Federal News Service - Hearing of the Emergency Preparedness and Response Subcommittee of the House Select Committee on Homeland Security - Transcript
Federal News Service September 29, 2004 Wednesday
SECTION: CAPITOL HILL HEARING
HEADLINE: HEARING OF THE EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS AND RESPONSE SUBCOMMITTEE OF THE HOUSE SELECT COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY SUBJECT: THE NATIONAL INCIDENT MANAGEMENT SYSTEM: ENHANCING RESPONSE TO TERRORIST ATTACKS
CHAIRED BY: REPRESENTATIVE JOHN SHADEGG (R-AZ)
WITNESSES: GIL JAMIESON, ACTING DIRECTOR, NIMS INTEGRATION CENTER, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY;
CHIEF P. MICHAEL FREEMAN, LOS ANGELES COUNTY FIRE DEPARTMENT, CALIFORNIA, ON BEHALF OF THE INTERNATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FIRE CHIEFS; STEVE LENKART, NATIONAL DIRECTOR OF LEGISLATIVE AFFAIRS, INTERNATIONAL BROTHERHOOD OF POLICE OFFICERS; DR. JOSEPH BARBERA, CO-DIRECTOR, INSTITUTE FOR CRISIS, DISASTER, AND RISK MANAGEMENT, GEORGE WASHINGTON UNIVERSITY
LOCATION: 210 CANNON HOUSE OFFICE BUILDING, WASHINGTON, D.C.
BODY:
REP. JOHN SHADEGG (R-AZ): The committee will come to order. First let me extend my personal apology. I was tied up with a vote in another committee. I regret my delay in getting here. I express sincerely my apologies to the members and the witnesses who were waiting and my regret that that occurred. May I begin by asking unanimous consent that opening statements be limited to subcommittee and full committee chairmen and ranking members? Without objection, so ordered.
On March 1, 2004, the Department of Homeland Security secretary, Tom Ridge, acting on Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5 announced the approval of the National Incident Management System, or NIMS. This is a particularly announcement for our nation's homeland security as NIMS is the nation's first standardized management system unifying the actions of all levels of government during a large-scale emergency response. The creation and implementation of NIMS also comports with the recommendation of the 9/11 Commission. Specifically the commission recommended making homeland security funding contingent on the adoption of an incident command system to strengthen teamwork in a crisis, including a regional approach.
What does all this talk about NIMS and incident command mean for America's homeland security? It means that, for the first time, at all levels of government, be it federal, state or local, they will be reading from the same plan, playbook and speaking the same language when they respond to an emergency, ranging from a flood or a fire to a terrorist attack. NIMS is designed to provide a controlled, organized and unified command structure and to respond efficiently and effectively to all major events across the country.
The National Incident Management System has many distinct advantages. As mentioned earlier, it ensures the coordination of all levels of government across city, state and county lines during an emergency. It also provides a basis for standardized communications and a more efficient and effective way to relay information, both essential components for the safe and effective management of a disaster scene or terrorist attack.
Incident management teams have been operating successfully since the 1970s in the management of forest fires. More recently, we have seen the success of NIMS in managing the breakout of the avian influenza in the spring of 2002 and the exotic Newcastle disease in 2003 and in the search and recovery efforts during the space shuttle Columbia disaster. In all of these instances, we saw how successful communication, coordination and cooperation can save lives.
NIMS also assures the same level of preparedness for all agencies of all levels of government across the country. It provides for the same training, certification and planning exercises to ensure standardized responses consistent with mutual agreed upon doctrine. A key to responding successfully to an incident is simply keeping calm and letting logic and the best practices prevail. Educating the public furthers this goal by helping to prevent confusion and chaos. This allows the trained professionals, whether fire, police or health officials or National Guard, to do their jobs in a safe and effective manner.
To help us better understand the intricacies and importance of the National Incident Management System, we will be hearing from both federal and county officials. We are particularly interested in what they have to say about what the respective federal agencies are doing to implement, coordinate and maintain NIMS. We will also assess the rate of integration of NIMS in the national emergency response protocol and if the deadlines for federal grant monies are appropriate and realistic. Finally, we will evaluate how effective NIMS will be in enhancing the response of the fire services, law enforcement agencies and health disaster relief workers.
