AllHazards_F2

Mid-Atlantic All Hazards Forum 2005Post-Conference Report

Contents

Preface

All Hazards Forum and Consortium Overview 3

2005 Strategic Advisory Committee 6

Participating states 7

Special thanks 8

2005 Forum 9

Session Summaries

1 Federal grants for state and local procurements 12

2 Strategies in evacuation planning 15

3 Media’s role in crisis communications 22

4 Emergency communications; interoperability 26for voice and data

5 Port security and other maritime assessments 31

6 Staying open for business in times of hazard 37

7 U.S. DHS First Responders Card initiative 42

8 National Guard Adjutant Generals: Lessons learned from Katrina 45

9 Regional transit security strategies 49

10 Strategies for critical infrastructure protection 52

11 Regional CIO perspectives roundtable 57

12 Business resources in time of crisis 61

13 Surge capacity in the health and medical fields 65

14 Implementing federal and state regionalism 68

15 Alerting the public through the use of technology 72

16 Response and recovery from a biohazard event 76

17 Who’s in charge here? Incident chain of command 82

18 Best practices on implementing Citizen Corps 85

19 DHS Office of Domestic Preparedness strategic program planning 89

About the Sponsors

Gold sponsors

AIG Business 108 Protection

Americom 108Government Services

Ciber 108

CSC 108

HAZMED 108

Official wire sponsor

Business Wire 109

Founders

IBM 95

M/A-COM/Cisco Systems, Inc. 96

Motorola 97

Oracle 98

Sun Microsystems 99

Eagles

Computer Associates 100

GE Security 101

Lucent Technologies 102

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet 103

ARINC 104

Maryland Department 105of Transportation

SMART and Associates, LLP 106

State Farm Insurance 107

Resources

Contacts 110

Publications 110

Presentations 110

Web links 110

Mid-Atlantic All Hazards Forum 2005 Post-Conference Report

Preface Session Summaries About the Sponsors Resources Preface

3

All Hazards Forum and Consortium Overview

2005 Strategic Advisory Committee

Participating states

Special thanks

2005 Forum


In 2004, emergency preparedness officials from the Mid-Atlantic region saw a need to create an event that would cross organizational and institutional boundaries, bringing a broad-based group of stakeholders in hazards preparedness, response and recovery, and homeland security together to exchange ideas and best practices, develop lasting relationships and foster an ongoing dialogue that would benefit all.

The state officials noticed that the stakeholders were already attending conferences and meetings to discuss these problems, but for the most part they were meeting only with their peers: police chiefs were going to law enforcement conferences, transportation officials were going to transportation conferences, and so on. There was no single place where communication was taking place between these silos.

The idea of a conference for the Mid-Atlantic region (NC, VA, WV, DC, MD, PA, DE, and NJ) was born. The first All-Hazards Forum in 2004 was a great success, providing an opportunity for government, industry and universities to meet face-to-face. It drew 350 attendees from 19 states, and feedback was very positive. The 2005 Forum built on that initial success, with an overall attendance of 1,700, with more than 670 attendees representing 31 states and four foreign countries.

The Forum brings together four distinct constituencies, each one of which has different capabilities and needs:

• Government– Government “owns” the problems surrounding preparedness and homeland security, as well as some of the funding to solve those problems.. .but in today’s fast-paced world of technology, government lacks the technical knowledge, at present, to match itself to appropriate technologies.

• Private sector – The private sector creates solutions, products and services that government needs in order to solve its problems. Also, critical assets are often owned by private companies, such as railroads, shipping companies and utilities. Other companies with an interest in homeland security and preparedness, such as financial institutions and insurance providers, are also part of this group.

• Universities –The universities bring independent knowledge and expertise to the equation, helping determine what solutions are appropriate. Government may need solutions, but doesn’t necessarily have the ability to clearly define what those solutions may look like. Universities provide key resources in the form of centers of excellence.

• Not-for-profits – These stakeholders play a key role in recovery and relief efforts.



4

In addition to validating the basic idea of a cross-disciplinary regional meeting, the first All Hazards Forum (AHF) spawned an ongoing outreach effort in the form of a conference call open to forum attendees that serves to help maintain contact throughout the year, giving interested parties a chance to hear about the latest best practices, new challenges and ongoing needs. The conference calls typically have 60-100 attendees, and have proven very useful as a way to cross organizational boundaries and foster communication and collaboration within the Mid-Atlantic region.

One of the annual goals of the AHF is to help collect information shared and distribute it across the U.S. to all states in order to help improve overall knowledge and coordination at the regional level. To accomplish this, the All Hazards Forum Annual Report is published, which summarizes the activities and lessons learned during the conference. It is a practical document that clearly communi-cates the issues and strategies in homeland security and emergency management as well as best practices and les-sons learned from real disasters. The AHF Annual Report also serves as a working document for all stakeholders to learn about the region’s issues, challenges, opportunities and solutions.

The All Hazards Consortium

The All Hazards Consortium (AHC) is a 501c3 organization that was conceived as an extension of the All Hazards Forum, formed to support the ongoing interactions between stakeholders, establish goals of the Forum, and provide support to homeland security and emergency management efforts. Led by a board of directors from both government and private sectors, the AHC has the following goals:

• To create an appropriate environment for government, industry, universities and nonprofits to come together to discuss issues, share best practices/ideas/strategies, and discuss plans to improve regional coordination between all stakeholders.

• To help identify, clarify and prioritize state/local government requirements for homeland security and emergency man-agement initiatives.

• To provide education, training and certification services through year-round activities.

• To provide a vehicle that could create multiple conferences across the U.S. to meet the needs of other regions.

• To help stimulate regionally coordinated planning, programs and procurements.




Special thanks

2005 Forum



5

Since its inception, the All Hazards Forum has been a grass-roots effort, formed on an ad hoc basis and adapting as needed to best serve the needs of its constituents. An important initiative being undertaken by the Consortium is the staging of regional forums and outreach programs in other parts of the country modeled on the Mid-Atlantic All Hazards Forum. Given the different challenges and resources faced by different regions, a regional structure has been chosen as the most suitable way to engage states outside the Mid-Atlantic region. This would enable the All Hazards Consortium to become a national voice for state-level home-land security and emergency management collaboration.

The value of the Forum: Personal contact

One of the most important things that the Forum provides is personal contact. “It all comes down to trust,” says John Contestabile. “There’s just no substitute for meeting people and talking to them. Once people get to know you and trust you, the network of trusted individuals grows very quickly. Humans trust other humans, not technology and processes.”




Special thanks

2005 Forum



6


Bryan BeattyNorth Carolina Department of Crime Control and Public Safety

John ContestabileMaryland Department of Transportation

Ed CurranNew Jersey Office of Counter-Terrorism

John W. DroneburgMaryland Emergency Management Agency

Evalyn FisherOffice of Pennsylvania Emergency Management

George ForesmanVirginia Office of the Governor

Kelly KirwanMotorola

Bud MertzPennsylvania Office of Homeland Security

Tom O’ReillyNew Jersey Office of Attorney General

Dennis R. SchraderMaryland Office of Homeland Security

Clay B. StampMaryland Institute for Emergency Medical Services

Tom SteeleDelaware Office of Homeland Security Systems

James TurnerDelaware Office of the Governor

Tom VitaleSun Microsystems

Ellis KitchenMaryland Department of Budget and Management

Steve KralDC Department of Public Safety and Justice

Tom LockwoodDepartment of Homeland Security

Jimmy GianatoWest Virginia Division of Homeland Security andEmergency Management

Davis MitchellDelaware Office of Homeland Security

Christy MorrisWV Department of Military Affairs and Public Safety to West Virginia




Special thanks

2005 Forum



7


District of ColumbiaSteve KrallAdministrator, Office of Homeland Securitywww.dc.gov

DelawareJames TurnerDirector, Delaware Emergency Management Administration Office of the Governorwww.delaware.gov

MarylandDennis R. SchraderDirector, Maryland Office of Homeland Securitywww.maryland.gov

New JerseySidney CaspersenDirector, Office of Counterterrorismwww.state.nj.us

North CarolinaBryan BeattySecretary, North Carolina Department of Crime Control and Public Safetywww.ncgov.com

PennsylvaniaBud MertzDirector, Pennsylvania Office of Homeland Securitywww.state.pa.us

VirginiaGeorge ForesmanAssistant to the Governor for Commonwealth Preparedness, Virginia Office of the Governorwww.virginia.gov

West VirginiaJimmy GianatoDirector, West Virginia Division of Homeland Security andEmergency Managementwww.wv.gov




Special thanks

2005 Forum

http://www.dc.gov

http://www.delaware.gov

http://www.maryland.gov

http://www.state.nj.us

http://www.ncgov.com

http://www.state.pa.us

http://www.virginia.gov

http://www.wv.gov



8

Special thanks to:

Governor Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr. and the host state of Maryland

Dennis R. SchraderDirector, Maryland Governor’s Office of Homeland Security and AHF Strategic Advisory Board Chair

John ContestabileDirector, Office of Engineering, Procurement and Emergency Services, MD Department of Transportation and AHF Executive Program Committee Chair

Tom MoranCommercial Services Network and AHF Government/Industry Liaison

Jim HerbertVice President, E.J. Krause & Associates and AHF Organizer

IBM is proud to sponsor the 2005 Mid-Atlantic All Hazards Forum Report. We’ve had 75 years of hands-on experience in the public sector – which includes Federal, State and Local governments, education and healthcare customers. Organizations operating in the public sector today face many of the toughest issues common to any industry, and it is our hope that this report provides some order and clarity to an already challenging environment.

We would like to salute the organizers, participants and attendees of this important forum as leaders in what we hope will become a trend for every state in America to broaden communication and cooperation between all branches of government, private corporations and citizens to help make America a safer place to work and live.




Special thanks

2005 Forum

Addy KennedyProgram ManagerE.J. Krause & Associatesand AHF Organizer



9

“Public safety is priority one in the event of a natural disaster or terror incident. We’ll need across-the-board cooperation –from Maryland’s health professionals, to our law enforcement officers – to ensure that every man, woman and child is out of harm’s way. Forums of this nature are essential to ensure that Maryland remains on the front lines of constant vigilance and continued cooperation.”Governor Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr.Closing remarks to the second annual All Hazards Forum October 27, 2005

The second annual Mid-Atlantic All Hazards Forum was held in Baltimore, Maryland, on October 25-28, 2005 and drew an audience of 1,702.

Lessons learned from the first conference were applied during the planning for this year’s event. The 2004 Forum was focused on the All Hazard strategies and activities of each individual state. This proved valuable, but it was deter-mined that greater benefit could be realized if the sessions were not broken out in this way. As a result, the 2005 Forum and plenary sessions were oriented more toward pertinent topics of interest to all, with greater interaction between the participating states. Thus, attendees with a particular interest could hear from experts representing a variety of organizations in a single session.

The purpose of this post-conference report is to provide a concise, useful summary of the conference, rather than an exhaustive compendium. All of the panel discussions and plenary sessions are covered, with insights that were pre-sented during the course of the conference. For those who wish additional information, there are links throughout the document and a reference section designed to guide readers to the relevant resources.

2005 Forum




Special thanks

2005 Forum

Continued



10

Common themes

The focus of the 2004 conference was on strategy and planning. . .what would the states do in case of a disaster? 2005 has unfortunately provided a living laboratory for how disasters unfold, and some hard lessons have been learned.

The leading theme that emerged was cooperation/coordination, followed by interoperability and planning/practice. A number of additional threads related to these overarching themes also emerged.

Cooperation and coordination were severely lacking during the response to Hurricane Katrina, with unfortunate results. A great deal of interest was expressed during the confer-ence in ways to help agencies at the local, state, regional and federal levels work together in a robust, unified manner. Relationships on every level within the public sector are vital, but so are relationships forged with private industry (the response of Wal-Mart to the Katrina disaster is a case in point). A clear call for standard practices became evident, while at the same time it was acknowledged that all disas-ters are different and are first and foremost local events, dealt with on a local level.

Interoperability was a topic that generated great interest, from leadership roles (a clear chain of command) to cre-dentialing standards to common definitions and terminology, to communications technology and access to information. The United States has so many different agencies that are involved with first response that when a major disaster such as 9/11 or Hurricane Katrina occurs which requires multiple agencies to work together – often from across the

country – interoperability between agencies becomes a critical concern. In the case of 9/11, this was dramatically highlighted when the police and fire departments in the same city were unable to talk to one another because of incompatible radio systems.

Finally, many of the panelists highlighted the value of simulations and live exercises as a way to validate planning activity, expose weaknesses and develop best practices such as the prepositioning of assets and relief supplies, or the development of effective evacuation plans. Once again, the unpredictable nature of disasters was acknowledged; not every eventuality can be planned for.

Conclusion

This year’s Forum was held against the backdrop of a series of events that are unprecedented in the nation’s history, from overseas disasters that have put enormous stress on fiscal and physical resources around the world, to the ongo-ing threat of terrorism, to the largest natural disaster ever to strike the United States. These events are horrific and recovery efforts will take years and unimagined resources, yet something positive has emerged from them: the critical nature of cooperation has been made abundantly clear. Cooperation not only between government agencies, but at all levels . . .between the military, local, state and federal agencies, law enforcement, local and national businesses, government officials, industry, academia, the media and the public at large.




Special thanks

2005 Forum overview


Preface About the Sponsors Resources Session Summaries

11

Session Summaries

1 Federal grants for state and local procurements

2 Strategies in evacuation planning

3 Media’s role in crisis communications

4 Emergency communications interoperability; for voice and data

5 Port security and other maritime assessments

6 Staying open for business in times of hazard

7 U.S. DHS First Responders Card initiative

8 National Guard Adjutant Generals: Lessons learned from Katrina

9 Regional transit security strategies

10 Strategies for critical infrastructure protection

11 Regional CIO perspectives roundtable

12 Business resources in time of crisis

13 Surge capacity in the health and medical field

14 Implementing federal and state regionalism

15 Alerting the public through the use of technology

16 Response and recovery from a biohazard event

17 Who’s in charge here? Incident chain of command

18 Best practices on implementing Citizen Corps

19 DHS Office of Domestic Preparedness strategic program planning



12

1Federal grants for state and local procurements

Moderator

Merril OliverDeputy Director, Maryland Governor’s Grants Office

Panelists

Nicholas W. PeakeOffice for Domestic Preparedness, U.S. Department of Homeland Security

Julian GilmanODP Grants Coordinator, Virginia Department of Emergency Management

Steve KralAdministrator for the Office of Homeland Security, Office of the Deputy Mayor for Public Safety and Justice

Steve TalpasGrants Coordinator, New Jersey Department of Law and Public Safety

Richard RiffeDirector of Corporate Development and Procurement, Montgomery County Fire and Rescue

The purpose of this session was to discuss the Office for Domestic Preparedness (OPD) grant priorities, along with its procedures for obtaining coordinated state and local plans as part of the grant application proc-ess. The session covered ways that states are getting new grants, what they are doing with the new funds, and how they are turning grants into procurements. It also showed ways governments are demonstrat-ing that procurements and programs are measurably improving the planning, readi-ness, response and recovery capabilities that make communities safer.




4 Emergency communications; interoperability for voice and data
















Continued



13

Broad ODP mandate

The OPD has a large, broad mandate to represent all aspects of homeland security to state and local entities.

• Emphasis is swinging back from terrorism to all hazards.• Although most grants were bundled together last year, this

year the OPD grants will be awarded separately.• EMPG grants will be awarded soon.• The State Homeland Security Program (SHSP) includes

grants to states, the Urban Areas Security Initiative (UASI), the Law Enforcement Terrorism Prevention Program (LETPP), the Citizen Corps Program, (CCP), and the Metropolitan Medical Response System (MMRS).

• ODP is issuing a business plan template the states can use to articulate their grant streams.

• Any questions should be channeled through the state SAA and then to the Federal contact.

Focus on local governments

Because the State of Virginia believes that local governments are best able to determine the needs of their people, it tar-gets its grant program to that level.

• Each local government can apply for a grant or several can apply together.

• Each local government can determine its own methodolo-gies; however, the state reviews all spending plans at the local level.

NCR challenges

Encompassing the District of Columbia, Maryland and Virginia, the National Capitol Region is primarily challenged with identifying funding gaps – and then finding the dollars to fill those gaps. Right now it is administering US$175 million in funding. For each local jurisdiction, NCR tries to deter-mine the baseline state of its capabilities and then the desired state of these capacities. To that end, it:

• Coordinates with government councils to determine needs and how money should be spent.

• Works with regional hospital associations to define capacities such as number of beds and surge capacities.

• Created regional working groups of first responders, bringing all players together to understand their needs and responsibilities.

• Moved from a day-to-day issue focus – for example on obesity in children – to a terrorism and homeland security focus.

• Emphasizes project management to help ensure that funds are spent in a timely manner.




















Continued



14

Doing business in New Jersey

Vendors wishing to do business with governments in New Jersey are advised to work at the county level.

• Each county has an original equipment manufacturer (OEM) structure in place, and that is who potential vendors should contact.

• State and local governments have recently streamlined ways to purchase items in a war-time environment; for example, they can now use prime vendor contracts.

• Some counties are taking advantage of the GSA contracts.• Vendors must register before they can do business with

governments in New Jersey.

The new 3R’s

From the county government point of view, the three key issues are readiness, response and recovery. To cover these areas effectively, governments need to:

• Communicate with the public to enhance its comfort and confidence levels.

• Ensure that first responders – for example, IT workers, truckers and the local health department – know where to go and what to do. The general public needs to know how they can help themselves.

• Prepare to meet basic human needs such as safety, shelter, security and sustenance.

• Determine who will provide what services at what level.• Share grant information with the public, including what can

and will be done with the money.

Best practices and recommendations

The two key themes of the session were how to facilitate the funding of projects at both the state and local levels and also how to improve the management of funded projects so they actually benefit the public.

• Success happens when you get the money, manage it well and complete the project within a two-year period.

• Since grants are not backdated, most of the work needs to be done up front. Managers should know what they are going to do with the money before they get it.

• Spending funding on equipment purchases is time- consuming. When possible, it is useful to have a full-time staff person to coordinate grants and funding.

