- FEMA'S PRIORITIES FOR 2020 AND BEYOND: COORDINATING MISSION AND VISION

[House Hearing, 116 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

FEMA'S PRIORITIES FOR 2020 AND BEYOND: COORDINATING MISSION AND VISION

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

(116-59)

HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC BUILDINGS, AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED SIXTEENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION

__________

MARCH 11, 2020

__________

Printed for the use of the
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

Available online at: https://www.govinfo.gov/committee/house-
transportation?path=/browsecommittee/chamber/house/committee/
transportation
_________

U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

42-964 PDF WASHINGTON : 2021

COMMITTEE ON TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE

PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon, Chair
SAM GRAVES, Missouri ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,
DON YOUNG, Alaska District of Columbia
ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD, Arkansas EDDIE BERNICE JOHNSON, Texas
BOB GIBBS, Ohio RICK LARSEN, Washington
DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky DANIEL LIPINSKI, Illinois
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois JOHN GARAMENDI, California
ROB WOODALL, Georgia HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
JOHN KATKO, New York Georgia
BRIAN BABIN, Texas ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana DINA TITUS, Nevada
DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
MIKE BOST, Illinois JARED HUFFMAN, California
RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas JULIA BROWNLEY, California
DOUG LaMALFA, California FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas DONALD M. PAYNE, Jr., New Jersey
LLOYD SMUCKER, Pennsylvania ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
PAUL MITCHELL, Michigan MARK DeSAULNIER, California
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands
MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
GARY J. PALMER, Alabama SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California,
BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania Vice Chair
JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
Puerto Rico ADRIANO ESPAILLAT, New York
TROY BALDERSON, Ohio TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey
ROSS SPANO, Florida GREG STANTON, Arizona
PETE STAUBER, Minnesota DEBBIE MUCARSEL-POWELL, Florida
CAROL D. MILLER, West Virginia LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas
GREG PENCE, Indiana COLIN Z. ALLRED, Texas
SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas
ABBY FINKENAUER, Iowa
JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
ANTONIO DELGADO, New York
CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire
ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota
HARLEY ROUDA, California
CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania
------

Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency
Management

DINA TITUS, Nevada, Chair
JOHN KATKO, New York DEBBIE MUCARSEL-POWELL, Florida
MARK MEADOWS, North Carolina SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas
GARY J. PALMER, Alabama ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,
JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, District of Columbia
Puerto Rico HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
CAROL D. MILLER, West Virginia Georgia
GREG PENCE, Indiana JOHN GARAMENDI, California
SAM GRAVES, Missouri (Ex Officio) ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
LIZZIE FLETCHER, Texas, Vice Chair
PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon (Ex
Officio)

CONTENTS

Page

Summary of Subject Matter........................................ v

STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF CONGRESS

Hon. Dina Titus, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Nevada, and Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Economic Development,
Public Buildings, and Emergency Management:

Opening statement

Prepared statement........................................... 3
Hon. David N. Cicilline, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Rhode Island, opening statement....................... 1
Hon. John Katko, a Representative in Congress from the State of
New York, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Economic
Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management:

Opening statement............................................ 4
Prepared statement........................................... 6
Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in Congress from the
State of Oregon, and Chair, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure:

Opening statement............................................ 6
Prepared statement........................................... 7
Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure:

Opening statement............................................ 8
Prepared statement........................................... 9

WITNESS

Hon. Peter T. Gaynor, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA), U.S. Department of Homeland Security:

Oral statement............................................... 10
Prepared statement........................................... 12

[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

March 6, 2020

SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER

TO: Members, Subcommittee on Economic Development,
Public Buildings, and Emergency Management
FROM: Staff, Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public
Buildings, and Emergency Management
RE: Subcommittee hearing on ``FEMA's Priorities for
2020 and Beyond: Coordinating Mission and Vision''
_______________________________________________________________________

PURPOSE

The Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings,
and Emergency Management will meet on Wednesday, March 11,
2020, at 10:00 a.m. in 2167 Rayburn House Office Building, to
receive testimony on ``FEMA's Priorities for 2020 and Beyond:
Coordinating Mission and Vision'' from Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) Administrator Peter T. Gaynor.
With the January confirmation of Admin. Gaynor, FEMA once
again has a non-interim leader. With his confirmation, the
February release of the President's FY21 budget request, the
release of a revised Publication One in November 2019, an
updated and streamlined Strategic Plan in March 2018, and
continuing demand for Federal disaster assistance resulting
from significant disaster activity across the Nation in recent
years, the Subcommittee looks forward to receiving the
Administrator's testimony.
As recent hearings have illustrated, the Federal
government's disaster recovery programs and personnel continue
to be under pressure to work to help communities recover from
several of the costliest natural disasters in the Nation's
history.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ See An Assessment of Federal Recovery Efforts from Recent
Disasters. Hearing before the Subcommittee on Economic Development,
Public Buildings, and Emergency Management. 116th Congress, October 22,
2019. See also Disaster Preparedness: DRRA Implementation and FEMA
Readiness. 116th Congress, May 22, 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

BACKGROUND

FEMA'S PRIORITIES AND FOCUS_2018-2022

In March 2018, FEMA simplified its mission statement and
released its Strategic Plan for 2018-2022.\2\ The new mission
statement is ``FEMA's mission is helping people before, during,
and after disasters.'' \3\ The 2018-2022 edition of the
strategic plan streamlined the five priorities and 16
objectives from the previous edition (2014-2018) to three goals
and 12 objectives: \4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ FEMA 2018-2022 Strategic Plan. Available at https://
www.fema.gov/media-library-data/1533052524696-
b5137201a4614ade5e0129ef01cbf661/strat_plan.pdf.
\3\ Id at 6.
\4\ Id at 11.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Goal 1) LBuild a Culture of Preparedness
Objective 1.1) LIncentivize Investments that Reduce Risk,
Including Pre-disaster Mitigation, and Reduce Disaster Costs at
All Levels
Objective 1.2) LClose the Insurance Gap
Objective 1.3) LHelp People Prepare for Disasters
Objective 1.4) LBetter Learn from Past Disasters, Improve
Continuously, and Innovate

Goal 2) LReady the Nation for Catastrophic Disasters
Objective 2.1) LOrganize the ``BEST'' (Build, Empower,
Sustain, and Train) Scalable and Capable Incident Workforce
Objective 2.2) LEnhance Intergovernmental Coordination
through FEMA Integration Teams
Objective 2.3) LPosture FEMA and the Whole Community to
Provide Life-Saving and Life-Sustaining Commodities, Equipment,
and Personnel from all Available Sources
Objective 2.4) LImprove Continuity and Resilient
Communications Capabilities

Goal 3) LReduce the Complexity of FEMA
Objective 3.1) LStreamline the Disaster Survivor and
Grantee Experience
Objective 3.2) LMature the National Disaster Recovery
Framework
Objective 3.3) LDevelop Innovative Systems and Business
Processes that Enable FEMA's Employees to Rapidly and
Effectively Deliver the Agency's Mission
Objective 3.4) LStrengthen Grants Management, Increase
Transparency, and Improve Data Analytics

This strategic plan was developed in the wake of some of
the costliest and most devastating natural disasters FEMA has
worked to respond to since being established in 1979.\5\ The
current plan reflects lessons learned and accomplishments from
the prior plan. However, some external stakeholders expressed
dissatisfaction with the level of engagement and input from
whole community partners in the development of the current
plan.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Id at 8.
\6\ https://adapt.org/press-release-demands-fema-to-cancel-
strategic-planning-meeting/. See also https://www.npr.org/sections/
thetwo-way/2018/03/15/594140026/fema-drops-climate-change-from-its-
strategic-plan.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to the updated Strategic Plan, FEMA more
recently released a revamped Publication One (Pub 1), a
document that FEMA describes as its capstone document to
``understand our role in the emergency management community and
provides direction for how we conduct ourselves and make
decisions each day. The intent of our Pub 1 is to promote
innovation, flexibility, and performance in achieving our
mission. It promotes unity of purpose, guides professional
judgment, and enables each of us to fulfill our
responsibilities.'' \7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ https://www.fema.gov/pub1
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pub 1 defines FEMA's core values as compassion, integrity,
fairness, and respect. The stated guiding principles are:
accessibility, accountability, empowerment, engagement,
flexibility, getting results, preparation, stewardship, and
teamwork.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ https://emilms.fema.gov/IS822/groups/38.html
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

HIGHLIGHTS OF PRESIDENT'S FY21 FEMA BUDGET REQUEST

While briefing the Committee staff on the President's FY21
budget request, FEMA stressed the following for the coming
fiscal year: \9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ Ben Moncarz, Acting Chief Financial Officer at FEMA, briefed
Committee staff on the President's Fiscal Year 2021 budget request on
February 20, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LContinuing to advance the priorities outlined in
its FY 2018-2022 Strategic Plan and implementation of the
requirements of the Disaster Recovery Reform Act and Pub 1;
LFocusing on filling critical gaps in the Incident
Management (IM) Workforce to improve force strength, employee
qualifications, and overall readiness to respond to disasters
throughout the country;
LPrioritizing resources to ensure expeditious and
fair review of allegations of misconduct or harassment by
employees through our Office of Professional Responsibility;
and
LInvesting in FEMA's real property requirements to
ensure the Agency can adequately train its workforce, quickly
distribute life-saving commodities, and provide effective
recovery services to survivors.

Additionally, the FEMA previewed several legislative
proposals currently pending with the Office of Management and
Budget. These draft proposals include:
LPublic Assistance Federal Cost Share Adjustment
Proposal--would phase out federal support for repairing
buildings and equipment; encourages more effective risk
management, increased mitigation investment, and decreased
federal disaster costs.
LAssistance to Individuals and Households Federal
Cost Share Adjustment Proposal--would make the states
responsible for no more than 25% of all eligible costs;
encourages greater state ownership of housing assistance,
promotes shared responsibility, and reduces federal disaster
costs.
L25% Non-Federal Cost Match Proposal--would
establish a local match for remaining preparedness grants that
currently lack a local share: State Homeland Security Grant
Program (SHSGP), Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI), and
Transit Security Grant Program (TSGP). This proposal would
establish a consistent cost share requirement across all of the
preparedness grants.
LNational Security and Resilience Grant Program
Legislative Proposal--a proposed consolidation of existing
preparedness grants to a single $406.9M pot of money to remain
available until September 30, 2022, to provide financial
assistance on a competitive basis to non-Federal entities to
address specific, existing, and emerging threats as identified
and prioritized by the Secretary through the Administrator
LNational Flood Insurance Program (NFIP)
Affordability Proposal--would establish a targeted means-tested
affordability program for policyholders residing in the Special
Flood Hazard Area who cannot afford rate increases mandated
under current law.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Presentation of the Fiscal Year 2021 President's Budget for
the Federal Emergency Management Agency. Delivered to House staff on
February 20, 2020. Slide deck available upon request.

It is unknown if or when these legislative proposals will
be released publicly, but some reflect issues the Agency has
raised in prior years without action on the proposals.
Below are funding tables comparing FY20 enacted
appropriations with FY21 Administration proposals for key FEMA
programs and Federal assistance:

Disaster Relief and Mitigation \11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management
Agency--Budget Overview, Fiscal Year 2021 Congressional Submission.
Available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/
federal_emergency_management_agency.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(in millions)

Federal Assistance: Grants \12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Department of Homeland Security, Federal Emergency Management
Agency--Budget Overview, Fiscal Year 2021 Congressional Submission.
Available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/publications/
federal_emergency_management_agency.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
(in millions)

----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diff. of FY 2021
FY 2021 Pres. Budget and FY
Program FY 2020 FY 2021 Authorized President's 2020 Enacted
Enacted Budget ----------------------
$ %
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Assistance to Firefighters Grants (AFG).. $355.0 $750 \D\ $344.3 -$10.7 -3.1%
Emergency Food and Shelter Program (EFSP) $125 $187.5 \E\ $0 $125 -100%
Emergency Management Performance Grants $355.0 $950 \F\ $279.3 -$75.7 -21.4%
(EMPG)..................................
Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis $263 $263 \G\ $100 -$163 -61.9%
Program (Risk Map)......................
High Risk Dam Safety (HHPD).............. $10 $40 \H\ $0 -$10 -100%
National Security and Resilience Grant N/A Pending Legislative 406.9 $406.9 N/A
Program (NSRGP)......................... Proposal
Port Security Grant Program (PSGP)....... $100 $400 \I\ 36.3 -$63.6 -63.6%
Presidential Residence Protection $41 Authorization via $0 -$41 -100%
Assistance (PRPA)....................... Appropriations
Public Transportation Security Assistance $100 $1,100 \J\ 36.3 -$63.6 -63.6%
and Railroad Security Assistance (TGSP).
Regional Catastrophic Preparedness Grant $10 Authorization via $0 -$10 -100%
Program (RCPGP)......................... Appropriations
Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency $355.0 $750 \D\ $344.3 -$10.7 -3.1%
Response (SAFER) Grants.................
State Homeland Security Grant Program $560 Such sums as are $331.9 -$228.1 -40.7%
(SHSGP)................................. necessary \K\
Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI).... $665 Such sums as are $426.5 -$238.5 -35.9%
necessary \L\
Targeted Violence and Terrorism $10 Authorization via $20 $10 100%
Prevention Grant Program (TVTP)......... Appropriations
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.................................. $2,949 $4,440.5 $2,325.8 -$623.2 -21.1%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
\D\ The United States Fire Administration, AFG, and SAFER Program Reauthorization Act of 2017 (P.L. 115-98)
reauthorized AFG and SAFER through FY 2023.
\E\ The Housing and Community Development Act of 1992 (P.L. 102-550) reauthorized EFSP.
\F\ The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-53) reauthorized EMPG.
\G\ The Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 (P.L. 116-94) extended the National Flood Insurance
Program and reauthorized Risk Map through FY 2020.
\H\ The Water Infrastructure Improvements for the Nation Act (P.L. 114-322) authorized the HHPD.
\I\ The Security and Accountability for Every Port Act of 2006 (P.L. 109-357) authorized the PSGP.
\J\ The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-53) reauthorized TGSP.
\K\ The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-53) reauthorized SHSGP.
\L\ The Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of 2007 (P.L. 110-53) reauthorized UASI.

