COM M IT TE E ON A PPRO PRIA TIO NS 

GEORGE H. MAHON, Texas, Ch airm an

JA M IE L. W HI TT EN , M is siss ip pi 

RO BER T L. F. SI KES , F lo ri da 

ED W AR D P. BOL AND , M ass ac huse tt s 

W IL LIA M H. NA TC IIE R, K en tu ck y 

D A N IE L J. FLO OD, P ennsy lv ania 

TO M ST EE D, Ok lahom a 

GE OR GE E. SH IP LE Y, Illino is 

JO H N M. SLACK, West V ir gin ia 

JO H N J. FLYN T, J r., Ge orgia 

NEAL SM ITH, Iowa 

ROBER T N. GIA IMO , Con ne ct ic ut 

JO S E P H P. ADDABBO, New York 

JO H N J. MCFALL, C al if orn ia 

ED W AR D J. PA TT EN , Ne w Je rs ey 

CL AR EN CE D. LONG, M ar yl an d 

SI DNEY It. YATES, Illino is 

FRA N K E. EVA NS, Co lorado 

DAVID R. OBEY, W isc on sin 

ED W AR D R. ROYBAL, C alifo rn ia 

LO U IS STOK ES, Ohio 

GU NN McKAY, Utah 

TO M BE VI LL , Alab am a 

B IL L C H A PrE L L , F lo ri da 

B IL L D. BU RL ISO N, M isso ur i 

B IL L AL EX AN DE R. A rk an sa s 

YV ON NE BR AT IIW AI TE BU RKE, 

C al if orn ia

JO H N P. MU RTHA, P ennsy lv ania 

BO B TR AX LE R, Mi ch iga n 

RO BER T B. DUNCAN , Or egon 

JO S E P H D. EAR LY, M ass ac huse tt s 

MA X BAU CUS, M on tana 

CHA RLE S WILSON , Tex as 

LIN DY (MRS. HA LE ) BOGGS, L ouis ia na 

AD AM BE NJ AMIN , J r., In d ia n a

ELF ORD A. CEDER BE RG , Michig an 

RO BE RT H. M IC H EL , Illino is 

SILV IO 0. CO NT E, M as sa ch us et ts 

JO SE PH M. McD AD E, Pen ns yl va ni a 

MARK AN DR EW S, N ort h D ak ot a 

JA CK ED WAR DS , A la ba m a 

RO BE RT C. M cE W EN , New York 

JO HN T. MY ERS, In d ia n a 

J. KENNET H ROB TNS ON, Vi rg inia 

CL AR EN CE E. M IL LER, Ohio 

LA WRE NC E CO UGH LI N, Pen ns yl va ni a 

C. W. B IL L YOU NG, Flo ri da 

JA CK F. KE MP, Ne w Yo rk 

WILLIAM L. AR MS TR ON G, Co lorado 

RALP H S. RE GU LA , Oh io 

CL AIR W. BU RGEN ER , Cal ifor ni a 

GE OR GE M. O’BR IE N , Illin oi s 

VI RG IN IA SM IT H, Neb ra sk a

NO RM AN D. DICK S. W as hin gto n 

M ATT HE W F. Mc IIU GH . New York

Keith F . Mainland, Clerk and Staff Director

(XI)
HUD-INDEPENDENT AGENCIES SUPPLEMENTAL 

APPROPRIATION FOR 1978

Thursday, March 16, 1978.

FEDERAL DISASTER ASSISTANCE ADMINISTRATION 

FISCAL YEAR 1978 SUPPLEMENTAL REQUEST

W IT N E SSE S

W IL L IA M H. W IL COX , A D M IN IS T R A T O R , FD A A

TH OM AS R. CA SE Y, A C T IN G D EPU T Y A D M IN IS T R A T O R . FD AA

A A R O N H A L P E R , F IN A N C IA L M A NA GER, FD A A

C R A IG A N N EA R , O FF IC E OF G EN ER A L CO UNS EL , O FFIC E OF T H E

SE C R E T A R Y

A L B E R T J. K LIM A N , D E P A R T M E N T A L BUD GET O FF IC E R , O FFIC E

OF T H E SEC R ETA R Y

Mr. Boland. The committee will come to order.

We are pleased to have with us the Federal Disaster Assistance Administration. We welcome the Administrator, W illiam IL Wilcox, accompanied by Thomas R. Casey, Acting Deputy Administrator, 

and Aaron Hal per, Financial Manager. Will you submit a biographical sketch for the record? This is your first appearance before this subcommittee. How long have you been 

on the job?

Mr. Wilcox. Since January 9th.

[The biographical sketch follows:]

Biographical Sketch of William H. Wilcox

William II. Wilcox, Ad minis trator of the Fed eral Disas ter Assistance Admin­ istration , is responsible for supervising the relie f activities of governmental and volunteer agencies following an emergency or major disaste r decla ration 

by the President. Mr. Wilcox was appointed to the position by Secretary Pa tricia Roberts Ha rris , U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, on Janu ary 9, 

1978. Prior to joining HUD, Mr. Wilcox was Secretary of Community Affairs in the Commonwealth of Pen nsylvan ia since 1971. While in sta te government, Mr. Wilcox coordinated various state disas ter recovery activities on Tropical Storms Agnes and Eloise, the Joh nstown Flood of 1977, and he was sta te fuel allocation officer during the energy crisis. Previously, Mr. Wilcox was Exe cutive Directo r of the Greater Philadelphia Movement from 1954 to 1971. He was also a member of the Executiv e Board of Gaudenzia House, Inc., and Ch airma n of the Philade lphia Committee on City 

Policy. He is also a member of the App alachian Mountain Club and enjoys such out­ door activitie s as biking, hiking, winte r camping, and cross country skiing. Born Ju ne 9, 1919 in Philad elphia, the son of Charles L. and Myrtle (Kaiser) Wilcox, he studied at the University of Connecticut (A.B.) and Wayne Univer­ sity (M aster of Public Admin istr ation) as a Volker Fellow. Mr. Wilcox served in the Armed Forces from 1942-1945, and he was awarded the Air Medal and the 

Distinguished Flying Cross. He marrie d the former Madelene Watt on October 5, 1945. and they have two 

children.

(1)
2

DE LA Y IN SU PPLEM EN TA L RE QU ES T

Mr. Boland. You are officially requesting supplemental funding 

of $150 million for fiscal year 1978, which, if appropriated, would 

bring the total amount fo r 1978 to $300 million. There is an additional request for $150 million working its way 

through the administration somewhere. We had anticipated that the 

second supplemental request would have been transmitted by now. W e 

are talking about d isaster situations and providing relief to people in 

need. I think the Congress is prepared to act on the entire amount, including the $150 million request not yet formally transmitted, but 

our iob would be easier with the Administration request in hand.

What is the problem here, why don’t we have the second request ?

Mr. Kliman. F irs t of all. we have official OMB permission to address the additional $150 million which will be forthcoming. There is 

a technical problem over in OMB with regard to batching all urgent 

supplementals and transmitting them at the same time or breaking 

this supplemental out and sending it separately. Tha t is all I can say 

about that. There is no substantive problem with it.

Mr. Boland. Mr. A dministrator, if you have a prepared statement, 

we will hear it now. As one who comes from an area very hard hit by 

the snow, wind and rain, T want to compliment you and the FDAA for 

the efforts it expended and the cooperation it gave to the New England 

States. T am sure this is true in all other areas.

