1 9 2002 Agenda Item 5 Resolution from ad hoc

1/9/2002 Agenda Item #5 Resolution from ad hoc Task Force on Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness Presented to: COG Board of Directors January 9, 2002 1

1/9/2002 COG CAOs Committee COG Task Force on Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness for the National Capital Area Carol Schwartz, Chair M. H. Jim Estepp, V. Chair; John Mason, V. Chair Communications Robert Dorsey/Gerry Connolly Resources COG CAOs, COG PIOs, State PIOs Private Sector Industry representatives Federal: FEMA, OPM, FBI, GSA Waste & Debris Management Mary K. Hill Resources Health Adrian Fenty Resources • COG Solid Waste Managers • COG Health Officers Committee • U. S. Army COE • COG Bio-Terrorism Task Force • Private Sector industry representatives Public Safety and Emergency Management M. H. Jim Estepp Transportation John Mason Resources • COG Police Chiefs Com. • Transportation Pl. Bd. • COG Fire Chiefs Comm. • DCDOT, MDOT, VDOT • COG D&EPC Comm. • WMATA • FBI, USPP, FPS, USCP • MARC, VRE • FEMA, MEMA, VDEM, • MDW DC/EMA • FEMA • MDW • Private Sector industry representatives Water and Energy Infrastructure Anthony Griffin Resources • COG Water Utility Group • COG Energy Committee • EPA, DC, Md. , Va. • Private Sector industry representatives 2

1/9/2002 Presentation Overview • Introduction (Chairman Schwartz) • Background on Proposed Resolution (Michael Rogers) – Overview of federal funding earmarks for homeland security in COG region – Overview of Task Force Recommendations – Process for preparation of regional emergency response plan – Proposal for establishment of Regional Incident Communication Center 3 – Resolution R 1 -02 summary

1/9/2002 Overview of federal funding earmarks for homeland security in National Capital Area 4

1/9/2002 Federal Funding Earmarks • Under the Department of Defense 2002 Appropriation bill (including supplemental appropriations) the following earmarks for homeland security in our region were included: – – – District of Columbia WMATA Suburban Maryland jurisdictions Suburban Virginia jurisdictions COG - $5 M Data being compiled • Significant action: federal government recognizes “National Capital Area” in homeland security earmark process 5

1/9/2002 Federal Funding Earmarks: Purposes • Protective and other emergency equipment for first responders • Training • Communications technology for interoperability communications (law enforcement, fire, medical services, transportation) • Pharmaceuticals • Other counter-terrorism measures • Regional Emergency Response Planning 6

1/9/2002 COG Earmark • Allocation of COG Earmark ($5 M total over 18 months): – Regional emergency planning - $1. 5 M – Infrastructure threat assessment - $0. 5 M – Communications - $0. 5 M – Training and outreach - $2. 5 M • Funding will also be used to prepare feasibility assessment of regional medical surveillance system • Work plan for COG earmark will be drawn from Task Force recommendations and presented to Board for approval at February, 2002 meeting 7

1/9/2002 CAOs Action 1 -4 -2002 • CAOs agreed to coordinate expenditure plans for the federal funding earmarks to insure their efficient and effective use • Funding matrix under development • Voluntary reporting to Congress proposed 8

1/9/2002 Overview of Task Force Recommendations 9

1/9/2002 More than 50 Recommendations on: • Transportation • Public Safety: – Disaster & Emergency Preparedness – Police Chiefs – Fire Chiefs • • • Health Officers Water Supply Energy Solid Waste Communication 10

1/9/2002 Recommendations… • Form the basis for COG workplan in homeland security and emergency preparedness • May be funded/carried out by COG, through COG, by COG members, by federal and state governments and others. • Details provided in attachments to Resolution R 1 -02 11

1/9/2002 Process for Preparation of Regional Emergency Response Plan for National Capital Area 12

1/9/2002 Structure for National Capital Region (NCR) Emergency Support Plan (ESP) 13

