FC: After 18 months as U.S. fire administrator, with what accomplishments are you most pleased?

Paulison: I think the obvious thing is the FIRE grants. Getting those on the Web-based grant application process, the success of those grants and how popular they've been is definitely an accomplishment of the Fire Administration.

I can't take full credit for it, because obviously Ken Burris had a lot to do with that program, as well as the staff — Brian Cowan and the whole group. It's just a tremendous agency-wide effort, not just for the USFA, but all of FEMA. I'm very proud of that cooperation, and everybody's on board with us. It's not like you have to beg people to help; all the agencies see the need, and it's very heartwarming to work around it.

Another accomplishment is being able to raise the profile of the Fire Administration. In the past it's been, I don't want to say ignored, but it hadn't been a high-profile position inside of FEMA, and lately it has been. I think part of it, too, is that I've had a lot of experience managing disasters, so when you speak, people stop and listen. I think that brings a lot of credibility, since FEMA is about responding to disasters so people will listen.

I'm very proud of the work we've done on equipment interoperability. Bringing the manufacturers' associations together and the cooperation we've gotten from them was strictly an initiative that I took upon myself to work on.

Also, raising the profile of incident command to the point where the president talks about it in his strategic initiative. We're working on a single incident command system for the entire country with backing right out of the White House. I guess those are the things I'm most proud of, to be able to do that.

FC: Speaking of the FIRE grants, the president's 2004 budget has $500 million earmarked for the program, but it's supposed to move to the Office of Domestic Preparedness, a branch of Homeland Security's Border and Transportation Security Directorate. What will that move do to the FIRE grants?

Paulison: The '04 budget is a long way off, and things have a tendency to change as things go along. Regardless of where the FIRE grant ends up, I will commit the full resources of the Fire Administration to continue to make sure those grants are successful. They're too important to be bickering over who has them and who doesn't have them. We will still work with whoever has them to make them successful.

FC: Now that you've been involved with the USFA in a hands-on role, how do you as a former fire chief see its role in relation to fire departments across the country?

Paulison: One of the obvious things is that we're in charge of education, making sure that we get the class work out there at the campus, the National Fire Academy, but also for what we deliver to the states and what we do online.

I'm also an advocate for the fire service. I can carry the message to the administration about what the needs of the fire service are and vice versa. I can explain to the fire service what the position of the administration is and why they are making some of the decisions that they do. I guess my official title is that I'm representing the president for the fire service, but there's a dual role there. I also have a responsibility to the administration to bring back the concerns and needs of the fire service.

Also, going out and doing public speaking, getting my message across of what I think the fire service should be doing and where it should it be heading, especially when it comes to dealing with terrorism. We're all waiting for the federal dollars to come down, but there's a lot of things we can do and have a responsibility to do that I think we can do before the federal dollars come down.

FC: How has your recent appointment to the FEMA chief operating officer position affected your role as fire administrator?

Paulison: I don't think it's having a major impact. I have such good people at the Fire Academy, at the Emmitsburg campus — particularly Charlie Dickinson. If it weren't for him, I wouldn't be able to do the job as effectively as I am. I don't have to worry about the campus work because he can handle that.

I think what it has done is send a message to everyone that FEMA recognizes that fire chiefs bring a lot of management experience to the table. The fact that they chose a fire chief to be fire administrator, to step up and run FEMA until we get the new Homeland Security Department set up, that was a significant decision and it was not made haphazardly. I think it's good for the fire service to see that that fire chiefs are recognized as managers, and we do manage very complex departments. We have a lot of experience with disasters, so it's a good thing for everyone.

FC: Although it hasn't been finalized, what do you perceive the fire service's role will be in the new Homeland Security Department?

Paulison: I've always felt that the fire service is an integral part of homeland security. Gov. Tom Ridge also recognizes that, so I see nothing but positive things for the fire service by being part of the Department of Homeland Security. We'll have access to information, we'll have access to dollars, and we'll have a person running that department who believes in the fire service and believes in first responders and what they do. In fact, I see it as extremely positive to see that we get the equipment and the training we need.

FC: Previously, you've mentioned that in the DHS, the fire service would be together with the FBI and CIA, not the police. In your opinion, is that a good idea? Shouldn't the police be part of this security effort?

Paulison: I think police really should stay with the Department of Justice because that's a law enforcement issue; they respond differently than we do. The important thing is that we have to continue to work together. We simply cannot handle things in a vacuum, and we can't stovepipe our decision-making or our response.

I do believe the fire service belongs in Homeland Security, and I know that Gov. Ridge and [Attorney General] John Ashcroft have a good relationship, so I don't see it as a bad thing if police are with Justice and we're with Homeland Security. I think it's going to work out fine.

