Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress
Bruce R. Lindsay
Analyst in American National Government
April 29, 2010
Congressional Research Service
7-5700
www.crs.gov
RL34745
CRS Report for Congress
P
repared for Members and Committees of Congress

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

Summary
When government officials become aware of an impending disaster, they may take steps to
protect citizens before the incident occurs. Evacuation of the geographic area that may be affected
is one option to ensure public safety. If implemented properly, evacuation can be an effective
strategy for saving lives. Evacuations and decisions to evacuate, however, can also entail complex
factors and elevated risks. Decisions to evacuate may require officials to balance potentially
costly, hazardous, or unnecessary evacuations against the possibility of loss of life due to a
delayed order to evacuate.
Some observers of evacuations, notably those from New Orleans during Hurricane Katrina, claim
evacuations pose unique challenges to certain segments of society. From their perspective,
special-needs populations, the transit-dependent, and individuals with pets faced particular
hardships associated with the storm. This, they claim, is because some evacuation plans, and the
way in which they were carried out, appeared to inadequately address their unique circumstances
or needs.
In responding to these challenges, then-Senator Obama introduced S. 1685 in the 109th Congress,
which would have directed the Secretary of Homeland Security to ensure that each state provided
detailed and comprehensive information regarding its pre-disaster and post-disaster plans for the
evacuation of individuals with special needs in emergencies. President Barack Obama indicated
during his campaign that he would continue to pursue similar evacuation polices.
Another facet of evacuation is sheltering displaced individuals. For short-term sheltering,
federally provided resources include food, water, cots, and essential toiletries. When displaced
individuals need long-term sheltering, federal policy provides financial assistance for alternative
accommodations such as apartments, motels and hotels, recreational vehicles, and modular units.
While federal law provides for certain aspects of civilian emergency evacuation, evacuation
policy generally is established and enforced by state and local officials. In recent years, Members
of Congress have focused, in part, on policy options that addressed issues of equity during
evacuations as well as attempts to integrate federal, state, and local evacuation efforts more fully.
This report discusses federal evacuation policy and analyzes potential lessons learned from the
evacuations of individuals in response to the Gulf Coast hurricanes of 2005. Several issue areas
that might arise concerning potential lawmaking and oversight on evacuation policy are also
highlighted. This report will be updated as significant legislative or administrative changes occur.

Congressional Research Service

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

Contents
Introduction .......................................................................................................................... 1
Examples of Federal Evacuation Policy................................................................................. 1
Evacuations: Lessons Learned............................................................................................... 3
General Lessons Learned from Evacuations .................................................................... 3
Lessons Learned from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita ......................................................... 4
Potential Congressional Issues .............................................................................................. 6
Low-Income Individuals and Households........................................................................ 6
The Evacuation of Children............................................................................................. 6
Evacuating Foreign Nationals.......................................................................................... 7
Federal, State, and Local Integration ............................................................................... 7
Technology ..................................................................................................................... 7
Re-entry into Evacuated Zones........................................................................................ 8
Citizen Participation in Evacuation Planning ................................................................... 9
Evacuation Fatigue.......................................................................................................... 9
Returning and Relocating Evacuees................................................................................. 9
Pending Legislation in the 111th Congress Related to Evacuations ....................................... 10
H.R. 244 ....................................................................................................................... 10
H.R. 327 ....................................................................................................................... 10
H.R. 431 ....................................................................................................................... 11
H.R. 434 ....................................................................................................................... 11
H.R. 748 ....................................................................................................................... 11
H.R. 2953 ..................................................................................................................... 11
H.R. 3416 ..................................................................................................................... 12
S. 1485 ......................................................................................................................... 12
S. 1649 ......................................................................................................................... 12
S. 2898 ......................................................................................................................... 12
Concluding Observations .................................................................................................... 12

Tables
Table A-1. Selected Federal Evacuation Authorities................................................................... 14

Appendixes
Appendix. Statutory Authority for Evacuations.......................................................................... 14

Contacts
Author Contact Information ...................................................................................................... 16
Acknowledgments .................................................................................................................... 16

Congressional Research Service

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

Introduction
Threats of impending disasters—such as hurricanes, floods, volcanic eruptions, the movement of
airborne hazardous material, or unstable conditions at nuclear power plants—may provide
officials an opportunity to save lives by encouraging or mandating civilian evacuation.
Evacuation has three basic components. First is the departure of people from a stricken or
threatened area. Second are the temporary resettlement of evacuees, and the provision of shelter
and resources to them. Third is the final return of evacuees to either their predisaster residences or
alternative locations.
Moving a population out of harm’s way through evacuation can save lives and substantially
reduce exposure to hazards. Evacuations, however, can create complex challenges for officials
and emergency managers. For instance, officials need to time the evacuation accurately to ensure
the impending disaster does not occur while people are evacuating. Evacuations can also be
hazardous. According to some reports, more people died during the Hurricane Rita evacuation
than from the actual hurricane.1 Officials also need to take into account individuals who lack
adequate transportation or have special needs because these individuals generally require more
time to prepare to evacuate and travel out of the area. In such cases, it may be safer to have the
special-needs population remain in the area and “shelter in place.”2
Over the years, congressional concern regarding the equity, timing, and execution of evacuations
has increased. Much of this concern is attributable to the New Orleans evacuation during the 2005
hurricane season, which has spurred numerous changes in federal evacuation policy.
Examples of Federal Evacuation Policy
In general, federal policy defers to the states to enact laws pertinent to evacuation.3 Using
authority from state laws and local ordinances, state and local officials may suggest or require the
evacuation of residents from homes and communities before certain catastrophes occur.4 Rather
than taking the lead in evacuations, the federal government facilitates the evacuation process
through federal statutes that authorize agency heads to use federal resources to assist in the
evacuation of civilians. Brief descriptions of four federal authorities follow.
Stafford Act: Pre-Hurricane Katrina
The Robert T. Stafford Disaster and Relief Emergency Assistance Act (hereafter the Stafford Act)
authorizes the President to direct the Secretary of Defense to use resources to perform necessary
emergency work to preserve life and property. This may take place even before the President

