Congressional Record, Volume 152 Issue 99 (Tuesday, July 25, 2006)

[Congressional Record Volume 152, Number 99 (Tuesday, July 25, 2006)]
[House]
[Pages H5696-H5705]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

21ST CENTURY EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS ACT OF 2006

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the bill
(H.R. 5852) to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to enhance
emergency communications at the Department of Homeland Security, and
for other purposes.
The Clerk read as follows:

H.R. 5852

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,

SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.

This Act may be cited as the ``21st Century Emergency
Communications Act of 2006''.

SEC. 2. EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS.

(a) In General.--The Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6
U.S.C. 101 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end the
following new title:

``TITLE XVIII--EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS

``SEC. 1801. OFFICE OF EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS.

``(a) In General.--There is in the Department an Office of
Emergency Communications.
``(b) Assistant Secretary.--The head of the office shall be
the Assistant Secretary for Emergency Communications.
``(c) Responsibilities.--The Assistant Secretary for
Emergency Communications shall--
``(1) assist the Secretary in developing and implementing
the program described in section 7303(a)(1) of the
Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (6
U.S.C. 194(a)(1)), except as provided in section 314;
``(2) administer the Department's responsibilities and
authorities relating to the SAFECOM Program, excluding
elements related to research, development, testing, and
evaluation and standards;
``(3) administer the Department's responsibilities and
authorities relating to the Integrated Wireless Network
program;
``(4) coordinate, as appropriate, regarding the
administration of the National Communications System;
``(5) conduct extensive, nationwide outreach and foster the
development of interoperable emergency communications
capabilities by State, regional, local, and tribal
governments and public safety agencies;
``(6) provide technical assistance to State, regional,
local, and tribal officials with respect to use of
interoperable emergency communications capabilities;
``(7) facilitate the creation of Regional Emergency
Communications Coordination Working Groups under section
1805;
``(8) promote the development of best practices with
respect to use of interoperable emergency communications
capabilities for incident response and facilitate the sharing
of information on such best practices (including from
governments abroad) for achieving, maintaining, and enhancing
interoperable emergency communications capabilities for such
response;
``(9) coordinate the establishment of a national response
capability with initial and ongoing planning, implementation,
and training for the deployment of backup communications
services in the event of a catastrophic loss of local and
regional emergency communications services;
``(10) assist the President, the National Security Council,
the Homeland Security Council, and the Director of the Office
of Management and Budget in ensuring the operability of the
telecommunications functions and responsibilities of the
Federal Government, excluding spectrum management;
``(11) establish, in coordination with the Director of the
Office of Interoperability and Compatibility, requirements
for total and nonproprietary interoperable emergency
communications capabilities for all public safety radio and
data communications systems and equipment purchased using
homeland security assistance administered by the Department;
``(12) review, in consultation with the Assistant Secretary
for Grants and Training, all interoperable emergency
communications plans of Federal, State, local, and tribal
governments, including Statewide and tactical
interoperability plans, developed pursuant to homeland
security assistance administered by the Department, but
excluding spectrum allocation and management related to such
plans.
``(d) Performance of Previously Transferred Functions.--
There is transferred to the Secretary the authority to
administer, through the Assistant Secretary for Emergency
Communications, the following:
``(1) The SAFECOM Program, excluding elements related to
research, development, testing, and evaluation and standards.
``(2) The responsibilities of the Chief Information Officer
related to the implementation of the Integrated Wireless
Network.
``(3) The Interoperable Communications Technical Assistance
Program.
``(e) Coordination.--The Assistant Secretary shall
coordinate, as appropriate, with the Director of the Office
for Interoperability and Compatibility with respect to the
responsibilities described in section 314.
``(f) Sufficiency of Resources Plan.--
``(1) Report.--Not later than days 60 days after the
enactment of this section, the Secretary shall submit to
Congress a report on the resources and staff necessary to
carry out the responsibilities under this subtitle.
``(2) Comptroller general review.--The Comptroller General
shall review the validity of the report submitted by the
Secretary under paragraph (1). Not later than 30 days after
the date on which such report is submitted, the Comptroller
General shall submit to Congress a report containing the
findings of such review.

``SEC. 1802. NATIONAL EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS REPORT.

``(a) In General.--The Secretary, acting through the
Assistant Secretary for Emergency Communications, shall, not
later than one year after the completion of the baseline
assessment under section 1803, and in cooperation with State,
local, and tribal governments, Federal departments and
agencies, emergency response providers, emergency support
responders, and the private sector, develop a National
Emergency Communications Report to provide recommendations
regarding how the United States can accelerate the deployment
of interoperable emergency communications nationwide.
``(b) Contents.--The report shall--
``(1) include a national interoperable emergency
communications inventory to be completed by the Secretary of
Homeland Security, the Secretary of Commerce, and the
Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission that--
``(A) identifies for each Federal department and agency--
``(i) the channels and frequencies used;
``(ii) the nomenclature used to refer to each channel or
frequency used; and
``(iii) the types of communications system and equipment
used;
``(B) identifies the interoperable emergency communications
systems in use for public safety systems in the United
States; and
``(C) provides a listing of public safety mutual aid
channels in operation and their ability to connect to an
interoperable communications system;
``(2) recommend, in consultation with the Federal
Communications Commission and the National Institute of
Standards and Technology, a process for expediting national
voluntary consensus-based emergency communications equipment
standards for the purchase and use by public safety agencies
of interoperable emergency communications equipment and
technologies;
``(3) identify the appropriate interoperable emergency
communications capabilities necessary for Federal, State,
local, and tribal governments to operate at all threat
levels;
``(4) recommend both short-term and long-term solutions for
deploying Federal, State, local, and tribal interoperable
emergency communications systems nationwide, including
through the provision of existing and emerging technologies
that facilitate operability, interoperability, coordination,
and integration among existing emergency communications
systems;
``(5) identify how Federal Government departments and
agencies that respond to acts of terrorism, natural
disasters, and other emergencies can work effectively with
State, local, and tribal governments, in all States, and with
other entities;
``(6) include recommendations to identify and overcome
obstacles to deploying interoperable emergency communications
nationwide; and
``(7) recommend goals and timeframes for the deployment of
an emergency, command-level communications system based on
new and existing equipment across the United

[[Page H5697]]

States and develop a timetable for deploying interoperable
emergency communications systems nationwide.

``SEC. 1803. ASSESSMENTS AND REPORTS.

``(a) Baseline Operability and Interoperability
Assessment.--Not later than one year after the date of the
enactment of this section and not less than every 5 years
thereafter, the Secretary, acting through the Assistant
Secretary for Emergency Communications, shall conduct an
assessment of Federal, State, local, and tribal governments,
to--
``(1) define the range of operable and interoperable
emergency communications capabilities needed for specific
events;
``(2) assess the current capabilities to meet such
communications needs; and
``(3) identify the gap between such current capabilities
and defined requirements.
``(b) Progress Reports.--Not later than one year after the
date of enactment of this section and annually thereafter,
the Secretary, acting through the Assistant Secretary for
Emergency Communications, shall submit to Congress a report
on the progress of the Department in implementing and
achieving the goals of this subtitle, including--
``(1) a description of the findings of the most recent
baseline assessment conducted under subsection (a);
``(2) a determination of the degree to which interoperable
emergency communications has been achieved to date and
ascertain the gaps that remains for interoperability to be
achieved;
``(3) an assessment of the ability of communities to
provide and maintain interoperable emergency communications
among emergency managers, emergency response providers,
emergency support providers, and government officials in the
event of acts of terrorism, natural disasters, or other
emergencies, including Incidents of National Significance
declared by the Secretary under the National Response Plan,
and where there is substantial damage to communications
infrastructure;
``(4) a list of best practices among communities for
providing and maintaining interoperable emergency
communications in the event of acts of terrorism, natural
disasters, or other emergencies; and
``(5) an evaluation of the feasibility and desirability of
the Department developing, on its own or in conjunction with
the Department of Defense, a mobile communications
capability, modeled on the Army Signal Corps, that could be
deployed to support emergency communications at the site of
acts of terrorism, natural disasters, or other emergencies.

