NRT Plan Reconciliation Analysis

Department of Homeland Security

And the NRT / RRTs

CDR Ray Perry

2

Project Purpose

Conduct an analysis of the Federal emergency response plans to identify

conflicts and gaps in coverage, as well as a review of authorities for each plan.

&

Provide recommendations to address identified conflicts & gaps.

3

NRT Plan Reconciliation AnalysisBackground

Four plans considered in the analysis: FRP, NCP, FRERP, & CONPLAN.

May 23, 02 – Analysis was adopted by NRT as a Project. (1st meeting Sept 2002)

November 05, 02 - Interim Brief # 1 to OHS.

January, 06 - Interim Brief # 2 to OHS.

4

Recommendations

(12 of 22)

5

Develop a “One Plan” document that clearly lays out the relationships, reconciles the differences, covers the gaps, and bridges, but does not reinvent the FRP, NCP, FRERP and the CONPLAN. The FRP should be the basis for this plan and amended to clearly allow implementation without a presidential declaration.

The existing plans and the “One Plan” (assuming it uses existing plans as its base), should clarify which Federal agency has the lead in different types of emergencies and when multiple plans apply.

6

The role & responsibilities of the “LFA” & supporting agencies at national, regional and on-scene levels needs to be decided as a policy matter and clarified in the “one plan” or plans.

As much as possible, standardize the methodology and terminology for federal government response management organizations and resources to ensure a smoother integration of plans when more than a single plan applies during an incident.

7

NIIMS based ICS/UC should be adopted nationally by federal government as the “on scene” management system.

A bridging document that seeks to reconcile the various federal plans needs to rise above the level of a plan itself. Since plans are a subset of preparedness, the document should focus on preparedness as a strategy and the plans as key factors of that strategy. Use the preparedness model in the next slide to incorporate all elements of preparedness in the “One Plan” and all the subordinate plans.

8

Preparedness Model

Non-GovernmentCapabilities

Non-GovernmentCapabilities

EvaluationsEvaluations

Plans & Policy

Plans & Policy

GovernmentCapabilitiesGovernmentCapabilities

Team- Training,Exercises & Actual

events

Team- Training,Exercises & Actual

events

Stakeholder Outreach & Engagement

Outcome : Successful Response

9

Planning must include a structure to implement the preparedness model depicted in No. 9 at the national, regional and local levels. The structure should be supported by funding, & mandated participation by the response organizations. (Note: The NCP, with its NRT, RRTs & APCs/LEPCs comes closest to this structure. FRERP has a similar structure, but applies only to areas having Nuclear Power Plant

OSHA should provide assistance to the “LFA” by being the primary support agency for technical expertise & risk management of worker safety & health. Responder & recovery worker safety & health should be explicitly addressed in the federal response plan(s).

10

Private sector responsibilities and role in preparedness & response needs to be included in the federal plans.

Coordination with DOD needs to continue in order to identify conditions under which DOD might be in the lead, develop a process for requesting DOD assets as needed, & establish a communications process so local and DOD communication can take place effectively.

11

Enhanced interagency biological response planning is needed. One approach would be to strengthen ESF #8 – Health & Medical Services, ESF # 10 – Hazardous Materials, & ESF # 11 – Food Groups of the FRP. The planning should ensure that appropriate roles and responsibilities are defined for both biological agents with an environmental component & those without.

Develop legislation or policy to address shortfalls and coordination of funding (Stafford Act, Price-Anderson Act, CERCLA, Oil Pollution Fund).

END

12

NRT Plan Recon. Analysis Score CardRecommendation HS PD-5 NRP Leg. Auth.

1. Develop plan that reconciles & bridges, but does not replace

(16)April 1, 03

2. Clarify Federal Lead

3. Clarify Roles & Responsibilities of LFA +

(4) (8) (9) (10) (11)

4. Announce LFA

5. Process to Transfer the Lead

6. Procedures at Fed.Bldings

7. Standard Methodology & Terminology

(15)

8. NIIMS based ICS/UC (15)(16a)(18)(19b)

9. Preparedness Model (12) (16d)

10. Structure to Implement Preparedness

Sept. 1, 03

11. OSHA Assistance to LFA

12. Security (Prsn/Info/OPSEC) Sept. 1, 03

13

NRT Plan Recon. Analysis Score Card

Recommendation HS PD-5 NRP Leg. Auth.13. Private Sector Resp. & Role (7) April, 1, 03

14. Coordination with DOD (9)

15. Enhance Biological Resp.

16. Include Special Teams Info.

17. Address Coordination & Shortfalls in Funding

Sept. 1, 03

18. Support/Fund Preparedness (#9)

Sept. 1, 03

19. Develop Publ. Info/Risk Comms Protocols

20. Multiple Incident Resource Mngt. Mechanism-Cons. SONS

21. Data Management Sys

22. Address Long Term Recovery & Remediation

14

This Next Presentation Provides an Overview of DHS.

