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

38–983 PDF 2008

S. Hrg. 110–528 

NOMINATIONS OF ROBERT D. JAMISON AND 

W. ROSS ASHLEY III 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

HOMELAND SECURITY AND 

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

UNITED STATES SENATE 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

ROBERT D. JAMISON TO BE UNDER SECRETARY FOR NATIONAL PROTECTION AND PROGRAMS, AND W. ROSS ASHLEY III TO BE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR GRANT PROGRAMS OF THE FEDERAL 

EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

NOVEMBER 9, 2007 

Available via http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html 

Printed for the use of the 

Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs 

( 

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS 

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman 

CARL LEVIN, Michigan 

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii 

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware 

MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas 

MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana 

BARACK OBAMA, Illinois 

CLAIRE MCCASKILL, Missouri 

JON TESTER, Montana 

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine 

TED STEVENS, Alaska 

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio 

NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota 

TOM COBURN, Oklahoma 

PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico 

JOHN WARNER, Virginia 

JOHN E. SUNUNU, New Hampshire 

MICHAEL L. ALEXANDER, Staff Director 

KRISTINE V. LAM Research Assistant 

BRANDON L. MILHORN, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel 

JENNIFER L. TARR, Minority Counsel 

TRINA DRIESSNACK TYRER, Chief Clerk 

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Opening statements: Page 

Senator Lieberman ........................................................................................... 1 

Prepared statements: 

Senator Warner ................................................................................................ 4 

Senator Collins ................................................................................................. 19 

Senator Akaka .................................................................................................. 19 

WITNESSES 

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2007 

Robert D. Jamison to be Under Secretary for National Protection and Programs, U.S. Department of Homeland Security ................................................ 3 

W. Ross Ashley III to be Assistant Administrator for Grant Programs of 

the Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security ........................................................................................................ 5 

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF WITNESSES

Ashley, W. Ross III: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 5 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 109 

Biographical and professional information ..................................................... 114 

Responses to pre-hearing questions ................................................................ 123 

Letter from U.S. Office of Government Ethics ............................................... 160 

Responses to post-hearing questions .............................................................. 161 

Jamison, Robert D.: 

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 3 

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 21 

Biographical and professional information ..................................................... 25 

Responses to pre-hearing questions ................................................................ 32 

Letter from U.S. Office of Government Ethics ............................................... 68 

Responses to post-hearing questions .............................................................. 69 

(1) 

NOMINATIONS OF ROBERT D. JAMISON AND 

W. ROSS ASHLEY III 

FRIDAY, NOVEMBER 9, 2007 

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY

AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, 

Washington, DC. 

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 9:07 a.m., in Room 

SD–342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Joseph I. Lieberman, Chairman of the Committee, presiding. 

Present: Senator Lieberman. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN LIEBERMAN 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. The hearing will come to order. Good 

morning to everyone. Thanks for being here at this early hour, although probably I was up later than any of you last night because 

we were here voting until after 11 p.m. 

We are here to consider nominees to two very important positions at the Department of Homeland Security. The first is Robert 

D. Jamison, who has been nominated to be Under Secretary of the 

Department of Homeland Security with responsibility for the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD). Second is W. 

Ross Ashley III, nominated to be Assistant Administrator for 

FEMA in charge of Grant Programs. 

Both of these jobs cover critical aspects of our homeland security, 

a wide range from cyber security to ensuring that our State and 

local partners have the resources they need on the front lines of 

our defense against all disasters, whether natural or man-made. 

If confirmed, these two nominees before us today will have to 

work closely with our Nation’s first responders, with the private 

sector, and with State and local officials to provide overall strategic 

guidance and support. I would say that as this Committee—from 

which the original proposal to create the Department of Homeland 

Security came—continues our oversight of the Department, I feel 

some satisfaction that we have made substantial progress in improving the capacity of the Federal Government to both prevent 

and respond to disasters, whether natural or terrorist. But I think 

we all agree that we have some way to go to get us to where we 

need to be in this threat environment. And it is in that cooperative 

spirit that I look forward to this hearing. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Lieberman follows:] 

2 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR LIEBERMAN 

Thank you all for coming today. We are here to consider nominees to two important positions at the Department of Homeland Security. The first is Robert D. 

Jamison, who has been nominated to be Under Secretary of DHS, with responsibility for the National Protection and Programs Directorate (NPPD), followed by W. 

Ross Ashley III, nominated to be Assistant Administrator for FEMA in charge of 

grant programs. 

Both jobs cover critical aspects of our homeland security from cyber security to 

ensuring that our State and local partners have the resources they need on the front 

lines of our defense against all disasters, whether natural or man-made. 

The post Mr. Jamison has been nominated to is relatively new and consists of a 

medley of responsibilities, including cyber security, infrastructure protection, foreign 

traveler screening, emergency communications, and risk analysis. 

I have several concerns that I’d like to discuss with Mr. Jamison. The Department 

continues to work with the private sector to ensure risk assessments are performed 

for the Nation’s most critical infrastructure, although, we are behind in this effort. 

The process must be sped up as experience tells us terrorists are likely to target 

large structures and systems that will cause maximum havoc. 

The Department must also move ahead expeditiously with the new chemical site 

security program, and must ensure that the program is sufficiently rigorous to significantly reduce this homeland security vulnerability. 

The Office of Infrastructure Protection is heavily dependent upon outside contractors. Half the office staff is made up of contractors. As a matter of fact, 42 percent 

of the grants program directorate is also made up of contractors—and they are performing key functions like helping figure out the methodology by which we allocate 

grants. The Government Accountability Office recently testified before this Committee that overdependence on contractors deprives the government of the institutional knowledge it needs to perform its functions over the long run. I will want to 

know how Mr. Jamison and Mr. Ashley plan to prevent this from happening within 

their areas of authority at DHS. 

We also face serious challenges protecting government computer systems and 

databases, another area that will fall within Mr. Jamison’s portfolio. With persistent 

vacancies in key positions, and all too frequent reports of missing computers and 

lost equipment, everyone agrees we have not made sufficient progress, given the 

threats that exist to our cyber systems. 

I am pleased, however, that the Department is now busy working on how to address many of these cyber security problems in a coordinated way. Just this week, 

the Administration announced its new Cyber Initiative to strengthen the protection 

of all government systems and databases. The program is still under development, 

and of course much about it remains classified, but I look forward to hearing as 

much detail as can be discussed in a public setting. 

