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

83–688 PDF 2004

S. HRG. 107–957

FIRST RESPONDERS’ PROGRAM IN

FISCAL YEAR 2003 BUDGET

HEARING

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON

ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

UNITED STATES SENATE

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

ON

THE BUDGET FOR THE PROGRAMS OF THE FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY TO PREPARE FIRST RESPONDERS TO NATURAL AND MAN-MADE DISASTERS

MARCH 12, 2002

Printed for the use of the Committee on Environment and Public Works

(
(II)

COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

JAMES M. JEFFORDS, Vermont, Chairman

MAX BAUCUS, Montana

HARRY REID, Nevada

BOB GRAHAM, Florida

JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut

BARBARA BOXER, California

RON WYDEN, Oregon

THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware

HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON, New York

JON S. CORZINE, New Jersey

BOB SMITH, New Hampshire

JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia

JAMES M. INHOFE, Oklahoma

CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, Missouri

GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio

MICHAEL D. CRAPO, Idaho

LINCOLN CHAFEE, Rhode Island

ARLEN SPECTER, Pennsylvania

BEN NIGHTHORSE CAMPBELL, Colorado

KEN CONNOLLY, Democratic Staff Director

DAVE CONOVER, Republican Staff Director
(III)

CONTENTS

Page

MARCH 12, 2002

OPENING STATEMENTS

Bond, Hon. Christopher S., U.S. Senator from the State of Missouri ................. 33

Clinton, Hon. Hillary Rodham, U.S. Senator from the State of New York ........ 15

Corzine, Hon. Jon S. U.S. Senator from the State of New Jersey ....................... 18

Jeffords, Hon. James, U.S. Senator from the State of Vermont .......................... 1

Smith, Hon. Bob, U.S. Senator from the State of New Hampshire ..................... 13

Voinovich, Hon. George V., U.S. Senator from the State of Ohio ........................ 8

Warner, Hon. John W., U.S. Senator from the Commonwealth of Virginia ....... 16

Wyden, Hon. Ron, U.S. Senator from the State of Oregon .................................. 3

WITNESSES

Allabaugh, Hon. Joseph, Director, Federal Emergency Management Agency ... 5

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 34

Responses to additional questions from:

Senator Clinton ......................................................................................... 46

Senator Jeffords ......................................................................................... 39

Senator Smith ............................................................................................ 42

Senator Voinovich ..................................................................................... 43

Senator Warner ......................................................................................... 49

Fogg, Woodbury P., National Emergency Management Association ................... 23

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 49

Report, White Paper on Domestic Preparedness............................................ 53–55

Resolution, Terrorism Committee Resolution on States’ Principles for a

National Domestic Preparedness Strategy.................................................. 56–57

O’Neil, Michael, chief, South Burlington Fire Department, Burlington, VT ...... 27

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 60

Wison, Edward, chief, City of Portland Fire Department, Portland, OR ............ 25

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 58

Responses to additional questions from Senator Clinton .............................. 59

Zirkle, Kenneth, E., president, University of Findlay, Findlay, OH ................... 29

Article, National Center of Excellence for Environmental Management ..... 63

Prepared statement .......................................................................................... 62

(1)

FIRST RESPONDERS’ PROGRAM IN

FISCAL YEAR 2003 BUDGET

TUESDAY, MARCH 12, 2002

U.S. SENATE, COMMITTEE ON ENVIRONMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS, Washington, DC.

The committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:30 p.m. in room 406,

Senate Dirksen Building, Hon. James Jeffords (chairman of the

committee) presiding.

Present: Senators Jeffords, Clinton, Corzine, Smith, Voinovich,

Warner, and Wyden.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. JEFFORDS,

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF VERMONT

Senator JEFFORDS. The committee will come to order.

I consider this to be an important hearing, but also one that

brings back so many memories in different directions, both terrible

events we have been through and all. But I would like to start off

by just talking a little bit about my personal experience.

I am from a very small town called Shrewsbury. When we first

got to the town and moved in, I wanted to volunteer for everything,

so I volunteered for the fire department. That proved to be very advantageous because I lived on top of the hill and the fire engine

was at the bottom of the hill, and I had a big barn. So they suggested, well, we have a 1936 pumper here that is a little rusty, but

it still works pretty well, but the problem is, it is at the bottom of

the hill. So by the time it gets to the top of the hill, it is all done.

So I said, OK, I will be fire engine station No. 2.

So one evening, we got word that down at the bottom of the hill

a long ways a way a fire had started, so we were asked to go down

there. So I got in my old Ford, 1936 Ford with mechanical brakes—

that will give you part of the story away—so we came roaring

down. My neighbor was ahead of me in a little Volkswagen, and

fortunately he pulled off quickly because I had lost the brakes by

the time I got to the bottom. So I went right by the fire, and finally

got it stopped. Then damned if I didn’t run out of gas. So you had

to get out, take the seat off, pull the cork out, and then pour out

from a 5-gallon can into the tank. Well, while I was doing that—

this is where my danger came—a guy with a big cigar leaned over

and said, ‘‘Can I help?’’ I said, ‘‘Yes, get the hell out of here.’’ [Laughter.]

Senator JEFFORDS. But we ended up being heroes because the

other engine ran out of water just as we got ours revved up again,

and we got it banked up and we were the ones that put the fire
2

out. So I consider that in the end, it was a great victory. But it just

gives you an idea when you live in small towns—you all have had

experiences—but there are some hairy moments, and just driving

a 1936 Ford down a steep hill was enough of one.

But anyway, I want to welcome everyone. I would especially like

to welcome Director Allbaugh and all the other witnesses, including

Chief Mike O’Neil of the South Burlington Fire Department.

We are here today to discuss the President’s new First Responder

Initiative. Yesterday, this Nation commemorated an unfortunate

milestone—6 months since the tragic attacks on September 11.

Since that time, much has been said and written about the terrible

events of the day. I vividly remember my own visits to the Pentagon and the World Trade Center just days after the attacks, and

I remember the sights, the sounds, the smells and most of all the

relentless and tireless efforts of the first responders risking their

lives in a heroic attempt to save others. But these men and women

were heroes long before September 11. These men and women were

heroes the day they became firefighters and police officers. As a

former volunteer in my own small community, I feel a great sense

of pride when I listen to the stories of the brave men and women— the firefighters and the police officers and other emergency personnel who on a daily basis answer the call to serve.

Since September 11, I have thought every day about the causes

of the horrible tragedy and what we as a Nation can do to better

prepare ourselves against future terrorist attacks. Time is a great

healer, and the passage of time has allowed the Nation to begin to

feel normal again. For me, this healing process has brought a renewed commitment to make sure the Nation is prepared for and

can respond effectively to any future acts of terrorism.

However, we cannot allow the passage of time to dull our recollection of what we saw and felt on that day of September 11. The

Federal Government under the careful orchestration of FEMA mobilized like never before to respond September 11. But as Oliver

Wendell Holmes once said, ‘‘I find the great thing in the world is

not so much where we stand, as the direction we are moving.’’ I believe the First Responder Initiative is an important step in the

right direction, moving us toward a strong national preparedness

network—a network composed of well-prepared, well-trained, and

well-equipped first responders.

As we move today away from September 11, we must not forget

the continuing need. Currently in the United States, there are over

1 million firefighters and 600,000 law enforcement officers and

155,000 trained EMTs within this community. Because of their responsibilities and capabilities, they vary widely, and many areas

have little or no response capability.

This initiative aims at correcting these deficiencies by helping

States prepare for and respond to terrorist attacks. But the Federal

Government and the States must be partners in this process. I

hope, as all Americans hope, that we will never again have to respond to another act of terrorism, but we live in a world where we

must be prepared. I call on FEMA and the Office of Homeland Security to carefully craft this initiative. State and Federal Government must work together to ensure that our people on the front

lines, our first responders, receive all they need to answer the call.
3

I look forward to your testimony and am so pleased to have you

here as our first witness. Please proceed, Mr. Allbaugh.

[The prepared statement of Senator Jeffords follows:]

STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES M. JEFFORDS, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE

STATE OF VERMONT

Good morning. I’d like to begin by thanking all of our witnesses for participating

in today’s hearing. I am really looking forward to listening to your testimonies.

Today’s hearing stems from my long-term interest in helping our cities and towns

become economically vibrant and culturally cohesive communities. One of the best

ways to support these efforts is to provide our communities with growth planning

and redevelopment tools.

I have been involved in ‘‘smart’’ growth efforts since the 1960’s when I served as

a Vermont State Senator and Attorney General of Vermont.

I am proud to have had a major role in drafting Vermont’s development review

plans that became Act 250, the first and most comprehensive State level growth

management policy in the United States.

I have continued my activities with regard to ‘‘smart’’ growth during my tenure

in both the House and Senate. In January 1999, I established the Senate Smart

Growth Task Force, a bipartisan, multi-regional caucus. Twenty-three Senators currently participate in the Task Force. The overall goal of the Task Force is to determine how the Federal Government can help States and localities address their own

growth management issues.

Growth decisions should be made, ultimately, at the local level. However, the Federal Government needs to continue assessing Federal policies that may interfere

with local growth management.

For example, the National Interstate System has had a tremendous impact on

local development patterns. Over the last 10 years, we have brought substantial attention to this issue through the transportation planning process. We will address

this issue in our upcoming hearing on Transportation and Smart Growth.

The Federal Government also needs to provide communities with the necessary

tools and resources to achieve local growth objectives. I believe that the two bills

before us today help us make great strides in this direction.

With the recent enactment of the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields

Revitalization Act, we have made great progress in addressing local liability and financial concerns.

Through the Brownfield Site Redevelopment Assistance Act, we have an opportunity to complement these efforts. S. 1079 will address that next step after assessment and cleanup; the step in which communities actually begin redeveloping the

sites. The economic benefits are incredible. The U.S. Conference of Mayors estimates

that brownfields redevelopment could generate more than 550,000 additional jobs

and up to $2.4 billion in new tax revenues for cities.

The other bill we will discuss today is the Community Character Act. This bill

presents another important opportunity to provide communities that wish to plan

proactively with the resources to do so. This is especially important for my home

State of Vermont. Rural communities frequently grapple with a lack of planning resources and expertise. I recently learned from our distinguished Vermont witness

that only 39 percent of rural governments do comprehensive planning versus more

than 70 percent of metropolitan governments. S. 975 provide the necessary resources to even out that ratio.

Finally, I am in the process of working on another ‘‘smart’’ growth legislative proposal. It will substantially improve decisionmaking capacity for local planners. The

legislation will provide communities with the resources to access visualization, modeling, and other planning tools.

I look forward to working with my EPW colleagues on this legislation.

Senator JEFFORDS. Oh, yes. Sorry about that.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. RON WYDEN, U.S. SENATOR

FROM THE STATE OF OREGON

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

Chairman, I want to commend you for holding this very important

hearing. Let me say I also share your views about Director

Allbaugh. He has been working with me on a number of issues and
4

been extremely responsive, and we are very pleased that he is here.

I also want to take this opportunity to welcome Mr. Ed Wilson,

who is chief of the city of Portland’s Fire Department and serves

with great valor at home in my State.

I think it is obvious, Mr. Chairman, that there is a new appreciation for the bravery of this country’s first responders. Our fire, police and emergency personnel came through so tremendously on

September 11 and I think for millions of Americans there is no

much more awareness about the crucial role that the first responders play in saving lives. But first responders cannot help us win

this war against terrorism with bravery alone. They also need resources, the right tools and the right training. That is where the

First Responder Initiative comes in. I am very pleased to have the

opportunity to work with the Bush administration on a bipartisan

basis to ensure that the first responders have actual resources, and

not just promises and slogans.

It is obvious that in working on this effort, there are going to be

some difficult choices. It is not possible to have all the resources

to buy everything that you would want in an ideal world. But I do

believe that the Congress, working with the Administration, can

make sure that the dollars available buy the biggest possible improvements in preparedness and safety.

I also want to say, Mr. Chairman, I think it is critical for the

Congress in addition to making sure that there are adequate resources for the first responders, fire, police and emergency personnel who work for the Government, to have the opportunity to

have their work supplemented with the skills and talents of thousands of patriotic Americans with extraordinary scientific and technological ability. Toward that end, I will shortly be introducing legislation that will give us a chance to mobilize those leaders with

science and technological training. At a minimum, we ought to

make it possible in every community in this country to have a data

base of expertise—those who have expertise available in health and

scientific areas. It ought to be possible to have a data base where

communities can turn to get help from the private sector.

We have a Strategic Petroleum Reserve in this country. I think

we ought to have a Strategic Technology Reserve where it would

be possible for communities to call on private companies, many of

them have contacted me in this regard, to get help, both with technology and with personnel.

Finally, I think we ought to have a test bed so that we can analyze the thousands and thousands of products that are coming now

to government at all levels, that have great potential for helping

us win this war against terrorism, but for which there really is not

any systematic way to evaluate them.

So I think that the First Responder Initiative is an important

one. It allows the Government to get on the side of the first responders, and it is not going to count in this country unless you

have additional resources for the first responders. But I think we

need to go further than that, and in addition to these government

efforts, I think there should be a new effort to mobilize those in the

private sector with science and technological training. Mr. Allbaugh

has been very forthright in sharing his ideas and suggestions in

this area, and like you, Mr. Chairman, I welcome him today.
5

Senator JEFFORDS. Director Allbaugh, please proceed.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH ALLBAUGH, DIRECTOR,

FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the opportunity to be here today. Senator Wyden, good to see you again.

It is an honor to come before this committee and talk about

President Bush’s First Responder Initiative. I would like to take a

few minutes to describe the proposed program and its value to

America’s national preparedness in the 21st century. But I think

that before I do that, it is important for the committee to hear

about some of the lessons learned from September 11 that illustrate the need for firefighters, police, and emergency medical personnel to have a single defined coordinating authority and point of

contact within the Federal Government.

One of the lessons of September 11 was that lack of a single incident command system for the entire country. On that day, New

York, Pennsylvania and northern Virginia all activated unrelated

operations, hindering FEMA’s efforts to gather and disseminate important information. The same kind of incomplete coordination is

the root cause of several other lessons we learned that day. For instance, onsite commanders at the World Trade Center in New York

City had no choice but to turn away hundreds of self-deployed firefighters from around the country because they had no way of knowing what training or experience levels those individuals, those selfless volunteers had at the time.

Many first responders deployed to New York from other jurisdictions often found their equipment was incompatible with that used

by the city of New York Police and Fire Departments. Items such

as breathing apparatus and personal protective gear are not standardized around the country or even city to city within a State. So

much of the equipment made available on the scene that day could

not be used.

This problem of limited interoperability is especially frustrating

in the area of communications. While at Ground Zero for several

days, I personally witnessed first responders passing notes, handwritten notes, back and forth to one another as the most reliable,

effective means of communication. On September 11 and in other

emergency situations, seamless communication interoperability

would have saved lives.

Addressing this overall problem of compatibility is one of the primary up-sides of mutual aid. More robust and meaningful mutual

aid agreements will bring the first responder community closer together on a lot of these issues. I am concerned at this time that

only 6 of FEMA’s 28 urban search and rescue teams are trained

to respond to a weapons of mass destruction scenario. In hindsight,

none of these lessons and concerns are new or surprising, but the

seismic change in the world we all witnessed on that day has

transformed these solutions to these problems from marginal action

items on some bureaucratic to-do list, to the moral responsibilities

of a challenged Nation.

The first step toward finally solving these problems head-on is

President Bush’s First Responder Initiative we are here to discuss

today. The First Responder Initiative includes $3.5 billion in the
6

2003 budget request, most of which would be distributed to States

and local jurisdictions to give them critically needed funds to, No.

1, purchase equipment; No. 2, train and exercise personnel; and

No. 3, plan to respond to a terrorist incident in their community.

The grants will be administered by our Office of National Preparedness. To address some of the lessons learned, the first responder community will coordinate with the Office of National Preparedness, which will establish national standards for interoperability and compatibility in a number of areas, including training,

equipment, mutual aid and exercising.

The grants, coupled with the standards, will balance the dual

needs for both flexibility and accountability at the State and local

level. At FEMA, ONP will be working within the Federal Government and with States to coordinate every terrorism-related first responder program so that the entire national response system will

be singing off the same page.

The lessons we learned on September 11 accentuate the need for

this single point of contact approach. The current model of Federal

terrorism preparedness of scattered unrelated programs without a

single coordinating entity cultivates the inadequacies that were

clearly visible on September 11. With its longstanding relationships

within the first responder community, and successful record of

grant distributions, FEMA is the perfect home for this initiative. I

look forward to working with you and other members of the committee to make President Bush’s vision of a seamless national response system a reality.

I thank you for inviting me today. I have submitted written testimony for the committee’s acceptance, and I would be happy to entertain any questions.

Senator JEFFORDS. Mr. Allbaugh, it is my understanding that

FEMA will distribute first responder funds to the States by formula, and that population will be a major factor in this formula.

I represent, of course, a small, less-populous State. Can you explain

what factors other than population you will consider in distributing

funds? Also, can you discuss how the States will assess local needs

and what percentage of the funds you expect to go to the local governments?

Mr. ALLBAUGH. One of the things that we did last fall right before Thanksgiving was to conduct a capability readiness study of

all 50 States and the territories. It is extremely important that

what we learned in that 15-day period be a cornerstone of this formula, not only based on their own current capability, but also

based on population.

Some States have heard the call years ago, and taken the responsibility themselves. Other States have not. Even within States,

some communities have stepped up to the plate and accepted that

responsibility of preparing, training, exercising, and funding properly their first responders.

So I think working with the States and local communities, we

will devise a system that will be fair to all. Given the fact that I

believe that this $3.5 billion is just the first installment of many

years, I believe it will take many years to correct this problem, but

we will be taking the first step in the right direction.
7

Senator JEFFORDS. I was at the Pentagon site closely after the

beginning, and talked with the firefighters there. There were responders from I think Nebraska and all over the place.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Right.

Senator JEFFORDS. One of the problems they had were the inability to communicate with each other. That is sort of a massive-type

problem in the sense of any kind of coordination or what we do to

make sure there is some common frequency. What is being done in

that regard?

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Well, we have an interagency committee that is

studying the communication problems. I happen to believe that

communication is the single most vital problem that we face in this

country when it comes to responding to incidents. We are about the

business of savings lives and protecting property, and if we cannot

communicate, we are putting those lives further at risk. Ron Miller, our IT expert, is working with many other Agencies inside the

Government on this. There are a lot of private firms outside the

Federal Government that believe they have the single answer.

There needs to be a clearinghouse for this new technology. I am

anxious to get this ball rolling.

Senator JEFFORDS. Yes, there is so much potential, but I can understand also that with so many different communities and all, it

is going to be not an easy situation.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Right. I think, Mr. Chairman, our biggest challenge for us is to at FEMA set national standards. We do not want

to be in the business of telling a community or a State, you need

to by X equipment or Y equipment. But we need to set the standards, design the specifications, and then allow the States and the

communities to live up to those standards.

Senator JEFFORDS. In your testimony, you briefly address the Assistant Firefighter Grant Program. You said that the program remains an important element in supporting the most pressing needs

of the at-risk community. I know this is especially true in small

States like Vermont. I understand the President’s budget proposes

to administer this program through the Office of National Preparedness. Will this new First Responder Initiative phase-out funding for this most important program?

Mr. ALLBAUGH. I believe very strongly that the two programs

need to be administered separately. They will be very compatible.

The Fire Grant Program that we started last year with the blessing

of Congress, funded at $100 million in fiscal year 2001. We have

current funding of $360 million. Whatever Congress gives us, I assure you we can get out the door. That is for basic firefighting

needs. There were no set-asides in that program—a truly competitive program that was administered fairly.

The Terrorism Grants with the First Responder Program is a

much broader program, much bigger program, more robust in a lot

of areas. It does not address basic firefighting needs that the

33,000 departments have nationwide. However, I believe both programs together complement one another greatly.

Senator JEFFORDS. Senator Voinovich.
8

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE V. VOINOVICH,

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OHIO

Senator VOINOVICH. Mr. Chairman, I apologize for being late. I

had a bill-signing at the White House, as a matter of fact, on a

piece of legislation that was voted out of this committee, the Appalachian Regional Commissions.

I would like to welcome Joe Allbaugh here.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Thank you.

Senator VOINOVICH. I would like my statement that I was going

to deliver to be inserted in the record.

Senator JEFFORDS. It will be.

Senator VOINOVICH. Mr. Allbaugh, I sincerely believe that your

Agency is the right one to handle this initiative. I am very concerned that when the money is allocated that it is actually used for

the things that you want it to, and I am glad that you are going

to be writing the specifications. But I have been a mayor and a

Governor, and so often a program comes along and it is an opportunity maybe to get some stuff that you were not able to get locally

because you did not have the money for it. I think we ought to

make sure that the money that is spent really goes for things that

are going to make these responders much more able to deal with

a terrorist attack. So I think that the specs are important. I did

not have a chance to hear your testimony. I would be interested in

any comments you may make on that.

The other thing that I wanted to bring to your attention today,

and I am 1pleased with the progress that we have made in terms

of responding to Ground Zero and what we have done at the Pentagon and so on, but as you know, I am very concerned about the

units that participated—the first responder units. We had an Ohio

unit that participated at Ground Zero.

A couple of weeks ago, you and I had a telephone call about the

conversation about that, and I also talked to Governor Ridge. It is

very, very frustrating that today that the information that these individuals need in terms of what they were exposed to, and you

have mentioned there were some Agencies that have to be coordinated. The EPA and a couple of other ones still do not have the

information in regard to what were they exposed to. Some of them

have gotten asthma and pneumonia. I think it is incumbent on

your Agency to work with the others and make sure that they get

the information that they need so that they can find out what they

have been exposed to, so that will give them some direction in

terms of the kind of medical help that they need.

Second of all, they need the forms, the paperwork that is necessary to be filled out so that they can take advantage of the Federal Compensation Program. What we have gotten back from them

is that they have complained is that right now in some of the paperwork, they feel they are being nickeled and dimed in terms of

the Agency. We are sending paper back and forth, and they are

very concerned about—they have told my office that they have approximately $1 million in expenses from the work at the World

Trade Center. They need help from FEMA to get reimbursed and

the process is not going well. FEMA is nickeling and diming them

on the paperwork and rejecting claims for what seems to be like

bureaucratic reasons.
9

I am concerned about that, because if we are going to have local

responding units participate, and hopefully we will not have any

more of these things, God forbid, but if we do, how we treat those

that participated is going to have a lot to do with how willing they

are to respond to other things that might occur. I would like to

know just where are we on this. I think we owe it to them.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Senator Voinovich, you have asked several questions there. Let me try to take them in order.

I, too, am deeply concerned about what everyone was exposed to

in New York City. On February 1, I put together a task force representing all the Agencies. We are working through those issues.

There was a followup meeting yesterday, that we will be sharing

information that we have gleaned1 from all the Agencies as quickly

as we possibly can.

On the funding side, I know that there are a multitude of issues

to be resolved. I would like to know specifically. I could meet with

your staff about that particular issue. But we have made just about

everyone whole on every submission that they have given us thus

far. There are numerous teams that have not submitted any paperwork thus far. It is not my intention, nor do I believe it is anyone’s

intention at FEMA, to nickel and dime a USAR team to death

when they have overhead that they need to take care of.

So after this meeting, I would like to talk with staff and figure

out exactly what their concerns are. We have an ongoing dialog

with every USAR team member. We have a health team made up

of 18 individuals that are closely monitoring each one of the teams.

