Transmittal - 4/4/2024CITY COUNCIL TRANSMITTAL
_______________________ Date Received: ___________
Rachel Otto, Chief of Staff Date sent to Council: ___________
TO: Salt Lake City Council DATE: 04/03/2024
Victoria Petro, Chair
FROM: Karl Lieb, Chief – Fire Department
________________________
(signature)
SUBJECT: Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
STAFF CONTACTS: Robert Stafford, Assistant Fire Chief, Robert.stafford@slcgov.com
Tyler Shepherd, Battalion Chief, tyler.shepherd@slcgov.com
Jaysen Oldroyd, Senior City Attorney, jaysen.oldroyd@slcgov.com
DOCUMENT TYPE: Resolution
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council pass this resolution adopting
the Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan.
BUDGET IMPACT: There will be no material budget impact associated with adopting the
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan.
BACKGROUND/DISCUSSION: Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management
Plan establishes the framework through which Salt Lake City will respond to, recover, from,
prepare for, and mitigate against all hazards that threaten Salt Lake City. This plan is intended
to be used as a guide the city may follow when executing response or recovery operations during
a disaster and to guide preparedness and mitigation operations. The plan also addresses
emergency operations with other government entities including, but not limited to, Salt Lake
County and the State of Utah.
Robert Stafford, Tyler Shepherd, and Jaysen Oldroyd would be available to be at the table during
the work session. A clean copy (approved as to form) version of the proposed resolution is
included with this transmittal.
rachel otto (Apr 4, 2024 13:23 MDT)04/04/2024
04/04/2024
SALT LAKE CITY RESOLUTION
NO._________OF 2024
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF SALT LAKE CITY APPROVING AND ADOPTING THE SALT
LAKE CITY COMPREHENSIVE EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT PLAN
RECITALS
WHEREAS, Salt Lake City Corporation (“City”) recognizes it is at risk to a wide range of
potential natural, technological, and man-made emergencies and disaster and that there exists a need
for ongoing emergency planning by the City – including cooperative efforts with other jurisdictions
of government that have responsibilities and authority in or around the boundaries of Salt Lake City
(“Related Jurisdictions”); and
WHEREAS, to provide a framework for Salt Lake City to plan and perform its respective
emergency functions, including coordinating with Related Jursidictions, during or in response to an
emergency or disaster; and
WHEREAS, to provide guidance regarding the establishment and use of policies and
procedures that address an emergency or disaster; and
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Council has determined that it is in the best interest of the
citizens of Salt Lake City to have an established plan whereby Salt Lake City can perform its
respective emergency functions, including coordinating with Related Jurisdictions, during or in
response to an emergency or disaster; and
WHEREAS, the Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan attached hereto
as EXHIBIT A addresses the City’s performance of its respective emergency functions and is
designed to comply with all applicable federal, state, and local laws, rules, and ordinances.
2
RESOLUTION
NOW THEREFORE, be it resolved by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah:
SECTION 1. That the Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan,
attached hereto as EXHIBIT A, is hereby adopted.
SECTION 2. That the Salt Lake City Mayor is authorized to implement the Salt Lake City
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan, as attached hereto as EXHIBIT A.
SECTION 3. This resolution shall take effect upon adoption.
Passed by the City Council of Salt Lake City, Utah, this ______ day of _____________, 2024.
SALT LAKE CITY COUNCIL
_______________________
CHAIRPERSON
ATTEST AND COUNTERSIGN:
_______________________________
CITY RECORDER Salt Lake City Attorney’s Office
Approved As To Form
___ _______
Jaysen Oldroyd
A
AA
SALT LAKE CITY
Comprehensive Emergency
Management Plan
Revised December 2023
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 1
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) establishes the
framework through which Salt Lake City will respond to, recover from, prepare for, and
mitigate against all hazards that threaten Salt Lake City. Local government has the
primary responsibility of emergency management activities. When the emergency
exceeds the local government’s capabilities to respond, assistance will be requested
from Salt Lake County, and then the State of Utah. The Federal Government will aid the
State when appropriate. This plan is based upon the concept that the emergency
functions for city departments, functions or groups will generally parallel their normal
day-to-day functions. To the extent possible, the same personnel and material resources
will be employed in both cases.
Along with the supporting documents section, this plan is intended to be used as a guide
when executing response or recovery operations during a disaster and to guide
preparedness and mitigation operations.
Salt Lake City has chosen to mirror the Salt Lake County CEMP to standardize documents
that set forth the city’s role in organizing and responding to emergencies within the
jurisdiction.
The intended audience for the CEMP includes:
• Salt Lake City leadership
• Salt Lake City Division of Emergency Management (EM) staff
• Salt Lake City staff expected to support response, recovery, preparedness, and
mitigation operations
• Salt Lake City, County, State, federal, private-sector, and non-governmental
organizations (NGO) that may support response, recovery, preparedness, and
recovery operations
Navigating the Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
The following sections in the CEMP provide direction on emergency or disaster
activation, response, recovery, preparedness, and mitigation procedures.
Activation occurs after identifying an occurring or imminent emergency or disaster
incident. Operations in this section include:
• Assessing the scope and potential impacts of the emergency
• Convening the Policy Group and senior leadership to determine response
priorities and next steps
• Activating the CEMP to facilitate response and recovery operations
• Determining which Salt Lake City facilities are activated to support response and
recovery operations
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 2
• Staffing the Emergency Coordination Center (ECC) to facilitate and support
response and recovery operations
Response includes immediate operations following the identification of an occurring or
imminent emergency or disaster to save lives and prevent further property damage.
Operations in this section include:
• Forming a common operating picture to ensure situational awareness among
responding entities
• Developing and documenting incident priorities through the Incident Action Plan
(IAP)
• Issuing and/or coordinating with the County for timely and accurate public
warning and guidance to the community
• Implementing protective actions, such as evacuations and sheltering, to save lives
and property
• Coordinating with partners such as other municipalities, the County, and the State
to support emergency or disaster response
• Documenting response operations to support audits, documentation policies,
and transition to recovery operations
Recovery operations support returning the community to pre-emergency or disaster
conditions. Operations in this section include:
• Transitioning from response to recovery operations
• Assessing recovery needs of the community to execute targeted recovery
operations
• Initiating long-term recovery efforts to support the community returning to normal
Preparedness operations prepare for and mitigate the impacts of all hazards.
Operations in this section include:
• Developing planning documentation to formalize capabilities and procedures
that prepare for and mitigate the impacts of emergencies and disasters
• Conducting mitigation planning to build resilience and identify mitigation actions
to lessen the impacts of specific hazards
• Training and exercising on plans and procedures to support execution of
response and recovery operations
• Involving the public in emergency management through outreach to increase
community preparedness
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 3
Additional Elements and supporting documents of the Comprehensive Emergency
Management Plan (CEMP)
The following documents provide additional tools and information to support operations
in the CEMP:
• Continuity of Operations / Government Plans (COOPs)
• Functional Annexes
• Hazard-specific Annexes
• Emergency Support Functions Handbook
• Recovery Support Functions Handbook
• Policy Group Handbook
• City Council Emergency Group Handbook
• Crisis Communications Plan
• FEMA’s National Disaster Recovery Framework
• FEMA’s Pre-Disaster Recovery Planning Guide for Local Governments
• Salt Lake County Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
• Salt Lake County Hazard Mitigation Plan
• Appendices
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 4
PROMULGATION
Transmitted herewith is the Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
(CEMP). The CEMP was developed through the collaborative efforts of Salt Lake City
Emergency Management (EM) and stakeholders from Salt Lake City departments,
municipalities, Salt Lake County Emergency Management, and the Utah Division of
Emergency Management (DEM).
EM appreciates the cooperation and support from all stakeholders that contributed to
the development of the CEMP. EM, Salt Lake City departments, and supporting
municipal, County and State organizations listed in this plan will review the CEMP for
accuracy on a periodic basis.
The CEMP and its supporting documents supersede any previous Emergency
Management plan and have been approved for implementation by:
Name Position Date
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 5
RECORD OF DISTRIBUTION
Table 0.1: Record of Distribution
Name Title Agency Date Delivered Number of
Copies
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 6
RECORD OF REVISION
Table 0. 2: Record of Revision
Section Title Revision Summary Date Revised By (Name)
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 7
Table of Contents
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ............................................................................................. 1
PROMULGATION ...................................................................................................... 4
RECORD OF DISTRIBUTION ...................................................................................... 5
RECORD OF REVISION .............................................................................................. 6
1. BASE PLAN INTRODUCTION .............................................................................. 9
1.1 Purpose ....................................................................................................... 9
1.2 Scope ......................................................................................................... 10
1.3 Authorities and References ........................................................................ 10
1.4 Access and Functional Needs..................................................................... 14
2. SALT LAKE CITY HAZARDS ............................................................................... 14
2.1 Hazard Overview ....................................................................................... 14
3. ASSUMPTIONS ................................................................................................. 16
4. CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS ............................................................................. 17
4.1 Activation .................................................................................................. 18
4.1.1 Assess the Emergency ................................................................................................... 18
4.1.2 Convene Policy Group and Senior Leadership ........................................................... 19
4.1.2.1 The Policy Group ............................................................................................................ 19
4.1.3 Determine Whether CEMP Activation is Required ...................................................... 20
4.1.3.1 Determine Which Emergency Facilities to Use ........................................................... 21
4.1.3.2 Activate the Emergency Coordination Center ............................................................ 21
4.1.3.3 ECC Activation Levels..................................................................................................... 22
4.1.3.5 Staff the Emergency Coordination Center (ECC) ........................................................ 23
4.1.3.8 Notify Personnel of Activation ....................................................................................... 26
4.2 Response ................................................................................................... 27
4.2.1 Establish a Common Operating Picture ....................................................................... 28
4.2.2 Determine Incident Priorities ......................................................................................... 29
4.2.2.1 Develop an Incident Action Plan ................................................................................... 29
4.2.3 Respond to the Emergency ........................................................................................... 30
4.2.3.2 Communicate with the Community .............................................................................. 31
4.2.3.3 Take Protective Actions .................................................................................................. 33
4.2.3.4 Perform Damage Assessments ..................................................................................... 36
4.2.3 Request Mutual Aid ........................................................................................................ 36
4.2.4 Request a Disaster Declaration ..................................................................................... 36
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 8
4.2.5 Coordinate with Non-City Partners ............................................................................... 38
4.3 Recovery ............................................................ Error! Bookmark not defined.
4.3.1 Recovery Framework ...................................................................................................... 40
4.3.2 Recovery Support Functions (RSFs) .............................................................................. 41
4.3.3 Recovery Task Force (RTF) ............................................................................................. 43
4.3.3.1 RTF Activation ................................................................................................................. 44
4.3.3.2 Recovery Plans ................................................................................................................ 44
4.5 Preparedness ............................................................................................. 46
4.5.1 Develop Plans for Future Emergencies ........................................................................ 46
4.5.2 Involve the Community in Emergency Management ................................................. 47
5. ADMINISTRATION, FINANCE, LOGISTICS, AND PLAN MAINTENANCE............ 48
5.1 Administration Information ........................................................................... 48
5.1.1 Records Preservation and Restoration ......................................................................... 48
5.1.2 Reports and Records ...................................................................................................... 49
5.2 Financial Management .................................................................................. 49
5.2.1 Accounting ...................................................................................................................... 50
5.2.2 Fiscal Agreements .......................................................................................................... 50
5.3 Financial Management .................................................................................. 50
5.4 Plan Maintenance .......................................................................................... 51
5.4.1 Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan Maintenance .................................. 51
6. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ........................................................................ 53
5.1 Functional Responsibilities ........................................................................ 53
5.2 General Roles and Responsibilities ............................................................ 55
5.2.1 Salt Lake City ................................................................................................................... 55
5.2.2 County .............................................................................................................................. 57
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 9
1. BASE PLAN INTRODUCTION
The Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) establishes the framework
through which Salt Lake City will respond to, recover from, prepare for, and mitigate
against all hazards that threaten Salt Lake City. It describes the comprehensive
integration and coordination of all levels of municipal, county, state, and federal
government, volunteer organizations, non-profit agencies, and the private sector.