1 “In Texas, Governor Orders Improvements to Evacuation Plans,” New York Times, March 22, 2006, at
http://www.nytimes.com/2006/03/22/national/22texas.html.
2 “Shelter in place” refers to taking protective measures while remaining in the affected area.
3 The Appendix to this report identifies selected federal statutory citations that appear to be most pertinent to domestic
evacuation. This report does not comprehensively review all federal evacuation policies, nor does it review state and
local evacuation policies.
4 State laws generally authorize governors to order and enforce the evacuation of residents under emergency situations.
See CRS Report RL32287, Emergency Management and Homeland Security Statutory Authorities in the States,
District of Columbia, and Insular Areas: A Summary, by Keith Bea, L. Cheryl Runyon, and Kae M. Warnock.
Congressional Research Service
1

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

issues a major disaster or emergency declaration.5 The President may also issue the declaration
before the incident to lessen or avert the threat of a catastrophe by providing assistance for
“precautionary evacuations.”6
Stafford Act: Post-Hurricane Katrina
As mentioned previously, the final component of an evacuation is the return of evacuees to their
predisaster residences or, if needed, to alternative locations. As amended by the Post Katrina
Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006 (hereafter the Post Katrina Act),7 Section 425 of the
Stafford Act states that the President may provide transportation assistance to “relocate
individuals displaced from their predisaster primary residences as a result of an incident ... or
otherwise transported from their predisaster primary residences ... to and from alternative
locations for short or long-term accommodation or to return an individual or household to their
predisaster primary residence or alternative location, as determined by the President.” Under this
authority the role of the federal government has been expanded not only to assist in the removal
of citizens, but also to return disaster victims, or to relocate them. Limited information exists on
the implementation of this relatively new authority for the return of evacuees to their predisaster
residences. The issue of returning evacuees to their residences will be addressed later in the
report.
National Response Framework
Another way in which the federal government facilitates evacuations is through assigning roles
and responsibilities to various federal agencies, states and localities, and nonprofit organizations.
The National Response Framework (NRF), administered by the Federal Emergency Management
Agency (FEMA) and the Department of Homeland Security (DHS), establishes the roles and
responsibilities of federal and certain non-federal entities when incidents overwhelm state or local
governments. For example, the NRF identifies state, local, and tribal governments as having the
responsibility of “ordering the evacuation of persons from any portions of the state threatened by
the incident, giving consideration to the requirements of special-needs populations and those with
household pets or service animals.”8
The NRF includes “Incident Annexes,” which are documents that address specific hazard
situations.9 One of the annexes, the Mass Evacuation Incident Annex, assigns DHS and FEMA the
responsibility for coordinating mass evacuations. With the support of other federal agencies and
nonprofit organizations, the Annex also provides overall guidance for integrating the efforts of
federal, state, local, and tribal governments during the evacuation of large numbers of people.
According to the Annex:

5 42 U.S.C. 5170b(c). For further analysis on the Stafford Act and presidential declaration authority, see CRS Report
RL33053, Federal Stafford Act Disaster Assistance: Presidential Declarations, Eligible Activities, and Funding, by
Keith Bea.
6 42 U.S.C. § 5192(a)(1).
7 P.L. 109-295, § 601, 120 Stat. 1409.
8 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, National Response Framework, January 2008, p. 39.
9 There are seven Incident Annexes that accompany the NRF: Biological, Food and Agriculture, Mass Evacuation,
Nuclear/Radiological, Catastrophic, Cyber, and Terrorism Incident Law Enforcement and Investigation.
Congressional Research Service
2

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

Federal support to mass evacuation operations will be provided at the state/tribal level and
scaled to the incident.... Regardless of the scale of the incident, coordination among
numerous command entities will be required to carry out the major functions of evacuation
operations.10
National Hurricane Program
Established in 1985, FEMA’s National Hurricane Program (NHP) helps protect communities from
hurricane hazards through various projects and activities. The NHP also provides assistance to
state and local agencies in developing hurricane evacuation plans. One of the ways this is
achieved is through NHP’s Hurricane Evacuation Studies (HES). HES helps states and localities
determine the probable effects of a hurricane, identify appropriate shelters, and predict public
response to a hurricane and hurricane advisories.11
NHP also conducts hazard and vulnerability analyses for coastal communities. Analyses include
an assessment of a hurricane’s impact, a review of existing roads and transportation systems, and
an analysis of the population (e.g., demographic characteristics). The information gained from
analyses helps communities determine evacuation zones (areas vulnerable to the hurricane),
develop evacuation maps, and determine clearance times.
Evacuations: Lessons Learned
General Lessons Learned from Evacuations
Studies of evacuations have identified several techniques that can make evacuations more
effective. For example, informing citizens about evacuation routes and shelter locations as part of
a community preparedness activity can help reduce the amount of time a household takes to
evacuate. Without this information, households are generally slow to react to an evacuation
order.12 Making provisions, such as gasoline, portable restrooms, and water, available along the
route can also positively influence the effectiveness of an evacuation. Having tow trucks along
egress routes to move vehicles can also help to keep the roads clear.13
The use of hazard analyses and evacuation analyses may produce a more effective evacuation.
Hazard analyses are used to identify areas susceptible to a hazard’s impact. Evacuation analyses
assess the size of the affected population and its capability to transport itself. Additionally,
evacuation analyses help identify modes of transportation to be used in the evacuation and
potential evacuation routes.
These lessons were derived primarily from disasters and emergencies such as wildfires,
hazardous material spills, and hurricanes that would not be categorized as large-scale or
catastrophic incidents. The evacuations as a result of some of these incidents do not involve long-

