[House Hearing, 108 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
COMBATING TERRORISM: ASSESSING FEDERAL ASSISTANCE TO FIRST RESPONDERS
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
SUBCOMMITTEE ON NATIONAL SECURITY,
EMERGING THREATS AND INTERNATIONAL
RELATIONS
of the
COMMITTEE ON
GOVERNMENT REFORM
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED EIGHTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
SEPTEMBER 15, 2003
__________
Serial No. 108-112
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Government Reform
Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house
http://www.house.gov/reform
______
92-125 U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 2003
____________________________________________________________________________
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM
TOM DAVIS, Virginia, Chairman
DAN BURTON, Indiana HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut TOM LANTOS, California
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
JOHN L. MICA, Florida PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
DOUG OSE, California DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
RON LEWIS, Kentucky DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
CHRIS CANNON, Utah DIANE E. WATSON, California
ADAM H. PUTNAM, Florida STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
EDWARD L. SCHROCK, Virginia CHRIS VAN HOLLEN, Maryland
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee LINDA T. SANCHEZ, California
JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma C.A. ``DUTCH'' RUPPERSBERGER,
NATHAN DEAL, Georgia Maryland
CANDICE S. MILLER, Michigan ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, District of
TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania Columbia
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio JIM COOPER, Tennessee
JOHN R. CARTER, Texas CHRIS BELL, Texas
WILLIAM J. JANKLOW, South Dakota ------
MARSHA BLACKBURN, Tennessee BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
(Independent)
Peter Sirh, Staff Director
Melissa Wojciak, Deputy Staff Director
Rob Borden, Parliamentarian
Teresa Austin, Chief Clerk
Philip M. Schiliro, Minority Staff Director
Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats and International
Relations
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut, Chairman
MICHAEL R. TURNER, Ohio
DAN BURTON, Indiana DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio TOM LANTOS, California
RON LEWIS, Kentucky BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont
TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
ADAM H. PUTNAM, Florida CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
EDWARD L. SCHROCK, Virginia LINDA T. SANCHEZ, California
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee C.A. ``DUTCH'' RUPPERSBERGER,
TIM MURPHY, Pennsylvania Maryland
WILLIAM J. JANKLOW, South Dakota CHRIS BELL, Texas
JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
Ex Officio
TOM DAVIS, Virginia HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
Lawrence J. Halloran, Staff Director and Counsel
R. Nicholas Palarino, Senior Policy Advisor
Robert A. Briggs, Clerk
David Rapallo, Minority Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on September 15, 2003............................... 1
Statement of:
Arenovski, Dan, associate director of security, Purdue PHARMA 54
Bergstresser, Richard, first selectman, town of Greenwich, CT 45
Bond, Richard, first selectman, New Canaan, CT............... 45
Conte, John, captain, Stamford Fire Department............... 60
Duff, Bob, Connecticut State Representative, Norwalk, CT..... 49
Farrell, Diane, first selectwoman, town of Westport, CT...... 46
Hawreluk, David, advisor-director, Darien EMS................ 60
Larkin, Jim, Global Strategy Advisors........................ 58
Latessa, E. Michael, EMS director, city of Norwalk, CT....... 61
Malloy, Dannel P., mayor, city of Stamford, CT; Ted Macklin,
Director, Exercise and Evaluation Division, Office for
Domestic Preparedness, U.S. Department of Homeland
Security; Daniel A. Craig, Regional Director, FEMA Region
I; Donald Petri, Department of Public Safety, Division of
Homeland Security, State of Connecticut, accompanied by
Charles C. Beck, Chief, Domestic Preparedness Division,
Office of Emergency Management, State of Connecticut; and
Christopher Bruhl, president and chief executive officer of
the SACIA.................................................. 9
McCormack, Ed, Stamford Health System........................ 53
McGrath, Robert J., fire chief, city of Stamford, CT......... 52
Powers, Claudia Dolly, Connecticut State Representative...... 48
Wuennemann, Thomas, Captain, Stamford Police Department...... 51
Letters, statements, etc., submitted for the record by:
Bruhl, Christopher, president and chief executive officer of
the SACIA, prepared statement of........................... 36
Craig, Daniel A., Regional Director, FEMA Region I, prepared
statement of............................................... 25
Macklin, Ted, Director, Exercise and Evaluation Division,
Office for Domestic Preparedness, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security, prepared statement of................... 15
Malloy, Dannel P., mayor, city of Stamford, CT, prepared
statement of............................................... 11
Petri, Donald, Department of Public Safety, Division of
Homeland Security, State of Connecticut, prepared statement
of......................................................... 30
Shays, Hon. Christopher, a Representative in Congress from
the State of Connecticut, prepared statement of............ 3
COMBATING TERRORISM: ASSESSING FEDERAL ASSISTANCE TO FIRST RESPONDERS
----------
MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 15, 2003
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on National Security, Emerging Threats
and International Relations,
Committee on Government Reform,
Stamford, CT.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 11:43 a.m., in
the Davenport Ballroom, Holiday Inn Select, 700 Main Street,
Stamford, CT, Hon. Christopher Shays (chairman of the
subcommittee) presiding.
Present: Representatives Shays, Turner, Maloney.
Staff present: Lawrence Halloran, staff director and
general counsel; R. Nicholas Palarino, senior policy analyst;
Robert A. Briggs, clerk and professional staff member;
Christopher Skaluba, Presidential management intern; and David
Rapallo, minority counsel.
Mr. Shays. A quorum being present the Subcommittee on
National Security, Emerging Threats and International Relations
hearing entitled, ``Combating Terrorism, Assessing Federal
Assistance to First Responders,'' is called to order.
Let me first thank the city of Stamford and the U.S.
Department of Homeland Security [DHS] for allowing the
subcommittee to embed this hearing in the emergency response
tabletop exercise now underway. We are here because, whether
directed at Washington, DC, or Washington, CT, all terrorism is
local. As a Nation, our preparedness to meet the terrorist
menace can only be measured in the strength and readiness of
local first responders.
How prepared are we to meet the uncertain, changing threat
of terrorism, specifically the dangers posed by chemical,
biological, radiological or even nuclear weapons? Exercises
like today's will help answer that question. But this we
already know: Unless efforts to train and equip first
responders are sharply focused and aggressively funded, those
sworn to protect public health and safety will be asked to
confront mortal perils without all the tools they need to
survive and prevail.
Well before September 11, 2001, this subcommittee focused
on the needs of first responders for real-time threat
information, the need for an overarching strategy to guide
their efforts and the need to reorganize government at all
levels to implement that strategy effectively and efficiently.
In numerous sessions from Connecticut to Florida, we have heard
testimony from police officers, firefighters, HAZMAT teams,
emergency medical personnel and other experts expressing
frustration over the extent and pace of Federal
counterterrorism equipment and training programs. They told us
fragmentation and duplication hobbled a multi-jurisdictional,
multi-agency, multi-billion dollar preparedness effort.
Since the September 11th attacks, much has been done, and a
great deal of money has been spent to consolidate and focus
Federal support for first responders. But last week we heard
sobering evidence that local emergency personnel remain
dangerously ill-prepared to handle a catastrophic attack on
American soil.
The recent report of the Independent Task Force of the
Council of Foreign Relations [CFR] found that Federal agencies
have been slow getting funding to State and local
jurisdictions, and States have hampered the efficient
dissemination of much-needed Federal funds to the local level.
According to the report, the overall effectiveness of Federal
funding has been further diluted by the lack of a process to
determine the most critical needs of the emergency responder
community in order to achieve the greatest return on
investments.
The key reason cited by the CFR Task Force for the current
preparedness deficit was the lack of concrete, threat-based
equipment and training standards against which to measure State
and local capabilities. Standards capture community consensus
and collective wisdom on the minimum that would be achieved
with scarce public resources. Development of preparedness
standards would transform unfocused motion into real progress
toward actual preparedness. Standards should also guide
allocation of scarce resources.
The question of whether first-responder funding goes
through the State or directly to localities is not an all-or-
nothing proposition, especially in a State like Connecticut
where the absence of counties can leave mid-sized cities like
Stamford at a disadvantage in national funding formulae
directed only to large metropolitan areas. Funding, even
through the State, must be timely and commensurate with need as
calibrated by objective preparedness standards.
This week, the subcommittee will launch a bipartisan call
for development of national preparedness standards. We will
call on DHS and the relevant congressional committees of
Congress to consolidate and coordinate ongoing standard
programs to produce measurable norms for equipment and training
readiness to meet the terrorist threat. What we see and hear
today will be of inestimable value in that effort.
Again, we thank Mayor Malloy and his administration for
their hospitality and help in giving the subcommittee this
opportunity to examine local preparedness initiatives first-
hand. We look forward to his testimony, and that of all our
witnesses today, as we strive to improve the immediacy, impact
and efficiency of Federal first responder programs.
At this time, the Chair would invite the distinguished
representative Carolyn Maloney from New York to make any
statements that she would like to.
[The prepared statement of Hon. Christopher Shays follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.003
Mrs. Maloney. I thank Chairman Shays and Vice Chairman
Turner, Mayor Malloy and the entire team that worked today to
put the exercises before us. It was tremendously informative
and extremely helpful.
I am a former member of the New York City Council and not
only serve on Chris' subcommittee, but am Chair of the
Democratic Task Force for Homeland Security. So this is an
issue that is tremendously important to both parties. It is one
that we have truly worked together in a bipartisan way. One of
the good things about our government--I am going to put my
opening statement in the record--is that we are taught to
question. And one of the things that I would like to hear from
the panelists today is exactly what you need and are you
getting what you need from the Federal Government?
Just last week our committee had a very important hearing
with former Senator Warren Rudman, on his recently released
study from the Council on Foreign Relations called Emergency
Responders Drastically Underfunded and Dangerously Unprepared.
And in it he outlined that the resources are not getting there.
He called for $100 billion more on emergency responders.
I found it very interesting throughout the entire display,
no one called for the Federal Government. I kept waiting for
when the call was going to FEMA or the FBI Central or to the
President and Vice President. But truly in an emergency it is
the first responders that are there reacting to the immediate
crisis on line.
As a New Yorker I am very proud of our mayor and our
government and our first responders. In fact, the last bill
that I passed--actually the last bill that Congress passed on
the day of September 11 was giving the Congressional Gold
Medal, the highest award that can be bestowed to those
responders who gave their lives helping others, and to their
units, their firehouses and emergency units as an artifact from
that day.
Your talk about how we would handle the transportation
vividly brought back September 11 where I started driving back
to New York, everything was barricaded, and to tell you the
truth, it was the only time that my congressional ID was worth
anything, because I could get through all of the barricades.
And as you got closer and closer to New York, the only people
you saw were emergency responders coming in from Connecticut,
New Jersey, Massachusetts, almost as a reflex running into the
city of New York and heavy equipment coming in, tractors, etc.,
to respond.
One thing that is lost in all of the discussion is that
September 11 was truly the most miraculous rescue effort in the
history of our country. On September 12 the estimates were that
20,000 people died. We know it is less than 3,000. We do not
know how many lives each of these heroes saved by rushing into
the fires.
One thing that I find troubling are the numbers that have
been released by New York City's police department. They tell
us that on July before the attacks there were over 39,000
police officers in New York City, but as of this July there
were only 37,000, a reduction of over 2,000 police officers.
The fire department says the same. So I fail to understand how
we can respond in a better way if our resources or manpower is
not as strong as it was before.
I have to say that I thought the exercise today was
brilliant really, and I congratulate everyone who participated.
It appears that you have done a great deal of work since
September 11 to get ready. I would be interested today to hear
what your plans are in responding to New York. Regrettably New
York remains the No. 1 terrorist target not only in our region
but in the entire world. When Connecticut is yellow, we're
orange; when Connecticut is orange, we're red and by all
accounts we are a major target. So part of it will be,
regrettably, hopefully not the case, but how Connecticut will
again respond to such a situation in New York again as you so
brilliantly did coming and standing with us.
In short, I look forward to your testimony and the
opportunity to ask questions. Thank you, Mayor Malloy for your
leadership in having us today.