1.1 Purpose
The base plan provides a comprehensive overview of scalable command and control
structures and operational procedures across all levels of government to prepare for,
respond to, recover from, and mitigate against all hazards. The base plan for Salt Lake
City establishes a framework for an effective system of comprehensive emergency
operations and management for the purpose of:
• Reducing the loss of life, injury, property damage and loss from natural or man-
made emergencies.
• Preparing for prompt and efficient response activities to protect lives and
property impacted by emergencies.
• Responding to emergencies with the effective use of all relevant plans and
appropriate resources.
• Providing for the rapid and orderly implementation of recovery operations.
• Assisting in awareness, education, prevention, and mitigation of emergencies
National Incident Management System Compliance
Response and recovery coordination structures in the base plan are designed to reflect
the National Incident Management System (NIMS), which was adopted by the entire
State via Utah Governor Executive Order 2004-0012.
As defined in the National Incident Management System, 2017, the core components of
NIMS include:
o Resource Management: Standard mechanisms to systematically manage
resources (e.g., personnel, equipment, supplies, teams, and facilities) both before
and during incidents, to help organizations more effectively share resources when
needed.
o Command and Coordination: Leadership roles, processes, and recommended
organizational structures for incident management at the operational and incident
support levels, and an explanation of how these structures interact to manage
incidents effectively and efficiently.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 10
o Communications and Information Management: Systems and methods that
help ensure incident personnel and other decision makers have the means and
information they need to make and communicate decisions.
1.2 Scope
The CEMP consists of this base plan and supporting components. These components
consist of 15 Emergency Support Function (ESF) and six Recovery Support Function (RSF)
checklists and hazard-specific annexes.
• The Base Plan provides information regarding policy and operations focused on
coordination, command and control structures, roles and responsibilities,
procedures, and resources for the City and its departments that support
response, recovery, preparedness, and mitigation for all hazards.
• The Emergency Support Functions (ESF) annex provide an overview of the 15
ESFs and include step-by-step actions for activation, response, and transition to
recovery operations. The checklists are contained in this CEMP.
• The Recovery Support Functions (RSF) annex provide an overview of Salt Lake
City specific step-by-step actions for recovery operations and considerations. The
checklists are contained in the RSF supporting annex.
• The Continuity of Operations Plan for each city department outlines procedures
to ensure essential functions continue to be performed during the disruption of
typical operations.
• The Functional-specific annexes describe general aspects, actions, and
considerations for critical operation functions.
• The Hazard-specific annexes describe unique aspects, actions, and
considerations for specific hazards.
1.3 Authorities and References
The CEMP base plan and accompanying components are governed by multiple City,
County, State, and Federal authorities to include:
• The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act (P.L. 100-
707) Title 44, Code of Federal Regulations, Emergency Management and
Assistance
• The Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA)
• The National Homeland Security and Combating Terrorism Act of 2002 (S.
2452)
• The National Incident Management System
• The National Response Framework
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 11
• State Laws
• City Code and Ordinance
• Other authorities as required
These presuppose an active emergency management function at all levels of
government, and they emphasize the need for emergency planning in advance of the
disaster.
The Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act provides for
federal assistance to state and local governments after a disaster. It provides for
declaration of a disaster by the President, appointment of coordinating officers, and
utilization of various federal resources in the disaster area. The law directs the President
to assist states in developing plans and preparing programs for disaster response and
mitigation.
The Stafford Act has public and private provisions that cover certain costs following a
declared disaster. The public assistance sections provide for federal contributions to
remove debris and to repair or replace facilities and infrastructure that belong to state
or local government or to private, non-profit organizations. The federal reimbursement
may include costs for equipment, materials, contracts and labor costs for base pay or
overtime for regular and temporary or “special hire” employees.
The Individuals and Households sections of the law provide federal assistance for
private individuals affected by the disaster once loss thresholds are met. Housing and
other needs assistance may be provided to homeowners, renters, or individuals.
Housing assistance may take the form of a grant for temporary housing (hotels,
apartments, and travel-trailers), a repair assistance grant, or limited money to help
replace a destroyed home. Other needs assistance includes grants to replace personal
property, to repair or replace automobiles, or to reimburse victims for other serious and
necessary disaster losses such as medical, dental, or funerals. Other provisions may
include disaster unemployment assistance, food stamps assistance, direct distribution
of food, legal services, emergency public transportation, and crisis counseling.
The aforementioned laws and directives are dependent on a presidential disaster
declaration and on appropriate demonstration of need. When a disaster does strike, a
victim’s primary method of applying for assistance is by registering with the Federal
Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) via telephone. Additionally, federal and state
disaster workers may establish a Disaster Recovery Center (DRC) where citizens can
receive help in applying for the above-mentioned assistance or in coping with other
aspects of their disaster loss.
The federal government amended the Stafford Act to include the provisions of the Civil
Defense Act of 1951. This law provided money to state and local governments to build
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 12
emergency management capabilities. Although the law originally provided for
preparedness against enemy attack, its inclusion into the Stafford act expands it to
include preparedness for all hazards that may affect a community.
As defined in the law, the purpose of the emergency management program is to:
• minimize the effects of disaster.
• respond to emergency conditions.
• repair and restore vital infrastructure and facilities.
Identifying hazards, analyzing our capabilities, and planning a comprehensive response
meet these goals. The law places responsibility for this preparedness jointly on federal,
state, and local (municipal or county) governments.
The National Homeland Security and Combating Terrorism Act of 2002 (S.
2452), Implementing Recommendations of the 9/11 Commission Act of
2007 (Public Law 110-53), and the Consolidated Security, Disaster
Assistance and Continuing Appropriations Act of 2009 (Public Law 110-
329), restructures and strengthens the executive branch of the federal
government to better meet the threat to our homeland posed by
terrorism. The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) has the primary
mission to help prevent, protect against, and respond to acts of terrorism
on our soil. Title VIII, Coordination with Non- Federal entities, and others,
establishes the Office for State and Local Government Coordination to
oversee and coordinate departmental programs for and relationships with
state and local governments. This section allows for assessment and
advocacy for the resources needed by state and local governments to
implement the national strategy for combating terrorism.
The Grants Program Directorate (GPD) is charged with coordinating preparedness
efforts at the federal level, and working with all state, local, tribal, parish, and private
sector emergency response providers on all matters pertaining to combating terrorism,
including training, exercises, and equipment support. The GPD supervises the
preparedness grant programs of the federal government. Local governments receive
the benefits of the grant funding. The county is the administrator for some of the federal
preparedness grant programs and provides management and administration of these
grant programs.
The National Incident Management System (NIMS) was initially published by the DHS on
December 18, 2008. It provides a comprehensive and consistent national approach to
all- hazard incident management at all jurisdictional levels and across all functional
emergency management disciplines.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 13
Elected and appointed officials should have a clear understanding of their roles and
responsibilities for successful emergency management and incident response. These
officials include administrative and political personnel, as well as department/agency
administrators who have leadership roles in a jurisdiction, including legislators and chief
executives, whether elected (e.g., governors, mayors, sheriffs, tribal leaders, and county
executives) or appointed (e.g., county administrators and city managers). Although their
roles may require providing direction and guidance to constituents during an incident,
their day-to-day activities do not necessarily focus on emergency management and
incident response.
To better serve their constituents, elected and appointed officials should do the
following:
• Understand, commit to, adopt, and receive NIMS training.
• Provide guidance to their jurisdictions, departments, and/or agencies, with
clearly stated policies for NIMS implementation.
• Participate in exercises.
• Maintain an understanding of basic emergency management, Continuity of
Operations (COOP) and Continuity of Government (COG) plans, jurisdictional
response capabilities, and initiation of disaster declarations.
• Lead and encourage preparedness efforts within the community, agencies of
the jurisdiction, Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs), and the private
sector, as appropriate.
• Help to establish relationships (including mutual aid agreements and assistance
agreements) with other jurisdictions and, as appropriate, NGOs and the private
sector.
• Support and encourage participation in mitigation efforts within the jurisdiction
and, as appropriate, with NGOs and the private sector.
• Understand laws and regulations in their jurisdictions that pertain to emergency
management and incident response.
• Maintain awareness of designated Critical Infrastructure and Key Resources
(collectively CI/KR) within their jurisdictions, potential incident impacts, and
restoration priorities.
Elected and appointed officials may also be called upon to help shape and revise laws,
policies, and budgets to aid in preparedness efforts and to improve emergency
management and incident response activities.
An incident may have a mix of political, economic, social, environmental, public safety,
public health, and financial implications with potentially serious long-term effects.
Frequently, incidents require a coordinated response across agencies, jurisdictions,
including NGOs and the private sector, during which elected and appointed officials
must make difficult decisions under crisis conditions. Elected and appointed officials
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 14
should be aware of how NIMS can work to ensure cooperative response efforts, thereby
minimizing the potential implications of an incident.
1.4 Access and Functional Needs
Salt Lake City and the emergency management plans created strive to encompass the
whole community in a way that provides equal access and response during a disaster.
