U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

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

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

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

88–232PS 2003

H.R. 2692, UNITED STATES FIRE

ADMINISTRATION AUTHORIZATION

ACT OF 2003

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

JULY 17, 2003

Serial No. 108–22

Printed for the use of the Committee on Science

(

Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.house.gov/science

(II)

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE

HON. SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT, New York, Chairman

LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas

CURT WELDON, Pennsylvania

DANA ROHRABACHER, California

JOE BARTON, Texas

KEN CALVERT, California

NICK SMITH, Michigan

ROSCOE G. BARTLETT, Maryland

VERNON J. EHLERS, Michigan

GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota

GEORGE R. NETHERCUTT, JR.,

Washington

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma

JUDY BIGGERT, Illinois

WAYNE T. GILCHREST, Maryland

W. TODD AKIN, Missouri

TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois

MELISSA A. HART, Pennsylvania

JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma

J. RANDY FORBES, Virginia

PHIL GINGREY, Georgia

ROB BISHOP, Utah

MICHAEL C. BURGESS, Texas

JO BONNER, Alabama

TOM FEENEY, Florida

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas

RALPH M. HALL, Texas

BART GORDON, Tennessee

JERRY F. COSTELLO, Illinois

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas

LYNN C. WOOLSEY, California

NICK LAMPSON, Texas

JOHN B. LARSON, Connecticut

MARK UDALL, Colorado

DAVID WU, Oregon

MICHAEL M. HONDA, California

CHRIS BELL, Texas

BRAD MILLER, North Carolina

LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas

ZOE LOFGREN, California

BRAD SHERMAN, California

BRIAN BAIRD, Washington

DENNIS MOORE, Kansas

ANTHONY D. WEINER, New York

JIM MATHESON, Utah

DENNIS A. CARDOZA, California

VACANCY

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH

NICK SMITH, Michigan, Chairman

LAMAR S. SMITH, Texas

DANA ROHRABACHER, California

GIL GUTKNECHT, Minnesota

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma

W. TODD AKIN, Missouri

TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois

MELISSA A. HART, Pennsylvania

JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma

PHIL GINGREY, Georgia

SHERWOOD L. BOEHLERT, New York

EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas

MICHAEL M. HONDA, California

ZOE LOFGREN, California

DENNIS A. CARDOZA, California

BRAD SHERMAN, California

DENNIS MOORE, Kansas

JIM MATHESON, Utah

SHEILA JACKSON LEE, Texas

RALPH M. HALL, Texas

PETER ROONEY Subcommittee Staff Director

DAN BYERS Professional Staff Member/Designee

JIM WILSON Democratic Professional Staff Member

ELIZABETH GROSSMAN, KARA HAAS Professional Staff Members

JAMES HAGUE Staff Assistant

(III)

C O N T E N T S

July 17, 2003

Page

Witness List ............................................................................................................. 2

Hearing Charter ...................................................................................................... 3

Opening Statements

Statement by Representative Nick Smith, Chairman, Subcommittee on Research, Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives ........................ 12

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 13

Statement by Representative Eddie Bernice Johnson, Ranking Minority Member, Subcommittee on Research, Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives ........................................................................................................... 15

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 16

Prepared Statement by Representative John Sullivan, Member, Subcommittee

on Research, Committee on Science, U.S. House of Representatives .............. 16

Statement by Representative Sherwood L. Boehlert, Chairman, Committee

on Science, U.S. House of Representatives ........................................................ 17

Panel 1:

Honorable Dave Camp, Member, U.S. House of Representatives from the

State of Michigan

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 17

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 19

Discussion ................................................................................................................. 20

Panel 2:

Mr. David Paulison, U.S. Fire Administrator and Director, Preparedness Division of the Emergency Preparedness & Response Directorate/FEMA, Department of Homeland Security

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 21

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 23

Biography .......................................................................................................... 28

Dr. Arden L. Bement, Jr., Director, National Institute of Standards and

Technology

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 28

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 30

Biography .......................................................................................................... 33

Discussion ................................................................................................................. 33

Panel 3:

Mr. Dennis Compton, Immediate Past Chair, Board for the International

Fire Service Training Association

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 45

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 46

Biography .......................................................................................................... 50

Financial Disclosure ......................................................................................... 53

Page

IV

Dr. John R. Hall, Jr., Assistant Vice President, Fire Analysis and Research,

National Fire Protection Association

Oral Statement ................................................................................................. 54

Written Statement ............................................................................................ 55

Biography .......................................................................................................... 58

Financial Disclosure ......................................................................................... 60

Discussion ................................................................................................................. 63

Appendix 1: Additional Material for the Record

H.R. 2692, United States Administration Authorization Act of 2003 ................. 70

H.R. 545, Firefighting Research and Coordination Act ........................................ 74

(1)

H.R. 2692, UNITED STATES FIRE ADMINISTRATION AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2003

THURSDAY, JULY 17, 2003

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH,

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE,

Washington, DC.

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 9:35 a.m., in Room

2318 of the Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Nick Smith

[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.

2

3

HEARING CHARTER

SUBCOMMITTEE ON RESEARCH

COMMITTEE ON SCIENCE

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

H.R. 2692, United States Fire

Administration Authorization

Act of 2003

THURSDAY, JULY 17, 2003

9:30 A.M.–12:00 P.M.

2318 RAYBURN HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING

1. PURPOSE

On Thursday, July 17th, 2003, the Research Subcommittee of the House Science

Committee will hold a hearing to examine U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) programs and activities and H.R. 2692, the U.S. Fire Administration Authorization Act

of 2003. The USFA, housed within the Federal Emergency Management Agency

(FEMA) and located in Emmitsburg, Maryland, is charged with helping to prevent

and limit fire-related losses. Its activities revolve around four primary areas: training, public education, research, and data collection and analysis. On March 1, 2003,

USFA and FEMA officially became part of the Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS).

2. WITNESSES

Panel 1

The Honorable Dave Camp is the Representative of the 4th Congressional District of Michigan. First elected to Congress in 1990, Mr. Camp sits on the Ways and

Means Committee and the Homeland Security Committee, where he chairs the Subcommittee of Infrastructure and Border Security.

Panel 2

Mr. David Paulison is the U.S. Fire Administrator and Director of the Preparedness Division of the Emergency Preparedness & Response Directorate/FEMA in the

Department of Homeland Security. Prior to his appointment as U.S. Fire Administrator in December 2001, he was chief of the Miami-Dade Fire Rescue Department.

Administrator Paulison has 30 years of fire rescue experience and was selected as

Florida’s fire chief of the year in 1993.

Dr. Arden Bement is Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology, a position he has held since December 2001. Before receiving this appointment, Bement served as the David A. Ross Distinguished Professor of Nuclear Engineering and head of the School of Nuclear Engineering at Purdue University. From

1989 to 1995, Dr. Bement was a member of the U.S. National Science Board, the

governing board for the National Science Foundation. He is also a member of the

U.S. National Academy of Engineering.

Panel 3

Mr. Dennis Compton is the immediate past Chair of the Board for the International Fire Service Training Association. Chief Compton has served for over 32

years in the fire service—27 years with the Phoenix Fire Department and five years

as the Mesa Chief. He was selected as a charter member of the Arizona Fire Service

Hall of Fame and recently received the Congressional Fire Services Institute (CFSI)

2003 Mason Lankford National Fire Service Leadership Award.

Dr. John Hall is Assistant Vice President for Fire Analysis and Research at the

National Fire Protection Association (NFPA). This division at NFPA is responsible

for the measurement of the national fire problem and the communication of the results as a statistical basis for fire protection strategies. Dr. Hall was formerly an

Operations Research Analyst with the U.S. Fire Administration. He holds a B.A. in

4

Mathematics from Brown University and a Ph.D. in Operations Research from the

University of Pennsylvania.

3. OVERARCHING QUESTIONS

The hearing will address the following overarching questions:

1. What is the status of traditional USFA activities, such as public education

and outreach, fire research and data analysis, and emergency responder

training programs? Does H.R. 2692 adequately address issues relevant to

these programs?

2. What is the status of the USFA Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program,

and should Congress modify the program in H.R. 2692?

3. What is the need for development of testing methodologies and standards for

new firefighting technologies, and what are the pros and cons of H.R. 545,

the Firefighting Research and Coordination Act?

4. What is the status of USFA-supported fire research programs? How is

USFA’s relatively small research budget being leveraged and coordinated

with related efforts at the National Institute of Standards and Technology

and the Department of Homeland Security’s Science and Technology Directorate?

4. BACKGROUND

• In the early 1970’s, a report by the President’s National Commission on Fire

Prevention and Control entitled America Burning presented a dismal assessment of fire safety in the United States. The report found that nearly 12,000

citizens and 250 firefighters were lost to fire annually, in addition to approximately 300,000 injuries.

• In response to the report, Congress created the USFA and the National Fire

Academy. The USFA, housed within the Federal Emergency Management

Agency (FEMA) and located in Emmitsburg, Maryland, is charged with helping to prevent and control fire-related losses. Its activities revolve around four

primary areas: training, public education, research, and data collection and

analysis.

• When the USFA was established in 1974, its goal was to reduce by half the

number of fire-related fatalities in the Nation—bringing the number to approximately 6,000 or less per year within a generation. The agency met this

goal, and by 1998 civilian fire deaths were at their lowest level. Additionally,

using nearly any measure—number of fires, deaths, injuries, or property

losses—the statistics also reflect a declining trend.

• Despite this significant progress, the United States still has one of the worst

fire safety records in the industrialized world. The per capita death rate remains two to three times that of several European nations and at least 20

percent higher than most developed countries. Fire remains the cause of approximately 3,700 deaths and $11 billion in economic damages each year, and

every 18 seconds a fire department responds to a call somewhere in the

United States.

USFA Organization and Programs

USFA’s mission is to provide leadership, coordination, and support for the Nation’s fire prevention and control, fire training and education, and emergency medical services activities, particularly for America’s 26,350 fire departments. USFA’s

five-year operational objectives, established in 2000, aim to reduce the loss of life

from fire in the United States by 15 percent, through targeted reductions of 25 percent for high-risk populations: children 14 years and below, adults 65 years and

above, and firefighters.

USFA programs include the following:

Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program—Established in FY 2001, this program

awards grants directly to fire departments to supplement basic needs (described in

more detail below).

Data Collection—USFA’s National Fire Data Center (NFDC) administers a national

system for collecting, analyzing and disseminating data and information on fire and

other emergency incidents to State and local governments and the fire community.

The NFDC provides a national analysis of the fire problem, identifying problem

areas for which prevention and mitigation strategies are needed.

Public Education and Awareness—Through partnerships and special initiatives,

USFA involves the fire service, the media, other federal agencies and safety interest

5

groups in the development and delivery of fire safety awareness and education programs. These programs are targeted at those groups most vulnerable to the hazards

of fire, including the young, elderly, and disabled. For example, USFA recently announced the development of an aggressive plan to advocate increased use of residential fire sprinklers, which have become significantly more effective and less costly

due to new technology, but remain utilized in only a very small percentage of

homes.

Training—USFA’s National Fire Academy offers educational opportunities for the

advanced professional development of mid-level and senior fire and emergency medical service officers and allied professionals involved in fire prevention and life safety activities. The Academy develops and delivers educational and training programs

with a national focus that is aimed at supplementing and supporting State and local

fire service training. In 2002, the Academy trained almost 8,000 firefighters in various courses at Academy headquarters in Emmitsburg, 86,000 firefighters through

off-campus training programs (primarily administered through support of state

training programs), and 195,000 through its distance-learning program. It is estimated that NFA has trained over 1.4 million students through on-campus and offcampus training programs since its establishment in 1975.

In 2003, an organizational change within FEMA as part of the agency’s transfer

into the Department of Homeland Security resulted in the transfer of FEMA’s

Emergency Management Institute (EMI) into USFA. Through a combination of oncampus, off-campus, and distance learning courses similar to those at NFA, EMI

serves as the focal point for the development and delivery of emergency incident

management training. Together, EMI and NFA now comprise USFA’s National

Emergency Training Center (NETC), also headquartered in Emmitsburg, Maryland.

Research—Through research, testing and evaluation, USFA works with public and

private entities to promote and improve fire and life safety. For fiscal year (FY)

2003, USFA research activities were authorized at $3.5 million. These activities are

administered in cooperation with the Building and Fire Research Laboratory

(BFRL) at the National Institutes of Standards and Technology (NIST). For example, USFA–NIST cooperative research focusing on residential fire protection technologies successfully resulted in the development and enhancement of national consensus standards for sprinkler applications for residential occupancies-where most

of fire deaths occur.

The current USFA authorization legislation (P.L. 106–503) directed USFA to work

with NIST, private organizations, and State and local government to develop a

prioritized research agenda for the agency. The agenda, completed in 2001, identified as top priorities research projects that focus on improving the safety of highrisk populations such as children, senior citizens, and firefighters, reflecting USFA’s

agency-wide fire safety goals.

Budget—The President’s FY 2004 budget request for USFA ‘‘base’’ activities (those

except for the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program, which is authorized

through FY 2004), is $61.0 million, a 49 percent increase above the FY 2003 request. This increase is in part due to the transfer of EMI into USFA as part of

FEMA reorganization. USFA has not yet provided Congress written information detailing the FY 2004 request or FY 2003 current appropriations plan. Agency activities are currently authorized at $50 million for FY 2003.

Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program

The Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program (Also known as the FIRE Act Grant

Program) at USFA was established by Congress to provide, through competitively

awarded matching grants, direct financial assistance to local fire departments for

basic equipment and training needs. For the FY 2003 grant program, Congress appropriated, and President Bush signed into law, $745 million for the grant program.

To ensure USFA has adequate time to distribute the funding effectively, Congress

allowed the agency until the end of FY 2004 to obligate all of the funds.

In FY 2003, fire departments were eligible to apply for grants in one of four program areas:

1. Fire Operations and Firefighter Safety. Eligible activities under this

function are limited to training, wellness and fitness, firefighting equipment,

personal protective equipment, and modifications to fire stations and facilities.

2. Fire Prevention. Eligible activities under this function include, but are not

limited to, public education and awareness activities, fire codes enforcement

activities, fire inspector certifications, purchase and installation of smoke

6

alarms and fire suppression systems, wildland mitigation, and arson prevention and detection activities.

3. Emergency Medical Services. Eligible activities under this function for

fire-based EMS units are limited to equipment, training, and wellness and

fitness initiatives. Vehicles, such as ambulances, are not eligible in this programmatic area.

4. Firefighting Vehicles Acquisition. Eligible apparatus under this program

include, but are not limited to, pumpers, brush trucks, tankers, rescue, ambulances, quints (advanced fire trucks with space for extra personnel and

equipment), aerials, foam units, and fireboats. You may apply for only one

vehicle per year.

USFA received 19,949 applications for over $2 billion in federal funding, and

began awarding grants in June. As of July 11, 2003, USFA had announced 800

awards totaling $48 million. By September of 2004, USFA plans to have obligated

the full $745 million through grants to approximately 7,000 fire departments.

In the FY 2004 budget request, the Administration proposed transferring the Assistance to Firefighters grant program to the Office of Domestic Preparedness within the Department of Homeland Security, to be funded at $500 million. The proposed transfer is part of the Administration’s effort to consolidate the counter-terrorism programs for emergency responders. While supportive of the first responder

program, many in the fire services community have expressed concern about the

transfer of the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program out of USFA, arguing the

proposal may result in a shift in program focus toward specialized equipment and

training when many fire departments still lack the minimum tools and resources

necessary for day-to-day emergency response.

On June 24, 2003, the House approved the FY 2004 spending bill for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), providing $750 million for the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program and explicitly directing that the funds be administered from

the Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate. On July 10, the Senate Appropriations Committee approved its version of the bill, also providing $750 million

for the program, but placing it within the Border and Transportation Security Directorate per the Administration’s request.

H.R. 2692, the United States Fire Administration Authorization Act of 2003

H.R. 2692, introduced on July 10, 2003 by representatives Smith (MI) and Johnson (TX), authorizes appropriations for ‘‘base activities’’ (those excluding the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program, which is authorized through FY 2004) at the

Fire Administration of $61.0, $62.83, and $65 million annually for fiscal years FY

2004 through FY 2006, respectively. These amounts reflect the FY 2004 budget request, with approximately 3 percent annual increases thereafter. The legislation

also:

• Reinstates the position of U.S. Fire Administrator as a Presidentially-appointed, Senate-confirmed position (this was unintentionally eliminated by

the Homeland Security Act of 2002 by a broader provision modifying the status of executive positions transferred into the department).

• Requires the Administrator to develop and implement a strategy for promoting the installation and use of residential fire sprinklers.

• Transfers responsibility for administration of the Assistance to Firefighters

Grant Program from the Director of FEMA to the USFA Administrator.

On June 19, 2003, the Senate Commerce Committee approved S. 1152, its version

of the USFA Authorization legislation. S. 1152 authorizes USFA activities through

FY 2008, and differs from H.R. 2692 primarily in its inclusion of provisions from

S. 321, the Firefighting Research and Coordination Act. S. 321 and its companion

in the House, H.R. 545, introduced by Representative Camp (MI), would (1) authorize the Administrator to develop standards for new firefighting technologies such as

thermal imaging cameras and chemical protective equipment, and require that

equipment purchased through the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program meet

those standards; (2) require the Administrator to work with State and local fire

service officials to establish nationwide and State mutual aid systems for responding

to national emergencies; and (3) authorize the National Fire Academy to train firefighters to offer courses to respond to acts of terrorism. A complete section-by-section analysis of both H.R. 2692 and H.R. 545 are included in the appendix.

7

Council on Foreign Relations Report on Emergency Response Needs

On June 29, 2003, the Council on Foreign Relations, a foreign affairs think tank,

released a report entitled, Emergency Responders: Drastically Underfunded, Dangerously Unprepared. The report was compiled by an Independent Task Force on

Emergency Responders led by former Senator Warren Rudman and former White

House cyber security chief Richard Clarke. The task force met with emergency responder organizations across the country to identify needs—not a wish list—for minimum effective response to a catastrophic terrorist attack. The final unbudgeted

needs of emergency responders was determined by the task force to be $98.4 billion,

including almost $37 billion for the fire services. The report does not make clear

how the task force arrived at this figure and how the how the $37 billion estimated

need for the fire services is broken down according to equipment, personnel, training, etc.

6. QUESTIONS FOR WITNESSES

In addition to being asked to provide written comment on H.R. 2692, witnesses

were asked the following questions:

Questions for Administrator Paulison

• What is the Administration’s position on the provisions of H.R. 545, the Firefighting Research and Coordination Act (enclosed)? What is the current process for developing standards for new firefighting technologies, and how does

USFA contribute to this effort?

• What is the status of traditional USFA activities such as public education and

outreach, fire research and data analysis, and National Fire Academy training programs? What is the status of the USFA Assistance to Firefighters

Grant Program?

• What is the status of USFA-supported fire research programs? Please provide

a list of these activities, including budget information. How do you work to

leverage USFA’s relatively small research budget with related efforts at the

Department of Homeland Security, National Institute of Standards and Technology, other federal agencies, and the private sector?

• How have USFA activities been affected by its recent transition into the

Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate of the Department of

Homeland Security?

• Please comment on the recently released report by the Council on Foreign Relations, Emergency Responders: Drastically Underfunded, Dangerously Unprepared. Are the findings and recommendations, which call for an additional

$36 billion annually for the fire services, realistic?

Questions for Dr. Bement

• Provide an overview of fire research activities at the National Institute of

Standards and Technology (NIST), including budget details. With regard to

mission and focus, how do NIST fire research activities compare to those at

USFA? How does NIST coordinate and prioritize these activities with USFA?

• What is the current process for developing standards for new firefighting

technologies, and how is NIST involved in this effort? What challenges exist

associated with standardization of firefighting equipment and technologies?

Has the absence of standards in any particular areas acted as a barrier to

the introduction of new firefighting technologies?

Questions for Mr. Hall

• What is the NFPA position on H.R. 545, the Firefighting Research and Coordination Act (enclosed)? What is the current process for developing standards for new firefighting technologies, and how is NFPA involved in this effort? What challenges exist associated with standardization of firefighting

equipment and technologies? Has the absence of standards in any particular

areas acted as a barrier to the introduction of new firefighting technologies?

• Provide an overview of the findings of the recent FEMA/NFPA study, ‘‘A

Needs Assessment of the U.S. Fire Service.’’ How can Congress use the findings to strengthen USFA in the pending reauthorization legislation?

• Please comment on the findings and recommendations of recently released report by the Council on Foreign Relations, Emergency Responders: Drastically

Underfunded, Dangerously Unprepared. How did NFPA contribute to this

study?

8

Questions for Mr. Compton

• What is the fire services community’s opinion of provisions in the enclosed

legislation, H.R. 545, the Firefighting Research and Coordination Act?

• Is the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program successfully meeting its

charge to help the Nation’s fire departments meet basic firefighting equipment and training needs necessary for day-to-day operations? Should the program be modified in this reauthorization legislation, and if so, how?

• What is the fire services community’s general opinion on the proposed consolidation of the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program with other first responder grant programs within DHS, including the recent proposal to move

the program into the DHS Office of State and Local Government Coordination? What other encouragements and concerns does the fire services community have associated with the recent transition of FEMA and USFA into the

Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate of the Department of

Homeland Security?

• How effective has USFA been at administering ‘‘traditional’’ agency activities

such as public education, outreach, and research, and data collection and

analysis? Please provide any recommendations for improving these activities

within USFA.

• Please comment on the recently released report by the Council on Foreign Relations, Emergency Responders: Drastically Underfunded, Dangerously Unprepared. Are the findings and recommendations, which call for an additional

$36 billion annually for the fire services, realistic?

9

7. APPENDIX I

SECTION BY SECTION ANALYSIS OF H.R. 2692

Introduced by Mr. Smith of Michigan and Ms. Johnson of Texas

Section 1. Short Title.

