May 2010 Volume 4, Issue 1

Inside this issue:

The Guardian A Publication of the APUS Chapter of

the International Emergency Managers Student Association

Toll Free Access Number

1-877-643-6951 Canadian Access Number

1-877-722-6536 International Number

1-302-607-2017

Participant Passcode 21082304#

Message from the President

2

EMAC and Katrina 3-8

Medical CM Assets 9-10

Crises 11-13 Dr. Blanchard 13 Books 15 EPP Organizes 15 Recognition 16 Upcoming Conferences

16

Upcoming Chapter Teleconference Dates:

Date Time

Sat., 15 May 1200 ET Sat., 19 Jun 1200 ET Sat., 17 Jul 1200 ET

Chapter Elects New Officers By Dawn Heyse IAEM-USA at APUS Treasurer The IAEM chapter at APUS held elections for the offices of President, Vice Presi-dent, Secretary and Treasurer, 12-19 April. Running unopposed were Hannah Vick for President, Ryan Carpenter for Vice President, and Jeanette (Jet) Holt for Secretary. Dawn Heyse and Michael Kelley faced off for Treasurer, with Dawn coming out ahead in the final count. The new Executive Committee, lead by Hannah Vick, took office on 1 May. Please join us in congratulating the new officers, as well as thanking the outgoing Executive Committee for their work in the past year!

IAEM Scholarship Deadline Approaching Extract from an email by Dawn M. Shiley IAEM Scholarship Program Director The deadline for application to the IAEM Scholarship Program is May 14, 2010. As of May 6, very few applications have been received. This is a great opportunity to receive funding for your education. The program is available to all full-time students working towards a degree in emergency management, disaster management or a related field. Information on the program is available at www.iaem.com/scholarships. Download the application to review the eligibility requirements and read the submission guidelines and rules. Please remember to have all materials to the IAEM headquarters no later than May 14, 2010. If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me at shiley@iaem.com

Join us for our monthly meet-ing using the numbers/passcode below. Hope to hear you at the next meeting!

CEM®/AEM Prep Now Online Extract from an email by Angela Jackson IAEM CEM Certification Administrator & Program Manager The CEM®/AEM Preparatory Course is now being offered as a webinar. On 12 May 2010, at 1-5pm ET, the full four-hour in-depth course will be offered to emergency man-agement professionals wishing to prepare an application, but unable to attend the course in person. Attendees will have the opportunity during the webinar to ask a sea-soned emergency management professional and current CEM Commissioner specific questions relevant to their applications, just as they would in person. Cost for the webi-nar is $400. Register at: http://www.knowledgefoundation.com/viewevents.php?event_id=221&act=webevt IAEM is also offering the CEM Overview as an on-demand webinar to watch at your convenience. The CEM®/AEM Overview is a one-hour look of the CEM®/AEM applica-tion process and includes brief explanation of the program requirements, application process ands procedures, and completion tips. The CEM Overview is $50. Register at: http://knowledgefoundation.com/viewevents.php?event_id=220&act=webevt

Message from the President

The Guardian Page 2

The Guardian

A quarterly publication of the American Public University

System Chapter of the International Emergency Management Student

Association

Officers

2010-2011

President

Hannah Vick

Vice President

Ryan Carpenter

Secretary

Jeanette Holt

Treasurer

Dawn Heyse

Faculty Advisor

Dr. Micheal Kemp

Program Director

Dr. Christopher Reynolds

The Guardian

Staff

Editor

Dawn Heyse

Contributors

Darren Endris

Judy Whidbee

Michael Kelley

Randy Nelson

By Hannah Vick IAEM-USA at APUS President Our APUS IAEM chapter had a fantastic 2009-2010 year! Your leadership team made it a priority to reinvigorate the chapter and they succeeded, by winning the IAEM “Student Chapter of the Year” in 2009, hosting an impressive Distinguished Speaker Se-ries and offering many opportunities for our members to grow. As we begin the new 2010-2011 APUS IAEM term, we look forward to building on past successes to make the chapter even better. With more than 230 active members, our chapter can offer a wide variety of networking and resource opportunities. We will continue to host the Distinguished Speaker series, offer monthly membership meetings, publish The Guardian newsletter and present new activities to benefit the professional development of our members. So how can you get involved?

We are working with APUS Student Affairs to fully develop the APUS IAEM page at the OrgSync.com website. We plan to discontinue the “classroom” site and move all ac-tivity announcements, discussions and links to OrgSync. All members are encouraged to register at https://orgsync.com/register/communities/american-public-university-system. Registration is quick and painless!

Our Distinguished Speaker Series has been a wonderful addition to the chapter; The last executive team hosted impressive speakers like FEMA Administrator Craig Fugate and Professor Emeritus Thomas Drabek. We plan to continue this program and we need your help! If you would like to be involved in the Distinguished Speaker Series, please e-mail Hannah.M.Vick@gmail.com.

Join us for our monthly membership meetings to learn about upcoming conferences, networking, the Distinguished Speakers Series and opportunities to be more involved in the chapter. Membership meetings take place by teleconference the third Saturday of each month. Be sure to check your e-mail and OrgSync for meeting announcements!

We’ve all heard the adage, “The time to exchange business cards is not at the disaster site.” The APUS IAEM chapter offers you the chance to meet fellow students, share information and build relationships. As our chapter grows, we need your help to create even more opportunities and success, so get involved! We look forward to another great year! -Hannah Meet Your New Executive Team A sincere thank you to the 2009-2010 APUS IAEM Executive Team, Dorian Young, Dawn Heyse, Darren Endris and Jeremy Beck for their outstanding work! The 2010-2011 Executive Team members: Hannah M. Vick, President, is earning her Master’s degree in Emergency and Disaster Management (EDM). She is a reservist for FEMA, working field operations across the country. Ryan Carpenter, CEM, Vice President, just finished his Bachelor’s in EDM and will begin the Master’s program in June. Ryan is the Emergency Manager / CBRNE Specialist for the United States Army Installation Command in Maryland. Jeanette (Jet) Holt, Secretary, has been actively involved in the APUS IAEM chapter for two years. She was also recently elected as the IAEM-USA Student Region Secretary (congratulations, Jet!). S. Dawn Heyse, Treasurer, is pursuing her Bachelors in EDM and served as Vice Presi-dent for the APUS IAEM chapter during the 2009-2010 year. She is also the editor of The Guardian (Thanks, Dawn!).

