<DOC>
[109 Senate Hearings]
[From the U.S. Government Printing Office via GPO Access]
[DOCID: f:27755.wais]
S. Hrg. 109-567
THE WAR ON TERRORISM: HOW PREPARED IS THE NATION'S CAPITAL?-- PART II
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT,
THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE AND THE DISTRICT
OF COLUMBIA SUBCOMMITTEE
of the
COMMITTEE ON
HOMELAND SECURITY AND
GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED NINTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
MARCH 29, 2006
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
WASHINGTON : 2006
27-755 PDF
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512-1800
Fax: (202) 512-2250 Mail: Stop SSOP, Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON HOMELAND SECURITY AND GOVERNMENTAL AFFAIRS
SUSAN M. COLLINS, Maine, Chairman
TED STEVENS, Alaska JOSEPH I. LIEBERMAN, Connecticut
GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio CARL LEVIN, Michigan
NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
TOM COBURN, Oklahoma THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island MARK DAYTON, Minnesota
ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia
Michael D. Bopp, Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Joyce A. Rechtschaffen, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Trina D. Tyrer, Chief Clerk
OVERSIGHT OF GOVERNMENT MANAGEMENT, THE FEDERAL WORKFORCE AND THE
DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA SUBCOMMITTEE
GEORGE V. VOINOVICH, Ohio, Chairman
TED STEVENS, Alaska DANIEL K. AKAKA, Hawaii
NORM COLEMAN, Minnesota CARL LEVIN, Michigan
TOM COBURN, Oklahoma THOMAS R. CARPER, Delaware
LINCOLN D. CHAFEE, Rhode Island MARK DAYTON, Minnesota
ROBERT F. BENNETT, Utah FRANK LAUTENBERG, New Jersey
PETE V. DOMENICI, New Mexico MARK PRYOR, Arkansas
JOHN W. WARNER, Virginia
Andrew Richardson, Staff Director
Richard J. Kessler, Minority Staff Director
Nanci E. Langley, Minority Deputy Staff Director
Emily Marthaler, Chief Clerk
C O N T E N T S
------
Opening statements:
Page
Senator Voinovich............................................ 1
Senator Akaka................................................ 3
Senator Warner............................................... 17
WITNESSES
Wednesday, March 29, 2006
Thomas Lockwood, Director, Office of National Capital Region
Coordination, U.S. Department of Homeland Security............. 5
Dennis R. Schrader, Director, Governor's Office of Homeland
Security, State of Maryland.................................... 7
Edward D. Reiskin, Deputy Mayor, Public Safety and Justice,
District of Columbia........................................... 8
Robert P. Crouch, Jr., Assistant to the Governor for Commonwealth
Preparedness, Office of Commonwealth Preparedness, Commonwealth
of Virginia.................................................... 10
William O. Jenkins, Jr., Director, Homeland Security and Justice
Issues, U.S. Government Accountability Office.................. 12
Alphabetical List of Witnesses
Crouch, Robert P., Jr.:
Testimony.................................................... 10
Joint prepared statement..................................... 45
Jenkins, William O., Jr.:
Testimony.................................................... 12
Prepared statement........................................... 62
Lockwood, Thomas:
Testimony.................................................... 5
Prepared statement with attachments.......................... 33
Reiskin, Edward D.:
Testimony.................................................... 9
Joint prepared statement..................................... 45
Schrader, Dennis R.:
Testimony.................................................... 7
Joint prepared statement..................................... 45
APPENDIX
``FY 2003 Urban Area Homeland Security Strategy, National Capital
Region,'' October 22, 2003..................................... 80
Responses to Questions submitted for the Record from Mr. Lockwood 93
Joint Responses to Questions for the Record from Mr. Reiskin, Mr.
Crouch, and Mr. Schrader....................................... 102
THE WAR ON TERRORISM: HOW PREPARED IS THE NATION'S CAPITAL?-- PART II
----------
WEDNESDAY, MARCH 29, 2006
U.S. Senate,
Oversight of Government Management, the Federal
Workforce, and the District of Columbia Subcommittee,
of the Committee on Homeland Security
and Governmental Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:35 p.m., in
room SD-342, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. George V.
Voinovich, Chairman of the Subcommittee, presiding.
Present: Senators Voinovich, Warner, and Akaka.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR VOINOVICH
Senator Voinovich. The hearing will please come to order.
Gentleman, you don't have to stand up for us. I thought
maybe you were standing up to get sworn in. Since you are
standing I will swear you in. [Laughter.]
Do you swear that the testimony you are about to give this
Subcommittee is the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the
truth, so help you, God?
Mr. Lockwood. I do.
Mr. Reiskin. I do.
Mr. Crouch. I do.
Mr. Schrader. I do.
Mr. Jenkins. I do.
Senator Voinovich. One thing that many people are not aware
of regarding this Subcommittee, is that we spend significant
amount of time on issues dealing with the District. The issue
before us today is one that is very important.
Today we meet for the second time this Congress to examine
the collective ability of the governments and responsible
authorities of the National Capital Region (NCR) to respond to
a catastrophic event, be it a terrorist attack or a natural
disaster. As the seat of the Nation's Government, the National
Capital Region is a prime target for a terrorist attack.
We must do all that we can to prevent another attack to
this region and the Nation, but as Hurricane Katrina
demonstrated, we must also be prepared to respond to all types
of hazards.
Since September 11, the NCR has received significant
resources for equipment, training, planning, and other
preparedness efforts. As the Senate Subcommittee that has
authorizing jurisdiction over all matters relating to the
District, it is our responsibility to provide effective
oversight to ensure that this region, which houses the Federal
Government and is the symbol of freedom to the world, is well
prepared to respond.
In addition, the full Committee and this Subcommittee have
been involved in the development and refinement of the
Department of Homeland Security and have worked closely with
Secretary Chertoff in that regard. The Subcommittee has closely
tracked the Secretary's Second Stage Review, offering
assistance wherever possible. Last year, I cosponsored S. 21,
Senator Collins' legislation, to help State and local
governments and first responders receive Homeland Security
resources in an efficient and timely manner and create a means
of ensuring that essential capabilities required are met. We
want to ensure the National Capital Region is a model of
preparedness for the entire Nation.
The National Capital Region faces many unique challenges in
its preparedness efforts. Because the region consists of
Federal, State, and local jurisdictions, there is no single
person or office in charge with the authority to order
preparedness activities across the region. As a former governor
and mayor, I understand the difficulties in bringing together
many different players with limited resources to accomplish a
common goal.
To address these challenges, the Office of National Capital
Region Coordination with the Department of Homeland Security
was established in the Act. The office was created to oversee
and coordinate Federal programs and preparedness initiatives
for State, local, and regional authorities. We need to ensure
that this office and the other responsible governments of the
region are effectively using their resources and adequately
executing their responsibilities.
In June 2004, the General Accounting Office, the Government
Accountability Office released a report which recommended that
the Office of National Capital Region Coordination work with
local jurisdictions to develop a coordinated strategic plan to
establish goals and priorities, monitor the plan's
implementation, and identify and address gaps in emergency
preparedness. It also recommended a mechanism to evaluate the
effectiveness of expenditures by conducting assessments based
on established standards and guidelines. I look forward to
learning how the NCR has responded to the GAO recommendations.
I am pleased to hear that the Office of Homeland Security,
within the District, has developed a web-based tracking system
or program to manage and monitor the region's Urban Area
Security Initiative grants. However, I do have concerns with
the lack of information of non-UASI funding in this database.
In joint response by Virginia, Maryland, and the District
to a question from the last hearing regarding the progress made
on tracking Federal funds, the response was that the NCR is
absolutely committed on coordination of all resources. I look
forward to hearing how this program is working and if the
region fully plans to implement the recommendations of GAO to
track all grant funding.
Furthermore, I look forward to learning of the progress
made with regard to the National Capital Region's strategic
plan. In our first Subcommittee hearing in July 2005, Mr.
Lockwood testified that a final draft of the strategic plan had
been circulated to key stakeholders and that it would be
released in September 2005. Eight months later, and 6 months
since the proposed release date, the region has yet to release
a final version of the strategic plan. This is unacceptable,
and we would like to know why the delay.
It is both urgent and critical that the National Capital
Region develop an effective strategic plan to establish goals
and priorities for the region. It is contrary to good
management practices to proceed with large expenditures without
a strategic plan. This delay has to be explained. Additionally,
I strongly recommend that in the final development of the plan,
the region officials take advantage of the assistance of GAO.
The cooperation between the Office of Management and Budget and
GAO on developing strategic plans to address high-risk programs
can serve as a model in this regard.
Finally, I would like you all to provide the Subcommittee
with a date for the completion of this plan and stick to it. I
assure you that I will continue to monitor your progress, as
well as Senator Akaka.
After the poor response to Hurricane Katrina, we saw the
importance of establishing a clear chain of command before a
catastrophic event occurs. Because the NCR has multiple
entities involved with the security, it is imperative that we
know who is in charge. I am interested in hearing how the NCR
is addressing this issue as well as if you have assigned
ownership of programs and response within your strategic plan.
Before concluding my remarks, I would like to recognize the
hard work and dedication of those individuals who are
collaborating between all levels of government, the private
sector, and the nonprofit community to improve the safety of
this region. I do not want anything said here today to say that
we do not appreciate the hard work that all of you are doing.
As I stated in the last hearing, I offer whatever
assistance I can to ensure you have the necessary resources to
get the job done. If there is something standing in the way,
something in terms of homeland security, we want to know about
it. Don't we, Senator Akaka?
Senator Akaka. Yes.
Senator Voinovich. I now yield to my good friend, Senator
Akaka, for his opening statement.
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR AKAKA
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Chairman Voinovich. It
is a pleasure to work with you on this Subcommittee. Today we
follow up on the National Capital Region hearing that the
Subcommittee held last July.
I would like to welcome our witnesses back to the
Subcommittee, and also looking at those who are attending this,
I want to welcome all of you, too. And, Mr. Crouch, you are the
only new face here today, and we are happy to have you
representing the Commonwealth of Virginia.
