A GOVERNOR’S GUIDE to HOMELAND SECURITY · AGOVER NOR’S GUIDE to HO MELANDSE CURITY 3 Foreword HurricaneKatrinacommandedthenation’s attention for months after it slammed into

A GOVERNOR’S GUIDE toHOMELAND SECURITY i

The National Governors Association (NGA),founded in 1908, is the instrument through which the nation’s governorscollectively influence the development and implementation of nationalpolicy and apply creative leadership to state issues. Its members are thegovernors of the 50 states, three territories, and two commonwealths.

The NGA Center for Best Practices is the nation’s only dedicated consultingfirm for governors and their key policy staff. The Center’s mission is to developand implement innovative solutions to public policy challenges. Throughthe staff of the Center, governors and their policy advisors can:

■ quickly learn about what works, what doesn’t, and what lessons can belearned from other governors grappling with the same problems;

■ obtain assistance in designing and implementing new programs or makingcurrent programs more effective;

■ receive up-to-date, comprehensive information about what is happeningin other state capitals and in Washington, D.C., so governors are awareof cutting edge policies: and

■ learn about emerging national trends and their implications for states, sogovernors can prepare to meet future demands.

For more information about NGA and the Center for Best Practices, pleasevisit www.nga.org

Copyright 2007 by theNational Governors Association Center for Best Practices.

All rights reserved.

ISBN: 1-55877-407-6

ii

A GOVERNOR’S GUIDE toHOMELAND SECURITY

AGOVERNOR’S GUIDE toHOMELAND SECURITY

2

Foreword 3

Acknowledgements 4

Executive Summary 5

Introduction: What a New Governor Should Know 10

Chapter 1: Governors’ Powers, Roles, and Responsibilities 14

Chapter 2: State Homeland Security Governance 19

Chapter 3: Developing a Public Communications and Media Strategy 25

Chapter 4: Mutual Aid 30

Chapter 5: National Guard and Military Assistance 36

Chapter 6: Major Disasters and Emergency Declarations 44

Chapter 7: Federal Assistance Available to States and Individuals 48

Chapter 8: Intelligence and Information Sharing 54

Chapter 9: Interoperability 59

Chapter 10: Critical Infrastructure Protection 64

Notes 69

Appendix A 73

Table of Contents

A GOVERNOR’S GUIDE toHOMELAND SECURITY 3

Foreword

Hurricane Katrina commanded the nation’sattention for months after it slammed intoLouisiana and Mississippi in late August 2005.The images of flooded homes, lost lives, andstranded survivors on the rooftops of NewOrleans — and of the debris field that had oncebeen Gulfport— haunted America and much ofthe world throughout that autumn.

But the response to Katrina began long before thetelevision crews and international media arrivedand recovery efforts continued long after theypacked their gear and went home. In Louisiana,Mississippi, and Alabama, residents and stateand local officials labored through the stormand worked in its immediate aftermath evenbefore outside help began to arrive. Theprocess of rebuilding homes, businesses, andlives in hundreds of Gulf Coast communitiescontinuesmore than a year later andwill go on formany months to come. In places like Delacroix,Shell Beach, Belle Chase, Bay Saint Louis,Diamondhead, and Waveland the struggle torecover and the millions of individual stories ofsuccess — and failure — illustrate most clearly apoint that has been made so often as to be almostclichéd: all disasters are local. In this post-September 11 era, the catastrophe wrought firstby Katrina and then by Hurricane Rita highlightanother point: terrorism is just one of the threatsfacing the nation and preparedness means havingplans in place to respond to all hazards, includingterrorist attacks, natural disasters, technologicalfailures, or pandemic diseases.

As the chief executives of their states, governors areresponsible for ensuring their states are adequately

prepared for emergencies and disasters of all typesand sizes. All emergencies will be handled at thelocal level and few will require a presidentialdisaster declaration or attract the attention of theworld’s media. But governors must be as preparedfor those day-to-day events — the tornadoes,power outages, hazardous materials spills, andindustrial fires — as for catastrophes on the scaleof the September 11 terrorist attacks or a categoryfive hurricane.

A Governor’s Guide to Homeland Security waswritten to provide governors with an overview oftheir homeland security roles and responsibilitiesand to offer some guidance on how to approachissues such as mutual aid, information sharing,obtaining assistance from the military, andprotecting critical infrastructure. The Guidedraws heavily on the experiences of governors whohavemanaged during emergencies and disasters ofall sizes and on the lessons learned by states in theyears since the September 11 attacks.

The homeland security waterfront is extremelybroad, encompassing policy areas as diverse asborder security, public health preparedness, andtelecommunications. An encyclopedic guidewould be voluminous. This document focuses onareas governorsmust immediately be aware of andthe resources they are most likely to rely on dur-ing the initial response to an incident. OtherNational Governors Association Center for BestPractices publications complement this guide byfocusingmore closely on individual subject areassuch as energy assurance, intelligence fusion,pandemic influenza preparedness, and the useof technology to enhance homeland security.

January, 2007

A Governor’s Guide to Homeland Security waswritten by the staff of the NGA Center for BestPractices Homeland Security and TechnologyDivision: Erin Lee, Christopher Logan, JeffreyMitchell, and Joe Trella with immeasurableassistance from the division’s director, JohnRatliff, administrative coordinator, DebraWilson, and intern, Renee Stapley. Office ofCommunications Assistant Jessica Gillman andPress Secretary John Blacksten contributedsubstantially to the production of the publication.Additionally, the authors would like to acknowl-edge all those who reviewed this guide in part orinwhole, includingMaj.Gen.TimothyLowenberg,J. Eric Dietz, Kris Eide, Barry Van Lare, andAngelyn Shapiro.

Acknowledgements

Executive Summary

As the chief executives of their states, governorsare responsible for overseeing the state’s responseto any emergency or disaster. A well-plannedand well-implemented response is vital to thesafety and well-being of the citizens of the state;an ineffective response, on the other hand,threatens those citizens and their property and canexacerbate damages to the state and its economy.

In today’s world, emergencies and disasterstake many forms, including natural disasters,technological and infrastructure failures, terroristattacks, and health emergencies such as pandemicdisease outbreaks. An effective crisis-managementprogramwill encompass five critical components:an assessment of the threats facing the state;development of a plan to mitigate those threats;development of a strategy to prepare for allhazards; a comprehensive andwell-tested responseplan; and a plan for short- and long-term recovery.This document focuses primarily on the pre-paredness and response components of a state’scrisis-management program.

Preparing to Govern

A new governor must be prepared to respondto an emergency immediately upon assumingoffice. Governors-elect and their future staffshould therefore:

� obtain early briefings on the status of emergencymanagement and homeland security structures inthe state, including an updated risk assessmentand overview of response plans;

� designate a senior staff person to become famil-iar with the forms and procedures needed to acti-vate the emergency preparedness response andto declare disasters and request mutual aid orfederal assistance;

� ensure continuity of command of critical functionsthrough the early appointment of key officials orby carrying over existing appointees; and

� ensure that key gubernatorial staff such as thechief of staff, legal counsel, and communicationsdirector are fully briefed on their roles in a disasterprior to taking office.

The Governor’s Role in an Emergency

While the governor will be thrust into a leader-ship role during an emergency or disaster, it isequally important that the governor take anactive role in ensuring that other state officialsand agencies are well prepared to act effectivelyshould a disaster occur. Some critical steps include:

� making emergency preparedness and homelandsecurity a gubernatorial priority;

� creating a governance structure that reflects thegovernor’s priorities and leadership and manage-ment style; and

� encouraging cooperation among state and localofficials who will be expected to play a role inemergency response.

During an emergency, governors will be called onto play a number of roles, including the state’s chiefcommunicator and primary source of informationon the need for evacuations, the scope of the dis-aster, and the availability of assistance. Governorsalso will need to make decisions regarding thedeclaration of emergencies or disasters, the use ofthe National Guard, requests for mutual aid,and calls for federal assistance. In addition, thegovernormay be called on to authorize emergencyspending, suspend state regulations, requestwaivers of federal regulations, and ensure thatstate agencies are responding appropriately.

6

Executive Summary

This document serves as a guide to governors asthey begin to examine their state’s homeland securityoperations and structures. A separate “What a NewGovernor Should Know” section has been preparedspecifically to help newly elected governors put inplace the structures and procedures they will need toeffectively manage emergencies and disasters. Eachchapter of the guide provides a discussion of salientissues and includes “key points” that summarizethose discussions. Some of those key points include:

Governors’ Powers, Roles, and ResponsibilitiesGovernors should understand their emergencypowers and should ensure that key staff such as thechief of staff, counsel, and the communicationsdirector are prepared and well-versed in their rolesduring a disaster. Governors also should ensurethat homeland security or emergency manage-ment professionals brief any new members oftheir staff about the staff role during a disaster.

State Homeland Security GovernanceThe homeland security department, office, council,or committee should reflect the governor’s vision,establish the state’s security strategy, encompassvarious stakeholders, and include an all-hazardsapproach. The homeland security structure shouldhave sufficient budget oversight and authority toallocate funds based on the overarching strategy,and the state homeland security director shouldunderstand and be able to manage the diversity ofrelated disciplines, including public safety, theNational Guard, and emergency management.

Developing a Public Communications StrategyGovernors should require the chief of staff, presssecretary, and public information officers from stateagencies to prepare a communications strategy priorto a disaster. Governors also should ensure that linesof communicationwith the press remain open duringdisasters so that questions receive prompt answersand false rumors and misinformation can beaddressed quickly.

Mutual AidGovernors should ensure that robust intrastatemutual aid agreements are in place to supportjurisdictions across the state. TheModel IntrastateMutual Aid Legislation provides a useful templatefor the development of mutual aid provisions.Governors also should become familiar with theEmergency Management Assistance Compact,which provides the framework for most state-to-state mutual aid during governor-declaredemergencies and disasters.

National Guard and Military AssistanceTheNational Guard is a crucial state resource duringemergencies and disasters, with expertise incommunications, logistics, search-and-rescue, anddecontamination. Governors generally enjoy theauthority to deploy National Guard resources toexecute state law, suppress or prevent insurrectionor lawless violence, and repel invasion. In addition,significant federal military assistance is availableto governors during disasters, in particular,command-and-control elements that can be usedto coordinate federal forces that may be requested.The effective integration of federal military forceswith those of the state, however, is critical to anefficient response.

Major Disaster and Emergency DeclarationsMost emergencies in a state do not result ingovernor-declared emergencies or disasters, muchless presidential declarations. When the federalgovernment does become involved, however,governors should be aware that the amount andextent of assistance varies greatly depending onwhether the incident is declared an emergency ora disaster. The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Reliefand Emergency Assistance Act provides the legalbasis for the President and the federal governmentto provide assistance to state and local govern-ments, eligible organizations, and individuals.Governors should understand the processes used torequest Presidential disaster declarations andfederal assistance.


Federal Assistance Available to States andIndividualsOnce a disaster declaration is approved, governorsshould have state officials work with FEMA toconduct a briefing for state, local, and eligibleorganizations applying for federal assistance.The state in most cases will be required to pay25 percent of rebuilding and recovery costs. Gov-ernors also should be aware that some federal as-sistance is available even without a presidentialdisaster declaration.

Intelligence and Information SharingState-level intelligence fusion centers are thefocal point for information and intelligence sharingamong local, state, and federal agencies froma variety of disciplines. Guidelines exist to helpstates establish fusion centers, and several nationalinformation-sharing initiatives have beenlaunched to assist states in accessing federal andstate databases. Privacy issues, the need for securityclearances, and the existence of a large numberof information-sharing networks present challengesto the seamless integration of informationfrom all levels of government and across disciplines.

InteroperabilityGovernors should form committees to reportback to them on regional and state interoperabilitysuccesses and challenges. Memorandums ofunderstanding can be used to define interoper-ability procedures with state agencies and localgovernments. Funding strategies and incentivesneed to be developed to encourage greater state,local, and federal participation in interoperabilityinitiatives. New communication systems shouldadhere to accepted interoperability standards.

Critical Infrastructure ProtectionGovernors should understand the federalgovernment’s role in infrastructure protectionand should develop plans and strategies in thecontext of that federal role. Governors shouldensure that vulnerability and risk assessmentshave been conducted and are adequate for theentire infrastructure in their state. Interdepen-dencies among various industry sectors alsoshould be identified and governors should considerinvesting in infrastructure and working withother states to increase the resiliency of infra-structure on a regional basis.

8


IntroductionWhat a New GovernorShould Know

On the chilly morning of January 16, 1979,Richard Thornburgh took the oath of office asthe 44th governor of the Commonwealth ofPennsylvania. Less than three months later, in thepredawn hours of March 28, the Unit 2 nuclearreactor at theThreeMile IslandNuclear GeneratingStation, just 10miles from the state capitol, suffereda partial core meltdown.1

Just 71 days into his term, Governor Thornburghfound himself in the national spotlight and wasexpected to serve expertly as the leader in a litanyof complicated duties: commander-in-chief of thestate forces responding to the incident, chief exec-utive officer of the government, chief communi-cator to a worried public, and chief liaison to thegovernors of neighboring states and to the federalgovernment. The citizens of Pennsylvania viewedhis performance through the prism of the film TheChina Syndrome, which had been released just daysbefore, and against the backdrop of the most seri-ous accident in the history of commercial nuclearpower in the United States.

A generation after Three Mile Island, the funda-mental principle that governors must be preparedto lead during disasters — from the moment theytake office — still applies. The following sectionoutlines the major recommendations each chapterin this document makes for governors in cases ofdisaster or emergency.

Governors’ Powers, Roles, andResponsibilities

Governors should understand the emergency powersat their disposal during an emergency and, as oneof their first priorities upon taking office, ensurethat their staff members recognize the roles theywill be asked to serve during a disaster. A new gov-ernor should be aware of the following points:

� They have the authority to allocate resources, includingNational Guard forces, to coordinate the responseof state agencies, and to communicate with thepublic.

� Several current governors recommend that theircolleagues be physically present at their stateemergency operations centers (EOC) duringmajor incidents.

� Governors have the power to call on other statesfor assistance through mutual aid agreements suchas the Emergency Management Assistance Com-pact to request help from the federal government.

� Key gubernatorial staff, including the chief of staff,legal counsel, communications director, and presssecretary, must be prepared and well-versed ontheir roles during a disaster. Likewise, governorsand their top staff must be aware of the roles andresponsibilities of key public safety agencies andmanagers.

� The technical expertise on which a governor will relyfor decisions relating to homeland security andemergency management will reside for the mostpart in the state agencies responsible for thoseactivities.

State Homeland Security Governance

The way a state’s homeland security apparatus isorganized has a significant impact on the level ofpreparedness and the efficiency of response and re-covery efforts. For the most part, state homelandsecurity structures did not exist prior to theSeptember 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and inmany cases, those organizations remain a work-in-progress five years after those attacks. Three guid-ing principles, described below, have emerged thatgovernors can follow to determine the appropriatehomeland security structure for their states:

� The state homeland security department, office,council, or committee should reflect the governor’svision, establish the state’s security strategy, addressconcerns of necessary stakeholders, and ensure anapproach applicable to all types of hazards.

10

� The entity responsible for homeland security shouldhave appropriate budget oversight and authorityto allocate funds based on the overarching strategy.

� The homeland security director should understandand manage the diversity of related disciplines, includ-ing public safety, the National Guard, and emergencymanagement. The director also should have an under-standing of disciplines not traditionally part of publicsafety, such as public health and agriculture, thataffect the security of a state. In addition, the directorshould be aware of the range of threats facing thestate, from health issues such as pandemic diseasesto economic disruptions stemming from terroristattacks, natural disasters, or technological failures.

Developing a Public Communications andMedia Strategy

A communications strategy is an essential componentof state emergency response and should be developedwell before the state faces a disaster. Without ad-equate preparation and coordination by the gover-nor’s chief of staff, press secretary, and state agencypublic information officers, rumor may be taken astruth and facts may be misrepresented, resulting ina distorted public perception of an emergency. Anew governor should know the following aboutdeveloping a communications strategy:

� Communication should include helping the state’sresidents understand what they should do to priorto a disaster, including providing guidance on whento evacuate and where to go during an evacuation;

when to stay where they are and what supplies theyshould have on hand; and the need for comprehen-sive home and work preparedness plans.

� Communicating directly to victims and victims’ familiesabout where to turn for help is not only appropriatebut essential to a comprehensive response.

� The temptation to speed to the scene of an emer-gency or disaster should often be resisted. The gover-nor should consult with his or her homeland securitystaff and emergency management team beforedeciding whether it is a good idea to visit the scene.

Mutual Aid

Disasters and emergencies can quickly exhaust oroverwhelm the resources of a single jurisdiction,whether at the state or local level. Two primarytypes of mutual aid, intrastate and interstate,exist. A new governor should know the followingabout mutual aid:

� The Model Intrastate Mutual Aid Legislation devel-oped by the National Emergency Management As-sociation can serve as a useful tool fordeveloping or refining mutual aid agreements withina state.

� Assistance from other states is most efficiently ob-tained through the Emergency Management Assis-tance Compact (EMAC), a nationwide compactapproved by Congress and administered by thestates. EMAC helps avoid the arrival of uncoordi-nated, inappropriate, and unlicensed help.


Before a New Governor Is Sworn In

• New governors should avoid vacancies in key homeland security positions such as the state homelandsecurity director or the state emergency manager. A newly elected governor should work with his orher transition team to identify these key personnel early to minimize vacancies and encourage overlapwith the outgoing administration. As soon as a new governor selects people for these positions, thedepartment or agency they are about to lead should be informed.

• New governors should ensure that staff able to manage a disaster response operation are in place on theirinauguration day.

• New governors should task their incoming gubernatorial staff, particularly the legal counsel, with review-ing the procedures necessary for them to declare a state emergency and use their emergency powers.

Military Assistance

During a disaster, governors have at their disposala crucial state resource in the National Guard. Todeploy their National Guard effectively, governorsneed to understand the role the Guard plays intheir emergency response systems and recognizethe other military assets that are available throughthe U.S. Department of Defense. A new governorshould know the following about military assistance:

� Under Title 32 authority, the governor is in com-mand and control of the National Guard, and PosseComitatus restrictions (such as the use of militarypolice to maintain law and order) do not apply.

� Under Title 10 authority, the President may federal-ize and deploy all or part of the state’s NationalGuard, and Posse Comitatus restrictions do apply.

� Federalizing the National Guard may reduce costsfor a state, but governors also lose control of theirGuard forces when they are deployed under Title 10.

� Federal funding for some National Guard costsrelated to homeland defense activities is availableif the secretary of defense determines a NationalGuard component is necessary and appropriate.

� Several strategies exist to integrate military forceswith those of the state, including the “dual statecommand” in which one commander can lead bothNational Guard forces deployed under Title 10 andthose deployed under Title 32.

Major Disaster and EmergencyDeclarations

Most disasters do not reach the magnitude of apresidential declaration. However, when state andlocal resources are insufficient to respond to andrecover from a disaster, a governor may ask thePresident to declare a major disaster or an emer-gency. A new governor should know the followingabout presidential declarations:

� The extent and amount of assistance availablefrom the federal government varies dramaticallydepending on whether the President declaresan emergency or a major disaster.

�When requesting a presidential declaration, governorsshould communicate with the regional FederalEmergency Management Agency (FEMA) director.

� The National Response Plan provides the mecha-nism for coordinating delivery of federal assistanceand resources to augment efforts of state and localgovernments overwhelmed by a major disaster oremergency.

Federal Disaster and Emergency AssistanceAvailable to States and Individuals

State and local governments share responsibility forpreparing their citizens for disasters and helpingthem recover when disasters strikes. In cases wherestate and local governments’ ability to respond todisasters is overwhelmed, their ability to fullyrecover on their own also is likely to be compro-mised, and federal assistance will be required. A newgovernor should know the following about federalassistance:

� Once the President declares a disaster, governorsshould have state officials work with FEMA toconduct a briefing for state, local, and eligibleprivate nonprofit organizations applying for federalassistance programs.

� Federal public assistance to rebuild damaged stateinfrastructure can account for up to 75 percent ofcosts.

� State officials should be present at any disasterrecovery center set up by FEMA for heavily affectedcommunities.

� Some forms of federal disaster assistance — suchas fire management assistance from FEMA, repairsto federal aid system roads and bridges through theU.S. Department of Transportation, and search andrescue assistance from the U.S. Coast Guard —can be obtained without a presidential disasterdeclaration.

12

Intelligence and Information Sharing

Public safety agencies have pointed to a lack ofinformation sharing as one of the main obstaclesto implementing an effective homeland securitystrategy. A significant focus of the post September11 efforts to improve homeland security has beento close the information sharing gaps. A newgovernor should know the following about infor-mation sharing:

� New governors should decide whether they wantclassified information to help inform their disasterresponse efforts. If so, the Department of HomelandSecurity (DHS) will send governors a non-disclosureform to allow them access to classified information.

� New governors should determine whether theirstates have a structure such as a fusion center thatallows public safety agencies to collect, analyze,and disseminate information from multiple sources.

� New governors should review the fusion centerguidelines from the Global Justice InformationSharing Initiative to determine whether their fusioncenter has the types of capabilities necessary toinform disaster response.

Interoperability

Reliable communications are a critical componentof any disaster response. In the early stages of amajor incident, the ability of first responders tosave lives and property can be influenced to a largedegree by their ability to communicate with eachother. A new governor should know the followingabout interoperability:

� Statewide plans for interoperable communicationsdo not exist in all states, and new governors shouldask for an honest appraisal of the current status ofinteroperability in their states.

� New governors should determine whether a strat-egy exists to drive the effort toward fully interopera-ble communications in their state.

