The deficiencies of the troubled and much-criticized governmental response to Hurricane Katrina in September 2005 has been attributed, in part, to the failure to establish adequate emergency preparedness standards or to adhere to standards that were established. This is not a new issue for congressional concern. The report issued by the National Commission on Terrorist Attacks Upon the United States (also referred to as the "9/11 Commission") also identified emergency response gaps evident after the attacks of September 11, 2001. In short, while heroic actions after both catastrophes saved thousands of people, many lives were lost, in part because standard procedures were not in place, or were not followed, and because standardized technologies had not yet been developed or were not used by participating agencies. To correct those deficiencies, the 9/11 Commission report included recommendations that emergency response standards be adopted nationwide. Investigations and reviews conducted after Hurricane Katrina address the same concerns, and the Senate and White House reports included recommendations as well. Through enactment of the Intelligence Reform and Terrorism Prevention Act of 2004 (P.L. 108-458) Congress addressed these recommendations. In addition, the Department of Homeland Security has taken administrative action to establish and implement standards to improve emergency response capabilities. Also, legislation before the 109th Congress (S. 3721, H.R. 5351, H.R. 5316) would continue to shape federal policy on emergency preparedness standards. Questions that might be raised as Congress debates the pending legislation include the following: Would federally imposed or endorsed standards diminish the authority and ability of state and local governments to establish operational procedures that best fit the needs of their communities? Would the imposition of standards through legislation raise unfunded mandate concerns? What effect might the adoption of such st