‘‘United States Fire Administration Authorization Act of 2003’’.

Section 2. United States Fire Administrator.

Preserves the position of U.S. Fire Administrator as a Presidentially-appointed,

Senate-confirmed position.

Section 3. National Residential Fire Sprinkler Strategy.

Requires the Administrator to develop and implement a strategy for promoting

the installation and use of residential fire sprinklers. Requires strategy to include

advocacy and informational support to relevant stakeholders, with a particular focus

on residences at high risk to fire hazards and occupants at high risk to fire hazards

(such as senior citizens).

Section 4. Support for Training to Fight Maritime Fires.

Amends the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program to allow support for training to fight maritime fires as an eligible grant activity.

Section 5. Firefighters Assistance Grants Program.

Transfers responsibility for administration of the program from the Director of the

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to the Administrator of the U.S.

Fire Administration (USFA).

Section 6. Authorization of Appropriations.

Authorizes appropriations for USFA of $61.0, $62.83, and $65 million annually for

fiscal years FY 2004 through FY 2006, respectively.

Section 7. Courses and Training Assistance.

Clarifies that National Fire Academy Superintendent, in offering training courses,

work to accommodate as many geographic areas and needs of firefighters as possible.

10

8. APPENDIX II

SECTION-BY-SECTION ANALYSIS OF H.R. 545

Introduced by Mr. Camp of Michigan

Section 1. Short title.

‘‘Firefighting Research and Coordination Act.’’

Sec. 2. New firefighting technology.

Subsection (a) would establish a new section 8(e) of the Federal Fire Prevention

and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2207). This new subsection would direct the Administrator, in consultation with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, the Inter-Agency Board for Equipment Standardization and Inter-Operability, national voluntary consensus standards development organizations, and

other interested parties, to develop new, and utilize existing, measurement techniques and testing methodologies for evaluating the performance of new firefighting

technology, including:

• personal protection equipment;

• devices for advance warning of extreme hazard;

• equipment for enhanced vision;

• devices to locate victims, firefighters, and other rescue personnel in aboveground and below-ground structures;

• equipment and methods to provide information for incident command, including the monitoring and reporting of individual personnel welfare;

• equipment and methods for training, especially for virtual reality training;

and

• robotics and other remote-controlled devices.

The Administrator would also be required to evaluate the compatibility of new

equipment and technology with existing firefighter technology, and support the development of new voluntary consensus standards through national voluntary consensus standards organizations for new firefighting technologies.

For equipment for which applicable voluntary consensus standards have been established, the Administrator would be directed to require, by regulation, that equipment purchased through the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program established

by section 33 of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C.

2229) meet or exceed applicable voluntary consensus standards. For the purposes

of this subsection, the Administrator would have the discretion to determine the applicability of voluntary consensus standards to an application under this program.

Authorizes appropriations of $2.2 million for FY 2004 to carry out this section.

Sec. 3. Coordination of response to national emergency.

Subsection (a) would create a new section 10(b) of the Federal Fire Prevention

and Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2209). New subsection (b) would require the Administrator, after consultation with the Director of FEMA, to provide technical assistance and training to State and local fire service officials to establish nationwide

and State mutual aid systems for dealing with national emergencies. These mutual

aid systems would include threat assessment and equipment deployment strategies,

and include means of collecting asset and resource information to provide accurate

and timely data for regional deployment. These mutual aid systems also would have

to be consistent with FEMA’s Federal Response Plan. The Administrator, in consultation with the Director of FEMA, would be required to develop and make available to State and local fire service officials model mutual aid plans for both intrastate and interstate assistance.

Subsection (b) would require the Administrator to report to the Senate Committee

on Commerce, Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on Science, within 90 days after the date of enactment of this Act, on the

need for a strategy concerning the deployment of volunteers and emergency response personnel (as defined in section 6 of the Firefighters’ Safety Study Act (15

U.S.C. 2223e)), including a national credentialing system, in the event of a national

emergency.

Subsection (c) would require the Director of FEMA to revise the Federal Response

Plan within 180 days after the date of enactment of this Act to incorporate plans

for responding to terrorist attacks, particularly in urban areas, including fire detection and suppression and related emergency services. The Director of FEMA would

11

also be required to transmit a report to the Senate Committee on Commerce,

Science, and Transportation and the House of Representatives Committee on

Science on these revisions.

Sec. 4. Training.

Subsection (a) would amend section 8(d)(1) of the Federal Fire Prevention and

Control Act of 1974 (15 U.S.C. 2206(d)(1) to authorize the Superintendent of the National Fire Academy to conduct training in the following areas:

(i) strategies for building collapse rescue;

(ii) the use of technology in response to fires, including terrorist incidents and

other national emergencies;

(iii) response, tactics, and strategies for dealing with terrorist- caused national

catastrophes;

(iv) use of and familiarity with FEMA’s Federal Response Plan;

(v) leadership and strategic skills, including integrated management systems

operations and integrated response;

(vi) applying new technology and developing strategies and tactics for fighting

forest fires;

(vii) integrating terrorism response agencies into the national terrorism incident response system; and

(viii) response tactics and strategies for fighting fires at United States ports, including fires on the water and aboard vessels.

Subsection (b) would authorize the Superintendent of the National Fire Academy

to consult with other Federal, State, and local government officials in developing

curricula for classes at the Academy.

Subsection (c) would require the Administrator to coordinate the training provided

under section 8(d)(1) of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (15

U.S.C. 2206(d)(1)) with the Attorney General, the Secretary of Health and Human

Services, and the heads of other federal agencies, to ensure that such training does

not duplicate existing courses available to fire service personnel and to establish a

mechanism for eliminating duplicative training programs.

12

Chairman SMITH. The Subcommittee on Research of the Committee on Science will come to order, and certainly, I would like to

welcome everyone here today for this Research Subcommittee hearing to review the activities of the U.S. Fire Administration and consider our reauthorization bill, H.R. 2692, and also, Dave Camp’s

bill, H.R. 545, the Firefighting Research and Coordination Act.

Created in 1974, the U.S. Fire Administration is now sort of closing out almost 30 years of service to the country aimed at reducing

the Nation’s fire losses through better fire prevention and control.

During this time, the Agency has contributed what has been a very

dramatic improvement in terms of reducing the loss of life and the

loss of property. In 1973, over 12,000 citizens and 250 firefighters

were lost to fire. Today, while our population has increased by 30

percent, the average number of deaths each year due to fires has

decreased by over 60 percent. That is very impressive improvement

and one that the U.S. Fire Administration can certainly be proud

of.

However, there are still opportunities for further improvements

to our fire safety record. As the lead federal agency working with

Americans—America’s 26,000 fire departments, the U.S. Fire Administration is properly positioned to help make those improvements through its support in areas such as training, fire research,

data collection and analysis. Additionally, three years ago, I met

with Congressman Curt Weldon and Steny Hoyer to write the floor

amendment to start and kick off what has turned out to be a very

successful assistance to firefighters grants program, now also, I

think an important part of the effort for federal encouragement.

USFA and the firemen that volunteer their time to be grant reviewers for this program should be congratulated for doing such a

fine job.

In addition to receiving comments on the legislation before the

Subcommittee, we will also discuss several issues not currently addressed in the legislation, but also of importance to fire services.

Among these are the need for and use of equipment standards in

fire services, U.S. Fire Administration’s fire research program and

third, the future of the Assistance to Firefighters grant program.

Allow me just to comment briefly on a few of these items so we

can begin the testimony. First of all, I want to note that I have put

a great deal of time and effort into learning more about the need

and use of equipment standards. I believe that it is widely recognized that standards for equipment and new technologies are very

important, and I—so I compliment my colleague, Dave Camp from

Michigan, for initiating this legislation. We need to encourage more

standards and evaluations in the current environment, where it

seems that every equipment company, especially after 9/11, is coming and trying to sell our fire departments and our fire services

new technologies for the challenge that lies ahead. I have called the

fire chiefs in Michigan and other states, who have shared their concerns that any sweeping mandates requiring that federal grant

funds purchase only equipment that meets the standards is too

prescriptive and may limit the flexibility of fire departments who

desire guidance and information but whose needs may not fit perfectly with, if you will, a one size fits all federal mandate.

13

I will also want to voice my concerns with the ongoing attempts

to transfer the Assistance to Firefighters grant program out of the

United States Fire Administration. I understand and support the

notion that we should consolidate duplicative programs to increase

efficiency of our federal support for emergency responders. In fact,

I am pretty regularly one of those people working to find and eliminate unnecessary duplication in our federal programs. However, I

can say for certain that the goals and objectives of the firefighters

grant program, helping fire departments meet the equipment and

training needs for basic day to day firefighting are quite different

from other homeland security grant programs designed to better

prepare first responders to defend against terrorism. I believe the

Section 33 firefighters grant program should remain as it was envisioned when Congress established it, and it should be administered

by those that best understand the needs of the fire services, which

is the people of the USFA.

I would also like to highlight that today’s legislation contains an

important provision to authorize the Administrator to begin an aggressive strategy to advocate the use of residential fire sprinklers.

We know that over 80 percent of the deaths due to fire are caused

in the home and there has never been a multiple death fire in a

home that had functional sprinklers. We also know that the technology of fast-response sprinklers has improved greatly while the

cost has decreased, yet less than three percent of the residences in

the United States have sprinkler systems. I am excited that this

effort by USFA is—if successful, could help to substantially lower

the loss of life and property due to fire in residences.

Finally, I would like to say a quick word about the recent report

by the Council on Foreign Relations. It was called ‘‘Drastically Underfunded, Dangerously Unprepared.’’ The report was led by former

Senator Warren Rudman, who will be testifying in this room before

the Select Homeland Security Committee later today. It calls for

$37 billion in additional funding for the fire services, and while I

strongly agree that there is more that we need to do to improve

emergency responder preparedness, I am concerned that the findings of the report may have been overestimated due to some—what

looks like inaccurate calculations. The Committee will be looking

into this today.

I am pleased that Administrator Paulison is here for the Subcommittee really for the first time since he took the reins at the

end of 2001. Administrator Paulison may have to leave a bit early,

so we will try to keep this thing moving to ensure adequate time

for discussion with him this morning.

I look forward to a productive discussion, and I want to welcome

Dave Camp before the Subcommittee, so Dave, welcome, and we

will ask Representative Johnson for a comment and then the

Chairman of the full Science Committee, so—Eddie Bernice.

[The prepared statement of Chairman Smith follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN NICK SMITH

I would like to welcome everyone here today for this Research Subcommittee

hearing to review the activities of the U.S. Fire Administration and consider H.R.

2692, the USFA AUTHORIZATION ACT OF 2003. We will also review H.R. 545, the Firefighting Research and Coordination Act, which has been introduced by my colleague

from Michigan Mr. Camp.

14

Created in 1974, USFA is now closing in on 30 years of service to the country

aimed at reducing the Nation’s fire losses through better fire prevention and control.

During this time, the agency has contributed to what has been a very dramatic improvement in America’s once-dismal fire safety record. In 1973, over 12,000 citizens

and 250 firefighters were lost to fire. Today, while our population has increased by

30 percent, the average number of deaths each year due to fires has decreased by

over 60 percent. That is a very impressive improvement, and one that USFA can

be proud of.

However, there is still some opportunities for further improvements to our fire

safety record. As the lead federal agency working with America’s 26,000 fire departments, USFA is properly positioned to help make those improvements through its

support in areas such as training, fire research, data collection and analysis. Additionally, three years ago, I met with Congressman Curt Weldon and Steny Hoyer

to write the floor amendment to start the very successful Assistance to Firefighters

grant program, now also an important part of this effort. And USFA and the firemen that volunteer their time to be grant reviewers for this program should be congratulated for doing such a fine job.

In addition to receiving comments on the legislation before the Subcommittee

today, we will also discuss several issues not currently addressed in the legislation

but also of importance to the fire services. Among these are: (1) the need for and

use of equipment standards in the fire services; (2) USFA’s fire research program;

and (3) the future of the Assistance to Firefighters grant program.

Allow me to just comment briefly on a few of these items so we can begin the,

testimony. First of all, I want to note that I have put a great deal of effort into

learning more about the need for and use of equipment standards. I believe it is

widely recognized that standards for equipment and new technologies are very useful to the fire services. We need to encourage more standards and evaluations are

developed in the current environment where it seems every equipment company has

suddenly become interested in selling their wares to fire departments. However, I

have called fire chiefs in Michigan and other states who have shared their concerns

that any sweeping mandates requiring that federal grant funds purchase only

equipment that meets these standards is too prescriptive and may limit the flexibility of fire departments who desire the guidance but whose needs may not fit perfectly with one-size-fits-all standards.

I also want to voice my concerns with the ongoing attempts to transfer the Assistance to Firefighters grant program out of USFA. I understand and support the notion that we should consolidate duplicative programs to increase efficiency of our

federal support for emergency responders. In fact, I am regularly one of the first

people working to find and. eliminate unnecessary duplication of effort in federal

programs. However, I can say for certain that the goals and objectives of the firefighters grant program—helping fire departments meet equipment and training

needs for basic day-to-day firefighting—are quite different from other homeland security grant programs designed to better prepare first responders to defend against

terrorism. I believe the Section 33 firefighters grant program should remain as it

was envisioned when Congress established it, and it should be administered by

those that best understand the needs of the fire services, which is the people at

USFA.

I would also like to highlight that today’s legislation contains an important provision to authorize the Administrator to begin an aggressive strategy to advocate the

use of residential fire sprinklers. We know that over 80 percent of deaths due to

fire occur in the home, and we know that—amazingly—there has never been a multiple death fire in a home that had functional sprinklers. We also know that the

technology of fast-response sprinklers has improved greatly while the cost has decreased, yet less than three percent of homes in the United States have them installed. The legislation before us today specifically directs USFA to develop a strategy to advocate increased installation of sprinklers. I am excited that this effort by

USFA, if successful, could help to substantially lower loss of life and property due

to fire in residences.

Finally, I would like to say a quick word about the recent report by the Council

on Foreign Relations, ‘‘Drastically Underfunded, Dangerously Unprepared.’’ The report was led by former Senator Warren Rudman, who will be testifying in this room

before the Select Homeland Security Committee later today. It calls for $37 billion

in additional funding for the fire services. While I strongly agree that there is more

we need to do to improve emergency responder preparedness, I am concerned that

the findings of the report may have been overestimated due to inaccurate calculations. The Committee will also look into this today.

I am pleased that Administrator Paulison is here before the Subcommittee for the

first time since he took over the reigns at the end of 2001. Administrator Paulison

15

may have to leave a bit early, so we will try to keep things moving to ensure adequate time for discussion with him this morning.

I look forward to a productive discussion this morning and a smooth markup of

H.R. 2692 immediately following the hearing.

First I want to welcome Representative Dave Camp before the Subcommittee.

Representative Camp is a friend and colleague of mine from Michigan and is here

to talk about his legislation, H.R. 545, that we will be including in the substitute

amendment during the markup that will immediately follow this hearing.

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I am

pleased to join you in welcoming our witnesses this morning to this

hearing on legislation that Chairman Smith and I introduced to reauthorize activities of the U.S. Fire Administration.

The Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 was intended to address a serious problem affecting safety for all Americans. Much progress has been made as a result of this legislation

in public education about fire safety and improvements in the effectiveness of fire services and in the wider use of home fire safety

devices. Nevertheless, the United States still has one of the highest

fire death rates among advanced nations, and fire deaths exceed

loss of life in all natural disasters combined.

The question then arises as to what is being done that is effective and what more ought to be done in order to make further

progress in improving the Nation’s fire safety record. As we begin

the process of reauthorization of the 1974 Act, we seek the assistance of our witnesses in assessing how well current programs are

working and whether the available resources are being allocated

optimally.

A matter of concern for this committee is how well the Fire Administration will function and the degree of attention it will receive

in its new position as part of the Department of Homeland Security. Based on our experience in getting the USFA budget information so far this year, the visibility and priority the Agency is receiving in the Department is not encouraging. Despite repeated requests, the first time the Subcommittee saw any budget details for

Fiscal Year 2003 current spending plan and for Fiscal Year 2004

request was yesterday afternoon.

The authorization bill Chairman Smith and I have introduced attempts to preserve the status of the Fire Administration. First, it

explicitly reestablishes the Presidentially-appointed and Senate-approved position of Fire Administrator. It also includes language to

ensure that the Fire Administration runs the FIRE Grant program.

This has been a valuable program, which most agree has been effectively administered by the Fire Administration.

One issue that I hope to explore today is the vitality of the Fire

Administration’s research activities. The current authorization

statute includes provisions that attempt to reverse a withering

away of support for this mission area, which is naturally of concern

to this committee. One question is whether the Fire Administration

and NIST are coordinating and cooperating effectively to develop

and implement a fire research agenda of value to the fire services

community. A Memorandum of Understanding regarding research

activities has been in place between the two agencies for several

years now, and I would like to find out more about how it has been

working.

16

Finally, I encourage our outside witnesses to provide recommendations regarding the specific priorities of the Fire Administration’s program, as well—programs, as well as recommendations

on any aspect of the Agency’s policies and operations that could improve its overall effectiveness in achieving its mission objectives.

Again, it is my pleasure to welcome all of our witnesses and our

colleague, Congressman Camp, and I look forward to all of your

testimony. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[The prepared statement of Ms. Johnson follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON

I am pleased to join Chairman Smith in welcoming our witnesses this morning

to this hearing on legislation that Chairman Smith and I introduced to reauthorize

activities at the U.S. Fire Administration.

The Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 was intended to address a

serious problem affecting the safety of all Americans. Much progress has been made

as a result of this legislation in public education about fire safety, in improvements

in the effectiveness of fire services, and in the wider use of home fire safety devices.

Nevertheless, the United States still has one of the highest fire death rates among

advanced nations, and fire deaths exceed loss of life in all natural disasters combined.

The question then arises as to what is being done that is effective and what more

ought to be done in order to make further progress in improving the Nation’s fire

safety record. As we begin the process of reauthorization of the 1974 act, we seek

the assistance of our witnesses in assessing how well current programs are working

and whether the available resources are being allocated optimally.

A matter of concern for this committee is how well the Fire Administration will

function, and the degree of attention it will receive, in its new position as part of

the Department of Homeland Security. Based on our experience in getting USFA

budget information so far this year, the visibility and priority the agency is receiving in the department is not encouraging. Despite repeated requests, the first time

the Subcommittee saw any budget details for the FY 2003 current spending plan

and for the FY 2004 request was yesterday afternoon.

The authorization bill Chairman Smith and I have introduced attempt’s to preserve the status of the Fire Administration. First, it explicitly re-establishes the

Presidentially appointed and Senate approved position of Fire Administrator. It also

includes language to ensure that the Fire Administration runs the FIRE grants program. This has been a valuable program, which most agree has been effectively administered by USFA.

One issue that I hope to explore today is the vitality of USFA’s research activities.

The current authorization statute includes provisions that attempted to reverse a

withering away of support for this mission area, which is naturally of concern to

this committee. One question is whether USFA and NIST are coordinating and cooperating effectively to develop and implement a fire research agenda of value to

the fire services community. A Memorandum of Understanding regarding research

activities has been in place between the two agencies for several years now, and I

would like to find out more about how it has been working.

Finally, I encourage our outside witnesses to provide recommendations regarding

the specific priorities of the Fire Administration’s programs, as well as recommendations on any aspect of the agency’s policies and operations that could improve its

overall effectiveness in achieving its mission objectives.

Again, it is my pleasure to welcome all of our witnesses today, and I look forward

to your testimony.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Sullivan follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE JOHN SULLIVAN

Thank you Mr. Chairman. I appreciate your calling this hearing and markup on,

H.R. 2692, the United States Fire Administration Authorization Act of 2003. As a

member of the Research Subcommittee on the House Science Committee, I am glad

to be a part of this hearing to address the needs of our nation’s Firefighters.

The United States still has one of the worst fire safety records in the industrialized world. The per capita death rate remains two to three times that of several

European nations and at least 20 percent higher than most developed countries.

Fire remains the cause of approximately 3,700 deaths and $11 billion in economic

17

damages each year, and every 18 seconds a fire department responds to a call somewhere in the United States.

Reauthorization of the United States Fire Administration Authorization Act of

2003 is critical to addressing the needs of our nation’s Firefighters through preventing and limiting fire-related losses through training, public education, research,

and data collection and analysis. It authorizes appropriations to fire departments

through the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program. This appropriation will

greatly assist the needs of fire departments all across the country.

This reauthorization also transfers responsibility for administration of the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program from the Director of Federal Emergency Management Agency to the United States Fire Administrator. This transfer will aid the

development of a nationwide and state aid system for responding to national emergencies, and authorize the National Fire Academy to train Firefighters to offer

courses to respond to acts of terrorism.

The reauthorization of H.R. 2692 is vital to our nation’s safety and security in a

post 9/11 world and I urge its adoption by this subcommittee this morning.

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, Representative Johnson. The gentlemen from New York, the Chairman of our Full Science Committee, Sherry Boehlert.

Chairman BOEHLERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am here to

one, compliment you for the leadership you are demonstrating repeatedly in dealing with these very important programs and secondly, to provide tangible evidence of the Chair’s importance that

he assigns to these programs. I have been an unabashed champion

of the fire program since I first came here and sat down at the bottom 21 years ago as a raw rookie, and since that time, I have been

educated by the fire services and my affection for them, my appreciation for them and my determination to be helpful to them has

increased exponentially. Administrator Paulison, you are going to—

this is your maiden journey before the Subcommittee and you will

find that we are going to be asking some questions, I am sure, and

it is sort of a tough love scenario. We want you to succeed. We

don’t want to see cuts in programs. We want the Fire Academy to

succeed. We don’t want to see cuts in programs. We are determined

to do what the rest of the Nation finally has got its mind set on

doing, and that is not only appreciating but supporting the fire

services from coast to coast. It took 9/11 for some people to fully

appreciate the fire services, but I can tell you, Chairman Smith

and Ms. Johnson and the rest of us have been champions of the

cause for a long, long time, and while you may have a new home

in the Department of Homeland Security, that has only increased

the attention you are getting from us, because we want to make

sure you get it right, but we are here as partners, as facilitators.

