SERC Meeting Anchorage Alaska STATE EMERGENCY RESPONSE COMMISSION MINUTES May

SERC Meeting Anchorage, Alaska STATE EMERGENCY RESPONSE COMMISSION MINUTES May 15, 2008 Anchorage, Alaska I. Call to order - Chair May 15, 2008 Page 1 Chairman Cramer, Deputy Commissioner, Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, called the meeting to order at 1:00 p.m. A. Roll Call was taken. Members Present: John Cramer (Chair) Larry Dietrick (Co-Chair) Doug Vincent-Lang Grey Mitchell Lt. Barry Wilson Kerre Fisher Dean Brown George Vakalis James Maltby Brian Templin Tom Vaden James Butler III Dianne Keller Jamie Sunderland Members Absent: Mike Black Mike Coffey Dept. of Community & Economic Development Dept. of Transportation & Public Facilities Dept. of Military and Veterans Affairs Dept. of Environmental Conservation Dept. of Fish and Game Dept. of Labor and Workforce Development Dept. of Public Safety Dept. of Health & Social Services Dept. of Natural Resources Urban LEPC Urban LEPC Rural LEPC Rural LEPC Public Member at Large Local Government Local Government Ex Officio Members Present: Lt. Col. Lori Stender Robert Forgit Capt. Mike Cerne Mary Goolie Guests Present: Bea Adler, Citizen Corps Committee Merry Carlson, DHS&EM Roberta Carney, DHS&EM Dave Cole, AK Seismic Hazards Safety Commission Wanice Cowles, SERC Coordinator Bryan Fisher, DHS&EM Craig Freeman, Dept. of Homeland Security Alaskan Command FEMA USCG EPA SERC Meeting Anchorage, Alaska David Kang, All hazards Plan Review Committee John Madden, Dept. of Military and Veterans Affairs Mike Mitchell, Dept. of Law Mike O’Hare, DHS&EM Alan Wien, Work Plan Committee CDR Thomas Wilder, Alaskan Command Lisa A. Kern, DHS&EM Vivian Kinnaird, EPA Michaela Goertzen, Institute of the North Chris Nelsen, Institute of the North Frederick Brower, North Slope Borough LEPC Rusty Lasell, Denali Borough LEPC Doug McCloskey, Petersburg/Wrangell LEPC Kim Coreson, Soldotna LEPC Alaine Tate, Nome LEPC Jonathan Lappin, Ketchikan LEPC Sarah Sanderlin, Mat-Su LEPC Tom Smayda, Mat-Su Borough Lisa Howard, FEPC/Fairbanks Fire Dept Warren Cummings, City of Fairbanks Layne McDowell, Alaskan Command Michael Paschall, Delta-Greely LEPC Wanda Clark, Valdez LEPC Ray Leggett, Northern Southeast LEPC Mark Roberts, DHS&EM Andrew Jones, DHS&EM Brian Fisher, DHS&EM Jim Kohler, Dept of Administration Kim Helgredon, Archie Ferguson, Northwest Arctic Borough Rich Etheridge, Juneau LEPC B. C. It was concluded that a quorum was present. May 15, 2008 Page 2 Administrative Announcements – SERC Coordinator Wanice Cowles introduced the new appointments as well as the reappointment. New Appointments 1. LEPC Rural – Mr. Brian Templin 2. Local Government Representative – Mr. Jamie Sunderland Reappointment 1. LEPC Urban – Mr. George Vakalis Ms. Cowles stated that a revised agenda has been distributed as well as updates to the meeting packets. She reminded members to turn their microphones on, state their name, and then when finished speaking to turn their microphones off. There is a public comment sign-up sheet at the sign-up table. She pointed out the exits in the room. There is a computer set up for those who want to do early check-in. II. Welcome and Introductions. SERC Meeting Anchorage, Alaska A. Opening Comments by Co-Chairs May 15, 2008 Page 3 Chair Cramer thanked those who were present for being in attendance. Commissioner Campbell sends his regrets that he is unable to attend the meeting. Co-Chair Dietrick also welcomed everyone to the meeting. B. Member Introductions and Opening Comments Chair Cramer asked the members of the SERC to introduce themselves. III. Approval of Previous Meeting’s Minutes – January 17, 2008 George Vakalis MOVED to approve the minutes of January 17, 2008. James Maltby seconded the motion. The MOTION passed without objection. IV. Public Comment There was no one signed up for public comment. V. Consent Agenda George Vakalis MOVED to approve the Agenda with the following changes: B. LEPC appointments; C. Proposed 2009 Meeting Schedule. James Maltby seconded the motion. Motion passed with no objections. A. B. C. VI. Approval of and Changes to the Agenda LEPC Appointments Proposed 2009 Meeting Schedule Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management Report A. DHS&EM Updates – Mr. John Madden, Director, stated that they are aggressively pursuing a course of improving their ability to aid local communities, the boroughs, individuals, families, academia, state agencies, and at the same time looking to the future for the event that has not happened yet. He discussed the doctrine is guiding them in their activities. Before you write a plan, you must analyze why you need it and what are your guiding principles. The three they have developed include one he reported on last meeting, the essentials necessary to stabilize a disaster in its opening hours (food, water, energy, medicine and shelter, supported by transportation, communication and finance). One of the other doctrines goes before and the other after the event. The first one is creating and sustaining a culture of preparedness, the means by which individuals, families, neighborhoods, communities, cities, boroughs organizations, private sector can understand what can go wrong within their organization or their neighborhood or their house, how to reduce the effects of it, how to prevent it, how to deter it, and how to quickly recover from it. The second doctrine is restating the ones about the essentials necessary to stabilize, which is a swift, coordinated response. The third element is comprehensive recovery. The recovery after a disaster is measured by many things. This is more than getting people back in their homes and businesses open. If the businesses are open, it means nothing unless the shelves have products on them, unless that supply chain is working. We need a broader understanding of what recovery means so that we can restore the fabric of society. On the national level, this is a year of transition. The Federal Department of Homeland Security will be undergoing its first change of administration and they are planning on how to do that. Mr. Madden stated that there is a concern that many of the emerging policies or continuing policies of the DHS and FEMA are put out as national solutions, but are really 48 states solutions. They are working through all of their national SERC Meeting Anchorage, Alaska May 15, 2008 Page 4 organizations and through the regions to make sure that a national solution includes Alaska and Hawaii, Puerto Rico and the Virgin Islands, the Marshall Islands and all the other areas. They have formed a caucus to present a united voice that, for instance, this logistics system, this distribution system, this commodity system