The goal of any plan or response model is to provide services and support to anyone
affected by catastrophic events. Realizing the specific make-up of a population can better
prepare emergency management professionals in planning for equal access, physical
access, access to effective communication, inclusion, integration, and program
modifications.
The Department of Justice define Access and Functional Needs as
“those actions, services, accommodations, and programmatic, architectural, and
communication modifications that a covered entity must undertake or provide to
afford individuals with disabilities a full and equal opportunity to use and enjoy
programs, services, activities, goods, facilities, privileges, advantages, and
accommodations in the most integrated setting, in light of the exigent
circumstances of the emergency and the legal obligation to undertake advance
planning and prepare to meet the disability-related needs of individuals who
have disabilities as defined by the ADA Amendments Act of 2008, P.L. 110-325,
and those associated with them.”
The ADA and other laws outline steps for disaster operations that apply to preparation,
notification, evacuation and transportation, sheltering, first aid and medical services,
temporary housing, transition back to the community, clean up, and other disaster
related services. This Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan and supporting
documents include guidance on local procedures for meeting these needs
requirements and identifying methods for achieving equitable emergency management
programs.
2. SALT LAKE CITY HAZARDS
2.1 Hazard Overview
The Salt Lake County Hazard Mitigation Plan identifies the hazards that pose a risk to Salt
Lake City and details their potential impacts. Figure 2.1 provides an overview of those
hazards. Additional information on each of the hazards and their impacts can be found
in the Hazard Annexes.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 15
Figure 2. 1: County Hazard Overview
2.2 Identifying Hazard Vulnerabilities
The two core documents and planning processes that identify the City’s vulnerabilities to
hazards are the Salt Lake County Hazard Mitigation Plan and the Threat and Hazard
Identification and Risk Assessment (THIRA). Decision-makers consider the vulnerabilities
in Figure 2.2 when assessing the impacts or potential impacts of disaster or emergency
incidents.
Figure 2. 2: Types of Vulnerability
The base plan has five hazard-specific annexes that describe unique aspects, actions, and
considerations for each of the following hazards:
• Wildfire
• Earthquake
• Severe Weather
• Public Health
• Active Threat
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 16
3. ASSUMPTIONS
The following planning assumptions in Table 3.1 were considered in the development
and execution of the base plan.
Table 3.1: Base Plan Assumptions
Group Assumptions
Coordination
Structures
● Municipal, County, State, and federal response organizations adopt NIMS as the
integrated system to respond to and recover from incidents.
● Emergency Management coordination and resource allocation starts at the city
level and extends to County, State, and federal resources as availability and
capabilities are exhausted.
● The Salt Lake City Emergency Coordination Center (ECC) is staffed with
representatives from City Departments and private organizations grouped under
the ECC/ICS hybrid model with Emergency Support Function (ESF) structure during
response and the Recovery Support Function (RSF) structure during recovery.
Activation
● Some activation notifications and communications depend on availability of
communications and energy infrastructure.
● Damaged infrastructure impacts the speed at which municipal, special service
district, County, State, and federal agencies can activate and deploy resources.
Response
● Salt Lake City makes every reasonable effort to respond in the event of an
emergency or disaster.
● Time of occurrence, severity of impact, weather conditions, population density,
building construction, and cascading events are significant factors that affect
casualties and damage.
● Emergency response capabilities are diminished due to damaged infrastructure and
equipment or inaccessible locales.
● Damages to infrastructure are likely to manifest in direct physical and economic
damages to facilities and systems.
● Disaster relief from agencies outside Salt Lake City may take 72 hours or more to
arrive.
Recovery
● Recovery of losses or reimbursements of costs from federal assistance requires
preparation and compliance with federal statutes and regulations.
● The economic and physical limitations of recovery operations may result in
temporary or protracted interruptions to services.
Preparedness
and Mitigation
● Effective preparedness requires ongoing public community awareness and
education programs so that citizens are prepared and understand their
responsibilities should a major disaster or emergency occur.
● Residents living within Salt Lake City boundaries should maintain essential supplies
to be self-sufficient for a minimum of 96 hours and up to two weeks following the
initial impacts of an emergency or disaster.
● Effective mitigation may prevent certain hazards or incidents from occurring. For
hazards or incidents that cannot be prevented, effective mitigation may reduce
their impacts.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 17
4. CONCEPT OF OPERATIONS
The concept of operations describes command and control structures, operations, and
mechanisms Salt Lake City utilizes to activate, respond to, recover from, and prepare for
all hazards. All emergency and disaster incidents are unique; operations are guided by
the scope of impacts and available resources and capabilities. Figure 4.1 illustrates the
general sequence of events during emergencies and disasters that are expanded upon
in the concept of operations.
Figure 4.1: Concept of Operations
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 18
4.1 Activation
Effective and timely life and property saving operations often depend on prompt
identification and activation of resources during a disaster or emergency. This section
provides an overview of operations that occur after identifying an occurring or imminent
emergency or disaster incident.
Figure 4.2: Activation Phase Overview
ACTIVATION PHASE
Assess the
Emergency
Convene Policy
Group and Senior
Leadership
Determine if
CEMP Activation
is Required
Determine Which
Emergency
Facilities to Use
Staff the ECC
Key Activities
• Emergency Management (EM) and first responders assess potential or actual
emergencies to determine whether the CEMP should be activated, in
coordination with the Policy Group.
• EM, first responders, the Policy Group, and the Salt Lake City Mayor determine
which emergency management facilities should be used to support response.
• EM determines which organizational structures and staff need to be mobilized to
support activated facilities.
• EM notifies personnel they have been activated to support response.
4.1.1 Assess the Emergency
Salt Lake City first responders are often the first agency to identify an imminent or
potential emergency or disaster. Responding agencies on-scene utilize coordination
structures defined in NIMS to respond to and assess the scope or potential impacts of
the incident. Considerations when assessing the scope or potential impacts include:
• Potential for loss of life or injury
• Potential damage to property, roads, electricity, water, and other infrastructure
• Amount of time before incident impact
• Potential economic disruption
Following an initial assessment, responding departments or first responders determine
actions, including activation of resources, plans, communication, scaling up response
operations, and coordinating with Salt Lake City Emergency Management who will
coordinate with Salt Lake County EM if needed.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 19
4.1.2 Convene Policy Group and Senior Leadership
Responding departments should use established communications channels to notify
their senior decision-makers and the Salt Lake City Emergency Management Duty
Officer. The Salt Lake City Emergency Manager, Deputy, or Duty Officer will then make
notifications to the Salt Lake City Mayor, the Standing Policy Group or the Full Policy
Group, of imminent or occurring emergencies or disasters. These channels of Policy
Group notification include:
• City Emergency Notification Program (RAVE)
• SART TEAMS Meeting
• Conference call backup
• Radio Communication
• EM Duty Officer through phone tree
• SLC911 Dispatch Center
The EM Duty Officer is constantly monitoring events within the City and County. An EM
Duty Officer (DO) is always on-call to monitor and follow up on situations, threats, or
events. Upon notification or identification of a threat, the DO is responsible for notifying
other EM staff and acting accordingly to activate or elevate activation of the Emergency
Coordination Center (ECC), as necessary. Once the Emergency Manager arrives at the
ECC they will assume management of the ECC.
4.1.2.1 The Policy Group
The Policy Group consists of elected officials, relevant department heads, and incident-
specific leadership. They oversee and participate in emergency decision-making and
issue appropriate emergency proclamations, resolutions, and executive orders. Their
role is to provide overall direction and objectives that inform response operations and
priorities. Other Policy Group responsibilities include but are not limited to:
• Promulgating plans for safeguarding the lives and property of the residents of the
City
• Providing for the continuance of effective and orderly governmental control for
emergency and recovery operations
• Overseeing and participating in emergency policy decision-making
The Standing Policy Group for Salt Lake City consists of the following city personnel:
• Mayor
• Chief Administrative Officer
• Chief of Staff
• Chief Financial Officer
• Chief Information Officer
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 20
• Chief of Police
• City Attorney
• Communications Director
• Council Executive Chair
• Fire Chief
• Parks & Public Lands Director
• Public Services Director
• Public Utilities Director
• SLC911 Director
• Other Department Directors as needed
Salt Lake City Joint Information System
Salt Lake City procedures for
policy group, emergency
coordination center, and
incident command use the
standard FEMA model for an
ICS/ECC interface.
Communications between the
policy group, ECC, and ICS
will utilize liaisons and basic
unity of command shown in
this figure.
4.1.3 Determine Whether CEMP Activation is Required
Upon identification or warning of an incident, the following senior decision-makers have
the authority to activate the CEMP:
• Salt Lake City Mayor or designee
• Salt Lake City Emergency Manager or designee
• EM Duty Officer (DO)
• Fire Chief or designee
• Police Chief or designee
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 21
Senior leadership considers the initial assessment from first responders to determine if
the CEMP and operations within should be activated. Once the CEMP has been
activated, relevant City Departments, County and State agencies, and partners are
notified to implement the subsequent sections of this plan.
Warn the Community About Imminent Threats
If an emergency or disaster poses an immediate risk to the community, first responder
departments, in coordination with the City Joint Information Center Manager and the
City Emergency Management Duty Officer can activate alert and warnings to the
community. Protective actions should be implemented as rapidly as possible. If needed,
authorized personnel will coordinate with Salt Lake County Emergency Management for
Integrated Public Alert & Warning System (iPAWS) messaging.
4.1.3.1 Determine Which Emergency Facilities to Use
Decide Which Facilities are Necessary to Support Response
Following the activation of the CEMP, the Salt Lake City Emergency Manager or designee
coordinates with the Salt Lake City Mayor, the Policy Group, first responding
departments, and other Salt Lake City leadership. Together, they determine which
facilities to activate.
4.1.3.2 Activate the Emergency Coordination Center
The Salt Lake City Mayor, Emergency Manager, EM Duty Officer (DO), or their interim
successors may activate the ECC at one of five levels in response to an emergency or
disaster, depending on the severity. ECC activation levels provide a means for
centralized response and recovery, with operational plans and activities focused on
efficiency, quality, and quantity of resources. The five levels of activation, potential
conditions for activation and staffing guidelines are described in the following table.
Upon identification of a potential incident or receipt of a notification, EM is responsible
for:
• Contacting the Mayor or designee to discuss the potential ECC activation
• Determining to activate the ECC, either independently or at the direction of City
Leadership
• Activating the ECC at the proper level based on the scope and size of the disaster
or emergency
• Notifying all relevant stakeholders and response partners of ECC activation
through identified communications channels
• Monitoring the emergency or disaster situation to escalate or de-escalate the ECC
activation level
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 22
4.1.3.3 ECC Activation Levels
The Mayor, Emergency Manager, or EM Duty Officer (DO) will activate the ECC at the
level appropriate for the incident. ECC Director checklists provide guidance on activation
procedures and notifications. The activation level can be changed during an event to
accommodate changes in circumstances.