Resources

Web siteState of Maryland, Governor’s Grants Office www.gov.state.md.us/grants.html

Contact informationAddy [email protected]




















http://www.gov.state.md.us/grants.html

mailto:[email protected]



15

2Strategies in evacuation planning

Moderator

Barbara Childs-PairDirector, District of Columbia Emergency Management Association

Panelists

Dan TangherliniDirector, District of Columbia Department of Transportation

Steve MondulDirector of Security and Emergency Management, Virginia Department of Transportation

Warren LeeDirector, Emergency Management, New Hanover County, North Carolina

The purpose of this session was to outline the concerns surrounding evacua-tion planning in the event of an emergency. Two different cases were presented: evacuation of a coastal (beach) area in North Carolina, and evacuation of a major city (Washington DC). The issues of road closure, buy-in from stakeholders and the public, communications, resource allocation, appropriateness of measures and public psychology were discussed.




















Continued



16

Different circumstances, different requirements

The two areas represented by the panelists are markedly different. New Hanover County, North Carolina, is a seashore area that hosts a large number of tourists during hurricane season and is served by one major highway (Interstate 40), in addition to local roads. New Hanover County is also the location of the city of Wilmington.

Washington DC, by contrast, has a large population of commuters in addition to a large resident population, a pub-lic transit infrastructure, endemic traffic congestion and multiple major highways including a ring road (the Beltway).

• Different areas are concerned with different kinds of events, which affect the details of the evacuation plan.– New Hanover County is primarily concerned with natural

disasters in the form of hurricanes.– Washington does not require the same degree of weather

preparedness, but is more concerned with the issues that are particular to a large urban area, and specifically, as the nation’s capital, terrorism.

• Major cities must concern themselves with a large number of pedestrians, users of public transit systems and traffic in and out of the city.

• Rural/outlying areas are primarily concerned with road traffic.

• Resort areas may have a significant number of visitors who are not familiar with the area and secondary roads. Significant tourist holidays such as Independence Day and Labor Day can swell the population of the area by nearly 50 percent or more.

Advance warning and decision making

In the case of a natural disaster such as a hurricane, there is time to make advance preparations for an evacuation. This is a key element of evacuation planning. New Hanover County, North Carolina, does the following:

• Trigger points (storm strength, estimated time and location of landfall) are taken into account when deciding when to activate various phases of the evacuation plan. Planners will meet 72 to 96 hours prior to expected landfall.

• New Hanover County has a volunteer “Special Needs” task force that evacuates those with special needs (the disabled, those requiring special medical attention) in advance of the general evacuation. Those with special needs are registered as requiring this assistance. In New Hanover County, 650 people are registered, out of a population of approximately 173,000 permanent residents.

• Municipal employees are given specific “disaster jobs” that are staffed redundantly to ensure coverage. These employ-ees are sent home early to tend to the safety of their own families so that they can return and focus on the evacuation.




















Continued



17

• Evacuation orders may be staged according to location (low-lying areas first), type of shelter available in situ (mobile homes first) and type of disaster (an entire city may not need to be evacuated, only a localized area).

Road reversals and evacuation routes

The images of clogged highways in Texas during Hurricane Rita brought home the importance of making the best use of highway infrastructure in an evacuation scenario. Many areas do, in fact, have plans to reverse traffic flow on inter-state highways.

• The road closure plan should be reviewed periodically and changed as needed.

• Current conditions (e.g., construction) should be monitored and taken into account.

• Road reversals are a major undertaking, involving state DOT and public works, state and local police, EMS and fire/rescue personnel, as well as private resources such as tow vehicles and buses. Access to the road must be controlled along the entire reversed route: in the case of Hanover County, this is 100 miles of roadway. This raises issues of resource alloca-tion, since these personnel must be diverted from other, possibly more important duties to deal with the evacuation.

• Gathering the necessary assets requires approximately 12 hours in the case of New Hanover County.

• Reversal must happen during daylight hours for safety, and must be completed at least two hours prior to the arrival of tropical storm force winds to allow personnel time to secure barricades and variable message signs.

• It is impractical and economically unsustainable to conduct drills that actually involve road reversals. However, all other aspects of the road reversal can and should be practiced, such as prepositioning of needed assets along the route.

• Local residents may be familiar with side roads and alternate routes, but visitors will tend to use only the major highways.

• The more congested an area, the more emergency routes should be established to facilitate rapid evacuation. In the case of Washington, there are more than 25 pre-planned routes leading from downtown out to the Beltway.

• Pre-planned evacuation routes should be clearly marked with distinctive, permanent signs.

• Variable message signs along evacuation routes are an important supplement to permanent signage and can deliver up-to-date, pertinent information to evacuees.

• In an urban area, many evacuees will be on foot (as was the case on 9/11). An evacuation plan to accommodate these people should be put in place so that they do not interfere with traffic.




















Continued



18

Economic and social impact

An evacuation order carries with it severe economic impact, not only in terms of lost commerce and direct costs to the government, but also in secondary costs. Given the unpredictable nature of disasters, balancing the safety of the public against the cost of evacuation can be a signifi-cant challenge.

• Hotels/motels may reimburse tourists, but only in the event of a mandatory evacuation order. It is in the best interest of these local businesses to avoid this unless absolutely neces-sary. For this reason, New Hanover County rarely issues mandatory evacuation orders.

• Vacation rental insurance rarely reimburses vacationers in case of evacuation. This may influence their decision to leave.

• Buildings designated as shelters (such as certain schools) must be shut down.

• The economic impact of a full-scale evacuation drill, including road reversals, can be in the millions, so these drills are not conducted. Exercises that simulate evacuation are used instead.

• Evacuations do not take place in a vacuum. Neighboring areas are also impacted economically due to the influx of evacuees. Governmental agencies and private industry from these areas should be made part of the evacuation planning process, and buy-in is critical. In the case of a major disaster such as Hurricane Katrina, this “ripple effect” can extend throughout the entire region and beyond.

Public reaction and psychology

A key issue surrounding any evacuation is actually getting the public to leave when necessary. Many factors play into this, including unexpected concerns. For example, there were well-publicized stories of New Orleanians who refused to abandon their pets, even though it put their own lives at significant risk.

• Depending on state law, a “mandatory” evacuation order may or may not be enforceable. In the case of New Hanover County, North Carolina law does not permit forcible removal.

• Permanent residents of areas subject to frequent evacuation (such as coastal areas) may become complacent and choose to “ride it out” rather than evacuate.

• The date of the last major storm can have an effect on willingness to leave. Category 4 and 5 hurricanes are rare enough, and coastal communities growing fast enough, that many residents may not remember how severe the weather can get.




















Continued



19

• Officials must prevent people from returning to their homes after the storm has passed until it’s been determined that the area is truly safe. This can cause frustration on the part of the populace and may influence them to choose not to evacuate in the first place.

• Trust is absolutely critical. Without the trust of the public, the evacuation plan will fail.

Transportation systems

In the case of rural areas, evacuation will take place primar-ily along major highways, and transportation will be via bus and private cars. But in a congested urban area, the type and mode of transportation may be highly variable.

• In a typical city, tens of thousands of commuters drive to work, while thousands of others rely on public transit and do not have private cars available to them.

• Congested urban areas with extensive traffic signal networks can reprogram those signals to facilitate faster evacuation along established routes. (On July 4, 2005, Washington was the first municipality in the country to actually test such a measure; the test was successful.)

• Power loss may render the traffic signal grid inoperable. Police may not be available to perform traffic duty. Backup generators should be considered.

• Traffic congestion and gridlock will force many evacuees to walk. A large increase in foot traffic should be considered during evacuation planning. This was dramatically demon-strated both on 9/11 and during the Northeast blackout.

• Coordination with neighboring constituencies and stake-holders to manage the flow of traffic is essential to keeping things flowing smoothly. Therefore, command and control centers as well as robust communications links are vital.

• Some transportation systems, such as subways, may be rendered partially or completely inoperable during an event that requires evacuation. Therefore, contingency plans should be put in place to provide gathering and transfer points, e.g., bus staging areas.

• Workers in urban areas should bear in mind that they may need to walk, and have appropriate footwear available.




















Continued



20

Shelters

Shelter can take many forms, from specially prepared buildings to ad hoc uses of large structures (e.g., the Superdome). In congested areas or localized evacuation scenarios, staying put might be the best course of action.

• In areas prone to natural disaster, designated shelter (e.g., schools) should be appropriately reinforced and equipped with emergency generators. New Hanover County has five such specially reinforced school buildings located at the end of its evacuation corridor.

• Plans for the use of large structures such as stadiums and convention centers should be put in place.

• In congested areas and under certain circumstances, evacuation may prove more dangerous than sheltering in place. Communication with the public is critical in this case.

• It is important that the public be given some place to go. They need to be made aware of the location of shelters.

Communications

Getting the word out to everyone in the event of an evacua-tion is one of the more challenging tasks facing planners. The most effective approach is to take multiple measures. The Emergency Broadcast System is of course used, but is not the only, nor even necessarily the best, way to inform the public.

• The Internet and e-mail are being used, especially in large cities, to inform the public. Washington has a program called DC Alert that goes out to Internet and Blackberry users, disseminating information about evacuation plans and street conditions.

• Variable message signs along roadways are a very effective means of directing drivers and spreading up-to-date information.

• The media, in particular local radio and television stations, is a very important partner in informing the public.

• Highway advisory radio is used, but limits on signal strength limit its effectiveness.

• Accurate information is critical.

• Inevitably, there will be those who aren’t “plugged in” to the media. It may be necessary to dispatch personnel to physi-cally spread the word door-to-door.

• Public awareness campaigns and literature are important preparatory measures, but getting the public to pay attention when disaster is not looming is difficult.




















Continued



21


The key theme of the session was the need for a comprehen-sive, multifaceted plan that deals with the particular issues faced by the area in question. Different areas have different needs. In addition, it was recognized that there is no such thing as a single “standard” evacuation event. Every storm and every crisis has its own character and challenges that will dramatically affect the details of the actual evacuation.

• Communication and public trust are critical to the success of an evacuation. Every available means should be used to reach the public, not only during a crisis but as part of preparation.

• All stakeholders, including neighboring areas, should be made part of the process.

• Where possible (e.g., an approaching hurricane), advance warning should be taken advantage of to get ahead of the crisis. This should be part of the planning process.

• Ensure that personnel who are expected to perform evacuation duties are allowed to see to the safety of their own families. Redundantly staff positions to ensure coverage.

• Set up designated, properly prepared shelters, collection and transfer points.

• Clearly mark evacuation routes.

• Anticipate and plan for the failure of transportation systems. Install backup generators in key areas. Anticipate and plan for a surge in pedestrian traffic.

• The economic impact of an evacuation can be severe and should be taken into account when determining evacuation order criteria.

Resources
























22

3Media’s role in crisis communications

Moderator

Gary McLhinneyMaryland Transportation Authority Police Chief, Maryland Transportation Authority

Panelists

Greg ShipleyPublic Information Officer, Maryland State Police

Mike SchuhTelevision reporter, WJZ Channel 13

Jo’Ellen CounteePublic Information Officer, DC Emergency Management Association

Roger ShatzkinPublic Information Officer, New Jersey Office of the Governor

The purpose of this session was to explore the handling of the media during times of crisis, to discuss the role of the PlO (Public Information Officer) and to explore how to best leverage the media’s capabilities to inform the public.

A case study was used by Chief of Police Gary McLhinney of the Maryland State Police to illustrate the challenges pre-sented by an interstate traffic disaster: A tanker truck crash that took place in the I-95/I-895 area on January 14, 2004, and blocked this vital corridor for several hours. Details of the accident are contained in the PowerPoint presentation, The Media’s Role in Crisis Communications, available at www.allhazardsforum.org.




















Continued

http://www.allhazardsforum.org



23

Challenge

The incident occurred on an extremely cold evening. Because of the magnitude of the explosion, there were multiple fatali-ties, including the truck driver and passengers in cars. First responders immediately sprayed foam to put out the fires; however, the foam itself made it difficult for investigators to quickly determine the number of victims. The bitterly cold conditions also slowed this process.

The accident highlighted a number of operational and interoperability challenges faced by law enforcement, including those relevant to communicating with the media. In particular:

• The accident site straddled two jurisdictions and involved several responding agencies, not all of which could commu-nicate with one another. Communications were erratic; agencies were reduced to using runners to pass information.

• Cell phone lines jammed almost immediately due to the large number of calls coming in from witnesses of the acci-dent. This hampered officials’ ability to stay in touch with the media outside the context of official briefings, and high-lighted the need for alternative communications technology such as satellite phones.

• Providing the press safe access to the site was also a challenge due to the extent of the accident and its location.

The media’s point of view

During the session, reporter Mike Schuh (who covered the incident) commented on the priorities of the media during any incident:

• Pictures and immediate information (e.g., number of fatali-ties), are what is needed, not necessarily access to the PlO.

• Access to the scene, or, if access is difficult as in this case, a briefing area. The media will try to get access any way they can.

• Staying informed of breaking events.• Trust in the acting PlO or officials to accurately explain and

update events and information as they unfold.

Police PlO Greg Shipley echoed these concerns, highlighting the need for media briefing points to be set up in optimal locations that provide a good vantage point. He also pointed out that the media will arrive on the scene very early. . .as fast as first responders in many cases. Therefore, there is a need to bring the PlO on the scene as quickly as possible.

The importance of relationship building

A key theme of the session was the importance of relation-ship building between public information officials and the media. Developing and maintaining an open and transparent relationship with the local media is crucial – especially in times of crisis when the credibility, or even the accountability, of local officials may be in question. These relationships must be developed and maintained before a crisis takes place.




















Continued



24

Other reasons to keep a strong relationship with the local press:

• The national media often relies on the local media for background information about an area and its officials.

• The national media may come and go as national interest waxes and wanes, but the local media will remain interested in the resolution of events and how it affects their community.

• The local press can help staunch misinformation and rumors that the national press might inadvertently spread due to their lack of in-depth understanding of an area.

The role of the Public Information Officer

The primary duty of the police and other government agencies is to protect the public; their secondary duty is to inform. The goal of the PlO is to reinforce this idea, and develop the trust and confidence of the media that he/she will provide the information they need in a timely and accurate manner. This is how a strong and credible rela-tionship, developed before the emergency, pays off. In order to facilitate open, transparent relationships with the media, PIOs should:

• Get to know key reporters and editors.• Be proactive with the press – gain their trust by giving them,

when possible, a “scoop.”• Have a thorough working knowledge of the area; the local

government, agencies, officials and history.• Involve the PIO in all command-level briefings.

• Involve PIOs in internal debates within agencies – keep them fully informed at all times, and allow them to deal proactively with the press and pass on appropriate information.

• Involve the media in “what if” exercises, to let the public know that the agencies are prepared for an emergency when one does occur.

Handling information during a crisis

When multiple agencies are involved (which is true of any large-scale event) there will be multiple PIOs involved. It is of the utmost importance to gather everyone together and assign one PlO or government authority figure to be in charge, as a single point of contact. It was suggested that this be done in advance when possible. At a minimum, all stakeholders should meet and agree on a hierarchy before the media is to be engaged.

• Interoperability and coordination among agencies is critical; the PlO in charge needs to know exactly what is happening at all times.

• PIOs need strong back-office support (i.e., access to information), especially during a crisis. When the media asks questions, PlOs should be ready with facts and figures, such as information on detours and off-scene activity. Therefore, a mechanism for providing this sometimes critical informa-tion to the public has to be put in place beforehand.

• PlOs should be provided only with relevant information.• The natural urge to provide a lot of information right away

should be avoided. The PlO should not speak until there is a story to tell, to eliminate the possibility of passing erroneous information on to the media.




















Continued



25

• PlOs should have the cell phone numbers of executive producers of both local and national media on hand, so they can proactively reach out to them.

• PlOs and officials have a responsibility to reassure the public. The media is one of the only conduits available for accurate information. To that end, an authorized spokesper-son should be placed in front of the camera, preferably one who is trained to deal with the media.

• Elected officials should be kept away from the cameras.• It is not possible to eliminate speculation and rumor, so it is

important to keep the media informed on a continuous basis, with scheduled briefings taking place at (for example) half-hour intervals.

• The media should be monitored for rumor and misinforma-tion so that this issue can be directly and quickly addressed.


The key theme of the session was coordination and open communication, keeping PIOs “in the loop” in order to maxi-mize their effectiveness.

• Strong relationships with the media (especially local media) should be built and maintained outside the context of a crisis.

• Agencies should involve PIOs in briefings – not only during crisis, but on an ongoing basis as a member of the team. Eventually, the PlO will be in a position to help manage key aspects of a crisis when one does occur.

• PIOs should also be part of preparedness exercises and training, as should the media.

• PIOs must have strong back-office information support, available on a moment’s notice.

• PIOs should be proactive and contact the media directly (with editors’ and producers’ phone numbers on hand).

• Coordination between jurisdictions/agencies is critical.• There should be one PlO in charge on-scene.

Resources

Publications Jane’s Crisis Communications Handbook, by Louie Fernandez and Martin Merzer. Copyright 2003, Jane’s Information Group

Incident Communications Emergency Reference: A Guide for Communications Professions – Department of Homeland Security

Web link Department of Homeland Security, National Incident Management Systemwww.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/NIMS-90-web.pdf





















http://www.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/NIMS-90-web.pdf




26

4Emergency communications; interopera-bility for voice and data

Moderator

John ContestabileDirector, Office of Engineering, Procurement and Emergency Services, Maryland Department of Transportation

Panelists

Tony FraterDepartment of Homeland Security, Office of Interoperability and Compatibility

William D. Ramsey, M.D.West Virginia State EMS Medical Director

Robert LeGrandeDeputy CTO for Wireless Networks, HSMP Development and Agency Liaison, Office of Chief Technology Officer, DC Government

Mike MahaffieDelaware State GIS Director

Leigh MiddleditchCIO, Governor’s Office of Executive Services, State House, State of Maryland

William D. Ramsey, M.D.West Virginia State EMS Medical Director

Interoperability covers a wide spectrum of concerns, including voice and data communication as well as leveraging information that has been made available between agencies. It is at present a patch-work with many gaps – each jurisdiction has a different level of capability. There is a continuum of interoperability, pro-gressing from minimal interoperability to an optimal level of interoperability. True interoperability – coast to coast and border to border – does not exist and will not for some time. The ultimate goal is for first responders to be able to go anywhere and be able to communicate (voice, video and data) with no restriction or compati-bility issues.




















Continued



27

Key challenges

9/11 highlighted specific communications problems, including the inability to talk in buildings, in subways, and between different agencies (e.g., police and fire). This has become a key focus of interoperability initiatives.

• Tony Frater from DHS identified five key challenges in the area of interoperability:– Incompatible/aging communications equipment– Limited/fragmented funding and budget cycles– Limited/fragmented planning and coordination– Limited/fragmented radio spectrum standards– Limited equipment standards

• Considerable progress has been made in these areas, some by Federal agencies (e.g., FCC), as well as by state governments.