does not work for us. They are also working through several national organizations to get the emphasis on the effects of a disaster, not to plan for earthquakes differently than tornadoes, differently than hurricanes. Once they occur, the response and recovery are similar. They are working on getting national policies on resilience. Many other states have joined the coalition on this. Mr. Madden reported that he was in Whitehorse, Yukon Territory May 14th meeting his counterparts from the Yukon Territory, British Columbia, Washington, Oregon and Idaho along with the FEMA staff from Region X. They discussed a number of ways in which the border should not be an obstacle during an emergency, and how to move goods, services, and teams that can help across the border, and how do you make sure that the communications systems support them. He felt they made significant progress on a number of things which can lead to better communications and some capabilities that we do not have throughout all of Southeast and along the eastern state border. Washington and Oregon are a critical part of our supply chain. If there is a possibility of a disruption, a threat not yet made public, they will let us know so that we can start our contingencies and work arounds before the event even happens. Mr. Madden reported that they have successfully completed the second regional evacuation workshop and exercise in Southwest Alaska with representatives of 40 communities participating. He stated they are now planning one for Western Alaska. They are finding that the approaches to emergency planning and preparedness tend to be piecemeal, tend to have an emphasis one year and then another emphasis the next year so that emergency evacuation planning is separate from emergency operations, separate from the training, separate from the exercises. He stated they have developed a model that will be used very soon for the six communities that have been identified as communities in peril by the Governor’s Subcabinet on Climate Change. It is community-based comprehensive planning, an entire suite of services that starts with the documentation of the assets in a community and what are the threats that face it, the hazards, the risks. Then you do the community-wide planning at the same time for operations, evacuation and then in that package also do the training and the exercising so that it is truly comprehensive and community-based. There cannot be an emphasis of the day, but you must treat the community, the borough and the region as a total entity. They are using this comprehensive look in the River Watch Program. There has been an aircraft flying hundreds of miles over dozens of hours with an emergency manager from DHS&EM, a hydrologist from the National Weather Service, a local community leader and the pilot. When they see something developing, they can communicate back to the community immediately and put into action their plans that have already been worked through. Mr. Madden also spoke about interagency. With the area office for FEMA, Alaska is the only state in the Union that has an Incident Management Assistance Team (IMAT) for our one state. Robert Forgit, FEMA, is now organizing a team to assist the state with any federal assets located inside the state should a disaster occur. Mr. Madden stated that Alaska had one of the best coordinating efforts on anti-terrorism and criminal in the entire nation. We have the Anti-Terrorism Advisory Council of Alaska which puts us in the know and in the coordination and running through the plans and how things work on criminal and terrorist activity, the human element. He stated they are looking at a way to expand this interagency, sharing of information, coordination of activities approach across the full range of hazards that face the state. On May 16, 2008 there will be the first gathering of the potential members of the Advisory Council of Alaska. This group will be the means by which we gain the support necessary for true interagency, multi-jurisdictional planning. They will meet twice a year. SERC Meeting Anchorage, Alaska May 15, 2008 Page 5 Mr. Butler stated that one of the things he has seen more and more in corporations is they are moving from manned aircraft to unmanned aircraft. With respect to the River Watch, he asked if there was a way to use an UAV type approach to not only see what’s going on, but collecting the data in a way that could be manipulated once it is collected. Mr. Madden stated they have been in discussion with FAA and NOAA about this. NOAA is seeking to base some unmanned aerial vehicles in Alaska to study the Arctic. If there is a basing in Alaska then it is our desire to maximize that use. Chair Cramer stated that there are now two division deputy directors in DHS&EM, Mr. Mike O’Hare and Ms. Roberta Carney. VII. Local Emergency Planning Committee Status Reports Mr. George Vakalis, LEPCA Chairperson, reported on the LEPCA meeting that was held May 15. He also gave a recap of the training that took place May 14. He announced that they have volunteers to serve on the Interoperability Communications Committee. VIII. Local Emergency Planning Committee Status Reports (None) IX Old Business A. Communications Interoperability Committee Discussion – Mr. Bryan Fisher stated that at the last meeting the Commission approved the recommendation to create the Interoperable Communications Committee. The division was tasked with coming up with the recommended composition of the committee as well as the mission and duty statements. He had provided that information to the members. The goal was to keep the committee manageable but yet have it broad in terms of its representation to include all disciplines and all regions of the state. Currently they are looking at a 13member committee. The Delta-Greely LEPC will be the rural LEPC representative with Denali LEPC as an alternate, and Mat-Su LEPC for urban representation from the LEPCA. He stated that invitation letters will be sent out soon to the other agencies listed. The names nominated will be part of the consent agenda at the next SERC meeting. The primary emphasis of the committee is two-fold: 1. coordinate and make sure that the State’s Communications Interoperability Plan is integrated with all of our planning efforts and to coordinate and integrate our efforts from the Interoperable Communications Committee with the SERC All-Hazards Plan Review Committee and with the SERC Training Committee; 2. to manage the State’s Communications Interoperability Plan. The draft plan was submitted in December. The Department of Commerce and the Department of Homeland Security at the federal level have accepted the plan. The intent is for this committee to be the owner/operator of that