[House Hearing, 112 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office]
FIRST RESPONDER TECHNOLOGIES: ENSURING A PRIORITIZED APPROACH FOR
HOMELAND
SECURITY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
=======================================================================
JOINT HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS,
RESPONSE, AND COMMUNICATIONS
and the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CYBERSECURITY,
INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION,
AND SECURITY TECHNOLOGIES
of the
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED TWELFTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MAY 9, 2012
__________
Serial No. 112-90
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/
_____
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
77-804 PDF WASHINGTON : 2013
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
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 SSOP, Washington, DC
20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY
Peter T. King, New York, Chairman
Lamar Smith, Texas Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Daniel E. Lungren, California Loretta Sanchez, California
Mike Rogers, Alabama Sheila Jackson Lee, Texas
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Henry Cuellar, Texas
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Paul C. Broun, Georgia Laura Richardson, California
Candice S. Miller, Michigan Danny K. Davis, Illinois
Tim Walberg, Michigan Brian Higgins, New York
Chip Cravaack, Minnesota Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Joe Walsh, Illinois Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Ben Quayle, Arizona Kathleen C. Hochul, New York
Scott Rigell, Virginia Janice Hahn, California
Billy Long, Missouri Vacancy
Jeff Duncan, South Carolina
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania
Blake Farenthold, Texas
Robert L. Turner, New York
Michael J. Russell, Staff Director/Chief Counsel
Kerry Ann Watkins, Senior Policy Director
Michael S. Twinchek, Chief Clerk
I. Lanier Avant, Minority Staff Director
SUBCOMMITTEE ON EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS, RESPONSE, AND COMMUNICATIONS
Gus M. Bilirakis, Florida, Chairman
Laura Richardson, California
Scott Rigell, Virginia Hansen Clarke, Michigan
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania, Vice Kathleen C. Hochul, New York
Chair Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Blake Farenthold, Texas (Ex Officio)
Robert L. Turner, New York
Peter T. King, New York (Ex
Officio)
Kerry A. Kinirons, Staff Director
Natalie Nixon, Deputy Chief Clerk
Vacant, Minority Professional Staff Member
------
SUBCOMMITTEE ON CYBERSECURITY, INFRASTRUCTURE PROTECTION, AND SECURITY
TECHNOLOGIES
Daniel E. Lungren, California, Chairman
Michael T. McCaul, Texas Yvette D. Clarke, New York
Tim Walberg, Michigan, Vice Chair Laura Richardson, California
Patrick Meehan, Pennsylvania Cedric L. Richmond, Louisiana
Billy Long, Missouri William R. Keating, Massachusetts
Tom Marino, Pennsylvania Bennie G. Thompson, Mississippi
Peter T. King, New York (Ex (Ex Officio)
Officio)
Coley C. O'Brien, Staff Director
Zachary D. Harris, Subcommittee Clerk
Chris Schepis, Minority Senior Professional Staff Member
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Statements
The Honorable Gus M. Bilirakis, a Representative in Congress From
the State of Florida, and Chairman, Subcommittee on Emergency
Preparedness, Response, and Communications..................... 1
The Honorable Laura Richardson, a Representative in Congress From
the State of California, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications........... 2
The Honorable Yvette D. Clarke, a Representative in Congress From
the State of New York, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and Security
Technologies................................................... 3
The Honorable Bennie G. Thompson, a Representative in Congress
From the State of Mississippi, and Ranking Member, Committee on
Homeland Security:
Prepared Statement............................................. 4
Witnesses
Mr. Robert Griffin, Director of First Responder Programs, Science
and Technology Directorate, Department of Homeland Security:
Oral Statement................................................. 6
Prepared Statement............................................. 8
Ms. Mary H. Saunders, Director, Standards Coordination Office,
National Institute of Standards and Technology:
Oral Statement................................................. 15
Prepared Statement............................................. 17
Mr. Edward Kilduff, Chief of Department, New York City Fire
Department, New York, New York:
Oral Statement................................................. 22
Prepared Statement............................................. 25
Ms. Annette Doying, Director, Office of Emergency Management,
Pasco County, Florida:
Oral Statement................................................. 29
Prepared Statement............................................. 31
Ms. Kiersten Todt Coon, President and CEO, Liberty Group
Ventures:
Oral Statement................................................. 33
Prepared Statement............................................. 36
Appendix
Questions From Chairman Gus Bilirakis for Robert Griffin......... 53
Questions From Chairman Daniel Lungren for Robert Griffin........ 53
FIRST RESPONDER TECHNOLOGIES: ENSURING A PRIORITIZED APPROACH FOR
HOMELAND SECURITY RESEARCH AND DEVELOPMENT
----------
Wednesday, May 9, 2012
U.S. House of Representatives,
Committee on Homeland Security,
Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness,
Response, and Communications, and
Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure
Protection, and Security Technologies,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittees met, pursuant to call, at 11:02 a.m., in
Room 311, Cannon House Office Building, Hon. Gus M. Bilirakis
[Chairman of the Emergency Preparedness, Response, and
Communications subcommittee] presiding.
Present from the Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness,
Response, and Communications: Representatives Bilirakis,
Walberg, Long, Clarke of New York, and Richmond.
Present from the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity,
Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies:
Representatives Lungren, Marino, Richardson, and Clarke of
Michigan.
Mr. Bilirakis. Good morning. It is still morning. The Joint
Hearing of the Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on
Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications and the
Subcommittee on Cybersecurity, Infrastructure Protection, and
Security Technologies will come to order.
The subcommittees are meeting today to receive testimony on
Federal efforts to research, develop, and deploy technologies
to help first responders achieve their vital missions. I now
recognize myself for an opening statement.
I am pleased our two subcommittees are once again meeting
to consider a topic of mutual interest and concern. Our
Nation's first responders are vital members of the Homeland
Security Enterprise. First responders at the State and local
level are first on the scene of a terrorist attack, natural
disaster, or other emergency and we must ensure that they have
the training, equipment, and technology they need to get the
job done.
The Department of Homeland Security Science and Technology
Directorate through its First Responder Group has taken steps
to work with Federal partners, the first responder community,
and the private sector to research, develop, and get to market
technologies that will enhance response capabilities.
I want to thank Dr. Griffin for bringing some of the
technologies--and they are right here--that S&T has developed
along with him today. So thanks for bringing them, Doctor. I
appreciate it very much. They provide great examples of S&T's
on-going work.
I am interested in hearing from our Federal witnesses about
how technology requirements and standards are set for this
technology and how successful we have been in getting these
promising technologies into the hands of first responders. I am
also interested in hearing how DHS assists first responders in
identifying appropriate technology as they consider how to
allocate grant funding.
From our first responder witnesses, I am interested in your
perspective in how the technology research and development
process is working, and how well your input is being integrated
into that process. I will say that I am disappointed that FEMA
declined to participate in today's hearing.
FEMA's National Integration Center and Grant Programs
Directorate regularly work with S&T and the first responder
community and provide resources for technology identification
and procurement through grant funds, responder knowledge base,
and project responder. It would have been nice, of course, to
have their input in today's hearing. So I am very disappointed.
However, the subcommittees' oversight of this issue will
continue after this hearing and that oversight will include
FEMA.
With that, I welcome our distinguished panel of witnesses
and we look forward to your testimony.
The Chairman now recognizes the Ranking Member of the
Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and
Communications. Of course, the gentlelady and the Ranking
Member from California, Ms. Richardson, you are recognized.
Ms. Richardson. Good morning. Thank you, Mr. Chairman
Bilirakis and also Mr. Lungren for supporting this hearing
today.
As Ranking Member on Emergency Communications,
Preparedness, and Response Subcommittee, and also a Member of
Cybersecurity with my colleague here from New York, Ms. Clarke,
I have a documented interest in ensuring that Science and
Technology Directorate effectively meets the needs of first
responders.
Today, we will hear from Dr. Griffin on Science and
Technology Directorate's efforts to better meet the needs of
first responders like others on this panel. Yet, I equally am
concerned, as Mr. Bilirakis has just stated, of FEMA's failure
and its decline to appear and testify before us today.
Discussing FEMA's role in ensuring that our first responders
have the equipment they need to respond to disaster safely and
effectively should be a priority for all of us.
In previous hearings, this committee has joined with the
Government Accountability Office and the Department of Homeland
Security's Inspector General to raise appropriate questions
about S&T's efforts to meet the responsibilities to the first
responder community. Before 2009, concerns were brought to the
Director regarding the inadequate conduct of adequate outreach
for first responders in the community. It was noted before 2009
that S&T had not identified the needs of first responders. If a
system to identify needs does not exist, then the assignment of
priorities certainly cannot be done in a meaningful way.
Equally, last November, Under Secretary O'Toole appeared
before the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity to discuss her efforts
to reorganize S&T and to put it on the right track. At that
same time, she informed us of her efforts to establish a first
responder group to identify the priorities of the first
responders community and to allocate appropriate resources
accordingly.
Further, the Under Secretary was made aware of and had
discussed herself the improvements and the mechanisms that she
had established to ensure that taxpayer dollars are used
effectively about the effect of budget cuts that would occur on
S&T's first responder activities. The Under Secretary was
candid with this committee about the impacts of the
Congressional budget cuts that would allow S&T to address only
two or three of the 11 first responder priorities identified by
the National Academy of Public Administration.
It is unfortunate that as S&T is working to become more
responsive to the needs of first responders, Congress is
significantly reducing its ability to do so by cutting its
funding. Today, as the Appropriations Committee on Homeland
Security marks up the Department's budget, I think it is
important to bear in mind how S&T's budget affects its ability
to work to get things done and to ensure that S&T has the
proper infrastructure to invest the money necessary that we
have deemed in this committee. Although S&T has made progress
since 2009, more must be done to fully carry out the R&D
strategies and to fully implement the evaluation metrics.
I am also eager to hear from representatives of the first
responder community about their technology needs and whether
they feel the Department has effectively solicited and
responded to their input. Current challenges do exist and we
need to make sure that they are removed.
I look forward to the testimony today and I yield back the
balance of my time.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much. Now I recognize the
Ranking Member of the Subcommittee on Cybersecurity,
Infrastructure Protection, and Security Technologies, the
gentlelady from New York, Ms. Clarke, you are recognized.
Ms. Clarke of New York. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I thank the Ranking Member, Ms. Richardson, as well as Chairman
Lungren for convening this joint hearing.
Having a closer look at how the Homeland Security
Enterprise and First Responders Groups operates in S&T will be
valuable. I also want to welcome all of our witnesses,
especially my fellow New Yorker, Chief Ed Kilduff. Thank you
for taking the time from your responsibilities to come to
Washington today.
Over the years, many of our successes have come from our
ability to forge practical solutions from tough challenges.
This committee has been supportive of the S&T Directorate in
becoming better prepared to make such contributions for first
responders. This progress is due to the hard work of S&T's
people, our better understanding of the precise problems, and
to the increasing capacity to make use of innovation from our
laboratories, universities, and the private sectors.
The S&T Directorate has found it challenging to craft an
overall strategy for first responder needs. It has also lacked
the mechanisms necessary to assess past performance. Over the
past few years, GAO and OIG reports have suggested that the
Department had not yet developed a transparent, risk-based
methodology to determine what first responder projects to fund,
how much to fund, and how to evaluate the project's
effectiveness and usefulness. Without clearly defined metrics,
Congress cannot gauge project goals and evaluate funding.
I am eager to hear of the strides that the first responder
group may have made in evaluating first responder needs,
developing new and readapting existing technology, creating
standards and prioritizing how first responder R&D moves
forward. What we do here in Washington affects how fire
fighters, police, EMS technicians, border and maritime
security, doctors and nurses protect Americans every day,
especially in times of disaster.
One key issue in translating what works at the local level
is finding a way to communicate success, so each jurisdiction
doesn't have to reinvent the wheel. Local first responders must
feel more empowered to develop strategic initiatives for
themselves. They recognize the importance of interoperability
and the collaboration across jurisdictional boundaries. They
know that crises do not stop at city and county lines.
In the end, Congress needs to know how current first
responder technology investments position S&T for the future.
We must have a clear view of how first responder projects are
aligned with customer requirements and how projects are
prioritized and evaluated.
We have been told by Under Secretary O'Toole that decreases
in S&T's budget will wipe out dozens of programs, stalling the
development of technologies for border protection, detection of
biohazards, cargo screening, and leaving in doubt research in
IED detection. Striving to do more with less is always a symbol
of an efficiently running program of any type, but trying to
protect our citizens and Nation with programs that are backed
by limited and dwindling science and technology assets is
another matter.
There are serious concerns about what programs the
Directorate will have to give up as result of the budget voted
by the majority. I look forward to hearing from Director
Griffin on how he will prioritize the project in a reduced
Homeland Security Enterprise and First Responder Group
operation.
I thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield the balance of my time.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you, Ms. Clarke. I do want to report
that this year's budget--this bill that is on the floor is $158
million above last year's level, so I am glad to see that.
Other Members are reminded that statements may be submitted
for the record.
[The statement of Ranking Member Thompson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Ranking Member Bennie G. Thompson
May 9, 2012
Good afternoon. I want to thank our witnesses for being here today.
To effectively prioritize resources, we need to align technology
and training with the specific needs of our first responders.
Since fiscal year 2002, DHS has awarded $35 billion in Federal
grant money. Because of significant budget cuts and grant
consolidation, fewer resources will be available to the first responder
community.
As the ``boots on the ground'' in every emergency and disaster,
first responders have a unique vantage point on equipment needs and
equipment failures.
The Department must have a two-way dialogue with the first
responder community.
It is only through planning based on such a dialogue that Science
and Technology will be able to prioritize its limited resources and
conduct research and development that meets the needs of the first
responder community.
It is my understanding that the Under Secretary has established a
First Responder group to begin such a dialogue.
However, FEMA's involvement in this group is unclear.
As the agency within the Department with the most direct
interaction with the first responder community, FEMA should be much
more than a liaison.
Further, in light of budget cuts to the Science and Technology
Directorate and the Homeland Security Grant Program, DHS must take a
fresh look at its research and development resources.
S&T's activities must be designed to meet real needs.
In the past, I have had serious concerns about how the Science and
Technology Directorate invested resources.
In 2009, for example, S&T funded a project on something called
``brain music,'' which was billed as research that would help first
responders.
This project had been funded for several years without any
measurable results.
At the time, I questioned the wisdom of funding that project, and
how it could have any practical use for a fire fighter, police officer,
or other first responder.
After today's hearing, I want the Under Secretary to inform me
whether the ``brain music'' project is still being funded.
I commend the Under Secretary for her reorganization of S&T and
hope that the alignment of research with real needs will enhance this
Nation's safety and security.
However, we all know that the austerity measures forced by this
Congress will seriously undermine your ability to conduct meaningful
research and development.
My colleagues on the other side of the aisle tout the need to do
more with less. However, reducing the number of scientists and
engineers involved in working on a problem does not help us arrive at
solutions any sooner.
As Ben Franklin once said, ``an investment in knowledge pays the
best interest.''
I look forward to the testimony of all of the witnesses, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. Bilirakis. I now am pleased to welcome our
distinguished panel of witnesses.
Our first witness is Dr. Bob Griffin. Dr. Griffin is the
director of first responder programs in the Department of
Homeland Security Science and Technology Directorate, a
position he has held since August 2012--2010, excuse me.
Prior to joining DHS, Dr. Griffin served as the director of
environmental services for Arlington County, Virginia. He also
served as Arlington's director of emergency management and as
the assistant county administrator and chief of fire and rescue
in Loudoun County, Virginia.
Dr. Griffin earned his Ph.D. in Public Administration from
Virginia Tech and his Master's degree in Public Administration
and Bachelor's of Science in Political Science from UMass
Amherst.
Following Dr. Griffin, we will hear from Ms. Mary Saunders.
Ms. Saunders is the director of the standards coordination
office at the National Institute of Standards and Technology.
Prior to her current position at the NIST, Ms. Saunders
served as the deputy assistant secretary for manufacturing and
services at the International Trade Administration. Ms.
Saunders has been in Federal service for more than 30 years,
including with the Department of Army and the U.S. Military
Academy.
Next, we will hear from testimony from Chief Edward
Kilduff. Chief Kilduff is from New York City, New York City's
Fire Department, 34th Chief of Department, a position to which
he has been appointed. He was appointed in January 2010.
Prior to his position, Chief Kilduff served as a Brooklyn
Borough commander and has been a New York City fire fighter
since 1977. Thank you for your service, Chief. Chief Kilduff
has a Bachelor's of Arts degree in Political Science from
Amherst College.
Following Chief Kilduff, we will receive testimony from Ms.
Annette Doying. Ms. Doying is emergency management director for
Pasco County, Florida, and serves as the Tampa Bay Emergency
Management co-chair to Florida's Domestic Security Oversight
Council.
Ms. Doying has been educated as an EMT and has trained in
chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear, and explosives
response. Ms. Doying also has a graduate degree in Applied
Forensics Anthropology from the University of South Florida.
Finally, we will hear testimony from Kiersten--Ms. Kiersten
Coon. Ms. Coon is the president and CEO of Liberty Group
Ventures. She previously served on the staff of the U.S. Senate
Committee on Governmental Affairs. Ms. Coon has a Public Policy
degree from Princeton University and a Master's degree in
Public Policy from the Kennedy School of Government at Harvard
University.
I want to welcome all the witnesses. Your entire written
statements will appear in the record. I ask that you summarize
your testimony for 5 minutes. Again, welcome. I will ask Dr.
Griffin to begin and you are recognized, sir. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF ROBERT GRIFFIN, DIRECTOR OF FIRST RESPONDER
PROGRAMS, SCIENCE AND TECHNOLOGY DIRECTORATE, DEPARTMENT OF
HOMELAND SECURITY
Mr. Griffin. Good morning. Thank you. Chairman Bilirakis,
Ranking Member Richardson, Ranking Member Clarke, Members of
the subcommittee, I would like to begin by apologizing to
anybody in the audience that hopes to hear from the quarterback
for the Redskins. I am Robert Griffin. I am not that Robert
Griffin. I am the Director of the Support to the Homeland
Security Enterprise and First Responder Group in Science and
Technology.
I joined the Federal Government August 2010, after 20 years
of service in local government, including service as a fire
chief and emergency manager.
My approach to the research and development for first
responders is based on a mix of field experience, empathy, and
a healthy dose of operational pragmatism. In December 2010,
Under Secretary O'Toole realigned the Directorate and created a
group to better understand, prioritize, and transition S&T's
work to the first responder community.
I will present a quick overview of how we integrate first
responder operational needs into our process, create
methodologically valid approaches to drive critical funding
decisions, promote innovation to meet capability gaps, and
leverage partnerships to maximize our funding. To scope the
challenge and opportunity of my role, the first responder
community consists of over 80,000 different agencies, each of
which has numerous needs and strong opinions on priorities.
To capture and prioritize the needs and requirements of
this diverse and often divergent community, we developed a
methodology to prioritize gaps and expand first responder
participation.