Critical Infrastructure Protection

The federal government defines critical infrastructureas systems and assets so vital to the nation thattheir incapacity or destruction would have a de-bilitating impact on security, the national economy,national public health or safety, or any combinationof those matters. However, governors’ ability toensure the security and resiliency of privatelyowned infrastructure and assets often is limited bya lack of statutory or regulatory authority. A newgovernor should do the following concerninginfrastructure protection:

� Recognize that current federal surveys of thenation’s infrastructure may not provide an accuratepicture of the state’s critical infrastructure;

� Ensure that an adequate survey has beenconducted and is updated regularly;

� Make targeted investments in systems andfacilities that will improve the state’s ability to recoverquickly from disaster and emergencies;

� Consider joining with other states to developstrategies for managing events that affectinfrastructure serving more than one state; and

� Partner with the private sector to developemergency response and risk communicationplans for incidents affecting privately ownedsystems or infrastructure.


Chapter 1Governors’ Powers, Roles, andResponsibilities

Governors should understand their emergencypowers and, as one of their first priorities upontaking office, ensure their staff members recognizethe roles they will be required to perform during adisaster. Governors also should develop mecha-nisms to keep other state and local elected and ap-pointed officials informed about their states’emergency response plans and activities.

Governors’ preparations for disasters should begineven before they take the oath of office, as theymust be prepared to respond to an emergency im-mediately upon assuming control. To that end,governors-elect and their future staff should:

� obtain early briefings on the status of emergencymanagement and homeland security structures inthe state, including an updated risk assessmentand overview of response plans;

� designate a senior staff person to become familiarwith the forms and procedures needed to activatethe emergency preparedness response and todeclare disasters and request mutual aid or federalassistance;

� ensure continuity of command of critical functionsthrough the early appointment of key officials or bycarrying over existing appointees; and

� ensure that key gubernatorial staff such as the chiefof staff, legal counsel and communications directorare fully briefed on their roles in a disaster prior totaking office.

Governors’ Emergency Powers and Roles

Reflecting their leading role in disaster response,governors are granted emergency powers to fulfilltheir responsibilities in extraordinary circum-stances. These powers are established legislativelyand vary from state to state, and it is important forgovernors, before they take office, to understandthe emergency powers reposed in them. Examplesof gubernatorial emergency powers include:

� suspending state regulations and statutes;

� ordering evacuations;

� commandeering the use of private property;

� controlling access to the disaster sites;

� rationing supplies such as food, water, and fuel;

� implementing specific public health responsemeasures; and

� authorizing emergency funds without prior legislativeconsent.

In addition, all governors have the power to dothe following:

� call upon other states for mutual assistance throughmutual aid agreements such as theEmergency Management Assistance Compact;

� call upon the federal government for assistance; and

� mobilize the National Guard.

To use any of these powers, governors generallymust declare a state of emergency, usually throughan executive order or a proclamation.

During an emergency, the governor’s most impor-tant role is ensuring a structured, coordinated, andorderly response. During major incidents, gover-nors should consider being present at their stateemergency operations centers (EOC). This doesnot mean that the governor should be engaged inthe details of disaster response operations, but thegovernor’s presence in the EOC can serve to defuseinteragency turf battles and eliminate bureaucraticred tape. It is also essential that the governor strikesthe appropriate tone during the early stages of adisaster response to ensure the state’s executiveleadership is unified and coordinated.

Limitations on Emergency Powers

Emergency powers are not absolute, and emergencydeclarations often come with strings attached. Insome states, such as Alabama and Arizona, statutesrequire the governor to convene the legislature intospecial session immediately once he or she issues a

14

state emergency proclamation. Other states, suchas Maryland, require public dissemination of theexecutive order declaring the state of emergency.In many states, the legislature can vote to end astate emergency through a concurrent resolution.Governors therefore must understand not onlyhow to declare a state emergency, but also what islegally required of them once an emergency isdeclared.2

In most states, emergencies cannot be declared in-definitely. In five states, a state of emergency can lastfor 60 days ormore. In 16 states, a state of emergencycan last for nomore than 30 days. In 10 states, a stateof emergency must expire in less than 30 days. In 14states, these time limits can be extended. In 12 states,the legislature can terminate a state of emergency.

Some states also allow governors tomake declarationsfor different types of emergencies, and the type ofemergency often dictates the time limit of theemergency declaration. InWisconsin, for example,the governor can declare a state of emergency for60 days due to “enemy action” and 30 days due toa natural disaster.3

Governors should also be aware that they do not havethe authority to waive federal statutes or regulations.Instead, theymust request waivers of those statutes orregulations from the relevant federal agencies (for adetailed discussion of the federal government’s rolein disaster response, please see chapter 6). In the

aftermath of Hurricane Katrina, states workedwith federal regulatory agencies to receive waiversin several areas as shown in the following examples:

� Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Florida, Kentucky,Louisiana, Mississippi, New Mexico, NorthCarolina, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas,and Virginia received U.S. Environmental ProtectionAgency waivers to allow the use of high sulfur dieselfuels on highways;

� Alabama, Arkansas, Louisiana, Oklahoma, andTexas received U.S. Department of AgricultureForest Service waivers of national forest campgroundfees for survivors of Hurricane Katrina;

� Mississippi received a U.S. Department of Educationwaiver allowing the state department of educationan extra year to obligate funds that had not beenspent under the Elementary and SecondaryEducation Act;4 and


Summary Points

• Governors should know the emergency powers available to them as soon as they take office.

• Governors should know how to declare a state emergency and what is legally required once anemergency is declared.

• Governors should be aware of the length of state of emergency declarations within their state and thetypes of emergency declarations that are at their disposal.

• Governors should be aware that they must work with the federal government to waive federalregulations.

� Louisiana, Mississippi, and other affected statesreceived waivers to streamline Medicaid andTemporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)enrollment and reimbursements.

The Role of the Governor’s Staff

The role for most gubernatorial staff members,other than the homeland security advisor, duringa disaster will be to support the governor. The levelof this support depends upon the person’s jobdescription. Governors should encourage key staffsuch as the chief of staff, counsel, and the commu-nications director and/or press secretary to beprepared and well-versed on their roles during adisaster.

Chief of Staff.The most important member of thegubernatorial staff during a disaster is the chief ofstaff. At times, the chief of staff will have a formalresponse role detailed in the state emergencyresponse plan. The chief of staff is essentially anextension of the governor but, unlike the gover-nor, may be involved in the operational aspects ofdisaster response. Often, complications will arisethat were not envisioned in the response plan, andcrafting solutions to those complications and un-foreseen events typically falls to the chief of staff.

The chief of staff also controls access to the governorduring the crisis. This can mean curtailing thegovernor’s normal schedule so that he or she canreceive briefings from homeland security or opera-tional staff about the disaster and response efforts.The chief of staff also typically plays a key role indecisions about when the governor should go tothe disaster scene. This decision requires a carefulread of the situation.The governor needs to informvictims, the general public, and state staff that it isthe administration’s priority to respond to thedisaster, and there is no better way to send thatmessage than for the governor to visit a disasterscene. Nevertheless, the media and security pres-ence that a governor likely will bring to a disasterscene also has the potential to tie up operationalpersonnel and complicate response efforts. The

chief of staff often will be responsible for strikingthe appropriate balance between maximizing theeffectiveness of a gubernatorial visit to a disasterscene with the need to allow for an efficient andeffective response.5

Homeland Security Advisor.The position of home-land security advisor on the governor’s staff wascreated after the September 11 attacks. As such, nosingle model has emerged for the roles and respon-sibilities of this individual. In several states, the ad-visor staffs the governor on homeland securityissues and serves as a liaison between the governor’soffice, the state homeland security structure, thefederal Department of Homeland Security, andother outside organizations. The advisor oftenchairs a committee — made up of representativesof relevant state agencies, including public safety,the National Guard, emergency management,public health, and others— chargedwith developingpreparedness and response strategies.

Legal Counsel.The governor’s legal counsel will bea key player during an emergency. The counsel willbe expected to provide expert legal advice aboutthe emergency powers that the governor can exerciseover the course of a disaster.

To meet this challenge, a draft checklist forgovernment attorneys prepared by the AmericanBar Association (ABA) recommends that counselsmake preparations in advance, creating an emergencyand disaster response handbook for quick refer-ence. The ABA checklist also recommends thatcounsels determine the authorities in the jurisdictionwith respect to several issues, including:

� who determines the circumstances under whichmass evacuations can be ordered and the conditionsrequired for an evacuation;

� the restrictions a governor can impose on publicaccess to residential areas and disaster sites;

� curfew provisions and the conditions required to im-pose them;

16

� the range of public health powers available to con-trol contamination and to permit destruction of pri-vate property that may constitute a potentialhazard, and the compensation obligations that arerequired of government;

� gubernatorial authority to impose protections andcontrols for access to critical infrastructure;

� gubernatorial access to various types of intelligenceinformation from other levels of government;

� the scope of existing joint powers agreements withother governmental bodies;

� the command structure for emergency manage-ment and the governor’s role in that structure;

� the parameters for sharing intelligence and disasterinformation with the news media;

� the applicability of freedom of information and openmeeting laws during a crisis;

� the authority to exceed appropriations and disregardset budgets during an emergency;

� the applicability of personnel rules during a disaster;

� the circumstances under which emergencyappointments are permitted;

� the extent to which liability rules apply to the stateduring a disaster; and

� laws that are subject to suspension during times ofemergency.6

Communications Staff. Over the course of anemergency, communications staff members will beexpected to provide timely, accurate, and consistentinformation to victims and their relatives, officialsfrom all levels of government, and the generalpublic. To meet this challenge, communicationsstaff must read and understand the state emer-gency plan, know the key response personnel andtheir roles, and have some understanding of stateand federal disaster aid programs.

The governor’s communication staff shouldmeet with their state’s public information officersin the agencies responsible for emergency manage-

ment or homeland security to develop commu-nications protocols in advance of a disaster. Thegovernor’s communications staff should use thisopportunity to delineate media-relations respon-sibilities during a disaster. In addition, the governor’scommunications office should have a multi-media public notification and information planthat includes use of the state’s Web page as avehicle for disseminating up-to-date informationon the disaster, response activities, and relief andrecovery resources for victims. That plan shouldreflect the possibility that some modes of com-munication, such as the Internet, telephones,and television, are likely to be unavailable forsome period of time after a disaster hits.

The Role of Other Elected and AppointedOfficials

Governors may take the lead for disaster response,but they will need the cooperation of other electedand appointed officials to ensure a successfulresponse. A common adage in homeland securityand emergency management is, “All disasters arelocal.” Many states recognize this maxim by author-izing local governments to declare disasters for shortperiods. In general, governors declare a state of emer-gency when it becomes clear that local resources willbe overwhelmed.

Governors who use emergency powers or attemptto coordinate disaster response without consult-ing state and local elected or appointed officialsmay unnecessarily complicate an already difficultsituation. Without this consultation, local andstate officials may inadvertently convey inaccurateinformation to citizens or develop unrealistic ex-pectations on important issues such as state reim-bursement for response efforts. A governor’sdisaster declaration, for example, does not meanthat local officials can immediately apply forfederal disaster aid assistance.

Governors also should ensure that their cabinet sec-retaries understand their respective roles and au-thorities during disasters and that those officials


participate in tabletop and full-scale emergencyresponse exercises. In addition, governors shouldensure that their offices and all state agencies andbranches of government have up-to-date continuityof operations plans.

Lessons frompast experiences that will help governorskeep state and local officials apprised during adisaster include:

� set up lines of communication with local govern-ment and have technology to communicate withlocal officials during power and telephone outages;

� coordinate communications with the media;

� understand the local chain of command in a disasterarea;

� update the state legislature, county officials,mayors, and others on a regular basis aboutresponse efforts;

� participate in training and exercises with cabinet of-ficials, local officials, and first responders;

� ensure up-to-date continuity of operations plansare in place for all agencies and branches of gov-ernment; and

� follow established emergency plans and protocolsfor coordinating with local governments.

18

Summary Points

• Governors should consider being physically present at the state emergency operations centersduring major incidents.

• Governors should direct key staff such as the chief of staff, counsel, and the communicationsdirector and/or press secretary to be prepared and well-versed on their roles during a disaster.

• The governor should ensure that the chief of staff understands any roles assigned in the stateemergency response plan.

• The governor should ensure that the counsel prepares a reference book in advance that providesanswers to key legal issues that might arise during a disaster.

• The governor should ensure that communication staff read and understand the state emer-gency plan, know the key response personnel and their roles, and have some understanding ofstate and federal disaster aid programs, as well as delineate media-relations responsibilities dur-ing disasters with other state public information officers.

• Governors should insist that homeland security or emergency management professionals briefany new members of their staff about the staff role during a disaster.

Chapter 2State Homeland SecurityGovernance

A well-structured homeland security organizationcan contribute to a state’s ability to prepare for,mitigate, and respond to a range of threats. Statehomeland security structures, for the most part,did not exist prior to the September 11, 2001,terrorist attacks, and in many cases, they remain awork-in-progress five years after those attacks.However, three guiding principles have emergedthat can help governors determine the appropriatehomeland structure for their states:

� The state homeland security department, office,council, or committee should reflect the governor’svision, establish the state’s security strategy,encompass all necessary stakeholders, andinclude an all-hazards approach.

� The entity responsible for homeland security shouldhave sufficient budget oversight and authority to al-locate funds based on the overarching strategy.

� The governor should appoint a homeland securitydirector who understands and can manage the di-versity of related disciplines, including public safety,the National Guard, and emergency management.The director should also have an understanding ofdisciplines outside of the department that may impactthe security of a state, including public health.

Creating the State Homeland SecurityOffice

Homeland security is now a required functionwithin state government to ensure preparedness for,and response to, all types of threats. The challengefor governors is to build the airplane while it is inflight. It has been five years since the September 11attacks, but in that time, governors have movedswiftly to appoint homeland security directors andto establish homeland security offices that unitetheir states’ preparedness and response capabilitiesacross multiple agencies and jurisdictions. These

state offices or departments accomplish theirmissionsby facilitating the interaction and coordinationneeded among the governor’s office, the homelandsecurity director, the state emergency managementoffice, other state agencies, local governments, theprivate sector, volunteer organizations, and thefederal government.

Still, there is a notable variety among the statesboth in the background of the people responsiblefor homeland security and in their roles intheir states. Governors have designated peoplefrom law enforcement, the military, emergencymanagement, and public safety to serve as theirhomeland security directors. In many states, thehomeland security director also serves as an advisorto the governor. And in some states, officials otherthan the homeland security director are tasked withspecific oversight of emergency operations.

In the years since September 11, 2001, severalareas have been identified that governors shouldfocus on to improve their homeland securityorganizations and make them more viable struc-tures for addressing and implementing their states’homeland security strategy. One common short-coming in state homeland security structures is alack of connections among management, opera-tional, and budgetary functions, which often aresplit among several agencies. This is detrimentalto the efficient allocation of resources at the stateand local levels and has resulted in turf battlesamong state agencies. Although these issuesremain unresolved in some states, other governorsare consolidating public safety functions intocabinet-level departments of homeland security.The departments set strategy, manage operations,and have grantmaking authority with oversightfrom an executive or advisory council to helpguide decisions. This is especially importantbecause of the number of stakeholders that needto be consulted for all aspects of state homelandsecurity planning.


Many states have followed these principles whenestablishing their homeland security organizations:

� The homeland security department, office, council,or committee should reflect the governor’s vision,establish the state’s security strategy, encompassall necessary stakeholders, and include an all-hazardsapproach.

� The homeland security structure should havebudget oversight and use the governance structureto allocate funds based on the overarching strategy.

� The governor should appoint a homeland securitydirector who can manage the diversity of disciplines,including public safety, National Guard, and emer-gency management. The director also should havean understanding of disciplines outside of thedepartment that may impact security, such aspublic health threats.

Set a VisionThe governor’s vision of homeland securitydetermines how the state manages this function.Governors should examine their homeland securitycapabilities to determine how they will structurethe organization and provide for its governance.This also will afford an opportunity to determinethe physical organization and the reporting re-lationships among the cabinet agencies. All statesnow have homeland security structures, but it isimportant to think through how the entity isoperating to identify its strengths and weaknesses.

Most states developed homeland security strategiesin response to funding mandates from the U.S. De-partment of Homeland Security (DHS). However,state public safety structures may not match the fed-eral model. It is important to develop a state struc-ture that coordinates all functions.

Other important considerations that should gointo establishing a vision include the following:

� Develop an all-hazards approach.

� Establish and coordinate interstate regions.

� Share interstate resources.

� Create a statewide focus.

� Make sure it is sustainable over the long term.

Budget OversightThe battle over the “power of the purse” is tradi-tionally the toughest one fought by agencies at alllevels of government. DHS provides grant fundingdirectly to the states, which in turn allocate resourcesto local agencies. This relationship has becomestrained simply because of the number of dollars atstake and the need for local governments to be self-reliant during the early stages of a disaster. Therecommended approach is to grant the statehomeland security office oversight of all homelandsecurity funding so that allocations can be coordi-nated with the overall state strategy. This authority,however, must come with a requirement to engageappropriate state agencies in a cooperative planningprocess that ensures all preparedness disciplines areequally represented. In addition, state exercise andtraining programs must address the requirementsestablished in all federal preparedness grant programs,not just those from the Department of HomelandSecurity.

Federal agencies other than DHS also providefunding to the states, and those funding streamsalso must be coordinated. The U.S. Departmentof Justice (DOJ) provides direct grants to statesand local governments for public safety projects.These projects frequently have a homeland secu-rity function, yet the DHS and DOJ fundingstreams often flow to different agencies in thestates.*

The U.S. Department of Health and HumanServices (HHS) provides grants for bioterrorismand public health preparedness; these funds godirectly to each state’s health agency and toprivate-sector hospitals. States should use thehomeland security governance structure to coor-dinate the use and prioritization of all federalfunds.

20

* Although this is true in the majority of states, in Wisconsin, for instance, the Office of Justice Assistance oversees both DOJ and DHS funds.

Ability to Manage Diverse DisciplinesThe governor should look to the homeland securitydirector as the person who will carry out the state’spolicy agenda through the implementation ofspecific objectives. This person needs to have theability to manage large organizations, developcollaborative partnerships, and understand thevarious disciplines involved. The director shouldhave the authority to influence and coordinate theimplementation of homeland security directives.

The following state agencies should coordinatetheir efforts:

� The governor’s office

� State administering agency

� Public safety department

� Military department

� Public health offices

� State department of transportation

� Various state police agencies

� Emergency management offices

� Emergency Medical Services

� Public works

� Fire services

Types of Homeland Security Organizations

A review of several state homeland security functionsreveals three basic organizational structures withvarying degrees of planning and operationalauthority. These organizations continue to evolveas states learn about the benefits and pitfalls ofeach approach. Regardless of their physical structure,however, the people leading the organizationsultimately drive the success or failure of statestrategies and ensure collaboration among stake-holders.

Homeland Security Advisor withCommittee/Coordinating CouncilSome governors have appointed homeland secu-rity advisors or directors to provide direct counselto and speak on behalf of the governor on mattersrelated to homeland security. As mentioned, theadvisor often chairs a committee — made up ofrepresentatives of relevant state agencies, includ-ing public safety, the National Guard, emergencymanagement, public health, and others — chargedwith developing preparedness and response strategies.

In 2003, Maryland Governor Robert Ehrlichcreated an office of homeland security andappointed an advisor to head that office. Theadvisor is the liaison to the U.S. Department ofHomeland Security and coordinates the state’sdepartments, municipalities, and counties inmatters of homeland security and emergency pre-paredness. TheMaryland EmergencyManagementAgency (MEMA), which is part of the MarylandMilitary Department, provides logistical andinfrastructure support to the office of homelandsecurity. MEMA manages many of the federalgrants funding a broad range of initiatives relatedto protection from and responses to the full rangeof natural and man-made disasters that couldthreaten the state.7

InNebraska, the governor appointed the lieutenantgovernor as the director of the Nebraska Home-land Security Office. The office’s mission is to helpthe lieutenant governor and the policy group forhomeland security implement the state disasterassistance and recovery program, operate theradiological emergency preparedness program,oversee the state emergency response commission,and conduct comprehensive training and exercises.The office comprises representatives from themilitary department, emergency management,state patrol, state fire, health and human services,the governor’s policy group, the University ofNebraska system, the department of agriculture,the department of environmental quality, the FBI,the department of administrative services, and thestate energy office.8


The state of Washington, for example, created astatewide collaborative partnership known asTEAM WASHINGTON. The governor ap-pointed the state’s adjutant general, who heads thestate’s military department, as homeland securityadvisor. TEAM WASHINGTON includes thedomestic security executive group, the emergencymanagement council, the committee on homelandsecurity, the state interoperability executive com-mittee, the enhanced 9-1-1 advisory committee,and the regional homeland security coordinationdistricts. While the adjutant general, as homelandsecurity advisor, is the state administrative agent(SAA) and administers all Department ofHomelandSecurity funds, he does not have direct control orbudget authority over all of these groups. Theywork collectively toward a mutually beneficial all-hazards approach to homeland security.9

Department of Homeland SecurityAs the homeland security discipline has evolved,governors are beginning to create state departmentsof homeland security that have the statutory authorityto oversee operations as well as to develop all-haz-ards approaches to mitigation, preparedness, andresponse. Under this model, the governor maybring several public safety agencies, includingemergency management, under one department tocoordinate capabilities and resourcesmore effectively.