The position to which Mr. Ashley has been nominated—Assistant FEMA Administrator, heading the Grant Programs Directorate—is of special interest to me for a 

couple of reasons. I have made it a point over the past 4 years to work as hard as 

I could to obtain extra funding for our under-trained and under-equipped police officers, firefighters, and emergency medical workers who are on the front lines of the 

disasters that strike American communities. 

In February, for the fourth year in a row, the President’s FY 2008 budget request 

for the Department of Homeland Security would have cut crucial support for these 

brave men and women—slashing overall homeland security grant funding by a staggering 40 percent. That is unconscionable to me and would have been tantamount 

to disarming in the middle of a war. I hope you recognize the ongoing needs of first 

responders, Mr. Ashley, and I look forward to hearing your views on grant budgeting. 

I am also keenly interested in grants because of legislation we passed earlier this 

year to fulfill most of the remaining 9/11 Commission recommendations. That measure, now signed into law, calls for substantial funding increases for training, planning, and new equipment for first responders. 

Furthermore, we finally settled a year-long dispute over how to dispense homeland security grants in a way that would provide even more anti-terrorism funding 

on the basis of risk, while giving each State a smaller percentage of guaranteed 

funding for some basic level of preparedness. We also authorized more funding for 

key programs designed to help all States prepare for natural disasters and other 

threats. 

Implementation of this provision is very important to me, Mr. Ashley, so I look 

forward to hearing your plans. 

3 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Jamison appears in the Appendix on page 21. 

If confirmed, these two nominees before us today will have to work closely with 

our Nation’s first responders, with the private sector, and with State and local officials to provide overall strategic guidance. We have made important strides, but still 

have much to do to protect our critical infrastructure, while also preparing ourselves 

for the next disaster that inevitably will come. Thank you. 

Senator LIBERMAN. I will have several questions to ask after you 

make your opening statements, which I hope will allow us to have 

a conversation about some of those issues. 

Both nominees have filed responses to a biographical and financial questionnaire. They have answered pre-hearing questions submitted by the Committee and had their financial statements reviewed by the Office of Government Ethics. Without objection, this 

information will be made a part of the hearing record with the exception of the financial data, which are on file and available for 

public inspection in the Committee offices. 

Our Committee rules require that all witnesses at nomination 

hearings give their testimony under oath. Mr. Jamison and Mr. 

Ashley, would you please stand and raise your right hand? 

Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give to the 

Committee will be the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the 

truth, so help you, God? 

Mr. JAMISON. I do. 

Mr. ASHLEY. I do. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you. Please be seated. 

We will begin with Mr. Jamison. I understand you have family 

here with you today, and I would be delighted to have you introduce them to us, and then proceed with your statement. 

Mr. JAMISON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My wife, Meg, and my 

daughters, Elizabeth and Caroline, are here. I would like to thank 

them for their support not only today but every day leading up to 

it. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. You know, all the tough questions I had 

prepared, looking at those two adorable girls, I think I am just 

going to throw them out. [Laughter.] 

Mr. JAMISON. Thank you, sir. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Go right ahead. 

TESTIMONY OF ROBERT D. JAMISON,1 TO BE UNDER SECRETARY FOR NATIONAL PROTECTION AND PROGRAMS, U.S. 

DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY 

Mr. JAMISON. Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to 

appear before you today. I am very grateful to President Bush and 

Secretary Chertoff for their confidence in my ability to lead the National Protection and Programs Directorate. I believe in the missions of the Department of Homeland Security and the Directorate 

and know they are critical to our Nation’s security. 

Serving in the Federal Government with thousands of people 

who take part in the many different aspects of securing the Nation, 

its people, and its critical assets and systems has been an honor. 

I appreciate the opportunity I have had in the past few weeks to 

communicate with the Committee about my professional experience 

and work that I have done in the public, private, and not-for-profit 

sectors. 

4 

In my roles at the Department of Transportation and the Department of Homeland Security, as well as in my positions at the 

American Red Cross and United Parcel Service, I have relied on 

three fundamental principles that I learned very early in my career: Have a commitment to attract and retain skilled people, focus 

on outcome-based results, and instill and insist on a culture of accountability and integrity. Those are the fundamentals I have focused on since I was named Deputy Under Secretary of NPPD in 

April, and those are the fundamentals I will continue to pursue if 

confirmed. 

NPPD is a diverse organization with an important cross-cutting, 

binding mission of risk reduction. I believe in the mission and, if 

confirmed, would continue to strive for improvement. 

I know that you and many of the Members have concerns about 

the stability of the Directorate and question if we are prepared for 

a transition of administrations. I firmly believe that an overarching 

goal for the Directorate must be its successful growth and stabilization. For that reason, the maturation of the Directorate must be a 

top priority that I will continue to pursue if confirmed. 

One issue with relevance to maturing the Directorate is NPPD’s 

use of contractor staff. As we evaluate this usage and convert contract staff to full-time Federal staff where appropriate, we will 

strike the balance that makes the Directorate more efficient and 

ensures that we have the skills necessary to position the Directorate for future success. 

NPPD’s broad and important portfolio demands dedicated stewardship. If confirmed, I would commit to strengthening an organization that works closely with the Department’s security partners 

and stakeholders across the country. NPPD would also continue to 

be an organization that respects and relies on the direction and 

guidance provided by the Administration and Congress. If confirmed, I intend to work closely with and draw from all the individuals and entities able to assist the Directorate in fulfilling its mission. 

I believe that NPPD, in addition to having a critical mission, is 

the right place to serve for those who are highly skilled, highly motivated, and profoundly dedicated to the security of our Nation. If 

confirmed, I will be proud to serve alongside the men and women 

of NPPD. Thank you. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thanks very much, Mr. Jamison, for that 

opening statement. I appreciate what you said. 

Mr. Ashley, I want to note for the record that Senator John Warner, our dear friend and colleague from Virginia, had hoped to be 

here to introduce you this morning but had a scheduling conflict 

and is unable to be here. Senator Warner has submitted a statement of introduction and, I might say, great praise, and without 

objection, we will place it in the record. 

[The prepared statement of Senator Warner follows:] 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR WARNER 

Chairman Lieberman, Senator Collins, and my other distinguished colleagues on 

the Senate’s Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee, I thank you 

for holding this confirmation hearing today. 

