This report provides a general analysis of key concepts involving deployable federal assets, including 
what it means to be a deployable federal asset; when the assets will be used to support response operations; what the main authorities and policies are that guide the use of assets; and what level of support the federal government is prepared to provide for response operations. This report also examines several issues Congress may wish to consider as it evaluates the future authorization and funding for various deployable federal assets. Issues examined in the report include the potential policy benefits and disadvantages of federal investment in deployable federal assets, the cost-effectiveness of different staffing models for the assets, the methods for financing the deployment of the assets, whether federal assets should have greater operational control in response operations, and the challenges Congress may face in its oversight of the use of the assets. The term is used to classify sets of specially trained federal employees whose mission, though not necessarily exclusive mission, is to provide on-scene assistance to communities by supporting their disaster response. Colloquially, deployable federal assets can be described as the federal government's "first responders" to a disaster. However, due to the magnitude of the disaster, a local, state, or tribal government may (a) be unable to respond to the unique consequences of a disaster (e.g., it lacks a capability to eliminate a certain biological contaminant), or (b) have its capability to respond become overwhelmed by the scale of consequences (e.g., there are too many survivors requiring temporary shelter assistance). There are many federal laws and regulations that prescribe how a request for assistance may be made, but the most prominent is the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. §5721 et seq. CRS also has a number of available reports that analyze federal authorities for disaster assistance, including the authorizing legislation for deployable federal assets. A central guideline of the NRF is the National Incident Management System (NIMS). Policy Benefits and Disadvantages of Deployable Federal Assets

There are several theoretical policy benefits and disadvantages that may result from authorization and appropriation of deployable federal assets by Congress. These benefits and disadvantages are largely a result of the federalism structure of the nation, and may also apply to the provision of deployable assets by states. Another theoretical disadvantage is that federal provision of response capabilities may crowd out investment in those same capabilities by other actors, including the private sector. Federalism and Operational Control

As previously discussed, the federal government generally provides disaster assistance, including deployable federal assets, at the request of a state or tribal government. Congress may wish to consider whether the provision of federal assistance should grant the federal government more decision-making power if disagreements arise in the incident management. Thus, in general, the limited use of deployable federal assets and the unique circumstances of each disaster result in a small sample size that Congress and others can use to evaluate the benefits of the capabilities provided by the asset. Brief Summaries of Sample Federal Assets

This section of the report provides brief summaries of example s of deployable federal assets that can support disaster response operations. Authorization and Appropriations

Authority for the Corps is found in Title II of the Public Health Service Act. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) in the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) manages the stockpile. The Homeland Security Act of 2002 ( P.L. The National Response Framework (NRF) and DOD refer to this type of assistance as Defense Support of Civil Authorities (DSCA). Contaminated debris management is coordinated with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. 84-99 (33 U.S.C.
For most disasters across the nation, the affected local, state, or tribal governments have sufficient capabilities to respond to the incident. However, for disasters with consequences that require unique capabilities or that overwhelm the existing capabilities of a respective state or tribal government, Congress has authorized and appropriated a suite of deployable federal assets to support domestic disaster response operations. This report reviews several key concepts about these federal assets, and highlights possible issues Congress may consider when evaluating their authorization and appropriation.
In this report, a deployable federal asset generally means sets of specially trained federal employees whose mission is to provide on-scene assistance to communities by supporting their disaster response. Deployable federal assets can be described as the federal government's "first responders" to a disaster. They typically only provide assistance at the request of states or tribes and in circumstances where the capabilities of non-federal government entities are insufficient. The federal government also scopes its assistance to provide only the assets that are required by the situation. The maximum disaster consequences that the federal government is prepared to address with its full set of response capabilities is largely unknown.
Given the diversity of deployable federal assets, there are many legal authorities and executive branch policies that guide their use in response operations. Some of the most notable authorities are the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. §5121 et seq.), Title XXVIII of the Public Health Service Act, the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (6 U.S.C. §101 et seq.), and the Posse Comitatus Act (18 U.S.C. §1385 et seq.). Some primary federal policies guiding the use of deployable federal assets include the National Response Framework (NRF) and accompanying Federal Interagency Operational Plan (FIOP), the National Incident Management System (NIMS), and the Defense Support for Civilian Authorities (DSCA).
Congress may consider several policy issues as it evaluates the future authorization and appropriations for deployable federal assets, and in its oversight of the assets' response capabilities. There may be theoretical benefits gained by the provision of deployable federal assets, including the pooling of disaster risk across the nation and greater efficiency in the supply of response capabilities. There may also be theoretical disadvantages, including that the provision of deployable federal assets creates a moral hazard resulting in greater disaster risk for the nation, and that federal investment may crowd out the investment of non-federal entities in similar response capabilities. Congress may also assess the various models for staffing these assets, including the benefits and costs of conditional employments, dedicated staffing versus multiuse staffing, and "federalizing" staff into temporary federal employment for response operations. Congress may evaluate whether the provision of deployable federal assets should grant federal officials greater decision-making authority in the management of response operations. Finally, there are a number of challenges that may inhibit congressional oversight, such as the small sample size of incidents available to evaluate the effectiveness of deployable federal assets and the lack of specificity in many of the authorizations and appropriations for these assets.
This report also provides brief summaries of examples of deployable federal assets. These assets are managed, either solely or jointly, by a variety of federal departments and agencies, including components of the Departments of Agriculture, Defense, Homeland Security, and Health and Human Services; the Environmental Protection Agency; the National Transportation Safety Board; and others. A synopsis of these assets is provided in Table 1.