1 / 31

HSEEP AND REP

gervaise
Download Presentation

HSEEP AND REP

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

    1. HSEEP AND REP A Tale of Two Methodologies Session 15 - March 30, 2010 HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 0

    2. Acknowledgements We wish to thank Michele Skiermont, Sam Guerrera, Barbara Culverhouse, Harry Sherwood, LaTonya Stephens and Sara Kaminske for their contributions to this presentation. HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 1

    3. HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 2

    4. State of Arizona Perspective Steve Marshall Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program Manager HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 3

    5. Why? Three Separate Exercise Programs REP CSEP HSEEP Similarities Project Management Tool Differences Specific vs Generic HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 4

    6. Why Not? Same Goal Testing Plans & Procedures Document Performance Identify Gaps Improved Interoperability with OROs NRF ICS NIMS HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 5

    7. Pro’s & Con’s EEG Current TCLs do not match with REP requirements Be Careful of “Check the Block” Note Pads Preferred Use Specific Criteria Time Checks AAR More Descriptive SRF matrix would be a welcomed addition HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 6

    8. HSEEP Pilot Project Goals REP exercises added to NEP calendar Standardized criteria for EEGs Develop a nationwide template Evaluations based on traditional REP criteria HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 7

    9. AZ State EOC HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 8

    10. HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 9

    11. SONGS ExPlan Use of the ExPlan for a REP Exercise: Method, Planning and Design Challenges Successes Player responses HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 10

    12. SONGS Controller Documentation HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 11

    13. HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 12

    14. HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 13

    15. HSEEP Integration Evaluated Exercise November 4, 2009 Exercise Evaluation Guide (EEG) Development Currently the REP evaluation process uses the Exercise Preparation Guide HSEEP evaluation process uses EEGs which are designed to meet a set of target capabilities The exercise planning team worked to blend the two approaches to test radiological response plans and the concepts for integrating REP and HSEEP HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 14

    16. The BFNPP EEGs were capability based REP criterion was used as activities under each capability This aligns better with the HSEEP approach rather than criteria based EEGs Capability based EEGs were used to measure exercise outcomes through selecting specific actions from the Target Capabilities List (TCL) HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 15

    17. EEGs for Dose Assessment and Field Team Monitoring did not have activities or supporting tasks available from the TCL These were written by Alabama Department of Public Health Office of Radiation Control using the REP criteria, with modifications, to ensure their applicability for our jurisdiction EEGs can be customized by selecting subordinate activities you want to demonstrate for the capability that is being evaluated EEG DEVELOPMENT HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 16

    18. The capabilities used for the EEGs during the BFNPP Exercise were: Emergency Operations Center Management Responder Health and Safety Citizen Evacuation and Shelter in Place Emergency Public Safety and Security Emergency Public Information and Warning Communications Mass Prophylaxis Mass Care (Sheltering, Feeding, and Related Services) Weapons of Mass Destruction WMD and Hazardous Materials (Hazmat) Response and Decontamination EEG DEVELOPMENT HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 17

    19. EEG DEVELOPMENT Lessons Learned: Creating capability based EEGs v criterion based EEGs Document Control HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 18

    20. HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 19

    21. Emergency Operations Center HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 20

    22. HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 21

    23. HSEEP Pilot Project Planning Issues Training will be needed for Utility, State and Local (HSEEP, NIMS, ICS) Evaluators will complete HSEEP class on-line prior to exercise. TCL and EEGs will need to be cross walked with REP Program Manual, Extent of Play and Offsite Plan Use of REP narratives in AAR format will need to be addressed. HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 22

    24. HSEEP Pilot Project Planning Issues Current TCLs do not match with REP requirements. EEGs will be location based. - (EOC, JIC, REAT Forward, etc.) EEGs will be introduced to evaluators at Dress Rehearsal (February 4, 2009). 16 March 2010 23

    25. HSEEP Pilot Project Planning Issues Resolution of exercise issues will be done by RAC Chair Any deficiencies will be compared to current REP evaluation Exercise generated both SRF and AAR/IP. HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 24

    26. REP Using the HSEEP Process for AAR/IP Randy Hecht, South Section Chief FEMA RIV, Atlanta, GA HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 25

    27. HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 26 AAR/IP falls into this component of the HSEEP processAAR/IP falls into this component of the HSEEP process

    28. Post Exercise Schedule ED +3 Evaluators conduct post-exercise participant interviews DHS/FEMA ED +3 Conduct participants meeting DHS/FEMA ED +3 Conduct post-exercise meeting that includes the public DHS/FEMA, NRC ED +7 Conduct controller debrief and initiate consultation process State ED +7 Complete evaluation modules and narratives DHS/FEMA ED +30 Draft AAR/IP sent to OROs for review DHS/FEMA ED +60 Draft AAR/IP comments sent from ORO to Region State ED +60 Conduct After Action Conference State, Utility, DHS/FEMA ED +90 Final AAR/IP issued by Region DHS/FEMA ED +90 Share lessons learned, areas for improvement, best practices, and successes identified in final AAR State, DHS/FEMA HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 27

    29. So What About Deficiencies ED +1 Consultation process for Deficiencies initiated by RAC Chair DHS/FEMA ED +2 Conduct evaluator debrief DHS/FEMA ED +2 Notification of potential Deficiencies to DHS/FEMA Headquarters DHS/FEMA ED +10 Notification of Deficiencies to State DHS/FEMA ED +20 State acknowledges receipt of Deficiency letter and proposes schedule for remedial actions State ED +120 Deficiencies/corrective action demonstrated Evaluate and report on remedial exercises DHS/FEMA HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 28

    30. Questions HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 29

    31. Contact Information John Padilla Maricopa County Department of Emergency Management Padillaj001@mail.maricopa.gov HSEEP-REP 16 March 2010 30

More Related