national incident organization national incident management organization final recommendations

National Incident National Incident Management OrganizationOrganization

Final Recommendations

BackgroundBackground1999 the Forest Service

commissioned a review of the Fire Management Program which produced An Agency Strategy for Fire Management, also known as “The Jacob’s Report.”

• The Forest Service’s ability to provide adequate support to large fires is diminishing.

• The Forest Service fire and fuels program is not well integrated with the land management program of the agency.

• Many cooperators and partners think the Forest Service is ineffective and inefficient in fire management.

Background Con’t.

Background Con’t.

The following reports all emphasized the need to improve the complex incident management system:

– “The Jacob’s Report”– “The Rains Report”– IMRT and Federal Fire Policy (1995 & 2001)

– GAO Report-03-805 which addressed fuels treatment and priorities.

– NAPA Report, Wildfire Suppression Strategies.

– “Where Have All the Firefighters Gone” Brookings.

January 2003, NWCG chartered NIMO Project to:

Review “Jacob’s Report.” Evaluate alternative implementation

strategies. Develop recommendations of

implementing the report’s actions. Develop specific implementation

options. Ensure implementation actions are

consistent with Fire Policy.

Project ObjectivesProject Objectives Develop and evaluate

organizational options to:– Meet resource & fire

management objectives on the local unit.

– Meet the needs for complex incident management. Improve interagency cooperation.

– Develop a preferred strategic recommendation.

Team Membership

Agencies represented:

Bureau of Land ManagementForest ServicePark ServiceNASFUS Fire Administration

Several Options Analyzed

Status Quo – Current Organization

Enhanced Current OrganizationNIMO – All Type 1 and 2 Teams

with about 30 NIMO members per team

NIMO – Type 1 full TeamsNIMO – All Type 1 and 2 Teams –

10 people per team

Basic Foundation of Basic Foundation of RecommendationRecommendation

Success is predicated on planning & implementing an aggressive landscape scale

vegetative management program and nine key

recommendations

Key Recommendations Improved Capacity and Capability: Change

Federal agency policy to require employee support of incident management and develop incident management positive requirements for unit level agency administrators.

Type 3 IMTs: Significantly increase the number of Interagency Type 3 incident management teams.

Training: Streamline the NWCG fire training and qualifications program to reduce redundancy & more effectively focus on the needs of the various positions.

Key Recommendations Con’t.

Legal Authorities: Improve and standardize the legal authorities to allow effective implementation of incident management across all levels of government.

NMAC IMT Management: The National MAC becomes responsible for standardization & mobilization of Type 1 and Type 2 incident management teams.

Non-traditional Partnerships: Actively seek partnerships with other federal agencies (i.e. EPA, Coast Guard, FEMA) to improve capacity for the development and utilization of incident management personnel for fire and non-fire incidents.

Key Recommendations Con’t.

Improved Hiring Authority: Reduce dependency on retirees and improve the temporary emergency hiring authorities.

Standardized Contracts: Standardize pay rates, contracts, performance standards and common definitions of inherent government functions.

Complex Incident Management: Develop a new model for managing complex incidents that utilizes social values, significant resource values & cost/benefits in the decision making process.

Recommended Organization

Implement a permanent incident management organization

focused on leadership, safety, cost efficiency & training.

Implementation

An Interagency Implementation Strategy will be required to address the specific aspects of this recommendation such as: chain of command, pay/ grade structure, methods to include State and Local Government participation, duty stations, and administrative support structure

Implementation StrategiesImplementation StrategiesLocal emergency response agencies

support IM organization to extent of their ability. NRP and NIMS provide context for enhanced support to complex IM. Small numbers of Nat’l experts travel to support local emergencies.

Efficiency in mobilization is keystone of the NIMO. NRP, NIMS, ROSS, IQCS provide supporting tools.

Implementation StrategiesImplementation StrategiesA strong central core of full time

C&G are available year round for incident management; experts in their field; focus on leadership, safety and efficiency. Ready to be mobilized for a long duration of time.

7 teams; 7 people with no additional standing OH team members devoted to sub-staff positions.

Implementation StrategiesImplementation StrategiesTeams located in 7 Geographic Areas

in Atlanta, Albuquerque, Denver, Salt Lake City, Missoula, Portland and Sacramento.

Deployment is managed by NMAC

Excellent leaders & trainers; ensure leadership succession – incorporate trainees at assignments

Implementation StrategiesImplementation Strategies Teams deployed most of the year – may

be supplemented by traditional Type 1 & 2 teams.

As experts work closely with Agency Administrators in determining cost efficiencies, and enhancing understanding of appropriate risk management measures

Merit promotion principles apply in selection of positions. State & local agencies participate through IPAs

Implementation StrategiesImplementation Strategies Positions on the NIMO would be time

limited (5 years?)

Off season work includes training, quality assurance activities, fuels management, ad-hoc fire & resource management work, NWCG issues, cost containment, leadership development.

Monitoring Plan to evaluate over 5 years to determine whether to increase no. of teams or abandon the concept.

Estimated Cost

$7,400,000 salary and overhead per year

7 teams with 7 peopleIC calculated @ GS-14/5

C&G calculated @ GS-13/5OH rate est. 30%

Transfer of Station not included

Analysis ConclusionOur analysis did not find the silver bullet. We

found that none of the alternatives analyzed:

Were affordable based on the current funding levels and structure.

Reduce the reliance on the agency “militia”

Provide a career path for employees interested in working in large incident management

Increase the capacity at the local level to complete natural resource work

…….However.However

The team determined that hiring and developing a small number

of employees with large incident management as their primary responsibility would result in

significant benefits if implemented along with the key

recommendations presented.

Questions/ Discussion?Questions/ Discussion?