document as we move forward. Mr. Fisher reported they have gone through the grant application process and received 26 applications from across the State requesting a total of about $11 million. They have about $5.5 million to go out locally. He stated that a lot of the projects are primarily equipment projects. They still consider this a critical shortage that we have particularly with non-governmental volunteer organizations that have not had access to the regular homeland security federal funding streams to procure equipment. There is also some planning and coordination projects including some good projects for doing assessments, training and exercise plans. Mr. Fisher reported that the State’s Communications Interoperability Plan has been approved. With respect to the investment justifications, he had good news and bad news. The good news was they have no substantive changes at all to that; however, they do want to see the full slate of approved SERC Meeting Anchorage, Alaska May 15, 2008 Page 6 projects within the state before they take the conditions off the grant. The external review committee process will occur May 21st, 22nd and 23rd. They will go through the 26 projects and try to whittle the $11 million worth of requests down to the $5.5 million that is available. Once that is completed, the recommendations will go to the Director who will make approvals of the projects. Those state approved projects will be submitted to the federal government. Then they will release the conditions and the division will be able to award the money. He hoped to have the money available in the middle of June or July. In response to a question from Mr. Butler, Mr. Fisher stated that there are a number of other bodies that are dealing with the federal/state/local interagency communications governance, such as the Alaska Land Mobile Radio Executive Council and the Users Council. There is a regional planning committee under the FCC for the 700 megahertz bands. The intent is not for this committee to take over those functions that already exist, but to enhance them and to make sure that there is information flow between not only those separate organizations and governance structures, but also with the rest of the response community. B. Department of Administration Ex-officio Discussion (Whitepaper – Dept. of Administration representation on SERC) – Mr. John Madden stated that working through the Public Safety Interoperable Communications Grant Program involved the Department of Military and Veterans Affairs, Department of Public Safety and Department Administration as the key stake holders. Through this they found that we had a need for the Interoperable Communications Committee. They also looked at, in a larger sense, across the broad range of preparedness, response and recovery, is there a role for the Department of Administration. There is more there than what they had codified. He also conferred with his counterparts in several other states. There is a need within the immediate response to do certain things and do it well for the best use of money and the best use of people. A way to do this successfully is through their equivalent of the Department of Administration. It worked well in those states in which they included their Department of Administration in on the comprehensive planning, the coordination. It worked very badly in those states that did not. He stated that in their analysis, looking at the needs to stabilize a disaster and the need to quickly go into a comprehensive recovery, they feel that the participation of the Department of Administration through a forum like the SERC is very important. There was a motion at the last SERC meeting to add the Department of Administration as an ex officio member. It was tabled after discussion with the understanding that if the SERC feels it is worthy that it would take another motion in order address this. Dianne Keller MOVED that the Department of Administration be added as an ex officio member. George Vakalis seconded the motion. Under discussion, Mr. Butler stated that there is a recommendation in the report that is even more important, and that is to codify this in the Alaska Disaster Act or in the SERC. Chair Cramer thought it might be best to separate the two. Mr. Madden added that there is also the matter of insurance. During a major disaster, the insurance industry is in great need of guidance and how that works and living up to the policies, et cetera. The insurance industry is regulated by the state under the Department of Administration. The MOTION passed without objection. Chair Cramer stated that Mr. Butler’s comment regarding codifying this action in statute was worthy of discussion. There has been some discussion to do this. Mr. Madden stated that there is not a clear pattern for this in the other states that have had disasters, whether the Department of Administration equivalent is on a governing body or an advisory to it. He does not have a complete analysis as to whether it would better serve in a position within ex-officio or if it needs the full membership. Ms. Brown stated that when it comes to the basic issue, she still felt the same as she did at the January meeting, although she did not object to making them an ex-officio member. Her concern is that the Department of Administration is a support function to every one of the state departments that are initial SERC Meeting Anchorage, Alaska May 15, 2008 Page 7 response for emergencies. She did not feel that putting it into the statute was necessary or welladvised. Chair Cramer stated that the Department of Administration is a member of the Disaster Policy Cabinet. He stated that they currently use them and they are always at the table. He did not know if codification was necessary. Lt. Wilson stated the question is what would be gained by having them as a member versus ex officio member. C. Committee Reports 1. Finance Committee – Mr. George Vakalis, Chairperson, reported that the committee met May 14th. They dealt with three items. One item they dealt with was reallocation of funds ($1,000) being turned back. The committee was concerned because as of May 14th there was still approximately $130,000 that did not have firm documentation showing that it was spent. The committee honored a request from Fairbanks for $1,000 to purchase a four-drawer file cabinet. They also decided that if there is a further turn-back, it will be used (1) for any particular LEPC that may be overspent; (2) to help offset the cost of the May meeting; (3) to work off the priority list of the requests that came in from Fairbanks. The committee allocated the upcoming year’s funds. For the new members, Mr. Vakalis gave the history of the baseline. This year they have enough funds to cover baseline funding and a little bit more. They decided to distribute the money to all of the LEPCs less $25. They increased the base allocation for this year only. The baseline for Level I LEPCs was increased to $7,500; Level II LEPCs were increased to $12,612.50; Level III LEPCs were increased to $15,135; Level IV LEPCs were increased to $20,180; Level V LEPCs were increased to $25,225. There was also a distribution for the Citizens Corps. Start up was reduced from $7,500 to $5,000. The four existing Citizens Corps organizations will receive $25,000 each. $28,393 is being held in reserve to be distributed on a case-by-case basis. There is a possibility of a new Citizens Corps being formed. 