• Broadband data and video are important for future appli-cations, but current spectrum allocations do not enable the deployment of these applications, e.g., 700 MHz for video communications. Legislation will be required to move tele-vision broadcasters out of this spectrum.

Building consensus – the human element

Interoperability has been difficult to achieve in large part because past efforts have focused on technology problems (e.g., the well-publicized difficulties experienced by first responders on 9/11). There are other dimensions, most notably people and process.

• Make sure that local agencies can voice their concerns and needs . . .police, fire, public transportation, public health, etc. Policy should be driven by practitioners at the local level. . . those who actually use the solutions.

• A proactive effort that builds consensus and which has the ultimate goal of creating a working interoperability infra-structure has proven effective at the state level (Maryland).

• It can take a considerable length of time (in Maryland, 18 months) to arrive at a working solution that meets all needs.

• Actually creating solutions that span agencies and jurisdic-tions requires institutionalization: an overarching group that has authority to allocate funds and coordinate activities.

• The autonomy of individual agencies and jurisdictions should not be sacrificed in the name of interoperability.

• Local situations differ.




















Continued



28

• Good interoperability solutions share five key elements, only one of which is technological:– Governance– Standard operating procedures– Common technology– Training and exercises– Using interoperable communications

• Interoperability is a multidimensional problem, involving many jurisdictions, agencies, standards, technologies, radio frequencies, applications, etc. It is a “Rubik’s Cube.”

• There must be willingness to share information and data. Personal relationships are important.

Integrating technology platforms

Interoperability involves two key aspects: being able to communicate by voice and being able to share data. The underlying infrastructure that enables this to happen varies by location and agency, but there are common resources available that serve as a starting point for interoperability. Much progress has been made in recent years.

• The DHS Office of Interoperability and Compatibility (OIC) addresses issues relating to communications, equipment, training and risk assessment. OIC focuses on standards, R&D, testing and evaluation and technical assistance. It also identifies, certifies and facilitates interoperability initiatives.

• The OIC has established a national program called SAFECOM (see the Web link at the end of this section) that assists local practitioners with interoperability projects.

• The FCC has set aside a number of communications channels for interoperability (VHF tactical channel [VTAC], UHF Tactical Channel [UTAC], National Public Safety Planning Advisor Committee [NPSPAC]). In Maryland, tech-nology is being put in place to enable all of these to be accessed, across the state, and to bridge them to existing communications networks (e.g., state police).

• Involvement at the state level is needed for effective solutions as well as collaboration with federal agencies.

• Creating an ideal solution from scratch is impractical. Exist-ing technology and standards are what there are to work with.

• Hybrid communications infrastructures are in use in some areas. Washington has DC-NET, a fiber optic network that carries all first responder communications and connects to ten fixed transceiver sites in DC, along with mobile repeaters. DC-NET carries both voice and broadband data, providing enhanced capabilities. (This solution, which relies on buried fiber optic cable, would not be appropriate for flood-prone areas like New Orleans.)

• Plans are underway in the Capitol Region to design and deploy a regional broadband wireless “network of networks” using a data exchange hub, with deployment scheduled to begin in June 2006. The design could become a viable model for replication across the country, providing coast-to-coast interoperability.




















Continued



29

• Data interoperability is a complex problem. Example: Fairfax County, Virginia, has 600 applications it wants to share within the National Capitol Region.

• GIS (geospatial data) is being used in many locations as a common data platform, accessed using a variety of applications such as incident management and mapping software packages.– Data must fit together seamlessly. Commercial demand for

GIS data has helped reduce or eliminate technical barriers to data exchange and integration.

– A common, agreed-upon structure for data sharing must be put in place. This can be highly structured or loose and free-flowing, as long as there is consensus.

• Metadata (data about data: how and why it was created, how it should be used, who has access, etc.) is an important element of effective data sharing. Raw data is difficult to integrate without metadata.


The key theme of the session was that interoperability, while it relies on technological solutions, is not solely a technological problem: people, process and consensus are important elements.

• The SAFECOM program Web site (at the end of this section) is an excellent resource for more information on interoperability.

• Interoperability has been treated as everyone’s problem, therefore it’s nobody’s problem. . .proactive leadership is needed to gain traction.

• Consensus is critical to success of any interoperability initiative; it is only partly a technological problem.

• Maintaining autonomy at the local level is important.

• Interoperability initiatives should take into account increased future need for broadband data and video communications.

• The sharing of data is very important; commonality and usefulness are vital. GIS is being used as a common data platform.

• An interoperable infrastructure is not invulnerable. In extreme circumstances (e.g., Katrina), the infrastructure may be rendered inoperable. Satellite communications should be considered as a contingency measure.

• Interoperability can be used to make response more effective, e.g., sharing of information between criminal justice, law enforcement and social services to improve enforcement and coordination. Therefore partnerships between stakeholders outside the first responder com-munity are important.




















Continued



30

Resources

Web linksDepartment of Homeland Security SAFECOM programwww.safecomprogram.gov

Maryland State Interoperability Executive Committeewww.governor.maryland.gov/gohs/SIEC/index.htm

National States Geographic Information Councilwww.nsgic.org

Federal Communications Commissionwww.fcc.gov





















http://www.safecomprogram.gov

http://www.governor.maryland.gov/gohs/SIEC/index.htm

http://www.nsgic.org

http://www.fcc.gov




31

5Port security and other maritime assessments

Moderator

Brooks RoysterExecutive Director, Maryland Port Administration

Panelists

Steven MondulDirector of Security and Emergency Management, Virginia Department of Transportation

Capt. Kurt SpringerCommander, United States Coast Guard Sector Baltimore

Miles LehmannPartner, Cincinnatus Consulting LLC

Some 95 percent of the goods consumed by the United States pass through its ports. A terrorist attack or natural disaster that takes out a major port would have a dramatic impact on the U.S. economy, and by extension the world economy. Thus, the security of the nation’s ports has been under intense scrutiny since 9/11, and the focus of security efforts has changed dramatically in the years since then. This session dealt with how the focus has changed, the current status of security efforts and some of the challenges, both technological and procedural, that face those concerned with port security.




















Continued



32

Shifting focus

Prior to 9/11, ports were insular, with little interaction with the local community. The focus of port security was inward, with the goal of controlling illegal immigration, contraband and pilferage within the boundaries of the port. Now, the focus is outward, with access to the port itself becoming more of a priority. In addition, there is now a strong focus on stopping a terrorist attack in the form of a weapon of mass destruction.

• Post-9/11 measures include increased video surveillance, fencing, physical access controls and enhanced detec-tion technology.

• The new focus is a significant shift in outlook . . .not normal to the purview of a port or cargo facility. The new interaction between government, military and maritime constituencies has in some ways been challenging.– Different stakeholders bring with them different cultures,

and don’t always speak the “same language.” Consultants have come out of the woodwork to help the maritime com-munity work with government and military, etc.

– Many stakeholders are overly given to the use of acronyms and obscure terminology. Using plain language can avoid communication and productivity problems.

• A key challenge is the balance between security and commerce. At one extreme is a bunker mentality that would stifle commerce; at the other is a wide-open facility with no security.– Also important in the balance are the requirements

imposed by regulatory agencies.– Enhanced port security costs a significant amount of

money. Most of this must come from the government: it is difficult to raise user fees because doing so will put the United States at a competitive disadvantage to countries with less stringent standards and/or greater governmen-tal funding.

• Integration of information and intelligence is very important in the context of the total transportation infrastructure. This includes not only ports, but also highway and rail assets.– The goal should be a unified view of actionable information,

with access granted to those who can best use it.– A “fusion” or centralized intelligence center should be put

in place. It should be a single physical location if possible, or failing that a virtualized collection of resources.




















Continued



33

Planning and response requirements

A new issue in port security is response to a targeted attack, and the planning associated with that response. While much of the planning for this has been done post-9/11, significant measures have been in place for years.

• Facilities, vessels and ports must have disaster response plans in place, but not as a result of 9/11 . . .as a result of the 1989 Exxon Valdez disaster. The enforcement apparatus put in place at that time and the plans that were implemented were used as a model for further measures post-9/11, lead-ing up to the Maritime Security Act in November 2002.– Approximately 4,000 facilities and 10,000 vessels

were impacted.– Highly accelerated timetable for implementation.– Some security plans for cruise ships were developed

subsequent to the 1985 Achille Lauro hijacking.

• The anticipated terrorist attack scenario is multiple efforts against multiple targets. It may not be immediately apparent which is the primary target, or if there is a primary target.

• Flexibility of response is important.

• In the past, ports looked to U.S. Customs and the U.S. Coast Guard (USCG) exclusively. Now, local jurisdic-tions are brought in and made part of the planning process and exercises.– Local responders will be first on the scene.

• All stakeholders need to be brought in (DoD, Homeland Security, local, state, and regional jurisdictions, as well as concerned private enterprise).

• Regular meetings are important to maintain momentum and share information.

• Exercises are an iterative process, building on lessons learned from the previous exercise.

• Jurisdictional boundaries and procedures are an issue in response. Rules must be established for who is responsible for what, at what stage.– Exercises and actual events (Katrina) have shown that

local stakeholders want to institute their own policies and procedures on the spot, which is not productive in the midst of a crisis. This is because of a perceived slowness or lack of response on the part of federal or state authori-ties, and lack of clear communications between agencies and governments.

• It is strongly recommended that all stakeholders take part in the National Incident Management System (NIMS), which establishes a clear chain of command.– Future federal funding will be contingent on NIMS

participation.




















Continued



34

Current status of port security efforts

With the rapid passage and implementation of the Maritime Security Act, port security activities ramped up considerably.

• USCG devotes 28 percent of its resources to maritime home-land security.– Compared to pre-9/11, USCG has a 25 percent increase in

personnel, and a 50 percent increase in patrol boats, doing 50 percent more patrols (figures are for the Port of Baltimore).

• In Baltimore, 2,000 large commercial vessels arrive each year (5-6 per day). Not all can be inspected.– Vessels are targeted using a risk-based approach.– Random inspections also conducted on vessels that do not

match the risk profile.

• There is a balance between security and use of resources.

• Patrols also serve to improve enforcement and detection in other areas: health/safety, pollution watch, etc.

• USCG local commanders have considerable autonomy.

Needed procedures and technology

Panelist Miles Lehmann highlighted a number of short-comings in the current system of security and outlined some technologies that have the potential to prove useful in the near future.

• The number of containers arriving in the United States varies widely depending on who is providing the numbers.

• Standards are in place such as the International Ship and Port Security Code (ISPS), but the U.S. is accepting stated compliance at face value and not checking on it.

• Current scanner technology (Vehicle and Container Inspection System [VACIS]) works to a degree, but cannot detect WMD specifically.– Future scanners based on molecular sensing technology

will be far more effective.

• Current procedure requires shipping manifests to be available for review 24 hours before arrival, but there are problems beyond our control.– U.S. must take manifests at face value; it is not possible

to physically check every container.– Controls at port of departure are often lax. Example:

Customs at port of departure inspects shipment, and places a seal on the container, but the loading dock is con-figured such that the container could not actually be closed until the truck has traveled a mile. So the container is certi-fied as sealed when it has not been.




















Continued



35

• The Maritime Security Act is audited annually, but not by people with specific knowledge of what is happening in the field. Audits do not match reality.

• Port access controls (e.g., physical checkpoints) are in place, but are not being used correctly. People and loads are not being uniformly checked at access points.

• Transportation Worker Identification Cards (TWIC) are needed, but are not yet in place because existing technology is not being leveraged.– Biometrics are important and needed, but the entire

program is being held up waiting for workable technology.– Monitoring of personnel in a facility via regular checks and

credentials that expire is needed.


Significant strides have been made in port security since 9/11, but there is a great deal that must still be done. Some of the themes of this session echoed themes brought out in other sessions– the need for repeated readiness exercises and better communication/cooperation between stakeholders.

• Port security is no longer insular. It is outward-looking, and must involve the local community (via outreach) and local government/first responders.

• Sharing of information and cooperative planning is important.

• Airtight security is not practical. There is a balance between security and commerce, and tipping the balance slightly may have a significant impact on the economy.

• Clear guidelines on chain of command and jurisdiction need to be implemented. Participation in NIMS is highly recommended.

• There are significant gaps in the system at the field level, some of which are beyond our control.– Customs procedures at overseas ports of departure may

be lax.– Security measures that are in place (e.g., access controls)

are not uniformly employed, nor are rules uniformly enforced.

• Improved detection technology is on the way.




















Continued



36

Resources

Web linkNational Incident Management Systemwww.fema.gov/nims/





















http://www.fema.gov/nims/




37

6Staying open for business in times of hazard

The purpose of this session was to help government understand what the private sector is doing in the area of contingency planning and to improve skills in this area by cross-leveraging public and private efforts.

Moderator

Teresa ChapmanState COOP Manager, Maryland Emergency Management Agency

Panelists

Charles MahanVice President, Homeland Security and Defense, SAP Public Services, Inc.

Sheila CarpenterCatastrophe Section Manager, State Farm Insurance

Jason JacksonDirector of Business Continuity, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc.

Continued






















38

Setting priorities

All three participants stated that their company’s first concern in the event of a disaster was the safety of employ-ees and their families. That may involve:

• Getting people out of the area in a safe and timely manner• Or, if they are to stay in the area, helping them to secure

their homes.

It might also involve bringing in emergency response teams from other areas to help in this effort, which then involves a whole new set of challenges. Incoming support teams need:

• Water• Food• Places to sleep

After Katrina, local Wal-Mart managers in New Orleans improvised by converting two unused facilities into dormito-ries for men and women. However, that necessitated urgent negotiations with the city about zoning issues.

Getting back to business

It takes extensive interaction with local and state govern-ments to get many types of businesses back up and running. Most government agencies will not let retailers open up to the public without meeting a whole checklist of require-ments, such as bottled water for food service operations.

Insurance companies need to know:• Where the shelters are• When people will be allowed back to look at their homes• If and when they will be allowed to take personal property

from them• Changes in building codes

In contrast, IT service companies such as SAP have secure offsite data backup and employee work-at-home programs, so they need:

• Less involvement with government agencies to get back up and running

• Lists of key accounts and suppliers at the ready to help get their customers back in business

Facilitating communication

Communication – both internal and external – is everything in a disaster, and all three participants expressed an ongoing need to facilitate it. The many hindrances to communication during a disaster typically include:

• Lack of electricity• Downed telephone lines and cell towers• Clouds that limit satellite use

To help overcome these challenges, Wal-Mart actually placed two people in the Texas Emergency Operation Center after Katrina and before Rita.

Continued






















39

It’s important for companies to establish ongoing relation-ships with key state and local personnel. However, there is a fair amount of turnover in state and local personnel, so efforts to establish formal liaisons between the specific industries and government officials are especially helpful. An example is the one set up for the insurance industry by New York State following the World Trade Center disaster.

The ability to centrally collect and distribute data is especially crucial in a disaster:

• Wal-Mart, for example, needed to track population shifts following Katrina so that it could direct supplies to stores serving the greatest number of people.

• IT companies like SAP can help enable organizations to collect, integrate and distribute this type of data to groups that need it, such as:– First responders– Local and state governments– Salvation Army and Red Cross– Medical community

Incorporating lessons learned into ongoing planning

The need for advanced planning and prioritization was stressed by all three participants.

• To Charles Mahan it’s mostly about lists:– Asset lists– Employee lists– Customer lists, etc.

He also stressed the importance of executive sponsorship in making sure that lessons learned are actually incorporated into the ongoing planning process.

• Jason Jackson emphasized the importance of sharing lessons learned and best practices. As a global company, Wal-Mart is able to take a practice developed in China or Argentina, for example, and adapt it to the United States.

• Sheila Carpenter cited the lessons learned following Hurricane Andrew regarding building materials and building codes designed to make homes safer as another example.

Continued






















40


The key theme of the session was improving coordination between public and private efforts in response to a disaster, thereby maximizing the effectiveness of both.

• Know ahead of time the FEMA requirements for reopening your business (i.e., potable water, portable toilets, etc.).

• Prioritize your planning. Know critical items that are required to establish operations.

• Leverage the private sector to consider the bigger picture when providing assistance. The locales may not understand why you can’t give them help, because they are not able to focus or communicate beyond the local disaster recovery.

• Decide how to communicate in times of crisis – before one actually occurs. What is the best way to get information to and from state and local governments? Who are your coun-terparts in nearby regions that you might need to obtain resources from or deliver resources to?

• Build one-on-one relationships and document them. Create a regional directory of state and local contacts in addition to industry contacts.

• Develop voice and data communication plans for possible events. Have all systems available as backup and as a resource sharing device, including land, cell, satellite, etc.

• Practice and evaluate procedures in a controlled environ-ment – as opposed to in an emergency.

• Coordinate state and local efforts with private industry and universities. If government needs an “asset” that is available, it should have plans and techniques in place in order to acquire it. Government also needs to define a better way to “tag” available assets, along with a governance policy that manages how the assets are distributed.

• Establish a seat in the Maryland Emergency Management headquarters for private industry to act as the private section tie-in to the emergency management process.

• Empower an executive sponsor to modify the plan, based on past mistakes. “A lesson learned is only a lesson learned when behavior has been modified.”

• Ensure that disaster planning is an ongoing process (not a one-time plan that is written once and shelved).

Continued






















41

Resources

OrganizationsAssociation of Contingency Planners, chaired by Dan Sadler from the Constellation Energy Corp; includes executives focused on continuity of operations for their respective firms.

Maryland has been awarded a grant by the United States Department of Health and Services to train other state and local entities in their emergency management techniques. It will be delivering workshops over the next year to anyone who wants to hear this methodology.

Web link Department of Homeland Security, National Incident Management Systemwww.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/NIMS-90-web.pdf

























42


Moderator

Craig A. WilsonFirst Responder Partnership Coordinator, Office of National Capital Region Coordination, Department of Homeland Security

Panelists

Anthony M. CieriSenior Consultant to the Department of Interior and Federal Interagency Advisory Board

Lemar Jones, Jr.Director, Antiterrorism/Force Protection Directorate, Pentagon Force Protection Agency

Mike McAllisterDeputy State Director, Security & Emergency Management, Virginia Department of Transportation

Brad JewittDirector, Office of the Fleet, Facilities and Administrative Services, Maryland Department of Transportation

Jack MarkeyDirector of Emergency Management for Frederick County, Maryland

Elmer T. Carreno, M.D.Deputy, Health Officer, Prince George’s County Health Department

Chris TonjesDirector of Special Projects, District of Columbia Office of the Chief Technology Officer

This session covered the National Capital Region First Responder Partnership initia-tive, which is providing smart identity cards to federal, state and local first responders beginning January 2006. By enabling the electronic verification of first responder personnel identity and emergency attri-butes during a crisis, this initiative will help protect building ingress, network access and incident command login and logout at the crisis scene. Ultimately, this new tech-nology will help localities to quickly identify human resource assets and determine who does or does not meet the personnel requirements dictated by the crisis.

