WASHINGTON, DC B U.S. Senators Robert F. Bennett (R-Utah), Chairman of the Senate Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem and Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), committee Vice-Chair, today announced a >virtual hearing= on emergency preparedness for Thursday, October 7, when statements from Senators and witness testimony will posted on the Y2K Committee web site.

WHAT: Senate Special Committee on the Year 2000 Technology Problem

On-Line Update on Emergency Preparedness

WHO: Senator Robert F. Bennett (R-Utah), Chair Senator Christopher J. Dodd (D-Conn.), Vice-Chair

WHEN/ Thursday, October 7, 1999




Major General (Ret.) David Gay Chairman, State of Connecticut Year 2000 Committee National Guard Armory

Lacy Suiter Executive Associate Director, Response and Recovery Directorate Federal Emergency Management Agency

Ellen Gordon Administrator, Division of Emergency Management Federal Emergency Management Agency

Major General Raymond F. Rees Vice Chief National Guard Bureau

Sheriff Patrick J. Sullivan Arapahoe County Sheriff=s Office

Elizabeth Armstrong Executive Director International Association of Emergency Managers

-- Roland (, October 07, 1999


Here they are: m/docs/senate/

There will also be a summary soon on

Some excerpts from the documents:

The Federal Emergency Management Agency plans to have over 800 employees on the job from 28 December to 4 January at locations including the underground bunker below Virginia's Mount Weather.

"It is also important to insure to the extent possible, that incomplete, inaccurate, and/or old data is not released by government agencies. An example of this is the 'Navy Report' that not only caught the National Chairman, John Koskinen by surprise but caused a rash of inquiries at the State level," said David Gay, a retired major general and chairman of Connecticut's Y2K committee.

"We are focusing on potential overreaction by the public," said Ellen Gordon, an Iowa emergency official and former president of the National Emergency Management Association. "For example, we need to be prepared for the possibility of shortages of food, water and other supplies in the event that people begin to stockpile. Various polls and surveys indicate that public concern may ultimately be a major Y2K issue."

-- Declan (, October 07, 1999.

in the event that people begin to stockpile. Various
polls and surveys indicate that public concern may
ultimately be a major Y2K issue

Right. It's the people that are preparing that
are the *real* problem. Blame the victims!

-- spider (, October 07, 1999.


Declan didn't post her whole train of thought.

"We in emergency management are focusing our efforts on two potential consequences of the Year 2000 problem. First, we are focusing on the potential disruption of essential and health and safety services. For example, we all need to ensure that hospitals have the necessary power and supplies in order to carry out their operations.

Second, we are focusing on potential overreaction by the public. For example, we need to be prepared for the possibility of shortages of food, water and other supplies in the event that people begin to stockpile. Various polls and surveys indicate that public concern may ultimately be a major Y2K issue.

In general, however, emergency management is most concerned about threats to public health and safety."

Note what they are MOST concerned about.


-- Roland (, October 07, 1999.

Roland, FEMA was created to be the agency that
will be in charge when a President declares
a national emergency. In the 1980's Oliver
North was in charge and he directed the
agency to prepare for civil disruption. They
did a poor job responding to natural disasters
such as the San Francisco earthquake, the
Mississippi flooding and huricanes because
all of their practice scenarios were focused
on responding to civilian unrest. "threats to
public health and safety" is not their main

-- spider (, October 07, 1999.

I am confused about this Us and Them mentality. Doesn't y2k make us all one? I mean except the real high(low) government officials. I feel people like the emergency mgmt folks are us. Anyone could be in emergency mgmt. I know there is no excuse for ignorance but I think they are trying to do the right thing. Let's help them instead of criticize or feel THEY are trying to screw US. We are all one.

-- a mom (, October 07, 1999.

A Mom, you really ARE still innocently naive, which is amazing since you've been on this forum long enough to know the real concerns others have about what is going on in our government! Please go into the archives and read, read, read, read, while you still can. And ask yourself if the innocent people in Waco and on Ruby Ridge, as well as other innocents, still see it as "we are all one" or "us and them." Oh, that's right...many of them cannot be asked, because they were murdered by "them!"

