STANDARDS FOR LOCAL CIVIL PREPAREDNESS

INTRODUCTION

These Standards for civil preparedness have been developed jointly by Federal personnel and representative State and local civil preparedness Directors/Coordinators. The term "civil preparedness Director/Coordinator" is used in recognition of the variation in both the official title and duties of the position, in States and localities throughout the Nation. It means the person who is primarily responsible to coordinate and lead in developing civil preparedness - whether he (or she) is called the "Civil Defense Director," the "Disaster Services Coordinator," or by any similar title.

A companion piece to the Standards is the shorter Summary for Public Officials (CPG 14). The Summary stresses the "why" of civil preparedness, and outlines the "what" in no more detail than public officials are likely to need.

The Standards, in contrast, contain additional details on the ‘what’- the specifics of civil preparedness. The Standards are intended for use primarily by civil preparedness Directors and staffs at local, State, and Regional levels.

Purpose of Standards

The Standards, agreed upon by Federal, State, and local representatives, are provided as a basis for professionalizing and improving local civil preparedness. They contain criteria on specifics of the training and professional competence needed by the local civil preparedness Director/Coordinator, and also on the specifics of readiness for local government operations in major emergencies or disasters.

The basic purpose of the Standards, developed by knowledgeable civil preparedness professionals, is to assist local governments in developing the capability to save lives and preserve property should the jurisdiction be affected by any type of major emergency or disaster. Effective civil preparedness in local governments throughout the United States is an essential part of the nation's defensive posture. In addition, local jurisdictions must be prepared to deal with major peacetime emergencies that threaten life and property.

Nearly all capabilities, forces, and procedures needed in major peacetime emergencies would also be needed in emergencies caused by enemy attack upon the United States. Thus, all actions taken to strengthen the ability of local government to deal with peacetime emergencies will strengthen attack preparedness (and the reverse is also largely true). Duties of Local Civil Preparedness Directors/Coordinators

The duties outlined below are typical of those performed by the local civil preparedness Director/Coordinator in non-emergency periods, to develop readiness for operations in emergencies:

1. Develop an Emergency Operating Center (EOC) facility, a protected site from which key local officials control operations.

2. Develop EOC staffing and internal procedures to permit key local officials to conduct coordinated operations in emergencies.

3. Conduct tests and exercises to give key local officials practice in directing coordinated operations under simulated emergency conditions.

4. Provide expert knowledge and advice to operating departments on the special conditions and operating requirements that would be imposed by peacetime or attack disasters.

5. Develop local government emergency operations plans, outlining which local forces and supporting groups would do what, in both peacetime and attack disasters, and specifying local organization for major emergencies.

6. Establish system to warn the public of peace-time or attack disasters.

7. Establish system to alert key local officials.

8. Organize radiological monitoring and analysis system, including procurement of instruments and training and exercising of personnel.

9. Coordinate and lead emergency communications planning, secure necessary equipment, and exercise emergency communications.

10. Coordinate with doctors, hospitals, and public and private sector medical personnel to develop emergency medical plans and capabilities, as part of local emergency plans.

11. Establish and maintain a shelter system.

12. Establish and exercise an emergency public information system and train personnel to utilize it.

13. Coordinate with welfare offices, and the Red Cross and other voluntary groups, to develop emergency welfare capabilities to care for people needing mass care as a result of peace-time or attack disaster.

14. Coordinate and maintain relationships with industry to develop industrial emergency plans and capabilities in support of local government emergency plans.

15. Assist local operating departments (e.g., fire, police, public works) with radiological defense and other training needs.

16. Coordinate and participate in training programs for the public on disaster preparedness.

17. Assist in the establishment of mutual aid agreements to provide needed services, equipment or other resources in an emergency.

18. Prepare, submit, and justify the annual civil preparedness budget.

19. Secure matching funds and other assistance available through the civil preparedness program, and through other Federal programs (includes preparing annual program papers and other documents required for Federal assistance programs).