The Alabama Department of Homeland Security(ALDHS) was established by the Alabama StateLegislature in 2003, and the director is appointed bythe governor. ALDHS is divided into four majorfunctional areas: borders, ports and transportation;science and technology; information managementand budget; and emergency preparedness andresponse. ALDHS coordinates with federal, state,and local partners and the private sector. Thedepartment works closely with many disciplines,including law enforcement, emergency manage-ment, emergency medical, fire services, publicworks, agriculture, public health, public safety com-munications, environmental management, military,and transportation. ALDHS administers the state’s

federal grant funding and since 2003 hasadministered more than $100 million in federallyappropriated homeland security grants.10

After first establishing an office of homeland secu-rity, Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano in 2006created the Arizona Department of Homeland Se-curity. The department is charged with develop-ing comprehensive emergency plans to preventand respond to natural, technological, and terror-ist events. In addition the department has man-agement, operational, and budgetary oversightover all homeland security functions. This has cre-ated an opportunity to coordinate the disparatepieces of the state’s preparedness structure into amore cohesive all-hazards approach.11

In Delaware, the governor established the depart-ment of safety and homeland security and ap-pointed the secretary of that department as thestate homeland security director and liaison to thegovernor’s office. The department is composed ofthe division of alcohol and tobacco enforcement,capitol police, communications, Delaware Emer-gency Management Agency, Delaware State Police,and the office of highway safety. The secretary alsoserves as the central point for coordination of thedepartment’s homeland security funding.12

In 2005 Indiana consolidated all of its emergencymanagement and homeland security efforts into onedepartment by creating the Indiana Department ofHomeland Security (IDHS). The four divisionswithin the department include the division of plan-ning and assessment, responsible for federal grants;the division of preparedness and training, which in-cludes the state’s former public safety training insti-tute; the division of emergency response and recovery,which incorporates the former state emergencyman-agement agency; and the division of fire and buildingsafety, which includes the newly combined role of thestate fire marshal and state building commissioner.The department is responsible for implementing thestate intelligence fusion center, overseeing the appli-cation and disbursement of federal homeland security

22

funds, acting as the single emergency operations co-ordinator during state emergencies, and serving asthe director of the counter terrorism and securitycouncil, which is chaired by Indiana’s lieutenant gov-ernor.13

Homeland Security Functions UnderExisting AgenciesIn many states, the homeland security functionshave been assigned to an existing agency, such aspublic safety or the military department. Thehomeland security advisor wears several hats andreports directly to the governor on matters ofhomeland security policy and may or may nothave responsibility for homeland security opera-tions. Generally, these homeland security advisors,at a minimum, coordinate response resources andactivities across the various state agencies, and inmany cases, they have planning and budgetaryauthority.

The Florida Department of Law Enforcement(FDLE) oversees homeland security, and the com-missioner of the department is appointed by thegovernor. The commissioner has management andbudgetary oversight; however, a separate emer-gency management division is tasked with provid-ing communications, responding to disasters, andserving as the point of contact for local govern-ment, state government agencies, and the federalgovernment during an emergency. FDLE, in co-operation with municipal, county, and state agen-cies, developed a homeland security strategy thatidentified Florida’s terror-related vulnerabilitiesand devised a comprehensive, integrated plan foraddressing those vulnerabilities. Homeland secu-rity functions in the state are carried out throughseven regional domestic security task forces.14

In Idaho, the bureau of homeland security and itsgovernor-appointed director reside in the militarydivision, which is part of the office of the governor.The bureau’s employees are civilian emergencymanagement specialists specifically trained to coordi-nate local, state, and federal response and recovery

disaster operations as a result of major emergenciesand disasters. The bureau assists Idaho’s stateagencies, counties, cities, and citizens in preparingfor and protecting themselves from the effectsof terrorist incidents involving weapons of massdestruction.15

Governors have carried out the homeland securitymission in a variety of ways and in many cases arestill creating or refining current structures to betterbring the various functions together in a collabo-rative environment. At the core of any state home-land security structure, however, is a directrelationship between the governor and the officialcharged with the oversight of the statewide home-land security strategy.

In Massachusetts, for example, the homeland se-curity advisor is the executive director of publicsafety. The executive director maintains the oper-ational resources to carry out the state homelandsecurity strategy and serves as the state homelandsecurity director. The public safety agency includeshomeland security, oversees the state intelligencefusion center, develops the state security strategy,coordinates preparedness activities, and is respon-sible for emergency management functions.16

The commissioner of public safety is also Min-nesota’s state homeland security advisor. Thisagency includes a division of homeland securityand emergency management that has overall co-ordination for homeland security and emergencymanagement functions. As a division under thecommissioner of public safety, homeland securityand emergency management coordinates budgetsand plans to ensure that the state’s vision and goalsare of an all-hazards approach. The division also isthe state administering agency and distributes fed-eral grant funding to local governments.17


24

Summary Points

• The homeland security department, office, council, or committee should reflect the governor’svision, establish the state’s security strategy, encompass various stakeholders, and include an all-hazards approach.

• The homeland security structure should have sufficient budget oversight and authority to allo-cate funds based on the overarching strategy.

• The governor should appoint a homeland security director who understands and can managethe diversity of related disciplines, including public safety, the National Guard, and emergencymanagement. The director also should have an understanding of disciplines outside of the de-partment that may impact the security of a state, including public health.

Chapter 3Developing a PublicCommunications andMedia Strategy

A communications strategy is an important com-ponent of state emergency response and should bedeveloped well before the state is facing a disaster.Without adequate preparation and coordinationby the governor’s chief of staff, press secretary, andagency public information officers before andduring an emergency, rumor may be taken as truthand facts may be misrepresented, resulting in adistorted public perception of an emergency.

It is essential for the state government to speakwith one voice and communicate the governor’sconcerns. Prior to a disaster, if enough advancenotice is available, a governor should advise citizensabout what actions they can take to protect them-selves and their families. That information, whenappropriate, should include guidance on evacuationroutes and the locations of emergency shelters.Immediately after a disaster, the governor shouldprovide the state’s residents with the followingpublic assurances:

� the state recognizes the seriousness of thesituation;

� someone is in charge; and

� all reasonable steps are being taken to respond.

Governors can use their unique access to themedia to provide information to the publicthrough scheduled press briefings, televisedappearances, and radio announcements. The gov-ernor should ensure lines of communication withthe press remain open so that questions receiveprompt responses and false rumors can be quelledbefore they spread. It is equally important for gover-nors or their representatives to communicate directlywith the victims and victims’ families and providespecific information on how to get help.

Media coverage of disasters has led to increased pub-lic expectations of government response. The pressis eager to report what the government is doing —and not doing — to deal with the emergency. Dis-asters and emergencies provide dramatic live cover-age for the media and evoke strong emotions fromthe public; therefore, governors must have a strategyfor managing those emotions and expectations.Thestrategy should include the following:

� making a quick, initial statement;

� clearly establishing who speaks about what andwhen;

� establishing a regular schedule of statements;

� monitoring the media closely;

� correcting erroneous reports; and

� preparing for “Who’s to blame” questions.


Summary Points

• Governors should require the chief of staff, press secretary, and agency public informationofficers to prepare a public communications strategy before the state is faced with a disaster.

• Governors should ensure that communication lines with the press are open so that ques-tions receive prompt responses and false rumors can be quelled before they spread.

• Governors should ensure that someone is communicating directly with victims and victims’families about where to receive help.

Role of the Governor

Governors should resist the temptation to speedto the scene of an emergency or disaster. Rather,they should make the decision of whether to visita disaster site based on deliberate consultation withtheir homeland security staff and emergency man-agement team. The governor’s presence can go along way toward calming and reassuring the com-munity during and after a disaster. Survivors, vic-tims’ families, and other citizens will look to thegovernor for leadership. However, depending onthe circumstances, governors may decide to avoidthe emergency area when their presence could in-terfere with rescue efforts or attract unwanted at-tention, possibly slowing assistance to victims. Forexample, because of the atypical nature of theOklahoma City bombing disaster,OklahomaGov-ernor Frank Keating decided not to go immedi-ately to the site. Instead, the governor stayed awayas much as possible to avoid impeding the rescuersand politicizing the disaster. He directed much ofhis communication and aid to surviving familymembers and the caregivers helping victims.

A governor’s presence can be reassuring, but it alsocan set unrealistic expectations that governmentprograms or assistance may be forthcoming when,in fact, they will not. The most important role ofthe governor is to set realistic expectations amongdisaster victims and to provide comfort by wordsand actions. If an uninformed governor raisesvictim expectations it can be a recipe for a publicrelations disaster on top of the actual event.

A governor’s actions during the early stages of adisaster often will set the tone for the state govern-ment’s response. The following paragraphs de-scribe actions governors should consider duringthe first 72 hours of an event such as a hurricane’slandfall.

Day 1. The governor should make an announce-ment, either in person or through a press release,that the state is collecting information and is work-ing with the affected local governments. The an-nouncement should indicate that the governor isin charge of the situation, that there is a unifiedplan in action, and that information on further de-velopments will be forthcoming. Compiling anddisseminating consistent, accurate information canbe an enormous challenge. The governor shouldnot provide a detailed assessment until adequatedata has been collected to avoid communicatingmisleading or incomplete information.

Day 2. A governor’s representative should be readyto make an announcement describing the extentof damage as well as the response and recovery op-erations. If possible, the second-day announce-ment should be made from the disaster site. Thegovernor’s representative should not make specificpromises for recovery assistance. Statementsshould be carefully framed to indicate that stateand federal aid, if appropriate, are available tothose who qualify. The governor’s press secretarymay wish to coordinate messages regarding federalaid with the Federal Emergency ManagementAgency’s (FEMA) regional office to ensure accu-rate release of information.

Although questions can be expected from re-porters about how this emergency compares withothers of its type, experience shows that accuratecomparisons are difficult, if not impossible.Comparisons should be avoided, especially at thebeginning of a disaster. If appropriate and safe, thegovernor should consider visiting the site affected.The governor’s presence at the scene can graphicallydemonstrate his or her concern and the serious-ness with which he or she is treating the event. Italso may bolster the spirits of citizens affected bythe disaster. Local officials as well as technical expertssuch as the homeland security advisor or personnel

26

from the state’s emergency management office andrelevant state agencies should join the governor.These experts can handle technical questionsconcerning long-term damages and state aid.

Day 3 and thereafter. The governor’s involvementand presence should not end suddenly with his orher return to the state capital. Those affected by thedisaster need to know the emergency is still a toppriority and that the governor is doing everythingpossible to provide assistance. A daily press releaseshould indicate that on-site personnel are keepingthe governor apprised of the situation.These releasesshould be coordinated with the homeland securityand/or state emergency management agency’s pressofficer so that all offices speak with one voice.

The governor and his or her staff should remember,however, that every disaster and emergency situationis unique. It is important for the governor to beflexible and determine what action to take on acase-by-case basis rather than strictly adhere to aprescribed response approach.

The homeland security advisor or state emergencymanagement director should brief the governorcontinually on the status of state response andrecovery efforts. Long after the emergency occurs,disaster assistance will be a key concern of themedia from the affected area. The governor willalso be questioned about the status of federalrecovery efforts. However, the governor shouldavoid answering questions about specific cases,such as why a particular business has not receiveda loan from the Small Business Administration.Governors should reinforce the federal, state, andlocal response partnership when communicatingwith victims.

Role of the Chief of Staff

Typically, the chief of staff serves as a secondarymedia contact for the governor’s office. Mostoften, this role is fulfilled during situations requir-

ing the press to contact a member of the governor’sstaff other than the press secretary. As an extensionof the governor, the chief of staff is well situated tomeet this occasional need.

A more important media role for the chief of staff isto serve as the “enforcer” of state government effortsto convey a single message to the media during adisaster. Although this role is typically performedby the communications staff during small or mod-erately sized disasters, larger disasters may requireadditional assistance. In this event, the chief ofstaff can help to ensure that cabinet officials andother members of the governor’s staff know thecorrect media protocols during an emergency.

Role of the Press Secretary

Communications staff in governors’ offices spendmost of their time accentuating the positive andensuring that reporters see the best of state gov-ernment. When disaster strikes, communicationsand press office staff are sometimes stunned andcaught unprepared for the ensuing challenges.Press secretaries should take time to read the state’semergency plan, learn the established procedures,and be familiar with the roles assigned to stateofficials in responding to disasters.

During an emergency, the governor’s press secretarymaintains critical lines of communication amongthe governor’s office and emergency personnel,victims, the press, state and local officials, and thefederal government, all of whom want to be first inline for the latest information. Press secretarieshave the enormous challenge of compiling anddisseminating consistent, accurate information.There are several things a press secretary should dobefore a disaster strikes:

� Set up a model for the types of communication tobe sent during a disaster, who will serve as spokes-people for state government, and a process forclearing any communication with the media.


� Read the state emergency management plan.

� Sit down with homeland security and emergencymanagement officials, learn their roles, and estab-lish a contact person in each organization.

� Meet with the state emergency management and/orhomeland security office’s public information officerand other key state personnel involved in communi-cations to establish a relationship and informa-tion-release protocol.

� Develop a system for disseminating information toagency public information officers and the pressand clarify that the governor’s office must approveall communications from the field.

� Understand federal disaster aid programs, includingtheir purposes and limitations, and manage the dis-semination of information so that public expecta-tions are realistic when the governor asks thePresident to declare a disaster.

� See that members of the governor’s staff have textpagers: When telephone lines are down and cellphones become jammed, communication links arecritical.

� Understand the roles of the Red Cross, SalvationArmy, and other emergency assistance groups andidentify an appropriate governor’s staff liaison tothose organizations.

� Understand the best practices and lessons learnedby the state, so that communications staff can rein-force the steps the governor and state have takento minimize the impact of disasters and mitigate therisks to citizens, communities, and the economy.

Establishing a State-Federal JointInformation Center

After the President has declared a disaster, a jointinformation center (JIC) should be established tocoordinate the dissemination of information aboutdisaster response and recovery programs and thestate’s long-term prevention and mitigation strat-egy. Public information officers representing allfederal, state, and local agencies providing

response or recovery services should be part of theJIC to ensure messages are coordinated. The statehomeland security and/or emergency managementoffice’s public information officer plays an integralrole in the JIC and is an invaluable resource to thegovernor’s press secretary. Volunteer organizationsalso should be included in the JIC.

JIC objectives are to develop and implementpublic relations and media strategies that do thefollowing:

� instill confidence within the affected community thatthe state is using all possible resources and is work-ing in partnership with federal, state, and local organ-izations to restore essential services and help victimsbegin to put their lives back together;

� promote a positive understanding of response,recovery, and mitigation programs;

� provide everyone with equal access to timely andaccurate information about disaster response, re-covery, and mitigation programs; and

� manage expectations so that disaster victims havea clear understanding of the disaster response, re-covery, and mitigation services available to themand the limitations of those services.

Working with the Media to Publicize theState’s Response and Long-TermRecovery Strategy

A consistent flow of accurate information is crucialduring a disaster situation. It is not enough torespond swiftly and effectively to a crisis; the pub-lic must be fully informed of the governor’s ac-tions. Establishing a media center for the press toobtain information, hold news conferences, andpost reports is helpful. Press secretaries also shouldremember the special needs of local media repre-sentatives and ensure they get the access they needand are not boxed out by the national press. To en-hance media coordination, press secretaries shoulddo the following:

28

� See that the governor is positioned at the top ofthe information flow.

� Establish a consistent flow of information and deter-mine who will give the governor’s office the latestand most accurate information.

� Identify who is responsible for speaking to thepress.

� Make sure the disseminated information is accu-rate and represents the local, state, and federalpartnership efforts.

� Set up a central media center to coordinate mediatours of the disaster site and help provide reporterswith phones, fax machines, and copiers to helpthem file stories.

� Use the state Web page to disseminate information.

� Have someone from either the governor’s office orthe state’s emergency management agency at thedisaster site at all times.

� Make sure the governor’s staff answering thephones are fully informed and able to refer citizensto appropriate help.

� Settle conflicts between local and national mediacarefully, protecting relationships with local media,and recognizing the different needs of local and na-tional reporters.

� Monitor media reports and quickly correct misinfor-mation to prevent the spread of rumors.

� Develop a message for the governor and ensure thegovernor stays “on message” when making publiccomments.


Summary Points

• Governors should resist the temptation to speed to the scene of an emergency or disaster.Thedecision to go should be made deliberately in consultation with the governor’s homeland se-curity staff and emergency management team.

• During the first day of an emergency, the governor should make an announcement, either inperson or through a press release, that information is being collected and that the state is work-ing with the affected local governments.

• After the first day, a governor’s representative should be ready to describe the extent of dam-age as well as response and recovery operations. If possible, the second-day announcementshould be made from the disaster site.

• Governors should reinforce the federal, state, and local response partnership when commu-nicating with victims.

Chapter 4Mutual Aid

Disasters and emergencies can quickly exhaust oroverwhelm the resources of a single jurisdiction,whether at the local or state level. As a result, mu-nicipalities and states have developed mutual aidagreements and memoranda of understanding tosupplement each others’ response capabilities withadditional personnel, equipment, and expertise.Mutual aid agreements also are a necessary compo-nent of an effective response to incidents that tran-scend political and jurisdictional boundaries.

At the local level, where fire and police depart-ments support their colleagues in neighboringmunicipalities on a routine basis as well as duringemergencies, mutual aid agreements are well-established and well-tested. They specify the typeof assistance to be provided under particularcircumstances, describe the triggers and mecha-nisms for obtaining that assistance, and provide amechanism for ensuring that member jurisdictionsare compensated for the assistance they give.Interstate mutual aid agreements address the sameissues as those used by local governments.However, cross-state mutual aid is a more com-plicated endeavor because workers’ compensa-tion and liability laws differ from state to state,as do licensing procedures and standards forsome professionals, notably doctors, nurses,and other health practitioners.

Intrastate Mutual Aid

When confronted with a large-scale emergency orpotential disaster, governors should first lookwithin their borders to determine whetherresources and assets are available to support thejurisdictions involved in the immediate response.Most jurisdictions, as mentioned, have standingagreements with their neighbors to share assets ona routine and emergency basis. Moving equipmentand personnel from one part of the state to

another, however, can be more complicatedbecause agreements about cost reimbursementmay not be in place. In the wake of the September11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Department ofHomeland Security contracted with the NationalEmergency Management Association (NEMA) todevelop a Model Intrastate Mutual Aid Legislationthat serves as a tool for states to consider as theydevelop or refine statewide mutual aid agree-ments18. The model law, published in 2004,addresses issues such as:

� member party responsibilities;

� implementation;

� limitations;

� license, certificate, and permit portability;

� reimbursement;

� development of guidelines and procedures;

� workers compensation; and

� immunity.

Several states already had, or have since developed,state-wide mutual aid programs. In April 2002, forexample, Iowa introduced a voluntary statewidemutual aid program known as the Iowa MutualAid Compact (IMAC). Modeled on the nationalEmergency Management Assistance Compact,IMAC establishes a system through which politicalsubdivisions can help each other during disastersthat have been declared either by local officials orby the governor.19 Kansas has a similar statewidemutual aid system, created in the 2006 KansasIntrastate Mutual Aid Act. The act provides for asystem of intrastate mutual aid between partici-pating political subdivisions in cases of declareddisasters as well as during drills and exercises inpreparation for such disasters.

In Illinois, meanwhile, the fire service developedand implemented a mutual aid system that beganin the northern part of the state but has sinceexpanded to all of Illinois, southern Wisconsin,

30

and parts of Indiana. The Mutual Aid Box AlarmSystem (MABAS) comprises hundreds of fire depart-ments and provides an orderly system for dispatchingfire and emergency medical service equipment andpersonnel to fires, accidents, or other incidents.Equipment is moved among participating jurisdic-tions according to predetermined lists, known as boxcards. Each card covers specific equipment for specifictypes of incidents in specific areas. The system ismanaged through geographic divisions bywhich localfire departments can access assistance. From itsinception, MABAS included procedures for ensur-ing the integration of assisting personnel and equip-ment into the local command structure.Recently, the system adopted the National IncidentManagement System to allow agencies that may beunfamiliar with each other to work together under aunified command and with common procedures.

Interstate Mutual Aid

When incidents overwhelm the response capabilitiesof a state, governors may need to look beyondtheir own borders for assistance. Although mutualaid agreements exist on a state-to-state basis in theareas of wildfire suppression, law enforcement, anddrug interdiction, interstate mutual aid in the areaof disaster response and recovery now generallycomes through the Emergency ManagementAssistance Compact, a nationwide compactapproved by Congress and administered by thestates.

The Emergency Management AssistanceCompact

In August and September 2005, equipment,supplies, and personnel flowed from across thenation into Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, andTexas in the wake of hurricanes Katrina and Rita.This influx of assistance was largely the result of theEmergency Management Assistance Compact(EMAC), which provides the structure and mecha-nisms for the rapid movement of equipment andpeople across state lines.

EMAC addresses a majority of the challenges tointerstate mutual aid, including:

� The acceptance of out-of-state medical licenses:EMAC specifies that when a person holds a license,certificate, or other permit issued by any state thatis party to the compact, that person shall bedeemed licensed, certified, or permitted by thestate requesting assistance, subject to limitationsand conditions prescribed by the governor of thestate requesting that assistance.20

� The recovery of costs incurred by states providingassistance: EMAC provides that any state offeringassistance to another state under the compact willbe reimbursed by the state receiving the assistancefor costs related to the provision of that assis-tance.21

� Legal liability claims that arise from the activities ofout-of-state workers: The compact regulates thatofficers or employees of a party state rendering aidin another state pursuant to the compact areconsidered agents of the requesting state for tortliability and immunity purposes.22

�Workers’ compensation payments should thoseout-of-state workers be injured or killed whileresponding to the disasters: The compact specifiesthat each party state shall provide for the paymentof compensation and death benefits to injuredmembers of the emergency forces of that state andrepresentatives of deceased members of thoseemergency forces in the same manner and on thesame terms as if the injury or death were sustainedwithin their own state.23

In short, EMAC provides for “mutual assistancebetween states… in managing any emergency ordisaster that is duly declared by the governor ofthe affected state(s), whether arising from naturaldisaster, technological hazard, man-made disaster,civil emergency aspects of resource shortages, com-munity disorders, insurgency, or enemy attack.”24

The history of EMAC dates to Hurricane Andrewin 1992. In the wake of that storm— which untilHurricane Katrina in 2005 was the most devastat-ing natural disaster in U.S. history— then Florida


Governor Lawton Chiles initiated a mutual aidcompact among states in the southeast UnitedStates. Participating governors amended the agree-ment to open participation to all states, creatingthe Emergency Management Assistance Compact.The 104thCongress ratified the interstate agreementin 1996 with the passage of House Resolution 193(PL 104-321).The National Governors Associationhas endorsed EMAC and, in 2006,Hawaii becamethe 50th state to join the compact, which alsocounts District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, and theU.S. Virgin Islands among its members.