FC: To clarify, because we're so used to saying “fire departments” to mean more than just firefighters: Do you see EMS as a separate role, or do you see a combined, all-in-one effort?

Paulison: I guess I should start saying “first responders” because there's a whole bunch of things that first responder encompasses.

The community has to decide how it wants to provide services. EMS works extremely well in fire departments, but there are some communities that choose not to do that, and that's fine. The issue is that they are still first responders who need the same information. We have a responsibility to get that to them.

FC: According to a recent IAFC survey, the call-up of military reservists will significantly affect smaller fire departments. Is the federal government planning to provide any resources to assist with the tight budgets?

Paulison: I have not seen anything regarding that issue coming out of Congress as far as providing resources to supplement local fire departments that have lost people to the call-up of reservists. It's not just fire departments — it's every business in this country and every company.

Everybody in our military reserves can be called up, and it's part of our responsibility as citizens to take on that part of helping to defend this country. Sometimes it is a burden on a local company or the local fire service, police or public works, but it's just one those issues. If that's what it costs to be an American, that's what it costs to have a nation as free as ours.

FC: Interoperability: How would you define it?

Paulison: It's not a simple answer because interoperability can mean a lot of different things. One of the issues of interoperability is speaking the same language. Way too often we get on the scene of these major incidents and have different incident command systems or, in some cases, none at all. That's an interoperability issue, not having a unified command post where we share information.

And there's the physical communication part: radio systems, UHF or VHF, 800MHZ…. We can't communicate across the different frequencies with lots of radios. We have the technology to fix that, and part of the president's strategic initiative and part of the first responder monies in the '04 budget provide dollars to deal with some of the issues.

One of the most important issues is interoperability of our equipment. It seems to me that every entity out there has resolved the interoperability problem except for the fire service. I'm a licensed general contractor in the state of Florida, and I can rent an air compressor in one area of town and drive it across the country and rent a jack-hammer and the fittings always work. I can go to Home Depot and buy a stack of circular saw blades, and it doesn't matter if I have a Mikita, a Sears Craftsman, a Skil saw or any other brand, the blades always fit. I can take my diving regulator with me when I travel around the world, go to any country in the world and rent a SCUBA tank and it always fits, but almost nothing in the fire service fits.

Our air bottles can't be changed from one air pack to another. Our hydraulic tools don't match up. A lot of our stuff is just totally incompatible from one brand to another, and it could be made in the same country. That is not acceptable anymore. I've been meeting with the Fire Equipment Manufacturers & Services Association, and they're on board with this and coming up with some very close, quick wins where some companies have already agreed to start making their equipment compatible from one brand to another. There are some long-term things — the air pack manufacturers — before we can make those compatible, but they've agreed to work on it. We've met twice, and everyone at those meetings has agreed it's an issue we have to deal with. I'm very excited about that, and I see a short- and long-term win for us in those areas.

FC: How do we change the terminology to be consistent?

Paulison: I think that's a short-term issue. We're already developing a single, national incident command system. There's only two main ones out there, so it's just a matter of locking these people in a room and telling them they can't go to the bathroom until they come out with one system! I think everybody seems to be on board with it; they recognize that all the systems are similar. We just need to develop one that we're all going to use. I see that as a very do-able project.

FC: What about a national communication system? During the recent shuttle catastrophe, NASA warned people to stay away from fallen pieces due to toxic gases. When you need to send a warning to fire departments across the United States, you're pretty much relying on CNN.

Paulison: We've had some discussions about a national or nationwide communication system. I'm not sure that that's the answer. One, if you depend on something like that, it's very vulnerable to attack. The way it is right now — we have independent communication systems set up — there is no single point of attack or a weakness for them.

I think we need to make them compatible where we can talk from one group to another. I would rather see us develop technology along those lines than one single, national system.

Yes, we do depend on the media a lot, but there's nothing wrong with that. During hurricanes when I was in Miami-Dade County and emergency management came under me, we used the media significantly to get the message out to the people because they watch television and read newspapers and magazines. It's a viable method of communicating with people, and there's nothing wrong with using that. We used it to its fullest in Miami-Dade County and we can do the same at the national level, also.

FC: Based on the need for standardization and statewide participation, do you see the role of state fire marshals changing within the Department of Homeland Security?

Paulison: That is a very complicated question because I do sense some changes at the state level. A lot of states are already developing homeland security departments, and some are encompassing that into state emergency management groups. I see some changes in the works, and I'm not sure how it's going to end up.

I do see the role of the state fire marshal expanding into other areas and people recognizing the significant amount of resources and capability the fire department brings to the table. Because of that, if the fire service is going to have the ability to tap into those resources, it has to rise up to the state level.