Continued






















43

New technology platform

Much more than a card program, this initiative uses the technical requirements from the Federal Information Processing Standards publication 201 – commonly referred to as FIPS 201 – to build a technology platform for a com-mon identity framework that spans multiple jurisdictions.

• Initially all federal agencies will be issued chip cards with the PKI (Public Key Infrastructure) that includes a platform for loading biometric information at a later date.

• State and local agencies will then verify credentials and issue cards locally, using the same standards so that the system will work across multiple jurisdictions.

• Vetting information from all federal, state and local governments will be updated and synchronized nightly at a central location.

• Because this framework is standards-based and scalable, it will potentially support a variety of other applications, such as family reunification.

Protecting the Pentagon

When several first responders were unable to enter the Pentagon following 9/11 because they couldn’t prove their identity, the Department of Defense (DoD) looked for a new type of identity system based on the vetting of individuals and the updating, storage and sharing of this information.

• The DoD has now issued 4.5 million common access cards, including every reservist, national guard member, contrac-tor, civilian and military person.

• Forty-eight federal agencies recently participated in an exercise testing this platform.

Improving security at the Virginia Department of Transportation

Although the Virginia Department of Transportation had a card-based security system prior to 9/11, it has recently upgraded it so that it can interoperate with the federal system.

• In November 2005, the VDOT deployed its new system at the Smart Traffic Center in northern Virginia in conjunction with the Department of Homeland Security.

• It also rolled the new system out to include the Virginia State Police.

Looking for synergy at the Maryland Department of Transportation

Although various entities in the State of Maryland were on the brink of purchasing new card systems, the Maryland Department of Transportation has worked to bring them all into a common credentialing system based on federal stand-ards. This includes such entities as:

• National Guard• Coast Guard• Transportation Safety Authority, which is involved at airports• Port of Baltimore

Continued






















44


In today’s complex times when federal, state and local first responders often have to cross jurisdictions to do their jobs, a national, standards-based credentialing system is a must. This need is exemplified by a doctor from Maryland who went to help out in the Gulf of Mexico after Hurricane Katrina and was not allowed to work for 48 hours until local authorities verified that he was, in fact, a doctor.

• Standards-based smart cards can enable trust and cooperation among neighboring jurisdictions.

• These cards can also support human resources asset management.

• When upgrading to a new security access system, it is important to research the new possibilities carefully since they are expensive to install.

• Agencies that have bought into the new multijurisdictional standards are finding them easy to implement.

• Smart cards that are based on the federal platform may cost as little as US$8 each.

Resources
























45

8National Guard Adjutant Generals: Lessons learned from Katrina

Moderator

Major General Bruce TuxillAdjutant General, Maryland National Guard

Panelists

Major General David F. Wherley, Jr.Commanding General, District of Columbia National Guard

Major General William E. Ingram, Jr.Adjutant General, North Carolina National Guard

The purpose of this session was to discuss the challenges faced by the National Guard when responding to disasters in another state. In addition, specific findings of inter-est were presented. The focus was on procedural and logistical issues, and coop-eration among states via the Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC) mechanism, which has been in place since 1996.

Continued






















46

Background

National Guard units from the states and district represented in the session were called upon to respond to Hurricane Katrina. The initial requests began coming in via telephone late in the week of the storm, before it made landfall, and quick-response forces were dispatched to Louisiana within 36 hours.

The Guard was initially asked to provide military police and communications capabilities. In addition to those resources, logistics and operational support capabilities were put in place.

EMAC challenges

The EMAC process (see Web link at the end of this section) involves requesting assistance at the state emergency man-agement level and obtaining approvals, liability protection and funding to dispatch those resources to another part of the country. As with any such administrative process, it takes time to work through all of the steps, and time is always in short supply. Because of different organizational structures within the states (and in the case of the District of Columbia, different legal status), the details of how EMAC works will differ. Each state has a rapid-reaction force that can be sent in response to EMAC requests, and these were employed in many cases.

• Initial EMAC requests can be verbal, but must be followed up by the full, documented process, which can run concurrently with the initial deployment.

• The EMAC process can be slowed in the case of major disaster if the requesting state does not fully grasp the magnitude of the crisis. Resources may be ready to go, but have no mission because their capabilities have not been requested via EMAC.

• There are gaps in the EMAC process. In the case of Maryland, the Medical Reserve Corps was deployed for the first time, but because of the way Maryland is organized, they had to be “recruited” into the Maryland Defense Force under militia law in order to have liability coverage per EMAC.

• A recommendation was made to amend the EMAC process to allow for resources to be sent in the case of a chaotic major disaster.

Balancing resources

At the time Katrina hit, Hurricane Ophelia was forming in the Atlantic. It never did strike land, but at the time, the possibil-ity caused those states that might be affected by Ophelia to hold resources in reserve.

• All of the panelists stated that the first concern was to bal-ance their needs at home with the requests from the Gulf.

• In the case of North Carolina, the Joint Operations Center had to monitor two situations at once: Katrina and the approaching Ophelia.

Continued






















47

Capabilities and chain of command

The National Guard is able to provide unique capabilities to civilian authorities in times of crisis. Unlike the military, the National Guard is not subject to posse comitatus, and so has the ability to provide enhanced law enforcement capabilities to local government.

• The Guard was asked for specific technical capabilities not readily available to local government, including a mobile communications infrastructure and aerial surveillance.

• All of the panelists noted that their units were under the control of civilian authorities, and all stated that this arrangement worked very well.

• In the case of EMAC requests, interstate access to data and computing systems is not seen as particularly relevant (i.e., Maryland does not need to be directly involved with North Carolina for the purposes of EMAC response).

• Personal contact is very important; knowing the people involved helps get the job done. Initial requests and discus-sions take place on a person-to-person basis via telephone, not through “the system.”

Preparation and anticipation

National Guard units from other states were on the ground in Louisiana and Mississippi very quickly, due to the avail-ability of standard rapid-deployment “packages” and early communication among the states anticipating the need for help. In addition, foresight in training and preparation for an emergency of this kind helped speed the response.

• Preparation, training and regular exercises are key elements. In the case of North Carolina, the lessons

learned from Hurricane Andrew were used to help train for future hurricanes.

• Exercises must be run regularly (at least annually) because of the turnover of personnel, and should be as realistic as possible.

• It must be recognized that each disaster is unique; yet there is a natural tendency to plan and prepare based on the last event.

• Anticipation is critical to rapid response. Calls for assistance need to go out before a disaster strikes, and deployment must start immediately. The earlier the notification, the more quickly resources can be deployed. In the case of Katrina, forces were in place in Louisiana within 36 hours of the first call for assistance.

Planning for sustainability

While initial response is critical, it is also important to take ongoing needs into account. The National Guard has respon-sibilities at home, as well as a continuing role in Iraq, that must be attended to.

• Fatigue is a factor. In the first days of a crisis, personnel go without adequate rest. This dramatically affects the ability to make effective decisions, and should be anticipated.

• Units must be rotated out and responsibility handed back to the state affected by the disaster. Steps should be taken to assure a smooth transfer, sequencing units so that they are available when needed and can be relieved appropriately.

• The initial request is likely to be for security, law enforce-ment and communications. The ongoing needs are different: logistical and operational support.

Continued






















48

The “fog of war”

Difficulties in communications and organization in the first hours of a disaster, combined with a fluid situation, can make appropriate response problematic. In the case of Katrina, a variety of inappropriate actions took place, from deploying too many troops to failure to employ resources that were ready and waiting.

• In one case, the Louisiana National Guard sent out a request for 600 personnel to be sent to a particular Parish. When they arrived, Parish officials said they only needed 40, and those needed to be law enforcement personnel.

• Deployed Guard units work for local authorities, and are dependent upon them for appropriate mission assignments. However, the capabilities of local authorities may be severely hampered; the Louisiana National Guard headquarters was devastated by flood waters.


The key theme of the session focused on the ability to effectively deploy assets while taking into account a variety of limiting factors. Most important was the need to get things moving early.

• The EMAC process should be leveraged to maximize effec-tiveness, with an emphasis on getting resources where they are needed, when they are needed. Difficulties in communi-cation and organization should be anticipated: appropriate resources may be available, but not requested.

• Balancing the needs of a disaster area against requirements at home is critical.

• Plan, prepare and train for EMAC deployment well in advance. Training and exercises should be conducted regularly.

• Keep in mind that the National Guard is working for civilian authorities at all times, providing unique capabilities.

• Authorities must prepare for ongoing operations, not just the first response.

• Personal contact is very important.• The earlier the process is set in motion, the more effective

it can be.

Resources

Web link Emergency Management Assistance Compact www.emacweb.org





















http://www.emacweb.org




49


Moderator

Earl R. Lewis, Jr.Assistant Secretary for Administration, Maryland Department of Transportation

Panelists

Harold W. Neil, Jr.Director, Office of Transportation Security, New Jersey Department of Transportation

Errol EttingsDirector of Intelligence, Maryland Transportation

Mark MillerEmergency Planning Operation Coordinator, Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority

This session covered the two key security priorities of transportation authorities: 1) preventing disaster involving mass tran-sit; air, rail, truck and automobile traffic; and marine shipping; 2) protecting the essential resources of highways, railways, airports and ports so they are usable in a disaster. It also discussed system-wide communications in security and emergency management and looked at what is needed for optimal safety in today’s environment.

Continued






















50

Shared responsibilities

Securing the nation’s air, rail, marine and mass transit capabilities is a shared responsibility that crosses private entities and local, state and federal agencies. Leadership is needed at both the federal and local levels, along with adequate funding. Current tools include:

• Risk assessments that cover threat, vulnerability and criticality of various assets

• Threat response capabilities including canine programs and passenger inspections

• Passenger education programs designed to increase alertness

• Regional transit security strategies that include coordination of risk profiles, goals and objectives, including prioritization and evaluation plans

Regional coordination

Regional transit coordination covers a lot of territory, geographically, functionally and jurisdictionally. New Jersey, for example, is coordinating with New York and Connecticut in the north and with Pennsylvania in the south. This effort includes many diverse transportation subgroups in all modes of transportation including private sector buses and ferries.

• A key objective is to change the culture in the transportation community so that security is a main component.

• A major effort of the New Jersey Department of Transportation is the development of best management practices in each industry across the entire transporta-tion section, including the identification of vulnerabilities and risks.

• New Jersey is working collaboratively on communications that would allow first responders to get through the various New York City tunnels and also on a medical hospital train to help out in emergencies.

• The state is developing a telecommunications system that makes information available to the state police and other first responders, backs up the regular telecommuni-cations system and ties into similar networks in New York and Pennsylvania.

• A regional transit security strategy developed by the Maryland, northern Virginia and District of Columbia rail systems establishes funding priorities, along with guidelines for allocations.

• TRANSCOM provides a regional transportation architecture that covers all of Monmouth county in New Jersey, all of New York City, Long Island, northern New York, and Connecticut.

The law enforcement perspective

Judging by the attacks in Madrid and London, the next terrorist attack in the United States is likely to be mass transit or rail. These are difficult to defend since their very purpose is to move vast numbers of people efficiently –especially along the middle Atlantic states and southern New England.

• Coordination between federal and local authorities is critical.• Each jurisdiction must guard it own facilities.

Continued






















51


The Government Accounting Office has recommended that the Transportation Security Administration establish a plan with timelines for completing a risk assessment methodol-ogy that will be applied uniformly across the country. It also recommended developing security standards consistent with best practices that can be measured and enforced on transit systems. Here are some of the panelists’ lessons learned:

• Establishing agreements among various jurisdictions and the private sector can be painstaking and challenging. It involves a lot of legal contracts.

• Partnering with the private sector is more effective than trying to regulate it. When you regulate companies, they tend to meet only the minimum requirements. But when you partner and cooperate with them, they often exceed the minimums. The focus for regulation is on audits rather than on inspections.

• Companies know their businesses well and often identify security vulnerabilities and weaknesses that governmental agencies don’t see. Therefore, it is useful to have them draft an initial best management practices document.

• Uniform standards are important. For example, New Jersey is preparing the best management practices for the entire bus sector nationwide.

Resources
























52

10Strategies for critical infrastructure protection

Moderator

Jeff WendelChief Operating Officer, Division of Economic & Community Outreach,Towson University

Panelists

Mel BlizzardDomestic Preparedness Manager, Maryland Emergency Management Association

Chris VossChief of Training, Exercises, Mitigation and Planning, DC Emergency Management Agency

Robert NewmanDeputy Assistant to the Governor, Virginia Office of the Governor

Critical infrastructure protection is only partly about preventing damage to the nation’s infrastructure. It also deals with the creation of a resilient infrastructure that can recover quickly from a natural disaster or terrorist attack, and ways to minimize the impact of an incident. This session focused on the importance of information flow and availability, and ongoing challenges. As with many of the sessions, the importance of interagency collaboration and the building of partner-ships was emphasized.

Continued






















53

An important part of infrastructure protection is the Department of Homeland Security’s Buffer Zone Protection Program (BZPP), which provides federal funding, and the Buffer Zone Plans (BZPs) that critical facilities are required to have in place. DHS regulations and programs were not specifically discussed during the session, other than to make the point that individual state and agency efforts should be designed to work with and complement the DHS initiatives. More information on BZPP and BZPs is available at the DHS Web site at www.dhs.gov.

Expanding beyond “gates, guards and guns”

After 9/11, the immediate emphasis on infrastructure protection was deterrence and prevention of attacks on indi-vidual facilities. This was the impetus behind the BZPP and the BZPs, which help create secure buffer zones around critical assets. Since that time, the efforts have evolved and broadened, and current activities include planning to limit the impact of an incident (either natural or human-caused) and restore vital functions. Capabilities – the ability to supply power, water, transportation, etc. – are a new focus, in addi-tion to individual critical sites.

• It is not possible to avoid natural disasters, nor is it possible to completely eliminate the possibility of a terrorist attack that will knock out a given facility.

• Individual site protection is still very important, but no longer paramount. The effort is moving beyond single sites, single cities, even single states, to a regional view.

• Individual risk assessment for assets is ongoing and impor-tant, but understanding interdependencies and “the big picture” has emerged as a new priority. These dependencies often extend beyond state boundaries.

• A consistent definition of what critical infrastructure actually consists of is needed.

• Requirement definitions for infrastructure protection should come from the bottom up; local and state authorities should drive requirements upward to DHS, rather than the other way around.

• Detailed plans for resiliency and recovery are well underway and in some cases are being released (e.g., in Virginia).

Continued




















http://www.dhs.gov



54

The role of information

Information has been recognized as an important component of infrastructure protection, both for prevention/deterrence purposes and for response/recovery purposes.

• Sensitive information must be protected so that terrorists cannot make use of it. At the same time, it must be made available to planners and first responders as needed. The information flow must be seamless.

• Private companies will be required in some cases to share confidential information. This is of great concern to them (see The importance of the private sector).

• Certain existing laws can pose a problem (Freedom of Information Act). Newer legislation allows for the pro-tection of sensitive information (Critical Infrastructure Information Act).

The importance of the private sector

The vast majority of critical infrastructure assets – some 80 to 85 percent – are privately held. It is therefore vital to gain the cooperation of and provide support to the private sector if a viable infrastructure protection plan is to be implemented.

• This kind of public/private collaboration regarding security is unprecedented; it is a new paradigm. University involvement is also part of the picture.

• Private companies are looking to government for incentives in the form of tax relief to pay for security measures and cer-tification. Private industry does not want to pass costs on to consumers in the form of higher rates.

• A key concern of private companies is the protection of confidential, competitive information. Governments must address this aggressively if the private sector is to be brought on board.

• One role of government is to orchestrate efforts, rather than looking to private companies to work directly with one another.

• Private companies face financial constraints that discourage them from spending too much money on costly physical security measures; in some cases they are more interested in focusing on the resilience/recovery aspects of infrastruc-ture protection.

Continued






















55

Building partnerships

A point that was emphasized during the session is that critical infrastructure is not limited to individual facilities or localities. It is highly interdependent and must be looked at on a regional basis.

• Collaboration between public and private sectors is vital. Universities also have a role to play: in Maryland, the state is working with universities to develop a risk analysis/assessment/reporting methodology.

• States need to work together to develop common methodolo-gies so that all are looking at the problem in the same way. This requires a regional viewpoint and also regular interac-tion so that agencies can learn from each other’s mistakes.

• The various stakeholders (government and private sector) are working toward the same goal, but are on separate tracks. Personal relationships that cross boundaries have been found to be effective in coordinating efforts.

• Collaboration needs to be institutionalized so that the change of administration that comes along with the normal cycle of elections does not result in the loss of collaborative relationships. This has proven to be a challenge.

• Cooperation within states is a challenge. Maryland has taken some steps to create a framework for information sharing between public and private sectors (Governor’s Emergency Management and Advisory Council, Critical Infrastructure Protection Subcommittee). Virginia has found that individual agencies tend to work in isolation, and that this culture is difficult to change.

• Methodology planning should involve engineers, not bureaucrats.

Continued






















56


While much has been done since 9/11 in the area of critical infrastructure protection, there is considerable work left to do. Largely, this is due to the scope of the problem. Out of hundreds of sites, work has been completed at only a frac-tion. The process of assessment and planning continues.

• The view of what critical infrastructure protection actually means is evolving, from an insular “moat around the castle” concept to one of capability protection, resiliency and recovery.

• Interdependencies and regionalism are recognized as highly important. Because of this, the building of relationships both within each state and beyond its borders is vital.

• Common risk assessment methodologies and definitions should be implemented so that the various stakeholders approach the problem in the same way.

• Because most critical infrastructure assets are privately owned, the private sector is an important player in infra-structure protection. They have concerns and needs that differ from those of the public sector (e.g., the protection of confidential information).

• Information is an important part of infrastructure protection. It must be secured and protected, yet still made available for planning and first responder purposes.

