RRT VI Structure
description
Transcript of RRT VI Structure
RRT VI Structure• Standing RRT
• Standing Committees– Preparedness– Response– S & T Committee
– Industry
• Incident Specific RRT
2
Regional Response Teams(RRTs)
• 13 RRTs comprised of 15 Federal agencies plus State representatives
• Co-chaired by EPA and USCG
• Engage in planning and training activities year-round
• Coordinate decision making process for alternative cleanup operations
AlaskaAlaska
XVIII
IX VII
VI
V
IV
III
III
CaribbeanCaribbean
• Provide technical expertise and resources to the OSC during a response
OceaniaOceania
RRT STANDING AGENCY BODY
Alternate Response TechnologiesEvaluated at RRT Level
• Dispersants• In Situ Burns• Surface Washing Agents• Bioremediation Agents
– Bioremediation Agents– Natural Sorbents
• Solidifiers
ESA, EFH Consultations
Historic Properties
Specialist
(Reports Directly to FOSC at UAC)
Historic PropertiesSpecialist’s Rep.
Historic PropertiesSpecialist’s Rep.
ICP
Historic PropertiesSpecialist’ Rep.
ICP
Tribal Consultation Coordinator
ICP
Structure of Section 106 Response Approved 6/24/2010
Houma Mobile Miami
Tribal Liaison
GIS Data Tech
Tribal Liaison
GIS Data Tech
Traditional CulturalProperties Ethnographer
Traditional CulturalProperties Ethnographer
Tribal Liaison
SHPO Liaison (2)
GIS Data Tech
Traditional CulturalProperties Ethnographer
Archeology Crew Chief (3)
Federal or Federal Contracted (20)Responsible Party Contracted (78)
Archeology Crew Members (15)
Archeology Crew Members (23)
Archeology Crew Members (18)
Archeology Crew Chief (4)
Archeology Crew Chief (5)
SHPO Liaison (2) SHPO Liaison (2)
Administrative Support (1) Administrative Support (2) Administrative Support (1)
Historic Architect
Architectural Conservator
Historic Architect
Architectural Conservator
Historic Architect
Architectural Conservator
Historic Properties Specialist
Archeology Crew Chief
1 per 5 Crew Members
Archeology Crew Members
Cultural Resource Management Structure for Each ICP
Incident: Deepwater Horizon Accepted Structure of Section 106 Response
Tribal Liaison
SHPO Liaison
SHPO Liaison
TCP Ethnographer
GIS Data Tech
Admin. Asst. Historic Architect
Architectural Conservator
Administrative Support
Federal or Federal Contracted
Responsible Party Contracted
Louisiana SOSC Authority for Oil Related Coastal Spill Response Issues
Louisiana SOSC Authority
Office of Coastal Protection And RestorationLouisiana Oil Spill Coordinators OfficeDepartment of Natural ResourcesDepartment of Environmental QualityDepartment of Wildlife and Fisheries
Louisiana NRDA Trustees
• 40 CFR 300.180 - State and local participation in response.• • (a) Each state governor is requested to designate one state
office/representative to represent the state on the appropriate RRT. The state's office/representative may participate fully in all activities of the appropriate RRT. Each state governor is also requested to designate a lead state agency that will direct state-lead response operations.
• • This agency is responsible for designating the lead state
response official for federal and/or state-lead response actions, and coordinating/communicating with any other state agencies, as appropriate...
Inter-Regional RRT Coordination of Alternate Response Technologies
Jurisdictional Boundaries- Region VI
EPA
SECTORCORPUS CHRISTI
SECTORNEW
ORLEANS
SECTORHOUS-GALV
MSUMORGAN
CITY
MSUPORT ARTHUR
SECTOR
HOUSTON-GALV
Jurisdictional Boundaries - Region IV
SECTORMOBILE
SECTORNEW ORLEANS
EPA
SECTORMIAMI
SECTORST. PETE
SECTORJACKSONVILLE
Cross –Regional CoordinationAlternate Response Technology
RRT VI RRT IV
Dispersant Pre-Auth Zone Yes – Pre Auth Plan
Yes – Pre Auth Plan
In Sutu Burn Policy Yes – Pre Auth Plan Yes – Pre Auth Plan
Surface Washing Agents Policy-Yes: But No Pre-Auth Zones identified in Region VI ACPs
Incident Specific RRT Decision
Solidifiers Policy Draft Limited Pre-Auth Yes: Limited Pre-Auth provided all recovered similar to sorbent requirements
Bioremediation Policy Guidance Document Yes
RPFOSC
Responsible Party
ACTIVATE GST & SMART PROTOCOL
Dispersant Asset on STBY
Original Dispersant Pre-Auth Consults
Request
Targetsproposed
TargetsJustified?
