See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/267977254

Recent NIIMS ICS Enhancements for U.S. Spill Response

Article

CITATION READS
1 88

2 authors, including:

Erich Gundlach
E-Tech International Inc.
87 PUBLICATIONS   735 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

TROPICS (Tropical Research on Oil Pollution in Coastal Systems) View project

Oil impacts to mangroves east-side of Bonny River Nigeria. View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Erich Gundlach on 26 June 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

Recent NIIMS ICS Enhancements for U.S. Spill Response

Erich R. Gundlach Donald S. Jensen

E-Tech International Inc. Jensen & Associates
P.O. Box 2976 807 Riverside Avenue
Acton, MA 01720 Elizabeth City, NC 27909
ErichEti@cs.com* djensen@interpath.com*
*updated to 2001

Abstract
In 1994, a Task Force called STORMS (STandard Oil Response Management System)
was formed by representatives from U.S. Coast Guard, California Department of Fish &
Game/Office of Spill Prevention and Response, the petroleum industry, oil spill response
organizations and local governments. This Task Force agreed upon a standardized ICS format
and developed a Field Operations Guide (FOG) which forms the basis of a unified government-
industry approach to ICS for oil spill response. Importantly, the Task Force adopted the ICS of
the National Interagency Incident Management System (NIIMS), the primary response
management system used in the United States today. This paper focuses on the ICS being used
by the U.S. Coast Guard, describes enhancements to the system specific for oil spills, and
discusses forthcoming activities related to nationwide training for the U.S. Coast Guard and the
public.

1.1 Introduction
The February 1996 adoption of the Incident Command System (ICS) by the U.S. Coast
Guard as the management system to be used for oil spill response has lead to a resurgence of
interest in the application of ICS as an emergency management tool among government and
industry. This paper reviews the key elements of the oil spill Incident Command System as
developed by a government/industry task force and which, by being utilized by the U.S. Coast
Guard, is likely to become the de facto standard for managing oil spills and other marine-related
emergencies in the United States. Oil and gas companies currently using ICS are likely to
review the developed organizational structure to determine if changes within their ICS or other
response-management system are necessary to ensure conformity. Although industry has been a
leader in accepting ICS, the reluctance of the U.S. Coast Guard, as the primary federal agency

1
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

with authority over coastal zone and marine spills, to accept ICS within their organization has
before now been a hindrance to its full acceptance across industry and other government
agencies.

1.2 What is the Incident Command System?

The Incident Command System is a management system which has embodied a number
of key features important to emergency response, including a modular organization, common
terminology, integrated communications, a unified command structure, a manageable span of
control, the designation of incident facilities, and the means for comprehensive resource
management. The ICS has broad application for managing both planned events, such as
celebrations and parades, and emergency incidents. It has been successfully used during a
variety of emergency responses, including the extensive western wildfires occurring in late
summer 1996, the 1994 Northridge, CA earthquake, the 1993 midwestern floods, the urban
search and rescue efforts following the 1995 Oklahoma City bombing, and a number of recent
major oil spill responses.
The ICS developed out of requirements described in the early 1970’s to fight large forest
fires that could extend over thousands of acres and cross several western state boundaries. In
these cases, various fire departments having no prior experience of working together would be
called upon to respond. As at most emergencies, as responders arrived onscene it became
obvious that experience, training, job titles, and managerial responsibilities differed substantially
among organizations. Recognizing the need for coordination and integration of these resources,
an interagency task force called FIRESCOPE (FIrefighting RESources of California Organized
for Potential Emergencies) was formed in 1976 and through which the Incident Command
System was developed. In 1980, ICS became part of a national program called the National
Interagency Incident Management System (NIIMS), which guides federal agencies having
wildland fire management responsibilities. NIIMS added other features to ICS to give it a
national utility, including the development of standardized qualification and training programs,
control and management of ICS publications, and the mechanism to review and integrate
supporting technology.
During the development of ICS, four essential requirements for such a system were
recognized.

2
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

1. The system must be organizationally flexible to meet the needs of incidents that could
vary by size and type.
2. Agencies must be able to use the system on a day-to-day basis for routine situations
as well as for major emergencies to ensure a working knowledge of the response
system.
3. The system must be sufficiently standardized to enable personnel from various
backgrounds, positions, and locations to rapidly meld into a common management
structure.
4. The system must be cost effective.

While ICS was first utilized to combat large forest fires in the 1970’s, it took many years
for it to be actively applied to oil spill response. The catalyst in the United States was clearly the
T/V Exxon Valdez event of 1989, which involved over 10,000 responders, various state, local,
and national agencies, as well as numerous private contractors in addition to Exxon. Lacking
such a systemic method to integrate responders, separate government and industry command
posts were set up causing numerous instances of overlapping responsibilities and a duplication of
field activities. As a result, conflicts between organizations, oftentimes aired in public, erupted
over the handling of the spill. Clearly there was a better way.
Following Exxon Valdez, many companies embraced ICS, developing so-called “hybrid”
versions which utilized ICS elements and nomenclature as appropriate to the particular company.
Standard ICS organizational titles and responsibilities were altered depending on company
requirements. The U.S. Coast Guard also recognized the value of ICS. In its development of the
National Preparedness for Response Exercise Program (PREP), the U.S. Coast Guard set
evaluation criteria for exercise participants in forming an ICS organization and a Unified
Command Structure having state and federal representation in addition to industry. During
responses following the August 1993 Tampa Bay spill, the 1994 T/B Morris J. Berman
grounding and the October 1994 San Jacinto River spill, the predesignated Federal On Scene
Coordinators all used ICS and formed effective Unified Command Structures. However, the
agency was reluctant to adopt ICS across the organization, leaving it to individual Coast Guard
Districts and field units to decide on the level and brand of ICS to adopt or not adopt, as desired.
In 1994, a Task Force called STORMS (STandard Oil Response Management System)

3
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

was formed by representatives from U.S. Coast Guard, California Department of Fish &
Game/Office of Spill Prevention and Response, the petroleum industry, oil spill response
organizations and local governments. This Task Force agreed upon a standardized ICS format
and developed a Field Operations Guide (FOG) which forms the basis of a unified government-
industry approach to ICS for oil spill response (STORMS Task Force, 1996). Importantly, the
Task Force adopted the ICS of the National Interagency Incident Management System (NIIMS),
the primary response management system used in the United States today. NIIMS is consistent
with the U.S. National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) and is
the system that was subsequently adopted by the U.S. Coast Guard as it’s national oil spill
response management system. The adoption of NIIMS for oil spill response provides an
extensive source of pre-prepared and low-cost manuals, documentation, standardized forms, and
training programs.