FEMA'S CHALLENGES

There are several significant challenges facing FEMA that--
combined or alone--could be devastating blows to an
organization that had seemingly recovered from the failings of
Katrina. Some questioned the effectiveness of the Agency
following the devastation in Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin
Islands in the fall of 2017 following the impacts of Irma and
Maria,\13\ and the subsequent resignation of former
Administrator Brock Long.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ 2017 Hurricane Season FEMA After-Action Report. Available at
https://www.fema.gov/media-library/assets/documents/167249
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA has tried to reframe and focus its work since 2017:
revising its mission statement (``Helping people before,
during, and after disasters.'' \14\); releasing a streamlined
strategic plan; and repeatedly stressing that disasters are
``federally supported, state managed, and locally executed.''
\15\ That said, several hurdles exist to effectively converting
these priorities into realities:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ https://www.fema.gov/about-agency
\15\ ``FEMA: We are not the first responders''. Available at
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/05/31/fema-supports-puerto-
rico-government-editorials-debates/35556537/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LSenior leadership vacancies (HQ and Regions): Two
of FEMA's three Presidentially appointed, Senate-confirmed
(PAS) leadership positions remain vacant: Deputy Administrator
and Deputy Administrator for Resilience. Additionally, there
are several vacancies and/or acting career and political Senior
Executive Service (SES) positions across key offices at
headquarters and FEMA's ten regional offices.
LDisaster workforce shortfalls: The Agency has
seen significant churn in the various cadres of disaster
workforce employees. While there have been systemic issues in
recruiting to fill these positions across administrations,
there still do not appear to be any measurable gains to recruit
and retain enough personal to meet the Agency's projected
needs.\16\ A forthcoming GAO examination requested by this
Committee is expected in the coming weeks.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ GAO-19-617T--``EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT: FEMA Has Made Progress,
but Challenges and Future Risks Highlight Imperative for Further
Improvements''. Available at https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-19-617T
\17\ May 9, 2018 request letter to GAO Comptroller General from
then Ch. Shuster and then RM DeFazio. Available upon request.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LInconsistent policies: FEMA is working to reform
and standardize how Project Worksheets are developed for the
Public Assistance (PA) program, to better align recoveries from
region to region, but challenges remain. The Agency is now
utilizing the PA National Delivery Model and the corresponding
Grants Manager and Grants Portal systems for all ongoing
recoveries, but there has been a learning curve as state,
local, tribal, and territorial grantees and subgrantees use the
new systems.\18\ FEMA has also centralized pieces of this
process at three Consolidated Resource Centers in California,
Texas, and Puerto Rico in an effort to lessen inconsistencies
from one disaster to another.\19\ While these efforts are
laudable and welcomed, there remains concern from disaster-
impacted communities experiencing conflicting guidance from
FEMA, and frustration with misalignment with other federal
disaster recovery programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ FEMA Public Assistance Delivery Model Fact Sheet. Available at
https://www.fema.gov/media-library-data/1534520496845-
4b41646e3d8839c768deb3a7f4ded513/
PADeliveryModelFactSheetFINAL_Updated_052418.pdf.
\19\ Id.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LHarassment in the workplace: Following high-
profile allegations of sexual misconduct of a former Chief
Component Human Capital Officer, former Administrator Brock
Long announced in July 2018 the establishment of a new Office
of Professional Responsibility (OPR).\20\ OPR was established
in 2019 and is in the process of hiring staff to fully execute
its mission.\21\ Additionally, OPR is now investigating issues
such as information technology policy infractions in addition
to more serious harassment cases.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ July 30, 2018 Statement by FEMA Administrator Brock Long on
the Results of a Recent Internal Investigation. Available at https://
www.fema.gov/news-release/2018/07/30/statement-fema-administrator-
brock-long-results-recent-internal.
\21\ FEMA's Director of the Office of Professional Responsibility,
Lauren Kaufer, briefed the Committee on January 17, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LPuerto Rico/Virgin Islands recoveries: Two and a
half years after the 2017 hurricanes Irma and Maria, recovery
funds are still slow to reach these U.S. territories in the
Caribbean. As for the 2020 earthquakes that have struck Puerto
Rico, the Governor's request for a disaster declaration under
the Stafford Act for permanent repair work was denied. Further,
despite the FEMA Administrator having the authority and ability
to do so following the President's initial disaster
declaration, FEMA has yet to approve this outstanding piece of
the Governor's initial request.\22\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ 44 CFR 206.40(c).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LDRRA implementation: FEMA continues work toward
full implementation of the Disaster Recovery Reform Act (DRRA,
Division D of P.L. 115-254), with significant attention being
paid to the establishment and initial round of funds for the
Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC)
program, which is the Agency's re-branding of the Predisaster
Mitigation (PDM) program following Congress' establishment of a
dedicated funding stream for PDM.

WITNESS LIST

LThe Honorable Peter T. Gaynor, Administrator,
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), U.S. Department of
Homeland Security

FEMA'S PRIORITIES FOR 2020 AND BEYOND: COORDINATING MISSION AND VISION

----------

WEDNESDAY, MARCH 11, 2020

House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public
Buildings, and Emergency Management,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:04 a.m. in
room 2167, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Dina Titus
(Chairwoman of the subcommittee) presiding.
Ms. Titus. The subcommittee will come to order.
I ask unanimous consent that the chair be authorized to
declare recesses during today's hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
I also ask unanimous consent that the Members not on the
subcommittee be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at
today's hearing and ask questions.
Without objection, so ordered.
Today we are going to examine the priorities of the Federal
Emergency Management Agency and its vision for addressing the
challenges the agency faces in meeting its strategic
priorities.
I want to first welcome our new ranking member, Mr. Katko
from New York State. We are delighted to work with you. We also
sit together on the Homeland Security Committee, so many of
those issues overlap. So I see a lot of opportunities for
collaboration. We met personally, talked about some of our
priorities, and we look forward to a great relationship going
forward.
I also now want to welcome our guest, who is the
Administrator for FEMA, Mr. Peter Gaynor, and also a colleague,
Mr. Cicilline, who knows Mr. Gaynor and would like to introduce
him. So I now recognize Mr. Cicilline.
Mr. Cicilline. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you to the
ranking member and the chair of the full committee for giving
me this opportunity.
Mr. Gaynor served as my emergency management director for
the city of Providence when I served as mayor from 2008 to
2014. His talent was then identified by our Governor, Governor
Raimondo, who took him and hired him as the emergency manager
and director for the State of Rhode Island from 2015 to 2018.
And he was then named the Deputy Director of FEMA, and then
ultimately, the Director of FEMA, and confirmed twice by the
United States Senate. He served our country for 26 years as a
United States Marine.
But I can tell you my own personal experience is that, as
an emergency management professional, he is really spectacular.
And, in fact, he took the city of Providence, which was a
fairly disorganized emergency management operation, and made it
the first city in America with an accredited emergency
management agency. That is just one example of the
extraordinary work that he did, and earned the deep respect of
all of the partners, both in the city and the State, and
someone I know who will continue to carry out this great work
ethic, and professionalism, and dedication to the mission of
emergency management.
And I learned yesterday that he was testifying before this
subcommittee, and I am really grateful that you are giving me
the opportunity to make the introduction. I can say, of all the
many people I have worked with in my 25 years in public life,
Pete Gaynor is at the top of the list, in terms of his
professionalism, his expertise, his commitment to the public
mission of emergency management, and I really appreciate the
opportunity to share those thoughts with the committee, and
thank you.
Ms. Titus. Thank you, Mr. Cicilline. We appreciate that,
and we look forward to working with Mr. Gaynor. We are glad now
that he is no longer ``acting.'' We need that leadership at the
head of FEMA, especially during these trying times.
FEMA is supposed to be led by three presidentially
appointed, Senate-confirmed public servants, but here we are
with only one, so there is a lot of responsibility that is
falling on your shoulders. Usually we think that it is the
Senate's fault that things don't get done, but that is not the
case with FEMA. The White House hasn't even nominated anyone to
fill the other two positions.
This void in management at FEMA has come at a time when we
are navigating several major disaster declarations and a
pandemic with potentially devastating impacts all across the
country. So strong leadership is essential at every level
within FEMA.
There is also shared concern in this subcommittee that
FEMA's workforce is stretched thin, and you noted as much in
your written testimony. We want to talk more about how we can
address that. It is clear we need some solutions to improve
recruitment and retention at FEMA so that the agency can
effectively respond to the needs of communities in the wake of
disasters.
It should go without saying that the Government must
address the needs of all Americans in disaster recovery.
However, some of our most vulnerable populations are being
neglected or shamefully overlooked by existing FEMA programs.
Committee staff have met with advocates from the disability and
low-income communities regarding their frustration with FEMA's
attention, or lack thereof, to their needs in times of
recovery. After years of progress on this front in response to
the failures we saw in Hurricane Katrina, these communities
fear that we are backsliding. We will discuss these issues,
too, I am sure, further on in today's hearing.
I appreciate how much you have embraced the Disaster
Recovery Reform Act and the long-term benefits it will have,
not only for the well-being of our people in times of disaster,
but for the resilience of our public buildings and private
homes. In the wake of disaster we should be building back
better than what existed before.
That is why I was proud of the bipartisan work of this
committee in passing H.R. 5756, the Resiliency Enhancement Act,
cosponsored by Congresswoman Plaskett of the U.S. Virgin
Islands and Congresswoman Gonzalez-Colon of Puerto Rico.
Finally, I am certain that members of this committee will
be interested in hearing updates on FEMA's involvement in the
effort to prevent the spread of the coronavirus in the U.S. I
know there are some developments just happening last night and
this morning in the Senate, and we would like to have you
address those, if this is the time for expanding the Stafford
Act to cover coronavirus.
At the State, local, Tribal, and Territorial level, public
health officials are working with their emergency management
counterparts to boost public preparedness, safety, and
education. To date, FEMA has not been part of the coordinated
effort to these ends, as it was in 2000 in response to West
Nile outbreak, and we would like to talk about that.
So I will close by saying we certainly recognize the
challenges you face, Mr. Administrator, and we are here to
help, because we want you to be successful in this job. Our
communities need for you to be successful in this job. We look
forward to working with you.
[Ms. Titus' prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Dina Titus, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Nevada, and Chairwoman, Subcommittee on Economic
Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management
Today we will examine the priorities for the Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA) and its vision for addressing the challenges
the agency faces in meeting its strategic priorities.
I want to start by recognizing and welcoming our new Ranking
Member, Mr. Katko of New York State.
We also serve on the Homeland Security Committee, which has some
overlapping jurisdiction, so I see great opportunities for
collaboration.
Our Subcommittee is responsible for a wide variety of issues and
agencies, and produces more legislation than any other in this
Committee.
I look forward to keeping these efforts on track and working with
you and your staff.
This morning we are joined by FEMA Administrator Peter Gaynor who
for the better part of the last year served in an acting role until he
was confirmed earlier this year.
FEMA is supposed to be led by three presidentially-appointed,
Senate-confirmed public servants. Yet, here we are, and you're the only
one confirmed.
Here in the House, we often like to point to the lack of action in
the U.S. Senate, but in this situation that's not the case.
The White House hasn't even nominated anyone to fill the other two
positions. And this void in management at FEMA comes at a time when we
are navigating several major disaster declarations and a pandemic with
potentially devastating impacts all across the country.
Strong leadership is essential at every level within FEMA.
There is also shared concern in this Subcommittee that FEMA's
workforce is stretched thin, and you note as much in your written
testimony.
It's clear that we need solutions to improve recruitment and
retention at FEMA so that the agency can effectively respond to the
needs of communities in the wake of disasters.
It should go without saying that the government must address the
needs of all Americans in disaster recovery. However, some of our most
vulnerable populations are being neglected--shamefully overlooked by
existing FEMA programs.
Committee staff have met with advocates from the disability and
low-income communities regarding frustration with FEMA's attention to
their needs in times of recovery.
After years of progress on this front in response to the failures
we saw in Hurricane Katrina, these communities fear that we are
backtracking.
We will discuss these concerns further during today's hearing.
I appreciate how much you've embraced the Disaster Recovery Reform
Act and the long-term benefits it will have, not only for the well-
being of our people in times of disaster, but for the resilience of our
public buildings and private homes.
In the wake of disaster, we should be building back better than
what existed before.
That is why I was proud of the bipartisan work of this Committee in
passing H.R. 5756, the Resiliency Enhancement Act sponsored by
Congresswoman Plaskett of the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Congresswoman
Gonzalez-Colon of Puerto Rico.
Finally, I'm certain that Members of this Committee would be
interested to hear an update on FEMA's involvement in the effort to
prevent the spread of the coronavirus in the United States.
At the state, local, tribal, and territorial level, public health
officials are working with their emergency management counterparts to
boost public preparedness, safety, and education.
To date, FEMA has not been part of this coordinated effort as it
was in 2000 in response to the West Nile outbreak.
I'll close by saying that we recognize the challenges you face, Mr.
Administrator, and we are here because we want you to be successful in
this job. Our communities need you to be successful in your job.

Ms. Titus. I will now recognize the ranking member for an
opening statement.
Mr. Katko. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I appreciate that.
And I appreciate the opportunity to serve on this committee and
this subcommittee.
And I want to echo your sentiments that we had a very good
meeting before we came in here the last couple of days, talking
about how we can proceed in a bipartisan manner. That seems to
be the hallmark of this subcommittee, and it is a hallmark of
what we do on the Homeland Security Committee, as well. So I am
quite confident that we are going to be able to work well
together and do good things together. We both are blessed with
excellent staffers, as well, on this subcommittee. So I am
excited for what the future brings for us on this subcommittee.
And I am happy to talk to you again, Mr. Gaynor. I want to
thank you for coming to my district last year to talk about and
look at and survey for yourself some of the disaster issues we
have.
And when we had those discussions last year--I think you
will recall, and we had them recently again--I voiced some of
my concerns about FEMA, not so much how it is managed, but some
of the Byzantine rules you have to go through to try and get
disaster relief. What is considered as a disaster in upstate
New York may pale in comparison to disasters elsewhere, but
they are disasters, nonetheless, and I want to give you two
quick examples.
One was Moravia, New York. They had a flash flood after
torrential rain came down, and it basically wiped out the
town's sewer and water systems, and roadways, and all kinds of
damage. For them, it was catastrophic. For FEMA it was a blip
on a screen, and they didn't get any money.
Something more severe happened recently that you were up in
Lake Ontario for, and that was Plan 2014. That was implemented
at the very end of the Obama administration, and it radically
changed the regulation of water on Lake Ontario, and water
levels on Lake Ontario for the first time in 70 years. In those
ensuing 70 years, lakefront properties were developed, economic
vitality became key for those counties on the lakeshore
properties.
In fact, one of the counties, 50 percent of their tax
revenue comes from lakeshore properties. And they have been
devastated 2 out of the last 3 years since Plan 2014 has been
implemented. And again this year, they are expecting
catastrophic water levels, probably worse than the other 2
years.
So, again, it may not rise to the level of a big disaster
for a place like New York City, but it is devastating for
people in upstate New York. And when you have hundreds of
millions of dollars of damages, and then you have to tell your
constituents, ``You don't qualify under FEMA,'' it is very
frustrating. So I look forward to talking with you and
developing programs that are going to help that.
While we are working to get changes to Plan 2014, it is
critical we also work to recover and mitigate against future
flooding, and find ways to help communities outside the major
urban areas that may not meet the damage threshold for a
Federal declaration. Key issues relate to support for
preliminary damage assessments, and clarifying how severe
localized impacts of disasters are considered in the
declaration process.
Last year I introduced H.R. 4358, the Preliminary Damage
Assessment Improvement Act, that would help clarify the support
FEMA provides on damage assessments. I hope we can act on that
legislation soon on this subcommittee.
I also look forward to working with members of this
committee on how we can further improve the declaration process
for disasters with localized impacts. From a broader
standpoint, it is critical for us to focus on how we can
approach disaster response and recovery in an innovative and
commonsense way that makes sense for local communities hit by
disasters and for the Federal taxpayer. I believe it can be
done, and I am confident, with your leadership, we can get
there.
I appreciate the progress being made on reforms we enacted
in the Disaster Recovery Reform Act. However, as we are
learning, more reforms and streamlining are needed to ensure
communities can recover faster and smarter. Time is money, and
the longer it takes for communities to rebuild, the higher the
cost, not only for those communities, but also for the Federal
taxpayer. So it serves no one when recovery drags on. We must
find ways to do things differently to help speed up the
process, and I am confident that you are the person to do that.
The DRRA was a good step in cutting through some of the
redtape, but more is needed. I look forward to hearing from
FEMA--from you, Mr. Gaynor--and working with members on the
committee, on ensuring our emergency management system works
effectively for communities preparing for, responding to, and
recovering from disasters.
[Mr. Katko's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. John Katko, a Representative in Congress
from the State of New York, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on
Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management
I look forward to working with you, Chairwoman Titus, on critical
issues of this Subcommittee as Ranking Member. I know traditionally
this Subcommittee has worked in a bipartisan fashion and I hope we can
continue that tradition.
I want to welcome FEMA Administrator Gaynor and congratulate him on
his confirmation in January. I also want to thank him for visiting my
district as acting administrator last year to survey the Lake Ontario
flood damage. The International Joint Commission's Plan 2014 has caused
high water levels along Lake Ontario resulting in devastating flooding
in my district in New York. While a presidential declaration was issued
in 2017, there was no declaration for the 2019 flooding. It may not
rise to the level of a big disaster for New York City, but the flooding
was devastating for people in Upstate New York.
And we continue to deal with flash flooding. While we are working
to get changes to the Plan 2014, it is critical we also work to recover
and mitigate against future flooding and find ways to help communities
outside of the major urban areas that may not meet the damage threshold
for a federal declaration. Key issues relate to support for preliminary
damage assessments and clarifying how severe localized impacts of
disasters are considered in the declaration process.
Last year, I introduced H.R. 4358, the Preliminary Damage
Assessment Improvement Act, that would help clarify the support FEMA
provides on damage assessments. I hope we can act on that legislation
soon.
I also look forward to working with Members of this Committee on
how we can further improve the declaration process for disasters with
localized impacts.
From a broader standpoint, it is critical for us to focus on how we
can approach disaster response and recovery in an innovative and
commonsense way that makes sense for local communities hit by disaster
and for the federal taxpayer. I believe it can be done.
I appreciate the progress being made on reforms we enacted in the
Disaster Recovery Reform Act. However, as we are learning, more reforms
and streamlining are needed to ensure communities can recover faster
and smarter.
Time is money. The longer it takes for communities to rebuild, the
higher the costs not only for those communities but also for the
federal taxpayer. So it serves no one when recovery drags on. We must
find ways to do things differently to speed up the process. DRRA was a
good step in cutting through some of the red tape, but more is needed.
I look forward to hearing from FEMA Administrator Gaynor and
working with him and Members of this Committee on ensuring our
emergency management system works effectively for communities preparing
for, responding to, and recovering from disasters.