Resources

Web linkNational Incident Management System www.fema.gov/nims/

























57





















Moderator

Ellis KitchenChief Information Officer, Department of Budget and Management, State of Maryland

Panelists

Maria CardiellosChief of Information Technology, Department of Law and Public Safety, State of New Jersey

Robert LeGrandeDeputy CTO for Wireless Networks, HSMP Development and Agency Liaison, Office of Chief Technology Officer, DC Government

Tom SteeleChief Information Officer, Delaware Department of Safety and Homeland Security

Tom ReidyDirector of Office of Information Technology (QIT)/Statewide Radio, Commonwealth of Pennsylvania

The sharing of information across multiple state and local agencies in times of disas-ter requires extensive systems integration, interoperability and data fusion. In this session, regional chief information exec-utives discussed their strategies and lessons learned in the areas of resource sharing, state and regional networking, continuity of operations and critical infra-structure resilience.

Continued



58

Evolution versus revolution

The vertical IT silos that often exist in state, county and local agencies are primarily a result of how their processes have been structured over time. Rather then trying to change these processes, the State of New Jersey is trying to leverage existing relationships using open standards and protocols.

• New Jersey’s Department of Law and Public Safety coordi-nates a large share of DOH and DHS funds, so it is able to deploy new resources in a holistic way. It emphasizes part-nerships with other state governments, as well as with private industry.

• Its EPINet (Emergency Preparedness Information Network) connects people, standards, data, infrastructure, services and solutions through a common information architecture and solutions environment.

• EPINet leverages existing data and presents it in a more uniform fashion. It also collects and builds information and services that can be used many times.

• EPINet includes a number of application solutions – for example, SIMS, an intelligence management system, and CATS, an asset tracking system – that enable it to share data and information residing in diverse background sys-tems with users in other regions in real time.

Investing in data sharing

Recognizing that thousands of applications around the country contain data that is useful in responding to disasters, the District of Columbia is investing in the ability to share this data with mobile and wired users in real time.

• It is building a regional wireless broadband network that will carry voice and data. This will enable first responders to go into other jurisdictions and receive the information they need– including video, voice, text and GIS information – seamlessly across applications.

• Using a data exchange hub, this network will provide a common interface that enables users from various juris-dictions at the federal, state and local levels to exchange information in a uniform way.

• In time, this network will be extended to human resources and education uses.

• The District of Columbia has also built a data exchange capability that enables human services agencies to share data.




















Continued



59

Making it all work together

Although most people think of homeland security in terms of police, fire and EMS, many other agencies are also involved such as public health, public works, even agricul-ture. Lessons learned in events such as the Air Florida crash and the sniper shootings a couple of years ago point to the current inoperability of both voice and data across jurisdic-tions. One of the few states to have a state-level CIO for Homeland Security, Delaware is taking the following actions to remedy this:

• It is constructing the Delaware Information Analysis Center, which will gather and analyze information – from field contact reports to calls for fire assistance, ambulance and agricul-tural events – 24x7.

• Working across legacy systems and databases across the state, Delaware is preparing to share information with private industries as well as with Delaware State University, which has much needed resources in the areas of public health, criminology, computer science, agriculture and languages.

Laying the groundwork for interoperability

Taking the long view, the State of Maryland is developing a target architecture that all levels of government can eventu-ally adopt. After assessing the needs of all three levels of government, it will establish a prototype test site for proof of concept. In addition, the state is:

• Putting mobile data computers in state police cruisers, so that when Maryland State Police officers pull someone over, they can do a tag check.

• Implementing a project called Network Live Scan that will reduce the amount of time for getting fingerprint information from a state agency to local jurisdictions from approximately six weeks to 72 to 84 hours.

• Implementing a digital fingerprinting system designed to quickly get information out to officers in the field.

• Developing Network Maryland, a broadband network encompassing 23 county seats, as well as the City of Baltimore. In addition, the state has established the Bernett Waltermore Education Research Network, which provides Internet access and data port capabilities to universities.

• Consolidating its e-mail systems into one unified messaging system.




















Continued



60


All participants emphasized the need to work with existing applications and infrastructures, tying them together with open standards, protocols and data hubs.

• Replacing existing systems by building a uniform system within a region could cost billions of dollars. It’s more cost-effective to build an architecture that will enable the data in existing applications to be shared across jurisdictions.

• When developing new networks, such as a wireless broad-band network, it’s important to look beyond the region and the state to national interoperability.

• Agencies developing new applications should first prepare a business plan that defines their problems, priorities and requirements.

Resources
























61

12Business resources in time of crisis

Moderator

William “Corky” LowePrograms Director, New Jersey Business Force

Panelists

Jan MaresBusiness Liaison Director, Private Sector Office, Department of Homeland Security

Brian WalshNational Venue Representative, Humanitarian International Services Group

Howard ButtCaptain, New Jersey State Police (ret.), EMAC Coordinator, Emergency Management Section, State of New Jersey

Nick DeTuraVice President, North America Services, Lucent Technologies

Walter GrahamExecutive Director, New Jersey Business Executives for National Security

This session covered the ways in which the resources of private business can best be used in a crisis. The emphasis was on public/private partnerships, and some programs that are already in place were described. In addition, an extensive presen-tation was given by Nick DeTura of Lucent Technologies, describing how a global company that has to respond to crises as a normal part of its operations prepares for and responds to emergency situations.




















Continued



62

Challenges to public/private partnership

Some 85 percent of the physical assets and capabilities that exist in the United States are privately held. Therefore, it is natural for the public sector to turn to the private sector in times of crisis. There are, however, a number of challenges to be overcome.

• In an emergency, between 45 and 50 percent of the affected private businesses essentially disappear. There is also a ripple/cascade effect in which businesses can no longer operate because their employees have been dislocated. This has happened in the wake of Katrina.

• There are cultural differences between the public and private sectors that discourage cooperation. Areas of responsibility are an issue.

• Lack of consistency is an issue. Different states have different ways of doing things; this is a problem for a national or global company that is trying to help.

• Complexity is an issue. There is no central clearinghouse for information on how to cooperate with government. Agencies have multiple Web sites, multiple programs.

• There is a lack of “big picture” guidelines. Example: There is no plan for how to go about rebuilding a city that is devas-tated (e.g., Post-Katrina New Orleans).

Programs that facilitate cooperation

During the session an important source of frustration for businesses was highlighted: the lack of coordination between the disaster response needs of the public sector and the resources available from the private sector. An example from 9/11 was cited: there were truckloads of dog food being made available, but local community organiza-tions couldn’t feed people.

Several programs were cited that are designed to break down this barrier and foster cooperation between the public and private sectors.

• The Private Sector office at the Department of Homeland Security was set up specifically to promote coopera-tion between the public and private sectors, acting as an ombudsman within DHS.

• The National Emergency Response Registry (NERR) is a database that allows individuals or companies to list goods and/or services that are available to the public sector in times of crisis.– The NERR lacks the resources necessary to vet individ-

ual offers.– Cultural barriers within government stand in the way of

this kind of initiative from gaining traction.– The government has a hard time identifying needs.– Coordination and consistency has been challenging.– The system is being reviewed.




















Continued



63

• NGOs can act as coordinators/intermediaries between the public sector and private relief organizations. The Humanitarian International Services Group was cited as an example.

• The Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC) is an agreement between states to assist one another in time of need.– EMAC covers issues of liability and recognition

of credentials.– Largely public sector, but private sector also involved.

• Business Executives for National Security (BENS) has been in existence for over 20 years. It is a group of hundreds of corporations that promote public/private partnership and the federal level on a pro bono basis.– A need to drive the BENS model down to the state level

was identified.– The Business Response Network is a state-level initiative

to pre-identify and pre-position assets. Currently being implemented three states.

Example of how a private company responds to crises

Nick DeTura of Lucent Technologies was one of the panel-ists, and he described in detail how Lucent handles disaster response. The details of his presentation are available in the PowerPoint presentation that is linked at the end of this section.

Lucent Technologies is a provider of telecommunications network equipment, servicing local and regional communi-cations service providers. In the event of a disaster that affects communications capabilities, Lucent works with the local service providers to restore service. To that end, the company has mobile/temporary assets that can be moved into an affected area quickly.

• In the case of Lucent, the services it provides have a direct and immediate impact on public-sector disaster response, because of the critical nature of communications in a crisis. This may not be the case for other private businesses.

• Assessment of capabilities, vulnerabilities and risks is a key activity. This is an iterative process, in which lessons learned are applied to future planning.– It is important to understand what exists before the disaster

occurs so that the appropriate response can be made.

• An understanding of what to ask for is important; companies need to work with communities to educate them. A bridge between the public and private sector is needed.




















Continued



64

• Private companies have needed knowledge – how infrastruc-ture works, how it’s designed, what it’s capable of – that may be lacking in the public sector.

• Lucent takes a global view of its resources and methodolo-gies. Equipment may be called in literally from overseas to respond to a need close to home. Response methodologies are structured similarly worldwide.

• Response efforts by private companies tend to be reactive; this was presented as a flaw in the system.

• A company that has disaster response as part of its normal purview can respond very quickly. The example cited was the restoration of communications to the New York Stock Exchange within 72 hours of 9/11.

• A single point of coordination within the business is needed.


The key issue that the session highlighted was coordination and cooperation between the public and private sectors. There are a number of initiatives already in place that are designed to foster this cooperation.

• All stakeholders (both public and private) should become familiar with the National Incident Management System and the Homeland Security Presidential Directives to establish a common framework.

• Private businesses should avail themselves of public resources such as the Public Sector Office at DHS and the National Emergency Response Registry.

• Basic disaster preparedness (e.g., business continuity and resiliency planning) should be undertaken to ensure that private sector resources remain available.

• Partnerships between government and the private sector are important. There is a need to pre-identify requirements and pre-position needed assets. This should be done before disaster strikes.

Resources

Web linksNational Incident Management Systemwww.fema.gov/nims/

Business Executives for National Security www.bens.org

Business Response Networkwww.businessresponsenetwork.org

Emergency Management Assistance Compactwww.emacweb.org






















http://www.bens.org

http://www.businessresponsenetwork.org





65

13Surge capacity in the health and medical fields

Presenters

Julie Casani, M.D.Director, Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response, Maryland Department of Health and Mental Hygiene

Cathy Slemp, MD, MPHWest Virginia Bureau for Public Health

This session explored the types of planning necessary to ensure that a health system can expend its services rapidly during a disaster or catastrophe. This planning should encompass information technology systems; data and voice communications; inventories of beds, drugs and supplies; the availability of qualified personnel and their ability to perform tasks assigned to them. It should also cover secondary outbreaks, biological, chemical and radiological events, along with incident command, communica-tion of risks, and the treatment of special populations. Lessons learned in the after-math of Katrina were analyzed and applied to threats that could affect our own area.




















Continued



66

All surge is not the same

At the same time that governments are urging hospitals to shrink capacity, they are telling them to build surge capacity. However, surge capacity is difficult to quantify because it varies, depending on the nature of the disaster or catastro-phe. For example:

• Surge capacity might include opening a closed state hospital and equipping it with stretchers and cots. But if hospital beds are needed in a matter of minutes following a blast or explo-sion, for example, there won’t be time.

• Different disasters require different provider-to-patient ratios. For example, providers may have to examine many healthy people who have been exposed to a poison or a virus in order to find the ones who actually need treatment. This puts a huge burden on healthcare providers, which can be reduced by communicating the risk factors to the public so individuals can sort themselves out.

• Certain disasters may necessitate longer periods of care. After a while, healthcare providers may become fatigued, sick or simply burn out and drop from the provider pool.

Different threats, different facilities

The type of facilities that are needed in a disaster depends on the type of threat involved. For example:

• The pre-hospital arena may include a patient being transported from the scene to the hospital or a person with a fever sitting at home trying to decide whether or not to go to the hospital.

• Traditional facilities include hospitals, clinics and private providers – wherever people are used to going for healthcare.

• Offsite treatment centers may include a community college or convention center equipped with cots for use in emergen-cies, or they might include home care.

• Certain conditions such as third-degree burns and SARS require special facilities and equipment, for example, N95 masks.

• All of these types of facilities need medical supplies – and policies for properly regulating them.




















Continued



67

Personnel shortages

Because of today’s nursing shortage, getting the personnel necessary to staff a facility is usually a bigger challenge than getting the beds. In addition, these personnel need a command and control structure that is able to coordinate both the private and public sectors.

• Estimates often double count the availability of healthcare providers. For example, after Katrina half of the Louisiana National Guard was overseas and much of the rest was deployed for safety and law enforcement purposes.

• Volunteers are often listed on multiple specialty teams.

• Administrators must agree upon standards of care and communicate them to the public.


Surge capacity can differ depending on how quickly it is needed and also on the nature of the care to be delivered –for example, surge capacity for individuals severely burned in a blast as opposed to that for individuals exposed to anthrax or SARS.

• Maryland found it effective to allow each hospital to find ways of building surge bed capacity – instead of telling them how to do it. Some have early patient discharge policies; others have purchased temporary structures or are partnering with community agencies.

• Local health departments in West Virginia have recruited and trained volunteers to work with physicians, nurses, mental health professionals, pharmacists and others. They are encouraged to use them on a frequent basis to build skills and relationships.

• The Emergency System for Advanced Registration of Volunteer Health Professionals (ESARVHP) is a national program that registers healthcare professionals using common standards. Interstate standards and guidelines like this are needed to support rapid sharing of assets.

• It is important to explore potential liability issues when using volunteers.

Resources

Web linkHRSA U.S. Department of Health and Human Serviceswww.hrsa.gov/esarvhp/guidelines/default.htm





















http://www.hrsa.gov/esarvhp/guidelines/default.htm




68

14Implementing federal and state regionalism

Moderator

Tom SteeleChief Information Officer, Delaware Department of Safety and Homeland Security

Panelists

Tom LockwoodDirector, National Capital Region, Department of Homeland Security

Bob CacceseDirector, Operations Audit Unit, Department of Law and Public Safety, State of New Jersey

Juan MartinezSenior BiometricsSolutions Engineer,Motorola

Meeting Department of Homeland Security priorities for regionalism and state compliance with Homeland Security Presidential Directive (HSPD) timelines and milestones is heavily dependent on systems integration. This presents major opportunities for information technology companies that can provide advanced tech-nology solutions. This session explored how government can stay abreast of state-of-the-art technologies that can link regional efforts and how industry can present the most advanced solutions for regional pro-curement consideration.




















Continued



69

Regionalism is multifaceted

When most people think of regionalism, they think of geographic boundaries. But in today’s complex environment, the concept is more complicated: it encompasses critical dependencies such as the flow of water, energy, transporta-tion and commutation.

• There is a myth that when disaster strikes there is a single person in charge. However, what really is in charge are the processes, practices and protocols that practitioners must coordinate in the event of an emergency.

• These not only involve first responders and various practitioner groups, but also the private sector, which supplies the basic necessities– bread, milk, water, toilet paper and cash – that citizens need during a crisis.

• As agencies build the collaborative relationships necessary to integrate processes, practices and protocols, they need to do so in a way that respects individual jurisdictional authorities.

• The ultimate goal for homeland security is an open, collaborative, distributed environment.

Regional planning in New Jersey

After 9/11, New Jersey created a domestic preparedness task force based on the fact that the state was not only a potential terrorist target, but also a part of a national corridor. Its first initiative was to create a region of main service providers that included Newark and six surround-ing counties. It later designated Jersey City as an urban area and incorporated it into the Newark region to share resources including law enforcement, fire services and emergency services.

• New Jersey also developed a Urban Search and Rescue (USAR) capability to provide rescue preparedness for the tunnels it shares with New York under the Hudson River.

• The state has partnered with each of its 20 private sectors, which have developed security plans that have been approved by the governor.

• It has also developed public/private relationships to secure reservoirs, pumping stations and malls.

• To ensure communications interoperability among the casinos in Atlantic City, the state hired a vendor to develop standards, and all casinos are required to use them.




















Continued



70

Sharing biometrics

The sharing of biometric data – including fingerprints, facial mug shots, palm prints and iris scans – across regions can help in the identification of first responders, as well as crimi-nals. For example:

• The Northern Virginia Regional Identification System (NOVARIS) system – which is shared by the District of Columbia and the Virginia counties of Fairfax, Arlington, Alexandria, Prince William and Loudoun – and the Regional Fingerprinting Identification System (RAFIS )– which is shared by Montgomery and Prince Georges counties and Delaware – enable the exchange of fingerprints so that criminals can be identified even if they cross regions.

• Now that systems such as NOVARIS and RAFIS use relatively inexpensive off-the-shelf equipment and open standards and architectures, more localities can afford to take advantage of them.

Deriving public benefits from military infrastructures

In the past, infrastructure projects that the United States has undertaken for military reasons have resulted in benefits for the general public, and it is possible that some of our homeland security projects may do so today. For example:

• President Eisenhower initiated the building of our existing national highway system because he learned the importance of moving military forces as supreme commander in Europe.

• The Internet was originally built to provide secure government communications in the event that the central communications system was taken out.

• It is possible that the current effort to build a regional identity system for first responders may become the basis for a national identity system.




















Continued



71


Instead of simply focusing on grants, regions need to focus more on their core principles, goals and objectives. What do they want to achieve in the next 24 or 36 months? What are their priorities? What kind of mutual aid agreements can they develop to help to bring these about?

• The ability to visualize resources is key to using them effectively in a dynamic environment.

• Building technology on open standards and architectures lays the groundwork for meeting future needs.

• Regional cooperation is often the result of relationships created during events such as this All Hazards Forum, so it is important to introduce yourself to your colleagues and explore mutual needs and experiences.

Resources

Web site USARcan-tf1.org/index.html





















http://can-tf1.org/index.html




72

15Alerting the public through the use of technology

Moderator

Art Agin,Senior Management, Public Sector Product Manager, Sprint Nextel Corporation

Panelists

Bob PeterDirector, Business Development, REVERSE 911®

Marc LadinVice President of Marketing, National Notification Network

Joe WalshChief Operating Officer, SquareLoop

Creating a coordinated public notification system for use in emergencies is a major national priority. In this session, emergency management and technology leaders discussed the kinds of tools and communi-cations systems that are currently available to push information out to government workers and to the public. The panel dis-cussed the kinds of systems that now exist for automatic and instantaneous outbound messaging to electronic highway signs, land lines, cell phones and computers using voice alerts, text messaging and e-mails. It also covered how these systems have been tested and some of the glitches.




















Continued



73

Sprint Nextel wireless Amber alerts

Developed by the wireless industry as a free public service, wireless Amber alerts are designed to supplement the alerts that currently go out to highway signs. They notify subscrib-ers on their cell phones with messages targeted according to their physical locations.