10 U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Mass Evacuation Incident Annex, June 2008, p. 5.
11 Information on the National Hurricane Program can be obtained at http://www.fema.gov/plan/prevent/nhp/.
12 Ronald W. Perry, Michael K. Lindell, and Marjorie R. Greene, Evacuation Planning in Emergency Management
(Lexington, MA: Lexington Books, 1981), p. 145.
13 Ronald W. Perry and Michael K. Lindell, Emergency Planning (Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley and Sons, 2007), pp.
172-173.
Congressional Research Service
3

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

term displacement, or the need to evacuate a large population. Hurricanes Katrina and Rita,
however, did offer lessons on large-scale evacuations.
Lessons Learned from Hurricanes Katrina and Rita
Hurricanes Katrina and Rita increased knowledge of evacuations from large-scale incidents.
Studies and reports covering the evacuations prompted by Hurricane Katrina also found
techniques that make evacuations more effective.14 In general, they stated that implementation of
the evacuations of many of the individuals affected by Hurricane Katrina went relatively
smoothly because of successful evacuation procedures. Some examples of these procedures
include the use of traffic management techniques such as “contra-flow” (making the in-bound and
out-bound lanes uni-directional), which proved to be very effective. The use of conference calls
by emergency managers and traffic directors to coordinate evacuation efforts also produced
positive results.
However, reports also asserted that other aspects of the evacuations needed significant
improvement. The evacuations of New Orleans and Jefferson Parish were particularly
troublesome. In fact, they were so problematic that they tended to negatively shape public
perception of the evacuations as a whole.
One account that criticized the Hurricane Katrina and Rita evacuations said that the call to
evacuate appeared to be “weak, bureaucratic, and confusing.”15 Perhaps as a result of such
criticisms, calls to evacuate during Hurricane Ike16 used stronger language to convey the
seriousness of the event. It is unclear, however, if stronger language was more effective than other
factors in getting individuals to heed notices to evacuate. Another factor that influenced the way
in which people were evacuated for Hurricane Ike was the experience of gasoline shortages and
gridlock. In some disasters, a phenomenon known as “shadow evacuation” takes place. Shadow
evacuations consist of individuals leaving the area without being told to do so. During the
Hurricane Rita evacuation, non-mandated departures burdened evacuation routes and created fuel
shortages. In Hurricane Ike, efforts such as persuading individuals in non-evacuation zones not to
leave and asking families not to evacuate in multiple vehicles helped reduce shadow
evacuations.17
The Hurricane Katrina evacuations also underscored the significance of timing an evacuation.
According to one view, large metropolitan areas generally need 48 hours to evacuate (for
Louisiana, the preferred minimum amount of time to conduct a major evacuation is 72 hours).18
However, the earlier an evacuation is ordered, the greater the likelihood is that there will be an

14 Examples include U.S. Congress, House Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and
Response to Hurricane Katrina, A Failure of Initiative, 109th Cong., 2nd sess., H.Rept. 109-377 (Washington: GPO,
2006); U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Hurricane Katrina: A
Nation Still Unprepared, 109th Cong., 2nd sess., S.Rept. 109-322 (Washington: GPO, 2006); and Todd Litman,
“Lessons from Katrina and Rita: What Major Disasters Teach Transportation Planners,” Journal of Transportation
Engineering, vol. 132, no. 11 (January 2006).
15 Douglas Brinkley, The Great Deluge (New York: HarperCollins, 2006), p. 59.
16 Hurricane Ike made U.S. landfall on September 13, 2008.
17 Interview of Mayor Bill White by Jim Lehrer on the PBS Newshour, aired September 11, 2008.
18 Ivan Van Veerden and Mike Brown, The Storm (New York: Viking, 2006), p. 47.
Congressional Research Service
4

