[Senate Hearing 111-152]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
S. Hrg. 111-152
ARE WE READY? A STATUS REPORT ON
EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FOR THE
2009 HURRICANE SEASON
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISASTER RECOVERY
of the
COMMITTEE ON
HOMELAND SECURITY AND
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
JUNE 4, 2009
__________
Available via http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/index.html
Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
51-783 PDF WASHINGTON : 2009
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut, Chairman
CARL LEVIN, Michigan SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine
DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii TOM COBURN, Oklahoma
THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware JOHN McCAIN, Arizona
MARK L. PRYOR, Arkansas GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana JOHN ENSIGN, Nevada
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
JON TESTER, Montana
ROLAND W. BURRIS, Illinois
MICHAEL F. BENNET, Colorado
Michael L. Alexander, Staff Director
Brandon L. Milhorn, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Trina Driessnack Tyrer, Chief Clerk
AD HOC SUBCOMMITTEE ON DISASTER RECOVERY
MARY L. LANDRIEU, Louisiana, Chairman
CLAIRE McCASKILL, Missouri LINDSEY GRAHAM, South Carolina
ROLAND W. BURRIS, Illinois
Ben Billings, Staff Director
Andy Olson, Minority Staff Director
Kelsey Stroud, Chief Clerk
C O N T E N T S
------
Opening statements:
Page
Senator Landrieu............................................. 1
Senator Burris............................................... 8
Senator Graham............................................... 15
WITNESSES
Thursday, June 4, 2009
Hon. W. Craig Fugate, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security................... 5
Major General Frank Grass, Director of Operations, U.S. Northern
Command........................................................ 7
George Foresman, Advisory Board Co-Chairman of the
ReadyCommunities Partnership, Corporate Crisis Response
Officers Association, Former Undersecretary, Preparedness and
Emergency Response, U.S. Department of Homeland Security....... 22
Armond Mascelli, Vice President, Disaster Operations, American
Red Cross...................................................... 24
Janet Durden, President, United Way of Northeast Louisiana....... 26
Alphabetical List of Witnesses
Durden, Janet:
Testimony.................................................... 26
Prepared statement with attachments.......................... 58
Foresman, George:
Testimony.................................................... 22
Prepared statement........................................... 50
Fugate, Hon. W. Craig:
Testimony.................................................... 5
Prepared statement........................................... 35
Grass, Major General Frank:
Testimony.................................................... 7
Prepared statement........................................... 48
Mascelli, Armond:
Testimony.................................................... 24
Prepared statement........................................... 52
APPENDIX
Ronald C. Osborne, Director, State of South Carolina, Office of
the Adjutant General, Emergency Management Division, prepared
statement submitted by Senator Graham.......................... 93
Charts submitted for the Record by Senator Landrieu.............. 97
Questions and responses submitted for the Record from:
Mr. Fugate................................................... 101
Major General Grass.......................................... 107
Mr. Mascelli with attachments................................ 110
Mr. Mascelli answer to question asked at hearing............. 114
Additional statements submitted for the record by:
Mr. Kenny Harrell............................................ 115
Ms. Lucinda Nord............................................. 116
Ms. Francis G. Furrie........................................ 117
Ms. Tracy Hays............................................... 118
Ms. Lori Linstead............................................ 119
Mr. Stephen G. Almon......................................... 120
ARE WE READY? A STATUS REPORT ON EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS FOR THE 2009
HURRICANE SEASON
----------
THURSDAY, JUNE 4, 2009
U.S. Senate,
Ad Hoc Subcommittee on Disaster Recovery,
of the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:03 p.m., in
room SD-342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. Mary L.
Landrieu, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senators Landrieu, Burris, and Graham.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR LANDRIEU
Senator Landrieu. Good afternoon. Our Subcommittee on
Disaster Recovery will come to order. And let me welcome
everyone that has joined us today for what I think is a very
important hearing and what is one of a series of hearings that
will continue to happen as we strive to get our Nation's
response capabilities in the very best possible shape that we
can for hurricanes and all disasters.
That is the subject of this hearing today, to see where we
are, and we have the opportunity to have on our first panel the
new FEMA administrator who will be testifying today for the
first time since his confirmation.
Welcome, Mr. Fugate. And Major General Grass from Missouri,
who will be testifying today as well.
Let me say that this hearing is focused on hurricane
response because we started hurricane season this week. But we
will be examining issues that affect not just the hurricane
region, but all regions of the country in this hearing today,
and we will be focusing on plans and processes that actually
have applicability across the board for many different types of
threats, be it hurricanes, earthquakes, etc.
The Ranking Member and I both represent States that have
seen large portions of our States, major cities, and very
important rural areas devastated by recent hurricanes. 2004,
2005, and 2008 were particularly hard years for cities and
communities throughout the Gulf Coast, from Florida to Texas,
but the last century has been difficult for many States.
And I would like to put the first chart up.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The chart referred to appears in the Appendix on page 97.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are the tracker of all the hurricanes that have hit
this particular region of the country, which is the Hurricane
Belt, from 1955 to 2005. The blue line is Hurricane Katrina,
which was the greatest among all the storms depicted there by a
significant amount, in terms of size, of damage. And then,
Hurricane Rita, which ranks second amongst the storms in terms
of damage. And I would like to show you the next graph, which
is even more startling, these are the storms since 1851 to the
present.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ The chart referred to appears in the Appendix on page 98.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
So when we, in the Gulf Coast, talk about the threat, it is
real, it is frightening, and it is important for this
Subcommittee, and all committees of this Congress, to continue
to focus, as best we can, on the sure threat of hurricanes,
that are getting more and more predictable, we know, and can be
better focused on where they are going to hit and when they are
hitting, unlike earthquakes, although our science is getting
much better on earthquakes and fires as well. But we have
gotten pretty good at predicting where these storms will hit.
There is very little we can do, I think, immediately to stop
them, but we most certainly can prepare our people better for
the threat that they are facing.
It is important for us to understand our capacity to deal
with these real and ongoing, and in some people's minds, ever-
strengthening threats, and that is what this Subcommittee will
focus on and has focused on since the wake-up call of Hurricane
Katrina, which will be 4 years ago on August 29.
We want to make sure that we continue the work necessary to
make more scientifically-based predictions and warnings for
people, so they can move out of the way of these powerful
storms. We want to make sure that their evacuation routes are
clear and secure and that the rules and regulations involving
evacuation are clear to the millions of people that have to
follow them, as well as to those who are organizing the
evacuations.
What will people be reimbursed for, what they will not be
reimbursed for is of particular interest to me. Immediately
stabilizing availablity of water, food, and medicine to all the
people that flee from storms like this is important, and we
have not quite gotten that right yet. Where do people that flee
these storms, where do they live in the event that they cannot
go back to the house, or the shelter, or the apartment, or the
place, nursing home, hospitals that they evacuated from? Where
do we shelter them and who pays for that and for how long?
Then, what do we do to help these communities recover when
they are big cities, large metropolitan areas with millions of
people? How do we help the small rural communities that do not
get any attention from anybody once the wind and the waves are
gone? How do we help them to recover? I would suggest that we
have a lot of work to do.
I would like to say a few words about the devastating
hurricanes that struck Texas and Louisiana last year because
the response to those demonstrated progress that has been made,
as well as the requirement for significant improvement.
The evacuations for Hurricanes Gustav and Ike were the
largest in U.S. history. Louisiana moved 2 million people out
of harm's way, including the elderly, the disabled, and those
without transport.
Texas kept Houston residents at home so roads could be
cleared for people on the Coast to flee from Hurricane Ike
without getting stuck in traffic as they did when Hurricane
Rita was approaching. Communication and coordination between
different levels of government was better. FEMA declared pre-
landfall disasters in both States, surged resources into the
areas before impact, and the Federal levees held.
However, insufficient quantities of generators forced
hospitals in Baton Rouge to evacuate patients. Insufficient
supply of generators caused gas stations to shut down, which
almost caused a panic in a major metropolitan area, as for
weeks people could not access any gasoline. When people cannot
access gasoline, they cannot get to work. It shuts the economy
down. People start getting laid off of work. Even within a week
or two of a storm that could happen.
We cannot afford to lose more jobs right now, I might
remind the people testifying today. Local governments waited
days for commodities like ice and water and blue tarps. The
State of Louisiana bus contractor failed. Evacuees were forced
to take school buses without air conditioning or bathrooms,
which does not seem like much, except if it is 100 degrees out
and your bus ride is 10 hours or longer, it becomes a real
issue for people who are sick or elderly, or for small children
to sit still on a bus is very hard, particularly if they have
to do so without bathrooms.
Evacuees from Texas and Louisiana arrived in Shreveport and
Bastrop, just two, to give examples of. And I have walked
through these shelters myself that were wholly inadequate.
There were no cots, there were no blankets, there were
inadequate showers, and people were forced to sleep on floors
because the cots and towels did not arrive until 17 days after
people arrived. So it was a very interesting couple of weeks
for the mayors of those towns, which did their very level best
to make a bad situation better.
Local levees in South Louisiana failed again. They failed
in Hurricane Katrina, they failed in Hurricane Rita, they
failed in Hurricane Gustav and Hurricane Ike. And as
Administrator Fugate knows, because he is from Florida, the
people of South Florida are very concerned about their water
management issues and whether their dikes, levees, and water
will hold, and that is the subject of another hearing.
Recovery has continued to be a frustrating and cumbersome
process for individuals and local governments despite many
improvements, which I will mention in a moment. I believe we
are still relying, Mr. Fugate, too much on trailers in order to
jump start recoveries, and we are going to be pressing hard on
new housing and shelter options from this Subcommittee.
I will continue to say that providing these communities
with $5 million in community disaster loan assistance is
probably not what Charleston, Savannah, Miami, New Orleans,
Atlanta, Baton Rouge, or any number of communities--they cannot
do much with $5 million, and that is all the law allows them to
borrow.
So Administrator Fugate from FEMA will discuss the 2008
response and the agency's work on alert and warning systems,
evacuation plans, and, from his perspective--if we are better
situated as the 2009 season opens.
Major General Grass from U.S. Northern Command will outline
the Department of Defense's support mission for hurricane
response, including aerial storm surveillance, air MedEvac,
search and rescue, communications support, logistics support,
recent hurricane response exercises, and NORTHCOM's
coordination with the State National Guard. It is a lot, but we
are going to try to get that in. And I will mention that we are
very proud to have the general with us. And he is from the
Missouri National Guard, which is of particular interest to
Senator McCaskill.