Mr. Shays. Thank you. At this time, the Chair would
recognize the vice chairman, Mr. Turner.
Mr. Turner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to thank our chairman, Chairman Shays, for his
leadership in this area. We all know that even prior to
September 11, Chairman Shays was a leader in our country in
making certain that communities looked to the issue of their
vulnerabilities and also to look at issues at a national level
as to how we need to be equipped to respond. Chairman Shays
encouraged these types of exercises even prior to September 11
and encouraged this exercise to occur.
I want to congratulate the mayor. Certainly, as I have gone
from tabletop to tabletop, I have seen some tremendous
leadership in your community and surrounding communities. And
this certainly is a topic that is one that you are not ill
prepared for. You can tell the people have had these
discussions and that this exercise is one that compliments the
work that you have already done.
I served as mayor of the city of Dayton from about 1993 to
2001 and we were one of the cities that also had a weapons of
mass destruction exercise prior to September 11. We had an
actual mock exercise at a basketball arena, had a play where
two devices were placed, one inside the facility and one
outside the facility. And from that, we learned a tremendous
amount. And as I went from tabletop to tabletop, I heard the
types of issues that you were discussing that we faced.
I know from our exercise when September 11 happened, we
were a community that was much more prepared. We had people who
had responsibility, knew what their responsibilities were, we
knew what roads to shut down, we knew what processes to put in
place.
Even though we are not in close proximity, as you are, to
New York, we were a community that contributed responders to
the situation, both from our HAZMAT teams and our fire and
additional police.
One thing that has been wonderful in serving under Chairman
Shays, as you see in this hearing today, is that this is not
just an exercise in getting additional information. Chairman
Shays works to make certain that legislation or regulations are
modified that need to respond to the issues that are brought
forth today. So we are looking for the information you provide
to us.
Also in addition to this, Chairman Shays has been holding a
series of hearings on issues of strategic targets throughout
our country and how they might have new vulnerabilities and
what we need to be responding there.
So any information you provide us today will actually go to
formulation of policy, legislation and reforms in regulation
and will be a complement to the information that this committee
has been gathering on strategic locations.
I look forward to your testimony.
Mr. Shays. I thank the gentleman.
What you all are experiencing is what we call congressional
courtesy where Members from outside of the District say nice
things about the Member in the District.
Mr. Turner. That is if they are true. [Laughter.]
Mr. Shays. Let me just say that it is a privilege to have
both these Members. They could be in their own districts right
now and for them to spend their day with us is a real
compliment. I just want to also say before recognizing our
witnesses that all three of us were talking about how proud we
are of our country--how proud we are to be in a room with so
many competent people. We just felt, all of us, that we were
just seeing a lot of competence and yet we all know we have a
lot to learn.
So with that, let me just take care of some business. I ask
unanimous consent that all members of the subcommittee be
permitted to place an opening statement in the record and the
record will remain open for 3 days for that purpose. Without
objection, so ordered.
I ask further unanimous consent that all witnesses be
permitted to include their written statements in the record.
And without objection, so ordered.
At this time, I will just recognize the witnesses we have
before us. We have the Honorable Dannel P. Malloy, mayor of the
city of Stamford; we have Mr. Ted Macklin, assistant director,
Office for Domestic Preparedness, Department of Homeland
Security; we have Mr. Daniel Craig, Regional Director,
Department of Homeland Security; and taking Mr. Vincent
DeRosa's place, who is not well today, we have Donald F. Petri,
State of Connecticut Department of Public Safety, Division of
Homeland Security. Petri, am I saying it correctly?
Mr. Petri. Yes, sir.
Mr. Shays. Thank you. And accompanied by Charles Beck,
chief, Domestic Preparedness Division, State of Connecticut,
Office of Emergency Management.
I am going to swear you gentlemen in, as you know that is
our practice. If there is anyone else that you think you may
call on to make a statement or respond to a question, I would
ask them to stand up at the same time.
And I am sorry, I left out my very good friend--I am sorry,
Chris--I saw Dan pointing this way and I was not getting the
message. [Laughter.]
I am very delighted, Chris, to have you here, one of the
most competent people I know, head of SACIA and it is very nice
to have you here as well. You are going to be closing up the
comments.
At this time, I would ask you all to stand, please.
[Witnesses sworn.]
Mr. Shays. Thank you. At this time, we will recognize Mayor
Malloy. Dan, we do 5 minutes and we roll over. I think we are
going to try to crunch this up a little bit, so we can get
that. So your full statements will be in the record.
STATEMENTS OF DANNEL P. MALLOY, MAYOR, CITY OF STAMFORD, CT;
TED MACKLIN, DIRECTOR, EXERCISE AND EVALUATION DIVISION, OFFICE
FOR DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY; DANIEL A. CRAIG, REGIONAL DIRECTOR, FEMA REGION I;
DONALD PETRI, DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC SAFETY, DIVISION OF HOMELAND
SECURITY, STATE OF CONNECTICUT, ACCOMPANIED BY CHARLES C. BECK,
CHIEF, DOMESTIC PREPAREDNESS DIVISION, OFFICE OF EMERGENCY
MANAGEMENT, STATE OF CONNECTICUT; AND CHRISTOPHER BRUHL,
PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER OF THE SACIA
Mayor Malloy. Congressman, I want to thank you very much
for bringing the entire subcommittee, members of the
subcommittee, with you. We very much appreciate this
opportunity. I think we have learned a great deal. I will not
read my statement, I will, on the other hand, make a few points
in the nature of crunching this together.
This is an important exercise and one which I would
certainly recommend to all regions and mayors and first
selectmen throughout Connecticut and any other portion.
Mr. Shays. Let me just--can you hear in the back or do we
need to put these mics in front of us? Can you hear in the back
all right? OK, we are all right.
Mayor Malloy. I will try to do a little bit better.
So I certainly would recommend this activity and I want to
say that since September 11, this is one of the most useful
things that we have done, being brought to us by an outside
governmental agency. Clearly we have done, and I think we have
evidenced, a fair amount of work within the community during
the period of time to improve our readiness and I think we are
demonstrating that in many ways today.
My written statement, which has been submitted, makes a few
points, but I do want to say that the funding of equipment for
first responders is very important. There is a perfect storm
out there with respect to the operation of municipal
government. With rising prices, particularly for employee
insurance benefits, decreased availability of funds from State
and Federal agencies in many cases, but also effects of tax
base. And all of this had led to a drying up of funds that
might otherwise be dedicated on a local basis to preparedness.
To Congresswoman Maloney's point, Stamford's police
department is today smaller than it was on September 11 and
that is in no small part due to the effects or the conditions
which I have described.
However, money is starting to flow to local jurisdictions.
But back to Congressman Shay's point, Connecticut, I suspect
Massachusetts and Rhode Island, have similar problems in the
sense that we do not have county government and we are dealing
as 169 municipalities with the State government. There needs to
be the setting of priorities and the probability, for instance,
of sites of attack and therefore, funds being driven that way.
But money has started to flow and some equipment is
starting to be distributed, such as decontamination units, one
of which is now based in Stamford, another which is based in
Greenwich, and highly appropriate. We are also starting to see
coordination of activities. One of our great fears, however, in
lower Fairfield County and southwestern Connecticut is the
availability of State and Federal resources and their ability
to respond in a very congested part of the State of
Connecticut. One of the points that I have already made mental
note of with respect to today's exercise is whether or not
certain local officials should be designated to carry on those
State activities that would otherwise be coordinated in
Hartford in the absence of the availability of people to get to
Stamford from another portion of the State.
Finally, I would like to make a point that local
governments can be overwhelmed. Certainly a terrorist attack
could overwhelm or emergency responders. You know, for
instance, if this exact event happened in Darien as opposed to
Stamford, Stamford would be equally impacted but Darien would
not have the resources to throw at the issue that we have here
in Stamford. It could be same incident, very different
reactions, very different impacts on the intermodal travel and
likewise.
So we have to be cognizant of the fact that we can in fact
be overwhelmed, that additional coordination efforts need to be
undertaken by the State and Federal Government and that we as
localities need to work more closely together.
Mr. Chairman, I would like to thank you for the opportunity
to appear before you and stand ready to answer questions when
appropriate.
Mr. Shays. Thank you, mayor. Mr. Macklin.
[The prepared statement of Mayor Malloy follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.005
Mr. Macklin. Good morning, Chairman Shays, Vice Chairman
Turner, Congresswoman Maloney. I am Ted Macklin from the Office
of Emergency Preparedness. As you know, ODP is a component of
the Department of Homeland Security. It is a pleasure and
privilege to be here today to talk about ODP's efforts to
provide support to our Nation's emergency responders.
I am pleased to be here in Stamford, CT, as the city
participates in an important exercise to practice its response
capabilities to a mock terrorist incident. On behalf of Tom
Ridge, the Department of Homeland Security and the Office for
Domestic Preparedness, I would like to express my appreciation
for your support and your interest in Federal programs to
combat terrorism.
Assisting States and localities is critical to DHS' mission
of protecting the homeland. As Secretary Ridge has often
stated, the homeland is secure only when the hometowns are
secure. And the way to ensure that hometowns are secure is to
ensure that State and local officials, State and local
emergency response agencies and State and local emergency
response personnel have the resources, the information and the
tools they need to do their jobs.
Four days ago, we marked the second anniversary of the
terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. The lessons of
September 11 are as true today as they were then--that State
and local personnel are the first on the scene of any
emergency, including acts of terrorism, to save lives, often at
the risk of their own.
As you are aware, Mr. Chairman, DHS was established to
better enable the Nation to defend its borders, enhance its
security and respond to external and internal threats and
attacks.
In the 8 months since DHS was established, significant
progress has been made toward making America safer. To this
end, since its creation, the Department has provided a
significant amount of funds to States, cities and localities to
prevent, prepare for and respond to acts of terrorism. DHS has
provided more than $4 billion to State and local governments to
assist first responders and offset costs of improving overall
preparedness and enhanced security. A large majority of this
assistance, including today's exercise, is provided through the
Office for Domestic Preparedness.
Before the creation of DHS in March 2003, ODP was a
component of the Department of Justice. With the passage of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002, ODP was transferred to DHS and
designated the principal Federal agency for assisting States
and local jurisdictions to prepare for, prevent and respond to
incidents of terrorism.
Since its establishment in 1998, ODP has provided more than
$4.3 billion to our Nation's emergency response community for
equipment acquisition, exercise support, training and technical
assistance efforts. ODP has delivered weapons of mass
destruction awareness, operations, technician and incident
command level training to more than 304,000 emergency
responders from approximately 5,000 jurisdictions nationwide.
Additionally, ODP has conducted more than 260 preparedness
exercises, including the congressionally mandated Top Officials
I and Top Officials II exercises, most recently being concluded
in May 2003 in Seattle and the city of Chicago.
The State of Connecticut has benefited from this funding
and support. From fiscal year 1998 through fiscal year 2002,
ODP has provided more than $7 million in equipment acquisition,
planning and exercise support funds. During fiscal year 2003,
the State has received an additional more than $30 million
under the State Homeland Security Grant program for equipment
acquisition, exercise support, training and management and
planning.
It is a priority of this administration and the department
to effectively and efficiently meet our responsibility to
support first responders in fulfilling their critical role in
our Nation's counter-terrorism efforts. We at DHS take very
seriously the need to ensure that Federal support is focused
and well organized.
The Department recognizes the financial constraints placed
on State governments which require difficult decisions to be
made about limited resources. Nevertheless, it is the
Department's view that Federal, State and local governments
have a shared responsibility with respect to homeland security
efforts. As such, State and local governments should take
responsibility to directly fund a portion of the costs
associated with domestic preparedness, including personnel
costs. The Federal Government's role, on the other hand, should
largely be geared to capacity building at the State and local
level. One of the most important Federal roles is also to
provide guidance, subject matter expertise and technical
assistance. There is also an important shared responsibility at
all levels of government to maintain accountability--to be able
to provide assurance that the needed capability has been
developed or that any shortfalls are identified and addressed.