• Last year, Nextel and some of its partners worked with the Pennsylvania State Police to set up a pilot for a wireless Amber alert system using an application that Nextel engi-neers built on their free time. The pilot was a success.

• Then Nextel went to the National Center for Missing and Exploited Children, which sought funding to develop an appli-cation that could consolidate the various formats of incoming Amber alerts. As a result, the center has now been chartered by the Department of Justice to collect alerts from all the Amber programs throughout the country and put them into a consistent format.

• Nextel also contracted with a company called Synaburst to take the list of all wireless subscribers and determine who is to receive each alert, depending on geographical location. So, for example, if a child is missing in eastern Colorado, only the subscribers who are in parts of the state where the kidnapper is most likely to be are notified.

REVERSE 911

REVERSE 911 is a GIS map-based database and interactive program that has been used to send emergency notifica-tions throughout the United States since 1982. The tech-nology has evolved over the years and is currently in use by many companies.

SquareLoop

Working across all carrier technologies, this company enables emergency managers to target messages to mobile phones based on where the phone is actually located – rather than where it has been registered. So, for example, if there is a chemical spill at a factory, users can communicate evac-uation instructions to people who are downwind of the spill and also tell those who are upwind to stay where they are.

• This system not only delivers a message based on where the subscriber is, but also where he or she has been. So in the case of an Amber alert for a missing child, the system can reach back in time and contact individuals who were in the area when the child was taken. These individuals could potentially provide valuable information about the abduction.

• The system also is able to cut through spam by playing a special tone to indicate that an incoming message is critical.




















Continued



74

National Notification Network

Known as 3N, this company is a mass notification solution provider that is agnostic when it comes to devices. It incorpo-rates all device information about potential recipients into a single system, including numbers for cell phones, mobile phones and home phones. It also includes personalized information such as e-mail addresses, instant messaging addresses and fax numbers.

• Businesses use this system for emergency communications and also for more routine activities, such as staffing issues.

• The system has a two-way communications capability so companies can verify that a message has been received and how it will be acted upon. So, for example, if a company sends out a message about some problem at the office, the recipient might reply that he or she got the message and is on the way to the office.


Experience shows that no system is 100 percent effective in a disaster. A provider’s facility might be damaged or destroyed. Cell towers and land lines can collapse during hurricanes. In addition, authorities actually shut down the cell phone system during the London bombings because they thought the cell phone system was being used to detonate the bombs. Whenever a primary system goes down, govern-ments, businesses and individuals need backups. In addition:

• Since wireless users have to subscribe to receive alerts, the individuals who don’t subscribe won’t receive them. Becoming a subscriber could potentially involve privacy issues, since the wireless companies have to know the sub-scriber’s location to target messages properly.

• Although wireless alerts are effective for missing children, they are inadequate for emergency situations, such as tornado alerts. Wireless communication has been designed as a one-to-one communication system, and is therefore not a broadcast system. Since it takes a finite time to send out hundreds of thousands of messages to wireless sub-scribers, the original message may not have gotten out to everyone before an update is ready to follow.




















Continued



75

• Text messaging systems have proven highly reliable in the Washington D.C. area, which has had to deal with numerous emergencies in the last few years.

• Senate Bill 1753 provides funding to explore the development of a national warning and alert system with various govern-ment and industry groups. It includes state and local govern-ments and carriers, as well as equipment manufacturers.

Resources
























76

16Response and recovery from a biohazard event

Moderator

Chris WagnerOn-Site Coordinator, Western Response Branch, Environmental Protection Agency

Panelist

Lisa G. Kaplowitz, MD, MSHADeputy Commissioner, Virginia Department of Health

This session covered issues and challenges surrounding detection and response to biohazard incidents, whether from deliberate attack or natural sources. The panelist discussed the difficulty of detecting an outbreak in the first place, the limitations of technology, and the problem of responding in an effective and appropriate manner to an outbreak.

Continued






















77

The participants pointed out that while a great deal of attention has been paid to the possibility of a deliberate attack using an agent such as anthrax, in fact the more prev-alent and ongoing threat comes from natural outbreaks (e.g., food-borne contamination or Legionnaire’s Disease, or the possibility of an avian flu pandemic), which happen relatively often. Also, the potential size of a natural outbreak is far greater than that of a bioterrorism attack, and it can place severe stress on the nation’s surge capacity.

Detection

The anthrax attacks that occurred in the wake of 9/11 focused attention on detecting and responding rapidly to such attacks. To that end, detection technology was put in place in key areas. However, it is not perfect, and there are other issues surrounding the detection . . .and even the definition . . .of an attack.

• Sensors have been put in place in major metropolitan areas under the DHS-funded BioWatch program (See Resources). These detect a number of pathogens (the list has not been made public), and are checked once per day.– The sensors have proven to be effective at detecting

various airborne agents, but none have been due to inten-tional attack.

– A different sensor system (the Biohazard Detection System), currently capable of detecting anthrax and rigged to sound an immediate alarm, is also in place at United States Postal Service (USPS) distribution facilities.

– The sensors cannot detect every possible biological agent, and laboratory tests are not perfect, so it is unwise to rely on technology too heavily. Alert healthcare professionals are critically important in detecting an outbreak.

• It is important not to narrow the scope of attention too much, for example by focusing on anthrax to the exclusion of other hazards, such as botulinum toxin or ricin.

• It is not always apparent whether an actual attack has taken place. With the exception of smallpox, all biohazard agents are potentially present in the environment, and a positive detection may not actually involve a threat significant enough to warrant a large-scale response.

• It is not practical to test for every possible disease, all the time. The costs are prohibitive. Labs only test for what they’ve been asked to test for.

• Non-technological methods of detection are also in place.– Traditionally, health departments have relied on passive

methods of getting information from the field; forms are filled out and sent in when certain patterns of symptoms or disease are spotted.

– Syndromic surveillance is being put in place, which is a more active process. Information is gathered from a variety of sources (e.g., absenteeism from schools, information from hospitals) and analyzed on a daily basis.

– The diligence of health workers is critical. The detection protocols in place would not have caught the Florida anthrax attacks in 2001: it was an astute clinician who saw anthrax-caused pneumonia and realized it was some-thing unusual.

Continued




















http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL32152.html



78

• Detection is complicated by a number of factors:– Many diseases present similar symptoms (e.g., pneumonia,

fever, sore throat, “flu-like symptoms”), that may be diffi-cult to correlate to a specific disease or toxic agent.

– Healthcare professionals may not immediately recognize a disease they’ve never seen before (e.g., Ebola), which can slow response.

• Departments of Agriculture also play an important role in detection, specifically of diseases that involve animal-to-human transmission, e.g., Avian Flu.

Treatment

Several programs that are designed to rapidly treat and/or immunize the population are in place. But significant questions remain, and plans continue to evolve. It was emphasized that there is no one “best” answer for the problem of treatment.

• There is a National Strategic Stockpile of vaccines and other medicine, maintained by the federal government, which can be dispatched to states within eight to 12 hours of a request. The Stockpile does not contain medicine to treat every pos-sible disease.– Every state is required to have a response plan to adminis-

ter antibiotics and vaccine to a large population in a short period of time.

– Once the medicine and vaccines arrive, it is the states’ responsibility to distribute them.

• The baseline for distribution has been seven to ten days. More recently, starting with major metropolitan areas, this has been shortened to 48 hours (the Cities Readiness Initiative mandates that the population of entire metropolitan areas be treated within 48 hours of an incident).– The faster treatment occurs, the greater the likelihood of

preventing a widespread outbreak and saving more lives.– If treatment of the population takes place within 48 hours

of the incident, over 99 percent of the population will be covered before they can be infected (depending on the nature of the incident).

• The shorter 48-hour time frame has created new challenges for distribution. The previous scheme, to set up distribu-tion points in public buildings such as schools or convention centers, may not be efficient enough. Novel distribution schemes, such as delivery by mail, or in a drive-through fashion, are being investigated.

• Treatment may also involve isolation or quarantine, either of individuals or entire areas.– The Centers for Disease Control (CDC) is increasing the

number of quarantine facilities.

• By definition, if a new strain of influenza is detected, there will not be a stockpile of vaccine for four to six months. This fact must be considered when making contingency plans.

Continued






















79

Appropriateness of response

Since it is not possible to treat the entire population of the country, it is necessary to control the spread of any disease outbreak. One of the most difficult issues surrounding biohazard events involves the level of response needed to achieve containment, and its appropriateness. For example, under ordinary circumstances the side effects of a medicine or vaccine are of great concern; it might prove dangerous for certain people such as children. In a crisis situation involving a lethal outbreak, those concerns must be set aside, because the goal is no longer to minimize the risk to each individual, it is to treat the entire population as quickly as possible in order to contain the outbreak.

• Public health departments and the CDC play a vital role in assessment.

• There is no one correct response for all situations, or even a specific path of escalation: it all depends on the nature of the specific crisis.

• In the case of a major outbreak, dramatic measures may have to be taken, such as ring vaccination and forced quaran-tine of entire cities.– New ideas, such as “work quarantine,” which was used by

the Canadians during the SARS crisis and involves quaran-tined healthcare workers being able to go home or to work but nowhere else, are being developed. Methods such as this can keep systems from breaking down.

• States are responsible for plans involving their own territory, while the federal government is responsible for interna-tional travel.

• Escalating levels of response involve high costs, risk and potentially severe social and economic impact. This must be balanced against the need to contain and treat an outbreak, using a risk/benefit analysis.– Depending on the scale and nature of the emergency,

it may be necessary to involve law enforcement or even the military.

– An attack has a law enforcement aspect, while a natural outbreak does not. This is where determining the cause of an outbreak becomes an issue.

– There is a fundamental tension between the intelligence and law enforcement community and the public health community regarding the dissemination of information. The former want to limit and control information, while the lat-ter wants to get the word out to as many people as possible. A balance must be struck.

Continued






















80

Practical issues surrounding recovery

The USPS anthrax attacks demonstrated how difficult it can be to recover from a biohazard event. Many lessons were learned about how to make the process more efficient and effective.

• A key question is “how clean is clean?” It is not realistic to expect to sterilize an entire building or city, or even to test every single surface in every single room in an affected building. The setting up of expert review organizations to make judgment calls on when it is safe to return has proven useful.

• Setting dates and expectations is unrealistic; it is important to let the science drive the cleanup, and reopening facilities should be done only when they have been cleared.

• To minimize disruption, keeping track of affected individu-als’ personal possessions during decontamination has been helpful.


The overarching theme of this session was that there is no single “best” way to respond to, or even to detect, a bio-hazard incident. The range of possible causes, possible transmission vectors, severity and appropriate responses is simply too great.

• Every situation is different and must be responded to differently.

• A balance must be struck between actual severity and level of response. This is a key assessment issue.

• Detection technology has become much more widespread since 9/11, but it is not perfect. Alert healthcare profes-sionals and proactive data analysis are still the best way of detecting an outbreak. Even then, there are signifi-cant challenges.

• Collaboration and coordination between hospitals, law enforcement, public health departments, the CDC, and governments are essential both for planning and response purposes.

• Response plans are required by law, involving treatment of entire populations in as little as 48 hours.– The faster treatment is administered, the more lives can

be saved.– Novel medication and vaccine distribution schemes are

being looked at to make this practical.

• Recovery and cleanup methods are becoming more streamlined, partly as the result of lessons learned from the post-9/11 anthrax attacks.

Continued






















81

Resources

Web linksBioWatch program informationwww.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL32152.html

Strategic National Stockpilewww.bt.cdc.gov/stockpile/

Cities Readiness Initiativewww.bt.cdc.gov/cri/






















http://www.bt.cdc.gov/stockpile/

http://www.bt.cdc.gov/cri/




82


Moderator

Michael GreenbergerDirector, Center for Health and Homeland Security, University of Maryland School of Law

A recognized and accepted chain of incident management command can pre-vent crisis management from turning into a disaster. This session explored who takes command at the local scene during various points in the emergency timeline. Panelists discussed when and how the state and federal governments become involved and the roles of the National Guard and FEMA. Taking advantage of lessons learned in the command structure breakdown during the aftermath of Katrina, the discussion high-lighted what should happen – and when – in an expanding incident chain of command.

Panelists

John DroneburgDirector, Maryland Emergency Management Agency

Christa-Marie Singleton, MD, MPHChief Medical Director for the Baltimore City Health Department’s Office of Public Health Preparedness and Response

James K. “CHIPS” StewartSenior Fellow, Office of the President, CNA Corporation Institute for Public Research




















Continued



83

Local focus

Although there is a consensus that emergencies should be handled as locally as possible, there is considerable dis-cussion about what should happen when a crisis becomes multijurisdictional. Leaders at all levels of government, as well as those in the academic community, are examining the roles of the federal government and the active military in emergency management.

• Business and the military both have established command structures, so it’s logical that emergency management should have one, too.

• This need became apparent in the 1970s, when California required resources from all over the nation to fight wildfires. The state needed fire tankers that fly in the air and dump water from helicopters– as opposed to fire trucks that drive along streets with tanks of water on their backs, which are common to the East Coast – and thus the Fire Scope Incident Command System (ICS) was born. It provided a common terminology, which was expanded during the 1980s into the National Interagency Incident Management (NIIMS) system. NIIMS provided a simple management structure to ensure that someone is in charge, along with standard practices and terminology.

• A recent Homeland Security directive established the National Incident Management System (NIMS), which provides a national planning framework for inter-agency response that includes interoperable equipment and communications.

• An incident command system usually includes an incident commander, a safety officer to make sure everyone is safe, a public information officer who communicates to the public, a planning function and a financial administrator.

Who is in charge?

During most emergencies, either the police or the fire department is in charge. But who would be in charge dur-ing an outbreak of Avian or pandemic flu? Would it be the public health officer? Or would it be the mayor or governor? When multiple agencies are involved – as in the Katrina aftermath – it is necessary to bring them into a unified command structure with common terminology and inte-grated communications.

• Since biological incidents do not respect jurisdictional boundaries, they usually involve leaders from multi-ple jurisdictions.

• Local authorities must be able to define what they need so that state partners can respond appropriately.

• To be truly prepared, state and local agencies must practice working together on an ongoing basis.




















Continued



84

Who is responsible?

Although government and private-sector officials often think everything necessary to handle an emergency is in place, the proof comes when the system is actually tested. The events following Katrina included some real “firsts” in the area of emergency management:

• The Secretary of Health and Human Services declared a public health emergency so that he could federalize civilian medical volunteers, thereby covering licensing and liabil-ity issues.

• The National Disaster Medical System (NDMS) evacuated patient populations.

• The USNS Comfort was deployed, along with specialists usually needed in battle: thoracic surgeons, neurologists, etc. However, what the area mostly needed was pediatricians and mental health workers.


Perhaps the question isn’t “Who is in charge?” A better question might be “Who is responsible?” In a sense, the public safety area has a coordination structure – as opposed to a chain of command. Relationships are important. Not only do you have to know your counterparts in other areas, but you also need to know their roles – what you can expect from them.

• The National Response Plan, which is on the Department of Homeland Security Web site, emphasizes coordination and sets up various coordinating structures.

• Since it is not possible to anticipate every emergency, it is important to anticipate the strengths and weaknesses of various groups.

• The State of Maryland used another way to cover liability issues for volunteers going to serve in Louisiana after Katrina: it swore them all into the Maryland Defense Force.

• The Maryland Attorney General has published an emergency preparedness handbook that discusses liability issues during emergency operations.

• The State of Maryland has implemented NIMS as the state incident management system and is working to provide ongoing training for its thousands of emergency workers.

Resources
























85




















18Best practices on implementing Citizen Corps

Moderator

Angela HeimRegion 3 Program Manager, Citizen Corp, Office for Domestic Preparedness, Department of Homeland Security

Panelists

Suzanne SimmonsVolunteer Coordinator, Virginia Department of Emergency Management

Howie ButtNew Jersey State Police, State Citizen Corp

Headquartered in Washington, D.C., the five Citizens Corps programs are designed to help make volunteers, their families and their communities safer, stronger and better prepared for emergen-cies. The five programs are Community Emergency Response Teams (CERT), Fire Corps, Neighborhood Watch, Medical Reserve Corps, and Volunteers in Police Service (VIPS). This session explored best practices for each.

Continued



86

How can I help?

One of three programs initiated following 9/11 as part of the USA Freedom Corp initiative, the Citizen Corps answers the important question: “How can I help?” Its mission is to prepare citizens to make the United States safer by training for and playing a role in hometown security. Once volunteers have acquired basic emergency skills, they can help protect their homes, neighborhoods and workplaces by supporting their families and first responders.

• Victims and bystanders are the first on the scene in 95 percent of all emergencies.

• Per capita we have one firefighter for every 280 people, one sworn officer for every 385 people, and one EMT or paramedic for every 325 people – so there is a great need for volunteer help.

• Citizens Corps programs are usually implemented at the local level through Citizen Corps councils, which drive local participation and coordinate the five programs.

The five programs

Although programs vary at the local level, here is a brief overview of each:

• Nationwide, there are 1,700 CERT teams, which are skilled in light search and rescue and disaster response operations. Volunteers can attend EMT training at a Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) center in Emmitsburg, Maryland.

• Fire Corp is funded through the Department of Homeland Security and managed through the National Volunteer Fire Council, the International Firefighters Association and the International Association of Fire Chiefs. It encourages citizen advocates to support the expertise of firefighters by per-forming administrative and clerical duties, performing light search and rescue, or through participation in fund raising and public education.

• Neighborhood Watch is funded by the Department of Justice and administered by the National Sheriff’s Association. In existence for more than 30 years, the program now has approximately 12,000 groups nationwide. In addition to its traditional crime prevention mission, Neighborhood Watch now encompasses terrorism awareness and disas-ter response, so in addition to being on the lookout for suspicious activity, these volunteers also participate in evacuation drills and exercises.




















Continued



87

• The Medical Reserve Corp has approximately 277 units throughout the country. Administered by the Department of Health and Human Services, the program includes retired nurses, physicians and public health services professionals. They provide ongoing public health services, such as immu-nizations, screenings and public health education. In an emergency, they assist emergency responders by providing aid to victims with lesser injuries.

• Volunteers in Police Service (VIPS) support local law enforcement officers with clerical activities and citizen patrols, and they help with missing person reports and guiding traffic during evacuations.

Citizens Corps in Virginia

Started in September 2002 at the direction of Governor Mark Warner, the Virginia Citizen Corps program was off and run-ning in less than six weeks. The state team worked with local citizens councils and also partnered with the existing volun-teer community, including the Red Cross. The local Citizens Corps programs that evolved often vary according to local needs, resources and partnerships. For example:

• Since fire was Hampton county’s strongest program, it started its CERT program in the fire department. It now has 40 people who are training trainers and has expanded out into ten neighborhood programs.