``SEC. 1804. COORDINATION OF DEPARTMENT EMERGENCY
COMMUNICATIONS GRANT PROGRAMS.

``(a) Coordination of Grants and Standards Programs.--The
Secretary, acting through Assistant Secretary for Emergency
Communications, shall ensure that grant guidelines for the
use of homeland security assistance administered by the
Department relating to interoperable emergency communications
are coordinated and consistent with the goals and
recommendations in the National Emergency Communications
Report under section 1802.
``(b) Denial of Eligibility for Grants.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary, acting through the
Assistant Secretary for Grants and Planning, and in
consultation with the Assistant Secretary for Emergency
Communications, may prohibit any State, local, or tribal
government from using homeland security assistance
administered by the Department to achieve, maintain, or
enhance interoperable emergency communications capabilities,
if--
``(A) such government has not complied with the requirement
to submit a Statewide Interoperable Communications Plan as
required by section 7303(f) of the Intelligence Reform and
Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (6 U.S.C. 194(f));
``(B) such government has proposed to upgrade or purchase
new equipment or systems that do not meet or exceed any
applicable national voluntary consensus standards and has not
provided a reasonable explanation of why such equipment or
systems will serve the needs of the applicant better than
equipment or systems that meet or exceed such standards; and
``(C) as of the date that is three years after the date of
the enactment of this section, national voluntary consensus
standards for interoperable emergency communications
capabilities have not been developed and promulgated.
``(2) Standards.--The Secretary, in coordination with the
Federal Communications Commission, the National Institute of
Standards and Technology, and other Federal departments and
agencies with responsibility for standards, shall support the
development, promulgation, and updating as necessary of
national voluntary consensus standards for interoperable
emergency communications with the goal of having such
standards in place to satisfy the requirements of paragraph
(1)(C).

``SEC. 1805. REGIONAL EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS COORDINATION.

``(a) In General.--There is in each Regional Office a
Regional Emergency Communications Coordination Working Group
(in this section referred to as an `RECC Working Group').
``(b) Subject Matter Experts.--The RECC Working Group shall
consist of the following:
``(1) Non-federal.--Organizations representing the
interests of the following:
``(A) State officials.
``(B) Local officials, including sheriffs.
``(C) State police departments.
``(D) Local police departments.
``(E) Local fire departments.
``(F) Public safety answering points (9-1-1 services).
``(G) Communications equipment vendors (including broadband
data service providers).
``(H) Hospitals.
``(I) Public utility services.
``(J) Local exchange carriers.
``(K) Local broadcast media.
``(L) Wireless carriers.
``(M) Satellite communications services.
``(N) Emergency evacuation transit services.
``(O) Ambulance services.
``(P) HAM and amateur radio operators.
``(Q) State emergency managers, homeland security
directors, or representatives of State Administrative
Agencies.
``(R) Local emergency managers or homeland security
directors.
``(S) Cable operators.
``(T) Other emergency response providers or emergency
support providers as deemed appropriate.
``(2) Federal.--Representatives from the Department and
other Federal departments and agencies with responsibility
for coordinating interoperable emergency communications with
or providing emergency support services to State, local, and
tribal governments.
``(c) Duties.--The duties of each RECC Working Group shall
include--
``(1) assessing the survivability, sustainability, and
interoperability of local emergency communications systems to
meet the goals of the National Emergency Communications
Report;
``(2) reporting annually to the Assistant Secretary for
Emergency Communications on the status of its region in
building robust and sustainable interoperable voice and data
emergency communications networks and on the progress of the
region in meeting the goals of the National Emergency
Communications Report under section 1802 when such Report is
complete;
``(3) ensuring a process for the coordination of the
establishment of effective multijurisdictional, multi-agency
emergency communications networks for use during acts of
terrorism, natural disasters, and other emergencies through
the expanded use of emergency management and public safety
communications mutual aid agreements; and
``(4) coordinating the establishment of Federal, State,
local, and tribal support services and networks designed to
address the immediate and critical human needs in responding
to acts of terrorism, natural disasters, and other
emergencies.

``SEC. 1806. EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS PREPAREDNESS CENTER.

``(a) Establishment.--There is established the Emergency
Communications Preparedness Center (in this section referred
to as the `Center').
``(b) Operation.--
``(1) In general.--The Secretary, the Chairman of the
Federal Communications Commission, the Secretary of Defense,
the Secretary of Commerce, the Attorney General, and the
heads of other Federal departments and agencies or their
designees shall jointly operate the Center in accordance with
the Memorandum of Understanding entitled, `Emergency
Communications Preparedness Center (ECPC) Charter'.
``(2) Chair.--The Chair of the Center shall rotate every
two years between the Secretary of Homeland Security, the
Secretary of Defense, the Secretary of Commerce, the Attorney
General, and the Chairman of the Federal Communications
Commission.
``(c) Functions.--The Center shall--
``(1) serve as the focal point for interagency efforts to
address operable and interoperable communications;
``(2) serve as a clearinghouse with respect to all relevant
information regarding intergovernmental efforts to achieve
nationwide interoperable emergency communications
capabilities;
``(3) ensure cooperation among the relevant Federal
Government departments and agencies to improve effectiveness
in the communication and implementation of the goals
recommended in the National Emergency Communications Report
under section 1802, including specifically by working to
avoid duplication, hindrances, and counteractive efforts
among the participating Federal departments and agencies;
``(4) prepare and submit to Congress, on an annual basis, a
strategic assessment regarding the efforts of Federal
departments and agencies to implement the National Emergency
Communications Report under section 1802; and
``(5) perform such other functions as are provided in the
ECPC Charter under subsection (b)(1).
``(d) Report.--Not later than 180 days after the date of
the enactment of this section, the Chair shall transmit to
the Congress a report regarding the implementation of this
section, including a description of the staffing and resource
needs of the Center.

``SEC. 1807. URBAN AND OTHER HIGH RISK AREA COMMUNICATIONS
CAPABILITIES.

``(a) In General.--The Secretary, in consultation with the
Chairman of the Federal Communications Commission and the
Secretary of Defense, and with appropriate State, local, and
tribal government officials,

[[Page H5698]]

shall provide technical guidance, training, and other
assistance, as appropriate, to support the rapid
establishment of consistent, secure, and effective
interoperable emergency communications capabilities in the
event of an emergency in urban and other areas determined by
the Secretary to be at consistently high levels of risk from
acts of terrorism, natural disasters, and other emergencies.
``(b) Minimum Capabilities.--The interoperable emergency
communications capabilities established under subsection (a)
shall ensure the ability of all levels of government,
emergency response providers, emergency support providers,
the private sector, and other organizations with emergency
response capabilities--
``(1) to communicate with each other in the event of an
emergency;
``(2) to have appropriate and timely access to the
Information Sharing Environment described in section 1016 of
the National Security Intelligence Reform Act of 2004 (6
U.S.C. 321); and
``(3) to be consistent with any applicable State or Urban
Area homeland strategy or plan.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section
1(b) of such Act is amended by adding at the end the
following:

``TITLE XVIII--EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS

``Sec. 1801. Office of Emergency Communications.
``Sec. 1802. National Emergency Communications Report.
``Sec. 1803. Assessments and reports.
``Sec. 1804. Coordination of Federal emergency communications grant
programs.
``Sec. 1805. Regional emergency communications coordination.
``Sec. 1806. Emergency Communications Preparedness Center.
``Sec. 1807. Urban and other high risk area communications
capabilities.

SEC. 3. OFFICE OF INTEROPERABILITY AND COMPATIBILITY.

(a) In General.--Title III of the Homeland Security Act of
2002 (6 U.S.C. 181 et seq.) is amended by adding at the end
the following:

``SEC. 314. OFFICE OF INTEROPERABILITY AND COMPATIBILITY.