Today, I am pleased to introduce a Virginian, Ross Ashley, who has been nominated to serve as the Assistant Administrator for Grant Programs, Federal EmerVerDate Aug 31 2005 11:41 Oct 15, 2008 Jkt 038983 PO 00000 Frm 00008 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 P:\DOCS\38983.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PAT
5 

1The prepared statement of Mr. Ashley appears in the Appendix on page 109. 

gency Management Agency, Department of Homeland Security. He is joined today 

with his family including his wife, Lauren, his daughter, Catherine, his sons Cailan 

and Patrick, his mother, Brenda Dumas, and his brother Major John Ashley. I understand that his youngest daughter, Caroline, is not here today. 

Mr. Ashley graduated from Tabb High School in Yorktown, Virginia, and subsequently earned his B.A. degree in International Studies from George Mason University in 1989 and M.S. in Strategic Intelligence from the Joint Military Intelligence 

College. From 1997 to 2004, Mr. Ashley served in the Air Force Reserves as an Intelligence Officer. He retired at the rank of Captain. In addition, from 1984 to 1997, 

Mr. Ashley served in the Virginia Air National Guard in Richmond, Virginia. Mr. 

Ashley has received numerous accolades for his military service. 

The job of Assistant Administrator for Federal Grant Programs is a critical one, 

tasked with responsibility of overseeing a comprehensive assortment of grant programs at FEMA ranging from funding for communications equipment for first responders to funding for the hiring of firefighters. Due to the breadth of FEMA’s 

grant programs, this job requires an individual with significant involvement in executing complex grant programs. Mr. Ashley has past work experience advising entities participating in the Federal grant process. 

Mr. Ashley has almost 20 years of experience and expertise as an officer or executive at a diverse set of companies ranging from a non-profit provider of services to 

individuals with disabilities to high-tech companies. Through his various positions, 

including Director of Law Enforcement Technologies at ISX Corporation and as 

President and Chief Operating Officer at The Templar Corporation, Mr. Ashley has 

concentrated his work on information operations, strategic planning and execution, 

strategy assessment, operations analysis, team development, and project management which are all areas of critical expertise for a grant program administrator. 

I am pleased to introduce Mr. Ashley today and I urge the Committee to give him 

every appropriate consideration. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Mr. Ashley, I believe you have some family here also. We would welcome their introduction and then your 

opening statement. 

Mr. ASHLEY. First off, my wife, Lauren, is here; my son, Cailan; 

daughter, Catherine; and our other son, Patrick. We also have a 2- 

year-old, Caroline, that we thought best not to be here today. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Am I getting older or are the nominees 

getting younger? [Laughter.] 

Mr. ASHLEY. My mother, Brenda Dumas, is also here visiting 

from Alabama. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. That is great. 

Mr. ASHLEY. My brother, Major John Ashley; my sister-in-law; 

and aunt- and uncle-in-law and cousin-in-law are here as well. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. That is great. I cannot resist one of my 

favorite one-liners, which is that somebody, noting the presence of 

your mother-in-law, somebody said to me when they met my mother-in-law, which is that behind every successful man, there is a 

surprised mother-in-law. [Laughter.] 

Apparently your mother-in-law agrees with that. 

Mr. ASHLEY. ‘‘Shocked’’ might be appropriate. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. OK, Mr. Ashley, go right ahead. 

TESTIMONY OF W. ROSS ASHLEY III1 TO BE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR GRANT PROGRAMS OF THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, U.S. DEPARTMENT HOMELAND SECURITY 

Mr. ASHLEY. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. My name is Ross 

Ashley, and I would like to thank Senator Warner for his statement of support as well. 

6 

I am appearing before you today as the nominee for Assistant 

Administrator for Grant Programs at the Federal Emergency Management Agency within the Department of Homeland Security. It 

is a great honor to be nominated by the President for this position 

and to have the opportunity to answer the questions as you consider my nomination. I cannot express how honored I am to be 

nominated for a position that will continue to further preparedness, 

response, and recovery capabilities of our State, local, and tribal 

partners and of our Nation as a whole. 

I would like to begin today by thanking my wife, Lauren, for her 

patience and encouragement over the last 10 years as our family 

has grown. As each of you know, public service requires dedication 

and commitment from the whole family. 

Also with us today are our oldest daughter and two sons—Catherine, Cailan, and Patrick—who inspire me with the eagerness 

with which they approach the start of every day. Our 2-year-old 

daughter, Caroline, thought best to hold down the fort while the 

rest of the family came to the hearing today. My mother is here 

from Alabama, and I would like to thank her for making the trip 

to be with us. 

I have had the privilege of growing up in a family full of public 

servants. My father retired from serving both in the U.S. Air Force 

and the National Guard, and my mother worked in rural Mississippi as a social worker. My brother, Major John Ashley, is here 

today from serving on active duty in the National Guard. John is 

the true picture of the citizen soldier, having piloted F–16s on multiple combat deployments to Iraq and now preparing himself and 

others for deployment again in a new theater-based reconnaissance 

aircraft. John, his wife, Tracy, and their four children’s dedication 

to their country is an inspiration to all of us who know them. 

If confirmed as Assistant Administrator for Grant Programs, my 

responsibility will be to ensure that Federal investment into State, 

local, and tribal preparedness, response, and recovery capabilities 

provides the greatest return on investment for the American public. I will bring to this position many years of experience of military 

service, financial management, and executive leadership. I spent 20 

years in the National Guard and Reserves, serving both as an enlisted member and as a commissioned officer. Early in my National 

Guard career, I volunteered on a number of occasions to fill sandbags and to pre-position supplies and equipment in order to prepare for hurricanes and floods threatening the Commonwealth of 

Virginia. Immediately following September 11, 2001, as a reserve 

officer I volunteered to augment active-duty personnel at the Pentagon, manning a 24-hour intelligence watch center. 

From the time I was 18 years old, the educational and professional opportunities afforded me in the National Guard have been 

the foundation for every endeavor in my life, and if confirmed, I 

will bring this foundation with me to this new challenge. 

One of the most important aspects of this position is to ensure 

that Federal investments and partnerships with State, local, and 

tribal first responders provide support to meet the National Preparedness Guidelines and the Target Capabilities List. This process 

requires financial experience in grant programs, fiscal responsibility, and accountability. 

7 

Since 1997, I have had the opportunity to work as a commercial 

partner with State, local, and tribal first responders, specifically in 

the areas of information sharing, incident management, and communications interoperability. As the founder and president of the 

Templar Corporation, I worked with individual States and localities on regional information sharing grants and supported all aspects of the grants process, from interpretation of guidance, preparation of submission packages, and financial and programmatic 

compliance. If confirmed, I believe I will bring the necessary perspective of our State, local, and tribal partners to the execution of 

all grant programs. 