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

error in the weather forecast. The inability to predict a storm track compounds the difficulties of
evacuation decision making.
In the case of Hurricane Katrina, evacuations were declared late, or not at all, in two of
Louisiana’s most populous areas: New Orleans and Jefferson Parish. According to one
congressional report, a more complete evacuation of these areas could have saved lives and
reduced human suffering.19 Another congressional report concluded that the incomplete
evacuation led to the need for a post-hurricane evacuation. Federal, state, and local officials had
not anticipated the need for a second evacuation. As a consequence, problems in communication,
lack of situational awareness, and a shortage of bus drivers resulted in poor implementation of the
second evacuation.20
Economically disadvantaged individuals, those with pets, and special-needs populations21 also
experienced difficulty during the evacuations. Some households who wished to leave the area
could not because of a lack of transportation. Special-needs populations were underserved
because some were too frail for transport.22 Others depended on service animals (animals that are
trained to perform tasks for individuals with disabilities, such as guiding people who are blind,
alerting people who are deaf, or pulling wheelchairs). Some of these individuals were helpless
because their animals could not navigate flooded streets. Others elected not to evacuate because
shelters had no provisions for their pets and they feared leaving their pets behind.
Much of the post-Hurricane Katrina legislation is directed at these problems. For example, some
of the legislation enacted after Hurricane Katrina includes grants for states and localities to
develop evacuation plans and ensure that these plans include provisions for special needs
populations. Another example is legislation directed toward ensuring that evacuation plans
address individuals with household pets and service animals. Table A-1 in the Appendix to this
report includes some of this legislation.
Finally, the House report23 concluded that the responsibility to evacuate did not reside solely
within the government. Many individuals were aware of the need to evacuate but chose not to do
so. Some had waited out hurricanes in the past and believed they could do the same for Hurricane
Katrina. Others simply failed to recognize the seriousness of the hurricane. Despite the severity of
the event, the amount of evacuation planning that takes place, and the necessary resources at
hand, there will always be individuals who choose to remain in the affected area.

19 U.S. Congress, House Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane
Katrina, A Failure of Initiative, 109th Cong., 2nd sess., H.Rept. 109-377 (Washington: GPO, 2006), p. 103.
20 U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, Hurricane Katrina: A Nation
Still Unprepared, 109th Cong., 2nd sess., S.Rept. 109-322 (Washington: GPO, 2006), pp. 594-595.
21 Examples of special-needs populations identified in FEMA’s Interim Emergency Management Planning Guide for
Special Needs Populations (August 15, 2008) include individuals in need of additional response assistance, individuals
with disabilities, individuals who live in institutionalized settings, elderly individuals, children, people from diverse
cultures who have limited English proficiency or who are non-English speaking, and those who lack transportation.
22 David M. Dosa, Nancy Grossman, Terrie Wetle, and Vincent Mor, “To Evacuate or Not to Evacuate: Lessons
Learned from Louisiana Nursing Home Administrators Following Hurricanes Katrina and Rita,” Journal of the
American Medical Directors Association, vol. 8 , no. 3 (March 2007), p. 147.
23 U.S. Congress, House Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation for and Response to Hurricane
Katrina, A Failure of Initiative, 109th Cong., 2nd sess., H.Rept. 109-377 (Washington: GPO, 2006), p. 113.
Congressional Research Service
5

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

Potential Congressional Issues
During a review of issues related to evacuation, displacement, and sheltering policies, Congress
might move to consider options for better integrating federal, state, and local efforts during
evacuation. Congress might also review options that address issues of inequity or reform
evacuation policy to make the decision to evacuate more precise, or take no action.
Low-Income Individuals and Households
The Stafford Act stipulates that relief and assistance be provided “without discrimination on the
grounds of ... economic status.”24 FEMA has responsibility to provide for the evacuation of
disaster victims and provide for evacuation as part of federal emergency preparedness efforts.25
Congress might assess whether existing evacuation plans and procedures comport with the
requirements of the Stafford Act, and whether other efforts are required to ensure that low-income
individuals and households receive necessary aid.
The Evacuation of Children26
Months after Hurricane Katrina struck, over 5,000 children from affected areas were reported as
missing to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children.27 In response to the
challenges of family reunification, the National Commission on Children in Disasters
recommended developing a “standardized, interoperable, national evacuee tracking and family
reunification system that ensures the safety and well-being of children.”28 The Post-Katrina
Emergency Management Reform Act29 required FEMA to establish the National Emergency
Family Registry and Locator (NEFRL) system and the National Emergency Child Locator Center
to address family reunification needs in disasters. The act also required FEMA to establish a
disability coordinator to ensure that the needs of individuals with disabilities in disasters are
addressed.
Currently, there is no similar statutory provision for a coordinator for children in disasters.
Congress might choose to consider establishing a coordinator within FEMA to ensure that the
needs of children are addressed in the development and implementation of a national,
standardized, and interoperable evacuee tracking and family reunification system.

24 42 U.S.C. 5151(b).
25 6 U.S.C. 314(a)(9)(C).
26 This section was co- authored by Natalie Keegan, CRS Analyst in American Federalism and Emergency
Management Policy.
27 National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, “National Center for Missing and Exploited Children reunites
last missing child separated by Hurricane Katrina and Rita,” press release, March 17, 2006,
http://www.missingkids.com/missingkids/servlet/NewsEventServlet?LanguageCountry=en_US&PageId=2317.
28 National Commission on Children in Disasters, Interim Report, October 14, 2009, p. 76, at
http://www.childrenanddisasters.acf.hhs.gov/home.html. The quote in the Interim Report is from 120 Stat. 1451, P.L.
109-295, § 689c.
29 P.L. 109-295, § 601, 120 Stat. 1409.
Congressional Research Service
6