At this time, I would like to recognize the ranking member, Mr. Thompson, for his opening statement.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: The chair would note that neither the chairman of the full committee nor the ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Cox or Mr. Turner, are here at the moment. So they will not be able to make their opening statements. If they should join us soon, we will at least offer them that opportunity. At this point, I would like to introduce our panel of witnesses.
Mr. Gil Jamieson is the director of NIMS Integration Center for the Department of Homeland Security. Mr. Michael Freeman is the fire chief of the Los Angeles County Fire Department. Mr. Steve Lenkart is the director of Legislative Affairs for the National Association of Government Employees, International Brotherhood of Police Officers and Dr. Joseph Barbera is an associate professor of engineering management and clinical associate professor of emergency medicine at George Washington University.
I'd like to thank all the witnesses for being here. We sincerely appreciate your testimony which we have in written form. Your full testimony will appear in the record. I would invite you at this point in your opening statements to summarize it as best you would like and make any particular points, highlight any particular points that you've made in your written testimony.
With that, Mr. Jamieson, would you like to begin?
If you would, please, maybe press the button on your mike and get a light to come on and then we'll be able to hear you.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: I think we still can't quite hear you. It's not being picked up. Maybe you have to move that microphone a little closer.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: It should work.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: Thank you very much for your testimony.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: Thank you very much for your testimony. I guess I would note that, by tradition, I should have introduced you as Chief Freeman and my apologies for that.
Mr. Steve Lenkart.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: Thank you very much for your testimony.
Dr. Joseph Barbera.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: I'd like to thank all the witness for their thoughtful testimony. Let me begin the questioning with you, Mr. Jamieson. I want to pick up on a point made by Dr. Barbera, and quite frankly, points made by each of our other panelists by kind of beginning with, Dr. Barbera referred to the fact that in reviewing NIMS documents some of the terminology, some of the structure isn't completely understandable within the medical provision. NIMS was developed within Forest Fire Service, as I understand it. You also heard, I think, thoughtful testimony by Mr. Lenkart about how these concepts are somewhat foreign to police officers, and I want to get into some detail on those points earlier.
But it seems to me it's important to begin with the basics. And I guess I would ask you, for my colleagues in Congress, because I've asked a couple of them in the last few days, what do they know about NIMS, and I get blank stares. And also, for the American public, can you just synopsize in plain English, like I might have to do at a town hall meeting, what NIMS is in a way that would be understandable to a doctor or a police officer that had never embraced these concepts, or more importantly, to an average American?
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: And effectively implemented, it is a coordination of all of the first responders to best manage a particular attack, in our case as a terrorism attack or some other incident.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: I want to go-and my time is limited, but I want to give you an opportunity to respond to-specifically respond to the three concerns that the others have raised. First, I think Chief Freeman said clearly that 2006 looks difficult, and I want to ask him a question about that, but I'd like you to respond to the issue of 2006. I think Mr. Lenkart made a very valid point that police officers, for one, don't have the training time that other agencies do, to a certain degree, and in some ways this isn't suited to them. And he asked for special help, including financial assistance, to get the police departments ready for that.
And then last, I think, Dr. Barbera's point about these concepts being formed of doctors who think about the care of a patient now trying to be embracing a whole new concept of taking care of mass casualties. I guess I'd like you to briefly respond to those if you could.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: I hate to cut you off. Hopefully maybe we'll get a second round. But before I finish my first round in case we don't get a second round, Chief, I'd like to ask you and give you a chance to respond to it. The point you made about the 2006 deadline strikes well with me although-because I think it's a tremendous amount, a vast amount to try to accomplish in the time we have. At the same time, it seems to me it's like the many issues that present themselves to the Homeland Security Committee. You're damned if you do and damned if you don't.
And that is, you know, do we set realistic deadline because the American people deserve to be protected as quickly as possible or do we not set that deadline and take the criticism of not setting the deadline? And I'm not sure where the balance strikes. I'd like you to talk to it to that point. Maybe in my own mind, it's like, perhaps the best thing to do is to leave the deadline there until the last minute to encourage everybody to do as much as they can and then out of reality, extend it but only extend it after you realize it can't be achieved. I'd be happy to hear your response.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: I thank you all for your testimony. The chair would now call the ranking member, Mr. Thompson, for his questions.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: Thank you.