ICC developsbriefing package
for FOSCNLT: 1800 CDT
FOSCEPA-6/RA
STOP
Justification NO
NO
YES
WeatherSkimmer availabilityISB not practical
MonitoringJustificationLocationTrajectory
YES
AdvanceDeploymentNMT 48 Hours in advance
ICC/Houma
Re-Justify?
STOP
NO
YES
AM TargetingFlight
06:00-07:00
SignificantChanges
08:00
ChangesCan bejustified
FOSCEPA/Robert
NOAA08:30
DEPLOY
STOPYES
NO
YES
YES
NO
STOP NO
Morning of Deployment
Who gets the intel?
40 CFR 300.915 (d)
The OSC may authorize the use of any dispersant, surface washing agent, surface collecting agent, other chemical agent, burning agent, or miscellaneous oil spill control agent, including products not listed on the NCP Product Schedule, WITHOUT obtaining the concurrence of the EPA representative to the RRT and, as appropriate, the RRT representatives from the states with jurisdiction over the navigable waters threatened by the release or discharge when, in the judgment of the OSC, the use of the product is
necessary to prevent or substantially reduce a hazard to human life.
Surface Dispersant for Health and Safety FOSC Issues
Approval for Surface Dispersant
Vessels Follow Existing H&S Plans for Dispersant Use
Nightly Report Correlating VOCs and Dispersant
Applications
Does the Data Justify the use of
Dispersants
If 2 consecutive Days, Re-Evaluate the use of Dispersants for Health
and Safety
Does the Revisited H&S Plan Involve the Use of
Dispersants
STOP USE OF SURFACE DISPERSANTS FOR
HEALTH AND SAFETY
Yes
Yes
No
No
Cross –Regional CoordinationAlternate Response Technology
RRT VI RRT IV
Dispersant Pre-Auth Zone Yes – Pre Auth Plan Yes – Pre Auth Plan
In Sutu Burn Policy Yes – Pre Auth Plan Yes – Pre Auth Plan
Surface Washing Agents Policy-Yes: But No Pre-Auth Zones identified in Region VI ACPs
Incident Specific RRT Decision
Solidifiers Policy Draft Limited Pre-Auth Yes: Limited Pre-Auth provided all recovered similar to sorbent requirements
Bioremediation Policy Guidance Document Yes
NRT Authorized In-Situ Burns via R6 Pre-Auth
Cross –Regional CoordinationAlternate Response Technology
RRT VI RRT IV
Dispersant Pre-Auth Zone Yes – Pre Auth Plan Yes – Pre Auth Plan
In Sutu Burn Policy Yes – Pre Auth Plan Yes – Pre Auth Plan
Surface Washing Agents Policy-Yes: But No Pre-Auth Zones identified in Region VI ACPs
Incident Specific RRT Decision
Solidifiers Policy Draft Limited Pre-Auth Yes: Limited Pre-Auth provided all recovered similar to sorbent requirements
Bioremediation Policy Guidance Document Yes
RRT IV Incident Specific
Approval of SWA off
MS, AL, & FL
Cross –Regional CoordinationAlternate Response Technology
RRT VI RRT IV
Dispersant Pre-Auth Zone Yes – Pre Auth Plan Yes – Pre Auth Plan
In Sutu Burn Policy Yes – Pre Auth Plan Yes – Pre Auth Plan
Surface Washing Agents Policy-Yes: But No Pre-Auth Zones identified in Region VI ACPs
Incident Specific RRT Decision
Solidifiers Policy Draft Limited Pre Auth Yes: Limited Pre Auth provided all recovered similar to sorbent requirements
Bioremediation Policy Guidance Document Yes
Note that the listing of “XXXX” on the NCP Product Schedule does not constitute approval, certification, authorization, licensing or promotion of the product; nor does it imply compliance with any criteria or minimum standards for such agents. Failure to comply with these restrictions or the making of any improper reference to EPA in an attempt to demonstrate approval or acceptance of the product will constitute grounds for removal of the product from the schedule.
What is the Product Schedule?• Required by Section 311(d)(2)(G) of the CWA
– Compiles chemicals and other agents that may be used to carry out the NCP, waters they may be used in, and quantities that may be used.
• Listing in the schedule gives:– The RRT the power to pre-approve usage under certain conditions and in
specific locations with “preauthorization plans” – 300.910(a)– The OSC the power, with concurrence/consultation of select RRT members,
to approve the use “on the fly”. – 300.910(b)• EPA co-chair and State reps of States with jurisdiction over the effected
or threatened waters: concurrence• US DOI and US DOC trustees: consultation
• Not listed on the schedule? No approval can be granted…– Except by an OSC to prevent or “remove a hazard to human life.”