Prior to September 11, 2001, I supported the initial efforts to 

provide regional interoperable capabilities to our Nation’s first responders. Shortly after the killing of Gianni Versace in 1997, it was 

discovered that his killer, Andrew Cunanan, pawned property 

under his real name while there was a nationwide manhunt underway for his apprehension. As a result of this and other multijurisdictional events, I worked with the Department of Justice and 

other partners to develop a real-time distributed information-sharing system for Broward, Brevard, and Monroe Counties in South 

Florida. Since these early efforts, I have had the opportunity to 

support similar interoperability efforts for both voice and data communications in a number of States and multi-jurisdictional regions, 

to include the National Capital Region. 

My financial management experience includes efforts with my 

business partner to mortgage our houses and start a successful 

small business, participating in complex multi-million-dollar corporate sales in both the commercial and nonprofit sectors, and 

leading a high-performance financial management team in the 

turn-around of a challenged nonprofit. 

As the CEO of an 1,100-person nonprofit, I was responsible for 

multiple cost centers and funding agencies at both the State and 

Federal levels that cut across all aspects of the lives of people with 

developmental disabilities. When I took over as CEO of the National Children’s Center, the previous year audit included 32 findings of significant deficiency. Working with and leading a great 

team, we were able to, in one short year, reduce the number of auditing findings to two, neither of which was in the area of financial 

management. 

It is also critical at this point to ensure that the resulting organizational changes in grant programs have a minimum effect on our 

stakeholders. Over the years, working with States and localities, 

one of the common themes in grant programs is the need for consistency year over year. If confirmed, I will ensure that the transition to a one-stop shop for grant programs continues to fully support all of our stakeholders. In addition, if confirmed, I am committed to an effective transition to the next Administration and 

will ensure that my successor has all the tools necessary to continue the tremendous work already accomplished by this Congress 

and the Administration. 

Our Nation’s grant programs are critical to ensure adequate allhazard planning and operational capabilities for emergency managers, firefighters, law enforcement, medical response, and everyday citizens. If confirmed, I look forward to working with AdminisVerDate Aug 31 2005 11:41 Oct 15, 2008 Jkt 038983 PO 00000 Frm 00011 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 P:\DOCS\38983.TXT SAFFAIRS PsN: PAT
8 

trator Paulison, the FEMA leadership team, across the Department 

of Homeland Security, and with all of our partners, continuing the 

efforts to develop a new FEMA and a culture of preparedness 

across our society. 

In closing, the Congress continues to support the efforts of our 

Nation’s first responders and has provided the necessary guidelines 

in the Post-Katrina Emergency Reform Act of 2006 and the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act. If confirmed, I welcome the opportunity to continue these efforts to support our Nation’s first responders and respectfully ask this Committee to confirm my nomination to serve as Assistant Administrator for Grant Programs at the Federal Emergency Management 

Agency within the Department of Homeland Security. 

I want to thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to appear before you, and I would be happy to answer any questions you 

may have. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thanks very much, Mr. Ashley. 

I am going to start my questioning with the standard questions 

we ask of all nominees, and in the interest of efficiency, I will ask 

them of both of you simultaneously. 

Is there anything you are aware of in your background that 

might present a conflict of interest with the duties of the office to 

which you have been nominated? 

Mr. JAMISON. No. 

Mr. ASHLEY. No, sir. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you. Do you know of anything, personal or otherwise, that would in any way prevent you from fully 

and honorably discharging the responsibilities of the office to which 

you have been nominated? 

Mr. JAMISON. No. 

Mr. ASHLEY. No, sir. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. And, finally, do you agree without reservation to respond to any reasonable summons to appear and testify before any duly constituted committee of Congress if you are 

confirmed? 

Mr. JAMISON. I do. 

Mr. ASHLEY. Yes, sir. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Jamison, I think what I will do is go back and forth, one 

question to each. Let me begin with the Cyber Security Initiative, 

which is a very important part of the new world of attack and defense. 

On Tuesday of this week, President Bush sent to Congress an 

amendment to the fiscal year 2008 budget request, reallocating 

funds to protect Federal civilian agency networks. This change is 

part of a new governmentwide effort on cyber security called, as 

you know, the Cyber Initiative. The request includes an increase of 

$115 million for cyber security within the NPPD at the U.S. Computer Emergency Readiness Team, also known as US–CERT. This 

increase would more than double the current budget of the Department for cyber security. 

I wanted to ask you whether you believe this new initiative will 

fundamentally alter the approach that the Department has taken 

toward cyber security, and in answering that question to the best 

9 

of your ability, tell us what you think are the current capabilities 

of the Department relating to cyber security. And I would say that 

I understand that certain parts of the program are classified, and 

I respect that. But also I understand that many details are unclassified, and I would like you to speak from that base of information. 

Mr. JAMISON. Yes, sir. First of all, I do believe this is a fundamentally new approach, but I believe it builds upon the capabilities that we have in US–CERT. US–CERT has a 24-by-7 response 

capability and provides a valuable service to respond and analyze 

the threat environment. And I must say that we at DHS, as well 

as in the Administration, are very concerned about the cyber threat 

and the fact that attacks are more prevalent, more focused, and 

more sophisticated. And as a result—— 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. We are seeing such attacks, aren’t we? 

Mr. JAMISON. Yes, we are. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Yes. 

Mr. JAMISON. And they are more frequent. And as a result, we 

have an interagency effort that is looking differently at cyber security. 

But our approach and the role that DHS is going to play in that 

is really a more aggressive approach to some of the current capabilities that we have most fundamentally. Currently, we have a capability to do intrusion detection with an Einstein Program. We 

want to get much more aggressive and ramp that out across the 

Federal Government. We also want to look at how we are managing the security policies and standards across the Federal Government, and US–CERT will play a much more prominent role in 

that. 

But it really builds on fundamental capabilities. I cannot say 

enough about the technical expertise that we have in US–CERT, 

and this initiative will dramatically ramp up that capability, add 

more staff to do more analysis of threats and allow us to respond 

as a government comprehensively, and have us have better situational awareness on what is happening across the dot-gov network. 

I would be very happy, as we have done with your staff, to give 

you a detailed classified briefing on some of the classified parts of 

that initiative. But to reiterate your first point of the question, I 

do think it is a fundamentally different approach, but it builds on 

our current capabilities. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. I appreciate it, and I would like to do 

that. Let me ask you one related question. Given that the majority 

of the cyber infrastructure is owned privately by industry, will this 

initiative also help monitor and protect those systems? 