I understand also that Mr. Casey was in charge of the disaster relief 

operations in Buffalo last winter, so you have had some pretty good 

experience.

ATr. Casey. Yes: T have.

Mr. Coughlin. I want to welcome a very distinguished Pennsylvanian, appearing before this committee. Tie has had broad experience 

in Government and in the State of Pennsylvania. I am delighted to see 

him here.

Statement of Mr. Wilcox

Mr. Wilcox. Mr. Chairm an and members of the committee:

I am pleased to appear before this distinguished committee today. We are requesting $200 million for 1979, as well as a 1978 supplemental of $300 million because of the severe weather conditions we 

have had in recent weeks, and the number of emergency and major 

declarations tha t followed in the wake of these winter storms.

The President’s Disaster Relief program is designed to supplement 

the efforts and available resources of State and local governments and 

voluntary relief organizations. The President’s declaration of a “major disaster” or an “emergency” authorizes Fede ral assistance u nder 

the Disaster Relief Act o f 1974 and triggers other Federal disaster relief programs. The Federal response is coordinated bv the Federal 

Disaster Assistance Administration (FD AA) of the Department of 

Housing and Urban Development.

SU PPL E M E N T A L RE QU ES T FOR 19 78

A 1978 supplemental appropriation of $150 million was originally 

requested in the 1979 budget. This supplemental was deemed necessary 

because of an exceptional number of costly ma jor disasters and emer-
3

gencies tha t occurred in FY 1977. Reimbursement to other Federal agencies had to be deferred until FY 1978 in order to have sufficient funds for direct assistance payments to State and local governments 

and individuals. There is now a need to increase the supplemental request by an addi­ tional $150 million due to severe weather conditions experienced this winter. We understand tha t a second supplemental request for $150 million, in addition to the $150 million now in the budget, is being processed within the Executive Office of the President. We expect it to be signed and transmitted to the Congress in the very near future. The President has already declared emergencies because of snow and blizzard conditions in Ohio, India na, Michigan, Massachusetts, Con­ necticut, Rhode Island, and North Dakota. Fede ral assistance was pro­ vided for the opening of vita l transp ortation arteries, the provision of public health services, the reopening of blocked supply routes to educational, governmental, commercial, and industrial establishments, and such other emergency assistance as required to protect public health and safety. Major disaster declarations were made in Massa­ chusetts, California, Arizona, Rhode Island, New Hampshire, and Maine because of storm and flood damage. These Presidential declara­ tions authorized Federal help for relief and recovery measures. The need for funds is critical. During this past year we have been in the position of withholding reimbursement of funds owed to other Federal agencies so th at funds could be made available to State and 

local governments. However, this cutoff of dollars could cause a hardship where local governments paid for disaster relief costs by borrowing from operating funds in the expectation of promp t payments from the Federal Government for the costs of restoring public facilities and services. Also, should additional disasters occur, FDA A could find itself in the position of lacking dollars to pay for the Federal share of the indi­ vidual and family gra nt prog ram—an important disaster assistance 

program for the lower income and the elderly. Other authorized disaster assistance programs funded through FDA A would be unavailable to help victims; for these reasons I urge the Congress to promptly enact the requested supplemental 

appropriations.

BUDGET REQUEST FOR 19 79

As far as 1979 is concerned, w’e are requesting a $200 million appro­ priation. This is substantially less than the amounts required in 1977 and 1978 and reflects an assumption that disaster activities will return to more normal levels in 1979. This assumption takes account of two abnormal situations existing in both 1977 and 1978 which should not 

continue into 1979. The first one is that over $100 million was required in 1977 and 1978 for emergency drought assistance. However, legislation was enacted making drought relief, beginning in 1979, the responsibility of the Department of Agriculture without reimbursement from HUD. The second is that d evastating floods in Appalachia and Johnstown, Pennsylvania, cost F DAA about one-quarter of a billion dollars in 

1977 and 1978. We believe the $200 million request for 1979 will be adequate based on an average disaster cost of about $3 million, which represents the
average for disasters declared during the past six years, and our anticipation that the requested supplemental for 1978 will allow us to end 

this year fully current with respect to monies owed other Federal 

agencies.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Boland. We will pu t the supplemental justification in the record 

at this point.

[The justification follows:]

Depar tm en t of H ous ing and Urban Development

FU ND S APPROPRIATED TO TH E PRESIDE NT

Justification o f Supplemental Estim ates—Fiscal Year 1918

[E xcerp t fro m th e Bud ge t of th e Uni ted Sta te s Gov er nm en t, Ap pe nd ix, Fi sc al Ye ar 197 9, 

P a rt II I, P. 1018 .]

‘‘DISASTER RELIE F”

(Suppleme ntal now requested, existing legislation)

“For an add itional amount for ‘Disa ster relief', 8300,000,000,

to remain available until expended: Provided, That not to exceed 3

per centum of the foregoing amount shall be available for administrative expenses."

“This supplemental app rop riation is requested to enable the Federal Disaste r 

Assistance Adm inistration to carry out its responsibility to allev iate the suffer ing and damage which result from disasters. The larg e number of disasters 

during the lat ter pa rt of 1976 an d 1977 has resulted in greater than anticipated 

demand for disaste r assistance. The authority to car ry out these responsibilities 

has been delegated to the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development by 

Executive O rder No. 11795.”

Sum mary of Budget Bequ est

A 197S supplemental app rop riation of $150,000,000 was orginally requested in 

the 1979 Budget to fund assista nce required by heavy disaster activity during 

th e latte r part of fiscal ye ar 1977. This supplemental was deemed necessary to 

respond to the harsh effects of the severe winter conditions of 1977, the agricultu ra l drought, and the heavy Hooding in Appalachia and Johnstown. Pennsylvania. The need is even greater now because the heavy disa ster activity during fiscal year 1977 has continued into fiscal yea r 1978 and has resulted in 

dis aster assistance requirements greater than those anticip ated at the time of 

the FY 1978 supplemental request. The costs involved require tha t the proposed 

supplemental be increase d to $300,000,000.

The following table summarizes available fund s and estim ated requirements

fo r fiscal year 197S:

Fu nds available and required

Funds Available: Miliiona

Unobligated balance from prior periods_________________________ «$4.2

Appropriation for 1978______________________________________ 150.0

Total availab le___________________________________________ 154.2

Funds Requi red :

For prior yea r declaration s such as Appalachia,

Johnstown, Pennsylvania, and Kan sas City----------------------------- 1S8.6

For decla rations in 1978 (oth er than severe winte r 

wea tiler) _______________________________________________ 34.3

For severe win ter we ath er declarations in Michigan,

Indiana, Ohio. Massachusetts, Rhode Island,

Connecticut, Califo rnia, New Hampshire, Maine----------------------- 160.6

Fo r potential dec larations during remainder of 1978------------------- 70.7

Total 1978 requirements___________________________________ 454.2

Supplemental appro priation requ ired_________________________ 300.0
5

As of the end of Febru ary , approxim ately $15 million remained ava ilab le for 

disaste r assistance. The requ ests from Sta te and local governments for pa yments 

pursuant to dis aster an d emergency declara tion s in the New England states are 

now being submitted, an d this small balan ce will be quickly depleted. Unless the 

requested suppleme ntal is promptly enacted, FDAA will be unable to reim burse 

local governments for costs which they have alread y paid out in anticip atio n of 

prompt reimb ursement f or these costs from the F edera l Government. Also, FDAA 

will not have the reso urces to continue advancing fund s for individual and 

family grants which can be used for emergency clothing, medical, and oth er 

eligible expenses.