Table 4.3 : Emergency Coordination Center Levels
1.
Activation Level Conditions Staffing Guidelines
Level 1
Full
Activation
The incident requires an extreme
amount of direct assistance for
response and recovery efforts.
Significant community disruption has
occurred.
• Full ECC staffing
• All ECC sections,
branches, and positions
• All ESFs and interagency
liaisons
Level 2
Partial/Full
Activation
The incident requires a high
amount of direct assistance
for response and recovery efforts.
• Moderate ECC staffing
• Relevant ECC sections,
branches, and positions
• Most, but not all, ESFs and
liaisons
Level 3
Partial
Activation
High Public Concern and the
incident requires some ECC
assistance.
• Minimal ECC staffing
• Some ECC sections,
branches, and positions
may be activated
Level 4
Enhanced
Watch
Information gathering begins and
select members of the ECC
maintain situational awareness.
Under these conditions, the ECC is
not activated.
• Anticipation of ECC
assistance and immediate
response to disaster
• Normal EM office staffing
Level 5
Steady
State
Incidents are being responded to
and mitigated by the appropriate
department. The ECC maintains
situational awareness.
• Normal EM office staffing
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 23
4.1.3.5 Staff the Emergency Coordination Center (ECC)
When an event requires ECC activation, the Salt Lake City Emergency Manager or
designee determines which ECC sections, branches, and positions are activated or
deactivated depending on the emergency or disaster's scope and size.
The ECC uses an ICS/Hybrid Structure to respond to incidents and is organized by:
• Sections that group the operations of the four core functions of the ECC
• Branches that organize section-specific operations and may have a combination
of ESF and ECC positions
• ESF positions and units that are groupings of similar organizations and agencies
to support section and branch-specific operations
• ECC positions provide specific support for ECC sections and overall ECC
operations, such as safety, communications support, and documentation
Error! Reference source not found.5 provides an overview of the Salt Lake City ECC
structure, including sections, branches, and positions.
Figure 4.4: IC / ECC Coordination
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 24
Figure 4.5: Emergency Coordination Center Organization
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 25
4.1.3.7 Activate Emergency Coordination Center Sections and Branches
Emergency Coordination Center Sections
ECC sections group the overarching operations of the ECC by function. Table 4.6
provides an overview of the four ECC Sections.
Table 4.6: ECC Sections
__________________________________________________
Operations Coordination
Section
Provides coordination and communication with on-scene
emergency responders and tactical operations. May be organized
as Branches or ESFs
Planning Coordination
Section
Receives, evaluates, and analyzes all emergency or disaster
information and provides updated status reports to the ECC and
Command to facilitate situational awareness. Conduct ICS meetings
within the Planning P. In addition, the ECC Planning Coordination
Section maintains documentation with emergency or disaster
information.
Logistics Coordination Section Procures supplies, personnel, and material support needed to
conduct emergency response and recovery operations.
Finance/Administration
Coordination Section
Coordinates cost accountability, purchase authorizations,
documentation, and human resource needs.
Intelligence and Information
Depending on the type, scope, and size of an incident the
Emergency Manager may choose to activate the Intelligence and
Information as a Section rather than a unit within Planning. This
Section collects, analyzes, and synthesizes disaster-related
intelligence and data.
__________________________________________________
Emergency Coordination Center ESFs, Branches, & Units
The ECC Sections contain either units or ESFs that organize the structure into similar
position functions based on event needs and staffing capabilities. The hybrid ICS-ESF
structure allows for greater flexibility In ECC organizational structure. Branches may be
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 26
needed when the number of ESFs activated exceeds the span of control of the
Coordination Section Chief.
ECC Branch ECC Section n Description
Public Safety Branch Operations
Coordinates life safety supporting functions
such as firefighting, law enforcement,
evacuations, and animal protection.
Public Works Branch Operations
Coordinates public works such as
infrastructure, transportation, public utilities,
public services, and sustainability.
Services Branch Logistics Responsible for developing plans and supplying
medical, communication, and food
Support Branch Logistics
Responsible for ordering, setting up,
maintaining, and demobilizing supplies,
facilities, and ground support resources.
__________________________________________________
4.1.3.8 Notify Personnel of Activation
Once the Salt Lake City Emergency Manager or designee has decided to activate ECC
sections, branches, ESFs, and positions, EM notifies City staff and supporting
organizations of their activation and expected next steps. Activation notifications can be
sent through a variety of channels, including:
• Phone calls
• Emails
• Text alerts
• Microsoft Teams or City Video Conferencing Software
• RAVE or City Alerting Software
Figure 4.6 shows the communication flow path and emergency check-in process for
parties that respond to and have a responsibility in the SLC ECC. Detailed information
and supplemental documents regarding procedures for ECC activation can be found in
the Salt Lake City Fire Department Emergency Management Policies and Procedures.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 27
4.2 Response
Response begins immediately after an incident occurs or is identified. Response
operations often start at the Department level, then expand to the City ECC, County,
State, and Federal support as the needs of the incident exceed capabilities. In
compliance with Homeland Security Presidential Directive 5, municipal, special service
district, County, State, and responding federal entities utilize NIMS as the coordination
structure to facilitate command and control during response operations. An effective
response depends on proper incident evaluation, rapid interagency coordination, and
efficient utilization of available resources.
Response operations consist of immediate actions that save lives and prevent further
property damage, such as fire suppression, food distribution, and communicating
emergency public information. Municipal, County, and State agencies are responsible for
executing these actions to limit the impacts of the incident on the affected community.
Figure 3.7: Response Phase Overview
Key Activities
• First responders perform immediate life-saving and protective actions as they
arrive on-scene of the incident.
• Incident Command directs first responders, supporting agencies, and the ECC to
coordinate protective actions.
• ECC coordinates interagency information sharing to establish a common
operating picture and maintain situational awareness across the response.
• ECC organizes ESF Operations Support around the assessment and stabilization
of Community Lifelines.
• EM, first responders, the Joint Information Center (JIC) and other supporting City
entities provide warning and status updates to the community through various
notification platforms.
• EM coordinates agencies and organizations to conduct rapid damage
assessments (RDA) and initial damage estimates to determine immediate
response needs and begin to estimate monetary damages.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 28
• The ECC Logistics Coordination Section with assistance from the Finance
Coordination Section identifies and procures requested resources and
coordinates distribution.
• Municipal and County agencies coordinate a request for a disaster declaration
through the State if the disaster or emergency incident overwhelms municipal
capabilities.
• The ECC Finance/Administration Section and the Planning Coordination Section
collect incident-related documentation.
4.2.1 Establish a Common Operating Picture
In critical situations, effective decision-making relies on a comprehensive understanding
of the strategic environment. For first responders, elected officials, members of the Policy
Group, and supply chain managers alike, maintaining robust situational awareness over
real-time events is essential. A common operating picture facilitates situational
awareness and information sharing and ensures incident leadership across all agencies
can make effective and consistent decisions.
The ECC Director and ECC Planning Support Section determine the procedures and
integrated systems that first responder, and City entities utilize to establish a common
operating picture. They include but are not limited to:
• Updates through phone, text, and email
• Recurring scheduled meetings providing status updates
• Development and dissemination of Situation Reports (SitReps)
• Information and data management tools
Field Response and Tactical Operations
City first responder agencies are often first on the scene of an imminent or actualized emergency or
disaster incident. They will respond to incidents to protect life, safety, and property based on internal
SOPs. These agencies often set up ICS structures to coordinate interagency operations.
EM and the ECC staff coordinate with the Incident Command Post (ICP) regularly to support field
response by identifying additional resources, disseminating public information, and coordinating mass
care operations. The ECC coordinates with field response through the ECC Operations Coordination
Section by communicating with first responder agency liaisons.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 29
4.2.2 Determine Incident Priorities
4.2.2.1 Develop an Incident Action Plan
The ECC Planning Coordination Section, in coordination with other ECC sections,
develops an Incident Action Plan (IAP) to organize the goals, priorities, resources, and
staffing for response operations. The IAP is updated periodically (e.g., daily, weekly)
based on the tempo of response operations. Elements of the IAP include:
WebEOC Overview
WebEOC is a web-based data information and management tool that is integral in forming a
common operating picture among municipal, County, and State agencies. The functionalities
of this tool allow users of all agencies to:
• Provide situation status updates and share significant events.
• Request and track resources.
• Input and share damage assessment information.
• Track sheltering status and capacity.
WebEOC automatically documents incident communications and information that is needed
for audit purposes or review for an AAR.
Establish a Common Operating Picture Early and Throughout Response
The common operating picture provides the foundation for information sharing and effective
and timely response and recovery operations.
Failure to establish a common operating picture can be a primary factor in
undermining response and recovery efforts.
Responding agencies share the following types of information to establish a common
operating picture:
• Operational priorities
• Response metrics such as:
• Injuries and deaths
• Evacuees
• Estimated value of damages
• Status of resources ordered, received, and deployed
• Financial expenditures and encumbrances
• Scheduled meetings
As a common operating picture is established, responding agencies have the awareness to
scale response resources and staff to better meet the needs of the incident.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 30
• Overall incident response goals and priorities
• ECC section goals and priorities
• Staffing
• Resource allocation
• Safety protocol
• Situation status updates
• Communications lists
Each of the ECC sections is responsible for developing the IAP elements and
coordinating with the ECC Planning Coordination Section to provide any missing
information. ECC branches and groups may be responsible for completing additional
forms for the IAP as requested by the ECC Planning Coordination Section.
In addition to the IAP, the ECC Planning Coordination Section may develop Situation
Reports (SitReps) that provide a condensed summary of critical incident status
information. SitReps are developed and distributed at a more rapid frequency (i.e., every
12 hours, every 24 hours) based on the tempo of response operations.
4.2.3 Respond to the Emergency
The City conducts the following procedures during emergency and disaster incidents.
These operations are sustained and repeated as necessary until the City transitions to
recovery.
4.2.3.1 Prioritize Response Activities
City ESFs are aligned with Community Lifelines to assess and prioritize the stabilization of
critical infrastructure following a disaster. ESFs inform the status of lifelines and support
their restoration through:
• Conducting damage assessments
• Coordinating stabilization operations
• Utilizing functional area expertise to minimize disruptions
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 31
The ESFs that support the stabilization of specific lifelines are described in the
Emergency Support Functions Annex found in the supporting documents section of
this plan.
