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

81–311 PDF 2002

S. Hrg. 107–616

NOMINATION OF MICHAEL D. BROWN

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON

GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON THE

NOMINATION OF MICHAEL D. BROWN TO BE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF

THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

JUNE 19, 2002

Printed for the use of the Committee on Governmental Affairs

(

(II)

COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman

CARL LEVIN, Michigan

DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii

RICHARD J. DURBIN, Illinois

ROBERT G. TORRICELLI, New Jersey

MAX CLELAND, Georgia

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware

JEAN CARNAHAN, Missouri

MARK DAYTON, Minnesota

FRED THOMPSON, Tennessee

TED STEVENS, Alaska

SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio

THAD COCHRAN, Mississippi

ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah

JIM BUNNING, Kentucky

PETER G. FITZGERALD, Illinois

JOYCE A. RECHTSCHAFFEN, Staff Director and Counsel

SUSAN E. PROPPER, Counsel

JENNIFER E. HAMILTON, Research Assistant

RICHARD A. HERTLING, Minority Staff Director

JOHANNA L. HARDY, Minority Counsel

JANA C. SINCLAIR WHITE, Minority Counsel

DARLA D. CASSELL, Chief Clerk

(III)

C O N T E N T S

Opening statements: Page

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

Senator Bunning ............................................................................................... 5

Senator Akaka .................................................................................................. 5

Senator Bennett ................................................................................................ 14

WITNESSES

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 19, 2002

Hon. Ben Nighthorse Campbell, a U.S. Senator from the State of Colorado ..... 1

Hon. Wayne Allard, a U.S. Senator from the State of Colorado .......................... 2

Michael D. Brown, to be Deputy Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) ........................................................................................... 8

ALPHABETICAL LIST OF WITNESSES

Allard, Hon. Wayne:

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 2

Brown, Michael D.:

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 8

Biographical and professional information ..................................................... 17

Pre-hearing questions and responses .............................................................. 62

Questions for the Record and responses ......................................................... 95

Campbell, Hon. Ben Nighthorse:

Testimony .......................................................................................................... 1

(1)

NOMINATION OF MICHAEL D. BROWN

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 19, 2002

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS, Washington, DC.

The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:37 a.m., in room

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

Present: Senators Lieberman, Akaka, Bunning, and Bennett.

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN LIEBERMAN

Chairman LIEBERMAN. The hearing will come to order. I apologize to everyone here that I am a bit late. One of those phone calls

came in as I was heading out of the office.

I wonder if my colleagues up here, Senator Bunning and Senator

Akaka, would mind if we yielded to the introducers first since the

two of you may have to go on to other matters. We are delighted

to welcome you here. Who is senior, or do you care?

Senator CAMPBELL. Does it go by age, Mr. Chairman? [Laughter.]

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Yes. Well, you have gray hair. [Laughter.]

Is it OK if we start with him?

Senator ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, I ask to vote alphabetically, but

he has got seniority.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. OK. Senator Campbell.

STATEMENT OF HON. BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, A U.S.

SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF COLORADO

Senator CAMPBELL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is an honor and

a pleasure to introduce to the Committee today an outstanding

gentleman who has been nominated to serve as the Deputy Director for the Federal Emergency Management Agency, Michael

Brown.

As my colleagues know, FEMA has played a very important role

in Colorado in recent weeks, as well as throughout many of the

Western States faced with the catastrophic wildfires that we face.

In Colorado, as an example, we have lost over 200,000 acres this

summer alone to forest fires. FEMA and people like Mr. Brown

have been serving the State, the country, and indeed, all of us as

citizens in their capacity within that agency steadfastly and tenaciously.

FEMA has been there non-stop to help our States in terms of

floods, earthquakes, tornadoes, and all kinds of natural disasters.

But beginning this year alone, Colorado has received 11 fire management assistance grants from FEMA. For my part, and certainly

2

on behalf of the people of Colorado, I need to thank Mr. Brown for

that dedication. It is going to be a long, hot, dangerous summer,

and I am sure that FEMA will always be there as friends and good

public servants.

Wildfires aside, we are here today to talk about Mr. Brown’s appointment to serve as the Deputy Director. Mr. Brown was first appointed to serve as the FEMA General Counsel in February 2001,

and then as Acting Deputy Director in September, where he served

as the Chairman of the Consequences Management Working

Group. As FEMA’s General Counsel, Mr. Brown is both the principal legal advisor to FEMA’s Director Joe Allbaugh and the head

of the Office of General Counsel. Not only does he provide legal advice to the Director, but he and his staff of approximately 30 attorneys provide legal services to all of FEMA’s programs and support

offices and they also represent the agency in litigation.

Prior to his current job, from 1991 to 2000, Mr. Brown was the

Commissioner of the International Arabian Horse Association, an

international subsidiary of the National Governing Organization of

the U.S. Olympic Committee. In his position there, he created ethical programs, enforcement policies and procedures, conducted investigations, and prosecuted fraud and corruption cases.

Before that, he served as General Counsel of Dillingham Insurance, Suits Drilling, Suits Rig, and Latigo Energy, in addition to

Dillingham Ranch and Dillingham Enterprises. Earlier positions

included 8 years in private practice, 2 years as an advisor to the

Oklahoma State Senate’s Finance Committee, and 3 years as Public Administrator for Edmond, Oklahoma, where he co-founded

joint public-private partnerships for economic development.