2.0 The ICS Organizational Structure

The ICS organizational structure is modular, flexible and can be expanded to meet
complex situations or reduced for minor incidents. The objective of the organizational structure
is to obtain and then maintain an appropriate span of control over all incident personnel.
The organizational structure developed for oil spills by the STORMS Task Force is
presented in Figure 1. It differs slightly from the Standard NIIMS structure in that it contains
several positions specific to oil spills. These new positions are indicated by shading in Figure 1.
Although the functions need to be addressed in spills of any size, callout of specific personnel to
fill each position indicated in this structure would, of course, occur only during very large spill
events. For each position, written oil spill responsibilities are available in the FOG, and NIIMS
has available additional training and other supporting material. Several positions are new and
training require-ments have yet to be developed, although they are likely to be already contained
in many industry response plans that were designed using “hybrid” ICS structures.
The Incident Command System is organized around five major management activities or
functions that must be performed during every incident: Command, Planning, Operations,
Logistics, and Finance/Administration. Command has overall responsibility for the incident,
determines objectives and establishes priorities based on the nature of the incident, available
resources and company/agency policy. Planning develops an Incident Action Plan to accomplish

4
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

the objectives, collects and evaluates information, and maintains the status of assigned resources.
Operations develops the tactical organization and directs all resources to carry out the Incident
Action Plan. Logistics provides the resources and all other services needed to support the
organization. Finance/Administration monitors costs related to the incident, provides
accounting, procurement, time recording, cost analysis, and overall fiscal guidance.
On small incidents, these five activities may be managed by a single individual. Large
incidents usually require each of these activities to be established as separate sections within the
organization.
The Incident Commander leads the Command function. In the United States, Incident
Command is jointly shared by at least three Incident Commanders, representing the federal and
state governments and the responsible party. (If more than one state or responsible party are
involved, each will provide an Incident Commander.) Together, they form a Unified Command
Structure to ensure an integrated industry/government response. However, as is well-known, the
responsible party is mandated to take the lead in responding to the spill, with state and federal
representatives providing support as needed to effectively handle the incident. The federal
Incident Commander (Federal On Scene Coordinator) is required by statute to “direct” the
cleanup operations and exercises a “51% vote” on those occasions where consensus cannot be
reached within the Unified Command. Among the command and general staff are the members
of Unified Command’s key support staff: the Safety Officer, Liaison Officer, Information
Officer, and four Section Chiefs (Operations, Planning, Logistics, and Finance/Administration).
Under a Unified Command Structure, each position in the organization is filled by most qualified
individual for either industry or government.
Note that Figure 1 shows three positions linked to the Liaison Officer: Agency
Representative, Investigation Representative, and the NRDA (Natural Resources Damage
Assessment) Representative. Locating the position of NRDA Representative, whose role is to
determine spill-related damages which often result in financial assessments against the
responsible party, has been somewhat controversial. Previously, it was placed as part of the
scientific functions associated with the Planning Section’s Situation Unit which has the
responsibility of guiding efforts to prevent and reduce damages. The present location may
alleviate some of the prior conflicts and serve to better fit this legally mandated position into the
ICS structure.

5
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

During the response to a major oil spill, the coordination of resources and support
between agencies and jurisdictions can be complex. To facilitate this function, ICS has
established a Multi-Agency Coordination System (MACS). Within MACS, a MAC Group,
comprised of agency administrators or designees from the agencies involved or heavily
committed to the incident, is formed to provide high level support to the Unified Command
Structure. The MAC Group meets at a location away from the Incident Command Post or
confers by tele-conferencing to coordinate such strategic issues as incident priority
determination, critical resource use priorities, communications systems integration, information
exchange and inter-governmental decisions. The MACS functions in much the same manner as
do Regional Response Teams (RRT), so designated in the National Contingency Plan. This
apparent overlap between the MACS and the RRT is not yet fully clarified. As indicated by the
dashed line leading to the Unified Command triangle in Figure 1, the MAC Group provides a
coordination and support mechanism to the members of Unified Command, but does not exercise
command authority over them.
Within Sections are Branches, Groups, and Units, dependent on the nature and
complexity of the spill incident and the number of personnel involved. In the Planning Section,
the Standard NIIMS ICS designates the following Units: Situation, Resources, Documentation,
Demobilization, and Technical Specialists. For oil spills, several Technical Specialists are
specifically defined; these include Disposal Specialist, Scientific Support Coordinator,
Alternative Response Technology Specialist (e.g. in-situ burning and dispersants), and Legal
Specialist. Technical Specialists are initially assigned to the Planning Section, but may be
reassigned anywhere in the organization where they are needed. The Legal Specialist, for
instance, is often reassigned and reports directly to the Incident Commander. The Task Force
also added several positions to the Situation Unit including Display Processor, Field Observer,
Trajectory Analysis Specialist, Geographic Information Specialist, and Resources at Risk
Specialist.
For oil spills occurring in the coastal zone where the U.S. Coast Guard provides the
Federal On Scene Coordinator, the Scientific Support Coordinator is designated by the National
Contingency Plan as being a NOAA (National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration)
representative. Industry response plans have also included several other Technical Specialists
and may show an entire Environmental Unit under Planning, completely separate from the

