and fire departments are being cut back 

just as the threats they need to meet are growing. That’s like turning off the air 

conditioner for the summer time. Yet the administration has consistently opposed 

efforts to provide the level of assistance our local first responders need, choosing instead to provide massive new tax cuts to those who need them least. And even the 

increases in funding that have been proposed are misleading—as they come at the 

cost of existing law enforcement assistance programs. 

We have to do better. I’ve put forward a plan for $7.5 billion in new funding for 

our first responders beyond the President’s budget for this coming year. That will 

enable communities across the country to start upgrading communications equipment, improve information sharing, enhance training, expand their ranks, and rise 

to the challenges we face. Will the Administration put our dollars where the danger 

is, or will it continue to talk tough without providing the real resources our communities need to do the job? 

Madam Chairman, in addition to providing more funds, we also have to ensure 

that the funding we provide is delivered with a minimum of red tape and delay. 

There’s been a lot of talk these past few months about duct tape; but what we say 

and do about red tape is just as important to the fight against terrorism. This hearing, and others we will have to look closely at the way these programs work, will 

help us learn directly from those they are intended to help how we can make them 

better. The current array of programs is clearly too cumbersome, too confusing, and 

in many ways inefficient. We need to understand what works and what doesn’t. And 

we need to make sure that we fix what is broken while leaving alone that which 

is working well. 

So I want to thank you for holding this hearing and thank our witnesses for sharing their expertise with us. Our country is facing an unprecedented challenge—and 

we have to put aside old ways of thinking and provide the resources necessary to 

meet the challenges that we face. We have to work diligently and improve these 

funding programs where they need to be improved, to ensure that they meet the 

objectives that we have set. This hearing is an important step in that direction.

43


87739.001
44


87739.002
45


87739.003
46


87739.004
47


87739.005
48


87739.006
49


87739.007
50


87739.008
51


87739.009
52


87739.010
53


87739.011
54


87739.012
55


87739.013
56


87739.014
57


87739.015
58


87739.016
59


87739.017
60


87739.018
61


87739.019
62


87739.020
63


87739.021
64


87739.022
65


87739.023
66


87739.024
67


87739.025
68


87739.026
69


87739.027
70


87739.028
71


87739.029
72


87739.030
73


87739.031
74


87739.032
75


87739.033
76


87739.034
77


87739.035
78


87739.036
79


87739.037
80


87739.038
81


87739.039
82


87739.040
83


87739.041
84


87739.042
85


87739.043
86


87739.044
87


87739.045
88


87739.046
89


87739.047
90


87739.048
91


87739.049
92


87739.050
93


87739.051
94


87739.052
95


87739.053
96


87739.054
97


87739.055
98


87739.056
99


87739.057
100


87739.058
101


87739.059
102


87739.060
103


87739.061
104


87739.062
105


87739.063
106


87739.064
107


87739.065
108


87739.066
109


87739.067
110


87739.068
111


87739.069
112


87739.070
113


87739.071
114


87739.072
115


87739.073
116


87739.074
117


87739.075
118


87739.077
119


87739.078
120

Æ


87739.076