2. Citizen Corps Committees – Ms. Beatrice Adler, Chairperson, reported that the Citizen Corps is aimed at helping us create disaster resilient communities at the local level. We have four very active communities with the Citizen Corps programs: Municipality of Anchorage, MatSu Borough, Fairbanks North Star Borough, and the Kenai Peninsula Borough. A number of smaller communities over the years have tried to make the Citizen Corps program work, primarily things like the CERT program. Smaller communities have been struggling with it. She understands that several are going to make another run at it and she hopes they are successful. The national funding has been diminishing every year. At the national level the concept is that the funding for Citizen Corps Programs is meant to primarily be start-up money. Once they are up and running the federal perspective is they are not supposed to need grant funding. They are meant to go under the wing of the local jurisdiction. That does not happen very much in Alaska. Our communities become grant dependent. As the grant money diminishes, we will see if the local jurisdictions do step up. There may be a need for an educational program to local administrations. With respect to programs around the state, Ms. Adler stated that one of the things that will be a benefit in the Citizen Corps programs not having to compete for funding is it will encourage more collaboration. The Mat-Su and Kenai Peninsula LEPCs and Citizen Corps councils brought up a two-day workshop called Creating Vigilant Prepared and Resilient Communities for Homeland Security. This is a federally-approved Department of Homeland Security training out of the Western Community Policing Institute at Western Oregon University. The Kenai Peninsula Borough continues to train people in the Citizen Corps SERC Meeting Anchorage, Alaska May 15, 2008 Page 8 program and puts out an excellent newsletter which is on-line. Fairbanks North Star Borough has had five people take the train-the-trainer course. They are now partnering with their police department to add the CERT program. The Mat-Su Borough has trained another 122 individuals in CERT. They have now trained almost 700 people. There are 47 actual card-carrying CERT members who have said, yes, call me, I will do whatever you need me to do. The teams that are developed will have on-going training and need to be cultivated. The University of Alaska at the state level is adopting CERT. They are now discussing how to offer CERT training as part of the University’s offerings at the Mat-Su campus. Several communities around the state are doing the Map Your Neighborhood program as an adjunct to CERT and Neighborhood Watch. She also reminded everyone that it is fire season and the CERT program works with Forestry, to work with the Fire Wise program and get every one fire conscious. Lt. Wilson asked what the response has been from community agencies regarding support for the programs and what can be done to help in that area. Ms. Adler stated they have not made an attempt other than individuals at their local level to get local support, as they’re doing in Fairbanks. In the Mat-Su Borough they get a lot of support for Neighborhood Watch from the State Troopers Detachment B. They provide a state trooper to come to every Neighborhood Watch meeting and presentation. The cost of running these programs is primarily in staff support (wages) and that is where the support is needed. There are some unanswered questions there. 3. Training Committee – Mr. Thomas Vaden, Chairperson, stated they have had two meetings since January. About half the committee has turned over since January. They are still working on the training matrix, but it is currently on hold. The training calendar is working well. Work Plan Committee – (2008-2010 Work Plan Approval) Mr. Alan Wien, Chairperson, stated that a copy of the draft work plan is in the meeting materials. The first draft of a new SERC work plan was presented in January. That started the 30-day public comment period. They did not receive any public comments, so the proposed changes to the work plan are from the committee only. Changes to the plan include the dates of the plan; the addition of the Interoperable Communications Committee to the official list of committees; and the addition to SERC task number 6 the words “as funding allows”. If approved, the plan will become effective July 1, 2008. There was a point of order that several members of the committee did not have a page 2. Copies were provided. Chair Cramer introduced Susan Rinardson, regional administrator for FEMA Region X, Dennis Hundsinger, deputy administrator. Tom Vaden MOVED to approve the 2008-2010 Work Plan. Dean Brown seconded the motion. The MOTION passed without objection. 5. All-Hazards Plan Review Committee – Mr. David Kang, Chairperson, reported the committee has had three meetings since the last SERC meeting. In February they looked at how to get the committee members more involved. At the February meeting they had 15 members up from the 5 they had prior to that. In March the committee looked at some plans, the planning concepts and again focused on procedures. In May they looked at two plans, the Alaska Water/Wastewater plan. That plan culminated in a large gathering two weeks ago in Anchorage. The other plan was a CAN/US North plan introduced by EPA. They provided some input to that plan. It needs some additional work, but it is a living document and input 4. SERC Meeting Anchorage, Alaska May 15, 2008 Page 9 is provided as it goes along. The committee is trying to provide some standardization for plans review so they are looking at some of the national best practices as well as the state needs in terms of how planning in Alaska can be uniquely different. The goal was to provide some sort of template, which they have done. It is also a living document that continues to be changed. They are looking at the Northwest Arctic Borough’s plan as well as the upcoming Mat-Su EOP. They are soliciting additional plans to