In order to conserve available funds to meet the immediate needs of State 

and local governments, FDAA has delayed paymen ts in excess of $150 million 

to other Federal agencies. These expenses and payments for fut ure dis ast er re ­

lief activities of oth er Feder al agencies will continue to be delayed until enactm ent of the su pplemental appropriation.

Program description

The President’s Disaste r Relief program is designed to supplement the efforts 

and available resource s of State and local governments and volu ntary relief 

organizations. The Presiden t’s declaration of a “ma jor dis ast er” or an “emergency” authorizes Fe deral assistance under the Disaste r Relief Act of 1974, as 

amended, and trig gers other Federal dis ast er rel ief program s. The Fed eral response is coordinated by the Federal Dis aster Assistance Adm inistration (FDA A) 

of the Department of Ho usin g and Urban Development.

By Executive Order 11795, the Pre sident delegated the primary responsibility 

for adm inistering the Act to the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development. 

The Secretary, in tur n, has assigned program management responsibility to the 

Administrator of the F ederal Disaster Assistanc e Administra tion.

When a dis ast er threaten s or occurs, local au tho rities take immediate step s 

to warn and evacuate citiz ens, alleviate suffering, and protect life and property. 

If additional help is needed, the Governor may direct execution of the State’s 

emergency plan, use St ate police or National Guardsmen, or commit other Sta te 

resources as the situ ation demands. Fed eral establishments, particularly military 

installatio ns which ar e located in or near the disaste r area , may provide immedia te lifesaving assistan ce, and other Fed eral agencies may be able to provide 

assistance und er their own statutory authorities. However, if the situ ation is 

beyond the capabilitie s of local and Sta te forces, supplemented by limited assis tance of Federal forces on the scene, th e Governor m ay requ est that th e P res ide nt 

declare a “majo r d isas ter” or an “emergency”.

A “major dis aster ” is defined in the Dis aster Relief Act of 1974, Public Law 

93-288, as any “hurric ane, tornado, storm, flood, high water, wind-driven 

water, tida l wave, tsunam i, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, mudslide, 

snowstorm, drought, fire, explosion, or other cat astrop he in any pa rt of the 

United States which, in the determination of the Presiden t, causes damage of 

sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant ma jor disaster assistance above 

and beyond emergency services by the Federal Government to supplement the 

efforts and ava ilable resources of States, local governments, and priva te 

relief organizations in alleviating the damage, loss, hardship, or suffering caused 

by a disa ster.”

An “emergency” is defined as any of the various types of natur al disaste rs 

included in the definition of a “major dis aster ” which requires Fed eral emergency assistance to supp leme nt Sta te and local efforts to save lives and pro tect 

property, public health and safety, or to avert or lessen the threa t of dis aster.

A Presiden tial dec laration of a “majo r disaste r” or an “emergency” make s a 

broad range of ass istance available to individ uals and State and local governments. This help may includ e:

To individuals.—

Temporary housing for disaster victim s whose homes are uninh abitable 

until other housing resources are available. No ren tal is charged during the 

first 12 months of occupancy;

Minimum essential repa irs to owner-occupied residences in lieu of oth er 

types of tem porary housing resources, so t ha t families can return quickly to 

the ir damaged ho mes;

Temporary ass istance with mortgage or renta l payments for persons faced 

with loss of their residences because of disaster-c reated financial hardship 

for a period not to exceed 12 mo nth s;

Disaster unemployment assistance and job placement assistance for those 

unemployed as a resu lt of a m ajor dis as te r;
6

Individual and family g rants of up to $5,000 to meet disa ster-related necessary expenses or serious needs of those adversely affected by a major disaster when they are unab le to meet such expenses or needs through other 

programs or other m eans;

Legal services to low-income families and in dividuals ;

Consumer counseling and assistance in obtaining benefits ; and

Crisis counseling and referra ls to app ropriate mental health agencies 

to relieve d isaster caused mental health problems.

To S tates and Local Govern ments—

Clearance of debris on public or private lands or wa ters ;

Emergency protective measures for the prese rvation of life and property ;

Repair or replacement of roads, streets, a nd bridg es;

Repair or replacement of water control facilities (dikes, levees, irriga ­

tion works, and drainage fac ilities) ;

Repair or replacement o f public buildings a nd rela ted equ ipm ent;

Repair or replacement of public ut ili tie s;

Repair or restora tion to pre-disaster condition of public facilities damaged while under co nstru ction;

Repair or restoration of rec reation facilities a nd parks ; and

Repair or replacement of private, nonprofit educational, utility, emergency, 

medical, and custodial care facilities.

ACCURACY OF IN IT IA L DAMAGE ESTIM AT ES

Mr. Boland. The justification has a program description of disaster assistance and it breaks out the assistance given under both 

emergency declarations and also major disaster declarations of the 

President.

In your statement you mention some seven States where the President declared emergencies occasioned by snow and blizzard conditions. Do you have any estimate of the damage to those areas, the 

costs to those partic ular areas? Do you have it by States? One of the 

reasons we ask is that every time there is a disaster, every time there 

is a terrific storm, whether it is occasioned by tornado or hurricane or 

Hoods or snoiv or wdiat-have-you, the first stories tha t appear in the 

papers have fantastic figures and estimates on the storm damage 

itself. After a while, of course, more accurate estimates are developed, 

and they are usually lower.

Wha t are some of the estimated damages and costs in these particular areas, the seven States where emergencies were declared by the 

President? You are fam iliar with the type of statements tha t are 

made by local and State officials with regard to the amount of damage done in a particu lar area occasioned by whatever the disaster 

might be. Inflated figures are tossed around, but after there has been 

a closer look, the figures are sometimes adjusted upward, but most 

always downward. I wonder whether or not you have any estimates 

for these particular States ?

Mr. Wilcox. I would say with respect to the blizzards and the snow 

impact, the current damage was relatively modest. The problem was 

an emergency problem of getting roads open to hospitals, fire station 

accesses made available.

EM ER GE NC Y VERSUS MA JOR DISASTER

Mr. Boland. Tha t is where you have an emergency situation 

and you go in and protect life and property as a result of the 

President’s declaration. The President makes a determination in conjunction with the FDAA and, of course, the Governors of the States,
to determine wh eth er or not those area s ought to be dec lared ma jor 

disaste r are as, which opens up a br oa d ran ge of assistance to those 

are as an d you hav e it all listed here in your justificatio ns. T hat is 

where the big bill is because th at is where you st ar t ge ttin g into 

gr an ts to individu als and gr an ts to businesses. Tha t is where you get 

int o a n um ber of areas tha t are ve ry co stly .

Th e que stio n of open ing up roads an d prote cti ng lives an d pr op ­

erty whe n the emergency occurs an d af te r the emergency ha s been 

dec lared, t h at ma y be only a small p art of w hat t he total runo ut costs 

may be.

Mr. Wilcox. I think it might be he lpf ul fo r you if we were to 

iden tify the s tates t hat have ha d win ter d isasters as di stinct fro m those 

th at have ha d wi nter emergencies.