Mr. Chairman, I cannot state firmly enough that I believe Michael Brown to be more than qualified to serve FEMA and the people of this country as part of the administration. He is dedicated,

tenacious, and he is exactly the type of individual who has given

up probably a better lifestyle to be in public service and we certainly appreciate all of that.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. We can certify to that final statement—— [Laughter.]

And everything else you said, too. Thanks, Senator Campbell.

Senator Allard.

STATEMENT OF HON. WAYNE ALLARD, A U.S. SENATOR FROM

THE STATE OF COLORADO

Senator ALLARD. Mr. Chairman, it is good to see you this morning. I think this is the first time I have had an opportunity to appear before your Committee.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. It is a pleasure to have you here. Thank

you.

Senator ALLARD. I want to join my colleague from Colorado, Senator Ben Nighthorse Campbell, in strongly endorsing President

Bush’s nominee for Deputy Director of the Federal Emergency

Management Agency, otherwise known as FEMA.

Undoubtedly, everyone in this room is well aware by now of the

serious wildfire situation that we have in the State of Colorado. I

would just point out after the comments made by my colleague that

3

it is important that we move forward expeditiously on this nomination because this is the fire season throughout the entire Rocky

Mountain region, although I think that Colorado is probably more

heavily impacted than any other State in the Rocky Mountain region.

I am pleased to know that Michael D. Brown has the opportunity

to serve as Deputy Director of FEMA because he is a Coloradan.

He holds a Bachelor of Arts in Public Administration and Political

Science from Central State University in Oklahoma. He got his

Juris Doctorate from Oklahoma City University School of Law. He

has also served as an adjunct professor of law for the school.

He was appointed as FEMA’s General Counsel by President

Bush in February 2001 and consequently appointed as Acting Deputy Director for the agency. As FEMA’s General Counsel, he served

as the principal legal advisor to the Director, led a staff of 30 attorneys, and provided legal services to all of FEMA’s program and

support offices. He also represented the agency in litigation matters.

As Acting Deputy Director, Mr. Brown serves as Chief Operating

Officer for the agency and helps the Director oversee the activities

of the agency. He offers the agency many years of professional experience. I think that is extremely important and I believe it will

serve the agency well, especially when faced with the serious situations that call for the agency’s response.

In the past, he served as a hearing officer for the Colorado and

Oklahoma Supreme Courts, and as a special prosecutor appointed

by the Police Civil Service Commission in internal affairs.

Mr. Brown, I believe, is a person of integrity. He has served as

a bar examiner on ethics and professional responsibility. He also

served as commissioner for an international sports and trade federation, during which time he created ethical programs, enforcement policies, and conducted investigations and prosecuted fraud

and corruption cases. I believe that Mr. Brown has valuable experience and familiarity with insurance law, energy issues, land use,

and environmental law, practical skills that have and will serve

him well at FEMA.

Mr. Brown brings strong family values to this job. He lives in a

community not far from where I live known as Longmont, Colorado. He is a Coloradan. He has lived there for 11 years. He has

two children, Amy and Jared and he travels back to Colorado almost every weekend, as I do. I can understand the difficulty of flying all the time as official duties permit.

Again, I thank the Committee for allowing me the opportunity to

introduce Michael D. Brown. I wish to congratulate the Committee

for acting on this nomination expeditiously. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you, Senator Allard.

Mr. Brown, you are off to a good start with two strong statements of endorsement. I am going to put my opening statement in

the record.

[The prepared opening statement of Chairman Lieberman follows:]

4

PREPARED OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LIEBERMAN

Good morning. Welcome to you, Mr. Brown, and also to your wife, Tamara.

We are here this morning for the nomination hearing of Michael Brown to become

Deputy Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency—a government

agency under much discussion these days, as we begin to reorganize government to

better protect our citizens from terrorist attacks here at home. If, and I hope when,

the Department of Homeland Security comes into existence, FEMA will be folded

into the Department; we must ensure that the agency is equipped to function at the

highest level today, and equipped to make the transition into the new department

without losing a step tomorrow.

Responding to terrorist attacks, of course, is just one piece of FEMA’s mission. Recent floods in Minnesota and crippling forest fires in Colorado have reminded us of

FEMA’s critical, often life-saving role in helping Americans protect themselves from

and recover from natural disasters. My state of Connecticut was grateful for the assistance FEMA provided in 1999 to aid recovery from Tropical Storm Floyd. And

more recently, the agency has assisted scores of fire departments and companies in

my state of Connecticut—including Stonington, Oakdale, West Haven, Allington,

Danbury, Bethel and Farmington, to name a few—with funds to purchase protective

equipment, fire prevention programs, and fire trucks.

But because, by creating the Department of Homeland Security, we are in the

throes of making such an important decision that will affect FEMA’s historic and

future responsibilities, I’d like to focus today on the agency’s role as the lead federal

agency responding to terrorist attacks. Based on a series of hearings on homeland

security the Governmental Affairs Committee held last fall, it is crystal clear to me

that effective coordination among and between layers of government is the crux of

all quick and effective terror response. Therefore, FEMA must be an absolutely dependable link in that communications chain. It must ensure that the Federal Government’s entire emergency response network is a well-honed machine, and then

that the Federal, state and local governments are just as well coordinated with one

another. This is an immense challenge that FEMA has yet to meet.

I am glad the President has nominated someone already familiar with FEMA’s mission to become Deputy Director. Mr. Brown is currently General Counsel and

Chief Operating Officer of the agency, a position he has held since February of 2001.

