[House Report 107-766]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]



107th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     107-766
_______________________________________________________________________

                                     

                                     

                                     

                                                 Union Calendar No. 481

     HOW CAN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BETTER ASSIST STATE AND LOCAL 
 GOVERNMENTS IN PREPARING FOR A BIOLOGICAL, CHEMICAL OR NUCLEAR ATTACK?

                               __________

                              FIFTH REPORT

                                 by the

                     COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM


                                     


                                     

  Available via the World Wide Web: http://www.gpo.gov/congress/house
                      http://www.house.gov/reform

October 24, 2002.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed


                     COMMITTEE ON GOVERNMENT REFORM

                     DAN BURTON, Indiana, Chairman
BENJAMIN A. GILMAN, New York         HENRY A. WAXMAN, California
CONSTANCE A. MORELLA, Maryland       TOM LANTOS, California
CHRISTOPHER SHAYS, Connecticut       MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
ILEANA ROS-LEHTINEN, Florida         EDOLPHUS TOWNS, New York
JOHN M. McHUGH, New York             PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
STEPHEN HORN, California             PATSY T. MINK, Hawaii
JOHN L. MICA, Florida                CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York
THOMAS M. DAVIS, Virginia            ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON, Washington, 
MARK E. SOUDER, Indiana                  DC
STEVEN C. LaTOURETTE, Ohio           ELIJAH E. CUMMINGS, Maryland
BOB BARR, Georgia                    DENNIS J. KUCINICH, Ohio
DAN MILLER, Florida                  ROD R. BLAGOJEVICH, Illinois
DOUG OSE, California                 DANNY K. DAVIS, Illinois
RON LEWIS, Kentucky                  JOHN F. TIERNEY, Massachusetts
JO ANN DAVIS, Virginia               JIM TURNER, Texas
TODD RUSSELL PLATTS, Pennsylvania    THOMAS H. ALLEN, Maine
DAVE WELDON, Florida                 JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
CHRIS CANNON, Utah                   WM. LACY CLAY, Missouri
ADAM H. PUTNAM, Florida              DIANE E. WATSON, California
C.L. ``BUTCH'' OTTER, Idaho          STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
EDWARD L. SCHROCK, Virginia                      ------
JOHN J. DUNCAN, Jr., Tennessee       BERNARD SANDERS, Vermont 
JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma                  (Independent)


                      Kevin Binger, Staff Director
                 Daniel R. Moll, Deputy Staff Director
                     James C. Wilson, Chief Counsel
                     Robert A. Briggs, Chief Clerk
                 Phil Schiliro, Minority Staff Director

    Subcommittee on Government Efficiency, Financial Management and 
                      Intergovernmental Relations

                   STEPHEN HORN, California, Chairman
RON LEWIS, Kentucky                  JANICE D. SCHAKOWSKY, Illinois
DOUG OSE, California                 MAJOR R. OWENS, New York
ADAM H. PUTNAM, Florida              PAUL E. KANJORSKI, Pennsylvania
JOHN SULLIVAN, Oklahoma              CAROLYN B. MALONEY, New York

                               Ex Officio

DAN BURTON, Indiana                  HENRY A. WAXMAN, California


                    Bonnie L. Heald, Staff Director
                     Henry A. Wray, Senior Counsel
                          Chris Barkley, Clerk
           David McMillen, Minority Professional Staff Member
  


                         LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL

                              ----------                              

                                  House of Representatives,
                                  Washington, DC, October 24, 2002.
Hon. J. Dennis Hastert,
Speaker of the House of Representatives,
Washington, DC.
    Dear Mr. Speaker: By direction of the Committee on 
Government Reform, I submit herewith the committee's fifth 
report to the 107th Congress. The committee's report is based 
on a study conducted by its Subcommittee on Government 
Efficiency, Financial Management and Intergovernmental 
Relations.
                                                Dan Burton,
                                                          Chairman.

                                 (iii)

                                     


                               C O N T E N T S

                                                                   Page
  I. Summary of Oversight Findings and Recommendations................1
      A. Introduction............................................     1
      B. Findings................................................     3
          1. Incompatible communications systems impede               3
              interagency coordination efforts.
          2. The Nation's health care infrastructure has limited      5
              capacity.
          3. Intelligence sharing among law enforcement agencies      8
              is improving.
          4. National emergency management guidelines, standards      9
              and best practices are needed.
          5. Federal funding structure need greater flexibility       9
              and a single point of contact.
      C. Recommendations.........................................    12

                               APPENDIXES

Appendix A.--List of field hearings..............................    13
Appendix B.--Index of witnesses..................................    14

                                  (v)

  
                                                 Union Calendar No. 481
107th Congress                                                   Report
                        HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
 2d Session                                                     107-766

======================================================================

 
     HOW CAN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT BETTER ASSIST STATE AND LOCAL 
 GOVERNMENTS IN PREPARING FOR A BIOLOGICAL, CHEMICAL OR NUCLEAR ATTACK?

                                _______
                                

October 24, 2002.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the 
              State of the Union and ordered to be printed

                                _______
                                

   Mr. Burton, from the Committee on Government Reform submitted the 
                               following

                              FIFTH REPORT

    On October 9, 2002, the Committee on Government Reform 
approved and adopted a report entitled ``How Can the Federal 
Government Better Assist State and Local Governments in 
Preparing for a Biological, Chemical or Nuclear Attack?'' The 
chairman was directed to transmit a copy to the Speaker of the 
House.

          I. Summary of Oversight Findings and Recommendations


                            A. INTRODUCTION

    The Committee on Government Reform (the ``committee'') has 
legislative jurisdiction with respect to the ``overall economy, 
efficiency, and management of government operations and 
activities.'' \1\ The committee also has the general oversight 
responsibility:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \1\ Clause 1(h)(6) rule X of the Rules of the House of 
Representatives, 107th Congress.