As you know, the security of the National Capital Region,
which includes the District of Columbia and the surrounding
counties in Maryland and Virginia, became a heightened priority
after the attacks of September 11, 2001. To address this
concern, Congress created an Office of National Capital Region
Coordination in the Department of Homeland Security to oversee
and coordinate Federal programs and domestic preparedness
initiatives for State, local, and regional authorities within
the National Capital Region. Coordinating so many jurisdictions
and levels of government is an immense challenge, yet we must
ensure the NCR is able to function as a cohesive body in times
of crisis.
Last July, I expressed my hope that the NCR will serve as a
model for other urban areas as the country moves towards a more
regionalized preparedness model. We saw during Hurricane
Katrina the chaos and suffering that can result from
insufficient coordination between different levels of
government. Conversely, residents of Hawaii witnessed
government coordination at its best over the past few weeks as
Federal, State, and local officials worked together to mitigate
flooding on the Island of Kauai.
The NCR presents far greater intergovernmental coordination
challenges than anywhere else in the country because of the
strong Federal presence in the District. Who responds, how they
respond, and who is in charge of the response are questions
that should be answered long before disaster strikes.
The lack of coordination between DHS and the D.C.
Government was demonstrated by the handling of a breach of D.C.
airspace by a small plane on May 11 of last year, and I think
the Chairman alluded to that. Mayor Williams was not notified
of the incident until it was almost over, approximately 40
minutes after DHS began tracking the plane.
At our last hearing, Mr. Reiskin testified that DHS and the
District were working on communication protocols for major
security incidents in the District. I am eager to hear how
these protocols have been implemented and whether coordination
has improved.
We should not forget that one of the reasons the DHS Office
of National Capital Region Coordination was created in the
first place was to facilitate Federal, State, and local
communications in the NCR. Mr. Lockwood, you represent the
Federal piece of the NCR, and it is your job to ensure Federal
agencies work with the State and local authorities. I see this
intergovernmental facilitation as one of the primary reasons
DHS is part of the NCR.
I understand that NCR has conducted numerous planning
sessions and meetings as a region, and I commend you for that
cooperation. However, this Subcommittee has been concerned over
the lack of having a Homeland Security Strategic Plan for the
NCR.
Operational planning is good, but it needs to be guided by
a strategic blueprint. I am disappointed that 4\1/2\ years
after September 11 the NCR still does not have a strategic plan
that all Members endorse.
GAO first alerted the NCR to the importance of developing a
strategic plan almost 2 years ago, and at our July 2005 hearing
each of you testified that a draft strategic plan was complete
and a final version would be ready by September 2005. Today, 6
months after that deadline lapsed, a final strategic plan has
yet to be completed. The people who live here, no question,
deserve better than that.
I also would like to take this opportunity to discuss the
NCR's ability to track homeland security spending by its member
governments. The NCR needs to know what investments have been
made in its region--this includes Federal and State funding--so
as not to be duplicative with its Urban Area Security
Initiative funds. This is not simply a bookkeeping exercise. I
believe the NCR has made progress towards this goal, but it is
my understanding that this capability has not yet been
achieved.
I would like to thank each of you for your service. I
recognize that your workload and responsibilities have
increased significantly in recent years and your offices are
all understaffed. However, I know you agree that ensuring the
security of our Nation's capital must be top priority.
I look forward to your testimony and to continuing to work
with all of you. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Voinovich. I would like to point out to the
witnesses that Senator Akaka and I did not coordinate our
opening statements. But the fact that they were so much alike
underscores our mutual concern about the planning.
We look forward to hearing what you have to say, and we are
very fortunate today to have Thomas Lockwood, who is the
Director of the Office of National Capital Region Coordination
at the Department of Homeland Security; the Hon. Robert Crouch
is the Assistant to the Governor for Commonwealth Preparedness
for the Commonwealth of Virginia; the Hon. Dennis Schrader is
the Director of the Maryland Governor's Office of Homeland
Security; Edward D. Reiskin is the Deputy Mayor for Public
Safety and Justice for the District of Columbia; and, finally,
William Jenkins is the Director of Homeland Security and
Justice Issues at the Government Accountability Office.
Mr. Lockwood, we will start with your testimony. I would
like you to understand that we would like you to complete your
testimony within 5 minutes. Your entire statement will be
inserted in the record, and we are glad to have you here.
TESTIMONY OF THOMAS LOCKWOOD,\1\ DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF NATIONAL
CAPITAL REGION COORDINATION, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY
Mr. Lockwood. Thank you all, and thank you for the
opportunity to update you on the work that we have done since
we talked to you in July.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Lockwood with attachments appears
in the Appendix on page 33.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since July, we have made great strides in strategic
planning of where we are and where we are going. Several times
today you are going to hear the phrase either ``partners'' or
``teammates.'' The region is diverse, and includes Maryland,
Virginia, the District, the Executive, Legislative, and
Judicial Branches, regional authorities, the private sector for
profit and not-for-profit, and our international participants.
We have made an active effort to integrate and bring these
parties together.
Our plan, the 2005 National Capital Region Strategic Plan
\1\ addresses this challenge by defining the priorities and
objectives for the entire region without regard to any specific
funding mechanisms, provides strategic guidance to the
application and allocation of all homeland security and
preparedness grants throughout the region, and provides input
to the future internal planning, programming, and budgeting
processes of the NCR jurisdictions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The ``2005 Update to the National Capital Region Homeland
Security Strategic Plan'' appears in the Appendix on page 40.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The NCR homeland security partners have been absolutely
dedicated to building a strategic plan. As a starting point, we
have decided on and we have leveraged the foundational work
from September 11 through today. This includes a 2002 Regional
Emergency Coordination Plan; the Eight Commitments to Action in
2002 through the Governor and Mayor, and Advisor Ridge; the
2003 UASI Strategic Plan; the recommendations from the Chief
Administrative Officers in 2004; and, again, working with the
practitioners of the emergency support functions, even in 2005.
Additionally, the Federal documents that were foundational
to our strategic plan were: The National Strategy for Homeland
Security, the Department of Homeland Security Strategic Plan,
Homeland Security Presidential Directives, the National
Incident Management System, the National Response Plan, various
templates, and various grant guidances. We have used these as
an integrating framework between national and regional
initiatives to build our framework.
From August 2004 to June 2005, we went through a detailed
consensus-building phase. Through this phase, we decided to
take an all-hazards approach. This was an extensive discussion.
The leadership at all levels agreed that this should be an all-
hazards approach.
One of the key foundational principles that we came to was
strengthening regional coordination among all partners to gain
synergy without weakening jurisdictional autonomy. That is a
foundation for what we do in the NCR. How do we coordinate but
recognize the organizational or jurisdictional distinctions
between us; to prepare for all-hazards, to advance safety, to
foster a culture of collaboration, respect, innovation, mutual
aid amongst all of the partners, and to adopt best practices.
These guiding principles help shape the vision, which is
working together toward a safe and secure National Capital
Region. Using these principles to guide planning within the
context of the overall mission and vision, the leadership could
then gain agreement on the high-level goals and objectives.
That initial development took place between June and
November. Once the overall framework was established and agreed
to during the NCR-wide strategic planning in June, we continued
to work together through multiple groups. There were four core
goal groups. Participants in these groups included Federal,
State, local representatives, regional representatives,
representatives of core practitioner groups, not-for-profits,
civic groups, and private sector representatives.
We have continued to mature those goals through the Katrina
time period and through the events that we had in the fall.
These were framed out. In fact, having worked with these groups
and targeting the November time frame so that the work was done
prior to this grant cycle, we aligned priorities against the
core capability task lists to define our priorities prior to
this grant cycle. Those priorities align with both the national
priorities and the regional priorities. Deputy Mayor Reiskin's
section will explain in detail, how these priorities and
initiatives were foundational for the process now and moving
forward.
Our update, which has been available since, I believe,
October on the Council of Governments web page, will contribute
to the NCR's success by providing numerous important related
benefits such as a more efficient allocation of resources
throughout the region, transportation and funding priorities,
and increased communication and interaction with our
coordinating stakeholders.
This region has been actively engaged to develop out and to
mature a strong framework across the multiple partners.
Thank you, sir.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you. Mr. Schrader.
TESTIMONY OF DENNIS R. SCHRADER,\1\ DIRECTOR, GOVERNOR'S OFFICE
OF HOMELAND SECURITY, STATE OF MARYLAND
Mr. Schrader. Mr. Chairman, Mr. Ranking Member, thank you
for having us here today. I am going to focus on the strategic
plan implementation and how we have gone about that.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The joint prepared statement of Messrs. Schrader, Reiskin, and
Crouch appears in the Appendix on page 45.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Strategic Goal No. 1 talks about a collaborative culture
for planning, decisionmaking, and implementation across the
NCR, and there are six objectives within that goal that focus
on risk assessment, identification of priorities, and gaps in
the enhancement of our project delivery process to ensure
accountability.
For the past 2 years, the NCR has focused on improving its
execution of projects to create tangible outcomes, which you
will hear from Mr. Crouch here in a minute. And the key to this
is effective regional decisionmaking. There are probably 200 or
300 key stakeholders that we are coordinating with throughout
the region, which at the meetings we held, there were probably
60 to 80 people at any one of these facilitated meetings. So
effective regional decisionmaking and program management are
keys to implementing this plan, which has multiple initiatives,
programs, and objectives, of which 16--we have 45 initiatives
that were identified--are key initiatives that are focused on
as priorities in the grant process which Mr. Reiskin will talk
about.
The Senior Policy Group has the responsibility for
oversight of homeland security grant funding for each of the
individual States and the urban areas on a day-to-day basis, so
myself and John Droneburg from Maryland, as is the same in the
other jurisdictions, we have day-to-day responsibility, and we
track the overall--in Maryland, for example, we have $369
million in all categories, and then, of course, we have the
$171 million from the NCR.
In that vein, we have directed our State administrative
agents to get together to start comparing information. That is
happening. And then the States have to coordinate their
programs together with the Federal Government and the local
jurisdictions. And we do that working closely with the chief
administrative officers and their practitioners through the
Washington Council of Governments. But the other thing we have
done since the last time we spoke to you which is very
important, is we have created these regional program working
groups, which are our people in the State enterprise who are
doing this work on a day-to-day basis. So, for example, the key
priorities, like critical infrastructure protection,
intelligence, information sharing, interoperability, we have
work groups that are organized that are accountable back to us
so that we are getting integration between the State dollars
that are being spent and the NCR dollars.