Another critical component of ODP's mission is its ongoing
Training and Technical Assistance Program, which provides an
extensive array of training to Federal, State and local
agencies. Through this program, ODP provides more than 30
direct training and technical assistance courses and programs
to State and local officials.
Perhaps the most notable means through which ODP provides
support to States and localities is the State Homeland Security
Grant Program. Through this program. ODP provides funds to all
50 States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico and the
territories for the acquisition of specialized equipment that
could be used to prevent, deter and respond to terrorism.
Mr. Shays. Why do you not just make a last closing sentence
here.
Mr. Macklin. Yes, sir.
Sir, we at DHS are convinced that these programs are
working at this time and we are extremely supportive of the
activities of your subcommittee and we look forward to working
with you shoulder to shoulder as we advance the cause of
terrorism preparedness in the Nation.
Mr. Shays. Thank you, Ted. We have more of the information
and it will be part of the record. Sorry to rush you this time,
but we are just trying to finish up here.
Mr. Macklin. Yes.
Mr. Shays. Mr. Craig.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Macklin follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.013
Mr. Craig. Good afternoon, Chairman Shays, Vice Chairman
Turner, Representative Maloney and distinguished members of
this committee. My name is Daniel Craig and I serve as the
Regional Director of FEMA Region I. On behalf of Secretary
Ridge and Under Secretary Brown, it is my privilege to be with
you today to discuss FEMA's role in emergency preparedness and
response.
As you know, the Federal Emergency Management Agency was
transitioned into the U.S. Department of Homeland Security in
March of this year. That transition has strengthened FEMA's
core mission of preparing for and responding to acts of
terrorism and natural disasters. It has also provided a closer
working relationship with other Federal agencies as well as
State and local governments.
On February 28, 2003, the President signed the Homeland
Security Presidential Directive 5, HSPD-5, on the management of
domestic incidents to establish a single comprehensive national
incident management system and to integrate separate Federal
response plans, including the current Federal response plan
into a single, all discipline, all hazards national response
plan. The Secretary of Homeland Security is responsible for
developing and implementing both initiatives. FEMA is actively
participating in the task force created by Secretary Ridge to
develop a National Response Plan and a framework for a National
Incident Management System. As directed by the Department of
Homeland Security Act of 2002, FEMA will play a key role in the
management and maintenance of NIMS once it is developed.
To ensure better coordination and management of disaster
relief, FEMA currently utilizes a Federal Response Plan [FRP].
The FRP establishes FEMA as the lead coordinating agency for
all Federal disaster relief. A total of 27 separate Federal
departments and agencies have signed on as partners under the
plan and work with FEMA to deliver disaster services in
Presidentially declared emergencies and disasters that
overwhelm State and local resources. One of the FRP's unique
features is that it divides the Federal disaster relief efforts
into distinct functional areas called Emergency Support
Functions. These 12 functions are based on the types of direct
Federal assistance that a State is most likely to need in case
of a disaster. Each ESF is headed by a primary agency designed
on the basis of its authorities, resources, capabilities in
that functional area. These functions include transportation
with the Department of Transportation being the lead;
communications with the National Communications System; public
works and engineering with the Corps of Engineers;
firefighting, the U.S. Department of Agriculture; information
and planning, FEMA; mass care with American Red Cross; resource
support with the General Services Administration; health and
medical services with the Department of Health and Human
Services; urban search and rescue with FEMA; hazardous
materials with the EPA; food with the U.S. Department of
Agriculture; and energy with the Department of Energy.
FEMA operates an Emergency Support Team which presently is
up on a 24-hour basis because of Hurricane Isabel at our
headquarters in Washington, DC, to coordinate and manage the
initial response to major disasters, deploy assets, locate
needed relief supplies and provide full range of disaster
assistance 24 hours a day, 12 hour shifts until field teams can
take over the response.
At the same time we begin disaster response operations in
Washington, our regional staff activate the regional operation
centers which serve as the point of contact for State
government seeking disaster assistance. Staff in our regional
offices are key to disaster operations and they are among the
first on the scene of a disaster. At the request of the State,
the region will deploy a response liaison officer to act as an
intermediary to address State concerns with FEMA. When an act
of terrorism or natural disaster strikes and overwhelms the
State and local capabilities, the Governor of the affected
State can petition the President through FEMA for regional
assistance. A senior FEMA official known as the Federal
Coordinating Officer is appointed to head up the disaster
response and recovery operations for FEMA and coordinate
delivery of assistance with individuals and with State and
local governments.
In a Presidentially declared disaster, individuals may be
eligible for assistance to help them recover from damages to
residences, businesses and personal property. Assistance can
include temporary housing, unemployment assistance, food
coupons, family grants, low interest loans, legal aid and
crisis counseling. Assistance may also be available through
State and local governments and certain private nonprofit
organizations for repair of infrastructure and public
facilities. The assistance can include emergency protective
measures, clearance of debris, repair, restoration and
replacement of damaged facilities, equipment and contents.
Partnerships among the Federal departments and agencies,
among the various levels of government, among emergency
managers and first responders and among public, private and
volunteer entities are key to successful disaster response
operations and maintenance of the Nation's comprehensive
emergency management system. Partnerships also help us prepare
for potential hazards. Our preparedness mission is to provide
the technical expertise, guidance, assistance necessary to
establish, maintain and improve and ensure the success of a
comprehensive emergency preparedness system. We accomplish this
mission through activities, programs and a broad range of
functions of emergency planning, training, exercise,
partnerships and outreach to all levels of the Federal
Government. For example, the Emergency Management Institute,
the National Fire Academy in Emmitsburg.
We now are a major component in the Department of Homeland
Security and FEMA's mission will only become more important in
the years to come.
I will take any questions.
Mr. Shays. Thank you very much. Mr. Petri.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Craig follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.016
Mr. Petri. Thank you. Good morning, Chairman Shays, Vice
Chairman Turner and Representative Maloney. On behalf of
Governor John Rowland and Commissioner of Public Safety Arthur
Spada, it is my pleasure to welcome you and your subcommittee
to the State of Connecticut.
I am pleased to appear before you today to report that
substantial progress is being made to provide equipment and
training to Connecticut's first responders. Indeed, they are
better prepared to deal with a chemical, biological,
radiological, nuclear explosion today than any time prior.
Two years ago, the horrific events of September 11 and the
subsequent anthrax incidents fostered a reexamination of the
logistics of Connecticut's public safety and emergency
services.
With 169 municipalities, over 300 fire districts, two
tribal nations, significant centers of industrial and
commercial enterprise, substantial marine activity and notable
population centers within and adjacent to our borders, the
diversity of interests, perspectives and priorities seemed
overwhelming. Governor Rowland led the effort to marshal
Connecticut's resources toward a coordinated strategy for
preparedness and response.
Toward that end, he designated the Department of Public
Safety, Division of Homeland Security as the lead agency in
that effort. By adopting a proactive approach for prevention
strategies in collaboration and cooperation with Federal, State
and local entities, Connecticut pursued, secured and allocated
all available Federal funding to outfit and train each first
responder within the State.
This was accomplished by building from the pre-existing
foundation established by State, regional and local entities
under the auspices of the State Office of Emergency Management.
Prioritizing the most critical needs, a three-prong program has
been implemented to enhance existing equipment inventories, to
provide additional training as well as practical exercises, and
undertake a vigorous assessment of anticipated needs to serve
as a realistic planning platform for future funding.
A leading priority is to place each first responder in a
position of knowledge and safety when confronted with a CBRNE
event. All first responders are being outfitted with personal
protective equipment appropriate to their disciplines--that
being hazmat, fire, police and emergency services. Training in
use of personal protective equipment sponsored by ODP has been
conducted. Overtime costs incurred for public safety
authorities for training and for periods of heightened alert
status have been defrayed.
Metering packages for each jurisdiction within the State
have been acquired and distributed, as have specialized hazmat
metering packages for urban and regional teams.
Thirty-four prime movers and mass decontamination trailers
are being distributed throughout the State with interoperable
radio communications centers. Each of the primary and secondary
public safety answering points are now equipped with mobile
radio stations at the interoperable frequency. Key local
officials are being assigned portable radios at the
interoperable frequency. Bomb trucks and a robotic device for
local law enforcement are in place.
An interdisciplinary urban search and rescue task force
staffed by State and local first responders has been
established. Relative to this last point, I wish to publicly
express my appreciation to officials across the State who have
volunteered their time to develop, recruit, interview and
select the highly skilled local volunteers comprising this task
force.
A key feature of our training regimen is the partnership
that has been developed between the Department of Public
Safety, Department of Homeland Security and the University of
Connecticut in the creation of the Homeland Security Education
Center. Integrating the expertise of the Police Officers'
Standards and Training Council, Connecticut Fire Academy,
Office of Emergency Management and academic professionals, this
center will provide a continuous improvement model of
organizational development. Specific goals include training
6,000 first responders, elected officials and program
administrators in CBRNE awareness, performance and management
level training programs currently available through the Office
of Domestic Preparedness. For the first time in Connecticut,
the training will integrate a CBRNE Exercise and Evaluation
Program within the curriculum.
At this time, Connecticut is participating in a detailed
assessment mandated by the Federal Office of Homeland Security.
DPS and DHS worked with the Office of Domestic Preparedness to
offer each jurisdiction the opportunity to participate in
training and receive technical assistance in the assessment
process. This task is critical to our future level of
readiness. Citizens and officials across our State will build
this assessment by investing countless hours in performing
unglamorous tasks. These reports must be submitted to DPS and
Department of Homeland Security by November 1, 2003. A
statewide strategy based on this data must be compiled,
analyzed and submitted to the Office of Domestic Preparedness
by December 31.
In closing my remarks, I wish to acknowledge their efforts
for they are performing truly heroic deeds that will go largely
unheralded. It is only fitting that we recognize the broad-
based citizen participation that we are attempting to build
through programs such as Citizens Corps initiative, the
community emergency response team program that is the most
essential ingredient in maintaining our free and secure
society.
Thank you.
Mr. Shays. Thank you very much. Mr. Bruhl.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Petri follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.020
Mr. Bruhl. Thanks very much, Mr. Chairman, for the
invitation to meet with you today. I have the honor of serving
as president of a network of close to 500 companies here in
Fairfield County.
Over the last 2 years obviously, government and industry
have really taken important steps to improve security. Progress
has been made, we all share the commitment that more needs to
be done.
Business comes at it from the point of view of feeling we
share responsibility with the public sector for our own
people--and I would like to underscore the idea of our own
people. We have a responsibility that transcends merely calling
for help. We have a belief that we need to provide help from
the very first moment forward and we need to anticipate
circumstances that might arise.
As a result of that, our member firms have been, over the
last 2 years, conducting a regular program of leadership
dialogs among our security and crisis management leadership. We
have reached out to our first responders throughout the region.
We have participated in regional readiness exercises. We have
had a regular formal exchange of corporate best practices. We
have conducted advocacy in the public sector, security issues.
I might note that eight of our participating companies are
participating today and they have more than 15,000 employees in
the city of Stamford.
So what have we learned over the last 24 months that we
would like to share with you in response to your invitation?
First, communication is key. Public officials, private
sector leaders and citizens need timely information upon which
to base their actions.
Second, homeland security is a shared responsibility. We
need to coordinate every level, every aspect in a far more
detailed way than we have previously. And also, the critical
role of the private sector and the media play in readiness and
response recovery needs to be more fully recognized and
embraced, we believe, by the public sector.
And finally, a management structure that is understood and
embraced by all first responders--the same structure needs to
be in place.
You have asked us to focus our comments on the appropriate
role for Federal agencies and ways that we might improve your
ability to support local and State response activities. We have
four key areas of suggestions: First, leadership role for the
Federal Government; a role as an educator; a facilitator; and
of course financier.
In the Federal Government's leadership role, we believe it
is critical to continue to develop the homeland security
strategy or road map and to set benchmarks for local and State
agencies. We need consistency. An important part of that is to
adopt the unified command system as a national best practice.
All of our first responders need to utilize the same management
framework at every critical incident and disaster operation.