We want to work with you for the fire service. Thank you very

much, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman SMITH. Now, for those that don’t know, Sherry Boehlert and Curt Weldon started the Fire Caucus, so we welcome all

of our witnesses and Congressman Camp, please proceed with your

testimony.

Panel 1

STATEMENT OF HON. DAVE CAMP, A REPRESENTATIVE IN

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF MICHIGAN

Mr. CAMP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you, Congresswoman Johnson and Congressman Boehlert. I appreciate the opVerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:36 Oct 25, 2003 Jkt 088232 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 C:\WORKD\RES03\071703\88232 SCIENCE1 PsN: SCIENCE1
18

portunity to testify before the Subcommittee. The mission of the

U.S.—United States Fire Administration has taken on added importance since the September 11 terrorist attacks, and America’s

firefighters are taking on heightened responsibilities that go beyond fighting fires. As the USFA locates in its new home in the Department of Homeland Security, its role in combating America’s—

and coordinating America’s fire prevention and response activities

and leadership in fire education must be strengthened to meet

these new challenges, and I appreciate the inclusion of H.R 545 in

the reauthorization measure.

This bill was introduced in February as the Firefighting Research and Coordination Act, along with Senator McCain, who introduced a companion bill in the Senate, and this legislation will

help address current policy questions on how the Federal Government can most effectively provide firefighters with the training and

the equipment necessary to save lives, and in my view, the Firefighting Research and Coordination Act gives appropriate weight to

the top fire service needs, more specifically, the bill supports the

development of voluntary consensus standards for firefighting

equipment and technology. I underscore the word voluntary. It establishes nationwide and state mutual aid systems for dealing with

national emergencies and will authorize the National Fire Academy

to train firefighters to respond to acts of terrorism and other national emergencies.

The first objective of the bill focuses on establishing equipment

and technology standards, and would allow the U.S. Fire Administrator, in consultation with the National Institute of Standards and

Technology and other standards organizations, to develop voluntary

consensus standards for evaluating the performance and compatibility of new firefighting technology. And examples include personal protection equipment, devices for advance warning of extreme

hazard, equipment for enhanced vision, robotics and other remotecontrolled devices, among others. Equipment purchased under the

Assistance to Firefighters grant program must meet or exceed the

voluntary consensus standards.

Requirements for equipment to voluntary consensus standards

aren’t new, as James Shannon, President and CEO of the National

Fire Protection Association testified in April in a hearing on this

subject before the Senate Commerce Committee. The Department

of Justice’s Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program requires

that vests meet minimum safety and performance standards. In addition, the President has advocated for standards under the President’s 2002 National Strategy for Homeland Security, the Department of Homeland Security will establish national standards for

emergency response training and preparedness, and just recently,

the Council on Foreign Relations released a study chaired by

former Senator Warren Rudman that recommended Congress

should require DHS and HHS to work with other federal agencies,

state and local emergency responder agencies and officials, and

standard-setting bodies from the emergency responder community

to establish clearly defined standards and guidelines for federal,

state and local government emergency preparedness and response

in such areas as training, interoperable communications systems

and response equipment. Mr. Chairman, this bill accommodates

19

these recommendations, but it also allows for the USFA Administrator to exercise some flexibility in the rare case when a newer

technology is introduced that may make an existing voluntary consensus standard irrelevant.

The second objective of the bill is to address mutual aid systems.

Mutual aid compacts are widely acknowledged to be an effective

and efficient means of sharing emergency management resources

among different jurisdictions. Federal support for mutual aid could

be better—could better prepare states and localities for all types of

disasters, including acts of terrorism. The Firefighting Research

and Coordination Act directs the U.S. Fire Administrator, in consultation with the Director of FEMA, to provide technical assistance and training to state and local fire service officials to establish

nationwide and state mutual aid systems for responding to national emergencies, and obviously September 11 is an important example of why those systems are important.

And the last objective, the third objective, permits the Superintendent of the National Fire Academy to coordinate with other

federal, state and local officials in developing new curricula at the

Academy. This legislation enjoys wide support among many of the

Nation’s fire groups, including the Congressional Fire Service Institute, International Association of Fire Chiefs, International Association of Fire Fighters, National Volunteer Fire Council, the National Fire Protection Association and many other prominent fire

organizations, and I appreciate the inclusion of this legislation in

the reauthorization, and I thank you, Mr. Chairman, for the opportunity to testify before the Committee.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Camp follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE DAVE CAMP

Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to testify before the Subcommittee.

The mission of the United States Fire Administration (USFA) has taken on added

importance since the September 11th terrorist attacks. America’s fire fighters are

taking on heightened responsibilities that go beyond combating fires. As the USFA

moves to the Department of Homeland Security, its role in coordinating the America’s fire prevention and response activities and leadership in fire education must

be strengthened to meet new these challenges. I am hopeful that as the Subcommittee considers re-authorizing the USFA it will also examine the merits of the

Firefighting Research and Coordination Act, H.R. 545 and include this important

legislation into the reauthorization measure.

Mr. Chairman, in February I introduced the Firefighting Research and Coordination Act. Senator McCain has introduced this bill in the Senate where it enjoys

broad support among members of the Commerce, Science, and Transportation Committee. This legislation will help address current policy questions on how the federal

government can most effectively provide firefighters with the training and equipment necessary to protect lives. In my view, the Firefighting Research and Coordination Act gives appropriate weight to top fire service needs. More specifically, the

bill seeks to:

1. Support the development of voluntary consensus standards for firefighting

equipment and technology;

2. Establish nationwide and State mutual aid systems for dealing with national

emergencies, and;

3. Authorize the National Fire Academy to train firefighters to respond to acts

of terrorism and other national emergencies.

The first objective of the bill focuses on establishing equipment and technology

standards. It would allow the U.S. Fire Administrator, in consultation with the National Institute of Standards and Technology, and other standards organizations to

develop voluntary consensus standards for evaluating the performance and compatibility of new fire fighting technology. Examples of these new technologies include:

20

personal protection equipment, devices for advance warning of extreme hazard,

equipment for enhanced vision, and robotics and other remote-controlled devices,

among others. Equipment purchased under the Assistance to Firefighters grant program must meet or exceed the voluntary consensus standards.

Requirements for equipment to meet voluntary consensus standards are not new.

As James Shannon, President and CEO of the National Fire Protection Association

testified in an April 30, 2003 hearing on this subject before the Senate Commerce

Committee, the Department of Justice’s Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Program requires that vests meet minimum safety and performance standards. In addition, the President has advocated for standards. Under the President’s 2002 National Strategy for Homeland Security, the Department of Homeland Security will

establish national standards for emergency response training and preparedness.

And just recently, the Council on Foreign Relations released a study chaired by

former Senator Warren Rudman, that recommended, ‘‘Congress should require DHS

and HHS to work with other federal agencies, state and local emergency responder

agencies and officials, and standard-setting bodies from the emergency responder

community to establish clearly defined standards and guidelines for federal, state,

and local government emergency preparedness and response in such areas as training, inter-operable communication systems, and response equipment.’’ Mr. Chairman, my bill accommodates these recommendations, but is also allows for the USFA

Administrator to exercise some flexibility in the rare case when a newer technology

is introduced that may make an existing voluntary consensus standard irrelevant.

The second objective of the bill addresses mutual aid systems. Mutual aid compacts are widely acknowledged to be an effective and efficient means of sharing

emergency management resources among different jurisdictions. Federal support for

mutual aid could better prepare states and localities for all types of disasters, including acts of terrorism. The Firefighting Research and Coordination Act directs

the U.S. Fire Administrator, in consultation with the Director of Federal Emergency

Management Agency (FEMA), to provide technical assistance and training to state

and local fire service officials to establish nationwide and state mutual aid systems

for responding to national emergencies. An important example of why model mutual

aid systems are important to establish comes in part, as a response to the September 11th attacks.

The third objective of the Firefighting Research and Coordination Act permits the

Superintendent of the National Fire Academy to coordinate with other Federal,

State, and local officials in developing new curricula at the Academy. New training

courses would focus on: building collapse rescue, the use of technology in response

to fires; including terrorist incidents and other national emergencies; and strategies

for dealing with terrorist-caused national catastrophes.

This legislation enjoys wide support among many of this nation’s fire groups including the Congressional Fire Services Institute, International Association of Fire

Chiefs, International Association of Fire Fighters, National Volunteer Fire Council,

the National Fire Protection Association, and many other prominent fire organizations.

Thank you again Mr. Chairman for the opportunity to testify before the Subcommittee.

DISCUSSION

Chairman SMITH. Turned this off, and—oh, there it goes. Dave,

anyway, thanks for your leadership in developing this kind of language. I guess my question is, we—in your bill, in the substitute

bill, we changed the mandatory, that they have to only use federal

grant money for equipment that met the standards to make it more

flexible, that in applying for a grant, that—and you have read the

language that makes it a little more flexible. Do you support that

change?

Mr. CAMP. I do, and just let me say that the standards really

only apply to protective clothing, not to all other equipment, and

so that—yes, I think what the Committee is doing is certainly supported by me and others and look forward to working with you to

move this bill forward. Thank you.

21

Chairman SMITH. Representative Johnson, do you have questions? Mr. Chairman. Microphone is not working, let me see if

this—here we go.

Chairman BOEHLERT. Thank you for your outstanding testimony

and leadership. I appreciate it. I would like to say that the Chairman, the Ranking Member and me are three people here, and a lot

of people are wondering why the lack of more enthusiasm up here.

It is not for lack of enthusiasm. I will tell you, most people look

at fire programs and say, we are not going to take leave of our

senses and do the wrong thing. They are convinced we are going

to do the right thing, so I think this is one of the most important

activities going on in any Subcommittee on the Hill today, and yet

we have very sparse attendance, and you know, as I do, what the

schedule is of all of our colleagues. It is rather mind-boggling on

occasion, but the lack of attendance up here on the part of our colleagues does not in any way constitute a lack of interest. They just

are confident that in Chairman Smith, the hearing is in good

hands, and that Ms. Johnson and I are going to make sure he does

the right things, and we want to thank you, Mr. Camp, for your

outstanding testimony.

Chairman SMITH. I would just add to that the hearing is being

simulcast, so it is available in—to staff and all of the Members of

the Science Committee’s offices, plus an estimated million people

are tuning in waiting for what Administrator Paulison is going to

tell us. Dave, thank you.

Mr. CAMP. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman SMITH. Thanks again. If the next panel would come to

the table.

[PA malfunction]

Panel 2

Chairman SMITH. We will—our first witness will be David

Paulison, who is the U.S. Fire Administrator and Director of the

Preparedness Division of the Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate/FEMA. Prior to his appointment as U.S. Fire

Administrator in December of 2001, he was Chief of the MiamiDade Fire Rescue Department. Administrator Paulison has 30

years of fire and rescue experience and was selected as Florida’s

Fire Chief of the Year for—in the 1990’s, so Mr. Paulison, please

proceed with your testimony, and then we will go to Dr. Bement.

STATEMENT OF R. DAVID PAULISON, U.S. FIRE ADMINISTRATOR AND DIRECTOR, PREPAREDNESS DIVISION OF THE

EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS & RESPONSE DIRECTORATE/

FEMA, DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Mr. PAULISON. Good morning, Mr. Chair and Members of the

Subcommittee. I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you

today on behalf of Secretary Ridge and Undersecretary Mike

Brown.

As you stated earlier, each year, fire injures or kills more Americans than the combined losses of all other natural disasters. Death

rates by fire in the United States are among the highest in the industrialized world. The U.S. Fire Administrator’s mission is to reVerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:36 Oct 25, 2003 Jkt 088232 PO 00000 Frm 00025 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 C:\WORKD\RES03\071703\88232 SCIENCE1 PsN: SCIENCE1
22

duce loss of life and property because of fire and related emergencies, and it is a sobering challenge for us, but it is also a hopeful challenge, because in our opinion, most of these deaths are preventable.

To accomplish this mission, we work with the fire service, other

emergency responders, state and local governments, to better prepare our firefighters for all hazards, including acts of terrorism. We

listen to state and local governments, and work with private industry to provide standardized practical compatible equipment that

works in all possible circumstances.

The U.S. Fire Administration recognizes the importance of training as a vital step toward the first responder community that is

prepared to respond to any kind of emergency, ranging from a

small fire or a terrorist attack involving a large number of victims.

Emergency preparedness and response provides training and emergency management to our firefighters, law enforcement officials,

emergency managers, health care workers, public works directors

and state and local officials at our National Fire Academy at the

Emergency Management Institute and most recently, the Noble

Training Center in Anniston, Alabama. This year, you, Congress, appropriated $750 million to emergency

preparedness and response for the Assistance to Firefighters Grant

Program, which provides grants directly to fire departments to

build our basic response capabilities for fire suppression and fire

prevention. This brings our total funding to this grant program to

a little over $1 billion since the program began three years ago,

and the fire service is extremely appreciative of your support.

These competitive grants address training, safety, prevention,

apparatus, personal protective gear and other firefighting equipment needs, as well as wellness and fitness issues for local fire departments. We have streamlined the online application process for

fire grants and sped up the flow of resources to first responders,

while ensuring the funds they use effectively and appropriately,

and in the last three years, we have received applications from

20,000 departments each year, and every year we have had this application open.

The National Fire Academy and Emergency Management Institute offer a wide variety of training programs to promote the professional development of command level officers, emergency managers, emergency responders and technical staff.

Distance learning strategies and strategic partnerships with

state fire training organizations have helped us realize approximately 15 off-campus students for every one of the 16,000 students

who get to attend classes at the National Emergency Training Center in Emmitsburg. The National Fire Academy reached almost

8,000 students on campus and an additional 87,000 students offcampus, compared to 1995, when we reached a mere 15,000 students. In 2002, the Emergency Management Institute conducted

training activities of almost 9,000 students on campus and 185,000

students off campus through our independent study courses.

We will continue to deliver fire safety messages to those most

vulnerable to fire: the very young, those under 14, and elderly,

those over 65 and others. And we will also continue to assist communities in establishing our community emergency response teams.

23

The USFA has a long-standing working relationship with a variety of federal agencies. In addition, there are partners with the national level trade—fire trade associations such as the National Volunteer Fire Council, the International Association of Fire Chiefs,

the International Association of Fire Fighters and the National

Fire Protection Association. And we also reach out to academic institutions for non-fire service organizations to direct topics of mutual interest that affect our fire service. A current example is our

partnership with the American Forest and Paper Association to examine and promote building performance awareness of lightweight

construction during fires. By sharing resources and expertise, the

partners are able to achieve much more together than we could

achieve individually.

I would also like to thank this committee for the opportunity to

comment on H.R. 545. Developing new technology for firefighters is

a critical need and has been so for a long time, and long before terrorism reached our shores. The development of measurement techniques for evaluating new firefighting technologies, rather than the

actual development of technologies, is necessary, and the USFA is

currently involved in such activities with a variety of organizations

such as NIST, sitting next to me here.

For example, in Fiscal Year 2003, we collaborated with NIST on

the following projects: Structural Collapse Prediction Tools, Full

Ensemble Test Apparatus, Thermal Protective Properties of Personal Protective Clothing and Personal Alert Safety Systems, or

PASS devices.

Reducing the loss of life and property caused by fire remains a

significant challenge and firefighters pay a high price. In 2002, 102

firefighters died in the line of duty.

Although the numbers are still way too high, as most deaths can

be prevented, great progress is being made as you pointed out, Mr.

Chair, to reduce the toll from fires.

Interoperability issues are also one of the most significant things

to overcome. It not only includes communication, but equipment,

operations, training and other areas, such as communications on

scene.

Thank you, Mr. Chair, for giving me this opportunity to appear

before you today. Your continued support is greatly appreciated,

and I will be happy to answer any questions you or the Subcommittee might have.

Thank you.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Paulison follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF R. DAVID PAULISON

Good Morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee. My name is R.

David Paulison. I am the Director of the Preparedness Division in the Emergency

Preparedness and Response (EP&R) Directorate of the Department of Homeland Security (DHS). I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today on behalf of

Secretary Ridge.

Each year, fire injures and kills more Americans than the combined losses of all

other natural disasters. Death rates by fire in the United States are among the

highest in the industrialized world. The U.S. Fire Administration’s mission to reduce loss of life and property because of fire and related emergencies is a sobering

challenge, but also a hopeful challenge, since most of these deaths are preventable.

As a part of DHS, the staff works diligently to prevent these deaths, injuries, and

the damage to property through leadership, advocacy, coordination and support in

24

four basic mission areas: fire service training, public education and awareness, technology and research, and data analysis.

To accomplish this mission, we work with the fire service, other emergency responders and State and local governments to better prepare them to respond to all

hazards, including acts of terrorism. We are also listening to State and local governments, and working with private industry, to provide standardized, practical, compatible equipment that works in all possible circumstances. We are helping first responders and emergency managers practice and refine their response plans with

partners at the local, State and federal level. We will continue to provide training

and education, programs to prepare for the routine hazards as well as the emergent

threats posed by WMD and terrorist incidents.

Today, I will focus my remarks on the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA), its programs and services, how to improve the preparedness and effectiveness and safety

of our first responders, and summarize our current activities and future needs.

Accomplishments

The U.S. Fire Administration is a national leader in fire safety and prevention

and in preparing communities to deal with fires and other hazards. USFA is working to support the efforts of local communities to reduce the number of fires and

fire deaths and it champions federal fire protection issues and coordinates information about fire programs.

In terms of our preparedness programs, we recognize the importance of training

as a vital step toward a first responder community that is prepared to respond to

any kind of emergency, ranging from a small fire to a terrorist attack involving a

large number of victims. We continue to administer training and education programs for community leaders and first responders to help them prepare for and respond to emergencies regardless of cause or magnitude.

EP&R also continues to provide training in emergency management to our firefighters, law enforcement, emergency managers, health care workers, public works,

and state and local officials at our Emergency Management Institute. I would like

to give you a few more details about these and other USFA activities.

Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program

This year, Congress appropriated $750 million to EP&R to for the Assistance to

Firefighters Grant program, which provides grant directly to fire departments to

build their basic response capabilities for fire suppression. This brings our total

funding for this grant program to a little over $1 billion since the program began

three years ago.

These competitive grants address training, safety, prevention, apparatus, personal

protective gear and other firefighting equipment needs as well as wellness and fitness issues of local fire departments. We have streamlined the online application

process for fire grants and sped up the flow of resources to first responders, while

ensuring that the funds are used effectively and appropriately. In 2001 and again

in 2002, we received nearly 20,000 applications from fire departments across the

country. Beginning with the 2001 grant program, the Emergency Education NETwork (EENET) broadcast valuable information on the grant programs and process.

Prior to the application period in 2003, EENET broadcast an actual applicant workshop, which was rebroadcast six times during the application period. We heard from

many organizations that this eased the application process. The 2003 application

process closed on April 11 and again we received nearly 20,000 applications. We

began announcing the FY 2003 awards to successful applicants in June 2003.

As you are aware, the Administration believes that this program should be integrated into the ongoing efforts to help the fire service prepare for acts of terrorism.

To achieve that end in 2004, the Office for Domestic Preparedness in the Border

Transportation and Security Directorate of DHS will manage the fire grants program to offer one-stop shopping for grants in the new Department. The transfer

would enhance coordination with other DHS grants and prioritization of terrorismpreparedness needs, while retaining the current practices of expert peer review and

direct grants to departments. EP&R and the U.S. Fire Administration will work

closely with ODP to ensure the success of this program.

Fire Service Training

The National Fire Academy (NFA) and the Emergency Management Institute

(EMI) offer a wide variety of training programs to promote the professional development of command level fire officers, emergency managers, emergency responders

and technical staff. Fire departments will continue to receive training to respond to

terrorist attacks from DHS in addition to training to respond to other hazards, such

as chemical accidents, floods, or hurricanes. We will continue to develop policy, proVerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:36 Oct 25, 2003 Jkt 088232 PO 00000 Frm 00028 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 C:\WORKD\RES03\071703\88232 SCIENCE1 PsN: SCIENCE1
25

cedures and training for a cadre of structural firefighters that will be identified by

states in wildland fire threat zones.

One training program under development is to prepare regional Incident Management Teams (IMT) to provide support for major incidents prior to, or in lieu of, the

arrival of a federal IMT. Simultaneously, we are developing the training for the Federal Incident Management Teams Program.

Emergency responders, firefighters, emergency managers and others who have

taken courses at EMI and NFA have told us these courses have added value to job

performance and professional development. In fact, surveys conducted in FY 2000

and 2001 revealed that our student’s supervisors have reported an 88 percent improvement in the student’s job performance following training. Ninety-three percent

report that EMI and NFA training have contributed to the student’s professional development and almost 87 percent report that the training has improved the department’s performance.

State and local support of fire service training must be increased and the federal

role is to foster that participation. In the future USFA will:

• Coordinate the exchange of training materials and information among State

and local fire training systems;

• Focus on distance learning and alternate training delivery methods such as

the National Incident Simulation and Training network; independent study

programs and computer-based courses;

• Increase the number of Integrated Emergency Management Courses with bioterrorism scenarios aimed at bringing officials of local jurisdictions together

to simulate and critique their responses to terrorism-driven events;

• Revise training courses to include the most updated information on risk management, public fire safety education and emergency response;

• Partner with associate and bachelor degree programs to align the national

academic fire curricula; and

• Include multiple delivery formats in future course development so that the

nexus of the course may be provided to the field in a variety of adaptable formats.