Moving on to program management, we are continuously
improving our process to implement the strategy through the
program management function that has been established. As I
said, we have got $188 million in UASI, which includes a $13
million regional transit grant. We are paying particular
attention to the expenditure rate as a first priority. The last
time we talked to you, we had a 17.6 percent expenditure rate
on the total dollars. It is now 39.5 percent, so we have put a
lot of focus on driving that program process.
We believe that improving the project management process is
critical to the implementation of the plan, and we are very
focused on that.
I would like to also mention on these regional program
working groups, that they have representatives from our States.
So, for example, the individual who runs the critical
infrastructure protection program in Maryland is the same
person who is on the NCR group, so they are tied together. My
colleagues in the District and Virginia have done the same
thing, and it has led to things like, for example, WEBEOC,
which is an incident management product that we piloted in
Maryland. It is now being migrated into all the jurisdictions
so we are able to talk to each other and integrate our
operations centers. So there are very tangible outcomes.
Finally, the Office of National Capital Region Coordination
has facilitated a working relationship with Joint Forces
Command here in the NCR, which has been very productive. The
Joint Forces Command is helping to coordinate the DOD and NCR
capabilities. We are trying to figure out how to exercise
together, and there are monthly meetings now hosted by the
Joint Forces Command with Federal, State, and local officials
to create visibility and prioritization of all the exercises in
the NCR, which is no small task.
Finally, on the airspace incursion, I think Mr. Reiskin
will talk about this, but since we have met last, the Domestic
Events Network monitoring stations have been installed in the
District in a couple of places, as well as the HSOC, and there
has been significant improvement in that over the last year--or
almost a year.
So I will stop there, and I would just say that we believe
that program management, which is a hallmark of DOD program
management and strategy implementation, is our objective, and
we are going to drive to continue improving that process to
satisfactorily meet our expectations.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Voinovich. I will now call on Mr. Reiskin.
TESTIMONY OF EDWARD D. REISKIN,\1\ DEPUTY MAYOR, PUBLIC SAFETY
AND JUSTICE, DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA
Mr. Reiskin. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member
Akaka.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The joint prepared statement of Messrs. Schrader, Reiskin, and
Crouch appears in the Appendix on page 45.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
You heard from Mr. Lockwood about the extensive strategic
planning process that we went through both before and
subsequent to the last hearing, and that did get us to a point
by last fall where we had a consensus on a vision, mission,
goals, objectives, and priority initiatives.
You also heard from Mr. Schrader, who described how we
matured our processes and relationships such that all
stakeholders--State, regional, local, Federal--leverage and
complement each other to support the intensive program
management structure needed to manage such a significant
enterprise, which is what Mr. Schrader just referred to in his
closing.
So to pick up from where they left off, I want to bring you
forward to the present to explain how our work in recent months
follows from and supports our strategic plan.
We met with members of your staff last December shortly
after having received the fiscal year 2006 homeland security
grant program guidance. Although the guidance was developed for
a specific set of grant programs, it did contain an element
designed to look more broadly beyond the grant program. The
enhancement plan, which was a part of the application process,
as I understood it when we met with your staff, would provide
for enhancing our capabilities, not limited to single grant
funding sources or a grant performance period. While it did
take that broader perspective, as we went through the process,
it did not get us to the level that GAO recommends, and that we
are striving for in terms of specific outcomes, milestones, and
performance measures for each of the program areas.
That process, the enhancement of the planning process,
started with the identification of priority capabilities for
the region that we added to national priorities that were
designated by the Department of Homeland Security. Using our
recently completed strategic plan as a guide, the State and
local leadership of the region identified six capabilities that
represented the region's priorities, so those came directly
from the strategic plan.
We then tasked regional working groups with undertaking
capability reviews of each priority capability, which led to
the completion of the enhancement plan. That plan, while rich
in depth with regard to our capabilities, is not an
implementation document. In other words, again, it does not
specify outcomes, milestones, and performance measures, nor
does it identify the implementing parties, specifically. It
did, however, serve its purpose as a basis, that was framed by
the strategic plan for the leadership, allowing them to develop
its proposal for the 2006 grant applications.
As Mr. Crouch will discuss, we are now refining work in
each of those priority capability areas--we have 14 of them--
which we will fold back into the implementation aspect of the
strategic plan. So the enhancement plan work will support the
broader need, in other words, beyond the current UASI grant,
and will help flesh out many, though not all, aspects of the
strategic plan.
Our written testimony provides a lot of detail on the
process, and we have provided the outcomes of that process to
your staff. But before turning it over to Mr. Crouch, I do want
to summarize where we were and where we are.
We had been undertaking our strategic planning process with
all the key regional stakeholders for some time when the
Department of Homeland Security issued strategy guidance last
summer. We then endeavored to adjust our process to come in
line with that guidance.
Then in December, just 2 weeks after we had completed the
first major phase of our strategic planning process, the
Department issued its grant guidance, which, while not
completely unexpected, represented a significant departure from
previous guidance and the processes needed to support them.
The new guidance was firmly grounded in the National
Preparedness Goal, which is a good thing and something that we
in the region very much support. It did, however, cause us to
reorient, because although our strategic plan was developed
fully mindful of the National Preparedness Goal, it did not use
that goal as its framework.
So using our strategic plan to provide the strategic
direction, we then had to begin a completely different process
in order to execute the grant application in order to align
with the priority capabilities, which then led to the
development of the enhancement plan that I referenced. That
plan did flow from our strategic plan and was worked
essentially by the same people, those folks in the room that
Mr. Schrader referred to. More or less the same people who
worked on the strategic plan are the ones who then worked on
the enhancement plan. The enhancement plan, however, is a very
different orientation than the four goals of our strategic
plan.
But with the enhancement plan now, we have gone a level
deeper and with a different orientation that we will now fold
back into the maturation of our strategic plan into an
implementation document, as Mr. Crouch will now describe.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you. Mr. Crouch.
TESTIMONY OF ROBERT P. CROUCH, JR.,\1\ ASSISTANT TO THE
GOVERNOR FOR COMMONWEALTH PREPAREDNESS, OFFICE OF COMMONWEALTH
PREPAREDNESS, COMMONWEALTH OF VIRGINIA
Mr. Crouch. Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member
Akaka.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The joint prepared statement of Messrs. Schrader, Reiskin, and
Crouch appears in the Appendix on page 45.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mr. Reiskin spoke to where we have been and where we are
now, and as the newest member of this panel, it is my pleasure
to speak of the direction in which we are going. I think it is
significant, as the Chairman noted, that both the Chairman and
the Ranking Member made reference to the National Capital
Region serving as a model for the Nation. It has impressed me
in the 2\1/2\ months that I have been in my current position
that commitment strongly exists among all of the participants
at the local, State, and Federal level involved in the National
Capital Region efforts.
Certainly critical to that is our finalization of a
strategic plan. I have been asked by my colleagues to share
with the Chairman and the Ranking Member that it is our
intention to have that final strategic plan completed no later
than August of this year. Incorporated into that final
strategic plan, which we will use as our guide for the coming
years in working with our local, State, and Federal partners,
will be several efforts that are ongoing currently. One is a
detailed, rigorous assessment of preparedness levels by our
local partners and State partners entitled the ``Emergency
Management Accreditation Program.'' This reviews emergency
operations at all levels. It is a nationally accredited plan,
one in which only eight States have actually received
accreditation, and we will be applying the results of that
exercise in the final strategic plan, which we will have
complete by August.
Additionally, we will also fold into the final strategic
plan the results of the President's and Congress' direction for
a nationwide plan review. That effort will be completed in time
to be rolled into the strategic plan as well.
We would like to share with you some of the tangible
accomplishments that have occurred within the National Capital
Region since this group met with you last in July 2005. We have
begun building an interoperable communications platform, which
will provide secure, non-commercial, restricted access to
critical region communications networks for both high-speed
fiber optics and wireless broadband mobile communications. This
platform will ensure that the infrastructure is in place for
facilitating real-time, any-time data communications within the
National Capital Region. The first stage of this effort, which
will incorporate all the jurisdictions out to the Beltway, will
be completed by January 2007.
We have developed an electronic surveillance system called
ESSENCE for the early notification of community-based
epidemics. ESSENCE uses both traditional and non-traditional
data such as a hospital emergency room chief complaints,
military outpatient encounters, physician office visit claims,
and over-the-counter medication sales to display potential
epidemiological anomalies.
We have completed the National Capital Region Surge
Capacity Concept of Operations Plan to determine the available
hospital beds throughout the Maryland, Virginia, and District
of Columbia hospitals that would be available in the event of a
critical event, again, applying our all-hazards approach to
these issues.
We are currently linking, as Mr. Schrader indicated
earlier, all emergency operation centers within the National
Capital Region and installing a common communication/emergency
operation software--WEBEOC.
Each jurisdiction within the National Capital Region has
been supplied with an electronic citizen notification system,
and we have purchased a second round of turn-out gear for all
firefighters within the National Capital Region, thus allowing
the individual firefighter to continue to function, even if the
first round of gear is contaminated during an incident.
As we move forward with our completed strategic plan
seeking to be the model of the Nation, our goal is to
demonstrate that in the complicated layering of government--
local, State, and Federal--across jurisdictional lines in the
National Capital Region, perhaps unparalleled elsewhere in the
Nation, that if we can get it right here, our comrades
throughout the country can also use this as a template to
approach their efforts and cooperation.
We also, as we move forward, appreciate the resources that
this Committee and others have extended to us and would like to
reiterate the continuing need particularly for Emergency
Management Preparedness Grant funds to supply the resources we
need to do this work. Thank you, gentlemen.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you. Mr. Jenkins.
TESTIMONY OF WILLIAM O. JENKINS, JR.,\1\ DIRECTOR, HOMELAND
SECURITY AND JUSTICE ISSUES, U.S. GOVERNMENT ACCOUNTABILITY
OFFICE
Mr. Jenkins. Chairman Voinovich and Ranking Member Akaka, I
appreciate the opportunity to be here today to discuss the
status of strategic planning for emergency preparedness in the
National Capital Region. Effective strategic planning is
essential for setting clear goals and priorities, guiding the
effective use of resources, and measuring success and achieving
targeted levels of preparedness for all types of major
emergencies, including catastrophic events, whether the result
of nature, accident, or deliberate action.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The prepared statement of Mr. Jenkins appears in the Appendix
on page 62.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A well-defined, comprehensive strategic planning for the
NCR is an essential part of assuring that the region is
prepared for the risks it faces. The Office of National Capital
Region Coordination has worked closely with NCR member States,
local jurisdictions, and nongovernmental entities to establish
collaborative working relationships and processes for assessing
emergency preparedness needs and developing a strategic plan
for the region. Such collaboration and stakeholder input and
buy-in is important. However, there is still not a completed
strategic plan for the region, and according to the NCR,
completion of the plan will require integrating information and
analyses from other documents, which the other witnesses have
described, that are completed or nearly complete.