Before joining the Bush Administration, I note from his resume, he served as executive director of the Independent Electrical Contractors in Denver. In the early

1980s, Mr. Brown served as staff director of the Oklahoma Senate’s Finance Committee, while serving on the Edmund, Oklahoma, City Council. He ran for Congress

in the sixth district, and, in what I think is particularly useful experience, early in

his career, was assistant city manager in Edmond, with responsibility for police, fire

and emergency services.

As I have said, since September 11th, FEMA has taken on new responsibilities

of the highest priority, in addition to its traditional and critical role of responding

to natural disasters. Although the agency received generally good reviews on its performance in the wake of the September 11th attacks, some have criticized FEMA’s limited assistance payments to families in New York, its failure to fully reimburse

New York City for higher-than-expected police security costs, and its inadequate

consultation with state and local groups outside of emergency management personnel.

In addition, the Administration’s budget calls for a $3.5 billion increase for state

and local preparedness. That new funding is welcome. At the same time, we should

understand that for the money to be effectively spent, the agency will have to undergo a thorough assessment of its operations and organizational structure.

Mr. Brown, you have extensive management experience. For this job, you will

need it. You will need to redouble FEMA’s strengths, strengthen its weaknesses,

and work with the reorganization effort to allow a seamless transition that only enhances our government’s emergency response network.

In 1940, President Franklin Roosevelt said, ‘‘We will harness and speed up the

use of the material resources of this nation in order that we ourselves in the Americas may have equipment and training equal to the task of any emergency and every

defense.’’

That is once again our challenge and our opportunity today. I hope together we

are up to the task.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. I will say for the record that Mr. Brown

has submitted responses to a biographical and financial questionnaire, has answered pre-hearing questions submitted by the Committee and additional questions from individual Senators, and has

5

had his financial statement reviewed by the Office of Government

Ethics. Without objection, this information will be made part of the

hearing record, with the exception of the financial data, which is

on file and available for inspection in the Committee’s offices.

In addition, the FBI file has been reviewed by Senator Thompson

and me pursuant to Committee rules.

Senator Bunning, would you like to make an opening statement?

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BUNNING

Senator BUNNING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As we all know,

FEMA provides America with vital services during some of the

most difficult moments. In fact, so far this year, Kentucky has

three times experienced severe flooding, and yesterday, we had an

earthquake. The epicenter was in Evansville, Indiana, and affected

Western Kentucky. Can you imagine Kentucky with an earthquake? So we have used the services of FEMA at least three times

in these last few months. In all instances, FEMA was ready to provide the needed support to help my State, and I appreciate their

hard work.

As we all know, earlier this month, President Bush announced

his proposal to create a new Department of Homeland Security,

which will be responsible for keeping all Americans safe inside our

borders. It may be the biggest undertaking by the Federal Government and will require cooperation, dedication, and hard work from

Federal employees, Congress, and the administration.

One of the agencies the President has proposed moving into the

new Department is FEMA, and today, our Committee has the

pleasure of considering the nomination of Michael Brown to be

Deputy Director of FEMA. Since Mr. Brown is already serving as

Chief Operating Officer and General Counsel to FEMA, I suspect

he is already familiar with the agency’s strengths and weaknesses

and I am looking forward to gaining his perspective on future

changes to FEMA. I also hope that he has some suggestions for us,

since this Committee will be primarily responsible for creating the

new Department in the Senate.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you, Senator Bunning. Senator

Akaka.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR AKAKA

Senator AKAKA. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Brown, aloha and welcome to this Committee. Since you and

I met a month ago, it seems that the nature of the position to

which you have been nominated has changed dramatically. I also

want to say welcome to anyone you have with you. Do you have

any members of your family here you wish to introduce?

Mr. BROWN. Yes.

Senator AKAKA. Can you introduce them?

Mr. BROWN. My wife, Tamara.

Senator AKAKA. Thank you for supporting him at this hearing.

I also want to thank my colleagues, Senator Allard and Senator

Campbell, for their introduction.

Mr. Chairman, the President’s proposal for a new Department of

Homeland Security includes FEMA. I hope, Mr. Chairman, since

6

you have led the Senate with your bill establishing the Department

of Homeland Security, that we can explore how this new role will

affect the agency’s traditional mission.

Many of the agencies impacted by this proposal, including

FEMA, have a number of core responsibilities unrelated to homeland security missions. Most of what FEMA does every day, and

what Americans expect FEMA to do, does not fall under the description of homeland security. An example is when FEMA

partnered with local and State agencies to help residents on the Island of Hawaii in the wake of tropical storms and flooding last

year. It is the dedicated men and women who formed—as I would

like to call them the FEMA family—who continue to build on these

relationships and provide Federal assistance to those most in need.

Every State in the Union, including Hawaii, works with FEMA

on mitigation to lessen the impact of future disasters. These efforts

are all-hazard and will help communities respond to floods and terrorist attacks. However, there are those in the administration who

have criticized mitigation efforts and have questioned their cost

and benefit. I believe that Mr. Brown and Director Allbaugh appreciate the importance of disaster mitigation. Unfortunately, traditional cost-benefit analysis is not appropriate for mitigation programs and OMB has failed to give FEMA guidelines on what factors will be used in the future.

I am concerned that these same problems will haunt the new

Homeland Security Department. What factors will OMB use to determine the effectiveness of different homeland security programs?

Mr. Chairman, I hope that Governor Ridge will shed some light on

this when he appears before us tomorrow.

