The Federal Role in Local Fire Protection, Commission Report

... he Advisory Commission on Intergovern- 111 Tmental Relations was established by P.L. 380, which was passed by the first session of the 86th Congress and approved by the Presi- dent on September 24, 1959. Section 2 of the act sets forth the following declaration of purpose and specific responsibilities for the Com- mission: Sec. 2. Because the complexity of modern life intensifies the need in a federal form of government for the full- est cooperation and coordination of activities between the levels of government, and because population growth and scientific developments portend an increasingly complex society in future years, it is essential that an appropriate agency be established to give continuing attention to intergovernmental problems. It is intended that the Commission, in the performance of its duties, will: 1) bring together representatives of the federal, state, and local governments for the consideration of common problems. . . . 5) encourage discussion and study at an early stage of emerging public problems that are likely to require intergovernmental cooperation. 6) recommend, within the frame- work of the Constitution, the most desirable allocation of governmental nature of the American federal system functions, responsibilities, and revenues in the short-term and long-term future among the several levels of govern- and possible adjustments to such sys- ment. . . . tem, if any, which may be desirable, in light of future developments. Pursuant to its statutory responsibilities, The study, The Federal Role in the Fed- from time to time the Commission has been eral System: The Dynamics of Growth, of requested by the Congress or the President to which the present volume is one component, is examine particular problems impeding the ef- part of the Commission's response to this fectiveness of the federal system. The 1976 mandate. Staff were directed to: (a) examine renewal legislation for General Revenue Shar- the present role of the federal government ing, P.L. 94-488, mandated in Section 145 in the American federal system; (b) review that the Commission: theoretical perspectives on American fed- . . . study and evaluate the American eralism, the assignment of functions, and federal fiscal system in terms of the al- governmental growth; and (c) identify his- location and coordination of public re- torical and political patterns in the devel- sources among federal, state, and local opment and expansion of national govern- governments including, but not limited mental domestic activities. This case study on to, a study and evaluation of: (1) the the federal role in local fire protection is one iv allocation and coordination of taxing of seven prepared by Commission staff pur- and spending authorities between levels suant to this assignment. of government, including a comparison of other federal government sys- Abraham D. Beame tems. . . . (5) forces likely to affect the Chairman Acknowledgements

v his volume was prepared by the Govern- tor of technology utilization, US. Fire Ad- Tment Structure and Functions Section ministration; Dean Coston of Coston As- of the Commission staff. Mavis Mann Reeves, sociates; Harold Gallagher, state forester of senior resident and associate professor of gov- Kansas; James W. Giltmier, Senate Com- ernment and politics at the University of mittee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Fores- Maryland, had responsibility for the research try Staff; David. B. Gratz, vice president, In- and preparation of this case study. Other ternational Association of Fire Chiefs' members of the Government Structure and Foundation; Ken Gray, former legislative Functions Section, including Cynthia Colella, assistant to the late U.S. Sen. Hubert H. Robert Stein, Carol Monical, and, particular- Humphrey; William Hanbury, coordinator, ly, David R.'Beam, project manager, reviewed Intergovernmental Activities, U.S. Fire Ad- the manuscript and made helpful suggestions. ministration; Thomas Hughes, Public Infor- Lynn Schwalje worked out the intricacies of mation Office, U.S. Fire Administration; Table 1 and Figure 1 and typed the copy. Barbara Lundquist, National Data Center, Patricia Koch gave valuable library guidance. U.S. Fire Administration; W. Howard Mc- During the research for the study, many Clennan, president, International Associa- individuals associated with fire protection tion of Fire Fighters; U.S. Sen. Charles M. activities provided information, perceptive Mathias, Jr.; Alexander F. Robertson, Fire comments, advice, and criticism. The Com- Center, National Bureau of Standards; John mission appreciates their generous responses Rockett, Fire Center, National Bureau of to requests for interviews. The following Standards; Anne Rush, Warren County, KY, shared their time and expertise: J. 0. Baker, REA Coop., James Ryan, Fire Center, Na- Jr., staff specialist, Cooperative Fire Protec- tional Bureau of Standards; Erwin Schaffer, tion, U.S. Forest Service; Richard E. Bland, U.S. Forest Products Laboratories, Madison, associate professor of fire engineering, Penn- WI; William Taggart, Senate Committee on sylvania State University; Percy Bugbee, Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Staff; president emeritus, National Fire Protection James Thornton, Farmers' Home Adminis- Association; John L. Bryan, professor and tration; Willard R. Tikkala, director, Co- chairman, Fire Protection Engineering, Uni- operative Fire Protection, Forest Service; versity of Maryland, College Park; Frederick Gordon Vickery, Administrator, U.S. Fire B. Clarke, director, Fire Center, National Administration; and Ralph Winkworth, Bureau of Standards; Joseph E. Clark, direc- North Carolina state forester. In addition Michael J. Smith, acting direc- ander F. Robertson were kind enough to re- tor of research, International Association of view and comment on a preliminary draft of Fire Fighters, was kind enough to search as- the study. Charles S. Morgan, president of sociation records for resolutions relating to the National Fire Protection Association, and federal involvement, and the staff of the his staff also provided helpful criticism. The Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, report would not have been possible without and Forestry helped to locate committee re- the cooperation and assistance of the people cords. Pat Bowley secured useful research and agencies identified above. Full responsi- materials. We are indebted, as well, to the bility for content and accuracy rests, of staffs of the U.S. Fire Administration Library course. with the Commission and its staff. and the International Association of Fire Chiefs' Library for help in locating necessary Wayne F. Anderson materials. Executive Director Along with providing information, J. 0. Baker, Jr., Richard E. Bland, Percy Bugbee, David B. Walker Joseph E. Clark, David B. Gratz, and Alex- Assistant Director Contents

Introduction ...... 1 Historical Development ...... 3 TheStateRole ...... 4 Expenditures For Fire ...... 4 Development Of The Federal Role ...... 4 Current Federal Activity ...... 7 U.S. Fire Administration Responsibilities ...... 18 Rural Community Fire Protection Program ...... 20 Questions on Federal Involvement ...... 23 National Policy Streams ...... 25 Major Events Influencing Policy Streams ...... 26 Establishment Of The U.S . Fire Administration ...... 27 Early Roots In The Scientific Stream ...... 27 The 1940s: Fires Of War ...... 33 The 1950s: Interest Builds ...... 33 Relocation Of NBS ...... 33 Committee On Fire Research ...... 34 Federal Council On Science And Technology ...... 34 Forestry Activities ...... 35 The Early 1960s: The Quickening ...... 35 Woods Hole Conference ...... 35 Council On Science And Technology Action ...... 35 Fire Research Conference Actions ...... 36 NBS Actions ...... 36 Basis Of Opposition ...... 38 The Defense Stream ...... 38 Other Events Of The Early And Middle 1960s ...... 39 Activities Of The Fire Chiefs ...... 40 The Wingspread Conference ...... 41 Wingspread Impact ...... 42 Subsequent Developments ...... 43 1967-68: Legislative Success ...... 43 Apollo Spacecraft Fire ...... 43 Riots ...... 43 Consumer Policy Developments ...... 43 Senate Action ...... 45 House Action ...... 47 Interest Group Alignment ...... 48 The Fire Research And Safety Act Of 1968 ...... 48 Implementation ...... 49 The National Commission ...... 49 The Commission Report ...... 50 Interest Group Activity During 1968-70 ...... 52 The Williamsburg Conference ...... 52 Other Interest Group Activity ...... 53 1972-73 Congressional Action ...... 54 The Commission Bills ...... 54 Congressional Hearings ...... 55 SenateAction ...... 56 House Action ...... 57 Conference Committee Action ...... 59 Finalpassage ...... 59 Influences In Passage ...... 60 The Birth Of The U.S. Fire Administration ...... 61 Implementation ...... 62 Relocation ...... 66 A New Name And Broader Responsibilities ...... 68 Proposals For Additional Growth ...... 69 The Convergence Of Forces: A Summary Assessment Of The Development Of The U.S. Fire Administration ...... 69 TheEnvironment ...... 69 Institutional Readiness ...... 71 Forces For Expansion ...... 72 The Threshold Crossed ...... 72 The 1974 Legislation ...... 73 TheActors ...... 73 Special Magnuson Role ...... 75 The Time Was Right ...... 76 One Step At A Time: The Rural Community Fire Protection Program- ...... 81 Forestry And Other Policy Influences ...... 84 Forests And Fires ...... 84 Early Awareness ...... 85 Creation Of The Federal Reserve ...... 86 Federal Forest Management Begins ...... 86 Federal Assistance Initiated ...... 87 The Three Decades: 1930-59 ...... 88 The Copeland Report ...... 88 Conservation Activity ...... 90 Civil Defense Inputs ...... 90 The Decade Of The 1960s: Federal Training Begins ...... 90 TheLate1960s ...... 91 Rural Development Stream ...... 92 The Environment For Action ...... 93 Preliminary Moves Toward Action ...... 93 Forest Service Concerns ...... 93 The Role Of The State Foresters ...... 94 Moves In The Congress ...... 94 Sikes' Cooperative Forestry Bill Passes ...... 95 The Route Through Congress ...... 95 The Program As Enacted ...... 97 Implementation ...... 98 Subsequent Legislative Changes ...... 101 The Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act Of 1978 ...... 101 Incrementalism At Its Best: An Analysis Of The Evolution Of The Rural Community Fire Protection Program ...... 102 Environmental Factors ...... 103 Institutional Readiness ...... 103 Precipitation Factors ...... 104 Actors' Roles ...... 104 One More Step ...... 105 Fire, Federalism, And Functional Assignment ...... 109 Giants Or Pygmies? A Look To The Future ...... 111 Outlook For The U.S. Fire Administration ...... 112 Environmental Factors ...... 112 Institutional Readiness ...... 113 New Policy Stream ...... 113 Events ...... 113 Funding Problems ...... 113 Internal Problems ...... 114 Forces Facilitating Growth ...... 114 Outlook For The Rural Community Fire Protection Program ... 114

1. Significant Federal Intergovernmental Activities Affecting Fire Prevention And Control. 1979 ...... 8 2 . 1963 Budget For FY 1964 For NBS Fire Research. Program And Financing ...... 37 3 . Source Of NBS Funding For Fire Research Contracts. 1960-66 ...... 38 4 . Fire Administration Operations Funding. 1975-79 ...... 66 1. Phase I Policy Making: Chronology Of Events Leading To Enactment Of The Fire Research And Safety Act of 1968 .... 28 2. Phase I1 Policy Making: Chronology Of Events Affecting The U.S. Fire Administration, 1968-79 ...... 31 3. Original Organization Of The National Fire Prevention And Control Administration ...... 63 3A. USFA Organization And Budget, 1980 ...... 64 4. National Fire Prevention And Control Administration Financial Resources, FY 1978 ...... 67 5. Incremental Development Of The Rural Community Fire Protection Program Within The Forestry Stream Of Federalpolicy ...... 82 6. Forest Area In State And Private Ownership Under Cooperative Fire Protection, 1911-31 ...... 88 7. Rural Community Fire Protection: Fund Allocations By State, Total Dollars Received, FY 1975, 1976, And T.Q...... 99 8. Rural Community Fire Protection: Number Of Applications Received And Total Funding Requested ...... 100

Introduction

Hundreds of thousands of Fi'"!times a year, that shout reverber- ates down hallways or the inner re- cesses of the mind as Americans come face to face with one of the most dread- ed causes of death and disfigurement. Ironically, for every American who will confront flames or choking smoke this year, there are hundreds who give the threat of fire not a moment's thought, who will continue to take only the slightest precautions to guard against fire. Fire is a major national problem. During the next hour there is a statistical likelihood that more than 300 destructive fires will rage somewhere in this nation. When they are extin- guished, more than $300,000 worth of property will have been ruined. At least one person will have died. Thirty-four will be injured, some of them crippled or disfigured for life. These words from America Burning: The Report of the National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control present a different perspective on fire than that held by most Americans. Most citizens would consider fire a problem, but few in the past have thought on the rise. The two case studies set out here it a national problem to be dealt with by the examine the two most important areas of fed- federal government. On the contrary the con- eral intergovernmental fire activity-those ventional wisdom holds that fire protection is under the U.S. Fire Administration and the most local of government functions.' For those under the Forest Service of the U.S. the most part the conventional wisdom was, Department of Agriculture-and seek to de- and still is, true. Although state governments termine how and why federal involvement long have been concerned with prevention and occurred. control of wildfires through the office of the state forester and the federal government works to assure safety for its employees and property, local jurisdictions, especially muni- FOOTNOTES cipalities, bear the responsibility for general 'See, for example, George F. Break, Intergovernmental fire protection service^.^ Fiscal Relations in the United States, Washington, DC. Nevertheless federal assistance to state and The Brookings Institution. 1967. pp. 68-69. and Inter- local governments for fire services grew subnational City Management Association, Management Policies in Local Government Finance, J. Richard Aron- stantially during the 1970s. This is not to say son and Eli Schwartz, eds., Washington, DC, 1975, p. 39. that the national government has taken over 'A 1977 calculation by the Advisory Commission on In- the provision of local fire services, or that it is tergovernmental Relations (ACIR) staff indicates that fire protection and parking are the only two functions likely to; however, its participation in deci- for which local governments provide more than 55% of sions concerning local fire service delivery is the financial support in all 50 states. Historical Development

,. ,. ire was a particular hazard in colonial and larger cities usually had more than one. FAmerica because of the close, huddled In some areas insurance companies paid any placement of houses in compact settlements. organization suppressing the fire, and several The flammable materials used for building companies often appeared at the same con- construction and the use of fire as a weapon flagration. Competition among volunteer by Indian tribes and military forces height- companies, anxious both for the glory and the ened the danger. Communities began early financial reward, was intense. The result on to organize bucket brigades and to dis- was that a burning building sometimes had courage the use of certain materials in con- to await fisticuff settlement of the issue of struction. Gov. Peter Stuyvestant of New which company had premier claim before the York promulgated the first American fire actual pouring on of water got underway. prevention and building code in 1628. Some The winners then were subjected to jeers and 20 years later, he appointed fire wardens to catcalls and to an ongoing critique of their inspect chimneys and levy fines on those not performance by the losing volunteers." cleaning them properly. The ever present Boston established the first paid fire depart- threat of arson was acknowledged as early as ment in 1679 following a disastrous fire, but 1652 by an arson law enacted by the General for the next two centuries separate volunteer Court of Massachusetts.' departments served most communitie~.~Bal- Although efforts to protect settled areas timore, for example, relied on its famed Me- from the hazards of fire developed early in chanical Fire Company until 1858 when a American history, the destruction by wild- paid department was established, and Phil- fires received little attention until the latter adelphia did not inaugurate its first paid depart of the last century. Not only were fires partment until 1871.5 It took a riot by volun- in forests and on rangelands ignored, they teer companies to persuade Cincinnati to often were set for the thrill of watching them establish the country's first post-Indepen- burn as well as for convenience in clearing dence paid fire de~artment.~ the land. Conservation was a long time aborn- Today approximately 28,000 fire depart- ing because forest resources were regarded as ments with between 1.4 and 2.2 million fire inexhau~tible.~ service personnel serve the nation's com- In the settled areas early fire companies munities. More than three-fourths of both the often were privately organized and financed, fire departments and the personnel are volun- not paid for their services or paid only EXPENDITURES FOR FIRE a minimal amount as needed. Larger cities and counties have building code enforcement Despite the recent expansion in activities, agencies as well. Almost all of these are pub- the state role in day-to-day local fire protec- lic agencies; however, private companies that tion is still a relatively minor one. Local gov- contract for fire suppression still exist in parts ernments have a near monopoly on fire ser- of Arizona, Georgia, Tennessee, Montana, vice delivery to the public. This is reflected in and Oregon, as well as in Rochester, NY." expenditures for this function. Direct ex- Although still small, the number of private penditures for local fire service,ll which fire protection organizations is on the in- amounted to approximately $4.3 billion in crease. 1976-77, are made at the local level to such an extent that the Census Bureau's Gouern- THE STATE ROLE mental Finances lists no expenditures for the other levels. Unfortunately figures on inter- State governments long have performed governmental transfers for fire protection are limited functions in regard to general fire pro- not available. The local expenditures for fire tection but have assumed major responsibili- were 2.5% of total local expenditures and ties for prevention and control of wildfires. about one-third of those for police in 1976- Early fire companies were incorporated under 77.12 state law. Legislatures enacted arson laws, DEVELOPMENT OF requirements for building codes, and authorized the establishment of fire services. State THE FEDERAL ROLE foresters worked to prevent and suppress Until recently the federal government con- forest fires. State fire marshals were em- fined its fire protection activities largely to powered to set and enforce standards for pro- protection of federal personnel and property, tection of state property as well as for certain and to research. Despite this largely self- other facilities, including places of public serving focus, federal aid activities have af- assembly, hospitals, nursing homes, schools, fected state and local governments since and prisons. In addition they provided emer- early in the century. The fire research begun gency assistance to local units and performed on a minor scale by the National Bureau of other functions in regard to fire protection. Standards in 1904 has been used by all levels Current state activities usually include fire of government. In addition The Weeks Forest and building code administration and en- Purchase Act of 191113 permitted the Forest forcement, supervision of local implementa- Service to enter into agreements with the tion of state legislation or codes, dissemina- states to protect from fire those nonfederal tion of technical information, and wildfire forest lands situated on watersheds of naviga- prevention and suppression. States typically ble rivers. Interstate compacts and a match- collect and analyze fire data, investigate fire ing fund program were authorized for fire crimes, develop and deliver public fire educa- protection. tion programs, adopt standards for fire ser- Other federal agencies long have cooperated vice personnel, and provide fire training. In with local government authorities in fire pre- addition the state legislatures may provide vention and control. The U.S. Coast Guard, by law for the establishment and operation of for example, which has responsibility for ship local fire protection systems, including stip- and boating safety, joins with local officials ulations regarding personnel, training, fi- in providing fire protection for ports. Simi- nancing, reporting, and other mattersY larly other federal agencies have cooperated, These state-level programs frequently are the fire programs being incidental to the developed and administered by several loosely carrying out of other programs or purposes. coordinated agencies and with varying de- The federal government began to get in- grees of effectiveness. Conflict among state volved with local fire service delivery during agencies is frequent as is conflict with local World War 11, when it gave surplus federal officials.'O equipment to state and local fire agencies. Later it started to plan for use of the fire ser- ment of Agriculture the responsibility for sup- vice as a tool of the civil defense effort and, pression of fires in rural areas resulting from in 1961, initiated staff and command schools enemy attacks.14 This was part of the height- for a small number of fire chiefs. The Forest ened emphasis of civil defense resulting from Service instituted a program of training in the Cuban Missile Crisis of October 1962. selected rural areas in 1964 in response to an Until the early 1960s, then, federal efforts executive order assigning the US. Depart- were spasmodic and limited.

FOOTNOTES Vol. 2, No. 25, Washington, DC, National League of Cities, June 18, 1979, p. 12; and Lawrence M. Kushner, "The National Bureau of Standards and the Fire Re- IRobert Paul Lyons, Fire in America!, Boston. MA, Na- search and Safety Act of 1968," Fire Journal, 62:5, tional Fire Protection Association, 1976, Chap. I. September 1968, p. 32. 'Junius 0. Baker, Jr., "Wilderness Fire Management: g"State Government Fire Programs," Fireword, Decem- Policy Development and Implementation," M.S. thesis, ber 1977, Washington, DC, National Fire Prevention Colorado State University, May 1975. p. 4. and Control Administration, U.S. Department of Com- "merica Burning: Report of the National Commission merce, p. 1; Municipal Fire Service Workbook, prepared on Fire Prevention and Control, Washington. DC. U.S. by Research Triangle Institute, International City Government Printing Office, May 1973, p. 21; Lyons, Management Association, and the National Fire Pro- op. cit.. p. 25. tection Association for the National Science Founda- 4America Burning, op. cit., p. 21. tion, Washington, DC, U.S. Government Printing Of- 5Lyons, op. cit., p. 25. fice, May 1977, App. B. Tau1 C. Ditzel, Fire Engines. Fire Fighters, New York, l0"State Government Fire Programs," op. cit. 5 NY, Crown Publishers, Inc., 1976, Chap. 12. "These include "fire fighting organization and auxiliary 'Exact figures on fire departments and fire fighters are service thereof, inspection for fire hazards, and other nonexistent. The National Fire Protection Association fire protection activities. Includes cost of fire fighting (NFPA) estimates that there are approximately 28,000 facilities such as fire hydrants and water." U.S. Bureau departments while the U.S. Fire Administration figure of the Census, 1972 Census of Governments, Vol. 4. is 28,500. Only about 1,250 are paid according to NFPA. Governmental Finances, No. 5, Compendium of Govern- Estimates of paid firefighters range from 140,000 to ment Finance, Washington, DC, U.S. Government 160,000 according to USFA and around 170,000 accord- Printing Office, 1974, p. 620. ing to NFPA. USFA has no figures on volunteers. LZGooernmental Finances. 1978. op. cit. NFPA estimates one to 2.2 million. NFPA figures are '96 Stat. 961 as amended, 16 U.S.C. 513-21. from Douglas Forsman, by telephone, on September 4, 14E.0. 10998, "Assigning Emergency Preparedness Func- 1979. USFA estimates are from John Ferguson, by tele- tions to the Secretary of Agriculture," February 16, phone, on the same day. 1962; Title 3-The President, Kennedy, Code of Federal XRobert W. Poole, Jr., "Some Cities Let Contracts to Regulations, 1959-1963 Compilation, Washington, DC, Private Fire Protection Firms," Nation's Cities Weekly, U.S. Government Printing Office, p. 543.

Current Federal Activity

7 gainst this historical background, it may A come as a surprise to many to find the federal government involved in the delivery of fire services to rural communities. One may be even more astounded to discover that all federal executive departmen4s-except the De- partments of State and Defense-as well as at least 11 other federal agencies are involved in fire-related activities that affect state and, local governments. (See Table 1.) The fire activities of the Department of Defense are extensive; however, they are directed at defense goals and only indirectly impact local fire service delivery except where military installations have agreements for emergency support with local organizations. The federal programs include a variety of activities, ranging from research to the training of fire personnel. In addition to General Revenue Sharing, sometimes used to support fire service delivery, 52 grant-in-aid programs handled by 24 separate administrative units are available to subnational jurisdictions. Eight agencies make loans of money or equipment that can be used to improve fire protection. Five collect data related to fire incidence, injuries, and losses, and many provide some kind of technical assistance and information available to those who request it. Most of the federal activities are designed to promote some federal purpose other than the prevention or suppression of fires. The Table 1

SIGNIFICANT FEDERAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES Federal Agency Mechanism/Activity RecipienVAffected: Level of Government National Wildfires Coordinating Group: Training S,L Forest Senlce (Agriculture); Weather Information Sewice (Committee); Bureau of Land Communications Management (International); National Fire support (equipment, data, Association of State Foresters back-up crews)

Department of Agriculture Farmers Home Administration Loans 10.423

Forest Service Contracts S.L Grants (F) 10.664 S Equipment loans 10.656 S Grants 10.662 (PIF) s,L Grants (P) 10.651 S Grants (P) 10.652 S Grants (F) 10.657 S Technical assistance S Training S Cooperative data collection and sharing S,L Research S

Science and Education Administration Grants (F) 10.877 S Grants (F) 10.878 S Technical assistance 10.883 S

Rural Development Administration Loans for economic development L

Soil Consenation Senice Grants (P) 10.901 Technical assistance

Department of Commerce Assistant Secretary for Maritime Affairs Technical assistance S,L, port authorities

Assistant Secretary for Grants (P) 11.308 S.L,R Economic Development Grants (P) 11.300; 11.307 S, L, R

Loans 11.300; 11.308 S,L.R

National Bureau of Standards Research S,L Technical assistance S,L Exchange research personnel S,L Secretariat operations S (Conf. of States on Building Codes) AFFECTING FIRE PREVENTION AND CONTROL, 1979

Federal Agency Purpose RedpienVAlfected: Probable Use Fire control and suppression Fire control and suppression

Improvement of rural community facilities Construction of fire facilities

Fire suppression Fire suppression Cooperative forest fire control Fire prevention, control, and suppression Cooperative forest fire control Fire control and suppression Rural community fire protection Rural fire protection Forestry cooperative research Increased information E Forestry research General forest improvement Cooperative forestry management and processing lmprove forest management Fire protection and suppression Prevent and suppress fires Forestry personnel development lmprove personnel capability Information lmprove information availability Forest conservation and wood use Protection and use of forest products

Cooperative forestry research Forest fire prevention research Research to promote sound rural life lmprove fire fighting capability Dissemination of technical information lmprove fire service capability

Rural economic development Construct/improve fire facilities

Resource conservation and development lmprove soil conservation Resource conservation and development lmprove soil conservation

Harbor and vessel safety Port fire protection

Promote economic growth by public facilities Planning and facilities for fire services construction Public works and development facilities to aid Construct water supply systems, fire stations adjustment Economic development, adjustment Construct water supply systems, fire stations

Fire prevention; product safefy Improve fire service, protect personnel Disemminate information; assist on building codes Improve fire service, protect personnel Secure expert assistance Broaden expertise in research Coordinate; assist Assistance Table 7 SIGNIFICANT FEDERAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES Federal Agency Mechanism/Activity RecipienVAffected: Level of Government

National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Weather forcasting s,L Arson program development s,L

Assess state and local capability in S,L regard to arson investigation and detection

Department of Energy Energy Research Center Research, information s,L - Department of Health, Education and Welfare

Public Health Service Sets and enforces building standards S,L (including National Institutes of Health) Data collection on occupational fire S,L incidents Research on occupational safety S.L Behavioral research-arson s, L Grants (P) 13.262 S,L

Grants (P) 13.263 s,L

Grants (P) 13.887 S,L

Loans Grants (P) 13.284

Grants (P) 13.287 s,L

Social Security Administration Review and enforce safety standards S,L

Office of Education Grants (F) 13.493; 13.499 (F) S Technical assistance S

Department of Housing and Urban Development Federal Housing Commissioner Sets minimum property standards Technical assistance Contracts

Community Planning and Development Grants (P-F,P) 14.218,14.219 Grants (P) 14.211 (Action grants) Grants (P) 14.203 ("701") Agreements Technical assistance AFFECTING FIRE PREVENTION AND CONTROL, 1979 (cont.) Federal Agency Purpose RecipienVAflecled: Probable Use

Provide information Fire suppression, prevent spread Assist federal, state, and local governments in lmprove arson detection and prevention improving arson prevention, detection, control Advice lrnprove arson detection and prevention

Fire protection in energy-related areas Improve fire service capability, delivery

Safety in federally assisted health care lmprove health facility safety facilities Secure information Reduce fire incidents

Secure information, promote safety Fire prevention Understand behavior Fire prevention Research to improve occupational safety and Research on eliminating safety hazards health lmprove training for occupational safety Fire prevention training and health Insure safety in medical care facilities Prevent or eliminate fire hazards in medical care facilities Insure safety in medical care facilities lrnprove safety in medical care facilities Encourage areawide emergency medical service lmprove emergency medical services systems Train emergency personnel Train emergency medical personnel

Safety in health care facilities receiving lmprove safety of health facilities medicare

Vocational education Train fire-related personnel Encourage educational planning Develop educational plans

Health and safety lmprove housing safety in public housing Information and assistance lrnprove housing safety in public housing Promote technical assistance lmprove housing safety in public housing

Develop viable communities; delete hazards Develop safer and more livable communities Alleviate deterioration; revitalize areas Upgrade building safety Improve planning capability; areawide cooperation Train planners Research on safety I mprove safety capability Improve capability: assist Plan safer and more livable communities Table 1 SIGNIFICANT FEDERAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES

Federal Agency Mechanism/Activity RecipienVAffected: Level of Government Policy Development and Research Research s,L Demonstrations S,L Grants (P) 14.506 s.L

Consumer Affairs and Regulatory Information Functions Enforcement

Department of the Interior Bureau of Mines Grants (P) 15.301 s,L Technical assistance 15.304 s,L

Bureau of Indian Affairs Mutual aid agreements S, L

Bureau of Land Management Mutual aid agreements s,L

Department of Justice Law Enforcement Assistance Grants (F,P) 16.502 Administration Grants (P) 16.503 Grants (P) 16.513 Research Coordination Technical information

Federal Bureau of Investigation Data collection; arson

Department of Labor Occupational Safety and Health Data collection Administration Technical assistance and advice Grants (P) 17.500

Training

Mine Safety and Health Grants (P) 17.600 Administration Training centers Research Technical assistance 17.601

Employment and Training Grants (F) 17.232 Administration Grants (F) 17.232 Technical assistance

Department of Transportation Coast Guard Regulates fire protection in ports L, port authorities Enforces federal and state boating and L, port authorities safety laws AFFECTING FIRE PREVENTION AND CONTROL, 1979 (cont.)

Federal Agency Purpose RecipienVAfieded: Probable Use Housing and mobile home safety Delete mobile home hazards Housing safety Improve housing safety Promote research on community problems, housing Research on housing safety and problems

Cooperative enforcement of mobile homes Insure mobile home safety safety standards

Promote coal mine safety Prevent and control mine fires Efficient recovery of nonfuel minerals Prevent and control mine fires

Fire suppression on Bureau lands Suppress fires

lmprove law enforcement Facilitate emergency communications Provide technical assistance Training, technical information lmprove professional training Prevent and detect arson Information on arson Prevent and detect arson lmprove arson control Determine arson incidence Crime statistics collection Determine arson incidence

Arson prevention Determine arson incidence, methods

Determine incidence and causes of accidents To insure safe and healthful working conditions Supply information, use data for planning Administrative and enforcement programs, including lmprove occupational safety mine safety Inspection, safety and rescue training lmprove occupational safety Inspection, safety and rescue training

Promote mine safety Prevent and control fires Safety training Prevent and control fires, improve rescues Promote mine safety Promote mine safety Promote mine safety Promote mine safety

Increase employability of disadvantaged (CETA) Fire service training Train public service employees (Manpower) Fire service training Training of disadvantaged (CETA) Fire service training

lmprove harbor and vessel safety lmprove local firefighting capability lmprove boat safety lmprove boating safety Table 1 SIGNIFICANT FEDERAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES

Federal Agency RecipienVAffected: Level of Government Federal Aviation Administration Grants (P) 20.102 S,L,other airport authorities Develops standards and regulations S,L,other airport authorities Inspections S,L,other airport authorities Reviews airport certification S,L,other airport authorities Technical assistance S,L,other airport authorities

Federal Railroad Administration Grants (P) 20.303 Technical assistance

National Highway Traffic Safety Grants (F) 20.600 Administration Technical assistance Development of standards

Urban Mass Transportation Grants (P) 20.504; 20.506; 20.505 Research (P)20.502; 20.504; 20.502 Demonstration grants 20.506 Standards

Materials Transportation Bureau Grants (F) 20.700 Training and safety programs Advice Standards

Department of the Treasury Mceof Revenue Sharing Revenue sharing funds (F) s,L

Bureau of Government Financial Reimbursement Operations

Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms Technical assistance S,L

Office of Personnel Management IntorgovernmentalPersonnel Programs Grants (P) 27.009 s,L

Consumer Product Safety Commission Data collected s,L Information s,L Joint use of personnel s,L

-- - Federal Communications Commission Regulation of radio services s, L AFFECTING FIRE PREVENTION AND CONTROL, 1979 (cont.)

Federal Agency Purpose RecipienVAffected: Probable Use

lmprove air crash survivability Construction, equipment, and operation of airport fire services lmprove air crash survivability lmprove fire fighting capability

lmprove air crash survivability Assure fire fighting capability

Improve air crash survivability Assure fire fighting capability

Improve air crash survivability Improve airport safety

lmprove railroad safety lmprove railroad safety lmprove railroad safety lrnprove railroad safety

Provide coordinated highway safety program lmprove highway safety Promote highway safety lmprove highway safety Promote highway safety lmprove highway safety

Promote urban mass transportation lmprove mass transit Promote urban mass transportation lmprove mass transit Promote urban mass transportation lmprove mass transit Promote urban mass transportation lmprove mass transit

Promote pipeline safety Insure pipeline safety Safe transport of hazardous materials Train safety enforcement personnel Safe transport of hazardous materials Safe transport of hazardous materials Safe transport of hazardous materials Safe transport of hazardous materials

Broaden local discretion Local priorities including fire protection

Protection of federal property by nonfederal Fire protection firefighters

Aid in arson investigation Improve arson investigations

Improve personnel management, development Improve personnel management capability

Obtain injury and hazard information Provide the data, promote safety Disemminate burn and hazard information Improve recovery from burns Investigate violations of federal law Improve safety

Promote safety; strengthen defense Maintain communications Table 7

SIGNIFICANT FEDERAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES

Federal Agency Mechanism/Activity RecipienVAftected: Level of Government > Federal Emergency Management Administration Defense Civil Preparedness Agency Develops standards Technical assistance Training and joint use of personnel

Grants (F) 12.315 Grants (P) 12.319 Grants (P) 12.321 Grants (FIP) 12.319; 12.321 Personal property loans 12.322

Federal Disaster Assistance Grants (P) 14.701 Administration Grants (P) 14.702 Property loans Financial loans Technical assistance

Federal Preparedness Agency Research Training

U.S. Fire Administration Grants (P) 11.700

Grants (P) 11.701

Research Training Data collection and dissemination Technical assistance Educational resources Liaison

- - General Services Administration Federal Supply Service Gifts of surplus property 39.002, 39.003 S,L Sales of surplus property 39.002, S.L 39.003, 39.007

Publlc Building Service Cooperative fire suppression s,L

National Aeronautics and Space Research S.L AdministraHon Fiscal agreements L (with NASA facilities) AFFECTING FIRE PREVENTION AND CONTROL, 1979 (cont.)

Federal Agency Purpose RecipienVAffected: Probable Use

lmprove fire equipment for civil defense lmprove fire service equipment lmprove civil defense capability lmprove fire service delivery lmprove fire fighting for civil defense lmprove fire service delivery: fire chief, civil defense director Personnel and administrative expenses Personnel compensation administration Maintenance and services Maintenance, training, supplies Provide supporting materials Purchase of emergency equipment Establish operating centers for civil defense Establish, equip, maintain centers Standby or emergencies-civil defense Secure emergency equipment on loan

Restore public facilities, operations Restore public services Plan for disaster preparedness Plan for disaster preparedness Provide assistance Restore property use Provide assistance Replace destroyed facilities Provide assistance Recover from disasters

Emergency preparedness Plan for emergencies Emergency preparedness Train personnel for emergencies

Academy planning assistance: development of State fire plan and education and training and education in fire prevention training plan development and control Accurate data collection and dissemination Development of statewide fire incident and casualty reporting system lmprove fire prevention and control lmprove fire service delivery, personnel safety Train fire training instructors l mprove training Secure valid information Fire planning and service delivery Provide assistance Promote fire protection, personnel safety Provide assistance Promote fire protection, personnel safety Coordination, information federal fire activities lmprove fire service

Dispose of surplus property Secure equipment, supplies Dispose of surplus property Secure equipment, supplies

Protect federal property Fire suppression

Increase safety in space activities Protect personnel Protect personnel, facilities, equipment Improve facilities, equipment, capability Table 1 SIGNIFICANT FEDERAL INTERGOVERNMENTAL ACTIVITIES

Federal Agency Mechanism1Activity RecipienVAffected: Level of Government National Transportation Safety Cooperative accident investigat~on S Board Recommendations S, L Regulations for accident reports s.L

Nuclear Regulatory Commission Agreements Regulations

National Academy of Sciences National Research Council- Cooperative research s,L National Fire Committee

National Science Foundation Grants (P) 47.041 Research contracts Technical assistance

Transportation Safety Institute Training s,L

KEY: P-Project grants F-Formula grants S-State L-Local R-Regional

Department of Labor, for example, is at- protection at the local level. The work of the tempting to promote the training and em- Forest Service in the Rural Community Fire ployment of the disadvantaged under its Protection Program and efforts of the U.S. Comprehensive Employment and Training Fire Administration in collecting data, train- Act (CETA) and manpower programs rather ing fire instructors, and promoting master than to improve fire protection. Nevertheless planning for fire protection, among other the training provided for prospective fire activities, have as their basic purpose the im- fighters or emergency medical personnel improvement of the quality of local fire service proves the capability of the local fire service. delivery, thus making the federal govern- Similarly the activities of the Federal Hous- ment a partner in attaining that goal. This ing Administrator in setting housing stand- constitutes a new area of federal policy. It ards, the work of the Federal Communi- also breeches one of the last bastions of major cations Commission in regulating radio activity previously reserved for local govern- communications, and the efforts of the Of- ment. fice of Education in vocational education, to U.S. FIRE ADMINISTRATION name a few, contribute to fire protection as RESPONSIBILITIES byproducts of other programs. Certain other federal activities are related The Federal Fire Prevention and Control more directly to the actual delivery of fire Act of 1974' established the National Fire AFFECTING FIRE PREVENTION AND CONTROL, 1979 (cont.)

Federal Agency Purpose RecipienVAffected: Probable Use Promote transportation safety Promote transportation safety Promote transportation safety Promote transportation safety Promote transportation safety Promote transportation safety

Promote safety in handling of nuclear Promote safety materials and plant construction

Promote fire research lncrease knowledge of fire

Promote progress of science lncrease knowledge of fire Meet national needs Improve fire prevention capabilities Further knowledge, safety lmprove fire prevention capabilities

Promote transportation safety Train employees

SOURCE: Compiled by the Advisory Commission on Intergovernmental Relations staff from a variety of sources. Grant numbers are from Executive Office of the President. Office of Management and Budget. 1978 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, Washington. DC, U.S. Government Printing Office. May 1978.

