NORAD USNORTHCOM Disaster Planning Field Operations 14 January 2005 LTC Jeff McKitrick

1. This Briefing is Classified UNCLASSIFIED NORAD USNORTHCOM Disaster Planning Field Operations 14 January 2005 LTC Jeff McKitrick

2. Agenda • NORAD-USNORTHCOM Exercise Program • Amalgam Virgo-Determined Promise 04 • Objectives • Legal Issues • Lessons Learned

3. Commander’s Training Guidance • Homeland Defense Planning and Operations • Interagency Planning and Operations • NORAD-USNORTHCOM Seams • Intelligence • Information Sharing • Information Operations

4. Commander’s Training Guidance • Two CONUS field training exercises a year (Ardent Sentry/Vigilant Shield) • Incident management • Homeland Defense • One exercise in Alaska a year (Northern Edge) • Homeland Defense • Civil Support • Twelve Operation Noble Eagle exercises (Amalgam Chief) • Airborne terrorist threats • Expanded maritime interception operations

5. Amalgam Virgo-Determined Promise 04

6. Air Threat Air Threat Air Threat AV-DP 04 Major Scenario Events • Air threats to Canada & US • Simultaneous attack • CM/UAV defense • QRF Deployment to Richmond, VA to secure DoD facilities • Maritime HLS and HLD threats, events • BMD/SMCC threat • Threat to NCR implied by other events • CBRNE-CM • Richmond & Hampton Roads, VA • Los Angeles & Long Beach, CA • USCG Port Security, Counter-Terrorism events BMD/SMCC Threat QRF Deployment USCG Baltimore CT, Pollution, Mass Rescue event WMD attacks WMD attacks SLCM attack MARITIME Threat

7. Amalgam Virgo/Determined Promise 04

8. AV-DP 04 Exercise Objectives • Focus Training Objectives on Joint Mission Essential Task List (JMETL) untrained and partially trained tasks • Assess Maturity of USNORTHCOM organizational structure and Concept of Operations (CONOPS) • Assess USNORTHCOM Standing Operating Procedures (SOPs) • Assess USNORTHCOM ability to Command & Control (C2) simultaneous Homeland Defense (HLD), and Military Assistance to Civil Authorities (MACA) • Demonstrate proficiency at planning and executing incident management operations in response to procedures established in the new National Response Plan • Observe, assess, evaluate SJFHQ-North concept • Observe, assess, evaluate JFHQ-NCR concept

9. AV-DP 04 Exercise Objectives cont • Exercise BMDC2 Operations and validation of USNORTHCOM’s supporting plans to USSTRATCOM’s CONPLAN • Conduct Integrated Tactical Warning and Attack Assessment (ITW/AA) • Provide Air Sovereignty (Air Surveillance and Control) • Execute Counter-Air Operations (Air Defense) • Support other US and Canadian government agencies • Operate a Chemical, Biological, Radiological, and Nuclear (CBRN) Warning and Reporting System • Conduct Full Spectrum Information Operations

10. Virginia Objectives • Request Federal Assistance from Civilian Authorities • Demonstrate the use of the Emergency Operations Center (EOC) to effectively direct, coordinate and support emergency response activities involving federal, state and local governments • Improve coordination and communication interoperability between local, state and federal agencies • Exercise EMACs • Activation of National Guard assets • Managing emerging volunteer efforts • Demonstrate and assess: incident response activities, resource management capabilities, personnel safety procedures and information management procedures • Effective implementation of the Incident Command System • Stress Management Lessons Learned (Hurricane Isabel)

11. Virginia Objectives Cont. • Demonstrate the ability to establish and maintain communications and interoperability among all appropriate response locations, organizations and personnel • Demonstrate the ability to coordinate and disseminate accurate information about the incident to the public and the media in a timely manner • Exercise Crisis Management coordination - involve all law enforcement agencies who will deal with the crime scene • Continuity of Government Operations • Test Health and Medical response at regional level • Population protection plan • Plan for overall recovery

12. California Objectives • Exercise Unified Command • Exercise National Response Plan • EOC Operations • Activate EOC • Interagency coordination • Intelligence sharing • Provide and receive mutual aid • Conduct Evacuation Operations • Respond to Mass Casualties • Deploy First Responders • Conduct Containment Operations • Refine operation plans for MACA • Coordinate with DoD/USNORTHCOM forces