Then on our next panel, we will have George Foresman, a
former DHS official who is here today to talk about the private
sector's role because this Subcommittee Chairman, and Ranking
Member, and Members recognized, it is not just the Federal
Government. It is State and local government. It is
individuals. It is the private sector and the nonprofit sector.
We want to give them a voice.
We also are happy to hear from Armond Mascelli, the
Director of Operations for the American Red Cross. They have
gone through a major transformation since Hurricane Katrina. We
are very interested in hearing about the fact that they have
increased their volunteer base from 23,000 to 90,000. And we
think it is not only a bigger but a better Red Cross, and we
are excited about hearing, because I think Americans look to
the Red Cross to give them strength and comfort at times of
disaster, and that, of course, has been a key role of the Red
Cross for many years.
Finally, Janet Durden joins us on behalf of a community in
Northeast Louisiana, of which I am very proud, my husband's
hometown. And in Hurricane Katrina, they did a phenomenal job
through their 2-1-1 system there. As the offices lost current
and became overwhelmed in south Louisiana, north Louisiana
picked up, and I am sure the same thing happened in Texas,
Alabama, Mississippi, and Florida. As these storms come in, the
northern part of the State provides a great amount of help. And
we want to hear about the increased activity of the 2-1-1
operation, which is sort of the go-to-operation when people
need information during an emergency. They do not call 9-1-1,
they call 2-1-1, and we want to help Americans understand that.
So with that opening statement, I would like to ask Mr.
Fugate to begin.
Let me ask Senator Burris--I know you are just coming in,
and welcome.
Do you want to make any brief opening statement or should
we go right to the panel?
Senator Burris. Go right to the panel, and I will catch up.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you, Senator.
We are happy to have Craig Fugate with us, who is the new
Administrator of FEMA, a man whom I supported wholeheartedly,
as did many other members of the Senate. You are extremely
experienced. We thank you for the work that you have already
done, but we are looking forward to hearing from you,
Administrator Fugate, because, you know as I know, that while
we have made some progress, there is a tremendous amount of
work that has to be done, and we are looking to you for
leadership and guidance.
And may I say before you start, how thankful I am to Nancy
Ward, who came in before the election of President Obama and
the appointment of the Secretary of Homeland Security, Janet
Napolitano, and stepped in the interim and was immediately able
to make a tremendous difference and improvement. And I know
that you are happy with what she was able to do. And I wanted
to acknowledge that and then thank you for now being the formal
and official director, and I look forward to your remarks.
STATEMENT OF THE HON. W. CRAIG FUGATE,\1\ ADMINISTRATOR,
FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY
Mr. Fugate. Thank you, Madam Chairman and Senator Burris.
There is always your first time to testify a lot of
formalities. I have submitted written testimony to address some
of the questions. I have some opening statements. I will try to
keep these short because I would rather have the questions and
be able to have the dialogue.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Fugate appears in the Appendix on
page 35.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
I am pleased to be here to represent Homeland Security and
the Federal Emergency Management Agency to talk about
preparations for 2009. And I really appreciate the opportunity
to come before you, particularly your leadership in these
issues, this Subcommittee's work in identifying as a Nation
where we need to go. That kind of talks about changing how we
want to approach things.
We, in FEMA, believe our role is to ensure that we are
working together as a Nation to build, sustain, and improve our
capabilities to prepare for, protect against, respond to,
recover from, and mitigate against all hazards. And the key
thing here is recognizing that FEMA by itself cannot be
successful.
Many of the groups that you have represented today in your
hearing are part of that team. More importantly, it is our
local and State officials and the volunteer organizations, but
ultimately it is our citizens that are part of that team. And
if nothing else, I am trying to get people to recognize that
the public is not the liability; they are the resource that can
help us be more successful, but we also have to be there for
their needs when disaster strikes.
As you know, the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform
Act of 2006 established the position of administrator, provided
for the authorities and additional functions that we now have
at FEMA, more tools that, as you pointed out, last year began
showing the improvement, but, again, we still have a ways to
go. And it allows us to further strengthen that relationship
with our State partners, with our tribal and local governments
as part of that community. It is contributed to our increased
operational capacity to manage all types of emergencies.
As you remember, one of the challenges in Hurricane Katrina
was not being able to move and release items until there was a
declaration. And the challenges of pre-positioning and
providing that assistance, that clarity, has been brought
because of the work your Subcommittee did and the findings that
said we needed to enable the administrator and the team to
support governors more proactively.
We continue that work in empowering FEMA to do that. In
fact, as you point out, we face a variety of hazards. We have
also instituted, starting this morning, no-notice exercises. To
begin testing the team, we simulated a major earthquake in
California this morning at 6 a.m, no notice to the team, to see
and make sure that we are reinforcing these procedures so that,
as you point out, we are not 72 hours after disaster strikes
getting critical resources there in support of the governors.
This process of building this team and enhancing what you
have given us, the tools, is really what we are focused on in
this 2009 season. There is tremendous capability that has been
built and the legal construct that often times your work, the
Subcommittee's work, and the legislation's past has addressed.
Now it is our responsibility to make sure we can implement that
fully.
So as we go through this and build these integral
partnerships--Secretary Napolitano, as you pointed out, and
Nancy Ward, who I just cannot say enough great things about,
having worked with her as a State Director, having her serve in
that role and helping transition as I came on board, and now,
again, a very strong regional administrator as part of the FEMA
family. As you pointed out, she brought a lot of common-sense
approach and got a good team to address the challenges we face
in the recovery, and that is a continual commitment that we
have.
As I serve in this capacity, coming from a State director
and working with Secretary Napolitano, as she was a former
governor, we very much bring the experience that we were once,
too, customers of our Federal family and the challenges we face
in trying to help our citizens. And we continue to work towards
that, and we are working on our State partners to give them
more ownership of this process.
We know that, as you point out, temporary housing--how do
we house people after a disaster--is not a solution that we are
going to be able to bring from Washington and fit all States.
We really want to work with our States as we have developed
some ideas and concepts to really work with our States and say,
what other ideas have you come up with. How do we make sure
that we are able to capture what resources are there, what is
the best way to address that. We know that there is no one
solution that fits every scenario, and we want to make sure
that we are working with the States to build those housing task
forces, so that as, unfortunately, these may occur in the
future, we have more options as we go forward.
It is again, multidiscipline, multi-team approach. We need
to have that ownership and buy in at all levels and integrate.
And when I said working together, I think sometimes when we
look at our planning process, we are so government-centric, we
forget that the community's a lot more than government.
As you have here, some of the volunteer agencies that are
represented, of course, our partners, the American Red Cross,
the people that promote the United Way with 2-1-1, and
brokering those resources is critical, that we bring about that
team approach and that we work as not just representing
government but what the private sector does.
I mean, to me, it is always the challenge--does it make
sense to be distributing supplies when we have an open grocery
store, but we have other areas in the community that are not
served? And we cannot do that if our focus is we are just going
to build a government-centric team and we do not recognize. We
have to build a team that involves all the partners that can
serve and support our citizens. But most importantly, making
sure our citizens understand they have a role to be as prepared
as they can so that when disaster strikes, we can focus on the
most vulnerable citizens because we have done our part to get a
plan to be ready.
Finally, the last thing, Madam Chairman, as my time runs
out, if we can just ask folks--all this work that your
Subcommittee is doing, we can do a lot more if people do one
more thing when disaster strikes. If you and your family are
OK, check on a neighbor. We can do a lot more working together
than we can just trying to do it from a government-centric
approach.
Senator Landrieu. Spoken like a true local FEMA
administrator. I thank you. And we will give you as much time
as you need. Thank you for sticking to the 5 minutes, but I
want to be very liberal with you in your time because I do
think that you have a great message to bring to the Nation.
General Grass.
STATEMENT OF MAJOR GENERAL FRANK GRASS,\1\ DIRECTOR OF
OPERATIONS, U.S. NORTHERN COMMAND
General Grass. Chairman Landrieu, Senator Burris, thank you
for the opportunity today to represent and present comments of
the defense support to civil authorities that we do at NORTHCOM
everyday. I would like to take just a moment to introduce my
executive officer, Commander Dan Baxter, who grew up in
Jefferson Parish, Louisiana, a great naval aviator, and has
many relatives living there today. He definitely understands
the hurricane season, ma'am.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of General Grass appears in the Appendix
on page 48.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Landrieu. Very nice to meet you.
Commander Baxter. Thank you.
General Grass. We at U.S. Northern Command are privileged
to be a member of the whole U.S. Government approach to
disaster response, including active Guard and Reserve,
alongside our Federal, State, tribal and local partners.
We started our planning this year well in advance of the
past year. We stand ready to assist the primary Federal
agencies in responding quickly to man-made and natural
disasters when directed by the President or the Secretary of
Defense. When requested and approved by appropriate Federal
officials, in accordance with the national response framework,
we support civil authorities by providing specialized skills
and assets to save lives, reduce suffering, and restore
infrastructure in the wake of catastrophic events in the
homeland.
Last year, during one of the most destructive hurricane
seasons on record, we supported the Department of Homeland
Security and the Federal Emergency Management Agency in
responding to three major hurricanes, Hurricanes Gustav, Hanna
and Ike, within a 13-day period.
We continued to take significant steps in improving our
response capabilities. First of all, we have incorporated the
Joint Staff standing execution order to streamline defense
support to civil authorities within operational planning for
the 2009 hurricane season. This Joint Staff Execution Order
provides U.S. Northern Command commander the authority to
establish operational staging areas, Federal mobilization
centers, national logistic support areas, and Department of
Defense base support installations to support FEMA. In
addition, our 10 full-time defense coordinating officers and
their staffs coordinate and plan continually with their
respective FEMA regions.
In collaboration with the Department of Defense and the
Department of Homeland Security, we have also developed pre-
scripted mission assignments for FEMA. We have 24 of those
approved currently. It provides a menu of response capabilities
with a cost to FEMA so they can quickly respond and request
those mission assignments, based on anticipated requirements of
medical evacuation, damage assessment and commodity
distribution, to mention just a few.
Finally, in 2009 February, we co-hosted the first National
Guard and Northern Command Hurricane Planning Conference, in
South Carolina. It brought together adjutant generals from the
Eastern and Gulf Coast States, along with the chief of the
National Guard Bureau and General Renuart, my boss, to the
opportunity to look at gaps and also work with FEMA and other
interagencies, and provide a list of shortfalls that we
anticipate, based on current deployments, for the 2009
hurricane season.
Additional planning for the 2009 hurricane season included
discussions with U.S. Transportation Command on aeromedical
evacuation, general population evacuation, discussions with the
Department of Homeland Security and also FEMA, Health and Human
Services, and our service component commands. All of these are
planning conferences and table-top exercises we have conducted
in preparation for the season.
