resolution from ad hoc task force on homeland security and emergency preparedness n.
Skip this Video
Download Presentation
Resolution from ad hoc Task Force on Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness

Loading in 2 Seconds...

play fullscreen
1 / 31

Resolution from ad hoc Task Force on Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

  • Uploaded on

Agenda Item #5. Resolution from ad hoc Task Force on Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness. Presented to: COG Board of Directors January 9, 2002. Communications Robert Dorsey/Gerry Connolly. Resources COG CAOs, COG PIOs, State PIOs Private Sector Industry representatives

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.
Download Presentation

PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Resolution from ad hoc Task Force on Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness' - ikia

Download Now An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript
resolution from ad hoc task force on homeland security and emergency preparedness

Agenda Item #5

Resolution from ad hoc Task Force on Homeland Security and Emergency Preparedness

Presented to:

COG Board of Directors

January 9, 2002



Robert Dorsey/Gerry Connolly



Private Sector Industry representatives

Federal: FEMA, OPM, FBI, GSA

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

COG CAOs Committee

Waste & Debris


Mary K. Hill


Adrian Fenty

Public Safety and

Emergency Management

M.H. Jim Estepp


John Mason

Water and Energy


Anthony Griffin

  • Resources
  • COG Solid Waste Managers
  • U.S. Army COE
  • Private Sector industry representatives
  • Resources
  • COG Health Officers Committee
  • COG Bio-Terrorism Task Force
  • Private Sector industry representatives
  • Resources
  • COG Police Chiefs Com.
  • COG Fire Chiefs Comm.
  • COG D&EPC Comm.
  • DC/EMA
  • MDW
  • Private Sector industry
  • representatives
  • Resources
  • Transportation Pl. Bd.
  • MDW
  • FEMA
  • Private Sector industry
  • representatives
  • Resources
  • COG Water Utility Group
  • COG Energy Committee
  • EPA, DC, Md., Va.
  • Private Sector industry representatives
presentation overview
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
    • Resolution R1-02 summary

Overview of federal

funding earmarks

for homeland security

in National Capital Area

federal funding earmarks
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 - $5M
  • Significant action: federal government recognizes “National Capital Area” in homeland security earmark process

Data being compiled

federal funding earmarks purposes
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
cog earmark
COG Earmark
  • Allocation of COG Earmark ($5M total over 18 months):
    • Regional emergency planning - $1.5 M
    • Infrastructure threat assessment - $0.5M
    • Communications - $0.5M
    • Training and outreach - $2.5M
  • 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
caos action 1 4 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

Overview of Task Force


more than 50 recommendations on
More than 50 Recommendations on:
  • Transportation
  • Public Safety:
    • Disaster & Emergency Preparedness
    • Police Chiefs
    • Fire Chiefs
  • Health Officers
  • Water Supply
  • Energy
  • Solid Waste
  • Communication
  • 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 R1-02

Process for Preparation

of Regional

Emergency Response Plan

for National Capital Area

regional emergency response plan for the national capital area
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

Timeline for Regional Emergency Plan Development


Jan. 9




Agree on Plan Process

Identify consultant(s)

Enhance COG Staff support

Organize Regional ESP Development Teams

COG Board Approve the Process

COG Board Approval

Approval by all stakeholders

Publication of plan

Hold Regional Emergency Preparedness Summit

Develop and distribute CD ROMS and Web based distribution

Draft Plan presented to CAOs and COG Board Task Force for Review,

Plan distributed to Private Sector and Non-profit associations for comment

Work Groups work for 60 days on plan development

COG Task Force Meeting

Work with FEMA and DC EMA on consultant identification and selection

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.

CAOs to appoint staff for regional plan development

Need to hire more COG staff to manage Task Force Process

Plan Development methods to include workshops, focus groups, surveys, interviews, information gathering

products timetable
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
funding and resources
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

Regional Incident

Communication Center


communication components
Communication Components
  • Incident response communications
      • On-scene
      • Internal to responding organization
      • With mutual aid partners
  • Regional Communication and Coordination of Decision-making – via RICC
  • Communication Technology
  • Communication with the Media and Public

Interim Incident Communications Process for the National Capital Area

Potential Declarations of Emergency

Incident Occurs

Incident Commander/

First Responder assesses regional impact

Public Information, WAWAS,

EAS, Media, HMARS.

Regional Conference call

If regional impact

Incident commander notifies Regional Incident Communications Center (RICC)

RICC notifies Federal and Regional Partners ,conference call initiated


If local event implement local response procedure

Government Operations: Open or Close


If WMD incident ,federal conference call, White House OPM, FEMA, DOJ ,

Federal Government decision


Define regional impact

Criteria for RICC


IF WMD,implement FRP

Implement coordinated early release plan or evauation plan


Incident detection and response

Regional Communication and Coord. of Decisions

Information and Decision Dissemin ation

Analysis and agreements required


FEMA, DOTs, EMAs, CAOs to define

Process for RICC Selection


Health Officers

Early release/evacuation plan,s staggered release plan

MOU on RICC selection,

operations, resources be negotiated with Federal state and local EMAs, Police and Fire Chiefs and COG CAOs

Health System

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)

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:

regional incident communications center mission


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.



Regional Incident Communication Center: Capabilities

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

Regional Incident Communication Center:Core Communication Cluster

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














Regional Incident Communication Center: Functional Area Communication Clusters




Local Bus


Regional Incident Communication Center:Transportation Cluster*

*Adapted from TPB 12-19-2001

  • Other Involved
  • Agencies, e.g.
  • MWAA
  • OPM
  • MDW
  • Other






Public Safety










  • Notes
  • Through RICC, any agency in Level A can convene a conference call among Level A agencies.
  • Secondary communication between Level A and Level B agencies
  • Notes (continued)
  • 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.


Regional Incident Communication Center:Information Protocol



  • Through RICC, Common, coordinated message(s) developed for communication to media and public with assistance of PIOs
  • Regional spokesperson drawn from appropriate agency – likely from lead responding agency
  • Potential use of Emergency Broadcast system
  • Need for systems to regularly report information on real-time basis (web site, radio, TV, press conference, …)
next steps in ricc process


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
    • Id funding and staff
resolution r1 02
Resolution R1-02
  • 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 plan content