Title placeholder
Download
1 / 28

Title Placeholder - PowerPoint PPT Presentation


  • 270 Views
  • Updated On :

Title Placeholder. April 20, 2006 Memphis/Shelby County LEPC USCG Sector Lower Mississippi River Brief. Date Placeholder. Point of Contact. Philip Boruszewski USCG Sector Lower Mississippi River (901) 521-4828 [email protected] Brief History.

loader
I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
capcha
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Title Placeholder' - richard_edik


An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.


- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
Title placeholder l.jpg

Title Placeholder

April 20, 2006

Memphis/Shelby County

LEPC

USCG Sector Lower

Mississippi River Brief

Date Placeholder


Point of contact l.jpg
Point of Contact

  • Philip Boruszewski USCG Sector Lower Mississippi River(901) 521-4828

    [email protected]


Brief history l.jpg
Brief History

  • Dec 1811 and Jan 1812 New Madrid Earthquakes were stronger than the San Francisco quake of April 18, 1906.

  • Church Bells rang in Boston.

  • Possible level 7 or 8 plus earthquakes.


Brief history continued l.jpg
Brief History (continued)

  • An 8-plus quake today will wreak havoc over a densely populated 5-state area.

  • Memphis, TN is 35 miles west of the epicenter of a 6.8 quake in 1843.


Dead and injured l.jpg
Dead and injured

  • A 1990 federal disaster drill projected as many as 2,200 dead and 18,000 injured.

  • Memphis MSA population in 1990: 1,007,306

  • Memphis MSA population in 2007: 1,250,000 Estimated – 2,500 dead and 25,000 injured.


Major objectives l.jpg
Major Objectives

  • Increase national preparedness for a SONS (IONS) scenario by engaging all levels of spill management and other emergency responses in a coordinated response.

  • Improve through practice, the ability of the Area Command and/or JFO organization to manage a SONS (IONS) incident.


Supporting objectives l.jpg
Supporting Objectives

  • Evaluate SLMR’s ability to integrate with federal, state, and local agencies under the NRP.

  • Evaluate SLMR’s ability to coordinate response activities with the Regional Response Team (RRT).


Supporting objectives cont d l.jpg
Supporting Objectives (Cont’d)

  • Assess SLMR’s ability to perform Critical Information Communication (CIC) procedures.

  • Evaluate SLMR’s ability to facilitate restoration of ports and waterways.


Sub objectives l.jpg
Sub Objectives

  • Reconstitute Sector Lower Mississippi River

  • Implement vertical communications using JOPES

  • Request surge support (GST, IMAT, MSST, PIAT)

  • Implement NIMS and NRP


Sub objectives continued l.jpg
Sub Objectives (continued)

  • Stand-up a NIMS ICS UC Organization

  • Coordinate response options with RRT

  • Deploy DARTs (flood punts)

  • Deploy Marine Safety Inspectors/Investigators

  • Use Homeland Security Information Network (HSIN)


Plans to be exercised l.jpg
Plans to be Exercised

  • Sector Lower Mississippi River OPLAN 9722

  • District Eight OPLAN 9780-03

  • EPA’s Area Contingency Plan (ACP)

  • Facility and Vessel Response Plans (FRP and VRP)

  • Area Maritime Security Plans (AMSP)

  • Facility and Vessel Security Plans (FSP and VSP)


Slide12 l.jpg
METS

  • Mission Essential Tasks (METS) –

    are tasks that are critical to the success of the mission/objective and are key areas within the plans.


Slide13 l.jpg
METS

  • Test SLMR notification system in response to an earthquake event.

  • Exercise ability to recall essential personnel after an initial catastrophic earthquake.

  • Exercise the process to identify the various initial IC’s at the Fed, State, and Local levels.


Mets continued l.jpg
METS (continued)

  • Exercise the ability to prioritize CG participation with the incident response organizations and multiple UC’s and to integrate with the ICS/UC structure at the state and local level across multiple states.

  • Evaluate comms and info exchange between CG and county/state/federal response agencies and determine comms capabilities of all response agencies.


