+Chertoff, Michael, Secretary of Homeland Security, FEMA/Preparedness Transition: Information for Employees (January 16-18, 2007) (PDF — 51K)
Disasters & the Law
UC Berkeley School of Law
3 entriesexpand all
+Kruger, Lennard G., Specialist in Science and Technology Resources, Science, and Industry Division, Congressional Research Service (CRS), United States Fire Administration: An Overview (CRS Report for Congress, Order Code RS20071) (Updated October 10, 2008) (PDF — 70.3K)
+Moss, Mitchell L. & Charles Shelhamer, Robert F. Wagner Graduate School of Public Service, New York University (NYU), The Center for Catastrophe Preparedness & Response, The Stafford Act: Priorities for Reform (Cities, Communications and Catastrophe: Improving Robustness and Resiliency) (2007) (PDF — 440K)
"The Stafford Act establishes two incident levels—emergencies and major disasters. Emergencies tend to be smaller events where a limited federal role will suffice. Major disasters are larger events—but this can run the gamut from a blizzard in Buffalo to a major earthquake in southern California that affects millions. In other words, no distinction, and no special response, is provided in the Stafford Act following catastrophes such as major earthquakes and hurricanes. The Stafford Act should be amended to establish a response level for catastrophic events.
"The Stafford Act does not adequately recognize 21st century threats. For example, the definition of a major disaster does not cover chemical, biological, radiological, or nuclear attacks or accidents. The act should further be amended to encompass 21st century threats.
"This report does not focus on the performance of government agencies immediately following a disaster—these have been well documented by others. Rather, this report focuses on the federal role in the long-term recovery and rebuilding process following catastrophes, and what can be done to improve the effectiveness of the federal government in aiding these efforts."—Executive Summary.