review. The committee is also looking at a document management system. They would like to share information and collaborate. They are trying to find a platform that the federal, state and locals can use to share information not only in plans but also for future planning. They are also looking at future events, how planners do planning. At the March meeting one of the operations people talked about some more initiatives in the River Watch. Since there is a DNR representative on the committee, they also discussed wildland fire and some of their forecasts. They are trying to not only review plans, but also provide planners planning topics. Mr. Vaden stated that parts of their plans are not for public consumption. Mr. Kang stated that the parts that are to be kept private should be taken out. They are looking at security components to protect critical information, infrastructure component. In response to Lt. Wilson, Mr. Kang stated that HSIN is a restricted data base. With respect to removing parts of documents that you do not have as public consumption, Lt. Wilson asked if that would be post review. Mr. Kang stated that it would be during review. No Presentations from the Committee Listed Below 6. X New Business A. University of Alaska/Anchorage – Performance Measurement and Metric Analysis of Preparedness, Operations, and Recovery as it pertains to Comprehensive Emergency Management – Mr. Madden stated that in the fall semester 2007 they gave the University of Alaska Anchorage’s Master’s Program on Supply Chain Management the top of fall sea storms, understanding the impacts, the logistics, the considerations of it. He stated that they were able to take the recommendations from that and use them during the Governor’s Subcabinet on Climate Change, Immediate Actions Work Group. The second semester the assignment was let’s transform our approach to understanding our effectiveness from just intuition into a discipline. They looked at how to measure success and effectiveness. Mr. Madden stated that they are seeking to continue this relationship with the University. He also stated that they looked at this as a way to institutionalize the approach, so they established a temporary position for a logistician. Understanding how the state works, what can go out of equilibrium and how do we bring it back in is important, but it has to be done in a very disciplined academic way. The performance measurement approach is one of the ways to do it. Ms. Lisa Kern reported that the University worked with the Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management to look at performance measurements. It was part of the Masters of Science Program, Global Logistics Supply Chain Management. They were asked to provide recommendations on the current performance measures for DHS&EM, and also to consider new ones for the future, looking at performance measurements. They looked at it on the tactical level, the operational level and the strategic level. The strategic level looked a lot more at the federal documents and looked at it from a federal perspective. The operational looked at it from the state level, and tactical level looked at it from a local level. With the documents they had to look at, they found it was very difficult to take these federal documents and bring them down to the operational or even the local level and help Urban Search and Rescue Committee - Ms. Pamela Bergmann, Chairperson. SERC Meeting Anchorage, Alaska May 15, 2008 Page 10 develop those performance measurements. They realized that the best way to do it was to look at the fact that you need to realize how things move. That there are specific flows we have within the State of Alaska. There are four major flows. These are transportation, finance, goods and services and communication. If any of these flows are disrupted at all, we need to get them back up and going so that we can get other items moving. These four flows were the basis of developing the performance measurements. With these four flows there are three main roles: culture of preparedness, swift and coordinated response, and comprehensive recovery. As you look at developing your performance measurements, your goals, you need to determine your capabilities first, and then develop your matrix. When you do that, you will then end up with performance measurements. Ms. Kern went through some of the process that the groups went through in this study. All three groups followed the same path. She stated that how you develop the performance measurements, how you develop those goals, the matrixes, is that you first need to develop your capabilities. Capabilities must be of interest to the client, whether it is the local level, state level or the federal level. Whatever you are developing the performance measurements for, they need to be at that level that you are working with. They also need to be generically worded. For example, in case of an evacuation, the question would be do we have the transportation available, yes or no? Then the matrix would be, would that be by number of airplanes, would that be by boats, by plane, etc. The matrix supports the capability. Three papers were developed, one at the tactical level, one at the operational level, and one at the strategic level. These papers are available through the University of Alaska/Anchorage. In response to Ms. Keller, Chair Cramer said that they could probably link the University website through the DHS&EM website. C. National Response Framework – Mr. Robert Forgit, FEMA, reported there will be a NRF and NIMS awareness training June 26th in Anchorage as well as others around the region starting next week. The National Response Framework outlines the importance of a strong and unified response throughout the nation. The purpose of the framework is to be a guide for all hazards, all incidents. The key to the response, the principals, roles and structures of a national response is that it starts at a local level. The national response plan focuses nationally and might have missed the boat a little on looking at it from the basics, which is it starts at the local level and works its way up. The framework builds on the NIMS concept and the doctrine of flexibility and standardization, which is the emphasis on incident command systems. One of the things in the response doctrine is unity of effort through a unified command. We need to prepare communities at all levels to act as one government entity. He stated that the printed core document is a document you can pick up. In addition there are the on-line components, the function annex, the support annex and the emergency support functions. Mr. Forgit discussed the main functions that have changed or that have been added or modified. There are