Mets continued15 l.jpg
METS (continued)

  • Exercise the ability to ID local areas for equipment staging areas.

  • Exercise the ability to conduct maritime damage assessment surveys and brief the appropriate UC/JFO/CG.

  • Exercise the stand-up and organization of salvage response groups.

  • Evaluate SLMR’s ability to determine emergency resources and ability to order needed resources within CG chain of command or via JFO’s.


Mets continued16 l.jpg
METS (continued)

  • Evaluate SLMR’s ability to communicate and coordinate with the various state EOC’s.

  • Exercise info flow between the CG SUL and the JFO’s and CG chain of command.

  • Evaluate SLMR’s process to ID and task critical emergency responders in support of MRO and/or USAR.


Mets continued17 l.jpg
METS (continued)

  • Evaluate the ability of local CG to develop short term (12-24 hours) incident objectives (ICS-202) and tasking (ICS-204) for emergency personnel.

  • Test the CG’s ability to plug-in at IC/UC with available response agencies with multiple incident locations.

  • Evaluate the ability of SLMR to provide food and drinking water to affected CG persons involved in an earthquake event. Power, phones, or any other public works.


Level of participation l.jpg
Level of Participation

  • Federal, State, Local & Private Sector Participation

  • U.S. Navy NSA Mid-South

  • U.S. Army Corps of Engineers – Memphis District

  • USEPA – Regions 4, 6, and 7

  • USCG – D8, Sectors SUMR and SOHV


Level of participation cont d l.jpg
Level of Participation (Cont’d)

  • National Guard – AR, MO, MS, and TN

  • States of AR, MO, MS, & TN: EMA, DNR, EPA

  • State Police – AR, MO, MS, & TN

  • County and local LE / FD / EMA

  • Oil Spill Response Organizations / Contractors


Level of participation20 l.jpg
Level of Participation

Full Scale Exercise

  • 19, 20, and 21 June 2007

  • Organize Using NIMS ICS – Unified Command

  • Deploy Personnel and Equipment


Level of participation21 l.jpg
Level of Participation

Table Top Exercise

  • Organize Using NIMS ICS – Unified Command

  • Post Earthquake – recovery operations


Exercise locations venues l.jpg
Exercise Locations & Venues

  • Memphis/Shelby County EOC

  • Desoto and Tunica County, MS EOC

  • Crittenden and Lee County, AR EOC

  • Dyer, TN and Pemiscot, MO County EOC

  • AR, MO, MS, & TN State EOC’s

  • Joint Field Offices located in area of operations


Desired response activities l.jpg
Desired Response Activities

  • Manage ICS Organization

  • C3 (Command, Control, & Communications)

  • Urban Mass Rescue Operations

  • Boom Deployment / Protect Sensitive Areas


Exercise hours l.jpg
Exercise Hours

Under Development


Scenario impacts l.jpg
Scenario Impacts

Major (worst case discharge) Oil Spill Impacts Lake McKellar and the Lower Mississippi River (LMR) from MM 734 to MM 692.

Wide-spread destruction of infrastructure in the region: Shelby County (Memphis), Caruthersville, MO including the collapse of the I-155 Highway Bridge in Dyer / Pemiscot Counties over the LMR at MM 838.7 and flooding as a result of wide-spread levee destruction.


Exercise control evaluation l.jpg
Exercise Control & Evaluation

  • Supported by SLMR and D8 Exercise Design Team Members. Pre-exercise Control and Evaluation Training Provided.

  • Hotwash Session Conducted Upon Completion.

  • After-Action Report Includes Lessons Learned.


Assumptions l.jpg
Assumptions

  • Western Rivers Component is an Oil Spill, River Closure due to obstructions (I-155 Highway Bridge), and a Mass Rescue Response Exercise as a result of wide-spread flooding.

  • Field-level Goals and Objectives Could be Affected by Competing Resources due to Response Needs at Multiple Catastrophic Sites in the Great Lakes and Western Rivers.


ad