If and when called, Northern Command continues to stand
ready to provide robust support to civil authorities during the
2009 hurricane season. Thank you for the opportunity to present
today, and I stand ready to answer your questions.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you, General. We very much
appreciate it. Senator Burris.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR BURRIS
Senator Burris. Thank you very much, Madam Chairman. And to
our distinguished panel, it is certainly a good opportunity to
listen and learn what we are preparing for.
Mr. Fugate, we know that we had a bad--it was not quite a
tornado. We hear a lot about hurricanes, but inland a hurricane
is a tornado, and that is what we get in Illinois. And my home,
as a matter of fact, is in Tornado Alley down in Southern
Illinois. And we just had a big storm come through a few weeks
ago, and it was not quite at the tornado level. They called it
a ``dorado.'' But they come up with this new name for it, but
it is high winds that reaches about 75 miles an hour.
Is that correct, Mr. Fugate? Is that what they call it now,
a dorado?
Mr. Fugate. That is one term they use. You also may hear it
called a microburst. My experience has been if you lose your
roof, it is kind of academic. It was a strong----
Senator Burris. It is a hell of a storm. Right.
Mr. Fugate. Yes, sir.
Senator Burris. And we had quite a bit of damage. And, of
course, our governor has asked for some assistance, and I am
just hoping that assistance would be forthcoming because,
unfortunately, in Southern Illinois, there is a lot of poverty
and it is just not that much resources. So I just hope that we
can get some assistance on that.
Are you familiar with that request? Has it been put in for
Southern Illinois yet?
Mr. Fugate. No, sir, I am not. We will research that. It
could still be at the region. I have not seen it.
Senator Burris. It was about 6 weeks ago.
Mr. Fugate. Yes, sir. It may have already come through. I
have been on the job for about 2 weeks and 3 days, so if I have
not seen it, I will find out where it is at, sir.
Senator Burris. Check it out for us.
General, I was down in my National Guard facility, down at
Camp Lincoln the other day, and we were talking about a
coordination of the disasters of what our National Guard does.
We also have another issue called flooding over that
Mississippi River that ends up in New Orleans. But it comes
down through Illinois, roaring like a Mack truck doing 90 down
I-55. And it leaves in its wake a lot of flooding.
And I was just wondering, how does NORTHCOM coordinate with
the National Guard in terms of the disaster coordination? Does
it go through the National Guard first or who is really in
charge there?
General Grass. To answer your question, our coordination is
with the National Guard Bureau, but the first response will
always be with the National Guard supporting the State and
local officials.
We, though, immediately upon indications that there is a
disaster pending, we will begin to coordinate with the National
Guard in case there are gaps in their capability to respond.
And I talk with the National Guard chief of operations daily,
looking across the country, looking at where they have forces
deployed so we are prepared to respond if they have gaps.
We recently responded to the flood in the Red River of the
North in North Dakota, working with the National Guard in North
Dakota and Minnesota. And we provided some active duty forces
to back them up, at the request of the Federal Emergency
Management Agency. And we prepositioned six aircraft.
Senator Burris. Pardon me. So you say your request also
could be from FEMA to you.
Now, does that have to originate at the state level? It
generally originates at the State level.
Mr. Fugate. Senator, the process by which we would activate
NORTHCOM would be at the request of the State, and we would not
have assets within either your National Guard or other Federal
assets, and it was appropriate. We would mission Task D folks
at NORCOM to provide that assistance.
But one of the things we have done--and this goes back to
some of the issues that Madam Chairman had raised previously. A
lot of times, these would be requests that we had not planned
ahead of time.
What we have done is after Hurricane Katrina, and then
after the hurricanes last year, we have developed what we call
a pre-scripted mission, which is, essentially, we are putting
together the types of things that we would be likely asking for
from NORTHCOM. We write these missions out very clearly what we
are trying to accomplish. NORTHCOM then identifies the
resources, trains those resources, and have them ready to go so
that rather than trying to describe or call up pieces to do
something, we can activate a mission package that NORTHCOM can
then execute in support of our mission, which is working
through those States.
So if it exceeds the capability of that National Guard, we
often times have built these packages for the threats we know
about, so that whether it was to do a flood fight, whether it
was to support mass care, whether it was to support commodity
distribution or bring in specific equipment, these are the
types of things that we have written out. I believe there are
over 260 of those missions we have already written out. And
that is in addition to the capability NORTHCOM could do in
addition to the support we would have from the Federal family
for things we had not written one on.
One of the things we try to do in our after-action reports
is capture anything that was different that we either needed to
adjust that mission or we needed to create a mission support
for. So that is a constantly evolving process each time we go
through a disaster.
Senator Burris. Well, gentlemen, I have naturally been a
civilian for so long, coming back into the government. I think
the general public has no idea of the preparation and planning
that goes into these disaster. And what I am certainly saying
as a public official, it is good that I know these things so,
hopefully we can get a message out to the people that we are
really prepared to assist in these situations, which leads me,
Mr. Fugate, to another question.
Are you familiar with what the University of Illinois has
with this super computer that they are simulating the tornadoes
and the hurricanes, and simulating disasters on these computer
models?
I was down at the University of Illinois, which has the
fastest computer, Madam Chairman, in the whole country. And
what they showed me a demonstration of is a simulated tornado.
And they can then study this, and then actually prepare, based
on the atmospheric conditions that are taking place and the
development of the various winds and velocities, and all the
other elements that go to make up a tornado, as well as
simulating floods and a disaster, even at the city of Chicago.
They have this computer design that, say, if there is a
disaster in Chicago, where are evacuation routes.
Do you know of any other facility where this is being
studied computer-wise or these simulations are taking place?
Mr. Fugate. Senator Burris, I know there are a lot of
different programs out there. I do not know directly about
this, but I will ask my staff to get with your staff so I can
be briefed on it, sir.
Senator Burris. Yes. We would certainly like to let you
know what the University of Illinois is really coming up with
in terms of the simulations and the preparations for it.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you, Senator.
I am actually aware of a center like that in Louisiana. I
do not know if our computers are as fast as yours, but we will
see. I think it is; the battle of the computers here between
Illinois and Louisiana. But I am very impressed with what
several of our universities have done on the heels of
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita, and using technology that was
there, and building some strategic partnerships.
So let's explore the opportunity because there may be some
real expertise out there, Mr. Fugate; I know there is at the
University of Lafayette because I have seen it. Perhaps,
Senator Burris has a suggestion as well.
I would like to get to my line of questioning if I could,
Senator, and we will come back.
I wanted to ask, first, Mr. Fugate, what are your top three
priorities? I know you have many, but if you could, for this
Subcommittee--because we would like to work with you. We are
going to push. We are going to work with you, but push to get
the very best systems we can.
So what are your top three priorities as you are stepping
in to an agency that has really been on the front line in many
ways these last few years? And I am certain that you have
discussed this with the Secretary and with the highest levels
of this Administration. So would you outline that for us now?
Mr. Fugate. Yes, ma'am. They are rather broad, they are
easy to communicate, and they require a lot of moving pieces,
and they are very simple.
My first and my greatest priority is to increase the
responsibility of participation of our citizens to prepare for
disaster. I truly believe that far too many of us who do not
get ready, do not prepare, often times put our most vulnerable
citizens in jeopardy as we compete for those needed resources.
And in looking at these large-scale type disasters, I know that
the more that those of us that can be ready, can be prepared,
the more successful the team will be. That is one.
Two. I really have come into this job with the
understanding that in our response to the immediate needs to a
State and a governor, we need to be focused on the outcome we
are trying to achieve and not necessarily look at process. I am
challenging the team, as we have been participating in
hurricane exercises, to not merely define our response by our
capabilities, but define the response by what is needed to
support an impacted State and local government, recognizing
there are many parts of that partnership.
But as an example, it does not seem to me to be very
effective in search and rescue operations that if we are not
reaching the injured quickly, that we are mobilizing, staging
and assessing, and it is still 2, 3 days into the event, and we
have not reached people, we have not changed that outcome. So I
would rather take the approach of let's define what that
outcome should be. Let's then work in partnership and say,
rather than waiting for a disaster and trying to bring it from
the outside, how do we build that capability within those
communities, within those States? And then where the Federal
Government responds, how do we do that.
But speed and stabilization have to be based upon not what
we can build capability to and say that is what the response
will be, but look at what could happen and go, if that does,
have we got all the parts of the team working together,
including our support from the National Guard, from our active
duty and reserve components, to achieve that? And not merely
go, we are going to incrementally improve something.
I think that starts getting back to the crux of some of
your issues that you raised, some of the challenges we had in
2008, such as hospitals that we had not gotten generators pre-
planned for. We need to do that ahead of time, because it is
not a generator, it is getting that hospital back on line. And
that may mean a generator, an electrician, or a mechanic. And
if you just look at one piece of it, you did not get the
outcome, which was getting that hospital back on line so you do
not have to evacuate it. And that is one of the things that I
learned and continue to bring forth. So that response, based on
changing outcomes.
The third piece--and this is a piece I have seen in much of
what you have been trying to get in testimony; it is much of
what you have been writing about--is what is recovery? We keep
talking about long-term recovery; we keep trying to build it.
And I keep walking away from it. I am not sure that all the
pieces understand what we are trying to do. And I certainly
recognize the Stafford Act all by itself will not achieve what
we need to achieve. But if we do not have some focal point that
says this is where we are going, then I think we get lost in
our housing programs. We get lost in these solutions because
they are not really tied to that outcome.
It is a very simplistic approach, but it helps me guide an
outcome that I can articulate and begin looking at the variety
of resources we have at the Federal level to support State, and
that is reestablishing a tax base in a community within a time
frame that I would say no greater than 5 years, that equals or
exceeds that tax base prior to the event. And this is
recognizing you do not want to just take 5 years, but in an
event like Hurricane Katrina, where we have so much rebuilding
to take place, that it is----
Sometimes people say it may be a simplistic measure, but
having been in government most of my life, tax bases are a good
indicator of the health of the economy. It tells us how many
homes we have. It tells me that businesses are buying permits
and people are buying cars. It tells me that I can provide for
the services, such as schools and other components. And it
gives me a chance to start looking at programs that can come
in, such as HUD dollars from Community Block Development
Grants, training dollars that come in from the Department of
Labor, working with Commerce and other groups and SBA to make
sure that--sometimes disasters happen as a community is
pivoting economically, and it does not make sense if you do not
recognize that just putting it back will not change the
economic outcome, and we still end up with a failure; so
looking at something that may not be the best answer in all
cases, but from the standpoint of being able to give us a focal
point to start driving recovery. Not just merely administering
the Stafford Act, but really getting to the point where a
community has their tax base in tact, which is a good indicator
that they can continue those services that have been
successful.