seven incident annexes. There is also a partnership guide. The website is www.fema.gov/nrf. He stated that the NRF was designed to hit two audiences: (1) the elected and appointed leaders of the federal departments and agencies; (2) the emergency management practitioners. He stated that they are changing the ERTS to IMATS. In Alaska they are going to develop an IMAT level 3 team. Level 1 and 2 teams are permanent teams that FEMA is creating and that is all they do. The level 3 team is a volunteer group made up of not only FEMA employees, but also other federal employees. He also stated that they are looking at the feasibility of having a logistics center in Alaska. Mr. Forgit stated that at the EMI website there are many courses people can take for free and get college credit. There are about 24 courses in regard to the NRF some of which are online. In response to Ms. Keller’s questions about moving full fuel tanks to another location prior to a disaster, Mr. Forgit stated that the national contingency plan address those emergency procedures and how they work on ensuring that we do not have a major oil/hazmat issue. Ms. Goolie stated that for a before the fact bulk fuel storage in the villages that are having the issues with coastal erosion, they have facility response plans, SPCC plans, bulk prevention control and current measure plans, but that SERC Meeting Anchorage, Alaska May 15, 2008 Page 11 will not put up a wall for a sea storm coming in that erodes 10 feet in and takes out the bulk fuel storage. There have been discussions looking at preplanning in those communities and processes to try and get that fuel transported. She stated that currently there is not a funding stream through either the EPA or the Coast Guard before a spill occurs. Mr. Forgit stated that from a FEMA perspective, they are constrained by the Stafford Act. Ms. Keller stated that her question is whether there is discussion centered around what can be done to look at mitigating, i.e. moving, it so that it does not get spilled. Mr. Forgit stated that there has been discussion on several levels. Ms. Keller clarified that she was talking about having, for example, a bladder and taking the fuel out when it is in danger and just moving it to another nearby location, not long-term mitigation. Ms. Carney stated that at the state level they have the capacity to declare a disaster if there is an imminent threat. The difficulty is in determining if it is an imminent threat. If a disaster is declared, then the federal partners can become involved through the Stafford Act and other functions. Dennis Hundsinger, FEMA, stated that what they can do in the early stages of a pre-declaration, it is an emergency declaration, and what that gets you is emergency protective measures. He could not address the specific nuances of transferring fuel into a bladder, but the main thing is that before you can come to FEMA, the first question they will ask is has that exceeded the State’s capability to handle themselves. Co-Chair Dietrick stated that the State was pretty effective with dealing with the situation in Kivalina last fall. It was a predisaster declaration. The transfer was successful. It was actually done without any state funding support at the time, but was facilitated by the State. Through the Global Warming Subcabinet the administration has since identified all the critical at risk coastal communities. They are seeking funding now to take care of the critical infrastructure items as a first step in terms of relocating those in anticipation of future events threatening them. D. Chemical Security Compliance - Craig Freeman, Inspector, DHS Inspections and Enforcement Branch, discussed the implementation of the Chemical Facility Anti-Terrorism Standards (CFATS). He had a PowerPoint presentation. Appendix A is the list of chemicals, the risk-based performance standards, the chemical security assessment tool, chemical vulnerability information, the rule-out program and contact information. The Department of Homeland Security was given six months to implement the federal regulation. As a result, not all aspects of the regulations have been answered to this point. The rule went into effect in June of 2007. It is a risk-based regulation. It requires facilities to meet certain risk-based standards in the development of their security plan. The standards apply only to facilities that are deemed high risk. There are five categories statutorily exempt from the regulation: (1) Facilities covered under the Coast Guard’s MTSA regulation; (2) facilities operated by the Department of Defense or (3) the Department of Energy; (4) facilities regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission; (5) facilities covered under the Water Treatment Act and Wastewater Treatment Acts. Mr. Freeman discussed Appendix A. The chemicals listed there determine whether or not a facility is required to comply with the regulation. He also touched on the risk based performance standards. There are 19 risk based performance standards identified by the regulation. A facility has to meet the risk based performance standards that are applicable to the facility and their chemicals on hand. How the facility meets the security goals is up to the facility. The department is developing a guidance document for the risk based performance standards. A facility currently would have 90 days to complete their security vulnerability assessment after receipt of their preliminary tiering letter. These notices are anticipated to go out by the end of May. After the Department of Homeland Security has received the facility’s security vulnerability assessments, a notice of final tiering will be issued to a facility. Upon notice of final tiering, the facilities will be directed to complete a site security plan which will become the facility’s individual federal regulation that meets the chemical facility anti-terrorism standards. Chemical terrorism vulnerability information (CVI) is a security handling protocol that is assigned to information under the regulation. It only applies to the information that is entered into the system and to the information that the system generates. The CVI regulation does not preclude a facility from reporting under any current existing regulatory requirements. A facility can not choose not to report under ECRA to their local emergency planning SERC Meeting Anchorage, Alaska May 15, 2008 Page 12 committee citing CVI. He also discussed who can have access to the information under CVI. Basically it is on a need to know. He then discussed the CFATS help desk which is the central point for all questions CFATS related. In response to Mr. Maltby who asked how the transportation sector fits in, Mr. Freeman stated that