Fire departments have almost universally adopted the incident
command system, yet other first responders still have different
protocols. And people of good will and excellent training who
do not share the same protocols and who have not trained
necessarily together will find confusion rather than
cooperation, regardless of their intent, in the heat of an
event. We think also that this management structure needs to
include and be shared with the private sector. We had the
blackout referred to many times this morning of recent event,
in which our major employers allowed their people or could not
stop their people from all going home together; therefore,
creating each other's traffic jam. A plan in advance would have
mitigated some of those impacts.
In the role of educator, we believe that it is appropriate
to highlight best practices and provide training resources.
This morning's exercise is a wonderful example. Eighty-five
percent of the critical infrastructure is either owned or
operated by the private sector in this country, 85 percent of
the people participating in readiness exercises are not private
sector representatives.
We are kind of pushy people here at SACIA, I suppose, and
we have reached out and invited ourselves to participate. Last
year, we participated in a Bridgeport regional exercise and we
were the only private sector participants.
Earlier this summer, we were the only private people in
FEMA Region I at the Newport War College exercise.
Today, we are delighted to participate with you and the
city of Stamford in this exercise.
And in October, we will take part in Livewire, a national
cyber security training exercise.
In every case, we were welcomed, but we needed to invite
ourselves. And we were lonely when we got there because we were
the only people who invited ourselves--being pushy. But as we
go forward, we believe it should be an important part of the
protocol that the private sector must be invited to take part
in this planning. In some ways, it would be in their best
interest to participate, some may decline. But at the very
least, let us be sure that we reach out to involve people in
training, because absent that, the communication that we know
is so essential to make something work simply will not be
there. We will be relying on a dozen different media offering a
dozen media outlets offering a dozen different interpretation
of events and we need to have direct links.
The facilitator role, we have already mentioned. It is an
important activity to be sure that our various agencies at the
Federal, local and State level are able to work together. For
example, Congresswoman Maloney, you asked about Connecticut
coming to New York. Connecticut is in FEMA Region I, we do not
drill with New York, and so therefore we need to look across
these boundaries to enable ourselves to participate and to help
each other across these boundaries. They are artificial
boundaries that windstorms and terrorists do not respect.
And finally, of course, I would just like to add our
private sector voice to those of the public sector that have
spoken already today, the role of the Federal Government as
financier. Your money is critically important as local and
State governments go through the financial storm of the
century.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Bruhl follows:]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T2125.023
Mr. Shays. I would like to thank all of our witnesses for
their very helpful statements and just point out, it is rather
surprising but the only politician in this group was the most
punctual. [Laughter.]
So that is some mark of achievement.
I want us to be very candid. I am going to run us over 10
minutes. We had 15 minutes. We do not need a lot of nice little
talk here, we need as direct and as honest conversation as we
can have.
I am going to turn to Mr. Turner first, but I am going to
have Mr. Craig, have you anticipate a question I am going to be
asking, why should we not be part of New York and train with
New York throughout the metropolitan area. I know you live in
Connecticut, so I love that.
Mrs. Maloney. Point of personal privilege since you
mentioned New York. I know that even though you did not train
with New York, Connecticut responded because I saw the police
and fire and equipment coming in from Connecticut to our aid,
and on behalf of my constituents, I thank you.
Mr. Shays. Thank you.
Mr. Turner. Mr. Bruhl, I want to congratulate you on the
participation that you have from the business community.
Certainly we noted as part of this exercise that some of the
businesses had put into place their emergency response teams
that are working in coordination with this exercise.
It was also interesting to see how quickly in the
discussion the issue of liability came up and how that is going
to restrain our abilities for private sector organizations,
specifically in the area of hospitals, how they might operate.
I know that is going to be a continuing issue for the private
sector.
My question is for the mayor. Our chairman has been a
leader in advocating for the issue of national equipment and
performance standards really looking at the process of
establishing a national threat assessment, from that deriving
national equipment and performance standards. Recognizing that
there are national associations, certainly professional
associations, that would be first responders, there is
community experience and research, there is obviously State and
national agencies that provide some guidance, but the
Department of Homeland Security currently does not have in
place for you to follow national equipment and performance
standards that would coincide with grant application processes
and funding processes, and also guidelines as to what you
should have in your inventory as you look to responding. I
wanted your thoughts and comments on that.
Mayor Malloy. It is an interesting question, Congressman.
You do not know this, but as mayor of the city of Stamford, I
actually have six different fire companies. So we are just
about being our own schedule for that which is purchased within
the city with city funds, but distributed to volunteer
companies. So I can appreciate the difficulty.
I think it is a very important movement. I think standards
across the board need to be set. I think it is part of the role
that the Congress could in fact play if they were desirous of,
or appropriate agencies could do. But clearly, one of our
concerns will continue to be what equipment other people show
up with if they respond in Stamford from surrounding
communities or States. And I think it is an important interest.
Mr. Turner. Thank you.
Mr. Shays. Would anyone else like to address that question
real quick?
Mr. Petri. Yes, just a comment concerning the equipment
that first responders will show up with. In the handout of
personal protection equipment, great effort was made to
standardize the colors of various chemical suits so that all
police responding to a scene are in a particular color, all
fire officials are in a particular color, etc. That will go a
long way I think toward addressing some of the mayor's concern.
Mr. Shays. Thank you. Mrs. Maloney.
Mrs. Maloney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I sometimes feel a disconnect between the rhetoric and the
reality of what is on the ground, and what I heard today from
the panel, the first responders that were reporting, we heard
from the police group that they only have about 14 protective
suits. I suppose that means hazmat suits. And that they had
only escape hoods. Well, in the case of a chemical or
biological attack, they are going to need more than escape
hoods and they are going to need masks to be able to go in and
help. Otherwise, they will just die themselves.
Then we also heard that they do not have equipment for
interoperable communications with officers from other
jurisdictions. So they testified they could not communicate
that way.
The fire and EMS group said that they had only two
trailers, one for the scene and a smaller one for the hospital.
And then they had a comment that I did not quite follow. They
said if they were contaminated they did not want to go to the
hospital because they might contaminate other people. Well, a
very serious concern to me is what are we going to be doing to
protect our first responders and save their lives, both on the
scene and later, with health problems.
And my question is on equipment. Where are the critical
needs? What is it you feel that you need for equipment and
could you give us a listing from this city's perspective,
knowing you will be helping all of your neighboring towns and
villages--what are your biggest priorities for Stamford?
Mayor Malloy. Congresswoman, I am going to attempt to
answer that for you, but I do not have the specifics before me.
But I will seek to have specifics--a list presented to you.
Quite clearly, we are concerned about the hazmat area and
the ability of police officers who may need to respond, given
certain circumstances, to an incident whose needs are not being
addressed as rapidly as the hazmat, fire units area. And quite
clearly, the list that I will present you will address that
issue. Police officers will play a vital role in responding,
for instance, to the incident that presents itself in today's
scenario.
The math that was done before you a little while ago speaks
of $4 billion distributed for local preparation, but $30
million flowing to the State of Connecticut for redistribution.
That is not the best flow level that I have ever seen reported
when it comes to distributing assets for local preparation,
albeit I understand we have a ways to go and I do not mean to
be over critical, because we are working at this together. But
there are great and tremendous needs.
Let me point one thing out to you. although there are two
trailers in Stamford, we actually built one locally because it
was taking so long to get one distributed by the Federal
Government through the State government. So the members of our
fire department took an old backup piece of equipment and
converted it to a decontamination unit, and that is the one
that we, in today's exercise, would have responded to the
hospital to help in their preparations, as opposed to the main
unit which has now been distributed through the State I guess
about 7 months ago, if I remember correctly. And one in New
York--I mean in Greenwich. Greenwich and Stamford were chosen
for some of the early distribution of that equipment because we
are on the metro north line and in fact 222 trains going
through Stamford on a daily basis.
But I will otherwise ask our police chief and fire, EMS
services to provide you a list of what we think is necessary.
Mrs. Maloney. The mayor of New York, his office told me
last week that the city of New York has received only $34
million for homeland security. And one of the recommendations
that Senator Rudman gave is that the grant should go directly
to the localities and not to the States, since the response is
from the locality, basically not from the State.
So my question is your response to that. And also I would
like to ask the mayor, Mayor Malloy, what funding did you,
Mayor Malloy, request from the Federal Government for equipment
and what level was funded? I assume you did make a request,
correct?
Mayor Malloy. Yes. The point you have raised is a very
important one, even more critical in Connecticut. As has
previously been said, we do not have county government for
redistribution purposes. So we have a great fear about moneys
not being fairly distributed to local jurisdictions,
particularly jurisdictions that, relating to my earlier
testimony, have a higher probability--not possibility, but
higher probability--of attack or being the situs of such an
incident. So we do have very serious concerns about that.
There are, by last count, 244 municipalities in the United
States, Dayton included, with a population of 100,000 or more,
a relatively small number of such jurisdictions and if you want
to use a 75,000 or a 50,000 definition of cities, you can still
get to manageable numbers. We have other distribution formulas
at work, the CDBG grant funds are distributed and recognized, a
certain size community for direct distribution purposes. I
would agree with what I believe the premise of the Congressman
to be, that we probably can make some pretty good decisions on
how to invest that money within the framework of State or
national guidelines.
With respect to the specifics of how much we have
requested; for instance, we have requested overtime
reimbursement and not received such funds. Not for training,
but for higher levels of preparation and standby. And as a
mayor who met the first train leaving New York City after train
service was re-established on September 11, we had very great
concerns about contamination being transported on that date.
That grows out of the sarin gas attacks in Japan where more
individuals died as a result of the transmittal than died as a
direct result of the attack.
Mrs. Maloney. My time is up. Thank you.
Mr. Shays. Thank you. We are just going to go this first
round and then when we come back afterwards, you will all be
invited to make any other comments you would like to make.
We are going to invite those who have been the spokespeople
for each of those tabletops to respond, but we will also invite
the general audience to respond as well.
My colleagues may need to get back to Washington, but I
will make sure that this hearing lasts until we cover that.
Just real quick, why should I not want to see Fairfield
County as part of the New York region, FEMA region?
Mr. Craig. Well, administratively it is very difficult, if
not impossible, to break up a State to give out grants and to
train. The regional structure of the Federal Government is
based on 10 regions. The Department of Homeland Security, while
we will have a regional structure, has not decided what the
size or look of that structure will be. So that will be coming
out in the near future. But we do work with New York State and
New York City on different events. As you hear earlier,
Operation Yankee, which was run by FEMA Region I out of the
Naval War College, was for the six States of New England. Early
next year, that will include New York and New Jersey to be
participants in that.
Mr. Shays. If there is an event like what happened, we
would logically see people from New York come to Stamford,
correct? We are not going to wait for Boston.
Mr. Craig. Absolutely.
Mr. Shays. OK.
Mr. Craig. And we would immediately deploy somebody to the
State of Connecticut.
Also, a specific event where we are working together is the
Republican National Convention, Democratic National Convention.
We have sent liaisons to New York for the RNC meetings and vice
versa, Region II has sent them up to Boston for the DNC. So we
have that kind of coordination between regions.
Mr. Shays. When we did a tabletop in the Stratford-
Bridgeport area, about 3 plus years ago, we learned a lot from
that. One of the things we learned, which is obvious to us now
particularly since September 11, was the challenge of
communicating within units and then clearly among units--fire
to police and so on. But the biggest negative or surprise was
the health department had no communication at all within and
then really a difficult time communicating among the different
units.
This time around, the thing that I am caught most by
surprise--and it is so obvious--and it relates to you, Mr.
Bruhl--first congratulations on getting the business community
to think about this and to be a leader in this, and others
should follow. But you are not going to keep anyone in the
office building if they want to be with their child. And
particularly since September 11 when people were told to stay
in the buildings and the towers when they probably should have
left. There is probably going to be a lack of trust as well.
Speak to me about the challenges you are encountering and
what your biggest obstacles were in getting the business
community to come together.