In order to build trust, we created a transparent process
to identify first responder needs in strategic programmatic
areas. Working with FEMA and first responders from a cross-
section of disciplines, geography, demographics, and levels of
government, we commissioned a third iteration of Project
Responder to identify and prioritize capability gaps. From
these gaps, we developed projects based on a criterion that
includes meeting operational needs, building on existing
investments, leveraging interagency and private sector
resources, promoting non-proprietary solutions, and increasing
market competition.
We recognize that getting research to the field requires
solutions that are affordable with a clear transition path. We
have broadened our participation requirements gathering by
leveraging on-going work in the Interagency Board, professional
associations, and other regional collaborative efforts. The use
of multiple groups allows us to gather requirements from a
larger cross-section of first responders, while validating gaps
and funding priorities.
While strengthening the process is important, our measure
of success is transitioning technologies to operational use. We
have successfully commercialized the multi-band radio, the
protective backboard cover, explosive and hazardous materials
response application, the compact rescue tool, the dazzler, the
pipe bomb cap remover for improved forensics and bomb tech
safety. We have also developed technology, like the advanced
breathing apparatus that you see in front of you with private-
sector partners who are working to bring this technology to
market.
Recent efforts have brought significant technology
innovations to the first responder community, allowing them to
become more resilient, efficient, and effective in executing
their missions. Innovation is often limited by budget
constraints, the capacity to incrementally incorporate new
technologies into operations, while overcoming procurement,
cultural, and functional challenges.
Innovation can be creative. The creative use of existing
technologies, like Kevlar and Breathing Apparatus or Tyvek, act
as an impervious barrier to protect patients from contaminated
body fluids.
As a former fire chief, I am used to working in teams and
leveraging others' resources. For example, building off the
investments of the Department of Defense, we developed
requirements that linked industry to the first responders to
build and test the multi-band radio prototypes you see before
you. The multi-band project provides a single radio capable of
operating across disparate public safety radio bands. These
radios are now available commercially from three manufacturers.
In addition to local jurisdictions, ICE, the FBI, and Marine
Corps are all procuring these radios for use.
We are also currently working with the Army's National
Protection Center and NATICK, Kell Fire, the U.S. Fire Service,
Australia, and the commercial sector to develop wildland fire
fighter gear that improves radiant thermal protection, form,
fit, and function, and reduces heat stress. This project
leverages funding from not only DHS, but DOD and the Department
of Agriculture. During this summer's fire season, the gear will
be field-tested by over a thousand fire fighters in California,
as we work to reduce wildland fire fighter deaths and injuries.
Following Project Responder, we are working on virtual
training, first responder tracking, hazard location,
interoperable communications, and protective clothing and
equipment. We will also continue to work in areas such as
extending the operational life of existing technologies,
technology forging, developing with NIST and others in
communications, data sharing, ambulance safety, and alerts and
warnings.
Every dollar we are allocated is targeted to improving the
operations of the men and women like Chief Kilduff and Ms.
Doying. My team recognizes that by keeping the first responders
safer, directly translates to keeping the Nation safer.
Thank you for the opportunity to address the committee. I
am happy to answer any questions you may have.
[The statement of Mr. Griffin follows:]
Prepared Statement of Robert Griffin
May 9, 2012
introduction
Good morning Chairman Lungren, Chairman Bilirakis, Ranking Member
Clarke, Ranking Member Richardson, and Members of the subcommittees.
Thank you for inviting me to speak with you today about our efforts to
develop technologies to assist first responders.
The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) remains committed to
helping first responders Nation-wide by ensuring that they are
prepared, equipped, and trained for any situation and by bringing
together information and resources to prepare for and respond to a
terrorist attack, natural disaster, or other large-scale emergency. The
DHS Science and Technology (S&T) Directorate's mission is to strengthen
America's security and resiliency by providing knowledge products and
innovative technology solutions for the Homeland Security Enterprise
(HSE). To meet the diverse needs of the HSE, S&T provides value by
pursuing a strategy which is operationally focused, highly innovative,
and founded on building strong partnerships. As the primary research,
development, testing, and evaluation agency for the first responder
community, S&T provides the HSE with strategic and focused technology
options and operational process enhancements. S&T provides the
technical depth and reach to discover, adapt, and leverage technology
solutions developed by Federal agencies and laboratories, State, local,
and Tribal governments, universities, and the private sector--across
the United States and internationally.
This commitment is reflected in S&T's third strategic goal, which
charges the Directorate to ``strengthen the Homeland Security
Enterprise and First Responders' capabilities to protect the homeland
and respond to disasters.'' To meet this goal S&T created the Support
to the Homeland Security Enterprise and First Responders Group (FRG) to
foster S&T's understanding of the needs and requirements of responders.
The responder community consists of more than 60,000 disparate agencies
across a variety of disciplines, including but not limited to fire, law
enforcement, emergency management, and emergency medical services. By
engaging first responders at every stage of the technology development
cycle, FRG pursues a better understanding of their functional needs and
requirements, and develops innovative solutions to their most pressing
operational challenges. Without an effective research, development,
testing, and evaluation program that specifically address their needs,
responders have largely either done without or relied on vendor-driven
solutions.
Since it was created in December 2010, FRG has committed to
understanding the mission and operational requirements of first
responders, creating high-impact technologies and knowledge products,
improving interoperability of equipment, and increasing first
responders' access to technical- and science-based information. To
maximize limited funding, FRG is focusing on advanced technologies that
address the greatest multi-functional need and that can be developed
for first responders within a 12- to 18-month time frame--providing
them access to new technology that meet at least 80 percent of their
requirements. FRG has also focused on building methodologically sound
processes to define and prioritize first responder needs while engaging
responders at all levels of government. This process has allowed FRG to
fund the highest-priority projects identified by practitioners and
leverage resources from partners within DHS and across other levels of
government to create the greatest impact.
guiding principles
To safely and effectively respond in dangerous environments, first
responders need access to better technology and equipment. FRG
approaches project solutions with pragmatic criteria in mind. Through
direct engagement with first responders, FRG has identified several
guiding principles used as criteria to assist with identifying
solutions including:
Practitioner-Driven Approach.--Recognizing that initiatives
must be based on user needs and driven from the field.
Building on Existing Investments.--Encouraging efficiencies
by building on existing investments saves money by avoiding
unnecessary and costly new hardware, software, data
development, and training.
Leveraging Existing Solutions.--Conducting environmental
scans to help leverage existing interagency and private sector
solutions before any investments in new solutions are made.
Daily Use Solutions.--Seeking technological solutions that
improve not only catastrophic response but daily use by first
responders.
Non-Proprietary Solutions.--Ensuring that technologies from
different manufacturers can actually interoperate requires the
use of open-source, non-proprietary solutions.
Affordable and Accessible Solutions.--Recognizing that
solutions need to be affordable and commercially available for
purchase.
solution development process
In 2009, S&T established the First Responder Integrated Product
Team (IPT), often referred to as the 13th IPT, to address the most
critical needs of the first responder community. Building on the First
Responder IPT, FRG established a more methodologically comprehensive
process--known as the Solution Development Process (see Figure 1)--to
identify and address the most critical needs of the community.
In partnership with first responders, FRG uses the Solution
Development Process to identify, validate, and facilitate the
fulfillment of needs through the use of existing and emerging
technologies, knowledge products, and standards. This process focuses
FRG's limited funding on priorities identified by the first responder
community. The process provides methodological rigor and allows for
programmatic prioritization before projects are funded. This has helped
ensure that related projects are coordinated, thereby consolidating
efforts and saving time and money. The Solution Development Process is
designed to operate within the broader S&T portfolio review process,
which evaluates projects based on impact, transition, technology
positioning, clarity of purpose, customer involvement, and innovation.
Additionally, this process supports the S&T Resource Allocation
Strategy which includes all activities and processes associated with
the timely development and transition/transfer of S&T products.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
As part of the Solution Development Process, first responders from
around the country including those serving on S&T's First Responder
Resource Group (FRRG),\1\ the InterAgency Board for Equipment
Standardization and Interoperability (IAB),\2\ and Project Responder
\3\ focus groups identify the current capability gaps faced by the
community. These capability gaps are used by stakeholders to generate
accompanying requirements. FRG uses the capability gaps, requirements,
and its own analysis to inform its resource allocation and the private
sector's research and development investments. FRG selects projects for
funding based on a number of criteria including: The practitioner-
identified gaps, criticality/operational impact, threat likelihood,
applicability, state of the science, cost-benefit analysis, ease of
integration, transition likelihood, and time needed to prototype. The
responders work with FRG program managers throughout the life cycle of
each project and assist DHS in creating awareness of these newly-
developed solutions in the field. FRG then works with the first
responder community and commercial sector partners to transition the
technologies, standards, and knowledge products and integrate them into
regular use.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The FRRG includes over 120 practitioners from a wide array of
professional disciplines representing all levels of the public sector.
\2\ The IAB is a voluntary collaborative panel of emergency
preparedness and response practitioners from a wide array of
professional disciplines that represent all levels of government and
the public sector.
\3\ Project Responder is a partnership between FRG, the Homeland
Security Studies and Analysis Institute, the IAB, and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency's National Preparedness Directorate to
identify capability gaps and prioritize areas of investment to address
or reduce those gaps.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
First Responder Coordination
Direct first responder interaction is paramount to S&T's ability to
deliver critically-needed solutions and technologies to the emergency
preparedness and response community. S&T established the FRRG to aid in
this mission by serving as a mechanism for continuous dialogue and the
coordination of research, development, and delivery of technology
solutions to first responders at the local, State, Tribal, territorial,
and Federal levels. As part of the FRRG, responders from around the
country are engaged throughout FRG's Solution Development Process to
identify, validate, and facilitate the fulfillment of first responder
needs through the use of existing and emerging technologies, knowledge
products, and standards. In addition to being geographically diverse,
the FRRG membership represents jurisdictions of varying population
sizes and budget size. The membership also represents the wide breadth
of professions involved in emergency preparedness and response that
includes, but is not limited to, leaders and experts in law
enforcement, fire fighting, emergency medical services, emergency
management, 9-1-1, public health, hospital preparedness, Geospatial
Information Systems, and information security.
One of the areas both first responder and industry leaders
identified as needing improvement was a clearer articulation of the
funding priorities. Recognizing this, FRG has focused its resources on
this critical first step of FRG's Solution Development Process. Project
Responder 3 is the third iteration in a series of studies to identify
gaps between current and required capabilities to ensure that
responders can effectively and safely address catastrophic incidents,
both now and in the future. By leveraging Project Responder 3 and the
FRRG, FRG is currently focused on the following five highest priority
areas:
Readily accessible, high-fidelity simulation tools to
support training in incident management and response.
The ability to remotely monitor the tactical actions and
progress of all responders involved in the incident in real
time.
The ability to know the location of responders and their
proximity to risks and hazards in real time.
The ability to communicate with responders in any
environmental conditions (including through barriers, inside
buildings, and underground).
Protective clothing and equipment for all first responders
that protects against multiple hazards (e.g., heat, smoke,
blood-borne or airborne pathogens, and projectiles).
These priority areas are currently being used to help guide
research and development investment by the Federal Government, as well
as, local, Tribal, State, and territorial authorities, and the private
sector.
Realized Solutions
One example of how FRG partners to bring solutions to operations is
the Wildland Firefighters Advanced Personal Protection System. Wildland
fire fighters are often required to respond to emergencies in remote
areas. This can involve hiking from a staging area to the fire
location. Because the fire season takes place during the warmest months
of the year, wildland fire fighters frequently must work under extreme
heat and humidity. The Wildland Firefighters Advanced Personal
Protection System will help to reduce heat stress--a major concern for
wildland fire fighting personnel who must wear and carry a significant
amount of personal protective gear to perform their duties. FRG is
working with the U.S. Army Natick Research, Development & Engineering
Center's National Protection Center (Natick), the California Department
of Forestry and Fire Protection (CALFIRE), the United States Fire
Service, and others to develop a National Fire Protection Association
(NFPA) certified garment system that improves radiant thermal
protection; reduces heat stress; and improves form, fit, and function
when compared to existing garment systems.
technology transition
Transitioning technology for regular use by first responders
remains a critical challenge for S&T. To help mitigate this challenge,
FRG leverages the Center for Commercialization of Advanced Technology
(CCAT) process, in coordination with San Diego State University, to
solicit proposals from the vendor community for technologies that
address gaps identified by first responders. The goal of this process
is to develop technologies in 12 to 18 months that meet 80 percent or
more of the requirement identified by the first responder community,
with transition occurring 6 to 12 months after project completion.
Should a capability gap be both unique and one that receives a high-
priority ranking by practitioners, contracts may then be awarded. By
using CCAT, FRG is able to bring first responders, industry, and
business professionals together under one focus, which allows FRG to
provide solutions more efficiently. This process ensures that each
technology development is undertaken with a high probability of
successfully transitioning to the first responder community.
A core focus of S&T is the rapid delivery of new technologies that
address the mission needs of the first responder community. Over the
past year, S&T has used Research, Development, and Innovation funding
to develop technologies and knowledge products important to a range of
homeland security activities and customers. FRG, with a cost share from
industry, has been able to develop and transition technology solutions
to the first responder community. Recent transitions include:
First Responder Equipment
Board ArmourTM Backboard Cover.--Repurposing the
TyvexTM material used to wrap houses in
construction, S&T, in partnership with Advanced EMS Designs,
developed a disposable backboard cover to better protect
patients and responders from disease and contaminants. This
product was developed, tested, and commercialized in less than
8 months. It is now commercially available for about $10.
Next-Generation Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA).--
S&T partnered with the Mine Safety Appliance Company to
integrate and certify S&T's lighter and smaller profile SCBA
cylinder array into a full SCBA ensemble that has been
certified by the Department of Transportation and tested
against National Fire Protection Association standards. This
represents the first major redesign in decades of this critical
piece of first responder safety equipment.
First Responder Support Tool (FIRST)-Bomb Response.--S&T
partnered with Applied Research Associates, Inc. to develop a
smartphone application that provides authorized first
responders the information necessary to safely control incident
locations such as stand-off distances, rough damage and injury
contours, nearby areas of concern (e.g., schools and daycare
centers), and suggested roadblocks that could help isolate an
incident. FIRST-Bomb Response also provides improvised
explosive device and HAZMAT guidelines, reference information,
and points of contact to call for questions and assistance.
This capability is available through the Apple App store, the
Android Market, and the ARA Store for laptops.
Semi-Autonomous Pipe Bomb End Cap Remover (SAPBER).--This
technology removes end caps from pipe bombs while keeping
operators at a safe distance and collecting video and physical
evidence from the pipe bomb. SAPBER is a small, low-cost system
capable of remote operation and accommodating a range of
possible pipe bomb sizes and configurations.
Interoperable Communications Solutions
Multi-Band Radio (MBR).--To provide a successful coordinated
response, emergency responders must be able to effectively
communicate with all partners across jurisdictional lines,
including local, regional, State, and Federal entities. Until
recently, no public safety radio existed that was capable of
operating on more than one radio band. S&T developed the
requirements for a hand-held MBR that allows first responders
to communicate with partner agencies, regardless of the band on
which they operate. The first responder communities in Chicago,
Illinois, Miami, Florida, and New Orleans, Louisiana
participated in highly successful pilots of the technology.
S&T's efforts sparked industry interest: MBRs are now
commercially available from four manufacturers (Thales
Communications, Inc., Harris Corporation, Datron World
Communications, and Motorola Solutions, Inc.). Recently the
Federal Bureau of Investigation and the United States Marine
Corps both announced they would be procuring MBRs for
operational use. This project is just one example of how FRG
efforts can result in useful market competition.
Voice over Internet Protocol (VoIP).--This project enables
legacy analog radio systems to interoperate with similar
systems as well as with new digital systems. Given the need for
standardized implementations, the VoIP Working Group is
producing specifications, or implementation profiles, for the
most critical VoIP interfaces. The first VoIP specification
developed by the working group is the Bridging Systems
Interface (BSI) Core Profile, which allows first responder
agencies to seamlessly connect radio systems over an IP network
regardless of the manufacturer. Thirteen manufacturers
voluntarily adopted the BSI platform and others have committed
to doing so in their next product cycle. This helps reduce
costs for first responder agency's system design and
installation.
Virtual USA (vUSA).--A collaborative effort among S&T,
other DHS agencies, and State and local emergency management
agencies, vUSA improves information sharing among agencies and
other partners. vUSA is a blend of process and technology that
provides a virtual pipeline to allow data (such as the
operational status of critical infrastructure or emergency
vehicle locations) to be shared by different systems and
operating platforms with no changes to the current system.
Selected as a White House Open Government Initiative and a
flagship DHS Open Government Initiative, vUSA is currently in
use in 23 States. Earlier this year, FRG initiated a pilot in
the Northeast to integrate vUSA and the Next-Generation
Incident Command System (NICS). NICS improves first responder
situational awareness, collaboration, and interagency
interoperability during disaster response efforts by displaying
incident information--such as road closures and fire hot
spots--on a shared on-line map, allowing it to be shared
between local agencies and local-to-State. The San Diego County
Board of Supervisors has agreed to use vUSA/NICS as the primary
way of sharing information within the county as well as with
other agencies outside of San Diego County. The CALFIRE is also
adopting vUSA/NICS as their incident command and data sharing
system. Partnering with the DHS Office of the Chief Information
Officer's Office of Operations Coordination and Planning, S&T
plans to make vUSA/NICS available as part of the Homeland
Security Information Network (HSIN). vUSA users now have HSIN
accounts, which allows them to access a new HSIN Community of
Interest that provides a suite of collaboration services such
as web conferencing and instant messaging and access to new
geospatial data.
Commercial Mobile Alert Service (CMAS).--This program
provides a National capability to deliver relevant, timely, and
geographically-targeted messages to mobile devices. In December
2011, New York City partnered with S&T and the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to conduct the first end-to-
end test of the CMAS tool. CMAS has reached its initial
operating capability and S&T is working on several research,
development, testing, and evaluation activities designed to
improve current and future system capabilities.
Emergency Data Exchange Language (EDXL) Suite of
Standards.--These standards help responders share critical data
in any form. By sending messages to tablets, computers, and
phones with EDXL-compliant software, real-time information
arrives at the fingertips of those who need it most. EDXL
standards are helping provide the ability to exchange all-
hazard emergency alerts, notifications, and public warnings as
well as to the exchange of hospital status, capacity, and
resource availability/usage information among medical and
health organizations and emergency information systems.
In fiscal year 2012, FRG is working on additional projects
including:
Heads Up Display for HazMat Suits.--This device will monitor
the internal and external temperatures both inside and outside
a responder Level-A suit and will provide a warning when
hazardous temperatures are reached.
Improved Structure Glove.--This next-generation high
dexterity structural fire glove will dramatically improve water
repellency, heat and flame protection, puncture resistance,
dexterity, and don and doff ability.