``(a) Clarification of Responsibilities.--The Director of
the Office of Interoperability and Compatibility shall--
``(1) assist the Secretary in developing and implementing
the science and technology aspects of the program described
in subparagraphs (D), (E), (F), and (G) of section 7303(a)(1)
of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of
2004 (6 U.S.C. 194(a)(1));
``(2) support the creation of national voluntary consensus
standards for interoperable emergency communications;
``(3) establish a comprehensive research, development,
testing, and evaluation program for improving interoperable
emergency communications;
``(4) establish, in coordination with the Assistant
Secretary for Emergency Communications, requirements for
total and nonproprietary interoperable emergency
communications capabilities for all public safety radio and
data communications systems and equipment purchased using
homeland security assistance administered by the Department;
``(5) carry out the Department's responsibilities and
authorities relating to research, development, testing,
evaluation, or standards-related elements of the SAFECOM
Program;
``(6) evaluate and assess new technology in real-world
environments to achieve interoperable emergency
communications capabilities;
``(7) encourage more efficient use of existing resources,
including equipment, to achieve interoperable emergency
communications capabilities;
``(8) test public safety communications systems that are
less prone to failure, support new nonvoice services, use
spectrum more efficiently, and cost less than existing
systems; and
``(9) coordinate with the private sector to develop
solutions to improve emergency communications capabilities
and achieve interoperable emergency communications
capabilities.
``(b) Coordination.--The Director shall coordinate with the
Assistant Secretary for Emergency Communications with respect
to the SAFECOM program.
``(c) Sufficiency of Resources.--The Secretary shall
provide the Office for Interoperability and Compatibility the
resources and staff necessary to carry out the
responsibilities under this section.''.
(b) Clerical Amendment.--The table of contents in section
1(b) of such Act is amended by inserting at the end of the
items relating to title III the following:

``Sec. 314. Office of Interoperability and Compatibility.''.

SEC. 4. SENSE OF CONGRESS ON THE PROJECT 25 CONFORMITY
ASSESSMENT PROJECT.

It is the sense of Congress that in carrying out the
responsibilities and authorities of the Department of
Homeland Security relating to the SAFECOM Program, the
Assistant Secretary of Homeland Security for Emergency
Communications and the Director of the Office of
Interoperability and Compatibility should work with the
National Institute of Standards and Technology for the
purpose of implementing, as soon as possible, the Project 25
Compliance Assessment Program.

The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Michigan (Mr. Upton) and the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) each
will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton).

General Leave

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members may
have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their remarks
on this legislation and insert extraneous material on the bill.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Michigan?
There was no objection.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume. I
rise in support of H.R. 5852, the 21st Century Emergency Communications
Act of 2006.
I would especially like to commend Representative Reichert for his
authorship of this legislation. In addition, I want to recognize the
efforts of both Chairman Barton and Chairman King in preparing this
legislation for consideration on the floor today.

{time} 1100

Mr. Speaker, without a doubt, this Nation has endured significant
domestic tragedies in the past 5 years, and of course, 9/11 and
Hurricane Katrina stand out as most catastrophic.
While both were catastrophic, the causes were very different. The
former a profoundly evil terrorist act, and the latter a terrible act
of nature. But there at least is one common lesson that we learned from
both tragedies: We learned how critically important interoperable
communication is for our Nation's first responders during crisis
regardless of the cause. It really is a matter of life and death.
At its heart, H.R. 5852 is designed to improve interoperable
communications among our Nation's first responders. Of course, this
Congress has already paved the way by providing for an orderly digital
television transition to be completed by February 17, 2009, at which
point 24 megahertz of spectrum in the upper 700 megahertz band will be
returned by the broadcasters and provided to first responders to
facilitate interoperable radio communications. That spectrum is ideally
suited for this purpose. Congress also earmarked $1 billion from
upcoming spectrum auction proceeds to assist State and local
governments in procuring interoperable communications equipment.
But the legislation before us today mandates a National Emergency
Communications report to recommend goals and time frames for the
achievement of redundant, sustainable, and interoperable emergency
communication systems. It requires a baseline assessment of current
emergency communications capabilities and periodic assessments on
progress in filling existing gaps, and it accelerates the development
of national voluntary consensus standards for emergency communications
equipment. It requires State and local governments to establish
effective statewide interoperable communication plans before being able
to use DHS grant funds for emergency communications. It facilitates
coordination on emergency communications by establishing regional
working groups comprised of Federal, State, and local officials, first
responders, and other relevant stakeholders. And it elevates the
importance of emergency communications within the Department of
Homeland Security, enhancing accountability and resources to ensure
first responders on the ground that it can communicate with one
another.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 5852 is truly an excellent bill which builds on the
work that this Congress has already done to ensure that our Nation's
first responders have the interoperable communications that they need
to do their job of protecting our constituents in times of crisis.
Again, I want to commend Representative Reichert, Chairman Barton, and
Chairman King for their excellent work. I would urge all of my
colleagues to support this bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
While I do not oppose the substance of H.R. 5852, the 21st Century
Emergency Communications Act of 2006, I

[[Page H5699]]