Ohio, at le as t so fa r—th ere is an ap pe al in—ha s been decla red only 

for emergency purposes so the re is no—a nd by the way , I th in k th at 

you will be int ere ste d to know th at w ith respect to th e snow-related disasters o r emergencies, at no time did we act iva te the Public Ass istance 

Pr og ram of res tor ati on of public fac ilitie s because wh ate ver dam age 

occ urred to public facilities as a re su lt of the snow storm was well 

wi thin the capa city of state a nd local gov ernments to deal with so t ha t 

in o ur recom menda tion s to the P re side nt, which he con cur red , we at no 

time recommen ded for snow emer gen cies or disasters any deact iva tio n 

of the public assistance pro gra m.

The only places where the public assistance prog ram was activ ate d 

was in ea ste rn Massac husetts fo r th e e ig ht counties th at ha d t id al surge, 

flooding an d high winds.

BR EA KD OW N OF W IN TE R W EA TH ER COSTS BY ST AT E AN D T Y PE OF 

ASS IS TANCE

Mr. Boland. Do you have an e stima te on what the total cost is going 

to be there ?

Mr. W ilcox. We estimate for Ma ssachu setts about $96 millio n in 

total.

Mr. Boland. You have to break (h at down, of course. Ho w do you 

break it d own ?

Mr. W ilcox. I m ight ad d $33 m illi on for Ca lifo rnia.

We ll, t hat would break down into costs for tem po rary housing.

Mr. Boland. H ow much wou ld th at cost? W ha t 1 wan t is a specific 

do lla r f igure fo r the pa rti cu la r p ro gram s where you are g oing to spend 

the $96 millio n. How much of i t is g oing to ind ividuals ? How much is 

go ing to businesses where you make gr an ts, d isa ste r g rant s ? These are 

gr an ts an d n ot loans. They a re g ra nts in these p rog ram s.

Mr. Wilcox. Gr an ts in every case except SB A and Fa rm er s Home. 

Those are loans.

Mr. B oland. Th at is not in clu ded i n th e $96 million.

Th e assista nce rendered by the Fa rm er s Home Adm inist ratio n, and 

also the assistance rende red by the S mall Business A dm inist ratio n, you 

do n’t inc lud e th at in the $96 m illion, do you ? Is n't th at se pa rate from 

th is figure?

Mr. Wilcox. Yes.

Mr. Boland. W hat I wan t to know is, wh at are fhe do lla r costs for 

the par ticu la r pro gra ms th at the FD A A has been engaged in. Supply 

it fo r the record .

24-762— 7! -2
Mr. Wilcox. Let me be sure we provide precisely what you want. 

You want tha t information for Massachusetts. California, Arizona—- 

perhaps not Arizona.

Mr. Boland. Provide the information for the major disaster declarations that were made for Massachusetts, California, Arizona, Rhode 

Island , and Maine.

Emergencies were declared in Ohio. Indiana, Michigan. Massachusetts, Connecticut, Rhode Isla nd and North Dakota. Your justification 

indicates, th at emergency declarations are required to take care of the 

public health and safety while disasters look at the broader damages 

tha t result. There are applications from communities, from the states, 

from the local communities and also from individuals, and what I 

would like is a breakout of th e figures for the particu lar states where 

disasters have been declared, where major disasters have been declared, 

and what the costs are with respect to particular programs the FDA A 

is engaged in.

Provide that for the record.

[The information follows:]

State

Total

estim ate d

cost

Pu blic

assistance

In div id ual assistan ce

Unit Am ount

Ma ssachusetts - - . . $9 6,000,000 $78, 600,0 00 Tempor ar y housin g.. $5, 000,000

DUA 1, 400, 000

IFG _______________ 11,000,00 0

C alif orn ia _________ 33, 000. 000 27, 250, 000 Tem por ar y housin g.. 

DU A_______________

IFG _________ . . .

5, 000, 000

750, 000

Rhode Is la n d . . 212,0 00 0 Tem por ar y ho us ing. 0

D U A ... 212 ,00 0

IFG_____ ____ 0

M a in e ... . . . 1,97 1,60 0 1, 899, 000 Tem por ar y housin g.. 0

DUA 72, 600

IFG____ 0

A rizona___________ 10, 540,000 10, 410, 000 Tem por ar y housin g.. 0

DUA .. 100, 000

IFG_____________ 0

DE CL AR AT IO NS DU RING 19 78

Mr. Boland. Also for the record provide a list of all the emergency 

and disaster declarations for 1978 to date.

[The information follows:]

Fiscal year 1918 major disasters through March Uj, 1918

Sta te and date of deci a rat ion

Arizona, Nov. 4,1977________________

Georgia. Nov. 7, 1977_______________

North Carolina, Nov. 9. 1977--------------

Virginia, Nov. 12, 1977______________

Tennessee, Nov. 12. 1977-------------------

Washington. Dec. 10, 1977____________

Massachu setts, Feb. 2. 197S__________

California. Feb. 15, 1$>78_____________

Rhode Island. Feb. 16. 1978__________

New Hampshire. Feb. 16. 1978------------

Maine. Feb. 17. 1978________________

Arizona. Mar. 4. 1978_______________

Type

Severe storms and flooding.

Dam collapse, flooding.

Severe sto rms and flooding.

Do.

Do.

Severe storms, mudslides, and flooding. 

Coastal storms, flood, snows, ice. 

Coastal storms, mudslides, and flooding. 

Snow and ice.

High winds, tida l surge, and coastal 

flooding.

Do.

Severe sto rms and flooding.
Fiscal yea r 1978 emergency declarations through March H , 1978

Sta te and date of declaration

Arkansas, .Tan. 20, 1978,______________

Ohio, Ja n. 26, 1978__________________

India na , .Jan. 27. 1978_______________

Mic higan, Ja n. 27, 1978---------------------

Rhode Island, Feb. 7, 1978___________

Ma ssa chuse tts. Feb. 7, 1978---------------

Conne ctic ut, Feb. 7, 1978_____________

No rth Dakota, Feb . 16, 1978__________

Type

Tornadoes.

Blizzards and snowstorms.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

Do.

STATUS OF AVAILABLE FUNDS

Mr. Boland. Wliat is the current balance left in the fund, in the 

Disaster Assistance Fund, as of the end of February ? How much 

do you have left ?

Mr. Halpek. Fifteen million dollars on hand, and $57 million in 

the field.

Mr. Boland. I understand tha t as of last Friday the balance was 

$15.6 million a t headquarters and $42.4 million in the field for a total 

of $58 million. That is the balance tha t is left in the fund. Is tha t all 

committed?

Mr. H alpek. We have $80 million in commitments, identified commitments.

Mr. B oland. But the $58 million has not been committed as of this 

date; is that correct? I know’ you have identified commitments but 

I am talking about the $58 million in the fun d; has that been allocated ?

Mr. Halpek. It is unobligated.

Mr. Boland. And for the next 30 days what do you think your firm 

commitments might be ?

Mr. Halpek. In excess of $80 million.

DELAYED REPAYMENT OF FEDERAL AGENCIES

Mr. Boland. You indicated in your statement and your justifications also say it, that you have had to delay reimbursement of over 

$150 million to other Federal agencies due to the low balance in the 

fund. That is correct, isn’t it? Those are reimbursements that you owe 

other Federal agencies for 1977 ?

Mr. Halpek. Yes. We have a list for the record.

Mr. Boland. Just read them off there.

