Integration: Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) and Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program (REPP) Technological Hazards Divisions December 2008
Agenda • Background • Creating a Unified Exercise Strategy • Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program • Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program • REP – HSEEP Integration • Required REP – HSEEP Synchronization • Way Forward • Challenges
Background • “Provide policy, guidance, and standards for scheduling, uniformity in design, development, conduct, and evaluation of emergency response exercises at all levels of government” • Establish a National Exercise Program to test and evaluate preparedness plans and strategies under the circumstances of actual emergency events • Realism –use current risk and threat assessments, or based on actual past events; • Simulate the incapacitation of State, local, or tribal governments • Exercise conduct should be carried out with limited Notice • Scenario design and exercise conduct – provide as much readiness information as possible • Special Needs – incorporate requirements of special needs populations • Multiple requests – Federal/State/local ‘integrate HSEEP and REPP to achieve efficiencies’
Creating a Unified Exercise Strategy • The National Exercise Program (NEP): • Meets requirements laid out in Homeland Security Presidential Directive 8, Homeland Security Act of 2002 and Public Law 109-295, “Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act of 2006” (PKEMRA) • Provides a national program and a multi-year planning system to focus, coordinate, plan, conduct, execute, evaluate, and prioritize national security and homeland security preparedness-related exercises activities • Works as the primary mechanism to improve delivery of Federal preparedness assistance to State and local governments strengthening preparedness capabilities of Federal, State, and local entities • Incorporates Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) as the policy and guidance for exercise design, conduct and evaluation
Homeland Security Exercise & Evaluation Program • The National Exercise Program provides policy guidance making HSEEP the key pillar for homeland security preparedness exercises • HSEEP established a national standard providing • Common exercise program doctrine • Common exercise project management • Common ‘tools’ for exercise scheduling, planning/design, conduct, evaluation, assessment, and corrective actions • HSEEP doctrine provides guidance for • Consistent terminology that can be used by all exercise planners • A common exercise design, conduct, and evaluation process • A platform for sharing information (LLIS) • ‘Compliance’ mechanism for State/local/tribal use of grant funds for exercises
Homeland Security Exercise & Evaluation Program • What HSEEP doctrine and guidance does ‘not do’ • Address the complete life cycle of preparedness requirements • Establish preparedness priorities • Identify preparedness needs through system trend/gap analysis • Identify mission/capability gaps through analysis • Identify training requirements • HSEEP misconceptions • Require a complete building block approach for each and every exercise • Require strict adherence and use of the complete list of HSEEP conferences and documents National Preparedness System Who Does?
Homeland Security Exercise & Evaluation Program • HSEEP incorporates lessons learned and best practices from existing exercise programs (including CSEEP and REPP) and can adapt to the full spectrum of all hazards exercises • HSEEP integrates language and concepts from; • National Response Framework (NRF) • National Incident Management System (NIMS) • National Preparedness Goal • Universal Task List (UTL) • Target Capabilities List (TCL) • Guiding principles of HSEEP: • Conduct an annual Training and Exercise Plan Workshop and develop and maintain a Multi-year Training and Exercise Plan. • Plan and conduct exercises in accordance with the guidelines set forth in HSEEP Volumes I-III and the “HSEEP Prevention Exercises” volume as applicable. • Develop and submit a properly formatted After-Action Report/Improvement Plan (AAR/IP). • Track and implement corrective actions identified in the AAR/IP.
Radiological Emergency Preparedness Program • 44 CFR provides criteria for review and approval of State and local radiological emergency plans and preparedness • NUREG-0654 includes 16 planning standards that provide for “reasonable assurance that public health and safety is not endangered by operation of the facility concerned” • The REP Exercise Preparation Guide provides assistance to exercise planners and evaluators in preparing for a radiological emergency response exercise. • Nearly 30 years of history, provided a foundation for development of NEP and HSEEP
REP - HSEEP Integration • What it does: • Compliance with elements of HSPD-5, HSPD-8 and PKEMRA • Furthers nationwide standardization for exercise design, conduct, evaluation, and improvement planning • Integrates scheduling of REP exercises with other Federal, State, and local exercises under the National Exercise Program 5-year Plans and Schedules • Provides an opportunity to reduce Federal, State, and local exercise fatigue by combining multiple requirements into fewer total exercises • Provides a suite of standardized tools for scheduling, planning, information sharing, evaluation/corrective action • Requires active ownership by REPP, State/local/Tribal, and industry partners in order to be successful
REP - HSEEP Integration • What it does not: • HSEEP does not establish additional exercises requirement for REPP • HSEEP does not require additional activities that will add to the cost of a REPP exercise • Require REPP to abandon existing evaluation criteria or to adopt TCL methodologies • Require new capabilities or restrict development and implementation of NUREG/REP 1 requirements.