The housing mission, getting schools open, providing public
safety, setting the stage for business to thrive, helps me
articulate a view that says as much as we work as a team to
respond to the governor in a disaster--it is not FEMA. We
merely are articulating, on behalf of the President, the team
approach of all of our Federal agencies. That approach in
recovery was just, to me, one of the things; that you cannot
have a great response and not recover is still a failure.
It gives us a better opportunity to start looking at
holistically what Federal programs do we already have, what
authorities we already have. And even though FEMA may not have
those programs, helping provide that focus of the Stafford Act,
parts of the program doing what it can, but also bringing in
the rest of the Federal family to help a local government and a
State re-establish that government, that tax base, which in
turn is a reflection that we have been able to achieve these
things, such as housing, jobs, and maintaining the community
infrastructure.
Senator Landrieu. Well, let me say, Mr. Fugate, what you
have just outlined is music to my ears. And the people that I
represent will be very grateful to hear such a clear and
passionate vision of what is needed and, truly, what has been
lacking for many years here, and your focus on citizens and
empowering them to make decisions that help us make all of this
much better, even though these are very difficult challenges,
whether it is hurricanes, earthquakes, tornadoes, or great
floods.
Your focus on results as opposed to process, I cannot tell
you how happy that makes this Senator. And what you just said
about trying to define what recovery is because I myself have
searched for that, and your focus on defining it as restoring
the tax base, either 100 percent or 120 percent, or being
satisfied with 80 percent. Whatever we decide it is, at least
it gives us a goal that we all know we are working toward. And
I think that is a very excellent vision that you have outlined,
and I most certainly can appreciate the significance of it.
Let me ask you this question, which I have to bring up to
you because it is a very tough issue at home, is the V-zone
issue.
Can you take a minute to explain to the country what a V-
zone is, how many parts of the country are going to be affected
by the Federal Government's current policy on V-zones, and why
we are struggling right now with what we rebuild and what we do
not rebuild?
I am happy that FEMA released, I think, 60 percent of $33
million or so that we have tied up in this issue which affects
the building of fire stations, police stations along the coast
of Louisiana, Mississippi. All the coastal communities from
Texas to Mississippi to Florida are going to be affected as
well as many communities alongside rivers. And I am going to
get a map of the United States with all the V-zones on it so
people can understand.
You may find yourself in one of these V-zones. And if a
tornado comes, Senator Burris, and destroys areas in the V-
zones, the reimbursement that your community thinks they may be
getting from the Federal Government is not necessarily going to
happen.
So I would like Mr. Fugate to take a minute, and I am going
to press you on how we can try to resolve this for our State.
But go ahead.
Mr. Fugate. Madam Chairman, a V-zone is a velocity zone. It
refers to the Flood Insurance Program in determining risk, that
these are areas that have the highest risk. And we have had, as
a policy within the Nation, to direct new growth away from the
most vulnerable, most hazardous areas. That is a good policy;
it makes sense.
The challenge, though, however, is as we go back and re-map
and identify these areas, we are often times finding that we
have many communities that were built in the V-zone and
historically are there--and as we had developed our policy of
passively directing construction out of there and again, not
wanting to put new growth there. But when you had a disaster,
if something was damaged there, we would relocate.
Well, there are probably opportunities in a small event,
where we had only a few homes, that relocation would make
sense. But when you are dealing with the challenges we find
across the Gulf Coast and other places that, when you look at
the new data that would suggest it is a high velocity or a
high-risk area, merely using the passive approach of removal
and not rebuilding the totally destroyed but allowing repairs
to damaged buildings, but mitigating, really did not recognize
that we still have to ask the question that as good stewards,
we do not want to promote growth in a hazardous area, but if it
is already there, can we not look at engineering? And I
understand, Madam Chairman, you have just come back from the
Netherlands where they do a lot more active engineering to
protect property that we would look at as being in a vulnerable
zone.
So I think we are reaching a point, where as we come back
and we discuss the reauthorization of the National Flood
Insurance Program and we look at V-zones, we have the immediate
issues you are facing right now in your district that we are
working under our current rules and regulations. But also
looking at, as we go forward, is it time to recognize that
there are many places along coastal communities that are going
to face this same challenge in a disaster; that we have to
recognize it?
If we are going to allow a repair to occur if we mitigate,
why would a destroyed building not also be considered the same
factor? And should we not be looking at if we can engineer a
solution that keeps the public safe, reduces the future
damages, does not commit to new growth in these areas but
allows those historical communities to rebuild as they were,
but better so they are not damaged. I think that is something
we have to ask ourselves as a country. And this will be, again,
through your leadership and through the process of Congress,
looking at reauthorization that we want guidance on.
But I think we have to recognize that for far too many
areas, that a passive approach of relocation only does not
provide options that communities need to be able to continue.
As you pointed out numerous times, doing an alternative project
for a fire station fire away from the community it is supposed
to protect does not make any sense.
Senator Landrieu. And I want the public to understand the
significance of this issue. Right now, we have communities that
have been in place for hundreds of years, that are vibrant
communities, vital communities, that are shipping communities,
that have been designated as V-zones. The current law says FEMA
will--you can repair your home, but we will not build a fire
station, we will not build a post office. We will not build a
library.
So the question then becomes how viable a community can you
remain without a fire station, without a police station,
without a library? And that is a big question. And when this
map is put up, which I do not have today, it is going to show
all the V-zones in the country and how many millions of people,
millions and millions and millions of people, live in V-zones,
which are in this Senator's State. I can promise you this is
going to be a major debate on this reauthorization of flood
insurance.
As you know, I have a hold on that bill. That hold is going
to remain until this issue gets resolved in a way that I
believe, or my Subcommittee--I am only one Senator, but this
Subcommittee is going to work very close with you to find a
rational approach, which is part of what motivated me to go to
the Netherlands because I think that they have an extremely
rational approach to this issue, which is a whole different
system we will not get into at this hearing, but we will have
some more hearings on that subject.
I have been joined by my Ranking Member, and I would like
to recognize him now because, as I was pointing out, he and I
have quite a challenge. And why I love having him on my
Subcommittee, when I pointed this map out to him, he said,
``And, yes, Strom Thurman was there through most of these.''
Senator Graham. He did not miss many of them.
Senator Landrieu. So he is ready to work side by side with
me.
And let me correct myself. When I pointed out earlier,
Senator--the blue is actually the route of Hurricane Rita,
which was one of the second largest, I think, storms of all of
these, and Hurricane Katrina was the yellow. I said the
reverse. And I, of course, should know these patterns better
than anyone. So Hurricane Rita was the blue and Hurricane
Katrina was the yellow, and this was done before Hurricane Ike.
And I am going to put Hurricane Ike up there because it really
ran right smack into Galveston. And I am sure you have had some
major storms in your time.
But, Senator Graham, let me recognize you at this time.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR GRAHAM
Senator Graham. Well, thank you, Madam Chairman. That would
be interesting modern art, and it is just scary that it
represents hurricanes. Hurricane Hugo came through South
Carolina and was very devastating.
One, I appreciate the work of the Chairman of this
Subcommittee. I have never met anybody in the entire Congress
more dedicated to a cause than you are to this Subcommittee. I
am just trying to stay up with you. But South Carolina is
certainly in harm's way.
I want to thank all the folks at the State, local and
Federal level who help our fellow citizens with disaster. In
Myrtle Beach, we had a huge fire. The fire did a lot of damage
to Myrtle Beach. And it is not just hurricanes. The Red Cross
was there. So hurricanes are what we are talking about today,
but coastal communities can be hit in many different ways.
Ron Osborne, the Director of the Emergency Management
Division, the Office of Adjutant General, Madam Chairman, could
not be here today, but he prepared a report about hurricane
preparedness, and I would like to submit it to the record. They
are doing an exercise in South Carolina, a major exercise
today. But Mr. Osborne is a very smart guy, and I would like to
put this into the record and share it with the Subcommittee.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement from Ron Osborne submitted by Senator
Graham for the record appears in the Appendix on page 93.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Landrieu. Without objection.
Senator Graham. And one final thought. As you talk about--
when you go down to the coast of South Carolina, land is
obviously very valuable, but there are a lot of minority
communities and where do they go? I mean, there are people that
have been there, literally, generation after generation after
generation, and where do they go and what do they do? For
someone that may live in Nebraska or on the upper part of South
Carolina where hurricanes are not such a factor, I think we
want to make sure that our coastal residents can get help.
I mean, people are not being irresponsible. They are not
living in areas for mudslides. I mean, so many people in our
country live along the coast, and it is a rich tradition
culturally, the Gullah culture in South Carolina, and I want to
hang on to it. I want to make sure that we have that rational
approach.
So, Madam Chairman, I will help you in any way I can to
make sure that when a community is hurt, the community is
rebuilt, and that community includes fire stations, libraries
and other aspects of a community. Because if you are not
willing to invest in those things, you have lost a community,
and these communities are worth hanging on to.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much. Let me ask the
General a question if I might.
You said that the exercises that you have recently
conducted identified some gaps, General, in the organization
between NORTHCOM and the National Guard.
Could you identify for us one or two or three of those gaps
that you identified and what you are doing to close them?
General Grass. Madam Chairman, as we met in South Carolina
in February, the first thing we did was we brought together the
staff from the National Guard from each of the 11 coastal
States. And we sat with the National Guard, FEMA, and then we
brought in a representative from Beaufort County, county-level
first responder, and then we brought in the State coordinating
officer.
What we did is we walked through those gaps from how the
locals would be responding, how the State would respond. Then
the National Guard gave us a lay down by State of where their
shortfalls were. Then FEMA came in and explained what
capabilities they may be requesting, and then General Renuart
summarized the table-top exercise.
I would tell you that the biggest shortfall in this current
hurricane season probably is in the brigade structure within
the National Guard because of the number of brigades deploying.
Even though it is a shortfall in certain regions--and it is not
a shortfall across the Nation. So it is a matter of
reallocating forces. And the National Guard is working very
closely right now with the State's adjutant general to identify
those forces that can fill those shortfalls.
So the brigade structure was one area. Another area was the
number of rotary wing aircraft that could be deploying. Again,
we looked across the States, and there are plenty of assets
available. It is, again, identifying those well in advance, who
would back up who within the States. And on top of that, we
have looked closely at the active component, both Army, Navy,
Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard assets, working with the
Coast Guard through DHS to see where their assets would be
available as rotary wing would be called into the emergency.
