Approvement act . And what other benefits are being experienced . Um as far as benefits of the Sandy Recovery reimprovement act is a very important tool and the other lesson that we have learned from is the events of katrina is that there are certain types of projects that are technically difficult that exceed the average capacity for people to manage and you need expert so we engage very early. And identify where the projects will be whether they are hospitals or other large public infrastructures. We brought in a lot of experts. It wasnt until you passed a Sandy Recovery improvement act that we had the resolution had we been using an old program and using actual costs, there would have been more uncertainty for the application cant on what they could and could not do. It would have been more overhead in making those decisions and they would not have had the ability to get what they were going to get from us and move forward. As it is we have obligated the majority of those funds. They are now engaged in repair and construction. We still have projects from katrina that have not even been resolved yet. So i think that one, better understanding the complex its and projects on the fronten and two you gave usa tool we did not have before to more engage the applicants and to get a better resolution of what the project involved and getting a figure agreed to and obligating dollars on the front inverses waiting for the construction to start and constantly coming back for the revisions and updates. What are some of the most Alarming Trends that have you observed in disaster preparedness, response and recovery . I this i that it was alluded to by representative carson when we talk about vulnerable populations, as we you know have built our programs it is something that and i have disagreement with my state colleagues on this. Nobody disagrees on the importance of getting this right. But this is one of the thing that i observed is that we ten to treat the hard to do as an an exin planning funding and programs. And instead looking at the communities as they are, in building the programs so that they do not say we need to have an an exfor kids or an an exfor those with animals and the elderly. They are part of the community. We will need to plan more and we need to plan for what is there and not exclude it. When you look at the vulnerable populations. I will be hoevent with you, one of the growing challenges anyone creasing poverty and maybe the middle class with no safety net that a disaster will wipe out all of their savings and wipe out their most important equity their homes. We saw this in the 04 hurricanes. I do not think that people understand how big of a role that the poverty and lack of safety nets and the middle class that are just one payment away from all losing all, makes them troomly vulnerable to disasters in very difficult to recover. I this i that this is up with of the things another he we look at the program. We cannot forget there are parts of the community vulnerable and the numbers are growing. And it has a lot to do with the economy and the distribution of wealth and the lack of resource as monk many people that consider themselves middle class. One disaster wipes them out. And they have suddenly found that their safety threats nets are not there for them either. Thank you. The chair will recognize Ranking Member carson for five minutes the administrator written testimony talks about the need for clarification for functional needs, support for the general population shelters and that fema and the doj have provided this information. What is your sense sir about when will the joint guidance be issued from fema and the doj . There is a lot of guidance issued. I am not sure. What guidance i know. There is ongoing discussions but let me tell what you the outcome should look like. I think that if you do not know watt outcome looks like we will talk about the process. The good outcome. And as the state director i will think it as soon astive as a local emergency manager i was sensitive to the issue. But a perfect i wouldnt say perfect it should not be pfr but the expectation. You arrive in a shelter, and you should not be turned away. If you arrived because you had a pet people have pets. We have a plan for that. And if you show up on oxygen, if you show up with a Family Member on a ventilator. Now it may not always be the best place. There may be other options, but i think that what you want is in a crisis people do not really have the luxury of picking and choosing where they are going to go. So we would like to get to where most people the majority of the population can choose their shelter based upon what is convenient for them. Not what we have only been willing or able to provide. We are not there and it is unfair to say that the local State Government should be there immediate loochlt we did not get there. We are not where we are at because of the lack of effort or trying. This is the states and locals will have to deal with,isting buildings and many of which were not designed for people with disabilities. And you flow. Is requirementes to upgrade them. Many times it is minimal and the level of care the type of the equipment and the durable goods. So this is a goal i this i that most of us agreed to work towards. People should not be turned away from shelters because they are not easy to accommodate. But also we need to understand that it is alon lot easier to say and do. There is big challenges of what could be done to get there. So we will continue to work with partners with justice and with the disabled community that advocate for that right. And i this i that is probably the thing to drive me passionately is that this is a civil right. Absolutely. Yeah. We have to do everything to ensure that we are maintaining that while understanding that this is not easy. If it was nobody would be saying, we have questions. But there is a lot of questions asked what is a reasonable complication. And to what degree that they could be prepared inform