Mr. JAMISON. What we are talking about in the Cyber Initiative 

for 2008 is focused on the dot-gov network. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Right. 

Mr. JAMISON. But just as we saw recently with the visibility that 

the control system vulnerability got in the U.S. that we have been 

working on at DHS with our interagency partners and with the 

public-private partnership, we must not forget about the 

vulnerabilities to our critical infrastructure and the threat that exists in the cyber domain. So we are going to continue to work those 

partnerships just like we have through the NIP Partnership 

10 

Framework, continue to roll out mitigation measures, and to look 

at that. 

But the main focus of the Cyber Initiative is to focus in 2008 on 

the dot-gov networks and try to get more secure in that area. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Good. 

Mr. Ashley, let me ask you a couple of questions related to the 

Federal Government’s attempt to enhance terrorism prevention efforts at the State and local level. The National Strategy for Homeland Security says that ‘‘State, local, and tribal governments which 

best understand their communities, will always play a prominent 

front-line role in helping to prevent terrorist attacks.’’ And I could 

not agree more. 

Could you describe what steps you will take to ensure that State 

and local law enforcement are full partners in national prevention 

efforts to defeat Islamist terrorism which the Department and the 

FBI have identified as the greatest threat to the homeland? 

Mr. ASHLEY. Yes, sir. I agree wholeheartedly with your statement there as far as the people on the ground that understand best 

our communities are State, local, and tribal first responders. The 

efforts that will continue to make a big difference in this area are 

cross-discipline fusion centers for the law enforcement community. 

And when I say cross-discipline, I am also including the rest of the 

first responder community there because I think it is very important for the continued efforts of preparedness planning to look 

across all disciplines, be it emergency managers, firefighters, law 

enforcement, or medical response. 

Continuing those planning initiatives, many people say that 

planning is critical and the plan is worthless. I think that as we 

enhance the fusion center efforts and as we enhance planning capabilities across disciplines, this will begin to break down some of 

those barriers and allow people to start sharing information across 

these disciplines. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. That is very important. Let me go to a 

different part of it. This Committee held a hearing last week—a 

very important hearing to me, and I think to the Committee—in 

which local police officers from New York, Los Angeles, Kansas 

City, and Miami-Dade County testified about the importance of 

outreach and forging bonds with local Muslim-American communities that are essential in preventing the spread of Islamist 

radicalization and extremism. But they all testified that they have 

not yet been able to use their homeland security grants for such 

efforts. 

The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission 

Act, as we call it, provides the FEMA Administrator flexibility to 

allow State and local communities to spend homeland security 

grants on ‘‘any appropriate activity’’ relating to preventing, preparing for, protecting against, and responding to acts of terrorism. 

Will you indicate to us that you are going to do what you can 

to ensure that the upcoming grant guidance will authorize the use 

of grants by State, county, and local law enforcement for the kind 

of community outreach that I have talked about? 

Mr. ASHLEY. Of course, I am not aware of what is currently written in the fiscal year 2008 grant guidance. However, I will tell you 

that I think it is critical that outreach is conducted by State and 

11 

local partners, and I meant that in many different ways, whether 

it is reaching out to a local Muslim community or whether that is 

reaching out to the commercial businesses that may have assets 

that are required and such like that. Also, from the standpoint of 

privacy, as we begin to stand up these fusion centers across the 

country, I think it is critical that community buy in to the process 

so there is not this vision of a green door that the community is 

unaware of what is going on. So I am committed to working with 

Administrator Paulison and expressing those, if confirmed for the 

position, yes, sir. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. I appreciate that. To say what you know, 

the 750,000 county, State, and local law enforcement people around 

the country, they are really a mighty force to implement everything 

we are trying to do at the Federal level to detect and prevent and, 

God forbid, have to respond to a terrorist attack. They seem quite 

ready to get at this. I was impressed last week that these four departments took this initiative on their own, and right now they are 

supporting it entirely, as far as I can determine, through locally 

generated revenues. 

There are, in fact, in my staff’s investigation of this matter, some 

police departments in communities that have significant MuslimAmerican communities that are not doing any of this outreach, and 

we will talk about that. But I hope that you can both urge and support them getting involved in it. 

Do you have any thoughts about how you might more broadly involve other first responders? I am thinking particularly of firefighters and emergency medical personnel. 

Mr. ASHLEY. Sure. I think that one of the things that you all envisioned in this Congress when it came to putting grants all into 

one location is one of the expectations is that we would look across 

all of those grant programs to ensure the best possible preparedness. I think there is an opportunity now, with the grants being in 

a consolidated, one-stop-shopping environment, to begin looking at 

the guidance as it goes across disciplines and to continue to encourage things like the Regional Transit Working Group’s participation 

on the UASI programs and that cross-discipline planning and coordination. 

As far as bringing the law enforcement and emergency managers 

group together, again, as we start standing up these fusion centers, 

we have the opportunity to write into grant guidance how those relationships will interact with emergency management centers 

across the country. A lot of this is unwritten and new at this point, 

and there are a lot of new cultural barriers that are beginning to 

come down at the grass-roots level. And I think that by doing that 

at the Federal level, by putting everything in the same department, 

it also gives us an opportunity to organize inside of the Grant Programs Directorate, so there is that cross-pollination across those 

grant programs, whether it is firefighters, emergency managers, 

law enforcement, or medical response. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. I agree. You are coming on at an important time at the beginning of this reorganized function to make it 

work, so I appreciate that. 

Mr. Jamison, let me go back to you. Earlier this year, as you well 

know, DHS alerted many sectors to a vulnerability known as the 

12 

Aurora scenario, which showed that rotating electrical machines 

used throughout critical infrastructure could be damaged through 

a remote cyber attack. This vulnerability, which poses a severe potential impact for many industries, including electric, nuclear, and 

water, illustrates the even greater potential risk that exists due to 

increasing interconnectivity between more traditional systems and 

the Internet. So let me ask you a few questions about that. 

First, do you believe that particular risk has been mitigated? 

