109th Congress - Firefighter Legislation

First Responder Grants - HR 1544, Faster and Smarter Funding for First Responders Act. The measure changes the formula for distributing homeland-security first-responder grants under three major federal programs to put greater emphasis on the threat level faced by communities. It does guarantee each state, however, at least 0.25% of the total funding available, with states on the Mexican and Canadian borders guaranteed 0.45%. The rest of the funds would be distributed by a new federal First Responder Grant Board in the Homeland Security Department. The new distribution formula would not apply to grants to firefighters, emergency planning and management, and all grants outside of the Homeland Security Department. The bill also requires states to pass along to their local governments 80% of federal grant money within 45 days, and to distribute the funds within the state based on threat levels.

FLOOR SITUATION: The Rules Committee may recommend a rule making in order specified amendments. Members are requested to submit their amendments to the Rules Committee by noon on Tuesday, May 10. The bill will be managed by Chairman Cox, R-Calif. The Democratic manager will be Rep. Thompson, D-Miss.

BACKGROUND: The Homeland Security Committee reported the measure by voice vote (H Rept 109-65).

Since the Sept. 11, 2001, terrorist attacks, the Homeland Security Department has provided nearly $10.5 billion directly to state and local "first responders," such as emergency personnel, law enforcement and other agencies, to enhance their ability to prepare for and respond to terrorist attacks. This money has been distributed through several grant programs, the largest of which are the formula-based State Homeland Security Grant program and a discretionary Urban Area Security Initiative, which provides money to cities and regional areas considered to be at the highest risk of terrorist attack. Although there is wide agreement that this funding has helped local areas enhance their preparedness, many organizations and members of Congress have expressed concern about the way that such funding is distributed and used.

The USA PATRIOT Act (PL 107-56) guarantees each state, plus Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia, at least 0.75% of the total funding available under the formula-based program, while each territory is guaranteed 0.25%. In allocating funding over the past three years, the Homeland Security Department's Office of Domestic Preparedness has provided the base amount, and has then distributed the remaining funding on the basis of population. Although the department wanted to shift toward a risk-based distribution, the FY 2005 Homeland Security Appropriations Act (PL 108-334) required the department to distribute grants in line with the previous methodology.

Some critics contend that these minimum guarantees are unfair, because they prevent funding from going where it is most needed. Under the current system, Wyoming received $37.94 per capita in FY 2004 while New York state, which was attacked on September 11, received $5.42 per capita. In its report, the September 11 commission urged that first responder grants be distributed on the basis of risk. This call was reiterated in recent weeks by the vice chairman of that committee, former Rep. Lee H. Hamilton, who said that terrorists have not targeted rural areas and it is believed that they have little intention of attacking such areas. He urged Congress to take that into consideration. Others argue, however, that because we never know how or when terrorists may strike, we should ensure that all areas have access to federal funding.

There are also concerns that states and local governments have been slow to use the money that they've received. According to reports, only about 30% of the funding appropriated since 2002 has actually been spent, leaving about $6.8 billion "in the pipeline." The committee has argued that one of the principal reasons for this is that states have not developed plans for using the money before receiving it. Questions have also been raised about how the funds are spent by localities, especially on items that seem to have little or no use for terrorism prevention. Among the items purchased using the funds, according to a report on CBS's 60 Minutes, were traffic cones in Des Moines, air-conditioned garbage trucks in Newark, N.J., and bullet-proof vests for dogs in Columbus, Ohio. Critics have argued that standards for equipment and training should be developed to ensure that funds are spent more wisely.

Last year, Congress attempted to change the funding structures, but came to no resolution. Two Senate committees reported out legislation to change the structure, while in the House, four committees reported out different versions of a bill (HR 3266) sponsored by Rep. Christopher Cox, R-Calif., chairman of the then-Select Homeland Security Committee. These competing versions reflected the tension between providing money to all states and ensuring that funds go to areas with the highest levels of risk. A compromise - requiring risk-based distribution while providing each state with a certain amount of funding - was reached on the House bill and it was included in the the House version (HR 10) of intelligence-reform legislation based on the Sept. 11 commission's recommendations. The enacted version of that legislation (PL 108-458) did not include any changes to the grant funding. Instead, it urged Congress to address the matter in the first session of the 109th Congress.

In its FY 2006 budget request, the administration proposed restructuring the grant distribution to target funding to areas with the greatest needs. Under the administration's proposal, both the state funding and the high-risk urban-area funding would be provided through discretionary grants, rather than through formulas. It has also proposed a new grant program focused on protecting infrastructure.

