[House Hearing, 117 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

FEMA'S PRIORITIES FOR FY22 AND BEYOND: COORDINATING MISSION, VISION,
AND BUDGET

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

(117-20)

REMOTE HEARING

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC BUILDINGS, AND EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON
TRANSPORTATION AND INFRASTRUCTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

FIRST SESSION

__________

JUNE 23, 2021

__________

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
49-634 PDF WASHINGTON : 2022

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 STEVE COHEN, Tennessee
SCOTT PERRY, Pennsylvania ALBIO SIRES, New Jersey
RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois JOHN GARAMENDI, California
JOHN KATKO, New York HENRY C. ``HANK'' JOHNSON, Jr.,
BRIAN BABIN, Texas Georgia
GARRET GRAVES, Louisiana ANDRE CARSON, Indiana
DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina DINA TITUS, Nevada
MIKE BOST, Illinois SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York
RANDY K. WEBER, Sr., Texas JARED HUFFMAN, California
DOUG LaMALFA, California JULIA BROWNLEY, California
BRUCE WESTERMAN, Arkansas FREDERICA S. WILSON, Florida
BRIAN J. MAST, Florida DONALD M. PAYNE, Jr., New Jersey
MIKE GALLAGHER, Wisconsin ALAN S. LOWENTHAL, California
BRIAN K. FITZPATRICK, Pennsylvania MARK DeSAULNIER, California
JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, STEPHEN F. LYNCH, Massachusetts
Puerto Rico SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California
TROY BALDERSON, Ohio ANTHONY G. BROWN, Maryland
PETE STAUBER, Minnesota TOM MALINOWSKI, New Jersey
TIM BURCHETT, Tennessee GREG STANTON, Arizona
DUSTY JOHNSON, South Dakota COLIN Z. ALLRED, Texas
JEFFERSON VAN DREW, New Jersey SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas, Vice Chair
MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi JESUS G. ``CHUY'' GARCIA, Illinois
TROY E. NEHLS, Texas ANTONIO DELGADO, New York
NANCY MACE, South Carolina CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire
NICOLE MALLIOTAKIS, New York CONOR LAMB, Pennsylvania
BETH VAN DUYNE, Texas SETH MOULTON, Massachusetts
CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida JAKE AUCHINCLOSS, Massachusetts
MICHELLE STEEL, California CAROLYN BOURDEAUX, Georgia
KAIALI`I KAHELE, Hawaii
MARILYN STRICKLAND, Washington
NIKEMA WILLIAMS, Georgia
MARIE NEWMAN, Illinois
TROY A. CARTER, Louisiana
------

Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and
Emergency Management

DINA TITUS, Nevada, Chair
DANIEL WEBSTER, Florida ELEANOR HOLMES NORTON,
THOMAS MASSIE, Kentucky District of Columbia
JENNIFFER GONZALEZ-COLON, SHARICE DAVIDS, Kansas
Puerto Rico CHRIS PAPPAS, New Hampshire, Vice
MICHAEL GUEST, Mississippi Chair
BETH VAN DUYNE, Texas GRACE F. NAPOLITANO, California
CARLOS A. GIMENEZ, Florida JOHN GARAMENDI, California
SAM GRAVES, Missouri (Ex Officio) TROY A. CARTER, Louisiana
PETER A. DeFAZIO, Oregon (Ex
Officio)

CONTENTS

Page

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

STATEMENTS OF MEMBERS OF THE COMMITTEE

Hon. Dina Titus, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Nevada, and Chair, Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public
Buildings, and Emergency Management, opening statement......... 1
Prepared statement........................................... 3
Hon. Daniel Webster, a Representative in Congress from the State
of Florida, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Economic
Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management,
opening statement.............................................. 4
Prepared statement........................................... 5
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........................................... 8
Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress from the State of
Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on Transportation and
Infrastructure, prepared statement............................. 35

WITNESS

Hon. Deanne Criswell, Administrator, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security, oral statement... 10
Prepared statement........................................... 12

June 20, 2021

SUMMARY OF SUBJECT MATTER

TO: LMembers, Subcommittee on Economic Development,
Public Buildings, and Emergency Management
FROM: LSubcommittee Staff
RE: LSubcommittee Hearing on ``FEMA's Priorities for
FY22 and Beyond: Coordinating Mission, Vision, and Budget''
_______________________________________________________________________

PURPOSE

The Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings,
and Emergency Management will meet on Wednesday, June 23, 2021,
at 2:00 p.m. in 2167 Rayburn House Office Building and via
Zoom, to receive testimony from the Honorable Deanne Criswell,
Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA)
regarding ``FEMA's Priorities for FY22 and Beyond: Coordinating
Mission, Vision, and Budget.''

BACKGROUND

DEVELOPMENTS SINCE OUR MOST RECENT FEMA ADMINISTRATOR HEARING

The subcommittee last received testimony from a FEMA
Administrator--former Administrator Peter Gaynor--on March 11,
2020. This testimony took place two days before President Trump
invoked Sec. 501(b) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief
and Emergency Assistance Act (Stafford Act, P.L. 93-288 as
amended) to issue emergency declarations for each state and
territory of the United States to provide federal assistance in
combatting the quickly expanding COVID-19 pandemic.\1\
Subsequently, states sought major disaster declarations for
expanded federal assistance, which President Trump granted to
all states and territories, as well as some federally
recognized tribes.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ ``Letter from President Donald J. Trump on Emergency
Determination Under the Stafford Act,'' March 13, 2020,``determine[ing]
that an emergency exists for which the primary responsibility for
response rests with the United States because the emergency involves a
subject area for which, under the Constitution or laws of the United
States, the United States exercises exclusive or preeminent
responsibility and authority.'' Available at https://
trumpwhitehouse.archives.gov/briefings-statements/letter-president-
donald-j-trump-emergency-determination-stafford-act/.
\2\ FEMA.gov, ``Coronavirus (COVID-19) Response.'' Available at
https://www.fema.gov/disasters/coronavirus.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During fiscal years (FYs) 2020 and 2021, Congress provided
FEMA with significant amounts of supplemental assistance for
COVID-related emergency measures.\3\ Concurrent with its
activities related to the pandemic, FEMA was repeatedly tapped
to assist state, local, tribal, and territorial governments as
the nation was buffeted by record hurricane and wildfire
seasons during the latter half of 2020,\4\ continuing recent
trends of increasing severe weather and hazard activity.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ P.L. 116-136, Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security
(CARES) Act (Division B, Title VI), March 27, 2020. See also P.L. 116-
260, FY 2021 DHS Appropriations Act and Coronavirus Response and Relief
Supplemental Appropriations Act (Division F, Title III and Division M,
Title II), December 2020. See also P.L. 117-2, American Rescue Plan Act
(Title IV, Secs. 4005, 4006, 4007, 4013, and 4014).
\4\ Scientific American. ``A Running List of Record-Breaking
Natural Disasters in 2020.'' Last updated December 22, 2020. Available
at: https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/a-running-list-of-
record-breaking-natural-disasters-in-2020/.
\5\ See FEMA's Priorities for 2020 and Beyond: Coordinating Mission
and Vision; hearing before the Subcommittee on Economic Development,
Public Buildings, and Emergency Management, 116th Congress, March 11,
2020. See also Disaster Preparedness: DRRA Implementation and FEMA
Readiness; hearing before the Subcommittee on Economic Development,
Public Buildings, and Emergency Management, 116th Congress, May 22,
2019. See also Building a 21st Century Infrastructure for America:
Mitigating Damage and Recovering Quickly from Disasters; hearing before
the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings, and
Emergency Management, 115th Congress, April 27, 2017.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Decades of regular federal data collection and scientific
research and analysis, as well as private sector research
indicates that these types of events are increasing.\6\ State
and tribal requests for FEMA federal emergency assistance and/
or disaster relief are accordingly on the rise as state,
tribal, territorial, and local governments' capacity to respond
to and recover from these events is quickly exceeded given the
scale and associated losses.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA).
``Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters: Events''. Available at:
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions/events.
\7\ Congressional Research Service. Stafford Act Declarations 1953-
2016: Trends, Analyses, and Implications for Congress (R42702). August
28, 2017. See also FEMA, Declared Disasters. Available at https://
www.fema.gov/disasters/disaster-declarations. See also FEMA. ``Pandemic
Response to Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19): Initial Assessment
Report.'' January 2021. Available at: https://www.fema.gov/sites/
default/files/documents/fema_covid-19-initial-assessment-
report_2021.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FEMA's response to the pandemic since President Trump's
invocation of Stafford Act Sec. 501(b) has been noteworthy,
including nearly $75.5 billion in assistance to state, local,
tribal, and territorial partners; \8\ a 210-days-long
activation of the National Response Coordination Center at FEMA
headquarters; and an unprecedented logistics mission including
249 Project Airbridge flights to quickly import personal
protective equipment in the opening months of the pandemic.\9\
It has proven the capacity and tenacity of FEMA's personnel and
the flexibility of the Stafford Act, but it has also exposed
the limitations of the agency's capabilities to quickly provide
reimbursement for eligible activities, highlighted
discrepancies in administering assistance across regions, and
shown challenges for vulnerable populations across the
country.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ FEMA. ``DRF Funds Status report.'' Provided to committee staff
by FEMA Congressional Affairs Division, June 10, 2021.
\9\ ``Presentation of the Fiscal Year 2022 President's Budget for
the Federal Emergency Management Agency,'' briefing to committee staff.
June 16, 2021.
\10\ ``Public Assistance Project Processing,'' briefing to
committee staff. March 26, 2021; see also Experiences of Vulnerable
Populations During Disaster; hearing before the Subcommittee on
Economic Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management, 116th
Congress, July 28, 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

FEMA LEADERSHIP DURING A TIME OF TRANSITION

During Administrator Gaynor's tenure at FEMA, the Trump
Administration did not nominate individuals to serve as the
agency's other top two leadership posts--Deputy Administrator
and Deputy Administrator for Resilience. The Associate
Administrator for Response and Recovery was, and continues to
be, filled by an official in an acting capacity. Administrator
Gaynor was tapped to become acting Secretary of the Department
of Homeland Security on January 11, 2021, in addition to his
FEMA role.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ DHS.gov. ``People--Peter T. Gaynor.'' Available at https://
www.dhs.gov/person/peter-t-gaynor.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
President-elect Biden nominated Deanne Criswell to be FEMA
Administrator on January 15, 2021.\12\ During the transition of
administrations, FEMA Region 9 Administrator Robert Fenton
assumed the role of Acting Administrator on January 20, 2021,
and Region 3 Administrator Mary Ann Tierney became the senior
official performing the responsibilities of Deputy
Administrator. Both Fenton and Tierney are career members of
the Senior Executive Service with significant experience in the
field of emergency management.\13\ However, tapping Tierney
ignores the existing orders of succession in place to fill the
vacancy in the Deputy Administrator role, continuing a practice
with which the committee previously expressed concern.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Boston Globe. ``Biden picks David Kessler, Deanne Criswell,
David Cohen for top roles.'' January 15, 2021. Available at: https://
www.bostonglobe.com/2021/01/15/nation/biden-picks-deanne-criswell-
david-cohen-top-roles-fema-cia/.
\13\ FEMA.gov, ``Robert J. Fenton'' and ``MaryAnn E. Tierney.''
Available at https://www.fema.gov/profile/robert-j-fenton-jr and
https://www.fema.gov/profile/maryann-e-tierney.
\14\ ``DHS Orders of Succession and Orders for Delegations of
Authorities'', updated January 31, 2020. Provided to committee by U.S.
Dept. of Homeland Security Office of Legislative Affairs February 4,
2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrator Criswell most recently served as the
Commissioner of the Department of Emergency Management for the
City of New York (NYCDEM), starting in 2019. Prior service in
the first responder community includes 21 years in the Colorado
Air National Guard as a firefighter (1992-2013), Emergency
Manager for the city of Aurora, CO (2005-2011), and a stint at
FEMA as a Federal Coordinating Officer and then leading one of
the agency's elite National Incident Management Assistance
Teams (IMAT) (2011-2017). Additionally, she was an emergency
management consultant between her service at FEMA and
NYCDEM.\15\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ LinkedIn. Profile of Deanne Criswell. Available at https://
www.linkedin.com/in/deanne-criswell-862bb2a.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Administrator Criswell's nomination was formally
transmitted to the Senate on February 22, 2021; the Senate
Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs (HSGAC)
held her confirmation hearing March 25, 2021; her nomination
was fast-tracked out of committee on April 14, 2021; and she
was confirmed by the Senate via unanimous consent on April 22,
2021.
The Biden administration has not yet announced additional
nominees for political leadership positions at FEMA. On June
11, 2021, FEMA announced that Regional Administrator Tierney
will serve as the agency's senior official performing the
responsibilities of the Deputy Administrator through July 6,
2021, and that Nancy Dragani--currently the Acting Regional
Administrator for Region 8--will assume the Deputy
Administrator role on July 8, 2021.\16\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ FEMA all-hands e-mail ``FEMA Senior Leadership Announcement,''
June, 11, 2021. Provided to committee staff by FEMA Congressional
Affairs Division.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

ADMINISTRATOR'S PRIORITIES

During her confirmation hearing, Criswell stressed to HSGAC
the importance of FEMA's employees and the need to bolster
community resilience through mitigation. Criswell also
highlighted the potential impact to communities across the
nation posed by climate change.\17\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\17\ See Nomination of Deanne B. Criswell to be Administrator,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland
Security. Hearing before the Senate Committee on Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs. 117th Congress, March 25, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On her first full day following her swearing in,
Administrator Criswell shared a message with FEMA's employees
via an all-hands e-mail. She thanked them for their tireless
efforts to respond to the pandemic and noted the challenges
over which the agency prevailed, and revisited her commitment
to bolstering resilience from the individual-level up to the
nation as a whole. Administrator Criswell also stressed that
considerations of equity, diversity, and inclusion are
paramount to the agency's future efforts.\18\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\18\ Provided by FEMA Congressional Affairs Division to committee
staff.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Weeks later, during remarks to FEMA's National Advisory
Committee (NAC) in early May, Administrator Criswell re-
affirmed that her areas of focus would include FEMA's
workforce; emergency management as a discipline--including
managing expectations of the public and improving the community
of emergency managers; resilience and mitigation; and equity--
for disaster survivors, FEMA's workforce, and across the
profession of emergency management.