Prevention and Control Administration in the Office. The Data Center collects, analyzes, Department of Commerce. Because of con- and disseminates data on fire incidence and fusion with the National Fire Protection As- causes in order to provide state and local gov- sociation, a private organization long active ernments, the fire services, federal agencies, in fire prevention, the agency later was re- and others involved in fire activities with the named the U.S. Fire Administration2 and best possible information with which to plan transferred in 1979 to the new Federal Emer- and operate. It also works with state and lo- gency Management Agen~y.~ cal governments in developing more accurate The U.S. Fire Administration has the gen- data reporting systems. The Academy con- eral responsibility for coordination of fire ef- centrates on curriculum development and forts on the federal level. although its ability training of fire service personnel and others to do so is limited by its lack of means of per- engaged in fire prevention and control and suading some agencies to comply. Its activi- conducts a special program to train those who ties are reflected in its four original operating investigate and work to prevent arson. The components: the National Fire Data Center, Public Education Office develops plans and the National Academy for Fire Prevention materials for public education in regard to and Control, the Public Education Office fire and cooperates with a variety of organiza- (now the Office of Planning and Education), tions, both public and private, in promoting and the National Fire Safety and Resear+ fire prevention education. The National Fire Safety and Research RURAL COMMUNITY FIRE Office formerly served as a center for applied PROTECTION PROGRAM technical and management research, focusing on the development of better fire fighting apparel and equipment, the effectiveness and The Rural Community Fire Protection Pro- efficiency of the fire services, and improve- gram was established as a pilot program by ment in fire safety for buildings. The func- Title IV of The Rural Development Act of tions of this office recently were divided 1972.5 Although Section 7 of The Coopera- among the other sections with most going to tive Forestry Assistance Act of 1978"ncor- the National Fire Data Center. The research porated the program into other cooperative and safety office was abolished. fire protection programs, it still is administered separately by the Forest Service through state foresters (administrators in Puerto Rico, The agency's research function is shared Guam, and the Virgin Islands). Along with with the Fire Research Center of the Na- technical assistance it provides federal grants- tional Bureau of Standards. The Center has in-aid to states for projects by local govern- responsibility for basic research while USFA ments, private or public nonprofit organiza- concentrates on applied aspects. By agree- tions, and other residents in rural ment and because of regular interactions be- communities under 10,000 population for fire tween staff, the two research programs are protection in unprotected or inadequately 20 coordinated closely. Approximately one-third protected rural areas. The project grants may of the Fire Administration , budget is ear- be used for planning assistance, organization marked for the Fire Research Center." and training of fire fighting units, purchase of equipment, conversion of federal excess personal property for fire fighting purposes, pur- The Fire Administration also has substan- chase of communications equipment, and tial responsibilities in the field of arson pre- other projects that will improve local fire ser- vention and detection and in regard to the vice activities. Funds cannot be used to meet evaluation of, and improvements in, state and operating costs. Federal assistance is limited local fire prevention codes and building codes. to 50% of the actual expenditure. In addition It aids in the improvement of fire services as the federal share of the cost of any unit of well. fire apparatus is limited to a maximum of $22,500, with adjustments for the Consumer Two small grant-in-aid programs are ad- Price Inde~.~ ministered by the U.S. Fire Administration Although Congress authorized the Rural and two others are in the testing stage. Its Community Fire Protection Program in 1972, academy planning assistance grants are made it did not fund it until FY 1975. Consequently to assist states in the development of train- the program has operated only for a short ing and education in the fire prevention and time. In 1978 it was reenacted as part of The control area. The project grants may be used Cooperative Forest Assistance Act of 1978 only for the development of statewide fire and the authorization ceiling was removed. plans or statewide fire education and train- Appropriations have been the same for each ing plans. State fire incident reporting assis- year since the program began-$3.5 million. tance grants are made to assist states in the The Carter Administration requested no establishment and operation of a statewide funding for it for 1979 and 1980;Weverthe- fire incident and casualty reporting system. less, Congress provided funds for FY 1979. They also are project grants and can range up At this writing, the 1980 appropriation bills to $20,000 for each state. Grants for master have not been enacted. More than 2,800 planning and public education are being grants were made under agreements between tested. An estimated $3 million in grants will state foresters and rural communities in 1978, be awarded in 1979 according to a U.S. Fire and it is estimated that the number will be Administration estimate. comparable for 1979.9 FOOTNOTES Washington, DC, US. Government Printing Office, July 1978, passim. 5P.L. 92-419. bP.L.95-313; 92 Stat. 365. 'P.L. 93-498; 15 U.S.C. 2201 et seq., 1976. 'Facts on Rural Development Resources, Washington. 'P.L. 95-422; 92 Stat. 932. DC, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Rural Develop- "eorganization Plan No. 3. 1978. Message from the Pre- ment Service, May 1975. See also, Rural Community sident of the United States Transmitting A Reorganiza- Fire Protection, Program Aid-1196. Washington, DC, tion Plan to Improve Federal Emergency Management U.S. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service, October and Assistance, Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. 903 (91 Stat. 30). 1977. Washington, DC, U.S. Government Printing Office, "979 Budget of the United States Gouernment. Appen- June 1978. dix, Washington, DC. U.S. Government Printing Of- 4Fourth Annual Report of the Secretary of Commerce on fice, 1978. p. 160. The budget documents explain that Implementation of the Federal Fire Prevention and other program assistance is available for this purpose. Control Act of 1974, Report for Calendar Year 1977, gIbid.

Questions On Federal Involvement

2 3 ederal involvement in what has been la- Fbeled correctly as the most local activity raises some interesting analytical questions: How did the federal government become involved in primarily local functions? Why did the issue arise at this particular time? Who were the individuals, organizations, and groups primarily responsible for the adoption of new federal policies? What were they trying to do? What outside events contributed to the adoption of the programs? What alternatives, if any, were considered for the programs? How are states involved in the administration of the programs? What problems arose in implementation of the programs? Furthermore the establishment of a new federal policy stream poses questions in regard to its future development: Will the present limited federal fire functions expand as is usually true of grant programs? Are there forces working for this expansion? What can be expected for the future? In brief the two case studies presented here grams involved no great debates on the ap- illustrate what might be termed pragmatic propriate role of the national government. federalism. That is, Only a few individuals were concerned with national intrusion into local activities, and . . . a constantly adjusting arrangement most of them were outside the Congress. fashioned to current needs with an em- Members of that body were trying to solve a phasis on problem solving and a mini- problem that had been brought to their at- mal adherence to rigid doctrine. A tention in the only way they could-by enact- problem solved in one manner at a ing federal legislation. given time and place may be solved differently in another period and setting. As each change occurs, the entire sys- 'Parris N. Glendening and Mavis Mann Reeves. Prap- tem adjusts, even if ever so slightly.' matic Federalism: An Intergovernmental View of Amer- ican Government. Pacific Palisades. CA. Palisades Pub- For the most part establishment of these pro- lishers, 1977, p. 8. National Policy Streams

hree streams of national policy, each with 25 Tits own environmental base, actors, and developments, encouraged the widening range of federal fire functions. These three policy areas-protection of national forests, defense (especially civil defense), and science-provided the major impetus to expanded federal fire activity. Other federal policy streams, particularly consumer protection and rural economic development, were used as vehicles for advancing fire programs at one time or another; nonetheless, the origins of federal fire policy rest in forest protection, civil defense, and science policies. The existing policy streams were emphasized differently in the development of the two programs considered here. The Rural Community Fire Protection Program had its origins and major stimulation, almost to the time of enactment, from the efforts of the Forest Service to protect national forests. The Fire Administration, on the other hand, is rooted in the scientific and defense streams of national policy, although it owes some debt to the forestry program as well. Each federal policy stream had its own group of actors involved in the development of fire policies, although there was some overlapping. The Congress, particularly through its committees, and the President influenced all streams as might be expected. In the forestry stream the Forest Service and the state foresters engaged in the major sustaining activities over the years. Impor- activities relating to the two programs under tant as well was the civil defense program, consideration predate World War 11. On the which was a major stimulus at certain points. other hand most of the activities within these From time to time certain members of the policy streams which resulted in the adoption Congress with special ties to rural areas en- of federal fire policies occurred during the gaged in enlarging the scope of Forest Service period between World War I1 and the late fire activities. In this stream the fire services 1970s. The 40 years between 1939 and 1979 played an occasional, but not overly impor- witnessed some dramatic events. In addition tant, role. to World War 11, within this time span were Major participants in the defense area were two other armed conflicts in which Americans centered in the Office of Civil Defense (OCD) were engaged-the Korean and Vietnam Wars (or Civil Defense Mobilization, depending on -along with an interwar period so fraught the time period). In particular James Kerr, with suspicion and fear that it was termed director of OCD, was a leading actor, al- the Cold War. Americans learned with horror though the Forest Service, the National Bu- the terrible power of the atomic bomb-and reau of Standards (NBS), and the national only later realized its potential for supplying fire service organizations were involved as energy. They watched in frustration as the well. Russian Sputnik circled the earth, regaining The scientific stream was much more com- their pride in national scientific accomplish- 26 plex. The network of academicians and scien- ment only when Neil Armstrong walked on tists-practioners with the National Academy the moon. of Science-National Research Council's Com- Internal friction reached a high level as the mittee on Fire Research, those engaged in civil rights movement gained momentum and fire research at NBS, and the Federal Council one of its leaders was struck by an assassin's on Science and Technology played the most bullet, less than five years after a young Pre- significant continuous role. Also important sident died in a similar fashion. Most partici- were administrators at Commerce and NBS, pated in what came to be called the urban along with those at the Bureau of the Budget crisis. They favored the federal government's (later Office of Management and Budget). moves to fight a "war on poverty," at least More than the two other policy areas involved for awhile, and began to look to the national in fire developments, the scientific stream was government to solve problems formerly left to the object of interest group activity. The fire state and local governments. They saw con- service organizations, the cities, and various sumers and environmentalists come into their insurance groups influenced policy here. After own and witnessed rising demands from other the adoption of The Fire Research and Safety groups. They feared for public safety. They Act of 1968, the National Commission on Fire experienced for the first time in history the Prevention and Control made major con- beginning of an age of scarcity in land and tributions. natural resources in America. Within this turmoil developed the forces that precipitated federal involvement in the MAJOR EVENTS INFLUENCING delivery of local fire services. Some of the POLICY STREAMS events of these dramatic four decades influenced directly the policy streams involved. The forestry, defense, and scientific streams Others simply fertilized the ground from in federal policy as well as some important which policies emerged. Establishment Of The US. Fire Administration

he key events leading to the creation of T the U.S. Fire Administration (USFA) are set out in Figures I and 2. Included in Figure 1 are major national activities that influenced fire policy (i.e., World War 11), fire-related events outside government (the late 1960s riots), and happenings in the major policy streams as well as some others that led to the enactment of The Fire Research and Safety Act of 1968. This act did not establish the Fire Administration; however, it was crucial to the passage of The Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974, which did. Figure 2 gives the chronology of developments between 1968 and the present that have had significant effect on the Fire Administration. Some of these developments are more important than others. Similarly some individuals and groups that participated played more significant roles than others. Federal policy streams ebbed and flowed as well in their significance as conduits for greater federal involvement. Civil defense in particular had uneven surges throughout the period, although it usually was involved.

EARLY ROOTS IN THE SCIENTIFIC STREAM The agency has its roots in the early fire research of the National Bureau of Standards (NBS). Major fires throughout the country Figure 1 PHASE I POLICY MAKING: CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS LEADING TO ENACTMENT OF THE FIRE RESEARCH AND SAFETY ACT OF 1968

Major National Fires and Other Non- Science Pollcy Stream Defense Policy Stream Forest Policy Stream Consumer Policy I 1 Stream Fire-Related governmental Events I Events I I 1904-Baltimore f~re 1904-NBS initial I becomes a disaster fire research 1 I I when hose couplings I I I I I do not fit I I I I 1910-Forest Ser- I I vice establishes U.S. I Forest Products Re- I search Laboratory in I I cooperation w~thUnl- verslty of Wiscons~n 1911- Weeks Forest Purchase Act authorizes compacts and matching funds for I forest fire protection 1914-Fire program World War I begins at NBS r 1918 1924-Clarke-M~- Nary Act authorizes assistance to state and I private forestry I 1933-Copeland Re- 1 1 port makes fire preven- ! tion recommendations 1941-45-Incendiary lS42-Coconut Grove bombing of Germany 1944-Forest Ser- World War I I nightclub fire in Boston and Japan vice authorized to sell kills 492 and distribute supplies 1945-Atomic and equipment to 1945-Children's bombs dropped on states and others co- deaths and injuries Japan from flammable fabric operating in fire control in "Gene Autry Ranch I Outfits" 1947-Torch 1947-President's sweater fires Conference on Fire Prevention held. May 6-8 (Truman) I 1949-Federal Pro- perty and Administra- tive Services Act au- 1 thorizes giving of 1 surplus federal equipment to state and local I I fire departments I 1953-Flammable ! Fabrics Act passed 1955-NAS-N RC 1955-Civil Defense Committee on Fire Re- requests establ~sh- search (CFR) estab- ment of NAS-NRC Fire lished at request of Civil Committee (CFR) I Defense ! Mid 1950s-Deci- sion to move NBS 1956-National Con- I ferences on Fire Re- I search sponsored by I CFR I 1957-2nd Con- ference on Fire Re- I search sponsored by ! CFR . I I 1958-Forest Ser- 1958-Our Lady of I Angels School fire in I vice authorized to I Chicago kills 95 I transfer fire lookout 1 I towers and other un- I needed structures and I connecting land (if outside national for- I I ests) to states and I ! I localities 1959-A proposed 1959-Forest Ser- tire research program vice establishes re- issued by CFR gional laboratory at localities I I 1959-Forest Ser- I I I I vice establishes regional laboratory at I I Macon. GA 1980-IAFC adopts 1960-OCDM Di- 1960-Forest Ser- resolution approving rector establishes Na- vice establishes re- civil defense plans for tional Fire Defense gional laboratory at fire services Advisory Commission Missoula. M,T I that recommends first I national fire plan, de- I I signating fire services I as arm of Civil Defense I I and staff and command I schools for fire chiefs I 1960-65-Navy and I Civil Defense contract with NBS for fire re- I I ! search 1961-Bel Air and 1961-Woods Hole 1961-First staff and Brentwood. CA, fire- Conference. sponsored command school for worst in North America by CFR, recommends f~rechiefs at Battle since 1923 expanded federal role Creek. MI. sponsored i in A Study of Fire by Civil Def?nse ! Problems I 1962-IAFC resolu- 1962-Commerce 1962-Second staff tlons favor creation of a Department proposes a and command school division of fire tech- division of fire tech- sponsored by Civil nology in Commerce nology Defense and a federal fire 1962-Beginning of spokesman annual Asilomar Con- I I ferences on flre re- I search I! I 1 1963-IAFC resolu- 1963-N BS requests 1963-Forest Ser. tlons support federal funds for regional ftre vice establ~shesre- funds for fire research research centers glonal laboratory at and continuation of I R~vers~de.C,A staff and command I schools I N CD 0 0 Figure 1 PHASE I POLICY MAKING: CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS LEADING TO ENACTMENT OF THE FIRE RESEARCH AND SAFETY ACT OF 1968 (cont.) Major National Fires and Other Non- Science Policy Stream Defense Policy Stream Forest Policy Stream Consumer Policy Other Fire-Related Events governmental events Stream

I 1964-Office of 1964-Civil Defense 1964-Forest Ser- i I Science and rech- asks Forest Service to vice undertakes study 1 undertake study of fire of fire protection needs research protection and program for Civil Defense needs 1964-Forest Ser- 1964-President vice begins fire train- designates Forest Ser- ing in rural areas in vice as responsible for response to Executive fire protection in rural Order assigning re- I areas in case of enemy sponsibility for preven- I attack and it begins tion of fires in rural I training of rural fire- areas caused by enemy 1965-Department men attack of Labor special oc- 8 1964-Staff and I cupational survey cltes I command school held I I I fire fighting as the at University of Mary- I most hazardous oc- I land I I I 1965-IAFC resolu- 1965-FRC sponsors 1965-National Fire 1965-Forest Ser- I Riots in Watts. tion supports clvll Symposium on Needs Coordination Study vice completes Na- I Los Angeles- defense proposals for of the Fire Services prepared by Forest tional Fire Coordina- I fires set national nuclear fire Service for Civil De- tion Study for Civil I I I leadership training fense published Defense, I I I I I I I 1966-Wingspread I I Conference report I 1 I I I questions local financial II I capability in fire protec- i I tion I I ! 1967 1967-Saratoga 1967-House hear- 1967- Pr esident ! Riotina in Ne- Symposium on Higher ings on Apollo space- 'I Johnson requests fire 5 wark.~~.and Education for Fire craft fire I safety legislation in I consumer message -c Detroit-fires Set Services 1967-Senate and I .? and firemen at- 1967-Chicago House hearings on 1967-Fire legisla- ' tacked-July symposium explores Fire Research and tion (S. 1124) in- 1967 Wingspread ideas Safety Act (S. 1124) troduced by Magnuson I ~oollos~acecraft ,967-Information 1967-Flammable fiie kills'three Council on Fabric Fabrics Act Amend- astronauts Flammabil~tyholds ment adopted ex- New York Conference. tending coyerage - December 14 I i --. -. 1968-bresident 6I -. --. --. again requests passage ,/ - . -. \ I -. of fire safety legisla- 0' --.-5 -. \ I I --.- tlon (March 1) 0,#0 I I --. -5. -. -. -5 -5 -.-. -*. --.--. -I KEY CRF-Committee on F~reResearch -.-. IAFC-lnternat~onal Assoc~af~onof F~reCh~efs --. NAS-NRC-Natlonal Academy of Sciences-Nat~onal Research Council of NBS (March) NBS-National Bureau of Standards OCDM-Office of CIVII Defense Mob~lizat~on SOURCE Complled by AClR staff . Figure 2 PHASE ll POLICY MAKING: CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS AFFECTING THE U.S. FIRE ADMINISTRATION, 1968-79 Nongovernmental Science Policy Stream Fire Policy Stream Consumer Policy Stream Forestry Policy Stream Events , 1 I and Other 1 I I 1968-Rlots In 1968-Fire Research and safety Act of 1968 enacted (March) 1968-Law En- I Washlngton. DC (established National Commission on Fire Prevention and forcement Assistance 1 Control (NCFPC); expanded fire functions of NBS) Administration estab- 1970-NAS Sympo- 1970-President Nixon appointed National Commission lished (June) burg Conference- sium on Training and (November) i I Jolnt Council of Education in the Fire I Nat~onalFire Ser- Services I vice Organizations I Formed I ! I 1971-NCFPC funded, began work (July) 1971-Bureau of I the Census held con- I 1 ference on fire data I ! needs 1972-~ational 1972-Sen Mathias and Rep. Steele Introduced bills for fire 1972-Sen. Mathlas 1972-Coopera tive League of Cities academy and other fire bills and Rep. Steele In- Forestry Management surveys flre ch~efs 1972-House holds hearlngs on fire problem troduced flammable Act extended to urban 1972-Sen. Mag- I fabrlcs legislation areas nuson and Dr. Abra- 1972-Sen Mag- 1972-Rural Com- ham Bergman appear I nuson and Dr. Abraham munity Fire Protec- \ on TV program ! Bergman appeared on tion Program enacted I 1973-At least 173 pleces of fire legislation introduced in '1 TV program on cloth- I \ Congress l... ing burns: Commerce \ 1973-Sen. Magnuson and Rep. Patman Introduced com- 1973-More than *--I Department received .. \ mittee bills-"Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1973": S, 1769 173 pieces of fire \ 3.000 letters urging ------.. passed Senate: House hearings held legislation introduced .. \ stricter standards for -- . in Congress -- . I \ - - . children's sleepwear .. **** -. 1974-Federal Fire Preventlon and Control Act of 1974 -2. */** CLLLL------d .I. enacted (October) (Established Fire Prevention and Control . *' _dLL------L Administration (FPCA): Fire Research Center in NBS ___------

1975-President Ford appointed Administrator and deputy administrator 1976-Secretary of Commerce appointed superintendent of Academy 1977-Campus of Marjorie Webster College in Washington. DC, selected as site for Fire Academy 1978-NFPCA name changed to U.S. Fire Administration; arson functions expanded; sale of Marjor~eWebster site authorized 1079-New Academy site selected: St. Joseph's College Campus. Emmlttsburg. MD KEY NAS-Nattonal Academy of Sc~ences 1979-USFA and Defense Civil Preparedness Agency NCFPC-Natlonal Commtsslon on F~rePreventlon and Control transferred to Federal Emergency Management Agency by NBS-Nattonal Bureau of Standards Reorganization Plan No. 3. SOURCE: Compiled by AClR staff. in the latter part of the 19th Century, includ- not incapacitated). This fact particularly ing major conflagrations in Chicago, New annoyed businessmen who lost customers and York, Baltimore, and Richmond, VA, in- had difficulties with shipments and deliveries creased fire consciousness. Another Baltimore when such accidents occurred. In initiating fire in 1904 had a special impact when 80 a study of fire-resistant materials, the De- blocks of the city burned despite the efforts of partment of Commerce and Labor, the Bu- 1,700 firemen. The 15 fire companies that reau's parent department, was responding to came from as far away as New York City to businessmen's concern^.^ assist in combatting the blaze were hampered When it surveyed city building codes, the when the threads in their hose couplings did Bureau engineers found them "full of the not fit those on the fire hydrants.' In that most absurd data regulating the properties same year NBS experienced a leaf fire on an of material^."^ Apparently the code drafters outlying area of its own grounds and faced assumed that brick, plaster, mortar, cement, the same difficulties when hoses from two dif- and metals were equally fire-resistant and no ferent buildings could not be connected to account was taken of the varying composi- reach the fire. Fortunately the small fire was tions of these materials. Regulations had been stamped out. Needless to say, the occurrence established without a thorough knowledge provoked considerable interest in fire hose of their melting points or their support limits coupling^.^ Knowledge that hose couplings when exposed to fire. In fact, the chief of NBS 32 and threads were not uniform was not first testified that, "The greatest [fire] losses are discovered in these incidents. The Interna- in cities having fire laws and regulations."8 tional Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC) The Bureau, in collaboration with the pointed up this problem at its first conference NFPA and the Underwriters' Laboratories, in 1873,3 and the National Board of Fire undertook a thorough study of the safety of Underwriters and the National Fire Protec- building materials under the direction of tion Association (NFPA) had been advocating Simon H. Ingberg, who also headed the Fire- standard couplings for all fire departments for Resistance Section established in the Heat a quarter of a century. They received little Division less than a year later.9 Although ~upport.~Couplings still are not standard, other sections of the Bureau contributed to although an adapter has been developed to the research on fire, the program was con- permit coupling of hoses and hydrants with tinued in the Heat Division until 1947 when different thread systems. it became part of the newly organized Build- The NBS began fire research on a modest ing Technology Division. In 1966 following scale in 1904 when a decision was made to passage of The Flammable Fabrics Act, the undertake a planned fire program. The Forest program was fragmented; it only was com- Service, in cooperation with the University of bined into a single coordinated program in Wisconsin, already had begun research on the 19741° when the Fire Research Center was behavior of wood in fires in its Forest Pro- established." ducts Research Laboratory at Madison, During the 1920s fire research accounted established in 1910. In 1914 Congress appro- for a fairly significant part of the total NBS priated funds to NBS for a special investiga- research, but as the rest of the NBS grew, fire tion of the fire-resistant properties of building research did not. It became an increasingly materials. Fires were claiming thousands of smaller portion of the Bureau's work.'* NBS lives each year in the United States-ten fire activities continued to be important, times the rate of any European country. Fur- nonetheless. The compilation of building con- thermore many people were baffled that struction standards published in 1931 still purportedly fireproof structures seemed to be serves as the basis for state and local building destroyed as completely as older buildings codes.13 with no such pretension^.^ These problems Scientific interest in fire research was sus- were aggravated by the fact that when the tained to some degree by the Combustion masonry walls tumbled into the street, per- Institute, a professional group organized in sons wishing to pass were inconvenienced (if the 1930s by industry and academics. The institute included a panel on fire research at a gift of federal surplus property to state and conference which produced papers for circula- local fire forces for defense-related and other tion among interested scientists. activities.

THE 1940s: FIRES OF WAR THE 1950s: INTEREST BUILDS Fire disasters continued to plague the coun- With the advent of the 1950s, the consumer try, but little of significance in the science protection stream of federal policy interwined and defense streams affected federal fire pol- with the scientific policy stream and bore icy until the 1940s. During that decade the fruit. In response to pressures unleashed by incendiary bombing in World War I1 that the deaths and injuries resulting from unusually flammable clothing, Congress passed killed more than one million people elsewhere in the world heightened interest in research The Flammable Fabrics Act in 1953.l"t had on combustion and other fire concerns. This become apparent that danger from fire lay research was promoted largely by the Depart- not only in forests and structures, but also in ment of the Army and by civil defense orga- the flammability of wearing apparel and in- nizations. terior furnishings. This act, prohibiting the Several disastrous fires, especially the 1942 movement of highly flammable wearing ap- Coconut Grove fire in Boston that killed 492 parel in interstate commerce, sometimes is called the "Torch Sweater Act" in reference people, and a rash of deaths and injuries as- 3: sociated with flammable clothing raised the to the clothing fires that led to its adoption.lg level of concern. A number of children were The attention to fire needs and the recogni- killed or badly burned while wearing "Gene tion of NBS research provided by the fabrics Autry Ranch Outfits." The material used in legislation helped to sustain interest in other making the chaps proved to be unusually fire research areas. flammable. So was the brushed rayon used in the manufacture of some sweaters; conse- Relocation Of N BS quently, several "torch sweater" deaths and One of the most significant developments of injuries occurred around 1947. the 1950s in stimulating federal involvement In that year President Truman called the in fire protection was a decision to move NBS President's Conference on Fire Prevention. from its northwest Washington facilities to How much his decision was influenced by the new quarters at Gaithersburg, MD, a few events of the preceding years is impossible to miles outside the District of Columbia. This determine. One authority on fire activities move provided the opportunity to think about recalls that a successful conference on high- a new focus for the Bureau's programs. In way safety had just been held and attributes gathering ideas for the new facilities, mem- the Presidential initiative to Bruce Pielaski, bers of the staff identified the hardware nec- head of the Arson Department of Fire Under- essary for the projects they had wanted to writers. Mr. Truman's brother worked for pursue. In fire research the staff wished to him as an arson investigator.15 In any event study the effect of fire on the total building, the conference did not appear to have much not just on roof or walls, and needed addi- impact except that its recommendations later tional fire laboratories for that purpose. They were cited in a proposal for expanding the fire made an effort to develop an expanded pro- research activities of the NBS.16 Important gram at this time because they did not want to this chain of events were recommendations to forgo the opportunity to have new facili- for research on the nature of fires, for im- ties included in the plans for the new site. provement in fire fighting methods and train- Here might be an opportunity for increased ing, and for public education to increase pub- and more sophisticated research.*O It should lic awareness of fire hazards. be noted that "although the fire facilities As the decade closed Congress passed The were the first considered in planning the Federal Property and Administrative Services move, the costs so greatly exceeded previous Act of 1949." This legislation authorized the estimates that no new construction funds were assigned for the fire program." NBS After extensive study, in 1958, the Com- Director A.F. Astin thought that with the mittee prepared a "Proposed Fire Research support of the Committee on Fire Research, Program" designed "to encourage more basic he could sell Congress on an appropriation for studies of the nature of 'unfriendly' combus- the special purpose fire facilities needed. Al- tion" and "proposed a more effective use of though a special fire research building was modern tools of fluid mechanics, chemical provided as a stopgap measure when the Van kinetics, applied mathematics, and opera- Ness site had to be vacated, the fire facilities tional resear~h."~~The program was pub- at the Gaithersburg location are not con- lished in 1959.29 In addition to its technical sidered adequate by those engaged in fire re- recommendations relating to fire research, search.Z1 Nevertheless possibilities began to the Committee proposed: (1) federal expendi- be discussed. ture, at an initial rate of $500,000 a year, to support fundamental fire research through- Committee On Fire Research out the nation and under contract with one of the armed services research offices of the In 1955 the National Academy of Sciences National Science Foundation; (2) expenditure created the Committee on Fire Research at of an additional $2,200,000 annually on in- the request of the federal Civil Defense Ad- house research by government agencies in- ministration and the Forest Service.22 The terested in fire; and (3) the formation of a fire 34 academic scientific community also supported research agency along the lines of the United this move.23 The Committee, originally Kingdom Joint Fire Research Organi~ation.~~ chaired by Hoyt Hottel of MIT and later by This proposal apparently joined the scientific Howard Emmons of Har~ard,~~was a small research community with NBS in urging in- prestigious group of scientists and engineers, creased federal funding for fire research. It representing both the government and private began a period of sustained public expression sectors, that emphasized basic research. For of interest in increased federal fire activities. awhile it was supplemented by a larger advisory conference. Its original objective was to Federal Council On Science And promote research on technical problems as- Technology sociated with wartime fires, but it soon became apparent that peacetime fires were The National Academy of Sciences' Fire important.25 Research Committee's proposal was submit- Until its dissolution in 1978, the Committee ted to the Federal Council on Science and published a journal, Fire Research Abstracts Technology. This group, composed of rep- and Reviews, as well as reports and proceed- resentatives from all federal agencies deal- ings of conferences and symposia. In 1956 it ing with science, was established during the sponsored the first Fire Research Correlation Eisenhower Administration to coordinate Conference, bringing together those engaged scientific work. James R. Killan, Jr., the in contract research.26 A part of its financing, President's science advisor, appointed an ad especially in support of the journal, came hoc committee composed of government agen- from the NBS. Although it focused on encour- cy representatives and chaired by Gerald Gal- aging fire research, its sponsorship of con- lagher, director for technical liaison, Office ferences and symposia, publication of pro- of Civil Defense, to assess the Committee on ceedings, and the general interaction of its Fire Research proposal^.^^ small membership (originally about six) The Gallagher Committee met and con- served to generate interest in federal funding curred in the implementation of the first for increased research and, above all, to pro- recommendation for support of fire research vide an ongoing mechanism for sustaining under contract or grant "under the aegis of a this interest. John Rockett, long active in single agency," which it suggested should be fire research, said the Committee "was the NBS, with a line item in the budget after FY only voice in the wilderness for about 15 1960. It also recommended that the Bureau years."27 provide leadership in developing an improved system for dissemination of fire research re- This would take the form of financial support sults and that the National Science Founda- to private and public organizations already tion (NSF) support basic fire research and carrying out work in deficient areas. Where underwrite conferences devoted to the topic. necessary it would contract for new work. The Gallagher Committee emphasized that The fire group also would encourage dissemi- no agency should be limited in carrying out nation of information, urge state and local programs responsive to its own needs by im- adoption of the best techniques, collect data, plementing the single-agency recommenda- and support public education on fire preven- ti~n.~~Following its recommendation the tion. It suggested an operating budget of $3 Office of Civil Defense Mobilization and the million and set forth detailed recommenda- Department of Defense (DOD) transferred tions concerning its activities.35 $250,000 for FY 1960 to the NBS to support Subsequently the Committee on Fire Re- out-of-house basic fire research.33 search approved the Woods Hole recommendations to establish a federal fire group and Forestry Activities arranged the proposed activities on the basis of priority. First priority went to fundamental As the decade ended, the Forest Service research, followed by statistical studies of established its first regional Forest Product factors in fire control, operational studies Research Laboratory at Macon, GA. Within a of fire fighting and prefile planning, and few years additional laboratories were started controlled "burns" of condemned structures at Missoula, MT, and Riverside, CA. Scien- and selected forest areas. The findings of the tists at these institutions engaged in fire re- Committee were passed along to Jerome B. search as it related to wood. The work under- Wiesner, special assistant to the President for taken apparently spurred attempts at NBS science and chairman of the Federal Council to upgrade fire research.34 on Science and Techn~logy.:~" THE EARLY 1960s: THE QUICKENING Council On Science And The decade of the 1960s was marked by in- Technology Action tensified activity in the several policy streams In October 1961, the Council asked the that converged to create the U.S. Fire Ad- Gallagher Committee to review and evaluate ministration. In the scientific stream efforts the Woods Hole study group's recommenda- continued to place NBS in a lead role with tions, which it did. regard to federal fire functions and to broaden the scope of its fire responsibilities. The national problem of fire, particularly in respect to urban and in- Woods Hole Conference dustrial fires, merits much more serious attention from the federal government Interest began to build with the Woods than it has received. If-(increased ef- Hole Conference of July-August 1961, which fort)-is to succeed, it is agreed that it the National Academy of Sciences' Com- must be given substantial organiza- mittee on Fire Research sponsored. About 25 tional stature in the federal struc- scientists and engineers met to study the fire ture. . . . It is recommended that there problem. This group recommended the es- be established in the Department of tablishment within the federal government Commerce a fire office with a clear of a permanent group responsible for main- statement of mission aimed at accom- taining a balanced and integrated effort of plishment of the two fv .ctions (coordi- fire-related research. It would assess con- nation, with responsi~1. , for research tinuously the complete program of fire pre- and development in the urban field vention and suppression, including research comparable to that now resting with and development, being carried out in the the Forest Service in respect to forests United States. Furthermore, it would arrange and wild lands; and conducting an to perform work not financed adequately. operational program for the urban and industrial fire field) discussed above. fice would strengthen work in existing agen- $3,000,000-for the first year and per- ~ies."~" haps three times this sum as the program develops-is reasonable if an ef- NBS Actions fective organization is developed. . . . It is recommended that the Department of In the meantime NBS had requested funds Commerce seek an appropriation in for FY 1962 and 1963 to pick up federal re- FY 1962 for organizing and staffing search contract programs and to augment and in FY 1963 an appropriation of its own research. Each year, however, Con- $3,000,000.37 gress reduced the total NBS budget request Representatives of the Committee on Fire and the proposed expansion of the fire re- Research appeared before the Council on search program was not made.41The failure Science and Technology and made recom- of NBS to begin expanding with the funds mendations almost identical to those in the appropriated caused conflict with the Appro- Woods Hole report. The Council responded priations Subcommittee, with some members favorably to increased fire research activity. believing that NBS should proceed to estab- Responsibility for implementation of the rec- lish the expanded program with the funds ommendations was assigned to the Depart- appropriated. ment of Commerce, which later assigned the One participant in these events explained 36 task to the National Bureau of Standards. that the efforts of the Bureau to increase its Deputy Dir. I.C. Schoonover headed the NBS capacity in fire research came as a result of group developing implementation plans.38 the Gallagher report assigning the lead role in expanding federal participation to Com- Fire Research Conference Actions merce and from support for increased research by individual physicians. The doctors In mid-June 1962 after the report of the were concerned with the terrible cost of Woods Hole Conference had been published, burns-physically, psychologically, and fi- the Fire Research Conference (a group of 22 nancially-to their patients and they orga- fire experts advisory to the Fire Research nized an expensive lobby to support greater Committee) met to evaluate that report. The federal inv~lvement.~~Other forces also were total membership present, including the Com- working in support of NBS. The IAFC al- mittee, was 18. The Fire Research Conference ready was on record in support of a federal voted unanimously in favor of federal action fire agency in the Department of Commerce in support of basic fire research. Opposition and of expanded federal research,43although on some detailed items ranged up to one- other fire groups were opposed.44The Amer- third, and on the establishment of a national ican Municipal Association also supported the fire group, 12 favored the recommendation expansion.45 with a minor wording change and six ab- stained.3Y SCHOONOVER GROUP PROPOSALS About the same time the chairman of the Committee on Fire Research appointed a sub- Undeterred by its failure to gain increased committee from among the Fire Research resources, NBS came back in 1963 with the Conference members. Each member was con- plans worked out by the Schoonover group. It nected with a federal agency interested in proposed enlargement of the Bureau's fire fire research. The subcommittee's task was technology program. This would involve a to consider the effect of the proposed creation federally supported fire research laboratory of a federal fire group or fire research office that would serve as a pioneer research facility on existing federal fire programs. The sub- to point the way to technological advances in committee, chaired by R. L. Tuve, corrcluded fire technology. Other moneys would support that there was "need to strengthen and in- out-of-house fire research through contracts terrelate present fire effort in various federal with other laboratories. NBS also proposed agencies; the creation of a fire research of- the establishment of regional fire centers, patterned after the Department of Agricul- uproar in the subcommittee at the time, ac- ture's extension program, in the Land Grant cording to Chairman Rooney.jo In explain- C~lleges.~'jAdditionalstimulus for the crea- ing the portion of the funds required for tion of regional centers may have come from support of fire research in other laboratories, the establishment by the Forest Service of A.F. Astin, director of NBS, said: three regional Forest Products Research Lab- The Federal Council on Science and oratories.17 The NBS regional centers would Technology for the past two years has assist local and state authorities with educa- urged NBS to assume a central respon- tion and training of fire fighters, develop a sibility for coordination and sponsor- fire service curriculum in fire protection engi- ship of a comprehensive program of neering, collect and disseminate information basic and applied research on the on causes and costs of fires, conduct field en- origin, mechanism, and control of fires. gineering evaluations for effectiveness of The request was based, in part, on the methods and new equipment for fire fighting, limited work NBS has been doing for a distribute information on construction and number of years as part of its building planning of communities for maximum fire research program. safety, and engage in major applied fire research program~.~~ Astin went on to say that there had been plans for such a program for the past two BUDGET PROPOSALS years, but appropriations were insufficient The Bureau requested for FY 1964 an ad- to conduct an adequate program of fire re- ditional $1.8 million for fire research .and search as envisioned by other agencies and $400,000 for the planning and designing of advisory groups in the National Academy of a specific-purpose fire research lab~ratory.~~Sciences. Because of their pressing require- The Bureau of the Budget reduced the ments, the Department of Defense and the wmount for research to $1.2 million before in- Office of Emergency Planning provided lim- cluding it in the President's budget request. ited financing of the program on a temporary As submitted to John Rooney's subcommittee ba~is.~' of the House Appropriations Committee, the The NBS request received support from the budget proposal appeared as shown in Table scientific community, the Factory Mutual 2. Insurance Group,52 and from the IAFC,53 Even with the Bureau of the Budget reduc- but again the NFPA, the National Board of tion, the request was six times the then cur- Fire Underwriters, and American Mutual rent appropriation of $200,000. It caused an Insurance Alliance, and other groups were op-

Table 2 1963 BUDGET FOR FY 1964 FOR NBS FIRE RESEARCH, PROGRAM AND FINANCING (thousands of dollars)

