1 / 67

Liberty RadEx National RDD Exercise Philadelphia, PA April, 2010

Liberty RadEx National RDD Exercise Philadelphia, PA April, 2010. Liberty RadEx. This is an Exercise!. LRE Lessons Learned RRT Meeting 9/15/2010. Exercise overview Major hits, misses, and obstacles Corrective Actions (proposed) Exercise Planning & Design Suggestions.

odell
Download Presentation

Liberty RadEx National RDD Exercise Philadelphia, PA April, 2010

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. Liberty RadEx National RDD Exercise Philadelphia, PA April, 2010

  2. Liberty RadEx This is an Exercise!

  3. LRE Lessons LearnedRRT Meeting 9/15/2010 • Exercise overview • Major hits, misses, and obstacles • Corrective Actions (proposed) • Exercise Planning & Design Suggestions

  4. Draft After Action Report • Lessons learned subject to change • 1st Draft After Action Report • 2nd Draft 9/25 • Senior EPA management review October • Submit to FEMA NED November

  5. Over 1000 participants • Over 30 agencies • First NEP Exercise to focus on: • “Post-emergency” phase • WMD cleanup • “Community recovery”

  6. Participating Agencies State: PADEP & PEMA City: OEM, PDPH, PFD, PPD, PWD Local: PATCO DVRPC American Red Cross

  7. Participating Agencies Federal: DHS DOE DOJ DOI EPA FBI FEMA GSA HHS (ATSDR, CDC, HUD FDA, NIOSH, NIEHS) NPS NRC OSHA SBA USACE USCG USDA USPIS VA

  8. Exercise Overview

  9. Scenario • Radiological Dispersion Device (RDD) • Post-emergency response • ESF-10 focus (Cesium 137 cleanup) • Robust/mature ICS organization • Community recovery planning • Return & rebuild

  10. Ground Deposition to 5x Background

  11. 50 Year PAG Immediate Cleanup Prioritization Area

  12. Mandatory Temporary Relocation Area

  13. Post-Emergency Challenges • Liberty RadEx: 30 to 90 days • Detailed assessment & monitoring • Cleanup of immediate priorities • Long-term cleanup planning • Re-entry & permanent relocation • Displaced population and population living w/ radiation contamination • FEMA community recovery planning • Community involvement

  14. Incident Command Post • Unified Command • Command Staff: PIO, LNO, Safety & others • Planning, Ops, Logs and Finance • Over 80 ICS units

  15. Planning Section FRMAC/Environmental Unit Training Unit (NOTIONAL) Cleanup Planning Unit (Cleanup Advisory Forum) Resource Unit SituationUnit DocumentationUnit NAME Demobilization Unit (NOTIONAL) Check-In/ Status Recorder FRMAC DocumentControl Unit Waste Management Group Technical Advisory Panel Health and Ecological Assessment Group Field Observer Team (NOTIONAL) Community Advisory Panel Laboratory and Analysis Group Situation Report Team Advisory Team Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Team Data Interpretation and Sample Planning Team Sample Control Team Display ProcessorTeam Sample Preparation Team Data Management Group Historical/ Cultural Resources Group Private Party Oversight Team (NOTIONAL) Mobile Lab Team Laboratory Team Data Validation/ Verification Teams Field Team Fixed Lab Team Technology & Mitigation Assessment Group Database Team

  16. Operations Section Cleanup/Mitigation Branch Assessment Branch M. Aquino EnvironmentalMonitoring Branch WasteManagement Branch (NOTIONAL) Air Ops Branch (NOTIONAL) RadiologicalWorker Protection Branch Northern Area Venues Debris Zone Group Waste Material Group (NOTIONAL) ASPECT Group (NOTIONAL) Personnel and Equipment Decontamination Group Mitigation Group Radiological WorkerGroup Southern Area Venues Exclusion Zone Control Area Group (NOTIONAL) Waste Collection Group (NOTIONAL) Mitigation Team RadNet Group Waste Transportation Group (NOTIONAL) Access Control Team Dose Management Team FRMAC AerialMeasurementSystem Group (NOTIONAL) Contaminant Control Team (NOTIONAL) Rapid Response Team (NOTIONAL) Liberty Radiation Exercise IAP 207 Updated 9/19/2014

  17. Venues • ESF-10 Incident Command Post at Sheraton • JFO at FEMA Region 3 Office • 10 Field venues • EPA Region 3 & EPA HQ EOCs • Community Advisory Forum (Sheraton) • Community Recovery Facilitated Discussion (FEMA 3)

  18. Hits, Misses & Obstacles

  19. Major Hits, Misses & Obstacles LRE was a great success but not an unqualified success: Many large and small lessons learned. • 17 overall successes • 7 critical misses • 3 planning obstacles • Over 90 preparedness corrective action proposals • Over 120 exercise planning recommendations

  20. Major Success

  21. Lessons Learned • The ONLY purpose of exercises is to learn and improve • LRE big, detailed, and challenging enough to learn real lessons; not just RDD • Learn from your mistakes: LRE was a great success!

  22. Participation People – Over 1000 participants with diverse backgrounds and expertise came to learn, teach and test new skills. Agencies – Over 30 state, local, Federal and private agencies addressed a scenario that most had never planned for or exercised. Radiological Community PADEP RadPro, DOE, NRC, HHS, EPA RERT. First support of cleanup activities. First integration into ESF-10 ICS. Assumed new roles, performed well and fully supported the exercise.