The last area that I would mention that is of concern to
us, and we worked closely last week with U.S. Transportation
Command, DHS, FEMA, Health and Human Services, and the
Veterans' Administration, is aeromedical evacuation. And I
think we have improved greatly since last hurricane season on
the ability to identify patients that may be moved, how to
receive them on the outbound end. And the problem I think that
we will face, and we have brought it up and discussed at great
length, is the release time of those patients at local and
state levels, because if you wait until the last moment, we can
only move so many patients.
So we are trying to have our defense coordinating officers
working closely with Administrator Fugate's Federal
coordinating officers to talk to the locals and give them that
time line, and say, if you make the decision 48 hours, here is
the number of patients that we can still move and get aircraft
in.
Senator Landrieu. Now, I am going to ask my staff for the
next hearing to design a chart along the Coast from Texas to
New York, and indicate how many nursing home patients live
within 30 miles of the coast, and I am going to provide those
numbers for you. Because, as you know, in Hurricane Katrina, we
had the very unfortunate incidents of dozens of patients
drowned in those nursing homes. And, of course, it was quite
traumatic for the families as well as for the victims,
obviously.
I do not think people realize, like Senator Graham just
said, how many people live near this coast. And not everyone
that lives near the coast has an automobile. Not everyone is
well. Not everyone is strong enough or young enough to move
out--they have got to have help moving out--or be wealthy
enough to afford the several thousand dollars that it costs to
leave your home for several days. Even if you manage to just
find shelter in a tent, there is some expense associated with
that. And I just do not think people have an idea of this that
have not recently gone through what some of our States have
gone through.
So that is going to be an interesting focus. And I think
that you have identified this MedEvac situation as something
with which the National Guard and NORTHCOM can be very helpful.
Because, as you know, States do not have helicopters to move
their citizens out of harm's way. So it would be helpful to
have these Federal assets available to conduct this evacuation.
Senator Graham. General Grass, it is not a question of lack
of capacity in terms of overall numbers for the Guard; it is
just the resources may not be in the right spot. Is that
correct?
General Grass. Senator, yes, sir.
Senator Graham. And I hear recruiting and retention is
pretty good now in the Guard?
General Grass. Yes, sir. They are over-strength right now.
Senator Graham. How important is the Guard to hurricane
assistance in terms of the different agencies involved? How
important does the Guard--what role do they play?
General Grass. I cannot talk for the National Guard being a
Title 10 Federal officer right now serving at Northern Command.
But I grew up in the Missouri National Guard, so I will talk
about my experiences from the past. But they are the first
responders in support of the fire departments, the emergency
responders, and the governor. And so, they are going to be
there first. And it behooves us at NORTHCOM to understand their
capability, look at their response times, because if they are
successful at the local level, that is less Federal assets that
we have to put forward.
Senator Graham. You do not see any need from this
Subcommittee or the Armed Services Committee to plus up
anything? It is just to redistribute, reorganize what we have
got?
General Grass. Yes, Senator. The Congress has been very
gracious with the Department of Defense in our ability to look
at what we call the 10 essentials that we use in the homeland,
those capabilities that we respond to disasters. And we are
coming along very well and improving that capability,
especially in equipping of those 10 essentials.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you.
Mr. Fugate, would you comment, from your perspective, on
the role of the National Guard, whether you consider it to be
essential, and how you want to position your organization with
it?
Then also comment on the idea about a civilian-ready
reserve force that could supplement both FEMA and the National
Guard in terms of trained personnel that could be called out in
the event of a catastrophic disaster, which, obviously, we
cannot maintain on call every day, but it would be nice to
maybe have something like that.
Maybe that is partly what the Red Cross is going to do, or
maybe that is a role the National Guard can play. But if there
is a gap--please comment on the National Guard and then this
ready reserve idea.
Mr. Fugate. Thank you, Madam Chairman. The National Guard
is a key component of any State governor's ability to respond
to a variety of disasters. They are a force multiplier for the
local and State responders.
Again, with your leadership, upon my confirmation, one of
my first visits was with General McKinley, commanding general
of the National Guard Bureau, having worked very closely with
my TAG, knowing that relationship. And, again, we have a very
strong Statewide mutual aid system under EMAC. We leveraged
that with the National Guard so that as units rotate in and
out, we have capability, we identify other States. In addition
to that, there is a lot of work done within the TAGs to make
sure that things, such as your joint operation center training,
that they are ready to go and support each other in a disaster.
So I think it is a good team. It is a key component of our
national defense strategy. But most importantly, they are the
first of those assets available to governors on that governors'
authority, and those governors can request from other State
governors additional Guard units as part of their authority in
managing a disaster.
As far as the reserve component, there is actually some
requirements that have been provided in the Post-Katrina
Emergency Management Reform Act for FEMA to build and take our
existing structures and build a more professional response
force and provide more training and capabilities within our
reserve force. And so, we are looking at that.
As far as a standing reserve, that would be something I
would like to further research. But I think there are some
elements of that that we are already seeing in some of our
programs, where we are not creating so much formal reserve
processes, but building like community emergency response teams
through the CERT training; and in many cases, building
capabilities that are more adequately leveraged at the local
level by enhancing, through community emergency response teams,
through citizen corp capabilities, that people stand ready to
help in their neighborhoods and their communities when a
disaster strikes.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you. General Grass, When you did
your assessment of the Joint Task Force, one of the issues that
came up was the significance of particularly this coast. I
mean, all of our coasts have port assets. That, of course, must
be maintained, not just for the benefit of those communities,
but the Nation's economy depends--and in some measure you could
say the world's economy depends on the continued operations of
these major ports.
If you start from Houston and work your way up to Maine,
there are many major ports that can be affected. And we saw
when Hurricane Katrina hit, one of the largest, by volume,
ports in the Nation was shut down for a long period of time,
and the oil and gas operations off the Gulf Coast came
precariously close to shutting down as well.
Had Hurricane Rita hit Houston, which it did not--it hit
close to Houston. It was very interesting, as someone might
want to write what could have happened to the price of oil and
gas had both the Port of New Orleans and the Port of Houston--
and almost all offshore operations at that point would have
been shut down for quite some time. That did not happen, but it
would be an interesting research project.
But what is your responsibility to the ports to keeping
them open, and did you discuss that at your exercise, and could
you testify to that point, please?
General Grass. Madam Chairman, again, working with FEMA--
and I will give you an example of what we did during Hurricane
Ike last year. We work closely with the Coast Guard through DHS
and FEMA. And FEMA requested an amphibious ship be deployed
into the Gulf. And the Port of Galveston was devastated by
Hurricane Ike, and there was over a hundred obstacles in the
channel. And so, the USS Nassau was deployed there.
We have, any given day, two ships on the East Coast and two
ships on the West Coast, primarily amphibious ships that can
take on rotary wing helos. Also, it is the type that you unload
vessels out the back that can respond. And we had Navy Seabees
on board that went ashore, and they worked with the locals to
try to open the port facilities, again, working at the request
of FEMA.
Senator Landrieu. Now, you said you have two ships on the
East Coast and the West Coast. Do you have any on the Gulf
Coast?
General Grass. No, ma'am, not at this point. But the two on
the East Coast would respond.
Senator Landrieu. And they are able to get there in time or
be pre-positioned in the event you had enough notice?
General Grass. Yes, ma'am. If we receive a request from
FEMA, we are prepared to move those. And as we move those,
again, we are looking at the storm path to try to get them as
close into a port as we can outside of the storm path.
Senator Landrieu. Last question, Mr. Fugate, and I am going
to submit several, about pets, about community disaster loans,
and other things--trailers, alternative housing. But because my
time is short, and because the season is now, and because a
storm will hit, this debris removal for local communities is a
nightmare, and it causes unmitigated pain and suffering on the
part of local officials, that one of the first things they have
to do is remove debris. And we had just one headache after
another about FEMA's rules and regulations that went something
like this.
If the tree limb was more than 5 inches round, you got
reimbursed at a hundred percent, if it was 4 inches, you got 80
percent, and if it was 2 inches, you got 30 percent. I am
exaggerating a little bit. But for the purposes of this
hearing, what has been changed about debris removal in a
catastrophic or major storm? What hope could you give to these
local officials, that is one of their immediate headaches,
trying to just clear their streets, clear their roads so that
people can get back? Obviously, with debris there, no one can
move. That has to be done. And it seems to me that we keep
making mistake after mistake after mistake.
So what can you do as the FEMA director to put a system in
place that is clear, easy to use and cost effective? We are not
asking the Federal Government to always pick up 100 percent,
but we are asking the Federal Government to have clear rules
and regulations so the local officials can actually begin the
recovery, because without debris removal, there is no recovery.
Mr. Fugate. Madam Chairman, debris and emergency protective
measures are two of those things that I think that we have to
make sure we know what the outcome is so we can get there
quickly. And that is, to get debris, where, one, we can get
access in the community, and, two, we get the debris up so we
prevent the problems it creates and we begin the recovery.
There were some successful programs started. There were
pilots--I would like to revisit those--that provided a better
incentive financially to the local governments and States, who
went ahead and developed debris management plans. So they had
many of these questions answered, knew what they were going to
do.
But I think it is also incumbent upon us at FEMA to make
sure that our guidance is providing clear direction without
being a process that is so difficult, that as a local official,
the only way I can understand it is to hire a former FEMA
official as a contractor to explain to me the rules; that I am
now having to seek reimbursement from the Federal Government in
my time of need.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much.
Thank you. The panel has been wonderful. I wish we could
spend more time, but we will follow up. Thank you all.
If the second panel would take your seats, please. Thank
you very much for joining us. I would like to introduce all of
you, and then in the order that I do so, you are asked to
proceed with your opening remarks.
Our first witness today on the second panel will be George
Foresman. Mr. Foresman co-chairs the Advisory Board for the
Corporate Crisis Response Officers Association. He is also the
former Undersecretary for Preparedness and Emergency Response
at the Department of Homeland Security. The Corporate Crisis
Response Officers Association is a new organization chartered
to identify, train, and engage crisis response officers, as
local contact points for the public sector.
So I am, as Chairman of this Subcommittee--and you heard
Mr. Fugate say that we look to the private sector for partners.
We want to not only look to the private sector for partners,
but I want to look to the private sector for better
technologies, operations and efficiencies that we can, of
course, incorporate into the government response. And we thank
you very much for your testimony today. We are anxious to hear
your views and perspective.
Next, we will hear from Armond Mascelli. Mr. Mascelli is
Vice President of Disaster Operations at the American Red
Cross. Mr. Mascelli is responsible for initiating and
coordinating the Red Cross' response to major domestic
disasters, and managing the organization's disaster logistics,
technology and human resource systems.