PRESIDENT'S FISCAL YEAR 2022 (FY22) BUDGET REQUEST

President Biden's proposed budget for FY22 calls for a
modest increase for the Disaster Relief Fund (DRF) over the
base amount enacted for FY21 to account for ongoing pandemic-
related operations and assistance. It also proposes an
appropriation of $500 million for Pre-Disaster Mitigation
(PDM), which the president's budget request refers to as
``Disaster Relief Climate.'' This $500 million would be moved
immediately into the PDM set-aside of the DRF established as
part of Sec. 1234 of the Disaster Recovery Reform Act (Div. D
of P.L. 115-254) to fund the Building Resilient Infrastructure
and Communities (BRIC) program.\19\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\19\ DHS.gov, ``Department of Homeland Security Federal Emergency
Management Agency Budget Overview--Fiscal Year 2022 Congressional
Justification.'' Available at https://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/
publications/federal_emergency_management_agency_0.pdf
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The FY22 president's budget request also proposes the
following changes over FY21 enacted appropriations:
LAn increase of $3.2 million to enhance Wildland-
Urban Interface (WUI) Fire Outreach and Training activities of
the U.S. Fire Administration and its National Fire Academy;
LAn increase of $2 million--to $12 million for
FY22--for the High Hazard Potential Dam grant program;
LAn additional $12.5 million--to $275.5 million
for FY22--for flood hazard mapping and risk analysis (RISKMAP);
LAn additional $10 million each--to $370 million
each for FY22--for Assistance to Firefighter Grants (AFG) and
Staffing for Adequate Fire and Emergency Response (SAFER)
Grants; and
LA reduction of $15.3 million--to $594.7 million
for FY22--from the State Homeland Security Grant Program
(SHSGP) and $15.3 million--to $689.7 million for FY22--from the
Urban Area Security Initiative (UASI).\20\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\20\ DHS.gov, ``Department of Homeland Security Federal Emergency
Management Agency Budget Overview--Fiscal Year 2022 Congressional
Justification.''

The President's budget request seeks level funding for
Emergency Management Performance Grants ($355 million), Post
Security Grants ($100 million), Public Transportation Security
Assistance ($100 million), Emergency Food and Shelter ($130
million), and Targeted Violence and Terrorism Prevention ($20
million). Additionally, the President's Budget request includes
a proposal for resources to implement the Federal Flood Risk
Management Standard (FFRMS), which is intended to ensure that
all federal infrastructure investments are constructed with
resilience to current and predictable future flood risk, and
was re-instituted on May 20, 2021.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\21\ ``Executive Order on Climate-Related Financial Risk'' Sec.
5(e). May 20, 2021. Available at: https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-
room/presidential-actions/2021/05/20/executive-order-on-climate-
related-financial-risk/.

Overview of Disaster Relief and Mitigation Request in FY22 President's Budget \22\
(in millions)
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Diff. of FY 2022 Pres.
FY 2022 Budget and FY 2021
Program FY 2021 Enacted FY 2022 President's Enacted
Authorized Budget -----------------------
$ %
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Disaster Relief Fund (DRF)............... $17,142.0
$2,000.0 \23\
$50,000.0 \24\
Such sums as $18,799.0 +$1.657 over +9.66%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pre-Disaster Mitigation.................. $0 \25\ Authorized in $500.0 \27\ +$500.0 N/A
Stafford Act
Sec. 203(i)
\26\
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Emergency Management Performance Grants.. $355.0 No $355.0 $0 0%
Authorization
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total.................................. $18,218.2 $5,933.1 -$12,285.6 -67.4%
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

ONGOING CHALLENGES

The\\ committee\\, the\\ Government\\ Accountability\\
Office\\ (GAO), and various external stakeholder groups have
identified several facets of FEMA's work ripe for improvement.
The committee has already taken up legislation to address some
of these issues and is working toward additional legislation.
These areas include:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ ``Executive Order on Climate-Related Financial Risk'' Sec.
5(e). May 20, 2021.
\23\ P.L. 116-260, FY 2021 DHS Appropriations Act and Coronavirus
Response and Relief Supplemental Appropriations Act, December 2020.
\24\ P.L. 117-2, American Rescue Plan Act, March 2021.
\25\ No money was appropriated by Congress to Pre-Disaster
Mitigation (PDM) for FY21, but the Agency utilized some of the six
percent set-aside established in Sec. 1234 of the Disaster Recovery
Reform Act of 2018 (DRRA, Division D of P.L. 115-254) to fund PDM
grants for the FY20 grants cycle (Notice of Funding Opportunity
released August 2020, awards pending) and will do so again for the FY21
cycle, for which a $1B NOFO is expected in the summer 2021.
\26\ To more permanently address the need for authorization and
dedicated funding for Pre-Disaster Mitigation, the Disaster Recovery
Reform Act of 2018 (DRRA, Division D of P.L. 115-254) amended the
Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to
establish a National Public Infrastructure Predisaster Mitigation
Assistance program, funded by a six percent set-aside from the Disaster
Relief Fund, based on the estimated aggregate amount of the grants made
pursuant to Stafford sections 403, 406, 407, 408, 410, 416, and 428 for
major disasters.
\27\ The President's budget refers to this as ``Disaster Relief
Climate'', noting that this $500 M will supplement the 6 percent set-
aside allowed pursuant to DRRA, and that this is intended to make up
for amounts not set-aside in October 2020.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
LReducing the complexity of FEMA's programs to
help individuals and disaster-impacted communities recover and
cut red tape.
+ LFEMA's Public Assistance (PA) program, which funds
infrastructure repair/replacement and essential governmental
services, has an arduous application process and the agency is
now dealing with more PA applicants than ever in its history
resulting from the COVID-19 pandemic and related Stafford Act
declarations; \28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\28\ ``Public Assistance Project Processing,'' briefing to
committee staff. March 26, 2021.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
+ LOverhauling the disaster survivor experience to ensure
all those impacted by disaster who are under- or un-insured
have access to the Individual Assistance (IA) they need and
deserve and are not set back further in the wake of disaster;
+ LWorking with federal partners like the U.S. Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and the U.S. Small
Business Administration (SBA) to eliminate post-disaster
bureaucracy and align rebuilding standards where applicable;
LIncreasing federal investment in resilience and
mitigation to reduce future response and recovery costs.
+ LEnsuring the full calculation of aggregate disaster
costs are placed in the Pre-Disaster Mitigation set-aside of
the Disaster Relief Fund to fund BRIC (Building Resilient
Infrastructure and Communities) projects;
+ LProviding states/tribes/territories the assistance
needed to spend down post-disaster Hazard Mitigation Grant
Program (HMGP) balances;
+ LEncouraging communities to adopt building codes and
standards to reduce the impacts of disaster using the full
suite of assistance programs beyond HMGP and BRIC to construct
a built environment that is insurable;
LEnsuring agency policies are consistently applied
from one FEMA region to another.

CONCLUSION

FEMA has been tested in recent years given COVID-19 and
increasing disasters. Disasters are becoming more costly and
increasing in frequency.\29\ The new FEMA administrator is
tasked with leading the federal government's crisis management
agency during a time of overlapping management and mission
challenges. It is imperative that the Biden administration has
permanent leadership in place to tackle all of these issues and
appropriately invest in pre-disaster mitigation and resilience
to drive down the severity of future hazard events and ensure
it has contributed to increasing national resilience from the
individual citizen up to local, state, tribal, and territorial
levels of government. This hearing provides the committee an
opportunity to hear directly from Administrator Criswell how
the administration will try to meet these challenges.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA),
``Billion-Dollar Weather and Climate Disasters: Events.'' Available at:
https://www.ncdc.noaa.gov/billions/events.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------

WITNESS LIST

LThe Honorable Deanne Criswell, Administrator,
Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), U.S. Department of
Homeland Security

FEMA'S PRIORITIES FOR FY22 AND BEYOND: COORDINATING MISSION, VISION,
AND BUDGET

----------

WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 2021

House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public
Buildings, and Emergency Management,
Committee on Transportation and Infrastructure,
Washington, DC.
The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 2:39 p.m., in
room 2167 Rayburn House Office Building and via Zoom, Hon. Dina
Titus (Chair of the subcommittee) presiding.
Members present in person: Ms. Titus, Ms. Norton, Mr.
Garamendi, Mr. Webster, Miss Gonzalez-Colon, Ms. Van Duyne, Mr.
Graves of Louisiana, and Mr. Rouzer.
Members present remotely: Mr. DeFazio, Ms. Davids, Mrs.
Napolitano, and Mr. Gimenez.
Ms. Titus. The subcommittee will come to order.
I ask unanimous consent that the chair be authorized to
declare a recess at any time during today's hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
I also ask unanimous consent that Members not on the
subcommittee be permitted to sit with the subcommittee at
today's hearing and ask questions.
Without objection, so ordered.
As a reminder, I would ask you to please keep your
microphones muted unless you are speaking. Should I hear any
inadvertent noise, I will request that the Member please mute
their microphone.
To insert a document into the record, please have your
staff email it to DocumentsT&I@mail.house.gov.
Today, in this hearing, we are going to examine the
priorities for the coming fiscal year for the Federal Emergency
Management Agency, that I will refer to as FEMA going forward,
and hear from the Administrator, Deanne Criswell, the Agency's
first female leader.
And thank you very much for being here, and
congratulations.
I look forward to hearing how Administrator Criswell and
her team plan to convert the priorities of President Biden's
fiscal year 2022 budget into measurable improvements in FEMA's
administration of emergency assistance, disaster relief,
mitigation, and resilience.
In March of last year, we held a similar hearing with
former Administrator Gaynor. This was 2 days before President
Trump invoked the Stafford Act to grant emergency declarations
to each State and Territory to provide assistance to combat the
COVID-19 pandemic as it quickly spread across the country.
At that time, I don't think any of us could have imagined
FEMA would be tapped just a month later to plan and conduct an
airlift, in coordination with the Department of Defense and the
private sector, to bring staggering volumes of personal
protective equipment from all over the world into this country.
Since that time, FEMA has helped multiple States utilize,
tragically, refrigerated tractor-trailers to serve as makeshift
mortuaries and has set up the Lost Wages Assistance program to
provide additional jobless aid to those impacted by the
pandemic's economic impact.
At the same time, they were dealing with record-setting
hurricane and wildfire seasons and processing an unprecedented
number of reimbursement requests from eligible grantees and
subgrantees. In fact, the statistics show that there were more
unique requesters in the last year alone than there were in the
Agency's first four decades of existence. You can imagine how
overwhelming that must have been. And these are just the most
immediate issues that Administrator Criswell will be tasked
with having to address and get us through.
While the Agency has accomplished a lot since March 2020,
including helping State, local, Tribal, and Territorial
partners fully vaccinate more than 150 million Americans--and
that was just in the last 6 months--many of the problems that
deserve FEMA's attention were prepandemic. And so we must not
forget about addressing those now as well.
Fortunately, the Administrator is no stranger to FEMA nor
to being challenged shortly after stepping into a new
leadership role. What an impressive resume she has. She served
with distinction at FEMA as the Federal Coordinating Officer
and as the lead for one of the Agency's elite National Incident
Management Assistance Teams.
Just days after taking the helm of New York City Emergency
Management, a blackout struck Manhattan, stranding hundreds of
elevators and subways and wreaking havoc over a large part of
the island. I cannot even imagine if those were my constituents
calling me from a locked-in elevator.
So we look forward to hearing from you, based on that
experience and your talent and your knowledge. I don't expect
you to have solved all of the challenges in just your first 8
weeks leading FEMA, but we are hopeful that we can learn more
about your plans to address the foundational challenges facing
FEMA.
Some of those are adjudicating the backlog of
reimbursements due to States and local governments under the
Public Assistance program; tackling the inequities of the
Individual Assistance program; recruiting and retaining a
qualified, compassionate, and competent disaster workforce to
provide timely aid; and allocating resources to better invest
in mitigation and resilience before danger strikes our
communities so they will be able to get back up on their feet
faster and with less expense following a disaster. We must
build back better and not make the same mistakes of the past,
even if it seems like it would be quicker or cheaper in the
short run.
I expect you will touch on many of these tasks during
today's hearing, and we will learn how the President's budget
request will contribute to resolving some of those challenges
we see facing the Agency.
I will close by saying, we recognize the challenges you
face, Administrator Criswell, and we are here because we want
you to be successful in that job. We also want to hear from you
so we can ensure that you have the resources and authorities
that you need to get the job done and done right for survivors
and their impacted communities.
So thank you very much.
And I will now recognize the ranking member for his opening
statement.
[Ms. Titus' prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Dina Titus, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Nevada, and Chair, Subcommittee on Economic
Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management
Today we will examine the priorities for the coming fiscal year for
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), and of Administrator
Deanne Criswell, the agency's first female leader.
I look forward to hearing how Administrator Criswell and her team
plan to convert the priorities in the President Biden's Fiscal Year
2022 budget request into measurable improvements in FEMA's
administration of emergency assistance, disaster relief, mitigation,
and resilience.
In March of last year, we held a similar hearing with former
Administrator Gaynor two days before President Trump invoked the
Stafford Act to grant emergency declarations to each state and
territory to provide assistance to combat the COVID-19 pandemic as it
quickly spread.
At the time, I don't think Mr. Gaynor could have imagined FEMA
would be tapped a month later to plan and conduct an airlift in
coordination with the Department of Defense and the private sector to
bring staggering volumes of personal protective equipment from all over
the world into this country. Since then, FEMA helped multiple states
utilize refrigerated tractor trailers to serve as makeshift mortuaries,
set up the Lost Wages Assistance program to provide additional jobless
aid to those impacted by the pandemic's economic impact concurrent with
record-setting hurricane and wildfire seasons last year, and processed
an unprecedented number of reimbursement requests from eligible
grantees and sub-grantees. In fact, there were more unique requestors
in the last year alone than there were in the Agency's first four
decades of existence.
And these are just the most immediate issues that Administrator
Criswell will be tasked with addressing.
While the agency has accomplished much since March 2020--including
helping state, local, tribal, and territorial partners fully vaccinate
more than one hundred and fifty million Americans since January of this
year--many of the problems that deserved FEMA's attention pre-pandemic
remain.
Fortunately, Administrator Criswell is no stranger to FEMA, nor to
being challenged shortly after stepping into a new leadership role.
She served with distinction at FEMA as a Federal Coordinating
Officer and the lead for one of the Agency's elite National Incident
Management Assistance Teams. Days after taking the helm of New York
City Emergency Management, a blackout struck Manhattan, stranding
hundreds in elevators and subways, and wreaking havoc over a good chunk
of the island.
I do not expect our witness to have solved all of the agency's
challenges half-way through her eighth full week leading FEMA.
But I am hopeful that we can learn more about her plans to address
the foundational challenges facing FEMA: adjudicating the backlog of
reimbursements due to states and local governments under the Public
Assistance program; tackling the inequities of the Individual
Assistance program; recruiting and retaining a qualified,
compassionate, and competent disaster workforce to provide timely aid;
and allocating resources to better invest in mitigation and resilience
before danger strikes so our communities are able to get back up on
their feet faster and with less expense following a disaster.
We must build back better, not continue to make the same mistakes
because it may be easier or cheaper in the short-term.
I expect we'll touch upon many of these tasks during today's
hearing, and how President Biden's budget request will contribute to
resolving them.
I'll close by saying we recognize the challenges you face,
Administrator Criswell, and we are here because we want you to be
successful in this job. We also want to ensure you have the resources
and authorities you need to get the job done, and done right for
survivors and their impacted communities.

