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