[Senate Hearing 115-47]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
S. Hrg. 115-47
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT IN INDIAN COUNTRY: IMPROVING FEMA'S FEDERAL
TRIBAL RELATIONSHIP WITH INDIAN TRIBES
=======================================================================
HEARING
before the
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
UNITED STATES SENATE
ONE HUNDRED FIFTEENTH CONGRESS
FIRST SESSION
__________
FEBRUARY 8, 2017
__________
Printed for the use of the Committee on Indian Affairs
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
26-164 PDF WASHINGTON : 2017
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing
Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800;
DC area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104 Mail: Stop IDCC,
Washington, DC 20402-0001
COMMITTEE ON INDIAN AFFAIRS
JOHN HOEVEN, North Dakota, Chairman
TOM UDALL, New Mexico, Vice Chairman
JOHN BARRASSO, Wyoming MARIA CANTWELL, Washington
JOHN McCAIN, Arizona JON TESTER, Montana,
LISA MURKOWSKI, Alaska AL FRANKEN, Minnesota
JAMES LANKFORD, Oklahoma BRIAN SCHATZ, Hawaii
STEVE DAINES, Montana HEIDI HEITKAMP, North Dakota
MIKE CRAPO, Idaho CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO, Nevada
JERRY MORAN, Kansas
T. Michael Andrews, Majority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
Jennifer Romero, Minority Staff Director and Chief Counsel
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Hearing held on February 8, 2017................................. 1
Statement of Senator Cantwell.................................... 3
Statement of Senator Cortez Mastro............................... 31
Statement of Senator Franken..................................... 4
Statement of Senator Hoeven...................................... 1
Statement of Senator Lankford.................................... 29
Statement of Senator Murkowski................................... 4
Statement of Senator Tester...................................... 3
Statement of Senator Udall....................................... 2
Witnesses
Amparo, Alex, Assistant Administrator for Recovery, Office of
Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management Agency,
U.S. Department of Homeland Security........................... 5
Prepared statement........................................... 7
Begaye, Hon. Russell, President, Navajo Nation................... 12
Prepared statement........................................... 13
Chavarria, Hon. J. Michael, Governor, Pueblo of Santa Clara...... 16
Prepared statement........................................... 18
Desautel, Cody, Natural Resources Director, Confederated Tribes
of the Colville Reservation.................................... 25
Prepared statement........................................... 27
Appendix
Hansen, Jeff, Director, Office of Emergency Management, Choctaw
Nation of Oklahoma, prepared statement......................... 47
Response to written questions submitted to Alex Amparo by:
Hon. Heidi Heitkamp.......................................... 56
Hon. James Lankford.......................................... 57
Hon. Tom Udall............................................... 49
EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT IN INDIAN
COUNTRY: IMPROVING FEMA'S FEDERAL-
TRIBAL RELATIONSHIP WITH INDIAN TRIBES
----------
WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 8, 2017
U.S. Senate,
Committee on Indian Affairs,
Washington, DC.
The Committee met, pursuant to notice, at 2:57 p.m. in room
628, Dirksen Senate Office Building, Hon. John Hoeven,
Chairman of the Committee, presiding.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOHN HOEVEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NORTH DAKOTA
The Chairman. We will now commence the oversight hearing on
Emergency Management in Indian Country: Improving FEMA's
Federal-Tribal Relationship with Indian Tribes.
The Committee is holding this important hearing on
emergency management in Indian country. It is timely to begin
this conversation now.
The winters can be hazardous in many parts of the country.
With the spring comes the thaw and often flooding. My home
State of North Dakota is a good example. In other parts of the
country, oftentimes it is tornadoes or battling fires.
Some Indian reservations in North Dakota, most notably the
Spirit Lake Indian Reservation and the Turtle Mountain Band of
Chippewa, have received major disaster declarations due to
spring flooding.
Tribes around the country experience other types of
emergencies and disasters. These hard hit communities face a
long road to recovery. It is incumbent upon the Federal
Emergency Management Agency, FEMA, to effectively assist in
that recovery and to get an early start on efforts to reduce
the impacts of future disaster risks.
Tribes can seek emergency aid for emergency declarations
directly from the President, instead of going through the
States. This is designed to help with timely requests and
timely assistance to hard hit communities.
Today, we will hear from the witnesses regarding these
events and the Federal response, as well as recommendations for
improving emergency management and the Federal-tribal
relationship.
Before we turn to our witnesses, I want to ask Vice
Chairman Udall if he has an opening statement?
STATEMENT OF HON. TOM UDALL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEW MEXICO
Senator Udall. Yes, I do, Mr. Chairman.
Thank you for calling this oversight hearing so quickly
into the new Congress. Tribal disaster declaration authority is
critical to tribal governments across the country.
I look forward to working with you on this issue and others
that require deliberate and focused congressional oversight.
Before I begin my opening remarks, I would like to welcome
and thank the tribal witnesses, two of whom represent tribes
from my home State of New Mexico. Both Governor Chavarria of
the Santa Clara Pueblo and President Begaye of the Navajo
Nation have shown strong leadership and dedication to tribal
self determination and self governance, particularly in
managing natural disasters on their tribal homelands.
In 2015, 3 million gallons of toxic mine water swept
downstream into the Navajo Nation's lands following the rupture
of the Gold King Mine in Colorado. As President Begaye can
attest, we still do not know the full impacts of this
environmental disaster that sent polluted water into the Animas
and San Juan Rivers and through the Navajo Nation.
The Federal Government response to Gold King has been one
of the most frustrating things I have seen the Navajo Nation go
through in my time in Congress. In response, working with a
bipartisan group of colleagues, we enacted the legislation last
year to prioritize government reimbursements and to fund and
authorize long term water quality monitoring.
Now the Federal Government is denying liability for
personal damage claims, including for Navajo farmers. This is
unacceptable to me. We are now again working on new legislation
to compensate individuals who lost crops and suffered other
damages from the spills.
In Santa Clara Pueblo, the Las Conchas fire, one of the
largest in New Mexico history, destroyed thousands of acres of
Pueblo's traditional lands. Subsequent severe flooding
destroyed thousands more. The damage was extensive and
devastating to the tribe's canyon and scorched the tribe's
watershed.
I have seen the aftermath of this disaster firsthand and I
know the watershed restoration project is a major challenge.
As a result of this catastrophic wildfire, the Pueblo has
been forced to make five disaster declarations seeking
assistance from the Federal Government since 2011. I am proud
to say that I supported both the Santa Clara Pueblo and Navajo
Nations' emergency declaration requests and letters to the
President.
I look forward to hearing about their experience with
disaster relief and its impacts. I also look forward to hearing
the FEMA witnesses describe the recently issued Tribal Pilot
Guidance and the agency's plans for further implementation of
the Act.
Since the enactment of the Tribal Stafford Act in 2013,
tribes have been able to request emergency or major disaster
declarations directly from the President and independent of
States. For many years, tribes were forced to rely on their
State governor to make these requests on their behalf in order
to receive Stafford Act assistance, assistance that is vital to
tribal governments for protecting the health and safety of
their citizens in the wake of emergency or major disasters.
I strongly support the parity created by the Tribal
Stafford Act for tribal and State governments and their
concurrent ability to seek disaster assistance directly from
the President.
I understand that there are tribal State coordination
issues that could result in inadequate Federal assistance for
both sovereigns. I look forward to hearing from FEMA and the
tribal witnesses today about what actions have been taken to
ensure that tribes and States coordinate closely on decisions
to request emergency or disaster declarations.
Federal assistance that supports tribal efforts to respond
to and recover from an incident that overwhelms tribal
capabilities must be effective. That is why I signed onto a
Government Accountability Office request to study tribal
disaster declaration issues.
This request includes ways to build and strengthen tribal
capacity to request major disaster declarations and manage
associated funding. I expect the result of this study to inform
further bipartisan discussions among my Committee colleagues on
how we can work together to assist tribal governments in
protecting public health, safety and property in the event of a
major disaster in Indian country.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Vice Chairman Udall.
Are there other opening statements before we turn to the
witnesses? Senator Cantwell.
STATEMENT OF HON. MARIA CANTWELL,
U.S. SENATOR FROM WASHINGTON
Senator Cantwell. Mr. Chairman, I would just like to
welcome my constituent and witness, Mr. Cody Desautel from the
Colville Tribe who is with us here today and thank him for
coming.
The Colville Tribe, along with Washington State, has been
front and center in two years of devastating fires in 2014 and
2015. We lost 863,000 acres during that time period. In 2015,
the Tunk Block and North Star fires devastated the Confederated
Tribe of the Colville Reservation and they lost 259,000 acres
of commercial timberland which held a billion board feet of
salable lumber resulting in a 20 percent loss of their general
operating revenues.
If there is any tribe in America that can tell you the
devastating impacts of these natural disasters and fires, it is
the Colville Reservation.
Thank you, Mr. Desautel, for being with us and being a
witness at today's hearing.
The Chairman. Senator Tester.
STATEMENT OF HON. JON TESTER,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MONTANA
Senator Tester. Very quickly, thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Black Feet Tribe just declared a state of emergency
because they received five feet of snow last night. To rub salt
in the wound, they are predicting 50 mile an hour winds
tomorrow. They will get help from the State.
I only bring this up because of the timeliness of this
hearing. They are going to be calling and will be needing help.
You know what happens with 5 feet of snow and 50 mile an hour
winds. You also know what happens when it gets above 32 degrees
and you have that kind of snow melt.
Thank you all for being here. I especially want to thank
the tribes.
The Chairman. Do other Senators have opening comments?
Senator Murkowski.
STATEMENT OF HON. LISA MURKOWSKI,
U.S. SENATOR FROM ALASKA
Senator Murkowski. You gave me an opening. I said we need
to get to the witnesses.
Mr. Chairman, I too want to thank you for the timeliness of
this hearing. Alaska is pretty legendary for the disasters we
have whether they are earthquakes, floods, fires, mudslides or
volcanoes. We kind of do it all.
One of the things I am hoping to have discussion about
today, I really appreciate the witnesses, is what we are
calling a slow moving disaster. That is a reality we are facing
in Alaska as we are seeing communities threatened by storms,
flooding, coastal erosion, the thaw of our permafrost and the
impact to our communities that are considering relocation,
asking for assistance with relocation to protect their families
and their way of life.
The infrastructure is being severely damaged whether it is
the water systems, maybe not water at all, peoples' homes are
literally falling into the ocean due to coastal erosion and
more are in danger. There are schools and community buildings
that are at risk.
Two of the communities that are facing substantial danger
right now are the Yupik community of Newtok and Kivalina and
the Inupiat community up on the Chukchi. Both of these
communities have recently applied for major disaster
declarations due to severe storms, flooding and many of the
issues I mentioned.
Yet both of these communities were denied because they did
not fit the contours of the Stafford Act. It is something that
as we are talking about disasters, I think we need to recognize
that we have disasters as Senator Tester has just mentioned
with the weather that is coming and then we have these
disasters that we see coming at us and perhaps not in an
immediate forceful way but the force of the looming danger to
our communities is very, very real.
I thank you for the opportunity to discuss these important
issues today and look forward to the comments from today's
witnesses.
The Chairman. Do other Senators have comments before we
turn to the witnesses? Senator Franken.
STATEMENT OF HON. AL FRANKEN,
U.S. SENATOR FROM MINNESOTA
Senator Franken. Thank you, Chairman Hoeven and Vice
Chairman Udall for holding this hearing and thank you to all of
our witnesses for your testimony.
Before I begin my remarks, I want to take a moment to
recognize Senator Barrasso for his leadership as chairman and
Senator Tester for his as well in the last Congress.
To our new Chair and new Vice Chairman, I look forward to
continuing to work with you in this new Congress.
This hearing is an opportunity to shine a light on the very
important relationship between FEMA and the tribes. I will
touch on this a bit more in my questions but I am particularly
interested to hear about FEMA's relationship with the Prairie
Island Indian community.
Prairie Island sits on a floodplain in the Mississippi
River. It is also approximately 600 yards from two nuclear
reactors and nuclear waste storage facilities. The members of
the Prairie Island community live with a constant concern of
radiation exposure.
In my State, it is very important that FEMA is prepared for
anything and that it continues to coordinate its emergency
management plans with Prairie Island.
Thank you again, Mr. Chairman and Vice Chairman Udall. To
all the witnesses, I look forward to your testimony.
The Chairman. Do any other Senators wish comment before we
proceed to the witnesses?
Our witnesses today are: Mr. Alex Amparo, Assistant
Administrator for Recovery, Office of Response and Recovery,
Federal Emergency Management Agency, U.S. Department of
Homeland Security; Mr. Milo Booth, National Tribal Affairs
Advisor, Office of External Affairs, Federal Emergency
Management Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security; the
Honorable Russell Begaye, President, Navajo Nation, Window
Rock, Arizona; the Honorable J. Michael Chavarria, Governor,
Pueblo of Santa Clara, Espanola, New Mexico; and Mr. Cody
Desautel, Natural Resources Director, Confederated Tribes of
the Colville Reservation, Nespelem, Washington.
I want to remind the witnesses that your full written
testimony will be made a part of the official hearing record.
If you would, please keep your opening statements to five
minutes each so that we proceed to questions.
With that, we will begin with Mr. Amparo.
STATEMENT OF ALEX AMPARO, ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR RECOVERY,
OFFICE OF RESPONSE AND RECOVERY, FEDERAL EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT
AGENCY, U.S.
DEPARTMENT OF HOMELAND SECURITY; ACCOMPANIED BY: MILO BOOTH,
NATIONAL TRIBAL AFFAIRS ADVISOR, OFFICE OF EXTERNAL AFFAIRS
Mr. Amparo. Good afternoon and thank you, Chairman Hoeven,
Vice Chairman Udall, and members of the Committee.
It is my pleasure to be here today with our National Tribal
Advisor, Mr. Milo Booth. Thank you for the opportunity to
provide you an update on FEMA's efforts since we last testified
in the summer of 2014. I am excited to talk with you about how
we have progressed.
FEMA has a long history of working within our authority to
fully embrace the nation-to-nation relationship between the
U.S. Government and federally recognized tribes. Prior to 2013,
as mentioned, tribes had to seek disaster assistance through
State declarations.
Thanks to the authority provided to us by Congress with the
passage of the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act, tribes now have
the option to request a declaration from the President
directly.
At FEMA, we applaud this change which properly reflects
tribal sovereignty and we work very hard to further our
agency's relationship with tribes. I am pleased to share with
you that FEMA has released the Tribal Declarations Pilot
Guidance which provides new specifically designed criteria for
evaluating a tribe's request for a declaration and takes into
account the unique effects of tribal nations and conditions.
This guidance was shaped by extensive outreach and
communication with our tribal partners. This included three
rounds of tribal consultation comprised of 140 listening
sessions nationwide. Each round of consultation averaged 500
participants representing approximately one-third of all
federally-recognized tribes.
By the end, we had received more than 2,000 comments which
we, as an agency carefully reviewed and responded to on our
website. Most importantly, this input was vital in shaping the
pilot guidance that has been released.
In addition to the development of the declaration guidance,
FEMA has undertaken many actions to build and improve
relationships with our tribal partners. We have hired a
national tribal advisor and a tribal specialist at our
headquarters to help lead this activity.
We ensured that each of our ten regions has at least one
tribal liaison to work in building that relationship in the
field with tribes individually on a regular basis. They help
coordinate a variety of services that FEMA can provide to
tribes including technical assistance, grant opportunities,
exercise training and others. When disaster strikes, we also
deploy from our cadre of tribal specialists who are on call.
I tell you from my more than 20 years experience in
emergency management that effective emergency management at its
core is based on relationships, understanding mutual capacities
and the needs of communities. From this foundation, we then
enhance disaster preparedness through targeted planning,
training and exercises.
FEMA's Emergency Management Institute and the Center for
Domestic Preparedness, two of our main training facilities,
have developed tribal-specific training. For example, in 2016,
more than 1,000 tribal emergency managers and first responders
were trained in these facilities.
In fact, in just a few weeks at the Center for Domestic
Preparedness, we will host the second annual tribal nations
training week which includes multiple courses for training
first responders, followed by a full scale integrated exercise.
Last year, over 157 tribal emergency managers and 46 tribal
nations participated.
Outside of our training facilities, FEMA is also
facilitating more large scale exercises to support building
tribal response capabilities. Last year, FEMA Region 10 in the
Northwest conducted the Cascadia Rising, a four day earthquake
and tsunami exercise. Twenty-four tribes in Washington, Oregon
and Idaho participated in various ways ranging from tsunami
evacuation drills to full integration in local emergency
operations centers.
What I have outlined today illustrates just a part of our
commitment to federally-recognized tribal governments.
Thank you for the opportunity to talk to you about the work
the men and women at FEMA have done. FEMA continues to be
committed to our partnership and collaboration with tribes.
There is still much work for us to do. We recognize that
and remain committed to Indian country and working with this
Committee and our tribal partners to learn, evolve and help
build a more resilient America.
Thank you for your time and I look forward to the questions
of this Committee.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Amparo follows:]
Prepared Statement of Alex Amparo, Assistant Administrator for
Recovery, Office of Response and Recovery, Federal Emergency Management
Agency, U.S. Department of Homeland Security
Introduction
Good afternoon, Chairman Hoeven, Vice Chairman Udall, and members
of the Committee. I am Alex Amparo, Assistant Administrator with the
U.S. Department of Homeland Security's (DHS) Federal Emergency
Management Agency (FEMA). Thank you for this opportunity to meet with
you today to discuss ways in which FEMA is improving relationships with
federally recognized Indian tribes.
FEMA is committed to our partnership and collaboration with
federally recognized Indian tribes, and to providing support in their
preparation for, protection against, mitigation of, response to, and
recovery from all hazards and disasters. FEMA has a strong tradition of
engagement with federally recognized Indian tribal governments (tribal
governments). However, since the passage of the Sandy Recovery
Improvement Act (SRIA) in 2013, the agency has dedicated additional
resources to ensuring that tribal governments are fully woven into the
fabric of our mission.