1/9/2002 Regional Emergency Response Plan for the National Capital Area • Plan will build upon FEMA plan for National Capital area and District of Columbia Emergency Response Plan • Plan will be a baseline emergency response plan that closes gaps in policies, procedures, protocols, communication infrastructure, equipment and legal authority 14

1/9/2002 Timeline for Regional Emergency Plan Development DEC 6 Agree on Plan Process COG Task Force Meeting Work with FEMA and DC EMA on consultant identification and selection Jan. 9 Identify consultant(s) Enhance COG Staff support Organize Regional ESP Development Teams COG Board Approve the Process CAOs to appoint staff for regional Need to hire more plan COG staff to development manage Task Force Process Jan-Feb Work Groups work for 60 days on plan development March April Draft Plan presented to CAOs and COG Board Task Force for Review, Plan distributed to Private Sector and Non-profit associations for comment Plan Development methods to include workshops, focus groups, surveys, interviews, information gathering COG Board Approval by all stakeholders Publication of plan Hold Regional Emergency Preparedness Summit Develop and distribute CD ROMS and Web based distribution Resources Needed Consultants to facilitate process and write plans. Support for COG Board to approve funds to start the process though foundation and federal support anticipated. Additional staff support will be needed to support Task Force work. 15

1/9/2002 Products & Timetable • January – Consultant contract in place – Agreement on project plan – Information gathering – focus groups, workshops, etc. to gather critical plan data – Identify plan signatories • February – draft report prepared • March – draft report presented to COG Task Force and Board, private sector and non-profit partners for review • April – plan approval by COG Board – Plan circulated for signature – Public roll out 16

1/9/2002 Funding and Resources • $150, 000 from Washington Regional Association of Grant-makers and private sector for consultant support • $100, 000 from COG Reserve fund for COG staff support (requires COG Board Approval) • In-kind support from COG membership, FEMA, state emergency management agencies • Additional funds from Congressional earmark when available: would cover training, and exercises, plan refinements 17

1/9/2002 Regional Incident Communication Center “RICC” 18

1/9/2002 Communication Components q Incident response communications § § § On-scene Internal to responding organization With mutual aid partners q Regional Communication and Coordination of Decision-making – via RICC q q Communication Technology Communication with the Media and Public 19

1/9/2002 Incident Occurs Interim Incident Communications Process for the National Capital Area Incident Commander / First Responder assesses regional impact If local event implement local response procedure Legend Incident detection and response Regional Communication and Coord. of Decisions Potential Declarations of Emergency If regional impact Incident commander notifies Regional Incident Communications Center (RICC) Define regional impact Criteria for RICC notifies Federal and Regional Partners , conference call initiated If WMD incident , federal conference call, White House OPM, FEMA, DOJ , Federal Government decision Process for RICC Selection Government Operations: Open or Close Implemen t coordinate d early release plan or evauation plan Schools CAOs Governments DOTs, PDs, Transportatio n Health Officers Information and Decision Dissemin ation Analysis and agreements required EAS, Media, HMARS. Superintendents IF WMD, implement FRP FEMA, DOTs, EMAs, CAOs to define Public Information, WAWAS, Regional Conference call MOU on RICC selection, operations, resources be negotiated with Federal state and local EMAs, Police and Fire Chiefs and COG CAOs Early release/evacuation plan, s staggered release plan Health System 20

1/9/2002 Potential Events Warranting An Enhanced Regional Communications System Regional events warranting use of a RICC may include deliberate acts, accidents, incidents, threats, as well as forecasted events such as snowstorms and droughts. Examples include: • • Weapon of mass destruction employed Bio-terrorism event Chemical attack Major health-related event Hazardous materials event Severe weather incident (tornado, flood, snowstorm, drought, etc. ) Mutual aid required More than 1 jurisdiction affected • • • Significant impact on transportation system/operations (METRO, major road and bridge facilities) Significant impact on major employment center Major impact on infrastructure (transportation facility/operations, water, wastewater, energy generation/transmission, waste management, telephone, pipelines, airports, other significant “regional” facility) 21