Mr. Bruhl. Well, in terms of getting the business community
to come together, there were no obstacles here in Fairfield
County because so many of our companies had loss of life in New
York, so many of our communities had loss of life. There was an
obvious sense that we were in this together, it was real. But
that is a different thing from what I know the question is, how
did they actually get action as opposed to merely getting
together to commiserate. This idea----
Mr. Shays. I thought you were going to say first you have a
good mayor that took charge. [Laughter.]
Mr. Bruhl. We happen to be blessed with a brilliant mayor--
[laughter]--as we are blessed with a brilliant Representative
as well. And as you know, I am a classic case of the
understating.
However, the issue of the employee as a person, the
employee as a family member, not as a unit on a chart that gets
managed is really where our companies have a lot of experience.
And that is why when we say they are going home to their
children, we are not saying these are thoughtless people,
unable to understand that the first responders are trying to do
the best they can. I am saying that my daughter is not going to
be left on a street corner. And that issue can only yield to
better planning where we all work on this together. Second,
some form of evacuation planning. We heard some very good
examples from the uniformed folks about corridors to move
people in and out. But where is the public sector in doing
that--I am sorry, the private sector in understanding that so
we can communicate in advance of an event, not after an event
when rumor and fear kicks in. And then finally, real
communications, not the reliance on seeing press briefings. We
need real time access to real hard information that people can
make determinations on and therefore know is a plume coming our
way or not--those kinds of things. Not to supersede the
judgment of the public sector, but to tamp down the fear factor
where people unilaterally take things into their hands.
Mr. Shays. No board of education folks in the exercise
today, board of finance, but not board of ed, correct?
Mr. Bruhl. I believe that is correct.
Mr. Shays. I am struck with the fact that if you knew
beforehand that the various board of eds had a very sound
program that could make you feel a little more comfortable--but
obviously you are working and they are then sent home and who
is at home to take care of them. So it raises some interesting
points.
Mr. Bruhl. Yes, sir. The mayor of Stamford pointed out that
in Stamford, the decision was made that children are not
dismissed in the middle of the day and yet in many other school
districts, and in fact in my own, there was a different
building-by-building decision with the principal. Some form of
cooperative understanding of how we are going to keep these
children until called for is a very simple thing for a regional
community to address. But it needs to be facilitated, I think,
and encouraged, not just by the State but by the Federal
Government in its overall protocol, so we do not add
unnecessary pressures on parents to then lead them to act in a
way that complicates everyone's lives.
Mr. Shays. Real Briefly, Mr. Petri.
Mr. Petri. Yes, Mr. Chairman, I would just like to address
the committee concerning a comment previously made about Region
I and whether or not it should be part of New York or New York
part of us.
I would like for you to know that for the past several
months, Connecticut has been engaged in spear heading a
collaborative effort taking place with the city of New York,
State of New York and with New Jersey, as it pertains to
planning for evacuation purposes. The level of effort being put
into this has been substantial as traffic management is of
critical importance. Both New York City, New York State and New
Jersey have opened their doors in terms of cooperation and we
are taking advantage of that cooperation by working together to
bring about a coordinated and integrated tri-State plan for
this region.
Mr. Shays. We are going to have to break in 2 minutes here,
but I did want to talk about standards and density, but I am
going to wait until the afternoon. But I do just want to have
you respond to this, mayor. No large cities in Connecticut, no
county governments, so is your sense that--and you have got a
Federal Government that is going to set standards for density
and so on ultimately I think. Do you think we can make the
State system work or do you still, as mayor, want to see direct
pass-throughs?
Mayor Malloy. I am concerned that the State's approach in
distributing assets is not the right one, that an across-the-
board formula-driven approach----
Mr. Shays. Just by population.
Mayor Malloy. Yes, just by population. And I think that
there is a greater willingness in regions to recognize lead
organizations than the State is recognizing. I can assure you
that, for instance, Darien and New Canaan, if they had that
incident that is presenting itself in today's scenario, would
expect Stamford to respond a lot quicker than anyone out of
Hartford is going to respond. And although I believe the FBI
agent's discussion today about how quickly they would respond
is what he intends to do, I doubt that the FBI is going to
respond from New Haven to Stamford in 20 minutes.
Mr. Shays. What we are going to do right now is we are
going to be at recess and we will come back afterwards.
We do thank you all for letting us interrupt your tabletop
and we will invite others to testify afterwards as well. Thank
you, we are at recess.
[Recess.]
Mr. Shays. I would like to call this hearing back to order
and what we are going to do is we are going to first hear from
elected officials--first selectmen, mayors, State
representatives--and then we are going to have an individual
from each of the tables explain, make comments on what they
want us to know, what they have learned, and then we will open
this to anyone who has general comments.
I will first start in Greenwich and just go up the State
here. So Mr. Bergstresser, you are on. If you would state your
name and your title, please.
STATEMENT OF RICHARD BERGSTRESSER, FIRST SELECTMAN, TOWN OF
GREENWICH, CT
Mr. Bergstresser. Richard Bergstresser, first selectman for
the town of Greenwich.
I just wanted to emphasize one point, and that is about the
allocation of funding. And I second some of the comments that--
I have had conversation with Andy Spado in Westchester County--
it is vital that the funding be done on some sort of a priority
basis and with some focus on risk assessment because we sit
just over the State line from Westchester County and of course
New York City, we feel, has unfortunately demonstrated they are
a primary target.
We need to focus not only on the funding--I guess I will
expand my comments to also say in terms of incident management,
to really get a focus on regional control. If an incident
happens in New York City, one of the things we saw was an
outpouring from our emergency services people and some people
just going down--getting on the train and going down to New
York City. That obviously was not good staffing. So we need to
really organize ourselves so that we have a turnout on a
controlled basis.
Thank you very much for the opportunity.
Mr. Shays. Thank you, Dick, I appreciate it a lot.
Going up, we will go to New Canaan. I just want the record
to note in my 16 years at a hearing, this is the first hearing
I have ever conducted where a witness is eating at the table.
[Laughter.]
I want you to know that that was First Selectman Bond. Mr.
Bond, you are on.
STATEMENT OF RICHARD BOND, FIRST SELECTMAN, NEW CANAAN, CT
Mr. Bond. Jealousy will get you nowhere.
Mr. Shays. Would you state your name and title, please?
Mr. Bond. My name is Richard Bond, I am the first
selectman, New Canaan, CT. Gentlemen, thank you for giving us
this opportunity.
The concern I have is probably a concern we all have, the
timing of the whole incident. With the transportation situation
as it is in New Canaan, whether it is I-95 in New Canaan or
Fairfield County, I-95, Route 1 and Merritt Parkway is--today,
given certain hours of the day, particularly commuting hours,
as Mr. Malloy said, probably from 6:30 a.m., until 9 and then
around 3 to 6 p.m., the highways are absolutely jammed. The
ability to get additional support in, whether it is individuals
or equipment, and to get people out is almost impossible.
And I think we are all aware of that and we know that the
State is trying to address that, but the timing in which they
will be able to address it is years. This is a concern to me
for Fairfield County, not as much for New Canaan because we are
not quite faced with the same problems. But if we were to
supply help to Stamford or Westport, it would be very difficult
for us to get police, fire, ambulances down there to help.
We do not know the answer to it, but the answer, as is
presented today, is a long, long term situation. And some of
the solutions are not too favorable. But whatever the solution
is, it has to be something other than on these major roads at
this time.
Mr. Shays. Was it your sense that there was not as much
intensity in this tabletop as would have been in the real
world, given this kind of challenge that you are talking about?
Mr. Bond. Yes, sir.
Mr. Shays. Any other comment?
Mr. Bond. No. May I go back to eating? [Laughter.]
Mr. Shays. We will go with you. Diane, if you will give
your title.
STATEMENT OF DIANE FARRELL, FIRST SELECTWOMAN, TOWN OF
WESTPORT, CT
Ms. Farrell. First of all--and I will not belabor, Chris,
because I know you do not appreciate all the accolades, but I
say thank you, thank you, thank you for all that you are doing,
because it has been terrific.
Second thing is, in response to the exercises, I think that
today was very good. We have done a number of tabletop
exercises in Westport, we have done a number of cooperative
exercises with metro north and with the city of Bridgeport and
each time, as the chief elected official and therefore, a non-
emergency response professional, I remain very, very impressed
with the level of professionalism that we have in lower
Fairfield County, and I think today was another illustration in
point.
However, you can never practice enough and you can never
anticipate every subtlety or nuance that may occur during a
real time event, so the more we do this and the more we talk to
each other, the better. So I think today was a success from
that standpoint.
I did want to respond to a couple of the statements/
comments that were made at the hearing prior to our going to
back to phase 3 and I do want to thank Congressman Turner for
coming. And I wanted to add something, you had asked the
question about standards and I certainly support the idea that
we try to work with the two primary organizations--police and
fire--as it relates to standards by a municipality.
One that is going to be very difficult to tackle and one
that you never think about is how we handle the issue of
smallpox inoculations. And that is something that we have
wrestled with in our municipalities. When we were originally
informed that we needed to begin this rolling inoculation,
first with our first responders and then anticipating a mass
inoculation with the population, a number of very critical
questions came up as it relates to whether or not you make this
a condition of employment, for first responders for example;
whether or not you suffer certain liabilities because there
obviously are certain risks to the smallpox inoculation.
And you know, it comes down to the practical level. Do you
literally say as a police chief, well, you do not have to be
inoculated, but you do, and therefore when something happens,
the person who agreed to be inoculated is suddenly placed in a
greater level of danger than say the individual who chose not
to. So it is a real tricky issue, it is a liability issue and I
do not think it is necessarily going to be answered at even the
State level, let alone at the local level. So it is something
to think about when you are working with those organizations.
With regard to money, I have to agree with Mayor Malloy
that we are beginning to see funds coming from the Federal
Government and we are very grateful for that. Primarily they
are coming through the States and, as has already been
mentioned, Connecticut is a little bit complicated because we
do not have a regional government.
I do have to say that distributing on a population basis to
me makes absolutely no sense. It has to be a qualitative
decision on the basis of threat level. And the individuals
sitting here before you this afternoon are all at least within
50 miles of New York City, if not closer. And given that fact
that that is the de facto target, it would be silly to just
look at us on the basis of population and not as a threat
assessment.
The other problem with money is that while we are grateful
for it, I have observed frustration both at the State and in
our own level in terms of the amount of time that we are
allowed to apply. And I will give you a perfect case in point.
We were invited by the Department of Justice to apply for an
interoperability communications grant and it was a significant
sum, I want to say $78 million to be distributed across the 50
States, and theoretically municipalities were invited to apply.
We were given 30 days to respond to a fairly lengthy
application and the Federal Government put together a panel and
only had 30 days to make the decision. So that is a total of 60
days to decide upon tens of millions of dollars and how best
they could be spent. And given the fact that each of us are
trying to squeeze everything we can out of every dollar that we
are given, it just does not seem the best process. And I do
understand the use it or lose it aspect of things and I
understand that we were coming to the end of the Federal budget
year, but I would like to think that if we are given that kind
of money that we can seriously look at our taxpayers and say we
are spending it as efficiently as possible because every dollar
is so valuable. So that is something that has been a bit
frustrating.
The final comment I will have is that you heard from Don
Petri today from the Office of Homeland Security for
Connecticut, and Don is wearing many hats. One is that he has
been tasked with looking at evacuation planning for the State
of Connecticut. And as he mentioned, he is working with New
York and New Jersey to come together--clearly this has to be a
tri-State effort. If we just looked at Connecticut, it would be
a very naive view and he understands that. It is not easy to
get Governors to all agree, as evidenced by the power line
issue right now between New York and Connecticut.
And a thought that I had that perhaps might help and might
help us to not reinvent the wheel is whether or not this could
be looked at as a Federal challenge; again, considering that we
are talking about New York as the epicenter here. And perhaps
the Department of the Army or another Federal agency could be
looking at this, which would sort of take it out of the local
jurisdictions; i.e., the States, and working it through on a
logistics basis. I mean I am anecdotally reminded from that
famous scene in Patton where George C. Scott is standing on a
jeep and directing troops. And it occurs to me--we need George
C. Scott in Connecticut I guess--but it occurs to me that
perhaps there is a Federal agency like the Department of the
Army, the Army Corps or through the National Guard where this
could really be treated as a Federal response to what is a tri-
State problem.