Today, I can tell you that FEMA recognizes the unique relationship
between Indian Country and the Federal Government, and the unique
conditions that affect Indian Country. We work side-by-side with our
tribal partners on all aspects of our mission, and we continue to
posture ourselves to better support our tribal partners at any time. To
reinforce how we recognize these important relationships, I would like
to specifically outline FEMA's approach as described in: (1) FEMA's
Tribal Policy; (2) FEMA's Tribal Consultation Policy; and, (3) FEMA's
Tribal Declaration Pilot Guidance.
FEMA's Tribal Policy
The U.S. Government has a unique nation-to-nation relationship with
federally recognized tribal governments based on the Constitution of
the United States, treaties, statutes, executive orders, and judicial
decisions. In 2016, FEMA updated its agency-wide tribal policy. The
policy outlines a framework for nation-to-nation relations with
federally recognized tribal governments that recognizes tribal
sovereignty, self-governance, and the general trust relationship,
consistent with applicable authorities.
Key principles of our policy include:
A. Recognizing the unique nature of each tribal community and
the need to work with all members of tribal communities, FEMA
commits to building strong and lasting partnerships with tribal
governments to assist in preparing for all threats and hazards,
including those unique to tribal communities.
B. FEMA will respect and support the unique status of
sovereign tribal governments by engaging in meaningful dialogue
that will assist tribal communities with any emergency
management needs, which fall under the authority of FEMA.
C. FEMA acknowledges the inherent sovereignty of tribal
governments, the general trust relationship with the federal
government, and the nation-to-nation relationship between the
U.S. Government and tribal governments as established by the
U.S. Constitution, statutes, treaties, court decisions,
executive orders, regulations, and policies as the foundation
of this policy.
In updating this policy, FEMA conducted tribal consultation in
2016, to facilitate tribal feedback on the proposed policy revisions.
FEMA held 23 separate events nationwide consisting of 18 regional in-
person listening sessions, two national webinars, and three tribal
association conference presentations during the tribal consultation
period reaching more than 300 tribal participants. FEMA received more
than 100 comments in-person and through email, which the agency
adjudicated to finalize this revised policy.
For FEMA, this consultation effort on the updated FEMA Tribal
Policy represented a significant outreach. To accomplish this FEMA
developed structures throughout the agency to support improving our
relationships with federally recognized Indian tribal governments. In
2014, FEMA hired a National Tribal Affairs Advisor, Milo Booth
(Tsimpshian from the Metlakatla Indian Community in Metlakatla,
Alaska), to lead the Tribal Partners Branch (TPB) at FEMA headquarters.
In 2016, Margeau Valteau (Navajo from Window Rock, Arizona) joined the
TPB as a tribal specialist.
FEMA tribal liaisons, located in our regional offices, are the
first resource and point of contact for tribal nations that have
questions or require technical assistance on agency programs. Following
the federal recognition of the Pamunkey Indian Tribe in 2016, FEMA
added a Regional Tribal Liaison to FEMA Region III giving each FEMA
regional office at least one tribal liaison supporting tribal affairs.
While these tribal liaisons are a critical piece to our outreach and
work with tribal governments, it is important to know that all FEMA
employees who administer our various programs are available to assist
in delivering programs and resources to Indian Country.
In addition to Tribal Affairs staffing, FEMA's Emergency Management
Institute (EMI) provides training to tribal governments and their
employees to develop their emergency management capabilities. During
fiscal year 2016, EMI delivered 55 tribal courses to 763 tribal
attendees and 94 other partners. The tribal curriculum courses are
delivered by a team of instructors who are selected for their extensive
experience working with and for tribal governments in emergency
management and the majority of the instructors are tribal members. In
addition to providing tribal curriculum courses on the EMI campus in
Emmitsburg, Maryland, EMI also provides these courses off-site,
traveling out to Indian Country to reach tribal communities directly.
EMI currently has planned 21 courses on their 2017 schedule, and will
likely increase course deliveries as the year progresses.
FEMA's Center for Domestic Preparedness (CDP) provides training to
tribal emergency responders. In fiscal year 2016, CDP hosted its first
Tribal Training Week and trained 157 tribal emergency responders from
46 tribal nations. During the week, CDP conducted five courses followed
by an operational Integrated Capstone Event full-scale exercise. In
2016, 793 tribal first responders completed courses at the CDP, a 245
percent increase from 2015. This year CDP will host the 2017 Tribal
Nations Training Week from March 19 to 25.
Exercises
In addition to providing training, FEMA also coordinates exercises
with tribal nations to examine and validate capabilities critical to
their readiness.
In September 2015, in Great Falls, Montana, more than 100 people
came together to simulate the response to crude oil train derailment on
the Blackfeet Nation. FEMA's National Exercise Division coordinated the
exercise, Montana Operation Safe Delivery, along with Blackfeet Nation,
the State of Montana, and FEMA Region VIII staff. This is one of three
in a nationwide series of exercises and the only one to take place on a
tribal nation. The goal of the exercise was to examine and confirm the
capabilities needed to respond to, reduce the effects of, mitigate the
consequences of, and recover from a train derailment involving crude
oil. The two-day seminar and tabletop exercise brought together all
seven tribal nations in Montana to participate in and learn from a
simulated volatile incident.
In June 2016, FEMA Region X conducted a four-day functional
earthquake and tsunami exercise, Cascadia Rising. At least 24 tribes in
Washington, Oregon, and Idaho participated in various ways ranging from
tsunami evacuation drills to full integration in the local Emergency
Operations Center. During Cascadia Rising, FEMA exercised its internal
capacity to respond to multiple direct disaster declarations from
tribal governments.
Tribal participation continues to improve our discussions about
pre-landfall hurricane preparedness as well. For the third year in
2016, tribal emergency managers participated in FEMA's annual hurricane
preparedness video teleconference with FEMA leadership and state
emergency management directors in hurricane-prone areas.
By both providing staff resources at the national and regional
level, as well as mission critical training opportunities for tribes,
FEMA gains a better understanding of the unique circumstances that
affect tribal governments and identifies creative solutions to these
unique challenges to better partner with tribal governments and
emergency management professionals to serve the needs of disaster
survivors.
FEMA Tribal Consultation Policy
FEMA's Tribal Consultation Policy governs precisely how we engage
Indian tribes in meaningful consultation. It was developed and issued
pursuant to E.O. 13175 of November 6, 2000, Consultation and
Coordination with Indian Tribal Governments and Presidential
Memorandum, Tribal Consultation (74 Fed. Reg. 57881) that direct
agencies to engage in regular and meaningful consultation and
collaboration with tribal officials in the development of federal
policies that have tribal implications, and to strengthen the
government-to-government relationship between the United States and
Indian tribes.
The current consultation policy was signed in August 2014, and
outlines the specific roles and responsibilities for various FEMA
officials, as well as a detailed outline on how consultation is
achieved and when it takes place. As a result of this policy, if a
tribal government was not consulted on an existing policy or action by
FEMA that they determine affects their community or has tribal
implications, they may contact the National Tribal Affairs Advisor and
request to be a consulting party. Much like how the FEMA Tribal Policy
was updated, we anticipate updating the FEMA Tribal Consultation Policy
in 2017. We look forward to engaging our tribal partners during the
comment period to ensure that our update reflects the evolving needs of
Indian Country.
Underlying FEMA's work and mission is the whole community approach
that reinforces that FEMA is only one part of our nation's emergency
management team. We must leverage all of our collective team resources
in preparing for, protecting against, responding to, recovering from,
and mitigating against all hazards. Tribal nations are critical
components in our whole community, and our commitment to addressing
their needs is evident in our strategic priority to be survivor-centric
in mission and program delivery. To further survivor-centric outcomes,
FEMA leadership adopted a ``cut the red tape'' posture to focus on the
needs of survivors and to develop and execute programs and policies
with survivors' perspectives in mind. FEMA recognizes that the
consistent participation and partnership of tribal governments is vital
in helping FEMA achieve its mission, so an ongoing dialogue with tribal
governments and periodic updates of our policies is key to ensuring
these goals are met.
FEMA's Tribal Declaration Pilot Guidance
On January 29, 2013, President Obama signed into law the Sandy
Recovery Improvement Act of 2013 (P.L. 113-2) (SRIA), one of the most
significant pieces of legislation impacting disaster response and
recovery since the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of
2006.
Section 1110 of SRIA, ``Tribal Requests for a Major Disaster or
Emergency Declaration under the Stafford Act'' authorized federally
recognized Indian tribal governments (tribal governments) the option to
request a Stafford Act emergency or major disaster declaration
independent of the state if they chose to do so. As amended, the
Stafford Act now better reflects the sovereignty of tribal governments
and acknowledges FEMA's nation-to-nation relationship with tribal
governments. This new authority also requires the President to
``consider the unique conditions that affect the general welfare of
Indian tribal governments'' when issuing regulations to implement this
new authority. FEMA developed a phased implementation to ensure
consideration of the unique needs of tribal governments, which are
further outlined below.
In consultation with federally recognized tribal governments, we
are working thoughtfully and deliberately to develop regulations that
best reflect the unique situation of tribal governments. Therefore,
FEMA began implementing the new authority in three phases: (1) use of
adapted state regulations; (2) implementation of pilot guidance; and
(3) final rulemaking.
Immediate Use of Regulations
Immediately after SRIA's enactment, FEMA used existing state
declaration regulations and criteria to process declaration requests
from tribal governments. Since the passage of SRIA, there have been
eight major disasters declared in Indian Country: The Eastern Band of
Cherokee Indians (North Carolina), the Navajo Nation (Arizona, New
Mexico, and Utah), the Standing Rock Sioux Tribe (North Dakota and
South Dakota), the Karuk Tribe (California), the Santa Clara Pueblo
Tribe (New Mexico), which has received two disaster declarations, the
Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians (California), and the Oglala Sioux Tribe
of the Pine Ridge Reservations (South Dakota). Through these
declarations, Public Assistance, Individual Assistance, and Hazard
Mitigation Grant Program funding is being provided directly to the
tribal governments.
On February 14, 2013, the Eastern Band of Cherokee Indians (EBCI)
submitted a request for a declaration due to severe weather which
resulted in flooding, road damage, and landslides in the EBCI Qualla
Boundary and associated lands. A Major Disaster Declaration was signed
on March 1, 2013, as the first direct federal to tribe disaster
declaration under SRIA. The tribe's existing relationship with the
state of North Carolina and the FEMA Region IV Tribal Liaison was
strengthened and additional connections with FEMA were created during
the event. These connections allowed less turmoil for the tribe when
performing multiple processes and mission support in an environment of
inexperienced applicants. Lessons learned included clarification and
guidance regarding policies and procedures on tribal declarations and
the need for more cultural awareness by FEMA staff.
In August 2015, the President declared a disaster for the Oglala
Sioux tribe as a result of severe storms, straight line winds, and
flooding. As part of the assistance made available through the disaster
declaration, FEMA and the Oglala Sioux Tribe completed a permanent
housing construction mission that delivered 196 manufactured homes, and
repaired an additional 107 homes on the tribe's Pine Ridge Indian
Reservation. The housing mission was part of the first ever
Presidential major disaster declaration for Individual Assistance
granted directly to a tribal nation. The agency hired 25 local tribal
members to assist in that effort and their roles were vital in the
success of the mission. In addition, following the disaster, eleven
tribal members joined the FEMA Reservist program.
FEMA gathered critical information, best practices, and process
challenges that have informed the development of the Tribal
Declarations Pilot Guidance that serves as a comprehensive resource for
tribal governments on Stafford Act declarations, disaster assistance,
and related requirements.
Pilot Guidance Development
FEMA's disaster declaration regulations were developed to evaluate
states' capacity and their need for supplemental disaster assistance.
Since these parameters may not be indicative of a tribal nation's
ability to respond and recover from a disaster, FEMA augmented its
procedures and criteria to reflect the capacity and needs of tribal
governments. Before entering the rulemaking process, FEMA intends to
utilize the pilot period to inform the development of regulations,
ultimately leading to final regulations which reflect the unique needs
of tribal governments.
Tribal participation and input was critical to the development of
the Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance. In 2013, FEMA initiated tribal
consultation to inform the development of the first draft guidance.
FEMA hosted 26 listening sessions nationwide. FEMA sent written
correspondence from the FEMA Administrator to all 567 federally
recognized tribes, and issued advisories to national and regional
tribal organizations and associations to advise them of the
consultation. FEMA regional and headquarters leadership presented at
numerous tribal conferences to provide an overview of the declaration
process and to solicit feedback.
In 2014, FEMA conducted 60 listening sessions around the country,
from Northern Alaska to Montana, Oklahoma to Florida, and to Maine with
540 participants and 220 tribes represented. Through these listening
sessions, FEMA gathered more than 1,000 comments on the first draft
guidance as well as strengthened relationships with tribal governments.
We learned more about the challenges that tribal communities face, the
response and recovery capabilities of tribal governments, and their
understanding of Stafford Act assistance. FEMA regions have been
extremely proactive in meeting consultation requests of Native Alaskan
Villages and Indian tribal governments. For instance, FEMA Region X
senior staff flew to Alaska to consult with the Aleut Communities of
St. Paul and St. George Islands.
The second draft of the guidance was posted to the Federal Register
for a 90-day public comment period that ended in April 2016. In
addition to posting in the Federal Register, FEMA conducted additional
consultation over the 90-day period with over 500 tribal officials
representing 178 federally recognized tribal governments through
participation in 54 listening sessions nationwide. Nearly 800 comments
were received and adjudicated. The final Tribal Declarations Pilot
Guidance is a culmination of all of the interaction and feedback
through consultation with tribal governments that has occurred over the
past several years. In total, FEMA received over 2,000 comments and
conducted 140 listening sessions nationwide.
The pilot guidance describes the process by which tribal
governments will use to request Stafford Act declarations, during the
pilot period, and the criteria FEMA will use to evaluate direct tribal
declaration requests and make a recommendation to the President. It is
the culmination of over three years of tribal consultation and
development of multiple drafts of the guidance. The guidance
incorporates key changes based on comments FEMA received from tribes.
These changes include the establishment of a Public Assistance minimum
damage amount for tribal declarations of $250,000; the addition of
historic preservation as a demographic factor that may influence the
impacts of a disaster; expansion of eligibility under the Individuals
and Households Program to include non-enrolled tribal community
members, when requested by the tribal government; and modifying and
adding definitions of terms.
The extensive consultation FEMA conducted with tribal governments
in the development of the Tribal Declaration Pilot Guidance was not
only valuable in informing what the pilot would look like, but also was
invaluable to improving our understanding of the needs and unique
characteristics of Indian Country. Additionally, it serves as a good
example of FEMA's commitment to improving our relationships with tribal
governments.
Additional Ongoing Initiatives to Support Tribal Governments
The Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration (FIMA) supports
tribal governments by providing direct assistance and support in the
development of FEMA approved Hazard Mitigation Plans and guidance in
the development of projects for Hazard Mitigation Assistance (HMA)
grants. Hazard mitigation planning enables tribal governments to
identify risks and vulnerabilities associated with natural disasters,
and develop long-term strategies for protecting people and property
from future hazard events. FIMA currently uses regional and headquarter
resources to provide outreach and technical assistance to tribal
governments in support of these activities. FIMA developed guidance
documents, outreach materials and provided training opportunities to
educate tribal governments in developing hazard mitigation plans and
grant applications, and provided technical assistance to tribal
governments applying for, and developing HMA Grants for projects
including development of hazard mitigation plans. FIMA also developed
resources to assist tribal governments with accessing the eGrants
System, and applying directly to FEMA for HMA Grants. In the past two
years a portion of the Pre-Disaster Mitigation Grant funds have been
set-aside for tribal applications. Tribal nations occupy three of the
ten non-FEMA positions on the External Stakeholders Working Group that
was formed to increase engagement and transparency with external (non-
federal) partners.
In 2016, FIMA conducted tribal consultation on the Tribal
Mitigation Planning Guidance that guides agency officials in the
interpretation of regulatory requirements in their review and approval
of tribal mitigation plans. The underlying regulatory requirements for
tribal mitigation planning in 44 CFR Part 201 have not changed. The
goal of this update was to simplify and streamline the document,
introduce a set of Guiding Principles for Tribal Mitigation Plan
Review, and to improve alignment with similar state and local guidance
on mitigation planning.
Conclusion
The development and update of FEMA's Tribal Policy, Tribal
Consultation Policy, and Tribal Declaration Pilot Guidance shows just
part of our commitment to supporting federally recognized tribal
governments in their preparation for, protection against, mitigation
of, response to, and recovery from all hazards and disasters. The
agency continues to seek feedback from our tribal partners and to
improve how we can engage and work with them.
We look forward to our continued collaboration to further support
tribal governments as they build their emergency management
capabilities. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you, Mr. Amparo.
It is my understanding your opening remarks will cover both
yourself and Mr. Booth. Mr. Booth, did you have anything to
add?
Mr. Booth. Yes, sir.
Good afternoon, Chairman Hoeven and Vice Chairman Udall.
I fully support everything that Mr. Amparo has said. I look
forward to any questions this Committee may have.
The Chairman. Thank you.
Next is the Honorable Russell Begaye.
STATEMENT OF HON. RUSSELL BEGAYE, PRESIDENT, NAVAJO NATION
Mr. Begaye. Thank you, Chairman. Also, congratulations for
taking on this important position for Indian Nations across
America. Senator Udall, thank you for assuming that
responsibility as Vice Chair of this important Committee.
I am Russell Begaye, President of the Navajo Nation. First,
I want to talk about the Gold Kind Mine spill.
On August 5, we saw the river that feeds into our Nation
turn yellow as orange juice. It passed the City of Durango. I
asked that all of our irrigation systems be cut off to all of
our farmland on our Nation. The river runs 200 miles on the
Nation so we immediately cut off the source that would
contaminate our land, our river and our water.
That was done and we had 200 Navajo Nation employees and
volunteers assist in the response but no FEMA employee was on
the ground with our people that responded.