Program by Activities: 1962 Actual 1963 Estimate 1964 Estimate 1. Fire Research - - $ 534 2. Regional Fire Centers - - 90 3. Program Administration - - 152 Total Program Costs Funded - - 776 Change in Selected Resources 474 Total Obligations (object class 25) $1,200 Financing New Obligation Authority (appropriation) $1,200 I SOURCE The Budget of The Un~tedStates 1964 Append~x Washington DC. U S Government Prlnt~ngOff~ce 1963 p 21 1 posed. The latter group maintained that in- the 1950s, collecting fire information and sup- creasing federal activities would duplicate plementing inservice training,b" with the on- current actions in the private sector and that set of the 1960s the defense policy stream the federal government was out to "federalize took on new significance with regard to fed- the fire departments."" Regional centers eral fire policy. The 1962 Cuban Missile were the focus of much criti~ism.~~ Crisis, which confronted the nation with the The 1963 NBS request died in the House possibility of dealing with destructive mis- s~bcommittee,~~nddespite urging from siles, increased international tensions and some quarters, the Bureau did not try to have revived public interest in civil defense. In ad- it reinstated in budget considerations before dition to the move to construct bomb shelters the Senate Appropriations Subcommittee. in many homes, renewed emphasis was placed The Bureau believed that there was so much on the use of the fire services as the principal public opposition to the proposal from fire arm of civil defense. As already established groups that it would be futile to continue ef- organizations with ongoing operations, the forts for passage at this time.57 fire services provided a ready-made vehicle Later in 1964 Schoonover called a meeting through which civil defense could be pro- of interested individuals-chiefly those in- moted. volved in fire research, engineering, and fire Civil defense agencies took a number of fighting-to clear up misunderstandings steps to advance federal participation in fire 38 about the NBS proposal. His efforts were un- activities. They provided substantial finan- successful, and the Bureau did not resubmit cial support for fire research, both to NBS its proposal for FY 1965. No out-of-house fire and to others. The amounts awarded NBS research items were included in the 1965 re- between 1960 and 1966 are reflected in Table quest. NBS did ask for funds for a fire re- 3. (The Bureau had done a substantial por- search laboratory with "unique advanced tion of its fire research on contract for other facilities," involving a budget expenditure agencies almost from the start.) Civil defense over five years from current level of $200,000 also aided the formation of a fire research in- to a final level of between $1 million and $1.5 formation network by bringing together its million.jn research contractors. For about ten years Basis Of Opposition beginning in 1962, it sponsored annual fire research conferences at Asilomar, a State of Fire service opponents to the Schoonover California conference center at M~nterey.~~ proposal and to subsequent NBS efforts to achieve its ends more indirectly were concerned primarily over what many perceived Table 3 as a move to federalize the fire services. Even SOURCE OF NBS FUNDING FOR those generally favoring an increased federal FIRE RESEARCH CONTRACTS, 1960-66 role objected to this possibility. The fire ser- Amount Year vices further expressed concern over what Office of Naval Research $175.000 FY 1960 some considered a "power grab" at NBS and Advance Research Projects over the fact that fire activities at NBS in Agency 110,000 FY 1961 the past had been confined to research. As a Office of Civil Defense consequence they believed that as far as the Mobilization 75.000 1960 proposal for training of fire fighters was con- Office of Civil Defense 100.000 1962 cerned, "the Bureau did not know what it 200.000 1963 was talking about."5Y Sentiments to this 100,000 1964 effect were expressed in a meeting with As- 75.000 1965 sistant Secretary of Commerce J. Herbert 60,000 1966 Hollomon. SOURCE Enclosure A F~re Research Contract Program The Defense Stream Techn~cal Progress Reports and Publ~cat~onsas of April 1968 Nat~onal Bureau of Standards NBS Although civil defense organizations had f~les been involved in fire prevention activities in Scientists had an opportunity to exchange clear fire protection program. Toward that ideas. In addition the Office of Defense Mobil- end, in 1964 it funded a Forest Service study ization (ODM) had established the National on fire protection needs and programs. In ad- Fire Defense Advisory Commission composed dition the Forest Service undertook the train- of nationally recognized fire authorities and ing of firemen in selected rural areas in order representatives of the fire services. In 1960, to build defense capability. this Commission recommended the first Na- The Fire Coordination Study, the forestry tional Fire Defense Plan, which set out pro- report, was published in 1966. It recommend- cedures for protecting the population in the ed that the local fire services be used as the event of nuclear fire, and staff and command foundation for nuclear fire defense. It sug- schools for training fire chiefs. gested that fire defense readiness be developed through training, special fire analysis of each STAFF AND COMMAND SCHOOLS community, fire defense plans, and protective ODM, aided in financing by the National measures. The proposed "National Fire De- Board of Fire Underwriters," began the fense Program" would "describe objectives schools the following year. During the first and organization of fire defense activities at half of the decade, three were held, the first all levels of government." The study recom- two at Battle Creek, MI. The third, at the mended fire defense coordinators for local University of Maryland in College Park, was jurisdictions, for zones within the states, for not a civil defense undertaking, but was co- states, for interstate regions, and at national 39 sponsored by the IAFC, the American In- headquarters. OCD would share the planning surance Association, and the university. Par- costs of extraordinary arrangements for nu- ticipation in the schools was by invitation clear fire pr~tection.~~ only, and it was considered a mark of prestige for a fire chief to be invited. As far as the development of federal fire OTHER EVENTS OF THE EARLY AND programs is concerned, the schools contri- MIDDLE 1960s buted in at least two important ways. First, the interaction of professionals on the federal Events outside the three major federal and local levels created mutual understanding policy streams contributed to interest in fire and respect. As a result attitudes of fire lead- service delivery during the early and middle ers changed." Second, the schools brought 1960s. The 1961 Be1 Air fire in California was together individuals who held important posi- the worst in North America since 1923, when tions in the fire service professions, providing a Berkeley, CA, brush fire destroyed 640 them with the opportunity to become ac- buildings. The Be1 Air conflagration des- quainted and to exchange ideas on fire ser- troyed 450 homes and 180 other building^.^^ vice problems. Several of the participants This disaster attracted nationwide attention later became presidents of the IAFC. Accord- to the fire problem. The 1962 Cuban Missile ing to one participant these schools were the Crisis stimulated new interest in civil defense genesis of the Wingspread Conference in 1966. and in aiding fire services. Fires sel by rioters That conference, discussed below, was a codi- in the six days of burning and looting during fication of "what everyone had talked about the Watts riots in Los Angeles in 1965 gave over the years."65 the public another look at the difficulties of the fire services via television. An estimated THE FIRE COORDINATION STUDY 2.000 fires occurred during the rioting and To augment its capacity to deal with pos- fire fighters frequently were attacked with sible nuclear attacks, the Office of Civil De- stones, sticks, and even Molotov cocktail^.^^ fense (OCD) drew the Forest Service into its In the same year the Department of Labor programs. President Kennedy had given the (DOL) released the results of its special oc- Forest Service the responsibility for rural fire cupational survey for 1965, concentrating on protection in case of enemy attack. Civil de- deaths and injuries of fire fighters. The De- fense was to coordinate and finance the nu- partment was persuaded to undertake the survey of 7,500 fire departments by the In- While the chiefs wanted a national voice ternational Association of Fire Fighters and federal assistance, they shared the con- (IAFF)." The survey found firefighting to cern of the other national fire service organi- be the most hazardous occupation. zations about possible federalization of the fire service. They were careful to insist on local control, and they stressed the necessity of their own participation in any decisions Activities Of The Fire Chiefs that were to be made. In the meantime the IAFC continued the Between 1960 and 1965, IAFC adopted barrage of resolutions, begun about 1960, resolutions on the following subjects in re- calling attention to fire problems and asking ference to federal fire policy at the same time for federal assistance. The chiefs believed that that it stepped up less formal action to ensure rapid technological advances were imposing its participation in that activity: unprecedented demands on them while an 1960 endorsing the Office of Defense Mobili- apathetic public remained unconcerned. zation's National Fire Defense Plan and Their problems were increasing at such a its plans for staff and command schools rate that present fire fighting methods, equip- for fire chiefs;71 ment, and apparel were inadequate. At the calling for a national commission on same time they knew that the technology fire; 40 necessary for development of the things they needed, such as better breathing equipment, supporting establishment of a division was beyond the capacity of even the largest of fire research in the Department of local government and could not be justified Commerce; for any single community on a cost-benefit approving a recommendation to Presi- basis. Furthermore professional development dent Kennedy that one individual be was difficult with the training provided. designated a national representative of In addition the chiefs wanted a "fire the fire services; spokesman" on the federal level similar to supporting the appointment of a com- what law enforcement had in J. Edgar mittee to investigate securing federal Hoover, director of the Federal Bureau of funds for smoke detectors and breathing Investigation (FBI). They found that the apparatus for firefighters; Department of Justice and the FBI provided urging continuance of staff and com- the police with federal representation. No one mand schools for fire chiefs; and spoke for the fire interests. When they came to Washington, they were shunted from door advocating expedition of implementa- to door. Chief Dan Vogel of Cincinnati, OH, tion of civil defense proposal for na- presented to the 1962 meeting of the IAFC a tional nuclear fire leadership training." proposal of the Ohio fire chiefs for a federal Another 1962 proposal seeking more direct fire spokesman, indicating that he had writ- assistance was referred to a committee. The ten the national organization about it four resolution requested that either the Depart- years earlier. General Manager R. Richter ment of Defense (DOD) or the Department of Townsend responded that, Health, Education, and Welfare (HEW) be This Association has been the prime asked: leader. . . in charting what you re- . . . to make a suitable appropriation to commend. We have never in the fire the various states to be used specifically service, apparently, educated our fed- for the training of firemen, and if neces- eral agencies, our Congressmen, or our sary, the IAFC shall endeavor to have Senators in the area of fire respon- such legislation introduced in Congress sibility on the federal level. They con- to secure such an appr~priation.~~ sider that fire responsibility is a local The fire chiefs were in the vanguard among resp~nsibility.~~ professional fire groups in pressing for a stronger federal role in meeting fire service The Wingspread Conference needs. In fact other groups either opposed a stronger federal role or took no public stand until lobbying for The Fire Research and The fire chiefs occupied center stage in fed- Safety Act of 1968 got underway. Then, the eral fire program development in 1966. Al- IAFF played a major role; however, the min- though probably no one was aware of it at the utes of their conventions and board meetings time, the "Wingspread Conference on Fire reflect no effort to seek federal assistance Service Administration, Education, and Re- before 1968.74Until that time the fire chiefs search" held in Racine, WI, added new im- were the organization sustaining the pressure petus to the movement for an expanded fed- for federal action. eral role in fire protection. This conference of ten men grew out of an after-hours infor- The footprints of the chiefs can be seen mal discussion, at a national meeting, of the throughout the activities in the science and difficulties encountered by fire departments. defense policy streams. Probably because of There was a consensus of those present that their relationship with the civil defense "no one has defined the problem." Someone agency through staff and command schools, commented, "What we need is to go off for they seemed more closely involved in the de- two or three days and have a thinking ses- fense stream at the beginning of the decade. sion." The idea was left there, and several They managed to shift quite nicely, nonethe- days later those involved were called by 4, less, after it became apparent that the De- William E. Clark, who said that he had ar- partment of Commerce likely would be the ranged for the Johnson Foundation to sponsor coordinating agency for fire activities. Their such a meeting at Wingspread, Racine, WI.7h eyes were always on the main chance to The conference was not organized formally. strengthen the fire services, and they were Participants were selected on an ad hoc basis less concerned with what department was to and "no effort was made to cover all fronts." administer the programs than with whether The subject matter was related to defining they, themselves, managed to maintain their the fire problem. After the conference was hegemony. To a greater extent than some of underway, it was discovered that sessions their colleagues, they appreciated the niceties were being taped. At the close the group de- of grants-in-aid as a means of acquiring fed- cided to issue a report in order to share their eral funds while retaining local control. thinking with others interested in the problem. The relationship between the fire chiefs The Wingspread report contained 12 "state- and the federal agencies was not entirely har- ments of national significance" to the fire monious. Some of their resolutions were problem in the United States: aimed at ensuring that they would play a role in whatever program developed. They re- 1. Unprecedented demands are being im- sented the failure of civil defense officials to posed on the fire service by rapid social consult them before building civil defense and technological change. plans around the fire services. They also op- 2. The public is complacent toward the posed subsequent NBS efforts to expand the rising trend of life and property loss scope of its fire activities through administra- by fire. tive means after its proposals had failed in the appropriation process. Opposition was cen- 3. There is a serious lack of communication between the public and the fire ser- tered on the training provisions. David Gratz, vice. a participant at the time, recalls that the chiefs were concerned that this move was 4. Behavior patterns of the public have a simply an NBS power play and believed that direct influence on the fire problem. perhaps any such program should be located 5. The insurance interest has exerted a elsewhere because NBS knew little about strong influence over the organization training.75 of the fire service. 6. Professional status begins with educa- where it began to Percy Bugbee, tion. at the time NFPA general manager, thought 7. The scope, degree, and depth of edu- it "was not influential." He declared, "It cational requirements for efficient was important in the chiefs' membership, functioning of the fire service must be but had no great effect on the public."xO examined. Joseph E. Clark of the USFA agreed about the chiefs, stating, "It does seem to have had 8. Increased mobility at the executive a seminal effect on a small number of fire level of the fire service will be impor- leader^."^' Prof. John L. Bryan, chairman tant to the achievement of professional of the Fire Engineering Department at the status. University of Maryland, College Park, agreed 9. The career development of the fire ex- that: ecutive must be systematic and deliber- ate. Wingspread was more important in 10. Governing bodies and municipal ad- the constituency of those present, al- ministrators generally do not recognize though it had influence generally. It the need for executive development of pursuaded many in the fire service or- the fire officer. ganizations to accept new and different 11. Fire service labor and management, concept^.^" 4 2 municipal officers, and administrators must join together if professionalism is John Rockett, formerly director of fire re- to become a reality. search for Factory Mutual Insurance Com- panies and later with NBS, indicated that 12. The traditional concept that fire pro- Wingspread probably was quite important tection is strictly a responsibility of in forming a consensus among fire service peo- local government must be re-example. He pointed out that there is no lateral inedJ7 mobility in the fire services, a fact that mili- The emphasis on education and profes- tates against competent management. At the sionalism is heavy in the statements of signi- national organization levels, the fire service ficance-an emphasis reflected later in The is a collection of "prima donnas" and it is Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 and very difficult for them to form a consensus on the subsequent establishment of the National anything. Wingspread reduced the number of Fire Academy. The report does not recom- factions and enabled them to form a consen- mend federal action, but it does say: "A sus on direction, to work toward an organiza- thorough cost analysis study needs to be made tion presenting a point of view.n:' to determine if fire protection, as a respon- David Gratz, one of the participants and sibility of local government, is economically later IAFC president, said the report had a fea~ible."~Vhepreface to the report states: "tremendous impact" on fire professionals, "The economic base of the community may principally because it articulated what others place such heavy demands on the service had been thinking. After the Wingspread re- dollars available for all local government port received so much attention from the fire functions that the financing of the fire func- services, the participants made an effort to tion cannot be afforded at the local level." push its ideas by making speeches and ar- ranging programs on the subject. The IAFC Wingspread Impact endorsed it, as did other groups.n4 Observers of, and participants in, fire de- At the least the Wingspread report started velopments in the 1960s disagree as to the the fire interests thinking and discussing the impact of the Wingspread report. Prof. proper role for the federal government in fire Richard E. Bland, later chairman of the Na- services. In addition it provided a stimulus tional Commission on Fire Prevention and for cooperation among professional fire groups Control, said that "wingspread was where that culminated in the establishment of the the fire movement got its first visibility, Joint Council of National Fire Service Orga- nizations at a 1970 conference in Williams- Technology just before its hearings on The burg, VA. Fire Research and Safety Act got underway, thus providing national attention for fire Subsequent Developments problems as well as credibility for witnesses. Observers disagree as to what extent the Wingspread generated almost immediately Apollo fire promoted favorable consideration a number of other meetings, designed to fol- of fire legi~lation.~" low up on the ideas articulated. In early 1967 a "Symposium on Higher Education for the Riots Fire Services" was held in Syracuse, NY, aimed at identifying problems in fire service During the same year riots erupted in major education as well as examining what moti- cities. In Newark, NJ, and Detroit. MI, rio- vates fire service personnel to seek higher edu- ters set fires and attacked fire fighters, thus cation. A month later the editors of Fire drawing public attention to the hazards of Engineering magazine conducted a sympo- their occupation. Between July 12-17, 1967, sium in Chicago to explore problem areas a total of 23 persons died in Newark, includ- defined at Wingspread. These meetings sus- ing a police officer and a fire captain, and tained the momentum the earlier conference more than 2,000 buildings were damaged, 100 established. The Chicago symposium sum- by fire. In Detroit during the eight days of mary report included a section entitled "Fed- rioting between July 23-31, one fire fighter 43 eral Government: Stronger Role."85 was shot to death. At least 38 individuals died By this time the movement to do something and more than 1,500 were injured. A total of to meet the needs of the fire services and to 538 businesses were destroyed and 549 were ensure better fire protection was in full swing. damaged badly.87 The riots agitated people Initiatives were coming from all directions. watching news broadcasts on television and Disagreements persisted, nevertheless, as to probably were more effective than the space- what should be done. craft fire in creating a favorable climate for federal assistance for fire activities. IAFF 1967-68: LEGISLATIVE SUCCESS Pres. J. Howard McClennan regards them The year 1967 was critical in the evolution as "immediately provoking," producing "a dramatic change."" Sen. Warren G. Mag- of the U.S. Fire Administration. In addition nuson (D-WA) cites them in reporting the to the momentum established in the professional fire services by the Wingspread Con- "Fire Research and Safety Act of 1967."89 ference and sustained by the symposium in Two other 1967 fires may have had an impact. Dale's Penthouse fire in Montgomery, Chicago, many other events and forces in the field appeared to converge at this time to AL, took the lives of several teamsters of- promote the enactment of The Fire Research ficials in town for a meeting, thus stimulating union interest. Another fire at a Cornell Uni- and Safety Act of 1968, the first major legislative step leading to the establishment of versity dormitory occurred on April 5 during the USFA. Although none of the outside Senate Commerce Committee hearings on the events can be said to have been responsible "Fire Research and Safety Act of 1967." A for Congressional action, at least two helped professor and eight coeds were killed. to create a favorable environment, and others may have played a part. Consumer Policy Developments Apollo Spacecraft Fire Perhaps the most significant development at this time leading to enactment of the 1968 The Apollo spacecraft fire in 1967, in which legislation was the expansion of the federal three astronauts died, occurred during con- consumer policy stream to include an in- sideration of the fire legislation. In fact hear- creased federal role in fire protection. Al- ings on its causes were held the next year though the consumer movement had been by the House Committee on Science and underway for several years, its origins were in an important Congressional issue-the inter- shameful loss of life and property re- mittent hearings on the prescription drug in- sulting from fires. In 1965, some 12,000 dustry held by Sen. Estes Kefauver's Anti- lives and $1.75 billion worth of property trust and Monopoly Subcommittee from were lost to fire. Our per capita death 1959-62. Its legislative highpoint was reached rate through fire was about four times during 1966-68 when Congress enacted a as great as that of the United Kingdom series of major consumer laws.g0 Consumer- and over six times as great as that of ism was the cause of the moment and proved Japan. We can do better, and we must. a popular vehicle for any interest that could We must begin by developing im- ally with it. This was easy for fire interests proved information about the number because some of the same individuals and and causes of fires and their costs in groups already were involved in the promotion terms of property, lives, and injuries. of consumer safety through the flammable The federal government must also fabrics legislation. begin to support and supplement private research efforts on fire fighting CONVERGENCE ON and fire prevention. It should work to FLAMMABLE FABRICS expand public education about fire pre- Efforts to deal with the flammability of vention. It should extend a helping fabrics used in clothing already had resulted hand to communities willing to inno- 44 in The Flammable Fabrics Act of 1953. Pres- vate and experiment in the field of fire sures to expand the legislation and to vest control and prevention. regulatory power over these materials in the I recommend the "Fire [Research Secretary of Commerce, rather than waiting and] Safety Act of 1967." for Congressional action at each occurrence This act will authorize and support of a technological development, were build- the: ing at the same time that moves for federal -collection, analysis and dissemi- study of the fire service delivery problems nation of comprehensive, detailed were under consideration. The two matters fire information. were before the Congress at the same time. -Initiation of a fire safety research This convergence of the consumer protec- program. tion policy stream with the facets of defense -Improved education for those who and scientific research policies involving fire prevent and control fire. protection quickened the pace of the move- -Educational programs to inform the ment for federal action. Fire protection came public of its opportunities and re- to be viewed as a matter of consumer safety, sponsibilities for fire prevention. and its advocates were able to ride the high tide of consumerism just as they had been -Pilot projects to improve and up- buoyed by those of defense and scientific grade the efficiency of fire fighting building research in earlier years. professions and to promote more effective application of fire safety THE PRESIDENTIAL REQUEST principles in construction. Early in 1967, President Lyndon B. John- The appearance of this endorsement in the son delivered his "Consumer Protection Mes- Presidential message, enmeshed as it was in a sage" to the Congress, calling on the legisla- myriad of recommendations, did not attract tors to "improve our shameful record of losses much public attention, but it did encourage of life and property through fires." After and give impetus and credibility to those recommending adoption of flammable fabrics working for federal assistance. Furthermore legislation, he said: it assured consideration of fire legislation in The strengthening of The Flammable the Congress. Fabrics Act should be one early step in Accounts vary as to what inspired the Pres- a major national effort to reduce our ident to include a request for fire safety legislation in a consumer protection message. He points out, nonetheless, that it was hard Gordon Vickery, then fire chief of the City of to keep track of all the directions in which Seattle, WA, says that Sen. Warren Magnu- Humphrey went. The staff was lucky to find son persuaded President Johnson of the desir- out what was underway. Humphrey would ability of the request. Vickery said that he get an idea and write a letter." Coston also and Magnuson spent two hours with the Pres- did not see the Vice President's tracks in get- ident and discussed the proposal during that ting fire legislation into the consumer mes- time.g0 According to another source, inspira- sage.Y4But, W. Howard McClennan, IAFF tion could have emanated from the Depart- president and a member of the National Com- ment of Commerce in 1966 in response to a mission on Fire Prevention and Control es- White House call for programs to include in tablished by the 1968 legislation, recalls the message. Dean Coston, then assistant sec- action by Humphrey in support of studying retary for legislation for HEW, recalls that fire needs.g5 Esther Peterson, then an assistant secretary It is possible, of course, that all of these of labor and special assistant to the President efforts to interest the President played a part for consumer affairs, and Wilbur Cohen, Sec- in his decision to recommend fire safety legis- retary of HEW, persuaded President Johnson lation. None af them precludes the others. that he ought to do something about con- The Bureau of the Budget adamantly op- sumers. Subsequently they, Coston, and posed including fire interests in the message, either Bill Moyers or Douglas Cater met with presumably because of the additional funds 45 the President and proposed a consumer mes- that might be required, but lost out because sage. These persons then put together a con- of the support the proposal had from a couple sumer package and drafted the message. It of people on the White House staff, according is Coston's belief that Dr. J. Herbert Hollo- to Coston. Assistant Secretary Hollomon had mon, assistant secretary of Commerce for close connections with Sen. Robert Kerr (D- science and technology, had to come up with OK), a close Johnson friend, and this may a consumer package to put in the message. well have helped his cause. He was prevailed on by the fire interests to propose that the New Society move on fire and worked to get it into the message. Cer- Senate Action tainly there appears to have been considerable The consumer message barely was out when interaction between Commerce and the fire fire safety legislation was introduced in both services, especially the chiefs, during this pe- houses of Congress. Sen. John Sparkman (D- riod. Coston thinks that Hollomon also may AL) submitted Senate Joint Resolution 46, have looked at the growing research capacity "To Establish A National Advisory Commis- at NBS and wanted to build.g1 sion on Fire Protection and Control," on The suggestion for including the request for February 27, 1967, followed shortly thereafter fire safety legislation could have come from by Sen. Magnuson's submission of S. 1124, another source as well. David Gratz of the "The Fire Research and Safety Act of 1967." IAFC believes the push came from the fire Magnuson chaired the Committee on Com- services through then Vice President Hubert merce and its Consumer Subcommittee that Humphrey. He recalls that three IAFF mem- later held hearings on the bills. He had been bers were on Capitol Hill about another mat- active in passing consumer legislation. Both ter and stopped by the Humphrey office. In the Flammable Fabrics and Auto Safety the course of a discussion, someone mentioned legislation carried his imprimatur. Sparkman, the need for fire legislation and the Vice Pres- who apparently had an interest in fire safety ident assured them he would look into it.92 inspired by his nephew's military service at What action he took if any, is not known. Redstone Ar~enal,~~is credited in subsequent Ken Gray, legislative assistant to Humphrey floor debate with yielding jurisdiction over his when he returned to the Senate, doubts if fire legislation to Magnuson so that both Humphrey was responsible for the reference measures could be considered at the same to fire in the consumer protection message. hearing.97 S. 1124 proposed to amend the organic act April 1967, during which time nine persons of the NBS to authorize a fire research and were killed in the Cornell University fire. safety program. It would include the gather- Testimony at the hearings was strongly fa- ing of fire data, a fire research program, fire vorable except from the National Fire Pro- safety and educational programs, as well as tection Association (NFPA). The IAFC, provisions for demonstration of new ap- IAFF, and the International Fire Adminis- proaches and improvements in fire preven- tration Institute favored amending the pro- tion, control, and the reduction of death, posal to include a study group. This idea was personal injury, and property damage. The endorsed strongly by Percy Bugbee of NFPA. intent to establish a fire research and safety Nevertheless the NFPA was the nucleus of center to carry out the act was explicitly stat- opposition in both the Senate and the House ed in the legislation. In addition the proposal because the measure included provisions for would authorize the Secretary of Commerce, increasing the role of the NBS in fire re- directly or through grants to state and local search, investigation, data collection, and governments or nonprofit institutions, to: training. The NFPA board of directors had engage in investigations of fires to de- taken a position in opposition to Title I termine their causes, frequency of oc- (S. 1124 and H.R. 6637, as originally pre- currences, severity. and other pertinent pared) that provided for the establishment of factors; a fire research and safety center in NBS 46 conduct research into the causes and while supporting Title I1 (first submitted nature of fires and development of imple- separately as S.J. Res. 36) creating a na- mentation methods and techniques for tional commi~sion.~~NFPAbelieved that fire prevention, control, reduction of adoption of the Sparkman proposal for a death, personal injury, and property national commission "should precede action damage; providing sweeping new programs."" As before, it feared federal usurpation of its data establish educational programs to in- collecting and other activities. form the public of fire hazards and fire The Senate incorporated the proposal for a safety techniques and encourage avoid- national study commission as Title I1 of the ance of such hazards and the use of such fire safety act and reported the bill favorably. techniques; In reporting the measure Magnuson said, "A institute fire information reference ser- major national effort is required to reduce the vices, including collection, analysis, and present shameful loss of life and property re- dissemination of data, research results, sulting from fires." He pointed out that "the and other information; best estimates available indicate that in establish education and training pro- 1965, fire in the United States caused 12,100 grams and demonstration projects to im- deaths and property damage amounting to prove efficiency, operation, and organiza- $l,74l,4OO,OOO--or $8.98 for every man, tion of fire services and their capability woman, and child." He noted that the com- for controlling unusual fire related haz- mittee was particularly disturbed to learn at ards and fire disasters; and the hearings that "among the major nations of the world, the United States has the high- support, by contract or grants, the de- est per capita death rate from fires; twice that velopment of materials for use by educa- of Canada, four times that of the United tors and other nonprofit institutions of Kingdom, and, remarkably, six and one-half fire safety and fire protection engineering times that of Japan." or science curriculum for fire safety Magnuson cited as deficiencies in the fire courses. safety programs: (1) the lack of comprehen- Substantially the same administration bill sive and detailed information on fire causes was introduced in the House of Representa- and effects; (2) the "mission oriented" nature tives as H.R. 6637. of the fire research undertaken by government Senate hearings on S. 1124 were held in agencies that is not applicable to many fire safety problems; (3) the inadequate research troduce a clean bill. Subsequently the clean "attention given to establishing an under- bill, H.R. 11284, was approved by the full standing of the basic nature and behavior of committee on July 20, 1967.10:1The House fire upon which to base a theory and more leadership did not schedule the bill for floor efficient practice of fire prevention and con- action in 1967 and no bill was passed by the trol;" (4) inadequate public education on fire House until early in the next session. prevention; and (5) the insufficient attention President Johnson again urged the enact- given to fire prevention and control education ment of "The Fire Research and Safety Act" in the fields of engineering, architecture, city in his State of the Union Message in January planning, and comparable curricula. 1968, and in his second consumer message on In regard to the federal role, he said: February 6, 1968. Two days later, on Feb- ruary 8, the House passed H.R. 11284 by a The committee wishes to emphasize bipartisan majority of 269 to 78, after adopt- that S. 1124 does not represent any ing an amendment offered by Rep. Alphonzo federal takeover of fire prevention and Bell (R-CA) reducing the authorization for control programs. Rather the com- research and development programs from $10 mittee believes that the problem of fire million to $5 million for FY 1969 and from safety is a perfect example of a problem the "necessary funds" for 1970 to $5 million which can best be resolved through the for that fiscal year. After passage the House cooperative efforts of public and pri- by voice vote substituted its language for that vate organizations, and through a 47 of the Senate passed bill (S. 1124).Io4 The working partnership of government at Senate agreed to the House amendment on all levels. February 16 and President Johnson signed There was little debate on the Senate floor. the measure on March 1, 1968.'"" Magnuson, Coston, and J. Caleb Boggs (R- Most of the opposition to the bill on the DE) spoke for the bill. No one spoke against House floor came from Republicans con- it. S. 1124 passed by a voice vote. cerned with rising government costs. David Martin of Nebraska is quoted as saying that House Action action on the bill "should be deferred . . . in view of the serious fiscal situation in which In the House, the Administration's bill, this country finds itself today." He said it H.R. 6637, was introduced by Rep. George P. gave the House an opportunity to prove that Miller (D-CA), chairman of the Committee on it meant what it said about government Science and Astronautics. He referred it to economy. Martin also argued that the pro- the Subcommittee on Science, Research, and posed programs duplicated activities in the Development, chaired by Rep. Emilio Dad- private sector and in the federal government dario (D-CN). The subcommittee held four whose agencies had spent $11 million on days of hearings during May and June. fire research in 1968.1°" Virtually all of the witnesses who appeared Daddario, who managed the bill on the before the subcommittee approved of the pur- floor, replied that most of the research by poses of the bill.10' Reservations were ex- federal agencies was "mission oriented" or pressed by Charles S. Morgan, assistant gen- dosely related to their main tasks (e.g., ship eral manager of the NFPA, for the same safety). He said, "We have a national fire reasons as expressed to the Senate.lo2 problem and the time has come to seek a During the hearings a suggestion was made national solution." He pointed out that sup- that a national commission on fire protec- port for the bill had been practically unani- tion and control be established, along the mous. Only the NFPA opposed parts of it. lines of House Joint Resolution 498, intro- Daddario found inconsistencies between the duced by Rep. William A. Barrett (D-PA) testimony the NFPA had given on H.R. 11284 on April 8. This provision was discussed and and letters that it had sent to all members approved. The subcommittee reported H.R. opposing passage.'07 6637, as amended, with instructions to in- Although a majority of members of both parties in the House voted in favor of the against H.R. 11284 and Report No. 522 (90th measure, Democratic support exceeded that Congress, 1st Sess.). Among other reasons of the Republicans. Democrats voted in favor Bugbee pointed out that fire protection was 177-27; Republicans were split 95-21. South- historically and properly handled at state and ern Democrats were more likely to oppose the local levels and that a study of the problem bill than were their northern counterparts. was desirable first.'" Northern Democrats voted 127-73 in favor of the measure while southern Democrats favored it by 50-24.1°" THE FIRE RESEARCH AND SAFETY ACT OF 1968 Interest Group Alignment Title I of the new fire legislation was sub- While the bill was before the Congress, an stantially the same as that originally intro- inhouse memorandum in the Department of duced as the Administration's bill. It pro- Commerce indicated Commerce's perception vided for a national fire research and safety of group alignments on the "Fire Research program in the Department of Commerce, in- and Safety Act:" cluding the gathering of comprehensive fire Strong Support: Cities, fire services, data, a major fire research program, fire firemen's labor union, mutual insurance safety education and training programs, and 48 companies, one leading stock insurance demonstrations of new approaches and im- company, a school safety official, fire re- provements in fire prevention and control. It search organizations, Imported Hard- was the sense of Congress that the Secretary wood Products Association, fire equip- should establish a fire research and safety center for administering this title. The act ment manufacturers and distributors authorized the Secretary of Commerce to associations. make grants to state and local governments Tentative Support: Aerospace indus- and nonprofit organizations for carrying out tries. provisions of the act. The Secretary was Neutral to Negative: NFPA, U.S. designated as the official liaison and coordi- Chamber of Commerce, Underwriters nator of fire problems among federal agencies, Laboratories, American Insurance As- but no existing functions were to be elimi- sociation, and stock fire insurance com- nated by this act. panies. Title 11, added during committee consider- Unknown at This Time: building ation, provided for a national commission on code officials, state fire materials indus- fire prevention and control to undertake a try, textile industry, NAM.'OS comprehensive study and investigation to determine the most practical and effective mea- The memorandum author perceived that the sures for reducing the destructive effects of NFPA Firemen for May 1967 distorted the fire. This was to include study of effective pre- effects of the act on fire service by saying: vention methods, present and future needs, 1. National directives and policies would the adequacy of communications in relation replace local policy on control of fire to fire, administrative problems affecting the services. capability of local fire departments, and assessment of federal, state, and local responsi- 2. Scope of the proposed legislation ap- bility in developing practicable solutions for pears to imply a "take-over" of entire reducing fire losses. The commission was fire prevention and fire protection given two years after its organization for its machinery of the country to be oper- work. ated from Washington.l1° The law specified that the 20-member com- Subsequently, Percy Bugbee, general mana- mission include the Secretary of Commerce, ger of NFPA, wrote a letter to Rep. Donald the Secretary of Housing and Urban Develop- E. Lukens on August 25, 1967, urging his vote ment (HUD), and 18 other Presidentially appointed members from all sections of the crease of $1.11 million specifically for tasks country and all segments of the fire com- set out in the 1968 act.l15 munity. The National Commission