To join EMAC, states were required to pass legis-lation approving the compact as written. Thisensures that states receiving assistance underthe terms of EMAC are legally responsible forreimbursing assisting states and are liable for out-of-state personnel. This significantly reduces theconfusion and anxiety sometimes associated withinterstate mutual aid.

Benefits of Membership

Participation in EMAC does not reduce federaldisaster assistance to states in any way and partici-pating states receive several benefits as a result of theirmembership in the compact, because EMAC doesthe following:

� supplements federal assistance;

� replaces federal assistance when it is not availableor when a state is ineligible for funds;

� enhances cost-effectiveness;

� establishes standard operating procedures;

� rapidly mobilizes resources;

� provides expertise of member states;

� guarantees reimbursement to states that provideeligible assistance; and

� authorizes the use of National Guard forces forhumanitarian purposes.

An additional, and no less important, benefit ofEMAC is that the system is structured to providegovernors the authority to pull resources into a dis-aster zone, rather than to allow other states or or-ganizations to flood an affected area withresources, personnel, and donations. This allowsgovernors to maintain control over the types andsources of assistance provided and to maximize theintegration of out-of-state resources into in-stateincident command systems. Because EMAC re-quires states receiving assistance to accept respon-sibility for cost reimbursement and for liabilityclaims, the ability of receiving state governors tomanage that outside assistance is critical.

How EMAC Works

EMAC is administered by NEMA, which providesthe day-to-day support and technical backbone forthe compact. During emergencies, NEMA staffwork directly with EMACmembers to ensure thatrequests for assistance are fielded quickly and effec-tively to maximize relief efforts.

The trigger for assistance under EMAC is a decla-ration of emergency by the governor of theaffected state. Once that declaration is made, theEMAC assistance process can be set into motion.The process works as follows:

� An authorized representative of the affected statecontacts the EMAC national coordinating group.

� The affected state requests the deployment of anA-Team† to facilitate assistance requests.

� The A-Team works with the state to determineneeds and sends an EMAC broadcast requestingassistance from member states.

� The A-Team helps the requesting state determinecosts and the availability of resources.

� States complete requisitions and negotiation ofcosts.

� Resources are sent to the requesting state.

32

† An A-Team normally consists of two or more people from any EMAC member state who are knowledgeable about and capable of imple-menting EMAC procedures. The A-Team is the primary point-of-contact for requesting and acquiring assistance provided under EMAC.

Major Issues

The scope and scale of destruction wrought by the2005 hurricane season was unprecedented in theUnited States. The season, which extended wellbeyond the traditional November 30 end date andinto early 2006, saw damages in excess of $100billion, primarily from five storms: Dennis, Emily,Katrina, Rita andWilma. More than 2,200 peoplelost their lives. Katrina alone killed about 1,800people, caused $81 billion in damages and affectedabout 93,000 square miles of territory.

The scale of response to Katrina was equally un-precedented. EMAC assistance in Louisiana andMississippi included 61,439 personnel — 18,160civilian and 43,279 National Guard, and cost anestimated $771.7 million.25 The complexity of theresponse and the number of EMAC missionsfielded — estimated at more than 1,900 — high-lighted several issues governors should be aware ofas they contemplate receiving or providing EMACassistance during an emergency or disaster.

Reimbursement Is Limited to Approved EMACMissions. EMAC sets out the terms and condi-tions under which states will be reimbursed forcosts they incur in providing assistance to anothermember state. In general, states providing assis-tance must closely track their costs and submitthose costs to the receiving state, which compen-sates them with funding under the federal StaffordAct (for a detailed discussion of the Stafford Act,please see chapter 6).

Only activities carried out under an EMAC requi-sition agreement signed by the requesting state andthe assisting state are eligible for reimbursement.Costs incurred for activities that are outside thescope of that agreement or by response teams who“self-deploy” into a disaster zone outside theEMAC framework are not reimbursable under theterms of the compact.

Detailed Record Keeping and Auditing Is Essential.The sheer number of EMAC missions carried outduring the response to Katrina illustrates the needfor accurate record keeping by both receivingand assisting states. Detailed, accurate receipts;employee timesheets; and other financial docu-ments will ease the reimbursement process,particularly in large-scale, costly events such asKatrina. Federal auditors from the GovernmentAccountability Office monitored the post-Katrinareimbursement process very closely, auditing manyof the reimbursement claims and rejecting thosefor which adequate documentation did not exist.

State and Local Officials Should Be Educated AboutEMAC. Out-of-state teams were able to reach af-fected areas of the Gulf Coast efficiently throughEMAC deployments. However, their integrationwith response crews already on the ground wascomplicated by the fact that many local officials,and some federal officials, were unfamiliar withEMAC and questioned or rejected the credentialsof the EMAC-deployed teams. The absence ofreliable communications systems in the disasterzone meant that the state emergency operationscenter often was unaware of the problem and couldnot intervene on behalf of the EMAC teams.

Education at all levels of government is thereforeessential for EMAC’s continued success. Localemergency management officials, local law en-forcement officials, the National Guard leadership,and federal emergency response personnel must bemade aware of EMAC, its provisions, its benefits,and its limitations so that out-of-state resourcescan quickly and efficiently be brought to bearduring disasters.

Other Interstate Mutual Aid Agreements

EMAC has emerged as the gold standard in state-to-state mutual aid since its inception in the wakeof Hurricane Andrew. But it is not the only vehiclefor cross-border cooperation, and the compact


recognizes the likelihood of other arrangements,specifying that EMAC membership does not“preclude any state entering into supplementaryagreements with another state or affect any otheragreements already in force between states.” Thosesupplementary agreements, the compact adds, couldinclude provisions for “evacuation and reception ofinjured and other persons and the exchange ofmedical, fire, police, public utility, reconnaissance,welfare, transportation, and communicationspersonnel, and equipment, and supplies.”

Several other interstate mutual aid compacts orarrangements already exist. A representative, butby no means comprehensive, sample of interstatemutual aid agreements includes the following:

The Pacific Northwest Emergency ManagementArrangementRatified by Congress in July 1998, PNEMA is aninterstate and international emergency manage-ment compact among Alaska, Idaho, Oregon,Washington, and the Canadian provinces of BritishColumbia and Yukon Territory.

The Mid-America AllianceAlthough not an interstate compact, the Mid-America Alliance is a multistate framework forpublic health mutual assistance during situationsthat stress a state’s resources but do not initiate agovernor-declared state of emergency. Memberstates include Colorado, Iowa, Kansas, Missouri,Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, South Dakota,Utah, and Wyoming. The Mid-America Allianceaims to establish a system by which member statescan share services, resources, and information toefficiently address the needs of citizens during apublic health emergency.

The National Guard Mutual Assistance CompactThe compact creates a mechanism by whichgovernors can send National Guard forces toanother state and place those forces under thetemporary command of appropriate NationalGuard or military authorities of that state. Thecompact addresses questions of liability, reim-bursement, pay, and workers’ compensation.

National Guard Mutual Assistance Counter-DrugActivities CompactThe Counter-Drug Activities Compact providesfor mutual assistance and support among partystates through the use of National Guard troopsin drug-interdiction, counter-drug, and demand-reduction activities.

Northern New England Metropolitan Medical Re-sponse SystemThree states — New Hampshire, Maine, andVermont—have taken the concept of the MMRSand applied it to a multistate region. The MMRSis a DHS program that encourages metropolitanareas to develop an interjurisdictional, interagencycapacity to prepare for and respond to healthemergencies in that region. The three-state North-ern New England MMRS is designed to ensurethat:

� The plans, resources, and responses of the regionare coordinated to handle mass care locally

� The education, training, and exercising for theregion are cooperative and coordinated

� There is a system in place to keep those activitiescoordinated on a routine basis

� The region can manage any surge from an event inBoston or New York

The member states also are developing an opera-tional capacity through the establishment of med-ical strike teams that will be trained and equippedto respond to incidents anywhere in the region.

Public-Private Partnerships

Partnering effectively with the private sector to im-prove disaster preparedness and response is an areaof emergency management that has begun to re-ceive attention only recently. This is despite thefact that the private sector has significantinvolvement in disaster response, from engaging involunteer and donation-management activities toproviding emergency and long-termmedical care toreporting and disseminating information. In some

34

jurisdictions, private-sector entities have been estab-lished to provide services that supplement the gov-ernment’s emergency response role. Thus far,however, most public-private partnerships in the areaof emergency preparedness and response exist at thelocal, rather than at the state, level.

In Hernando County, Florida, north of Tampa, forexample, the local business community has formedthe Hernando Emergency Recovery Council to as-sist the community in recovering from disasters oremergencies. The organization has more than 30members and provides services in nine key areas, in-cluding emergency housing, education, health care,food, animal care, and transportation. The councilwas initiated by the local business community inpartnership with the county’s emergency manage-ment division, and county officials have providedadvice on how the council should organize itself towork most effectively with the public sector.

In 2001, St. Louis, Missouri, launched a programto coordinate emergency response to large-scalecritical incidents in eastern Missouri and westernIllinois. The St. Louis Area Regional ResponseSystem (STARRS) formed a partnership withNextel, Raytheon, AirClic, and the St. Louis Met-ropolitan Medical Response program to developan emergency patient-management system thattracks patients from the scene of an emergency toarea hospitals. The emergency patient trackingsystem is a state-of-the-art wireless triage systemthat provides information to hospitals, healthdepartments, the Missouri National Guard, andthe state emergency management agency.

STARRS features an advisory council comprisingrepresentatives of police, fire, EMS, schools, trans-portation, utility companies, local businesses, pub-lic health, hospitals, and emergency managementto plan and prepare for emergency responsethroughout the region. The partnership is nowresponsible for five separate contracts in disasterpreparedness and homeland security.


Summary Points

• Governors should ensure that robust in-trastate mutual aid agreements are inplace to support jurisdictions across thestate as they respond to emergenciesand disasters.

• Governors should refer to the ModelIntrastateMutual Aid Legislation whendeveloping mutual aid provisions formember party responsibilities; license,certificate, and permit portability; costreimbursement; workers compensation;and liability protection.

• Governors should become familiar withthe EmergencyManagement AssistanceCompact, which provides the frame-work for most state-to-state mutual aidduring governor-declared emergenciesand disasters. EMAC addresses a major-ity of the challenges to interstate mutualaid, including out-of-state license porta-bility, cost recovery, liability protections,and workers’ compensation claims.

Chapter 5National Guard and MilitaryAssistance

During a disaster, governors have at their disposala crucial state resource in the National Guard.These state military forces have equipment andexpertise in communications, logistics, search andrescue, law enforcement, and decontaminationand can serve as a significant resource during a dis-aster response. When National Guard forcesfrom disaster-impacted and supporting states areinsufficient, federal military assets also are avail-able through the U.S. Department of Defense.

The September 11, 2001, terrorist attacks and the2004 and 2005 hurricane seasons highlighted theimportant role of the National Guard in disasterresponse. National Guard members provided air-port security immediately following September11th and were deployed to guard some commer-cial nuclear power plants; they also were integral tothe response efforts during Hurricanes Katrina andRita. A total of 50,087 National Guard memberswere deployed to provide assistance in Alabama,Louisiana, and Mississippi in the late summer andfall of 2005. National Guard aircrews from theresponding states flew more than 300 air missionseach day, flying in critical supplies while evacuatinginjured and special needs persons and other disastervictims.

Statutory Role of the Governor

Under Article I of the United States Constitution,authority over the state militia (the NationalGuard) is reposed in the states. States, in turn,have further codified the roles and responsibilitiesof the governor as commander-in-chief throughtheir state constitutions and statutes.* ( The U.S.and state constitutions also generally grant gover-nors the authority to deploy the National Guard toexecute laws, suppress or prevent insurrections orlawless violence, and repel invasions. For example,

in Oregon, “the Governor shall be commander inchief [sic] of the military, and naval forces of thisState, and may call out such forces to execute thelaws, to suppress insurrection [sic], or to repel in-vasion.” In Alabama, “the governor shall be com-mander-in-chief of the militia and volunteer forcesof this state, except when they shall be called intothe service of the United States, and he may callout the same to execute the laws, suppress insur-rection, and repel invasion, but need not com-mand in person unless directed to do so byresolution of the legislature; and when acting inthe service of the United States, he shall appointhis staff, and the legislature shall fix his rank.”

Legal Considerations for MilitaryAssistance to Civilian Authority

To stem the potential for abuse or misuse ofmilitary forces, legal safeguards have been estab-lished to regulate the use of themilitary in providingassistance to civilian authorities. The most signifi-cant of these federal safeguards are the PosseComitatus Act and the Insurrection Act.

The Posse Comitatus Act of 1878 prohibits theuse of the federal military, including NationalGuard units operating under federal authority (i.e.Title 10 duty status), to enforce civil laws unlessauthorized to do so by the U.S. Constitution orfederal law. The limitations on federal forcesspelled out in the Posse Comitatus Act apply onlyto direct application of federal military forces.Supportive and technical assistance, such as use offacilities, vessels, aircraft, and technical aid are notrestricted under the act. The act also does not inany way limit the use of the National Guard whilein state active duty or Title 32 status since theNational Guard in both statuses remains understate control.

In addition, legislation has been enacted at thefederal level to allow federal military forces somelaw enforcement authority in limited circum-stances. These legislative provisions include:

36

* Article I, Section VII, Clause 16 states: “Congress shall have the power…to provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining the militia, andfor governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointmentof the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress

� The military may provide assistance in druginterdiction at the request of federal or state lawenforcement agencies.26

� Military personnel may conduct searches and arrestthose involved in prohibited transactions of nuclearmaterials if the attorney general and secretary ofdefense jointly determine that the situation poses aserious threat.27

� At the attorney general’s request, during the threatof chemical or biological weapons, the military mayprovide equipment necessary to detect and disposeof those weapons.28

� The governor of a state where a major disaster hasoccurred may request that the President directmilitary personnel to assist in emergency work topreserve life and property.29

� The secret service may request military assistanceto protect the President from assault, manslaughter,or murder.30

� If requested by the FBI, the military may assist ininvestigations of the assassination, kidnapping, orassault of a cabinet member, member of Congress,or a Supreme Court justice.31

As noted above, governors may use the NationalGuard for many of the foregoing purposes withoutthe necessity of citing an exception to the PosseComitatus Act since use of the National Guard instate active duty or Title 32 status does not fallwithin the proscriptions of the act.

The Insurrection Act recognizes that the primaryresponsibility for protecting life and property andmaintaining law and order in the civilian commu-nity is vested in state and local governments butauthorizes the President to direct the armed forcesto enforce the law to suppress insurrections anddomestic violence.32 Military forces may be usedto restore order, prevent looting, and engage inother law enforcement activities.

The John Warner Defense Authorization Act of2007 amends the Insurrection Act to allow thePresident to federalize National Guard troops to

“restore public order as a result of a national disaster,epidemic, or serious public health emergency.”33 ThePresident must inform Congress that he is going toexercise this new authority and must continue toinform Congress every 14 days thereafter as long ashe exercises that authority.

The new provision provides little guidance onwhen the new authority may be used and thiscould put governors at a disadvantage duringdisasters. Absent specific guidelines and procedures,the President could federalize a governor’s NationalGuard members at a time when they are mostneeded by the state. Also, once the Presidentfederalizes a National Guard unit, a governor losesall command and control over those forces and isnot able to recall the unit or any of its members toaddress a need within his or her own state.

The National Defense Authorization Act of 2005includes provisions to help states train, prepare for,and participate in homeland defense activities.34

Subject to prior approval of the secretary ofdefense, the act allows the National Guard, whilein Title 32 status, to perform and participate intraining for homeland defense activities whilebeing compensated by the Department ofDefense. Under the act, the term “homelanddefense activity” refers to any activity undertakenfor the military protection of the territory ordomestic population of the United States or ofinfrastructure or other assets of the United Statesdetermined by the secretary of defense as beingcritical to national security, from a threat oraggression against the United States. What con-stitutes homeland defense activities is left to thediscretion of the secretary of defense.

Under the 2005 act, governors may request thesecretary of defense to authorize their NationalGuard to engage in federally funded Title 32homeland defense activities. Such requests mustinclude:

� A description of the specific intended homelanddefense activities;


� An explanation of why participation of NationalGuard units or members in the homeland defenseactivities is necessary and appropriate; and

� A certification that homeland defense activities areto be conducted at a time when the personnelinvolved are not in federal service.

Military Homeland Security and DefenseStructures

Amid the continuing debate over the military’srole in disaster response, at least there has been aclear delineation of which federal agency hasprimary responsibility for homeland defense andhomeland security missions:

� Homeland defense is defined as the protection ofU.S. sovereignty, territory, domestic population,and critical defense infrastructure against externalthreats and aggression, or other threats as directedby the President. The Department of Defense isresponsible for homeland defense.

� Homeland security is the concerted national effortto prevent terrorist attacks within the United States,reduce America’s vulnerability to terrorism, andminimize the damage and recover from attacks thatdo occur. The Department of Homeland Security isthe lead federal agency for homeland security.

The National Guard straddles both of thesemissions. In many states, the National Guardadjutant general is the governor’s homeland securityadvisor as well as commander of the state’s militaryforces. For example, as noted in Chapter 2, in thestate of Washington, the state’s homelandsecurity apparatus is embedded in theWashingtonMilitary Department. The adjutant general istherefore responsible for military operations, emer-gency management, E-911 telecommunications,and policy-related interaction with executive andlegislative branches of local, state, and federalgovernments.

In Idaho, the Idaho Bureau of Homeland Securityis one of the three divisions within the IdahoMilitary Division. The mission of the bureau ofhomeland security is to save lives and limit human

suffering, prevent injury to wildlife, limit damageto natural resources, and protect private and publicproperty, the environment, and the economy as aresult of the harmful effects of natural and man-made disasters from all hazards, including terrorismand the use of weapons of mass destruction, insupport of local governments and communities.

As a shared state and federal asset, the NationalGuard also plays an important role in the home-land defense mission. The guard has had a criticalpart in the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq. At onepoint, more than 40 percent of the units involvedin the Iraq war were National Guard members,and the Air National Guard continues to flymissions under North American AerospaceDefense Command control in defense of theNorth American air space.

There are a number of mechanisms through whichthe National Guard can be deployed in domesticdisaster situations. These include deploying inState active duty status or Title 32 status, or in rarecircumstances in Title 10 status. Each of thesemechanisms has benefits and drawbacks related tostate vs. federal command and control, funding,and other operational considerations.

In state active duty and Title 32 status, the gov-ernor is clearly in command and control of theNational Guard forces operating within their stateor territory. By contrast, personnel in Title 10status, whether operating domestically or overseas,are under the command and control of the Presidentor his designee, the secretary of defense. Governorshave therefore long taken the position that when-ever the National Guard is used domestically itshould be used in state active duty or Title 32 sta-tus to the maximum extent possible.

State active duty. When deployed in state activeduty status, the governor retains command andcontrol of the National Guard forces inside theirstate or territory.The governor can activate NationalGuard personnel to state active duty in responseto natural or man-made disasters or other missionsauthorized by state law. State active duty is based

38

on state statute and policy, and the state is respon-sible for all costs relating to the deployment. A keyaspect of state active duty status is that the PosseComitatus restrictions on military activities donot apply.

Title 32 Full-Time National Guard Duty. “Full timeNational Guard duty” means federal training orother duty, other than inactive duty, performed bya member of the National Guard. Title 32 allowsthe governor, with the approval of the President orthe secretary of defense, to order a guard memberto duty in accordance with the following sectionsof the United States Code (USC):

� 32 USC §502(f). This statute allows members ofthe National Guard to be ordered to full-time Na-tional Guard duty to perform training and otheroperational activities.

� 32 USC § 901. This provision defines “HomelandDefense activity” as any activity undertaken for themilitary protection of the territory or domestic popu-lation of the United States, or of the infrastructure orother assets of the United States determined by thesecretary of defense as being critical to nationalsecurity, from a threat or aggression against theUnited States.

� 32 USC § 902. Homeland Defense funds. Thesecretary of defense may provide funds to a governorto employ National Guard units or members toconduct homeland defense activities that theSecretary determines to be necessary andappropriate for participation by the NationalGuard units or members.

The key to these Title 32 deployments is that theygive the governor the ability to place a NationalGuard soldier or airman in full-duty status at federalexpense but under continued state command andcontrol. Duty performed in this status, eventhough funded directly from the federal govern-ment, is not subject to the Posse Comitatus restric-tions. A governor may use the National Guard inthis status in a direct law enforcement capacitywhile retaining the state chain of command.

Title 10 Active Duty. The circumstances in whichthe President can federalize National Guard forcesfor domestic duties under Title 10 are: 1) the state(legislature or the governor if the legislature cannotbe convened) may request, through the U.S.Attorney General, federal military assistanceunder 10 U.S.C. Chapter 15 in the event that stateand local police forces, including the NationalGuard operating under state control, are unable toadequately respond to a civil disturbance or otherserious law enforcement emergency; and 2) thePresident also may “federalize” the National Guardto enforce federal law or to protect Constitutionalrights. Under Title 10 authority, the President mayfederalize and deploy all or part of any state’sNational Guard in accordance with several Title10 provisions:

� Voluntary Order to Active Duty. At any time, amember of the National Guard may be ordered toactive duty voluntarily with the consent of thegovernor.35

� Partial Mobilization. In time of a national emergencydeclared by the President, the secretary of defensemay order any National Guard unit and anymember to federal active duty for not more than24 consecutive months.36

� Presidential Reserve Call Up. When the Presidentdetermines that it is necessary to augment theactive duty federal forces for any operational mission,he may authorize the secretary of defense to orderany National Guard unit and any member to federalactive duty for not more than 270 days.37

� Federal Aid for State Governments. Wheneveran insurrection occurs in any state against itsgovernment, the President may, upon the requestof the state’s legislature or governor if the legislaturecannot be convened, call into federal service suchof the militia of the other states, in the numberrequested by the supported state, and use federalarmed forces as he considers necessary to sup-press the insurrection.38 This section is a statutoryexception to the Posse Comitatus Act.