        [T]o determine whether laws and programs addressing 
        subjects within the jurisdiction of [the] committee are 
        being implemented and carried out in accordance with 
        the intent of Congress and whether they should be 
        continued, curtailed, or eliminated. Each standing 
        committee (other than the Committee on Appropriations) 
        shall review and study on a continuing basis the 
        application, administration, execution, and 
        effectiveness of laws and programs addressing subjects 
        within its jurisdiction. [The committee shall review 
        and study] any condition or circumstances that may 
        indicate the necessity or desirability of enacting new 
        or additional legislation addressing subjects within 
        its jurisdiction.\2\ Moreover, the committee has the 
        special oversight function to ``review and study on a 
        continuing basis the operation of Government activities 
        at all levels with a view to determining their economy 
        and efficiency.'' \3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    \2\ Ibid., Clause 2(b)(1) (A) and (C).
    \3\ Ibid., Clause 3(e).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    The Subcommittee on Government Efficiency, Financial 
Management and Intergovernmental Relations (the 
``subcommittee'') has legislative jurisdiction with respect to 
all matters relating to the handling of Government efficiency 
and intergovernmental relations.
    Pursuant to this authority, the Committee on Government 
Reform's Subcommittee on Government Efficiency, Financial 
Management and Intergovernmental Relations (the 
``subcommittee'') convened 11 oversight hearings to explore:
 The Federal Government's role in helping State and 
local government agencies prepare for the possibility of a 
terrorist attack using a biological, chemical or nuclear agent.
 How the Federal Government can improve its 
assistance to State, local and regional entities in responding 
to a biological, chemical or nuclear attack.
 The ability of the Nation's public health system to 
handle the large influx of victims that could result from a 
biological, chemical or nuclear attack.
    On September 11, 2001, the world witnessed the most 
devastating attacks ever committed on United States soil. 
Despite the damage and enormous loss of life, the attacks 
failed to cripple this Nation. To the contrary, Americans have 
never been more united in their fundamental belief in freedom 
and their willingness to protect that freedom. Nonetheless, the 
diabolical nature of those attacks and the subsequent anthrax 
attacks sent a loud and clear message to all Americans: We must 
be prepared for the unexpected. The mechanisms must be in place 
to protect the Nation and its people in the event that another 
attack occurs. The aftermath of September 11, 2001, clearly 
demonstrated the need for reliable communications systems and 
the rapid deployment of well-trained, well-equipped emergency 
personnel. Yet despite billions of dollars in Federal spending 
toward that goal, there remain serious doubts as to whether the 
Nation is adequately prepared to withstand a massive chemical, 
biological or nuclear attack.
    To gain a better understanding of the efficiency and 
effectiveness of Federal emergency management efforts in 
assisting State and local governments in their preparation for 
a major disaster, the Government Reform Committee's 
Subcommittee on Government Efficiency, Financial Management, 
and Intergovernmental Relations conducted a series of 11 field 
hearings in U.S. cities of varying size and demographics. 
Between March 1, 2002, and August 23, 2002, the subcommittee 
visited Nashville, TN; Tempe, AZ; Albuquerque, NM; Los Angeles 
and San Francisco, CA; Milwaukee, WI; Chicago, IL; Omaha, NE; 
Abilene, KS; Iowa City, IA; and Golden, CO. Witnesses at each 
hearing included representatives from local, regional and State 
agencies involved with emergency management. In addition, the 
subcommittee interviewed private-sector witnesses responsible 
for health care and others who are responsible for key 
infrastructures, including water and power.
    The hearings primarily focused on the first responders to 
an emergency--the firefighters, police officers, medical 
personnel and local emergency management officials who are 
responsible for protecting the health and well-being of the 
citizens in their community. Witnesses also included 
representatives from the Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI] 
and the Federal Emergency Management Agency [FEMA], two of the 
more than 40 Federal agencies that have a role in the Nation's 
homeland security efforts. In addition, the U.S. General 
Accounting Office, which is evaluating the Nation's overall 
preparedness to respond to a terrorist attack, testified at 
each subcommittee hearing.

                              B. FINDINGS

    Although many issues were discussed throughout the field 
hearings, first responders highlighted several significant 
concerns. They included: (1) the lack of interoperable 
communications systems; (2) the inability of the health care 
system to handle a massive influx of victims; (3) the need for 
fast, reliable intelligence sharing; and (4) the need for 
Federal emergency planning guidelines, standards and best 
practices.
    In addition, first responders said the Federal Government 
could provide more effective assistance if: (1) Federal funding 
programs had greater flexibility; (2) the Federal Government 
had a single point of contact to apply for Federal grants, 
awards and training programs; and (3) the Federal Government 
encouraged more fully a regional, all-hazards approach to 
emergency preparedness.

1. Incompatible communications systems impede interagency coordination 
        efforts.

    Communications interoperability emerged as one of the 
leading concerns of local officials throughout the subcommittee 
hearings. During the subcommittee's first field hearing in 
Nashville, local witnesses discussed a serious communications 
shortfall, in which a civilian helicopter and a National Guard 
helicopter were responding to the same incident but were unable 
to communicate with each other. At a subsequent hearing in 
Albuquerque, witness Thomas L. English, Cabinet Secretary for 
the New Mexico Department of Public Safety, explained that 
existing regulations require the National Guard to operate on a 
separate set of frequencies. ``A complete re-look at this is 
absolutely essential to our ability to have a unified 
response,'' he said.
    The problem is an interagency issue as well as 
intergovernmental. In Albuquerque, for example, the city and 
Bernalillo County, which includes Albuquerque, use compatible 
800-megahertz systems. However, neighboring cities operate on 
much lower frequencies. Thus, a significant part of the region 
is left out of the communications loop.
    In Nashville, Dr. William Schaffner of Vanderbilt 
University School of Medicine stressed the need for a multi-
faceted communications network that ties together a 
communitywide response. It should also include hospitals, he 
said. ``Our community has the communications capacity, however, 
it is institution specific. Something substantially more 
sophisticated is needed that could tie all the elements of the 
response mechanism together.'' Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee 
Baca agreed, saying, ``We need to coordinate with the medical 
group as to what goes on when firefighters and police officers 
get out on the scene of a disaster or terrorist attack.''
    Local officials in Omaha are hoping to upgrade to an 
interoperable system, said Omaha Fire Chief Paul Wagner. 
Douglas County, which includes Omaha, is planning to move to an 
800-megahertz system that would allow regional communications. 
But the proposal is still being worked out, he said. ``So we 
are looking at a number of years down the road before we would 
even be able to do that.''
    Having an 800-megahertz system does not necessarily resolve 
the communications problem, however. Mario H. Trevino, Director 
of the San Francisco Fire Department, said that San Francisco 
uses an 800-megahertz system, but during emergencies, the 
system becomes overloaded and shuts down. Better systems exist, 
but they are too expensive for most city budgets, he said, 
noting that one system costs $50,000 per radio unit.
    ``It's more than just a problem of procuring radios,'' said 
Lucien Canton, who heads up the San Francisco Mayor's Office of 
Emergency Services. ``There are no national standards on how we 
should use these radios; no set frequencies that are all on a 
common band.'' Mr. Canton said that the Federal Government 
should take a leadership role in developing national standards 
for emergency responders.
    Additional concerns were raised over the Federal 
Communications Commission's proposed sale of frequencies within 
the 700-megahertz spectrum for commercial use. The concern 
involves potential voice interference between commercial users 
on the 700-megahertz spectrum and the 800-megahertz public 
safety spectrum. ``To put it simply, there is a level of over-
speak between the two systems that is problematic,'' said 
Phoenix Mayor Skip Rimsza. Noting the devastating 
communications breakdown in New York City on September 11, 
2001, Mr. Rimsza said, ``One of the reasons we are all looking 
to 800 megahertz is to avoid that kind of loss.'' Mr. Rimsza is 
especially concerned because Phoenix voters just approved a 
$120 million referendum to purchase a new 800-megahertz 
communications system. Jack Harris, assistant chief of the 
Phoenix Police Department, is equally concerned about potential 
disruptions, saying, ``when you get into that group of bands, 
it is not that there is not enough bands for public safety and 
for the private sector; it is how they are arranged . . . When 
they are not arranged appropriately, you can get cross-talk 
between the bands, and it stops the communication.''
    Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca reiterated the 
importance of interoperability, saying, ``first responders need 
to talk to each other at command sites of incidents. We can't 
do that now, and I don't think it is being done in too many 
places in the Nation. Therefore, what we need is the Federal 
Communications Commission to be a participant in ensuring that 
the radio frequency spectrum, which is so valued in this 
Nation, is not just given to the private sector on any request 
that the private sector has,'' he said. ``The public safety 
systems of our Nation depend on radio communication.''
    Phoenix Mayor Rimsza summed up this concern, saying, ``All 
we are asking is: Solve the problem before we sell those radio 
frequencies so that our officers do not get blocked from 
critical communications when they are most important.''