Implementation There was delay in naming the National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control, The gratification of those who had worked and President Nixon did not announce the for the enactment of The Fire Research and appointees until November 17, 1970. The Safety Act diminished as the delays en- Commission received funds and began work in countered in getting its programs underway July 1971, under the chairmanship of Prof. continued. The law was passed in March Richard E. Bland, Pennsylvania State Uni- 1968, too late for funding in the regular ap- versity. IAFF Pres. W. Howard McClennan propriation request of NBS for FY 1969. A served as vice chairman. Members were drawn revised request was submitted in time for con- from academia, the professional fire services, sideration by the Senate. That body recom- the insurance industry, fire equipment manu- mended $500,000 to finance the act, but the facturers, the Administration, and other appropriation did not survive Senate-House groups.l16 Howard D. Tipton, later director conference. Funds were requested for FY of the National Fire Prevention and Control 1970, and the Congress approved. But it ap- Administration, predecessor of the USFA, qg propriated only $550,000 for all program in- served as executive director of the Commis- creases for NBS, including expansion-of the sion. Flammable Fabrics Program. Additional During the almost two years of its opera- funds never could survive the conference.ll' tion, the Commission heard 92 witnesses, The Bureau testified that it was not possible representing a wide range of interests. It also for it to initiate new programs to carry out received information and assistance from the 1968 act without more funds. federal agencies, the fire services, a variety of Rep. John Rooney, chairman of the Ap- professional and business associations, and propriations Subcommittee, was not con- consultants. Chairman Bland reported that vinced that the Center for Fire Research was the members of the Commission were "very needed so it received no funds for a while, heavily involved in its work. The average at- according to Rockett. NBS would not re- tendance at Commission meetings was 14.3." program any funds and Rooney would not Many Commission members also lobbied hard add any if it did not. There was pressure to for legislation to back up its recommenda- do something to show Congress, "Look what tions. 117 we are doing and we need more funds." One of the major problems it faced was Rockett also perceived conflict within the obtaining accurate information. Bland said: Bureau as well as a lack of support for any- Information was not available or thing other than continuation and expansion sources disagreed on it. As chairman, of traditional fire research. There was re- I asked Baron Wittaker, president of sistance to the training provisions of the Underwriters' Lab, and John Jablon- law."" ski, and one other to provide the Com- As time passed the professional fire groups mission with certain information. They became concerned over the lack of funding couldn't find reliable information. because unless something was done, the authorization for appropriations was due to They couldn't find a base line (the number of deaths, etc.) against which expire on June 30, 1970. This was reflected in testimony at hearings on H.R. 16538 before to base improvements. We needed data. the House Committee on Science and As- He said that the Commission saw a lot of tronautics, which was considering reauthori- work being done in a lot of places but with no zation of funds to carry out the act.l14 For coordination. "We perceived a need for a FY 1971, President Nixon requested an in- focal point." The Commission Report Operating cost of insurance industry 1,900 The Commission transmitted its report, Productivity loss 3,300 America Burning, to President Nixon on Total $11,400 May 4, 1973. It set out graphically the fire problem in the United States and made 90 recommendations the Commission believed Among those paying most heavily for would reduce death, injuries, and property this poor record are the nation's fire- losses from fire by 50% in the next generation. fighters. Theirs is the most hazardous The report included the following grim sta- profession of all. Their death rate is tistics: 15% greater than the next most dangerous occupations, mining and quarry- ing. In 1971, the injury rate for fire- Annually, fire claims nearly 12,000 fighters was 39.6 per 100 men-far lives in the United States. Among higher than that of any other profes- causes of accidental death, only motor sion. That same year, 175 firefighters vehicle accidents and falls rank higher. died in the line of duty; an additional Most of fire's victims die by inhaling 89 died of heart attacks and 26 are smoke or toxic gases well before the known to have died of lung disease contributed to by the routine smoke hazard 50 flames have reached them. The scars and terrifying memories of their occupation.119 live on with the 300,000 Americans who The Commission proposed the U.S. Fire are injured by fire every year. Of these, Administration as a grantmaking agency in nearly 50,000 lie in hospitals for a the field of fire protection, similar in concept period ranging from six weeks to two to the Law Enforcement Assistance Admin- years. Many of them must return, over istration (LEAA). The new unit would not and over again, for plastic and recon- "swallow or supplant ongoing programs," but structive surgery. Many never resume would help guide efforts. It would keep state, normal lives. . . . local, and federal agencies informed of fire Appallingly, the richest and most efforts in both the public and private sectors, technologically advanced nation in the encourage cooperation, and promote interest world leads all the major industrialized in neglected areas of research. It would serve countries in per capita deaths and as the federal "fire spokesman" the fire ser- property loss from fire. While differing vices had wanted for so long. Nonetheless the reporting procedures make interna- Commission emphasized the limited nature of tional comparisons unreliable, the fact the federal role. In the introduction to Amer- that the United States reports a ica Burning, the Commission stated: deaths-per-million-population rate nearly twice that of second-ranking We feel strongly that fire prevention Canada (57.1 versus 29.7) leaves little and control should remain primarily lo- doubt that this nation leads the other cal responsibilities. Local govern- industrialized nations in fire deaths ments-through codes and fire safety per capita. Similarly, in the category laws, and through heavy investments of economic loss per capita, the United in fire department personnel and equip- States exceeds Canada by one-third. ment-have shouldered the major burden of protecting citizens from fire and should continue to do so. Those gov- Estimated Annual U.S. Fire Costs ernments appreciate special local con- (in millions) ditions and needs more fully than an Property loss $2,700 arm of the federal government would Fire department operations 2,500 be able to do. Roles for the federal Burn injury treatment 1,000 government, in the Commission's view, are appropriately limited to lending The points she raised were those around technical and educational assistance which most of the future arguments over fire to state and local governments, col- legislation would revolve. The location of the lecting and analyzing fire information, new agency, the level of funding, and program regulating the flammability of mate- emphasis were criticized and these arguments rials, conducting research and develop- reappeared later as the legislation went ment in certain areas, and providing through Congress. Her stance also anticipated financial assistance when adequate fire to a substantial degree the later position of protection lies beyond a community's the Ford Administration. means.12" Phillips supported the position of the majority that expanded federal action was In addition to proposing establishment of needed on fire and that, properly directed, ad- a federal fire agency, the Commission recom- ditional efforts would pay off handsomely mended an expanded federal role in research, in reduction of human and property fire data collection, public education, training, losses. She emphasized at several points that and assistance to local fire departments widespread public education in fire safety through grants and technical assistance. It principles should be the first concern of an supported a major increase in federal ex- expanded effort. In this connection she spon- penditures for fire programs and for a na- sored, independently of the Commission, a tional fire academy that the fire services had survey of public knowledge of fire safety and wanted for so long. Specific recommendations 51 found "alarming voids" in public fire safety included: understanding. She strongly disagreed with establishment of the USFA in HUD to the proposed emphasis on assistance to the provide a national focus for the nation's local fire services by the USFA, asserting that fire problem with adequate funding to the focus should be on an intensive public reduce life and property loss from fire; education program. To underscore her point the establishment of a national fire data she cited a nationwide survey of fire chiefs system; that pointed up a lack of public education as their most serious concern. federal grants for equipment, training, Phillips opposed the Commission's recom- and planning; mendation to place the new fire administra- USFA coordination of studies of fire pro- tion in HUD, preferring to retain the Depart- tection methods and its assistance to ment of Commerce as the principal locale for local jurisdictions in adapting findings the federal fire effort in accordance with to their fire protection planning; Title I of The Fire Research and Safety Act establishment of a national fire acad- of 1968. (She believed that the Commission emy as a division of the proposed USFA had run roughshod over Title I.) She agreed to provide specialized training in areas with the need for a national academy, but important to the fire services and to assist found it less important than the public edu- states and localities with their training cation program. In her view the Commission programs; and was recommending too large a budget to be complete federal financing of the fire spent on the wrong programs. academy. Although the majority and minority disagreed as to the emphasis of future action, they were united in the belief that losses of THE MINORITY REPORT life and property from fire constituted a major Although the Commission's report was sup- problem, one that could be mitigated sub- ported by a substantial majority of its mem- stantially by an increased federal role. The bers, objections were raised on several im- minority report pointed out that as grim as portant points. Dr. Anne Wright Phillips of our losses were from enemy action in Viet- the Harvard Medical School prepared a nam, they were small compared with the minority report setting out her objections.12' nation's fire casualties for the same period. The 143,550 fire deaths in the United States Academy of Sciences' Fire Research Com- between 1961-72 were more than three times mittee, Charles S. Morgan, new general man- the 45,925 deaths resulting from actions by ager of NFPA, indicated a need for coopera- hostile forces in Vietnam during the same tion among fire groups. 12'jSubsequently, the period. 122 conference was announced by Robert Grant, Contrary to the fate of many other Presi- NFPA's assistant general manager, at the dential commission reports that have been Academy's "Symposium on Training and filed and then ignored, America Burning had Education in the Fire Service" in April; a pronounced impact on the move for greater nevertheless, the Academy had no involve- federal involvement in fire protection. The ment in its sponsors hi^.'^^ The conference document itself makes a strong case for fire was held in Williamsburg, VA, on August 31 needs. In addition Commission members and September 1, 1970. Present at Williams- worked hard to sell the recommendations to burg were the chief executives of ten national the Congress. Some, such as McClennan, fire service organizations: NFPA, the fire had widespread resources at their call. The chiefs, and fire fighters, the Fire Marshals fire fighters' union frequently was credited Association of North America, Fire Protection with being the strongest lobbying force work- Research International, the International ing for implementing legislation, although Association of Arson Investigators, the In- Clark believes efforts of the other Commission ternational Fire Administration Institute, 52 members also strongly influenced the sub- the International Fire Service Training As- sequent enactment of The Federal Fire Pre- sociation, the International Society of Fire vention and Control Act of 1974. Service Instructors, and the Metropolitan Chiefs Committee of the IAFC.128 INTEREST GROUP ACTIVITY The conference was intended to afford rep- DURING 1968-70 resentatives of the fire organizations the opportunity to discuss informally "how the During the period following enactment of needs of the fire service could be met on a The Fire Research and Safety Act of 1968, national basis." The spirit of cooperation developments outside the Congress affected that prevailed among participants was in future decisions. Of major impact was the recognition of the need for a national focus for establishment of LEAA by The Omnibus fire service groups. It may have been pro- Crime Control and Safe Streets Act in June moted to some degree by the thought of what 1968.lZ3 Federal generosity to police forces, the police were to obtain through LEAA and apparent in this act, stimulated anew the by the frustrations encountered in the imple- long-standing rivalry of the police and fire mentation of the 1968 fire legislation. services. McClennan said, "The fire service Participants took two important steps. felt like the forgotten service."124 The fire They formed the Joint Council of National forces did not want an LEAA for firefighters Fire Service Organizations-a significant and felt that the new block grant had hurt development because it was the first time their chances for federal assistance.125The these groups had organized to present a legislation had the effect then of drawing the united front. In addition they adopted a half fire groups closer together and stimulating co- dozen national goals for the fire service: operation for their own advancement. It also redefinition of public fire protection to prompted a somewhat more aggressive stance on their own behalf. recognize new technology and the changing character of community life; The Williamsburg Conference develop programs designed to increase public appreciation of the fire service as The most important outside development a vital community agency; was the Williamsburg Conference of the Na- broaden and stimulate channels of tional Fire Service Organizations sponsored communication with local, state and by the NFPA. At a meeting of the National federal government officials; promote national standards for per- ing fire instructors, but, in general, looked formance and education leading to with disfavor on the establishment of a new greater professionalization of the paid federal administrative agency as well as on and volunteer fire service; federal involvement in data collection, code preparation, and other activities that it per- development of a nationwide fire information system and the dissemina- ceived as duplicating its work.l:3" In pref- tion of valid data which will result in erence to an administrative agency it advo- greater support for research leading cated "a federal commission as the best toward solutions of many national fire means for focusing primary attention on fire protection problems; and waste reduction as the goal rather than upon the means of attaining the goal. A permanent promotion and development of research federal commission . . . can serve as a monitor, efforts directed toward increased ef- a catalyst, and coordinator to continually ficiency and safety for the American focus attention on the national goal of fire fire fighter."Y waste reduction.'"" This would have been The Joint Council was a powerful, visible a much weaker agency than the full-fledged group although it was not representative of administrative agency ultimately established. the entire spectrum of fire interests, since NFPA's support for federal research, imple- all its representatives were from the national mentation, and the fire service academy was fire service organizations. Yet it provided for tailored carefully to discourage usurpation of 53 the first time "a national vehicle through its own activities, an action it understandably which the fire services could speak with one opposed. Whether or not its objection to a voice. At the outset it influenced the appoint- stronger federal agency was based on an ideo- ment of the National Commission." It also logical commitment to federalism or its own proved to be an effective lobby for the 1974 interest, NFPA's actions to preserve its posi- fire legislation.'" It aided in converting option as premier collector and disseminator of ponents of a stronger federal role to advocates fire data and as the major organization in- of increased federal inv~lvement.~~~ volved in the preparation and sale of fire safety manuals and codes coincided with the position of those seeking to limit federal Other Interest Group Activity government growth and to preserve the fed- Another development during the post-NBS eral system. period was the gradual moderation of the op- NFPA's opposition was not as strong after position of the NFPA to a federal administra- the retirement of Percy Bugbee as general tion role. NFPA consistently had opposed manager.lS According to Bugbee, the federal involvement in areas that it believed softening was the result of "a feeling on the were dealt with adequately by state and local part of association leaders that there was agencies and by the private sector, and was enough political support for stronger federal regarded by some participants in the con- involvement to enact legislation and that the troversy over greater federal involvement as Association should try to steer it the way it the principal obstruction during the 1960s to would be the most useful."'" Its sponsor- the establishment of a federal fire agency. Its ship of the Williamsburg Conference, where official position was the federal government its prestige allowed it to exert considerable should become involved only when "the re- influence on other fire service representatives sources of nonfederal organizations were not in regard to what the federal role would be, sufficient to have an effect on the problem." was in this vein. So was its staff study seeking It regarded the proper federal role as sup- to identify areas in which the federal govern- plementary to state, local, and private sector ment was needed."7 A document it pub- activities.'" NNFPA testified in favor of part lished for consideration by the National Com- of the 1968 legislation establishing the Na- mission on Fire Protection and Control is an tional Commission on Fire Prevention and eloquent plea for limited federal action (pre- Control, and supported an academy for train- sented in a positive fashion) and for participation of NFPA in any future federal activities. television with Dr. Abraham Bergrnan on a Although officials of the Association deny program concerning children's burns from any connection, others involved in the activi- flammable fabrics. The impact was such ties leading up to The Federal Fire Preven- that 3,000 persons wrote the Secretary of tion and Control Act of 1974 attributed the Commerce demanding stricter standards on lessening of NFPA's opposition to the receipt flammability of children's sleepwear.14Vn or prospect of federal grants-in-aid.138 1972, Sen. Charles M. Mathias, Jr. (R-MD) Concurrently the IAFF, under the leader- and Rep. Robert H. Steele (R-CN) introduced ship of McClennan, began to exert stronger nine bills providing for a national fire aca- pressure for federal action. At its August demy, research, training and equipment 1968, Convention, the IAFF adopted a resolu- grants, a data clearinghouse, regulation of tion calling for an amendment to The Fire transportation of hazardous materials, and Research and Safety Act that would require expansion of flammable fabrics legislation to national testing and certification of equip- include building mate^-ial~.l~~ ment, apparatus, and clothing used by fire Related legislation enacted during the post- fighters.139 This was the first resolution 1968 period were The Consumer Product adopted by the organization calling for an Safety Act, establishing an independent increased federal role.'40 federal regulatory agency for all consumer The fire chiefs, on the other hand, believed products, another facet of the consumer 54 the need for improved training for fire fight- policy stream, and two acts affecting the for- ers. Responses to a 1972 survey of fire chiefs estry stream. The Rural Community Fire in cities over 10,000 population indicated that Protection Program became law as Title IV the chiefs wanted a fire service academy or of The Rural Development Act of 1972, and institute similar to the FBI's academy for The Cooperative Forest Management Act, police officers. More advanced command and including forest fire protection arrangements, administrative training could be provided was extended to urban areas by P.L. 92-288. and new fire fighting techniques and equip- Congressional fire activity reached its peak ment developed. 14' in 1973 when more than 165 pieces of fire legislation were intr~duced,~~~ncluding 1972-73 CONGRESSIONAL ACTION the proposal that eventually became The Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of During the period following the adoption of 1974. Almost immediately upon the transmis- The Fire Research and Safety Act of 1968, sion of America Burning to the President, Congressional activity in the area of fire companion bills setting forth the National safety increased. For example, in 1969, Sen. J. Commission's proposed legislation were in- Caleb Boggs (R-DE) and 26 cosponsors introduced in the House and Senate. Sen. troduced a bill restoring the matching funds Magnuson introduced, for himself and Sen- for training volunteer fire fighters eliminated ators Norris Cotton (R-NH) and Lowell by a 1968 amendment to The Vocational Weiker (R-CN), "The Fire Prevention and Education Act of 1963. The amendment re- Control Act of 1973," (S. 1769) and the bill stricted the use of matching funds to edu- was ultimately adopted (although not in its cational programs preparing students for em- original form). Rep. Wright Patman (D-TX) ployment. Since volunteer firemen were not offered H.R. 11989, the companion bill, in the employed as such, their training did not House. Other fire legislation was already qualify for funding. The problem was brought before the respective committees with juris- to the attention of Sen. Boggs by Louis J. diction over this type of legislation. Amabili, director of the Delaware Fire Scho01.l~~Amabili was a member of the Na- The Commission Bills tional Commission on Fire Prevention and Control. As introduced the Commission bills, S. Meanwhile Sen. Mag~usonwas active out- 69 and H.R. 11989, provided for a national side Congressional walls, appearing on Seattle fire prevention and control program, including fire safety education and training pro- provided under the grants to the states would grams, a national fire data system, a fire re- be passed through to general local govern- search and development program, a burn and ments. smoke injury treatment program in HEW, The bill authorized $5 million for FY 1974, assistance to state and local governments to $50 million for FY 1975, and $128 million for implement model programs in fire prevention FY 1976 and succeeding years as Congress and control, and low interest loans by HUD might authorize for the USFA. In addition for installing "early warning" fire protection fire research in NBS was to receive $3 mil- equipment. All of this was intended to supple- lion for FY 1974 and successive years as Con- ment rather than supplant existing progress authorizes. HEW would have $42.5 mil- grams. The legislation established the USFA lion for burn treatment research, and HUD in HUD to administer the program and ex- would receive another $2 million for a pro- ercise an effective national fire safety over- gram of low-cost insured loans for installation view responsibility. Specific provision was of fire equipment in nursing homes. made for a Presidentially appointed administrator and deputy administrator and for four Congressional Hearings assistant administrators for the national fire academy, the national fire data center, The House Subcommittee on Science, Re- research and development, and state and search, and Technology of the Committee on local program assistance, respectively. Science and Astronautics had before it 74 55 The academy would have substantial flexi- bills dealing with fire when hearings on the bility for improving training and education legislation began in July.146 It had held of fire fighters and administrators. In addi- hearings on fire problems in 1972, but waited rion to its own programs, it would accredit for the Commission report and additional and provide assistance to other training pro- hearings before marking up the legislation. grams, develop model curricula, and disseminate information on fire research. The HOUSE HEARINGS national fire data center would collect and The most important measures before the disseminate statistics regarding fire, stand- House subcommittee in addition to the "Fire ardize data collection, identify emerging Prevention and Control Act" were seven bills problems, and measure effectiveness of pro- introduced by Rep. James Symington (D- grams. The research and development pro- MO), that would create a fire protection as- gram was aimed at evaluating fire research sistance administration. Each was introduced needs, providing information as to what re- with numerous cosponsors as well as sepa- search is being pursued, disseminating re- rately by individual members of the House. search results, coordinating existing and The subcommittee held hearings on all of future research programs at all levels on an them together, attempting to focus testimony advisory basis, sponsoring and encouraging on the desirability of certain programs and research, and performing other functions the locus of their administration rather than related to research on fire prevention and con- on individual provisions. Most witnesses trol. directed their remarks to the need for a fed- A substantial program of categorical eral fire program that would include a fire grants-in-aids was included in the proposed academy, improved education, training, tech- legislation, as were planning grants to states nology, master planning, and basic and ap- ,, for preparation of comprehensive master plied research. Those who mentioned specific plans for fire protection and for establish- bills spoke to the Commission proposals or the ment of state fire agencies to conduct the Davis "omnibus" 1egi~lation.I~~ planning. Once states had established fire The witnesses were unanimous in their agencies and drafted comprehensive plans, endorsement of a federal fire program. Again additional funds could be awarded for equip- and again the loss of life by fire in this coun- ment, public education, recruiting and train- try-exceeding 12,000 persons a year-were ing, and other purposes. Much of the money cited. Dr. Anne W. Phillips, who had drafted the Commission's minority report, probably categorical grants-in-aid as having the poten- was the most effective in this respect. In- tial of creating a large bureaucracy and fed- cluded in her testimony was the following: eral interference that the National Commis- sion stated it did not want.150 During the past two years, while a member of the National Commission on SENATE HEARINGS Fire Prevention and Control, I have had an opportunity to ask hundreds of Hearings on "The Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1973" were held on Sep- people questions about fire safety, and tember 4 and 5. The organizations repre- one of the questions was, "What are your chances of being in a fire? One in sented were substantially the same, although a million: One in 1,000 or one in 100? the cast of characters differed. Again there was enthusiasm for a federal fire program. What do you think your chances are?" Suggestions were made for modifications in The majority of the public chose "one the bill, but except for the Administration's in a million" as their answer. Yet proposals, these were minor. Assist. Sec. testimony before the Commission Ancker-Johnson again presented the Ad- showed that each of us can expect to be ministration's position. She reiterated that in three fires in our lifetime serious the Commerce Department should be the enough to call the fire department. home of the fire program and objected to the The chances are greater than one in 100 categorical grants. She promised to forward 56 that it will happen to you, or me, this the Administration's proposals sh0rt1y.l~~ year. 148 In a letter to Chairman Magnuson dated Even the NFPA, which previously had been October 5, Ancker-Johnson set out the Ad- one of the chief opponents of increased fed- ministration's plans. They included a na- eral activity in some areas, endorsed a strong- tional bureau of fire safety (NBFS) to be er federal role. Charles S. Morgan, president set up in the Department of Commerce. It of the Association, said: would contain a national fire academy system, a fire research and development office, fire protection has been on a diet . . . and a national fire data information center. of thin financial assistance for decades NBS's fire research program would be trans- and, until now, there has been no great ferred to NBFS. The new bureau would oper- federal underpinning to the conquest ate under the assistant secretary for science of destructive fire. Therefore, we wel- and techn01ogy.l~~On October 30, the Ad- come any improvement. You asked our ministration bill, S. 2638, was introduced by view on this legislation and we must Senators Magnuson and C0tt0n.l~~ honestly state that H.R. 7681 comes closest in most respects to meeting the range of fire control and fire prevention Senate Action needs. We hope that the major provi- The Commerce Committee reported S. sions of this bill will be a part of the 1769 on October 18 with an amendment to final product of this Congre~s.'~~ strike out all after the enacting clause and At the time of the House hearings, the substitute a Committee bill. The new title Administration's proposal had not been com- was "The Federal Fire Prevention and Con- pleted. Assist. Sec. of Commerce for Science trol Act of 1973." and Technology Betsy Ancker-Johnson ap- The proposed act made the Commerce De- peared at the hearings to explain its proposals partment rather than HUD the locus of a more fully. She indicated that the Adminis- coordinated fire program. A new assistant tration preferred that the fire program be secretary of Commerce for fire prevention and located in the Department of Commerce control would be created to administer the rather than HUD in order to "capitalize on program. The intent was to reenforce and the expertise already developed in the Depart- support the fire activities of state and local ment of Commerce." She also opposed the governments and volunteer fire departments through a research and development pro- I must oppose new federal spending gram, a technical assistance program for programs unless Congress and the Pres- state, local, and private fire services, a na- ident are willing to cut other pro- tional FIREPAC academy, a national data grams. . . . The question of fire com- center, and a master plans demonstration panies and fire fighting is about as project. In addition the Secretary of HEW local as any function of government. was to establish a research program on burn Yet, the Senate is considering estab- injuries in the National Institutes of Health, lishing a new program, the initial cost and the Secretary of HUD was to make loan of which will be $127.5 million. I ques- guarantees toward the installation of fire tion the wisdom and desirability at this safety equipment in skilled nursing facilities time in our history of having the fed- and intermediate care facilities. eral government undertake such a local The Committee envisioned the academy endeavor. 157 offering fire fighters the same quality of Senators present did not find these arguments teaching in advanced techniques that the persuasive and the substitute bill passed the FBI Police Academy offers law enforcement Senate by a vote of 62-7 with Senators Paul officials and did not perceive it as an aca- J. Fannin (R-AZ) and Strom Thurmond demic degree-granting institution similar to (R-SC) paired nay and yea, respectively. the Coast Guard or Maritime academies. In Other negative votes were cast by Senators addition to its own courses, it would develop Harry F. Byrd and William L. Scott (R-VA), 57 curricula and materials to be used for state Robert C. Byrd (D-WV), Floyd Haskell (D- and local training.154 Assistance to- state, CO), James A. McClure (R-ID), William local, and private fire services was to be Proxmire (D-WI), and Robert A. Taft, Jr. largely technical, although authority for $10 (R-OH).~~~ million in grants to a small number of localities for demonstration master plan develop- House Action ment was included. The bill authorized a On the House side the Subcommittee on total of $127.5 mi1li0n.l~~ Science, Research, and Development wrote a When S. 1769 came up for consideration in new bill after considering the myriad of pro- the Senate on November 2, little debate en- posals before it. Committee Chairman Olin sued. Senators Magnuson, Stevens, Weiker, Teague (D-TX) introduced a clean bill, H.R. J. Glenn Beall, Jr. (R-MD), Edmund Muskie 11981, on December 17.15YThe committee (D-ME), and Edward M. Kennedy (D-MA) reported it on February 7, 1974, and it came spoke in favor of the bill. Only Assist. Maj. up for consideration on the floor on April 29. Leader Robert C. Byrd (D-WV) and Sen. Rep. Davis, floor manager for the bill, em- Harry F. Byrd (I-VA) rose in opposition. The phasized that the bill would not destroy the former opposed the bill on the grounds that continuing role of local fire fighters. It was . . . it will establish another govern- designed to assist them through education, mental layer and further proliferate our technology, data collection and dissemina- everexpanding federal bureaucracy. I tion, and professional development.160 believe that most of the desired objec- H.R. 11989, as reported, was similar to the tives set forth in S. 1769 could be ac- Administration's bill in its purposes and most complished within existing government of its provisions. It established a comprehen- structures, and at a lower cost, rather sive fire prevention and control program to be than providing for these new, and in located in the Department of Commerce with some cases, duplicative programs which emphasis on fire education, professional fire are estimated to cost over $170 million training, research and development, and through fiscal year 1976.156 national data gathering. Major provisions Harry Byrd opposed on similar grounds. After were: pointing to his years of work for the local fire a bureau of fire safety in the Depart- fighters in his state, he said: ment of Commerce headed by a Presi- dentially appointed director and oper- Bronx section of New York.. . I wit- ating under the assistant secretary for nessed a case of arson and three other science and technology; fires within the first hour of my arrival. a fire technology program; It quickly became apparent that these a national fire data center; fires occurred every night in major cities across the country.16" a U.S. fire academy; a fire research center in NBS to pursue Three Representatives spoke against the basic and applied fire research; measure, all conservative Republicans. The federal assistance for fire training pro- most spirited exchange came between H.R. grams; Gross (R-IA) and Davis on Gross's charge of duplication and his concern with federal a site selection committee to assist the expansion and financial costs. Earl F. Land- Secretary in choosing a site for the grebe (R-IN) pointed out that the Ford Ad- academy; ministration opposed this bill on the grounds financial assistance to students at- that the creation of a separate fire research tending the academy and for students center in NBS is a "superficial exercise in enrolled in fire engineering programs at more bureaucrats, more cost, without a re- colleges and universities; sulting return on the taxpayer's money.''164 58 eligibility of civil defense personnel for George Goodling (R-PA) was the third op- participation in programs under the ponent. bill; Several committee-approved amendments a total authorization of appropriations were adopted on the floor after being intro- for one year, FY 1975, of $5.5 million duced by Davis. One, credited to Rep. James ($2 million for the Bureau and $3.5 Symington, authorized federal reimburse- million for the fire research center), and ments to local fire fighters for fighting fires on federal property. Another provided for a an expanded program of research on FY 1974 open-ended authorization for NBS. burns, treatment of burn injuries, and A third deleted a provision on loans for rehabilitation of fire victims established safety devices in nursing homes because it was in the National Institutes of HealthlG1 already law. Added were provisions to extend Support for a federal fire program was assistance to all kinds of fire departments widespread in the House. It came from both and authority for the director to undertake sides of the aisle and from both conservative activities directly or to provide for them and liberal members. Geographically it was through contracts and grants. spread throughout the nation. Steele pointed H.R. 11989 passed the House on April 29 by out to his colleagues that "well over a quar- a vote of 352-12. Numerous members were ter of the members of Congress have either paired and 69 did not vote. Voting against it sponsored or cosponsored fire legi~lation."'~~ were Representatives Harold Collier, Cordiss In addition to Davis, 29 representatives Collins, Philip M. Crane, David W. Dennis, spoke in favor of the bill. They cited the ter- John N. Erlenborn, Goodling, Gross, Edward rible waste of life and property from fire and R. Hutchinson, Landgrebe, James Mann, the human suffering that burn victims under- John Rarick, and Steven Syrnrn~.'~~All go. Steele, credited by several members with were conservatives and all except Mann and being one of the strongest advocates and Rarick were Republicans. hardest workers for the legislation although Immediately after the passage of H.R. he was not on the committee, told of his visit 11989, the House took up S. 1769, struck out with a fire company. all the language after the enacting clause, substituted the language of H.R. 11989, and My real awakening came with a passed the Senate bill. H.R. 11989 was tabled night I spent with Dennis Smith and and the House and Senate went to conference Engine Company No. 82 in the South on S. 1769, as amended. Conference Committee Action Commerce and the Director of the Office of Management and Budget (OMB). Sen. Mag- nuson reported that it was unacceptable to The Conference Committee wrote a sub- the Administration and that a veto was stitute bill. Sen. Magnuson reported to the threatened. Negotiations between the con- Senate that there was very little disagreement ferees and the Ford Administration went on in the conference.lh"en. Beall, another for about six weeks, according to Sen. Mag- conferee, said that the most controversial nuson, and some changes were made that issue was organizational structure. The satisfied Commerce and OMB. Modifications Senate wanted high visibility for the new fire reduced the authorization from $21 million to organization and this was its reason for pro- $15 million. The section on master plan dem- posing a new assistant secretary of Com- onstration programs was dropped and a merce. The House had opted for a bureau new program providing that the Secretary under the existing assistant secretary of sci- assist states in the development of such plans ence and technology. The Senate feared that was substituted. In addition the conferees such a location would emphasize research deleted a requirement that Congressional rather than education, data collection, fire committees approve academy construction technology development, and the academy.l6I plans and added a $9 million ceiling on con- The conference amendments provided for a struction costs for the academy site. Never- new fire administration in Commerce headed theless not everyone was satisfied. There were 59 by a Presidentially appointed administrator objections from HEW. Sen. Magnuson told who reported to the Secretary. The two the Senate: houses also disagreed on the location of the fire research center, with the Senate plat- Just when we thought agreement had ing it under the proposed assistant secretary been reached, last Friday we were in- and the House locating it in NBS. The con- formed by OMB that there were 'a few ferees opted for NBS. The conferees also ac- more concerns' about the bill that in- cepted a House provision for national ac- volved the burn center program. Many crediting of fire training and educational of these had never been voiced before. 170 programs, not included in the Senate bill, The conferees considered these outside the as well as the House section making civil scope of the conference since the Senate and defense personnel eligible for inclusion in the House measures were identical in this respect. fire programs. The House amendment for Sen. Magnuson said that the Department of federal reimbursement for fighting fires on Commerce now approved the measure, and he federal property was approved. Senate provi- did not believe it would be vetoed. sions for the new fire administration to review fire and building codes and encourage fire Final Passage efficiency statements by building owners were written into the conference version. Also in- The House agreed to the second conference cluded was the Senate proposal for public report on October 10, 1974, by a vote of 381- safety awards, an annual conference, and 3, the dissenters being Representatives Gross, authorization for assistance to states in the Landgrebe, and Collins. The Senate approved development of master ~1ans.l~~A compro- it the following day by voice vote. Only Sena- mise was reached on authorizations. The tors Beall and Stevens spoke on the issue, and Senate had included a total of $127.5 million both of them recommended adoption. for three years. The total House provision President Ford signed the bill on October was for $5.5 million for one year. The con- 1974. On that occasion he said: ferees agreed on $59 million for two years.169 After a unanimous report by the Conference While fire prevention and control is Committee, the legislation subsequently was and will remain a state and local re- recommitted to conference on October 1, be- sponsibility, I believe the federal gov- cause of objections from the Secretary of ernment can make useful contribu- tions. I endorse the intention of this For example the minutes of the IAFF Execu- act to supplement rather than supplant tive Board Meeting for September 10-14, 1973, existing state and local government include the following: responsibilities.17 There were five days of hearings be- The President also said he would not seek fore the House Subcommittee on Sci- appropriations for the part of the legislation ence, Research, and Development of requiring the Secretary of HEW to establish the House Committee on Science and burn treatment and research centers because Astronautics. Many fire fighters, in they would duplicate the research carried on uniform, came to these hearings, by the National Institute of General Medical mostly from areas of those Congress- Sciences and add $5 million to the FY 1975 men on the subcommittee. The results budget. of the House hearings were not too Secretary of Commerce Frederick Dent encouraging and it now appears that called a press conference on November 1, our best prospects rest on the Senate 1974, to announce initiation of the new side. As a result of the hearings, it now agency, with Joseph Clark acting as Adminis- appears that the jurisdiction of the trator until a Presidential appointment could implementation of the Commission be made. The long sought U.S. Fire Adminis- report will be in the Department of tration then became a reality. Commerce and not in HUD as origi- 60 nally proposed. As legislative hearings Influences In Passage develop, the International [IAFF] will By the time "The Fire Prevention and Con- present testimony in conjunction with a trol Act" came before the Congress, the ques- panel of fire representatives from the tion as to whether the federal government Joint Council on Fire Services. should expand its fire activities already had Our best prospects for passing legis- been settled by the Fire Research and Safety lation that would assure us of an in- Act of 1968. The legitimacy of federal involve- dependent fire academy, grants, and ment was not at issue. The questions were on other desirable features of the fire the status of the new organization and its Commission report appear to be in the location. The Commission had recommended Department of Commerce at an under that a U.S. fire administration be estab- secretary level, but not in the Bureau of lished in HUD because of HUD's primary Standards. responsibility for urban affairs, urban plan- Many volunteer fire organizations also ning, local government assistance, and hous- pushed it as did other fire groups. Rep. Kemp, ing, as well as its expertise on building re- when speaking to the House in support of quirements. The Administration favored H.R. 11989, mentioned the New York volun- Commerce because of the ongoing program teer fire fighters who had spoken to him.17" in NBS. During the course of passage through The members of the National Commission Congress, many shifts were made. worked hard for it, "throwing the weight of The act had the general support of "an im- their personalities although not necessarily pressive collection of concerned industries, their backgrounds, toward the fire service organizations, and fire-related agencies," ac- side."174 Commission staff members kept in cording to Bland.17' The NFPA, through touch with Congressional staffs. Clark re- testimony, staff work, the designation of a members Howard Tipton, executive director staff member to work full-time with Con- of the Commission, and Thomas Hughes, gressional committees, and in leading its then with NFPA, as being particularly ef- substantial prestige and influence to the fective. cause, supported this legislation. The pro- Bugbee said that, fessional fire services-coordinated by the The two biggest factors in getting the Joint Council of Fire Service Organizations- legislation enacted were the activities mounted a strong grassroots lobbying effort. of the fire chiefs and the fire fighters. They had contacts with the Congress Mosher, and Pettis were the strongest advo- and the White House. Their influence cates, although many other members were with Magnuson probably resulted in his interested in fire safety legislation by the time continued support of the fire academy, the bills reached the committee. Rep. Teague, which they wanted, when someone as chairman of the Science and Astronautics (probably OMB) tried to stop it.175 Committee, apparently "did not bend over backwards" in behalf of the bill, but he did Bland believes that McClennan was the most aid Subcommittee Chairman Davis who "was powerful force.17"ockett thinks that Mc- a real supporter."1Y2 Clennan's influence probably resulted in the America Burning undoubtedly had an fire academy getting away from NBS.177 enormous impact. Almost everyone involved There is disagreement on the influence of credits it with generating Congressional the scientific community on the bill. Bland awareness of the country's fire losses. Its and Bugbee did not regard the National importance was cited at the outset of Senate Academy of Sciences (NAS) as having impor- hearings and it was widely quoted during the tant influence at this time.178 Clark debates and hearings. The Commission's thought that NAS was a major factor in the recommendations were endorsed, at least in long-term move toward greater federal fire re- part, by all major groups concerned with the search, but thought that "the scientific com- issue. Fire safety, being the emotional issue munity did not do its job on this bill."179 that it is, was difficult to argue against. 61 This included the National Bureau of Stan- When presented as graphically and forcefully dards in Rockett's view. He regarded it as as it was in America Burning, it took on the "not very politically a~tute."'~" aura of motherhood. In addition it was a good The Administration's role was clouded as a issue for those who wanted to use it as a result of the President's Watergate difficul- political vehicle-emotional, difficult to op- ties and his subsequent resignation on August pose, and dramatic. 9, 1974. The apparent foot-dragging may have been connected with the uncertainties as to the future of the Administration. Under THE BIRTH OF THE U.S. FIRE the circumstances it is not surprising that ADMINISTRATION strong leadership was not forthcoming or that sometimes it seemed that the Administration As finally enacted The Federal Fire Pre- spoke with two tongues. An assistant secre- vention and Control Act (P.L. 93-498) estab- tary of Commerce testified in favor of a fire lished the National Fire Prevention and Con- program in Commerce and wrote Sen. Mag- trol Administration (NFPCA)-the first nuson on October 5, 1973, about the Depart- federal agency created as a focal point for fire ment's eagerness to undertake the program. protection activities (later renamed the U.S. Yet earlier, on August 29, the Treasury wrote Fire Administration). Placed in the Depart- that it opposed the bill because the provisions ment of Commerce, the new agency was to be for categorical grants were not consistent headed by a Presidentially appointed Ad- with the Administration's revenue sharing ministrator who reported to the Secretary of program. Both letters had the approval of Commerce. Specifically set out as part of 0MB.181 Eventually the Administration NFPCA were the National Fire Data Center proposals got to Congress and seemed to in- and National Academy of Fire Prevention fluence the character of the final legislation. and Control. The superintendent of the Acad- In Congress Sen. Magnuson exerted tre- emy was to be appointed by the Secretary of mendous influence as chairman of both the Commerce but would work under the supervi- subcommittee and full committee that sion of the NFPCA Administrator. The legis- handled the bill. Other influential Senators lation also provided for a fire research cen- were Stevens, Beall, and Mathias-all Repub- ter in NBS and an intensified burn treatment licans-who worked hard for the measure. In research program in HEW'S National Insti- the House Representatives Davis, Steele, tutes of Health. The NFPCA Administrator was given re- toward the recruitment of personnel. Dr. sponsibility for: (I) a program of public edu- Joseph Clark was named Acting Administra- cation to overcome public indifference to fire tor and served until 1975 when an Adminis- and fire prevention; (2) programs for strength- trator was appointed. The Fire Service Tech- ening training and education for local fire nology Program of NBS was transferred to services, local governments, and private in- NFPCA and plans were made to move the stitutions through technical assistance to Fire Research Grants Program of the Na- junior colleges and engineering programs at tional Science Foundation's Research Ap- advanced institutions; and (3) for assistance plied to National Needs Program. Areas of to state and local fire service training pro- responsibility for NBS research were de- grams. In addition he was charged with confined through cooperative effort^.'^:' Presi- ducting a continuing program of develop- dent Ford appointed Howard D. Tipton of ment, testing, and evaluation of equipment California as Administrator and David A. for use by fire, rescue, and civil defense ser- Lucht of Ohio as deputy administrator on vices. Also placed under his purview were August 5, 1975, and June 27, 1976, respective- studies of managerial aspects of fire service ly. Subsequently NFPCA developed a five- operation of the fire services, including dem- year plan for its operations. onstration projects to encourage the use of operation of the fire services, including de- ORGANIZATION 62 monstration projects to encourage the use of NFPCA was organized originally into four new techniques, standards, methods, and operating units: the National Fire Data Cen- management systems. ter, the National Fire Safety and Research Expectations were that the NFPCA Ad- Office, the Public Education Office (now the ministrator would encourage research by Office of Planning and Education), and the fire services, assist in cost-benefit analyses of National Academy for Fire Prevention and local fire services, and promote the drafting of Control, each headed by an associate admin- master plans for fire prevention and control istrator except for the Academy, which has a by state and local governments. He also was superintendent. The organization is set out in expected to review, evaluate, and suggest im- Figure 3. The Fire Safety and Research Of- provements in state and local fire prevention fice was abolished in 1979. The reorganization codes. He was given the option of using con- is reflected in Figure 3A. tracts or grants to perform many of these The Data Center operates a National Fire functions or of having them performed in his Incident Reporting System, a cooperative own agency. In addition the National Fire effort among all levels of government to col- Data Center came under his supervision. The lect, analyze, and disseminate standard fire legislation also provided for federal reimburse- data, and a fire reference service as a center ment to fire services that fight fires on fed- of technical fire information. The National eral property and for the establishment of Fire Safety and Research Office serves as a public safety awards, an annual report, and liaison between researchers and fire prac- an annual conference. tioners and cooperates with NBS's Fire Re- search Center to identify priority needs and Implementation to disseminate research results to those who need them. Research involves both technol- Implementation of the 1974 legislation was ogy and management sciences, the latter relatively smooth compared to the experience aimed at improving delivery in the fire ser- with the 1968 act. Funds never equaled the vices. This office also reviews, evaluates, and authorized amount, but except for the Acad- suggests improvements in state and local emy, few other major problems were en- fire prevention codes and building codes, fire countered in the initial operations. The first services, and any relevant federal or private implementation efforts were directed toward codes and regulations. establishment of NFPCA as a functioning The activities of the Office of Planning and unit in the Departmerit of Commerce and Education involve the design of new tech- Figure 3 'E ORIGINAL ORGANIZATION OF THE NATIONAL FIRE PREVENTION AND CONTROL ADMINISTRATION