1/9/2002 Regional Incident Communications Center: Mission The mission of the Regional Incident Communication Center (RICC) is to facilitate communication and coordination among local, state, and federal government authorities to ensure an effective and timely response to regional emergencies and incidents. RICC 22

1/9/2002 Regional Incident Communication Center: Capabilities ü 24/7 operation ü 100 conference call lines that can be dedicated to regional emergency communications RICC ü A reliable and redundant conferencing system available in the event of emergency affecting primary communications system ü Secure communications capability ü Ability to rapidly convene conference call participants ü Ability to handle more than one simultaneous conference call ü Be a node in the WAWAS system ü Be sited in a secure location ü Have back-up power ü Have the ability to use multiple communication alternatives (telephone, radio, TV, video-conferencing, internet, etc. ) ü Information analysis and synthesis capability ü Have staff with special training and understanding of region 23

1/9/2002 Regional Incident Communication Center: Communication Protocol • • Establish a “Core Communication Cluster” of decision-makers Core Cluster members are on call 24/7 Core Cluster convened by the RICC at the request of any member of the cluster, of the responding incident commander/designee, or by the RICC coordinator. The Core Communication Cluster would facilitate a coordinated regional response to emergency events, supported by functional area communication clusters. 24

1/9/2002 Regional Incident Communication Center: Core Communication Cluster q Permanent Members: CAOs from 17 COG Members + COG Executive Director q Other Members Selected from Functional Area Clusters: o Public Safety Officials (Police, Fire, EMA) o Federal Cluster (FEMA, OPM, Homeland Security, DOJ, Treasury, Capitol Police, White House, Judicial Branch, MDW) o Transportation Representatives (WMATA, state DOTs –DC, MD, VA) o Health Officers representatives o Water Utilities representatives o Energy Utilities representatives o Private Sector representatives o COG Staff 25

1/9/2002 Regional Incident Communication Center: Functional Area Communication Clusters RICC CAOs Health Transportation Public Safety CORE School Supts. Water Federal Government PIOs 26

1/9/2002 Regional Incident Communication Center: Transportation Cluster* *Adapted from TPB 12 -19 -2001 LEVEL A WMATA Other Involved Agencies, e. g. - MWAA - OPM - MDW - Other NPS DCDOT MARC LEVEL B Local Bus Systems VRE AMTRAK CSX Notes v Through RICC, any agency in Level A can convene a conference call among Level A agencies. v Secondary communication between Level A and Level B agencies MDOT VDOT Public Safety BWI Maryland Jurisdictions Virginia Jurisdictions Notes (continued) v In each situation, one Level A agency (probably an agency at the site of the incident) would be designated to consolidate information provided by the involved agencies and to provide it to the media and real-time public information resources like Partners in Motion. All of the involved agencies would also continue to provide their own agency -specific information to the media at their discretion. 27

1/9/2002 Regional Incident Communication Center: Information Protocol COMMON MESSAGES: MANY VOICES RICC ü Through RICC, Common, coordinated message(s) developed for communication to media and public with assistance of PIOs ü Regional spokesperson drawn from appropriate agency – likely from lead responding agency ü Potential use of Emergency Broadcast system ü Need for systems to regularly report information on real-time basis (web site, radio, TV, press conference, …) 28

1/9/2002 RICC Next Steps in RICC Process • Formalize Interim RICC at DC-EOC – Id funding and staffing – Id Core Communication Cluster and participant data – Test conference call system and protocol • Establish Permanent RICCs – primary and 2 back-up co-located at existing communication sites in DC, MD, VA – CAOs review existing and planned capabilities in region and consider best practices elsewhere within 90 -120 days 29 – Id funding and staff

1/9/2002 Resolution R 1 -02 Summary 30

1/9/2002 Resolution R 1 -02 • Recognizes work of COG Homeland Security Task force and COG CAOs • Adopts Task Force Recommendations (including RICC) • Authorizes preparation of baseline Regional Emergency Response Plan by 4/2002, acceptance of grant funds and allocation of COG reserve funds, engaging consultant and new staff as necessary • Includes developmental draft MOU outlining emergency planning participants, process and 31 plan content