Mr. Wilcox. Department of Housing and Urban Development $129.2 

million. Corps of Egineers, $30,535 million. Department of Defense, $7,250 million, General Services Administration $1,442 million. 

Environmental Protection Agency, $15,000. Federal Highway Administration, $55,000. HEW, $2,000. Defense Civil Preparedness, $1.- 

000; for a total of $168.5 million.

Mr. Boland. Wh at about the impact of the delay of the reimbursement of these agencies, is that delay serious to the agencies?

Mr. Kliman. As far as IIUD is concerned, it is not serious. We can 

take a delay. We have been taking a delay.

Mr. Boland. What occasioned that expense to HUD ?

Mr. K liman. That is primarily a tem porary housing expense.
10

ASSISTANCE TO STATE AN D LOCAL GOVERNM ENTS

Mr. Boland. What about State and local agencies, have you had 

to delay any reimbursements, or do you owe anything to State and 

local agencies where the State has actually shelled out its money on 

the assumption that it would be getting moneys from the FDA A 

reimbursements?

Mr. Halter. The answer is no to that.

INDIVIDU AL AND FA M IL Y GRANTS

Mr. Boland. In the areas where major disasters have been declared 

and where there are particular grants made to individuals or families, 

what about individual and family grants, have you been able to satisfy 

all the valid requirements that have been submitted ?

Mr. Wilcox. The answer to that is yes, we have, but. as I noted in my 

testimony, our concern is tha t we would not be able to do so for additional disasters if they were to occur in the next few months.

Mr. Boland. But up to this point in time you have satisfied all the 

requirements for individual and family grants; is that correct?

Mr. Wilcox. That is correct.

Mr. H alter. We advance money to the States and they dole out the 

money to the individual families, with 25 percent coming from the 

States.

Mr. Boland. I s it the State that actually makes the determination on 

whether or not a grant should be made to an individual or a family?

Mr. Halter. Th at is correct, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Boland. I)o you have any idea of the total amount for this particular activity for individual and family grants for the New Eng ­

land States. Also, if you have it for other States, you may provide that.

Mr. Casey. We don't have it for the New England States, but on the 

average over which we have been administering the program, we have 

averaged a little over $1,000 per family.

PO RT ION OF SUPPLE ME NT AL FOR FEDERAL AGENCIES

Mr. B oland. Is there any portion of the requested supplemental intended for reimbursement to other Fec dral agencies?

Mr. IT alter. Of the additional $150 million ?

Mr. Boland. Of the initial $150 million and of the $150 million that 

is working its way up here to the Hill.

Mr. Halter. We hope to be current by the end of this fiscal year.

Air. Boland. So you will be actually repaying $108 million, is it, 

that you told me a moment ago?

Mr. Halter. Yes.

Mr. B oland. So $168 million of the $300 million is for the purpose 

of reimbursing other Federal agencies that you owe money to. and 

who participated in assisting in the disaster assistance in all of these 

areas.

Mr. Wilcox. However, we would not do that immediately, because 

we would want to be sure we weren’t hit with a Johnstown-tvpe 

disaster.
11

FU ND S FOR POTENT IAL DECLARATIONS DURIN G BALANCE OF 19 78

Air. Boland. I understand. 1 think that is good.

Historically, most disaster and emergency declarations have occurred between March and June. As 1 understand, of the total request 

of $300 million, approximately $70 million is required for possible 

disasters during the remainder of 1978, is tha t correct?

Mr. Wilcox. That has changed since we included California and 

Arizona. It is only $43 million now.

ADEQUACY OF SU PPLEME NT AL REQ UES T

Mr. Boland. I t is impossible to predict with certainty the number 

or severity of disasters that will occur, but are you confident this supplemental will be sufficient to carry you throu gh the year?

Mr. Wilcox. I don’t think we can ever be completely confident that 

any amount will be precisely sufficient. I f we were to have an Agnes 

disaster such as occurred in the eastern p art of the United States in 

1972, this would not be adequate. Our best judgment, based on the 

statistical material we mentioned earlier, is that it would probably 

be sufficient but one cannot say categorically it will be.

Mr. Boland. How much did you request of the Office of Management and Budget for this supplemental ?

Mr. Kliman. The $150 million supplemental, the original $150 million in the budget, was as requested. For the additional $150 million, 

our first request to 0MB was for $100 million. They asked us whether 

or not that was sufficient. We discussed with them the figures based 

upon a reexamination of the severe weather and came to the conclusion we needed another $50 million.

Mr. Boland. And you got it, so the total of $300 million is what 

you requested, really.

DROU GHT RE LIE F

Mr. Coughlin. What kind of assistance did you provide in the area 

of d rought relief ?

Mr. Casey. Transporting hay and subsidizing the purchase of feed 

for cattle in the drought stricken states, partic ularly out in the Midwest and the West.

Mr. Coughlin. We didn’t do any construction work out of disaster 

funds, did we?

Mr. Casey. No.

Mr. Coughlin. Drilling wells and building dams or anything like 

tha t?

Mr. Casey. No. we did not.

Mr. Coughlin. Has the whole drought relief program now been 

removed from your agency ?

Mr. Casf.y. Yes. it has. and the. Department of Agriculture has responsibility for that now.

Mr. Coughlin. Wa s th at done bv act of Congress’?

Mr. Casey. Yes.
12

BASIS FOR ESTIMATES

Mr. Cougiilin. I take it that your estimating process—this goes for 

the supplemental particularly—is really an inexact science to sav 

the very least ?

Mr. Wilcox. There is a higher appeal that has to be made to get 

the righ t answer.

Mr. Coughlin. Ts the funding level to which you are coming just 

based on past experience and whatever you can pick out of the air?

Mr. Wilcox. Yes.

Mr. Coughlin. Do you include in the supplemental request—this 

may impinge on a question of the chairman—funding for flooding 

in the spring, as a result of the severe winter conditions?

Mr. Wilcox. Yes.

Mr. Coughlin. Does the supplemental request contain potential 

funding for that?

Mr. Wilcox. $43 million for tha t possibility.

Mr. Coughlin. If that, flooding doesn’t materialize, would you be 

$43 million to the good ?

Mr. Wilcox. Yes.

Mr. Boland. Mrs. Boggs ?

coordination of flood prevention measures and disaster relief

Mrs. Boggs. I would like to compliment you on this remarkable 

job you had to do under the most severe circumstances.

My other Appropriations subcommittee assignment is Public 

Works. There are no new starts for water resource projects recommended in the budget this year, and 13 flood control projects on the 

Mississippi and its tributaries alone are not funded this year.

What type of impact do you think tha t tha t sort of holdback is 

going to have on more and more requests for disaster relief 

supplementals ?

Mr. Wilcox. I really don’t feel tha t I am sufficiently conversant 

with those issues to give you a very precise response. In FDA.A we 

are placing increasing emphasis on hazard mitigation activities to 

try to encourage the States, for example, to undertake flood plain 

management programs and improved construction techniques in the 

event tha t flooding should occur, b ut to try to respond to questions 

of such great importance, and with such technical complications, T 

am afraid I am not competent to respond.

Mrs. Boggs. Thank you very much.

Are you tryi ng to accelerate the studies for the flood plains regions 

and the criteria for flood insurance ?

Mr. Wilcox. There is another agency of HUD which, as you know, 

has those general responsibilities, and we have a very close working 

relationship with the Federal Insurance Administration.

Before I came to Washington, I was a State official, or employee. 