• 300.910(d) – the only place the NCP states “human life”
Subpart J applies only to water, right?
• No – 300.900(b)– “…adjoining shorelines…activities that may effect
natural resources belonging to, appertaining to, or under exclusive management of the United States…”
What are defined “natural resources”??
• Natural resources – 300.5– Land, fish, wildlife, biota, water, groundwater
drinking water supplies, and other such resources belonging to, managed by, held in trust by, appertaining to, or otherwise controlled by the United States…any state or local government, any Indian Tribe, or if such resources are subject to a trust restriction on alienation, any member of an Indian Tribe.
Use in Headwaters vs Main Streams
• NCP and CWA 311 do not distinguish between them.
• RRT’s responsibility to approve, or not, per 40 CFR 300.910
• 40 CFR § 300.910 Authorization of use. • (b) For spill situations that are not addressed by the
preauthorization plans developed pursuant to paragraph (a) of this section, the OSC, with the concurrence of the EPA representative to the RRT and, as appropriate, the concurrence of the RRT representatives from the states with jurisdiction over the navigable waters threatened by the release or discharge, and in consultation with the DOC and DOI natural resource trustees, when practicable, may authorize the use of dispersants, surface washing agents, surface collecting agents, bioremediation agents, or miscellaneous oil spill control agents on the oil discharge, provided that the products are listed on the NCP Product Schedule.
Senate Hearings and Congressional Inquiries:
Example of Political Pressure being exercised by vendors whose products were not being purchased for the spill response
Cross –Regional CoordinationAlternate Response Technology
RRT VI RRT IV
Dispersant Pre-Auth Zone Yes – Pre Auth Plan Yes – Pre Auth Plan
In Sutu Burn Policy Yes – Pre Auth Plan Yes – Pre Auth Plan
Surface Washing Agents Policy-Yes: But No Pre-Auth Zones identified in Region VI ACPs
Incident Specific RRT Decision
Solidifiers Policy Draft Limited Pre-Auth Yes: Limited Pre- Auth provided all recovered similar to sorbent requirements
Bioremediation Policy Guidance Document Yes
Request to the FOSC for
alternative spill product use
Source of request is of
a political nature?
no
Yes
Product on NCP product schedule?
no
Yes
Is the request for operational
use?
no
yes
Is the request for
pre –operational
test?
Forward request to EPA
Reg & Policy Division
UAC EU Replies to sender that
request has been
forwarded to EPA
Request /assist the originator in completing RRT 6 Small-Scale Alternative Shoreline Testing Checklist
UAC EU forwards to CG RDC ARTES
- Houma for testing
yes
Houma EU provides strategies list to
FOSC /R & Ops sections for potential use
Request the sender provide idea to
DWH IATAP website
RDC ARTES prioritizes request &
conducts test
Test sucessful
?
yes
no
RDC notifies BP of successful
test
RDC notifies Requestor of unsuccessful
test
Houma EU & RDC develop strategies for potential use
Was the product
tested using RRT6 small
scale checklist?
yes
no
Awaits operationa
l need from
FOSC/R
Go to
next page
DWH Process for Alternative Spill Product Use Flowchart
Source of
request is of a
political nature?
no
Yes
Is the product RRT pre-authorized for use?
no
Is plan consistent with RRT 6/4 guidelines?
FOSC/R executes plan & provides report
as required
Request /assist the originator in completing operational plan for the
product within RRT Guidelines
FOSC/R requests RRT
approval
yes yes
yes
Notify requestor a
product awaits operational need from
FOSC/R
Approval
granted?
FOSC/R determine
d operationa
l need?