6
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

Situation Unit. However, these differences are relatively minor and integration with this new
format should be straight-forward.
Conflicts, however, can arise in cases of conflicting allegiances, particularly in cases
where state or federal agency personnel fill ICS positions. Under ICS, the organizational
command structure takes precedence over agency or industry responsibilities; for example, the
Planning Section Chief provides direction for all personnel occupying positions within that
section. However, state or federal personnel, for example, associated with wildlife
collection/rehabilitation may have the dual (and conflicting) role of filling agency
responsibilities while still trying to support the ICS organization. These conflicts can be
avoided through ICS training, spill drills with industry and government participating, and other
forms of education related to use of the ICS management procedures.
In the Operations Section, Standard NIIMS ICS designates by name the Air Operations
Branch with its supporting supervisors and coordinators. Other Branch/Group positions are left
untitled, to be filled in depending on the kind of incident and type of tactical operations required.
In their development of the ICS for oil spill response, the petroleum industry has historically
been more explicit in naming these positions. The STORMS Task Force followed this tradition
and designated three Branches (Recovery and Protection, Emergency Response, and Wildlife) in
addition to Air Operations. As illustrated in Figure 1, there are now various Groups designated
below each Branch (e.g., the Recovery & Protection Branch contains Protection, On Water
Recovery, Shoreside Recovery, Disposal, and Decontamination Groups). Corporate response
plans may include other Branches and supporting Groups, but generally show entities having
similar functions. Otherwise these positions are already fairly well-accepted designations across
the response industry.
The Logistics Section is almost Standard NIIMS ICS, comprised of two Branches:
Services and Support. Services has three units: Communications, Medical, and Food, while the
Support Branch has Supply, Facilities, and Ground Support. Specific to oil spill response, a
Vessel Support Unit and two subdivisions of the Supply Unit (Personnel and
Equipment/Materials) have been added.
Lastly, the Finance Section consists of four units: Time, Procurement,
Compensation/Claims, and Cost. This is the same under both Standard ICS and that adopted by
the STORMS Task Force.

7
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

3.0 The Use of Standardized Forms

The management system used in the oil spill ICS provides the means to quickly transition
the response from the initial “emergency” phase to a more methodical “project” phase. As with
most emergencies, the magnitude of impact is unknown and resources are limited during the
initial stages of a spill. Application of the ICS management process enables the appropriate
resources to be effectively brought onscene and utilized such that the reactionary nature of the
event, becomes routine, predictable, and therefore manageable.
To reduce the startup time during emergencies, the STORMS Task Force developed and
tested a series of standardized, non-proprietary forms (National Wildfire Coordinating Group,
1995). These forms, listed in Table 1, assist with spill management and the creation of Incident
Action Plans (IAP) which are prepared for defined operational periods and govern the entire
response effort. These forms, able to be copied or computer-based, do much to focus the effort
externally on combating the incident rather than internally on worrying about form format and
distribution procedures. As experience from exercises and actual responses is gained, the
STORMS Task Force will continue to modify the forms and develop additional forms as
necessary.

4.0 The Planning Cycle

A primary management tool of ICS is use of a planning cycle. As it involves all
personnel, it is tightly coordinated between the members of Unified Command, the Command
Staff and the four Sections. The planning process begins with gaining an understanding of the
situation and establishing incident objectives and strategies. The members of Unified Command
are solely responsible for setting the objectives. Designated staff then develop the tactical
direction to attain the objectives and strategies and assign the incident resources as needed. Once
collated, the incident objectives, organization assignments, tactical work assignments plus other
supporting forms become the Incident Action Plan to be approved by the members of Unified
Command. The plan is then implemented and evaluated during the next operational period to
determine it’s effectiveness and the cycle repeats itself through successive operational periods
until the response is complete.
The duration of the planning cycle is determined by the particular requirements of the

8
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

incident. The cycle may be 6 hours, 12 hours, 48 hours, etc., although a 4-6 hour planning cycle
is common at the onset or “emergency” phase of a oil spill response. The duration of the
planning cycle is likely to change as the incident progresses from the emergency phase to the
“project” phase. In the early stages of the project phase, 24 hours is a typical length. In later
stages, it may increase to several days or even a week. The length of the planning cycle is
determined solely by the particular character and needs of each incident.

9
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

Table 1. ICS Forms for Oil Spills (modified from National Wildfire Coordinating
Group, 1996). The Preparer and Addressees are Indicated. Figures 2 - 6 Indicate the
Schedule of Form Input and Output with Respect to the Planning Cycle.

ICS FORM TITLE PREPARED PRIMARY INFO ADDRESSEE

FORM BY ADDRESSEE
NO.
201 # Incident Initial Relieving Command Staff, Appropriate
Briefing Respondee Incident Com- Supervisory Staff
Incident mand/Unified
Command Command,
General Staff
202 # Response Planning Incident Action All Supervisory Personnel
Objectives * Section Plan
Chief
203 # Organization Resources Incident Action --
Assignment Unit Leader Plan
List *
204 # Division Operations Incident Action --
Assignment Section Plan
List * Chief &
Resources
Unit Leader
205 Incident Radio Communica- Incident Action --
Communica- tions Unit Plan,
tions Plan Leader Communica-
tions Center
Manager
206 Medical Medical Unit Incident Action --
Plan * Leader Plan, (or
incorporated into
202/204)
207 Organization Resources Incident --
Chart Unit Leader Command Post
OS-209 Incident Situation General Staff Incident Commander,
+ Status Unit Leader Command Staff, Incident
Summary Command Post, Joint
Information Center, Planning
Section Unit Leaders
210 Status Communica- Resources Unit Communications Unit
Change Card tions Center Leader Leader
# ICS form has been slightly modified for oil spills, either version can be used; ** No ICS form
equivalent; * Commonly used in written Incident Action Plans (IAP); + Form is significantly changed
from the original ICS version.