2. The Nation's health care infrastructure has limited capacity.

    The terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and the 
ensuing anthrax attacks focused long overdue attention on the 
ability of the Nation's health infrastructure to respond to 
major emergencies involving a large number of victims. This 
concern was discussed at each of the subcommittee's 11 field 
hearings.
    During the subcommittee's Los Angeles field hearing, 
witnesses representing the Centers for Disease Control and 
Prevention [CDC] and California's Department of Health Services 
pointed out that September 11, 2001, demonstrated the fragility 
of the public health system. In addition, witnesses raised 
serious concerns that private-sector hospitals no longer have 
the capacity to treat the potential influx of victims that 
would result from a biological, chemical or nuclear incident. 
Throughout the hearings, witnesses said that hospitals have 
essentially eliminated their excess capacity, called surge 
capacity, in order to cut overhead costs.
    In Nashville, Dr. Schaffner said, ``Given the structure and 
financing of health care in the United States today, there is 
only minimal surge capacity in the health care system.'' Dr. 
Ian Jones of Vanderbilt University Medical Center concurred, 
saying, ``The No. 1 problem that we are facing today is 
emergency department overcrowding.''
    As an example, Dr. Jones said that a recent, relatively 
mild outbreak of influenza temporarily shut down a number of 
hospital emergency rooms throughout the Nashville area. In 
other areas, he said, there have been reports of citywide 
emergency room shutdowns. ``When that happens, there is really 
nowhere for the EMS service, who may be carrying critically ill 
patients, to take them,'' he said. ``It does not take a lot of 
imagination to understand what might happen if 1,000 critically 
ill patients requiring ICU care were dumped on the system at 
the same time, as might happen in a bioterrorism event.''
    Dr. Philip Smith, Chief of Infectious Diseases at the 
University of Nebraska confirmed that overcrowded emergency 
rooms is also a problem in Omaha, where, on occasion, patients 
have had to be shuttled to hospitals as far away as Kansas City 
and Des Moines.
    Dr. Jones said that emergency room overcrowding is a result 
of several factors. In large part, hospital emergency rooms are 
serving as a source of primary care for uninsured patients. In 
addition, the population is aging and is sicker and, in 
general, there has been a breakdown in the mental health 
system, he said.
    In Albuquerque, witnesses Dr. Paul Roth, Dean of the 
University of New Mexico School of Medicine and Dr. Mack 
Sewell, State Epidemiologist at the New Mexico Department of 
Health reaffirmed that emergency room overcrowding is 
nationwide problem.
    During the subcommittee's hearing in Abilene, Raymond 
Williams, president and chief executive officer of the Sumner 
Regional Center suggested yet another cause of declining 
hospital capacity. ``Over the last 10 years we have watched the 
Medicare reimbursement go lower and lower to the point that, 
today, we find almost every hospital in Kansas getting paid 
below its cost,'' he said. ``If we had any cash reserves set 
aside to buy equipment, to provide training, those funds are no 
longer there.''
    States are looking at various ways to create additional 
patient beds. In Nebraska, health officials are working on a 
plan to set up field hospitals, which would create an 
additional 500 beds in the event of a catastrophe, said Dr. 
Smith of the University of Nebraska. However, Vanderbilt's Dr. 
Schaffner urged caution in relying on such temporary 
facilities. ``The medical capacity we would need in a 
bioterrorist event would not be satisfied simply by housing 
patients somewhere else with minimal care. Neither the medical 
community nor the public would find that sufficient today,'' he 
said.
    In California, State health officials are working closely 
with the Department of Veterans Affairs [VA] to use VA 
facilities during a major emergency, said Diana Bonta, director 
of the California Department of Health and Human Services. ``We 
have had coordination at a local level and at a statewide 
level, and we will continue to have that as well with the 
Federal facilities. It is very crucial for us to be able to 
work closely with them,'' she said.
    During the subcommittee hearing in Tempe, Robert Spencer, 
the director of Maricopa County Department of Emergency 
Management, suggested that the Federal Government consider 
developing 12 regional mobile field hospitals, which could 
respond effectively to a disaster in any part of the country.
    Metro Medical Response Systems [MMRS], composed of law 
enforcement, public health and hospital personnel, have been 
established in most of the cities the subcommittee visited. In 
Omaha, Lieutenant Tim Conohan, emergency preparedness 
coordinator for the Omaha Police Department, credited this 
regional program for Omaha's overall planning for emergencies. 
Emergency managers are eager to embrace the program, however, 
they are concerned about the Federal Government's willingness 
provide sustaining funding for it. Dr. Frances Winslow, 
Director of Emergency Services for the city of San Jose, said, 
``We received training, equipment and supplies. However, at 
this point, we have no promise of sustainment of these efforts 
that we bought at such great cost.''