Page 3 Volume 3, Issue 4

EMAC and Hurricane Katrina By Darren Endris MA EDM Student This paper was originally written and submitted for EDMG503 in February 2009

On the 29 of August 2005 Hurricane Katrina made landfall on the southeastern coast of the state of Louisiana. The catastrophic damage from the storm to the communities and states within the hurricanes path is unparalleled in modern history. Louisiana and Mississippi sustained most of the damage but Texas, Alabama, and Florida were impacted as well. Hurricane Katrina made landfall as a category 3 hurricane that produced a twenty-eight foot storm surge and at its fiercest had tropical force winds extending as far as two hundred and thirty miles from the center. Katrina laid waste to ninety thousand square miles of land. (Congress, 2006) Hurricane Katrina was one of the most costly disasters in U.S. history causing over ninety six billion dollars in property damages and the loss one thousand three hundred and thirty lives. The storm damaged or destroyed over three hundred thousand homes and displaced around seven hundred and seventy thousand persons. (Townsend, 2006) The response and recovery effort for Hurricane Katrina has received a lot of criticism. On the federal level the Office of the President, the United States Congress and the United States Senate all conducted investigation as to what went wrong for this disaster and how to improve on the response and recovery from a catastrophic incident such as Katrina. In 2006 the United States Congress released its report from the House Bipartisan Committee that investigated the prepara-tion and the response to Hurricane Katrina. After an extensive investigation which included testimony from federal, state, and local government officials who were directly involved with Hurricane Katrina the House Committee found there to be an overall failure of all levels of government with planning, responding to, and recovering from the Hurricane. Although these failures were identified in this report and others the report also showed instances of success when the Emergency Management Assistance Compact was used. (Congress, 2006) The Governor of Mississippi, Haley Barbour, said in his testimony to Congress that he was overwhelmed by the support of the American people and that the, ”essential help pro-vided from other states is a testament to the effectiveness of the Emergency Management Assistance Com-pact.” (Barbour, 2005) Additionally Robert Latham the Executive Director of the Mississippi Emergency Management Agency said that the during the preparing for and responding to Hurricane Katrina, “the biggest success stories has been the activation and the utilization of EMAC.” (Latham, 2005) The effective use of EMAC can also be compared by the differences of how quickly and how effectively the Gover-nors of Louisiana and Mississippi accessed the EMAC system and got resources to the affected areas. It can be sug-gested for the after action reports that Mississippi utilized the EMAC system more effectively than Louisiana because the officials of Mississippi were more familiar with the compact. At all levels of Louisiana government there was a lack of fa-miliarity with any mutual assistance systems because the state lacked its own. This was one of the contributing to the states lack of coordination that may have affected the effectiveness of the response and the deployment of EMAC per-sonnel into operations in a timely manner. (Waugh, 2007) In her testimony to Congress about Katrina the then Governor of Louisiana Kathleen Blanco said that she believes that in order to, “get first responders on the ground working quickly, states should negotiate pre-storm first responder compacts called EMAC, these agreements would pre-certify personnel, …. saving valuable search and rescue time.” (Blanco, 2005)

EMAC BACKGROUND Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC) was brought about in 1993 after Hurricane Andrew destroyed much of the area around Miami, Florida. This event had created questions among the members of the Southern Gover-nors Association (SGA) about the federal government’s inability to manage disasters effectively. The governors who were members of the association concluded that the best solution would be for them to develop a state-to-state mutual aid agreement among themselves. This first agreement that they developed was called the Southern Regional Emer-gency Management Compact and was adopted by 17 states, as well as the U.S. Virgin Islands and Puerto Rico. (Bea, 2005) By 1995 the southern governors decided to open the membership to the agreement to any state or territory in the United States that wished to join. Also that year the mutual aid agreement was renamed the Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC) and the SGA decided that the National Emergency Management Association (NEMA) would become the administrator of the new disaster compact. (NEMA(A) 2008) The NEMA is a non-governmental volun-tary membership organization of state emergency management directors and EMAC’s governing body is a subcommit-tee of NEMA. (SEMP, 2006) In 1996 EMAC become Public Law (104-321) and was ratified by the United States Con-gress. (NEMA(A) 2008) Under the United States Constitution the United States Congress has the authority to approve or disapprove any interstate compact such as EMAC. (Bea, 2005) Upon ratification EMAC became the first national disas-ter compact since the Civil Defense Compact of 1950. Today all fifty states and territories in the United States are all part of the EMAC agreement. (NEMA(A) 2008)

Continued on page 4

The Guardian Page 4

EMAC and Hurricane Katrina

EMAC is not the only mutual aid agreement that is available for local and state governments to use. EMAC had ex-perienced significant growth and development following the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. The Department of Homeland Security started to focus on state and local mutual aid agreements as a way of dealing with the national’s emergency response capabilities to all-hazard, man-made, or natural disasters. The DHS developed the National Inci-dent Management System (NIMS) as a blueprint for emergency management operations for all levels of government within the United States. In the NIMS mutual aid is seen as an indispensable tool for the swift coordinated response to emergency incidents. NIMS specifies that a mutual aid agreement should be able to move resources and assets be-tween local jurisdictions and across state lines while addressing the liability and compensation concerns in a manner that is consistent with state law. (NEMA(A) 2008) In 2004 NEMA increased EMAC’s ability to accomplish this by developing a multi-discipline working group, which brought together representatives of state emergency management personnel, state general counsels, and members of national and international first responder and emergency management associations to develop the Model Intrastate Mutual Aid Legislation (2004). This legislation was modeled after EMAC. When the legislation was passed by the individual states EMAC became a formal agreement that addressed the issues specified within NIMS, such as compensation and liability. This set the stage for EMAC to become the standard for effective mu-tual aid relationships that are consistent between all jurisdictions both, in the local and state governments. (NEMA(B) 2008) Before 2004 EMAC member states, during an emergency incident where mutual aid was needed, would mainly re-quest additional emergency management personnel to help support the state and local emergency operations centers management and administration. An example of this is following the 9-11 terrorist attacks the EMAC was activated and 26 emergency management personnel were deployed to supplement the states emergency management efforts. How-ever after 2004 the way states used EMAC changed considerable. (GAO, 2007) This perhaps is because the passing of the Model Intrastate Mutual Aid Legislation provided the states with a broader use for EMAC. (NEMA(B) 2008) An exam-ple of this is in response to the 2004 Florida hurricanes EMAC was able to provide the disaster stricken state with an additional resource of 2,500 National Guard and civilian personnel who were not only deployed to the emergency opera-tions centers but also to the impacted areas. By the 2005 hurricane season the EMAC was able to deploy about 46,500 National Guard and 19,500 state and local civilian responders from 48 states, 2 territories, and the District of Columbia to areas devastated as a result of the Gulf Coast hurricanes. EMAC deployments during 2005 accounted for over half of all out-of-state assistance for that year. (GAO, 2007) EMAC ORGANIZATIONAL STRUCTURE National Emergency Management Association (NEMA) began in 1974 as a way for state directors of emergency ser-vices to meet and exchange information and ideas about emergency management issues that have happened or may threatened their communities. EMAC is the interstate mutual aid agreement that is managed by NEMA. EMAC is man-aged by a subcommittee of the NEMA Response and Recovery Committee. This subcommittee is called the EMAC Op-erations Subcommittee. The EMAC Operations Subcommittee has the responsibility of establishing EMAC policies, in-suring service quality, and providing for the over-all organizational management and planning of EMAC. The subcommit-tee is made-up of representatives from each NEMA member state. (SEMP, 2006) Every state or territory that has passed EMAC legislation and maintains EMAC into that states laws are invited to have that states emergency management di-rectors as a member of the EMAC subcommittee. The subcommittee consists of the subcommittee chair that is selected annually by the NEMA President; the assigned state directors or their designated representative; and a non-voting pri-vate sector liaison that is selected annually by the NEMA Private Sector Committee Chair. (NEMA(C) 2008) The EMAC subcommittee formally meets concurrently with the NEMA annual and mid-year conferences to review and authorize the work accomplished on its behalf by the EMAC Executive Task Force. (SEMP, 2006) The Executive Task Force (ETF) conducts the day-to-day operations and the work of the EMAC subcommittee. (SEMP, 2006) The ETF is comprised of a chair, chair-elect, past chair, ten lead state representative members, three members at large, a legal liaison, and three non-voting NEMA staff members. (NEMA(C) 2008) The EFT chair is elected annually by a quorum of the subcommittee members at the NEMA Annual Conference. (SEMP, 2006) The EFT chair also is the Team Leader of the EMAC National Coordination Group. The National Coordination Group is the operational arm of EMAC and (NEMA(C) 2008) during emergency incidents works to direct EMAC policy and procedures. (FEMA, 2008) The position of chair-elect and past-chair, also chosen annually, are filled by chairmen who have just been elected or a chairman who have previously held the chair position. The functions of these two positions are to provide support for the person holding the chair position. The lead state representative members are selected for a two-year term. These repre-sentatives represent the ten FEMA regions within the United States. Each representative is selected by a consensus of the state emergency management directors within their region. Their responsibilities include being a liaison and to