10
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

Table 1. ICS Forms for Oil Spills (Cont.).

ICS FORM TITLE PREPARED PRIMARY INFO ADDRESSEE

FORM BY ADDRESSEE
NO.
211 Check-in List Resources Resources Unit --
Unit at Multiple Leader, Finance/
Locations Administration
Section Chief
213 General Any Message Message --
Message Form Originator Addressee
214 Unit Log All Positions Documentation --
Unit Leader
215 Operational Operations Resources Unit --
Planning Section Chief Leader
Worksheet & Planning
Section Chief
216 Radio Re- Communica- Communications --
quirements tions Unit Unit Leader
Worksheet Leader
217 Radio Communica- Communications --
Frequency tions Unit Unit Leader
Assignment Leader
218 Support Ground Resources Unit --
Vehicle Support Unit Leader
Inventory Leader
219 Resources Resources Resources Unit Documentation
Status Card Unit Leader Leader Unit Leader (at
demobilization)
220 # Air Operations Operations Air Operations Resources Unit Leader
Summary Section Chief Personnel
221 Demobilization Demobilization Individual Demobilization Unit
Checkout Unit Leader Resources Leader
OS-230 Daily Meeting Situation Unit Incident All Supervisory
** Schedule Leader Command Post Personnel
OS-231 Meeting Meeting Incident Appropriate Meeting
** Description Facilitator Command Post Attendees
# ICS form has been slightly modified for oil spills, either version can be used;
** No ICS form equivalent;
* Commonly used in written Incident Action Plans (IAP);
+ Form is significantly changed from the original ICS version.

11
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

Table 1. ICS Forms for Oil Spills (Cont.)

ICS FORM FORM TITLE PREPARED BY PRIMARY INFO

NO. ADDRESSEE ADDRESSEE
OS-232 ** Resources at Situation Unit Incident Action Scientific Support
Risk Summary Leader Plan Coordinator
*
** General Plan Planning Section Appropriate ---
Chief Division/Group/
Unit Personnel
** Executive Planning Section Incident Command &
Summary Chief Command Post General Staff,
Joint Information
Center
** ICS Incident Situation Unit Incident Action --
Action Plan Leader Plan
Cover *
** ACP Site Situation Unit Incident --
Index/ Leader Command Post
Response
Actions
** Initial Person receiving Incident Command &
Notification initial report. Commander General Staff,
Sheet/ Updated by Incident
Incident Situation Unit Command Post,
Information Leader Joint Information
(ACP, Annex Center
1, Tab A)
# ICS form has been slightly modified for oil spills, either version can be used;
** No ICS form equivalent; * Commonly used in written Incident Action Plans (IAP);
+ Form is significantly changed from the original ICS version.

Several meetings are prescribed and are necessary to sustain an effective planning cycle.
Each meeting is specific in purpose and will remain short providing attendees come prepared and
maintain a focus on the meeting’s specific objective. Other meetings are called only as needed.
As the incident matures into its project phase, the planning cycle and meetings fall into a
predictable pattern. As other particular response issues arise, the management system is able to
effectively deal with each.
Even though tactical operations often cease at night for safety reasons, the planning cycle
continues over a 24 hour period. The evening and nighttime hours provide an excellent
opportunity to catch up on the previous day’s events and complete the planning for the next

12
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

day’s activities. Shift changes are often staggered among Sections and Incident Command to
maintain continuity and avoid excessive confusion caused by a complete change in personnel at
one time.

4.1 Integrating ICS Forms and Meetings into the Planning Cycle
The integration of the planning cycle, meetings, and forms is summarized in planning
cycle guides developed for the Command and General Staff and for each Section in Figures 2
through 6. These guides contain the sequence of form input and output, and when used in
conjunction with Table 1, indicate the respective preparer and receiver(s). They were developed
by first completing a planning cycle for the entire process, and then repositioning the meetings,
forms and activities of importance to each organizational component onto its own individual
planning cycle guide. All planning cycle guides are integrated so that common events occur at
the same positions on each diagram. Since the Command and General Staff and Planning
Section are more involved in planning cycle actions, the diagrams for these groups contain more
information.
The planning cycle guides indicate a sequence but not a time clock because the duration
of a planning cycle may vary. The circle can be entered at any point to initiate a cycle. Numbers
“0”, “3”, “6” and “9” around the circles in Figures 2 through 6 indicate the sequence based on a
12 hour operational period. All guides contain the following general format. Entry into any of
the five cycle guides at the “0” position indicates the meetings to be held and forms needed in
preparation for upcoming Planning Meetings. At the “3” position, all attend Planning Meetings
to set the course for the next operational period. Moving clockwise, assigned staff members
complete the detailed planning and the necessary forms that make up the Incident Action Plan.
The plan is completed and submitted to the Incident Commander at the “10” position, and
approved, promulgated and briefed during an Operations Briefing at the “11” position. The
cycle then begins anew.
As an example of how the planning cycle guides and the ICS forms of Table 1 interact,
consider the Planning Section Planning Cycle Guide in Figure 4. A double-headed arrow labeled
“OS-231 Planning Meeting (PSC)” is shown at the “3” position (the OS signifies a specially-
developed Oil Spill form). Note that for these forms, the ICS position listed within parentheses
associated with arrows exiting the circle indicates the form’s preparer. If a meeting is involved,