The Deputy Director will be responsible to ensure that FEMA’s

core functions are not neglected.

Over the past decade, FEMA has regained the confidence of local

and State emergency managers. Individuals and families rely on

FEMA when their lives are torn apart by natural disasters. I believe confidence and trust are among America’s most important assets in our struggle to make our community safer and more secure.

FEMA has expanded its responsibilities towards this.

Mr. Brown, again, I want to say thank you for your dedication

and your willingness to serve our Nation. You have a tough road

ahead. If we are to use the parallel between this reorganization

and the creation of the Department of Defense in 1947, we must

remember that it took years, even decades, to shape a truly integrated armed forces. Unfortunately, we do not have years to reshape how our country prepares for terrorism.

Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman, and I ask unanimous consent that my longer statement be placed in the record.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thanks, Senator Akaka. Without objection, it will be placed in the record.

[The prepared statement of Senator Akaka follows:]

PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR AKAKA

I wish to welcome our nominee to the Committee. Since you and I met a month

ago, it seems that the nature of the position to which you have been nominated has

changed dramatically.

7

The President’s proposal for a new Department of Homeland Security will include

Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). A key question is how will this

new role for FEMA in Homeland Security affect its traditional mission?

There is already a Federal Response Plan that does what the President says the

new Department will do, that is, ‘‘the Homeland Security Department will integrate

the Federal interagency emergency response plans into a single comprehensive, government-wide plan.’’ Since 1992, a Federal Response Plan has managed the activities of 26 Federal agencies and the Red Cross during all phases of a disaster, including readiness, response, recovery, and mitigation. In 1999, FEMA published the second edition of the Federal Response Plan Terrorism Incident Annex.

When necessary, FEMA has made agreements with specific government agencies

to address terrorism. In January 2001, FEMA and the Department of Justice released an Interagency Domestic Terrorism Concept of Operations Plan (CONPLAN).

FEMA is currently working with the Catastrophic Disaster Response Group

(CDRG), made up of representatives of all Federal agencies, to update the Federal

Response Plan in light of the lessons learned from September 11. These changes are

to be integrated with the national strategy for homeland security, on which Governor Ridge has spent the past eight months working.

I hope the proposed department will build on all the different plans and agreements already in place. We do not need a brand new coordination plan. What we

need is better communication and implementation of the plans we have.

The President and his staff compare this reorganization to the creation of the Department of Defense after World War II. However, there are many differences. The

Departments of the Navy and the Army shared the primary mission of defending

the United States. They were both military departments with similar cultures and

management priorities.

In contrast, many of the agencies impacted by this proposal, including FEMA,

have a number of core responsibilities unrelated to their homeland security missions. Most of what FEMA does every day, and what Americans expect from FEMA,

does not fall under the description of homeland security.

Homeland security is strengthened through developing assets that are built dayby-day and community-by-community. These assets include well-trained firefighters

and law enforcement officers, well-equipped medical personnel, and well-exercised

emergency response drills.

An example is when FEMA partnered with local and state agencies to help residents on the Island of Hawaii in the wake of tropical storms and flooding last year.

It is the dedicated men and women who form the FEMA family who continue to

build on these relationships and provide Federal assistance to those most in need.

Just this year, FEMA assisted flood victims in West Virginia, Kentucky, and Illinois

and is working with communities devastated by wildfires in Colorado and New Mexico.

Every state in the Union, including Hawaii, works with FEMA to include disaster

mitigation when rebuilding after an event. Cities and counties across the country

are working with FEMA to lessen the impact of future natural disasters through

mitigation programs.

These efforts are all-hazard and will help communities respond to floods and terrorist attacks. However, there are those in the Administration who have criticized

mitigation efforts and have questioned their cost and benefit.

FEMA’s pre-disaster mitigation program was eliminated in the President’s 2002

budget because it was deemed ineffective by the Office of Management and Budget.

Congress disagreed and saved the $25 million program only to see the Administration’s FY03 budget proposal seek to eliminate FEMA’s post-disaster mitigation program, which was also judged ineffective by OMB.

I believe that Mr. Brown and Director Allbaugh appreciate the importance of disaster mitigation. Unfortunately, traditional cost-benefit analysis is not appropriate

for mitigation and prevention programs, and OMB has not given FEMA guidelines

on what factors will be used in the future.

I am concerned that these same problems will haunt the new Homeland Security

Department. What factors will OMB use to determine the effectiveness of different

homeland security programs? I hope Governor Ridge will shed some light on this

when he appears before us tomorrow.

The Deputy Director will be responsible to make sure that core functions are not

neglected. Over the past decade, FEMA has regained the confidence of local and

state emergency managers. Individuals and families rely on FEMA when their lives

are torn apart by natural disasters. I believe confidence and trust are among America’s most important assets in our struggle to make our communities safer and more

secure.

8

1 Biographical and professional information appears in the Appendix on page 17.

Pre-hearing questions and responses appear in the Appendix on page 62.

Questions for the Record and responses appear in the Appendix on page 95.

FEMA has these assets because of it employees. The Deputy Director also will be

responsible for ensuring that these dedicated Federal workers have the resources,

training, and support necessary to do their jobs. Likewise, FEMA’s core missions are

too important to take the best and most experienced staff away from traditional disaster response and mitigation to fill new homeland security activities.