On October 2, 2015, we declared an emergency. We made an
application to FEMA. FEMA denied us 18 days later on October
20, 2015. In its denial, FEMA said, ``The vast majority of the
response and recovery efforts for this event fall under the
authorities of other Federal agencies.''
I met with then Secretary Vilsack from USDA who was willing
to help. I met with the Secretary of Health and Human Services.
They were willing to come and assist us through the HHS
facilities but both of them were told not to get involved with
this disaster because they were not the lead agency.
EPA told these Federal agencies not to assist the Navajo
Nation because EPA was the lead agency for this. Because of
that, USDA, HHS and other Federal agencies did not come
alongside the Navajo Nation to help us.
That needs to change because anytime disasters occur, all
Federal agencies should use their resources to help Indian
tribes like the Navajo Nation in the Gold King Mine spill with
their disaster. If that had happened, I know that today farmers
would be farming their land. Now they are reluctant to open up
the water system because they feel the contaminants are still
in the river, still on the banks, still in river banks and the
river beds.
To this day, a lot of farmers are reluctant to use the
water source. That is the livelihood of our farmers. Not a
single farmer to date has been compensated for their loss. We
are saying look at the policy. Let all Federal agencies be
released to help in any disaster situation.
We would also like to say that because of the resources we
have, we are always stretched thin. I urge Congress to review
FEMA's funding for tribes so that our people can be better
served in event of a disaster.
When you compare this to the BP oil spill, why did FEMA and
other Federal agencies engage in that situation, yet shy away
from the Gold King Mine spill? EPA is the only one that came
and monitored and looked at the river but FEMA was not there
because we believe they were told to back off because EPA was
the lead agency.
Also, on August 3 through August 5, 2016, the evening of
August 3, I was given a call and told that there was a flood
coming through the Town of Shiprock. Homes were being washed
away and vehicles were floating down the river. A huge disaster
took place in the City of Shiprock.
Again we submitted an application to FEMA declaring a major
disaster on August 21, 2016. On October 12, 2016, FEMA denied
our application because FEMA determined that ``The impact to
individuals and households from this event was not of such
severity and magnitude to warrant supplemental Federal disaster
assistance.''
We are saying when is it disastrous enough for FEMA to come
and help? In this case, these homes were washed away and the
vehicles were hanging off the trees two or three days later.
We are asking and appealing that more details about the
impact and factors applied by FEMA for individual assistance be
clarified. FEMA again denied the appeal we made by simply
reaffirming their original conclusion.
FEMA's response was short and general and did not explain
how they reached the decision. We are saying we need more
guidance and clarity from FEMA when they deny assistance to
Indian tribes which encounter disasters.
Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Begaye follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Russell Begaye, President, Navajo Nation
Ya'at'eeh Chairman Hoeven, Ranking Member Udall, and Members of the
Committee. My name is Russell Begaye. I am the elected President of the
Navajo Nation. Thank you for this opportunity to present testimony to
discuss the Navajo Nation's experience in working with Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA). I want to talk about two request
for declarations that we worked on during my administration: a request
for emergency declaration relating to the Gold King Mine spill in
August 2015 and a request for a major disaster declaration concerning
the Shiprock Flooding that occurred in August of 2016. Unfortunately,
both of these requests for declarations were denied. We hope to provide
testimony that will prevent tribes in similar situations from being
denied federal emergency management resources in times of need.
Gold King Mine, August 2015
As this Committee is aware, on August 5, 2015, the U.S.
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) and its contractors triggered a
release of at least three million gallons of toxic mine waste in the
waters directly upstream of the Navajo Nation. The toxic waste flowed
into the Animas River and the San Juan River. The San Juan River runs
approximately 250 miles along the northern border of the Navajo Nation.
Thirteen Navajo Chapters were affected. Upon notice of the spill, the
Navajo Nation took action immediately to shut down all intakes into the
Shiprock, Upper Fruitland-Cambridge and Hogback irrigation canal
systems. The Navajo Nation Department of Emergency Management (``DEM'')
identified livestock watering points in the affected area. Our teams
worked with the BIA to haul water and set up water tanks at these
watering points. The Navajo Nation DEM provided ranchers and farmers
information about safe water intake for livestock and for preserving
crop fields. The Navajo Nation's EPA monitored water quality at eleven
strategic points along the San Juan River. The Nation's DEM activated
the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) to coordinate the Nation's
response to this toxic spill. In all, approximately 200 Navajo Nation
DEM and Navajo EPA employees and volunteers assisted in the response to
this disastrous federal EPA-triggered spill. No federal FEMA employees
were ever on the ground.
The Nation submitted its FEMA application for an emergency
application on October 2, 2015. FEMA notified the Nation on October 20,
2015 that it denied our application for an emergency declaration.
FEMA's justification for the denial was that the agency determined that
``the vast majority of the response and recovery efforts for this event
fall under the authorities of other federal agencies.'' The ``other
federal agency'' referred to by FEMA was the USEPA, the agency
responsible for causing the emergency situation, and with a strong
self-interest in minimizing the response in order to minimize potential
liability for its actions. Despite this strong conflict of interest,
the Obama administration designated USEPA as the lead federal agency
for spill response. We believe the designation of the USEPA as the lead
agency blocked assistance from other federal agencies including FEMA
and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). For example, in
discussions with FEMA staff, we were informed that FEMA's ``federal
mission'' does not include livestock and crop fields, and livestock and
crop fields were the most affected by the toxic spill. FEMA staff also
informed us that USDA assistance for livestock and crop fields are
provided under major disaster declarations, not under emergency
declarations. When we reached out to the USDA we were informed their
regulations prohibited them from assisting us here because the
livestock and crop fields were impacted by an emergency, not a major
disaster. As you know, the USEPA recently declared that they are not
legally responsible for the spill--just days before the Obama
administration left office. The bottom line is that the USEPA caused
this spill, and our Navajo people who have suffered greatly as a result
of the spill have yet to be compensated for their damages.
In addition to the above roadblocks, we were also informed that
FEMA does not generally get involved in emergency assistance when an
actual or potentially liable party is involved, as was the case with
the Gold King Mine spill.
In regards to FEMA and other agencies lack of involvement in the
Gold King Mine spill, we ask whether FEMA applies this policy
selectively because it is our understanding that FEMA provided
assistance during the BP oil spill that occurred in the Gulf of Mexico
where many federal departments became involved and there were liable
parties. Why did President Obama's FEMA engage in the BP-caused Gulf of
Mexico spill, yet shy away from the USEPA-caused Gold King Mine spill?
We ask the Committee to explore the difference in assistance and
response between these two cases.
FEMA's denial of an emergency declaration also effectively denied
the Nation assistance for its people through counseling services. We
received many requests from the local chapters and individuals for
counseling services. We would have applied for counseling services
assistance from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS)
for those affected by the spill as well as responders to the spill.
However, when we requested this assistance from DHHS, it informed us
that it can only provide this service if an emergency declaration is
made and approved by FEMA. We request this policy be reviewed--our
people should not be denied access to federal counseling services that
would normally have been available under different political
circumstances.
Our Navajo DEM is made up of only 3 employees. When a disaster
occurs, they must take the lead in organizing the response. This is a
lot of work and yet at the same time, they have to make assessments,
develop all the documentation, and submit all the required documents to
FEMA. As such, our resources are stretched thin. Comparable State
emergency departments are made up of 50 or more people. I imagine that
a smaller Tribe than the Navajo Nation, who has limited or no resources
will have even greater difficulty in getting any type of declaration
approved by FEMA. I therefore urge Congress to review FEMA funding for
Tribes so that our people can be better served in the event of a
disaster. Our emergency response teams should have the same resources
as State teams, and Congress can help ensure this parity.
Because the USEPA caused this spill, it effectively prevented FEMA
from taking the lead and engaging with the Navajo Nation. The USEPA
then denied our claims a year-and-a-half after the spill and only days
before the Obama administration left office. I find it appalling that a
federal agency can cause a spill, testify before this Committee that it
takes full responsibility, then prevent FEMA from engaging, then
finally deny liability. This should never be allowed to happen again.
Shiprock Flooding, August 2016
From August 3-5, 2016, flooding occurred in northwest Shiprock, New
Mexico on the Navajo reservation. Three hours after the rainstorm
reached its peak, residents in the affected area began calling public
rescue agencies who responded immediately. Individuals and families
were evacuated to the Shiprock Chapter (``Chapter'') House. Red Cross
had supplies and bedding set up in the Chapter House. The local
emergency response team, entitled the Shiprock ALERT Team, set up a
command post in the Chapter House. DEM provided technical assistance to
the Shiprock ALERT Team. In the early morning of August 6th, breakers
and water lines were shut down; roads were cleared of flood debris so
that residents and rescuers could travel in and out of the area. A
loader and bar screen was used to clear flood debris from the
demolished houses. Trash bins were donated so that debris could be
quickly removed, thus reducing risks to public health. Donations were
being continuously received at the Chapter and distributed to affected
residents. Temporary housing was found for those whose homes had washed
away. Public meetings were held at the Chapter House to keep the
community regularly informed. The Nation's Division of Health staff
assisted affected residents by providing them with safety and health
information and monitoring them for days.
The primary area where flooding occurred was approximately three
square miles. Twenty-seven homes were affected and all were surveyed
for damage by DEM and FEMA. Ten were deemed to be affected but
habitable, two had minor damage and five sustained major damage. Ten
homes were destroyed. Eleven vehicles were destroyed and five of these
washed away. The damage to the affected families was documented and
estimated at $967,516. Five months after the flooding seven families
have been re-settled, nine families continue living in temporary homes,
three have been provided trailers by the Navajo Nation, one person is
homeless, one family purchased their own home, and one family is
renovating their home to make it habitable.
The Navajo Nation submitted its FEMA major disaster declaration
application on September 21, 2016. On October 12, 2016, FEMA denied our
application because FEMA ``determined that the impact to individuals
and households from this event was not of such severity and magnitude
as to warrant supplemental federal disaster assistance.'' The Nation
appealed FEMA's denial on November 9, 2016. Our appeal emphasized the
individual assistance factors applied by FEMA pursuant to 44 CFR
206.48(b): (1) concentration of damages, (2) trauma, (3) special
populations, (4) voluntary agency assistance, and (5) insurance. \1\ On
November 28, 2016, FEMA notified the Nation that its appeal was denied.
The denial simply reaffirmed FEMA's original conclusion that the
``impact to individuals and households from this event is not of the
severity and magnitude as to warrant supplemental federal assistance.''
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The 6th factor applies primarily to states.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The original FEMA denial stated only that the impact to the
individuals and families was not severe enough and the magnitude was
not sufficient enough. In our appeal, we gave more details about the
impact experienced by the affected individuals and families in
accordance with the factors applied by FEMA for individual assistance.
Nonetheless, FEMA denied our appeal on the same basis of insufficient
severity and magnitude.
The Nation requests clearer guidance from FEMA to Indian tribes who
apply for individual assistance. Because FEMA did not explain how and
why it reached the conclusion that it did, we can only speculate about
the basis of their conclusion with questions such as the following. Was
the 3 square-mile area not of sufficient magnitude? Given the census
population numbers we included for the Shiprock community, were 21
families not sufficient to warrant a declaration? Were the estimated
total damage costs of $967,516 not severe enough or of sufficient
magnitude? The Nation does not know what thresholds apply under each
factor that FEMA considers in deciding whether a major disaster event
qualifies for federal assistance. In addition, the Nation wonders
whether the scope of the disaster response might have worked against a
declaration decision because the locally-based Shiprock ALERT Team
functioned as the primary responder, not the Nation's DEM. Shiprock
ALERT Team was right there in the community and could respond
immediately and coordinate services for rescue, repair, and aid.
Because the affected area was a residential area, the flooding did not
impact any government operations or facilities. This experience with
unclear guidance from FEMA about its individual assistance
determinations leads us to request that FEMA provide clear guidance for
Indian tribes with respect to applications for individual assistance.
The Nation also recommends that FEMA consider a class of disaster
relief that would allow for assistance for individuals who have
disaster damages that are localized in scope even if tribal government
functions and facilities are not affected. Given the limited resources
of all types for Indian tribes, even a localized disaster event will
greatly challenge the internal resources of most Indian tribes.
Other Declarations
Prior to my Presidency, there were two other Navajo Nation
declarations approved by FEMA. One declaration was for a freeze that
occurred across the Navajo Nation around December 2012 to January 2013.
The Nation had filed a request for a major disaster declaration and
FEMA approved the declaration. This declaration was filed shortly after
the Stafford Act was changed to allow Indian tribes to file
declarations for themselves rather than go through the state. Navajo
was one of the first few tribes to file pursuant to this new law.
The other declaration was made as a result of severe storms,
flooding and mudslides that occurred in New Mexico from July through
September of 2013, but this assistance did not come from Navajo's own
declaration. Initially, from our understanding, Navajo was denied
assistance from FEMA because the cumulative amount of Navajo's
documented damages did not exceed the $1 million threshold. In the
alternative, the Nation filed as a subgrantee of the State of New
Mexico under their declaration since their cumulative damages would
then exceed the $1 million threshold. The tribal threshold has since
been reduced to $250,000, which now makes it easier for tribes to
receive assistance.
If you need further information on these declarations, we can
provide it upon your request.
Conclusion
FEMA recently published a Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance dated
January 2017. We provided comments to the draft of this guidance.
However, at this time, we are working to see if any of our comments
were incorporated into that Guidance. When the flooding and the Gold
King Mine spill occurred, we did not have this guidance and we had to
rely on specialized expertise and navigate the complex maze of federal
regulations. Since it is in the pilot phase, we shall see how this will
help us out in the future.
The Nation places a spotlight on the difficulties Indian tribes
confront when attempting to apply for emergency declaration assistance,
especially when federal guidelines and regulations require criteria
that do not apply to an emergency event such as the toxic spill that
contaminated the San Juan River and yet caused damage to vitally
important tribal resources. As a result, many of the individual farmers
and ranchers affected by the toxic spill remain uncompensated almost
two years after the event. The fact that farmers have not been
compensated for their EPA-caused losses and the fact that FEMA was
prevented from engaging is absolutely unacceptable. I commend this
Committee for focusing on tribes' difficulties in obtaining disaster
assistance from the Federal Government.
The Chairman. Thank you, President Begaye.
We will now turn to Governor Chavarria.
STATEMENT OF HON. J. MICHAEL CHAVARRIA, GOVERNOR, PUEBLO OF
SANTA CLARA
Mr. Chavarria. [Greeting in native tongue.]
Out of respect, Mr. Chairman, Vice Chairman and members of
the Committee, my name is Michael Chavarria, Governor for Santa
Clara Pueblo.
In my native Santa Clara, I just asked the Chairman, out of
respect, to speak on behalf of my Pueblo in Santa Clara and for
an invitation to testify this afternoon before this Committee.
In the last 20 years, the Santa Clara Pueblo has faced and
overcome numerous natural disasters. In 2011, as Vice Chairman,
I mentioned we were devastated with the Las Conchas fire.
The fire caused damage to our forests and lands which is
our pharmacy. The Santa Clara Creek is a biological classroom.
Most of our Santa Clara Canyon, which is our spiritual
sanctuary, has a 25.9 mile burn scar across our traditional
lands. The burn scar destabilized the land and left our
community vulnerable to flashfloods and mudslides.
While FEMA and other Federal agencies have undertaken
significant efforts to protect our people and our lands, that
threat still remains. Our lands remain unstable and our prone
to the imminent threat of flooding.
However, we are thankful to those Federal agencies for
coming to our aid and continue to partner for the resilience of
flooding for Santa Clara Pueblo.
As mentioned, we had five presidential disaster
declarations. We have two or three as a sub-grantee to the
State of New Mexico and as Stafford amendments were made, we
have two direct disaster declarations for Santa Clara Pueblo.
There are serious financial considerations in choosing
whether to proceed as a sub-grantee or as a direct grantee. As
a sub-grantee to the State, we are responsible for 12.5 percent
of that cost. However as a direct grantee, we are obligated to
meet 25 percent of that cost while the Federal Government
through FEMA covers the remaining 75 percent.
With five presidential disaster declarations, Santa Clara
has been responsible for tens of millions of dollars in cost
sharing matches which has placed a tremendous burden on our
already limited tribal budgets and has taken away from other
social programs for our elders and children.
One of the things I have recommended is adjusting the cost
share thresholds to be more responsive to the financial needs
of the tribe. Santa Clara took that opportunity by writing to
Mr. Tony Robinson, Regional Administrator on September 26, 2014
pursuant to 44 CFR Subsection 206.47 about a reduction in the
local cost share. ``Yes, this request could be authorized but
must be approved by the President.''
With this, we are approved at a 10 percent cost share
reduction. This is very vital because we are not wealthy
financially. However, we are wealthy with our traditions, our
culture and our religion. An important thing is our Native
language which is the glue that holds together our culture and
traditions.
Because the devastation was so huge in November 2013, Santa
Clara became the first tribal government to request and receive
disaster recovery assistance under the National Disaster
Recovery Framework, the NDRF.
The NDRF is used to create a comprehensive federally-led
strategy to the build the community's resiliency to future
flooding. The National Disaster Recovery Framework incorporates
a recovery support strategy which enables the tribes to
maximize their resources by enabling the tribes to coordinate
with Federal, State and non-governmental organizations through
a systematic approach that is mutually beneficial. Most
importantly, it respects our sovereignty.
I have submitted a written statement for this hearing. It
contains the background of the fire, the impacts and continued
threats to our existence as Santa Clara Pueblo. Most important
is a graph that was provided by the Corps of Engineers that
shows on any given day, we face a 100-year flood event.
Pre-fire, it was 5,000 cubic feet per second. Because no
more vegetation was there, we are now prone to a 21,000 cubic
feet per second flood event within our canyon because of the
altered hydrology.
This is very important. Five minutes is not really enough
time to go into full detail about our challenges. However, I
would like to recommend that we support Stafford amendments
which promote self determination and better reflect the unique
government-to-government relationship that exists between FEMA
and tribal nations.
Second, we recommend the creation of a BIA emergency
response fund that will be equipped to provide tribes with
emergency funding to address short and long term disaster
recovery and prevention efforts.
