The local government response to the Port Arthur incident

Port Arthur and the area of the Seascape Cottage are located on the Tasman Peninsula, and fall within the Municipal boundary of the Tasman Council. Councillor Neil Noye is the Mayor of the Tasman Council and on 28 april 1986 found his community thrust into the international spotlight as a result of the shootings at Port Arthur. The Tasman contains manny areas of tourist interest. The Council was faced with a range of problems following the tragedy at Port Arthur, including shock at the nnumbers of people killed, impact on the economic infrastructure as a direct result of the loss of tourist earnings and how to handle the issue of community recovery a process thet was recognised as being complex and protracted (AU)

The Federal Emergency Management Agency's supporting role in implementing the defense department's key asset protection program

The Department of Defense Key Asset Protection Program (KAPP) was established in 1984 to identify industrial and infrastructure facilities in the United States deemed essential to DoD's ability to mobilize, deploy and sustain U.S. forces during any type of national security emergency. In compliance with DoD KAPP regulation 5160.54-R and a memorandum of agreement between the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Commander - in- Chief, Force Command (CINCFOR), FEMA supports KAPP by: (1) developing procedures and guidance for Federal Civil asset Departments and Agencies; (2) Coordinating Federal Civil asset nomination process for FORSCOM; (3) participating in the biennial review of KAPP and (4) participating in the development of KAPP training programs. FEMA has recently undertaken a number of proactive efforts to further enhance Federeal Civil Department and Agency participation in KAPP. These efforts include: (1) The dissemination of area-specific portions of the DoD Key Asset List (KAL) rto FEMA regional Offices and State Governments; (2) participating in annual KAPP-oriented conferences and (3) working with DoD agencies to develop new KAPP training courses. additionally, the author chairs an interagency group that has been tasked to prepare a review of asset protection policy for the National Secury Council. This article also describes some of this group's findings and recomendations (AU)

The DoD key asset protection program (KAPP)

The Department of Defense (D0D) Key Asset Protection Program (KAPP) is a planning mechanism designed to meet the specific responsibility of the Secretary od Defense oulined in Executive Order (E.O.) 12656 (National Security Emergency Preparedness or NSEP). From its inception in 1984, KAPP has stressed flexibility to deal with all risks that are foreseeable through the 1990s.. The primary objective of KAPP is to identify U.S: industrial and infrastructure facilities which are critical to DoD and plan for their continued functioning time of national security emergency. A major element of KAPP is the Key Assets List (KAL), which is developed maintained and classified by the Commander In Chief Forces Command (CINCFOR), who is a major commander of U.S. Army Active and Reserve Forces and oversees training and mobilization of the Army National Guard. The KAL is dynamic and is updated continuously to add and delete specific facilities as DoD need and interests change. This paper addresses KAPP from a DoD perspective, provides an ovierview of functional elements, and describes how the program received heightened interest and support when it was activated during the 1990/91 Desert Storm/Desert Shield wartime scenario (AU)

Asset protection : A mission for the national guard

Presidential Executive Order 12656 assigns certain responsibilities to the various Federal department and agencies. The program developed by the Department of Defense (DoD) to meet the requirements of the Executive Order is the DoD Key Asset Protection Program. One of the primary players in this program is the National Guard Bureau and the national Guard in each state. The national Guard has a major role in support of state emergencies beyond this important federal mission. A key example of the different types of missions conducted by State National Guard was seen during the recent Los Angeles riots. The supporting role that the National Guard has in each state is vital to the security of that state and the national level. The proposed cutbacks for the National Guard poses a question that remains to be answered, " What is the impact that this reduction will have on the emergency response capabilities of that state?" (AU)

The defense investigative service and its role in the Key Asset Protection Program

This articule provides an ovierview of the structure and funtional responsibilities of the Defense Investigative Service (DIS). Organized in 1972 and based in Washington, D.C., The DIS organization has a Personnel Investigations Center (PIC) in Baltimore, Maryland, a Defense Industrial Security Clearance Office (DISCO) in Columbus, Ohio, two Offices of Industrial Security International for Europe and Far East, as well as eigth Regional Offices. Overall, Dis has approximately 350 field activities. Mast of the Dis investigative effort is expended on personnel security investigations which is controlled at the PIC in Baltimore. In summary, DIS has evolved dramatically from being a single-mission security investigation agency to the more complex security organization it is today (AU)

Risk sharing for energy emergency preparedness

This article discusses the need for proper planning and preparedness for local, regional or even national emergencies resulting from energy disruptions. It describes a specturm of natural and man-made phenomena which can disrupt our energy supply and questions whether we as s nation are properly prepared for such events. It discusses the current fragmented approach to energy emergency risk sharing by industry, state and local governments and the federal government. It argues that these agents could do a better job possibly with fewer total resources, if they adopted a risk sharing approach and coordinated their combined activities (AU)

A survery of emergency managers on the seismic mitigation measures : Proposed in H.R. 2806, H.R. 4792 and S.2533

The National Coordinating Council on Emergency Management's (NCCEM) earthquake subcommittee conducted earthquake-safety surveys in 1991 and 1992. The 1991 results revealed broad support among governmental emergency managers for a federal earthquake mitigation and insurance program. In 1992, the Subcommittee surveyed NCCEM members and other emergency managers to assess their level of support for each mitigation measure proposed in H.R. 4792 and S.2533. The 1992 questionnaire was distributed: 1) in the NCCEM Bulletin 2) on an electronic bulletin board; 3) in a letter to each state and territory, the largest cities in each state, and the 1991 survey's respondents and 4) at both a southern California and a national emergency-services conference. Seven measures were given more support than the only two categorized in the bills as mandatory. In seismic-hazard areas, those seven measures would: control construction of all new buildings, retrofit seismically deficient buildings that house surgical, governmental EOC, fire-suppression, or police functions; and minimize earthquake damage to lifelines (AU)