Continued from page 3

Continued on page 5

Page 5 Volume 3, Issue 4

EMAC and Hurricane Katrina

represent the states in their region in the EMAC EFT. The three members-at-large are appointed by the chair of the EFT for a duration of one year. They include members of the public or private sectors and are to provide guidance on policies and issues that effect EMAC. The EFT legal liaison is also the NEMA Legal Counsel Chair. They provide the EFT with legal opinions and advice about the EMAC. Finally there are the three EFT NEMA staff members. These members in-clude two full-time paid employees, which are the EMCA coordinator and the EMAC Training Coordinator, and the part-time private contractor acting as a NEMA EMAC senior advisor. Their responsibilities to the EFT are to serve as the ad-ministrators of EMAC. (NEMA(C) 2008) Additionally NEMA provides an EMAC Advisory Group. This group is comprised of representatives from several na-tional based organizations who represent the first responder community as-well-as other mutual aid stakeholders. The representatives of the advisory group are invited to join the group by the NEMA and attend EMAC Executive Task Force or EMAC Committee meetings as spectators only. Their function is to better understand EMAC policies and procedures and communicate that information to the organization they represent. (NEMA(C) 2008)

The diagram above details the EMAC Organization. (NEMA(C) 2008)

THE EMAC AGREEMENT There are thirteen articles in the EMAC agreement. All fifty states and the United States territories, through the indi-vidual states legislatures, presently agree to the EMAC agreement and all thirteen articles. These thirteen articles in-clude the purpose and authority, the general implementation, party state responsibilities, limitations, licenses and per-mits, liability, supplementary agreement, compensation, reimbursement, evacuation, implementation, validity, and

Continued from page 4

Continued on page 6

The Guardian Page 6

EMAC and Hurricane Katrina

additional provisions. The explanation given about the articles here are given for informational purposes only and are meant to highlight the most important parts of the EMAC agreement. This citation includes the articles below. (NEMA(B) 2008) Article I – Purpose and Authority. This article states that the purpose of the EMAC is to provide mutual assistance between states for the managing of any emergency or disasters for which the governor of the affected state has declared a state of emergency. Also to facilitate an effective response under the EMAC the article specifies that the states will provide a mutual cooperation in emergency related exercises, testing, and training in any aspect of the giving or the re-ceiving of aid by party states. Article II – General Implementation. This article states that under the agreement each state recognizes that emergen-cies transcend political and jurisdictional boundaries and that an intergovernmental coordination is essential to the man-aging of emergencies under the EMAC. Therefore it is the responsibility of a designated state official of each participat-ing state to continually formulate the appropriate mutual plans and procedures necessary to implement the EMAC within their state. Article III – Party State Responsibilities. This article details the responsibilities of each individual state in order for EMAC to be facilitated properly. The first responsibility is the party states are to conduct planning. This planning in-cludes performing a state hazards analysis and the developing of plans for the use of interstate management of potential emergencies and then developing procedures to fill in any identified gaps. Planning for the warning of potential emergen-cies to adjacent communities and across state borders. Planning for the protection to assure uninterrupted community services. Planning the procedures for the interstate loan and delivery of personnel and material resources to requesting states and planning for any manipulation of the states laws that will restrict these planning requirements. The second responsibility of the party state is to designate an EMAC Authorized Representative. All request for assistance by a party state will be given by that states EMAC Authorized Representative and all assistance given from a party state will be by contacting that party state’s EMAC Authorized Representative. These request may be verbal or in writing were as if the request is verbal it is to be confirmed in writing within thirty days. The request is to include the description of the type of emergency service that is needed, the amount of personnel and other resources needed, and the specific place and time these resources are to be staged. Article IV – Limitations. This article states that under the agreement the assisting states shall provide any resource necessary to provide aid to a requesting state covered by the EMAC. However it is understood that the assisting state may withhold resources necessary to provide reasonable protection within their own borders. Additionally during deploy-ment of the assisting states resources to another state the resources of the assisting state will fall under the operational control of the requesting state. The assisting state resources will remain under the command and control of their regular leadership but the organizational units will come under the operational control of the emergency services authorities of the requesting state. Article V – Licenses and Permits. This article states that under the agreement that persons who hold a license, per-mit, or certificate issued by an assisting state shall be permitted to perform those duties requiring a license, permit, or certificate within the requesting state during the time they are deployed within the borders of the requesting state. This provision is limited to the discretion of the requesting states Governor. Article VI – Liability. This article states that under the agreement that the officials and employees of the assisting state who are deployed to the requesting state shall be considered agents of the requesting state and receive the same con-siderations when dealing with tort liability and immunity processes that are given the requesting states officers and em-ployees. Article VII – Supplementary Agreements. This article states that under the agreement it is understood that this agree-ment does not preclude any state from entering into a supplementary agreement with any other state. Article VIII – Compensation. This article states that under the agreement that should an employee and officer of an assisting state die or become injured then each party state shall provide payments of compensation to injured members and death benefits to the representative’s deceased members. Article IX – Reimbursement. This article states that under the agreement the assisting state shall be reimbursed by the requesting state for any loss or damage to or any expenses incurred during the operation of any equipment or ser-vices provided during the period that the requesting state use these services and equipment. Article X – Evacuation. This article states that under the agreement plans should made for the evacuation of the civil-ian population and that a preexisting agreement should be worked out between the party states and jurisdictions for the handling of evacuees. Article XI – Implementation. This article states that under the agreement that the compact will be operative immedi-ately upon its enactment into law of any two party states. Once a state has approved the compact and supplemental