During 2002 and early 2003, the USFA held summit meetings in the EP&R regions looking for information that defined the needs of the first responder community in the new environment that includes WMD and terrorism preparation and response. Our staff also met with focus groups, course developers, and students at the

National Emergency Training Center for the same purpose. Each group identified

the skill sets necessary to conduct or support a WMD or terrorism catastrophe. Over

95 percent of those skills are already being taught in the existing curriculum and

courses. The message conveyed by these organizations is very clear. We need to:

• Continue teaching the curriculum we have on hand;

• Update our course materials regularly to reflect emerging issues;

• Continue to maximize learning opportunities for all first responders.

During the past year, the importance of working directly with the emergency

management, fire service and EMS communities has become even more apparent.

It is critical that we keep the most likely first responders to any terrorism or WMD

event fully advised of information and circumstances that might affect their response rind their community’s preparation. Partnering with the law enforcement

community has enhanced our ability to deliver direct warnings that will result in

improved operations and better outcomes.

Distance learning strategies and strategic partnerships with state fire service

training organizations have helped us realize approximately 15 additional off-campus students for every one of the 16,000 students who get to attend classes on campus at the National Emergency Training Center, which is comprised of the National

Fire Academy and the Emergency Management Institute. In FY 2002, the National

Fire Academy reached a total of 7,860 students on campus and an additional 87,265

students off campus, compared to FY 1995 when that number was 15,000 students.

In 2002, EMI conducted training activities for 8,968 students on campus and an additional 185,000 off campus through EMI independent study courses.

The USFA’s National Fire Academy work also underpins the training provided by

accredited State Fire Training Programs. These state programs have over $’700 million in capital facilities and trained over 750,000 firefighters last year.

For the past five years, we have partnered with colleges and universities across

the country to ensure that important fire safety concepts are delivered to the Nation’s fire service. Our training programs continue to focus on those classes that

26

align with the USFA Operational Objectives. We develop and deliver the type of

training that cannot be obtained through other institutions. A curriculum review for

the National Fire Academy curriculum is scheduled for FY 2004 and we expect to

see those results by 2005.

USFA continues a commitment to excellence in delivering fire related public education, training, research and technology, and data initiatives.

Public Education and Awareness

USFA continues to deliver fire safety messages to those most vulnerable to fire—

the very young, the elderly and others. We will continue to manage Emergency Response Team activities with an eye toward public outreach and community hazards

assessment and mitigation efforts. USFA will assist communities in establishing

Community Emergency Response Teams.

We will continue to broadcast training information via the Emergency Education

Network (EENET) twice a month to enhance State and local preparedness for all

hazards, including terrorist incidents. Since 1981, EENET has broadcast more than

400 programs to meet the needs of all levels of emergency management, from volunteer fire fighters to State Emergency Management Directors.

EENET is an effective way to get timely information or training out to a large

audience. Coupled with other outreach and training programs, EENET is a good

way to share information about training and education and to keep first responders,

abreast of emerging issues.

Data Collection

The Fire Administration continues to collect, analyze, publish and distribute data

and information related to fire prevention, occurrence, control, and related fields; defines and describes the national fire problem; and supports State and local collection

and analysis of fire incident data.

This past fall, in cooperation with the National Fire Protection Association, the

USFA completed a needs assessment of the U.S. fire service to gain a current understanding of problem areas and to guide future planning and initiatives. Combined

with the ongoing national fire department census, we continue to develop an increasingly complete and accurate picture of the Nation’s fire departments’ capability

to meet the challenge of expanding roles and responsibilities in response to all hazards, including acts of terrorism.

Research and Technology

To maximize the impact of limited resources, USFA uses its national position to

serve as a focal point for developing cooperative relationships among the diverse organizations that have a shared interest in developing new technologies to address

fire safety and firefighting. USFA-supported fire research is almost without exception accomplished through partnerships.

USFA has long standing working relationships with a variety of federal agencies

including the Consumer Product Safety Commission, Department of Transportation,

National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, Department of Housing and

Urban Development, and the National Institute of Standards and Technology. In addition, there are partnerships with national-level fire trade associations such as the

National Volunteer Fire Council, the International Association of Fire Chiefs, the

International Association of Fire Fighters, and the National Fire Protection Association. The USFA also reaches out to academic institutions and non-fire service organizations to address topics of mutual interest. A current example is a partnership

with the American Forest and Paper Association to examine and promote building

performance awareness of lightweight construction during fires. By sharing resources and expertise, the partners are able to achieve much more together than

they could achieve individually.

The data and information derived from these partnership research effort, have influenced the decisions of consensus standards-making committees on a variety of

issues such as firefighting protective clothing, chemical protective clothing, protective clothing for urban search and rescue, self-contained breathing apparatus, and

residential sprinkler systems.

Details of USFA’s research program are being shared with the DHS Office of

Science and Technology (S&T) to identify areas of complementary research, inform

S&T on research needs specific to the fire community, and explore ways of combining resources for maximum impact.

USFA leverages research partnerships and technology developments to improve

fire prevention and promote public safety. In April, the USFA met with the fire

sprinkler community to reenergize our advocacy for residential fire sprinklers. I am

happy to report that industry agreed to work with USFA on this project. The data

suggests that localized fire suppression systems in kitchens would dramatically reVerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:36 Oct 25, 2003 Jkt 088232 PO 00000 Frm 00030 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 C:\WORKD\RES03\071703\88232 SCIENCE1 PsN: SCIENCE1
27

duce the number of civilian fire deaths in this country by as much as 25 percent.

The cost to retrofit a kitchen is minimal. This is an excellent opportunity to reduce

residential fire losses in the U.S. Since 40 percent of firefighter deaths in the line

of duty occur at or en route, to residential structures, the long-term, benefit is that

firefighter injuries and deaths will also be reduced.

I also would like to thank the Committee for the opportunity to comment on H.R.

545. Developing new technology for firefighters is a critical need and has been so

long before terrorism reached our shores. The development of measurement techniques for evaluating new firefighting technologies rather than the actual development of technologies is necessary and USFA is currently involved in such activities

with a variety of organizations, including NIST.

For example, in FY03 USFA collaborated with NIST on the following related

projects: Structural Collapse Prediction Tools, Full Ensemble Test Apparatus, Thermal Protective Properties of Personal Protective Clothing, Personal Alert Safety Systems (PASS). These activities appear to fit the bill as drafted.

It would be helpful to have the legislation identify priorities for the limited funds.

We hope that it is not the intent of the legislation to limit this work to NIST. We

have a very productive working relationship with NIST, but they are not the only

partners we have for this type of activity. We do not believe it is in the best interest

of the fire community to limit participation, and thus, inhibit creativity, efficiency

and effectiveness.

A few examples of organizations other than NIST that have collaborated with

USFA on evaluating technology and providing documentation for consideration by

standards-making bodies include: Hughes Associates and Factory Mutual—water

mist technology for residential applications, TRI Research, Austin, TX—standards

for chemical protective clothing; and Lawrence Livermore Labs—testing of SCBA for

standards development. We believe that the maintenance of partnerships with a

wide range of organizations is in the best interest of technology development.

We believe the best course would be to identify, document, and, to the extent possible, assess the applicability of already existing technologies and testing methodologies.

Challenges

Reducing the loss of life and property caused by fire remains a significant challenge. Each year, fire kills more than 4,000 people and injures more than 22,000.

Annual property losses due to fire are estimated at nearly $10 billion. And, firefighters pay a high price. In 2002, 102 firefighters died while on duty.

Although the numbers are still too high as most of these deaths can be prevented,

great progress is being made to reduce the toll from fires. Since 1974, when Congress passed the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act (P.L. 93–498), and established the United States Fire Administration and its National Fire Academy—USFA

has helped to reduce fire deaths significantly. Over the last 10 years, fires have declined by 16 percent. During this same period, a 22 percent decline in civilian

deaths and a 31 percent drop in civilian injuries were also reported.

USFA continues to deliver the strongest system of training with available funding. USFA training is designed to supplement the currently existing state and local

accredited and staffed systems. These existing State and local systems have the expertise and an underutilized capacity that could be tapped to meet growing training

needs.

Since the events of 9/11, and the increased threat to our homeland from terrorists

organizations that have access to some of the most deadly forms of chemical and

biological agents in human history, as well as radiological devices of various types

and descriptions, the ability of the U.S. Fire Service to successfully deal with such

potential incidents remains a priority of the Department. Providing the U.S. Fire

Service with training, equipment, planning and exercise support would greatly benefit the public by providing levels of everyday fire protection and EMS delivery unsurpassed anywhere in the world while at the same time dramatically improving

first responder capabilities to deal with terrorist attacks in the homeland.

This has been supported in two aspects by the Federal Government. Funds provided by Congress for the Assistance to Firefighters Grants Program have addressed

basic fire suppression needs, while State Homeland Security Grants provided by the

Office for Domestic Preparedness have supported terrorism-specific training and

equipment purchases.

Fire and emergency responders to the three 9–11 incidents, when the motive is

removed, confronted aircraft crashes. It was the sheer size and scope of these incidents that made them horrendous. While in many instances the normal equipment

carried by fire-rescue departments may be sufficient to resolve a terrorist incident,

the Federal Government has a unique responsibility to ensure that terrorism-speVerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:36 Oct 25, 2003 Jkt 088232 PO 00000 Frm 00031 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 C:\WORKD\RES03\071703\88232 SCIENCE1 PsN: SCIENCE1
28

cialized equipment is available to departments, especially those at greatest risk of

terrorism. The Department of Homeland Security is committed to addressing those

needs.

Interoperability issues are also one of the most significant matters to be overcome.

This not only includes communications, but equipment, operations, training, and

other areas.

The current lack of national consensus standards for response to terrorist incidents is a critical challenge that DHS faces and we are working diligently to address

them. Without these consensus standards, there can be no measurement or analysis

of response to terrorist incidents in any quantifiable manner. These standards

should be developed through a forum that supports a consensus-making standards

process.

Conclusion

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for giving me this opportunity to appear before you

today. Your continued support is greatly appreciated. I will be glad to answer any

questions you and other Members of the Committee may have.

BIOGRAPHY FOR R. DAVID PAULISON

R. David Paulison of Miami was appointed U.S. Fire Administrator in December

2001. As U.S. Fire Administrator, Mr. Paulison heads the U.S. Fire Administration,

part of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and supports state

and local fire service programs as well as implementing FEMA Director Joe M.

Allbaugh’s initiatives for emergency readiness, firefighter training and equipment.

The mission of the U.S. Fire Administration is to reduce life and economic losses

due to fire and related emergencies through public education, training, technology

and data research initiatives in coordination with other federal agencies and in

partnership with fire protection and emergency service communities.

Before accepting this post, Paulison, who has 30 years of fire rescue services experience, had been chief of the Miami-Dade Fire Rescue Department since 1992. In

that position, he oversaw 1,900 personnel with a $200 million operating budget and

a $70 million capital budget. He also oversaw the county’s emergency management

office.

He began his career as a rescue firefighter and rose through the ranks to rescue

lieutenant, battalion commander, district chief of operations, division chief, assistant

chief and then deputy director for administration before becoming chief. His emergency management experience includes Hurricane Andrew and the crash of ValuJet

Flight 592.

A native of Miami, Fla., Paulison earned a Bachelor of Arts from Florida Atlantic

University and completed the Program for Senior Executives in State and Local

Government at Harvard University’s John F. Kennedy School of Government. He received the LeRoy Collins Distinguished Alumni Award and was inducted into the

Miami-Dade Community College Hall of Fame. Paulison was selected as fire chief

of the year by Florida in 1993 and holds positions in several professional associations. He is a certified paramedic and as fire chief, oversaw the Miami-Date Urban

Search and Rescue Task Force. He is also past president of the International Association of Fire Chiefs.

Chairman SMITH. Administrator, thank you. Director Bement is,

of course, the Director of the National Institute of Standards, a position he has held since December of 2001. Before receiving this appointment, Dr. Bement served as the David A. Ross Distinguished

Professor of Nuclear Engineering and head of the School of the Nuclear Engineering at Purdue University. From 1989 to ’95, Dr.

Bement was a member of the U.S. National Science Board, the governing board of the National Science Foundation. He is also a

member of the U.S. National Academy of Engineering.

Welcome, Director Bement. We look forward to your testimony.

STATEMENT OF DR. ARDEN L. BEMENT, DIRECTOR, NATIONAL

INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY

Dr. BEMENT. We at NIST applaud the Committee for holding this

hearing to discuss the needs of the fire services and to examine

29

H.R. 545. This very important legislation is aimed at getting better

equipment into the hands of firefighters. To support this goal, there

is an urgent need for performance-based consensus standards that

will lead to better performing, safer, reliable and cost-effective

equipment for firefighters.

NIST’s mission is to support this effort through our expertise in

measurement science and technology. NFPA [National Fire Protection Association] has committees that develop voluntary consensus

standards. Many NIST staff members serve on these committees.

Technical reports from NIST provide NFPA committees and

NIOSH [National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health]

with data and procedures to help advance national standards,

based on these performance requirements.

The Department of Homeland Security’s FEMA provides grants

to fire departments allowing firefighters to better equip and prepare for fires and other emergencies. However, many new technologies are not yet supported by consensus standards. In the absence of such standards, individual fire departments must either

assess the performance of these new technologies or rely solely on

manufacturers’ information and demonstration. Equipment interoperability also suffers from lack of consensus standards. To help

address these issues, NIST, the Department of Justice and Department of Homeland Security are working together to evaluate equipment for use by the Nation’s first responder and emergency management communities.

Less than a month ago, NIST, in partnership with DHS and Justice hosted a summit on interoperable communications for public

safety. Three significant accomplishments were achieved during the

summit. First, key interoperable—interoperability players were familiarized with the work being done by others. Second, insight was

gained into where additional federal resources might be warranted.

Finally, the summit was the first step in leveraging available resources to develop standards, approaches, products and services for

the benefit of all.

NIST’s current fire research activities comprise $8.4 million in

direct appropriations and an additional $2 million being funded by

the Fire Administration. Time only permits a brief summary of a

few of the 20 or more projects that we are currently undertaking

with this funding level.

In partnership with the Fire Administration, NIST is performing

research on passive and active fire protection technologies that will

assure that residential fires do not spread beyond the room where

the fire starts. Fires that involve more than one room greatly increase fire deaths, injuries and property damage. NIST is determining how inexpensive clay nanoparticles added to ordinary plastics will dramatically reduce flammability while increasing the

properties important to manufacturing.

Experiments at NIST have demonstrated a single sprinkler—

sprinklers can provide active fire control for kitchens, where many

home fires start. Results of this research are being shared with

NFPA and others.

Portable thermal imagers are used by firefighters to enhance vision, to identify hot spots in cool surroundings, such as hidden

fires, and to identify cool objects like victims of fire or downed fireVerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:36 Oct 25, 2003 Jkt 088232 PO 00000 Frm 00033 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 C:\WORKD\RES03\071703\88232 SCIENCE1 PsN: SCIENCE1
30

fighters. NIST is developing an apparatus to measure how well

such thermal imaging hardware is able to add to vision.

The fire alarm panel in buildings often found in the lobby near

the main entrance is the heart of the building’s fire information

system. Until recently, even the best displays offered only rows of

lights that indicated building zones where fire was detected. In

many cases, it was easier to look for the fire than to decipher the

panel display. The development of more powerful and affordable

computer and graphic displays has provided an opportunity to expand the amount of information available at the panel. NIST created a standard set of graphic icons so the firefighters have only

to learn the meaning of one set of symbols, and last fall, NFPA

adopted a set of standard icons for fire alarm system displays.

NIST is now turning its attention to the standards that will be

needed to advance the wireless transmission of information from

building emergency systems to responding firefighters even before

they arrive at the building.

In conclusion, NIST welcomes its role as envisaged under H.R.

545 to work with the Administrator in the development of new

technologies for firefighters, and to assist the Administrator in assuring that new equipment meets or exceeds voluntary consensus

standards.

Thank you, and I would be happy to answer any of your questions.

[The prepared statement of Dr. Bement follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF ARDEN L. BEMENT, JR.

Good morning, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee. My name is Arden

Bement. I am the Director of the National Institute of Standards and Technology

(NIST). I appreciate the opportunity to appear before you today. NIST conducts research that advances the Nation’s measurement and standards infrastructure and

works closely with national voluntary consensus standards organizations to support

the development of consensus standards. These standards are needed by U.S. industry for continually improving products and services. In relation to fire research,

NIST was given specific authority under the Fire Prevention and Control Act of

1974 to ‘‘perform and support research on all aspects of fire with the aim of providing scientific and technical knowledge applicable to the prevention and control

of fires.’’

Equipment for first responders is very specialized. It also constitutes a small market that is generally served by small manufacturers. Producing new equipment for

the market in the absence of generally-accepted standards is a high-risk venture.

In addition, standards that reflect in use conditions for determining the performance

of firefighter equipment would assist industry in providing equipment that meets

or exceeds firefighter needs.

The U.S. fire service looks to the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) and

the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) as its primary

sources of equipment performance standards and safety information. NFPA has established committees that consider the need for equipment performance standards

and develop consensus standards where views of industry, the fire service, government and commercial laboratories, and other interested parties are represented.

Many of the staff in the NIST Building and Fire Research Laboratory and the Office

of Law Enforcement Standards at NIST are members of NFPA and serve on their

standards developing committees. NIST provides technical assistance to NIOSH in

firefighter fatality investigations and thermal sensor evaluation. Technical reports

from NIST on measurement techniques, methodologies, and results, provide NFPA

committees and NIOSH with data and procedures to help advance national standards. NIST developed measurement methods are also adopted by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) and the International Organization for Standardization (ISO).

In FY 2001, FEMA established the Assistance to Firefighter’s Grant Program following passage of the Firefighter Investment and Response (FIRE) ACT that proVerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:36 Oct 25, 2003 Jkt 088232 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 C:\WORKD\RES03\071703\88232 SCIENCE1 PsN: SCIENCE1
31

vides fire departments funding through grants for needed equipment. These funds

are now allowing firefighters to be better equipped and prepared for fires and other

emergencies. However, many new technologies are not yet supported by the existence of consensus standards. Individual fire departments are forced to assess the

performance of these new technologies or rely solely on manufacturers’ information

and demonstrations. Inter-operability of equipment also suffers from lack of consensus standards.

To help address this issue, a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between

NIST and FEMA was signed in March 2002 and establishes a framework for NIST

to serve as a standards and measurement science resource for the Department of

Homeland Security’s FEMA in the areas of fire, disaster prevention, and homeland

security. One of the purposes called out in the agreement is to aid the development

of standards and methods to evaluate equipment for use by the Nation’s first responder and emergency management communities. The MOU also reaffirms NIST’s

role as a critical element of our national fire strategy. Additionally, NIST will continue to work with other agencies and directorates of the Department of Homeland

Security. In particular, the Under Secretary of Technology recently signed a Memorandum of Understanding between the Technology Administration and the Directorate of Science and Technology at the Department of Homeland Security to formalize this relationship.

NIST is proud of its role as FEMA’s science and technology resource and in helping the Fire Administration to improve the effectiveness and safety of firefighting.

NIST’s current research activities in this area comprises $8.4 million in direct appropriations with an additional $2 million being funded by the Fire Administration.

Below is a brief description of our current and recent activities.

Portable thermal imagers are used by firefighters to enhance vision. They are

used to identify hot spots in cool surroundings such as hidden fires in void space

or over-heated fluorescent light ballasts. They are also used to identify cool objects,

like victims of fire incapacitated by smoke or downed firefighters in hot surroundings during building search and rescue. Unfortunately, the performance of the

sensors implemented in various products has not been measured under controlled

conditions. Furthermore, the minimum level of important performance attributes,

such as image contrast, have not been determined.

NIST, with added funding from USFA, is developing an apparatus to measure

how well thermal imaging hardware is able to aid vision and hazard sensing under

a variety of realistic conditions. These laboratory measurements will be compared

to measurements made in actual building fires and in large-scale fire experiments

at NIST. The results will be used to assure that laboratory measurements are reliable indicators of real-world performance. Standards built on this foundation will

provide for accurate measurement of the important performance attributes of firefighter equipment essential for quality, reliability, safe, and effective use.

Another example of our work deals with firefighter protective clothing. The NFPA

Standard on Protective Ensemble for Structural Fire Fighting (NFPA 1971) specifies

the minimum design, performance, certification requirements, and test methods for

structural firefighter protective ensembles. The test method for measurement of

thermal protective performance for firefighter protective garment and the minimum

rating required for safety is part of this NFPA standard. The Thermal Protective

Performance (TPP) rating is determined by exposing dry materials to a single high

intensity exposure condition that is often related to an extreme fire condition called

flashover. This standard has contributed substantially to improved safety for firefighters, but firefighters tell us they are being burned through their gear under

lower intensity exposures.

During firefighting, a firefighter’s protective clothing is wet from the outside by

water spray and the inside by perspiration produced from strenuous activity. NIST,

assisted by funding from USFA, is performing measurements under a range of thermal exposures and moisture conditions and has found that wet gear performs differently than dry gear with respect to burn injury protection. Manufacturers have

come to NIST to utilize the NIST apparatus to understand more about the behavior

of their products under conditions different from those assumed in the present

standard. This data generated by manufacturers working at NIST will be used to

improve protective clothing products. In addition, the testing approach used at NIST

will be offered for consideration for adoption as part of the current standard. The

apparatus is also being used in exploratory NIST research to evaluate the thermal

protective attributes of new materials such as carbon nano-tube composite fabrics.

These measurements can help in the development of future protective clothing that

has even better resistance to burn injury with reduced weight.

NIST works hard to anticipate needs so that information is ready when needed

by industry to advance their products and provide for inter-operability. Four years

32

ago, NIST formed a consortium with several fire alarm hardware manufacturers.

The fire alarm panel in buildings, often found in the lobby near the main entrance,

is the heart of the building’s fire information system. Condition measurements and

alarms from fire detectors placed throughout a building are sent to this display.