Mr. Brown, thank you again for your dedication and willingness to serve your nation. You have a tough road ahead. If we are to use the parallel between this reorganization and the creation of the Department of Defense in 1947, we must remember

that it took years, even decades, to shape a truly integrated armed forces. Unfortunately, we do not have years to reshape how our country prepares for terrorism.

We can, and should, pass legislation to create a homeland security department.

However, we must remember that the issue is not a new Federal department, but

what is most effective in protecting Americans.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Mr. Brown, our Committee rules require

that all witnesses at nomination hearings give their testimony

under oath, so at this point, I would ask you to please stand and

raise your right hand.

Do you solemnly swear to tell the truth, the whole truth, and

nothing but the truth, so help you, God?

Mr. BROWN. I do.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you. Please be seated. Mr. Brown,

do you have a statement that you would like to make at this time?

Mr. BROWN. A very short statement, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Please proceed.

TESTIMONY OF MICHAEL D. BROWN 1 TO BE DEPUTY DIRECTOR OF THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

(FEMA)

Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Senator Akaka, and Senator Bunning. It is truly an honor to be here today. I am especially

proud to be joined today by so many people from FEMA. I really

consider them to be my friends after a year and a half or so of

working there. The people at FEMA are truly dedicated to doing

a good job, truly dedicated to fulfilling the mission of that agency,

and truly dedicated to being the best public servants that they can.

The fact that some of them showed up today is very meaningful to

me and I appreciate their being here.

I am also very grateful for my wife being here today. As all of

you know, public service sometimes can cause a heavy toll in terms

of just relationships, in terms of the workload, in terms of what the

undertaking is that we do in being public servants, and my wife

has followed me throughout my career and has been very supportive, at times questioning me, at times prodding me, at times

looking at me with that strange look on her face like, ‘‘What are

you doing now?’’ [Laughter.]

Mr. BROWN. But throughout all of it, she has been very supportive, so I would like to introduce my wife, Tamara, and just tell

you how much I appreciate her being here today.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you for being here, Mrs. Brown.

All of us are familiar with that strange spousal look that Mr.

Brown referred to. ‘‘What are you doing now?’’ I have seen that a

few times at home. [Laughter.]

9

Mr. BROWN. I am very grateful to President Bush for nominating

me to this position. Like you, I believe public service is an honorable path and an honorable career and I am fortunate to have this

opportunity to contribute and I am honored that I have been asked

to serve. I am especially honored that I have been asked to serve

at this incredibly interesting time in our country’s history.

I am also very pleased that I was introduced by two, I think,

very unique members of the U.S. Senate, the only veterinarian in

the Senate and the only Senator I know that when I am traveling

through Colorado and I see a Harley Davidson drive by, I pull

down my glasses to see if it is Senator Campbell or not. So two of

the most unique Senators in this institution have introduced me

today and I am very honored by that.

I am also honored by the fact that my friend, Joe Allbaugh,

whom I have known for some 25 years, has asked me to serve with

him. Our friendship goes back many years, but that personal history pales when you put it in the context of the past 9 months. It

is during times such as this that we learn a lot about ourselves,

our families, our friends, and everyone else, and how much we

cherish them.

I have been saying a lot of thank yous, and that is because

FEMA is a terrific agency with an inspiring mission. FEMA cuts

across political and philosophical lines. It is an agency people can

agree on. They respect our mission. They understand the challenges that the mission represents.

Mr. Chairman, both as Chairman of this Committee and as a

member of our EPW Subcommittee, you know what a broad reach

that we have in this agency, for example, from disaster response

to fire grants, from the President’s first responder grants to

supplementing homeless service providers, from safety near chemical storage sites to safety near earthen dams, from disaster mitigation to safety around nuclear power plants, from the Cerro Grande

Fire Claims Office to flood insurance maps. That covers a lot of

ground and requires as much energy as it does expertise.

In short, we at FEMA have a lot of responsibility, but we are

also blessed with partners who are the best in America. Some of

those partners that we work with include State and local governments at all levels, communities, homeowners, nonprofits, charitable groups, emergency managers, fire fighters, and all of the

other first responders.

As you can see, we are part of a terrific team. Contrary to

Groucho Marx’s theory on club memership, it is the kind of club of

which you would want to be a member. We have a lot on our plate

and a lot more coming to our plate, but through this work, we are

also blessed to see firsthand on a regular basis the very best that

this country has to offer.

I have now been at FEMA for just over a year as General Counsel and Chief Operating Officer. It has been a tumultuous time, but

also a time of great hope and a time of great possibility. I want to

assure you that if I am confirmed as Deputy Director, I will work

hard to maintain FEMA’s standard. We have worked hard to gain

a reputation as dependable partners, and I want to not only maintain that record, but to improve on that record, also.

10

I pledge with all sincerity to work with this Committee and the

Congress to strengthen the agency, its dedicated staff, and the

service that we provide to people most in need of our help. Working

together, I believe all things are possible.

I thank the Committee for your time and your attention and I

will be happy to answer any questions that you have.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thanks very much, Mr. Brown.

I am going to ask you some questions first, that we ask of all

nominees. Is there anything you are aware of in your background

which might present a conflict of interest with the duties of the office to which you have been nominated?

Mr. BROWN. There are none, Senator.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Do you know of anything personal or otherwise, that would in any way prevent you from fully and honorably discharging your responsibilities as Deputy Director of FEMA?

Mr. BROWN. No, sir.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. And do you agree without reservation to

respond to any reasonable summons to appear and testify before

any duly constituted committee of Congress if you are confirmed?