Required REP – HSEEP Synchronization • Consistency – leadership challenge, must be led by FPC’s, REPP Personnel (HQ and Regions), NRC (HQ and Regions) • Organize integrated TF (F/S/L/Industry) • Define scope of integration • Determine regulatory implications • Develop integration timeline • Establish a more comprehensive, standing evaluation capability • Not REPP specific • Real world as well as exercise capable • Support for ‘constructive credit’ needs of all preparedness assessments. • Standardize success criteria • Training for evaluation staff
Required REP – HSEEP Synchronization • Review, update, and align all REP & HSEEP exercise related directives • HSEEP Volumes 1- IV • 44 CFR Part 350.9 • NUREG-0654/FEMA-REP-1 • REP Exercise Preparedness Guide • Align exercise scheduling efforts • NRC/FEMA Regional REP scheduling meetings • NEP FEMA Regional TEPW • Review and Align all REP & HSEEP training courses • Utilize pilot exercises to validate integration • Palo Verde – March 2009 • Browns Ferry – June 2009 • San Onofre – September 2009
Way Forward • FEMA Regional Training and Exercise Planning Workshops (TEPW) • FEMA Regional Coordination • Federal Preparedness Coordinator • Regional Exercise Planner • REP Exercise Planner • CSEEP Exercise Planner • NRC/FEMA Regional REP scheduling prior to FEMA Regional TEPW • TEPW Schedule R-I 03/21/09 R-II R-III 02/25-26/09 R-IV R-V 02/10-11/09 R-VI 03/11/09 R-VII R-VIII R-IX R-X
Way Forward • Review, update, and align all REP & HSEEP exercise related training courses • HSEEP: • IS 120-A Introduction to HSEEP • IS 130 HSEEP Exercise Evaluation & Improvement Planning • IS 139 HSEEP Exercise Design • E/L-146/147 HSEEP • G 130 Practical HSEEP Exercise Evaluation & Improvement Planning (in development) • G 135 HSEEP Exercise Conduct – Operations Based • G New HSEEP Exercise Conduct – Discussion Based • G 137 HSEEP Exercise Program Management & Foundation • G 139 HSEEP Exercise Design & Development • REP: • IS 331 Introduction to Radiological Emergency Preparedness Exercise Evaluation • E/L 304 Practical REP Exercise Evaluator Training • Make HSEEP courses available to the REP community regionally
Way Forward • Ongoing Steps • Review & Crosswalk HSEEP IS-130 and REP IS-331 • Are both IS-130 and IS-331 necessary? • Does IS-331 address the HSEEP evaluation process? • Do IS-130 and IS-331 complement each other? • Review & Crosswalk HSEEP G-130 and REP E/L-304 • Incorporate HSEEP evaluation methodology into REP E/L-304 • With HSEEP evaluation methodology included will REP E/L-304 meet the requirements of HSEEP G-130? • Present a modified REP E/L-304 class: - January 2009 - Austin, TX – use REP specific drills during course presentation - February 2009 - Harrisburg, PA – use generic drills during course presentation • Adapt REP E/L-304 to meet the needs of all HSEEP & REP evaluation training
Way Forward • Palo Verde pilot exercise • HSEEP Formatted Documents • EXPLAN with appropriate annexes (Control, Evaluation, Scenario, etc.) • Draw information from existing documents; “Extent of Play” • HSEEP Exercise Evaluation Guide • REP Exercise Evaluation Criteria • TCL • TOPOFF 4 EEGs • HSEEP Tools • LLIS for sharing exercise planning documents • NxMSEL
Challenges to Integration • Federal rulemaking process and associated timeframes • REP stakeholder community engagement and acceptance • State/Local OROs, Utilities, F/S/L partners • In-depth revisions required to NUREG-0654, REP Program Manual, REP documentation, and REP evaluation guides • Incorporate REP best practices into HSEEP documentation • Stakeholder and REP evaluator training for new REP/HSEEP policy and guidance • Funding - Utility funded vs. DHS grant funded exercise activities • Exercise credit for real-world events and other exercise activities outside of REP
HSEEP & HSEEP Training Overview Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) December 2008