Until recently, even the best displays offered only rows of lights that indicated the

zones in the building where fire was detected. Often a key or map was needed to

interpret the lights. In many cases, it was easier to look for the fire than to use

the information from the panel display.

The development of more powerful and affordable computer and graphic displays

has provided manufacturers with the opportunity to expand the display capabilities

and the amount of information available at the panel using graphic icons. NIST created a standard set of icons for these panels and other fire command devices. In

this way, firefighters would only have to learn the meaning of one set of symbols

if they were applied on all fire service graphic displays. Last fall, working from documents submitted by NIST, the NFPA Technical Committee on Testing and Maintenance of Fire Alarm Systems adopted a set of standard icons for fire alarm system

displays and published these in the 2002 Edition of National Fire Alarm Code

(NFPA 1972). NIST is now turning its attention to the standards that will be needed to advance the wireless transmission and display of information contained in the

building emergency systems to responding firefighters even before they arrive at a

building.

Interagency research managed by NIST is also helping to protect firefighters responding to terrorism incidents. Threat analyses and simulations have been conducted to examine chemical warfare agent hazard concentrations in a variety of domestic terrorist attack scenarios, both for respiratory and percutaneous (skin)

threats. Results are being supplied to the NFPA committee revising the Standard

on Protective Ensembles for Chemical/Biological Terrorism Incidents (NFPA 1994).

Additionally, NIST and the Department of Homeland Security have begun to coordinate efforts aimed at improving the communication capabilities of first responders. Even though there are many exceptional inter-operability program efforts underway, they are being conducted (more or less) independently. They were established with a particular mission, to meet certain objectives, and to satisfy a set of

user requirements. And they continue to operate in that vein. While these programs

are accomplishing good things within the confines of their operating environment,

they may not ever be able to realize the broader impact that comes with greater

exposure and cooperation. That is why less than a month ago NIST’s Office of Law

Enforcement Standards, in partnership with DHS’ Science and Technology Directorate and the National Institute of Justice, hosted a Summit on Inter-operable

Communications for Public Safety. Three significant accomplishments were achieved

during the Summit. First, key inter-operability players were familiarized with the

work being done by others so that mutually-beneficial coordination and collaboration

among the various technical programs can be established. Second, insight was

gained into where additional federal resources might be warranted. Finally, the

Summit was the first step in maximizing the limited resources that are available

across all government levels so that we can begin to leverage program successes and

use developed standards, approaches, products, and services for the benefit of all.

While these activities are significant additional activities need to be undertaken

in order to develop consensus standards for new firefighting technologies as described in H.R. 545.

First, priorities must be established for the development of the standards. In cooperation with the USFA, NIST has hosted workshops with representatives of the

fire service, industry, and other laboratories to establish priorities for fire service

research. Published results of these workshops have helped set the current research

agenda for both NIST and USFA. Similar workshops should be held to establish priority and a timeline for the development of measurement techniques, testing methodologies, and consensus standards.

Second, measurement techniques and testing methodologies need to be developed

for evaluating the performance of firefighter equipment using new technologies.

NIST is the Nation’s primary measurement laboratory. Our mission is to develop

measurements and standards to enhance productivity, facilitate trade, and improve

the quality of life. NIST has specialized laboratory facilities and staff expertise

ideally suited for the development of these techniques and methodologies for many

of the new firefighting technologies.

Third, a network of private sector laboratories and facilities are needed where the

measurement techniques and the methodologies can be used in a reproducible way,

a necessary condition for the success of any standard. NIST will work with other

organizations to assure that the measurement results are reproducible.

33

Finally, NIST will work closely with national voluntary consensus standards organizations to support the development of the consensus standards. An unbiased

source of technical information and data, such as that supplied by NIST, is critical

to the success of this effort.

I am delighted that there is recognition by this Subcommittee of the importance

of standards development for firefighting equipment. NIST is the Nation’s primary

measurement laboratory and has always played a critical role in the development

of effective consensus standards. This role was first demonstrated with our study

of ‘‘the problem of fire hose couplings’’ during the Baltimore Fire of 1904 and it continues today as we support the improved safety and effectiveness of firefighting in

America.

Thank you and I would be happy to answer any of your questions.

BIOGRAPHY FOR ARDEN L. BEMENT, JR.

Arden L. Bement, Jr., was sworn in as the 12th director of NIST on December

7, 2001. Bement oversees an agency with an annual budget of about $812 million

and an onsite research and administrative staff of about 3,000, complemented by

a NIST-sponsored network of 2,000 locally managed manufacturing and business

specialists serving smaller manufacturers across the United States. Prior to his appointment as NIST director, Bement served as the David A. Ross Distinguished Professor of Nuclear Engineering and head of the School of Nuclear Engineering at Purdue University. He has held appointments at Purdue University in the schools of

Nuclear Engineering, Materials Engineering, and Electrical and Computer Engineering, as well as a courtesy appointment in the Krannert School of Management.

He was director of the Midwest Superconductivity Consortium and the Consortium

for the Intelligent Management of the Electrical Power Grid.

Bement came to his position as NIST Director well versed in the workings of the

agency, having previously served as head of the Visiting Committee on Advanced

Technology, the agency’s primary private-sector policy adviser; as head of the advisory committee for NIST’s Advanced Technology Program; and on the Board of

Overseers for the Malcolm Baldrige National Quality Award.

Bement joined the Purdue faculty in 1992 after a 39-year career in industry, government, and academia. These positions included: Vice President of Technical Resources and of Science and Technology for TRW Inc. (1980–1992); Deputy Under

Secretary of Defense for Research and Engineering (1979–1980); Director, Office of

Materials Science, DARPA (1976–1979); Professor of Nuclear Materials, MIT (1970–

1976); Manager, Fuels and Materials Department and the Metallurgy Research Department, Battelle Northwest Laboratories (1965–1970); and Senior Research Associate, General Electric Co. (1954–1965).

Along with his NIST advisory roles, Bement served as a member of the U.S. National Science Board, the governing board for the National Science Foundation, from

1989 to 1995. He also chaired the Commission for Engineering and Technical Studies and the National Materials Advisory Board of the National Research Council;

was a member of the Space Station Utilization Advisory Subcommittee and the

Commercialization and Technology Advisory Committee for NASA; and consulted for

the Department of Energy’s Argonne National Laboratory and Idaho Nuclear Energy and Environmental Laboratory.

He has been a director of Keithley Instruments Inc. and the Lord Corp. and was

a member of the Science and Technology Advisory Committee for the Howmet Corp.

(a division of ALCOA).

Bement holds an Engineer of Metallurgy degree from the Colorado School of

Mines, a Master’s degree in Metallurgical Engineering from the University of Idaho,

a doctorate degree in Metallurgical Engineering from the University of Michigan,

and a honorary doctorate degree in Engineering from Cleveland State University.

He is a member of the U.S. National Academy of Engineering.

DISCUSSION

Chairman SMITH. Director, thank you very much. Administrator

Paulison, it seems like the environment is—gives us a lot of potential to expand in the areas that we need to expand for greater fire

safety, for greater assistance in helping our firefighters. After 9/11,

I think there is a greater appreciation for the contribution that our

first responders make to their communities, their states and their

34

countries. In terms of—for lack of a better way, holding your own

for firefighters, as FEMA and you are incorporated into Homeland

Security, do you see dangers in performing the traditional role that

the U.S. Fire Administration has had with sometimes a greater

concentration and push toward protecting against terrorism? How

do you see the compatibility of the two goals?

Mr. PAULISON. I think it is a concern that all of us had going into

the Department of Homeland Security. You know, we know we

have to pick up the terrorism piece. It is extremely important for

this country to be prepared for this, but at the same time, we wanted to make sure we didn’t forget what our core mission was.

I think having an Office of Disaster Preparedness outside of

EP&R in B&TS [Border and Transportation Security] right now

helps us focus on our core mission. We continue to focus on firefighter safety. We have concentrated very clearly that our mission

is to provide protection to the people that live and travel in this

country and predominantly, those that are under 14 and over 65,

and we are continuing to focus on that. We are going to continue

to focus on firefighter safety. We still lose 100—over 100 firefighters every year in this country. Totally unacceptable. So as we

moved into this Department, a huge Department, you know, some

200,000 employees or more, we have been able to keep that focus,

and we have got a tremendous amount of support from Secretary

Ridge for all hazards approach to—from the Fire Administration.

Chairman SMITH. Let me just mention for the record that the

Committee staff and the Committee were disappointed that we

didn’t get your—the Administration’s—your estimates of what is

needed in terms of authorized funding until the night before last.

I would just hope that somehow, our communication could be such

that we could have more advance notice of that kind of information, and also, there is still a question in my mind on the Noble

Training Center. Is it the Administration’s recommendation that

the Noble Training Center funding be transferred to the USFA?

Mr. PAULISON. Yes, sir. We are going to—the Noble Training

Center will come under the Preparedness Division in EP&R, which

I oversee, and that will be part of our three legs that we are developing. We are trying to develop a university type system, so we will

have the Emergency Management Institute for the emergency

management, we will have the Fire Academy for the fire training

side and then we will have the Noble Training Center for the medical side, as far as training our EMS people in our health positions

out there in dealing with biological disasters and chemical disasters.

Chairman SMITH. Let me—in March, you announced that you

would—because of budget constraints, there would be a cut in some

of the classes. With this kind of funding that is being recommended

by the Administration, can you give us assurance that classes won’t

be cut in ’04?

Mr. PAULISON. The ’04 budget as it is proposed, it gives full funding for the Fire Academy and all of the classes that we had scheduled will be delivered.

Chairman SMITH. Dr. Bement, the problem of communications

has been identified as a major challenge to the ability of fire departments to effectively communicate and respond to emergencies.

35

Is this problem being addressed, at least in part, through the development of standards?

Dr. BEMENT. Yes, sir, it is. We are working closely with NTIA

[National Telecommunications and Information Administration]

and Commerce in terms of examining spectrum allocation, but also,

in looking at the future of wireless and broadband communication.

We are also looking at new technologies through spectrum switching and through software-defined radio and other new developments that will allow a higher level of interoperability among different wavelengths of communication equipment, not only

handheld but also land mobile radio systems.

I had my eyes open when I attended the conference just—the

summit just a few days ago on communication interoperability. The

great complexity that currently exists in this area, because over the

years, we have developed so many different approaches to emergency response and communication, but I am very much encouraged that with the effort that we are taking now and the level of

cooperation that is now recognized that is going to be needed, that

we are going to make good progress but it is going to take time.

It will probably take another five or 10 years before we have the

system fully interoperable.

Chairman SMITH. My time has expired. Maybe we will have time

for a second round. Representative Cardoza.

Mr. CARDOZA. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Mr. Paulison, Mr.

Bement. Do you believe that firefighting and fire protection equipment obtained under the FIRE Grants program should conform to

consensus standards where such standards exist, and should this

be an explicit requirement of the program?

Mr. PAULISON. The consensus standards apply mostly to protective gear, so the general answer is yes. However, what we don’t

want to do is to cut off any new technologies out there, so if, you

know, if we give preference to fire departments that have included

that in their application, that the particular equipment they are

buying does not meet particular consensus standards, such as

NFPA or OSHA [Occupational Safety and Health Administration]

or other ones, and then they get preference in that, but at the same

time, you know, we need to give a little bit of leeway, if there are

new technologies out there. Like Mr. Chairman here mentioned,

that we need to look at those very closely.

Mr. CARDOZA. Mr. Paulison, the blue ribbon panel that reviewed

USFA in 1998 recommended a $10 million per year increase in research activities. What is the current funding level for research activities? Do you believe that these resources are adequate?

Mr. PAULISON. Well, right now, we give $2 million to NIST to do

the research we talked about earlier, and we also work with other

agencies that we don’t necessarily fund, but we partner with, such

as the Maryland Fire Rescue Institute at the University of Maryland.

Mr. CARDOZA. My alma mater, sir, that is a good school.

Mr. PAULISON. Is it really?

Mr. CARDOZA. Yes.

Mr. PAULISON. By the way, they are doing an excellent job in

doing research into some of these technologies that we are talking

about. And there are also private agencies that are doing some—

36

Motorola is working very significantly now since September 11 of

2001 on interoperability issues. Other companies are stepping up

to the plate to recognize that. So it allows to—although the dollars

are not necessarily what was recommended by the blue ribbon

panel, we are able to leverage those relationships to make sure the

research is being done, and we are getting—we are making a significant headway into getting some of these equipments out on the

street.

Mr. CARDOZA. Thank you.

Chairman SMITH. This is one of the most high tech advanced offices we were to—or hearing rooms, we were told.

Mr. PAULISON. Maybe we need some technological research and

standards.

Chairman SMITH. I guess.

Mr. PAULISON. Standards.

Chairman SMITH. I guess they resolved the communications

issue.

Mr. GINGREY. You have got to have this on the Science Committee, of course. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Is that not working?

Musical chairs, here. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and thank you,

Mr. Paulison and Dr. Bement for being here this morning and giving your testimony. Administrator Paulison, according to the

USFA’s strategic plan, the 10 year goal is to reduce America’s loss

of life by fire to 30 percent with the 1998 national fire data statistics used as the baseline. It is through, of course, targeting of highrisk groups such as children, the elderly and firefighters. At the

halfway point in working toward the 10 year goal, do you believe

the United States Fire Administration and the country is on a glide

path to achieve the goal, and if not, what else must happen to realize this reduction in loss of life?

Mr. PAULISON. The reduction in loss of life for our citizens, our

residents and our firefighters is not where I want it to be. We are

still losing 4,000 people a year to fires, and like the Chairman

pointed out, 80 percent of those are in their homes, and we are still

losing over 100 firefighters a year, so there are things we have to

do. One of the things we are doing is we are going to start putting

a big, major focus on the residential sprinkling. We have met with

the sprinkler industry. They have been opposed to what we call localized sprinkler systems, where instead of sprinkling the whole

house, we are recommending we target those areas that we know

we have the fires in: our kitchens, utility rooms, garages, those

areas where our fires are most prevalent. And in work with builders and developers to start sprinkling some of these—onto those—

in those areas. It is the minimal cost, and we think it will greatly

reduce the loss of life.

Smoke alarms that we put in some 15 years ago have been the—

in my opinion, the big difference between the 8,000 or 9,000 people

we lost back in the ’60’s and ’70’s to down to 4,000, but now, we

have come to a plateau and we need to move on with that, and I

think sprinklers are the next move.

Public education plays heavily into that, and also with firefighters. Most of our firefighter deaths are heart attacks and vehicle accidents, two of the most preventable things that we have. So

we are focusing on driver training and also, we are focusing on

37

wellness and fitness in the fire station itself and with the firefighters. So we think we are—we have got the answers to move to

the next level to see a decline in these deaths.

Mr. GINGREY. Well, it would seem to me, of course, that you are

already doing a lot in regard to physical fitness, and when I look

at—you can almost spot a firefighter out of uniform in an instant.

They look like—look pretty good. Pretty good physical specimens,

so they are obviously working out and spending some valuable time

doing that, and I think that is good. You mentioned, of course, putting in alarm systems and maybe over a few years, bringing the

loss down from 9,000 to 4,000, and I am pleasantly surprised at

that. I would think, though, that getting builders to do that would

be a lot easier and a lot cheaper than getting them to agree to put

in sprinkler systems even in targeted areas. Although I certainly—

you know, it makes sense to me thinking about that that that

would certainly save lives, but you indicated maybe that the costs

wouldn’t be that significant, but it seemed like to me would be a

much more substantial cost than just putting in an alarm system.

Mr. PAULISON. Well, it is more expensive than just putting—we

need the alarm system also. The smoke alarms are what alerts our

people that there is a fire in the house, but at the same time, there

needs to be something in the home to contain that fire until they

can get safely out of the building. The focus of residential sprinklers is not necessarily to put the fire out, but to contain the fire.

That is different than our commercial occupancies. Our commercial

occupancies, a sprinkler system is designed to put the fire out, because they may be closed, you know, overnight, but our goal with

residential sprinklers is to get people out of the home. You mentioned—I just recently built a home, and tried to get the builder

to put sprinklers in there. Even though I was willing to pay for it,

the builder refused to do that, because it—their—his impression

was it would slow down the closing on the house, which slows down

their draws from the bank, so we have to overcome that, and we

are going to be meeting with builders. We have already met with

the sprinkler industry on several occasions. They have agreed to

get on board with us to promote these residential sprinklers, and

even retrofit existing homes with the localized sprinkler system.

Mr. GINGREY. Mr. Chairman, I had a second question. Do I need

to wait for the second round, or do we have—it is widely agreed

that in addition to saving lives, lower property losses are a significant secondary benefit to increased use of residential sprinklers.

Approximately how many years does it take before these sprinklers

pay for themselves in terms of potential savings, and do insurance

companies offer reduced policy premiums for those who install

sprinklers? If they don’t, how can USFA reach out to the insurance

companies and encourage them to do the premium reductions?

Mr. PAULISON. We haven’t seen insurance companies willing to

take that step yet, and that is one of our goals, along with getting

the sprinkler companies on board with our philosophy, is to also

work with insurance companies to see if we can do—we can get

them to start reducing the premiums. If—for those homes that are

sprinkled, if something as simple as putting in a localized fire

sprinkler system, let us say in a—just put a sprinkler head in a

kitchen in an existing home, is somewhere between $500 and

38

$1,000, it is just a simple plumbing issue, it is not a major issue,

a new existing home, it would depend on the locality and the type

of laws that they have, but the cost of amortizing that sprinkler

system over the life of that home is insignificant, and we think that

the value is way out—outweighs any cost that may be incurred.

Mr. GINGREY. Thank you, Mr. Paulison, and thank you, Mr.

Chairman.

Chairman SMITH. Thank you, sir. Representative Lofgren.

Ms. LOFGREN. Thank you. First, let me apologize for being late.

I was speaking to a whole room full of the top science and math

graduates in the country, who were—they were just—cheers you up

just to see these kids and—just down the way. I am interested in

how we are developing standards for new firefighting technologies,

and also, what challenges are present in the standardization of

firefighting equipment and technologies that exist today. I remember the Oakland fire. I am sure that is legendary in firefighting

worlds, and I was on the Board of Supervisors in Santa Clara

County when the Oakland fire broke out, and my cohort, Don

Perata, was on the Board of Supervisors in Alameda County. I

later found out when I called Don at home on that Sunday that

that was the first communication between an outside agency and

Alameda County, and when we sent equipment up, we couldn’t connect our hoses to their hydrants, because they were not the same

size, and it did contribute to the conflagration. So that may not be

the main issue that we are dealing with, but I am wondering if you

had thoughts and advice in that arena. Would you turn on the

mike?

Mr. PAULISON. I did.

Ms. LOFGREN. Very good.

Mr. PAULISON. The equipment interoperability and—you were

singing my song—I appreciate you asking that question—is a significant issue. We keep talking about interoperability and people

focus on radio interoperability, which is an issue we are trying to

deal with. But the equipment interoperability is as significant as

the interoperability of our radio systems. You know, I am from

Miami, I am a scuba diver. I can take my diving regulator anywhere in the world, and rent a scuba tank and it always fits, but

I can’t take an air bottle off of one air pack and put it on a different brand, both made here in the United States. The—I can rent

an air compressor in Miami and take it to Seattle and rent a jackhammer, it always fits, but our hydraulic tools, our jaws of life and

those types of equipment are totally incompatible from one brand

to another, and the construction industry has figured it out, you

can go to a Home Depot and rent—and buy saw blades and they

will fit any saw you have, but the fire industry is totally incompatible, and I have been meeting with the Fire Equipment Manufacturers Association. I met with them four times, and they recognized

that we have to change this, and they are working diligently to do

that. We have already got some manufacturers that—for instance,

airbag manufacturers are very close—or lifting bags, to lift cars off

people—and have already agreed that they were going to start

changing their fittings to where they are all the same. It is just a

small step, but it is a big step. The International Association of

Fire Chiefs was created in the late 1800’s to resolve the hose

39

thread differences, and here we are 150 years later and we are

worse off than we were back then.

Ms. LOFGREN. Isn’t there a role to play for the Federal Government in this area? I mean, I don’t know what the standards ought

to be, but NIST actually is a standard-setting body.

Mr. PAULISON. Yes.

Ms. LOFGREN. Shouldn’t we ask them to work with the firefighting world and develop some standards to get this moving

along?

Mr. PAULISON. Absolutely. The—part of the problem is us in the

fire service ourselves. Different—for particularly—for instance, the

hose thread standards is the most significant. New York—the City

of New York has its own hose threads. Kansas City has its own

hose threads that they designed themselves and make, and we perpetuate the problem, because we are unwilling to make those

changes, but other areas are—definitely are resolvable, and Doctor,

do you want to address that?

Dr. BEMENT. Well, I am glad you brought it up, Representative

Lofgren, because this is what got us involved in fire standards in

the first place. It was the Baltimore fire of 1903, where different

responding fire companies couldn’t participate because their hoses

wouldn’t fit the hydrants. It is surprising that even today, almost

100 years—almost exactly 100 years later, we still have similar

problems. We deal with interoperability issues not only in protective equipment and hydrants and so forth, but—in almost every

area, communications.

By working closely with standard development organizations in

order to develop standards in this area, this is what consensus

standards are all about, we work very closely with stakeholders, including the U.S. Fire Administration, to hold workshops to identify

performance-based standards, because if standards are too prescriptive, they add only cost to the equipment. And through our

testing efforts, our research efforts, our guide—issuing technical

guidelines, our work with the Fire Administration, in putting out

newsletters, like fire.gov on the Internet, which informs the fire

community of technical developments throughout the world, we are

trying to get more agreement on what these performance standards

should be.