Mr. JAMISON. I believe we have taken a lot of risk off the table, 

and I think it is a good example of how the NIP Partnership 

Framework worked with our industry partners and our Federal 

agency partners to quickly—once our research had indicated there 

was a vulnerability, to work to develop mitigation measures and to 

roll those out. We need to continue to monitor the performance in 

the field on the implementation of those mitigation measures, but 

we started with our high-risk infrastructure and are confident that 

the industry and the sectors are taking action as necessary. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. As you probably know, some members of 

the impacted sectors said that DHS did not notify them of this Aurora vulnerability in a timely or consistent manner and failed to 

use the so-called Sector Coordinating Councils to disseminate information and seek counsel from sector experts. I know you know 

about this complaint. What did you learn from the Aurora scenario 

in terms of private sector coordination? 

Mr. JAMISON. Sir, I am not familiar with that particular complaint. I think it may be due to the fact that we did risk analysis 

on the vulnerabilities across the sectors, and we engaged with certain sectors prior to other sectors. 

I think what it proved to me is that the Sector Coordinating 

Council and the partnership that we have is a viable model to look 

at managing risk in a system where 85 percent of our infrastructure is owned by the private sector. Within a matter of months, 

once the vulnerability was verified, we quickly had mitigation 

measures in both the nuclear and the electrical sector and worked 

and had already started getting those mitigation measures out. We 

are continuing to work through the rest of those sectors. Several 

other sectors have engaged—I think it works. I think we need to 

continue to build upon that partnership and make sure that we 

strive to figure out better ways to continue to share sensitive information down to the people that need to have it in order to make 

the decisions and implement the measures. But it proved to me we 

have a framework that has come a long way over the last few 

years. We just need to continue to get better at using it. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Do you think that DHS has adequate regulatory authority to ensure that the mitigation measures you have 

just talked about are being put into place throughout the critical 

infrastructure? 

Mr. JAMISON. I am satisfied with our current authorities. I think 

we need to continue to make sure that we are doing outcome performance measures in the field to determine whether or not those 

mitigation measures are being implemented. And if we do not 

think that they are being implemented sufficiently, we either need 

to leverage the regulatory authorities or our partners, other agencies within the Federal Government, or ask for them like we did 

13 

in chemical security where we asked for additional regulatory authority when we thought we needed it. But the key is to make sure 

we carefully monitor the results. 

One point I wanted to make about that vulnerability is that, for 

the most part, a lot of mitigation measures are low-cost investments that could protect high-risk, expensive pieces of equipment. 

And it is in the owner’s best interest to take those mitigation measures from a capital protection standpoint. It is one of the reasons 

we are pleased with the results so far about the mitigation measures. But it is something we need to continue to look at and monitor. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. I agree. Good. 

Mr. Ashley, we have talked a little bit about the Fusion Centers. 

One of the problems that State and local officials who have come 

before our Committee have identified with regard to the development of the Fusion Centers is that there is no guarantee of funding 

for long-term sustainment. And the problem, obviously, is that to 

work, they need to make long-term investments in technology and 

even training and personnel. 

How will you work to assure the States that the Department remains committed to the Fusion Center program and that the 

grants that they depend on for these long-term investments will be 

there and will not suddenly disappear? 

Mr. ASHLEY. Right. Planning from year to year and consistency 

from year to year has been a common theme with our State and 

local partners. I think one of the best ways to address this from 

a grant programs perspective is to work from the programmatic 

side to ensure State and locals are making investments that have 

deliverable milestones and leave-behind capability because at any 

given moment we do not know where the budget process is going 

to be with next year’s funds, and etc., for State and local. So working with them to ensure that each year that they are investing 

grant dollars, that if they are working toward a longer-term goal, 

that there is leave-behind at each milestone. And that is, I will 

bring experience and program management to helping to support 

that process. 

But it is a multi-year effort on many of these different issues, 

and we are reliant upon multiple moving parts to ensure year-overyear consistent funding. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. I hear it. Part of it is us. So the Committee will work very hard to assure that long-term sustainment 

as well. 

Mr. Jamison, you mentioned a little bit about contracting in your 

opening statement. As you know, the Committee held a hearing 

last month that raised serious concerns about the Department’s reliance on outside contractors to do the government’s work. Overuse 

of contractors, obviously, we are concerned raises the risk that the 

Department itself is not developing the institutional knowledge for 

the longer term and, at worst, will lose control of its own decisionmaking. The problem appears to be significant in the NPPD. Half 

of the staff of the Office of Infrastructure Protection are contractors; for instance, three-quarters of the positions in the National 

Cyber Security Division were contracted out. 

14 

So I want you to describe a bit more—I know you have this 

under review—what actions you hope to take to reduce NPPD’s reliance on contractors and really in a fundamental way how you intend to prepare the Directorate for the upcoming transition. 

Mr. JAMISON. Yes, sir. I agree with you. I think that making sure 

that we have in-house Federal staff that can position ourselves for 

the transition and for the challenges that we face is absolutely crucial. Not only that, we need to make sure that we put a focus on 

retaining the key Federal staff that we currently have. So that is 

one of the reasons attracting and retaining the key people is a top 

priority for myself. 

I have asked that a review be done to determine in 2008, given 

as contracts expire and given our capabilities to hire people, how 

many contractor staff should be converted to full-time Federal staff 

if appropriate for efficiency and appropriate for roles and responsibilities. We have a preliminary target for fiscal year 2008 to convert 150 staff from contractors to full-time. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Good. 

Mr. JAMISON. And I think most people that know me would tell 

you that I am an outcome-focused metrics type of person, and that 

is going to be one of my metrics for 2008 to make sure that we do 

that because I do believe it is a fundamental key point to make 

sure that we are more stable going into the transition. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Good. We will obviously want to keep in 

touch with you on all that. 

Mr. Jamison, when Congress passed the Post-Katrina Emergency 

Management Reform Act over a year ago, we created the Office of 

Emergency Communications (OEC). As you know, DHS was supposed to submit a report to Congress within 120 days of enacting 

the law outlining the resources needed to establish the office. 

The Committee just received the report this week, and obviously 

we are grateful for that, but also concerned that OEC is not as far 

along as we hoped it would be at this point. And there are other 

deadlines, as you may know, that OEC also has to meet. 

Could you update the Committee, to the best of your knowledge 

at this point, on the status of the Office of Emergency Communications? 

Mr. JAMISON. Yes, sir. First of all, we have faced some challenges 

in the stand-up of OEC, standing up a new organization and making sure that we have the staff in place and the leadership in place 

to move forward. I am glad we got the report up here this week. 

