Loading...
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