4.2.3.2 Communicate with the Community
The ECC, through the JIC, uses regular warnings, status updates, and public information
dissemination methods to inform the community of protective actions and emergency
and disaster status. Access and functional needs notifications will be considered prior to
and during communication events with the public.
Issue Warning and Status Updates
EM provides notification of an emergency or disaster event as early as is practical and/or
with as much advance notice as possible. Warning, notification, and status updates to
the partner agencies and the community are issued through a variety of methods
depending on the scope and size of an incident. The Joint Information Center will follow
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 32
the Crisis Communication Plan guidelines as appropriate. Table 4.8 describes some of
the mediums utilized to provide warning, notification, and status updates.
Table 4.8: Warning, Notification, and Status Update Channels
Additional procedures may be utilized to ensure emergency and disaster notifications
reach the entire community. These include:
• Rave or Reverse 911 Notification System
• IPAWS
• Amateur Radio Groups such as Amateur Radio Emergency Services (ARES) and
Radio Amateur Civil Emergency Service (RACES)
• Public Service Announcements
• Press Briefings
• Social Media
• Landing Pages on City websites
• Language Line and Translation Services
• Accessible communications
Establish Procedures to Communicate with the Community
The EM PIO, who serves as the JIC manager, is responsible for establishing the JIC to
facilitate the collection and dissemination of accurate and timely information. The JIC is
staffed by qualified City and private-sector personnel. Public information responsibilities
of Salt Lake City include:
• Coordinating with appropriate neighboring jurisdictions, special service district,
County, State, federal entities, and all media representatives to ensure timely and
accurate information is provided to the community
• Pushing public messaging to the community through various channels (e.g., press
conferences, social media, emergency alerts)
• If needed, activating the JIC and support team to better facilitate:
o Information collection
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 33
o Information dissemination
o Interaction and coordination with the media
o Unified messaging
o Information deconfliction
All communication should be guided by the Crisis Communications Plan and follow best
practices for access and functional needs.
4.2.3.3 Take Protective Actions
Some emergency or disaster incidents may require the City to implement protective
actions such as evacuations and sheltering. Incident Command, in coordination with the
EM Duty Officer (DO) and/or the Mayor, decides whether to implement protective
actions based on the scope, size, and impacts of the incident as well as information from
responding agencies and organizations.
Executing protective actions requires coordination among multiple departments, ESFs,
and supporting agencies. Table 4.9 provides an overview of protective actions,
supporting ESFs, and expected operations. Additional details can be found in the
Shelter Annex.
Communicating With the Whole Community
Additional communications methods are incorporated into warning, notification, and status
updates to increase the accessibility of information and reach the whole community, including
individuals with access and functional needs. Examples of accessible communications include:
• Adding open and closed captioning on Salt Lake City television broadcasts.
• Including an American Sign Language (ASL) interpreter during media briefings.
• Translating and providing print, news, and social media emergency public information in
English, Spanish, and other languages commonly spoken in the Salt Lake City.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 34
Table 4.9: Protective Actions Overview
2.
Protective
Action
Responsible
Emergency
Support Function
Operations
Evacuation
• ESF #1
• ESF #6
• ESF #13
• ESF #15
• Implementation of the Emergency
Evacuation and Sheltering Annexes
• Ensuring residents are aware of
evacuation orders
• Moving affected residents that are
unable to evacuate themselves
• Identifying, activating, and procuring
transportation and paratransit
resources including routes to support
evacuations
• Activating and operating reception
centers as temporary collection and
accountability facilities
• Maintaining and executing evacuation
planning for facilities and locations such
as:
• Residential health care
facilities (RHCFs)
• Schools
• Businesses
• Mobile home parks
• Canyons
• Evacuating populations with
special transportation needs,
including but not limited to:
• Medical patients
• Long-term care facility residents
• Individuals housed in prisons or
jails
• Residents in other housing
facilities (e.g., group homes)
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 35
Sheltering
• ESF #5
• ESF #6
• ESF #8
• Identifying shelters
• Coordinating shelter staffing
and operations
• Supporting mass care
• Identifying considerations for pet-
friendly shelters
• Access to medications, medication
refrigeration, electricity for life saving
equipment, service animal
considerations, and any other access
and functional needs
Transportation
• ESF #1
• Providing resources to support
evacuations such as public
transportation
• Coordinating with supporting agencies
such as UDOT, UTA, Schools for
additional transportation resources
Protective
Action
Responsible
Emergency
Support Function
Operations
Victim
Tracking
• ESF #8
• Coordinating with emergency
medical services (EMS) and hospitals
to estimate patient numbers, types,
and volumes
• Coordinating with first responders
and hospitals to estimate total
transported individuals, self-
transported individuals, and walking
wounded to understand incident
impacts
• Tracking patient movement
Reunification • ESF #6
• ESF #15
• Supporting reunification of displaced
incident victims with their friends and
family
• Operating facilities and hotlines to
support reunification operations
• Pushing public information
regarding reunification processes
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 36
4.2.3.4 Perform Damage Assessments
Municipal agencies conduct damage assessments during the response to identify
incident impacts, prioritize response and restoration activities, and initiate the cost
recovery process. The objectives of damage assessments include:
• Determining immediate life safety issues such as trapped or missing individuals
• Assessing economic impacts
• Identifying the scope of damages
• Determining the status of infrastructure
• Prioritizing response operations
• Documenting damages
• Affixing an estimated dollar amount to damage to justify the need for additional
assistance
New impacts, damages, or disruptions to infrastructure are incorporated into updated
assessments and reported to relevant ESFs and County, State, and federal supporting
agencies.
4.2.3 Request Mutual Aid
Note: Municipal response may require the use of resources beyond those available
within the municipality. To expedite the resource sharing process, Salt Lake City has
entered into mutual aid agreements with neighboring jurisdictions and assisting
agencies to access additional resources should they be available. Such mutual aid
agreements can be pre-established (preferred) or created at the onset of response
operations. Pre-establishing mutual aid agreements prior to response operations is
preferred as the agreements can be rapidly utilized during response.
Mutual aid agreements include:
• Identification of the resources accessed
• Reasonable assurance that resources are available when needed
• Terms for compensation
4.2.4 Request a Disaster Declaration
The disaster declaration process is a critical step for local entities to access County, State
and federal support and assistance Figure 4.10 provides an overview of how emergency
declarations at the municipal and County level are escalated to the State and federal
government.
Local Emergency Declaration and Disaster Declaration documentation and procedures
can be found in the Policy Group Handbook. All procedures should follow federal
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 37
regulations, state code, and local ordinances. Declarations are a critical part of
emergency response and recovery funding/reimbursement.
• Municipal agencies respond with available resources and capabilities.
• Municipal agencies conduct assessment to determine scope of damages.
• As incident exceeds local capabilities, EM supports local response and coordination.
• Municipal mayor proclaims a local emergency, and forwards proclamation to EM.
• Municipal mayor may utilize mutual aid and impose regulations, such as curfews, business
closures, and tasking out law enforcement.
Municipality
• EM receives municipal emergency proclamation.
• EM supports response by providing coordination, personnel, or equipment as needed.
• EM coordinates Facilities Management, Public Work and Engineering, and Planning and
Development to conducts and develop damage assessments to support declaration.
• The District Attorneys’ office supports writing and legal review of emergency declarations,
and ensures they are processed correctly.
• As incident exceeds County capabilities and resources, Salt Lake Count Emergency
Manager declaration to DEM Region 2 liaison to request State assistance.
County
• DEM receives County emergency declaration.
• DEM verifies that the county has met the threshold for disaster declaration.
• DEM Director advises governor of situation and, if warranted, governor proclaims a state
of emergency.
• DEM Director initiates State response by activating agencies and relevant ESFs to take
necessary action per Utah Emergency Operations Plan and agency standard operating
procedures to support response.
State
• Federal agencies dispatch such as FEMA to verify damages and identify support needs.
• If needed, federal agencies provide response support resources.
• Federal agencies provide disaster assistance programs to support recovery.
• Federal agencies coordinate with State and County to monitor application of federal
assistance funding.
Federal
Figure 4.10: Response Phase Overview
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 38
4.2.5 Coordinate with Non-City Partners
To effectively implement activation, response, recovery, and preparedness actions, Salt
Lake City coordinates with County, State, federal, and private-sector partners. This
section provides an overview of how these entities coordinate.
As an incident evolves, expands, or affects certain sectors, various agencies may become
involved to support response and recovery operations. Figure 4.11 provides a general
overview of how different agencies and entities are involved as an incident becomes
more complex.
Figure 4. 11: Incident Complexity
Table 4.12 describes the major responsibilities related to coordination during
emergency and disaster response and recovery operations.
Table 4. 12: Coordination Roles and Responsibilities
Salt Lake City
● Respond to incident based on available resources and capabilities.
● Notify municipal emergency management and other supporting agencies of
operations, initial assessment, and need for further support (if required).
● Activate relevant municipal ECC to provide timely, accurate, and regular
assessments and coordination support.
● Declare a local emergency if warranted.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 39
Salt Lake County
● Activate ECC to support response and recovery coordination.
● Notify DEM of incident and request support as needed.
● Create County disaster declaration as needed.
● Coordinate with Utah DEM to request federal assistance as needed.
● Coordinate requests from municipalities and County departments,
organizations, and agencies for resources to support response and recovery.
● Regularly assess and document incident impacts and status.
● Develop timely and accurate messaging to the community regarding incident
status and protective actions.
State of Utah
● Provide DEM liaison to support communication and coordinate between the
ECC and DEM.
● Coordinate support from State of Utah agencies, other counties, and inter-
State mutual aid through EMAC.
● Support Salt Lake City and State disaster declaration as needed.
● Coordinate federal assistance.
Federal
Government
● Provide response support and resources if State of Utah capabilities are
insufficient to respond and recover from the incident.
● Provide federal assistance to help the [Municipality] recover from
emergency or disaster impacts.
Private Sector
● Incorporate response and recovery resources and support to municipal and
County governments through requests, agreements, and memorandums of
understanding (MOU).
● Provide situational assessment and ensure situational awareness of disaster
or emergency, if applicable.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 40
4.3 Recovery
This section provides an overview of the City’s recovery operations and a return to
normal operations following disaster situations. Each Salt Lake City department will
activate their Continuity of Operations plan which outlines procedures for reconstitution.
The recovery phase can occur concurrently or proceeding the response phase of an
emergency and vary in length and degree based on the scale and impact of events.
Key Activities
• The City Mayor, in coordination with the Salt Lake City Emergency Manager and
the City Council, initiates recovery and the mobilization of recovery resources and
operations.
