[Congressional Record Volume 161, Number 119 (Monday, July 27, 2015)]
[House]
[Pages H5506-H5508]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
STATE WIDE INTEROPERABLE COMMUNICATIONS ENHANCEMENT ACT
Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and
pass the bill (H.R. 2206) to amend the Homeland Security Act of 2002 to
require recipients of State Homeland Security Grant Program funding to
preserve and strengthen interoperable emergency communications
capabilities, and for other purposes, as amended.
The Clerk read the title of the bill.
The text of the bill is as follows:
H.R. 2206
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 ``State Wide Interoperable
Communications Enhancement Act'' or the ``SWIC Enhancement
Act''.
SEC. 2. MINIMUM CONTENTS OF APPLICATION FOR CERTAIN HOMELAND
SECURITY GRANT FUNDS.
(a) In General.--Paragraph (2) of section 2004(b) of the
Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. 605(b)) is amended
by--
(1) redesignating subparagraphs (B) and (C) as
subparagraphs (C) and (D), respectively; and
(2) inserting after subparagraph (A) the following new
subparagraph:
``(B)(i) certification that the Governor of the State has
designated a Statewide Interoperability Coordinator,
including identification in such certification of the
individual so designated, who shall be responsible for--
``(I) coordinating the daily operations of the State's
interoperability efforts;
``(II) coordinating State interoperability and
communications projects and grant applications for such
projects;
``(III) establishing and maintaining working groups to
develop and implement key interoperability initiatives; and
``(IV) coordinating and updating, as necessary, a Statewide
Communications Interoperability Plan that specifies the
current status of State efforts to enhance communications
interoperability within the State, including progress,
modifications, or setbacks, and future goals for
communications interoperability among emergency response
agencies in the State; or
``(ii) if a Statewide Interoperability Coordinator has not
been designated in accordance with clause (i)--
``(I) certification that the State is performing in another
manner the functions described in subclauses (I) through (IV)
of such clause; and
``(II) identification in such certification of an
individual who has been designated by the State as the
primary point of contact for performance of such
functions;''.
(b) Limitation on Application.--The amendment made by
subsection (a) shall not apply with respect to any grant for
which an application was submitted under the State Homeland
Security Grant Program before the date of the enactment of
this Act.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from New
York (Mr. King) and the gentlewoman from New York (Miss Rice) each will
control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from New York.
General Leave
Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks and include any extraneous material on the bill under
consideration.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from New York?
There was no objection.
Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, let me just say at the outset, it is great to have two
New Yorkers running a debate. It doesn't happen often that we run the
House; so, Kathleen, let's take advantage of it while we can. Any
motions you can think of we can make?
Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R. 2206, the State
Wide Interoperable Communications Enhancement Act, which was introduced
by the ranking member of the Committee on Homeland Security's
Subcommittee on Emergency Preparedness, Response, and Communications,
the gentleman from New Jersey (Mr. Payne). This bill recognizes the
important role played by Statewide Interoperability Coordinators,
SWICs.
We have all witnessed the communications failures during the response
to the September 11 terrorist attacks and Hurricane Katrina.
Interoperability is vital during disaster response.
However, despite investing more than $5 billion in grant funding to
enhance communications capability over the past 10 years,
interoperability remains a challenge. To address this challenge, States
have appointed SWICs to ensure emergency response providers in their
States have the ability to communicate.
SWICs complete Statewide Interoperable Communications Plans, ensure
grant investments are coordinated statewide, and oversee communications
projects. Many SWICs also serve as the State point of contact to
FirstNet for the design and construction of the Public Safety Broadband
Network.
H.R. 2206 requires Governors to certify, as part of their
applications for
[[Page H5507]]
State Homeland Security grant programs, that they have designated a
person to serve as the SWIC or, if not, that the functions of a SWIC
are being carried out in another manner.
The Committee on Homeland Security approved H.R. 2206 in May by a
bipartisan voice vote. I urge Members to join me in supporting this
bill.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Miss RICE of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume, and I rise in strong support of H.R. 2206, the State Wide
Interoperable Communications Enhancement Act.
Mr. Speaker, it is a great privilege to be here with my colleague and
friend from New York. This legislation, introduced by Congressman
Donald Payne, will help prevent Federal grant dollars from being spent
on communications equipment that will not advance the goal of
interoperability.
After the September 11 attack, interoperable communications failures
were identified as a factor that complicated first responders' efforts.
In the immediate aftermath, Congress appropriated millions of dollars
in grant funds to address national response capability gaps, including
interoperable communications.
Unfortunately, millions of dollars were invested on interoperable
communications equipment before State and local governments had
developed the strategies, plans, and governance structures to ensure
that the investments would actually advance their interoperability
goals.
Nearly 10 years ago, when interoperability challenges plagued the
Hurricane Katrina response, one of the major takeaways was that
spending millions of dollars on the interoperability problem does not
yield results unless there are mechanisms in place for coordination.
In response to that tough lesson, Congress, in 2006, authorized the
creation of the Office of Emergency Communications within the
Department of Homeland Security and tasked the office with developing a
National Emergency Communications Plan.
The first plan, which was released in 2008, set as a milestone for
every State the designation of a full-time Statewide Interoperability
Coordinator. This was a major recommendation from first responders
across the Nation.
States initially met the goal of appointing full-time SWICs, and we
saw the benefits firsthand during the response to the Boston Marathon
bombings.