                  MEDICAL LABORATORIES NEED BOLSTERING

    Along with other public health efforts, the Nation needs to 
have a robust network of medical laboratories capable of 
testing for unique biological, chemical and nuclear agents. 
That concern was raised at many of the subcommittee's field 
hearings. Chicago physician, Dr. Quentin Young said, ``Our 
national, State and local health agencies are under-funded and 
poorly coordinated. Elementary modern capabilities in computer 
information systems, round the clock personnel in place, 
laboratories of a uniform high quality and speedy 
accessibility, a full public health professional work force--
are all deficient in various degrees across our country and our 
State.''
    Omaha's police Lt. Tim Conohan agreed, saying, ``The 
Government must examine the status of the Nation's medical 
laboratories. These labs need to be a high priority. Public 
safety departments cannot formulate a response plan until they 
know exactly what they are dealing with, and time is critical 
during these types of incidents.''
    In Iowa City, Dr. Mary Gilchrist, director of the 
University of Iowa Hygienic Laboratory told the subcommittee 
that the anthrax threat in 2001 taxed her laboratory beyond its 
limitations, and she described the result. Dr. Gilchrist's lab 
is part of the Center for Disease Control and Prevention's 
[CDC] Laboratory Response Network. Yet despite the lab's 
capabilities, its limited resources required that specimens be 
initially evaluated at local facilities to rule out powders 
that did not appear to constitute a credible Anthrax threat. 
``Some powders were not tested at all,'' she said. ``While not 
a real health threat, it caused panic and the shutdown of 
assembly lines at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars. 
We were lucky that our wake-up call involved few who were truly 
ill, and we managed to minimize fear and panic.'' Dr. Gilchrist 
said there is a significant need to train and equip local 
laboratories to enable them to test for chemical and nuclear 
agents as well as biological agents. ``The capacity for 
detection and identification of the three types of agents 
should be present in each lab,'' she said. In addition, Dr. 
Gilchrist said the CDC should expand the Laboratory Response 
Network to include food and other specialized laboratories.
    Dr. Steven Hinrichs who heads up the Nebraska Public Health 
Laboratory is also concerned about the Nation's laboratory 
network. ``Continued support of public health efforts over 
several years is needed to facilitate the rebuilding of 
national capacity and the overall national laboratory system. 
The recruitment and training of new personnel to fill the need 
of expert scientists will take many years,'' he said. In 
addition, Dr. Hinrichs is concerned that the CDC-sponsored 
Laboratory Response Network does not include the private 
sector. ``We believe that the private sector is really on the 
front lines. So our efforts have been to connect to the front 
lines those private laboratories in order to prepare them. That 
is an extremely important issue,'' he said.
    Dr. Hinrichs also pointed out the need to utilize 
universities and colleges more effectively for training first 
responders and volunteer service providers, and educating the 
public on the threats stemming from biological, nuclear and 
chemical agents.
    Kirkwood Community College near Iowa City provided an 
excellent example of how colleges can assist in the Nation's 
homeland security effort. Kirkwood's Director of Environmental 
Training Programs, Douglas A. Feil, discussed the college's 
training program for first responders. Kirkwood provides 
hazardous materials training through the Hazardous Materials 
Training and Research Institute, he said. Since 1987, the 
institute, which includes Kirkwood and 80 partner colleges, has 
trained more than 120,000 workers. In addition, Kirkwood has 
developed a partnership with city and county governments, and 
local industry to build and operate a multi-use community 
training and response center. The center will provide an 
emergency operations center for Linn County's Emergency 
Management Agency and will house a CDC-funded national mass 
fatalities institute.
    As well as partnering with colleges and universities, Dr. 
Hinrichs said, ``The national need exists for a reserve force 
of expert laboratory scientists capable of responding to 
national emergencies. These reserve scientists could be 
deployed during non-crisis times to provide training to front-
line laboratories throughout each State. The CDC has begun 
exploring mechanisms to meet this need.''
    California's health director, Diana Bonta, said that 
California is considering compiling an inventory of infectious 
disease specialists who might be available in time of 
emergency. The State is also considering adding education 
courses on bioterrorism-related issues for health care 
professionals.
    ``Training and coordinating physicians, both in the 
hospital and in the community, to recognize unusual infections 
and to respond appropriately is a task that has begun, but more 
needs to be done,'' said Vanderbilt's Dr. Shaffner.
    Dr. Philip Smith of the University of Nebraska summed up 
his concerns and the concerns of many others saying, ``The key 
role of the Federal Government here is to not only to foster, 
but to insist on multi-agency collaboration to minimize the 
chance that we are going to have duplication and do the best 
job of protecting the public in the future.''

3. Intelligence sharing among law enforcement agencies is improving.

    Shortly after September 11, 2001, the subcommittee held its 
initial hearing on the Nation's ability to respond to 
biological or chemical attack in Washington, DC. During that 
hearing police chiefs from Philadelphia and Baltimore told the 
subcommittee that they were not getting adequate or timely 
intelligence from the Federal Bureau of Investigation [FBI] 
regarding suspects in the terrorist attacks. Following the 
hearing, FBI Director Robert Mueller pledged that the Bureau 
would be more forthcoming with detailed, timely information for 
local law enforcement officials. In addition, the director 
began extending the offer of security clearances to local law 
enforcement department heads who qualify for them. This issue 
was discussed extensively at the subcommittee's field hearings.
    Witnesses from the FBI discussed their efforts to improve 
intelligence sharing through the Bureau's expanded Joint 
Terrorism Task Force [JTTF] structure. The JTTFs and the 
Bureau's effort to give local police chiefs and sheriffs access 
to classified information have clearly enhanced the 
intelligence sharing process, especially among JTTF 
participants.
    Some States, such as Colorado, are also working to improve 
intelligence sharing. Suzanne Mencer, executive director of 
Colorado's Department of Public Safety, described a statewide 
system that is being developed in Colorado for the secure 
dissemination of intelligence information. Once completed, she 
said, the State will be able to disseminate FBI bulletins to 
State and local law enforcement officials and will be able to 
share data generated by these agencies with the FBI.
    Overall, most law enforcement witnesses said they were 
satisfied with the progress the FBI has made in providing more 
detailed and timely information. However, a few non-law 
enforcement witnesses described their ongoing frustration in 
obtaining timely threat information. Mr. Canton, who directs 
the San Francisco Mayor's Office of Emergency Services said, 
``There is very little intelligence that actually reaches us 
through the emergency management community.'' Several other 
witnesses agreed, saying that their most timely information 
still comes from the media via CNN. Similarly, representatives 
from water and power utilities said they needed more 
information on potential threats to their facilities.