strongly oppose the process by which this bill has been brought to the
floor today.
H.R. 5852 was introduced July 20, 5 days ago, and was referred to the
Energy and Commerce Committee. The committee has held no hearings on
this bill nor did the subcommittee or full committee ever mark up this
bill. The last hearing the committee held on this issue was September
2005, and the focus was public safety communications after Hurricane
Katrina. Now, a month before the anniversary of Hurricane Katrina, the
majority party is bringing up a bill that is not nearly enough to help
our first responders on the ground.
This is no way to bring public safety legislation to the floor, and
this process does a disservice to all our public safety officers
throughout America.
Since the bill was not subject to any hearings in the Energy and
Commerce Committee, I will not spend a lot of time talking about the
bill's substance. I will say that the Department of Homeland Security
should have taken these steps months and years ago. This bill gives the
Department of Homeland Security the ability to deny grants to States
and localities that don't have interoperability plans completed and
don't meet minimum standards.
Let me be clear. I support accountability for the money spent from
the Department of Homeland Security grant programs. However, we have
not heard from the States and localities, because they did not have a
hearing on this bill. I suspect that some States and localities may
consider these provisions to be unfunded mandates.
The bill calls for periodic baseline surveys on the level of
interoperability across the country. I support efforts to measure our
progress towards interoperable public safety communications; however, I
have little faith that the Department of Homeland Security is going to
complete these surveys. We heard in committee that while the first
survey was supposed to be finished by 2005, the Department had only
recently agreed on methodology and had no start time in mind.
A bill that holds DHS's feet to the fire is a good thing. The
administration could certainly use some prodding. DHS testified in
September that it is the administration's goal to achieve
interoperability within the next 20 years, by 2023. We don't have 20
years to become interoperable as a Nation. Our first responders are on
the front lines in the war against terror today. They need the help
now. Without adequate funding, the benchmarks and planning in this bill
will not be implemented in our communities. Last year, the Republican
Congress cut the DHS grant programs that fund interoperable
communications by almost $600 million and slashed the Department of
Justice interoperability grant program by $82 million, effectively
eliminating it.
My colleagues may not know that this bill is based very closely on a
bill introduced by my colleague, Ms. Lowey, which has the support of
Democrats. There is one glaring difference, Ms. Lowey's bill would have
established an interoperability grant program at the Department of
Homeland Security to help our communities. In the closed door
negotiations, the Republican majority removed the grant program. No
money, no program.
This has become a pattern of the majority: Take a good Democratic
bill, copy it in theme only, rush it to the floor without any hearings,
send out a press release, and then quietly never fund the program. We
have seen this time and time again.
Mr. Speaker, we ask more of our first responders than ever before.
They are on the front lines in the war against terror. They must be
prepared to respond to chemical disasters, rail disasters, natural
disasters. We saw during 9/11 and Hurricane Katrina that public safety
communications are critical in any emergency, but without adequate
funding, the bill's worthy goals may never be achieved.
Are new interoperable radios more important than replacing out-of-
date fire trucks or creating a meth crime task force? These are the
real choices that communities across this Nation must make every day,
and they receive no help from Washington. Their choices are becoming
harder and harder as the Bush administration and Republican budgets ask
them to make more with less and less.
The real reason why I think the Republicans have brought the bill
before us today is because they don't want to face any funding
amendments that may come up. In committee last fall, I offered an
amendment to create a $5.8 billion trust fund for first responder
communications. My amendment failed on a tie vote. Homeland Security
Committee Democrats have forced similar votes. Why is this bill on
suspension today? Because the majority wants to avoid votes on
amendments that would invest in public safety communication grants for
our communities.
My colleagues should vote for this bill because it will bring some
accountability to the Department of Homeland Security and focus more
attention on the urgent need of interoperable communications. But my
colleagues should not be under any false illusion that this bill will
make it easier for first responders to acquire modern equipment. This
bill will not provide the necessary interoperable equipment this
country needs.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, at this point I would yield as much time as
he may consume to Sheriff Reichert, the sponsor of this legislation and
the chairman of the Emergency Preparedness Subcommittee.
Mr. REICHERT. Mr. Speaker, I am proud to rise in support as a sponsor
of H.R. 5852, the 21st Century Emergency Communications Act of 2006.
Although I appreciate the comments from the gentleman from Michigan, I
would like to first address before I get into my formal statement some
of his comments.
There have been several hearings, four hearings and a joint hearing,
held on the issue of interoperability and operability under the
umbrella of the Homeland Security Committee and, more specifically,
through the Emergency Preparedness Subcommittee that I chair.
I have only been in Congress 18 months. I was a police officer for 33
years. The last 8 years of that I was the sheriff. So I know a little
bit about interoperability. I know a little bit about the inability for
police officers to communicate. I know a little bit about life and
death, and the ability to be in touch with your communications center
or not to be in touch with your communications center, or not to have a
partner present, or wait for a partner when you are facing someone with
a gun. And I understand, too, the gentleman from Michigan has some
experience in law enforcement and hopefully understands the importance
of this bill.
I would also like to point out that between 2003 and 2005, $2 billion
have been spent by the Federal Government across this Nation for
interoperability without any national plan, without any national
standards. And that is what this bill addresses today, and that is why
it is so important for first responders across this country.
So there have been hearings. And not only have there been hearings,
but these hearings have been held with people in attendance like
firefighters, police officers, emergency management, people on the
ground, people doing the job. We are not just hearing from politicians
and mayors and CEOs of police departments and sheriff's offices, we are
hearing from cops and firefighters, and they are supporting this bill
110 percent.
So, I would like to thank Mr. Pascrell, my ranking member on my
subcommittee, and I would like to thank Mr. Thompson, the ranking
member of the full committee, and all those who serve on both
committees, the Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Science and
Technology and the full Homeland Security Committee, who supported this
bill.
When people look at Congress, they say what are we doing? Why are we
not working together? On this particular issue, we did work together.
This was a combined effort, this was a team effort, and it was
congenial and it was an effort that was well respected by every member
and every staff member on both the subcommittee and the committee.
Protecting our Nation should never be an issue where Democrats and
Republicans cannot come together and recognize the need for our
cooperation, especially on behalf of our first responders to ensure
that our communities stay safe.

[[Page H5700]]

The Committee on Homeland Security did not just develop a bipartisan
legislation overnight. Rather, it is the product of a series of
hearings on the state of public safety energy communications. I
presided over these hearings as chairman of the Subcommittee on
Emergency Preparedness, Science and Technology, as well as held
countless meetings on the topic with first responders, government
officials, and other interested stakeholders. Last fall, Chairman King
appointed me to serve as the chairman of the Emergency Preparedness
Subcommittee. I know the importance of finding solutions to this
problem. That is precisely why I made interoperability the
subcommittee's number one priority.
Until the events of September 11, 2001, many people in this Nation
believed and assumed that first responders from different disciplines
and jurisdictions could actually talk to each other. It wasn't
happening. It is still not happening today. Unfortunately, that was not
the case then, and, as demonstrated by the inadequate responses to
Hurricane Katrina, that is not the case today. In fact, inability of
first responders to communicate with one another effectively led to the
loss of many lives in New Orleans and in other gulf coast communities.
This is simply unacceptable. It is intolerable that our Nation's law
enforcement, fire service, and emergency medical services personnel
still confront many of the same emergency communication problems that I
did as a rookie cop when I started in 1972.
To many, the word ``interoperability'' means little. It is a little
confusing term that police officers, firefighters, and first responders
use. But I want to just share a personal story.
Back in the early 1970s when I was a deputy in a police car, I
responded to a call where a young man 17 years old was high on drugs
and alcohol, and he was able to gain access to his father's .308
Winchester rifle and he came from his house and he began to shoot at
the neighborhood. I was the first car to arrive. A shot was fired over
my police car. He ran out the back door of his house. We lost him for a
while. We were able to surround the area. I was one of the officers on
the perimeter. My radio didn't work, and a neighbor who saw the young
man with the rifle pointed at three Seattle police officers who were
coming to help the sheriffs office in the south end of the county
called the neighbor across the street because she was afraid to leave
her house. The neighbor across the street ran across the street to my
police car and told me what was going on, because the person saw this
young man ready to fire on three police officers.
I grabbed my police radio and I tried to get through the
communications center, and I couldn't. No one heard me. A rifle pointed
at three police officers, and I could not communicate back in 1974,
1975.

{time} 1115

Three police officers' lives are now in danger. The only choice I had
was to holster my weapon because there were people in the house peeking
out of the window, watching the young man with the rifle pointed at the
police officers, and run across the yard. That is what I did, holstered
my gun, radio would not work, ran across the yard, jumped on the back
of the 17-year-old with the .308 Winchester rifle and now was in a
fight for my life.
Interoperability is a life and death matter. This bill matters to the
police officers, firefighters and first responders working in our
country today.
As I said earlier, the legislation before us today is based on the
record made during four separate hearings, and during those hearings,
the subcommittee heard testimony from a wide variety of parties
including first responders, public works, utilities, hospitals, State
and local officials, standards-setting organizations, the Department of
Homeland Security, the Department of Commerce, the Federal
Communications Commission, and other Federal Departments.
During these hearings, the witnesses identified the same problems
over and over again. We heard about the lack of an accountable senior-
level official in the Department of Homeland Security to oversee
interoperability. When I first came here, I was told at one of my first
hearings that the Federal Government has been dealing with the problem
of interoperability for 10 years; and as I have just shared with you,
we have been dealing with it as police officers for over 30 years.
Something needs to be done, and it needs to be done now.
The absence of national voluntary consensus standards to help State
and local governments to make wise decisions when purchasing
communications equipment is something we heard over and over again.
We also heard about the failure of the Department to condition the
use of grant funds by State and local governments on approved statewide
communications plans and the absence of effective coordination between
Federal Departments with shared responsibility for emergency
communications.
H.R. 5852 will solve these and other problems that hinder the rapid
deployment of interoperable emergency communication systems in our
Nation.
H.R. 5852 enjoys broad support from members of the Committee on
Homeland Security. It is almost identical to the provisions of H.R.
5351, the National Emergency Management Reform and Enhancement Act of
2006, a comprehensive Katrina lessons-learned legislation that the
Committee on Homeland Security passed 28-0.
Mr. Speaker, it is time for us to send a message to our Nation's
first responders that we support them in their efforts to protect us.
Passage of H.R. 5852 would send such a message. I urge my colleagues to
vote in favor of H.R. 5852.
Mr. Speaker, before I conclude, I will include in the Record at this
point letters exchanged between the Committee on Homeland Security and
the Committee on Science regarding jurisdiction over this bill, and I
thank the Science Committee and Energy and Commerce Committee for their
input on this important legislation.