We deployed 21 teams to New York City. I am deeply concerned

as to what those individuals are exposed to. We are monitoring

that. I know that we spent $10 million thus far reimbursing those

teams.

Senator VOINOVICH. The question I have is what—at this stage

of the game, it has been a long time. Senator Clinton is here with

us, in New York, and many of her people were also exposed to it.

What information have you made available to those individuals

that were in New York and to the other first responder units as

of today about what they were exposed to. That is No. 1. No. 2, has

there been some kind of formal process that you put in place so

that these people could take advantage of filling out the papers to

be compensated for what they went through?

Mr. ALLBAUGH. There is a formal process for each individual and

for each team. We have asked them to have medical checkups. We

have asked them to have blood tests for heavy metals, to have a

chest X-ray. We are waiting for that information. We will pay for

everything that they incur in this process as a part of the disaster.

No one is going to be out a dime insofar as taking care of their

medical concerns. This has been translated not only to each task

force, but to each individual in a letter that I signed to those task

force members. There were 1,400 and some-odd that were in New

York City and we have communicated with every one of them directly.

Senator VOINOVICH. I have found from my experience that how

well we treat them now will have a lot to do with the kind of response that we are going to get from them in the future. I think

that the response that came out from the country to the Pentagon,
10

to Ground Zero was just spectacular. I hope that you can move on

that as quickly as possible and get that worked out.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. It is a primary concern of mine, Senators, I assure you. How we treat this folks today, as you alluded to, is how

we will be able to respond in the future.

[The prepared statement of Senator Voinovich follows:]

STATEMENT OF HON. GEORGE VOINOVICH, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF OHIO

Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing today on the President’s proposed First Responder Initiative. This is an important issue to Ohioans and other

First Responders that were deployed to Ground Zero last September. I hope that

as a result of these hearings, we can ascertain how we can help support our first

responders in their home communities, God forbid to respond to other terrorist attacks that we may have.

As I said on September 11th and several times since, I believe that our first responsibility is to support the victims and their families. Mr. Chairman, I also believe that we have a responsibility to ensure the health and safety of those who

have worked on the front lines to respond to these terrorist threats. We have a responsibility not only to the New York police and firefighters but also the First Responders from Ohio and across the country and the people from the Federal agencies that responded.

I got to see first hand the hard work of these State and local first responders

when I toured the Pentagon with Senator Jeffords just a few days after 9–11 and

then again when I visited Ground Zero a few days later. In both tragedies it was

local emergency response personnel, not Federal personnel, who were the first on

the scene and who provided the bulk of relief services.

The stronger the relationship between FEMA and State and local first responders

the better our Nation’s overall preparation will be in the event of a terrorist attack.

I am pleased that the President has evaluated the level of cooperation and responded with this proposal for the First Responders Initiative run through FEMA.

To that end, I hope this program stays focused on terrorism response and that we

make sure that funds authorized don’t just end up augmenting the Firefighters

Grant Program or paying for basic firefighting equipment, but instead are allocated

based on the risk of a terrorist threat.

I believe that given the mission of this agency, FEMA is perhaps the best choice

of any Federal agency to oversee this initiative. After all, the basic responsibility

of this agency is to lead the Nation in preparing for, responding to and recovering

from major disasters by coordinating the efforts of up to 26 Federal agencies.

Just last month I had the opportunity speak with some of the representatives

from Ohio’s Task Force One who worked at Ground Zero. These men and women

expressed concerns about the lack of receiving consistent information about what

they were exposed to so that they can be properly treated by their doctors. They

still haven’t received enough information to successfully process claims through the

Federal claims system.

Officials from Ohio Task Force One have told my office that members of the team have approximately $1 million in expenses, including health care expenses, from

their work at the World Trade Center. They need help from FEMA to get reimbursed and the process is not going well. They have told my office that FEMA is

nickeling and diming them on the paperwork and rejecting claims for what seems

like bureaucratic reasons. These are not wealthy individuals by any means and

these units operate on tight budgets. These are hardworking men and women who

risked their lives to respond to a serious disaster.

After that conversation, I had a chance to speak personally with you, Director

Allbaugh and tell you exactly what the people in Ohio were worried about. I think

we had a good conversation, however, I am disappointed that I have not had a response from your office. Can you tell me what FEMA is doing to expedite the reimbursements for these teams and their members? Also, what is being done to help

these individuals know in advance what is expected of them from a paperwork

standpoint so they can get their reimbursements as quickly as possible? Many of

these expenses are health-related. Members of Ohio Task Force One have developed

respiratory illnesses including pneumonia and asthma. What is FEMA doing to help

the task force with its Federal workers compensation issues?

I shared my concerns with Tom Ridge who said he would look into it. We still

don’t have any information. As I said to you, if we want State and local teams to

be in a position to assist FEMA with disaster response, we must make sure that

FEMA itself responds after the disaster when these teams have needs. I hope that
11

before the week is out, we can get the information they requested, not just for Ohio,

but for all of the teams of First Responders that came from all over this country

to lend a helping hand in New York City.

On the issue of how to strengthen relationships between FEMA and State and

local first responders, I’m confident that today’s witnesses will help to lead us in

the right direction and give us some insight on how we should proceed. I would particularly like to welcome from Findlay, Ohio, the President of the University of

Findlay, Mr. Kenneth Zirkle. Mr. Zirkle, welcome to today’s hearing. I am sorry that

I cannot be here for your testimony this afternoon. I have a Governmental Affairs

Committee hearing taking place at the same time and as the Ranking Member on

that Committee, I need to be in attendance. However, I appreciate you coming here

today and, I would like to commend the University of Findlay on their Environmental Health and Safety preparedness program. I look forward to reading your testimony in the record.

Mr. Chairman, it is my hope that this Committee will work hard to ensure the

President’s vision of a successful First Responders Initiative becomes a reality. I

look forward to working with each member of this committee to make sure that we

reach that goal and working with FEMA to get the information necessary to help

our First Responders in Ohio and everywhere else in this Nation.

Senator JEFFORDS. Senator Wyden.

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Director Allbaugh, we agree that the single most important thing

to improve emergency response and to save lives is to enable these

first responders to talk to each other. I think the country was just

horrified that in New York City, arguably the most sophisticated

communications place on the planet, you had these firemen handwalking in the messages that you talked about before my subcommittee in December, and mentioned again today. Of course, this

is because systems break down in these tragedies and many are incompatible.

Would it be possible under the First Responder Initiative to use

some of those dollars to work on projects to promote communications interoperability? I am going to in my legislation that I have

talked about on a number of occasions—we are going to make some

funds available under my legislation for some pilot projects to promote communications interoperability. But I know that some of the

local government folks that are here and have been visiting are

wondering whether some of the money under the First Responder

Initiative could be used for these kinds of projects as well. I am

sure this is early on in terms of the Administration’s work, but

what are your thoughts on that?

Mr. ALLBAUGH. I am sure we could use some of that money for

that, but once you start dipping into what the purpose of the

money is for, then you dilute and you are ultimately going to cut

out the amount of money that we are able to distribute. We are

planning to distribute $3.5 billion in four broad categories, No. 1,

having the ability to do proper planning; No. 2, proper training; No.

3, exercises; and No. 4, equipment purchases. Now, we are setting

aside just a ballpark figure—$2 billion—for equipment purchases.

I am sure there might be a few dollars we could use out of that

for further study. But I am reluctant to dip into that.

What I am interested in is getting the most amount of money we

possibly can to those State and local entities, and that is why we

decided to cap, quite frankly, the States’ portion or participation at

25 percent of this money so we can force the bulk of the money—

75–80 percent of the money—on down to the local communities
12

where they actually need the money the most to make the difference in saving lives and protecting property.

Senator WYDEN. Now, you have also said that in the wake of the

terrorist attacks, you all were flooded with proposals for technology

to help you do you your job, and mentioned that because the Agency is an operational organization, it really is not set up to evaluate

and test new technologies. I have gathered from comments you

have made earlier that something with testing facilities capable of

evaluating whether some of these technologies work and are particularly useful compared to the alternatives would be helpful to

you. Do you think that something like that would be a step forward

for FEMA right now?

Mr. ALLBAUGH. I do think a clearinghouse to test some of these

alleged proven technologies would be very beneficial. We are not

set up in that fashion. We are a response mechanism, a preparation mechanism, a teaching mechanism, a preparedness entity. We

do not have the testing facilities. I know there are many other

Agencies, for example NIST over at Commerce, could be a perfect

entity to take on this responsibility for all of the Federal Government.

Senator WYDEN. I would like to explore further with you the role

of NIST, because I think that that is an Agency that perhaps has

been underutilized and I share your views in that area.

Now, we also would like to have, as I mentioned in my opening

statement, a data base of technology and scientific expertise in

communities around this country, so that your people, State and

local emergency officials and others can turn to it quickly. You

have also indicated that right now, there is some confusion with respect to where you turn to get technological and scientific expertise. Do you think the kind of data base that I am describing here

could be helpful to your people?

Mr. ALLBAUGH. It probably could be helpful. The basis of our

knowledge stems from our long-term existing contracts with major

players across the Nation. Those are the individuals—not individuals, but companies that we turn to when we have a specific need.

I am interested in pushing the envelope and testing that brain

matter even further. Not all ideas reside in one particular location.

So if there is a data base for a particular expertise, I would like

to take advantage of it.

Senator WYDEN. Let me ask you about just one other aspect of

what I have been looking at, to make sure that we tap all the potential in the private sector. That is the Strategic Technology Reserve. I really do compare it to the Strategic Petroleum Reserve.

The Strategic Petroleum Reserve is there if we get into a crunch

with respect to oil and energy. What I have been told is all across

the country we could really bank, either literally or in terms of a

virtual kind of assurance, tremendous resources from the private

sector. Do you think something like that would be worth exploring

as well?

Mr. ALLBAUGH. I think it is worth exploring. I am afraid I do not

know enough to really comment.

Senator WYDEN. Well, we are going to be soliciting the views of

the Administration, but I think in particular the First Responder

Initiative and the focus that you have placed on making sure the
13

dollars get to the local level and make sense, I want you to know

that I am going to be working closely with you and the Administration to try to have the private sector supplement it. We are going

to include some dollars for some pilot projects in terms of communications interoperability, to keep those data bases in place in

terms of private resources, for test beds so that you and others will

be able to evaluate products. We want to talk to you some more

about the Technology Reserve.

I want to thank you as well for your responsiveness.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Well, I thank you for that. I think if there is one

issue we should try to solve nationwide it is the communications

problem. It does more and will do more to save lives and protect

property than just about anything else that we will probably talk

about here this afternoon.

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator JEFFORDS. My good friend and neighbor, Senator Smith.

Senator SMITH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. Director, welcome. It is good to see you here. Welcome also

to my friend Woody Fogg who will be testifying on the next panel,

from New Hampshire.

I did have a prepared statement, Mr. Chairman, which I will introduce as part of the record.

Senator JEFFORDS. Without objection.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. BOB SMITH, U.S. SENATOR

FROM THE STATE OF NEW HAMPSHIRE

Senator SMITH. I just want to ask a couple of questions of you,

Mr. Director. I in many ways have sympathy for you knowing the

turf battles you are going to have to fight here as you try to put

all of this into one effective emergency responding Agency or entity

or whatever the correct term is.

To me, it makes sense for FEMA to be the Agency to lead this

effort. They have a great track record, and I know this decision by

the President has not come without some internal strife. But you

are a tough guy. You look tough, too. I mean, that is the thing.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. I take that as a compliment.

[Laughter.]

Senator SMITH. But I think it is common sense. We all fight

these inside the beltway turf battles. Hang in there. We will get

to the heart of it. The most important thing is to do what is right

for the Nation, and that means that if something we support is not

right, then we will come around to that view, I think, in the end,

to do what is best-suited.

I am going to just throw four issues out there that give you a

chance to respond briefly, on the points that they make about why

it should not be FEMA, and just who is the lead Agency, and you

can respond to it in any way that you see fit.

The first point, first criticism, which is not my criticism, but the

general criticisms, is that FEMA is not a grant Agency, therefore

would not be effective in being the lead Agency in this effort.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Senator, the best way to respond to that is rely upon our track record. In 2001, we issued grants over $3.5 billion

alone in a multitude of programs. Unfortunately, as a result of the

incident in particular in New York City, as Senator Clinton knows,
14

we will alone this fiscal year approach $8 billion and probably even

go higher than that. These are dollars that make a difference in

individual’s lives. We have excellent relationships with the States.

We move the money very quickly. I am very proud of our NPS’s,

which are teleregistration facilities. We have four of them. Normally, when an individual calls and registers with us over our 800

line, within 2 or 3 days or maybe 4, they are receiving a check from

us to help them get back on their feet. So we know how to move

money. We move it very quickly and to say we are not a grant

Agency, that is probably about 50 percent of what we do is move

money.

Senator SMITH. How about the issue that ODP programs are primarily law enforcement, and you are not a law enforcement Agency?

Mr. ALLBAUGH. We are not a law enforcement Agency. I do not

want to become a law enforcement Agency. But I do believe that

communities should not be confused where they go for their first

responder training. Whether it is at FEMA, Justice, Defense Department, EPA—it does not matter to me. I think we ought to provide a unified, simplified, one-stop shop for all types of training.

Most of the ODP training that I am aware of revolves around basic

firefighting, which we do through our Fire Administration,

HAZMAT, and rescue operations.

So I think it is important to the American public that we make

it as simple as we possibly can insofar as going to a repository for

all their training.

Senator SMITH. The other issue which is often raised, which I

had a chance to witness first-hand, and I know Senator Clinton

and others did, was the issue that it may not be the best option

as a coordinating Agency. I was in New York I think 5 days or 6

days after the attack, and saw the building that FEMA had set up

there with just—I was commandeered, I guess, on the docks there.

I forget what the building was.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Pier 90.

Senator SMITH. Pier 90.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Yes, sir.

Senator SMITH. Thank you.

It was amazing—all the hustle and bustle, and the booths and

the people. Basically what could have been total confusion was not.

It was very organized and compartmentalized. If there is anybody

that could do it any better than that, I do not know who it is.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Well, we are charged specifically by the President

and through the Federal Response Plan to be the Agency of coordination and facilitation. We do not have a lot of Federal assets that

we own personally. What we do have is the knowledge to commandeer those assets that other Agencies have, and mobilize them

in a timely fashion to save lives and protect property. That is one

of the things that we do best.

Senator SMITH. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator JEFFORDS. Senator Clinton.
15

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON,

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF NEW YORK

Senator CLINTON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

It is a pleasure once again to have the Director here. I cannot

express eloquently enough, I am afraid, my personal gratitude and

the gratitude of New Yorkers for the extraordinary job that he and

his team have done. I appreciate your bringing this First Responder Initiative to this committee for our consideration. I am

hoping that we can work through some of the questions that have

been raised because clearly what we have learned since September

11 should inform everything we do from this point forward. That

is what I know the Director and his staff are attempting to do.

I have introduced a Homeland Security Block Grant last November or so because what I started hearing were the concerns that

this initiative attempts to address, from all over New York, where

far away from New York City, in places like Buffalo, for the first

time they were just getting calls for hazardous materials responses

and found themselves going deeper and deeper into red ink trying

to figure out how to get out there and help, especially after the anthrax attack.

Among the questions that I would like to ask the Director, it

really comes down to how do we make sure that we not only get

the money out there to the local community, but that the local community is able to use it both for the planning and the exercise and

the training and the initiatives that you have got in your description here, but what is happening now is that they are spending so

much money on overtime. They are just going deeper and deeper

into debt. I have been meeting with the Conference of Mayors, and

I am wondering, Mr. Director, how we are going to help them out

of their new increased obligations? How do we take care of these

overtime expenses, for example? Because elsewhere in the President’s budget, I know that we are seeing cutbacks in the COPS

program and the local law enforcement block program. So at the

same time that we are trying to upgrade our capacity to respond

to disasters, we are cutting some of the resources we would otherwise give to local law enforcement.

You know, there seems to be a kind of mismatch. This does not

fall under your bailiwick, because you are trying to get everybody

up to speed for disasters, but the front line of those disaster responses are our local police and fire. So how are we going to take

care of issues like overtime expenses attributable to responding?

Mr. ALLBAUGH. I am not sure how to answer that, except that

I do not believe the Federal Government should bear the brunt of

all those expenses. I think we are in partnership with State and

local communities as we proceed down this road together addressing these personnel issues. I really do not want to be in the personnel business either. I think that is a local issue more than anything else.

What we can do is provide them standards and the technical expertise; draw a roadmap, if you will; help them to try and get there

along the way by giving them also a certain amount of flexibility

to achieve some local concerns. It will take time and it will take

money. But I know communities all across the country are fighting

the battle of overtime on personnel. I was in Syracuse last night
16

and this morning; sat with the Fire Department there and it is

their No. 1 concern. Plus, they have many members of the Department that are coming up for retirement, and it is difficult on the

recruitment side; it is difficult on the retention side. This is not a

problem that resides just in one community. It is all across the

United States. I am all ears, as they say. I am searching for that

answer as well.

Senator CLINTON. I think that that is a matter of great importance to this committee, because the first line of our homeland defense are those local responders, so we have to figure out how we

are going to help local communities be able to confront that.

I want to followup, too, on what Senator Voinovich said. The efforts we have made to try to provide information, and this committee was nice enough to authorize a subcommittee hearing that

Senator Lieberman chaired that I asked for in Lower Manhattan,

to try to get to the bottom of what was going on with the air quality issues. What we hear, what Senator Voinovich hears from his

first responders in Ohio, we have not completed a medical screening of our firefighters—25 percent have some kind of respiratory,

bronchitis, asthmatic reaction. One thing that I believe we should

try to do across the board, and I appreciated what you said to Senator Voinovich, was to pick up some of the costs for those medical

exams, because the Federal Government needs to know what we

are learning from them. This is something that needs to be factored

into the work that FEMA does. So I think we really should look

and try to figure out how better we can both screen our first responders and then do followup medical treatment.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. I will tell you one thing, and members as well,

Senator Clinton, that as a result of one of the lessons we learned

in deploying our urban search and rescue teams for September

11th, these men and women were deployed without any type of

medical exam prior to deployment. What we have instituted since

that date is that everyone will receive a medical exam prior to deployment so we have a baseline when they return to compare to.

I think it is a positive step. I think members of those task forces

appreciate that step. As we learn more, we will continue to change.

We have to be cognizant of being able to have the flexibility to add

new procedures when called for. This was a perfect example.

Senator CLINTON. I have some additional questions which I will

give to the Director in writing.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator JEFFORDS. Senator Warner.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN W. WARNER,

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA

Senator WARNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Thank you, Mr.

Chairman, for having this important hearing.

So nice to see you again, Director Allbaugh.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Good to be seen, Sir.

Senator WARNER. I remember vividly our first meeting when we

described FEMA. It appeared to be a relatively straightforward assignment. Now, you have, I think, the most important assignment,

next to the President, and that is homeland defense. Our President

had the wisdom way back before he was elected, in his speech at
17

The Citadel, to express his concern for preparing to defend America

here at home. The rest is history. Now that responsibility in many

respects falls on your shoulders, and I am glad that this committee

is going to give you the support that you need.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Thank you, sir.

Senator WARNER. We were talking about Senator Wyden, a very

important subject on the interoperability. I went to the Pentagon

about 5 hours after that plane hit, and worked with the Secretary

of Defense. I went out and saw the responders and experienced

then some of the difficulties of the inability to have a common communications system. I am pleased to say that we, Virginia and the

area here, the greater metropolitan area of Washington, got $20

million to get this interoperability into our system. So I hope it can

be achieved elsewhere.

I turn now to the urban search and rescue teams. I would like

to mention here that it was Senators Nunn, Lugar, Domenici and

I joined them in 1997, that had the vision; and it was President

Clinton who, on his watch as President, enacted these measures

into law. So I am going to read a rather lengthy question, and I

will see that it is handed to you, and ask you for your views on

this question.

The search and rescue teams have proven to be a vital component to our emergency response efforts even before September 11.

In Virginia, the Fairfax team has responded to earthquake recovery efforts worldwide. Also, the Virginia Beach team responded at

the Pentagon attack. As you well know, these urban search and

rescue teams bring uniquely trained professionals and equipment

to disaster scenes. State and local rescue efforts do not have these

capabilities.

The following situation came to my attention shortly after September 11, and I credit the distinguished Mayor, Meyera

Oberndorf, for bringing this to my attention—the Mayor of Virginia

Beach. The task force at Virginia Beach consists of 180 trained individuals. On September 11, 62 members of the task force responded to the attack on the Department of Defense. Only onethird of the 180-man team could be outfitted to respond. The rest

of the team members remained in Virginia Beach. If there had

been another incident, they would not have been able to respond

because of a lack of equipment.

Also, it is my understanding that last year FEMA designated

Virginia Beach as one of six FEMA task forces nationwide to respond to domestic attacks involving weapons of mass destruction.

It is clear that these premier urban search and rescue teams are

not fully equipped to perform their missions.

Can you tell me and the committee what are the funding needs

to fully equip and train the existing 28 FEMA urban search and

rescue teams across America?

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Sixty-four million dollars to get them up to speed

immediately. We have submitted not only for the 2003 budget, but

for the 2002 supplemental; $15 million for the 2003 budget. It was

subsequently cut back; and in the supplemental, $32 million. But

it is a high priority for me to properly equip, properly train, make

sure that they were WMD trained, as you said—6 of the 28 are
18

trained to that capability right now, and that is not satisfactory in

my book.

Senator WARNER. My understanding is, you said $64 million.

There is $6.5 million only in the President’s budget.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Yes, sir, I know.

Senator WARNER. Consequently, Mr. Chairman and members of

the committee, I think it is incumbent upon us to address that

issue in the forthcoming deliberations on our budget.

My second is the First Responder Initiative. Again, the three

mayors in the Virginia Beach-Tidewater area—Meyera Oberndorf,

Joe Frank and Paul Frame have put this question to me.

We applaud the President’s initiative to provide critical resources

to the local police, fire and rescue. We saw first-hand how critical

local fire and police were in responding to the attack on the Pentagon as Arlington County was the first onsite, and ultimately became the on-scene coordinator for all recovery efforts. Also, every

major fire department in the metropolitan Washington area provided critical resources at the Pentagon. Many of us are very interested in the criteria that FEMA will use to allocate the first responder grant funds.

I believe we all know that many local fire and police departments

are the only resources to protect critical Federal installations. The

Virginia example is very telling. We know that Arlington County

and other local departments are the only responders for major Federal installations from the Pentagon to the Central Intelligence

Agency. Elsewhere in Virginia, local fire and police are the first responders to major defense installations in the Hampton Roads

area.

Can you tell me to what degree will we be protecting critical Federal facilities factor into FEMA’s criteria for this new First Responder Initiative?

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Well, we have not addressed that yet, Senator.

We are in the midst of internal discussions on that subject. I would

be happy to get back with you when we bring that to closure. I can

assure you we have and will have in the future ongoing dialog with

State and local entities to make sure they have ample opportunity

to have their say about this.

I am most concerned about setting standards. I am most concerned about accountability. I am most concerned about giving

these departments the flexibility to meet what they see as their

priorities, as well as facilitating the continuing buildup of our infrastructure nationwide.

Senator WARNER. They are the ones that have to respond. They

need the financial support, and it has to be in the $3.5 billion that

you are now funding.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Yes, sir.