• Deactivation and demobilization of resources with coordination between the
Mayor, Policy Group, City Council, Emergency Manager and ESFs.
• Activation of the Recovery Task Force (RTF) and Salt Lake City Disaster Recovery
Plan transitioning from Emergency Support Functions to Recovery Support
Functions (RSFs).
• ECC organizes ESF Operations Support around the assessment and stabilization
of Community Lifelines.
• Coordinate with Salt Lake County Emergency Management and Salt Lake City
Departments to conduct a Preliminary Damage Assessment.
• Enact disaster declarations and any other notifications to begin assistance
through county, state or federal means.
• The RTF will develop and implement both short-term and long-term recovery
plans to support community and city recovery and resilience building.
4.3.1 Recovery Framework
The Salt Lake City Recovery plan uses the National Disaster Recovery Framework (NDFR)
as a model for transitioning from response to recovery. Guiding principles and Core
Capabilities are followed through the deployment of the RTF utilizing RSFs objectives.
Detailed guides for pre-disaster recovery planning can be found in FEMA’s Pre-Disaster
Recovery Planning Guide for Local Governments supporting document.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 41
Figure 4.13: NDRF Recovery Timeline
4.3.2 Recovery Support Functions (RSFs)
Salt Lake City Emergency Management will utilize Recovery Support Functions during
the recovery phase of a disaster to better coordinate and organize key personnel and
plans during the entire recovery for the city. Emergency Support Functions during the
response phase will transition to RSFs as the situation dictates. RSFs can also be activated
during the response phase in conjunction with the ECC sections or ESFs. Salt Lake City
has adopted FEMA’s recovery support functions outline in the National Disaster Recovery
Framework plan defining 6 RSFs areas to provide a comprehensive recovery plan. The
table below shows each recovery support function, key responsible departments or
entities, and an overview of responsibilities for each role. Comprehensive and detailed
procedures for the Recovery Task Force and Recovery Support Functions can be found in
the Recovery Support Functions supporting document.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 42
Table 4.14: NDRF Recovery Timeline
Recovery Action
/ RSF
Responsible
Department
Key Responsibilities
Community
Planning &
Capacity Building
Recovery Support
Function
RSF #1
• Mayor’s Office
• City Council
• Community and
Neighborhoods
• Public Services
• Public Utilities
• RDA
• Sustainability
• Community
Outreach
The Community Planning and Capacity Building RSF unifies and
coordinates expertise and assistance programs from across
governmental entities as well as nongovernment partners to
aid in building capabilities to effectively plan for and manage
recovery and engage the whole community in the recovery
planning process.
Economic
Recovery
Support Function
RSF #2
• Mayor’s Office
• City Council
• City Attorney
• City Finance
• Economic
Development
Economic Recovery is the ability to return economic and
business activities (including agricultural) to a state of health
and develop new economic opportunities that result in a
sustainable and economically viable community. The Federal
Economic Recovery RSF integrates the expertise of the Federal
Government to help local, regional/metropolitan, state, tribal,
territorial, and insular area governments and the private
sector sustain and/or rebuild businesses and employment and
develop economic opportunities that result in sustainable and
economically resilient communities after an incident.
Health & Social
Services
Recovery
Support
Function
RSF #3
• Community
Outreach
• Homeless
Policy and
Outreach
• Health
Department
Healthcare is an economic driver in many communities, which
if damaged make this sector critical to most communities’
disaster recovery. Social Services have a major impact on the
ability of a community to recover. The support of social
services programs for individuals and families affected by a
disaster can promote a more effective and rapid recovery. The
Health and Social Services RSF outlines the Federal framework
to support locally led recovery efforts to address public health,
health care facilities and coalitions, and essential social
services needs. Displaced individuals in need of housing will
also need health and social services support.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 43
Housing Recovery
Support Function
RSF #4
• Community and
Neighborhoods
• RDA
• Sustainability
• Community
Outreach
The Housing RSF coordinates and facilitates the delivery of
resources to implement housing solutions that effectively
support the needs of the whole community and contribute to
its sustainability and resilience. Housing is a critical and often
challenging component of disaster recovery, but must be
adequate, affordable, and accessible to make a difference for
the whole community.
Infrastructure
Systems
Recovery Support
Function
RSF #5
• Community and
Neighborhoods
• Public Utilities
• Public Services
The Infrastructure Systems RSF works to efficiently facilitate
the restoration of infrastructure systems and services to
support a viable, sustainable community and improves
resilience to and protection from future hazards.
Natural &Cultural
Resources
Recovery Support
Function
RSF #6
• Sustainability
• RDA
• Public Lands
The NCR RSF facilitates the integration of capabilities of the
Federal, State, and Local Government to support the
protection of natural and cultural resources and historic
properties through appropriate response and recovery actions
to preserve, conserve, rehabilitate, and restore them
consistent with post-disaster community priorities and in
compliance with applicable environmental and historical
preservation laws and Executive orders.
4.3.3 Recovery Task Force (RTF)
The purpose of a recovery task force is to provide a coordinated mechanism to oversee
the recovery and reconstruction process and to serve as an advisory committee to city
officials responsible for recovery activities. This is done through policy creation,
recommendations, planning, and implementation of mitigation and recovery plans. The
recovery actions and RTF make-up following a disaster or major event will vary based on
impact and may include city, county, state, or federal resources. Salt Lake City Recovery
Task Force should be composed of the following roles:
• Disaster Recovery Coordinator – To coordinate disaster assistance available
from the federal government and state agencies to Salt Lake City following a
major or catastrophic disaster.
• Economic Development Coordinator – To coordinate economic recovery
with the business community following a major or catastrophic disaster.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 44
• Hazard Mitigation Coordinator – To coordinate hazard mitigation assistance
available from the federal government and state agencies to Salt Lake City
following a major or catastrophic disaster.
• Representatives
• Public Safety
• Public Services
• Public Utilities
• Public Lands
• Community and Neighborhoods
• Economic Development
• Finance
• Community Outreach
• Human Resources
• RDA
• Sustainability
• Business/Industry
• Health Department
• School District
• UDOT
• VOAD
An Emergency Review Board can be established by the Mayor or Mayor’s designee to
review disputes arising from the implementation of any policies presented by the RTF.
The Emergency Review Board will consist of three representatives from the RTF
appointed by the Chief Administrative Officer. Decisions rendered by the Emergency
Review Board may be appealed to the Salt Lake City Planning Commission through the
appeals process. The Emergency Review Board may make recommendations to specific
departments for any requests that are beyond the authorization of the board.
4.3.3.1 RTF Activation
The RTF will be activated and mobilized by a disaster declaration made by the
Mayor/City Council under the procedures set forth in the Salt Lake City Emergency
Declaration policy. The RTF will be activated for the duration of the emergency
declaration unless demobilized by the Mayor/City Council. Initial activation tasks include
receiving and reviewing damage and impact reports, recommending disaster
ordinances, define recovery organization structure, create recovery plans, and liaison
with city, state, federal, and private entities. RTF activation will also coordinate with Salt
Lake County’s Recovery Task Force and Recovery Support Functions as needed.
4.3.3.2 Recovery Plans
Recovery Plans developed by the RTF are an essential tool for managing recovery
operations. This requires a unified, coordinated, and focused effort. The plan may follow
the basic steps described below:
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 45
• Outline the city recovery management structure and management process.
• Describe the organizational networks and structures appropriate to recovery.
• Formalize arrangements for the effective management of the recovery
process.
• Facilitate the recovery of affected individuals, businesses, infrastructure, and
city government as quickly and practically as possible.
• Involve all agencies with a role to play in recovery.
• Ensure community participation in the recovery process.
• Identify responsibilities and tasks of key agencies and departments.
• Describe appropriate resource arrangements.
• Be simple and concise as possible.
The elements of the plan include the composition of the Recovery Task Force and the
priority of effects in the following order:
• Activities that reestablish services that meet the physical and safety needs of the
community, to include food, ice, medical care, emergency access, continuity of
government and operations, emergency communications, security of residents
and possessions from harm, health, and temporary housing.
• Reestablishing infrastructure necessary for community reconstruction including
electrical distribution systems, potable water, and sanitary sewer service,
restoring medical and health care, rebuilding damaged transportation facilities,
and housing facilities.
• Restoring the city’s economic base.
• Improving the city’s ability to withstand the effects of future major or catastrophic
disasters:
o Phasing/milestones for recovery tasks
o Support requirements
o Coordination requirements
o Methodologies
o Reporting requirements
Long term recovery is a collaborative process over months or years that requires the
efforts of the entire community. During this period the city will continue to liaison with
appropriate partners, find funding resources, determine new measures, create new
policies, assist in community planning, make recommendations, and update emergency
plans.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 46
4.5 Preparedness
This section provides an overview of preparedness actions executed by Salt Lake City
and partnering agencies to prepare for the impacts of all hazards. Preparedness actions
occur prior to and after emergencies and disasters and include planning, training, and
exercises.
Figure 4.15: Preparedness Phase Overview
Key Activities
• All agencies develop internal plans to support emergency or disaster
preparedness.
• EM coordinates hazard mitigation planning and identification of mitigation
projects to lessen the impacts of emergencies and disasters.
• EM plans for and executes training and exercises for different partner entities
within the Municipality.
• The EM and municipal PIOs implement outreach strategies to inform, educate,
and engage the community in emergency preparedness.
4.5.1 Develop Plans for Future Emergencies
4.5.1.1 Maintain Plans that Support Response and Recovery
Relevant Salt Lake City departments, agencies, and organizations maintain operational
plans and documents described in Table 4.16 to better facilitate disaster and
emergency response.
Table 3.16: Planning Documentation Overview
Comprehensive
Emergency
Management Plan
Establishes the framework for the Salt Lake City to respond to, recover from,
prepare for, and mitigate against all hazards that pose a threat to the Salt Lake
City.
Continuity of
Operations Plans
Outlines Concept of Operations, Activation and Relocation, Continuity
Operations, and Reconstitution for each city department to ensure essential
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 47
functions continue during prolonged disruptions.
Emergency Support
Functions and
Recovery Support
Functions Handbooks
The ESF and RSF handbooks include checklists and documentation to outline
departmental roles and responsibilities in line with FEMA's 15 Emergency
Support Functions and 6 Recovery Support Functions. These functions detail
concept of operations, actions, and supporting agencies/entities and are
deployed In the ECC.
Disaster Recovery
Plan
Utilizes Recovery Support Functions (RSFs) and Recovery Task Force (RTF) to
guide recovery operations for the community and city.