that to the level that they could implement that care and probably the hard question is always, where is the money going to come from . Often times in local governments that have soon tremendous reductions in the staff and funding bases and yet expect to provide service in the crisis. And many of which will not be declared by the federal government and would not receive the federal dollars. Lastly sir, i have hear from some of my could not state went about the long waits to attend the fema Training Center in alabama and as well as the i guess you can say the insufficient funding for the Emergency ResponseTraining Programs in general. Could you provide from us sir because of your last statement so phenomenal and deeply in sight full. We appreciate that. Could you provide the subcommittee sir with some description of each of the fema Training Programs and over view quickly of the budget to the last five years . Well, the center for preparedness is a hard place to get into. There is a high demand this. Is the only nondod facility in the United States that offers live agent training. Meaning your hazmat team will actually go in and experience what it is like to handle lethaler in agents and biological agents and in a controlled environment. It is priceless training for those teams. Are the national academy. Hemsberg is a program for many fire executives as well as training many specialized programs across the country where people come in both for training there, and also for training as delivered to the state and programs that are developed jointly with the National Fire carred plea. And the Emergency Management institute colocated in helmsberg providing training for state and local emergency managers. Bringing together, many of them outside of their normal working environment to share their experiences but also to get the latest updates. It is both a capacity issue. In state and current programs. So again, center for domestic preparedness we have funded for so many seats. We will maximize that many of and the staff will continue to look at how to increase the capacity. It is a finite resource with high demand and we will try to accommodate those that have applied but it is again a premier facility which capabilities not found elsewhere. With a very high demand for the resource. Thank you sir. Thank you mr. Carson. The chair recognizes mr. Norton for five minutes. Into thank you mr. Chairman i have just one question that i would like to take advantage of the experience that mr. Fuga at the has had in Disaster Mitigation and ask for his candid views and here i am not asking you about funding, that is not something that you control. I want to contrast the difference between the way that congress behaved after the terrorist attacks and the way they behaved after katrina and sandy. After the terrorist attack the country, it scare the dickens out of the country. I am going to say that it scared us so badly that after the fact we actually through money at the jurisdiction. The there was not a state that did not get fund to prepare for the next disaster attack. Not including the states that alqaeda never heard of. Never would venture to care about. And every state got some funds. I was on Homeland Security at the time and saw it happen. Again i am not asking you about funding. I recognize and i appreciate that predisaster funding we have over again found in this subcommittee and committee that savings from 1 dollar invested 4. As we look at katrina and sandy. I mean i recall that in order to get funds for sandy even after new york and new jersey were laid low. It took two votes to get funding for to you begin to do your work in sandy. Now um what i really want to know is as an agency that has looked at the disasters now natural disasters for decades whether or not the agency will need to have a revision whether in law or structure. Can you sit there and in the face of katrina and sandy, and not envision when you see hurricanes occurring where they are not suppose to occur, when you see climate not only changes but this disasters in parts of the country that have never known them. Is the fema of today structured decadesing a, the fema that can handle the unknown that we now see before us . And here i am looking for how the agency whether it needs to ask for revisions in law or in its own structure, rather than what you encountered after sandy, and after the finger was pointed at you, it didnt matter when we gave money or how you were structured. You just had to take it. And instead of just taking it it does seem to me that the agency with expertise should come before this panel and tell us whether you are prepared for disaster for earthquakes or to occur in california or the kind that it has never seen before or shall we just sit here and think it will never happen and just wait for it to come after us. Is the fema of the 21st century prepared for what we know now from our own experience with katrina and sandy . Is surely to come in parts of the country that we never expected . If so, if you think that it is prepared tell us. If it is not fully prepared you should actually. I ask you then, is the Agency Looking at how it could make recommendations for what appears to be the entirely new era in both terrorist disasters and for that matter in now we know natural disasters. Are you looking at the future . Future . I learned a long timing a that the person that says that we are fully prepared and we know what will happen is a fool that will certainly be no you do not know what will happen so we dont. No. I want to make clear. You know they have hurricanes in florida. You no he that they have earthquakes. In california. I bet you did not know that we had we would have a quake quick here in the Nations Capital i am talking about what you dont know. And what you will be held responsible for not with stanning the fact that you dont know. Is your agency structured so it can handle what you dont know . That is where we are going. What we changed the question was