I ADMINISTRATOR

DEPUTY

I I

INFORMATION CHIEF COUNSEL ADM INISTRATION I SERVICES

r---- L--- 7 FIRE SAFETY JNATIONALBUREAU1 PUBLIC ACADEMY DATA I OF STANDARDS I EDUCATION RESEARCH I CENTER FOR I FIRE RESEARCH I . ,,,,,,,,J

SOURCE. The Fourth Annual Report of the Secretary of Commerce on Implementation of the Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-4981: Report for Calendar Year 7977. Washlngton. DC, U.S. Department of Commerce. National Fire Prevention and Control Administration. July 1978. p. 2. Figure 3A USFA ORGANIZATION AND BUDGET, 1980

Administrator Deputy Administrator

FY81-1.1 M FY80- .9M FY79-1 .OM

National Office of Center for National Planning Fire Fire Fire and Research Academy Center Education

Source: U.S. Ftre Adm~nistration niques for enhancing public awareness about detailed space plan and renovation cost es- behavior in fires and about fire protection. timate.ls6 OMB deemed the cost of renova- A variety of programs, including one on ar- tion excessive, and the President included no son, are undertaken to alert and inform the funds for the renovation in his 1979 budget public. In addition, it administers the master request. Congress authorized the sale of the planning grant-in-aid program. Marjorie Webster site in October 1978, with The National Academy emphasizes the the receipts set aside for the purchase of an- development of training and education pro- other location.ls7 The site selection board's grams aimed at upgrading the professional second choice, the campus of the former St. capability of state and local fire service per- Joseph's College at Emmittsburg, MD, was sonnel and others in fire prevention and con- later approved by Secretary of Commerce trol efforts. It trains fire leaders and instruc- Juanita Kreps and purchased. In the mean- tors from across the country and produces time the academy has gone ahead with lim- training packages. The Academy is the prin- ited educational and training programs, cipal delivery arm of USFA, and is used as a many of which are offered in each of the ten communication and technology transfer me- federal regions. dium in disseminating information to state GRANT-IN-AID PROGRAMS and local fire agencies. NFPCA established two grant-in-aid pro- Academy Problems grams. The Academy Planning Assistance 6c There appear to have been more delays and Project grants were designed to assist states difficulties in impl.ementing the Academy's in the development of training and education programs than those in other sections of in fire prevention and control. They may be NFPCA. Part of this resulted from opposition made to states, the District of Columbia, the to the Academy in 0MB.ls4 In addition, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and other there was a controversy over the selection of U.S. possessions for the development of state- a superintendent, with the fire services in- wide organizational designs or statewide fire sisting on someone from the professional fire education and training plans. By the end of services and other interests preferring an in- 1977 a total of 26 states had received these dividual with an academic background. The grants. The program is expected to continue fire services won and the Secretary appointed until all interested states and territories have David M. McCormack of New York City as developed five-year plans for education and superintendent in 1976. training. Individual grants are not large, and Additional problems arose over the selection the total obligations for the two categories of a site for the Academy. In January 1976 are small. Grants for statewide organizational the Secretary named a site selection board design average $11,000 and those for state- consisting of John L. Swindle, chief of the wide fire education and training plans aver- Birmingham, AL, Fire Department; Henry D. age $50,000. A total of $316,563 was obligated Smith, chief, Fire Service Training, Texas A for these awards for FY 1977.1s8 & M University; and Superintendent Mc- State Fire Incident Reporting Assistance Cormack. The site selection board investi- Project grants are aimed at assisting states gated and examined more than 220 proposals in the establishment and operation of state- from 38 states before recommending that the wide fire incident and casualty reporting sys- Secretary select the former campus of the tems. Nineteen states now participate in this Majorie Webster Junior College in Washing- program. All had received a Phase I grant ton, DC. On August 30, 1976, Secretary of and some were awarded Phase I1 grants by Commerce Elliot Richardson announced that 1978. NFPCA obligated $245,562 for this this property had been selected as the site of purpose in FY 1977, an estimated $257,000 for the Fire Academy.ls5 FY 1978, and an estimated $205,000 for FY The Fire Administration purchased the 8.5- 1979. The amount of individual grants ranged acre campus in May 1977 for $2.6 million and up to $50,000 per state.ls9 engaged an architectural firm to develop a In addition to these two grant programs, two others are in the testing stage. Grants existing research programs that would under the Policy Development Assistance have continued without the Fire [Pre- Program will be made to states for master vention and Control] Act of 1974. Of planning in fire prevention and control. Four the remaining 50%, one-half has been of these were ready to be made in 1978. Public devoted to the Fire Academy, one-quar- Education Assistance Program grants are ter for the development of the data sys- designed to help build a state's capacity to tem, and one-quarter for public edu- provide information and materials for the cation programs, organization and assistance of local fire educators, to make a management studies, and general ad- state public fire education program part of mini~tration.'~~ the state fire structure, and to develop the Roughly one-third of the money appropriated ability of communities to plan, implement, to it is earmarked for the Fire Research Cen- and evaluate effective public fire education ter at the NBS. programs. Four grants were awarded for this Of the money that remains for the USFA program in 1978.1g0 after Fire Research Center funds are deleted, According to the USFA, a total of $2.6 mil- there are more resources for the academy lion for all grant categories was awarded than for any other single purpose. Figure 4 through 80 grants in 1978. Awards are ex- illustrates the distribution. pected to total approximately $3 million for 66 1979.1g1 Relocation FINANCES Not long after it began functioning, the The USFA operates on a budget that is Fire Administration became involved in a small compared to most federal agencies and maze of bureaucratic wranglings over its the amounts appropriated have never reached future. In addition to the difficulties with the limit of the authorization. (See Table 4.) funding and the location of the academy site, In remarks before the Subcommittee on Sci- NFPCA became enmeshed in a controversy ence, Research, and Technology of the over governmental reorganization. On June House Committee on Science and Technology 19, 1978, President Carter submitted to Con- in February 1978, Rep. Ronnie G. Flippo gress the "Reorganization Plan No. 3 of declared: 1978," which proposed creation of a Federal Past expenditures have been far be- Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) low even the modest levels originally that would include the Fire Administra- authorized by Congress in 1974. . . . Of tion.lg"ecause Congress did not disap- the funds appropriated through fiscal prove the reorganization proposal, it became year 1978, 50% have been devoted to effective April 1, 1979.

Table 4 FIRE ADMINISTRATION OPERATIONS FUNDING, 1975-79 (rn~ll~onsof dollars)

Fiscal Year Authorization Appropriation Expenditure 1975 (part) $9 5 $6 0 $4 9 1976 19 0 8 7 9 aa 1977 20 5 12 3 11 8 1978 26 0 14 1 14 1 1979 29 9 17 4 17 4 (est ) '$9 m~llionfor an academy slte are not Included alncludes carryover from previous year SOURCE U S F~reAdm~ntstrat~on March 14 1979 Figure 4 NATIONAL FlRE PREVENTION AND CONTROL ADMINISTRATION FINANCIAL RESOURCES, FY 1978

GENERAL ADMINISTRATION

PUBLIC EDUCATION

NBS CENTER FOR FlRE FlRE DATA RESEARCH 33.7%

NATIONAL FlRE SAFETY

PREVENTION AND CONTROL

SOURCE Fourth Annual Report of the Secretary of Commerce on lmplementatron of the Federal F~rePrevenhon and Control Act of 1974 (PL 93-4981:Report for Calendar Year 7977. Washington. DC. U.S. Department of Commerce, n.d . p. 4. AGENCY OPPOSITION There is a potential reduction of em- The transfer of NFPCA was greeted with phasis on fire safety and prevention in less than enthusiasm by Administrator Tip- respect to the small fire incident which ton and some members of his staff. They ar- could occur in a major disaster oriented gued that the transfer might change the focus agency. It must be fully recognized that of the agency from one of fire prevention with it is the private home that is cumula- emphasis on training, public education, data tively the most dangerous to human collection, and research, to one of fire sup- life and is the place where over 6,000 pression since the misssion of FEMA would persons die each year. These fires are be disaster management. In addition they not spectacular, and often property thought that the Fire Administration might losses are low. . . . The priorities needed be a misfit in a disaster organization. Re- here are vastly different from those orientation of training and research might required for a potential disaster. These lessen NFPCA's effectiveness in, connection priorities must be kept in proper per- with routine fire protection and control be- spective. lg5 cause fire service delivery usually involves Nevertheless when the chips were down, dealing with one small fire at a time on a day- the fire groups supported the transfer. Ap- to-day basis. Similar concerns were expressed parently there was a trade-off, with the fire by Chairman A1 Ullman of the House Ways groups' support exchanged for assurance 68 and Means Committee in a letter to Chair- from the White House that the Academy site man Jack Brooks of the House Legislation would be developed. Their dream of a Fire and National Security Subcommittee, which Academy took precedence over all. The lack of was holding the hearings, and by the Na- a request for Academy site funds in the FY tional League of Cities. Even those supporting 1979 budget angered them, but they had the transfer urged caution so that the princi- already testified in support of the reorganiza- pal focus of the Fire Administration would tion. After much maneuvering, the end result be preserved. NFPA took this position as did was the transfer of the Fire Administration to the IAFC.lg4 FEMA, a new site for the Academy at Em- mitsburg, MD, and the appointment of a new Administrator for the Fire Administration to FIRE SERVICE SUPPORT replace Tipton who disagreed with the pro- jected reorganization. Under FEMA the ad- The national fire service organizations ministrator of the Fire Administration has originally shared this lack of enthusiasm for associate director status. Subsequently the the plan, being reluctant to lose the separate identity that NFPCA had enjoyed in Com- Fire Administration Administrator served a brief period as acting director of FEMA when merce. They also were concerned with the the Administration encountered difficulties in difference in the continuing, day-to-day finding a director. nature of the fire problem from that of in- termittent major disasters, the possibility of A NEW NAME AND BROADER diffusion of the national focus on the fire problem, and the possible subordination of RESPONSIBILITIES the Fire Academy. They also objected to the Other developments were not quite so trau- plans for regionalization of emergency nian- matic. In October 1978, Congress changed the agement, arguing that the national fire focus name of the National Fire Prevention and must be responsive to the state and local fire Control Administration to the U.S. Fire Ad- protection community. Regionalization, they ministration, lg6 the name originally pro- believed, would decrease NFPCA's ability to posed by the National Commission. This deal with the daily fire protection needs in simplification avoids the confusion with the a cost-effective manner. In a statement be- National Fire Protection Association (NFPA) fore the House Subcommittee, John F. that often occurs. Swindle, president of IAFC said: The same legislation increased the responsibilities of the USFA in regard to arson. The somewhat like the National Transportation Administrator is required to: Safety Board.lY7Opposition to the Breckin- ridge proposai was widespread, immediate, develop arson detection techniques to and intense. The idea received little support assist federal, state, and local agencies in in the hearings. Other bills introduced in the improved collection of nationwide arson same year would make grants up to 50% to and control; local fire departments for equipment and provide training and instructional ma- emergency first aid and grants up to 90% for terials in skills and knowledge necessary fire fighting suits and self-contained breath- to assist fire service and law enforcement ing eq~ipment.'~Wonewere passed. personnel in arson, detection, prevention, and control; THE CONVERGENCE OF FORCES: formulate methods for arson data collec- A SUMMARY ASSESSMENT OF THE tion compatible with methods used by the DEVELOPMENT OF THE U.S. FIRE FBI in collection of crime statistics; ADMINISTRATION develop and implement programs for improved collection of nationwide arson In 1974, at a time when concern over an statistics; expanding federal budget and a growing develop public education programs on the bureaucracy were on the rise, Congress gave extent, causes, and prevention of arson; and birth to the U.S. Fire Administration, thus 69 develop handbooks to assist fire service establishing for the first time a federal agency and law enforcement personnel in arson whose primary mission was fire prevention prevention and detection. and control. The federal government became a partner, albeit a limited one, in the effort In addition, the Administrator is to assess the to provide improved local fire service. The capabilities of state and local governments organization brought forth was small and in regard to arson investigation and detection, continued to suffer from underfunding. It had evaluate the necessity for, and the desirability a dedicated coterie of well wishers, nonethe- of, federal supplementation of such capabili- less, and continued to survive the crises of its ties or other federal assistance in arson detec- infant years. tion, and recommend any additional legisla- The gestation period for the USFA seems tion or other programs required to assist in long, yet when placed in perspective and com- reducing arson in the United States. pared with those of black civil rights, votes PROPOSALS FOR ADDITIONAL for women, or gun control, for example, it GROWTH was a relatively short pregnancy. It had its inception with the establishment of a fire Other moves to expand the activities of the program at NBS in 1914, but efforts to build USFA have met with no success to date. A a larger federal role in fire service did not get 1978 effort by Rep. John Breckinridge (D- underway until the 1950s and gained little KY) to establish an office of fire investigator momentum until the next decade. The issue in the Administration met with almost un- was decided for all intents and purposes with animous opposition from the fire interests. the passage of The Fire Research and Safety Rep. Breckinridge was responding to the Beverly Hills Night Club Fire in Southgate, Act of 1968. After that the question was not whether the federal fire role would expand KY, in which 135 people were killed, when but when and how. he introduced H.R. 10037. The bill proposed that the fire investigator give assistance to The Environment state and local governments in investigat- ing fires when they requested it, or in the The environment in which gestation oc- event of fatalities, the investigation could be curred would not have seemed a fertile one at made on the initiative of the U.S. Fire Ad- first glance. No polls showed that Americans ministration. He perceived it as operating considered fire a major problem, much less one that the national government should cendiary fires and arson that, according to solve. No provocative books, such as Rachel estimates, more than doubled between 1960- Carson's Silent Spring or Ralph Nader's Un- 70 and again between 1970-75.19"etween safe at Any Speed, appeared to generate con- 1951-75 fires were ranked third as the cause of cern. No citizens organized to lie under fire accidental deaths following motor vehicle trucks and demand action. Nevertheless cer- accidents and falls of all kinds. As a cause of tain developments had created a climate catastrophic death-that is, accidents in receptive to federal expansion in fire preven- which the loss of life was five or more-they tion and control. ranked second in the years between 1971-75.200 ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS Furthermore, fire fighting was the country's CONTRIBUTING TO GROWTH most hazardous occupation. Numerous factors contributed to a recep- Technological Developments tive environment. Demographic and social changes, the financial plight of local govern- Not only had fire losses mounted, but also ments, rising fire losses, technological devel- technological changes had altered the chal- opments, and increased awareness of fire lenges facing fire fighters engaged in fire sup- problems through television, along with other pression. New problems were created by the factors, were significant. development of new products and materials about which little was known of their hazard 70 Demographic, Social, And Financial Factors capacity while burning. Fire fighters initially During the period covered by the drive for were unaware of the difficulties they faced development of a national fire policy, the and subsequently lacked the technology to country had become predominately urban. deal with them. The problems appeared to Three out of four persons lived in urban areas be accelerating at such a rapid rate that as compared to one out of two a half century known fire-fighting techniques and equip- before. The consequent clogged streets, high ment were inadequate to deal with them. At rise buildings, concentrations of populations the same time technological advances that in dilapidated tenements, and sometimes produced the space age encouraged the fire sleezy surburban developments magnified fire service community to look to technology for fighting difficulties. development of breathing apparatus and The turbulent 1960s helped make fire pre- other equipment and apparel that they vention and control more hazardous. During needed. This was a technology local govern- the long hot summer of the late 1960s. ghetto ments could not afford. discontent often was expressed as arson, false alarms, hassling of firemen, and some- Television times riots. Because of their increasingly serious fi- Although the extent of its influence is dif- nancial plight, many local governments, ficult to measure, the advent of television particularly large cities, found themselves undoubtedly added to a climate receptive to unable to cope with their mushrooming prob- action. The public could witness fires from lems. Fire services, along with other local throughout the country on their home activities, suffered from the fiscal inadequa- screens, thus becoming more personally in- cies of local governments. volved in the events. Televised news coverage of the riots of the 1960s in which fire fighters Increasing Fire Losses were shot, stoned, and prevented in a number While the general public seemed unaware of ways from performing their functions of the extent of fire losses, those involved in probably made action to assist them more the provision of fire services, research, and acceptable. Certainly the audience reaction burn treatment were cognizant of the grow- to the television program on flammable fab- ing number of fires and the rise in property rics in which Sen. Magnuson and Dr. Berg- losses attributable to fire. Of special concern man appeared indicated substantial television was the dramatic rise in the number of in- stimuli. ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS ON dent, the Congress, the bureaucracy, and FEDERAL INVOLVEMENT interest groups were poised for action. Only political parties and the judiciary played no Not all the environmental factors were favorable to a new federal role. Public indif- role, except that President Lyndon Johnson's erence to the fire problem was so prevalent position as titular head of the Democratic Party probably attracted support from un- that it took riots to create any further interest. Even then there was no outpouring of committed Democrats. Nevertheless the public demand for a federal fire program. Republicans adopted no position against it Fire never was listed by a majority of respon- and certain Republican Senators proved to dents to public opinion polls as one of the be zealous supporters. Fire policy never de- major problems facing the nation. Further- veloped as a partisan issue. more advocates of increased federal fire activ- Presidential readiness was assured by the ity had to operate in the face of the belief that presence of Johnson in the White House when fire protection was a purely local function the movement reached its peak. He embraced and that federal involvement was inappro- a philosophy that looked kindly on the use of priate. In addition there was an attitude government to solve problems. In fact he among some that certain of the activities contributed to the impetus of the movement encouraged in federal legislation were private by advocating fire safety legislation in his functions and should not be taken over by consumer messages. Later Presidents involved governments. Only Congressional pragma- were not so enthusiastic, but neither Richard tism, reflected in the willingness to adopt M. Nixon nor Gerald R. Ford opposed the whatever solution to the problem seemed program. President Ford did threaten to veto viable at the moment, overcame this con- the 1974 measure unless authorization ceil- straint, although television was undoubtedly ings were reduced and other changes made. a mitigating medium. The Congress was overwhelmingly Demo- Although the lobbying organization was cratic; in fact, it was so heavily weighted in already in place, it represented a narrow that direction that the northern liberals could constituency, unable to gather to its cause hold sway. This is not to say that the Repub- the multitudes that supported the civil rights licans did not support the fire programs. They and peace movements of the period or even did, and sometimes they were in the vanguard the broad constituency involved in environ- of the movement. But the overwhelming mental protection. Only its ability to ride numerical superiority of the liberal Demo- the wave of the consumer movement assured crats, coupled with their traditional willing- its success. Futhermore some of the groups ness to sanction government growth, lessened that seemingly should have been the strongest opposition to almost negligible proportions. advocates of any program to reduce fire losses The whole atmosphere associated with the opposed federal action much of the time. The Great Society and its avalanche of federal NFPA and a substantial portion of the in- grants-in-aid made one more program a mat- surance industry curbed the tendencies to- ter of little concern. Congressmen were ward a growing federal involvement for a looking for programs to sponsor. number of years. The majority of the national In addition, as James Q. Wilson has pointed fire service organizations sat on their hands or out, "the Congress of 1968 or 1978, much registered opposition in the early and middle more than that of 1948, is susceptible to the 60s, although they supported the 1974 legisla- power of ideas whenever there seems to be a tion strongly. strong consensus." This means that ideas with strong symbolic appeal, such as con- Institutional Readiness sumerism or safety, "are handled by a political process in which the advantage lies with "Institutional readiness" contributed to the proponents of the change."201Thus pros- change. That is, the institutions in society pects for new legislation were enhanced in that participated in the policymaking process contrast to earlier periods in our history when were attuned to new initiatives. The Presi- the advantage lay with the opponents. As Congress became more susceptible to ideas, ple and others, issued a coherent statement at the problems associated with getting the fire Wingspread around which fire groups could proposals on the agenda for consideration rally. The momentum it created eventually diminished. resulted in establishment of the Joint Council The bureaucracy also was prepared for the of Fire Service Organizations at Williamsburg move. In fact NBS had instigated it. Already in 1970 sponsored by the NFPA, which had in place on the federal level was a science moderated its stand and pressed for federal policy community with a fire program. This action in some areas. For the first time the both mitigated the issue of legitimacy and fire interests presented a united front on fed- produced a continuous interest in fire. In ad- eral action. While that occurred too late for dition it provided an existing situs for future the 1968 legislation, fire service activity had expansion. It was the "nose under the tent," intensified. The IAFF was an especially so to speak. strong lobbying force, but all the groups in There was in place, as well, an extensive the Joint Council provided support, although lobbying mechanism, in the guise of the fire some efforts were directed toward molding services, with roots in every Congressional the federal action to conform to particular district. It was well organized and financed viewpoints. and had a leadership knowledgeable about Several events were fortuitous, at least for the legislative process. fire policy, and provided needed stimulation 72 Forces For Expansion at critical times. The Baltimore fire of 1904, although only one of a series of major disas- Into an environment more favorable than ters, was close enough to the nation's capitol not moved the forces that precipitated The to attract governmental attention, particular- Fire Research and Safety Act of 1968. Pre- ly that of the National Bureau of Standards. eminent at the moment was the consumer The incendiary bombing during World War I1 movement that was co-opted by the scientific- initiated research into fire behavior financed academic complex, the Department of Com- by defense agencies. The 1942 Coconut Grove merce, and the fire groups as a convenient fire in Boston that killed 492 occurred about vehicle for delivery. Consumerism was in its the same time and added to fire prevention heyday. Between 1966-70 Congress passed at interest. The formation of the NAS-NRC Least 18 major laws on consumer protec- Fire Committee, unnotable at the outset, kept ti~n.~O~It was simple to relate fire safety to up an interest in fire and served as a nucleus the consumer movement and ride that tide to for a scientific fire community. The decision enactment. Presidential endorsement in con- to move NBS and creation of the Forest Pro- sumer messages provided the necessary boost ducts Research Laboratories stimulated an for success. assessment of fire needs and a move to expand Add to this the civil defense needs high- and upgrade the NBS program. The 1966 lighted by the Cuban Missile Crisis, the Cold Wingspread Conference began a unification War, and nuclear proliferation and the con- movement among the national fire services vergence of three policy streams created a that the Williamsburg Conference of 1970 tide difficult to stem. The notable success of catalyzed into the Joint Council, consolidat- the Forest Service in reducing forest fires ing fire service support. The 1968 riots and through the use of airplanes and the "Smokey Presidential endorsement of fire safety legis- the Bear" campaign set an example of what lation at the peak of the movement added the could happen if the federal government be- final boost needed for adoption. All of these came involved. events helped produce the convergence of The national fire service organizations had policy streams that resulted in the enactment become more sophisticated and articulate. of the 1968 law. The IAFC kept beating the drum with pre- sistent resolutions, although these did not The Threshold Crossed attract much attention in the Congress. A Once The Fire Research and Safety Act of few chiefs, along with some fire training peo- 1968 was passed, the issue of legitimacy of federal fire prevention and control activities agency along with other organizations whose was settled. After that it was no longer a missions differed, and public demands for question of "whether" the federal govern- reduced federal spending assured a tight ment would become more involved, but budget. "when," "how," and "to what extent." Title I had already opened the door for fed- The Actors eral action, and the report of the National In the incubation period leading to the es- Commission on Fire Prevention and Control, tablishment of the U.S. Fire Administration, America Burning, insured that it would come numerous individuals and organizations con- quickly, even though it left the other ques- tributed in a variety of ways that either tions unanswered. fertilized the environment or oiled or steered the mechanism through the passageway to The 1974 Legislation adoption. They were the "precipitators/legiti- Undoubtedly the major immediate influ- mizers," "initiators," "sustainers," "'lm- ences on the enactment of The Federal Fire presarios," "promoters," and "supporters" Protection and Control Act of 1974 were the in this process. A few who interfered with the 1968 legislation and the work of the National progress toward passage were the "constrain- Commission that it established. Once the ers." These classifications are not intended to Commission hearings got underway, the fact be either laudatory or perjorative. Whether a that a new federal fire program would be "supporter" or "constrainer" plays a worth- 73 enacted was assured. The testimony of need while role depends on one's attitude toward for federal action was almost unanimous. government growth, the federal system, and When America Burning was issued, its rec- the appropriate national role in fire protec- ommendations attracted widespread sup- tion. port. This was in part because the need was The "precipitators/legitimizers" stimulated well documented, in part because the fire ser- immediate action and lent the weight of their vice organizations had gotten together in the authority to it. They included President Joint Council to present a unified position, Johnson, the National Commission on Fire in part because the consumer movement had Prevention and Control, civil defense authori- raised the level of concern for safety, and in ties, and the Federal Council for Science and part because television gave everyone an op- Technology, especially its Gallagher Com- portunity to witness fire destruction and mittee. Each of these performed both func- suffering. Pressure for legislation came from tions. Through his consumer messages, the all directions. What disagreements existed President both encouraged the enactment of were largely concerned with the agency's sta- fire safety legislation and gave legitimacy tus and its location in the federal bureau- to the NBS and Commerce moves in that cracy. Few questioned the desirability of the direction. The National Commission preci- new program, although the small cluster of pitated the 1974 act through its recommenda- legislators voting against it at one stage or tions, which, because they came from an another of the legislative process expressed official group with substantial prestige, lent misgivings about the appropriateness of the legitimacy to demands for a federal program. federal role. Commission Chairman Richard E. Bland If the path of passage was smooth, the probably deserves special notice in this res- course of implementation was not. For both pect, but the group as a whole was dedicated the 1968 and 1974 acts, there were delays in and hard working. Earlier the Federal Coun- funding and appointments. OMB, regardless cil sparked the move by the NBS to take on of which Administration was in power, new fire activities. Its organization under seemed ever ready to reduce or eliminate the White House science adviser and its rep- funds. Presidential support for the U.S. Fire resentation of all federal agencies dealing Administration seemed less then enthusiastic. with science endowed its actions with objec- Then hardly had it begun operations when an tivity and official endorsement. Those operat- executive reorganization placed it in a new ing the civil defense program also precipitated actions by others. Throughout the 50s and coalition promoting expansion. The fire chiefs 60s, they were engaged in stimulating execu- kept the drums beating throughout the 1960s. tive orders, financing research, and other focusing what attention they could on the actions related to fire. need for federal assistance. Other fire organi- The "initiators" were NBS and members zations either expressed little interest or op- of the Congress. At various times each began posed proposed federal actions during this some official action to expand federal fire period. activities. Senators Magnuson, Mathias, and NBS Director Astin, Assistant Secretary of Sparkman, and Representatives Davis and Commerce Hollomon, Consumer Advisor Steele each introduced major legislation or Esther Peterson, and Civil Defense's James took actions that had an impact on the crea- Kerr all loom large as "impresarios," those tion of the new agency. Representatives Mil- who worked to manage others in order to ler and Teague were introducers of the Ad- promote the interests of their own organiza- ministration and National Commission bills tions. Hollomon tried to get the fire safety in the House, but they did this primarily as proposals in the 1967 Consumer Message and delegates and left the action roles to Repre- he and Astin strived to expand the fire func- sentatives Daddario and Davis. Mathias and tions of NBS during an earlier period. Peter- Steele introduced numerous fire bills in the son pushed for a consumer message, thus 1972 session, fertilizing the environment for providing an opening for the fire recommen- 74 later action. Many of their provisions ap- dation. Kerr kept the civil defense organiza- peared in later legislation. Magnuson in- tion involved with fire activities and insti- troduced and piloted through the Senate gated conferences and publications that both the 1968 and 1974 acts and is given advocated a wider federal role. He spread a major credit for beginning the legislative wide net to capitalize on fire organizations move in 1968. Sparkman, whose role was and activities for civil defense purposes. more limited, introduced the legislation that Major "promotersv-those who pushed and provided for the establishment of the Na- managed people and processes until the goal tional Commission, later incorporated into was reached-were Magnuson, Daddario, the 1968 law. Rep. Barrett performed a sim- Davis, and the Joint Council. McClennan ilar function in the House. Beall provided deserves special notice in connection with the major support on the floor of the Senate as latter group. He and the IAFF were major well as behind the scenes. Throughout the forces in stimulating grassroots pressure and 1960s, NBS, engaged in efforts to expand its convincing members of Congress to support fire research, initiated proposals toward this the 1974 act. The Joint Council brought to end. During the period of Astin's leadership, bear the concerted efforts of the fire organiza- in particular, its proposals included new functions in order to get the Academy they tions for the Bureau. wanted so badly as well as to insure some kind Those responsible for keeping interest in of fire agency. Daddario chaired the House federal involvement in fire problems alive Subcommittee handling the 1968 legislation could be called "sustainers." Prominent in and served as floor manager for the bill. Davis this category are NBS, the NAS-NRC Fire was in the same position for the 1974 law. Committee, and IAFC. All of these operated Both worked skillfully to lessen opposition to over the years in such a way as to sustain the bills and steer them to passage. Steele interest in federal fire activities. Civil defense should be mentioned because of his continu- contributed to this as well. NBS continued ing efforts to get the 1974 legislation its fire research and worked to expand it. adopted-efforts highly praised by those sup- The NAS-NRC Fire Committee sponsored porting the legislation. conferences and symposia and published Two organizations stand out among the reports throughout the period. In addition "constrainers"-the NFPA and the OMB it served as a channel for exchange of infor- -although all national fire service organiza- mation among various institutions and in- tions except the IAFC originally opposed an terests, forming the nucleus of an informal expanded role of NBS. NFPA was especially effective in fighting NBS's expansion moves Products Association, fire equipment manu- during the early 1960s and led the opposition facturers, individual physicians involved in to the 1968 legislation, although it lent luke- burn treatment and research, and the fire warm support to the establishment of a na- services. Among the strongest Congressional tional commission to study the problem. By supporters were Mosher, Pettis, Steele, Ste- 1970 it moderated its opposition and was the vens, Beall, Cotton, and Weiker. guiding force behind the Williamsburg Con- ference that sparked cooperation among the Special Magnuson Role fire groups and, in general, supported the Sen. Magnuson generally is credited with 1974 law, although with reservations. NFPA's having the most legislative influence on both focus during the 1970s was on molding the the 1968 and 1974 fire legislation. He served federal fire programs to coincide with its con- as a Congressional advisory member of the cept of the proper federal role. That concept National Commission on Fire Prevention and would avoid federal assumption of responsi- Control and sponsored both the 1968 and bilities already undertaken in the private or 1974 laws. In addition he chaired the Con- state and local sector. Hence it could support sumer Subcommittee that processed the bills the Academy with enthusiasm and temper and urged President Johnson to include fire endorsement of certain other programs. Testi- safety in his Consumer Protection Message. mony and publications were carefully worded How much of Magnuson's interest in fire to endorse goals of public education, data safety legislation was a personal concern and 75 collection, and the like, while at the same how much the result of constituent pressures time promoting NFPA's performance of the and other influences is a matter of disagree- activity with federal support rather than fed- ment among some who were involved in activ- eral performance. On the data collection, for ities related to the fire safety legislation at example, after pointing out that NFPA had that time. Bryan says that a number of mem- the most extensive fire data collection, Mor- bers of Congress supported the 1967 bill in gan urged "federal funding to broaden and response to their constituents. He believes enhance the present data system." Because of that Magnuson's interest reflected the inter- its preeminent position among fire groups, est of the Seattle fire service and the State of any opposition NAPA expressed was espe- Washington fire professionals. Gordon Vikery, cially effective. Bugbee and Morgan were its then chief of the Seattle fire department and principal spokesmen. currently Administrator of the US. Fire Ad- The budget agency was an opponent of ministration, had close ties to Magnu- NBS expansion efforts in the early 1960s. son.203 He frequently discussed fire service Later, during consideration of the 1974 legis- needs with both Magnuson and his wife. lation, OMB raised objections and during the Percy Bugbee also saw the hands of the fire period leading to final passage expressed op- services in Magnuson's backing and believes position that forced recommitment of the they were the ones who interested Magnuson measure to the Conference Committee. As the in it.204McClennan says that the fire services federal agency most concerned with limiting urged Sen. Magnuson to do something for the of federal spending, and as the representative fire services and helped draft the act.205 of the President in such matters, its position Others believe that it was the Senator's wife is understandable. President Ford was a con- who exerted the telling pressure. She was a strainer, also, with his threatened veto until consumer advocate concerned with safety and authorizations were reduced. lived next door to Vickery for 15 years. Ac- The "supporters" were legion. In addition cording to him, she worked hard for fire safe- to the large number of members of Congress ty.206 Michael Pertshuk, a former general who sponsored legislation or spoke in favor of counsel to the Commerce Committee and cur- one or more bills, the list includes the Amer- rently chairman of the Federal Trade Com- ican Municipal Associati.on (later the Na- mission, reportedly was concerned about fire tional League of Cities), the Factory Mutual protection and supported Magnuson's efforts Insurance group, the Imported Hardwood in this conne~tion."~ Magnuson built a record of working with activity in the science, civil defense, and consumer matters, particularly as chairman forestry streams of national policy that con- of the Subcommittee on Consumer Affairs. tinued until the fire safety legislation was He gave up the chairmanship of the Subcom- introduced. The consumer stream surged mittee on Merchant Marine and Fisheries, somewhat later and reached its peak about an area of major importance to his home the time that the country witnessed on tele- state, to head the Consumer Subcommittee vision the Apollo spacecraft fire and the 1967 in 1967. This probably was as much a matter riots. At the same time demands of the fire of good politics as it was an interest in con- services for federal assistance were becoming sumer safety. According to one account Mag- stronger, although there was no agreement as nuson had won reelection by a close margin in to the form the assistance should take. The 1962 (52.1%)and realized the need to appeal momentum created by the convergence of all to a larger constituency. Consequently at the these streams and events was greater than urging of aides, he changed his campaign that of any of them alone. And from this emphasis from bringing new industry to convergence came a new national policy Washington State to consumer protection, stream-fire protection-small though it was. plastering the state with billboards pro- Had the push for increased federal fire claiming his role in consumer legislation. His activity peaked in the 1950s, it is doubtful 1968 margin of victory was 64.4%.'Os that fire safety legislation would have been 76 No reason exists why all these factors could placed on the national agenda. The Presi- not have played a part in Magnuson's spon- dent and Congress were involved elsewhere. sorship of the legislation. In addition as chair- Furthermore the occupants of the White man of the subcommittee concerned with the House and Congressional chambers differed bill, he was the Administration's surrogate from those of the later period. The expansion for consumer legislation. No doubt the rela- of federal grants-in-aid was just commencing, tionship of this proposal to others regarding the consumer movement was just aborning, flammable fabrics legislation also added to and the fire services had not defined their his interest. Magnuson subsequently served problems and did not look to the federal as one of the four Congressional advisory government to finance the technology that members of the National Commission on Fire might provide solutions. Ten years later the Protection and Control, established by the idea would have run into stronger efforts to 1968 act, and sponsored The Fire Prevention cut federal spending and to reduce the fed- and Control Act of 1974. eral role. Fiscal constraints even stronger than those that hampered implementation The Time Was Right of the fire legislation were operating. The new Magnuson and all of the others involved in federal policy was adopted because all the bringing about the establishment of the U.S. forces pushing for it converged at a moment Fire Administration might have been inef- of institutional readiness to adopt it. fective, nonetheless, without the convergence By 1974 the sources of momentum for of ideas, policy streams, and events that came establishment of the USFA had shifted to together in 1968 to facilitate the passage of the new fire policy stream. The peak of the The Fire Research and Safety Act. Had they consumer movement had passed, although worked in another time frame when federal there was still considerable interest in safety. governmental activity was less acceptable, No particular civil defense needs pointed to a or without the fertilization of the environ- stronger federal role in fire protection. The ment that had occurred by this point, their Forest Service had achieved a goal with the efforts might not have met with success. enactment of the Rural Community Fire Pro- Their achievement rests in large part on the tection Program. On the other hand fire ser- fact that they were dealing with an idea vices had finally agreed on what they wanted. whose time was right. The National Commission on Fire Prevention Figure 1 shows that, beginning about 1961, and Control had issued its report, America there was an intensification of fire-related Burning. Congress, which already had jumped the hurdle of establishing a new na- a new federal agency would be created but tional policy stream, was flooded with fire over its status, location, and financing. The bills. Support surfaced from many directions. convergence had produced a new agency as The arguments were not over whether or not well as a new policy stream.

