FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY STATEMENT OF BERNARD T. GALLAGHER, ACTING DIRECTOR ACCOMPANIED BY: DAVID MCLOUGHLIN, ASSISTANT DIRECTOR, TRAINING AND EDU CATION ROBERT CRAWFORD, ACTING DIRECTOR, MITIGATION AND RESEARCH THOMAS R. CASEY, ACTING ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, DISASTER RESPONSE AND RECOVERY ROBERT H. VOLLAND, DEPUTY DIRECTOR, FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION JOHN W. McCONNELL, ACTING ASSOCIATE DIRECTOR, PLANS AND PREPAREDNESS JOSEPH A. MORELAND, ACTING ADMINISTRATOR, U.S. FIRE ADMINISTRATION RICHARD W. KRIMM, ACTING ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL INSURANCE ADMINISTRATION RICHARD H. WILCOX, ACTING DIRECTOR, OPERATIONS SUPPORT Senator GARN. Gentlemen, we are happy to have you with us. The Federal Emergency Management Agency was created in 1979 as an independent agency pursuant to Executive Order 12127. The plan called for the consolidation of five agencies and several Federal emergency mitigation, response, and disaster programs into FEMA. Later that year, the programs and authorities relating to civil defense, Federal disaster assistance, and Federal preparedness activities were also transferred to FEMA. FEMA is responsible for supervising Federal efforts to anticipate, prepare for, and respond to major civil emergencies. The Agency also works to insure the effectiveness of the national civil defense program as well as the availability of civil defense systems and resources in coping with all major disasters; consolidates the programs aimed at preventing and mitigating the effects of potential disasters with the programs designed to deal with these disasters once they occur; coordinates and plans for the emergency deployment of resources that are used on a routine basis by Federal agencies; and helps to coordinate preparedness programs with State and local governments, private industry and voluntary organizations. BUDGET REQUEST This year FEMA is requesting $183,277,000 for emergency planning, preparedness, and mobilization; $112,844,000 for hazardous mitigation and disaster assistance; $369 million for disaster relief funds; and $373 million for the national flood insurance fund. Again, I would like to welcome you gentlemen. Mr. Gallagher, if you (511) could summarize your remarks, we will be happy to place you entire statement in the record. Mr. GALLAGHER. Thank you, Senator. SUMMARY OF REMARKS Mr. Chairman, as Acting Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency, I am pleased to appear before this committee to present the Agency's appropriations requests for fiscal year 1982. Fiscal year 1980 was the first full year of this Agency's operations-an agency which comprises many varied and complex functions. I am pleased to report that, while there have been problems, there have also been significant accomplishments, and efforts have been made to establish a cohesive organization and to economize wherever possible. For example, our fiscal year 1982 budget request is $1,038,121,000. This amount is $35,499,000 less than the fiscal year 1982 estimates submitted by President Carter in January, and is $153 million less than the amount currently estimated for fiscal year 1981 and $278 million less than the amount appropriated for fiscal year 1980. These reductions have been made possible by a general tightening of the belt throughout the Federal Emergency Management Agency and from anticipated results of policy changes affecting the national flood insurance fund and the disaster relief fund. Since my appointment in January, I have been reviewing the budget and its implications for the coming year and I am here to support the total estimates before you as necessary to maintain the Agency. Recently, the President has announced his intention to nominate Mr. Louis O. Giuffrida to be the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency. I am sure that Mr. Giuffrida will carefully review the Agency's mission and programs. It is possible that this review will lead to a different resource distribution. We will advise you and work closely with the committee if the review affects the requests now under your consideration. The budget does reflect increased funding levels for several priority programs in fiscal year 1982. The first of these is the national civil defense program for which $133 million is requested. This includes an increase which will preserve the momentum achieved in the current fiscal year. The second area of emphasis is mobilization planning. Work has recently begun, in conjunction with the National Security Council, to give increased attention to this long-neglected facet of our preparedness responsibilities. A third priority is continuity of Government planning, sparked by program requirements and emphasis supported by the National Security Council. This activity deals with Presidential successor support planning and essential uninterruptible functions of Federal agencies in an attack environment. A fourth area receiving increased attention is earthquake hazard reduction, in line with the Federal Emergency Management Agency's responsibilities under the Earthquake Hazards Reduction Act of 1977 and the results of a recent National Security Council study on a potential major earthquake in California. The fifth area of increase is radiological emergency preparedness, in which the Federal Emergency Management Agency is responsible for taking the lead in developing offsite emergency plans for areas surrounding fixed nuclear facilities. Other activities funded through the Federal Emergency Management Agency remain essentially level or decrease in fiscal year 1982. Our experience with the disaster relief fund last year demonstrates the difficulty in projecting disaster funding requirements with any accuracy, but we believe the $369 million request to be a reasonable one in light of experience in a normal year. As was the case for the first time last year, we are requesting appropriations to retire outstanding indebtedness of the national flood insurance fund-an amount of $373 million for fiscal year 1982. This statement is purposely brief, to permit more time for discussion of the budget estimates. I have with me the acting heads of our major program offices upon whom, with your permission, Mr. Chairman, I will rely to provide the detailed answers to your questions. I have with me, also, should you desire it for the record, a copy of the interim organization chart under which the Federal Emergency Management Agency is presently operating. You should also be aware, and your staff has been so advised, that the "Actual fiscal year 1980" column of the estimates, so far as we know, is not entirely correct. This is a result of a number of in-house problems which we are making strong efforts to overcome, including some organizational changes and an outside of Government audit of our accounting procedures and system. Based on the results of this audit, we are instituting corrective measures. We expect to complete our reconciliation with Treasury shortly and will present the committee with results of this effort. In