13
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

it illustrates the facilitator. In the example above, the double-headed arrow indicates that the
Planning Meeting is facilitated by the Planning Section Chief (PSC) and that other positions
within the Planning Section also attend.
Continuing with the Planning Section Planning Cycle Guide in Figure 4, the double-
headed arrow past the “6” position contains the label “202 (PSC), 203 (R.U.L.), 204 [R.U.L.
(Assist by OPS)], OS-232 [S.U.L. (Assist by SSC & RAR)] and Incident Maps (S.U.L.)”. These
notations used in conjunction with Table 1 indicate that:
• Form 202, Response Objectives, is prepared by the Planning Section Chief and is used by the
Planning Section as part of the Incident Action Plan;
• Form 203, Organization Assignment List, is prepared by the Resource Unit Leader (Planning
Section) and is used by the Planning Section as a part of the Incident Action Plan;
• Form 204, Division Assignment List, is prepared by the Resource Unit Leader (Planning
Section) with the help of the Operations Section Chief and is used by the Planning Section as
a part of the Incident Action Plan;
• Form OS-232, Resources at Risk, is prepared by the Situation Unit Leader (Planning Section)
with assistance from the Scientific Support Coordinator and Resources at Risk Specialist and
is used by the Planning Section as a part of the Incident Action Plan; and the
• Incident Maps are assembled by the Situation Unit Leader (Planning Section) and are used by
the Planning Section as a part of the Incident Action Plan.
Using these examples, the planning cycle guides can be interpreted and utilized for
incident planning to illustrate the timing of planning events, form completion and distribution,
and the development and approval of the Incident Action Plan. Their use will also serve to assist
in transitioning the response to the “project” phase and to increase overall response efficiency.

5.0 ICS Training

As with all response plans, training programs and simulation exercises provide the means
to become efficient in the application of Incident Command System. Fortunately, as ICS has
been in practice for over a decade, the procedures and levels of training are well defined and
supported by specially designed curricula and training materials. As illustrated in Table 2, the
training program is divided into four categories, each having a series of related modules. Table 2
also provides the estimated number of classroom hours associated with each program.

14
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

The first level (I-100) is a general introduction to ICS designed for those who may be
assigned to a response but have minimal requirements for knowing system details. The second
level (I-200) covers the principals of ICS in greater detail and includes special instruction on
organization, facilities, resource terminology, and assigned responsibilities. This program level
is designed for those that can reasonably be expected to actively participate in the response, both
supervisory and technical personnel, and will need to know the basics of ICS to adequately
perform their response task. The I-100 course takes on the order of 2 hours while 12 hours is
minimally necessary to sufficiently cover the I-200 series. Many U.S. petroleum companies
present the I-200 series prior to conducting a day-and-a half simulation exercise which then
reinforces the material learned.
The next level of training, designated as I-300 Intermediate ICS, includes several more
advanced modules on organization, resource management, planning, and air operations. It also
covers the steps in organizing the response as the incident develops. Designated personnel
filling the response leadership roles, including Command and General Staff and Unit Leaders,
would take this series. Additional modules are available as part of the series for several
intermediate level positions, e.g. Documentation Unit Leader, Situation Unit Leader, etc. The
last level, I-400 Advanced ICS, covers the development of large-scale response organizations,
the role of Command and General Staff in such organizations, and planning, logistical,
operational, and financial considerations. This level would assist the petroleum company’s
response managers in preparing for major events. Additional training is available on
coordinating with government, and the I-400 series also includes training modules specific for
positions within the Command and General Staff. The usual time allotments for the base I-300
and I-400 series are 27 and 22 hours, respectively.
Simulation exercises are an integral part of the training program and vary greatly in size
and complexity. There are regulations that designated facilities conduct a tabletop spill
management team exercise on a annual basis. At the other end of the spectrum are the Area
PREP exercises conducted on a regional level that commonly involve several hundred persons
from the sponsoring petroleum company, government, and affected stakeholders. These
exercises do much to improve internal response coordination and offer an excellent means of
acquainting the interested public with the company’s response capabilities.

15
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

Table 2. Summary of the ICS training program and associated modules.

MODULE COURSE TITLE EST.

HOURS
I-100 INTRODUCTION TO ICS (2 total)
1 ICS Orientation 2

I-200 BASIC ICS (12 total)

2 Principles and Features of ICS 2
3 Organizational Overview 4
4 Incident Facilities 2
5 Incident Resources 2
6 Common Responsibilities 2
+ Additional courses for lower ICS positions (manager)

I-300 INTERMEDIATE ICS (27

Total)
7 Organization and Staffing 6
8 Organizing for Incidents or Events 5
9 Incident Resources Management 4
10 Air Operations 4
11 Incident and Event Planning 8
+ Additional courses for Unit Leaders/Supervisors

I-400 ADVANCED ICS (22

Total)
12 Command and General Staff 6
13 Unified Command 6
14 Major Incident Management 4
15 Area Command 6
+ Additional courses for Command and General Staff
positions
++ Special courses for Multi-Agency Coordination and ICS
for Executives

6.0 What’s Next?

The STORMS Task Force Field Operations Guide and the ICS Forms Catalog for oil
spills published by the U.S. Coast Guard are being widely requested by both government and
industry, and are being distributed free-of-charge via the internet

16
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

(http://www.dot.gov/dotinfo/uscg/hq/g-m/gmhome.htm). The STORMS Task Force remains