4. National emergency management guidelines and best practices are 
        needed.

    At each of the hearings, witnesses, including the General 
Accounting Office, stressed the need to establish national 
standards for preparedness. They noted that such standards 
would assist State and local entities in determining their 
successes and weaknesses, and in their long-term planning. In 
addition, performance standards could be used as a basis for 
assessing the effectiveness of Federal programs.
    Lt. Tim Conohan of the Omaha Police Department said, ``We 
would like to see the Federal Government assist us with a best 
practices manual. There needs to be consistency throughout the 
country when dealing with these events. Regional training for 
standardized response goes hand in hand with the completion of 
a best practice manual. State and local public safety agencies 
need the Federal Government's expertise in the field to assist 
us with training our people so there is a standardized response 
to these types of incidents.'' That sentiment was reiterated at 
all of the subcommittee's field hearings.
    In California, Los Angeles County Sheriff Lee Baca said, 
``We look forward to the Office of National Preparedness, under 
FEMA, to get some guidelines out so that we can start doing 
what we need to do to further our ability to provide first 
responder services. And so we wait. The whole idea of homeland 
security when you boil it down is how well local fire and 
police and medical service are going to be able to perform.''
    Mr. Canton from San Francisco summed it up, saying, ``We 
really do need some national priorities. What do you expect us 
to be able to do at the local level? What should we be focusing 
on? What is important?''

5. Federal funding structure needs greater flexibility and a single 
        point of contact.

    Federal funding and the mechanisms for distributing those 
funds were also discussed during this series of hearings. 
Although State and local officials are appreciative of the 
increased Federal dollars they are receiving in response to the 
September 11, 2001, attacks, they encouraged greater 
flexibility in spending those dollars and a single source of 
the revenue.
    In general, some of the larger Federal homeland security-
related grants require that States distribute approximately 75 
percent of the dollars they receive to local governments. 
Predictably, local agencies would prefer that those Federal 
dollars be given directly to them. San Francisco's Fire Chief 
Mario Trevino said, ``It is essential that the process is done 
so without any redirection of those funds so that as much of 
the money as possible comes to the aid of the emergency 
agencies that will be responding. The first responders that you 
see represented here today will be alone working the disaster 
until other assistance arrives, and that could be anywhere from 
hours to days,'' he said. In addition, Mr. Canton from San 
Francisco's Emergency Management Service said that first 
responders need a block grant from a single source. ``We are 
more than happy to be held accountable for funds that are 
provided to us. We've been doing that for years. That's part of 
our job. What we would like to see are those requirements 
reduced to the point where they are manageable, and we can give 
you some concrete evidence of what we've done,'' he said.
    State agencies see it differently, saying that in order to 
have an organized, comprehensive statewide emergency response, 
the funding must be distributed to State agencies.
    Milwaukee's Mayor John Norquist believes the best solution 
is somewhere in between. The mayor said, ``To make sure that 
funds are expended efficiently, I am not sure that any level of 
government should be getting 100 percent funding from the 
Federal Government. I do not completely agree with the U.S. 
Conference of Mayors, which wants to have an unrestricted block 
grant in this area, and I would not agree that States ought to 
just be able to have money to throw around . . . My plea to you 
would be to have the money follow where it is going to be the 
most effective. That takes a thoughtful approach by the Federal 
Government, not just making State governments happy or local 
governments happy, but figuring out how things will work 
effectively in Wisconsin or California.''
    Throughout the hearings, first responders expressed their 
frustration over the lack of coordination among the Federal 
agencies that issue grants. ``There are training and education 
opportunities from many, many Federal agencies that can be 
applied at the local level,'' said. Fire Chief James Reardon of 
Northbrook, IL. ``We appreciate that, but there is no single 
coordination point. What that means is that we are missing 
opportunities to send people to the right training,'' he said. 
``We need a single point of coordination with all the Federal 
agencies and the Federal training programs.''
    Dennis Nilsson, commander of field operations for the 
Evanston Police Department, agreed, saying, ``We need to know 
what resources are out there and available to us.''
    Dallas Jones, who heads up the Governor's Office of 
Emergency Services in California, said the Government needs to 
compile a directory of Federal training programs. ``That would 
be very helpful in sorting through some of the maze of 
identifying some of these programs for local governments,'' he 
said.

                       NEED FOR BETTER EQUIPMENT

    Overall, fire and police chiefs of small and mid-sized 
cities said they need more equipment and training. They said 
their departments lack basic equipment such as personal 
protective gear. In larger, better equipped cities, officials 
noted that many types protective equipment have a shelf life. 
They are concerned that Federal funding might not be available 
to replace those items. In addition, several witnesses said 
that the Federal Government should provide better guidance in 
purchasing equipment and do a better job of sharing new 
technology.
    In general, local fire departments are better equipped to 
respond to a hazardous incident than police departments, many 
of which lack personal protection equipment. Police officers 
have been called ``blue canaries,'' said Lt. Tim Conohan of the 
Omaha Police Department. ``We respond, and we determine that we 
have a hazardous situation by falling to the ground and 
dying,'' he said, explaining that the police department is 
generally called to a hazardous incident before the fire 
department. ``So, we do need a minimal amount of personal 
protective equipment,'' he said.
    Lt. Roger Hoffner of the Arapahoe County Officer of 
Emergency Management in Colorado obtained a Federal grant to 
buy some quick masks for his police officers whose protective 
equipment consisted of out-dated military gas masks which, he 
said, gave the officers a false sense of security. ``They had 
nothing,'' he said. He asked Federal officials to recommend the 
best type of mask to purchase. Their response: ``Well, now, we 
could give you a list of things, but we can't tell you which 
one because that would be a conflict of interest,'' Lt. Hoffner 
said, adding, ``I found that very frustrating.''
    Fire Chief Reardon of Northbrook, IL, also would like 
Federal guidance on his equipment purchases, he said. ``Vendors 
are selling products that I am calling snake oil out there. We 
need to have those validated through a single source so that if 
we respond to an incident in California or Florida, or they 
come here, we are all using similar equipment.''
    Larger agencies with more sophisticated equipment have an 
additional concern. Omaha's Fire Chief Wagner said that Federal 
grant programs have been extremely beneficial, however, he 
said, ``there is a shelf-life on some of these products, and 
there is no program in effect to offer replacement without 
using city funds,'' which, he noted, are extremely limited.
    In addition, nearly all first responders said they need 
more flexibility in the Federal grant programs. Summing up this 
concern, Chief Wagner said, ``As a fire chief, we respond 
locally first and regionally second, but that can obviously 
change very quickly. We want to be able to provide the best 
equipment, the best training and the best offer to save lives 
that we can.''
    Dallas Jones, who heads up California's homeland security 
effort, also said, ``Technology transfers from Federal agencies 
in the military to local and State government would be very 
helpful.'' Mr. Jones had learned about a technology that could 
quickly detect chemical and biological agents, but the 
technology is not available to State and local agencies, he 
said. ``We even asked the question, `Could we buy it for the 
State or local government?' And the answer basically is `no.' 
''
    Throughout the subcommittee field hearings, witnesses from 
State, local and regional agencies stressed the importance of a 
comprehensive, flexible, all-hazards approach to emergency 
management planning. In earthquake-prone San Francisco Mr. 
Trevino said, ``Any capability we develop must be able to be 
used for multi-hazard planning.''