Senator WARNER. Thank you.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator JEFFORDS. Senator Corzine.

OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JON S. CORZINE,

U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF NEW JERSEY

Senator CORZINE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
19

I welcome Director Allbaugh. It is terrific to see you. I want to

commend you and all of the people at FEMA for the tremendous

response that we have seen given to the September 11 attacks. I

want to specifically say that you have been very responsive, and

your people have been to New Jersey’s dialog about recovery needs.

They are ones that I will give more emphasis to in my questions.

But I do hope that you will get a sense that we are very much

strongly supportive of the initiatives being put into FEMA on this

first responder preparedness.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Thank you, Senator.

Senator CORZINE. I will go parochial for a second. There are a

number of issues that fall out of the post-September 11 situation

that impact New Jersey. We have had conversations with a number

of your folks, including Deputy Director Brown, about transportation infrastructure, particularly as it relates to the changed patterns of transportation that have occurred because of the PATH

closure.

There is significant dialog about whether funding on that actually will be recognized or taken into consideration. We are under

the impression, and the Governor’s office and the Attorney General’s office are that FEMA is authorized to cover New Jersey’s interim transportation needs. I wonder if that is your understanding?

Mr. ALLBAUGH. That is my impression as well. I am not sure as

to the specific incident or issue that you are referring to.

Senator CORZINE. It has to do with actually paying for additional

ferry, rail and bus service that is really taking the overflow or the

redistribution of transportation.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. I do not know specifically about that, Senator,

but I would like to take the opportunity to check that out and then

respond back to you on that.

Senator CORZINE. We will put in writing the specifics of it. But

it is a very heavy burden on the State, and I think it is actually

very important for the revitalization of Southern Manhattan.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. My recollection, and I am receiving confirmation

that it is eligible, so I am not sure why there is a roadblock, no

pun intended, as to why this is not going forward.

Senator CORZINE. We would very much love to hear a response

about where it stands in the process.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. We will do that.

Senator CORZINE. I know you have many priorities. This is one

that our people are concerned about.

The second issue is about straight time reimbursement for some

of the aid provided to the New York response, which is a continual

issue.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Right. Right.

Senator CORZINE. Aid to New York that was provided in New

York, whether it is State police closing down tunnels and bridges,

or hospital services provided. There continue to be open questions

about whether that meets the criterion. We have a number of communities that are pressed just as I am sure many local communities are across the country, but they took on additional burdens

that are really quite substantial. The two Senators from New Jersey were encouraging the folks to do what they needed to do, not

that they would not have done that anyway, but there was a sense
20

of good faith that they would be treated in a mutual aid resource

agreement for the efforts they made.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. I was in New York yesterday and Sunday, and

had a meeting specifically on this issue. It is my understanding

that we are moving along on getting a lot of those issues resolved.

If there is something specific that we are not addressing, I think

I need to know that as well.

Senator CORZINE. We will go through that. There are a number

of communities up and down the——

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Could you add that to your letter?

Senator CORZINE. Yes. We will do that.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. We would appreciate that.

Senator CORZINE. I will make sure that we have it.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. If there are communities that are missing in the

dialog, I want to get them in the mix, of course.

Senator CORZINE. A lot of this is just the mechanics and logistics

of getting it done, and I know you have a lot of—your people have

been quite engaged and open to process it along.

Thank you.

Senator JEFFORDS. Senator Voinovich.

Senator VOINOVICH. Mr. Allbaugh, when you came to my office

and we talked prior to your confirmation hearing, we talked about

the human capital crisis that is confronting the United States of

America.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Yes, sir.

Senator VOINOVICH. For the benefit of the committee members,

by 2004, we could lose about 55 percent of our people through early

retirement or regular retirement, and our Senior Executive Service

up to about 70 percent by the year 2005. You indicated you thought

that you were in fairly good shape.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. We are not in good shape.

Senator VOINOVICH. I am really worried about that because one

of the things, and I hate to be bringing back news from the locals

in Dayton, but the fact of the matter is they have said that they

think that you really need a lot more people in the urban section

of FEMA. I remember being up at Ground Zero, and of course that

as an extraordinarily unusual situation, but we had people from

the Department of Energy. You just went out and scouted up the

best people you could to give you assistance there.

I would like for you to share with the committee what plans you

have under way to deal with the human capital needs that you

have currently, and what additional capital needs are you going to

have to respond to in terms of taking on this new responsibility.

Last but not least, do you have the budget and the tools to attract

that people that you are going to need to get the job done?

Mr. ALLBAUGH. I have been in this position about a year, and it

was clear to me right up front that we have not been spending

enough time internally on our employees—properly training them,

helping them with a career path. Retention was a problem. Recruitment—there was essentially no recruitment. I brought in about a

month and a half ago a new Human Resources Director from OPM,

Doug Fair. We are working together in crafting a plan to address

all of our needs.
21

I think over the next 18 months, somewhere between 45 and 50

percent of our Agency is eligible for retirement. That is just a lot

of gray matter to be walking out the door. Since September 11, the

retirements have accelerated. People have come to my office with

a different perspective on life, which I cannot fault them for—wanting to spend time with their kids, their grandkids, their spouses.

But it is a severe need that we have at FEMA, particularly given

the stresses and strains of responding to disasters natural and

man-made. I do not have an answer crafted yet. I would be happy

to get back to you, sir. I know Doug is working as hard-out to try

and accommodate me on a variety of issues in this arena. Whether

we have the necessary budget or not, I would have to say probably

not right now. FEMA suffers from its own successes in that if you

want a job done you give it to FEMA and oftentimes we are given

the task to perform, but not necessarily the resources to complete

the task.

So as a result, many of our people in not only the Washington

headquarters, but in our 10 regional offices, wear two, three, and

four or five hats at the same time. It puts an inordinate amount

of stress on those individuals, on their families who I think make

the ultimate sacrifices because those individuals are kept away

from home more than necessary.

I would like to respond back to you in writing and tell you exactly how we are doing.

Senator VOINOVICH. I would like to have you do that in terms of

what your current needs are, what additional needs you are going

to have when you take on these new responsibilities.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. We have identified with the First Responder Program. We do know what we need.

Senator VOINOVICH. Also the issue of tools, because in another

committee that I am supposed to be at right now, Mr. Chairman,

we are dealing with this issue of human capital and the President’s

management agenda, and after 3 years, my agenda, and trying to

give Agencies the flexibility that they need to retain the people

that they have on-board and to attract in people at the entry level

and actually at the mid-management level. One of the things that

I must say that too often here we talk about the money to buy

things, but we neglect the fact that Agencies in the Federal Government need the tools and the people to get the job done. We are

all talking about Enron. Well, if you go and check at the Securities

and Exchange Commission, you will find that they have lost a third

of their people because of the fact that their pay scale is—I think,

Senator Corzine, you know that—not competitive.

We can just go straight through the Federal Government and

find that we have some really severe problems because we had a

period of downsizing without any attention to reshaping those

Agencies to get the job done. If he does not have the people that

he needs to get the job done, I do not care what we do in terms

of some of these other things that we are talking about today, he

will not be able to perform properly.

So I am really interested in your providing that to me. I want

to stay on top of it. I know I have been a little bit tough on you

today.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Have you?
22

Senator VOINOVICH. Yes, I have.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. We have a few answers, but I do not think you

have been that tough.

Senator VOINOVICH. But I just want to say to you—— Mr. ALLBAUGH. There are questions that need to be answered,

and if I do not know about them, we need to get the answers to

you. So I think that is fair.

Senator VOINOVICH [continuing]. I would like to say to you that

I thank you very much for the sacrifice that you have made for

your country, and the hours that you have put in. I thank your

lovely wife for the sacrifice that she and your family have put up

so that you could continue to do this job. I think so often we take

for granted the people like you that come into government. We do

not appreciate what you go through. I just want to say thank you

very much.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Thank you, Senator.

Senator JEFFORDS. We all join in that thank you.

Senator Wyden, last question.

Senator VOINOVICH. Mr. Chairman, could I do one other thing?

Pardon me—I just want to introduce Ken Zirkle from Ohio. I failed

to do that. Ken is at the University of Findlay.

Senator JEFFORDS. Stand up, Ken.

Senator VOINOVICH. He has trained all of our EMS people in

Ohio. Ken, I have to run out of here because I have to go to the

other committee that is dealing with this human capital thing, but

thank you for being here today.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Senator JEFFORDS. Senator Wyden.

Senator WYDEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I do not want to

turn this into a bouquet-tossing contest, Director Allbaugh.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Please don’t.

Senator WYDEN. I think it is clear you have a lot of support here,

and particularly on the proposition that your key programs are

going to need more resources. I want to ask you about the urban

search and rescue area in particular. As you know, I think this is

a very attractive kind of program. Senator Warner touched on it as

well. It is one that works.

I really see it as a model for an area that I am interested in getting into, and that is to mobilize people in the science and technology area. I tentatively called it NETGuard—the National Emergency Technology Guard where we would rely on people from private enterprise to help with people and equipment. What is your

sense? Do you think that properly developed—and we are going to

be asking the Council of the executive branch on it—that these

kinds of teams, these kind of NETGuard teams could play a useful

role in assisting the efforts of local emergency response authorities?

Mr. ALLBAUGH. I think if they are focused and they understand

who is in charge when it comes to the decisionmaking process, that

obviously smart people who have the right talent could be nothing

but an asset to responding to disasters man-made or natural.

Senator WYDEN. That was what I was hoping to see evolve. The

last thing you want to do is to get talented people, say, from Intel

or Microsoft or these leading technology companies, to basically

come on into a very difficult situation and sort of stand around and
23

get in the way. We want to work with you to make sure that we

mobilize these resources so that they do not usurp the authority of

the local first responders and really do complement what you and

your people are doing on the ground. We will be asking for your

counsel, and I thank you, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Thank you, Senator.

Senator JEFFORDS. Thank you sincerely for very, very excellent

answers, and we enjoy working with you and look forward to working with you again.

Mr. ALLBAUGH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the support this committee has given FEMA. It is an important Agency,

as you all recognize. We look forward to working closely with you

in the future. Thanks for your support. Thanks for having me here

today.

Senator JEFFORDS. Thank you.

Our next panel and last panel—four wonderful individuals—Mr.

Woodbury P. Fogg, P.E., on behalf of the National Emergency Management Association, Washington, DC.; Mr. Ed Wilson, chief, City

of Portland Fire Department, Portland, OR; Mr. Mike O’Neil, chief,

South Burlington Fire Department, Burlington, VT; and Mr. Kenneth E. Zirkle, president, University of Findlay, Findlay, OH.

Please proceed. Yes, start with Mr. Fogg.

STATEMENT OF WOODBURY P. FOGG, NATIONAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION

Mr. FOGG. Thank you.

Chairman Jeffords, Ranking Member Smith and members of the

committee, thank you for the opportunity to appear before you

today to offer comments on the First Responder Program. The National Emergency Management Association, NEMA, supports Federal efforts to increase the emergency management capacity-building at the State, territorial and local level for personnel, planning,

training, equipment, coordination and exercising. A significant Federal commitment must be made to give State, territorial and local

governments the tools to ensure adequate preparedness.

While States have significantly increased their commitment to

emergency management over the last decade, those States are

struggling with budgetary issues and the increased investments

necessary to meet these new demands.

In my testimony today, I am going to make five key points about

the proposed First Responder Program. No. 1, all efforts need to be

coordinated through the States to ensure harmonization with the

State emergency operations plan and the Federal response plan, to

ensure equitable distribution of resources, and to coordinate those

resources for intra-State and inter-State mutual aid.

The Stafford Act successfully uses States and Governors as the

managers of Federal disaster relief funds for local governments

which are overtaxed and need assistance. There is no question that

most of that $3.5 billion proposed First Responder Grants Funds

needs to go to police, firefighters, emergency medical and public

health workers, and other front-line local responders. We can effectively ensure this by working through the States to build on the

statewide plans that FEMA, the Department of Justice and other

Agencies have already required. State emergency management has
24

a proven track record of passing most of the funds they get through

to the local level. That is something they have done for years and

done well.

No. 2, State emergency managers need to have a commitment for

sustained Federal resources and the flexibility to ensure the hiring

and training of sufficient professional personnel to manage the expanding antiterrorism programs. We are concerned that an influx

of new and separate funding programs from the Federal Government could actually detract from our all-hazards approach. Building a statewide emergency management capability is key to ensuring preparedness across the board. I like to say this is not just

about terrorism. This is about preparedness—preparedness in general for all hazards.

Emergency management performance grant—otherwise known

as EMPG—is the only flexible, consistent source of Federal funding

for State and local capacity building. As the existing funding

stream, EMPG could be used quite quickly to hire State and local

staff to manage critical programs and build the incremental emergency management capacity and prepare for the first responder

grants and the coordination that will be required to execute these

programs. EMPG is already in place and it is effective. It could

move money very quickly to the ones most in need, and it allows

tailoring on a State-by-State basis and a locality basis, and allows

the taking of a statewide approach.

Emergency management is overstressed and working to capacity

to address this new environment, and we need relief now. In that

vein, we are requesting an additional $200 million in funding for

EMPG in the April supplemental appropriations package to serve

as a down payment or an initial, a kick-start, for addressing emergency management needs. In 2000, well before September 11, a

NEMA survey of the States revealed a $123 million shortfall in

Federal funding of State and local emergency management programs, and Congress needs to address this shortfall.

No. 3, standards must be developed to ensure interoperability of

equipment, communications and training across State, regional and

local jurisdictions. NEMA was a leader in the creation of the Emergency Management Accreditation Program, or EMAP. This voluntary standards and accreditation program for State and local

emergency management is based on the National Fire Protection

Association’s standards and on FEMA’s capability assessment of

readiness, or CAR. NEMA suggests that these standards, which are

already being implemented through EMAP, be incorporated in the

development of any minimum standards for training, exercise and

equipment. This is something we have already in place. It is beginning to work. I hope we can begin to use this program for domestic

preparedness.

No. 4, mutual aid, both intra-State and inter-State, is a key component to capacity building, and a proven system we need to take

advantage of for all domestic preparedness planning is the Emergency Management Assistance Compact, or EMAC. EMAC is an

inter-State mutual aid agreement that allows States to assist one

another in responding to all kinds of natural and man-made disasters. There are 46 States and 2 territories that are already members of EMAC, and the other States and territories are considering
25

joining. As an example, in response to September 11, several States

provided support to New York through EMAC. It is a system that

works. We use it for nearly all major disasters now.

No. 5, State and local government must be fully, directly and

continuously involved and consulted in development of the national

domestic preparedness strategy. NEMA espouses a national strategy, not just a Federal one. We look forward to working with the

Office of Homeland Security toward the development and implementation of that strategy.

In conclusion, close coordination of programs and Agencies in

building this capacity to deal with truly catastrophic events is the

key to success in assuring our Nation’s preparedness against terrorism. One of the best demonstrations of the value of better Federal, State, private and local coordination was the TOPOFF exercise in 2000. We hope that the First Responder Program will aid

in national coordination and preparedness. I have submitted written testimony, with copies of NEMA’s 10 principles on a domestic

national preparedness strategy, and a white paper that was done

earlier this year. I request that that be entered into the record.

Senator JEFFORDS. It will be.

Mr. FOGG. Thank you.

Thank you for your commitment to ensuring our Nation is as

ready as we can be. Are there any questions that I can answer?

Senator JEFFORDS. Thank you. We will have questions later.

Our next witness is Mr. Ed Wilson, chief of the city of Portland

Fire Department, from Portland, OR. Please proceed.

STATEMENT OF EDWARD WILSON, CHIEF, CITY OF PORTLAND

FIRE DEPARTMENT, PORTLAND, OR

Chief WILSON. Mr. Chairman, Senator Wyden, members of the

committee, I am Ed Wilson, fire chief of the city of Portland, OR.

I want to thank you for the opportunity to address the committee

today.

Two weeks after the September 11 attacks on our Nation, City

of Portland Mayor, Vera Katz directed me to join with our partners

in public safety in our region to determine our state of preparedness for a terrorist attack and to conduct a needs assessment.

On behalf of all the emergency responders in major cities across

the United States who undoubtedly undertook similar processes, I

am here to testify about our findings and briefly outline what we

would do with additional funding to increase our readiness.

Like many large cities, we are on the right track with regard to

planning for a mass casualty incident and have been for many

years. Most large cities have functional plans in place and welltrained responders on all levels. Since September 11, however, we

have focused on a few key areas to improve our plans in case the

unthinkable happens—that being a terrorist attack in our home

town. As large cities in the United States, we have numerous factors that put our citizens at risk. Our most obvious issue, as we

learned from the World Trade Center attacks, and earlier from the

bombing of the Federal building in Oklahoma City, is that sheer

number of people who populate large cities. Higher concentrations

of people mean more potential loss of life.
26

Metropolitan areas are also more vulnerable to hazardous material incidents because of the industrial activity that is an important

part of our economy. In addition, we have larger and more complex

infrastructures. Of course, many of America’s most visible landmarks, such as the World Trade Center and the Pentagon, are located in big cities. All of these increase the vulnerability of metropolitan areas. That is why metropolitan areas such as Portland are

in need of increased resources to keep our homeland safe.

Our needs assessment showed four primary areas where we need

to improve—first, equipment and training. We recommend increasing the supply of protective equipment and training for all emergency responders. Decontamination at the hospitals would add yet

another layer of protection as well. In addition, incident command

system training at the executive level will enhance any major city’s

ability to provide leadership during a terrorist or any disaster.

Second, communications. We found room to improve the redundancy and interoperability of our communications systems. While

local agencies have mechanisms in place to communicate with each

other, these plans may quickly splinter when State and Federal

Agencies arrive on the scene. This lack of interoperability was

starkly evident during the response to terrorist attack at the Pentagon on September 11.

Third, building security. Portland, like many other cities in our

country, is free, very open. To protect our citizens, we are considering enhancing our building security.

Forth, for recovery. To improve continuity of government after a

terrorist incident, we will develop a comprehensive recovery plan.

First steps include a business risk assessment and a mainframe recovery study.

Some ask, will the First Responder Initiative help major cities

across this country address these types of issues? The answer is absolutely. But there is another strength in the proposed initiative.

It would support programs that develop or buildupon existing mutual aid agreements. For example, in the Portland metropolitan

area, a regional group of emergency managers involving five counties and two States has worked since 1993 to coordinate regional

response to natural hazards. We are now developing a regional request for antiterrorism dollars.

Finally, I would note that according to the U.S. Conference of

Mayors, initial estimates show that local communities have spent

more than $525 million since September 11, for added security, and

they anticipate that these cities will spend about $2.2 billion in

2002 to manage a burden unforeseen before September 11. The

need for Federal assistance is clear to these major cities.

Noting that a simple and quick method for dispersing Federal assistance is a stated objective of the First Responder Initiative, I

would like to recommend systems similar to the Community Block

Grant Program. This would serve as an excellent model for dispersing these funds. It would allow Federal funding to go directly

to cities with populations greater than 50,000, and the rest would

go to the States for distributions to jurisdictions with a population

less than 50,000, and actually for the First Responder Initiative, an

increased population above 50,000 for those direct grants may be

appropriate.
27

This model already exists and has been used successfully and extensively. It would be easy to duplicate and would avoid delays in

getting funding to the local communities who need it now. It would

also be important that Federal funding to local communities allow

as much flexibility as possible. As you know, different communities

will identify different needs, levels of vulnerability and solutions to

these difficult problems. We are glad to see funding flexibility included as one of the stated objectives in the President’s initiative.

So Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, thank you

again for the opportunity to provide this information about how

major cities in the United States would benefit from implementation of the First Responder Initiative. This benefit would be immediate and long term, making us safer from terrorist attacks and

also enhancing our everyday response capabilities.

At this time, I would be happy to answer any questions you may

have.

Senator JEFFORDS. Thank you for an excellent statement, and we

will be back with questions.

Our third witness is Mr. Mike O’Neil, chief of the South Burlington Fire Department in Burlington, VT.

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL O’NEIL, CHIEF, SOUTH BURLINGTON

FIRE DEPARTMENT, BURLINGTON, VT

Chief O’NEIL. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, fellow Senators.

Let me begin by extending greetings from the Vermont Fire

Service. We appreciate the important discussions and deliberations

that you are involved in. I would like to address the committee on

a few issues that have been the subject of much debate in our

small State, that we like to think reflects the ongoing national discussion.

The focus is that the ability of our Nation’s fire service to be

properly equipped to respond to the myriad of events that only a

few short years ago would have been as viewed as scenarios from

a movie script. There never has been a doubt that the American

Fire Service would be called upon to respond to any situation. We

do it every day. We do not choose what types of incidents that we

respond to and which ones we won’t. I believe as a fire chief, I owe

it to the firefighters who respond to these calls for help from our

citizens to be as prepared and protected as is possible.

As I sit here before you today, I know that I cannot do that because our communities cannot afford to provide that protection.

The need is real. We cannot continue to send our firefighters out

without the proper protection. We would not send our servicemen

and—women to foreign soil ill-prepared to perform. Why should our

front-line home security forces be any different?

When the White House proposed—through the Office of Homeland Defense giving $3.5 billion in Federal aid to State and local

responders, America’s front-line soldiers, firefighters, police officers

and emergency medical technicians—to prepare for terrorist actions, the fire service believed that it was going to be able to solve

a longstanding barrier to effectiveness, the lack of adequate funding. We view the First Responder Initiative as extremely important

in getting money directly to departments large and small for basic

needs such as equipment and training, and supplying specialized
28

equipment and training to larger urban departments with the

greater possibility of terror acts exists.

In his remarks to the National Emergency Managers Association,

Governor Ridge voiced his strong support for first responders in the

President’s proposed budget. He feels very strongly that the equipment, training and exercise resources are needed by the Nation’s

first line of defense. Governor Ridge reiterated the Administration’s

position that funding should go directly to the States, and not to

the local government. We would question that. Past history, at

least in our small State, has shown that very little of those resources have found their way to the local level once the State has

finished utilizing the grants to better equip the State responses.

We have been told for the last 3 years that any State resources

will not be available to us for up to several hours after an incident,

and that we as first responders will be on our own for that timeframe. We did not have to have that fact pointed out to us. We already knew it from past experience. My point is, now that when

State resources arrive several hours later, they have better, more

up-to-date equipment than we as the first responders have, and we

still are holding the line initially.

The cities of Burlington and South Burlington have met with

State officials with a number of projects including much-needed

communications systems upgrades that focused on interoperability

and regional responses. The projects have not been acted on because vital funding has gone to other State agencies. What funding

has been left over is so small that it has not been sufficient to be

effective. We resort to makeshift solutions in the field, while important funding is utilized in other areas.

Recent events have demonstrated once and for all the role of

America’s fire service responding to and mitigating disasters, terrorist or otherwise. We are truly America’s first line of defense

against all risk hazards, including hazardous materials, terrorist

events, emergency search and rescue, fire suppression and emergency medical services. We need your help.

Last year, Congress provided $100 million in funding for the Assistance to Firefighters Program for fiscal year 2001. After announcing the grant program, FEMA received nearly 30,000 applications for assistance, totaling about $2.9 billion. Because of the

added responsibilities of the fire service, its role in response to disasters and the potential for that role to be expanded, funding at

much higher levels is required. Local jurisdictions simply do not

have the resources to independently fund the improvements to respond to the new challenges.

In his State of the Union address, President Bush made a commitment to a sustained strategy for increased homeland security.