Mr. Katko. And with that, Madam Chair, I yield back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you, and I now recognize the chairman of
the committee, Mr. DeFazio.
Mr. DeFazio. Thank you, Madam Chair. Thanks for holding
this hearing.
Mr. Administrator, thank you for being here today.
Congratulations, I guess, on taking the job, and being
confirmed. It is a very difficult job, as we all recognize.
I took the committee down to Puerto Rico and the Virgin
Islands a few weeks ago. In particular, the FEMA person in the
Virgin Islands was very impressive. I guess it is his second
tour of duty there. Puerto Rico is still a work in progress, I
think, but I think FEMA is trying to get things on track. I
couldn't tell whether some of the problems had to do more with
the Government of Puerto Rico, or what the concern was, but I
think they were going to finally start doing some housing
reconstruction this month. And they say it is going to ramp up
quickly. They have still got 24,000 blue tarps there.
And then we went over to the other side of the island,
which is a different story. I mean, not only do they still have
hurricane impacts, but the earthquake was quite devastating.
For one thing, there are schools where the hurricane shelters--
hurricane season is 3 months away, and the schools are
collapsed. And most of the public buildings, too, are unusable,
because they were pretty much all 1960s, 1970s vintage before
we came up with more modern techniques that--and realized the
extent.
One thing, though--and hopefully you will address that
here--is that we still don't have approval for permanent repair
assistance. I met with a group of the mayors over in Ponce, but
they represented the whole earthquake zone. And, you know, that
is a concern, because the public buildings have to be
reconstructed, and--well demolished, then reconstructed, and
the schools and--I don't know what exactly is holding that up.
And another observation would be people are having trouble
with records again, particularly property records. And we
adopted, after the hurricane, a self-certification document
that FEMA used, but it isn't yet being used, or wasn't as of a
few weeks ago in the earthquake zone. And I would hope that we
can just dust off that form, and get these people the
assistance they need more quickly.
With that, I look forward to hearing your remarks.
And also, I don't know if you will address this, or--it may
come up in questions--what sort of planning is going on, since
FEMA has played a key role, historically, in coordinating among
agencies in, you know, SARs and some other things, whether that
same role is being played today in the Federal Government.
[Mr. DeFazio's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in
Congress from the State of Oregon, and Chairman, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure
Thank you Chair Titus, and thank you Administrator Gaynor for being
here today.
As you know, this Committee is responsible for jurisdiction over
all of FEMA's Stafford Act authorities, but also over Federal
management of emergencies writ large.
I've unfortunately been here to see FEMA during some its worst
moments, but also, during some of its best.
Last month, I led a delegation to Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin
Islands.
Two and a half years after hurricanes Irma and Maria devastated
both, noticeable Federal recovery efforts leave a lot to be desired.
But my delegation got the sense from your local partners in Puerto
Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands that their FEMA counterparts were
willing and committed to their full recoveries.
And, it's worth noting that we've noticed the uptick in approved
Federal recovery assistance flowing to commonwealth and the territory.
I also want to note for the record that it's been nearly eight
weeks since a magnitude 6.4 earthquake struck southern Puerto Rico, and
you have still not approved permanent repair assistance. I am also
troubled to hear that survivors are having to go through a similar
rigamarole as what happened in the wake of the 2017 hurricanes when it
comes to registering for Individual Assistance--it's bureaucratic,
cruel, and unnecessary. FEMA developed a self-certification document
two and a half years ago in Puerto Rico, and it should just be using it
again this time around.
That said, I am pleased that you've accepted your promotion to this
thankless role and that the Senate has confirmed you. As you know,
you're only as good as your most recent disaster, so I expect you'll be
leaning forward.
We have strong expectations that you will continue to advance full
implementation of the Disaster Recovery Reform Act. We're looking
forward to a robust new pre-disaster mitigation program later this
year, as former Deputy Administrator Kaniewski previewed for us last
May.
So, you've certainly got your work cut out for you.
We look forward to your testimony today, but also to this
Subcommittee working with you as a partner to ensure you have all the
authorities you need to execute on your mission of helping people
before, during, and following disasters.
Thank you again.

Mr. DeFazio. With that, Madam Chair, I yield back the
balance of my time.
Ms. Titus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I now recognize the
ranking member of the committee, Mr. Graves, for an opening
statement.
Mr. Graves of Missouri. Thank you, Madam Chair, and I also
want to thank Administrator Gaynor for being here today. And I
also want to thank the Administrator for meeting with me and
other members of the committee earlier.
Ensuring there is ongoing communication is very helpful for
Members whose districts have obviously been impacted by
disasters.
FEMA has a lot on its plate, and I know we have got more
than 640 open disasters dating back to 2000. With 2017 to 2018
being record years for disasters, we have to find some
innovative ways to speed up recovery and get people and
communities back on their feet more quickly. Otherwise, FEMA
resources are going to continue to be stretched thin, which
slows that recovery process even more.
But redtape and bureaucratic requirements that may have
been intended to save taxpayers' dollars, I think, actually
cost the taxpayers more. And when FEMA resources are spent to
claw back a few thousand dollars from an individual who applied
for those funds in good faith, and may have spent those funds
to repair their home, I think it costs more to collect those
funds, or claw them back, and it also revictimizes those
disaster victims.
And that is why I introduced the bill, Preventing Disaster
Revictimization Act, which requires FEMA to waive those debts
for victims in instances where the agency was at fault. And I
very much appreciate the committee unanimously approving that
bill last month.
But there are many more examples where current law in
practice simply doesn't make sense, they increase costs, and
they do slow recovery. And I hope to work with you,
Administrator Gaynor, and the other members of the committee,
on additional reforms to improve this process.
There is also a lot more in your portfolio, including
preparedness and response. And I hope today we can also hear a
little bit about FEMA's unique role with respect to
coronavirus. While currently HHS is in the lead, should there
need to be a declaration pursuant to the Stafford Act, by law,
the Administrator is going to report and advise the President
directly.
This requirement in law was a change after Hurricane
Katrina to ensure the President is advised directly by the
Government's emergency management expert. And while we hope
such an emergency declaration is not needed, it is important
that FEMA is at the table now, so that, should it be needed,
there is a seamless transition to FEMA as that lead agency.
But again, I want to thank Administrator Gaynor for being
here, and I look forward to your testimony.
[Mr. Graves of Missouri's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure
I want to thank FEMA Administrator Gaynor for being here today. I
also want to thank the Administrator for meeting with me and other
Members of the Committee. Ensuring there is ongoing communication is
helpful for members whose districts have been impacted by disasters.
FEMA has a lot on its plate with more than 640 open disasters,
dating back to 2000. With 2017 and 2018 being record years for
disasters, we have to find innovative ways to speed up recovery and get
people and communities back on their feet more quickly. Otherwise, FEMA
resources will continue to be stretched thin--slowing recovery even
more.
Red tape and bureaucratic requirements that may have been intended
to save taxpayer dollars may actually cost the taxpayer more. When FEMA
resources are spent to claw back a few thousand dollars from an
individual--who applied for those funds in good faith and may have
spent those funds to repair their home--it costs more to collect those
funds and revictimizes the disaster victim.
That is why I introduced my bill, the Preventing Disaster
Revictimization Act, to require FEMA to wave those debts for victims in
instances where the agency was at fault. And I appreciate that the
Committee unanimously approved that bill last month.
But there are many other examples where current law and practice
simply don't make sense, increase costs, and slow recovery. I hope to
work with you, Administrator Gaynor and members of this Committee, on
additional reforms to improve the process.
There is also a lot more in your portfolio--including preparedness
and response.
I hope today we can also talk about FEMA's unique role with respect
to the Coronavirus. While currently HHS is in the lead, should there
need to be a declaration pursuant to the Stafford Act, by law, the
Administrator would report and advise the President directly. This
requirement in law was a change after Hurricane Katrina to ensure the
President is advised directly by the government's emergency management
expert. While we hope such an emergency declaration is not needed, it
is important that FEMA is at the table now so that should it be needed,
there is a seamless transition to FEMA as the lead agency.
I want to thank Administrator Gaynor for being here today and look
forward to his testimony.

Mr. Graves of Missouri. And with that I would yield back
the balance. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Titus. And I would now like to welcome our witness, the
Honorable Peter T. Gaynor, who is the new Administrator of the
Federal Emergency Management Agency, known as FEMA.
We thank you very much for being here today and for meeting
with us. We look forward to your testimony.
Without objection, the witness' full statement will be
included in the record.
And since your written testimony has been made a part of
the record, the subcommittee requests that you limit your oral
testimony to 5 minutes.
So, Mr. Gaynor, the floor is yours.

TESTIMONY OF HON. PETER T. GAYNOR, ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY (FEMA), U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY

Mr. Gaynor. Well, good morning, Chairman DeFazio,
Chairwoman Titus, Ranking Members Katko and Graves, and
distinguished members of the subcommittee. My name is Pete
Gaynor, and I am the FEMA Administrator. It is an honor to
appear before you today to discuss FEMA's strategic goals that
will best serve the American people in 2020 and beyond.
Interwoven into our priorities is an understanding that
emergency management is about putting people first, both the
disaster survivors we serve and the individuals who serve them.
The principles within our strategic goals for 2020 were
designed with lessons learned from recent historic disasters
which have tested our Nation's ability to respond to and
recover from multiple concurrent disasters.
Recovery from these historic disasters continues today,
even as we pivot to prepare for emerging threats facing our
homeland. Resiliency is at the heart of America's heritage, and
I remain confident in FEMA's ability to respond to any
disaster, as well as support the efforts to contain and
mitigate COVID-19.
Experience has demonstrated that one of the most effective
ways to support FEMA's mission is by building a culture of
preparedness before disasters take place. Developing resilient
communities reduces both loss of life and economic disruption.
Every dollar invested in mitigation is estimated to save the
American taxpayer $6 in future spending. It is for these
reasons that building a culture of preparedness is the first
goal within FEMA's strategic plan.
As a former emergency manager at the State and local level,
I am mindful that all levels of Government share a fundamental
responsibility for disaster preparedness. In 2020, I am
directing the agency to focus on advancing shared
responsibility across FEMA's mission space.
One of the most important ways to increase our preparedness
for disasters begins with standardized building codes, which
are designed to protect lives and property. State, local,
Tribal, and Territorial governments must play a leading role in
incorporating and enforcing disaster-resilient designs within
our communities. Presently, less than half of U.S.
jurisdictions have adopted the latest disaster-resilient
building codes.
FEMA will also continue to promote shared responsibility
for preparedness by implementing the Building Resilient
Infrastructure and Communities grant program, also known as
BRIC. This year, FEMA was able to make $250 million available
through BRIC to support pre-disaster mitigation programs
designed to protect community lifelines and build more
resilient infrastructure. As we move towards full
implementation in October of this year, BRIC will continue to
allow for larger and more consistent investments in
preparedness.
One of the most important considerations for building codes
and mitigation projects is the risk of catastrophic flooding.
Flooding is the most common and costly natural disaster in the
United States. Ninety-eight percent of the counties across the
country have experienced a flooding event. Mitigating these
risks to protect people and property is not only a moral
imperative, it is prudent fiscal policy. The investment in pre-
disaster mitigation across the country has resulted in $100
billion in avoided losses over the past 40 years.
In 2020, FEMA is focused on ensuring Americans are
protected from floodwaters, both physically and financially.
Flood insurance is the first line of defense. Managing risk
through insurance helps families recover faster after
disasters, and reduces the overall cost for taxpayers by
lowering applications for assistance programs. In response to
the 2019 flooding season alone, FEMA paid $1.1 billion for
33,000 validated claims. Yet, despite these advantages, only 33
percent of the people living within the special flood hazard
areas carry flood insurance. FEMA hopes to coordinate with
Congress to make flood insurance more financially accessible to
all Americans to close the insurance gap.
But to fully build a culture of preparedness, we must seek
to incentivize external partners to proactively adopt better
risk management practices by reducing Federal support for
repetitive post-disaster repairs.
FEMA's second goal is to ready the Nation for catastrophic
disasters. This includes low- and no-notice incidents, which
can overwhelm governments at all levels and threaten national
security. Our Nation's readiness largely depends on the
emergency management professionals who execute FEMA's mission.
I have had the opportunity to see our dedicated employees
across the country firsthand, and I believe that we must
support FEMA professionals as they support the American people.
Therefore, it is vital that we remain laser-focused on
supporting our workforce by ensuring that our culture is
reflected in our core values. FEMA will continue to ensure
expeditious and fair review of allegations of misconduct
through our Office of Professional Responsibility. We will also
continue to prioritize that our workforce and leaders better
reflect the diverse nature of our country.
The final goal in our strategic plan is to reduce the
complexity of FEMA. FEMA must be adaptable to meet the needs of
disaster survivors, and we must ensure that assistance programs
are accessible by making them easier to navigate. Recovery
funds currently come from 17 different Federal agencies, and
FEMA does not want to burden survivors by adding the complexity
of an already intricate system.
One of the most effective ways to reduce the complexity of
emergency management is to reduce the overreliance on the
Federal Government in the first place, and to better empower
States and municipalities with the tools they need to manage
smaller scale disasters. We are eager to work closely with
Congress to increase this shared responsibility across the
Nation. Whether it is increasing preparedness, readying the
Nation for catastrophic disasters, or reducing the complexity
of FEMA, increasing the shared responsibility of emergency
management at all levels of Government is critical to our
success. Emergency management works best when it is locally
executed, State managed, and federally supported.
I would like to thank the lawmakers here today for
providing FEMA with the resources to build a prepared and more
resilient Nation, and thank you for the opportunity to testify.
And I look forward to any questions you may have today.
[Mr. Gaynor's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Peter T. Gaynor, Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), U.S. Department of Homeland
Security
Introduction
Good morning, Chairwoman Titus, Ranking Member Katko, and
distinguished Members of the Subcommittee. My name is Pete Gaynor, and
I am the Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency
(FEMA). It is an honor to appear before you today to discuss FEMA's
evolving role in the emergency management community and our strategic
priorities to best serve the American people in 2020 and beyond.
I am proud to be part of an agency that, every day, helps
communities before, during and after disasters, and I firmly believe
FEMA has the best mission in the Federal Government.
This job is about people--the disaster survivors we serve and the
individuals who serve them.
The nation is counting on us to accomplish our mission and we will
do so in accordance with our core values of compassion, fairness,
integrity, and respect. In the winter of 2019, FEMA re-introduced our
capstone doctrine, Publication 1, which outlines this ethos. This
document, in conjunction with our Strategic Plan for 2018-2022, serves
as the roadmap for the future of the Agency.
The guiding principles and priorities within these documents were
designed with lessons learned from the rapid succession of historic
disasters in recent years which have continued to test our Nation's
ability to respond to and recover from multiple concurrent
catastrophes.
Recovery from these historic disasters continues to this day, even
as we pivot to prepare for the evolving threats facing our homeland--
both natural and otherwise. In order to accomplish our mission, no
matter what type of disaster takes place, it is imperative that the
American people have the highest level of trust and confidence in
FEMA's capabilities. This agency is often the last line of hope when a
disaster strikes and cripples a community. We must be able to perform
the delivery of lifesaving, life-sustaining resources on that
community's worst day. With the gravity of this undertaking in mind,
FEMA continues to champion our Strategic Plan, focusing on three key
goals for the entire emergency management community: first, to Build a
Culture of Preparedness; second, to Ready the Nation for Catastrophic
Disasters; and, third, to Reduce the Complexity of FEMA. Our top
priorities for 2020 are guided by these strategic goals.
Part 1: Build a Culture of Preparedness
Building Codes
FEMA's mission is helping the American people before, during, and
after disasters. One of the most effective and fiscally responsible
ways to begin is by building a culture of preparedness before these
disasters take place. Developing resilient communities ahead of an
incident reduces both the loss of life and economic disruption, and
every dollar invested in mitigation is estimated to save the American
taxpayer six dollars in future spending. It is for these reasons that
building a culture of preparedness is the first goal within FEMA's
Strategic Plan.
Experience has demonstrated repeatedly that emergency management
practices are most effective when locally executed, state managed and
federally supported. FEMA cannot accomplish this mission alone. It
requires mature and strong partnerships at the State, Local, Tribal,
and Territorial (SLTT) levels. All levels of government, along with the
private and non-profit sectors, share a responsibility for disaster
preparedness. In 2020, I am directing the Agency to focus on advancing
shared responsibility across FEMA's mission space.
One of the most fundamental ways to bolster our preparedness for
disasters begins with standardized building codes designed to protect
lives and property. Presently, only 30 percent of U.S. jurisdictions
have adopted the latest disaster resistant building codes. In order to
address this vulnerability, FEMA will continue to encourage robust code
enforcement and provide the information or training needed to help
convey the value of standardized, up-to-date building codes. In
congruence with this priority, FEMA is hiring more Subject Matter
Experts and engineers to work with and contribute technical or
engineering expertise to FEMA Headquarters, Regions and external
stakeholders.
To provide local partners with financial support for preparedness
projects, FEMA will continue to implement the Building Resilient
Infrastructure and Communities (BRIC) program. We would like to thank
Congress for providing the legislative tools to create BRIC from
Section 1234 of the Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 (DRRA). Within
its first year, FEMA was able to allocate $250 Million through BRIC to
support community pre-disaster mitigation programs designed to protect
lifelines and build more resilient infrastructure. As the program
continues to mature, BRIC will continue to allow for larger and more
consistent investments in preparedness that aim to reduce future costs
to the Disaster Relief Fund. The current target date for Notice of
Funding Opportunity is August 2020.
Furthermore, over the course of the coming year, FEMA's Building
Code Specialists will develop a national strategy for the adoption and
enforcement of disaster resistant building codes through a state,
local, tribal, territorial and partner-driven collaborative effort. As
empowered by Congress in Section 1235(b) of DRRA, FEMA will use this
initiative to identify national consensus-based codes and standards
that resiliently incorporate hazard-resistant designs.
One of the most important building code considerations is the risk
of catastrophic flooding. As millions of American families
unfortunately have experienced first-hand, flooding is the most common
and costly natural disaster in the United States. Indeed, 98 percent of
counties have experienced a flooding event, and flood waters continue
to pose a greater potential for damage than any other natural disaster.
Mitigating these risks to protect people and their property is not only
a moral imperative, it is a prudent fiscal policy. The local adoption
of minimum standards has resulted in $100 billion in avoided losses
over the last 40 years.
Considering the frequency and high costs of disasters such as
flooding, FEMA is exploring ways in which to financially incentivize
state and local partners to proactively adopt better risk management
practices by rethinking the federal share of the financial burden. We
hope to work closely with our congressional partners to improve Public
Assistance programs as well as to identify ways to reduce federal
support for the repair of buildings or equipment in order to encourage
more leaders at the state and local level to proactively increase
mitigation investment and ultimately decrease federal disaster costs.
Closing the Insurance Gap
Another top preparedness priority for FEMA in 2020 is to ensure
that Americans living within flood hazard areas are protected
financially as well as physically. History has demonstrated that
individuals, communities, and businesses that transfer their flood risk
through insurance recover faster and more fully after a disaster.
Approximately 40 percent of Americans do not have enough cash savings
to cover a sudden unexpected expense and replacing their losses after a
catastrophic event can force individuals to take on debt loads that
prove disastrous in their own right. Insurance will help them to fill
that financial void when a disaster occurs and better rebuild their
lives in its aftermath.
Furthermore, while insurance benefits those directly affected by a
disaster, it also reduces the need for federal disaster assistance and
lowers the overall costs for American taxpayers. Despite the
advantages, only 33 percent of Americans living within Special Flood
Hazard Areas (SFHAs) currently carry flood insurance policies, which is
why closing this insurance gap remains a top strategic priority for
FEMA. We hope to work closely with our congressional partners to
improve the affordability of the National Flood Insurance Program
(NFIP) in order to ensure that all Americans are financially prepared
for flooding. Specifically, we have proposed the establishment of a
targeted means-tested affordability program for policyholders residing
in the SFHA who cannot afford rate increases mandated under current
law.
In addition, in order to help incentivize state and local
communities to prioritize adequate insurance coverage and smart land
management, FEMA plans to propose phasing out Public Assistance for
public buildings. While the Disaster Relief Fund (DRF) supports
survivors in the immediate aftermath of a major disaster declared under
the Stafford Act, this federal support only serves as a temporary
safety net for immediate needs and does not provide for complete
financial recovery. Financial preparedness, including having an
insurance policy on personal and public properties, is critical to
helping rebuild a home, replace belongings, and restore order to a
family and community.
Disasters are becoming costlier. Direct average annual flood losses
have quadrupled from approximately $4 billion per year in the 1980's to
roughly $17 billion per year between 2010 and 2018. In order to further
incentivize state level investments that mitigate against these rising
costs, FEMA plans to propose legislative opportunities to promote
shared responsibility for assistance to individuals and households.
Specifically, we hope to work with our lawmakers to readjust the
federal contribution and make states responsible for no more than 25
percent of all eligible costs in housing assistance after a disaster
such as floods.
Incentivizing increased adoption of minimum standard building codes
and closing the flood insurance gap is a fundamental strategic priority
for FEMA in 2020 as we work to build a culture of preparedness.
Part 2: Ready the Nation for Catastrophic Disasters
The second goal in FEMA's Strategic Plan for 2020 and beyond is to
ready the nation for catastrophic disasters. Catastrophic disasters,
including low- and no-notice incidents, can overwhelm the government at
all levels and threaten national security. They are life-altering
incidents for those impacted, causing a high number of fatalities and
widespread destruction.
Catastrophic disasters disrupt lives and hurt our communities--
physically and emotionally. Readiness is critical for FEMA and our
partners to ensure that the response and recovery missions are
appropriately executed and successful.
Expanding and Supporting our Workforce
The Nation's readiness depends on emergency management
professionals who execute the mission on behalf of the Federal
Government and SLTTs. This requires a scalable and capable National
incident workforce that can adapt and deploy to a changing risk
landscape, greater integration with our partners at all levels, and the
ability to communicate and coordinate effectively in every situation.
It is for these reasons that FEMA is focused on filling critical gaps
in the Incident Management Workforce with applicants possessing
enhanced qualifications to improve force strength and increase our
readiness to respond to disasters throughout the country. Incident
Management personnel are expected to maintain a constant state of
readiness and preparation, and the agency is committed to regularly
exercising and utilizing this workforce.
FEMA is also committed to ensuring that our expanding workforce is
empowered to succeed in their mission. As outlined in our capstone
doctrine, Publication 1, FEMA personnel are expected to collaborate
with colleagues and assist survivors under the auspices of our core
values: compassion, fairness, integrity, and respect. In order to
ensure that our emergency management professionals are unhindered
within the workplace and able to focus on the life-saving missions at
hand, FEMA continues prioritizing resources to ensure expeditious and
fair review of allegations of misconduct through our Office of
Professional Responsibility.
I have seen firsthand the dedication our employees exhibit--from
FEMA Corps members, to our incident workforce, local hires, reservists,
and full-time employees. It is vital that we remain equally devoted to
supporting our employees and ensuring that our work culture reflects
our core values. It is my firm belief that if we take care of and
empower the people of FEMA, then these steadfast public servants will
be ready to deliver meaningful and much needed assistance to our
citizens when they need it the most after a disaster. I was recently
able to meet with one such employee in Puerto Rico who personifies this
commitment to service. Mr. Luis Lozano, a Telecommunications Manager
within our Joint Recovery Office, risked his own life to pull an
unconscious stranger from a smoke-filled vehicle.
FEMA is not perfect. We must accept responsibility for our
shortcomings and seek out solutions so our mistakes will not be
repeated. However, for any failure we may have, I can show you
countless success stories, large and small, that have made a difference
in bettering the lives of disaster survivors and furthering the
readiness of the Nation.
Part 3: Reduce the Complexity of FEMA
The third overarching goal for FEMA is to reduce the complexity of
our organization and the services we provide. FEMA must be a modern
agency that can adapt to both the public and government's priorities,
while creating and using innovative solutions for the emergency
management mission. A simplified FEMA streamlines survivor experiences,
simplifies processes and policies for disaster staff, and improves
stewardship of federal taxpayer dollars.
FEMA is committed to simplifying our processes and putting
survivors first. We are looking at ways we can streamline our
assistance programs to make FEMA's programs as clear and easy as
possible for survivors and grantees to navigate.
Reducing administrative and bureaucratic burdens will allow
survivors and communities to receive federal assistance quicker.
Throughout the Federal Government, there are several programs that
offer assistance to survivors. Presently, FEMA administers more than 40
financial assistance programs, issuing thousands of grant awards each
year worth billions of dollars. We are working with our partners to
improve some of these activities to ensure survivors can better
navigate these various programs. For example, FEMA is consolidating and
updating all FEMA Individual Assistance (IA) policies and program
guidance to simplify and streamline information about IA programs.
Through the Individual Assistance Program and Policy Guide created in
2019, FEMA has produced a single reference resource for all IA programs
on behalf of SLTT partners assisting survivors in post-disaster
recovery.
This drive to simplify the process is exemplified within FEMA's
Grants Management Modernization Initiative and is another strategic
priority for the agency in 2020 and beyond. The Grants Management
Modernization (GMM) Program is a FEMA-wide initiative to modernize and
consolidate existing FEMA grants management systems and business
processes into one single IT Platform with one common grants management
life cycle to better support the agency's mission. We will continue to
prioritize this program in 2020.
FEMA's commitment to reduce complexity, uniformly administer
grants, and ensure the proper controls for its grant programs will
improve the Agency's ability to support survivors and communities. By
increasing transparency and prioritizing analytics, FEMA is taking the
steps necessary to keep pace with a rapidly changing world, streamline
its processes to stay ahead of emergencies, and deliver swift,
effective assistance in times of greatest need.
Conclusion
In conclusion, I would like to thank Congress and the President for
providing FEMA with the resources to help people before, during and
after disasters while allowing us to strive for our vision of a
prepared and more resilient Nation. Every disaster is unique with its
own set of challenges, yet in the spirit of constant improvement, we
are exploring how to incentivize investments that reduce risk and
reduce disaster costs at all levels.
As we examine and further develop these initiatives, we will find
that some can be accomplished by existing authorities Congress has
already provided to us. There will also be some challenges that cannot
be solved by administrative action alone. As we identify these
opportunities to improve the Agency, we will work with this committee
and the rest of Congress to ensure we move forward in close
partnership. I look forward to working in concert with you to
accomplish our shared goals in service of the American people.
Thank you for this opportunity to testify on behalf of the
dedicated employees of FEMA and share the priorities of this Agency in
2020 and beyond. I look forward to answering any questions that you may
have.