Mr. Webster. Thank you, Chair Titus. And thank you to the
new FEMA Administrator Criswell for being here today.
FEMA has a critical mission in our Nation and especially in
my home State, Florida. FEMA leads the Federal Government's
response to disasters, natural and man-made. While hurricanes,
floods, wildfires, tornadoes, things like that, those disasters
are more common, FEMA also manages the response to man-made
disasters. Additionally, as we have seen with COVID-19, FEMA
has an important role in responding to pandemics.
This all-hazards approach is critical to ensuring that we
are prepared and the chain of command at the Federal level is
clear, effective, and efficient.
Following problems in the Federal Government's response to
Hurricane Katrina, Congress fixed key issues. Prior to Katrina,
DHS had dispersed FEMA authorities throughout the Department
and put multiple people in charge. This created confusion with
no clear chain of command.
The Post-Katrina Act put FEMA back together again, and
while maintaining FEMA within DHS, ensured that it is FEMA's
Administrator--the emergency management expert--leading the
Federal response. This provides a clear chain of command up to
the Administrator and then directly to the President.
Since the reforms of the Post-Katrina Act, we have passed
reforms to streamline the recovery process and invest more in
mitigation and resiliency. There has been some progress.
However, at times, it seems like after Congress removes
redtape, there is more redtape.
Time costs money. The longer it takes communities to
rebuild, the higher the cost to both the communities and to the
Federal taxpayer. For example, in the Sandy Recovery
Improvement Act, we created section 428 of the Stafford Act,
which intended to give States a choice for a streamlined,
faster process or to use the old paperwork way.
Security 428 authority was intended to speed up the process
by basing assistance on certified cost estimates. The idea was
to reduce costs by shortening the rebuilding time, cutting
administrative costs, and arriving at a more definitive dollar
amount for a project faster. Yet by many accounts, the section
428 process is looking more and more like the old.
Similarly, on the Individual Assistance side, GAO detailed
how confusing FEMA's process can be for individuals and
families who want to navigate the process. Communities hit by
disaster should not have to deal with bureaucratic redtape when
they are trying to rebuild their lives. Ultimately, making it
more difficult to access assistance will not reduce the rise in
disaster costs--it may actually increase it.
Proposals to tinker around the edges, like making it more
difficult for disaster declarations or creating more redtape,
do little to reduce the disaster costs and harm individuals and
communities.
The reality is that only a quarter of the disasters make up
about 90 percent of the cost. It is the big disasters that
drive the cost. And we know the proven way to reduce future
administrative costs or disaster costs is to invest in
mitigation. Study after study has shown that $1 of investment
in mitigation can save $4 to $11 in disaster recovery costs. In
Florida, we have seen these benefits firsthand frequently by
building smarter and investing in proven mitigation strategies.
This is why, on a bipartisan basis, in the Disaster
Recovery Reform Act, we authorized up to 6 percent of disaster
costs out of the Disaster Relief Fund to be used in predisaster
mitigation. Unfortunately, FEMA has only set aside a portion of
that money that is available.
The solution is helping communities recover and reducing
future costs. Simplify the recovery process for small disasters
to reduce administrative cost and allow Federal and State
resources to focus on the large, more complex disasters.
Second, in the larger disasters, leverage flexibilities in
the law to close out projects faster.
Third, maximize investment in proven mitigation measures.
FEMA already has many tools and legal authorities to
achieve these goals. To make meaningful progress in these
areas, it has to come from the top down within FEMA.
I look forward to working with you closely on these and
other issues. I believe we can all work together to finally
make a difference in how to prepare for recovery from
disasters. I look forward to hearing your testimony.
Thank you, Chair Titus. I yield back.
[Mr. Webster's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Daniel Webster, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Florida, and Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Economic
Development, Public Buildings, and Emergency Management
Thank you, Chair Titus, and thank you to the new FEMA
Administrator, Ms. Criswell, for being here today.
FEMA has a mission critical to our Nation and my home state of
Florida. FEMA leads the federal government's response to disasters--
natural and man-made. While hurricanes, floods, wildfires, and tornados
are disasters that are more common, FEMA also manages the response to
man-made disasters. Additionally, as we have seen with COVID-19, FEMA
has an important role in responding to pandemics. This all-hazards
approach is critical to ensuring we are prepared and the chain of
command at the federal level is clear, effective, and efficient.
Following problems in the federal government's response to
Hurricane Katrina, Congress fixed key issues. Prior to Hurricane
Katrina, DHS had dispersed FEMA authorities throughout the Department
and put multiple people in charge. This created confusion with no clear
chain of command. The Post-Katrina Act put FEMA back together again
and, while maintaining FEMA within DHS, ensured that it's the FEMA
Administrator--the emergency management expert--leading the federal
response. This provides a clear chain of command up to the
Administrator and then directly to the President.
Since the reforms of the Post-Katrina Act, we have also passed
reforms to streamline the recovery process and invest more in
mitigation and resiliency. There has been some progress; however, at
times it seems after Congress removes red tape, more red tape is
created by FEMA. With the significant rise in disaster costs and more
disasters happening more frequently, we simply cannot afford to
continue doing things the same way and expect different results.
Time costs money--the longer it takes communities to rebuild, the
higher the costs to both those communities and to the federal taxpayer.
For example, in the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act, we created section
428 of the Stafford Act intended to give States a choice for a
streamlined, faster process or to use the old, paperwork-intensive
process for rebuilding infrastructure. 428 authority was intended to
speed up the process by basing assistance on certified cost estimates.
The idea was to reduce costs by shortening the rebuilding time, cutting
administrative costs, and arriving at a more definitive dollar amount
for a project faster. Yet, by many accounts the 428 process is looking
more like the old, cumbersome process, removing any incentives to use
it.
Similarly, on the individual assistance side, GAO detailed how
confusing FEMA's process can be for individuals and families to
navigate. Communities hit by disaster should not have to deal with
bureaucratic red tape when they are trying to rebuild their lives.
Ultimately, making it more difficult to access assistance will not
reduce the rise in disaster costs--it may actually increase it.
Proposals to tinker around the edges, like making it more difficult
for disaster declarations or creating more red tape, do little to
reduce disaster costs and harm individuals and communities. The reality
is only a quarter of the disasters make up over 90 percent of disaster
costs. It's the big disasters that drive the costs.
And, we know the proven way we can reduce future disaster costs is
investment in mitigation. Study after study has shown that $1 of
investment in mitigation can save $4 to $11 dollars in disaster
recovery costs. In Florida, we have seen these benefits firsthand
frequently by building smarter and investing in proven mitigation
strategies. That is why on a bipartisan basis, in the Disaster Recovery
Reform Act, we authorized up to 6 percent of disaster costs out of the
Disaster Relief Fund to be used for pre-disaster mitigation.
Unfortunately, FEMA has only set aside a portion of what is available
for mitigation, and we see the same proposed for the FY2022 budget.
The solutions to helping communities recover and reducing future
costs are clear. First, simplify the recovery process for small
disasters to reduce administrative costs and allow federal and state
resources to focus on the large, more complex disasters. Second, in the
larger disasters, leverage flexibilities in the law to close out
projects faster. Third, maximize investment in proven mitigation
measures.
FEMA already has many tools and legal authorities to achieve these
goals, but where you feel you don't have what you need, we need to
know. And, to make meaningful progress in these areas, it must come
from the top down within FEMA. I look forward to working with you
closely on these and other issues. I believe we can all work together
to finally really make a difference in how we prepare for and recover
from disasters. I look forward to hearing your testimony.