active and will continue to improve the tools needed for ICS implementation, particularly the
Field Operations Guide. Port Area Committees across the U.S. are modifying their Area
Contingency Plans to include ICS as the structure to be used in the formation of Unified
Commands in their local areas.
ICS training, known as MATES (Multi-Agency Team-building Enhancement Systems),
is being provided for government and industry spill management personnel and, in several port
areas, government and industry are being trained together to facilitate the formation of a Unified
Command organization during major responses. Building on a successful pilot program
conducted by the U. S. Coast Guard Research and Development Center at selected port areas
during 1995-1996, MATES is being expanded throughout the United States. Key representatives
of federal, state and local government agencies and potential responsible parties are invited by
the U.S. Coast Guard Captain of the Port to participate in the 5-day sub-team training program
that strives to improve the development of “shared mental models” and team problem-solving
skills among the potentially diverse members of the individual ICS sections.
The first day of the MATES program provides ICS refresher training for all trainees. On
the following 4 days, training is provided to members of Command and Section personnel,
focusing on a different group each day. Port areas scheduled for MATES training during the
federal 1997 fiscal year (FY) include: Providence, RI; Savanna, GA; Jacksonville, FL; Detroit,
MI; Corpus Christi, TX; Juneau, AK; Hampton Roads, VA; San Francisco, CA; and Portland,
OR. Port areas scheduled for training during FY 1998 include: New Orleans, LA; Guam; San
Diego, CA; Baltimore, MD; New Haven, CT; Wilmington, NC; and Sault Ste. Marie, MI.
Additional port areas scheduled for FY 1999 include: Morgan City, LA; Los Angles/Long
Beach, CA; Valdez, AK; Boston, MA; Buffalo, NY; Anchorage, AK; and New York, NY.
Additionally, six government-led Area PREP exercises are held each year to continue the
focusing of attention on the principles of ICS and the ability of participants to form effective
Unified Command Structures.
In the support area, forms, diagrams, and position responsibilities have been
computerized in word processing and spreadsheet programs to enable more rapid computer-
based data entry. On a grander scale, the ICS for oil spills is now reaching a sufficient level of
standardization within industry and government to enable further development of more

17
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

sophisticated, more-effective computer-based, response-support systems. While one or more

commercial applications have previously been available, the lack of a standardized format for
data display and organization has partially inhibited broad-based acceptance of these systems.
The U.S. Coast Guard has recently reviewed potential requirements for such a computer-based
system (Gundlach and Kendziorek, 1996) and the U.S. Coast Guard R&D Center in Groton, CT,
is currently in the process of supporting development of such a system. The many advantages
offered by the Incident Command System show that it can be applied with equal effectiveness to
other emergencies, petroleum or non-petroleum related, in North America and elsewhere.
From the perspective of providing environmental support during a spill incident, several
companies are first verifying their environmental support function will conform to the NIIMS
ICS structure, and secondly, developing a series of Assignment Sheets indicating specific field
teams, operational area, and equipment requirements. Upon arrival on-scene the pre-developed
Assignment Sheet can be modified and copied (or downloaded and printed) as
personnel/equipment requests and for direct entry into the Incident Action Plan. Many of the
basic requirements of environmental support are well-recognized and standard (e.g. SCAT
surveys - Shoreline Cleanup Assessment Team, aerial surveillance, field sampling,
modeling/mass balance), and therefore can be prepared before the event. An example of such a
form is provided in Figure 7.

7.0 Sources for ICS Material

The following sources provide guidance documents and training materials related to the
Incident Command System.
• Coast Guard Headquarters home page: (http://www.dot.gov/dotinfo/uscg/hq/g-
m/gmhome.htm) - Field Operations Guide and ICS Forms for Oil Spills.
• National Interagency Fire Center, Attn: Supply, 3833 S Development Avenue, Boise, ID
83705. For ICS publications and materials. Phone (208) 387-5542, Fax (208) 387-5573.
• California Office of Emergency Services, Operations Coordination Center, P.O. Box 55157,
Riverside CA 92517. For Firescope ICS publication and materials. Phone (909) 782-4174,
Fax (909) 782-4239.
• Fire Protection Publications, IFSTA Headquarters, Attn: Customer Service, Oklahoma State
University, Stillwater, OK 74078-0118. For commercial ICS publications and manuals.

18
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

Phone (800) 654-4055, Fax (405) 744-8204.

8.0 Acknowledgments
We gratefully acknowledge the assistance and guidance provided by reviewers Mr. Tim
McKinna, McKinna's Emergency Spill Support, Austin, Texas; Cdr. Mark Johnson, USCG,
Chief, Response Operations Division, Office of Response, USCG Headquarters; Lt. Rick
Johnson, USCG, Chief, Port Operations Department, USCG MSO Corpus Christi, Corpus
Christi, Texas; Tina Burke, Operations Division, USCG National Strike Force Coordination
Center, Elizabeth City, NC; and Mr. Jim Gynther, USCG Research & Development Center,
Groton, Connecticut. Mr. Jim Gynther is particularly acknowledged for providing the idea and
support to develop the modified planning cycle guides that appear in this paper. Mike Ammann
of Chevron Research & Technology Co. is acknowledged for enabling presentation of their
SCAT Assignment Sheet in Figure 7.

9.0 References Cited

Gundlach, E.R. and M. Kendziorek, “Evaluation of MAR_TAD Requirements, Final
Report; Using the OSARMS System to Validate and Identify Refinements to MAR_TAD
Requirements”, A.D. Little Report to U.S. Coast Guard R&D, Groton, CT 06340, 30 p., 1996.
National Wildfire Coordinating Group, “ICS Forms Catalog for Oil Spills”, U.S. Coast
Guard Headquarters home page: (http://www.dot.gov/dotinfo/uscg/hq/g-m/gmhome.htm). 60 p.,
1995.
STORMS Task Force, “Oil Spill Field Operations Guide, ICS-OS-420-1”, U.S. Coast
Guard Headquarters home page: (http://www.dot.gov/dotinfo/uscg/hq/g-m/gmhome.htm), 120 p.,
1996.

Authors

Erich R. Gundlach, Ph.D. is internationally recognized for his scientific study of oil
spills with over 20 years’ experience in environmental consulting and oil spill response. He has
authored over 200 publications, technical articles, reports, and training programs, and has served
as a senior environmental advisor at some of the largest oil spills in history, including Amoco
Cadiz (France), the Gulf War Spills (Saudi Arabia), the Haven (Italy), and Exxon Valdez in

19
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

Alaska. He has developed both contingency plans and training programs using the Incident
Command System in the United States and Latin America.