Mr. BROWN. Absolutely.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you very much.

Mr. Brown, as we have indicated here today, as much as any

other agency, FEMA’s role will be greatly expanded as we reorganize government to prepare for and respond to terrorist attacks at

home. FEMA, of course, has done an outstanding job in working

closely with State emergency managers to respond to natural disasters.

However, I know there is a concern among some, including some

law enforcement officials and regional councils of government, that

FEMA sticks pretty closely, if I can put it in the vernacular, to its

own network of State emergency management personnel and local

emergency management personnel. Given FEMA’s expanding mission, what would you intend to do to expand FEMA’s network and

to reach out to these other groups that you may have more contact

with than you have had in the past?

Mr. BROWN. I think we have already started down that path,

Senator. Director Allbaugh met, I think, possibly 30 days ago or so

with a group of law enforcement officials and literally sat down

with them at Tortilla Coast in a room. I envisioned a room with

a chair in the middle, the way he describes it, and a single light

bulb over his head and they grilled him extensively about the relationship that FEMA has with law enforcement agencies. He very

forthrightly told them that our partnership has to be with all agencies responding to the disaster, all first responders, and the impression I had from my conversation with him is they walked away

feeling much better about that.

We also have reached out to FBI Director Mueller and had a

meeting with him a couple of weeks ago and they have agreed to

detail an FBI Special Agent to our FEMA Operations Center so

that as we do our planning, as we do our preparations, we will

have that law enforcement component as a part of our emergency

support team.

So I think we are already doing that. My pledge would be that

just as we have good partnering relationships with State and local

11

government, I will do my best to expand that partnership attitude,

those partnership relationships to all aspects of law enforcement

that may be involved in first response.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you very much. That is a good answer.

In the homeland security bill that this Committee reported out

about a month ago, FEMA would be the key component in the

Emergency Preparedness and Response Directorate, as we called it

in that bill, of the new Department of Homeland Security. That

particular directorate would be responsible for all of the disaster

response activities currently handled by FEMA as well as the Federal, State, and local planning, training, and exercise programs and

the coordination that needs to occur between the Federal agencies,

State and local governments, and the private sector.

The role envisioned for FEMA in the administration’s proposal,

it seems to me, is quite similar to the one in our Committee bill,

but in addition, the administration in its bill would create a Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear Countermeasures Directorate. Among that directorate’s responsibilities would be, ‘‘to direct

exercises and drills for Federal, State, and local chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear response teams and plans.’’ I am going to ask this question on Thursday, or I am sure somebody will, of Governor Ridge, but the question that I want you to

give a response to, and think about further if you would like, is

whether the responsibilities of this fourth directorate that the administration bill proposes, to the extent that it would focus on

training and exercises for and in response to catastrophic terrorism, may duplicate what FEMA would be doing in the Emergency Preparedness Directorate. So I am wondering whether those

responsibilities, separate from what I take to be the research and

development parts of this new directorate, would better be consolidated within FEMA or the FEMA-dominated directorate in our

Committee bill.

Mr. BROWN. Let me answer the question this way. First and foremost, I will support whatever proposal the President submits and

will work hard to implement that and make certain that it works.

In this respect, Senator, FEMA has what I think is the absolute

appropriate approach to hazards and it is the all-hazards approach.

And not to be crass, but on September 11, if the planes had gone

into the towers because of a failure of the air traffic control system

or whether they had gone into the towers because of the terrorists

who were flying them into the towers, FEMA’s response would

have been the same. It is the all-hazards approach. We train first

responders. We train State and local governments. We build the

partnership such that regardless of the cause of the disaster, our

response is the same, and we will make certain that we are well

prepared for whether the tanker truck carrying ammonium nitrate

falls over because of a flat tire or falls over because someone shoots

at the tire, that our response is adequate and geared to solving

whatever the response needs to be for that incident.

So in terms of the restructuring, I think as long as FEMA continues its all-hazard approach, its all-hazards mission, that we will

be able to fulfill whatever mission it is that the President and Congress give us to fulfill. Now, we currently have the CSEP (Chemical

12

Stockpile Emergency Preparedness) and the REP (Radiological

Emergency Preparedness) programs in which we have some of

those training responsibilities already. We would continue those. I

think we have a good track record in that regard, so we would, not

to continue repeating myself, but we would continue to take the allhazards approach regardless of what responsibilities we are given

in some final version of the bill.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. I urge you to continue to think about

that. We are all together. We are all trying to figure out in a very

new circumstance what the best way is to organize the government’s response. It is just the question was raised in my mind

whether parts of the functions of this new CBRN Directorate,

frankly, would be better in the other directorate with FEMA, and

I encourage a continued dialogue on that.

Mr. BROWN. I think there will be a lot of dialogue in that regard.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Sure. Thank you. Senator Bunning.

Senator BUNNING. Yes. In following up on the Chairman’s questions, has FEMA’s relation with emergency responders changed

since September 11 or has the focus of the agency changed? Are

you doing more with local responders than you used to?

Mr. BROWN. I do not think so. Let me answer the question this

way, Senator. People often ask me what has happened, what has

changed in terms of our function since September 11 and I answer,

not flippantly but very seriously, everything has changed and nothing has changed.

Everything has changed only in the sense that the intensity with

which we approach our mission, the intensity with which the employees who are here today and the employees back in headquarters and throughout all the regions, that they approach their

job has taken on a new meaning to them. It is much more acute,

much more intense in terms of making sure that we are prepared

in every possible sense of that word.