� Use of the Militia and Armed Forces to EnforceFederal Authority. Whenever the President considersthat unlawful obstructions, combinations, assem-blages, or rebellion against the authority of theUnited States, make it impracticable to enforce thelaws of the United States in any state or territory byan ordinary course of judicial proceedings, he maycall into federal service the militia (the NationalGuard) of any state, and use the armed forces ashe considers necessary to enforce those laws or tosuppress the rebellion.39 This section is a statutoryexception to the Posse Comitatus Act.

� Interference with State and Federal Law. ThePresident, by using the militia (the National Guard)or the armed forces, or both, or by any other means,shall take such measures as he considers necessaryto suppress, in a state, any insurrection, domesticviolence, unlawful combination, or conspiracy.40

The main limitation on National Guard forcesoperating under a Title 10 deployment is that theywould normally be prohibited by Posse Comitatusfrom enforcing the laws and would be limited toproviding support functions such as logistics orcommunications. In times of disaster, particularlyin a catastrophic event, military units are in highdemand to maintain law and order in the disasterzone. Under Title 10, National Guard forces couldnot perform those functions.

The primary benefit of National Guard unitsdeployed under Title 10 is that the Departmentof Defense assumes full responsibility for allaspects of the deployment. The primary disadvan-tage is that the governor forfeits all command,control, and effective influence over the employmentof the military force.

Funding of National Guard Activities

Funding military units and activities for homelandsecurity missions and training is a significantconcern at the state level. Deployment of theNational Guard is expensive once the costs for pay,allowances, subsistence, benefits, equipment, andmobilization activities are taken into account.

Governors need to be aware of the deploymentfunding options for homeland security and emer-gency response activities. Funding is determinedby the deployment status of the National Guardpersonnel and equipment. States routinely useNational Guard units in disaster-response roles.After the September 11th terrorist attacks, manystates deployed National Guard units in Title 32status (at federal expense but under state control)to provide security support at airports and, insome cases, at commercial nuclear facilities. Bycontrast, in the summer of 2006, Massachusettsand New York deployed guard units to provideairport security in response to a liquid-explosivesplot uncovered in the United Kingdom. Becausethose forces were deployed under state active duty,the individual states were required to fund thoseactivities directly.

The Defense Authorization Act of 2005 providesan additional means for funding of homelanddefense activities. In the case of any homelanddefense activity for which the secretary of defensedetermines aNationalGuard component is necessaryand appropriate, funds may be provided to thestate in an amount that the secretary determinesis appropriate to cover the following operationalcosts:

� the pay, allowances, clothing, subsistence, gratuities,travel, and related expenses of personnel of theNational Guard of that state;

� the operation and maintenance of the equipmentand facilities of the National Guard of that state; and

� the procurement of services and equipment, andthe leasing of equipment, for the National Guard ofthat state.

Role of the Military in Support of States

The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emer-gency Assistance Act (the Stafford Act), creates theframework through which the federal governmentprovides disaster relief to the states (for a discussionof the Stafford Act, please see Chapter 6). After a

40

presidential declaration has been signed for animpacted state, the Stafford Act permits a governorto request military assistance directly from thePresident. The President then directs the secretaryof defense to use the resources of the Departmentof Defense to provide relief for a period of no morethan 10 days.

With or without a presidential disaster or emer-gency declaration, the governor can requestNational Guard assistance from all other statesand territories under the Emergency ManagementAssistance Compact (EMAC). Requests for suchassistance are processed by the governor’s adjutantgeneral in coordination with the state emergencymanagement director. National Guard assistancefrom other states is not time-limited.

If a presidential disaster declaration is signed, theprovisions of the Stafford Act take effect and, aspart of the federal response, a governor can requestadditional federal military support. Under theNational Response Plan, a governor sends arequest for federal military assistance to the officeof the secretary of defense. If approved by thesecretary, the Department of Defense designatesa supporting combatant commander for theresponse. The supporting combatant commanderdetermines the appropriate level of command andcontrol for each response and usually deploys asenior military officer to the incident site.

Under most emergency response circumstances,the senior federal military liaison officer is thedefense coordinating officer (DCO), who servesas DOD’s point of contact in the joint field office(JFO). Requests for DOD assistance originatingat the JFO are, with a few exceptions such as thosefor Army Corps of Engineers missions, coordi-nated and processed through the DCO. In general,the DCO’s job is to:

� Co-locate with the primary federal officer, or thefederal coordinating officer in the JFO

� Coordinate and process applicable requests forfederal military assistance from the primary federalofficer or the federal coordinating officer or desig-nated representative

� Orchestrate the accomplishment of approvedmission assignments using available resources

� Assign federal military liaison officers as appropriateto emergency support function agencies at the JFOto provide technical assistance or facilitate timelycoordination

� Refer problematic or contentious issues through theappropriate federal military chain of command tothe office of the assistant secretary of defense forHomeland Defense

The foregoing functions for all National Guardsupporting forces are handled by the governor’sadjutant general or his or her designee.

Available Military Resources

Governors have access to the full resources of theirown National Guard and to the National Guardpersonnel and equipment of all other states andterritories in times of disasters and emergencies.One such invaluable resource is the NationalGuard’sWeapons ofMassDestructionCivil SupportTeams (CST). The CSTs are federally funded,specially trained National Guard units who canaugment local and regional terrorism and disasterresponse capabilities. The Civil Support Teams canprovide rapid incident site analysis of hundreds ofchemical, biological, radiological, nuclear; orconventional high-yield explosive threat agents.The CST is organized around six functions:command, operations, survey, medical, commu-nications, and logistics/administration. Its 22 full-time soldiers and airmen have more than 850hours of technical training by agencies includingthe National Fire Academy, Department ofDefense, Department of Energy, and the Environ-mental Protection Agency.


Team members are trained to the HazMat techni-cian response level or above. The CST teams traincollectively onWMD scenarios and drill with localresponders for coordinated response effort. Priorto certification, each team undergoes an externalevaluation involving more than 40 individual tasksof WMD response operations that are unique tothe CST mission.

Upon notification, a team can be dispatchedby the adjutant general or designee to anincident scene within three hours to supportcivil authorities by:

� identifying chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear,and explosive agents and substances;

� accessing current and projected consequences;

� advising on response measures and appropriateresponse actions; and

� assisting requests for additional state and federalassets to help save lives, prevent human suffering,and mitigate property damage.

In addition, 13 states have deployable Chemical,Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and high-yieldExplosive Emergency Response Force Package(CERFP) task forces capable of conducting massmedical decontamination, tactical interoperablecommunications fusion, and urban search, andrescue on request of a supported governor. Thesetask forces are deployable at the direction of thesupporting state adjutant general.

While the governor has the National Guard andcivilian subject matter experts from all other statesand territories available to him or her, there arealso federal military resources available to governorsduring disasters, in particular, command andcontrol elements to help coordinate federal militaryunits that may be requested. The U.S. NorthernCommand (USNORTHCOM) provides commandand control of DOD homeland defense effortsand coordinates defense support to civil author-ities. In providing civil support, USNORTH-

COM generally operates through its subordinatejoint task forces. An emergency must exceed thecapabilities of local, state, and federal civilian agen-cies before USNORTHCOM becomes involved.In most cases, support will be limited, localized,and specific. When the scope of the disaster hasbeen reduced to the point that the lead agency canagain assume full control and management with-out military assistance, USNORTHCOM willwithdraw and leave the on-scene experts to finish thejob.

One of the standing joint task forces operating underUSNORTHCOM is the Joint Task Force CivilSupport (JTF-CS). Comprised of active, reserve,and Guard members from the U.S. Army, Navy,Air Force, Marines, and Coast Guard as well ascivilian personnel, the JTF-CS is commanded bya federalized Army National Guard general officer.

Integrating State and Federal MilitaryResponse

Integration of federal military forces with theNational Guard forces of the supported and othersupporting states is critical to an effective andefficient response. Several approaches have beendeveloped in this area.

A recent development in integrated command andcontrol is the “dual status command” concept,which allows one commander to command bothTitle 10 federal forces and National Guard forcesoperating in either a Title 32 status or on state ac-tive duty. Dual status command requires the priorconsent of the governor and authorization by thePresident. This structure provides both the federaland state chains of command with a common mis-sion — tasking authority. In practice the dual sta-tus commander can either be a Title 10 federalactive duty officer or a Title 32 or state active dutyNational Guard officer. To date, however, it hasonly been used to effectuate a dual status NationalGuard commander assuming command of bothfederal and state military forces at the G8 summit

42

in Georgia and at the Democrat and Republicannational conventions. Designation of a NationalGuard dual status commander assures the governorthat military forces operating in his or her statewill be under the effective command and controlof the governor’s designated National Guard officer.

Another strategy is to set up a joint operationscenter that includes representation from appropriatestate and federal agencies, including the defensecoordinating officer. In Maryland, the emergencyoperations center is co-located with the NationalGuard headquarters. During activation of theemergency operations center, each state agencydesignates a representative to address any issues

that may arise. As the scale of the event determinesfederal involvement, the responding federal agenciesprovide a representative to the operations center,including the federal and defense coordinatingofficers, but the state continues to lead the re-sponse efforts. All state resource requests areprocessed in the emergency operations center, andthe federal and state agencies work together to fillthe requests and ensure that there are no duplica-tions of effort. Although this model does effectu-ate unity of command for military forces operatingwithin the state, it does help expose and potentiallyde-conflict inconsistent federal and state militaryoperations.


Summary Points

• Governors have at their disposal a crucial state resource in the National Guard. These statemilitary forces have equipment and expertise in communications, logistics, and decontam-ination and can serve as a significant resource during a disaster response.

• Governors generally are granted the authority to deploy the National Guard to execute statelaw, suppress or prevent insurrection or lawless violence, and repel invasion.

• The National Guard straddles homeland defense and homeland security mission areas.

• There are various mechanisms through which the National Guard can be deployed in disastersituations, including deploying on state active duty, deploying under Title 10 status, anddeploying under Title 32 states, each of which comes with benefits and costs.

• Significant federal military resources are available to governors during disasters, in particularcommand and control elements to help coordinate federal units that may be requested.

• Integration of military forces with those of the state is critical to an effective and efficientresponse.

Chapter 6Major Disaster and EmergencyDeclarations

Most emergencies in a state do not reach sufficientmagnitude to merit a presidential disaster decla-ration. However, when state and local resourcesare insufficient to respond to and recover from asituation, a governor may ask the President todeclare a federal disaster or emergency.

The amount and extent of federal assistance, andthe state’s share of the response and recovery costs,are different for disasters and emergencies. Apresidential disaster declaration sets in motionlong-term federal recovery assistance programs—some of which are matched by state programs— tohelp disaster victims, businesses, and public entities.

The amount of federal assistance available in adisaster is limited only by congressional appropri-ations. Under a federal disaster declaration, statesare required to cover no more than 25 percent ofthe response and recovery costs. A presidentialdeclaration of an emergency, by contrast, providesrelatively short-term federal assistance for conductinglifesaving measures. The amount of federal assis-tance is limited to $5 million per declaration, andthe state’s cost-share of response and recoveryprograms are negotiated on a case-by-case basis.

When the governor or the state official responsiblefor disaster operations believes federal assistance isneeded, he or she should contact the FEMAregional director through the state emergencymanagement director to request assistance. TheFEMA regional office will then deploy a team offederal officials to assist the state in determining ifa request to the President is warranted.

Defining a Disaster or Emergency

The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emer-gency Assistance Act, generally known as the

Stafford Act, authorizes the President to providefinancial and other forms of assistance to state andlocal governments, certain private nonprofitorganizations, and individuals to support response,recovery, and mitigation efforts following presi-dentially declared major disasters and emergencies.The Stafford Act describes generally the declarationprocess, the types and extent of assistance that maybe provided, and assistance-eligibility requirements.

The Stafford Act defines a major disaster as “anynatural catastrophe (including any hurricane,tornado, storm, high water, wind-driven water,tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption,landslide, mudslide, snowstorm, or drought), or,regardless of cause, any fire, flood, or explosionin any part of the United States, which in thedetermination of the President causes damage ofsufficient severity and magnitude to warrant majordisaster assistance under this Act to supplementthe efforts and available resources of states, localgovernments, and disaster relief organizations inalleviating the damage, loss, hardship, or sufferingcaused thereby.”

The Stafford Act defines an emergency as “anyoccasion or instance for which, in the determinationof the President, federal assistance is needed tosupplement state and local efforts and capabilitiesto save lives and to protect property and publichealth and safety, or to lessen or avert the threat ofa catastrophe in any part of the United States.”

Actions Prior to Requesting a PresidentialDeclaration

Before making a request to the President for adisaster or emergency declaration, the governormust activate the state’s emergency plan and ensurethat all appropriate state and local actions havebeen taken. If the governor is considering askingthe President to declare a major disaster or an emer-gency, state emergency management officials — incooperation with local officials — should do thefollowing:

44

� Survey the affected areas to determine the extent ofprivate and public damage.

� Conduct joint preliminary damage assessmentswith FEMA officials.

� Estimate the types and extent of federal disasterassistance required.

� Consult with the FEMA regional director on eligibilityfor federal disaster assistance.

� Advise the FEMA regional office if the governorintends to request a declaration by the President.

Requesting a Major Disaster Declaration

Only the governor can initiate a request for a pres-idential disaster or major disaster declaration. Thisrequest is made through the FEMA regionaldirector, in accordance with the Stafford Act. Thegovernor bases the request on a finding that thesituation is of such severity and magnitude that aneffective response is beyond state and local capabilitiesand federal assistance is needed. The governor’srequest for a disaster declaration should includethe following:

� information on the extent and nature of stateresources that have been or will be used toaddress the consequences of the disaster;

� a certification by the governor that state and localgovernments will assume all applicable nonfederalcosts required by the Stafford Act;

� an estimate of the types and amounts ofsupplementary federal assistance required; and

� designation of the state coordination officer forpurposes of coordinating response and recoveryoperations on behalf of the governor.

The completed request should be addressed to thePresident and sent to the FEMA regional director,who will evaluate the damage and requirementsfor federal assistance and make a recommendationto the FEMA director. The FEMA director willthen recommend a course of action to the President.

The governor, appropriate members of Congress,and federal agencies are immediately notified of apresidential declaration. (For an example of a dis-aster-declaration request, please see Appendix A.)

Requesting an Emergency Declaration

For events that do not qualify as a major disaster,the governor may request an emergency declarationto obtain federal assistance to save lives; protectproperty, public health, and safety; or lessen or avertthe threat of a catastrophe. This request is madethrough the FEMA regional director, in accordancewith the Stafford Act and its implementing regula-tions. The process for requesting an emergencydeclaration is similar to that used for requesting amajor disaster declaration except the time in whichto submit a request is generally shorter.

The governor’s request should contain specificinformation describing state and local efforts andresources used to alleviate the situation, as well asthe extent and type of federal assistance necessary.States are encouraged to consult with the FEMAregional office when preparing the request. Thegovernor has the right to appeal if the request fora declaration is denied or if the request forapproval of certain kinds of assistance or designa-tion of certain affected areas is denied (For anexample of an emergency-declaration request,please see Appendix A.)

As detailed in the Stafford Act, a declaration ofemergency allows federal agencies assisting stateand local governments to employ federal equip-ment, supplies, facilities, and personnel to dothe following:

� lend or donate medicine, food, or other services;

� remove debris;

� engage in search and rescue activities;

� provide emergency medical care and emergencyshelter;


� assist in moving supplies and people (e.g., clear-ance of roads, construction of temporary bridges);

� provide temporary facilities for schools;

� demolish unsafe structures; and

� disseminate public information.41

The National Response Plan

Triggered by a presidential declaration of a majordisaster or emergency, the National ResponsePlan (NRP) is implemented in anticipation of asignificant event or in response to an actualevent. The NRP is the major frameworkthrough which the federal government respondsto all disasters — whether natural, technological,or man-made. Implemented by DHS, the NRPassigns authorities and responsibilities to federaldepartments and agencies in support of a disas-ter or emergency declared by the President.

The NRP is a signed agreement among 31 federaldepartments and agencies and the American RedCross that does the following:

� provides the mechanism for coordinating delivery offederal assistance and resources to augment effortsof state and local governments overwhelmed by amajor disaster or emergency;

� supports implementation of the Robert T. StaffordDisaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act, asamended, as well as individual agency statutoryauthorities; and

� supplements other federal emergency operationsplans developed to address specific hazards.

What Federal Resources Can Be Deployed?

The following federal resources can be deployedthrough the NRP:

� specialized teams for damage assessment, emer-gency communications, medical assistance andsupport, urban search and rescue, emergencypower restoration, and community relations;

� equipment and supplies, such as mobile kitchens,water purification units, portable toilets, and show-ers, and tents; and

� facilities, including a disaster field office, mobilizationcenter, and disaster recovery centers.

What Types of Federal Assistance Are Available?To speed recovery and reduce damage from futureoccurrences, the following immediate assistance isavailable to states under the NRP:

� initial response resources, including food, water,and emergency generators;

� emergency services to clear debris, open criticaltransportation routes, and provide mass shelter andfeeding;

� loans and grants to repair or replace damagedhousing and personal property;

� grants to repair or replace roads and public buildings(incorporating, to the extent practical, hazard-reduction structural and nonstructural measures);

� technical assistance to identify and implementmitigation opportunities to reduce future losses;and

� other assistance, including crisis counseling, tax re-lief, legal services, and job placement.

Additional information on the National ResponsePlan is available from the Department of Home-land Security Web site at http://www.dhs.gov/xprepresp/committees/editorial_0566.shtm.

As a final note, governors should keep in mindthat in catastrophic situations, their relationshipswith the federal government will be fundamentallydifferent than in emergencies or disasters, whencommunications and coordination likely willinvolve FEMA and other response agencies. Incatastrophic incidents governors should expect theWhite House and Congress to take a direct inter-est in response and recovery activities.

46


Summary Points

• Most emergencies in a state do not reach sufficient magnitude to merit a presidentialdisaster declaration.

• The amount and extent of federal assistance, and the state’s share of the response andrecovery costs, are different for disasters and emergencies.

• When the governor or the state official responsible for disaster operations believes federalassistance is needed, he or she should contact the FEMA regional director through the stateemergency management director to request assistance.

• The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (The Stafford Act)authorizes the President to provide financial and other forms of assistance to state and localgovernments, certain private non-profit organizations, and individuals to support response,recovery, and mitigation efforts following presidentially declared major disasters andemergencies.

• Before making a request to the President for a disaster or emergency declaration, the gover-nor must activate the state’s emergency plan and ensure that all appropriate state and local ac-tions have been taken.

• The National Response Plan spells out the role of federal departments and agencies in emer-gency and disaster response and can be implemented in anticipation of a significant eventlikely to result in a need for federal assistance or in response to an actual event requiring fed-eral assistance under a presidential declaration of a major disaster or emergency.

Chapter 7Federal Assistance Available toStates and Individuals

State and local governments share responsibilityfor protecting their citizens from disasters and forhelping them recover when a disaster strikes. Insome cases, however, the scale of a disaster exhauststhe capabilities of the state and local governments.The previous chapter described the immediate as-sistance available to states under presidential emer-gency and disaster declarations and the processesfor obtaining that assistance. This chapter outlinesadditional and long-term assistance available fromthe federal government for states, local govern-ments, and individuals.

Actions Following a Presidential Declaration

As soon as is practical after the President declaresmajor disaster or emergency, the state, with assis-tance from FEMA, should conduct a briefing forstate, local, and eligible private nonprofitorganization officials on the type of assistance thatwill be available to them, what the eligibilityrequirements are, how to apply for the assistance,and how the funds for eligible projects will beprovided. The state needs to appoint a coordinatingofficer who will ensure that state agencies admin-istering individual assistance programs (such as thestate labor department, which administers disasterunemployment assistance, or the human servicesagency) take action to hire adequate staff, initiatefunding requests, and process disaster applications.

The state should submit for approval by the FEMAregional director a single assistance application forall disaster-related projects.The state will serve as theprogram grantee, with overall management and fi-nancial responsibilities. A team of federal, state, andlocal officials should inspect the damage area. Federalinspectors will then prepare project worksheets withrecommended scopes of work and estimated projectcosts in accordance with FEMA eligibility criteria.

Federal regulations allow for repair or restorationof facilities to their predisaster condition, in accor-dance with applicable codes, specifications, andstandards. Following the applicants’ briefing, andafter identifying public or private nonprofit facilitydamages, state or local representatives attend aninitial meeting with a FEMA representative —generally the public assistance coordinator (PAC).At this meeting, damages will be discussed, needsassessed, and a plan of action put into place. ThePAC will go over what is expected of the state andwill provide detailed instructions on the processfor applying for and receiving federal assistance.This meeting also is the appropriate time and placefor state officials to raise questions or voice concernsabout how the public assistance process works.

Assistance Available to State andLocal Governments

Public assistance, oriented to public entities, canfund the repair, restoration, reconstruction, orreplacement of a public facility or infrastructurethat is damaged or destroyed in a disaster. Eligiblerecipients include state governments, local govern-ments, any political subdivision of the state, as wellas Indian tribes or authorized tribal organizations,and Alaska native villages. Private nonprofit organ-izations such as educational organizations; non-profit utilities; emergency, medical, rehabilitation,temporary, or permanent custodial care facilities(including those for the aged and disabled); andother facilities that provide essential services of agovernmental nature to the general public alsomay be eligible to receive assistance.

State agency, local government, and nonprofitorganization officials must submit requests forpublic assistance to the state public assistanceofficer — a state official situated in the emergencyoperations center — within 30 days of the date ofthe disaster declaration.