• Williamsburg based its CERT program on a human services need. It identified special needs and resources in each neighborhood and then tried to match them up.

• Chesapeake county designed its program around emergency management and fire. It has developed standard operating procedures and a tier training system. It has also incorpo-rated amateur radio.

• Virginia now has close to 20 Medical Reserve Corps. The Department of Health has taken the lead in providing guide-lines for liability and credentialing.

• In addition, the state has teams trained in chainsaw safety because it learned how important chainsaws can be in the aftermath of a hurricane.

Citizens Corps in New Jersey

New Jersey is partnering with its counties and municipalities to explore how best to implement Citizens Corps programs throughout the state. It holds discussions with everyone involved, including county emergency management coordi-nators, local emergency management coordinators, the health community, the education community, chiefs of police, the league of municipalities, mayors and the attorney general’s office. As a result:

• The state now has 35 Medical Reserve Corp teams and is working on a regional concept to build a team in each county. Teams range from small groups of 19 members to a county-sponsored group with 650 members.




















Continued



88

• It is establishing and training Neighborhood Watch groups to be the eyes and ears of law enforcement. This training includes disaster preparedness, how to make disaster supply kits, how to develop a family communications plan and ter-rorism awareness.

• The state is also partnering with New Jersey Public Television and other public and private organizations – such as members of the clergy, the fire community and police departments – to solicit volunteers. For example, it has set up a training program for fifth- and sixth-grade students in conjunction with the New York Giants. Students who com-plete the program will spend a day at Giant’s Stadium and meet the players.

• It encourages Citizen Corps volunteers to learn how to protect themselves with basic life-saving skills, as well as how to protect their families and their communities, includ-ing people with special needs.


Keeping Citizen Corps volunteers motivated is as important as recruiting them initially. The key is to get them actively involved and to recognize their skills and contributions. Giving volunteers legitimate roles and responsibilities – along with necessary training and support – goes a long way toward sustained participation.

• When starting a Citizen Corps program, it’s important to look at all local resources and partnerships, including the poten-tial for cross-training.

• Senior citizens are a great pool of volunteers. Although some may not have the computer skills necessary for some cleri-cal activities, they can be effective in other types of activities, such as telephoning.

• It’s important to use volunteers in an organized way. For example, after Katrina volunteers brought in truckloads of clothing with no organized way to distribute it.

• Following Katrina, Mark Sloan, the Citizen Corps coordinator in Harris County, Texas, pulled together thousands of volun-teers from the Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster (VOAD), the Red Cross and other non-profits to man the Astrodome shelter. He even had professionals, including lawyers and communications specialists, on his team.

• To find out which Citizen Corps programs are active in various locations and the contact names for each, go towww.citizencorps.gov.

Resources

Citizen Corpswww.citizencorps.gov

Office of Domestic Preparednesswww.ojcp.usdoj.gov/odp/

Department of Homeland Securitywww.dhs.gov

Addy [email protected]




















http://www.citizencorps.gov


http://www.ojcp.usdoj.gov/odp/assessments/hspd8.htm

http://www.dhs.gov




89




















19Office of Domestic Preparedness strategic program planning

Moderator

Scott KelbergActing Director, Technical Assistance Division, Office of Domestic Preparedness, Department of Homeland Security

This session was not a panel discussion; rather, it was a presentation by Mr. Kelberg of the Office of Domestic Preparedness’s (ODP) efforts to address the requirements of Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8 (HSPD-8), December, 2003.

Continued



90

HSPD-8 mandated the development of a National Preparedness Goal (the “Goal”) to:

• Help ensure the preparedness of the nation for terrorist attacks, major disasters and other emergencies

• Establish measurable readiness priorities and targets that balance the potential threat and magnitude with the resources required to prepare for terrorist attacks, major disasters and other emergencies

• Include standards for preparedness assessments and strate-gies and a system for assessing the nation’s preparedness.

The ODP’s response to HSPD-8 has been to engage in a collaborative exchange with state, local and tribal entities that is designed to determine their state of readiness and provide guidance, tools and assistance to address any needs or shortcomings.

The National Preparedness Goal is meant to address three core questions:

• How is preparedness measured?

• How do we know we’re prepared?

• How do we identify and address gaps and weaknesses in our preparedness?

A shift in planning focus: Capabilities, not scenarios

A key element of this initiative is a shift from scenario-based planning to capabilities-based planning. In the past, all-hazards planning has focused on the response to specific scenarios. The new focus recognizes that for most hazards, there are key capabilities that are required, and that will be employed regardless of the nature of the emergency. The focus on capabilities, instead of specific scenarios, should improve flexibility, enabling a more effective response to any given hazard, even if it falls out-side the parameters of a specific scenario.

The dialog between local and state entities and DHS concerns, in part, identifying the capabilities that are impor-tant to each locality. While many capabilities will be the same or similar, different environments and circumstances warrant different priorities in terms of response capability.

The ODP recognizes that this is not a starting point; preparedness planning has been conducted for years, and the new initiative is designed to recognize and incorpo-rate that existing knowledge and expertise.




















Continued



91

Collaboration

The ODP’s purpose is to provide guidance on preparedness programs; to help local and state entities achieve the targets of the Goal. It endeavors to develop a common baseline framework within which to make recommendations. This work has been going on for well over ten years, gathering information on planning activities and status from local and state entities, assessing it and using it to build a knowledge base. The Goal attempts to formalize that process and set a benchmark against which ongoing preparedness planning can be measured.

This baseline information helps the ODP identify capabilities that are important, and also helps to identify the tools and resources that are needed to assist in future planning.

An important aspect of the planning process is ensuring that all appropriate stakeholders are represented: a multi-disciplinary, multijurisdictional approach. In particular, it has been recognized that a regional view of preparedness planning is called for. Helping local and state entities engage the proper stakeholders is an area where the ODP can offer its expertise and lessons learned from past assessments. This input from the ODP can be used to help build bridges and get the appropriate stakeholders involved.

The ODP’s input can help state and local entities identify who should be involved in discussions, as well as help iden-tify what needs to be addressed.

An interactive process

Recognizing that there is no “one size fits all” solution to preparedness, and that different jurisdictions have different levels of capability, the ODP has instituted a structured proc-ess designed to review and analyze the current state of readiness, and make recommendations on how to improve it.

The framework of the process is as follows:

• Review existing strategies– State and local entities review their existing plans and strategies with the assistance of the ODP, which applies its own expertise and lessons learned from past engagements and other localities.

• Update strategic goals and objectives – The ODP maps the existing strategies to national goals and objectives.

• Review Homeland Security programs and capabilities–The ODP determines what resources are available to assist the state/local entities, using previous assessment and funding data.

• Identify gaps and deficiencies – Using input from the previous steps, identify what needs to be addressed.




















Continued



92

• Develop or sustain initiatives – This final step makes specific recommendations and provides a path to investment justifi-cation and obtaining grant funding.

In light of the new focus on capabilities-based planning and the Goal, a long-term view of preparedness plans and strategies is being taken. Initiatives are not necessarily lim-ited to current-year funding or individual projects.

The review and feedback process is designed to be a holistic approach to security programs and capabilities rather than a full-blown, detailed assessment. It is qualitative, not quanti-tative – no score or grade is generated.

Program and capability review elements

The review of existing strategies encompasses two parts, each of which is measured against specific goals and priorities. These elements serve as a starting point for discussions.

Program review• Implement the National Incident Management System

and National Response Plan

• Expand Regional Collaboration

• Implement the Interim National Infrastructure Protection Plan

Capability Review• Strengthen information sharing and collaboration

capabilities

• Strengthen interoperable communications capabilities

• Strengthen CBRN (Chemical-Biological-Radiological-Nuclear) detection, response and decontamination capabilities

• Strengthen medical surge and mass prophylaxis capabilities

Funding

An important aspect of the review is how it impacts funding for new and ongoing initiatives. The review process helps local and state jurisdictions identify what they need to invest in, and also assists them in understanding the available sources of funding that can be leveraged.

A key output of the review process is investment justification that is then submitted with Homeland Security Grant Program (HSGP) applications. These grants are awarded based on risk and need; the review process provides impor-tant input to that award process.




















Continued



93

Summary

The ODP’s activities are designed to assist state and local governments in working with the federal government to improve their preparedness strategy and planning activities. The ODP’s expertise and processes can help local and state governments analyze and assess their state of readiness, target important capabilities, identify key stakeholders, and generate needed input for the funding process.

Resources

Web linksHSPD-8 informationwww.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/assessments/hspd8.htm

ODP secure portalodp.esportals.com

Lessons learned information sharing systemwww.llis.gov

Contact informationQuestions and feedback

UTL and [email protected]

Other HSPD-8 [email protected]

Addy [email protected]





















http://odp.esportals.com

http://www.llis.gov





Preface Session Summaries Resources About the Sponsors

94

About the Sponsors

Founders

IBM

M/A-COM/Cisco Systems, Inc.

Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC

Maryland Department of Transportation

SMART and Associates, LLP

State Farm Insurance

Gold sponsors

AIG Business Protection

Americom Government Services

Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire



95

Founder

IBM

IBM CorporationPeter PorterClient Manager, IBM100 E. Pratt StreetBaltimore, MD 21202410 [email protected]/government

Serving government interests, efficiently and securely

IBM has a proven track record of providing cutting-edge solutions to government agencies around the world. Our areas of expertise include: risk management, biometrics, case management, enterprise resource planning (ERP), multi-sensor intelligent surveillance, interagency collabora-tion and RFID. IBM draws on its extensive public sector experience, innovative thinking, knowledge of best practices and a global network of strategic relationships to help meet the complex economic, security and logistical challenges that government agencies face in an increasingly complex global environment.

Today, information can reside in multiple locations and systems – compelling the modern government agency to give users a single, secure, integrated point of entry to the information, applications, people and processes they need to efficiently and effectively perform their jobs. Silos of disparate information are common and pervasive at both intradepartmental and interagency levels. Timely access to accurate information is a prerequisite for innovation, pro-gram reform and reliable delivery of benefits.

Founders

IBM


Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC




Gold sponsors



Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire

IBM has successfully implemented solutions that answer these challenges and span the spectrum of government services, in areas such as:

• Customs, ports and border management• Defense• Postal• Finance and taxation• Safety and security• Social services/social security

IBM offers consulting, systems integration, availability services and managed operations, as well as a wide range of open software and computing systems to assist all types of governments with meeting the demands and expectations of their constituencies.

Providing innovative solutionsIBM stands alone in the vendor community with its innovative work in weather modeling, bioinformatics, Text-to-Speech, chemistry, and materials and mathematical sciences. Innovation at IBM is exemplified by our work in advanced video analysis for surveillance: the IBM Smart Surveillance System (S3) enables new security strategies with Web-based real-time alerts, Web-based event search and Web-based event statistic functionalities.

For each unique engagement, IBM can mobilize selected resources from our global network. IBM has the people, the capabilities and the expertise to design and implement solu-tions for your government or organization. We can even help you manage the change that transformation brings, and help your agency do it all on a secure, resilient IT infrastructure.


http://ibm.com/government/



96

Founder


M/A-COM1011 Pawtucket BoulevardLowell, MA 01853978 422-4038www.macom.com

M/A-COM leads the industry in delivering technologically superior IP-based private voice and data networks for critical two-way radio communications. Our markets include public safety, utility, industrial, commercial and govern-ment. As a leading supplier, we have built our reputation on providing products and systems that ensure the highest levels of security, reliability, interoperability and capacity. M/A-COM is a recognized leader in Internet Protocol (IP) and open architecture technologies. M/A-COM provides Voice, Interoperability, Data and Access to Federal and Homeland Security markets worldwide – allowing the most comprehensive, multi-agency P25-interoperability available in radio communications today.

M/A-COM’s network solutions include:

• EDACS ®– Our Enhanced Digital Access Communications System.

• OpenSky®– OpenSky uses IP-based technology and a Time Division Multiple Access (TDMA) airlink.

• NetworkFirst®– Provides the fastest path to interoperability among systems of all sizes and architectures.

• P25IP–“P25 to the Power of IP”–M/A-COM offers a full line of Project 25 trunked mobile and portable radios.

Founders

IBM


Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC




Gold sponsors



Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire

Cisco Systems, Inc.170 West Tasman Dr.San Jose, CA 95134408 526-4000; 800 553-6387www.cisco.com

Cisco Systems, Inc. is the worldwide leader in networking for the Internet. Today, networks are an essential part of busi-ness, education, government and home communications, and Cisco Internet Protocol-based (IP) networking solutions are the foundation of these networks. Cisco hardware, soft-ware and service offerings are used to create Internet solutions that allow individuals, companies and countries to increase productivity, improve customer satisfaction and strengthen competitive advantage. The Cisco name has become synonymous with the Internet, as well as with the productivity improvements that Internet business solutions provide. At Cisco, our vision is to change the way people work, live, play and learn.

Cisco was founded in 1984 by a small group of computer scientists from Stanford University. Since the company’s inception, Cisco engineers have been leaders in the development of Internet Protocol (IP)-based networking technologies. Our industry-leading products include: Home Networking, IP Telephony, Optical, Network Security, Storage Networking and Wireless LAN.

Cisco is committed to delivering differentiated value to cus-tomers and partners through its unique product and service offerings, while closely mapping products and services to its customers’ needs and priorities – such as productivity, cost savings, return on investment and standard of living improvements.

http://www.macom.com

http://www.cisco.com



97

Founders

IBM


Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC




Gold sponsors



Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire

Founder

Motorola

Joseph N. Dunston7031 Columbia Gateway Dr., 3rd FloorColumbia, MD 21046410 712-6578www.motorola.com

Motorola is a Fortune 100 global communications leader that provides seamless mobility products and solutions across broadband, embedded systems and wireless net-works. Seamless mobility means you can reach the people, things and information you need in your home, auto, workplace and all spaces in between. Seamless mobility harnesses the power of technology convergence and enables smarter, faster, cost-effective and flexible commu-nication. Motorola had sales of US$36.8 billion in 2005.

Today, Motorola comprises four businesses:

Connected Home Solutions

Provides a scalable, integrated end-to-end system for the delivery of broadband services that keeps consumers informed, entertained and connected. Its technology enables network operators and retailers to create and execute on new business opportunities by providing innovative products and services to the home.

Government and Enterprise Mobility Solutions

A leading provider of integrated radio communications and information solutions, with more than 65 years of experience

in meeting the mission-critical requirements of public safety, government and enterprise customers worldwide. It also designs, manufactures and sells automotive and industrial electronics systems and telematics systems that enable automated roadside assistance, navigation and advanced safety features for automobiles.

Mobile Devices

Offers market-changing icons of personal technology–transforming the device formerly known as the cell phone into a universal remote control for life. A leader in multi-mode, multi-band communications products and technologies, Mobile Devices designs, manufactures, sells and services wireless subscriber and server equipment for cellular systems, portable energy storage products and systems, servers and software solutions, and related soft-ware and accessory products.

Networks

Delivers proven capabilities in cellular, wireless broadband and wireline access technologies, with recognized leadership in integrating core networks through wireless IP, wireless softswitch and IP multimedia subsystems. The Networks group is advancing seamless mobility with innovative tech-nology solutions, as well as a billion-dollar services business with an expanded portfolio delivering support, integration, applications and management.

http://www.motorola.com



98

Founders

IBM


Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC




Gold sponsors



Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire

Founder

Oracle

1910 Oracle WayReston, VA 20190703 364-2951www.oracle.com

Information-driven

Oracle’s business is information – how to manage it, use it, share it, protect it. For nearly three decades, Oracle, the world’s largest enterprise software company, has provided the software and services that let organizations get the most up-to-date and accurate information from their busi-ness systems.

The 2005 combination of Oracle and PeopleSoft marks a major turning point in the evolution of the software industry. The combined companies are now positioned to deliver a more competitive offering in the enterprise applications market and increase innovation with a larger applications R&D budget.

Today, Oracle is helping more governments and businesses around the world become information-driven than anyother company.

Principles of the information-driven enterprise

Adhering to three principles has saved Oracle more than US$1 billion in operating costs – so far. With these principles, which are incorporated into the design of our software, we have coordinated and streamlined all our business processes worldwide.

• Simplify: Speed information delivery with integrated systems and a single database.

• Standardize: Reduce cost and maintenance cycles with open, easily available components.

• Automate: Improve operational efficiency with technology and best practices.

We believe that our customers get more from their informa-tion by using Oracle’s software and services and applying these principles. Many have already improved their ability to use information and IT as strategic assets, and they are now able to share data and processes, measure results for con-tinuous improvement, align stakeholders, and communicate a single truth to all their constituents.

For more information

United States phone1 800 ORACLE1

International phone+1 650 506-7000

http://www.oracle.com



99

Founders

IBM


Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC




Gold sponsors



Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire

Founder

Sun Microsystems

7900 Westpark DriveMcLean, VA 22102703 204-4169www.sun.com

Since its inception in 1982, a singular vision –“The Network Is The Computer”– has propelled Sun Microsystems, Inc. to its position as a leading provider of industrial-strength solutions using innovative technology and services that make the Net work.

Sun’s method results in less time to completion, reduced costs, and fewer resources to implement. The result: improved ROI. Our solutions include structured and proven building blocks that leverage over 20 years of experience and customer feedback. The outcome: greater agility, efficiency and security, and a reduction in both consulting time and expense – plus faster solution deployment.

Top solutions

• SunTM Network Services for SAP Solutions • Sun Grid Solution • Sun Operations Management Solution • Sun Business Intelligence Network Computing Solution • Business Compliance Solutions • Sun Identity Management Solutions • Sun Business Continuity Solutions • Sun Secure Network Access Platform Solutions • Sun Enterprise Consolidation/Migration Solutions

Sun solution practices

Sun has six unique practice areas that create, deliver, and manage Sun’s solutions portfolio. This provides custom-ers quicker and easier access to Sun’s wide range of deep industry expertise and iForce partner solutions. Sun can solve the most pressing of business needs by leveraging IT best practices gleaned from over two decades of expertise and value-add solutions.

For more information

United States phone1 800 555-9SUN

International phone1 650 960-1300

http://www.sun.com



100

Founders

IBM


Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC




Gold sponsors



Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire

Eagle

Computer Associates

100 Staples DriveFramingham, MA 01702508 628-8057www.ca.com

Bob WomackVP, Global Public Sector, Transportation [email protected] 733-5741 (cell)

Computer Associates is one of the world’s largest IT man-agement software providers. Our software and expertise unify and simplify complex IT environments in a secure way across the enterprise for greater business results.