The President has made clear that he considers a critical component of that strategy to be increased Federal funding for America’s

fire and emergency service. In order to ensure the full benefit of

this increased funding are realized by the American people, we

urge you and Congress to enact the First Responders Initiative providing funding to the fire and emergency services. By using these

programs, Congress can ensure that appropriate funds quickly

reach America’s fire service, the only people in the United States

who are locally trained, equipped and sworn to respond within min-
29

utes to all incidents, natural or man-made, which threaten America’s homeland.

Mr. Chairman, the American Fire Service has been strongly supportive of FEMA. The reason for this is simple. They have earned

the support of the fire and emergency service based on a proven

track record of providing invaluable training, equipment and resources to America’s local first responder community, both on-scene

at disaster sites and during ongoing planning and training that all

responder organizations must constantly pursue. They clearly recognize that America’s local fire departments are the first line of

disaster response in this country. For this reason, we encourage

Congress to utilize this Agency as you look toward significantly enhancing and improving America’s readiness capabilities.

Thank you on behalf of the American Fire Service.

Senator JEFFORDS. Thank you, again, for an excellent statement.

I am obviously familiar with much of what you talked about.

Mr. Zirkle, please proceed.

STATEMENT OF KENNETH E. ZIRKLE, PRESIDENT,

UNIVERSITY OF FINDLAY, FINDLAY, OH

Mr. ZIRKLE. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my

name is Ken Zirkle and I am president of the University of Findlay

in Findlay, OH. Thank you for inviting me here today. I have testimony which I would like to submit for the record if I may do so.

Senator JEFFORDS. That will be admitted.

Mr. ZIRKLE. I am prepared to read a short statement.

Our university currently serves 4,000 students at the graduate

and undergraduate levels. We offer more than 60 academic majors.

The city of Findlay, home of several major industries, is located in

northwestern Ohio, 45 miles south of Toledo. One of Findlay’s

major industries is a national leader in hazardous materials cleanup. Because of its presence, we became aware of the increased need

for environmental clean-up professionals and developed one of the

first programs in the Nation for disaster response training.

In 1986, we established our National Center of Excellence for Environmental Management. In so doing, we made the decision to

offer practical education and training on environmental and disaster preparedness in two specific program areas. One program

grants undergraduate and graduate degrees in environmental safety and health training. To date, we have more than 1,000 graduates. Our current enrollment includes on-line students in 19

States. Most of our students are employed even before they graduate, by corporations such as Honda, Marathon, Owens-Illinois,

General Electric, the Ohio EPA, and the IT Group, which recently

decontaminated the Senate Hart Building.

Our second focus is consulting services in response training. We

have hands-on training centers in Findlay that offer scenarios including rail car, tank truck, and chemical spills, plus confined

space entry and rescue, as well as additional practical training simulations. Furthermore, we specialize in custom-designed response

training programs. Approximately 80 percent of the training we do

is provided at our customers’ locations. People do not have to come

to us. Rather, we go to them.
30

In the past 16 years, we have trained more than 50,000 first responder and industry professionals from across the United States,

designing programs for such companies as Ford, Roadway, and

CSX Transportation. We have also conducted training in Canada

and Mexico and have translated materials into Spanish.

More specific to the topic we are discussing here today, in June

1999, we added a third focus, the University of Findlay Center for

Terrorism Preparedness. The Nunn-Lugar 120 cities program was

already under way.

We realized, however, there were underserved populations, especially our smaller communities, which desperately needed first responder training. Certainly, our foresight has served us well. Working in concert with Dale Shipley, director of the Ohio Emergency

Management Agency, Ohio’s Governor Taft and his staff, the Medical College of Ohio, the Ohio Department of Health, and the Fire

Marshall’s office, we have prepared firefighters and police officers,

emergency, medical, hospital, and school personnel, city and county

officials, as well as public health workers.

We enable communities to develop fully integrated preparation,

response, and recovery programs. We have conducted terrorism

preparedness training for first responders nationwide—on campus,

onsite, and on-line. Further, for the last 3 years under grants from

the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, we have provided eight

different first responder programs to more than 2,000 volunteer

firefighters in 70 Ohio cities. We have trained them on weekends

and evenings—the only viable time to work with volunteers.

Well before September 11, the University of Findlay was training

first responders. How have we changed since September 11? Here

are a few examples. No. 1, the Ohio Emergency Medical Service

Agency has asked us to spearhead a grant that will offer EMS providers training in domestic preparedness issues such as emergency

response, terrorism preparedness, and bioterrorist response. No. 2,

the Ohio Emergency Management Agency has asked us to develop

and deliver a train-the-trainer curriculum for Ohio’s first responders to the threat of terrorism. No. 3, our staff has developed a CDROM to prepare school employees in the event of terrorist attacks

and other acts of violence. No. 4, in September, we were designated

1 of only 14 CDC Centers for Bioterrorism Preparedness.

Points I would like to leave you with—Secretary Rumsfeld has

mentioned that our mindset today is completely different from a

year ago. Like it or not, terrorism is and will be a part of all of

our lives. Given that terrorism is a fact in our lives, we must do

everything possible to prevent it, yet prepare for it.

In closing, as institutions of higher learning, we have a moral

and ethical obligation to play a role, in a broader sense, of guaranteeing that we become a Nation of first responders. From community colleges to professional schools, we all know that terrorism response courses must be incorporated to educate all students preparing for any profession. The models exist. It is not necessary to

start from square one. Complete eradication of terrorism is not

likely, but complete response training is absolutely mandatory.

Thank you.

Senator JEFFORDS. Thank you.
31

Let me start with you, Mr. Zirkle. It is impressive what you are

doing and how effective you have been. How many similar institutions are there in this country like yours? None, I assume, but that

is good.

Mr. ZIRKLE. You are right. Good answer.

[Laughter.]

Senator JEFFORDS. Is that basically the case?

Mr. ZIRKLE. That is basically the case, yes. We became involved,

like I said, several years ago in emergency response training. That

experience just sort of lent itself to the problem that we are facing

today. When we started this 3 years ago, dealing with the terrorism, we had no idea that there was going to be such an event

as September 11. But since it has happened, I guess it points out

the need for this to an even greater degree.

Senator JEFFORDS. Thank you. That is discouraging, at the same

time, very encouraging what you do, that we do not have more

available institutions—junior colleges or anything?

Mr. ZIRKLE. I suspect that what you will see is more people moving into that direction. We think the model that we have developed

and perfected over the last number of years is one that can be used

in many other institutions, and we are exploring that very fact

right now. As a matter of fact, we are working with a community

college in Ohio to look at setting up a cooperative situation with

them. We see that as sort of a pilot project. We think it is something that can be distributed across the entire country.

Senator JEFFORDS. Of course, as you know, a lot of the universities are using the Internet and expanding their capacities in that

regard. It is another thing that certainly somebody ought to look

at.

Mr. ZIRKLE. We are involved. We have students taking this program right now in 19 different States using Internet at this very

moment. But one thing we have found out. We have the hands-on

training scenarios at the University. We have a site off-campus. We

have railroad cars and tank cars. We can really focus on almost

any type of situation there.

We have found that the people who go through that, with the

hands-on experience, are those who remember it for the longest. It

has the greatest impact. We think there are several steps that can

be taken until we can get to that point for everyone, but I think

ultimately you are going to have to have that type of scenario approach as well.

Senator JEFFORDS. That is very helpful.

Mr. O’Neil, can you please discuss any mutual aid agreements

currently in place with the city of Burlington and other localities

in Vermont? Can you discuss Vermont’s State role in these operations?

Chief O’NEIL. Yes, there are multiple mutual aid agreements

throughout the State, and specifically in the Chittenden County

area. Perhaps one of the best examples I can give you is the city

of Burlington received mutual aid from the communities surrounding it, such as South Burlington, Shelburne, Winooski, Mallets Bay, and Colchester-Center Fire Department. So that system

works out adequately, but there again the interoperability question

comes in where the radio systems are not compatible to each other,
32

and that is something that the communities are working on and

have worked on for the last couple of years.

Senator JEFFORDS. What are they doing? Is the State helping

them or coordinating it or what?

Chief O’NEIL. We have approached the State on a number of occasions to deal with that issue, and apparently the funding has not

been available to move forward on that. We have suggested a few

different scenarios to them, but as I said, the adequate funding is

not in place at this point.

Senator JEFFORDS. Well, thank you. I was able to get a little help

to your department from the Federal grant. How effective has that

been? How helpful?

Chief O’NEIL. That has been very effective throughout the State.

In fact, in talking with State Senator Illuzzi a few weeks ago about

that very issue, is that it is a great start and it is very well appreciated and very much needed. I think that if that continues to be

ongoing along with this program and the Fire Act program, I think

that the State will be able to bring its response level up to a need

that is adequate.

Senator JEFFORDS. I heard from my benefactor in that, the Appropriations Committee, however they said don’t come back next

year. So I just wanted to warn you.

[Laughter.]

Chief O’NEIL. We appreciate the effort, that is for sure.

Senator JEFFORDS. Yes. OK.

Mr. Wilson, we have heard discussion of mutual aid agreements,

and I know you are heavily involved with firefighters across the

State of Oregon, many of whom are of course volunteers. Is your

State currently utilizing mutual aid agreements? If you can, sir,

would you discuss your experiences with them?

Chief WILSON. Yes, Mr. Chairman. In the Portland metropolitan

region and then across the State, we have very mature mutual aid

agreements. The city of Portland on its borders has the city of Vancouver, which is in the State of Washington; the city of Gresham;

Clackamas County Rural Fire Protection District; and Tualatin

Valley Rural Fire Protection Districts. Not only do we have mature

mutual aid agreements that have worked time and eternity, they

are actually built into the automatic dispatch so the closest unit is

dispatched no matter what community is paying their salary. This

is all done free of charge on a reciprocal basis.

Statewide, under the State Conflagration Act, certain types of

fires, primarily in the wild land and urban interface, the State

helps coordinate mutual aid assistance, and in fact, in some cases,

compensates those departments that are responding from a great

distance from their home to the fire.

Senator JEFFORDS. Mr. Fogg, I am interested in the role that the

State will play in preparing first responders. Given your past experience as a State emergency manager, can you please discuss what

you see as the role of the States in preparing first responders?

Also, can you discuss how States can ensure that local governments

receive adequate funding under this initiative?

Mr. FOGG. I guess I would start by answering the last one first.

I think there is a very consistent track record with the States

through the whole disaster preparedness and response system that
33

State emergency management has been fair about distributing resources and seeing that resources get to the local level, and not

taking a lot off the top, so to speak.

In terms of how the role that emergency management plays in

making sure that local first responders have what they need not

only in equipment, but in training and in their mutual aid relationships and everything else, I will go back to that. This is not just

about terrorism. It is about preparedness for all hazards. Emergency management looks and has a history of looking at the whole

system—how do we put all the resources together to best complement and supplement each other? Instead of a community-bycommunity approach, they look at a region within a State; look at

a statewide approach; even look at an inter-State approach toward

getting those local first responders, those incident commanders— and we all know that the local incident commander is in charge— see that they get what they need, when they need it, and that they

get what they asked for.

There is a track record there. We have been doing this I think

quite successfully for years. As an example, a lot of the training

that comes through the Fire Academy has been managed or coordinated through the State Offices of Emergency Management. That

training has been developed jointly between emergency management, fire and in some cases law enforcement folks to make sure

that the local first responders are getting the training they need,

and that they train together. That is a key issue here. It is one of

the things emergency management brings to the table. It does not

have a vested interest and it tries to make sure that everybody

gets what they need and that they work together—work together,

train together, and build a plan and a response capability together.

Senator JEFFORDS. Thank you, and thank you all for that very

helpful testimony. We always reserve the right to bludgeon you

with questions for the mail. I would say do not stand by your mailbox, but anyway, we may have some more questions for you.

You are the front-line people and the Nation depends upon you.

I am confident as we finish your testimony today that certainly we

have got a good system, but it obviously can improve and we all

know that. Our job now is to get out there and improve it.

Thank you very much for your testimony.

[Whereupon at 4:13 p.m., the committee was adjourned, to reconvene at the call of the chair.]

[Additional statements submitted for the record follow:]

STATEMENT OF HON. CHRISTOPHER S. BOND, U.S. SENATOR FROM THE

STATE OF MISSOURI

Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for calling this important hearing on FEMA’s First Responder Initiative.

This hearings is critical to developing the budget priorities for FEMA, especially

the new priorities that are central to the public safety concerns of the Nation as

we seek to minimize the risk of terrorism and its consequences.

The cowardly terrorist attacks on September 11th on the Pentagon, the World

Trade Center and in Pennsylvania is one of the saddest days in the history of our

Nation. However, I can personally attest that the spirit of the American people has

never been stronger or more caring.

Last month, I visited Ground Zero, I talked with survivors as well as many of the

heroic men and women who continue to rebuild from our losses in the aftermath

of this terrible tragedy. I have never been more touched or more proud of our Nation’s ability to stand tall, and to stand unbowed.
34

Nevertheless, we must do more to ensure that States and localities have the needed resources, training and equipment to respond to threats and acts of terrorism

and the consequences of such acts.

In response, the President is proposing to fund FEMA at an unprecedented $3.5

billion for fiscal year 2003 as a further down payment to ensure that the Nation

will not be caught unaware again by a cowardly act of terrorism and is fully capable

of responding to both the threat and consequence of any act of terrorism.

These FEMA funds are targeted to States and localities and are intended to create a safety net of First Responders with firefighters, law enforcement officers and

emergency medical personnel at its heart.

Despite the response to September 11th, the current capacity of our communities

and our First Responders vary widely across the United States, with even the best

prepared States and localities lacking crucial resources and expertise. Many areas

have little or no ability to cope or respond to a terrorist attack, especially ones that

use weapons of mass destruction including biological or chemical toxin.

I have met with volunteer fire departments around Missouri in the last few weeks

and Missouri’s USAR has great appreciation for interest. Real dedication.

The recommended commitment of funding in the President’s Budget is only the

first step. There needs to be a comprehensive approach that identifies and meets

State and local First Responder needs, both rural and urban, pursuant to Federal

leadership, benchmarks and guidelines.

As a result, the roles of the Office of Homeland Security and FEMA need to be

articulated clearly, especially if the Administration expect the Congress to move the

responsibility for law enforcement officers as First Responders from the Department

of Justice to FEMA.

We also need to address the fears of local fire departments, especially rural departments, that some fire departments will be shortchanged if FIRE Act Grant

funds are merged into these First Responder funds and block granted to States. The

FIRE Act Grants program works very well and I am not inclined support the removal of a program that is a hallmark of success.

Finally, I will be introducing a bill that would establish clear authority with a

funding authorization of $150 million for fiscal year 2003 for a National Urban

Search and Rescue Response System.

The Nation currently is served by 28 Urban Search and Rescue Task Forces which

proved to be a key resource in our Nation’s ability to quickly respond to the tragedy

of September 11th. These task forces currently are underfunded and underequipped,

but, nonetheless, are committed to be the front-line soldiers for our local governments in responding to the worst consequences of terrorism at the local level.

I believe we have an obligation to realize fully the capacity of these 28 search and

rescue task forces to meet First Responder events. I hope you will support this legislation.

While I understand that the Administration believes it currently has adequate

legislative authority to meet all First Responder support requirements through

FEMA, the truth is that the urban search and rescue teams have been underfunded

while continuing to perform at the highest levels because they believe in what they

do and understand the importance of their mission. It is time to ensure their ability

to meet their mission as First Responders.

Thank you.

STATEMENT OF HON. JOSEPH M. ALLBAUGH, DIRECTOR, FEDERAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT AGENCY

INTRODUCTION

Good afternoon Chairman Jeffords, Ranking Member Smith and members of the

Committee. I am Joe Allbaugh, Director of the Federal Emergency Management

Agency (FEMA). Thank you for the opportunity to brief you today on FEMA’s First

Responder Initiative. I am honored to appear before a committee that has provided

so much leadership in the areas of mitigation and disaster response and recovery.

FEMA is the Federal Agency responsible for coordinating our Nation’s efforts to

mitigate against, prepare for, respond to and recover from all hazards. Our success

depends on our ability to organize and lead a community of local, State, and Federal

agencies, volunteer organizations, private sector entities and the first responder

community. We know whom to bring to the table when a disaster strikes in order

to ensure the most effective management of the response and recovery effort. We

provide management expertise and financial resources to help State and local governments when they are overwhelmed by disasters.
35

The Federal Response Plan (FRP) forms the heart of our management framework

and lays out the process by which interagency groups work together to respond as

a cohesive team to all types of disasters. This team is made up of 26 Federal departments and agencies, and the American Red Cross, and is organized into 12 emergency support functions based on the authorities and expertise of the members and

the needs of our counterparts at the State and local level.

Since 1992, in all manner of horrific natural disasters like the Northridge Earthquake and Hurricane Floyd and also in response to the Oklahoma City bombing and

the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, the FRP has proven to be an effective

and efficient framework for managing all phases of disasters and emergencies. The

FRP is successful because it builds upon existing professional disciplines, expertise,

delivery systems, and relationships among the participating agencies. FEMA has

strong ties to emergency management organizations—fire service, law enforcement

and emergency medical communities—and we routinely plan, train, exercise, and

operate together to remain prepared to respond and recover from all hazards.

We learn from every disaster experience and incorporate these lessons wherever

possible into our planning and processes to improve the next disaster response. For

example, an assessment of the Oklahoma City bombing led to the creation of the

FEMA Urban Search & Rescue teams as well as the processes for monitoring the

long-term health of 1st responders. The World Trade Center and Pentagon disaster

responses are no different. We have learned from both. We recognize that better

personal protective equipment is needed for our first responders. More training and

exercises, better communications and improved interoperability of the equipment,

and enhanced medical response capabilities and mutual aid agreements are also

needed. I am committed to ensuring that those needs are met.

MEETING THE CHALLENGE AHEAD—OFFICE OF NATIONAL PREPAREDNESS

Although the challenge of meeting these needs may represent an expansion of our

duties, in many respects, FEMA’s role in responding to terrorist attacks was identified well before September 11th. On May 8, 2001, the President tasked me with creating the Office of National Preparedness (ONP) within FEMA to ‘‘coordinate all

Federal programs dealing with weapons of mass destruction consequence management within the Departments of Defense, Health and Human Services, Justice, and

Energy, the Environmental Protection Agency, and other Federal agencies.’’ Additionally, the ONP was directed to ‘‘work closely with State and local governments

to ensure their planning, training, and equipment needs are met.’’

ONP: MISSION AND ACTIVITIES IN SUPPORT OF THE OFFICE OF HOMELAND SECURITY

Following the September 11 attacks, the President appointed Governor Ridge to

head the newly established Office of Homeland Security (OHS) with the charge to

‘‘develop and coordinate the implementation of a comprehensive national strategy to

secure the United States from terrorist threats or attacks.’’ In carrying out this activity, the OHS was tasked to ‘‘coordinate the executive branch’s efforts to detect,

prepare for, prevent, protect against, respond to, and recover from terrorist attacks

within the United States.’’ Since that time, FEMA has been working closely with

Governor Ridge and the OHS, and other agencies to identify and develop the most

effective ways to quickly build and enhance the overall domestic capability to respond to terrorist attacks. In consultation with OHS, FEMA will provide critical

support for homeland security initiatives, particularly in the area of local and State

capability building. FEMA will also have a significant role supporting the development of the national strategy, participating in interagency forums and working

groups, including the Homeland Security Council and Policy Coordinating Committees, and contributing to the interagency budget strategy and formulation process.

The Office of National Preparedness’ (ONP) mission is to provide leadership in the

coordination and facilitation of all Federal efforts to assist State and local first responders (including fire, medical and law enforcement) and emergency management

organizations with planning, training, equipment and exercises necessary to build

and sustain capability to respond to any emergency or disaster, including a terrorist

incident involving a weapon of mass destruction and other natural or manmade hazards.

FEMA has made the following changes to support this expanded mission to support the Office of Homeland Security:

• Realigned preparedness activities from the Readiness, Response and Recovery

Directorate to ONP;

• Realigned all training activities into the U.S. Fire Administration to allow

greater coordination between training for emergency managers and training for firefighters;
36

• Moved the authority for credentialing, training and deploying Urban Search

and Rescue teams from the Readiness, Response and Recovery Directorate to the

U.S. Fire Administration.

ONP ORGANIZATION

The ONP is organized in FEMA Headquarters under a Director (reporting directly

to the FEMA Director) and supported by a Management Services Unit and four Divisions to carry out key its functions to coordinate and implement Federal programs

and activities aimed at building and sustaining the national preparedness capability. The divisions and their functional responsibilities include the following:

• Administration Division.—Provide financial and support services, and management of the grant assistance activities for local and State capability building efforts.

• Program Coordination Division.—Ensure development of a coordinated national

capability involving Federal, State, and local governments, to include citizen participation in the overall efforts to effectively deal with the consequences of terrorist acts

and other incidents within the United States.

• Technological Services Division.—Improve the capabilities of communities to

manage technological hazard emergencies—whether accidental or intentional—and

leverage this capability to enhance the capability for dealing with terrorist attacks.

• Assessment and Exercise Division.—Provide guidance, exercises, and assessments and evaluate progress in meeting National goals for development of a domestic consequence management capability.

We continue to work with all 55 States and territories and federally recognized

Indian Tribes and Alaskan Native Villages to implement our current and other

grant programs to assist State, Tribal and local government to enhance their capabilities to respond to all types of hazards and emergencies including chemical incidents, incidents involving radiological substances and natural disasters.

FIRST RESPONDER INITIATIVE

In his FY 2003 Budget proposal, the President has requested that FEMA receive

$3.5 billion to administer a major component of the Homeland Security efforts—the

First Responder Initiative. Grants based on this initiative will give the first responder community—firefighters, police officers, and emergency medical personnel—

critically needed funds to purchase equipment, train their personnel and prepare for

a Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD)/terrorist incident. The Office of National

Preparedness (ONP) within FEMA will be responsible for administering these First

Responder grants.

Some of the goals established by ONP for the First Responder Initiative are as

follows: Provide States and localities with the proper balance of guidance and flexibility so that the funds are used in the local areas where they are needed most;

• Establish a consolidated, simple, and quick method for disbursing Federal assistance to States and localities;

• Foster mutual aid across the Nation so that the entire local, State, Federal and

volunteer network can operate together seamlessly;

• Create an evaluation process to make sure that all programs are producing results and to direct the allocation of future resources, and;

• Involve all Americans in programs to make their homes, communities, States

and Nation safer and stronger.

In achieving these objectives, FEMA will implement a procedure designed to

speed the flow of resources to the States and localities. Federal funds will then be

used to support State and local governments in four key areas:

• Planning.—Providing support to State and local governments in developing

comprehensive plans to prepare for and respond to a terrorist incident.

• Equipment.—Allowing State and local agencies to purchase a wide range of

equipment needed to respond effectively to a terrorist attack, including better, more

interoperable communications equipment.

• Training.—Provide training to first responders to respond to terrorist incidents

and operate in contaminated environments.

• Exercises.—Develop a coordinated, regular exercise program to improve response capabilities, practice mutual aid, and assess operational improvements and

deficiencies.

The First Responder Initiative builds upon existing capabilities at the Federal,

State, and local level by providing needed resources to improve our response capabilities and strengthen our preparedness as a Nation.
37

THE ROLE OF THE U.S. FIRE ADMINISTRATION

Our Nation’s firefighters will continue to bear an increasing portion of the burden

for Homeland Defense, responding to a variety of emergent issues including terrorism. The U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) will provide the Office of National

Preparedness with essential support through its unique focus on training programs

within the Federal Government. These programs are included in the Agency’s mission-related preparedness and mitigation strategies.