I should say, incidentally, in this area of flexibility, the test work

that we do at NIST and the research that we do at NIST informs

not only the standard development organizations but the fire community at large in their procurement decisions. We had guests just

two days ago from local fire chiefs and the National Association of

State Fire Marshals visiting NIST so they could identify the test

beds that we currently have that would help them evaluate some

of their procurement decisions that they have to make in the absence of standards, and so much equipment is coming on the market now, and technology is flourishing more rapidly than the standards development effort, so we have worked with ANSI [American

National Standards Institute] in establishing the Homeland Security Standards Panel to work with the standard development organizations to see how we can accelerate the effort in bringing new

standards to bear on some of these issues.

Chairman SMITH. The—are you finished?

40

Ms. LOFGREN. My time has expired. I appreciate the

Chairman’s——

Chairman SMITH. The gentleman from Missouri, Congressman

Akin.

[PA malfunction]

Mr. AKIN. St. Louis area, of our first responders, fire folks, the

ambulance, as well as some of the local police and—okay, we have

got it. I asked them, I don’t want to know your second and third

and fourth priority, what is your number one priority, in terms of

what we ought to be looking at, and there was a complete consensus that it was the interoperability of the communication systems. They said that is the thing that they really—you know, we

are—our assessment was for small kinds of incidents, you know,

some truck of chemicals that goes off the highway or something, we

are—we handle those kinds of things very well.

Our concern was the larger scale kinds of deal where you have

got, you know, 50 different police districts within a particular metropolitan area, you may go across the Mississippi River to Illinois,

you have got different states, different governments. How do you

coordinate those kinds of things? They said their big concern was

communications. Now, this new technology that—is it Nextel is advertising, that walkie-talkie type thing, does that answer those

problems, or is that the potential—or if it doesn’t, what still has

to be done, because their first estimate to us was, oh, all we need

is a couple hundred million dollars, and of course we all kind of

rolled our eyes at that, but the next thing we saw were those vans

that have the different antennas and you can—with a computer,

you can hook up your Wal-Mart little $30 walkie-talkie with a police radio with a military, so you could interlock those things.

What do you see in that area and where are we?

Mr. PAULISON. It is—the radio communications, the interoperability is significant. We have fire departments out there with low

band radios with UHF, VHF, 800 megahertz, and now, the new frequency, 700 megahertz coming on the board, and they don’t communicate with each other.

There are interface boxes like you mentioned, and the one particular van you saw, that allows that to be set up on a particular

incident to deal with that. I think—I see that as a short-term solution. We have—between the Department of Homeland Security and

the COPS program in Justice, I think it is right around $100 million, we are going to be issuing in these next couple months, on a

competitive basis to cities around the country, and to look at best

practices, where they are—these companies, or these cities that are

awarded these grants will set up their interoperable communications system and then we can look at those and offer those as best

practices, or not if they don’t work, to the different cities to deal

with this.

The—I just had a meeting with one of the major radio manufacturers, and they perceive the answer to this is a radio that will

adapt to whatever system it goes into. So if you have a base for

a handheld radio, and you are dispatched into a territory on a different system, if you have a—let us say UHF, with a 450 megahertz and you go into a system on an 800, the radio could adapt

41

to that new system. And I believe if they can resolve that technical

issue inside those radios, that will be the answer.

What we don’t want, though, is every radio able to talk to every

radio. It overwhelms the system. We need every radio to be able

to communicate with the command post, because we are trying to

set up unified command systems throughout the country, so that—

I think that is the answer down the road.

I don’t know, Dr. Bement, if you have any response to that, too.

Dr. BEMENT. I think Dr. Paulison—or Mr. Paulison stated it very

clearly, it is not just the interoperability of the communication system, but it is also interoperability of the communication system

with the decision support system, the command system itself, and

in many cases, it is not only how you transmit voice, but how you

transmit data, and the cross-band switching issues in going from

band to band and developing interoperability is a very daunting

challenge.

More than that, in many cases, some of the 800 megahertz systems don’t communicate inside buildings very well, especially

buildings that are very well shielded, so in some cases, that is

going to take ancillary equipment like co-ax repeaters built into the

building so that you can transmit effectively from inside the building to outside the building and actually engage in the fire operation

itself. So this is a very big menu of things that we have to address,

and we are addressing it in every one of these areas. In fact, the

Advanced Technology Program at NIST is funding some of this

work in cross-band switching and also XML and being able to exchange data in disparate systems, and so we feel that NIST is very

much engaged.

Mr. AKIN. Is there—to follow on, is there any use—I understand

there was a big fire situation last summer out West where they

used those walkie-talkie type handheld—they were actually cell

phones, you know, essentially.

Dr. BEMENT. Yes.

Mr. AKIN. And that that was supposed to be the backup system

and the firefighters all switched over to the backup because they

like it so well.

Dr. BEMENT. Well, we have actually developed a test bed at

NIST, not only to use these handheld phones, but also to use PDAs

that will operate in an interoperable mode, and that system is up

and operating, and we are using it to evaluate different products

that are coming into the marketplace that will help serve this need,

but I have to say that there is not a secure component yet in this

form of communications, and as Administrator Paulison indicated,

in some cases, you want that security level built in to the system

as well, and that is where we are focusing our attention at the

present time.

Mr. AKIN. Is there any one agency or person that is responsible

for basically dealing with this problem and coordinating a solution,

or is this something that you have got different agencies and different people stumbling over themselves on?

Dr. BEMENT. Well, I mentioned the summit that we had just a

couple weeks ago that brought together federal agencies, state

agencies, the firefighting community, National Laboratories, so

NIST is trying to bring this community together. Through our OfVerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:36 Oct 25, 2003 Jkt 088232 PO 00000 Frm 00045 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 C:\WORKD\RES03\071703\88232 SCIENCE1 PsN: SCIENCE1
42

fice of Law Enforcement Standards, we do serve as a coordinating

arm for the Office of Disaster Preparedness of the Science and

Technology Directorate in the Department of Homeland Security,

and the National Institute of Justice in trying to coordinate investments in research and development in this area, and to try and coordinate the technical approach to developing standards in this

area.

Mr. AKIN. I think what I heard you say is no. I said, I mean, is

there one person that is tasked with the responsibility, and I

think—I understand you have got to talk to a lot of different people

and sort of develop what you are going to do, but is there somebody

who is spearheading that, or is it really something that that responsibility currently is on an organization chart, or is that being

shared?

Dr. BEMENT. There is a committee or a group inside of the Department of Homeland Security called SAFECOM that brings all of

the federal agencies together to work on the issue together, and

that—they are the ones that are coordinating the effort, and make

sure the money is being spent.

Mr. AKIN. So if there is any——

Chairman SMITH. I am going to have to interrupt you. The Administrator is going to have to leave in a few minutes, and we have

two more questioners, Congressman, so I apologize, but I will now

call on Representative Johnson.

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much. This question will go to

both witnesses. A Memorandum of Understanding is now in place

between NIST and the Fire Administration that calls for one, establishing points of contact in each agency to be responsible for carrying out the purpose of the Memorandum of Understanding, and

two, jointly drafting an annual fire research and technology development agenda with input from the research community, fire services representatives and other end users, and three, holding bimonthly meetings with participation by representatives of the fire

services industry and other interested groups for the coordination

and implementation of the fire research plan, and four, disseminating the results of the fire research program more broadly. And

I want to ask each of you three questions, one, are all of these components of the agreement being carried out, and two, are you both

satisfied with the process, and in particular, are you satisfied that

a research agenda is being developed that has priorities acceptable

to the fire services community and has an appropriate balance between long-term research and near-term development, and the

final question is, is there an adequate coordination in developing

research agendas among the federal agencies that support fire research?

Dr. BEMENT. I can address part of that list of questions. Yes,

there has been ongoing consultation between NIST and the U.S.

Fire Administration, as well as the Directorate for Science and

Technology on the research and development agenda. That has

been ongoing. It existed even before the Memorandum of Understanding was signed.

In addition to that, we have sponsored joint workshops in addressing some of the issues having to do not only with technical

needs, but also performance-based standards. That is ongoing. That

43

1The National Fire Incident Reporting System’s FY03 budget is $1 million and the FY04

budget is currently undetermined.

continues. NIST has established a technical liaison with the Fire

Academy at Emmitsburg, and we continue to work with them on

agenda development.

And of course, there is the direct support from the Fire Administration for the research that is currently going on at NIST.

So in those areas, this is a very active engagement.

Mr. PAULISON. The other player we need to bring in, also, which

we are doing now, is the Science and Technology Division or Directorate inside of Homeland Security—Department of Homeland Security, and we are doing that. They are very interested in getting

involved in our research and helping fund some of those things

also. So they will be a player with us also, along with NIST and

other groups out there. We have a lot of work to do. There is no

question about it. But I am comfortable that we are on the right

road to do this research.

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much. Mr. Paulison, what is the

budget for the National Fire Incident Reporting System for Fiscal

Year 2003, and what is requested for 2004?

[PA malfunction]

Mr. PAULISON. Our total budget is $56 million, I believe, this

year, to run that whole program at Emmitsburg. But I will get

those, I will break those out for you. I just don’t have it at my fingertips right now. I can get that to you tomorrow, or even this

afternoon.1

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much. Thank you.

[PA malfunction]

Chairman SMITH. The—we are delighted that the Vice Chairman

of the full Science Committee has joined us, Representative Gutknecht.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I apologize for being

late. I don’t have any specific questions. I think the questions I was

going to ask have pretty well been answered, but if my colleague

from Missouri would like, I would be happy to yield him a few minutes of my time.

Mr. AKIN. These buttons are hard things to learn to work. I

would just—the concern I have is, is having been in some big corporations and all, sometimes if you have a responsibility that it

isn’t really clear who is doing what that you end up with a whole

lot of people doing a lot of different things, and it gets kind of

scrambled, and my concern is particularly in the communications

area, where our people back in the St. Louis area say that is their

number one priority, do we have somebody that—not necessarily

that they have to be made a czar or something, but is there a good

consensus that one group is going to come up with at least a good

workable solution?

Mr. PAULISON. The group that I mentioned earlier is—that is

their task, to make sure that happens. The—but I don’t want to

mislead you, because is one group going to come up with the answer? I don’t know. There is a lot of people working on the communications issue, a lot of people in private industry are very serious

about this, so the answer may come from them, but as far as the

44

Federal Government is concerned, we have one group that is focusing our dollars and our attention to make sure we are going in the

right direction.

Mr. AKIN. Thank you very much.

Chairman SMITH. The—just a quick last question. The Fire Chief

in Jackson, Michigan, in my district, has been trying to get the

state legislature to require that mobile homes be built with a sprinkler system inside those mobile homes. Is that something that

should be considered by the state or Federal Government?

[PA malfunction]

Mr. PAULISON. Firefighter for 30 years, I can tell you that when

we respond to a mobile home fire, seldom do we get there and put

the fire out. It is usually—the mobile home is burnt to the ground

before we arrive. If we sprinkle anything, from the day they built

it, it—mobile homes is extremely important.

Chairman SMITH. And Administrator Paulison, if there is anything else, we understand you have got a commitment at 11. I hope

it is within 10 minutes of here. If you make it, and with that, you

are certainly—we thank you both. If you have any additional advice, please inform this committee on the Noble Training, whether

we should include that in this bill, that $8 million, as far as being

within the U.S. Fire Administration, or whether it should be a separate authorization for Homeland Security.

Let us know your recommendation on that.

Mr. PAULISON. Yes. Yes, sir, and thank you for your support, too,

and if there is any other questions that we have missed, you know,

if you would just give those to us, we will get them right back to

you in writing.

Chairman SMITH. Okay. Thank you.

Mr. PAULISON. Thank you very much.

Chairman SMITH. Again, thank you both for your presence today.

If we could start Panel 3.

[PA malfunction]

Panel 3

Chairman SMITH. Dr. Dennis Compton is the immediate past

Chair of the Board for International Fire Service Training Association. Chief Compton has served for over 32 years in the fire service,

27 years with the Phoenix Fire Department, five years as the Mesa

Chief and he was selected as a charter member of the Arizona Fire

Service Hall of Fame and recently received the Congressional Fire

Service Institute, the CFSI 2003 Mason Langford National Fire

Service Leadership Award, so Chief, congratulations. Thank you for

sharing some of your advice and wisdom today and please proceed

with your testimony.

[PA malfunction]

Chairman SMITH. I think, I am not sure but—whether it is a

long push on the button, or a short push.

45

STATEMENT OF DENNIS COMPTON, IMMEDIATE PAST CHAIR,

BOARD FOR THE INTERNATIONAL FIRE SERVICE TRAINING

ASSOCIATION

Mr. COMPTON. Members of the House Research Subcommittee,

my name is Chief Dennis Compton of Mesa, Arizona. I am honored

to testify before the House Research Subcommittee on issues of

great importance to you and our nation’s one million career and

volunteer fire and emergency response personnel. I have a full

statement I have submitted for the record.

Chairman SMITH. Without objection, all full statements will be

included in the record.

Mr. COMPTON. For 32 years, I have been a firefighter, 27 years

with the Phoenix, Arizona Fire Department and the last five as

Chief of Mesa, Arizona Fire Department. Although retired from

Mesa, I continue to remain very active, serving as a leader in many

national fire service organizations, including the International Fire

Service Training Association and the Congressional Fire Services

Institute’s National Advisory Committee.

I have been asked to present my views on a number of important

issues that this subcommittee is addressing. First, the reauthorization of the United States Fire Administration. The USFA is doing

an excellent job serving its core mission, in addition to assuming

new responsibilities in the area of terrorism training. Its Administrator, Chief David Paulison, is a widely respected 30 year veteran

of the fire service who understands what is needed by our firefighters and how the Federal Government can respond to those

needs. The United States Fire Administration is the lone federal

agency tasked with reducing the Nation’s loss of life and property

due to fire.

I urge Congress and this subcommittee to never allow the USFA

to lose its identity. The U.S. Fire Administrator should maintain

a prominent presence within the Department of Homeland Security. I also strongly believe that the Fire Administrator should remain a Presidential appointed position confirmed by the Senate.

I also fully support developing a national residential fire sprinkler strategy. In fact, my home is fully sprinklered. The combination of fire sprinklers and smoke alarms installed in homes can significantly reduce the number of lives lost from fires each year in

this nation.

Regarding the Firefighting Research and Coordination Act, a key

element of that Act, introduced by my Senator, John McCain and

Congressman Dave Camp, addresses the advent of firefighting

technology and the development of new standards to measure their

performance as well as calling for coordination of response to national emergencies, including training and credentialing.

Credentialing of emergency responders is critical to the successful

management of national emergencies. It is important that existing

fire service certification systems be incorporated into any national

program to improve emergency management.

This legislation has received the support of more than 40 national fire organizations, composing the Congressional Fire Service

Institute’s National Advisory Committee. Nothing is more critical

to our mission than continuing to fund the FIRE Act grant program. The FIRE Act is directed at addressing basic needs. AccordVerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:36 Oct 25, 2003 Jkt 088232 PO 00000 Frm 00049 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 C:\WORKD\RES03\071703\88232 SCIENCE1 PsN: SCIENCE1
46

ing to the survey recently completed by the USFA and the NFPA,

data reveals that many fire departments are understaffed and in

need of basic equipment, such as turnout gear, radio communications, breathing apparatus.

The management of the FIRE Act grant program by the U.S.

Fire Administration has been an incredible success, and the fire

service is concerned that transferring that responsibility to the Office of Domestic Preparedness will dilute the effectiveness of that

program.

Unlike grant programs administered by ODP, the FIRE Act

grant program sends money directly to local fire departments.

ODP’s focus is on state terrorism grants. While the act focuses on

basic, everyday response needs, using the states to direct the flow

of dollars, which is consistent with ODP grant programs, has never

proven to be effective for the fire service, and it is primarily because the fire service lacks any centralized representation at the

state level in any of the states.

The Council on Foreign Relations recently issued a report titled

‘‘Emergency Responders: Drastically Underfunded, Dangerously

Unprepared.’’ The report outlined a number of concerns regarding

our nation’s preparedness for potential terrorist attacks. I was intrigued by their assessment of how slowly federal funds are being

distributed and spent at the state level.

Conversely, the United States Fire Administration has been very

effective in distributing FIRE Act funds. Should the Federal Government be spending five times the current amount, as the report

recommends? It is hard to say. However, I know that given the

challenges facing local fire departments, we need to spend more.

Through the FIRE Act, we need to bring all fire departments up

to a baseline level of training and equipment. Through pending

SAFER legislation, we need to address the staffing shortages in

both the career and volunteer fire services, and we must also make

certain that fire departments serving high risk areas for terrorism

are fully staffed and prepared.

The fire service appreciates the support Congress has provided to

the United States Fire Administration. Through the outstanding

work performed by USFA, the increased funding contained in your

reauthorization measure is well justified and should continue to

target USFA’s major program areas.

I strongly appeal to this subcommittee to preserve the FIRE Act

program in its current structure, under the management of the

United States Fire Administration. I also urge this Congress to ensure that the fire service plays a key role in homeland security and

the development of national strategies dealing with terrorism preparedness.

It is truly an honor for me to testify before you today, and I

thank you for this opportunity, and I will be glad to answer any

questions you might have.

[The prepared statement of Mr. Compton follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF DENNIS COMPTON

Good Morning.

Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson and Members of the House Research

Subcommittee, my name is Chief Dennis Compton of Mesa Arizona. I am honored

to be testifying before the House Research Subcommittee on issues of great imporVerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:36 Oct 25, 2003 Jkt 088232 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 C:\WORKD\RES03\071703\88232 SCIENCE1 PsN: SCIENCE1
47

tance to both this subcommittee and to our nation’s fire and emergency response

personnel—issues that impact the readiness of approximately one million firefighters from every state in the Nation who serve as both career and volunteers.

Prepared to make the ultimate sacrifice, our nation’s firefighters respond to over 17

millions calls, annually. . .from fire and emergency medical calls, to hazardous materials incidents, and potential acts of terrorism.

Before I advance into my testimony, I would like to express my thanks and appreciation to this committee, specifically Chairman Smith and Ranking Member Johnson, for your leadership on our behalf. We are the beneficiaries of several significant

pieces of legislation enacted by Congress in recent years, most notably legislation

that created and funded the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program, commonly

referred to as the FIRE Act. We, our nation’s fire service, appreciate the willingness

on the part of Congress to work in the spirit of bi-partisanship to address critical

needs that will improve the level of readiness of our nation’s first responders.

For 32 years, I have been a firefighter—27 years with the Phoenix, Arizona Fire

Department and the last five as Chief of the Mesa Fire Department. From the very

first, I have looked forward to every day on the job. Although retired from Mesa,

I continue to remain active serving with the International Fire Service Training Association, as a board member of the National Fire Protection Association, member

of the International Association of Fire Chiefs, and as immediate past chair of the

Congressional Fire Services Institute’s National Advisory Committee. The fire service will always be an important part of my life. . .and so will my desire to make

the fire service better prepared to do its job.

I have been asked to present my views on a number of important issues this subcommittee is addressing: the reauthorization of the United States Fire Administration (USFA), the administration of the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program,

the position of United States Fire Administrator as a Presidential Appointee and

the Firefighting Research and Coordination Act sponsored by my Senator, John

McCain in the Senate and Congressman Dave Camp in the House. Following my

testimony, I would be most willing to answer questions related to these issues as

well as any others that pertain to what it takes to prepare our nation’s fire service

for its job.

I. REAUTHORIZATION OF THE UNITED STATES FIRE ADMINISTRATION

First the reauthorization of the United States Fire Administration. Five years

ago, I was asked to participate in a panel convened by then-FEMA Director James

Lee Witt. The mission of the panel was both compelling and time sensitive as there

was a fear that our federal fire programs—specifically the United States Fire Administration and National Fire Academy—were languishing. The panel issued a report containing 34 recommendations for change. The panel did not point fingers at

individuals, but rather cited core deficiencies in the areas of leadership, resource

management and communication.

Wasting little time, the USFA began the process of responding to each recommendation. Today, USFA is serving its core mission in addition to assuming new

responsibilities primarily in the area of terrorism training. It has as its administrator, Chief David Paulison, a widely-respected 30-year veteran of the fire service

who understands what’s needed by our firefighters and how the Federal Government can respond most effectively and efficiently.

The United States Fire Administration is the lead federal agency for the fire service. It is our voice. . .the guardian of our programs. We take great pride in the work

of USFA. It is the lone federal agency tasked with reducing the Nation’s loss of life

due to fire through data collection, public education, training, and research and

technology.

While I support transferring USFA and FEMA into the Department of Homeland

Security, I urge Congress and this subcommittee to never allow USFA to loose its

identity. Both the Fire Administration and the Fire Administrator should maintain

a prominent presence within the Department of Homeland Security. When officials

within the Department convene to discuss policy matters or heightened security

alerts, USFA officials should have a seat at the table with their tent card reading

‘‘USFA’’ to make clear to everyone in the room the individual representing the interest of our one million firefighters.

PRESIDENTIAL APPOINTMENT OF U.S. FIRE ADMINISTRATOR

Moreover, I strongly believe that the Fire Administrator should remain a presidential-appointed position, confirmed by the Senate. Because of the important nature and duties associated with this position, the President needs an Administrator

with whom he can place his trust and who shares his vision on homeland security

48

issues. I would also urge future administrations to look for candidates who possess

an acute understanding of the fire and emergency services and hold no predisposition for any particular fire service group or element, but rather have holistic outlooks of the fire service.

NATIONAL RESIDENTIAL FIRE SPRINKLER STRATEGY

Section Three of the House measure addresses a National Residential Fire Sprinkler Strategy, a provision I fully support. I am a strong proponent of residential fire

sprinklers. In fact, my home is fully sprinklered. When I served as Chief of Mesa,

the city adopted a sprinkler ordinance for new residential construction. Saving lives

starts with prevention and the combination of sprinklers and smoke alarms can significantly reduce the number of lives lost each year, which stands at approximately

4,000 annually. Many of my peers share my conviction and would look forward to

supporting the Fire Administration in developing a strategy to promote the use of

residential fire sprinklers.