Ms. Titus. Thank you very much, Mr. Webster.
I now recognize Mr. DeFazio, who is the chairman of the
Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, for his opening
remarks.
Mr. DeFazio. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And thank you, Ms. Criswell, for testifying here today. As
I reminded your predecessor, Administrator Gaynor, our
committee has jurisdiction over all of FEMA's Stafford Act
responsibilities, which obviously are vast and of extraordinary
importance and growing importance with the disasters invoked by
climate change.
You have got a big job ahead. You bring good credentials to
the job. But I have got to say, there is a lot of work to do.
Having heard from Members representing devastated areas in
previous disasters and myself last year with the extraordinary
fires here in Oregon, including in my district--it looks like I
am frozen up here. Hopefully, this is coming through well. I am
in my office and I don't know what is with the Wi-Fi.
One of the common threads across these recoveries was a
disconnect somewhere in the Public Assistance pipeline where
bureaucracy seems to stifle the efforts on the ground. Many of
the FEMA folks I have met on the ground are doing an
extraordinary job and trying to help those who have been
impacted, but somewhere further up the food chain and the
bureaucracy, things get messy or delayed.
I have experienced that personally here in Oregon and
particularly, not in my district, but in the district south of
mine with assistance programs that were very, very slowly
implemented. So there is a lot of concern about the logjam in
the Public Assistance pipeline.
You have got a lot of eligible project worksheets to work
on. I mean, there are a whole lot of them. But the pace at
which they are being adjudicated is daunting, maddening, and
very much a hardship for the applicants.
But despite the backlog, I am glad we were able to ensure
the Agency had resources necessary to provide assistance. We
worked hard on CARES, the end-of-year 2021 omnibus, and this
year's American Rescue Plan. The only two times I can recall
Congress allocating FEMA more and as quickly was after 9/11 and
the 2005 hurricane season with Katrina, Rita, and Wilma.
The share of FEMA's assistance overall for disasters is
infinitesimal compared to Public Assistance, yet Individual
Assistance is seemingly bureaucratic and even more
exasperating.
You got a letter from me, Chair Titus, Ranking Member
Graves, and Ranking Member Webster, regarding confusion even
for basic determinations of eligibility for Individual
Assistance and the drastic differences, which have now been
noted, between survivors' Individual Assistance awards for very
similar types of damage in the same disaster. So you know there
is a problem. And it is pretty much a black box to us. And I
hope we will get some more insight into that today and in the
future.
We can't get details for things as simple as full lists of
questions posed to survivors, or copies of form letters used by
the Agency to communicate throughout the process. You know,
sure, I want to prevent fraud, but there has got to be a way to
balance between the widespread fraud after 2005 and where we
are today. When survivors have lost virtually everything, they
shouldn't have to go through such a tortuous process.
I appreciate that you have discussed within the Agency the
importance of ensuring more equity for survivors and within
FEMA and their workforce itself. I want to know more about how
you are going to improve in those areas.
And then finally, one more priority of the committee is, as
was mentioned by both who spoke before me, the predisaster
mitigation. We are all very proud of what we did on a very
bipartisan basis in the DRRA, Disaster Recovery Reform Act, in
2018.
We were pleased to hear about the upcoming notice of
funding opportunity for the Building Resilient Infrastructure
and Communities program, doubling it from $500 million to $1
billion. It is a great step. But last year, the interest in the
BRIC funding outstripped available resources by $3 billion.
So this is another area where the chairs and ranking
members sent a letter to your predecessor. Based on the
calculations of disaster relief during the first 6 months of
the pandemic, FEMA should have placed $3.2 billion into the
predisaster mitigation set-aside. Instead, the Trump
administration only set aside $500 million. So that means there
is yet another $1.7 billion in authority you have to commit to
predisaster mitigation from the COVID declarations alone, which
could result in, at a minimum by calculations that are well-
documented, a 4-to-1 return. We will look for any way we can to
provide additional funding for these cost-effective investments
so we can achieve our shared goal of building a more disaster-
resilient Nation.
Later in questions, I will bring up concerns I have about
coordination between SBA, HUD, and FEMA, in the hope that we
can deal with that morass into which many people fall.
So thanks again for your testimony, your time, and the
expertise you bring to this Agency. You have massive challenges
ahead. Thank you.
[Mr. DeFazio's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Peter A. DeFazio, a Representative in
Congress from the State of Oregon, and Chair, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure
Thank you Chair Titus and thank you Administrator Criswell for
being here today.
As I reminded former Administrator Gaynor at last year's hearing,
this Committee has jurisdiction over all of FEMA's Stafford Act
authorities. What I didn't realize then was how much time we were all
going to spend working on FEMA issues over the past year.
I suspected that a lot of our work was going to surround the
oversight of the still-ongoing recoveries from the record wildfires of
2017 and 2018, as well as hurricanes Harvey, Irma, Maria, and Michael.
Hearing from members representing those disaster devastated areas,
I was frustrated by the complexity of nearly every aspect of the
recoveries, but when I traveled to see these areas, I was always
heartened by the FEMA leaders in place who were clearly committed to
working with state and local leaders through the tough recovery issues.
But, one of the common threads across these recoveries was a
disconnect somewhere in the Public Assistance pipeline, where
bureaucracy was able to rear its ugly head and stymie efforts on the
ground.
Unfortunately, since last year's hearing with the previous
administrator, much of my own state of Oregon is also now working
through recovery from the catastrophic destruction of last September's
wildfires, while concurrently planning for what will likely be another
devastating wildfire season.
All while still fighting to defeat the COVID-19 pandemic.
And Oregon isn't alone. So many states, territories, and tribes are
working through recoveries from non-pandemic, presidentially-declared
emergencies and disasters from recent years.
The committee has some serious concerns with the logjam in the
Public Assistance pipeline. That's why I'm thankful that President
Biden clarified eligibility for pandemic-related efforts earlier this
year. But the glut of eligible project worksheets and the pace with
which the agency is adjudicating them is daunting and frankly
maddening.
But, despite the backlog, I'm glad that we were able to ensure the
agency had the resources necessary to provide assistance. We worked
hard on the CARES Act, the end-of-year FY21 omnibus, and this year's
American Rescue Plan.
The only two times that I recall Congress providing FEMA as much
and as quickly to assist states and locals was in the wake of 9/11 and
the 2005 hurricane season that produced Katrina, Rita, and Wilma.
Tucked into last year's omnibus and this year's Rescue Plan was
dedicated funds for funeral assistance--assistance for individual
Americans who lost their lives to the pandemic.
As a share of FEMA's overall assistance, help for disaster
survivors is infinitesimal compared to Public Assistance. Yet
Individual Assistance is seemingly bureaucratic and even more
exasperating.
When you get a letter from me, Ranking Member Sam Graves, Chair
Titus, and Ranking Member Webster about the confusion regarding even
basic determinations of eligibility for Individual Assistance and the
drastic differences between survivors' Individual Assistance awards for
similar types of damages, you know you have a problem.
The apparent inconsistencies and inequities for disaster survivors
seeking help are frustrating. And the process survivors endure to apply
and get evaluated is frankly a black box.
We can't seem to get details as basic as the full lists of
questions posed to survivors or even copies of the form letters used by
the agency to communicate throughout the process.
I'm all for preventing fraud, but there must be a middle ground
between the abuses we saw in the wake of the 2005 hurricanes and the
bureaucratic Individual Assistance program that exists today.
Survivors who have lost literally everything should not have to go
through a rigmarole to try to prove eligibility for often meager FEMA
assistance. It's demoralizing.
Having been here for the post-Katrina investigations, I realize
there will always be people trying to beat the systems in place to
deter fraud. But, the federal government should be able to ensure more
consistent outcomes for survivors, without making them jump through
hoops.
I appreciate that you've discussed the importance of ensuring more
equity for survivors and the FEMA workforce, and I look forward to
learning more about how you're going to improve outcomes in this area.
One more priority of the committee that I hope we can work on with
you is pre-disaster mitigation. We are all proud of the work we did to
get the Disaster Recovery Reform Act enacted in 2018, and the more
consistent resources it provides for pre-disaster mitigation.
We were pleased to hear about the upcoming Notice of Funding
Opportunity for the Building Resilient Infrastructure and Communities
program--doubling it from last year's $500 million to $1 billion. This
is a great step, but interest in last year's BRIC funding outstripped
available resources by nearly three billion dollars.
This is another area where the chairs and ranking members sent a
letter to your predecessor last October. Based on the calculations of
disaster relief during the first six months of the pandemic, FEMA
should have placed $3.2 billion dollars into the pre-disaster
mitigation set aside. Instead, the Trump administration only set-aside
$500 million.
So, that means that there's yet another $1.7 billion in authority
you have to commit to pre-disaster mitigation from the COVID
declarations alone, which could result in--at a minimum--a four-to-one
return on investment.
We are looking at ways to provide additional funding for these very
cost-effective investments so that we can achieve our shared goal of
building a more disaster-resistant nation.
Thank you again for your time, testimony, and expertise. I'm
hopeful that you'll be the change agent needed to drive reforms inside
FEMA, improve outcomes, and cut red tape. I look forward to the
committee being a partner to ensure you have the authorities,
resources, and direction to achieve your goals and the agency's
mission.
Thank you. I yield back.

Ms. Titus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The ranking member of the full committee is not here today,
so we will move on to hear from our witness.
I would like to welcome you again.
Our witness is the Honorable Deanne Criswell, who is
Administrator of the Federal Emergency Management Agency.
Thank you very much for being with us here today. We all
look forward to hearing from you.
Without objection, our witness' full statement will be
included in the record.
Since your witness testimony has been made a part of the
record, the committee would request that you limit your oral
testimony to 5 minutes.
So, Administrator Criswell, the floor is yours. Please
proceed.

TESTIMONY OF HON. DEANNE CRISWELL, ADMINISTRATOR, FEDERAL
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT AGENCY, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND
SECURITY

Ms. Criswell. All right. Thank you, Chair Titus. Just real
fast for a sound check to make sure you can hear me.
Ms. Titus. We can hear you. You look and sound good.
Ms. Criswell. OK, great.
Chair Titus, Ranking Member Webster, and members of the
subcommittee, I am delighted to appear before you today to
discuss the President's budget request for FEMA in fiscal year
2022, and to describe how the President's vision guides my
priorities for the Agency.
FEMA's mission of supporting people before, during, and
after disasters has never been more critical than we see right
now. Our role during the COVID-19 pandemic response and
numerous other active disasters attests to the vital importance
and responsibility of this Agency to our Nation.
Given FEMA's unprecedented mission requirements, the
President's budget increases the FEMA budget to $28.4 billion.
This is $1.9 billion more than the fiscal year 2021 enactment.
The President's budget, if enacted, will allow FEMA to meet the
challenges we face ahead.
In my first months as the FEMA Administrator, I am focused
on three key priorities: supporting the FEMA workforce and our
readiness, integrating equity into everything we do, and
addressing climate change through risk reduction. I will
describe these priorities in turn.
First, we must support the FEMA workforce and our
readiness. To protect the well-being of our workforce and the
communities we serve in a COVID-19 environment, we continue to
rely on virtual operations where appropriate. We are evaluating
how to enhance our operational capacity, promote an agile and
expeditionary culture, and support the safe return to the
office.
Workforce readiness begins with the right staffing levels.
The fiscal year 2022 budget supports increased hiring, and
among other things, would result in a 14-percent increase in
the number of our Stafford Act employees. Readiness also means
ensuring the workforce has the training, tools, and resources
they need to do their job. And I am committed to providing that
to my workforce.
Longer term, we also need to professionalize the field of
emergency management by better defining what it means to be an
emergency manager and building career paths for the Nation's
emergency management workforce.
Second, we must integrate equity into everything we do. The
Nation deserves to have our programs and services delivered
fairly and equitably. To meet this expectation, diversity,
equity, and inclusion must be core components of how we conduct
ourselves and execute our mission.
FEMA is currently soliciting feedback from the public and
our partners to ensure we understand how our programs impact
survivors of different demographics and, where needed, we are
committed to making changes. This includes changes to our
policies, procedures, and how we deploy and execute our
mission.
Internally, this means building a diverse and inclusive
workforce which resembles the communities that we serve.
Externally, it means we must proactively identify and reach out
to underserved communities and populations most in need of our
help.
We are analyzing our operational programs through the lens
of equity, and we are doing that for a reason. We know that
disasters exacerbate existing inequalities, and we need to
ensure FEMA assistance reaches everyone who needs it. We must
also identify the root causes of differing recovery outcomes
for survivors and work aggressively and collectively to ensure
access for all disaster response and recovery assistance.
FEMA's commitment to equity is evident in our efforts to
advance the accessibility of COVID-19 vaccines. At the
President's direction, FEMA coordinated with Federal, State,
local, Tribal, and Territorial partners to support the
establishment and expansion of over 2,100 community vaccination
centers. This included 39 federally led CVC pilot sites and the
deployment of 18 mobile vaccination units to help reach
traditionally underserved and remote communities. Nearly 60
percent of all of the doses administered at the federally led
pilot CVCs went to communities of color.
As we continue to execute our response to COVID-19 and
other disasters, FEMA will also continue to prioritize equity
across all of our operations.
Finally, we must address climate change through risk
reduction. As emergency managers, we must face the challenges
that climate change poses to our mission head-on and make
generational-level investments to reduce these impacts.
As a former firefighter in Colorado, I understand the
benefits of mitigation. Developing resilient communities ahead
of an incident reduces both the loss of life and economic
disruption. Every dollar invested in mitigation saves the
American taxpayers $6 in future spending.
To provide local partners with financial support for
mitigation projects, FEMA is expanding resources and technical
assistance for the Building Resilient Infrastructure and
Communities program, which establishes a reliable stream of
funding for larger mitigation projects through a nationwide
grant program. Recently, the President visited FEMA and
announced that he was doubling the funding available for the
BRIC program to $1 billion for the fiscal year 2021 application
period.
Mitigating the increasing flood risk is particularly
important, as flooding is the most common and costly natural
disaster in the United States. Among other initiatives, the
President's fiscal year 2022 budget requests more than $428
million for the Flood Hazard Mapping and Risk Analysis Program
to allow for more climate change data to be incorporated into
flood risk analysis.
FEMA is also working to ensure that communities are
protected financially from flooding. FEMA is updating the
National Flood Insurance Program pricing methodology to fix
longstanding inequities by more closely aligning insurance
premiums to the specific flood risk of each home. The fiscal
year 2022 budget also includes a means-tested affordability
proposal to ensure that everyone who needs flood insurance can
afford it.
In conclusion, the COVID-19 pandemic is an important
turning point for our country and challenges us to rethink our
systems, decisions, and investments. This past year has not
been easy, and I would like to recognize the professionalism
and perseverance demonstrated by the FEMA workforce.
I look forward to working with the members of this
subcommittee as we build a more ready and resilient Nation. I
am happy to answer any questions.
[Ms. Criswell's prepared statement follows:]

