Case Study Phase 2: National Infrastructure Protection Plan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Case Study Phase 2: National Infrastructure Protection Plan     

Amare Alemu

Strayer University

CIS 502: Theory of Security Management

Professor Mark O. Afolabi, Ph.D.

August 9, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Case Study Phase 2: National Infrastructure Protection Plan

Introduction

           Protection of the Nation’s physical and cyber infrastructure and the people who operate and use these vital systems is a highly challenging portion of the overall homeland security effort. The national architecture of Critical Infrastructures and Key Resources (CIKR) assets and systems continually grow more complex and more interdependent. Therefore, plans must cut across a broad range of sectors, Federal and non-Federal governmental entities, and critical industries. In this paper, first, the communication plan will be visually demonstrated. Secondly, the paper will analyze how to manage risk. Next, the paper will communicate how CIKR protection is an essential part of the Homeland Security Mission. Further, the article will ensure an Effective, Efficient Program Over the Long Term. Lastly, the article will provide a summary of National Infrastructure Protection Plan.

         According to Michael Chertoff, (2009), the author, the communication plan will be visually demonstrated by addressing five primary communications channels which will communicate with Department of Homeland Security, DHS.  First, Sector-Specific Agency communicates with DHS. Given their unique capabilities and individual risk landscapes, CIKR sectors each face different challenges. For instance, some sectors have distinct, easily identifiable assets that can be logically prioritized. Some are characterized by thousands of distributed assets, not all of which are equally critical. Others are made up of systems or networks for which the identification of specific protective measures may prove to be incredibly complicated, but should be attempted nonetheless. Furthermore, interdependencies among sectors can cause duplicative efforts or lead to gaps in funding for CIKR protection. To ensure that government resources are allocated according to national priorities and are based on national risk, need, and effective risk-reduction opportunities, DHS must be able to accurately assess priorities, requirements, and efforts across these diverse sectors. Requirements driven by regulations, statutes, congressional mandates, and presidential directives should also be considered. As DHS conducts this assessment, the SSAs, supported by their respective SCCs and GCCs, provide information regarding their sectors’ individual CIKR protection efforts. The SCCs participate in the process to ensure that private sector input is reflected in SSA reporting on industry priorities and requirements. The first step for an SSA in the risk-informed resource allocation process is to coordinate with industry partners, including SCCs and GCCs, as appropriate, to determine sector priorities, program requirements, and resource needs for CIKR protection. HSPD-7 requires each SSA to provide an annual report to the Secretary of Homeland Security on their efforts to identify, prioritize, and coordinate CIKR protection and resiliency in their respective sectors. Consistent with this requirement, DHS provides the SSAs with reporting guidance and templates that include requests for specific information, such as CIKR protection priorities, needs, and resources. Second, State Government communicates with DHS. Like sectors, State governments face diverse CIKR protection challenges and have different priorities, needs, and available resources. Furthermore, State CIKR protection efforts are closely intertwined with those of other government and private sector partners. In particular, States work in close collaboration with local and tribal governments to address CIKR protection challenges at those levels. To accurately assess the CIKR protection effort and identify needs that warrant attention at a national level, DHS must aggregate information across State jurisdictions as it does across sectors. DHS requires that each State develop a homeland security strategy that establishes goals and objectives for its homeland security program, which includes CIKR protection as a core element. State administrative agencies develop a Program and Capability Enhancement Plan that prioritizes statewide resource needs to support this program.  Third, State, Local, Tribal, and Territorial Government Coordinating Council communicates with DHS. The intent of the SLTTGCC is to provide input and suggestions for implementation of the NIPP, including sector protection programs and initiatives. These types of engagements foster broad public sector partner involvement in actively developing CIKR protection priorities and requirements. Through the SLTTGCC Annual Report, the Council provides annual updates on CIKR programs and initiatives that are being conducted or planned by the Council, DHS, other Federal partners, or private sector partners. Fourth, Regional Consortium Coordinating Council communicates with DHS. Cross-sector and multi-jurisdictional CIKR protection challenges provide an opportunity to manage interdependent risks at the regional level. Individually, the activities of the local consortium enhance the physical security, cyber security, emergency preparedness, and overall public-private continuity and resiliency of one or more States, urban areas, or municipalities. The RCCC provides a unique mechanism to integrate NIPP implementation on a regional scale and details its efforts in the RCCC Annual Report. Fifth, Aggregating Submissions to DHS. DHS uses the information collected from the Sector CIKR Protection Annual Reports, the SLTTGCC Annual Report, the RCCC Annual Report, and State reports to assess CIKR protection status and requirements across the country. As national priorities and requirements are established, DHS will develop