Case Study Phase 4: National Infrastructure Protection Plan

 

 

                                                             

 

 

 

 

Case Study Phase 4: National Infrastructure Protection Plan     

Amare Alemu

Strayer University

CIS 502: Theory of Security Management

Professor Mark O. Afolabi, Ph.D.

September 6, 2017

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Case Study Phase 4: National Infrastructure Protection Plan

Introduction

           The National Infrastructure Protection Plan (NIPP) framework supports the prioritization of protection and resiliency initiatives. Investments across sectors to guarantee that government and private sector resources are utilized where they offer the most benefit for mitigating risk by lessening vulnerabilities, deterring threats, and minimizing the consequences of terrorist attacks and other man-made and natural disasters. In this regard to have successful achievement the plan should be backed up with appropriate budgetary plan as well. Thus, in this paper, first, all the components included in the previous phase will be analyzed. Secondly, the paper will analyze how to manage risk. Next, the paper will determine methods for organizing and partnering for Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources (CIKR) protection. Further, the article will provide resources for CIKR protection program. Lastly, the article will provide a summary of National Infrastructure Protection Plan.

         According to John Kelly, (2018), the author, discussed on five components (though according to Michael Chertoff, (2009), they were eighteen) and analyzed them as follows. 1. Securing Our Borders: Our Nation’s land and maritime borders security is critical and requires investment in people, infrastructure, and technology. To stop illegal migrants, criminals, and terrorists from threatening our homeland, we need to know who is coming into our country, where they have been, and why they want to come. Fostering legal pathways for immigration, trade, and travel remain vital DHS goals and support our compliance with the President’s Executive Orders, even while we focus on reducing the flow of illegal immigration and illicit contraband. 2. Enforcing Our Immigration Laws: Enforcing and administering the Nation’s immigration laws continues to be a priority of the Department. The United States welcomes anyone who comes to our country by legal means; however, illegal immigration presents an unknown risk to the safety and security of the American people. Each day, the dedicated men and women of U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) carry out their mission and enforce our Nation’s existing immigration laws to protect the United States from the cross-border crime and illegal immigration that threaten national security and public safety and economic security. DHS is committed to the rule of law and is taking targeted enforcement actions to identify, locate, arrest, and deport illegal aliens from the United States. 3. Cyber Security: As cyber threats evolve; DHS’s intelligence enterprise is evolving to implement real-time prevention and mitigation strategies and ensure the right people get the right information on time. 4. Aviation Security: The threat to aviation security remains high, and criminals and terrorists continue to target airlines, airports, and the security and law enforcement officials who protect them. 5. American Preparedness and Resilience: Natural disasters, major accidents or disruptions continue to challenge DHS and the Nation. In collaboration with State, local, and tribal governments across the country the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) ensures effective emergency responses to mitigate destruction caused by, and recover from, a variety of disasters ranging from unforeseen, no-notice events to catastrophic events such as hurricanes and tornados. It is also discussed by Michael Chertoff, (2009). 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 and 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 determined that methods for organizing and partnering for CIKR Protection. The enormity and complexity of the Nation’s CIKR, the distributed character of our national protective architecture, and the doubtful nature of the terrorist threat and human-made or natural hazards make the effective implementation of protection and resiliency efforts a great challenge. To be effective, the NIPP must be executed using organizational structures and cooperations committed to sharing and protecting the information needed to reach the NIPP goal and supporting objectives. The purpose of NIPP-related organizational structures, partnerships, and information-sharing networks is to establish the context, framework, and support for activities required to implement and sustain the national CIKR protection effort. Further, according to Michael Chertoff, (2009), the author, discussed and provided resources for the CIKR Protection Program. First, Sector-Specific Agency Reporting to DHS: The 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 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. Second, State Government Reporting to DHS: 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 Reporting to DHS: The SLTTGCC intends to provide inputs 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. Fourth, Regional Consortium Coordinating Council Reporting to 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 regional 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. 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. Furthermore, according to Sujeet Shenoi, (2017), the critical infrastructure sectors include information technology, telecommunications, energy, banking, and finance. And also include 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.

           In conclusion, the paper, firstly, discussed and analyzed the components included in the previous phases. Secondly, the paper analyzed how to manage risk. Thirdly, the paper determined methods for organizing and partnering for CIKR protection. Lastly, the paper provided resources for the CIKR Protection Program.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

References

Kelly, John. (2018). FY 2018 Budget in Brief. Retrieved on Sept 1, 2017

from https://www.dhs.gov/publication/fy-2018-budget-brief

Chertoff, M. (2009). National Infrastructure Protection Plan. Retrieved

          on September 1, 2017, from http://www.dhs.gov/xlibrary/assets/NIPP_Plan.pdf

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

         September 1, 2017, from https://www.journals.elsevier.com/international journal-of-critical infrastructure-protection/