Homeland Security Exercise and Evaluation Program (HSEEP) • Standardizes exercise design, development, conduct, and evaluation for all (National-level, Federal, State, local) exercises • Establishes common language and concepts to be adopted and used by various agencies and organizations • Meets the National Response Framework (NRF) and National Incident Management System (NIMS) goals • Synchronizes all exercises in the Nation • Provides tools and resources for States and local jurisdictions to establish self-sustaining exercise programs
HSEEP Components • HSEEP addresses the range of exercise evaluation issues through a blended approach involving four related program areas: • Policy and Guidance — Providing the strategic direction for exercise and evaluation programs Nationwide • Training — Offering courses and tutorials on the many HSEEP plans, policies, and requirements • Technology — Ensuring that Federal, State, and local jurisdictions have the tools necessary to plan and implement exercise programs • Direct Support — Supporting jurisdictions across the Nation through funding, training, and other exercise support Training Policy and Guidance HSEEP Direct Support Technology
HSEEP Volumes • Volume I: Overview and Exercise Program Management • Volume II: Exercise Planning and Conduct • Volume III: Exercise Evaluation and Improvement Planning • Volume IV: Sample Exercise Documents and Formats • Prevention Exercises (Draft) – supports terrorism prevention exercises
HSEEP Terminology and Methodology • Exercises allow homeland security and emergency management personnel, from first responders to senior officials, to train and practice prevention, protection, response, and recovery capabilities in a realistic but risk-free environment. Exercises are also a valuable tool for assessing and improving performance, while demonstrating community resolve to prepare for major incidents. • A consistent terminology and methodology for exercises is critical to avoiding confusion, and to ensuring that entities can exercise together seamlessly • There are seven types of exercises defined within HSEEP, each of which is either discussions-based or operations-based.
HSEEP Exercise Types • Discussions-based Exercises familiarize participants with current plans, policies, agreements and procedures, or may be used to develop new plans, policies, agreements, and procedures. • Operations-based Exercises validate plans, policies, agreements and procedures, clarify roles and responsibilities, and identify resource gaps in an operational environment
HSEEP Discussions-based Exercises • Seminar. A seminar is an informal discussion, designed to orient participants to new or updated plans, policies, or procedures • Workshop. A workshop resembles a seminar, but is employed to build specific products, such as a draft plan or policy • Tabletop Exercise (TTX). A tabletop exercise involves key personnel discussing simulated scenarios in an informal setting. TTXs can be used to assess plans, policies, and procedures. • Games. A game is a simulation of operations that often involves two or more teams, usually in a competitive environment, using rules, data, and procedure designed to depict an actual or assumed real-life situation.
HSEEP Operations-based Exercises • Drill. A drill is a coordinated, supervised activity usually employed to test a single, specific operation or function within a single entity • Functional Exercise (FE). A functional exercise examines and/or validates the coordination, command, and control between various multi-agency coordination centers (e.g., emergency operation center, joint field office, etc.). A functional exercise does not involve any "boots on the ground" (i.e., first responders or emergency officials responding to an incident in real time). • Full-Scale Exercises (FSE). A full-scale exercise is a multi-agency, multi-jurisdictional, multi-discipline exercise involving functional (e.g., joint field office, emergency operation centers, etc.) and "boots on the ground" response (e.g., firefighters decontaminating mock victims).