I think it is representative of the resources that we need and an 

alignment of where we need to focus our resources. But more importantly, over the last few months we have named a Deputy Director that has a long history of emergency communications in the 

field, in working with State and locals and being a part of that 

emergency responder community that is going to bring a lot of experience to that. He has been on board for, I think, about 6 weeks 

now. We are in the final processes of bringing on board, offers have 

been accepted, another—the director of that office, who also brings 

valuable State emergency communications experience. Those are 

the two biggest pieces to the puzzle, in my opinion, to taking this 

organization to the next level. Do we need to get better at our reporting timeliness? Yes. Do we have the pieces in place to start 

15 

moving forward? Yes. I think we have come a long way in the last 

year, but we need to make sure we are building on that foundation. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. OK. That is hopeful. 

And this one is to you, Mr. Ashley. 

Mr. ASHLEY. OK. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. It is similar. Congress established the 

Interoperable Emergency Communications Grant Program when it 

passed the Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act. Funding for the new program was included in both the 

Senate and House homeland security appropriations bills, and we 

are really looking forward to the program beginning next year. This 

is, as you know, from a tragic real-life experience, both on September 11, 2001, in New York where we lost a lot of firefighters 

because of the inability to communicate with other first responders, 

and then when in Hurricane Katrina they just were not able to operate, let alone communicate. 

So I wanted to ask you what steps the Department has taken 

and do you intend to take to get this critically important Interoperable Emergency Communications Grant Program up and running 

during fiscal year 2008? 

Mr. ASHLEY. Yes, sir. There are a couple things there. We also 

have the PSIC grants as well that came out of Commerce, and ensuring that those grants are synergistic and working together, utilizing the same grant guidance. 

Specifically, I think in what you guys accomplished with the 9/ 

11 bill and the requirement of statewide interoperability plans 

being submitted and going and working with the Office of Emergency Communication and looking at those statewide plans and ensuring investment across interoperable communications efforts are 

done in a coordinated fashion, I think you guys have given us a lot 

of guidance in that area as well. 

I think the utilization of the similar grant guidance from 

SAFECOM as far as both for PSIC and interoperable communications in my understanding as well is that we have individuals that 

are actually working in the Office of Emergency Communications 

as well to make sure there is that tight fit between the policy and 

the review of the statewide plans and then the implementation of 

grants. I think that the groundwork has already started to take 

place, and I look forward to working with Mr. Jamison to further 

that. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Good. Obviously, we really want to see 

this up and running and beginning to turn to plug this gap during 

this coming fiscal year. 

DHS announced earlier this year that it intends to direct the airlines to collect biometric information, including fingerprints, from 

international travelers in order to carry out the air exit requirement of the US–VISIT program. Mr. Jamison, I wanted to ask you 

what is the status of the proposal and whether you believe it is appropriate to delegate this immigration and law enforcement function to the private sector. 

Mr. JAMISON. Yes, sir. Currently, we are in the late stages of 

drafting a Notice of Proposed Rulemaking. We want to have that 

out in the very near future with the goal of hopefully having the 

final rule implemented by this summer, June 2008, and with an 

16 

implementation date of December 2008, to actually start the biometric collection. 

We are currently in the late stages of doing final cost/benefit 

analysis in preparation for that Notice of Proposed Rulemaking, 

but from a principles standpoint, we do believe that this is not inconsistent with the airlines’ responsibility currently to collect passport information and other passenger information required for the 

government, and this will be consistent in that realm as well. 

We need to make sure we carefully evaluate the true costs to the 

airlines versus the costs to the government of doing that function. 

But we do believe that is a function that can be carried out most 

effectively by the airlines. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. What impact do you think the proposal 

will have on passenger processing at airports? 

Mr. JAMISON. It is something that we are taking into consideration very carefully. It really depends upon the point at which a 

biometric will be collected. Our current thinking is that the checkin counter is the most efficient place to do that. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Right. 

Mr. JAMISON. We do not think that it will have a big impact on 

line delays due to the other processing that takes place, and while 

the reservations are printing and tickets are printing, there is a capability because it is a very short transaction, a matter of, I think, 

about 20 seconds to do the full biometric collection. So we do not 

anticipate a full impact. We are carefully going through that evaluation in the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking to make sure that we 

have fully captured the impact to the airlines and to the wait times 

for the passengers. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Are the airlines opposing that idea? 

Mr. JAMISON. I think they will oppose that idea, and they have 

been fairly vocal about that. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Right. 

Mr. JAMISON. It becomes the issue, I think, that we have to determine where is the best place to do that and whether or not we 

really need that information in terms of knowing who is in the 

country. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Obviously, we are finding pushback in a 

lot of different areas in which we are, in the interest of homeland 

security, asking people to do things that they have not done before, 

that they thought they would never have to do, but we are doing 

it for a reason. I know there will be pushback. There already has 

been. But in the end, we want you to be able to say that you have 

set up a system that will give maximum protection to the American 

people, even if some people are unhappy because they have to do 

a little more a little differently than they have done before. 

DHS has reported that this whole change will be complicated and 

costly to the US–VISIT biometric exit system. Let me just ask you, 

finally, to step back and talk a little more about what you think 

the most significant challenges are in developing an exit system at 

land ports of entry. That is what I want to focus on for this question. 

Mr. JAMISON. I think it is a significant challenge. As you know, 

at many of our border locations, we do not stop individuals from 

entering Canada at several border spots, so implementing an exit 

17 

regime in those land borders requires a significant challenge and 

significant resources. 

I think that the process that we are about to embark on in air 

exit is going to inform us greatly on those challenges and at the 

same time will capture, I believe, about 94 percent of the visa waiver-eligible population that we are focused on capturing. 

So that learning curve and going through that process will help 

us lay out the next phase of this and the strategy that is going to 

take us into the future years of getting a land exit program evaluated. 

Chairman LIEBERMAN. OK. I thank both of you. You are obviously both very well informed and experienced to take on these 

critical assignments. These are two positions that the general public probably never has heard of and we hope, in a way, never does 

hear of. But what you are about to take on is critically important 

to the security of every person in this country and the country 

overall, the government overall. So I appreciate it very much. You 

both obviously have been blessed with devoted and beautiful families behind you, and as I think they know, you are going to need 

them to continue to be behind you in the time ahead, particularly 

your mother-in-law. [Laughter.] 

I cannot tell you how important that is. 

Without objection, the record will be kept open until 12 noon tomorrow for the submission of any written questions from Members 

of the Committee or statements for the record that you or others 

want to add. We are doing that very quick turn-around because it 

is my intention, based on the importance of these two positions, to 

bring your nominations before a Committee business meeting, 

which I believe is scheduled for next Wednesday, and then hopefully to move them through the full Senate quickly before we depart at the end of next week for our Thanksgiving two-week break. 