On April 15, the Senate Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee reported a bill (S 21) that authorizes $2.9 billion in first responder funding in both FY 2006 and FY 2007, combines three existing programs into a single program, and guarantees each state 0.55% of the total funding. It also includes a "sliding scale" that provides more populous states with up to 3% of the total funding. The House Homeland Security Committee reported out its own bill, largely based on the compromise language included in the 9/11 legislation. This year, the bill was not referred to any other committees, due in part to the committee's new permanent status and jurisdiction and the agreements that Chairman Cox worked out with other chairmen.

It is unclear how quickly the differences between the chambers will be resolved, or if the formula change will actually apply to the FY 2006 cycle. The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Homeland Security approved a draft FY 2006 appropriations bill that would maintain the current 0.75% minimum guarantee unless a change to the formula is enacted; but, it would require any remaining funding to be distributed on the basis of risk, rather than population.

SUMMARY: This bill changes the distribution of certain first responder grants provided by the Homeland Security Department to require that grants be distributed primarily based on threat levels, while providing each state with a minimum guarantee of at least 0.25% of the total funding available, or 0.45% for states that have an international border. It requires state governments to develop three-year homeland-security plans for enhancing their preparedness and response capabilities, and it requires all applications, whether from a state, a region or an eligible Indian tribe, to be consistent with the plan. It also requires states to forward at least 80% of the funds to local entities within 45 days of receiving them. Finally, the measure requires the department to establish a task force to assist the department in updating a list of essential capabilities for first responders, and it requires the department to establish national standards for training and equipment. Unlike a similar Senate measure (S 21), the bill does not authorize a specific funding level for first responder grants.

The bill requires the department to take the risks and threats posed to states and local areas when distributing first responder grants, while ensuring that each state receives a minimum guarantee of funding. The measure supersedes provisions in the USA PATRIOT Act (PL 107-56) concerning the allocation of terrorism grants.

The measure establishes a First Responder Grant Board to review and prioritize applications submitted by states, regions and Indian tribes. The board would be chaired by the Homeland Security secretary and also would include the undersecretaries for the four directorates, the director of the Office of Domestic Preparedness, and the administrator of the U.S. Fire Administration.

The bill requires the grant board to base its prioritization on the degree that the use of such funding would lessen the threat to, vulnerability of, and consequences for, people and critical infrastructure from a terrorist attack. Priority would be given to threats of terrorism that are more specific or credible, especially in areas that are prone to repeat attacks. The bill requires the board to consider various types of threats - including nuclear, biological, chemical and radiological - across 16 different sectors identified in the bill.

The measure sets minimum levels of funding and requires the department, after it distributes grants based on risk, to distribute additional funding to applicants that have not reached the specified funding level. Under the measure, each state - plus Puerto Rico and the District of Columbia - would receive at least 0.25% of the total amount distributed, while states that have an international border, or that are on a body of water with an international border, would receive at least 0.45%. Guam, the Virgin Islands, American Samoa and the Northern Marianna Islands would each receive at least 0.08%.

(Under current law, first responder grants are primarily distributed through two programs, and states receive at least 0.75% of the total funding. The department has then distributed the remaining funding based on population.)

Under the measure, the new distribution method would apply only to three programs - the State Homeland Security Grant Program, the Urban Area Security Initiative and the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention program. In FY 2005, these grant programs were appropriated a total of $2.7 billion.

The measure specifically excludes grants to assist firefighters, emergency-management planning and assistance grants, and all grant programs outside of the Homeland Security Department. The committee report notes that the measure also would not apply to critical infrastructure programs, the Citizen Corps Program, or the Metropolitan Medical Response System.

The measure allows states, regions and Indian tribes to apply for first responder grants. (Under the current program, only states are allowed to do so.)

The measure requires states to submit a three-year homeland-security plan for approval by the Homeland Security Department in order to be eligible for grants covered by the measure. The plan must include a description of the state's progress in meeting essential capabilities, must demonstrate and prioritize the state's needs, and must describe how the state intends to address its needs at the state, local, regional and interstate level, with an emphasis on regional planning. The state plan would be developed in consultation with local governments, Indian tribes and first responders. The committee report recommends that states also should consider the risks posed to non profit groups that are at risk.

The measure requires that any grants awarded to a state, Indian tribe or region must be consistent with the state homeland-security plan or plans. In addition, all applications must detail the purpose for which funds are being sought, how the funds will help meet essential capabilities, a statement about the applicability of a mutual aid agreement, a capital budget, and a statement on how the applicant will meet their matching requirements.

The measure permits the department to award grants to regions, including those within a state and those that cover area in more than one state. The bill defines a region as a geographical area that covers at least 20,000 square miles or that has more than 1.65 million people. It permits other areas to be designated by the department with the consent of local and state governments.

