I would like to begin by thanking the Committee for having me today.  Issues related to terrorism and related preparedness efforts have taken on new meaning in our nation.   Our region was engaged for five years prior to the events of last September in educating federal policy makers as to the role of the fire and emergency services in mitigating acts of terrorism.  The men and women of my fire department were joined by thousands of others from the Washington, DC, and New York metropolitan areas in demonstrating that role last fall.  I believe we owe it to them and to the public safety to move forward as quickly as possible in fashioning the most rational and workable national terrorism preparedness policy as is possible.  The public safety and the memory of 343 fallen firefighters in New York demand no less. 

 Since its inception, the Office of Emergency Preparedness, U.S. Public Health, Department of Health and Human Services has provided an invaluable contribution to the first responder community within our nation.  Creating and supporting the Disaster Medical Assistance Teams (DMATS) and the National Medical Response Teams (NMRTs) has provided not only the financial support but the leadership and direction in the most critical aspect of disaster response emergency medical care.  It goes without saying that without this program our nation would not be as prepared as we are to deal with both man-made and natural disasters.  Long range relationships have been developed and are vital to the success of the program.  As we found on September 11^th it is the up front work that pays dividends during an emergency event.

In addition the last six years has seen the development of public and local assets under the direction of OEP.  These local assets, the Metropolitan Medical Response Systems are designed to deal with the consequences of weapons of mass destruction incidents.  Each MMRS has, in order to get OED funding, been required to develop these very critical pre-incident relationships.  Bringing to the table discipline who routinely to not work together but during a disaster of "terrorist" event must not only work together but must do so in a seamless manner. Sacrificing any part of this long-term relationship building and seamless response to medical emergency management must not be allowed to vanish.  Hence my position on moving OEP to the new department of Homeland Security is somewhat tied to building upon a well-laid foundation and not allowing this foundation to erode.  I have seen with the vast matrix of federal programs "the good, the bad and the ugly".  Direct relationship building and direct financial support for local relationship building has produced outstanding results for national medical preparedness without this the ability of the first responder community is greatly diminished.  I have also seen the Department of Defense via the "Weapons of Mass Destruction Act of 1996" provide training exercise and expertise but fail to develop lasting relationships within a community or city.  That is bad and it continues to miss the mark now as a Department of Justice program.  The ugly I am referring to is the State & local assistance program currently under way in the Department of Justice.  Even though well intended by Congress and meaningful in amounts, over 100 million a year, almost none of the support has reached the first responder community.  Utilizing the states as the funding mechanism has not, and I believe will not, work as intended.  As the police chief in Arlington County, Edward Flynn relates " Terrorism is a global act with local response".

Back to the concept of transferring OEP to Homeland Defense; if in the transition the relationship building cornerstone crumbles, the transition is a giant step backwards.  Local response is built on managing a wide array of assets, which is best accomplished in an atmosphere of trust.  On the other hand, if more direct assistance is provided to local first responders, with states in the loop to provide uniformity between states and within states, but not as a controlling element or as a barrier to assistance, then Homeland Defense and OEP could benefit with a departmental alignment.

I want to thank the committee for giving me the opportunity to testify and look forward to your questions.