the regulation specifically deals with the facility itself and not the transportation modes or the supply chain. The Department of Transportation and TSA are currently implementing their own surface transportation security rules for toxic chemicals. Mr. Madden stated that the senior homeland security advisors of all 50 states were in Washington, DC last week. They said that the best way to control this was to have the information provided to the state homeland security advisor and for the access to it to be coordinated in that way. In response to Mr. Madden, Mr. Freeman stated that it is solely at the discretion of the state where the CVI office for the state resides. Alaska Seismic Hazards Safety Commission - Dave Cole, Commissioner, gave some history of the Commission. The first meeting was held towards the end of 2005. There are 11 members on the Commission from both the private sector and government. The Commission recommends to the Governor and the Legislature the seismic risk mitigation and methods and recommends needed research, mapping and monitoring programs regarding earthquake activities in Alaska, and offer advice and coordination of disaster preparedness, review practices for recovery and reconstruction. Some of their goals are to recommend improvements to mitigate losses from future events; gather, analyze and disseminate information; establish working relationships with public and private agencies; review of warning and suggest appropriate responses; review proposed seismic notifications; recommend issuance of notifications; give appropriate response advice. He stated that tsunami warnings go through the local divisions of emergency services and should not come from the Commission. Among the Commissions accomplishments are the development of the Commissions charter, some of the rules of procedures, and established standing committees. They have a website. They have given 22 briefings such as the one he was giving the SERC. Every year they author an annual report and post it on the web site. He touched on some of their standing committees. The two most critical at this point are the schools and earthquakes scenario. The schools committee has been gathering information on where all the schools in the State of Alaska are located. They plan to develop a methodology for inventorying the schools with respect to their seismic resistance, and then make recommendations regarding what to do relative to their seismic resistance and where they are situated in the state. The earthquake scenario committee will look at two generic areas of the state, an urban area and a rural area, and based on the seismic environment of the state, come up with a reasonable earthquake event and determine what its effects are. The purpose is to help with planning to effectively respond to the events. They are struggling with what is a reasonable earthquake scenario to come up with. He asked the SERC members to help them determine what is a reasonable scenario that the SERC members could use? The insurance committee is trying to figure out what is going on with the insurance community with respect to earthquake insurance and then maybe help them through the earthquake scenarios help them set their rates a little more reasonably. XI Other State Agency and Ex-officio Reports – Department of Health & Social Services - Ms. Fisher stated the department is currently undergoing some leadership organizational changes. Within the department they have been continuing with the preparedness program and doing outreach workshops for local communities upon request. They will be doing a workshop in St. Mary’s at the end of May for their region. They will also be going to the Fairbanks area to talk with the Tanana Chief Conference communities in the middle of June. They are also working on another one for the Chugachmuit villages. She stated that they are also continuing with the strategic national stockpile planning, training and exercising. They are also continuing their state stockpiles of information and equipment. They E. SERC Meeting Anchorage, Alaska May 15, 2008 Page 13 purchased 28 portable ventilators that have been distributed around the state to various hospitals, and they have been training hospitals and EMS workers on how to use them. Ms. Fisher reported that they are working on a medical surge series of exercises for this summer, one in June and one in July to test pediatric medical surge. Ms. Fisher thanked their partners at the Division of Homeland Security and Emergency Management for their River Watch Program that they have been coordinating. The consistent and regular flow of information about that situation has been appreciated by the department leadership. U.S. Coast Guard - Capt. Cerne reported on two exercises held since the last meeting. One was a command post exercise with a catastrophic earthquake scenario with the main objective of testing communications. Juneau held a triennial full scale area maritime security exercise with the scenario of a terrorist attack on Juneau. They worked with state, local and federal agencies on that. It was a successful exercise. He reported that they are putting the finishing touches on their COOP plan. They have hired a full-time COOP person to help the Coast Guard increase their capabilities with respect to COOP throughout the entire state. He reported they have signed a generic CAN/US North plan with Canada to cooperate in spill response in the Arctic. There will be a meeting in Anchorage in June to set forth the two-year work plan with what sort of exercises, equipment, table tops, workshops, etc, they will do over the next two years to increase their capability to respond to a spill on the North Slope. Today they are sponsoring an underwater terrorism workshop in Juneau. They will collect information on what Juneau’s capabilities are and then draft a plan for Juneau. They did one for Valdez three years ago and will be in Anchorage in July. Capt. Cerne reported that they held regional response team meetings in February and March. They adopted the in-situ burn guidelines. The next step is to get those incorporated into the unified plan. The state has been a critical partner in that effort. Ms. Goolie and Capt. Cerne will be attending the national response team meeting in Tacoma in June. With respect to operations, the Coast Guard is gearing up for a busy summer season. They are working closely with Fish and Game and Public Safety on preventative measures for recreational boating. In advance of major fisheries, the Coast Guard also works with Fish and Game and Public Safety to target the commercial fishing vessels with respect to safety. He stated that they are monitoring the waste streams from the cruise ships as well as