House of Representatives,

Committee on Science,

Washington, DC, July 24, 2006.
Hon. Peter T. King,
Chairman, Committee on Homeland Security, Ford House Office
Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning the
jurisdictional interest of the Science Committee in matters
being considered in H.R. 5852, the 21st Century Emergency
Communications Act of 2006. The Science Committee
acknowledges the importance of H.R. 5852 and the need for the
legislation to move expeditiously. Therefore, while we have a
valid claim to jurisdiction over the bill, I agree not to
request a sequential referral. This, of course, is
conditional on our mutual understanding that nothing in this
legislation or my decision to forgo a sequential referral
waives, reduces or otherwise affects the jurisdiction of the
Science Committee, and that a copy of this letter and of your
response will be included in the Congressional Record when
the bill is considered on the House Floor.
The Science Committee also asks that you support our
request to be conferees on any provisions over which we have
jurisdiction during House-Senate conference on this
legislation.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Sherwood Boehlert,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives,

Committee on Homeland Security,

Washington, DC, July 24, 2006.
Hon. Sherwood Boehlert,
Chairman, Committee on Science, House Office Building,
Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: Thank you for your recent letter
expressing the Science Committee's jurisdictional interest in
H.R. 5852. I appreciate your willingness not to seek a
sequential referral in order to expedite proceedings on this
legislation. I agree that, by not exercising your right to
request a referral, the Science Committee does not waive any
jurisdiction it may have over H.R. 5852. In addition, I agree
to support representation for your Committee during the
possible House-Senate conference meetings on provisions
determined to be within your Committee's jurisdiction.
As you have requested, I will include a copy of your letter
and this response as part of the Congressional Record during
consideration of the legislation on the House floor. Thank
you for your cooperation as we work toward the enactment of
H.R. 5852.
Sincerely,
Peter T. King,
Chairman.

Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself 30 seconds to just respond to
the gentleman from Washington.
I repeat, I know you have been in Congress for a limited amount of
time, but there have been no hearings in the Energy and Commerce
Committee on this bill, the committee with primary jurisdiction.
You talked about your law enforcement career. Well, back when you
were

[[Page H5701]]

deputy in the early 1970s, I was a city police officer, went on to
Michigan State Police, where I served until I was injured in the line
of duty.
I am the founder of the Law Enforcement Caucus, and I hope you will
join our caucus someday.
Law enforcement and first responders, what we are doing here today is
giving them false hope and promises. The gentleman from Washington
claims interoperability is a life and death issue. Then let us fund
interoperability and not put law enforcement with a death penalty
because they did not get the equipment they need.
I yield 6 minutes to the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Pascrell),
the ranking member of the Energy Preparedness Subcommittee.
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5852, the
21st Century Emergency Communications Act.
As an original sponsor with my good friend Congressman Reichert, this
is long-overdue legislation. It is bipartisan legislation and really
sends a message throughout the entire Congress of the United States
that we can work together if we place the needs of our families and
neighborhoods ahead of partisan politics.
When the 9/11 Commission released its final report, it found that the
inability of our first responders to talk with each other and their
commanders resulted in a loss of life. This is very, very important to
America.
The 9/11 Commission identified a problem that has been in existence,
Mr. Speaker, for decades. It identified a problem that many
policymakers have known for some time.
In fact, in 1996, 10 years ago, Congress asked a blue ribbon
committee, the Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee, to examine
the issue of interoperable communications. It concluded 10 years ago
that public safety agencies did not have the sufficient interoperable
communications ability to do their jobs.
Five years later, on September 11, 2001, public safety officers were
still ill-equipped in this regard. Now, this is unconscionable. Five
years after the
9/11 catastrophe, the 30 major cities in the United States of America
still cannot communicate.
In 2002, the National Task Force on Interoperability convened several
meetings with various national associations representing public safety
officials to discuss the challenges of interoperable communications.
They explicitly identified the key challenges that must be addressed if
we are to move forward on the issue: incompatible aging equipment,
fragmented planning in general, and a lack of coordination and
cooperation from all the different stakeholders.
So we have known about the problems that exist, Mr. Speaker. Many
have explored the possible remedies. Yet many in Congress sit, after 9/
11, after Katrina, wondering why no real progress has been made.
And although I may take difference with my good friend and brother
from Michigan, his point must be well taken, that these cannot be empty
commitments. We must fund the very process that we have identified and
voted on today.
The bottom line is that H.R. 5852 will improve the capability of
first responders to communicate during times of emergencies. I am proud
to work with a bipartisan allotment of Members. We have had hearings,
and I am sorry that one of the major problems in this Congress is
jurisdiction and we have not addressed that, and I hope that we can do
this and not air our linen. I hope that we can come to agreement, but
the fact is that homeland security is at the center of the stage in
trying to make a terrible situation much better.
In an era when information can be sent instantaneously anywhere, it
is utterly nonsensical that our Nation's police, the fire, and EMS
personnel cannot consistently communicate with each other.
First, this bill elevates the importance of improved emergency
communication. For the first time, we are going to finally have a
central office within the Department of Homeland Security that does
just that. We will create an Office of Emergency Communications within
the Department where the Assistant Secretary for Emergency
Communications is directed to force the development of interoperable
emergency communications capabilities by States and territorial, local
and tribal and public safety agencies. This is absolutely critical.
Elevating the status and standing, that standing of interoperability,
within the Department is a key first step to ensuring the Department
focuses at the proper time, has the staff, has the resources.
This office will be charged with a variety of long-overdue critical
endeavors, including preparing a baseline report.
H.R. 5852 ensures that the appropriate staffing and resources are
available to carry out the obligations charged.
Mr. Speaker, our legislation compels the Department of Homeland
Security to create a national emergency communications plan. Common
sense must prevail here. This bill, I know, does not address the grant
funding; but it is interesting to note, and I would ask my brothers and
sisters on both sides of the aisle just to listen to this one statement
that I have if you listen to nothing else: a one-time expenditure,
equivalent to 3 days of what we spend in the Iraq war, will do one
thing. It will pay for making emergency radio systems interoperable 5
years after
9/11.
This bill is important, Mr. Speaker. This bill affects every
American.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield 2 minutes to the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. McCaul).
Mr. McCAUL of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank Chairman
Reichert for his outstanding leadership on this important piece of
legislation, which, in my view, will ultimately save lives.
Following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita last year, the Nation witnessed
emergency response problems at all levels of government, especially
with interoperability between our first responders. After Katrina and
Rita, like on September 11, first responders and military personnel on
the scene could not communicate effectively with each other.
This crucial piece of legislation will work to improve
interoperability for our first responders by bolstering the national
standards for emergency communications equipment. The bill also gives
incentives to the States to improve their emergency communications
plans and creates regional working groups to help Federal first
responders better coordinate with their State and local counterparts.
Prior to coming to Congress, I served as chief of terrorism and
national security in the U.S. Attorney's office in Texas. I also led
the joint terrorism task force charged with detecting, deterring and
preventing terrorist activity. I have worked with first responders for
most of my professional career and have learned through experience that
the ability to communicate between the Federal, State and local levels
means saving lives, whether it is a terrorist attack or destruction at
the hands of Mother Nature.
The time to fix and improve communications for our first responders
is now, and I urge my colleagues to vote for this important bill.
Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, can you tell us how much time we have
remaining?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) has
8\1/2\ minutes remaining. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) has 5
minutes remaining.
Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentleman from
Mississippi (Mr. Thompson), a former first responder and a volunteer
firefighter for 26 years.
Mr. THOMPSON of Mississippi. Mr. Speaker, I rise to speak in support
of H.R. 5852, the 21st Century Emergency Communications Act of 2006.
As the ranking member of the House Committee on Homeland Security, I
am proud to be an original cosponsor of this legislation. This bill
amends the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to enhance and improve the
capability of first responders to communicate during times of
emergency. It does so by improving the coordination of Federal, State,
territorial, local and tribal governments as it relates to voice, data
and other emerging technologies.
Mr. Speaker, the Committee on Homeland Security has heard from more
than 25 witnesses in the more

[[Page H5702]]

than six hearings held on the interoperable challenges of emergency
communications. We heard from Governors, mayors, first responders,
emergency support responders, the heads of Federal agencies with
responsibilities for promulgating emergency communication capabilities,
as well as experts in the technology sectors of interoperable emergency
communications.
All in all, Mr. Speaker, the message from the witnesses was twofold:
the need for leadership and funding for the deployment of an
interoperable emergency communications system.
Today, Congress has finally decided to show one of these two things
by placing this legislation on the calendar. The timing, days before
Members go home before the August recess and only a couple of months
before fall elections, does not escape me.