So those were my thoughts for the day and once again, I do
thank you both for your time and attention. This is obviously a
very critical issue.
Mr. Shays. Thank you very much.
Next we will go to Ms. Powers. If you would state your name
and title.
STATEMENT OF CLAUDIA DOLLY POWERS, CONNECTICUT STATE
REPRESENTATIVE
Ms. Powers. That is right. I am State Representative
Claudia Dolly Powers, I am the deputy minority leader in the
House.
I am going to make some recommendations and ask some
questions that maybe need to be looked into a little bit at the
Federal level as opposed to the State level, because we are
limited. We like to talk about working together, but we all
know State lines can stop discussions even though they should
not.
The question I asked in the exercise about the privacy of
medical information. Perhaps a very small amendment could
remedy that situation whereby in an emergency that has been
declared by a Governor or the President, that particular issue
in terms of locating a patient in a hospital could be
addressed.
Next, this particular issue I have heard at other
discussions that we have had on the local and State level which
is, once we have had an incident, localities need help with
replacement of equipment that they have used, because as we
noted in several of the discussions, masks are only good for 20
minutes and the filter, replacement filter is only good for 20
minutes and then you have to throw the whole thing away because
it has been contaminated. Same thing with suits and boots and
gloves.
Every group that spoke in this tabletop exercise mentioned
communications, some more than once and in some level of
frustration. I would hope that perhaps we could look at
something in terms of newer, faster technology, perhaps
something in terms of an emergency that has been declared by a
Governor or the President, taking over a frequency for a
specific period of time to--aside from the 800 megahertz which
we are in the process of implementing, but as we all know, it
is lengthy and expensive.
Another issue that actually has been brought to me by a
number of constituents which is the cell phone network, which
we saw fail completely on September 11, it failed completely on
the blackout. And whether or not there is something that we can
do at the Federal level in terms of requiring some kind of a
backup system or relaying to--I am not an engineer so I do not
know the right terminology to use, but the total frustration of
individuals who have become dependent on their cell phones and
at the very instant of an emergency, they are completely cutoff
and then they are standing in the old fashioned line to get to
a land line, you know, in a phone booth on the street.
Mr. Shays. Let me just interrupt you. I just want to make
you all feel that if you need to get on your way, because you
told me you needed to get on your way. We are going to kind of
just go through and hear and not ask a lot of questions. Thank
you very much.
Ms. Powers. Next, there was discussion about using
helicopters to bring in personnel, emergency personnel,
specialized personnel and pharmaceuticals on an emergency
basis. My question was who controls that? Is that the FAA, is
that the nearest airport, is that the State police? Again, that
may be a State/Federal issue that maybe Homeland Security on
the national level could set up a standardized system so people
would know where to turn for that particular issue.
Another issue that we have been dealing with on the State
level, and it ties into the liability issue, which is if you
have--and it is especially pertinent to here because we are so
close to the New York line--if in the event of an emergency,
you call people in from Westchester County, identity in terms
of individuals. We have passed bills to mitigate, you know, the
good samaritan issue, someone comes in in an emergency to help,
whether they are an engineer, whether they are a doctor, a
nurse, something--you know, whether there is someone who runs a
company that actually mitigates spills and helps out in an
emergency, the liability issues. The question has been raised
how in the middle of an emergency do you identify that person
absolutely. Perhaps there would be some system of a smart card
ID for those people who would be available in terms of
emergencies.
I am glad you are all looking at standards in terms of
equipment and training. I think a Federal minimum for--maybe do
not tie it right away to the funding because people get
hysterical when you do that, but setting up Federal minimums in
terms of the level of equipment and training, I think it would
be helpful because it gives everyone at least a starting point
that is, you know, community-wide, statewide, nationwide.
And on a lighter note, I, as a Navy kid, was given the
smallpox vaccination three times and I am here and I am fine.
So if you are worried about the smallpox, I have even
volunteered to go have it done again.
Thank you very much.
Mr. Shays. Thank you very much. Representative Duff.
STATEMENT OF BOB DUFF, CONNECTICUT STATE REPRESENTATIVE,
NORWALK, CT
Mr. Duff. Thank you. My name is Bob Duff, I am a State
Representative from Norwalk, and I just want to thank you
again, Congressman, and thank you, Congressman Turner, for
coming and thank you for letting us be both observers and
participants today.
Frankly, I found this day to be very sobering and I think
that we have come a long way in our 2 years since September 11
but obviously more needs to be done. What I am walking away
with is I am very thankful that we have such professional
people who are helping us and protecting us and they have a
tremendous amount of skill, as we saw today. I mean they know
the agencies and different types of chemicals and different
types of things that are needed to go through this maze and I
just want to compliment them. And just to make sure that we
make sure that they continue to have the tools that they need
to better protect us.
The way I see this is I think this is a multi-pronged
approach. We need communication, we need people to be prepared
and we need coordination. I think we are on our way to that,
but I think the blackout was a very good rehearsal toward
something that could happen that could be disastrous.
One of the things I think we need to do is make sure we
keep the business community involved. They have to take steps
obviously because we have our reliance on our electrical grid,
and as we saw during the blackout, I had people who I know who
had no idea really what was going on. I think a lot of us
thought that there was terrorism in the beginning, but did not
know what was going on because they missed one of the
essentials. And this may sound over-simplistic, but one of the
things I think some of our businesses need is they need radios
with batteries. I went to my car and drove home so I could
listen to the radio to hear what was going on. And there were
those in office buildings who had no lights and nobody had any
idea what was going on because, as the mayor said, one of the
best ways of communication was the radio at that point.
The other concern I have is that we had Federal and State
officials testifying about money given and trickling down to
municipalities but then you had the mayors and first selectmen
who said that they have not seen it or it was very much of a
spend it or lose it in a very quick amount of time. So I think
we need to make sure we keep our cooperation together and that
we work well together and make sure that the money that does
come down comes down in the proper channels.
Again, I just wanted to thank you for your leadership and
for this continuing dialog because I think this is the only way
we can improve the safety of our citizens. Thank you very much.
Mr. Shays. Thank you, Representative Duff. Mayor.
Mayor Malloy. I just wanted to reflect a little bit
further, Chris, on the issue that was raised in our earlier
discussions. And that is this top down driven allocation of
resources. I was reflecting in the afternoon session and I
believe that Members of Congress need to understand that at
least within our region, there is a built-in political
incentive to getting this done right on the local level. And as
much as Congressmen or Senators, from time to time, may worry
about whether Federal dollars are going to be used for some
other purpose, in this particular area, I can honestly look you
straight in the eye and say every cent that has come to the
community with respect to homeland defense has been spent
appropriately and in the area that was designed. I believe that
the Fire Department, either Chief McGrath or someone else, will
speak as to what some of the things that we have identified we
would add if we could and if direct allocations were made.
The other thing I wanted to assure----
Mr. Shays. Let me just interrupt you to say that is one
vehicle we still have because we have the fire grant.
Mayor Malloy. Right.
Mr. Shays. That comes direct to local communities.
Mayor Malloy. The fire grant does. And interestingly
enough, the fire grant predated September 11, but the dollars
have been useful in our preparation for a post-September 11
world, although that clearly was not the intent at the time
that the fire legislation was passed. But even the way we look
at vehicles and what we want on vehicles has been impacted I
think by September 11.
The other point I wanted to make is that there may from
time to time be a disbelief on the State level--or a belief on
the State level of the inability of local communities to work
together on a regional basis in a State which does not have a
regional form of government. And I think what you saw
demonstrated today by the first selectmen and myself and the
mayor of Norwalk is this willingness to work these issues out
between ourselves, to identify who is a more likely victim of a
particular type of activity, to input as to where resources
should be housed so that they can get most quickly to an event.
We are prepared to work together and this is one of those
issues that just simply cuts across, and you should feel good
about that.
Mr. Shays. Thank you very much. Mr. Bond, do you have any
closing comment you would like to make?
Mr. Bond. No, I agree with Mr. Malloy that the ability to
work together is absolutely there. No one has any other thing
in mind than to help each other if and when needed, not a
problem.
Mr. Shays. That is a nice way to close. Gentlemen, thank
you so very much. And again, mayor, thank you.
We are now going to invite five table representatives--law
enforcement, business, city administration, firefighters,
emergency medical services and public health to come forward. I
hope we assigned someone from each table.
While one is testifying, if you all would just fill out
your name and your address, title and so on. I count four, we
had five, who is missing, what table is not represented here?
Voice. Medical community.
Mr. Shays. Medical community. Is there anyone from--he is
out there. So we have the medical community here, public
health--you know it would have been the mayors of the city. If
you are going to still be here, mayor, maybe we should have you
just----
Mayor Malloy. I thought you might have gotten tired of me.
Mr. Shays. No, we have not gotten tired of you. I enjoy
competence.
The sound is a little dead in the back here so I am going
to ask all of us to speak much closer into these mics.
OK, why do we not just start. First, why do we not begin
with law enforcement--name, title and so on.
STATEMENT OF THOMAS WUENNEMANN, CAPTAIN, STAMFORD POLICE
DEPARTMENT
Captain Wuennemann. My name is Thomas Wuennemann, I am a
captain with the Stamford Police Department.
We thought today was a great start, but we also realize
that our officers need a lot more training, and we also would
like to see a practical drill for the front line officers,
because they are the ones that are going to make the critical
decisions early on that is going to shape which way this goes.
A big thing for law enforcement is the interoperability
communications. The fire department is way ahead of us on this.
We are well behind on that and that is something that greatly
concerns us.
As mentioned before, equipment is starting to come in, but
what we are concerned about is the upkeep of the equipment. A
lot of this stuff has filters and the maintenance type money to
keep it going. That is a big issue for us because a lot of this
stuff in 2 years, or even annually, needs to be updated.
Those are our main things, but the big thing for us is
training.
Mr. Shays. Thank you very much. We will go to fire.
STATEMENT OF ROBERT J. MCGRATH, FIRE CHIEF, CITY OF STAMFORD,
CT
Chief McGrath. Yes. My name is Robert McGrath, I am the
fire chief, city of Stamford.
Reflecting on training, I agree with Captain Wuennemann, we
are doing most of our training in-house. It is becoming a
burden on our taxpayers here in Stamford. While we are doing a
regional response, we feel as though that some of the money
should come from a regional aspect to train people if we are
going to respond to their towns and basically take over and
mitigate situations there.
Referring to the Fire Act you mentioned earlier, it seems a
little bit unfair as to where that money is being allocated.
The larger municipalities have to come up with a 30 percent
match, whereas the smaller ones only have to come up with a 10
percent match. Cities like Philadelphia have turned money back
because they do not have the 30 percent match. And here in
Stamford, we have seen very little come this way, while a lot
of the other smaller municipalities upstate have been getting a
lot more. We feel as though we would like to see more come this
way toward training, equipment and so forth.
Thank you.
Mr. Shays. I am going to react by saying I wonder if it is
a perception that they have more or whether they do have more,
and it would be something we can check on. But your point is
though you actually need a higher match in Stamford than you
would need somewhere else here in the State?
Chief McGrath. In the State of Connecticut. The
municipalities I believe with 100,000--or 50,000 and less only
have to come up with 10 percent and those over 50,000 I believe
have to come up with a 30 percent match.
So some of the cities I have spoke to have not even applied
for it because they could not come up with that match.
Mr. Shays. Is that for Federal dollars?
Chief McGrath. That is for the fire grant, sir.
Mr. Shays. The main fire grant, OK. That is very
interesting.
I tell people I learn lots of new things every day here.
Shall we go to the public health?
STATEMENT OF ED MCCORMACK, STAMFORD HEALTH SYSTEM
Mr. McCormack. Ed McCormack from Stamford Health System, I
was participating at the table from the medical community. So I
do not speak particularly for public health.
Mr. Shays. OK, but just as you see what happened in your
table, where were the biggest challenges?