providing security escorts. Capt. Cerne reported the Coast Guard is gearing up for a pretty significant operation in the Arctic this summer. They want to get some lessons learned on what it takes to operate up there, the logistics involved with getting their equipment and operating up there, and how well things work. The Aleutian Islands Risk Assessment, National Science Foundation scoping study is scheduled for release July 1st. The Coast Guard is also participating on the Governor’s Subcabinet Level Commission on Climate Change. Environmental Protection Agency - Ms. Goolie reported that they will continue their joint planning with DEC, Coast Guard and EPA for a unified plan update this summer for spill response to oil/chemical hazard. Currently they are working on their Aleutians and Kodiak subarea plans. The next plan they will work on updating is the Northwest Arctic plan beginning in the fall. With respect to EPA’s joint cross border planning with Environment Canada, their inland joint plan was signed by both Canada and U.S. They have started their plan updates for CAN/US West and CAN/US West North. She thanked Mr. Kang for keeping EPA as part of the all hazards plan review committee. They brought the CAN/US West North plan to the committee for comments and review. With respect to Tier II information, EPA did a joint compilation project with DEC starting last fall for the 2006 Tier II information. They had that information compiles and CDs at the January SERC meeting, but have found that some of the information was incorrect. It has now been corrected. There were some problems with Tier II Submit that they are still working on. EPA would like to continue this next year working jointly with DEC on doing the compilation of the 2007 information. Ms. Goolie talked about e-plan which has been funded by DHS to be used within states for the next couple years. It is a tool for first responders to look at their RMP information, and also to have EPA assist the state in getting Tier II information into that internet tool. She suggested having the e-plan as a topic at a future SERC meeting. Federal Emergency Management Agency - Mr. Forgit stated that with respect to Advisory Council Alaska the first meeting for the charter will be May 16 at the Campbell Creek Science Center. The next Alaska Federal Executive Association meeting is May 28th. They will be pushing a Determined Accord, which is a pandemic SERC Meeting Anchorage, Alaska May 15, 2008 Page 14 influenza workshop that will occur June 6th at the GSA rooms in the Federal Building Annex. On the 29th there is an exercise planning workshop in Seattle involving the ESFs and the state. COOP training is June 3rd through the 5th. The next RISC meeting will be June 25th in Anchorage. On June 26th is the National Response Framework and NIMS training from 8 to 12 at the Loussac Library. Lt. Col. Sender, Alaskan Command, reported that Tom Wilder is retiring this summer. Lane McDowell will fill in his position at Alaskan Command and will also be the civil support planner to meetings like the SERC and working with the state. Lt. Col. Sender will fill the role CDR Wilder held as the Alaska Deputy Defense Coordinating Officer who works closely with FEMA in the event of a disaster to talk about DOD assets that are available. She hopes to also be the state emergency preparedness liaison officer Army. As of last Friday Alaskan Command has a new commander, Lt. Gen. Atkins. Department of Administration - Mr. Kohler thanked the SERC for making the department an ex officio member. They look forward to bringing as much energy as they can to the SERC. Mr. Kohler stated that part of his primary responsibility with the department is to manage the State’s participation and responsibility for the ALMR project as well as to manage a small group of individuals charged with operating and maintaining the SATS system. He reported that 30 days ago they lost three of the six senior technicians that are responsible for that field work. In the early difficult days after that loss, they heard from the SERC community expressions of support. He asked them to carry back to their people that not only was that support appreciated, but it was very tangible. He saw his people lean on it, because with those expressions of shared loss, the community sense. XII Informational Items A. Ethics Information for Members of Boards and Commissions XIII. Public Comment (None) XIV. Commission Member Closing Comments Ms. Brown, DNR, reminded everyone that we are in fire season. We have had over 60 fires, all human caused. She also thanked the chairman for an efficiently run meeting. Lt. Wilson, DPS, stated that there will be a replacement to the MASS Unit which is being deployed in July. The replacement will come from the National Guard during the week, and assets have been identified to use for weekends plus search and rescue efforts that will be done through the State Troopers. There have been ongoing discussions between General Campbell and Commissioner Monegan. Ms. Fisher, DH&SS, stated that in addition to it being fire season, it is also tourist season. Please remember your hand hygiene and cough etiquette so we can try to reduce the number of infectious disease outbreaks this summer. Capt. Cerne, USCG, reminded everyone to wear their life jacket when out fishing. Ms. Keller apologized to Mr. Forgit for putting him on the spot at the wrong time. She also thanked Mr. Dietrick for answering the question. She thanked Bea Adler for the creating vigilant, prepared and resilient community training. She welcomed Robert Carney back. She thanked Sarah Sanderlin for serving on the Interoperable Communications Committee. SERC Meeting Anchorage, Alaska Mr. Butler also welcomed Roberta Carney back. May 15, 2008 Page 15 Co-Chair Dietrick stated that the concept Ms. Keller brought up earlier about not standing on the sidelines until an event happens and then react was a very important point. There is a weakness in the system currently, because we do not have a ready capability to do this. However he felt the State is at the forefront of trying to deal with that front end aspect, but he does not see it at the federal level. Co-Chair Dietrick also welcomed Roberta Carney back. Chair Cramer stated that the partners that make up SERC and LEPC dedicate an inordinate amount of time and energy and effort and resources for the citizens of Alaska. He expressed his appreciation for this effort. He also thanked the staff that helped put on the conference. They won some awards at the state level and he expects them to win more this year. Chair Cramer announced that the next meeting will be Thursday, September 18th, 2008 in Fairbanks. XVI. Adjournment The meeting adjourned at 4:25 p.m.