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

Evacuating Foreign Nationals30
Foreign nationals living in the United States face particular problems during natural disasters.
Lack of adequate documents for personal identification—a problem for many victims as a result
of being evacuated from their homes or the loss of or damage to personal items and records—has
specific consequences under immigration laws. Enforcement of immigration laws may also
inhibit foreign nationals’ access to emergency disaster relief. According to §401 of the Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996,31 unauthorized aliens are
eligible for short-term, in-kind emergency disaster relief assistance that delivers in-kind services
at the community level, provides assistance without individual determinations of each recipient’s
needs, and is necessary for the protection of life and safety. Unauthorized aliens who are
receiving federal disaster aid, however, have no immunity from deportation, according to DHS
officials. In the aftermath of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita in 2005, many displaced aliens
reportedly feared that seeking government help might lead to their deportation. DHS arrested,
detained, and ordered deported an unspecified number of unauthorized aliens displaced by the
2005 hurricanes.32 It is possible that this situation may inhibit those who fear deportation from
evacuating, potentially placing these individuals at risk during catastrophic incidents. Congress
might elect to review the relationship between evacuation policy and immigration policy.
Federal, State, and Local Integration
In conjunction with DHS, the U.S. Department of Transportation issued a report entitled Report
to Congress on Catastrophic Hurricane Evacuation Plan Evaluation. The report found that
federal, state, and local emergency plans and operations for evacuations were not well
integrated.33 Congress could consider measures to improve jurisdictional integration.
Technology
Congress might consider expanding FEMA grants for the research and development of
technologies that could improve evacuation planning and decision making. Current advances in
technology include the use of geographic information systems (GIS) to help emergency managers
make more informed decisions regarding evacuations. Some of the ways in which GIS can be
used are determining efficient evacuation routes and identifying and mapping areas containing
populations who might have difficulty evacuating (e.g., nursing home residents, hospital patients,
and non-English speaking groups). Recently, GIS and aerial photography were combined to
create a real-time application called “Virtual Alabama.” The program offers a panoramic view of
the Alabama coastline, allowing emergency mangers to direct assets and responders where they

30 This section was authored by Ruth Ellen Wasem, CRS Specialist in Immigration Policy.
31 P.L. 104-193, 110 Stat. 2105.
32 For further analysis, see CRS Report RL34500, Unauthorized Aliens’ Access to Federal Benefits: Policy and Issues,
by Ruth Ellen Wasem; CRS Congressional Distribution Memorandum, Noncitizen Eligibility for Disaster-Related
Assistance, by Alison Siskin, February 15, 2002; and CRS Report RL33091, Hurricane Katrina-Related Immigration
Issues and Legislation, by Ruth Ellen Wasem.
33 U.S. Department of Transportation, in cooperation with the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, Report to
Congress on Catastrophic Hurricane Evacuation Plan Evaluation, June 1, 2006, chapter 5, “Findings and
Recommendations,” at http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/reports/hurricanevacuation/chapter5.htm.
Congressional Research Service
7

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

are needed most. The program also allows for real-time evacuation routing and vehicle and asset
tracking.34
A citizen-evacuation system is also being developed that employs radio-frequency identification
(RFID) and wireless technologies to help individuals during emergencies and disasters. When
finished, the system should provide real-time information on evacuees to assist officials in
tracking the evacuation of special-needs populations and tracking individuals to help reunite
families after an emergency or a disaster. The system is also designed to help reduce the number
of dangerous search-and-rescue operations that need to be conducted during and after disasters.35
Another example of an emerging technology might be a software tool that applies operations
research methods to help emergency managers better decide whether and when to order
evacuations.36 Using operation research methods enables a modeler to identify bottlenecks in
evacuations and predict problems and solutions for a complex evacuation situation. This tool
might aid emergency managers in conducting evacuations more efficiently by clearing out
inhabitants in stages. Software and other tools could also help planners optimize the location of
relief supplies before a hurricane made landfall.37 Congress could consider approaches for making
such technology more readily available to state and local emergency managers, or fund further
research in the area.
Re-entry into Evacuated Zones
Evacuation policy may present difficult choices to inhabitants of hazardous areas. Whereas
individuals who choose not to evacuate remain in their residences and retain access to their
property, evacuees may not be granted reentry to their residences for prolonged periods of time.
This tension may be problematic for the implementation of evacuation policy for at least two
reasons. First, it creates a disincentive to evacuate and potentially places individuals at risk
because some may be concerned about being absent from their property for a prolonged period.
Second, it may create an inequity between those who evacuate and those who stay, because those
who remain may be able to protect their property and begin the recovery process more quickly
than those who evacuate. If this topic were of interest, Congress might explore options related to
this tension. For example, Congress might create incentives for individuals to evacuate and create
mechanisms to ensure a timely yet safe return to an evacuated area.
Many city and county codes require damaged residences to be inspected before individuals are
allowed to re-enter their homes. After large disasters, however, there often is a lack of inspectors
available for conducting inspections. If Congress addressed this concern, it might consider

34 Testimony of Alabama Department of Homeland Security Director James M. Walker, Jr., in U.S. Congress, House
Committee on Homeland Security, Subcommittee on Management, Investigations, and Oversight, Ready to Lead? DHS
and the Next Major Catastrophe, 110th Cong., June 11, 2008, at http://homeland.house.gov/SiteDocuments/
20080611154609-65973.pdf.
35 Michael Keating, “Texas Taps AT&T to Develop Emergency Evacuation and Notification Tool,” GovPro,
December 5, 2007, at http://www.govpro.com/News/Article/76845/.
36 Operations Research applies mathematical modeling, statistics, probability queuing theory, decision analysis, and
similar techniques to solve complex management problems.
37 For example, see MIT News, Saving Lives Through Smarter Hurricane Evacuations, David Chandler, MIT News
Office, August 28, 2008, at http://web.mit.edu/newsoffice/2008/hurricanes-0828.html.
Congressional Research Service
8