Prepared Statement of Hon. Deanne Criswell, Administrator, Federal
Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Chair Titus, Ranking Member Webster, and Members of the
Subcommittee. My name is Deanne Criswell, and I am the Administrator of
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). I am delighted to
appear before you to discuss the President's Budget request for FEMA in
Fiscal Year (FY) 2022, and to describe how the President's vision
guides my priorities for FEMA as the Agency's new Administrator.
FEMA's mission of supporting people before, during, and after
disasters has never been more critical. Our role during the response to
the COVID-19 pandemic, as well as the numerous other disasters we are
actively supporting, attests to the vital importance and responsibility
of this Agency to our Nation. Given FEMA's unprecedented mission
requirements, the President's Budget increases the overall FEMA budget
to $28.4 billion, which is $1.9 billion more than the FY 2021
enactment. I believe that the President's Budget, if enacted, will put
FEMA on sound footing to meet the challenges ahead.
Climate change is making natural disasters more frequent, more
intense, and more destructive, and we must be prepared for another
challenging series of disaster events this summer and fall. Last year,
FEMA faced record-setting hurricane and wildfire seasons. Response and
recovery operations from many of these past disasters continue even as
FEMA pivots to prepare for what lies ahead. The FY 2022 President's
Budget would increase the major disaster allocation in the Disaster
Relief Fund (DRF) from $17.1 billion to $18.8 billion to address
ongoing Stafford Act disasters. This includes $9.3 billion for COVID-
19; $4.1 billion for Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria; $2.2 billion
for non-catastrophic disasters; $1.2 billion for catastrophic
disasters; and $2.0 billion in reserve in anticipation of additional
COVID-19 costs.
In my first months as the FEMA Administrator, I am focused on three
key priorities, which are guided by the President's vision: (1)
supporting the FEMA workforce and our readiness; (2) integrating equity
into everything we do, and (3) addressing climate change through risk
reduction. In today's testimony, I will describe these priorities in
turn.
Supporting the FEMA workforce and our readiness. FEMA's workforce
of more than 21,700 emergency managers does exceptional work every day
to deliver our mission and as FEMA's Administrator, their readiness and
well-being is my first priority.
Prioritizing the health and safety of FEMA's workforce enables us
to best ensure that our personnel are ready to deploy or re-deploy to
any disaster at a moment's notice. FEMA will continue to take all
necessary measures to prioritize workforce health and safety within the
COVID-19 environment. FEMA's workforce became eligible for the COVID-19
vaccine through the Department of Homeland Security's Operation
Vaccinate our Workforce, which was launched in late January. Where
appropriate, we continue to rely on virtual operations and inspections,
as well as no-contact service methods, to protect both our workforce
and the communities they serve. As we prepare for a post-COVID-19
environment, we are evaluating how to enhance operational capacity, and
promote an agile and expeditionary culture, while we support remote
work where appropriate and return to the workplace safely.
Workforce readiness means that our people are ready to respond.
This starts with having the right staffing levels. The FY 2022 Budget
supports increased hiring, and among other things would result in a 14
percent increase in the number of FEMA's Stafford Act employees.
Readiness also means the workforce has the training, tools, and
resources they need to do their job, and I am committed to providing
them. For instance, FEMA's Incident Management (IM) workforce is
currently comprised of nearly 11,000 personnel. The FY 2022 Budget
includes $32.3 million to not only recruit additional staff for the
Incident Management Workforce, but to also train and equip them.
As we enter the 2021 hurricane and wildfire seasons and continue to
prepare for no-notice events, our workforce has never been more
experienced or tested. However, I recognize that many of our staff have
been activated in support of COVID-19 response operations and numerous
other disaster declarations for over a year, and we will ensure that
our deployed workforce gets the rest and training to be ready for what
comes next.
Longer term, we also need to continue to professionalize the field
of emergency management by better defining what it means to be an
emergency manager and building career paths for the Nation's emergency
management workforce.
Integrating equity into everything we do. The Nation deserves to
have our programs and services delivered fairly and equitably. To meet
this expectation, diversity, equity, and inclusion are not optional and
must be core components of how we conduct ourselves and execute our
mission. They are not empty buzzwords. FEMA is actively working to meet
this expectation and reduce unnecessary barriers to program
participation for disaster survivors, grant recipients, and other key
stakeholders. That includes low-income households and other
traditionally vulnerable populations. We know we have work to do and we
are committed to doing it. FEMA is currently soliciting feedback from
the public and our partners to ensure we understand how our programs
impact survivors of different demographics, and we are committed to
making changes where needed. This includes changes to our policies,
procedures, or how we deploy and execute our mission.
Internally, this means understanding that to help individuals we
must create safe and welcoming environments and that we do this by
building a diverse and inclusive workforce which resembles the
communities we serve. Externally, it means we cannot be satisfied only
with assisting those who seek us out--we must also proactively identify
and reach out to underserved communities and populations most in need
of our help. We are analyzing our operational programs through the lens
of equity for a reason. We know that disasters exacerbate existing
inequalities, and we need to ensure that FEMA assistance reaches
everyone who needs it. We must also come together across all disaster
recovery stakeholders to identify the root causes of differing recovery
outcomes for survivors and work aggressively and collectively to ensure
equity in disaster response and recovery.
FEMA's commitment to equity is further evident in our efforts to
advance the accessibility of COVID-19 vaccines. At the President's
direction, FEMA coordinated with federal and state, local, tribal, and
territorial (SLTT) partners to support the establishment and expansion
of over 2,100 Community Vaccination Centers (CVCs) to achieve the
Administration's goal of administering 200 million shots in 100 days.
This included 39 federally led CVC pilot sites and the deployment of 18
mobile vaccination units to help reach traditionally underserved and
more remote communities. As part of these efforts, FEMA established a
Civil Rights Advisory Group (CRAG) in January with our federal partners
to support the Administration's priority of making equity a cornerstone
of the COVID-19 response. The CRAG supported the development of the
methodology used to determine federally led CVC pilot site selections
and has worked in all ten FEMA regions to collect and analyze
demographic data, identify underserved communities, and collaborate
with community-based organizations. Nearly 60 percent of all doses
administered at federally led pilot CVCs went to communities of color,
and interpretation services have been provided to non-English speakers
in over 180 languages.
As we execute our response to COVID-19 and other disasters, FEMA
will continue to prioritize equity across all operations, both
internally and externally. In support of this priority, the FY 2022
President's Budget includes an additional 54 employees at Headquarters
and in the Regions, who will focus on equity issues. Among other
things, these staff will analyze the extent to which FEMA is delivering
programs and services fairly and equitably, as well as make data-
informed recommendations for how FEMA can improve the delivery of its
programs and services nationwide.
Addressing climate change through risk reduction. As emergency
managers, we must face the challenges that climate change poses to our
mission head-on and make generational-level investments to reduce the
impacts we are experiencing as a result. Disasters are more frequent
and more costly. While we will always be ready to respond when
disasters occur, we recognize that true success rests in mitigating the
worst impacts of disasters before they occur. As a former firefighter
in Colorado, I understand the impact mitigation has. Developing
resilient communities ahead of an incident reduces both the loss of
life and economic disruption, and, according to an independent study by
the National Institute of Building Sciences in 2019, every dollar in
federal hazard mitigation grants invested in mitigation is estimated to
save the American taxpayer six dollars in future spending.
To provide local partners with financial support for mitigation
projects, FEMA will expand the Building Resilient Infrastructure and
Communities (BRIC) program. I would like to thank Congress for
providing the legislative tools to create BRIC, per Section 1234 of the
Disaster Recovery Reform Act of 2018 (DRRA). By establishing a reliable
stream of funding for larger mitigation projects through a nationwide
grant program, the BRIC program provides a critical opportunity for
governments to invest in a more resilient nation, reduce disaster
suffering, and avoid future disaster costs. Recently, the President
visited FEMA to announce that he was increasing the funding available
for the BRIC program to $1 billion for the FY 2021 Notice of Funding
Opportunity (NOFO) application period. FEMA will set funding levels for
the FY 2022 BRIC program consistent with the President's priorities.
Mitigating the increasing risk of flooding will be an important
component of FEMA's efforts to increase our Nation's resilience to
climate change. As millions of American families have unfortunately
experienced first-hand, flooding is the most common and costly natural
disaster in the United States. Furthermore, direct average annual flood
losses have quadrupled from approximately $4 billion per year in the
1980s to roughly $17 billion per year between 2010 and 2018. Over the
past decade, flooding and coastal storms have accounted for roughly 70
percent of all Presidential Disaster Declarations.
We must drive the kind of system-based mitigation this Nation needs
to make our communities more resilient to flooding. The President's FY
2022 Budget requests more than $428 million for the Flood Hazard
Mapping and Risk Analysis Program (Risk MAP) to allow for climate
change data to be incorporated into flood risk analysis. The FY 2022
Budget also requests $5 million to help other federal agencies put
flood resilience measures into effect. A further $5 million is
requested in FY 2022 for climate research and nature-based solutions,
to provide funding for actionable climate research that can be used by
SLTT partners to design and build innovative mitigation projects which
address the impacts of climate change. By investing in mitigation, our
federal and SLTT partners will be better prepared for future extreme
weather events and be able to recover faster at the individual and
community level.
FEMA is also working to ensure that communities are protected
financially as well as physically from flooding. Flood insurance
policies through the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP) can help
households fill a financial void when a disaster occurs and better
rebuild their lives in its aftermath. For the first time in nearly 50
years, FEMA will update the NFIP pricing methodology to communicate
flood risk more clearly so households can make more informed decisions
on risk, insurance, and mitigation actions to protect against the
perils of flooding and climate change. These changes will also fix
longstanding inequities in flood insurance pricing by more closely
aligning insurance premiums to the specific flood risk of each home.
The FY 2022 Budget also proposes a means-tested affordability proposal.
Conclusion
The COVID-19 pandemic has represented an important turning point
for our country, and challenges us to rethink our systems, decisions,
and investments. This past year has not been easy, and I would like to
recognize the professionalism, resilience, and perseverance
demonstrated by the FEMA workforce and our partners. As we look to the
challenges ahead, I look forward to working with the Members of this
Subcommittee as we build a more ready and resilient nation. Thank you
for this opportunity to testify. I am happy to answer any questions.