Ms. Titus. Thank you, Mr. Administrator, for being here. We
appreciate your testimony. We are now going to move on to
Member questions. Each Member will be recognized for 5 minutes,
and I will start by recognizing myself.
Administrator Gaynor, you discussed the need to grow and
retain your national incident management workforce. We are
spending millions of dollars to train these folks, only to see
them then leave their jobs. Based on the briefings we have
received over the last year, any gains FEMA made in growing its
workforce have been offset by relatively equal numbers of
people who are leaving.
You have been at the agency and at this kind of work for a
long time. I wonder if you have some plans, what you are
thinking about, keeping these public servants from leaving
after they learn the skills to deal with disasters.
And have you explored seeking similar return-to-work
protections that Americans interested in serving in disasters
could have, similar to the National Guard and military reserve,
so when they go off to duty, when they come back, they have a
guaranteed job, something like that?
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am. Thank you for your question.
First I would like to say that I think I have the greatest
workforce in Federal Government, along with the greatest
mission in Federal Government, helping people before, during,
and after disasters.
We have been focused on making sure that we attract and
recruit the best qualified individuals from across the country
to come and join our mission, as well as retain all those great
employees that come here to participate in providing disaster
assistance to disaster survivors across the country in all
sorts of different circumstances.
This has been one of my first goals, even as the Deputy
Administrator at FEMA, and continues to be my goal today, to
make sure that we have a diverse, ethical, integrated workforce
from the beginning. And so I have a number of different
initiatives going on within our mission support branch to focus
on retention and retaining, career path, and--again, we
retain--we put a lot of money and invest a lot of money into
our workforce, and it is our number-one priority. Without
people, you know, it makes it extremely difficult for me to
deliver any kind of mission. So this is my first priority.
Ms. Titus. That is great. We often see pictures and hear
stories of heroes during times of disaster, and we hate to lose
them, or not get them in the first place because they are
afraid they will lose their job, and then what will they go
home to.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am.
And for US&R, I think we would love to have a conversation
with Congress about moving that forward.
Again, the large majority of my workforce are reservists,
about 12,000. And these are the people I count on every day to
leave their homes, go to the field, and, again, provide that
disaster assistance to our disaster survivors. So, again----
Ms. Titus. Well----
Mr. Gaynor [continuing]. A critical part of our workforce.
Ms. Titus. Well, great, we look forward to working with you
on that.
My second question--and this is something I noted in the
opening statement--is I am concerned about what appears to be
backsliding with FEMA's work with people with disabilities. The
Office of Disability Integration and Coordination was
established a decade ago, but the administration seems to be
pulling back in their efforts with the community.
The ODIC is absent from the weekly national disability
stakeholders' calls, they are consistently absent in any
discussion related to emergency. And the emergency preparedness
report released last fall, which guides FEMA's mission, makes
zero mention of people with disabilities.
Could you speak to these concerns, and give some assurances
to us, as well as the 61 million Americans who have a
disability, that you are not forgetting them, and that you do
see them and their challenges?
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am. The Office of Disability
Integration and Coordination works directly for me. The
Director and I have traveled numerous times to make sure that
we are connecting with that community.
I have a sister who has a disability, so this is at the top
of my priority list, making sure that we serve everyone, to
include those with access and functional needs.
The office has conducted numerous outreach to dozens of
different stakeholders in the community: Wounded Warrior
Project; our National Council on Disability; National VOAD, who
represents 70 or 80 different volunteer organizations. I
believe that our outreach is comprehensive.
We also have the ability to send disability-integrated
employees to disaster sites to make sure that we are taking
care of those disaster survivors who need it the most.
I would be happy to provide you or any member of the
committee a brief from my team on all the things that we are
doing to improve the connection between disaster services to
those with access and functional needs.
Ms. Titus. Well, I think that would help reassure folks.
But also, maybe you could direct the Office of Disability
Integration and Coordination to get on those national
stakeholder calls, and that would be an improvement, as well.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. I now recognize the ranking member
for 5 minutes.
Mr. Katko. Thank you, Madam Chair. I appreciate that. I am
going to kind of give you a fact pattern, and then maybe we can
work from that fact pattern, because I think it would be
instructive here.
I mentioned Plan 2014 in my opening statement, but I just
want to kind of give you a couple of examples that have
happened. Since Plan 2014 has been implemented, there has been
catastrophic flooding on Lake Ontario 2 out of the first 3
years of its implementation.
Sodus Bay makes up 50 percent of the tax revenue for Wayne
County, or other shoreline properties. And they have been
dramatically affected. And the town of Sodus Bay really is
going to be--literally, going to be under water this year. And
there are multiple restaurants, marinas that are probably going
to not survive, financially.
Same with Fair Haven next door. Greene Point Marina, for
example, has been in existence for 115 years, is on the verge
of going out of business because they have suffered over $4
million worth of losses and damages from these two flooding
acts.
Put your face on this, too. Bill and Karen Dunn, they
bought a house in 2017 on Lake Ontario that had not had
flooding in 90 years, and 2 out of the 3 years their house has
been under water. And they are not wealthy people.
And this is going on across 200 miles of Lake Ontario
shoreline. And, to date, zero FEMA funds are going there
because of the technical rules, if you will. And I know I have
talked to you about this, and I am--not to accuse you, I am
just saying I want to know how we can fix this and think about
this. And you add into what happens in those smalltown
disasters--we are really a blip on the screen for FEMA, but for
those small towns, they are catastrophic disasters, like I
mentioned with Moravia.
And I know the Disaster Recovery Reform Act directed FEMA
to give greater consideration for localized impacts of
disasters and declarations. And I know you have pushed out some
guidance to your regions. But, from a practical standpoint, how
is localized impact giving greater weight?
And what are the shortcomings now?
What can we do, moving forward, to try and get a better
handle on this?
And if it needs legislation, tell me what we need.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir. So, as it relates to flooding, and
whether it is in your district or across the country, really,
the best defense against flooding is insurance: 1 inch of water
is $25,000 in damage.
And if I can give you an example from Hurricane Harvey in
Houston--and we have a couple different programs that we offer
in disasters. One of them is Individual Assistance. And the cap
for Individual Assistance is about $34,900. That is the max you
can get. And the other program is in NFIP, National Flood
Insurance Program. The cap on that is $250,000 for the
structure, and another $250,000 for the content.
So in Harvey, very few people max out in IA, very few. The
average IA check that we sent to disaster survivors was about
$6,000, average. If you had flood insurance, the average check
that you got from the insurance company, NFIP, was about
$119,000. And again, the difference is dramatic. Will $6,000 be
helpful in a flooding event? Absolutely. But will it help you
repair or build your house back? It will be a difficult
stretch. But if you had $119,000, it is a good start to getting
your life back.
So I would just implore everyone--again, this is the
insurance gap that I talked about. Flood insurance is your best
defense. The average cost for an insurance program is about
$700 across the Nation. And you can get that through your local
insurance adjuster. So it doesn't matter----
Mr. Katko. Does that go up if there is continuous flooding
that is evident?
Mr. Gaynor. Say that one more time, sir.
Mr. Katko. Does that go up, the premiums go up, if there is
continuous flooding happening?
Mr. Gaynor. Again, I think you would have to call your
insurance broker----
Mr. Katko. OK, we will check that out, OK.
Mr. Gaynor [continuing]. To kind of get the details about
where you live, and what your risk is. I mean I don't want to
give any specifics on it, because it is, I think, house by
house. But again, essentially, it is the best defense.
When it comes to localized impacts, we have six things we
look at. And we want to give greater weight to localized
impacts, but that doesn't necessarily mean it--like localized--
greater weight on localized impacts wins every time. I mean
there is a tension between localized impact and the capacity of
a local community or a State or a county----
Mr. Katko. OK, applying what you know about Lake Ontario
and what has been happening up there, do you foresee possibly
seeing a different result of what they have had so far, which
is basically nothing?
Mr. Gaynor. For an award?
Mr. Katko. Yes.
Mr. Gaynor. Well, again, sir, it is based on damages and
eligibility and, you know, we do this--it is called a pre-
disaster assessment on damages.
Mr. Katko. Yes, just--I am getting ready to run out of
time, so I just want to interrupt you real quick.
There is, literally, hundreds of millions, if not billions
of dollars' worth of damages on this shoreline that can be
proven, but they don't fall into the FEMA bucket. And that is
our concern. That is the point I am trying to get at.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir.
Mr. Katko. And so what can we do about that?
Mr. Gaynor. There are 19 different Federal agencies that
have probably 90 different disaster programs. I would be happy
to work with you and your staff to see is there another program
other than FEMA that fits into that problem set that we can
help with.
Mr. Katko. Thank you. I yield back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. We will work on that.
I now recognize the chairman for 5 minutes.
Mr. DeFazio. Thanks, Madam Chair.
Mr. Administrator, I raised the issue of the Individual
Assistance and self-certification consequent to what I had
heard in Puerto Rico. And you had developed this process
previously, but it isn't being currently applied for the
earthquake victims.
So what is the rationale to change back to the more
difficult process?
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir. I was just in Puerto Rico after the
new year, and we are using self-certification, the same process
that we used in Maria. There is no difference. I asked that
specific question to make sure that we didn't create a new
program. It has been in use since days after the earthquake
struck. And again, I have had direct contact with my leadership
down there on this topic.
Mr. DeFazio. OK, well, we heard some things to the contrary
when we were down there, and if you could just maybe reach back
out again, particularly----
Mr. Gaynor. I will----
Mr. DeFazio [continuing]. As relates to the earthquake----
Mr. Gaynor. I will follow up.
Mr. DeFazio. Yes.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir.
Mr. DeFazio. That would be good.
Also, the chancellor of Germany said today she expects,
according to her experts, that 70 percent of the people in
Germany will get the COVID-19. And there is, really, no reason
that--you know, if that does happen in Germany, it is likely to
happen here.
And I am just wondering what kind of disaster pre-planning,
continuity for FEMA itself is being done now in anticipation
that we might have a national disaster declaration. We
certainly have a number of States already that have declared
disasters.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir. And if I can divide it into a couple
of different buckets----
Mr. DeFazio. Sure.
Mr. Gaynor. So we are in support of HHS. They are the lead
in this COVID-19 disease. And so we have, from the beginning,
been providing interagency coordination, planning, analysis on
a number of different things that we have a specialty in. So we
have been in support from day one. I have about 30 people that
work every day in support of HHS.
When it comes to inside FEMA, I have three priorities that
I have given the workforce from the beginning. Number one is
preserve and protect the force. I need to protect my workforce
because my number two priority is to be able to deliver my
mission-critical missions in a degraded COVID-19 environment.
So make sure we have enough people to execute our mission-
essential functions. And then lastly, number three, is support
HHS and anything they need for their attack on squashing COVID-
19 across the country. Those are the three priorities that we
operate on today.
We have members of the task force that are in consultation
with them daily about what they need. And so it changes every
day. It is fluid, it is dynamic. And, I know the administration
is looking at all tools at their disposal to do battle COVID-
19.
Mr. DeFazio. OK, thank you.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. I now recognize Mr. Graves.
Mr. Graves?
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Administrator, thank you for being here. I appreciate the
opportunity to meet with you again. And as I told you last
time, I am not sure how many people I would wish that job on.
That is a tough job that you have stepped into, and you have
inherited an awful lot of disasters that are going on, as the
ranking member noted earlier.
I want to flag a few things for you.
Number one, the Disaster Recovery Reform Act that became
law in 2018, and a bipartisan bill that many members in this
committee worked on, it had a provision in there related to
rebuilding of schools and other public facilities. In the
Stafford Act it says that each facility that floods--``facility
that floods''--is to have a $500,000 deductible.
The way that FEMA has applied that is they have applied
that $500,000 facility--which I view as being in a school--they
have applied it to a storage shed, they have applied it to a
gymnasium, they have applied it to the elementary school
building, they have applied it to the middle school building,
they have applied it to the high school building, they have
applied it to the cafeteria. So, all of a sudden, what would
have been a $500,000 payment that I think Congress intended in
Stafford, has become, who knows, an $8 million payment.
Many of our schools get their funds from property taxes.
Properties have been destroyed during the floods. So you can
just see this whole cascading effect.
So in that bill Congress enacted a change that made it
clear it was $500,000 per facility, period, for a school, for a
jail, whatever it is. That was law over a year ago. We have
schools that still have not been rebuilt from our August 2016
flood because FEMA has not changed their rules. They have not
implemented this law that was put in place over a year ago.
So we have children that are being affected. We have
schools that are doubling up. We have temporary buildings. We
have schools that are literally in the same shape they were in
before, because they can't afford to rebuild them, because they
can't afford the deductible.
Could you please make this a priority, and fix this? The
law is crystal clear. I think the law was clear before; now it
is even more clear, if that is possible. Would you please make
this a priority and get this fixed as soon as possible?
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir. And I will look into the specifics of
how we have applied it, and the actual--you know, right down to
the local and county and State level. I don't know enough
detail about how we are actually applying it, but you have my
commitment that I will get you feedback, and we will compare
what the law says and how we are applying it. And we will work
towards----
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you.
Mr. Gaynor [continuing]. So that we----
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Administrator, I don't think there
is any argument over what the law says. Actually, Congress has
stepped in and done the same thing in the past for past
disasters, whenever FEMA has applied--and again, in my
opinion--inappropriately applied Stafford. So there is nobody
who should be reinventing the wheel. You can cut and paste what
you have done in the past, and just apply it here.
The second issue is--because I am burning time here--the
second issue, we also included a provision in there that, I
think, was very well-thought, bipartisan support, that says
that FEMA should get together with the Federal Highway
Administration and develop standards for evacuation routes. And
the reason is because, in the event of disasters, we have found
that many of our evacuation routes are inundated or otherwise
impassable.
Now, you think about that for a minute. If our evacuation
routes are impassable, that is a big deal. In our August 2016
flood the interstate barrier between the east and west lane
actually served as a levee--we needed levees, not there--which
exacerbated flooding to the tune of 6 and, in some cases, maybe
as high as 8 feet higher inundation on the north side of the
interstate. It actually created victims, because the people
couldn't get off the interstate. They were stuck on these
little interstate islands. We had to fly helicopters to drop
food and supplies to them. It was ridiculous.
So we put a provision in and said, hey, get with Federal
Highway Administration, develop the right standards.
Nothing has been changed on this interstate. Nothing. Would
you please look into this, and make this a priority? There was
some very tenuous guidance that was issued that didn't even
come close to hitting the mark on this. So would you please
look into this, and make sure that this works?
Mr. Gaynor. I will, sir.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. All right, and last question. I am
going to guess that, if you did work and you didn't receive a
paycheck for a couple of years, that would probably make it
very difficult on you--I don't know if you are married, but--
your spouse, your family. We have contractors in Louisiana that
have done work in the Virgin Islands. Look, I know we can point
fingers at everybody, we can point fingers at the companies, we
can point fingers at the USVI Government, you can point fingers
at me. I don't care.
Administrator, this is not OK. You are losing your disaster
response capabilities across the United States. You are going
to be limited to having two big companies left, and they are
going to gouge you on prices. This is not in your interest.
Would you please step in and provide some leadership and
address this?
I yield back.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. I now recognize Representative Holmes
Norton for 5 minutes.