Applicants may combine damaged sites into workprojects. Projects are considered small if they fall

48

below an inflation-adjusted threshold. In fiscal2006, that threshold was $57,500. Applicants maycomplete their own small projects and documenttheir damages on a project worksheet. If the appli-cant is unable to complete the worksheet, federalrepresentatives are available to develop the work-sheet for the applicant. For large projects, a federalrepresentative will work with the applicant and thestate to develop the worksheet. Large projects fallin the following categories:

� Category A: Debris removal

� Category B: Emergency protective measures

� Category C: Road systems and bridges

� Category D: Water control facilities

� Category E: Public buildings and contents

� Category F: Public utilities

� Category G: Parks, recreational, and other

For insurable structures — primarily buildings —within special flood hazard areas (SFHA), FEMAreduces its assistance by the amount of insurancethat could have been obtained under a standardnational flood insurance program (NFIP) policy.For structures located outside a SFHA, FEMAreduces the amount of assistance by any insuranceproceeds.

FEMA reviews and approves project worksheetsand obligates the federal share of the costs (at least75 percent of the total) to the state. The state thendistributes funds to the local recipients. For smallpublic assistance projects, payment of the federalshare of the estimated total is made upon approvalof the project, and no further accounting toFEMA is required. For large public assistance proj-ects (currently $57,500 or greater), payment ismade on the basis of actual costs after the projectis completed, although interim payments may bemade. Once FEMA obligates funds to the state,the state is responsible for further management ofthe assistance, including disbursement to localgovernments and nonprofit organizations. FEMA

will continue to monitor the recovery process toensure the timely delivery of eligible assistance andcompliance with applicable laws and regulations.

Following a major disaster declaration, state andlocal governments may obtain assistance to paypart of the costs of rebuilding a community’sdamaged infrastructure. Federal public assistanceprograms typically pay for 75 percent of theapproved project costs.

Assistance Available to Individuals

After the President has declared a major disaster,FEMA, in coordination with the affected state,will inform citizens how to apply for various formsof federal assistance. The application processgenerally commences when those affected by thedisaster call a FEMA toll-free teleregistrationnumber. Through this number, applicants canaccess all FEMA programs for individuals. FEMAalso may refer applicants to disaster programsoperated by the Small Business Administration(SBA) and other federal, state, and local programs.FEMA generally mails the applicants informationon accessing other federal programs.

In some cases, FEMA, in coordination with thestate, will establish disaster recovery centers(DRCs) in heavily affected communities. DRCsprovide a location in which disaster applicants canspeak directly with FEMA representatives andobtain information about applying for disasterassistance. States also have the opportunity to staffDRCs with representatives of various state agenciesthat want to provide greater access to theirprograms and services. The state also has a majorrole in managing donated goods and services.42

Individual assistanceIndividual assistance is available from the federalgovernment in a wide range of categories, including:

Disaster Unemployment Assistance. Weekly benefitpayments for up to 26 weeks are available to thoseout of work because of the disaster. Recipients


include the self-employed, farm workers, farm andranch owners, and others not covered by regularunemployment insurance programs.This assistanceis available through state unemployment offices.

Crisis Counseling.The Crisis Counseling Assistanceand Training Program (CCP), authorized by theStafford Act, is designed to provide supplementalfunding to states for short-term crisis counselingservices to people affected by presidentially declareddisasters. Two separate portions of the CCP can befunded: immediate services and regular programs. Astate may request either or both types of funding.

The immediate services program is intended to en-able the state or local agency to respond to the im-mediate mental health needs of disaster victims.Immediate services include screening, diagnosis,and counseling as well as outreach services such aspublic information and community networking.The regular services program is designed to provideup to nine months of crisis counseling, communityoutreach, consultation, and education services topeople affected by a presidentially declared disaster.To be eligible for crisis counseling services fundedby this program, applicants must be residents of thedesignated area or must have been in the area whenthe disaster occurred. The person also must have amental health problem that was caused by or aggra-vated by the disaster or its aftermath or must other-wise benefit from services provided by the program.

Disaster Housing Assistance.Disaster housing assis-tance is available to people in the affected areawhose primary residence has been damaged ordestroyed and whose losses are not covered byinsurance. This assistance provides for temporaryhousing, repair, placement, and permanent housingconstruction.

Legal Services.Through an agreement with FEMA,the young lawyers division of the American Bar As-sociation (ABA) provides free legal advice to low-income people whose cases will notproduce a fee. ABA turns over cases that maygenerate fees to local lawyer-referral services.

Veterans’ Assistance. Veterans’ assistance includesdeath benefits, pensions, insurance settlements,and adjustments to home mortgages held by theU.S. Department of Veterans’ Affairs (VA) if a VA-insured home has been damaged.43

Tax Relief. The Internal Revenue Service (IRS)provides assistance to people claiming casualtylosses as a result of the disaster. State tax assistanceis available as well. The IRS also can expediterefunds due to taxpayers in a federally declareddisaster area.

Federal Disaster LoansThe federal government also provides low-interestloans through SBA and the U.S. Department ofAgriculture’s Farm Service Agency (FSA). This as-sistance is intended to aid individuals, farmers,ranchers, and businesses in repairing or replacinguninsured property that was damaged in a disaster.

Small Business AdministrationSBA offers two primary kinds of disaster loan pro-grams to help business owners recover from a dis-aster:

Business Physical Disaster Loans.Up to 100 percentof the uninsured, SBA-verified loss, not to exceed$1.5 million, is available to repair or replace dam-aged business property, including inventory andsupplies. Within this limit, the loan may be in-creased by up to 20 percent for the purchase ofmitigating devices for damaged real property.

Economic Injury Disaster Loans. The purpose ofeconomic injury disaster loans (EIDLs) is topermit small businesses and small agricultural co-operatives to meet necessary financial obligationsthat could have been met had a disaster notoccurred. EIDLs are working-capital loans and aremade only to provide relief from economic injurycaused directly by the disaster and to permit peopleto maintain a reasonable working-capital positionduring the period affected by the disaster.

EIDL assistance is provided only to businesses thatcannot obtain credit elsewhere and is limited to a

50

maximum of $1.5 million (together with any busi-ness physical-disaster loan for damage from thesame disaster). However, the actual amount of theloan will be based upon the economic injury tothe business and its financial needs. The interestrate on EIDLs may not exceed 4 percent per year,and the term of these loans may not exceed 30years. The actual term will be based upon the abil-ity of the business to repay the loan.44

Farm Service AgencyThe Farm Service Agency (FSA), provides an assort-ment of loans to farming and ranching operationsthat have suffered a loss caused by a natural disaster.

Emergency Conservation Program. The EmergencyConservation Program (ECP) helps agriculturalproducers rehabilitate eligible farmlands damagedby natural disaster. ECP cost-share assistance maybe available to agricultural producers for all desig-nated natural disasters. To be eligible, an applicantmust have suffered a natural disaster that creatednew conservation problems that, untreated, wouldimpair or endanger the land; materially affect theland’s productive capacity; represent unusual dam-age that, except for wind erosion, is not of a typelikely to recur frequently in the same area; or are socostly to repair that federal assistance is or will berequired to return the land to productive agricul-tural use. Conservation problems that existed be-fore the natural disaster are not eligible forcost-sharing assistance. ECP funds may be usedfor debris removal, fence restoration, restoringconservation structures, or water conservationmeasures, including providing water to livestockin periods of severe drought. Other emergencyconservation measures may be authorized bycounty FSA committees with the approval of thestate committee and the agency’s deputy adminis-trator for farm programs.

The Crop Disaster Program.The Crop Disaster Pro-gram (CDP) covers crops for which crop insurance isnot available and crops insured by either catastrophicor “buy-in” insurance. It provides assistance for farm-ers who grow such crops, limiting their losses from

natural disaster and helping to manage their overallbusiness risk. CDP payments are limited to $80,000per person. Producers with incomes of greater than$2.5 million, as defined by the Food Security Actof 1985, are not eligible.

Emergency Loan Assistance. FSA provides low-in-terest loan assistance to eligible farmers and ranchersto help cover production and physical losses incounties declared disaster areas by the President ordesignated by the secretary of agriculture. The FSAadministrator also may authorize loan assistanceto cover physical losses. Emergency loans are avail-able to qualifying ranchers and farmers who are estab-lished operators of family farms, are citizens orpermanent residents of the United States, have ade-quate training or experience in managing and oper-ating a farm or ranch, have suffered a qualifyingphysical loss or a production loss of at least 30 percentin any essential farmor ranch enterprise, cannot obtaincommercial credit, can provide collateral to secure theloan; and can demonstrate repayment ability.

Emergency loan funds may be used to restore or re-place essential physical property, pay all or part ofproduction costs associated with the disaster year, payessential family living expenses, reorganize the farm-ing operation, and refinance debts. The loan limit is100 percent of the actual physical loss, with a maxi-mum indebtedness under this program of $500,000.

Emergency Haying and Grazing Assistance. Emer-gency haying and grazing of certain ConservationReserve Program acreage may be made available inareas suffering from a weather-related natural dis-aster. FSA county committees may initiate requestsfor assistance. The state committee may approveemergency haying and grazing on a county-by-county basis under the designated extreme orexception drought conditions.45

Federal Assistance Available Without a PresidentialDeclarationGovernors should be aware that disaster assistancemay be obtained from the federal government andvolunteer agencies without a presidential disaster


or emergency declaration. For example, militaryinstallations located near the disaster areas mayprovide immediate lifesaving assistance, and otherfederal agencies may provide assistance under theirown statutory authorities.

Fire Management AssistanceThe Stafford Act authorizes the President to pro-vide assistance, including grants, equipment, sup-plies, and personnel, to a state for the suppressionof a forest or grassland fire on public or privatelands that threatens to become a major disaster.The governor or the governor’s authorized repre-sentative must request this assistance through theFEMA regional director. The request must includedetailed information on the nature of the threatand the federal assistance needed. Fire suppressionassistance must be requested while the fire is burn-ing. The fire must threaten to cause such destruc-tion to life or property that it would constitute amajor disaster. A FEMA decision can be renderedwithin a few hours of the request. Costs eligiblefor reimbursement include equipment, emergencywork such as evacuation and sheltering, the tem-porary repair of damage caused by firefighting ac-tivities, and other items.46

Flood ProtectionThe U.S. Army Corps of Engineers is authorizedto assist in flood fighting and rescue operationsand to protect, repair, and restore certain flood-control works that are threatened, damaged, ordestroyed by a flood. The corps may assist statesfor a 10-day period, subject to specific criteria.47

Health and WelfareThe U.S. Department of Health and HumanServices may provide assistance to state and localwelfare agencies and state vocational rehabilitationagencies. The U.S. Food and Drug Administrationmay work with state and local governments to es-tablish public health controls by decontaminatingor condemning contaminated food and drugs.48

Repairs to Roads and BridgesThe U.S. Department of Transportation’s FederalHighway Administration can provide assistance torestore roads and bridges that are part of thefederal aid system.49

Search and RescueU.S. Coast Guard or armed forces units may assistin search-and-rescue operations, evacuate disastervictims, and transport supplies and equipment.50

Tax RefundsThe Internal Revenue Service can help peopleapply for casualty losses resulting from naturaldisasters.

Long-Term Recovery AssistanceRecovery is defined as the process of restoring acommunity to predisaster conditions. It is thefinal phase of managing an emergency and con-tinues until all systems return to normal or nearnormal. Recovery is a longer and more complexprocess than response, and it can take years untilthe entire disaster area is completely redevel-oped, either as it was in the past or for entirelynew purposes that are more resistant to disasters.The amount, type, and sources of assistance forlong-term recovery depend on the extent of thedisaster.

Federal recovery assistance is supplementary to stateand local activities, and the governor should empha-size that point in public statements. It will be incum-bent upon the governor to ensure coordination oflong-term recovery activities well after resourcesfrom outside the state have departed. Historically,federal financing has been available for physicaldamage and loss of business, such as working capi-tal, machinery and equipment, building construc-tion or rehabilitation, environmental remediation,hazard mitigation, and other improvements.

52


Summary Points

• Once a disaster declaration is approved, governors should have state officials workwith FEMA to conduct a briefing for state, local, and eligible private nonprofit organ-izations applying for federal assistance programs.

• Governors should be aware that the state will be required to pay 25 percent of thecosts of rebuilding damaged state infrastructure.

• Governors should ensure that the state sends staff to any disaster recovery center setup by FEMA for heavily affected communities.

• Governors should be aware that some forms of federal disaster assistance are availableeven without a presidential disaster declaration.

Chapter 8Intelligence and InformationSharing

A lack of information sharing can be an obstacle toimplementing an effective homeland security strat-egy. The fragmented nature of data collection andincident reporting among state, local, and federallaw enforcement agencies hinders their ability toconnect information that may point to terroristplots or other ongoing criminal activity, and theprivate sector — which owns a significant amountof data and an estimated 85 percent of the nation’scritical infrastructure — often is not connected tothe homeland security intelligence and informa-tion-sharing networks.†

Recognizing these challenges, governors can aid insolving such information-sharing problems by:

� creating intelligence fusion centers that bring to-gether law enforcement, intelligence, emergencymanagement, public health, and other agencies,and the variety of information they collect into onecentral location;

� utilizing national standards for information sharingthat foster the ability of systems to exchange data;and

� joining national efforts that encourage intelligenceand information sharing and include regional, multi-state, and federal systems.

Building an Intelligence Fusion Center

A significant focus of post-September 11 effortsto improve homeland security has been to closethe information-sharing gaps among variouscomponents of the intelligence community. Atthe state level, intelligence fusion centers — cen-tral locations at which local, state, and federal of-ficials can work in close proximity to receive,integrate, and analyze information and intelli-gence — encourage interagency cooperation andhelp integrate that information into a network

that can benefit homeland security and counter-terrorism programs.

Since 2003, more than 42 fusion centers have beencreated by states, cities, and regions to share infor-mation from several agencies. Many of these oper-ations are still in their infancy, but they representefforts at the state level to build a foundation forthe integration of information from federal, state,and local agencies.

As a result of those efforts, state and local practi-tioners in cooperation with the Department ofJustice’s Global Justice Information Sharing Initia-tive (Global) and the Department of HomelandSecurity’s Homeland Security Advisory Council(HSAC) have developed a set of initial guidelinesthat governors should be aware of as they establishor enhance state fusion centers. The guidelineshave been created specifically to enhance informa-tion sharing among law enforcement agencies, theintelligence community, public safety organiza-tions, and the private sector. Additional guidelinesare being developed to incorporate informationfrom other disciplines, such as public health, trans-portation, and energy.

According to those guidelines, states should ensurethat their fusion centers:

� adhere to preexisting information-sharing plans,such as the National Criminal Intelligence SharingPlan;

� have representative governance structures that in-clude law enforcement, public safety, and theprivate sector;

� foster an environment conducive to informationsharing among local, state, tribal, and federal lawenforcement agencies, public safety agencies, andthe private sector;

� leverage the databases, systems, and networksavailable via participating entities to maximizeinformation sharing;

� develop, publish, and adhere to policies for theprotection of privacy and civil liberties; and

54

† Intelligence can be defined in many different ways depending on one’s point of reference. In this document, the terms “information” and“intelligence” are used interchangeably to mean data that has been analyzed and used for decision-making purposes.

� develop and implement a communications planamong fusion center personnel, all law enforce-ment, public safety, and private sector agenciesand entities involved, and the general public.51

Although state fusion centers operate under avariety of organizational structures and missions,states have come to rely on the DOJ/DHS guide-lines to create environments in which those fusioncenters can operate effectively. In total, there are18 guidelines that states should incorporate intothe development of their fusion centers. In addi-tion, DHS’ National Intelligence Fusion ResourceCenter provides assistance to states in establishingpolices and procedures for fusion center opera-tions. The center also provides DHS analysts tohelp staff state centers on an as-needed basis.

The following descriptions of operating statefusion centers illustrate different organizationaland staffing methods.

Arizona’s fusion center, known as the ArizonaCounter-Terrorism Information Center (ACTIC),opened in 2004 as the state’s central analysis hubfor real-time crime and terrorism-related intelli-gence and information. ACTIC is staffed withmore than 200 detectives, special agents, analysts,and other personnel representing 34 state, local,and federal agencies. ACTIC also includes acomplete integration of the FBI’s Joint TerrorismTask Force (JTTF). Although the driving force ofthe center is counter-terrorism detection, plan-ning, response, and recovery, it also builds onexisting networks, such as the state’s domesticpreparedness operations center and city/countylaw enforcement agencies to provide analysis.

In 2006, Arizona Governor Janet Napolitanosigned a memorandum of understanding withCalifornia Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger,Texas Governor Rick Perry, and New MexicoGovernor Bill Richardson that will enable the foursouthwest border states to share unclassified andclassified intelligence information to provide bettersecurity along the border. The four states are for-malizing a cooperative relationship between

ACTIC, the California State Terrorist ThreatAssessment Center, the New Mexico Office ofHomeland Security, and theTexas Fusion Center.52

Georgia’s Information Sharing and Analysis Cen-ter (GISAC) has an analytical and investigatoryrole. Each investigator is assigned an analyst,and officials report regular contact between inves-tigators and their assigned analysts to share infor-mation. GISAC is equipped with an emergencyoperations center — featuring large-screentelevision, multiple phone lines, white boards,high-speed Internet connections, and backup gen-erators — although that facility is used only dur-ing active operations.

The Illinois StatewideTerrorism Intelligence Center(STIC) includes analysts and representatives ofagencies dealing with narcotics, sex offenses,violent crimes, andmotor vehicle theft.The facilityis outfitted with whiteboards, multiple televisionscreens, and a virtual command center that linksto the FBI and to state and local emergency oper-ations centers. In 2005, the Illinois STIC co-located its facility with the state emergency oper-ations center. In the new facility, all personnelshare the same work area, a change that officialsexpect will improve information sharing.

In 2006, North Carolina opened its InformationSharing and Analysis Center (ISAAC) to help lawenforcement agencies from across the state gather,exchange, and evaluate information on homelandsecurity and gang activity in the state. The ISAACserves as the focal point for collection, analysis,and dissemination of information on possibleterrorist and criminal threats. ISAAC partnersinclude the U.S. Attorney’s Office, the FBI, theNorth Carolina State Bureau of Investigation, thestate highway patrol, the National Guard, the stateassociation of chiefs of police, the state sheriff ’sassociation, the state alcohol law enforcementagency, the division of public health, the statedepartment of agriculture, the state departmentof corrections, the division of emergency manage-ment, and the governor’s crime commission.


ISAAC staff collaborate to analyze informationfrom a variety of sources, including tips from thepublic, public records such as driver’s license andvehicle registration records, and national lawenforcement databases. The 2,500-square-footfacility houses about a dozen people from partici-pating law enforcement agencies.53

South Dakota has established a statewide fusioncenter to investigate, collect, and disseminatehomeland security-related information and intel-ligence gathered by law enforcement and otherstate and federal agencies. The center is staffed bythe state’s office of homeland security, the divisionof criminal investigation, and the South DakotaNational Guard. Center staff monitor and shareintelligence from local, state, and federal lawenforcement agencies; military organizations;public tips; and media sources. The center alsoserves as a link to the FBI’s JTTF.

Employing National Standards forInformation Sharing

As information sharing improves and expands,states should adopt national technical standardsfor exchanging data among their law enforcement,public safety, emergency management, and Na-tional Guard networks. Specifically, the NationalInformation Exchange Model (NIEM) has beenadopted by DOJ/DHS for sharing informationand has emerged as the national information-sharingtechnical standard. NIEM is based on the work ofstate and local practitioners. It removes the needfor agencies to create exchange standards inde-pendently and provides flexibility to deal withunique agency requirements.

Although NIEM is a technical set of requirementsthat states might adopt, another information-sharingframework is being created that focuses on theprocesses, policy, and technology that should becoordinated among federal, state, local, private,and international organizations. In 2005, PresidentBush signed Executive Order 13388 to create aninformation sharing council tasked with defining

an information-sharing environment (ISE). ISE isnot a system but a framework that defines the rolesand responsibilities of each entity in terms of whenand how it needs to share information. The ISEdefinition is scheduled to be available by the endof 2006.

One of ISE’s major tenets is that the federalgovernment is not creating one communicationspipeline but is relying on the systems that state andlocal agencies use every day to create multiplechannels of information.

It should be emphasized that as these and othernational information-sharing standards evolve andbecome accepted, they may be used to determinegrant funding to states.

Joining National Efforts that EncourageIntelligence and Information Sharing

Several national information-sharing initiativeshave been launched to assist states in accessingdatabases that may be helpful to ongoing investi-gations. Both DHS and DOJ have introducedsecure computer networks andWeb-based servicesaimed at improving the flow of informationamong intelligence and law enforcement agenciesat the federal, state, tribal, and local levels. Requeststo access those federal systems must come from thelaw enforcement agency or the state intelligencefusion center. The owner of the information net-work will then authenticate and authorize accessto the user.

The following systems are notable examples ofinformation-sharing networks.

� The Regional Information Sharing SystemsNetwork (RISS.Net), sponsored by DOJ, supportsregional law enforcement efforts to combat terroristactivity, drug trafficking, organized crime, gangactivity, violent crime, and other regional criminalpriorities and to promote officer safety. There aresix regional centers that coordinate the variousfunctions of the network. States sign on to RISSthrough their regional center.54

56

� The National Data Exchange Project, or N-DExis an FBI-led initiative that includes state and localpractitioners. The purpose of N-DEx is to sharecomplete, accurate, timely, and useful informationacross jurisdictional boundaries and provide inves-tigative tools that enhance the nation’s ability to fightcrime and terrorism. This will allow law enforcementagencies to search, link, and analyze criminal justiceinformation.55

� Nlets, the International Justice & Public Safety Infor-mation Sharing Network, is owned and governedby its state members. This is a message-switchingsystem that links state, local, and federal law en-forcement and justice agencies for the purpose ofinformation exchange. Nlets supports data commu-nications links to state networks through a commoninterface. Users include all states and territories, allfederal agencies with a justice component, andselected international agencies. The types of dataexchanged by the users vary from motor vehicleand driver data to Canadian “Hot File” records tostate criminal history records.56

These are just a few of the examples of informationsharing systems; there are several others that providevaluable information to the public safety andhomeland security community everyday. Ideallythese information networks need to provide prod-ucts that can be quickly shared among stakeholdersin order to minimize threats to homeland security.Collaboration among agencies, coordination ofresources, and the use of commonly agreed-uponstandards are the keys to improving informationsharing.