But in the actual implementation of that preparation, nothing

has changed. We are continuing to build the partnerships. We are

continuing to make certain that our relationships with all of the

partners of State and local government are in place and that it is

a good working relationship.

We have brought on who was going to be the new President of

the National Emergency Managers Association into FEMA as an

employee. We are reaching out to law enforcement. We are reaching out to—I gave a speech, I forget, it was the Association of Supreme Court Justices and made it reach out to them and said, how

many of you have talked to your State emergency managers or

your State homeland security director? Nobody in the room raised

their hand. But it was the point of trying to get them to start

building those partnerships that we are already good at and trying

to expand those partnerships as much as possible.

Senator BUNNING. I can just say to you that the relationship between the local responder and FEMA has changed in Kentucky because they are more friendly doing their job. They always did their

job, but the response has been a more friendly response and a willingness to cooperate. I want to make sure that if you are put in

homeland security, that this function that is placed in homeland

13

security does not get someone involved that does not have that

same attitude as far as responding is concerned.

Mr. BROWN. Well, Senator, I will make this pledge to you, that

as long as I am around, those partnerships will continue to grow

and expand as much as possible. The partnerships, both with our

State and local partners and with our Federal partners, are exactly

what makes FEMA successful.

Senator BUNNING. You were in city government like I was before

I became a State Senator and a Member of the House and a Member of the U.S. Senate. You were an Assistant City Manager in Edmond, Oklahoma, one of my old hangouts when I managed the

Oklahoma City 89-ers, in the mid-1970s, actually. So was I, 1976.

How has the responsibility and focus of local officials changed since

September 11, the relationship to FEMA?

Mr. BROWN. First of all, I would say I probably went to some of

those ballgames, but I am sure I never screamed at the manager.

Senator BUNNING. Yes. I can remember you specifically doing

that. [Laughter.]

Mr. BROWN. I never did that. [Laughter.]

State and local governments are looking to us for leadership.

They are looking to FEMA to tell them where are the holes in our

response plans? Where are the holes in our mutual aid agreements? What incentives can you provide us to fill those holes?

And I think as long as we continue those relationships—we did

an assessment immediately following September 11 at the request

of Governor Ridge, Director Allbaugh, and the President and we

went to the State and local governments and said, tell us what

your greatest needs are. Tell us what your greatest vulnerabilities

are. And because they trust us, they were willing to give us that

unabashed response about: In Oklahoma, our hole is here. In Colorado, our vulnerability is here. In Kentucky, we have a weakness

here that we need to get filled. And so they looked to us for that

kind of leadership and I think will continue that. I do not think

that will change regardless of where the Congress and the President end up putting the FEMA structure.

Senator BUNNING. In other words, you will be able to do your two

main functions, to respond to natural disasters and prepare for any

terrorist attack, no matter where you are placed?

Mr. BROWN. That is my intent, and I think that is a true statement, that regardless of where we are placed, our coordination will

stay the same and we will be able to do that job as well as we

have, and hopefully even better. Under the proposed structure, I

think it would be even better because the partners we now work

with will now be part of our organization.

Senator BUNNING. This will be my last question, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. No problem.

Senator BUNNING. You mentioned in a speech the need for a national accreditation system for emergency responders. Do you think

that is necessary, to put a grade on our responders or to say that

this group is better than that group, or how did you mean that?

Mr. BROWN. Accreditation is probably not the proper word, but

some sort of certification that says this group has been through

this type of training and they are able to do A, B, and C, so that

when you have a mutual aid agreement and there is a requirement

14

that says we need additional response from somewhere else, we

know we can turn to your team and your folks and they will have

the necessary training that we need for that particular incident

that is taking place.

Senator BUNNING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you, Senator Bunning. Senator

Bennett, good morning.

Senator BENNETT. Good morning, Mr. Chairman. Good morning,

Mr. Brown.

Mr. BROWN. Good morning, Senator.

OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BENNETT

Senator BENNETT. We appreciate your being here. I must say for

the record what I have said privately but cannot really say too

often, how grateful we in Utah are to FEMA and the other agencies

that were involved in providing security for the Olympics. As the

head of security for the Olympics said to me as I stood in the command center where all of the agencies were present, he said, ‘‘Senator, this is boring, and in the security business, boring is good.’’

[Laughter.]

I think we saw in the Olympics a model that can be used now

for the Homeland Security Department, as every agency who was

involved in providing security for the Olympics had a coordinated

role and obvious stake in seeing to it that it stayed boring. It was

amazing, the contrast, for example, with the Atlanta Olympics,

which took place against a backdrop of no terrorism around the

world, at least as far as Americans were concerned, and the Utah

Olympics that took place against the backdrop of September 11.

The difference was stark. Atlanta had bomb scares in the hundreds

every day. In the Salt Lake Olympics, we had less than 100 bomb

scares through the entire 17 days. So that was an example of how

different agencies can work together and provide security.

The concern I have with respect to the creation of this new department is what happens to your other missions. FEMA has missions other than security missions. If the primary focus of the new

department is homeland security and that becomes the primary

focus of FEMA, what happens to your other responses in situations

that have nothing to do with homeland security and homeland defense? Have you given any thought to that as you have looked to

your new home?

Mr. BROWN. I have given considerable thought to it, Senator, and

I am honestly convinced that it really has no detrimental effect to

our all-hazards approach that we currently have. I sincerely believe

it will enhance our ability to convince all of our partners, State,

local, and Federal partners, that the whole concept of having an

all-hazards approach is the best way to secure the homeland.