I understand the Red Cross since Hurricane Katrina has gone
through a major reorganization, and we are looking forward to
hearing some of the outcomes today.
Finally, last but most certainly not least, Janet Durden,
President of the Northeast Louisiana Chapter of the United Way.
She served on the coordinating council for Louisiana 2-1-1, but
this is actually a nationwide emergency response system that I
think can be very helpful in all of the issues that we have
talked about this morning.
So, Mr. Foresman, if you will begin. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF GEORGE FORESMAN,\1\ ADVISORY BOARD CO-CHAIRMAN OF
THE READYCOMMUNITIES PARTNERSHIP, CORPORATE CRISIS RESPONSE
OFFICERS ASSOCIATION, FORMER UNDERSECRETARY, PREPAREDNESS AND
EMERGENCY RESPONSE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY
Mr. Foresman. Senator, thank you very much. I am pleased to
be here.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Foresman appears in the Appendix
on page 50.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Landrieu, thank you for the opportunity to be with
you this afternoon and to talk about the important work of the
ReadyCommunities Partnership. We have provided written
testimony and respectfully request that it be included in the
record.
The ReadyCommunities Partnership is an initiative for the
Corporate Crisis Response Officers Association. It seeks to
identify and implement best practices that help support
improvements in public and private sector disaster response and
recovery efforts. This initiative has grassroots, developed by
a coalition of public and private sector leaders who recognize
that better preparedness for emergencies and disasters could
not solely depend on the actions of the Federal Government or,
in fact, government alone.
This initiative is centered on a community-based approach
that seeks to further galvanize the resources of the public and
private sectors to address a large-scale crisis in a community.
These two sectors depend on each other on a day-to-day life of
a community as they collaborate on how to improve their
economic competitiveness, schools, and infrastructure.
The partnership operates under a tenet that the dependency
should be just as strong, if not stronger, during a crisis. Yet
today, even following Hurricane Katrina and countless other
disasters, a widespread cultural belief remains that envisions
crisis response and recovery during the first critical 72 hours
as being government-centered with private sector engagement
limited to those for-profit companies and not-for-profit
organizations that deliver essential services, like
electricity, phone, debris removal, or disaster aid.
As a result, the broader private sector is viewed as part
of the victim population rather than as a potential community
of resources to be leveraged to alleviate suffering and speed
up recovery, and the communities return to normal.
The ReadyCommunities Partnership seeks to give local,
political and business leaders, as well as emergency managers,
an additional low-cost tool to improve private sector
integration for pre-and post-event crisis management efforts,
while simultaneously acknowledging that it must be accomplished
in a manner that complements existing government-centered
community preparedness initiatives.
Specific to the challenges that we face for the upcoming
hurricane season, America's newest FEMA administrator, Craig
Fugate, has just provided you with a very compelling update on
FEMA's readiness for the upcoming season. I cannot think of a
better or more qualified professional to lead FEMA. I will also
offer that as someone who has been associated with the field
for more than a quarter of a century, Craig and his senior
management team are collectively the most diverse, qualified,
and hands-on experienced group to ever occupy the senior seats
of that agency. This is bolstered by the talented group and its
parent organization, the Department of Homeland Security.
It gives me optimism, and it should give optimism to
Americans, that the Federal Government is continuing to reform
and improve in its ability to support communities and States in
dealing with emergencies and disasters of all kinds. But to be
fair, however, even with this great leadership team, the
Federal Government is but one part of America's preparedness
equation. Federal readiness should not imply national
readiness. Other parts, local and State government, non-
profits, the private sector, and America's citizens, have
equally compelling and important roles in all aspects of
communities, not just government actions. We need to make sure
that the entire community is ready for the hurricane season.
Our recent work with the private sector relative to the flu
outbreak provides anecdotal evidence to suggest that private
sector preparedness efforts remain inconsistent and not
necessarily coordinated with the government officials in
communities where these businesses operate. Even with the
heightened attention to nationwide pandemic planning, for
instance, over the past 4 years, there has been surprise at the
number of businesses, large and small, who have done nothing at
the assumption that their local, State and Federal Governments
will and can do everything when a crisis like a hurricane or a
pandemic appears at the front door.
But yet, at the same time, we have seen innovative
hurricane preparedness efforts along the Gulf Coast and the
Atlantic Coast, between local and State governments, and the
private sector, and in States such as Florida. But,
unfortunately, these are not replicated across all States
vulnerable to a hurricane strike. In light of both, we are left
to conclude that, on the whole, community preparedness with the
right mix of public and private collaboration and mutual
dependence is lacking. This will create unrealistic
expectations and requirements for government, and especially
for the Federal Government. This Subcommittee knows that with
preparedness efforts, leaders make the difference, business and
government making the political and economic business case that
crisis preparedness is essential to the physical and economic
survival.
In light of today's severely cash-strapped communities,
States and businesses, there is very little margin for error in
terms of the efficiencies applied to how we respond to and
recover from disasters. The ReadyCommunities Partnership has
seen the value of businesses, large and small, designating a
corporate crisis response officer to work hand in hand with
government in the preparation for and response and recovery to
a crisis. These predesignated contact points, along with pre-
event collaboration, enhance the resiliency of a community in a
crisis because when something bad happens, the right public and
private officials are talking at the right time about the right
issues.
Thank you for the opportunity to appear today, and I look
forward to your questions.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much.
Mr. Mascelli, am I pronouncing that correctly?
Mr. Mascelli. Yes, ma'am, you are.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF ARMOND MASCELLI,\1\ VICE PRESIDENT, DISASTER
OPERATIONS, AMERICAN RED CROSS
Mr. Mascelli. Senator, thank you very much. It is an honor
to testify before you on behalf of the American Red Cross. We
appreciate this opportunity to share with you some of the
details on our ability to respond to the challenges that may
face the American people during the coming months. Before I
begin my testimony, I would like to take this opportunity to
thank our new FEMA Administrator Fugate for his work in Florida
and to express the appreciation of the Red Cross for his
support to our disaster preparedness and response efforts in
that State.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Mascelli appears in the Appendix
on page 52.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
For more than 125 years, the Red Cross has provided relief
to the victims of disasters, helped families and individuals
prevent, prepare for, and respond to emergencies. From single-
family house fires to large-scale disasters like hurricanes,
the Red Cross works to provide essential life-saving and
sustaining services to those in need. We shelter, we feed, we
provide critical supplies and emotional support to those
impacted by disasters in communities across our country. Our
work relies heavily on generous contributions from the public,
including donations of time, money, and blood.
Today I will report on our preparations for the upcoming
hurricane season.
Our organization on a local and national level operates in
a constant cycle of responding to disasters and preparing for
the future. Red Cross regularly participates in activities to
build capacity, to partner, to plan, prepare, exercise, and
evaluate our capabilities.
Spring is a critical time of year for us because,
typically, we are responding to tornados and floods in one part
of the country, while at the same time preparing for potential
demands of the upcoming hurricane season. To meet expected
needs, material resources have been pre-positioned in 23
warehouses that we have across the country for easy access and
mobilization. We have completed a detailed assessment of our
communications equipment inventory and have verified the
readiness of our nationwide disaster fleet.
The National Shelter System is ready. It now contains
shelter locations and capacity information for over 55,000
buildings that could potentially be used as shelters across
this country. The National Shelter System is used for both
planning and operational decisions. It records all shelter
openings and closings and overnight populations on a daily
basis. We have made the National Shelter System available to
FEMA and to all the States free of charge. And it is also
currently being used by 12 other national non-government
partners.
Staffing for disaster operations is also a critical
function that requires advance planning. While we focus on the
use of local volunteers when possible, we also have a cadre of
people trained and available to leave their communities to go
to disasters. The number is now 50,000 available to travel,
which is a substantial increase from the 23,000 we had
available for Hurricane Katrina. These disaster workers are
trained for specific jobs, and we are now in the process of
evaluating availability for disaster assignment over the next
several months.
Since Hurricane Katrina, in part, as a result of several
after-action reports, including one from the Senate Committee
on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, the Red Cross
has focused more resources on coordination with the Federal,
State and local government. With support from FEMA, we
currently have brought full-time Red Cross representatives into
each of the 10 FEMA regional offices, and we also have two
additional staff who are working at the FEMA National
Headquarters. We have also tasked a staff member to work with
the National Disaster Housing Task Force.
During the last year, we have been working with State
governments in improving planning; for example, the Red Cross
and the state of Louisiana working toward a single unified
sheltering plan. Discussions are continuing with the State's
Department of Social Services and the Governor's Office of
Homeland Security Emergency Preparedness about mutual logistics
and sheltering for people with critical transportation needs.
We recently participated, in the State of Florida, in a
major disaster exercise with FEMA on a table-top exercise, to
model a Category 4 hurricane affecting Savannah, Georgia. We
also participated in a recent cabinet-level exercise that dealt
with a catastrophic hurricane scenario.
Identifying new and strengthening existing partnerships
continues to be a strong priority of my organization. On the
local level, chapters partner with local community, faith-based
and civic organizations. We have also stepped up efforts to
ensure that community 2-1-1 organizations have current disaster
information. I would like to acknowledge to Ms. Durden the good
work that the United Way has been doing in this area.
In addition, we have cultivated and strengthened
partnerships with such diverse groups as HOPE worldwide, the
National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the
Legal Services Corporation, and the Tzu Chi Buddhist
Foundation. In addition, we have worked closely with the
National Association of Judiciary Interpreters and Translators,
the Virtual Translation Center, the National Council of La
Raza, National Disability Rights Network, and Save the
Children. We have also worked with pet rights groups, such as
the U.S. Humane Society.
Seeing that my time is short, I will just move on to say
that the Red Cross is also involved and continuing to improve
our disaster response in a cost-effective way. In an economic
turndown, the needs of the most vulnerable are magnified by
disasters. At the same time, the donations to charitable
organizations are decreasing. Like many non-profit
organizations that depend on the generosity of donors, we are
faced with financial challenges.
The major disasters of 2008, such as the wildfires in
California, flooding in the Midwest, and Hurricanes Gustav and
Ike, created expenses that far outpaced donations. We were
fortunate that our organization received support from
Congress----
Senator Landrieu. You could try to wrap up, if you could. I
am sorry.
Mr. Mascelli. With that, I will conclude my presentation,
and if you have questions, I would be happy to answer them.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much. Ms. Durden.