Challenges to Intelligence and InformationSharing

Although some information-sharing initiativeshave achieved success, governors should be awarethat several challenges remain to the seamless inte-gration of information from intelligence, law en-forcement, public safety, and other agencies acrossall levels of government. Those challenges include:

� The existence of a large number of federal informa-tion-sharing networks, some of which are not com-

patible with state and local systems. As a result,users at the state and local level are required to signon to multiple systems to access information.

� The need for security clearances for public safetyofficials to receive SBU information. Security clear-ances issued by one federal agency often are notrecognized by other federal agencies, exacerbatingan already lengthy clearance process.

� Privacy issues that stymie information sharing be-cause of the fear of lawsuits. Resources exist to helpstate policymakers navigate federal privacy-protectionregulations, but states that have pushed to share in-formation before privacy or security policies are inplace have seen those information-sharing efforts fail.

Additional Resources

State Intelligence Fusion Centers: Recent StateActions http://www.nga.org/Files/pdf/0509FU-SION.PDF

Fusion Center Guidelineshttp://it.ojp.gov/topic.jsp?topic_id=209

Executive Order: Further Strengthening theSharing of Terrorism Information to ProtectAmericans http://www.whitehouse.gov/news/re-leases/2005/10/20051025-5.html

U.S. Department of Justice Information SharingInitiatives and the Global Justiced InformationSharing Initiative http://www.it.ojp.gov/index.jsp

National Information Exchange Modelwww.niem.gov

U.S. Department of Justice Privacy PolicyGuidelineshttp://it.ojp.gov/documents/Privacy_Guide_Final.pdf

National Criminal Intelligence Resource Center(NCIRC) http://www.ncirc.gov

Nlets, The International Justice & Public SafetyInformation Sharing Networkhttp://www.nlets.org


58

Summary Points

• State-level intelligence fusion centers are the focal point for information and intelli-gence sharing among local, state, and federal agencies from a variety of disciplines, in-cluding law enforcement, emergency management, and, increasingly, public health,transportation, energy, and others.

• Guidelines exist to help governors and state officials establish fusion centers that willenhance information sharing and incorporate a variety of agencies into the state’s infor-mation sharing efforts.

• Several national information sharing initiatives have been launched to assist states in ac-cessing databases that may be helpful to ongoing investigations.

• Privacy issues, the need for security clearances, and the existence of a large numberof federal information-sharing networks present challenges to the seamless integra-tion of information from all levels of government and across disciplines.

Chapter 9Interoperability

Reliable communications are a critical componentof any disaster response. In the early stages of anymajor incident, the ability of first responders tosave lives and property can be influenced to a largedegree by their ability to communicate with eachother.

Many states are developing state-of-the art radiocommunications systems for law enforcement, fireservices, emergency medical services, public health,transportation, the National Guard, and otherresponse agencies. To be fully effective, these com-munications systems must be interoperable — thatis, they must allow communications among thevarious agencies and across jurisdictional linesand levels of government. The efficiency of inter-jurisdictional mutual aid agreements and theeffectiveness of emergency response will increasedirectly if state and local governments developinteroperable equipment, procedures, plans, andstandards.

Governors and their state homeland securityadvisors should:

� Develop a statewide plan for interoperablecommunications

� Develop a funding strategy that addresses startupcosts as well as maintenance and operation costs

� Include interoperability as part of state training andexercise programs

� Incorporate developed technical and equipmentstandards as part of the state system

Interoperability Defined

Interoperability refers to the ability of public safetyagencies to share information using radio commu-nications systems to exchange voice and/or dataon demand, in real time, when needed, and as au-

thorized.57 Public safety agencies have used radiocommunications systems for many decades, butmost of these systems have been limited in reachand have only enabled communication within aparticular group, agency, or jurisdiction.

Public safety systems operate on differentfrequency bands, much like AM and FM bandson standard radios. Just as AM radios cannotreceive transmissions from FM radio stations,public safety radios in one frequency band cannotreceive transmissions from another channel. As aresult, when public safety agencies from differentor multiple jurisdictions respond to incidents, theymay not be able to talk with each other on their as-signed radios because of incompatible equipment.

Challenges to Interoperability58

Five key issues underlie the current status of inter-operability among public safety agencies in theUnited States:

� Many jurisdictions have incompatible and agingcommunications equipment that escalate mainte-nance costs and reduce reliability.

� Limited and fragmented funding has restricted publicsafety agencies’ ability to develop radio communi-cations systems based on individual needs and re-sulted in strategies that did not considerinteroperability requirements.

� Interoperability planning is inadequate resulting inwasted resources and unachieved outcomes. Alack of coordination of the various communicationsfunding streams also hampers overall interoperability,since divergent agency and community fundingpriorities and budget cycles result in inefficientimplementation.

� Despite the need for coordination, many publicsafety agencies are reluctant to cede managementand control of their communications systemsbecause of disparate agency missions andjurisdictional responsibilities. Interoperabilityrequires shared management, control, policies,and procedures.


� The current radio spectrum dedicated to publicsafety is inadequate and fragmented.59 The FederalCommunications Commission manages thenation’s radio spectrum, but the allocated spectrumfor public safety is not able to accommodate anever-growing number of electronic communicationsdevices.

Improving Interoperability

The most effective means to address the challengesto interoperability is through an integrated ap-proach that incorporates all levels of governmentand disciplines. Governors can lead this effort by:

� developing a statewide plan that incorporates localplans and input;

� developing a comprehensive funding strategy thatincludes not only build-out costs for a system butfunding for operational and maintenance costs inthe long term;

� including interoperability as part of a training andexercise program to test interoperable communica-tions systems to determine the gaps that need tobe addressed; and

� ensuring that an interoperable communicationssystem adheres to developed standards, is flexibleenough to adjust to new technologies, and is ableto connect existing legacy systems.

Develop a Statewide PlanGovernors should require their agencies to develop acoordinated vision for interoperability that includesa mix of existing resources and new investments.Such a vision can help create a public safety commu-nications infrastructure that provides consistent,quality service throughout the state. A governorshould encourage progress through systemicimprovements that will allow governments at alllevels to realize efficiencies in spectrum allocation,funding, and shared use of common infrastructurecomponents. State leadership is essential to develop-ing a common approach to regional and statewideinteroperability.

Many states are establishing foundations for coop-eration and statewide planning through robustgovernance structures that solidify relationships,bring all stakeholders to the decision-makingtable, and provide a method for exploring innova-tive technologies and potential funding sources toachieve interoperability. For example, Florida’sinteroperability strategy is based on a grassrootseffort that now reflects local, state, and federalinterests. Each of the state’s seven regional domesticsecurity task forces (RDSTFs) has an interoperablecommunications committee, which is open to allradio systems staff in the region. People who areresponsible for their jurisdictions’ radio servicesmeet regularly to discuss short-term and long-termissues, build business relationships for interagencyactions, and contribute to statewide discussions andactions. The state’s domestic security oversightboard (DSOB) sets the overall direction and prior-ities for domestic security and related emergencymanagement plans, actions, and funding. DSOB islinked to the local RDSTF committees through thestate working group and Florida Executive Interop-erable Technologies Committee.

In Idaho, the statewide interoperability executivecouncil (SIEC) developed the I-C-A-N WINConcept — a concept plan for the developmentof a statewide emergency communications system.The SIEC leveraged several state assets, such as theState of Idaho’s Microwave System investment andthe Idaho Bureau of Homeland Security’s Mastersite investment, to allow the state and localities toplan and implement a single infrastructure to servethe communications needs of first responders. Italso built upon regional networks being con-structed in counties across the state and incorpo-rated existing local and tribal plans into itsdecisions.

In order to develop a consensus-driven statewideplan, a governor can do the following:

� establish an executive committee that reports to thegovernor and the legislature, establishes priorities,and develops a funding strategy;

60

� establish memoranda of understanding that defineinteroperability procedures; and

� lead planning efforts to identify state requirementsfor implementing interoperable communicationssystem strategies.

Develop a Comprehensive Funding StrategyArguably, the most difficult hurdle agencies, re-gions, and states face in establishing, upgrading,or operating interoperable wireless communica-tions systems is funding. Many existing publicsafety communications systems cannot supportthe modern technologies needed to achieve full in-teroperability. Covering the basic maintenancecosts of an existing system often is a big challenge,and obtaining the significant funding required formajor upgrades or for a complete system replace-ment — often tens of millions of dollars — issometimes impossible.

Optimizing the use of limited funding is thereforeimportant in interoperability planning and imple-mentation. States should develop prioritizedstrategies for governmental units to coordinate andshare funding for common infrastructure andequipment. State and local governments alsoshould ensure that homeland security funding des-ignated for interoperable communications is spenteffectively and efficiently.

State comprehensive funding strategies should:60

� foster cooperative efforts to ensure maximum costsavings;

� identify and educate stakeholders to build consen-sus and support;

� determine a recognized and accepted authority forprocuring, implementing, and operating the newcommunications system;

� examine the successful funding processes of similarstates or regions; and

� use anecdotal stories to emphasize the fundingneed.

In Indiana, Project Hoosier SAFE-T, the statewideinteroperable communications system, partneredwith Motorola to decrease the costs of the systemto the users. Motorola equipment prices are fixeduntil July 1, 2007, with discounts of between20 percent and 25 percent when purchasedthrough the integrated public safety commission.Also, Project Hoosier SAFE-T has negotiated forvolume discounts on maintenance.61

Some states have adopted creative approaches tofund interoperability systems. Minnesota passedlegislation that encourages state and local govern-ments to share infrastructure instead of upgradingsystems separately. The Minnesota Department ofTransportation financed half the cost of the infra-structure, partly through general obligation bondsand partly with money from the state’s trunk high-way fund. The other half of the capital costs camefrom the metropolitan radio board throughrevenue bonds issued on its behalf by the metro-politan council. Debt service is provided by 4 centsof a 9-1-1 surtax, which is collected monthly on allof the state’s wired and wireless telephone lines.62

Include Interoperability as Part of State Trainingand Exercise ProgramsAn interoperable communications system is onlyeffective if the users understand how to use it.Governors need to ensure that realistic communi-cations scenarios are included in all state trainingprograms and tabletop and full-scale exercises. Thechances of success will be increased by regular,comprehensive, and realistic exercises that addresspotential problems in the region or state and thatinvolve all personnel.

To achieve the most effective results, state com-munications training and exercises should betiered and include the entire spectrum of exercisedesigns, from single agency tabletop exercises tomultiagency, multidiscipline functional exercises.Agencies should participate in a structured table-top exercise program that promotes coordinatedplanning and identifies gaps. Once multiagencyand multidiscipline plans are developed at the


management and supervisory level, it is then criticalthat all staff who would eventually be involved inimplementation receive training and participate inexercises.63 One strategy to ensure training for allusers or potential users is to include training aspart of the procurement process of a new interop-erable communications system. Governors alsocan require detailed interoperable communica-tions training and exercise programs as a prerequi-site for state funding.

Incorporate Interoperable Technical andEquipment StandardsNew radio technologies provide an unprecedentedtechnical capability to first responders, but thatalone does not guarantee interoperability. Manystates, regions, or cities have invested in a single,homogeneous system that, while providing sub-stantial interoperability among users of thatsystem, does not result in compatibility withsystems in nearby jurisdictions.

Governors can help ensure interoperability byrequiring communications systems to be designedon an open architecture that adheres to universallyagreed upon standards. For example, the Associa-tion of Public Safety Communications Officialsdeveloped a digital standard for wireless commu-nications users called Project 25 (P25) that hadinput from state, local, and federal agencies andfrom theTelecommunications Industry Association.

The P25 standards seek to provide digital, narrow-band radios that are effective, efficient, and

reliable for intra- and interagency communica-tions. A secondary objective is to achieve maximumradio spectrum efficiency. Project 25 systems havebeen deployed globally and should provide stateswith a standard guidance for procuring new landmobile radio systems.

Ensuring that a state’s communications systemadheres to published standards is critical for long-term viability of that system. A governor canensure that technical and equipment standards areincorporated by doing the following:

� developing and implementing strategies for efficientuse of radio frequency spectrum;

� funding only those new communications systemacquisitions that adhere to accepted standards;and

� establishing a statewide interoperability policy thatsupports agency participation in a statewide or re-gional shared system built on established standards.

Coordination among local and state emergencyresponse agencies leads to improved interoperablecommunications in daily operations. Further, asnew capabilities and resources are acquired, localand state agencies can work together to developstandard operating procedures, training curricula,and exercise schedules for those new capabilities.As a result, a larger number of stakeholders in localand state agencies will have access to and knowledgeof resources and capabilities for interoperablecommunications.

62


Summary Points

• Form a committee or council that reports back to the governor and the legislature onregional and state interoperability issues.

• Establish memoranda of understanding that define interoperability procedures withagencies and local government.

• Lead planning efforts to identify state requirements necessary for implementing inter-operable system strategies.

• Develop funding strategies and incentives that encourage greater local, state, andfederal participation.

• Ensure training to all users or potential users as part of the procurement process of anew interoperable communications system.

• Require a detailed interoperable communications training and exercise program as aprerequisite for state funding.

• Develop and implement strategies for efficient use of available radio frequency spectrum.

• Fund only those new communications system acquisitions that adhere to accepted standards.

• Establish a statewide interoperability policy that supports agency participation in astatewide or regional shared system built on established standards.

Chapter 10Critical Infrastructure Protection

As heads of state, governors ultimately are respon-sible for preparing for and responding to any dis-aster or emergency within their state. However,governors’ ability to ensure the security andresiliency of privately owned infrastructure and as-sets often is limited by a lack of regulatory or statu-tory authority. Although this makes privateindustry primarily responsible for its own security,governors can take several steps to ensure theirstates are well-positioned to respond to electricalblackouts, fuel shortages, cyberattacks, and othercrises.

Because the nation’s critical infrastructure oftencrosses state borders, and because the disasters andemergencies that affect that infrastructure rarelyconfine themselves to a state’s political borders, thefederal government has a significant role in preparingthe nation for energy crises and for respondingwhen emergencies occur. State planning effortsshould be conducted in the context of that federalrole.

The Federal RoleThe basis for the federal government’s role in criticalinfrastructure protection is a series of homelandsecurity presidential directives (HSPD) issued inthe years since the September 11, 2001, terroristattacks. The directive most applicable to the areaof critical infrastructure protection is HSPD-7:Critical Infrastructure Identification, Prioritizationand Protection.

HSPD-7 establishes a national policy for federaldepartments and agencies to identify, prioritize,and protect the nation’s critical infrastructure,which it defines as “systems and assets, whetherphysical or virtual, so vital to the United Statesthat [their] incapacity or destruction… wouldhave a debilitating impact on security, nationaleconomic security, national public health or safety,or any combination of those matters.”64 The

directive designates lead federal agencies, knownas sector-specific agencies, for each sector of theeconomy and charges those lead agencies with thefollowing:

� collaborating with all relevant federal agencies, stateand local governments, and the private sector, in-cluding key people and entities in their infrastructuresector;

� conducting or facilitating vulnerability assessmentsfor the sector; and

� encouraging risk-management strategies to protectagainst or mitigate the effects of attacks againstcritical infrastructure and key resources.

The sector-specific agencies also are required tocollaborate with the private sector to develop in-formation-sharing and analysis mechanisms andto work with industry to identify, prioritize, andcoordinate the protection of critical infrastructureand key resources. They also facilitate the sharingof information about physical and cyber threats,vulnerabilities, incidents, potential protectivemeasures, and best practices.65

The National Infrastructure Protection PlanThe National Infrastructure Protection Plan(NIPP), released by the Department of HomelandSecurity in 2006, details the development of astructure of collaboration among the private sector,state governments, and federal agencies. Theoverall goal of the plan is to:

� set security goals;

� identify assets;

� assess risk;

� prioritize infrastructure;

� implement protective programs;

� measure effectiveness; and

� establish a feedback mechanism for continuousimprovement.

64

The backbone of the NIPP is a network of indus-try-specific sector coordinating councils (SCCs)and government coordinating councils (GCCs)through which representatives of the private sectorand government will share information, collaborate,and develop strategies for protecting criticalinfrastructure.

The industry-based SCCs are the principal focalpoint for private sector coordination with thegovernment on critical infrastructure protectionactivities and issues. Membership of the SCCs willvary by sector but should include a broad base ofowners, operators, associations, and other entitieswithin each sector. A private sector cross-sectorcouncil has been established to address cross-sectorissues and interdependencies.

GCCs are the public-sector counterparts to theSCCs and are designed to provide interagency andcross-jurisdictional coordination. Each GCCincludes representation from federal, state, local,and tribal governments. As in the private sector, agovernment cross-sector council will address cross-sector issues and interdependencies.66 The variousindustry sector and government coordinatingcouncils are themselves coordinated through thepartnership for critical infrastructure securitycomposed of representatives of each of the sectorcoordinating councils, and the NIPP senior lead-ership council, composed of representatives ofeach government coordinating council.

Sector-specific plans detailing the application ofthe NIPP framework across all critical sectors wereexpected to be completed by the end of calendaryear 2006. Each of those sector-specific plans willinclude eight components:

� Sector-specific profile and goals.

� An identification of assets, systems, networks, andfunctions.

� A sector-wide risk assessment.

� A prioritization of infrastructure.

� Outlines of a plan to develop and implementprotective programs.

� Processes to measure progress.

� Research and development strategies.

� A sector management and coordination plan.

Governors’ Role in Protecting CriticalInfrastructureDespite their statutory and regulatory limitations,governors can take several steps that, in combinationwith the federal programs and activities outlinedabove, will ensure their states are well-positioned torespond to electrical blackouts, fuel shortages, cyber-attacks, and other crises. Those steps include:

� identifying the state’s critical infrastructure;

� conducting vulnerability and risk assessments;

� identifying and understand interdependencies;

� investing in infrastructure improvements;

� developing regional strategies; and

� coordinating with the private sector.

Conduct an Inventory of the State’s CriticalInfrastructureOne of the truisms of homeland security is that anestimated 85 percent of the nation’s critical infra-structure is privately owned. To fully comprehendthe range of threats that exist in any state, gover-nors must ensure that all critical infrastructure andkey assets in their states — that is, those physicaland cyber-based systems that are essential to theminimum operations of the economy and govern-ment — are fully identified.67 The federal govern-ment has encouraged this cataloguing of criticalinfrastructure through the establishment of theNational Asset Database, a comprehensive inventoryof all assets in the nation. That database, however,has been criticized as including businesses and sitesthat do not appear to meet the federal govern-ment’s definition of “critical.”


Governors should ensure that state officials worknot only with their federal counterparts in theDepartment of Homeland Security and otheragencies but also with local governments, businessowners, and other organizations to identify infra-structure and assets that are critical and to assesstheir vulnerabilities.

Conduct Vulnerability and Risk AssessmentsGovernors and their homeland security teamsshould first determine who will conduct the riskassessment process and the methodology to beused. Many states have developed and appliedtheir own risk-and-vulnerability assessment tools;others have either designated agency risk managersor contracted with the private sector to conductassessments.

Threats to state critical infrastructure should be as-sessed in the context of natural, man-made, terror-ist, and technological events, and risks should bedetermined based on those threats, their likelihoodof occurrence, and the impact they would have onthe immediate infrastructure and on interdepend-ent systems and facilities. This type of analysis canbe used to prioritize infrastructure for protectionand to develop and implement a critical infrastruc-ture protection plan that identifies measures to pre-vent, eliminate, or mitigate the threat.

Some states have gone so far as to enact legislationrequiring industries to take specific actions toprotect their infrastructure.New Jersey, for example,amended its Toxic Catastrophe Prevention Act(TCPA) in November 2005 to require the state’s140 chemical facilities to conduct an assessmentof vulnerabilities and hazards that might beexploited by terrorists. The assessments mustinclude critical reviews of the following areas:

� security systems and access to the facility grounds;

� existing or required security measures outside theperimeter of the facility that would reduce vulnera-bilities to an attack on the facility;

� storage and processing of potentially hazardousmaterials;

� employee and contractor background checks andother personnel security measures; and

� information and cyber security systems.

Forty-three facilities that already were subject tothe state’s TCPA program also are required underthe new law to review the potential for adopting in-herently safer technologies.

Identify and Understand InterdependenciesThe nation’s critical infrastructure is not a distinctcollection of factories, power plants, hospitals andother physical entities. Increasingly, it is an inter-connected system of systems, each part of whichrelies on and affects the operations of other parts.Petroleum refineries, for example, rely on the na-tion’s transportation systems, including pipelines,trains, and trucks, to move both raw and refinedproducts. Those transportation systems, in turn,rely on a robust and resilient refining capacity toprovide the fuels they need to operate. The com-puter-based systems that control much of the na-tion’s infrastructure — from freight rail lines tonuclear power plants — rely on the electrical gridto operate. In turn, those supervisory control anddata acquisition systems are used to control,direct, and detect failures in the nation’s energynetworks.

Invest in Infrastructure ImprovementsAlthough state and local governments own andcontrol a minority of the nation’s critical infra-structure, governors can play a significant role inthe resilience of that infrastructure by making tar-geted investments in systems and facilities that willimprove their states’ ability to quickly recover fromdisasters and emergencies.

For example,North DakotaGovernor JohnHoevencreated a new state agency to plan, finance, construct,develop, and, if necessary, acquire and operateelectrical transmission facilities to improve theresiliency of the state’s electrical systems. The

66

NorthDakotaTransmission Authority is authorizedto do the following:

� Make grants and loans.

� Establish reasonable fees, rates, tariffs, and othercharges.

� Obtain permits and acquire rights-of-way.

� Identify, plan, prioritize, and propose electrictransmission corridors.

� Create and execute interest rate exchange contracts.