A November 18, 2005, NCR presentation describes the NCR's
vision, mission, goals, objectives, and priority initiatives.
This document contains some elements of a good strategic plan,
including some performance measures, some target dates, and
some cost estimates.
On March 14, the NCR provided us with copies of additional
documents that officials said were to be incorporated into the
strategic plan. Not yet available was the completed assessment
of the NCR and its individual jurisdictions using the Emergency
Management Assessment Program criteria.
The majority of the documents provided to us were developed
in response to DHS requirements such as the National
Preparedness Goal and in support of the NCR's fiscal year 2006
homeland security grant application. NCR's investment
justification in support of its fiscal year 2006 grant
application includes 12 of the NCR priority initiatives as
identified in the November 18 core planning document. These
investment justifications include such initiatives as mass care
and citizen preparedness and participation. However, not all of
the 12 individual investments in the grant application were
among the region's priorities.
For example, strengthening interoperable communications is
a national priority, and a regional priority, but it was not
included in the 16 priority initiatives that the NCR identified
in November 2005. It is important and necessary, of course,
that the NCR address national priorities and goals in its
strategic plan, but it is equally important and necessary that
a final strategic plan clearly integrate national goals,
priorities, and requirements with regional goals, priorities,
and requirements.
The plan should be based on an assessment of the risks the
region faces and the capabilities needed to reduce those risks.
The documents we received have no discussion of those two
elements.
A completed strategic plan that builds on the November 18
presentation should review, strengthen, and clarify the
following core elements of a strategic plan: It should clearly
identify initiatives that will accomplish the objectives of
each strategic goal; include performance measures and targets
that indicate how the initiatives will accomplish the
objectives; include milestones and target dates for
accomplishing individual initiatives; include specific
information on the resources and investment for each
initiative; and it should also clearly identify organizational
roles and responsibilities for coordination, integration, and
implementation of the plan, including clear assignment of
accountability for implementing specific initiatives.
It is also important that the NCR plan identify how it
relates to, and leverages, the efforts and resources of the
District, Maryland, Virginia, and individual local member
jurisdictions. We appreciate that a regional approach to
emergency preparedness has not been the historic norm in the
NCR or elsewhere. Emergency preparedness has largely been
approached as the responsibility of individual local
jurisdictions supplemented with mutual aid agreements.
We also recognize that a strategic plan, once initially
completed, is a living document that requires continual
reassessment as risks, capabilities, and resources change. But
before the plan can be fully assessed, it must first be
completed.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you very much.
Mr. Reiskin, you are the deputy mayor in charge of
preparedness, correct? You are appointed by the mayor?
Mr. Reiskin. That is correct.
Senator Voinovich. The District is going to have an
election in November.
Mr. Reiskin. That is correct.
Senator Voinovich. You are knowledgeable about the NCR. I
think all of you should recognize that if there is a change in
leadership, Mr. Reiskin may not have his job. It is important
that you take advantage of the fact that we have got some time,
but not a whole lot. I just bring that up.
Mr. Crouch, you have been in your job for 2\1/2\ months?
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir.
Senator Voinovich. Your predecessor is now working for the
Department of Homeland Security.
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir. My predecessor, George Foresman, is
now Under Secretary for Preparedness for the Department of
Homeland Security, yes, sir.
Senator Voinovich. Obviously recognized for his background.
We welcome you to the team.
Mr. Jenkins, a very simple question is: Do you think that
it is possible for the NCR to effectively manage Federal
homeland security funds and be adequately prepared for a
catastrophic event without a collaboratively written final
strategic plan?
Mr. Jenkins. In a word, no.
Senator Voinovich. If we had a natural disaster or
terrorist attack today, the NCR would be at a disadvantage
because the strategic plan is not in place?
Mr. Jenkins. Well, I think it is hard to say how
disadvantaged. In a sense, I think it is a question knowing in
what way they would be disadvantaged. As I said, the real issue
is identifying the risks that you face and the capabilities
that you need to be able to address those risks. And in the
documents that we have got, there is very little discussion of
the risks that are faced or the capabilities that are needed.
There is a lot of discussion of particular initiatives, of
particular activities, of particular projects, but it is not
easy with the documents we have to figure out what they add up
to.
Senator Voinovich. So it is risks and capabilities. Those
of you that are charged with the responsibility of coordinating
the NCR, do you understand those things that GAO says are
missing? And are you responding to them? In other words, Mr.
Jenkins, have you communicated to the NCR what GAO thinks
should be in the plan? I encourage the NCR to use GAO as a
valuable resource in developing their plan.
Mr. Lockwood. Mr. Chairman, if I may?
Senator Voinovich. Yes.
Mr. Lockwood. The working group here between Maryland,
Virginia, the District, and DHS has worked collaborately--we
have worked together as a matter of course, just building out
the documents, but we have also opened up the process to GAO to
share all of the documents we have. It is not as though we are
providing finished, copied, or camera-ready documents to GAO.
We have opened up our internal working process and our internal
working documents to GAO, which show exactly what we are doing.
GAO has been very open with the things that they expect to
see in a strategic plan to help us shape our requirements and
our phases as well. We have asked GAO to provide
recommendations of what they see or what they want to see in
strong, guiding strategic plans.
Senator Voinovich. Can you give us a date as to when you
believe that you will be able to announce that the plan is
completed?
Mr. Reiskin. In our testimony, Mr. Chairman, we reference
August of this year, August 2006, as when we believe that we
will have the strategic plan done to the level that both we--
and we do agree with the GAO, that we are comfortable with in
terms of having adequate specificity in terms of milestones,
performance measures, accountable parties. Of our strategic
plan, we have identified 16 priority initiatives, and all of
those by August will be developed with all of those elements as
prescribed by the GAO. And as we have discussed with GAO, we
welcome their input as we continue to develop this.
Senator Voinovich. I should point out that you did not give
GAO the documents until March 14.
Mr. Jenkins, do you think that this August date is
reasonable?
Mr. Jenkins. It is a little bit difficult for us to say.
They do have these other documents that they need to meld into
it. I think they do need an overarching statement of risks and
capabilities that they are aiming for, and at least in the
documents that we got, that seems to be missing. And I think
that is an important component of the plan that is not in there
now.
Senator Voinovich. Do you understand that, that he wants
risks and capabilities? That is a big area.
Senator Akaka.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to note that I am directing my questions on
the strategic plan to Mr. Lockwood because his testimony
focused on the plan. However, I would like to invite any of the
NCR representatives to answer the following questions as well.
Mr. Lockwood, I want to clarify a few things in your
testimony. First, you mentioned that you are working on an
update to the NCR-HLS strategic plan. To me, this implies that
a strategic plan exists. I want to make sure we are clear. The
document entitled ``NCR Plenary Session,'' dated November 17,
2005, is this the document that you are referring to as the
strategic plan?
Mr. Lockwood. On the website in September, we published the
visions, the goals, and the guidelines. The document that you
see, the November document, is a much more detailed level,
including the accountability, the goals, and the measures.
One of the things that the region felt very strongly about
was their strategic plans, even though they did not meet the
GAO criteria, they continued to build upon and leverage the
previous agreements that they came to. The region agreed that
this should be an update of the regional strategic plan.
Three core pieces need to be folded in and we made the
decision to hold off until these three pieces were done:
One, the national review following Katrina, the review of
the catastrophic planning indexes needed to be done by the
State, territories, District of Columbia, and all 75 major
urban areas. That is taking place now. Two, the enhancement
review that you saw through the Urban Area-Security Initiative
and SHSGP money, is also taking place.
Last, the EMAP assessments, as we look at those core major
foundational projects, they will have much more detailed level
that need to be shaped and integrated into the strategic plan
itself.
Senator Akaka. One question about the document previously
mentioned, Mr. Lockwood. Is there a reason the document is not
labeled ``Draft NCR-HLS Strategic Plan''?
Mr. Lockwood. The document that you have in front of you is
actually from the plenary session, where we had a host of
Federal, State, and locals, to review work that the individual
groups worked on from July through November and to agree on the
framework points for the UASI section, the next session. That
document will continually be updated. That document was also a
core reference point for driving the priorities for this year's
grant process.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The ``FY 2003 Urban Area Homeland Security Strategy, National
Capital Region,'' October 22, 2003 appears in the Appendix on page 80.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senator Akaka. When you appeared before the Subcommittee in
July 2005, you testified that the NCR had completed a draft
strategic plan. Can you tell me how that document differed from
the NCR Plenary Session document?
Mr. Lockwood. The vision, mission, goals, objectives, the
guiding principles have been consistent. The framework that we
had hoped to publicly announce and we had released on the
websites back in September, in fact, was done. The detailed
levels to guide the spending, the performance levels, the
roles, the responsibilities, target milestones, the key content
that GAO is looking for in a strategic plan, was not matured
enough, and it took us several weeks and several comprehensive
meetings just to break out the pieces that you see in that
November plenary session.
Senator Akaka. As I looked through your testimony, I found
your timeline for the strategic plan development confusing. You
said that the consensus-building phase lasted from August 2004
through June 2005, and the initiative development phase lasted
from June 2005 to November 2005. Yet when you testified before
the Subcommittee in July 2005, you said that you had completed
a draft strategic plan and that the final plan would be done in
September 2005. When did your timeline change? And why?
Mr. Lockwood. There are a couple of key pieces in this.
Again, the vision, mission, goals, objectives, principles have
been fairly consistent as we were boiling these down and
driving consensus across those. By summer, those were pretty
well completed. The core problems that we have is at the
detailed level and detailed agreement on who has which
responsibilities, who are the supporting organizations, what
are the resources required to deliver those.
The consensus process around the details takes much longer
to do. The other complicating fact is that the people that are
executing the programs are also doing the strategic planning.