Ms. Norton. I very much appreciate this hearing, Madam
Chair.
Administrator Gaynor, I looked at your strategic plan. It
covers 4 years. I looked at your so-called ``Publication 1''.
You call it a capstone document. Given the extreme weather--and
some of it has been discussed here, and they, of course, amount
to floods and fires and hurricanes and earthquakes--there was
no mention of the climate change that may be the cause of these
increases, and the seriousness.
So I need to know whether you recognize what is happening
across the country and across the world as significantly
different from what FEMA has experienced before, and that
climate change is real.
Yes, sir?
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am. Just to be clear on ``Publication
1,'' ``Publication 1'' is really focused on the people of FEMA,
and that is kind of the purpose of that document.
So when it comes to climate change, you know, we are, at
FEMA, committed to respond to any disaster, no matter the
cause. But that doesn't say we don't embrace a changing
climate. Every mitigation plan in the United States at the
State level is required to address changing conditions. They
need to change the extreme environment, they need to address
infrastructure, they need to address demographics to make sure
that we address it.
You can look at the past 75, 80 years--and I will just pick
hurricanes--they are more frequent, they are more intense, they
are more costly, they are more deadly. And we understand that.
And for my role here at FEMA--and this is the same concept I
have had as a local and at State--we will--we embrace all of
those things.
And I am not going to argue with the science of it. My,
really, job is to make sure that the Nation--I am prepared to
deliver those disaster resources to the Nation, no matter the
cause.
And so I am going to get graded on my response to a
disaster. And you can name any one of them. And that is what we
are focused on. However, we embrace all of those things to make
sure that we have good planning, that we invest in pre-disaster
mitigation. We realize that we cannot sustain the cost of
disasters like we have seen in 2017 and 2018.
Again, I thank Congress for passing the DRRA that allowed
us to set aside 6 percent of disaster costs for pre-disaster
mitigation. That changes the dynamic in the country, saying
that we are going to invest in pre-disaster mitigation before a
disaster happens. That is my tool to address some of those
concerns that you have.
Ms. Norton. Well, that is--your answer is important
because, obviously, what we are experiencing today is a
difference in quality and in quantity of what we have ever
experienced. So you are going to be the capstone agency. There
is no way to get around who the Nation will look to, so I
appreciate what you said.
Now, the Nation's Capital, which I represent, is located on
two rivers, the Anacostia and the Potomac, and has experienced
very severe flooding. I mean flooding even on our main avenues,
where the Archives are, where the most important businesses
are. I am very pleased in your testimony, while you didn't
mention the words ``climate change,'' you did talk about
resistant infrastructure. You did talk about catastrophic
flooding.
What is FEMA doing to prepare for urban flooding where you
may have whole cities under water, or important parts of cities
like the Nation's Capital?
What is FEMA doing to prepare for that kind of catastrophe
that could face, not only the Nation's Capital, but many other
cities which are located on the banks of rivers?
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am. I think we are addressing all kinds
of flooding. When people think of flooding, they think of a
hurricane and, you know, Houston that floods. But again, in my
opening statement, 98 percent of the counties in America have
flooded. So it is just not coastal communities, it is any
community that really----
Ms. Norton. Is that new, that virtually every community has
flooding? Is that new in the United States?
Mr. Gaynor. We kind of say laughingly that if it rains, it
floods. Just because you are not on a coast doesn't mean that
you won't flood.
And so one of the things we ask individuals, homeowners, is
assess your risk where you live. Are you at risk of flooding?
And if you are at risk of flooding, do you have flood
insurance? Again, it is the best defense against flooding. It
will get you back to normal quicker than a FEMA Individual
Assistance program where, again, the average in Hurricane
Harvey was only about $6,000. I would rather give you that
check for $250,000 because you insured your home, and maybe
another $250,000 because you insured the contents of your home.
That is how we really want to make a difference in the United
States, is close that insurance gap so people are best
protected.
The FEMA headquarters is in a rented building in
Washington, DC. We are in a commercial building. Across the
street from me is the Education Department. Because my building
is commercial, it is insured. The building across the street
from me is a Federal building which is not insured. So, again,
we really need to take a hard look at what we insure in
America, to include homes.
What are we doing to address local problems? I would be
happy to connect with the DC local emergency managers to see
what--how they are doing it, because it really is--again, back
to shared responsibility, they have a mission to make sure
that, in this certain specific case, that they reduce or
minimize flooding in Washington, DC. So I would be happy to
connect the both of you to see what they are doing in tangible
terms to prevent that from happening.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Titus. We now recognize Miss Gonzalez-Colon for 5
minutes.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Madam Chair, and good
morning to Mr. Gaynor.
And first of all, I want to say thank you for always
answering my calls, my texts regarding many of the issues
regarding Puerto Rico and the two previous disasters, Hurricane
Irma, Hurricane Maria, and now the earthquakes at the
southwestern part of the island. So, I mean, for me, it is
important every time we do have cases, as you may know, that
you are always there. So I appreciate that. It has made a big
difference.
I was taking notes of Chairman DeFazio's comments in terms
of the roundtable we had with the mayors in Puerto Rico when
the Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure went there,
as well as many other Members of Congress. And many of them are
still wondering when the major--approvals for start to
permanent works, mitigation programs are going to happen. Can
we have the current rate of Maria projects, Hurricane Maria
projects approval, in terms of municipalities in the State
government? Do you have that information?
Mr. Gaynor. I just missed--are we talking about Maria or
earthquake----
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Maria, Maria.
Mr. Gaynor. And I just----
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Hurricane Maria. OK, many of the
mayors in Puerto Rico, the municipalities, are still asking
when the major projects are going to be approved. So I am
asking if you do have a rate of approval of those major
projects.
Mr. Gaynor. Again, I was down, I met with you and the
Governor of Puerto Rico, the staff of COR3, and my leadership
down there, Alex Amparo, on many of these topics. It is--and we
met with mayors, as you all know.
And part of our goal was to make sure--and there are many
small projects that we want to get on the street. Our goal was
to get 200 small projects a month approved. And we are--last
month I think it was 211. It will grow. And those small
projects directly impact the 78 municipalities on Puerto Rico.
It will help those mayors show progress and recovery. We are
committed to making sure that we keep that pipeline open, and
get those small projects into those communities where it will
make a big difference. Not really big projects, but projects
that make a difference in a small community anywhere in Puerto
Rico.
So, again, it is one of my priorities, and it is a priority
of Mr. Amparo's, to make sure that we deliver on what we said.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you. And maybe not for now, but
if you can, submit to the committee data regarding the approval
and disbursement on emergency funds still pending, as well as
approval for start of permanent work and mitigation project
spending. And if we do have that rate of all the projects that
are being approved, not just the small projects, but the main
projects, because that is still one of the concerns.
I do know that the new Governor requested a change for the
alternative procedure. And, my question is, is the new model
now fully implemented on the island? Is that better, in terms
of taking cases more easily?
New delivery model. I think you need to turn on your mic.
Mr. Gaynor. It is on.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. OK, perfect.
Mr. Gaynor. We are committed to that model. It works in
Puerto Rico. We didn't have it from the beginning, we kind of
did it midstream. But I think now it shows results.
And I always smile when a mayor knows the exact process in
that. I think in Puerto Rico they call it the snake--where
their projects are, what phase they are in, and when they can
expect it to, again, be a tangible result at the end of that
process.
It has been a long slog in Puerto Rico, and I get that. And
recovery is never fast enough for disaster survivors, and it is
not fast enough for us.
I think we have made major headway in the past 6, 8 months
on policy, process, rules. And you will see here shortly major
projects be approved and on the street. We have done all the
work, we have done all the scoping, we have settled on all the
rules about how we are going to treat all these different
sectors, whether it is the electrical sector, or health, or
education. All those rules have been agreed to. And now you
will see that model put out results. And I think that is what
we are all looking for.
And again, we are committed to the recovery in Puerto Rico.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you. Do you see that happening
before the third anniversary of Maria in September of this
year, major projects being expedited or beginning?
Mr. Gaynor. I do. I do. I think you will see the first
major projects shortly. Yes, ma'am.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Titus. Now I recognize Representative Johnson for 5
minutes.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you. Administrator Gaynor,
the President's fiscal year 2021 proposed budget cuts the
Disaster Relief Fund by over $12 million, an almost 70-percent
decrease from DRF's fiscal year 2020 allocation. How would the
proposed budget cut affect FEMA's ability to carry out a
culture of preparedness, ready the Nation for catastrophic
disasters, and streamline the complexity of the agency?
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir. I think the cut is reflected in FEMA
receiving a supplemental, either in the budget year or the
previous budget year, that made us redo the math.
Today I have $42 billion in the DRF. We are healthy when it
comes to having enough money to deal with all the disasters
that are on the books, and all the disasters or--the next
coming hurricane season. We have enough money in there to
respond to and recover from a number of disasters that we are
working on, or a disaster that may beset us in the next year.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you. President Trump's budget
also calls for a $163 million reduction to the Flood Hazard
Mapping and Risk Analysis Program. Since flooding is the most
common and most costly disaster to repair from, how would the
agency plan to execute flooding mitigation plans in lieu of
such drastic cuts?
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir. And again, I think the cut is just
reflective of how much progress we have made on flood mapping.
We have 100 percent of the highest risk flood areas in the
United States mapped. We have about one-third of the entire
catalog mapped of the United States. There is another third
that are at low risk, areas that have no people in them, or
have no risk of flooding that would impact either facilities or
individuals. We will work through that. And then we have
another third that we have to map.
I think we have sufficient funding to do mapping over the
next couple of years. We actually map about 20 percent a year.
And so maps get refreshed every 5 years. So we do 20 percent of
the catalog every year, and then every 5 years the entire
catalog is updated.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Sure. So----
Mr. Gaynor. We could always do more, but right now I think
we made good headway.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. But is----
Mr. Gaynor. We digitized the majority of these maps today--
--
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Well, is it your testimony that
$163 million cut from the Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk
Analysis Program would not hurt your efforts?
Mr. Gaynor. I think part of it is----
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Is that your testimony?
Mr. Gaynor. I think, for us, it is a capacity issue.I
think, for the amount of work we have in front of us, the
amount of people who are assigned to it, the amount that we
have today is sufficient.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Well, let me ask you this question,
sir, and thank you.
As I know you--well, one of the most prevalent issues
facing the agency currently is an understaffed workforce. In
response to Chairwoman Titus' question you stated that you seek
to create a diverse, ethical, and integrated workforce. Can you
expound on how you plan to achieve this objective, and explain
why you believe that a diverse workforce is important in
enabling FEMA to accomplish its mission?
Mr. Gaynor. Well, if I answer the last one first, because
we need to reflect what the country looks like. And so having a
diverse workforce is important to us.
This past October--and one of the Members referenced
``Publication 1,'' which is, ``We are FEMA,'' and it really is
about who we are, what we do, how we deliver our services, and
what we believe in. And so I have doubled down on our core
values of compassion, integrity, respect, and fairness. That is
how I want every employee to operate. If you use those core
values to operate in sometimes a complex, difficult,
challenging environment, you will never make a wrong mistake,
or have a wrong solution.
We need to invest more in our incident workforce. Today I
have enough personnel to respond to anything in the United
States. We have a challenge on the recovery side. Again, I
think Member Graves referenced 640 open disasters dating as far
back as the year 2000. So there are a lot of open disasters.
Last year flooding was prevalent across the Midwest. About 70
brandnew disasters last year. So we need to do a better job in,
again, telling people who we are, so they want to join our
ranks.
Again, I believe I have the best mission in the Federal
Government, helping people before, during, and after disasters.
I need to attract those kind of people to come to FEMA so I can
deliver those services to the American people. We are working
hard at it, to make sure that we double down on how we recruit,
where we recruit, and how we retain people. It is important to
our mission. We can't do it without people. And that is the
bottom line.
Mr. Johnson of Georgia. Thank you, sir.
I yield back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. Now I recognize Mr. Palmer for 5
minutes.
Mr. Palmer. I thank the chairman.
Administrator Gaynor, this is an issue that I had brought
up, I think, on the Oversight and Reform Committee, and I want
to revisit here, about the FEMA trailers. And there was an
Associated Press report from December 2017 that detailed FEMA's
management of trailers leased to disaster victims, and noted
that the Federal Government spends up to $150,000 for these
mobile homes, which are used for about 18 months, and then
auctioned off for considerably less than what FEMA pays for
them.
Since this report initially came out--and I assume you are
familiar with that report--has FEMA made any changes to, first
of all, the process by which they procure these mobile homes?
And they are not your fancier mobile homes, to start with.
That price seems rather high, but--and your disposition of them
afterwards.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir. We are cognizant of the cost of all
sorts of disaster supplies or materials.
Mr. Palmer. I have only got a little bit of time, so I want
to really drill down on this.
So what concerns me is I understand that there would be
some issues with storage or parking these things after you use
them, but does it make sense to pay $150,000 for a housing
unit, and then auction it off for prices below $10,000?
Mr. Gaynor. Sir, there is a certain cost of doing business
in emergency management. So we buy supplies. We buy water. We
buy food. We buy housing units to have, to be ready. And in
some cases you may not have enough, and you have to go out to
the market to buy more. And so you--sometimes you----
Mr. Palmer. OK.
Mr. Gaynor [continuing]. Pay a premium. But our mission is
to deliver.
Mr. Palmer. I understand, but--and I am trying to help you.
This is not--just from a practical perspective, that if you
paid this for these mobile homes and they are used for 18
months, you know, does it make sense to have an inventory, or
does it make sense to go out and have to pay a premium for
these, when you could probably buy a more upscale unit for
less?
I am trying to figure out if there is a way that we can
manage this, and not cost the taxpayer so much money.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir. The root of this problem, I think, is
post-disaster housing across the United States, so just not
California or other places. Post-disaster housing is an issue.
We are working with States and counties and localities to help
improve post-disaster housing, because it will minimize the use
for these trailers and mobile housing units.
I think, for me, these are the last-resort kinds of things
that we want to implement.
Mr. Palmer. Right.
Mr. Gaynor. I think no one wants to move into a travel
trailer after living in a, you know, 2,000-square-foot home. We
want to put those disaster survivors in something----
Mr. Palmer. That is not what I am asking. And maybe I need
to put this in writing. I am just trying to figure out, does it
make sense to pay $150,000 for a unit, use it one time for 18
months, and then auction it off for less than $10,000? Does it
make sense to inventory those and refurbish them so that they
can be used again?
And--first of all, so that you are--you have some level of
preparedness the next time you need something, instead of
having to go out and pay these high prices.
Also, in regard to debris removal, Alabama suffered a
horrendous swarm of tornadoes on April 27, 2011. My hometown of
Hackleburg, Alabama--the F5 was named the Hackleburg tornado--
was wiped out. And FEMA's report said that there was about 10
million cubic feet of debris that was removed. Some of us think
that it was a good bit more.
Before I was in Congress, I ran a think tank, and I was
looking at this. FEMA apparently--it almost looked like a
single-source bid for debris removal, and it was about $40 per
cubic yard, when--I know some of the counties refused to go
along with that bid. The State has to pay, I think, about 25
percent of that cost. And they were doing it for $10 to $15 a
cubic foot. If your estimate of 10 million cubic feet is
correct, that would have been $400 million; $100 million of
that would have come from the States.
When you do debris removal, do you have multiple companies