RRT provides
explanation of denial
no
no
Requestor ensures plan meets RRT guidelines
RRT or FOSC
provides explanation
of denial
FOSC/R executes plan
& provides report as required
LT 400 Acres of LA Marsh Impacted
Strategy Presidential Directives
National Incident Management
System (NIMS)
National Preparedness
Guidance
Capabilities-Based Planning Tools
(Scenarios, UTL, TCL)
National Preparedness Goal
National Response Plan (NRP)The National The National
Strategy for Strategy for Homeland Homeland SecuritySecurity Homeland Homeland
Security Security Presidential Presidential Directive 7Directive 7
Homeland Security Grant Program
Guidance
Homeland Homeland Security Security
Presidential Presidential Directive 5Directive 5
Common approach to
national incident management:
Prevention
Protection
Response
Recovery
Preparedness
National Initiatives
Homeland Homeland Security Security
Presidential Presidential Directive 8Directive 8
National Infrastructure
Protection Plan (NIPP)
15 National Planning ScenariosScenario 1: Nuclear Detonation – Improvised Nuclear Device
Scenario 2: Biological Attack – Aerosol Anthrax
Scenario 3: Biological Disease Outbreak – Pandemic Influenza
Scenario 4: Biological Attack – Pneumonic Plague
Scenario 5: Chemical Attack – Blister Agent
Scenario 6: Chemical Attack – Toxic Industrial Chemicals
Scenario 7: Chemical Attack – Nerve Agent
Scenario 8: Chemical Attack – Chlorine Tank Explosion
Scenario 9: Natural Disaster – Major Earthquake
Scenario 10: Natural Disaster – Major Hurricane
Scenario 11: Radiological Attack – Radiological Dispersal Devices
Scenario 12: Explosives Attack – Bombing Using Improvised Explosive Devices
Scenario 13: Biological Attack – Food Contamination
Scenario 14: Biological Attack – Foreign Animal Disease
Scenario 15: Cyber Attack
#1 NuclearDetonation
#2 Anthrax #3 Pandemic #4 Plague
#5 Blister #8 Chlorine
#10 Hurricane
#6 Toxic Industrial #7 Nerve Agent
#9 EarthQuake
#15 Cyber
#11 RadiologicalAttack (RDD)
#12 ExplosivesAttack (IED)
#13 Food #14 Animal
15 NATIONAL PLANNING SCENARIOS
Natural Disaster
Chemical Attack
Biological Attack /Disease
Rad/Nuc/ExplosiveAttack
Cyber Attack
Target Capabilities List• 1. Animal Health Emergency Support
• 2. CBRNE Detection
• 3. Citizen Preparedness and Participation
• 4. Citizen Protection: Evacuation and/or In-Place Protection
• 5. Critical Infrastructure Protection
• 6. Critical Resource Logistics and Distribution
• 7. Economic and Community Recovery
• 8. Emergency Operations Center Management
• 9. Emergency Public Information and Warning
• 10. Environmental Health and Vector Control
• 11. Explosive Device Response Operations
• 12. Fatality Management
• 13. Firefighting Operations/Support
• 14. Food and Agriculture Safety and Defense
• 15. Information Collection and Threat Recognition
• 16. Information Sharing and Collaboration
• 17. Intelligence Fusion and Analysis
• 18. Interoperable Communications
19. Isolation and Quarantine
20. Mass Care (Sheltering, Feeding, and Related Services)
21. Mass Prophylaxis
22. Medical Supplies Management and Distribution
23. Medical Surge
24. On-Site Incident Management
25. Planning
26. Public Health Epidemiological Investigation and Laboratory Testing
27. Public Safety and Security Response
28. Restoration of Lifelines
29. Risk Analysis
30. Search and Rescue
31. Structural Damage Assessment and Mitigation
32. Terrorism Investigation and Intervention
33. Triage and Pre-Hospital Treatment
34. Volunteer Management and Donations
35. WMD/Hazardous Materials Response and Decontamination
36. Worker Health and Safety
55
Unified Area CmdFOSC State RP
UCGFCO DCO SCO(JFO) (EOC)
NIC
NCP = Federal Command/Control
STATE EOC
PARISH AND COUNTY EOC
FEMA Administrator
STATE EOC
PARISH AND COUNTY EOC
National Contingency Plan
National Response Framework
Governor Governor
UICHouston, TX
UIC Houma, LA
UIC Mobile, AL
UICMiami, FL
ESF 1-15
ESF 9
EPA COORDUSCG-D8/7USCG-DWH
ESF 10
FEMA COORDFEMA-R4/6USCG-D8/7NPSDOD
NRF = Federal Support to State/Local
Secretary DHS
WHITE HOUSE
EmergencyAnd Disaster Declaration s
56
Barge, Train or Truck?
1 Barge =
100 16 Rail Cars =
60 Trucks
Recommendations
• A web-site and dial-in line as established for DWH event was an invaluable tool to acquire and filter the thousands of ideas coming from the public
• SONS type events require immediate IASG/ARTES establishment to vet high visibility, or response strategies having either a high media, political and/or senate/congressional query associated. Although adequate procedures already exist that document RRT –level approvals of Sub Part-J (NPL) listed chemical countermeasures, an elevated level of feedback to originator is sometimes necessary based on the politics associated with the requestor. FOSC level or NRT/HQ level work-group such as IASG is needed in some cases.
• Work toward consistency in Policies across regions for approval or pre-authorization plans involving alternate response technologies and sub-part J listed products.