So be on good behavior between now and the end of next week. 

[Laughter.] 

I thank you very much, and with that, the hearing is adjourned. 

[Whereupon, at 9:54 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.] 

(19) 

A P P E N D I X 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR COLLINS 

The nominations we consider today encompass two critical responsibilities at the 

Department of Homeland Security: management of the federal programs that protect our citizens from natural or man-made disasters, and administration of the 

grant programs that help States and localities improve their ability to counter terrorist attacks, respond to natural disasters, and communicate in emergencies. 

The scope and importance of the NPPD’s responsibilities are daunting. The NPPD 

is charged with: 

• maintaining the Office of Bombing Prevention as a strong and active participant in the nation’s efforts to counter the threat of terrorists using improvised 

explosive devices on our soil; • ensuring successful implementation of the chemical-facility security program 

authorized last year, due to the work of this Committee; 

• assessing risks and developing prioritized inventories of our nation’s critical 

infrastructure, and 

• managing voluntary private-sector coordination programs to achieve the goals 

of the National Infrastructure Protection Plan. 

I would note that the Office of Bomb Prevention would be formally established 

and strengthened by the National Bombing Prevention Act that Senator Lieberman 

and I introduced last week. 

The second nomination is to a position within FEMA that plays a vital role in 

preparing our State and local first responders to handle the next major natural disaster or terrorist attack. 

The FEMA reform legislation that Senator Lieberman and I crafted in 2006 restored preparedness grant programs to FEMA. This improved the agency’s ability 

to support State and local preparedness with funds for planning, training, exercises, 

and interoperable communications. 

Grants are a vital part of our essential goal of achieving effective capabilities and 

coordination among federal, State, local, and other stakeholders in the preparation 

and response to natural disasters and terrorist attacks. As part of that effort, I 

would add, the Grant Programs Directorate has another critical role: ensuring that 

tax dollars are not wasted. 

Ross Ashley comes before our Committee with a long record of executive experience in both commercial and non-profit organizations. 

I join the Chairman in welcoming both of these nominees to this hearing. 

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR AKAKA 

I am pleased to join you today in welcoming Robert Jamison who has been nominated to serve as the Under Secretary of National Protection and Programs at DHS, 

and Ross Ashley, who has been nominated to serve as Deputy Administrator for 

Grant Programs at FEMA. These are important positions and their programs are 

essential to State and local governments trying to build effective disaster response 

capabilities. 

Many States are still struggling with the need to upgrade or supplement outdated 

resources, including crowded emergency operations centers, to establish fusion centers for effective law enforcement and intelligence coordination, and to ensure that 

adequate surge capacity is available in the aftermath of a natural disaster or terrorist attack. DHS grants are a key resource in accomplishing those tasks. 

Mr. Ashley, I cannot emphasize enough how important the effective and efficient 

administration of the grants process is to our State and local governments. It is my 

20 

hope that, during your tenure, you will communicate with those recipients closely 

and often to ensure that grant guidance is clear, concise and easily understood. 

The threat of improvised explosive devices, protection of critical infrastructure 

and the possibility that our nation’s power plants can be sabotaged because of 

vulnerabilities in cybersecurity are no less critical to the homeland security mission. 

I look forward to hearing how Mr. Jamison intends to move the NPPD from its recent establishment to a more mature directorate responsible for overseeing and implementing programs in those areas. I would also like to hear how the NPPD will 

work with State and local governments to not only ensure the security of critical 

infrastructure, but also its safety. 

21 


38983.001
22 


38983.002
23 


38983.003
24 


38983.004
25 


38983.005
26 


38983.006
27 


38983.007
28 


38983.008
29 


38983.009
30 


38983.010
31 


38983.011
32 


38983.067
33 


38983.068
34 


38983.069
35 


38983.070
36 


38983.071
37 


38983.072
38 


38983.073
39 


38983.074
40 


38983.075
41 


38983.076
42 


38983.077
43 


38983.078
44 


38983.079
45 


38983.080
46 


38983.081
47 


38983.082
48 


38983.083
49 


38983.084
50 


38983.085
51 


38983.086
52 


38983.087
53 


38983.088
54 


38983.089
55 


38983.090
56 


38983.091
57 


38983.092
58 


38983.093
59 


38983.094
60 


38983.095
61 


38983.096
62 


38983.097
63 


38983.098
64 


38983.099
65 


38983.100
66 


38983.101
67 


38983.110
68 


38983.012
69 


38983.013
70 


38983.014
71 


38983.015
72 


38983.016
73 


38983.017
74 


38983.018
75 


38983.019
76 


38983.020
77 


38983.021
78 


38983.022
79 


38983.023
80 


38983.024
81 


38983.025
82 


38983.026
83 


38983.027
84 


38983.028
85 


38983.029
86 


38983.030
87 


38983.031
88 


38983.032
89 


38983.033
90 


38983.034
91 


38983.035
92 


38983.036
93 


38983.037
94 


38983.038
95 


38983.039
96 


38983.040
97 


38983.041
98 


38983.042
99 


38983.043
100 


38983.044
101 


38983.045
102 


38983.046
103 


38983.047
104 


38983.048
105 


38983.049
106 


38983.050
107 


38983.051
108 


38983.052
109 


38983.053
110 


38983.054
111 


38983.055
112 


38983.056
113 


38983.057
114 


38983.058
115 


38983.059
116 


38983.060
117 


38983.061
118 


38983.062
119 


38983.063
120 


38983.064
121 


38983.065
122 


38983.066
123 


38983.111
124 


38983.112
125 


38983.113
126 


38983.114
127 


38983.115
128 


38983.116
129 


38983.117
130 


38983.118
131 


38983.119
132 


38983.120
133 


38983.121
134 


38983.122
135 


38983.123
136 


38983.124
137 


38983.125
138 


38983.126
139 


38983.127
140 


38983.128
141 


38983.129
142 


38983.130
143 


38983.131
144 


38983.132
145 


38983.133
146 


38983.134
147 


38983.135
148 


38983.136
149 


38983.137
150 


38983.138
151 


38983.139
152 


38983.140
153 


38983.141
154 


38983.142
155 


38983.143
156 


38983.144
157 


38983.145
158 


38983.146
159 


38983.147
160 


38983.103
161 


38983.104
162 


38983.105
163 


38983.106
164 


38983.107
165 


38983.108
166 

Æ 


38983.109