Mr. McCormack. I would say they involve communication--not
surprising. Our issue from the hospital's perspective is
through providing decontamination immediately, recognition of
the need and providing the decontamination. We have a lot of
equipment that has been purchased toward that end, we are
looking to do training--it is expensive and will pose some
challenges--but the plan we are putting in place calls for our
ability to decontaminate initially. So we still rely upon the
fire department to help with that.
Mr. Shays. We did not have the opportunity to interact with
Greenwich and Norwalk, correct, in this exercise?
Mr McCormack. They were not represented at the table.
Mr. Shays. Right. So tell me how you do interact.
Mr. McCormack. Normally what happens, once an emergency is
activated, much like the city's model, we have an incident
command structure within the hospital, we set up incident
command and EOC and we communicate with the city's emergency
operations center of course and we usually reach out, as part
of that process, to the neighboring hospitals. There is also a
CMED communication system which immediately tends to poll the
hospitals as to their bed availability and relay that
information between the hospitals. I am sure there is also
informal communication that goes on, but from a formal
structure, it is through the EOC to contact the surrounding
hospitals, advise them of where we stand in terms of a certain
event and exchange information, you know, through that
structure.
We are aware of the fact that both neighboring hospitals
are probably somewhere in the same process that we are in, of
revisiting our emergency management planning, updating it,
implementing some of the newer concepts. Certainly for Stamford
Hospital, that is what we have been engaged in for at least a
2-year period, actually pursuing that. And we are in the
process right now of putting our plan in place, which mirrors
the process that the fire and police departments use to do
command and control and it allows us to probably better manage
our resources and direct them to where they are needed.
Some of our issues that were identified through this
tabletop exercise are the continuing need for training, which
we have a plan to accomplish; some of the issues with locking
down the facility, securing it in the event of a terrorist type
of event. There are issues with transportation, whether it is
bringing supplies in or moving patients out, both situations
would probably occur in this scenario. There is limitation to
ground resources from the demands that are put on the local
emergency services and there are limitations to air resources
due to what access the hospital has to a helicopter landing
site. Currently we use corporate sites which are off campus and
I am sure that in the bigger picture of planning for the
hospital, there would be a need to somehow be able to access
air resources closer to the facility. That came up with
September 11 and it came up again in the recent situation where
we were trying to bring in parts that were critical to the
infrastructure of the hospital in the power outage, and they
had to be transported by ground.
So issues like that came up again in today's exercise.
Those would be the main ones. And I just wanted to say that I
appreciate, speaking for the hospital, the opportunity to
participate in this exercise and that it was very helpful.
Mr. Shays. Thank you. I just want to pursue one little
part.
I just want to be clear as to what type of communications
the hospitals have.
Mr. McCormack. Internally we have a pretty good state of
affairs, we have probably 40 walkie talkie type devices that
can be distributed throughout the facility. We have phones that
are working without power, we have a couple of other
communication systems within the hospital. So that is
relatively strong.
We communicate externally through cellular means, through--
we have a dedicated network, a radio system which is available
through the CMED network which is probably the primary
communication line and there are additional resources being
brought to bear such as a satellite phone system, which is to
be installed through the southern Connecticut regional group
that has been meeting regularly to work on some of these
issues.
Mr. Shays. Mayor.
Mayor Malloy. Congressman, I think your question can also
be answered by there is a regional CMED organization that helps
distribute--in the time of a crisis or mass crisis, would help
distribute the traffic flow between the hospitals that are
nearest to the event, in this case, for our discussion
purposes, it likely would have been Greenwich, Norwalk and
Bridgeport, perhaps Danbury. There is an organization who would
then help coordinate that transportation.
Mr. Shays. Great, thank you. That is very helpful.
Business community. Thank you.
STATEMENT OF DAN ARENOVSKI, ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR OF SECURITY,
PURDUE PHARMA
Mr. Arenovski. Dan Arenovski, associate director of
security for Purdue Pharma.
The exercise today was definitely needed and we thank you
for including the business community. Funding for additional
exercises, tabletop and other outside scenarios, is definitely
needed and we would like to see the continued inclusion of the
business community in that.
We identified at our table today one area that was probably
most important and had the most significant impact on how we in
the private sector effect our crisis management plans or
disaster recovery and most importantly our business continuity
plans, and that was communications.
With our 15-story high rises here in Stamford, you know, we
have an enormous amount of people that want to evacuate and get
home. We do not know--we were looking for that type of
information conduit, either from local police, fire or other
State and Federal Governments to be able to disseminate that
information either to the directors of security or the business
leaders, to let us know what we need to do in order to help the
city and to be able to facilitate business continuity. That
type of conduit, that information conduit that we have either
available to us would be either through Web sites or e-mail,
telecommunications, sat phones and what-not, just the
establishment of a couple of information clearinghouses that we
can go to to get that information and stop bothering the 911
centers.
That was the largest area that we looked at today as a
major problem. The sooner we gather that information, the
sooner we were able to direct our people to go in the right
direction or keep them in our facilities, especially with
today's scenario.
That is all.
Mr. Shays. Mayor, did you want to make a comment?
Mayor Malloy. Yes, the last thing I would say as far as our
group, we were very grateful that the private sector
participated today. I think we learned a lot of things and
including what we need to bone up on with respect to our
communications with that sector, as well as the education
operations. For instance, we probably should have had
superintendents of schools here today. We did not do that and
that was perhaps a weakness on our part. So we certainly
learned a couple of lessons, not the least of which, those two
come to mind and are important. And we will have to build
better ways to communicate with those outside agencies, there
is no doubt about it.
Mr. Shays. I just react, it would not have occurred to me
to do that, to have the board of education here, and yet it is
like hello. Parents want to be with their kids and want to make
sure they are well.
I do not want this to seem a bit negative here, but I want
to make sure the committee is doing its work in regard to this
particular exercise, and I will react to--I have seen a few,
and I thought this was very good, but I wondered if there was
the intensity level that needed to be, and I am thinking that
it could have been--they did one radio, TV station, I could
have seen them jump in with three or four, one trying to trump
the other, and instead of you learning your information by the
bullets of how many were in the hospital, you learn it from the
TV saying, you know, there are 600 and then you find out there
is a correction, it is only 300. And confusing you all a little
bit in the beginning.
I am just wondering if you felt that the intensity level--
first, did you think that the event was realistic; in other
words, that that could happen. And I will say I thought it was,
but I would be curious to know if you did.
And second, do you think that we could make this a more
intense effort, is there value in doing that? Intense by a
little more pressure on you.
Chief McGrath. I think that if you changed the area where
this happened to perhaps a more rural setting that does not
have the equipment and the first responders to be able to get
to the situation in a timely fashion and have to rely more and
more on mutual aid, that may be able to be more realistic as to
what probably could happen.
Mr. Shays. Other thoughts?
Mr. Arenovski. I think if we rely strictly on the media to
disseminate the information coming out of our local government,
that there is the opportunity for misinterpretation. That we
would look for the offices of our local and elected officials
to be able to come forward and release those statements and
mandate that the media disseminate that information verbatim so
that there is a representation of strong government and that we
understand that this is coming directly from our people, the
people in the official capacity.
Mr. Shays. I am just wondering what is in the real world
though. It is in the real world though you are going to have
your TV sets on hearing this, or are you going to be able--and
then you are going to have better information come to you
privately and you are going to have to deal with it. I wondered
if your sector was challenged enough because it seemed to me
you should have been forced to have to deal with rumors and
innuendo and a whole host of other things.
Mayor Malloy. I think those are valid points, Congressman,
but it takes me back to September 11 and in the discussion at
my table, when we opened the EOC at the Stamford Government
Center on September 11, 2001, we did so assuming we were a
target. We had two of the major non-New York traders, GE
Capital at the time, and USB Warburg at the time, in our
community. So for all of our planning purposes, we made that
assumption. So we had a real test that day and we had to
respond to that. I mean as we watched the TV, there could be
20,000 people injured--dead or injured--at the World Trade
Center.
We started making and laying plans as to how we would
respond, meet the trains, for instance, and all the rest of it.
So we have had that.
I think you are in a community in which we have drilled
this. I mean tomorrow, we will probably have our first
meeting--depending on weather reports--have our first meeting
at 1 tomorrow in preparation of a hurricane.
Mr. Shays. I guess what I am asking is a little more subtle
because what you are saying is you think you are capable to
deal with it. But in the real world, would you have had to turn
on the TV and find that there was this outrageous rumor on TV
which then, you as the command post for information, would have
to figure out how do you correct that information and how
quickly can you, because that incorrect--you know, for
instance, the plume is three times larger than we think and it
is headed right downtown Stamford and the entire building was
destroyed. And you know the building was not destroyed, you
know the plume was not as bad, but in the meantime, all your
workers are headed out of their community.
So I am asking, did you feel you were faced with
misinformation during the course of the day, and should you
have been.
Mayor Malloy. It might have been valuable. You know, I am
certainly familiar with other exercises such as the virus
exercises that have occurred elsewhere, and they present very
different situations than the one today. The one today is much
more likely to happen, the virus scenario or the scenarios that
could be presented might be more challenging.
Mr. Shays. Well, the event is more likely, the question is
maybe I am----
Mayor Malloy. No, no, I am agreeing with you. I think it
would present substantially more challenges and we probably
would learn how to handle those challenges, or at least test
our ability to handle those challenges in a more meaningful
way.
Mr. Shays. I just want to make sure for the record--I am
not talking about an outrageous example, I am talking about
just total misinformation.
Mayor Malloy. Yes.
Mr. Turner. Let me jump in, Mr. Chairman, to give you an
example.
Your scenario is not that outrageous. On September 11, in
Dayton, OH, at 3 p.m., on the major news channel of our market,
they go live with the report that they have just heard from our
emergency responders that an airplane has been crashed into the
Veterans Administration Hospital in Dayton, OH.
I walk out of the City Hall, I look to the direction of the
city where the Veterans Hospital is and there is a tremendous
amount of smoke rising from the community. We had all just
heard in the entire city a huge boom, just right before the
media made this report.
What had happened was one of the planes that was chasing
the President's detail, the jets, had gone supersonic over the
city, we had a sonic boom and a house fire occurred near the
Veterans Affairs Hospital.
Mr. Shays. Wow.
Mr. Turner. And so we were dealing with suddenly trying to
come up to speed with what really is going on over there and do
we really just have a fire.
Now we were blessed with the fact that we were not at the
site, so all of our communication systems worked, we were able
to work with our police department, our fire department, but we
had a community where we had to play catch up. And that is an
outrageous rumor, one that did not prove to be the case, and
that you would face because of the level of hysteria that you
have when something real is happening.
Mr. Shays. Any other comment about today before we invite
comments from the floor?
Captain Wuennemann. I just have one. I think in a real time
exercise, I think the transportation issue in this area of the
State is something that cannot be overlooked. We are talking
about getting assets here in several hours where you cannot
make that on a normal commute day. I think when you have a real
event, that is something that we kind of misled ourselves a
little bit today.
Mr. Shays. I would ask one more thing about the--and thank
you for that point. I am not quite sure if the business
community was recording events or helping to shape events.
Because you mentioned basically your employees are going to
leave whether or not you want them to. Are you saying that by
providing some quality information, some may have decided to
leave and some may have decided to go in a different direction?
How do you think you can shape the conduct of your employees?
Mr. Arenovski. I think we can certainly shape the amount of
panic that would come out of a scenario like this, being that
business and industry is so close to where today's scenario
took place. By disseminating more timely, up to date
information regarding the incident, we can probably quell some
of that panic and either keep people where they need to stay--
now we are not going to stop everyone, we know that. We know we
are going to have the factor of families, but the timely
information and then having us within the facilities being able
to disseminate that through our employees, either through our
internal Web sites or PA systems or what-not, will quell some
of that panic and it will be better, more inclusive
information.
Mr. Shays. Thank you very much. Any other comments?
[No response.]
Mr. Shays. Gentlemen, thank you so very much.
Let me ask by a show of hands, it may be zero or it may be
a few, how many people would like to make a comment before we
adjourn this hearing?
[Show of hands.]
Mr. Shays. I see one, two, three, four--Chris, did you want
to make a comment as well?