One of my m ajor roles was to t ry to persuade communities to qualify 

for flood insurance and also try to persuade people who lived in the 

flood plain to purchase flood insurance : and. coming to Washington. 

I didn’t abandon that commitment, and we have done everything we 

could in FDA A, even though it is not an official responsibility of the
13

FD A A to promote qu alifying fo r flood insura nce an d purch asing i t, 

bu t we ha ve done ev ery thi ng we can to en courage comm unities to do so.

Mrs. B oggs. I realize i t isn ’t y ou r direct res ponsibi lity, Mr. Adminis trat or , bu t I think co ordina tio n is very im po rtan t an d I am very 

ple ase d t hat you are doing th at .

Tha nk you very much.

WINTER WEA THER ASSISTANCE REQUIRED

Mr. B oland. I un derst and th at $160.6 million is requ ire d for severe 

winter we ath er decla rat ion s; is th at c orrect?

Mr. H alper. That, figure we nt up. Th e latest nu mber is $180.3 million for fiscal y ear 1978.

Mr. Boland. Will you indicate for the record how you developed 

th at numb er?

[The inf orma tio n fo llo ws:]

[dollars in millions]

Total

Date of estim ated

State declaration requirement

Ohio.............. . ............................. .......................... ............... .......................................... ............Jan. 26,1978 $16.0

India na____________ ____ __________ ________ __________________ ______________ Jan. 27,1978 15.0

Michigan.......................................... ......................................................................................................do______ 16.5

Rhode Isla nd _____________________ _____ ____ _____________ _____________ ____ Feb. 7, 1978 1.4

Massachusetts.................................... ............................................................................... . .................do______ 15.2

Connecticut................................................ . ............................................................................... . .........d o .. .___ 3.3

North Dakota______ _______ Feb. 16,1978 1.1

Massachusetts________________________________ Feb. 10,1978 72.5

California______________ Feb. 15,1978 26.1

Rhode Is lan d____ ____________ Feb. 16,1976 .2

New Hampshire__________________________________________ . . . . . do . . . . .2

Maine __________________________________ Feb. 17,1978 2.8

A rizo na.................... Mar. 4, 1978 10.0

T o ta l. ............................................................................................. ...................................................... ........ 180.3

Mr. Boland. In the pa st few mo nth s, the F DAA h as au tho riz ed r eimburseme nt of local governm ents fo r snow rem oval in at least six 

Sta tes . A t this point in the rec ord we will place copies of Presi dent 

Car te r’s eme rgency decla ration of Ja nu ar y 26, 1978, f or th e State of 

Ohio, an d Mr. Wilcox’s lette r to the Governor of the St ate, adv isin g 

him of the snow removal reimb urs em ent.

[T he in form ati on foll ow s:]

The Whi te House, 

Washington, January 26, 1678.

Hon. Patricia Roberts Harris,

Secretary of Housing and Urban Development,

Washington, D.C.

Dear Madam Secretary : I have determined that the impact of an abnormal 

accumulation of snow resulting from a series of blizzards and snowstorms in the 

State of Ohio is of sufficient severity and magnitude to w arrant a declaration of 

an emergency under Public Law 93-288. I therefore declare that such an emergency exists in the State of Ohio.

The purpose of this declaration is to provide Federal aid for the opening of 

vital transportation arteries, the provision of public health services, the reopening of blocked supply routes to educational, governmental, commercial and industrial establishments, and such other emergency assistance as may be required 

to protect public health and safety.

In order to provide Federal assistance, you are hereby authorized to allocate, 

from funds available for these purposes, such amounts as are necessary to provide Federal disaster assistance authorized by law and by this declaration.
14

I expect reg ula r reports on p rogress made in meeting the effects of this emergency, the exten t of Federal assista nce already made available, and a curre nt 

projection of additional assistance required.

Sincerely,

Jimm y Carter.

Department of Housing and Urban Development.

Federal Disastep. Assistance Administration.

Washington, D.C., January 27, 797#.

Hon. J ames A. Rhodes,

Governor of Ohio,

Sta te House, Columbus, Ohio.

Dear Governor R hodes : This is to inform you that I have authorized the Acting Regional Director. Federal Disa ste r Assistance Administration (FDA A), to 

reimburse local governments for ce rta in emergency snow removal costs in your 

State. Such reimbursements for emergency snow removal shall be for 75% of actual 

costs eligible under Public Law 93-288 of snow removal performed by the local 

governments under contract or purch ase orde r within five days af te r the date of 

declaration of the emergency by the P res ide nt for your State. Such reim bursements to local governm ents for emergency snow removal are 

furth er lim ited to tha t which the head of local government or its authorize d repre ­ sentative dete rmines is necessary to save lives or to protect public health and 

safety, inclu ding opening access for rest oration of essential public services. Within th is five-day period. I an tic ipate the State and Federal forc es will mobilize effective supp ort for local governm ents in these snow removal activ ities. We 

will also hope f or favorable w eather to alle viate this situation . I trus t th at this auth orization will meet the c urre nt needs for emergency Fed­ era l assistance. Our Regional Dir ector is working closely with you r authorized 

rep res entative and is keeping me info rmed.

Sincerely, William H. Wilcox.

Admfnfafrotor.

REIMBU RSEM EN T FOR SNOW REMOVAL

Mr. Boland. Give vou r ratio na le fo r pa rti al r eim burse me nt of snow 

removal duri ng a declared emergency . As evidenced by the v ote on the 

$20 millio n supplemental am endm ent las t year the House feels snow 

remo val is bas ically a local res ponsibility . W hy should the Feder al 

Gover nm ent be g ett ing involved in th is area ?

Mr. W ilcox. In the w inter of 1977, th e Cor ps of En gineers in Sta tes 

th at ha d been app roved for em erg enc y declaration s un de rto ok to do 

snow rem oval where the ac tiv ity was life saving, or for prote cti on of 

public he alth an d prote ctio n o f p ro pe rty.

Th is w in ter, where the snow w as m uch more severe, it became clear to 

us t hat th e Co rps of Eng ineers was not really pr epared to move immedia tel y an d th at we should wo rk—in the inte rest of the public 

healt h an d pro tection of pr op er ty —to supplement the Cor ps ’ efforts 

fo r th e firs t five days by au thor izin g commun ities to con tra ct fo r snow 

removal fo r em ergency purposes with local c ontra cto rs and the Fe deral 

Governm ent would pay thr ee -q ua rte rs o f th at amoun t. Th e reason we 

lim ited th at to three -qu arters was because we believe t ha t wo uld act as 

som eth ing of a self -policing mecha nism again st abuse or w aste of the 

prog ram , an d the reason we lim ite d it to five days was because we 

believed— an d I th ink we co uld pr ov ide sta tis tic al evidence to support 

th e soundn ess of th at —th at with in five days the Corps of En gin eers 

would be fu lly geare d up wi th its con tra cting m echanism to u ndertake 

additio na l emergency snow rem oval activities.

Really, I th in k th at it could be arg ued, and it would be very dif ­

ficult, I th in k, to develop an objective test, but 1 think it could be
15

argued tha t we may have saved the Federal Government some funds, 

because, to the extent th at the contracting services replaced the Corps of Engineers, we were paying three-quarters of the cost, rather than 100 percent of the cost, which the Corps of Engineers bills FDA A for. If you have any specific questions, I will be glad to deal with them, 

but, in general, tha t is th e answer.