Wireless Vital Sign Monitoring.--This hands-free body-worn
system, lacking any external wires, will measure vital signs
and properties through a short-range wireless interface, and
during transport, will transmit data from the ambulance to a
receiving hospital through a long-range wireless interface. In
an effort to leverage DoD's work in this area, this project
uses the 1401 Technology Transfer Program to make use of
similarly developed DoD technology. FRG is in the process of
awarding a contract to modify the technology so it can be used
by EMT emergency responders on the civilian side.
Next Generation Textiles for Personal Protective Equipment
(PPE).--FRG is working across the S&T community to identify
current technology and research efforts to determine the
feasibility of a material that could provide protection against
multiple threats (e.g., chemical/biological agents, ballistic,
puncture, and fire/thermal) while maintaining wearer comfort.
By improving the normal response garments, FRG will ensure that
first responders have safer PPE that will protect them--even in
unexpected incidents. This project is part of S&T's Small
Business Innovation Research Program that was initiated in
2004. Two solicitations are issued per year and consist of
topics that address the needs of the seven DHS Operational
Units (e.g., U.S. Coast Guard, U.S. Transportation Security
Administration, U.S. Customs and Border Protection, Federal
Emergency Management Agency), as well as first responders.
National Information Sharing Consortium.--FRG is partnering
with a core group of leaders in State and local government to
build the National Information Sharing Consortium to address
and promote State-wide information sharing and data
interoperability. The purpose of the Consortium is to promote
private investment and creativity to enhance data sharing and
the creation of collaborative technologies and exchange
environments. The Consortium's activities will include the
sharing of software code, applications, and model practices.
The Consortium will oversee the on-going transition of vUSA as
an operational capability for local and State use.
Virtual Training.--FRG is conducting research to leverage
existing Government funding investments and technological
advances that use capabilities available in the gaming
industry, interagency simulations, and virtual interactive
training to promote different first responder operating
training opportunities. Virtual training can dramatically
reduce training costs, help standardize training--especially
for multi-agency events--and make it possible to provide more
responders the training required to respond to emergencies.
FRG also works closely with other elements of S&T to improve first
responders' operational capabilities. Additional examples of S&T's
recent transition successes include:
Controlled Impact Rescue Tool (CIRT).--Decreases by 85
percent the time it takes to breach reinforced concrete walls
while increasing first responders' control and overall safety.
S&T demonstrated and transferred CIRT to Fairfax County Fire
and Rescue, who routinely deploy internationally to assist in
rescues from disasters both natural and man-made. CIRT is now
commercially available from Raytheon Corporation, which shared
development costs with S&T.
Explosives Trace Detection.--For checked baggage screening,
this next-generation device is ten times more sensitive than
existing systems, can detect narcotics as well as explosives,
and is similarly priced to existing machines. The system is
currently undergoing operational testing with the
Transportation Security Administration and will be commercially
available within a year.
SportEvac.--This is computer modeling software developed by
S&T that provides simulation of evacuations allowing venue
operators to determine the safest evacuation and optimum plans
and procedures. The Indianapolis Department of Public Safety
used SportEvac in their security and safety planning for this
year's NFL Super Bowl. This technology is covered by the SAFETY
Act.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ The Support Anti-terrorism by Fostering Effective Technologies
Act of 2002 (SAFETY Act) provides important legal liability protections
for providers of Qualified Anti-Terrorism Technologies--whether they
are products or services.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Geo-spatial Location Accountability and Navigation System
for Emergency Responders (GLANSER).--A tool which allows
incident commanders to locate and track personnel inside
enclosed areas. Honeywell, Inc. has begun to commercialize
GLANSER.
Qualification Testing on White Powder Detector.--S&T
completed qualification testing for a commercially-available
system that allows first responders to determine if suspicious
white powders contain threat agents. The process relied upon
the S&T-developed Public-Safety Actionable Assay standards that
ensure local jurisdictions are using technology that meets
rigorous specifications for accuracy and sensitivity.
System Assessment and Validation for Emergency Responders
(SAVER).--SAVER is an S&T program that provides knowledge
products that enable responders to better select, procure, use,
and maintain their responder equipment. The SAVER Program
conducts objective assessments of commercial responder
equipment and systems and provides those results along with
other relevant equipment information to the emergency response
community in an operationally useful form. SAVER focuses
primarily on answering two main questions for the responder
community: ``What commercial equipment is available?'' and
``How does it perform?'' The knowledge products produced by the
SAVER Program are available to the responder community through
FEMA's Responder Knowledge Base (RKB).
Moving forward, FRG will continue to serve as a voice for the first
responder community. While FRG itself stood up in 2010, FRG's Office
for Interoperability and Compatibility (OIC) was established in
2004.\5\ OIC has a long history of developing solutions to help
strengthen first responder communications for legacy systems. OIC's
technical capability and firm understanding of first responder needs
has resulted in a trusted relationship with the first responder
community. Recently, FRG has played a similar role for DHS operational
components serving as a technical resource for the DHS Tactical
Wireless Communications Modernization Effort (TacNet) as the Department
makes critical procurement decisions for communications systems. FRG
intends on continuing to play this role for legacy systems as well as
emerging systems that use new technology.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ 6 U.S.C. 195.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Not only is it important to develop and transition technologies,
but it is also vital to inform the first responder community about the
type of technologies and services that are available to them. FRG is
committed to building high levels of trust with the field and does so
through direct interaction with first responders. At the same time, FRG
is continuing to identify effective, innovative, affordable ways to
enhance those efforts, including working to increase the use of virtual
meetings, brain storming platforms, and social media to strengthen our
contacts with the field.
The Homeland Security Act of 2002 requires DHS to establish a
Federal clearinghouse for information and technology, to encourage and
support innovative solutions to enhance homeland security.\6\
FirstResponder.gov and First Responder Communities of Practice (FR CoP)
are two websites that were developed by S&T to support this mandate.
FirstResponder.gov debuted in January 2007 as a ``one-stop'' portal to
enable local, Tribal, State, and Federal first responders to easily
access and leverage Federal web services, information on resources,
products, standards, testing and evaluation, and best practices, in a
collaborative environment. In 2010, S&T unveiled a newly redesigned and
enhanced FirstResponder.gov, which includes original news stories and
communication tools to help first responders engage directly with DHS.
FirstResponder.gov has more than 200 links to Federal, State, and local
resources; is linked from more than 300 external sites; and is either
the first or second website listed for a ``first responder'' query in
both Google and Yahoo. FRG also developed the FR CoP. FR CoP is a
professional networking, collaboration, and communication platform for
first responders and others working in homeland security and provides
an opportunity for responders to share lessons learned and best
practices to assist other departments. FR CoP has approximately 3,000
members and more than 100 communities.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ 6 U.S.C. 193.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
conclusion
S&T is committed to developing technologies for and providing
technology information to our first responders, to assist them in
conducting their mission to protect the Nation more effectively,
efficiently, and safely. While we have seen significant results,
capability gaps remain and the response environment's constantly
changing, which necessitates S&T to continually evaluate needs,
required capabilities, and potential investments and innovations. S&T
will continue to work with partners at the local, Tribal, State,
territorial, and Federal levels to maximize investments as we develop
new technologies to meet responders' highest priority needs. My vision
for FRG is grounded in the principles I discussed earlier, and I look
forward to achieving that vision for our Nation's first responder
community.
Thank you for inviting me to appear before you today. I appreciate
the opportunity to testify and would be pleased to answer any questions
you may have.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you, Dr. Griffin. Now I recognize Ms.
Saunders. You are recognized for 5 minutes. Welcome.
STATEMENT OF MARY H. SAUNDERS, DIRECTOR, STANDARDS COORDINATION
OFFICE, NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF STANDARDS AND TECHNOLOGY
Ms. Saunders. Thank you. Chairman Bilirakis, Ranking
Members Richardson and Clarke, and Members of the
subcommittees, thank you for this opportunity to discuss
standards development and this role in standards that relates
to equipment for and in support of our first responders.
NIST is a non-regulatory agency within the U.S. Department
of Commerce, whose mission is to promote U.S. innovation and
industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science,
standards, and technology in ways that enhance economic
security and improve our quality of life.
Mr. Chairman, a U.S. voluntary consensus standards system
is bottom-up, private-sector-driven, and sector-focused. The
Government participates as an equal and very interested
partner. In contrast to many other countries, the Federal
Government does not control or direct the standards system in
the United States.
As the Nation's measurement laboratory, NIST has multiple
roles relating to standards in the Federal enterprise. This
standards coordination function, defined by statute has been
borne out by a track record of over a hundred years of
technical excellence and objectivity. NIST's strong ties to the
industry and the standards development community have enabled
us to take on critical standards-related challenges and deliver
timely and effective solutions.
NIST also leads the National Science and Technology Council
Subcommittee on Standards, which brings together senior
officials from across the Federal Government to engage on
standards-related issues. NIST views standardization as an
important tool to enable U.S. innovation and competitiveness,
and facilitate the effective and efficient transfer of
technology from the NIST laboratories to the marketplace.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to highlight for you some of
NIST's programmatic activities that relate directly to
standards development for a wide variety of first responder
equipment, from telecommunications interoperability for public
safety to materials research and more. One of the most
important issues facing the first responder community is the
current inability of telecommunications equipment to talk
across systems or interoperate. NIST is deeply involved in the
effort to foster interoperability.
The Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012
has allocated $7 billion in funding and made new broad-band
spectrum in the 700 MHz band available to public safety,
setting a foundation for a unified system operating on common
spectrum bands that will foster Nation-wide roaming and
interoperability and provide access to broadband data, video,
mapping, GPS applications, and more. NIST Public Safety
Communications Research Program, with support and funding from
DHS S&T, has stood up a 700 MHz Public Safety Broadband
Demonstration Network at our Boulder, Colorado campus, that
serves both as a vendor-neutral environment and a test bed to
aid and requirements gathering and standards development.
Leveraging our staff's expertise and the unique assets of
the Boulder facilities, TSCR has taken steps to get the network
up and running, including acquiring 700 MHz band class 14LTE
commercial broadband equipment free of charge as part of a
series of cooperative research and development agreements.
Knowledge gleaned from network testing and evaluation will
allow us to understand where current commercial standards meet
public safety needs and where there are gaps. Identified needs
will be incorporated into a standards development strategy.
Broadband presents a unique opportunity for public safety.
It is crucial that public safety's requirements are reflected
in the LTE standards, so that Federal grant dollars and
taxpayer dollars are spent only on equipment that is both
interoperable and performs as required under high user volume
in emergency conditions, allowing first responders to better
carry out their mission of protecting lives and property.
NIST has also been involved in research efforts within the
National Institute of Justice to develop standards related to
body armor. A key NIJ standard describes how body armor used by
first responders should perform and includes methods for
testing and evaluating the armor. Nearly every piece of body
armor worn by law enforcement officers in this country complies
with the NIJ standard.
Beginning in 2005, NIST provided assistance to NIJ to
revise the standard to address a number of concerns. NIST
developed a new protocol through which armor is exposed to an
environment of elevated temperature, humidity, and mechanical
tumbling, and then subjected to ballistic tests. This proposed
protocol has been incorporated into the most recent revision of
the NIJ standard issued in July 2008 and continues to be used
in NIJ's body armor compliance testing program.
NIST is creating critical solution-enabling measurement
science and technical contributions underpinning emerging
standards, codes, and regulations that are used to improve the
safety and effectiveness of fire fighters. We are working with
local and States' fire services, manufacturers, and a range of
other Federal agencies on equipment such as self-contained
breathing apparatus, thermal imaging cameras, and personal
alert safety systems.
I will talk specifically about the PASS devices, which are
designed to signal for aid if a fire fighter becomes
incapacitated. NIST investigators found evidence that PASS
signal failed to function properly in the fire fighter's
environment. NIST determined that exposure to higher
temperature environments negatively affected the loudness of
the alarm signal. As it cooled, the alarm signal on most of the
units returned to pre-exposure sound levels. NIST researchers,
supported by DHS S&T, developed a new high temperature
functionality requirement and test protocol, a life-saving
improvement for each of the 1.25 million fire fighters whose
past devices were upgraded.
Mr. Chairman, NIST, in conjunction with other Federal
agencies, is focusing on developing test methods in a number of
areas and has other activities focused on specific environments
of interest in which the first responder community operates.
We look forward to continuing to work with our Federal,
State, local, and private sector partners to improve safety and
performance of our Nation's first responders. Thank you, again.
[The statement of Ms. Saunders follows:]
Prepared Statement of Mary H. Saunders
May 9, 2012
Chairmen Bilirakis and Lungren, Ranking Members Richardson and
Clarke, Members of the subcommittees, I am Mary Saunders, director,
Standards Coordination Office of the National Institute of Standards
and Technology (NIST). I want to thank you for this opportunity to
discuss standards development and NIST's role in standards as it
relates to equipment for and in support of our first responders.
NIST is a non-regulatory Federal agency within the U.S. Department
of Commerce. NIST's mission is to promote U.S. innovation and
industrial competitiveness by advancing measurement science, standards,
and technology in ways that enhance economic security and improve our
quality of life. Our efforts to drive innovation through advances in
measurement science enable industry to bring technological advances to
the commercial market sooner, thereby helping U.S. manufacturers stay
globally competitive. The focus on innovation is critical if we are to,
as the President and Secretary of Commerce John Bryson have noted,
``make it here and sell it everywhere.''
Today's hearing is focused on innovation as it relates to the
development of standards for equipment used by or in support of the
first responder community. My testimony will discuss the standards
ecosystem in which NIST works, address the issue of standards as a help
or hindrance to innovation in this space, highlight some examples of
our work related to first responders, and the touch upon the technical
challenges ahead.
the standards ecosystem
Mr. Chairman, the U.S. voluntary, consensus standards system is
bottom-up, industry-driven, and sector-focused. The Government
participates as an equal and interested partner. Federal, State, local,
and Tribal government representatives participate when the activity is
relevant to their needs, and consistent with their respective missions
and functions. In contrast to the Government-directed, prescriptive
standards that characterize the systems in place in a number of other
countries, the Federal Government does not control or direct the
standards system in the United States.
The modern-day engagement of the U.S. Government in the formal U.S.
standards system can be traced back to the founding of the organization
that has evolved into the American National Standards Institute (ANSI).
In 1916, the Department of Commerce was one of the founding members of
the American Engineering Standards Committee, formed to be an
``impartial national body to coordinate standards development, approve
national consensus standards, and halt user confusion on
acceptability.''\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ http://www.ansi.org/about_ansi/introduction/
history.aspx?menuid=1.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since the founding of the American Engineering Standards Committee,
U.S. Government agencies have been extensively involved in the
development and use of standards to meet agency missions and
priorities. This engagement was catalyzed in 1995 by the passage of the
National Technology Transfer and Advancement Act (Pub. L. 104-113),
which directed Federal agencies to ``use technical standards that are
developed or adopted by voluntary consensus standards bodies, using
such technical standards as a means to carry out policy objectives or
activities determined by the agencies and departments'',\2\ except
where inconsistent with applicable law or impractical.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ Pub. L. 104-113 National Technology Transfer and Advancement
Act of 1995, 12(d)(1). (available at: http://standards.gov/
standards_gov/nttaa.cfm).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The strength and agility of the U.S. standards system stems from
its sector-specific focus. Individual industry and technology sectors
are served by standards developing organizations that are sensitive to
and responsive to that sector's needs, and understand the dynamics of
that technology and industry. While there is no formal count of the
number of standards developers in the United States, it is estimated
that there are about 600 standards-setting organizations based in the
United States.
the federal government's role
Federal Government agencies engage in standardization in a wide
range of mission-specific roles, including contributing to development
of standards in the private sector and using standards for procurement
or regulatory actions. In fiscal year 2010, more than 2,800 Federal
agency staff from across the Federal enterprise participated in more
than 500 private-sector standards organizations. This participation is
spurred in large part by the National Technology Transfer and
Advancement Act (NTTAA) of 1995 (Pub. L. 104-113), and the associated
OMB Circular A119. The NTTAA directs agencies to consider the use of
voluntary consensus standards, in lieu of Government unique standards,
and OMB A-119 reflects this direction and also strongly encourages
agencies to participate in standards development activities to ensure
that the resulting standards are better suited to meet agency needs.
nist's role in the u.s. standards system
NIST plays a critical role in the context of Federal engagement in
the standards process. As the Nation's measurement laboratory, NIST has
multiple roles relating to standards in the Federal enterprise. NIST's
coordination function, defined by statute, has been borne out by a
track record of technical excellence and objectivity, embraced by
NIST's world-class scientists and engineers, ever since the Institute
was chartered by Congress in 1901. NIST's strong ties to industry and
the standards development community, backed by technical excellence,
have enabled NIST to take on critical standards-related challenges and
deliver timely and effective solutions.
NIST also plays a leadership role on the National Science and
Technology Council's Subcommittee on Standards (SOS), which brings
together senior officials across the Federal Government to engage on
standards-related issues. In October 2011, the subcommittee issued a
report, ``Federal Engagement in Standards Activities to Address
National Priorities: Background and Proposed Policy Recommendations,''
that provided an overview of the current legal and policy frameworks
for Government engagement in private-sector standardization and
conformity-assessment activities; described how the Government engages
in those activities; summarized stakeholder observations in response to
a request for information about Government engagement in
standardization; and outlined policy recommendations to supplement
existing guidance to agencies. As a follow-up to this report, the
administration released a memo in January 2012 highlighting the need
for continued work in the standards area.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ http://www.whitehouse.gov/sites/default/files/omb/memoranda/
2012/m-12-08.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
NIST views standards and standardization as an important tool to
enable U.S. innovation and competitiveness. NIST engagement in the
private-sector-led standards system enables the effective and efficient
transfer of technology from the NIST laboratories to the marketplace.
This is further made possible by the participation of nearly 400 NIST
technical staff in over 100 standards organizations, and more than
1,000 different standards activities, in support of domestic and
international priorities. It is noteworthy that this number represents
more than a quarter of the NIST technical staff. NIST's engagement with
industry in these standards activities also provides us the ability to
learn first-hand about industry's measurement, standards, and research
needs, and this provides valuable input into our prioritization of
current NIST programs and planning for future programs.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to highlight for you some of NIST's
specific programmatic activities that directly relate to standards
development for a wide variety of first responder equipment. Given the
foundational nature of NIST's research mission in measurement science
and standards, NIST technical expertise is being brought to bear across
multiple sectors. From telecommunications interoperability for public
safety to materials research, NIST technical expertise, in
collaboration with industry, academia, and other Federal entities, such
as the Department of Homeland Security's Science and Technology
Directorate (DHS S&T), can improve the reliability, safety, and
performance of equipment used by first responders across the country.
examples of nist standards activities related to first responder
equipment
700 MHz Public Safety Broadband Communications
This subcommittee is very aware of challenges facing the first
responder community. One of the most important issues is the current
inability of telecommunications equipment to talk across systems, or
``interoperate''. NIST is deeply involved in the effort to foster
interoperability.
The public safety community is experiencing a generational shift in
technology that will revolutionize the way it communicates.