One statistic says it all about fire sprinkler systems: there has never been a

multi-death fire in a fully sprinklered building in which the sprinklers were fully

operational.

FIREFIGHTING RESEARCH AND COORDINATION

One key difference between the House and Senate authorization measures is the

inclusion in the Senate bill of the Firefighting Research bill introduced by Senator

John McCain. Congressman Dave Camp introduced a similar measure, which is

pending in the House Science Committee. Prior to introducing their measures, both

Senator McCain and Congressman Camp sought input from the fire service organizations to ensure that their measures would have the desired results they intended.

A key element of the legislation addresses the advent of firefighting technology

and the development of new standards to measure their performance. The legislation would not authorize the Federal Government to create standards, but rather

to create measuring techniques and testing methodologies that can be incorporated

into the standards-making process. The legislation has received the support of more

than 40 national organizations composing the Congressional Fire Services Institute’s

National Advisory Committee.

Since September 11th, new technologies have been introduced to the market designed to address both existing and emerging threats. In the interest of firefighter

safety, there must be some mechanism in place to measure the performance of this

equipment, especially if they are going to be purchased with federal funds. Where

standards do not exist to address this technology, the McCain-Camp bill will initiate

the process.

The national fire organizations also support other sections of the legislation calling for coordination of response to national emergencies and for increased training.

We believe strongly that the United States Fire Administration should serve as the

primary point of contact for state and local firefighting units during national emergencies. But as we stated to both authors, Congress needs to appropriate additional

funds for USFA to carry-out this legislation, and not use existing funds.

II. ASSISTANCE TO FIREFIGHTERS GRANT PROGRAM (FIRE Act)

As I mentioned earlier, the fire service is the beneficiary of a number of Congressional actions, but nothing is more critical to our mission than the measures that

authorized and continue to fund the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program.

Public Law 106–398, which contains the language that established the grant program, states that the purpose of the program is for ‘‘protecting the health and safety

of the public and firefighter personnel against fire and fire-related hazards.’’ Although funds can be used to purchase terrorism-related equipment, the program is

directed at addressing basic needs. And according to the survey recently completed

by the U.S. Fire Administration and National Fire Protection Association, many departments remain in need of basic equipment such as turn-out gear, radio communications, and breathing apparatus that only the FIRE Act can address.

The survey revealed that:

• An estimated 73,000 firefighters serve in fire departments that protect communities of at least 50,000 in population and have fewer than 4 career firefighters assigned to first-due engine companies. (The National Fire Protection

Association calls for at least four firefighters per engine.)

• Fire departments that deliver an average of 4 or fewer volunteers to a midday house fire constituted 21 percent of departments protecting communities

with less than 2,500 population.

• An estimated 57,000 firefighters lack personal protective clothing.

49

• An estimated one-third of firefighters shifts are not equipped with self-contained breathing apparatus.

• Overall, fire departments do not have enough portable radios to equip more

than about half of the emergency responders on a shift.

• An estimated 120.1 million people are protected by fire departments that do

not have a program for free distribution of home smoke alarms.

As you know, the House Appropriations Committee approved $750 million for the

program for Fiscal Year 2004, the same level as last year. In addition, they included

in the report language that the Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate

should administer the program, giving USFA control of the program. The Senate

version, approved last week, also contains $750 million for the grant program, but

transfers authority to administer the program to the Office of Domestic Preparedness (ODP). The $750 million contained in both measures exceed the President’s request of $500 million; however the Senate measure is more closely aligned with the

Administration’s proposal which recommends the shift to ODP. The management of

the FIRE Act by the U.S. Fire Administration has been an incredible success and

the fire service is concerned that transferring that responsibility to ODP would dilute the effectiveness of the program.

Unlike grant programs administered by ODP, the FIRE Act sends money directly

to local fire departments; only a small percentage is set aside for USFA to cover

administrative costs. Now some argue the benefits of using the states to direct the

flow of dollars, saying it’s more cost effective and can target the money better. However, this method has never proven to be effective for the fire service, primarily because the fire service lacks centralized representation at the state level. We have

neither state fire chiefs nor Secretaries of Fire Safety within any of the 50 states.

Instead, the command structure originates from within local jurisdictions, with local

fire chiefs occupying the top positions.

Moreover, reiterating what I just said moments, ago, the FIRE Act is about addressing basic needs to enable fire departments to confront challenges they encounter on a daily basis—fires, emergency medical calls, hazardous material spills, etc.

On the other hand, there is no question regarding the mission of ODP. Prominently

displayed on its website, the mission statement reads, ‘‘Enhancing the capacity of

state and local first responders to respond to incidents of terrorism involving weapons of mass destruction.’’ This is what raises our concern; that eventually the FIRE

Act would become another terrorism program, leaving thousands of fire departments

unprepared for their basic missions.

III. COUNCIL ON FOREIGN RELATIONS REPORT

As Members of the this subcommittee are aware, the Council on Foreign Relations, chaired by former U.S. Senator Warren Rudman, recently issued a report titled, ‘‘Emergency Responders: Drastically Underfunded, Dangerously Unprepared.’’

The report outlined a number of concerns regarding our nation’s preparedness for

potential terrorist attacks. As it relates to the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program, I was intrigued by their assessment of how slowly federal funds are being distributed and spent at the State level. The Council attributes it, in part, to the excessive amounts of paperwork. Conversely, USFA has been very effective in disbursing

FIRE Act funds, enabling local fire departments to purchase needed equipment and

training, including the types highlighted in the Council’s report.

As the report says, ‘‘The United States could spend the entire gross domestic

product (GDP) and still be unprepared, or wisely spend a limited amount and end

up sufficiently prepared.’’ Is the Federal Government spending enough? The answer

is ‘‘no.’’ Should it be spending five times the current amount as the report recommends? It’s hard to say. I can only speak on the needs of the fire service.

I do believe that given the challenges facing local fire departments, we need to

spend more. First we need to bring all fire departments up to a base-line level for

training and equipment. This is being achieved through the FIRE Act. Then we

need to address the staffing shortages in both the career and volunteer fire services.

This can be addressed through the SAFER legislation pending in both the House

and Senate (H.R. 1118 and S. 544). Then we must identify high-risk areas and make

certain that the fire departments serving in these areas are fully staffed, trained,

and equipped to respond to potential acts of terrorism. This might mean spending

five times more than the Federal Government is spending, or it might mean less.

We can’t say that time will provide the answers, because as you know, time is

not on our side. We must move quickly.

50

IV. CONCLUSION

Members of this subcommittee, I thank you for allowing me this opportunity to

testify today. Hopefully, both my oral and written testimonies have provided some

valuable insight on the Federal Government’s role to enhance the readiness of our

nation’s fire service.

Thirty years ago, the National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control issued

a report titled, ‘‘America Burning,’’ highlighting our nation’s fire problems. At the

time the report was issued, 12,000 people were dying in fire each year. Today the

figure is down to approximately 4,000. The reason for the reduction has so much

to do with the content of the report, including the recommendation to establish a

United States Fire Administration and National Fire Academy.

The fire service appreciates the support Congress has provided to the United

States Fire Administration. Through the outstanding work performed by USFA, the

increased funding contained in your reauthorization measure is well justified. The

funds should continue to target programs benefiting fire departments and their personnel, primarily through USFA’s four program areas: data collection, public education, training, and technology development.

Moreover, I appeal to this subcommittee to preserve the FIRE Act in its current

structure. Nobody can ascertain the needs of the fire service better than USFA, the

national fire associations that continue to work in close consultation with USFA in

administering the program, and the hundreds of firefighting personnel who volunteer their time to review the grant applications each year. We know what’s best for

our own.

On the important issue of homeland security, I urge this Congress to ensure that

the fire service plays a key role in the development of national strategies dealing

with terrorism preparedness. After all, we are the front line of defense prepared to

send our bravest in the first wave of battle. Hence, we deserve to fill positions of

leadership so that our voice will be heard.

It is truly an honor for me to have a role in this process today. Chairman Smith,

I thank you in particular for your support of the National Fallen Firefighters Memorial Service. We were honored by your presence both last year and in 1999 as we

paid final tribute to those firefighters who died in the line of duty.

Now I will be glad to answer any questions from this subcommittee.

BIOGRAPHY FOR DENNIS COMPTON

Personal Information:

Business Address: P.O. Box 21208; Mesa, AZ 85277–1208

Business Telephone: (480) 244–8529; Fax: (480) 654–5420

E-mail: dcompton@cableaz.com

Marital Status: Married to Sher since 1968

U.S. Army Veteran: 1968–1970; Honorable Discharge

Employment and Acknowledgments:

• Currently serve as an Executive Advisor, facilitator, teacher, and consultant

in the public, private, and non-profit sectors.

• Functioned at the Executive level of two large, complex organizations. Served

as the Chief Executive of the Mesa, Arizona Fire Department for more than

five years and as Assistant Fire Chief for the Phoenix, Arizona Fire Department for more than fifteen years.

• Served for a total of thirty-two (32) years in the Phoenix and Mesa Fire Departments. During that time, I managed budgets in excess of $120 million.

Phoenix and Mesa are the 6th and 43rd largest cities in the United States

and have earned reputations for having world class Fire Departments. The

Mesa Fire Department is fully accredited since 2001. Responsible for Citywide Emergency Management in Mesa.

• Served in command of the Phoenix (FEMA) Urban Search and Rescue Team

(USAR) that was deployed to incidents attracting worldwide concern, including the bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City. Also served at the

Pentagon and World Trade Center scenes immediately following the September 11, 2001 terrorist attacks.

• Co-owner of Dennis Compton & Associates and S&D Products and Services.

These two businesses are held in partnership with my spouse.

51

• Selected as the 1991 National Instructor of the Year by the International Society of Fire Service Instructors.

• Selected as the Fire Service Person of the Year 2000 by the American Fire

Sprinkler Association.

• Selected as the University of Phoenix Distinguished Alumnus of the Year

2001.

• Received the 2003 CFSI Mason Lankford National Fire Service Leadership

Award.

• Member of the Arizona Fire Service Hall of Fame.

Additional Professional Contributions and Experience:

• Past Chair of the Executive Board of the International Fire Service Training

Association (IFSTA).

• Elected as the Vice-Chair and Chair of the Congressional Fire Services Institute’s National Advisory Committee (CFSI NAC) headquartered in Washington, D.C.

• Member of the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) since 1979, serving in various capacities including:

b Member of NFPA Board of Directors.

b Managed the Fire Department Analysis Project (FIREDAP).

b Strategist and facilitator for strategic and operational planning exercises

throughout the operations and business areas of NFPA.

b Member of NFPA Urban Fire Forum for five years.

b Member of NFPA technical committees.

b Representative on the National Home Fire Sprinkler Coalition.

• Appointed to the National Blue Ribbon Panel in 1998 to review the effectiveness of the United States Fire Administration.

• Served on the National Fire Service Leadership Summit since its inception.

• Elected President of the Metropolitan Phoenix Fire Chiefs Organization.

• More than thirty years of experience in local, county, State, and national politics.

• Member of the International Association of Fire Chiefs and their Metro Chiefs

organization.

• Member of the Arizona Emergency Services Association.

• Serve on the Advisory Board of the non-profit Foundation for Burns and

Trauma.

• Member of the Board of the non-profit 100 Club of Arizona.

• Member and Paul Harris Fellow in the Downtown Phoenix Rotary Club.

International Involvement:

• Consulted with international representatives to develop alliances directed towards integrating the IFSTA validation process into their countries and developing new product lines.

• Consulted with representatives of the Soviet Union, England, Germany, other

European countries, Australia, Latin America, Mexico, Japan, and others to

present and discuss community fire and life safety issues.

• Worked with Rotary International to provide ambulances, medical supplies,

fire fighting apparatus, and other equipment to cities in Mexico.

• Invited to do various management presentations at several international conferences conducted abroad.

• Member of Institution of Fire Engineers (IFE).

Education, Teaching, and Writing Experience:

• Bachelor of Arts Degree in Management from the University of Phoenix.

• Associate of Arts Degree in Fire Science from Phoenix College.

• Selected as one of only forty participants in a one-year ‘‘Leadership Fellowship’’ in Phoenix, Arizona.

• Program Chair of Fire Science at Phoenix College for 14 years.

52

• Past member of the President’s Commission on Excellence in Education at

Mesa Community College.

• Member of the Advisory Board of the Arizona State University Fire Services

Institute.

• Member of the Advisory Board for the Fire and Emergency Management Masters Degree Program at Oklahoma State University.

• Invited speaker at many national and international conferences.

• Teach accredited management and leadership courses at universities and

symposia internationally.

• Author of three successful books in a continuing series focusing on management and leadership titled, When In Doubt, Lead!

• Co-editor of the current edition of the International City and County Management Association’s text and reference book titled, Managing Fire and Rescue

Services.

• Author of the leadership chapter of The Fire Chiefs Handbook, published by

PennWell.

• Co-author of a lead chapter in the NFPA’s Fire Protection Handbook.

• Contributing Editor for ‘‘Firehouse’’ Magazine, ‘‘FireTimes.com’’, and ‘‘Firehouse.com’’.

• Author of many articles published in national and international periodicals.

Interviewed and referenced in technical articles and textbooks.

53

54

Chairman SMITH. The honor is ours, Dennis. Dr. John Hall is our

next witness. Dr. Hall is Assistant Vice President for Fire Analysis

and Research at the National Fire Protection Association, NFPA.

This division of NFPA is responsible for the measurement of the

national fire problem and the communication of the results as a

statistical basis for the fire protection strategies.

Dr. Hall was formerly an operations research analyst with the

U.S. Fire Administration. He holds a B.A. in mathematics from

Brown University and a Ph.D. in operations research from the University of Pennsylvania.

Dr. Hall, welcome, and thank you.

STATEMENT OF DR. JOHN R. HALL, JR., ASSISTANT VICE

PRESIDENT, FIRE ANALYSIS AND RESEARCH, NATIONAL

FIRE PROTECTION ASSOCIATION (NFPA)

Dr. HALL. Chairman Smith—honored to appear before you today.

[PA malfunction]

Dr. HALL. Take three. Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson and Members of the Committee, I am honored to appear before

you today. NFPA is a non-profit organization founded more than

100 years ago with a mission to save lives through education, research and the development of consensus codes and standards. Our

codes and standards are accredited by the American National

Standards Institute and developed in a consensus process that ensures all interested parties have a say. Congress has repeatedly affirmed its support for voluntary consensus standards.

Today, I wish to testify in support of H.R. 545, and first, let me

state emphatically that the reauthorization of the U.S. Fire Administration is extremely important to the effectiveness of the fire

service throughout the United States. For nearly three decades, the

USFA and the National Fire Academy have been working successfully with NFPA and the fire service to reduce the death and destruction caused by fire in the U.S.

The staff at USFA has done a tremendous job in administering

the Assistance to Firefighters grant program. This program has

provided more than $1 billion in financial resources directly to fire

departments. Nonetheless, fire departments have applied for more

than $7 billion, and the real needs are even greater, as I shall discuss.

It is crucial that the FIRE Grant program be maintained as a

separate and distinct funding source where fire departments can

receive direct funding from the USFA and avoid unnecessary red

tape. I would also urge the Congress to fund the program at a level

no less than its authorized amount of $900 million.

When I said the needs are much greater than the currently authorized and appropriated amounts for the FIRE Grant program,

I was speaking on the basis of the Needs Assessment Survey of the

fire service, which was specifically commissioned by Congress as

part of the FIRE Act, and which was recently completed by NFPA

in cooperation with FEMA/USFA.

The needs assessment began before the horrific events of September 11, 2001, but because of the foresight of USFA and our fire

service advisors, that survey included extensive attention to terrorism preparedness. Thus, when the Council on Foreign Relations

55

began their exercise under former Senator Warren Rudman to develop estimates of the costs of terrorism preparedness, the needs

assessment permitted NFPA to develop and substantiate the fire

service portion of these cost estimates with unusual supporting detail.

In a report released just a few weeks ago, the Council estimates that it will take $98.4 billion in additional funds over the next five

years to adequately meet the needs of our first responders to handle the additional responsibilities of homeland security. The fire

service portion of this is more than half the total.

The needs identified by the Council are enormous, and the needs

identified by NFPA for traditional fire service duties are equally

impressive. It is important to understand that these needs are not

a wish list for the fire service. They are the result of an objective

third party comparison of what the fire service has to what the fire

service needs to do its assigned job safely and effectively.

A key element of H.R. 545 is the requirement that equipment

purchased through the FIRE Grant program must meet or exceed

applicable voluntary consensus standards. This is not a new concept. For example, the Department of Justice’s Bulletproof Vest

Partnership Grant Program requires that vests meet minimum

safety and performance standards. The Office of Domestic Preparedness and the Department of Homeland Security encourages

and may soon require the use of NFPA standards for protective

clothing in responding to hazardous materials, chemical and biological incidents. In July 2002, the national fire service organizations, including IAFC [International Association of Fire Chiefs],

IAFF [International Association of Fire Fighters] and NVFC [National Volunteer Fire Council], stated that all equipment and training purchased with federal funds should be required to meet nationally recognized voluntary consensus standards whenever possible.

The Needs Assessment Survey and the Council on Foreign Relations exercise are a call to action, a challenge to our nation to respond fully to dangerous times.

Our firefighters face the same limitations and obstacles they encountered on September 11th. In fact, with the reported State and

local budget cuts that are in the papers everywhere you look, they

face even greater limitations. We can no longer ask our fire departments to survive entirely on local tax revenue supplemented by

local fundraisers. The Federal Government must provide adequate

resources and support to our firefighters, as they protect us and

the security of our homeland.

This legislation would begin to address these urgent needs, and

NFPA enthusiastically supports it. Mr. Chairman, thank you for

the opportunity to testify today. I will be happy to answer any

questions you or other Members of the Committee may have.

[The prepared statement of Dr. Hall follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF JOHN R. HALL, JR.

Chairman Smith, Ranking Member Johnson and Members of the Committee, I am

honored to appear before this Committee today. My name is John Hall and I am

Assistant Vice President for Fire Analysis and Research of NFPA (the National Fire

Protection Association). NFPA is a non-profit organization, founded more than 100

years ago, with a mission to save lives through fire and life safety education and

56

training, fire research and analysis, and the development of consensus codes and

standards that are adopted by state and local jurisdictions throughout the United

States and widely used by the Federal Government.

Today NFPA has nearly 300 codes and standards addressing safety, each accredited by the American National Standard Institute (ANSI) and developed by technical experts, the fire service, and others participating as volunteers in a consensus

process. This process ensures that all interested parties have a say in developing

standards. Congress affirmed its support for voluntary consensus standards in the

National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act of 1995 (P.L. 104–113) and reaffirmed that support in the Homeland Security Act of 2002, the law that created

the new department.

As the Congress considers the reauthorization of the U.S. Fire Administration

(USFA) and its many important functions, I wish, Chairman Smith, to testify today

in support of H.R. 545, the Firefighting Research and Coordination Act, which is

Title II of S. 1152, the Senate version of the USFA reauthorization bill.

First, let me state emphatically that the reauthorization of the U.S. Fire Administration is extremely important to the effectiveness of the fire service throughout the

United States. In May of 1973, just over 30 years ago, the Chairman of the National

Commission on Fire Prevention and Control, Richard E. Bland, transmitted to President Nixon its final report ‘‘America Burning.’’ In that report the Commission recommended establishment of the United States Fire Administration to:

• Evaluate the Nation’s fire problem through data collection and analysis and

research,

• Create a National Fire Academy to improve training and education for fire

service personnel,

• Strengthen public awareness of the fire threat, and

• Provide grants to State and local governments.

For nearly three decades, the USFA and the National Fire Academy have been

working successfully with NFPA and the fire service to reduce the death and destruction caused by fire in the U.S. We have made great strides over the past 30

years. While both civilian and firefighter deaths have decreased dramatically, we

must do much more to ensure that our fire departments can meet the new challenges of homeland security, including responding effectively to biological or chemical accidents or attacks.

Because my job at NFPA is to coordinate our statistical work in tracking and analyzing the U.S. fire problem, I particularly wish to commend the USFA for the National Fire Incident Reporting System (NFIRS). It is no exaggeration to say that

more than 90 percent of what we know about the details of U.S. fire risks today

would be a matter of unsupported opinion if it were not for NFIRS. But NFIRS

needs care and support, as does the National Fire Information Council, which is the

association of states and large cities participating in NFIRS. They cannot do the

work they need to do without continued support from USFA, but that support is in

doubt in the next budget.

I also wish to commend the USFA for a quarter-century of leadership in advocacy

of fire sprinklers in homes. From tests and engineering analysis to assessments of

cost and public opinion, the USFA has contributed greatly to our national progress

in bringing this life-saving technology to the places where most U.S. fire deaths still

occur. I would note that the legislation you recently introduced to reauthorize the

USFA to include a more explicit emphasis on residential fire sprinklers contains a

point, which needs to be clarified. Kitchens are not a high-risk area for fatal home

fires, and it is USFA’s NFIRS data that tells us this.

Returning to the particulars of the USFA reauthorization, while we support the

move of the USFA to the new Department of Homeland Security, there are important functions and positions that must be retained. For example, the USFA must

continue to provide public education and fire prevention activities in partnership

and cooperation with safety organizations, particularly those working to reduce fire

deaths among high risk groups (children, older adults and persons with disabilities).

It is also critical that the position of Administrator of the USFA remain a Presidential appointment to retain that important advocacy position within the Executive

Branch.

The staff at USFA has done a tremendous job in administering the Assistance to

Firefighters (FIRE) Grant Program. Since its creation in FY 2001, this program has

provided more than $1 billion in financial resources directly to fire departments.

Nonetheless, fire departments have applied for more than $7 billion, and the real

needs are even greater than this, as I shall discuss. It is crucial that the FIRE

Grant Program be maintained as a separate and distinct funding source where fire

57

departments can receive direct funding from the USFA and avoid unnecessary red

tape. I would also urge the Congress to fund the program at a level no less than

its authorized amount of $900 million dollars.