funding recommendations for programs and initiatives designed to reduce national-level risk in the CIKR protection mission area. In cases where gaps or duplicative efforts exist, DHS will work with the SSA and the States to identify strategies or additional funding sources to help ensure that national CIKR protection priorities are efficiently and more addressed. Secondly, according to Michael Chertoff, (2009), the author, the paper analyzed the risk management and discussed that DHS, in collaboration with the SSA and other sector partners, undertakes many protective programs, resiliency strategies, initiatives, activities, and reports that support CIKR protection. Many of these are available to or provide resources for CIKR partners. Furthermore, the above mentioned five communication plans are mainly meant to address on how to manage risk in protecting the CIKR. The NIPP uses the risk management framework to support coordination between CIKR partners outside the Federal Government. Each step of the risk management framework presents opportunities for collaboration between and among all CIKR partners. Coordination between State and local agencies and the sectors themselves ensures that cross-sector needs and priorities are more accurately identified and understood. Government coordination with private sector owners and operators at all levels is required throughout the process to: ensure a unified national CIKR protection effort; provide accurate, secure identification of CIKR assets and systems; provide and protect risk-related information; ensure implementation of appropriate protective measures; measure program effectiveness; and make required improvements. Next, the author Michael Chertoff, (2009), discussed and communicated that the result of the interrelated set of national authorities, strategies, and initiatives is a standard, holistic approach to achieving the homeland security mission that includes an emphasis on preparedness across the board and on the protection of America’s CIKR as a steady-state component of routine, day-to-day business operations for government and private sector partners. The NIPP and NRF are complementary plans that span a spectrum of prevention, protection, response, and recovery activities to enable this coordinated approach on a day-to-day basis, as well as during periods of heightened threat. The NIPP and its associated SSPs establish the Nation’s steady-state level of protection by helping to focus resources where investment yields the greatest return in terms of national risk management. The NRF addresses response and short-term recovery in the context of domestic threat and incident management. The National Preparedness Guidelines support implementation of both the NIPP and the NRF by establishing national priorities and guidance for building the requisite capabilities to support both plans at all levels of government. Each of the guiding elements includes specific requirements for DHS and other Federal departments and agencies to build engaged partnerships and work in cooperation and collaboration with State, local, tribal, and private sector partners. This partnership and cooperation between government and private sector owners and operators is specifically applicable to the CIKR protection efforts outlined in the NIPP. Furthermore, According to Sujeet Shenoi, (2017), The critical infrastructure sectors include: information technology, telecommunications, energy, banking and finance, transportation systems, chemicals, significant manufacturing, agriculture and food, defense industrial base, public health and health care, national monuments and icons, drinking water and water treatment systems, commercial facilities, dams, emergency services, nuclear reactors, materials and waste, postal and shipping, and government facilities. Protecting and ensuring the continuity of operation of critical infrastructure assets are vital to national security, public health and safety, economic vitality, and societal well-being. According to Michael Chertoff, (2009), the author, the paper discussed to ensuring an effective and efficient program over the Long Term. The key activities that are needed for achieving this are 1. Building national awareness to support the CIKR protection program and related investments by ensuring a focused understanding of the all-hazards risk environment and what is being done to protect and enable the timely restoration of the Nation’s CIKR considering such threats; 2. Enabling education, training, and exercise programs to ensure that skilled and knowledgeable professionals and experienced organizations can undertake NIPP-related responsibilities in the future; 3. Conducting R&D and using technology to improve protective capabilities or resiliency strategies or to lower the costs of existing capabilities so that CIKR partners can afford to do more with limited budgets; 4. Developing, protecting, and maintaining data systems and simulations to enable continuously refined risk assessment within and across sectors and to ensure preparedness for domestic incident management; and 5. Continually improving the NIPP and associated plans and programs through ongoing management and revision, as required.

           In conclusion, the paper, firstly, discussed and visually demonstrated the communication scheme. Secondly, the paper analyzed how to manage risk. Next, the paper presented and communicated how CIKR protection is an essential part of the Homeland Security Mission. Lastly, the article discussed the topic of Ensuring an Effective, Efficient Program Over the Long Term.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Chertoff, M. (2009). National Infrastructure Protection Plan. Retrieved on August 07, 2017      from http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/NIPP_Plan.pdf

 

  Shenoi S. (2017). International Journal of Critical Infrastructure Protection. Retrieved on    

                        August 07, 2017 from https://www.journals.elsevier.com/international journal-of-critical infrastructure-protection/