                           C. Recommendations

    Based on the foregoing findings, the committee recommends 
the following:
 The Federal Government must take a leadership role 
in resolving the communications interoperability problem. 
Congress must insist that sufficient radio frequencies remain 
in the public domain to ensure that the Nation's emergency 
responders have access to reliable communications systems. In 
addition, Congress must provide adequate funding for research 
and development of radio technologies that would allow local, 
State and Federal emergency responders to communicate.
 The Federal Government must re-examine ways to 
bolster the Nation's public health system.
 The Federal Government should establish a single 
point of contact in the Federal system for homeland security 
grants, training programs and other related funding.
 The Federal Government should insist on working 
agreements among local governments, health officials, the 
Department of Defense, and the Department of Veterans Affairs 
to provide additional medical facilities in catastrophic 
situations.
 The Federal Government needs to assist local and 
State governments in procuring new technologies that enhance 
the detection of, and protection against, biological, chemical 
or nuclear agents; and technologies designed to enhance 
communications interoperability.
 Working with State and local governments, the 
Federal Government must move quickly to provide national 
guidance standards and best practices for emergency management 
responders.
                               APPENDIXES

                                ------                                


                  Appendix A.--List of Field Hearings


    ``How Effectively is the Federal Government Assisting State 
and Local Governments in Preparing for a Biological, Chemical 
or Nuclear Attack?''


------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                             City and State Hearing was
              Date of Hearing                           Held
------------------------------------------------------------------------
March 1, 2002.............................  Nashville, Tennessee
March 22, 2002............................  Tempe, Arizona
March 25, 2002............................  Albuquerque, New Mexico
March 28, 2002............................  Los Angeles, California
April 2, 2002.............................  San Francisco, California
July 1, 2002..............................  Milwaukee, Wisconsin
July 2, 2002..............................  Chicago, Illinois
July 3, 2002..............................  Omaha, Nebraska
August 20, 2002...........................  Abilene, Kansas
August 22, 2002...........................  Iowa City, Iowa
August 23, 2002...........................  Golden, Colorado
------------------------------------------------------------------------