traditionally, what was fema capable of responding to . As you point out, that is an aron if you are only prepared to have a certain level of disaster. You fail so we started to look at where was the risk in the population and not looking at what fema was capable of responding to but what is the worst case that could happen . We started to ask questions that were not easy to answer because the questions started to generate response levels greater than the federal government. It forced to us really take a different look at how we fund as you point out the hom homodollars as we fund the jurisdiction and many of us were not likely to have a terrorist attack. They are a resource for the rest of the nation when it is a big disaster that happens. We saw this in sandy. Many of the responsible ors from outside of the area were able to responsive because of the capabilities of Homeland Security dollars so. We are following what you are pointing out. We cannot prepare for what we expect or what we are prepared to handle. We have to prepare for what could happen. This is driving our Strategic Planning this. Is driving how we are looking at how we are structured with fema. Not to what we can respond to. But what could happen. That is again driving a lot of our decisions again it is, we dont think that the resources are necessarily the first answer but it requires resources in sustained funding and a budget as you well know. Operating under continuings are lugss is not how you prepare for catastrophic disasters and in my term here. Have i been unmore continuing resolutions than i have unbudgets so i would love to have the staff if necessary, you no. If you were available to sit down and talk about this but we are definitely trying to look at the future and looking at what could happen. Looking at how you build a response. Can i tell you it is built today . No it is a work in progress but i think that we have moved past the barriers of planning of what we know and what we are prepared to respond to and asking a harder question. How bad it could be. And the president said this in a will earlier meet that can i of attending. We cant protect everything so we need to know what we can live without and what we cant. If we cant live without as a nation that is where we need to fox us. So when we start to look at disasters and where they can happen and where they are expected verses what could happen based upon the modeling and the data of various organizations and pop layings a the risk. We are looking at how do you build and. This is not just fema but you call it the whole government. And we will come back to this is will take mutual aide and the federal government. Our Department Defense and private sector and it will take a lot of the public to respond to that scale of the sdaf disaster. So that is where i would just ask that a the an appropriate time it would be not resting to have a briefing. And as to how they are looking it he unknown that we now know to expect but we do not know what it is and could bring calamity to us as congress would be asked to do. And it didnt have the funds to do and expect for it to happen if they would pinpoint how they would go about that. It would educate me. And the suband full committee. Mr. Chairman. I think that we have samples we are doing. The catastrophic planting and some of the work that we have done. And in the new cascade fault zone and off of the coast of the northwest u. S. The new earthquake risk. That is again a very large risk of a large area. And i this i that we can show where we are going and tell you what we think is the path to get us there then that will give you the opportunity to look at are there additional tools that you can give us the last thing that i want to end with it is the stafford act was often times the constraint that was seen as what fema was capable of doing. The past year since i have been in female a we have responded to the haiti, the triadedly the role of the usad. With we are asked to support usad. We did. And last year we were asked to accompanieded childrens and the mass care issues of children in detention facilities. We supported that. And we were asked to support the Ebola Response many of the things that may not be in the papers but they are capabilities that you built and you gave us the tools un Homeland Security act as amended. The stafford act however is limited to often times the Natural Hazards with the limited flexibility. I think that there is an important point. When you look at growing hazards like cyber and others what is the role of the Disaster Relief fund and consequence world and if it is not in rebuilding in the Emergency Response costs and the ability to use the Emergency Declaration to mobilize and bring resources to bear. Is this worthwhile looking at such things which it is a question, what is the role in the pandemic . It is not specifically excluded in the Emergency Declaration. It is not mentioned. Cyber. Again we do not look to have the role in the prevention or the Law Enforcement or or even the response to the technical aspects of it. But states and locals will be dealing with consequences of it. Many of which will follow similar patterns of other types of hazards. We saw this in deep water horizon again the cost guard is the lead agency for that. And had many of of the tools to deal with the response. Much of the coordination with the local and State Governments would have to be built and again, fema is not looking to grow our role. But we think that is better understanding of what the intent of congress is as you point out in the Homeland Security act as a menned as a principal adviser to the president and to congress on Emergency Management and also the role in the capabilities that we have built for many of the sdafer disasters not limiting the applicability to other lead agencies to support them or governors when they fall outside traditional known disasters. Chair will recognize mr. Graves for five minutes thank you mr. Chairman. Mr. Fugate i want to go on a fe