NRT Plan Reconciliation Analysis

1. 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 Plans & Policy Outcome : Successful Response GovernmentCapabilities Evaluations Stakeholder Outreach & Engagement Non-GovernmentCapabilities Team- Training, Exercises & Actual events

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 Card

13. NRT Plan Recon. Analysis Score Card

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 CGProvides 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. Department of Homeland Security SecretaryDepartment of Homeland Security Thomas J. Ridge Deputy Secretary of Homeland Security Gordon R. England Coast Guard Secret Service EP&R Michael D. Brown B&TS Asa Hutchinson Management Janet Hale IAIP John C. Gannon? S&T Dr.Charles McQuery

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 Pre- DHS Integrated Operations One Department Independent Agencies In Various Departments Functional Alignment Integrated At Region • Strong Regions* • Enhanced Security • Unity of Purpose • Clear Chains of Authority • New Capabilities Created • Duplicative Efforts Eliminated

19. VII IV I V II VIII III VI I CT, MA, ME, NH, NJ, NY, RI, VT II DC, DE, MD, PA, VA, WV III AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN, PR, VI VI AR, LA, NM, OK, TX IV IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI VII AK, ID, OR, WA, MT, ND V IA, KS, MO, NE, CO, SD, UT, WY VIII AZ, CA, HI, NV Proposed DHS Regional Structure

20. Secretary Deputy Secretary Coast Guard Commandant VerticalAlignment HQ Command Center Coast Guard Component Great Lakes Region The Other Five Regions Mid Atlantic Region Southeast Region Region OpsCen Port/District/Sector Coordination Center Port/District/Sector Coordination Center Port/District/Sector Coordination Center Port/District/Sector Coordination Center Port/District/Sector BICE SAIC Port/District/Sector BCBP Director Port/District/Sector FSD (airport) Port/District/Sector CG COTP

21. Port / District RegionalStaff DHS Regional Director Public Affairs External Liaison E.A. & Legal Staff Northcom & FBI Operations Center Operational & Contingency Plans & Exercises Operational Planning Intelligence Coast Guard Component Commander TSA Component Commander Customs Component Commander Bureau of Border Security Component Cdr. Routine Operations Non-Routine HLS Operations

22. Plays major support role in maritime security COTP/FOSC: The Way Ahead Under DHS Our New DHS Partners in the Port : The Border & Transportation Security Directorate BCBP Bureau of Customs and Border Inspections BICE Bureau of Inspections and Customs Enforcement TSA Federal Security Director (FSD) No Single BICE POC Port Director • FPS • Customs • Investigations/Foreign Ops • Air Marine Div • Intelligence • INS • Intelligence • Investigations • Detention & Removal • Customs Inspections • INS Inspections • APHIS Border Patrol Sector Chief • Prevent Terrorist/WMD Entry • Facilitate Flow of Legitimate commerce

23. COTP/FOSC: The Way Ahead Under DHS 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

24. DHS Procurement DHS OpCen Regions Fully Operational Ops/Resp & Resource/Rqmnts OpCens for Responses RD, Intel, CIP & Plans Baseline Coordination OpCens for all Ops/Responses Notional Transition Steps for Regions Regions Ports, Districts & Sectors Ports, Districts & Sectors Stand-up BTS BTS Alignment DHS Personnel Mgmt. Directorates 02/01 02/08 02/15 02/22 03/01 04//07 05/05 06/02 Jul Sep Dec Mar 04 Jul 04

25. The End Any Answers?