In addition, the Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program remains an important

element in supporting the most pressing needs of at-risk communities and fire service providers in reducing the loss of life and property from fire, including loss of life

and injury to firefighters. As a result of the last year’s appropriations, this Grant

Program received $150 million that must be obligated by September 30 of the current fiscal year. An additional $210 million was received in the Emergency Supplemental that is expendable until September 30, 2003. We expect most of the supplemental appropriation will be obligated in fiscal year 2002 with almost all of the remainder obligated in the first quarter of fiscal year 2003. FEMA is happy to report

that our on-line application system is up and running as of this month.

I would like to again thank the Subcommittee for all of the support they have

given to the fire community over the last few years.

TRANSFER OF THE OFFICE FOR DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS TO FEMA

The President’s budget request also seeks to consolidate our Nation’s preparedness efforts under one Federal Agency; the President has requested that the Office

for Domestic Preparedness (ODP) be transferred from the Department of Justice to

FEMA. With this proposal the President has shown true leadership in his willingness to address a long-standing problem—the need for central coordination among

the myriad of Federal programs dealing with terrorism preparedness.

Some 40 Federal Departments and Agencies have been involved in the overall effort to build the national capability for preparedness and response to the consequences of terrorist incidents. Many of these activities have been primarily focused on the development or enhancement of Federal capabilities to deal with terrorist incidents, including plans, personnel and physical security upgrades, and specialized resources such as protection and detection technology and response teams.

Other Federal programs and activities are focused on building the local and State

first responder and emergency management capabilities, to include the provision of

resources and funding to support planning, training, exercises and equipment acquisition.

Various independent studies and commissions have recognized the problems inherent in this uncoordinated approach. Several recommendations by the Gilmore

Commission, for example, stress the importance of giving States and first responders a single point of contact for Federal assistance for training, exercises and equipment. In its second report issued in December 2000, the commission found that the

‘‘organization of the Federal Government’s programs for combating terrorism is fragmented, uncoordinated, and politically unaccountable.’’

The Commission’s third report issued seven key recommendations regarding State

and local response capabilities. These seven recommendations included:

• Consolidating Federal grant program information and application procedures;

• Designing and scheduling Federal preparedness programs to include first responder participation; and

• Establishing an information clearinghouse in OHS on Federal programs, assets,

and agencies.

These findings and recommendations have been echoed in numerous other Commissions and reports, by the first responder community, and by State and local governments. In recent testimony before the Congress, Chief Ray Alfred spoke on behalf of the International Association of Fire Chiefs. He stated: ‘‘Some of my colleagues in the fires service have . . . spoken of their concerns as to the lack of a

coordinated Federal effort, both in terms of the preparedness and support programs

. . . and the seemingly endless Federal response capabilities that appear duplicative and continue to grow.’’

In the post-9–11 environment, we can ill afford to wage turf battles that in effect

protect the inefficiencies of the status quo. We must instead focus on the merits of

a proposal that seeks to address duplication, shore up gaps, eliminate confusion and

reduce complication. As the attacks of September 11th have drawn much comparison to the attacks of December 7, 1941, there is a forward to a book about Pearl

Harbor that has been brought to my attention that speaks of the worst-case scenario

in a government’s preparation and response:
38

‘‘Surprise, when it happens to a government, is likely to be a complicated, diffuse, bureaucratic thing. It includes neglect of responsibility but also responsibility so poorly defined or so ambiguously delegated that action gets lost . . .

‘‘. . . It includes the contingencies that occur to no one, but also those that

everyone assumes somebody else is taking care of. It includes straightforward

procrastination, but also decisions protracted by internal disagreement. It includes, in addition, the inability of individual human beings to rise to the occasion until they are sure it is the occasion—which is usually too late,’’ (Thomas

Schelling, forward to Roberta Wohlstetter’s Pearl Harbor: Warning and Decision).

The Office of National Preparedness looks forward to building on the grant-making experience accumulated by ODP. The centralization of terrorism preparedness

efforts will enable ONP to enhance the core ODP activities such as exercise development, training, and equipment acquisition to better address the needs of homeland

defense.

CITIZEN CORPS

In order to help Americans strengthen their communities, President Bush tasked

FEMA with overseeing Citizen Corps. This initiative is part of the overall effort of

Freedom Corps, whose mission is to assist individuals and communities with implementing Homeland Security Programs in their areas. Since September 11, 2001,

Americans are more aware than ever of the threat of terrorist acts on home soil.

In the days following the attacks we saw immediate and selfless volunteering, generous monetary gifts, blood donations, and an outpouring of support and patriotism

across America. Sustaining that spirit of volunteerism and unity is crucial to defending the homeland.

Citizen Corp’s broad network of volunteer efforts will harness the power of the

American people by relying on their individual skills and interests to prepare local

communities to effectively prevent and respond to the threats of terrorism, crime,

or any kind of disaster.

Citizen Corps will buildupon existing crime prevention, natural disaster preparedness, and public health response networks. Citizen Corps will initially consist of

participants in the following five programs: the Volunteers in Police Service Program; an expanded Neighborhood Watch Program; the Medical Reserve Corps; Community Emergency Response Teams (CERT), and the Terrorism Information and

Prevention System (TIPS). FEMA has the responsibility for approving additional

programs to be affiliated with Citizen Corps in the future.

Finally, Citizen Corps will bring together local government, law enforcement, educational institutions, the private sector, faith-based groups and volunteers into a cohesive community resource. The Federal role is to provide general information, to

develop training standards and materials, and to identify volunteer programs and

initiatives that support the goals of the Citizen Corps.

MOVING FORWARD

In addition to the President’s plan to provide greater assistance to First Responders, FEMA and ONP are currently implementing a number of other homeland security initiatives. We are working, for example, to foster intergovernmental mutual aid

arrangements so that the entire local, State, Tribal, Federal and volunteer network

can operate seamlessly together. ONP is in the process of establishing a national

strategic exercise program that will ensure our first responders are as well trained

and prepared as possible. It is also preparing a Report to Congress on Terrorism

and Emergency Preparedness and Training that will include a complete accounting

of these and all other Federal emergency and terrorism preparedness training programs and activities. In addition, we are continuing to use the Capability Assessment for Readiness (CAR) report as a means to locate gaps in preparedness, as well

as unmet training needs. All of these activities will strengthen the nation’s capability to respond to a terrorist incident.

CONCLUSION

Operationally, FEMA is well prepared and equipped to respond to an act of terrorism. Following a manmade or natural disaster FEMA will ensure that the Federal Government and its partners provide needed support to disaster victims, first

responders, and local governments. I look forward to working with each of you on

this critical matter, as it will require a commitment from all of us to ensure its continued success.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would be happy to answer any questions you have.
39

RESPONSES BY HON. JOSEPH ALLBAUGH TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM

SENATOR JEFFORDS

Question 1. In your testimony, you note that one mission of the Office of National

Preparedness is to assist State and local communities with ‘‘planning, training,

equipment and exercises necessary to build and sustain capability to respond to any

emergency or disaster, including a terrorist incident involving a weapon of mass destruction and other natural or manmade hazard.’’ Given the fact that children will

respond differently to such emergencies or disasters than adults and therefore will

require specialized health care, what is ONP doing to ensure that various planning,

training and exercise activities are adequately preparing communities to care for

children? Similarly, what is ONP doing to ensure that all communities have the specialized equipment needed to care for children following a disaster or other emergency?

Response. Because State and local governments are in the best position to determine the needs of their citizens, FEMA provides their representatives with funds

and technical assistance to meet those needs, including the needs of their youngest

citizens. Many of the issues that children will face in a terrorism event are similar

to those they would experience in a natural disaster, i.e. fear of the unknown, what

to do, etc. As a result, FEMA is well prepared with existing materials to assist children, and can easily adapt our existing information to address specific terrorism

threats. Immediately following the September 11 attack FEMA put specific information on the website to address children’s concerns, fears and questions. FEMA offers

information on its website geared toward young people and their parents so they

can understand and participate in their family’s and community’s preparedness for

disasters and emergencies. FEMA has developed two sets of curriculum materials

and lesson plans on emergency preparedness—one set geared toward grades K–8,

the other for grades 9–12. FEMA has the ‘‘FEMA for Kids’’ and the ‘‘USFA Kids

Page’’ websites, which provide children an interactive opportunity to learn about fire

and disaster preparedness and safety. Also, FEMA provides a range of disaster public education materials for family preparedness, including the following brochures:

Your Family Disaster Plan, Your Family Disaster Supplies Kit, and Helping Children Cope with Disaster. These publications and curriculum materials were developed jointly by FEMA and the American Red Cross, as part of FEMA’s Community

and Family Preparedness program. If Congress approves the proposed First Responder Initiative, FEMA will administer a program of grants to States, to be used

by States and localities for identifying and addressing their needs in emergency preparedness, which should and must include the needs of children.

Additionally, some communities have reached out to their young people through

the Community Emergency Response Team concept. The Community Emergency

Response Team (CERT) program helps train people to be better prepared to respond

to emergency situations in their communities. CERT members give critical support

to first responders in emergencies, provide immediate assistance to victims, organize

spontaneous volunteers at a disaster site, and collect disaster intelligence to support

first responder efforts.

Allowing someone under 18 to participate is a local decision. Winter Springs High

School in Florida, for example, offers the training to high school students. CERT is

a great way to address the community service requirements for high school students

and provides students with useful skills. CERT also fits nicely with training given

to Boy and Girl Scouts and the Civil Air Patrol. Over 170 communities have listed

their program on the CERT website under the Directory of CERT Programs by

State.

Over the next 2 years, the CERT program aims to double the number of participants, with over 400,000 individuals completing the 18-plus hours of training. Communities in 28 States have initiated CERT training and additional Train-the-Trainer sessions will be held over the next year to expand the program throughout the

United States.

Question 2. You indicate that FEMA’s oversight of the Citizen Corps will include

efforts to develop training standards and materials for the Citizen Corps network.

Two key programs within this network that will be called upon to provide medical

care after an disaster or other emergency are the Medical Reserve Corps and the

Community Emergency Response Teams (CERTs). Given the likelihood that children will require care following a disaster or other emergency, what mechanisms

are in place to ensure that the training standards and materials the Medical Reserve Corps and CERTs receive will adequately prepare them to treat and care for

children?

Response. The Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) will assist

communities with coordinating and training for Medical Reserve Corps volunteers.
40

This oversight will help ensure that the training and materials Medical Reserve

Corps volunteers receive adequately prepares them to treat and care for all members of the community, including children. Medical Reserve Corps volunteers will

provide additional manpower to augment emergency medical response teams during

an emergency and will also play a productive role in meeting non-emergency but

pressing public health needs of the community throughout the year.

CERT members, generally people who do not have the medical background required to be a part of the Medical Reserve Corps, are trained in very basic medical

response skills. These skills are to treat immediate life-threatening injuries of both

adults and children. Team members learn how to stop bleeding, treat for shock,

open airways, triage victims, and provide on-going care until professional help arrives. Some CERT members take additional training such as advanced first aid,

cardiopulmonary resuscitation, and automatic external defibrillators, but this is not

required.

CERT members are told the best source of help following an emergency or disaster is professionally trained responders. Because immediate professional help may

be overwhelmed due to the number of victims, or may be delayed due to communication or transportation failures, the most immediate source of help will be people in

the area. People will try to help each other and CERT training prepares neighborhood and workplace teams for this role.

Question 3. According to your testimony, one role FEMA will be undertaking with

respect to the Citizen Corps is the development of general information to help local

communities effectively prevent and respond to threats of terrorism, crime or other

disasters. Knowing that effective response planning and preparedness efforts must

specifically consider children’s needs in times of disaster, what safeguards are in

place to ensure that FEMA’s information adequately addresses the unique health

needs of infants, children, adolescents and young adults?

Response. The safeguards that are in place to ensure that information developed

by FEMA in cooperation with our partners addresses the unique health needs of infants, children, adolescents and young adults are based on two basic principles, tested and proven over time: (1) coordination among the range of authoritative sources

of the expertise required to prepare for all of the ways in which each kind of disaster or crime can injure or kill children and youth, including their special

vulnerabilities because of age and inexperience; and (2) the science, engineering and

associated methods of analysis and evaluation that can assure the validity of data,

information and the results that are made available to the relevant professions,

families and caregivers as well as to the general public.

The coordination is accomplished through administrative management arrangements among responsible agencies—the heart of interagency coordination. Second,

quality control is drawn from the methods of scientific inquiry and analysis and the

accumulated knowledge and expertise of those qualified to understand its application to the health and medical needs of infants, children, adolescents and young

adults in emergencies and disasters—as well as the needs of mature adults, the elderly, those challenged by a range of permanent injuries and disabilities, and those

whose social, geographic, economic, ethnic and linguistic circumstances limit their

ability to get the help they need to prevent or deal with threats of death and injury.

FEMA and its Federal Response Plan partners have an impressive array of emergency public information and disaster public education materials, including a number that are relevant to the young. FEMA for Kids, on the web at http://fema.gov/

kids, is designed for children and for those responsible for their care and education.

Most publications listed there are available both in print and on our websites in a

form to be downloaded.

Many of these are already identified and are being reviewed to determine needed

modification to meet the needs of the War on Terrorism. They will also be upgraded

in other ways, based on recent experience, research and lessons learned. Among

those in FEMA’s library of materials are the following that are pertinent to the

young:

• Helping Children Cope with Disaster (English & Spanish)

• The Disaster Twins: The Adventures of Julia and Robbie (English & Spanish)

• Jason and Robin’s Awesome Hurricane Adventure (Comic book and video)

• Adventures of the Disaster Dudes (video)

• Disaster Preparedness Coloring Book (English & Spanish)

• Your Family Disaster Plan (English & Spanish) (Includes information for helping children as their families form disaster plans.)

• Your Family Disaster Supplies Kit (English & Spanish)

• Are You Ready? A Guide to Citizen Preparedness

• Family Earthquake Safety Home Hazard Hunt and Drill
41

• Tremor Troop: Earth Quakes (K–3 Curriculum) and Seismic Sleuths (4–6 Curriculum) (These are used with a train-the-trainer course for teachers to take before

introducing the curriculum package in their school systems.) • Multi-Hazard Program for Schools (Training course for school emergency planning team, adapted for school violence and includes possibility of terrorist event.)

Curricula in process:

• Risk Watch: Natural Hazards Curriculum K–8, National Fire Protection Association. • Natural Hazards. (Grades 8–12). Internet and interactive CD ROM under development with FEMA sponsorship at Purdue University Agricultural Center for 4-H

and other youth programs.

The specific safeguards include U.S. Public Health Service primacy and interagency clearance of information materials that are developed for or adapted to the

health and medical consequences of terrorism. Participating Departments and Agencies follow the principles of coordination among lead and support agencies for each

Emergency Support Function (ESF) under the Federal Response Plan (FRP) for disaster response and recovery, including operational guidance as well as public information for public health and medical care in preparedness and response to terrorism by government agencies at all levels. The U.S. Public Health Service, Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS), has primary responsibility to provide

assistance for public health and medical care needs (ESF 7), and is the lead Agency

for approving health and medical information materials that will be available

through FEMA. One area in particular, psychological counseling for disaster trauma

authorized as a service under disaster relief provisions of the Stafford Act, already

includes special expertise for counseling children through the National Disaster

Medical System, and has been applied to incidents of school violence as well as

Presidentially declared major disasters.

The lead agencies and associated organizations that will be actively involved in

the development of emergency public information and disaster public education materials are the Office of Emergency Preparedness, Office of the Assistant Secretary

for Health, and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, U.S. Department

of Health and Human Services; Food Safety and Inspection Service, and State Cooperative Education and Extension Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture; National

Weather Service, National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, U.S. Department of Commerce; U.S. Geological Survey, U.S. Department of the Interior; the

American Red Cross; the National Fire Protection Association; the International Association for Emergency Management; and the Institute for Business and Home

Safety.

An informal, interagency National Disaster Education Coalition (NDEC) at the

staff level has served for several years to coordinate updating of disaster public education materials, to coordinate technical input from lead agencies and reach consensus on effective messages for the public that are technically correct and consistent, so they will not confuse the public by differences in language or emphasis.

These include some protective measures to prevent injury and death.

Second, the U.S. Fire Administration, along with FEMA, chairs and administers

the Federal Interagency Committee on Emergency Medical Services (FICEMS),

which serves as a forum to establish and facilitate effective communications and coordination between and among Federal departments and agencies involved in activities related to EMS. Other participating Departments and Agencies include U.S. Department of Health and Human Services/Office of the Assistant Secretary for Health

and the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, U.S. Department of

Defense, Veterans Administration, U.S. Department of Transportation/National

Highway Transportation Safety Administration, U.S. Department of Interior/Bureau

of Land Management, Bureau of Indian Affairs and National Park Service, U.S. Department of State/Agency for International Development, U.S. Department of Justice/Office of Justice Programs and Federal Bureau of Investigation, and U.S. Department of Labor/Occupational Safety and Health Administration. FICEMS develops recommendations that will:

• Strengthen the communication and coordination of Federal policies and programs;

• Promote harmony and avoid duplication of efforts;

• Promote uniformity of standards and policies consistent with existing Federal

laws and regulations regarding EMS.

FICEMS also maintains a liaison with national EMS trade and professional organizations to ensure effective two-way communications concerning EMS issues, committee policies and programs, and Federal activities related to EMS.

FEMA was last involved in a major effort to develop appropriate standby public

information concerning terrorism during Desert Shield and Desert Storm. FEMA
42

worked with other members of the Special Working Group’s Chemical, Biological

and Radiological Research and Development Subgroup (CBRRDS), drawing on published U.S. military and NATO guidance for military personnel, and public information issued daily to the public on television and in the Jerusalem Post during Scud

missile attacks and the Iraqi threat of chemical and biological agents. The information assembled at that time addressed incendiary and explosive events as well as

chemical, biological and radiological weapons of mass destruction. Current understanding of threats and hazards from terrorism requires a more extensive analysis

of the innovative ways in which terrorists might utilize the range of weapons they

have employed or threatened to use, cyber- and agro-terrorism, as well as identifying potential means of terrorism not yet identified, health effects, and preventive

and treatment information for the general public.

As the interagency groups address the current need, they will also draw on sponsored research in Government scientific organizations and laboratories, Government-sponsored research and engineering programs in universities, the National

Academy of Science/National Research Council, which have conducted disaster research for decades and have an illustrious history of bringing the cutting edge of

science to national security problems, and established authorities in industrial sabotage and terrorism with potential for direct or intended indirect health and medical

consequences.

RESPONSES BY HON. JOSEPH ALLBAUGH TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM

SENATOR SMITH

Question 1. There has been some question as to whether FEMA is the right Agency to lead the First Responder programs, specifically as it relates to the relocation

of the Office of Domestic Preparedness: There are few points that have been raised

that I would like you to address:

(1) FEMA is not a grant Agency

(2) ODP programs are primarily law enforcement

(3) They already have training facilities; and

(4) Is FEMA the best option to act as the coordinating Agency

Response. Consistent with its responsibility for consequence management, over

the last several years FEMA has provided training as well as preparedness planning assistance, technical guidance, and exercise support to State emergency management organizations and first responders in the fire service, emergency medical,

and law enforcement communities. Since 2000, FEMA has administered approximately $6.9 billion in grants on a multitude of programs. In addition, FEMA regularly reimburses law enforcement agencies through grants to the States for their response in all-hazard disasters, particularly for emergency protective measures.

FEMA’s mission regarding the First Responder Initiative will be to provide leadership in the coordination and facilitation of this program. FEMA will serve as the

‘‘single point of contact’’ for State and local governments. Consolidating and simplifying Federal grant program information and application procedures was recommended by a number of Commissions as well as State and local agencies.

FEMA has an established history of working with State and local governments

and the first responder community to prepare for, mitigate against, and respond to

natural disasters. Our core mission is to provide leadership and support to reduce

the loss of life and property and to protect our Nation’s institutions from all types

of hazards through a comprehensive, risk-based, all-hazards approach. As evidenced

in the Federal Response Plan, FEMA coordinates all facets of emergency management without directly ‘‘owning’’ many of the specific programs and activities. This

permits FEMA to remain unbiased, allowing us to coordinate programs in the most

effective manner possible.

FEMA has experience in providing grants for both day-to-day preparedness and

disaster recovery efforts. FEMA has particular experience in working with law enforcement organizations for emergency management functions, and regularly reimburses law enforcement agencies through grants to the States for their response in

all-hazard disasters, particularly for emergency protective measures.

Through the National Emergency Training Center in Emmitsburg, FEMA offers

a nationwide program of instruction for emergency management officials through its

regional offices. Most of this training is conducted in partnership with State emergency management offices and the Metro Chiefs organization. Courses include Introduction to Emergency Management; Emergency Planning; Developing Volunteer Resources; Exercise Design; Community Emergency Response Training; Disaster Response and Recovery Operations; Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Management

and Operations; Strategic Considerations for Command Officers, among others. In
43

many respects, FEMA has already been helping to coordinate the training conducted

by ODP. ODP training is based on National Fire Protection Association standards,

and ODP staff has established regular and recurring meetings with the National

Fire Academy to discuss and coordinate WMD training development. In essence,

staff currently at ODP will be performing these same functions simply at FEMA

where the coordination already exists.

FEMA is well qualified to coordinate First Responder assistance programs by virtue of our mission, capabilities, and experience. FEMA’s statutory mission is to help

States and localities prepare for disasters—natural or man made—by carrying out

exercises, providing grants, and offering training and technical assistance. FEMA

derives this authority from its primary disaster relief and assistance statute, the

Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, as amended (42

U.S.C. 5121 et. seq.).

Question 2. Could you provide us background on where things stand at the Office

of National Preparedness: what are the priorities, resource needs and timeline for

developing a long-term plan and becoming fully operational? What is the process for

the development of the plan?

Response. The Office of National Preparedness’ (ONP) mission is to provide leadership in the coordination and facilitation of all Federal efforts to assist State and

local first responders (including fire, medical and law enforcement) and emergency

management organizations with planning, training, equipment and exercises necessary to build and sustain capability to respond to any emergency or disaster, including a terrorist incident involving a weapon of mass destruction and other natural or manmade hazards.

FEMA has made the following changes to support this expanded mission:

• Realigned preparedness activities from the Readiness, Response and Recovery

Directorate to ONP;

• Realigned all training activities into the U.S. Fire Administration to allow

greater coordination between training for emergency managers and training for firefighters;

• Moved the authority for credentialing, training and deploying Urban Search

and Rescue teams from the Readiness, Response and Recovery Directorate to the

U.S. Fire Administration.

The ONP is organized in FEMA Headquarters under a Director (reporting directly

to the FEMA Director) and supported by a Management Services Unit and four Divisions to carry out its functions to coordinate and implement Federal programs and

activities aimed at building and sustaining the national preparedness capability.

The divisions and their functional responsibilities include the following:

• Administration Division—Provide financial and support services, and management of the grant assistance activities for local and State capability building efforts.

• Program Coordination Division—Ensure development of a coordinated national

capability involving Federal, State, and local governments, to include citizen participation in the overall efforts to effectively deal with the consequences of terrorist acts

and other incidents within the United States.