Traditionally, emergency responders have used land mobile radio
technology that has limited data capabilities and suffers from a large
installed base of stove-piped proprietary systems with non-contiguous
spectrum assignments. As a result, public safety has long struggled
with effective cross-agency/jurisdiction communications and lags far
behind the commercial sector in data capability. The Middle Class Tax
Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Pub. L. 112-96)\4\ has allocated
$7 billion in funding and made new broadband spectrum in the 700-
megahertz (MHz) band available to public safety, setting the foundation
for a unified system operating on common spectrum bands that will
foster Nation-wide roaming and interoperability and provide access to
broadband data, video, mapping, GPS applications, and more.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation Act of 2012 (Pub. L.
112-96)--http://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-112publ96/pdf/PLAW-
112publ96.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The new Nation-wide public safety broadband network will rely on
commercial cellular technology. However, the public safety community
has several unique requirements that are not reflected in current
broadband technology or the roadmap for future standards development.
In an effort to identify those gaps in public safety's requirements and
represent those to international standards bodies, the Public Safety
Communications Research (PSCR) program \5\--with support and funding
from DHS S&T--has stood up a 700-MHz public safety broadband
Demonstration Network at the NIST/National Telecommunications and
Information Administration (NTIA) laboratory at the Department of
Commerce's Boulder, Colorado campus, that serves both as a vendor-
neutral environment where public safety, industry, and other
stakeholders can observe how new broadband technologies can meet public
safety's unique communication needs as well as a test bed to aid in
requirements gathering and standards development.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ PSCR is a joint program of the Department of Commerce's NIST/
OLES and NTIA/ITS that provides research, development, testing, and
evaluation to foster Nation-wide communications interoperability for
first responders.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Leveraging the expertise of the PSCR staff and the unique assets of
the Boulder facilities, including NTIA's Table Mountain Radio Test
Site, PSCR has obtained an experimental spectrum license and has
deployed an over-the-air broadband network, operating in the 700 MHz
public safety broadband spectrum. The Demonstration Network has
successfully acquired 700MHz Band Class 14 LTE broadband equipment--
including eNodeBs, devices, evolved packet cores, and test equipment--
free of charge as part of a Cooperative Research and Development
Agreement (CRADA) process.
Research gleaned from Demonstration Network testing and evaluation
will allow us to understand where current commercial standards meet
public safety's needs and where there are gaps. The gaps that are
identified will be incorporated into a standards development strategy.
Broadband presents a unique opportunity for public safety to define
their requirements before deployment and only purchase systems that
conform to the standard. It is crucial that public safety's
requirements are incorporated into the LTE standard so that Federal
grant dollars and taxpayer dollars are spent only on equipment that is
interoperable and allows first responders to better carry out their
mission of protecting lives and property. PSCR's Demonstration Network
exists to facilitate this requirements gathering and standards
development.
Body Armor
NIST has also been involved in research efforts with other Federal
agencies such as the National Institute of Justice (NIJ) to develop
standards related to public safety and criminal justice. One standard
maintained by NIJ describes how body armor used by first responders
should perform, and includes methods for testing and evaluating the
armor. This standard has existed since 1972, and a testing program that
relies on the standard has been in place since 1978. Nearly every piece
of body armor worn by police officers in this country complies with the
NIJ body armor standard.
An influential piece of legislation was enacted in 1998 that
accelerated adoption and use of protective body armor by law
enforcement. The Bulletproof Vest Partnership Grant Act of 1998
provided matching Federal funds to qualifying local and State agencies
to make their body armor procurement dollars go farther. Grant
recipients were required to have mandatory wear policies. As a result
of this legislation and related grants: (1) Agencies were able to
afford body armor for all of their officers, and officers were required
to wear it; and (2) the body armor industry had incentives to continue
advancing technologies to improve body armor.
To keep pace with technology advances, standards must continually
be updated to reflect and encompass technological advancements while
not inhibiting innovation by being overly prescriptive. Lags in
updating standards may affect the adoption of newer technologies. New
technologies may be introduced in advance of standardization. In the
former case, delays may occur in the widespread deployment of new
technologies. In the latter case, confidence in the technology or the
reliability of the equipment utilizing the technology may suffer.
Consider an incident in 2003 when a police officer's body armor, or
vest, was perforated by a round it was rated to stop. This incident
illustrates the importance of ensuring that standards and technologies
advance together. Until the late 1990s, most body armor worn by police
officers was made of either aramid (Kevlar or Twaron) or polyethylene
(Spectra or Dyneema). In this case, the armor was made out of a
relatively new material, polybenzobisoxazole, or PBO, that was first
introduced into body armor in 1998. The perforation of this vest in the
2003 case was the first known field failure in the 30-year history of
the body armor standards program. In response to this incident, the
U.S. Attorney General launched a safety initiative to examine soft body
armor containing the material PBO.
Until this time, materials in common use had been studied
previously and the most significant environmental factor affecting
armor performance--liquid water--was a long-standing part of the
standard testing protocol. NIST was tasked to undertake a research
effort to examine PBO and its performance in fielded body armor
performance and to make recommendations for improvements in the
standards and testing program. NIST research revealed that PBO degrades
due to exposure to moisture (humidity in the air or liquid water) as
well as folding. It was clear that a revised version of the NIJ body
armor standard that incorporated some measure of resistance to these
environmental degradation factors was essential for officer safety.
Beginning in 2005, NIST provided assistance to NIJ to develop a
revised body armor performance standard to address a number of
concerns, one of which was the ability of the armor to withstand
environmental and wear conditions that armor might see over its
lifetime. NIST developed a soft armor conditioning protocol, through
which armor is exposed to an environment of elevated temperature,
humidity, and mechanical tumbling, and then subjected to ballistic
tests. This protocol has been incorporated into the most recent
revision of the NIJ body armor standard issued in July 2008 and
continues to be used in NIJ's body armor Compliance Testing Program.
Since all officers want body armor that is lighter and more
comfortable, new materials and new construction methods for body armor
continue to be introduced into the marketplace. The body armor standard
must be able to address the safety of new materials, both in initial
use and over time. The armor conditioning protocol in the NIJ standard
is an excellent first step in assessing the long-term field performance
of body armor, but more work needs to be done and is in fact, the
subject of on-going research at NIST.
First Responder Equipment
NIST is also creating critical solution-enabling measurement
science and technical contributions underpinning emerging standards,
codes, and regulations that are used to improve safety and
effectiveness of the U.S. fire service. In 2009, the fire service
responded to over 1.3 million fires \6\ that resulted in 78,000 fire
fighter injuries and 83 fatalities \7\ with an estimated cost of $8
billion.\8\ In order to reduce the number of fire fighter fatalities
and injuries, science-based performance metrics are necessary to
improve fire fighter safety and enhance fire ground effectiveness. For
both equipment and tactics, it is critical that performance can be
measured and evaluated in a scientifically sound manner. The lack of
adequate measurement science directly impacts the protective equipment
and tactics utilized by the over
1 million fire fighters in over 32,000 fire departments in the United
States.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Karter, M.J., Fire Loss in the United States During 2009,
National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA, August 2010.
\7\ Karter, M.J., and Molis, J. L., U.S. Firefighter Injuries--
2009, National Fire Protection Association, Quincy, MA, August 2010.
\8\ ``The Economic Consequences of Firefighter Injuries and Their
Prevention,'' NIST GCR 05-874, March 2005.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To respond safely and effectively in hazardous environments, fire
fighters need access to better technology and equipment. If relevant
performance data is available for existing equipment or tactics, then a
meaningful performance metric can be developed, but too often the
necessary data is not readily available. Lab- and full-scale tests in
combination with science-based metrics will allow industry to evaluate
and improve their own products and develop new technology.
For the past 9 years, NIST has been an active leader and
participant in developing measurement science for fire service
technology. Our Fire Research Laboratory has unsurpassed experience in
fire testing and is a trusted source of unbiased, science-based,
quantifiable recommendations to standards-developing organizations
including the National Fire Protection Association (NFPA), ASTM,
International Organization for Standardization (ISO), and the
International Code Council (ICC).
NIST's unique role as a non-regulatory Federal agency, deep
technical expertise, and unique assets enables industry, academia, and
Federal entities to work with NIST collaboratively, to the benefit of
all parties involved. NIST works with local and State fire services,
manufacturers, the National Institute for Occupational Safety and
Health (NIOSH) National Personal Protection Technology Laboratory, the
Fire Protection Research Foundation of NFPA and others in this space.
In partnership with first responders, NIST identifies and
prioritizes research needs for the fire service. This process focuses
NIST's efforts on priorities identified by the fire fighting community.
The 2005 National Fire Research Agenda Symposium,\9\ which was attended
by over 50 organizations, including the fire service, manufacturers,
the International Association of Fire Chiefs, International Association
of Fire Fighters, National Voluntary Fire Council, DHS, and the U.S.
Fire Administration (USFA) identified and prioritized research needs
for fire fighters. Some of the ``urgent and critical issues'' that were
identified included improved respiratory protection, situational
awareness technology, tactical decision aids, lessons learned/fire
reconstructions, and strategies that would reduce injuries and
fatalities. Over 60 participants at the 2009 NIST Innovative Fire
Protection Workshop identified tactical decision aids, improved
respirators, and enhanced turnout gear as high-priority research needs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ National Research Agenda Symposium Report of the National Fire
Service Research Agenda Symposium June 1-3, 2005, Emmitsburg, Maryland.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Examples of Fire Fighter Standard Solutions
Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) Lenses: Fire
fighters wear protective equipment to protect themselves from
exposure to the harsh environment. SCBAs are designed to
provide clean breathing air and prevent exposure to toxic
combustion gases. NIOSH investigators noticed SCBA thermal
degradation issues after the deaths of several fire fighters.
NIST partnered with NIOSH to characterize the performance of
the SCBA face piece in the fire fighting environment and
determined that exposure to high thermal radiant flux caused
the viewing lenses to soften, form holes, and fail. With
funding from the DHS United States Fire Administration and DHS
S&T, NIST studied the conditions that may be encountered by
fire fighters and the effects of those conditions on SCBA face
piece lenses. This led to recommendations for a new test
methodology and performance criteria to the NFPA Technical
Committee on Respiratory Protection Equipment which are to be
included in the 2013 Edition of NFPA Standard 1981 on Open-
Circuit Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) for Emergency
Services.
Thermal Imaging Cameras: Thermal imaging cameras (TIC) are
becoming increasingly valuable tools for first responders;
however, there were initially no performance standards that
addressed the unique conditions in which first responders
operate. Evaluating the performance of thermal imagers requires
the resources to characterize the performance of thermal
imagers, both in lab- and full-scale experiments and then
developing performance metrics and standard testing protocols.
NIST developed performance metrics and testing protocols to
evaluate and ensure predictable performance of thermal imaging
cameras that were incorporated by the NFPA Technical Committee
on Electronic Safety Equipment into the 2010 edition of NFPA
1801 Standard on Thermal Imagers for the Fire Service. As this
standard was put into place, each of the over 32,000 fire
departments across the United States gained access to thermal
imaging cameras that would perform as expected in the harsh
fire conditions.
Personal Alert Safety Systems (PASS): Fire fighters can be
overcome by heat or smoke of a fire and may be unable to alert
other fire ground personnel to their need for assistance. PASS
devices are designed to signal for aid if a fire fighter
becomes incapacitated. NIOSH investigators noticed that there
was evidence the PASS alarm signal failed to function or was
not heard by other personnel in the area. NIST again partnered
with NIOSH to characterize the performance of PASS devices in
the fire fighters' environment. NIST determined that exposure
to high temperature environments typical of what a fire fighter
encounters caused the loudness of the PASS alarm signal to be
reduced enough to become indistinguishable from background
noise on the emergency scene. As the PASS cooled, the alarm
signal on most of the units returned to pre-exposure sound
levels. NIST researchers, supported by DHS S&T, developed a new
high temperature functionality requirement and test protocol
for inclusion in the 2007 edition of NFPA 1982 Standard on
Personal Alert Safety Systems (PASS), a lifesaving improvement
for each of the 1.25 million fire fighters whose PASS devices
were upgraded.
conclusion
NIST continues its pursuit of measurement science to improve test
methods and standards for advancing innovation for products used by
everyone in the first responder community. NIST, in conjunction with
other Federal agencies, is focusing on developing test methods in a
number of areas, ranging from telecommunications interoperability to
determining the performance of Radio Frequency Identification (RFID)
and fire fighter locator systems, fire fighter radios, and fire fighter
protective clothing in rough-duty environments. NIST has other
activities focused on specific environments of interest in which the
first responder community operates, such as guidance on non-traditional
means to mitigate the fire hazard due to ventilation and suppression
activities within structures in a manner that provides optimum safety
and effectiveness for the fire fighter; and development of improved
standards and building codes through simulations and experiments on
structural vulnerabilities to wildland-urban interface (WUI) fires.
Mr. Chairman, thank you again for the opportunity to testify today.
I would be happy to answer any questions the subcommittees may have.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you, Ms. Saunders. Chief, you are
recognized now for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF EDWARD KILDUFF, CHIEF OF DEPARTMENT, NEW YORK CITY
FIRE DEPARTMENT, NEW YORK, NEW YORK
Chief Kilduff. Good morning, Chairman Bilirakis, Ranking
Members Richardson and Clarke, and all subcommittee Members
that are here. Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you
today about the New York City Fire Department's homeland
security technology efforts, our initiatives, and our
innovations.
New York City remains a primary target for terrorists, due
to its size, economic importance, complex infrastructure, and
symbolic status. During the more than 10\1/2\ years since
September 11, the Fire Department has made significant progress
in preparing for future terrorist threats and natural disasters
by increasing our capabilities and expanding our capacity to
search for any significant event that threatens the lives of
New Yorkers.
The most critical partners in supporting these initiatives,
which are discussed in greater detail in our written submission
to the subcommittees, are the Federal Department of Homeland
Security and Congress. Since its inception almost a decade ago,
DHS has recognized FDNY's unique role in protecting New York
City and has awarded the Department more than $400 million to
enhance our capacity to respond to terrorism. This funding has
enabled the FDNY to provide specialized training and resources
for our hazmat and rescue teams to improve internal and
interoperable communications, and to provide commanders with
better on-scene information and situational awareness.
We also use DHS grants to fund firehouse-based computerized
training kiosks. Many of the drills and exercises provide all
field units with tactical training for real-life incidents,
such as bus bombings, subway attacks, incidents in the harbor,
and all-hazards events.
With the limited time I have, I want to try to demonstrate
to the subcommittee Members how DHS funding has been invested
wisely in the FDNY, which works for the benefit of New York
City, the New York Metropolitan area, the region, and all first
responders. That investment has been made in each and every one
of our 11,000 fire fighters and fire officers and 3,200 EMS
members, who every day use the funded technology equipment,
tools, and training to help save lives and increase the safety
of the public and our first responders.
Imagine the scene of a large-scale or complex incident. As
our first responders arrive, the incident command system and
our tiered response matrix have already determined the roles
that each member will play upon their initial arrival on the
scene and as the incident escalates. At their disposal is an
improved, three-part fire ground communication system,
consisting of vehicle-based cross-band repeaters, high-powered
portable command post radios, and handy talkie radios with
customized channels.
Our members are equipped with improved gear in the form of
radiological detectors and safer chemical protective clothing.
They are supported on scene by mobile command vehicles,
helicopter video feeds, new generation Marine response craft,
and electronic command boards for control and tracking of
resources. Leading these efforts are ICS-trained center
commanders assisted by specialized squads and rescue companies,
tactical support units, and haz-tech ambulances.
At the same time, our department leaders operate out of our
state-of-the-art fire department operation center based in our
Brooklyn headquarters. From this operational nerve center,
commanders can oversee operations at the scene and exchange
information with regional partners, while keeping a close eye
on events unfolding in the rest of the city.
Throughout our operations, we utilize the electronic fire
ground accountability system to facilitate on-scene
accountability of first responders. From the scene, we can
share voice, video, and data communications in real time with
law enforcement, regional and mutual aid partners, city and
State agencies, DHS, and other Homeland Security partners. As
this scenario shows, FDNY has the resources and training to
respond to a myriad of complex incidents. DHS funding has
helped our first responders, the boots on the ground,
immeasurably.
There is much more to be done, however. With DHS and its
Science and Technology Directorate as our partner, we are
confident that we will continue to find innovative solutions to
address our on-going needs. We support the efforts of the S&T
Directorate to create economies of scale by developing
solutions that help the fire service and first responders
Nation-wide. Due to anticipated reductions in grant funding
going forward, this is not only practical, it is imperative.
Two areas where we think this is particularly critical for
first responders are standards and testing and network command.
Most fire departments throughout the country lack the resources
to establish standards and test equipment themselves,
especially in light of ever-increasing changes in technology.
The S&T Directorate is uniquely situated to take the lead in
the testing and development of National standards that we need
for, among other things, CBRNE detection and mitigation
equipment. We support, benefit from, and urge continued funding
for these efforts.
Network commands, where commanders are linked to real-time
data on desktop computers and mobile devices or via their
operation centers, remain an unmet need. However, the S&T
Directorate is piloting the Next-Generation Incident Command
System, or NICS, a geo-special tool that can integrate data
from diverse agencies and allows first responders to have a
common operating platform.
The FDNY supports the S&T Directorate's efforts to develop
this important tool for first responders. In fact, the FDNY
recently tested NICS in a simulated hurricane exercise that we
designed for West Point cadets involving the management of
National Guard resources. With regard to DHS grant funding for
the FDNY, we understand that DHS' focus will be on providing
sufficient funding so that we can sustain our current
capabilities, maintain the equipment and resources that we
currently have, and support us as we continue to utilize our
strengths and assets to protect the New York region.
As mentioned in the subcommittee testimony in more detail,
we do have some concerns about the proposed changes for fiscal
year 2013 Homeland Security Grant Cycle. First and foremost, we
urge that funding be targeted to those areas at most risk for
terrorism. Another concern is the compressed time frames
proposed for Homeland Security grants that removes the
flexibility we need to develop the complex systems and assets
we require.
It is important that the technological advancements I have
described can potentially become part of a Nation-wide
integrated system of response that benefits first responders in
every jurisdiction.
I thank you for allowing us to testify today and look
forward to answering the committee's questions.
[The statement of Chief Kilduff follows:]
Prepared Statement of Edward Kilduff
May 9, 2012
Good morning, Chairmen Bilirakis and Lungren, Ranking Members
Richardson and Clarke, and Members of the subcommittees. My name is
Edward Kilduff and I am chief of department for the New York City Fire
Department.
Thank you for the opportunity to speak with you today about the New
York City Fire Department's homeland security technology efforts,
innovations, and initiatives.
New York City remains a primary target for terrorists due to its
size, economic importance, complex infrastructure, and symbolic status.
During the more than 10\1/2\ years since 9/11, the Fire Department has
made significant progress in preparing for future terrorist threats by
increasing our capabilities and expanding our capacity to surge for any
significant event that threatens the lives of New Yorkers. The most
critical partner in supporting these initiatives--which I will discuss
in more detail--is the Federal Department of Homeland Security (DHS),
with the support of Congress.
department of homeland security funding
Since its inception almost a decade ago, DHS has recognized the
FDNY's unique role in protecting New York City, and has awarded the
Department more than $400 million to enhance our capacity to respond to
terrorism.