Multi-year Training
Plan
Comprehensive training plan identifying education, tabletop, functional, and
full exercises on a multi-year cycle.
4.5.1.2 Update Plans Regularly
EM has the overall responsibility for ensuring their plans, annexes, operations guides,
and associated checklists are current. The Salt Lake City Emergency Manager or
designee assigns personnel to be accountable for the upkeep of specific planning
documentation. All other municipal departments or divisions that have emergency
response or recovery assignments are responsible for developing and maintaining their
own plans and procedures.
4.5.2 Involve the Community in Emergency Management
Effective community preparedness requires ongoing community awareness and
education programs so citizens are prepared and understand their responsibilities
should a major disaster or emergency occur. Emergency management plans need to be
built with the understanding that not all communities can prepare or respond in a
uniform way. Specialized or specific planning with input from each individual community
is vital to the successful response to disasters.
4.5.2.1 Improve Public Safety through Education and Outreach
The EM JIC Manager/PIO, in coordination with other municipal communications officers,
is responsible for developing and disseminating preparedness public messaging
campaigns. Examples of these campaigns include:
• Signing up for public alert applications
• Developing a personal preparedness plan
• Informing the community on safety information about flood zones and evacuation
routes
• Provide outreach in multiple languages and multiple formats to reach the most
audiences
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 48
5. ADMINISTRATION, FINANCE, LOGISTICS,
AND PLAN MAINTENANCE
5.1 Administration Information
The Salt Lake City Emergency Coordination Center monitors continuously 24 hours per
day and is administered by Salt Lake City Emergency Management. Day-to-day
operations are under the direction of the Salt Lake City Fire Department Emergency
Management Division.
The operational readiness of the Emergency Coordination Center is the responsibility of
the Salt Lake City Emergency Management Division of the Salt Lake City Fire
Department.
Police Department assisted by the Information Management Services Department is
primarily responsible for maintaining the PSB/SLIC facility.
Narratives and operational documentation of response actions will be kept.
All written/electronic records, reports, and other documents will follow the principles of
the National Incident Management System (NIMS).
Agreements and understandings must be entered into by duly authorized officials and
should be formalized in writing whenever possible prior to emergencies.
Organizations with responsibilities for implementing this plan are responsible for
providing their own administrative and logistical needs and for the preparation and
maintenance of a resource list for use in carrying out their emergency responsibilities.
5.1.1 Records Preservation and Restoration
All affected governments in Salt Lake City must ensure protection of their records so
normal operations can continue after the emergency. Such records may also be vital to
the rapid recovery from the effects of an emergency. The Information Management
Services Department is charged with maintaining plans for the safety, recovery, and
restoration of Salt Lake City’s data and telecommunication systems during a disaster.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 49
5.1.2 Reports and Records
General: The planning and activation of an effective emergency response requires timely
and accurate reporting of information and the maintenance of records on a continual
basis.
Reporting guidelines: Salt Lake City will submit consolidated reports to Salt Lake
County who will forward them to the Utah Division of Emergency Management to include
information from local municipalities. Salt Lake City will submit situation reports, requests
for assistance, and damage assessment reports to Salt Lake County Emergency
Management by the most practical means and in a timely manner. Municipal and county
governments will use pre-established bookkeeping and accounting methods to track
and maintain records of expenditures and obligations. Narrative and written log-type
records of response actions will be kept by the Emergency Management Division. The
logs and records will form the basis for status reports to the county and state.
Initial Reports: Initial reports (needs assessment) are the basis for the mayor’s decision for
a Declaration of Emergency. These reports determine the specific types and extent of
assistance needed and available to the affected area.
Updates: Situation reports outlining new developments and providing additional
information will be forwarded as often as necessary in the most expeditious manner
available duration a local activation.
5.2 Financial Management
The Salt Lake City CEMP assigns lead and support agencies for 15 functional areas of
disaster response. Each agency assigned to an emergency support function (ESF) is
responsible for mobilizing existing personnel, equipment, materials, supplies, and other
resources under their control.
When agencies require additional resources, these requests will be referred to ESF #7 –
Logistics Management and Resource Support in the Salt Lake City Emergency
Coordination Center. ESF # 7 is tasked with identifying the most appropriate and
economical method of meeting the resource request.
There are four basic methods of meeting a resource request as follows:
• Local forces are those resources under direct control of the city ECC. They can
be assigned based on priorities established by the Policy group, ECC, or
incident command.
• Mutual aid can be requested by the Salt Lake City Coordination Center to
augment staff during a locally declared state of emergency. Salt Lake City is a
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 50
signature party of the Utah Interlocal Mutual Aid Agreement for Catastrophic
Disaster Response and Recovery. All requests for mutual aid must follow the
procedures established by the Utah Division of Emergency Management under
this agreement.
• State and federal agencies’ response may be required when either mutual aid or
contracting can meet the resource request. It is anticipated that this response
would occur early in the disaster for short time periods.
• All ESF procurements and expenditures will be documented. All receipts and
invoices with explanations and justifications will be forwarded to the
Finance/Admin Section in a timely fashion. The auditor will ensure all
documentation is complete, recorded on the appropriate forms, and proper in
all respects. If a disaster in Salt Lake City is federally declared, the auditor will
submit for reimbursement. If Salt Lake City was not declared, the documentation
will serve as a recorded history of activity with expenditures.
5.2.1 Accounting
Complete and accurate accounts of emergency expenditures and obligations (including
personnel and equipment costs) will be maintained. Such records are essential to identify
and document funds for which no federal reimbursement will be requested and funds
eligible for reimbursement under major emergency project applications. When federal
public assistance 18 provided under the Disaster Relief Act, local projects approved by
the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) are subject to both state and
federal audit. The Accounting Division in the Finance Department will coordinate the
reimbursement documentation for the FEMA Public Assistance Program during a
presidentially declared disaster for county government.
5.2.2 Fiscal Agreements
A clear statement of agreement between all major departments and agencies
responding to an emergency concerning payment or reimbursement for personnel
services rendered, equipment costs, and expenditures of materials used in response to
an emergency is recommended.
5.3 Financial Management
Salt Lake City Emergency Management maintains current resource information on
supplies, equipment, facilities, and skilled personnel available for emergency response
and recovery operations.
Logistics Section provides logistical and resource support, including locating, procuring,
and issuing resources (such as supplies, office space, office equipment, fuel, and
communications contracting services, personnel, heavy equipment and transportation)
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 51
to agencies and departments involved in delivery emergency response and recovery
efforts.
The mayor or designee has the authority to appropriate services and equipment from
citizens as necessary in response to a disaster.
5.4 Plan Maintenance
Salt Lake City Emergency Management is responsible for the overall maintenance of this
Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan (CEMP) and supporting documents by
ensuring that changes and revisions are prepared, coordinated, published, and
distributed. This CEMP will be reviewed and updated at least annually based on
deficiencies identified in simulated or actual use or due to organizational or
technological changes. All changes will be recorded by the receiving department or
agency.
CEMP revisions will be forwarded to all departments or agencies assigned
responsibilities in the plan. Contact names and telephone numbers (for Emergency
Coordination Center staff, departments, agencies, special facilities, schools, etc.) will be
maintained by appropriate departments and agencies.
5.4.1 Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan Maintenance
To maintain emergency plan capabilities and to be prepared for any emergency or
disaster that may affect Salt Lake City, Salt Lake City Emergency Management has
developed and maintains a multiyear strategy. Table 5.1 provides a standardized list of
activities necessary to monitor the dynamic elements of the Salt Lake City CEMP and the
frequency of their occurrence.
Activity Tasks Frequency
Plan update and
maintenance
• Review entire plan for
accuracy
• Incorporate lessons learned
and changes in policy and
practices
• Manage distribution
Annually
Train new Salt Lake City
Emergency Management
Staff
• Conduct CEMP training for
new Salt Lake City Emergency
Management Staff
Within 30 days of
appointment
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 52
Orient new policy officials
and senior leadership
• Brief officials on existence and
concepts of the CEMP
• Brief officials of their
responsibilities under the
CEMP
Within 30 days of
appointment
Plan and conduct
exercises
• Conduct internal CEMP
exercises
• Conduct joint exercises
with ESFs and section chief
members
• Support and participate in
local, county, state, and
national exercises
Semiannually,
Annually or as needed
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 53
6. ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
This section outlines general roles and responsibilities for Municipal, County, State, and
federal entities related to response, recovery, preparedness, and mitigation operations.
5.1 Functional Responsibilities
Table 5.1 provides an overview of emergency response functions and the primary (P) and
secondary (S) entities that are responsible for executing those functions.
Table 4.1: Agency Roles & Responsibilities
Fu
n
c
t
i
o
n
Sa
l
t
L
a
k
e
C
i
t
y
EM
Ma
y
o
r
's
Of
f
i
c
e
Sa
l
t
L
a
k
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
He
a
l
t
h
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
Pu
b
l
i
c
U
t
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
O
u
t
r
e
a
c
h
Of
f
i
c
e
o
f
F
i
n
a
n
c
e
Po
l
i
c
e
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
Fi
r
e
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
Pu
b
l
i
c
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
VO
A
D
SL
C
9
1
1
D
i
s
p
a
t
c
h
Pa
r
k
s
a
n
d
P
u
b
l
i
c
L
a
n
d
s
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
a
n
d
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
Mu
t
u
a
l
A
i
d
/
P
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
Administration and
Finance S P
Agriculture and
Natural Resources S P
Alert and Notification P S S P
Communications S P S S S
Critical Infrastructure
and Key Resource
Restoration
P S S
Damage Assessment S P S
Debris Management P S S
Detection And
Monitoring S P P
Direction, Control, and
Coordination P P S S
Donation Management P S S S
Emergency Public
Information P S
Energy and Utilities
Services P P P
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 54
Fu
n
c
t
i
o
n
Sa
l
t
L
a
k
e
C
i
t
y
EM
Ma
y
o
r
's
Of
f
i
c
e
Sa
l
t
L
a
k
e
C
o
u
n
t
y
He
a
l
t
h
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
In
f
o
r
m
a
t
i
o
n
Ma
n
a
g
e
m
e
n
t
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
Pu
b
l
i
c
U
t
i
l
i
t
i
e
s
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
O
u
t
r
e
a
c
h
Of
f
i
c
e
o
f
F
i
n
a
n
c
e
Po
l
i
c
e
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
Fi
r
e
D
e
p
a
r
t
m
e
n
t
Pu
b
l
i
c
Se
r
v
i
c
e
s
VO
A
D
SL
C
9
1
1
D
i
s
p
a
t
c
h
Pa
r
k
s
a
n
d
P
u
b
l
i
c
L
a
n
d
s
Co
m
m
u
n
i
t
y
a
n
d
N
e
i
g
h
b
o
r
h
o
o
d
s
Mu
t
u
a
l
A
i
d
/
P
a
r
t
n
e
r
s
Evacuation and
Shelter-in-Place S P P
Fatality Management
and Mortuary Services P
Firefighting/Fire
Protection P
Food, Water, and
Commodities
Distribution
S P
Hazardous Materials P
Information Collection,
Analysis, and
Dissemination
P S
Law Enforcement P
Mass Care and
Sheltering S P S S P SST
Mutual Aid P S
Private Sector
Coordination P S S
Public Health and
Medical Services P S
Public Works and
Engineering P P P
Resource Management
and Logistics P S
Search and Rescue S P
Transportation
Systems and Resources P P UTA
Volunteer
Management P S P
Warning P S S P
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 55
5.2 General Roles and Responsibilities
5.2.1 Salt Lake City
Salt Lake City serves as the primary provider of emergency services within their jurisdiction to
ensure timely response to incidents and are often the first to use their personnel and
resources during an incident.