Continued from page 5

Continued on page 7

Page 7 Volume 3, Issue 4

EMAC and Hurricane Katrina

agreements they are required to distribute copies of that states agreements to other party states, the Federal Emergency Management agency, and any other appropriate agencies of the United States Government. The article also provide a provision for any state wishing to withdraw from the compact by the governor giving notice to other compact states of their withdrawal and then enacting a statute to repeal the agreement. Article XII – Validity. This article states that under the agreement that if any part of this compact is found to be uncon-stitutional or invalid under law then the unaffected parts of the compact shall continue to remain valid. Article XIII – Additional Provisions. This article states that under the agreement that the EMAC does not authorize the use of the National Guard of any state outside of that state’s borders in any emergency for which the President of the United States has not authorized. THE EMAC PROCESS The EMAC process starts with the states emergency planning and addressing the states responsibilities under article three of the compact agreement. The party state must incorporate the EMAC into its emergency management prepared-ness planning and setup the emergency management organizational structure that will provide a constant state of readi-ness to implement EMAC within the party state. In providing this EMAC organizational structure the state should include into their emergency management structure the positions of EMAC Authorized Representative(s) (who is usually the state’s Emergency Management Director), EMAC Designated Contacts, EMAC Lead State Representatives, and EMAC A-Teams. (NEMA(B) 2008)

The diagram above details the EMAC Activation Process. (NEMA(B) 2008).

Activation of the EMAC process begins when the requesting state’s Governor declares a state of emergency within the requesting state. (NEMA(B) 2008) The requesting and deploying is made at the discretion of the requesting state. This allows the requesting state the ability to pick the resources they need and for the price they are willing to pay. (FEMA, 2008) When a declaration has been declared in a state with an emergency need then that requesting state can open an event in the EMAC Operations System through that states emergency operations center. The requesting state will discuss with the EMAC National Coordination Group to decide what level of operation will EMAC be activated under and determine if A-Teams from other states will be needed to assist in the acquisitions of resources. (NEMA(B) 2008) The three levels of EMAC operation are mirrored after most state and federal operation levels that have worked effec-tively within NIMS. (FEMA, 2008) Once the level of activation has been determined the EMAC Authorized Representa-tive for the requesting state will determine the best source to find the needed resources. When an EMAC resource is requested the request is given to the EMAC A-Team (Advance-Team). The A-Team then takes the request directly to the potential Assisting state emergency management agencies or the request is broadcast using the EMAC Operations Sys-tem. Upon receiving the request from a requesting state an assisting state will use its pre-established EMAC procedures and contact the resource owner to determine if they have the resource needed to complete the request. If the resource of the assisting state matches the needed resource of the requesting state then the assisting state will then notify the requesting state about the resource. If the requesting state is interested in the assisting states resource then both assist-ing and requesting states will fill out the appropriate sections of the EMAC Request Form A (REQ-A). Then the

Continued from page 6

Continued on page 8

The Guardian Page 8

EMAC and Hurricane Katrina

requesting and the assisting states will negotiate for the resource through their emergency management agencies. After an agreement is made then the requesting state will submit the signed section 3 of the REQ-A and send it to the assist-ing state who then will forward the REQ-A to the resource owner authorizing the resources to be deployed. The resource is then deployed to the requesting state and arrives at the place and time as was identified in the REQ-A form. During deployment of an assisting state resource the mission for its use may change and the before deployment agreement will need to amended. This is done by the assisting state and the requesting state renegotiating the previous REQ-A agree-ment. At the completion of the mission the resource is returned to the assisting state and to its owner. Additionally the requesting state is responsible for the reimbursement of all expenses incurred during the resources deployment. (NEMA(B) 2008) If the President of the United States declares a disaster within the requesting state, then that state can work with FEMA to seek federal financial assistance to cover costs associated with emergency response efforts under EMAC. (GAO, 2007) BIBLIOGRAPHY Barbour, H. (2005). Testimony of Governor Haley Barbour, State of Mississippi. Before the House Select Bipartisan

Committee to Investigate the Preparation and Response to Hurricane Katrina. Washington, D.C. December 7, 2005 Bea, Keith. (2005). Emergency Management Assistance Compact (EMAC): An Overview. Congressional Research Ser-

vice. Library of Congress. Washington, D.C. Retrieved Feb. 10, 2009 from http://digital.library.unt.edu/govdocs/permalink/meta-crs-7952:1

Blanco, K. (2005). Testimony of Governor Kathleen Blanco, State of Louisiana. Before the House Select Bipartisan Com-

mittee to Investigate the Preparation and Response to Hurricane Katrina. Washington, D.C. December 14, 2005 Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) (2008). Emergency Management Assistance Compact. FEMA. Wash-

ington, D.C. Retrieved Feb. 17, 2009 from http://www.fema.gov/pdf/emergency/nrf/EMACoverviewForNRF.pdf Latham, R. (2005). Testimony of Executive Director Robert Latham, Mississippi Emergency Management Agency, State

of Mississippi. Before the House Select Bipartisan Committee to Investigate the Preparation and Response to Hurricane Katrina. Washington, D.C. December 7, 2005 National Emergency Management Association (NEMA(A) (2008). Introduction to EMAC. NEMA. Lexington, KY. Retrieved Feb. 2, 2009 from http://emacweb.org/?1592 National Emergency Management Association (NEMA(B) (2008). Understanding EMAC. NEMA. Lexington, KY. Retrieved Feb. 3, 2009 from http://emacweb.org/?1593 National Emergency Management Association (NEMA(C) (2008). EMAC Organization and Governance Structure.

NEMA. Lexington, KY. Retrieved Feb. 10, 2009 from http://emacweb.org/?1595 Suburban Emergency Management Project (SEMP) (2006). EMAC Governance and Operations: Curiously Convoluted,

Yet Do They Work? SEMP Inc. Retrieved Feb. 18, 2009 from http://www.semp.us/publications/biot_reader.php?BiotID=354

Townsend, F.F. (2006). The Federal Response to Hurricane Katrina: Lessons Learned. U.S. Government Printing Office.