Ms. Titus. Thank you very much.
I now recognize Chairman DeFazio for his first questions.
[Pause.]
Sorry, we can't hear you.
Mr. DeFazio. Sorry. And I am there. OK, sorry.
You mentioned your firefighting background, and that is
going to be critical in the coming summer. We are having what
might turn out to be the hottest week over the Greater West in
history. I mean, we are not anywhere near August yet and we
were already in record drought. So this is going to be
extraordinary.
And I am just wondering if you think that our pre- and
post-disaster funding has historically--just because, you know,
the severe wildfires are a more recent occurrence--slanted
toward wind and flood events, hurricanes and the like, and
whether we need to rethink those priorities in predisaster.
Ms. Criswell. Yes. It is a really timely question as we
talk about the hazard mitigation funding that we have available
through BRIC, but we also have several other hazard mitigation
programs.
I think an important point to note is we in recent years
have enacted a hazard mitigation funding after an FMAG, a Fire
Management Assistance Grant, has been given to do additional
hazard mitigation that is specific to those communities that
were impacted by the fire. This program allows us to rebuild
and help those communities that were specifically impacted.
But I think, on a larger note, the grant program that we
have available or the various grant programs that we have
available, it is the State and local jurisdictions that submit
for the projects that they want to conduct within their
communities. And I think where FEMA can help play a part in
that is really help educating communities that this funding is
available to also support wildland mitigation efforts, which to
date only a small percentage of the grants submitted are
submitted for wildland fire mitigation.
And so I think as a Nation we have work to do to make sure
everybody understands the magnitude and scope that this program
can cover and that we help people understand the types of
systemwide mitigation that can now be done through this
increased level of funding.
Mr. DeFazio. Excellent. Yes, I think a new program of
outreach is warranted. In many cases, we are dealing with
relatively unpopulated counties, small jurisdictions, and there
is not a lot of expertise there. So that would be very welcome.
How about the issue I raised at the beginning: simplifying
the language used in correspondence and the notifications for
status of applications, and then some kind of coordination?
Is it possible--I know bureaucracies are difficult--to have
a universal application between HUD, SBA, and FEMA, and is that
something you are envisioning working on?
Ms. Criswell. I think that the points you raise really
demonstrate that recovery from these disasters is really
complex. And there are several programs that are out there that
do support the long-term recovery of communities and for
individuals.
I understand the frustration. I recently came from the
local level. And while it may be a major urban center, it was
also difficult to navigate sometimes the Federal bureaucracy.
I think that right now we can do a better job of trying to
make sure that our programs are more accessible and easily
accessible for individuals so they know what to ask for and
what they would be eligible for. But from the long-term
recovery standpoint, we have recovery coordinators that do work
with communities to help bring all of the various programs
together.
But I think as we talk about the fact that these disasters
are becoming more complex and we are having to bring in more
programs to rebuild really emphasizes the point that we need to
also be taking a different approach, and as all of you have
stated, investing in mitigation upfront so we reduce those
impacts and so we don't have to rely on so many programs for
recovery.
Mr. DeFazio. OK. Again, we may want to revisit my idea
about universal application, and I would be happy to work with
the other committees of jurisdiction.
But finally, we have been looking for a national rule of
reasonable and prudent alternatives under the National Flood
Insurance Program for ESA compliance, given some perverse court
rulings on this. And I want to know when we can expect to have
that rule published, because the alternative is, we are going
to have litigation in myriad States by various groups regarding
the NFIP program and noncompliance with ESA for whatever
species exists in those States. I think we really have to move
on to a national rule.
Do you have a timeline on that?
Ms. Criswell. I don't have the specifics on where we are at
with that program, Representative, but certainly I will get
with my team and we will get back to you with the status and
what the timeline looks like.
Mr. DeFazio. OK. Thank you. That would be fabulous because
this has been dragging on for far too long. I mean, the
litigation was back under the Obama administration. Granted,
there probably wasn't much progress under the last
administration on this issue. But, anyway, that would be great.
Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
The Chair now recognizes the ranking member for 5 minutes.
Mr. Webster. Thank you, Chair.
FEMA has played a critical, I might say from my own
experience, a very effective leadership position and leadership
role in response to COVID-19. Are you looking, is FEMA looking
at sort of the lessons learned of success and failure--or
whatever--during this time, and are you making recommendations
for, hopefully not, but the pandemic of the future?
Ms. Criswell. Representative Webster, we have learned so
much as a Nation from the response to COVID-19, and I learned a
great deal during my time in New York City. And when I came
here, I worked with my team to see where we are at in really
discovering what we as an Agency learned and how we implemented
our programs differently.
And we did find that there are ways that we can administer
our programs more remotely, more efficiently, through the use
of technology. And that is one of the things that we are now
looking at, how we can institutionalize that into the way we
deliver programs for the future.
I think that we have such a great opportunity in front of
us right now to capitalize on how we learn to do things better
and differently that I believe will really make a difference in
reaching out to more underserved communities and being able to
bring assistance to the people where they are at instead of
making them come to FEMA to get their help.
Mr. Webster. Awesome. The State of Florida has two problems
related to each other, both of them related to time. And I
would suspect there are others that have the same problem. In
one case, we need more time. In another case, we need less
time.
And at least in my area, FEMA has set, at least in some
instances, it has set an amount of time, 30-day deadline to get
cost estimates in to the damage that has happened. So the
storms happened, the winds came, or if it was a hurricane or
something, then it leaves, and now we have got 30 days to come
up with a cost estimate.
On the other hand, for our area, after that happens, 30
days is just when it is probably subsiding. It may be just 3 or
4 days before that the flooding from the rivers has peaked,
because the flow of the water comes downstream and this rolling
crest that is coming down floods the area again, and so we
can't make the estimates needed. So that is sort of the--we
need a little bit more time, because it is just the way it
works, at least in some areas for some things.
Secondly, though, we need less time. Sometimes our State,
especially the small cities and counties that don't have a
surplus, they don't have sort of a slush fund or anything else
to balance their needs, they get by from kind of like paycheck
to paycheck. And so those counties and cities that do that need
less time for FEMA to pony up the money that they need.
I was thinking about several of them who waited maybe after
a disaster over a year, maybe 2 years before they were able to
get their money. It is not that they didn't get it. It is just
that in the time in between, they have nothing to fill in the
gaps. Lots of major cities, larger cities, they can do it. They
can get by and things work out and the time isn't as big a
problem, but for us, I have a lot of small counties and cities.
They do--they need time shortened so that they can get those
things taken care of.
So I guess my question is, can you commit to help us out?
Or if there are other tools you need in order to do that, can
we provide them? Or is it do you have enough tools, you just
need to do it? Those are my questions.
Ms. Criswell. Thank you. I appreciate the conversation you
and I had the other day regarding this. Time, as you stated, is
our most precious commodity. When it comes to response, we want
to make sure that we are getting in there fast so we can save
lives. When it comes to recovery, we want to make sure that we
are getting people assistance, financial reimbursement soon so
they can stay viable for their own staff.
But you bring up the great point, as I have seen firsthand
how long it can take for flooding to recede and actually get in
there to do the assessments that are required. So I think that
your point also really goes to my priority of equity, which is,
we want to be able to ensure that we are delivering our
programs equitably across the Nation and to provide for the
needs of the communities that are impacted, which will all have
their own specific and unique needs.
So I am committed to having my team continue to dive into
this subject and determine how we can better support
communities, give them access to the programs that they need
soon when they need it, and give them the time that they need
to make sure that they can get all of the appropriate paperwork
in place so they can get the reimbursement that they are
eligible for.
Mr. Webster. Thank you very much. I look forward to working
with you.
I yield back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
Now I yield to myself.
It is very refreshing to hear you speak so freely about the
impacts of climate change as opposed to erasing the term from
the website like we saw happen with some agencies under the
last administration.
Now, Nevada and the West are drier and hotter in recent
years than ever, exacerbating the wildfire threats. Just last
week, my district in Las Vegas experienced 5 straight days over
113 degrees and a couple at 117. Meanwhile, we are burning up,
other places are flooding. Riverside and coastal communities
are dealing with the consequences of sea level rise, whether it
is just regular tidal flooding on clear days or it's severe
storm surges during the extreme weather, like the hurricanes
that you are seeing in the Southeast.
We already know, and as Chairman DeFazio pointed out, the
demand is great for State, local, Tribal, and Territorial
governments to invest in infrastructure projects to mitigate
some of these known and predictable threats that arise from
environmental changes. And we are seeing that reflected in the
oversubscribed Building Resilient Infrastructure and
Communities program, or BRIC, as we call it.
Another place we are seeing it is in a program that this
committee enacted last year with FEMA to seed State-managed
revolving loan funds. This idea was introduced by our
colleague, Representative Angie Craig, and it is based on very
successful Water State Revolving Funds.
Those communities that have gotten tired of repeatedly
applying and not being selected for some of the highly
competitive grants can instead just choose to pursue projects
on their own with a predictable path of paying it off. And I
hope that FEMA will seek funds to seed those revolving funds in
the next budget.
But something we could do today is put aside more resources
into predisaster mitigation. And I realize what the budget
calls for, the request for $500 million for disaster relief
funding and the 6-percent calculation for BRIC, but could you
talk to us a little bit about how you see those two buckets
coming together to help with this issue of great demand and not
very many resources?
Ms. Criswell. Thank you for the question. We are, and I
have seen personally the continuous increase in the number of
natural disasters, the severity of these disasters, the
frequency of these disasters, and I think, more importantly,
how rapidly they start to escalate now, more rapidly than we
have seen them in the past. And that goes from wildfires to
hurricanes in the gulf. And this is a direct result of our
changing climate.
The best protection we have as we work to reduce and change
the direction that the climate is going, the best investment
that we can do right now is through predisaster mitigation
funding. And we have multiple different mitigation programs
that can support this.
The BRIC program, which I thank everybody here for your
involvement in making this a reality. I think the importance of
the BRIC program and how it relates to some of our other
programs is we now have a continuous source of funding at a
much higher level than we have had in the past. So we can make
generational-level investments in reducing risk.
In our previous programs, the max grant I believe was $4
million Federal share, and now we can go up to $50 million.
This takes us away from the incremental way that we have been
approaching hazard mitigation in the past and really shifts our
focus to a systemwide approach.
But what we need to do is really help communities think in
the systemwide approach more so we can start to put these
visionary projects that will not just have an impact for us now
but for our children and our grandchildren in the future. I
think this type of generational-level investment is going to be
critical as we start to think about what the risks are going to
be 10 years from now or 20 years from now as a result of our
changing climate.
Ms. Titus. I know that there is bipartisan support for
expanding these kind of investment opportunities, and I wonder
if you see any problems with increasing that budget from $1
billion?
Ms. Criswell. Chair Titus, I don't see any issues for
increasing that budget. FEMA has the ability to set aside 6
percent as a result of the DRRA, and we are committed to
continuing a baseline of funding at $500 million to help
support these mitigation projects as we continue to build out
and mature the BRIC program.
Ms. Titus. OK. Well, thank you. We would like to pursue
that and see if we can't encourage some greater investment.
I will now recognize Ms. Van Duyne.
Ms. Van Duyne. Thank you very much, Chairwoman Titus and
Ranking Member Webster, for holding this hearing.
FEMA plays an incredibly important role responding to
natural disasters, but it also works side by side with numerous
other agencies to fulfill its mission.
When I was regional administrator for HUD during Hurricane
Harvey, Maria, and Irma, I saw firsthand the bureaucratic web
of redtape and inefficiencies that prevented getting help to
those who needed it most in a timely manner. And I spoke with
many of you in this body who came to me fighting for your
constituents and asking me why it was taking so long to get
aid. And I felt and understood your frustration, but I had to
explain the long list of policies, procedures, and redtape that
our regulations demanded.
And these inefficiencies have serious costs. The faster
FEMA is able to get help to communities of need, the faster
they can recover. And it is critically important that these
agencies all work together.
Now, I understand what has been said today about increasing
funding, but I think it shouldn't be always about increasing
the amount of funding but about spending the allocated dollars
in the most efficient way possible. And many of the rules for
disaster recovery often make no sense. For example, FEMA can
spend $500 to install a temporary water heater, but it can't
spend more than $300 to repair the one that is there. So FEMA
is unable to build a permanent structure when often the
temporary is more expensive.
Can you help me understand and just bring a little bit more
common sense and tell me what kind of efficiencies and
adjustments have you seen in your time at FEMA that could
actually help in this matter?
Ms. Criswell. I think that it is a great point. As I
mentioned a little bit earlier, there is so much of our funding
that is designed for long-term recovery, and we have so many
different sources that can bring assistance to individuals.
And I hear you. I hear that sometimes the way the
regulations are written, it takes the common sense out of the
factor of how do we actually be good stewards of the taxpayer
dollar.
I understand some of the struggles that we have had in the
past. And we have been able to do some creative things through
the Stafford Act, like the STEP program during the response to
Hurricane Sandy in New York and New Jersey, and I believe we
have done some other things. FEMA has done some other things
over the past 2 years as well.
But I have directed my team to take a look at how we are
applying the intent of the Stafford Act, and do we need to make
some regulatory changes so we can make sure that we are, one,
being good stewards of the taxpayer dollar, but getting people
on the road to recovery sooner than having to wait for all of
these programs to come together.
Ms. Van Duyne. And I appreciate that. And by the way, I do
want to give a shout-out to Tony Robinson. He is your RA out in
region 6. I would recommend talking to him and others who I
have worked with that actually can help you direct the funds
more efficiently.
I have got another question. Since March, FEMA has been
involved in setting up shelters at the border. Yesterday, I
know that you met with President Biden. Was the ongoing crisis
at the border and FEMA's ongoing mission discussed?
I know that Press Secretary Psaki was unable to answer if
there was a deadline on FEMA and whether or not you are going
to be able to pull away from the border as we enter into our
hurricane season.
Ms. Criswell. Thank you for asking that question. FEMA's
role is to coordinate across the Federal interagency. We are
very good at that.
And FEMA was brought in to support HHS and CBP as they were
executing their mission to support the border. FEMA at no
time--I mean, the max number of people that we had at the
border was less than 100 at any given time. So only a small
amount of our staff were involved in providing some technical
assistance to that.
But as HHS and CBP have continued to take over their roles
in the program, we now have less than 14 people supporting this
mission, and our staff has reset so they can get ready to
support hurricane season.
Ms. Van Duyne. Great. Thank you very much.
I have got one quick other question. I know we had a great
relationship at HUD and FEMA and USDA and others that are
working on disaster recovery, but sometimes we have like hard
silos that we see that were unable to be able to cooperate in a
manner that would make the most sense.
So have you seen how to be able to build more of a unified
front with some of the other agencies?
Ms. Criswell. I think as we talk about long-term recovery,
that is what the intent of a National Disaster Recovery
Framework was all about, about how do we build those
relationships and bring all of the things that the Federal
Government has to offer to the table, and to make sure that we
are doing it in a collective way so we are complementing each
other's programs instead of working in individual silos.
As we continue to look at how we are going to approach and