{time} 1130

Despite the convenience of timing, I am grateful that we are moving
forward and finally are doing something to help the men and women on
the front lines of our homeland security efforts. This has been a long
time coming.
When Air Florida Flight 90 crashed in the Potomac Basin in
Washington, D.C. on January 13, 1982, Congress learned that there were
no provisions for communication interoperability in place.
On April 19, 1995, when the white supremacist and homegrown terrorist
Timothy McVeigh rammed his flammable truck into the Murrah Federal
Building in downtown Oklahoma City, the post-investigation revealed
that the 117 local, State, and Federal agencies, with more than 1,500
personnel on the scene, were forced to rely on runners to disseminate
critical, time sensitive information.
Congress must respond. Now, in less than 2 months, this Nation will
mark the fifth anniversary of September 11, 2001. On that fateful day,
Americans learned that the Nation was vulnerable and unprepared for an
attack that killed almost 3,000 people. Among the dead were 343 New
York City Fire Department members and 23 New York City Police
Department officers.
As a volunteer firefighter of 26 years, Mr. Speaker, my heart dropped
when I heard of the radio communication failures of that day. Lack of
inoperable communication impeded a lot of help that could have gone to
those individuals.
Four years later, Mr. Speaker, as Hurricane Katrina and Rita struck
the gulf coast, the same story emerged. Firefighters and police along
the gulf coast didn't have the means to communicate.
This legislation will move us closer to fixing the interoperability
crisis facing our Nation. As I noted earlier, leadership is only half
the solution for the interoperability crisis. All our efforts here
today will be for naught if we do not provide funding for the
development and deployment of a nationwide emergency communication
system. My colleague, Representative Nita Lowey of New York, has
repeatedly raised this issue.
Mr. Speaker, I look forward to the passage of this legislation.
In less than two months, this Nation will mark the fifth anniversary
of the Al Qaida's attack on the United States. On Tuesday, September
11, 2001, millions of Americans watched in shock and horror as American
Airline Flight 11 and United Airline Flight 75 torpedoed into the Twin
Towers of the World Trade Center in New York City at 8:46 AM and 9:20
AM respectively. Within 17 minutes, the public learned that American
Airlines Flight 77 smashed into the Pentagon. Twenty-six minutes later,
United Airlines Flight 93 plummeted into a field in Shankville, PA
after passengers attempted to deter the terrorists' attempt to fly the
plane to Washington, D.C. Al Qaida's villainous assault on American
soil killed almost 3,000 people. Among the dead were 343 New York City
Fire Department Firefighters and 23 New York City Police Department
officers.
Americans were startled to learn of the United States'
vulnerabilities and lack of preparedness on September 11th. As a former
volunteer firefighter of 26 years, I understood instinctively the radio
communication challenges the firefighters and police officers faced in
New York City. As one who experienced the threat of collapsing
buildings and other dangers in the line of duty, I was heartbroken to
learn that New York City firefighters never received the police warning
to evacuate the North Tower after the South Tower's collapse because
their system was not interoperable with the police communication
systems. Lack of interoperable communication also impeded the relay of
the message that an open stairwell in the South Tower free of debris
and obstruction could be used for evacuation.
Interoperable or emergency communication capabilities became catch-
phrases to the public because of September 11th. However, first
responders face the challenge of emergency communications in everyday
emergencies and high-profiled public safety events. Members of Congress
also know of these challenges. When Air Florida Flight 90 crashed in
the Potomac Basin in Washington, D.C. on January 13, 1982, Congress
learned that there were no provisions for communication
interoperability in place. On April 19, 1995, when white supremacist
Timothy McVeigh rammed his flammable truck into the Murrah Federal
Building in downtown Oklahoma City, the post-investigation revealed
that the 117 local, state, and federal agencies with more than 1,500
personnel on the scene were forced to rely on runners to disseminate
critical, time sensitive information.
In 1996, the Public Safety Wireless Advisory Committee (PSWAC), a
blue ribbon committee created by Congress to examine the issue of
interoperable communication, concluded that public safety agencies did
not have sufficient radio spectrum to communicate with each other when
they responded to emergencies. Responding to the PSWAC report, Congress
included a provision in the Balanced Budget Act of 1997 which called
for the Federal Communications Commission to allocate portions of the
700 Mhz spectrum for public safety use by December 31, 2006.

The catastrophic Hurricanes Katrina and Rita demonstrated, yet again,
the critical need for operable and interoperable communication. Despite
the high-profiled events and everyday challenges facing first
responders, Congress extended the date for freeing the much-needed
public safety spectrum to February 17, 2009.
Interoperability directly impacts the first responder community which
consists of over 61,000 public safety agencies including 960,000
firefighters, 830,000 EMS personnel, and 710,000 Law Enforcement
Officers. The U.S. Conference of Mayors (USCM) conducted a survey of
192 cities regarding their interoperable communications systems in 2004
and found:
--Of the cities with a major chemical plant, 97% reported that they
did not have interoperable communications capability between the
chemical plant, police, fire and emergency medical services;
--60% of the cities reported that they did not have interoperable
communications capability with state emergency operations centers; and
--75% of the cities pointed out that limited funding was preventing
achieving full interoperable communications capability.
Despite the pressing need for effective emergency communications
capabilities, the Department of Homeland Security has incredibly
assigned a full-time staff of only four to seven employees to provide
grant guidance, develop standards and methodology, implement pilot
programs and the expansion of the Rapidcom program, research and
development, conduct a national interoperability baseline study, and
disaster management and emergency communication at the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA).
The 9/11 Commission said a rededication to preparedness is perhaps
the best way to honor the memories of those we lost that day [September
11]. This is why I join my fellow original cosponsors to introduce the
21st Century Emergency Communications Act of 2006. H.R. 5852 will
improve the country's preparedness and emergency communications
capability by (1) creating, for the first time, a central office within
the Department for the administration and policy consideration for
emergency communications; (2) ensuring appropriate staffing and
resources commitment to improve emergency communication capabilities;
(3) compelling DHS to create a national emergency communications plan
and inventory of the Nation's emergency communications system and
capabilities; and, (4) seeking accountability regarding the use of DHS
funds and governance.

The bill would establish an Office of Emergency Communications within
the Department where the Assistant Secretary for Emergency
Communications would be directed to foster the development of
interoperable emergency communications capabilities by State,
territorial, local, tribal, and public safety agencies. The Office
would prepare a baseline report that provides a snapshot of the current
state of emergency communications capabilities; follow-up with periodic
assessment reports regarding Federal efforts to address existing gaps
and identify best-practices models; coordinate the capability to deploy
backup communications services in the event of system failures during
an emergency; create regional working groups made up of public and
private sector emergency communication experts that would assess and
report on the state of emergency communication networks nationwide;