Thus if there is a major event or if there is a major break in
the workload to do an event, we stop the strategic planning.
Senator Akaka. Yes, well, my time is up, Mr. Chairman, but
let me ask one question of the rest of you, and you can give me
a one-word answer. Will you commit to keep the Subcommittee
updated on the status of the plan?
Mr. Reiskin. Yes.
Mr. Crouch. Absolutely.
Mr. Schrader. Yes.
Senator Akaka. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Voinovich. I would like to have you submit for the
record how you are going about keeping the Subcommittee up-to-
date on the plans so we have something in writing.
I am very happy to have Senator Warner here. Senator Warner
is the senior Senator from Virginia. This NCR plan has enormous
impact on your constituents. Senator Warner, do you have a
statement?
OPENING STATEMENT OF SENATOR WARNER
Senator Warner. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will ask
unanimous consent to put my prepared statement in the record.
Senator Voinovich. Without objection.
[The prepared statement of Senator Warner follows:]
PREPARED STATEMENT OF SENATOR WARNER
Mr. Chairman, thank you for calling this hearing today to look at
the preparedness of the Nation's Capital. I, unfortunately, was not
able to attend your first hearing on this topic last summer and very
much appreciate your continued efforts in this arena as it is of the
highest importance.
After the September 11 attacks, the National Capital region's
congressional delegation worked together to create the Office of
National Capital Region Coordination (ONCRC). In the legislation
creating the Department of Homeland Security we inserted a provision
that created the office we have represented today. The ONCRC has the
mission to ``oversee and coordinate Federal programs for, and
relationships with Federal, State, local, and regional authorities in
the NCR.'' While that doesn't sound terribly clear, the intent of the
Members of Congress who created this office is unified--we expect this
office to help the region identify, plan, and prepare for, and respond
to potential homeland security incidents and to provide a coordinating
entity within DHS for that effort. To date much has been done but there
is still much more to do.
The NCR Office was intended to be a model of regional cooperation
and I believe that the Senior Policy Group (SPG) has fostered a strong
relationship among the local and state governments. However, the lack
of a strategic plan guiding the day-to-day efforts and long-term
planning of the ONCRC is a glaring shortcoming. As I have told the
Office since 2003, the first step is for you to ``define where you are
going so you know what the next step will be.''
I feel the lack of a plan and inadequate funding from the
Department and the Congress have left the Office with inadequate
staffing levels or authority within the Department. Each year I work to
increase the staffing of the Office but we have not been successful.
Fortunately this year the President's budget request includes funds to
hire one additional person and I hope this can be a sign of things to
come. We, in the Congress, have to help the ONCRC gain the resources
necessary to get the job done and I pledge to you to continue in that
effort.
It is imperative not only for this region's security but also as a
model to the rest of the Nation. The NCR has been pointed to by the
Department as the type of entity that should be mirrored in
administering the Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI) grants in 2006.
Essentially, we are the only UASI area that has followed the regional
model in the past and others must now learn from our experience.
I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about the progress of
the Office and also to working with the Members of this Committee to
continue to improve the region's and the nation's homeland security.
Senator Warner. Mr. Chairman, I had a chance when the DHS
bill was on the floor to put in the provisions establishing the
Office of the National Capital Region, and I would like to
first inquire of Mr. Lockwood. I see there is a $1 million
increase for the staff. That is on top of what is the base sum
today in last year's budget.
Mr. Lockwood. The current budget calls for five people in
the office, and the total budget to pay for staff is $892,000.
Senator Warner. So the million then is practically a
doubling? You got another million? Is that it?
Mr. Lockwood. That would be correct, sir.
Senator Warner. That is pretty good. Now, how did you lobby
that through? [Laughter.]
Mr. Lockwood. By working a strategic planning process that
showed the value.
Senator Warner. Well, then, I am not trying to be critical.
I am very pleased, because having had a hand in establishing
this office, I just want each of the witnesses to describe how
effective it is going and whether or not we here in Congress
could give you assistance. The budget is getting more
satisfactory. How many people do you have working now on the
current budget you have?
Mr. Lockwood. Currently, we have three onboard. We have a
few detailees, and with the half-year funding, we will be
hiring two more.
Senator Warner. I see. Well, that is very helpful.
Then I would ask Mr. Crouch, from the Commonwealth of
Virginia, how effective do you feel this arrangement has been
thus far? And does it need any improvements, statutorily or
otherwise?
Mr. Crouch. Your last question first, Senator Warner, I am
not aware of any statutory change that is needed at the present
time. My impression, as you are aware, Senator, I joined
Governor Kaine's administration in this capacity following
George Foresman.
Senator Warner. George Foresman served with great
distinction, and we know that, all of us.
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir. My view from my observations over the
past 2\1/2\ months in this regard is that it is working very
effectively. There is a great deal of communication between the
two States and the District, with Mr. Lockwood's office. Mr.
Lockwood's office has been extremely responsive to--speaking
for Virginia. I cannot speak for Maryland or the District, but
to a variety of activities and events that we have been
participating in regarding preparedness and, again, in the all-
hazards approach, and I would say in that regard that the
office has not limited its focus on the National Capital Region
alone, but also viewed the rest of Virginia as an extension of
that, participating in our recent pandemic summit in Richmond
as well as working with us as we continue to develop our
Intelligence Fusion Center at Virginia State Police
Headquarters in Richmond. So I am looking forward to our
continued relationship and believe that the concept is a sound
one.
As we discussed earlier in testimony, the National Capital
Region presents challenges that may well be unique in the
Nation in terms of, one, we are the seat of the Nation's
Government, but also we have two State jurisdictions as well as
the District of Columbia, multiple local jurisdictions in
Northern Virginia and in the Maryland suburbs. And if we can
get it right here--and we have a duty and obligation to get it
right here--then certainly folks elsewhere in the Nation can
get it right as well.
Senator Warner. Well, it is imperative. This is the
Nation's capital. Putting aside all politics and everything
else, our three constituencies--Virginia, Maryland, and the
District of Columbia--have to frequently act as a greater
metropolitan area serving the Nation's capital. So this is why
we put this together, and I judge your report to be
satisfactory.
I would like to have the Maryland perspective, Mr.
Schrader.
Mr. Schrader. Yes, Senator. We are very pleased with the
working relationship. I know Tom very well. He was actually on
Governor Ehrlich's staff when he was still in the Congress, and
I had the privilege of Tom being my deputy in Governor
Ehrlich's office before he came to the National Capital Region.
So he is very well aware of the imperatives at the State level.
His leadership on driving the development of the strategy was
very important. He basically decided well over a year and a
half ago that we were going to get this done, and it was his
dogged determinedness that we were going to get it done. And we
are continuing to work in a collaborative manner with him.
Clearly, the States and the District of Columbia have a
responsibility with driving the preparedness efforts within our
jurisdictions in collaboration with the NCR, and so we have a
major responsibility for facilitating and making sure that
effort is successful. And Tom, with very limited staff, we
believe has--or I believe has done an excellent job of
facilitation.
Senator Warner. He has achieved something that many would
be envious of, doubling his budget. [Laughter.]
However, we are aware that there is still work on that
front to sustain it.
Mr. Schrader. Yes, sir.
Senator Warner. Mr. Reiskin.
Mr. Reiskin. Thank you, Senator Warner. I would echo the
sentiments of my colleagues. I would add also that here in the
District in particular, but in the region, because of the
significant Federal presence, what's the most challenging thing
for us to deal with is coordination with the Federal
Government. It is not coordination across State lines. It is
coordination with the various Federal agencies.
What we look to from Mr. Lockwood's office is coordination
across the Department of Homeland Security, across the
Executive Branch, and then across the entire Federal
Government. And that is something that is a pretty awesome task
for five people to do. So I think that increased staffing is
probably well warranted. The examples that the Chairman and the
Ranking Member gave in their opening statements about the
airspace incursion and other coordination issues, the airspace
incursion was the FAA, it was the Department of Defense, it was
the U.S. Capitol Police. So this is spanning many agencies and
two branches of government, and it is very difficult for us at
the State and local level to coordinate independently with all
those different entities, and that is great value that the
Office of National Capital Region Coordination has brought to
us here in the District and the region.
Senator Warner. With the Chairman's indulgence, I would
like to have one more question.
Senator Voinovich. Certainly.
Senator Warner. All of us remember where we were on
September 11, and I was here with my colleagues in the Senate,
and later that afternoon I decided that I would go over to the
Department of Defense, where I spent 5 years of my life working
there--I will never forget it--and joined the Secretary of
Defense and others, went out to the crash site on that facade
of the building that was struck, and witnessed just the
magnificent performance of all levels of fire, police,
security, Red Cross, just coming together to work. And being an
old communicator in the military, I have always been interested
in communications, and I would like to know--and I have
followed this through these ensuing years. Do we now have a
network of communication between our fire and our police and
other rescue workers in this National Capital Region that meets
the criteria that you presumably have settled among yourselves?
And are the recipients of the funds, individual police and fire
and rescue services, satisfied and join you in your opinion as
to what the situation is?
Now, who would like to lead off? Why don't you talk, Mr.
Lockwood, and then I will get to the other three quickly.
Mr. Lockwood. Sure. Just to create the framework for
coordination between the multiple jurisdictions within the NCR,
the multiple jurisdictions, we were able to bring a number of
the CIOs together to look at how they are investing within
their State enterprise or local enterprises and start
integrating. We used some seed money from DHS, some monies or
resources that were available through the local tax base, to
start coordinating the actual networks themselves, then to
integrate in the operation, the operators, the migration of
databases, the maturation----
Senator Warner. My time is going to run out. I just simply
want to know: Do they have in their hands the equipment today
in the fire and rescue and police and other services to handle
a catastrophe if it hit this afternoon?
Mr. Lockwood. They are better today than they were on
September 11. We still have a long way to go.
Senator Warner. That is not too good after all these years,
I have to tell you, gents.
Mr. Reiskin.
Mr. Reiskin. I would say in terms of voice
interoperability, we are fairly interoperable between police,
fire, emergency medical, and between the different
jurisdictions. We are better than we were in 2001. We have,
additionally, purchased and deployed at the suggestion of the
responders a regional radio cache that we have put into use and
will put into use during disasters that adds an additional
1,250 radios that are fully interoperable across all levels.