Washington, D.C. United States Congress (2006). Hurricane Katrina: A Nation Still Unprepared. U.S. Government Printing Office. Washington, D.C. Retrieved Feb. 19, 2009 from http://www.gpoaccess.gov/serialset/creports/katrinanation.html United States Government Accountability Office (GAO). (2007). Emergency Management Assistance Compact: Enhanc-

ing EMAC’s Collaborative and Administrative Capacity Should Improve National Disaster Response. Report to the Committee on Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs, U.S. Senate. GAO-07-854. Washington, D.C.

Waugh, W. (2007). EMAC, Katrina, and the Governors of Louisiana and Mississippi. Public Administration Review. December 2007 Issue.

Continued from page 7

Page 9 Volume 3, Issue 4

Medical Consequence Management Assets By Michael J. Kelley, Jr., AEM, ALEM MA EDM Student This paper was originally written and submitted for PBHE413 in August 2009 In March of 1995, the Japanese terrorist cult Aum Shinrikyo released the nerve agent Sarin into the Tokyo subway system, killing 12 and injuring thousands (Miller, Engelberg, & Broad, 2002). This attack disproved the theory that terror-ists would never be able to obtain and use Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD). Nations now had to deal not only with the danger of the agent itself, be it chemical, biological or nuclear, but also the civilian casualties from such an event. It was understood that standard medical facilities and responders were not prepared to handle the results of a CBRNE (Chemical, Biological, Radiological, Nuclear, and high Explosive) incident. Special teams with specific medical training would be needed to face this new threat as we moved towards the 21st century and a new era of both warfare and na-tional defense. The first of these specialized teams was the Marine Corps Chemical Biological Incident Response Force (CBIRF), the brainchild of Marine General Charles Krulak. Gen Krulak saw that during the 1995 Tokyo attacks there were no U.S. as-sets capable of helping the Japanese (Miller, Engelberg, & Broad, 2002). Upon becoming Commandant of the Marine Corps, he created the CBIRF to give the U.S. a specialized, self contained team that could deploy anywhere to respond to a CBRNE incident. The medical element of CBIRF is designed to treat the casualties of a CBRNE incident in order to administer anti-dotes, stabilize patients, and evacuate them to surrounding medical facilities. The Sailors in this unit consist of 17 Corps-man, and 6 officers in various medical fields. They all receive advance training from the US Army Medical Management of Chemical Casualties course, the Contaminated Casualty Decon course, and other CBRNE related courses (GlobalSecurity.Org, 2005). CBIRF enables victims to be rescued and treated properly by experts trained in CBRNE medicine before being handed off to a local medical facility for care, thereby easing the pressure on the local facilities, and allowing the victims to receive the best care possible. In 1998, the U.S. Army created their version of a CBRNE response force. Originally called RAID teams, and subse-quently renamed Weapons of Mass Destruction Civil Support Teams (WMD-CST), these units would be the first joint Army/Air National Guard assets to be on duty full time (United States Army, 2007). The 55 teams that were created, one per state and territory and two in California, are available to state Governors in the event of a CBRNE incident to advise the Incident Commander on recommended courses of action and serve as subject matter experts (Morgan, 2006). The teams are small, only twenty-two people, and the medical section even smaller, consisting of a Medical NCO, a CBRNE Science Officer, a Medical Operations Officer, and a Physician’s Assistant. The medical section is designed to take care of the CST members, and is not equipped or capable of providing care to civilian casualties. The Army designed the CST as just the first level in a three tiered response to a CBRNE incident. If the event is large enough, the Army will deploy the CBRNE Enhanced Response Force Package (CERFP) as the second tier. There are currently twelve CERFP located across the country, with a minimum of one Package per FEMA region (US National Guard , 2007). The CERFP is comprised of 4 sections: a Search and Extraction team, a Decon team, a Command and Control team and a Medical team. The CERFP consists of between 180-200 members comprised of Army and Air Na-tional Guardsman. The medical element is based on an Army medical company and an Air Force Medical Group detach-ment. They are able to treat large numbers of victims, and provide life saving medical attention before transferring the patient to a local medical facility for continued care. The CERFP medical element often works alongside the Disaster Medical Assistance Teams (DMAT), in order to provide the best care possible and alleviate the burden on local respond-ers and medical facilities. They also have aero medical evacuation assets available as part of the deployment package. In 2008, the National Guard certified the top tier of the response capability. The new CBRNE Consequence Manage-ment Response Force consists of over 4700 troops from all branches of service. The US Northern Command would “gain” various units from around the Department of Defense if an incident occurred, and could have them on-scene in forty eight hours or less (Beilling, Patti, US Army North Public Affairs Office, 2008). The CCMRF is organized into three Task Forces- Operations, Medical and Aviation. It also features a Technical Sup-port section, consisting of such units as CBIRF, and the Air Force Radiation Assessment Team. The Medical Task Force contains assets not normally contained in a CBRNE response unit, including an epidemiology section and blood storage and distribution. When activated, the CCMRF would be under the command of Joint Task Force – Civil Support. In addition to federal assets, some states have created their own CBRNE response teams. In South Carolina, the Emergency Management Division created the COBRA (Chemical, Ordnance, Biological and Radiological) Team to aug-ment local Hazmat response and serve as technical experts. The COBRA teams consist of four Advanced teams sta-tioned in the four largest cities in the state, and then twelve Basic teams located in cities with a population of over 100,000 (South Carolina Emergency Managment Division, 2008).

Continued on page 10

The Guardian Page 10

Medical Consequence Management Assets

The Basic teams have a Command element, an Operations element, and a Logistics element, requiring a minimum of twenty seven people. The Operations element is made up of Hazmat, EMS, and Law Enforcement personnel that are “gained” by the team when activated. The EMS section is staffed by six Paramedics, and an EMS Operations Supervi-sor. They are under the guidance of a licensed Physician who serves as the team’s medical director. The Advanced team, in addition to the elements contained in the Basic team, also adds an Explosive Ordnance Dis-posal capability. The Advanced team consists of over 39 personnel, with the EMS element staffed by 14 Paramedics and an EMS Supervisor. Admission to the team is by application, and requires extensive training. In addition to the usual medical training, all COBRA medics must have completed the Army Medical Management of Chemical/Biological Casualties course, EMS Operations and Planning for WMD Incidents, and are recommended to take the National Fire Academy Hazmat Ad-vanced Life Support course. To ensure that members are able to function in a CBRNE environment, all are required to undergo live nerve agent training at the Center for Domestic Preparedness in Anniston, Alabama. In the event of an activation, the COBRA team would deploy to the event area with their prepackaged, color coded equipment cases (blue for EMS, black for decon, etc.) and advise the Incident Commander, provide advanced medical care and victim decon, and serve as a liaison with the Civil Support Team upon its arrival. The capability that the United States now possesses with these specialized teams will allow us to not only save lives, but ensure better patient care by ensuring that the proper precautions are taken when working in a CBRNE environment. The supplies and tools used by these teams are expensive and task specific, but they are valuable assets that we can-not afford to be without. The safety of our communities, and ultimately our nation, depend on it.