This funding has enabled the FDNY to provide specialized training
and resources for our HazMat and Rescue teams, to improve interoperable
communications and to provide commanders with better on-scene
information and situational awareness. We also use DHS grants to fund
many of the drills and exercises that provide all field units with
practical training for real-life incidents such as bus bombings, subway
attacks, incidents in the harbor, and all-hazards events.
Looking forward, we understand that DHS's focus will be on
providing sufficient funding so that we can sustain current
capabilities, maintain the equipment and resources that we have, and
support us as we continue to develop new-generation resources to
protect the region's critical infrastructure.
initiatives and enhancements
In preparation for this hearing, we reviewed our homeland security
initiatives and hoped to highlight in this testimony those that
involved some technological component. Technology is an integral part
of all of our initiatives--from our state-of-the-art new fireboats to
all methods of field communications to our drills and training. So,
with that in mind, allow me to briefly describe some of our highest-
priority preparedness accomplishments.
Special Operations Command
The FDNY has rebuilt and significantly enhanced our Special
Operations Command (SOC) capabilities, so that we are more prepared
than ever to deal with incidents involving biological, chemical, or
radioactive releases, and other major incidents with mass-casualty
potential.
The underpinning of these enhancements is the ``tiered response''
system that we established to ensure the optimal availability and
distribution of response resources. This tiered-response framework
entails training FDNY units in a variety of response capabilities at
incremental proficiency levels and strategically locating those units
across the city. In addition to Hazardous Materials (HazMat)
capabilities, this matrix maximizes the FDNY's capabilities to respond
to any large-scale incident in a manner that is highly effective,
economically efficient, and sustainable over the long term.
SOC includes five Rescue Companies, seven Squad Companies, our
highly specialized HazMat Unit and the Marine Division consisting of
three year-round and three seasonal Marine Companies. Rescue and Squad
Company members receive the highest levels of training the Department
offers in technical rescue and victim-removal--more than 280 hours of
specialized rescue training in collapse response and rescue operations.
All five Rescue Companies are SCUBA-qualified. All Rescue and Squad
Companies have advanced hydraulic and search equipment for operating at
building collapses and are trained and equipped for high-angle rescues.
All Fire and EMS personnel have received training to the HazMat
Operations level.
To augment and support our SOC response, we can deploy:
25 SOC Support Ladder Companies, which are capable of
providing personnel and equipment to support search-and-rescue
operations;
Four HazTech Engine Companies, whose members receive 80
hours of HazMat training;
35 HazTac Ambulance Units, whose vehicles are equipped to
provide medical care in a HazMat environment;
Two new state-of-the-art 140-foot fireboats, specially
equipped with radiological detection capability, that can
respond to chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear
(CBRN) incidents anywhere on or near the water;
One new 65-foot state-of-the-art fast-response boat (with
one on the way) with CBRN protection and radiological detection
capability, three 33-foot fast-response rescue boats (with
seven more on order), and one 31-foot medical response boat
(with two more on order);
One Decon, one SCUBA, and two Tactical Support Units and one
De-watering Unit;
A Re-breather Unit that allows us to operate for prolonged
periods in hazardous environments;
29 Chemical Protection Clothing units; and
Ten Rescue Medic Ambulances.
Organizational and Communications Infrastructure
Of course, enhanced capabilities are only one component of our
preparedness goals. The FDNY has also taken steps to improve our
organizational and communications infrastructures as well. The FDNY
has:
Expanded training in the Incident Command System for all
Fire and EMS personnel;
Developed a fully-staffed Incident Management Team (IMT),
which was dispatched to New Orleans after Hurricanes Katrina
and Gustav, and to Broome County, New York this past fall after
Hurricane Irene;
Launched an automated recall program that can target off-
duty members to ensure resources are available to maintain
coverage throughout the city during any emergency;
Implemented a communications channel between on-scene fire
fighters and the EMS command;
Implemented a second EMS city-wide channel for Multiple
Casualty Incidents;
Established links to the MTA repeater systems to facilitate
communications in the subways and tunnels;
Designed and purchased two state-of-the-art Mobile Command
Vehicles and an IMT/Planning Vehicle to assist in response
coordination and communications;
Finalized all-hazards emergency response plans for
responding to terrorist threats and natural disasters;
Developed an internal risk assessment website for priority
locations;
Assigned a fire officer, beginning in July 2012, to the
National Counter Terrorism Center in McLean, Virginia;
Established a connection to the U.S. intelligence community
via the Homeland Security Data Network and Intelink, secret-
level networks that link to finished intelligence to aid our
overall readiness to meet the consequences of a terrorist
attack;
Enhanced our Bureau of Fire Investigation intelligence
capabilities, including the assignment of Fire Marshals to the
Joint Terrorism Task Force, the acquisition of top-secret
clearance for National intelligence, the creation of a 24-hour
hotline for FDNY members to report suspicious activity, and
target hardening and protection of FDNY's critical
infrastructure; and
Established the Center for Terrorism and Disaster
Preparedness to coordinate our counterterrorism planning and
strategy.
The FDNY has also successfully deployed a three-part field
communication system that represents a critical step in improved
fireground communications. The system--designed and built in-house--
consists of 13 vehicle-based, cross-band repeaters, which allow radio
signals to be transmitted into dense building environments; 75 high-
powered portable command post radios; and handie-talkie radios with
several customized features that have improved on-scene tactical and
command communications and fire fighter safety. These radios also
provide us with full interoperability--the ability to speak with other
city agencies and our mutual aid partners--helping to protect all first
responders.
The FDNY has made important strides in strengthening EMS
communications by adding a second city-wide radio channel. This
additional EMS channel eliminates the overlapping frequencies between
our command and city-wide channels, enhances the capability of EMS
command at the scene of multiple incidents and allows for better
utilization of frequency allocations for EMS Chiefs.
Technology and Network Command
As circumstances evolve at a disaster, a critical challenge is to
ensure situational awareness for optimal incident management. This
would include forming networks of voice, video, and data among multiple
groups of emergency responders, Government agencies, and non-Government
organizations--at the incident scene and at emergency operations
centers away from the scene. The FDNY has leveraged our technology to
create a common operational picture and interoperable networks for
coordination and unified command.
To that end, we have implemented many long-term technology
initiatives, which include:
Building a state-of-the-art Fire Department Operations
Center (FDOC), an operational nerve center at our 9 MetroTech
headquarters that is fully activated for use by senior Chiefs
in the event of serious fires and other large-scale incidents;
Developing an enhanced real-time deployment and siting model
for the Department; and
Piloting wireless Electronic Command Boards for better on-
scene command, control, and tracking of resources.
The FDNY also supports the efforts of the DHS Science & Technology
Directorate to develop an integrated situational awareness platform for
first responders called the ``Next-Generation Incident Command System''
or NICS. NICS is a geospatial tool that can integrate data from diverse
agencies and allow first responders to have a common operating picture.
We understand that DHS is working with MIT's Lincoln Laboratory to
pilot NICS and that NICS is currently supporting the integrated
operations of California first responders, led by the California
Department of Forestry and Fire Protection, or Cal Fire. The FDNY
recently tested NICS in a simulated hurricane exercise that we designed
for West Point Cadets involving the management of National Guard
resources.
Virtual Training
Over the past year, with help from DHS, the FDNY created and
introduced its kiosk e-learning platform in all FDNY firehouses and EMS
stations. The computer-based training enables us to deliver training
and situational awareness information to the field faster and more
efficiently than ever before. Keeping our 15,000 fire fighters and EMTs
trained and refreshed is a crucial--and costly--part of our mandate as
we address the complexities of the post-9/11 environment. Using real-
time, video-rich content captures the attention of our members and
encourages on-going learning. Among its benefits are:
Company officers use kiosk content to structure drills and
education in the firehouse; and
Our FDOC can push out situational awareness to members about
in-progress events where they might be called to respond.
FDNY has the most comprehensive fire fighter training program in
the country, consisting of classroom learning, hands-on skills
development and training in state-of-the-art simulated environments
including a high-rise building, subway cars and tunnels. We know that
e-learning will never fully replace classroom or practical skills
training, but it has become an important component of the training
cycle we provide for our members. Fire departments from around the
country are interested in leveraging our e-training content. This
information sharing is a core value of the FDNY, and we are evaluating
the feasibility of offering our kiosk training to other departments.
the center for terrorism and disaster preparedness
Making consistent progress on the wide array of initiatives I have
just described requires careful planning. We created the Center for
Terrorism and Disaster Preparedness (CTDP) in 2004 to be the focal
point for the Department's strategic preparedness, providing the
Department with the necessary intelligence to make critical decisions
in dangerous environments beyond more routine responses.
The Center's activities bring together our own members' varied
expertise to create a dynamic and practical approach to
counterterrorism, disaster response, and consequence management. CTDP
bridges the divide between the established intelligence community and
non-traditional intelligence consumers and producers, such as the fire
service.
CTDP has also helped develop new technologies such as the
Electronic Command Board (ECB), which I mentioned earlier. The
Department piloted the ECB and its hand-held, tablet-style Command Pad
this past spring. ECB is used to account for deployed units and will be
connected to FDOC to send digital blueprints and other building
information to the fireground. It can also be used in subway
emergencies to provide Incident Commanders with information on tunnels
and emergency exits. It will also receive mayday signals from
Electronic Fireground Accountability System.
One of the functions of CTDP is to develop tabletop and full-scale
exercises to test procedures and core capabilities of the Department.
Continual training exercises better prepares our first responders to
use technology at routine and major events.
future preparedness enhancements
Building on the achievements I have just listed, we set an
ambitious agenda for future preparedness enhancements.
One significant development is the implementation of the Electronic
Fireground Accountability System (EFAS), just mentioned. The EFAS pilot
was launched in December 2010 to improve the on-scene accountability of
members at fires and other emergencies, including large-scale high-rise
or subway incidents. With EFAS, an officer's laptop identifies and
assigns a position for all fire company members. Now fully integrated,
EFAS will monitor handie-talkie transmissions and mayday alerts and
allow the Incident Commander to perform an Electronic Roll Call.
Grants
In the area of Federal grants in general, we do have some concerns
going forward. We know that FEMA plans sweeping changes for the fiscal
year 2013 Homeland Security grant cycle. First and foremost, the Urban
Areas Security Initiative needs to be preserved as a stand-alone
program that is well-funded and targets assistance to those areas
identified as most at-risk for terrorism.
With funding expected to decrease Nation-wide, it is more
imperative than ever that FEMA direct funds based on where intelligence
and threat analysis tell us they are most needed. Now is not the time
to cut funding to New York City, which remains the No. 1 high-value
target for terrorists.
We are also concerned about the compressed time lines being
instituted for homeland security grants. The proposed 24-month grant
cycle, with very limited exceptions, is short-sighted. Some of the
FDNY's most successful and powerful DHS-funded assets, such as our
fireboats and our FDOC, took years to build and implement. We need
flexibility so that we can continue to develop the complex systems and
assets that, although they may have relatively long time lines for
implementation, have equally far-reaching and impactful results.
Our goal is not to spend funds quickly, but to use Federal
resources efficiently and well to advance preparedness for New York
City and the Nation. We will continue to encourage DHS to be flexible
and work with us to achieve that mission.
significant responses
Last, I would like to mention two key incidents from the last few
years where many of the technological advancements I have just
described came into play, with great outcomes: Flight 1549's emergency
landing in the Hudson River in January 2009, and the May 2010 terrorist
incident in Times Square.
Flight 1549's landing is a noteworthy example of networked command
in action: The FDNY Fire and EMS Operations, the NYPD, and the U.S.
Coast Guard all worked together, connecting at the scene through a
unified command structure under the National Incident Management (NIMS)
protocol. We were able to connect back to the FDOC at headquarters
while the Fire Marshals connected with LaGuardia Operations to obtain
the flight manifest. EMS connected with the broader EMS system--
including hospitals in New Jersey--to track all of the transported
patients. Ultimately, the FDNY was able to confirm that all the
passengers were accounted for. We then posted this information on the
Homeland Security Information Network, which was shared with our
partner agencies, and ultimately that good news made its way to the
Situation Room at the White House. In sum, we had to hastily form an
effective, new-generation network where human and technological
networks played a key role in instant information sharing and analysis.
In May 2010, Faisal Shazad attempted to detonate a car bomb in
Times Square. Engine 54 and Ladder 4--companies that lost their entire
crews on 9/11--were called to the scene for a car fire. Before 9/11, a
fire officer's first instinct may have been to get up close to the car
and use water to extinguish the fire. But these first responders
recognized that this was no ordinary car fire. And, because of their
increased situational awareness and dedicated training, they
immediately realized that they had a potential terrorist threat on
their hands. They knew exactly what to do: They started clearing the
area and called the NYPD bomb squad. They also knew what NOT to do:
They did not disrupt the vehicle and did not attempt to put out the
fire. Their actions kept bystanders safe and also preserved crucial
evidence that lead to a quick capture of the suspect.
I am proud of our members' critical role in these two incidents,
but the truth is we respond to incidents on a daily basis that require
a ``new-generation'' response. While our rebuilding is never finished,
I can say without equivocation that this Department is better prepared,
equipped, and trained and more capable than ever before.
conclusion
In conclusion, to quote New York City's Fire Commissioner,
Salvatore Cassano, ``the greatest way to honor those we lost on 9/11 is
to make sure that we are prepared for the next event.'' We are prepared
for the next event, and the process of continuing these preparedness
efforts carries on. Our partnership with DHS and the support of the
Members of Congress have been absolutely critical to these efforts.
Importantly, all of the technological advancements I have described can
potentially become part of a Nation-wide, integrated system of response
information that benefits first responders in every jurisdiction in the
country.
I would be happy to answer any questions you may have.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you, Chief. Ms. Doying, you are
recognized for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF ANNETTE DOYING, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT, PASCO COUNTY, FLORIDA
Ms. Doying. Chairman Bilirakis, Ranking Members Richardson
and Clarke, other Members of the subcommittee, I appreciate you
allowing me to testify here today before you on your first
responder technologies hearing. The subject matter, trying to
accomplish a prioritized ranking scheme for funding, resonates
very directly with me and I hope that my testimony assists you
with that today.
When I first came on board to work as the Homeland Security
Coordinator in Pasco County, Florida, science and technology
was a DHS element that I was quite excited about. Over the
course of more than 6 years, I taught approximately 4,000 first
responders Homeland Security-related concepts of operation.
I would tell the students a story that started something
like this. Do you remember the fellow who died of anthrax
exposure in October 2001? He worked at the National Inquirer
building in Palm Beach County. I want you to imagine that you
are the local hazmat responder and you have been asked to enter
that building, find, contain, and remove the anthrax from that
building. As you don your low-bid SCBA, as you don your low-bid
protective ensemble, and as you strap on your low-bid
protective device, how do you feel about being the guy going in
that building?
I would go on to talk in these classes about how the DHS
Science and Technology Directorate was intended in part to
bring cutting-edge technology being developed in private sector
and university R&D labs to those agencies that have
responsibility for responding to WMD CBRNE events. I shared my
opinion that the future held for us the idea that the choice of
low-bid-only equipment would be countered by the science behind
the why we need this device or equipment justification. I held
out hope that our local hazardous materials responders would
don TPE and use devices that would be of a proven quality,
proven to Government through Government, instead of by a
corporate salesman who we can't point to and swear that he has
our best interests in mind.
Today, I hesitate to share that message, because my
observations of how science and technology has trickled down to
local communities shows me some disparities between what I had
hoped for and what is. An example I offer is a very limited
local perspective on the work of the domestic nuclear detection
office. This program seems to have worked diligently to ensure
that communities are protected from a radiological or a nuclear
incident. As a result, local law enforcement officers have been
recipients of personal radiation detector devices and hospital
entryways are outfitted with NC2 detectors. But not enough law
enforcement officers have these devices. Certainly, the first-
in officer doesn't have one.
For those hospitals that have these devices, not enough
integrated planning with local health departments and first
responders has been accomplished. At the local level, there is
little understanding of how to access technical reach-back
capabilities to support an incident of this type, and so there
will be losses.
The consolidation by the Science and Technology Directorate
of the multiple standards that apply to Homeland Security is a
successful and useful effort. NFPA 1981 and NFPA 1994 standards
of self-contained breathing apparatus and protective ensembles
are key and critical components of a Nation-wide homeland
security program. Their focus on protection of first responders
is of an importance that is well understood by all of us here
today. Continued focus on modernizing these standards,
promoting the use of emerging technologies and support of the
response community, and leveraging the knowledge found in R&D
labs is our first line of defense for local responders.
In the last 10 years, I have seen a significant amount of
confusion about where homeland security funds should be spent.
I have heard the arguments that ask how equipment fits into the
context of capability building and risk reduction. Equipment,
the right equipment, well trained on, is an important tool for
the first responder.
I have observed the gains made within the area of training
for the National Domestic Preparedness Consortium facilities. I
find that resident training at these facilities is more
effective than attempts to provide the same training within
local communities. A significant effort to promote first
responder participation and educate local communities about the
value of this training would further the agenda that asks us to
standardize our approach towards emergency response.
There is considerable logic for concentrating funding in
high-risk communities. However, the designation of
jurisdictions-specific specialty team means that single
jurisdictions have been well-equipped and trained with the use
of homeland security funds. For those of us serving on the
fringe of those high-risk communities, this funding methodology
has produced some sense of detachment to the homeland security
mission. There should be a more networked approach to
capability building, one that disregards jurisdiction, supports
multi-agency response, and acknowledges that it is through
mutual aid that all disasters are best served.
In nearly all of the communities that surround me, I see
emergency managers, fire fighters, and law enforcement officers
struggling with Homeland Security as an ``other duty as
assigned.'' For the local first response community, this is a
deficit. You should know that without dedicated Homeland
Security personnel at the local level, much of the work being
done on a National scale is hidden from view and, therefore,
largely disregarded.
Thank you for offering me the time to speak to you today.
[The statement of Ms. Doying follows:]
Prepared Statement of Annette Doying
May 9, 2012
Members of the committee, thank you for the invitation to testify
today in your joint hearing on first responder technologies. Your focus
on ensuring a prioritized approach for Homeland Security Research and
Development resonates with me and I hope that my testimony assists you
towards that end.
I realize that this committee has probably seen some very tangible
work accomplished by the universities and private sector institutes
funded through the Science and Technology Directorate. Through
conversations with my new-hires, guys who worked CBRNE in the Air Force
and Army up until a few months ago, I understand that the Department of
Defense saw an increase in the quality and quantity of Personal
Protective Equipment and response equipment over the last 10 years.
They also experienced strengthened relationships with Research &
Development entities and labs that support testing and analysis. I also
know that the placement of the very competent and well-equipped WMD-
CSTs (civilian support teams) in local communities was a positive
forward movement in support of local response. The experiences of
Federal representatives working with and within the S&T Directorate,
members of the military, and the faculty at funded universities and
staff of National labs is not the experience of local responders. My
perspective is limited to the outcomes of homeland security initiatives
at the local level.