Senator Warner. Wait a minute. Where are we? What is
existing today? If it happened this afternoon, what have you
got in hand today?
Mr. Reiskin. Well, all of the responders have radios that
are largely interoperable with each other. We also have these
caches that exist today that we would deploy. We have a
protocol for deployment. We have a protocol for implementation.
We would kick in that protocol and get those additional 1,250
radios out to folks so that we could communicate across the
entire region.
Senator Warner. I am having a tough time digging through
this testimony to figure out where we are. Give it a shot, Mr.
Crouch.
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir, Senator. I think what Mr. Reiskin is
trying to say is that we have made great progress, that by and
large our local fire/emergency responders throughout the region
do have communications interoperability capability today that
they did not----
Senator Warner. It is the ``by and large'' that worries me.
I tell you what. I will let you gentlemen put this in for the
record. But anything, Mr. Schrader, you want to add to this?
Mr. Schrader. Nothing additional, sir.
Senator Warner. Just tell me what is in place today, and if
it does not meet your objectives, what is the timeline which
you need to get the objectives? And do you need further funding
specifically directed by the Congress or Homeland Security or
wherever the deep pockets are to bring you up to speed?
Because, gentlemen, if another crisis hits in this community
and we are all running around like we were on the afternoon of
September 11, the people of this community should chuck us all
out.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you, Senator. The question you
asked was going to be the first question I asked, and while you
are here, I think it is real important that I have tried this
last time around to get more money for the EMPG grants, and I
would like you to let Senator Warner know how important that
is, because my colleagues do not seem to understand that if you
do not have the resources at the State level to have the people
that can get the job done, you cannot get it done.
Would somebody comment before we go to vote?
Mr. Schrader. Senator, it is vital for the local
jurisdictions live and die on EMPG grants. Without that money,
we cannot keep these programs going, and a lot of the local----
Senator Voinovich. What are EMPG grants?
Mr. Schrader. The Emergency Management Program Grant funds.
They are absolutely essential, and they are matching grants,
and our local jurisdictions, which is where our programs live
and die, need those dollars. There is no question. We could not
operate without them, and it is a very difficult process.
Senator Voinovich. The budget right now is absolutely
inadequate to get the job done?
Mr. Schrader. Right.
Senator Warner. Then we need a line item to change it.
Senator Voinovich. Well, why don't the two of us work on it
and put it in the budget.
Senator Warner. It is not that I am trying to get added
protection for Members of Congress. But we do have the
responsibility here in the Nation's capital of literally
millions of tourists at any time of day or week. We do have the
three branches of the government collocated here, with the
heads of the respective branches collocated here, and the
functioning of our government is highly dependent on the
interoperability of the three branches of government in a time
of crisis. That in turn is dependent on the infrastructure that
can react to a crisis and give us the means by which to
continue to function as a government.
I guess we do not have it in place this day. Is that about
right? Maybe a little voice communication?
Mr. Crouch. I think we have extensive voice
interoperability.
Senator Warner. You do? Then I do not want to underestimate
it.
Mr. Crouch. We will get documentation of that for you.
Senator Warner. Well, what I would like to do is have a
document signed by all of you saying this is our consensus of
where we are today, where we need to go, and what are the
mechanics, money or otherwise, to get there.
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir.
Senator Voinovich. Senator, I am also going to ask Mr.
Jenkins what--you can answer. He is from the GAO. He is looking
at this. What is your answer to this question, Mr. Jenkins?
Mr. Jenkins. You mean the interoperability?
Senator Voinovich. Yes, sir.
Senator Warner. Today.
Mr. Jenkins. I would agree with what they said; that is,
there is partial interoperability but not complete, and they
have asked for money in their grant to buy radios for Prince
George's County, for example, who is not totally compatible
with everybody around here. So if they had to bring in Prince
George's County, you probably would have some communication
problems.
Mr. Crouch. If I may, Mr. Chairman, respond also to your
question regarding the Emergency Management Preparedness
Grants, I think it is significant that in fiscal year 2006
there was $183 million appropriated for that. The National
Emergency Management Association has asked for $270 million,
and the President's budget currently has $170 million in there.
So we certainly appreciate the Chairman's support.
Senator Voinovich. We were able to get $10 million last
year, but maybe with Senator Warner's help and a few others, we
can get additional funds to take care of your situation.
Mr. Crouch. Yes, sir.
Senator Warner. You know, it is amazing, Mr. Chairman. The
budget which I have under my jurisdiction, as Chairman of the
Armed Services Committee. The Department of Defense's budget is
nearly half a trillion dollars. And the Pentagon is part of the
network and could again be the target. We just simply--we will
get to the bottom of it. Thank you very much. But give us that
analysis as quickly as you can.
Senator Voinovich. My problem around this place is that we
have silos all over, this appropriation, that appropriation. As
a former mayor and governor, it bothers me to sit back and see
that the big picture is not being considered. We should
consider the type of relationships that the DOD and the NCR
have, and whose programs we fund. We could respond to it in a
very constructive fashion.
Let me get back to the interoperability. When I was
governor, I got chewed out by a lot of people because we
appropriated $270 million to go to 800 megahertz radio system.
I would really like you today to tell the Subcommittee where
you are with the voice and where you are with data
communication? How much have you spent on it so far in terms of
additional dollars? How much money do you need in terms of the
dollars that are being allocated to the region and then to your
respective States? Which portion of those dollars have you
allocated to support this communications set-up?
Mr. Lockwood, as I mentioned in my opening statement,
Hurricane Katrina taught us the importance of a clear chain of
command, and in the event of a natural catastrophe or major
terrorist attack in the District or other regions in the NCR,
is there any single official in charge who would have command
authority over all of the resources in the region at the
Federal, State, and local level? And if not, should there be?
Mr. Lockwood. If there is an event, whether it is in the
National Capital Region or any other region of the United
States, the National Response Plan and the National Incident
Management System will be utilized. If it takes place in the
District, the District is going to be accountable. Our region
will be supporting the D.C. Government. If national resources
are required, they will be provided through an emergency
management structure that will support our local governments.
The coordination we are trying to do on a daily basis with
the Federal family in the NCR is where those activities occur
in the first few hours so that we do not, through protective
measures and through protocols, mis-position ourselves. That is
an ongoing challenge we work with.
Senator Voinovich. I am going to recess the hearing to go
vote. I would ask Senator Akaka when he comes back to take over
and continue with his questions.
[Recess.]
Senator Akaka [presiding]. The hearing will be in order. I
want to thank you again for your testimony. This question is
for any member of the NCR. Your joint testimony stated that the
NCR web portal allows you to share regionally relevant data.
Can you tell me what ``regionally relevant'' means?
Specifically, does it include information on how each
individual jurisdiction spends its own local and homeland
security funds? Mr. Reiskin.
Mr. Reiskin. I can try to respond. First, this portal was
established as a workspace to give all the stakeholders or the
relevant stakeholders in a region visibility into various
programs, not just spending, but other aspects as well. With
regard to spending, the data that is there now is the regional
homeland security dollars, the UASI grants from all grant
years. It also has some of the State homeland security fund
data. It does not have local fund data from any of the
government sources.
As Mr. Schrader pointed out, the people who are responsible
for the State and local homeland security spending in the
respective jurisdictions are the same people, the people here,
and the local level folks that we work with, the chief
administrative officers. They are the same people who are doing
the regional planning. So whereas, we don't have a single place
where we could go where you could see how much my police
department is spending out of local funds towards
preparedness--it is a significant amount--I am at the table and
making the State decisions and making the regional decisions,
and we are coordinating and leveraging.
As an example, as we have developed the radio network that
we were just talking about, and built up the radio
interoperability, we have invested at different levels in
different jurisdictions based on where they were, what
investments had already been made. Many local jurisdictions had
gotten themselves the 800 megahertz. In some circumstances we
used regional funds to fill gaps in order to get everybody up
to the same level.
So we do make all decisions very much mindful of where the
regional, State, and local spending investments have been made
and will be made.
Senator Akaka. I look upon what you said as representing
the group of you here.
Mr. Jenkins, would you care to comment on this issue? Do
you agree with that definition of regionally relevant
information?
Mr. Jenkins. I think our perspective on this is--I know
that the last time we had a hearing, our position was described
as a bookkeeping exercise, and I certainly do not agree with
that. The basic issue here is that UASI is a regional source of
money, and to be used effectively it has to leverage the money
that is being spent elsewhere. So that it is an enhancement to
money that is being spent elsewhere. It is not duplicative and
it is not supplanting that money, it's not being used to
displace local funds, and therefore, you do at the very least
need to know what the money is being spent on, for what
purpose. I think it is better to know where the dollars are
coming from and how much you can leverage, but at the very
least you need to know what the money is being spent on, for
what purpose, and in what way that UASI can be leveraged? It is
supposed to complement and leverage these other monies.
Senator Akaka. To any member of the NCR, in 2005 DHS
conducted an exercise in New Orleans called Hurricane Pam to
test Federal, State, and local emergency response capabilities
at that time. How many similar exercises has the NCR conducted?
Mr. Lockwood. In the NCR, we do a number of events,
including State funerals and special events. We look at every
event in the National Capital Region. As an event, we look at
the hot washes of the event to see what we did well and what we
would like to do better. This is in addition to the major
exercises that are played in the National Capital Region.
One of the challenges that we have had with the different
Federal activities and State or local activities, is how do we
start integrating the lessons learned from the exercises to the
resource spending or into operations themselves? That has been
a challenge, and that is part of the focus in the partnership
with the Military District of Washington, where we are trying
to coordinate those Federal exercises and activities so we
don't have multiple exercises overlapping on similar
objectives. That is a challenge.
Senator Akaka. Mr. Reiskin, at the July hearing, you
testified that DHS and the District were working on an improved
communication protocols for major security incidents in the
District. Can you please tell us if those protocols have been
implemented, and if communication between the District and DHS
has improved? Specifically, can you provide us with an example
of incident that occurred in the District since last July and
describe the coordination?
Mr. Reiskin. We did develop protocols. We developed generic
protocols, although it did stem from that airspace incursion
incident, and I can tell you that we have had a number of
airspace incursions since then, and the protocols have worked
as drafted. We get notification now through multiple paths,
including through the Department of Homeland Security, but also
directly from the FAA. So I believe that issue, which was
certainly a problem for us, that particular one, has been
addressed.