Develop Regional StrategiesJust as critical infrastructure seldom exists as anisland unaffected by other infrastructure, eventsthat affect the critical systems and facilities in onestate are likely to have an impact across state lines.As a result, governors should develop regionalstrategies to manage emergencies and disasters thataffect the infrastructure in one state. Mutual aidagreements such as EMAC allow for the rapidmovement of replacement equipment and suppliesinto affected areas, and private sector utilities andretailers also have systems in place to back up theiroperations and supply chains after disasters.

Similarly, governors should consider workingtogether to develop strategies for managing eventsthat affect regions of the country. In some regions,this already is taking place. The Pacific NorthWestEconomic Region, which comprises Alaska, Idaho,Montana, Oregon,Washington, and the Canadianprovinces of Alberta, British Columbia, and theYukon, created a partnership for regional infra-structure security to develop a regional protection,preparedness, and response plan for dealing withinfrastructure-related emergencies.

Coordinate with the Private Sector on ResponsePlansGovernors should work closely with the privatesector to develop emergency response and riskcommunications plans for incidents affectingprivately owned systems or infrastructure. Forg-

ing a trust-based relationship between emergencyresponse officials and the private sector is essentialto ensure effective security preparations, includingaccurate vulnerability assessments and the integra-tion of private-sector emergency response planswith those of government agencies.

Several national-level efforts already are underwayto encourage this coordination. The InfrastructureSecurity Partnership (TISP), formed by 11 profes-sional organizations and federal agencies after theSeptember 11 terrorist attacks, promotes collabo-ration within government and industry to improvethe resilience of the nation’s critical infrastructureagainst natural and man-made disasters.68 TISPmembers include state, local, and federal agencies;national organizations; academics; and represen-tatives of the design, construction, operation, andmaintenance communities. A steering committeecomposed of professional and technical organiza-tions and federal agencies oversees TISP activities.

The partnership’s objectives are to:

� Raise awareness of the importance of achievingnational and regional disaster resilience for criticalinfrastructure.

� Create effective, task-focused, multidisciplinarywork groups to improve regional disaster resiliencefor critical infrastructure.

� Foster creation and development of regional public-private partnerships to address infrastructure inter-dependency and interoperability.

� Disseminate knowledge on infrastructure securityand disaster preparedness.

� Mobilize TISP members to respond to significant is-sues and events.

� Promote the improvement and application of riskassessment and management methodologies.

� Promote development and review of national andregional plans and policies.


In addition, information sharing and analysis cen-ters (ISACs) were established jointly by federalagencies and private industry in several sectors.ISACs are used to share information on threatsand planning among industry members; state,local, and federal agencies; and other industries.The electricity sector ISAC, for example, is oper-ated by the North American Electric ReliabilityCouncil and provides daily infrastructure reportsfrom the Department of Homeland Security; ad-visories, alerts, and notices from federal agencies;and security standard and guideline information.

States also should consider developing directrelationships with industries in their states. Exxon-Mobil, for example, maintains close working rela-tionships with each state in which the companyhas a large industrial presence. Company officials

have met with state officials in at least one state todiscuss their security efforts and to discuss whatthreats the company is and is not capable of man-aging on its own.

Direct relationships with the owners and operatorsof critical infrastructure in a state are important forseveral reasons, but coordination of effort during theresponse to a disaster is essential. During the 2004hurricane season, Florida utilities sent representativesto the state emergency operations center (EOC) andto local government EOCs. Other utility officialswere available by telephone or other communicationssystems. As a result, emerging problems were capableof being solved at the local level by officials who feltempowered to make critical decisions and then re-port what they had accomplished.69

68

Summary Points

• Governors should understand the federal government’s role in infrastructure protection andshould develop plans and strategies in the context of that federal role.

• Governors should ensure that vulnerability and risk assessments have been conducted andare adequate for all the infrastructure in their state.

• Governors should identify interdependencies among various industry sectors and under-stand that attacks on or damage to one sector can have immediate effects on other sectors.

• Governors should invest in infrastructure and work with other states to improve their states’resiliency to natural disasters and other emergencies.

• Governors should work closely with the private sector to develop emergency response andrisk communication plans for incidents that affect privately owned infrastructure.

Notes

1 Louise Comfort and Carrie Miller, “Case Study: The Media’sRole in High Risk Conditions,” The University of PittsburghInstitute of Politics, April 2004.

2 Keith Bea, L. Cheryl Runyon, and Kae M.Warnock, “EmergencyManagement and Homeland Security Statutory Authorities in theStates, District of Columbia, and Insular Areas,” CongressionalResearch Service series, 2004_2005.

3 Ibid.

4 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, “List of GovernmentWaivers and Dispensations Authorized for Hurricane KatrinaResponse,” October 6, 2005, available atwww.dhs.gov/dhspublic/display?theme=16&content=4803&print=true.

5 National Governors Association Management Note, “The ManyRoles of the Governor’s Chief of Staff,” 2004.

6 Ernest B. Abbott, “Draft Checklist for State and Local Govern-ment Attorneys to Prepare for Possible Disasters,” AmericanBar Association State and Local Government Law Section,March 2003, available at http://www.abanet.org/statelocal/disaster.pdf#search=%22American%20Bar%20Association%20A%20Checklist%20for%20State%20and%20Local%20Government%20Lawyers%20to%20Prepare%20for%20Possible%20Disasters%22

7 Maryland Emergency Management Agency, available athttp://www.mema.state.md.us/MEMA/index.jsp.

8 Nebraska Homeland Security Office, available athttp://www.nema.ne.gov/index_html?page=content/home_news/homelandsecurity_home.html.

9 Washington Emergency Management Division, available athttp://emd.wa.gov/5-prog/wahsas/wahsas-idx.htm.

10 Alabama Department of Homeland Security, available athttp://www.homelandsecurity.alabama.gov/.

11 Arizona Department of Homeland Security, available athttp://www.homelandsecurity.az.gov/.

12 Delaware Department of Safety and Homeland Security,available at http://dshs.delaware.gov/.

13 Indiana Department of Homeland Security, available athttp://www.in.gov/dhs/.

14 Florida Department of Law Enforcement, available athttp://www.fdle.state.fl.us/.

15 Idaho Bureau of Homeland Security, available athttp://www.bhs.idaho.gov/.

16 Massachusetts Executive Office of Public Safety, available athttp://www.mass.gov/?pageID=eopshomepage&L=1&L0=Home&sid=Eeops.

17 Minnesota Department of Public Safety, available athttp://www.dps.state.mn.us/.

18 Model Intrastate Mutual Aid Legislation, available athttp://emacweb.org/docs/Wide%20Release%20In-trastate%20Mutual%20Aid.pdf

19 http://www.iowahomelandsecurity.org/asp/IMAC/legis_language.doc

20 Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC), ArticleV, “Licenses and Permits,” available at http://www.emacweb.org.Accessed September 21, 2006.

21 EMAC, Article IX, “Reimbursement.”

22 EMAC, Article VI, “Liability.”

23 EMAC, Article VIII, “Compensation.”

24 EMAC, Article I, “Purpose and Authorities.”

25 National Emergency Management Association “EMACOverview,” August 2006, available athttp://www.emacweb.org/?323#search=%22EMAC%20Kat-rina%20response%22. Accessed September 22, 2006.

26 10 USC § 374.

27 18 USC § 831.

28 10 USC § 382.

29 10 USC § 2012.

30 18 USC § 3056.

31 18 USC §§ 351, 1116, 1751.

32 10 U.S.C. §§ 331_335.

33 John Warner Authorization Act, available athttp://www.rules.house.gov/109_2nd/text/hr5122cr/1092nd5122cr_1.pdf

34 Ronald Reagan National Defense Authorization Act for 2005,available at http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?c108:5:./temp/~c108YGbKqv::

35 10 USC § 12301(d).

36 10 USC § 12302.

70

NOTES

37 10 USC § 12304.

38 10 USC § 331.

39 10 USC § 332.

40 10 USC § 333.

41 Ibid., p. 1_2.

42 Additional information on federal disaster assistance is availableon the Federal Emergency Management Agency Web site atwww.fema.gov.

43 Additional information on Department of Veterans Affairs assistanceprograms is available on the VAWeb site at www.va.gov.

44 Additional information on Small Business Administration assistanceis available on the SBAWeb site at www.sba.gov.

45 Additional information on Farm Service Agency assistance isavailable on the U.S. Department of Agriculture Web site atwww.fsa.usda.gov/pas.

46 Additional information on FEMA’s Fire Management AssistanceProgram is available on FEMA’s Web site athttp://www.fema.gov/government/grant/fmagp/details.shtm.

47 Additional information on U.S. Army Corps of Engineers assis-tance is available on the Corps’ Web site at www.usace.army.mil.

48 Additional information on U.S. Department of Health andHuman Services assistance is available on the HHS Web site atwww.hhs.gov. Additional information on U.S. Food and DrugAdministration assistance is available on the FDAWeb site atwww.fda.gov.

49 Additional information on Federal Highway Administrationassistance is available on the U.S. Department of TransportationWeb site at www.fhwa.dot.gov/index.html.

50 For a detailed discussion of military assistance during disasters,please see chapter 5.

51 “Fusion Center Guidelines: Developing and Sharing Informa-tion and Intelligence in a New Era,” August 2006, available athttp://it.ojp.gov/documents/fusion_center_guidelines.pdf.

52 “Governor Napolitano Signs Homeland Security Agreementwith California, New Mexico, and Texas,” March 3, 2006,available at http://www.homelandsecurity.az.gov/docu-ments/030306_BorderStateMOU.pdf.

53 North Carolina Information Sharing and Analysis Center,available at http://www.nccrimecontrol.org/Index2.cfm?a=000003,000010,000021.

54 Regional Information Sharing Systems, available athttp://www.rissinfo.com/overview.htm.

55 Presentation on N-DEx given by David Gavin, Texas Depart-ment of Public Safety, March 20, 2006, available athttp://www.search.org/conferences/2006symposium/presentations/Wednesday_Day%203/Ndex%20Case%20Study/David%20Gavin%20N-DEx%20Presentation%20SEARCH%20March%202006%20%202.ppt#262,7,N-DEx Vision.

56 Nlets, available at http://www.nlets.org/.

57 “What Is Communications Interoperability,” available on theSAFECOMWebsite at www.safecomprogram.gov/SAFECOM/interoperabillity/default.htm. Accessed October 24, 2006.

58 “Why Can’t We Talk? Working Together to Bridge the Commu-nications Gap to Save Lives: A Guide for Public Officials,”National Task Force on Interoperability,Washington, D.C., 2003.

59 “Why Can’t We Talk?”

60 PSWN Funding Strategy Report, available at http://www.safe-comprogram.gov/NR/rdonlyres/E2D71272-B332-4B28-9DE8-745CC576B618/0/Funding_Strategy_Best_Practices_Report.pdf

61 Project Hoosier SAFE-T Web site, available athttp://www.in.gov/ipsc/safe-t/links/brochure.pdf

62 “Why Can’t We Talk?” 18_19.

63 Interoperability Continuum, available at http://www.safecom-program.gov/NR/rdonlyres/65AA8ACF-5DE6-428B-BBD2-7EA4BF44FE3A/0/Continuum080106JR.pdf

64 The White House, Homeland Security Presidential Directive 7,“Critical Infrastructure Identification, Prioritization, andProtection,” Washington, DC, 2003.

65 HSPD-7.

66 Department of Homeland Security, National InfrastructureProtection Plan Sector Partnership Model.

67 Presidential Decision Directive/NSC-63, “Critical InfrastructureProtection,” May 22, 1998.

68 The Infrastructure Security Partnership at www.tisp.org.Accessed September 27, 2006.

69 U.S. Department of Energy, Florida State’s Energy EmergencyResponse to the 2004 Hurricanes, June 2005.


Appendix A

74Governor’s Request For a Major Disaster Declaration

Dear Mr. President:

Under the provisions of Section 401 of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency As-sistance Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5121-5206 (Stafford Act), and implemented by 44 CFR § 206.36, Irequest that you declare a major disaster for the State of ______ as a result of

Name type of incident: e.g., severe storms, flooding, hurricane, tornadoes; includethe time period involved, e.g., beginning ______ through ______ or, beginning______ and continuing. Name the affected counties or independent cities being re-quested.

In response to the situation, I have taken appropriate action under State law and directed the exe-cution of the State Emergency Plan on (date) in accordance with Section 401 of the StaffordAct.1

If a State of Emergency has been declared, indicate when and to what area(s) it isapplicable. Identify status of the State’s mitigation planning effort, type of StateMitigation Plan, and expected completion date.

On (date), I requested a joint Federal, State, and local survey of the damaged areas. Preliminaryassessments indicated the most severe impacts were to

Describe the type of facilities and the adverse affect the damage has on the publicand private sectors.

I have determined that this incident is of such severity and magnitude that effective response isbeyond the capabilities of the State and the affected local governments and that supplementaryFederal assistance is necessary. I am specifically requesting

Name programs: e.g., Individual Assistance (including the Individuals and House-holds Program (IHP), Disaster Unemployment Assistance, Crisis Counseling); Pub-lic Assistance; Hazard Mitigation; and Small Business Administration disasterloans.

Name counties requested for each program. For Hazard Mitigation, request“statewide” or name specific counties.

Preliminary estimates of the types and amount of assistance needed under the Stafford Act aretabulated in Enclosures A and B. Estimated requirements for assistance from certain Federalagencies under other statutory authorities are tabulated in Enclosure C.

The following information is furnished on the nature and amount of State and local resourcesthat have been or will be used to alleviate the conditions of this disaster:

List Actions. Include actions pending or taken by State legislative and governingbodies with regard to the disaster.

(Date of Request) The PresidentThe White HouseWashington, D. C.

Through: Regional DirectorFEMA Region _____City, State, Zip Code


I certify that for this major disaster, the State and local governments will assume all applicable non-Federal shareof costs required by the Stafford Act. Total expenditures are expected to exceed $____________________, inaccordance with the table in Enclosure D.2

IF Direct Federal Assistance (DFA) is requested, the following information and certificationsmust be provided before DFA can take place.

I request direct Federal assistance for work and services to save lives and protect property.

(a). List any reasons State and local government cannot perform or contract for performance, (if applicable).

(b). Specify the type of assistance requested.

In accordance with 44 CFR § 206.208, the State of _______ agrees that it will, with respect to direct Federalassistance:

1. Provide without cost to the United States all lands, easements and rights-of-ways necessary to accomplish theapproved work;

2. Hold and save the United States free from damages due to the requested work, and shall indemnify the Fed-eral Government against any claims arising from such work;

3. Provide reimbursement to FEMA for the non-Federal share of the cost of such work in accordance with theprovisions of the FEMA-State Agreement; and

4. Assist the performing Federal agency in all support and local jurisdictional matters.

IF debris removal is being requested/or anticipated, either through DFA or through reimbursement under aproject worksheet under the Public Assistance program, the following information and certifications must beprovided before DFA, debris removal, or reimbursement for debris removal under project worksheet cant takeplace.

In addition, I anticipate the need for debris removal, which poses an immediate threat to lives, public health,and safety.

Pursuant to Sections 403 and 407 of the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5170b & 5173, the State agrees to indem-nify and hold harmless the United States of America for any claims arising from the removal of debris or wreck-age for this disaster. The State agrees that debris removal from public and private property will not occur untilthe landowner signs an unconditional authorization for the removal of debris.

I have designated ______________________________ as the State Coordinating Officer for this request.He/she will work with the Federal Emergency Management Agency in damage assessments and may providefurther information or justification on my behalf.

Sincerely,

Governor

Enclosure

76

County Assistance to Individuals and Households Other Programs

(List eachrequested county)

TemporaryHousing

(Indicate No.)Repairs Replacement

PermanentHousing

Construction

Other NeedsAssistance

(DisasterUnemploymentAssistance, LegalServices, and Cri-sis Counseling)

TOTALS

ENCLOSURE A TO MAJOR DISASTER REQUEST

Estimated Requirements for Individual Assistance under the Stafford Act

ENCLOSURE B TO MAJOR DISASTER REQUEST

Estimated Requirements for Public Assistance Stafford Act

CATEGORY

County A B C D E F G Total

Totals:

Note: Estimates are to reflect total eligible costs before any cost sharing.


ENCLOSURE C TO MAJOR DISASTER REQUEST

Estimated Requirements for Other Federal Agency Programs

ENCLOSURE D TO MAJOR DISASTER REQUEST

Governor’s Certification

I certify that for this current disaster, State and local government expenditures and obligations will include the non-Federalshare of costs required by the Stafford Act. As stated in my basic letter, and based on information available at this time, tabu-lation of these estimated expenditures and obligations are as follows:

CountySBA HomeLoans

SBA BusinessLoans

FSA Loans NRCS FHWA USACE OTHER

Totals

Note: Provide numbers and amounts, as appropriate.

CATEGORY OF ASSISTANCE AMOUNT

Individual Assistance: STATE LOCAL

“Other Assistance” under the Individuals and Households Program”

Other (specify)

Total:

Public Assistance:

Category A — Debris Removal

Category B — Emergency Protective Measures

Category C — Roads and Bridges

Category D —Water Control Facilities

Category E — Buildings and Equipment

Category F — Utilities

Category G — Other (Parks, Recreational Facilities, etc.)

Total:

Grand Total:

Governor’s Request For Emergency Declaration

Dear Mr. President:

Under the provisions of Section 501 (a) of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and EmergencyAssistance Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5121-5206 (Stafford Act), and implemented by 44 CFR § 206.35,I request that you declare an emergency for the State of ______ as a result of

Name type of incident: e.g., severe storms, flooding, hurricane, tornadoes; includethe time period involved, e.g., beginning ______ through ______ or, beginning______ and continuing. Name the affected counties or independent cities being re-quested.

In response to the situation I have taken appropriate action under State law and directed the exe-cution of the State Emergency Plan on (date) in accordance with Section 501 (a) of the StaffordAct.3

If a State of Emergency has been declared, indicate when and to what area(s) it isapplicable.

Pursuant to 44 CFR § 206.35, I have determined that this incident is of such severity and magni-tude that effective response is beyond the capabilities of the State and affected local governments,and that supplementary Federal assistance is necessary to save lives, protect property, publichealth, and safety, or to lessen or avert the threat of a disaster. I am specifically requesting

Indicate type and nature of emergency assistance required, such as debris removal,emergency protective measures, direct Federal Assistance, or the Individuals andHouseholds Program (IHP).

Preliminary estimates of the types and amount of emergency assistance needed under the StaffordAct, and emergency assistance from certain Federal agencies under other statutory authorities aretabulated in Enclosure A.

The following information is furnished on the nature and amount of State and local resourcesthat have been or will be used to alleviate the conditions of this emergency:

List actions. Include actions pending or taken by State legislative and governingbodies with regard to the emergency.

The following information is furnished on efforts and resources of other Federal agencies, whichhave been or will be used in responding to this incident:

List actions by agency

I certify that for this emergency, the State and local governments will assume all applicable non-Federal share of costs required by the Stafford Act.4

78

(Date of Request) The PresidentThe White HouseWashington, D. C.

Through: Regional DirectorFEMA Region ___City, State, Zip Code


IF Direct Federal Assistance is requested, the following information and certification must be provided beforeDFA can take place.

I request direct Federal assistance for work and services to save lives and protect property.

(a) List any reasons State and local government cannot perform or contract for performance, (if applicable).

(b) Specify the type of assistance requested.

In accordance with 44 CFR § 206.208, the State of ________ agrees that it will, with respect to direct Federalassistance:

1. Provide without cost to the United States all lands, easement, and rights-of-ways necessary to accomplish theapproved work.

2. Hold and save the United States free from damages due to the requested work, and shall indemnify the Fed-eral Government against any claims arising from such work;

3. Provide reimbursement to FEMA for the non-Federal share of the cost of such work in accordance with theprovisions of the FEMA-State Agreement; and

4. Assist the performing Federal agency in all support and local jurisdictional matters.

IF debris removal is being requested/ or anticipated, either through DFA or through reimbursement under aproject worksheet under the Public Assistance program, the following information and certifications must beprovided before DFA, debris removal, or reimbursement for debris removal under a project worksheet can takeplace

In addition, I anticipate the need for debris removal, which poses an immediate threat to lives, public health,and safety.

Pursuant to Sections 502 and 407 of the Stafford Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 5192 & 5173, the State agrees to indem-nify and hold harmless the United States of America for any claims arising from the removal of debris or wreck-age for this disaster. The State agrees that debris removal from public and private property will not occur untilthe landowner signs an unconditional authorization for the removal of debris.

I have designated ______________________________ as the State Coordinating Officer for this request.He/she will work with the Federal Emergency Management Agency in damage assessments and may providefurther information or justification on my behalf.

Sincerely,

Governor

Enclosure

80

1 Execution of the State’s emergency plan is a prerequisite to major disaster assistance.

2 The certification to cost share must be included; otherwise the processing of the request may be delayed untilthe Governor has provided the certification.

3 Execution of the State’s Emergency Plan is a prerequisite to emergency assistance.

4 The certification to cost share must be included; otherwise the processing of the request may be delayed untilthe Governor has provided the certification.

ENCLOSURE A TO EMERGENCY REQUEST DECLARATION

(Estimated Requirements)

Estimated requirements for other Federal agency programs:

(Specify agency and assistance required).

Totals: ______________

Estimated Requirements for assistance under the Stafford Act:

AMOUNT

Coordination

Technical and advisory assistance

Debris removal

Emergency protective measures

Individuals and Households Program (IHP)

Distribution of emergency supplies

Other (specify)

Totals:

Grand Total:

Note: Estimates should reflect total eligible costs prior to cost sharing.


John Thomasian, DirectorNGA Center for Best Practices

444 N. Capitol Street, Suite 267Washington, D.C. 20001-1512

Phone: 202.624.5300www.nga.org/center

Documents

A GOVERNOR’S GUIDE to HOMELAND SECURITY · AGOVER NOR’S GUIDE to HO MELANDSE CURITY 3 Foreword HurricaneKatrinacommandedthenation’s attention for months after it slammed into