(We've dialogued before, so I would also refer you to the website of the Jews for the Preservation of Firearms, for a real education.)

-- Elaine Seavey (, October 07, 1999.

Thanks Roland.

http: //

Raymond F. Rees Major General, U. S. Army Vice Chief, National Guard Bureau

Attachment below


SUBJECT: Use of National Guard to Respond to Year 2000 Emergencies

1. Purpose. To describe and compare the different types of authorities under which the National Guard could be called to respond to Year 2000 emergencies.

2. Facts.

a. The National Guard on State Active Duty.

(1.) There is a long tradition of National Guard support to civil authorities. This support is a compliment to civil authorities. In 1998, the National Guard responded to more than 300 state call-ups across the Nation in response to natural disasters or civil unrest.

(2.) The National Guard as a "state" force serves under the direction of the Governors of the various states. If called to duty under state authority, the state government pays for personnel expenses and other costs relating to use of the National Guard.

(3.) Under certain circumstances in which the President declares an emergency, the State may be able to obtain Federal reimbursement pursuant to the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act.

(4.) The Posse Comitatus Act provides: "Whoever, except in cases and under circumstances expressly authorized by the Constitution or Act of Congress, willfully uses any part of the Army or the Air Force as a posse comitatus or otherwise to execute the laws shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than two years, or both." The Act was designed to limit direct active use of federal troops by civil law enforcement officers to enforce laws. It prohibits direct participation by military personnel in civilian searches, seizures, and arrests, and other similar activities unless expressly authorized by law.

(5.) The unique state status of National Guardsmen allows the use of a federally trained force to maintain peace and order without violating the Posse Comitatus Act (18 USC 1385). State law, however, may still limit use of the National Guard in a law enforcement role.

b. Federalizing the National Guard.

(1.) Pursuant to a request from the legislature or governor of a State, the President may call the National Guard into Federal service under 10 USC 331 to suppress an insurrection against the State government.

(2.) The President may also call the National Guard into Federal service under 10 USC 332 without a request from a State, if he considers it necessary to enforce the laws of the United States or to suppress rebellion.

(3.) The difference between a "call into Federal service" and an "order to active duty" is that under a call into Federal service the National Guard retains its organizational integrity as militia while under an order to active duty the National Guard will function in its dual status as reserve components of the Army and the Air Force known as the Army National Guard of the United States (ARNGUS) and the Air National Guard of the United States (ANGUS) respectively.

c. The National Guard on duty under Title 32.

(1.) National Guard members may perform duties that fulfill a valid training requirement as annual training or drills under Title 32, USC. Members on duty under title 32, USC, are under State command and control, but are paid by the Federal Government to perform training and other duties in accordance with Federally prescribed standards.

(2.) National Guard members on duty under Title 32 are not subject to the Posse Comitatus Act (18 USC 1385), but participation in law enforcement activities is still limited by service policies.

d. Calling members of the National Guard to active duty under Title 10.

(1.) Members of the ARNGUS and ANGUS can be ordered to active duty by a service secretary for an unlimited period of time with their consent under 10 USC 12301(d). In addition to the consent of the individual, this authority requires the consent of the governor or other appropriate State authority.

(2.) Members of the National Guard can also be ordered to active duty without their consent by a service secretary under 10 USC 12301(b). This authority, however, is limited to 15 days each year, and like 10 USC 12301(d), requires the consent of the governor.

(3.) A Presidential Selective Reserve Call-Up (PSRC) under 10 USC 12304 is limited to 270 days of duty. This does not require the governors consent. This authority, however, cannot be used to provide assistance to either the Federal Government or a State in time of a serious natural or manmade disaster, accident, or catastrophe, except for responding to the use or threat of use of a weapon of mass destruction.

(4.) Under 10 USC 12302 a partial mobilization may be ordered by the President following a declaration of emergency allowing involuntary recall of the Ready Reserve for not more than two years. This is limited to 1,000,000 members.

(5.) Full mobilization under 10 USC 12301(a) requires Federalization with a Declaration of War by Congress. There is no limit on the number of personnel or length of time for service.

-- Deborah (, October 07, 1999.

Moderation questions? read the FAQ