13. California Concept Live Event Live Event Simulated Event Live Event Ventura County: Train Derailment & Chemical Spill Live Event LA/LB Harbor: Large-Scale RDD & Secondary Explosions Suspect container being transported via truck/rail Simulated Event

14. Legal Issues • Family Assistance Center for Non-DoD • ROE • Quarantine • Mass-Fatality Incidents • QRF deployment • Posse Comitatus Issue • Military housing for displaced persons

15. Family Assistance Center • Military Chaplain Assistance • “DoD through the services will provide 60 Crisis Counselors for work with civilian family victims in Family Assistance Centers in support of the Commonwealth of Virginia. DoD will provide personnel who by training, expertise, or credentials, can provide to civilian family members at Family Assistance Centers any of the following types of Crisis Counseling: Critical Incident Stress Debriefings, Stress Counseling, Suicide Prevention Counseling or grief Counseling. Recommend that DoD uniformed or civilian mental health, combat stress or chaplain personnel be considered for deployment. If military chaplains are included in the deployment, their role will be restricted to provision of secular counseling services.”

16. Family Assistance Center • Military Chaplain Assistance • DOPLAW Handbook 2001 • The Establishment Clause of the First Amendment to the U.S. Constitution limits the use of military chaplains. There is no provision in the Stafford Act allowing DoD Chaplains to provide services to the civilian population of an affected area… One exception is when FEMA requests DoD Chaplains to provide non-secular counseling services…

17. Family Assistance Center • Military Chaplain Assistance • JP 3-26 (Draft) • Military chaplains may deploy in response to CM events. Requests will be from the LFA through the federal coordinating officer, the DCO, and/or the on scene JTF commander. Accordingly, military chaplains may provide religious support to civilian disaster victims during emergency operations. This ministry will be limited to the designated disaster control area and will cease with the termination of emergency operations. Moreover, the primary focus of military chaplain ministry will remain DoD personnel.

18. Family Assistance Center • Military Chaplain Assistance • DOPLAW Handbook 2004 • NO GUIDANCE PROVIDED • USNORTHCOM OSJA VIEW • Judge Advocates should continue to closely scrutinize any requests for Chaplain Assistance or Chaplain initiatives to support Disaster Assistance because of Establishment Clause limitations

19. Family Assistance Center • Legal/Casualty/Government Assistance • Coordinated by FEMA using State licensed attorneys • Possible use of Reserve Judge Advocates within the state • Interagency is better suited on advising civilians on government assistance issues • No DoD role to provide escorts for non DoD family members

20. Family Assistance Center • Security • Performed by Title 10 or State authorities • Located on/off Federal installation • Off installation security not a role for Title 10 personnel • On installation “Military Purpose Doctrine” would apply

21. ROE • UAVs/Civilian Aircraft • Engaged by Aircraft • Engaged by ADA • Engaged by Aegis Cruisers

22. Quarantine • Federal • State

23. Mass-Fatality Incidents • State/Federal • Criminal Investigation • Laws • Religious Issues • Political Issues • JP 4-06 Mortuary Affairs in Joint Operations

24. QRF Deployment • Federal Property • Non DoD Critical Infrastructure

25. Posse Comitatus Issue • Deployment of MPs to Virginia • 18 USC 2332e • 10 USC 382

26. Military housing for displaced persons • Request from FEMA (42 USC Section 5174) • Billeting • Medical • Food • Security

27. Amalgam Virgo/Determined Promise 04

28. AV-DP 04 Lessons Learned • Poor quality mission assignments • Immediate response missions are not reported to USNORTHCOM • Communication with installation not exercised • Inappropriate/Unapproved Chemical Gear • ROE and ops procedures for UAV events needs to be improved

29. Interagency/State Comments • Better feedback on availability and timing of DoD resources needed • Develop improved understanding of Military Support to Civil Authorities and Federal response capabilities for state and local government decision makers • Coordination between DoD and DHS on Interagency decisions needs to improve. • Decisions on HLS/HLD missions needs further discussion • Response timeline to RFAs needs improvement

30. Interagency/State Comments • Need to educate USNORTHCOM staff on current policy and agency responsibilities • Absence of FBI participation in the exercise resulted in missed opportunities for Homeland Security community • Commonwealth and DoD on-site coordinated directly on missions and requests instead of using established procedures outlined in Initial National Response Plan • Clarify mission assignment process