In the years and months leading up to that day, the Massachusetts
SWIC had engaged in significant planning activities and had coordinated
with organizations at the Federal, State, and local levels to exercise
the emergency communications capabilities.
As a result of the high performance of the emergency communications
systems, lives were saved that day in Boston.
Due to recent budgetary pressures, however, the number of States that
maintain dedicated full-time SWICs has dwindled. SWICs are charged with
overseeing the daily operation of the State's interoperability efforts,
coordinating interoperability and communications projects, maintaining
governance structures, and implementing Statewide Communications
Interoperability Plans.
H.R. 2206 seeks to maintain the governance structures and
coordination activities that have helped guide interoperable
communications investments since Hurricane Katrina.
Nationwide, over $13 billion of Federal money has been spent on
developing robust interoperable communications capabilities, and the
goal still has not been achieved.
But we have made progress, and we cannot fall backwards by losing the
governance and coordination that ensures we are making sound
investments in emergency communications.
H.R. 2206 requires that States, in some way, are overseeing emergency
communications investments to ensure that the systems are
interoperable.
On behalf of the Emergency Preparedness Subcommittee Ranking Member
Payne, I would like to thank full Committee Chairman Mike McCaul,
Ranking Member Thompson, and Subcommittee Chairman McSally for
supporting this measure and for helping to bring it to the floor today.
I urge my colleagues to join me in supporting H.R. 2206, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I have no further speakers, and I
reserve the balance of my time.
Miss RICE of New York. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may
consume.
Mr. Speaker, H.R. 2206 will protect the progress we have made toward
achieving nationwide interoperable emergency communications and prevent
money from being wasted on investments that will not advance that goal.
SWICs play a critical role in coordinating emergency communications
investments and policies at the State level, and it is important that
this work continue.
I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation, and I
yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. KING of New York. Mr. Speaker, I want to commend Ranking Member
Payne and Chairman Martha McSally for their efforts on this.
I, again, urge my colleagues to support H.R. 2206, and I yield back
the balance of my time.
Ms. JACKSON LEE. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 2206,
the State Wide Interoperable Communications Enhancement Act, which
would establish a grant program to preserve and strengthen
interoperable emergency communications capabilities for local and state
first responders.
The bill requires a state to include in its application for State
Homeland Security Grant Program funding a certification:
That the governor of the state has designated a Statewide
Interoperability Coordinator; or
Indicating that the state is performing the functions of such a
Coordinator in another manner and identifying the primary point of
contact for performance of such functions.
The bill would establish the role of State Interoperability
Coordinator as:
Overseeing the daily operations of the state's interoperability
efforts;
Coordinating state interoperability and communications projects and
grant applications for such projects;
Establishing and maintaining working groups to develop and implement
key interoperability initiatives; and
Implementing and updating a Statewide Communications Interoperability
Plan that specifies the current status of state efforts to enhance
communications interoperability within the state, including future
goals for communications interoperability among emergency response
agencies in the state.
The bill would formalize the role of the State Wide Interoperability
Coordinator to ensure that there was a single point of contact in each
state.
The bill will assist in establishing a single point of contact for
Statewide interoperability for state and local first responders;
Second, the legislation is necessary to create a seamless level of
communication between the Department of Homeland Security and states to
ensure that communications regarding terrorist attacks, natural or
manmade disasters are managed appropriately.
As a senior member of the House Committee on Homeland Security, I am
well aware, as are many of my colleagues, of the essential and
lifesaving role of communications during a crisis.
Because the tragedy of September 11, 2001, was compounded by
communication failures among the brave first responders who entered the
burning towers that comprised the World Trade Center it has been an
imperative of the Homeland Security Committee to address first
responder communication interoperability challenges.
The number of first responders lost on that single day was the
greatest loss of first responders at any single event in U.S. History:
343 New York City Fire Department firefighters; 23 New York City Police
Department Officers; 37 Port Authority Police Department officers, 15
EMTs and 3 court officers were casualties of the attacks.
The need for this bill authored by Congressman Payne is evident.
The City of Houston covers over a 1,000 square mile region in
Southeast Texas. It has a night-time population of nearly two million
people, which peaks with over three million daytime inhabitants.
The city of Houston's 9-1-1 Emergency Center manages nearly 9,000
emergency calls per day. The volume of emergency calls can easily
double during times of inclement weather or special City social/
sporting events like Hurricanes Ike in September 2008; and Katrina as
well as Rita, which occurred in September and October of 2005.
Annually, one out of every ten citizens uses EMS.
There are over 200,000 EMS incidents involving over 225,000 patients
or potential patients annually. On the average, EMS responds to a
citizen every 3 minutes. Each
[[Page H5508]]
EMS response is made by one of 88 City of Houston EMS vehicles.
In 2013, the City of Houston's fire Department lost Captain EMT
Matthew Renaud, Engineer Operator EMT Robert Bebee, Firefighter EMT
Robert Garner and Probationary Firefighter Anne Sullivan when they
responded to a hotel fire.
Each member of the House of Representatives knows of the loss of a
first responder who was going to the aid of those in harm's way.This
bill will offer additional resources to the first responders of the
Department of Homeland Security.
This bill will ensure that a critical communication element for our
nation's first responders and the role of the Department of Homeland
Security in providing them with support is addressed.
I ask my colleagues to join me in voting in favor of H.R. 2206.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from New York (Mr. King) that the House suspend the rules and
pass the bill, H.R. 2206, as amended.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds being in the affirmative) the
rules were suspended and the bill, as amended, was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________