Third, we also recommend additional funding for effective
fire prevention treatment such as fuel breaks, hazardous fuel
reduction projects which could then provide our lands with
greater protection and reduce the need for extensive costly
fire suppression efforts.
Fourth, we support the expansion of land management
programs such as the Tribal Forest Protection Act that empowers
tribal governments to act as caretakers of those Federal lands
adjacent to our reservation and partnering the tribes to
protect the trust resources is very vital.
Finally, we support the FEMA Tribal Declaration Pilot
Guidance as a valuable addition to the Federal toolbox. It
reflects the diverse voices of Indian country including our own
and is responsive to our concerns.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee. I now
stand for any questions you may have at this time.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Chavarria follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. J. Michael Chavarria, Governor, Pueblo of
Santa Clara
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
The Chairman. Thank you, Governor Chavarria.
Now we will turn to Director Desautel.
STATEMENT OF CODY DESAUTEL, NATURAL RESOURCES
DIRECTOR, CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE COLVILLE
RESERVATION
Mr. Desautel. Good afternoon, Chairman Hoeven, Vice
Chairman Udall, and members of the Committee. I appreciate the
opportunity to testify today.
My name is Cody Desautel and I am the Natural Resources
Director for the Confederated Tribes of the Colville
Reservation. The tribe appreciates the opportunity and would
like to share our important issues and experiences working with
FEMA during disasters.
The Colville Reservation covers approximately 1.4 million
acres. The reservation is slightly larger than the State of
Delaware by area. About half of the tribe's members live on our
reservation.
Of the 1.4 million acres, more than 900,000 are forested
and of those 900,000 forested acres, over 660,000 our part of
our commercial cut base which we rely on for timber production
and revenue that supports our tribal government.
I am going to address three issues. The first will be the
catastrophic fires we had in 2014 and 2015 and later a
windstorm event we had in 2012.
The catastrophic fires are explained in my written
statement. In eastern Washington, we saw the worse fire season
in the State's history in 2014 and 2015. In 2014, four fires
collectively referred to as the Carlton Complex, burned 256,000
acres in communities near the Colville Reservation.
While damage to the Colville Reservation was comparatively
small and limited to our inhabited rangeland, our tribal
personnel assisted local governments in the suppression and
recovery efforts. The Carlton Complex fire burned more than 300
homes and other structures and affected life and property
throughout two watersheds.
In 2015, the Colville Tribes endured the most destructive
fire on an Indian reservation in recorded history. The North
Star and Okanogan Complex fires collectively burned more than
255,000 acres on the Colville Reservation, nearly 20 percent of
the total land base, and approximately one-fourth of the
commercial timber land.
Approximately 800 million board feet of timber we think was
burned but further inventory work is ongoing to fully assess
the damage of that fire season.
The 2015 fires statewide resulted in the deaths of three
firefighters, a non-firefighting fatality and 21 injuries, and
ultimately burned more than 1 million acres in the State. The
Okanogan Complex fire surpassed the 2014 Carlton Complex fire
as the largest fire in Washington State history.
2015 marked the first year ever that Washington State
officials asked residents to volunteer to assist in fighting
wildfires.
For both the 2014 Carlton Complex and the 2015 fires, the
President issued PDDs that authorized public assistance for
both the Colville Tribes and the affected local governments. In
both cases, however, FEMA denied Governor Inslee's requests for
assistance for homeowners under FEMA's Individual Assistance
Program.
The tribe then submitted its own separate request for
Individual Assistance for on-reservation residents. FEMA denied
that request as well.
The second point is catastrophic wildfires should be
treated differently by FEMA. Neither FEMA nor the Stafford Act
adequately addresses the full extent of damage caused by
massive, catastrophic wildfires, especially for Indian tribes.
In the next few years to Colville Tribe's single largest
task will be replanting trees burned during the 2015 wildfire
season. The only dedicated funding source for replanting is BIA
funds which are somewhat limited, as I am sure you know. The
BIA has a statutory obligation to replant Indian forests but
its annual average reforestation budget is approximately $3.4
million. In comparison, the tribe's request for rehabilitation
funding was roughly $20 million.
This would cover planting of less than 11,000 acres for all
tribes nationwide. I think just in 2015, there was half a
million acres of Indian forests burned.
For catastrophic fire events, FEMA should provide immediate
assistance for fire suppression, stabilization and landscape
rehabilitation. For Indian forestland, FEMA should also provide
resources for replanting in light of the United States' trust
obligations to reforest Indian forestland.
One approach would be to create a separate disaster
declaration category for catastrophic fire events. This concept
was included in Title IX of the House-passed Resilient Federal
Forests Act of 2015.
As a third point, FEMA should re-examine its criteria to
ensure rural tribal communities are treated fairly. One of
FEMA's criteria for evaluating requests for individual
assistance is concentration of damages.
FEMA has never explained why it denied the Washington State
and Colville Tribes' requests for individual assistance for the
2014 or 2015 fires. The tribes believe the fact that much of
the damage was widespread over a large geographic area was the
primary reason for the denial.
Rural areas like the Colville Reservation are inherently
prone to a lower concentration of damages based on population
density but often suffer more damage than metropolitan areas.
This was the case with the affected residents of the Colville
Reservation, many of whom lost access to health care and other
essentials due to extended road closures.
Other tribal members lost their livelihoods when cattle and
rangeland burned, which are damages that have persisted and
will continue long after the fires were extinguished.
The new FEMA Pilot Guidance for Tribal Disaster Declaration
did not affect how FEMA applies concentration of damages to
tribes. We believe FEMA should amend this guidance to issue new
guidance that makes clear that rural Indian tribes will not be
denied assistance based on concentration of damages.
This concludes my testimony and I would be happy to answer
any questions the Committee may have.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Desautel follows:]
Prepared Statement of Cody Desautel, Natural Resources Director,
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation
Good afternoon, Chairman Hoeven, Vice Chairman Udall, and members
of the Committee. My name is Cody Desautel and I am the Natural
Resources Director for the Confederated Tribes of the Colville
Reservation (``Colville Tribes'' or the ``CCT''). I appreciate the
opportunity to testify on improving FEMA's relationship with Indian
tribes.
My testimony today will focus on three issues: (1) the impact of
three major disasters on the Colville Reservation during the past five
years, including two massive wildfires; (2) why catastrophic wildfires
should be treated differently by FEMA and under the Stafford Act; and
(3) the need for FEMA to re-examine its criteria for evaluating
disaster declarations for rural tribal communities.
Background on the Colville Tribes and Major Disasters on the Colville
Reservation
Although now considered a single Indian tribe, the Confederated
Tribes of the Colville Reservation is a confederation of twelve
aboriginal tribes and bands from across eastern Washington State. The
present-day Colville Reservation is in north-central Washington State
and was established by Executive Order in 1872. The Colville
Reservation covers approximately 1.4 million acres and its boundaries
include parts of Okanogan and Ferry counties. The CCT has more than
9,400 enrolled members, making it one of the largest Indian tribes in
the Pacific Northwest, and the second largest in the State of
Washington. About half of the CCT's members live on or near the
Colville Reservation. Of the 1.4 million acres that comprise the
Colville Reservation, 922,240 acres are forested land, and 660,000 of
the forested acres are commercial timber land.
The Colville Tribes has endured three major disasters during the
past five years. The first occurred in July 2012, when a major wind
storm and flash flood toppled trees, destroyed power lines and tribal
infrastructure, and blocked or damaged roads over an area of several
hundred thousand acres. Although damage occurred reservation-wide, the
community of Keller was most heavily affected by the storm. Homes were
lost or damaged, and residents with undamaged homes were left without
power for extended periods. The community water infrastructure was
damaged by uprooted trees, and rural residents outside of the Keller
community were without power for even longer. The Keller disaster
occurred before the tribal amendments to the Stafford Act became law
and the CCT worked with the State of Washington to ensure that the
state included damage to the Colville Reservation as part of its
request for a Presidential Disaster Declaration (PDD). President Obama
issued the PDD, which enabled the Colville Tribes and other affected
jurisdictions to obtain assistance through FEMA's Public Assistance
program.
Two years later, in 2014, four fires, collectively referred to as
the ``Carlton Complex'' fires, burned 256,108 acres in communities near
the Colville Reservation. While the Colville Reservation damage was
comparatively small and limited to uninhabited rangeland, CCT personnel
assisted local governments in the suppression and recovery efforts. The
Carlton Complex fire burned more than 300 homes and other structures
and affected life and property throughout two watersheds.
Most recently, in 2015, the Colville Tribes endured the most
destructive fire on an Indian reservation in recorded history. The
North Star and Okanogan Complex fires collectively burned more than
255,000 acres on the Colville Reservation--nearly 20 percent of the
total land base. Approximately one-fourth of the commercial timber land
on the Reservation burned or was affected, which included 788 million
board feet of timber. These two fires were part of the worst wildfire
season in Washington state history that saw more than 121 fires ignited
during a four-day period from August 10-14, 2015.
The 2015 fires statewide resulted in the deaths of three
firefighters, a non-firefighting fatality, 21 injuries, and ultimately
burned more than 1 million acres. The Okanogan Complex fire surpassed
the 2014 Carlton Complex fire as the largest fire in Washington state
history. 2015 marked the first year ever that Washington state
officials asked residents to volunteer to assist in fighting wildfires.
For both the 2014 Carlton Complex and the 2015 fires, Washington
State Governor Inslee requested, and President Obama issued, PDDs that
authorized Public Assistance for both the Colville Tribes and the
affected local governments. In both cases, however, FEMA denied the
Governor's requests for assistance for homeowners under FEMA's
Individual Assistance program. Following FEMA's denial of the
Governor's Individual Assistance request for the 2015 fires, the
Colville Tribes submitted its own separate request for Individual
Assistance for on-reservation residents. FEMA denied that request as
well.
Catastrophic Wildfires Should be Treated Differently by FEMA and in the
Stafford Act
Currently, neither FEMA nor the Stafford Act adequately addresses
the full extent of damage caused by massive, catastrophic wildfires.
While FEMA did establish an ``Erosion Threat Assessment Reduction
Team'' to assess post-fire rehabilitation needs, the funding for
carrying out most of those activities must be secured from other
sources. Funding for immediate landscape stabilization can be charged
to the Department of the Interior's Wildland Fire Management program,
but longer term Burn Area Rehabilitation funding is extremely limited
for Indian tribes nationwide, as are funds for replanting.
In the next few years, the single biggest task will be replanting
trees burned during the 2015 wildfire season. Although the Colville
Tribes has and continues to seek alternative funding sources, the only
dedicated federal source of replanting funds for Indian forests are BIA
forestry funds. The BIA has a statutory obligation to replant Indian
forest land but its average annual reforestation budget is
approximately $3.2 million for tribes nationwide.
The BIA's entire $3.2 million budget would cover planting of less
than 11,000 acres. Relying only on BIA funds would mean the hundreds of
thousands of acres of forest land on the Colville Reservation may not
be replanted for decades, if ever. In contrast to the obstacles the CCT
must endure given the limitations of the BIA's reforestation budget,
the U.S. Forest Service is already implementing its plans to replant
the 9,095 acres of national forest land affected by the 2014 and 2015
fires.
The CCT has traditionally relied on forest products and stumpage as
primary sources of revenue to fund tribal government programs. The
long-term damage to the CCT's economy and government will be felt for
decades unless replanting can take place soon. The loss of forest lands
will also have a lasting cultural impact on the Colville Tribes and its
members. The fires devastated big game populations, cultural plants,
and culturally significant sites reservation-wide.
FEMA programs do not address the full extent of the damage caused
by catastrophic fire events, including fires on non-Indian federal
lands. FEMA should provide immediate assistance for fire suppression,
stabilization, and landscape rehabilitation. For Indian forest land,
FEMA should also provide assistance for replanting in light of the
United States' statutory obligations to reforest Indian forest land.
One approach would be to create a separate disaster declaration
category for catastrophic fire events, like what was included in Title
IX of the House-passed Resilient Federal Forests Act of 2015 (H.R.
2647). That provision would have authorized the President to declare a
major disaster for wildfires on federal lands (including Indian trust
lands) and authorized FEMA to aid the Departments of the Interior and
Agriculture for extraordinary wildfire suppression costs that exceed
the 10-year average. The scope and severity of fire events continues to
grow and this type of solution is needed to ensure that both Indian and
non-Indian communities can fully recover from massive fire events.
FEMA Should Re-examine its Criteria to Ensure Rural Tribal Communities
are Treated Fairly
One of FEMA's criteria for evaluating requests for Individual
Assistance is concentrations of damages. As stated in FEMA regulations,
``High concentrations of damages generally indicate a greater need for
Federal assistance than widespread and scattered damages throughout a
State.'' 44 C.F.R. 206.48(b)(1). The FEMA pilot guidance for tribal
disaster declarations did not modify this criterion or otherwise change
how FEMA applies it to tribes.
FEMA has never publicly articulated the basis for its denials of
the Washington state and Colville Tribes' requests for Individual
Assistance for the 2014 and 2015 fires. Based on discussions with local
officials and our congressional delegation, however, we believe that
the fact that much of the damage was widespread over a large geographic
area was the primary reason for FEMA's denials.
Rural areas like the Colville Reservation are inherently prone to a
lower concentration of damages based on population density. However,
the economic, social, agricultural, and cultural damages from major
disasters often impact rural communities much more severely than in
metropolitan areas. This was the case with the affected residents of
the Colville Reservation, many of whom lost access to health care and
other essentials due to extended road closures. Other tribal members
lost their livelihoods when cattle and rangeland burned, which are
damages that have persisted and will continue long after the fires were
extinguished.
In the 114th Congress, members of the Washington state
congressional delegation introduced the ``Individual Assistance
Improvement Act of 2015'' (H.R. 4243), which would have waived the
concentration of damages criterion for rural communities in certain
instances. Until a permanent legislative or administrative fix can be
made, FEMA should amend existing guidance or issue new guidance that
makes clear that rural Indian tribes will not be denied assistance
based on concentration of damages.
The Chairman. Thank you, Director Desautel.
With that, we will turn to questions. The Chairman and Vice
Chairman will save their questions until the end, at least for
this hearing. That could change from hearing to hearing. That
is how we will start. We will start with Senator Lankford.
STATEMENT OF HON. JAMES LANKFORD,
U.S. SENATOR FROM OKLAHOMA
Senator Lankford. Thank you very much.
I appreciate all of you being here and appreciate your
testimony and the conversation on this. This is a pilot program
that has very far reaching implications. As this dais has heard
me say before, Oklahoma is a little different in the way we
handle reservation and non-reservation areas.
As a non-reservation State, there is a tremendous amount of
area that is historic tribal area where there are no businesses
in trust or lands in trust or tribal headquarters that are
there. My question really relates to this program and how this
would work and function.
It is my understanding that for a tribe to make a disaster
declaration, it is $250,000 worth of damage. For a State to
make a declaration, it is $1 million. Is that correct?
Mr. Amparo. Senator, you are referring to what is termed as
a ``minimum damage amount.'' For States, it is a $1 million
damage amount. For tribes, it is $250,000 but that is not a
threshold as if you have $250,000, there is a guarantee for a
declaration.
In the pilot, this is part of the comments we have received
in our listening sessions, the $1 million for tribes was just
too high.
Senator Lankford. So how do you deal with areas of overlap?
For instance, we have many communities where we may have a city
and county that would have issues; you would also have tribal
areas within that same historic area. What accounts for overlap
in an area like Oklahoma where we are a non-reservation
location?
Mr. Amparo. There is coordination with Albert Ashwood, the
State Director of Emergency Management in Oklahoma, close
coordination with our regional office, Region 6 out of Denton,
Texas, with the tribes and the State, the tribes and the State
being the eligible entities to be grantees.
There are situations where we have seen even tribes that
did not have land but had infrastructure that was damaged that
worked closely with the State on a declaration request. I would
tell you the way that overlap is adjudicated is through
coordination between the State and our regional office.
Senator Lankford. Let me ask about the pilot, the
functioning of it.
We are approaching the end of it in many ways as we look on
the horizon at 2020. Is that the end of the pilot program?
Mr. Amparo. We do not have an official end to the pilot
program. It has taken us several years of consultation with
tribes to develop the pilot guidance. It is now in effect. It
will be in effect for at least two years at which time we would
evaluate through data collection what our findings are and what
future changes we would make to guidance.
Senator Lankford. What metrics are you using at this point
to be able to determine that? As you say you are putting it out
to them; you have two years to evaluate it. Do you already have
those metrics in place to see what you want to try to achieve?
Mr. Amparo. I think Senator Murkowski mentioned a couple of
the issues we have with the two declarations requests that came
through. There were different types of events. They were unique
in the way they are.
We continue to hear comments from Indian country on things
that may not have been contemplated where we have put the
guidance out. We are open to those in this pilot period to
account for them.
I think just a sheer number of how many declarations were
granted versus ones that were not, it is not our measure. We
would like to be able to is compare a period of time under this
pilot guidance to a period of time that we were not under this
pilot guidance and look to see what the findings are and be
open to what the data tells us.
Senator Lankford. Mr. President?
Mr. Begaye. Thank you, Senator.
We are asking this Committee to make that disaster balance
a permanent designation of $250,000 because it really is
difficult for communities and rural areas to reach that $1
million threshold that we had to abide by earlier.
Now with this new guidance, we are asking the Committee to
keep that at $250,000 as the amendment for damages.
Senator Lankford. Let me ask a question as well. Is there
any properties, locations or structures that are excluded from
a disaster declaration? If a tribe says these are sacred lands
and here is a certain building, there is a house of worship, or
there is a meeting place or a business, is there any type of
structure that FEMA would say we do not recognize and will not
allot funds to that?
Mr. Amparo. No, sir. Quite the contrary, we work very
closely with the tribes. We have environmental and historic
preservation experts. We also look to the tribes to provide us
some of the cultural experts on tribal lands.
In the declarations we have worked specifically with the
Oglala Sioux Tribe in a large disaster, our reliance on tribal
expertise is immense. That is the direction in which we are
moving.