Mr. Thompson.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: The time of the gentleman has expired. The chair will call on the gentlelady from New York, Ms. Lowey, for questioning.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: I thank the gentlelady for her questions. This is a comment. I would say I think her impatience on the topic of interoperability and on the topic of coordination and just in the general sense of pushing the department and all of those with these responsibilities to move as quickly as possible serves the nation well and I appreciate it.
The chair would call upon the gentlelady from the Virgin Islands, Ms. Christensen, for her question.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: I thank the gentlelady for her questions and I would advise her that the chair is going to afford a second round if you have the interest or time.
Let me begin a second round just because we have such expertise on this panel and we have the time to do it. I'd like to begin by following up on some questioning that Ms. Lowey pursued on the issue of interoperability. It occurs to me that to make all radio systems within the first responder community interoperable is a very worthy goal but technically and financially a very, very challenging goal. It's going to take us some time. You have departments and agencies that I think had, just prior to 9/11 or even after 9/11 with the community resources, bought systems that were not in fact interoperable.
At the same time, it seems to me, when you first think about incident management-Doctor, and I think you're right, that is a better term-one could first brush, say, well, without interoperability, how can you have incident management between and amongst the different agencies? But at the same time, it seems to me that your testimony, Mr. Jamieson, suggested-and you used a term which I'd like to define, a communication plan-that combined with other testimony, particularly Dr. Barbera's testimony, that in fact a communication plan can in fact overcome the lack of interoperability. It educates me and I think would educate the public-I guess I'd like to describe a communications plan, somewhat as the doctor did with regards to the incident at the Pentagon, and explain how NIMS can help us get beyond the fact that we cannot overnight get interoperability amongst all communications equipment.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: I'm sorry. Dr. Barbera, just to expand on a point you made, as I understand it, it can be as simple as the designation of a liaison to an agency that doesn't have the interoperable equipment, where you communicate to that liaison and then it is repeated amongst that agency on its radio system so that you have essentially two lines of communication, one with those with whom you do have interoperability and some other mechanism to communicate to those that you don't. And that I think can be part of incident management. Is that correct?
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: I'd like to conclude with a question to Mr. Lenkart and Dr. Barbera and also Chief Freeman to you and let each of you comment on it. Rather than asking Mr. Jamieson to give his view, let me ask each of you to give your view. Each of you expressed a concern about your ability to, in the future, impact the NIMS guidelines that have already been developed.
I believe Dr. Barbera said, to a certain degree, there was not enough input from the medical community. I believe Mr. Lenkart pointed out that this is a new concept for police and it needs to be adapted to police in a unique way. And Chief Freeman, as a westerner who spent some time in Los Angeles County, I appreciate your efforts and I think it's important that you be allowed-you're probably the most sophisticated at it because it was, in a way, developed in a fire context. I'd like to each of you to comment on whether or not you feel the department is, in fact, open to input from you as the process goes forward to implementing NIMS and refining the guidelines so that it's in fact workable.
Anyone of you can begin, if you like.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: And from what I have heard, I'm convinced you need to buy in and it seems to me to some degree you already have incident management when you have done search and rescue. Perhaps done in more traditional law enforcement functions but when you do urban search and rescue, you look for somebody or even manhunt circumstances, it seems to me you have similar issues.
Dr. Barbera.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: I appreciate that.
Chief Freeman.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: Thank you.
For a second round, Mr. Thompson.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: Ms. Christensen.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: Maybe if we get our own hearing room some day, we'll be able to operate the buttons instead of having to go room to room like transients.
(BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT)
REP. SHADEGG: I thank the gentlelady. I would concur with her remarks that the testimony has been very helpful and the interchange between panelists, I think, has been an education for them. I'd like to thank all the witnesses for their testimony. The hearing record will remain open for 10 days. We may have additional questions for you as witnesses that are submitted in writing by members who couldn't be here today and your cooperation in responding to those will be greatly appreciated.
With that, the committee stands adjourned.