Much of the Information is Predecisional and should NOT be

Considered Endorsed by the DHS or the CG

Provides a Point of Reference forNRT / RRTs to move forward

15

Keep In Mind:

The NRS is the most Comprehensive & Best in place today, but can be improved;

Unity of Purpose;

Window Of Opportunity; and

In this time of Change, if it is not broken?

Protect It.

16

SecretaryDepartment of Homeland Security

Thomas J. Ridge

SecretaryDepartment of Homeland Security

Thomas J. Ridge

Deputy Secretary of Homeland SecurityGordon R. England

Deputy Secretary of Homeland SecurityGordon R. England

S&TDr.Charles McQuery

S&TDr.Charles McQuery

IAIPJohn C. Gannon?

IAIPJohn C. Gannon?

B&TSAsa Hutchinson

B&TSAsa Hutchinson

ManagementJanet Hale

ManagementJanet Hale

EP&RMichael D. Brown

EP&RMichael D. Brown

Department of Homeland Security

Coast GuardCoast GuardSecret ServiceSecret Service

17

Know Now

President Wants One “Coordinator” for Emergency Response.

DHS Will Coordinate Preparedness & Responses to All Hazards: Intentional; Accidental; and Natural.

Announcement on Field Structure Should be made in the Near Future.

18

Regional Integration Concept

OneDepartment

Pre-DHS

IntegratedOperations

• Strong Regions*• Enhanced Security• Unity of Purpose

• Clear Chains of Authority • New Capabilities Created• Duplicative Efforts Eliminated

Independent AgenciesIn Various Departments

Functional AlignmentIntegrated At Region

19

Proposed DHS Regional StructureProposed DHS Regional Structure

II

IIIIII

IIII

IVIV

VIIIVIII

VIIVII

VIVI

VV

CT, MA, ME, NH, NJ, NY, RI, VT

IA, KS, MO, NE, CO, SD, UT, WY

IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI

AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN, PR, VI

DC, DE, MD, PA, VA, WV

I

II

III

IV

V

VI

VII

VIII

AR, LA, NM, OK, TX

AZ, CA, HI, NV

AK, ID, OR, WA, MT, ND

20

SecretaryDeputy Secretary

Coast GuardComponent

The Other FiveRegions

Mid AtlanticRegion

SoutheastRegion

RegionOpsCen

Coast GuardCommandant

Port/District/SectorCG COTP

Port/District/SectorBCBP Director

Port/District/SectorBICE SAIC

Port/District/SectorFSD (airport)

HQ CommandCenter

VerticalAlignment

Great LakesRegion

Port/District/Sector

Coordination CenterPort/District/Sector

Coordination CenterPort/District/Sector

Coordination CenterPort/District/Sector

Coordination Center

21

RegionalStaff

DHS RegionalDirector

Coast GuardComponent Commander

TSAComponent Commander

CustomsComponent Commander

Bureau ofBorder SecurityComponent Cdr.

Port / District

IntelligenceOperationalPlanning

OperationsCenter

Operational &Contingency

Plans & Exercises

Public AffairsExternal Liaison

Northcom & FBI

E.A. & LegalStaff

Routine OperationsNon-Routine HLS Operations

22

Plays major support role in maritime security

BCBPBureau of Customs and Border

Inspections

BICEBureau of Inspections

and Customs Enforcement

Port Director

No Single BICE POC

FPS

Customs Investigations/Foreign

Ops Air Marine

Div Intelligence

INS Intelligence Investigations Detention & Removal

TSA

Federal Security Director (FSD)

Border Patrol Sector Chief

COTP/FOSC: The Way Ahead Under DHS

Our New DHS Partners in the Port : The Border & Transportation Security Directorate

Prevent Terrorist/WMD Entry

Facilitate Flow of Legitimate commerce

Customs Inspections

INS Inspections

APHIS

23

COTP/FOSC Alignment with DHS Partners: How it all adds up:

Consistent Relationships +

Shared Data +

Shared Intelligence +

Common Operating Picture +

Standard Operating Procedures+

Unity of Effort =________________________

Enhanced Port Security

COTP/FOSC: The Way Ahead Under DHS

24

Notional Transition Steps for Regions

02/01 02/08 02/15 02/22 03/01 04//07 05/05 06/02 Jul Sep Dec Mar 04 Jul 04

Ports, Districts& Sectors

Regions

DHS OpCenDirectorates

BTS AlignmentBTS

Ports, Districts & Sectors Stand-up

DHS Procurement

DHS Personnel Mgmt.

Baseline Coordination RD, Intel, CIP & Plans

OpCens for Responses

Ops/Resp & Resource/Rqmnts

OpCens for all Ops/Responses

Regions Fully Operational

The End

Any Answers?