that you go out for bid for, or is there one or two companies
that you rely on all the time?
Mr. Gaynor. So we don't do debris removal.
Mr. Palmer. I know. You bid it out.
Mr. Gaynor. No. Well, we reimburse for debris removal. So--
--
Mr. Palmer. Correct.
Mr. Gaynor. So the contract for debris removal--if we just
want to keep it simple--from a State point of view, the
contract is between the State and the contractors or the
vendors that they hire. So they have to follow Federal
procurement laws to make sure that they do it correctly, to
make sure that it is eligible, and reasonable costs. And only
then do we reimburse.
But we have no contract between debris removal vendors.
That is strictly between, in this case, the State and the
vendors that they select.
Mr. Palmer. Is the Army Corps of Engineers involved in this
process?
Mr. Gaynor. You can use----
Mr. Palmer. Someone----
Mr. Gaynor. You can----
Mr. Palmer [continuing]. Gave them this contractor, and led
many of them to believe that they needed to go this route at
$40 a cubic yard, when I know for a fact that they were--the
counties who refused to do that were getting it done for $10 to
$15 a cubic foot. I mean a cubic yard.
So that may not be something that you have looked into,
but, you know, we keep looking at all these disasters in the--
and Madam Chairman, the cost keeps going up and up and up. And
I am all for getting in there and helping people. I really am.
But I think we need to maximize every dollar to get it to the
people that need it.
And also the tremendous burden that is imposed on States,
we need to be aware of that, because they are not the--it is
not just the Federal Government, it is the States, as well.
I appreciate your indulgence, and I yield back.
Ms. Titus. I now recognize Mr. Garamendi for 5 minutes.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you. The gentleman is quite correct.
It is the regulations that basically require the hiring of a
company that has previously done it.
In California, in one of the fires, it was a Tennessee
company that came all the way to California to do it at a very,
very high cost. And this does need to be looked into. Thank you
for raising that question, and we will follow through.
Administrator Gaynor, thank you for being here, and taking
all of this, these questions. We have heard from many
communities in my area that the financial recovery projects,
the permanent work, they cannot afford the upfront cost.
Waiting for reimbursement from FEMA is just an impossible
situation, and often they just let it go.
In the 2013 Sandy Recovery Act, Congress established the
so-called section 428 alternative procedures under FEMA's
Public Assistance program, allowing your agency to fund major
disaster recovery projects, so-called permanent work, up front,
in exchange for the State accepting a binding cost estimate for
the project. However, many localities facing these cash flow
problems following disasters do not participate in the section
428 alternative procedures.
My question to you, does FEMA agree that section 428 is
underutilized by the States?
And why might that be the case?
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir. Well, it is not mandatory, I think,
is the first case. It is not mandatory that you use it.
However, we champion section 428 wherever we go. And it is a
better way to do business. And really, it is the difference
between section 428 agreeing on a fixed cost, and the
traditional way is actual costs. And I can give you an example.
There is a disaster in the South that we are still working
on. And it is from Katrina, it is 14 years old. It is still
open. I am still paying on actual costs, because with the
actual costs there is no incentive to actually close a disaster
or speed the project, right? Because the Federal Government
will pay the entire bill on that. Section 428 is fixed cost. We
are--like building a house, you agree on the cost of that
house, and if it runs over, then--and again, I just use the
State--the State is on the hook for that overage. But if it is
under, you get to use that money for other projects.
And I think that--and again, that is a great incentive to
speed recovery and to save taxpayer dollars.
Mr. Garamendi. You have that right. And by raising the
issue of cost--you and I had this discussion beforehand--if we
were to move more aggressively in this, and you had a cost
estimate up front, it was agreed that that would be the cost
the county or the State would then proceed, that then would
allow the FEMA to make periodic payments, for example, when the
contract was signed, 10 percent, and then when some of the work
was done, periodic payments. And at the end, you do the audit
and get it done.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir.
Mr. Garamendi. I really would urge you to move in that
direction, and provide for these periodic upfront costs. It
might be better for everybody, and your 14 years at Katrina
would not happen again.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir.
Mr. Garamendi. So please give that your consideration, and
we will work with you to accomplish that.
And by the way, I have a piece of legislation that would
urge you to do it even more, and that is H.R. 6071. Write that
one down. We are coming to you to get it done.
Wildfire mitigation, a clarification on it. Presently, you
can relocate buildings that are in a hazard area. Would you
please confirm that FEMA's current interpretation of the
Federal regulation that allows you to do this, to relocate
destroyed facilities due to the risk of wildfire or other
hazards, not just floods?
Presently, you seem to be focused on floods and not
applying this relocation alternative to fires. Tell me that is
not the case.
Mr. Gaynor. Well, I am not going to give you a definitive
answer, because I would have to go research it. But I think,
when you think about mitigation, we would not want to, just in
a general sense, rebuild in the same place the same structure
as we previously had.
So, you know, section 428, combined with mitigation, I
think we want to build smarter, build up to current code
standards, and, you know, look in the environment that we are
building in.
So I owe you an answer about how we apply that when it
comes to wildfire.
Mr. Garamendi. Yes. I will look forward to your responses
to both of these over time.
Mr. Gaynor. Thank you, sir.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you for your work.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. I now recognize Ms. Mucarsel-Powell.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Thank you, Madam Chair, and thank you
for having this hearing.
Congratulations on the appointment, Mr. Gaynor. I want to
start just by asking you if you recall a letter that I sent to
you in July that deals specifically with flood insurance. I
wanted to get information on the National Flood Insurance
Program and FEMA's new initiative of Risk Rating 2.0. I
expressed my strong concerns that FEMA's new risk pricing model
that is being developed currently is not fairly being
communicated with local municipalities, and being transparent
to the public.
And I did ask several questions, and you have mentioned
that everyone should be under a flood insurance plan. And one
of my questions is what steps are you taking to ensure that all
homeowners with a federally backed mortgage are enrolled in
flood insurance?
So I want to know--I have been waiting for months--if you
recall the letter, and if you have any answers to those
questions today.
Mr. Gaynor. I can't say that I have personally seen that
letter. What is the date on it?
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. It was directed to you July 11th,
2019.
Mr. Gaynor. It seems overdue to me. We try to get back
pretty quickly on letters from Members.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. I would appreciate that.
Mr. Gaynor. I will look into that.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Thank you.
Mr. Gaynor. And, you know, we took a pause on rates,
because we wanted to make sure we did it right, because there
is lots of sensitivity across the Nation about the premium, and
against risk.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Exactly.
Mr. Gaynor. We want to make sure that----
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Which is why I think it is important
to be communicating with the local communities, because they
are extremely concerned, and they want to understand what
process you are following as you establish the new Risk Rating
2.0 plan.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am. And again, this hasn't been updated
to since the 1970s.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Yes.
Mr. Gaynor. And we are eager to actually, you know, move
this along so it actually reflects risk.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Thank you, Mr. Gaynor.
Now, you were talking about making sure that people have
flood insurance. And just to give you an idea, most people
assume that people that are living in coastal communities are
extremely wealthy, and that is not the case. We have
hardworking Americans living in my district along the Keys, and
also in Miami-Dade County. And in the Keys their average annual
premium is $2,278 a year, so much higher than what you stated
of $700 a year. And it is definitely a concern, as you start
developing premiums under the Risk Rating 2.0.
So I wanted to ask you, what steps are you taking right now
to ensure affordability under this new plan that you are
formulating?
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am. So, again, it goes back to risk.
And I will try to keep it simple. So if you live on the water,
you would assume that you probably have the highest risk of
something bad happening to your home. If you live right on the
beach, and the ocean is right there, you probably have the
highest risk.
Some of our maps don't reflect that in a really elegant
way. We have these hard-drawn lines where, once you go over a
certain line, the risk really drops off a cliff, and that is
not reasonable. And so we want to make sure that--if you have
the highest risk, you should probably pay the highest premium.
And then, as you work your way to less riskier locations, that
you have lower premiums.
And again, our maps don't help us get there. But one of our
goals is to make those maps graduated so it really reflects
reality. We are looking at what does it cost to rebuild a
house----
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. That is good to hear. Mr. Gaynor, I am
going to cut you off because I have so many questions. Thank
you so much. We definitely have to meet after this hearing----
Mr. Gaynor. Absolutely.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell [continuing]. To discuss that issue
more.
But also, you are saying that you have enough money, that
you are not really concerned. We had Hurricane Irma back in
2017. It is going to be almost 3 years this summer, and we are
still waiting to get the reimbursements for my community.
Just to give you an idea, the city of Key West is still
waiting on $3 million to be obligated. The city of Homestead,
waiting on nearly $12 million. Florida City, $4 million. Miami-
Dade County alone is waiting for over $100 million.
While I thank you for the funding that we have received
after my requests, I just need to hear from you that we are
going to be receiving those reimbursements quickly, because we
are now entering another hurricane season. This was a hurricane
category 4. Scientists are talking about categories 5, 6, and
higher. And I am very concerned that we are not prepared once
again. And we haven't even gotten those reimbursements.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am. My staff will go connect with you,
and specifically what reimbursements are you waiting for.
But typically, we reimburse the State, and the State
actually does all the validation of the projects, making sure,
again, they are eligible, making sure they are reasonable,
making sure all the documentation is there. And then----
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. The State hasn't received those funds
yet. So it is still sitting at FEMA.
Mr. Gaynor. I will----
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. And last, because my 5 minutes are up,
and I am very concerned that we are not following all the
appropriate procedures, and policies, and all the different
Federal agencies to prepare for coronavirus.
And so I want to ask, specifically, what conversations have
you personally had with the Secretary of Health and Human
Services as we are entering into this outbreak here in the
United States?
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am. I have personally not had any
conversations with----
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. You have not had a----
Mr. Gaynor. But that doesn't mean----
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell [continuing]. Seat at the table in
these--you have not been at the table, discussing what you need
to do for emergency response?
Mr. Gaynor. The Secretary of Homeland Security and his
Deputy have been at the table on the task force. We are in
support of HHS. So at the staff level, that is where my focus
is right now, on making sure that I support the Secretary in
all the things that he needs support for.
So again, interagency coordination, planning, analysis, all
those things that we are really good at, we are supporting him
right now.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. And you have all the supplies you need
to provide assistance to areas that would be hit by this
outbreak from one day to the next? Are you ready?
Mr. Gaynor. So when you say supplies, what do you mean?
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Meds, tents, food, water.
Mr. Gaynor. So we have warehouses across the country with
all sorts of commodities for all sorts of--it is an all-hazard
approach. So we have commodities from coast to coast. We have
commodities on Puerto Rico. We have----
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. You are ready?
Mr. Gaynor [continuing]. On Hawaii----
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Do you feel ready?
Mr. Gaynor. We are ready every day----
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Is FEMA ready?
Mr. Gaynor. FEMA is ready every day, because every day----
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. That is what I want to hear.
Mr. Gaynor. And the simplest term is earthquake day, right?
It could happen tomorrow. So we are ready. We are ready to
support HHS, who is in the lead for the COVID-19. And until
that changes, we will remain in support.
Ms. Mucarsel-Powell. Thank you, Mr. Gaynor.
Mr. Gaynor. You are welcome.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. I now recognize Mrs. Fletcher for 5
minutes.
Mrs. Fletcher. Thank you, Chairwoman Titus. Thank you for
holding this hearing.
Thank you, Administrator Gaynor, for being here and taking
the time to testify today. You have already touched in your
testimony a little bit about the area I represent, and some of
the complications we saw after Hurricane Harvey.
I represent Texas, the Seventh Congressional District in
Houston. And my district had some of the most affected areas
during Harvey and in the response. And I know, from that
experience and from being here, that FEMA personnel are
stretched thin, are managing responses across the country,
especially during Harvey. We had wildfires, we had other
hurricanes. It was a tremendous effort. And we know that we ask
the agency to do a lot, and often with limited resources, and
appreciate the good work that FEMA did in our community and
across the country.
That said, I think that most of us on this committee still
see room for improvement, as I think you do, as well, in how we
respond to natural disasters. And often the recovery is just
slower than we need it to be.
In our experience--and I kind of want to touch on some of
the things my constituents have told me were particular
challenges for them, because what I would like to see--and I
think the purpose of this hearing is to talk about ways we can
improve and streamline disaster response.
And, you know, we have already done legislation that has
gone through this committee to try to help with some of the
challenges that we have seen. But the greatest concern that I
hear from my constituents is that we just haven't made enough
progress in preparing for future storms, and that there are a
lot of confusing processes in the disaster recovery process.
So I am hopeful that implementation of DRRA will lead to
more resilient communities and processes before catastrophic
events happen. But I would like you to touch on a couple of
things, and I have only got a few minutes left, so I am just
going to put them out there. And if you can address these, that
would be great.
One, can you talk a little bit about how FEMA plans to
incentivize investments and reduce risk from a pre-disaster
perspective?
And right now, the other thing that really seems to be a
challenge to me that we are working on--and I would love your
perspective on--the disaster response and disaster preparedness
are currently split between a variety of agencies. I wrote down
earlier you said 19 agencies and 90 different disaster
programs. So that is often incredibly confusing for the
disaster victims who are trying to navigate it, often with
limited resources after a storm.
So what do you see as the largest gaps when it comes to
communicating and coordinating with those agencies, whether it
is the SBA, or HUD, or even the Army Corps, following a
disaster?
And what tools do you need that you currently lack to close
some of those gaps? What can we provide that could help close
those gaps?
If you could just address kind of that general topic for
the next couple of minutes, that would be great.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am. So the first question about how do
we incentivize better behavior, I guess, when it comes to being
prepared--and I will go back to what I touched on before, is
investment in pre-disaster mitigation.
We have had a number of catastrophic disasters since 2017
and 2018. It is bad, but, you know, it could be worse. And we
hope that never happens.
But I think the passage of DRRA allowed us to set aside 6
percent of all disaster costs to do pre-disaster investment or
pre-disaster mitigation. That is a game changer, in my point of
view. We are going to actually take money before disaster
happens, and invest that in making our infrastructure more
resilient.
And the money in the new program, BRIC, Building Resilient
Infrastructure and Communities, is aimed at community
lifelines. These are seven community lifelines that, if any of
these are interrupted like telecommunications, energy, if any
of those are interrupted, life changes in that community.
And so, can we invest this money, this pre-disaster money,
in making those things more resilient? So when a disaster
happens, we bend but we don't break, and we snap back to some
better result than if we had not invested in pre-disaster. So
that is the best thing that we have done, locally.
But that is just not a Federal responsibility, that is a
share responsible.
Mrs. Fletcher. Sure.
Mr. Gaynor. So I would encourage localities and States and
counties and Tribes and Territories to invest in their own pre-
disaster mitigation programs, because, again, this whole thing
works best when localities and States, Tribes, and Territories
all work together.
Mrs. Fletcher. Sure, and I think that goes to the
coordination point. So with the time we have left, can you talk
a little bit about coordinating among the Federal agencies, and
helping----
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am.
Mrs. Fletcher [continuing]. Victims get the help they need?