reviewing last year's hearings, I noted the committee's dissatisfaction with the justification material. For the fiscal year 1982 cycle, we have restructured the submission and hope that you have found the results more acceptable. This concludes my prepared statement, Mr. Chairman. I would now like to introduce my colleages and to address questions. INTRODUCTION OF ASSOCIATES On my right is Robert Crawford, the Acting Director of Mitigation and Research. Next to him is Thomas Casey, Acting Associate Director for Disaster Response and Recovery. Right next to me is Robert Volland, Deputy Director of Finance and Administration. On my left here is John McConnell, Associate Director for Plans and Preparedness. Next to him, Joseph Moreland, Acting Administrator of the U.S. Fire Administration, and Richard Krimm, Acting Administrator of the Federal Insurance Administration. Behind me, although not at the table, I would like to introduce David McLoughlin, Assistant Director for Training and Education. Next to him is Richard Wilcox, Acting Director for Operations Support. We are prepared to answer your questions. Senator GARN. Thank you, Mr. Gallagher. There is a vote. We will have a brief recess so that I can run up and vote before we start questions. I will be right back. [A brief recess was taken.] ARSON PREVENTION AND CONTROL Senator GARN. Mr. Gallagher, last year the committee requested you prepare and submit to the committee by March 31, 1981, a report outlining the plan for enhancing the arson prevention and control program. My understanding is this was the only report which the committee requested from FEMA, and I am also told that this report is not available. Has the report been prepared?. Mr. GALLAGHER. Correct, sir; it is not available. It is not ready at this time. It is the fault of our Agency. There is no excuse or mitigating circumstances. It is not ready; it is close. Senator GARN. I was not a member of the subcommittee last year, but it is puzzling to me that on requesting one report with that much lead time, some explanation of why Mr. GALLAGHER. I can give you an explanation. It isn't really pertinent. We have to take the blame for it. There was a man assigned to it and he left for another assignment. It fell in the cracks. He did not advise other people about it, and when the head office called for it 6 weeks ago, this is when we first actually started to do something about it. The head office predecessor, of course, was under the understanding it was being worked on. As a matter of fact, it wasn't until 6 weeks ago. Senator GARN. Did you inform the committee in writing of your inability to submit the report? Mr. MORELAND. There was nothing put in writing that it would not be available. Senator GARN. When do you expect it will be ready? Is April 30 a good time? Mr. MORELAND. The report is in draft, Mr. Chairman, and it is in the process of clearances as a draft report for submission. Senator GARN. Do you think it is possible to clear that draft and have the final to us by the 30th of April? Mr. MORELAND. I would certainly hope so. Mr. GALLAGHER. We will do it. MOBILE HOME STORAGE CENTERS Senator GARN. According to a letter which you sent to me on March 27, FEMA intends, during the next 60 days, to convert the strategic mobile home storage center in Ogden, Utah, to inactive status. The Utah center was opened in 1977 and is presently staffed by four permanent and three temporary employees. The center has been responsible for providing to 14 Western States mobile homes for victims of federally declared disasters, transportation of mobile homes to disaster sites, and providing technical advice and assistance to housing officials. There are currently three other mobile home centers located in Texas, Kentucky, and Georgia. When the Utah center is closed it is my understanding the Texas facility will be responsible for the 14 States presently being serviced by the Utah center. What I am asking for is the justification for converting the center. It isn't a parochial question at all. It may appear to be. I am a Utah Senator, but we are talking about seven positions. It is hardly worth fighting about just on a parochial basis. A few years ago there were attempts to close Fort Douglas and I initially received a lot of criticism. from my constituents because I would not automatically defend keeping it open until I received information on the cost of keeping the base open versus closing the base. If the center was in Wyoming or someplace else, I assure you I would be asking the same questions. We have seen these sorts of things come up many times in HUD reorganizations. What appears to be saving money in the short run may end up costing more in the long run. Mr. GALLAGHER. Tom, do you want to respond to that? There are a number of reasons for this. Mr. CASEY. Senator, the mobile home storage centers serve two purposes. They provide a place to refurbish the units after they have been used by disaster victims, and also they are used to store the units for use in future disasters. In the case of the Ogden facility, we have 309 mobile homes located there. They have all been refurbished and are ready for use in future disasters. The point here is that in effect, there is no more work for these folks to do in refurbishing the trailers. It is all done. But there are economic reasons also. In that storage center study that we conducted, the average cost per family served by Ogden is four times that of any of the other storage centers. The reason for that is we do not anticipate the need for the trailers occurring in those Western States. Therefore, we have fixed costs at the facility that must be accommodated and we have not been using as many mobile homes out of that facility. We intend to leave the 309 trailers there. It will become just a storage facility and we will continue to use the mobile homes until the stock is depleted and then move them to another area, such as the Texas center. We have found at a maximum, in any of the Western States currently served by Ogden, it will take us 2 extra days, given the process we have, in providing mobile homes to disaster victims. That 2 additional days of travel is not critical because there still are pads that have to be constructed, the victim's applications processed, so on, so forth. So we feel we have enough time. Senator GARN. Two extra days from Texas, you mean? Mr. CASEY. Yes; to the farthest point currently served by Ogden. Mr. CASEY. It will be quite a while before they are depleted. Senator GARN. They could be there a long, long time. You can tell there are more disasters in Texas-hurricanes. Mr. CASEY. Hurricanes in Texas; yes, sir. Senator GARN. I was stationed in Corpus Christi, Tex. Mr. CASEY. I was in Hurricane Cecilia. The total cost of the lost income that will impact on Ogden is less than $163,000 a year, and we are going to make very serious attempts to relocate the permanent fulltime individuals with other Federal agencies in the area or elsewhere, and also the temporary employees will go on our disaster reserve staff and be used in disasters in other parts of the country. |