Senator Lankford. Just clarification, sacred lands, houses
of worship, meeting spots, all of those would be included?
Mr. Amparo. Yes, sir, as tribal infrastructure.
Senator Lankford. Thank you.
The Chairman. Senator Cortez Masto.
STATEMENT OF HON. CATHERINE CORTEZ MASTO,
U.S. SENATOR FROM NEVADA
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
Mr. Amparo and Mr. Booth, thank you very much. Thank you
all for joining us. I have a specific question that impacts my
State of Nevada.
Most people do not realize there are actually 32 Indian
reservations and colonies that stretch across Nevada.
Unfortunately, in January of this year, we had a severe
flooding event in northern Nevada that impacted the Pyramid
Lake Paiute Tribe.
I have similar questions when it comes to the emergency
declaration because I know under the Pilot Guidance you just
released, there is a requirement that the emergency declaration
can be made by the chief executive of the affected tribal
government or governor of the State but it has to be made
within 30 days of the occurrence of the incident.
In my State, if the Pyramid Lake Paiute Tribe decides to
work with the governor, who has not declared that emergency yet
because they are still assessing the damage, can you address
for me whether that 30 days is going to impact whether they are
able to receive the funds or not or how you handle that 30 day
timeline?
Mr. Amparo. Senator, the 30 day is a regulatory timeframe
that we have. We are aware of the preliminary damage
assessments that are underway along with the work the tribe and
the State are working together on. Our commitment is to
continue to work closely.
The impetus behind the Tribal Declaration Guidance and the
change to the Stafford Act through the Senate Recovery Act was
to provide an option to the tribe, an option that they can go
with a declaration in partnership with the State and that has
occurred and continues to occur throughout the country.
Quite frankly, that is a great partnership between tribes
and States or tribes have gone directly to the President
through this. That provides their option. That option still
exists but our commitment is to work closely with the State and
the tribe.
Senator Cortez Masto. Just for clarification, if they do
not get it within that 30 days, you are still willing to accept
that declaration and work with them to respond and provide the
appropriate monetary response if possible?
Mr. Amparo. That is correct. I would say that the State and
the tribe can request an extension prior to the end of the 30
days.
Senator Cortez Masto. Okay. That could be normal course?
Mr. Amparo. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Cortez Masto. Maybe this is something you can
provide to me later. I would like to know how active the
regional tribal liaison is for region 9, particularly leading
up to the severe event. If you could provide that to me in
writing after this that would be fantastic.
Mr. Amparo. I absolutely will, Senator. I would also take
the time to say that among tribes, your State is among the
greatest number participating in the flood insurance program as
well. That is a good thing.
Senator Cortez Masto. You just dovetailed right into the
next discussion. As we all know, the reauthorization of the
National Flood Insurance Program is very important. We also
know that participation in the program overall is low among
Native American communities.
Can you talk a little bit about what effort FEMA has
undertaken to boost participation in this program and ensure
that these communities have affordable flood insurance?
Mr. Amparo. Senator, I would like to be able to get back to
you with more specifics but I will tell you what I do know.
One, we announced yesterday consultation that will begin
with Indian country on hazard mitigation planning review. That
is an effort that we are undergoing to ensure that tribes have
hazard mitigation plans in place prior to events from
happening.
In the same sense, part of my opening oral testimony has
been to show you a bit about how agency has evolved as well.
Working directly with tribes has increased our capacity
internally.
I believe in Region IX, your region, there is more than one
regional tribal liaison. Now we are including in their body of
work the responsibility to talk about all FEMA programs as we
have interaction in both consultation but also in participation
at one of our training institutes or outreach that we do to the
tribes.
We are providing information about the National Flood
Insurance Program and what steps tribes can take to be active
participants.
Senator Cortez Masto. Thank you very much.
Mr. Amparo. Thank you, Senator.
The Chairman. Senator Murkowski.
Senator Murkowski. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I want to give a special shout out to Mr. Booth, who I
understand hails originally from Metlakatla.
Mr. Booth. That is correct, Senator.
Senator Murkowski. It is good to have you here. We
appreciate your leadership.
I mentioned in my opening comments the request from two
villages. The Village of Nutok on December 24 applied for a
presidential declaration of major disaster. They had
destruction of their barge landing, sewage disposal systems,
solid waste site, boat dock, 45 homes damaged and were
concerned they will lose their water supply later this year.
Again, the response to Nutok was that this request was
denied because it did not fit the requirements of the Stafford
Act. We recognize that Nutok's request was unique. This slow
moving disaster, as I mentioned, is unique to FEMA.
Even more recent was Kivalina's request. They submitted
their application for major disaster declaration on January 15,
2017. It was denied on February 1. In that application for
disaster, they cited severe storms, flooding, persistent
erosion, storm led to shutdown of the airport and does not
allow for opportunities for evacuations.
Clearly, these are situations that anyone would look at and
say, this is a disaster area. If it is not a disaster
immediately, it is clearly a disaster in the making.
The question I have today is they were not given a reason
for the denial except that based on FEMA's review of the major
disaster declaration, it was not appropriate to address the
situation in these communities.
It kind of begs the question what is appropriate? What is
FEMA's path forward for communities whether it is Nutok or
Kivalina today, Shishmaref or other communities tomorrow? If
you can provide any information or any reasoning behind the
denials to me and whether or not FEMA was able to offer
anything else in terms of guidance or assistance?
I am trying to understand whether there are written
policies out there that guide FEMA with these slow moving
disasters and where are we with situations as these communities
are facing?
Mr. Amparo. Senator Murkowski, I will tell you that I agree
with you. The situation of a slow moving disaster in the making
is something not contemplated under the Stafford Act but it is
a situation that we face, I think collectively ``we.''
In that vein, I will also say that situations like this
would call for more than a single-pronged approach in terms of
FEMA or Federal declaration and one that is more akin to a
whole of government approach.
We do have a hazard mitigation grant program to allow for
taking efforts prior to a disaster to lessen the impacts of a
disaster, yet even within that program, I think that would not
solve the problem faced by the communities.
Senator Murkowski. Let me ask you then, because I agree
with everything that you have said. One of the reasons that
these applications were submitted, was recognized by the
communities that these were unique, was because they have tried
and have come looking for direct appropriations, an earmark.
They have contacted the Corps trying to work through the
Army Corps of Engineers and have basically been told, well,
until you fall off the edge, there is no relief for you.
When the Obama Administration announced its climate
resilience grants last year, they thought ah ha, this is
exactly where we can go and they made application through the
Administration. Alaska villages got nothing from that.
They said okay, you have the Stafford Act out there and if
not there, where? Is this something that you will commit to me
and to our Alaska Native villages, not just the Alaska Native
villages, but we have other communities as well that are in
jeopardy, that we can be working through to define how we can
address some of these threats before we see that loss of life,
before we see an entire village wiped out?
Mr. Amparo. Senator, you have my commitment that I will
work with you, your staff, and the Alaska Native villages on
this issue, including bringing in other Federal agency partners
that may be necessary.
Senator Murkowski. You are right. It does need to be a
whole of agency approach. Again, we are looking for guidance
and somebody to step up and take point because to this point in
time, no agency has been willing to shoulder it.
It is a significant task but it is one that I think we
recognize we have to address. We are going to have to address
more situations like this rather than less going forward.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you, Senator Murkowski.
Senator Cantwell.
Senator Cantwell. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I would like to turn to Mr. Desautel's comments as it
relates to the impacts that rural communities are seeing and
FEMA's designation. Mr. Desautel mentioned how two requests by
rural communities in our State were turned down by FEMA frankly
because the way the definition works, it does not recognize
rural communities.
I do not know, Mr. Amparo, if you have any comments about
that definition and how it came into place. Just so my
colleagues know, this would be like saying Galena, Taos, Aspen
or something does not have an impact because there is not a
concentration when in reality, the impact to that community is
just as devastating.
The fact that it is a rural community, maybe based on
tourism, maybe in our case, at least in Twisp and other aspects
of the Carlton Complex fire, the workforce was basically unable
to locate in the region.
They continued to support the hotel and continued to
support all this but because your definition says it has to
have this concentration of population and this much assessment
of housing damage across the population area, these communities
do not get any help.
Mr. Amparo. My comments in this area would be that I do not
believe it is the definition of a concentration of damage or is
it an issue of rural vs. urban. It is more of what the
aggregate damage and destruction was.
The Stafford Act is for supplementary assistance when an
event has exceeded the capacity of the tribe or the State. In
the case of Colville, I do not have the damage assessments in
front of me, I believe it was more the case of the damages in
aggregate, not the fact that the damages occurred in an area
that was rural.
Senator Cantwell. I am pretty sure they were pretty
significant if he said there was 20 percent loss in revenue.
Mr. Desautel, do you want to address that?
Mr. Desautel. We never really got a response as to why we
were denied but that was our assumption. From a damages
standpoint, we still do not know to this day. We have been
working on getting a full assessment for a year and a half but
the damage was so vast, we still do not have a good handle on
what that number might be as far as total economic loss or
total resource damage.
Senator Cantwell. Is it in the hundreds of millions?
Mr. Desautel. I would guess it is north of $100 million. It
is $100 million just in timber revenue.
Senator Cantwell. Okay, so pretty significant damage when
that is your operating revenue for your government?
Mr. Desautel. Yes, ma'am.
Senator Cantwell. Pretty significant.
I think, Mr. Amparo, I really do believe this Committee has
to come back and address this or other committees because I
think we are going to continue to see this kind of devastation.
I do not think these trends are going to stop, whether it is
flooding or fire. They are not going to stop.
I think the point is that while you are thinking of it as
the impact of damage, you have to think of it as a percentage
of that rural economy. What happens in the State of Washington,
a rural economy that exists on a major thoroughfare, is the
anchor for the entire region is decimated and people cannot go
to work because there is no housing. It becomes a problem.
I wanted to touch, Mr. Desautel, on another related issue
particularly since my colleague from Alaska is here and she and
I have worked so hard on trying to get out a timber bill.
One of the things I believe you have been able to do
successfully on the Colville Reservation is the type of fuel
reduction that has helped in protecting some of your
timberlands by creating barriers and efforts to better manage
the forest, is that correct?
Mr. Desautel. That is correct. We have done active forest
management which was commercial type treatments that has
reduced stocking and changed species composition for those
acres so those acres are more resilient to fire.
We have done other fuels type treatment, especially in
those areas where we see risk to communities. We also see
resources pulled when we have active fires.
Senator Cantwell. Even though we saw devastating seasons,
you saw success in having done that kind of work. If we could
do more of it in the future, it would be helpful to protecting
our communities?
Mr. Desautel. Yes, I think you are exactly right. We have
done a lot of it. We have not done enough of it. It is
definitely a pace and scale thing that there are lots of acres
that are growing into fire regime twos and threes, for those
familiar with that, where they are very susceptible to insect,
disease and fire.
You need to make sure we are treating enough that we are
keeping pace with that while making progress towards making
those acres resilient for future fires and disturbance.
Senator Cantwell. Thank you.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Senator Franken.
Senator Franken. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again,
congratulations on heading up this Committee.
As I mentioned in my opening statement, I am concerned
about the Prairie Island Indian Community in my State. Prairie
Island Indian Community is located essentially on an island in
the Mississippi River on the river's floodplain.
The nuclear reactor and the nuclear waste sites are located
about 600 yards from the nearest home on Prairie Island. The
community is obviously concerned about the potential for
emergency situations causes by either the power plant or by the
flooding. This concern is exacerbated because there are few
evacuation routes off the reservation.
My question for both Mr. Amparo and Mr. Booth is basically,
has FEMA consulted with the Prairie Island Reservation to
develop an emergency preparedness plan?
Mr. Amparo. Senator Franken, I spoke earlier with our
regional office out of Chicago, Region V. I have information
that they have a very good relationship with the Prairie Island
Community, specifically because of their proximity to the
nuclear plant.
Because of that, tribal government staff has hosted and
participated in several of the FEMA tribal emergency training.
Additionally, the community has participated in exercises that
have been offered by our regional office as well.
There are requirements as well from the nuclear power plant
site to help host those types of exercises to ensure that the
community is aware of hazards, evacuation planning and the
like.
Senator Franken. So there are evacuation routes in place
and a plan in place in case of an event?
Mr. Amparo. Yes, sir. I can get back to you with specifics
on that plan and those evacuation routes. I do know having
spoken with our regional office that there is a good working
relationship with the community.
Senator Franken. Thank you.
Obviously every tribe is unique and so is its relationship
with the State government. In Minnesota, tribes and State
government have a good working relationship when it comes to
preparedness and relief from disasters.
It is my understanding that the Tribal Stafford Act does
not outline ways for the States to work collaboratively with
tribes and obviously coordination between tribal and State
governments is very important during disaster relief efforts
and during the events.
Can you speak, Mr. Amparo or Mr. Booth, to what FEMA does
to foster the relationship between the States and the tribes?
Mr. Amparo. Yes, sir. I outlined a bit of what we went into
just with the consultation for our Tribal Declaration Guidance
in working with tribes. Prior to coming to work at FEMA, I
worked with the State of Florida in emergency management. We
worked with our Miccosukee and Seminole Indian tribes there.
It is a relationship which we value because many times
there are declarations or there are disasters that are not
declared. I think we have spoken about several here today. The
relationship between a State and the tribes pays dividends in
helping disaster survivors where they are.
We have hosted training sessions. The exercises that we do
are both with tribes and with State partners, again valuing
that. Last year, when we did the Cascadia exercise, the
Cascadia subduction zone, we had 24 tribes participate along
with three States, so they were working jointly at the State
level and also at the local emergency management level.
Senator Franken. I was wondering also about the counties.
Obviously that coordination seems to be key to me because it is
all hands on deck during an emergency.
Mr. Amparo. Locally is where the resources come first as
well, whether it is a fire engine.
Senator Franken. Or getting electricity back up.
Mr. Amparo. That is right, so it is the Rural Electric
Cooperative that is providing services.
Senator Franken. Thank you, gentlemen.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. This question is for either Mr. Amparo or Mr.
Booth.
President Begaye talked about when they had the mine
disaster and the spill on the reservation that essentially FEMA
took the position that all the other agencies were in there
taking care of things.
You talked about working with other agencies. Tell us how
you work with those other agencies and when other agencies are
involved, how do you make that decision to come in or not come?
I want you to specifically respond to the situation Mr. Begaye
described.
In other words, there is a big difference between you
coming in immediately and providing disaster assistance and
relief assistance or taking the position, well, there are other
agencies taking care of that, so we are not going to.
I want you to respond to that and then I am going to ask
President Begaye to kind of tell me what he thinks of that, how
it works and how it should work. I will start with you.
Mr. Amparo. Sir, I am a Federal public servant and I am an
emergency manager. When faced with situations like this, we
certainly recognize where FEMA has authority to operate.
Sometimes our assistance is not the emergency assistance, it is
reimbursement assistance. It is dollars to help pay for what
other agencies can provide.
I certainly know that in the spill, the Environmental
Protection Agency had jurisdiction but we do work as a
interagency. I think that is what is expected of us as Federal
servants. We work through what is known as the Emergency
Support Function Leadership Group, the ESFLG, where we have all
interagency partners there. We discuss the threats out there.
It is also my understanding that in that spill, the
Environmental Protection Agency set up a Unified Coordination
Group. I can go back and get much more specifics and respond to
you with much more clarity but I will tell you, at least from
the posture of our agency, our agency's leadership, we do see
ourselves as a coordinating entity, even in ensuring that the
right agencies get to be able to support the communities and
individuals impacted by disaster.
The Chairman. President Begaye, would you discuss how that
worked on the ground and how you think it should work or could
be improved?
Mr. Begaye. Yes. The response we got from FEMA, this is
what they said, ``The vast majority of the response and
recovery efforts for this event, Gold King Mine spill, fall
under the authorities of other Federal agencies,'' which meant
to us the U.S. EPA.
I met with USDA and asked them, why aren't you helping us?
They said, ``We were told that we are not the lead agency; that
EPA is the lead agency and we are not to assist unless they ask
us to come to the table.''
I said, well, why can't you just use your normal, regular
responsibilities and help us clean out the ditches where the
spill came in and just help us from that standpoint because we
are talking about farmers and so forth? Why can't you just come
under your own program, not under EPA?
We understand this whole dynamic that has taken place as
far as EPA saying back off other Federal agencies; we are the
lead in this disaster and we will ask you when we need you to
come to assist Navajo Nation.
We are asking that this policy change, that there be a
definite ``collaboration among Federal agencies when any
disaster occurs.'' FEMA, HHS, or any Federal agency should come
to assist in any type of major disaster, declaration or
emergency declaration.
I believe that needs to be clarified also because there is
one category for major disaster declaration and then there is
another category for emergency declaration. Under the major
disaster, they will come and help assist farmers, ranchers with
livestock and crop losses. Under emergency declaration, we
understand they could not help in that instance.
All of those need to be clarified. All Federal agencies
need to be called on to assist in any disaster, especially in
the magnitude of the Gold King Mine.
The Chairman. Now I am going to go to Governor Chavarria
and ask essentially the same question on the Pilot Guidance, if
it is what it should be or if it should be modified. If so,
how?
Before I do, did you have any response, Mr. Amparo?
In regard to President Begaye?
I am very concerned. When a tribe or anyone else has to
start trying to figure out which agency is going to help and
each agency says, it is really that agency, it can be a very
frustrating and difficult situation. Particularly in an
emergency response, I am concerned about that.
Mr. Amparo. Senator, I have a response and I will tell you
that I do have questions. I believe there is an exigency that a
tribe must have the right answers when faced with a disaster. I
agree with that.
I also believe that, quite frankly, one of the things we
are doing with our outreach, with our tribal liaisons, is to
talk about what FEMA programs do and do not do, and what other
Federal agencies can provide so that it is not when the
disaster is at our doorstep that we are having that
conversation. We can preplan and know ahead of time.
There is more work. Part of my statement is to say that
there is much more work for us to do, including our other
Federal agency partners, to work with Indian country about what
our programs provide and how we can synchronize them so that
they are efficient.