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

expanding the Stafford Act’s Public Assistance program38 to include programs that bring outside
inspectors to an affected area to hasten the inspection process.
Additionally, Congress might choose to investigate evacuee expenditures for re-entry to
determine if the matter warrants federal assistance such as grant assistance, small loans, or, as
proposed in H.R. 2953, a tax credit or deduction for evacuation victims.
Citizen Participation in Evacuation Planning
It has been argued that the success of an evacuation is significantly enhanced when citizens
participate in evacuation planning. Citizens, according to this argument, are less likely to resist
evacuation orders when there is increased citizen participation because they believe they had a
say in how the evacuations should be conducted.39 Congress might explore options for increasing
citizen participation in state and local evacuation planning. Congress could also explore options
to help state and local governments carry out evacuations (see H.R. 327 Error! Reference source
not found.and S. 1485) or pass legislation that would help disseminate information to the public
(see S. 1649Error! Reference source not found.). Such options might increase citizen “buy-in”
and could lead to more complete evacuations.
Evacuation Fatigue
Hurricanes generally occur in close succession, which sometimes necessitates more than one
evacuation. Under such circumstances, individuals may become “burned out” and reluctant to
heed orders to evacuate. This was a concern for officials during Hurricane Ike; they stated that
evacuation fatigue may have contributed to an incomplete evacuation. If Congress wished to
address this issue, it could offer grants to universities and colleges to study evacuation fatigue and
produce methods to increase citizen participation in evacuations, even when they occur in
succession.
Returning and Relocating Evacuees
In addition to removing people from a hazardous area, successful evacuation plans also address
strategies for returning and relocating residents when it is safe for the area to be inhabited again.
Section 425 of Post-Katrina Act amends the Stafford Act to provide transportation assistance to
relocate displaced individuals to and from alternative locations for short- or long-term
accommodation, or to return an individual or household to the predisaster primary residence, or
an alternative location.
This amendment expands the role of the federal government beyond merely assisting states and
localities in evacuations by authorizing the federal government to return evacuees to their
predisaster residences. Furthermore, administering the return of evacuees raises issues that may
involve oversight by Congress. If evacuees were flown out of the area, does the federal
government cover the cost for return airfare? Or can the return of evacuees be accomplished with
a less expensive mode of transportation such as a bus? Since the Hurricane Katrina evacuation,

38 42 U.S.C. 5172 § 406.
39 Ronald Perry and Alvin Mushkatel, Minority Citizens in Disasters (Athens, GA: University of Georgia Press, 1986),
p. 144.
Congressional Research Service
9

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

many individuals and households have purchased new furnishings and other belongings. Is the
federal government responsible to pay for the return of these belongings? If so, the federal
government may have to reimburse individuals and households for such items as moving vans
and rental trucks. If individuals and households are not reimbursed for moving their belongings,
some may not have the economic means to do so themselves.
On August 13, 2008, the National Advisory Committee (NAC)40 stated that while it supports the
return of disaster victims to their homes when transported by FEMA, NAC could not reach a
consensus on how to proceed with the return policy and identified some concerns relating to the
issue.41 For one, NAC noted that providing transportation for evacuees back to their homes may
prove to be difficult for FEMA to manage. Another concern was the clarity of the policy. NAC
requested that FEMA establish clear guidance concerning the criteria for transportation
assistance. Some might argue that such concerns indicate a need for congressional oversight. If
this amendment proves costly or difficult to administer, Congress might elect to re-examine this
policy.
Pending Legislation in the 111th Congress Related to Evacuations
H.R. 244
H.R. 244, “To Provide for the Security of Critical Energy Infrastructure,” was introduced by
Representative Gene Green and referred to the Energy and Commerce Committee on January 7,
2009. Section I of the bill, “Evacuation Plan Review,” would require the Secretary of Energy to
submit to Congress an annual report of the Secretary’s review of the fuel supply plan components
of state and National Capitol region evacuation plans. The Secretary’s report would be used to
determine the sufficiency of such plans and would include potential recommendations for
improvements.
H.R. 327
H.R. 327, the “National Hurricane Research Initiative Act of 2009,” was introduced by
Representative Alcee Hastings and referred to the Science and Technology Committee,
Subcommittee on Research and Science Education, on January 8, 2009. The bill would establish
the National Hurricane Research Initiative under the Under Secretary and Director of the National
Science Foundation. Section 3(a)(i) would require research to improve the manner in which
hurricane-related information is provided to, and utilized by, the public and government officials.
H.R. 327 would also provide for research to assist officials of state or local governments in
determining the circumstances in which evacuations are required and in carrying out such
evacuations.

40 The National Advisory Council (NAC) advises the Administrator of FEMA on all aspects of emergency
management. NAC incorporates input from state, local, and tribal governments, as well as the private sector, in the
development and revision of the national preparedness goal, the national preparedness system, the National Incident
Management System, the National Response Framework, as well as other related plans and strategies. The Council is
Authorized by Section 508 of the Homeland Security Act of 2002 (P.L. 107-296), as amended by Section 611 of the
Post-Katrina Act, as set forth in the Department of Homeland Security Appropriations Act of 2007 (P.L. 109-295),
which directs the Secretary of Homeland Security to establish the NAC. The NAC is established in accordance with
and operates under the provisions of the Federal Advisory Committee Act (FACA), 5 U.S.C. App. (P.L. 92-463).
41 Minutes from the National Advisory Council meeting in Washington, DC, held on August 13, 2008.
Congressional Research Service
10