STATEMENT OF JANET DURDEN,\1\ PRESIDENT, UNITED WAY OF
NORTHEAST LOUISIANA
Ms. Durden. Thank you, Chairman Landrieu. It is an honor
and a privilege to have this opportunity to be able to speak
today on behalf of the United Way and their 2-1-1 system across
America. As you are aware, 2-1-1 is an information referral
line that connects people to existing community resources, like
rent and mortgage assistance, as well as food and utility
assistance; however, 2-1-1 plays a vital role in disaster
response and recovery. Trained specialists assist callers in
times of natural disaster and crisis, providing real time
information on shelter locations, food and water distribution
sites, and all important evacuation routes. 2-1-1 disseminates
accurate information about the crisis and it relieves the very
overworked 9-1-1 dispatchers, who are also taking those non-
emergency calls.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Ms. Durden with attachments appears
in the Appendix on page 58.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As you are aware, 2-1-1 was truly a bright spot in a very
difficult time in our State in responding to 2005 Hurricanes
Katrina and Rita. Prior to the landfall of Hurricane Katrina,
the 2-1-1 in New Orleans had to close. Our United Way, the
United Way of Northeast Louisiana and Monroe, began taking all
the 2-1-1 calls that were directed from New Orleans. Overnight,
we expanded from a four-person call center there in Monroe to a
65-person 2-1-1. We had additional support that was
outstanding. From 2-1-1 call specialists around America, 25
States sent people to our community, and there were hundreds of
local volunteers that responded.
As a result of that, in Monroe, 2-1-1 responded to more
than 111,000 calls in 2 months. The call volume peaked at 7,358
the day that Hurricane Rita hit. After 2005, we were even
better prepared for 2008. Going into the hurricane season in
2000, we had a partially integrated telephony, a statewide
disaster plan, a centralized disaster database, and 24-hour a
day, 7-day a week coverage.
2-1-1 Louisiana answered more than 117,000 calls between
Hurricane Gustav hitting on August 31 and September 16, 2008.
In the peak of that, we were assisted by the 2-1-1 system in
California, which was invaluable in expanding our capacity. In
an 8-day window, when Hurricane Ike hit Texas in September, the
Texas 2-1-1 answered 157,000 calls, an absolutely incredible
response. Inland, the aftermath of Hurricane Ike caused
unprecedented flooding, as you are well aware, and wind damage
throughout the Midwest. The 2-1-1's in Missouri, Iowa, Indiana,
and Ohio played significant roles in their recovery efforts.
The 2009 preparation is well underway, and I am pleased to
report to you that we have complete integrated telephony
throughout the State of Louisiana. Most importantly, we have an
extended and enhanced relationship with the Louisiana State
government. I am pleased to tell you that we have had both Red
Cross, 2-1-1 and the National Guard embedded in DSS for months
of planning that have been underway. And third, I would tell
you that statewide, we have recruited and begun training
response volunteers if called upon. However, there remain
enormous vulnerabilities, and I would like to address those.
The current economic crisis has surged the call volume
beyond the current capacity of our system in many locations
around America. Most 2-1-1's are still in need of critical
elements for disaster response. For example, generators,
remote-controlled calling ability, telephone service priority
arrangements with telephone companies, and of significant
concern to all of us are the gaps in services along the U.S.
Atlantic coast.
To properly respond to disaster, 2-1-1's across America
need to unify technology and standard operating procedure to
ensure best responsiveness. Every resident must have 2-1-1
access on any kind of telecommunications device, particularly
cell phones. 2-1-1's need a system of national inoperability
with each other and other three-digit numbers.
Senator Landrieu, we are in desperate need of the Congress'
help to ensure both a reliable response to disaster and to
everyday needs. Fortunately, Congress can cure this
vulnerability during this session by passing the Calling For 2-
1-1 Act before the next event occurs.
Senator Landrieu, we are extremely grateful to you for your
steadfast support of this legislation, for your co-sponsorship
of the bill, and your ability to deliver on dedicated Federal
funding for Louisiana 2-1-1 this year. Thank you again for this
opportunity, and I welcome the opportunity to answer questions.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much. I really appreciate
the content of all of your testimony and the thoughtfulness
that went into it.
I would like to start, Mr. Mascelli, with questions here to
you about these charts,\1\ which represents the National
Shelter System. I know that this was probably in your testimony
in some detail, but could you take a minute to explain.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The charts referred to appear in the Appendix on pages 99 and
100.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These are all the, and the only, official Red Cross
shelters. And would you describe most of them as school
buildings or most of them as churches or places where people
worship? How would you describe the shelters if someone looked
at that map and said describe the actual buildings that those
dots represent?
Mr. Mascelli. Yes, Senator. You are right in the sense that
most of them are public buildings. Part of the criteria when we
look at buildings, along with safety construction, etc., is
that they have facilities there that could support a
population: Kitchens, bathrooms, etc. Schools and churches fill
that bill quite readily, so most of them are either churches or
schools throughout the United States.
We had the shelters before Hurricane Katrina, but after
Hurricane Katrina, we actually put those into a database. So
the first time, in a computer base, we could see where they
were at short notice, what might be available. And also, when
we actually have a disaster, our local chapters will report
back to us how many shelters are opening, numbers of people in
the shelters, etc.
Senator Landrieu. And the school issue is interesting to me
because, obviously, in a catastrophic disaster like the one
that we had, and others have had, when people move in to
schools for a long period of time, it is hard to actually
operate the school. And one of the essential ingredients of
recovery for parents with children is to get their children
back in school as soon as possible because, then, at least when
the children are in school, the parents can go about all the
work that they need to do to rebuild their home, their
business, etc.
How does the Red Cross approach the use of school buildings
in areas that could potentially suffer catastrophic flooding
and destruction? And do you have a backup plan in the event
that using schools in some areas might not be the best approach
in that circumstance?
Mr. Mascelli. There is right now work being done, but there
is a long way from a solution regarding--and you are absolutely
right, a place of catastrophic disaster. What happens when you
have large numbers of people that are dislocated on a sudden
basis for long periods of time? Now, there is the Housing Task
Force that FEMA has, that really should be the natural
connection from getting people from shelters into some other
type of housing. I know that looking at evacuations of people
to other areas, that is a possibility, but that has its own
trials and tribulations in terms of dislocating large numbers
of people to other communities.
So as it stands right now, the options are kind of limited
and this does press communities. We feel it quite a bit,
particularly when people evacuate from one community to go to
another community, and that community would like to get back to
normal again. So it is something that, until a solution comes
up, a ready solution comes up, for interim housing for large
numbers of people, we will still be struggling with that.
Senator Landrieu. In the Red Cross' model right now for the
sheltering program, do you have a timeframe of 1 week or 2
weeks or 3 days or 30 days? Your sheltering plan is, I know,
geared toward immediate, not long term assistance.
Mr. Mascelli. Right.
Senator Landrieu. So what is your explanation today of
that?
Mr. Mascelli. We look at emergency shelters for about a 30-
day period. We think after that, for a whole variety of other
reasons, that may not be a good environment for a lot of folks.
So unless absolutely no other option is available, we would
like the sheltering to be within a 30-day period.
Senator Landrieu. Mr. Foresman, this is still what I would
identify as one of dozens of gaps that I see across the board.
Do you have any comments about any private sector solution
that some of your members might be willing to put forward on
this particular issue?
Mr. Foresman. Well, Senator, I do. I have three points that
I would make.
First, I think that part of what you heard in Administrator
Fugate's testimony is this whole idea about getting to defining
the objective rather than defining the process. And I think
that is really critical, and you said it in your opening
statement, that part of it is about how do we link, because
disaster housing is very much of a community issue. It is a
State issue, it is a local issue.
The Federal Government is a supporter in a lot of different
ways, but it is about being able to partner those private
sector entities with those local governments, not only in the
context of crisis preparedness for the first 72 hours, but what
are the innovative solutions, particularly doing large-scale
housing operations. And I think FEMA is to be commended for
having gotten the task force report out on housing, but we have
got to address the broader issue of what are we going to do if,
God forbid, we have 200,000 Americans that are homeless again?
Because the solutions that we currently have on the table will
not solve that for us. And as my colleague from the Red Cross
has correctly pointed out, you cannot leave them in schools
indefinitely.
The second point, we have seen through a lot of our
corporate sponsors, who have engaged in a very active way--
Sprint is a very big player in the ReadyCommunities' initiative
Previstar. Previstar has provided some technology about being
able to identify resources on a more ready scale, for instance,
in a local community, not being dependent on the traditional
government resource identification, but private sector tools
that allow the private sector to put in their resources and
make those available to local officials, to the nonprofit
community, to a variety of others to be able to deal with it.
The final comment is this, Senator. We have been wrestling
with a model of disaster preparedness and recovery in this
country for the past 25 years that, apparently, is not good for
catastrophic events. What you heard in the last hour with
Administrator Fugate's testimony and his vision, what you are
hearing from the colleagues of 2-1-1 and from the Red Cross and
the United Way is 21st Century thinking for disaster response
and recovery. That is what the ReadyCommunities initiative is
about. Let's not put it all on the back of government to try to
be everything to everybody in the midst of a crisis. Let's
truly take a community approach to a community problem to deal
with a crisis event.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much. And I want you to
know that I agree 100 percent with what you said, but I also
would stress that it is important for the Federal Government to
be able to function, and to function efficiently and well.
Because when it does not, the other parties, whether they are
private sector or nonprofit or States or locals, have that much
more of a difficult time.
So you are correct. The focus of this hearing is, is the
Nation ready, not just is FEMA ready or Homeland Security ready
or the Federal Government ready. Is the Nation ready? But it is
important for, at least, the Federal framework to be clear. And
I think the vision that Administrator Fugate--and I happen to
agree with you about the quality of people now in these
positions. If any team could get it done, this is the team that
can, with our support and, of course, a lot of other people's
input.
Mr. Mascelli, let me ask you this about the Red Cross. I
know Congress just appropriated a significant amount of money
for the Red Cross, which maybe is not unprecedented but it is
not usual.
Can you comment on the financial stability right now of
your organization and what resources you have to address this
pending hurricane season?
Mr. Mascelli. Yes. We did receive an appropriation from the
Federal Government. We are in the process of drawing funds
through the Federal Emergency Management Agency, which is the
executor of the grant.
Senator Landrieu. And how much was that?
Mr. Mascelli. One hundred million dollars total. And we are
in the process of drawing from that reimbursement for expenses
for the last hurricane season, and it continues until the end
of this fiscal year, Federal fiscal year.
In addition to that, we have taken a number of activities
to basically come within budget, and looking at our finances.
And part of that is we have restructured our organization
fairly substantially, our national headquarters, and then with
our chapter structure to reduce cost. And we are still in the
middle of that at this point. In addition to that, an
aggressive fundraising campaign to get out even in this time of
economic instability, to be able to raise funds when we have
these big disasters on an ongoing basis.