If we are prepared against, and again, I give the example, another example of the all-hazards approach is if we are prepared for

responding to the breaking of a dam, regardless of the cause of the

breaking of that dam, we have secured the homeland. If we are

prepared to respond to wildfires occurring in Colorado, then we

have secured the homeland regardless of the cause of those

wildfires.

15

It is the all-hazards approach that is developed solely on these

partnerships that I think will be enhanced by the new structure.

I do not think we will lose that core mission at all.

Senator BENNETT. The reason for my concern, and the Chairman

has heard me on this subject before, I was present at the creation

of the Department of Transportation, where we did pretty much

the same thing, brought a number of agencies in from a number

of different places, and frankly, the Department did not function

for years as it should have functioned because the Coast Guard and

the FAA and the Urban Mass Transit Administration and the highway people all had very different cultures and different attitudes

and they were not used to thinking in terms of a single Department focused on transportation and it took years for the cultures

to change.

I am concerned about that happening here. I am delighted with

your answer, which does demonstrate that you have given some

thought to it, and my only counsel to you is continue to look in that

direction because putting together this new department is going to

be very difficult.

Mr. BROWN. If I can be so bold as to offer a little further insight

into my thinking, FEMA is in essence being taken lock, stock, and

barrel and placed into the new organization, and I think because,

again—I know I am repeating myself—but because of our partnership relationships, it is my belief that our culture, building partnerships and working together, will probably, in my way of thinking,

permeate the new organization.

Senator BENNETT. Well, let us hope.

I congratulate you on your nomination. I intend to support it

with great vigor and look forward to working with you. Thank you,

Mr. Chairman.

Mr. BROWN. Thank you, Senator.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Thank you, Senator Bennett.

Just a couple more questions that have actually come in to us

from others. I received some communications from a member of the

New York City Council, Peter Valone. I know you are aware, Mr.

Brown, that discussions have been going on between FEMA and

the City of New York regarding the City’s request for reimbursement of costs incurred by the police department in connection with

the attacks on the World Trade Center. I just wonder if you could

report to us on the status of those discussions, if you know them

at this point.

Mr. BROWN. I can report on that generally and specifically, Mr.

Chairman. We have had ongoing discussions. I have set up within

FEMA a New York Special Task Force that all these issues, such

as the reimbursement for the police, come to. I have included the

Inspector General of FEMA in those discussions so that whatever

decision that we make, the Inspector General has had a chance to

look at our policy direction that we are going to make sure he is

comfortable with it. We are coordinating all those decisions with

the White House and I think we are very close in terms of New

York City police overtime, of having a mechanism where we can do

those reimbursements.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. That is encouraging. I thank you for that

and I know that will mean a lot to folks in New York.

16

Finally, there has been, as you know, obviously, increased scrutiny lately on the evacuation plans for nuclear plants. That is of

some significance to us in Connecticut because we have four nuclear plants, two active and two that are decommissioned. There

has been some concern expressed in Connecticut about whether the

evacuation plans are adequate to ensure the safety of people living

near the plants should there be an accident or a terrorist attack.

I also note that a member of the New York State Assembly, Richard Brodsky, has conducted hearings into the adequacy of the evacuation plans for a particular plant in New York, namely the Indian

Point plant, and has filed a petition asking FEMA to reconsider

and disapprove the evacuation plan which has been in place since

1996.

As Deputy Director, you will be responsible for considering the

petition, so I wanted to ask you generally how you see your role

in investigating the adequacy of these evacuation plans for nuclear

power plants in the United States.

Mr. BROWN. I think my role is a very serious one. I think the

agency’s role is a very serious one, that we should not just wait for

someone to petition or request that we evaluate, that those types

of plans should be evaluated on an ongoing basis. It would be my

intent to somehow implement the ongoing evaluation so we do not

have to look in hindsight and say, gosh, we wish we had looked at

that. We should be looking at that all the time to make sure they

are adequate, and I will pledge to you that we will certainly do

that.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. I appreciate that, obviously, from the

point of view of Connecticut. I am not asking for what your response will be, but do you have any sense of how you will handle

this petition from New York about a review of the Indian Point

plant?

Mr. BROWN. In all honesty, I do not. I just received it

yesterday—— Chairman LIEBERMAN. You did?

Mr. BROWN [continuing]. When I got back into the States and I

just looked at it for the first time yesterday.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Understood. We will continue to want to

be in dialogue with you on this, as well, and I appreciate the

commitment that you made to be involved in ongoing review of

these plans because it is obviously critical.

Senator Bunning, do you have any other questions?

Senator BUNNING. No, no more questions.

Chairman LIEBERMAN. Mr. Brown, I thank you very much. I will

certainly support your nomination. I will do my best to move it

through the Committee as soon as possible so we can have you

fully and legally at work in your new position. In the meantime,

I thank you very much. I thank your family for their support of

you, and at this point, we will adjourn the hearing.

[Whereupon, at 11:19 a.m., the Committee was adjourned.]

(17)

A P P E N D I X

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

29

30

31

32

33

34

35

36

37

38

39

40

41

42

43

44

45

46

47

48

49

50

51

52

53

54

55

56

57

58

59

60

61

62

63

64

65

66

67

68

69

70

71

72

73

74

75

76

77

78

79

80

81

82

83

84

85

86

87

88

89

90

91

92

93

94

95

96

97

98

Æ