The Chairman. President Begaye.
Mr. Begaye. Just the word jurisdiction really implies that
this is our responsibility. It is our jurisdiction and not
yours. That language needs to be taken out.
The other thing is right answers. To me, it should not be
that. If you provide the right answers, we will help you. That
should not be the response of FEMA. They should be coming
alongside and helping us develop those applications because we
do not know what the right answers are or what the right
languages are.
We need FEMA to come alongside and help us help those
people who are losing homes, vehicles, farms, crops, irrigation
and things like that. We need them to come alongside us and
treat us as human beings.
The Chairman. I think that is the key. Even if it is not a
FEMA response, it is a FEMA responsibility to make sure that
the agency, whoever is the responder, is taking care of things.
That should be a FEMA role as well as direct response if you
are not the direct responder. That is kind of what I am getting
at here.
Governor Chavarria, your thoughts?
Mr. Chavarria. I also feel that it is open to
interpretation. Yes, we have the Pilot Guidance document but it
comes with challenges. It is a new process for both the tribes
and FEMA. We are the first tribe in Region 6 to utilize the
Stafford Act amendments to allow the tribes to go direct.
However, as the changes to the Stafford Act allows tribes
to see that direct disaster declaration are promulgated, FEMA
may be better served by implanting a training program that
better communicates the regulatory requirements associated with
being a direct guarantee.
This would better enable the tribes to make an informed
decision regarding FEMA's assistance may it be for your public
assistance or your individual assistance. Those are different
categories that fall within FEMA.
It is very important. It is not a catchall because FEMA is
not the answer to all the disasters. You have the Corps, BIA,
the Bureau of Reclamation, the Forest Service, and the Park
Service. All these other agencies are out there but how do they
fit in because the time of need is where that dollar needs to
hit our communities.
We have had bad experiences as sub-grantees. Our first
disaster happened on August 21, 2011. We did not get the funds
until almost a year later. By then, you have additional events.
That is very important. Yes, there is a process. However, what
is critical that starts off anything is your hazard mitigation
plan. If you do not have a hazard mitigation plan, you do not
even qualify. That is important.
As the President said, the facts need to be addressed to
all tribes and have a good understanding of the regulatory
requirements because even though you do not meet that $250,000
threshold, you are not even eligible for financial assistance.
That is hurtful and again, it is not a catchall.
The best way that FEMA and tribes can really get together
is sit down, have a training session, so both sides understand
what the roles and responsibilities are or what we are
accountable for on both sides of aisle.
The Chairman. Exactly right. We are on the front end of
this, so it is building the process and making sure it works
and fostering understanding.
Mr. Chavarria. Yes.
The Chairman. Director Desautel, anything else along that
line from your recent experience?
Mr. Desautel. One thing I think FEMA struggles with is in
our area, when there were disaster declarations, they used the
county records to assess value to try to get to that threshold
but for trust properties, they are not assessed by the county
so they do not have a good way to value resources whether it be
homes or land damage.
I think that is also something that needs to be assessed to
determine what values are placed on tribal lands. If you do not
have an accounting system like the counties have to document
what the value is, it is really difficult for us to manage the
process and show $250,000 worth of damages.
The Chairman. Mr. Amparo, anything that you want to add to
respond to that?
Mr. Amparo. Yes. I think that is a great point. It is one
we heard very loud and clear. In our Tribal Declarations
Guidance, we took that into account. Now we will go to the
tribe and ask them to provide us that information.
There has also been some great movement with the Oglala
Sioux Tribe where they are working to get better numbers
themselves. When we are active in a joint field office, we work
with the tribe to help them either map the roads or help them
get more but I would like to have our tribal advisor talk a
little bit to the Governor's comments and our efforts to better
create an environment where we are sharing more information.
Mr. Booth. Thank you, Mr. Amparo.
Mr. Chairman and Mr. Vice Chairman, to address the
Governor's comments about training and integration with our
rollout plan that we started last week, we started off with a
national webinar/conference call.
It continued this week at the United South and Eastern
Tribes where we had our Tribal Consultation Coordinator for the
Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance give that presentation so we
can collect those comments and get the word out.
We are going to continue doing this as immediately as next
week at the National Congress of American Indians' Executive
Winter Session and will continue as we move forward both at
regional and national tribal associations.
The Chairman. I think it is very important. Again, you are
on the front end of the process. You need to create that
understanding, get the good input and build the best approach
you can with all the tribes.
I apologize, Vice Chairman, for going over my time. I
should have broken that up into two but I did not realize that
some of my questions would go as long as they did. However, you
go ahead and complete with any questions that you have.
Senator Udall. That is the Chairman's discretion. No
problem there. It is good to finish your train of thought and
get the points in. We really appreciate that.
What the Chairman has outlined here is very helpful. His
approach and my approach I think will be very similar in terms
of trying to get to the situation where we get help in these
disasters.
Both tribal leaders have shown they want to do, Mr. Amparo,
everything they can on the ground at the time of a tribal
emergency to try to help their people. If there are situations
where, for example in the Gold King Mine spill, the Navajo
Nation had specific expenses they were expending as a part of
this emergency. They wanted to have a relationship with the
Federal agency to figure out whether or not they were going to
be reimbursed, how they were going to be reimbursed, and what
the timetable was going to be.
Following up on some of what Chairman Hoeven said, it seems
to me one of the issues here is the issue if EPA is supposed to
be the lead, is EPA, in your opinion, capable of being lead in
a disaster? I thought FEMA was the disaster agency.
How does that happen all of a sudden with an agency like
the EPA, because they happened to be the agency that caused the
problem? As President Begaye said, here you had a mine that
backed up, filled water and filled water and filled water and
the EPA contractor punctured a hole in it and that caused the
flood.
That is what caused the flood and now they are in charge of
the emergency. How does that happen? I am wondering do you
assess or look at this and say, well, they know all about
floods and disasters with mines and are capable of doing this?
How do they get to be the lead?
It seemed to me you are the lead in a way on a disaster.
Let me tell you that when you have come into New Mexico, we
have had disasters on reservation and off reservation. I have
seen some very impressive work by FEMA. We had the Cerro Grande
Fire in Los Alamos which wiped out 400 homes. FEMA was in there
and you did some incredible work.
Part of asking this question is trying to get to the heart
of how do we get the very best response for Native communities
when it comes to these disasters like both Governors have
described?
Mr. Amparo, can you answer that briefly because I do not
want to go much over what the Chairman went. I know we are both
busy here today.
Mr. Amparo. First, to the President, let me first say that
there is no secret code in terms of asking the right questions.
Our commitment from our regional office is to have our experts
work with tribes on requests they make of us to ensure that we
are reviewing documents for them prior to their submission.
That is something we do.
Second, to commend Governor Chavarria for speaking about a
mitigation plan and talking about that being the start and
where we need to go, that is an area that is refreshing for us
because we know that understanding what vulnerabilities and
risks are prior to event changes the outcome.
Our commitment is to work with other Federal agencies,
ultimately to support the tribe. We are going to continue to do
that.
The Chairman mentioned that and I have questions. I will
have to look more at it with our regional office but our
commitment will be to work closely with the tribes and should
an incident like this happen again, ensure that the outcomes
are the ones that are expected.
Senator Udall. Thank you very much for that.
President Begaye, I know you are an incredible champion for
the Navajo people in terms of trying to deal with this
disaster. You were everyplace. I believe you and some of your
officials went to water tanks which were going to be provided
for drinking water and it ended up that some of that was
tainted with oil. You said, these cannot be for drinking water.
I know how upset you are and you stated very well what
happened. The new Guidance that has come out from FEMA, in your
opinion, are we headed in the right direction on that?
Mr. Begaye. Consultation is always a thing that we have to
do. Having an advisory council is always the right thing to
have. Having the right benchmarks, $250,000 against $1 million,
is the right thing to do. Those are good starting points.
The webinar, they are always helpful if we can have access
to Internet. That is always a challenge for us, especially on
Navajo when 30 percent of our people have access and 70 percent
do not. We have those challenges.
However, the new principle that they put in place, we made
comments on it. We believe the consultation is really
important. It is helping to clarify some of these terms I
mentioned earlier, ``major disaster declaration'' versus
``emergency declaration,'' our actual liability partner or
potential liability partner, what does that terminology mean,
what are they?
If we can answer those types of questions, we can better
answer, especially when we apply for disaster assistance and we
know what language to use, how to approach FEMA and other
Federal agencies. I endorse that. I feel that is something we
need.
Having a tribal liaison person, of course, is always very
helpful. Having a FEMA office on Navajo would be tremendously
helpful. We are as big as West Virginia and we should have our
own FEMA office located on Navajo Nation. That is how we can
really resolve these issues.
Senator Udall. Thank you.
President Begaye, for you and I, I think one of the
frustrating things in this particular situation with EPA was
that the EPA Administrator came out from the beginning. Now I
am talking about the injury to the farmers that happened on the
land. We have been to many of the same farms. She said from the
beginning, ``We take responsibility. We are going to take
responsibility. We are going to make sure those farmers get
paid for their damages.''
That is the way we proceeded but there was a little glitch.
Over here there was a little independent agency within EPA that
has to make a decision on liability. About a year later, they
tell us, sorry, you have to file a lawsuit and go to court. We
were on one track and now we are on another track.
You and I are working on legislation with your Washington
office and with others. I would just ask you to urge the
Committee, this is your opportunity to tell the Committee why
these folks should be compensated.
You described what happened and how the Navajo people live
an agricultural life and what they are doing out there and you
would urge us because we need to pass legislation to help these
farmers. This is really important.
This is your opportunity to speak to the Committee as a
whole. There are only two of us here but believe me, everyone
else will hear it.
Mr. Begaye. Thank you, Senator.
When a Federal agency says we caused a spill, we will hold
ourselves responsible and we will make sure that all the
impacted people will be compensated, when that statement comes
out of the mouth of a Federal agency, we expect that to happen.
Just within the last few weeks, I got a letter that says we
will not give you a dime. We will not help you because there is
this Federal sovereignty that exists meaning that we cannot be
sued, we cannot help you.
None of our farmers have ever been helped. This is when a
Federal agency says, we will hold ourselves responsible. When
that statement is made, we expect and I believe this Committee
will have to hold that agency's feet to the fire to say you
said that, it came out of your mouth in a Senate hearing, then
you ought to pay up.
These farmers are hurting. Not a single farmer has been
compensated. That to me is criminal. That should never happen
within the trust responsibility, trust relationship that we
have, government-to-government relationship we have.
Every one of those farmers today are still hurting, over a
year and a half. None of them have been compensated. They are
still out there. You and I visited, we have been out to the
farms. They weep; they are crying, so the disaster is
continuing.
Farming is not just one crop. It is multiple crops,
multiple seasons. When you cut off the water stream, when you
are not able to use the water, we are talking about a disaster
that lasts for two to three years. That is happening to our
farmers today.
I am asking this Committee to hold EPA's word and let them
compensate every one of our farmers that has been hurt. That is
our priority.
Of course we also, as tribal nations, need to be
compensated for the work we have put in too because they said
they did it and they would hold themselves responsible. To this
day, they have not. That letter specially says, we cannot
compensate you a penny. That is wrong. I am asking this
Committee to step and hold EPA's feet to the fire.
Thank you.
Senator Udall. Thank you very much. I could not agree with
you more.
I have one final question for Governor Chavarria. Santa
Clara has had five presidential disaster declarations. Three
have been as a sub-grantee pursuant to requests made by the
State of New Mexico and two issued directly to the Pueblo by
the President.
How would you compare the two approaches? Can you explain
to the Committee the advantages and disadvantages of each
approach? Would you prefer to use one or the other in the
future?
Mr. Chavarria. Let me start from the last and go back. I do
not want to experience another disaster. It is a headache, it
is time consuming but because of build up in terms of capacity
and capabilities, we have shown that our tribe is capable of
implementing and utilizing these Federal dollars to our best
advantage.
We even had the Office of OIG come out and do audits of the
use of those funds. Those audits came back clean.
For me, it is up to us as tribal leaders, the tribal
council, as a direct grantee to have the opportunity to tell
your own story. Identify your specific needs. Again, having
that tribal mitigation plan is crucial.
If you go with a sub-grantee, you are letting someone else
tell the story for you, having the State tell the story and
identify your needs, your infrastructure damage. Then you have
to use their State mitigation plan. You absorb 25 percent of
the cost if you go as a direct grantee. If you go as a sub-
grantee, you are indebted for 12.5 percent of that cost.
The most important thing is the technical support from the
Federal agency which is FEMA. Another thing as a con, if you go
as a sub-grantee, you do not get the 324 administrative costs.
All the tribes still have administrative burdens, so we are not
guaranteed those administrative costs.
However, as the direct grantee, you are guaranteed 3.37
percent of the total cost to come down and help with
administrative burdens. That is very important. We see that
smaller projects receive quick funding responses from FEMA
while the larger projects such as a permanent road and water
control facilities remain mired in time consuming, quality
assurance, quality control processes.
While clearly important, these processes greatly lengthen
the review time. Time is of the essence in preventing or
mitigating a natural disaster. For Santa Clara Pueblo as we
enter the monsoon season, we spend our days scanning the skies
and read the weather reports, fearing the worst and praying for
the best.
Receiving funds that support recovery efforts prior to
seasonal impacts and monsoons is imperative in breaking the
cycle of continued damage. As our presidential disaster
declaration experience demonstrates, in emergencies, project
implementation is crucial to protecting lives, securing our
communities and preventing repeated damage to key
infrastructure of Santa Clara.
As I mentioned, we are not wealthy financially. I have been
asked to combine all five disaster declarations but I was told,
no, because each disaster is its own disaster. I cannot combine
all five when then helps me financially.
Right now we are going through all disaster project
worksheets and determining are these still feasible? If not,
let us take that one back and give it to the Federal Government
because ultimately it comes back to the cost match.
Those are the things our staff is reviewing and determining
but ultimately closing out these projects is essential because
that is where reimbursement comes into play.
Senator Udall. Thank you very much. Thanks to all of the
witnesses.
Thank you for your courtesies, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate
it. I am sorry to run over.
The Chairman. Absolutely. No problem at all.
If there are no more questions for today, members may also
submit written follow-up questions for the record. The hearing
record will be open for two weeks.
With that, I would also like to express my thanks to you,
Vice Chairman, and to all of our witnesses. Thank you for being
here. We appreciate it very much.
With that, this hearing is concluded.
[Whereupon, at 4:33 p.m., the Committee was adjourned.]
A P P E N D I X
Prepared Statement of Jeff Hansen, Director, Office of Emergency
Management, Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma
Good afternoon. Mr. Chairman, members of the Committee, my name is
Jeff Hansen and I am the Director of the Office of Emergency Management
for the Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma. On behalf of our Chief, the
Honorable Gary Batton, I thank you for this opportunity to provide
testimony on FEMA's role in Indian Country.
It is my responsibility to ensure that the Choctaw Nation of
Oklahoma develops and maintains a robust Emergency Management Program
for our tribal service area, for our tribal citizens, and for our
neighbors. I have had oversight of the emergency management program for
the past four years and have worked diligently to develop the
capabilities necessary to respond to any potential disaster that may
arise. Our capabilities have grown from a piece-meal response
initiative to a coordinated effort through many departments within the
Nation. We have reached many milestones in this time, but there is
still more to do.
The Choctaw Nation jurisdictional boundaries cover a 10 \1/2\
county-wide area in southeastern Oklahoma encompassing approximately 1
1,000 square miles. This mostly rural area has a Census 2010 population
of 233,126. Of that, approximately 42,000 are Choctaw tribal members.
The Choctaw Nation shares governmental responsibilities for our
citizens and our neighbors with state and various local units of
government. Because our Indian Country lands were divided and
distributed, in the form of fee-simple properties, to Choctaw Nation
citizens in the late 1800s and early 1900s, we face a somewhat
different approach to emergencies than do Indian tribes who have been
able to maintain a contiguous reservation land base. Our tribal
government responsibilities are necessarily intertwined with the
governmental responsibilities of our neighboring towns, cities,
counties and states.
Not unlike the rest of Oklahoma, the Choctaw Nation has experienced
and responded to numerous disasters. Annually, we face the potential
for any number of emergencies, including ice storms, tornadoes, floods,
hazardous materials releases, high winds, drought, wildfires,
transportation incidents, to name a few. In every instance, the Choctaw
Nation of Oklahoma responds with both personnel and resources to
address not only the needs of our people but also the non-tribal
citizens within our jurisdiction. We have also responded to areas
outside the Choctaw Nation to assist our fellow Oklahomans. It is our
belief that we must all work closely in partnership with one another to
provide the most good for the most people possible in times of disaster
need.
The Choctaw Nation of Oklahoma applauds the work of this Committee,
Mr. Chairman, and of the entire Congress on its effort to improve the
Stafford Act through the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act. The ability
for tribes to request a disaster declaration through the President of
the United States is a remarkable step forward in the recognition of
the Nation-to-Nation relationship and Trust Responsibility of the
Federal Government and Indian Country. I believe the relationship
between Tribes and specifically the Federal Emergency Management Agency
have improved exponentially in recent years. However, there is still
more work to be completed.
With last month's release of the Tribal Declarations Pilot
Guidance, we can see the culmination of several years of work toward
active consultation with tribes throughout the country. FEMA held over
100 meetings around the country from 2014 to 2016. I personally
participated in at least 10 listening and consultation sessions through
various settings. In every session, I heard Indian Country make our
voices heard in regards to emergency management. According to FEMA, it
received and adjudicated almost 2000 comments in regards to the Pilot
Guidance during that time. As we progress through the pilot stage of
this Pilot Guidance, there will be opportunity to review some of the
issues that arise. However, FEMA should address some issues during the
pilot phase of the Pilot Guidance.