• Technological Services Division—Improve the capabilities of communities to

manage technological hazard emergencies—whether accidental or intentional—and

leverage this capability to enhance the capability for dealing with terrorist attacks.

• Assessment and Exercise—Provide guidance, exercise, and assess and evaluate

progress in meeting National goals for development of a domestic consequence management capability.

We continue to work with all 50 States and territories to implement our current

and other grant programs to assist State, Tribal and local government to enhance

their capabilities to respond to all types of hazards and emergencies.

RESPONSES BY HON. JOSEPH ALLBAUGH TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM

SENATOR VOINOVICH

Question 1. When will FEMA coordinate the collection of information from Federal

agencies like EPA and NIOSH and make a report to Congress and First Responder

teams detailing the types and levels of exposure to toxins at the World Trade Center

site?

Response. This information is already being collected and analyzed by the New

York City Department of Health and the New York State Department of Health and

associated academic institutions, as part of a number of ongoing research and analysis activities being coordinated with the National Institute of Environmental

Health Sciences (NIEHS).
44

Question 2. What medical surveillance systems does FEMA currently have in

place that will track the occurrence of adverse health (specifically respiratory) reactions for First Responders at Ground Zero?

Response. As we watched the images of fire and smoke on September 11 and the

days that followed, FEMA immediately recognized problems with air quality and the

potential risk to rescue worker health. FEMA moved quickly to assign a mission for

air monitoring to the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), through the Federal

Response Plan. EPA monitoring results were reported during twice-daily interagency briefings. This information was conveyed to emergency teams in the field.

FEMA coordinated efforts with local incident management officials and supporting

Federal agencies, including EPA, to determine and specify levels of personal protective equipment needed for rescue workers. Appropriate levels of personnel protective

equipment are largely based on the presence of harmful agents found during monitoring. A P–100 cartridge respirator was determined to provide an appropriate level

of protection for those working at Ground Zero. FEMA procured, delivered and supplied this equipment onsite.

On February 20, 2002, the Director requested the Urban Search and Rescue Task

Force leaders to identify Task Force personnel deployed to the WTC, in an effort

to identify those personnel who believed they may have a medical condition related

to the event. They were instructed to contact FEMA’s Workers’ Compensation Center to record, file and if necessary, process health-related claims for all National

Urban Search & Rescue workers who responded to Ground Zero and the Pentagon.

When medical treatment is required, the Compensation Center works with the Department of Labor’s Office of Workers Compensation Program to establish a case

number and ensure needed medical attention. FEMA has surveyed all participating

Task Forces to develop data on the members who worked these disasters, and to

determine the amount of time they worked in the impacted areas. The Task Forces

continue to submit information to FEMA for compilation and tracking. FEMA has

also provided $9 million to the Public Health Service to conduct baseline testing of

first responders. Blood samples were taken from 11,000 fire fighters and 4,000 New

York State employees.

Records on file will ensure future medical treatment coverage should that be

needed. This system, as established, will allow the Agency to monitor the nature

and extent of illnesses associated with US&R personnel involved in the September

11 response. FEMA is monitoring the US&R responder health issues and processing

all workers compensation claims received from the Task Forces.

Question 3. How will FEMA ensure that the funds allocated to this First Responder Initiative will not be used to augment the Firefighters Grant Program?

Response. The two programs are fundamentally different in that the Assistance

to Firefighters Grant Program is designed to provide basic assistance directly to

local fire departments and the First Responder Program is designed to provide assistance to the local governments through the State for specialized WMD training

and equipment. The Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program is currently underway. FEMA will be distributing the entire $360 million fiscal year 2002 appropriation by the end of this calendar year. The Assistance to Firefighters Grant Program

provides basic needs, including firefighting gear and equipment, personal protective

clothing, firefighting vehicles, etc. The First Responder Program is far more specialized than the basic fire grant program. It is designed to provide WMD equipment

and training. This is The First Responder Program will help to increase the level

of preparedness for our first responders above and beyond their basic day-to-day responsibilities. While it is true that there is some overlap on certain protective equipment and training due to recent changes in the Fire Grant statute, this will be the

exception rather than the rule.

Question 4. What challenges exist that may prevent FEMA from fulfilling the mission of this Initiative? What plans are underway to adequately overcome these challenges?

Response. As numerous studies have reminded us all, the Federal Government’s

efforts related to terrorism preparedness are vast and complex. Our major challenge

is to work constantly on our relationships, without becoming too overwhelmed with

day-to-day urgent actions, so that there is a cooperative and willing exchange of information. Without constant attention to these relationships, we will have difficulty

exercising leadership on program implementation.

We are working on cementing interagency coordination and cooperation at the

level of program implementation. We have held monthly meetings with senior representatives of our partner agencies to make them aware of what we are doing, invite their comments, and solicit information from them on their own efforts. We

have detailees from several agencies to ensure close day-to-day coordination, and are
45

still seeking detailees from others. We are continually discovering efforts that can

be related and made to work together. The issue of communications interoperability

is an excellent example of this coordination. FEMA along with the Department of

the Treasury and are the managing partners for the Wireless Public Safety Interoperable Communications Program, or Project SAFECOM for short. Project

SAFECOM is an interagency initiative, and all Federal Government programs and

resources currently devoted to public safety wireless communications interoperability are to be consolidated under this initiative. The objective is to eliminate duplication, improve business processes, and ensure the successful delivery of interoperable wireless communications solutions to customers at the Federal, State and

local levels.

Question 5. How will FEMA ensure that local emergency management infrastructures become capable of handling the significant effort proposed in the President’s budget and have the capacity to respond to disasters caused by terrorists as well

as natural disasters?

Response. The Office of National Preparedness will be hosting a series of meetings

to solicit ideas from key stakeholders, including law enforcement, fire service, the

emergency medical community, and State and local emergency management directors, and congressional staff, and on how to develop the first responder grant process. We are soliciting information on State and local grant management processes

and capabilities, as well as any potential State and local legislative, regulatory, or

budget hurdles to effective implementation of the program. We also will meet with

of some of our key interagency partners to solicit their lessons learned from similar

program efforts. We will provide planning guidance and technical assistance to

State and local governments on the basis of what we learn in this process. FEMA

also has experience working with State and local governments on very large postdisaster grants, and we will apply relevant lessons from that process to the effort.

Precisely by readying the administrative side of the emergency management and

responder community to receive and expend the grants, we will be setting the stage

to increase local capacity to respond to terrorism and other disasters. The President’s First Responder Initiative would provide $3.5 billion in funding to support

planning, exercises, training, and equipment—including interoperable communications.

If communities are interested in receiving these funds, then the Federal Government can create an incentive for all facets of the State and local response community to converge over time into a nationwide response system. For example, under

the First Responder Initiative, it is proposed that participating in a mutual aid

agreement be a condition of eligibility. The Federal Government would thereby create an incentive for communities to work together Regionally to pool their resources

and plan together: all would benefit. To underpin this requirement, we have to develop a common language for discussing capabilities. Therefore, we are working with

the National Emergency Management Association on a resource typing initiative.

Initially, this is to support interstate mutual aid under the Emergency Management

Assistance Compact, of which almost every U.S. State and Territory is a member,

but its acceptance by States should lead over time to widespread local acceptance.

Resource typing amounts to providing standard definitions of certain capabilities;

for example, the definition for a certain type of team would specify its staffing, the

training and certification of its various personnel, what equipment it brings, and

what its logistical or sustainment requirements are. This provides a common language for requesting or planning for mutual aid, and for surveying what capability

exists in the country. It is a necessary foundation for effective interstate and intrastate mutual aid arrangements, and we are excited to be working in this area because it will promote true interoperability over time. Either the standard resource

typing definitions will lead to development of specific standards on training and

equipment specifications, or de facto standards will evolve naturally as more communities work together across jurisdictional boundaries.

Question 6. What assistance and/or training has FEMA offered to First Responder

teams to help them understand and process Federal medical claims forms and reimbursement paperwork?

Response. On February 20, 2002, the Director requested the Urban Search and

Rescue Task Force leaders to identify Task Force personnel who deployed to the

WTC, in an effort to identify those personnel who believed they may have a medical

condition related to the event. They were instructed to contact FEMA’s Workers’

Compensation Center to record, file and if necessary, process health-related claims

for all National Urban Search & Rescue workers who responded to Ground Zero and

the Pentagon. When medical treatment is required, the Compensation Center works

with the Department of Labor’s Office of Workers Compensation Program to estab-
46

lish a case number and ensure needed medical attention. Records on file will ensure

future medical treatment coverage should that be needed. This system allows the

Agency to monitor the nature and extent of illnesses associated with US&R personnel involved in the September 11 response. FEMA continues to advise, instruct

and inform Urban Search and Rescue workers regarding this process through several communications sources including: briefings, memos, and a US&R Newsletter.

A brochure describing the FEMA Workers Compensation Program was also produced and delivered to US&R Task Forces.

FEMA will also provide $20 million in funding to establish a comprehensive

health registry to track the long-term health effects of all people (including first responders) who were subject to exposure from potential toxins in the post-collapse

environment surrounding the World Trade Center. It will be done through an interagency agreement with the Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry

(ATSDR) of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). This interagency

agreement is expected to be approved no later than the end of June.

RESPONSES BY HON. JOSEPH ALLBAUGH TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM

SENATOR CLINTON

Question 1. First Responder Initiative.—Director Allbaugh, you described the

First Responder Initiative as having four areas: planning, equipment, training, and

exercises. As I’m sure you know, one of the biggest expenses for local communities

is for overtime for first responders because of the incredible increased demands

being placed on them for the purposes of homeland security. (ONP)

Under the President’s Initiative, would local communities be able to use funds for

overtime expenses attributable to homeland security? If not, why not?

With respect to funding getting to local communities, how will the Administration

ensure that much-needed funds get to local communities quickly?

Will all local communities: counties, cities, towns, etc. be eligible to receive funding?

Who will determine what communities receive funding and in what amounts?

How will the funding level for each State or locality be determined? If risk is involved in determining the funding level, how is risk defined and how would risk be

measured for funding purposes?

Response. Local communities will not be able to use the First Responder Initiative

grants for overtime expenses attributable to homeland security. Overtime pay is

part of an employee’s salary and benefits package and therefore not eligible for

grant funding. However, the funding will have a matching requirement, and in-kind

matches will be allowable. This match can be part of the costs local governments

have incurred paying overtime to employees who are providing coverage for other

employees participating in exercises or training.

Because grants will be managed by the States, FEMA will ensure that muchneeded funds get to local communities quickly. Each State will submit an application for Federal assistance. FEMA will make awards, and the Governors will determine the allocation of funds among their localities. It is the intent of the program

that the assistance will reach the local level within 30 days after the State receives

its award from FEMA. States will follow their own laws and procedures when

awarding and administering subgrants of financial assistance to localities and Indian tribal governments. All local communities will be eligible to receive funding.

In fiscal year 2002, grant funds will be distributed based on population. In fiscal

year 2003, each State will receive a base allocation of $5 million. The remaining

funds will be distributed to each State based on population. States will be allowed

to keep up to 25 percent of the funds (some Governors may chose to use this share

to address statewide interoperable communications issues and to retain and

strengthen some emergency management capabilities at the State level), with at

least 75 percent distributed to local jurisdictions.

Question 2. Health Monitoring.—Director Allbaugh, in your testimony, you mentioned the creation of processes for monitoring the long-term health of first responders in response to the Oklahoma City bombing. As you know, this is an issue that

many of my colleagues on this Committee and I have a significant interest in. Can

you please tell us how these processes are being implemented in response to the

September 11 attacks on the Pentagon and the World Trade Center?

Response. FEMA will provide $20 million in funding to establish a comprehensive

health registry to track the long-term health effects of all people (including first responders) who were subject to exposure from potential toxins in the post-collapse

environment surrounding the World Trade Center. It will be done through an interagency agreement with the Agency for Toxic Substance and Disease Registry
47

(ATSDR) of the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). This interagency

agreement is expected to be approved no later than the end of June.

In addition, on February 20, 2002, the Director requested the Urban Search and

Rescue Task Force leaders to identify Task Force personnel who deployed to the

WTC, in an effort to identify those personnel who believed they may have a medical

condition related to the event. They were instructed to contact FEMA’s Workers’

Compensation Center to record, file and if necessary, process health-related claims

for all National Urban Search & Rescue workers who responded to Ground Zero and

the Pentagon. When medical treatment is required, the Compensation Center works

with the Department of Labor’s Office of Workers Compensation Program to establish a case number and ensure needed medical attention. Records on file will ensure

future medical treatment coverage should that be needed. This system allows the

Agency to monitor the nature and extent of illnesses associated with US&R personnel involved in the September 11 response. FEMA continues to advise, instruct

and inform Urban Search and Rescue workers regarding this process through several communications sources including: briefings, memos, and a US&R Newsletter.

A brochure describing the FEMA Workers Compensation Program was also produced and delivered to US&R Task Forces.

Question 3. Personal Protective Equipment.—Director Allbaugh, in your testimony, you discussed four key areas in which Federal funds will be used as part of

this new First Responders Initiative to support State and local governments. One

of these areas is the purchase of a wide range of equipment needed to respond effectively. As you know, in the case of the World Trade Center, as Dr. Kerry Kelly,

Chief Medical Officer for the New York City Fire Department, testified at our field

hearing in New York City last month, respirators were not available for all members working at the site, certainly not in the first few days. Dr. Kelly also testified

that many firefighters also found it more difficult to operate while wearing respirators, which seems to indicate that there is a need to develop new and improved

equipment. Would funds be made available through this new Initiative for the purchase of personal protective equipment (respirators, etc.), as well as for the development of new, more innovative equipment that meets the needs of first responders

working in a situation such as that experienced at the World Trade Center?

Response. The First Responder Initiative provides funding to allow State and local

first responder agencies to purchase a wide range of equipment needed to respond

effectively to a terrorist attack, including personal protective equipment, chemical

and biological detection systems, and interoperable communications gear. It is important that States and local governments, as part of their emergency preparedness

planning, take into account the need for readily available equipment. It is also important that FEMA, working with other Federal agencies, identify where additional

equipment can be obtained and utilize FEMA’s strong logistics program to quickly

deliver the requested resources to the areas affected. There is a wide variety of respiratory protective gear currently available for first responders and many new innovations are coming online. While the First Responder Grant Program does not have

specific funding for research and development of new protective equipment, FEMA

is working with the National Institute for Standards and Technology, the CDC, as

well as several technology transfer think tanks, to look at technology that has been

developed by the military, NASA and academia that can be made available to the

first responder community to increase their level of protection and comfort.

Question 4. Emergency Preparedness at Nuclear Power Plants.—Director

Allbaugh, in your testimony, you mention providing assistance to State and local

governments to enhance their capabilities to respond to all types of hazards and

emergencies including incidents involving radiological substances. As you know,

there is significant concern in New York regarding the Indian Point nuclear power

plant in Westchester County, New York where I happen to live. Can you please explain what role FEMA is playing in ensuring emergency preparedness at Indian

Point and all nuclear power plants in the country in the wake of 9–11, particularly

in light of reports by President Bush and others in the Administration that nuclear

power plants are in fact a possible terrorist target? How will the new initiative specifically help to increase security at and around our Nation’s commercial power

plants?

Response. FEMA is the lead Federal Agency for planning and preparedness for

all types of peacetime radiological emergencies. This includes planning and preparedness for accidents at commercial nuclear power plants. In accordance with a

Presidential Directive and Federal mandates, FEMA issues policy and guidance to

assist State and local governments in developing and implementing their radiological emergency response plans and procedures. Much of this guidance is devel-
48

oped with the assistance of the Federal Radiological Preparedness Coordinating

Committee (FRPCC) and its member agencies.

FEMA-REP–14, ‘‘Radiological Emergency Preparedness Exercise Manual’’ and

FEMA-REP–15, ‘‘Radiological Emergency Preparedness Exercise Evaluation Methodology,’’ have served as the principal documents which FEMA uses in planning and

preparing for, conducting, and evaluating all REP exercises. These documents have

been valuable tools for assessing the adequacy and implementability of State and

local governments’ radiological emergency preparedness plans and procedures.

FEMA-REP–14 assists State and local offsite response organizations in planning,

preparing for, and evaluating REP exercises. Specifically, FEMA-REP–14 provides

basic guidance relative to the interpretation and application of the planning standards and evaluation criteria. These planning standards and evaluation criteria have

been restated in FEMA-REP–14 in the form of 33 REP objectives which are to be

demonstrated by the offsite response organizations at the REP biennial exercises.

Each objective addresses the offsite response organization’s capability to carry out

specific radiological emergency functions such as communications, mobilization of

emergency response personnel, dose assessment, protective action decisionmaking

and implementation, public alerting and notification, evacuee monitoring and decontamination, etc.

Similarly, FEMA-REP–15 assists FEMA and other Federal agencies in the uniform and consistent documentation of the performance of the offsite response organizations during REP exercises. REP exercises are designed to test the capability of

offsite response organizations to protect the public health and safety through the

implementation of their emergency response plans and procedures under simulated

accident conditions. FEMA-REP–15 contains a set of 33 multi-page evaluation

forms, one for each of the 33 REP objectives, consisting of a series of short questions

or prompts (points of review) for each REP objective to facilitate the exercise evaluator’s systematic collection and documentation of essential data and information

required by FEMA and the Nuclear Regulatory Commission for making findings on

the adequacy of offsite radiological emergency planning and preparedness.

In the introduction of the First Responder Initiative, President Bush proposed increased funding to strengthen, build, and sustain first responder capabilities. With

the support of Federal agencies as well as the States, these first responders have

the ability to determine the success with which America handles attacks involving

weapons of mass destruction, including radiological attacks.

Question 5. Funds for New York City.—With congressional approval of the resources announced last week by the President to be included in the Supplemental

appropriations request expected in the next week or two, there will be nearly $9 billion flowing through FEMA for debris removal, emergency construction contracts

and rebuilding stemming from the attacks of September 11th.

As I know you would agree from your several trips to Lower Manhattan over the

past 6 months, these resources are tremendously important for New York’s recovery.

But as important as the availability of the dollars is removing the barriers that may

currently exist in the Stafford Act to effectively using the dollars.

I think its fair to say that the Stafford Act never imagined the type of act or magnitude of destruction that was thrust upon us on the 11th of September. And, as

a result, New York has incurred costs directly related to the attacks but that don’t

fall into any of the boxes of reimbursable activities, such as:

Salary for city employees for the thousands of hours of straight time for those

pulled off their regular duties to respond to the attacks. We now have tremendous

backlogs for various administrative activities, sanitation services, and correctional

activities, to name a few. For example, security guards from correctional facilities

were pulled off their normal duties to help with security at airports, tunnels, and

bridges. Not surprisingly, we now have backlogs.

Response. FEMA regulations provide that the straight time salaries of an applicant’s regular employees will not be reimbursed for their disaster response duty because these salaries were budgeted already. Overtime of these employees is reimbursable. The work that is now required to deal with the administrative backlog is

not eligible disaster work. Salaries, including overtime, of employees used to backfill

positions while primary employees were deployed to emergency activities are eligible

for reimbursement. There are, however, some activities for which neither the primary employee’s salary nor the backfill employee’s salary is eligible. When the attacks occurred, security at airports and many other facilities was increased. While

these expenses were caused by the event, they were not in direct response to the

event and are therefore ineligible.

While a great deal of additional funding may be provided to FEMA for expenses

in New York, there have been no changes to the Stafford Act or specific exceptions
49

directed by Congress at this time. Therefore, it is incumbent upon FEMA to administer the disaster assistance program in accordance with that law.

Question 6. Full compensation for the computers, dump trucks and other purchases that was necessary in responding to the attacks. The city had to make purchases not only to replace damaged and destroyed equipment, but additional purchases to develop a communication infrastructure, to keep records, and to haul

trash, to name a few. These are purchases that would never have been made were

it not for the attacks.

Response. Equipment and supplies that are purchased for the performance of eligible emergency response activities are generally eligible for reimbursement. Extensive purchases for such items have been approved in the WTC disaster. However,

durable equipment (i.e., cost over $5,000 per unit) must have its salvage value at

the end of the emergency period returned to FEMA. These recoveries are evaluated

individually and in many cases there may be no salvage value to be returned.

Question 7. As you’ve heard in previous hearings, there is also the issue of what

constitutes a critical service (non-critical service providers must first seek assistance

through SBA).

Response. The current definition of critical services comes directly from the

amendments to the Stafford Act made by the Disaster Mitigation Act of 2000 (P.L.

106–390) or from congressional guidance. Absent any further guidance, FEMA is not

planning any changes to the list of facilities that are not required to apply for an

SBA loan before requesting assistance from FEMA.

RESPONSE BY HON. JOSEPH ALLBAUGH TO ADDITIONAL QUESTION FROM

SENATOR WARNER

Question. I applaud the President’s initiative to provide critical resources to local

police, fire and rescue personnel. We saw first-hand how critical local fire and police

were in responding to the attack on the Pentagon as Arlington County was the first

onsite and ultimately became the on-scene coordinator for all recovery efforts. Also,

every major fire department in the metropolitan Washington area provided critical

resources to the Pentagon facility. Many of us are very interested in the criteria

that FEMA will use to allocate the First Responder grant funds. I believe we all

know that many local fire and police departments are the only resources to protect

critical Federal installations. The Virginia example is very telling. We know that Arlington County, and other local departments, are the only responders for major Federal installations from the Pentagon to the CIA. Elsewhere in Virginia, local fire

and police are the first responders to major defense installations in the Hampton

Roads area. Can you tell me to what degree will protecting critical Federal facilities

factor into FEMA’s criteria for this new First Responder Initiative?

Response. The First Responder Initiative will provide assistance to State and local

governments to enhance the homeland security response capabilities of America’s

first responders and improve our ability to prepare for and respond to an act of terrorism. This initiative will give the first responder community critically needed

funds to purchase equipment, train and exercise their personnel, and plan; and provide States and localities with the flexibility they require to ensure that the funds

are used in the local areas where they are needed most. Critical facilities would be

a key consideration in the development of State and local plans, training and exercise programs as well as the provision of equipment.

FEMA plans to deliver these funds through grants to States. These funds will be

allocated to States, with each State receiving a base amount and additional funds

supplied by means of a population-based formula. This funding will provide for the

needs of all 50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the territories, and insular areas.

The program will be run through, and coordinated by States. As a condition of

receiving these grants, States will submit their own plans, receive plans from local

jurisdictions, and allocate funding based on locally driven needs identified through

plans and assessments. We believe the States are in the best position to determine

first responder needs in relation to critical facilities that are located within their jurisdictions.

STATEMENT OF WOODBURY P. FOGG, P.E. ON BEHALF OF NATIONAL EMERGENCY

MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Smith and Members of the Committee:
50

Thank you for the opportunity to appear before you today to offer comments on

the proposed first responder program. My name is Woody Fogg and I am testifying

on behalf of the National Emergency Management Association (NEMA). Most recently, I served as the Director of the Office of Emergency Management for the

State of New Hampshire for the past 4 years. As a member of NEMA, I have served

as the Co-Chair for NEMA’s Terrorism Committee.

NEMA’s members include the directors of emergency management for all the

States and territories, who are responsible to their Governors for disaster mitigation, preparedness, response and recovery. This includes responsibility for terrorism

consequence management and preparedness.

Long before September 11, 2001, NEMA had established itself as a leader in providing input to Congress and Federal agencies on issues of domestic preparedness.