Mr. Bruhl. I will followup at the end.
Mr. Shays. OK, so why don't we do this, all of you come
forward and I am going to make an assumption. I am more than
happy to have anyone who would like to, but I need to know now
not before we adjourn, just so we have a sense of time here. Is
there anyone else that would like to come to the table?
So what I am going to ask you each to do is write your
names and addresses and titles if you have them, if you do not
have a card, and for the record just state your name and title.
STATEMENT OF JIM LARKIN, GLOBAL STRATEGY ADVISORS
Mr. Larkin. My name is Jim Larkin. I run my own consulting
company, Global Strategy Advisors, I am a retired vice chairman
of American Express and I am a former Marine Corps officer,
with a great deal of experience in the Middle East and the
Persian Gulf.
Mr. Shays. Little closer to the mic, just bring that mic
closer. Thank you.
Mr. Larkin. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, this morning I heard
the word communicate and communications probably 1,000 times.
Permit me to make some observations if I might. It is gospel or
classic today in conventional war, guerilla war and the war on
terror to disrupt or destroy the adversary's ability to
coordinate response. I point out that even bin Laden at this
particular juncture has been reduced to camels.
It cannot be ruled out that a sophisticated terror attack
in the United States or in Stamford in the future will include
multiple targets including the disruption or the destruction of
local communications. And by the way, if I were doing it, that
is exactly what I would do.
While it was not part of the September 11 episode in New
York, the NYPD in New York, because its headquarter's proximity
to the World Trade Center tower, lost communications, had no
backup and had to depend several hours later on hastily
installed landlines installed by Verizon. And of course, New
York's EOC went down with the buildings.
What I believe needs to be addressed urgently in Stamford,
in the State, in the region, is what happens if an EOC or its
communications are taken down at the same time as another
episode. What happens if a communication system is taken down
individually in a terror attack.
I heard Mayor Malloy this morning, who by the way has run
an excellent operation here, I heard him say when somebody said
to him how will you be in touch with your people, he said well,
everyone has a cell phone today.
What if the towers are destroyed or the electric grid makes
them inoperable as happened exactly 4 weeks ago for
approximately 8 to 10 hours here in the east?
With the proper device, I could take down the Greenwich
unguarded emergency communication system in 10 minutes. By the
way, it does not exist on top of the police station. Some will
say we always have backup systems. There are no backup systems
except a couple operated by the Federal Government that can be
taken down also.
Therefore, should not coordination with public utilities
come into the mix of your discussions? There has to be
compatibility of systems, there is not compatibility of systems
even in Fairfield County, not to speak of the State. There are
dead areas in the State of Connecticut.
What do we do in the event of a communications overload? In
1993 and at September 11, and I was present for both of them,
it was impossible for citizens to communicate with the New York
Police Department or the Fire Department in New York for hours.
I heard two hopeful words introduced into today's hearings--one
was interoperable communications, as it related to the State I
think. And I heard another word from the private sector called
same protocols are important. I recommend that this be
introduced also.
Two final comments, Mr. Chairman. The people, not just the
emergency responders, need to be reassured that both the
response and prevention are being carefully planned and
executed. The word carefully planned and executed is very
important. People must be reassured. While there are some fine
people in the State of Connecticut Homeland Security, the
people need to be reassured. They are not being reassured. We
have an excellent man from Homeland Security here, if not two,
but papers report he is overworked. I can understand that.
And finally, Mr. Chairman, with your permission, there is
an absence of county government in Fairfield County. The
nearest thing we have to county government, Mr. Chairman, is
yourself. You cover the county.
The terrorist attack war gaming and response at the Naval
War College in Newport, RI, is run at the war facility down
there. I am a trustee of that organization and treasurer of the
foundation. We have war games, not the response war game that
we saw today, but the actual attack itself and the response.
And had the New York Fire Department twice. We have done the
New York Police Department twice, and the reason we did it a
second time is because Commissioner Kelly and General LaBoudy
said we have got to do this once more, and that went for 3
days. We have done it with the entire State of Rhode Island and
I suggest to you that we could do that for Fairfield County, if
not the State of Connecticut. There seems to be resistance in
the State of Connecticut. There is no reason also--and I am
sorry that Congressman Maloney is not here--there is no reason
why we cannot do the same for Fairfield County and Westchester
County together at the Naval War College. We are not
constrained by regions.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Shays. Thank you very much, Colonel.
STATEMENT OF DAVID HAWRELUK, ADVISOR-DIRECTOR, DARIEN EMS
Mr. Hawreluk. David Hawreluk, Advisor-Director, Darien EMS.
Mr. Shays. Welcome.
Mr. Hawreluk. Thank you. Thank you for coming.
Mr. Shays. Pull the mic, if you would, a little closer.
Mr. Hawreluk. Most of the major concerns that I have been
thinking about have already been brought up, but some of the
minor ones that I think we could address a little bit more with
some money toward it is the public awareness ahead of the
incident and post-after. Standards of actions, expectations
that people get immediate information. We should prepare them
that they are not going to be getting things like that.
Expectations like opening up the emergency lanes for traffic
control at rush hour sets expectations of putting us in
gridlock long before there is a problem. So looking at things
like that would probably help us in the long term deal with
issues that could arise after the fact where people want all
this information right away. And I do not think that is being
addressed. It is kind of a minor problem behind the scenes, but
we need to work on it before an incident happens.
Mr. Shays. Thank you. Thank you for being here, by the way,
too.
STATEMENT OF JOHN CONTE, CAPTAIN, STAMFORD FIRE DEPARTMENT
Captain Conte. Yes, I am John Conte, I am a captain with
the Stamford Fire Department, I am one of the city's hazmat
officers.
A couple of things I would like to say. No. 1, from the
emergency response side, it is just ordinary people in
extraordinary circumstances. We have talked a lot today about
incident command system. The incident command system works
because it is used at basic incidents and it gets extrapolated
out to major incidents.
With that in mind, there has been some discussion about
standards, you were talking about earlier, Congressman Turner,
and I think Congresswoman Maloney was also speaking about that.
The ICS system works because it is extrapolated out, our
standard system uses airpacks and our airpacks are presently
not set up for standards of NIOSH, which comes out before CBRNE
systems. In order for us to retrofit to that type of system,
they would cost roughly $400 apiece, you are looking at
$100,000 for our size city. If you looked at a regional type
basis, you are talking about millions of dollars in order to
extrapolate out. This is equipment the fire department people
use on a daily basis, again it would be extrapolating existing
equipment to extraordinary circumstances.
If you run out the numbers even further, looking at the
World Trade Center, for example, you would wean off of an SCBA
system to a filtration system. Presently, fire departments are
not set up to switch down to a filtration type system where you
could use those for a longer period of time. That is an area
which needs to be addressed from a stockpiling system and how
the individual departments would have access to that.
Getting down to metering equipment, a lot of metering
equipment has come down to the basic local level. One of the
problems that we have seen is that the upgrade, the
calibration, the necessary replacements that occur 3, 5 years
down the line is not in place for it. So you might have a meter
now, 3 years from now the battery or the sensor goes out, there
is really no system in place to get the replacements for it.
The last thing I would like to say, and this sort of like
brings around full cycle, is that FEMA has some excellent
training programs out there. I have had the ability to go out
and take some of these programs. For example, there are several
excellent radiological programs. The problem is that their
funding has been in jeopardy for the past couple of years and
those programs are the ones that our ancillary people are going
to be the ones taking, people coming down from the State,
people coming from the Federal Government are going to be
trained to that level, not necessarily trained on terrorist
prevention type things, but these are courses that are used by
people day in and day out, they are necessary skills that get
brought out on a daily basis. And again, they would be
extrapolated out into an extraordinary circumstance.
So I would echo what Chief McGrath was talking about
earlier, the funding is needed in various areas, but it is just
not making its way into what is needed.
Mr. Shays. Thank you very much.
STATEMENT OF E. MICHAEL LATESSA, EMS DIRECTOR, CITY OF NORWALK,
CT
Mr. Latessa. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. My name is Michael
Latessa. I am the Emergency Management Director for the city of
Norwalk, also the Emergency Communications Director.
I would like to briefly speak on two continuous themes that
I have heard over the 30 years of my public safety career, and
that is communications and training.
In the first aspect of communications, we have heard this
term interoperability kicked around all day and assuming
tomorrow we were flushed with money to solve that problem, we
desperately need Congress to motivate the Federal
Communications Commission to work diligently with respect to
spectrum allocation for public safety services. From what I
understand, especially in this region of Connecticut, it is
almost impossible to get a license for 800 megahertz channels,
short of what you already have allocated, for a variety of
reasons which I do not quite understand yet, because I am very
new to the area. But I would encourage Congress to pursue that.
Mr. Shays. I am going to ask a really dumb question but it
will help me understand the problem.
I see limousine services, they have their cell phone and
then they have their walkie talkies and so on. They do not seem
to have any trouble. Why do they not have trouble? They seem to
be able to get what they need when they need it. What is
happening there?
Mr. Latessa. Sir, I am not sure I know the answer to that
question, but what I do know is that it is very difficult for a
public safety agency to make application and receive additional
spectrum allocation in just about any spectrum that you choose,
whether it is high band, ultra high or 800-900 spectrum radio
systems.
Mr. Shays. I am just going to have my staff respond.
Mr. Halloran. One of the issues is that State and local
governments compete with every phone company and every other
commercial operator in the world----
Mr. Latessa. That is right.
Mr. Halloran [continuing]. In front of the FCC for access
to spectrum. The Federal NTIA handles Federal user needs and
DOD and other Federal users have a chunks of spectrum they can
use, but you folks compete with Motorola and everybody else for
what you are going to get out of the spectrum.
Mr. Latessa. And that is what I understand, you know, that
most spectrum allocation is being eaten up by commercial,
cellular phone operators.
Mr. Shays. I hear you. And this clearly is a problem.
Mr. Latessa. But that is really key. Even if we were
flushed with money, we would still have difficulty solving the
problem.
The second is to encourage again Congress for the continual
financial and political support for the National Emergency
Training Center in Emmitsburg, MD. This is really a key
training facility for the emergency responder community
throughout the United States. For example, the----
Mr. Shays. Should there be a few of them located in
different places or does it make sense just to have one?
Mr. Latessa. Well, that is an often debated subject. I
think currently because of the way that the National
Emergency--where it is at, it is a tremendous facility and it
is publicly supported with respect that if you live in
California, your stipend for travel, your expenses are paid for
to bring you to Emmitsburg, MD to where you can basically
network with emergency responders from throughout the Nation.
So that is beneficial.
Mr. Shays. Is there anyone else who has utilized that
facility or can speak to it? OK.
Mr. Latessa. I think most of us that have been in this
business for any length of time have either been there--
personally, I am an adjunct instructor there and have seen the
benefits over the years of, you know, this facility.
But I want to focus on one particular program, and that is
the integrated incident command system program that they have
there, which is a 4-day course which basically sees what you
saw today in a 4 or 5 hour period of time stretched out over a
4-day period of time. It allows whole communities to bring
their key first responder staff to the facility and they do a
scenario, based on your location, and it is not just some
canned scenario. But integrate all of the elements that we were
referring to, what if this happens and what if this happens and
what if this happens. Because it is over a 4-day period, you
can do a lot more of that kind of think tanking and, you know,
throwing a few curve balls into the emergency responders. And
it involves the community, the business community, the first
responder community and political community. They actually go
down there and participate in this 3 or 4-day program. I
encourage your continued support of that institution.
Mr. Shays. Thank you very much.
Is there anyone who has not been invited to speak or has
been invited and chosen not to, but just really feels we need
to put something in the record, or can we adjourn?
[No response.]
Mr. Shays. Is that OK? Any other comments from the
gentlemen here?
[No response.]
Mr. Shays. With that, I thank my colleague, Mr. Turner, for
spending his day in Stamford instead of Ohio with his family
and I thank all of you for your participation. I thank the
recorder for his good work and the staff from our committee,
the National Security Subcommittee. Job well done.
Thank you all very much.
[Whereupon, at 3:15 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]