Table 5.2: Municipal Roles & Responsibilities
Salt Lake City
● Support ESF #15 by providing updates on incident status to the community through
public information and outreach.
● Support ESFs #1, #5, #7 and #15 by coordinating response efforts and
communications.
● Respond to and recover from emergencies and disasters based on municipal resources
and capabilities.
● Through liaisons, maintain communications with neighboring municipalities and the
County regarding additional resource and capability needs.
● Provide personnel and resources to neighboring municipalities and the County through
formal requests.
● Declare a local emergency, per authority stated in local ordinance, if municipal
resources and capabilities do not meet scope and size of emergency or disaster.
● Identify deficiencies and enhance protective measures to lessen the impact on
vulnerable populations and minimize damage to local facilities.
● Provide 24/7 personnel with an on-call supervisor and Duty Officer (DO).
● Establish ECC activation level.
● Coordinate response and recovery operations out of the ECC.
● Establish the coordination structures through which local staff respond to and recover
from emergencies and disasters.
● Identify, train, and exercise Salt Lake City staff to enable effective implementation of
existing response plans, procedures, and policies.
● Facilitate coordination with municipal, County, State, private-sector, and federal
entities to support emergency or disaster response, recovery, preparedness, and
mitigation.
● Conduct public information operations out of the JIC to ensure the community receives
timely and accurate information.
Coordinate with municipal departments and divisions to maintain COOP plans.
Mayor's Office
● Support ESF #7 through the ECC Finance/Administration Section and ECC Operations
Support Section.
● Enhance protective policies to lessen the impact on vulnerable populations and
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 56
minimize damage to critical facilities.
● Provide overall direction to ECC for emergency and disaster response and recovery
operations.
● Support development and dissemination of public information out of the JIC.
● Establish emergency declaration if Salt Lake City capabilities and resources are
insufficient to meet needs of incident.
Public Services
● Support ESFs #1, #10, and #12 with appropriate vehicles and equipment, as well as
personnel expertise.
● Work with government departments and industry partners to assess damage to
transportation infrastructure and operations.
● Identify and acquire secondary buildings for operations to utilize during a response,
should critical facilities be damaged, to maintain continuity of operations.
Public Utilities
● Support ESFs #3 with appropriate vehicles and equipment, as well as personnel
expertise.
● Ensure public works and engineering-related functions are protected prior to an
incident.
● Coordinate with entities contracted to provide energy and natural resources to the city
Parks and Public
Lands
● Support ESFs #11 through coordination efforts.
● Provide assistance and support for open space and lands needs.
● Assist in sheltering, collection points, and distribution points
Police Department
● Support ESFs #9 and #13 through coordination efforts.
● Execute tactical response operations to protect life and property.
● Provide assistance for evacuation operations.
● Provide security for incident perimeter and other operations.
● Regularly coordinate with ECC and other responding entities to form common
operating picture.
Fire Department
● Support ESFs #2, #4, #6, #9, and #10 through appropriate equipment and personnel
expertise.
● Execute tactical response and emergency medical services operations to protect life
and property.
● Coordinate with Contracts and Procurement, Salt Lake City Emergency Management,
and others to jointly secure and manage supply chains.
● Coordinate with ECC and other responding entities to form common operating picture.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 57
5.2.2 County
County entities are responsible for coordinating to support response, recovery,
preparedness, and mitigation operations for all hazards exceeding local capacity.
Table 5.3: County Roles & Responsibilities
Health Department
● Support ESFs #8, #10, and #14 with public health facilities, personnel, and
documentation.
● Assist in community health-focused response and recovery efforts.
● Support tracking of hospital resources, such as available beds.
● Activate Health Department to coordinate community-health focused response
operations.
Public Works
● Support ESFs #1, #3, #10, #11, and #12 with appropriate vehicles and equipment, as
well as personnel expertise.
● Work with government departments and industry partners to assess damage to
transportation infrastructure and operations.
● Ensure public works and engineering-related functions are protected prior to an
incident.
● Identify and acquire secondary buildings for operations to utilize during a response,
should critical facilities be damaged, to maintain continuity of operations.
Human Services
● Support ESFs #6, #7, and #8 with logistics to ensure populations receive necessary
resources.
● Support implementation of disaster assistance programs to help populations recover
non-housing losses and access food stamps, crisis counseling, disaster unemployment
benefits, legal services, and other services.
● Provide staff to coordinate volunteers and manage donations depending on the scope
and size of the incident and as needed.
Unified Police
● Support ESFs #9 and #13 through coordination efforts.
● Execute tactical response operations to protect life and property.
● Aid with evacuation operations.
● Provide security for incident perimeter and other operations.
● Regularly coordinate with ECC and other responding entities to form common
operating picture.
Unified Fire Authority
● Support ESFs #2, #4, #9, and #10 through appropriate equipment and personnel
expertise.
● Execute tactical response and emergency medical services operations to protect life
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 58
and property.
● Coordinate with Contracts and Procurement, UFA Logistics, and others to jointly
secure and manage supply chains.
● Coordinate with ECC and other responding entities to form common operating
picture.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 59
Glossary of Common Emergency Management Terms
Table 5.4: Glossary of Common EM Terms
After-Action Report A document intended to capture experiences, best practices, and lessons
learned after an operation.
Authorities and References A component of an emergency management plan that provides the legal
basis for emergency operations and activities.
Chain of Command The orderly line of authority within the ranks of the incident management
organization.
Chief An individual leading a specific section (e.g., Planning Section Chief)
Command Staff
The staff who report directly to the Incident Commander, including the
Public Information Officer, Safety Officer, Liaison Officer, and other
positions, as required. They may have an assistant or assistants, as needed.
Concept of Operations
A component of an emergency management plan that clarifies the overall
approach to response (i.e., what should happen, when, and at whose
direction) and identifies specialized response teams and/or unique
resources needed to respond to an incident.
County Coordinating
Officer (CCO)
Assigned to coordinate municipal resource support activities and
information sharing following a major municipal emergency event or
disaster. The CCO is responsible for all ECC coordination of resources,
programs, and ESF groups for affected jurisdictions, individual victims, and
the private sector. The CCO is also responsible for overseeing the
preparation of the IAP, which includes identifying operational periods and
filling command and general staff positions as needed.
Emergency Support
Function
ESFs are the grouping of certain sector capabilities into an organizational
structure to provide support, resources, program implementation, and
services.
Finance/Administration
Section
The Incident Command System Section responsible for all administrative
and financial considerations surrounding an incident.
General Staff
A group of incident management personnel organized according to function
and reporting to the Incident Commander. The General Staff normally
consists of the Operations Section Chief, Planning Section Chief, Logistics
Section Chief, and Finance/Administration Section Chief.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 60
Incident Action Plan A document outlining the goals, objectives, and strategy for responding to
an incident during each operational period.
Incident Command System ICS is a common organizational structure for the management of an
incident.
Incident Commander
The individual responsible for all incident activities, including the
development of strategies and tactics and the ordering and release of
resources. The Incident Commander has overall authority and responsibility
for conducting incident operations and is responsible for managing all
incident operations at the incident site.
Incident Support Model
The ISM is a variation of the ICS structure that separates the information
management/situational awareness function from the ICS Planning Section
and combines the functions of the ICS Operations and Logistics Sections and
comptroller/purchasing functions from the ICS Administration/Finance
Section.
Joint Information Center
A facility established to coordinate critical emergency information, crisis
communications, and public affairs functions. The Joint Information Center
is the central point of contact for all news media. The PIO may activate the
JIC to better manage external communication.
Logistics Section The Incident Command System section responsible for providing facilities,
services, and material support for the incident.
National Incident
Management System
A set of principles that provides a systematic, proactive approach guiding
government agencies at all levels, non-governmental organizations, and the
private sector to work seamlessly to prevent, protect against, respond to,
recover from, and mitigate the effects of incidents, regardless of cause, size,
location, or complexity, in order to reduce the loss of life or property and
harm to the environment.
Operations Section The ICS section responsible for all tactical incident operations and
implementation of the Incident Action Plan.
Planning Section
The ICS section Is responsible for collecting, evaluating, and disseminating
operational information related to the incident and for preparing and
documenting the Incident Action Plan. This section also maintains
information on the current and forecasted situation and on the status of
resources assigned to the incident.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 61
Public Information Officer
A member of the Command Staff who serves as the conduit for information
to internal and external stakeholders, including the media or other
organizations seeking information directly from the incident or event.
Resources
Personnel and major items of equipment, supplies, and facilities available or
potentially available for assignment to incident operations and for which
status is maintained.
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 62
Acronyms
Table 5.5: Acronyms
ARC American Red Cross
CEMP Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan
COOP Continuity of Operations
DA Damage Assessment
DEM Utah Division of Emergency Management
DO Duty Officer
DOC Department Operations Center
DRC Disaster Recovery Center
ECC Emergency Coordination Center
EM Emergency Management
EMAC Emergency Management Assistance Compact
EOC Emergency Operations Center
ESF Emergency Support Function
ISM Incident Support Model
FEMA Federal Emergency Management Agency
IAP Incident Action Plan
ICP Incident Command Post
ICS Incident Command System
IT Information Technology
JIC Joint Information Center
NGO Non-Governmental Organization
NIMS National Incident Management System
PDA Preliminary Damage Assessment
PIO Public Information Officer
RDA Rapid Damage Assessment
RSF Recovery Support Function
SOP Standard Operating Procedure
Salt Lake City Comprehensive Emergency Management Plan | Page 63
THIS PAGE LEFT BLANK INTENTIONALLY