refine the way we are doing business here at FEMA, given the
new operational things that we have learned from COVID-19, I
think we have another opportunity to also talk about how we are
doing that for long-term recovery and can actually bring these
programs together in a better way.
Ms. Van Duyne. Awesome. Thank you very much.
I yield back my time.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
The Chair now recognizes Ms. Norton.
Ms. Norton. Thank you very much, Madam Chair.
Administrator Criswell, I want to question you first on
FEMA's role in the insurrection here at the U.S. Capitol. The
reason I am interested is I noted that FEMA has an Office of
National Capital Region Coordination. Let me read to you what
its mission is: ``To conduct preparedness, planning, and
operational activities and provide leadership and coordination
within the National Capital region to synchronize and integrate
the whole community in executing homeland security and
emergency management activities.''
Administrator Criswell, what steps did FEMA take in
general, and the Office of National Capital Region Coordination
in particular, take to prepare for and respond to the attack of
January 6?
Ms. Criswell. Thank you for that question. I observed the
events of January 6 not from Washington, DC; I was in New York
City at the time. And so I was away from the area as many
Americans watched what happened that day.
But I want to point out that FEMA is not a law enforcement
agency. But as you stated, we do have a team, the National
Capital Region Coordination team, the National Capital Region
Coordination. And they work every day with the district and the
neighboring jurisdictions on preparedness activities. And
particularly, one of their roles is to work collectively with
those homeland security and emergency management agencies
across the region in preparation for national special security
events.
And so that team had done a number of preparedness efforts
in advance of the inauguration. They had done a number of
tabletop exercises, planning exercises, coordination meetings,
to talk specifically about what would happen at the
inauguration if there was an event of civil unrest. And so they
had----
Ms. Norton. Well, that is really my question. Now that we
know what happened on January 6, in what ways is FEMA prepared
to respond to any future such attacks against the Federal
Government in the Nation's Capitol?
Ms. Criswell. Again, I would like to point out that FEMA is
not a law enforcement agency. Our job is to work with our local
jurisdictions in their preparedness efforts, make sure that
they have the tools and the resources that they need in order
to accomplish their mission.
Ms. Norton. You have an office of preparedness, planning,
and operational activities for the National Capital region.
That is the reason I am asking this question.
Ms. Criswell. Yes, ma'am. And it is that group that works
with the local agencies to help in their capability and their
preparedness efforts. Our role is to work with them, to do
exercises with them, to assist in writing their plans as needed
so that they can execute it. But FEMA, again, is not a law
enforcement agency and would not respond to such a situation.
Ms. Norton. I am well aware of that. I am just trying to
make sure you are playing your role here in the National
Capital region. The Department of Defense failed to deploy the
DC National Guard here for hours. And so FEMA is not uninvolved
in all of this.
Let me ask you a question about communities of color and
low-income and disabled people here around the country in the
wake of national disasters, because these are the people who
face more difficulties when applying for FEMA disaster
assistance.
Now, I know that the President has an Executive order--that
is President Biden--that commits the Federal Government to
implementing a comprehensive approach--I was very pleased at
that--to advancing equity for historically underserved and
marginalized communities.
Administrator Criswell, how do you plan to fulfill this
administration's pledge of eradicating inequity in emergency
planning?
Ms. Criswell. Yes. Through my previous experience, I have
seen firsthand the disproportionate impact that our underserved
communities face during a disaster. What I have seen is those
communities that have a hard time during day-to-day life have
an even harder time then once a disaster happens.
And as I stated in my opening remarks, equity--and equity
in how we deliver our programs--is one of my top priorities as
I come into this position. I have directed my team to really
take a deep look at the barriers that people are facing in
receiving assistance.
But I think even more importantly is access to assistance.
What we have seen and what we have been able to do during our
support for the COVID-19 response is learning how important it
is to get assistance to the people instead of having them and
forcing them to come to us.
And we were able to use data in a way that we have never
been able to or didn't use before. And I think that is really
going to be instrumental in how we change the delivery of our
programs going forward, to make sure that we can target and
reach out to those communities we know are going to need
assistance and maybe just don't have the means to access it as
much as some other communities. And so, again, I have directed
my team to take a look at what barriers that we are seeing.
And we have also, and it is important to point out here, we
have asked for input from the public. We have put out a request
for information on our website asking the community what
struggles are you facing in receiving assistance from FEMA.
And we are going to take that information as we continue
this analysis of our delivery of programs and make improvements
along the way. And that RFI, that request for information is
available for the communities to respond to until July 21.
Ms. Norton. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
Mr. Gimenez.
Mr. Gimenez. Thank you, Madam Chair and the ranking member.
Administrator Criswell, I represent the congressional
district with probably the most National Flood Insurance
Program policies in the country. In Miami-Dade and Monroe
Counties, which I represent, there are almost 400,000 NFIP
policies. Obviously, the Risk Rating 2.0 is going to have a
huge impact on my constituents and I intend to watch the
situation very closely.
With that in mind, I am concerned with the roll-out of the
plan. It all seems to be happening pretty quickly and I don't
think that any of my constituents who are policyholders
understand what may happen to their rates. What does FEMA
intend to do beyond simply working through the insurance
industry to educate and inform policyholders about their rates?
And, more importantly, what else can FEMA do to help people
learn about the mitigation options available to them to help
them reduce their rates if they are going to go up
significantly under the new rate structure, and it looks like
it will? And some of my constituents that never had to buy
flood insurance are now going to be faced with buying flood
insurance for the first time at a significant rate.
So what can you do to help?
Ms. Criswell. Yes. Thank you for that question. Risk Rating
2.0 has been in the works for several years, and FEMA has
worked with industry experts to really look at how we were
providing rates and establishing rates for individuals. And
what we found is that the risk calculations themselves were not
specific and unique to the individual's risk.
And so what Risk Rating 2.0 does is, it really creates an
equitable distribution of the risk that is out there and so
homeowners that don't have as much risk, their rates are
actually going to go down, but they have been subsidizing the
risk for some of the individual homeowners that have a higher
risk and so the program itself just--I believe it is about two-
thirds of the program, their rates are either going to go down
or the increase in the rate is going to be no more than what
they experience on a year to year basis right now.
I hear you on the ability to make sure that we are doing
enough education and outreach to make sure people understand
what their rates are going to be. The roll-out of the program
for phase 1 is that any new policies that are put in place by
October 1, they are going to be subject to the new risk rating
methodology, but also beginning October 1, any individuals that
their rates are going to go down, their rates will go down
starting October 1.
But for those policyholders that need to renew their
policies, if their rates are going to go up, that is not going
to happen until April 1 of next year.
And I will commit to you that I will make sure that my team
is doing the appropriate level of outreach and education so
homeowners understand what their impacts are going to be and
how they can get better prepared for that.
Mr. Gimenez. The statement that you said about the rates
going up and down. That is not on a nationwide level, right? It
is not really--it is not really in Monroe County, which is
really the county that I am most concerned about?
Ms. Criswell. Yes.
Mr. Gimenez. OK. All right. Thank you.
The second question I have--and I appreciate the
administration's recent focus on the Building Resilient
Infrastructure and Communities Predisaster Mitigation Grant
program and I really applaud Congress for creating it.
Monroe County, again, that is the Keys, which makes up the
Florida Keys, requested funding from the BRIC program for the
Twin Lake project in my district, but Twin Lakes and another
community in the Keys, Stillwright Point, are ground zero for
sea level rise and sea level rise concerns, and they really
need FEMA's urgent attention through the BRIC program.
The situation is so dire that the New York Times back in
November of 2019 featured both communities and that they had
lived through 82 straight days of flooding in their streets due
to sea level rise.
Will you please join me in my districts to visit these
communities that really point to the spherical sea level rise
and work with the county, the constituents, and me to help
devise a plan to improve the situation there through their BRIC
or other programs?
Ms. Criswell. Congressman, yes. I mean, I think that is a
true example of how this community [inaudible] now available
through the BRIC program can make real differences across the
community, and so I would be happy to meet with you and your
constituents to get a better understanding of what their
challenges are.
Mr. Gimenez. Well, thank you. By the way, that is in the
Keys, so it is really not a bad trip. OK?
Thank you. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And I yield my time back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. Maybe we should all go down there on
a field trip for this committee.
Mrs. Napolitano.
Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Administrator Criswell, it is great to see you here. I have
three points that I would like to make. First is the strategic
goal that you name to reduce complexity. Many constituents in
my area were struggling to identify and access funeral
assistance and would like to know what efforts you make to
improve outreach and accessibility?
Second question, the $1 billion President Biden has
included for FEMA's budget, Building Resilient Infrastructure
and Communities program doubling the funding available to help
citizens and States prepare for extreme weather disasters. In
instances like Puerto Rico, can we make sure that the
infrastructure policy is changed to allow rebuilding to modern
infrastructure, not to the same old, to withstand frequent
hurricanes or emergencies?
And then to the same question, how will FEMA prioritize
communities' requests for predisaster mitigation funding and
will the communities be able to take precedence over them?
The third item, a New York Times article on June 7, found
FEMA looking at ratio disparities. Have you identified these,
and how are you sharing your findings and changes with local
government?
Ms. Criswell. OK. I think I have all of them. So I am going
to start out with funeral assistance, Representative
Napolitano. Again, I spent the most challenging year of my life
in New York City last year and saw the devastating impacts that
communities were feeling by the loss of loved ones and I think
all of us here have been touched by that in some way or
another. FEMA was able to implement the funeral assistance
program in a way that we have never been able to do before on a
scale that is much bigger than what we have done in the past.
To date, we have given out over $400 million already in
funeral assistance to individuals that experienced this loss,
and we continue to do outreach with communities to make sure
that they understand that this program is available for them
and also making sure that--again, back to the access issue--
that those that need the access to the program have access and
they know how to apply for assistance.
And so working through our regional administrators as they
work with their State directors, we are making sure that we are
trying to get that information out to everybody so they know
that this assistance is out there. It doesn't mitigate their
loss, but it does help take away some of the stress that they
were feeling from that loss.
Mrs. Napolitano. And reduce the redtape, reduction of the
redtape involved.
Ms. Criswell. Yes. I think right now our average award is
taking less than 25 days from the time a person submits an
application for funeral assistance till the time they get their
reimbursement.
Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you.
Ms. Criswell. And then on your second point on mitigation
and PDMG, I think that you make a great point. We don't want to
build back our infrastructure to the way it was before. We want
to build back stronger so we can reduce the impacts from future
disasters. And we do that in a couple of ways. As communities
have declared disasters and they get Public Assistance funding
to repair their projects, they can also repair to a higher
level through that program already. But then also after
disasters we give out hazard mitigation grants to the State or
the Territory that they can also use not just for those
specific projects, but to talk about mitigation efforts across
their communities to help, again, increase their own resilience
to future events.
Mrs. Napolitano. Puerto Rico--I was told they were building
back to the old type of infrastructure and I found that very
disturbing.
Ms. Criswell. Yes. FEMA provides the funding, but we don't
provide authority to direct them to build back to a different
level, but we work and encourage----
Mrs. Napolitano. No. It was the Agency's decision, not the
community's.
Ms. Criswell. So, again, FEMA does not have the authority
to tell communities how to build, but we do work with them to
let them know what their possibilities are. So they can use the
funding to the most effective way possible and try to build
back better, build back stronger.
And so we work with them and encourage them and give them
guidance and advice as they are going through the process as to
what they are eligible to do.
But the local jurisdictions will ultimately make the final
decision on how they are going to repair their own
infrastructure.
And then on your last point, ma'am, on the New York Times
story, again, I have seen firsthand the disproportionate
impacts that the communities of color experience and this was
never more apparent than during my time in New York City when I
watched how the communities across New York City, the
underserved communities were having much greater impacts than
other parts of the city.
And, again, equity is one of my top priorities as we
continue to look at how we deliver our programs. It is partly
because of access and we want to make sure that people have
access to programs and we have seen through some of these
stories that have come out that our programs don't always reach
everybody that they need to reach, and that is not OK.
And I am committed and my team is working on trying to
figure out and identify what these barriers to access are so we
can get the assistance to those people that need it most.
Mrs. Napolitano. Thank you very much.
Thank you for your indulgence, Madam Chair.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
Mr. Graves, we are always glad to have you sit with us on
this committee, but we are wondering why you don't just get
assigned here so you can also have a vote as well as a voice?
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Madam Chair, thank you. I would
urge you to talk to our ranking member about that.
Administrator, thank you for joining us today and
congratulations to you. The good news is, you get to head up
FEMA; the bad news is, you get to inherit everything that has
happened before you which is what I want to talk to you about a
little bit.
First of all, I want to associate myself with the
chairman's comments and really reiterating what you said about
the 6-to-1 return on investment and, of course, other
statistics showing it is even higher.
I represent south Louisiana, and no better place to prove
the importance and the value of making proactive investments.
The PDM program, the BRIC program, hazard mitigation, all of
them are critical programs that can lead to more resilient
communities and ecosystems, but they are not going to work if
they are not fully funded. And they are not going to work if
they are siloed.
This committee also has jurisdiction over the Corps of
Engineers. In many cases, we found that we're unable to use
FEMA funds for these Corps of Engineer projects that are
unfunded whenever those projects are the highest priority in
the community. We fixed part of that in the DRRA bill, but we
still have more work to do and would love to work with you on
that.
First issue I would like to bring up is school
reimbursements. In 2016, we had a thousand-year flood perhaps.
East Baton Rouge Parish has 29 of their 40 reimbursements
outstanding and is waiting on FEMA for PW amendments right now.
This represents millions of dollars. This is a school district,
directly impacts the kids. Obviously not going to jump into the
details with you right now, but I would like a commitment from
you that you will put someone on this to full resolution. This
is really important and it is impacting the school district's
operations.
Ms. Criswell. Yes, Representative Graves. I just recently
visited Louisiana last week and was impressed with the meetings
that I had. And to your comment on the school districts, we
need to help these communities recover, and if we don't get
that funding and get them on the road to recovery, then they
are just more vulnerable to the next disaster. And so, yes, you
have my commitment to working with you and your team to make
sure that we get these projects moving.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. OK. I will say it, again, 29 of
the 40 reimbursements are outstanding and when you slip that
note to your staff, if you could also add Terrebonne Parish and
St. Charles Parish that have project worksheets from Hurricane
Katrina and Rita in 2005 and Hurricane Gustav in 2008, totaling
millions of dollars. So St. Charles, Terrebonne, and East Baton
Rouge Parishes, please.
The next issue I would like to bring up is one of the great
bipartisan bills we did that I referenced earlier, DRRA. I
think it made some really important reforms to FEMA--begin this