Mr. Gaynor. You know, if I think about coordination today,
I think about Puerto Rico and the, you know, big disaster, and
many different full-time Federal agencies down there working
together, combining all their resources together to drive that
outcome-driven recovery. Right? Not just using FEMA money for a
certain project, and using HUD money for a certain project, but
trying to figure out how do we leverage all this great Federal
money and opportunity into a better outcome. We are doing it in
Puerto Rico. We are doing it in other places across the
country. We need to be better at it.
You know, and one is we are working with HUD to--how do we
close the gap on temporary housing repairs and permanent
housing repairs? That time in between is too long, it is not
fully integrated. And we want to change that. So any help on
any of those topics, I would enjoy help in making it less
complex and speed recovery.
Mrs. Fletcher. OK. Well, thank you. I see that I have gone
over my time. So I encourage you to continue to coordinate, and
I really encourage you to look at the experience of recovery
from the perspective of the disaster victim in trying to help
that coordination. And we are going to do what we can to try to
help that, as well.
Thank you so much, Madam Chairwoman. I yield back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. We now recognize Mr. LaMalfa for 5
minutes.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thank you, Madam Chair, for allowing me to
help keep you company here in the committee today. And thank
you, Administrator Gaynor, for appearing in front of us.
First of all, I want to say thanks, heartfelt thanks, to
how much help FEMA has been in northern California over three
different disasters in the last 3 years, really, starting with
the Oroville Dam spillway situation, which could have been a
lot worse, but, indeed, required an amazing amount of cleanup
and restoration of the infrastructure there. Then the Carr Fire
west of Redding, California, in the north, and the Camp Fire,
as we know, from the Paradise area in northern California. So
you have been extremely helpful on that.
There are just a few nuances I am going to go over with you
on how some things can be executed.
So going to the Carr Fire situation, which--a lot of that
happened on the Whiskeytown National Recreation Area, a park
west of Redding, and a particular lake there called Rainbow
Lake nearby.
And the particular issue we are talking about is something
called the Messelbeck Dam. The issues there start with the fire
that wiped out so much vegetation on the national park there,
and the debris that subsequently, with the record rainfall we
had--which in itself was a disaster, some of the effects of the
rain were a disaster--swept much sediment into the lake and the
outlets there that would help to keep the lake level, you know,
the pipes and devices there to keep--to monitor--keep the lake
level as they see fit. A lot of sediment there.
It had been fairly well maintained, but was overwhelmed by
all this. So FEMA was asked if they could help with the
clearing of some of that silt and sediment in order to make
those functional. And my understanding is, on two different
occasions, they have denied that application for the assistance
from the 2019 rainstorms subsequent to the fire, claiming they
didn't have the information on the sediment levels before the
disaster, and that maintenance has been done.
So what we do have is information from our State experts at
CAL FIRE, who, a lot of times, work hand in hand with--about
the conditions that were there of the maintenance of the
project, the maintenance of those drains and such.
So my question is, why does FEMA disagree with local
experts on that, State experts on that?
And then how would a small community service district like
is up there in the place called Igo and Ono, how in the world
would they ever be able to take care of all that sediment after
a fire, being a small district?
And so I will stop there, and see what do you think of
those thoughts.
And then there is also a question on the 60-day period
after a disaster, too.
How would a local district do that?
Why would FEMA disagree with the assessment by the State
CAL FIRE organization?
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir. I do not know the specifics of that
particular project or that particular issue. I would be happy
to get with my staff, get with Bob Fenton, who is the----
Mr. LaMalfa. Yes, I have worked with him, yes.
Mr. Gaynor [continuing]. Regional administrator, and look
into that, and give you and your staff feedback about
decisionmaking. And I would be happy to speed that along and
get it done here in the next couple days.
Mr. LaMalfa. I appreciate that, because, again, it is very
important. There is really no way the local service district
could do that. And it is--you could have a situation where the
dam--I mean, I guess we are lucky, in a way, we have had almost
a drought this year. But the dam could overtop with the
inability to regulate the flow that way.
So also on the Whiskeytown and the Carr Fire situation, a
private site had been cleared around there for tree and debris
and such, and they had a contract do that. But there was also
nearby a public building, a public facility, which was a police
station and park ranger's office, also very important to that
operation. FEMA only did the work on the private building. They
would now have to send a second contractor a second time to do
cleanup on a public site, rather than one that--when they were
there, 40 yards away, doing a private facility.
Why wouldn't they do all in one, when they have the
opportunity, when they see--especially since it is a public
building right nearby? Why would they not do----
Mr. Gaynor. Again, sir, I don't know the details, but I
would be happy to get back to you on some of that
decisionmaking.
Mr. LaMalfa. OK, because that would be a cost-saving
measure and a time-saving one, as well, because they end up
doing both.
OK, lastly, when we are looking at fire disasters, it
doesn't appear that FEMA has been quite as geared towards
dealing with forest fire disasters, wildfires, as maybe,
unfortunately, versed on hurricanes and floods and things of
that nature. So burnt trees, they are still standing, but will
be a hazard. In my view, they should be counted as a debris
that would be in an area that FEMA should be looking really
hard at. Delayed damage from sediment, as we talked about with
the Carr Fire in Redding and Whiskeytown, and then into the
watersheds around the Camp Fire and Redding should be looked at
more closely, too.
I do have to give you kudos for the clearing that was done
at the Paradise, Magalia, and the Concow areas up there on
clearing out the lots where buildings had burned down and there
is a lot of toxic material in a footprint of a building. So
FEMA made the decision to do that just because it was
important, and pay for 90 percent of it. So that was very
important, and much appreciated by the community there.
But other sediment issues and other issues having to do
with wildfire recovery, I would just ask FEMA to work with us
more on having a definition on how you deal with the post-
wildfire disaster problems in--you know, other than--
unfortunately, your specialty lately has been a lot of
hurricanes, a lot of floods, too.
And I say that with all appreciation for the efforts you
have made in the area, and I know you have a lot to worry
about, you are stretched pretty thin. But these are just things
I think we can fine-tune, and I would love to have that
opportunity to work with you more on that. OK?
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, sir. We will get back to you on all those
things.
Mr. LaMalfa. OK. Thanks very much.
Mr. Gaynor. Thank you.
Mr. LaMalfa. Thanks for your time.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. Apparently, while you have been
sitting here, Mr. Administrator, your Atlanta office has found
evidence of someone exposed to coronavirus, and has closed down
for 2 weeks with people teleworking, waiting to hear from more
guidance from HHS.
Have you gotten any word about that?
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am. So late last night--this is a
suspected case of coronavirus, no test results back yet. But
out of an abundance of caution--back to my priorities to
preserve the force--it really coincided with what we are doing
today across the agency. We are actually doing an agencywide
connectivity telework drill today. So fortunately, it fell into
that. So most employees were either going to telework today, or
work from alternate locations.
And again, we want to make sure that I preserve the force,
so I can deliver those mission-essential functions.
So it happened in region 4 today. It is going to happen in
other locations across the country. It is going to happen here
in Washington, DC. And my staff and I have been working to make
sure that we have a balanced response to some of these
challenges we are going to have. Again, fluid, dynamic, you
know, the first instance is not like the second instance.
And so this is again--I have my leadership working on it
right now to make sure we adapt to the changing circumstances
and we make good decisions.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
Ms. Plaskett, you are recognized for 5 minutes.
Ms. Plaskett. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. And thank you,
Mr. Gaynor, for being here. Of course, thank you for your
service.
Before coming to FEMA--and I know you have an incredible
task on your hand, so many people relying on your agency
immediately after storms, after disasters. And that is a heavy
burden I know that you have, but I think you are very able for
the job, and we are grateful to have you there.
I wanted to ask you a couple of questions. One was about,
first, I understand now that the Virgin Islands has been put
under a Federal Coordinator that is working with Puerto Rico.
Can you tell me what was the reason for--because,
initially, we were told that we would not have a Federal
Coordinator, that we were doing things appropriately. And now
we have a Federal Coordinator underneath Puerto Rico. And while
my sister, Jenniffer Gonzalez-Colon, knows that I love Puerto
Rico, they are our nearest neighbor, they are a behemoth in
comparison to us, and can suck a lot of resources and attention
that we would otherwise have gotten.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am. So I had visited both Puerto Rico
and U.S. Virgin Islands. I went down to the U.S.----
Ms. Plaskett. We are America's paradise. They are Puerto
Rico, you know, Land of Sun.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am. I don't want to get into that----
Ms. Plaskett. But we are the paradise.
Mr. Gaynor [continuing]. Into that argument.
I go around the country to see how disaster recovery is
progressing. When it came to the U.S. Virgin Islands, I had
many discussions with the Governor and his staff, Adrienne
Williams, director of recovery, about the speed of recovery.
And I wasn't satisfied that it was going fast enough.
And I have a deep bench when it comes to Federal
Coordinating Officers. And one of my top FCOs is Bill Vogel. He
was down there right after Maria.
Ms. Plaskett. Sure.
Mr. Gaynor. And we----
Ms. Plaskett. And he is back now.
Mr. Gaynor. He is back now.
Ms. Plaskett. We are happy to have him there.
Mr. Gaynor. And he is doing tremendous. And we made some
really great headway. We were held up on education, trying to
move education----
Ms. Plaskett. Sure.
Mr. Gaynor [continuing]. Schools, get kids back in schools.
We moved that along in a big way. And again, it is about
leadership, and it is about making sure we have the focus on
it.
Ms. Plaskett. So why don't we have our own Federal
Coordinator, and not sit underneath Puerto Rico, if your bench
is, in fact, deep?
Mr. Gaynor. Because I think Mr. Amparo, who is in charge of
recovery for Puerto Rico, is also trying to deal with the
earthquake. And I think, you know, just again, we weren't
expecting the earthquake.
Ms. Plaskett. Sure.
Mr. Gaynor. And so he is--I think he is stretching a lot of
different ways, both in Maria recovery and now, as we proceed
in the earthquake recovery. It is prudent, I think, a prudent
leadership move, to move Mr. Vogel to USVI----
Ms. Plaskett. And so he would be considered our Federal
Coordinator, not underneath Puerto Rico, but reporting directly
to Washington?
Mr. Gaynor. Oh, no. I think there is an administrative
report to Mr. Amparo for the Caribbean.
Ms. Plaskett. So I guess my question is, if Mr. Amparo is
caught up with Puerto Rico and its massive not only hurricane
recovery and rebuilding, but also earthquake, why not have Bill
Vogel be a Federal Coordinator for the Virgin Islands and
report directly to you, or to whomever?
Mr. Gaynor. I mean, I think, typically, the way it works
across the country is the FCOs report to the regional
administrator. So Mr. Von Essen out of region 2 in New York
City, he is the one that coordinates all those things at the
region. So that is, typically, the way we do it across the
country.
Ms. Plaskett. OK. Well, you talked about schools just a
moment ago. And one of the issues that we have now with a
school that--we had a mobile unit placed on the island of St.
Croix, where I live, in Frederiksted. The Arthur Richards
middle school, which was completely destroyed, has now a Sprung
structure, a mobile unit.
We also have an elementary school, Alexander Henderson
Elementary School, there. There are massive odors coming from
there, and the school has had to be shut down. I don't know if
you are aware of this. The builder of that school, AECOM, has
said that it is not under warranty anymore, and they have no
responsibility, although the complaints were initially told to
them well before the warranty was out.
Can I get your support in having some discussion with AECOM
to address this issue? Our children, our teachers, have had to
leave the school for periods of time, days at a time, because
of this. And it is very concerning.
Mr. Gaynor. So I will talk to the Governor or Ms. Williams
about their contract with AECOM.
Ms. Plaskett. Great.
Mr. Gaynor. And I will do that this week.
Ms. Plaskett. Great. Thank you. I know the legislature, our
local legislature, is very concerned about this.
The other thing I wanted to talk about--I am almost running
out of time--is with regard to fixed-cost estimates. You know
that March 20th is the deadline when we have to have all of our
fixed-cost estimates in place for all projects funded through
the alternative procedures in the Virgin Islands. If the March
20th deadline is not met, and is not extended by FEMA, the
consequences may be significant. Projects in the Virgin Islands
that are not funded through the alternative procedures program
cannot take advantage of the unique assistance provided to the
islands by Congress.
That March 20th deadline is right around the corner. Do you
know how many projects have been completed by the Virgin
Islands, and how many are outstanding?
Mr. Gaynor. I don't know. I try to stay out of that, you
know, the----
Ms. Plaskett. OK. Well, I can tell you that over 300
projects have not been completed as yet. And that March 20th
deadline is coming.
I understand from the Virgin Islands that they are working
on submitting a request for an extension. Can you explain to
us, or understand what is causing the delay in this?
And because of that, will an extension be granted?
Mr. Gaynor. So I don't know of the specifics of the delay.
You know, we believe that deadlines drive progress. And so we
try to keep to those deadlines as much as possible. We try to
work with our partners on USVI and other partners across the
country on making sure that we drive recovery as hard as we
can. I will look into what is the major holdup.
Again, we work with our partners because this is, again,
this is a partnership between the Federal Government, the
Territory, and our other partners, making sure we move that
recovery along as fast as possible. I will look into the issues
and get back to----
Ms. Plaskett. Well, I am sure you will be getting a letter
from the Governor, because there is no way that we are going to
meet that March 20th deadline when my understanding is that
maybe we have a couple dozen projects, fixed-cost projects,
done.
I know that there is limited availability of local
resources, unique structural changes that need to be done in
the Virgin Islands. This is a new standard that we are giving
to Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico to build as it should be, as
opposed to as is.
Mr. Gaynor. Right.
Ms. Plaskett. But I do not want the Territory short-changed
on this game changer for us, in terms of becoming more
resilient through the funding that Congress has had. And it
would be imperative for you to extend that deadline for us to
meet these projects.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am.
Ms. Plaskett. Thank you so much for your indulgence, Madam
Chair. I yield back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
Mr. Administrator, I just have one last question before we
close.
I mentioned this in my opening statement, that there are
supposed to be three of you, the Administrator and two Deputy
Administrators. We don't have two Deputy Administrators, but
you have recently created what is called a Chief Operating
Officer. And if you look at the description of that position,
it is the same as a Deputy Administrator. And we are just
wondering if you did this to try to get around the Senate
approval process, or what your thinking is.
Mr. Gaynor. Yes, ma'am. No, I did not try to do this to get
around the Senate.
You know, for me, it is a practical solution. And the
practical solution is picking the right people for the right
job, for the right place, and try to keep the train moving in
the right direction.
We will work with the administration on identifying
nominees. But until then, Ms. Comans, who is the Chief
Operating Officer, will kind of drive the internal bus of FEMA,
all the things that are important to people, IT solutions,
procurement, all those things that are how we run an efficient
business.
And when the administration makes a nomination, and that
person gets confirmed, that COO position will sunset. But for
me, right now, it is about keeping stability, making sure I
select the very best people that I have in FEMA. I have some
wildly talented people, both politicals and career. And in this
case, this is a decision to make sure that we keep moving
forward on all things that are important to FEMA, and all the
things that are important to the Nation.
Ms. Titus. I appreciate that, but you are responsible for
the continuity of Government. We just don't want you setting a
bad example that now other agencies follow as an attempt to
short-circuit the process.
Mr. Gaynor. I try to set a good example every day.
Ms. Titus. We appreciate that.
Well, thank you very much for spending your morning with
us. I thank you. You answered some questions, allayed some
fears, and promised to coordinate with us both on individual
projects and bigger reform issues like recruitment and
retention. So thank you very much.
Are there any further questions from members of the
committee?
Seeing none, I would like to thank you again for your
testimony.
And I would ask unanimous consent that the record of
today's hearing remain open until such time as our witness
provides answers to any questions that may be submitted in
writing.
I ask unanimous consent that the record also remain open
for 15 days for any additional comments and information
submitted by Members or the witness to be included in the
record of today's hearing.
Without objection, so ordered. If no other Members have
anything to say, the subcommittee stands adjourned.
[Whereupon, at 11:47 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

[all]