Mr. Boland. Have any of the States received reimbursement for 

snow removal ? I am talking about the States, not local communities.

Mr. Wilcox. No, sir, we did not include the States and the reason 

was because we felt the States had basically the authority, informally perhaps, but had the authority to set the prior ities for the Corps of Engineers, and since the States had the Corps of Engineers’ contracting capabilities at their command, the need for assistance was at the local 

government level.

SNOW REM OVAL COSTS ELIGIBLE FOR FEDERA L FUNDS

Mr. Boland. Reimbursement authority for snow removal applies 

only to work performed under contract or purchase order; tha t is 

correct, isn't it ?

Mr. Wilcox. Yes, sir.

Mr. Boland. Doesn’t tha t have the effect of really penalizing a 

locality tha t maintains adequate snow removal capability of its own and rewards those localities tha t underbudget for snow removal and maintain little or no in-house capability but jus t have a contract with 

a contractor to do the work.

It is unfair, is it not ?

Mr. Wilcox. I think in the literal sense it is unfair. On the other 

hand, this is a prog ram designed to deal with an emergency situation and that is the most important criteria, getting lives saved-----

Mr. B oland. I know, but you know the torren tial rains and snows 

don’t differentiate from town to town. I f it is a disaster in one town, the town right next door will probably suffer also. One town main­ tains a snow removal capability and pays for its own and the other 

town doesn’t and the town that doesn't gets reimbursed.

I don't know who p ut this regulation in place.

Mr. Wilcox. I will take full responsibility for it, sir.

Mr. Boland. I understand you have to take responsibility for it, 

but who devised that regulation? Did you devise the regulation?

Mr. Wilcox. I certainly did.

Mr. Boland. H ow can you justify it?

Mr. Wilcox. I can justify it because it expedited the mission at 

hand and the mission a t hand was to save lives, protect property and protect public health and that is the measure and not whether it is 

fair between one community and another.

IN EQ UIT Y OF REG ULATION S

Mr. Boland. I must say I don’t follow your reasoning on it at all. 

I just think that the danger to health and the public safety and protection of lives or saving lives and protecting people is just as im­ portant in one town as it is in another, and i f one town moves rapid ly 

with its own equipment to remove snow, to get to the hospitals, to get
16

you to particular public facilities, and the other town hires a contrac tor to do it, I don’t know why in the world both of them should 

not be treated equally.

Mr. Wilcox. The people of the community are treated equally. The 

governments are not treated equally, but the people-----

Mr. Boland. I always though t the government was the people.

Mr. Wilcox. Sometimes there is a difference.

There are some States that did a better job than other States in 

responding to the snowfall. It may be the reason one of the requirements of the law is tha t the capacity of the State to respond to the 

circumstance has to be exceeded. Now if one State does a good job of 

developing an organization a nd capacity to respond and another State 

doesn’t, we help the State that doesn't. That is the way the legislation 

is basically oriented.

Mr. Boland. If you help communities that aren't prepared, I think 

you also ought to help the communities tha t have their equipment, 

who the minute the storms occur they go out and they start to plow 

their highways so people can get to their homes, get to th eir work, get 

to th e hospitals, get the firehouses clear and get the roads to the hospital clear. If they are responding, it would seem to me there is just 

as great an obligation to reimburse them as there is for a town th at 

has done nothing. They just go out and hire the contractor and say, 

“You do it.”

IN TE NT OF LEGISLATION

Air. Wilcox. No place in this legislation is there anything about 

fiscal relief, budgetary assistance. It only refers to saving lives, protecting public health and protecting property.

Mr. Boland. I know, but I think the same standard ought to be 

used for all communities.

Air. AYilcox. Let me tell you, Air. Chairman, this was something that 

was hammered out under stress and tension and we will be taking a 

look at it.

Air. Boland. I compliment you on the job you did. It was a perfectly 

magnificent job up in tha t area, the whole FD AA. AVe have been sitting here for a few years and know something about the operations 

of the FDA A and the committee members are familiar with the job 

tha t it does, but I think tha t is a regulation or rule that ought to be 

looked at and if it isn’t looked at, we can write a limitation in the 

appropriation bill to force you to rethink this situation.

I just think it is unfair to reimburse one town tha t faces exactly 

the same situation as another town that does not get reimbursed.

Air. AVilcox. I will welcome the chance to ta lk to you further about 

it and also we will be reviewing tha t policy.

Air. Boland. Let’s take the case of a town that has a labor agreement 

with its public works employees tha t prohibits the use of contractors 

and mandates extra employees and overtime if additional resources 

are needed. That town would not be eligible for reimbursement under 

your determination, would it ?

Air. AA ilcox. That is correct. T hat is the first time I have heard that 

any such condition exists, but if th at condition exists, reimbursement 

would not be authorized.
17

Mr. Boland. I am not sure tha t it is, but I thou ght we would develop a couple cases here to determine whether or not the rules and 

regulations are fair.

Mr. Wilcox. I f the community had agreed in a contract, an ironclad contract, that it could not use contracting services even in an emergency, there is no doubt tha t it would not use the contracting 

service and would not be eligible for the program. I agree.

Mr. B oland. At any rate, I thin k it is an area you ought to look at. 

I have received letters from small towns in Massachusetts tha t have been affected by this policy. We will insert them in the record a t this point. Also, we'will insert a brief synopsis of the recent New England 

snow storm.

[The information follows:]

Office of th e B oard of Selec tm en, 

Hubbardston, Mass., February 9,1978.

Edward P. Boland,

Member of Congress, Springfield District Office, Room 11/6, F ederal Office Bu ilding, 1888 Main Street, Springfield, Mass.

Dear Congressman Boland : HEL P ! The small town of Hubbardston has a very big problem. The results of the 

winter storms. As we understand it, the emergency Federal money which has been released to New England during this past disaster is to be used for equipment rental only. This means that, as usual, the small towns are being left out. At the onset of this storm our Highway Winter Account was already over­ drawn, the Highway Wage Account was extremely low and the Highway Ma­ chinery Maintenance Account was thousands of dollars overdrawn. Because of this situation the Highway Superintendent could not “afford” to rent outside heavy equipment for this storm but instead pushed our own equip­ ment and men to extremes. Our men w’orked stra ight through for two days and two nights and into the third day before stopping. Our equipment experienced many expensive breakdowns and with a $17.00 increase in taxes this year added to an already high tax rate we know that the residents are going to object to 

paying these bills. We feel that the small towns should be entitled to some of these Federal 

“Emergency” funds. Federal and State Government control has forced the small farmer and the small businessman out of business and now is doing the same to the small towns. 

WE NEED HE LP!

Very sincerely,

Theodore H. Curtis, Chairman.

Town of Sterling, Mass.,

Febru ary 27, 1978.

Congressman Edward P. Boland,

Post Office Building,

Springfield, Mass.

Dear Congressman Boland : Wet, the Board of Selectmen of the Town of Ster­ ling, wish to go on record as extremely provoked and disappointed in the manner in which the “State of Emergency” funds will be or were disbursed. Our departments worked around the clock for days in an effort to keep roads opened while other cities and towns hired outside help, to be paid for by the State or Federal Governments. It seems tha t if a town tries to be self-contained, they 

are punished. Also, the Town of Sterling paid all their employees during the “State of Emer­ gency”. Other towns and businesses tha t did not pay them are getting Federal and /or State reimbursement. Is this a fair way to spend the taxpayers money? We would appreciate hearing your views on these two matters.