In the realm of emergency preparedness gains have been made within
the area of training through the National Domestic Preparedness
Consortium facilities like the Center for Domestic Preparedness at Ft.
McClellan in Anniston, AL, the Energetic Materials Research and Testing
Center at New Mexico Tech, the National Center for Biomedical Research
and Training at Louisiana State University, and the Texas Engineering
Extension Service. This training has become a cornerstone of common
knowledge building for the local response community. I've seen the
consortium grow and I've watched as more and more local folk become
aware of the training opportunities offered through it. I've personally
put SHSGP funds to good use to support training of local responders
through the consortium and I've seen other local governments do the
same. I find that resident training at these facilities is more
effective than attempts to provide the same training through mobile
delivery within local communities. Support for local responders to
attend training at Consortium facilities should be the emphasis for
future capability building. A significant effort to promoting
participation and educate local communities about the value of this
training would further the agenda that asks us to standardize our
approach towards emergency response. Careful oversight that focuses on
the quality of instruction and gauging the depth of knowledge built
through consortium training will help justify the need to have local
responders leave their own communities for this training.
A few weeks ago, Sheriff Chris Nocco, Pasco County, Florida
provided testimony before this or a similar body. Sheriff Nocco spoke
about a number of things but I would like to speak to one of these as
well. The Sheriff conveyed his understanding of State and Federal
designation of regional specialty response teams and his concerns about
the use of these teams in a community which must then rely on the
skills and equipment of those teams. Designation of a regional team
really means that single jurisdictions ``own'' a team that will be
eligible for Federal homeland security planning, training, exercise,
and equipment funds. There is considerable logic for concentrating
funding in high-risk communities and expecting that those communities
build a capability for managing those risks. However, for those of us
living in and serving communities on the fringe of those high-risk
communities this funding methodology has produced some sense of
detachment to the homeland security mission. If you aren't empowered to
make decisions about the application of homeland security funds, then
how do you contribute to the mission? Further, the expectation that
those specialty teams will serve outlying communities through mutual
aid is reasonable, but this approach to building capability fails to
recognize that mutual aid works in two directions. There should be a
more networked approach to capability building; one that disregards
jurisdiction, supports multi-agency response, and acknowledges that it
is through mutual aid that all disasters are best served.
At the State and local level I've seen a significant amount of
confusion about where local State Homeland Security Grant Program funds
set aside for planning, training, and exercise should and could be
spent. I've understood the struggles and arguments that local,
regional, State, and Federal players have when trying to determine how
equipment fits into the context of capability building and risk
reduction. We've all felt the consternation over the debate about
sustainment funding for equipment upkeep. I, and my community, have
been fortunate in that from 2005 until 2011 I filled a Homeland
Security Coordinator position created by my local jurisdiction and
initially funded through the State Homeland Security Grant Program
(SSGP). This obligation of funds towards a dedicated full-time
emergency manager focused on local implementation of homeland security
initiatives is what enabled my understanding of the things I'm speaking
to you about today. But in nearly all of the communities that surround
me, I look and don't see a counterpart. Instead, I see emergency
managers, fire fighters, and law enforcement officers struggling with
an other-duty, as-assigned. For the local first response community,
this is a deficit. Without dedicated homeland security personnel at the
local level, much of the work being done on a National scale is hidden
from view and, therefore, largely disregarded.
The consolidation, by the Science and Technology Directorate, of
the multiple standards that apply to homeland security is a successful
and useful effort. NFPA 1600: Standard on Disaster/Emergency Management
and Business Continuity Programs should be well understood and
implemented by local government. Beyond the standard, however, there
should be stronger mechanisms for ensuring that disasters are well
managed, business can continue, and local civil servants know their
role. Other standards, such as NFPA 1981, Standard on Open-Circuit
Self-Contained Breathing Apparatus (SCBA) for Emergency Services which
requires all SCBA gear to adhere to certifications that provide
respiratory protection against chemical, biological, radiological, and
nuclear attacks and NFPA 1994, which specifies the minimum requirements
for protective ensembles for fire and emergency services personnel
operating at domestic terrorism incidents (chemical/biological) are key
and critical components of a Nation-wide homeland security program.
Their focus on the protection of first responders is of an importance
that is well understood by all of us here today. Continued focus on
modernizing these standards, promoting the use of emerging technologies
in support of the response community, and leveraging the knowledge
found in research and development labs in the private sector and
universities is our first line of defense for our local responders.
When I first came on board to work homeland security in Pasco
County, Florida, this was a DHS element that I was quite excited about.
Over the course of more than 6 years, I taught approximately 4,000
local first-responders homeland security related concepts of operation.
I would always tell a story that started something like this: ``Do you
all remember the fellow who died from Anthrax exposure in Palm Beach
County in October 2001--he worked at the National Enquirer building?
Well, imagine that you are the hazmat responder from local government
who is asked to go into that building, find (detect) the anthrax,
collect and package it, and transport it out of the building. As you
don your low-bid SCBA and your low-bid protective suit, and you strap
the low-bid detection device around you, how do you feel about being
the guy going in?''
I would go on to talk about how the DHS Science and Technology
Directorate was intended, in part, to bring cutting-edge technology
being developed in R&D labs in the private sector and in the great
universities across our Nation to those agencies inside of government
that have responsibility for responding to WMD/CBRNE events. I shared
my opinion that the future held for us the idea that the choice of low-
bid only would be countered by the science behind the why-we-need-THIS
device/equipment/supplies justification. I would go on to state that I
held out hope that our local hazardous materials responder would don
PPE and use devices that would be of a proven quality--proven TO
Government THROUGH Government instead of by a corporate salesman who we
can't point to and swear that he has our best interests in mind.
Today, I hesitate to share that message because my observation of
how science and technology has trickled down to local communities shows
me some disparities between what I had hoped for and what is. In
example, I offer a limited local perspective on the work of the
Domestic Nuclear Detection Office (DNDO). This program seems to have
worked diligently to ensure that communities are protected from a
radiological/nuclear incident. As a result, local law enforcement
officers have been the recipients of personal radiation detector
devices and hospital entryways are outfitted with in situ detection
devices. But, not enough law enforcement officers have these devices.
Certainly, the first-in officer doesn't have one. Not enough hospitals
have these devices and for those that do, not enough integrated
planning with local health departments and first responders has been
accomplished. At the local level, there is little to no understanding
of how to access technical reachback capabilities. And so there will be
losses if we find ourselves responding to a radiological or nuclear
incident. I could offer other examples of how a good program hasn't
gone far enough to reach local communities.
Outside of the purview of domestic security, other hazards exist.
Recently, the National Emergency Management Association (NEMA)
articulated its position on the National Hurricane Program to the
Federal Emergency Management Agency. I'm familiar with their
recommendations and wanted to take this opportunity to communicate my
support of a few of their key concepts as it relates to Emergency
Preparedness. NEMA suggests that the FEMA and the U.S. Army Corps of
Engineers conduct an analysis of government user's needs to ensure that
the software application HURREVAC remains the best tool for use by
emergency managers in their evacuation decision making. This
recommendation asks that these agencies consider current and emerging
technologies and the resource requirements for maintaining and
modernizing HURREVAC. This is a reasonable request and reflects the
customer-service-oriented approach that should be the underpinnings of
any emergency preparedness work. NEMA also shared their recommendations
related to a continued focus on private sector outreach and the need to
focus efforts on sharing FEMA products with the private sector. This is
a balanced and reasonable recommendation and is conducive to efforts
being made within local and State governments. Finally, NEMA's
recommendation related to leveraging academic institutions applies not
only to hurricane preparedness but to the entire realm of emergency
preparedness. Federal support for building collaboration between local
communities can promote the application of education and experience to
disaster management in all phases.
Thank you for providing me with the opportunity to share the local
perspective on first responder technologies. Your focus on a
prioritized approach to homeland security research and development is
strongly appreciated by the citizens and civil servants of our great
Nation. I personally appreciate the effort you are making here today on
behalf of Pasco County's first responders and all of the dedicated
first responders who serve in times of disaster.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you, Ms. Doying. Ms. Coon, you are
recognized to testify for 5 minutes.
STATEMENT OF KIERSTEN TODT COON, PRESIDENT AND CEO, LIBERTY
GROUP VENTURES
Ms. Coon. Thank you. Good morning. Good morning, Chairman
Bilirakis, Ranking Members Richardson and Clarke, and Members
of the subcommittee. Thank you for allowing me to testify in
front of you today.
As you have heard about, I think the most relevant
component to it is that I served on the Senate Committee on
Governmental Affairs after 9/11 and was part of the team that
drafted the Science and Technology Directorate. I have spent
most of my career in public service. In the private sector, I
continue to do that by working with strictly public-sector
clients on crisis management.
My focus, rather working in Government or outside of it,
has been how to bring solutions to the local level and how to
make the lessons learned at the Federal level and the best
practice accessible to those who are responsible for
implementing them every day.
In the context of this hearing, I would like to highlight
one primary issue, a key challenge, and a proposed solution.
This issue is how can we translate the technologies and the
tools that are working in one jurisdiction at the local level
to other jurisdictions near and far across the country.
Communities, particularly since 9/11, have done an exceptional
job of finding the resources to address their local issues, as
hard as that may have been, whether it is interoperability
among first responders or access to public and private
resources during the response and recovery phases of a crisis.
The challenge lies in the Federal Government, either
through DHS or FEMA, needing to have a structure in place to
survey Nationally what is working across the country, sharing
those best practices and the lessons learned at the local level
with other jurisdictions around the country, so we are not
forced to reinvent the wheel around the Nation. As we look at a
solution, DHS through S&T and FEMA need to connect to
localities, perhaps through the FEMA field and regional offices
to find out what is working. Use those Federal resources,
rather than putting the burden on the local level to find those
resources to share technologies, to take these best practices,
the effective technologies and the tools Nationally, so each
jurisdiction doesn't have to go through the similar trial-and-
error experiences.
DHS should develop a methodology for using the successful
technologies and tools that are working regionally and building
as a template from which other can build. It is important to
note that this template idea that we have looked at the local
level is not a one-size-fits-all approach. Any of us who have
worked at the local level know you can't impose one of those
structures on them, but it is taking it as a foundation upon
which jurisdictions can build and customize their needs and
resources.
I want to offer a case study that I have worked over the
last 3 years, which is the Arlington Office of Emergency
Management. In various capacities, I have had the privilege of
working with them, led by Jack Brown and Charlotte Franklin,
and I commend Dr. Griffin for making the move to take
somebody--Charlotte Franklin was working in economic
development--and bring her to crisis management. She has been
tremendously successful and she owes a lot of that to Dr.
Griffin and through the support of the Northern Virginia
Emergency Response System.
Arlington has focused on the role of the private sector in
disaster preparedness, response, and recovery, but not in the
traditional sense. The county has not recycled the overused
term ``public-private partnership.'' It has turned that phrase
on its head by asking the private sector: What does it need
from the public sector to do its job?
If we look at our understanding of the role of the private
sector since 9/11, we can look at three phrases: 9/11--we were
concerned if there were enough resources to respond and
recover. When we had Katrina, we understood that the public
sector and the private sector had the resources, but we failed
in matching the needs with the resources. What we now
understand is that this is not an inventory discussion. It is
not: Do we have them? Will the private sector donate it? The
private sector will donate it. The challenge is the supply
chain management. So how can the public sector work with that--
work with the private sector in facilitating supply chains to
work effectively?
Arlington County has taken on this issue in a multi-phase
project, which began in January 2011. After convening a forum
with representatives both Nationally and locally from the
private, public, and nonprofit sectors, the county, through a
DHS grant and support from NVERS, developed a web-based portal
that enables citizens to identify where they can donate goods
and where they can receive assistance. I am happy to go into
greater detail about the portal, but the lessons here revolve
around what has happened since this portal was developed with
Federal money.
Arlington learned through other grants and other regions
nearby--they have learned that other regions have developed
similar technologies. Florida and Louisiana both have a similar
web-based system. What is noteworthy is that it appears that
all of these were developed with Government funding, but with
limited knowledge of each other. What is also important to
understand is that one of the jurisdictions that developed this
money through Federal funding offered to sell the platform to
another's jurisdiction 400 miles away for $50,000.
The inefficiency of the system is obvious. Arlington works
under the premise that anything it has developed or discovered
through Federal monies should be shared without cost. It is
trying to put the portal on a platform that can be shared
Nationally and shared with other jurisdictions. I do want to
highlight that the S&T monies that were used for one of these
portal-based programs, it was S&T money that funded that and
S&T monies were also applied successfully to a risk management
assistance program in Arlington.
The case study highlights that DHS should have the
knowledge in both directions of how its monies are being spent.
Through my experience at the Federal, State, and local levels,
the other key issues in this context that are worth noting are
the fact that when S&T develops technologies, it needs to
ensure that it has the input of those who will be using them.
Similarly, first responders need to have a formal voice, a
liaison, or an advocate to DHS and FEMA. Over the past few
years, first responders have become more empowered to develop
strategic initiatives for themselves. They know better than
anyone that crises do not stop at borders and they are working
hard to integrate those capabilities across lines.
As we examine ways to improve current capabilities, we need
to focus on increasing the outreach between first responders
and S&T, increasing the connection and communication between
those who are developing technologies and those who will be
using them. Additionally, this process should not always move
in one direction. We also need to examine how to distribute the
information that is collected at the State and Federal level,
FEMA's information, to the people who need them in a time of
crisis. We should inventory the existing organizations and
outreach mechanisms that exist in the Federal Government. As we
explore ways to improve current processes, we understand that
it is not always about creating new and novel, but often about
enriching and supplementing what exists.
In conclusion, as a country, we rely on our first
responders every day for disruptions, crises, and disasters of
all kinds. One of the key intentions of the creation of the
Science and Technology Directorate within the Department of
Homeland Security was to enable the Nation's top scientific
minds to develop cutting-edge technologies and tools to help
our first responders do their jobs. A key factor to this
success is the frequent communication and relationship between
them.
We can get caught up in the jargon and technical terms, but
at the end of the day, we need to ask what is needed, how it
will be used, and who can develop it. The input from first
responders is critical. We need to be thoughtful and deliberate
in how we evaluate the needs of first responders, and identify
and develop technologies that ensure we are being as effective
as we can in creating prepared and resilient communities.
Because through the aggregation of small communities, we create
a strong Nation.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today,
and I look forward to your questions.
[The statement of Ms. Coon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Kiersten Todt Coon
May 9, 2012
introduction
Good morning Chairmen Bilirakis and Lungren and Ranking Members
Richardson and Clarke. It is a pleasure to testify before you today on
the Department of Homeland Security's Office of Science and
Technology's process to develop technologies that support the needs of
first responders. I am currently President and CEO of Liberty Group
Ventures, LLC and work with State and local governments, as well as
corporations, colleges, and universities, on cybersecurity, crisis
management, response, recovery, and community resiliency.
background
Prior to LGV, I was a partner at Good Harbor Consulting--and
developed its North American crisis management practice. In this
capacity, I built teams of small businesses, typically run by
individuals who had had leadership roles in government, to address
critical infrastructure protection and crisis management challenges at
the State and local level. The agility and efficiency of these teams
proved to be effective in assessing what was needed at the State level
and helping to translate lessons learned to the Federal level.
Before Good Harbor Consulting, I worked for Business Executives for
National Security (BENS) and focused on the role of the private sector
in disaster preparedness and response, as well as examining the role of
cybersecurity in crisis management. I spent time consulting for the
California Governor's office on homeland security and also served as a
Professional Staff Member on the U.S. Senate Committee on Governmental
Affairs (now the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental
Affairs); I was on the team that drafted the infrastructure protection,
emergency preparedness, and science and technology directorates of the
legislation that created the Department of Homeland Security. I also
worked in the White House domestic policy office and the Office of
National Drug Control Policy.
My focus, whether working in government, or outside of it, has been
how to bring solutions to the local level and how to make the lessons
learned at the Federal level accessible to those who are responsible
for implementing them every day. In the context of this hearing, I
would like to highlight one primary issue, its key challenge, and a
proposed solution.
issue/challenge/solution
Issue.--How can we translate technologies, tools, etc. that are
working in one jurisdiction, at the local level, to other
jurisdictions, near and far?
Communities, particularly since 9/11, have done an exceptional job
finding the resources to address their local issues--whether it is
interoperability among first responders or access to public and private
resources during the response and recovery phases of a crisis.
Challenge.--The Federal Government, either through DHS or FEMA,
should have a structure in place to survey what is working, across the
country, and share best practices, lessons learned, at the local level
with other jurisdictions around the country.
Solution.--DHS, through S&T, and FEMA, needs to connect to
localities--perhaps through the FEMA field and regional offices--to
find out what is working and then use Federal resources (do not put the
burden on the local level to find the resources to share technologies)
to take best practices, effective technologies and tools, Nationally,
so each jurisdiction doesn't have to go through similar trial-and-error
experiences and reinvent the wheel to get to the same solution. DHS
should develop a methodology for using successful technologies and
tools that are working regionally and/or locally, as a template from
which others can build. It is important to note that the template is
not a one-size-fits-all approach, but rather a foundation upon which
jurisdictions can build and customize to their needs and resources.
case study--arlington office of emergency management
In various capacities over the past 3 years, I have had the
privilege to work with the Arlington County Office of Emergency
Management, led by Jack Brown and Charlotte Franklin. Arlington has
focused on the role of the private sector in disaster preparedness,
response, and recovery--but not in the traditional sense. The county
has not recycled the over-used and now somewhat meaningless term,
``public/private partnership.'' The county has turned that phrase on
its head by asking the private sector what it needs from the public
sector to do its job. If we look at our understanding of the role of
the private sector since 9/11, we can divide it into three phases:
Phase I.--Immediately following 9/11, we were concerned if
there were enough resources to help respond and recover.
Phase II.--During Katrina, we learned that inventory was not
the issue and the primary concern, which was quickly assuaged,
was whether the private sector would be willing to donate the
inventory. The primary challenge then became how do we,
logistically and legally, get the resources to where they are
needed--and, what is the Government's role in facilitating the
movement of goods it does not own.
Phase III.--We now understand the public/private partnership
issue to be supply chain management-based. We know there is
enough inventory, and we know the private sector is
philanthropic and benevolent and will donate whatever is needed
in a crisis. But, what we haven't figured out is how to ensure
supply chain management can operate as effectively and
efficiently in a crisis state as it does in an emergency state.
Arlington County has taken on this issue in a multi-phase project,
which began in January 2011. After convening a Forum with
representatives, Nationally and locally, from the private, public, and
non-profit sectors, Arlington, through a DHS grant and support from the
Northern Virginia Emergency Response System (NVERS), developed a web-
based portal that enables citizens to identify where they can donate
goods and where they can receive assistance. I am happy to go in to
greater detail about the portal, but the key lesson here is what has
happened since the portal was developed. Arlington has learned that
through other grants, Washington, DC and Fairfax County have each
developed a related technology. It has also learned that Florida and
Louisiana have developed a similar web-based system. What is remarkable
is that it appears that all of these were developed with Government
funding, and with limited, if any knowledge, of the others. What is
also important to note is that one of the jurisdictions that has
developed this technology offered to sell the platform to another
jurisdiction 400 miles away for $50,000. The inefficiency of this
system is obvious. Arlington works under the premise that anything that
it has developed or discovered through Federal monies should be shared
without cost and is trying to put the portal on a platform that could
be shared, Nationally.