States have been in the forefront of preparing for and responding to all types of disasters, both natural and man-made. We take an all-hazards approach to disaster

preparedness and have integrated our domestic preparedness efforts into the proven

systems we already use for dealing with both man-made and natural disasters. We

also recognize clearly the value of prevention and mitigation in minimizing the consequences of disasters and we incorporate those considerations in all our efforts.

PROPOSED FIRST RESPONDER PROGRAM

In my testimony today, I’m going to make five key points about the proposed first

responder program:

(1) All efforts need to be coordinated through the States;

(2) State and local governments need programs to be flexible enough for personnel

to manage;

(3) Standards must be developed to ensure interoperability of equipment, communications, and training;

(4) Mutual aid—both intrastate and interstate—is a key component to capacity

building; and

(5) State and local government must be fully, directly and continuously involved

and consulted in the development of the National Domestic Preparedness Strategy.

NEMA supports Federal efforts to increase emergency management capacity

building at the State, territory, and local level for personnel, planning, training,

equipment, coordination, and exercising. A significant Federal commitment must be

made to give State, territorial, and local governments the tools to ensure adequate

preparedness. While States have significantly increased their commitment to emergency management over the last decade, States are struggling with budgetary issues

and the increased investments necessary to meet new demands.

STATE COORDINATION

All efforts to increase emergency management capacity building must be coordinated through the States to ensure harmonization with the State emergency operations plan, ensure equitable distribution of resources, and to synthesize resources

for intra-state and inter-state mutual aid. Also, the Stafford Act, which governs the

way disaster assistance is allocated, firmly and successfully uses States and Governors as the managers of Federal disaster relief funds for local governments which

are over-taxed and need assistance when disasters occur. States understand the

need to get funding to the first responders and have long coordinated statewide and

regionally to ensure adequate State assistance to local governments for emergency

preparedness and response. There is no question that most of the $3.5 billion proposed first responder grant funds need to get to police, fire fighters, emergency medical workers, and other front-line local responders—after all, disasters are local in

nature. The health community must not be forgotten and must be integrated into

all planning, training, and exercising under the State emergency operations plan.

We can effectively ensure this by working through the States to build on the needs

identified in the plans that FEMA, the Department of Justice, and other agencies

have required statewide. Further, because this is a national emergency and States

are in difficult fiscal situations, we must we wary of programs that would require

significant matches. If a significant match is required, the application of this initiative will only go to those agencies and governments that can fiscally afford the

match and not necessarily where the need is greatest.

FLEXIBILITY FOR PERSONNEL TO MANAGE THE PROGRAM

State emergency managers need to have a commitment for sustained Federal resources and the flexibility to insure the hiring and training of sufficient professional

personnel to manage the expanding antiterrorism programs. We are concerned that

an influx of funding programs from the Federal Government could detract from our
51

‘‘all hazards’’ approach and we will have to turn our focus away from natural disaster preparedness and response and thereby actually reduce overall preparedness

and efficiency. Building a statewide (local, State and interstate) emergency management capability is key to ensuring preparedness across the board. Flexibility to use

some of the first responder grants for personnel both at the State and local level

to manage the programs is critical to completing the preparedness mission.

NEMA has long advocated an increase in the only flexible source of Federal emergency management funding, the Emergency Management Performance Grant

(EMPG). EMPG is the only line item in the FEMA budget that has not received an

increase in the last decade, yet it is the only consistent source of Federal funding

for State and local capacity building. As an existing funding stream, EMPG could

be used to hire State and local staff to manage critical programs and build the incremental emergency management capacity to prepare for the first responder grants

and the coordination that will be required execute the program.

State and local government emergency management is over-stressed and working

to capacity to address the new environment. We need relief now, and in that vein

we are requesting an additional $200 million in funding for EMPG in the April supplemental appropriations package. In 2000, a NEMA survey of the States revealed

a $123 million shortfall in Federal funding of State and local emergency management programs. These funds will be a down payment for addressing the needs of

emergency management.

STANDARDS

Standards must be developed to ensure interoperability of equipment, communications, and training across State, regional, and local jurisdictions. In terms of establishing voluntary minimum standards for the terrorism preparedness programs of

State and local governments, NEMA offers itself as a resource in this area. Our organization, along with other stakeholder groups such as the Federal Emergency

Management Agency, the International Association of Emergency Managers, National Governors’ Association, National League of Cities, International Association

of Fire Chiefs, and others, has developed and is implementing an Emergency Management Accreditation Program (EMAP). EMAP is a voluntary standards and accreditation program for State and local emergency management that is based on

NFPA (National Fire Protection Association) 1600 Standard for Disaster/Emergency

Management and Business Continuity Operations (an ANSI or American National

Standards Institute approved standard) and FEMA’s Capability Assessment of

Readiness (CAR). Consequence management preparedness, response and recovery

standards are being developed in conjunction with those for the traditional emergency management functions. NEMA suggests that these standards already being

collaboratively developed through EMAP be considered in the development of minimum standards for training, exercises and equipment. Additionally, EMAP acceptance would provide the natural mechanism for Federal and State agencies to meet

the requirements of the Government Performance Results Act (GPRA). EMAP has

already completed a pilot phase in North Carolina and North Dakota and will begin

receiving State program applications in April. Local pilots will begin this spring.

MUTUAL AID

Mutual aid is a key to capacity building. A proven system we need to take advantage of for all domestic preparedness planning is the Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC). EMAC is an interstate mutual aid agreement that allows

States to assist one another in responding to all kinds of natural and man-made

disasters. EMAC offers a quick and easy way for States to send personnel and

equipment to help disaster relief efforts in other States. There are times when State

and local resources are overwhelmed and Federal assistance is inadequate, inappropriate, too far away or unavailable. Out-of-state aid through EMAC helps fill such

shortfalls. There are 46 States and two territories that are members of EMAC and

other States and territories are considering joining. In response to 9–11, emergency

managers from several States provided technical assistance and personnel support

to New York through EMAC. A system like this enables experts and specialized

equipment to be used across jurisdictions and regions based on the nature of a particular event. NEMA and FEMA are currently working together to standardize resource typing. By having commonly understood descriptions of resource packages,

impacted jurisdictions will know just what they are going to get when they request

each standard package.
52

NATIONAL DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS STRATEGY

NEMA has long requested for Congress to put in place an inclusive national

framework for developing a National Domestic Preparedness Strategy and a single

point of contact within the Federal Government that is accountable to Congress to

coordinate the Federal efforts in implementation of that strategy. Please also note

that we espouse a collaboratively developed national strategy, not just a Federal

one. We now look forward to working with the Office of Homeland Security toward

the development and implementation of that strategy. In addition to NEMA’s ‘‘Ten

Principles for a National Domestic Preparedness Strategy’’ adopted in 2000, we also

developed a White Paper on Domestic Preparedness in the aftermath of 9–11 that

is also supported by the Adjutants General Association of the United States, the

Council of State Governments, International Association of Emergency Managers,

and the National Guard Association of the United States. A copy of this White

Paper is attached, along with NEMA’s ‘‘Ten Principles’’.

In any way possible, the Federal Government needs to coordinate efforts for domestic preparedness and avoid duplication of efforts and programs. We hope that

State emergency managers and first responders from the State and local level will

be invited to participate in development of the national preparedness strategy.

CONCLUSION

Close coordination in the building of overall capacity to deal with truly catastrophic events is the key to success in assuring our Nation’s preparedness against

terrorism. One point that I would like to make is that one of the best demonstrations of the need for better Federal, State, private and local coordination on a regional basis was the TOPOFF exercise in 2000. TOPOFF was a congressionally

mandated ‘‘no-notice’’ national exercise that was designed to assess the Nation’s crisis and consequence management capabilities by exercising the plans, policies, procedures, systems and facilities through Federal, State and local responses to a challenging series of ‘‘no-notice’’, integrated, geographically dispersed terrorist threats

and acts. Clearly, one of the biggest issues was the question of who was in charge

of the scene. This held true in all of the venues—Portsmouth, Denver and Washington, DC. We need to ensure that those valuable Federal, State, local, and private

relationships and trust are built and exercised before a disaster. TOPOFF was a

valuable learning experience and we look forward to TOPOFF II, as well as a continuing series of regional and national exercises to continually refine and improve

the system. Plans are nothing without exercises to assess and develop their effectiveness.

There is a tested and proven ‘‘All Hazards’’ emergency preparedness and response

system in place which integrates Federal. Federal, State, local, and private organizations. We need to buildupon and enhance that system, not create a new one.

States must continue to serve as the bridge between the Federal Government and

the first responders at the local level in order to most effectively coordinate the Nation’s catastrophic response capabilities. Domestic preparedness funding programs

must be structured to allow local and State emergency managers the flexibility to

hire personnel needed to effectively carry out these programs. Equipment and training alone will not meet the goal.

NEMA asks Congress’ help in ensuring State and local emergency management

is fully and effectively represented in the development of the national domestic preparedness strategy. Thank you for your commitment to ensuring our Nation is as

ready as we can be.
53
54
55
56
57
58

STATEMENT OF EDWARD WILSON, FIRE CHIEF, CITY OF PORTLAND, OR

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, I’m Ed Wilson, fire chief for the

city of Portland, OR. Thank you for the opportunity to address the Committee.

Two weeks after the 9–11 attacks on our Nation, City of Portland Mayor, Vera

Katz directed me to join with our partners in public safety in our region, to determine our state of preparedness for a terrorist attack, and conduct a needs assessment. On behalf of all emergency responders in major cities across the United

States, who undoubtedly undertook similar processes, I am here to testify about our

findings and briefly outline what we would do with additional funding to increase

our readiness.

Like many large cities, we are on the right track with regards to planning for a

mass casualty incident, and have been for many years. Most large cities have functional plans in place, and well-trained responders on all levels. I can say from personal experience that, in Portland, we have also developed a phenomenal network

of relationships to facilitate a coordinated effort when we will need it most.

Many large cities take an all-hazard plan approach, which includes hazardous materials incidents, natural disasters such as earthquakes and hurricanes, and of

course, terrorism and weapons of mass destruction. It doesn’t really matter what

causes the emergency; the response to help citizens is very much the same.

Since 9–11, however, we have focused on a few key areas to improve our plans

in case the unthinkable happens . . . a terrorist attack in our hometown.

As large cities in the United States, we have numerous factors that put our citizens at risk. A most obvious issue, as we learned from the World Trade Center attacks, and earlier from the bombing of the Federal Building in Oklahoma City, is

the sheer number of people who populate large cities. Higher concentrations of people means more potential loss of life.

Metropolitan areas are also more vulnerable to hazardous materials incidents because of the industrial activity that is an important part of our economy.

In addition, we have larger and more complex infrastructures, such as huge water

systems, extensive communication networks, bridges, and tall buildings. And of

course many of America’s most visible landmarks, such as the World Trade Center

and the Pentagon, are located in big cities. All of these increase the vulnerability

of metropolitan areas.

That’s why metropolitan areas such as Portland are in need of increased resources

to keep our homeland safe. As I mentioned, Portland Fire & Rescue worked with

our regional partners in public safety to determine where we stand in terrorism preparedness. I’m sure our findings are very similar to what other major cities are experiencing. We found four areas where we can improve:

1. Equipment and Training.—We recommend increasing the supply of protective

equipment for all emergency responders, including law enforcement personnel. Decontamination equipment at the hospitals would add another layer of protection as

well. In addition, Incident Command System Training at the executive level will enhance any major city’s ability to provide leadership during a terrorist or any disaster incident.

2. Communication.—We found room to improve the redundancy and the interoperability of our communication systems. While local agencies have mechanisms in

place to communicate with each other, these plans may quickly splinter when State

and Federal agencies arrive on the scene. This lack of interoperability was starkly

evident during the response to the terrorist attack at the Pentagon on September

11th.

Information dissemination is another significant communication issue that we

need to address. Clear, timely, and accurate information needs to flow from the Federal Government to the States, counties, and local governments. Relevant information needs to be shared with first responders such as Fire and Emergency Medical

Service and with others such as public works and emergency managers.

3. Building Security.—Portland, like many other cities in this free country of ours,

is very open. To protect our citizens, we are considering enhancing security in our

buildings, by adding systems that can be accelerated as needed.

4. Recovery.—To improve continuity of government after a terrorist incident, we

will develop a comprehensive recovery plan. First steps include a business risk assessment and a mainframe recovery study.

Will the First Responder Initiative help major cities across the country address

these types of issues? Absolutely. But there’s another strength in the proposed Initiative. It would support programs that develop or buildupon existing mutual aid

agreements. For example, in the Portland metropolitan area, a regional group of

emergency managers, involving five counties and two States, has worked since 1993
59

to coordinate regional response to natural hazards. We are now developing a regional request for antiterrorism dollars.

We recently conducted a tabletop exercise to test our newly developed Metropolitan Medical Response System. It was a successful test drive of a federally funded

plan, which will help emergency responders coordinate with local hospitals and public health in the event of a biological emergency. Ours is the first Metropolitan Medical Response Plan in the Nation to have all of the 18 hospitals in the region participate.

One of our significant findings is that hospitals, as an extremely important resource in an actual mass casualty incident, would benefit from additional decontamination equipment. Finally, I would note that according to the U.S. Conference

of Mayors, initial estimates show that local communities have spent more than $525

million since 9–11 for added security. Moreover, they anticipate that these cities will

spend about $2.2 billion in 2002 to manage a burden unforeseen before 9–11. The

need for Federal assistance is clear.

Noting that a ‘‘simple and quick method for dispersing Federal assistance’’ is a

stated objective of the First Responder Initiative, I would like to recommend a system similar to the Community Development Block Grant Program. This would serve

as an excellent model for dispersing these funds. It would allow Federal funding to

go directly to cities with a population greater than 50,000. The remaining funding

would go directly to the States for distribution to jurisdictions with a population less

than 50,000. This model already exists and has been used successfully and extensively. It would be easy to duplicate, and would avoid unnecessary delays in getting

funding to local communities who need it now.

It will also be important that Federal funding to local communities allow as much

flexibility as possible. As you know, different communities will identify different

needs, levels of vulnerability, and solutions to these difficult problems. As a result,

each community will need as much latitude as possible to achieve those solutions.

We are glad to see funding flexibility included as one of the stated objectives of the

President’s initiative.

Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, thank you again for the opportunity to provide this information about how major cities in the United States would

benefit from implementation of the First Responder Initiative. Its benefits would be

immediate and long-term, making us safer from terrorist attacks and also enhancing our everyday response capabilities. In these tough economic times, we’re all

working together to maximize resources. At the same time, we have new issues to

address in our changed world. It’s my hope we can succeed at both to keep our country safe and livable. I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have.

RESPONSES OF EDWARD A. WILSON TO ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM

SENATOR CLINTON

Question 1. Lack of Redundancy.—Many large metropolitan areas around the

country have ‘‘consolidated’’ their public safety (police, fire and medical) and public

service (public works—roads, water and etc.) voice and data wireless systems on one

‘‘single network’’ to lower construction and operating costs.

The city of Portland, Oregon designed and constructed a regional 800 MHz

trunked radio and wireless data system to support city and county communications.

Normally, the infrastructure and employees that maintain and support these complex systems are also co-located at 911 public safety answering points (PSAP). In

the case of the city, all of our local government wireless, telephone and data communications are housed in one single ‘‘target’’ facility—all of our eggs are in one basket.

The original funding for these communications systems did not support 100 percent

redundancy and communications site diversification normally found in a military

grade system design.

Response. Fund and support redundant mission critical communication systems

that will allow the city of Portland, and the numerous agencies that share the communications infrastructure, to continue to communicate in the event the Portland

Communications Center is destroyed.

Question 2a. Lack of Interoperability.—One of the benefits of a consolidated wireless network is the ability of the public safety and public service agencies that share

a system to communicate directly with one another. Unfortunately due to the high

cost of the Motorola proprietary mobiles and portables, not all public safety and

public service agencies in the region have the necessary number of talkgroups on

their two-way mobile and portable radios to facilitate interoperability communications.
60

Response. Replace and upgrade mobile and portable radios to allow for expanded

interoperability communications.

Question 2b. The Portland metropolitan area public safety and public service responders use ‘‘like’’ Motorola 800 MHz voice and data networks, however, a majority

of the responders outside of Portland and throughout the State of Oregon are still

on VHF and UHF conventional radio systems. In the event of a major disaster, communications with the rest of the State, Southwest Washington and agencies from

outside the area will be a serious problem.

Response. Statewide military grade 143/700/800 MHz single interoperability radio

network to support all local and State public safety/public service wireless communications. This network must have wide-area cellular class coverage to support portable low power communications devices required by public safety.

The lack of interoperability between systems used by local, State and Federal police, firefighters and medical personnel makes it difficult to coordinate resources at

the scene of large scale emergencies whether they be natural disasters or terrorist

acts. A national plan for public safety communications is needed. Public safety

should have networks that are robust (and include voice, data and dispatch), secure,

interoperable, interconnected, accessible, affordable and spectrum efficient.

STATEMENT OF MICHAEL E. O’NEIL, CHIEF ENGINEER, SOUTH BURLINGTON

FIRE DEPARTMENT

Mr. Chairman, Let me begin by extending greetings from the Vermont fire service. We appreciate the important discussions and deliberations that you are involved

in. I would like to address this committee on a few issues that have been the subject

of much debate in our small State that we like to think reflects the ongoing national

discussion. The focus is the ability of our Nations fire service to be properly

equipped to respond to the myriad of events that only a few short years ago would

be viewed as scenarios from a movie script. There never has been a doubt that the

American Fire Service would be called on to respond to any situation. We do it every

day. We do not choose what types of incidents that we will respond to and which

ones we won’t. I believe, as a Fire Chief, I owe it to the firefighters who respond

to calls for help from our citizens, to be as prepared and protected as is possible.

As I sit here before you today, I know that I cannot do that because our communities cannot afford to provide that protection. The need is real. We cannot continue

to send our firefighters out without the proper protection. We would not send our

servicemen and women to foreign soil ill prepared to perform, why should our frontline home security forces be any different.

When the White House proposed through the Office of Homeland Defense, giving

$3.5 billion in Federal aid to State and local first-responders, America’s front-line

soldiers—firefighters, police officers, emergency medical technicians to prepare for

terrorist actions the fire service believed that it was going to be able to solve a long

standing barrier to effectiveness . . . . lack of adequate funding.

We view the First Responder Initiative as extremely important in getting money

directly to departments large and small for basic needs such as equipment and

training, and supplying specialized equipment and training to larger urban departments where the greater possibility of terrorist acts exists.

In his remarks on Tuesday morning at the National Emergency Managers Association Conference, Governor Ridge voiced his strong support for first responders in

the President’s proposed budget. He feels very strongly that equipment, training, exercises, and resources are needed by the Nations first line of defense. However, Governor Ridge reiterated the Administration’s position that funding should go to the

States and not directly to local government. We respectfully disagree. Past history,

at least in Vermont has been that when the State is finished utilizing grant funds

to better equip State resources, very little has found it’s way to the local level. We

have been told for the last 3 years that any State resources won’t be available for

up to several hours after an incident and that we as first responders will be on our

own for that timeframe. We did not have to have this fact pointed out to us, we

already knew that from past experience. My point is that now when the State resources arrive several hours later they have better, more up to date equipment and

we as the first responders have not received any equipment. The Cities of Burlington and South Burlington have met with State officials with a number of

projects, including much needed communication system upgrades that focused on

inter-operability and regional responses. The projects have not been acted on because vital funding has gone to other State agencies. What funding has been left

over is so small that it has not been sufficient to be effective. We resort to makeshift

solutions in the field while important funding is utilized in other areas. I can find
61

no better illustration of this situation than this: The staff of the State medical examiners office are better protected than are the men and women who respond every

day to protect Vermont citizens from whatever crisis unfolds.

Recent events have demonstrated once and for all the role of America’s fire service

in responding to and mitigating disasters, terrorist or otherwise. We truly are America’s first line of defense against all risk hazards, including hazardous materials,

terrorist events, emergency search and rescue, fire suppression and emergency medical services. And now, we need your help. Last year, Congress provided $100 million in funding for the Assistance to Firefighters program for fiscal year 2001. However, after announcing the grant program,

FEMA received nearly 30,000 applications for assistance totaling about $2.9 billion.

Because of the added responsibilities of the fire service, its role in response to disasters, and the potential for that role to be expanded, funding at much higher levels

is required. Local jurisdictions simply do not have the resources to independently

fund the improvements to respond to new challenges.

The number of grant applications for the Assistance to Firefighters program has

demonstrated the need for fire service funding for equipment, training, fire prevention, and apparatus. Enactment of the First Responders Initiative, beginning in

2002, can help to ensure that fire departments are prepared for a higher scale and

scope of incidents. First, the Initiative can provide funding for significantly higher

levels of training in mass casualty events, tactical command and control, fire fighter

safety, and managing chemical, biological and other potential events. Second, fire

fighters and fire department leaders must be trained and equipped to provide comprehensive response and support to Federal disaster response teams. Responses to

incidents will come first from the local and regional levels before Federal support

is available and those responders must accomplish evacuation, containment, mitigation, and other immediate functions prior to the arrival of outside assistance. More

importantly, the local responders must ensure that their actions are consistent with

contemporary professional standards so as not to exacerbate the problem.

Additional funding to support increased fire service staffing is necessary to ensure

that enough fire fighters are available to protect U.S. citizen immediately after a

significant incident occurs. Fire departments require Federal support to fund additional fire fighters. During terrorist events, the military and other Federal personnel

are committed to other activities thereby requiring local areas to be much more dependent on local fire service. Relying more on local resources when outside resources

are scarce means that communities have few options other than the local fire department. Unfortunately, many fire department operating budgets have been reduced during the last decade because fires have decreased. These reductions have

been without regard to requirements to respond to other missions. An increase in

staffing will allow the fire service to respond to an expanding list of responsibilities

more safely and more effectively, including homeland security issues.

Limited staffing reduces a fire department’s ability to respond to a terrorist event

where resources are needed quickly and in quantity. Early intervention in a terrorist event can influence the number of lives saved in the early moments after an

attack. Response to attacks and arrival by the fire service will occur within three

to 5 minutes after an incident takes place and remain until the incident is resolved.

No other consequence management resource can respond this quickly.

In his State of the Union address, President Bush made a commitment to a sustained strategy for increased homeland security. The President has made clear that

he considers a critical component of this strategy to be increased Federal funding

for America’s fire and emergency service. In order to ensure that the full benefits

of this increased funding are realized by the American people, we urge you and Congress to enact the First Responders Initiative to provide funding for the fire and

emergency services. The mechanisms to get necessary resources to local responders

are in place. Let’s use them. By using this existing program, Congress can ensure

that appropriated funds quickly reach America’s fire service, only people in the

United States who are situated locally and trained, equipped, and sworn to respond

within minutes to all incidents, natural or man-made, which threaten the American

homeland.

In 1997, the Departments of Defense and Justice began training and equipping

local firefighters and police to deal with incidents of terrorism involving weapons

of mass destruction. Similar programs have since been authorized by Congress,

bringing the Department of Health and Human Services, FEMA, and other Federal

agencies into the effort. Without doubt we have made progress, but preparedness

efforts need to be more clearly focused.

Mr. Chairman, the American Fire Service has been strongly supportive of FEMA.

The reason for this is simple. They have earned the support of the fire and emergency service based on a proven track record of providing invaluable training, equip-
62

ment, and resources to America’s local ‘‘first responder’’ community both on scene

and disaster sites and during the ongoing planning and training that all responder

organizations must constantly pursue. They clearly recognize that America’s local

fire departments are the first line of disaster response in this country.