When I said the needs are much greater than the currently authorized and appropriated amounts for the FIRE Grant program, I was speaking on the basis of the

‘‘Needs Assessment Survey’’ of the fire service, which was specifically commissioned

by Congress as part of the FIRE Act and which was recently completed by NFPA

in cooperation with FEMA/USFA. Let me share with you a few of the major findings

from that survey.

• Only one in every 10 fire departments has the local personnel and equipment

required to respond effectively to a building collapse or the release of chemical

or biological agents with even minimal to moderate casualties;

• 50 percent of our firefighters involved in ‘‘technical rescue’’ lack formal training, but technical rescue involving unique or complex conditions is precisely

the skill they would need to respond to a terrorist attack;

• There are other huge gaps in training—There has been no formal training for

21 percent of those involved in structural firefighting; for 27 percent of those

involved in EMS work; and for 40 percent who are sent in to deal with hazardous materials;

• And we don’t protect our firefighters as we should. One third of the protective

clothing worn by firefighters sent into a burning building is more than 10

years old, and an estimated 57,000 firefighters lack any protective clothing

at all;

• On a typical fire department shift, 45 percent of first responding firefighters

lack portable radios; 36 percent lack self-contained breathing apparatus; and

42 percent answer an emergency call without a Personal Alert Safety System

(PASS) device that is critical in locating an injured or trapped firefighter;

• Finally, at least 65 percent of cities and towns nationwide don’t have enough

fire stations to achieve widely recognized response-time guidelines. Those

guidelines recommend that firefighters be on the scene of any situation within

4 minutes, 90 percent of the time.

Not surprisingly, the picture is bleaker in our smaller communities. And remember seventy-five percent of the country’s firefighters are volunteers. Twenty-one percent of rural communities often respond with too few firefighters to engage safely

in structural firefighting. Our research also found that thirty-eight percent of fire

departments in communities with more than 50,000 residents often respond with too

few firefighters.

The Needs Assessment began before the horrific events of September 11, 2001,

but because of the foresight of USFA and our fire service advisors, the survey included extensive attention to terrorism preparedness. When the Council on Foreign

Relations began an exercise, under former Senator Warren Rudman, to develop estimates of the costs of terrorism preparedness for the entire first responder community at all levels of government, the Needs Assessment permitted NFPA to develop

and substantiate the fire service portion of these cost estimates with unusual detail.

In a report released just a few weeks ago, the Council estimated that it will take $98.4 billion in additional funds above current spending (estimated at $26–$76 billion) over the next 5 years, or $19.7 billion per year, to adequately meet the needs

of our first responders to adequately handle the additional responsibilities of homeland security. The fire service portion of this, based on the Council’s use of NFPA’s

analysis of the Needs Assessment Survey, was $26.5 billion in initial costs and $7.1

billion per year in ongoing costs. The Council report also addresses how federal

funding is allocated, stressing the importance of including threats and

vulnerabilities, not just population.

The terrorism preparedness needs identified by the Council for all first responders

are enormous, and the needs identified by NFPA for traditional fire service duties

are equally impressive, as may be seen in part in the background for the SAFER

Bill, which NFPA also supports and the Science Committee held hearings on just

one month ago. It is important to understand that these needs are not a wish list

for the fire service. They are the result of an objective, third-party comparison of

what the fire service has to what the fire service needs given its responsibilities,

which have grown rapidly in the face of terrorism, and existing standards and

guidelines. These standards and guidelines tell us what experts know about what

it takes to do a particular job safely and effectively.

A key element of H.R. 545 is the requirement that equipment purchased through

the FIRE Grant Program must meet or exceed applicable voluntary consensus

standards. This concept is not new. Many existing federal grant programs already

58

have similar requirements. For example, the Department of Justice’s Bulletproof

Vest Partnership Grant Program requires that vests meet minimum safety and performance standards. In addition, through its equipment grant program, the Office

of Domestic Preparedness (ODP) in the Department of Homeland Security encourages the use of NFPA standards for protective clothing in responding to hazardous

materials/chemical/biological incidents. It is expected in FY 2004 that ODP will require this. Additionally, the fire service and their national organizations understand

the importance of NFPA standards, which they help to develop. In July 2002, the

national fire service organizations, including IAFC, IAFF, and NVFC, released a position paper that addressed this issue by stating that all equipment and training

purchased with federal funds should be required to meet nationally recognized voluntary consensus standards, whenever possible.

The legislation you are considering is commendable and visionary. H.R. 545 will

provide focus and resources for research on breakthrough technologies for the fire

service. I will mention only one example of this kind of worthwhile research this

program will advance. Research at the National Institute of Standards and Technology, under current cooperative agreements with USFA and under the direction

of Dr. Randy Lawson, has already made major strides in developing better, more

scientifically grounded methods of measuring the effectiveness of firefighter protective clothing in protecting the wearer from burns.

Both H.R. 545 and the Senate version also address coordination of response to national emergency situations. The approach is similar to that used with great success

by the U.S. Forest Service and related agencies to coordinate response to major

wildfires. Contrast the smooth-running, pre-planned operations these agencies have

been able to mount with the more ad hoc approach to terrorist attacks on our country.

Both of these elements—focused research and multi-jurisdictional response planning—are excellent steps forward in meeting the needs of the fire service for both

traditional responsibilities and the new responsibilities of terrorism response.

As the country braces for the unknown at home, our nation’s firefighters, who are

nearly always the first responders in any crisis, are woefully unprepared to fully

protect our citizenry or themselves. The need is urgent and overdue. The Needs Assessment Survey of the fire service and the Council on Foreign Relations exercise

on terrorism preparedness for first responders are a call to action—a challenge to

our nation to respond fully to dangerous times.

Our firefighters face the same limitations and obstacles they encountered on September 11th. In fact, with the reported State and local budget cuts taking place, our

firefighters face even greater limitations than they did on September 11th. We can

no longer ask our fire departments to survive entirely on local tax revenue supplemented by local fundraisers. The Federal Government must provide adequate resources and support to our firefighters to meet the many challenges—whether natural, unintentional or deliberate—as they protect us and the security of our homeland.

This legislation would begin to address these urgent needs, and NFPA enthusiastically endorses it.

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I will be happy to

answer any questions you or other members of the Committee may have.

BIOGRAPHY FOR JOHN R. HALL, JR.

Dr. John R. Hall, Jr. is the Assistant Vice President for Fire Analysis and Research at the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) in Quincy, Massachusetts. Dr. Hall’s division at NFPA is responsible for the measurement of the national

fire problem and the communication of the results as a statistical bases for fire protection strategies.

Dr. Hall has authored or co-authored scores of articles and reports on fire statistics, effectiveness of fire service management practices, and fire risk analysis. He

was formerly an Operations Research Analyst with the U.S. Fire Administration

and with the National Bureau of Standards Center for Fire Research, after serving

as a Senior Research Associate with the Urban Institute. He has been active in fire

analysis and fire research for two decades.

He holds a B.A. in Mathematics from Brown University and a Ph.D. in Operations

Research from the University of Pennsylvania. He is a member of the Institute for

Operations Research and the Management Sciences, the American Society for Testing and Materials Committee E5 on Fire Tests, and the International Association

for Fire Safety Science. He has served as an officer or member of the governance

structure of all three organizations, and is the convenor of the Fire Risk Analysis

59

working group of ISO TC 92 SC4. He is also a member of the Society for Risk Analysis.

60

61

62

63

DISCUSSION

Chairman SMITH. Again, thank you very much. One of the concerns that Representative Lofgren had was the threads, and New

York has got its own thread standard that it manufactures. How

would we go about—other than, I mean, what we do in my home

town is all of the local fire departments that tend to work with

each other sit down and get together and say look, if we are going

to be called in on a fire, then we have got to be able to match up

with our equipment as it matches, to make sure that we can contribute when we are called in to one fire. On the thread problem,

we have got an estimated four or five different standards for accommodating hookups. How would you go about—other than having local communities where you are going to call in local fire departments, try to get together, to either have a coupling that would

make it compatible, how would you go about something like that,

making it more consistent and more standard?

Dr. HALL. Well, the hose standards were actually one of the

issues that led to the formation of NFPA over 100 years ago. The

problem with achieving actual standardization and interoperability

is always a multipart one. First, you have to have a standard, and

second, you have to get compliance with the standard. There have

always been jurisdictions which have, for their own reasons, decided to develop their own approaches, and it is not unusual that

problems arise in interoperability when this is the case. One of the

things that the Federal Government has often been able to do is

not so much to develop standards that are missing as to achieve

greater compliance with standards that exist. A good example is in

the area of manufactured housing. When the HUD standard was

developed in 1976, it basically took the language from an NFPA

standard, but by becoming a federal law, it instantly achieved universal compliance with the manufacturers of manufactured housing, and there was a substantial reduction in fires and fire deaths

as a direct result.

Unfortunately, over time, by having control over the development

of the standard, it ceased to keep pace with new technology, so you

both illustrated the specific advantage of the federal system, which

is achieving compliance, and their weakness, which is maintaining

modernness.

Chairman SMITH. Chief Compton, am I correct in assuming that

most of the country operates similar to Michigan, that the State of

Michigan provides funding for training, but essentially, the maintenance and support for local fire departments is a local effort that

comes from whether it is fundraisers or local property taxes, is that

the way most of the country operates?

Mr. COMPTON. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, yes.

That is the way that most—sort of states and communities operate.

Most of the funding for fire departments is local funding, and really, the FIRE Act has been the first significant program that has

provided direct support to those fire departments.

Chairman SMITH. Well, and just for the record, hopefully, the—

those interested in having a stronger program, next year, when the

$900 million expires, hopefully, we can increase that to a level that

is going to keep fire departments across the country in better shape

64

to respond to fires and emergencies that we are looking at. So,

hopefully, we can call on the support of everybody that might be

tuning in to this hearing today. Part of the challenge that I would

like your advice on, Chief, is where we go with the grant program

for fire departments to be better prepared for terrorist attacks, and

how much can the Fire Administration be involved in that kind of

effort as far as reviewing those grants, and I agree with the testimony that absolutely, we are going to insist that the—under the

Section 33 FIRE Grant program be separated from any additional

efforts for terrorist preparedness, but how—it seems to me like we

have got to have fire experts to be involved in a close way in trying

to decide what is reasonable for the FIRE Grant program that is

going to apply just to preparing against terrorist attacks.

Mr. COMPTON. Mr. Chairman, Members of the Committee, the

really separate methods of funding for preparing for some of the

more extreme aspects of terrorism, but let me go back kind of to

the beginning to your question. Is it—I was—I worked at Oklahoma City during the bombing there, the first seven days. I was

also on the scene of the Pentagon and the World Trade Center, and

those fire departments that responded there on those days did—on

April 19, 1995, they responded just like they did on April 18, 1995,

in Oklahoma City, and at the Pentagon, they responded the way

they did on September 10, and it was the same way in New York

City, and the funds that we invest in the day to day capability of

our fire departments and the basic capability to deliver fire suppression services, emergency medical services, hazardous materials

response, technical rescue capability, does tend to assist in preparing them more for any event that they respond to, so it is an

investment in the front end of our system. We don’t get a whole

lot of additional assistance the day we respond to a national terrorist event. We respond the way we did the day before, from the

standpoint of training and equipment.

Chairman SMITH. Yes. Excellent point. Representative Johnson.

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Do you believe that the

firefighting and fire protection equipment obtained under the FIRE

Grants program should conform to consensus standards where such

standards exist?

Dr. HALL. I am assuming that question is for me. Yes, Representative Johnson, we very much do believe that that is an important

provision of this bill. We are sensitive to the desirability of having

a process that can establish equivalence to a standard, and I believe that the language that is being discussed for the bill may provide a basis for doing that. Compliance with all of our standards

in all forums where they are examined for compliance always includes the possibility of equivalence and the tools to establish that

something is equivalent are very much the subject of the good work

at NIST. They have done a great deal to establish performancebased assessment procedures, so yes.

Mr. COMPTON. If I might add to that, many of the standards that

you—we were talking about deal directly with personal protective

equipment, and protecting firefighters and protecting the public, so

I believe very strongly that that equipment should have to conform,

but I also agree with Chief Paulison, in that the USFA needs some

65

latitude to deal with technologies and situations that were not anticipated, and so that we can continue to grow and improve.

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you both. How do the fire services community get involved in the current process of developing the standards? I know that with all of the fire departments, urban and

rural, across the country, there probably are some variations and

some various needs, different needs as well.

Dr. HALL. In the NFPA system, we achieve a balanced representation on all technical committees and the fire service is always a

part of that. They get particular emphasis in any committee that

is looking at standards of particular use to them, but we always

have representation also from manufacturers and researchers, the

public, other interests that have something to bring.

Ms. JOHNSON. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. GINGREY. Am I on? All right. Thank you, engineer. Dr. Hall

and Chief Compton, despite our wealth and prosperity, it is no secret that America has one of the worst fire records among developed nations. One of the reasons often cited for this is poor attention to fire prevention. Do you agree that this is a primary reason

for our higher—high injury and death rate relative to other nations? What activities does USFA focus on in terms of fire prevention, and finally, do competing agendas perhaps cause us to focus

too much on response and not enough on prevention?

Dr. HALL. That is an excellent question, Representative Gingrey.

I appreciate your asking it. From the very beginning, I believe the

U.S. Fire Administration has taken a very balanced approach to

both prevention and mitigation of fires. They have made major impacts on public fire safety education, arson prevention on the prevention side and fire detection and suppression on the mitigation

side. In each instance, what they try to do, and what we at NFPA

try to do, is to find out which new idea is going to make the most

difference for the least money.

Quite often, those new ideas are on the prevention side, because

you are quite right. Traditionally, the U.S. has paid less attention

to fire prevention than other advanced countries with better fire

safety records than ours.

As to the question of competing agendas, I think that the different organizations have found a great deal of success in working

together and complementing each other’s efforts, reinforcing each

other’s work, and that within the U.S. Fire Administration, they

have also done a very nice job of maintaining balance, so I would

not regard that as a major problem.

Mr. GINGREY. Chief Compton?

Mr. COMPTON. I look at that more in a systems—from a systems

standpoint, in that there are really three elements of a fire and life

safety infrastructure that we have to deal with. One is the built environment, and it deals with prevention and codes and built-in protection and those types of issues, and there are some immediate

gains made in that end of our system, but for the most part, that

is a long-term approach to building an environment that is safer.

The second deals with human behavior, and it is almost impossible for someone to build something that we can’t mess up by our

own behavior. Basically, what we take into structures, the way we

behave in those structures, the—literally, the way that we—the

66

way we teach people to either prevent situations from happening

to them, and not just fires, but others, or survive them if something

does occur, and then the other is the issue of emergency response,

because when we have situations that occur, which is a much more

short-term part of our system, matter of fact, it is usually three to

six minutes is the expectation there, but it is also a critical element. It is very difficult for fire departments to shore up the longterm solutions to our nation’s fire problem, which is fire prevention

and public education to some extent.

While you are trying to get on the scene within three to six minutes, and you can’t do that either, and it is another reason for the

FIRE Act and the SAFER legislation and bills of that nature, is

that we—if we can shore up the emergency response capability of

our system, we can continue to build the other. And I also—I don’t

know if you are all aware or not, but the FIRE Act program has

a percentage of those funds set aside for fire prevention and public

education programs, and it is a very important part of that Act. So

I appreciate the question as well. It is an important part of our system, and it is an issue that we deal with regularly at the local

level.

Mr. GINGREY. Thank you both, and I yield back my time, Mr.

Chairman.

Chairman SMITH. Gutknecht.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. The question I was

going to ask, actually essentially was asked by Representative

Gingrey, but I want to come back to a couple of points. One is, and

I think we have to be careful in—first of all, I think I speak on behalf of every Member of Congress and virtually every American.

We are so appreciative to our firefighters and what they do every

day, and we learned so much about the risks that they take on

September 11th and most of us have not forgotten that lesson, but

I think we have to be careful, too, and that is that you can’t build

a levy high enough to protect against a thousand year flood, and

I am not certain that we can do enough at the state, federal, or

local level to ever ultimately be ready for another act like we saw

on September 11, so I think we have to be careful to over-promise

what we can do here, or at the local level.

But I want to change the subject slightly, because I also chair

a Subcommittee, and we are responsible for—on that Subcommittee, for all of the national forests, through the USDA, and

I know that that is not necessarily your bailiwick, but I think we

need to remind ourselves, too, that last year, of the some 94 million

acres of federal forest land, we had wildfires which burned millions

of those acres, but worse than that, we lost, I believe the number

is 22 firefighters in battling those blazes.

Is there anything the USFA or any of the groups are doing, any

of the technology that you are deploying or any of the things that

we can do to hopefully protect more of these principally young people, who are out there whenever we have a wildfire, whether it be

in Arizona or Wyoming or Minnesota, wherever it happens to be,

is there anything that you are doing in your research or at NIST

that can help us do a better job of preventing those wildfires, and

we have some ideas of our own, in terms of what the President has

proposed and I am a strong supporter of that, but then secondly,

67

in terms of battling those blazes more effectively and protecting the

lives of those young firefighters?

Dr. HALL. You are absolutely right that that is a very important

part of the total U.S. fire problem. In fact, about a third of the costliest fires of all time in the U.S. consist of wildfires from the last

decade and a half, so it is an area that needs more of our attention.

NFPA is active in a program called Firewise, working with the U.S.

Forest Service and other kindred agencies to address a whole host

of research, educational and other programs to try to improve the

situation in these wildland/urban interface problems, which is the

term that is commonly used. The Forest Service, I think, is doing

a superb job of leadership in this area, and I believe that they

reach out to the Fire Administration and to NIST in areas where

there is a common goal or a common set of resources, and certainly,

NIST has a long history of technology applicable to all sorts of

fires.

Some of the work of the last several years, they have looked at

ways of modeling and predicting the development of fire in very

large situations. Initially, the oilfields of Kuwait, but it is applicable in many respects to forest fires as well. So I think the short

answer to your question is that we are all treating that as a priority, and there are always opportunities to work more together.

[PA malfunction]

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Here we go. Mr. Chairman, I will pursue this

more with folks from NIST, because you know, the kids that we

drop into those forest fires, I mean they don’t take with them much

technology at all, and it seems to me, especially since we are talking about federal lands, we have a very strong moral responsibility,

and I would just say this editorially, I am very concerned about

what is going to happen in northern Minnesota. We have had a terrible blowdown up there, and we know that sooner or later, it is

going to burn, and when it does, it is going to be a horrific fire,

and yet there is little being done right now to help clean up that

and get some fireblocks put in place, so that we don’t lose another

22 kids, and a lot of those kids are going to be from Minnesota.

I yield back my time. Mr. Compton, if you want to say.

Mr. COMPTON. The program John mentioned, or Dr. Hall mentioned on Firewise, is a program that if you all are not familiar

with it, it is something that from a national standpoint that we

could pay more attention to, because it is a prevention program. It

does deal with fireblocks. It does deal with this interface issue, of

where you have forest firefighting, but where we may have let that

burn in the past, we have homes in there now, and we—and so

there is a different motivation to deal with those fires differently,

so from the standpoint of training and incident command and prevention, there are programs in place that can help us do that better.

Dr. HALL. If I could just add one other point, one of the features

of the bill you are considering today which I spoke well of in the

full written testimony would create the kind of national response

to unusually large local situations which has already been well developed in the wildland area. The preexisting state and local agreements with federal agencies which now provide an automatic trigger for bringing in outside resources when a wildfire reaches a cerVerDate 11-MAY-2000 18:36 Oct 25, 2003 Jkt 088232 PO 00000 Frm 00071 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6601 C:\WORKD\RES03\071703\88232 SCIENCE1 PsN: SCIENCE1
68

tain size are transportable to the building environment and you

have a provision in your legislation that I think would implement

that concept in a very useful way.

Chairman SMITH. Well, we are just—the fire—the western fire

season is just starting, the fires have already started, a tremendous

challenge.

Mr. GUTKNECHT. Mr. Chairman, if I could, I would like to at

least continue this dialogue privately with you, and maybe we can

do some things, because one of the concerns, and I know my time

has expired, is that—and we had a situation, I think, a year ago

in Colorado where we had planes that could have helped put out

the fire faster, but for some arcane rules relative to the National

Guard and other things, they were unable to even take off, and it

seems to me there ought to be some ways we in Congress—it

shouldn’t require an act of Congress, but in Congress perhaps can

help massage those rules so that we can get at these fires more

quickly and get them under control. I yield back my time. I am

sorry.

Chairman SMITH. Gentlemen, again, thank you very much. Chief

Compton, just your practical commonsense approach is—should

be—it is an inspiration for me to try to look at ways that we can

make people more conscious of doing reasonable—taking reasonable precautions in their homes and in their backyards to prevent

more fires, and I was especially struck recently by what appears

to be sort of the loss of our pioneer spirit of taking care of ourselves

and thinking somehow, somebody else should protect us from

cracks in the sidewalk or whatever.

When a tree limb started cracking and I just happened to be

walking by it two weeks ago, out by the guard gate going into the

Capitol, and you could hear the cracking, you know, and people

looked up and just kept walking underneath it, and the limb finally

came down and knocked one guy and gave him a concussion, but

we are losing the—sometimes, the danger is of becoming too protective that we lose some of that pioneer spirit, that communities and

individuals have to start thinking and using common sense to try

to prevent more of the fires that can happen in those communities.

Gentlemen, again, thank you very much. The hearing is concluded. The Committee will convene in three minutes for a markup

on the bill.

Mr. COMPTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

[Whereupon, at 11:25 a.m., the Subcommittee proceeded to other

business.]

(69)

Appendix 1:

ADDITIONAL MATERIAL FOR THE RECORD

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81