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

H.R. 431
H.R. 431, the “Emergency Fueling Station Designation Act of 2009,” was introduced by
Representative Ted Poe and referred to the Transportation and Infrastructure Committee,
Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings and Emergency Management, on
January 9, 2009. The bill would amend Title II of the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and
Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5131) by establishing emergency fueling stations. Section
205 presents a number of provisions addressing evacuations. For example, Section 205(a) would
establish a program to address the shortage of fuel along hurricane evacuation routes by providing
funds to such states to assist in the purchase and installation of transfer switches and generators at
designated emergency fueling stations selected by an eligible state.42 Section 205(b)(1) would
also require the identification of hurricane zones and evacuation routes for the eligible states, and
Section 205(b)(5) would require that each designated emergency fueling station have a generator
capable of running for 72 or more hours that would be used only in the case of a hurricane in
which a political subdivision of a state ordered an evacuation.
H.R. 434
H.R. 434, “To amend Title 5, United States Code, to Permit Access to Databases Maintained by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency for Purposes of Complying with Sex Offender
Registry and Notification Laws, and for Other Purposes,” was introduced by Representative Ted
Poe and referred to the Oversight and Government Reform Committee and Transportation and
Infrastructure Committee on January 9, 2009, and referred to the Subcommittee on Information
Policy, Census, and National Archives on February 24, 2009. The bill would amend Title III of
the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 5121 et seq.).
Section 327(a) would require that the evacuation be carried out in compliance with federal or
state sex offender registry or notification laws.
H.R. 748
H.R. 748, “the CAMPUS Safety Act of 2009,” was introduced by Representative Robert Scott on
January 28, 2009. The bill passed the House on February 3, 2009, and was referred to the Senate
Judiciary Committee on February 4, 2009. Section 3021 of the act would create a National Center
for Campus Public Safety. The center would serve as a clearinghouse for the identification and
dissemination of information, policies, procedures, and best practices relevant to campus public
safety, including off-campus housing safety, the prevention of violence against persons and
property, and emergency response and evacuation procedures.
H.R. 2953
H.R. 2953, the “Evacuees Tax Relief Act of 2009,” was introduced by Representative Ron Paul
and referred to the Ways and Means Committee on June 18, 2009. The bill would amend the
Internal Revenue Code of 1986 to allow individuals either a credit against income tax or a
deduction for expenses paid or incurred by reason of a voluntary or mandatory evacuation.

42 Eligible states are Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, South Carolina, Texas, and
Virginia.
Congressional Research Service
11

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

H.R. 3416
H.R. 3416, the “Disaster Assistance Voting Act of 2009,” was introduced by Representative Artur
Davis and referred to the House Administration Committee and Transportation and Infrastructure
Committee on July 30, 2009, and the Subcommittee on Economic Development, Public Buildings
and Emergency Management on July 31, 2009. Section 2 of the bill would extend to individuals
evacuated from their residences as a result of a major disaster the right to use the absentee
balloting and registration procedures available to military and overseas voters under the
Uniformed and Overseas Citizens Absentee Voting Act. The bill would also direct the Election
Assistance Commission to make grants to states to respond to election administration needs
resulting from a major disaster.
S. 1485
S. 1485, the “National Hurricane Research Initiative Act of 2009,” was introduced by Senator
Mel Martinez on July 21, 2009, and referred to the Committee on Commerce, Science, and
Transportation on July, 28, 2009. Section 7 of the bill would establish a research program to
improve the manner in which hurricane-related information is provided to, and utilized by, the
public and government officials, including research to assist officials of state, tribal, regional, or
local governments in determining the circumstances in which evacuations are required and
carrying out such evacuations.
S. 1649
S. 1649, the “Weapons of Mass Destruction Prevention and Preparedness Act of 2009,” was
introduced by Senator Joseph Lieberman and referred to the Homeland Security and
Governmental Affairs Committee on September 8, 2009. Section 525(2)(B) of the bill would
require that prescripted templates be designed to provide accurate, essential, and appropriate
information and instructions to the population directly affected by a disaster or an incident,
including information related to evacuation, sheltering in place, and issues of immediate health
and safety.
S. 2898
S. 2898, the “Child Safety, Care, and Education Continuity Act of 2010,” was introduced by
Senator Mary Landrieu and referred to the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions Committee on
December 17, 2009. Section 401 would require that each state that receives funds under the Child
Care and Development Block Grant Act of 1990 (42 U.S.C. 9858 et seq.) develop a disaster plan,
as recommended by the National Commission on Children and Disasters, that includes guidelines
for evacuation, reunification, temporary operating standards, and special-needs populations.
Concluding Observations
Prior to Hurricane Katrina, evacuations were primarily a state and local responsibility. Because of
lessons learned from Hurricane Katrina, federal policy now establishes national standards.
Federal legislation authorizing the return or relocation of evacuees was enacted after Hurricane
Katrina. Also, Congress amended the Stafford Act to ensure that transportation-dependent groups
are included in state and local evacuation plans. President Obama’s platform of addressing the
Congressional Research Service
12

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

requirements of special-needs populations in evacuation policy may also deepen federal
involvement.43
As the federal government becomes more involved in evacuations, there may be a fundamental
shift in the roles and responsibilities of the various actors involved in evacuations. Federal
assumption of more responsibility in evacuations creates standards and guidelines for states and
localities to follow. While some may contend that this shift will save lives, others may argue that
an increased federal role will intrude on state sovereignty, or result in an unfunded mandate.
As it currently stands, states and localities will have to increase planning, dedicate resources, and
possibly shift priorities as they work to ensure that special-needs groups are not left out of
evacuation plans. The identification of transportation-dependent groups is part of the evacuation
process. According to Government Accountability Office (GAO) testimony, some emergency
management officials did not have a good understanding of the size, location, and composition of
the transportation disadvantaged in their communities.44 Thus, Congress might elect to monitor
how well states and localities are (1) identifying populations who may experience difficulty
evacuating; (2) incorporating these groups into evacuation plans, and updating them periodically
as demographic characteristics change; and (3) anticipating potential problems in their evacuation
planning, rather than merely using the lessons learned from past failures.