FOOTNOTES "Robertson letter, op. cit. 'Lyons, op. cit., p. 122. 22A Proposed Fire Research Program, Washington, DC, 2N. Ernest Dorsey, "Some Memories of the Early Days National Academy of Sciences, National Research at NBS," MSS. NBS historical files, as recounted in Council (NAS-NRC), Committee on Fire Research, Rexmond C. Cochrane, Measures for Progress: A His- 1959. tory of the National Bureau of Standards, Washing- '"ockett, op. cit. ton, DC, U.S. Department of Commerce, 1966, p. 84. 24Accordingto Frederick B. Clarke, director of the Fire 3David B. Gratz, vice president, International Associa- Research Center, NBS. Emmons "was a real crusader tion of Fire Chiefs' Foundation and former president, who lectured Congress, made a world tour, and pointed International Association of Fire Chiefs (IAFC), tele- out advanced activities in Britain and Japan." inter- phone interview, June 12, 1979. view, January 17, 1979. 4Dr. Alexander F. Robertson, NBS Fire Research Cen- 'jA.F. Robertson, "Plans for an Expanded Fire Tech- ter, interview, January 17, 1979. nology Program in the Department of Commerce," 5Cochrane, op. cit.. p. 130. January 25. 1963, MA, NBS files. bRobertson interview, op. cit. "Fire Research: Proceedings for First Correlations Con- 7Testimony of Samuel W. Stratton, chief, NBS, at ference. Washington, DC, NAS-NRC, Committee on Senate Hearings, May 22, 1912, as quoted in Cochrane, Fire Research, Publication 475, 1947. op. cit.. p. 130. 27Rockett,op. cit. "bid.. DD. 130-31. 'Xetter from H.C. Hottel, chairman, Committee on Fire 77 g~bid.,'p: 131. Research, to Dr. Frederick Seitz, president, National '"A.F. Robertson. senior scientist. Center for Fire Re- Academy of Sciences. Washington, DC, November 30, search, NBS, letter, June 8, 1979, to Mavis Mann Ree- 1964, in files of NBS. ves, ACIR. 2YAProposed Fire Research Program, op. cit. "The Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974, jUHottel,op. cit. P.L. 93-498. jlIbid. 12John Rockett, NBS, telephone interview, January 12, "Ibid. 1979. During the 1960s Rockett was director of Fire 3Vbid. Research for Factory Mutual, an association of indus- "Robertson letter, op. cit. trial insurance companies, and after September 1968, "A Study of Fire Problems, Washington. DC, NAS- chief of the Office of Fire Research and Safety for NRC, Committee on Fire Research, 1961, Publication NBS. 949. p. 100. Wongress & the Nation, 1965-1968, Washington, DC, "Hottel, op. cit. Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1969, I1:816. "[bid. 141bid. "Robertson interview, op. cit. '$Percy Bugbee, former general manager, NFPA, tele- "Hottel, op. cit. phone interview, November 8, 1978. 401bid. lb"Proposed Department of Commerce Program for 411bid. Providing Support to National Fire Technology Ef- 42Robertsoninterview, op. cit. forts," Washington, DC, US Department of Commerce, 4Troceedings of the 89th Annual Conference, IAFC, January 18, 1963 (mimeographed). Located in files of Toron to, Ontario, Canada, September 24-27, 1962, NBS. The conference recognized: (I) a need for im- Washington, DC, IAFC, p. 156; Proceedings of the 90th proved design and construction of buildings to increase Annual Conference, IAFC, Memphis, Tennessee, Octo- their fire safety; (2) a need for technical basis for mod- ber 28-31, 1963, Washington, DC, IAFC, p. 50. ernization of statutes, codes, and ordinances to eli- 44See,"Report of the General Manager, Richter Town- minate antiquated and obsolete regulations; (3) a need send," IAFC, Proceedings of the IAFC, 1964; and Let- for education at all levels to increase public awareness ter to H.C. Hottel, chairman, Committee on Fire Re- of fire hazards; (4) a need for improvement in fire fight- search, from Horatio Bond, chief engineer, NFPA, ing methods with provisions for training facilities for November 20, 1964, in NBS files. those who fight fires: and (5) a need for research on the 45Letter to John Garvey, Jr.. American Municipal As- nature of fire. sociation, from J. Herbert Hollomon, assistant secre- 1740U.S.C. 484. tary of Commerce, July 26, 1963, in response to Garvey 1867 Stat. 111. letter expressing disappointment that NBS did not IYAminor amendment in 1954 lowered the flammability appeal to the Senate Appropriations Committee to standards for certain plain-surface fabrics such as reinstate the request for additional funding. Hollomon organdy, tulle, and georgette. This apparently resulted letter in files of NBS. from the desire not to deter imports of Japanese scarves 4W.S. Department of Commerce, "Proposed Depart- at a time when the United States was promoting the ment of Commerce Program for Providing Support to economic development of Japan. Robertson letter, op. National Fire Technology Efforts," Preliminary ci t. Draft-for Discussion Only, Mss. in NBS files, Janu- "James Ryan, NBS, telephone interview, January 11, ary 18, 1963. 1979. 47Robertsonletter, op. cit. 4W.S. Department of Commerce, "Proposed Department Florida, October 18-21, 1965, Washington, DC, IAFC, of Commerce Program for Providing Support to Na- pp. 193-94. tional Fire Technology Efforts," op. cit. 'Vroceedings of the 89th Annual Conference, op. cit., 4YU.S. Department of Commerce, General Administra- p. 155. tion, Fire Technology, Fiscal Year 1964 Budget Es- '"etter from Michael J. Smith, acting director of re- timates, Bureau of the Budget Submission, Washing- search, IAFF, January 10, 1978. ton, DC. October 8, 1962. 'jGratz, op. cit., January 23, 1979. jUAs quoted in Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, 7bGratz,op. cit., October 12, 1978. Washington, DC, Congressional Quarterly, Inc., July 77 Wingspread Conference on Fire Service Adrninistra- 21, 1967, p. 38. tion, Education, and Research: Statements of Na- jlState, Justice, Commerce, the Judiciary, and Related tional Significance to the Fire Problem in the United Agencies Appropriations, 1963. Hearings Before a States. Racine, WI, The Johnson Foundation, Feb- Subcommittee of the Committee on Appropriations, ruary 1966, pp. 2-16. House of Representatives, 87th Congress, 2nd Sess.. '"bid., p. 16. Washington, DC. U.S. Department of Commerce, 1962, 7YRichardE. Bland, telephone interview. November 9, p. 936. 1978. 52Rockett,op. cit. aOBugbee,op. cit. T'ownsend, IAFC, 1964 Proceedings, op. cit., p. 56; ElJoseph E. Clark, interview, November 21, 1978. Congressional Quarterly Weekly Report, op. cit., pp. "Bryan, op. cit. 38-39; Congress & the Nation, 1965-68, op. cit., 11: 817. "Rockett, op. cit. j4"The row is dormant but can be resurrected," Occupa- "Gratz, op. cit., October 12, 1978. tional Hazards, October 1963, p. 140; Hottel, op. cit.; "Donald F. Favreau, "Crisis in Higher Education," Mutual Review, August 1963, NBS files. Fire Engineering, 121:4. April 1968, p. 57. j5Rockett, op. cit. "Rocket believed it did not have much effect (interview, 55tate,Justice, Commerce Hearings, op. cit., p. 948ff. op. cit.). Clark thought it had some impact but that it 57A.F. Robertson, NBS, telephone interview, January was secondary (interview. op. cit.). J. Howard McClen- 78 11, 1978. nan, president, IAFF, did not attach much importance 5wStatement of Purpose and Justification for Legis- to it since the fire safety legislation "was already roll- lation Establishing A Fundamental Fire Research ing when the astronauts fire occurred," but agreed Program at the National Bureau of Standards," Octo- that it did not harm the push for fire legislation (tele- ber 1965, Gaithersburg, MD, NBS files. phone interview, October 7, 1978). At the least it lent credibility to witnesses and made the fire problem jYDavid B. Gratz, vice president, IAFC Foundation, and visible (Bryan, "No one could say that every a participant in events of this period, telephone inter- op. cit.). effort had not been made to protect the astronauts" view, January 23, 1979. (Bugbee, op. cit. ). On the other hand one observer felt ""Testimony of James W. Kerr before the Subcom- that the spacecraft fire generated the feeling that if we mittee on Science and Astronautics, House of Repre- know this little about fire in a program with this much sentatives, October 11, 1972," The International Fire money and this much talent, we need to get more in- Chief, 38:10, December 1972, p. 12. formation (Bryan, op. cit.). "Robertson letter, op. cit. 87Lyons,op. cit.. p. 222. "Proceedings of the 89th Conference, op. cit., p. 132. "McClennan, op. cit. The plan was designated Annex 21 to The National dYCongressional Record, 80th Congress, 1st Sess., 113: Plan for Civil and Defense Mobilization. 22837. b%ratz interview, op. cit., October 18, 1978. YUMarkV. Nadel, The Politics of Consumer Protection, "[bid. Indianapolis, IN, The Bobbs-Merrill Company, Inc.. "Ibid. 1971, pp. 32-33. bbWilliamR. Moore, James W. Jay, and John H. Diete- Y'Dean Coston. telephone interview. November 29. 1978. rich, Defending the United States from Nuclear Fire: Y2Gratz,op. cit., October 12. 1978. A Resume of the Final Report of the National Fire YWenGray, telephone interview, November 13, 1978. Coordination Study. Washington, DC, U.S. Depart- S4Coston,op. cit. ment of Agriculture, Forest Service, Division of Fire y5McClennan,op. cit. Control. August 1966, p. 11. YbInterview with William Hanbury. USFA, November "Lyons. op. cit., p. 218. 11. 1978. bybid., p. 222. Y7Congressional Record, 80th Congress, 1st Sess.. 113: "Don O'Brian. "Injury Survey Important to Fire Ser- 22837. vices." Fire Engineering, 118:7, July 1965, p. 31. Y8SpecialReport to NFPA Members, Current U.S. Fed- 7UProceedingsof the 89th Conference, op. cit.. pp. 168-69. eral Government Proposals on Fire Research and 7LDavidGratz (interview, October 12, 1978) says that the Safety. Boston. MA, NFPA, April 1967. IAFC endorsed this resolution in an effort to get a YY"Watching Watchdog Legislation," Fire Journal, greater voice in the policymaking being done at Civil September 1970, p. 177. Defense. Historically. that agency had made many lUUCongressionalRecord, August 16. 1967, 113:22837. decisions affecting the fire services without consulting lU1"Fire Research and Safety Act," U.S. Code, Con- them. gressional and Administrative News, 90th Congress, 72Proceedings of the 87th Annual Conference, IAFC, 2nd Sess.. 1968, Vol. 2, St. Paul, MN, West Publishing Rochester, NY, September 12-15, 1960, Washington, Co.. 1968. Information is from "House Report No. DC, IAFC. p. 132; Proceedings of the 89th Annual 522" included in this document. pp. 1687. 1693. Conference. op. cit., pp. 156, 167-79; Proceedings of the "%ee. Special Report to NFPA Members, op. cit.. and 90th Annual Conference, op. cit., pp. 50, 167; Proceed- "Statement by Charles S. Morgan presented to the ings of the 92nd Annual Conference, IAFC, Miami. Committee on Banking and Currency, U.S. House of Representatives, April 21, 1967." Mavis Mann Reeves, ACIR, dated July 30, 1979. LU"bid. 12Wonference of National Fire Service Organizations, 1u4CongressionalQuarterly Almanac, 1968, Washington, Williamsburg 1970: National Goals of the Fire Service, DC, Congressional Quarterly, Inc., 1969, p. 356. Boston, MA, NFPA, 1970. The National Association lU5P.L.90-259. of Black Professional Fire Fighters later affiliated lwCongressional Quarterly Almanac, 1968, op. cit., p. with the Joint Council. 356. L'Ylbid. lU7Ibid. 'sUGratz,op. cit., October 10. 1978. IuVbid., p. 6-H. I"Bryan, op. cit. L''S"A Department of Commerce, United States Govern- '"Morgan letter, op. cit. ment Memorandum of July 27, 1967, by John F. '"Bugbee, telephone interview, September 5, 1979. Christian, special assistant to the director, IAT," 13'The Fire Problem: A Statement by the National Fire NBS files. Protection Association, Boston. MA, NFPA, circa ""Ibid. 1971. p. 39. Il1Letter from Percy Bugbee, general manager of NFPA IsBryan, op. cit.; Bugbee, September interview, op. cit. to Rep. Donald E. Lukens, August 25, 1967, NBS 1"Ibid. files. The Fire Problem, op. cit. "'Joseph E. Keller. "Sick Fire Research Needs Transfu- lJsRockett,op. cit. Both Bugbee and Morgan denied this. sion of Federal Dollar," Fire Engineering, 123:5:42. laResolution No. 105, IAFF, 29th Annual Convention. LL%o~kett,op. cit. Toronto, Canada, August 19-23, 1968. lL"Statement of the International Association of Fire L4uSmith,op. cit. Chiefs in regard to the Fire Research and Safety Act," I4lRaymond L. Bancroft, Municipal Fire Service Trends: The International Fire Chief, 35:6, June 1970, p. 4. 1972, National League of Cities Research Report, Il5A Program for the Fire Research and Safety Act, Re- Washington, DC, National League of Cities, 1972. port of the Subcommittee on the National Bureau of 142"Senate Bill Seeks Matching Funds for Training Standards of the Committee on Science and Astro- Volunteers," Fire Engineering, 122:9, September nautics, US. House of Representatives, 91st Congress, 1969, p. 49. 79 2nd Sess., July 1970, Washington, DC, U.S. Govern- 14JJosephClark recalls the major effort of his entire staff ment Printing Office, 1970, p. 1. at NBS in answering each letter individually (inter- lL6Memberswere: Tommy Arevalo, lieutenant, Fire De- view, op. cit. ). partment El Paso, TX; Percy Bugbee, honorary chair- 14'S. 3476-3482; H.R. 12892-12900. man, National Fire Protection Association; John L. L45"Challenge to the Fire Service: The Report of the Jablonsky, vice president, American Insurance As- National Commission on Fire Prevention and Con- sociation; Albert E. Hole, California State fire mar- trol," The International Fire Chief, 39:6. July 1973. shal; Anne W. Phillips, M.D., Harvard Medical School pp 4-5. and burn specialist, Massachusetts General Hospital; 14bFire Prevention and Control: Hearings before The Roger M. Freeman. Jr., president, Allendale Mutual Subcommittee on Science and Astronautics, U.S. Insurance Co.; Ernst R.G. Eckert, professor, University House of Representatives. 93rd Congress, 1st Sess., of Minnesota; Keith E. Klinger, chief emeritus, Los July 21, 26, 31, and August 1-2, 1973, Washington, Angeles County Fire Department; Robert A. Hecht- DC, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1973, p. 1. man, R.A. Hechtman and Associates; Louis J. Am- lqIbid., passim. brili, director, Delaware State Fire School; Peter S. ""bid., p. 261. Hackes, NBC, Washington. DC; William J. Young, 14YIbid.,p. 157. chief. Fire Department, Newington, NH, Dorothy 'Solbid., p. 357ff. Duke, consultant to National Council of Negro I5lFire Prevention and Control Act of 1973. Hearings Women; John F. Hurley, fire commissioner, Roches- Before The Committee on Commerce, United States ter, NY; John A. Proven, Fire Equipment Manufactur- Senate, 93rd Congress, 1st Sess. on S. 1769, September ers Association; Baron Witaker, president, Under- 24 and 26, 1973, Washington, DC, US. Government writers' Laboratories; Frederick B. Dent, secretary Printing Office, 1973, pp. 72-84. of Commerce; and James T. Lynn. Secretary of HUD. 15'"Senate Report No. 93-6217, Appendix 11," U.S. Code In addition the Speaker of the House of Representa- Congressional and Administrative News, op. cit., pp. tives named Rep. John W. Davis of Georgia and Rep. 6214-17. Jerry L. Pettis of California and the President of the 'js Congressional Record, 119:35306-08. Senate designated Sen. Warren G. Magnuson of Wash- 159enateReport No. 93-6217. op. cit., p. 6192. ington and Sen. Ted Stevens of Alaska to serve as '551bid., pp. 6193-94. Congressional advisory members. America Burning, 15~ongressionalRecord, 119:35843. op. cit., pp. V-VI. Ij71bid., p. 35844. 117 Bland. op. cit. 15Vbid., p. 35845. ""bid. 15yIbid..120:12027. llYAmericaBurning, op. cit., p. 1. lbUlbid. l'UIbid. '"Ibid., p. 12045-47. 121The minority report appears as a part of America '"Ibid., 120:12031-32. Burning, op. cit.. pp. 151-59. I" Ibid. 1221bid.,p. 156. lWIbid.,p. 12031. lZA84Stat. 197; 42 U.S.C. 3701 et seq. '"Ibid., p. 12052. lL4McClennan,op. cit. '"Zbid., p. 35030. lfiGratz, op. cit., October 12, 1978.. lb71bid. 12%ryan, op. cit. lWHouse Conference Report 93-1413, October 2. 1974 IZ7Letterfrom Charles S. Morgan, president, NFPA, to (To accompany S. 1769). l"Congressional Quarterly Almanac, 1974, Washington, ington. DC, U.S. Government Printing Office. 1978. DC. Congressional Quarterly. Inc., 1979. p. 332. p. 3. 17"Ibid., p. 35031. ly3Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978: Message from the 171"Federal Fire Prevention and Control Act of 1974: President of the United States Transmitting A Re- Statement by the President Upon Signing the Bill organization Plan to Improve Federal Emergency Into Law. October 29, 1974," Weekly Compilation of Management and Assistance, Pursuant to 5 U.S.C. Presidential Documents, Monday, November 4, 1974, 903 (91 Stat. 30). 95th Congress. 2nd Sess.. House Washington. DC. U.S. Government Printing Office. Document No. 95-356, Washington, DC, U.S. Gov- 10:44:1384. ernment Printing Office,1978. L72"Statementof Professor Richard E. Bland." National lY4Reorganization Plan No. 3 of 1978 (Federal Emergency Fire Protection and Control Administration, Legisla- Management Agency). Hearings Before a Subcom- tive History, 1:109, Library of the US. Fire Adminis- mittee of the Committee on Government Operations, tration. House of Representatives, 95th Congress 2nd Sess., L73CongressionalRecord, 120:12035. June 26 and 29, 1978, Washington, DC, US. Govern- '''Clark, op. cit. ment Printing Office,1978, pp. 13, 86-87, 159. L75Bugbee.op. cit. ly51bid. l7W1and,op. cit. lYbP.L.95-422, October 5, 1978.92 Stat. 932. 17' Rockett, op. cit. lY7Fora letter from Rep. Breckinridge and testimony of l7%1and, op. cit.; Bugbee, op. cit. fire interests on the issue, see Fire Prevention and L7YClark,op. cit. Control, Fire Authorization Hearings, op. cit., passim. 180Ro~kett,op. cit. lYW.R. 1061 and 1062 introduced by Rep. John M. IU1SenateReport. op. cit., pp. 6213-17. Murphy of New York. lWInterview with Thomas Hughes. USFA, November 2, 1978. lYYTheNFPA estimated that incendiary fires or fires of lW"First Annual Report of the Secretary of Commerce suspicious origin increased from 24,000 in 1960, to on Implementation of the Federal Fire Prevention and 65,000 in 1970, and to 144,000 in 1975. Despite the 80 Control Act of 1974," June 30, 1975. located in the efforts of NFPCA and the USFA, figures on fires are files of the USFA. not completely reliable. This accounts for the con- lU4"Three Cheers for the Fire Academy," National sistent appearance of a data collection program Journal. July 8. 1978. p. 1088. throughout the fire legislation proposals. Although the '"The Third Annual Report of the Secretary of Com- data center now collects data from a number of states merce on Implementation of the Federal Fire Preven- that have established statewide reporting systems, not tion and Control Act of 1974 (Public Law 93-498): all states participate in the program. The arson Report for Calendar Year 1976. Washington. DC, US. figures here are from The Fire Journal, Boston, MA, Department of Commerce. National Fire Prevention NFPA, as reported in the Statistical Abstract of the and Control Administration, n.d., p. 26. United States 1977, Washington, DC. US. Govern- '"Fourth Annual Report of the Secretary of Commerce ment Printing Office.1977. p. 546. on Implementation of the Federal Fire Prevention and 'OUFiguresfor accidental deaths are drawn from the U.S. Control Act of 1974 (P.L. 93-498): Report for Calendar National Center for Health Statistics. Vital Statistics Year 1977, Washington, DC, US. Department of Com- of the United States, and for catastrophic accidents merce. July 1978. p. 3. from Metropolitan Life Insurance Company, Statis- '"P.L. 95-422, October 5. 1978. 92 Stat. 932. tical Bulletin, and unpublished data, as cited in Ibid.. 1w1978 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, Wash- p. 73. ington, DC, Executive Office of the President. Of- 2UL"AmericanPolitics, Then and Now," Commentary. fice of Management and Budget. 1978, p. 123. February 1979, p. 44. lWIbid. wU21bid. lYUFourthAnnual Report, op. cit., pp. 11, 37-38. ZU4Bryan,op. cit.; Vickery. op. cit. lYIJamesRita, director, Officeof Administration, USFA, w4Bugbee,op. cit. telephone interview. March 14, 1979. 2U5McClennan,op. cit. lY2Fire Prevention and Control: Fire Authorization, 2UhBland,op. cit.; Clark, op. cit.; Vickery, op. cit. Hearings before the Subcommittee on Science, Re- "'Clark, op. cit. search and Technology of the Committee on Science ZUWarkV. Nadel. The Politics of Consumer Protection, and Technology, U.S. House of Representatives, Indianapolis, IN. The Bobbs-Merrill Company. Inc., 95th Congress. 2nd Sess.. February 2, 7, 1978, Wash- 1971, pp. 111-12. One Step At A Time: The Rural Community Fire Protection Program

81 're problems can be severe in rural areas. F"Fire and lightning strike about two out of every 100 farms each year, causing approximately 4,000 deaths and property losses estimated at well over $1 billion annually. When fire occurs in rural areas, the damage is about three to six times greater than when it strikes city property. This is because of the isolation of structures, the lack of fire fighting facilities in many neighborhoods, the less rigid wiring and construction standards, and unsafe heating equipment. Fire services for rural areas and small towns lag behind those of urban areas, a fact of significance since 42% of the nation's population lives in these areas. According to the Forest Service, There are 26,168 rural fire departments and about 20,000 rural fire places without fire protection. Of these potential 46,168 fire departments, approximately 26,000 were identified as needing assistance in organizing, training and equipping rural fire fighting to meet recommended state standards for fire protection.* It was to meet these problems that Congress enacted Title IV of The Rural Development Act of 1972 and the Forest Service developed the Rural Community Fire Protection Pro- gram. Intended as a three-year pilot program, Figure 5 INCREMENTAL DEVELOPMENT OF THE RURAL COMMUNITY FIRE PROTECTION PROGRAM WITHIN THE FORESTRY STREAM OF FEDERAL POLICY PRELIMINARY DEVELOPMENTS Peshtigo fire killed 1,500 and burned over a million acres. Congress made first important reservation of public land with creation of Yellowstone National Park. American Forestry Association organized. Dr. Franklin Hough named Special Assistant for Forestry to the Commissioner of Agriculture. Division of Forestry created in the Department of Agriculture. Division of Forestry given statutory status. Military Director of Yellowstone National Park initiated fire control program, thus making U.S. Army the first federal agency to combat forest fires. Congress authorized the President to set aside forest lands in the federal reserve. President Harrison placed first land in federal reserve for forestry purposes. Fires near Hinkley. MN, killed 418; Wisconsin fires burned several million acres, killed untold numbers. Secretary of the lnterior appointed a National Forest Commission to study forestry management problem. It recommended the establishment of an administrative agency part of whose duties would be to develop a fire protection program. Forest Management Act gave Secretary of the Interior authority to protect and administer the federal reserve. Department of Agriculture's Bureau of Forestry assumed responsibility for forest reserves and began active management. Its name was changed to Forest Service. U.S. Forest Products Research Laboratory established by Forest Service in cooperat~onwith the University of Wisconsin. Great Idaho fire burned three million acres. COOPERATIVE FOREST FIRE PROTECTION BEGINS Weeks Forest Purchase Act authorized Forest Service to enter into agreements with states to protect from fire those lands situated on watershed of navigable rivers; authorized interstate compacts and federal matching grants to states fire protection. Clarke-McNary Act strengthened federal assistance, removed the limitation that restricted federal aid to forested watersheds of nav~gablestreams. extended aid to Include prlvate forests. "Copeland Report" issued. The National Plan for American Forestry recommended, among other things, the doubling of funds for cooperative forestry under the Clarke-McNary Act. Cooperative Farm Forestry Act authorizes technical assistance to states for forest fire prevention. Congress authorized the Forest Service to spend up to $1 million annually for cooperative fire protection without matching funds (later rescinded) and to sell and distribute supplies, equipment, and materials to other federal agencies and to state and local governments that cooperate with the Forest Service in fire control. Congress amended and supplemented authorization for Sections 1. 2. and 3 of Clarke-McNary. Watershed Protection and Flood Prevention Act of 1954 authorized inclusion of soil conservation districts in cooperative forestry program. Congress authorized Forest Service to give unneeded fire lookout towers and other structures, along with connecting land, to state and local governments provided the facility is located outside national forests. Forest Service built first of three regional research laboratories at Macon, GA. Forest Service began a program of fire training in selected rural areas in 1964 in response to an executive order assigning to the Department of Agriculture the responsibility for suppression of fires in rural areas resulting from enemy attack. National Fire Coordination Study, prepared by the Forest Service under contract with the Office of Civil Defense, recommended use of local fire services as the major tool of nuclear fire suppression and training for local forces. President Nixon pointed up lack of adequate fire protection in his message accompanying the Report on Government Services to Rural America. Sikes' Cooperative Forestry Act extended cooperative forest management and assistance programs to urban communities and open spaces and doubled authorization for cooperative forest fire prevention under Clarke- McNary Act. ADOPTION AND MODIFICATION OF RURAL COMMUNITY PROGRAM Dole proposal for rural community fire protection included by Senate Agriculture and Forestry Committee in "Rural Development Act." Rural Development Act became law, established Rural Community Fire Protection Program. Nixon Administration announced intention not to fund Rural Community Fire Protection Program. Dole proposal to reauthorize Rural Community Fire Protection Program adopted as part of Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act. Huddleston amendment to provide assistance to volunteer fire departments adopted as part of the Agri- culture and Consumer Protection Act. Cooperative Forestry Assistance Act of 1978 repealed Title IV of Rural Development Act, replaced it with a consolidated cooperative forestry program. and establ~shed special Rural Fire Disaster Fund In the Treasury. President Carter's FY 1979 Budget requested no funds for Rural Community Fire Protection Program (still administered separately). President Carter's FY 1980 Budget requested no funds for Rural Community Fire Protection Program.

aJ W Title IV provided technical assistance and a wide network of cooperating state and local small grant-in-aid program. Project grants up agencies, was an expedient means for im- to 50% were made available to states for plan- proving civil defense capability in rural areas. ning, organization, and training of local fire Consequently the civil defense and forestry fighting units,' purchase of equipment, and streams merged occasionally to promote civil other projects to improve local fire service defense efforts to shield the rural population activities. Nevertheless appropriations for from fire. the program have amounted to just $3.5 mil- No individual, other than President John lion annually, making the program a minor F. Kennedy, stands out as having influenced one in the federal grants picture. the defense stream. The federal Civil Defense agency was the primary stimulator. To a lesser degree than civil defense policy, FORESTRY AND OTHER POLICY several other federal policy streams inter- INFLUENCES sected with forestry from time to time to advance rural fire policy to its present state. The genesis of the Rural Community Fire Federal science developments, especially those Protection Program is bound up in the fores- actions by the National Academy of Sci- try stream of federal policy. In fact forestry ences-National Research Council (NAS- concerns dominated the evolution of the pro- NRC) Committee on Fire Research and the gram until immediately before passage, when 84 Federal Council on Science and Technology, it rode to enactment on the back of rural influenced fire protection policy. More im- development policy. Federal civil defense ef- portant were the agricultural policies in- forts gave it a boost from time to time, and to volving soil and water conservation and rural a lesser degree other agricultural policies con- development. From the outset there was over- tributed to its advancement. Withal, the pro- lap between the forestry programs and those gram arose essentially from the efforts of the aimed at protecting other agricultural re- Forest Service and the state foresters to pro- sources. Often the growth of one carried along tect the nation's forests. Key developments expansion of the others. On the other hand affecting the evolution of the fire program are the fire programs had little connection with set out in Figure 5. the rural development policies until those The Forest Service and the state foresters promoting community fire protection seized and their organization, the National Associa- on the Rural Development Act of 1972 as a tion of State Foresters, were the major actors convenient vehicle for their program to ride in the forestry policy stream as far as rural to passage. community fire protection is concerned. Prominent in the rural development stream Harold Gallagher, state forester of Kansas, as it affected fire protection were Senators probably deserves special mention because of Henry Bellmon (R-OK), Dole, Hubert H. his efforts to interest Sen. Robert Dole (R- Humphrey (D-MN), Charles McC. Mathias KS) in introducing the fire provision, but (R-MD), and Joseph Montoya (D-NM). In others were equally active. addition John A. Baker, consultant to the Although the heritage of the Rural Com- Senate Agriculture and Forestry Committee, munity Fire Protection Program lies with fed- played a leading role. In the House, Represen- eral forestry policy, defense policy (especially tatives James T. Broyhill (R-NC), John J. civil defense) spurred its establishment by Flynt, Jr., (D-GA), and Robert L.F. Sikes interacting with forestry from time to time. (D-FL) were the chief promoters. The defense contribution was not important until the years following World War 11. The FORESTS AND FIRES fire destruction in Germany and Japan during the war had focused the attention of gov- Federal forestry policy grew out of national ernmental leaders on the problems of protect- land policy, traditionally based on the as- ing the civilian population in the event of sumption that federal ownership of a vast enemy attack. The Forest Service, with its public domain was temporary. Even 19th Century land grants to states were regarded urged that Congress and the state legislatures as a passthrough to private ownership. Since act to protect forests. His arguments, practi- for some time no need was perceived for the cal in nature, were based on the economic federal government to keep more than a value of timber and the need for it in manu- minimum acreage, this policy left the dis- facturing, railroad constructibn, the arts, and position of forested lands in the hands of pri- "the affairs of common life." His appeal was vate owners3 Through homesteading laws met with enthusiasm and the Association and gifts to states, railroads, and other adopted a resolution calling for the appoint- institutions, the largest share of the forest ment of a committee "to memorialize Con- lands of the country passed from federal gress and the several state legislatures upon ownership before 1900. Early state policy gen- the importance of promoting the cultivation erally followed that of the national govern- of timber and the preservation of forests, and ment in disposing of forest lands to private to recommend proper legislation for securing owners, especially railroads. these objects." Hough, of course, was ap- In the final quarter of the last century, at- pointed to the ~ommittee.~ titudes toward forest lands altered as the The committee drafted a memorial along public became aware of the need for conserva- the same lines as Hough's paper and secured tion, recognizing the value of forests to flood the endorsement of the U.S. Secretary of control and for recreation purposes. The Interior and Commissioner of Agriculture. organization of the American Forestry As- Along with proposed legislation, the paper 85 sociation (AFA) in 1875 was followed by the went to President Grant, who submitted it establishment of a large number of state to the Congress. The legislative proposal met forestry boards and other public and private with little success in the 43rd and 44th Con- conservation groups. These organizations gresses, but finally in 1866, through the ef- stimulated public awareness of the need for forts of Rep. Mark Dunnell of Minnesota, a forest protection and management. provision was attached to the 1877 appropriations bill providing $2,000 for the appoint- Early Awareness ment of a forestry agent to "prosecute investigations and inquiries" on the conditions Much of the early concern and agitation of American forest^.^ over the conditions of American forests came Hough was appointed to the job and began from scientists, particularly those belonging an investigation of the country's forest re- to the AFA, the National Academy of Sci- sources. Thus the federal government's in- ences, and the American Association for the volvement in forestry management began Advancement of Science. Memberships in the with the naming of a special agent to the organizations often were overlapping. U.S. Commissioner of Agriculture in 1876. The efforts of Franklin B. Hough deserve The Division of Forestry was created in 1881 special mention in the early development of and received statutory status in 1886. federal forestry policy. Hough, a meteorolo- Hough's Report on Forestry, issued in 1878, gist, botanist, and physician, became con- urged that states adopt laws on forest fire cerned about the depletion of forests when his prevention similar to those in effect in Eu- statistical work on forest products in 1855 and rope, but the recommendation had little 1865 revealed a falling off of timber activities effe~t.~Hough's concept of government in- in some areas of the country and increases in volvement in forestry management was others-indications that new fields had been limited. In his History of the U.S. Forest opened. After several years of interest, Hough Products Laboratory (1910-1963), Charles A. sought to attract government attention to Nelson notes: the problem. As an opening move he read a paper at the annual meeting of the American Hough did not think that govern- Association for the Advancement of Science, ment should enter into the field of tree entitled: "On the Duty of Governments in planting or caring for forest lands. the Preservation of Forests." His paper These were the activities of European forestry systems, but Hough argued responding to a persuasive presentation by that American conditions were not the AFA Law Committee." conducive to this extension of govern- Presidents took advantage of the opportu- mental authority. What the federal nity. President Harrison placed 13 million government *should do, as specified in acres in the reserve in 1893, and President the legislation of 1876, was to set up a Cleveland added 4.5 million in Oregon in the "central agency of inquiry" to investi- same year, but refused to set aside additional gate and report on several vital sub- acreage until provisions were made for its jects related to American forest con- management. As a result of the grant of Pres- ditions. Information on these subjects idential authority, approximately 20% of the should then be "collected, digested and remaining federally owned forest land soon diffused everywhere among our peo- was included in the national forest system, ple." From the outset, then, govern- practically all in the far west. The states still mental forestry activity involved owned a large acreage, but generally this was merely the collecting and disseminating being passed to private ownership at a rapid of information on the subject of Amer- rate. A few states had made modest begin- ican f~restry.~ nings toward permanent state ownership of forest lands, and municipalities and minor Creation Of The Federal Reserve political subdivisions held some acreage for 86 the protection of the public water supply.12 In response to public concerns over recrea- With the acknowledgment of a need to keep tion, the federal government began reserving certain federally owned land in the public federally owned lands for national parks in domain came the recognition of the need for 1871. Subsequently in 1875 the AFA was protection and management of the reserves. organized and began to push for withdrawal In response to President Cleveland's concern of certain forest lands from sale and their over lack of management of federal forest reservation in the public domain. Its law com- land and pressure from the AFA, the Secre- mittee met with President Benjamin Harri- tary of the Interior asked the National Acad- son and advocated an efficient forestry policy. emy of Sciences to appoint a national forest Later following the prompting of Bernhard commission to study the problem. This body Fernow, chief of the Division of Forestry, of experts, drawn almost entirely from the the Association called on Congress to reserve National Academy of Sciences with the ad- public lands and set up an administrative dition of Gifford Pinchot,13 recommended commission.g Congress also began to recog- among other things the creation of 13 forest nize that reservation of public lands was a reserves covering 21 million acres and the means of protecting forests and watersheds, a establishment of an administrative agency recognition probably spurred in part by the whose duties partly would be to develop a 1871 Peshtigo fire that killed 1,500 people and fire protection program. Encouraged by the burned over a million acres. Through an recommendation Cleveland then set aside the obscure amendment to The Forest Reserve 21 million acres, precipitating a furor in the Law of 1891,10 added by a conference com- west where lumber and mining interests pro- mittee, it made a radical change in public tested that large withdrawal would destroy policy, perhaps unknowingly. This provision their businesses. allowed the President to set aside public lands wholly or in part covered with timber as pub- Federal Forest Management Begins lic reservations, although it made no arrangements for forest management. It is doubtful In 1980 the military director of Yellowstone that Congress realized the far-reaching im- National Park made the U.S. Army the first plications of this grant of authority. The federal agency to establish a fire control pro- provision appears to have been added as a gram.I5 Nevertheless actions with longer result of the last minute intervention of range consequences for forest fire protection Secretary of the Interior John W. Noble, arose from concern over management of the federal reserve. authority conferred by the act enabled the The National Forest Commission report extension of the national forest system to the and the Cleveland land reservations created east, thus creating a nationwide basis for a climate favorable for adoption of the Forest cooperation. During Congressional delibera- Management Act of 1897.I"n unusually tions, nonetheless, scant attention was paid destructive fire in 1894 around Hinkley, MN, to Section 2 of the law authorizing funds for probably added to the pressure for this legis- federal-state cooperation in forest protec- lation as well. Although the act was a com- tione20 promise between the strong conservationists and the western interests, this legislation THE WEEKS ACT gave the Secretary of the Interior regulatory The Weeks Act marked the first federal as- power over land use on federal lands and sistance to states for fire protection activities directed that protection of the land must be and inaugurated the first matching funds an important factor in administration. requirement in the grants-in-aid system." Responsibility for administering the re- Congress appropriated $200,000 for the Sec- serves was lodged in the General Land Office, retary of Agriculture to cooperate with states an agency unquestionably unqualified for the in providing fire protection for the nonfederal duty because it had no foresters and its pri- watersheds of navigable streams. This pro- mary concern was the disposition of the feder- tection applied to both state and privately al domain. The federal foresters-"the whole owned lands. Only states with laws establish- 87 two of themw-were in the Department of ing a system of forest fire protection were Agriculture.'' That Department's Bureau of eligible for the grants. In addition the Con- Forestry assumed responsibility for adminis- gress gave advance consent to interstate com- tering the 85.6 million acres of forest reserves pacts for conserving forests and water supply. in 190518 under the leadership of Gifford The program grew incrementally as new Pinchot who later changed the Bureau's needs were recognized and the cooperative name to the Forest Service. President Theo- efforts of the Forest Service and the state dore Roosevelt aggressively continued the foresters matured. During 1911 cooperative policy of adding to the reserve, which reached agreements were negotiated with 11 states. 194.5 million by the end of his term. Under Both the number of states involved and the Roosevelt and Pinchot the federal govern- amount of appropriations increased steadily. ment began active management of the re- By FY 1925 a total of 29 states were included serves. It was just a step, then to acknowledg- under the program. Combined federal, state, ing that all forest lands were interrelated and and private expenditures under the Weeks that, to protect federal forests, state and law increased nearly tenfold from 1911 to private forests also must be protected. Fires 1925 and there was a similar growth in the did not recognize ownership boundaries. Con- area of forest land under protection. Figure 6 sequently federal assistance to ensure the illustrates the growth in acres under coopera- safety of state-owned forests was in order. tive fire protection between 1911-31. During calendar year 1911 a total of $36,692 federal, $165,975 state, and approximately Federal Assistance Initiated $54,590 private money was spent for the protection of approximately 60,799,000 acres Following the Great Idaho Fire of 1910, of forested watersheds. By FY 1925, the last Congressional concern for an adequate tim- year before the Clarke-McNary law became ber supply, erosion and flood control, and operative, corresponding amounts were scenic and recreational preservation resulted $397,651 federal and $1,844,192 state and in the enactment of the Weeks Forest Pur- private. 22 chase Act of 1911.19 This law authorized federal acquisition of lands and established THE CLARKE-McNARY ACT cooperative arrangements with the states for In 1924 Congress strengthened this federal- protecting forests from fire. The purchasing state alliance with the passage of The Clarke- Figure 6 FOREST AREA IN STATE AND PRIVATE OWNERSHIP UNDER COOPERATIVE FIRE PROTECTION, Millions of 191 1-31 Acres

1911 191 5 1919 1923 1927 1931 SOURCE. A.B. Hastings. "Federal Financial and Other District Aid to States." A National Plan tor American Forestry, Vol II. Senate I Document No. 12, 73rd Congress, 1st Sess., Washington, DC, U.S. Government Printing Office, 1933, p. 1059.