                    Appendix B.--Index of Witnesses


    ARREDONDO, P. Ben, city councilman, Phoenix, AZ, March 22, 
2002.
    ATCHINSON, Christopher G., associate dean for public health 
practice, College of Public Health, University of Iowa, Iowa 
City, IA, August 22, 2002.
    AUSTIN, Michael P., director, Arizona Division of Emergency 
Management, Phoenix, AZ, March 22, 2002.
    BACA, Lee, sheriff, Los Angeles County, Los Angeles, CA, 
April 2, 2002.
    BAKAS, Nick, chief of public safety, Office of Public 
Safety, City of Albuquerque, Albuquerque, NM, March 25, 2002.
    BAKERSKY, Peter, Director, Office of National Preparedness, 
Region 8, Federal Emergency Management Agency, Denver, CO, 
August 23, 2002.
    BEASLEY, Colonel Norman, assistant director, criminal 
investigations division, Arizona Department of Public Safety, 
Phoenix, AZ, March 22, 2002.
    BERKIN, Jeffrey J., Assistant Special Agent in Charge, 
Milwaukee Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Milwaukee, 
WI, July 1, 2002.
    BICE, Dr. Steven, Director, National Pharmaceutical 
Stockpile, Center for Disease Control and Prevention, San 
Francisco, CA, April 2, 2002.
    BOGNER, James F., Special Agent in Charge, Omaha Division, 
Federal Bureau of Investigation, Omaha, NE, July 3, 2002; Iowa 
City, IA, August 22, 2002.
    BONTA, Dr. Diana, director, California Department of Health 
Services, State of California, Los Angeles, CA, April 2, 2002.
    BROWN, Dr. John, medical director, San Francisco EMS System 
and Emergency Department, San Francisco, CA, April 2, 2002.
    BUIKEMA, Edward G., Regional Director, Region 5, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, Milwaukee, WI, July 1, 2002; 
Chicago, IL, July 2, 2002.
    BURRIS, Kenneth, Regional Director, Federal Emergency 
Management Agency, Nashville, TN, March 1, 2002.
    BURTON, Dr. Richard, associate director, California 
Department of Health Services, San Francisco, CA, April 2, 
2002.
    BUSBOOM, Stanley L., division leader, security and 
safeguards division, Los Alamos National Laboratory, 
Albuquerque, NM, March 25, 2002.
    CANTON, Lucien G., director, Mayor's Office of Emergency 
Services, city of San Francisco, San Francisco, CA, April 2, 
2002.
    CARBALLIDO, Raul E., Acting Special Agent in Charge, 
Federal Bureau of Investigation, Denver, CO, August 23, 2002.
    CARVER, James E., director, Tennessee Valley Authority 
Police, Nashville, TN, March 1, 2002.
    CASTLEMAN, Ron, Regional Director, Region 6, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, Phoenix, AZ, March 22, 2002; 
Albuquerque, NM, March 25, 2002; Los Angeles, CA, March 28, 
2002; San Francisco, CA, April 2, 2002.
    CHAPIN, John D., administrator, Department of Public 
Health, State of Wisconsin, Milwaukee, WI, July 1, 2002.
    CHEL, Casey, disaster preparedness manager, city of Long 
Beach, Los Angeles, CA, March 28, 2002.
    CHERRY, Janet, associate, the Cadmus Group, San Francisco, 
CA, April 2, 2002.
    CHURAY, Ray P., Assistant Special Agent In Charge, Phoenix 
Field Office Federal Bureau of Investigation, Phoenix, AZ, 
March 22, 2002.
    CLARKE, David, sheriff, Milwaukee County Sheriff's 
Department, Milwaukee, WI, July 1, 2002.
    COCHRAN, Ronald W., executive director, Lawrence Livermore 
National Laboratory, San Francisco, CA, April 2, 2002.
    CONOHAN, Lt. Tim, emergency preparedness coordinator, Omaha 
Police Department, Omaha, NE, July 3, 2002.
    COPELAND, Stanley H., director, planning and training, 
Tennessee Emergency Management Agency, Nashville, TN, March 1, 
2002.
    CRAIG, Dr. Allen, State epidemiologist, director of 
Communicable and Environmental Disease Services, Nashville, TN, 
March 1, 2002.
    DALTON, Patricia A., Director, Strategic Issues, U.S. 
General Accounting Office, Los Angeles, CA, March 28, 2002; San 
Francisco, CA, April 2, 2002; Abilene, KS, August 20, 2002.
    DALY, Patrick J., Administrative Assistant Special Agent in 
Charge, Chicago Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, 
Chicago, IL, July 2, 2002.
    DEAN, Steven M., Assistant Special in Charge, Albuquerque 
Field Office, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Albuquerque, NM, 
March 25, 2002.
    DEVRIES, Commander Mark R., Commanding Officer, Marine 
Safety Office Milwaukee, U.S. Coast Guard, Milwaukee, WI, July 
1, 2002.
    DIAZ, Dr. Pamela S., director, emergency preparedness and 
infectious disease control, Chicago Department of Public 
Health, Chicago, IL, July 2, 2002.
    EDEN, Catherine R., director, Arizona Department of Health 
Services, Phoenix, AZ, March 22, 2002.
    ENGLISH, Thomas, secretary, New Mexico Department of Public 
Safety, Albuquerque, NM, March 25, 2002.
    ERICKSON, Keith, director, Linn County Department of Public 
Health, Iowa City, IA, August 22, 2002.
    FEIL, Douglas A., director, environmental training 
programs, Kirkwood Community College, Iowa City, IA, August 22, 
2002.
    FOLDY, Dr. Seth, commissioner of health, city of Milwaukee, 
Milwaukee, WI, July 1, 2002.
    GALLIER, Tom, general manager, Tempe Water Utilities 
Department, Phoenix, AZ, March 22, 2002.
    GARDNER, Larry, fire chief, Milwaukee Fire Department, 
Milwaukee, WI, July 1, 2002.
    GARDNER, Major General Gregory, Kansas adjutant general, 
State of Kansas, Abilene, KS, August 20, 2002.
    GATES, W. Gary, vice president, nuclear division, Omaha 
Public Power District, Omaha, NE, July 3, 2002.
    GILBERT, Wendall H., Tennessee Department of Veterans 
Affairs, Deputy to the Governor for Homeland Security, 
Nashville, TN, March 1, 2002.
    GILCHRIST, Dr. Mary J.R., director, University of Iowa 
Hygienic Laboratory, University of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, August 
22, 2002.
    GLEASON, Edward J., administrator, Wisconsin Emergency 
Management, Milwaukee, WI, July 1, 2002.
    GORDON, Ellen M., administrator, emergency management 
division, State of Iowa, Iowa City, IA, August 22, 2002.
    HAINJE, Richard, Regional Director, Region 7, Federal 
Emergency Management Agency, Omaha, NE, July 3, 2002; Abilene, 
KS, August 20, 2002; Iowa City, IA, August 22, 2002.
    HALFORD, Stephen D., director and chief, Nashville Fire 
Department, Nashville, TN, March 1, 2002.
    HARBOR, Terry L., chief, Long Beach Fire Department, Los 
Angeles, CA, March 28, 2002.
    HARRIS, Jack, assistant chief, Phoenix Police Department, 
Phoenix, AZ, March 22, 2002.
    HARTLEY, Captain Scott E., Commanding Officer, National 
Strike Force Coordinating Center, U.S. Coast Guard, Milwaukee, 
WI, July 1, 2002.
    HAVLIK, Stephen C., fire chief, Cedar Rapids Fire 
Department, Iowa City, IA, August 22, 2002.
    HECKER, JayEtta Z., Director, Physical Infrastructure 
Issues, U.S. General Accounting Office, Nashville, TN, March 1, 
2002; Milwaukee, WI, July 1, 2002; Chicago, IL, July 2, 2002; 
Omaha, NE, July 3, 2002.
    HEINEMAN, David, Lt. Governor, State of Nebraska, Omaha, 
NE, July 3, 2002.
    HINRICHS, Dr. Steven, director of Nebraska health 
laboratory, director of microbiology and virology, Department 
of Pathology/ Microbiology, University of Nebraska Medical 
Center, Omaha, NE, July 3, 2002.
    HOFFNER, Lt. Roger E., Arapahoe County officer of Emergency 
Management, Denver, CO, August 23, 2002.
    IDEN, Ronald, L., Assistant Director in Charge, Los Angeles 
Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Los Angeles, CA, 
March 28, 2002.
    JAAX, Dr. Jerry P., associate vice provost for research 
compliance, university veterinarian, Kansas State University, 
Abilene, KS, August 20, 2002.
    JONES, Dallas, director, Governor's Office Of Emergency 