There are other areas of notification that we are still
working on, frankly, and as I mentioned previously, the
challenge of Mr. Lockwood's office, I believe, is not just to
coordinate with the Department of Homeland Security--and our
coordination with them, I would say, is excellent--but across
the rest of the Federal Government, including the Legislative
Branch.
Mr. Lockwood's office is currently convening a multi-agency
group including Defense, Health and Human Services, Justice,
and State and locals in this area to deal with bio-events. We
solved the airspace incursion and similar events to that. We
are now moving to bio-events, such as some of the false
readings of anthrax that we have had at the Pentagon in the
last years or so.
So we have made very good progress in terms of airspace and
some other incidents. In other areas, it is still a work in
progress.
Senator Akaka. Mr. Reiskin, September 11 demonstrated the
challenges of evacuating the District. The Metro stopped
running. The main bridges and roads through Maryland and
Virginia were gridlocked, and emergency response personnel
trying to cross the city just made traffic worse at that time.
What has the District done to improve evacuation capability
since September 11?
Mr. Reiskin. After September 11, we developed an evacuation
plan and communicated that plan. We did a mailing to households
in the District. We did that, I think, a couple of times. We
developed signal timing capacity so that we could essentially
flip a switch and time all of our outgoing signals to stream
the traffic outbound on evacuation routes that we labeled. We
established an intersection control program where we deployed
people to make sure that the traffic is moving in the downtown
area to clear people out. We deployed closed circuit television
cameras all around the District, so that within the
Transportation Management Center, which we stood up after
September 11, we can monitor in real time what is happening on
the streets, and then we can divert or send intersection
control or other resources accordingly.
We also--I think we discussed at this hearing last year--
have exercised our plan. We exercised on July 4. It was an
actual quasi-real exercise where we put the plan into place,
and although it wasn't during an emergency situation, it did
provide us some valuable information.
Last year with our homeland security funds, we funded the
development of a regional walk-out plan so that we can plan
for, as practically happened, such on September 11, the
facilitation of people leaving the District on foot as well as
and safely in coordination with the people leaving in cars. We
have purchased emergency generators for our downtown
intersection signals, so that if we lose power, we don't lose
the traffic signals. We are also investing in some scenario
planning that we will exercise to see how different kinds of
events would impact our evacuation flow. And we brought home
the message of shelter in place, versus evacuation, tried to do
that strongly through our educational awareness campaign.
We have, since Hurricanes Katrina and Rita hit, been
reevaluating our plan. We're currently in the process of
updating our evacuation plan. We are looking specifically at
the issues surrounding people with special needs and people
without their own vehicles. Our plan did contemplate having
buses available to move people who don't have the ability to
move themselves. But what we are doing now, is we are doing a
little bit finer-grain analysis, looking at census data,
looking at DMV data, to make sure and update where folks are
that don't have cars so that we can deploy our buses in the
right places, and make sure that people in those neighborhoods
are aware of where they need to go should they be required to
evacuate.
We are also looking at expanded rail and water-based modes
of transportation to enhance. So we have done, I think, a
significant amount, and we feel fairly confident that we could
move a significant amount of people out of downtown in a
relatively short period of time, notwithstanding what you see
on a normal rush hour when that is not our goal to just get
people out.
But I do want to add that we see a scenario whereby we
would have to evacuate the entire downtown or a large part of
the District as being a very unlikely scenario, and we continue
to push the message that in most cases and in most types of
events, the best course of action, the safest course of action,
will be to stay where you are.
Senator Akaka. Mr. Chairman, let me finish by asking Mr.
Schrader and Mr. Crouch, has Maryland and Virginia been
involved in evacuation planning?
Mr. Schrader. Absolutely. Since Katrina, we have actually
gone back as part of the National Plan Review, and pulled all
of our States and 26 jurisdictions, together, and are
developing a detailed evacuation plan for Maryland, which will
then be coordinated back with the National Capital Region. Of
course, Montgomery County and Prince George's County are in the
National Capital Region.
Our policy is to have--our programs are statewide programs,
and then we coordinate them with the NCR.
Senator Akaka. Thank you.
Mr. Crouch. Yes, Senator. Virginia's efforts are very
similar to Maryland's in that regard, and they have included
discussion among all of our jurisdictions. Most recently in the
National Capital Region there was also a meeting of the chief
administrative officers of all the counties and cities of the
Virginia jurisdictions in the National Capital Region with
their counterparts in outlying counties and cities, to discuss
the capacity of the outlying counties to anticipate and care
for a surge of evacuees from the National Capital Region.
So these efforts are ongoing, and to some extent existed
before Katrina and Rita, but certainly, have been reexamined
and strengthened since that time.
Senator Akaka. Thank you very much for your responses. Mr.
Chairman.
Senator Voinovich [presiding]. Thank you, Senator Akaka.
Mr. Reiskin, sometime ago, we talked about the issue of law
enforcement agencies, and their communications with each other
and coordinating their resources in the event of a terrorist
attack. Are you getting the kind of cooperation that you
should? Is this part of your strategic plan?
Mr. Reiskin. Yes. There are actually 35 different law
enforcement agencies that operate within the District of
Columbia. So it is somewhat of a challenge, but the major
agencies, such as the Capitol Police, the Park Police, the
Secret Service, we work every day with them at the Metropolitan
Police Department. Just a couple of hours ago we had a
suspicious package at 15th and E, right by the White House.
That is something that is jointly managed between the Secret
Service and the Metropolitan Police Department. We have
actually deployed Metropolitan Police Department officers into
the command centers of the Capitol Police and the Secret
Service on a regular basis, and certainly any time we have an
event, we have their folks in our command center as well.
For every major event, and for things as small as the
National Marathon this past weekend, we jointly develop our
plans with all of the law enforcement agencies in the District,
and often in conjunction with those in the region. So I would
say largely our coordination within the law enforcement
community is very strong.
Last year, in addition, we invested some of our UASI funds
toward the development of a law enforcement data sharing
network, which was more on the prevention side, perhaps, than
the response side. This will help significantly in terms of
information sharing across the region between all of our law
enforcement agencies.
Senator Voinovich. So you think that there has been a
significant improvement from what it was?
Mr. Reiskin. Absolutely, on a daily basis, I can at least
say for the major ones. There are some very small law
enforcement agencies, but I don't think they're really a
significant issue.
Senator Voinovich. It is my understanding that if something
happened in Maryland or Virginia, or the District, Maryland
would be in charge, or Virginia would be in charge, or the
District would be in charge. Mr. Reiskin, if an event happened
in the District you would have the job of accessing all the
resources. You would be able to access Virginia or Maryland to
help you to get the job done?
Mr. Reiskin. That is absolutely correct.
Senator Voinovich. Mr. Lockwood, where would you fit into
the picture? Would you be sitting there next to them in the
chair or would you be in communication with them because of
your responsibilities?
Mr. Lockwood. Yes, sir. Typically for most of the event
planning, I coordinate across different operation centers. I
coordinate physically with several of my partners. In the event
of an emergency, I will go to the inter-agency group that is
trying to coordinate the Federal Government to provide----
Senator Voinovich. Do you have a command center?
Mr. Lockwood. Yes, sir. The Inter-Agency Working Group is
at the Nebraska Avenue Complex under the Operations Division.
During the event of an emergency, that group, whether the
emergency is here in the National Capital Region or any other
place in the United States, it will surge representatives of
various Federal agencies, including the Legislative Branch, to
integrate our response to the State and local governments.
Senator Voinovich. Good. I really want all of you to tell
me what needs to be done to complete the strategic plan. What
is the timeline and milestones? I would like it in writing, and
sent to Senator Akaka, as well. I want our staff to be able to
monitor your progress. I would also like a full picture on
where you are in terms of communication. How much money have
you put in, how much additional money would you need to take it
to where it should be. In my State, I put 250 million into it,
the next governors put additional money into it. We are in
pretty good shape relative to the rest of the country.
I would also like to know your EMPG needs. I would like to
share that with Senator Warner and my other colleagues.
Maryland and Virginia should make sure your two Senators
understand how important EMPG is. I am going to try and get
additional EMPG funds because I know how important it is to
you.
Mr. Jenkins, you have had a chance to listen to this
testimony here today. Are there any thoughts that you have,
comments about some of the answers of some of the witnesses,
and wrap it up from your point of view at GAO?
Mr. Jenkins. I would say it is certainly our view that this
group sitting at this table and the region as a whole has
definitely established a cooperative working relationship that
is very important for being able to accomplish what they need
to accomplish.
I think our concern still remains--and this is the thought
I would like to leave--is that the documents that we saw are
task and project oriented, and what we were having trouble
looking at them and understanding is task and project oriented
to what end? What is it that you want to accomplish? And it
comes back, as I said, from my perspective, to the risk and
capabilities, what do you want to get?
When you look at the things, for example, it says
``immediate'' as the sort of measure, and immediate has to have
an operational measure. In other words, what do you mean by
``immediate'' in terms of being able to evacuate people? So it
really needs, from our perspective, to have--it should be a
road map, and that road map should say when I get there, what
is it that I want to be able to accomplish, and what is it that
I want to be able to do, and how can I best do that with the
resources I have? Because you will never have all the resources
that you need, so you inevitably are going to have to make
tradeoffs, and then on what basis are you making those
tradeoffs?
And we would like to see that in the plan because that is
how you can then understand where you are trying to go and how
you are going to get there. Right now these documents have a
lot of very useful information in them, but it does not really
tell you very much about the destination.
Senator Voinovich. Senator Akaka.
Senator Akaka. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
Mr. Reiskin, I know that the District uses text messages
and e-mails to alert residents to emergency conditions in the
District. How many of the one million people who live and work
in the District can be contacted through the current emergency
alert system?
Mr. Reiskin. I can't tell you how many can be. Right now of
the roughly 580,000 residents in the District, we have about, I
believe, 18,000 who have registered for the text alert system,
and that really is one of four means that we have to reach
people during an emergency, but it is a significant one. One of
the goals that I have tasked our emergency manager with is a
significant increase in that number, getting up towards over
100,000 people, working also with some local private sector
folks to help us on the outreach efforts towards that goal,
because the real-time awareness of an emergent issue is
something that we believe is very critical, and we think that
we need to take it to a much higher level.