The Pilot Guidance allows the chief executive of a tribe to decide
what direction the tribe would like to pursue in regards to a
declaration. Specifically, the chief executive can either request a
declaration directly to the federal government or request a declaration
as a sub-grantee or recipient to the state. One of the most pressing
issues with the ability for a tribe to decide whether to go directly to
the federal government or through a state is the political landscape in
which it functions. In the case of Indian tribes in Oklahoma, and many
other ``checkerboard'' tribal nations, this issue can be tricky to
navigate. Because we do not have contiguous lands, damages to our
infrastructure can be very widespread. If the Choctaw Nation elects to
go directly to the federal government for a declaration, our damages
are removed from state calculations. This could lead to a situation
where a particular county has reportable damages but fails to meet its
individual county threshold without our damages included. While the
tribe may receive a declaration, the county in which the damages
occurred may not qualify for assistance. This could potentially leave a
particular jurisdiction with a large amount of disaster related costs
that it cannot afford. As a good neighbor, an Indian tribe must decide
what is best for the whole community. Unfortunately, the county cannot
go to the tribe as a sub-grantee in the same manner that the tribe can
go to the state. That should be fixed with authority written into
federal law.
A second potential issue is with a tribe's ability to handle the
personnel and regulatory burden following a disaster. While this will
depend upon a tribe's capability, it is still relatively unknown what
the current capability levels are within Indian Country emergency
management. Many individuals have expressed the need for emergency
management programs to grow within Indian Country; hard data supporting
that need remains as anecdotal evidence. For many years, states have
received funding through the Emergency Management Performance Grant
program. Unfortunately, the manner in which the law was written
prohibits Indian Country from directly participating in the program.
States and territories use EMPG funds use in a variety of ways to
support the implementation of the National Preparedness System by
supporting the building, sustainment, and delivery of the core
capabilities as defined within the National Preparedness Goal. The
states and territories receive funds from this program based on a
population-share basis. Each state determines how the money is spent.
In most cases, tribes can apply to the state for funding. However, this
is not always the case. Grant programs supporting the development of
the core capabilities with tribal set-asides remain limited. The
statute should be improved with more tribal set-asides.
Lastly, FEMA has worked to expand its outreach to tribes through
the appointment of full time Tribal Liaisons. While this effort has
definitely improved relationships, a few FEMA regions remain limited in
outreach capability due to large number of tribes and limited FEMA
personnel. Within FEMA Regions 6, 9, and 10 there are a total of 478
tribes. Currently, Regions 6 and 9 have only one Tribal Liaison each
while Region 10 has four Tribal Liaisons. The amount of travel required
to engage this many tribes is daunting. Limited staffing at the FEMA
regional offices that deal directly with tribes creates a roadblock in
the tribes being able to develop their programs and have meaningful
relationships with FEMA.
We do not have all the answers but I would like to make some
suggestions that will may help to move Tribal Emergency Management
Programs and their relationship with FEMA forward. We would ask that
this Committee persuade FEMA to look into the potential to have local
jurisdictions request assistance as sub-grantee recipients to the
tribes in the event they do not meet their threshold when a tribe
receives a disaster declaration. This step would provide a more unified
approach between the states and tribes as we assist our common
communities in common disaster contexts.
We would also ask that this Committee work within Congress to
address funding opportunities for tribes within the emergency
management field. The lack of available funding continues to be a major
issue in the establishment and enhancement of emergency management core
capabilities in Indian Country. Targeting to Indian tribes funds like
those released in the EMPG program would allow tribes to begin building
capacity and becoming an asset to local and state jurisdictions during
a crisis.
Lastly, we ask that this Committee urge FEMA to expand its Tribal
Liaison program to assist in those regions where the majority of tribes
reside. Additionally, funding for training opportunities through FEMA
will assist in preparing tribal emergency management staff for the
tasks associated with the declaration process and the regulatory
paperwork to follow a disaster.
Again, thank you for the opportunity to provide testimony to the
Committee. It is an honor to be able to provide updates and background
to the situations we face in Indian Country. The Choctaw Nation of
Oklahoma is committed to better preparing our communities for disasters
and working with our partner agencies to respond and recover. Your
continued support is critical to the reduction of disaster impacts
across all of Indian Country. Yakoke!
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Tom Udall to
Alex Amparo
Question 1. What types of coordination efforts have there been to
update Tribal on the process and requirements for requesting Stafford
Act declarations?
Answer. In coordination with FEMA's National Tribal Affairs Advisor
and FEMA Regional Tribal Liaisons, FEMA Recovery Directorate and Office
of External Affairs Tribal Partners Branch hosted two national
webinars/conference calls on the final version of the Tribal
Declarations Pilot Guidance, which included information on the process
and requirements for requesting Stafford Act declarations.
In addition, FEMA continues to provide briefings at national and
Regional Tribal conferences and for individual Tribes when requested.
Question 2. What actions has FEMA taken to help Tribes understand
what Federal resources are available to build and maintain their
emergency management capacity?
Answer. FEMA is committed to partnering and collaborating with
Federally recognized Indian Tribes, and to providing resources to
support their preparation for, protection against, mitigation of,
response to, and recovery from all hazards and disasters.
FEMA established both a Tribal Policy and Tribal Consultation
Policy that provide the framework for FEMA Tribal relations, and guides
how the agency delivers technical assistance and programs tailored to
the unique circumstances of Tribal communities.
FEMA offers various resources to support Tribes. This includes:
Information Sharing and Program Support: sharing
information with, and receiving feedback from Tribes on issues
and resources that impact their communities;
Technical Assistance and Grant Opportunities: assisting
Tribes with technical assistance and providing awareness of
available grants that assist in building Tribal emergency
management capability and capacity;
Training and Exercises: providing access to training at
FEMA facilities and local Tribal venues to strengthen Tribes
ability to respond to emergencies by addressing identified gaps
and weaknesses; and
Tribal Consultation: working with Tribes to collect their
feedback on potential FEMA Tribal policies and actions to
ensure we are in compliance with EO 13175.
These areas, described in more detail below, ensure a consistent
interaction with our Tribal partners and offers Tribes a platform to
work with FEMA.
Information Sharing and Program Support
FEMA's National Tribal Affairs Advisor (NTAA), in the Headquarters
(HQ) Office of External Affairs, Tribal Partners Branch (TPB), is the
senior advisor on Tribal issues to the FEMA Administrator and senior
leadership. FEMA Regional Tribal Liaisons (RTLs) serve as the main
points of contact for Tribal nations, and are directly contacted by
Tribes for technical assistance or questions about available Federal
resources. The NTAA engages regularly with the national Tribal
associations to discuss policy issues with national implications for
Tribes while RTLs regularly provide information to Tribal nations on
FEMA programs, resources, and grant opportunities. They help coordinate
technical assistance through various mechanisms--direct contact via
meetings and calls with Tribal emergency managers on a regular basis,
conference calls or webinars with Tribes in their regions or Regional
Tribal associations, attending and presenting at Tribal conferences,
and visiting and briefing Tribes in person.
The HQ TPB hosts a monthly conference call with Tribal associations
and organizations to discuss and share information to support emergency
management efforts in Indian Country. In addition, FEMA's Office of
External Affairs includes Tribal partners when FEMA sends out
advisories to notify when a grant application period begins or when
there are other opportunities to engage or participate. FEMA's Office
of External Affairs also developed a ``FEMA and Tribal Nations'' pocket
guide, which provides information and resources that may be helpful to
Tribal partners. Distributed at Tribal conferences and meetings, the
pocket guide explains the Agency's policies related to Tribal
engagement, outlines key FEMA programs and how they specifically relate
to Tribes, and provides contact information for the Agency's Tribal
liaisons. This active engagement and frequent contact allows our Tribal
partners to have visibility on FEMA programs and services as they
change and evolve.
Technical Assistance and Grant Opportunities
FEMA continues to improve its education, outreach, and technical
assistance to Tribes to help them become more aware of available
Federal resources such as technical assistance and eligible Federal
grants. For example, FEMA provides technical assistance to Tribes on
the Threat and Hazard Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA), a
process for jurisdictions to identify their greatest threats and
hazards and ways to address them. Having a complete THIRA is a
requirement for Tribal applicants applying for a Tribal Homeland
Security Grant, which provides funding directly to eligible Tribes to
strengthen their capacity to prepare for and respond to emergencies.
The Federal Insurance and Mitigation Administration (FIMA) supports
Tribal governments by providing guidance, training, and technical
assistance in the development and/or update of FEMA approved Hazard
Mitigation Plans and in the development of Hazard Mitigation Assistance
(HMA) planning and project grants. Hazard mitigation planning enables
Tribal governments to identify risks and vulnerabilities associated
with natural disasters, and develop long-term strategies for protecting
people and property from future hazard events.
Training and Exercises
FEMA's Emergency Management Institute (EMI) provides training to
Tribal governments and their employees to develop their emergency
management capabilities. FEMA through EMI, engages with Tribes to
design courses that reflect Tribal needs and gaps in capabilities. EMI
provides housing during the training and reimburses participants for
their travel costs. In addition to providing Tribal curriculum courses
at FEMA facilities, EMI also provides these courses off-site, traveling
out to Tribal communities directly. To date, more than 3,000
certificates of completion have been issued for courses in the EMI
Tribal Curriculum. EMI currently has planned 21 courses on their 2017
schedule. Additionally, EMI provides Tribal emergency management
officials access to 550 courses.
FEMA's Center for Domestic Preparedness (CDP) also provides
training to Tribal emergency responders. In fiscal year 2016, CDP
hosted its first Tribal Nations Training Week and trained 157 Tribal
emergency responders from 46 Tribal nations. More than 150 Tribal
emergency responders from 41 Tribal agencies across the country,
trained at CDP during their second Tribal Nations Training Week from
March 19-25, 2017. CDP worked closely with Tribal students to enhance
their capability to respond to disasters and emergencies by taking one
or more of the seven courses delivered during the week.
In addition to providing training, FEMA also coordinates exercises
with Tribal nations to examine and validate readiness capabilities. In
September 2015, FEMA Region VIII and HQ TPB worked with seven Tribal
nations to coordinate a simulated exercise as part of Operation Safe
Delivery in response to a crude oil train derailment on the Blackfeet
Nation Reservation. In June 2016, FEMA Region X conducted a four-day
functional earthquake and tsunami exercise, Cascadia Rising, and worked
with 24 Tribes in Washington, Oregon, and Idaho. During these
exercises, FEMA examined its internal capacity to understand and
respond to the unique needs of Tribal governments. FEMA also invites
Tribal governments in hurricane-prone areas to participate in FEMA's
annual hurricane preparedness video teleconference with FEMA leadership
and State emergency management directors.
Tribal Consultation
FEMA's Tribal Consultation Policy establishes how the agency
engages Tribes in meaningful consultation to influence FEMA policies,
programs, and the resources supporting these efforts. The NTAA and HQ
TPB work closely with all FEMA programmatic offices and Regions to
ensure that FEMA policies take into consideration the unique needs and
capabilities of Tribes, and engages these offices to plan their Tribal
consultation outreach. This consultation outreach effort is worked
through the RTLs allowing an agency wide effort to give Tribes the
opportunity to be involved in the developing process of FEMA's
policies, programs, and resources. The Consultation Policy provides an
opportunity for Tribal governments to request Tribal consultation on a
policy or action by FEMA that they determine affects their community or
has Tribal implications. Tribal consultation is announced through in-
person events, Tribal meetings, monthly conference calls with Tribes
and other agencies, and through Intergovernmental Affairs advisories.
Tribal nations are a critical part of FEMA's whole community effort
to improve emergency management capabilities and capacity across the
nation and we remain committed to working with Tribes on a nation-to-
nation basis.
Question 3. The disaster declaration process was developed for
State governments, which generally have a larger tax base, receive more
grant funds, and have decades of experience managing Federally declared
major disasters. In comparison to the States, do Tribes have a similar
level of Federal resources available to them to help manage the post-
declaration recovery process?
Answer. The Sandy Recovery Improvement Act (SRIA) of 2013 (SRIA)
amended the Stafford Act to provide Federally-recognized Indian Tribal
governments the option to make a direct request to the President for a
major disaster or emergency declaration or to seek assistance under a
state's state declaration. Prior to SRIA State governments had primary
access to Federal resources to help them manage the post-declaration
recovery process, as compared to Indian Tribal governments. Today, due
to SRIA, Tribes have direct access to FEMA response and recovery
programs. In addition, our understanding is that there are other
Federal government agencies that provide recovery resources to States
and Tribes.
Question 4. What assistance has FEMA offered, or could FEMA offer,
to help enhance Tribal capacity to manage the recovery process?
Answer. Technical assistance, through FEMA Regional Tribal Liaisons
(located in all FEMA Regional offices), is one way that FEMA is working
to overcome potential access issues. Before, during, and after disaster
FEMA provides technical assistance and trainings to Indian Tribal
governments on various administrative requirements for Stafford Act
disaster assistance, including Preliminary Damage Assessments,
administrative plans, mitigation plans, and grants management
requirements. FEMA also provides field leadership to support Indian
Tribal governments in addressing, organizing and managing disaster
response and recovery activities through Federal Coordinating Officers
and Federal Disaster Recovery Coordinators.
Question 5. FEMA can authorize its crisis counseling program as
part of an individual assistance package. Some IHS facilities also
offer mental health services to Native Americans. How does access to
mental health services at IHS affect FEMA's recommendation to provide
crisis counseling services in Tribal communities?
Answer. States, territories and federally recognized Tribes can
apply for grant funding for the FEMA Crisis Counseling Assistance and
Training Program (CCP) in the wake of presidentially declared major
disasters which have received a designation for Individual Assistance.
As a supplemental program, CCP services are meant to supplement and not
supplant or replace existing behavioral health (mental health and
substance abuse) services. As part of the application, the grantee is
asked to describe State/Tribal and local mental health services and
explain why they cannot meet the disaster-related mental health needs
caused or aggravated by the disaster. Once FEMA determines that the
disaster overwhelmed the existing behavioral health capacity (including
IHS capacity), the State/territory/Tribe may receive CCP grant funding.
Question 6. Since the enactment of the Tribal Stafford Act, tribes
have made twenty requests and the President has declared eight
disasters in response.
Describe each request and the basis for FEMA's recommendation to
approve or deny those requests.
Answer. The President has sole discretion to approve emergency and
major disaster declarations. For every request, in making a
recommendation to the President, FEMA considers the Joint Preliminary
Damage Assessment provided by the Tribe, whether the Tribal resources
have been overwhelmed, and the extent to which Stafford Act programs
can address the needs created by the event and provide supplemental
assistance.
Question 7. In its 2014 testimony, FEMA stated that it received
eight direct Tribal requests and declared six major disasters. That is
a seventy-five percent success rate. As of January 31, 2017, FEMA
received twenty Tribal requests, and the President declared eight major
disasters. That brings the overall success rate to forty percent since
the enactment of the Tribal Stafford Act.
Please explain the markedly lower rate of declared disasters since
FEMA testified in 2014.
Are states denied disaster assistance at the same or a similar rate
as Tribes? Please explain and address any reasons for the disparity.
Answer. Many Indian Tribal governments (Tribal governments) are
less experienced than states with the disaster declaration process and
Stafford Act programs. This has resulted in some Tribes seeking
assistance for events that are either not eligible or cannot be readily
addressed by Stafford Act programs (i.e. impacts to fishing, impacts of
drought, erosion, etc.). There was a 47 percent approval rate for
Tribal declarations and 83 percent for state declarations (some of
which included Tribal entities as recipients or sub recipients) during
the period of January 29, 2013 and January 31, 2017. We are continuing
our outreach and education efforts to ensure that all Tribal
governments have a comprehensive understanding of Stafford Act
declarations.
In addition, requests received prior to publication of the Tribal
Declarations Pilot Guidance, were processed using the guidance for
state declaration requests, including a $1 million threshold for Public
Assistance and a per capita indicator. After three rounds of
consultation with Tribes, FEMA published the Tribal Declarations Pilot
Guidance, which provides unique factors, including a new minimum damage
amount of $250,000, for FEMA to consider that better take into account
the unique circumstances of Tribal governments.
Question 8. FEMA noted in its 2014 testimony that the regulations
may be ill-suited to tribal requests because the regulations were
designed for states.
How does the Pilot Guidance account for the unique status of
tribes?
Does FEMA consider the federal trust responsibility when
recommending a decision to the President? If so, how?
Answer. FEMA acknowledges the trust responsibility of the federal
government to federally recognized Tribal governments as established by
specific treaties, court decisions, statutes, executive orders,
regulations, and policies. Specifically, in recognition of this trust
responsibility and as prescribed by Congress in the Sandy Recovery
Improvement Act, FEMA is implementing the Tribal Declarations Pilot
Guidance (the Guidance) for direct emergency and disaster declarations.
The Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance provides new, specially
designed, criteria for evaluating an Indian Tribal government's request
for a disaster declaration, and takes into account the unique
conditions that affect Tribal nations. This criteria was developed as a
result of extensive consultation and listening sessions with Tribes.
For example, the Public Assistance minimum damage amount of
$250,000 for Tribal declarations (versus $1 million minimum for
states). Absent extraordinary circumstances, when preliminary damage
assessments indicate $250,000 in PA-eligible damage and costs, FEMA
will then look holistically at the impacts to and capabilities of a
Tribal nation to determine the need for supplemental federal
assistance.
In addition, the guidance provides for eligibility under the
Individuals and Households Program for enrolled Tribal members, and at
the request of the Tribal nation, members of the Tribal community who
are not enrolled Tribal members.
Question 9. FEMA testified in 2014 that it developed the Emergency
Management Institute Tribal curriculum to help Tribes with their
emergency response activities.
Has the curriculum evolved since then, if so, how?
Answer. Yes the curriculum continues evolving by including emerging
policies, highlighting best practices and discussing case studies.
Recently, FEMA's Office of Response and Recovery delivered a
presentation discussing the Tribal Declarations Guidance and provided
an informational briefing, fact sheet, and frequently asked questions
to each student. During the consultation period, FEMA staff utilized
the course presentations as an opportunity to conduct consultation on
the Declaration Guidance.
Question 10. Has FEMA updated the curriculum to include the Pilot
Guidance?
Answer. Yes. Immediately after passage of the Sandy Recovery
Improvement Act of 2013, the Tribal Curriculum course deliveries
included a presentation segment for the Tribal Declaration Guidance.