43 Obama and Biden 2008 campaign website, at http://origin.barackobama.com/issues/homeland_security/.
44 United States Government Accountability Office, Disaster Preparedness: Preliminary Observations on the
Evacuation of Vulnerable Populations Due to Hurricanes and Other Disasters, GAO/GAO-06-790T, May 18, 2006, p.
4.
Congressional Research Service
13

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

Appendix. Statutory Authority for Evacuations
Table A-1 lists examples of evacuation-related statutes. Although the provisions address many
issues, two prevalent themes are (1) integrating federal, state, and local evacuation efforts; and (2)
addressing equity issues that may arise as a result of an evacuation.
Table A-1. Selected Federal Evacuation Authorities45
General Federal Evacuation Policy
Summary
Citation
Approved
Federal employees and their dependents may receive federal
5 U.S.C. §§ 5709,
July
4,
1966
assistance if they must evacuate.
5725
The need for a mass evacuation may meet the criteria for a
6 U.S.C. § 701(4)
Oct. 4, 2006
catastrophic incident.
The role of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) 6 U.S.C. § 314
Nov. 25, 2002
includes evacuating disaster victims.
Evacuation Preparedness
Summary
Citation
Approved
Emergency preparedness activities include non-military civilian
42 U.S.C. § 5195a
May 22, 1974
evacuation of personnel during hazards.
National Construction Safety Teams (NCSTs) must evaluate
15 U.S.C. §§ 7301,
Oct.
01,
2002
technical aspects of evacuation procedures and recommend
7307-7308
research.
Emergency plans completed by local emergency planning
42 U.S.C. § 11003
Oct. 17, 1986
committees (LEPCs) must include evacuation plans.
Owners of facilities where a hazardous chemical release occurs
42
U.S.C.
Oct.
17,
1986
must provide information on precautions to be taken, including
§11004(b)(2)
evacuation.
The Secretary of Transportation must establish incident
46 U.S.C. § 70104(b)
Nov. 25, 2002
response plans for facilities and vessels that include evacuation
procedures.
Congressional finding that private and public sector emergency
P.L.
108-458,
Dec. 17, 2004
preparedness activities should include evacuation plans.
§ 7305,
118 Stat. 3848
The Director for Emergency Communications shal provide
6 U.S.C. § 721
Oct. 4, 2006
technical assistance to states and localities to develop
evacuation plans.
Amends the Stafford Act to ensure that state and local
42
U.S.C.
§
Oct. 4, 2006
emergency preparedness operational plans address the needs of
5170b(a)(3)(J)
individuals with household pets and service animals following a
major disaster or emergency.

45 A recent statutory search of the Legislative Information System (LIS) system using the term “evacuations” revealed
roughly 1,700 statutory provisions concerning some component of evacuation. Bonnie Mangan, Information Research
Specialist in the CRS Domestic Social Policy Division, Knowledge Services Group, assisted with the compilation of
this list.
Congressional Research Service
14

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress

Special-Needs
Summary
Citation
Approved
All public transportation agencies that are deemed to be at high
6 U.S.C. §
Aug. 3, 2007
risk of a terrorist attack, as determined by the DHS Secretary,
1134(c)(2)(C)
must include appropriate evacuation and communication
measures for the elderly and individuals with disabilities.
FEMA is responsible for supporting state, local, and tribal
6 U.S.C. §
Oct. 4, 2006
governments in creating operational plans for mass evacuations
753(b)(4)(A)(I)(ii)(iii)
that include short- and long-term sheltering and
accommodation. Operational plans must also contain provisions
to help populations with special needs, keep families together,
and expedite the location of missing children.
The disability coordinator of a major disaster is responsible for
6 U.S.C. § 321b(b)(6) Oct. 4, 2006
promoting the accessibility of telephone hotlines and websites
for the purposes of emergency preparedness, evacuations, and
disaster relief.
FEMA is authorized to provide grants to states and localities
6 U.S.C. § 321a(a)(1)
Oct. 4, 2006
through the State Homeland Security Grant Program, or the
and (b)(4)
Urban Area Security Initiative, for the development and
maintenance of mass evacuation plans, including provisions for
individuals located in hospitals, nursing homes, and other
institutional living facilities.
FEMA is authorized to provide grants for states and localities to
6 U.S.C. §
Oct. 4, 2006
develop procedures for informing the public of an evacuation,
321a(b)(5)(a)(b)(c)
including individuals with disabilities or other special needs,
individuals with limited English proficiency, or others who might
have difficulty interpreting evacuation information.


Congressional Research Service
15

---

Federal Evacuation Policy: Issues for Congress



Author Contact Information

Bruce R. Lindsay

Analyst in American National Government
blindsay@crs.loc.gov, 7-3752

Acknowledgments
This report was adapted from CRS Report RS22235, Disaster Evacuation and Displacement Policy: Issues
for Congress, by Keith Bea.

Congressional Research Service
16

---