Very truly yours,

Ronald E. Kidd. 

Chairman, Board of Selectmen.
18

New E ngla nd S now st or m

Feb ruary G, 1978—Storm hits New E ngla nd.

2:00 p.m.—Governor Grasso dec lared a State of Emergency in 

Connecticut.

10 :00 p.m.—Governor Garrahy dec lared a State of Emergency in Rhode 

Isla nd and requested a Federal emergency declaration. Governor Dukakis 

declared a State of Emergency in M assachusetts.

February 7, 1978—Governor Grasso requested a Federal emergency dec laration, which the President did the same day. The Preside nt also declared an 

emergency for the States of Rhode Island and Massachusetts. All declara tion s 

were because of blizzards and snow storm s. All counties in Massachusetts, 

Rhode Island, and Connecticut were eligible under the declarations.

February 10, 1978—Eight counties in Massachusetts were declared majo r 

disaste r areas by the President due to coastal flooding. The counties were: 

Barn stable, Bristol, Dukes, Essex, Nantucke t, Norfolk, Plymouth, and Suffolk.

Feb ruary 13, 1978—Governor Dukakis requested that the dis aster dec lara ­

tion be amended to cover damage caused by high winds, ice and snow, and 

tida l surge. Feb ruary 14, 1978—Disaster declaration for eight Massach usetts counties 

expanded to include damage caused by hig h winds, ice and snow, and tidal 

surge.

Febru ary 16, 1978—Disaster dec lara tion for Rhode Isla nd due to snow and 

ice.Overall, 1,130 Army personnel and 346 pieces of heavy equipment were 

used for emergency relief operations req uir ed by the heavy snows in New 

England beginning February 6. In add itio n, the Corps of Engineers, through 

an agreement with the Federal Dis aster Assistance Administration, mobilized 

1,741 contractors and almost 4.000 pieces of equipment for snow removal 

operations.

STATE RESPONSES TO SNOW EMERGENCIES

Mr. Stokes. Mr. Wilcox, I was interested in your statement with 

reference to snow removal where you said in terms o f snow removal 

some States were better than others. Can you expand on th at to some 

degree? Was there some standard type of criteria?

Mr. Wilcox. T am familiar with a State where the Governor of 

tha t State directed tha t the cars be removed from the highways at 

a very early point in the storm and Governors of the surrounding 

States, for one reason or another, did not make th at judgment.

When it came to snow removal, the State where the Governor had 

persuaded the citizens of that State to pull the cars off the road at 

an early point in the storm, the snowplows were able to move unimpeded whereas in another State, where the event occurred later, the 

closing down of driving, there were cars on the highway that were 

stuck on the highway. That is a case in point.

Mr. Stokes. You do not necessarily have information on the modus 

operandi of actual snow removal itself? That is, the mechanism by 

which it was removed and so forth ?

Mr. Wilcox. I have no knowledge that one State handles t ha t any 

better or worse than any other.

SNOW REMOVAL IN OinO

Mr. Stokes. Tn terms of snow removal, what assistance did your 

agency render to the State of Ohio ?

Mr.' Wilcox. $16 million. That includes the Corps of Engineers and 

the Federal reimbursement program tha t the Chairman had just been 

addressing. It does not include the military, regular Army military 

personnel flown in.
19

Mr. Stokes. How do you account for tha t ? We had to utilize military personnel in our State.

Mr. Wilcox. The Departm ent of Defense bills FD AA for tran sportation costs.

Mr. Casey. We pay 100 percent for the regular Army troops 

used in the State of Ohio; for National Guard there was no 

reimbursement.

Mr. Wilcox. Do you pay salaries too ?

Air. Casey. We don’t pay salaries. We pay all out-of-pocket expenses for regular Army troops flown into the State of Ohio.

Mr. Wilcox. But we do not have a figure on that as yet.

Mr. Stokes. We were declared an emergency area as opposed to a 

disaster area in Ohio.

Mr. Wilcox. That is correct.

Mr. Stokes. The Chairman may have asked for th is : What is the 

breakout on the type of assistance given a State under that declaration?

Mr. Wilcox. The Chairm an, I think, was asking about major disasters and I am not sure tha t what he was asking for would apply to 

a State with an emergency declaration such as Ohio, because basically 

what is triggered in an emergency declaration for a severe snowstorm 

is the Corps of Engineers and, if needed, the regular Army, which 

we did commission in Ohio, and the Federal reimbursement program we were exploring a while ago.

The public assistance and housing is not relevant to an emergency 

declaration.

Mr. Stokes. So the figure submitted a moment ago would be the 

extent of the assistance given the State of Ohio under the emergency 

declaration.

Mr. Wilcox. Except for the military costs, yes.

URGENT NEED FOR SUPPLEME NTAL

Mr. B oland. W ith respect to the supplemental, it is now March 16 

and the Congress has a distric t work period scheduled for March 23 

to April 1, so we will not be conducting business. We won’t be back 

until a round the third of the month.

What will happen if the Federal Disaster Assistance Administration does not receive additional funding until after Congress 

returns ?

Mr. Casey. With an additional disaster or without an additional 

disaster, we will run out of money.

Mr. B oland. Let’s not talk about additional disasters. What condition will you be in?

Mr. Casey. We will run out of money, Mr. Chairman, and at that 

point we will have to stop approv ing money for State and local government and individual grant programs.

Mr. Boland. When will you run out of money ?

Mr. Halper. T would say in the next 5 days, maybe 10 days.

Mr. Boland. You say you have $58 million that is unobligated, about 

$15 million in the headquarters and the other $42, or so, in the field?

Mr. Halper. That was as of February 28th. We are now 2 weeks 

down the pike and wTe have about the same amount left in the national 

office, and roughly $25 million or $30 million out in the regions.
20

Mr. Boland. When you say it is now in the regions, what are you 

talking about ? Which regions and how much ?

Mr. Halper. For example, region 1, which takes in all the New 

England States, th at has approximately, if I remember correctly, between $10 million and $15 million.

Mr. Boland. Let me tell you what we have here, as I understand the 

situation. e As of last Friday the unobligated balance, according to the infor­ mation given to this committee was $15.6 million at headquarters, and $42.4 million in the field for a total of $58 million. That is as of last 

F riday.

Mr. I Ialper. That number has been reduced.

Mr. Boland. Since last Friday?

Mr. Halper. Yes.

Mr. Boland. Reduced to what ?

Mr. Halper. I will have to get the exact number.

Mr. Boland. Let us have it for the record.

[The information follows:]

Unobligated balance as of March 16, 1918 Millions

Nation al Office__________________________________________________ R eg io ns________________________________________________________ 3—3

Unobligated B al an ce _______________________________________ 47. 8

Next Thirty Days Req uire ments---------- ’------------------------------------------ 8 0

-

1

Mr. Boland. Once again, you will be runn ing out of money and 

if no action is taken on the supplemental by April 3, you are not 

going to be able to take care of the obligations tha t the Federal Government has to some of the states and some of the communities, 

is that correct ?

Mr. Halper. Yes.

Mr. Boland. Without the passage of this supplemental. I am not 

talking about the regular bill; I am just talking about the supplemental now.

Mr. H alper. Yes.

Mr. Boland. This will conclude our hearing on your fiscal year 1978 

supplemental request for disaster relief.

o