Disaster Exercise Scenario “Injects” – What Might Stretch Credulity?
Emergency Management Once Removed
By Jim Mullen
Somewhere, or in many “somewhere” in the United States, diligent emergency management professionals are designing disaster exercises. Some will be tabletops; some full field exercises; some a mix of tabletop/field activity. Some will receive highly visible public attention; others may occur outside public view. Not all will successfully achieve their stated objectives. If a readiness gap is revealed or detected, a good public purpose will have been served, because capability gaps that surface, if addressed, will be more manageable if the after-action considerations have been appropriate. But, if gaps are glossed over, or omitted from corrective after – action efforts, they may resurface in a real event and prove costly, in terms of human suffering (not to mention political and professional reputations irretrievably damaged).
My exercise experiences included earthquakes, terrorism, wildfires, floods, and public health events. In post-9/11 TOPOFF II (radiological event) after-action reports were suppressed – not by me but by the sponsoring federal agency confirming my impression that we had been merely bit players in a national photo op, posing as a serious exercise. Seattle’s participation in TOPOFF II did inform some necessary alterations in training, communications and command and control, but that owed more to the quiet determination of my city of Seattle colleagues. And, returning to a frequent complaint of yours truly, recovery exercises really ought to include those responsible for actually managing a recovery. Stand-ins don’t provide much value.
A few years after leaving my state director’s job, I (whimsically) suggested that a future disaster exercise inject might introduce an after-hours “tweet” that declared that the governor of the afflicted state hadn’t always been “nice” toward the President, and thus could “wait” awhile for federal assistance, giving the exercise team a politically-charged challenge to ponder. Humorous intent aside, it was “inspired” by real-life examples of high-level pique often expressed in the midnight hours – certain states had experienced some very purposefully slow-walked declaration requests.
At the state level between 2004-13 there were challenging tabletop exercises, including public health scenarios, well before COVID presented itself. Pre-Covid, in development and execution of our public health exercises, health professionals were trusted to “call the tune”. We never contemplated that senior political officials would demean scientific expertise – pre COVID, an inject suggesting that might plausibly occur would have been laughable. The possibility that there would be highly placed officials undermining the work of highly respected epidemiological professionals in the health field never entered our deliberations. The COVID experience suggests a path forward for exercise designers and participants: whether it be an exercise related to combatting insurrection or a major health crisis. What exercise “twists” are off the table? Recent history suggests the answer to be NOTHING.

HINT: The RSS feed works in Internet Explorer, Firefox, and Safari but a free extension is needed if browsing in Google Chrome.
Jim has spent 3 decades in emergency management, including 12 years at the local level as director of the City of Seattle’s Office of Emergency Management and 8 and a half years as Washington State’s Emergency Management Division Director. Jim retired from state service in March 2013. Jim also served as President of the National Emergency Management Association (NEMA) from January 2011 to October 2012.
Disclaimer
Information on this Blog is provided with the understanding that the authors and publishers are not engaged in rendering professional advice or services. As such, it should not be used as a substitute for consultation with an professional adviser. Opinions expressed here represent the viewpoints of individuals authoring the blog and do not necessarily reflect the opinions or views of the Center of Excellence.