It is for this reason that we encourage Congress to utilize this Agency as you look

to significantly enhance and improve America’s readiness capabilities President

Bush has budgeted an unprecedented amount of Federal support for America’s ‘‘first

responders’’ in the name of homeland security. We strongly urge Congress to utilize

existing formats, specifically the Assistance to Firefighters grant program administered by FEMA, to ensure that these funds are quickly disbursed to the local responders who will use them efficiently and effectively to provide for the security of

the American homeland.

Thank you Senators on behalf of the American Fire Service.

STATEMENT OF KENNETH ZIRKLE, PRESIDENT, UNIVERSITY OF FINDLAY, FINDLAY, OH

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, my name is Ken Zirkle and I am

President of the University of Findlay in Findlay, OH. Thank you for inviting me

here to present my testimony today. I have testimony to submit for the record, if

I may do so, and I am prepared to read a short statement. The University currently

serves more than 4,000 students both at the graduate and undergraduate levels in

60 plus majors. The city of Findlay is located in northwestern Ohio on the 1–75 corridor, 45 miles south of Toledo. Shortly after the college was established in 1882,

the city experienced a gas, and then an oil boom, thus entering the American industrial revolution with gusto. Industries flocked to Findlay, but by the turn of the century, the wells began to dry up, and some of those industries moved on to other

boom towns, leaving behind, in some cases, waste, hazardous materials, and chemical spills to be dealt with by later generations. Findlay was representative of many

communities throughout the United States which inherited, and yet continued to

create, environmental, safety, and health-threatening situations before regulations

in late twentieth century began to track accountability.

Aware of the need for response training and clean-up, the University of Findlay

developed one of the first programs in the Nation to prepare environmental cleanup professionals. In 1986, we established our National Center of Excellence for Environmental Management. We made a strategic, conscientious decision to offer

hands-on, practical education, training, and information transfer services on environmental, safety, health, and disaster preparedness issues to public and private

sector clients, both nationally and internally. We concentrated on two specific program areas: Environmental Safety and Health Academic Degrees and Environmental Safety and Health Training and Consulting Services.

The first program grants undergraduate and graduate degrees in Environmental

Safety and Health Training. To date we have more than 1000 graduates. Our current enrollment includes on-line students in 19 States. Most of our students are employed before they graduate by corporations such as Honda, Marathon, Owens Illinois, General Electric, the Ohio EPA, and the IT Group, which recently decontaminated the Senate Hart building.

Our second focus is Environmental Safety and Health Training and Consulting

Services. We have extensive hands-on training centers in Findlay that offer scenarios including rail car, tank truck, ditch/stream spills, confined space entry and

rescue, and additional practical based training scenarios. Furthermore, we specialize

in custom designed training programs, offering them at the first responders’ locations using their own available equipment for their response training. Approximately 80 percent of the training we do is conducted in this manner. People don’t

have to come to us—rather, we go to them. In the past 16 years we have trained

more than 50,000 first responders and industry professionals from across the United

States, designing programs for Ford, Roadway, and CSX Transportation. We have

also conducted training in Canada and Mexico and have translated materials in

Spanish.

Recognizing and understanding that the ‘‘real’’ first responders are those who happen to be alongside incapacitated victims immediately at the site of the disaster before emergency personnel arrives, we know that a major thrust of preparedness

must be toward the work force. Lives are saved in the first minutes by those onsite

who have been trained to respond appropriately.

It is, frankly, heinous, but fortunate, that almost 4 years ago, anticipating the inevitable, our staff felt compelled to include terrorism preparedness as our third

major focus. In June 1999, we established the University of Findlay’s Center for

Terrorism Preparedness. At this time the ‘‘Nunn-Lugar-Domenici 120 Cities’’ pro-
63

gram was underway, but we knew that there were many underserved populations,

particularly the smaller communities, that desperately needed first responder training as well. Our objective, from the outset, was to offer an all hazards, integrated

approach to terrorism response training and education programs.

Our foresight has served us well. Working in concert with Dale Shipley, Director

of the Ohio Emergency Management Agency, Ohio’s Governor Taft and his staff,

The Medical College of Ohio, the Ohio Department of Health, and the Fire Marshall’s Office, to name a few, we have developed programs that prepare firefighters,

police officers, emergency, medical, hospital, and school personnel, city/county officials, and public health workers to respond to terrorism incidents as well as nuclear,

chemical, biological, explosive, and even natural disasters. We have trained first responders in communities across the United States on campus, onsite, and on line

to develop fully integrated preparation, response, and recovery programs that can

effectively and efficiently combat the terrorism threat to our society.

Further, for the last 3 years, under grants from the Public Utilities Commission

of Ohio, we have provided 8 different first responder courses to more than 2000 volunteer firefighters in 70 cities on weekends and evenings, the only viable time to

work with volunteers.

Well before September 11, the University of Findlay was preparing for terrorism

and preparing responders. How have we changed since September 11? We knew we

were on the right track; now we know that it’s also a fast track! Our services and

our expertise are constantly being sought out. Three examples:

(1) the State of Ohio Emergency Medical Services Agency has asked us to spearhead a grant that will offer EMS providers, state-wide, training in domestic preparedness issues such as emergency response, terrorism preparedness, and bio-terrorist response;

(2) the Ohio Emergency Management Agency has asked us to ‘‘develop and deliver

a Train-the-Trainer curriculum for Ohio’s first responders to the threat of terrorism;’’

(3) our staff has developed an interactive CD-ROM to prepare school employees

in the event of terrorist attacks and other acts of violence.

In October we were designated a Center for Public Health Preparedness for Bioterrorism and Emerging Health Threats by the Centers for Disease Control.

Indeed, we are providing what we believe to be a vital cog in our nation’s machine

of terrorism preparedness, or to use Governor Ridge’s term, ‘‘consequence management.’’

Points I’d like to leave you with:

First, as Secretary Rumsfeld has often mentioned, our mindset today is completely different from a year ago. Like it or not, terrorism is a part of all of our

lives. And it will be a part of our grandchildren’s and great-grandchildren’s lives at

the very least. Whereas a year ago, the word terrorism and the concept of terrorism

peppered conversations of a select few, today elementary school children across our

Nation hear the word in discussions on a regular basis.

Second, given that terrorism is a fact in our lives, we must do everything possible

to prevent it, but yet to prepare for it. Complete eradication of terrorism is not likely, but complete response preparation is absolutely mandatory.

Third, the Center for Terrorism Preparedness at the University of Findlay stands

ready to expand and develop its programs. We know that quality response preparation goes beyond the manuals, the charts, the computers. We have created terrorism

response models that must have significant impact on our Nation. It is not necessary to start from square one. We as a Nation must build on what we know and

what we have. Ladies and gentlemen, based on what we have learned since September 11, we are all on the fast track now.

Thank you.

NATIONAL CENTER OF EXCELLENCE FOR ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT

The University of Findlay is a private, liberal arts educational institution founded

in 1882. Its campus has grown to over 170 acres occupied by approximately 4,500

students annually. The University is a national leader in the delivery of distancelearning programs, primarily through Web-based course offerings.

The National Center of Excellence for Environmental Management (NCEEM) is

a multifaceted education, training, and information-transfer program that focuses

on environmental, safety and occupational health (ES&H) issues. NCEEM was established as a separate department within the University in 1986 with the initiation

of the Bachelor in Hazardous Materials Management degree.
64

NCEEM’s mission is to develop and deliver effective and practical ES&H educational, training, and consulting programs globally through a combination of the

following mechanisms: • Practical ‘‘hands-on’’ experiences • Internships and cooperatives • Various traditional delivery techniques • State-of-the-art, distance-learning techniques

The University of Findlay is virtually the only institution that integrates ES&H

management training with associate’s, bachelor’s, and master’s degree programs and

a nationally recognized Center for Terrorism Preparedness.

NCEEM’S THREE PRIMARY PROGRAMS

Academic Programs

The Environmental, Safety and Occupational Health Bachelor of Science Degree

Program • The ES&H bachelor of science degree program was established at the University of Findlay in 1986. • Over 100 students are currently enrolled in the ES&H bachelor’s degree program. • The University of Findlay has graduated over 650 students with a degree in the

ES&H fields since 1990. • Emphasis areas include science, industrial hygiene, compliance, and

preengineering. • Internship and cooperative positions are available to enable students to gain

practical on-the-job experience. • A bachelor’s degree completion program that allows students from 2-year associate degree programs to complete an ES&H bachelor’s degree is available at many

locations throughout the United States and online via the Internet.

The Environmental, Safety and Health Master of Science Degree Program

• The ES&H master of science degree program was established at the University

of Findlay in 1994. • Approximately 125 students are currently enrolled in the ES&H master’s degree program.

• The University of Findlay has graduated over 300 students with a master’s degree in ES&H management since 1995.

• The master’s degree is offered at various locations throughout Ohio as well as

online via the Internet.

• The master’s degree program is a blend of science, engineering, and business

principles.

Training and Consulting Services

Environmental Resource Training Center (ERTC)

• The ERTC was established in March 1989 and is now composed of two training

facilities including: three modern classrooms; on-campus, indoor training facilities;

and a 5-acre, outdoor, off-campus training facility on the east side of Findlay.

• The primary focus of the ERTC is ‘‘hands-on’’ ES&H training for private industry, State and Federal regulators, firefighters, and university students.

• The ERTC staffs 15 full-time and over 30 field-experienced contract trainers.

• The major strengths of the ERTC include: flexibility, experience, depth of instructional staff, use of ‘‘hands-on’’ training scenarios, and the ability to manage

multifaceted training programs conducted simultaneously at various locations across

the United States.

• The ERTC has trained over 50,000 people at the two training facilities in Findlay as well as at client locations coast to coast. Over 80 percent of the training conducted by the ERTC has been custom designed and conducted at client’s facilities.

The following are several examples:

Major public-sector clients include: U.S. Department of Defense at nine major

military bases and U.S. Department of Energy at seven sites in four States.

Private-industry clients include: Ford Motor Company—40 plants in 9 States and

18 plants in Mexico, Roadway Express—47 terminals in 30 States, LTV Steel Company—2,100 employees in 9 States and hundreds of large and small firms across

the Midwest.

Environmental, Safety and Health Consulting Services

• The ES&H Consulting Services group was established in 1997 and has provided

consulting services to clients in Ohio, Indiana, and Michigan.

• The ES&H Consulting Services has a special focus that addresses safety- and

emergency-plan assessments for hospitals and universities.
65

• The ES&H Consulting Services also specializes in onsite bioremediation and

phytoremediation projects.

Center for Terrorism Preparedness

• The Center for Terrorism Preparedness for Nuclear, Biological, and Chemical

Acts and Domestic Terrorism (CTP) was established in 1999 and focuses on providing training and consulting services to the following four underserved populations:

Public health/medical community

Corporate safety and security personnel

City/county officials

Law enforcement personnel

On September 30, 2001, the CTP was named by the Center for Disease Control

as a Public Health Center for Bioterrorism and Infectious Disease Preparedness.

The CTP features its own Web site at www.ufctp.org.

The CTP has over 20 full-time and contract trainers available.

The strength of the program lies in the CTP’s ability to custom design programs

and offers them at clients’ locations nationally and internationally. Open enrollment

courses are also available in Findlay, Ohio.

PUBLIC HEALTH/MEDICAL COMMUNITY

Will you, your employees, or your co-workers be able to function effectively in the

aftermath of a disaster? Are your loved ones prepared to manage without you?

The specter of terrorism has now raised its face upon the American horizon. During the decade of the 90’s, we witnessed the physical and psychological trauma from

such events as the bombings of the World Trade Center and the Alfred P. Murrah

Building. Now, entering the twenty-first century, we are confronted with Weapons

of Mass Destruction. To understand, prepare for, respond to, and recover from this

kind of catastrophe, there must be a basic understanding of all types of disasters

and their ramifications. Therefore, this Center is committed to providing educational

opportunities and services directed toward the vulnerable State created by one’s position, environment, or other circumstances.

These courses have been designed for any person or agency personnel that would

serve as an integral link to the affected community’s infrastructure. We invite you

to review the courses that have been developed, keeping in mind that they are the

first of many courses that will be developed in the future. We welcome your suggestions, comments, and concerns, regarding these offerings and future offerings. We

can better prepare you to respond to your community’s needs, if we have feedback

on what those needs are. A survey will be sent to each attendee before the course

to enable the instructors to provide a more customized approach.

CORPORATE SAFETY & SECURITY PERSONNEL

History clearly indicates that catastrophic terrorism can occur in virtually any location, at any time. Never before have we faced the dynamic problems that we are

facing today. These include incidents such as sarin releases in Matsumoto and

Tokyo, Japan, the bombings at the World Trade Center and the Federal building

in Oklahoma City and the American Embassy in Kenya and the tragic events of

September 11, 2001. All of these events strongly suggest that local terrorism preparedness and response programs are needed.

The Center for Terrorism Preparedness is a leader in corporate safety and security training and education. We have conducted both domestic and international terrorism preparedness and emergency management training for military, intelligence

and industries throughout the United States. Training is diverse and includes traditional classroom training, drills for first responders, tabletop exercises, and distance

learning opportunities, including on-line education and the use of emerging technologies.

The Center for Terrorism Preparedness is prepared to help you develop and implement all aspects of response to the ‘‘all-hazard’’ incident, including terrorist incidents. In addition, we realize that asset protection is a valuable part of preparedness and staff from the Center for Terrorism Preparedness are recognized the world

over for their understanding of all aspects of asset protection.

The CTP also specializes in custom designing training programs, and offering

them at client locations coast to coast. Approximately 80 percent of the work conducted through the Center is performed at our client’s location.

Planning for terrorism must go beyond training courses and drills. Terrorism

readiness requires an in-depth, comprehensive approach to all of the details of terrorism, in addition to a broad, overall understanding of the issues. CTP staff mem-
66

bers have experienced, first hand, all pieces of the puzzle and can present the wide

range of knowledge needed for effective terrorism preparedness.

Our staff can help you develop planning assumptions, establishing a baseline to

begin your process. Further program development includes: threat analysis, analysis

of targets and their vulnerabilities, analysis and development of your response capability and can help you institute an initiative to train, equip, and enhance your capabilities.

CITY/COUNTY OFFICIALS

Vast resources are available for response to a wide variety of incidents. We learn

daily of the public and private resources that are brought to bear during terrorist

events. However, in the first minutes and hours of a terrorist incident, the first line

of defense consists of local officials and resources. For the most part, local resources

are well trained. But, lack of common training causes individuals from different jurisdictions to have difficulty when responding together in an incident.

The CTP staff members bring years of incident management experience, from a

broad range of disciplines. This allows us to focus on the development, implementation, and delivery of programs to help communities develop a consolidated incident

action plan. Our staff understands what it takes to bring together all the key players in a community and help them work toward the goal of effective incident management and the subsequent protection of the public.

The Center for Terrorism Preparedness is a leader in training and education. We

have conducted terrorism preparedness and emergency management training for

military, intelligence and civilian authorities throughout the United States. Training is diverse and includes traditional classroom training, drills for first responders,

tabletop exercises, and distance learning opportunities, including on-line education

and the use of emerging technologies.

In addition, The CTP has recently been named as a ‘‘Public Health Center for Bioterrorism Preparedness from the CDC. In its role the CTP’s additional responsibilities include research and the development of technology to respond to the rapidly

changing bioterrorism response environment.

The CTP also specializes in custom designing training programs, and offering

them at client locations coast to coast. Approximately 80 percent of the work conducted through the Center is performed at our client’s location.

One of the primary training programs currently offered by the CTP is a 16-hour

countywide Terrorism Threat Assessment Workshop. All of the key players within

the county are gathered at a convenient location for 2-days of intense, facilitated

sessions, designed to get everyone on common ground and introduce the group to

consolidated planning. Part of the cost of the training is picked up by grants to the

Center for Terrorism Preparedness.

We invite you to look at the schedule of available open enrollment training classes

described below. As mentioned earlier, the CTP is fully capable of developing and

implementing customized programs and conducting the training at your facility.

LAW ENFORCEMENT PERSONNEL

No words can truly describe the tragedy that occurred on September 11, 2001.

The images of the destruction of the World Trade Center are extremely powerful

and will forever be etched in our memories. The tremendous emotions stirred in

every American as a result this tragic incident cannot be denied as well.

We have learned much from the tragic events of September 11. For example, we

now know that we will not only see more acts of terrorism in the future, but we

will see these acts grow more destructive and more difficult to combat as well. And

we have also been reminded that no area of the country is safe. Terrorism can strike

anywhere.

The Center for Terrorism Preparedness (CTP) is addressing these concerns and

fears by providing training to the law enforcement community that focuses on preventing acts of terrorism, as well as defending against such acts should prevention

fail. The training offered is both practical and hands-on. In addition, the courses are

taught by current and former law enforcement officers with many years of professional law enforcement experience in a variety of police disciplines.

CTP’s staff understands the problems facing today’s law enforcement professional

and his attempt to combat terrorism. To accomplish this task, the staff has developed a program that attempts to reduce our country’s vulnerability to devastating

acts of terrorism by providing a wide range of diverse training, which includes traditional classroom instruction as well as practical exercises.
67

The CTP also specializes in custom designing training programs, and offering

them at client locations coast to coast. Approximately 80 percent of the work conducted through the Center is performed at our client’s location.

Through it’s training, CTP can provide the responding officer the skills necessary

to identify and survive a terrorist incident as well as to identify and investigate the

terrorist himself. The CTP staff can also provide the law enforcement community

with the understanding to identify and deal with the unique emotional characteristics experienced by individuals involved in traumatic events and crisis.

FIRST RESPONDERS

‘‘The rules have changed’’, and your response must adapt to this new type of warfare. Fire, police, EMS, and HazMat personnel have been and will continue to be

the front line of defense for terrorist-types of incidents on our own soil. Continuing

education is the most effective way to assure a safe response.

The National Center for Excellence in Environmental Management (NCEEM) has

long been established as an excellent trainer for first responders. Training in

HazMat, incident command, and confined space promotes better responses to other

incidents including the ‘‘unique’’ type, i.e. terrorism, clandestine drug labs, environmental crimes, etc. where cooperation between agencies is a must. Through grants

from the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio, HazMat classes many times are offered free to Ohio First Responders. Currently, we are determining if the terrorism

classes can be offered under this plan.

The Center for Terrorism Preparedness (CTP) offers courses to first responders

under the same general levels of training already established for hazardous materials incidents. The Terrorism Overview course is an excellent awareness level

course for all first responders. Operations level personnel should receive the Emergency Response to Terrorism: Operations Level course and technicians will benefit

from the Emergency Response to Terrorism: Technician Level course.

Each course gives the participant an overview of current and past terrorist type

acts, recognition clues for the various types of weaponry (biological, nuclear, chemical, incendiary, and explosive) and suggested response guidelines. The technician

class also explores the use of military and civilian detection devices currently being

offered for use in a WMD event. These courses are constantly updated to reflect the

current but ever changing climate that we are facing each day. Whether you are

training 5 or 500, the CTPs use of qualified instructors (either retired or still actively working as first responders) will assure a fresh and relevant education.

In addition, The CTP has recently been named as a ‘‘Public Health Center for Bioterrorism Preparedness’’ from the CDC. In its role the CTP’s additional responsibilities include research and the development of technology to respond to the rapidly

changing bioterrorism response environment.

The CTP also specializes in custom designing training programs, and offering

them at client locations coast to coast. Approximately 80 percent of the work conducted through the Center is performed at our client’s location.

Terrorism in Schools: Be Prepared, Not Scared!

The threat of terrorism is real and affects all of us.

The University of Findlay’s Center for Terrorism Preparedness has developed a

CD-ROM to prepare school employees for terrorist attacks and other acts of violence.

The purpose of this training CD is to ensure proper planning, prevention, and response in the event of a bomb threat or a chemical or biological incident. The goal

is not to frighten, but to educate school personnel on standard techniques that will

help to ensure the safety of staff and students.

The CD-ROM is broken down into 10 sections based upon job category, such as

teacher, custodian, administrator, and school nurse. Video scenarios are given for

each job category, showing one or more scenes involving a suspicious incident or

event. The result of an improper response is then discussed, and a checklist is given

of the proper procedures and preparation for such incidents. This checklist can also

be printed for a reference, and a resource section presents relevant links for additional material.

TEACHER

As a teacher, your primary role is the safety of your classroom and students. In

the event of a disaster, you are the first responder. By recognizing the potential

areas of concern illustrated in the following scenario, remaining alert to them at all

times, and understanding the proper responses, you can ensure the safety of your

students and yourself.
68

OXLEY, DEWINE ANNOUNCE ANTITERRORISM GRANT FOR THE UNIVERSITY OF FINDLAY

Washington, December 20, 2001.—The University of Findlay will receive a $1.6

million Federal grant for terrorism preparedness training, U.S. Congressman Michael G. Oxley (R-Findlay) and U.S. Senator Mike DeWine announced today.

‘‘The University of Findlay is poised to play a leading role in protecting the citizens of Ohio and the U.S. against terrorism,’’ Oxley said. ‘‘The University foresaw

this threat when if formed The Center for Terrorism Preparedness. The tragic

events of September 11th have demonstrated how important it is for us to be able

to respond to catastrophes.’’

‘‘As a member of the Senate Appropriations Committee, I worked to ensure that

the University of Findlay’s antiterrorism program received careful attention during

the appropriations process,’’ said Senator DeWine. ‘‘Clearly, Americans are now

aware of the very real potential for terrorist attacks.’’

The $1.6 million grant was part of the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations conference report. The Senate approved the bill today, following House passage on

Wednesday. Oxley expressed appreciation to Appropriations Subcommittee Chairman Ralph Regula (R-Navarre) for his support.

The University of Findlay plans to use the money to further develop its training

programs and facilities. The Findlay program has the distinction of being one of

only 14 units in the U.S. officially designated as bioterrorism response centers by

the Centers for Disease Control.

‘‘The University of Findlay is working with the Centers for Disease Control and

partners in Ohio to fill a critical gap in education and training. As a former FBI

agent, I know that the U.S. faces very real threats,’’ Oxley stated.

‘‘Ohio is fortunate to have a high-quality bioterrorism preparedness training program at the University of Findlay,’’ said Senator DeWine. ‘‘The University is in a

prime position to help ensure the first responders to a bioterrorism attack are prepared.’’ Oxley and DeWine have a long record of support for the University of Findlay’s terrorism response and hazardous materials program.

The grant will be administered by the Health Resources and Services Administration in the Department of Health and Human Services.

UF/NWTC PARTNERSHIP ESTABLISHED

Findlay, Ohio, Jan. 18, 2002.—The University of Findlay’s Center for Terrorism

Preparedness and the National Wilderness Training Center, Inc., (NWTC) have announced a partnership to provide high quality special operations and tactical training to law enforcement, military and select corporate security communities as it relates to terrorism.

The partnership will provide hands-on, practical-based education and training to

develop a fully integrated preparation, response and recovery program to effectively

combat the threat of terrorism.

Courses offered by the Center for Terrorism Preparedness at UF give the officer

an overview of current and past terrorist type acts, recognition clues for the various

types of weaponry most likely to be encountered and suggested response guidelines.

All courses are designed with the law enforcement officer in mind and are tailored

specifically to enhance enforcement operations when preventing, responding to or

countering a critical incident.

Æ