Services, State of California, Los Angeles, CA, March 28, 2002.
    JONES, Ian David, Vanderbilt University Medical Center, 
Nashville, TN, March 1, 2002.
    KELLER, Larry, executive director, Port of Los Angeles, Los 
Angeles, CA, March 28, 2002.
    KNOWLES, Terry L., deputy director, Kansas Bureau of 
Investigation, Abilene, KS, August 20, 2002.
    KRAFT, David A., director, Nuclear Energy Information 
Services, Chicago, IL, July 2, 2002.
    KULESZ, Jim, program manager, systems engineering and 
technology, Oak Ridge National Laboratory, Nashville, TN, March 
1, 2002.
    KULISCH, Commander Gail, Commanding Officer Atlantic Area 
Strike Team, U.S. Coast Guard, Chicago, IL, July 2, 2002.
    LACY, Bruce, nuclear business assets manager for Alliant 
Energy, Duane Arnold Energy Center, Iowa City, IA, August 22, 
2002.
    LANE, James L., undersheriff, Ford County Sheriff's Office, 
Abilene, KS, August 20, 2002.
    LEE, Steve, director, Douglas County Emergency Management 
Agency, Douglas County Health Department, Omaha, NE, July 3, 
2002.
    LUMPKIN, Dr. John R., Director, Illinois Department of 
Public Health, Chicago, IL, July 2, 2002.
    MAYNARD, Otto, president and chief executive officer, Wolf 
Creek Nuclear Operating Corp., Abilene, KS, August 20, 2002.
    MCCUE, Kerry G., director, Ellis County Emergency Medical 
Service, Abilene, KS, August 20, 2002.
    MEFFORD, Larry A., Associate Special Agent in Charge, San 
Francisco Field Office, Federal Bureau of Investigation, San 
Francisco, CA, April 2, 2002.
    MENCER, Suzanne, executive director, Department of Public 
Safety, State of Colorado, Denver, CO, August 23, 2002.
    MILLER, Dr. Lisa A., State epidemiologist for bioterrorism, 
Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment, Denver, 
CO, August 23, 2002.
    MISRA, Dr. Majit, director, seed sciences, Iowa State 
University, Iowa City, IA, August 22, 2002.
    MOSER, Dr. Michael, director, Kansas Department of Health 
and Environment, Division of Health, Abilene, KS, August 20, 
2002.
    NEDDO, Pete, manager of safety and security, Metropolitan 
Utilities District, Omaha, NE, July 3, 2002.
    NILLSON, Commander Dennis, field operations division, 
Evanston Police Department, Chicago, IL, July 2, 2002.
    NOKES, K. David, director, Systems Research Organization, 
Sandia National Laboratory, Albuquerque, NM, March 25, 2002.
    NORQUIST, John O., mayor, city of Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, 
July 1, 2002.
    OLAV-JOHNSEN, John, chairman, DOE/NNSA Biosafety Working 
Group, Albuquerque, NM, March 25, 2002.
    PATE, Paul D., mayor, Cedar Rapids, Iowa City, IA, August 
22, 2002.
    POSNER, Paul L., Managing Director, Federal Budget Issues, 
Strategic Issues, U.S. General Accounting Office, Tempe, 
Phoenix, March 22, 2002; Iowa City, IA, August 22, 2002; 
Denver, CO, August 23, 2002.
    PURCELL, Bill, mayor, city of Nashville, Nashville, TN, 
March 1, 2002.
    RAYMOND, Dr. Richard A., chief medical officer, State of 
Nebraska, Omaha, NE, July 3, 2002.
    RESNICK, I. Gary, program manager, biothreat reduction 
programs, Los Alamos National Laboratory, Albuquerque, NM, 
March 25, 2002.
    RIMSZA, Skip, mayor, Phoenix, AZ, March 22, 2002.
    RIORDAN, Ray, emergency preparedness officer, East Bay 
Municipal Utility District, San Francisco, CA, April 2, 2002.
    ROTH, Dr. Paul B., associate vice president for clinical 
affairs and dean, school of medicine, University of New Mexico 
Health Sciences Center, Albuquerque, NM, March 25, 2002.
    SANDERS, Prentice, assistant chief, San Francisco Police 
Department, San Francisco, CA, April 2, 2002.
    SCHAFFNER, Dr. William, chairman, Department of 
Preventative Medicine, professor of infectious diseases, 
Vanderbilt University School of Medicine, Nashville, TN, March 
1, 2002.
    SCHIFALACQUA, Mariano A., commissioner, Department of 
Public Works, city of Milwaukee, Milwaukee, WI, July 1, 2002.
    SCHNEIDER, Dr. Arthur, professor of medicine, chief, 
endocrinology section, University of Illinois, Chicago, IL, 
July 2, 2002.
    SEEBALD, Captain Raymond E., Captain, Port of Chicago, U.S. 
Coast Guard, Chicago, IL, July 2, 2002.
    SEWELL, Dr. Mac, director of epidemiology, New Mexico 
Department of Health, State of New Mexico, Albuquerque, NM, 
March 25, 2002.
    SMITH, Dr. Philip W., chief, section of infectious disease, 
Department of Internal Medicine, University of Nebraska Medical 
Center, Omaha, NE, July 3, 2002.
    SPENCER, Robert, director, Maricopa County Department of 
Emergency Management, Phoenix, AZ, March 22, 2002.
    STAFFORD, Kevin L., Special Agent in Charge, Kansas City 
Field Office, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Abilene, KS, 
August 20, 2002.
    STANLEY, Ellis, Emergency Management Services, city of Los 
Angeles, Los Angeles, CA, March 28, 2002.
    STEWART, Roy, president, Stewart Electric & Communications, 
Phoenix, AZ, March 22, 2002.
    STORMENT, Steve, assistant chief, Phoenix Fire Department, 
Phoenix, AZ, March 22, 2002.
    SULLIVAN, David B., acting director, Office of Emergency 
Management, city of Denver, Denver, CO, August 23, 2002.
    TAIT, Joseph, E., executive vice president and chief, 
operating officer, Metropolitan Water District, Los Angeles, 
CA, March 28, 2002.
    TEAGARDEN, George A., livestock commissioner, Kansas Animal 
Health Department, State of Kansas, Abilene, KS, August 20, 
2002.
    THACKER, James E., director, Mayor's Office of Emergency 
Management, city of Nashville, Nashville, TN, March 1, 2002.
    THOMAS, Philip, Special Agent in Charge, Memphis Field 
Office, Federal Bureau of Investigation, Nashville, TN, March 
1, 2002.
    TREVINO, Mario H., chief, San Francisco Fire Department, 
San Francisco, CA, April 2, 2002.
    TURNER, Emmett H., chief, Nashville Police Department, 
Nashville, TN, March 1, 2002.
    VARNER, Dr. Kevin P., area veterinarian in charge, U.S. 
Department of Agriculture, Animal and Plant Health Inspection 
Services, Veterinary Services, State of Kansas, Abilene, KS, 
August 20, 2002.
    WAGNER, Paul R., chief, Omaha Fire Department, Omaha, NE, 
July 3, 2002.
    WALL, Larry H., president, Colorado Health and Hospital 
Association, Denver, CO, August 23, 2002.
    WHITNEY, Major General Mason C., adjutant general, State of 
Colorado, Denver, CO, August 23, 2002.
    WIKES, Lieutenant Byron D., Office of Safety Services, 
Police Division, city of Englewood, Denver, CO, August 23, 
2002.
    WILHELM, Dr. John, commisioner, Chicago Department of 
Public Health, Chicago, IL, July 2, 2002.
    WILKINSON, John, chief, Fire and Life Safety Services, city 
of Evanston, Chicago, IL, July 2, 2002.
    WILLIAMS III, Raymond, president, chief executive officer, 
Sumner Regional Medical Center, Abilene, KS, August 20, 2002.
    WILSON, Bernie, chief, Los Angeles International Airport 
Police Department, Los Angeles, CA, March 28, 2002.
    WINSLOW, Dr. Frances, director of Emergency Services, city 
of San Jose, San Francisco, CA, April 2, 2002.
    WOOD, Major General Jackie, adjutant general, Tennessee 
National Guard, Nashville, TN, March 1, 2002.
    WRIGHT, Ned, director, Linn County Management Agency, Iowa 
City, IA, August 22, 2002.
    YESKEY, Kevin, Director, Bioterrorism Response Program, 
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, Los Angeles, CA, 
March 28, 2002.
    YIM, Randall, Managing Director, National Preparedness, 
U.S. General Accounting Office, Albuquerque, NM, March 25, 
2002.
    YOUNG, Quentin, M.D., chair, Health and Medicine Policy 
Research Group, Hyde Park Associates in Medicine, Chicago, IL, 
July 2, 2002.