We have, in the region, invested in this text alerting
capability across the entire National Capital Region, and I
don't have the numbers, but we can certainly get you the
numbers for across the whole region how many people we have
signed up to date, and both in the District and the National
Capital Region we're working to get those numbers up.
Senator Akaka. Besides the text messages and e-mails to
alert the people, do you believe that the District needs a
siren system, and if so, are there plans to do that?
Mr. Reiskin. We are currently piloting--again, this is a
regional project--we're piloting a siren project that the
District, frankly, has gone back and forth quite a bit on the
siren issue. I think that general consensus has been that
sirens are not very helpful in an urban environment.
Our primary means of communication during an emergency, we
have the text alert system, we have the emergency alert system,
which is akin to the old emergency broadcast system, where we
can take over the airwaves, radio and TV, to get messages out.
We have, of course, our emergency portal on our website, and we
have a reverse 911 telephone system, where we can call out to
the entire District or certain neighborhoods. We think that
those four components give us pretty good reach in terms of
getting messages to people on an urgent basis.
We are, however, as part of the region, taking part in the
pilot of the siren system. We are also looking--I mentioned
that we are putting emergency generators in place, or will have
the ability to do so at our downtown intersections. The
electronics that are associated with a modern traffic signal
system actually would give us the capability to send messages
out in a very localized way, not just sirens, but actual voice
messages. So we're also looking at that system as a way to deal
with the outdoor warning system.
Senator Akaka. Mr. Chairman, let me ask Mr. Lockwood.
There are more than 150,000 Federal employees who work in
the District, a portion of which are critical personnel, who
support Federal Continuity of Operations, and Continuity of
Government Response Plans that are activated during an incident
in the NCR. In the event of a major disaster within the NCR,
there is no doubt that considerable confusion will exist,
including traffic jams, power outages, and major disruptions of
public transportation.
I am concerned that Federal employees with COOP and COG
responsibilities will be immobilized in this confusion and
unable to execute COOP and COG plans in a timely fashion. My
question to you is, what has been done to coordinate Federal
COOP and COG plans with the District emergency evacuation
plans?
Mr. Lockwood. In our region, we have over 300,000 Federal
employees. A significant number of employees are not COOP/COG,
but we have critical personnel that need to get to where they
need to go to support continuity of government and continuity
of operations. For the coordination of this, one of the key
efforts that we have been looking at is how do we credential
people, pre-identify people so that we don't walk into where we
were on September 11, 12, and 13, when people couldn't get to
where they needed to be. This is the interoperable identity
management piece that we have been looking at for leveraging
the Federal framework of FIPS 201. This region is probably the
first region in the Nation that is looking at how to coordinate
first responders and critical support people to cross through
lines.
Additionally, from the Federal side, we have programs under
way to look at how we rally people and get them to where they
need to be. They will be integrated into the testing scheduled
that occurs every year. So those are actively engaged. But one
of the key things that the Federal Government, State and
locals, the identity management piece, where we are integrated
is really a priority for the Federal Government to complete.
Senator Akaka. Thank you. Mr. Reiskin.
Mr. Reiskin. If I could add one thing that Mr. Lockwood
didn't mention, but that he's really been instrumental in
doing, is integrating the NCR State and local governments into
the Federal COOP/COG exercise process. So while we're fairly
confident right now with our ability to move people out of the
downtown in the event of an emergency, integrating us into
their exercise process will give us some better visibility into
what kind of impacts there are. As Mr. Lockwood said, it's not
all 150,000 employees who need to get out, but we do need to
make sure that the ones who do need to move, can move, and by
integrating us into that exercise, I think that will give us
the visibility to determine whether we are there yet or what we
need to do to fix it if we're not.
Mr. Lockwood. A key piece of this was in previous cycles,
local governments, State governments, were not represented
within these discussions. They were simulated. It think it's
important, and I believe that the Secretary thinks it's vitally
important, that we include our State and local partners in this
discussion. Furthermore, as we look at these exercises and
events, if there is something that's going to force a COOP
action with the National Capital Region, there also needs to be
a way to have an integrated Federal response. That integrated
Federal response does require joint operations space, and we
are actively looking at that with regard to our exercise
strategies as well. For each exercise we want to make sure that
the mix of Federal, State, and locals have an understanding of
where they need to go in the event of an emergency, to
integrate the response to support local government.
Senator Akaka. Thank you for your responses. As you can
tell, the Chairman and I are vitally interested in knowing what
you've done thus far, and look forward to those kinds of
documents.
I would like, Mr. Chairman, to close by associating myself
with the comments you made about the EMPG grant funding while I
was gone. I understand you spoke about that for about 5
minutes. Rest assured, we are committed to increasing EMPG
funds.
Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you, Senator Akaka.
Again, for the record, I would like to have the written
plan, and, Mr. Jenkins, I am going to ask you to look at it.
Mr. Lockwood, I expect that Senator Akaka, and I will spend
some time with you as we have along with the plan.
Senator Akaka, I think it might be very worthwhile to
schedule a hearing in September. If the plan is to be complete
in August, you can come back in September, and brag about what
you have done.
This is a technical question for Mr. Jenkins. Is it
necessary to include the Katrina after action report, the
enhancement plan, and EMAP into the strategic plan?
Mr. Jenkins. Well, I think certainly with regard to--the
real issue out of Katrina is not a ``normal major emergency,
it's a catastrophe, a catastrophic event.'' That is defined by
DHS as basically being a event that almost immediately
overwhelms the capacity of State and local governments to
respond. In other words, it turns the normal process in which
State and local governments are the first responders and they
ask for help further up the line, it turns that upside down
essentially on its head, where the Federal Government then
needs to be more proactive. And so I think that is clearly
something that needs to be considered, is what happens to
normal planning if there is a catastrophic event that really
overwhelms State and local responders in the region? So I think
it's important to incorporate that into it. I think that's very
important.
Senator Voinovich. If something would happen in the region,
it would be a way out of anything that you could----
Mr. Jenkins. Way out of anything, and it would affect--as
it did in Katrina--affects communications, affects
transportation, affects the ability of the first responders to
get to where they need to go, or be able to do what they need
to do because their equipment is incapacitated. And so Katrina
really is more of an issue of a catastrophic event. As horrible
as the events of September 11 were in both New York and here in
Washington, they were essentially local, non-catastrophic
events. That is, they were events that were largely managed by
State and local first responders who had the equipment and the
ability to respond. So they were very different from Katrina in
that regard, both in terms of--Katrina was much larger in terms
of geographic scope and the degree and scope of the
destruction, that is, the variety of things that it destroyed
and its ability, therefore, for State and locals to respond.
So I think that getting in and thinking about what would
happen if there were a catastrophe--and that's where you need
to think about the risk. The risk is not very high here for an
earthquake, and so you need to think about what the risks are
that you face. Think about the capacity that you need, and what
would happen under different sets of assumptions, and what does
that mean in terms of the capacity that I have and what I need
and what people's roles and responsibilities are.
So it is important, I think, particularly for the Katrina
reports, for people to look at what the lessons are learned
from Katrina, and what they mean for emergency preparedness in
this region, particularly a region as high a risk as this
region is for something pretty horrible to happen.
So those are, I think, the most important things. And as I
said, the other thing is really getting at the risk and
therefore the capabilities that you need, whatever those risks
are and then the capabilities that you need, and where are you
with regard to those capabilities and where do you need to go
in what priority order.
Senator Voinovich. Thank you.
Mr. Lockwood, who oversees the evacuation of Federal
buildings? We have several evacuation plans for our offices. We
have a lot of other Federal agencies around here. Who is
responsible to ensure that Federal agencies are prepared to
evacuate and ensure that everybody knows where they are
supposed to go?
Mr. Lockwood. Through the Joint Federal Committee, we try
to make sure people are aware of some of the planning
activities. One of the key planning activities has been
protective measures. In the event of an emergency, a fire, in
adjacent buildings, even if they are different branches of
government within the Executive Branch, we have to sort out the
planning, the immediate planning around those buildings. Each
building has an occupancy plan. What we are doing now is
looking at the clusters of Federal buildings within the
National Capital Region. Essentially, there are 13 major
clusters. We are looking in detail at one cluster right now to
say, when was the last time the occupancy plans were updated?
Have they been coordinated with their neighbors? Have they
sorted through, if it's inclement weather or the different
threat types that you might be working.
We're doing a detailed piece on one of the clusters right
now, and as we understand the conflicts and the deconflicts
that we need to do, we're going to then walk through the other
clusters.
Senator Voinovich. You are in charge of it? Is there
someone in the Administration that says to Mike Leavitt or to
some of the other secretaries of agencies, ``Have you guys
recently checked to see whether or not your folks know what
they're supposed to do and where they're supposed to go?''
Mr. Lockwood. The guidance originally is through OPM and
GSA, and that would be the driving guidance right now. The
executing arm of this is the Federal Protective Service across
the Executive Branch. One of the pieces of this office, is the
coordination across the groups. Again, it's coordination. I do
not have authority over Secretary Leavitt or the other----
Senator Voinovich. But the fact is, if I want to find out
when was the last time that they did a drill of some sort, who
would have that information?
Mr. Lockwood. I would have to work with FPS to understand
that, and I could get back to you.
Senator Voinovich. OK. I would just be interested in it. It
is one of those things, how often is anybody thinking about it?
Mr. Lockwood. Again, this goes back into the criteria of
these occupancy plans and updating those plans.
Senator Voinovich. This has been a good hearing. I think
you know how interested we are. Our goal is to have the plan by
August.
We thank you very much. This meeting is adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 4:37 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
----------
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.001
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.002
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.003
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.004
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.005
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.006
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.007
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.008
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.009
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.010
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.011
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.012
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.013
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.014
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.015
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.016
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.017
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.018
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.019
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.020
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.021
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.022
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.023
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.024
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.025
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.026
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.027
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.028
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.029
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.030
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.031
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.032
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.033
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.034
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.035
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.036
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.037
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.038
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.039
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.040
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.041
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.042
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.043
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.044
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.045
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.046
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.047
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.048
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.049
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.050
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.051
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.052
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.053
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.054
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.055
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.056
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.057
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.058
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.059
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.060
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.061
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.062
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.063
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.064
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.065
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.066
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.067
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.068
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.069
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.070
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.071
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.072
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.073
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.074
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] T7755.075
<all>