paradigm shift from a reactive Agency to a proactive one.
We still have more work to do, but one of the things we did
in terms of value to taxpayers is, we said that if a local
government entity can implement a housing solution that is 50
percent of the cost or less than the comparable FEMA housing
solution, then that local government can carry it out and get
reimbursed.
I want to thank FEMA for their work with our Livingston
Parish Sheriff's Office. It saved millions of dollars for the
Federal taxpayers. Now with all the hurricanes you visited in
southwest Louisiana recently, the sheriffs there being told
this is not a Stafford-eligible expense. All I can say is that
is completely bull, that we amended Stafford with DRRA, that
you all have done it once already with the Livingston Parish
sheriffs.
And, look, if you want to stand in front of a microphone
and tell the public that you think it is better for Federal
taxpayers to pay twice as much or more for a solution, you can
have at it. I am not playing any role in that and I just really
appreciate you bringing some common sense to this issue to
where we don't have to relegislate on this because that is
pretty frustrating.
Ms. Criswell. I understand and appreciate your frustration
with that. I think that sometimes our legislation and our
statutes take some of the common sense out, but I think FEMA
has demonstrated that we can put the common sense back in as
you stated. And my team is working through some of the issues
that you have just brought up, so we can figure out how to do
this better going forward.
Mr. Graves of Louisiana. Thank you. Two other things we put
on your all's radar screen. We did two provisions, one related
to evacuation route performance and the other one related to
inundated roads that we did provisions in DRRA. FEMA
effectively issued guidance that says the same damn thing as
they did before. We wouldn't have changed the law if that was
our intent. Evacuation routes are not performing in a
hurricane, for example, that indicates the standards are
inappropriate. We need those standards updated.
In my community and Mr. Rouzer's and Mr. Webster's, these
hurricane-prone areas, we can't have our main evacuation routes
like interstates that are under water. Ours is I-12 and in the
2016 flood was under 6 feet of water, as I recall somewhere
over 1,200 motorists stranded on the interstate that became
victims that we had to then go fly food and water to and things
like that. It diverted our emergency resources in that
disaster, and I would like to ask you to look at those two
things, please.
Lastly, Madam Chair, I just want to reiterate the comments
made by the mayor about Risk Rating 2.0. Very strong concerns.
We absolutely want fairness. We want risk conveyed, but very,
very concerned about how that is moving forward. Thank you,
Madam Chair.
Yield back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
Mr. Garamendi.
Mr. Garamendi. Thank you, Madam Chair.
Mr. Graves has brought up a series of issues, but before I
get to them, congratulations. Look forward to working with you.
We have got a whole host of us here that know how the
Department, how FEMA could be run better. If we were so good at
it, we would have sought the appointment, but we are wise. We
know that it is a thankless job because there is always more to
be done. We wish you well.
We may, from time to time, brow beat you, but we know that
you have got a very difficult situation and it is almost always
done at a time when people are traumatized and in need of great
help.
So now, having set the stage for being nice, let me jump on
along with everybody else. This is just one more example of the
work that I know you want to do and will do, and that is trying
to make it more feasible for people to get the assistance they
need.
During the height of the pandemic, the food lines stretched
for miles and the FEMA regulations were written in such a way
as a lot of the opportunity to provide food using FEMA's
authorization and money didn't happen because of a regulation
or practice that basically said that if there was another
Federal source then FEMA would not participate.
And, of course, the Department of Agriculture was already
there. I would ask you just to take a look at that as one of
many examples within your Agency that the rules really get in
the way of providing the relief that people really need.
So I will let that one just hang out there. What answer
would you have besides, yeah, we need to look at it, and I
suspect you will now that I have mentioned it.
There is another issue, the issue of small counties was
brought up by Chairman DeFazio, but he didn't bring up a piece
that I thought he would get to and that is the section 428
program. It is an alternative procedure that counties can use.
Many of the small counties when they are doing their recovery
programs have to front the money. They simply don't have the
money to front it. Often the damage is in the multimillions and
their budgets may just be in the single millions, and so they
are unable to carry out the mitigation and the disaster
recovery.
The section 428 program allows FEMA to front the money. And
my question to you is, are you aware of this problem? If not,
well, I just brought it up to you. If you could take a look at
the small and rural counties and how FEMA can assist these
counties by making full use of the section 428 alternative
procedures under the Recovery Act.
So if you could take a look at that and next time we have a
small county disaster, which will probably be any time in the
near future, if you would, please, help the counties by pushing
that money forward under the alternative procedures.
And I have got a minute. Once again, I think I have covered
it already. It is the cash flow problem that these small
counties have. Ms. Criswell, I have been talking, you have not
had a chance to say, yes, yes, we will get on it. Would you
like to do so?
Ms. Criswell. Congressman, I am familiar with the section
428 program slightly. It was something that was put in place
towards the end of my previous time here at FEMA, but it is
designed to help expedite the projects and get the projects
moving faster. I am not familiar with the cash flow piece, so I
would appreciate an opportunity to learn more about what that
struggle and that challenge is, and happy to have my staff
follow up with what we can do to assist.
Mr. Garamendi. I would appreciate it. And hopefully we'll
not have another pandemic with food lines around and round the
blocks, but if we do, it would be wonderful if FEMA would
participate side by side with other Federal agencies rather
than standing back.
Thank you so very much, and we wish you good success in
your job. Look forward to working with you and we will try to
brow beat you very kindly.
Thank you.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
Before I recognize Miss Gonzalez-Colon, I would point out
that the Administrator has to leave us at 4:15. She is going to
the White House for a meeting. Since we want her to take all
these concerns we have to the White House with her, we will try
to wrap it up by then.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you, Madam Chair. And thank you,
Administrator, for being with us today and also thank you for
visiting Puerto Rico a few weeks ago. I was able to host you
there for several meetings and I got the direct impression that
you know what you are doing and you took notes on many of the
issues on the island. So I appreciate that directly, and I want
to say it as I said to you personally here in public.
And one of the issues that we discussed at that meeting was
that the issue of a claw back when there is an error in funding
from FEMA to the agencies and actually to the people. And as of
last month, my office received several calls from constituents
that had FEMA assistance approved for their home that was
damaged in hurricanes in 2017 and they were recently called by
FEMA in coordination with the IRS informing them that the
assistance was given in error and they are seeking to claw back
the funding.
And this is something that we discussed, and this is not
new for the committee. That was the reason we co-sponsored H.R.
539, the Preventing Disaster Revictimization Act, introduced by
Ranking Member Graves that will require FEMA to waive the
disaster assistance debts that FEMA provided to people in
error.
Is the Agency forced to do this by current law or
regulation or can this can be reevaluated by the
administration?
Ms. Criswell. Representative Gonzalez-Colon, I just wanted
to thank you for your time when I visited Puerto Rico.
I appreciated the information and listening to the
struggles and the challenges that your communities are facing
out there.
First on the claw back issue, I wanted to point out that we
are currently using the waiver authority that current law has
that Congress provided to us through the DRRA to waive some of
those claw backs when it is an error on FEMA's part. But with
this one that you are talking about now, I would really
appreciate the opportunity for my team to learn more about this
particular situation so we can better understand it.
But I also understand that there is legislation that is
being drafted and my team stands ready to assist Congress with
technical drafting assistance so we can effectively address
this issue so we don't have this problem in the future.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Thank you. H.R. 539 is already
approved by the House. So it is in route to the Senate, and I
think it is a good piece of legislation.
The other question I do have is regarding the build back
better. You know that in Congress, Congressman Serrano and
myself put an amendment to Section 2601 in the 2018 Bipartisan
Budget Act that allow the Agency to be flexible in regards to
predecessor condition, which is one of the main issues on the
island, to instead rebuild to current industry standards.
And the reason we want to rebuild to the current code is so
in the next storm it is more resilient and so we don't have to
spend more money again and again to rebuild or replace
structures multiple times when we can be up to date in the
codes.
For the first years after the hurricanes in 2017, there
were repeated complaints from the municipalities and the State
government in spite of many occasions, projects that were in
such a way to only fix what was broken by the storm, even
though meeting new codes require many of the other parts of the
site to be upgraded. Do you think this is still a problem?
Ms. Criswell. So building codes are so important, and I
have been talking with some communities that have been impacted
recently by disasters and they have shared with me the fact
that when a community adopts stronger building codes that what
they are seeing is less impact from disasters.
And so I think the first step is making sure that
communities are adopting the current set of building codes so
as communities are rebuilding or building that they are
building to the new code.
When people are recovering, when communities are recovering
and repairing or rebuilding the structures that have been
damaged during a disaster and a Presidentially declared
disaster, again, FEMA does not have the authority to tell them
what to build to unless it is to the current code.
And we do provide additional mitigation funding so they
don't have to build back to the previous state, but they can
incorporate some increased hardening and resiliency to make
them stronger against future disasters.
Miss Gonzalez-Colon. Madam Secretary, I just want to say
thank you to your office and all the FEMA employees on the
island. They are helping the island, more than 1,000 employees
since 2017. So this is not new. I mean, they have been working
there. We are right now in the hurricane season. We got
earthquakes last 2 years.
So I know FEMA has had boots on the ground since 2017, and
I hope we can continue to work together to have a more
resilient Puerto Rico. So thank you, Madam Chair.
And I yield back.
Ms. Titus. Thank you. Before I recognize Mr. Rouzer, I
would like to ask the Administrator--we talked about this
earlier and you mentioned it in your opening remarks how
important it is to get the best workforce possible to deal with
some of these disasters.
And I wonder if given your experience with the National
Guard what you think about providing USERRA-like protections to
Americans who want to go and be helpful, but they can't because
they won't have their jobs when they come back home.
Do you think that is something that we could work on
together to help you build that better workforce?
Ms. Criswell. I think it is an important point. I spent 21
years in the Air National Guard and having USERRA protection
allowed me to support the duty to my Nation and know that I had
a job when I came back. And you are right. It is not a
protection that we currently have for the largest part of our
workforce, which is our reservist workforce.
So I would appreciate the opportunity to continue to work
with you on whether or not we can make that a reality for the
FEMA reservist workforce.
Ms. Titus. Great. I look forward to that too.
Mr. Rouzer.
Mr. Rouzer. Thank you, Madam Chair.
And Madam Administrator, congratulations on your new post,
your new assignment, and I know you will do great. I want to
follow up on some of the comments that my colleagues made
previously, and I have similar issues, obviously, in my
district, all of us that deal with hurricanes and floods and
natural disasters seems like on an annual basis seem to have
the same problems, obviously.
There are two towns, in particular, I want to highlight and
I want to mention, and if you don't mind, if you can help me
out with these two in terms of getting their reimbursement.
I heard mention about small counties, and small towns too
when they are putting up millions of dollars, $10, $14, $20
million, whatever it is, and they are set to be reimbursed
through the Public Assistance program from FEMA, but they don't
get the reimbursement for a year or more.
I know when Hurricane Matthew hit in 2016, I had some
communities that didn't get reimbursed for a long, long time.
Our North Carolina DOT was not reimbursed for their
expenditures for far more than a year, as I recall, and in this
particular case with Hurricane Florence, the town of Surf City
and the town of Topsail Beach, both of them are still waiting
for pretty significant reimbursement--the town of Surf City
approximately $10.6 million and the town of Topsail Beach,
pretty significant sum as well.
Would you mind looking into those two, in particular? Both
have waited more than a year. I believe they submitted their
request March a year ago and, of course, obviously that has
been a little more than a year since then.
Ms. Criswell. Absolutely. I don't, obviously, know the
specifics of those two, but I am happy to get the details and
get back to your team and your staff with the status.
Mr. Rouzer. I appreciate that very much because when they
don't get those reimbursements, it is very hard to plan and
prepare for the next storm. And like I said, in 2016, we had
Matthew, then 2018 we had Florence. And 2019 and 2020, we
escaped disaster, but very, very narrowly. And I expect 2021 to
make us a little nervous as well.
Following up on one other issue for the town of Topsail
Beach, they have submitted updated lidar data, but the revised
FIRM maps don't reflect those updates at all, and it has some
pretty substantial impact for more than 400 homes there. And
the town makes a very, very good case that the data that was
used for the original set of maps is just not accurate. In
fact, you know, really off.
Would you mind checking into that as well?
Ms. Criswell. Absolutely. Again, I am not familiar with the
specifics, but I will have my team get back to you with the
status of them.
Mr. Rouzer. That would be great. And then one question for
me just to help me understand. You have got Risk Rating 2.0
that was mentioned previously by a colleague that I happened to
hear his question and how does that overlay with--you know, you
are supposed to have these new flood maps every 5 to 7 years
and it takes forever to get them done and then here you got
Risk Rating 2.0 that is set to go in effect.
Is that just going to override the preliminary flood maps
when you get those finalized, or how is that going to work? I
would just like to know from an educational standpoint.
Ms. Criswell. I do not believe that it overrides. Risk
Rating 2.0 is really looking at the individual risk for each
person's home and the flood maps are a part of that.
But it goes into other pieces of the risk related to their
home as well, but we can certainly get a better definition and
clarification for you so you understand how the two
interrelate.
Mr. Rouzer. OK. Well, I have got more than 400 homes there
on that particular beach that basically would not be eligible
for flood insurance and it is all based on faulty data, and I
want to get--whether it is Risk Rating 2.0 or whether it is the
latest version of the flood maps that directly affects them, I
would like to make sure that at least those who are putting in
place these policies know what the correct data is.
Ms. Criswell. Absolutely.
Mr. Rouzer. Thank you, ma'am.
Ms. Titus. Thank you.
Thank you very much, Administrator. You have been very
helpful and very patient.
Mr. Webster, any final remarks.
Mr. Webster. What a great meeting.
Ms. Titus. All right. Well, I will then conclude our
hearing and like to thank you, again, for your testimony. It
has been very informative, helpful to us as we do policy and
try to provide you the resources that you need to get the job
done.
I will ask unanimous consent that the record of today's
hearing remain open until such time as our witness has provided
answers to any questions that may have been submitted.
I will also ask unanimous consent that the record remain
open for 15 days for any additional comments and information
submitted by Members to be included in the record of today's
hearing.
Without objection, so ordered.
The subcommittee stands adjourned.
Thank you.
[Whereupon, at 4:12 p.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.]

Submissions for the Record

----------

Prepared Statement of Hon. Sam Graves, a Representative in Congress
from the State of Missouri, and Ranking Member, Committee on
Transportation and Infrastructure
Thank you, Chair Titus, and welcome to the new FEMA Administrator,
Ms. Criswell.
As FEMA's committee of primary jurisdiction, we have worked on a
bipartisan basis over the years to improve our Nation's emergency
management system.
While there have been reforms and improvements to FEMA processes,
there is still a lot that needs to happen to speed up recovery from
disasters and build in mitigation.
Just last week, a bill I introduced, H.R. 539, the Preventing
Disaster Revictimization Act, passed the House.
For more than a decade, we were told FEMA was working to reduce its
error rate in individual assistance, yet little progress was made.
H.R. 539 ensures that at the very least, disaster victims don't pay
the price for FEMA's errors.
FEMA's process can be too confusing and bureaucratic for both
individuals and states impacted by disasters.
As highlighted in FEMA's FY22 Budget, FEMA's mission is, ``to help
people before, during, and after disasters.''
We need to ensure FEMA is doing just that.
I look forward to working with you, Ms. Criswell, on how we can
improve our disaster preparedness and response and recovery system.
Thank you, Chair Titus. I yield back.