McNary Act, 23 which superseded The Weeks states. All states negotiated agreements for Act with respect to federal-state cooperation. participation in the prjgram. Under these It removed the provision that limited coopera- the Forest Service coordinated and provided tive protection to forested watersheds of financial and technical assistance, including navigable streams and extended federal as- training of personnel and development of sistance to private forestry. It also provided equipment. Each state forester prepared a for cooperation between federal and state plan in collaboration with the Forest Service. officials in developing a forest fire prevention The latter had to approve both the annual and suppression system for each forest region budgets and the expenditure reports on which to protect the timbered and cut-over lands. federal reimbursement was based.25 Funds, not to exceed a limit of $2.5 million annually, were authorized for assistance in THE THREE DECADES: states whose practices encouraged forest and 1930-59 water resources protection. Within the limits of the authorization, each state could receive Compared to earlier years the period begin- up to the amount spent by the state and pri- ning with the Great Depression and continu- vate individuals for forest fire protection. An ing through the 1950s was relatively unevent- initial appropriation of $600,000 was made ful as far as increasing federal involvement in for FY 1926. Within five years the amount rural fire protection was concerned. Never- had grown to $1.7 million.24 theless a few developments pushed the na- From the outset the fire protection pro- tional commitment along one more step or grams authorized under the Weeks and Clark- contributed to a climate receptive to an ex- McNary laws operated on the principle that panded federal role. The first of these was each state would be responsible for the super- the Copeland Report, a landmark document vision and implementation of the program as far as American forestry is concerned. within its boundaries. Because state laws govern the handling of fire and of access to The Copeland Report state and private lands, Congress anticipated that most of the burden would rest with the The issuance of The National Plan for American Fore~try,~~better known as the annual cost of adequate fire protection for Copeland Report, was the next major event such lands eventually would amount to $20 affecting federal involvement in local fire million a year. Federal aid was urged for the protection. It was prepared in 1932-33 in expansion of these activities30 The return compliance with S.R. 17P7 introduced by of 25% of national forest receipts to local Sen. Royal S. Copeland of New York. The government was suggested as well. resolution stressed the threat of early exhaus- The report supported the case for increased tion of the country's timber supplies, par- federal assistance with the following sum- ticularly the softwoods in the east; the exis- mary of results of past aid usage: tence of large areas of land suitable only for growing timber; the benefits of wise utiliza- Federal cooperation has been an im- tion of such lands as public domain; and the portant factor in the establishment of desirability of developing immediately a co- 12 state forestry departments. In 17 ordinated federal and state program for their states the protection of private forest utilization. The resolution requested the land was commenced as a state activity Secretary of Agriculture to advise the Senate as the direct result of federal coopera- whether the federal government should tion. undertake to aid the states in restricting to Under federal cooperation the area of forestation purposes those areas of the coun- state and private forest land receiving try suitable only for forests. The Secretary organized protection increased from 95 89 responded with a two-volume report, prepared million acres in 1915 to 228 million by the Forest Service, containing a long list acres in 1931. Should this same rate of of recommendations, including the doubling increase be continued, the entire area of the amount of federally owned forest lands. needing protection would be covered This particular proposal garnered little sup- in about 20 years. . . . port, coming as it did at the depth of the Forty-six percent of the state and pri- Great Depression. In addition to the pro- vate forest land classed as in need of hibitive cost, it was not a politically feasible protection is still unprotected. This recomrnenda tion. area lies for the most part in the south The Copeland Report gave substantial at- and central regions, where federal aid tention to fire protection. It stated: has meant the most in getting protec- In spite of a rapid increase in human tion started. use, the size of the area burned in the On protected areas forest fires have average year has been reduced from annually burned over 1.7% of the area about 1,350,000 acres to about 500,000 protected, whereas fires have covered acres between 1910-15 and 1920-25. The about 19.8% of unprotected areas. actual ratio of allowable burn has been This proves that the protection work brought to 1.07-1. On all but 30 of the undertaken has caused a sharp reduc- 95 million acres requiring protection a tion in fire damage. satisfactory ratio has been reached. An Forest fire protection in the New Eng- important factor in this improvement land, middle Atlantic, lake, north has been the development of detailed Rocky Mountain, south Rocky Moun- plans for fire prote~tion.~~ tain, and Pacific coast regions is well Despite this favorable assessment of the established. . . . In parts of the north forest fire problem, the report recommended Rocky Mountain and Pacific coast re- doubling the funds for forest fire cooperation gions, however, conditions are develop- under The Clarke-McNary Act,29 a remark- ing that may become critical as a result able recommendation in a depression period. of the tendency of abandonment of Because organized fire protection was being protection by owners interested pri- provided for only about 54% of the state and marily in the merchantable timber now private lands, it was estimated that the on the land. The need here for a larger sharing in protection costs by the fed- assistance to states for forest fire protection. eral government and the states is In 1944 Congress authorized the Forest Ser- clearly indicated. . . . vice to spend up to $1 million a year for co- 6. In the administration of federal aid operative fire protection without matching the Forest Service has served as a funds (an authorization later rescinded). It clearinghouse for information and for also permitted the Forest Service to sell and educational material to the advantage distribute supplies, equipment, and materials of the state projects. The merit system to other federal agencies and to state and in the employment of men has been local governments that cooperate with the promoted, technical standards among Forest Service in fire control.35 This au- personnel have been raised, and me- thorization was expanded in 1958 to include thods of protection have been measur- gifts of unneeded fire lookout towers and ably other structures, along with connecting lands, if the facility were located outside national Inclusion of fire-related recommendations forests. A 1949 law, The Federal Property and in what has been called the "landmark report Administrative Services Act, permitted gifts on forest management" underscored the im- of other federal surplus personal property to portance of forest fire protection and pro- state and local governments, some of which duced a climate more amenable to federal went to the fire services. action. The most immediate result was the The Federal Civil Defense Act of 195036re- enactment of The Cooperative Farm Forestry quired federal leadership in "protecting life Act3* in 1937 which, among other things, and property in the United States from at- provided technical services to states for forest tack." This act was the basis of later orders fire prevention. extending federal activities for fire control in rural areas in defense emergency situations. Conservation Activity THE DECADE OF THE 1960s: The decades of the 1930s and 1940s pro- FEDERAL TRAINING BEGINS duced an expansion of forest land and conservation management as well as a struggle Under the influence of civil defense needs, between the Forest Service and the Depart- highlighted by the 1962 Cuban Missile Crisis, ment of Interior over forest management the Forest Service began a program of fire responsibility. Part of the conservation ac- training in selected rural areas in 1964 in tivity was a result of the Copeland Report's order to build fire capability in areas that recommendations; perhaps even more impor- lacked protection. By executive order Presi- tant were the New Deal efforts to combat the dent Kennedy had assigned to the Secretary Depression. The Civilian Conservation of Agriculture the responsibility for suppres- Corps-aimed at providing employment- sion of fires in rural areas resulting from put 500,000 young men on public lands to enemy attack.37 The order directed that all fight fires and engage in other conservation program activities be coordinated with na- measures.33 Later during the 1950s coopera- tional civil defense plans and the operations tive forestry was expanded when the Congress of the Department of Defense (DOD). In enacted The Watershed Protection and Flood cooperation with other federal, state, and Prevention Act of 1954.34 This legislation local fire protection agencies, the Forest Ser- authorized cooperation with soil conserva- vice was to direct, inform, organize, and train tion districts, placing them on a basis similar rural residents and fire units for emergency to general local governments. fire activities. The Office of Civil Defense (OCD) financed the training. Civil Defense Inputs The next year OCD contracted with the Forest Service for a national study on fire World War I1 and its aftermath brought protection needs. The resulting National Fire civil defense influences to bear on federal Coordination Study, published in 1966, suggested that local fire services be used as the stantial. Both streams had been involved in major tool for suppressing nuclear fire. It the Federal Council on Science and Tech- said: nology's efforts to designate the NBS as the lead agency in coordinating federal fire activi- Organized fire services in the U.S. ties in the 50s and 60s, but it is likely that the are effectively protecting urban areas Forest Service influenced the science stream and all but about 500 million acres of to a greater extent than it itself was affected. rural land. Personnel of these services In 1968 nonetheless the science, defense, and are competent firemen, equipped and consumer streams converged; the result was trained to act independently and ef- the passage of The Fire Research and Safety fectively. Given guidance, support, and Act of 1968. training in nuclear aspects of fire, they In addition to authorizing a fire research can provide fire defense leadership to program in the Department of Commerce, the public and take preparedness, selec- this act provided for the National Commission tive fire control, and related rescue on Fire Prevention and Control to study the actions that will reduce significantly fire problem. This Presidentially appointed the nuclear fire threat. The foundation Commission was to undertake a comprehen- of our nation's strength for fire defense sive study to determine the most effective in nuclear war is the organized fire measures for reducing the destructive effects service. These firemen, and the popu- of fire. Because of Congressional delays in lace, must face the fire threat indepen- funding and Presidential delays in making dently until it is possible to arrange appointments, the Commission did not actu- aid to stricken communities. Under- ally begin work until July 1971. Its report, standing by both public officials and America Burning, was issued in May 1973. citizenry of the size and complexity of In the meantime Congress already had en- the nuclear fire problem is the first acted The Rural Development Act of 1972 step toward reducing the fire threat. establishing the Rural Community Fire Pro- Such understanding is not widespread tection Program. Nevertheless the publicity in the U.S. today.38 surrounding the activities of the Commission, as well as the increasing intensity of activi- The study advocated a number of other mea- ties by the fire services and state foresters, sures including training for local fire services. stimulated by its hearings, undoubtedly In 1967 Senators Mark Hatfield (R-OR) created a climate in which chances for adop- and Milton R. Young (R-ND) introduced tion of the rural program were enhanced. The bills to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture Commission's work precipitated the introduc- to cooperate with states in preventing and tion of hundreds of pieces of fire protection suppressing structural fires and wildfires legislation in the early 1970s. in rural areas. Apparently the bill was es- Meanwhile Morrison A. Ennis, former chief sentially the same as the one proposed by of the Mort Lake Fire Department, Brooklyn, Agriculture and then undergoing the bureau CT, read a paper outlining rural fire problems of the Budget review process-a review it did at a National Academy of Sciences sympo- not survive. sium on "The Needs of the Fire Services." The Late 1960s The paper gained wide circulation among fire services when published in Fire Engineer- Defense concerns gave way to other in- ing magazine.39 In calling for federal fire fluences in growth of Forest Service assis- research in a rural context, Ennis said: tance to rural communities in the late 1960s. The federal science stream, in particular, af- The first thing we must do is to con- fected the environment at this time. It had vince everyone from firemen right interacted with defense policy before in regard through the general public, farmers, to fire protection, but its influence on Forest plant owners, insurance people, and Service activity did not' appear to be sub- legislators that we have a serious problem that is worsening as time goes quate fire protection and fire fighting ser- on. . . . It will take the combined efforts vices. The paper cited high insurance rates of all concerned to work through legis- as one of the reasons for improving rural fire lators to get the necessary laws on the services.42 Baker's views were especially im- books. By this I mean laws that will portant because he was a consultant to the regulate the fire safety of agricultural committee and in a position to discuss needs equipment, fire-safe design of buildings with its members. and minimum standards for industrial Meanwhile, in response to a requirement of installations. These will probably be The Agricultural Act of 197043 for an an- more effective if developed on the state nual Presidential report on services to rural level. However, they should be based America, President Nixon pointed out the on research conducted on a national lack of adequate rural fire protection in the level.40 first report. The President said: Ennis also called for better training for rural People want jobs and an adequate fire services. income to support an acceptable standard of living. But they also require RURAL DEVELOPMENT STREAM other things including a good educa- A rural development stream of federal tion for their children; accessible, quality medical care; adequate housing 92 policy was building toward major legislation at this time. The concern for poverty in at a price they can afford; and other rural areas, highlighted during the Kennedy community services such as police campaign of 1960, continued into the 1970s and fire protection, clean water supply, along with heightened emphasis on problems sewage disposal, transportation facili- of rural areas in general. This renewed atten- ties, and recreational and cultural tion was partially the result of the designa- opportunities. In many rural areas of tion of Hubert H. Humphrey as chairman of the United States, these services and the Rural Development Subcommittee of the facilities are inadequate; in some places Senate Committee on Agriculture and For- virtually nonexistent in whole or in estry. When Humphrey returned to the Sen- part. In sparsely settled areas and ate after serving as Vice President, he needed those declining in population, the a visable post from which to campaign. The shrinking tax base makes the delivery subcommittee was created for him. It held of such services increasingly costly and hearings on rural need throughout the coun- ineffi~ient.~~ try over a two-year period. As a former Vice Despite these actions rural fire protection President and a vocal and active Senator, was not an important part of the rural de- Humphrey generated increased public atten- velopment program, which was aimed princi- tion to rural needs. pally at farm credit, water and sewer facili- At the outset there was no particular de- ties, housing, and health. In fact it rarely mand for rural development aid, at least no was mentioned. It was not a component of the organized demand. The subcommittee set out rural renewal hearings before a Senate Sub- to build a constituency. In addition to hold- committee on Small Business, held on May 23 ing hearings in various parts of the country, and June 27, 1968, nor was there any specific in which fire was cited as a principal problem mention of fire in the report of the President's from time to time,41 the subcommittee pub- Task Force on Rural Development, A New lished papers on rural development. One of Life for the Country, issued in March 1970. these dealt with fire protection, along with The report did deal with a better living en- other topics. John A. Baker's paper, "What vironment. is Rural Development?," recommended ex- Subsequent Presidential messages and pansion of the Forest Service's civil defense reports paid little attention to the subject. responsibility to include aid for rural com- The Second Annual Report on Government munities in establishing and operating ade- Services to Rural America made no specific mention of fire needs. The third report men- period in southern California, 1,260 fires tioned the disparities among rural communi- burned more than 600,000 acres, killed 14 ties in regard to fire protection, but did not people, destroyed more than 900 houses, and include a policy recommendation on it. Much left the area vunerable to erosion, floods, and of President Nixon's attention focused on mudslides. That same year a fire in Laguna rural credit and rural revenue sharing. Both Hills in San Diego County, CA, burned were included in his Rural Development 225,000 acres and caused more than $100 mil- Message of March 10, 1971, although fire was lion in damages to buildings, crops, utilities, not mentioned.45 bridges, and other fa~ilities.~"he Secretary Although aid for rural fire services was in- of Agriculture stressed the high losses in his cluded in The Rural Development Act, it is 1970 report as he emphasized the need for not an important part of that legislation; additional protection. He indicated that in fact, it appears something of a misfit in some 520.5 million acres of the 566.2 million the law, which deals primarily with agricul- acres needing protection were then under the tural credit. The importance of the rural Department's forest fire protection pro- development stream of federal policy is not gram~.~~ that it developed a demand for fire protec- The concern for safety engendered by the tion, although it did to a limited extent, but consumer protection movement, reaching its that the legislation came to fruition at the apex at this time, also spilled over into con- same time that other forces were pushing for cern for fire safety. Concurrently the work of 93 a rural fire program. the National Commission on Fire Prevention and Control stimulated interest in the prob- THE ENVIRONMENT FOR ACTION lem, although the work of the Commission was not a major force in the rural program. In analyzing the political environment that This also was an era when the move for fed- existed when the Rural Community Fire eral assistance to local communities was at Protection Program was enacted in 1972, it its height. Congress had in 1965 enacted a is difficult to perceive why it was much more total of 109 pieces of grants-in-aid legislation favorable at this particular time than at any in one session of Congre~s;~~consequently, other. Public opinion polls showed no special the resistance to federal action was lowered. concern about fire protection, even in rural The pragmatic, problem-solving approach areas. Fire was mentioned as one among adopted by the Congress easily was extended many problems in the rural development to rural fire protection. Many members of hearings in 1971 and 1972, but it did not Congress were on the lookout for new pro- emerge as a major issue. Considerably more grams to sponsor. attention was given to the availability of credit, water and sewerage facilities, emer- PRELIMINARY MOVES gency health services, and housing. Although the President had mentioned fire protection TOWARD ACTION a time or so, his guiding philosophy was that The push for rural fire protection legisla- the federal government should attack rural tion came primarily from the Forest Service problems with a special revenue sharing pro- and the state foresters, who worked with gram that would leave discretion with state rural community fire departments and were and local governments in determining which in a position to appreciate their needs. Sena- were the most pressing needs. tors Humphrey and Dole led the move in the Several things happened to bring attention Senate, where the program was added to The to fire problems nonetheless-at least among Rural Development Act, and Senator the more "attentive public." In 1970 and Mathias also promoted federal assistance. again in 1971, forest fire losses were at one of the highest levels in recent years. In na- Forest Service Concerns tional forests alone fire losses amounted to more than $700 million. During a one-month As the federal agency responsible for the cooperative fire programs, the Forest Service aid. "It was a constituent request."52 was in a good position to perceive the needs Nevertheless the state foresters "were not in- in rural areas. In preparation of the National strumental in getting the program into The Fire Coordination Study in 1966, the Service Rural Development Act" and "did not know had examined fire mutual aid arrangements at the time how it came to be included," in California, Oregon, Michigan, Massachu- Winkworth said.53 They are credited by setts, and Washington, DC. It had an op- observers at the time with being the most portunity to observe the lack of capacity of active group in support of expanding the fed- many fire units to deal with major fires and eral role. The fire services made some efforts to consider the problems of many areas in behalf of assistance, but their action came having no organized fire protection at all. It after the move for the program was already appeared that federal assistance would be underway. required to enable such areas to meet their needs. Interest in aiding rural areas evolved Moves In The Congress over the years following this study.49 In- ternally and in collaboration with state The nationwide hearings used by Hum- foresters, the Forest Service promoted an phrey's Rural Development Subcommittee to increased federal role and it helped draft build a constituency for rural development legislation to expand national as~istance.~~ increased recognition of the fire problem and 9 4 provided an opportunity for state foresters The Role Of The State Foresters and others to promote their aims of additional federal aid. Although there was no ground As the connecting link between the Forest swell of support for action in this area, mem- Service and rural fire departments in the bers of the House and Senate were the targets federal assistance programs already under- of pressure by state foresters and others to way, state foresters became the strongest take some action on the problem. This is not advocates for expansion of federal aid. They to say that the major interest in rural fire saw a need for improvement of the small rural protection was the result of these hearings. fire departments that cooperated with the It had grown over the years in recognition of Forest Service in its fire protection work. In forest preservation and defense needs ap- the Rocky Mountain states, these organiza- parent to those active in forest management tions often were the initial attack units when and civil defense. The rural development fires broke out. Most of the departments were hearings simply provided an opportunity strictly volunteer, not funded by govern- and an occasion for action. mental units. According to Ralph Wink- Senators Dole, Humphrey, Mathias, and worth, immediate past president of the Na- Montoya each introduced legislation that tional Association of State Foresters, who would provide for an increased federal role. was a member of its legislative committee at Dole's bill, S. 69, introduced on January 25, the time the rural program was under con- 1971, called for a three-year pilot program sideration, the state foresters "made an effort of financial assistance for fire prevention to get them on their feet by pushing legisla- systems in nonmetropolitan areas with popu- tion that might provide equipment and radio lations of less than 5,000. Humphrey's "Rural facilities." The state foresters had provided Community Fire Protection Act," S. 3278, training for a long time, but the rural depart- submitted the next year, would have pro- ments needed eq~ipment.~'Consequently vided financial and technical assistance for the foresters pushed for an expansion of the communities with populations up to 2,500. federal assistance programs operated through The funds could be used for organizing, train- the Forest Service to provide help to local ing, and equipping local forces to deal with fire departments in small communities. Ac- wildfires. The Mathias bill, S. 3477, one of cording to Bill Taggart of Sen. Dole's staff, six fire safety bills he introduced at the same Harold Gallagher, state forester in Kansas, time, would have made federal funds avail- asked Dole to sponsor legislation providing able for equipment. The Montoya proposal, S. 963-also introduced in the House by The Sikes bill was opposed by the Nixon Flynt, a major advocate of fire protection Administration, and consequently by the legislation-would have established a cooper- Department of Agriculture, because its cate- ative system to protect woodlands, orchards, gorical grant financial arrangement was in- rangeland, pastures, crops, and farmsteads in consistent with the President's program of rural areas with the federal government bear- special revenue sharing for rural and urban ing 75% of the cost. community development. (The initial special In addition to the Flynt bill, other mea- revenue sharing would have combined the sures in the House included H.R. 537, in- funding of a number of federal programs in troduced by Broyhill of North Carolina in operation and increased funding for rural 1972. It proposed to amend The Farmer's development by $259 million.Y5 Neverthe- Home Administration Act of 1961 to autho- less it passed the Congress and became law on rize loans to rural community centers for May 5, 1972,56 adding another increment to fire facilities in rural areas. Another related the chain of legislation leading to the Rural bill, introduced by Sikes of Florida in 1971, Community Fire Protection Program, and was maneuvered successfully through Con- leaving small towns and nonforested areas as gress three months ahead of The Rural De- almost the only areas excluded from the velopment Act. cooperative federal-state program.

Sikes' Cooperative Forestry Bill Passes THE ROUTE THROUGH CONGRESS In April 1972, Congress passed H.R. 8817, Extensive hearings on rural development introduced by Rep. Sikes. This legislation were held during 1971 and 1972 by the House doubled the authorization for cooperative Committee on Agriculture as well as by its forest fire prevention under The Clarke-Mc- counterpart in the Senate. No particular Nary Act and amended The Cooperative piece of legislation was involved. The aim was Forestry Management Act to extend federal to determine what people in rural areas per- management and protective assistance to ceived as their problems and what solutions urban communities and open spaces as well they would propose. According to the House as to all wood processors (rather than only to Committee Report, few solutions were ad- processors of primary products). The com- ~anced.~~No members of the fire service mittee report stated: organizations testified at the hearings and The federal government has coopera- although rural fire needs were referred to tive agreements with all 50 states for from time to time, they received no special fighting forest fires. The cost of fire- emphasis. Nevertheless it was on the back of fighting activities on state and private The Rural Development Act of 1972 that the forest lands has been borne for the most Rural Community Fire Program rode to en- part by the states, with the federal gov- actment. ernment providing little more than On September 23 and 29, 1971, Rep. W.R. token assistance. Although authorized Poague (D-TX), chairman of the House Com- to pay up to 50% of the costs, the fed- mittee on Agriculture, and others intro- eral government in fiscal year 1970 duced H.R. 10867, "The Rural Development actually paid only 14.5%. . . . If the Act," and an identical bill, H.R. 10973, citizens of the United States are to respectively. A committee print on H.R. have the timber that will be needed in 10867 was considered and on February 3, the years ahead, it will be necessary 1972, Poague and 22 Committee members for the federal government to give more introduced a clean bill (H.R. 12931) that was cooperation to the states to see that the reported favorably to the House on February forests (both public and private) are 9. The committee rollcall vote was 32-4 in protected from fires, that young trees favor of the bill.58 are planted, and that forests are A minority view was submitted by Repre- tended and nurtured.j4 sentatives Page Belcher (R-OK), Charles M. Teague (R-CA), and George M. Goodling present at the time. Following the action by (R-PA). The three Republicans declared: Bellmon, John A. Baker, consultant to the committee, noted that the level of federal H.R. 12931 proposes to start a num- assistance for the Rural Community Fire ber of new federal grant programs at Protection Program had not been determined. a time when the federal government is He reported that Dole's bill provided that in no position to grant anything but a such assistance would not exceed 50% while share of a $39 billion deficit.59 Humphrey's measure set a limit of 80%. Fol- lowing further discussion, Sen. Jack Miller It should be kept in mind that the proposal (R-IA) moved the 50% limitation and it was for the Rural Community Fire Protection adopted. Of those present only Sen. Chiles Program was not in the legislation at this (D-FL) voted "nay." The committee also time. voted to authorize $5 million for each of the While H.R. 12931 as reported did not con- first three years of the program.'j2 At least tain the rural fire protection provision later one committee staff member credits Baker enacted, it did include a section authorizing with getting Title IV included in the act.'j3 the Secretary of Agriculture to share the "The Rural Development Act" was re- cost of water storage for fire protection up to ported favorably by the committee and passed 50% of the cost. The Administration had op- the Senate on April 20 by a voice vote. Dur- 96 posed this provision before the committee. Its ing consideration on the floor, Byrd (D-WV) statement to the committee raised the fed- offered an amendment to add $2 million in eral role issue: annual appropriations for the fire program The Administration opposes the for assistance in areas where per capita in- amendment which would authorize as- come was below the national average for sistance in developing water storage rural areas. The Senate adopted the amend- and other facilities for improved rural ment by voice vote.'j4 Little opposition was fire protection. This is a local responsi- expressed to the amendment and discussion of bility which can best be handled at the it constituted the major attention given to local level and federal cost sharing the fire program during the Senate debate. assistance is not justified.'jO The Senate passed an amended version of S. 3462 on April 20 by voice vote. After extensive discussion, none of which When the House bill reached the Senate, emphasized fire protection, the House passed that body struck all after the enacting clause the rural development proposal on February and substituted the provisions of S. 3462. 16, 1972. It included the section to which the A conference was held on the House bill. Administration objected. On provisions relating to fire protection, the The Senate Agriculture and Forestry Com- conferees: mittee drafted and reported its own version of "The Rural Development Act," S. 3462. The provision relating to the Rural Com- 1)adopted the House version of an amend- munity Fire Protection Program was added ment to section 306 of The Farmers during committee deliberation. At the same Home Administration Act to authorize time it was considering the rural develop- loans for "essential community facili- ment bill, the committee had before it Dole's ties," stipulating that "essential com- S. 69 and Humphrey's S. 3278 providing for munity facilities" means that assis- the fire program. The committee minutes tance would be available to nonprofit, show that when the committee was con- public, and quasi-public agencies and sidering S. 3462, Sen. Bellmon suggested that that facilities would include, but not provision be made for "a cooperative program necessarily be limited to, such items as for control of fires in rural areas," and that community centers, firehouses, in- after some discussion, the suggestion was ap- dustrial parks, and fire and rescue proved.'jl Neither Dole nor Humphrey was equipment, including ambulances; 2)defined rural areas to include towns of 0.66 The fire protection provisions were men- 10,000; and tioned several times, but only in the context 3)adopted the Senate provision for rural of what the act included. They provoked no community fire protection with modifi- debate. cations to conform to the definition of President Nixon signed the bill into law on rural areas as including towns of 10,000 August 30, 1972, saying that he approved of rather than the 5,500 in the Senate most of the provisions, but regretted that it version, raised the annual authoriza- did not include his rural revenue sharing tion to $7 million, and deleted the program. He said: Byrd amendment for additional funds The most disconcerting feature of for low income areas.65 this act is that it does not include one The conference substitute authorized the of my most important proposals for appropriation of $7 million for each of the rural development, the substitution of fiscal years 1973-75, to enable the U.S. Sec- the special revenue sharing for cate- retary of Agriculture to provide financial, gorical grants and, instead, creates a technical, and other assistance through ap- number of new categorical grant pro- propriate state officials to local public and gram~.~~ private nonprofit organizations for coopera- He had not previously taken a position on tive efforts in organizing, training, and equip- rural fire protection and at the signing he 97 ping local forces for wildfire prevention, sup- made no specific reference to the program. pression, and control in rural areas and rural communities of 10,000 or less outside of THE PROGRAM AS ENACTED standard metropolitan statistical areas. Fis- cal assistance could not exceed 50% of bud- The Rural Community Fire Protection geted or actual expenditure, whichever was Program is set out in Title IV of The Rural less. The conference report stated that the Development Act of 1972 (P.L. 92-419). Justi- conferees expected the Secretary, prior to fication for it is based on community develop- initiating this pilot program, to designate ment needs rather than on forestry protec- areas of the United States which are par- tion programs. The following reasons for its ticularly vulnerable to the hazards of wild- enactment are included in the law: fires. In addition they anticipated that spe- In order to shield human and na- cial attention would be given to those areas tural resources, financial investments, and communities having inadequate or non- and environmental quality from losses existent fire protection facilities. due to wildfires in unprotected or The House adopted the conference sub- poorly protected rural areas there is a stitute by a lopsided vote of 340-36 on July need to strengthen and synergize fed- 27. Republicans were divided 136-28 and eral, state, and local efforts to estab- Democrats 204-8. No southern Democrats lish an adequate protection capability voted in opposition to the measure. Since wherever the lives and property of the major portions of the proposal had no Americans are endangered by wildfire bearing on fire protection, the vote can hardly in rural communities and areas. The be considered an expression of sentiment on Congress hereby finds that inadequate the issue except that much of the opposition fire protection and the resultant threat to the measure involved opposition to addi- of substantial losses of life and property tional federal grant-in-aid programs. is a significant deterrent to the invest- Senate support for the conference report ment of the labor and capital needed was even more overwhelming. After a half- to help revitalize rural America, and hour of praising the provisions of The Rural that well organized, equipped, and Development Act, during which no opposition trained fire fighting forces are needed was expressed, the Senate adopted the con- in many rural areas to encourage and ference report on August 17 by a vote of 73- safeguard public and private investments in the improvement and develop- Administration's request for, and the Con- ment of areas of rural America where gress's appropriation of, a total of $3.5 mil- organized protection against losses lion for FY 1975,71 exactly half of the au- from wildfire is lacking or inadequate. thorized amount. Funding has remained at the same level ever since, although the Carter The legislation then authorized financial, technical, and other assistance to states; pro- Administration requested no funds for FY 1980.72 vided for a 50% match; required a report in two years on the contribution of the program; The Secretary of Agriculture delegated administrative authority for the fire program and authorized $7 million in appropriations for each of the program's three years. to the chief of the Forest Service. With the The Rural Development Act contains two assistance of an ad hoc committee of state foresters from the National Association of other provisions relating to rural fire protec- State Foresters, the Forest Service drafted tion. Title I provides loans for "essential guidelines for allocation of funds under the community facilities including necessary re- They are distributed among the states lated equipment" that can be used by local and territories by the following formula:74 fire departments, and Title 111 authorizes technical and other assistance, including a 50% of the annual appropriation is based share of the costs up to 50%, for "the storage upon crop land acreage as listed in the of water in reservoirs, farm ponds, or other Conservation Needs Inventory for 1967 98 impondments, together with necessary water (CN1);75 withdrawal appurtenances, for rural fire 20% on the basis of CNI acreage for other protection.. . ." (The 50% share was in- non-federal lands not protected under creased to 75% by The Agricultural Credit federal programs; and Act of 1978.P 30% on rural populations according to IMPLEMENTATION the Census in 1976 including the populations of towns and communities under The road to implementation for the rural 10,000 inhabitants. fire protection program was a rocky one as All 50 states participate in the program, a fac- far as finances were concerned. The statutory tor that strengthens it politically. The dis- authorization nearly expired before the pro- tribution of funds is reflected in Figure 7. gram received any funds. In 1973 the Ad- The actual administration of the fire pro- ministration announced its intention to re- gram is largely a state responsibility. State quest no appropriation for it and no request foresters accept applications from local gov- was included in the 1974 budget.69 The fund- ernments and nonprofit organizations in ing difficulties troubled several groups and their respective states. State forestry organi- their representatives testified before the zations then review them and approve pro- Senate Rural Development Subcommittee in jects to be funded. In addition the state units June 1973 in support of money for the pro- provide technical assistance to local units in gram. Organizations included were the Coali- organizing, training, and the selection of tion for Rural Development, the National equipment. The U.S. Forest Service concerns Association of Conservation Districts, the itself with program guidance, funding coor- National Association of State Foresters, dination, and audit, and offers technical along with a representative of the Minnesota assistance, including training and the de- State Planning Office.70 Subsequently the velopment of equipment. adoption of Sen. Dole's amendment to The The states handle the grant money in dif- Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act ferent ways, sometimes passing through to (P.L. 93-86) reauthorized funds for the localities all except the 10% used for adminis- program. It changed the authorization from tration, sometimes retaining part or all of it specific years to three consecutive years from at the state level to be spent there for local the time of initial funding. benefit.76 In Maryland, for example, the These activities may have influenced the state matches the federal funds used for train- Figure 7

RURAL COMMUNITY FIRE PROTECTION: FUND ALLOCATIONS BY STATE, TOTAL DOLLARS RECEIVED, FY 1975,1976, and T.Q."

Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware Florida Georgia Guam Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Virgin Islands Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming 1 I 1 1 1 0 100 200 300 400 500 600 'Transition Quarter thousands of dollars SOURCE: U.S. Department of Agricdlture. Forest Service. Rural Community Fire Protection. Program Aid 1196. Washington, DC. October 1977. p. 8. ing and gives them to the state fire academy funding requested for FY 1975 and 1976 and for training rural fiile fighters. In Kansas, on the transition quarter from July 1976 through the other hand, the'state matches its portion September 1976, when the dates of the fiscal for the state forester to buy equipment and year were changed. Financial assistance to distribute to rural fire departments. Other state forestry agencies ranged from $14,000 variations exist. Funds sometimes go to to $185,000 with the average grant being municipalities, counties, special districts, $65,000. Amounts involved in state agree- townships, or to private nonprofit groups. ments with communities were between $400 The ultimate responsibility for allocating the and $28,000, with the average at $2,000. A funds once they come to the state-for deter- total of 2,868 agreements between foresters mining who benefits from this federal pro- and communities were signed in 1977.77 gram-rests with the state foresters as long as Most of the successful applications re- they comply with federal requirements. quested funds for equipment. With them the In FY 1975, the first year of funding, 5,684 local fire departments acquired excess mili- applications were received requesting tary property, fire apparatus, self-contained $38,761,672. Those for subsequent years de- breathing units and protective clothing for clined somewhat, but they always have ex- fire fighters, and communications equipment. ceeded the funds available. Figure 8 reflects Rolling stock (trucks and trailers) accounted the number of applications received and total for $843,424 in FY 1975 and $476,172 in FY