References 43rd WMD-CST. (2009, August 5). 43rd WMD-CST. 43rd WMD-CST Mission. Columbia, SC, USA: 43rd WMD. Beilling, Patti, US Army North Public Affairs Office. (2008, September 19). CCMRF. Retrieved August 10, 2009, from US

Northern Command: http://www.northcom.mil/news/2008/091908_a.html GlobalSecurity.Org. (2005, 04 26). Chemical Biological Incident Response Force (CBIRF). Retrieved July 15, 2009, from

Global Security.org: http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/agency/usmc/cbirf.htm Miller, J., Engelberg, S., & Broad, W. (2002). Germs: Biological Weapons and America’s Secret War. New York: Simon

and Schuster. Morgan, T. L. (2006, April 6). Virginia Department of Military Affairs Assets. Retrieved August 15, 2009, from Virginia

Department of Emergency Managment: http://www.vdem.virginia.gov/newsroom/events/pdf/Morgan_DMA_VEMA_Brief.pdf

South Carolina Emergency Managment Division. (2008). COBRA Response Team Plan and Standard Operating Guide.

Columbia: SCEMD. U.S. Army National Guard Bureau. (2007). CBRNE Enhanced Response Force Package. Washington: U.S. Army Na-

tional Guard Bureau. United States Army. (2007). FM 3-11.22 Weapons of Mass Destruction - Civil Support Team Operations. Washington:

U.S. Army. US National Guard. (2007, May 21). CERFP Fact Sheet. Retrieved July 25, 2009, from National Guard - Homeland De-

fense: http://www.ngb.ngb.army.mil/features/HomelandDefense/cerfp/factsheet.html

Continued from page 9

Join the APUS IAEM Chapter on OrgSync!

http://www.orgsync.com/

Page 11 Volume 3, Issue 4

Crises: Causes, Avoidance and Tools By Judy Whidbee MA EDM Student This paper was originally written and submitted for EDMG560 in November 2008 There are crises that affect both small and large numbers of people and organizations and the cause or magnitude of any crisis can potentially devastate or destroy an organization, if appropriate measures are not taken to avoid or lessen the impact of a crisis. The causes of crises may be natural, manmade, or a financial event and affect hundreds if not thousands of people. Some of the crises are avoidable while others are inevitable. Often times there are warning signs or prodromes that are pre-cursors to the crisis; however; there are crises that occur with little or no warning at all. The ability to recognize the potential causes of crises and know the actions to take to avoid or lessen the crises through the utilization of the tools available for effective crisis management is essential for any leader. Crises occur almost daily around the world, the most common caused by natural disasters, i.e. earthquakes, hurri-canes, tornados, wildfires, tsunamis, etc. Not all natural disasters present themselves with a warning however, history does provide details of the different types of disasters that have occurred in the various regions. On the other hand, manmade disasters or crisis are ones that individuals can physically see, i.e. explosions or release of hazardous materi-als at a plant or a train derailment, aircraft crash, etc. Other manmade disasters not physically seen include product re-call, employee strike or general disagreement within the organization. Prepared managers know the various hazards associated with their line of business and the impact following a natural disaster, system failure in their facility, product recall or transportation accident and have taken measures to avoid or lessen an incident involving their company or or-ganization. Any crisis, natural or manmade, can have a profound effect on the organization and the effective leader is ever mindful of the prodromes signally the impending crisis and had developed a plan to reduce or avoid a crisis. Crises are not solely the result of natural and manmade physical actions. Many are the result of financial difficulties, i.e. financial failure, improper financial management or hostile takeover attempts. Financial crisis can be the most dan-gerous crises for any business occurring without warning if the management does not monitor the financial reports care-fully. A subtle or blatant hostile takeover attempt can produce more havoc in the organization than a misbalanced finan-cial sheet. Many times the difficulties result in either bankruptcy or a successful hostile takeover however the actions of the leaders can either exacerbate the financial crisis or lessen or avoid the impact. The life of most crises can be separated into four distinct stages, the prodromal, acute, chronic, and resolution stages. (Fink, 2002, p. 20-27) The prodromal stage, also known as the pre-crisis stage, is the period when the pro-dromes appear. It is during this time that the effective leader recognizes the prodromes and takes actions to prevent a crisis from escalating. While it can be difficult to recognize the prodromes, especially when the events are subtle in na-ture, the effective leader is cognizant of any warning signs that indicate a crisis could evolve. If the leader takes no ac-tion to ward off the prodromes, the situation will worsen and enter into the acute stage, a time in which there will be no return to normalcy. Failure by leaders to take action during either the prodromal or the acute stages will only exasperate the situation and lead the crisis into the next stage, the chronic stage. The chronic stage, a period when the clean-up process begins, potentially lasting for a few hours, days, weeks or even years, is generally the most time consuming for leaders. However, through the determination of leadership, an or-ganization can progress quickly through the chronic stage and into the resolution stage, a period when everything re-turns to normalcy, with the scars to prove their survival. It is during this time that the self-analysis and healing processes take place. Even though the crisis has continued through the various stages, the effective leader recognizes the events that lead up to the crisis and takes measures to ward off any future crises. The effective leader is the one who focuses on eliminating the acute and chronic stages all together, and takes the necessary action to avoid entering the stages at all. The ultimate goal is being able to proceed directly from the prodro-mal stage when the warning signs initially appear and proceed directly into the resolution stage correcting the areas where the prodromes appeared in the first place. If the situation progresses through the acute and chronic stages and into the resolution stage, the next process would be to learn from the crisis and take action to ensure the crisis did not occur again. An effective tool that managers can use is to conduct an analysis of the organization by developing worst-case sce-narios and answering five questions. Each answer is assigned a numerical value ranging from 0-10 (0 being the lowest). By subjectively answering the questions, leadership has the ability to identify what could go wrong, and provide an esti-mation of the ramifications and costs associated with a crisis if little or no action is taken. The questions to ask with this analysis are: 1) If the crisis has the potential to escalate in intensity, how intense might it get and how quickly will it es-calate? 2) Who will be watching for a crisis, i.e. the media or government regulatory agency and to what extent? 3) To what extent will the crisis interfere with the operations of the business? 4) Who are the potential victims of the crisis? 5) To what extent will the organization’s bottom line be damaged? (Fink, 2002, p. 36-42) Continued on page 12

