[Congressional Record Volume 153, Number 2 (Friday, January 5, 2007)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Page E31]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[[Page E31]]
 INTRODUCTION OF THE URBAN AREA SECURITY INITIATIVE IMPROVEMENT ACT OF 
                                  2007

                                 ______
                                 

                          HON. DORIS O. MATSUI

                             of california

                    in the house of representatives

                        Friday, January 5, 2007

  Ms. MATSUI. Madam Speaker, national security is our highest priority. 
Congress has created risk-based grants to direct limited federal funds 
toward areas facing higher threats, in order to ensure that our country 
is protected against and prepared for any future terrorist attack.
  Over the past year, however, my attempts--along with the efforts of a 
bipartisan coalition of my colleagues--to work with the Department of 
Homeland Security (DHS) to address concerns about one of those risk-
based grants, the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI), have been 
fruitless. This experience has led me to question whether we are 
successfully directing funds as this grant was intended.
  For this reason, I am introducing the Urban Area Security Initiative 
Improvement Act of 2007. Using the information I have gleaned over the 
past year, this legislation will ensure the grant functions as it was 
proposed. It will also make certain that instead of making arbitrary 
decisions, DHS uses conclusive data to inform its policy.
  The questions surrounding the UASI grant arose last January, when DHS 
released a list of 35 urban areas considered eligible to apply for UASI 
funding through the FY 2006 process. Eleven additional areas, including 
Sacramento, the Congressional District I represent, were placed in a 
second group and notified that their UASI funding may be terminated in 
future years if they did not meet the new risk assessment standards.
  When DHS announced that Sacramento's UASI funds may be in jeopardy, 
the decision seemed unwarranted. Sacramento has a population of almost 
two million people, and is the capital of California--the most populous 
state in the nation and the sixth largest economy in the world. The 
city is also home to dozens of critical federal and state government 
buildings and much of the state's water, electricity, and 
telecommunication systems are managed from Sacramento. To suffer an 
attack would have repercussions beyond our region.
  Immediately after learning about the changes to the UASI program, I 
requested meetings with DHS officials to understand their new risk 
assessment guidelines. After unsatisfactory responses from DHS, I led a 
coalition of my colleagues to demand information regarding DHS's 
revised guidelines for eligibility in an effort to urge them to change 
their policy.
  The Chairman of the Homeland Security Committee, colleagues from San 
Diego and Sacramento, both of California's United States Senators and I 
requested a Government Accountability Office (GAO) investigation into 
the UASI grant process. The preliminary findings of that investigation 
were completed in mid-December. GAO analyzed the risk methodology and 
the effectiveness of the assessment, in addition to reviewing planned 
changes to both in the upcoming year. The report confirmed that DHS had 
made many arbitrary decisions during their UASI determination that 
skewed the outcomes of the risk-scenarios and grant awards.

  Of particular concern is that DHS arbitrarily cut the number of 
eligible cities to 35 and created a second group of 11 of which were 
only able to apply for ``sustainment'' funding. Additionally, DHS 
assigned arbitrary values to assets and population without running a 
study of how the variation in the output of models (numerical or 
otherwise) used for such awards can be manipulated--a process commonly 
referred to as a ``sensitivity'' analysis. This analysis would have 
ensured that any changes to these values have little or no impact on 
the ranking of each urban area.
  Both 9-11 and Hurricane Katrina demonstrated the role our first 
responders play in any incident, whether an act of terrorism or mother 
nature. And the Urban Area Security Initiative is a critical component 
to ensuring the preparedness of those brave men and women and, 
ultimately, our nation's preparedness. We all recognize that we need to 
direct our limited resources towards the most at-risk locations. 
However, and DHS has acknowledged this, they have overlooked critical 
infrastructure. These arbitrary decisions may have influenced the 
outcome of the UASI grant. This is poor national security policy and in 
an era when national security is a priority, it is unacceptable.
  DHS will shortly be announcing those urban areas that will be 
eligible to apply for funding. However, Sacramento and all heavily 
populated urban areas will have to worry each year about whether DHS 
will arbitrarily change the number of eligible cities and thus, if they 
will even be able to apply for funding. This places significant and 
undue burdens on our regional homeland security efforts, as first 
responders attempt to prepare for and protect against any future 
threat, without knowing from year to year whether they can even apply 
for funding.
  That is why I am introducing this legislation today. The UASI 
Improvement Act will allow the 100 most populous urban areas, as 
determined by the census and the Secretary of the Department of 
Homeland Security, to apply for UASI funds. While each urban area does 
not have to apply, this will guarantee that those urban areas who 
believe they need the funding or who find that they meet the 
eligibility guidelines as determined by DHS will be able to at least 
apply for these vital funds.
  The bill also mandates that DHS conduct a sensitivity analysis. The 
GAO found DHS's decision to arbitrarily assign values during the risk-
assignment without conducting a sensitivity analysis to be a 
significant flaw in the UASI grant determination process. By conducting 
such an analysis, DHS will have conclusive data rather than uninformed 
decisions to guide their decision-making.
  Our local law enforcement and first responders continue to do an 
incredible job understanding the threats facing our country and are 
working hard to prevent and prepare for an attack. And while these 
heroes are doing their jobs, the federal government needs to do its 
job. Part of that is providing leadership by setting standards and the 
other is to provide resources. My concern is that the federal 
government has been shirking its responsibility, and so I am 
introducing legislation to make sure that Sacramento and all at-risk 
urban areas have the funding they need.
  Madam Speaker, the Urban Area Security Initiative Improvement Act 
will guarantee that our most at-risk urban areas will have access to 
necessary federal funds, which our first responders and law enforcement 
need in order to protect our citizens. I look forward to working with 
my colleagues to pass this bill in the newly-elected ll0th Congress.

                          ____________________