We call this Enterprise IT Management (EITM™) – our clear vision for the future of IT. It’s how you can manage systems, networks, security, storage, applications and data-bases securely and dynamically. You can build on your IT investments, rather than replacing them, and do so at your own pace.

Our more than 5,300 developers worldwide create and deliver IT management software that keeps our vision real. And we’ve taken our decades of experience solving compli-cated IT problems and developed practical paths for you to get from where you are today to where you want to be – from point A to point B.

Founded in 1976, Computer Associates today is a global company with headquarters in the United States and 150 offices in more than 45 countries. We serve more than 98 percent of Fortune 1000® companies, as well as govern-ment entities, educational institutions and thousands of other companies in diverse industries worldwide. We are driving our next level of growth through our four-part strat-egy of product development, leveraging partners, global expansion and strategic acquisitions – all with the goal of helping our customers realize the full power of IT to drive their business.

http://www.ca.com




101

Founders

IBM


Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC




Gold sponsors



Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire

Eagle

GE Security

7151 Gateway Blvd.Newark, CA 94560-1012888 GE-SECURITYwww.gesecurity.com

GE Security’s Homeland Protection business is a leading supplier of explosives and narcotics detection systems for government agencies, air and ground transportation venues, energy and other high-risk organizations and facilities, and the military.

Vision for integration

Homeland Protection brings together world-class trace detection, computed tomography, and X-ray diffraction technologies into a single business offering that can make a wide range of security activities more accurate and produc-tive. Homeland Protection helps customers protect people, assets and communities.

Product overviews

Trace DetectionEntryScanEntryScan is a high throughput, non-intrusive walk-through portal that enables rapid detection of both explosives and narcotics in a non-intrusive manner.

Itemiser and Itemiser FXItemiser is the first trace detector to simultaneously detect positive and negative ions, enabling the identification of the broadest range of explosives while also detecting narcotics.

VaporTracerVaporTracer detects and identifies microscopic traces of both explosives and narcotics in seconds.

StreetLabThe StreetLab portable substance identification system utilizes laser-based Raman technology to deliver fast, accurate, low-cost identification of unknown substances seized in the field.

EDS (Explosive Detection Systems)CTX 2500, CTX 5500 DS, CTX 9000 DsiDesigned for a wide variety of airport applications, GE’s CTX product line offers TSA-certified detection for both standalone and baggage handling system-integrated, inline applications.

Yxlon 3000, Yxlon 3500X-ray diffraction (XRD) is one of the most effective explosives detection technologies available. The Yxlon 3000 system is now in several airport baggage handling systems (BHS) in European airports.

http://www.gesecurity.com



102

Founders

IBM


Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC




Gold sponsors



Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire

Eagle

Lucent Technologies

1100 NY Avenue, NW, Suite 640Washington, DC 20005202 312-5915www.lucent.com

Kathleen Cowles202 [email protected]

Andy Smith703 [email protected]

Lucent Technologies offers expertise and solutions to make government communications networks more secure, reliable and cost-effective. Backed by the world renowned Bell Labs, Lucent uses its strengths in fundamen-tal scientific research, wireless and optical networking, software development, data/voice multivendor network integration and strategic alliances to design and deliver the solutions that define and enable next-generation com-munications networks.

Homeland Security Portfolio includes:

Public Safety Solutions

These solutions leverage wireless and IP-networking to work toward the creation of a public safety communications approach that will bridge the gap between commercial wireless and Land Mobile Radio infrastructure.

Business Continuity and Disaster Recovery (BCDR)

Lucent is providing advisory service to the Emergency Management Assistant Compact (EMAC) personnel, ensuring that networking best practices are incorporated into response plans.

Bell Labs Modeling and Simulation

Bell Labs has developed a simulation engine that uses publicly available data (e.g., demographics, census, infra-structures) and, coupled with Bell Labs’ network design and operational expertise, effectively models network per-formance during simulated attack or outage scenarios.

Security Consulting Services

Bell Labs pioneered and set the standards for the Network Security Model adopted by the International Telecommunication Union (ITU X.805) and the International Standards Organization (ISO 18028-2) – a comprehensive approach to combat security threats including hackers, viruses and worms.

Managed Security Services

Lucent’s state-of-the-art Global Network Operations Centers allow Lucent to provide industry-leading, real-time security monitoring, management, and support of a customer’s net-work on a 24x7x365 basis.

http://www.lucent.com





103

Founders

IBM


Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC




Gold sponsors



Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire

Ally

Anteon/CoreStreet

Anteon7611 Little River Turnpike, Suite 300EAnnandale, VA 22003703 813-8427www.anteon.com

Anteon is a leading systems integration company that provides mission, operational and IT enterprise support to the U.S. government. We design, integrate, maintain and upgrade systems for national defense, intelligence, emer-gency response, infrastructure and other high-priority government missions. We also provide many of our custom-ers with the systems engineering and program management skills necessary to manage the development and operations of their mission-critical systems.

Anteon Corporation also provides physical access security and turnkey credentialing solutions including biometric enrollment, document verification, identity vetting, card per-sonalization, logical and physical access control with Contact and Contactless Smart Cards, and Optical Memory Cards.

The company was founded in 1976 and has more than 100 offices worldwide. Anteon consistently ranks among the top information technology integrators based on inde-pendent surveys, and has been named to the Forbes’ List of the 400 Best Big Companies in 2005, earning distinction on the Forbes’ Platinum List.

[email protected]

CoreStreet1 Alewife Center, Suite 200Cambridge, MA 02140617 661-3554www.corestreet.com

The PIVMAN System from CoreStreet builds on CoreStreet’s credential validation technology, which is used today by the Department of Defense and other agencies. The system provides a portable, “always-on” solution for handling privi-leges, identities and attributes from the many federal, state and local agencies that use FIPS 201-compliant credentials, Common Access Cards (CACs), smart cards, and cards with 2D barcodes – even when all networks are down.

In use on the front lines

In emergencies, those on the front lines use PIVMAN Handhelds to check the IDs of arriving responders inorder to know whether the individuals are who they say they are, have valid cards, and have the specific training, authority, or other privileges required for that incident.

Behind the scenes

The identity and privilege information used by the PIVMAN System is gathered from independently controlled databases, thereby maintaining organizational control over privilege management.

http://www.anteon.com


http://www.corestreet.com



104

Founders

IBM


Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC




Gold sponsors



Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire

Ally

ARINC

2551 Riva Road, MS 6-3514AAnnapolis, MD 21401410 266-4754www.arinc.com

Jim [email protected] 266-4255

For seven decades, ARINC has been solving complex communications challenges around the world. Now we’ve mastered one of the most daunting – interoperability. ARINC’s solutions allow state, local and federal first responders to communicate whenever and wherever needed during an emergency while using their existing equipment. That’s the power of unparalleled radio exper-tise and mission-critical networks.

AWINS®–the ARINC Wireless Interoperability Network Solution –is revolutionizing the way public safety and emergency response teams communicate during a crisis. The power of AWINS allows first-responders to connect on command – instantly linking diverse radio systems, phones, cellular transmissions and digital devices into a seamless communications network.

Now crisis response teams can share urgent voice, video and data across jurisdictional boundaries – all without replacing their existing radio systems.

Emergency Operations Centers equipped with AWINS position first responders to partner both during disasters and for everyday tasks.

With AWINS a dispatcher can connect multiple, distinct radio systems at the click of a mouse, even when the radio systems are hundreds or thousands of miles apart.

Mobile Command Vehicles equipped with AWINS help public safety agencies accelerate disaster response and deliver immediate interoperability – right on the scene of a disaster.

These rolling emergency operations centers enable crisis teams to take critical resources with them, get close to the action, make decisions on the spot, ordinate tasks among commanders and personnel in the field, and enable anyone with a phone to engage in on-scene activities –no matter where they are.

http://www.arinc.com




105

Founders

IBM


Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC




Gold sponsors



Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire

Ally


7201 Corporate Center DriveP.O. Box 548Hanover, MD 21076410 865-1372www.marylandtransportation.com

Jack CahalanDirector, Office of Public Affairs410 [email protected]

John ContestabileDirector, Office of Engineering, Procurement andEmergency [email protected]

The Maryland Department of Transportation (MDOT) has responsibilities for capital investments, operations and planning that reach across all modes of transportation. The MDOT Secretary’s Office establishes transportation policy and oversees five modal administrations:

• The Maryland Aviation Administration (MAA) •The Maryland Port Administration (MPA) •The Maryland Transit Administration (MTA) • The Motor Vehicle Administration (MVA) • The State Highway Administration (SHA)

The Secretary of the Department also serves as Chairman of the Maryland Transportation Authority (MdTA) that is responsible for the state’s toll facilities, ensuring closely coordinated activity with MDOT on state transportation policy. MDOT is funded by an integrated Transportation Trust Fund that is a dedicated source of funding that sup-ports MDOT’s activities, including debt service, maintenance, operations, administration and capital investment.

Providing safe and secure travel for Maryland residents and visitors is a top priority of Governor Robert L. Ehrlich, Jr. He has charged Maryland’s transportation agencies with the responsibility of providing a secure transportation sys-tem. MDOT has embraced its responsibility to improve safety on the State’s transportation system through numerous programs ranging from roadway improvements, to transit security enhancements, to innovative vehicle licensing pro-grams, to support for outreach and education.

Since the events of 9/11, threats to the personal security of travelers and to transportation assets have received height-ened attention. The State’s transportation agencies are actively addressing the increasing security requirements, particularly at its airport and port facilities.

http://www.marylandtransportation.com





106

Founders

IBM


Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC




Gold sponsors



Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire

Ally


502 Washington Ave., Suite 500Towson, MD 21204410 296-6300www.smartllp.com

Patrick WheelerPartnerFederal [email protected]

SMART is a diverse team of business consulting and accounting professionals that offers a comprehensive foun-dation of business expertise and practical, informed advice. By combining the most attractive features of larger and smaller firms, SMART has set an innovative new standard for service that adds value to your bottom line and security to your planning strategy.

Public sector/government organizations operate in an era of increased regulation, unfunded mandates and greater public scrutiny. At the same time, public managers and exec-utives are experiencing unprecedented levels of retirements, skyrocketing healthcare costs, and decreased funding and resource levels. To operate as effectively as possible, public organizations require competent, talented resources who offer cost-sensitive and innovative solutions and strategies.

Surrounded by a full suite of service offerings to support our federal, state and local government clients, SMART delivers a broad array of business, advisory and information technology solutions to assist our public sector clients.

We specialize and focus our resources on the following areas:

• Business Process Management• Finance and Enterprise Solutions• Human Capital Management• Information Risk Management• Information Technology Transformation• Spend Management Solutions• Total Security Solutions and Infrastructure Protection

Our professionals thrive on planning new strategies, rede-signing organizations and business processes, managing Program Management Offices (PMO), gathering require-ments and selecting software, or helping government employees adjust to new technologies or organizational change. SMART is unique in the market; we welcome oppor-tunities to help public sector clients prepare for and assimilate new processes or technology, and often forego work on enterprise software configuration, as a result.

http://www.smartllp.com




107

Founders

IBM


Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC




Gold sponsors



Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire

Ally


State Farm InsuranceOne State Farm PlazaBloomington, IL 61710www.statefarm.com

Angela Mitchell410 455-4882

Our success is built on a foundation of shared values –quality service and relationships, mutual trust, integrity and financial strength.

State Farm® at a glance

State Farm provides insurance and financial services to more than 27 million households and small businesses in the United States and Canada. Approximately 69,000 employ-ees, along with nearly 17,000 agents and their 60,000 staff members share State Farm’s vision to be the customer’s first and best choice in the products and services we provide.

Products

• Through more than 15 affiliated companies, State Farm provides property and casualty insurance, life and health insurance, annuities, mutual funds and banking products.

• State Farm is the number one insurer of cars in the United States since 1942. Today, one out of five cars in the United States is insured by State Farm.

• State Farm is the second largest insurer of autos in Ontario and the fourth largest in Canada.

• State Farm is the leading insurer of homes since 1964. We insure one out of five homes in the United States.

• The State Farm Group ranked seventh in paid-for volume for ordinary life insurance among all companies in 2003.

• In just five years, State Farm Bank® has grown to one of the country’s largest 100 thrift institutions.

Service

• State Farm’s collision repair satisfaction ranks high among consumers.

• More than 80 percent of State Farm customers surveyed would recommend us to friends and family for auto and homeowners insurance.

• State Farm handles more than 30,000 insurance claims a day, with personal attention to customer needs through special programs that speed up the claim process.

• State Farm agents and employees volunteer countless hours to support not-for-profit and community-based organizations.

http://www.statefarm.com



108

Founders

IBM


Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC




Gold sponsors



Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire

Gold sponsors

AIG Business Protectionwww.aig.com

Americom Government Serviceswww.americom-gs.com

Ciberwww.ciber.com

CSCwww.csc.com

HAZMEDwww.hazmed.com

http://www.aig.com

http://www.americom-gs.com

http://www.ciber.com

http://www.csc.com

http://www.hazmed.com



109

Founders

IBM


Motorola

Oracle

Sun Microsystems

Eagles

Computer Associates

GE Security

Lucent Technologies

Allies

Anteon/CoreStreet

ARINC




Gold sponsors



Ciber

CSC

HAZMED


Business Wire


Business Wire

222 South Church Street, Suite 206Charlotte, NC 28202800 548-6463www.BusinessWire.com

Business Wire is the world’s leading commercial news distri-bution service. Thousands of companies and organizations worldwide depend on Business Wire to transmit their full-text news releases, regulatory filings, photos and other multimedia content to journalists, financial professionals, investor services, regulatory authorities and the general public worldwide.

Our proprietary high-speed NX network speeds our multi-media content to news systems around the world. In addition to NX, Business Wire is the only service with full-carriage access to the world’s leading news organizations, including Agence France-Presse, Associated Press, Bloomberg, Dow Jones and Reuters.

With Business Wire’s technically advanced multimedia plat-form, our members have options to deliver news to highly targeted audiences. Our news release distribution circuits allow for targeting to more than 160 industries, 150 countries and 45 different languages, with options to add photos and multimedia. We offer trade show services for event news, and NewsTrak reports for measurement and analysis.

Business Wire’s Smart News Release incorporates photos, multimedia and text news in an attractive, user-friendly format, and places the entire package into media systems,

news sites and consumer portals including Yahoo! Finance and Alta Vista, as well as posting to BusinessWire.com with value-added distribution to newspaper photo editors via the AP PhotoExpress network.

Through our EDGARit service, we offer complete financial disclosure and SEC filing services to our members. Business Wire also fulfills disclosure and regulatory requirements in Canada, France, Germany, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Sweden, Switzerland and the UK.

Business Wire’s Targeted Circuits allow members to deliver news to specific demographic groups including Hispanic, African-American and Asian audiences; or to deliver themed news to feature editors, college and university media outlets, and government/public policy writers.

Business Wire, a Berkshire Hathaway company, has 24 office locations in the United States, four offices in Europe, offices in Tokyo and Sydney, and more than a dozen affiliates and reciprocal offices around the world.

For more information about Business Wire products and services, please contact us toll-free nationwide at 888 381-WIRE (9473) or on the Web at www.BusinessWire.com.

http://www.BusinessWire.com

http://www.BusinessWire.com



110

Resources

Contacts

John ContestabileAll Hazards Forum Program [email protected]

Tom MoranIndustry/Government [email protected]

Addy KennedyProgram [email protected]

Other HSPD-8 [email protected]

UTL and [email protected]

Publications

Jane’s Crisis Communications Handbook, by Louie Fernandez and Martin Merzer. Copyright 2003, Jane’s Information Group

Incident Communications Emergency Reference: A Guide for Communications Professions – Department of Homeland Security

Presentations

Available presentations for some sessions can be found on the All Hazards Web site: www.allhazardsforum.org

Web links

All Hazards Forumwww.allhazardsforum.org

Department of Homeland Securitywww.dhs.gov

Office of Domestic Preparednesswww.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/

Federal grants for state and local procurements www.gov.state.md.us/grants.html

Department of Homeland Security SAFECOM programwww.safecomprogram.gov

Maryland State Interoperability Executive Committeewww.governor.maryland.gov/gohs/SIEC/index.htm

Google “National States Geographic Information Council” or “NSGIC”

Federal Communications Commissionwww.fcc.gov

National Incident Management Systemwww.fema.gov/nims/

Department of Homeland Security, National Incident Management Systemwww.dhs.gov/interweb/assetlibrary/NIMS-90-web.pdf

Emergency Management Assistance Compact www.emacweb.org

Business Executives for National Security www.bens.org










http://www.dhs.gov




http://www.safecomprogram.gov



http://www.fcc.gov






http://www.bens.org



111

Business Response Networkwww.businessresponsenetwork.org

HRSAU.S. Department of Health and Human Serviceswww.hrsa.gov/esarvhp/guidelines/default.htm

USARcan-tf1.org/index.html

BioWatch program informationwww.fas.org/sgp/crs/terror/RL32152.html

Strategic National Stockpilewww.bt.cdc.gov/stockpile/

Cities Readiness Initiativewww.bt.cdc.gov/cri/

Citizen Corpswww.citizencorps.gov

Office of Domestic Preparednesswww.ojcp.usdoj.gov/odp/

HSPD-8 informationwww.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/assessments/hspd8.htm

ODP secure portalodp.esportals.com

Lessons learned informa-tion sharing systemwww.llis.gov

State Web sites

District of Columbiawww.dc.gov

Delawarewww.delaware.gov

Marylandwww.maryland.gov

New Jerseywww.state.nj.us

North Carolinawww.ncgov.com

Pennsylvaniawww.state.pa.us

Virginiawww.virginia.gov

West Virginiawww.wv.gov

Editorial, creative and production of interactive PDF by BrandLogic. www.brandlogic.com





http://can-tf1.org/index.html



http://www.bt.cdc.gov/stockpile/

http://www.bt.cdc.gov/cri/



http://http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/assessments/hspd8.htm

http://http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/odp/assessments/hspd8.htm

http://odp.esportals.com

http://www.llis.gov

http://www.dc.gov

http://www.delaware.gov

http://www.maryland.gov

http://www.state.nj.us

http://www.ncgov.com

http://www.state.pa.us

http://www.virginia.gov

http://www.wv.gov

http://www.brandlogic.com

Date post:	27-Jul-2015
Category:	Documents
Upload:	susan-middeleer-mleczko
View:	18 times
Download:	0 times

AllHazards_F2

Documents