The Guardian Page 12

Crises: Causes, Avoidance and Tools

A numerical value is obtained for each answer and the sum of the five questions are divided by five resulting in a quantitative figure known as Critical Impact Value (CIV). The CIV is plotted on a vertical scale of 0-10, with the higher the number the higher the probability for a crisis occurring (Fink, 2002, p. 41-42). The proactive leaders use this infor-mation and determine the danger signs are that are causing the CIV to be so high and take measures to “eliminate or circumvent the danger” (Fink, 2002, p. 42). By utilizing this tool, leaders are able to forecast of the impact of a potential crisis and obtain a more analytical response to the question of what is the worst thing that could happen. An organization does not have to use the CIV to determine what can go wrong. Many times the history of the organi-zation, the geography of the region, or type of industry provides insight to the various types of crises that can occur. Not all crises are avoidable however; the effective leader is prepared to manage those that do transpire. The important thing for any leader to realize is the need to take action and develop a crisis action plan for the organization based on the po-tentials and historical facts prior to any crisis even occurring. Lessons Learned and After Action Reports (AAR) are valu-able tools, instrumental to any leader by providing details of previous crisis and actions taken by those who previously faced the very same challenges. By developing an effective crisis action plan based on past history or lessons learned from others with the internal and external sources integrated into the plan an organization is able to utilize the various entities and vertically integrate actions within the company and horizontally with the community’s emergency responders, supplies and customers. (Joy LePree, 2007) Once the plans are written, scenarios will provide realistic practices of the proposed actions outlined in the plan. Mock disaster exercises not only to provide individuals with a means to practice their required actions; it also enables the identification of areas that require attention or changes needed in the plan itself. By taking the time to practice the plans through drills and exercises, the business or organization will be one-step ahead of the crisis if one occurs. Not only is it important to have a crisis action plan, it is also important to keep the communication channels open and not operate within a vacuum whenever a crisis does erupt. The media has the ability to reach millions of people and if used effectively can provide a means of relaying critical information to the public. Hazardous material releases and product recalls are just two examples of crises in which the media can be used effectively to notify the public of a dan-gerous situation. Even though the media can reach a multitude of people and are a definite asset when there is a need to alert the public, the media is not the best avenue to use when relaying information to employees, especially if the news pertains to financial difficulties or takeover attempts. The employees need to hear the information from one of their own, not an outside source which typically does not have the compassion that the leader(s) of the organization will have toward their employees. Integrity combined with teamwork are instrumental not only for effective leadership but for effective crisis manage-ment as well. Aligning with a team of experts, leaders can develop a strategic plan outlining the necessary actions for most crises. The effective leader takes responsibility for the situation, does not place blame on others, addresses the media and the public and making an effort to explain the situation and the actions that the company will be taking to eliminate the crisis. Even though it may be beneficial for an organization to employ a spokesperson to relay information to the public, the CEO should be standing beside the spokesperson. This action portrays the impression that the leader-ship really does care about what is happening and is not embarrassed to come out into public. An effective leader is one who has an understanding of the organization and not only recognizes the causes of crises, but takes action to divert or lessen any impending crisis. No matter how hard one tries or how many measures are taken to prevent a crisis, eventually they will face one. No one is exempt, not even the efficient organization or effective leader. The effective leader is the one who takes the organization through the recovery process, re-building it to a more efficient operation, learning from the crisis and taking measures to prevent or lessen any future crisis. Regardless of the type of crisis, teamwork is essential for avoiding, lessening or resolving any crisis. Everyone must work together in order to combat the situation and eliminate the crisis or take measures to reduce the impact. The actions of the leaders will affect not only the leaders themselves, but also the employees and the public will realize the effects as well. The ulti-mate goal of any leader is to be ready whenever a crisis occurs, regardless of the source or cause. Bibliography

Augustine, N. R. (2000). Managing the Crisis You Tried to Prevent. In Harvard Business Review on Crisis Management

(pp. 1-31). Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing. Brenneman, G. (2000). Right Away and All at One: How We Save Continental. In Harvard Business Review on Crisis

Management (pp. 87-118). Boston: Harvard Business School Publishing.

Continued from page 11

Continued on page 13

Page 13 Volume 3, Issue 4

Crises: Causes, Avoidance and Tools

Darren Briggs (2008). In Tough Times, Help your CEO to Inspire Confidence. Strategic Communication Manage-ment, 12(3), 13. Retrieved November 23, 2008, from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document ID: 1468578861).

Dominiak, M. (2008, Oct 6). Manage the Crisis Before It Occurs. Retrieved Nov 23, 2008, from TelevisionWeek: http://

proquest.umi.com.ezproxy.apus.edu/pqdweb?did=1582670621&sid=4&Fmt=3&clientId=62546&RQT=309&VName=PQD

Fink, S. (2002). Crisis Management, Planning for the Inevitable. Lincoln: iUniverse, Inc. Joy LePree (2007). Will you be Ready when Disaster Strikes? Chemical Engineering, 114(10), 23-24,26,28,30. Re-

trieved November 23, 2008, from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document ID: 1403806521). Noel Tichy, Warren Bennis. (2008, May). Crisis Leadership. Leadership Excellence, 25(5), 3-4. Retrieved November 23,

2008, from ABI/INFORM Global database. (Document ID: 1481965951).

Continued from page 12

By Randy Nelson Dr. B. Wayne Blanchard is one of few individuals that can claim as much credit for the development of a profession as Dr. Blanchard can for the development of professional emergency management. Dr. Blanchard, a career public servant, is the director of the Higher Education Project within the Federal Emergency Management Agency's Emer-gency Management Institute in Emmitsburg, Maryland. Dr. Blanchard received a bache-lor's degree in political science from the University of North Caroline in Charlotte in 1974. From there he went to the University of Virginia and was awarded a master's degree in International Affairs in 1976 and a Ph.D. in Government and Foreign Affairs in 1980. He began working at FEMA in May 1980. Dr. Blanchard has been at FEMA throughout most of the agency's existence. He has served across several organizational units at FEMA, including the National Preparedness Directorate; the State and Local Programs Support Directorate; and the Office of Emergency and Public Information, the Preparedness, Training and Exercises Directorate. Dr. Blanchard has been assigned to FEMA's Emergency Management Institute since 1994. In recent years, Dr. Blanchard has taken the lead role within FEMA to promote a professional model of emergency management. As a part of this process, Dr. Blanchard and the Emergency Management Institute have promoted the startup of dozens of college undergraduate and graduate programs in emergency management and homeland security. Further, they have devel-oped model emergency management curricula and have shaped the core educational and training requirements for pro-fessionals in the field. Dr. Blanchard has also been instrumental in encouraging academic research through grant money so that a core body of knowledge for the profession of emergency management is developed - a process well under way today. Dr. Blanchard has actively promoted the certified emergency manager (CEM) program and has contributed to the development of emergency management's primary professional association - the International Association of Emergency Mangers. Dr. Blanchard himself received CEM certification in 1993. Dr. Blanchard has received several awards and much recognition for his federal service and service to the profession, including the FEMA Director’s Meritorious Service Award. He has participated in relief efforts of several disasters, including Hurricane Andrew in 1992, the Midwest Floods of 1993, and the Northridge earthquake in 1994” (Bumgarner). References Bumgarner, J.B. (2008.) Emergency management: a reference handbook. ABC-CLIO: Santa Barbara, California.