Don Jensen is a retired Captain in the United States Coast Guard and has some of the
most extensive experience in marine environmental response in the U.S. today based on service
as Commander of the National Strike Force, Commanding Officer of the U.S. Coast Guard
Atlantic Strike Team and Federal On-Scene Coordinator for several major oil and hazardous
substance spills. He filled key spill management team positions during responses to the Exxon
Valdez and Gulf War spills. While on active duty, he was an advocate for adoption of a standard
response management system and participated in the development of the NIIMS ICS national
training curriculum. He has conducted several NIIMS ICS training programs.

Figures Follow:

20
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

ICS 420-1 (OIL)

OSC
MAC
FEDERAL GROUP
RP IC *

*
STATE

SAFETY OFFICER
(S0) AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE *

*
LIAISON OFFICER INVESTIGATION REPRES.
(LO) *

*
NRDA REPRESENTATIVE
INFORMATION OFFICER *

*
(IO)

OPERATIONS PLANNING LOGISTICS FINANCE

SECTION SECTION SECTION SECTION

STAGING AREA
SERVICE SUPPORT
SITUATION RESOURCE DOCUMENTA- DEMOBILIZA- BRANCH BRANCH TIME UNIT
UNIT UNIT TION UNIT TION UNIT
PROCUREMENT
RECOVERY & EMERGENCY AIR OPS WILDLIFE COMMUNICA- SUPPLY UNIT
PROTECTION RESPONSE BRANCH BRANCH DISPLAY RESPONSE TION UNIT UNIT
BRANCH * BRANCH * * PROCESSOR TRAINING
* *
*

COMPENSATION/
*
*

*
MEDICAL ORDERING CLAIMS UNIT
UNIT MANAGER
PROTECT. SAR AIR TACTI- RECOVERY FIELD VOLUNTEER *
GROUP * *

*
GROUP CAL GROUP GROUP * OBSERVER COORDINATOR
* * TECHNICAL RECEIVING & COST UNIT
*

FOOD UNIT
*

*
SPECIALISTS DISTRIBUTION
ON WATER WILDLIFE TRAJECTORY
SALVAGE HELICOPTER MANAGER
RECOVERY
GROUP *
GROUP
* COORDIN. REHAB
CENTER*
ANALYSIS *
SPECIALIST *

*
*

FACILITIES
*

DISPOSAL
*

SHORESIDE FIRE FIXED WING GEOGRAPHIC * UNIT

*
RECOVERY SUPPRESSION COORDIN. INFO SPECIALIST
GROUP * GROUP * * SCIENTIFIC SECURITY
SUPPORT *
(GIS)
*

MANAGER

*
DISPOSAL
GROUP *
HAZMAT
GROUP *
AIR SUPPORT RESOURCES AT COORDINATOR *

*
GROUP RISK SPECIALIST VESSEL
* ALTERNATIVE
*

(RAR)
RESPONSE * SUPPORT
UNIT *
*

DECON EMS

*
GROUP * TECHNOLOGY
*

*
GROUP
GROUND
*

LAW EN- POSITIONS SPECIFIC LEGAL SUPPORT

FORCEMENT TO OIL SPILLS
* * UNIT
GROUP *

*
ICSCAD13.dwg
*
*

Figure 1. ICS organizational structure for a major oil spill (modified from STORMS 1996 Field Operations Guide). (Green shading
indicates positions specific to oil spills.

21
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

Command and General Staff: Planning Cycle Guide

OS-231 Agency
Representative
Mtg. (LO)

Off Shift
Executive Summary Available
ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS
INCIDENT
OS-230 ACP: Area Contingency Plan
MANAGEMENT
IAP: Incident Action Plan
213 (All Personnel)
FOSC: Federal On Scene Coordinator
On Shift IC: Incident Commander
214
IO: Information Officer
PLANNING
OS-231 MEETINGS (All Command LO: Liason Officer
Planning Mtg.
COMMAND
& General Staff) UC: Unified Command

202
OS-231
Tactics Mtg.
General Plan INCIDENT
MANAGEMENT
BUSINESS
MANAGEMENT
MEETING
OPERATIONS
COMMAND BRIEFING IAP (with Enclosures)
STAFF
MEETING OS-231 Press Conf. (IO)
ACP, Annex 1, Tab A

OS-209 201 (Initial Response IC)

OS-231 Command OS-231 UC Formation Mtg. (FOSC)
Staff Mtg. (IC/UC)
OS-231 Initial Incident Briefing (Initial
Response IC)
OS-231 Operations Briefing
com_new.dwg 11/97

Figure 2. Command and General Staff Planning Cycle Guide Indicating Activities and Schedule of Form Input and Output
(modified from STORMS Task Force, 1996). Parentheses with an Arrow Exiting the Cycle Indicate the Form Preparer or Meeting
Facilitator.

22
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

Operations Section: Planning Cycle Guide

FIELD OPERATIONS

213 (All Personnel)

220 (OPS/ 211 (Staging Area
Air Operations)
PLANNING Manager)
MEETINGS 214 (All Branch
OS-231 Directors, Division/
Planning Mtg. Group Supervisors,
OPERATIONS Strike Team/Task
Shift Change Force Leaders)
Prepare Mini 215
Operations Plan

215 Coordination/
[OPS+R.U.L.) Debrief OPERATIONS
COORDINATION
OS-231 Shift
Tactics Mtg. (OPS) Change MEETING

IAP (with Enclosures)

OPERATIONS
BRIEFING ACP, Annex 1, Tab A
(Person Receiving Initial Report)
221
201 (Initial Response IC)
OS-231
Operations Briefing (OPS)
ops_new.dwg 11/97

Figure 3. Operations Section Planning Cycle Guide Indicating Activities and Schedule of Form Input and Output (modified from
STORMS Task Force, 1996). ). Parentheses with an Arrow Exiting the Cycle Indicate the Form Preparer or Meeting Facilitator.