  23. Logistics & Deployment Logistics Plan: Room Layout - Planning - Operations - Safety Power, Wi-Fi, LAN, Printers, Copiers Set-up 16 Rooms in Sheraton 10 field venues

  24. Logistics & Deployment • Over 1000 personnel (700 players) in specific ICS units • IT, Communications, GIS, food, transportation, and other support • 10 Field venues with support facilities • Set-up virtually “overnight”

  25. Response Support Corps

  26. Response Support Corps • Not EPA response program personnel • Volunteers for disaster response • RSC over 50% of EPA LRE participants • Met technical challenge of RDD • Staffed much of Planning Section, field teams, lab support, Rad Safety activities • Mission Essential Teams • air, water, legal, waste, lab, contracts, finance

  27. Radiation Task Force Leaders

  28. Radiation Task Force Leaders • Non-radiation personnel trained to perform radiation monitoring and assessment • 29 RTFL participated (48 trained nationally) • Supported radiation safety and dose monitoring • Staffed all assessment activities • Rotated daily to different location, equipment & assessment plan • Needed coaching Day 1 but successfully on their own by Day 3

  29. Field Venues and Activities • 10 field venues throughout Philadelphia area • Diverse assessment and mitigation activities • Challenged player’s skills & equipment • Real-world safety issues • Local interest and focus

  30. PWD NE Water Pollution Control Plant

  31. PATCO “Franklin Square” Subway Station

  32. US Coast Guard Sector Delaware Bay Base

  33. FORT MIFFLIN; National Historic Site

  34. Exercise Safety • EPA exercise priority: Safety • Real World Safety Plan (subway, water plants, dock & vessel, roadway, Level C) • Exercise Safety Plan • Included radiation worker safety & dose monitoring and management • Real-world safety issues—better than injects!

  35. Real-world safety planning and overcoming problems encountered

  36. Radiological Worker Safety – monitoring and managing worker dose

  37. Community Advisory Forum – Stakeholders • Community Advisory Panel (CAP) • 12 Philadelphia Community Leaders • Technical Advisory Panel (TAP) • 5 Government and 5 local scientists & experts • Consulted on waste handling and cleanup prioritization • Reached consensus recommendations

  38. Waste Disposal • Huge RDD challenge: no solution? • Pre-planning framed LRE waste discussion • Philadelphia RDD workshop w/ LRE scenario • Waste calculation tool • State, Locals, stakeholders recognized need for local solutions • LRE waste team players included State Rad and Waste, ACOE, NRC and EPA personnel • Developed overall waste handling plan and strategy as LRE exercise product

  39. Drills, Exercises and Training • ICS training & experience enabled EPA IMT to manage 700 players & 100s of activities • “Just-in time” training gave EPA participants needed Rad, RDD and technical skills • LRE was a success because of EPA’s ICS training, regular exercises and deployment experience

  40. EPA’s National Approach to Response • Region 3, Back-up Regions (4&5), NSTs and “voluntary” support from other Regions • 530 EPA participants: • R3 253 participants • R4 & 5 92 participants • NSTs 67 participants (RERT, ERT, NDT, NCERT) • Other Regions 49 participants • HQ 67 participants • Used ICS and National EPA procedures, policies • Equipment from across the country

  41. Other Major Successes • Back-up Region Planning, Support & Response • EPA National Disaster Planning • Approach to RDD Response • ESF-10 & ICS • Community Recovery facilitated discussion

  42. Critical Misses

  43. Orientation Monday: Lots to Learn! • Complex scenario • Specialized ICS • Over one hundred units & activities • 100,000s data points Liberty RadEx • National Tier 2 Exercise (EPA’s first) • Approximately 1000 participants representing over 30 agencies • Complex scenario/Specialized ICS • First NEP Exercise to focus on: • “Post-emergency” phase • WMD cleanup • “Community recovery” • Transition Failure: • Real-world: one on one shadowing • Not possible for exercises • Post-emergency exercise challenge.

  44. Registration: 1000 people; long, slow, painful Solution: Hire a professional and don’t use Agency software.

  45. Too little room Limited Space: Crowded, noisy, too many activities. Planned and contracted for an exercise of about 500. Solution: Overestimate logistical needs

  46. Simulated Data: Day 30 - 90100,000s multimedia data pointsAccessData productsQA/QC: It’s all fake!

  47. Historic Documentation: Day 30 – 90 Too much, too little, not right kind, confusing. 600 page Explan: Who read it? Poor transition: Didn’t explain it. Highly technical: Not the right kind.

  48. Staffing Plan • Developed staffing plan/matrix too late • Delayed assignments & training • Prevented advance orientation • Entire focus of last 6 weeks for planning team

  49. Planning Section • Short term planning (operational) vs. long-term (environmental planning) • Environmental Unit: • Overwhelmed Planning Section • Too large • Many responsibilities • Management structure and organization not adequate for size and responsibilities • Data quality and management • Dispersed between Sections and Units

  50. Planning Section FRMAC/Environmental Unit Training Unit (NOTIONAL) Cleanup Planning Unit (Cleanup Advisory Forum) Resource Unit SituationUnit DocumentationUnit NAME Demobilization Unit (NOTIONAL) Check-In/ Status Recorder FRMAC DocumentControl Unit Waste Management Group Technical Advisory Panel Health and Ecological Assessment Group Field Observer Team (NOTIONAL) Community Advisory Panel Laboratory and Analysis Group Situation Report Team Advisory Team Geographic Information Systems (GIS) Team Data Interpretation and Sample Planning Team Sample Control Team Display ProcessorTeam Sample Preparation Team Data Management Group Historical/ Cultural Resources Group Private Party Oversight Team (NOTIONAL) Mobile Lab Team Laboratory Team Data Validation/ Verification Teams Field Team Fixed Lab Team Technology & Mitigation Assessment Group Database Team

More Related