Because regional grant applications must be consistent with a state's three-year homeland-security plan, the bill requires that regional applications be submitted to the relevant state government or governments. The bill gives the state governments 30 days to review the application and either submit it to the department or notify the department that it is inconsistent with the three-year plan. All regional applications would be required to include a description of the region and its participating local governments, as well as an explanation of which government entity would administer the funds. The measure also requires that a regional liaison be designated to administer the grant and coordinate with relevant parties.

Any funding awarded to the region would be provided to the relevant state governments, which would be required to pass the grant money to regional entities within 45 days, or the grant money would be provided directly to the regional entities. Regional awards would not count toward a state's minimum allocation.

The bill allows Indian tribes that meet certain criteria to apply for grants from the department. The measure requires that tribal applications be submitted to state governments, which would then submit the tribal application along with the state application. It allows states to comment upon the applications, but the department would have final authority to approve them.

As with the regions that apply for grants, a tribal liaison would be designated to administer the grants and coordinate with relevant parties. The measure limits to 20 the total number of tribal grants in any fiscal year, and guarantees that at least 0.08% of the total amount available for the grant programs will be collectively spent on tribal grants. Tribes that do not receive grants directly would be eligible for assistance through the grants provided to state governments.

The measure requires states to obligate or pass along to local governments, first responders or other local groups, at least 80% of the funds that they receive within 45 days. If the state fails to meet this deadline, the department could reduce or terminate the grant, or impose additional restrictions and burdens. States could request a 15-day extension, subject to approval by the department.

Grants could be used for a variety of purposes specified in the bill, including purchasing equipment, exercises and training approved by the department, response plans, information-sharing, planning, personnel costs incurred due to elevations in the Homeland Security Advisory System, interoperable communications, and certain expenses for protecting critical infrastructure. Up to 3% of the grant could be spent on administrative grants. The measure clarifies that its provisions do not preclude the use of funds in a manner that also enhances first responder preparedness for emergencies and disasters unrelated to acts of terrorism, if such use allows governments to meet their essential capabilities for terrorism preparedness.

The measure prohibits the use of funds to supplant state and local funds, to construct buildings or other physical facilities, to acquire land, or to cover state or local cost-sharing contributions.

The bill also allows recipients of grant money to seek approval from the department to transfer funds from uses specified in the grant agreement to other uses covered by the bill.

The bill specifies that the federal share of projects - i.e., the maximum amount of funding for a project that could come from the federal grant - would be 100% for the first two years and 75% after the initial two-year period.

The measure requires states, regions and tribes to provide quarterly reports on homeland-security spending. As an incentive for timely filing, the bill allows the maximum federal share to be increased by up to 2%, thereby reducing the state or local government's share of costs by 2%. The measure also requires grant recipients to file annual reports. States would file reports with the department while regions and tribes would submit their reports to the relevant state governments. The bill requires the department to submit an annual report to Congress on progress in meeting essential capabilities.

The measure requires the department to update its list of essential capabilities for first responders as often as necessary, but at the very least every three years. On April 1, the Homeland Security Department released the interim National Preparedness Goal, which had been required by the Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8 (HSPD-8). The goal provides guidance on how to most effectively and efficiently strengthen preparedness for terrorist attacks, major disasters, and other emergencies. A final goal could be issued in October.

The bill creates a new task force - the Task Force on Terrorism Preparedness for First Responders - to assist in updating, revising or replacing the list. The task force would consist of 25 members appointed by the secretary who would represent a cross section of first responders from both the state and local level, who would serve terms of no more than 18 months and will be limited to two terms. The bill requires the task force to submit reports, within one year of establishment and every two years thereafter, on recommended capabilities for different types of communities.

The measure requires the department, in consultation with outside groups and the Health and Human Services Department, to develop national standards for first responder equipment and training within six months of enactment. The standards for equipment would focus on maximizing certain factors, and grant applicants who purchase equipment with grants covered by this bill would be required to buy items that meet these standards or demonstrate why other items would be superior. The bill requires the training standards to ensure that personnel are trained for all hazards, not just terrorism-related events.

* Requires the department to establish an Office of the Comptroller to oversee the grant distribution process and the financial management of the Office of Domestic Preparedness; and

* Requires the Government Accountability Office (GAO) to conduct a study on the status of first-responder training programs within the Department of Homeland Security and other federal agencies.

The Congressional Budget Office (CBO) estimates that enacting the measure would have no significant impact on the federal budget. CBO also found that the bill contained no intergovernmental or private-sector mandates.

AMENDMENTS: The Rules Committee may recommend a rule making in order specified amendments. Members are requested to submit their amendments to the Rules Committee by noon on Tuesday, May 10.

Current Threat Level

TALKING POINTS

Information on HR 1544