MOD Guest Speaker Profile: Dr. B. Wayne Blanchard

The Guardian Page 14

Page 15 Volume 3, Issue 4

Curse of the Narrows, by Laura M. Mac Donald. Walker & Company, 2005. 356p. From back cover: Set against the vivid backdrop of World War I, Curse of the Narrows chronicles one of the most dramatic events in North American history: the catastrophic explosion that shattered Halifax. It is filled with unforgettable human stories: Charles Duggan, who was thrown to the seabed, stripped of his clothes, and left stranded on the opposite shore by the tsunami; Duggan’s nine-year-old niece, Helena, who pulled her mother and sib-lings out of the rubble and led them to safety; Dr. George Cox, an eye surgeon who operated for more than three straight days; pioneering surgeon W. E. Ladd, whose experiences treating children in Halifax would lead to the first pediatric surgery ward in North America; the Boston relief train which literally dug its way

through the snowdrifts to bring desperately needed supplies, doctors, and relief workers; and the Boston Christmas Tree, to this day given by the citizens of Halifax in remembrance of its sister city’s heroic efforts.

Utilizing primary sources, including the files of the explosion’s official historian plus medical and social work files—many of which have not been read since 1918—Laura M. Mac Donald has written the definitive narrative history of this early twentieth-century drama and the untold story of America’s first emergency response unit.

Books of Interest

The Tri-State Tornado: The Story of America’s Greatest Tornado Disaster, by Peter S. Felknor. iUni-verse, Inc., 2004. 119p. From back cover: The Tri-State Tornado is a gripping account of the worst tornado disaster in American history. Claiming 689 lives during a three-hour rampage across Missouri, Illinois, and Indiana on March 18, 1925, the storm had one of the longest uninterrupted paths (219 miles) and one of the widest (up to one mile) of any recorded tornado. Its continuous energy was so extreme that it completely obliterated several small towns in its path. Although the fatality count was nearly that of the 1906 San Fran-cisco earthquake, with the exception of meteorologists and residents of the affected area, few had ever heard of this catastrophe until this book’s initial release in 1992.

The Tri-State Tornado reconstructs the tragedy, using vivid eyewitness accounts of fourteen survivors who lived along the tornado’s path from the Missouri Ozarks to southwestern Indiana. The clarity with which they recall that day in their lives over sixty years earlier will give readers the unsettling feeling that the tornado struck days, not decades, ago.

EPP Establishes APUS Chapter By Michael J. Kelley, Jr., AEM, ALEM MA EDM Student Epsilon Pi Phi, the Emergency Management and Homeland Security Honor Society was granted provisional status by American Public University System on February 24, 2010. The Honor Society, which recently completed its Spring membership drive, has started strong with over 80 students and Alumni being accepted into the organization. The mission of Epsilon Pi Phi is to “strive for the reward, advancement and recognition of disas-ter/emergency management/homeland security as a discipline and profession and to encourage a high standard of excellence in these related fields of practice and study”. This new student organi-zation will allow students to receive the recognition they deserve for their academic achievement, while continuing to contribute to the field. Epsilon Pi Phi was created by the Foundation for Higher Education Accreditation, which is the accrediting body for Emergency Management and Homeland Security Studies programs. They worked with the FEMA Higher Education to create a set of standards to ensure quality academic instruction and standards in the field. Epsilon Pi Phi is looking forward to working hand in hand with the IAEM Student Chapter to further the study and practice of emergency management, and to recognize those students who excel academically. Additionally Epsilon Pi Phi has two award levels, Silver and Gold, which helps to not only build a more well rounded emergency management student, but are designed to help them successfully achieve the Certified Emergency Manager credential. The Officers of the APUS Chapter, along with our advisors Dr. Chris Reynolds and Dr. Mike Kemp, wish to congratu-late the new members on their achievement, and encourage other students to pursue membership in the honor society. We are looking forward to a great first year. Interested in learning more? The Epsilon Pi Phi chapter at APUS may be contacted at apus.epp@gmail.com

The Guardian Page 16

• May 11-13, 2010, 18th Annual Voluntary Organizations Active in Disaster Conference, Lake Buena Vista, FL http://www.nvoad.org/ • May 16-19, 2010, Eighth UCLA Conference on Public Health and Disasters, Torrance, CA http://www.cphd.ucla.edu/ • May 23-28, 2010, 24th Annual Governor’s Hurricane Conference, Fort Lauderdale, FL http://www.flghc.org/ • May 26, 2010, 2010 Coastal Resilience Symposium, Houston, TX http://www.rpts.tamu.edu/CoastalResilience/index.html • June 6-9, 2010, World Conference on Disaster Management, Toronto, Canada http://www.wcdm.org/ • June 7-10, 2010, 13th Annual Emergency Management Higher Education Conference, Emmitsburg, MD http://training.fema.gov/EMIWeb/edu/educonference10.asp • June 19-22, 2010, International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators, St. Louis, MO http://www.iaclea.org/visitors/events/Conference/index.cfm • June 21-24, 2010, National UASI Conference, New Orleans, LA http://www.urbanareas.org/con/index.php • June 29-July 1, 2010, 2010 International Climate Change Adaptation Conference, Gold Coast, Australia http://www.nccarf.edu.au/conference2010/ • July 10–13, 2010, 2010 ESRI Homeland Security GIS Summit, San Diego, CA http://www.esri.com/events/homeland/index.html • August 23-25, 2010, FEMA - 4th Annual HAZUS Conference , Indianapolis, IN http://www.regonline.com/Checkin.asp?EventId=776344 • October 17-21, 2010, National Emergency Management Association 2010 Annual Conference, Little Rock, AR http://www.nemaweb.org/default.aspx?ID=3193 • October 30-November 4, 2010, IAEM 58th Annual Conference & EMEX 2010, San Antonio, TX http://www.iaem.com/events/annual/intro.htm

Upcoming Conferences

Members Recognized for their Contributions By Dawn Heyse IAEM-USA at APUS Treasurer The outgoing 2009-2010 Executive Committee recently distributed Certificates of Appreciation to several chapter members who provided outstanding support to the chapter and its initiatives during the past year. Dr. Chris Reynolds and Dr. Mike Kemp, chapter advisors, were thanked for their support and advocacy throughout the past year, as well as previous years. Chapter members Tracy Hughes, Judy Whidbee and Randy Nelson, who com-posed biographies for the first group of speakers in the Masters of Disaster Distinguished Guest Speaker Series, re-ceived certificates thanking them for their work. Finally, member Kevin Schaller received a certificate for his initiative and leadership in organizing the chapter’s patch board at the 2009 IAEM conference. Please join us in extending your congratulations and appreciation to these individuals, whose efforts have made the past year a success!