23
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

Planning Section Planning Cycle Guide

202 (PSC)
Traffic Plan 203 (R.U.L.)
205 207(R.U.L.)
204 [R.U.L. (Assist by OPS)]
206 OS-232 [S.U.L. (Assist by SSC+RAR)]
Incident Maps (S.U.L.)

General Plan
215
220 210
PREPARE
INCIDENT ACTION PLAN
COMPLETE:
PLANNING DUTIES OS-230 (S.U.L.)

213 (All Personnel)

218
211 (Check-in at
PLANNING Multiple Locations)
FINALIZE IAP
OS-231 MEETINGS 214 (All Unit Leaders)
Planning
Mtg. (PSC) PLANS
OS-231 Prepare for
Planning CO
Tactics Mtg. (PSC) Meeting M
PL
ET
General E ABBREVIATIONS & ACRONYMS
Plan (PSC) Shift IA
Change P IAP Cover Sheet (S.U.L.) ACP: Area Contingency Plan
Executive Prepare for IAP: Incident Action Plan
Summary (PSC) Operations
Briefing IC: Incident Commander
OPS: Operations Section
Finalize IAP (with Enclosures) (PSC) PSC: Planning Section Chief
OS-209 OPERATIONS RAR: Resources at Risk
BRIEFING ACP Annex 1, Tab A (S.U.L.)
IAP (with Enclosures)
Technical Specialist
OS-231 Business Mgmt. Mtg. R.U.L.: Resources Unit Leader
OS-209 (S.U.L.) 219 (R.U.L.) SSC: Scientific Support Coordinator
221 Demobilization U.L.) S.U.L.: Situation Unit Leader
ACP Site Index/ Response Actions 201 (Initial Response IC)
(S.U.L. with SSC+RAR) OS-231 Operations Briefing (PSC) plnamop.dwg

Figure 4. Planning Section Planning Cycle Guide Indicating Activities and Schedule of Form Input and Output (modified from
STORMS Task Force, 1996). Parentheses with an Arrow Exiting the Cycle Indicate the Form Preparer or Meeting Facilitator.

24
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

Logistics Section: Planning Cycle Guide

(Communications Unit Leader) 205 206 (Medical Unit Leader)

Traffic Plan
(Ground Support Unit Leader)

210 (Radio/Telephone
Operators)
COMPLETE
LOGISTICS DUTIES

Prepare for
Shift Operation Shift
Change Change 213 (All Personnel)
218 (Ground Support Unit Leader)
PLANNING
MEETINGS 214 (All Branch Directors
OS-231 and Unit Leaders)
211
Planning Mtg. (Communications Center Manager)
LOGISTICS

BUSINESS
MANAGEMENT
MEETING
Prepare
for IAP (with Enclosures)
OPERATIONS
OS-231 Business Bus. Mgmt. BRIEFING
Mtg. 216 (Communications Unit Leader)
Management Mtg. 217 (Communications Unit Leader)
221
201 (Initial Response IC)

log_new.dwg 11/97

Figure 5. Logistics Section Planning Cycle Guide Indicating Activities and Schedule of Form Input and Output (modified from
STORMS Task Force, 1996). Parentheses with an Arrow Exiting the Cycle Indicate the Form Preparer or Meeting Facilitator.

25
1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

Finance/Administration Section: Planning Cycle Guide

COMPLETE
FINANCE/
ADMINISTRATION
Ti DUTIES
m
e
Un Check Injuries
it & Claims Reports 213 (All Personnel)
Of Shift
fS
hi Change
ft
PLANNING
MEETINGS 214 (All Unit Leaders)
OS-231 211
Planning Mtg.
FINANCE
ADMINISTRATION

Complete
All Reports &
Records

Prepare for
BUSINESS Operation
MANAGEMENT Prepare Shift Change
MEETING for Bus.
Mgmt.
Mtg. IAP (with Enclosures)
OPERATIONS
OS-231 Business Time Unit BRIEFING 221
Management on Shift
Mtg. (F/ASC)

201 (Initial Response IC)

fin_new.dwg 11/97
Figure 6. Finance/Administration Section Planning Cycle Guide Indicating Activities and Schedule of Form Input and Output
(modified from STORMS Task Force, 1996). Parentheses with an Arrow Exiting the Cycle Indicate the Form Preparer or Meeting
Facilitator.

26
 1997 Arctic Marine Oil Program (AMOP) Environment Canada

Figure 7. Example Pre-prepared Assignment Sheet for SCAT Surveys that can be
Integrated into the flexible NIIMS ICS used by the U.S. Coast Guard (compliments of
the Chevron Environmental Functional Team, 1996).

ASSIGNMENT SHEET (; FIELD, … OFFICE)

Incident Name:
Date: Time:
Operational Period:
Division: Group:
Mission: ORGANIZE AND MANAGE SCAT TEAMS.

Objective: To characterize the ecology, geology, cultural resources, and

cleanup requirements of specific segments of shoreline.
Tactical Strategy: Conduct detailed site surveys using a multi-disciplinary
team of specialists and Agency personnel.
Location: Specific areas within the spill site.
RESOURCES

Qty EQUIPMENT Status Qty PERSONNEL Status

1 Van (transportation) 1 Co. professional

1 Video/35mm + film 4 Consults. (ecologist,

5 Shovels/measuring scales geomorphologist,

10 Field notebooks cultural resources, &

5 Rain gear/boots cleanup specialist)

5 Clip boards/plastic bags 1-4 Agency personnel, as

5 Duct tape/Office supplies requested

20 Sorbent pads 1 Support (office)

3 50 m metric tape
STATUS KEY: 1 = ASSIGNED, 2 = REQUESTED, 3 = REASSIGNED, 4 = SURPLUS

SCHEDULE STATUS KEY: 1 = ASSIGNED, 2 = REQUESTED, 3 = REASSIGNED, 4 = SURPLUS

Start Time: Finish Time:

Prepared by: … Environmental Unit

27

View publication stats