Situation Manual (SitMan) Exercise Plan (ExPlan) Controller and Evaluator (C/E) Handbook Master Scenario Events List (MSEL) Player Handbook Exercise Evaluation Guides (EEGs) After Action Report/Improvement Plan (AAR/IP) HSEEP Exercise Documentation The list below contains the important document types associated with most exercises (HSEEP V2)
Concepts and Objectives Meeting Initial Planning Conference (IPC) Mid-Year Planning Conference (MPC) Master Scenario Events List (MSEL) Conference Final Planning Conference (FPC) After Action Conference (AAC) HSEEP Planning & After Action Conferences The HSEEP methodology defines a variety of planning and after action conferences (depending on type and scope of the exercise)
HSEEP Compliance HSEEP compliance is adherence to specific HSEEP-mandated practices for exercise design, conduct, evaluation, and documentation • HSEEP compliance includes four distinct performance requirements: • Conduct annual Training and Exercise Plan Workshop (T&EPW) and develop and maintain Multi-year Training and Exercise Plan • Plan and conduct exercises in accordance with guidelines in HSEEP Volumes I-III • Develop and submit a properly formatted After Action Report/Improvement Plan (AAR/IP) • Track and Implement corrective actions identified in AAR/IP
Training and Exercise Plan Workshop (T&EPW) • All HSEEP compliant entities conduct a T&EPW each calendar year in which they develop a Multi-year Training and Exercise Plan, which includes: • The entities' training and exercise priorities (based on an overarching strategy and previous improvement plans). • The capabilities from the TCL that the entity will train for and exercise against • A multi-year training and exercise schedule • A new or updated Multi-year Training and Exercise Plan must be finalized and implemented within 60 days of the T&EPW • All scheduled exercises must be entered into the National Exercise Schedule (NEXS) System • The Multi-Year Training and Exercise Plan must be updated on an annual basis (or as necessary) to reflect schedule changes
Exercise Planning and Conduct • The type of exercise selected by the entity should be consistent with the entity's Multi-year Training and Exercise Plan • Exercise objectives should be based on capabilities and their associated critical tasks, which are contained within the Exercise Evaluation Guides (EEGs) • The scenarios used in exercises must be tailored toward validating capabilities, and should be based on the entity's risk/vulnerability assessment
After-Action Reporting • After-Action Reports and Improvement Plans (AR/IPs) created for exercises must conform to HSEEP template • Draft AAR/IP must be developed based on information from the Exercise Evaluation Guides (EEGs) • Corrective actions are developed from AAR/IP recommendations
Improvement Planning • An improvement plan will include broad recommendations from the AAR/IP organized by target capability as defined in the Target Capability List (TCL) • Corrective actions derived from an AAC are associated with the recommendations and must be linked to a capability element as defined in the TCL • Corrective actions included in the improvement plan must be measurable, must designate a projected start date/ completion date, and must be assigned to an organization and a POC within that organization • Corrective actions must be continually monitored and reviewed as part of an organizational Corrective Action Program
Coordinating NEP Five-Year Schedule with Federal, Regional, and State Priorities 34
Five-Year Exercise Schedule Coordination • Establish Regional-State exercise objectives and priorities • Exercise mandates and requirements • Existing State exercise schedules • Prioritized State capabilities to exercise and evaluate • Prioritized State exercise objectives • Establish Regional-State training and exercise plans and schedules based on • Regional-State Priorities • Current Threat Analysis • NEP Implementation Plan guidance • Lessons Learned from actual incidents and other exercises • State prioritized input
NEP Exercise Tiers Tier I • Tier I: White House directed, USG-wide Strategy and Policy Focus • Tier II: Federal Strategy and Policy Focus • Tier III: Other Federal Exercises Operational, Tactical or Organizational Focus • Tier IV: State, Territorial, Local, Tribal or Private Sector Focus 1 NLE 4 PLE Tier II 3 Tier II Exercises Tier III Regional or Other Federal Exercises Tier IV Non-Federal Exercises 36
REP/HSEEP Crosswalk • Red • Major changes necessary - substantial effort required • Timeframe for completion >12 months • Yellow • Some changes necessary - moderate effort required • Timeframe for completion <12 months • Green • Minimal or no change needed - little effort required • Timeframe for completion <3 months