This case study highlights the fact that DHS/FEMA/S&T need to
understand how its monies are being spent and how to take the successes
of those grants to other parts of the country.
Through my experience at the Federal, State, and local level, the
other key issues in this context that are worth noting are:
When S&T develops technologies, it needs to ensure that it
has the input of those who will be using them. Similarly, first
responders need to have a formal voice, a liaison, or advocate
to DHS and FEMA.
Over the past few years, first responders have become more
empowered to develop strategic initiatives for themselves--and
they recognize the need for and importance of key issues, such
as interoperability of equipment and collaboration across
jurisdictional boundaries. First responders know better than
anyone that crises do not stop at borders--and they are working
hard to integrate capabilities across jurisdictional lines.
As we examine ways to improve current capabilities, we need to
focus on:
Increasing the outreach between first responders and S&T--
increasing the connection, communication between those who are
developing technologies and those who will be using them.
Additionally, this process should not always move in one
direction--there are cases where new technologies are developed
in response to needs, as well as scientific discovery; and,
there are cases where needs directly inform what technology
should be built.
We must inventory the existing organizations and outreach
mechanisms that exist between S&T, FEMA, DHS, and first
responders and identify the most effective and efficient ways
to utilize them. As we explore ways to improve current
processes, we understand it is not always about creating new
and novel, but often it is about enriching and supplementing
what exists and making it more accessible.
conclusion
As a country, we rely on our first responders every day for
disruptions, crises, and disasters of all kinds. One of the key
intentions of the creation of the Science and Technology Directorate
within the Department of Homeland Security was to enable the Nation's
top scientific minds to develop cutting-edge technologies and tools to
help our first responders do their jobs. A key factor to the success of
this idea is the frequent communication and strong relationship between
those who are developing the tools and those who are using them. We can
get caught up in jargon and technical terms, but, at the end of the
day, we need to ask what is needed, how will it be used, and who can
develop it. All of the necessary pieces exist--it is now our
responsibility to figure out how to complete the puzzle.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify before you today. I look
forward to answering any questions.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you, Ms. Coon. I want to thank the
panel for your excellent testimony--very informative. Now, I
would like to recognize myself for questions. I recognize
myself for 5 minutes.
I want to begin with Dr. Griffin. Dr. Griffin, since
December 2010, when your First Responder Group was established,
you have developed the Solution Development Process. This
process is designed to pull first responders from around the
Nation into S&T's methodology for developing resource
priorities. Can you tell me how this works exactly? How do you
choose the first responders to participate? Is it done by
survey or do you get together in a physical location once or
more a year? Then I have a follow-up. Please, sir.
Mr. Griffin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As we thought through
our requirements gathering process, one of the things I have
tried to do is build off the existing IPT process that was in
place, but I wanted to work to better identify operational gaps
and find a way to clearly prioritize programmatic areas. So one
of the first things I did was I partnered with FEMA and we
developed Project Responder as a mechanism to both identify
operational gaps from first responders across the country and
then to use that as a mechanism to prioritize areas that we
were going to put funding in, recognizing that I don't have
enough money to fund all of the needs of the first responder
community. So it also provides us a structure that we could use
to create priorities.
What I also then did is I brought in other workgroups, like
the IAB, InterAgency Board, spoke with professional
associations, looked at what was going on in regional
workgroups in order to cross-validate our priorities and needs.
As we look at our first responder outreach effort, I try to do
a couple of things. I try to make sure that we are balancing
our groups with not only folks from high-risk urban areas, but
also suburban and rural areas. I try to make sure that we are
balancing our first responder outreach to include all of the
demographics of the country, thinking about communities that
are both affluent and less affluent. I am also trying to
balance our groups so that we have a fair cross-section of all
of the functions, so that we have law enforcement and emergency
medical services and fire and emergency management, and other
first responder entities equally balanced to make sure that we
are thinking cross-functionally as we develop our set of
requirements.
What we have been doing is that we have been bringing the
committees together once a year and then using video conference
and teleconferences in order to then build sets of requirements
off of our prioritized lists.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you. For the first responders on the
panel, how many of you have been asked to participate in S&T?
Then how many have you? Anyone here been asked to participate
in S&T?
Chief Kilduff. Yes, sir. We have participated with S&T on a
number of different projects. In fact, Dr. Griffin was up with
us 2 weeks ago, as we ran an exercise with a class of West
Point cadets, looking to build out a network of communication
and information sharing that they could use in their exercise.
Then Dr. Griffin basically takes that back to his groups and
sees if he can develop that network communication program,
something that is very important to us. So we want to stay--
keep close ties with Dr. Griffin and the Directorate.
We also have a member that is dedicated to a couple of Dr.
Griffin's project staffs that, although he was not there full-
time, he has a full-time participant is a few committees,
mostly to do with detection equipment and hazmat management. We
have found the Directorate to be very responsive to what our
needs are and has always basically led whatever we need--has
always led the committees in that direction, obviously for the
benefit of the entire first responder community, but has always
been very responsive to us and our needs.
Mr. Bilirakis. Very good. Anyone else on the panel who has
participated?
Okay. Question for Ms. Doying. Capitol Hill and the State
of Florida are two places where the memory of the anthrax--I
know you address this a little bit in your testimony, but the
memory is so very strong of the anthrax attacks of 2001. Those
attacks drove most of the work in biodefense this Nation has
undertaken in the last decade, including development of
improved protective and detective equipment for first
responders.
You said in a course, that you taught this course for 6
years, you used to ask your first responders how they feel
about going into an anthrax-laden building to provide response.
What was their response then? Then how would you think they
would feel now? Is the equipment needed to do that work both
available and affordable to you? Very important.
Ms. Doying. Thank you.
Mr. Bilirakis. You are recognized.
Ms. Doying. Yes. At the time, as I would teach that class
and I would relate that story, all of the fire fighters and law
enforcement officers and EMTs in the room, they would laugh,
because the low-bid approach in local government to purchasing
technology is a long-standing custom. As we have moved forward
over the last 10 years, what I do know is that those first
responders from my community and the communities that surround
me that have participated in the consortium training using the
right tools, learning the methodologies for approaching a
chemical or biological incident, they have gained a lot of
confidence in the Nation's ability to respond to those events.
I also know that within fire service, the advancements with
SCBA, for example, to be more protective for a chemical or
biological incident and other safety features that have moved
forward into the PPE realm, have also increased the confidence
of the local first responder.
Mr. Bilirakis. Okay, so is the equipment available. Second,
is it affordable in your opinion?
Ms. Doying. It is available. Affordable in a highly-focused
way. Not available to the n'th degree. You know, you have to
concentrate who you are going to suitably protect and,
therefore, who you are going to not only gear up physically,
but gear up mentally to be the first line of defense for a
specific type of incident.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much. Now I recognize Ms.
Richardson for 5 minutes.
Ms. Richardson. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Chief, would you tell us if you agree or disagree with the
assessments that Ms. Coon made?
Chief Kilduff. I think that Ms. Coon made some very
valuable assessments when it comes to how a local picture can
be translated to a more National picture. I think that a lot
needs to be done by connecting communities, by connecting
people that have the ability to sponsor equipment, test
equipment, and then train and equip members that are out in the
first responder community. It is a step-by-step process that is
underway but has quite a few gaps when it comes to coordination
when it comes to coordination and also when it comes to
funding.
So I think what Arlington does is admirable and they are
leaders in a lot of these first responder communities. They do
have a very heads-up--it is an integral group that is very
attuned to National security, homeland security, first
responder preparedness, and they are a good demonstration for
that. But it all has to be applied at a National level and that
is really I think where this should be headed.
Ms. Richardson. Dr. Griffin, are you aware of the concerns
that both the Chief and now Ms. Coon have expressed?
Mr. Griffin. I am, Ma'am. It is one of the areas that we
are looking to address because I think it is a great
opportunity for us. One of the values that I believe my group
can bring is by connecting first responders around the country.
I understand that there are limitations and a direct
correlation between what works in Arlington County versus what
may work in Seattle, but at the same time, there is great work
being done at the local government that we can link together.
So as we think about some of our tools--like
firstresponder.gov or our first response community of practice,
which actually allows first responders to get on our sites and
safely chat with each other about what is working and not
working--are tools that we look at as, in part, trying to begin
the process of addressing the concerns that were raised in
testimony.
Ms. Richardson. Excuse me. Ms. Coon, could you share with
Dr. Griffin why those systems do or do not work?
Ms. Coon. The system to translate what is working at the
local level, Nationally?
Ms. Richardson. Right, and communicating that. He just
referenced firstresponder.gov and some other things.
Ms. Coon. So I think it is taking--what you want us to
encourage the local levels to be innovative and to take on the
money to do something that is sort of pushing, as Ms. Doying
talked about, the cutting-edge technologies. I am not--I don't
know that they are not working.
What I do know is that, in the experiences that I have had,
taking something efficiently that is working at the local level
and trying to work through the Federal Government to get it out
there, is a little bit of a cumbersome process. But I do want
to say that I am not--I don't know that those particular
mechanisms are not working. They just have not been accessible
to the projects that I have been working with.
Ms. Richardson. Okay. So Dr. Griffin, are you hearing their
concern?
Mr. Griffin. Yes, I am.
Ms. Richardson. Can you get back to the committee on what
you can do to address the concerns that have been addressed by
the folks here who have testified?
Mr. Griffin. Absolutely.
Ms. Richardson. My first question has to do with--Dr.
Griffin, being here on the committee now myself for a couple of
years, quite a lot of money has been expended for these various
programs. What are you going to do to make sure that the first
responders are spending their limited funds on equipment that
is actually necessary and that works? I think it builds upon my
initial first questions that I just asked.
Mr. Griffin. Part of the challenge, as I tried to address,
is that there is not a single set of requirements that are
going to meet the needs of 80,000 first responders. So as we
develop technologies, we recognize that we have to continue to
work with first responders through our entire process, so that
we work through what we call a spiral development process. As
we develop technologies, they are an integral part of
redefining and continuing to define equipment that we are
trying to bring to market.
Ms. Richardson. Dr. Griffin, if you don't know, we
certainly can't expect them to know. I served in local
government and I am familiar with--for example, the Chief, is
from a very large city--like, for example, Los Angeles or Long
Beach. The city of Long Beach--I was on the City Council--it is
one of the top--I think it is the 33rd city in the State of
California. So there are larger cities. There are medium-size
cities. Then there are smaller cities.
So what is precluding the Department from coming up--
obviously, every Department is different. However, we don't
have time to have every single city create their own process.
So what is precluding your Department from creating a basic
model for larger cities, medium-size cities, smaller rural
cities of at least some basic frameworks of what has been
done--what is available, how they can utilize it, and then
providing a mechanism for those that are being innovative and
creating new things to be able to piece that in, so that we can
save time and money of what the other folks are doing?
Mr. Griffin. To answer that question maybe better than I
started to. We are working with--we do work with FEMA on those
very processes. We also spend a lot of time developing
toolboxes, which will allow local jurisdictions to take the
knowledge that we have gained and adapt it for their personal
uses, tailored to their organizations just for those reasons.
The other part of one of the drives that I have had is also
to better define where we are putting our money, so that people
understand what projects we are working on, so they can begin
to think about how it could be adapted for their use. We do
take best practices and we do push them out to the first
responders so they can see what other first responders do.
Because what we find is that first responders who talk to first
responders are learning an awful lot.
So it gets back to the conversation that we had a little
bit before. But building toolboxes and basically, excuse the
analogy, but teaching first responders how to fish, rather than
giving them the fish is part of our responsibilities and it is
something that we do do.
Ms. Richardson. Okay. Mr. Chairman, could I ask one last
question?
Mr. Bilirakis. Yes, but one more question.
Ms. Richardson. Okay. Thank you, sir.
Dr. Griffin, do you feel it is appropriate that if an
agency is using Federal dollars to create a system, is it
appropriate for them to be charging other jurisdictions to
utilize that same system if it was Federal dollars that was
spent? If you don't think it is appropriate, do you have any
rules or process in place to prohibit that from occurring?
Mr. Griffin. Ma'am, I am not sure about any rules. I will
gladly, for the record, return a more cogent answer to you.
I can tell you from my own first experience in the first
responder community is that anything that we developed,
particularly money that was--well, it was anything that we
developed in either Loudoun County or as Chief or in Arlington
County, we gladly gave for free to other communities. So there
is an awful lot of sharing that does go on from community to
community. I will find a more cogent answer to your initial
questions about policies on charging.
Ms. Richardson. Okay. It is not just restricting to
Arlington, but it is other agencies that may be seeking to
charge Arlington and/or other jurisdictions. Thank you. Thank
you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you. Thank you. Ms. Clarke, you are
recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Clarke of New York. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Griffin, many of us believe that S&T should have a
formal strategy, clear guidelines, and requirements for first
responders funded research. In your testimony, you talked about
the first responder Integrated Product Team, IPT. You mentioned
the solution development process as part of the IPT, but it
appears to be an informal mechanism to hand out millions of
dollars in research.
What specific steps are you taking to make the Integrated
Product Team more analytically rigorous? Please give us more
detail about the solution development process. Who serves on
it? Who does it answer to? What role does it play in your
overall strategy?
Mr. Griffin. Thank you for the question, ma'am. It is a
very complex question. Again, I will be glad to submit, for the
record, a more formal answer. If I could just real quickly try
to hit on it. The process that I laid out in my written
testimony is actually a very formal process that I have
instituted within our group. So as we have defined the
strategic programmatic areas that we are working on, what we do
is that we use the IPT process and outreach to first responders
is to begin to gather requirements that we build projects off
of. Those projects then are worked through the formal process
within Science and Technology that Under Secretary O'Toole
briefed you on.
So what I have done is that I have integrated our IPT
process with what is happening in S&T. So we work through the
same portfolio review process. In fact, each month I take a
quarter of our portfolio and work a smaller portfolio review
process to make sure that we are meeting the goals and metrics
that we have defined for those projects. So it is very formal
as far as working into the new systems that have been
incorporated into Science and Technology.
In addition, what we have done is that we have tried to
define areas--those programmatic areas that we are going to
fund, recognizing that there are lots of capability gaps that
were identified in Project Responder. There were 40. We are
putting money towards five. Of those five, we are hitting only
partial, you know, partial solutions to those questions.
But what I can show you, though, is a much more
programmatic structured approach to how we are spending our
money and how we are leveraging a lot of other folks' money. So
it is a much more structured process than it was. It is a much
more strategic process with the idea of both identifying where
short money can go, but also areas that we just are not able to
hit because of budgetary constraints.
Ms. Clarke of New York. Well, thank you. Clearly, that is a
real challenge when you are really--you are dealing with such a
fluid dynamic in the varying jurisdictions around the Nation
and terrain. You know, we talked about the forest fire
incidents and the types of new technologies that would be
applicable there may not necessarily be applicable in a
municipality or a city.
Mr. Griffin. Yes, ma'am. If I could just hit that point 1
second. If you look at the gear on the table, what for a long
time we were doing is we were putting our wildland fire
fighters instructional gear--like you see my old jacket there--
what we have done is working with the Department of Defense and
Agriculture and U.S. Fire Service and Kell Fire, is that we
have developed a new set of gear based on requirements gathered
from the wildland fire fighters, just because it represents
such a change in the need of gear. Okay. That is just a prime
example of how we are trying to provide goods to the first
responder community.
Ms. Clarke of New York. There is much more of a rigorous
application than I guess we read into in terms of the
testimony. I look forward to you just forwarding to us
something more, I guess, more substantive that pulls it all
together for us.
Then my final question is to you, Chief. I want to thank
you, once again, for taking the time away from what I know are
massive duties back in the city.
In your testimony, you talked about your tiered response
system. Is that different from the Incident Command System?
Chief Kilduff. Well, Incident Command System would provide
oversight to--and structure to an incident. Our tiered response
is taking certain equipment and certain training abilities,
putting them in different units, and then having a layer of
these different units respond to an incident.
So we would have our hazmat unit. If we had a hazardous
materials incident, we would have our hazmat unit respond with
over 600 hours of training and we would couple them with more
local units that would have a reduced number of training but
still capabilities to complement the hazmat unit. Then we would
train them down. We would have other units respond that might
be entry units. Below that, we would have units come that might
be decontamination units, and units that would then decon any
victims or any patients of some sort, hand them off to an
advanced layer of EMS personnel that have special training.
So what we have done is we have layered the capabilities of
our units. These units respond every day as fire fighting and
emergency response units. Same thing with EMS, though we have
given them additional capabilities so we can layer whatever
response is necessary for a particular incident.
Ms. Clarke of New York. Mr. Chairman, I know that I have
gone over time. I just have one more question.
Mr. Bilirakis. We are going to have a second round, but you
can have another question.
Ms. Clarke of New York. Okay. Thank you. Thank you, sir.
I just wanted to find out whether, Chief, you had any ideas
that are coming from the men and women from a ground-up
perspective. How do you take these new ideas and evaluate them
to see if they in fact are valuable? Then second, does the
department have any formal way or protocol for you to send
ideas that you have vetted by the department to be evaluated by
your policymakers, laboratories, and advisory panels?
Chief Kilduff. If we receive something from the field units
that is of particular interest to us, we generally will direct
it to your research and development folks who have the ability
to reach out to many different testing and validation
throughout the country. We do rely heavily on the National Fire
Protection Association and the standards that they have set for
a lot of our equipment. That equipment has also been tested by
other folks to validate the usefulness of the equipment.
So there are actually quite a few layers that we can go
through. You know, S&T is one group that represents a National
level, so to speak, but there are other private interest
groups, private testing companies that we will all channel
through our research and development folks. We are fortunate
that we do have a robust research and development. That is
really why we are here is because not everybody has that
capability, but that is how we would work that.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much. I will recognize myself
for this second round for 5 minutes.
First question is for Ms. Saunders. I was pleased to read
in your testimony your reference to the NIST, National
Telecommunications and Information Administration laboratory at
the Department of Commerce in Boulder, Colorado at the campus.
My staff has visited this site and was very impressed with both
the work being carried out and the expertise and dedication of
the staff working there.
With regards to the 700 MHz Public Safety Broadband Network
that is being constructed in the coming years, in your opinion,
are NIST and NTIA being given all the resources that they need
in order to develop the necessary standards and to plug the
gaps, as you call them, so that the network will be a success?
Ms. Saunders. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I mentioned the
recent passage of the Middle Class Tax Relief and Job Creation
Act of 2012, Public Law 112-96, and its allocation of $7
billion in funding and new broadband spectrum. So our
colleagues in the National Telecommunications and Information
Administration are actively pursuing essentially a loan or an
advance on that funding, so that in partnership with NIST, we
can go ahead and take the next steps in terms of both the test
bed and the standards participation.
