Heather A. Parker, USCG D13 Seattle, WA Heather A. Parker, USCG D13 Seattle, WA

Presentation Topics and Learning Outcomes Background/Overview of the CANUSPAC Exercise Program Design of the 2014 Exercise (Format and Issues to be Tested) Observations from the Exercise Some Key Lessons Learned After Action Report and Next Steps 2

CANUSPAC Exercise Program Overview Required by JCP Bi-national Treaty, in the CANUSPAC Region -joint, transboundary CCG-USCG oil spill exercises every other year. Each nation takes turns hosting JRT (Joint Response Team), co-chaired by USCG and CCG = regional “pre-spill” coordinating body of federal and state/provincial agencies TableTop Exercise (TTX) – hosted by US Coast Guard. In recent years, focus has been on testing actual equipment deployment and movement across border. This year, focus was on a functional TTX to discuss a range of other issues. 3

Drill Design “Executive seminar” with a series of targeted questions, based off a specific transboundary spill scenario -Spill started in US, at Cherry Point refinery in Blaine, WA. - Oil moved into transboundary region and threatened Gulf Islands (CAN) and San Juan Islands (U.S.) 4

Drill Design Drill day was divided into 2 halves: first half was focused on the spin up of 2 Incident Command Posts (ICP) in each country – how they would deploy and set up and how they would communicate between each other during the critical first hours of the response. 5

Drill Design Second Half of day: focused on establishment of a Joint Unified Area Command (UAC), co- led by USCG and CCG “flag level”, and senior Responsible Party (RP) representative. 6

Joint UAC Drill Design KEY: active participation from an industry member to play role of RP – and fully engage throughout design and into drill play with robust staffing. 7

Issues to be Tested Joint (bi-national) UAC Formation Responder Indemnification International “Liaison Officers” between ICPs Joint Press Releases Dispersant Authorization process near-border Common Operating Picture Transboundary Waste/Decon issues 8 Issues to be Tested Joint (bi-national) UAC Formation Responder Indemnification International “Liaison Officers” between ICPs Joint Press Releases Dispersant Authorization process near-border Common Operating Picture Transboundary Waste and Decontamination issues

List of Participants United States: United States Coast Guard BP Cherry Point Marine Spill Response Corporation WA Dept of Ecology WA Dept of Fish & Wildlife U.S. Dept of the Interior National Oceanic and Atmospheric Admin. Nature Conservancy Olympic Tug & Barge BC States Task Force Whatcom County Dept of Emergency Mgmt Port of Bellingham San Juan County Lummi Nation, Makah Nation National Weather Service Canada: Canadian Coast Guard Transport Canada Marine Safety Western Canada Marine Response Corporation B.C. Ministry of Environment BP Canada City of Vancouver Canadian Border Services Agency (CBSA) City of Delta Capital Regional District Environment Canada Dept of Fisheries & Oceans Stratagem Consultants Kinder Morgan Islands Trust U.K: International Tanker Owners Pollution Federation (ITOPF) 9

The full engagement of an RP presence throughout the design phase as well as exercise play, ensured a very robust, thorough and full dimension of experience for the players, evaluators and observers throughout the entire exercise process. Having both the USCG RADM and the CCG Assistant Commissioner play in person was extremely beneficial, as well as the FOSC’s and State/Provincial-OSCs from both sides of the border. Observer Program: included a range of experienced oil spill response expert from various agencies and organizations, including: USCG District 11, National Pollution Funds Center, PACAREA as well as several key industry members. 10 The full engagement of an RP presence throughout the design phase as well as exercise play, ensured a very robust, thorough and full dimension of experience for the players, evaluators and observers throughout the entire exercise process. Having both the USCG RADM and the CCG Assistant Commissioner play in person was extremely beneficial, as well as the FOSC’s and State/Provincial On Scene Coordinators (OSCs) from both sides of the border. Observer Program: included a range of experienced oil spill response expert from various agencies and organizations, including: USCG District 11, National Pollution Funds Center, PACAREA as well as several key industry members. Observations from the Exercise

Some Key Lessons Learned Key Lessons Learned focused on in the After Action Report (AAR): 1. Joint Unified Area Command 2. Responder Indemnification; Cross-Border Operations 3. Joint Initial Incident Command Meeting 4. International Liaison Officer 5. Coordinated Media Strategy 6. Clarification and Role of the Joint Response Team (JRT) 11

Key Recommendations from AAR (1) Joint Unified Area Command Principles Manage and resolve cross-border, interagency and international impediments to response efforts. Coordinate international media strategy concerning international response issues/perspectives. Act as main point-of-contact for senior governmental officials, politicians, stakeholders, and the public; coordinate VIP visits. Work complex time consuming non-operational aspects of the spill response in order to free up time for the Incident Commanders to carry out their responsibilities. 12

Key Recommendations from AAR (2) Responder Indemnification - Cross Border Operations In the case of a spill without a known responsible party, MSRC would not cross the border into Canada at the request of the USCG unless the USCG signed the MSRC international addendum. The USCG is unable by current legal standards to sign such an addendum, which would in essence put the U.S. government in the position of potentially defending MSRC against claims in the Canadian court system. MSRC offers an international addendum to their contracts, which shifts the responsibility of indemnity from MSRC to their customers. 13

Key Recommendations from AAR (3) Joint Initial Incident Command Meeting Providing an opportunity for both sets of Incident Commanders (i.e. FOSCs) to discuss their initial UC Objectives and Priorities as well as to share their Leaders’ Intent with their cross-border counterparts in person could ideally set the tone for a very well integrated and coordinated response on both sides of the border moving forward – if there is time and opportunity for an initial in- person meeting. 14

Key Recommendations from AAR (4) International “Liaison Officer” FOSCs from each nation’s ICPs dispatch an International “Liaison Officer” to the corresponding ICP in the other nation, to be their representative in the UC of that nation’s ICP. 15

Key Recommendations from AAR (5) Coordinated Media Strategy Need to coordinate messages going from both nation’s Incident Command Posts out to the public and media is critical. If a Joint Unified Area Command is formed, there would likely be a third level of media messaging. 16

Key Recommendations from AAR (6) Clarification and Role of the Joint Response Team (JRT) At the time of an incident, the JRT must: Provide timely and accurate notification, information of cross-border incidents; Facilitate safe and timely cross-border movement of personnel, equipment and supplies; Ensure coordinated and timely flow of information to the public and media and Obtain/provide cross-border assistance when only one country is affected within the contiguous waters between the two countries. 17

Key Points: End State was to test components of the JCP and CANUSPAC Geographic Annex for gaps and improvements. First test of the concept of Joint Unified Area Command with USCG D13 and CCG Assistant Commissioner and senior RP member, as well as two separate Incident Command Posts (each with their own Unified Command). First time with a fully-engaged Responsible Party: BP Cherry Point 18

19