[[Page H5703]]

provide technical assistance to state and local governments; and,
develop a plan to ensure the operability of the Federal governments
communications systems.
The legislation would require the Secretary to report to Congress on
the resources and staff necessary to carry out the responsibilities of
the Office of Emergency Communications not later than 60 days after the
enactment of the bill. Within 30 days of the Secretary's report to
Congress, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) is to review,
assess, and report on the findings submitted by the Secretary of
Homeland Security.
The bill would also call a National Emergency Communications Strategy
to expedite an effective nationwide emergency communications system and
conduct a national inventory of the channels, frequencies, and the
types of communication systems and equipments. The plan would also
identify and make recommendations regarding both short-term and long-
term obstacles and solutions to achieving emergency communication
capabilities at all levels of government; set goals and timeframes for
achieving nationwide emergency communication capabilities; and,
accelerate the development of national standards for emergency
communications equipment.
To improve the accountability and good governance, State and local
governments would be required to establish effective statewide
interoperable communications plans before being able to use Department
of Homeland Security grant funds for emergency communications. The
Department's grant guidelines would also have to be coordinated and
consistent with the goals of the national strategy for emergency
communications.
Finally, this legislation would establish an Emergency Communications
Preparedness Center to act as a clearinghouse for the Federal
Government's efforts to achieve nationwide interoperability; ensure
cooperation among the relevant departments and agencies to implement
the goals of the emergency communications strategy, and prepare and
submit to Congress, on an annual basis, a strategic assessment
regarding efforts of Federal departments and agencies to implement the
emergency communications strategy.
The 21st Century Emergency Communications Act of 2006 will take
substantial steps to provide the leadership that is needed on emergency
communication. I hope this Congress moves quickly to pass this bill.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentlewoman from
New York (Mrs. Lowey), who really wrote this bill that the majority
presents here today in theme only.
Mrs. LOWEY. I thank the gentleman, and I thank Ranking Member
Thompson and Ranking Member Pascrell. It is a pleasure for us to be
here. And thank you, Chairman Reichert, for bringing this bill to the
floor. We have been talking about this issue for a very long time, and
I rise in strong support of the legislation. I strongly support the
emergency communications provisions, particularly the interoperability
strategy I first proposed more than 2 years ago.
It is really unfortunate that we waited 6 years into the 21st century
to adopt the 21st Century Emergency Communications Act. Communications
failures, as has been referenced by my colleagues on both sides of the
aisle, plagued the response in Oklahoma City in 1995, Columbine in
1999, New York in 2001, and in the gulf region following Hurricane
Katrina. In all of these cases, first responders had to use many of the
same communications as Paul Revere.
The lack of interoperability was deadly on September 11. Of the 58
firefighters who escaped the north tower of the World Trade Center and
gave oral histories to the Fire Department of New York, only three
heard radio warnings that the north tower was in danger of collapse.
Three. So as these brave firefighters were running up, the majority of
people were coming down. And many of the 343 firefighters who died that
day would have likely been saved had they carried effective,
interoperable radios.
The interoperability strategy in this bill is desperately needed, as
is an adequate number of employees at DHS to solve this crisis and to
validate manufacturers' claims that equipment meets widely accepted
standards. So I am pleased, and I thank the chairman and the ranking
members for bringing this bill to the floor.
However, the bill has one critical flaw. Despite the testimony of the
Director of the Office of Interoperability and Compatibility, Dr. David
Boyd, that it will cost over $100 billion to overhaul communication
systems across the country, the bill does not provide any funding for
State and local governments to plan, to implement, or to maintain
communication networks.
However, while this bill is not perfect, the bill is a vast
improvement over the lack of current policy. Right now, as we know, the
Office of Interoperability and Compatibility has only five employees
and a budget of less than one-half of 1 percent of the total DHS
budget.
We cannot wait for the next disaster before we take action, and I
urge your support.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, who has the ability to close?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) has
the right to close.
Mr. STUPAK. How much time do we have remaining, Mr. Speaker?
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Stupak) has
1\1/2\ minutes remaining.
Mr. STUPAK. I yield 30 seconds to Mr. Pascrell.
Mr. PASCRELL. Mr. Speaker, I think that those who have come before us
today have highlighted how critical this legislation is to the American
people. In the Subcommittee on Science, Technology and Emergency
Preparedness for our police, our fire and EMS, we believe that unless
the Homeland Security Department puts more emphasis and boots on the
ground than those people who are there every day and every night, that
we are never going to get this right in protecting America.
This bill seeks to do that, and, hopefully, within a very short
period of time, we will look and find the funding, and I have suggested
one place today, so that we will take care of those needs of homeland
security and protecting our families.
Mr. STUPAK. Mr. Speaker, Democrats on this side, we will support the
bill. It does create some accountability at the Department of Homeland
Security. It will provide the cities and counties with guidance and
standards 5 years after 9/11. But the real critical need is, we need
funding.
Public safety interoperability should be an urgent priority for this
country. As a former police officer, I understand clearly the
importance of adequate funding for homeland security programs. The bill
solves half the problem. We create the standards, but there is no
funding. Let us provide funding and not continue to give false hope to
our first responders that interoperability will finally arrive. It will
never arrive until we provide adequate funding.
Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself the balance of my time, and at
this point I want to include a number of letters as part of the Record:
Two from Chairman Barton, one from Mr. Boehlert and one from Mr. Young.

House of Representatives, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure,
Washington, DC, July 24, 2006.
Hon. Joe Barton,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning the
jurisdictional interest of the Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee in matters being considered in H.R.
5852, the 21st Century Emergency Communications Act of 2006.
Our Committee recognizes the importance of H.R. 5852 and
the need for the legislation to move expeditiously.
Therefore, while we have a valid claim to jurisdiction over a
number of provisions in the bill, I do not intend to request
referral. This, of course, is conditional on our mutual
understanding that nothing in this legislation or my decision
to forego the referral waives, reduces or otherwise affects
the jurisdiction of the Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee.
The Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure also
asks that you support our request to be conferees on the
provisions over which we have jurisdiction during any House-
Senate conference. I would appreciate it if you would include
a copy of this letter and of your response acknowledging our
jurisdictional interest as part of the Congressional Record
during consideration of the bill by the House.
Thank you for your cooperation in this matter.
Sincerely,
Don Young,
Chairman.

[[Page H5704]]

____
House of Representatives,

Committee on Energy and Commerce,

Washington, DC, July 25, 2006.
Hon. Sherwood L. Boehlert,
Chairman, Committee on Science,
Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Boehlert: Thank you for your letter in
regards to H.R. 5852, the 21st Century Emergency
Communications Act of 2006.
I acknowledge and appreciate your willingness not to
exercise your jurisdiction on the bill. In doing so, I agree
that your decision to forgo further action on the bill will
not prejudice the Committee on Science with respect to its
jurisdictional prerogatives on this legislation or similar
legislation. Further, I recognize your right to request
conferees on those provisions within the Committee on
Science's jurisdiction should they be the subject of a House-
Senate conference on this or similar legislation.
I will include your letter and this response in the
Congressional Record during consideration on the House floor.
Sincerely,
Joe Barton,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives,

Committee on Science,

Washington, DC, July 24, 2006.
Hon. Joe Barton,
Chairman, Committee on Energy and Commerce, Washington, DC.
Dear Mr. Chairman: I am writing to you concerning the
jurisdictional interest of the Science Committee in matters
being considered in H.R. 5852, the 21st Century Emergency
Communications Act of 2006. The Science Committee
acknowledges the importance of H.R. 5852 and the need for the
legislation to move expeditiously. Therefore, while we have a
valid claim to jurisdiction over the bill, I agree not to
request a sequential referral. This, of course, is
conditional on our mutual understanding that nothing in this
legislation or my decision to forgo a sequential referral
waives, reduces or otherwise affects the jurisdiction of the
Science Committee, and that a copy of this letter and of your
response will be included in the Congressional Record when
the bill is considered on the House Floor.
The Science Committee also asks that you support our
request to be conferees on any provisions over which we have
jurisdiction during House-Senate conference on this
legislation.
Thank you for your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Sherwood Boehlert,
Chairman.
____

House of Representatives,

Committee on Energy and Commerce,

Washington, DC, July 26, 2006.
Hon. Don Young,
Chairman, Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
House of Representatives, Washington, DC.
Dear Chairman Young: Thank you for your letter in regards
to H.R. 5852, the 21st Century Emergency Communications Act
of 2006.
I acknowledge and appreciate your willingness not to
exercise your referral on the bill. In doing so, I agree that
your decision to forgo further action on the bill will not
prejudice the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure
with respect to its jurisdictional prerogatives on this
legislation or similar legislation. Further, I recognize your
right to request conferees on those provisions within the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure's jurisdiction
should they be the subject of a House-Senate conference on
this or similar legislation.
I will include your letter and this response in the
Congressional Record during consideration on the House floor.
Sincerely,
Joe Barton,
Chairman.
____

Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, in closing, I would urge all my colleagues to
support this bill. I would remind my colleagues that it was clearly a
bipartisan bill. It passed 28-0. I want to particularly thank Mr.
Pascrell, Mr. Thompson, Mrs. Lowey, and Mr. Reichert. This has
bipartisan spirit behind it from the start.
I would just note that interoperability is very important. We saw
with 9/11 that our firefighters didn't get the message, they stayed in
the buildings, and they died. With Katrina, we saw the Coast Guard
folks couldn't communicate with the law enforcement folks at the bottom
of the helicopter ladders.
It needs to change. That is why we reserved part of the spectrum, as
part of the reconciliation bill earlier this year, to retrieve it from
the broadcasters and to be able to sell it so that, in fact, that
analog spectrum will be available. In addition, of course, we had $1
billion that was part of that sale that was reserved specifically on
matching grants to first responders across the country. It is very
important.
It is not the end. We need to do more. I realize it, and we are
prepared to do such. So I was pleased to see that legislation move
forward. This is yet another step. It passed 28-0 in committee. I would
like to think that when we have a vote on this later this afternoon, it
might be able to pass 433-0, knowing that we have two vacancies in the
House at this point.
Mr. ENGEL. Mr. Speaker, I rise today with mixed emotions. Almost
three years ago, I joined Representative Stupak and Representative
Fossella in offering legislation to create an interoperability trust
fund. Mr. Stupak is a former state trooper in Michigan. Mr. Fossella
and I are from the one place in the United States that has twice been a
victim of terrorism. Furthermore, as members of the Telecommunications
subcommittee we are well aware of the needs of our first responders for
radio equipment that works seamlessly for police, fire, and medical
personnel as well as for local, state, and federal officials.
So I am disheartened that this legislation has not followed regular
procedure in that the Energy and Commerce Committee did not hold
hearings or a markup on this bill. We are three Members of Congress
that have spent a great deal of time working on this very issue and yet
today we have a bill that we cannot try to improve. We can only vote
Yes or No.
I will vote ``yes.'' There are good things in this legislation. It
has an emphasis on high level personnel at the Department of Homeland
Security to do outreach, provide technical assistance and coordinate a
national response capability that can provide backup services for lost
local and regional services.
But I believe that with any legislation, if proper procedure were
followed, this could be a better bill.
I see the most glaring omission is that there is no new money to aid
our states and localities. In the digital television transition
provisions of the Budget Resolution, we included $1 billion for
Interoperability equipment grants to states and localities. We knew at
the time that $1 billion is a drop in the bucket. The estimates are
more in the $15 to $20 billion range.
And before someone stands up and complains that I am just a Democrat
looking to spend more money without having a way to pay for it, let me
be clear--the Bush tax cuts are why the federal government doesn't have
the resources it needs to fully fund programs like this. Reverse the
tax cuts for the wealthiest among us so that we can secure our country.
So I rise in support of the bill, but believe that it could be better
and urge my Chairman to convene hearings on this vital matter.
Mr. SHAYS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 5852, the
21st Century Emergency Communications Act.
This legislation would create a new emergency communications office
within the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to develop a
standardized radio system for first-responders during disasters.
Two years ago, the 9/11 Commission recommended placing all first-
responders on the same radio frequencies to facilitate communications.
Similar provisions to this legislation are included in legislation
Carolyn Maloney and I have introduced, H.R. 1794, the 9/11 Can You Hear
Me Now Act. This legislation would instruct DHS to provide the New York
Fire Department (FDNY) with a communication system that must be capable
of operating in all locations and under the circumstances we know
firefighters face and will continue to face when responding to an
emergency in New York City.
Under the bill, a communication system including three components--
radios, dispatch system and a supplemental communication device--would
be required to work in all buildings and in all parts of the city,
something that the radios unbelievably do not now do. This bill could
and should serve as an example for what needs to be done on a Federal
level.
We also introduced H.R. 5017, the Ensuring Implementation of the 9/11
Commission Report Act. H.R. 5017 brings renewed focus to the core
recommendations of the 9/11 Commission and holds the Administration and
relevant executive agencies accountable to carry out and document the
successful implementation of the 9/11 Commission Report's policy goals.
Mr. Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support this legislation.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R.
5852, the ``21st Century Emergency Communications Act of 2006.'' I
support H.R. 5852 because it will improve the capability of first
responders to communicate during times of emergency by improving the
coordination of among Federal, State, territorial, local and tribal
governments as it relates to voice, data, and other emerging
technologies. I support H.R. 5852 for several reasons:
1. Elevates the importance of improved emergency communications by
creating, for the first time, a central office within the Department
for the administration and policy consideration for emergency
communications.
H.R. 5852 creates an Office of Emergency Communications within the
Department of

[[Page H5705]]

Homeland Security headed by an Assistant Secretary for Emergency
Communications responsible for developing interoperable emergency
communications capabilities by State, territorial, local, tribal, and
public safety agencies. Among other things, the Office of Emergency
Communications will:
Prepare a baseline report that provides a ``snap shot'' of the
current state of emergency communications capabilities;
Follow-up with periodic assessment reports regarding Federal efforts
to address existing gaps and identify best-practices models;
Coordinate the capability to deploy backup communications services in
the event of system failures during an emergency;
Create regional working groups made up of public and private sector
emergency communication experts that would asses and report on the
state of emergency communication networks nationwide;
Provide technical assistance to State and local governments; and,
Develop a plan to ensure the operability of the Federal Government's
communications systems
2. Ensures appropriate staffing and resources commitment to improve
emergency communication capabilities.
H.R. 5852 requires the Secretary to report to Congress on the
resources and staff necessary to carry out the responsibilities of the
Office of Emergency Communications not later than 60 days after the
enactment of the bill. Within 30 days of the Secretary's report to
Congress, the Government Accountability Office (GAO) is to review,
assess, and report on the findings submitted by the Secretary of
Homeland Security.

3. Compels DHS to create a national emergency communications plan and
inventory of the Nation's emergency communications system and
capabilities.
H.R. 5852 adopts a ``bottoms-up'' approach by directing the Assistant
Secretary for Emergency Communications to develop a national strategy
to expedite an effective nationwide emergency communications system.
The strategy will be developed with the cooperation of State, local
and tribal governments, Federal departments and agencies, emergency
response providers, emergency support providers, and the private
sector.
The plan will be developed within one year of the completion of the
baseline study.
H.R. 5852 mandates a national inventory of the channels, frequencies,
and the types of communication systems and equipment. The plan must:
Identify and make recommendations regarding short-term and long-term
obstacles and solutions to achieving emergency communication
capabilities at all levels of government;
Set goals and timeframes for achieving nationwide emergency
communication capabilities; and
Accelerate the development of national standards for emergency
communications equipment.
4. Seeks accountability regarding the use of DHS funds and
governance.
H.R. 5852 requires State and local governments to establish effective
statewide interoperable communications plans before being able to use
DHS grant funds for emergency communications. In addition, H.R. 5852
requires that the Department's grant guidelines are coordinated and
consistent with the goals of the national plan for emergency
communications.
H.R. 5852 establishes an Emergency Communications Preparedness Center
to act as a clearinghouse for the Federal Government's efforts to
achieve nationwide interoperability; ensure cooperation among the
relevant departments and agencies to implement the goals of the
emergency communications strategy, and prepare and submit to Congress,
on an annual basis, a strategic assessment regading efforts of Federal
departments and agencies to implement the emergency communications
strategy.
For these reasons, I support H.R. 5852 and urge my colleagues to
support it also.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Michigan (Mr. Upton) that the House suspend the rules
and pass the bill, H.R. 5852.
The question was taken.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. In the opinion of the Chair, two-thirds of
those present have voted in the affirmative.
Mr. UPTON. Mr. Speaker, on that I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 8 of rule XX and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this question will
be postponed.

____________________