I think California is a perfect example. They monitor all the resources throughout the state and what their capability is at any given time. It's a tremendous system, and if every state could develop something similar in response to some of these major incidents, it would be much better coordinated than it is right now.

FC: As part of the FIRE grant process, participants must submit incident reports to NFIRS. What is the USFA doing to replace this outdated and ineffective system with a real-time technology, similar to what's used by police departments?

Paulison: Excellent question. If you ask any Congressional member what their crime statistics are in their area or district, they can pretty much tell you from memory what they are, but if you ask them what their fire statistics are — how many fire deaths, how much fire loss — they'd be hard pressed to do that.

If you look in your neighborhood newspaper, there's always a little section in there on crime reporting, but you never see anything on fire statistics. Part of that is the fire service's fault, and part of it is media's fault for not focusing on the fact that we have a fire problem in this country. People don't realize that we lose 3,000 people every year in fires, a statistic that's one of the worst in the industrialized nations.

Part of it is NFIRS' fault also. One, there is not a requirement that fire departments have to participate like there is on the police side. Police have to report their statistics to the state and the states have to submit that to the Department of Justice. We don't have a requirement in the fire service. Part of it is the NFIRS sysystem itself; it's more difficult to use than it should be.

We're already working with a Web browser-based reporting tool, to replace the current data entry tool we're using, and it's being tested in some states. There are some problems with it, but that's where we're heading with it. We want to make it more user-friendly.

FEMA just did an audit of NFIRS [that] we're going to put it on the Web so you can have access to that and see what the report says. We're looking to it to help us fix some of these issues that we have with NFIRS and work out the bugs. We need a bulk-import tool and we're working on that also. Although it hasn't been widely released yet, there are five states that are starting to use it. This system should be easier to use than it is. I would like to see departments be able to upload their data directly into NFIRS and then at the same time go to the states; they need that information also.

We need to make the information more usable for the local fire department. What does this information tell them? What are they getting out of it? That's the way we're heading on that project to make NFIRS more user-friendly, easier to get information in and easier to get it out.

FC: Risks continue to escalate with bioterrorism and hazmat, but we'd like your views on preventable fire deaths.

Paulison: We lose a firefighter every third day in this country. There are no firefighter deaths that are acceptable losses as far as I'm concerned. We may have that in some arenas, but not in the fire service. I consider one loss unacceptable. We lose most firefighters to heart attacks and vehicle accidents. These are two of the most preventable things we have.

One good thing is that we just received a survey back from the departments that are participating in the FIRE grant program. The survey was done by the USFA as a management project on the departments that have implemented the health and wellness programs funded by the FIRE grants. Of those, 90% reported a significant reduction in firefighter injury and firefighter sick time. It's remarkable, and I'm very pleased to see this.

The other thing is vehicle accidents: 80% of firefighter fatalities due to vehicle accidents are in volunteer fire departments, and that is a significant statement. We need to have mandatory seatbelt usage and mandatory, robust driver training programs, and we're obviously not doing that. We had a firefighter killed in San Francisco [in January]. A firefighter fell out of the truck just a few blocks from the station and did not survive the injuries, and she did not have her seatbelt on. That is something that should not happen.

The fire chiefs — the fire officers in the truck — have to be the ones responsible that the firefighters are wearing their seatbelts when they go on a call.

FC: Fire Chief is doing what we can to get that message out. One of our readers wrote that in his experience not buckling a seatbelt is a lifestyle issue: If people don't buckle up off the clock, they'll take the same risks on the job.

Paulison: That answer is not acceptable because that [firefighter] is a community resource. The community has paid a lot of money to train that firefighter. The other firefighters depend on [him] to do [his] job, so it's irresponsible: It's not being loyal to your community, and it's not being loyal to your fellow firefighters when you don't do the best you can to protect yourself. When you get hurt or killed, obviously, you're not there to help protect your fellow firefighters.

So it's not only a personal responsibility, it's a company — meaning fire company — responsibility and a community-wide responsibility.

FC: What's your message to readers?

Paulison: The terrorism issue is on everybody's mind, but one of the things I keep cautioning people is that we have to keep reminding people here in FEMA, people in the Fire Administration and fire departments, that as we go into homeland security to not forget your core mission. Yes, we have to pick up this thing called terrorism, but we have a mission that we do every day, and you can't neglect that and focus solely on terrorism.

Most of the skills and training and most equipment you use in your day-to-day jobs will work on terrorism. We need to remember to keep doing the training we're doing. We're going to continue to get hurricanes and floods. We're going to have earthquakes and house fires, and that's what our core business is, so don't neglect that just to pick up the terrorism piece.

We live in extraordinary times.