Vibrant Response 2014 (GIS Summary)

1. Vibrant Response 2014(GIS Summary) Indiana Department of Homeland Security District 5 GIS Task Force John Milburn Hancock County GIS Coordinator 111 S American Legion Pl Suite 171 Greenfield IN 46140 jmilburn@hancockcoingov.org 317-477-1150

2. What is an IDHS district GIS Task Force? • A district GIS task force (TF) exists to provide mapping support to its district Incident Management Team (IMT). • The need for this was established during the response to the Henryville tornado on March 2nd 2012. • Each task force is composed of public sector GIS professionals or private sector GIS professionals contracted by a government entity from within its district. • Each GIS TF received a grant from IDHS to develop the capacity to print maps for its IMT. • Currently district 1(Lake, Porter, LaPorte, Newton & Jasper) and district 5 (Marion, Boone, Hamilton, Hancock, Shelby, Johnson, Morgan & Hendricks) have GIS task forces. • The focus of this presentation is on district 5.

3. How does the GIS TF support the IMT? • Functionally, we do the same thing for the IMT that most of us do in our day to day jobs. They tell us want maps they want and we give them to them. • The D5 GIS TF purchased a large format plotter, laser printer, network attached storage devices, several laptops and all the odds and ends we need to network them. • The IMT logistics section did some carpentry work for us inside a trailer with a generator attached. We convoy with the IMT and setup on site.

4. Inside of GIS trailer

5. What was Vibrant Response 2014 (VR-14)? • VR-14 was a full scale training exercise hosted by U.S. Army North comprised of approximately 5,500 military and civilian personnel that simulates the response to a terrorist detonation of an improvised nuclear device in downtown Indianapolis. • The IDHS District 5 Incident Management Team (IMT) and it’s associated evaluators and Federal partners comprised roughly 30 +/- of those personnel.

6. Where and When did VR-14 Take Place? • VR-14 took place at the Muscatatuck Urban Training Complex (MUTC) and surrounding areas and ran from July 21st-Aug 7th • The D5 IMT and GIS Task Force were stationed at MUTC from July 21st-July 24th • In addition to the local responders who comprised the IMT and GIS professionals who supported them we were joined by Federal partners (primarily NWS, DoE, and EPA) who advised the IMT and/or provided the GIS Task Force with data so we could better support the IMT.

7. What were the target capacities the D5 GIS TF was attempting to demonstrate? • This was the first time the D5 GIS TF has been deployed. We were attempting to demonstrate the following capacities – • Printing 8.5”x11” maps for the IMT • Printing 24”x36” maps for the IMT • Laminating 8.5”x 11” maps for the IMT • Scanning IMT documents (identified during exercise) • Obtaining data from partner agencies (identified during exercise)

8. How did we do? • Printing 8.5”x11” maps: we printed roughly 100 8.5”x11” maps for the IMT without issue. • Printing 24”x36” maps: we were unable to use the GIS TF plotter due to one of the ink cartridges being out. The iPF6300 has eight different ink cartridges, four specialized for photo printing. The GIS TF only purchased replacement for the four standard colors (C, Y, M, Bl). We used the large format plotter in the Hamilton County command vehicle to support the IMT during VR-14. • Laminating 8.5”x11” maps: the IMT didn’t request laminated maps and this capacity is untested.

9. Additional Capacities Identified During VR-14 • Scanning IMT Documents: Scanning the Incident Management Plan (IMP) for the next day became a regular occurrence. The IMP was usually 25-30 pages long. The HP LaserJet Pro 300 struggled a little with the IMP and we had a few jams but we were able to scan the IMP to a thumb drive successfully after 2-3 tries. Humidity interacting with paper was probably a factor. • Obtaining Data from Partner Agencies: Partner agencies relied heavily on internet portals which was problematic since for most of the exercise the GIS TF had no internet connectivity. We were able to obtain mission critical data by relying on thumb drive transfers (all our Federal partners had internet connectivity).

10. So what about the maps? • The kinds of maps we produced, not surprisingly was dependent on what the IMT was being tasked with. Three distinct phases – • Initial Response, IMT as the only incident command and trying to respond to what was ultimately a multistate incident • Later, IMT being assigned a smaller Area of Response (AoR) outside of the impacted area • Finally, IMT being assigned an AoR containing the impacted area

11. Initial Maps • A lot of maps of the impact area. The IMT only seemed to care about streets, emphasis on maps that could be drawn on and aerials interfered with legibility. • The most involved maps were the projected plume map we pulled off the VR-14 falcon viewer during a brief window where we had internet access and maps showing the locations of areas where aerial fire suppression was requested.