Figure 8

RURAL COMMUNITY FIRE PROTECTION: NUMBER OF APPLICATIONS RECEIVED AND TOTAL FUNDING REQUESTED

iOUSANDS OF APPLICATIONS MILLIONS OF DOLLA 711

TOTAL FUNDING REQUESTED BY RURAL COMMUNITIES

APPLICATIONS

1975 1976 TO TOTAL FISCAL YEAR "Transition Quarter

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Agriculture. Forest Service, Rural Community Fire Protection. Program Aid 1196, Washington, DC. October 1977. 0. 9. 1976. During the same years $1.9 and $1.2 any Forest Service appropriation available for million, respectively, went for protective similar kinds of work. Apparently this would clothing, communications, and other items. permit rural community fire protection funds The Forest Service reports that the program to be used in this manner. This seems to be established 120 new rural fire departments, a forerunner of 1978 legislation consolidating brought others up to standard, and trained fire protection programs. over 28,000 fire fighting personnel in basic and advanced fire suppression techniques by The Cooperative Forestry Assistance mid-1977. Moreover in cooperation with the Act Of 197882 U. S. General Services Administration, more than 1,000 excess military trucks and tankers In 1978 Congress repealed Title IV of The were converted to fire fighting apparatus, Rural Development Act, Sections 1, 2, 3, loaned to rural fire departments through the and 4 of The Clarke-McNary Act, and cer- state forestry organization^.^^ tain other legislation, and consolidated fire protection and some other forestry activities SUBSEQUENT into one program. Section 7 of the legislation LEGISLATIVE CHANGES relates specifically to rural fire prevention and control. The legislation makes federal The fire program was not funded before assistance to local fire units permanent and efforts were underway to expand it. In 1973 expands the federal role. 101 Sen. Walter D. Huddleston (D-KY) intro- In enacting the law, Congress found that: duced S. 1785 to amend Title IV of The Rural Significant accomplishments have Development Act of 1972 to provide assis- been made by the Secretary and cooper- tance for volunteer fire departments in rural ating states in the prevention and con- towns, villages, or unincorporated areas with trol of fires on forest lands and on non- populations between 200 and 2,000. Funds up forested watersheds for more than 50 to 50% of the cost would be available for years. . . that progress is being made equipment and training. The proposal later by the Secretary and cooperating states was added in committee to S. 118, which and rural communities in the protec- became The Agriculture and Consumer Pro- tion of human lives, agricultural crops tection Act of 1973, although the training and livestock, property and other im- section did not survive the legislative pro- provements, and natural resources from ce~s.~~Since the Huddleston provision is fires in rural areas.. . [and] the ef- regarded as duplicative of Title IV, it never fective cooperative relationships be- has been funded.80 tween the Secretary and the states The Agriculture and Consumer Protection regarding fire prevention and control Act was broadened the coverage of Title IV on rural lands and in rural communi- of The Rural Development Act by substi- ties should be contained and im- tuting "fires" for "wildfires" wherever it approved. peared. Thus cooperative programs for train- . . . ing and equipment are not limited to those The legislation authorizes cooperation with for "wildfires." This made the program gen- state foresters in developing systems of forest eral in scope. fire prevention and control in rural areas. It Another piece of legislation affected the provides for technical assistance to them and program. Legislation passed in December through them to other agencies and indivi- 197581 authorized the Secretary of Agricul- duals for fire protection on nonfederal lands. ture to enter into cooperative agreements with Cooperative efforts to organize, train, and public or private agencies, organizations, equip local fire fighting forces in rural areas institutions, or persons for performance of are to be supported with financial, technical, forestry protection activities. These include and other aid. The statute also encourages fire protection, among other functions. To do the use of excess federal personal property by this the Secretary may advance funds from state and local fire units that receive federal assistance. The legislation also established before-that of extending financial assis- in the U.S. Treasury a special rural fire dis- tance. Perhaps more important in terms of aster fund to be immediately available to and possible expansion of federal activity are the used by the Secretary to supplement any federal actions sanctioned in regard to im- other money available to carry out Section 7 proving state capability in forest protection with respect to rural fire emergencies. State and management and the authorization for and local resources are to be used before the training of state forestry personnel. This can disaster fund money is spent. occur whenever the Secretary deems it neces- Provisions for improving state management sary to ensure that the programs are respon- capabilities are contained in the act as well. sive to special problems, unique situations, Federal assistance is authorized for the de- and changing conditions. The Secretary ap- velopment of stronger and more efficient state pears to be given a free hand to determine organizations that manage and protect non- when the need exists. federal forest lands. Such aid includes organization management, program planning and INCREMENTALISM AT ITS BEST: management, budget and fiscal accounting AN ANALYSIS OF THE EVOLUTION services, personnel training and management, OF THE RURAL COMMUNITY information services, and recordkeeping. It FIRE PROTECTION PROGRAM must be requested by state officials. 102 Other sections of the act that do not deal There probably is no better example of directly with fire protection but which may incrementalism in public policy development, affect it include financial and technical as- often discussed by political ~cientists,~Qhan sistance for assembly, analysis, display, and the evolution of the Rural Community Fire reporting of state forest resources data, for Protection Program. With one foot placed . training of state forest resources planners, firmly before the other, the federal govern- and for participating in forestry resource ment moved from a policy of reserving public planning at the state and federal levels. lands for timber, conservation, and recreation Moreover to ensure the dissemination of in- purposes to assisting rural communities in novative techniques, training of state forestry the development of fire protection capabili- personnel is authorized whenever it is neces- ties. Little by little the government expanded sary to ensure that the programs authorized its activities and its aid until rural communi- by the act are responsive to special problems, ties were about the only areas left without unique situations, and changing conditions. federal help. One more step was not difficult. Under The Cooperative Forestry Assistance Because the program evolved so gradually, Act, the Rural Community Fire Protection it met with little resistance after the princi- Program, originally a three-year pilot pro- ple of cooperative forestry had been estab- gram, acquired permanent status. The legis- lished by The Weeks Act in 1911. Both prior lation combined it with part of Clarke- and subsequent to that legislation, national McNary and other cooperative forestry efforts to reserve federal lands for public pur- programs. (It still is administered separately.) poses encountered considerable opposition. Moreover the authorization limit of $7 million But measures to protect the forests from fire, was removed, although the significance of this both economically and emotionally difficult is questionable at the present time since past to criticize, did not share this fate. Even those appropriations have never reached that fig- who opposed a broader role for the federal ure, remaining constant at $3.5 million. government found it difficult-or perhaps not In addition to making the rural fire pro- worth their while for such a small program- gram permanent, the legislation provides op- to argue against federal-state cooperation. portunities for expansion of the federal role. Since the nation's forested land was inter- As a matter of fact it requires it. Assuming mingled as to ownership, it was difficult to funding for the Rural Fire Disaster Fund. protect federal land without reducing fire the Secretary of Agriculture takes on an hazards and suppressing fires in state and emergency assistance function not exercised private forests. Environmental Factors could seem a natural step when a need became evident. Numerous proposals dealing The legislation establishing the program with one or more facets of fire prevention and was adopted in 1972 at a time when, on control already had been introduced. Sec- balance, the atmosphere was favorable to- ondly, Congress included a heavy component ward fire protection legislation. The two of liberal members whose philosophies favored preceding years had witnessed heavy fire the use of government to solve whatever prob- losses in rural areas and the public had an lems arose. They were not bothered by ques- opportunity to see some of this on television. tions of which level in the federal system In 1968, Congress had adopted The Fire Re- should bear the responsibility or whether the search and Safety Act, creating the Na- problem could be solved more effectively on tional Commission on Fire Prevention and another level. They were willing to use the Control. During 1971 and 1972 the National resources of the federal Treasury and the Commission was holding hearings on fire expertise of the federal bureaucracy to at- problems, including those in rural areas, and tempt solutions to whatever problems arose. some of the interest reflected there seeped Many of them as a matter of fact sought out into public and official understanding of programs that they might sponsor. Further- rural fire protection needs. More importantly more, John A. Baker, author of a paper on after a long bout with urban problems, na- the fire protection needs of rural areas, was tional attention was focused on rural areas. positioned as a consultant to the Senate com- 10 The Congressional hearings held throughout mittee considering rural development legisla- the country, the work of the President's Task tion-a location giving him an opportunity Force on Rural Development, and the Presi- to point out rural fire protection inadequa- dent's rural development message and pro- cies. gram all brought the glare of publicity to The Presidency, on the other hand, was not rural needs, although not necessarily to fire in such a state of readiness. Richard Nixon's protection. philosophy of slowing government growth, Environmental constraints were few. A holding down costs, and reversing the trend national government divided on a partisan toward Washington constituted a definite basis with the Democrats controlling Con- handicap for advocates of expansion. His gress and a Republican in the White House determination to institute special rural reve- made agreements on policy more difficult, nue sharing served to brake the adoption of although no partisan conflict developed in additional categorical grant programs. On regard to this issue. The fiscal constraints the other hand he did not oppose the rural fire imposed by growing inflation and a rising program and he did give it a boost by pointing resistance to taxes probably were more signi- up rural fire deficiencies in the message ac- ficant. As far as demands for action were companying the first Report on Government concerned, the public was apathetic, and no Services to Rural America. evidence exists of widespread calls for rural The Forest Service, destined to administer fire protection to be placed on the public the program, had long recognized the prob- agenda. lems inherent in rural fire protection. Its professionals drafted legislation extending the Institutional Readiness cooperative fire protection programs to rural areas and appeared before the National Com- "Institutional readiness''-that is, the mission on Fire Prevention and Control to willingness of the institutions in society that emphasize the problems. In addition they participate in the policymaking process to had a successful record of implementation undertake new programs-was mixed. The behind them. The reputation of the Forest Congress was in a receptive mood. In the Service for competency and professionalism first place the legitimacy of federal assistance was one of the strongest assets enjoyed by for forest fire prevention'and suppression had advocates of the rural community program. long been established. Extending it further Its work is regarded highly by other fire pro- fessionalse4 as well as others knowledgeable are relatively few compared to participants in fire activities. Richard E. Bland, chairman in many other areas of public policy, includ- of the National Commission, said: ing the establishment of the U.S. Fire Ad- ministration. The leading actors include the The forestry program was so strong Forest Service, the National Association of and working so well that the Commis- State Foresters, the Civil Defense agency, sion made only passing reference to it. Presidents Kennedy and Nixon, Harold It had great potential. We would have Gallagher, John A. Baker, Senators Bellmon, used it as a model if we could. Out of Copeland, Dole, Humphrey, Mathias, and Forest Service efforts came a way to Montoya, and Representatives Broyhill (NC), handle forest fire problems.85 Flynt, and Sikes. There was no question of readiness for the The participants played a variety of roles, National Association of State Foresters, the some of them appearing in more than one. principal interest group supporting rural Roles included that of "precipitator," "ini- community fire protection. Its members were tiator," "sustainer," "impresarios," "pro- organized to get the program introduced in moters" and "supporters," and most policy the Congress and that they did. Little addi- activities would have "constrainers" and tional action on their part was necessary to perhaps "legitimizers" as well, but there were assure adoption. Fire service organizations no "constrainers" of any note involved in 104 appeared to be taken somewhat by surprise by the adoption period, although Presidents the developments and mustered support late Nixon, Ford, and Carter and OMB could be in the process. considered constrainers in the implementation period. "Legitimizers" operated at an Precipitation Factors earlier time. "Precipitators" were those who stimulated Events occasionally precipitated greater immediate action. Franklin B. Hough, first federal involvement in local fire protection- special agent for forestry, probably was the particularly World War I1 and the Cuban first, pushing as he did for a federal role in Missile Crisis of 1962. In both instances con- forest preservation. Sen. Copeland was an- cern for suppression of fires caused by nuclear other early one, introducing the resolution attacks led to new or more substantial fed- responsible for the initiation of the National eral efforts to improve the capability of local Plan for American Forestry, a document fire fighting forces. Except for the Great helping create an environment favorable to Idaho Fire of 1910, especially disastrous fires fire protection. President Kennedy belongs in added only incrementally to the movement, this category because of his executive order and at the time the program was established, making the Department of Agriculture no particular event occurred to create a de- responsible for protecting rural areas from mand for action. fire in the event of nuclear attack. This "Empire building" on the part of the moved the Forest Service one step forward agency may have been a factor in the efforts in the move toward rural community fire of the Forest Service to broaden its activities, protection. OCD also can be classed with this and some believe the Service engaged in "a group for promoting training of local fire power grab." Equally plausible is the theory forces and for stimulating the Fire Coordina- that the Service recognized a need and moved tion Study. Sen. Humphrey precipitated to fill it. Their long cooperative relationship action by the hearings on rural development with the state foresters provided an oppor- held by his Subcommittee on Rural Develop- tunity for both parties to influence each ment. John A. Baker, whose activities re- other. portedly got the fire program into The Rural Actors' Roles Development Act, and Sen. Bellmon, who introduced the motion in the Senate com- The actors involved in the adoption of the mittee to include the program, played pre- Rural Community Fire Protection Program cipitating roles as well. The "initiators," who took some official mittee consideration. Humphrey, neverthe- action to expand federal assistance, were less, was busy elsewhere and attended few of numerous. Copeland, with his resolution, the committee markup sessions, although he was one. The Forest Service, which drafted proposed a provision similar to the successful legislation and generally promoted the adop- Dole Amendment. tion of the program, was another. Senators Baker, as committee consultant attending Dole, Humphrey, Mathias, and Montoya, committee sessions, was the "strategic per- and Representatives Flynt, Broyhill, and son" in the term Stephen K. Bailey used Sikes were "initiators" also, because all took when he wrote of the birth of a public policy positive action to introduce fire legislation. being "the result of the impact of seminal Harold Gallagher, Kansas State forester, ideas on strategic persons and propitious should be added to the group for his action times."87 His "strategic" positioning en- in interesting Dole in introducing the success- abled him to promote ideas at the point in ful proposal. Dole was particularly important the legislative process where they would be for his actions to get the program funds re- the most effective. authorized during the implementation period. Support had a narrow base. Originally its Those who kept interest in rural fire pro- locus was in the Forest Service and the state tection alive, the "sustainers," were the foresters. Eventually "supporters" also in- Forest Service and the state foresters. Over cluded the Coalition for Rural Development, the years through their commendable per- the National Association of Conservation 105 formance in providing fire services as well as Districts, the Minnesota State Planning Of- by constant promotion of increased coverage fice, and the fire services. There was little for federal aid, they kept at least some at- opportunity for action by those favorable to tention focused on the issue. They bear the the program at the time it was up for deci- primary responsibility for the final adoption sion since it was placed in the Senate bill of this program. without warning. Their assistance was OCD performed an "impresario" role, that needed during implementation. is, it managed others in order to promote the interests of its own organization. In doing so One More Step it also contributed to the incremental broad- ening of the activities of the federal govern- An examination of the events and factors ment in regard to fire protection. producing the Rural Community Fire Pro- Baker and Humphrey were the "promo- tection Program reinforces the concept of ters" in this policy area. They pushed and incrementalism at its most perfect. From the managed the process so that the legislation turn-of-the-century moves to manage and finally was adopted. Humphrey probably was protect the federal reserve to The Cooperative not managing for this purpose, but his rural Forestry Act of 1978, small changes in fed- development hearings accomplished the pur- eral forestry policy added to the cooperative pose just the same. He in fact created the activities of the Forest Service. First there rural development issue that resulted in what was Cleveland's insistence on proper manage- Roger B. Cobb and later Charles D. Elder ment for the public domain. Then the Sec- might classify as "an act manufactured for retary of the Interior appointed a commission an individual's gain."8Wumphrey's efforts to study the problem. Its recommendation for to build a forum enabling him to remain in an agency to manage the reserves eventually the limelight after his return to the Senate resulted, after a tour through the General resulted in his chairmanship of a Rural De- Land Office, in the designation of the Bureau velopment Subcommittee of the Committee of Forestry as the administrative agency. on Agriculture and Forestry and nationwide Actions by President Theodore Roosevelt hearings on rural development over a two- and Gifford Pinchot culminated in active year period. Almost nothing was said about forestry management. rural fire protection; however, it became a Cooperative forestry began with The Weeks part of the legislation during Senate com- Act of 1911 and was reinforced by The Clarke- McNury Act of 1924 that broadened the scope tiptoe as the measure was appended to the of federal protection by removing the limita- legislation by the Senate committee. The tion confining it to forested watersheds of rural development bill had passed the House navigable streams. The law extended federal previously. Consequently the only House assistance to private forestry and also pro- vote on the measure was when it voted on the vided for cooperative development of a forest adoption of the conference report. The Senate fire prevention and suppression system for committee action bears out J. Leiper Free- each forest region and for the first federal man's assessment that, matching grants-in-aid program. Then came the Civilian Conservation Corps of the 1930s, Senior substantive committee mem- contributing manpower and funds for con- bers on a day-to-day, year-in-year-out servation and fire protection. Another step basis constitute about the most per- forward occurred during the 1950s when co- sistent Congressional elite engaged in operative forestry was extended to soil con- shaping the policies of a bureau. Along servation districts. In the aftermath of World with the committee staff, whom the War 11, Congress provided for the sale of senior members and especially the com- surplus forestry supplies to state and local mittee chairman select and work with, governments and later for the disposition of they can write substantial amounts other surplus personal property by gift or sale of the final versions of policies for a 106 to other governmental units. In 1958 surplus bureau to administerea8 real property belonging to the Forest Service was included. Then as a result of the'cuban The fire program was such an insignificant Missile Crisis in the early 1960s, the Forest portion of The Rural Development Act that Service began to train rural residents and general Congressional and public attention fire units for emergency fire activities. Some- were focused elsewhere. Even if aid for rural what later federal management and protec- community fire protection had come up for tive assistance was extended to urban com- consideration on its own, it is doubtful that it munities and open spaces. From there it was would have met much opposition. The Hud- only a half-step to including rural communi- dleston Amendment, extending aid to volun- ties in the program. teer fire departments, was adopted a year The step Congress took when it added the later. After all the Congress was moving Rural Community Fire Protection Program federal cooperative fire protection just one to the Rural Development Act was done on step more.

FOOTNOTES 51bid., p. 4. 'jBaker. "Wilderness Fire Management," op. cit. 7Nelson,op. cit. 8This section draws heavily on Glen 0.Robinson, The IRural Community Fire Protection, Washington, DC, Forest Service, Baltimore. MD, The Johns Hopkins US. Department of Agriculture, Forest Service. Octo- University Press, for Resources for the Future. Inc.. ber 1977. pp. 3-4. 1975, pp. 1-7, and Harold K. Steen, The U.S. Forest 21bid. Service. A History, Seattle. WA, University of Wash- 3Fred Morrell. A National Plan for American Forestry: ington Press, 1976, Chapter 2. The Report of the Forest Service of the Agricultural gSteen, ibid., p. 26. Department on the Forest Problem of the United 1°26 Stat. 1095, March 3, 1891, Sec. 24. States, 73rd Congress, 1st Sess., Senate Document "Steen, op. cit., p. 26. No. 12, Washington, DC. U.S. Government Printing 12Morrell,op. cit., p. 1203. Office, Vol. 11, 1933, p. 1203. 13Steen, op. cit., p. 32. 4American Association for the Advancement of Science, 14Zbid. Proceedings. . . 22nd Meeting. Held at Portland, ME, 15Baker. "Wilderness Fire Management," op. cit., p. 7. August 1873. Salem: published by the permanent Sec- 1630 Stat. 34-36, 43, 44 (1897), as amended, 16 U.S.C. retary, 1874, pp. 3-4, as cited in Charles A. Nelson, 424 et seq. History of the U.S. Forest Products Laboratory (1910- 17Gifford Pinchot, Breaking New Ground, New York. 1963). The Forest Products Laboratory, Forest Service, Harcourt, Brace, 1947, p. 83, as quoted in Robinson, U.S. Department of Agriculture, in cooperation with op. cit., p. 7. the University of Wisconsin, n.d., pp. 2-3. 1833Stat. Part I, 628 (1905); U.S.C. 472. 1936 Stat. 961-63 (1911);16 U.S.C. 513-21. 53Winkworth,op. cit. =OSteen,op. cit., p. 129. 54Cooperative Forest Programs, House Report 92-492 2'A.B. Hastings, "Federal Financial and Other Direct as quoted in Senate Report 92-592, 92nd Congress, 2nd Aid to States," A National Plan for American Forestry. Sess., Washington, DC, U.S. Government Printing Of- op. cit., p. 1054. fice, 1972, pp. 2-3. 22Zbid. 66Letter from J. Phil Campbell, under secretary of Agri- 2343Stat. 653; U.S.C. 564-566. culture to Herman E. Talmadge, chairman, Committee 24Hastings,op. cit., pp. 1054-55. on Agriculture and Forestry, US. Senate, October 20. 36Zbid.,p. 1056. 1971, in ibid., pp. 6-7. 26TheNational Plan for American Forestry, op. cit. 56P.L.92-288. 2772ndCongress, 1st Sess., March 10, 1932. 67House Report No. 92-835 (to accompany H.R. 12931). 2sTheNational Plan for American Forestry, op. cit., p. 3. 92nd Congress, 2nd Sess., Committee on Agriculture, 29Zbid.,p. 75. Washington, DC, US. Government Printing Office, 30Zbid., p. 1601. February 16, 1972. 31Hastings,op. cit., p. 1074. 58"Rural Development Act of 1972." US. Code. Con- 3250Stat. 188. gressional and Administrative News, 92nd Congress, 33Robinson,op. cit., p. 12. 2nd Sess., 1972. St. Paul, MN, West Publishing Com- 3468Stat. 666; 16 U.S.C. 1001-1007. pany, 1972, II:3165. 3558Stat. 736 (1944);16 U.S.C. 580a. 59Zbid., p. 3174. 36Enacted January 12, 1951, 64 Stat. 1245, 50. U.S.C. 60Zbid.,p. 3159. App. 2251-64. 61U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, 37E.0. 10998, "Assigning Emergency Preparedness Func- "Minutes, Monday, March 13, 1972," Washington, DC, tions to the Secretary of Agriculture," Code of Federal US.Government Printing Office,p. 4. Regulations, 1959-63 Compilation, Washington, DC, 62Zbid.,p. 2. US.Government Printing Office,p. 543. 63Giltmier,op. cit. 38William R. Moore, James W. Jay, and John H. 64CongressionalRecord, April 20, 1972, 118:13837. Dieterick, Defending the United States from Nuclear 65"Conference Report No. 92-1129," U.S. Code, op. cit., 107 Fire: A Resume of the Final Report of the Fire Coordi- pp. 3178-86. nation Study, Washington, DC, US. Department of 66Congressional Record, Vol. 118, August 17, 1972, p. Agriculture, Forest Service, Division of Fire Control, 28820. August 1966, p. 7. 67 Weekly Compilation of Presidential Documents for 391t was published under the title "Needs of the Rural Week of Monday, September 4, 1972, Washington, DC, Fire Service as Automation Reaches the Farm," Fire U.S. Government Printing Office,8:36:1313. Engineering, 123:2, February 1970. pp. 53-56. 68P.L.95-334; 92 Stat. 421; 7 U.S.C. 1926. 40Zbid.,p. 55. 69Zmplementation of the Rural Development Act of "Interview by telephone with James W. Giltmier, staff, 1972, US. Senate Committee on Agriculture and Fores- Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and try, Subcommittee on Rural Development, 93rd Con- Forestry, October 27, 1978. gress, 1st Sess., Washington, DC, US. Government 42Rural Development: 1971-A Year of Listening and Printing Office,June 29, 1973, p. 6. Watching The Development of The Growing Consen- ?OZbid., passim. sus That Something Must Be Done for The People of 71"Implementation Progress Chart. Status Report on The American Countryside, US. Senate Committee on Implementation of the Rural Development Act of Agriculture and Forestry, 92nd Congress, 2nd Sess., 1972," 1975 Revised Guide to Rural Development Act Washington, DC, US. Government Printing Office, of 1972, prepared for the Subcommittee on Rural De- 1972, pp. 60, 92. velopment of the Committee on Agriculture and For- 43P.L.91-974. estry, US.Senate, January 1, 1975, after p. 102. 44Report on Government Services to Rural America: 721980 Budget of the United States, Appendix, Wash- Message from The President of the United States ington, DC, US. Government Printing Office, 1979, Transmitting the First Annual Report on Government p. 160. Services to Rural America Pursuant to the Agricultural 73Rural Community Fire Protection, Program Aid-1196, Act of 1970, 92nd Congress, 1st Sess., House Doc. No. Washington, DC. U.S. Department of Agriculture, 92-55, Washington, DC, US. Government Printing Of- Forest Service, October 1977, p. 8. fice, March 1, 1971, p. 5. 74Letterfrom Junius 0. Baker, Jr., staff specialist, Co- 45Themessage is printed in the 1971 Congressional Quar- operative Fire Protection, Forest Service, US. Depart- terly Almanac, Washington, DC, Congressional Quar- ment of Agriculture, July 19, 1979. terly Service, Inc., 1972, pp. 64-A to 67-A. 75U.S. Department of Agriculture, Basic Statistics-Na- '"merica Burning, op. cit., p. 97. tional Inventory of Soil and Water Conservation Needs, 47The Report of the Secretary of Agriculture, 1970: A 1967, Statistical Bulletin 461. Washington, DC, US. New Direction, Washington. DC, U.S. Department of Government Printing Office,1971. Agriculture, 1970, p. 87. 761nterview by telephone with J.O. Baker, Jr.. staff as- "Glendening and Reeves, op. cit. sistant to Cooperative Fire Protection Staff, Forest 491nterviewby telephone with Willard Tikkala, director, Service, US.Department of Agriculture, July 17. 1979. Cooperative Fire Protection, US. Forest Service, 771978 Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, op. cit., November 7,1978. p. 61. Solbid. 78Zbid.,pp. 8-9. SIInterview by telephone with Ralph Winkworth, North 79Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry. "Mi- Carolina state forester, November 7, 1978. nutes, Wednesday, May 9, 1973," Washington, DC, 521nterview by telephone with Bill Taggart, October 30. US. Government Printing Office, p. 9; P.L. 93-86; 87 1978. Stat. 240 (1973);7 U.S.C. 2651. aoInterview by telephone with Fred Young, Consumer No. 1, Winter, 1979, pp. 1-24, published by John Wiley Facilities Division, U.S. Department of Agriculture, & Sons, for the John Fitzgerald Kennedy School; and October 25, 1978. Aaron Wildavsky, The Politics of the Budgetary Pro- 81P.L.94-148; 89 Stat. 404; 16 U.S.C. 565a1. cess, Boston, MA, Little-Brown and Company, 1964. 82P.L.95-313; 92 Stat. 375; 16 U.S.C. 2101-2111. "'Gratz, op. cit. 83Forexamples, see: David Braybrooke and Charles Lind- 85Bland.op. cit. blom, A Strategy of Decision, New York, NY, The Free 86Participation in American Politics: The Dynamics of Press, 1963, Chapters 3 and 5; Lindblom, The Policy Agenda Building, Boston, MA, Allyn and Bacon. Inc., Making Process, Englewood Cliffs, NJ, Prentice-Hall, 1972, p. 82. 1968, pp. 21-27; J.P. Crecine, Governmental Problem 87CongressMakes a Law, New York. NY. Vintage Books, Solving: A Computer Simulation of Municipal Budget- 1950, p. 38. ing, Chicago, IL, Rand McNally, 1969; Robert Goodin 8aThe Political Process: Executive, Bureau-Legislative and Ilmar Waldner, "Thinking Big, Thinking Small, Committee Relations, New York, NY, Random House, and Not Thinking at All," Public Policy, Vol. 27, 1965, p. 98. Fire, Federalism, And Functional Assignment

espite the long-standing participation of Dthe federal and state governments, fire protection for citizens and their property remains primarily a local function. The country has not reached the stage where it considers the general provision of fire services to residynts an activity that should be undertaken on a national level. Nevertheless, it is apparent that no local monopoly exists. The rural community study brings one face to face with the paradox that exists between examination of the federal participation from a functional viewpoint-concentrating .on which level of government should perform a function-on the one hand, and a developmental analysis that tries to explain how the federal government became involved, on the other. The idea of a great federal government concerning itself with local fire protection in rural areas is ridiculous on its face if one takes the functional point of view; however, examined from a developmental perspective, federal assistance for rural community fire protection seems a natural next step in the development of programs already underway. Federal involvement in rural fire protection did not require any great debates about federalism or any major choices as to whether this was a proper activity for the federal government to undertake. It did not neces- sitate a catastrophic event, a major shift in public opinion, or even extensive interest group activity, although there was some. All that was required was the recognition of a public policy. The establishment of the U.S. problem and an effort to solve it in the most Fire Administration was the more complex reasonable way. Congress again followed the process of the two-the one involving more pragmatic course it so often takes and tried activity and depending to a greater extent on to solve the problem with whatever was at proper timing. Greater controversy sur- hand. rounded its inception, although discussion This pragmatism is shared by the two fire of the proper role of the federal government in programs. While they differed radically in the this activity received short shrift. This might processes of their development-one evolving have been expected at a time when many incrementally in one federal policy stream federal officials were reaching out to solve all and the other developing from a convergence problems, to redistribute public and private of several policies and a variety of influences, goods, and to reduce the risks of living in not the least of which were traumatic events America. In their efforts to achieve their such as the riots of the 1960s-both were goals, they used whatever tools and materials products of a "pragmatic federalismv-the were at hand. At another time, the solution problem-solving approach to determining they found might not have been the same. Giants Or Pygmies? A Look To The Future

111 hat does the future hold for federal pol- W icy in regard to local fire protection? The question is phrased poorly because there now are at least two federal policy streams concerned with local fire protection rather than one. The Rural Community Fire Protec- tion Program continues as part of federal forestry policy, while the U.S. Fire Adminis- tration now occupies a stream of its own, narrow and shallow though it may be. The confusion results from different ways of ap- proaching the activities. If one considers fire protection from the standpoint of functional assignment, it is a single function; however, if it is examined on the basis of its evolution, the distinction between the two policy streams in which the programs evolved is apparent. Consequently their futures are not entwined necessarily: one might grow into a giant while the other's development is stunted. Clearly local fire protection is a national problem if a national problem is defined in terms of nationwide effects and the serious- ness of deaths and injuries and property destruction. Losses of life and property from fire are great. Adequate fire protection, by whatever standards one uses for "adequate," is not provided universally throughout the country. In fact there are many places where there is no fire protection at all. On the other hand, if one defines a national problem as one that cannot be dealt with on a subnational as illustrated by California's Proposition 13, level, then fire protection does not qualify. It augurs better for cutback than for expansion. could be (and is) provided locally for the On the other hand the environment for most part, although there are subfunctions, the growth of the federal role in combatting such as research, that might better be arson is favorable. The incidence of arson is handled nationally. At a time in the nation's on the rise. The NFPA estimates that the history when hard choices must be made in number of building fires that were incendiary regard to what the federal government should or of suspicious origin increased from 24,000 finance, the extent to which fire protection is to 65,000 between 1960-70 and more than perceived as a national rather than a state or doubled again, reaching 144,000 by 1975.2 local problem may have a profound influence Arson is predicted to grow at a rate of 25% on the future of its federal support. annually. It is already a greater cause of Despite the perception of the problem as property loss than robbery or burglar^.^ national or local, the breadth and depth of Arson-for-profit especially is coming under political support for federal fire programs may scrutiny. It is believed to be stimulated by be of greater consequence in the long run. the Federal Riot Reinsurance Program, en- Fire forces, especially volunteer fire fighters, acted after the riots of the 1960s made fire are on the move to expand federal assistance insurance almost impossible to obtain in the in both programs.' inner city, and the Fair Access to Insurance Requirements Plans established by state legislation after federal auth~rization.~ OUTLOOK FOR THE U.S. FIRE Congressional hearings, government re- ADMINISTRATION ports, and well publicized incidents have increased public awareness and concern for the What does the future hold for an organiza- problem. A recent editorial in The Washing- tion puny at birth and suffering from under- ton Post, noting the rising incidence of ar- nourishment and unsettled conditions after- son, declared: wards? Will its paucity of funding and its relocation in the Federal Emergency Pre- All this makes arson an obvious can- paredness Agency (FEMA) stunt its growth? didate for elevation from local difficul- Prognostication is difficult. The USFA ties to the ranks of national problems came into being as a result of a convergence that Congressmen and federal agencies of environmental factors, Congressional en- feel compelled to address.j trepreneurship. federal policy streams, and interest group and bureaucratic actions. The Post opposed treating arson as a national Whether and when that could happen again problem, holding that curbing arson involved is impossible to anticipate. keeping people from setting fires and ensuring that those who do are caught and punished, activities that cannot be performed away Environmental Factors from the local communities where the fires occur. In discussing the LEAA plan for fed- Environmental factors operating at the eral involvement in the function, the editorial present time do not seem conducive to growth pointed up what often happens when a local except in regard to arson activities. Fire problem occurring throughout the country losses appear to be on the decline. New stan- comes to national attention. It said: dards and technological advances (such as smoke detectors) operate to reduce the num- The LEAA plan.. . has all the ele- . ber of deaths, although the problem is still ments of a proper federal attack on severe. Should the federal programs aimed at anything. It calls for interagency co- fire prevention prove effective, the U.S. Fire ordination, multijurisdictional task Administration could be a victim of its own forces, data collection and analysis, success. Furthermore the climate of fiscal training and technical aid for state and restraint prevalent throughout the country, local governments, demonstration projects, conferences and research- New Policy Stream part of which is to "synthesize" available data into "a series of program- Growth of the programs operated by the matic options directed at practioner U.S. Fire Administration may be impeded by audiences." That seems to mean telling a change of federal policy streams. They are communities which anti-arson pro- no longer a part of the science, defense, and grams work. . . . But such "strategies" consumer protection streams significant in have a way of growing-and the ten- their birth. The reorganization wrenched dency toward more and more official them from their original source, cutting them studies, mandates, task forces, and loose to operate in a new fire prevention and special programs is what's worri- control stream. This means that they may some. . . . have to rely on a narrower base of interest group and bureaucratic support, divorced It is quite possible, of course, that any from their backers in science, consumer pro- major growth that occurs will be in LEAA tection, and other policy areas. The exception rather than in the USFA. LEAA already has to this is probably the defense connection, a plan, and as the stronger agency, it may likely to continue to some degree in the new have the political strength to assert leader- emergency agency. ship in any future federal involvement. On the other hand, it was designated recently as a low priority agency by state-oriented interest groups. The two federal agencies recent- The impact of major events on growth can- ly signed an agreement for a coordinated at- not be anticipated. Some, like the Baltimore tack on arson. The USFA will provide the fire and those associated with the riots of the primary assistance for state and local govern- 1960s, could stimulate greater involvement, ments in fire training and fire investigation, especially if they were related to the failure while LEAA will promote improved state and of local fire efforts. Others equally disastrous local criminal investigation and ~rosecution.~ might have little effect. Events obviously have to converge with other factors to produce policy adoptions. Institutional Readiness Funding Problems A factor adverse to growth is that the institutional readiness present when the fire One can anticipate funding will continue bills were enacted no longer exists. Congress to be a problem for the USFA and in a time is more concerned with reducing federal ex- of widespread demands for budget cutting, penditures than with appropriating addi- substantially increased appropriations are tional funds to existing programs or agencies. improbable. If the interests surrounding the Appropriating funds is not as dramatic as agency had had enough political power to creating new programs, and at the present ensure brighter financial prospects, they time, the rewards are likely to be perceived as would have exerted it in the past. In addition going to the budget cutters. a long-established cabinet department, such The President also emphasizes reduced ex- as Commerce, is in a better position to sup- penditures, but, in part, he wants to do this port its components than the new FEMA with in order to undertake new initiatives, such as little in the way of a constituency to back up those for health insurance and an urban de- its requests. Its establishment in the middle velopment bank. These will attract greater of the Three Mile Island nuclear power plant public attention to the accomplishments of problem may enable it to make a stronger case his Administration than would an expansion for an increased budget. It is doubtful, never- of federal fire activity. In addition fire pro- theless, that the fire programs would profit tection still is regarded as a primarily local substantially from this since their emphasis is function. on day-to-day fire problems rather than disasters. The new location augurs for greater legislation providing grants-in-aid for equip- rather than fewer financial difficulties, par- ment for local fire departments, for example. ticularly since USFA must be alert constant- and the Breckridge proposal to give the ly to protect its resources from assumption agency broad investigatory authority could by its parent agency. be revived. The USFA also may be able to shore up its capacity by co-opting other fed- Internal Problems eral programs, such as some of those in education and housing, as well as through in- Administrative problems for the fire agency creased reliance on state and local agencies. could increase with the transfer to FEMA. More important is the rising public and It was separated from the Fire Research governmental concern over arson. Legislation Center, a fellow Commerce component, mak- enacted in 1978 already has broadened the ing coordination of fire research more dif- fire agency's functions in regard to this mat- ficult. It is now in an agency where the em- ter and Sen. John Glenn (R-OH) introduced phasis is on disasters while most of the fire S. 252, the "Anti-Arson Act of 1979," to ex- problems are associated with day-to-day pand the federal role. In a recent interview problems in putting out fires one residence Glenn responded to the statement that "arson at a time. It also could become the center of is primarily a local problem," with the state- a conflict between defense-oriented person- ment that: 114 nel, attuned to thinking of emergencies in Arson has become so epidemic that the guise of nuclear attacks, and others ac- it has become a national problem, no customed to dealing with natural disasters. longer just a local problem. That's been To add to its problems, its new Administra- one of the difficulties. We've con- tor served as acting director of FEMA for a sidered arson a local problem for so short period, thus infringing on the time long that, while at the federal level necessary to improve the fire programs. In addition the U.S. Fire Administration we've taken action on other crimes. no longer has the confidence of the fire ser- arson has had to wait until last.7 vices. The latter believe that they are not Any growth that occurs is likely to be con- getting anything and that the Carter Ad- centrated, at least at first, in activities de- ministration has gone back on its word. They signed to prevent arson. This is an emotional always have been interested especially in the subject. The public already is aware of in- Academy, but the problems with its site, fi- creases in incendiary fires and deliberately nancing, and full operation have dampened set fires. At a time when this concern is on their enthusiasm for it. Nevertheless, they the rise, it is unlikely that the federal role can be counted on to support initiatives to in arson prevention and detection will be strengthen the USFA as long as these do not abandoned. It is more probable that greater compromise local autonomy. responsibilities will be placed on the U.S. Fire Administration (or even some other federal Forces Facilitating Growth agency such as HUD or LEAA), although it does not follow that increased funding will be Despite this bleak picture forces are operat- forthcoming. Interagency grants, as exempli- ing that probably will contribute to further fied by a 1979 LEAA grant to the USFA, may growth. In general government agencies once be the pattern of future financing. established have a tendency to grow, nurtured by their own bureaucracies and the coterie of interests surrounding them. Their OUTLOOK FOR THE RURAL legitimacy has been established. They have COMMUNITY FIRE PROTECTION access to the policymaking process. In the PROGRAM case of USFA, there is already some support in Congress for new fire activities. Hardly a In attempting to assess the future of the session goes by without the introduction of Rural Community Fire Protection Program in an era of fiscal restraint and cutback man- assume responsibility for Forest Service com- agement, the failure of the Carter Adminis- munity fire activities itself, likely will support tration to request any funds in the budget continuation of this program. Thus another for continuation of the program assumes a federal advocate emerges. greater importance than perhaps it should. All in all, reversal of the federal policy of Presidential support for any program always assisting rural fire units is unlikely. Stepping is valuable, but it may not be the determin- backwards is a maneuver Congress seems ing factor in survival. Other forces are orga- politically unable to perform. nized to ensure the continuation of federal The outlook is for continued pragmatic assistance. Petitions from volunteer fire units action to deal with fire prevention and control throughout the country can be counted on to whether it be in rural or urban areas. There trigger Congressional response. Since these is no reason to believe that Congress and the organizations are located in almost every President will abandon past practices of at- Congressional district, the support the pro- tempting to work out solutions to major prob- gram gains through their actions can be im- lems on an issue-by-issue basis, with no hes- portant. Moreover the Forest Service is a itancy to modify or change a program respected agency with an existing support whenever necessary. This, of course, will base and access to federal decisionmakers. mean a constant shift in the intergovernmen- At the same time, the rural program profits tal arrangements among levels of government. from the establishment of the U.S. Fire Ad- It is almost certain to mean government 115 ministration. That agency, being too weak to growth at one or more levels.

FOOTNOTES Public Administration Times, Vol. 2, No. 9. Washing- ton, DC, American Society for Public Administration, May 1, 1979, p. 1. 'See. Comptroller General of the United States, Arson 'For example, see the report of a meeting of volunteer for Profit: More Could Be Done to Reduce It, Report fire service leaders with USFA Administrator Gordon CED-121, Washington, DC, U.S. General Accounting Vickery at Snowmass, CO, on August 17-19, 1979, to Office, May 31, 1978. set out their needs and priorities. Vickery had met pre- 5The Washington Post, Washington. DC, The Post Pub- viously with the National Volunteer Fire Council in lishing Co., April 10. 1979, p. A14. Dallas, TX. County News, Vol. 11, No. 3, Washington, 'jUFederal Agencies Launch Coordinated Arson Attack," DC, National Association of Counties, August 27, 1979, op. cit. p. 1. 7''Arson: What Are the Feds and Cities Doing?," Na- 2StatisticalA bstract, 1977, op. cit., p. 546. tion's Cities Weekly, Vol. 2, No. 35, Washington, DC, 3"Federal Agencies Launch Coordinated Arson Attack," National League of Cities, August 27. 1979.

*U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE: 1980-0-720-617/3

COMMISSION MEMBERS

Private Citizens Abraham D. Beame, ACIR Chairman, New York, New York Bill G. King, Alabama Vacancy

Members of the United States Senate Lawton Chiles, Florida William V. Roth, Jr., Delaware James R. Sasser, Tennessee

Members of the U.S. House of Representatives Clarence J. Brown, Jr.,Ohio L. H. Fountain, North Carolina Charles B. Rangel, New York

Officers of the Executive Branch, Federal Government Juanita M. Kreps, Secretary of Commerce James T. Mclntyre, Director, Office of Management and Budget Vacancy

Governors Bruce Babbitt, Arizona John N. Dalton, Virginia Richard W. Riley, South Carolina Richard A. Snelling, Vermont

Mayors Thomas Bradley, Los Angeles, California Richard E. Carver. Peoria, Illinois Tom Moody, Columbus, Ohio John P. Rousakis, Savannah, Georgia

State Legislative Leaders Fred E. Anderson, Colorado State Senate Leo McCarthy, Speaker, California Assembly Vacancy

Elected County Officials William 0. Beach, County Executive, Montgomery County, Tennessee Lynn G. Cutler, ACIR Vice-Chair, Board of Supervisors, Black Hawk County, Iowa Doris W. Dealaman, Freeholder Director, Somerset County, New Jersey