So we believe that the combination of cutting back and
restructuring the organization, reducing expenses, aggressive
fundraising, and then the use of the appropriation, that we
should balance our organization. We do project for our next
fiscal year, which begins July 1, 2009, that we will have a
balanced budget and we will proceed on that basis.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you. What is your operating budget?
Mr. Mascelli. I would have to get back to you. Counting the
biomedical services, the blood services, it is a little over $3
billion.
Senator Landrieu. Ms. Durden, can you comment about the
bill that we are moving through Congress? And, again, just hit
what the two or three most important parts of that legislation
are for supporting a national network, basically, of volunteers
in large measure--it is led by staff but leveraged by
volunteers--that would provide not only the operations, but the
training necessary to provide that backup communications, so
essential in disaster, really, of any size, for small
disasters. And as Mr. Fugate said, if it is your roof that is
gone, it is not a small problem for you.
Tell us again about the specifics of what you see as the
benefits of that legislation.
Ms. Durden. The Calling for 2-1-1 Act, Senator, is
critical. And I think the first point is that only 80 percent
of our country has access to 2-1-1. There are 23 States in
America that will have a hundred percent coverage as we are in
Louisiana, but that is 25 States, counting--including Puerto
Rico. I think there is a map that shows that.
Senator Landrieu. If the map could be put up there. So the
full coverage is in----
Ms. Durden. The full coverage is in green.
Senator Landrieu [continuing]. Green. And then the blue
States are----
Ms. Durden. Eighty percent is the dark blue.
Senator Landrieu. OK. And then the red States are----
Ms. Durden. The red States are where 2-1-1 is in
development. And I think it is particularly concerning that
there are gaps along our Gulf Coast, all the way up to
Delaware, Long Island, New York; rural Georgia; North Carolina;
and the Panhandle of Florida are some of those areas where
there are gaps, and that is of significance.
Another factor that this authorization bill would allow us
is the telephony capacity to be connected. We are very blessed
in Louisiana that there were donors that gave after Hurricane
Katrina that enabled us to have Voice Over IP. And that gives
us the opportunity, with the flipping of a switch, to move it
around. And that is an absolutely incredible opportunity, but
that is very rare in our country. And so, the capacity through
technology is just critical.
Senator Landrieu. If you could take that down, if you would
just a moment, and leave the state issue----
Ms. Durden. The map.
Senator Landrieu [continuing]. The map.
Am I seeing that New York has some serious gaps in that
very highly urbanized area there? You are shaking your head;
New York, New Jersey.
Is that Pennsylvania?
Ms. Durden. That is correct.
Senator Landrieu. Pennsylvania. And then is that Kentucky?
Ms. Durden. South Dakota, Arizona, and Wyoming.
Senator Landrieu. OK, the western States. But on the
eastern seaboard--and the reason that I raised this issue at
this hearing in the beginning of this season is that the
predictions that I have seen, or the feeling about this season,
because the storms have been so intense in the Gulf, there is
some sense that this is the East Coast's time. And I just need
to reinforce that I know that people in the northeast have not
had a storm in a long time, but there are some significant
studies that show what will happen if they do, and it is not a
pretty picture.
In 1938, there was a major storm that hit Long Island, and
you can just understand and think about what the population was
then, but what it is today, 70 years plus later.
Are you testifying that actually in that part of that
highly urbanized area, that there virtually is no method
outside of your 9-1-1 system which you would use to report an
emergency? In terms of where you could go get a shelter, where
you could get a voucher for an apartment, where you could get a
meal for your child, that is basically the service that you
provide?
Ms. Durden. That is correct.
Senator Landrieu. And you are absolutely right. I think it
speaks to the urgency of this Calling for 2-1-1 Act that you
are supporting. And I have to tell you that we know that was
never more vividly described or illustrated than after
September 11, 2001. The State of New York did not have it; the
State of Connecticut did. And the documented difference in the
response in that very urbanized region of our country was
vivid, and 2-1-1 was very successful in their response in the
state of Connecticut. And it is well documented, the concerns
that occurred in New York following September 11, 2001.
I just want to mention for the record, that in 1938, a
Category 4 hurricane struck Long Island. It destroyed 75,000
buildings and displaced thousands of residents.
For these highly, densely populated areas, if you do not
have a number to dial to get information, if your electricity
is severely compromised, if you do not have the right
sheltering plans, and if the only FEMA housing plan is still
what it is today, FEMA trailers, we are in for a very serious
situation here. And that is why this Subcommittee continues to
work. And we will continue to work, but it is just a matter of
time. And I do not know how much more I can do personally to
impress upon people how real some of these gaps are and what
catastrophe lies ahead should a Category 5 or 4, or a very
powerful 3, slam into one of these very densely populated urban
and low-lying areas along this coast.
So having said that, we have just a short amount of time.
If there is anything that you want to add--I have probably one
or two more questions.
Is there anything, Mr. Mascelli, you would like to add
about how you are going to shelter several million people?
Mr. Mascelli. Yes, ma'am. I would just like to just
reinforce what you said about the major metropolitan areas and
the level of capacity and preparedness in the area. It really--
these catastrophic disasters are an animal unto themselves,
something that, fortunately, we have not experienced until
recently.
There is a great deal of work that needs to be done,
particularly in those areas. We seem to do OK on the recurring
disasters at a certain level, and those happen on a regular
basis. But when we get to these catastrophic events, large
populations affected, large dislocation, it affects the whole
country, the economy of the country, the people, the psyche of
the country, etc. So it is something that keeps us concerned on
a consistent basis.
Senator Landrieu. And just for comparison, not to really
beat a dead horse here, but it has been something that as a
Senator from Louisiana and the lead spokesperson for the Gulf
Coast on this issue--I have to say that with the terrorist
attack in New York, which was just a horrible and a totally
different kind of event--that there were a confined number of
buildings that were destroyed in a very confined space. And
while it was a disaster that rocked the world, most of the
people in New York and Washington, DC on that night went to
sleep in their own homes. And there was a small percentage of
people led by Rudy Giuliani and all the rest of a very small
group that were focused on this particular thing. I mean, hands
on, the whole world watched. But that night in New York and New
Jersey and Connecticut, I mean, almost everyone was in their
own bed.
That is the difference between what happened there and what
happened in Hurricane Katrina, where that night of the storm, 2
million people were somewhere other than their own bedroom. And
I do not think the country understands what is going to happen
if this happens in New York or New Jersey or Connecticut or
Pennsylvania, or Virginia; I mean, anyplace. And I think that
people think that they are not going to be impacted by a
Category 5 hurricane. I think they think that they have built
buildings strong enough to withstand them, but I beg to differ.
So I will continue to make my voice heard to the President
and to the leadership, and hope that we get through this storm
season without facing a Category 3, 4, or 5 in a major
metropolitan area, not that New Orleans is not a major
metropolitan area or Galveston or Houston. But a northeast
metropolitan area has a lot more density than we do along the
Gulf Coast. Because the numbers are just staggering.
And I do not know, Janet, if you want to----
Ms. Durden. I do want to, first of all, thank you for your
sense of urgency. And I want to give you an update regarding
this critical issue of the urban parts of the northeast. New
York City has excellent coverage of 2-1-1, but because of the
economic condition of many of our States, specifically New York
State has had to cut their funding of 2-1-1. So you are
absolutely on point as you talk about that urgency in those
metropolitan areas.
The other comment I would make--and you know this so
vividly. But while you did an outstanding chart that shows the
73 percent growth in call volume in a 2-year period, I think
the public needs to understand those 14 million are people. And
during Hurricane Katrina, those were people whose lives were
being saved by the volunteers and the staff on the phone of 2-
1-1. We did rooftop rescues. We did connecting people to the
appropriate governmental entities. And the most vivid example
happened with someone you know quite well. Joe Thomas' wife,
Robin, was serving as a volunteer, and took a call from a man
who went back into his home and found his mother's body. There
was no one for him to call but 2-1-1.
I think that your urgency to continue this funding and this
legislation speaks to the need of American people, and I want
to thank you for that.
Senator Landrieu. Thank you very much. Any closing
comments?
Mr. Foresman. Senator, I just want to make--also add the
thanks to it. Having spent a few years doing this, I have
gotten pretty good at realizing that there has not been a lot
of advocacy on the Hill, consistent advocacy, on the issues of
disaster response and recovery. And to your point--and one of
the things that we have seen with the ReadyCommunities
initiative is----
I know you are focused on hurricanes. That is your
constituency, that is your geography, that is one of the
biggest threats that you have faced. But we have, over the
course of the last 60 days, had a little bit of a shake in the
Los Angeles region. We have had a scare from pandemic. And I
think the one recognition and the one thing that I very
strongly encourage you to do is let's make this about the need
for better capabilities to deal with catastrophic events,
particularly housing, irrespective of what the cause is.
Because as the Senator from Illinois pointed out, he is more
concerned about tornados or dorados, or whatever we are calling
them, or microbursts, these days. And we have got to make sure
that we are resonating the argument with the people who are
hearing them.
Senator Landrieu. Well, thank you. And I will tell you what
I am going to do because I do want to support the point that
you just made. I am going to call a hearing for earthquakes
particularly. And I want to show a film in this Subcommittee of
what is going to happen when an earthquake, a major earthquake,
hits not just California but also Memphis, which is vulnerable.
And I am going to use the risk assessment that has been done by
our risk managers to show the likely disasters, based on their
scientific information.
This is not just what Senator Landrieu thinks might happen.
This is what our government and scientists believe is probable
to happen. And what this Subcommittee is going to do is to try
continuously to show those probabilities and the gaps in
response capacity to what we are predicting is going to happen.
And as we work, I realize there are other priorities of the
government. This is not the only priority of the government.
But having represented people who live and survive through a
catastrophic disaster, it is hard to tell them that there is
another priority.
That is what is going to happen. I mean, for the 2 or 3 or
4 million, or 5 million, or 20 million people that are caught
up in it at the time it happens, it is very hard to tell them
that there is a higher priority than giving them a meal, a
shelter, a potential job, a place to return. And it becomes a
very significant issue for any country, whether it is China or
India or other countries that we have seen go through some
horrific catastrophic disasters. And it is just a matter of
time until some of these predictions happen. And I would like
to say we are ready, but I am telling you we are not, in any
number of areas that we have heard about today.
So thank you all. I think we will bring the hearing to a
close. The record will remain open for 15 days, and we urge
anyone, either here or listening, to submit any information
that will be helpful to our Subcommittee, and we thank you very
much. Hearing is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 3:55 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