We are in the process of developing a memorandum of
understanding between NTIA and NIST, laying out respective
roles and responsibilities very clearly in this particular
space. I will say that our technical staff at NIST have gone
ahead and aggressively identified the relevant centers'
organizations and a major center's organization is at the
international level. So these are international standards and
have already established NIST institutional membership in those
organizations and we are gearing up to--we have already begun
participating. So we are well on our way to taking the next
step with the test bed.
Mr. Bilirakis. Very good. Thank you very much.
Our next question is for Mr. Griffin. The Emergency
Preparedness Subcommittee has been closely following the
development of the Commercial Mobile Alert System, CMAS. In
your testimony, you noted that S&T is working on a number of
activities to improve the system capabilities. Would you please
elaborate on this and how are you working with, of course,
FEMA, the FCC, wireless carriers, and alert originators to get
these enhanced capabilities into the field?
Mr. Griffin. Certainly, sir. The Science and Technology and
the First Responder Group is actually responsible for the
RDT&E, the Research, Development, Test, and Evaluation for
Commercial Mobile Alert Services, CMAS, and the Integrated
Public Alert Warning System, IPAWS. We work in close
partnership with both the FCC and FEMA and the private
industry, because the carriers are incredibly important in the
whole alerting and warning systems.
I would highlight the work we did in December 2011 in New
York City. We are working with the Department of Emergency
Management in New York, FEMA, and their Central Aggregation
Systems, and the commercial carriers. We were able to send the
first end-to-end text message for alerts and warnings. We are
taking the information that we learned from that test and we
are developing both lessons learned and identifying additional
work that needs to go on within the sphere of CMAS and IPAWS.
What is coming next for us is that we are looking at
funding. We are currently funding research on public response.
We are looking at targeting of alerts to specific geographical
areas. We are planning four regional tests and a National test
on public alerts and systems. We are developing best practices,
lessons learned, and case studies for alert originators that
will help both local emergency managers as well as industry
leaders work together as far as developing a National alert
system.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much. Chief, you want to
comment on the testing that took place in New York with regard
to CMAS?
Chief Kilduff. Actually, that was actually run through OEM,
but I am not personally that familiar with it. I know that we
participated. We have some very talented people that have been
working on it, but I personally am not that familiar with it.
Mr. Bilirakis. All right. No problem. Well, thank you very
much. Appreciate it. Now I yield 5 minutes to the Ranking
Member, Ms. Richardson.
Ms. Richardson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Dr. Griffin, coming back to follow up on some earlier
questions. You mentioned that S&T works with FEMA to provide
information to first responders. Other than your
firstresponders.gov and so on, what other mechanisms are you
doing to coordinate with FEMA to ensure that first responders
know what equipment is available, what they might possibly
need, and how they might go about interacting?
Mr. Griffin. Sure. We work closely with FEMA in a number of
different ways. So FEMA has responsibility for coordination of
operations and does a lot of outreach with local first
responders, State and local first responders, and is
responsible for grant funding. We are responsible for the
research, development, test, and evaluation developments and
standards and requirements-gathering process. We do these in
conjunction with our FEMA partners.
So when we set out initially to begin to figure a way to
create a formalized process for gathering requirements through
Project Responder, we did that in conjunction and in
partnership with FEMA. We also work with FEMA in areas like the
alerts and warnings standards I just spoke to, as well as other
standards, communications interoperability standards--the 2P25
standards--which we develop in conjunction with people like
NIST and others. Then we work with the FEMA grants folks to
make sure that interoperability language is worked into the
grant process.
As we look at areas like data sharing and how we can move
data from like New York City to the State of New York to the
Federal agencies and then back down again. So I think it is
critical that we figure out ways to move data from both the
Federal agencies back down to local governments. We work
closely with FEMA to make sure that we are integrating all of
our systems with the systems that they use. So we work closely
with them in most aspects of everything that we do.
Ms. Richardson. Okay. Ms. Saunders, the budget for S&T was
significantly reduced from 2011 to 2012. As a result, the
funding to NIST dropped from $18.6 million to $17.6 million.
Were there projects that were discontinued or delayed due to
the result?
Ms. Saunders. Yes, ma'am. There were. There are various
projects impacting first responders at the Federal, State, and
local levels have either been scaled back or are no longer
funded due to the changes in the funding that you mentioned.
I will give you two examples. One is our projects
associated with personal protective equipment, specifically for
the Fire Service. Many of these efforts prior to this year
focused on standards development through the National Fire
Protection Association and successful development with respect
to thermal exposure measurements for first responders in the
areas of PASS devices, radios, and self-contained breathing
apparatus.
The standards for respirator masks--we have not yet been
able to get to the thermal metrics to those and currently there
are no high-temperature performance metrics that exist to test
respirator masks under high heat conditions. Those efforts were
not funded this year. S&T's First Responder Group and Human
Factor's Division was unable to fund the last phase of an
effort to develop a standard design guidance for the patient
compartment for an ambulance that takes human factors and
safety into consideration. The EMS community had identified
this as a No. 1 requirement.
We were able to stretch fiscal year 2011 funding to ensure
that we will be able to provide design guidance to NFPA next
spring to incorporate into the standard. It won't be quite as
comprehensive as originally planned, but we are able to
continue that. I would be happy to provide and follow up with a
specific list of the projects that were either terminated or
reduced in funding.
Ms. Richardson. Could you provide that to the committee,
please, as soon as possible? Thank you.
Last two questions. Chief Coons, with respect to R&D, do
you think that the Department adequately responds to the needs
of first responders?
Ms. Coon. Did you mean Chief Kilduff?
Ms. Richardson. Yes. I am sorry.
Chief Kilduff. Well, we are talking about the FDNY R&D?
Ms. Richardson. Yes.
Chief Kilduff. Yes. From our point of view, we think that
we cycle new equipment--a lot of PP through there. Everything
that we--a lot of communications equipment we cycle through
R&D. We pilot everything that we do. We don't just randomly
throw it out because somebody put a stamp of certification on
it or some agency or some bureau or whatever says this is the
hottest, newest, best product there is.
Everything we do, we test it thoroughly. Then we select
companies and we pilot the equipment for an extensive period of
time. We also collect an extensive amount of data and
evaluations on that equipment. So we find, from within, out R&D
is a very effective unit.
Ms. Richardson. But do you feel that the Department's R&D
is appropriately supportive?
Chief Kilduff. Yes. Yes.
Ms. Richardson. Yes. Okay. If I might, and I am sorry, Mr.
Chairman, for asking this twice. But I have noticed Ms. Doying
has not had an opportunity to comment as much. I just think it
is appropriate if we could give her an opportunity if there is
anything else. I didn't have a specific question, but if there
was something else you wanted to----
Mr. Bilirakis. Yes, I was going to ask them all, in truth.
Yes. Absolutely.
Ms. Richardson. Okay.
Mr. Bilirakis. But she can take the opportunity now if she
wishes.
Ms. Richardson. Sure. Ms. Doying, was there anything else
that you wanted to convey based upon all of the other testimony
that is going on that maybe we haven't asked you that you feel
would be appropriate to share?
Ms. Doying. Well, I find it interesting that there is what,
to my perception, is a common thread. This is that there is a
lot of good work being done and it may just be a matter of
smaller communities, which I represent, not having strong
visibility of what is out there and available to them. It may
sound a bit strange for me to say, but it is almost as though a
strong public relations campaign about the good stuff that is
out there is needed. I know that this is true for, for example,
the IPAWS and the CMAS projects.
You know, if the public doesn't know the good work that is
being done by local, State, regional, and Federal authorities,
well then certainly the guys that are really busy trying to do
their job--local government's been under a huge constraint
financially, so we have scaled back and scaled back. So for
local leadership to have the energy to study the big things
that are going on around them and grab hold of those big things
and make use of them locally, it is difficult. It is a huge
challenge.
So it may sound a bit funny to say--you know, we go home
and we watch TV in the recliner and we are told a lot of stuff
and we missed the most important stuff while we were at work,
because for some reason, it just wasn't shared cross-
jurisdictionally.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much. Yes. Again, anyone else
want to add something with regard--any concerns that you might
have, any suggestions that you have?
Of course, Dr. Griffin, if you want to elaborate further on
the equipment here. Is this equipment ready for prime time? Is
it in development? Anyone else want to add whether this
particular equipment here in front of us will be helpful,
affordable, what have you, accessible? But, Dr. Griffin, do you
want to elaborate further, first? Then I want to give everyone
an opportunity to speak, because we do have some time.
Mr. Griffin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. If I could, please.
Part of the paradox of our world is that if we do our job well,
and this is particularly for Science and Technology and NIST
and the first responder community, is that people don't know.
So when they pick up or purchase a radio from Motorola or Talis
or Harris that provides an increased level of interoperability,
what gets lost is the amount of work that goes into the
standards and the development of that technology.
So part of it is marketing. Part of it is realizing that
one of metrics of success is knowing that our standards are
making a difference in the field. We try to listen to the first
responders' needs and transition equipment quickly.
I am going to highlight really quickly the story of the
backboard cover in front of you, sir. We received an inquiry
through firstresponder.gov from some EMS providers in Florida,
who were concerned about the cleanliness of backboards. They
said are there ways that we could do something about that? What
we are able to do is, was work with a small business and first
responders developed requirements and within 9 months had a
concept to commercially available backboard cover that slips
right over the board and provides protection for not only the
patients, but also our first responders.
That is really how we are trying to think about the quick
transition of equipment to the first responder community. That
is disposable. It sells for $15. So it is affordable.
Some of our other technologies--the fire fighter gear is in
pilot. We are looking at different fibers. We are looking at
different weaves. We are looking to try to hit a different set
of requirements for the wildfire gear. That is why we have a
thousand sets of gear that we are going to be looking at this
summer to see which is the best fit for our wildland fire
fighters.
Then if you start to look at the self-contained breathing
apparatus here, you can see that the older sort of steel
cylinder and what we have done with a Kevlar wrap. That is work
that we are still working with the commercial sector, with the
idea that frankly we don't purchase equipment for the first
responders. We develop technology and then we have to make sure
we have a strong working relationship with the commercial
sector in order for them to have a place to buy it.
So these are all examples about how we are trying to bring
both process and good to the first responder community.
Mr. Bilirakis. Ms. Saunders, would you like to add
something?
Ms. Saunders. Just briefly, to build on what both Chief
Kilduff and Dr. Griffin mentioned. I agree strongly, if NIST is
successful at what we do in terms of our measurement science
contributions, that role will not be visible, but what you will
see, or what the first responders will see, are standards for
apparatus and equipment and systems that have a strong
technical underpinning and can be tested with respect to how
they perform. That is an important point that Chief Kilduff
made.
A standard is only useful if it is implemented. For, in
this space in particular, that necessitates testing or, in some
cases, certification of the equipment. That testing needs to be
done by competent authorities, competent independent test labs
or certification authorities. Then that information needs to be
made available and characterized in practical terms so that
first responders can actually make informed decisions about the
types of equipment or the quality of equipment that they
purchase.
Mr. Bilirakis. Chief, would you like to add anything?
Chief Kilduff. Yes, sir. Thank you. Just as a point of
information, we are developing a program right now that we will
be working with NIST this summer out in Governor's Island in
the harbor of New York. We are going to burn up a few buildings
up there. Together with NIST testing ability, we are going to
test fire dynamics. We are going to test ventilation principle,
et cetera.
So there is collaboration that goes on to set standards
that will be presented to a National audience. It takes a
little time, but it will be presented to a National audience.
It is good work that goes on.
I think what you have heard also today is important for the
committee to take into consideration--that first responders,
particularly the fire fighting and EMS communities are the
folks that put their hands on the people when something
happens. We are the ones that go to get the people when they
are in danger or when they have been affected by an incident or
an event or whatever it is--whether it is Joplin, or whether it
is a hurricane, whatever the situation is, or that biochem
release. This equipment here is going to enable us to go into
that environment and get people out of the environment.
We have spent an awful lot of time over the years,
particularly since September 11, trying to secure the country,
all for good reasons and extremely important. But now I think
the first responder community I think is demonstrating every
year, as we move away from September 11, away from that
security mindset to some degree, that it is important to fund
the folks that are helping people day-in day-out in those all-
hazards event and everything else, not just terrorist-type of
events.
So that is where I would like to leave the focus of this.
That is where our focus is. We want to collaborate with
everybody here. We also sent dispatchers down to Arlington
about a month ago to look at their OEM center there because we
are investing hundreds of millions of dollars in a call center
up in New York. We wanted to go down, because we knew they had
some best practices down there. It is all collaboration, but it
is all to create a network of information and intelligence,
when necessary, to make people safer when they do enter those
environments to, again, get the people out or assist the
people, whatever needs to be done.
So I just wanted to leave with that point of view. We are
willing to collaborate with anybody and we fully expect that
this is now going to shift to a regional, if not a National,
perspective when it comes to this first responder capabilities.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you. Ms. Doying, the RNC, of course,
the convention will be held in Tampa in August. Has the local
Tampa Police Department reached out to Pasco County, the
neighboring county north of Hillsboro County with regard to--if
you would like to speak. Has there been cooperation, because
obviously they are in need of your services? If you want to
speak to that or anything else, you are welcome to.
Ms. Doying. Sure. Yes, the approach from the first response
community towards the incoming folk for the Republican National
Convention has been a collaborative region-wide approach.
Actually, our State-wide partners are assisting with that. It
is very, very collaborative. A lot of good equipment going on
the street, people being outfitted and trained in the use of
the best technology that will ensure protection of people that
are arriving in the greater Tampa Bay area.
You know, I found that as the Chief talked, it really
resonated with me that we are in a better place in the year of
2012. I have served for 20 years in emergency management in the
State of Florida. What I have observed just in the last decade
is a really strong movement towards standardized approaches to
managing incidents.
I have seen a very strong effort coming out of the
Department of Homeland Security to ensure that the first
response community is well supported and it is recognized that
it is the first response community that serve the local citizen
that is in danger and in need. I applaud and appreciate the
efforts of the Department of Homeland Security. Coming from a
small local community, we feel the effects. We definitely feel
the effects of Science and Technology and of NIST.
Mr. Bilirakis. Thank you very much. Ms. Coon, would you
like to add anything?
Ms. Coon. Just one point to support what Ms. Doying said,
actually earlier. When we look at crisis management, just as we
don't expect people to act in a crisis beyond the aptitudes
that they are already performing well, in day-to-day, we
don't--we shouldn't expect that. We just want to be able to
support people to do what they do well.
I think, in this case, S&T does well with what they are
doing in technologies. The key here is that I believe, to Ms.
Doying's point about the PR campaign, FEMA plays a critical
role in this--that FEMA can be that facilitator among
circulating technologies--what is working--what is not working.
They have field and regional offices that are working on these
issues all the time.
That to me might be a--if we look at what can be done more
effectively or more efficiently, it is creating that role.
Whether it is the PR campaign, which I think is a great way to
categorize it, or something to be able to communicate and
create that liaison role between what is happening in Science
and Technology, the first responders. FEMA really is a very
strong element and that infrastructure is already in place and
we need to utilize that more effectively.
Mr. Bilirakis. Very good. Well, thank you very much. I
appreciate it. It was a great testimony--very informative--very
valuable. I think it has been a very productive hearing.
I also want to note that Chairman Lungren has been detained
in the Judiciary Committee. I know he shares our interest in
this topic. His questions will be entered in the record, so if
you could respond to those questions.
I thank all the witnesses, of course, for their valuable
testimony, and the Members for their questions. The Members of
the subcommittees should be reminded that additional
questions--they probably will ask you additional questions in
writing and we ask that you respond in writing. The hearing
record will be open for 10 days.
Without objection, the subcommittees stand adjourned. Thank
you very much, again.
[Whereupon, at 12:34 p.m., the subcommittees were
adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
Questions From Chairman Gus Bilirakis for Robert Griffin
Question 1. For some time, the DHS Science and Technology
Directorate had grappled with how to best interact with the Nation's
many and diverse State and local first responders to ensure that their
technology needs were being met. S&T has clearly amended its process in
the past few years in a way that seems to have alleviated some of those
partnership issues and fostered much more inclusiveness.
Do you believe that S&T is in the most optimal place now when it
comes to engaging first responders and ensuring that their requirements
are heard? Or is there any room for improvement?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 2a. Please provide additional information about the
process the Science and Technology Directorate uses to identify
capability requirements from the first responder community and
prioritize those requirements into research projects.
Specifically, how are requirements validated and prioritized for
funding by the Directorate? What specific criteria are used? Do
projects or solutions that have broad applicability to different types
of First Responder communities have a higher priority?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 2b. How is the First Responder Integrated Product Team
(IPT) integrated into the overall IPT process for the remaining
divisions within S&T? Are requirements that are identified within the
First Responder IPT cross-walked against requirements that may be
developed in other IPTs to identify duplications or overlaps that may
present opportunities for efficiencies or synergies?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 3. The Interagency Board (IAB), with whom you partner,
develops a list every year of research and development (R&D) priorities
for first responder equipment. The list is based on a survey of first
responders in categories such as urgent need, mission performance, and
life safety.
How do S&T's R&D priorities and investments reflect this annual
list produced by the IAB?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 4. You have indicated that you work closely with the
National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on standards
development for the technologies in your portfolio.
How many of your projects are coordinated with NIST and with
standards-developing bodies? All of them? I am wondering whether any
Federally-funded technology does or should have standards developed
concurrently with the technology itself.
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 5. What are the options for first responders when it comes
to assessing whether a piece of equipment is a good purchase? I know
S&T has the SAVER program, and FEMA has the Authorized Equipment List.
Can you please provide the committee with a list of all of the
different programs like this that are available to evaluate first
responder technologies, describe how they are different, and tell us
where the gaps still are?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Questions From Chairman Daniel Lungren for Robert Griffin
Question 1. I was interested to hear you mention in your testimony
that at least one of the projects you have worked on is covered by the
SAFETY Act. As you know, I am a big believer in the value that the
SAFETY Act law has brought to homeland security through liability
limitations.
Can you please describe how much and in what ways you coordinate
with the SAFETY Act Office at S&T to try to push more first responder
technologies through their process toward designation or certification,
which could increase their usage in the field?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
Question 2. While DHS makes significant acquisitions of technology
for its components, little guidance is provided in the annual budget
forecast about capabilities that merit development funding, and what
future funds might be devoted to commercializing such capabilities.
This makes it challenging for policymakers, State and local
governments, the private sector, and research and development
organizations to prepare for future needs and impacts of DHS investment
decisions. Congress has asked DHS to develop a multi-year budget
forecasting process similar to the 5-year process undertaken by the
Department of Defense.
Can you tell us how S&T is contributing to multi-year planning
efforts, and explain how multi-year planning can help you be a better
steward of taxpayer dollars?
Answer. Response was not received at the time of publication.
|
NEWSLETTER
|
|
Join the GlobalSecurity.org mailing list
|
|
|