Background for Use of Standards

It is assumed that users of these Standards are familiar with what civil preparedness is and is not: That it is not a separate function set apart from the normal responsibilities of government, or a special unit or group of people standing by to save the day in case of a major disaster. That the forces responsible for civil preparedness emergency operations are the normal forces of government, together with any trained auxiliaries needed-plus non-governmental personnel or groups with emergency capabilities, such as voluntary groups, doctors, and hospital and news media staffs. And that emergency operations require coordinated action by all forces with lifesaving capabilities, under the leadership and direction of key local executives. The concept of civil preparedness is further discussed in the Summary for Public Officials that is a companion piece to these Standards.

Use of Standards

The Standards provide guidelines - not a "bible" - for developing and improving civil preparedness. Local, State, and Regional Civil Preparedness professionals should use them as a primary reference in the preparation and review of Local Program Papers, and in On-Site Assistance projects. The Projected Program Activities portion of the local program paper provides a means for local governments to list their goals and objectives to improve preparedness in areas which do not meet these Standards. An annual program paper is required of local governments participating in Federal assistance programs.

Building Emergency Readiness

These Standards outline the work that each jurisdiction should do to build emergency readiness. Standard One deals with the steps needed to establish and run an effective civil preparedness program in a community. Standard Two establishes criteria for the local civil preparedness Director/Coordinator.

Standards Three to Five deal with the tangible assets that provide the basis for local emergency readiness. These include local government emergency plans, facilities and equipment, and trained personnel.

Standard Six is the most important of all. It deals with the intangible elements of overall local readiness, which boil down to assuring that all people or groups with emergency responsibilities are actually prepared to "do the right thing at the right time." This means that the jurisdiction has done the planning and exercising that add up to the "mechanics of coordinated disaster response," and can make these mechanics work when they are needed. The primary means to develop this ability is through realistic exercises based on simulated emergencies, unless of course the jurisdiction has suffered an actual peace- time emergency.

"Fully-Qualified" vs. "Minimum-Level" Standards

Standards Three through Six describe two levels of qualification. One is the "fully-qualified" standard which if attained in all areas, means that the jurisdiction has reached and is maintaining a high level of readiness for peacetime or attack-caused emergencies. This level will result in most cases from the efforts of an energetic, professional local civil preparedness Director/Coordinator who receives strong support from the citizens and the elected and appointed officials. Not many jurisdictions can now be evaluated as fully-qualified, but a number of them need to make improvements in only a relatively few areas to reach the fully-qualified level.

The ''minimum-level'' standard represents a degree of local readiness that many local governments have attained, and that all others should strive to attain as rapidly as possible. It provides a minimum level of readiness for continuing operations under nuclear attack conditions. This level, in many areas, provides for substantial reliance on "crisis activation" of capabilities needed for attack emergencies-such as training additional Radiological Monitors. At the same time, this minimum indicates readiness to cope with moderate scale peacetime emergencies. No jurisdiction should remain at the minimum level, however, for the development of local emergency readiness is a dynamic process. A jurisdiction im- proves and grows in readiness or it declines.

Regional and State civil preparedness agencies are working together to foster qualitative improvement in each jurisdiction. The On-Site Assistance process, when available, provides intensive help by a State- Regional team working in the jurisdiction. These teams assist local officials to evaluate their existing level of readiness and to develop, and then carry out, a plan of action to improve readiness. Other jurisdictions should use the Standards to develop their own action plan for improvement, pending the availability of direct assistance from the State/Region. The action plan should then become a part of the annual program paper.

Risk Areas

Some of the Standards set forth below vary from one jurisdiction to another based on the potential hazards or risks facing the locality. A "hazard analysis" will identify the specific risks a jurisdiction may face. Generally, the following factors are associated with a high degree of risk:

(1) Attack Effects - Publication TR-82, "High Risk Areas," identifies areas which could face high risk of blast and other nuclear weapons effects should the United States be attacked. State and Federal personnel can assist local jurisdictions in identifying more precisely the nuclear weapons effects that risk areas could receive.

(2) Natural Disasters - Frequent occurrence of, or potential for, natural disasters in a specific area constitutes a risk to the population.

(3) Other Hazards - Some jurisdictions may face potential risks such as major aircraft or industrial accidents, accidents at nuclear power plants, other hazards of a technological nature, or emergencies resulting from an energy shortage.