12. Air Support Request Map

13. Smaller AoR • With the reassignment of a smaller AoR more requests come from the Operations Section • Staging Areas, Casualty Collection Points, and other sites of interest • Evacuation & Ingress Routes • Map for Transportation Plan for the end of the end of every operational period

14. IMT reassigned to smaller AoR

15. IMT Reassigned to Impacted Area • Mapping became more complex and frequently we relied on Federal partners for key data, such as the projected fallout plume. • In addition to maps similar to what we produced in the previous AoR we also produced maps denoting the radiation dose levels in the plume (this came from the Federal Radiological Monitoring & Assessment Center (FRMAC)), decontamination sites, operational grid, AoR operational divisions and traffic control points. • We also plotted maps that had been drafted by FRMAC for the DoE & EPA liaisons on site.

17. Data Shortfalls • The Operations section requested hospital locations, not just in the immediate vicinity of Indianapolis but statewide and nearby facilities in neighboring states • DoE had some interest in address points so they could produce a list of addresses that needed to evacuate. This was cancelled later • The Operations section requested fire stations at one point but shifted priorities soon after • We didn’t have any of the above data and without an internet connection were unable to retrieve it

18. Some General Observations • Dealing with the lack of internet connectivity and working large format plotter in the trailer were greater headaches than mapping. Most of the map request were pretty basic. • Neither Operations nor Planning seemed to care about aerial photography (though there were some exceptions in the initial response). In general they only wanted streets and data specific to the incident. • It’s incredibly important to become familiar with IMT members and Federal partners. We’d have never been able to work around our limitations (internet/plotter) without help.

19. Special Thanks to… • Hamilton County (especially Steve) for the use of the large format plotter on the command vehicle • The Logistics section (Mike & Jerry) for the work they did on the trailer before the exercise & for the support we received (Mark) during the exercise • Our Federal partners for letting us piggy back off their MiFi the first day (NWS) and working around our inability to connect to the internet for the rest of the exercise (DoE) • Indiana State Department of Health for letting Judy attend VR-14. • And of course both the Planning and Operations sections for making their map requests clear and understandable

20. Some Pics… D5 GIS Trailer

21. Printer/Plotter

22. Checking Generator Fuel

23. Recommendation for the future • Formulate contingencies for internet • Try to have at least one TF member with VPN access on exercises/deployments • Identify all partner agencies that have internet access during an incident so we can potentially piggyback off them • Identify datasets the IMT may need prior to deployment and retain copies in the GIS trailer • Have several contingency plans for printing in place • Nearby plotters of government entities willing to print for the IMT • Private Sector providers willing to plot for the IMT on site • Nearby printing companies that will print digital documents produced by the task force from their office for pickup

24. Ongoing problems? • Trailer weight – the IMT truck was too light to tow the trailer. We had to use a F350 from the Fishers Fire Department. We also didn’t have anyone on the GIS TF that’s experienced pulling a trailer. • Internet Access – We’re just going to have to work around this limitation as best we can. • The plotter should be an easy fix. Logistics has notified me that we’re purchasing the ink cartridges. • Lack of all the data that IMT requires – We can work on this as the IMT identifies that data it needs for response (working with ISDH for hospital data, adding address points to NAS inventory, etc). • In general, the D5 GIS TF was able to work around it’s limitations to support the IMT during VR-14 but we have plenty of room to improve.

25. What does it take to join the task force? • You need to be public-sector GIS professional or private sector GIS contracted by a government entity. • The government you work for must approve your participation and sign the IMT participant approval form. • You must be Protected Critical Infrastructure Information certified (online training for cert). • WebEOC access (work with your local EMA) • Requires some basic FEMA on-line training • IS-100.b (Intro to Incident Command System) • IS-200.b (ICS for Single Resources & Initial Action Incidents)

26. Recommendations • Complete IS-800.b National Response Framework, An Introduction • Complete IS-860.a National Infrastructure Protection Plan • Join FBI’s Infragard collaboration community • Become a Chemical-terrorism Vulnerability Information authorized user

27. If you’re interested in joining the D5 GIS TF… • Talk to either myself or Aaron Shaw. We’ll provide you training information and the participant approval form. • If the IMT is mobilized we’ll contact members to see if they’re available to deploy with the IMT. TF members are under no obligation to deploy. • We don’t serve as a replacement for local GIS when we’re deployed. We focus on the needs of the IMT. • The group meets quarterly and tries to have a least one tabletop a year.

28. Questions/Comments?