The presentation explained FEMA's implementation plan for the
authority. In addition, the students received the presentation, fact
sheets, and frequently asked questions. Additionally, these documents
were used outside of the course delivery materials for consultation
during the development of implementation guidance.
Since the Pilot Period commenced on January 10, 2017, the Emergency
Management Institute initiated the development of appropriate training
material to be incorporated into the Tribal Curriculum courses, and is
currently assisting in the development of other complementary training
material to be delivered by FEMA Regional Offices. In addition,
Emergency Management Institute is developing Tribal Declaration
reusable learning object content to be made open source available to
the whole community for inclusion in other training.
The Center for Domestic Preparedness (CDP) has a lasting commitment
to Tribal Nations training. As part of an ongoing outreach effort, CDP
hosted 157 Tribal students from 41 Tribes enrolled in five different
training programs during the CDP 2017 Tribal Nations Training Week,
March 20-24, 2017. This is the second annual Tribal Nations Training
Week which has proven to be a highly successful outreach tool focused
on specific Tribal training needs. CDP invited members of the National
Domestic Preparedness Consortium, Rural Domestic Preparedness
Consortium, and the Emergency Management Institute to make short
presentations during the week. The week culminated with a fully
operational mass casualty exercise featuring a multi-disciplinary
response to a simulated disaster.
Thus far in FY17, CDP has trained 266 Tribal Nations students for a
total of 483 course completions which is 5.8 percent of the resident
training population.
Question 11. Preparing a disaster declaration request is resource-
intensive, and resources often get stretched thin during emergency
response.
What type of technical assistance does FEMA provide to Tribes while
preparing their declaration requests?
Does FEMA provide sample documents that would give Tribal officials
an idea of what an ideal request would look like?
Answer. Before, during, and after disaster FEMA provides technical
assistance and trainings to Indian Tribal governments (Tribal
governments) on various administrative requirements for Stafford Act
disaster assistance, including Preliminary Damage Assessments,
administrative plans, mitigation plans, and grants management.
On March 21, 2017, a Cover Letter Template for Tribal governments
was posted to www.fema.gov to assist Tribal governments in submitting
declaration requests which meet the criteria outlined in the Tribal
Declarations Pilot Guidance.
Each FEMA region has a Regional Tribal Liaison that works with the
Tribes on requests for technical assistance, and can provide Regional
resources prior to disasters to answer questions and guide them through
the disaster declaration process. Both the region and HQ Tribal staff
have facilitated many meetings with Tribal officials to discuss areas
of concern and questions they may have on disaster programs and
resources.
Question 12. The Pilot Guidance stresses the importance of having
emergency plans, mitigation plans, and administrative plans prepared in
advance of disaster events.
Please explain how tribes may successfully develop each plan and
describe any best practices for developing each type of plan.
Tribes have described preparation of these plans as both time and
resource intensive. Please provide specifics on how FEMA provides
technical assistance to assist tribes in preparing each type of plan.
Answer. At the request of Indian Tribal governments (Tribal
governments), training and technical assistance can be provided in a
variety of ways, including training in-person (field delivered or in-
residence at FEMA's Emergency Management Institute), or remote, and
online, for developing a Tribal Mitigation Plan, Public Assistance
Administrative Plan, Hazard Mitigation Administrative Plan, Tribal
Administrative Plan and how to complete the Other Needs Assistance
Option Selection form. FEMA encourages Tribal officials to contact
their Regional Tribal Liaison or FEMA Regional Recovery and Mitigation
Planning staff to request technical assistance, if needed. We are also
working with Tribes to develop other resources that can assist them in
meeting the planning requirements, such as the Tribal Mitigation
Planning Guidance (described below) which is now in consultation.
Other Needs Assistance Administrative Option Selection form and Tribal
Administrative Plan
Prior to assistance being provided, FEMA must have a current,
approved Other Needs Assistance (ONA) Administrative Option Selection
form and Tribal Administrative Plan (TAP), if applicable, on file. The
ONA Administrative Option Selection form is a standard FEMA form where
the Tribal government elects which entity will administer ONA (FEMA,
Tribe, or a joint effort) and establishes assistance limits for
specific ONA items and maximum award amounts for transportation,
funeral, and child care assistance. In situations where the Tribal
government elects to administer ONA jointly with FEMA or by itself, the
Tribal government must also submit an Administrative Plan, which
outlines the procedures that the Tribal government will use to
administer assistance. FEMA can assist in this decisionmaking and
provide technical assistance in the development of these plans.
FEMA Regional staff are the best point of contact for Tribal
leaders when filling out their ONA forms or in developing a TAP. Many
regions are currently conducting outreach to Tribal governments to
assist them in navigating the ONA process.
Tribal Mitigation Plan
It is important that Tribes begin the process of developing or
updating a mitigation plan, as far in advance as possible as the
process can require longer than a year and possibly more than two years
if the Tribal government seeks to fund the plan with a grant.
Information on potentially available planning grants can be found on
FEMA's Hazard Mitigation Assistance website.
The steps involved in developing a mitigation plan include:
1. Organization of resources--this includes the formation of
the planning team and other partnerships and technical
resources needed to move through the key planning steps. Some
Tribes may have the capability and capacity to do this on their
own. Others may choose to work with a consultant. Regardless, a
strong Tribal planning team and process is the key to a
successful mitigation program.
2. Assessment of risk--identification of the potential hazards
that could affect the Tribal area, and the people, property and
other assets, that are potentially vulnerable to these hazards.
3. Development of a mitigation strategy--the mitigation
strategy is the heart of the plan. Based on the findings of the
risk assessment, the Tribal government develops a course of
action, including goals and actions to address the risks. This
includes the prioritization of potential actions based on the
Tribal government's capabilities, (existing plans, programs,
personnel, funding and other factors).
4. Implementation, plan monitoring and plan updates: The
Tribal government can bring the mitigation plan to life in a
variety of ways, from implementing specific mitigation projects
to integrating the mitigation actions into existing Tribal
government programs and initiatives. It is important for the
plan to remain current and relevant with respect to risk and
Tribal capabilities. Periodic evaluations to assess changing
risks and priorities will enable the Tribal government to
ensure the plan continues to meet the Tribe's needs, and help
the Tribe prepare for a potential disaster.
Tribal governments can find mitigation planning resources online,
including the Tribal Hazard Mitigation Planning Guidance, which
includes some best practices. Regions can assist Tribes by connecting
them with examples and some best practices and examples of Tribal
mitigation plans can be found in the Homeland Security Digital Library,
by using search terms ``Tribal mitigation plan.''
Hazard Mitigation Administrative Plans
The Hazard Mitigation Administrative Plan is a procedural guide
that details how the Tribal government will administer the HMGP. The
Tribal government must have a current administrative plan approved by
the appropriate FEMA Regional Administrator before receiving HMGP
funds. The administrative plan may take any form including a chapter
within a comprehensive Tribal mitigation program strategy. The Tribal
government may forward an administrative plan to FEMA for approval at
any time prior to or immediately after the request for a disaster
declaration. An approved plan is a prerequisite of receiving HMGP funds
and is used by FEMA in determining approval for and the amount of each
grant.
The Administrative Plan, must establish procedures to guide the
following 13 activities, and FEMA will review the information provided
to ensure proper documentation of each activity:
1.Identify and notify potential sub applicants of the
availability of HMGP funding.
2.Provide, as applicable, potential sub applicants with
information on the application process, program eligibility,
and deadlines.
3.Determine sub applicant eligibility, as applicable.
4.Provide information for EHP and floodplain management
reviews.
5.Process requests for advances of funds and reimbursements.
6.Monitor and evaluate the progress and completion of funded
mitigation activities.
7.Review and approve cost overruns.
8.Process appeals.
9.Provide technical assistance as required to sub recipients,
as applicable.
10.Comply with the administrative requirements of 44 CFR Part
206 and 2 CFR Part 200.
11.Comply with audit requirements of 2 CFR Part 200 Subpart F.
12.Provide quarterly progress reports to FEMA on funded
mitigation activities.
FEMA Mitigation regularly holds mitigation training courses at the
Emergency Management Institute and disaster operation offices (JFO);
provides updates and general information to national audiences at
various stakeholder engagement meetings (e.g., National Emergency
Management Association, HMA Workshop); and hosts Regional meetings
between FEMA Regions and Regional partners. Additionally, FEMA has
written guidance in the Hazard Mitigation Assistance Guidance
(published February 27, 2015) on the requirement and development of an
administrative plan.
Emergency Plans
FEMA's Tribal Curriculum course Emergency Management Framework for
Tribal Governments does provide training in the development of
emergency plans. Since the development of the course in 2012, FEMA has
provided examples of Tribal Emergency Plans to course participants.
Question 13. Please describe how the National Disaster Recovery
Framework functions, including which agencies participate in the
Framework, and the resources it may provide to a Tribe that requests
Federal disaster recovery assistance.
Are Tribes and States eligible for the same number and types of
assistance under the Framework? Please list and describe any assistance
that is unavailable to Tribes and any assistance only available to
Tribes as sub-recipients of a State.
Answer. The National Disaster Recovery Framework (NDRF) provides
the architecture for organizing agencies to better leverage existing
Federal programs and support, de-conflict Federally support activities,
and maximize the impact of Federal funds and nongovernmental resources
to meet Tribal and survivor needs. The Framework does not provide
additional funding or resources beyond existing Federal authorities.
In coordination with the Federal Coordinating Officer (FCO), the
State or Tribal Coordinating Officer, and the community impacted, the
Federal Disaster Recovery Coordinator (FDRC) will determine which
additional Federal agencies are needed to support the recovery mission.
The FDRC helps to serve as a single representative to facilitate
identification of needs and provision of recovery resources from a
variety of resources. In collaboration with the FDRC, six Federal
departments and agencies coordinate Recovery Support Functions for core
sectors: Economic; Health and Social Services; Housing; Infrastructure
Systems; Natural and Cultural Resources; and Community Planning and
Capacity Building. Additional information about the Recovery Support
Functions, including lists of the participating agencies are available
on FEMA's website: https://www.fema.gov/recovery-support-functions.
The FDRC will convene Federal recovery interagency and
nongovernmental partners as a coordinating body in support of the
impacted community, Tribe, or State's recovery goals. Depending on the
disaster requirements, agency representatives will deploy directly to
the Joint Field Office and the area of impact to provide technical
assistance to the Federal operation, assess the impacts, and develop a
joint strategy for supporting the Tribe's and/or State's recovery
goals. As part of the strategic solutions process, agencies identify
programs under their own authorities that may be appropriate to assist
the recovery goals of the impacted community.
Note that some Federal program authorities are exclusive to Tribal
governments, and some programs are only accessible through a State
government. For instance, US Department of Housing and Urban
Development, Environmental Protection Agency, Indian Health Service,
and US Department of Transportation all have Tribal-specific programs
for which a State would not qualify. Similarly, some non-disaster State
pass-through programs, such as US Department of Health and Human
Services Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program, may be accessible
if the Tribe applies to the State. Some agency authorities distinguish
between States and Tribes, others do not.
Question 14. Please describe how the Recovery Support Strategy
relates to the Framework and how Tribal views are meaningfully
considered during the Strategy's development.
Answer. Under the National Disaster Recovery Framework, the Federal
Disaster Recovery Coordinator and activated Recovery Support Functions
develop a Recovery Support Strategy (RSS) after a disaster to organize
Federal support and resources to assist with local recovery priorities
and goals. The FDRC and partner agencies engage local leaders and
stakeholders to better understand Tribal, community, and State recovery
goals. In essence, the RSS is a road map that determines how existing
and available Federal resources will be used to support local recovery
needs and priorities.
For the Community of Galena, Alaska (which has both a city council
and a Tribal council [Louden Alaska Native Village]), residents were
invited to participate in two structured goal-setting sessions.
Representatives from Federal and State agencies met directly with the
community members to talk through issues, feasibility, funding options,
and lessons learned from other communities, in order to help with the
identification of possible projects. The representatives from Galena
identified about 200 possible projects, then selected about 30 priority
projects. These projects became the basis of the RSS (copy available
upon request). Participating Federal agencies included US Army Corps of
Engineers; National Renewable Energy Lab (US Department of Energy);
Economic Development Administration (US Department of Commerce); FEMA;
and US Department of Housing and Urban Development. State and Federal
agencies collectively agreed to honor the project descriptions as
written and not modify them without agreement from the community.
For the Oglala Sioux Tribe (OST), the OST President identified the
over-arching priorities of ``Health, Housing, and Roads'' for the
Federal recovery strategic focus. The OST President designated the
Tribal Coordinating Officer to work directly with the Federal partners,
and designated specific Tribal department directors to work with the
Federal agencies. The RSS for OST (copy available upon request) evolved
from direct interaction between the Tribal leadership and Tribal
department heads and the Federal agency representatives. Participating
Federal agencies included US Department of Housing and Urban
Development; US Department of Agriculture-Rural Development; US Army
Corps of Engineers; US Department of Energy--National Renewable Energy
Lab; and US Department of Transportation--Federal Highways
Administration.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. Heidi Heitkamp to
Alex Amparo
Question 1. What is FEMA's plan for continuing dialogue with Indian
Tribes during the Tribal declaration pilot program?
Answer. In coordination with FEMA's National Tribal Affairs Advisor
and FEMA Regional Tribal Liaisons, FEMA Recovery Directorate and Office
of External Affairs Tribal Partners Branch hosted two national
webinars/conference calls on the final version of the Tribal
Declarations Pilot Guidance, which included information on the process
and requirements for requesting Stafford Act declarations.
In addition, FEMA continues to work with Regional Tribal Liaisons
on nationwide Tribal engagement surrounding declarations and the
Guidance and to provide briefings at national and Regional Tribal
conferences and for individual Tribes, when desired.
Question 2. How is the formula for tribal declarations different
from state declarations?
What methods did FEMA use to determine the formula?
Answer. The Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance provides new,
specially designed, criteria for evaluating a Tribal government's
request for a disaster declaration and takes into account the unique
conditions which affect Tribal nations. This criteria was developed as
a result of extensive consultation and listening sessions with Tribes.
For example, the Public Assistance (PA) minimum damage amount of
$250,000 for Tribal declarations (versus $1 million dollar minimum for
States). Absent extraordinary circumstances, when preliminary damage
assessments indicate $250,000 in PA-eligible damage and costs, FEMA
will then look holistically at the impacts to and capabilities of a
Tribal nation to determine the need for supplemental Federal
assistance.
Immediately following the first round of consultation for the
guidance, FEMA proposed a figure of $1 million dollar requirement for
PA for Tribes with populations greater than 10,000 members. For Tribes
that had less than 10,000 members, they had to meet at $500,000 dollar
requirement. For the second round of consultation, $300,000 was the
proposed figure. During the final round of consultation, FEMA received
feedback that the $300,000 was still too high for many Tribes, so the
final Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance provides a minimum damage
amount of $250,000. The $250,000 PA minimum damage amount is based on
the average administrative cost to FEMA to administer a Tribal
declaration.
In addition, the guidance provides for eligibility under the
Individuals and Households Program for enrolled Tribal members, and at
the request of the Tribal nation, members of the Tribal community who
are not enrolled Tribal members.
It is also important to remember that the Guidance is only a pilot
and may be adjusted following the end of the pilot period.
Question 3. Given the change in the administration, how is FEMA
working to make sure that all of the past accomplishments in setting up
the pilot program are continuing to be used as a foundation for new
goals?
Answer. FEMA's commitment to implementing the Tribal authorities
under the Sandy Recovery Improvement Act (SRIA) has resulted in a
culture shift in the way we work with Tribal governments and officials,
and we engage with them on policies and actions that have substantial
direct effects on Tribes. Throughout our programs, we have instilled a
practice of ensuring that Tribes are considered when we develop policy
and that we consult when impacts are identified. These practices are in
support of FEMA's established Tribal Policy and Tribal Consultation
Policy that provide the framework for FEMA Tribal relations and Tribal
consultation, and guides how the agency delivers technical assistance
and programs tailored to the unique circumstances of Tribal
communities. These two policies are revised every four years to reflect
new authorities and polices. The Agency created a Tribal Integration
Group (TIG) focused on internal coordination and collaboration on
Tribal engagement and consultation efforts across all program areas.
In the development of the Tribal Declarations Pilot Guidance, FEMA
sought input from Tribal governments during three consultation periods,
and received and adjudicated hundreds of comments to develop the Pilot
Guidance. The Tribal consultation methods and Tribal engagement used
and learned during the development of the Tribal Declarations Pilot
Guidance, serve as best practices for consultations going forward. The
success of the effort solidified the consultation policy as the
foundation for how to conduct Tribal consultation moving forward. The
National Tribal Affairs Advisor, the Office of External Affairs' Tribal
Partners Branch, the Regional Tribal Liaisons, and the TIG will
continue to work closely with all FEMA programmatic offices to ensure
FEMA policies take into consideration the unique needs and capabilities
of Tribes, that programs are adhering to the Tribal Policy, and that
the agency is fully utilizing the Tribal Consultation Policy.
______
Response to Written Questions Submitted by Hon. James Lankford to
Alex Amparo
Question 1. Under current law (42 USC 5122), the owner or operator
of private nonprofit facilities damaged by major disasters may receive
financial assistance for the repair, restoration, reconstruction, or
replacement of the facility and related expenses. Private nonprofit
facilities currently are defined, in part, to include ''any private
nonprofit facility that provides essential services of a governmental
nature to the general public;'' however, houses of worship are
currently excluded.
During the hearing I asked whether there are any properties or
structures that are excluded from a disaster declaration, and in
particular, houses of worship. You indicated that sacred lands and
houses of worship, would be included as Tribal infrastructure. What if
that Tribal infrastructure is used for sectarian instruction or
worship? In that case, could that house of worship be a recipient of
FEMA disaster aid?
Answer. Even if the house of worship or other Tribal infrastructure
is used for American Indian traditional religious and cultural
practices, or for any other kind of sectarian instruction or worship,
the facility may still be an eligible recipient of FEMA assistance.
[all]